Letter to Paul Lafargue, May 24, 1889

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 24 May 1889


First published in: Marx and Engels, Works, First Russian Edition, Vol. XXVIII, Moscow, 1940
This letter was first published in English in Frederick Engels, Paul and Laura Lafargue. Correspondence. 1887-1890, Vol. 2, Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, 1960
Translated from the French
Reproduced in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 48


ENGELS TO PAUL LAFARGUE

AT LE PERREUX

London, 24 May 1889

My dear Lafargue,

Do for goodness' sake expedite the circular[1] with the foreign signa- tures! Here as everywhere else it will be of the greatest importance to us.

Never mind the content, however colourless and devoid of rhetorical flourishes—it's the signatures that count. If it reaches us within the next eight or ten days, it will mean victory for us here, otherwise we shall lose the battle for the second time, and this time it will be the Parisians' fault. It is really so difficult to write a circular anyone can sign?

Herewith Justice with a manifesto* of which the fury and bare-faced mendacity betray all too plainly the effect created here by the Convocation,[2] even at this late hour. The Social Democratic Federation,[3] you see,—or rather Hyndman—are well aware that what is at stake is their position over here, and likewise that of the Possibilists in France. We shall, of course, reply. But if we could append to our flysheet the Convocation with the foreign signatures, the effect would be tremendous.

The Convocation has appeared in Commonweal}'[4] and Morris has come out openly in support of our congress. In the Labour Elector W. Parnell, a delegate to the London congress[5] and a very good and capa- ble chap—a worker—says he has got copies of the Convocation for anybody who may want one.[6] A very good acquisition. Tussy has arranged a meeting for tomorrow at which Bernstein (over here we call him Ede, so if I happen to use that name, you will know whom I mean) will meet Burns, Tom Mann and other influential working men. Burns has been nominated for the Possibilist congress by his branch. It will be a very good thing to have men of that stamp at the Possibilist congress, supposing we cannot have them at our own.

The Star has not yet printed Okecki's letter,0 but only Bax's on Vaillant.d We shall remind hime about the former. As he wishes to promote the sale of his paper in Paris, we shall give him introductions to the radical Socialists of the Municipal Council, Longuet, Daumas, etc. What does Okecki say in his letter? Does he deny outright the imputa- tion that Boulé accepted Boulangist money? You cannot conceive the importance—both to ourselves and to you—of this English daily, nor how much it would repay the trouble of getting it out of Hyndman's clutches.

The manifesto in Justice claims that Farj at voted for the Possibilist congress (at the London congress). This cannot be true! I am asking him by this post to send us a letter we can publish.[7] But no, on second thoughts, I haven't got his address, and the man I had in mind was Fréjac of Commentry and not Farjat. So you would be doing us a great service if you could obtain a letter of this kind for us, and as soon as possible, for over here there's no time to be lost if we are not to lose our public.

I have written to Denmark to find out what is holding things up there[8] [9] —but my correspondent belongs to the radical opposition and not to the moderates who lead the party. We have also written to Bebel, telling him how important it is to secure the Danes who, in turn, will be followed by the Swedes and Norwegians, and have suggested that one of the Germans should go there in person if things don't go well.

And now, my dear Lafargue, make haste with the Convocation, signed by everybody concerned. It is the only effective way of stifling all the calumnies and lies put about by the others. And it is most important for the countries still hesitating that they should get it before they have made up their minds. Liebknecht, with his irresolution and dilatoriness, has cost us many a position; do not follow his example. For of one thing you may be certain—if you cause us to lose another battle by what others can only regard as incomprehensible delays, we over here shall be fully justified in losing patience and leaving you to 'shift for yourselves'. It is impossible to help people unless they are willing to help themselves just a little. So send out a circular of some sort, but not one liable to arouse opposition, to the Parties abroad without further delay, collect the signatures and have the thing printed, or send it to us for that purpose—with an English translation by Laura to save time. The prospects are so good, if only the lot of you would deign to put first things first, setting aside all petty rivalries and matters of detail. Don't ruin your own congress, don't be more German than the Germans.

Love to Laura,
Yours ever,

F. E.

Herewith Justice and Commonweal.

