Gesamtausgabe (MEGA): Band 16 September 1857 bis Dezember 1858 9783110585988, 9783110517675

This volume contains dozens of articles written by Marx and Engels for the New York Tribune and the New American Cyclope

197 72 15MB

German Pages 1180 [1193] Year 2019

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Polecaj historie

Gesamtausgabe (MEGA): Band 16 September 1857 bis Dezember 1858
 9783110585988, 9783110517675

Table of contents :
Inhalt
KARL MARX, FRIEDRICH ENGELS: ARTIKEL OKTOBER 1857 BIS DEZEMBER 1858
Friedrich Engels. Bomb - Bombardment
Karl Marx. The Revolt in India
Friedrich Engels. Bridge, Military
Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels. Bernadotte - Armada
Friedrich Engels/Karl Marx. Ayacucho
Karl Marx. The Revolt in India - The British Revulsion
Friedrich Engels. The Capture of Delhi - Artillery
Karl Marx. Bugeaud - The French Crisis
Friedrich Engels. The Siege and Storming of Lucknow - Captain
Karl Marx. British Commerce - Bolivar y Ponte
Friedrich Engels. The Relief of Lucknow - Case Shot
Karl Marx. The Approaching Indian Loan
Friedrich Engels. Berme - Windham’s Defeat
Karl Marx. The Attempt upon the Life of Bonaparte - The Commercial Crisis in France
Friedrich Engels. Camp - Coehorn
Karl Marx. The Rule of the Pretorians
Friedrich Engels. Bidassoa
Karl Marx. The Derby Ministry - Palmerston’s Sham Resignation
Friedrich Engels. Burmah - Brescia
Karl Marx. Portents of the Day
Friedrich Engels. Bomarsund
Karl Marx. Bonaparte’s Present Position - The French Trials in London
Friedrich Engels. The Fall of Lucknow
Karl Marx. The Financial State of France
Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels. Beresford
Karl Marx. Mr. Disraeli’s Budget - Important British Documents
Friedrich Engels. Details of the Attack on Lucknow
Karl Marx. The Annexation of Oude - Bonaparte’s Financial Maneuvers⎯Military Despotism
Friedrich Engels. The British Army in India
Karl Marx. The State of British Commerce - The British Government and the Slave- Trade
Friedrich Engels. Cavalry
Karl Marx. Taxation in India
Friedrich Engels. The Indian Army
Karl Marx. The Indian Bill - British Commerce and Finance
Friedrich Engels. The Revolt in India
Karl Marx. Mazzini’s New Manifesto - The King of Pussia’s Insanity
Friedrich Engels. Russian Progress in Central Asia
Karl Marx. The King of Pussia’s Insanity - Mr. John Bright
Friedrich Engels. The Prosecution of Montalembert
Karl Marx. The New Ministry - Affairs in Prussia
Friedrich Engels. Europe in 1858
Karl Marx. Affairs in Prussia - The Emancipation Question
ANHANG
Von der Redaktion der „New-York Tribune“ umgearbeitete Artikel
News from India
Indian Debates
The News of Peace and Treaties
The French Slave-Trade
Dubiosa
The Revolt in India
Zuschrift an „Die Neue Zeit“
Zuschrift an „The Free Press“
KARL MARX FRIEDRICH ENGELS GESAMTAUSGABE (MEGA)
Inhalt
Verzeichnis der Abkürzungen, Siglen und Zeichen
Einführung
Zur publizistischen Arbeit von Marx und Engels von Oktober 1857 bis Dezember 1858
Die Mitarbeit von Marx und Engels an der „New-York Tribune“
Die Mitarbeit von Marx und Engels an der „New American Cyclopædia“
APPARAT ZU DEN EINZELNEN TEXTEN DES BANDES
Friedrich Engels. Bomb - Bombardment
Karl Marx. The Revolt in India
Friedrich Engels. Bridge, Military
Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels. Bernadotte
Karl Marx. Brown
Friedrich Engels/Karl Marx. Armada - Ayacucho
Karl Marx. The Revolt in India
Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels. Blücher
Karl Marx. Brune - The British Revulsion
Friedrich Engels. The Capture of Delhi - Artillery
Karl Marx. Bugeaud - The French Crisis
Friedrich Engels. The Siege and Storming of Lucknow - Captain
Karl Marx. British Commerce - Bolivar y Ponte
Friedrich Engels. The Relief of Lucknow - Case Shot
Karl Marx. The Approaching Indian Loan
Friedrich Engels. Berme - Windham’s Defeat
Karl Marx. The Attempt upon the Life of Bonaparte - The Commercial Crisis in France
Friedrich Engels. Camp - Coehorn
Karl Marx. The Rule of the Pretorians
Friedrich Engels. Bidassoa
Karl Marx. The Derby Ministry––Palmerston’s Sham Resignation
Friedrich Engels. Burmah - Brescia
Karl Marx. Portents of the Day
Friedrich Engels. Bomarsund
Karl Marx. Bonaparte’s Present Position - The French Trials in London
Friedrich Engels. The Fall of Lucknow
Karl Marx. The Financial State of France
Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels. Beresford
Karl Marx. Mr. Disraeli’s Budget - Important British Documents
Friedrich Engels. Details of the Attack on Lucknow
Karl Marx. The Annexation of Oude - Bonaparte’s Financial Maneuvers––Military Despotism
Friedrich Engels. The British Army in India
Karl Marx. The State of British Commerce - The British Government and the Slave-Trade
Friedrich Engels. Cavalry
Karl Marx. Taxation in India
Friedrich Engels. The Indian Army
Karl Marx. The Indian Bill - British Commerce and Finance
Friedrich Engels. The Revolt in India
Karl Marx. Mazzini’s New Manifesto - The King of Prussia’s Insanity
Friedrich Engels. Russian Progress in Central Asia
Karl Marx. The King of Prussia’s Insanity - Affairs in Prussia
Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels. Russia in China
Karl Marx. Mr. John Bright
Friedrich Engels. The Prosecution of Montalembert
Karl Marx. The New Ministry
Karl Marx. The New Ministry - Affairs in Prussia
Friedrich Engels. Europe in 1858
Karl Marx. Affairs in Prussia - The Emancipation Question
ANHANG
Von der Redaktion der „New-York Tribune“ umgearbeitete Artikel
News from India
Indian Debates
The News of Peace and Treaties
The French Slave-Trade
Dubiosa
The Revolt in India
Zuschrift an „Die Neue Zeit“
Zuschrift an „The Free Press“
Verzeichnis nicht überlieferter Arbeiten
REGISTER UND VERZEICHNISSE
Namenregister
Literaturregister
Verzeichnis der im Apparat ausgewerteten Quellen und der benutzten Literatur
Sachregister

Citation preview

å

KARL MARX FRIEDRICH ENGELS GESAMTAUSGABE (MEGA) ERSTE ABTEILUNG WERKE · ARTIKEL · ENTWÜRFE BAND 16

HERAUSGEGEBEN VON DER INTERNATIONALEN MARX-ENGELS-STIFTUNG AMSTERDAM

KARL MARX FRIEDRICH ENGELS ARTIKEL OKTOBER 1857 BIS DEZEMBER 1858 TEXT Bearbeitet von Claudia Reichel und Hanno Strauß

DE GRUYTER AKADEMIE FORSCHUNG

2018

Internationale Marx-Engels-Stiftung Vorstand Anja Kruke, Marcel van der Linden, Herfried Münkler, Andrej Sorokin

Redaktionskommission Beatrix Bouvier, Fangguo Chai, Marcel van der Linden, Jürgen Herres, Gerald Hubmann, Götz Langkau, Izumi Omura, Teinosuke Otani, Claudia Reichel, Regina Roth, Ljudmila Vasina

Wissenschaftlicher Beirat Andreas Arndt, Birgit Aschmann, Shlomo Avineri, Harald Bluhm, Warren Breckman, James M. Brophy, Aleksandr Buzgalin, Gerd Callesen, Hans-Peter Harstick, Axel Honneth, Jürgen Kocka, Hermann Lübbe, Bertell Ollman, Alessandro Pinzani, Michael Quante, Hans Schilar, Gareth Stedman Jones, Immanuel Wallerstein, Jianhua Wei Dieser Band wurde im Rahmen der gemeinsamen Forschungsförderung im Akademienprogramm mit Mitteln des Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung, mit Mitteln des Regierenden Bürgermeisters von Berlin, Senatskanzlei – Wissenschaft und Forschung, des Thüringer Ministeriums für Wirtschaft, Wissenschaft und Digitale Gesellschaft sowie des Ministeriums für Wirtschaft, Wissenschaft und Digitalisierung des Landes Sachsen-Anhalt erarbeitet.

ISBN 978-3-11-051767-5 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-058598-8

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.dnb.de abrufbar. © 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/München/Boston Satz: pagina GmbH, Tübingen Druck und Bindung: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen www.degruyter.com

Inhalt Text

Apparat

Verzeichnis der Abkürzungen, Siglen und Zeichen

565

Einführung

567

Zur publizistischen Arbeit von Marx und Engels von Oktober 1857 bis Dezember 1858 Die Mitarbeit von Marx und Engels an der „New-York Tribune“ Die Mitarbeit von Marx und Engels an der „New American Cyclopædia“

617 617 648

KARL MARX, FRIEDRICH ENGELS: ARTIKEL OKTOBER 1857 BIS DEZEMBER 1858

Friedrich Engels · Bomb Friedrich Engels · Bomb Ketch Friedrich Engels · Bomb-Proof Friedrich Engels · Bomb Vessel Friedrich Engels · Bombardier Friedrich Engels · Bombardment Karl Marx · The Revolt in India Friedrich Engels · Bridge, Military

3 7 8 9 10

657 662 663 664 666

11 13 18

667 672 676

Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels · Bernadotte

25

679

Karl Marx · Brown

34

684

Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels · Armada

35

685

Friedrich Engels/Karl Marx · Ayacucho

40

690

V

Inhalt

Karl Marx · The Revolt in India Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels · Blücher Karl Marx · Brune Karl Marx · The Bank Act of 1844 and the Monetary Crisis in England Karl Marx · The British Revulsion Friedrich Engels · The Capture of Delhi Friedrich Engels · Artillery Karl Marx · Bugeaud Karl Marx · The Commercial Crisis in England Karl Marx · The Financial Crisis in Europe Karl Marx · The Commercial and Industrial State of England Karl Marx · The Crisis in Europe Karl Marx · The French Crisis Friedrich Engels · The Siege and Storming of Lucknow Friedrich Engels · Campaign Friedrich Engels · Cannonade Friedrich Engels · Captain Karl Marx · British Commerce Karl Marx · Bolivar y Ponte Friedrich Engels · The Relief of Lucknow Friedrich Engels · Carabine Friedrich Engels · Carcass Friedrich Engels · Carronade Friedrich Engels · Cartouch Friedrich Engels · Cartridge Friedrich Engels · Case Shot Karl Marx · The Approaching Indian Loan Friedrich Engels · Berme Friedrich Engels · Blenheim Friedrich Engels · Borodino Friedrich Engels · Bridge-Head Friedrich Engels · Buda Friedrich Engels · Windham’s Defeat Karl Marx · The Attempt upon the Life of Bonaparte

VI

Text

Apparat

42 47 61

692 695 699

64 69 75 80 101 104 110

702 706 710 714 723 725 729

115

733

120 123 128 132 133 134 135 145 160 167 168 169 171 172 173 175 179 180 182 189 191 194 199

737 739 742 746 748 749 750 755 766 772 774 775 776 777 778 779 783 784 786 789 791 793 797

Inhalt

Karl Marx · The Commercial Crisis in France Friedrich Engels · Camp Friedrich Engels · Catapult Friedrich Engels · Coehorn Karl Marx · The Rule of the Pretorians Friedrich Engels · Bidassoa Karl Marx · The Derby Ministry⎯Palmerston’s Sham Resignation Friedrich Engels · Burmah Friedrich Engels · Brescia Karl Marx · Portents of the Day Friedrich Engels · Bomarsund Karl Marx · Bonaparte’s Present Position Karl Marx · Pelissier’s Mission to England Karl Marx · Mazzini and Napoleon Karl Marx · The French Trials in London Friedrich Engels · The Fall of Lucknow Karl Marx · The Financial State of France Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels · Beresford Karl Marx · Mr. Disraeli’s Budget Karl Marx · The Anglo-French Alliance Karl Marx · Important British Documents Friedrich Engels · Details of the Attack on Lucknow Karl Marx · The Annexation of Oude Karl Marx · A Curious Piece of History Karl Marx · Lord Canning’s Proclamation and Land Tenure in India Karl Marx · Bonaparte’s Financial Maneuvers⎯Military Despotism Friedrich Engels · The British Army in India Karl Marx · The State of British Commerce Karl Marx · Political Parties in England⎯The State of Europe Karl Marx · The British Government and the SlaveTrade Friedrich Engels · Cavalry

Text

Apparat

204 208 211 212 214 217

802 805 808 809 811 815

222 225 231 233 237 238 243 246 251 259 264 268 270 274 279 285 290 295

817 823 826 829 833 836 839 843 847 852 855 858 860 864 867 869 873 878

303

881

306 309 313

885 888 891

318

893

321 326

896 901

VII

Inhalt Text

Apparat

350 355 359

908 911 914

363

919

364

921

373 378

925 927

383 388 392 396 399 402 409 414 418 422 427 433 438 441 445 450 454 459 463 467 471 474 479 483

931 934 938 942 947 951 954 962 964 967 970 975 983 985 990 996 1001 1004 1006 1008 1011 1015 1018 1021

Karl Marx · Affairs in Prussia

487

1024

Karl Marx · Project for the Regulation of the Price of Bread in France

490

1026

Karl Marx · Taxation in India Friedrich Engels · The Indian Army Karl Marx · The Indian Bill Karl Marx · An den Redakteur der „Neuen Zeit“ Karl Marx · Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton (First Article) Karl Marx · Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton (Second Article) Karl Marx · How the Indian War has been Mismanaged Karl Marx · The Increase of Lunacy in Great Britain Karl Marx · The English Bank Act of 1844 Karl Marx · Commercial Crisis and Currency in Britain Karl Marx · History of the Opium Trade (First Article) Karl Marx · History of the Opium Trade (Second Article) Karl Marx · Another Strange Chapter of Modern History Karl Marx · The Anglo-Chinese Treaty Karl Marx · British Commerce and Finance Friedrich Engels · The Revolt in India Karl Marx · Mazzini’s New Manifesto Karl Marx · A New French Revolutionary Manifesto Karl Marx · The British and Chinese Treaty Karl Marx · Russian Serfs Karl Marx · The King of Pussia’s Insanity Friedrich Engels · Russian Progress in Central Asia Karl Marx · The King of Pussia’s Insanity Karl Marx · The Prussian Regency Karl Marx · Affairs in Prussia Karl Marx · Affairs in Prussia Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels · Russia in China Karl Marx · Mr. John Bright Friedrich Engels · The Prosecution of Montalembert Karl Marx · The New Ministry Karl Marx · The New Ministry

VIII

Inhalt

Karl Marx · Affairs in Prussia Friedrich Engels · Europe in 1858 Karl Marx · Affairs in Prussia Karl Marx · Question of the Ionian Islands Karl Marx · The Excitement in Ireland Karl Marx · The Emancipation Question

Text

Apparat

495 499 503 507 512 516

1029 1032 1035 1037 1042 1046

529 531 534 536

1057 1061 1064 1067

541 543 544

1073 1075 1076

ANHANG Von der Redaktion der „New-York Tribune“ umgearbeitete Artikel News from India Indian Debates The News of Peace and Treaties The French Slave-Trade

Dubiosa The Revolt in India Zuschrift an „Die Neue Zeit“ Zuschrift an „The Free Press“

Verzeichnis nicht überlieferter Arbeiten

1077

REGISTER UND VERZEICHNISSE Namenregister

1081

Literaturregister 1. Arbeiten von Marx und Engels a. Gedruckte Schriften b. Manuskripte 2. Arbeiten anderer Autoren 3. Periodika

1125 1125 1125 1125 1127 1149

IX

Inhalt Text

Apparat

Verzeichnis der im Apparat ausgewerteten Quellen und der benutzten Literatur 1. Archivalien 2. Gedruckte Quellen a. Quelleneditionen b. Periodika c. Zeitgenössische Publikationen 3. Forschungsliteratur

1153 1153 1154 1154 1156 1156 1160

Sachregister

1168

Verzeichnis der Abbildungen Marx: Exzerpte als Beilage im Brief an Engels vom 15. September 1857. S. 1 Marx: Exzerpte als Beilage im Brief an Engels vom 15. September 1857. S. 2 Marx: Exzerpte als Beilage im Brief an Engels vom 15.September 1857. S. 3 Marx: Exzerpte als Beilage im Brief an Engels vom 15.September 1857. S. 4 Marx: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Armada“. S. [1] Marx: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Armada“. S. [2]/[3] Marx: Krisenheft. Book of the Crisis of 1857. S. [39] Marx: Krisenheft. 1857 France. S. [25a] Marx: Krisenheft. Book of the Crisis of 1857. S. [34] Marx: Krisenheft. Book of the Crisis of 1857. S. [35] Marx: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Bolivar y Ponte“. S. [16] Marx: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Bolivar y Ponte“. S. [24] Engels: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Borodino“ Engels: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Borodino“ Engels: Zeichnung einer Karte der Schlacht bei Bidassoa New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5465, 27. Oktober 1858. S. 6 New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5471, 3. November 1858. S. 6 Marx: Notizbuch aus den Jahren 1857–1861. Marx: Notizbuch aus den Jahren 1857–1861. Marx: Notizbuch aus den Jahren 1858–1860. The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1859. Titelblatt The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1859. S. 600 Marx: Notizbuch aus den Jahren 1858–1860. New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5535, 17. Januar 1859. Titelblatt New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5333, 14. Januar 1859. S. 5

X

5 6 21 22 37 38 105 106 137 138 147 148 183 184 219 455 456 669 670 781 903 904 991 1047 1048

KARL MARX FRIEDRICH ENGELS ARTIKEL OKTOBER 1857 BIS DEZEMBER 1858

Friedrich Engels Bomb

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

451 BOMB, or SHELL, a hollow iron shot for heavy guns and mortars, filled with powder, and thrown at a considerable elevation, and intended to act by the force of its fall and explosion. They are generally the largest of all projectiles used, as a mortar, being shorter than any other class of ordnance, can be made so much larger in diameter and bore. Bombs of 10, 11, and 13 inches are now of common use; the French, at the siege of Antwerp in 1832, used a mortar and shells cast in Belgium, of 24 inches calibre. The 452 powder contained in a bomb is exploded by a fuze or hollow tube filled with a slow-burning composition, which takes fire by the discharge of the mortar. These fuzes are so timed that the bomb bursts as short a time as possible after it has reached its destination, sometimes just before it reaches the ground. Beside the powder, there are sometimes a few pieces of Valenciennes composition put into the shell, to set fire to combustible objects, but it is maintained that these pieces are useless, the explosion shattering them to atoms, and that the incendiary effects of shells without such composition are equally great. Bombs are thrown at angles varying from 15° to 45°, but generally from 30° to 45°; the larger shells and smaller charges having the greatest proportional ranges at about 45°, while smaller shells with greater charges range furthest at about 30°. The charges are in all instances proportionally small: a 13-inch bomb weighing 200 lbs., thrown out of a mortar at the elevation of 45°, with a charge of 31/2 lbs. powder, ranges 1,000 yards, and with 20 lbs. or 1/10 of its weight, 4,200 yards. The effects of such a bomb, coming down from a tremendous height, are very great if it falls on any thing destructible. It will go through all the floors in a house, and penetrate vaulted arches of considerable strength; and, though a 13-inch shell only contains about 7 lbs. of powder, yet its bursting acts like the explosion of a mine, and the fragments will fly to a distance of 800 or 1,000 yards if unobstructed. On the contrary, if it falls on soft soil, it will imbed itself in the earth to a depth of from 8 to 12 feet, and either be

3

Friedrich Engels

extinguished or explode without doing any harm. Bombs are therefore often used as small mines, or fougasses, being imbedded in the earth about a foot deep in such places where the enemy must pass; to fire them, a slow match or train is prepared. This is the first shape in which they occur in history: the Chinese, according to their chronicles, several centuries before our era used metal balls filled with bursting composition and small pieces of metal, and fired by a slow match. They were employed in the defence of defiles, being deposited there on the approach of the enemy. In 1232, at the siege of Kaı¨-fong-fu, the Chinese used, against an assault, to roll bombs down the parapet among the assailant Mongols. Mahmood Shah of Guzerat, in the siege of Champaneer, in 1484, threw bombs into the town. In Europe, not to mention earlier instances of a more doubtful character, the Arabs in Spain, and the Spaniards after them, threw shells and carcasses from ordnance after the beginning of the 14th century, but the costliness and difficulties of manufacturing hollow shot long prevented their general introduction. They have become an important ingredient of siege artillery since the middle of the 17th century only.

