Letter to Paul Lafargue, April 15, 1892

Author(s) Eleanor Marx-Aveling
Written 15 April 1892


First published in: Marx and Engels, Works, Second Russian Edition, Vol. 38, Moscow, 1965
Published in English for the first time in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 49


AVELING TO PAUL LAFARGUE

AT LE PERREUX

[London,] 15 April 1892
65 Chancery Lane, W. C.

My dear Paul,

We sent you some days ago a copy of the Chronicle[1] containing a statement with regard to Adolphe Smith and the representation of the French Workers at the forthcoming demonstration in Hyde Park. In the Workman's Times of this week—I send you a second copy tho' I believe you get one regularly—you will see some notes re- ferring to this under the heading of (I think) 'London notes', and in any case over the signature of Autolycus—i.e. Burgess, Editor of the Workman's Times. Now the result of this paragraph has been much greater and much more unpleasant than you can probably imagine, and unless very disagreeable complications are to follow, you must ab- solutely write to the Chronicle and the Workman's Times on the sub- ject. That is, of course, if the organisations for which M. Adolphe is the mouthpiece are, as we surmise, simply the Possibilist ones.

You know that 2 years ago, when in the face of violent opposition we managed to force a demonstration,[2] you came and spoke from the platforms of the Demonstration Committee. You know that last year your Party was again invited by us, and your letter, stating the reasons why you could not send a delegate was publicly read at the Demonstration. During all this time the London Trades Council working then as now with Mr Hyndman and the English Possibilists, refused to have anything to do with the 'foreigners'. And do not forget the very important fact that the Legal Eight Hours Day demanded by Shipton and Co. is not our Legal Eight Hours Day. They only want the 8 hours day legalised in order that over-time may be more highly paid.

Now seeing all this our Committee who have held steadfastly to the whole Paris programme,[3] and specially the strongest body not only on our Committee, but the strongest of the New Unions 164— that of the 'Gas Workers and General Labourers'[4] —are deeply hurt and surprised at the insult offered them in the Chronicle. Thome came up here on Wednesday and said that he thought it doubly strange as his Union, long before the International Secretariats were thought about, had entered into correspondence with the French Parti Ouvrier,[5] and he wanted to know why they were now to be insulted. This is only one case out of many. I can't tell you the di- sastrous effect this will have if you don't reply.

Yesterday I had a long talk with the General on the subject (Ed- ward is very ill with a bad throat)—and we both agreed, that you, as foreign Secretary of the 'Parti', must send a line to the Chronicle. The delay you can easily explain by the fact that you have been visiting your constituents and Fourmies. You should write—if that is the fact—that M. A. Smith speaks only for the Possibilists who are the reactionary party and represent—you know what. That the Parti Ouvrier attended the 1st demonstration of the Legal Eight Hours Committee, that although it could send no delegate, it was at one with that Committee last year, and (this we all hope) that your Party will be represented on our platforms this year. The Possibilists are sending 2 delegates. Surely you could send one. Could not Delec- luze come? It would cost very little to come from Calais? And you could also nominate Bonnier. Those 2 (I know you can't come) would counterbalance the others.

In any case, my dear Paul, you must write a line to the Chronicle (or better still let Laura write it!) and copy that and send it, with further details if need be, to the Workman's Times. But this must be done at once.

Yours,

Tussy

Why don't you get your Verriers[6] to join the International Bottle- makers' Society? Their not doing so is a great pity—and 'tis only 4d. (8 sous!) per annum per member!!

  1. ↑ In his letter to George Shipton, published in Daily Chronicle of 11 April 1892 in the column 'The Eight Hour Demonstration', Adolph Smith wrote about his talks with the leaders of the Possibilists (see Note 3) in Paris on sending delegates to the May Day demonstrations being organised by the London Trades Council (see Note 196). The idea was to give the demonstration an international character and deal a blow to the prestige of the Marxist-led Legal Eight Hours and International Labour League (see Note 200).
  2. ↑ The Possibilists refused to take part in the demonstration on 1 May 1890 on the grounds that Boulangist and other agents of the reaction were going to participate and that the demonstration might harm the cause of the working class.
  3. ↑ Eleanor Marx-Aveling means the demands for international labour legislation put forward by the 1889 Paris International Socialist Workers' Congress (see Note 51).
  4. ↑ This refers to the New Trades Unions, which were called into being by the rise of the British working-class movement in the late 1880s and early 1890s. One of the biggest among them was the Union of Gas Workers and General Labourers, found ed in 1889 (see Note 164). In contrast to the 'old' unions which, as a rule, consist ed of workers of only one trade, the new ones were based on the production princi ple (workers of different trades in one industry could belong to the same union). The new unions opened their doors to unskilled workers, who hitherto had re mained outside the union movement. An important part in the formation of the new unions was played by British socialists, who had the direct assistance of Engels. He characterised the New Trades Unions in his article 'May 4 in London' and in his 'Preface to the 1892 English Edition of The Condition of the Working-Class in Eng land in 1844 (see present edition, Vol. 27, pp. 257-69).
  5. ↑ Engels refers to the various trends within the socialist movement in France.
    The Marxist trend, headed by Jules Guesde (hence its other name, Guesdists) and Paul Lafargue, was represented by the Workers' Party, founded in 1879. From the outset this trend was torn by a sharp ideological struggle, as a result of which the party, at its St.-Etienne Congress in 1882, split up into two groups — the Guesdists and the Possibilists (or Broussists). The Guesdists retained the name of Workers' Party. Its programme, adopted at the Havre Congress in 1880, was drawn up with the participation of Marx. The Guesdists' strongholds were France's industrial centres. More specifically, they relied on individual groups of workers at the large plants of Paris. The party saw one of its principal tasks in winning the backing of the working masses. In the 1880s and 90s it achieved a meas ure of success in propagating Marxist ideas among France's workers. An import ant role in this was played by Le Socialiste, the party's newspaper. Marxists were active in the trades unions and led the workers' strike struggle. The party mounted a large-scale campaign in support of Paul Lafargue, whose election to the Cham ber of Deputies in 1891 was a major success for the French socialists. The party also did a great deal to promote international socialist ties and expose the aggres sive nature of the foreign policy of the French bourgeois republic, in particular of the 1891-93 Franco-Prussian alliance.
    But the party's leaders did not always pursue a consistently Marxist policy and made opportunistic mistakes, particularly on the peasant question in the 1890s. Marx and Engels criticised them on various issues, helping them to work out a cor rect line for the working-class movement.
    For the Possibilists (or Broussists) — see Note 3.
  6. ↑ glassworkers