Letter to Paul Lafargue, April 10, 1889

Author(s) Friedrich Engels
Written 10 April 1889


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
First published in Russian in: Marx and Engels, Works, First Russian Edition, Vol. XXVIII, Moscow, 1940
Published in English in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 48


ENGELS TO PAUL LAFARGUE

AT LE PERREUX

London, 10 April 1889

My dear Lafargue,

I have just seen Bonnier and we discussed the situation. As I expected, your request that the date of the congress be changed has spread confusion everywhere. Liebknecht has stated in the Berlin press that, since there is little hope of the congress being held this year in Paris, it would be advisable to hold it next year in Switzerland. The Swiss press has seized on this idea with enthusiasm. Bebel, evidently tiring of all these difficulties, is prepared to leave the whole thing to Liebknecht. And the Belgians will not reply, either to Bebel or to Liebknecht.

Fortunately we know the Belgians' secret. Anseele, who is an honest man, wrote and told Bernstein about it: They intend to submit the Hague resolutions[1] to their national congress at Jolimont on 22 April, and their national council will act only after authorisation by the congress. That is how the good folk of Brussels interpret international action.

The thing's as plain as daylight. It will give the Brussels Possibilists a whole month to compound and intrigue with the Paris Possibilists; at the Jolimont congress they will put forward a proposal made by Brousse & Co., offering a few more or less derisory concessions (depending upon the position at the time), the Belgians will accept and will suggest that the others be satisfied with these great and magnanimous concessions. And, since the masses are always in favour of conciliation, and since the lesser nationalities dote on congresses, the Dutch, the Danes, the Swiss themselves, the Americans and,—who knows?—maybe also Liebknecht, will come out in favour of unity and of a Paris congress in 1889, short of having another tipsy session in Switzerland in 1890. For this much is certain: should the idea gain ground that the 1889 anti-Possibilist congress in Paris has been shelved, the Possibilists will have won the day, and everyone will attend their congress save only, perhaps, for the Germans.

It is what I have been telling you from the very start. You wanted everything and now you run the risk of getting nothing.

There is still a chance of saving the situation, and this we have resolutely seized upon.

Our pamphlet[2] has created an immense stir here, as I have told you. You have no doubt had a letter from the committee of the rebellious Trades Unionists[3] who have written to Bernstein and to others besides. Although they incline towards the Possibilist congress, they are still in doubt. And in the Social Democratic Federation,[4] too, there are rebellious elements, otherwise Hyndman would not have written last Saturday's article.[5] We have thus undermined the Possibilists' reserves and must now follow up the advantage we have gained.

Bernstein has therefore written to Justice[6] saying that, in view of that journal's more conciliatory style, and speaking only for himself, it might not be too late to come to an understanding; that if Justice so greatly desires such an understanding, it need only urge the Possibilists to accept the Hague resolutions unreservedly and forthwith; that two points—the admission of all on an equal footing, subject to ratification by the congress, and the sovereignty of the congress—are not open to discussion; they must take it or leave it; but that, if the Possibilists were to accept immediately, he would do his best to promote general agreement.

He and Tussy went to see Hyndman on Monday evening to hand him this reply, which is going to be inserted. They took advantage of the occasion to let him know that they were better acquainted than he with the situation abroad and no less well than he with that in England, and that there was no hope of his bamboozling them with his usual tricks. They told him that, if there were two congresses, ours would be attended, not only by the Germans, Dutch, Belgians and Swiss, but also by the Austrians, Danes, Swedes, Norwegians, Romanians, Americans and by those Russians and Poles living in the West. They made it clear to him that they knew perfectly well the extent to which his personal position over here had been undermined by our disclosure of the lies disseminated by him regarding the situation in France, etc. They gained the impression that his friends the Possibilists had themselves deceived him on several counts, and left, convinced that he would do all he could to make the Possibilists give way.

We have also had a letter from Liebknecht in which he undertakes to do what he can to bring about conciliation, on condition that the Hague resolutions are unreservedly accepted by the Possibilists before 20 April. I am also awaiting one from Bebel, whereupon we shall make use of them. It is stated in both that in no circumstances shall we budge an inch on the two main points.

According to Hyndman, the Possibilists were afraid of being chucked out of their own congress, hinc illae lacrimae![7]

In this way we shall foil the Brussels intrigues, by letting it be known from the outset that no compromise is possible. Either the Possibilists accept, in which case our victory over them will be complete; we shall have forced their hand, made them eat HUMBLE PIE, and trampled underfoot for good and all their claim to be the one and only French Socialist Party worthy of recognition; you will have all that you require and the congress will see to the rest if, as Bonnier tells us, you can saturate it with delegates from the provinces. Or else they refuse, and then we shall enjoy the advantage of being seen by everyone concerned to have done our utmost towards conciliation. All the waverers will be for us, and we shall hold a congress in Paris in the autumn whatever Liebknecht may say, for by that time there will not be any one sitting on the fence anywhere.

I am sending you two papers with articles relating to the congress from which you will see how much we are bestirring ourselves.

What could be better, after all, than to destroy the Possibilists through their own congress, supposing it can be managed?

Liebknecht thought he could get the Possibilists to rally round him in opposition to Brousse, in Brousse's despite and over Brousse's head! What an idea—ruling the world with Borsdorf for your capital!

Give Laura a kiss from me. What is she doing? She isn't ill, is she?

Yours ever,

F. E.

  1. ↑ The International Socialist Conference was held in the Hague on 28 February 1889. It was attended by representatives of the socialist movement of Germany, France, Belgium, Holland and Switzerland. The conference was convened at the suggestion of the Social Democratic faction in the German Reichstag with the aim of framing the conditions for the calling of an International Socialist Working Men's Congress in Paris. The Possibilists refused to attend the conference despite the invitation and did not recognise its decisions. The conference defined the powers of the forthcoming congress, its date and agenda. The International Working Men's Congress took place on 14 July 1889.
  2. ↑ A reference to the pamphlet The International Working Men's Congress of 1889. A Reply to 'Justice', London 1889. Its original version was written by Eduard Bernstein at Engels' suggestion in reply to the editorial comment entitled The German 'Official' Social Democrats and the International Congress in Paris and carried by the newspaper Justice on 16 March 1889, No. 270. Having been edited by Engels, the pamphlet appeared in English in London, and then it was published by the German newspaper Der Sozialdemokrat and signed: E. Bernstein.
  3. ↑ Engels means the Trade Union Committee of Protest Against the Parliamentary Committee's Actions With Regard To the Paris International Working Men's Congress. The Parliamentary Committee (see note 269) refused to take part on the pretext of British workers having a shorter working day and higher wages than the workers of other European countries and thus not needing any protection of their interests. The newly established Protest Committee of representatives of many trade unions organised protest meetings and entered into correspondence with socialist parties abroad concerning the preparation of the Congress.
  4. ↑ 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.
  5. ↑ See this volume, p. 291.
  6. ↑ E. Bernstein, 'The Paris Congress. To the Editor of Justice,' Justice, 13 April 1889.
  7. ↑ 'Hence those tears', Terentius, Andria, II, 99.