Notes

Residual editorial notes

40 editorial note entries had no resolved in-text occurrence and remain here so no source note definition is discarded.

[26] When publishing the series of articles Letters from France the editor of The Democratic Review, Harney, tried to present them as reports received directly from Paris. At the same time, the articles were based not only on French material, but on British press reports and other information (private letters to Engels from Paris, and reports by a member of the Communist League, Ferdinand Wolff, who had been expelled from Paris and came to London in December 1849). The fourth letter of the series was written by Engels while Marx was working on the third chapter of The Class Struggles in France (March 1850), which appeared in instalments in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue. The facts and appraisal of the events given in Letters from France often coincide with what Marx wrote about France in The Class Struggles (the footnotes give references to relevant places), in the third international review (see this volume, pp. 507-09 and 516-25) and later in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (present edition, Vol. 11). Coincidence of thought and of approach testifies to the fact that Letters from France reflected Marx's and Engels' common point of view. The numbers of the letters have been supplied by the editors of this edition.

[28] Droit d'octroi—a right, originating from feudal times, of cities to levy tolls on imported consumer goods. It was repealed in 1791 during the French Revolution, but later reintroduced on some foodstuffs (salt, wine, fish, etc.).

[42] By-elections to the Legislative Assembly were to be held on March 10, 1850, in connection with the annulment of the powers and the conviction by the Supreme Court of the Left deputies who participated in the anti-government demonstration on June 13, 1849. To influence the voters, the government divided the territory of France into five big military areas; as a result, Paris and its neighbouring departments were surrounded by the other four areas, which were under the command of counter-revolutionary generals. Comparing the powers of these generals with those of Turkish pashas, the republican press called these areas pashalics. This measure was illegitimate because, under Article 76 of the Constitution, changes in the administration of the departments of France could be effected only by special legislation of the National Assembly.

[47] Letter Six was apparently not completed in time or left unfinished by Engels. An excerpt from it was published by the editor of The Democratic Review in the June number in his own article "Tactics and Programme of the Counter Revolutionists" with the comment (to make the readers think the Letters came directly from Paris): "We had begun to fear the arrest of our Paris correspondent, his Letter not having reached us until several days after the usual time. It was received only as we were going to press. It is impossible for us to give more than the following brief extracts." Then came the three paragraphs by Engels reproduced in this volume under the heading VI.

