1. The Crisis in Berlin[1]
Cologne, November 8. The situation looks very complicated, but it is very simple.
The King, as the Neue Preussische Zeitung correctly notes,[3] stands "on the broadest basis" of his "hereditary" rights "by the grace of God".
On the other side, the National Assembly has no basis whatever, its purpose being to constitute, to lay the basis.
Two sovereign powers. The connecting link between the two is Camphausen, the theory of agreement.[2]
When these two sovereign powers are no longer able to agree or do not want to agree, they become two hostile sovereign powers. The King has the right to throw down the gauntlet to the Assembly, the Assembly has the right to throw down the gauntlet to the King. The greater right is on the side of the greater might. Might is tested in struggle. The test of the struggle is victory. Each of the two powers can prove that it is right only by its victory, that it is wrong only by its defeat.
The King until now has not been a constitutional king. He is an absolute monarch who decides for or against constitutionalism.
The Assembly until now has not been constitutional, it is constituent. It has so far attempted to constitute constitutionalism. It can continue or discontinue its attempts.
Both the King and the Assembly temporarily acquiesced in the constitutional ceremonial.
4 Articles from the Neue Rheinische Zeitung
The King's demand that a Brandenburg Ministry which is to his liking be appointed in defiance of the majority in the Chamber, is the demand of an absolute monarch.
The Chamber's presumption, by means of a deputation straight to the King, to forbid the formation of a Brandenburg Ministry is the presumption of an absolute Chamber.
The King and the Assembly have sinned against constitutional convention.
The King and the Assembly have both retreated to their original sphere, the King deliberately, the Chamber unwittingly.
The King is at an advantage. Right is on the side of might. Legal phrases are on the side of impotence. A Rodbertus Ministry would be a cipher in which plus and minus neutralise each other.
Written by Marx on November 8, 1848
2. The Ex-Principality[3]
From the Republic of Neuchâtel, November 7. You will be interested to hear something also from a little country that until recently enjoyed the blessings of Prussian rule, but which was the first of all the lands under the Prussian Crown to raise the banner of revolution and drive out the Prussian paternal Government. I am speaking of the former "principality of Neuenburg and Vallendis",[4] in which
Herr Pfuel, the present Prime Minister, performed his first administrative exercises as Governor and was deposed by the people in May of this year, even before he could win laurels in Posen[5] and gather votes of no confidence as Prime Minister in Berlin. This little country has now assumed the prouder title of "République et Canton de Neuchâtel", and the time is probably not far off when the last Neuchâtel guardsman brushes his green tunic in Berlin. I must confess it gave me an amusing feeling of satisfaction five weeks after my flight from the Prussian Holy Hermandad[6] to be able once more to walk about unmolested on what is de jure still Prussian soil.
Incidentally, the Republic and Canton of Neuchâtel evidently finds itself in much more comfortable circumstances than the late principality of Neuenburg and Vallendis; for at the recent elections to the Swiss National Council the republican candidates received over 6,000 votes, whereas the candidates of the royalists, of the bédouins,[3] as they are called here, hardly mustered 900 votes. The Great Council,[7] too, consists almost entirely of republicans, and only Les Ponts, a small mountain village dominated by the aristocrats, sent
This nickname of the Swiss royalists is an allusion to the fact that the old Swiss cantons preserved patriarchal relations similar to those found in the social organisation of an Arab nomadic tribe, the Bedouin.—Ed.
Calame, ex-State Councillor of the royal Prussian Neuenburg principality, as its representative to Neuchâtel, where a few days ago he had to swear an oath of loyalty to the Republic. Instead of the old royalist Constitutionnel Neuchâtelois, there is published now — in La Chaux-de-Fonds, the largest, most industrialised and most republican place in the canton — a Républicain Neuchâtelois, written it is true in very bad Swiss-French of the Jura, but otherwise not at all badly edited.
The clock- and watch-making industry of the Jura and the lace manufacture of Traverstal, which are the main sources of livelihood of this little country, are beginning to prosper again, and the Montagnards,[3] in spite of the snow here being already a foot deep, are gradually regaining their old cheerfulness. Meanwhile the
bédouins go about looking very dejected, displaying uselessly the Prussian colours on their breeches, blouses and caps, and sighing in vain for the return of the worthy Pfuel and the decrees that began:
"Nous Frédéric-Guillaume par la grâce de Dieu." High up in the Jura, 3,500 feet above sea-level, the Prussian colours, black caps with white edging, have the same dejected look and are as ambiguously smiled at as among us on the Rhine; if one did not see the Swiss flags and the big placards with the words "République et Canton de Neuchâtel", one might think one was at home. Incidentally, I am glad to be able to report that in the Neuchâtel revolution, as in all the revolutions of 1848, the German workers played a decisive and very honourable role. For that reason, too, they are allotted the fullest measure of the aristocrats' hatred.
Written by Engels on November 7, 1848
i.e. the revolutionary-minded population of the mountain canton of Neuchâtel who were engaged mainly in clock- ana watch-making. They were given the name by analogy with the representatives of the revolutionary Montagne — the Jacobins — in the French Convention of 1792-93.— Ed
3. The New Institutions. Progress in Switzerland[8]
Berne, November 9. The new legislative Federal Assembly, consisting of the Swiss National Council and the Council of States, has been gathered here since the day before yesterday. The city of Berne has done its utmost to give them as brilliant and seductive a reception as possible. There has been music, festive processions, illuminations, the boom of cannon and the peal of bells — nothing has been forgotten. The sessions began the day before yesterday. In the National Council, which is elected by universal suffrage and according to the number of inhabitants (Berne has returned 20 deputies, Zurich 12, the smallest cantons two or three each), the overwhelming majority of deputies are liberals of a radical hue. The decidedly radical party is strongly represented, and the conservatives have only six or seven seats out of over a hundred. The Council of States, which is made up of two deputies from each canton and one deputy from each demi-canton, on the whole resembles the last Diet[9]
as regards composition and character. The L/r-cantons have once again returned several true separatists,[10] and as a result of the indirect elections, the reactionary element, though definitely in a minority, is nevertheless more strongly represented in this Council than it is in the National Council. As a matter of fact, by abolishing binding mandates[3] and invalidating half votes, the Council of States has been turned into a rejuvenated version of the Diet and has been
i.e. the instructions which the deputies of the Swiss Diet received from their cantonal governments and which greatly impeded the adoption of general decisions.— Ed.
pushed into the background by the creation of the National Council. It plays the thankless role of a Senate or a Chamber of Peers, of a drag on the assumed excessive desire for innovation of the National Council, the role of heir to the mature wisdom and careful reflection of the forefathers. This dignified and sedate institution already shares the fate of similar bodies in England and America, and the now defunct one in France. Even before it has shown any signs of life it is looked down upon by the press and overshadowed by the National Council. Practically no one talks about the Council of States, and if it does make itself talked about it will be so much the worse for it.
Although the National Council is supposed to represent the entire Swiss "nation", it has already at its first sitting given proof of typically Swiss disunity and absorption with trifles, if not of petty cantonal spirit. Three votes had to be taken to elect a President, although there were only three candidates with any serious chances, and moreover all three of them from Berne. The three gentlemen in question were Ochsenbein, Funk and Neuhaus; the first two represent the old radical party of Berne, the third the old liberal, semi-conservative party. In the end Herr Ochsenbein was elected by 50 votes out of 93, that is, with a very narrow majority. One can understand the Zurich and other Moderados[11] preferring the wise and very experienced Herr Neuhaus to Herr Ochsenbein, but the fact that Herr Funk, who has exactly the same political colouring as Herr Ochsenbein, should have been put forward as a competing candidate and received support in two votings, shows how unorganised and undisciplined the parties still are. At any rate the election of Ochsehbein means that the radicals gained a victory in the first contest of the parties. In the subsequent election of a Vice-President, five votes had to be taken to produce an absolute majority. On the other hand, the staid and experienced Council of States almost unanimously elected the Moderado Furrer from Zurich as its President in the first round of voting. These two elections amply illustrate how different a spirit reigns in the two Chambers and that they will soon take different courses and enter into conflict with each other.
The choice of a federal capital will be the next interesting issue to be debated. It will be interesting for the Swiss because the financial interests of very many of them are involved, and interesting for people abroad because precisely this debate will reveal most clearly to what extent the old parochial patriotism, the petty cantonal narrow-mindedness has been discarded. The competition is most intense between Berne, Zurich and Lucerne. Berne would like to see Zurich satisfied with the federal university, and Lucerne with the federal court of law, but in vain. Berne at any rate is the only suitable city, being the point where German and French Switzerland merge, the capital of the largest canton and the emerging centre of the whole Swiss movement. But in order to become a real centre, Berne must also possess the university and the federal court. But try and explain that to the Swiss whose fanaticism for their cantonal town has been roused! It is quite possible that the more radical National Council will vote for radical Berne, and the sedate Council of States for sedate, wise and prudent Zurich. An extremely difficult situation will then arise.
There has been considerable unrest in Geneva during the last three weeks. The reactionary patricians and bourgeois, who, from their villas, keep the villages around Geneva in almost feudal dependence, managed with the help of their peasants to push through all their three candidates in the elections to the National Council. But the committee declared the elections invalid, as more ballot-papers were returned than had been issued. Only this measure was able to pacify the revolutionary workers of Saint-Gervais, crowds of whom were already marching through the streets and shouting "Aux
armesT The attitude of the workers in the course of the week that followed was so menacing that the bourgeois preferred not to vote at all rather than provoke a revolution with the inevitable scenes of horror of which there had already been warning, especially since the Government threatened to resign if the reactionary candidates were once more elected. The radicals meanwhile altered their list of candidates, to which they added some more moderate names, made up for lost canvassing time, and obtained 5,000 to 5,500 votes in the new elections, that is almost a thousand more than the reactionaries had received in the previous round. The three reactionary candidates obtained hardly any votes; General Dufour, who received the highest number, managed to poll 1,500 votes. Elections to the Great Council were held a week later. The city elected 44 radicals, and the countryside, which had to elect 46 councillors, returned almost exclusively reactionaries. The Revue de Genève is still arguing with the bourgeois newspapers as to whether all 46 are reactionary or half a dozen of them will vote for the radical Government. We shall soon know. The confusion in Geneva may increase; for if the Government, which is here elected directly by the people, is forced to resign, then during the new elections the same thing might easily happen as during the second elections to the National Council, and a radical government could be confronted with a reactionary majority in the Great Council. It is moreover certain that the workers of Geneva are only waiting for an opportunity to safeguard the threatened gains of 1847 [2] by a new revolution.
On the whole, compared with the early forties, Switzerland has made considerable progress. This is nowhere so striking as among the working class. Whereas the old spirit of parochial narrow-mindedness and pedantry still holds almost undivided sway among the bourgeoisie and especially in the old patrician families, or has, at best, assumed more modern forms, the Swiss workers have developed to a remarkable degree. Formerly, they kept aloof from the Germans and displayed the most absurd "free Swiss" national arrogance, complained about the "foreign rogues" and showed no interest whatever in the contemporary movement. Now this has changed. Ever since working conditions have deteriorated, ever since Switzerland has been democratised, and especially since the minor riots have given place to European revolutions and battles such as those waged in Paris in June and in Vienna in October[13]—ever since then the Swiss workers have participated more and more in the political and socialist movements, have fraternised with the foreign workers, especially the German workers, and have abandoned their "free Swiss attitude". In the French part of Switzerland and in many of its German districts, Germans and German Swiss are members of the same workers' association on an equal footing, and associations consisting mainly of Swiss workers have decided to join the proposed organisation of German democratic associations which has partly come into being. Whereas the extreme radicals of official Switzerland dream at best of a Helvetian republic,[14] one and indivisible, Swiss workers often express the view that the whole of little Switzerland's independence will soon perish in the impending European storm. And this is said quite calmly and indifferently, without a word of regret, by these proletarian traitors! All the Swiss I have met expressed great sympathy for the Viennese, but among the workers it amounted to real fanaticism. No one speaks about the National Council, the Council of States, the riot of the priests in Freiburg,[15] but Vienna was on everybody's lips all day long. One would think that Vienna were again the capital of Switzerland as it was in the days before William Tell, that Switzerland belonged again to Austria. Hundreds of rumours were bruited about, debated, called in question, believed, refuted, and all possible aspects were thoroughly discussed. And when, at last, the news of the defeat of the heroic Viennese workers and students and of Windischgrätz's superior strength and barbarity was definitely confirmed, the effect on these Swiss workers was as though their own fate had been decided in Vienna and their own country had succumbed. Though this feeling is not yet a universal one, it is steadily gaining ground among the Swiss proletariat, and the fact that it already exists in many localities is, for a country like Switzerland, a tremendous advance.
Written by Engels on November 9, 1848
4. Counter-Revolution in Berlin[16]
[Neue Rheinische ZeitungNo. 141, November 12, 1848]
Cologne, November 11. The Pfuel Ministry was a "misunderstand-ing"; its real meaning is the Brandenburg Ministry. The Pfuel Ministry was the table of contents, the Brandenburg Ministry is the content itself.
Brandenburg in the Assembly and the Assembly in Brandenburg.[17]
Thus runs the epitaph of the House of Brandenburg.[3]
The Emperor Charles V was admired because he had himself buried while still alive [18] To have a bad joke engraved on one's tombstone is to go one better than the Emperor Charles V and his penal system, his criminal code.[19]
Brandenburg in the Assembly and the Assembly in Brandenburg! A King of Prussia once put in an appearance in the Assembly. That was not the real Brandenburg. The Marquis of Brandenburg who appeared in the Assembly the day before yesterday was the real King of Prussia.
The guardroom in the Assembly, the Assembly in the guardroom—that means: Brandenburg in the Assembly, the Assembly in Brandenburg!
Or will the Assembly in Brandenburg—Berlin, as is well known, is situated in the Province of Brandenburg — be master ... of the Brandenburg in the Assembly? Will Brandenburg seek the protection of the Assembly as a Capet once did in another Assembly?[20]
Brandenburg in the Assembly and the Assembly in Brandenburg is an expression with many meanings, ambiguous and portentous.
As we know, it is much easier for the peoples to cope with kings than with legislative assemblies. History gives us a whole list of abortive revolts of the people against national assemblies. It knows only two important exceptions to this rule. The English people in the person
This refers to the Hohenzollerns, who became hereditary margraves of Brandenburg in 1417.—Ed.
of Cromwell dissolved the Long Parliament, and the French people in the person of Bonaparte dissolved the Corps législatif. But the Long Parliament had long ago become a Rump, and the Corps législatif a corpse.
Are the kings more fortunate than the peoples in their revolts against legislative assemblies}
Charles I, James II, Louis XVI and Charles X are hardly promising ancestral examples.
There are luckier ancestors in Spain and Italy however. And recently in Vienna}
But one must not forget that a Congress of Nations was in session in Vienna and that the representatives of the Slavs, except for the Poles, went over to the imperial camp with bands playing.[21]
The struggle of the camarilla in Vienna against the Imperial Diet was at the same time a struggle of the Slav Diet against the German Diet. It was not Slavs, however, who seceded in the Berlin Assembly, it was only slaves, and slaves do not constitute a party; at best they are camp-followers of a party. The members of the Right who left the Berlin Assembly[22] have not strengthened the enemy camp, they have infected it with a fatal malady — with treason.
The Slav party was victorious in Austria together with the camarilla. It will now fight the camarilla over the spoils. If the Berlin camarilla is victorious it will not have to share the victory with the Right or to defend it against the Right; the Right will be given a tip—and kicks.
The Prussian Crown is within its rights in confronting the Assembly as an absolute Crown. But the Assembly is in the wrong because it does not confront the Crown as an absolute assembly. To begin with it should have had the Ministers arrested as traitors, traitors to the sovereignty of the people. It should have proscribed and outlawed all officials who obey orders others than those of the Assembly.
But the political weakness characterising the actions of the National Assembly in Berlin may become a source of civic strength in the provinces.
The bourgeoisie would have liked so much to transform the feudal monarchy into a bourgeois monarchy in an amicable way. After depriving the feudal party of armorial bearings and titles, which are offensive to its civic pride, and of the dues appertaining to feudal property, which violate the bourgeois mode of appropriation, the bourgeoisie would have liked so much to unite with the feudal party and together with it enslave the people. But the old bureaucracy does not want to be reduced to the status of a servant of a bourgeoisie for whom, until now, it has been a despotic tutor. The feudal party does not want to see its marks of distinction and interests burnt at the altar of the bourgeoisie. Finally, the Crown sees in the elements of the old feudal society — a society of which it is the crowning excrescence-—its true, native social ground, whereas it regards the bourgeoisie as an alien, artificial soil which bears it only under the condition that it withers away.
The bourgeoisie turns the intoxicating "grace of God" into a sober legal title, the rule of blood into the rule of paper, the royal sun into a civic astral lamp.
Royalty, therefore, was not taken in by the bourgeoisie. Its reply to the partial revolution of the bourgeoisie was a full-fledged counter-revolution. It drove the bourgeoisie once more into the arms of the revolution, of the people, by crying out to it:
Brandenburg in the Assembly and the Assembly in Brandenburg, While admitting that we do not expect the bourgeoisie to answer in a manner befitting the occasion, we must not omit to remark, on the other hand, that in its rebellion against the National Assembly the Crown, too, resorts to hypocritical half measures and hides its head under the constitutional veil at the very moment when it tries to cast off this irksome veil.
Brandenburg makes the German Central Authority*[3] give him the order for his coup d'état. The regiments of the guards marched into Berlin by order of the Central Authority. The Berlin counter-revolution is carried out by order of the German Central Authority. Brandenburg orders Frankfurt to give him this order. It denies its sovereignty at the very moment when it wants to establish it. Herr Bassermann of course eagerly seized the opportunity to play the servant as master. But he has the satisfaction that the master in his turn plays the servant.
Whatever the outcome in Berlin may be, the dilemma is: either the King or the people—and the people will be victorious with the cry, Brandenburg in the Assembly and the Assembly in Brandenburg.
We may have to go through a hard»school, but it is the preparatory school for a complete revolution.
[Neue Rheinische Zeitung No. 141, November 12, 1848, second edition]
Cologne, November 11. The European revolution is describing a circle. It started in Italy and assumed a European character in Paris; the first repercussion of the February revolution took place in Vienna; the repercussion of the Viennese revolution followed in Berlin; European counter-revolution struck its first blow in Italy, in Naples; it assumed a European character in Paris in June; the first repercussion of the June counter-revolution followed in Vienna; it comes to a close and discredits itself in Berlin. The crowing of the Gallic cock in Paris will once again rouse Europe.[24]
But in Berlin the counter-revolution is bringing itself into disrepute. Everything becomes disreputable in Berlin, even counter-revolution.
In Naples the lazzaroni[25] are leagued with the monarchy against the bourgeoisie.
In Paris the greatest struggle ever known in history is taking place. The bourgeoisie is leagued with the lazzaroni against the working class.
In Vienna we have a whole swarm of nationalities who imagine that the counter-revolution will bring them emancipation. In addition — the secret spite of the bourgeoisie against the workers and the Academic Legion; strife within the civic militia itself[26]; finally, attack by the people supplying a pretext for the attack by the Court.
Nothing like that is happening in Berlin. The bourgeoisie and the people are on one side and the drill-sergeants on the other.
Wrangel and Brandenburg, two men who have no head, no heart, no opinions, nothing but mustachios(1)— such is the antithesis of this querulous, self-opinionated, irresolute National Assembly.
Will—be it even that of an ass, an ox, a moustache[3]—is all that is needed to tackle the weak-willed grumblers of the March revolution. And the Prussian Court, which has just as little will as the National Assembly, seeks out the two most stupid men in the monarchy and tells these lions: represent will. Pfuel still had a few grains of brain. But absolute stupidity makes even the grumblers of the March achievements flinch.
"With stupidity the gods themselves struggle in vain",
exclaims the perplexed National Assembly.
These Wrangels and Brandenburgs, these blockheads who can want because they have no will of their own, because they want what they are ordered, and who are too stupid to question the orders they are given with a faltering voice and trembling lips — they, too, discredit themselves because they do not get down to skull-cracking, the only job these battering-rams are good for.
Wrangel does not go beyond confessing that he recognises only a National Assembly that obeys orders. Brandenburgs given a lesson in parliamentary behaviour, and after having shocked the Chamber with his crude, repulsive jargon appropriate to a drill-sergeant, he allows the "tyrant to be tyrannised" and carries out the orders of the National Assembly by humbly begging for permission to speak, though he had just attempted to take this right.[27]
"/ had rather be a tick in a sheep Than such a valiant ignorance. " a
Berlin's calm attitude delights us; the ideals of the Prussian drill-sergeants prove unavailing against it.
But the National Assembly? Why does it not pronounce the mise hors de lof? Why does it not outlaw the Wrangels? Why does not one of the deputies step into the midst of Wrangel's bayonets to outlaw him and address the soldiers?
Let the Berlin National Assembly leaf through the Moniteur, the Moniteur for 1789-95.
And what should we do at the present time? We should refuse to pay taxes. A Wrangel and a Brandenburg understand — for these creatures learn Arabic from the Hyghlans[28]—that they wear a sword and get a uniform and a salary. But where the sword, the uniform and the salary come from — that they do not understand.
There is only one means of defeating the monarchy, and that is to do it before the advent of the anti-June revolution, which will take place in Paris in December.
The monarchy defies not only the people, but the bourgeoisie as well.
Defeat it therefore in a bourgeois manner. And how can one defeat the monarchy in a bourgeois manner?
By starving it out. And how can one starve it out? By refusing to pay taxes. Consider it well. All the princes of Prussia, all the Brandenburgs and Wrangels produce no bread for the army. It is you who produce even the bread for the army.
[Neue Rheinische Zeitung No. 142, November 14, 1848]
Cologne, November 13. Just as once the French National Assembly, on finding its official meeting place closed, had to continue its session in the tennis-court, so now the Prussian National Assembly has to meet in the shooting-gallery.[30] A decision adopted in the shooting-gallery declares Brandenburg a traitor. The text, as received from our Berlin correspondent (who signs his articles 0 ), is contained in our special edition issued this morning, but it is not mentioned in the report published in the
Kölnische Zeitung*
However, we have just received a letter from a member of the National Assembly which v/e quote word for word:
"The National Assembly has unanimously (242 members) declared that by introducing this measure (dissolution of the civic militia) Brandenburg has committed high treason, and any person who actively or passively co-operates in the implementation of this measure is to be regarded as a traitor."[31]
Dumont's trustworthiness is well known. Since the National Assembly has declared Brandenburg a traitor, the obligation to pay taxes ceases automatically. No taxes are to be paid to a government guilty of high treason. Tomorrow we shall inform our readers in greater detail how in England, the oldest constitutional country, a refusal to pay taxes operated during a similar conflict.[32]
Incidentally, the traitorous Government itself has shown the people the right way when it immediately refused to pay taxes (allowances etc.) to the National Assembly in order to starve it out.
The aforementioned deputy writes further:
"The civic militia will not hand over its arms."
A fight therefore seems inevitable, and it is the duty of the Rhine Province to hasten to the assistance of the Berlin National Assembly with men and weapons.
Written by Marx on November 11 and 13, 1848
5. Decision of the Berlin National Assembly
Berlin, November 11, 7.45 p.m.
About 6 o'clock news came that Rimpler had been ordered to hand over all arms of the civic militia by 4 o'clock tomorrow. In the meantime the Assembly had adopted the following decision:
1) That General Brandenburg is guilty of high treason; 2) that the civic militia shall not give up its arms and, if necessary, shall repel force by force; 3) that any officer who gives the order to fire against citizens shall be charged with high treason.—In addition, a commission was appointed to discuss the question of tax refusal.
At its morning sitting the Assembly had already appointed a commission to discuss tax refusal.
When the National Assembly reached the playhouse, they found the entrance barred. Inside a company of soldiers was bivouacking. Their captain refused to allow
Herr von Unruh to enter. The National Assembly then proceeded from there to the assembly hall, where they were likewise refused admittance. They then met in the Hotel de Russie.
Evening of November 11. The National Assembly transferred its afternoon sitting to the shooting-gallery in Lindenstrasse. On Monday it will move into the Köllnische Rathaus. From what I hear, the Stock Exchange has offered credit and the city councillors are willing to guarantee the deputies' allowances. Several deputations from Spandau, Magdeburg and Pomerania have arrived here to acknowledge the authority of the Assembly.