4

5

10

15

Marx: Exzerpte als Beilage im Brief an Engels vom 15. September 1857. S. 1

Marx: Exzerpte als Beilage im Brief an Engels vom 15. September 1857. S. 2

Friedrich Engels Bomb Ketch

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

452 BOMB KETCH is now generally used to designate the more oldfashioned sort of mortar vessels (galiotes a` bombes). They were built strong enough to resist the shock caused by the recoil of the mortar, 60 to 70 feet long, 100 to 150 tons burden; they drew from 8 to 9 feet water, and were rigged usually with 2 masts. They used to carry 2 mortars and some guns. The sailing qualities of these vessels were naturally very inferior. A tender, generally a brig, was attached to them, which carried the artillerymen and the greater part of the ammunition, until the action commenced.

7

Friedrich Engels Bomb-Proof

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

452 BOMB-PROOF, the state of a roof strong enough to resist the shock of bombs falling upon it. With the enormous calibres now in use, it is almost impossible, and certainly as yet not worth while, to aim at absolute security from vertical fire for most buildings covered in bombproof. A circular vault 31/2 feet thick at the keystone, will resist most shells, and even a single 13-inch shell might not break through; but a second one could in most cases do so. Absolutely bomb-proof buildings are therefore confined to powder magazines, laboratories, &c., where a single shell would cause an immense explosion. Strong vaults covered over with 3 or 4 feet of earth, will give the greatest security. For common casemates the vaults need not be so very strong, as the chance of shells falling repeatedly into the same place is very remote. For temporary shelter against shells, buildings are covered in with strong balks laid close together and overlaid with fascines, on which some dung and finally earth is spread. The introduction of casemated batteries and forts, and of casemated defensive barracks, placed mostly along the inner slope of the rampart, at a short distance from it, has considerably increased the number of bomb-proof buildings in fortresses; and with the present mode of combining violent bombardments, continued night and day, with the regular attack of a fortress, the garrison cannot be expected to hold out unless effective shelter is provided in which those off duty can recover their strength by rest. This sort of buildings is therefore likely to be still more extensively applied in the construction of modern fortresses.

8

5

10

15

20

Friedrich Engels Bomb Vessel

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

453 BOMB VESSEL, or MORTAR BOAT, is the expression in use for the more modern class of ships constructed to carry mortars. Up to the Russian war, those built for the British service drew 8 or 9 feet water, and carried, beside their 2 10-inch mortars, 4 68-pounders, and 6 18lb. carronades. When the Russian war made naval warfare in shallow waters and intricate channels a necessity, and mortar boats were required on account of the strong sea-fronts of the Russian fortresses, which defied any direct attack by ships, a new class of bomb vessels had to be devised. The new boats thus built are about 60 feet long, with great breadth of beam, round bows like a Dutch galliot, flat bottoms, drawing 6 or 7 feet water, and propelled by steam. They carry 2 mortars, 10 or 13-inch calibre, and a few field-guns or carronades to repel boarding parties by grape, but no heavy guns. They were used with great effect at Sweaborg, which place they bombarded from a distance of 4,000 yards.

9

Friedrich Engels Bombardier

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

453 BOMBARDIER, originally the man having charge of a mortar in a mortar battery, but now retained in some armies to designate a noncommissioned rank in the artillery, somewhat below a sergeant. The bombardier generally has the pointing of the gun for his principal duty. In Austria, a bombardier corps is formed as a training school for noncommissioned officers of the artillery, an institution which has contributed much to the effective and scientific mode of serving their guns, for which that branch of the Austrian service is distinguished.

10

5

Friedrich Engels Bombardment

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

453 BOMBARDMENT, the act of throwing bombs or shells into a town or fortress for incendiary purposes. A bombardment is either desultory, when ships, field batteries, or a proportionally small number of siege batteries, throw shells into a place in order to intimidate the inhabitants and garrison into a hasty surrender, or for some other purpose; or it is regular, and then forms one of the methods of conducting the attack of a fortified place. The attack by regular bombardment was first introduced by the Prussians in their sieges in 1815, after Waterloo, of the fortresses in the north of France. The army and the Bonapartist party being then much dispirited, and the remainder of the inhabitants anxiously wishing for peace, it was thought that the formalities of the old methodical attack in this case might be dispensed with, and a short and heavy bombardment substituted, which would create fires and explosions of magazines, prevent every soul in the place from getting a night’s rest, and thus in a short time compel a surrender, either by the moral pressure of the inhabitants on the commander, or by the actual amount of devastation caused, and by out-fatiguing the garrison. The regular attack by direct fire against the defences, though proceeded with, became secondary to vertical fire and shelling from heavy howitzers. In some cases a desultory bombardment was sufficient, in others a regular bombardment had to be resorted to; but in every instance the plan was successful; and it is now a maxim in the theory of sieges, that to destroy the resources, and to render unsafe the interior of a fortress by vertical fire, is as important (if not more so) as the destruction of its outer defences by direct and ricochet firing. A bombardment will be most effective against a fortress of middling size, with numerous non-military inhabitants, the moral effect upon them being one of the means applied to force the commander into surrender. For the bombardment of a large fortress, an immense mate´riel is required. The best example of this is the siege of Sebastopol, in which quantities of shells formerly unheard of were used. The same war

11

Friedrich Engels

furnishes the most important example of a desultory bombardment, in the attack upon Sweaborg by the Anglo-French mortar boats, in which above 5,000 shells and the same number of solid shot were thrown into the place.

12

Karl Marx The Revolt in India

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5462, 23. Oktober 1857.

5

We yesterday received files of London journals up the 7th inst. In discussing the State of the Indian revolt they are full of the same optimism which they have cultivated from the beginning. We are not only told that a successful attack upon Delhi was to take place, but that it was to take place on the 20th of August. The first thing to ascertain is, of course, the present strength of the besieging force. An artillery officer, writing from the camp before Delhi on the 13th of August, gives the following detailed statement of the effective British forces on the 10th of that month:

10

Staff Artillery Engineers Cavalry 1ST BRIGADE. 15 Her Majesty’s 75th Regt. Hon. Co’s 1st Fusileers Kumaon Battalion 2D BRIGADE. 20 Her Majesty’s 60th Rifles Hon. Co’s 2d Fusileers Sirmoor Battalion 3D BRIGADE. Her Majesty’s 8th Regt. 25 Her Majesty’s 61st Regt. 4th Sikhs Guide Corps Coke’s Corps Total

British Officers. 30 39 26 18

British Troops. .. 598 39 570

Native Officers. .. .. .. ..

Native Troops .. .. .. ..

H’ses.

16 17 4

502 487 ..

.. .. 13

.. .. 435

.. .. ..

15 20 4

251 493 ..

.. .. 9

.. .. 319

.. .. ..

15 12 4 4 5 229

153 249 .. .. .. 3,342

.. .. 4 4 16 46

.. .. 365 196 709 2,024

.. .. .. 520

.. .. .. .. .. 520

13

Karl Marx

The total effective British force in the camp before Delhi amounted, therefore, on the 10th of August to exactly 5,641 men. From these we must deduct 120 men (112 soldiers and 8 officers), who, according to the English reports, fell on the 12th of August during the attack upon a new battery which the rebels had opened outside the walls, in front of the English left. There remained, then, the number of 5,529 fighting men when Brigadier Nicholson joined the besieging army with the following forces from Ferozepore, escorting a second-class siege train: the 52d light infantry (say 900 men), a wing of the 61st (say 4 companies, 360 men), Bourchier’s field battery, a wing of the 6th Punjaub regiment (say 540 men), and some Mooltan horse and foot; altogether a force of about 2,000 men, of whom somewhat more than 1,200 were Europeans. Now, if we add this force to the 5,529 fighting men who were in the camp on the junction of Nicholson’s forces, we obtain a total of 7,529 men. Further ree¨nforcements are said to have been dispatched by Sir John Lawrence, the Governor of the Punjaub, consisting of the remaining wing of the 8th foot, three companies of the 24th, with three horse-artillery guns of Captain Paton’s troops from Peshawer, the 2d Punjaub infantry, the 4th Punjaub infantry, and the other wing of the 6th Punjaub. This force, however, which we may estimate at 3,000 men, at the utmost, and the bulk of which consists altogether of Sikhs, had not yet arrived. If the reader can recall the arrival of the Punjaub ree¨nforcements under Chamberlain about a month earlier, he will understand that, as the latter were only sufficient to bring Gen. Reed’s army up to the original number of Sir H. Barnard’s forces, so the new ree¨nforcements are only sufficient to bring Brigadier Wilson’s army up to the original strength of Gen. Reed; the only real fact in favor of the English being the arrival, at last, of a siege-train. But suppose even the expected 3,000 men to have joined the camp, and the total English force to have reached the number of 10,000, the loyalty of one-third of which is more than doubtful, what are they to do? They will invest Delhi, we are told. But leaving aside the ludicrous idea of investing with 10,000 men a strongly-fortified city, more than seven miles in extent, the English must first turn the Jumna from its regular course before they can think of investing Delhi. If the English entered Delhi in the morning, the rebels might leave it in the evening, either by crossing the Jumna and making for Rohilcund and Oude, or by marching down the Jumna in the direction of Muttra and Agra. At all events, the investment of a square, one of whose sides is inaccessible to the besieging forces, while affording a line of communication and retreat to the besieged, is a problem not yet solved. “All agree,” says the officer from whom we have borrowed the above table, “that taking Delhi by

14

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Revolt in India

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

assault is out of the question.” He informs us, at the same time, what is really expected in the camp, viz: “to shell the town for several days and make a decent breach.” Now, this officer himself adds that, “at a moderate calculation, the enemy must muster now nearly forty thousand men beside guns unlimited and well worked; their infantry also fighting well.” If the desperate obstinacy with which Mussulmans are accustomed to fight behind walls be considered, it becomes a great question indeed whether the small British army, having rushed in through “a decent breach,” would be allowed to rush out again. In fact, there remains only one chance for a successful attack upon Delhi by the present British forces⎯that of internal dissensions breaking out among the rebels, their ammunition being spent, their forces being demoralized, and their spirit of self-reliance giving way. But we must confess that their uninterrupted fighting from the 31st of July to the 12th of August seems hardly to warrant such a supposition. At the same time, a Calcutta letter gives us a broad hint why the English generals had resolved, in the teeth of all military rules, upon keeping their ground before Delhi. “When,” it says, “a few weeks ago it became a question whether our force should retreat from before Delhi, because it was too much harassed by daily fighting to support overwhelming fatigues much longer, that intention was strenuously resisted by Sir John Lawrence, who plainly informed the Generals that their retreat would be the signal for the rising of the populations around them, by which they must be placed in imminent danger. This counsel prevailed, and Sir John Lawrence promised to send them all the ree¨nforcements he could muster.” Denuded as it has been by Sir John Lawrence, the Punjaub itself may now rise in rebellion, while the troops in the cantonments before Delhi are likely to be laid on their backs and decimated by the pestilential effluvia rising from the soil at the close of the rainy season. Of Gen. Van Cortlandt’s forces, reported four weeks ago to have reached Hissar, and to be pushing forward to Delhi, no more is heard. They must, then, have encountered serious obstacles, or have been disbanded on their route. The position of the English on the Upper Ganges is, in fact, desperate. Gen. Havelock is threatened by the operations of the Oude rebels, moving from Lucknow via Bittoor and trying at Futteypore, to the south of Cawnpore, to cut off his retreat; while simultaneously the Gwalior contingent is marching on Cawnpore from Calpee, a town situated on the right bank of the Jumna. This concentric movement, perhaps directed by Nena Sahib, who is said to wield the supreme command at Lucknow, betrays for the first time some notion of strategy on the part of the rebels, while the English seem anxious only to exaggerate their own foolish

15

Karl Marx

method of centrifugal warfare. Thus we are told that the 90th foot and the 5th fusileers dispatched from Calcutta to ree¨nforce Gen. Havelock have been intercepted at Dinapore by Sir James Outram, who has taken it into his head to lead them via Fyrzabad to Lucknow. This plan of operation is hailed by The Morning Advertiser of London as the stroke of a master mind, because, it says, Lucknow will thus have been placed between two fires, being threatened on its right from Cawnpore and on its left from Fyrzabad. According to the ordinary rules of war, the immensely weaker army, which, instead of trying to concentrate its scattered members, cuts itself up into two portions, separated by the whole breadth of the hostile army, has spared the enemy the pains of annihilating it. For Gen. Havelock, the question, in fact, is no longer to save Lucknow, but to save the remainder of his own and Gen. Neill’s little corps. He will very likely have to fall back upon Allahabad. Allahabad is indeed a position of decisive importance, forming, as it does, the point of junction between the Ganges and the Jumna, and the key to the Doab, situated between the two rivers. On the first glance at the map, it will be seen that the main line of operations for an English army attempting the reconquest of the NorthWestern provinces runs along the valley of the lower Ganges. The positions of Dinapore, Benares, Mirzapore, and, above all, of Allahabad, from which the real operations must commence, will therefore have to be strengthened by the withdrawal to them of the garrisons of all the smaller and strategically indifferent stations in the province of Bengal Proper. That this main line of operations itself is seriously threatened at this moment, may be seen from the following extract from a Bombay letter addressed to The London Daily News: “The late mutiny of three regiments at Dinapore has cut off communications (except by steamers on the river) between Allahabad and Calcutta. The mutiny at Dinapore is the most serious affair that has happened lately, inasmuch as the whole of the Berar district, within 200 miles of Calcutta, is now in a blaze. Today a report has arrived that the Santhals have again risen, and the state of Bengal, overrun with 150,000 savages, who delight in blood, plunder and rapine, would be truly terrible.” The minor lines of operation, as long as Agra holds out, are those for the Bombay army, via Indore and Gwalior to Agra, and for the Madras army, via Saugor and Gwalior to Agra, with which latter place the Punjaub army, as well as the corps holding Allahabad, require to have their lines of communication restored. If, however, the wavering princes of Central India should openly declare against the English, and the mutiny among the Bombay army assume a serious aspect, all military calculation

16

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Revolt in India

5

is at an end for the present, and nothing will remain certain but an immense butchery from Cashmere to Cape Comorin. In the best case, all that can be done is to delay decisive events until the arrival in November of the European forces. Whether even this be effected will depend upon the brains of Sir Colin Campbell, of whom, till now, nothing is known but his personal bravery. If he is the man for his place, he will, at any expense, whether Delhi fall or not, create a disposable force, however small, with which to take the field. Yet, the ultimate decision, we must repeat, lies with the Bombay army.