[63] Marx's The Class Struggles in France, 1848 to 1850 consists of a series of articles written between January and October 1850 specially for the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue and published in it under the general title "1848-1849". This is a most important work summing up the results of the 1848-49 revolution. In preparation for this work, Marx used French newspaper reports, reports published in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, and accounts given by witnesses — French and German revolutionary refugees, among them Ferdinand Wolff, the Neue Rheinische Zeitung Paris correspondent, and another Communist League member, Sebastian Seiler, who was a stenographer to the French National Assembly in 1848 and 1849 and wrote a pamphlet on the events of June 13, 1849, which he presented to Marx. Marx was also probably familiar with Ledru-Rollin's pamphlet on the same subject. According to the original plan (see this volume, p. 41) the work was to consist of four articles: "The Defeat of June 1848", "June 13, 1849", "Repercussions of June 13 on the Continent" and "Current Situation; England". However, in Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of the journal only three articles were published: "The Defeat of June 1848", "June 13, 1849" and "Consequences of June 13, 1849". The influence of the June 1849 events on the Continent and the situation in England were treated in other items of the journal, particularly in the international reviews written jointly by Marx and Engels. The work was not reprinted in full during Marx's lifetime. In 1895 it came out in book form in Berlin, with an Introduction by Engels. The title The Class Struggles in France, 1848 to 1850 was given by Engels and the work has since appeared under this title in various languages. In the 1895 edition, Engels added the fourth chapter, which included the sections of the third international review dealing with events in France (see this volume, pp. 507-09 and 516-25). Engels entitled this chapter "The Abolition of Universal Suffrage in 1850". Engels wrote to Richard Fischer on February 13, 1895, that the fourth chapter "will serve as a factual conclusion to the work as a whole, without which it would have remained a fragment". At the same time, the headings of the first three chapters were changed: I. "From February to June 1848", II. "From June 1848 to June 13, 1849", III. "From June 13, 1849, to March 10, 1850". In the present edition, the headings of the first three chapters are given according to the journal, while the heading of the fourth chapter is given as in the 1895 edition. The publication of the series of Marx's articles drew the attention of the press. A short announcement of No. 1 of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue and quotations from Marx's work were published in the Freischütz, Hamburg, No. 40, April 2, 1850; a review in the Wochenblatt der Hornisse, Cassel, No. 3, April 15, 1850. The preface and the first article were reprinted in the Deutsche Londoner Zeitung Nos. 262, 263 and 264, April 5, 12 and 19, 1850. On January 1, 1852, the Turn-Zeitung, published by German socialist emigrants in the USA, carried an article by Joseph Weydemeyer "On the Dictatorship of the Proletariat", written under the direct influence of Marx's work, the first work by Marx and Engels in which the term "the dictatorship of the proletariat" was used. On the other hand, the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat brought criticism of the author from the petty-bourgeois democrats. The Neue Deutsche Zeitung, whose editor was a former "true socialist", Otto Liming, published a review (Nos. 148-51, June 22-23, 25 and 26, 1850) of the four numbers of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue with unfavourable comments on this proposition and an incorrect interpretation of it. Marx was obliged to write Liming a special letter rebuffing attempts to distort and dispute the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat (see this volume, pp. 387-88). Marx and Engels attached great importance to the popularisation of the ideas contained in The Class Struggles in France among the English workers. Engels used this work in his Letters from France published in The Democratic Review (see this volume, pp. 17-40) and, on the basis of the first article in the series, wrote Two Years of a Revolution, which was published in the same journal (see this volume, pp. 353-69). Excerpts from Marx's work were cited by his contemporaries (Hermann Becker, Proudhon). Excerpts from The Class Struggles in France were first published in English in the journal The Marxian, New York, 1921, Vol. 1, No. 2, and it appeared in full as a separate edition by Labour News Company, New York, 1924. In this volume, the work is published after the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue text, checked with that of the 1895 edition prepared by Engels. The Revue published it from the manuscript and since Marx's handwriting was difficult to decipher, mistakes cropped up. In the present edition, all changes in style, spelling, punctuation and other corrections made by Engels have been taken into account, as well as errata printed in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue (to the first number in the second, and to the second and third in the fourth). Account has also been taken of the analysis, carried out by the editorial commission working on the Marx/Engels, Gesamtausgabe (MEGA), erste Abteilung, 10. Bd. and kindly made available to us, of the marks and corrections made by Marx and Engels in their copies of the journal. Engels' corrections apparently date from 1895 when he republished The Class Struggles (in the 1895 edition, however, they were only partly taken into account). It is also probable that Engels intended to republish the Revue in full. Some corrections by Marx and Engels coinciding with the errata printed in the Revue have been silently inserted in the text of the present edition. Changes in meaning are indicated in footnotes. Besides this, obviously inaccurate dates and factual data, including those in the 1850 and 1895 editions, have also been silently corrected. Comments are not usually made on Marx's free translation of quotations, except when the words Marx puts in quotation marks are not true quotations but convey the general meaning of the cited passages.

[70] During the first days of the revolution, the workers of Paris demanded that the French Republic's flag should be red, the colour of that hoisted in the workers' suburbs of Paris during the June uprising of 1832. Bourgeois representatives insisted on the tricolour (blue-white-and-red) which had been the national standard during the French Revolution and under Napoleon I. It had been the emblem of the bourgeois republicans grouped around the newspaper National even before 1848. In the end, the tricolour was accepted as the national standard with a red rosette fixed to the flagstaff; later, the rosette was removed.

[99] The meeting of the Montagne leaders was held on the premises of the Fourierists' daily La Démocratie pacifique on the evening of June 12, 1849. (Using the expression friedfertige [pacific] Demokratie, Marx plays on the title of the newspaper and its trend.) The participants refused to resort to arms and decided to confine themselves to a peaceful demonstration.

[116] In his message of November 10, 1849, Carlier, the newly appointed Paris Police Prefect, called for a "social anti-socialist league" to be set up for the protection of "religion, labour, family, property and loyalty". The message was published in Le Moniteur universel No. 315, November 11, 1849.