During the course of the day a "proclamation" of the King was published, countersigned by the Ministers. This proclamation, which is reminiscent of similar proclamations by Dom Miguel, seeks to justify the prorogation of the National Assembly. A second royal decree disbands the civic militia; and a third appoints Rintelen, chief presiding judge of the Court of Appeal at Naumburg, to be Minister of Justice.(1) The royal Supreme Court, asked by Herr Bornemann whether the Crown had the right to prorogue, to transfer or to close down the National Assembly convened here in the name of the whole country, replied with a unanimous "No!"
In Berlin the rumour was circulating that at Breslau the troops have been driven out of the town and Brandenburg's hotel destroyed.
We cannot give credence to this rumour, for a letter which has just reached us from Breslau, dated 1 o'clock in the morning of November 11, contains no mention of this. The main contents of this letter are as follows:
At its sitting on November 10 the Central Committee of the civic militia decided to request that the City Council (and the City Councillors) take steps for the immediate general arming of all men capable of bearing arms and declare that it will recognise and protect the National Assembly under all circumstances and acknowledge it as the only seat of government. The Oberpräsident3 declared to a deputation sent to meet him that he would not go beyond the law, but that he would never undertake any action against the National Assembly, nor lend his hand to such action. He would resign from office immediately if he was asked to do anything contrary to the law. He did not recognise the necessity for prorogation of the National Assembly.
The Chief of Police, who was also present, gave his support to these declarations. He did not recognise any right to dissolve the Chamber and would immediately resign from office if anything of the sort were to happen.
The Central Committee of the Breslau civic militia has declared itself a permanent body.
Since the National Assembly has declared Prime Minister Brandenburg guilty of high treason, the obligation to pay taxes automatically ceases, for it would be impermissible to support his treasonable administration with taxes.—Therefore, to pay taxes is now tantamount to high treason and refusal to pay taxes is the primary duty of the citizen.
Written by Marx on November 11,1848
F?rst published in the Neue Rheinische Published in English for the first Zeitung No. 141 (special edition), time November 12, 1848
6. Sitting of the Swiss Chambers
Berne, November 12. In the sittings held so far, the two Swiss Chambers have not yet debated any of the more important questions. Last week the main business was the constituting of the two Councils; the debate on the publication of proceedings (which, as is known, has been dropped for the present without any conclusion being reached); the recall of deputies elected with reservations regarding the new Constitution.[35] During yesterday's sitting the oath for the federal authorities was finalised and the salaries of the Federal Council fixed (6,000 Swiss francs for the President, 5,000 for each of the councillors, and 4,000 and free residence for the Chancellor). It will now no longer be possible to delay the choice of the federal capital and the appointment of the Federal Council. In addition the Vorort* yesterday informed both Councils of the measures taken with regard to Tessin.[36] Tessiners have appealed against the Vorort to the new federal authorities; however, it is not to be expected that the latter will modify or revoke altogether the decisions taken by their predecessors.
Written by Engels on November 12, 1848
7. Cavaignac and the June Revolution
E. Girardin is pitiable in his apologia for the imperialistic cretin Louis Napoleon, the "little constable"[38]; he is likeable in his attacks on Cavaignac, the warrior hero of M. Marrast. Since November 7 he has been publishing in consecutive issues a philippic against the hero of the European bourgeoisie, which has fallen in love with his Arabian nightcap.[39] Perfidious as this bourgeoisie is, it has sacrificed him to the Sipehsalar* Jellachich, who is now the lion of the European hucksters.
We give our readers in full the acte d'accusation made by La Presse. In contrast to all European newspapers of great or small format, we have conceived the June revolution in a way that history has confirmed.[15] We insist on coming back from time to time to its chief factors and chief dramatis personae, since the June revolution is the centre around which the European revolution and counter-revolution revolve.(1) The distance from the June revolution, as we stated at the time when it was taking place, marked the zenith of counter-revolution, which had to make its tour of Europe. The return to the June revolution is the real beginning of the European revolution. Therefore, back to Cavaignac, to the inventor of the state of siege.
Written by Marx on November 13,1848
Supreme commander.—Ed.
See Karl Marx, "The June Revolution" (present edition, Vol. 7, pp. 144-49).— Ed.
8. Appeal of the Democratic District Committee of the Rhine Province[40]
APPEAL
Cologne, November 14. The Rhenish District Committee of Democrats calls upon all democratic associations in the Rhine Province immediately to convene their associations and organise everywhere in the neighbourhood popular meetings in order to encourage the entire population of the Rhine Province to refuse to pay taxes, since this is the most effective means to oppose the arbitrary acts committed by the Government against the assembly of Prussian people's representatives.
It is necessary to advise against any violent resistance in the case of taxes collected under a writ of execution, but it can be recommended that at public sales people should refrain from bidding.
In order to agree on further jmeasures, the District Committee is of the opinion that a congress of deputies from all associations should be held, and herewith invites them to meet on Thursday, November 23, at 9 a.m. (in the Eiser Hall, Komödienstrasse).
Cologne, November 14, 1848
For the District Committee
Karl Marx Schneider II
9. Impeachment of the Government[41]
The city of Brandenburg refuses to have anything to do with the Brandenburg Ministry and sends an address of thanks to the National Assembly. In its addresses the whole country recognises only the government of the National Assembly. The Ministry has committed a further act of high treason by defying the Habeas Corpus Act[42] and proclaiming a state of siege without the assent of the National Assembly and by expelling the National Assembly itself from the shooting-gallery at the point of the bayonet.
The National Assembly has its seat in the people and not in the confines of this or that heap of stones. If it is driven out of Berlin it will meet elsewhere, in Breslau, Cologne, or any other place it thinks fit. It has declared this in the decision it adopted on the 13th.(1)
The Berliners scoff at the state of siege and will not allow themselves to be in any way restrained by it. Nobody is handing over his arms.
Armed men from various parts of the country are hurrying to the assistance of the National Assembly.
The guards refuse to obey orders. More and more soldiers are fraternising with the people.
Silesia and Thuringia are in full revolt.
We, however, appeal to you, citizens — send money to the democratic Central Committee in Berlin. But pay no taxes to the counter-revolutionary Government. The National Assembly has declared that refusal to pay taxes is justified in law. It has not yet adopted a decision on this out of consideration for the officials. A starvation diet will make these officials realise the power of the citizenry and will make them also good citizens.
Starve the enemy and refuse to pay taxes! Nothing is sillier than to supply a traitorous government with the means to fight the nation, and the means of all means is money.
Written by Marx on November 15, 1848
iit &r. 143 bet Xenen 9tyeinifften 3eitung.
TOittwo*, 6 m 15. ÇRoetmfcer.
£>ûâ miniftetium ifi in SCnWaöc* gufla^ berfcjft i£>ie (Stobt 33ranbenburg toiU nicfctft toiffen non bent Whti« fhrium üSranbenbura. unb fdbieft cine »anf'Hbreffe an We Scattonatoerfammlung.
» a d gan}e Sanb erfrnnt in feinen Slbreffen nur We Sie* gterung ber Stationatoerfammlung an.
£ a # &?tnifterium begebt neuen &ocf>t>errat6, inbem ce im GlegenfaÇe gu bem Habeas-Corpus-Act o&ne Genehmigung ber 9?ati9nalt>erfammluug ben Stelagerungejuftanb au«gef)>ro< dien unb bte 9tationatoerfammlung felbfl mit ®ajannetten au* bem <3cbu£enf>aufe vertrieben bat.
Sie 9?ationatoerfämmlung Cat ibren ©i$ im Sßolfe, ntc^t in bem Um-freie biefer ober jener (Steinhaufen. Vertreibt man fïe au3 SBcrltn, fo wirb fie in einem anbern Orte tagen, in 93re$lau, itöln ober wo e$ ibr gutbunft. «Sie bat in ibrer Sifcuna, vom 13. biefen 33efd?tu$ gefaßt.
2Die berliner moqutren ftefe über ben 33elagerung$}uftanb unb laffen fid) in feiner Sßetfc bun$> benfelben rinfefcrdnfen. Wtemanb liefert bie Steffen ab. 93on oerf$iebenen ®egenben finb ^Bewaffnete ber National *93erfamm> lung jur #ülfe geeilt.
©if ©arten pervetaern ten <6>t\)or(am. ZPtr XJolbaten frûterntfirm immer meljr mit bem Dolke.
0rl)lefim unb Äljüringen finb in vollem 3uf*tanbe 2Bir aber, Surger, rufen eu* ju: ©cbitft ©elo bem bemofratifdjen CFentralauäfcbuftc nach. Berlin. 3 a ^ ( t öfl9'8en f"ne ©t'uern an Die contrereeolutionare SRegierung. Die National« 93er|ämmlung fytt erflärt. Daft bte Steueroermeigerung redjtlid) begrünet fei. ©ce M fie nod) niebt befibloffen auè 9?ûrffid>t fur bie, Seamten. Die $an«erfar wirb biefe Seamte bie SWadjt beé Bürgere fennen lehren, unb fie felbfl )u guten bürgern ntadjen.
hungert Dtn geinb au« unb verweigert bie (Steuern ! SRidjtè thôriAtrr aie einer bodmer* ratyertfefeen ^Regierung Wtttel jutn Äampfe gegen lie Matten ju bieten unb bad SRittel aller SWittel iff — ®tlb-
S«# ätatofmb in &ef<$&
•Öeute SDîittruo* Den 15. November TOt'ttagè halb 1 Ut)r S B e r f a n t m l u n g ber £anbroebrmdnner unb fteferoiften aller Waffengattungen emftfcliefilttfc beren Offnere im (Stfer'fôen ©aale.
Der feront: *orff. %Mt 3. 3D. Dt«8, untre frttiaQrt IT.
10. Statement
Cologne, November 16. The Kölnische Zeitung in its issue of November 16 draws a wholly invented connection between the "Appeal of the Rhenish District Committee of Democrats"[3] and an "Assurance" about the refusal to pay taxes[43] alleged to have been sent to the provinces by the extreme Left of the Prussian National Assembly. Nothing is known to the undersigned of a news report spread by members of the extreme Left concerning a refusal to pay taxes already decided on by the National Assembly.
Karl Marx Schneider II
Written by Marx on November 16, 1848
See this volume, p. 24.— Ed.
11. Confessions of a Noble Soul
Cologne, November 16. We predicted to the Right what would await them if the camarilla was victorious — a tip and kicks.b
We were mistaken. The struggle has not yet been decided, but they are already being given kicks by their chiefs, without receiving any tip.
The Neue Preussische Zeitung, Dame of the Army Reserve Cross "with God for King and Fatherland", the official organ of those now in power, states in one of its recent issues that the deputies Zweiffel (Chief Public Prosecutor in Cologne) and Schlink (Counsellor of the Court of Appeal in Cologne) are — let the reader guess—"revolutionary stomachs " [Magen] (the Neue Preussische Zeitung writes "Mägen"c). It speaks of these gentlemen's "inexpressible emptiness of thought and absence of thought". It finds even " Robespierre's fantasies" far superior to the ideas of these "gentlemen of the central section ". Avis
àd Messieurs Zweiffel et Schlink!
In the same issue of this newspaper Pinto-Hansemann[44] is declared to be a "leader of the extreme Left",e and according to the same newspaper there is only one remedy for leaders of the extreme Left—summary justice—the rope. Avis à M. Pinto-Hansemann, ex-Minister of action and of the constabulary.[45]
This is the title of the sixth book of Goethe's novel Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre.—Ed.
For an official news-sheet, the Neue Preussische Zeitung is too naively frank. It tells the various parties too explicitly what is locked in the files of the Santa Casa.[46]
In the Middle Ages, people used to open Virgil at random in order to prophesy. In the Prussian Brumaire of 1848, people open the Neue Preussische Zeitung to save themselves the trouble of prophesy-ing.[47] We shall give some new examples. What has the camarilla in store for the Catholics?
Listen!
No. 115 of the Neue Preussische Zeitung states:
"It is equally untrue that the state" (namely the royal Prussian state, the state of the Army Reserve Cross in its pre-March period) "has assumed a narrow denominational character and has guided religious affairs from this one-sided standpoint. Admittedly this reproach, if it were true, would be an expression of definite praise. But it is untrue; for it is well known that our Government has expressly abandoned the old and good standpoint of an evangelical government."
It is well known that Frederick William III made religion a branch of military discipline and had dissenters[48] thrashed by the police. It is well known that Frederick William IV, as one of the twelve minor prophets, wanted through the agency of the Eichhorn-Bodelschwingh-Ladenberg Ministry to convert the people and men of science forcibly to the religion of Bunsen. It is well known that even under the Camphausen Ministry the Poles were just as much plundered, scorched and clubbed because they were Poles as because they were Catholics. The Pomeranians always made a point of thrusting their bayonets through images of the Virgin Mary in Poland and hanging Catholic priests.
The persecution of dissenting Protestants under Frederick William III and Frederick William IV is equally well known.
The former immured in fortresses the Protestant pastors who repudiated the ritual and dogmas that he himself had invented. He was a great inventor of soldiers' uniforms and rituals. And the latter? The Eichhorn Ministry? It suffices to mention the name of the Eichhorn Ministry.
But all that was a mere nothing!
"Our Government had expressly abandoned the old and good standpoint of an evangelical government." Await therefore the restoration of Brandenburg-Manteuffel, you Catholics of the Rhine Province and Westphalia and Silesial Previously you were punished with rods, you will be scourged with scorpions* You will get to know "expressly the old and good standpoint of an evangelical government" \ And as for the Jews, who since the emancipation of their sect have everywhere put themselves, at least in the person of their eminent representatives, at the head of the counter-revolution—what awaits them?
There has been no waiting for victory in order to throw them back into their ghetto.
In Bromberg the Government is renewing the old restrictions on freedom of movement and thus robbing the Jews of one of the first of Rights of Man of 1789, the right to move freely from one place to another.
That is "one" aspect of the government of voluble Frederick William IV under the auspices of Brandenburg-Manteuffel-Ladenberg.
In its issue of November 1 la the Neue Preussische Zeitung threw out well-being as bait to the "liberal-constitutional party". But it was already shaking its head doubtfully over the constitutionalists.
"For the time being at any rate, our constitutionalists are still exceedingly shy of admitting, when together in their clubs or in their public press, that they are reactionaries."
However, it adds soothingly and pertinently:
"Every single one" (of the liberal-constitutionalists) "has long ago ceased to conceal that at the present time there is no salvation except in legal reaction,"
that is to say, in making the law reactionary or reaction legal, elevating reaction to the level of law.
In its issue of November 15b the Neue Preussische Zeitung already makes short work of the "constitutionalists" who want reaction elevated to the level of law, but are opposed to the Brandenburg-Man teuf f el Ministry because it wants counter-revolution sans phrase.0
"The ordinary constitutionalists," it says, "must be left to their fate."
Captured together! Hanged together! For the information of the ordinary constitutionalists! And wherein lies the extraordinary constitutionalism of Frederick William IV under the auspices of Brandenburg-Manteuffel-Ladenberg?
The official government organ, the Dame of the Army Reserve Cross with God for King and Fatherland, betrays the secrets of extraordinary constitutionalism.
The "simplest, most straightforward and least dangerous remedy", of course, is "to remove the Assembly to another place", from a capital to a guardroom, from Berlin to Brandenburg.
However, this removal is, as the Neue Preussische Zeitung reveals, only an "attempt".
"The attempt must be made," it says, "to see whether the Assembly by removal to another place regains internal freedom along with the re-achievement of external freedom of movement."
In Brandenburg the Assembly will be externally free. It will no longer be under the influence of the blouses,[3] it will only still be under the influence of the sabres of moustached cavalrymen.
But what about internal freedom? Will the Assembly in Brandenburg free itself from the prejudices and reprehensible revolutionary sentiments of the nineteenth century? Will its soul be free enough to proclaim once more as official articles of faith feudal hunting rights, all the musty lumber of former feudal burdens, social estate distinctions, censorship, tax inequalities, aristocracy, absolute monarchy and the death penalty, for which Frederick William IV is so enthusiastic, the plundering and squandering of national labour by
"the pale canaille who are looked upon as faith, love and hope"
by starved country junkers, guard lieutenants and personifications of good conduct records? Will the National Assembly even in Brandenburg be internally free enough to proclaim once more all these items of the old wretchedness to be official articles of faith?
It is known that the counter-revolutionary party put forward the constitutional watchword: "Completion of the work on the Constitution!"
The organ of the Brandenburg-Manteuffel-Ladenberg Ministry scorns to wear this mask any longer.
"The state of affairs," the official organ admits, "has reached a point at which even the long desired completion of the work on the Constitution can no longer help us. For who can any longer conceal from himself that a legal document which has been dictated to the people's representatives, paragraph by paragraph, under threat of the wheel and the gallows, and which has been wrung from the Crownhy these same representatives, will be considered binding only as long as the most direct compulsion is capable of maintaining it in force."
Therefore, to abolish once again, paragraph by paragraph, the meagre rights of the people achieved through the National Assembly in Berlin — such is the task of the National Assembly in Brandenburg!
If it does not completely restore the old lumber, paragraph by paragraph, that just proves that while it is true that it has regained "external freedom of movement" in Brandenburg, it has not regained internal freedom as claimed by Potsdam.[49]
And how should the Government act against the spiritual obduracy, against the internal lack of freedom of the Assembly that has migrated to Brandenburg?
"Dissolution ought to follow," exclaims the Neue Preussische Zeitung. But the idea occurs to it that perhaps the people is internally still less free than the Assembly.
"It would be possible," it says, shrugging its shoulders, "for doubt to arise whether new primary elections might not produce a still more pitiful result than the first."
In its primary elections the people is said to have external freedom of movement. But what about internal freedom? That is the question![3]
The statutes of the Assembly resulting from new primary elections could exceed the old ones in their iniquity.
What is to be done then against the "old" statutes? The Dame of the Army Reserve Cross strikes an attitude.
''The fist gave birth to them" (the old statutes of the Assembly after March 19), "the fist will overthrow them—and that in the name of God and right."
T h e fist will restore the "good old government". T h e fist is the ultimate argument of the Crown, the fist will be the ultimate argument of the people.
Above all, let the people ward off the mendicant hungry fists which take out of their pockets civil lists — and cannon. The boastful fists will become emaciated as soon as they are no longer fed. Above all, let the people refuse to pay taxes and — later it will be able to count on which side is the greater number of fists.
All the so-called March achievements will be considered binding only as long as the most direct compulsion is capable of maintaining them in force. The fist gave birth to them, the fist will overthrow them.
That is what the Neue Preussische Zeitung says, and what the Neue Preussische Zeitung says, Potsdam has said. Therefore, let there be no more illusion! The people must put an end to the halfway measures of March, or the Crown will put an end to them.
12. The Kölnische Zeitung
Cologne, November 16. The editorial board of the Kölnische Zeitung in its issue of November 16 describes itself brilliantly as follows:
"In our wavering between fear of anarchy today and fear of reaction tomorrow one is forcibly reminded of Luther's words: 'Man is like a drunken peasant; if he mounts a horse on one side, he falls off on the other.'"
Fear is the emotion of the Kölnische Zeitung.
Written by Marx on November 16, 1848
13. No More Taxes!!!
Cologne, November 16. All the Berlin newspapers, with the exception of the Preussische Staats-Anzeiger, Vossische Zeitung, and Neue Preussische Zeitung, have failed to appear.
The civic militia has been disarmed in the Privy Councillors' quarter,[51] but only there. It is the same battalion that dastardly murdered the engineering workers on October 31.[52] The disarming of this battalion strengthens the popular cause.
The National Assembly has again been driven out of the Köllnische Rathaus by force of arms. It assembled then in the Mielentz Hotel, where finally it unanimously (by 226 votes) adopted the following decision on the refusal to pay taxes:
"So long as the National Assembly is not at liberty to continue its sessions in Berlin, the Brandenburg Ministry bas no right to dispose of government revenues and to collect taxes. "This decision comes into force on November 17. The National Assembly, November 15."
From today, therefore, taxes, are abolished!!! It is high treason to pay taxes. Refusal to pay taxes is the primary duty of the citizen!
Written by Marx on November 16,1848
14. A Decree of Eichmann's
Cologne, November 18.
"The calls which are to be heard for a refusal to pay taxes make it my duty to utter a serious warning against them to the province entrusted to my care.
"After the King has publicly set out the weighty reasons for the removal of the National Assembly from Berlin, after a large part of the deputies has acknowledged the right of the Crown, and the German National Assembly equally with the Central Authority in Frankfurt has concurred with this acknowledgement, it cannot be my intention to add my voice to the verdict on this act of the Government which is being arrived at by the inhabitants of the Rhine Province.
"My official position alone obliges me to oppose with all the means at my disposal every attack against the laws and their implementation, without which no state can exist. Such an attack is to be seen in the calls to stop paying taxes, which are the indispensable means for maintaining law and order, taxes which have been legally imposed and can only be altered through a law.
"After my experience of the respect which the inhabitants of the province have for the law, I cannot envisage its violation by them, which would have serious consequences. On the contrary, I am confident that they will unshakeably resist such temptations directed against their honour and the common weal. As regards those unexpected cases where this confidence should nevertheless prove mistaken, I expect from all provincial and local authorities that they will ensure the payment of taxes by employing all the powers conferred on them by the laws and that they will do their duty without hesitation.
Cologne, November 17, 1848
Oberpräsident of the Rhine Province (signed) Eichmann"
Such is the text of the reply of ex-Minister and Oberpräsident Eichmann to the appeal of the Rhenish Committee of Democrats.(1) When Herr Eichmann wrote this, his Epistle to the Thessalonians,[3]
did he already know of the decision of the National Assembly on the refusal to pay taxes?
Eichmann previously represented the Brandenburg-Manteuffel elements within the Pfuel Ministry. He represents them now at the head of the Rhine Province. Eichmann embodies the counter-revolution of the Government in the Rhine Province.
Herr Eichmann's decrees, therefore, have the same value as those of Herr Brandenburg. Arraignment for high treason will sooner or later be the most fitting termination of the career of Herr Eichmann, this worthy man who in his youthful years with indefatigable zeal dispatched "traitors to the state" to imprisonment in fortresses.
In the above decree, Herr Oberpräsident Eichmann declares himself an open enemy of the National Assembly, in complete contrast to
Herr Oberpräsident Finder in Silesia, who is known to be a royalist. Herr Eichmann has therefore ceased to be Oberpräsident, just as his master, Brandenburg, has ceased to be a Minister. Herr Eichmann has dismissed himself. Officials who carry out his counter-revolutionary orders do so at their risk.
If the inhabitants of the Rhine Province wish to support the National Assembly in a more effective way than by mere addresses, if they are not prepared to kneel stupidly and unresistingly before the knout, they must compel all authorities, in particular the Regierungspräsidenten, Landräten, burgomasters and urban authorities, to make a public declaration as to whether they recognise the National Assembly and are willing to carry out its decisions, oui ou non? In case of refusal, and especially of direct contravention of these decisions, such officials are to be declared 1. dismissed from office, 2. guilty of high treason, and provisional committees of public safety appointed in their place, whose orders are alone to be regarded as valid. Where counter-revolutionary authorities seek forcibly to frustrate the formation and official activity of these committees of public safety, force must be opposed by every kind of force. Passive resistance must have active resistance as its basis.[53] Otherwise it will resemble the vain struggle of a calf against its slaughterer.
Written by Marx on November 18, 1848
15. Fax Refusal and the Countryside
Cologne, November 18. Lack of space prevents publication today of the numerous fresh messages of support for the National Assembly in Berlin. They will be published in one of our next issues.[54]
There are reports that barricades have been erected in Wittlich (Trier administrative district) to prevent the entry of the 27th Regiment. We have an eyewitness report that townsmen in Berncastel are sharpening up old lances and manufacturing scythes with which they mean to hasten to Wittlich.
It is reported that in Bonn force was used at the gates to bring in flour and cattle tax-free and that this led to a conflict.
Today the new acting Chief Burgomaster of this city, Herr Gräff, Counsellor of the Court of Appeal, protected by a body of armed men who occupied the entrance to the Town Hall, first attended a sitting of the Municipal Council. In order to prevent possible conflicts in case of refusal to pay the slaughter tax on the oxen to be brought in in the next few days by the cattle-dealers, the Municipal Council is said to have decided to send a deputation to meet the dealers at the gate and come to an agreement with them.
