George Julian Harney: Brief an Friedrich Engels

in Brüssel

London, 30. März 1846

[Nach Marx Engels Gesamtausgabe (MEGA). Dritte Abteilung. Briefwechsel, Band 1. Berlin 1975, S. 523-527]

For Engels.

London, March 30. 1846.

My dear E.

I am your debtor for two or three letters, and I fear must have offended you by my silence, particularly through not answering before this time the one very important letter to which I shall presently more particularly allude. I am always busy, but the Polish Insurrection has found for me additional occupation. Night and day I have been working to rouse public feeling – not altogether without success. At length the great London meeting has been accomplished – I breathe again, and devote the first moment to write to you.

I first notice a very long letter I received through W several weeks ago, the letter was without a date. I was glad to hear of your arrangements for the publication of your "Quarterly". Has the result answered your expectations. When I informed my wife of your very philosophical system of writing in couples till 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning, she protested that such philosophy would not suit her, and that if she was in Brussels she would get up a "pronunciamento" amongst your wives. My wife has no objection to the manufacturing of Revolutions, provided the work is done on the short time system. She recommends your wives to form an "Anti-3-or-4-o'clock-in-the-morning-Association", she will volunteer her services as "English Correspondent", and she thinks that M Caudle might also be induced to join the sisterhood.

Your speculations as to the speedy coming of a revolution in England, I doubt. Revolutionary changes in Germany I think certain and likely to come soon. Such changes are not less certain in France and likely to ensue soon after the death of that old scoundrel Louis-Philippe, but I confess I cannot see the likelihood of such changes in England, at least until England is moved from without as well as within. Your prediction that we will get the Charter in the course of the present year, and the abolition of private property within three years will certainly not be realized; – indeed as regards the latter, although it may and I hope will come, it is my belief that neither you nor I will see it. As to what O'C has been saying lately about "physical force", I think noting of it. The English people will not adopt Cooper's slavish notions about peace and non-resistance, but neither would they act upon the opposite doctrine. They applaud it at public meetings, but that is all. Notwithstanding all the talk in 1839 about "arming", the people did not arm, and they will not arm. A long immunity from the presence of war in their own country and the long suspension of the militia has created a general distaste for arms, which year by year is becoming more extensive and more intense. The body of the English people, without becoming a slavish people, are becoming an eminently pacific people. I do not say that our fighting propensities are gone, on the contrary, I believe that the trained English soldiery is the most powerful soldiery in the world, that is, that a given number will, ninety times out of a hundred, vanquish a similar number of the trained troops of any nation in the world (I hope I shall not offend your Prussian nationality). Wanting, however, military training, the English people are the most unmilitary, indeed anti-military people on the face of the earth. To attempt a "physical-force" agitation at the present time would be productive of no good, but on the contrary of some evil – the evil of exciting suspicion against the agitators. I do not suppose that the great changes which will come in this country, will come altogether without violence, but organised combats such as we may look for in France, Germany, Italy and Spain, cannot take place in this country. To organise, to conspire a revolution in this country would be a vain and foolish project and the men who with their eyes open could take part in so absurd an attempt would be worse than foolish, would be highly culpable.