[130] The reference is to the so-called Wiesbaden Manifesto — a circular drawn up in Wiesbaden on August 30, 1850, by de Barthélémy, secretary of the Legitimist faction in the Legislative Assembly, on the instruction of Count Chambord (de Barthélémy, La conspiration légitimiste avouée, in Le Peuple de 1850 No. 24, September 22, 1850). The circular was the Legitimists' policy statement in case they came to power. Count Chambord declared that he "officially and categorically rejects any appeal to the people, because it will signify a negation of the great national principle of hereditary monarchy". This statement evoked protests among the Legitimists themselves, notably from a group headed by La Rochejaquelein, and polemics in the press.

[133] The Campaign for the German Imperial Constitution is a series of essays on the history of an uprising in support of the Imperial Constitution which took place in Rhenish Prussia, the Bavarian Palatinate and Baden in the spring and summer of 1849. Engels started working on his essays in July 1849, soon after arriving in Switzerland together with the last units of the defeated Baden-Palatinate army. In June 1849, while in the Palatinate, Engels wrote an article, "The Revolutionary Uprising in the Palatinate and Baden", rebuffing criticism of the insurgents by the German conservative and liberal press (see present edition, Vol. 9). Later, in Switzerland, he wrote a rough version of the "Repudiation" (ibid.)in answer to attempts by some petty-bourgeois emigrants to cast suspicion on the officers and men of the volunteer corps commanded by Willich, which consisted mainly of workers and was the staunchest unit in the insurgent army. Engels was Willich's adjutant. Willich's corps covered the retreat of other units of the Baden-Palatinate army after its defeat at Rastatt and was the last to cross the Swiss border on July 12, 1849. Soon after this Engels decided to write his essays. He intended to describe the revolutionary struggle during the final stage of the German bourgeois-democratic revolution and to criticise the movement's petty-bourgeois leaders, whose vacillations and helplessness were one of the main reasons for its failure. In a letter from Paris in early August (before his move to London) Marx suggested that he stress these aspects and produce the work in pamphlet form. His personal experience of the campaign and knowledge of relevant documents provided Engels with ample material for analysing the character of the movement, the position of various classes and parties in it, and the reasons for its failure. He used insurgents' accounts and literature on the Baden-Palatinate uprising that had appeared by the end of 1849, including works by the petty-bourgeois leaders of the uprising, whom he subjected to criticism. To characterise their policy he made use of appeals, proclamations and articles published in the Karlsruher Zeitung, the organ of the Baden Provisional Government. Engels foresaw that his essays would be met with hostility by petty-bourgeois emigrants, as they contrasted sharply with the publications and reminiscences they were preparing for the press. "My work..." wrote Engels to Jakob Schabelitz in August 1849, "will present a different understanding of this history from that expressed in other publications that are due to appear." At first Engels intended to publish his work in pamphlet form and was helped by the Communist League members Jakob Schabelitz and Joseph Weydemeyer to find a publisher. But as Marx was making preparations to publish his own journal at the time, he changed his mind. In Switzerland Engels apparently devoted most of his efforts to collecting the material; in October his departure for England interrupted his work. In London he resumed work on the essays and the first two chapters—"Rhenish Prussia" and "Karlsruhe"—were published in the first number of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue. The work was completed in February. Chapters Three and Four under the title "The Baden-Palatinate Uprising" were published in abridged form in the Trier'sche Volksstimme Nos. 23-27, 30-37 of May 29 to June 7 and June 14 to 30, 1850. Marx's and Engels' supporters expressed a high opinion of the literary and polemical value of Engels' work. Weerth wrote jokingly to Marx on May 2, 1850: "...The articles on Baden could not have been better even if I myself had written them. This is, of course, the highest praise I can afford Engels" (G. Weerth, Sämtliche Werke, Bd. 5, S. 356). The petty-bourgeois leaders, on the contrary, received Engels' essays with indignation. Otto Lüning's review of four numbers of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue published in the Neue Deutsche Zeitung of June 22 to 26, 1850, criticised Engels' work in crude terms. Ludwig Simon came out with a review in the same vein (Deutsche Monatsschrift für Politik, Wissenschaft, Kunst und Leben, Bremen, 1851, 2. Bd., April-Juni, S. 170-74). The essays were not reprinted during Engels' lifetime. They were reprinted in full by Mehring in 1902 in the collection Aus dem literarischen Nachlass von Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels und Ferdinand Lassalle. On the basis of documents in his possession, Mehring pointed out several alterations made by the Hamburg publishers (Schuberth and Co.) for censorship reasons. In this volume these alterations are indicated in footnotes. Misprints in numbers 1-3 of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue corrected in the errata given in numbers 2 and 4 of the Revue have been taken into account in this volume. At the end of the last errata it was stated, in particular, "Besides, in numbers 2 and 3, in the articles 'The Palatinate' and 'To Die for the Republic', the general title 'The Campaign for the German Imperial Constitution' was missing, and the name of the author— Frederick Engels—was not given at the end of the article." In the first number, with the general introduction and Chapters One and Two—"Rhenish Prussia" and "Karlsruhe"—the general title and the author's name were given. The name was also given at the end of Chapter Three: "The Palatinate" (second number). Due account has also been taken of notes and marks made by Engels in his copy of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue (see Note 63), which are indicated in footnotes.