17

Friedrich Engels Bridge, Military

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

690 BRIDGE, MILITARY. The art of constructing temporary bridges for the passage, by troops, of large rivers and narrow arms of the sea, was well known to the ancients, whose works in this respect are sometimes of surprising magnitude. Darius passed the Bosporus and Danube, and Xerxes the Hellespont, by bridges of boats, the description of which we find in Herodotus. The army of Xerxes constructed 2 bridges across the Dardanelles, the first of 360 vessels, anchored head and stern alongside each other, their keels in the direction of the current, the vessels connected with each other by strong cables, over which planks were laid, fastened by a rail on either side, and covered in by a bed of earth. The 2d bridge had 314 vessels, and was similarly constructed. According to Arrian, Alexander had a regular pontoon-train of light boats attached to his army. The Romans had wicker-work vessels, covered with the skins of animals, destined to support the timber platform of a bridge; these formed a part of the train of their armies until the end of the empire. They, however, also knew how to construct a more solid kind of military bridge, whenever a rapid river had to be crossed; witness the famous bridges on piles, on which Cæsar passed the Rhine.⎯During the middle ages we find no notice of bridge equipages, but during the 30 years’ war the various armies engaged carried materials with them to form bridges across the large rivers of Germany. The boats used were very heavy, and generally made of oak. The platform of the bridge was laid on trestles standing in the bottoms of these boats. The Dutch first adopted a smaller kind of vessel, flat-bottomed, with nearly vertical sides, pointed head and stern, and both ends projecting, in an inclined plane, above the surface of the water. They consisted of a framework of wood, covered with sheets of tin, and were called pontoons. The French, too, according to Folard, claim the invention of pontoons made of copper, and are said to have had, about 1672, a complete pontoon train. By the beginning of the 18th century all European armies had provided themselves with this kind

18

5

10

15

20

25

30

Bridge, Military

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

of vessels, mostly wooden frames, covered in with tin, copper, leather, or tarred canvas. The latter material was used by the Russians. The boats were small, and had to be placed close together, with not more than 4 or 5 feet clear space between them, if the bridge was to have any buoyancy; the current of the water was thereby greatly obstructed, the safety of the bridge endangered, and a chance given to the enemy to destroy it by sending floating bodies against it.⎯The pontoons now employed by the continental armies of Europe are of a larger kind, but similar in principle to those 100 years ago. The French have used, since 1829, a flat-bottomed vessel with nearly vertical sides, diminishing in breadth toward the stem, and also, but a little less, toward the stern; the 2 ends rise above the gunwales and are curved like those of a canoe. The dimensions are: length, 31 ft.; breadth, at top, 5 ft. 7 in.; at bottom, 4 ft. 4 in. The framework is of oak, covered with fir planking. Every pontoon weighs 1,658 lbs. and has a buoyancy (weight of cargo which would sink the vessel to the top of the gunwales) of 18,675 lbs. When formed into a bridge, they are placed at intervals of 14 ft. clear space from gunwale to gunwale, and the road of the bridge is 11 ft. wide. For the advanced guard of an army a smaller kind of pontoon is used, for bridging over rivers of less importance. The Austrian pontoons are similar to the larger French pontoon, but divided transversely in the middle, for more convenient carriage, and put together in the water. 691 Two vessels placed close alongside each other, and connected by short timbers, a longitudinal timber supporting the balks of the platform, constitute a floating pier of a bridge. These pontoons, invented by Birago, were introduced in 1825. The Russians have a framework of wood for their pontoons, so constructed that the centre pieces, or thwarts, may be unshipped; over this frame is stretched sail-cloth, covered with tar or a solution of India rubber. They are in length, 21 ft. 9 in.; breadth, 4 ft. 11 in.; depth, 2 ft. 4 in., and weigh 718 lbs. each. Breadth of road of bridge, 10 ft.; distance from pontoon to pontoon, 8 ft. The Russians also have pontoons with a similar framework, covered over with leather. The Prussians are said to have been the first to divide their pontoons transversely into compartments, so as to prevent one leak from sinking them. Their pontoons are of wood and flat-bottomed. The span or clear distance between the pontoons, in their bridges, varies from 8 to 16 ft., according to circumstances. The Dutch, since 1832, and the Piedmontese, have pontoon trains similar to those in the Austrian service. The Belgian pontoon has a pointed head, but is not contracted at the stern. In all continental armies small boats to carry out the anchors accompany the pontoon train.⎯The British and the U.S. armies have entirely abandoned the use of boats for

19

Friedrich Engels

the formation of their pontoon trains, and adopted hollow cylinders of light material, closed on all sides, to support their bridges. In England the cylindrical pontoons, with conical, hemispherical or paraboloidal ends, as constructed in 1828 by Col. Blanchard, were adopted in 1836 to the exclusion of all other kinds. The larger British pontoon is 241/2 ft. long and 2 ft. 8 in. in diameter. It is formed of sheet tin, framed round a series of wheels constructed of tin, having hollow cylinders of tin for their spokes; a larger tin cylinder, 13/4 in. in diameter, forms their common axis, and runs through the entire length of the pontoon.⎯Experiments have been made in the United States with India rubber cylindrical pontoons. In 1836 Capt. (afterward Col.) Lane constructed bridges over a deep and rapid river in Alabama with such pontoons, and in 1839 Mr. Armstrong submitted similar floats, 18 ft. long, 18 in. in diameter when inflated, and weighing 39 lbs. each, 3 to form 1 link of the bridge. Pontoons of inflated India rubber were, in 1846, introduced in the U.S. army, and used in the war against Mexico. They are very easily carried, from their lightness and the small space they take up when folded; but, beside being liable to be damaged and rendered useless by friction on gravel, &c., they partake the common faults of all cylindrical pontoons. These are, that when once sunk in the water to 1/2 of their depth, their immersion becomes greater and greater with every equal addition of load, the reverse of what should be; their ends, moreover, easily catch and lodge floating matter; and finally, 2 of them must be joined to a raft by a platform before they can be moved in the water, whereas boat pontoons are as capable of independent motion in the water as common boats, and may serve for rowing rapidly across the river a detachment of troops. To compare the buoyant power of the cylindrical pontoon with that of the boat pontoon, the following may suffice: The French pontoon supports about 20 ft. of bridge, and has a buoyancy (the weight of the superstructure deducted) of more than 150 cwt. A British raft of 2 pontoons, supporting about the same length of bridge, has a buoyancy, superstructure deducted, of only 77 cwt., 1/2 of which is a safe load. A pontoon train contains, beside the pontoons, the oars, boat-hooks, anchors, cables, &c., necessary to move them about in the water, and to fix them in their position, and the balks and planks (chesses) to form the platform of the bridge. With boat pontoons, every pontoon is generally secured in its place, and then the balks and chesses stretched across, with cylindrical pontoons, 2 are connected to a raft, which is anchored at the proper distance from the end of the bridge, and connected with it by balks and chesses. Where circumstances admit of it, whole links, consisting of 3, 4, or 5 pontoons bridged over, are constructed in sheltered

20

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Marx: Exzerpte als Beilage im Brief an Engels vom 15. September 1857. S. 3

Marx: Exzerpte als Beilage im Brief an Engels vom 15. September 1857. S. 4

Bridge, Military

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

situations above the site fixed on for the bridge, and floated down successively into their positions. In some cases, with very experienced pontoniers, the whole bridge has been constructed on one bank of the river and swung round by the current when the passage was attempted. This was done by Napoleon when crossing the Danube, the day before the battle of Wagram. The whole of this campaign is highly instructive with regard to the passing of large rivers in the face of the enemy by military bridges.⎯Pontoon trains are, however, not always at hand, and the military engineer must be prepared to bridge over a river, in case of need, without them. For this purpose a variety of materials and modes of construction are employed. The larger kind of boats generally found on navigable rivers are made use of for bridges of boats. If no boats are to be found, and the depth or configuration of bottom of the river renders the use of floating supports necessary, rafts of timber, floats of casks, and other buoyant bodies may be used. If the river is shallow, and has a hard and tolerably level bottom, standing supports are constructed, consisting either of piles, which form the most durable and the safest kind of bridge, but require a great deal of time and labor, or of trestles, which may be easily and quickly constructed. Sometimes wagons loaded with fascines, &c., and sunk in the deeper places of the river, will form convenient supports for the platform of a bridge. Inundations, marshes, &c., are bridged over by means of gabions. For narrow rivers and ravines, where infantry only have to pass, various kinds of suspension bridges are adopted; they are generally suspended by strong cables.⎯The construction of 692 a military bridge under the actual fire of the enemy is now a matter of but rare occurrence; yet the possibility of resistance must always be provided for. On this account the bridge is generally constructed in a ree¨ntering bend of the river, so that the artillery placed right and left sweeps the ground on the opposite bank close to where the bridge is to land, and thus protects its construction. The concave bank, moreover, is generally higher than the convex one, and thus, in most cases, the advantage of command is added to that of a cross fire. Infantry are rowed across in boats or pontoons, and established immediately in front of the bridge. A floating bridge may be constructed to carry some cavalry and a few light guns across. The division of the river into several branches by islands, or a spot immediately below the junction of some smaller river, also offers advantages. In the latter, and sometimes in the former case, the several links of the bridge may be composed in sheltered water, and then floated down. The attacking party, having commonly to choose between many favorable points on a long line of river, may easily mislead his opponent by false attacks, and then effect the real passage at a distant

23

Friedrich Engels

point; and the danger of scattering the defending forces over that long line is so great, that it is nowadays preferred to keep them concentrated at some distance from the river, and march them in a body against the real point of passage as soon as it has once been ascertained, and before the enemy can have brought over all his army. It is from these causes that in none of the wars since the French revolution has the construction of a bridge on any of the large rivers of Europe been seriously contested.

24

5

Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels Bernadotte

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

177 BERNADOTTE, JEAN BAPTISTE JULES, marshal of the French empire, prince of Ponte Corvo, and, under the name of Charles XIV. John, king of Sweden and Norway, was born Jan. 26, 1764, at Pau, in the department of Basses Pyre´ne´es, died March 8, 1844, in the royal palace at Stockholm. He was the son of a lawyer, and was educated for that profession, but his military impulses induced him to enlist secretly, in 1780, in the royal marines, where he had advanced to the grade of sergeant, when the French revolution broke out. Thence his advancement became rapid. In 1792 he served as colonel in Custine’s army; commanded a demi-brigade in 1793; was in the same year, through Kleber’s patronage, promoted to the rank of brigadier-general, and contributed, as general of division in the army of the Sambre and Meuse, under Kleber and Jourdan, to the victory of Fleurus, June 26, 1794, the success of Jülich, and the capitulation of Maestricht. He also did good service in the campaign of 1795–’96 against the Austrian generals Clairfait, Kray, and the archduke Charles. Ordered by the directory, at the beginning of 1797, to march 20,000 men as ree¨nforcements to the Italian army, his first interview in Italy with Bonaparte decided their future relations. In spite of his natural greatness, Bonaparte entertained a petty and suspicious jealousy of the army of the Rhine and its generals. He understood at once that Bernadotte aspired to an independent career. The latter, on his part, was too much of a Gascon to justly appreciate the distance between a genius like Bonaparte and a man of abilities like himself. Hence their mutual dislike. During the invasion of Istria Bernadotte distinguished himself at the passage of the Tagliamento, where he led the vanguard, and at the capture of the fortress of Gradisca, March 19, 1797. After the so-called revolution of the 18th Fructidor, Bonaparte ordered his generals to collect from their respective divisions addresses in favor of that coup d’e´tat; but Bernadotte first protested, then affected great reluctance in obeying, and at last sent an address to the directory, but quite the reverse of that

25

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

asked for, and without conveying it through Bonaparte’s hands. The latter on his journey to Paris, whither he repaired to lay before the directory the treaty of Campo Formio, visited and cajoled Bernadotte at his head-quarters at Udine, but the following day, through an order from Milan, deprived him of half his division of the army of the Rhine, and commanded him to march the other half back to France. After many remonstrances, compromises, and new quarrels, Bernadotte was at last prevailed upon to accept the embassy to Vienna. There, acting up to the instructions of Talleyrand, he assumed a conciliatory attitude which the Paris journals, inspired by Bonaparte and his brothers, declared to be full of royalist tendencies; expatiating, in proof of these charges, on the suppression of the tricolored flag at the entrance of his hotel, and of the republican cockade on the hats of his suite. Being reprimanded for this by the directory, Bernadotte, on April 13, 1798, the anniversary of a Viennese anti-Jacobin demonstration, hoisted the tricolored flag with the inscription, “Liberty, equality, fraternity,” and had his hotel stormed by a Viennese mob, his flag burnt, and his own life endangered. The Austrian government declining to give the satisfaction demanded, Bernadotte withdrew to Rastadt with all his legation; but the directory, on the advice of Bonaparte, 178 who had himself been instrumental in provoking the scandal, hushed up the affair and dropped their representative. Bernadotte’s relationship to the Bonaparte family consequent upon his marriage, in Aug. 1798, with Mlle. De´sire´e Clary, the daughter of a Marseilles merchant, and Joseph Bonaparte’s sister-in-law, seemed but to confirm his opposition to Napoleon. As commander of the army of observation on the upper Rhine, in 1799, he proved incompetent for the charge, and thus verified beforehand Napoleon’s judgment at St. Helena, that he was a better lieutenant than general-in-chief. At the head of the war ministry, after the directorial e´meute of the 30th Prairial, his plans of operation were less remarkable than his intrigues with the Jacobins, through whose reviving influence he tried to create for himself a personal following in the ranks of the army. Yet one morning, Sept. 15, 1799, he found his resignation announced in the Moniteur before he was aware that he had tendered it. This trick was played upon him by Sie`yes and Roger Ducos, the directors allied to Bonaparte. While commanding the army of the west, he extinguished the last sparks of the Vendean war. After the proclamation of the empire, which made him a marshal, he was intrusted with the command of the army of Hanover. In this capacity as well as during his later command of the army of northern Germany, he took care to create for himself, among the northern people, a reputation for independence, moderation, and administrative ability. At the head of

26

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bernadotte

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

the corps stationed in Hanover, which formed the first corps of the grand army, he participated in the campaign of 1805 against the Austrians and Russians. He was sent by Napoleon to Iglau, to observe the movements of Archduke Ferdinand in Bohemia; then, called back to Brünn, he, with his corps, was posted at the battle of Austerlitz in the centre between Soult and Lannes, and contributed to baffle the attempt of the allied right wing at outflanking the French army. On June 5, 1806, he was created prince of Ponte Corvo. During the campaign of 1806–’7 against Prussia, he commanded the first corps d’arme´e. He received from Napoleon the order to march from Naumburg upon Dornburg, while Davoust, also stationed at Naumburg, was to march upon Apolda; the order held by Davoust adding that, if Bernadotte had already effected his junction with him, they might conjointly march upon Apolda. Having reconnoitred the movements of the Prussians, and made sure that no enemy was to be encountered in the direction of Dornburg, Davoust proposed to Bernadotte a combined march upon Apolda, and even offered to place himself under his command. The latter, however, sticking to the literal interpretation of Napoleon’s order, marched off in the direction of Dornburg without meeting an enemy during the whole day; while Davoust had alone to bear the brunt of the battle of Auerstädt, which, through Bernadotte’s absence, ended in an indecisive victory. It was only the meeting of the fugitives of Auerstädt with the fugitives from Jena, and the strategetical combinations of Napoleon, that counteracted the consequences of the deliberate blunder committed by Bernadotte. Napoleon signed an order to bring Bernadotte before a court-martial, but on further consideration rescinded it. After the battle of Jena, Bernadotte defeated the Prussians at Halle, Oct. 17, conjointly with Soult and Murat, pursued the Prussian general Blücher to Lübeck, and contributed to his capitulation at Ratekau, Nov. 7, 1806. He also defeated the Russians in the plains of Mohrungen, not far from Thorn, Jan. 25, 1807. After the peace of Tilsit, according to the alliance concluded between Denmark and Napoleon, French troops were to occupy the Danish islands, thence to act against Sweden. Accordingly, March 23, 1808, the very day when Russia invaded Finland, Bernadotte was commanded to move upon Seeland in order to penetrate with the Danes into Sweden, to dethrone its king, and to partition the country between Denmark and Russia; a strange mission for a man destined soon after to reign at Stockholm. He passed the Belt and arrived in Seeland at the head of 32,000 Frenchmen, Dutch, and Spaniards; 10,000 of the latter, however, contriving, by the assistance of an English fleet, to decamp under Gen. de la Roman˜a. Bernadotte undertook nothing and effected nothing during

27

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

his stay in Seeland. Being recalled to Germany, there to assist in the new war between France and Austria, he received the command of the 9th corps, mainly composed of Saxons. The battle of Wagram, July 5 and 6, 1809, added new fuel to his misunderstandings with Napoleon. On the first day, Euge`ne Beauharnais, having debouched in the vicinity of Wagram, and dashed into the centre of the hostile reserves, was not sufficiently supported by Bernadotte, who engaged his troops too late, and too weakly. Attacked in front and flank, Euge`ne was roughly thrown back upon Napoleon’s guard, and the first shock of the French attack was thus broken by Bernadotte’s lukewarmness, who, meanwhile, had occupied the village of Aderklaa, in the centre of the French army, but somewhat in advance of the French line. On the following day, at 6 o’clock in the morning, when the Austrians advanced for a concentric attack, Bernadotte deployed before Aderklaa, instead of placing that village, strongly occupied, in his front. Judging, on the arrival of the Austrians, that this position was too hazardous, he fell back upon a plateau in the rear of Aderklaa, leaving the village unoccupied, so that it was immediately taken by Bellegarde’s Austrians. The French centre being thus endangered, Massena, its commander, sent forward a division to retake Aderklaa, which division, however, was again dislodged by D’Aspre’s grenadiers. At that moment, Napoleon himself arrived, took the supreme command, formed a new plan of battle, and baffled the manœuvres of the Austrians. Thus Bernadotte 179 had again, as at Auerstädt, endangered the success of the day. On his part, he complained of Napoleon’s having, in violation of all military rules, ordered Gen. Dupas, whose French division formed part of Bernadotte’s corps, to act independently of his command. His resignation, which he tendered, was accepted, after Napoleon had become aware of an order of the day addressed by Bernadotte to his Saxons, in discord with the imperial bulletin. Shortly after his arrival at Paris, where he entered into intrigues with Fouche´, the Walcheren expedition (July 30, 1809) caused the French ministry, in the absence of the emperor, to intrust Bernadotte with the defence of Antwerp. The blunders of the English rendered action on his part unnecessary; but he took the occasion to slip into a proclamation, issued to his troops, the charge against Napoleon of having neglected to prepare the proper means of defence for the Belgian coast. He was deprived of his command; ordered, on his return to Paris, to leave it for his princedom of Ponte Corvo, and, refusing to comply with that order, he was summoned to Vienna. After some lively altercations with Napoleon, at Schönbrunn, he accepted the general government of the Roman states, a sort of honorable exile.⎯The circumstances which brought about his election as