  1. ↑ The circular about the convocation of an International Working Men's Congress, written by P. Lafargue and J. Guesde, was sent by the authors to Engels on 14 May, 1889. In June 1889 it was printed in the form of a leaflet in French in Paris and in English in London, and also published in German by the newspapers Der Sozialdemokrat on 1 June and Berliner Volksblatt on 2 June. The newspaper The Star had also printed it on 14 May 1889 in the Feature The People's Post Box (in English); the circular likewise appeared in the weekly Commonweal on 8 June and also as an appendix to the pamphlet The International Working Men's Congress of 1889, II, A Reply to the 'Manifesto of the Social Democratic Federation' (see note 444).
  2. ↑ The circular was written with P. Lafargue's active participation so as to inform the working-class and socialist organisations of all countries about the decision of the Hague Socialist Conference (February 1889) (see note 385) and about the International Working Men's Congress due on 6 May 1889. Lafargue sent the text of the circular to Engels who approved it and translated it into German. Engels also saw about it being published in English. In German the circular was published, in the Engels translation, by the newspaper Der Sozialdemokrat on 11 May and, in Wilhelm Liebknecht's translation, by the newspaper Berliner Volksblatt on 10 May; in English, the text of the circular came cut in the form of a leaflet, published by the newspapers Labour Elector on 18 May and by Reynold's Newspaper on 19 May under the heading 'International Workmen's Congress', as well as by The Commonweal on 25 May.
  3. ↑ The Social Democratic Federation was a British socialist organisation, the successor of the Democratic Federation, reformed in August 1884. It consisted of heterogeneous socialist elements, mostly intellectuals, but also politically active workers. The programme of the Federation provided for the collectivisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange. Its leader, Henry Hyndman, was dictatorial and arbitrary, and his supporters among the Federation's leaders denied the need to work among the trade unions. In contrast to Hyndman, the Federation members grouped round Eleanor Marx-Aveling, Edward Aveling, William Morris and Tom Mann sought close ties with the mass working-class movement. In December 1884, differences on questions of tactics and international co-operation led to a split in the Federation and the establishment of the independent socialist league (see note 21). In 1885-86 the Federation's branches were active in the movement of the unemployed, in strike struggles and in the campaign for the eight-hour day.
  4. ↑ 'Manifesto of the Social Democratic Federation. Plain Truths about the
  5. ↑ The reference is to the London International Congress of Trades Unions held on 6-10 November 1888 at the initiative of the British trade unions. The congress involved trade union representatives of Britain, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Italy as well as French syndicates aligned with the Possibilists. Stipulating that delegates to this congress should be officially elected by respective trade unions, its organisers thereby deprived the German and Austrian. Social Democrats, as well as representatives of the French Workers' Party (the Guesdists), see note 33, of an opportunity to attend. Yet the leaders of the British trade unions failed in their attempts to foist reformist decisions on the congress and isolate it from the Socialists. The congress adopted a number of positive decisions. Thus, the workers were not to confine themselves to forming purely professional organisations - they were to unite into an independent political party as well. One of the resolutions stressed the need to press for legislative regulation of the working day and working conditions. In its most significant decision, the congress resolved to convene an International Working Men's Congress in Paris in 1889; organisation of this congress was entrusted to the Possibilists.
  6. ↑ The appeal was published by Labour Elector on 18 May 1889; yet the paper had nothing to say about William Parnell and about copies of this appeal which he allegedly had.
  7. ↑ According to The Manifesto of the Social Democratic Federation, the International Congress of Trade Unions in London (see note 320) voted unanimously to authorise the Possibilists to convene an International Workingmen's Congress in Paris. The manifesto also claimed that Gabriel Farjat, described as a representative of the 'French soidisant Marxists, or Guesdists', voted for this resolution. E. Bernstein, in his pamphlet The International Working Men's Congress of 1889, II, A Reply to the Manifesto of the Social Democratic Federation rebutted these fabrications by proving that as a representative of the French trade unions, not Socialists, Farjat could not vote for this resolution. Subsequently one of the publications released by the Organising Committee for the Convocation of an International Working Men's Congress in Paris had a special postscript witarjat's statement to the effect that, far from voting for the resolution entrusting the convocation of an International Congress to the Possibilists, he could not do it for the simple reason that the resolution was never put to the vote.
  8. ↑ Pertaining to the collection of signatures to the circular for the convocation of an International Working Men's Congress in Paris. Representatives of the Danish Social Democratic Party, who had not attended the Hague Conference (see note 385) but had announced in advance that they agreed with all of its decisions, unexpectedly refused to send delegates to both congresses. Concerning the two trends in the Danish socialist movement, see note 418.
  9. ↑ Gerson Trier