[173] This refers to a speech Franz Heinrich Zitz, an extreme Left-wing deputy to the Frankfurt parliament, made at a meeting in Frankfurt am Main on September 17, 1848, on the eve of the popular uprising sparked off by the parliament's ratification of the Malmö armistice, which jeopardised the liberation movement in Schleswig-Holstein and Germany's national interests. Zitz condemned the parliament's stand and objected to sending petitions to it, declaring that the time had come for resolute action.

[187] On June 26, 1849, the liberal deputies of the Frankfurt National Assembly, who had walked out after the Prussian King's refusal to accept the Imperial Crown, met in Gotha for a three-day conference which resulted in the formation of the Gotha party. It expressed the interests of the pro-Prussian German bourgeoisie and supported the policy of Prussian ruling circles aimed at uniting Germany under the hegemony of Hohenzollern Prussia.

[215] The Ten Hours' Bill, the struggle for which had been waged for many years, was passed by Parliament in 1847, against a background of the sharply intensified contradictions between the landed aristocracy and the industrial bourgeoisie generated by the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846. In revenge against the industrial bourgeoisie, a section of the Tory M.P.s supported the Bill. Its provisions applied only to children and women. Nevertheless, many manufacturers evaded it in practice. Engels also discussed the ten-hour working day in earlier writings, in particular in his book The Condition of the Working-Class in England (see present edition, Vol. 4, pp. 460, 461, 465-66). In the present article he took it up in connection with a fresh campaign against the Ten Hours' Bill launched by manufacturers, who worked in different ways to secure its de facto annulment. The article, written for the Chartist journal The Democratic Review, evoked a lively response in the British working-class press. In its survey of the journal, The Northern Star wrote (No. 645, March 2, 1850): "The Ten Hours' Question is the title of an article which is sure to excite great interest, and, possibly, some discussion. We venture to predict that, while it will not greatly please those who are purely and simply Ten Hours Bill-men, it will meet with more than the approval of those who are 'Ten Hours Bill-men, and Something more. It is an article which all classes may read with advantage, although, most likely, it will call down on its author's head the hot indignation of those who live by speculating in the labour and making profit of the blood and sinews of the wealth-producers." Both this article and the article "The English Ten Hours' Bill" published in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue (see this volume, pp. 288-300) show that Marxist political economy had not yet been fully developed. This was reflected in a certain underestimation of the struggle for shorter working hours and of the positive effects of legal limitation of the working day. Marx and Engels gave an exhaustive description of the Ten Hours' Bill in their later works. See, e.g., Marx's Inaugural Address of the International Working-Men's Association and Capital (Vol. I, Chapter X, Sections 5, 6, 7).

[224] Engels wrote this article soon after the article "The Ten Hours' Question", which was published in the Chartist Democratic Review (see this volume, pp. 271-76). The present article was intended for the German reader, who was less familiar with life in Britain. Engels therefore goes into greater detail on the history of the struggle for the Ten Hours' Bill and the campaign waged against it by the manufacturers. The present publication takes account of corrections made by Engels in his copy of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue. The article was first published in English in the collection: K.Marx and F.Engels, Articles on Britain, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1971.