28

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bernadotte

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

crown prince of Sweden, were not fully elucidated until long after his death. Charles XIII., after the adoption of Charles August, duke of Augustenburg, as his son, and as heir to the Swedish throne, sent Count Wrede to Paris, to ask for the duke the hand of the princess Charlotte, daughter of Lucien Bonaparte. On the sudden death of the duke of Augustenburg, May 18, 1810, Russia pressed upon Charles XIII. the adoption of the duke of Oldenburg, while Napoleon supported the claims of Frederic VI., king of Denmark. The old king himself offered the succession to the brother of the late duke of Augustenburg, and despatched Baron Moerner to Gen. Wrede, with instructions enjoining the latter to bring Napoleon over to the king’s choice. Moerner, however, a young man belonging to the very large party in Sweden which then expected the recovery of their country only from an intimate alliance with France, on his arrival at Paris, took upon himself, in connection with Lapie, a young French officer in the engineers, with Seigneul, the Swedish consul-general, and with Count Wrede himself, to present Bernadotte as candidate for the Swedish throne, all of them taking care to conceal their proceedings from Count Lagerbielke, the Swedish minister at the Tuileries, and all firmly convinced by a series of misunderstandings, artfully kept up by Bernadotte, that the latter was really the candidate of Napoleon. On June 29, accordingly, Wrede and Seigneul sent despatches to the Swedish minister of foreign affairs, both announcing that Napoleon would, with great pleasure, see the royal succession offered to his lieutenant and relative. In spite of the opposition of Charles XIII., the diet of the States, at Orebro, elected Bernadotte crown prince of Sweden, Aug. 21, 1810. The king was also compelled to adopt him as his son, under the name of Charles John. Napoleon reluctantly, and with bad grace, ordered Bernadotte to accept the offered dignity. Leaving Paris, Sept. 28, 1810, he landed at Helsingborg, Oct. 20, there abjured the Catholic profession, entered Stockholm Nov. 1, attended the assembly of the states, Nov. 5, and from that moment grasped the reins of the state. Since the disastrous peace of Frederikshamn, the idea prevailing in Sweden was the reconquest of Finland, without which, it was thought, as Napoleon wrote to Alexander, Feb. 28, 1811, “Sweden had ceased to exist,” at least as a power independent of Russia. It was but by an intimate alliance with Napoleon that the Swedes could hope to recover that province. To this conviction Bernadotte owed his election. During the king’s sickness, from March 17, 1811, to January 7, 1812, Charles John was appointed regent; but this was a question of etiquette only, since from the day of his arrival, he conducted all affairs. Napoleon, too much of a parvenu himself to spare the susceptibilities of his ex-lieutenant, compelled him, Nov. 17,

29

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

1810, in spite of a prior engagement, to accede to the continental system, and declare war against England. He suppressed his revenues as a French prince; declined to receive his despatches directly addressed to him, because he was not “a sovereign his equal;” and sent back the order of the Seraphim, bestowed upon the new-born king of Rome by Charles John. This petty chicanery afforded to the latter the pretext only for a course of action long decided upon. Hardly was he installed at Stockholm, when he admitted to a public audience the Russian general, Suchtelen, who was detested by the Swedes for having suborned the commander of Sweaborg, and even allowed that personage to be accredited as ambassador to the Swedish court. On Dec. 18, 1810, he held a conference with Czernicheff, in which he declared himself “to be anxious to win the good opinion of the czar,” and to resign Finland forever, on the condition of Norway being detached from Denmark, and annexed to Sweden. By the same Czernicheff, he sent a most flattering letter to the czar Alexander. As he thus drew nearer to Russia, the Swedish generals who had overthrown Gustavus IV., and favored his own election, retired from him. Their opposition, ree¨choed by the army and the people, threatened to become dangerous, when the invasion of Swedish Pomerania by a French division, Jan. 17, 1812⎯a measure executed by Napoleon on secret advice from Stockholm⎯afforded at last to Charles John a plausible pretext for officially declaring the neutrality of Sweden. Secretly, however, and behind the back of the diet, he concluded with Alexander an offensive alliance against France, signed March 24, 1812 at St. Petersburg, in which the annexation 180 of Norway to Sweden was also stipulated.⎯Napoleon’s declaration of war against Russia made Bernadotte for a time the arbiter of the destinies of Europe. Napoleon offered him, on the condition of his attacking Russia with 40,000 Swedes, Finland, Mecklenburg, Stettin, and all the territory between Stettin and Volgast. Bernadotte might have decided the campaign and occupied St. Petersburg before Napoleon arrived at Moscow. He preferred acting as the Lepidus of a triumvirate formed with England and Russia. Inducing the sultan to ratify the peace of Bucharest, he enabled the Russian admiral Tchitchakoff to withdraw his forces from the banks of the Danube and to operate on the flank of the French army. He also mediated the peace of Orebro, concluded July 18, 1812, between England on the one side, and Russia and Sweden on the other. Frightened at Napoleon’s first successes, Alexander invited Charles John to an interview, at the same time offering him the command-in-chief of the Russian armies. Prudent enough to decline the latter offer, he accepted the invitation. On Aug. 27 he arrived at Abo, where he found Alexander very low-spirited and rath-

30

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bernadotte

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

er inclined to sue for peace. Having himself gone too far to recede, he steeled the wavering czar by showing that Napoleon’s apparent successes must lead to his ruin. The conference resulted in the so-called treaty of Abo, to which a secret article was appended, giving the alliance the character of a family compact. In fact, Charles John received nothing but promises, while Russia, without the slightest sacrifice, secured the then invaluable alliance of Sweden. By authentic documents it has been recently proved that it depended at that time on Bernadotte alone to have Finland restored to Sweden; but the Gascon ruler, deluded by Alexander’s flattery, that “one day the imperial crown of France, when fallen from Napoleon’s brow, might rest upon his,” already considered Sweden as mere pis-aller. After the French retreat from Moscow, he formally broke off diplomatic relations with France, and when England guaranteed him Norway by treaty of March 3, 1813, he entered the coalition. Furnished with English subsidies, he landed in May, 1813, at Stralsund with about 25,000 Swedes and advanced toward the Elbe. During the armistice of June 4, 1813, he played an important part at the meeting in Trachenberg, where the emperor Alexander presented him to the king of Prussia, and where the general plan of the campaign was decided upon. As commander-in-chief of the army of the north, composed of Swedes, Russians, Prussians, English, Hanseatic, and north German troops, he kept up very equivocal connections with the French army, managed by an individual who frequented his head-quarters as a friend, and grounded on his presumption that the French would gladly exchange Napoleon’s rule for Bernadotte’s, if he only gave them proofs of forbearance and clemency. Consequently, he prevented the generals placed under his command from taking the offensive, and when Bülow twice, at Grossbeeren and Dennewitz, had vanquished the French despite his orders, stopped the pursuit of the beaten army. When Blücher, in order to force him to action, had marched upon the Elbe, and effected his junction with him, it was only the threat held out by Sir Charles Stewart, the English commissary in his camp, of stopping the supplies, that induced him to move on. Still the Swedes appeared on the battle field of Leipsic for appearance’ sake only, and during the whole campaign lost not 200 men before the enemy. When the allies entered France, he retained the army of Sweden on her frontiers. After Napoleon’s abdication, he repaired personally to Paris to remind Alexander of the promises held out to him at Abo. Talleyrand cut short his puerile hopes by telling the council of the allied kings, that “there was no alternative but Bonaparte or the Bourbons,⎯every thing else being a mere intrigue.” Charles John having, after the battle of Leipsic, invaded the duchies of Holstein and Schleswig,

31

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

at the head of an army composed of Swedes, Germans, and Russians, Frederic VI., king of Denmark, in the presence of vastly superior forces, was forced to sign, Jan. 14, 1814, the peace of Kiel, by which Norway was ceded to Sweden. The Norwegians, however, demurring to being so unceremoniously disposed of, proclaimed the independence of Norway under the auspices of Christian Frederic, crown prince of Denmark. The representatives of the nation assembling at Edisvold, adopted, May 17, 1814, a constitution still in force, and the most democratic of modern Europe. Having put in motion a Swedish army and fleet, and seized upon the fortress of Frederickstadt, which commands the access to Christiania, Charles John entered into negotiation, agreed to consider Norway as an independent state and to accept the constitution of Edisvold, carried the assent of the assembled storthing Oct. 7, and Nov. 10, 1814, repaired to Christiania, there, in his own and the king’s name, to take the oath upon the constitution.⎯Charles XIII. expiring Feb. 5, 1818, Bernadotte, under the name of Charles XIV. John, was acknowledged by Europe as king both of Sweden and Norway. He now attempted to change the Norwegian constitution, to restore the abolished nobility, to secure to himself an absolute veto and the right of dismissing all officers, civil and military. This attempt gave rise to serious conflicts, and led, May 18, 1828, even to a cavalry charge upon the inhabitants of Christiania, who were celebrating the anniversary of their constitution. A violent outbreak seemed imminent, when the French revolution of 1830 caused the king to resort for the moment to conciliatory steps. Still Norway, for the acquisition of which he had sacrificed every thing, remained the constant source of embarrassments throughout his whole reign. After the first days of the French revolution of 1830, there existed a single man in Europe who 181 thought the king of Sweden a fit pretender for the French throne, and that man was Bernadotte himself. More than once he repeated to the French diplomatic agents at Stockholm, “How does it happen that Laffitte has not thought of me?” The changed aspect of Europe, and, above all, the Polish insurrection, inspired him for a moment with the idea of making front against Russia. His offers in this sense to Lord Palmerston meeting with a flat refusal, he had to expiate his transitory idea of independence by concluding, June 23, 1834, a convention of alliance with the emperor Nicholas, which rendered him a vassal of Russia. From that moment his policy in Sweden was distinguished by encroachments on the liberty of the press, persecution of the crime of le`se-majeste´, and resistance to improvements, even such as the emancipation of industry from the old laws of guilds and corporations. By playing upon the jealousies of the different orders constituting the Swedish diet, he long succeeded in

32

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bernadotte

5

paralyzing all movement, but the liberal resolutions of the diet of 1844, which were to be converted, according to the constitution, into laws by the diet of 1845, threatened his policy with final discomfiture, when his death occurred.⎯If Sweden, during the reign of Charles XIV., partly recovered from a century and a half of miseries and misfortunes, this was due not to Bernadotte, but exclusively to the native energies of the nation, and the agencies of a long peace.

33

Karl Marx Brown

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

751 BROWN, SIR GEORGE, a British general, was born in August, 1790, at Linkwood, near Elgin, Scotland. He entered the army Jan. 23, 1806, as ensign in the 43d regiment of foot, and, as lieutenant in the same regiment, was present at the bombardment of Copenhagen; served in the peninsular war, from its beginning in 1808 to its close in 1814; was severely wounded at the battle of Talavera, and one of the forlorn hope at the storming of Badajoz. He was appointed 752 captain in the 85th regiment, June 20, 1811; in Sept. 1814, he was a lieutenant-colonel in MajorGeneral Ross’s expedition to the United States, and took part in the battle of Bladensburg, and the capture of Washington. He was appointed commander of a battalion of the rifle brigade, Feb. 6, 1824; colonel, May 6, 1831; major-general, Nov. 23, 1841; deputy adjutant-general in 1842; adjutant-general of the forces in April, 1850, and lieut.-general in 1851. During the Crimean campaign, he led the English light division at the battle of Alma and the battle of Inkerman, and took the commandin-chief of the storming party in the first unsuccessful attack on the Redan. Among the allied armies he became distinguished as a martinet; but, by his personal prowess, and the strict impartiality with which he held the young aristocratic officers to all the duties of field discipline, he became popular among the common soldiers. In 1855 he was created a knight commander of the Bath, and April 2, 1856, gazetted “General in the army, for distinguished service in the field.”

34

5

10

15

20

Friedrich Engels/ Karl Marx Armada

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 2. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

105 ARMADA, SPANISH, the great naval armament sent by King Philip II. of Spain, in 1588, for the conquest of England, in order thereby “to serve God, and to returne unto his church a great many contrite souls that are oppressed by the heretics, enemies to our holy Catholic faith, which have them subject to their sects, and unhappiness.” (Expedit. Hispan. in Angl. Vera Descriptio, A.D. 1588.) The fullest account of this armament is given in a book published, about the time it set sail, by order of Philip, under the title La Felicissima Armada que el Rey Don Felipe nuestro Sen˜or mando´ juntar en el Puerto de Lisboa 1588. Hecha por Pedro de Paz Salas. A copy of this work was procured for Lord Burleigh, so that the English government was beforehand acquainted with every detail of the expedition. (This copy, containing notes up to March, 1588, is now in the British museum.) The fleet is therein stated to have consisted of 65 galleons and large ships, 25 urcas of 300 to 700 tons, 19 tenders of 70 to 100 tons, 13 small frigates, 4 galeasses and 4 galleys, in all 130 vessels, with a total tonnage of 57,868 tons. They were armed with 2,431 guns, of which 1,497 were of bronze, mostly full cannon (48 pdrs.), culverines (long 30 and 20 pdrs.), &c.; the ammunition consisted of 123,790 round shot and 5,175 cwt. of powder, giving about 50 rounds per gun, at an average charge of 41/2 lbs. The ships were manned with 8,052 sailors, and carried 19,295 soldiers and 180 priests and monks. Mules, carts, &c., were on board to move the field artillery when landed. The whole was provisioned, according to the above authority, for 6 months. This fleet, unequalled in its time, was to proceed to the Flemish coast, where another army of 30,000 foot and 4,000 horse, under the duke of Parma, was to embark, under its protection, in flat-bottomed vessels constructed for the purpose, and manned by sailors brought from the Baltic. The whole were then to proceed to England. In that country Queen Elizabeth had, by vigorous exertions, increased her fleet of originally 30 ships, to some 180 vessels of various sizes, but generally inferior in that respect to those

35

Friedrich Engels /Karl Marx

of the Spaniards. They were, however, manned by 17,500 sailors, and therefore possessed far more numerous crews than the Spanish fleet. The English military force was divided into two armies, one, of 18,500 men, under the earl of Leicester, for immediately opposing the enemy; the other, 45,000, for the defence of the queen’s person. According to a MS. in the British museum, entitled “Details of the English Force Assembled to Oppose the Spanish Armada,” (MS. Reg. 18th c. xxi.), 2,000 infantry were also expected from the Low Countries. The armada was to leave Lisbon in the beginning of May, but, owing to the death of the admiral Santa Cruz, and his vice-admiral, the departure was delayed. The duke of Medina Sidonia, a man totally unacquainted with naval matters, was now made captain-general of the fleet; his vice-admiral, Martinez de Ricalde, however, was an expert seaman. Having left Lisbon for Corunna for stores, May 29, 1588, the fleet was dispersed by a violent storm, and, though all the ships joined at Corunna with the exception of four, they were considerably shattered, and had to be repaired. Reports having reached England that the armament was completely disabled, the government ordered its own ships to be laid up; but Lord Howard, the admiral, opposed this order, set sail for Corunna, learned the truth, and, on his return, continued warlike preparations. Soon after, being informed that the armada had hove in sight, he weighed anchor and accompanied it on its way up the channel, harassing the Spanish ships whenever an opportunity presented itself. The Spaniards, in the mean time, proceeded to the coast of Flanders, keeping as close together as possible. In the various minor engagements which took place, the handier ships, more numerous crews, and better seamanship of the English, always gave them the victory over the clumsy and undermanned Spanish galleons, crowded as they were with soldiers. The Spanish artillery, too, was very badly served, and almost always planted too high. Off Calais the armada cast anchor, waiting for the duke of Parma’s fleet to come out of the Flemish harbors; but it soon received word that his ships, being unfit for fighting, could not come out until the armada had passed the straits and driven off the Anglo-Dutch blockading squadron. It accordingly weighed again, but, when in sight of Dunkirk, was becalmed between the English fleet on one side and the Dutch on the other. Lord Howard prepared fire-ships, and when, during the night of Aug. 7, the breeze sprang up again, he sent 8 of them among the enemy. They produced a perfect panic in the Spanish fleet. Some ships weighed anchor, some cut their cables, drifting before the wind; the whole fleet got into confusion, several ships ran foul of each other and were disabled. By morning order was far from being restored, and the several divisions were scattered far and wide. Then Lord How-

36

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Marx: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Armada“. S. [1]

Marx: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Armada“. S. [2]/[3]

Armada

5

10

15

20

25

30

ard, reinforced as he was by the ships equipped by the nobility and gentry, as also by the blockading squadron under Lord Byron, and ably seconded by Sir Francis Drake, engaged the enemy at 4 A.M. The battle, or rather chase (for the English were evidently superior on every point of attack), lasted till dark. The Spaniards fought bravely, but their unwieldy ships were unfit for the navigation of narrow waters, and for a moving fight. They were completely defeated, and suffered severe loss. The junction 106 with the duke of Parma’s transports having thus been foiled, a landing in England by the armada alone was out of the question. It was found that the greater part of the provisions on board had been consumed, and as access to Spanish Flanders was now impossible, nothing remained but to return to Spain to lay in fresh stores. (See “Certain Advertisements out of Ireland Concerning the Losses and Distresses Happened to the Spanish Navie on the Coast of Ireland,” London, 1588⎯Examination of Emanuel Fremosa, who served in the San Juan, 1,100 tons, flag-ship of Admiral Ricalde.) The passage through the channel being also closed by the English fleet, nothing remained but to round Scotland on their way home. The armada was but little harassed by the fleet of Lord Seymour sent in pursuit, as that fleet was badly supplied with ammunition and could not venture on an attack. But after the Spaniards had rounded the Orkneys dreadful storms arose and dispersed the whole fleet. Some ships were driven back as far as the coast of Norway, where they fell on the rocks; others foundered in the North sea, or struck on the rocks on the coast of Scotland or the Hebrides. Soon after, fresh storms overtook them on the west coast of Ireland, where above 30 vessels were lost. Those of the crews who escaped on shore were mostly killed; about 200 were executed by command of the lord deputy. Of the whole fleet not more than 60 vessels, and those in the most shattered condition, and with famine on board, reached Santander about the middle of September, when the plan of invading England was definitively given up.

39

Friedrich Engels/Karl Marx Ayacucho

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 2. New York 1858.

424 AYACUCHO, a department in the republic of Peru; pop. 131,921. Near its chief town, also named Ayacucho, the battle was fought which finally secured the independence of Spanish South America. After the battle of Junin (Aug. 6, 1824), the Spanish viceroy, Gen. La Serna, attempted by manœuvring to cut off the communications of the insurgent army, under Gen. Sucre. Unsuccessful in this, he at last drew his opponent to the plain of Ayacucho, where the Spaniards took up a defensive position on a height. They numbered 13 battalions of infantry, with artillery and cavalry, in all 9,310 men. On Dec. 8, 1824, the advanced guards of both armies became engaged, and on the following day Sucre advanced with 5,780 men to the attack. The 2d Colombian division, under Gen. Cordova, attacked the Spanish left, and at once threw it into disorder. The Peruvian division on the left, under Gen. Lamar, met with a more obstinate resistance, and could make no progress until the reserve, under Gen. Lara, came up. The enemy’s retreat now becoming general, the cavalry was launched in pursuit, dispersing the Spanish horse and completing the defeat of the infantry. The Spaniards lost 6 generals killed and 2,600 killed, wounded, and prisoners, among the latter the viceroy. The South American loss was 1 general and 308 officers and men killed, 520 wounded, among them 6 generals. The next day Gen. Canterac, who now commanded the Spanish army, concluded a capitulation, by which not only he and all his troops surrendered prisoners of war, but also all the Spanish troops in Peru, all military posts, artillery, and magazines, and the whole of Peru, as far as they still held it (Cuzco, Arequipa, Puno, Quilca, &c.), were delivered up to the insurgents. The troops thus delivered up as prisoners of war amounted in all to nearly 12,000. Thus the Spanish dominion was definitively destroyed, and on Aug. 6, 1825, the congress of Chuquisaca proclaimed the independence of the republic of Bolivia. ⎯The name Ayacuchos has in Spain been given to Espartero and his military partisans. A portion of the military camarilla grouped

40

5

10

15

20

25

30

Ayacucho

5

10

15

around him had served with him in the war against the South American insurrection, where, beside by military comradeship, they were bound together by their common habits of gambling, and actually pledged themselves to support each other politically when returned to Spain. This pledge they have honestly kept, much to their mutual interests. The nickname of Ayacuchos was conferred on them in order to imply that Espartero and his party had materially contributed to the unfortunate issue of that battle. This, however, is false, though the report has been so assiduously spread that even now it is generally credited in Spain. Espartero not only was not present at the battle of Ayacucho, but he was not even in America when it happened, being on his passage to Spain, whither Viceroy La Serna had sent him with despatches for Ferdinand VII. He had embarked at Quilca, June 5, 1824, in the British brig Tiber, arriving in Cadiz Sept. 28, and at Madrid Oct. 12, and again sailed for America from Bordeaux on that very same Dec. 9, 1824, on which the battle of Ayacucho was fought. (See Don Jose´ Segundo Florez, Espartero, Madrid, 1844, 4 vols., and Principe, Espartero, Madrid, 1848.)

