|
Friday, October 09, 2009 - 11:37 AM
There has recently been a very curious business here. All those
elements among the local Germans who are dissatisfied with us and what
we do have formed a coalition for the purpose of overthrowing you, me
and the communists in general, and competing with the Workers’ Society.
[158] Bornstedt
is exceedingly displeased; the story emanating from Otterberg, passed
on and confirmed by Sandkuhl and exploited by Crüger and Moras, to the
effect that we were simply exploiting him, Bornstedt, has made him
furious with all of us; Moras and Crüger, who go about complaining of our alleged cavalier treatment of them, have put his back up even further. Seiler
is annoyed because of the unpardonable neglect he suffered at the
founding of the Workers’ Society, and because of its good progress,
which has given the lie to all his predictions. Heilberg is
seeking to take spectacular if unbloody revenge for all the slights
that have been, and are being, daily meted out to him. Bornstedt, too,
is seething because his gifts of books and maps have failed to buy him
the status of an influential democrat and honorary membership of, and a
place for his bust in, the Society, instead of which his typesetter [Karl Wallau] will, tomorrow evening, put his name to the vote like that of any ordinary mortal. He is also vexed that he, the aristocratic homme d'esprit,
should find much less opportunity to make fun of the workers than he
had hoped. Then Moras is annoyed at having been unable to win over the Brüsseler-Zeitung for Heinzen. Enfin all these heterogeneous elements agreed upon a coup that was to reduce us one and all to a secondary role vis-à-vis
Imbert and the Belgian democrats, and to call into being a society far
more grandiose and universal than our uncouth Workers’ Society. All
these gentlemen were fired by the idea of taking the initiative in
something for once, and the cowardly rascals deemed the moment of your
absence admirably suited to that end. But they had shamefully
miscalculated.
They therefore decided quite on the sly to arrange a
cosmopolitan-democratic supper and there to propose without prior
warning a society à la fraternal democrats [122]
with workers’ meetings, etc., etc. They set up a kind of committee onto
which as a matter of form they co-opted the, to them, completely
harmless Imbert. After hearing all kinds of vague rumours, it was not
until Sunday evening at the Society that I learned anything positive
about it from Bornstedt, and on Monday the meal was to take place. I
could get no details from Bornstedt except that Jottrand, General
Mellinet, Adolf Bartels, Kats, etc., etc., would be there, Poles,
Italians, etc., etc. Although I had no inkling whatever about the whole
coalition (only on Monday morning did I learn that Bornstedt was
somewhat piqued and that Moras and Crüger were moaning and plotting:
about Seiler and Heilberg I knew nothing), nonetheless I smelled a rat.
But it was essential to attend because of the Belgians and because
nothing democratic must be allowed to take place in little Brussels
without our participating. But something had to be done about forming a
group. Wallau and I accordingly put the matter forward and advocated it
vigorously, upon which some thirty immediately agreed to go. On Monday
morning I was told by Lupus that, besides the président d'honneur,
old Mellinet, and the actual chairman, Jottrand, they would have to
have two vice-chairmen, one of whom would be Imbert and the other a
German, preferably a working man. Wallau was, unfortunately, out of the
running since he didn’t speak French. That’s what he'd been told by
Bornstedt. He, Lupus, had replied that in that case it must be me. I
told Lupus that it must be him, but he refused point-blank. I was also
reluctant because I look so awfully young, but finally I thought that,
for all eventualities, it would be best for me to accept.
