Letter to Karl Kautsky, March 17, 1891

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 17 March 1891


First published in Aus der Frühzeit des Marxismus. Engels Briefwechsel mit Kautsky, Prague 1935
Published in English in full for the first time in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 49


ENGELS TO KARL KAUTSKY

IN STUTTGART

London, 17 March 1891

Dear Kautsky,

Thank you for your letter of the 9th.— The 6 Dahn fascicles[1] went off to you yesterday by parcel post. I should have been hard at work on the Origin[2] if Fischer hadn't come up with a demand for a new edition of 10,000 copies of 1. The Civil War in France; 2. Marx, Wage Labour and Capital; 3. Entwicklung des Sozialismus, etc.[3] So I had to write an introduction to the Civil War, which went off on Saturday,[4] and at the same time thoroughly revise the thing and append thereto the General Council's 2 addresses on the Franco-Prussian War; fortunately Louise undertook to translate the latter. Nevertheless it has consumed a great deal of time. For Wage Labour and Capital was written in pre-surplus value terminology which cannot possibly be allowed to stand today in a propaganda piece running to 10,000 copies. So I shall have to translate it into present-day language and preface it with an apology. Finally, the Socialism also needs to be revised and, if possible, a little more popularised — 10,000 copies is no trifling matter -, so how can I find time for anything else? And of all times I ought not to withdraw from the field, leaving it free for Lassallean pamphlets. But as soon as I have rid myself of this task, I shall tackle the Origin. I have pretty well completed the preliminary studies. And now along comes a Frenchman, H. Rave, who wishes to translate the thing - he has translated Bebel's Frau[5] — not all that marvellously— and wants me if possible to send him revises or clean proof-sheets. But the matter has not yet been agreed.

I congratulate Peschel on his translator. Hope I shan't suffer the same fate.

The Anti-Brentano[6] is being published[7] by Meissner, 4'/2 sheets — I am getting him to print all documents, including Sedley Taylor and my preface to the 4th edition.[8] Printing almost complete.

Apropos, has the Neue Zeit had a review copy of the [Capital] 4th edition? If not, write and let me know at once (postcard) — I had made a particular point of this. If it has I should be glad if you would publish a brief notice in which, in connection with my preface,[9] you might also make a discreet allusion to Brentano.

For want of time I have not been able to have my introduction to the Civil War—about 9 or 10 pages of the Neue Zeit — copied out for you; this house is a hive of activity; Annie is getting married and Louise is having to see about a new girl, etc., added to which there have been the promptings of the Berliners. But I have asked Fischer to send me 3 clean proof-sheets; alternatively, if the revise turns out well I shall send it to you so that you may use it beforehand should you wish. If, for one reason or another, it doesn't suit you, nothing will have been lost.

Not a word from August[10] — there's no hurry. Sorge thinks I should take no notice of the mighty Vorwärts article.[11] What do you think? I am beginning to incline towards his view.

The bit in my letter to you about responsibility[12] was solely for August's consumption; if I had thought it would hurt your feelings in any way, I would have omitted it — such a thing had never even crossed my mind. And I certainly wasn't thinking of your note on the parliamentary group's ukase.[13] I simply regarded it as my duty, in the event of your forwarding the letter to the Berliners, to relieve you of as much responsibility as possible in their eyes and to take it upon myself. Voilà tout.[14]

Thank you for the Volkszeitung[15] and Critica Sociale. The first was sent me by Sorge, the second by Turati (at the behest of that braggart Loria); he now sends it regularly. Since then a still more forceful article, inspired by Sorge, and written by Schlüter, has appeared in the Volkszeitung.[16]

I too am coming increasingly to believe that the affair has aroused no indignation whatever in the party as such and that, for one reason or another, it has only hurt the feelings of the gentry in Berlin. And even the latter seem to have realised that the provocations in the Vorwärts proved abortive as soon as they were uttered and produced no effect at all — tombés à plat[17] as the French say. Otherwise I should have certainly had word from them.

Your complaints about the Vorwärts (since when has the thing acquired the masculine gender?) find a sympathetic echo over here. Never has such a paper been seen before. I can only wonder how long people will stand for it.

Percy and his family are shortly going to Ryde, Isle of Wight, where Percy is to set up and manage an agency for his brothers.

Kindest regards from

Your

F.E.

  1. ↑ F. Dahn, Urgeschichte der germanischen und romanischen Völker, vols 1-4
  2. ↑ The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State
  3. ↑ the third German edition; the separate German edition of 1891; the fourth German edition of Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
  4. ↑ 14 March
  5. ↑ A. Bebel, Die Frau in der Vergangenheit, Gegenwart und Zukunft and La Femme dans le passé, le présent et l'avenir
  6. ↑ F. Engels, In the Case of Brentano Versus Marx
  7. ↑ Manuscript damaged
  8. ↑ of the first volume of Capital
  9. ↑ to the first volume of Capital
  10. ↑ August Bebel
  11. ↑ In his letter to Engels of 2 March 1891 Sorge condemned the mistaken stand taken by the Social-Democratic group in the German Reichstag and by the editorial board of Vorwärts in regard of the publication of Critique of the Gotha Programme (see notes 118 and 162) but added: 'Only do not get involved in any further debates with these lads, you have more important things to do.'
  12. ↑ See this volume, p. 133
  13. ↑ On 13 February 1891 Vorwärts (No. 37) carried a leading article, 'Der Marx'sche Programm-Brief, written by Wilhelm Liebknecht, in which the Reichstag Social-Democratic group expressed disagreement with the assessment of the Gotha programme and Lassalle's role given in Marx's Critique.
  14. ↑ That's all.
  15. ↑ New Yorker Volkszeitung
  16. ↑ This presumably refers to the article, 'Marx' Kritik des Parteiprogramms', published in New Yorker Volkszeitung, No. 51, 28 February 1891. It condemned the attitude taken by Vorwärts on the publication of Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme (see Note 162) and emphasised the vast importance of this work.
  17. ↑ fell flat