41

Karl Marx The Revolt in India

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5170, 14. November 1857.

The mail of the Arabia brings us the important intelligence of the fall of Delhi. This event, so far as we can judge from the meager details at hand, appears to have resulted upon the simultaneous occurrence of bitter dissensions among the rebels, a change in the numerical proportions of the contending parties, and the arrival on Sept. 5 of the siege train which was expected as long ago as June 8. After the arrival of Nicholson’s ree¨nforcements, we had estimated the army before Delhi at a total of 7,529 men, an estimate fully confirmed since. After the subsequent accession of 3,000 Cashmere troops, lent to the English by the Rajah Ranbeer Singh, the British forces are stated by The Friend of India to have amounted in all to about 11,000 men. On the other hand, The Military Spectator of London affirms that the rebel forces had diminished in numbers to about 17,000 men, of whom 5,000 were cavalry; while The Friend of India computes their forces at about 13,000, including 1,000 irregular cavalry. As the horse became quite useless after the breach was once effected and the struggle within the town had begun, and, consequently, on the very entrance of the English they made their escape, the total forces of the Sepoys, whether we accept the computation of The Military Spectator or of The Friend of India, could not be estimated beyond 11,000 or 12,000 men. The English forces, less from increase on their side than from a decrease on the opposite one, had, therefore, become almost equal to those of the mutineers; their slight numerical inferiority being more than made up by the moral effect of a successful bombardment and the advantages of the offensive enabling them to choose the points on which to throw their main strength, while the defenders were obliged to disperse their inadequate forces over all the points of the menaced circumference. The decrease on the part of the rebel forces was caused still more by the withdrawal of whole contingents in consequence of internal dissensions than by the heavy losses they suffered in their incessant sorties for a

42

5

10

15

20

25

30

The Revolt in India

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

period of about ten days. While the Mogul specter himself like the merchants of Delhi, had become averse to the rule of the Sepoys, who plundered them of every rupee they had amassed, the religious dissensions between the Hindoo and Mohammedan Sepoys, and the quarrels between the old garrison and the new ree¨nforcements, sufficed to break up their superficial organization and to insure their downfall. Still, as the English had to cope with a force but slightly superior to their own, without unity of command, enfeebled and dispirited by dissensions in their own ranks, but who yet, after 84 hours’ bombardment, stood a six days’ cannonade and street-fight within the walls, and then quietly crossed the Jumna on the bridge of boats, it must be confessed that the rebels at last, with their main forces, made the best of a bad position. The facts of the capture appear to be, that on Sept. 8 the English batteries were opened much in advance of the original position of their forces and within 700 yards of the walls. Between the 8th and the 11th the British heavy ordnance guns and mortars were pushed forward still nearer to the works, a lodgment being effected and batteries established with little loss, considering that the Delhi garrison made two sorties on the 10th and 11th, and made repeated attempts to open fresh batteries, and kept up an annoying fire from rifle-pits. On the 12th the English sustained a loss of about 56 killed and wounded. On the morning of the 13th the enemy’s expense magazine, on one bastion, was blown up, as also the wagon of a light gun, which enfiladed the British batteries from the Talwara suburbs; and the British batteries effected a practicable breach near the Cashmere gate. On the 14th the assault was made on the city. The troops entered at the breach near the Cashmere gate without serious opposition, gained possession of the large buildings in its neighborhood, and advanced along the ramparts to the Moree bastion and Cabul gate, when the resistance grew very obstinate, and the loss was consequently severe. Preparations were being made to turn the guns from the captured bastions on the city, and to bring up other guns and mortars to commanding points. On the 15th the Burn bastions and Lahore bastions were played upon by the captured guns on the Moree and Cabul bastions, while a breach was made in the magazine and the palace began to be shelled. The magazine was stormed at daylight, Sept. 16, while on the 17th the mortars continued to play upon the palace from the magazine inclosure. At this date, owing, it is said by The Bombay Courier, to the plunder of the Punjaub and Lahore mails on the Scinde frontier, the official accounts of the storm break off. In a private communication addressed to the Governor of Bombay, it is stated that the entire city of Delhi was

43

Karl Marx

occupied on Sunday, the 20th, the main forces of the mutineers leaving the city at 3 a. m. on the same day, and escaping over the bridges of boats in the direction of Rohilcund. Since a pursuit on the part of the English was impracticable until after the occupation of Selimgurh, situated on the river front, it is evident that the rebels, slowly fighting their way from the extreme north end of the city to its south-eastern extremity, kept, until the 20th, the position necessary for covering their retreat. As to the probable effect of the capture of Delhi, a competent authority, The Friend of India, remarks that “it is the condition of Bengal, and not the state of Delhi, that ought at this time to engage the attention of Englishmen. The long delay that has taken place in the capture of the town has actually destroyed any prestige that we might have derived from an early success; and the strength of the rebels and their numbers are diminished as effectually by maintaining the siege as they would be by the capture of the city.” Meanwhile, the insurrection is said to be spreading north-east from Calcutta, through Central India up to the north-west; while on the Assam frontier, two strong regiments of Poorbeahs, openly proposing the restoration of the ex-Rajah Parandur Singh, had revolted; the Dinapore and Ranghur mutineers, led by Kooer Singh, were marching by Banda and Nagode in the direction of Subbulpore, and had forced, through his own troops, the Rajah of Rewah to join them. At Subbulpore itself the 52d Bengal Native Regiment had left their cantonments, taking with them a British officer as a hostage for their comrades left behind. The Gwalior mutineers are reported to have crossed the Chumbul, and are encamped somewhere between the river and Dhalapore. The most serious items of intelligence remain to be noticed. The Todhpore Legion has, it appears, taken service with the rebel Rajah of Arwah, a place 90 miles south-east of Beawar. They have defeated a considerable force which the Rajah of Todhpore had sent against them, killing the General and Captain Monck Mason, and capturing three guns. Gen. G. St. P. Lawrence made an advance against them with some of the Nusserabad force, and compelled them to retreat into a town, against which, however, his further attempts proved unavailing. The denuding of Scinde of its European troops had resulted in a widely extended conspiracy, attempts at insurrection being made at no less than five different places, among which figure Hyderabad, Kurrachee and Sikarpore. There is also an untoward symptom in the Punjaub, the communication between Moultan and Lahore having been cut off for eight days. In another place our readers will find a tabular statement of the forces dispatched from England since June 18; the days of arrival of the respec-

44

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Revolt in India

5

10

tive vessels being calculated by us on official statements, and therefore in favor of the British Government. From that list it will be seen that, apart from the small detachments of artillery and engineers sent by the overland route, the whole of the army embarked amounts to 30,899 men, of whom 24,884 belong to the infantry, 3,826 to the cavalry, and 2,334 to the artillery. It will also be seen that before the end of October no considerable ree¨nforcements were to be expected. Troops for India. The following is a list of the troops which have been sent to India from England since June 18, 1857: Date of arrival.

September 20 October 1 October 15 15 October 17 October 20 October 30 Total for Oct. November 1 20 November 5 November 10 November 12 November 15 November 19 25 November 20 November 24 November 25 November 30 Total for Nov. 30 December 1

December 5 December 10 December 14 December 15 35 December 20 December 25 Total for Dec.

Total.

Calcutta.

Ceylon.

Bombay.

Kurrachee. Madras.

214 300 1,906 288 4,235 2,028

214 300 124 288 3,845 479

.. .. 1,782 .. 390 1,544

.. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. ..

8,757 3,495 879 2,700 1,633 2,610 234 1,216 406 1,276 666 15,115

5,036 1,234 879 904 1,633 2,132 .. .. .. .. .. 6,782

3,721 1,629 .. 340 .. 478 .. 278 406 .. 462 3,593

.. .. .. 400 .. .. .. 938 .. .. 204 1,542

.. 632 .. 1,056 .. .. 234 .. .. .. .. 1,922

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,276 .. 1,276

354 459 1,758 1,057 948 693 624 5,893

.. .. .. .. .. 185 .. 185

.. .. 607 .. .. .. .. 607

354 201 .. 1,057 647 300 .. 2,559

.. .. 1,151 .. 301 208 624 2,284

.. 258 .. .. .. .. .. 258

45

Karl Marx

[Date of arrival.

January January January January

1 5 15 20

Total for Jan. Sept. till Jan. 20

Total.

Calcutta.

Ceylon.

Bombay.

340 220 140 220

.. .. .. ..

.. .. .. ..

340 .. .. ..

.. .. .. ..

.. 220 140 220

920

..

..

340

..

580

7,921

4,431

4,206

2,114

118 .. 122 240

.. .. .. ..

30,899

12,217

Kurrachee.

Madras.]

5

Troops dispatched by the overland route: October 2 October 12 October 14 Total for Oct.

235 R. E. 221 Art. 244 R. E. 700

117 221 122 460

Total Men en route from Cape, partly arrived Grand total

46

.. .. .. ..

.. .. .. ..

10

31,599 4,000 35,599

15

Karl Marx/ Friedrich Engels Blücher

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

386 BLÜCHER, GEBHARD LEBERECHT VON, prince of Wahlstadt, Prussian field-marshal, born Dec. 16, 1742, at Rostock, in MecklenburgSchwerin, died at Krieblowitz, in Silesia, Sept. 12, 1819. He was sent in 1754, while a boy, to the island of Rügen, and there secretly enlisted in a regiment of Swedish hussars as ensign, to serve against Frederic II. of Prussia. Made prisoner in the campaign of 1758, he was, after a year’s captivity, and after he had obtained his dismissal from the Swedish service, prevailed upon to enter the Prussian army. March 3, 1771, he was appointed senior captain of cavalry. In 1778, Capt. von Jägersfeld, a natural son of the margrave of Schwedt, being appointed in his stead to the vacant post of major, he wrote to Frederic II.: “Sire, Jägersfeld, who possesses no merit but that of being the son of the margrave of Schwedt, has been preferred to me. I beg your majesty to grant my dismissal.” In reply Frederic II. ordered him to be shut up in prison, but when, notwithstanding a somewhat protracted confinement, he refused to retract his letter, the king complied with his petition in a note to this effect: “Capt. von Blücher may go to the devil.” He now retired to Polish Silesia, married soon after, became a farmer, acquired a small estate in Pomerania, and, after the death of Frederic II., reentered his former regiment as major, on the express condition of his appointment being dated back to 1779. Some months later his wife died. Having participated in the bloodless invasion of Holland, he was appointed lieutenant-colonel, June 3, 1788. Aug. 20, 1790, he became colonel and commander of the 1st battalion of the regiment of hussars he had entered in 1760. In 1794 he distinguished himself during the campaign in the palatinate against republican France as a leader of the light cavalry. Being promoted, May 28, 1794, after the victorious affair of Kirrweiler, to the rank of major-general, the actions of Luxemburg, Kaiserslautern, Morschheim, Weidenthal, Edesheim, Edenkoben, secured him a rising reputation. While incessantly alarming the French by bold coups de main and suc-

47

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

cessful enterprises, he never neglected keeping the head-quarters supplied with the best information as to the hostile movements. His diary, written during this campaign, and published in 1796, by Count Goltz, his adjutant, is considered, despite its illiterate style, as a classical work on vanguard service. After the peace of Basel he married again. Frederic William III., on his accession to the throne, appointed him lieutenant-general, in which quality he occupied, and administered as governor, Erfurt, Mühlhausen, and Münster. In 1805 a small corps was collected under him at Bayreuth to watch the immediate consequences for Prussia of the battle of Austerlitz, viz., the occupation of the principality of Anspach by Bernadotte’s corps. In 1806 he led the Prussian vanguard at the battle of Auerstädt. His charge was, however, broken by the terrible fire of Davoust’s artillery, and his proposal to renew it with fresh forces and the whole of the cavalry, was rejected by the king of Prussia. After the double defeat at Auerstädt and Jena, he retired down the Elbe, while Napoleon drove the main body of the Prussian army in one wild chase from Jena to Stettin. On his retrograde movement, Blücher took up the remnants of different corps, which swelled his army to about 25,000 men. His retreat to Lübeck, before the united forces of Soult, Bernadotte, and Mürat, forms one of the few honorable episodes in that epoch of German degradation. Since Lübeck was a neutral territory, his making the streets of that open town the theatre of a desperate fight, which exposed it to a 3 days’ sack on the part of the French soldiery, afforded the subject of passionate censure; but under existing circumstances the important thing was to give the German people one example, at least, of stanch resistance. Thrown out of Lübeck, he had to capitulate in the plain of Radkow, Nov. 7, 1806, on the express condition that the cause of his surrender should be stated in writing to be “want of ammunition and provisions.” Liberated on his 387 word of honor, he repaired to Hamburg, there, in company with his sons, to kill time by card-playing, smoking, and drinking. Being exchanged for Gen. Victor, he was appointed governor-general of Pomerania; but one of the secret articles of the alliance concluded, Feb. 21, 1812, by Prussia with Napoleon, stipulated for Blücher’s discharge from service, like that of Scharnhorst, and other distinguished Prussian patriots. To soothe this official disgrace, the king secretly bestowed upon him the handsome estate of Kunzendorf, in Silesia. During the years that marked the period of transition between the peace of Tilsit and the German war of independence, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, the chiefs of the Tugendbund, desiring to extemporize a popular hero, chose Blücher. In propagating his fame among the masses, they succeeded so well, that when Frederic William III. called the Prussians to

48

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Blücher

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

arms by the proclamation of March 17, 1813, they were strong enough to impose him upon the king as the general-in-chief of the Prussian army. In the well-contested, but for the allies unfortunate, battles of Lützen and Bautzen, he acted under the command of Wittgenstein. During the retreat of the allied armies from Bautzen to Schweidnitz, he lay in ambush at Haynau, from which he fell, with his cavalry, on the French advanced guard under Maison, who, in this affair, lost 1,500 men and 11 guns. Through this surprise Blücher raised the spirit of the Prussian army, and made Napoleon very cautious in pursuit. Blücher’s command of an independent army dates from the expiration of the truce of Trachenberg, Aug. 10, 1813. The allied sovereigns had then divided their forces into 3 armies: the army of the north under Bernadotte, stationed along the lower Elbe; the grand army advancing through Bohemia, and the Silesian army, with Blücher as its commander-in-chief, supported by Gneisenau as the chief of his staff, and Müffling as his quartermaster-general. These 2 men, attached to him in the same quality until the peace of 1815, supplied all his strategetical plans. Blücher himself, as Müffling says, “understood nothing of the strategetical conduct of a war; so little indeed, that when a plan was laid before him for approval, even relating to some unimportant operation, he could not form any clear idea of it, or judge whether it was good or bad.” Like many of Napoleon’s marshals, he was unable to read the maps. The Silesian army was composed of 3 corps d’arme´e: 40,000 Russians, under Count Langeron; 16,000 men under Baron von Sacken; and a Prussian corps of 40,000 men under Gen. York. Blücher’s position was extremely difficult at the head of this heterogeneous army. Langeron, who had already held independent commands, and demurred to serving under a foreign general, was, moreover, aware that Blücher had received secret orders to limit himself to the defensive, but was altogether ignorant that the latter, in an interview, on Aug. 11, with Barclay de Tolly, at Reichenbach, had extorted the permission to act according to circumstances. Hence Langeron thought himself justified in disobeying orders, whenever the general-in-chief seemed to him to swerve from the preconcerted plan, and in this mutinous conduct he was strongly supported by Gen. York. The danger arising from this state of things became more and more threatening, when the battle on the Katzbach secured Blücher that hold on his army which guided it to the gates of Paris. Marshal Macdonald, charged by Napoleon to drive the Silesian army back into the interior of Silesia, began the battle by attacking, Aug. 26, Blücher’s outposts, stationed from Prausnitz to Kroitsch, where the Neisse flows into the Katzbach. The so-called battle on the Katzbach consisted, in fact, of 4 different actions, the first of which, the dislodging

49

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

by a bayonet attack from a plateau behind a ridge on the right bank of the Neisse of about 8 French battalions, which constituted hardly onetenth of the hostile force, led to results quite out of proportion to its original importance, in consequence of the fugitives from the plateau not being collected at Niedercrayn, and left behind the Katzbach at Kroitsch, in which case their flight would have had no influence whatever on the rest of the French army; in consequence of different defeats inflicted at nightfall upon the enemy by Sacken’s and Langeron’s corps stationed on the left bank of the Neisse; in consequence of Marshal Macdonald, who commanded in person on the left bank, and had defended himself weakly till 7 o’clock in the evening against Langeron’s attack, marching his troops at once after sunset to Goldberg, in such a state of exhaustion that they could no longer fight, and must fall into the enemy’s hand; and, lastly, in consequence of the state of the season, violent rains swelling the otherwise insignificant streams the fugitive French had to traverse⎯the Neisse, the Katzbach, the Deichsel, and the Bober⎯to rapid torrents, and making the roads almost impracticable. Thus it occurred, that with the aid of the country militia in the mountains on the left flank of the Silesian army, the battle on the Katzbach, insignificant in itself, resulted in the capture of 18,000 to 20,000 prisoners, above 200 pieces of artillery, and more than 300 ammunition, hospital, and baggage wagons, with baggage, &c. After the battle Blücher did every thing to instigate his forces to exert their utmost strength in the pursuit of the enemy, justly representing to them that “with some bodily exertion they might spare a new battle.” Sept. 3, he crossed the Neisse, with his army, and on the 4th proceeded by Bischofswerda to concentrate at Bautzen. By this move he saved the grand army, which, routed at Dresden, Aug. 27, and forced to retreat behind the Erzgebirge, was now disengaged; Napoleon being compelled to advance with reenforcements toward Bautzen, there to take up the army defeated on the Katzbach, and to offer battle to the Silesian army. During his stay in the S. E. corner of Saxony, on the right 388 bank of the Elbe, Blücher, by a series of retreats and advances, always shunned battle when offered by Napoleon, but always engaged when encountering single detachments of the French army. Sept. 22, 23, and 24, he executed a flank march on the right of the enemy, advancing by forced marches to the lower Elbe, in the vicinity of the army of the north. Oct. 2, he bridged the Elbe at Elster with pontoons, and on the morning of the 3d his army defiled. This movement, not only bold, but even hazardous, inasmuch as he completely abandoned his lines of communication, was necessitated by supreme political reasons, and led finally to the battle of Leipsic, which, but for Blücher, the slow and overcau-

