Letter to Adolf Hepner, July 2, 1872

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 2 July 1872


First published in: Marx and Engels, Works, First Russian Edition, Vol. XXIX, Moscow, 1946
Published in English for the first time in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 44


ENGELS TO ADOLF HEPNER

IN LEIPZIG

London, 2 July 1872

Dear Hepner,

When mandates[1] are sent out it is absolutely essential to include one for Cuno, who is now in Belgium. He is of the greatest importance because of the Italian Bakuninists; these people will send nothing but lawyers and other doctrinaire bourgeois who play at being workers' representatives and who have done everything in their power to prevent the workers from corresponding with us directly. It was precisely Cuno who was the first to break through this barrier and, had he remained there, the whole problem would have been solved by now. Moreover, Cuno is one of our very best people; Liebknecht's entire mistrust of him is groundless and is based on his belief that Cuno was an agent of J. Ph. Becker, working in the interests of the Geneva 'Mother Section', something that never crossed Cuno's mind. I had to explain the whole absurd story to him later on since he knew nothing about the Mother Section.[2] When I know what a man has really accomplished, I do not let myself be misled by such matters.

It goes without saying that the Congress deliberations will be conducted in all 3 languages—German, English and French — so that ignorance of the two last languages need deter no-one.[3]

Returning herewith Boruttau's letter.[4] The man is assuredly honest, but terribly muddle-headed and driven on by an urge to perform deeds out of all proportion to his talents. These qualities make him a highly suitable DUPE for the Bakuninists who surround him and exploit him. If you read the Bulletin de la Fédération jurassienne, you will see that precisely now, before the Congress, these gentlemen are doing all they can to obtain private letters and so forth from us and to discover what material damaging to them we have in our possession.[5] Apart from that the Boruttau letter is of no significance. It would not occur to us to do additional work for these gentlemen to our own detriment. If Boruttau is so unfamiliar with notorious facts which even Bakunin has never denied, it is not our responsibility to look up the issue of Kolokol where he can find it all, i.e. if he knows Russian, for if he doesn't, even referring him to the right issue will not help him.[6] So much is certain: we have the material. Moreover, as long as 3 years ago Borkheim published more on this matter in his Russische Briefe[7] than six Boruttaus could ask for. You would be well advised to tread warily with Boruttau. The magniloquent phrases of the Bakuninists have completely beguiled this muddle-head and this over-intense sort of honesty often turns into treachery in practice.

Scissions'.[8] The circular is confidential[9] and so not intended for publication. We do not know how the (legitimist) Courrier de France in Paris—which is publishing it—obtained possession of it. Likewise with the Radical, which may have taken it from the Courrier. A German translation in the Volksstaat (which you would have to produce over there) would only be desirable if the bourgeois press in Germany makes a scandal of the affair—but in that event it would be very desirable indeed In the meantime the Bulletin de la Fédération jurassienne has publicly attacked it,[10] so an article in the Volksstaat could do no harm. I assume that Liebknecht has left you the copy we sent him. If not, I shall send you one in a letter—a postal wrapper is impossible since the police have stolen everything I sent to Germany in that way.

Henri Perret, Temple Unique, Genève, has been instructed to send the ' Volksstaat' 50 copies for distribution in Germany. If they have not yet arrived, please drop him a few lines.

I shall write to Wigand[11] Schulze-Bastiat. Marx is buried up to his ears in work on the 2nd German edition[12] and the 1st French edition of Capital[13]

But even apart from this he would never agree to write an appendix to correct the blunders in such a completely unscientific book as Lassalle's.[14] He would have to correct almost the whole book. Entre nous if Marx ever does get around to correcting Lassalle there will be precious little of Lassalle left over. He has not done so up to now out of consideration for the many Lassalleans who have joined the Party, but one day it is sure to come.

The Housing Question.

Liebknecht spoke of his intention of publishing my article[15] on its own.[16] If this is the case, please let me have the galley proofs since there are a number of disastrous printing errors in it. There is also the following to be considered:

You write to me about Sax. Is it worthwhile writing a special article on a book[17] which appeared in 1869? If so, I shall give the man a good hiding for you, and it would perhaps be a good idea to follow up the critique of the petit bourgeois solution to the housing problem with a critique of the grand bourgeois solution. In that event the two articles[18] could be published together on their own, which would provide a more exhaustive treatment of the subject. Please let me know about this soon so that I may act accordingly.