The following report has reached us from Westphalia:
provincial capitals, can only be safeguarded through the revolutionary energy of the countryside. The refusal to pay taxes (whether direct or indirect taxes) gives the countryside the best opportunity to serve the revolution.
Written by Marx on November 18, 1848
16. Appeal[1]
Cologne, November 18. The Rhenish District Committee of Democrats calls upon all democratic assbciations in the Rhine Province to have the following measures decided upon and carried out:
1. Since the Prussian National Assembly itself has ruled that taxes are not to be paid,(1) their forcible collection must be resisted everywhere and in every way.
2. In order to repulse the enemy a people's militia must be organised everywhere. The cost of weapons and ammunition for impecunious citizens is to be defrayed by the community or by voluntary contributions.
3. The authorities are to be asked everywhere to state publicly whether they recognise the decisions of the National Assembly and intend to carry them out. In case of refusal committees of public safety are to be set up, and where possible this should be done with the consent of the local councils. Local councils opposed to the Legislative Assembly should be elected afresh by a universal vote.
Cologne, November 18
For the Rhenish District Committee of Democrats Karl Marx Karl Schapper Schneider II
Written by Marx on November 18, 1848
17. Elections to the Federal Court. Š Miscellaneous
Berne, November 18. Yesterday I gave you the names of the eight members of the Federal Court just elected.[56] In the course of yesterday's joint sitting the following were also appointed: Jolly horn Freiburg (one of the local National Councillors, whose election had been annulled), Dr. Karl Brenner, editor of the Schweizerische
National-Zeitung in Basle, and the lawyer Jauch from Uri, thus bringing the membership of the Federal Court up to the full complement of eleven judges. Kern was appointed President and Dr. K. Pfyffer Vice-President.
As you know, the National Council annulled the elections in the Freiburg canton because only those electors who were prepared to swear allegiance to the new Federal Constitution were allowed to vote.[57] The next day it confirmed its decision by rejecting almost unanimously (73 against 13) Funk's motion for the matter to be decided by both Councils. Apart from the local gossip which this decision evoked in Berne, it gave rise also to very bitter discussions between the radicals of German and French Switzerland. The matter stands as follows: according to the Federal Constitution, the first National Council is to be elected by all Swiss citizens of at least 20 years of age who are in other respects qualified to vote in their canton. For the rest, all arrangements, regulations and more detailed provisions are left to the individual cantons. The oath of allegiance demanded by the Freiburg administration is a condition for the suffrage in many other cantons as well; in these cantons every Swiss citizen who exercises his right to vote for the first time must swear allegiance to the cantonal Constitution. Clearly, the intention of the authors of the new Constitution was to ensure universal suffrage for the elections; but according to the wording of the Constitution the Freiburg administration is in the right, and in the circumstances in which it finds itself confronted by a compact hostile majority dominated by the priests, it had either to demand the oath or resign. The German radicals stand by the intention of the legislators, whereas the French, with Waadt[3] at their head, base themselves on the letter of the Constitution in order to rescue the Freiburg administration and the five radical votes in the National Council which they so much desire. They declare the decision of the National Council to be an indirect approval of the rebellion of the Bishop of Freiburg,b which — and in this they are quite correct — is bound to bring about the overthrow of the Freiburg radical administration and the establishment of a Sonderbund government in this canton.[58]
They call the Berne and other German radicals "theoreticians", "makers of empty abstractions", "doctrinaires" etc. It is true that the German-Swiss radicals, most of whom are lawyers, often adhere too closely to their legalistic standpoint, whereas the men of Waadt and Geneva, who have been trained in the revolutionary French school, are better politicians and sometimes make light of questions of law.
The most forthright newspaper of this French-Swiss trend is the Nouvelliste Vaudois of Lausanne, the "organ of the revolution declared permanent", as the conservatives and even the moderate liberals call it. This newspaper, which moreover is written not without wit and a light hand, hoists the banner of the red republic without reservation, declares its support of the June insurgents in Paris, calls the death of Latour in Vienna "a mighty act of justice of the sovereign people" and with bitter irony ridicules the pietistic-reactionary Courrier Suisse, which rolled its eyes and howled at such an abomination. Yet this Nouvelliste is the organ of a powerful party in the Waadt administration, indeed one can almost say the organ of the majority in this administration. Nevertheless in Waadt absolutely everything goes on in an orderly way, the people are calm and enthusiastically support their Government, as the elections to the National Council prove once again.
According to a semi-official report of the Revue de Genève, the decisions of the diocesan conference about the Bishop of Freiburg (you will have learnt of them long ago[59]) will be ratified by Geneva, with a few small reservations due to previous concordats. The other cantons in the diocese have already ratified them. The newspaper further reports that as soon as all ratifications have been received Bishop Marilley will be set free, since the Freiburg canton has stated that it is ready to put a stop to the criminal proceedings begun
The French name is Vaud.—Ed. Marilley.—Ed.
against him for participation in the recent attempt at an uprising. People are very excited over the choice of the federal capital. If Berne is not going to be chosen — and it is regarded as a portent of this that no one from Berne has been appointed either as President[3]
or Vice-Presidentb of the Federal Council — a movement will break out here which would result in the overthrow of Ochsenbein, a majority for the radical trend (Stämpfli, Niggeler, Stockmar etc.) and the revision of the Federal Constitution which has only just been adopted. For, according to the Constitution, both Councils must be dissolved and new ones elected for a revision of the Constitution, if 50,000 enfranchised Swiss citizens demand it. Berne by itself can easily collect this number of signatures, without counting the masses who would come from the leading Romance-speaking cantons, stimulated by the prospect of a one-Chamber system and greater centralisation. However, all suppositions about the votes of the Swiss Councils are guesswork; the unlimited fragmentation, that inevitable consequence of the historical federative republic, the indescribable confusion of interests, and the inconceivable medley of determining motives must render futile all talk about probabilities and pos-sibilities.
Written by Engels on November 18, 1848
The President was Furrer.—Ed. The Vice-President was Druey.—Ed.
18. The City Council
Cologne, November 20. The Cologne Municipal Council has sent a petition to Berlin in which it urgently begs the King[3] to dismiss the Ministry in order to save the monarchy.(1)
The Cologne City Council, or Herr Dumont and Co., addresses itself to the King at a time when the entire Rhine Province is turning away from the King in order to turn towards the Constituent Assembly. Herr Dumont, or the City Council, wants to save the King, whereas the Rhine Province is thinking only of saving itself. As if the salvation of the King had any connection with the salvation of the Rhine Province! At a moment when the kings and emperors are trying to save themselves by means of martial law and bombard-ments, the City Council wants to save the King. Who has authorised the City Council to save the King and issue a petition which is a most servile product of Cologne good-for-nothings? Judging from previous relations between the King and the Cologne City Council, the latter is begging for nothing more than to be kicked.
If the City Council had paid more attention to the decision of the Berlin deputies(2) than to the King's autocratic will and his salvation, it would long ago have ordered the Cologne city gates to be manned in order to prevent the levying of taxes and to emphasise the will of the Chamber. The Cologne City Council, therefore, must be dismissed without delay. All judicial and tax authorities that do not exert the utmost energy to hinder the levying of taxes must be treated as guilty of high treason.
If the city of Cologne does not dismiss its City Council and at once send two new deputies to Berlin in place of the two who ran away,(3) it deserves — the knout.
Written by Marx on November 20, 1848
19. Appeal
Cologne, November 20. Democrats of the Rhine Province, Instead of summoning Oberpräsident Eichmann, the well-known Chief Public Prosecutor Zweiffel has, through Examining Magistrate Leuthaus, summoned your Committee to appear tomorrow on a charge of public incitement to rebellion.
A scandal is expected; the Cologne Garrison Headquarters has made all preparations; in accordance with the order issued by a treacherous Ministry, on this occasion Cologne is to be declared in a state of siege.
Frustrate this hope. Whatever may befall us, conduct yourselves calmly.
The Congress is going to take place under any circumstances.[60]
The Rhine Province will sooner shed its last drop of blood than submit to the rule of the sword.
Karl Marx Karl Schapper Schneider II
Written by Marx on November 20, 1848
20. On the Proclamation of the Brandenburg-Manteuffel Ministry about Tax Refusal
Cologne, November 21. The Brandenburg-Manteuffel Ministry has issued an order to all royal administrative authorities to employ forcible measures to collect taxes.(1)
The Brandenburg-Manteuffel Ministry, whose position is illegal, recommends coercion against the recalcitrant and mildness towards the propertyless.
It thus establishes two categories of non-payers: those who refuse to pay in order to comply with the will of the National Assembly, and those who do not pay because they are unable to pay. The intention of the Ministry is only too clear. It wants to divide the democrats; it wants to make the peasants and workers count themselves as non-payers owing to lack of means to pay, in order to split them from those not paying out of regard for legality, and thereby deprive the latter of the support of the former. But this plan will fail; the people realises that it is responsible for solidarity in the refusal to pay taxes, just as previously it was responsible for solidarity in payment of them.
The struggle will be decided between the force that pays and the force that is paid.
Written by Marx on November 21, 1848
21. The Chief Public Prosecutor and the Neue Rheinische Zeitung
Cologne, November 21. Who takes a legal stand, Oberpräsident Eichmann or the editors of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung? Who ought to be put in prison, the editors of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung or Oberpräsident Eichmann? This question is at present awaiting decision by Chief Public Prosecutor Zweiffel. Will the Public Prosecutor's office, which Zweiffel represents, side with the Brandenburg Ministry or will he, as an old contributor to the Neue Rheinische Zeitung,[61] take the side of his colleagues? This question is at present awaiting decision by the public.
The Neue Rheinische Zeitung was pressing for cessation of payment of taxes prior to the decision of the National Assembly(1); it upheld legality before the legislative power did so. And if this anticipation of legality is an illegality, then for six whole days the editorial board of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung had been taking an illegal stand. Six days
Herr Zweiffel could have instituted proceedings, but on the seventh day he would have had to give up his inquisitorial zeal.
On the seventh day, however, when the work of creation had been completed and Herr Zweiffel had celebrated the Sabbath, and the National Assembly had elevated the refusal to pay taxes to the level of law, Präsident Eichmann proposed to Herr Zweiffel to institute proceedings against those who had provoked the refusal to pay taxes. Who provoked the refusal to pay taxes? The editorial board of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung or the National Assembly in Berlin? Whom should Herr Zweiffel arrest: his old colleagues, the deputies in Berlin, or his old co-workers, the editors of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, or the Prefect, Herr Eichmann? So far Herr Zweiffei has not arrested anyone.
We propose, therefore, that some other Zweiffel should arrest Herr Zweiffel because before the Sabbath he did not arrest the editors of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, and after the Sabbath he did not arrest Herr Eichmann.
Written by Marx on November 21, 1848
22. The Public Prosecutor's Office in Berlin and Cologne
Cologne, November 21. In Berlin the Public Prosecutor's office has capitulated to a traitor to the state. The Chief Public Prosecutor, Herr
Sethe, instead of complying with the National Assembly's demand that he should do his duty in respect of the traitor Brandenburg, has resigned.
The Rhenish District Committee of Democrats, which is en-deavouring to make the legal decision of the National Assembly as widely known as possible, and which therefore demands that the plans of a traitor to the state should be frustrated,[3] is being prosecuted by the Cologne Public Prosecutor on a charge of—rebellion (?!).
"He who has might, has right."—The representatives of the right are everywhere on the side of might.
Written by Marx on November 21, 1848
See this volume, p. 41.—Ed.
23. The Frankfurt Assembly
Cologne, November 22. The Frankfurt Parliament has declared the decision of the Berlin Assembly regarding the refusal to pay taxes null and void as being illegal. It has thereby sided with Brandenburg, with Wrangel, with specific Prussianism. Frankfurt has moved to Berlin, and Berlin to Frankfurt. The German Parliament is in Berlin, and the Prussian Parliament in Frankfurt. The Prussian Parliament has become a German Parliament, and the German one has become a Brandenburg-Prussian Parliament. Prussia was to be merged into Germany, now the German Parliament at Frankfurt wants Germany to be merged into Prussia!
German Parliament! Whoever spoke of a German Parliament after the grave events in Berlin and Vienna. After the death of Robert Blum no one gave another thought to the life of the noble Gagern. After the setting up of the Brandenburg-Manteuffel Ministry no one thought any more about a Schmerling. The professors who "made history" for their own amusement had to allow the shelling of Vienna, the murder of Robert Blum and the barbarity of Windischgrätz! The gentlemen who were so greatly concerned about the cultural history of Germany left the practical management of culture in the hands of a Jellachich and his Croats! While the professors were evolving the theory of history, history ran its stormy course without bothering about the professorial history.
The decision taken the day before yesterday has destroyed the Frankfurt Parliament. It has driven the Frankfurt Parliament into the arms of the traitor Brandenburg. The Frankfurt Parliament is guilty of high treason, it must be brought to trial. If a whole people rises to protest against an act of royal tyranny, and if this protest is made in an entirely legal way — by refusing to pay taxes — and an assembly of professors declares — without being at all competent to do so — that the refusal to pay taxes, this revolt of the whole people, is illegal, then this assembly places itself outside the law, it commits high treason.
It is the duty of all members of the Frankfurt Assembly who voted against this decision to resign from this "deceased Federal Diet".[63] It is the duty of all democrats to elect these resigned "Prussians" to the German National Assembly in Berlin in place of the "Germans" who have left. The National Assembly in Berlin is not a "fragment", it is a complete entity, for it has the right to take decisions. But the Brandenburg Assembly at Frankfurt will become a "fragment", for the inevitable resignation of the 150 deputies will surely be followed by that of many others who do not wish to set up a Federal Diet at Frankfurt. The Frankfurt Parliament! It fears a red republic and decrees a red monarchy ! We do not want a red monarchy, we do not want the crimson Crown of Austria to extend its sway over Prussia, and we therefore declare that the German Parliament is guilty of high treason! Nay, we do it too much honour; we impute to it a political importance which it has long since lost. The severest judgment has already been passed upon it — disregard of its rulings and total oblivion.
Written by Marx on November 22, 1848
24. State of Siege Every where
Cologne, November 22. We predicted that the Cologne City Council would receive kicks in answer to its petition to the King.[3] We were mistaken. It is true that the Municipal Council did receive kicks, although not from the King, but from Manteuffel-Brandenburg.[64]
Tant pis!b We said further that after the decision of the Frankfurt Parliament, it was the duty of the Left to withdraw from it.c
According to what we hear, not only the Left, but also the Left Centre has withdrawn in order to form a democratic Central Committee. Tant mieux!d
States of siege everywhere, such are the achievements of the March revolution. Düsseldorf in a state of siege! A town is besieged in order to be conquered. All Prussian towns are being gradually declared in a state of siege, in order to be reconquered. The whole of Prussia has to be reconquered because the whole of Prussia has become disloyal to Prussia. How is the state of siege put into effect? By disarming the citizens. How can a city like Cologne, which is already disarmed, be declared in a state of siege for a second time? By first of all being given back its arms. To put Cologne in a state of siege for a second time means putting weapons in its hands. Long live the state of siege!
Written by Marx on November 22, 1848
25. Position of the Left in the National Assembly
Cologne, November 22. We have heard from private sources that the Left and the Left Centre of the National Assembly in Frankfurt decided yesterday evening at a closed sitting to withdraw, to constitute themselves a democratic committee for Germany, and at the same time to issue an appeal to the German people. In publishing this information, we do not guarantee its authentici-ty, but we are convinced this is the only course open to the Left and the Left Centre. Were they not to take it, they would be signing their own death warrants.
Written by Marx on November 22, 1848
26. News from Switzerland
Berne, November 20. I have just heard from officials of the Federal War Department that the German Central Authority is reported to have declared war on Switzerland.[65] The courier arrived yesterday evening, and the Vorort was said to have gone into session at 11 o'clock the same evening. Measures had already been taken for serious war preparations. It was stated further that 50,000 imperial troops were concentrating on the Swiss frontier to begin hostilities.
I am passing this news to you exactly as I heard it. I myself do not believe it, although the source is reliable. I would not credit even the Imperial Government with such lunacy.
Written by Engels on November 20, 1848
27. Result of the Elections to the National Council
Berne, November 21. Here is the result of the elections to the National Council which took place the day before yesterday: ex-member of the Great Council Fischer (conservative), 1,793 votes, elected. Weingart 1,315, Matthys 1,266, Blösch (conservative) 1,256 votes. As none of the last three has an absolute majority, the two radicals Weingart and Matthys still remain in the ballot and Weingart will probably be elected. The fact that the radicals are having at least one of their candidates returned is due to the participation of the Berne militia battalion which happened to be on service in Freiburg and voted to a man for the radicals.
Written by Engels on November 21, 1848
28. Elections. - Sydow
Berne, November 21. At yesterday's sitting the Federal Assembly (the two Councils in joint session) dealt with the Freiburg elections.(1)
Earlier, the Vorort had announced that it intended to come to an agreement with Tessin and therefore desired the withdrawal of the troops that had been ordered there.[66] Further (because of the complications with the Imperial Government), the Vorort wants the Federal Diet to constitute itself as soon as possible.
Herr Escher wishes to resign as representative of the Confederation in Tessin.
Herr Furrer declares that for the time being, until the next'session, he accepts the position of Federal Councillor and Federal President. This means that four members (Furrer, Ochsenbein, Frei-Herose and Näff) are present; Herr Ochsenbein declares the Federal Council to be constituted, and leaves the chair of the Assembly, which Herr Escher takes over, and the four Federal Councillors are sworn in.[67]
Proceeding to the agenda, Herr Brugisser proposes a motion in the name of the majority of the commission concerned calling for the revocation of the decision by which the National Council annulled the Freiburg elections.[68] The minority demands that the decision of the National Council be confirmed. Messrs. Kopp, Anton Schnyder, Pottier, Eytel, Pittet, Castella (Freiburg), Weder (St. Gallen), Ochsenbein and Fazy spoke in support of the majority motions and Messrs. Tanner, Trog, Escher, Frei, Streng and Imobersteg in support of the minority. The arguments were mostly of a legal nature, but the defenders of the Freiburg elections laid tremendous emphasis on the political necessity to retain the Freiburg Government and to avoid exposing the canton once again to the intrigues of the clergy. The majority motion of the commission was finally adopted by 68 votes to 53, which meant that the decision of the National Council annulling the Freiburg elections was revoked.
The Suisse and the Verfassungsfreund are jubilant, for this decision ensures them five votes for Berne as the federal capital. The Nouvelliste Vaudois will also rejoice, for the radical Freiburg Government and the five radical votes on the National Council are for the time being guaranteed. The Berner Zeitung, although much closer in its principles to the Nouvelliste than to the two above-mentioned Ochsenbein newspapers, nevertheless declares that the decision of the Federal Assembly is the first victory for cantonal sovereignty in the new Confederation. In our opinion, the Berner Zeitung is wrong. Most speakers for the majority were certainly not serious about the issues of principle which were advanced during this debate, least of all Herr Eytel, who even went so far as to speak against the supporters of unity. With them it was purely a matter of practical interests; this is clear from the newspapers mentioned above, which pay homage to diametrically opposed parties and whose followers nevertheless used the same arguments in support of the same side. Most members of the minority, on the other hand, and especially the Berne radicals, were serious about the principles involved. But it is open to question whether these gentlemen did not allow themselves to be carried rather too far by their legal conscience.
To everyone's surprise, His Excellency Herr von Sydow, the Prussian envoy, returned here the day before yesterday after a year's absence. It is known that after the Sonderbund war[69] he took up residence in worthy Basle — birds of a feather etc. The significance of his sudden return is not yet known. Probably it has none at all. At least he has made no communication to the Vorort[70] or to the Federal Council. Besides, his whole staff has for the time being remained in Basle.
So my report yesterday[3] about disagreements with the Imperial Government did have some truth in it.— To be sure, there is no question of a declaration of war, nor has any new Note arrived from the Empire. But news of the 50,000 imperial troops said to be concentrating on the Swiss frontier and forming a cordon between Constance and Basle was certainly received the day before yesterday in the evening by the Vorort which, as I wrote to you, thereupon went into session the very same evening. We shall soon learn what sort of counter-measures it and the now constituted Federal Council have decided on.
The day before yesterday elections took place in the Mittelland district (Berne and vicinity) for two National Councillors to take the places of Dufour, who was elected in three constituencies and opted for Seeland, and of Ochsenbein, who on account of his election to the Federal Council loses his title of National Councillor. The conservative (i.e. reactionary) candidates Fischer and Blösch obtained 1,059 and 893 of the city's votes respectively, the two radicals Weingart and Matthys, 559 and 540.a Fischer's election is certain, while that of Blösch, who is the object of greater antipathy, is less so. The considerable conservative majority in the city of Berne is mainly due to the influence exercised on the elections by the rich and long established patrician families here. By far the greater part of the electorate is dependent on them and only breaks away from their tutelage in moments of crisis or when a candidate presents himself who, like Ochsenbein, has popular antecedents and has managed to achieve a respected position in Switzerland. Here, as in most places in Switzerland, the actual revolutionary forces of the people are among the Swiss and German workers, but since they have no permanent residence in the city, they only very rarely have the right to vote, even if they are citizens of the canton.[71] This circumstance, together with the fact that as soon as things become quieter the influence of the patricians once more begins to spread, explains the conservative elections which never fail to come about a few years after each liberal or radical revolution.
At today's sitting of the National Council, Dr. Steiger of Lucerne was elected President in place of Ochsenbein. The Assembly is debating the Tessin affair. In the course of a long and, for an Italian, very lifeless speech, Pioda (of Tessin) made numerous accusations against the representatives and troops of the Confederation in Tessin. Escher of Zurich, however, strove to refute these charges. If possible I shall send an additional report on the outcome of the sitting.0 It looks as though this will be unqualified approval for the
Vorort and the representatives, and at best simply an agenda based on the Vorort's announcement yesterday (see above) that everything has been settled.
There were several more speeches, including a final one from Colonel Ziegler. In this he supplemented the majority motions approving the steps taken by the Vorort with a motion ordering the Government of Tessin to pay at least a part of the costs and to express its appreciation of the representatives. The discussion was then adjourned until tomorrow on a motion from the President.
Written by Engels on November 21, 1848
November 26, 1848
29. Debate in the National Council
Berne, November 22. At today's sitting of the National Council, there was a long debate in which General Dufour made an excellent speech in support of Tessin. All the other military men in the Council — Ziegler, Michel, Benz etc.— bitterly opposed Tessin and after Pioda had made an admirable reply to all the attacks, a motion of the minority on the commission
"to intern the Italian refugees who took part in the recent uprising and to leave the execution of this decision to the Government of Tessin"
was rejected on a roll-call by 62 votes to 31. On the other hand, the majority motions
"1) to expel all Italian refugees from the canton of Tessin into the Swiss interior, taking into account humanitarian considerations, on which the representatives of the Confederation shall decide",
and
"2) to forbid the canton of Tessin until further notice to allow Italian refugees to remain there",
were adopted by 62 votes to 31 and 50 votes to 46 respectively. The two Zurich deputies, Escher and Furrer, decided the issue by skilfully influencing the German Swiss; Furrer threw his whole weight as President of the Federal Council onto the scales against Dufour's noble gentlemanliness and almost brought the matter to a vote of confidence. The 31 votes for Tessin were, with five or six exceptions, all French Swiss. During the roll-call one heard nothing but "oui" and "nein", not one "non", and only five or six "jas". Romance Switzerland was hopelessly overwhelmed by the Germans.
The remaining points in the majority motion, to which the minority (Herr Pioda) also agreed, are just being adopted. The sitting and the post-office close at the same time. More details of this interesting debate tomorrow.[72]
Written by Engels on November 22, 1848
30. Raveaux's Resignation. Š Violation of the Swiss Frontier
Berne, November 23. Raveaux's resignation from his embassy posta is causing quite a sensation here and is unanimously approved. But great indignation has been caused by the German troops' violation of the frontier at Sulgen, and still more by their commander's cavalier apology. What! Thirty-five soldiers enter Swiss territory, weapons in hand, and force their way into a village. They surround a pre-selected house where a pre-selected refugee, Herr Weisshaar, is supposed to be hiding, and make as if to search it. They persist in their purpose despite being told repeatedly that they are on Swiss soil, threaten to use force and finally have to be driven of • by peasants wielding cudgels and throwing stones. And despite those incontestable circumstances which prove beyond doubt that the attack was premeditated, the commander maintains that the troops did not know that they were on Swiss soil.