50

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Blücher

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

tious grand army would never have risked. The army of the north, of which Bernadotte was the commander-in-chief, was about 90,000 strong, and it was, consequently, of the utmost importance that it should advance on Saxony. By means of the close connection which he maintained with Bülow and Wintzingerode, the commanders of the Prussian and Russian corps forming part of the army of the north, Blücher obtained the most convincing proofs of Bernadotte’s coquetry with the French, and of the impossibility of inciting him to any activity, so long as he remained alone on a separate theatre of war. Bülow and Wintzingerode declared themselves ready to act in spite of Bernadotte, but to do so they wanted the support of 100,000 men. Hence Blücher’s resolution to venture upon his flank march, in which he persisted despite the orders he had received from the sovereigns to draw near to them on the left, toward Bohemia. He was not to be diverted from his purpose through the obstacles which Bernadotte systematically threw in his way, even after the crossing of the Elbe by the Silesian army. Before leaving Bautzen, he had despatched a confidential officer to Bernadotte, to inform him that, since the army of the north was too weak to operate alone on the left bank of the Elbe, he would come with the Silesian army, and cross at Elster on Oct. 3; he therefore invited him to cross the Elbe at the same time, and to advance with him toward Leipsic. Bernadotte not heeding this message, and the enemy occupying Wartenburg opposite Elster, Blücher first dislodged the latter, and then, to protect himself in case Napoleon should fall upon him with his whole strength, began establishing an intrenched encampment from Wartenburg to Bleddin. Thence he pushed forward toward the Mulde. Oct. 7, in an interview with Bernadotte, it was arranged that both armies should march upon Leipsic. On the 9th, while the Silesian army was preparing for this march, Bernadotte, on the news of Napoleon’s advance on the road from Meissen, insisted upon retreating behind the Elbe, and only consented to remain on its left bank on condition that Blücher would resolve to cross the Saale in concert with him, in order to take up a position behind that river. Although by this movement the Silesian army lost anew its line of communication, Blücher consented, since otherwise the army of the north would have been effectually lost for the allies. Oct. 10, the whole Silesian army stood united with the army of the north on the left bank of the Mulde, the bridges over which were destroyed. Bernadotte now declared a retreat upon Bernburg to have become necessary, and Blücher, with the single view of preventing him from crossing the right bank of the Elbe, yielded again on the condition that Bernadotte should cross the Saale at Wettin and take up a position there. Oct. 11, when his columns were just crossing the high

51

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

road from Magdeburg to Halle, Blücher being informed that, in spite of his positive promise, Bernadotte had constructed no bridge at Wettin, resolved upon following that high road in forced marches. Napoleon, seeing that the northern and Silesian armies avoided accepting battle, which he had offered them by concentrating at Düben, and knowing that they could not avoid it without retreating across the Elbe; being at the same time aware that he had but 4 days left before he must meet the grand army, and thus be placed between two fires, undertook a march on the right bank of the Elbe toward Wittenberg, in order by this simulated movement to draw the northern and Silesian armies across the Elbe, and then strike a rapid blow on the grand army. Bernadotte, indeed, anxious for his lines of communication with Sweden, gave his army orders to cross without delay to the right bank of the Elbe, by a bridge constructed at Aken, while, on the same day, Oct. 13, he informed Blücher that the emperor Alexander had, for certain important reasons, put him (Blücher) under his orders. He consequently requested him to follow his movements on the right bank of the Elbe with the Silesian army, with the least possible delay. Had Blücher shown less resolution on this occasion and followed the army of the north, the campaign would have been lost, since the Silesian and northern armies, amounting together to about 200,000 men, would not have been present at the battle of Leipsic. He wrote in reply to Bernadotte, that, according to all his information, Napoleon had no intention whatever of removing the theatre of war to the right bank of the Elbe, but only intended to lead them astray. At the same time he conjured Bernadotte to give up his intended movement across the Elbe. Having, meanwhile, again and again solicited the grand army to push forward upon Leipsic, and offered to meet them there, he received at last, Oct. 15, the long-expected invitation. He immediately advanced toward Leipsic, while Bernadotte retreated toward Petersberg. On his march from Halle to Leipsic on Oct. 16, he routed at Möckern the 6th corps of the French army under Marmont, in a hotly contested battle, in which he captured 54 pieces of artillery. Without delay he 389 sent accounts of the issue of this battle to Bernadotte, who was not present on the 1st day of the battle of Leipsic. On its 2d day, Oct. 17, Blücher dislodged the enemy from the right bank of the Parthe, with the exception of some houses and intrenchments near the Halle gate. On the 18th, at daybreak, he had a conference at Breitenfeld with Bernadotte, who declared he could not attack on the left bank of the Parthe unless Blücher gave him for that day 30,000 men of the Silesian army. Keeping the interest of the whole exclusively in view, Blücher consented without hesitation, but on the condition of remaining himself with these 30,000 men,

52

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Blücher

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

and thus securing their vigorous coöperation in the attack. After the final victory of Oct. 19, and during the whole of Napoleon’s retreat from Leipsic to the Rhine, Blücher alone gave him an earnest pursuit. While, on Oct. 19, the generals in command met the sovereigns in the market-place of Leipsic, and precious time was spent in mutual compliments, his Silesian army was already marching in pursuit of the enemy to Lützen. On his march from Lützen to Weissenfels, Prince William of Prussia overtook him, to deliver to him the commission of a Prussian field-marshal. The allied sovereigns had allowed Napoleon to gain a start which could never be recovered, but from Eisenach onward, Blücher found himself every afternoon in the room which Napoleon had left in the morning. When about to march upon Cologne, there to cross the Rhine, he was recalled and ordered to blockade Mentz on its left bank; his rapid pursuit as far as the Rhine having broken up the confederation of the Rhine, and disengaged its troops from the French divisions in which they were still enrolled. While the head-quarters of the Silesian army was established at Höchst, the grand army marched up the upper Rhine. Thus ended the campaign of 1813, whose success was entirely due to Blücher’s bold enterprise and iron energy.⎯The allies were divided as to the plan of operations now to be followed; the one party proposing to stay on the Rhine, and there to take up a defensive position; the other to cross the Rhine and march upon Paris. After much wavering on the part of the sovereigns, Blücher and his friends prevailed, and the resolution was adopted to advance upon Paris in a concentric movement, the grand army being to start from Switzerland, Bülow from Holland, and Blücher, with the Silesian army, from the middle Rhine. For the new campaign, 3 additional corps were made over to Blücher, viz., Kleist’s, the elector of Hesse’s, and the duke of Saxe-Coburg’s. Leaving part of Langeron’s corps to invest Mentz, and the new reenforcements to follow as a second division, Blücher crossed the Rhine Jan. 1, 1814, on 3 points, at Mannheim, Caub, and Coblentz, drove Marmont beyond the Vosges and the Sarre, in the valley of the Moselle, posted York’s corps between the fortresses of the Moselle, and with a force of 28,000 men, consisting of Sacken’s corps and a division of Langeron’s corps, proceeded by Vaucouleurs and Joinville to Brienne, in order to effect his junction with the grand army by his left. At Brienne, Jan. 29, he was attacked by Napoleon, whose forces mustered about 40,000, while York’s corps was still detached from the Silesian army, and the grand army, 110,000 strong, had only reached Chaumont. Blücher had consequently to face the greatly superior forces of Napoleon, but the latter neither attacked him with his usual vigor, nor hindered his retreat to Trannes, save by some

53

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

cavalry skirmishes. Having taken possession of Brienne, placed part of his troops in its vicinity, and occupied Dienville, La Rothie`re, and Chammenil, with 3 different corps, Napoleon would, on Jan. 30, have been able to fall upon Blücher with superior numbers, as the latter was still awaiting his ree¨nforcements. Napoleon, however, kept up a passive attitude, while the grand army was concentrating by Bar-sur-Aube, and detachments of it were strengthening Blücher’s right flank. The emperor’s inactivity is explained by the hopes from the negotiations of the peace congress of Chaˆtillon, which he had contrived to start, and through the means of which he expected to gain time. In fact, after the junction of the Silesian army with the grand army had been effected, the diplomatic party insisted that during the deliberations of the peace congress the war should be carried on as a feint only. Prince Schwartzenberg sent an officer to Blücher to procure his acquiescence, but Blücher dismissed him with this answer: “We must go to Paris. Napoleon has paid his visits to all the capitals of Europe; should we be less polite? In short, he must descend from the throne, and until he is hurled from it we shall have no rest.” He urged the great advantages of the allies attacking Napoleon near Brienne, before he could bring up the remainder of his troops, and offered himself to make the attack, if he were only strengthened in York’s absence. The consideration that the army could not subsist in the barren valley of the Aube, and must retreat if it did not attack, caused his advice to prevail. The battle was decided upon, but Prince Schwartzenberg, instead of bearing upon the enemy with the united force at hand, only lent Blücher the corps of the crown prince of Würtemberg (40,000 men), that of Gyulay (12,000), and that of Wrede (12,000). Napoleon, on his part, neither knew nor suspected any thing of the arrival of the grand army. When about 1 o’clock, Feb. 1, it was announced to him that Blücher was advancing, he would not believe it. Having made sure of the fact, he mounted his horse with the idea of avoiding the battle, and gave Berthier orders to this effect. When, however, between old Brienne and Rothie`re, he reached the young guard, who had got under arms on hearing the approaching cannonade, he was received with such enthusiasm that he thought fit to improve the opportunity, and exclaimed, “L’artillerie en avant!” Thus, 390 about 4 o’clock, the affair of La Rothie`re commenced in earnest. At the first reverse, however, Napoleon no longer took any personal part in the battle. His infantry having thrown itself into the village of La Rothie`re, the combat was long and obstinate, and Blücher was even obliged to bring up his reserve. The French were not dislodged from the village till 11 o’clock at night, when Napoleon ordered the retreat of his army, which had lost 4,000 or 5,000 men in killed and wound-

54

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Blücher

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

ed, 2,500 prisoners, and 53 cannon. If the allies, who were then only 6 days’ march from Paris, had vigorously pushed on, Napoleon must have succumbed before their immensely superior numbers; but the sovereigns, still apprehensive of cutting Napoleon off from making his peace at the congress of Chaˆtillon, allowed Prince Schwartzenberg, the commander-in-chief of the grand army, to seize upon every pretext for shunning a decisive action. While Napoleon ordered Marmont to return on the right bank of the Aube toward Ramern, and himself retired by a flank march upon Troyes, the allied army split into 2 armies, the grand army advancing slowly upon Troyes, and the Silesian army marching to the Marne, where Blücher knew he would find York, beside part of Langeron’s and Kleist’s corps, so that his aggregate forces would be swelled to about 50,000 men. The plan was for him to pursue Marshal Macdonald, who had meanwhile appeared on the lower Marne, to Paris, while Schwartzenberg was to keep in check the French main army on the Seine. Napoleon, however, seeing that the allies did not know how to use their victory, and sure of returning to the Seine before the grand army could have advanced far in the direction of Paris, resolved to fall upon the weaker Silesian army. Consequently, he left 20,000 men under Victor and Oudinot in face of the 100,000 men of the grand army, advanced with 40,000 men, the corps of Mortier and Ney, in the direction of the Marne, took up Marmont’s corps at Nogent, and on Feb. 9 arrived with these united forces at Se´zanne. Meanwhile Blücher had proceeded by St. Ouen and Sommepuis on the little road leading to Paris, and established, Feb. 9, his head-quarters at the little town of Vertus. The disposition of his forces was this: about 10,000 men at his head-quarters; 18,000, under York, posted between Dormans and Chaˆteau Thierry, in pursuit of Macdonald, who was already on the great post road leading to Paris from Epernay; 30,000 under Sacken, between Montmirail and La Ferte´-SousJouarre, destined to prevent the intended junction of Sebastiani’s cavalry with Macdonald, and to cut off the passage of the latter at La Ferte´Sous-Jouarre; the Russian general, Olsuvieff, cantoned with 5,000 men at Champaubert. This faulty distribution, by which the Silesian army was drawn up in a very extended position, en e´chelon, resulted from the contradictory motives which actuated Blücher. On the one hand, he desired to cut off Macdonald, and prevent his junction with Sebastiani’s cavalry; on the other hand, to take up the corps of Kleist and Kapzewitch, who were advancing from Chalons, and expected to unite with him on the 9th and 10th. The one motive kept him back, the other pushed him on. Feb. 9, Napoleon fell upon Olsuvieff, at Champaubert, and routed him. Blücher, with Kleist and Kapzewitch, who had mean-

55

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

while arrived, but without the greater part of their cavalry, advanced against Marmont, despatched by Napoleon, and followed him in his retreat upon La Fe`re Champenoise, but on the news of Olsuvieff’s discomfiture, returned in the same night, with his 2 corps, to Berge`res, there to cover the road to Chalons. After a successful combat on the 10th, Sacken had driven Macdonald across the Marne at Trilport, but hearing on the night of the same day of Napoleon’s march to Champaubert, hastened back on the 11th toward Montmirail. Before reaching it he was, at Vieux Maisons, obliged to form against the emperor, coming from Montmirail to meet him. Beaten with great loss before York could unite with him, the two generals effected their junction at Viffort, and retreated, Feb. 12, to Chaˆteau Thierry, where York had to stand a very damaging rear-guard engagement, and withdrew thence to Oulchy-la-Ville. Having ordered Mortier to pursue York and Sacken on the road of Fismes, Napoleon remained on the 13th at Chaˆteau Thierry. Uncertain as to the whereabout of York and Sacken and the success of their engagements, Blücher had, from Berge`res, during the 11th and 12th, quietly watched Marmont posted opposite him at Etoges. When informed, on the 13th, of the defeat of his generals, and supposing Napoleon to have moved off in search of the grand army, he gave way to the temptation of striking a parting blow upon Marmont, whom he considered Napoleon’s rear-guard. Advancing on Champaubert, he pushed Marmont to Montmirail, where the latter was joined on the 14th by Napoleon, who now turned against Blücher, met him at noon at Veauchamps, 20,000 strong, but almost without cavalry, attacked him, turned his columns with cavalry, and threw him back with great loss on Champaubert. During its retreat from the latter place, the Silesian army might have reached Etoges before it grew dark, without any considerable loss, if Blücher had not taken pleasure in the deliberate slowness of the retrograde movement. Thus he was attacked during the whole of his march, and one detachment of his forces, the division of Prince Augustus of Preussen, was again beset from the side streets of Etoges, on its passage through that town. About midnight Blücher reached his camp at Berge`res, broke up, after some hours’ rest, for Chalons, arrived there about noon, Feb. 15, and was joined by York’s and Sacken’s forces on the 16th and 17th. The different affairs at Champaubert, Montmirail, Chaˆteau Thierry, Veauchamps, and Etoges, had cost him 15,000 men and 27 guns; Gneisenau and Müffling being 391 alone responsible for the strategetical faults which led to these disasters. Leaving Marmont and Mortier to front Blücher, Napoleon, with Ney, returned in forced marches to the Seine, where Schwartzenberg had driven back Victor and Oudinot, who had

56

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Blücher

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

retreated across the Ye`res, and there taken up 12,000 men under Macdonald, and some ree¨nforcements from Spain. On the 16th they were surprised by the sudden arrival of Napoleon, followed on the 17th by his troops. After his junction with the marshals he hastened against Schwartzenberg, whom he found posted in an extended triangle, having for its summits Nogent, Montereau, and Sens. The generals under his command, Wittgenstein, Wrede, and the crown Prince of Würtemberg, being successively attacked and routed by Napoleon, Prince Schwartzenberg took to his heels, retreated toward Troyes, and sent word to Blücher to join him, so that they might in concert give battle on the Seine. Blücher, meanwhile, strengthened by new ree¨nforcements, immediately followed this call, and entered Me´ry Feb. 21, and waited there the whole of the 22d for the dispositions of the promised battle. He learned in the evening that an application for a truce had been made to Napoleon, through Prince Lichtenstein, who had met with a flat refusal. Instantly despatching a confidential officer to Troyes, he conjured Prince Schwartzenberg to give battle, and even offered to give it alone, if the grand army would only form a reserve; but Schwartzenberg, still more frightened by the news that Augereau had driven Gen. Bubna back into Switzerland, had already ordered the retreat upon Langres. Blücher understood at once that a retreat upon Langres would lead to a retreat beyond the Rhine; and, in order to draw Napoleon off from the pursuit of the dispirited grand army, resolved upon again marching straight in the direction of Paris, toward the Marne, where he could now expect to assemble an army of 100,000 men, Wintzingerode having arrived with about 25,000 men in the vicinity of Rheims, Bülow at Laon with 16,000 men, the remainder of Kleist’s corps being expected from Erfurt, and the rest of Langeron’s corps, under St. Priest, from Mentz. It was this second separation on the part of Blücher from the grand army, that turned the scale against Napoleon. If the latter had followed the retreating grand army instead of the advancing Silesian one, the campaign would have been lost for the allies. The passage of the Aube before Napoleon had followed him, the only difficult point in Blücher’s advance, he effected by constructing a pontoon bridge at Auglure on Feb. 24. Napoleon, commanding Oudinot and Macdonald, with about 25,000 men, to follow the grand army, left Herbisse on the 26th, together with Ney and Victor, in pursuit of the Silesian army. On the advice sent by Blücher, that the grand army had now but the 2 marshals before it, Schwartzenberg stopped his retreat, took heart, turned round upon Oudinot and Macdonald, and beat them on the 27th and 28th. It was Blücher’s intention to concentrate his army at some point as near as possible to Paris. Mar-