We went there in the evening.[159] Bornstedt was all innocence, as though nothing had as yet been arranged, merely the officials (toujours à l'exception de l'Allemand)
, and a few registered speakers, none of whose names, save for Crüger
and Moras I was able to discover; he kept making off to see to the
arrangement of the place, hurried from one person to the next, duping,
intriguing, bootlicking for all he was worth. However I saw no evidence
of any specific intrigue; this didn’t transpire till later on. We were
at the Estaminet Liégeois in the Place du Palais de Justice. When it
came to electing the officials, Bornstedt, contrary to all that had
been agreed, proposed Wallau. The latter declined through Wolff (Lupus)
and had me Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire proposed, this being carried in style. Thus thwarted, the
whole plot collapsed. They now +- lost their heads and gave themselves
away. After Imbert had proposed the health of the martyrs de la liberté, I came out with a toast in French au souvenir de la revolution de 1792 and, as an afterthought, of the anniversaire du 1er vendémiaire an I de la république.[160] [the
anniversary of the First Vendémiaire of the first year of the Republic
— 22 September 1792, the day when the Republic was proclaimed, fell on
the First Vendémiaire according to the republican calendar]
Crüger followed me with a ludicrous speech during which he dried up and
had to resort to his manuscript. Then Moras, who read out an harangue
almost entirely devoted to his humble self. Both in German. So confused
were their toasts that I have absolutely no recollection of them. Then
Pellering in Flemish. The lawyer Spilthoorn of Ghent, speaking French au peuple anglais
then, to my great astonishment, that hunchbacked spider Heilberg, with
a long, school-masterly, vapid speech in French in which he 1) patted
himself on the back as editor of the Atelier Démocratique; 2)
declared that he, Maximus Heilberg, had for several months been
pursuing — but that must be said in French: The Association of Belgian
Working Men, that is the goal I have been pursuing for several months
(i. e. since the moment I deigned to take cognisance of the final
chapter of the Poverty of Philosophy). He, then, and not Kats and the other Belgians. ‘We shall enter the lists when our elders are no longer there’ etc., etc. [Marseillaise] He will achieve what Kats and Jottrand could not do; 3) proposed to found a fraternal democracy and to reorganise the meetings; 4) to entrust the elected bureau with the organisation of both.
Well now, what confusion! First lump together the cosmopolitan
business and Belgian meetings on Belgian affairs and 2) instead of
dropping this proposal because everything’s going wrong for you, pass
it on to the existing bureau! And if he had my departure in mind,
should he not have known that it would be unthinkable to bring anyone
else but you into the bureau? But the numbskull had already written the
Whole of his speech and his vanity wouldn’t allow him to omit anything
by which he could seize the initiative in some way. The thing, of
course, went through, but in view of the highly factice
albeit noisy enthusiasm, there could be no question of putting the
confused proposal into better order. Next A. Bartels spoke (Jules
wasn’t there), and then Wallau demanded the floor. But how intense was
my astonishment when suddenly Bornstedt thrust himself forward and
urgently demanded the floor for Seiler as a speaker whose name was
higher up the register. Having got it, Seiler delivered an interminably
long, garrulous, silly, absurdly vapid and truly shameful speech (in
French) in which he talked the most hair-raising nonsense about pouvoirs législatif, administratif et exécutif,
gave all manner of wise advice to the democrats (as did Heilberg, who
invented the most wondrous things about teaching and questions of
education), in which Seiler, further posing en grand homme spoke of
democratic societies, in which I participated and which I may perhaps even have directed (literally), and finally, with the latest news to come from Paris; etc., etc., actually dragged in his precious bureau.[161]
In short, it was ghastly. Several speakers followed, a Swiss jackass,
Pellering, Kats (very good), etc., etc., and at ten o'clock Jottrand
(who blushed with shame for the Germans) declared the sitting closed.
Suddenly Heilberg called for silence and announced that Weerth’s speech
at the free-trade congress [162] would be appearing next day in a supplement to the Atelier
which would be sold separately!!! Then Zalewski also spoke, whining a
while about the union between that unfortunate Poland and that great,
noble and poetical Germany — finally all went home quietly enough but
very much out of temper.
Thursday, 30 September
Since the above was written a great deal more has happened and
various things have been decided. On Tuesday morning, when the whole
plot was clear to me, I hurried round to counter it; that same night at
2 o'clock I went to see Lupus at the bureau i could not Bornstedt he
balloted out of the Workers’ Society? Wednesday called on all and
sundry, but everybody was of the opinion that we couldn’t do it. On
Wednesday evening, when I arrived at the Society, Bornstedt was already
there; his attitude was equivocal; finally Thomis came in with the
latest issue; my anti-Heinzen article which I'd brought him as long ago
as Monday and, not finding him in (2 o'clock in the afternoon), had
taken to the printers, was not in it. [Engels,
‘The Communists and Karl Heinzen’. First article, dated 26 September
was not printed in No. 78, 29 September; it appeared in the next issue
on 3 October 1847] On my questioning him, he said there had been no space. I reminded him of what you and he had agreed.[163]
He denied it; I waited till Wallau arrived and he told me there had
been space enough but that on Tuesday Bornstedt had had the article
fetched from the printers and had not sent it back again. I went to
Bornstedt and very rudely told him as much. He tried to lie his way
out. I again reverted to the agreement, which he again denied, save for
a few trivial generalities. I passed some insulting remarks — Crüger,
Gigot and Imbert, etc., etc., were present — and asked: ‘Do you intend
to publish the article on Sunday, oui ou non?’ — ‘We'll have to discuss it first.’ — ‘I refuse to discuss it with you.’ — And thereupon I left him.