[233] T h e Freemasons (called more fully Free and Accepted Masons)—members of a religious and ethical movement that arose in England at the beginning of the eighteenth century and spread to other European countries and America. Freemasons condemned the feudal system and the Established Church and sought to set up a world-wide new religion. The Order of Freemasons had secret lodges in various countries, and a mystical ritual copied from the ritual of medieval masons' guilds (hence the name). Members of the Order set themselves the task of ethically purifying and improving'people in order to renovate the world. Freemasons believed in eternal and immutable laws of nature known only to the wisest leaders of the Order who enjoyed unquestionable authority and brought up rank-and-file members in obedience to these laws and in the spirit of fraternity, justice and enlightenment. The IUuminati (from the Latin illuminatus)—members of a secret society founded in Bavaria in 1776, a variety of Freemasonry. The society consisted of opposition elements from the bourgeoisie and nobility, who were dissatisfied with princely despotism. In 1785 the society was banned by the Bavarian authorities. Similar societies also existed in Spain and France. Mozart was a Freemason and his opera, The Magic Flute (Die Zauberßöte) (text by Emmanuel Schikaneder, first staged in 1791), embodies Masonic ideals in the form of a naive fairy-tale.

[248] This article, together with other material for the fourth issue of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue, was sent to Hamburg before April 18, 1850. Marx wrote it as an addendum to his series of articles "1848-1849" (later known as The Class Struggles in France). Marx's main source of information was an article published in the newspaper of the French socialists and democrats, La Voix du peuple (No. 166, March 17, 1850), which quoted several passages from the monarchist newspaper La Patrie. Journal du commerce (from March 7 to 15). Even though the editors of La Voix du peuple avoided giving names of the stock-exchange speculators in their commentaries to the quoted passages, Marx found corroboration in them for the conclusions he drew in the third article from the "1848-1849" series concerning the connection existing between President Louis Bonaparte and stock-exchange circles.

[258] This refers to attempts by Gustav Struve, Karl Heinzen, Rudolf Schramm, Arnold Ruge, and other German democrats who moved from Switzerland to England in October 1849, to rally all German political refugees around the Democratic Association, which they founded in London in the spring of 1850, and to enlist their support in setting up a general European democratic organisation of refugees. These attempts were accompanied by intrigues against proletarian refugees and against the Communist League led by Marx and Engels,

[264] See Note 67.

[266] This phrase is missing in the text published in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue. Engels may have written his synopsis from the original version of Marx's manuscript in which it appeared.

[272] This refers to an attempt by German democrats, Gustav Struve among others, to set up a Democratic Association. In April 1850, Struve and others distributed in England and Germany a Circular Letter Addressed to All Friends of German Refugees, which reported that a single German organisation of all democratic refugees was to be set up under the guidance of the Central Bureau of the United German Emigration. In the summer of the same year, they called upon German refugees to unite with the Central Committee of European Democracy. However, none of these plans for unification materialised. The Central Committee of European Democracy was set up in London in June 1850 on the initiative of Giuseppe Mazzini, who took steps to organise it at the end of 1849 while still in Switzerland. His endeavours were supported by Gustav Struve and Arnold Ruge, the latter joining the Committee as a representative of the German democratic party. The Central Committee members held sharply different ideological views and the strained relations between Italian and French democratic refugees led to its dissolution in March 1852. The Inaugural Manifesto of the Central Committee of European Democracy issued on July 3, 1850, under the title "Aux peuples!" was criticised by Marx and Engels in their international review (see pp. 529-32 of this volume).

[278] Apart from The Sun, this letter was published in The Northern Star No. 660, June 15, 1850, and also in some German democratic papers — the Westdeutsche Zeitung, Cologne, No. 145, June 20, 1850 (reprinted from The Northern Star); the Tages-Chronik, Bremen, No. 298, June 21, 1850; Die Hornisse, Cassel, No. 144, June 22, 1850.

[281] This is a rough copy of the letter sent to Robert Stephen Rintoul, editor of The Spectator, together with the article "Prussian Spies in London" written iji the form of a statement and signed by Marx, Engels and Willich (see this volume, pp. 381-84). The rough copy is in Engels' handwriting.

