ENGELS TO KARL KAUTSKY %? 

London, 11 February 1891 

Dear Kautsky, 

Many thanks for your two letters. I return herewith those of Be- 
bel and Schippel. 

The boycott imposed upon me by the Berliners has not yet been lift- 
ed; there’s been no sign of a letter and it’s obvious they haven’t yet 
made up their minds. By contrast, the Hamburger Echo published 
a leading article that was very fair,! considering that the chaps are 
still strongly tainted with Lassalleanism and actually swear by the 
system of acquired rights. From this, and from the Frankfurter Zei- 
tung, I also gathered that the onslaught of the opposition press was al- 
ready at its height, if not actually abating. Once they have survived 
that—and so far as I could see, it has so far been very mild—the 
chaps will recover from their initial alarm. By contrast, Adler’s Berlin 
correspondent (A. Braun?) has actually thanked me for publishing 
the thing.! A few more such voices and the opposition will languish. 

It became evident to me that the document had been deliberately 
suppressed and concealed from Bebel in May/June 1875 the moment 
he informed me that the date of his release from prison had been 
1 April; indeed, I have written to him '°* saying that he was bound to 
have seen it unless ‘something untoward’ had happened. In due 
course I shall, if necessary, request him to reply to this point. For 
a long time the document was held by Liebknecht from whose 
clutches Bracke had some difficulty in retrieving it; Liebknecht 
wished to keep it entirely to himself in order to use it for the final ver- 
sion of the programme. How, needs no saying. 

Send me Lafargue’s article ! by registered book post as a ms.; I'll 
smooth things out all right. Come to that, his article on Padlewski* 
was quite good and very useful, considering the way the Vorwärts mis- 
represents French politics. All in all, Wilhelm” would seem to be out 
of luck in this respect. He is always praising the French Republic to 

* P. Lafargue, ‘Der Schuf Padlewsky’s’, Die Neue Zeit, 9. Jg. 1890/91, 1. Bd., Nr. 19 (see 
also this volume, pp. 108, 123).-’ Wilhelm Liebknecht 

130 Engels to Kautsky. 1] February 189] 

the skies while Guesde, the correspondent whom he himself appoint- 
ed, is for ever tearing it to pieces.'*° 

The parliamentary group’s pronouncement,? heralded by Schip- 
pel, is a matter of complete indifference to me. Should they wish, 
I am prepared to confirm that I am not in the habit of asking their 
permission. Whether or not they approve of the fact of publication is 
all one to me. Nor do I begrudge them the right to express their dis- 
approval of this and that. Unless the affair turns out in such a way as 
absolutely to compel me to take it up, it would not occur to me to re- 
ply. So we shall wait and see. 

I shall not write to Bebel about it, for in the first place he himself 
must first let me know what view of the matter he has finally arrived 
at and, in the second, every resolution is signed by everybody in the 
parliamentary group whether or not they voted for it. By the way, Be- 
bel is wrong in thinking I would allow myself to become embroiled in 
acrimonious dispute. For that to happen, they would first have to 
provoke me with falsehoods, etc., which I could not overlook. On the 
contrary, [ am positively steeped in a spirit of conciliation, having af- 
ter all no cause for anger, and am only too anxious to build that 
bridge—pontoon bridge, trestle bridge, iron, stone or even golden 
bridge—across the potential abyss or gulf which Bebel thought he 
saw yawning in the distance. 

Odd! Schippel now writes of the many old Lassalleans who pride 
themselves on their Lassalleanism—yet when they were over 
here, it was unanimously agreed that there were no Lassalleans 
left in Germany! Indeed, this was the main reason for my abandoning 
many of my reservations. And then Bebel also chimes in, saying that 
a large number of the best comrades are seriously offended. If [so],’ 
they ought to have [described]* things to me as they really were. 

Come to that, if you cannot now, 15 years later, speak your mind 
about Lassalle’s theoretical balderdash and his prophetic mission, 
when if ever will you be able to? 

However, the party as such, the Executive, the parliamentary 
group and ¢utti quanti? are exempted by the Anti-Socialist Law )! from 
all blame save that of having accepted such a programme (and there 
is no getting round this). So long as that law was in force there could 
be no question of any revision; no sooner was it suspended than revi- 
sion was included in the agenda. So what more do they want? 

* Manuscript damaged. -? all the rest 

It is also imperative that the chaps should at long last throw off the 
habit of handling the party officials——their servants—with kid 
gloves and kow-towing to them as infallible bureaucrats, instead of 
confronting them critically. 

Your 
F.E. 

You will no doubt have heard that Aveling is standing for North- 
ampton in place of Bradlaugh.* The invitation came from the local 
BRANCHES OF THE Social Democratic Frprration? and from the 
Gasworkers. He went down there and his tub-thumping met with 
great applause. He was assured of 900-1,000 votes. But he hadn’t got 
the deposit for the election expenses and, when offered this by a Tory 
agent, indignantly refused it. Thus he was not nominated, but from 
now on will stand as labour candidate for Northampton.