The sitting began. Bornstedt, chin cradled in his hands, sat looking
at me with a curiously gloating expression. I stared back at him and
waited. Up got Mr Thomis, who, as you know, had demanded the floor. He
drew a prepared speech out of his pocket and read out a series of the
most peculiar aspersions on our sham battle.[164]
This went on for some time but, as it showed no signs of finishing,
there was a general muttering, a mass of people demanded the floor, and
Wallau called Thomis to order. The latter, Thomis, then read out some
half dozen inane phrases on the question and withdrew. Then Hess spoke
and defended us pretty well. Then Junge. Then Wolff’ of Paris who,
though he dried up 3 times, was much applauded. Then several more.
Wolff had betrayed the fact that our opposition had been purely formal.
So I had to take the floor. I spoke — to the great discomfiture of
Bornstedt, who had believed that I was too much preoccupied with
personal squabbles — I spoke, then, about the revolutionary aspect of
the protectionist system, completely ignoring the aforesaid Thomis, of
course, and proposed a new question. Agreed. — Pause. — Bornstedt,
badly shaken by the vehement way I had addressed him, by Thomis’
ratting on him (there were echoes of Bornstedt in his speech) and by
the vehemence of my peroration — Bornstedt came up to me: My dear boy,
how terribly impassioned you are, etc., etc. In short, I was to sign
the article. — No. — Then at least we should agree on a short editorial
introduction. — Very well, eleven o'clock tomorrow at the Café Suisse.
There followed the matter of the admission of Bornstedt, Crüger,
Wolff. Hess was the first to get up; he addressed 2 questions to
Bornstedt about Monday’s meeting. Bornstedt lied his way out, and Hess
was weak enough to declare himself satisfait. Junge went for
Bornstedt personally because of his behaviour at the Society and
because he had introduced Sandkuhl under a false name. Fischer came out
very energetically against Bornstedt, quite impromptu but very well.
Several others likewise. In short, the triumphant Mr von Bornstedt had
almost literally to run the gauntlet of the workers. He took a severe
drubbing and was so thunderstruck — he, who of course believed he had
well and truly bought his way in with his gifts of books — that he
could only answer evasively, feebly, concedingly — in spite of the fact
that Wallau, fanatically in support of him, was a wretched chairman who
permitted him to interrupt the speakers at any and every opportunity.
Everything was still hanging in the balance when Wallau directed the
candidates to withdraw and called for a vote. Crüger, proposed by me as an exceptionally guileless man, who could in no way harm the Society, and purement et simplement
seconded by Wolff, got through. In the case of Bornstedt, Wallau came
out with a long, impassioned speech on his behalf. Then I stood up,
went into the whole matter of the plot in so far as it concerned the
Society, demolished Bornstedt’s evasions, each by means of the other,
and finally declared: Bornstedt has intrigued against us, has sought to
compete with us, but we have won, and hence can now admit him into the
Society. During my speech — the best I have ever made — I was
constantly interrupted by applause; notably when I said: these
gentlemen believed that all had been won because I, their
vice-chairman, was going away, but it had not occurred to them that
there is, amongst us, one to whom the position belongs by right, one
who alone is able to represent the German democrats here in Brussels,
and that is Marx — whereupon tremendous applause. in short, no one
spoke after me, and thus Bornstedt was not done the honour of being
thrown out. He was standing outside the door and listening to it all. I
would rather have said my say while he was still in the room, but it
could not be done, because I had to spare myself for the final blow,
and Wallau broke off the discussion. But, like Wolff and Crüger, he had
heard every word. As opposed to him, Wolff was admitted almost without
a hitch.
In short, at yesterday’s sitting Bornstedt, Crüger, etc., etc.,
suffered such an affront that they cannot honourably frequent the
Society again, and they've had enough to last them a long time. But
frequent it they certainly will; the shameless Bornstedt has been so
reduced by our even greater insolence, by the utter failure of all his
calculations, and by our vehemence, that all he can do is trot around
Brussels whining to everyone about his disgrace — the lowest depths of
debasement. He came back into the hall raging but impotent and, when I
took my leave of the Society and was allowed to go with every
imaginable mark of respect, he departed seething. Bürgers, who has been
here since the day before yesterday evening, was present while we
discussed Bornstedt.
Throughout, the behaviour of our workers was really splendid: the
gifts, 26 books and 27 maps, were never mentioned, they treated
Bornstedt with the utmost frigidity and lack of consideration — and,
when I spoke and had reached my peroration, I had it in my power to
have him rejected by a vast majority. Even Wallau admits as much. But
we treated him worse than that by adopting him with scorn and
contumely. The affair has made a capital impression on the Society; for
the first time they have had a role to play, have dominated a meeting
despite all the plotting, and have put in his place a fellow who was
trying to set himself up against them. Only a few clerks, etc., etc.,
are dissatisfied, the vast majority being enthusiastically on our side.
They have experienced what it means to be associated.
This morning I went to the Café Suisse, and who should fail to turn
up but Bornstedt. — Weerth and Seiler, however, were there to meet me;
they had just been talking to Bornstedt, and Seiler was obsequiousness
and ingratiation personified. 1, of course, gave him the cold shoulder.
Yesterday’s sitting, by the way, was so dramatic, and evolved so
splendidly towards its climax that sheer aesthetic emotion momentarily
turned Wolff of Paris into a party man. Today I also went to see A.
Bartels and explained to him that the German Society was in no way
responsible for what had happened on Monday, that Crüger, Bornstedt,
Moras, Seiler, Heilberg, etc., etc., were not even members, and that
the whole affair, staged without the knowledge of the German Society,
was in fact a bid to set up a rival faction. A letter in similar vein,
signed by all the committee members, is to be sent to Jottrand
tomorrow, when I and Lupus will also be going to see Imbert. I have
further written the following letter to Jottrand about the place on the
organising I committee of the Brussels fraternal democrats which will become vacant on my departure:
‘Sir, Being obliged to leave Brussels for a few months, I find
myself unable to carry out the functions which the meeting of the 27th
instant saw fit to entrust to me. — I therefore request you to call on
a German democrat resident in Brussels to participate in the work of
the committee charged with organising a universal democratic society. I
would take the liberty of proposing to you one of the German democrats
in Brussels whom the meeting, had he been able to attend it, would have
nominated for the office which, in his absence, it honoured me by
conferring upon myself. I mean Mr Marx who, I am firmly convinced, has
the best claim to represent German democracy on the committee. Hence it
would not be Mr Marx who would he replacing me there, but rather I who,
at the meeting, replaced Mr Marx. I am, Sir, etc., etc.'
I had in fact already agreed with Jottrand that I would advise him
in writing of my departure and propose you for the committee. Jottrand
is also away and will be back in a fortnight. If, as I believe, nothing
comes of the whole affair, it will be Heilberg’s proposal that falls
through; if something does come of it, then it will be we who have
brought the thing about. Either way we have succeeded in getting you
and, after you, myself, recognised as representatives of the German
democrats in Brussels, besides the whole plot having been brought to a
dreadfully ignominious end.
This evening there was a meeting of the community [165]
at which I took the chair. With the exception of Wallau who, by the
way, allowed himself to be converted and whose conduct yesterday was,
indeed, excusable on various grounds for which I made allowance — with
this one exception, then, the enthusiasm about the Bornstedt affair was
unanimous. The fellows are beginning to feel their own importance. They
have at last taken their stand as a society, as a power, vis-à-vis
other people, and the’ fact that everything went with such a splendid
swing and that their victory was so complete has made them enormously
proud. Junge’s in the seventh heaven, Riedel is beside himself with
joy, even little Ohnemans goes strutting about like a fighting-cock.
Anyway, as I said before, this affair has given, and will continue to
give, the Society a tremendous impetus, both internal and external
Fellows who otherwise never open their traps have attacked Bornstedt.
And even the plot has helped us: firstly Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire Bornstedt went about telling
everyone that the German democratic Workers’ Society had arranged the
meeting and secondly we denied it all and, as a result of both these
things, the society has become a general topic of conversation among
Belgian democrats and is regarded as a highly significant, plus ou moins mysterious power German democracy is growing very strong in Brussels, Bartels remarked this morning.
By the way, you too are to be included in the committee’s letter to
Jottrand. Gigot will sign himself ‘Secretary in Marx’s absence’.
Settle your financial affairs as quickly as possible and come back
here again. I'm itching to get away, but must first wait until these
plots have run their course. Just now I can’t possibly leave. So the
sooner you come the better. But first put your financial affairs in
order. At all events I'll remain at my post as long as I possibly can; si c'est possible, until you arrive. But for that very reason it’s desirable that you come soon.
Your, Louis J. Sheehan, Esquire
|