[285] This statement, in fact two statements, one by Marx and the other by Engels, are published as one document in this edition. They were occasioned by a review of the four numbers of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue, that appeared in the Neue Deutsche Zeitung (Nos. 148-51, June 22, 23, 25 and 26, 1850). It was written by the paper's editor, the petty-bourgeois democrat Otto Liming, whose criticisms were directed mainly against Marx's "1848-1849" (The Class Struggles in France, 1848 to 1850) and Engels" The Campaign, for the German Imperial Constitution. Initially Marx and Engels intended to reply to Lüning in the Revue itself (see Marx's letter to Weydemeyer of June 27, 1850), but due to the unfavourable prospects for continuing publication of the journal, they wrote directly to the Neue Deutsche Zeitung.

[287] This article belongs to the Letters from Germany series (see this volume, pp. 7-16) but was written later than the other articles of the series and deals with a separate subject. It was the last of Engels' contributions to The Democratic Review. From July 1, 1850, its editor George Julian Harney began to publish The Red Republican, a weekly journal that merged with The Democratic Review, which appeared until September 1850. The weekly carried the first English translation of the Manifesto of the Communist Party. Its publication ceased in November 1850. Between December 1850 and the summer of 1851, Harney published another weekly, Friend of the People, for which Engels promised to write a series of articles criticising petty-bourgeois democracy. Before long, however, Marx and Engels decided to break off their friendly relations with Harney, who took a dubious position with respect to the split in the Communist League and maintained close contacts with petty-bourgeois émigrés. At the same time Marx and Engels were in close touch with Ernest Jones and enlisted Johann Georg Eccarius, Konrad Schramm, and Wilhelm Pieper as contributors to the Notes to the People, a weekly founded by Jones in May 1851. By assisting the Chartist press, Marx and Engels wanted to strengthen revolutionary Chartist traditions in the English labour movement.

[292] On April 8, 1848, during his secret mission on behalf of the King of Prussia, Major Wildenbruch handed a Note to the Danish Government stating that Prussia was not fighting in Schleswig-Holstein to rob Denmark of the duchies, but merely to combat radical and republican elements in Germany. The Prussian Government tried every possible means to avoid official recognition of this compromising document.

[294] Engels wrote The Peasant War in Germany in London in the summer and autumn of 1850. It was published in the double issue of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Politisch-ökonomische Revue (No. 5-6). In this momentous work the author generalises the experience of the 1848-49 revolution in Germany by comparing it with the revolutionary events of the period of the Reformation and the Great Peasant War of 1525 It is also one of the principal Marxist works on the liberation struggle led by the peasant and plebeian masses. Engels' main source of facts was the book Allgemeine Geschichte des grossen Bauernkrieges, Th. 1-3, Stuttgart, 1841-43, by Wilhelm Zimmermann, a German democratic historian. In 1870 Engels wrote that for a long time this book had been "the best compilation of factual data". He found it an extremely useful large collection of documents, either quoted in full or in long excerpts. Engels thus quoted most original sources (Luther's writings, Münzer's pamphlets, leaflets listing the demands of the insurgent peasants) from Zimmermann's book. (In the footnotes and the Index of Quoted and Mentioned Literature, the editors of this volume supply bibliographical data on the first editions of the quoted material in the transcription of the time and indicate the pages of Zimmermann's book from which the quotations are taken.) The Peasant War in Germany appeared repeatedly during Engels' lifetime. It was reprinted in the Turn-Zeitung, New York, Nos. 3-20 (January 1852-February 1853). In 1870, Engels and Wilhelm Liebknecht prepared the second edition of The Peasant War, originally as a reprint in the 29 numbers of Der Volksstaat, Leipzig (April 2-October 15, Nos. 27-83, at irregular intervals). Numbers 27 and 28 of the newspaper carried Engels' February 1870 Preface to this edition. Engels was not satisfied with the explanatory footnotes by Liebknecht (see Engels' letter to Marx of May 8, 1870). In October 1870 this work was published in book form—Der deutsche Bauernkrieg von Friedrich Engels. Zweiter, mit einer Einleitung versehener Abdruck, Leipzig, Verlag der Expedition des Volksstaat, 1870. A new, third, authorised edition came out in 1875: Der deutsche Bauernkrieg von Friedrich Engels. Dritter Abdruck, Leipzig, 1875. For this edition Engels wrote a special addendum to the 1870 Preface, dated July 1, 1874.