How then can we explain the strange fact that such a large detachment was commanded only by a non-commissioned officer, not at least by a lieutenant, as is otherwise invariably the case, particularly in Germany, which is teeming with lieutenants? How can we explain this, if not by the fact that the presence of an officer, who would certainly know that much geography, would have been far too compromising? The Swiss Government will certainly not rest content with an apology flung down so cavalierly after an insult so lightly committed. The Zurich authorities have already instituted an inquiry and the affair will probably end not with an apology from
Imperial commissioner in Switzerland.—Ed.
Switzerland to the Barataria's Reich,[73] but with the Barataria's Reich apologising to Switzerland.
Written by Engels on November 23, 1848
31. Manteuffel and the Central Authority
Cologne, November 24. The Minister Manteuffel declared yesterday to the imperial commissioners^ at present in Berlin that the Prussian Government would not submit to the decision of the Frankfurt Assembly to form a popular Ministry'[74] because this was an internal matter.
Hence Manteuffel agrees with us that the decision of the Frankfurt Assembly on the refusal to pay taxes b is also null and void, because it concerns only an internal matter.
It is possible, of course, that the Brandenburg-Manteuffel Ministry will help to convert the Rhine Province into an external matter for Prussia.
32. The German Central Authority and Switzerland
Cologne, November 24. In the comedies of last century, notably the French, there never failed to be a servant who amused the public because he was continually being cudgelled, cuffed and, in especially effective scenes, even kicked. The role of this servant is certainly a thankless one, but still it is enviable compared with a role which is being continuously performed at our Frankfurt imperial theatre: compared with the role of the Imperial Minister of Foreign Affairs. The servants in the comedy at least have a means of avenging themselves — they are witty. But the Imperial Minister!
Let us be fair. The year 1848 is no year of roses for any Minister of Foreign Affairs. Up to now Palmerston and Nesselrode have been glad to be left in peace. Eloquent Lamartine, who with his manifestos moved even German old maids and widows to tears, has had to slink away in shame with broken wings and bedraggled feathers. His successor, Bastide, only a year ago in the National and the obscure Revue nationale, as official trumpeter of war, gave vent to the most virtuous indignation at Guizot's cowardly policy. Now he sheds silent tears every evening on reading his œuvres complètes de la veille* and at the bitter thought that day by day he is sinking more and more to the level of Guizot of the respectable republic. Nevertheless all these Ministers have one consolation: if things have gone badly for them in big matters, they have been able to take their revenge in small matters, on Danish, Sicilian, Argentinian, Wallachian and other remote questions. Even the Prussian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Herr Arnim, when he concluded the unpleasant armistice with Denmark,[75] had the satisfaction not only of being duped, but also of duping someone, and this someone was — the Imperial Minister!
In fact, the Imperial Minister of Foreign Affairs is the only one of them all who played a completely passive role, who received blows, but did not deal a single one. From the first days of his entry into office he has been the predestined scapegoat on whom all his colleagues of neighbouring states vented their spleen, on whom they all took reprisals for the petty sufferings of diplomatic life, a share of which they too had to bear. When he was beaten and tortured, he remained silent, like a lamb being led to the slaughter. Where is there anyone who can say that the Imperial Minister ever harmed a hair of his head? Truly the German nation will never forget Herr Schmerling for having dared with such determination and consisten-cy to resume the traditions of the old Holy Roman Empire.[76]
Need we give further confirmation of Herr von Schmerling's courageous patience with a list of his diplomatic successes? Need we return to the journey of Herr Max Gagern from Frankfurt to Schleswig, that worthy parallel to the old story of Sophia's Journey from Memel to Saxony? [7] Need we again rake up the whole edifying history of the Danish armistice? Need we dwell on the unsuccessful offer of mediation in Piedmont and on Herr Heckscher's diplomatic study trip at the expense of the Empire? There is no need to do so. The facts are too recent and too striking for it to be necessary even to mention them.
But there is a limit to everything, and in the end even the most patient man must show his teeth, as the German philistine says. True to this maxim of a class which our worthy statesmen declare to be the great, well-meaning majority in Germany, Herr von Schmerling at last also felt the need to show his teeth. The sacrificial lamb looked for a scapegoat and believed it had finally found one in the shape of Switzerland. Switzerland — with scarcely two and a half million inhabitants, republicans into the bargain, the refuge from which Hecker and Struve invaded Germany[78] and seriously alarmed the new Holy Roman Empire — can one find a better and, at the same time, a less dangerous opportunity of proving that "great Germany" has teeth?
An "energetic" Note was immediately dispatched to the Vorort Berne because of the machinations of the refugees. The Vorort Berne, however, being conscious of its rights, replied no less energetically to "great Germany" in the name of "little Switzerland". But this did not at all intimidate Herr Schmerling. His capacity to bite grew with astonishing rapidity, and already on October 23, a new, still "more energetic" Note was drafted and on November 2 handed to the Vorort.[79] In it Herr Schmerling now threatened naughty Switzerland with the birch. The Vorort, even swifter in its actions than the Imperial Minister, replied two days later with the same calm and determination as before, and therefore Herr Schmerling will now put into effect his "provisions and measures" against Switzerland. He is already most busily engaged in this, as he has stated in the Frankfurt Assembly.[3]
If this threat was the usual imperial farce such as we have seen so many times this year, we would not waste a single word on it. Since, however, one can never sufficiently credit the stupidity of our imperial Don Quixotes, or rather imperial Sanchos, in administering the Foreign Office of their Barataria island,[80] it may easily happen that owing to this Swiss conflict we shall be involved in all kinds of new complications. Quidquid délirant reges etc.b
Let us then examine somewhat more closely the imperial Note to Switzerland.
It is well known that the Swiss speak German badly and are not much better at writing it. But the Note in reply from the Vorort is, as regards style, a perfect masterpiece worthy of Goethe compared with the schoolboyish, clumsy German of the Imperial Ministry, which is always at a loss for the right expressions. The Swiss diplomat (Federal Chancellor Schiess, it is said) seems to have deliberately used a specially pure, limpid and refined language in order in this respect too to form an ironical contrast to the Note of the Imperial Regent,c which could certainly not have been written in a worse style by one of Jellachich's red-coats.[81] In the imperial Note there are sentences which are quite incomprehensible, and others which are extremely clumsy, as we shall see later. But are not these sentences written precisely "in the straightforward language which the Government of the Imperial Regent will always consider it its duty to use in international intercourse"?
Herr Schmerling does no better in respect of the content. In the first paragraph he recalls
"the fact that in regard to the German Note of June 30 of this year for several weeks before any reply followed, proceedings took place in the Diet in a tone which at that time would have made it impossible for a representative of Germany to stay in Switzerland".
(This is also a sample of the style.) The Vorort is good-natured enough to prove to the "Government of the Imperial Regent" from the minutes of the Diet that these debates "for several weeks" were limited to a single brief session on one single day. It is clear, that our Imperial Minister, instead of looking up the documentary records, prefers to trust to his own confused memory. We shall find still further proofs of this.
Incidentally, the Government of the Imperial Regent could regard this obligingness of the Vorort, its readiness to come to the assistance of the Government's poor memory, as a proof of the "good-neighbourly attitude" of Switzerland. Indeed, if the Government of the Imperial Regent had taken into its head to speak in a Note in such a fashion about the debates of the English Parliament, the dry arrogance of Palmerston would have dealt with it in quite a different way! The Prussian and Austrian ambassadors in London can tell it what was said in public proceedings about their respective states and Notes, without anyone thinking that their stay in London was thereby rendered impossible. These tyros want to teach Switzerland international law and do not even know that the only thing that concerns them in the proceedings of sovereign assemblies is what is decided, but not what is said! These logicians assert in the same Note, "Switzerland should know that attacks on freedom of the press could not emanate from Germany" (it suffices to print these lines in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung to make them bitterly ironical!) — and they even want to meddle with the freedom of debate of the highest organ of authority in Switzerland at that time!
"There is no conflict here over principles. It is not a question of the right of asylum or of freedom of the press. Switzerland should know that attacks on these rights cannot emanate from Germany. Germany has repeatedly stated that it will not tolerate their abuse, it has recognised that the right of asylum must not become an industry for Switzerland" (what does that mean?), "a state of war for Germany" (the right of asylum a state of war — what German!), "that there must be a difference between shelter for the persecuted and a hiding-place for highway robbers."
"A hiding-place for highway robbers"! Have Rinaldo Rinaldini and all the robber chieftains who made their appearance with Gottfried Basse in Quedlinburg descended with their bands from the Abruzzi Mountains to the Rhine in order at a suitable time to plunder Upper Baden? Is Karl Moor on the march from the Bohemian forests? Has Schinderhannes also left behind a brother's son, who as the "nephew of his uncle"(1) wants to continue the dynasty from Switzerland? Far from it! Struve, now in the Baden prison, Madame Struve, and a few workers who crossed the frontier unarmed—these are the "highway robbers" who had their "hiding-place" in Switzerland, or allegedly still have it there. The imperial authority, not satisfied with the prisoners on whom it can take revenge, is so lost to all decency that it hurls abuse across the Rhine at those who were lucky enough to escape.
'Switzerland knows that it is not being asked to persecute the press in any way, that it is not a question of newspapers and leaflets, but of their authors, who at the very frontier day and night wage a base contraband war against Germany by the mass smuggling in of inflammatory writings."
"Smuggling in"! "Inflammatory writings"! "Base contraband war"! The expressions become ever more elegant, ever more diplomatic — but has not the Government of the Imperial Regent "considered it its duty to use straightforward language"?
And, in fact, its language is remarkably "straightforward"! It does not demand from Switzerland any persecution of the press; it is not speaking about "newspapers and leaflets", but about "their authors". The activities of the latter must be put a stop to. But, worthy "Government of the Imperial Regent", when proceedings are instituted in Germany against a newspaper, e.g. the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, is it a question of the newspaper which is in everyone's hands and can no longer be withdrawn from circulation, or of the "authors", who are put in prison and brought before the court? This worthy Government does not demand any persecution of the press, it merely demands persecution of the authors of the press. Well-meaning persons! Wonderful "straightforward language"!
These authors "wage a base contraband war against Germany by the mass smuggling in of inflammatory writings". This crime of the "highway robbers" is truly unpardonable, the more so since it goes on "day and night", and the fact that Switzerland tolerates it is a flagrant violation of international law.
From Gibraltar whole shiploads of English goods are smuggled into Spain, and the Spanish priests declare that the English "by smuggling in evangelical inflammatory writings", e.g. the Spanish Bibles published by the Bible Society, wage a base contraband war against the Catholic Church. Barcelona manufacturers also curse the base contraband war waged from Gibraltar against Spanish industry by the smuggling in of English calico. But were the Spanish ambassador to complain about it just once, Palmerston would reply to him: Thou blockhead,[3] that is just what we took Gibraltar for!
Hitherto all other governments have shown too much tact, taste and consideration to complain in Notes about smuggling. But thç naive Government of the Imperial Regent speaks in such "straightforward language" that it most artlessly declares that Switzerland has violated international law if the Baden customs officials do not display the appropriate vigilance.
"Switzerland, finally, cannot be unaware also that the right of foreign countries to resist such iniquity cannot depend on whether the Swiss authorities lack the strength or desire to prevent it."
The Government of the Imperial Regent seems completely "unaware that the right" of Switzerland to leave in peace everyone who obeys the laws of the land, even if he wages a base contraband war etc. by smuggling in etc., "cannot depend on whether the German authorities lack the strength or desire to prevent" this smuggling. The Government of the Imperial Regent should take to heart Heine's reply to the Hamburger who moaned to him about a big fire:
Get yourselves better laws And better fire-hoses(2)—
and then it would no longer need to make itself ridiculous by its straightforward language.
"The conflict is only over the facts," it goes on to say, and therefore we shall at last hear about some other significant facts besides the base contraband war. We are eager for them.
"The eminent Vorort demands, on die grounds of its lack of information, that it be supplied with definite proof of actions which could confirm the accusations made against the Swiss authorities."
Obviously, a very reasonable demand on the part of the eminent Vorort. And will the Government of the Imperial Regent most willingly accede to this just demand?
By no means! Just listen:
"But a controversial procedure between governments on generally known matters is not customary among nations."
That is a rough lesson in international law for arrogant little Switzerland, which believes itself entided to be as impertinent towards the Government of the Imperial Regent of great Germany as litde Denmark was at one time. It should take note of the example of the Danish armistice and be more modest. Otherwise the same thing might happen to it.
When the extradition of a common criminal is demanded from a neighbouring state, a controversial procedure is involved, however "generally known" the crime. But the controversial procedure, or rather the mere proof of guilt which Switzerland demands before taking measures — not against common criminals who have crossed the border, nor against refugees, no, against its own officials, elected on the basis of a democratic popular vote — such proof "is not customary among nations"! Truly, the "straightforward language" cannot be denied even for a moment. It could not be more straightforwardly confessed that there are no proofs to put forward.
There now follows a hail of questions in which all these generally known facts are enumerated.
"Does anyone doubt the activity of the German agitators in Switzerland?"
Of course no one does, just as no one doubts the activity of Herr Schmerling in Frankfurt. It is clear that most of the German refugees in Switzerland pursue some "activity". The only question is what their activity is, and obviously Herr Schmerling himself does not know, otherwise he would tell us.
"Has anyone any doubt about the refugee press?"
Of course no one has. Yet Herr Schmerling himself states that attacks on freedom of the press could not emanate from Germany. And if they were to come from there, Switzerland would certainly know how to repulse them. What then does this question mean? If we translate it from "straightforward language" into plain German, it can only mean: Switzerland should abolish freedom of the press for the refugees. A un autre,[3] Monsieur de Schmerling!
"Has Germany to give Europe proof of the pilgrimage to Muttenz?" Of course not, cunning "Government of the Imperial Regent"! But to prove that these pilgrimages were the cause of Struve's invasion or possibly of some other enterprise giving greater grounds for complaint against Switzerland — to prove that would bring no discredit to the Government of the Imperial Regent, but would be all the more difficult.
Once again the Vorort is obliging enough to do more than "is customary among nations", and to remind Herr Schmerling that the pilgrimages to Muttenz[83] directly concerned Hecker, that Hecker was against the second invasion, that he even went to America in order to dispel all doubts about his intentions, that among the pilgrims there were prominent members of the German National Assembly. The
Vorort is tactful enough, even in presence of the tactless Note of Herr Schmerling, not to mention the final and most striking reason: namely, that the "pilgrims" after all returned to Germany, where at any moment they could be called to account by the Government of the Imperial Regent for any punishable action, for all their "activity" in Muttenz. That this did not happen is the best proof that the Government of the Imperial Regent possesses no data incriminating the pilgrims, and that therefore it is still less able to reproach the Swiss authorities in this respect.
"Or the meetings in Birsfeld?"
"Straightforward language" is a fine thing. Anyone who, like the Government of the Imperial Regent, "has considered it his duty in international intercourse" to use this language, has merely to prove that meetings in general, or even meetings of refugees, took place in Birsfeld to be able to accuse the Swiss authorities of gross violation of international law. Other mortals, of course, would first of all have had to show what occurred at these meetings that was contrary to international law. But, of course, they are "generally known facts", so generally known that I am prepared to bet that among the readers of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung there are not three to be found who have any idea what meetings Herr Schmerling is talking about.
"Or the warlike preparations of the malefactors, who are able to pursue their activity along the frontier, in Rheinfelden, Zurzach, Gottlieben and Laufen?"
Praise God! At last we learn something more definite about the "activity" of the refugees! We did Herr von Schmerling an injustice in expressing the opinion that he did not know what the refugees were doing. He knows not only what they are doing, but also where they are doing it. Where do they do it? In Rheinfelden, Zurzach, Gottlieben and Laufen along the frontier. What do they do? "Pursue their activity"!
''They pursue their activity"! Monstrous violation of all international law — their activity! What then does the Government of the Imperial Regent do in order not to violate international law? Is it perhaps "its excesses"(3)?
But Herr von Schmerling speaks of "warlike preparations". And since among the towns where, to the terror of the whole Empire, the refugees pursue their activity there are several that belong to the Aargau canton, the Vorort takes it as an example. It again does something more than is necessary, it once again does more than "is customary among nations", and offers to prove by means of a "controversial procedure" that at that time only 25 refugees were living in the Aargau canton, that of these only ten took part in Struve's second expedition of volunteers,[84] and that even they entered Germany unarmed. That is all there was of "warlike preparations". But what does that mean? The other fifteen, who remained behind, were the most dangerous. They obviously only remained behind in order to continue to "pursue their activity" without interruption.
These are the weighty accusations of the "Government of the Imperial Regent" against Switzerland. More than this it is unable to put forward, nor does it need to do so, since it "is not customary among nations" etc. But if Switzerland is so shameless as still not to be shattered by these accusations, the "decisions" and "provisions" of the Government of the Imperial Regent will not fail to have a shattering effect. The world is curious to know what these decisions and provisions will consist of, and is all the more curious because Herr Schmerling is preparing them in the greatest secrecy and does not want to communicate any details even to the Frankfurt Assembly. Meanwhile the Swiss press has already shown that all reprisals Herr Schmerling might take are bound to have a more harmful effect on Germany than on Switzerland and, according to all reports, the Swiss regard the "provisions and decisions" of the Government of the Imperial Regent with the greatest equanimity. Whether the Ministers in Frankfurt will be of the same mind, especially if English and French Notes intervene, remains tobe seen. One thing is certain: the affair will end, like the Danish war, in a new disgrace, which on this occasion, however, will fall on official Germany alone.
Written by Engels on November 24, 1848
33. Drigalski - Legislator, Citizen and Communist[8]
Cologne, November 24. Düsseldorf has been declared in a state of siege; the Brandenburg-Wrangel Ministry has found worthy representatives in Herren Spiegel-Drigalski. The first of these gentlemen is a simple Regierungspräsident, but the second combines various qualities. He is not only a lieutenant-general and commander of a division — as such he figures in the army lists and as "supreme" legislator of the city and entire municipality of Düsseldorf — he is also an author and says of himself that he is at the same time a "citizen" and — a communist, and all that with God for King and Fatherland.[3] These two gentlemen, the simple as well as the multicoloured one, have discovered that the state of law in Düsseldorf can only be maintained by extraordinary measures; hence they have found themselves "compelled" to declare the entire municipality of Düsseldorf in a state of siege "for the protection of law and order".[86]
We have known for a long time that the Brandenburg Government can only preserve itself by extraordinary means; we know that its existence would have come to an end long ago if the country were not in a state of siege. The state of siege is the state of law of the Brandenburg Government.
"A state of siege, gentlemen, means a state of war," declared Prime Minister von Pfuel at the agreement sitting*(1) of September 29.[87] At that time the matter concerned the city and fortress of Cologne, at that time it was a question of an uprising, the decisions of the courts could not be carried out, the lawful force — the civic militia — could not ensure tranquillity, barricades had been erected; force could only be opposed by force. Such was the assertion at least of those who defended the state of siege, at least they still made an effort to save external appearances by relying on allegedly established facts. Now, however, the matter is regarded much more lightly; Düsseldorf is not in revolt, the activity of the courts has not been prevented for a single moment, the civic militia has always been ready to execute lawful orders; indeed one cannot appeal even to the obsolete instructions of the year 1809, on which the main stress was laid at that time, for Düsseldorf is not a fortress. But Düsseldorf with rare energy has declared itself in favour of the tax refusal; that sufficed for the two supporters of Brandenburg to establish the state of law, that is to say, to declare the city outside the law.
We shall not go into the accusations which are intended to serve as a pretext for proclaiming the state of siege; we recommend them to the attention of the judicial authorities as being false accusations, for nowhere has legal proof been adduced to support them; they are calumnies which come under Articles 367 et seq. of the Penal Code.[88] We desire here merely to set out the illegalities of which Herren Spiegel and Drigalski have made themselves guilty for the purpose of protecting law and order.
After these two gentlemen had proclaimed the state of siege and "thereby supreme power passed to the military authorities", "communist and citizen" Drigalski issued the following decrees:
1. The legally existing authorities remain in office and will be given the most energetic support in the measures undertaken by them.
That means that the legally existing authorities, insofar as they have a legal basis of existence, are dismissed, but they remain in office in order to support Herr von Drigalski.
"I expect," says Drigalski to his "co-citizens", "that all well-intentioned inhabitants will facilitate the application of the laws for me, and that the authorities will support me in this with complete determination."
Herr Drigalski not merely makes the laws, he also applies them; the legally existing authorities are his henchmen. And the "independent" judges of the Düsseldorf district court and the Chief Public Prosecutor and his colleagues calmly put up with all that! They see no violation of the law in their being removed from office, they pay homage to the legislator Drigalski and rejoice at being allowed at this price to continue to draw their salaries. Fie! Are you not ashamed, gentlemen, under the rule of the sword, to issue orders for arrests and institute criminal proceedings? Or perhaps the arrest of Herr Lassalle, who, trusting unfortunately all too boldly in his good right and the protection of the judicial authorities, did not want to evade the state of siege, is only an act of private revenge on the part of Herr Drigalski? Perhaps proceedings against this man and his helpers based on Articles 114, 123 and 124 have already been instituted secretly and are in process?
The second law of Herr Drigalski states:
"All associations having political and social aims are abolished."
What does Herr Drigalski care about the law of April 6, Paragraph 4![89] If, in accordance with that law, "all Prussians are entitled without previous police permission to unite in societies for purposes which do not contravene the existing laws", that is obviously one of those "achievements" which must be annulled as quickly as possible, that is to say, are incompatible with Drigalski's legislation.
Third and fourth laws. Herr von Drigalski controls street traffic and business hours of publie houses. As if Düsseldorf had become Paris, he issues a law against attroupements* But he is not merely a big figure as a policeman, he betrays also special talent as a night-watchman: he imposes a curfew.
Fifth law.
"In view of its impending reorganisation, the civic militia is disbanded and must surrender its arms as from today."
This law is a complex of illegalities. We distinguish the following:
a) The civic militia is disbanded. According to the ordinary laws, specifically the Civic Militia Law of October 17,[90] the militia can be disbanded only by a royal Cabinet Order. Has Herr von Drigalski perhaps a secret Cabinet Order in petto? Well then, why does he not publish it, as he published the statement of the Chief Postmaster,
Maurenbrecher? [91] Of course, this statement was at once repudiated as a lie by the Düsseldorf militia. Herr von Drigalski has no Cabinet Order, he acts on his own assumption of plenipotentiary powers and assumes royal prerogatives, although he is a royal-minded "citizen and communist''.
b) The civic militia is not merely removed from its duties. Herr von Drigalski is not satisfied with merely seizing for himself the official power of the Regierungspräsident. As far as illegality is concerned, he
Gatherings.—Ed.
would have already done quite enough by merely removing the militia from its duties. Paragraph 4 of the law of October 17 states:
"If the civic militia of a municipality or district refuses to obey the orders of the authorities or interferes in the activities of municipal, administrative or judicial authorities, then the administrative head of the governmental area may provisionally remove it from its duties, provided he gives the grounds for so doing."
Hence removal from duties could be pronounced only by the Regierungspräsident, but not by a lieutenant-general or divisional commander, nor by a citizen, nor finally by a communist, even a "royal Prussian communist".
But Herr Drigalski has his own good reasons for at once acting as royalty without regard for the regular instances. If he had dealt with the militia merely as a Regierungspräsident he could not have disarmed it. But
c) "the civic militia must surrender its arms as from today". Mere removal from duties in no way justifies the taking away of arms. Otherwise officers who have been suspended would also have to give up their swords. But Herr Drigalski is right; if the militia had been allowed to keep its arms, it would probably not have allowed itself to be removed from duties by him; it would have fulfilled its function as Paragraph 1 of the law prescribes.
d) Herr von Drigalski orders the arms to be handed over to him. Since he feels himself called upon to act as if he were royalty, he is not concerned about the royal order on compliance with the law on the institution of the civic militia. Here Paragraph 3 states:
"The arms supplied by the state to the municipalities remain in the possession of the latter in any case until the time indicated above."
The "city administration and Municipal Council" of Düsseldorf raise no objection to this order. Instead of protesting against this illegality and standing up for the rights of the municipality, they exhort the citizens to adopt a "calm, legal attitude" towards their new dictator.
Sixth law.
"Anyone found engaging in open and armed resistance to the orders of the legal authorities, or who exposes the troops to danger or disadvantage by treacherous behaviour, shall be brought before a military tribunal. "
According to the law safeguarding personal freedom,[92] no one may be brought before any judge other than the one designated by the law. Special courts and extraordinary commissions are inadmissible. No punishment can be threatened or imposed other than in accordance with the law. According to the same law, this provision can neverbe suspended for any time or area, even in case of war or insurrection. For even then, according to Paragraph 8, only Paragraphs 1 and 6 can be suspended, but only by decision and under the responsibility of the Ministry of State. Yet Herr von Drigalski decrees that civilians are to be tried by a military tribunal. It can no longer be a matter for surprise that he orders arrests to be made and for this purpose violates the sanctity of the home. These provisions can at least still be suspended, although not by Herr von Drigalski. For the rest, it is a matter of indifference whether one believes the assertion of the Düsseldorfer Zeitung* that Lassalle's arrest was carried out in a wholly irregular manner or the assurance given by the Kölnische Zeitung that the arrest occurred by order of the examining magistrate.(2) The Kölnische Zeitung, of course, takes the side of the military commandant in order to put the blame on the examining magistrate. In any case, the arrest is illegal; for in an illegal situation no legal actions can be undertaken. In a state of war, civil justice ceases to be operative. If the examining magistrate continues to function, he assumes the position of a member of a military tribunal; the articles of war become his code of law. The Düsseldorf Public Prosecutor's office is well aware of its new situation; for if it still considered its competence to be that laid down in the Rhenish Penal Code it would have intervened long ago, if only on the basis of Paragraph 9 of the Habeas Corpus Act, which states:
'Wo preliminary permission of the authorities is necessary for taking legal action against public officials, civil or military, for violating the above-mentioned provisions by exceeding their offaial powers."
In order to become fully acquainted with the power of our Rhenish institutions, the question still remains whether the Prosecutor-General, Herr Nicolovius, under whose supervision are all officials of the judicial police, even the examining magistrates, will approve the attitude of the Düsseldorf Public Prosecutor's office. To a deputation which visited him yesterday in order to demand that he should exercise his official powers in relation to the Düsseldorf events, Herr Nicolovius is said to have replied that he did not have at his disposal any legal provisions on the basis of which he could intervene. We say only that Herr Nicolovius is said to have made that reply, although this utterance was communicated to us in a most trustworthy way. Nevertheless we cannot believe it, for otherwise we
"Düsseldorf, vom 22. November", Düsseldorfer Zeitung No. 311, November 24 1848.—Ed.
would have to assume that Herr Nicolovius has completely forgotten the Code pénal together with all the laws that have been promulgated since March of this year.
Written by Marx on November 24, 1848
34. Three State Trials against the Neue Rheinische Zeitung
Cologne, November 24. At this moment three state trials against the Neue Rheinische Zeitung are impending — we do not include the judicial proceedings against Engels, Dronke, Wolff and Marx for alleged "unnewspaperlike" political offences.— We are assured from well-informed sources that at least a dozen more inquisitions have been instituted against the "scurrilous sheet"—the official expression of the ci-devant[3] Public Prosecutor and actual Chief Public Prosecutor Hecker (c'est du Hecker tout purb).[93]
First crime. Violent attack on the maidenly "delicacy" of six royal Prussian police officers and of the king of the Cologne Public Prosecutor's office, Herr Chief Public Prosecutor Zweiffel[94]—people's representative in partibus infidelium[95] who carries out his duties for the time being neither in Berlin nor in Brandenburg, but in Cologne on the Rhine. On the Rhine! on the Rhine! there our vines do grow!c
We, too, prefer the Rhine to the Spree and the Disch Hotel to the Mielentz Hotel.[96]
Va pour la délicatesse des gens d'armes!d As far as the "delicacy" of Herr Zweiffel is concerned, for us it is a "noli me tangere!"e We were morally incensed at the indelicate vote of non-confidence by which his electors are said to have caused him to beat a retreat. As true guardians of the maidenly " delicacy" of Herr Zweiffel, we request him to refute publicly the statement of Herr Weinhagen of Cleve. Herr
Former.—Ed.
It's genuine Hecker.—Ed. Matthias Claudius, "Rheinweinlied".— Ed.
So much for the delicacy of the police! — Ed. Not to be touched! — Ed.
Weinhagen stated in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung over his signature that he could communicate facts injurious to the "honour and delicacy" of Herr Zweiffei. He could even provide proof of these facts, he wrote, but he was compelled to refrain from publishing them as long as Herr Zweiffei could take refuge in the article of the Code pénal, by which every denunciation, even the most well-founded, is prosecuted as calumny unless it can be proved by a judicial verdict or authentic documents. We appeal therefore to the "honour and delicacy" of Herr Zweiffell
Second crime. The simple Hecker and the dichotomous Hecker.
Third crime. This crime, which took place in 1848, is being prosecuted on the demand of the Imperial Ministry. The crime — Schnapphahnski ! A feature article as a criminal ![97]
In its indictment, the Imperial Ministry is said to have described the Neue Rheinische Zeitung as the worst newspaper of the "bad press". For our part, we declare the imperial authority to be the most comic of all comic authorities.
Written by Marx on November 24, 1848
35. Personalities of the Federal Council
Berne, November 24. It will not be unwelcome to the readers of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung to learn something about the personalities who are now called upon to rule Switzerland under the control of the two Councils,[3] and who have now just begun their work. Five members of the Federal Council accepted their election without reservation, another, Herr Furrer, has accepted provisionally until the spring, and about acceptance by the seventh (Munzinger) there can be no doubt.
The President of the Federal Council, Herr Furrer, is a typical Züricher. He has, as the French would say, l'air éminemment bourgeois.(1) Clothes, demeanour and features, including his silver-mounted spectacles, reveal at the very first glance the "citizen of the imperial free town", who, as President of the Vorort and the Diet[98]
respectively, has, it is true, become somewhat civilised, but has yet remained "every inch a provincial"/ The chief merit of Herr Furrer, one of the most important lawyers of the "Swiss Athens" (as the Zurich philistine likes to call his little town of 10,000 inhabitants), is that by his consistent efforts and moderate liberalism the September regime in Zurich" was overthrown and the canton was won back to the party of progress. As President of the Diet he remained true to his principles. Moderate progress in internal affairs and the strictest neutrality in external affairs was the policy he
The National Council and the Council of States which made up the Federal Assembly of Switzerland.— Ed.
pursued. That he has now become President of the Federal Council is more a matter of accident than of design. People would have preferred a man from Berne; but then there was only the choice between Ochsenbein, against whom there was great antipathy, and Neuhaus, who now in 1848 has been just as conservative in his activity as five or six years ago and for that reason was not elected at all to the Federal Council. Owing to this difficulty a Züricher was chosen, and in that case Furrer was of course the most suitable. Thus Furrer by no means represents quite exactly the majority of the Federal Assembly, but at any rate he is the representative of the majority of German Switzerland.
The Vice-President, Druey, is in all respects the opposite of Furrer and the best representative that French Switzerland could send. Whereas Furrer is too moderate for the majority and particularly for the radical minority, Druey on the other hand is far too radical for most. Whereas Furrer is a moderate bourgeois liberal, Druey is a resolute supporter of the red republic. The prominent role played by Druey in the recent revolutionary events in his canton is well known; less well known but all the greater for that are the multifarious services he has rendered his canton (Waadt). Druey, a socialist democrat of the Louis Blanc shade, a first-class authority on constitutional law, and the quickest and most industrious worker in the whole of Switzerland, is an element in the Federal Council which in time is bound to win more and more influence and have the most beneficial effect.
Owing to his antecedents, Ochsenbein, leader of the volunteer bands against Lucerne, President of the Diet which decided on the war against the Sonderbund,[100] colonel of the Berne reservists in that campaign, has become well known and popular not only in Switzerland, but throughout Europe. Less well known, however, is his attitude since the February revolution. The partially socialist character of that revolution, the measures of the Provisional Government in France, and the whole movement of the French proletariat, served to no small extent to intimidate him, the démocrate pur, whom the French would count as belonging to the party of the National.[101] He gradually drew closer to the moderate trend. Especially in external policy, in which he had shown so much energy before and during the war against the Sonderbund, he became more and more inclined to the old system of so-called strict neutrality, which in reality is nothing but the policy of conservatism and connivance with reaction. Thus as President of the Vorort, he delayed in recognising the French Republic, and behaved ambiguously, to say the least, in regard to the Italian affair. In addition, the unrestrained passion which he displayed in presiding over the Diet, and which often caused him to take a biassed attitude towards the radicals, made him many enemies among these, and especially among the French Swiss. If any other choice had been possible for the Berne member of the Federal Council than between him and Neuhaus, Ochsenbein would have obtained far fewer votes.
Colonel Frey-Hérosé from Aargau is considered one of the most capable of Switzerland's military men. He was Chief of the General Staff during the campaign against the Sonderbund. Like most Swiss staff officers, he too for a fairly long time played a political role in his canton, and in consequence became familiar also with civil administration. In any case, in his new post he will perform excellent work for the Military Department. As regards his political views, he is one of the stauncher liberals of his canton.
State Councillor Franscini from Tessin is certainly one of the most respected public figures in the whole of Switzerland. For many years he has worked tirelessly in his canton. It was mainly he who in 1830, already before the July revolution, succeeded in bringing the despised Tessin, which was considered politically backward, to be the first in all Switzerland, and without a revolution, to replace the old oligarchic Constitution by a democratic one. It was he again who headed the 1840 revolution, which for the second time overthrew the surreptitiously restored domination of the priests and oligarchs.[1 2] Furthermore, it was Franscini who, after that revolution, organised afresh the administration, which had fallen into complete disorder in the hands of the reactionaries, put a stop to the innumerable occurrences of theft, fraud, bribery and squandering and, finally, as far as the means of a poor mountain region allowed, once more organised education in the schools, which had completely gone to ruin under the direction of the monks. He thereby deprived the priests of one of their chief means of influencing the people, and the results(2) become more evident each year by the increasing confidence of the Tessiners in their Government. In addition, Franscini is regarded as the most expert economist in Switzerland and is the author of the best books on Swiss statistics (Statistica della Svizzera, Lugano, 1827, Nuova Statistica della Svizzera, 1848). He is a staunch radical and in the Federal Council will side with Druey rather than with Ochsenbein and Furrer. The people of Tessin especially value him, the leader of their Government for many years, for his "honourable poverty".
Government Councillor Munzinger from Solothurn is the most influential man in his canton, which he has represented in the Diet almost continuously since 1830, and which he has actually ruled for several years. As a semi-radical newspaper of French Switzerland, the Gazette de Lausanne, puts it, he is said to cacher sous les apparences de la bonhomie un esprit fin et pénétrant? which means that concealed beneath the outward appearance of a good-natured fellow he possesses that petty cunning which in the imperial free towns is regarded as diplomatic ability. As for the rest, he is a moderate man of progress à la Furrer and he demands that Switzerland should concern itself with its own affairs and leave the high politics of Europe to God and Lord Palmerston. Hence he speaks extremely unfavourably of the foreign refugees, who so far have always been a source of unpleasantness for Switzerland. Together with the Swiss Athenian, Dr. Escher, he has recently in Tessin again given proofs of his attitude in this respect.[103] In general, Furrer and Munzinger in the Federal Council perfectly represent the prejudices and narrow-mindedness of the "enlightened" German Swiss.
Finally, Herr Näff from St. Gallen, about whom I can say very little. He is said to have done much to improve the administration in his canton, and has also distinguished himself in other respects. The canton of St. Gallen, one can read in Swiss newspapers, is in general one containing the richest and most excellent men; but these excellent men suffer from the misfortune that not much is heard about them, and in any case they seem to lack initiative. Nevertheless, in his special capacity as administrator, Herr Näff is apparently not without merit. As regards his political views, he stands midway between Furrer and Ochsenbein; he is more resolute than the former, but does not go as far as could perhaps be expected of the latter judging by his antecedents.
In view of this composition of the Federal Council, there is no doubt about the policy Switzerland will pursue in the immediate future. It is the same policy as the old Diet and the Vorort Berne pursued under the leadership of Ochsenbein, and later of Funk (who without Ochsenbein is a nonentity). In internal affairs — strict implementation of the new Federal Constitution which still leaves too much scope to the sovereignty of the cantons; in external affairs — strict neutrality, of course stricter or milder according to circumstances, in particular stricter in relation to Austria. The moderate party definitely has the upper hand, and it is probable that Herr Ochsenbein will vote with it on most questions.
But in order to understand how in such circumstances a minority, like Druey and Franscini, could agree to be elected and expose themselves to the prospect of being continually outvoted, how such a collegium can rule jointly — to understand this one must either be a Swiss or have seen how Switzerland is governed. Here, where all the executive authorities deliberate jointly, the principle followed is: Just accept the position; true, you are in the minority today, but perhaps you may still be of some use; and who knows whether in a year or two, owing to deaths, resignations etc., you will not find yourself in the majority. That is the natural consequence of the fact that governing collegiums are formed by means of elections. Then, just as in the legislative assemblies, each party tries at least to consolidate its position by securing the entry of one or several candidates to the collegium, and to ensure a minority for itself, as long as it cannot achieve a majority. If its candidates wished to refuse election, as would certainly happen in larger countries, the party would not take it amiss. But the Federal Council is no commission du pouvoir exécutif,[104] and Druey's position is infinitely remote from that of Ledru-Rollin.
The Swiss press as a whole asserts that the Federal Council consists of men of first-class talents. I doubt, however, whether a single one of its members apart from Druey and Franscini would ever play an outstanding role in a larger country, and whether any of the three other members, with the exception of Frey-Hérosé and Ochsenbein, would manage to achieve even an important secondary role.
Written by Engels on November 24, 1848
36. Report of the Frankfurt Committee on Austrian Affairs
Cologne, November 27. Some forty years ago there were people who described Germany in Its Deepest Humiliation.[105] It is as well that they have already been gathered ad patres.a They could not now write such a book; they would not know what title to give it, and if they chose the old one they would contradict themselves.
Because for Germany there is always, as the English poet says, "beneath the lowest deep a lower still".b
We believed that the conclusion of the Danish armistice[106]
signified the utmost depths of shame. It seemed to us that after the activity of the imperial envoy Raumer in Paris, of Heckscher in Italy, and of the Commissioner Stedtmann in Schleswig-Holstein, and after the two Notes to Switzerland,0 the humiliation of Germany could not go farther. The actions of the two imperial commissioners in regard to Austrian affairs prove that we were mistaken. How incredibly far the German imperial commissioners go in their disregard for the honour of Germany, what stupid incapacity, cowardice or treachery can be inherent in the men of the old liberalism, is abundantly evident from the recently issued "Report of the Committee for Austrian Affairs etc.," [107] and especially from the 20 documents it contains.
On October 13, Herren Welcker and Mosle travelled from Frankfurt on the orders of the Central Authority "to mediate in Vienna affairs". Persons not conversant with the new central
To their fathers.—Ed. John Milton, Paradise Lost. The quotation is in English in the German original.— Ed.
diplomacy expected news of their arrival in Vienna within a few days. It was not known at the time that imperial commissioners have their own itineraries. The Imperial Regent's[3] Eisele and Beisele [108]
took the most direct route to Vienna — via Munich. With the well-known travel map from the Jobsiade[109] in their hands, they arrived there in the evening of October 15. Until noon of October 17 they studied the Vienna events in cosy company with the Bavarian Ministers and the Austrian chargé d'affaires. In their first letter to Herr Schmerling they gave an account of their preliminary studies. In Munich the pair had a moment of illumination. They passionately desired the arrival of a "third colleague", if possible a Prussian, "because we would then be better able to cope with our great mission". The Herr "colleague" did not appear. The hope of a trinity was wrecked; the poor couple had to go out into the world alone. What then will become of the "great mission"? The great mission travels in the pockets of Herren Welcker and Mosle to Passau. Before crossing the Austrian Rubicon, the "great mission" sends out a proclamation in advance. It was frightful over there on the other side! (1)
"Here, too," Welcker writes to Schmerling, "on the Austrian frontier the population is by no means free from revolutionary and terrorist symptoms." Indeed, "only by the intervention of a military occupation of the bridge was even the national guard of Krems rendered incapable of depriving their Emperor of it and therefore to some extent of making him a prisoner".
What reader would be so hard-hearted as not to appreciate fully these feelings of the fine soul of a political encyclopaedia [Staatslex-ikonseele]\(2) After the two gentlemen had gathered strength in Passau from midday on the 18th to early on the 20th, they betook themselves to Linz.
They had left Frankfurt on October 13; in the evening of the 20th they were already in Linz. Is not this tremendous speed proof enough of the importance of their "great mission"? Were they perhaps spurred on by special instructions to this enormous haste? It suffices to say that after seven full days the gentlemen arrived in Linz. This town, which with its "big factory population already influenced by emissaries from Vienna" had aroused anxious forebodings in Herr Welcker during his stay in Passau, showed absolutely no signs of the gallows which he and his Herr colleague had probably envisaged in their imagination. On the contrary:
"The entire national guard with its officers and musicians ... received us in ceremonial formation with the German flag flying, and together with the surrounding people welcomed us with repeated cheers."
Therefore Linz — the revolutionary Sodom — turns out to be a well-disposed town, having sufficient bonhomie to welcome our excellent imperial commissioners with due ceremony. All the more dreadful does Vienna appear in the Welcker-Mosle reports to Herr Schmerling as the most godless Gomorrah, as a bottomless pit of anarchy etc.
On the 21st the gentlemen embarked on a steamship and went to Krems. On the way they reported to Frankfurt that they had been met with, a guard of honour in Linz, that the main guard had paraded before them under arms, and other equally important matters. At the same time they prepared three letters: to Windischgrätz, to Minister Krauss, and to the Presidium of the Imperial Diet.
Should anyone still not be completely satisfied with the more than eight days activity of our imperial commissioners, let him now accompany them during the night of October 21-22 to the headquarters of Windischgrätz in Stammersdorf. Here the Central Authority in the shape of its commissioners appears before us in all its glory.
"Windischgrätz," say Welcker-Mosle, "rejected every attempt at influence on our part with a certain harshness."
In other words, they were received with kicks and had to make themselves scarce. "Indeed, he would not even see our credentials," Welcker complains to his Minister Schmerling. And to fill the cup of bitterness to overflowing: Windischgrätz did not offer a drop of wine to the personifications of the Central Authority confronting him, not even a tot of brandy.
Our commissioners therefore once more seated themselves in their carriage, sadly humming the words " O du Deutschland etc.",[3] and continued their journey to — Vienna? Heaven forbid! To Olmütz,
"to the imperial residence". And they did well to do so. Otherwise the whole imperial joke would have lost its point, the last act would be missing from the mediation farce. If they were treated like stupid schoolboys by Windischgrätz, they found in Olmütz
"rt much more obliging reception on the part of the Emperor and the imperial family" (cf. p. 11 of the report, letter No. 6).
They were invited to a meal and, as they write further to Herr Schmerling, "we had the pleasure of the most gracious reception". It is not at all the German lackey character that is expressed here, but the most sincere thankfulness which finds its appropriate expression in the song: "After so much suffering etc." a
After all the dining and wining the famous "great mission" still remains to be fulfilled. Our two commissioners address themselves in writing to Minister Baron von Wessenberg.
"Your Excellency" (begins the letter of October 25), "we humbly request you to be so good as to fix a time at which it will be convenient for you to receive our thanks for the benevolent reception which has been accorded our mission and ourselves by His Royal Imperial Majesty and Your Excellency, and to inform us of your views and decisions in respect of the following points concerning the fulfilment of our mission."
The "following points" say in a great many words that the commissioners wish to be allowed to go to Vienna for the purpose of mediation.
The whole letter, as also the second one to Wessenberg, is drafted in such a complicated last-century government office style, and is so full of excessive politeness and servility that it really does one good to be able to read Wessenberg's replies immediately after it. Compared with the Austrian Minister, the two commissioners give the impression in this correspondence of being two loutish peasants confronting a highly cultured nobleman, before whom they bow and scrape in a comical fashion and try to make use of really select expressions.
Wessenberg replied to the above-mentioned letter as follows:
"Your Excellencies, I must apologise for being so late in replying to your letter of today.... As regards your well-meant intention to make one more attempt in Vienna to settle the dissension there, it seems to me necessary first of all to acquaint you with the state of affairs there at the present time. It is not a question of negotiating with a party, but solely of suppressing an insurrection etc." (cf. p. 16 of the report).
Together with this reply, he returned them their credentials. They repeated their request on October 27.
We have seen how this "assuaging and personal influence" operated in the fourteen days after they left the gates of Frankfurt.
It exerted such a powerful effect on Wessenberg that in his reply he gave no answer to their request. He gave them some items of news from Vienna, half untrue at that, and remarked ironically:
"Furthermore, that revolts like that of the proletarians in Vienna cannot easily be suppressed without the use of means of coercion has been confirmed recently by the events in Frankfurt!"
It was impossible for Herren Welcker and Mosle to withstand such arguments; hence they desisted from further attempts and waited with their "assuaging and personal influence" for the events that would come about.
On October 28 they again reported to Schmerling about their "great mission". In response to an offer by Wessenberg they handed their message to a courier whom the former was sending to Frankfurt. The courier departed, but not the message, which only arrived in Frankfurt on November 6. If they had not dined at the imperial table, if the imperial family, and especially Archduke Karl, had not spoken to them in such a friendly way — the commissioners must have gone out of their minds at such bad luck.
There now followed two days of silence. The "assuaging influence" was resting on the Sabbath after so much labour.
Then, on October 30, Wessenberg gave them official news of the surrender of Vienna. Their decision was taken. True, on October 28 they still expressed the opinion (p. 14 of the report),
"It seems that he" (Windischgrätz), "like the influential persons here" (in Olmiitz), "is all too greatly dominated by the idea not only of subjugating Vienna but of inflicting a revengeful punishment for previous wrong-doing."
However, since then Wessenberg has assured them — and how should an imperial commissioner dare to doubt it — that
"the Austrian Government, in making use of this victory, will be guided by principles suitable for ensuring the sympathy of its subjects".
"We can therefore assume," exclaim Welcker-Mosle in a tone of imperial pathos, "that nevertheless our proposals have had some influence." Therefore, nevertheless? O certainly! For eight days you have most magnificently amused Wessenberg, Archduke Karl, Sophia 8c Co. You were an aid to the royal imperial digestion, Welcker-Moslel Such is the conclusion of the last message of Herren Welcker-Mosle.
And, in fact, you are right; your "great mission" of conciliation and mediation was fulfilled. Why should you now go to Vienna? Were not those apostles of humanity, Windischgrätz and Jellachich, masters of the city? Have not the red-coats 1U and the royal imperial troops by means of plunder, arson, murder and rape preached the gospel of peace and constitutional liberty in a way comprehensible to all?
How effective your "assuaging influence" has been, how splendid-ly you have carried out your task — is evident from the death-rattles of the murdered, the desperate cries of the ravished, it is testified by the thousands in the prisons, it is taught us by the blood-stained shade of Robert Blum.
Your task was to supplement the trilogy staged by Windischgrätz, Jellachich and Wessenberg by helping to perform a farce in Olmütz. That task has been worthily carried out; with great virtuosity you have played to the end the role of the "bamboozled uncle", if not something worse.
37. News
Cologne, November 28. In its issue of November 17 the Neue Rheinische Zeitung stated:
"And as for the Jews, who since the emancipation of their sect have everywhere put themselves, at least in the person of their eminent representatives, at the head of the counter-revolution—what awaits them? There has been no waiting for victory in order to throw them back into their ghetto." a
At the time, we quoted government decrees from Bromberg. Today we have a still more striking fact to report. The big "Three Crowns" masonic lodge in Berlin — it is well known that the Prince of Prussia is the supreme head of the Prussian freemasons, just as Frederick William IV is the supreme head of the Prussian religion — has put a stop to the activity of the Minerva lodge in Cologne. Why? Because it has Jews among its members. Let the Jews take note of this!
A circular of the Brandenburg Ministry to all administrative bodies, which we came upon by chance, calls upon them to carry out mass arrests of the leaders of the clubs.
