Letter to Laura and Paul Lafargue, November 24-25, 1871

Author(s) Karl Marx
Written 24 November 1871


First published in the languages of the original (English and French) in Annali, an. 1, Milano, 1958
Published in English in part in Annali, an. 1, Milano, 1958, and in full in: Karl Marx, On the First International, Arranged and edited, with an introduction and new translations by Saul K. Padover. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1973
Published in English in full for the first time in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 44


MARX TO LAURA AND PAUL LAFARGUE

IN SAN SEBASTIAN

London, 24[-25] November 1871

My dear Laura and Toole,[1]

What with the International business, what with the visits from members of the Commune, I have not found the time to write. How my time is encroached upon, you may judge from one case. At Petersburg they have been translating Das Kapital into Russian, but they had reserved the first chapter because I had asked them to do so, since I intended to re-write it in a more popular manner. Since the events of Paris I was continually prevented from fulfilling my promise and was at last compelled to limit myself to a few alterations, in order not to stop the progress of the publication altogether.[2]

As for the calumnies against Toole, it is all moonshine, a canard put about by the French branch No. 2. Serraillier, the secretary for France, wrote immediately to Bordeaux. The six sections there existing have answered by a vote of absolute confidence in the illustrious Toole.

As to the scandals that have taken place at London and Geneva, I must begin from the beginning.

Amongst other French refugees we had admitted to the General Council Theisz, Chalain and Bastelica. The latter was hardly admitted when he proposed Avrial and Camélinat, but est modus in rebus[3] and we found that there were now enough Proudhonists in our ranks. On different pretexts the election of these two worthies was therefore delayed until the Conference, and dropped after the Conference, the latter having passed a Resolution inviting us not to admit too many refugees.[4] Hence the great rage of citizens Avrial and Camélinat.

On the Congress itself the Resolution on the political action of the working class was violently opposed by the Bakuninists—Robin, the Spaniard Lorenzo and the Corsican Bastelica. The latter, an empty-headed and very pretentious fellow, got the worse of it and was rather roughly handled. His main quality—i.e. his amour-propre—got him into steam. There was a further incident. On the affair of the 'Alliance of Socialist Democracy' and the dispute in Romance Switzerland, the Conference appointed a committee (of which I was a member) and which met in my house.[5] Outine on the one side, Bastelica and Robin on the other, were summoned as witnesses. Robin behaved in the most shabby and cowardly manner. After having had his say (at the beginning of the meeting) he declared that he must leave and rose, intending to go. Outine told him that he must stay, that the investigation was going to be a serious one and that he would not like to discuss him in his absence. Robin, in an admirable series of tactical moves, approached the door. Outine apostrophised him violently, saying that he would have to accuse him of being the mainspring of the Alliance's intrigues. Meanwhile, to secure a safe retreat, the great Robin had partly opened the door and, like a true Parthian,[6] delivered a parting shot at Outine with the words: 'Then I despise you.'

On 19 September, with Delahaye for intermediary, he communicated the following epistle to the Conference:

'Called upon as a witness in the matter of the Swiss dispute, before the committee nominated to examine it, I put in an appearance in the hope of contributing to an appeasement.

'Having been directly impugned, I state categorically that I do not accept the role of accused and will refrain from attending those meetings of the Conference at which the Swiss question is to be discussed.

'19 September 1871. 'P. Robin.'

Several members of the Conference, amongst whom De Paepe, demanded that the fellow be expelled forthwith from the General Council but on my advice it was resolved that he be asked to withdraw his letter and that, in case of refusal, the matter be left in the hands of the General Council. Since Robin obstinately persisted in standing by his letter, he was eventually expelled from the Council.

Meanwhile, he had addressed to myself the following billet doux of 28 September.

'Citizen Marx,

'I have been under great personal obligations to you, nor have these been a burden to me so long as I believed that nothing could change my respectful feelings of friendship towards you. Today, being unable to subordinate my gratitude to my conscience, and sorry though I am to break with you, I believe I owe you the following statement.

'I am convinced that, yielding to personal animosity, you have uttered or supported unjust accusations against the objects of that animosity, members of the International, whose sole crime is not to share the same.

'P. Robin.'