57

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

mont, with his troops, was still posted at Se´zanne, while Mortier was at Chaˆteau Thierry. On Blücher’s advance, Marmont retreated, united on the 26th with Mortier at La Ferte´-Sous-Jouarre, thence to retire with the latter upon Meaux. Blücher’s attempt, during 2 days, to cross the Ourcq, and, with a strongly advanced front, to force the 2 marshals to battle, having failed, he was now obliged to march on the right bank of the Ourcq. He reached Oulchy-le-Chaˆteau March 2, learned in the morning of the 3d the capitulation of Soissons, which had been effected by Bülow and Wintzingerode, and, in the course of the same day, crossed the Aisne, and concentrated his whole army at Soissons. Napoleon, who had crossed the Marne at La Ferte´-Sous-Jouarre, 2 forced marches behind Blücher, advanced in the direction of Chaˆteau Thierry and Fismes, and, having passed the Vesle, crossed the Aisne at Berry-au-Bac, March 6, after the recapture of Rheims by a detachment of his army. Blücher originally intended to offer battle behind the Aisne, on Napoleon’s passage of that river, and had drawn up his troops for that purpose. When he became aware that Napoleon took the direction of Fismes and Berryau-Bac, in order to pass the Silesian army by the left, he decided upon attacking him from Craone on the flank, in an oblique position, immediately after his debouching from Berry-au-Bac, so that Napoleon would have been forced to give battle with a defile in his rear. Having already posted his forces, with the right wing on the Aisne, with the left on the Lette, half way from Soissons to Craone, he resigned this excellent plan on making sure that Napoleon had, on the 6th, been allowed by Wintzingerode to pass Berry-au-Bac unmolested, and had even pushed a detachment on the road to Laon. He now thought it necessary to accept no decisive battle except at Laon. To delay Napoleon, who, by Corbeny, on the causeway from Rheims, could reach Laon as soon as the Silesian army from Craone, Blücher posted the corps of Woronzoff between the Aisne and the Lette, on the strong plateau of Craone, while he despatched 10,000 horse under Wintzingerode, to push on by Fetieux toward Corbeny, with the order to fall upon the right flank and rear of Napoleon, as soon as the latter should be engaged in attacking Woronzoff. Wintzingerode failing to execute the manœuvre intrusted to him, Napoleon drove Woronzoff from the plateau on the 7th, but himself lost 8,000 men, while Woronzoff escaped with the loss of 4,700, and proved able to effect his retreat in good order. On the 8th, Blücher had concentrated his troops at Laon, where the battle must decide the fate of both armies. Apart from his numerical superiority, the vast plain before Laon was peculiarly adapted for deploying the 20,000 horse of the Silesian army, 392 while Laon itself, situated on the plateau of a detached hill, which has on every

58

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Blücher

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

side a fall of 12, 16, 20 to 30 degrees, and at the foot of which lie 4 villages, offered great advantages for the defence as well as the attack. On that day, the left French wing, led by Napoleon himself, was repulsed, while the right wing, under Marmont, surprised in its bivouacs at nightfall, was so completely worsted, that the marshal could not bring his troops to a halt before reaching Fismes. Napoleon, completely isolated with his wing, numbering 35,000 men only, and cooped up in a bad position, must have yielded before far superior numbers flushed with victory. Yet on the following morning, a fever attack and an inflammation of the eyes disabled Blücher, while Napoleon yet remained in a provocatory attitude, in the same position, which so far intimidated the men who now directed the operations, that they not only stopped the advance of their own troops which had already begun, but allowed Napoleon to quietly retire at nightfall to Soissons. Still the battle of Laon had broken his forces, physically and morally. He tried in vain by the sudden capture, on March 13, of Rheims, which had fallen into the hands of St. Priest, to restore himself. So fully was his situation now understood, that when he advanced, on the 17th and 18th, on Arcis-surAube, against the grand army, Schwartzenberg himself, although but 80,000 strong against the 25,000 under Napoleon, dared to stand and accept a battle, which lasted through the 20th and 21st. When Napoleon broke it off, the grand army followed him up to Vitry, and united in his rear with the Silesian army. In his despair, Napoleon took a last refuge in a retreat upon St. Dizier, pretending thus to endanger, with his handful of men, the enormous army of the allies, by cutting off its main line of communication and retreat between Langres and Chaumont; a movement replied to on the part of the allies by their onward march to Paris. On March 30 took place the battle before Paris, in which the Silesian army stormed Montmartre. Though Blücher had not recovered since the battle of Laon, he still appeared at the battle for a short time, on horseback, with a shade over his eyes, but, after the capitulation of Paris, laid down his command, the pretext being his sickness, and the real cause the clashing of his open-mouthed hatred against the French with the diplomatic attitude which the allied sovereigns thought fit to exhibit. Thus he entered Paris, March 31, in the capacity of a private individual. During the whole campaign of 1814, he alone among the allied army represented the principle of the offensive. By the battle of La Rothie`re he baffled the Chaˆtillon pacificators; by his resolution at Me´ry he saved the allies from a ruinous retreat; and by the battle of Laon he decided the first capitulation of Paris.⎯After the first peace of Paris he accompanied the emperor Alexander and King Frederic William of Prussia on their visit to

59

Karl Marx /Friedrich Engels

England, where he was feˆted as the hero of the day. All the military orders of Europe were showered upon him; the king of Prussia created for him the order of the iron cross; the prince regent of England gave him his portrait, and the university of Oxford the academical degree of LL. D. In 1815 he again decided the final campaign against Napoleon. After the disastrous battle of Ligny, June 16, though now 73 years of age, he prevailed upon his routed army to form anew and march on the heels of their victor, so as to be able to appear in the evening of June 18 on the battle field of Waterloo, an exploit unprecedented in the history of war. His pursuit, after the battle of Waterloo, of the French fugitives, from Waterloo to Paris, possesses one parallel only, in Napoleon’s equally remarkable pursuit of the Prussians from Jena to Stettin. He now entered Paris at the head of his army, and even had Müffling, his quartermastergeneral, installed as the military governor-general of Paris. He insisted upon Napoleon’s being shot, the bridge of Jena blown up, and the restitution to their original owners of the treasures plundered by the French in the different capitals of Europe. His first wish was baffled by Wellington, and the second by the allied sovereigns, while the last was realized. He remained at Paris 3 months, very frequently attending the gambling tables for rouge-et-noir. On the anniversary of the battle on the Katzbach, he paid a visit to Rostock, his native place, where the inhabitants united to raise a public monument in his honor. On the occurrence of his death the whole Prussian army went into mourning for 8 days. Le vieux diable, as he was nicknamed by Napoleon, “Marshal Forwards,” as he was styled by the Russians of the Silesian army, was essentially a general of cavalry. In this speciality he excelled, because it required tactical acquirements only, but no strategetical knowledge. Participating to the highest degree in the popular hatred against Napoleon and the French, he was popular with the multitude for his plebeian passions, his gross common sense, the vulgarity of his manners, and the coarseness of his speech, to which, however, he knew, on fit occasions, how to impart a touch of fiery eloquence. He was the model of a soldier. Setting an example as the bravest in battle and the most indefatigable in exertion; exercising a fascinating influence on the common soldier; joining to his rash bravery a sagacious appreciation of the ground, a quick resolution in difficult situations, stubbornness in defence equal to his energy in the attack, with sufficient intelligence to find for himself the right course in simpler combinations, and to rely upon Gneisenau in those which were more intricate, he was the true general for the military operations of 1813–’15, which bore the character half of regular and half of insurrectionary warfare.

60

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Karl Marx Brune

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

15 BRUNE, GUILLAUME MARIE ANNE, a marshal of the French empire, born at Brives-la-Gaillarde, March 13, 1763, died in Avignon, Aug. 2, 1815. His father sent him to Paris to study the law, but on leaving the university, financial difficulties caused him to become a printer. In the beginning of the revolution, together with Gauthier and Jourgniac de St. Me´ard, he published the Journal ge´ne´ral de la cour et de la ville. He soon embraced the party of the revolution, enlisted in the national guard, and became an ardent member of the club of the cordeliers. His grand figure, martial air, and boisterous patriotism, rendered him one of the military leaders of the people in the demonstration of 1791 in the Champ de Mars, which was crushed by Lafayette’s national guards. Thrown into prison, and the rumor spreading that the partisans of the court had attempted to get rid of him by odious means, Danton was instrumental in procuring his release. To the protection of the latter, among whose partisans he became prominent, he owed a military appointment during the famous 16 days of Sept. 1792, and his sudden promotion, in Oct. 12, 1792, to the rank of colonel and adjutant-major. He served under Dumouriez in Belgium; was sent against the federalists of Calvados, advancing under Gen. Puisaye upon Paris, whom he easily defeated. He was next made a general of brigade, and participated in the battle of Hondschoote. The committee of public safety intrusted him with the mission of putting down the insurrectionary movements in the Gironde, which he did with the utmost rigor. After Danton’s imprisonment, he was expected to rush to the rescue of his friend and protector, but keeping prudently aloof during the first moments of danger, he contrived to shift through the reign of terror. After the 9th Thermidor he again joined the now victorious Dantonists, and followed Fre´ron to Marseilles and Avignon. On the 13th Vende´miaire (Oct. 5, 1795) he acted as one of Bonaparte’s undergenerals against the revolted sections of Paris. After having assisted the directory in putting down the conspiracy of the camp at Grenelle

61

Karl Marx

(Sept. 9, 1796), he entered the Italian army in the division of Massena, and distinguished himself during the whole campaign by great intrepidity. Wishing to propitiate the chiefs of the cordeliers, Bonaparte attributed part of his success at Rivoli to the exertions of Brune, appointed him general of division on the battlefield, and induced the directory to instal him as commander of the second division of the Italian army, made vacant by Augereau’s departure for Paris. After the peace of Campo Formio he was employed by the directory on the mission of first lulling the Swiss into security, then dividing their councils, and finally, when an army had been concentrated for that purpose, falling upon the canton of Bern, and seizing its public treasury; on which occasion Brune forgot to draw up an inventory of the plunder. Again, by dint of manœuvres, bearing a diplomatic rather than a military character, he forced Charles Emmanuel, the king of Sardinia, and the apparent ally of France, to deliver into his hands the citadel of Turin (July 3, 1798). The Batavian campaign, which lasted about 2 months, forms the great event of Brune’s military life. In this campaign he defeated the combined English and Russian forces, under the command of the duke of York, who capitulated to him, promising to restore all the French prisoners taken by the English from the commencement of the anti-Jacobinic war. After the coup d’e´tat of the 18th Brumaire, Bonaparte appointed Brune a member of the newly created council of state, and then despatched him against the royalists of Brittany. Sent in 1800 to the army of Italy, Brune occupied 3 hostile camps, intrenched on the Volta, drove the enemy beyond this river, and took measures for crossing it instantly. According to his orders, the army was to effect its passage at 2 points, the right wing under Gen. Dupont between a mill situated on the Volta and the village of Pozzolo, the left wing under Brune himself at Monzambano. The second part of the operations meeting with difficulties, Brune gave orders to delay its execution for 24 hours, although the right wing, which had commenced crossing on the other point, was already engaged with far superior Austrian forces. It was only due to Gen. Dupont’s exertions that the right wing was not destroyed or captured, and thus the success of the whole campaign imperilled. This blunder led to his recall to Paris. From 1802 to 1804 he cut a sorry figure as ambassador at Constantinople, where his diplomatic talents were not, as in Switzerland and Piedmont, backed by bayonets. On his return to Paris, in Dec. 1804, Napoleon created him marshal in preference to generals like Lecourbe. Having for a while commanded the camp at Boulogne, he was, in 1807, sent to Hamburg as governor of the Hanseatic towns, and as commander of the reserve of the grand army. In this quality he vigorously seconded Bourrienne in his

62

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Brune

5

10

15

20

25

peculations. In order to settle some contested points of a truce concluded with Sweden at Schlatkow, he had a long personal interview with King Gustavus, who, in fact, proposed to him to betray his master. The manner in which he declined this offer raised the suspicions of Napoleon, who became highly incensed when Brune, drawing up a convention relating to the surrender of the island of Rügen to the French, mentioned simply the French and the Swedish armies as parties to the agreement, without any allusion to his “imperial and royal majesty.” Brune was instantly recalled by a letter of Berthier, in which the latter, on the express order of Napoleon, stated “that such a scandal had never occurred since the days of Pharamond.” On his return to France, he retired into private life. In 1814 he gave his adhesion to the acts of the senate, and received the cross of St. Louis from Louis XVIII. During the Hundred Days he became again a Bonapartist, and received the command of a corps of observation on the Var, where he displayed against the royalists the brutal vigor of his Jacobin epoch. After the battle of Waterloo he proclaimed the king. Starting from Toulon for Paris, he arrived at Avignon, on Aug. 2, at a moment when that town had for 15 days been doomed to carnage and incendiary fires by the royalist mob. Being recognized by them, he was shot, the mob seizing his corpse, dragging in through the streets, and throwing it into the Rhone. “Brune, Massena, Augereau, and many others,” said Napoleon at St. Helena, “were intrepid depredators.” In regard to his military talents he remarks: “Brune was not without a certain merit, but, on the whole, he was a ge´ne´ral de tribune rather than a terrible warrior.” A monument was erected to him in his native town in 1841.

63

Karl Marx The Bank Act of 1844 and the Monetary Crisis in England

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5176, 21. November 1857.

On the 5th inst. the Bank of England raised its minimum rate of discount from 8 per cent, at which it was fixed on October 19, to 9 per cent. This enhancement, unprecedented as it is in the history of the Bank since the resumption of its cash payments, has, we presume, not yet reached its highest point. It is brought about by a drain of bullion, and by a decrease in what is called the reserve of notes. The drain of bullion acts in opposite directions⎯gold being shipped to this country in consequence of our bankruptcy, and silver to the East, in consequence of the decline of the export trade to China and India, and the direct Government remittances made for account of the East India Company. In exchange for the silver thus wanted, gold must be sent to the continent of Europe. As to the reserve of notes and the influential part it plays in the London money market, it is necessary to refer briefly to Sir Robert Peel’s Bank act of 1844, which affects not only England, but also the United States, and the whole market of the world. Sir Robert Peel, backed by the banker Lloyd, now Lord Overstone, and a number of influential men beside, proposed by his act to put into practice a self-acting principle for the circulation of paper money, according to which the latter would exactly conform in its movements of expansion and contraction to the laws of a purely metallic circulation; and all monetary crises, as he and his partisans affirmed, would thus be warded off for all time to come. The Bank of England is divided into two departments⎯the issuing department and the banking department; the former being a simple manufactory of notes and the latter the real bank. The issuing department is by law empowered to issue notes to the amount of fourteen millions sterling a sum supposed to indicate the lowest point, beneath which the actual circulation will never fall, the security for which is found in the debt due by the British Government to the Bank. Beyond these fourteen millions, no note can be issued which is not represented in the vaults of the issuing department by bullion to the same amount. The aggregate mass of notes

64

5

10

15

20

25

30

The Bank Act of 1844 and the Monetary Crisis in England

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

thus limited is made over to the banking department, which throws them into circulation. Consequently, if the bullion reserve in the vaults of the issuing department amounts to ten millions, it can issue notes to the amount of twenty-four millions, which are made over to the banking department. If the actual circulation amounts to twenty millions only, the four millions remaining in the till of the banking department forms its reserve of notes, which, in fact, constitutes the only security for the deposits confided by private individuals, and by the State to the banking department. Suppose now that a drain of bullion sets in, and successively abstracts various quantities of bullion from the issuing department, withdrawing, for instance, the amount of four millions of gold. In this case four millions of notes will be cancelled; the amount of notes issued by the issuing department will then exactly equal the amount of notes in circulation, and the reserve of disposable notes in the till of the banking department will have altogether disappeared. The banking department therefore, will not have a single farthing left to meet the claims of its depositors, and consequently will be compelled to declare itself insolvent; an act affecting its public as well as its private deposits, and therefore involving the suspension of the payment of the quarterly dividends due to the holders of public funds. The banking department might thus become bankrupt, while six millions of bullion were still heaped up in the vaults of the issuing department. This is not a mere supposition. On October 30, 1847, the reserve of the banking department had sunk to £1,600,000 while the deposits amounted to £13,000,000. With a few more days of the prevailing alarm, which was only allayed by a financial coup d’e´tat on the part of the Government, the Bank reserve would have been exhausted and the banking department would have been compelled to stop payments, while more than six millions of bullion lay still in the vaults of the issuing department. It is self-evident then, that the drain of bullion and the decrease of the reserve of notes, act mutually on each other. While the withdrawal of bullion from the vaults of the issuing department directly produces a decrease in the reserve of the banking department, the directors of the Bank, apprehensive lest the banking department should be driven to insolvency, put on the screw and raise the rate of discount. But the rise in the rate of discount induces part of the depositors to withdraw their deposits from the banking department, and lend them out at the current high rate of interest, while the steady decrease of the reserve intimidates other depositors, and induces them to withdraw their notes from the same department. Thus the very measures taken to keep up the reserve,

65

Karl Marx

tend to exhaust it. From this explanation the reader will understand the anxiety with which the decrease of the Bank reserve is watched in England, and the gross fallacy propounded in the money article of a recent number of The London Times. It says: “The old opponents of the Bank Charter Act are beginning to bustle in the storm, and it is impossible to feel certain on any point. One of their great modes of creating fright is by pointing to the low state of the reserve of unemployed notes, as if when that is exhausted the Bank would be obliged to cease discounting altogether. (As a bankrupt, under the existing law it would be, in fact, obliged to do so.) But the fact is that the Bank could, under such circumstances, still continue the discounts on as great a scale as ever, since their bills receivable each day of course, on the average, bring in as large a total as they are ordinarily asked to let out. They could not increase the scale, but no one will suppose that, with a contraction of business in all quarters, any increase can be required. There is, consequently, not the shadow of a pretext for government palliatives.” The sleight-of-hand on which this argument rests is this: that the depositors are deliberately kept out of view. It needs no peculiar exertion of thought to understand that if the banking department had once declared itself bankrupt in regard to its lenders, it could not go on making advances by way of discounts or loans to its borrowers. Taken all-in-all, Sir Robert Peel’s much vaunted Bank law does not act at all in common times; adds in difficult times a monetary panic created by law to the monetary panic resulting from the commercial crisis; and at the very moment when, according to its principles, its beneficial effects should set in, it must be suspended by Government interference. In ordinary times, the maximum of notes which the Bank may legally issue is never absorbed by the actual circulation⎯a fact sufficiently proved by the continued existence in such periods of a reserve of notes in the till of the banking department. You may prove this truth by comparing the reports of the Bank of England from 1847 to 1857, or even by comparing the amount of notes which actually circulated from 1819 till 1847, with that which might have circulated according to the maximum legally fixed. In difficult times, as in 1847, and at present by the arbitrary and absolute division between the two departments of the same concern, the effects of a drain of bullion are artificially aggravated, the rise of interest is artificially accelerated, the prospect of insolvency is held out not in consequence of the real insolvency of the Bank, but of the fictitious insolvency of one of its departments.