I shall also produce a small article for you about the latest squabble in America.[19]

Yours,

F. E.

  1. ↑ for delegates to the Hague Congress
  2. ↑ See this volume, pp. 370-72.
  3. ↑ On 11 June 1872, on Marx's suggestion, the General Council resolved to convene a regular Congress in Holland on 2 September 1872 and decided on the principal item on the agenda, the consolidation of the International's organisation (revision of the General Rules and Administrative Regulations). At its next meeting on 18 June the Council decided on The Hague as the venue for the Congress and appointed a special commission (Engels, Edouard Vaillant, Joseph MacDonnel) to prepare an official announcement of the forthcoming Congress. The announcement was written by Engels and despatched to The International Herald, which published it on 29 June 1872 (see present edition, Vol. 23, pp. 170-73).—325, 366, 372, 374, 376, 392, 396, 398, 401, 404, 407, 409, 411-13, 415, 417, 418, 422, 425, 426
  4. ↑ Hepner wrote on 29 June 1872 that he was forwarding Engels Karl Boruttau's letter requesting the recommendation of material for the campaign against Bakunin.
  5. ↑ 'La Liberté de Bruxelles du 5 mai publie...', Bulletin de la Fédération jurassienne, No. 6, 10 May 1872.
  6. ↑ This presumably refers to Bakunin's appeal, 'PyccKHMii, noAbCKHMi> H BCI>M CAaBHHCKHMi Apy3bn\rb' (To Russian, Polish and All Slavic Friends), KoJioKqjit, (The Bell), No. 122 & 123 (with Supplement No. 4), 15 February 1862.
  7. ↑ Marx is referring to the articles by Sigismund Borkheim, 'Russische Briefe. VIII-X. Michael Bakunin, XI. Ein russischer penny-a-liner', which were published anonymously in Die Zukunft between July and November 1869. Analysing Bakunin's articles which had appeared in Russian, Borkheim criticised the author mainly for his Pan-Slavist ideas and the idealisation of the Russian peasant commune.
  8. ↑ K. Marx and F. Engels, Fictitious Splits in the International
  9. ↑ From mid-January to early March 1872 Marx and Engels wrote 'Fictitious Splits in the International. Private Circular from the General Council of the International Working Men's Association' (see present edition, Vol. 23). Marx set forth its principal propositions at the meeting of the General Council on 5 March 1872. The circular was issued as a pamphlet in French at the end of May 1872; it was signed by all members of the General Council and sent to all federations of the International.
  10. ↑ A reference to the special issue of the Bulletin de la Federation jurassienne, No. 10-11, 15 June 1872, which featured replies from a number of Bakuninists to the General Council's circular Fictitious Splits in the International (including those from James Guillaume, Benoît Malon, and Mikhail Bakunin), as well as the reply of the editorial board to Paul Lafargue's letter in which he had exposed the activities of the secret Alliance in Spain.
  11. ↑ On 29 June 1872 Hepner wrote to Engels requesting that he ask the Wigand publishing house in Leipzig to return the remaining copies of the first edition of Engels' The Condition of the Working-Class in England for transmission to Der Volksstaat publishers.
  12. ↑ A reference to the 'Circulaire à toutes les fédérations de l'Association Internationale des Travailleurs' adopted at Sonvillier on 12 November 1871 (see Note 374). It was printed in La Emancipacion, the organ of the Spanish Federal Council, on 25 December 1871.
  13. ↑ The surviving manuscript copy of the letter does not bear the name of the addressee. However, its contents and Marx's correspondence on the subject indicate that it was addressed to the heads of the Lachâtre publishing house in Paris. On 13 February 1872 Marx received a reply from the manager Juste Vernouillet, who informed him about the despatch of copies of the agreement on the publication of the French translation of Volume I of Capital. The agreement was signed on 15 February by Marx on one side, and Maurice Lachâtre and Juste Vernouillet on the other. It stipulated that the French edition was to be published in 44 instalments, and sold five instalments at a time. The French authorised edition of Volume I of Capital was published between 17 September 1872 and November 1875. The translation was done by Joseph Roy, who began in February 1872 and completed work in late 1873. The quality of the translation largely failed to satisfy Marx; besides, he was convinced that the original needed to be revised to adapt it to French readers.
  14. ↑ F. Lassalle, Herr Bastiat Schuhe von Delitzsch, der ökonomische Julian, oder: Capital und Arbeit
  15. ↑ F. Engels, The Housing Question.
  16. ↑ Der Volksstaat, Nos. 10-13, 15 and 19 of 3, 7, 10, 14 and 21 February and 6 March 1872, reprinted from the Austrian workers' newspaper Volkswille a series of anonymous articles under the heading 'Die Wohnungsfrage'. The author of the articles was a doctor of medicine, the Proudhonist Arthur Mülberger. On 22 May Engels sent Liebknecht his reply to Miilberger's articles, which formed Part I of his work The Housing Question (see present edition, Vol. 23, pp. 315-37).
  17. ↑ E. Sax, Die Wohnungszustände der arbeitenden Klassen und ihre Reform.
  18. ↑ Parts I and II of Engels' work The Housing Question.
  19. ↑ F. Engels, 'The International in America'.