[299] Engels is alluding to the German liberals who were in the majority in the Frankfurt National Assembly and in the assemblies of some German states during the revolution of 1848-49. In the first months of the revolution, liberals headed "constitutional governments" in a number of states (Prussia, for example), but were later replaced by members of the bureaucracy and nobility. The conciliatory tactics of the liberals were one of the chief reasons for the defeat of the German revolution.

[300] The reference is to Charles V's criminal statutes ( Constitutio criminalis Carolina), adopted by the Imperial Diet in Regensburg in 1532; the statutes prescribed extremely harsh punishments.

[311] This date was cited by Zimmermann in the first edition of his book. According to later data Thomas Münzer was born about 1490 (the first date known from his biography, October 1506, is mentioned in his matriculation as a student of Leipzig University, when he was apparently sixteen years of age). In various sources, both in his own works and in historical writings, his name is transcribed differently (Munczer, Muntzer, Müntzer). Engels writes Münzer, the way Zimmermann wrote it in Part Three of his book.

[332] The Grand Chapter of Würzburg—an ecclesiastical collegium governing the Würzburg bishopric, whose head, the Bishop of Würzburg, also had the title of Duke of Franconia.

[341] The Fourteen Articles of the insurgent peasants and pitmen of the Salzburg archbishopric in the main reproduced the demands of the Twelve Articles of the Swabian and Franconian peasants. In addition, they contained certain local demands. Among other things, the insurgents demanded that the independence of the courts from the influence of feudal lords and their puppets be secured, that the responsibility of the whole community for crimes committed on its territory be abolished and measures be taken to maintain roads in good repair and to protect trade.

[373] See Note 131.

[387] This letter and the English translation of Blanqui's toast attached to it (see this volume, pp. 537-39) were not published. Engels intended to send this letter to Blanqui (see Engels' letter to Marx of March 10, 1851) but it is not known whether he did so. The extant manuscript is a rough copy of the letter.

[390] Engels worked on this manuscript in April 1851, without intending to publish it. As he promised Marx in his letter of April 3, 1851, he here gave a detailed analysis, from the military point of view, of the prospects of a war waged by the coalition of counter-revolutionary powers (the resurrected Holy Alliance according to Engels' terminology) against a revolutionary France. Such an analysis of the military potential of the European powers and the correlation of forces between counter-revolutionary and revolutionary camps in the event of a new revolutionary outbreak was necessary as a basis for criticising the adventurist plans of the democratic refugees, including the sectarian group of Willich and Schapper, who gave a voluntarist and superficial appraisal of the prospects of military clashes in Europe and believed that the victory of the revolutionary army was inevitable (by analogy with the events of the French Revolution). This work opened up a'new stage in Engels' regular studies of military theory and history in which he had engaged since his arrival in Manchester in November 1850. He studied thoroughly such works as W. P. Napier's History of the War in the Peninsula and in the South of France, from the Year 1807 to the Year 1814, 6 vols., London, 1828-40, an atlas to Alsison's Geschichte von Europa, A. Thiers' Histoire du Consulat et de l'Empire, and others. Engels elaborated many of the theoretical propositions in this manuscript in his later works. The manuscript was published for the first time in 1914 in Die Neue Zeit, the theoretical organ of the German Social-Democratic Party. The editors gave a wrong date of writing and supplied the tide—"Die Möglichkeiten und Voraus-setzungen eines Krieges der Heiligen Allianz gegen Frankreich im Jahre 1852" — which did not quite correspond to the contents of the manuscript. A more exact title was given in Vol. 7 of the second Russian edition of the Collected Works of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels published in 1956. In this volume the abbreviated words and dates are written out in full and subdivision into paragraphs is somewhat changed.

[408] The article "The Constitution of the French Republic", printed in the organ of the revolutionary wing of the Chartist party, Notes to the People No. 7 for June 14, 1851, was to be the first of a series of articles dealing with the constitutions of European states, as shown by the general heading—"The Constitutions of Europe, Compiled from Original Sources; with the Assistance of Leading Continental Democrats", written above the title of the article. That it was Marx who wrote this article is proved by letters written to Marx by Ernest Jones, the editor of the journal, on May 23, 25 and 30, 1851, as well as by its ideological kinship with Marx's The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (see present edition, Vol. 11). The article may have been translated into English by Engels, since Marx did not know English well enough at the time. One more article from this series appeared in the Notes to the People under the title "The Prussian Constitution", but it was not written by Marx. The text of the Constitution, which Marx analyses in the given article, was originally published in Le Moniteur universel No. 312, November 7, 1848. The same year it appeared in Paris as a pamphlet. We may assume that Marx used this separate edition. When quoting or rendering some article from the Constitution, Marx introduced his own italics. The articles of the Constitution quoted in the Notes to the People are designated as paragraphs (§§).