We are assured from a trustworthy source that Cologne, Düsseldorf, Aachen etc. will be given imperial troops, in fact Austrians, as a Christmas present from our most gracious sovereign. Probably they will include Croats, Serezhans, Czechs, Raizes, Serbs etc.,[112] so that "order and calm" will be established in the Rhine Province as in Vienna. By the way, people say that the Rhine Province borders not on Russia but on France. Let the most gracious sovereign take note of this!
See this volume, p. 32.— Ed.
38. Sittings of the Federal Council and the Council of States
Berne, November 25. Yesterday's sitting of the National Council did not come any nearer to solving the question of the federal capital and, if anything, it made the solution even more remote. It was decided, against the majority, to choose the federal capital not by secret ballot at a joint sitting of the two Councils, but through a law to be deliberated by each Council separately. If this happens a conflict will ensue, as I conjectured earlier[3]; the National Council will choose Berne and the Council of States will choose Zurich. This is admitted by members of both Councils. Unless the Council of States revokes this decision, it is impossible to see how the conflict is to be resolved. In addition, the federal capital that is to be chosen was placed under obligation to procure and furnish the necessary quarters for the legislative federal assemblies and the Central Government and likewise to provide a mint. After that, unlimited credit facilities were granted to the Federal Council by a large majority. Similar credit was simultaneously granted by the Council of States, and therefore has the force of law.
Today there was first a sitting of the Council of States, then of both Councils jointly, and afterwards of the National Council. At the joint sitting Druey and Franscini were sworn in as Federal Councillors. Since I was prevented from attending the sittings, I shall report any further developments of importance tomorrow.
Written by Engels on November 25, 1848
See this volume, p. 44.— Ed.
39. Letters Opened
Cologne, November 28, 11 p.m. Two of the items of correspondence that have reached us this evening, one postmarked Berne and the other Paris, have clearly been opened by an official or semi-official hand. The seal was missing. The wafers with which the letters had been re-sealed were not yet dry. Sedlnitzky, too, is making propaganda with Windischgrätz.
Written by Marx on November 28, 1848
40. Joint Sitting of the Councils. - The Federal Council
Berne, November 26. Contrary to the intention and declared purpose that the Federal Councillors Druey and Franscini were both to be sworn in at yesterday's joint sitting of the Councils,[3] only the former was sworn in. Franscini had not arrived as heavy snow had held up the stage-coach over the St. Gotthard. The Federal Council was then empowered to swear in those Federal Councillors and Federal Judges who did not arrive until after the eventual adjournment of the two legislative Councils.
A sitting of the Council of States had taken place earlier to discuss the draft Bill adopted two days ago by the National Council on the question of the federal capital. This question, which had already been posed in a complicated manner by the National Council, was here made even more complicated. Fazy of Geneva proposed a motion to keep the seat of government in Berne for a provisional period of one year, and in the meantime to work out a more detailed law which would also include the obligations to be imposed on the canton with regard to the security of the federal authorities. The question was being treated much too lightly. The Swiss people should also first be given an opportunity to express its wishes. Briatte of Waadt, President of the Council of States, shared this opinion. Other members proposed further amendments: that the seat of the Federal Government should be determined by a vote at a joint sitting; that like the old Vorort it should be changed, but only every six years, at least until the federal university is established etc. The debate had to be broken off because the time allocated for the joint
See this volume, p. 95.— Ed.
sitting had expired; it will be resumed today. Riittimann (Zurich) proposed to refer the draft back to the commission together with the amendments.
After the joint sitting, the National Council remained assembled to discuss the draft Bill submitted by the Federal Council on taking over all the Swiss postal establishments by the Confederation as from January 1, 1849, with the individual cantons continuing meanwhile to administer them until the postal system is finally settled, but the federal authorities having full powers to alter the rounds etc., etc. The draft was adopted séance tenante* with slight changes by Druey and others. Today the National Council is discussing the law proposed by the radical Dr. Emil Frei (Baselland) on responsibility of the executive officials of the Swiss Confederation; and, time permitting, the draft Bill proposed by Ochsenbein on the establishment of a federal university.
The Federal Council, the executive authority, has already sat several times. Provisionally, Furrer has taken over external affairs, Ochsenbein military affairs and Frei-Herose finance. The Federal Council of War has been accordingly thanked for its services and suspended from activity. The Federal Council has further decided to announce to the cantons, to Switzerland's diplomatic agents abroad and to the foreign powers that it has been constituted. It has likewise decided to lodge a complaint with the Imperial Government regarding the territorial violation in the canton of Zurich,0 and at the same time to make inquiries, in the relevant cantons, as to the behaviour of the refugees and the truth of the facts published by the imperial authorities in the Oberpostamts-Zeitung.[113]
Written by Engels on November 26, 1848
On the spot.—Ed. See this volume, pp. 63-64.— Ed.
41. The Organ of Manteuffel and Johann. - The Rhine Province and the King of Prussia
Cologne. The Neue Preussische Zeitung confirms Manteuffel's statement which we have already published(1) concerning the Frankfurt Central Authority and Assembly. Manteuffel's organ says:
"The proclamation of the Imperial Regent may be very well meant. We Prussians, however, must decisively reject it, the people no less than the Crown." (2)
Manteuffel's organ has guessed our inmost thoughts. The same official newspaper instructs us as follows about the validity of the Frankfurt decisions[114]:
" We Prussians have no other master than our King. And only what he approves in the Frankfurt decisions, only that will be binding for us, because He" (Prussian style!) "finds it good and for no other reason. "
We "Prussians"\V. In the great haggling over human beings in Vienna, we Rhinelanders had the good fortune to win an "Archduke" of the Lower Rhine, who has not fulfilled the conditions on which he became "Archduke".[115] A "King of Prussia" exists for us only through the Berlin National Assembly, and since no Berlin National Assembly exists for our "Archduke" of the Lower Rhine, no "King of Prussia" exists for us. We fell to the lot of the Archduke of the Lower Rhine owing to the haggling over nations! As soon as we have got so far that we no longer recognise the selling of human souls, we shall ask the "Archduke of the Lower Rhine" about his "title to ownership".
42. The Revolutionary Movement in Italy[116]
Cologne, November 29. After six months of almost uninterrupted defeats for democracy, after a series of unprecedented triumphs for the counter-revolution, there are at last indications of an approaching victory of the revolutionary party. Italy, the country whose uprising was the prelude to the European uprising of 1848 and whose collapse was the prelude to the fall of Vienna — Italy rises for the second time. Tuscany has succeeded in establishing a democratic government, and Rome has just won a similar government for itself.
London, April 10; Paris, May 15 and June 25; Milan, August 6; Vienna, November l[117] — these are the four important dates of the European counter-revolution, the four milestones marking the swiftly accomplished stages of its latest triumphal march.
Not only was the revolutionary might of the Chartists broken in London on April 10, but the revolutionary propaganda impact of the February victory was also for the first time broken. Those who correctly assess England and the role she plays in modern history were not surprised that the continental revolutions passed over her without leaving a trace for the time being. England, a country which, through her industry and commerce, dominates all the revolutionary nations of the Continent and nevertheless remains relatively independent of her customers because she dominates the Asian, American and Australian markets; a country in which the contradictions of present-day bourgeois society, the class struggle of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, are most strongly developed and most acute, England more than any other country pursues her own, independent, course of development. The fumbling approach of continental provisional governments to the solution of problems and the
5* abolition of contradictions is not required in England, for she is more competent in dealing with and solving them than any other country. England does not accept revolution from the Continent; when the time comes England will dictate revolution to the Continent. That was England's position and the necessary consequence of her position, and hence the victory of "order" on April 10 was quite understand-able. But who does not remember how this victory of "order", this first counterblow to the blows of February and March, gave fresh support to the counter-revolution everywhere and raised daring hopes in the hearts of those who were called conservatives! Who does not remember how throughout Germany the action of London's special constables was immediately accepted as a model by the entire civic militia! Who does not remember the impression made by this first proof that the movement which had broken out was not unconquerable!
On May 15, Paris promptly provided its counterpart to the victory of the English conservative party. The outermost waves of the revolutionary flood were stemmed on April 10; on May 15 its force was broken at its very source. April 10 demonstrated that the February movement was not irresistible; May 15 demonstrated that the insurrection could be checked in Paris. The revolution defeated at its centre was of course bound to succumb at the periphery as well. And this happened to an increasing extent day by day in Prussia and the smaller German states. But the revolutionary current was still strong enough to ensure two victories of the people in Vienna, the first also on May 15, the second on May 26, while the victory of absolutism in Naples, likewise won on May 15, acted because of its excesses rather as a counterbalance to the victory of order in Paris.[118]
Something was still missing, though. Not only had the revolutionary movement to be defeated in Paris, but armed insurrection had to be divested of the spell of invincibility in Paris itself; only then could the counter-revolution feel safe.
And that happened at Paris in a battle lasting four days, from June 23 to 26. Four days of gun-fire put an end to the impregnability of the barricades and the invincibility of the armed people. What did Cavaignac demonstrate by his victory if not that the laws of warfare are more or less the same in a street and in a defile, whether faced by a barricade or by an entanglement or bastion? That 40,000 undisciplined armed workers, without guns or howitzers and without deliveries of ammunition, can withstand a well-organised army of 120,000 experienced soldiers and 150,000 men of the national guard supported by the best and most numerous artillery and abundantly supplied with ammunition for no more than four days? Cavaignac's victory was the sheerest suppression of the smaller force by a force numerically seven times as big; it was the most inglorious victory ever won, the more inglorious for the blood that it cost despite the overwhelmingly superior forces. Nevertheless the world regarded it with amazement as if it were a miracle, for this victory won by superior forces divested the people of Paris and the Paris barricades of the aura of invincibility. By defeating 40,000 workers, Cavaignac's 300,000 men defeated not only the 40,000 workers, but, without realising it, defeated the European revolution. We all know what an impetuous storm of reaction set in from that day. There was nothing now to restrain it; the people of Paris were defeated with shell and grape-shot by conservative forces, and what could be done in Paris could be repeated elsewhere. Nothing remained to democracy after this decisive defeat but to make as honourable a retreat as possible and at least defend foot by foot in the press, at public meetings and in parliaments, the ground which could no longer be held.
The next great blow was the fall of Milan.(1) The recapture of Milan by Radetzky was indeed the first European event following the June victory in Paris. The double-headed eagle on the spire of the Milan Cathedral signified not only the fall of Italy as a whole, it signified also the restoration of Austria, the restoration of the stronghold of European counter-revolution. Italy crushed and Austria resurrected — what more could the counter-revolution demand! Indeed, with the fall of Milan there was an immediate slackening of revolutionary energy in Italy, Mamiani was overthrown in Rome, the democrats were defeated in Piedmont; and simultaneously the reactionary party raised its head again in Austria and from its centre, Radetzky's headquarters, it began with renewed courage to spread the net of its intrigues over all provinces. Only then did Jellachich assume the offensive, only then was the great alliance of the counter-revolution with the Austrian Slavs completed.
I say nothing of the brief intermezzi in which the counter-revolution gained local victories and conquered separate provinces, of the setback in Frankfurt,[119] and so on. They are of local, perhaps national, but not European significance.
Finally, the work that was begun on the day of Custozza[120] was completed on November 1 — just as Radetzky had marched into Milan so did Windischgrätz and Jellachich march into Vienna. Cavaignac's method was employed, and employed successfully, against the largest and most active focus of German revolution. The revolution in Vienna, like that in Paris, was smothered in blood and smoking ruins.
But it almost seems as if the victory of November 1 also marks the moment when the retrogressive movement reaches the turning-point and a crisis sets in. The attempt to repeat the bold exploit of Vienna bit by bit in Prussia has failed. Even if the country should forsake the Constituent Assembly, the most the Crown can expect is merely a partial victory which will decide nothing, and at any rate the first discouraging effect of the Viennese defeat has been nullified by the clumsy attempt to copy it in every detail.
While Northern Europe has either been forced back again into the servitude of 1847 or is laboriously defending the gains won during the first months against the attacks of the counter-revolution, Italy is suddenly rising again. Leghorn, the only Italian city which the fall of Milan spurred on to a victorious revolution, Leghorn has at last imparted its democratic élan to the whole of Tuscany and has succeeded in setting up a radically democratic government, more radical than any that ever existed under a monarchy, and more radical than most formed in a republic. This Government responded to the fall of Vienna and the restoration of Austria by proclaiming an Italian Constituent Assembly. The revolutionary fire-brand which this democratic Government has thus hurled into the midst of the Italian people has kindled a fire: in Rome the people, the national guard and the army have risen as one man, have overthrown the evasive, counter-revolutionary Government and secured a democratic government, and first among the demands they succeeded in putting through is a government based on the principle of Italian nationality, that is to say, the sending of delegates to the Italian Constituent Assembly as proposed by Guerazzi.[121]
That Piedmont and Sicily will follow suit is beyond doubt. They will follow just as they did last year.
And then? Will this second resurrection of Italy within three years — like the preceding one — herald the dawn of a new upsurge of European democracy? It almost looks as if it will. The measure of the counter-revolution has been filled to overflowing. France is about to throw herself into the arms of an adventurer[3] in order to escape the rule of Cavaignac and Marrast; Germany is more divided than ever; Austria is overwhelmed; Prussia is on the eve of civil war. All the illusions of February and March have been ruthlessly crushed beneath the swift tread of history. Indeed, the people have nothing more to learn from any further victories of the counter-revolution! It is up to the people, when the occasion arises, to apply the lessons of the past six months in good time and fearlessly.
Written by Marx on November 29, 1848
43. German Professorial Baseness
Cologne, November 29. The lackey nature of German professors finds its ideal surpassed in the learned gentlemen of Berlin and Halle. Such a servile frame of mind would shame a Russian serf. The pious Buddhist who credulously swallows the excrement of his Dalai Lama hears with astonishment about the Berlin and Halle Buddhists whose prostitution before royalty "by the grace of God" seems to him like a fable. He only believes in its reality when he is shown the addresses of the Berlin and Halle professors to the King of Prussia dated November 24 and 21 respectively, with the original signa-tures.[3]
"Freedom of discussion was abolished, the lives of the deputies menaced, the dignity of the Assembly and the honour of the nation besmirched, and the most well-intentioned and just proposals for putting an end to this reign of terror were frustrated by the resistance of those whom it was to benefit."
With these and other such brazen lies, and with the most servile assurances of inborn loyalty, 80 Berlin professors — including
Hengstenberg, Schönlein, Ehrenberg, Böckh, the two Grimms etc.— have concocted an address to the King in which they bray in chorus their learned applause for the coercive measures of the Brandenburg Ministry.
The address of 19 Halle professors has a similar sound, but they go so far in their comicality as to speak incidentally of the "seriousness of their profession".
"Adresse der Berliner Professoren an den König von Preussen", November 24, 1848; "Erklärung von Prorektor und Senat der Königlichen vereinten Friedrichs-Universität" in Halle, November 21, 1848 (Preussischer Staats-Anzeiger, November 25 and 26, 1848).— Ed.
The central feature in both addresses is an indescribable fury at the refusal to pay taxes. This is very easy to understand! No more taxes — and privileged erudition goes bankrupt. This money-greedy race of professors needs only the remotest threat to its purse for all science to be engulfed in fire and flames. Their monopoly is rooted in royalty "by the grace of God". They write addresses to the King expressing their devotion, that is to say, they are devoted until death to their own monopoly. If the people achieves final victory, these gentlemen will quickly, in spite of all the "seriousness of their scientific profession", manage to put themselves on the side of popular sovereignty, now so greatly condemned by them. The people, however, will cry out to them "too late" [122] and put a speedy end to the whole evil of privileged erudition.
44. Sitting of the National Council. - The Council of States. - Protest of the Pope. - Imperial Grain Embargo. - The Valaisan Great Council
Berne, November 26. At yesterday's sitting the National Council dispatched both items on the agenda (Emil Frei's motion on the law of responsibility and Ochsenbein's on the federal university) by referring them to the Federal Council. During the discussion on the university some strange remarks were made. Lusser from Uri saw in the project the ruin of his canton's finances. Hungerbühler from Berne similarly resisted the idea of a university with all his might: he said it was a luxury expenditure and that there were already enough people whose heads had been turned through too much learning. The Alcibiades of the Swiss Athens, Herr Escher from Zurich, also thought it necessary to wait first for the financial means. Alcibiades had good reason to press for an ordinary agenda; he was well aware that the Berne deputies intended to grab the seat of the Federal Government for themselves and let Lucerne be satisfied with the Federal Court and Zurich with the "Federal Higher School". But the ambition of the Athenians of Switzerland goes beyond that, and all but two of them voted, although to no avail, for an ordinary agenda.
In the Council of States the law on the seat of the Federal Government was approved in the draft proposed by the National Council and only one addendum was made, by Rüttimann, concerning the security of the federal authorities. Thus, it has now been decided that the seat of the Federal Government be chosen separately in each Council, and not by ballot, but according to the usual voting procedure. We shall see what comes of this.
A few days ago the canton of Neuchâtel witnessed scenes of great confusion. News arrived that all the State Councillors except one
(Herr Steck) had tendered their resignations. All the members of the Republic's National Council and Council of States immediately went home in great consternation. From what we have heard, the dispute resulted from a violent attack on the part of Herr Steck and was settled by a commission of the Great Council appointed specially for the purpose. At the sitting the day before yesterday the State Councillors withdrew their resignations amidst loud cries of vive la
république from the Great Council.
The Pope(1) has protested against the decisions of the five cantons of the Freiburg diocese, which are relieving Bishop Marilley of his episcopal duties and taking steps to set up a provisional administration of the bishopric.[123] If these measures are not revoked, he is threatening to issue "other decrees to which his conscience commits him towards the Catholic world". The Schweizerischer Beobachter, the local reactionary newspaper, consoled itself two nights ago with the hope that since a republic had now been proclaimed in Rome (the worthy paper was made to believe this), the papacy was finished with[124] and the Catholic world had regained its freedom, which meant that the confused situation in Freiburg would also be resolved!
There are conflicting reports from the German frontier as to whether or not a grain embargo has been introduced. It is known for sure that so far it has at the most been introduced at Lake Constance; for on the 24th, the day before yesterday, as many Swabian corn growers as ever before came to the market in Zurich.
The Valaisan Great Council has taken the decision to levy the taxes necessary to pay the Sonderbund war reparations not, as elsewhere, on the enormously rich monasteries, but on the municipalities. The proportion that Valais has to pay amounts to 1,600,000 Swiss francs. So, instead of the monks who were the original instigators of the insurrection, it is the poor people of the canton who will have to pay this tax. In the meantime, the reverend fathers are carting away more and more of their property to Piedmont, just as the patres of the Great St. Bernhard have already done. These priestlings, famous in school books and sentimental stories for their dogs and for their alleged selfless devotion to travellers dying in the snow, are in reality tremendously rich and live extremely comfortably. They have taken all their riches, their cattle, their money and their effects to Aosta, where they are also now staying and partaking copiously of Piedmontese wine. When Radetzky marched into Milan,(2) these philanthropists celebrated the happy event with banqueting and cannon-fire, for which they were brought before the Piedmontese courts. This ecclesia pressa* left nothing behind in their wintry monastery but a little bread and bacon, with which a few servants entertain travellers. However, the Suisse doubts whether the above decision was actually taken, even though it was printed in the Journal
du Valais.
Written by Engels on November 26, 1848
[SITTING OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL]
Berne, November 27. At today's sitting of the National Council the question of publishing a bulletin of proceedings was once again taken up, but owing to the small number of members present it was very soon adjourned until tomorrow.
Written by Engels on November 27, 1848
45. Sitting of the National Council Ill 46. Berne Declared Federal Capital. - Franscini
At yesterday's sitting the Council of States ratified the National Council's decision on the Tessin question[3] without amending it, which means that it has force of law. In the debate, which was somewhat long drawn out, Federal Councillor Franscini, who arrived the day before, particularly distinguished himself with a speech in support of the Tessiners. Carteret of Geneva also spoke out energetically in support of the Italian refugees and protested against their being referred to as "culprits" in this assembly, whereas they deserved the sympathy of all Swiss people for their aspirations and their struggles. It was indeed by demonstrating such active sympathy that the Tessiners proved that they were genuinely Swiss. In spite of this and several other vigorous protestations, especially against Article 2, which deprives Tessin of the right to grant asylum, the decision of the National Council was, as I have said, ratified in its entirety by a sizeable majority. Here too the German cantons were the decisive factor, even though a few German deputies also supported the Tessiners in the Council of States.
Written by Engels on November 28, 1848
See this volume, pp. 61-62.— Ed.
47. News from Switzerland
Berne, November 29. At yesterday's sitting of the Council of States the law centralising the control of the posts in the hands of the federal authorities as from January 1, 1849,(1) was debated and approved without amendments. It had already received the approval of the National Council. The decision on the seat of the Federal Government was on the agenda. However, since the National Council was debating this decision at the same time and had already taken the initiative, the sitting was adjourned until four o'clock. At four o'clock the Council proceeded to the vote. At the first vote Berne received 21 votes, Zurich 13 and Lucerne 3, which gave an absolute majority to Berne. Berne is therefore definitively the seat of the Swiss federal authorities.
This morning both Councils came together to swear in Federal Councillor Franscini. Franscini delivered a longish speech in Italian which was applauded by all. Thereupon the Federal Assembly adjourned indefinitely. It was left to the Federal Council to reconvene the Assembly at the appropriate time.
The Federal Council made the following distribution of departments among its members: Furrer, as President, was put in charge of external affairs and general direction of federal policies; Druey, justice and police; Ochsenbein, war; Franscini, internal affairs; Munzinger, finance; Frei-Herose, taxes on commerce and turnpike money (péages); Näff, posts and public works.
The two recent elections in Berne for "the National Council(2)
resulted in victories for the liberals; in Mittelland Weingart was elected and in Emmenthal, governor Karrer.
It goes without saying that the people of Berne are jubilant at their elevation to citizens of the capital of Switzerland. Last night there were any number of torchlight processions and serenades; in addition, the inevitable roar of cannon; bell-ringing seems to be left to the "imperial authority". There was naturally quite a serenade in front of the Erlacher Hof, where the Federal Council has its seat, and Steiger and Furrer made speeches.
I have just heard that Luvini fought a duel with Colonel Berg because of the latter's provocative remarks during the Tessin debate. It appears that no one was hurt; however, I cannot yet say anything definite on that score.
Written by Engels on November 29, 1848
48. Duel between Berg and Luvini
Berne, November 30. In the duel yesterday between Herren Berg and Luvini, Herr Berg sustained fairly severe wounds in the arm and in the side. The weapon chosen was the officer's broadsword (briquet
d'ordonnance). When Herr Berg left yesterday he had to be carried to the carriage.
Written by Engels on November 30, 1848
Endnotes
[4] In 1707-1806 the principality of Neuenburg and Vallendis (the German names for Neuchâtel and Valangin) was a dwarf state under the rule of Prussia. In 1806, during the Napoleonic wars, Neuchâtel was ceded to France. In 1815, by decision of the Vienna Congress, it was incorporated into the Swiss Confederation as its 21st canton but at the same time retained its vassal dependence on Prussia. On February 29, 1848, a bourgeois revolution in Neuchâtel put an end to Prussian 6 7 11 rule and a republic was proclaimed. However, up to 1857 Prussia constandy laid claim to Neuchâtel and was forced to renounce it officially only under pressure from France.
[5] An allusion to General Pfuel's participation in the suppression of the national liberation uprising in Posen, a duchy under Prussia's rule, which took place in the spring of 1848. On his orders the insurgents who had been taken prisoner had their heads shaved and their hands and ears branded with lunar caustic (in German Höllenstein, i.e. stone of hell); hence his nickname "von Höllenstein".
[6] The Holy Hermandad (Holy Brotherhood)—a league of Spanish towns set up at the end of the fifteenth century with the approbation of the King to fight against the powerful feudal lords. From the middle of the sixteenth century the armed detachments of the Holy Hermandad performed police duties. Thus the police in general was often ironically labelled the "Holy Hermandad".
[9] Demi-cantons—out of the 22 Swiss cantons three — Appenzell, Basle and Unterwaiden — were for various reasons (geographical, religious etc.) divided into demi-cantons: Appenzell into Innerrhoden and Ausserrhoden, Basle into Basle and Baselland, and Unterwaiden into Obwalden and Nidwalden. Diet (Tagsatzung) — supreme organ of the Swiss Confederation which existed until the latter was reorganised and transformed from a union of states into a federal state in 1848. The Diet consisted of representatives of the separate cantons. In 1848 it adopted a new Constitution and yielded place to the Federal Assembly consisting of two Chambers (the National Council and the Council of States).
[10] The Ur-cantons (Urkantpnli) are the mountain cantons of Uri, Schwyz and Unterwaiden which in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries formed the nucleus of the Swiss Confederation. During the civil war of 1847 these cantons, as members of the Sonderbund, opposed the progressive forces of Switzerland. Separatists—members of the Sonderbund, a separatist union formed by the seven economically backward Catholic cantons of Switzerland in 1843 to resist progressive bourgeois reforms and defend the privileges of the Church and the Jesuits. The decree of the Swiss Diet of July 1847 on the dissolution of the Sonderbund served as a pretext for the latter to start hostilities against the other cantons early in November. On November 23, 1847, the Sonderbund army was defeated by the federal forces.
[11] During the bourgeois revolution of 1820-23 in Spain, the liberal party split into a Right wing, the Moderados, and a Left wing, the Exaltados.
[13] For the proletarian uprising in Paris on June 23-26, 1848, see present edition, Vol. 7, pp. 124-28 and 130-64. The popular uprising in Vienna on October 6-7, 1848, flared up in response to the Austrian Government's order to dissolve the Hungarian Sejm and to dispatch Austrian troops to aid the Croatian Ban Jellachich who, supported by the Emperor's court, had started a counter-revolutionary campaign against Hungary and been defeated by the Hungarian revolutionary forces on September 29. Headed by the petty-bourgeois democrats, the masses prevented the Vienna garrison from marching to Hungary and seized control of the city after a fierce struggle. However, the insurgents did not receive the necessary support from other revolutionary forces in Austria and Germany and revolutionary measures were sabotaged by the Vienna bourgeoisie. The Hungarian troops were not energetic enough in their march to the aid of the insurgents and were halted by Jellachich on October 29 while the counter-revolutionary army of Windischgrätz had already been fighting in the city itself from October 26. On November 1 the resistance of the insurgents was broken. The restoration of the Habsburgs to power was accompanied by savage counter-revolutionary terror.
[14] In the spring of 1798, after the troops of the French Directory entered Switzerland, the one and indivisible Helvetian Republic was proclaimed there and a Constitution adopted on the pattern of the French Constitution of 1795. For the first time in the history of the country a central government was created, the equality of the cantons declared, the privileges of the estates and feudal dependence of the peasants abolished, the medieval guilds liquidated etc. Swiss participation in France's wars against the forces of the anti-French coalition was accompanied by a struggle between the progressive and reactionary forces within the country for preserving or abolishing the Helvetian Republic. The latter was abolished in 1803 by Napoleon, who restored, with certain modifications, the previous decentralised state system of the Swiss Confederation. In 1815 the Vienna Congress acknowledged Switzerland's permanent neutrality and approved the Federal Act adopted by the Swiss Diet in 1814, which limited the powers of the central Government still more. Though particularism was restored, on the whole the anti-feudal measures of the Helvetian Republic remained in force.
[16] In English this article was first published in full in the collection: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Articles from the "Neue Rheinische Zeitung". 1848-49, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1972. Prior to this, an excerpt from the article published in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung on November 12, 1848, appeared under the tide "We Refuse to Pay Taxes" in the book: Karl Marx, On Revolution, ed. by S. K. Padover, New York, 1971 ("The Karl Marx Library" series).
[17] Speaking of the Brandenburg Ministry, Frederick William IV said: "Either Brandenburg in the Assembly or the Assembly in Brandenburg." In its issue of November 9, 1848, the Neue Preussische Zeitung changed this to: "Brandenburg in the Assembly and the Assembly in Brandenburg."
[18] 1 The Emperor Charles V is said to have ordered his own funeral to be performed and to have taken part in the burial service shordy before his death.
[19] The criminal code of Charles V (Constitutio criminalis Carolina), adopted by the Imperial Diet in Regensburg in 1532, was notorious for its extremely cruel penalties.
[20] During the uprising of August 10, 1792, which overthrew the French monarchy, Louis XVI (of the Bourbon dynasty originating from the Capet dynasty) sought protection in the National Assembly. The next day he was arrested. The Convention which tried him found him guilty of conspiring against the freedom of the nation and the state security and sentenced him to death. On January 21, 1793, Louis XVI was guillotined. In its issues Nos. 19, 21, 22, 26 and 98 for June 19, 21, 22, 26 and September 9, 1848, the Neue Rheinische Zeitung published a series of articles under the title "Die Verhandlungen des National-Konvents über Louis Capet, Ex-König von Frankreich" describing the trial of Louis XVI.
[21] Marx is speaking here about the Austrian Imperial Diet which was in session in Vienna from July 1848. The majority of its Slav deputies were associated with the bourgeoisie or the landowners and sought to set up a Slav federal constitutional-monarchic state under the supremacy of Austria and its Emperor. During the Vienna uprising of October 6-7, 1848, the deputies belonging to the Czech national-liberal party urgently left Vienna for Prague, where they continued to provide assistance to the fugitive Emperor in Olmütz (Olomouc) in his struggle against the Vienna insurgents.
[22] When on November 9, 1848, the Prussian National Assembly was informed of the royal decree transferring it from Berlin to Brandenburg the majority of the Right-wing deputies obediently left the building.
[24] In the preface to his book Kahldorf über den Adel in Briefen an den Grafen M. von Moltke, which Heine published in March 1831, he says with reference to the French revolution of 1830: "The Gallic cock has now crowed a second time, and in Germany, too, day is breaking."
[25] Lazzaroni—a contemptuous nickname for declassed proletarians, primarily in the Kingdom of Naples. They were repeatedly used by the Government in the struggle against liberal and democratic movements.
[26] The Academic Legion—a student militarised organisation founded in Vienna in March 1848. Each faculty of the University formed a detachment divided into companies. The Legion consisted mostly of radical democrats. It also included University lecturers and professors as well as writers, poets, journalists and physicians. The Academic Legion played a significant role in the Austrian revolutionary movement in 1848. It was dissolved after the suppression of the October uprising in Vienna. The civic militia (Bürgerwehr)—the Vienna national guard formed after the March events; it was in its social composition a motley organisation: besides artisans and small shopkeepers, it included representatives of the bourgeoisie. Its bourgeois units took part in firing on the workers' demonstration already in August 1848. During the October uprising in Vienna the bourgeois elements of the national guard were pushed into the background and the artisans and small shopkeepers had the upper hand.
[27] This refers to the speech made by Brandenburg in the Prussian National Assembly on November 9, 1848. In this and other articles that follow, when speaking of events and debates in the Prussian National Assembly, use has been made as a rule of the shorthand reports subsequently published as a separate book: Verhandlungen der constituirenden Versammlung für Preussen, Berlin, 1848.
[28] In its issue of November 3, 1848, the Kölnische Zeitung carried an article about an imaginary African tribe, the Hyghlans, an intermediate form between man and ape. "Many of them," it said, "learn Arabic." On November 5, the Neue Rheinische Zeitung ridiculed the report, adding: "This discovery is at any rate of the greatest importance for the party of the wailers for whom the Hyghlans will provide a fitting reinforcement." For the wailers see Note 127.
[30] Marx draws an analogy between the events in Versailles on June 20, 1789 (when the delegates of the States General, which on June 17 declared themselves to be the National Assembly, took an oath in the tennis-court not to disperse until a Constitution had been drawn up), and the events in Berlin on November 11, 1848. On November 9, 1848, a royal decree was read to the delegates transferring the sittings of the Prussian National Assembly from Berlin to Brandenburg but the majority decided to continue their deliberations in Berlin. The next day they were expelled from the building (the playhouse) where their sittings had been held hitherto; from November 11 to 13 the delegates met in the Berlin shooting-gallery, which was occupied by soldiers in the evening of November 13. p. 18
[31] This decision was adopted by the Prussian National Assembly on November 11, 1848, at a sitting in the Berlin shooting-gallery (see Verhandlungen der constituirenden Versammlung für Preussen. 1848, Bd. 9, Suppl.-Bd.).
[32] The Neue Rheinische ZeitungNo. 142 (second edition) and No. 143, for November 14 and 15, 1848, carried an article by Georg Weerth under the heading "Die Steuerverweigerung in England bei Gelegenheit der Reform-Bill im Jahre 1832"
[35] In the Freiburg (Fribourg) and other Swiss cantons the Government made recognition of the cantonal Constitution one of the conditions for voting at the elections to the Federal Assembly. In Freiburg this measure was directed against clergymen who tried to get their deputies elected to the National Council. Many members of the National Council, however, regarded this as a violation of the universal suffrage introduced by the 1848 Constitution and managed to have the elections in the Freiburg canton annulled (for details see this volume, pp. 42-43). Subsequendy this decision was reviewed and the annulment of the Freiburg elections reversed (see this volume, pp. 57-58).
[36] Under pressure from Radetzky, commander-in-chief of the Austrian army in North Italy, the Vorort Berne sent its representatives and a military detachment to Tessin, a canton bordering on Italy, where Italian refugees who supported the insurgent movement against Austria had found asylum. The representatives demanded that all the Italian refugees should be deported from Tessin into the interior of the country. The Tessin Government refused to fulfil this demand and agreed to deport only those Italians who had taken a direct part in the insurgents' movement. The conflict was discussed in the columns of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung for several months. Engels gave details of the debate on it in the new Swiss Federal Assembly in his article "The National Council" (see this volume, pp. 138-53). The Vorort (the main canton) — the name given to a Swiss canton in whose capital the Diet, and later the Federal Assembly, held its sittings before Berne was proclaimed the Swiss capital. In 1803-09, there were six main cantons — Freiburg, Berne, Solothurn, Basle, Zurich and Lucerne; in 1815 their number was reduced to three: Zurich, Berne and Lucerne, and the seat of the Diet changed every two years. Until the Constitution of 1848, the Vorort authorities to a certain extent fulfilled the functions of the country's Government and its representative was President of the Diet.
[38] "Little constable" (kleiner Konstabier) — an ironical paraphrase of "little corporal", a nickname given to Napoleon I by the French soldiers in allusion to the fact that, while in emigration in England, Louis Bonaparte joined the detachments of special constables used to break up the Chartist demonstration of April 10, 1848.
[39] An allusion to General Cavaignac's part in the conquest of Algeria and his behaviour as Governor there in 1848 when he brutally suppressed the Arab national liberation movement. It was these "exploits" of Cavaignac that gave him the reputation of a reliable "limb of the law" in the eyes of the French bourgeoisie.
[40] The Central Commission of representatives of the three democratic organisations of Cologne — the Democratic Society, the Workers' Association and the Association for Workers and Employers — was set up at the end of June 1848 by decision of the First Democratic Congress in Frankfurt am Main; Marx was a member of the Commission. Until the convocation of the Rhenish Congress of Democrats, Ulis Commission functioned temporarily as the District Committee. The First Rhenish Congress of Democrats, which was held in Cologne on August 13 and 14, 1848, with the participation of Marx and Engels, confirmed the composition of the Central Commission of these three Cologne democratic associations as Rhenish District Committee of Democrats. Besides the President, lawyer Schneider II, it included Marx, Schapper and Moll. The activities of the Committee covered not only the Rhine Province but also Westphalia. The Congress adopted a decision on the necessity to carry on work among factory workers and peasants. On November 14, 1848, at the beginning of the counter-revolutionary coup d'état in Prussia, the Rhenish District Committee of Democrats called on the population to refuse to pay taxes, even before the Prussian National Assembly had adopted a decision to this effect. Until the Assembly recognised this slogan and the campaign for the refusal to pay taxes developed in other provinces, Marx judged it necessary to temporarily restrain the people from forcible resistance to the collection of taxes. However, he put the slogan of armed resistance on the agenda when, on November 15, the Assembly at last adopted a decision on the refusal to pay taxes as of November 17. From November 19 to December 17 the Neue Rheinische Zeitung carried the slogan "No More Taxes!!!" on its front page. There was a wide response to the appeal in the Rhine Province (see this volume, pp. 39-40). In English the text of the appeal was first published in the collection: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Articles from the "Neue Rheinische Zeitung". 1848-49, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1972.
[41] At its sitting on November 13, 1848, held in the Berlin shooting-gallery, the Prussian National Assembly approved the report of a special commission describing the Brandenburg Ministry's actions as acts of high treason. The Assembly decided to publish the report and convey it to the Public Prosecutor for him to take action (see Verhandlungen der constituirenden Versammlung für Preussen. 1848, Bd. 9, Suppl.-Bd.). This article was published in English for the first time in the collection: Karl Marx, On Revolution, ed. by S. K. Padover, New York, 1971, and then in the collection: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Articles from the "Neue Rheinische Zeitung". 1848-49, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1972.
[42] The reference is to the law safeguarding personal freedom passed by die Prussian National Assembly on August 28, 1848, and signed by the King on September 24. It was called the Habeas Corpus Act by analogy with the English Writ of Habeas Corpus. The law was published in the Preussischer Staats-Anzeiger No. 148, September 29, 1848. A Writ of Habeas Corpus is the name given in English judicial procedure to a document enjoining the relevant authorities to present an arrested person before a court on the demand of persons interested to check the legitimacy of the arrest. Having considered the reasons for the arrest, the court either frees the person arrested, sends him back to prison or releases him on bail or guarantee. The procedure, laid down by an Act of Parliament of 1679, does not apply to persons accused of high treason and can be suspended by decision of Parliament, p. 25
[43] This refers to the editors' introduction to the "Appeal of the Rhenish District Committee of Democrats" published in the Kölnische Zeitung No. 308 on November 16, 1848.
[44] An allusion to the similarity between the measures proposed by Hansemann, the Prussian Minister of Finance (i.e. a compulsory loan as a means to stimulate money circulation), and the views of Pinto, the eighteenth-century Dutch stockjobber, who regarded stockjobbing as a factor speeding up money circulation. Cf. the article "The Bill on the Compulsory Loan and Its Motivation" (present edition, Vol. 7, pp. 278-86).
[45] The Auerswald-Hansemann Government (the so-called Government of Action) was in power from June 25 to September 21, 1848 (see Note 153). Besides the ordinary police, a body of armed civilians was set up in Berlin in the summer of 1848 for use against street gatherings and mass demonstrations and for spying. These policemen were called constables by analogy with the special constables in England who played an important part in breaking up the Chartist demonstration of April 10, 1848.
[46] Santa Casa (the Sacred House) — headquarters of the Inquisition in Madrid.
[47] The Prussian Brumaire of 1848—an ironical comparison of the counter-revolutionary coup d'état in Prussia with that in France on the 18th Brumaire (November 9), 1799, as a result of which the dictatorship of Ceneral Bonaparte was established in the country. In tlie Middle Ages people used to believe that there was special wisdom in the works of the Roman poet Virgil. They regarded his poems as divinely inspired and treated him as an oracle.
[48] Dissenters or dissidents—members of religious trends and sects not belonging to the established church; in this particular case adherents of various Protestant sects who did not recognise orthodox Lutheranism.
[49] Potsdam—a town near Berlin, the residence of the Prussian kings where military parades and reviews of the Prussian army were held.
[51] The Privy Councillors' quarter (Geheimratsviertel)—a district in the soudi-west of Berlin inhabited mainly by Prussian officials. On October 31, 1848, a mass demonstration was held in Berlin in protest against the cruelty with which the Austrian counter-revolution crushed the Vienna uprising. The demonstration ended when unarmed engineering workers were attacked by the 8th Battalion of the bourgeois civic militia. This incident provided
[52] the Prussian reaction with an excuse for replacing the Pfuel Government by the openly counter-revolutionary Brandenburg Government.
[53] The majority of the National Assembly adhered to the tactics of passive resistance in their struggle against the counter-revolutionary actions of the Brandenburg Government when it began the coup d'état. These tactics amounted to not obeying the Government's orders, including the one on the transfer of the Assembly from Berlin to Brandenburg. The Assembly refrained from more effective forms of resistance to the counter-revolutionary forces, and only after much procrastina-tion did it adopt the decision on the refusal to pay taxes, interpreting it, moreover, in the spirit of passive disobedience to the authorities. Even the Left-wing deputies did not dare call on the people to arm and deal an open blow against reaction, which the Neue Rheinische Zeitung saw as the real means of struggle against the coup d'état. As a result of the tactics of passive resistance the Government — which on November 10 brought the troops of General Wrangel into Berlin and declared a state of siege there — managed, by force, arrests and intimidation, to make the Assembly cease its work in Berlin. Then, on December 5, after the resumption of its sittings in Brandenburg in early December 1848, the Government issued orders dissolving it altogether and introducing a Constitution imposed by the King.
[54] The Neue Rheinische Zeitung published the messages of support for the National Assembly in Berlin on November 21, 25 and 26 (Nos. 148, 152 and 153). .p. 39
[56] This report did not appear in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. In accordance with the new Constitution of the Swiss Confederation adopted on September 12, 1848, members of the Federal Court were elected at a joint sitting of the two Chambers of the Federal Assembly: the National Council and the Council of States. The eight members elected earlier were: Johann Kern (canton of Thurgau), Kasimir Pfyffer (Lucerne), Migy (Berne), Rüttimann (Zurich), Brosi (Graubünden), Zenrufinen (Wallis), Favre (Neuenburg) and Blumer (Glarus). The Federal Court was responsible for the speedy settlement of conflicts which the Diet (see Note 9) had formerly taken years over, and for passing sentence on persons who were charged with high treason but still remained unpunished.
[57] See Note 35. For the rebellion of the Bishop of Freiburg see Note 15. For the Sonderbund see Note 10. On October 25, 1848, Bishop Marilley was arrested. On October 30, a diocesan conference of representatives of the Freiburg, Berne, Vaud, Neuchâtel and Geneva canton governments was held in Freiburg (Fribourg). It decided to set the bishop free but to prohibit his stay and activities on the territory of these five cantons. The opening of this conference was announced in the Neue Rheinische
[59] Zeitung No. 136, November 7, 1848. Possibly Engels wrote about the conference decision in the above-mentioned report, which did not appear in the newspaper (see Note 56).
[60] The reference is to the Second Rhenish Congress of Democrats, which was held in Cologne on November 23, 1848. It discussed questions connected with the tax-refusal campaign and also the question of drawing the peasants into the struggle against the counter-revolution. Marx took part in the deliberations of the Congress, which approved his slogans of action and the tactics of active struggle against tJie coup d'état in Prussia. For reasons of security the newspaper did not cover the sessions of the Congress and gave only extremely laconic reports on its decisions. Thus, the second edition of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung No. 153, November 26, 1848, carried the following item: "The Congress of Rhenish democrats, held on November 23, approved the decisions adopted by the District Committee.—Detailed instructions will be communicated by the delegates to their associations."
[61] On July 5,1848, the Neue Rheinische Zeitung No. 35 published the article "Arrests" giving details of the arrest of Gottschalk and Anneke, then leaders of the Cologne Workers' Association (see present edition, Vol. 7, pp. 177-79). This article served as a pretext for charging the editors with insulting Chief Public Prosecutor Zweiffel and the police officers who made the arrests. Public Prosecutor Hecker sent a letter to the newspaper refuting the article "Arrests" and threatening the editors. Marx published the letter in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung and called the Cologne Public Prosecutor's office a "new, promising contributor" to that newspaper (see the article "Legal Proceedings against the Neue Rheinische Zeitung", present edition, Vol. 7, pp. 186-88).
[63] The Federal Di€t — the representative body of the German Confederation, that ephemeral union of German states founded by decision of the Vienna Congress in 1815. Consisting of representatives of the German states, the Federal Diet had no real power and served as a vehicle of feudal and monarchist reaction. After the March 1848 revolution in Germany the Right-wing circles tried in vain to revive the Federal Diet and use it to undermine the principle of popular sovereignty and prevent the democratic unification of Germany.
[64] Marx refers to the rejection by Prime Minister Brandenburg of the petition presented by a delegation from the Cologne Municipal Council and other Rhenish delegations asking to be given an audience by die King. When the delegates said that in case of refusal they would suspend payment of taxes, the Prime Minister threatened to resort to bayonets.
[65] This rumour was based on the conflict between the German Central Authority, or the so-called Imperial Government (see Note 23), which acted in the name of the Frankfurt National Assembly, and the Swiss authorities. Early in October the Imperial Government sent a Note to Berne demanding the cessation of the actions of the German republican refugees and their expulsion from the cantons bordering on Germany. This and the next Note, of October 23, contained both demands and threats, which, however, were rejected by the Swiss Government. The conflict accompanied by frontier incidents continued. Its essence was revealed by Engels in his article "The German Central Authority and Switzerland" (see this volume, pp. 66-74).
[66] See Note 36.
[67] A few days before the publication of this report, the Neue Rheinische Zeitung No. 198 of November 21, 1848, carried the following report marked with two asterisks: "Berne, November 16. I hasten to inform you of the results of the elections to the executive Federal Council held at today's joint sitting of the National Council and the Council of States. The following were elected: "President: Burgomaster Furrer, of Zurich; "Vice-President: State Councillor Druey, of Waadt; "Members: Colonel Ochsenbein, of Berne; Colonel Franscini, of Tessin; Herr Munzinger, of Solothurn; Herr Näff, of St. Gallen; Herr Steiger, of Lucerne. "The moderate party which has an overwhelming majority in both Councils also had its candidates elected against the candidates of the radical party: Eytel, Stämpfli, Luvini etc." This information, probably supplied by Engels, contained certain inaccuracies which can be explained by the fact that the Federal Council had not finally constituted itself by that time. Instead of Ochsenbein, Steiger was elected President of the National Council; and the seventh member of the Federal Council was Frey-Hérosé of Aargau. For the details see Engels' article "Personalities of the Federal Council" (this volume, pp. 83-87). The Federal Council was the supreme executive body of the Swiss Republic. The President of the Republic, elected from among the Council members, was also President of the Federal Council.
[68] See Note 35.
[69] See Note 10.
[70] See Note 36.
[71] According to the Constitution of the Swiss Confederation of 1848, Swiss citizens had the right to vote after three months' permanent residence.
[72] The following report from Berne, dated November 23, 1848, appeared in the supplement to No. 154 of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung but it elucidated other questions ("Raveaux's Resignation — Violation of the Swiss Frontier", see this volume, pp. 63-64). Engels gave detailed information about the debates in the National Council on the Tessin conflict in his article "The National Council", published in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung on December 10, 1848 (see this volume, pp. 138-53).
[73] The Barataria's Reich—an ironical name which Engels gave to the future united German state for which the members of the Frankfurt parliament were drafting a Constitution; an allusion to the imaginary island of Barataria of which Sancho Panza was made Governor in Cervantes' novel Don Quixote.
[74] During the coup d'état in Prussia the Frankfurt National Assembly undertook to settle the conflict between the Prussian National Assembly and the Crown. For this purpose, first Bassermann (one of the liberal leaders) and then Simson and Hergenhahn went to Berlin as imperial commissioners. In mid-November the Frankfurt National Assembly adopted a decision calling on the Central Authority to help, through the imperial commissioners in Berlin, to form a Ministry which would enjoy the confidence of the country, that is a Ministry more acceptable to the Prussian bourgeoisie than the obviously counter-revolutionary Brandenburg-Man teuf f el Ministry. However, this decision proved ineffective because the Frankfurt Assembly's liberal majority openly disapproved of the campaign for refusal to pay taxes as a means of struggle against the coup d'état. The mediation of the imperial commissioners proved to be helpful to the counter-revolutionaries since it diverted the democratic forces in the German states from real support of the Prussian National Assembly in its struggle against the Brandenburg-Manteuffel Ministry.
[75] The reference is to the armistice between Denmark and Prussia concluded in the Swedish city of Malmö on August 26, 1848. Though the Prussian ruling circles waged the war against Denmark over Schleswig and Holstein in the name of the German Confederation, they sacrificed general German interests to dynastic and counter-revolutionary interests when they concluded the armistice. They were moved by the desire to release troops for the suppression of the revolution in Prussia, and also by pressure from Russia and Britain, which supported Denmark. Besides a ceasefire between Prussia and Denmark, the armistice provided for the replacement of the provisional authorities in Schleswig with a new government, to be formed by the two contracting parties (representatives of the Danish monarchy were dominant in it), separation of the Schleswig and Holstein armed forces and other harsh terms for. the national liberation movement in the duchies. The revolutionary-democratic reforms which had been introduced were now virtually eliminated. The Malmö armistice and its ratification by the Frankfurt National Assembly caused popular dissatisfaction and protests in Germany.