I did not think it worth my while to answer to R. R. R.—Robin the sheep. (He was already known by that name to Rabelais, who specifically includes him in Panurge's flock.)[7] Let me now return to our other sheep.[8]

After the Conference, Avrial and Camélinat urged the formation of a French branch (London French Section of 1871).[9]

Collaborating therein were Theisz, Bastelica (who had already decided to go back to Switzerland and wished to create a prop for Bakunin in London before he left) and Chalain (a completely worthless wag). They published their own Rules in the paper Qui Vive! of which more anon. Those Rules were contrary to the General Rules. In particular, these gentry (there were 20 of them, amongst whom several informers; their secretary was the illustrious Durand, publicly branded an informer by the General Council and expelled from the International[10] ) arrogated to themselves the right to nominate delegates to the General Council with imperative mandates, at the same time resolving that no one belonging to their section must accept nomination as a member of the General Council save when sent as delegate by the Section itself.

Even before their Rules had been confirmed by the General Council, they had the impudence to send as Council delegates Chautard (a cretin who, during the Commune, was the laughing-stock of Paris) and Camélinat. They were politely invited to withdraw and await the confirmation of their Rules by the General Council. I was entrusted with a critique thereof. This first missive from the Council[11] to the new Section was still couched in conciliatory terms. All they were asked to do was to delete the articles contrary to the spirit and the letter of the General Rules and Regulations.

They were enraged. Avrial (in collaboration with Theisz and Camélinat) wrote a reply which cost him a fortnight's work and to which the last literary finish was given by Vermersch (Le Père Duchêne).

The said individual had wormed his way into their ranks because, with the aid of a few typographers (refugees), they had founded the paper Qui Vive!, under the provisional editorship of Le Verdet (a Schopenhauerian philosopher). Vermersch made much of them and stirred them up against the General Council in order to get hold of the paper—and in this he succeeded.

They sent Bastelica to Switzerland, whence they received a proclamation of policy: The General Council was under the yoke of Pan-Germanism (meaning me), authoritarian, etc. The prime duty of every citizen was to help bring about the fall of the said usurping Council, etc. All this emanated from Bakunin (acting through the Russian N. Zhukovsky, Secretary of the Alliance in Geneva,[12] Guillaume, etc.) whose clique (far from numerous in Switzerland by the by) had coalesced with Madame André Léo, Malon, Razoua and a small group of other French refugees who were not satisfied with playing second fiddle or no part whatever.

Incidentally, all the idiots who had been members of the Federal Council in Paris, or who falsely made themselves out so to have been—such as, e.g., Rouillier, that brawler, braggart and drunken sot—had deluded themselves into thinking they would be admitted—as of right—as members of the General Council.

Theisz (who had been nominated treasurer of the General Council, and not secretary for France) and Bastelica handed in their resignations from the Council on the grounds of the article in their Rules prohibiting them from accepting nomination by the Council.

I eventually replied to the letter embellished by old man Vermersch, whose wit is far more Flemish than French. So crushing was this reply[13] and at the same time so ironic that they resolved not to continue their correspondence with the Council. Hence they were not recognised as a section of the International.

Old man Vermersch had become editor-in-chief of Qui Vive!. In No. 42 he printed a letter[14] signed by Chautard, Chouteau (already denounced as an informer by Rigault in Patrie en danger), by Landeck—who had given his word to Mr Piétri (see the last trial of the Internationalists in Paris) that he would withdraw from the International and from politics—and [by] similar riff-raff in which they denounce the Resolution of the Conference which declares that the German working men (who demonstrated against the annexation of French provinces and, later, for the Commune, and many of whom are at this very moment suffering persecution at the hands of Bismarck) have done their duty, and adduce this as flagrant proof of 'pan-Germanism'!

This was rather too much for those zanies Theisz, Camélinat and Avrial. They refused to put their signatures to it. As members of the administrative council of Qui Vive!, they also fell out with Vermersch over an immoral novel he had published in the feuilleton.[15] Vermersch, who had no further use for these gentry, proceeded, without naming names, to attack them in Qui Vive!. His nauseating articles have also led to quarrels with other refugees, and I believe that he yesterday had his face slapped by Sicard.[16] Now they are determined to relieve him of his editorship. We shall see! He is believed to be paid by Versailles to compromise the Communards. To cut the story short: in London the conspiracy has failed. The French branch No. 2 is in complete disarray (needless to say, it was pushed by Le Lubez, Bradlaugh, Besson, etc.). Another and far larger French section has been formed which is in agreement with the General Council.[17]

In place of those who have resigned, we have nominated as members of the Council Ant. Arnaud, F. Cournet and G. Ranvier.

In Geneva the 'Alliance', with André Léo, Malon, etc., is publishing a little journal La Révolution sociale (edited by one Claris) in which they openly attack the General Council and the Conference. Pan-Germanism (German and Bismarckian intellects), authoritarian, etc., etc. The 'Jura Federation' (still the same old bunch, but under another name) has held a tiny little Congress at Sonvilliers (Bernese Jura) at which it was resolved that all the sections of the International be invited to join the Jura Federation in order to bring about the meeting, at the earliest opportunity, of a special Congress at which the conduct of the Council should be reviewed and the resolutions of the Conference annulled as being contrary to the principle of autonomy which those resolutions 'openly infringe'.[18] In particular, they protest against Resolutions II, 2, 3, IX (Political action by the working class), XVI and XVII.[19]

They have not ventured to mention Resolution XIV, which is especially distasteful to Bakunin because it would reveal to the whole of Europe the turpitudes for which he was responsible in Russia.

The attitude of the Federal Council in Madrid (manipulated by Bakunin and Bastelica) is highly suspect. Since Lorenzo's departure Engels has received no reply whatever to his many letters. They are imbued with the doctrine of abstention in politics. Engels has written and told them today that, if they persist in their silence, steps will be taken.[20] In any case Toole MUST ACT. I shall send him English and French copies of the new edition, revised and enlarged, of the Rules and Regulations.[21]

Our adversaries are indeed unfortunate. As I have already said, the first secretary of the dissident Section in London was G. Durand whom we unmasked as an agent of Versailles. The Bakuninists Blanc and Albert Richard (of Lyons) sold themselves to Bonaparte. They were over here to enrol members under his banner since—Bonaparte is worth more than Thiers!

Finally, the Béziers correspondent of the hostile refugees in Geneva—virtually their only French correspondent—has been denounced to us by the Béziers section as a police agent (he is secretary to the superintendent of police)![22]

I trust I shall soon have good news of the state of health of my beloved Schnaps[23] and of the whole family.

Old Nick[24]

As regards Theisz, he has lost all influence in Paris because of the praises meted out to him and to old man Beslay by the Versailles papers.

Bastelica is the chief of Bakunin's lickspittles. I should also remark that the attacks upon us by the Révolution sociale of Geneva are couched in more or less the same terms as those in the Journal de Genève (the most reactionary newspaper in Europe) and in The Times, which I am sending you. The newspaper mentioned in The Times is the Journal de Genève.

  1. ↑ Paul Lafargue's jocular nickname
  2. ↑ In his letter of 11 (23) May 1871, Nikolai Danielson informed Marx that Hermann Lopatin could not complete the translation of Capital into Russian and had asked Danielson to finish the work. Knowing from Lopatin that Marx intended to revise the first chapter of the first German edition of Capital, Volume I, for the Russian edition, Danielson asked Marx to send him the new version of the chapter. Being very busy at the time, Marx was unable to revise the chapter for the first Russian edition. In preparing the second German edition of Volume I of Capital Marx substantially revised the chapter and turned it into Part I, 'Commodities and Money' (see present edition, Vol. 35).
    On the Russian edition of Capital see Note 146.
  3. ↑ there's measure in everything (Horace, Satirae, Book 1, Satire 1)
  4. ↑ K. Marx and F. Engels, 'Resolutions of the Conference of Delegates of the International Working Men's Association Assembled at London from 17th to 23rd September 1871'. I: Composition of General Council.
  5. ↑ The reference is to a commission set up by the London Conference to consider the Swiss conflict (see Note 9). It included Marx, Vaillant, Verrycken, MacDonnel and Eccarius; Engels also took part in the commission's work. The meeting mentioned by Marx was held on 18 September 1871. Marx reported on the commission's findings at the sitting of 21 September 1871, which unanimously adopted the resolution tabled by him (see present edition, Vol. 22, pp. 419-22).
    The question of Robin's expulsion from the General Council for his attempt to disrupt the work of the commission was considered at several Council meetings. On 17 October 1871 Robin was expelled.
  6. ↑ An allusion to the custom of the ancient Parthians of shooting at an enemy from horseback with the horse turned away as if in flight. Hence the expression 'a Parthian shot', which means a parting shot or, in modern parlance, the last word in an argument.
  7. ↑ Marx had in mind an episode from Book Four of Rabelais' Gargantua and Pantagruel in which Panurge, having quarrelled with a sheep trader travelling on the same ship, bought a ram called Robin (the traditional name for a ram in France) from the trader and threw it overboard, and the whole flock followed.
  8. ↑ Revenons à nos moutons (let's return to our sheep)—an expression from a medieval French farce which means 'let us return to our starting point, the subject of our conversation'.
  9. ↑ The French Section of 1871 was formed in London in September of that year by French refugees. The leaders of the Section established close contacts with Bakuninists in Switzerland. The Rules of the French Section of 1871, published in Qui Vive!, its official newspaper, were submitted to the General Council at its extraordinary meeting on 16 October 1871 and referred to a special commission (see Note 341). At the General Council meeting of 17 October Marx tabled a resolution on behalf of the commission (present edition, Vol. 23, pp. 24-27), recommending that the Section bring several paragraphs of its Rules into line with the Rules of the International. In its letter of 31 October signed by Augustin Avrial, the Section rejected the General Council resolution. This reply was discussed in the commission and at the General Council meeting of 7 November 1871. Auguste Serraillier, Corresponding Secretary for France, submitted a resolution written by Marx, which was adopted unanimously by the Council (see present edition, Vol. 23, pp. 37-42). In December 1871 the French Section of 1871 split up into a number of groups. In some of his letters Marx called this section French Section No. 2 to distinguish it from the French Section in London, established in 1865 (see Note 50).
  10. ↑ The case of Gustave Durand, who tricked his way into the International as a leader of the French Section of 1871 and then was discovered to be a police agent, was considered at the special meeting of the General Council on 7 October 1871. Durand's correspondence with police officers was brought before the Council. The resolution on Durand's expulsion was drawn up and submitted to the General Council meeting by Engels (see present edition, Vol. 23, p. 21).
  11. ↑ K. Marx, 'Resolution of the General Council on the Rules of the French Section of 1871'.
  12. ↑ Secretary of the Geneva Section of the Alliance of Socialist Democracy
  13. ↑ K. Marx, 'Resolution of the General Council on the French Section of 1871'.
  14. ↑ An allusion to the 'Protestation' of the French Section of 1871, published in Qui Vive!, No. 42, 19-20 November 1871 (see Note 358).
  15. ↑ This refers to Alexis Berneville, the first novel in the series L'Infamie humaine, which was printed anonymously in the Qui Vive! in November December 1871.
  16. ↑ Marx is referring to Sicard's letter to Vermersch of 22 November published in Qui Vive!, No. 46, 24 November 1871.
  17. ↑ The reference is to the French-Language Section in London, formed in November 1871 by the proletarian elements from among the Paris Commune refugees. On 18 November 1871 the Section adopted its Rules, which were approved by the General Council in February 1872. The French-Language Section in London included Marguerittes, Le Moussu, De Wolffers, etc., and supported the General Council in its campaign against the petty-bourgeois stand adopted by some of the French refugees (Vermersch, etc.).
  18. ↑ The Congress of the Bakuninist Jura Federation held in Sonvillier on 12 November 1871 adopted the Sonvillier circular, 'Circulaire à toutes les fédérations de l'Association Internationale des Travailleurs'. It was directed against the General Council and the 1871 London Conference, and countered the Conference decisions with anarchist phrases about the sections' political indifferentism and complete autonomy. The Bakuninists proposed that all the federations demand the immediate convocation of a congress to revise the General Rules and to condemn the General Council's actions.
    The International's sections in Germany, Britain, France, Belgium, Holland, the USA, and also the Section in Milan, came out against the circular. Engels gave the Bakuninists a vigorous rebuff in his article 'The Congress of Sonvillier and the International' (present edition, Vol. 23).
  19. ↑ The reference is to the resolutions of the 1871 London Conference: 'Designation of National Councils, etc' (Resolution II, Points 1, 2, 3), 'Political Action of the Working Class' (Resolution IX), 'The Alliance of Socialist Democracy' (Resolution XVI) and 'Split in the French-speaking part of Switzerland' (Resolution XVII) (see present edition, Vol. 22).
  20. ↑ F. Engels, 'To the Federal Council of the Spanish Region in Madrid'.
  21. ↑ The London Conference adopted a decision to put out a new authentic edition of the International's Rules and Administrative Regulations in English, French and German (see present edition, Vol. 23, pp. 3-20). This edition appeared in English as a pamphlet published in London in November 1871. The French edition appeared in December 1871. The official German edition appeared in Der Volksstaat on 10 February 1872, and as a separate publication in Leipzig in 1872.
  22. ↑ The reference is to the letter to Serraillier of 13 November 1871 written on behalf of the International's sections in Béziers and Pézenas. The authors denounced Bousquet as a police agent and demanded his expulsion from the International.
  23. ↑ Charles Etienne Lafargue
  24. ↑ Marx's family nickname