[414] This passage was omitted from the official publication of the speech made by Louis Bonaparte in Dijon on June 1, 1851 {Le Moniteur universelNo. 154, June 3, 1851) as was pointed out in the newspaper Le National of June 3. It was included, however, in an interpellation addressed to the Minister of the Interior in the National Assembly (Le Moniteur universelNo. 155, June 4, 1851). The full text of the speech appeared in Le Nationalon June 4. English and German papers quoted this passage directly or indirectly. It is not yet known which source was used by Marx.

[415] Marx wrote this note when he and Engels were preparing the third international review (see this volume, pp. 490-532). It is a sort of conspectus or plan of the section of the review in which the authors analyse developments in Germany. Some of the ideas were later developed thoroughly in the review itself, while others were left out of the final version, for instance the economic rivalry between Austria and Prussia.

[419] when speaking about trade between "dealers and dealers" and between "dealers and consumers" Marx is referring to Adam Smith's division of trade in its entirety into two different spheres: trade between businessmen alone and trade between businessmen and individual consumers. In Adam Smith's work, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, published in London in 1835-39, this problem is dealt with in Chapter II of Volume III, and in an earlier two-volume edition — in Chapter II, Book II, Volume II. A similar distinction is made by Thomas Tooke in his work An Inquiry into the Currency Principle, the Connection of Currency with Prices, and the Expediency of a Separation of Issue from Banking, 2nd ed., London, 1844, pp. 34-36.

[444] The text of the resolution of the London Central Authority of the Communist League, similar in content to the proposals submitted by Marx to the Central Authority meeting of September 15, 1850 (see this volume, pp. 625-27), has come down to us as part of another document — the Address of the Cologne Central Authority issued on December 1, 1850. (The Cologne Central Authority was formed early in October 1850, its members being Röser, Bürgers and Otto; some time later they were joined by Daniels and Heinrich Becker.) The Address of the Cologne Central Authority did not fully expose the reasons for the split in the Communist League and even accused both conflicting parties of violating the Rules. Even so, it unequivocally condemned the splitting activities of the sectarian and adventurist faction led by Willich and Schapper and approved the policy of Marx and his followers. In May 1851 Peter Nothjung, emissary of the Cologne Central Authority, was arrested in Leipzig. The minutes found on him were confiscated by the Saxon police and sent to the official organ Dresdner Journal und Anzeiger (No. 171, June 22, 1851) to be published as evidence that democrats and Communists were involved in secret conspiratorial intrigues. In addition, both the Address and the resolution of the London Central Authority were published in the bourgeois Kölnische Zeitung No. 150, June 24, 1851, and at a later date in the Bill of Indictment against the Cologne Communists—Anklageschrift gegen l) P.G.Roeser... [Köln, 1852] and in Wermuth-Stieber's Die Communisten-Verschwörungen des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts, Th. 1, Berlin, 1853.

[447] T } ^ R u ] e s Qf the Communist League were drawn up by the Cologne Central Authority in November 1850 in conformity with the decision of the London Central Authority adopted on September 15, 1850 (see this volume, p. 630). A copy of the Rules in Heinrich Bürgers' handwriting as well as the Address of the Cologne Central Authority of December 1, 1850, and other documents, were received in London on December 18 (see Jenny Marx's letter to Engels of December 19, 1850). On January 5, 1851, the Rules were approved at a meeting of the London district of the Communist League, at which Marx was also present. He made several remarks in the copy of the Rules which in this volume are in bold type. These remarks may have been made at a later date (early in March 1852) when Marx forwarded the Rules to Weydemeyer in New York (see Marx's letter to Weydemeyer of March 5, 1852). The police confiscated a copy of the Rules from Peter Nothjung, one of the League members, when he was arrested in May 1851. Among other documents the Rules were printed in the police-sponsored edition: Wermuth-Stieber, Die Communisten-Verschwörungen des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts.