London, 15 December 1871 

Dear Liebknecht, 

About Schneider, the necessary steps will be taken at the local 
German Workers’ Society next Monday. Unfortunately too 
many of Schweitzer’s followers have been allowed in, and if we did 
not have Frankel, the whole Society would have fallen into their 
hands of late. (The issues of the Social-Demokrat have just this 
moment arrived.*) How Frankel can object, as you demand, to his 

a Marx’s daughter - > Charles Etienne Lafargue -* Laura Lafargue - 4 Engels’ 
nickname - ¢ 18 December 

old letter being reprinted, is not clear to me.**” He certainly 
regrets the first half of the letter; but as for the second half, with 
its criticism of your erstwhile bourgeois-democratic inclinations, it 
says no more than what we too wrote to you at the time.—At all 
events, the other author in the Neuer Social-Demokrat must be 
Weber. 

Against Schneider: 1. It goes without saying that the Con- 
ference* delegates were elected. To answer his other stupid 
questions would be absurd. 2. The 15-strong French contingent 
consists of 1 Commune member, Chalain; a number of drunkards; 
the same B.Landeck who declared in the course of the 
International trial in Paris that he had indeed belonged to the 
International, but would never do so again; 3 people who do not 
belong to the International at all (but only to this newly formed 
French Section in London, which has never been recognised ***)— 
and the whole fuss stems from the fact that since their rules 
contravene the Rules, no one has been willing to grant them 
recognition as the local French Section. Theisz and Avrial, the 
only decent people in the Section, have not signed this proclama- 
tion, and are now trying to make overtures to us once more! In 
contrast, in the General Council there are now 8 Commune 
members (Serraillier, Frankel, Vaillant, Cournet, Ranvier, Arnaud, 
Johannard, Longuet), and we have a French Section 50 men 
strong here, which includes the most decent of the refugees in its 
numbers.*”? Rouillier is not a Commune member but a loud- 
mouthed, drink-sodden cobbler. And these 15 men are described 
by the Neuer Social-Demokrat as ‘the well-known French leaders’! 

What the Neuer Social-Demokrat says about the English Federal 
Council and Dilke has been taken from an intentionally distorted 
report in the bourgeois press (The Daily News, etc.) and is false. 

The Neuer Social-Demokrat’s report from Denmark proves that 
they have absolutely no contact with people there. However, it 
would be a good idea for you to write to H. Brix, the editor of the 
Socialisten in Copenhagen, or to his deputy, L. Pio, offering them 
correspondents’ reports from Germany if they are willing in 
return to send you reports in German or English from Denmark. 
They do understand English. And anyway, you can learn enough 
Danish in a fortnight to understand the Socialisten; the Tauchnitz 
dictionary will suffice. The language has no grammar whatever. 
Address: Editorial board of ‘Socialisten’, Copenhagen. 

Incidentally, the Qui Vive! suffocated in its own filth a week ago. 

a the London Conference of 1871 

Even if Vermersch, its editor, was not a mouchard,* his way of 
writing at least suited the French police to a tee. The paper was 
finally offered to us, but we wanted nothing to do with such an 
inheritance, and so it died. 

Boruttau. The letter returned herewith” shows even more 
clearly than the previous one that the ass really is entangled right 
up to his eyes in Bakunin’s web. When he objects to our disavowal 
of the Alliance, or calls for compulsory atheism for all members of 
the International, is that Bakuninism or not? And when he 
expresses his partial approval of people’s complaints on matters of 
which he knows nothing—every word he writes about the 
Conference is false—is that Bakuninism or not? And you would 
like to play him off against them? He may be ‘honest’, but when it 
comes to those honest dolts with their vast, silent expectations, I 
would much rather have their enmity than their friendship. The 
muddled blockhead will not receive a single line from us here.” 
The events in Geneva*”' will either have opened his eyes, or else 
pushed him entirely into the ranks of the Bakuninists, where he 
belongs. Why don’t you get him to send you the Révolution sociale, 
especially Nos. 5, 6 and 7? I presume that you read the Egalité; 
that is absolutely essential to keep yourself au courant. 

You cannot understand why all the Geneva Communards 
should be against us. This problem, which has no interest at all for 
me, you can easily solve for yourself by thinking back to the 
behaviour of the various refugee associations of ’49 and ’50 where 
groupings were often determined by the sheer chance of being 
thrown together. All the Geneva Communards are confined to 
3 men: Malon, Lefrangais and Ostyn; the rest are people without 
any name at all. 

When you say that the non-representation of Germany at the 
Conference was the fault of Marx’s mystery-mongering, we have 
to reply that this is not the case. Marx merely wrote to say that the 
police should learn nothing of it. Is it not possible for you to 
inform your own committee or other local groups about the 
Conference, without its coming to the ears of the police? That 
would be a fine piece of ‘organisation’! We did indeed want to 
hold the Conference privatim, i.e. unbeknown to the continental 
police, but that does not mean that if you and Bebel could not 
attend, you should not have taken steps to ensure that others 
might come! Marx emphatically rejects this allegation. 

In the context, action souterranée’ means nothing more than 

a police informer - > See this volume, p. 248. - © underground activities 

unobtrusive action and pro opaganda- making without forcing one- 
self on the general public, in contrast to French loud-mouths a 
la Pyat who called for a daily dose of murder announcements and 
against whom measures have been taken.” 

In Spain we are in the clear, we have gained a resounding 
victory. The relevant Conference resolution has been reco ognised 
(you can find the Emancipacién article on it in the Egalité*) and 
even the business of abstaining from elections, on which they still 
insist for the moment, is about to crumble. Incidentally, this 
abstentionist ploy is just confined to the few Bakuninists and the 
remnants of the Proudhonists (we are rid of the majority) and has 
suffered a severe defeat this time. The matter is settled as far as, 
Spain is concerned. 

It was about the English company swindle that I wrote to you.’ I 
know nothing of German ones. Have you any material on this? 
Without that nothing can be done.” 

Your view that the German Internationalists do not need to pay 
dues, and that, in general, it is a matter of complete indifference 
whether the International has few members in Germany or many, 
is the exact opposite of ours. If you have not asked for the 
contributions of 1 silver groschen per person per annum, or if you 
have used them up yourselves, you will have to come up with your 
own justification. How you can imagine that the other nations 
would bear your share of the costs, so that you might come 
amongst them ‘in the Spirit’, like Jesus Christ, while saving your 
flesh and your money,—is something I quite fail to comprehend. 
At all events, this Platonic relationship has got to stop and the 
German workers must either be in the International or out of it. 
The French find themselves subjected to pressures of a completely 
different order, and we are better organised there than ever. If you 
personally treat the matter as being of no importance, we shall 
have to turn to others, but we shall clear the business up one way 
or the other, on that you may rely. 

The French and English versions of the Rules take up less than 
1 sheet of print, so that special supplement will probably not be 
necessary —should this not be the case, let us know how much the 
costs of typesetting, on the one hand, and the cost of the special 
supplement, on the other, come to, and we shall see what we can 
do. 

Marx is working on the 2nd edition of Capital; I have my hands 
full with the Italian and Spanish correspondence and other 

a F, Engels, ‘On the Company Swindle in England’. - > i.e. 16 pages 

176. Marx to Laura Lafargue. 18 December 187) 283 

business. We shall have to see what time we can find to do the 
preface for the Manifesto.’ 
With best wishes from us all to you and yours. 

Your 
F. E.