London, 2 July 1872 

Dear Hepner, 

When mandates’ are sent out it is absolutely essential to include 
one for Cuno, who is now in Belgium. He is of the greatest 
importance because of the Italian Bakuninists; these people will 
send nothing but lawyers and other doctrinaire bourgeois who 
play at being workers’ representatives and who have done 
everything in their power to prevent the workers from corres- 

a for delegates to the Hague Congress 

ponding with us directly. It was precisely Cuno who was the first 
to break through this barrier and, had he remained there, the 
whole problem would have been solved by now. Moreover, Cuno 
is one of our very best people; Liebknecht’s entire mistrust of him 
is groundless and is based on his belief that Cuno was an agent of 
J. Ph. Becker, working in the interests of the Geneva ‘Mother 
Section’, something that never crossed Cuno’s mind. I had to 
explain the whole absurd story to him later on since he knew 
nothing about the Mother Section.* When I know what a man 
has really accomplished, 1 do not let myself be misled by such 
matters. 

It goes without saying that the Congress deliberations will be 
conducted in all 3 languages—German, English and French—so 
that ignorance of the two last languages need deter no-one.*” 

Returning herewith Boruttau’s letter.°° The man is assuredly 
honest, but terribly muddle-headed and driven on by an urge to 
perform deeds out of all proportion to his talents. These qualities 
make him a highly suitable pure for the Bakuninists who surround 
him and exploit him. If you read the Bulletin de la Fédération 
jurassienne, you will see that precisely now, before the Congress, 
these gentlemen are doing all they can to obtain private letters and 
so forth from us and to discover what material damaging to them 
we have in our possession.” Apart from that the Boruttau letter is 
of no significance. It would not occur to us to do additional work 
for these gentlemen to our own detriment. H Boruttau is so 
unfamiliar with notorious facts which even Bakunin has never 
denied, it is not our responsibility’to look up the issue of Kolokol 
where he can find it all, i.e. if he knows Russian, for if he doesn’t, 
even referring him to the right issue will not help him.‘ So much 
is certain: we have the material. Moreover, as long as 3 years ago 
Borkheim published more on this matter in his Russische Briefe* 
than six Boruttaus could ask for. You would be well advised to 
tread warily with Boruttau. The magniloquent phrases of the 
Bakuninists have completely beguiled this muddle-head and this 
over-intense sort of honesty often turns into treachery in practice. 

‘Scissions.* The circular is confidential and so not intended for 

a See this volume, pp. 370-72. - > ‘La Liberté de Bruxelles du 5 mai publie...’, 
Bulletin de la Fédération jurassienne, No. 6, 10 May 1872. - © This presumably refers to 
Bakunin’s appeal, ‘PycckHM»b, MOABCKHMb H BCbM CAaBHHCKHMB Apy3bamp’ (To 
Russian, Polish and All Slavic Friends), Koroxons (The Bell), No. 122 & 123 (with 
Supplement No. 4), 15 February 1862. - 4 K. Marx and F. Engels, Fictitious Splits in 
the International. 

publication. We do not know how the (legitimist) Courrier de France 
in Paris—which is publishing it—obtained possession of it. 
Likewise with the Radical, which may have taken it from the 
Courrier. A German translation in the Volksstaat (which you would 
have to produce over there) would only be desirable if the 
bourgeois press in Germany makes a scandal of the affair— but in 
that event it would be very desirable indeed. In the meantime the 
Bulletin de la Fédération jurassienne has publicly attacked it,’ so an 
article in the Volksstaat could do no harm. I assume that 
Liebknecht has left you the copy we sent him. If not, I shall send 
you one in a letter—a postal wrapper is impossible since the police 
have stolen everything I sent to Germany in that way. 

Henri Perret, Temple Unique, Genéve, has been instructed to 
send the ‘Volksstaat’ 50 copies for distribution in Germany. If they 
have not yet arrived, please drop him a few lines. 

I shall write to Wigand.”? 

‘Schulze-Bastiat’. Marx is buried up to his ears in work on the 
2nd German edition” and the Ist French edition of Capital. 
But even apart from this he would never agree to write an 
appendix to correct the blunders in such a completely unscientific 
book as Lassalle’s.* He would have to correct almost the whole 
book. Entre nous if Marx ever does get around to correcting 
Lassalle there will be precious little of Lassalle left over. He has 
not done so up to now out of consideration for the many 
Lassalleans who have joined the Party, but one day it is sure to 
come. 

‘The Housing Question’. Liebknecht spoke of his intention 
of publishing my article” on its own.>™ If this is the case, please 
let me have the galley proofs since there are a number of disas- 
trous printing errors in it. There is also the following to be consi- 
dered: 

You write to me about Sax. Is it worthwhile writing a special 
article on a book‘ which appeared in 1869? If so, I shall give the 
man a good hiding for you, and it would perhaps be a good idea 
to follow up the critique of the petit bourgeois solution to the 
housing problem with a critique of the grand bourgeois solution. 
In that event the two articles‘ could be published together on 
their own, which would provide a more exhaustive treatment of 

a F. Lassalle, Herr Bastiat-Schulze von Delitzsch, der Gkonomische Julian, oder: Capital und 
Arbeit, -> F. Engels, The Housing Question. -¢ E. Sax, Die Wohnungszustände der 
arbeitenden Klassen und ihre Reform. - 4 Parts 1 and il of Engels’ work The Housing 

Question. : 

the subject. Please let me know about this soon so that I may act 
accordingly. 

I shall also produce a small article for you about the latest 
squabble in America.* 

Yours, 
F. E.