London, 15 July 1882 

Dear Mr Bernstein, 

I am replying to your last letter straight away as there would 
otherwise be a 3 days’ gap on account of the Sunday postal arrange- 
ments. 

I was shown the Mehringiad by an acquaintance here and at 
once recognised both author and prompter. Ever since the time his 
plans for the Sozialdemokrat went so completely awry because of the 
presence of yourself and Bebel, Hirsch* has been working himself up 
into a ludicrous rage against the ‘Zurich people’. We have often 

* rubber-? great-° Carl Hirsch 

292 162, Engels to Bernstein. 15 July 1882 

enough given him the broadest hints to the effect that we were not in 
accord with him in this respect; rather, anything he did, he did on his 
own responsibility, but this has helped only to the extent that he 
doesn’t pester us with his lamentations. He has, by the way, been 
back in Paris (on sufferance) for some considerable time, and last 
Saturday (8 July) married a certain Miss Lina Haschert. 

As for the actual contents of the thing, there is no reason for us to 
intervene. Mehring has treated the world to so many lies about us 
that, were we to deny just one of them, it would be tantamount to an 
admission that all the rest were true. For years we have let all this 
mendacious tittle-tattle pass unheeded, unless absolute necessity com- 
pelled us to reply. Our people have the Volks-Zeitung at their disposal, 
so all that is needed is a communication to the effect that an article 
of mine, signed by me, appeared in the Sozialdemokrat of ? June.?*’ 
That is the best way to reply. You yourself can, of course, also refer to 
it in the Sozialdemokrat as you intended, and say that Marx and I 
always agree beforehand on any public move we make. I’m very 
glad that the article in the Sozialdemokrat appeared at this precise 
moment; it will knock all these inanities on the head. 

On the other hand I think you would be well advised to leave 
Hochberg out of it. After all, he simply wants to appear as a private 
individual and hence will be able to conduct his own defence if he 
thinks it necessary. I don’t know whether it would be doing him a ser- 
vice to rake up the old affair of the Jahrbuch article, etc.*——should 
there be doubts within the party about our position, we might be com- 
pelled to revert to it, though I for one think it quite unnecessary. 

Since Marx leads a completely secluded existence in Argenteuil 
and keeps his presence there as secret as possible, he has seen nothing 
of Hirsch, at least so far as I know, nor is he in any way anxious to do 
so. Marx needs peace and quiet, and I shall not therefore bother him 
with all this business before it proves absolutely necessary, i. e. before 
Hirsch forms any further cabals. 

Kautsky has written me one, indeed two, long letters *** about 
everything under the sun. However, as I have already told you,” I no 
longer have the time for such lengthy correspondence and to be able 
to investigate and reply to this or that I should, what’s more, actually 
have to embark on specialised studies. That is the whole reason for 
my silence. 

" See this volume, p. 279.-° Ibid., p. 203. 

I know absolutely nothing of value about Chartism.'°° If I could 
persuade our old friend Harney in Boston (ex-editor of The Northern 
Star) to write a history of Chartism, he would be the man. 

Kindest regards. 

Yours, 
F. Engels 

I myself have been so much out of touch with Hirsch that I have no 
occasion whatever to give him my views on this business. If occasion 
arose, I should of course do so.