I must next notice what you say about my "leadership". First let me remark that you are too hard upon O Connor. You find fault with his "leaders", but you say the "week's summary" affords you entertainment – fun. You speak as though you credited me with the "summary", but the "summary" is prepared by O'Connor, as you might have known by the Irish jokes and very Irish poetry continually introduced into the commentary. You are wrong in supposing that he prevented my continuing the remarks on Cabet. The discontinuance was the result first of my own neglect, and second that Hetherington has never completed the translation, and I have defered further comment until the publication was complete. I must do O'C. the justice to say that he never interferes with what I write in the paper, nor does, he know what I write until he gets the paper. You have thought proper in the letter I am now commenting on to credit me with all the revolutionary virtues. You say I am "anti-national", "revolutionary", "energetical", "proletarian", "more of a Frenchman than an Englishman", "Atheistical, Republican, and Communist". I am too old a soldier to blush at this accumulation of virtues credited to my account, but supposing it to be even as you say, it does not follow that I am qualified for "leadership". A popular chief should be possessed of a magnificent bodily appearance, an iron frame, eloquence, or at least a ready fluency of tongue. I have none of these, O'C. has them all – at least in degree. A popular leader should possess great animal courage, contempt of pain and death, and be not altogether ignorant of arms and military science. No chief or leader that has hitherto appeared in the English movement has these qualifications, we have never had a Barbes for instance. In these qualifications I am decidedly deficient, I know noting of arms, have no stomach for fighting, and would rather die after some other fashion than by bullet or rope. From a knowledge of myself and all the men who have, and do figure in the Chartist movement, I am convinced that even in this respect was O'C. thrown overboard, we might go further and fare worse. Amongst my revolutionary virtues you give me credit for "energy". I know I do possess a sort of energy, which when occasion demands enables me to rouse others to exertion and direct their exertions, myself setting the example, but this is moral energy, the physical energy which makes Cromwell's Napoleon's etc. I possess, I fear, not an atom of. Placed in certain circumstances I should, I fear, fall like Robespierre, through want of the necessary courage to save myself. This is not all, the very qualities you give me the credit for possessing, and which you emphatically sum up in the sentence "You are the only Englishman who is really free of all prejudices that distinguish the Englishman from the Continental man", are sufficient of themselves to prevent my being a leader. If I am "the only Englishman etc.", it follows that I would be a chief without an army, a leader without followers. To myself my proper position appears clear, I am a "pioneer", the teacher of "strange doctrines", the proclaimer of principles which startle the many, and are but timidly acknowledged even by the few; and the office of the pioneer is surely useful, and as surely not inglorious. You see I am perfectly candid. I speak of myself as perhaps few men would speak, but I wish you not to be deceived, not to deceive yourself, not to deceive others. I am but one of the humble workers in the great movement of progress, as such I desire to be considered.

The letter I am commenting on came to me through W. opened. Now I have every confidence in W. but it is possible that, without meaning any harm, some points of your letter might come to be known, particularly as W. wrote me that he approved and agreed with all you had said about my leadership. Now if what you did say had become known it would place me in a very awkward position with O'C. I do not wish to prevent you criticising O'C. in your letters, or any other person (myself included), only I would wish that every necessary precaution should be taken by you in transmitting your letters.

If you find fault with this egotism, this talk about myself, you have only yourself to blame for it.

I now come to your letter of the 5th of March, which letter exists not, it has gone the way of all flesh, in accordance with your expressed wishes.

It is not necessary that I should go through all the points of your (5th of March) letter seriatim. I cannot pretend to judge of the policy and practicability of your scheme, of these you and your compatriots must be the best judges. For myself I have confidence in your discretion as well as your zeal, and as far as my humble abilities, and time will permit I am willing to aid you in the manner you suggest, you bearing in mind what I have said of my own deficiencies, and consequently that while competent to serve the cause in some ways, I am not competent to do so in others. But before I regularly commence the duties you expect of me, there is one point I must be assured of, – namely, – that your scheme has the sanction of the long-trusted, incorruptible, and martyr men of the German movement. I must inform you that I have been a member of the German Society for some weeks past (several Englishmen have joined the society lately which adds to its members every week), now should your scheme not be made known to the Society, or at least to one or two of its most trusted members, I should hesitate to join you, because if your arrangements came to be known I should be placed in a false position, perhaps regarded as a conspirator against the popular interests. I have great faith in Spr, and if he is not consulted I do not see how I could join you. But are you sure your scheme is not already known in London? I have acted as you directed, no one but myself knows the contents of your letter of the 5th March, but two or three weeks before that letter reached me, I heard that you (the literary characters in Brussels) had formed a society, confined to yourselves into which you admitted no working man. If by this society is meant the society respecting which you have written to me, you will see that it is already known and has excited prejudice amongst the good men. If this "society" be not your present scheme but something else, still whatever it may be it has excited prejudice here which you must endeavour to dispel before you can hope to have the views expressed in your 5th of March letter adopted by the Germans here. As regards Weitling he may have friends in the London Society, but certainly not the majority. S. is the man who leads, and properly so. He repudiates "leadership", but nature forms some men for chiefs and she has given him the necessary qualifications.

On Saturday I received a long letter from you through Weerth, or rather two letters. The one for the Star I like very much, it will appear this week. I have altered the date from February 20. to March 20th, it will thereby not look so stale.

The private letter accompanying your public letter I read with much interest, the facts connected with France are very important, and down to the line you indicate I shall use them in the Star though perhaps not this week. Do not be surprised if I use those facts in a "leader". All that you say about the middle-class in England and France I fully accord with. All that you say about "Merry England" is true. You say "I am just in time to include some resolutions which we thought proper to pass against Cooper". There are no "resolutions" in the letter I received from you.

A few words on the state of things in England. The anti-Corn Law agitation is drawing to a close. Whether or no Peel carries his measure through the Lords, the Corn Laws are doomed and the day of their final extinction is drawing nigh. Then comes complete middle-class domination, an increased agitation for the Charter, complete anstrangement between the proletarians and the middle-class, and the beginning of that conflict which will be a social as well as well as a political one.

The Chartists as Chartists are doing nothing, the "Chartist Convention" at Manchester, and the "Chartist Message" resulted in nothing – a mere flash in the pan. The Land Society goes on prospering, at least so I learn by the account of monies received, for I am not a member. Some land has been purchased and more will be almost immediately. The Land scheme may do as a passing experiment but is unworthy the energies of a national movement. I have told you that the German Society is advancing, I am glad that the report of their annual supper pleased your friends. I have seen the German paper published in New York. You will have seen that the "Fraternal Democrats" are progressing. After a deal of trouble and discouragement I think I shall succeed in this. We were for some time regarded with much prejudice and jealousy by the Chartists but this is wearing away. The Polish affair has done a good deal towards bringing this about.

Seeing that no other party would move, we determined to begin. Our efforts excited the Chartist-Executive who feared we would take the popular leadership out of their hands, hence they came to us, as soon as they came, we said "You lead, we will follow". Our policy is not to push ourselves, but our principles, and compel others to adopt them. Thus the two parties worked harmoniously, forming a joint committee to get up the meeting. To me was left the drawing up of the resolutions and petition, and I determined to make both ultra-democratic. I had all my own way in the Committee and at the public meeting the resolutions were passed unanimously. Schapper was received with great enthusiasm, and just in proportion as we were democratic in our sentiments we were applauded. Several Polish aristocrats present left the meeting in a rage, grinding their teeth, and denouncing me as a "sans-culotte" for my onslaught on them. The meeting was a glorious one, at least three thousand persons present. The humbugs (Lovett and Co) were plotting to get up a genteel Polish-nationality meeting, when we stepped in and settled their hash for them. It is not likely that they will now hold a meeting at all. The meeting was reported in the Times, Chronicle, Advertiser, D. News, Globe, and Sun. It was editorially praised by the Advertiser, and Sun, and denounced by the Times, and D. News. Did you see the Times-denunciation? It was capital, especially as following within a few days a "leader" in which the Times man had asserted that the "delusion of Chartism" was dead and gone. This meeting will be the commencement of a new era in English agitation, henceforth mere Chartism will not do, ultra democracy, social as well as political, will be the object of our propaganda. To night a meeting is to be holden in South London, but that of course not be reported in the daily papers. I must conclude. Write again soon. I will myself write again in a week or two. Mary's love to Mrs. E. [and] yourself. Remember me to Marx, G etc.

Thine fraternally –

Julian.

(Henceforth "J.")

M. Philippe Gigot

Rue de Bodenbreuk, 8,

Bruxelles,

Belgium.

Pre Paid.