AT LE PERREUX 
London, 28 March 1895 
41 Regent’s Park Road, N. W. 
My dear Lohr, 

If you were in danger of being flooded, it was just the reverse with us— 
four weeks without water, and at the end of the frost the canalisation blocked 
up as the result. A fine mess it was. London was thrown back into barbarism 
by this month of hard frost, and the Standard with truly British Conservatism 
congratulated us on the fact that the non-supply of water was a proof of the 
high civilisation attained here, while it pitied the uncivilised cities of the 
Continent where the water-pipes had not frozen. Well, thank goodness, it’s 
over. 

You grumble at the mythical union and real squabbles of the French 
Socialists—they are babies at that game, compared to the English. They are 
especially interesting—the English Socialists I mean—since Social 
Democratic Federation “* and Independent Labour Party ''* fight each other 
under the cloak of a pretended harmony. This harmony goes exactly as far as 
their common hatred of John Burns, and allows the Social Democratic 
Federation to invite Keir Hardie to speak at their Commune meeting; at 
which meeting Keir Hardie (read his speech in the Labour Leader“) directs 
hidden attacks against the Social Democratic Federation to which that body 
replies in Justice.” The Social Democratic Federation says the Independent 
Labour Party has no right to exist, the Social Democratic Federation being 
the 

“No. 51, 23 March 1895 -° No. 584, 23 March 1895: Topical Tattle 

only true orthodox church; and the Independent Labour Party says the Social 
Democratic Federation ought to allow itself to be absorbed in the 
Independent Labour Party. Their latest exploit was at the County Council 
Election where both of these organisations put up candidates, and only 
against ‘Progressives’; °° the result was: 1,300 votes in all out of 486,000, 
and the election of 4 Moderates (Conservatives) for seats held formerly by 
Progressives, and the cry of triumph in both Justice’ and Labour Leader’ that 
they had beaten the Progressives. Imagine the Paris Socialists voting with 
Clericals, Monarchists and Opportunists *’ against the parties claiming 
municipal autonomy for Paris, and you have the exact counterpart of the 
Socialist vote in London. But—to support the Progressives would have been 
to acknowledge that John Burns had behaved well in the County Council, and 
to endorse the policy of Sidney Webb and the Fabians *’ who, muffs though 
they be as Socialists, are really doing very good work municipally, and 
fighting energetically and cleverly for an autonomous London. And so the 
‘Socialists’ prefer to support the party which refuses to allow London its self- 
government and fights hard to keep the County Council powerless. Now the 
County Council is the next and best and easiest-to-be-conquered piece of 
governmental machinery—the working class could have it tomorrow if they 
were united. And what would Parliament be with a Socialist autonomous 
Council for London! 

The Berlin people are republishing Mohr’s articles in the Revue der Neuen 
Rheinischen Zeitung on France 1848-50 and I have written an introduction 
which will probably first appear in the Neue Zeit. It has suffered somewhat 
from the, as I think, exaggerated desires of our Berlin friends not to say 
anything which might be used as a means to assist in the passing of the 
Umsturzvorlage in the Reichstag. “** Under the circumstances I had to give 
way.” But this Umsturzvorlage and the absolutely uncertain state of things 
in Germany—splendid though it be for the general progress of our party— 
upsets a good deal of my calculations. I was, I believe you know, getting 
ready the Lassalle correspondence; *“* for that I have to compare a lot of old 
papers, letters, etc. But if the new bill passes, neither the letters nor my notes 
and introduction will be printable in Germany. And a reprint of our old 
articles of 1843-52 will be equally impossible. So I am compelled to neglect 
all this until we can see somewhat clearer wie 

* Justice, No 582, 9 March 1895: ‘A Pill for Palmer’ and H. W. Lee, ‘A Much-Needed Lesson 
for Progressives and Social-Democrats’ - > The Labour Leader, No. 49, 9 March 1895: ‘The 
L.C.C. Elections’ and ‘The L.C.C. and the I.L.P.’ 

der Hase lduft.’ In the meantime I am taking up Vol. IV of the Capital, '”’ 
reading and correcting the parts already copied out by Karl Kautsky and shall 
then arrange with Tussy about her continuing the work. 

Things in Germany are decidedly becoming critical. The latest escapade of 
young William’—his tiefste Entrtistung at the Reichstag’s anti-Bismarck 
vote is big with serious eventualities. First as a symptom; it shows that he 
has now not only ‘a slate off but that the whole of his slate roof is getting out 
of order. Then as a défi.“ I have no doubt our party will reply to that in the 
Reichstag, and although the thing may appear to be buried for the moment, 
the conflict is there and will crop up again. There is no doubt, we are facing 
in Germany a modern Charles I, a man possessed by Caésarenwahnsinn.° 

Then look at the confusion the fellow creates in the ranks of the bourgeois 
parties. The Conservative Junker he in turns cajoles and repels; their clamour 
for state-secured rents he cannot satisfy; the alliance between landed 
aristocracy and large manufacturers, founded by Bismarck [in] 1878 by 
means of his protective tariff, °° has gone to pot over conflicting economic 
interests; the Catholic party, °° who hold the balance of power in the 
Reichstag with their 100 members, was on the best way of being bribed into 
voting for the Umsturzvorlage, when the Bismarck vote and_ the 
Entriistunskaiser’ throw them at once back into opposition—and that means 
furthering the splitting up of the Catholic Centre into an aristocratic- 
bourgeois wing and a democratic, peasant and working men’s wing. 
Everywhere confusion and disunion, pushing William to a coup d’ état to 
assert his divine right to absolute power and to get rid of universal suffrage, 
and on the other side the silent and resistless advance of our party 
manifesting itself at every election for any post accessible to working men’s 
votes. This does look critical—qui vivra verra! 

In a day or two I shall write to Paul about his half of his double-bedded 
book." He has got a strange bed-fellow! °°” 

Ever yours 
F. Engels