[76] The Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation was founded in 962 and lasted till 1806. At different times it included German, Italian, Austrian, Hungarian and Bohemian lands, Switzerland and the Netherlands, forming a motley conglomera-tion of feudal kingdoms and principalities, church lands and free cities with different political structures, legal standards and customs.
[78] In April 1848 Baden was the scene of a republican uprising led by the petty-bourgeois democrats Friedrich Hecker and Gustav Struve. It started with republican detachments invading Baden from the Swiss border. But this poorly prepared and poorly organised uprising was crushed by the end of April.
[79] The first Note to the Vorort (main canton) Berne (see Note 36), dated October 4, 1848, and signed by Franz Raveaux, an imperial commissioner in Switzerland, was published in several German newspapers including the Preussischer Staats-Anzeiger No. 163 of October 14, 1848. The same day, the Neue Rheinische Zeitung (in the supplement to issue No. 116) carried a report from Berne dated October 8 setting forth the content of the Note from the main canton Berne written in reply to the imperial Note. The full text of the Note, dated October 5, was reproduced in the Frankfurter Oberpostamts-Zeitung on October 10 (No. 275, second supplement) and October 11, 1848 (No. 276). A new Note of the German Central Authority, dated October 23 and also signed by Raveaux, was published in the Frankfurter Oberpostamts-Zeitung No. 298 on November 6, 1848. An announcement about its delivery to the Berne authorities appeared in the Neue Rheinische ZèitungNo. 140, November 11. The main canton Berne's reply of November 4 was published in the Frankfurter Oberpostamts-Zeitung No. 304 and in the first supplement to it on November 13, 1848. The Neue Rheinische Zeitung likewise published the text of this Note in its issue No. 143, November 15, 1848.
[80] See Note 73.
[81] An allusion to the special troops supplied by the so-called Military Border Area — i.e., military settlements formed in the southern border regions of the Austrian Empire between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries. The inhabitants of these regions — Serbs, Croats, Rumanians, Szeklers, Saxons, and others — were allotted plots of land by the state, for which they had to serve in the army, pay taxes and fulfil certain public duties. While serving in the army they wore red coats and caps. In 1848 they formed part of the counter-revolutionary army of the Croatian Ban Jellachich deployed against revolutionary Vienna and Hungary. The names of these border regiments and battalions derived either from the names of the regions where they were formed, the names of the central towns of the corresponding border areas, or the nationality making up the majority of the military unit.
[83] After the defeat of the Baden republican uprising in April 1848 (see Note 78), one of its leaders, Friedrich Hecker, emigrated to Switzerland and lived in Muttenz (Basle canton) until September 1848, when he left for America.
[84] The reference is to the invasion of Baden from Swiss territory by detachments of German republican refugees led by Gustav Struve on September 21, 1848, following the news of the ratification by the Frankfurt National Assembly of the armistice in Malmö and the popular uprising in Frankfurt in reply to it. Supported by the local republicans, Struve proclaimed a German Republic in the frontier town of Lörrach and formed a provisional government. However, the insurgent detachments were shortly afterwards scattered by the troops, and Struve, Blind and other leaders of the uprising were imprisoned by decision of a court martial (they were released during another republican uprising in Baden in May 1849).
[86] 8 Pfuel's speech in the Prussian National Assembly on September 29, 1848, was connected with the declaration of a state of siege in Cologne on September 26. The Cologne authorities had been scared by the growing revolutionary-democratic movement and the campaign of protest against the Prussian-Danish armistice concluded in Malmö and ratified by the Frankfurt Assembly. Pfuel tried to justify this measure, but general indignation against the actions of the Cologne authorities and their condemnation by the Left deputies in the Assembly compelled the Government to issue an order lifting the state of siege in Cologne as of November 2, 1848.
[87] The Penal Code (Code pénal), adopted in France in 1810 and introduced into the regions of West and South-West Germany conquered by the French, remained in effect in the Rhine Province even after its incorporation into Prussia in 1815. The Prussian Government attempted to reduce the sphere of its application and by a whole series of laws and orders to reintroduce in this province Prussian Law designed to guarantee feudal privileges. These measures, which met with great opposition in the Rhine Province, were annulled after the March revolution by the decree of April 15, 1848.
[88] The law of April 6—"Decision on Some Principles of the Future Prussian Constitution" ("Verordnung über einige Grundlagen der künftigen Preussischen Verfassung")—was adopted by the Second United Diet, an assembly of representatives from the eight provincial diets of Prussia. Like the provincial diets, the United Diet was based on the estate principle. It sanctioned new taxes and loans, discussed new Bills and had the right to petition the King.
[89] The First United Diet opened on April 11, 1847, but was dissolved in June because it refused to grant a new loan. The Second United Diet met on April 2, 1848, after the revolution of March 18-19 in Prussia. It adopted decrees, decisions and a law on the elections to the Prussian National Assembly, and sanctioned the loan, following which its session was closed.
[90] The Civic Militia Law was adopted on the basis of the Bill introduced in mid-July of 1848 by the Auerswald-Hansemann Ministry. It reflected the desire of the Prussian liberals to prevent the masses from joining the civic militia formed after the March revolution in Prussia, and to convert it into a purely bourgeois military organisation. (For the criticism of it by the Neue Rheinische Zeitung see the article "The Civic Militia Bill", present edition, Vol. 7, pp. 256-65.) The law in effect abolished the militia as an autonomous armed organisation and subordinated it to the King and the Minister of the Interior. This dependence of the civic militia on the Government was utilised by the counter-revolutionary forces during the coup d'état in Prussia.
[91] The reference is to a statement made by the Düsseldorf Chief Postmaster (Oberpostdirektor) Maurenbrecher on November 21, 1848, and published in the Kölnische Zeitung No. 314 (second edition) on November 23. This statement accused a group of officers of the Düsseldorf civic militia of "sacrilegiously" violating the secrecy of the postal service and correspondence because they tried to find out at the post-office whether postal orders for large sums of money had arrived from the Regierungspräsident
[92] For the law safeguarding personal freedom see Note 42. Below Marx quotes Paragraph 9 of this law.
[93] In addition to the proceedings instituted earlier against the editors of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, the Cologne Public Prosecutor Hecker gave instructions, in the autumn of 1848, to bring to court the editor-in-chief Karl Marx and the responsible publisher Hermann Korff, for publishing in their newspaper a number of items which were not to the liking of the authorities, including the proclamation "To the German People" by the republican Friedrich Hecker. Although the examining magistrate declared in October 1848 that there were no serious grounds for prosecution, the Public Prosecutor insisted on his former accusations and even advanced new ones. In his article "Public Prosecutor 'Heclcer' and the Neue Rheinische Zeitung" (see present edition, Vol. 7, pp. 485-89), Marx sharply criticised the Cologne Public Prosecutor's office, using the coincidence of the names of the Public Prosecutor and the republican to call the former either "simple Hecker" ("tout bohnemenC) ("C'est du Hecker tout pur"—"it's genuine Hecker", as he wrote in French) or "the dichotomous Hecker". This was the "second crime" of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung (see this volume, p. 82).
[94] The Neue Rheinische Zeitung was accused by the Cologne authorities of insulting police officers and Public Prosecutor Zweiffel in the summer of 1848, by publishing the article "Arrests" exposing the repressive measures against Gottschalk and Anneke, leaders of the Cologne Workers' Association (see present edition, Vol. 7, pp. 177-79). Later this accusation was made at the trial of Marx and Engels (see this volume, pp. 304-22, 511 and 517).
[95] In partibus infidelium—literally: in parts inhabited by unbelievers. The words are added to the tide of Roman Catholic bishops appointed to purely nominal dioceses in non-Christian countries.
[96] The Disch Hotel was in Cologne; the Mielentz Hotel—a hotel in Berlin where the Prussian National Assembly, driven out of its former premises, held its sitting on November 15, 1848.
[97] At the end of September 1848, the Imperial Minister of Justice, Kisker, demanded that the Cologne Public Prosecutor should institute legal proceedings against the Neue Rheinische Zeitung editors for publishing a series of feature articles which ridiculed Prince Lichnowski, a reactionary deputy of the Frankfurt National Assembly, under the name of the knight Schnapphahnski. Written by Georg Weerth, the feature articles "Leben und Taten des berühmten Ritters Schnapphahnski" were published unsigned in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung in August, September and December 1848 and in January 1849.
[98] Concerning the Vorort see Note 36. Concerning the Swiss Diet see Note 9.
[100] See Note 10.
[101] The reference is to the party of moderate republicans headed by Armand Marrast which formed around the newspaper Le Nationalin the 1840s; it was supported by the industrial bourgeoisie and a section of the liberal intellectuals connected with it.
[12] On May 21, 1847, the canton of Geneva adopted a new bourgeois-democratic Constitution. Among other things, it legalised freedom of faith and the election of the State Council (the cantonal Government) directly by the people, granted suffrage to persons living on allowances, introduced free primary instruction etc. The canton's previous Constitution was abolished by its Great Council as a result of a popular uprising in October 1846 in which a decisive role was played by the workers of Saint-Gervais.
[103] Munzinger and Escher, the main canton Berne's representatives in Tessin at the time of the so-called Tessin conflict (see Note 36), insisted that all Italian refugees in Tessin and their families should be removed into the interior of the country. Their demand was contrary to the principle of sovereignty of the cantons.
[104] Commission du pouvoir exécutif (the Executive Commission)—the Government of the French Republic set up by the Constituent Assembly on May 10, 1848, to replace the Provisional Government which had resigned. It existed until June 24, 1848, when Cavaignac's dictatorship was established during the June proletarian uprising. The majority in the Commission were moderate republicans, Ledru-Rollin being the only representative of the Left.
[105] The reference is to an anonymous patriotic pamphlet, Deutschland in seiner tiefen Erniedrigung (Nuremberg, 1806), directed against Napoleon's rule. For the publication of this pamphlet the bookseller Johann Philipp Palm was shot by the French authorities.
[106] See Note 75.
[107] The full title of this report in German is "Bericht des Ausschusses für die österreichischen Angelegenheiten über die Anträge der Abgeordneten Venedey, Heinrich Simon, Wiesner und Bauernschmied, sowie über mehrere die österreichischen Angelegenheiten betreffende Petitionen". It was published in the book: Verhandlungen der deutschen verfassunggebenden Reichsversammlung zu Frankfurt am Main, Bd. 2, Frankfurt am Main, 1848-49, S. 602-19. The report was read out by Deputy H. Löwe, of Posen, at the 119th sitting of the Frankfurt National Assembly on November 20, 1848. Appended to it were letters of the two imperial commissioners Welcker and Mosle to the Imperial Minister Schmerling and the Austrian Prime Minister Wessenberg; these letters are repeatedly quoted in this article. Subsequendy, touching on Welcker and Mosle's mission when dealing with the October uprising in Vienna in his work Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Germany, Engels wrote: "The travels of Don Quixote and Sancho Panza form matter for an Odyssey in comparison to the heroic feats and wonderful adventures of these two knights-errant of German Unity.... Their dispatches and reports are perhaps the only portion of the Frankfurt transactions that will retain a place in German literature; they are a perfect satirical romance, ready cut and dried, and an eternal monument of disgrace for the Frankfurt Assembly and its government" (see present edition, Vol. 11).
[109] Eisele and Beisele, here nicknames for Welcker and Mosle, are comic characters from a pamphlet by Johann Wilhelm Christern published anonymously, Doctor Eisele's und Baron von Beisele's Landtagsreise im April 1847. Genrebilder aus der neuesten Zeitgeschichte, Leipzig, 1847. These names also appeared in the Munich Fliegenden Blättern in 1848.
[112] See Note 81. The Austrian troops of Windischgrätz and Jellachich which suppressed the Vienna uprising were mostly recruited from the South-Slav peoples. Serezhans—special units in border regiments (200 men per regiment) recruited in the Serbian and Croatian regions of the Military Border Area (see Note 81). In peacetime they protected the frontier and in wartime fulfilled vanguard, outpost and patrol duties. Razen, Rascier)—the name given to the Orthodox Serbs and Raizes (Raizen, often used for Serbs in general. It is apparendy derived from the name of one of the first setdements of Serbian tribes, the ancient town Rassa, centre of the Raschka region.
[113] A reference to the documents relating to the activities of the German refugees in the border cantons of Switzerland published in the Frankfurter Oberpostamts-Zeitung No. 301 (special supplement), November 9, 1848.
[114] See Note 74.
[115] By decision of the Vienna Congress (1814-15) the lands on the left and the right banks of the Rhine were incorporated into Prussia, and among other tides bestowed on the King of Prussia was that of Archduke of the Lower Rhine. In his manifesto of April 5, 1815, issued on the occasion of the incorporation of this territory into Prussia, Frederick William III promised to introduce representative institutions in the Rhine Province and throughout the country.
[116] An English translation of this article was first published in the collection: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Articles from the "Neue Rheinische Zeitung". 1848-49, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1972.
[117] On April 10, 1848, a Chartist demonstration in London was broken up by troops and special constables; the purpose of the demonstration was to present the third Chartist Petition to Parliament. On May 15, 1848, the bourgeois national guard suppressed the revolutionary actions of the Paris workers. On Juw< 25, 1848, the rising of the workers of Paris was crushed. On August 6, 1848, Milan was occupied by Austrian troops, who suppressed the national liberation movement in North Italy. On November 1, 1848, the troops of Windischgrätz took Vienna.
[118] As a result of the revolutionary actions of the masses in Vienna, primarily of the workers and students, on May 15 and 16, the Imperial Government was forced to give up the idea of creating an elective two-Chamber parliament and to introduce changes into the electoral law, adopted shortly before that, by extending the franchise. The armed people also secured the abrogation of the order of May 14 dissolving the Central Committee of the national guard and the Academic Legion (see Note 26). On May 15, 1848, a popular uprising in Naples caused by King Ferdinand's infringement of constitutional rights was brutally crushed, the lazzaroni (see Note 25) taking an active part in its suppression.
[119] This refers to the suppression of the popular uprising in Frankfurt am Main on September 18, 1848 (see Note 110).
[120] On July 25, 1848, at Custozza (North Italy), the Austrian army under Radetzky defeated the Piedmont troops. This was followed by the capture of Milan on August 6 and the conclusion on August 9 of an armistice between Austria and the Kingdom of Sardinia under which the latter was to withdraw its troops from the towns and fortresses of Lombardy and Venice and to hand them over to the Austrians.
[121] The uprising in Leghorn (Grand Duchy of Tuscany) began at the end of August 1848 and ended on September 2 with the rout of the government troops. Fearing that the uprising might spread all over Tuscany, the Grand Duke Leopold II
[122] dismissed the moderate liberal Government of Capponi. On October 27 a democratic government of Tuscany was formed headed by Montagnelli. It was he who put forward the slogan of convening an Italian Constituent Assembly (Guerazzi became a member of the Government). The victory of the people in Tuscany called forth mass demonstrations in Rome (Papal states) demanding the convocation of an Italian Constituent Assembly, resumption of the war with Austria, formation of a provisional democratic government, and social reforms. On November 16, in response to the attempts of the Papal Swiss Guard to disperse the demonstration, the people erected barricades near the Vatican and attacked it. Pius IX yielded, and a new government was set up in Rome with the participation of Left liberals and democrats. "Troppo tarai, santo padre, troppo tardi!" ("Too late, Holy Father, too late!") cried the revolutionary-minded people of Rome when Pius IX, after much procrastina-tion, issued an edict on March 15, 1848, introducing a watered-down Constitution of the Papal states.
[123] See Note 59.
[124] Fearing the growth of the revolutionary movement in Rome (see Note 121), Pius IX fled from Rome on the night of November 24, 1848, and took up residence in the Neapolitan fortress of Gaeta. Meanwhile a struggle flared up in the Papal states between the revolutionary democrats who stood for the proclamation of a republic and the liberals who sought to bring back the Pope to Rome and get his sanction for certain constitutional concessions. In the course of this struggle the liberals were defeated and on February 9, 1849, a Roman Republic was founded.
[1] Marx's article "The Crisis in Berlin" and his series of articles "Counter-Revolution in Berlin" were written in response to the first moves in the counter-revolutionary coup d'état in Prussia. On November 1, 1848, Frederick William IV dismissed the moderate liberal Pfuel Ministry, and an openly counter-revolutionary Ministry headed by Brandenburg and Manteuffel was formed. On November 9 a royal decree transferred the Prussian National Assembly from Berlin to Brandenburg, a small provincial town. This was the beginning of the coup d'état which ended with the dissolution of the Assembly on December 5, 1848. The Neue Rheinische Zeitung, under Marx's editorship, started a campaign to mobilise the people against the counter-revolution. In English this article was first published in the collection: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Articles from the "Neue Rheinische Zeitung". 1848-49, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1972. The Neue Rheinische Zeitung was founded by Marx as a militant organ intended to reach and to influence the masses and, by their ideological and political education and consolidation, to prepare the ground for a mass party of the German proletariat. At the same time, it served to direct the activities of the Communist League which Marx and Engels founded in 1847 and regarded as the embryo of the future proletarian party. At the peak of the 1848 revolution, the League itself was too weak and numerically small to immediately rally the workers. There was no point in secret activity during the revolution, and Marx and Engels instructed League members throughout Germany to use the legal opportunities afforded by joining the workers' associations and democratic societies which were being formed. In the situation that had arisen only a proletarian revolutionary newspaper could direct and co-ordinate the activities of Communist League members and mobilise the masses to carry through the tasks of the bourgeois-democratic revolution. It was decided to publish the newspaper in Cologne, the capital of the Rhine Province, one of the most economically and politically advanced regions in Germany (here there were considerable cadres of the proletariat, and the Code Napoleon which was in force provided for greater freedom of the press than Prussian Law). The newspaper was given the name of Neue Rheinische Zeitung to emphasise that it was to continue the revolutionary-democratic traditions of the Rheinische Zeitung edited by Marx in 1842 and 1843. Taking account of the specific circumstances, with no independent mass workers' party in Germany, Marx, Engels and their followers entered the political scene as the Left, actually proletarian, wing of the democratic movement. This determined the stand of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, which began to appear under the subtitle Organ der Demokratie (Organ of Democracy). The first issue of the newspaper appeared in the evening of May 31, 1848, and was dated June 1. The editorial board consisted of Karl Marx (editor-in-chief), Heinrich Bürgers, Ernst Dronke, Georg Weerth, Ferdinand and Wilhelm Wolff and Frederick Engels, joined in October 1848 by the poet Ferdinand Freiligrath. All the editors were members of the Communist League. The editorial board was known for its unanimity of views, smooth working and precise division of functions. Besides reading and answering letters and helping the editor-in-chief, each member had to deal with a definite range of questions. The editorial board had its correspondents in different parts of Germany and abroad. It established regular contacts with a number of democratic periodicals in other countries. As a rule, Marx and Engels wrote the editorials formulating the newspaper's stand on the most important questions of the revolution. These were marked "* Köln" or "** Köln". Sometimes editorial articles marked with one asterisk were printed in other sections under the heading of News from Italy, France, Hungary, Switzerland and other countries. In addition to editorials, Engels wrote articles on other subjects, including the course of the revolutionary liberation movement in Italy, the revolutionary war in Hungary, the political life of Switzerland, and so on. Wilhelm Wolff contributed articles on the agrarian question, on the condition of the peasants and the peasant movement, particularly in Silesia. He was also responsible for the current events section. Georg Weerth wrote feuilletons and Ernst Dronke contributed various reports (including reports from Paris). The only article which Heinrich Bürgers wrote for the Neue Rheinische Zeitungv/as practically rewritten by Marx. He was more successful as the newspaper's representative at workers' meetings. Freiligrath published his revolutionary poems in the newspaper. The Neue Rheinische Zeitungv/as a daily (from September 1848 it appeared every day except Monday). On some days a second edition was put out in order to supply the readers with prompt information on all the most important revolutionary developments in Germany and Europe; supplements were printed when there was too much material for the four pages of the issue, and special supplements and special editions in the form of leaflets carried the latest and most important news. Even in the first months of the newspaper's existence the bourgeois shareholders started to complain of the consistent revolutionary line of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, its militant internationalism and political denunciations of the Government. Its editors were persecuted by the Government and attacked in the feudal monarchist and liberal bourgeois press. Shareholders were especially scared off by articles in defence of the June 1848 uprising of the Paris proletariat. To make Marx's stay in the Rhine Province more difficult, the Cologne authorities, on instructions from Berlin, refused to reinstate him in his rights as a Prussian citizen (which Marx had renounced in 1845), and on several occasions instituted legal proceedings against him and other editors of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. On September 26, 1848, when a state of siege was declared in Cologne, several democratic newspapers, including the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, were suspended. To avoid arrest, Engels, Dronke and Ferdinand Wolff had to leave Germany for a time. Wilhelm Wolff stayed in Cologne but for several months lived in hiding. When the state of siege was lifted the paper resumed publication on October 12, thanks to the great efforts of Marx who contributed all his ready money to the paper. Until January 1849, the main burden of the work, including editorial articles, lay on Marx's shoulders since Engels had to stay out of Germany (in France and Switzerland). Persecution of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung editors by the legal authorities and the police was particularly intensified after the counter-revolutionary coup in Prussia in November-December 1848. On February 7, 1849, Marx, Engels and Hermann Korff, the responsible publisher, were summoned to appear before a jury in Cologne, and the next day Marx, together with Schapper and lawyer Schneider, was brought to trial as the leader of the Rhenish District Committee of Democrats. But in both cases Marx and his associates were acquitted thanks to skilful defence. The failure of these prosecutions compelled the authorities to resort to other means for the prohibition of the revolutionary periodical. In May 1849, when the counter-revolution went into the offensive all over Germany, the Prussian Government issued an order for Marx's expulsion from Prussia on the grounds that he had not been granted Prussian citizenship. Marx's expulsion and new repressions against other editors of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung put an end to the publication of the newspaper. Its last issue (No. 301), printed in red ink, came out on May 19, 1849. In their farewell address to the workers, the editors of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung said, "Their last word everywhere and always will be: emancipation of the working classF'
[3] This article, as well as a number of other reports below, was written by Engels during his forced stay in Switzerland. On September 26, 1848, a state of siege was declared in Cologne and an order was issued for the arrest of some of the editors of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, including Engels. Engels emigrated from Prussia to Belgium, where he was arrested by the Brussels police and on October 4 deported to France. After a short stay in Paris Engels went on foot to Switzerland (see his travel notes "From Paris to Berne" in Vol. 7 of the present edition, pp. 507-29). About November 9 Engels arrived in Berne via Geneva and Lausanne and remained there until January 1849. While in emigration he regularly sent to the Neue Rheinische Zeitung articles and various items of information.
[2] By the " theory of agreement' { Vereinbarungstheorie) the Prussian liberal bourgeoisie sought to justify its policy of compromise in the revolution. The "agreement theory" meant that the Prussian National Assembly convened in May 1848 was to draft a Constitution and introduce a constitutional system, not on the basis of its sovereign and constitutive rights, but "by agreement with the Crown". By accepting this formula, which was advanced by the Camphausen-Hansemann Government, the Assembly's liberal majority in fact abandoned the principle of popular sovereignty and gave freedom of action to the counter-revolutionaries who wanted to restore the absolute power of the King. Beginning with the early issues of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung Marx and Engels sharply criticised the "theory of agreement" calling its supporters "agreers" and the Berlin Assembly — the "Agreement Assembly". They warned that this theory would only serve the King as a screen for preparing a counter-revolutionary coup d'état and the forcible dissolution of the Assembly.
[7] In accordance with the Constitution of the Swiss Confederation adopted on September 12, 1848, the National Council (Nationalrat) consisted of deputies elected every three years by universal suffrage. The Constitution also provided for the existence of the Council of States (Ständerat) made up of two deputies from each canton. The two Councils constituted the Federal Assembly (Bundesversammlung), the supreme legislative body in Switzerland. Great Councils (Gross Räte) — legislatures of urban cantons set up under the Swiss Constitution of 1803.
[8] In English this article was first published in the collection: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Articles from the "Neue Rheinische Zeitung". 1848-49, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1972.
[15] The riot which took place on October 24, 1848, in Freiburg (Fribourg) was organised by the Catholic priests led by Bishop Marilley, and aimed at overthrowing the democratic Government of the canton. It was quickly suppressed.