66

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Bank Act of 1844 and the Monetary Crisis in England

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

When the real monetary distress has thus been aggravated by an artificial panic, and in its wake the sufficient number of victims has been immolated, public pressure grows too strong for the Government, and the law is suspended exactly at the period for the weathering of which it was created, and during the course of which it is alone able to produce any effect at all. Thus, on Oct. 23, 1847, the principal bankers of London resorted to Downing street, there to ask relief by a suspension of Peel’s Act. Lord John Russell and Sir Charles Wood consequently directed a letter to the Governor and Deputy Governor of the Bank of England, recommending them to enlarge their issue of notes, and thus to exceed the legal maximum of circulation, while they took upon themselves the responsibility for the violation of the law of 1844, and declared themselves prepared to propose to Parliament, on its meeting, a bill of indemnity. The same farce will be again enacted this time, after the state of things has come up to the standard of the week ending on Oct. 23, 1847, when a total suspension of all business and of all payments seemed imminent. The only advantage, then, derived from the Peel Act is this: that the whole community is placed in a thorough dependence on an aristocratic Government⎯on the pleasure of a reckless individual like Palmerston, for instance. Hence the Ministerial predilections for the act of 1844; investing them with an influence on private fortunes they were never before possessed of. We have thus dwelt on the Peel Act, because of its present influence on this country, as well as its probable suspension in England; but, if the British Government has the power of taking off the shoulders of the British public the difficulties fastened upon them by that Government itself, nothing could be falser than to suppose that the phenomena we shall witness on the London money market⎯the rise and the subsiding of the monetary panic⎯will constitute a true thermometer for the intensity of the crisis the British commercial community have to pass through. That crisis is beyond Government control. When the first news of the American crisis reached the shores of England, there was set up by her economists a theory which may lay claim, if not to ingenuity, to originality at least. It was said that English trade was sound, but that, alas! its customers, and, above all, the Yankees, were unsound. The sound state of a trade, the healthiness of which exists on one side only, is an idea quite worthy of a British economist. Cast a glance at the last half-yearly return issued by the English Board of Trade for 1857, and you will find that of the aggregate export of British produce and manufactures, 30 per cent went to the United States, 11 per cent to East India, and 10 per cent to Australia. Now, while the American

67

Karl Marx

market is closed for a long time to come, the Indian one, glutted for two years past, is to a great extent cut off by the insurrectionary convulsions, and the Australian one is so overstocked that British merchandise of all sorts is now sold cheaper at Adelaide, Sydney and Melbourne, than at London, Manchester or Glasgow. The general soundness of the British industrialists, declared bankrupt in consequence of the sudden failure of their customers, may be inferred from two instances. At a meeting of the creditors of a Glasgow calico printer, the list of debts exhibited a total of £116,000, while the assets did not reach the modest amount of £7,000. So, too, a Glasgow shipper, with liabilities of £11,800, could only show assets to meet them of £789. But these are merely individual cases; the important point is that British manufactures have been stretched to a point which must result in a general crash under contracted foreign markets, with a consequent revulsion in the social and political state of Great Britain. The American crisis of 1837 and 1839 produced a decline in British exports from £12,425,601, at which they stood in 1836, down to £4,695,225 in 1837, to £7,585,760 in 1838, and £3,562,000 in 1842. A similar paralysis is already setting in in England. It cannot fail to produce the most important effects before it is over.

68

5

10

15

Karl Marx The British Revulsion

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5183, 30. November 1857.

The British Revulsion.

5

10

15

20

25

The British commercial revulsion seems to have worn throughout its immense development the three distinct forms of a pressure on the money and produce markets of London and Liverpool, a bank panic in Scotland, and an industrial breakdown in the manufacturing districts. The facts were stated at length in our pages on Friday, in the form of copious extracts from the British journals, but their importance and prospective consequences require a still further exposition. Though, as we anticipated in a former article, the Government was finally compelled to suspend the Bank Act of 1844, this was not done till after the Bank had bravely swamped a host of its customers in the endeavor to save itself. But finally, on the evening of Nov. 11, the chiefs of the Bank held a war-council, which resulted in an appeal to the Government for help, which was answered by the suspension of the provisions of the Act. This ordinance of the Ministry will at once be submitted to Parliament for approval, that body having been convoked to meet at the close of the month. The effect of the suspension must be one of comparative relief, as we have previously shown. It does away with an artificial stringency, which the Act adds to the natural stringency of the money market in times of commercial revulsion. This view of the case is confirmed by the news by the Fulton, reported in our columns by telegraph this morning. In the progress of the present crisis the Bank had five times raised its rate of discount, in the vain hope of checking the rush of the current which was sweeping all away. On the 8th ult. the rate was advanced to 6 per cent; on the 12th to 7; on the 22d to 8; on the 5th inst. to 9; and on the 9th to 10. The rapidity of this movement offers a remarkable contrast to that which attended the crisis of 1847. Then the minimum rate of discount was raised to 5 per cent in April; to 51/2 in July; and to 8, its

69

Karl Marx

highest point, on the 23d of October. Thence it sank to 7 per cent on Nov. 20; to 6 on Dec. 4; and to 5 on Dec. 25. The five years next following form an epoch of continual decline in the rate, as regular, indeed, as if guided by a sliding scale. Thus, on June 26, 1852, it had reached its lowest point⎯being 2 per cent. The next five years, from 1852 to 1857, exhibit an opposite movement. On January 8, 1853, the rate stood at 21/2 per cent; on October 1, 1853, it was 5 per cent, whence, through many successive variations, at last it has attained its present elevation. So far, the oscillations of the rate of interest during the period of ten years now concluded have exhibited only the phenomena usual to the recurring phases of modern commerce. These phases are, briefly, an utter contraction of credit in the year of panic, followed by a gradual expansion, which reaches its maximum when the rate of interest sinks to its lowest point; then again a movement in the opposite direction, that of gradual contraction, which reaches its highest point when the interest has risen to its maximum, and the year of panic has again set in. Yet, on a closer examination, there will be discovered in the second part of the present period some phenomena which broadly distinguish it from all its predecessors. During the years of prosperity from 1844 till 1847, the rate of interest in London fluctuated between 3 and 4 per cent, so that the whole period was one of comparatively cheap credit. When the rate of interest reached 5 per cent, on April 10, 1847, the crisis had already set in and its universal explosion was, by a series of stratagems, put off for a few months only. On the other hand, the rate of interest which on May 6, 1854, had already mounted to 51/2 per cent, went down again successively to 5 per cent, 41/2 per cent, 4 per cent, and 31/2 per cent at which latter figure it continued to stand from June 16, 1855, to September 8, 1855. Then it ran again through the identical variations in the opposite direction, increasing to 4 per cent, 41/2 per cent, 5 per cent, until, in October, 1855, it had reached the very point from which it had started in May, 1854, namely, 51/2 per cent. Two weeks later, on October 20, 1855, it rose to 6 per cent for short bills, and to 7 per cent for long ones. But again a reaction set in. During the course of 1856 it went down and up until in October, 1856, it had anew reached 6 and 7 per cent, the points from which it had started in the October of the previous year. On November 15, 1856, it rose to 7 per cent, but with irregular and often interrupted fluctuations of decline, which brought it for three months as low as 51/2 per cent. It did not recover the original hight of 7 per cent till October 12 of the present year, when the American crisis had begun to bear upon England. From that moment its movement of increase was rapid and constant, resulting at last in an almost complete stoppage of discount.

70

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The British Revulsion

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

In other words, during the second half of the period from 1848 to 1857, the vicissitudes in the rate of interest were intensified at more frequently recurring intervals, and from October, 1855 to October, 1857, two years of dear money elapsed, when its fluctuations were circumscribed between the limits of 51/2 to 7 per cent. At the same time, in the face of this high rate of interest, production and exchange went on unabated at a pace never before thought of. On the one hand these exceptional phenomena may be traced back to the opportune arrivals of gold from Australia and the United States, which allowed the Bank of England to relax its grip at intervals; while on the other hand it is evident that the crisis was already due in October, 1855, that it was shifted off through a series of temporary convulsions, and that, consequently, its final explosion, as to the intensity of symptoms as well as the extent of contagion, will exceed every crisis ever before witnessed. The curious fact of the recurrence of the rate of 7 per cent on Oct. 20, 1855, on Oct. 4, 1856, and on Oct. 12, 1857, would go far to prove the latter proposition, if we did not know besides that, in 1854, a premonitory collapse had already taken place in this country, and that on the continent of Europe all the symptoms of panic had already repeated themselves in October, 1855 and 1856. On the whole, however, leaving these aggravating circumstances out of view, the period of 1848 to 1857 bears a striking resemblance to those of 1826 to 1836, and of 1837 to 1847. It is true we were told that British Free Trade would change all this, but if nothing else is proved it is at least clear that the Free-Trade doctors are nothing but quacks. As in former periods, a series of good harvests has been followed by a series of bad ones. In spite of the Free-Trade panacea in England the average price of wheat and all other raw produce has ruled even higher from 1853 to 1857 than from 1820 to 1853; and, what is still more remarkable, while industry took an unprecedented start in the face of the high prices of corn, now, as if to cut off every possible subterfuge, it has suffered an unprecedented collapse in the face of a plentiful harvest. Our readers will of course understand that this Bank of England rate of 10 per cent is merely nominal, and that the interest really paid by firstclass paper in London, greatly exceeds that figure. “The rates charged in the open market,” says The Daily News, “are considerably above those of the Bank.” “The Bank of England itself,” says The Morning Chronicle, “does not discount at the rate of 10 per cent, except in a very few cases⎯the exception, not the rule; while out of doors charges are notoriously disproportionate to the alleged quotation.” “The inability of second and third-class paper to obtain accommodation on any terms,” says

71

Karl Marx

The Morning Herald, “is already producing immense mischief.” “In consequence of this,” as says The Globe, “affairs are being brought to a dead lock; firms are falling whose assets exceed their liabilities; and there seems to be a general mercantile revolution.” What with this pressure on the money market, and with the influx of American products, all articles in the produce market have gone down. In the course of a few weeks cotton has fallen at Liverpool 20 to 25 per cent, sugar 25 per cent, corn 25 per cent, and coffee, saltpeter, tallow, leather, and the like, have followed in the wake. “Discounts and advances upon produce,” says The Morning Post, “are almost unattainable.” “In Mincing Lane,” says The Standard, “business has been turned inside out. It is no longer possible to sell any goods except in the shape of barter, money being out of the question.” All this distress, however, would not have so soon brought the Bank of England to her knees if the Bank panic in Scotland had not occurred. At Glasgow, the fall of the Western Bank was followed by that of the City of Glasgow Bank, producing in its turn a general run of depositors among the middle class and of noteholders among the working classes, and finally resulting in riotous disturbances which induced the Lord Provost of Glasgow to obtain the aid of bayonets. The City of Glasgow Bank, which had the honor of being governed by no less a personage than the Duke of Argyll, had a paid-up capital of one million sterling, a reserved fund of £90,595, and ninety-six branches spread through the country. Its authorized issues amounted to £72,921, while those of the Western Bank of Scotland were £225,292, making together £298,213 sterling, or nearly one-tenth of the entire authorized circulating medium of Scotland. The capital of these Banks was to a great extent furnished in small sums by the agricultural population. The Scotch panic naturally recoiled on the Bank of England; and £300,000 were taken from its vaults on Nov. 11, and £600,000 to £700,000 on the 12th, for transmission to Scotland. Other sums were also withdrawn on behalf of the Irish Banks, while large deposits were called in by the Provincial English Banks; so that the Banking Department of the Bank of England found itself driven to the very verge of bankruptcy. It is probable that for the two Scotch Banks above named the general crisis merely afforded a pretext for effecting a decent exit, they having long been rotten to the core. Still, the fact remains that the celebrated Scotch Banking system which in 1825–26, 1836–37, and in 1847 weathered the hurricanes that swept away the English and Irish Banks, for the first time, under the auspices of Peel’s Bank Act, which was forced upon Scotland in 1845, has met with a general run; that for the first time the

72

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The British Revulsion

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

cry of “gold against paper” has been heard there; and that at Edinburgh, for the first time, even Bank of England notes have been refused. The idea of the defenders of Peel’s Act, that if it was unable to ward off monetary crises in general, it would at least secure the convertibility of the notes in circulation, has now been exploded, the noteholders sharing the fate of the depositors. The general state of the British manufacturing districts cannot be better described than by two extracts, the one from a Manchester trade circular, printed in The Economist, the latter from a private letter from Macclesfield in the The London Free Press. The Manchester circular, after giving a comparative statement of the cotton trade for the last five years, proceeds as follows: “Prices have this week been falling with, day by day, more summary acceleration. For numerous descriptions, no prices can be given, because none could find a buyer, and generally where prices are given, they depend more on the position or apprehensions of the holder than on demand. No current demand exists. The home trade have laid in more stock than Winter prospects now give hope of clearing. íThat foreign markets have been overstocked, the circular does, of course, not say.î Short time has now been currently adopted as a necessity; the amount of its adoption is computed at present to exceed one-fifth of the whole production. The exceptions to extending its adoption are daily becoming less, and the expediency is now debated of rather closing the mills for a time wholly.” The Macclesfield writer tells us: “At least 5,000 persons, consisting of skilled artisans and their families, who get up each morning and know not where to get food to break their fast, have applied for relief to the Union, and as they come under the class of able-bodied paupers, the alternative is of either going to break stones at about four pence per day, or going into the House, where they are treated like prisoners, and where unhealthy and scanty food is given to them through a hole in the wall; and as to the breaking of stones to men that have hands only capable of handling the finest of materials, viz: silk; is a complete refusal.” What English writers consider an advantage of their present crisis, as compared with that of 1847⎯that there is no paramount channel of speculation, like the railways, for instance, absorbing their capital⎯is by no means a fact. The truth is the English have very largely participated in speculations abroad, both on the Continent of Europe and in America, while at home their surplus capital has been mainly invested in factories, so that, more than ever before, the present convulsion bears the character of an industrial crisis, and therefore strikes at the very roots of the national prosperity.

73

Karl Marx

On the Continent of Europe the contagion has spread from Sweden to Italy in one direction, and from Madrid to Pesth in the other. Hamburg, forming the great commercial center of the exports and imports of the Zollverein, and the general money market of Northern Germany, has had, of course, to bear the first shock. As to France, the Bank of France has screwed up its rate of discount to the English standard; the decrees for the prohibition of the export of corn have been revoked; all the Paris papers have received confidential warnings to beware of gloomy views; the bullion dealers are being frightened by gens d’armes, and Louis Bonaparte himself, in a rather coxcombical letter, condescends to inform his subjects that he does not feel himself prepared for a financial coup d’e´tat, and that, consequently, “the evil only exists in the imagination.” If we are not much mistaken, something of the same sort was put forth in this country, when philosophers like our neighbors of The Times and The Independent thought the catastrophe might be prevented, if people would only determine to be jolly, and give three cheers.

74

5

10

15

Friedrich Engels The Capture of Delhi

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5188, 5. Dezember 1857.

5

10

15

20

25

30

We will not join in the noisy chorus which, in Great Britain, is now extolling to the skies the bravery of the troops that took Delhi by storm. No people, not even the French, can equal the English in self laudation, especially when bravery is the point in question. The analysis of the facts, however, very soon reduces, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, the grandeur of this heroism to very commonplace proportions; and every man of common sense must be disgusted at this overtrading in other people’s courage, by which the English pater familias who lives quietly at home, and is uncommonly averse to anything that threatens him with the remotest chance of obtaining military glory, attempts to pass himself off as a participator in the undoubted, but certainly not so very extraordinary, bravery shown in the assault on Delhi. If we compare Delhi with Sevastopol, we of course agree that the Sepoys were no Russians; that none of their sallies against the British cantonment was anything like Inkermann; that there was no Todtleben in Delhi, and that the Sepoys, bravely as every individual man and company fought in most instances, were utterly without leadership, not only for brigades and divisions, but almost for battalions; that their cohesion did not therefore extend beyond the companies; that they entirely lacked the scientific element without which an army is now-a-days helpless, and the defense of a town utterly hopeless. Still, the disproportion of numbers and means of action, the superiority of the Sepoys over the Europeans in withstanding the climate, the extreme weakness to which the force before Delhi was at times reduced, make up for many of these differences, and render a fair parallel between the two sieges (to call these operations sieges) possible. Again we do not consider the storming of Delhi as an act of uncommon or extra-heroic bravery, although as in every battle individual acts of high spirit no doubt occurred on either side, but we maintain that the Anglo-Indian army before Delhi has shown more perseverance, force of character, judgment and skill, than the English army when

75

Friedrich Engels

on its trial between Sevastopol and Balaklava. The latter, after Inkermann, was ready and willing to ree¨mbark, and no doubt would have done so if it had not been for the French. The former, when the season of the year, the deadly maladies consequent upon it, the interruption of the communications, the absence of all chance of speedy ree¨nforcements, the condition of all Upper India, invited a withdrawal, did indeed consider the advisability of this step, but for all that, held out at its post. When the insurrection was at its highest point, a movable column in Upper India was the first thing required. There were only two forces that could be thus employed⎯the small force of Havelock, which soon proved inadequate, and the force before Delhi. That it was, under these circumstances, a military mistake to stay before Delhi, consuming the available strength in useless fights with an unassailable enemy; that the army in motion would have been worth four times its value when at rest; that the clearing of Upper India, with the exception of Delhi, the ree¨stablishing of the communications, the crushing of every attempt of the insurgents to concentrate a force, would have been obtained, and with it the fall of Delhi as a natural and easy consequence, are indisputable facts. But political reasons commanded that the camp before Delhi should not be raised. It is the wiseacres at headquarters who sent the army to Delhi that should be blamed⎯not the perseverance of the army in holding out when once there. At the same time we must not omit to state that the effect of the rainy season on this army was far milder than was to be anticipated, and that with anything like an average amount of the sickness consequent upon active operations at such a period, the withdrawal or the dissolution of the army would have been unavoidable. The dangerous position of the army lasted till the end of August. The ree¨nforcements began to come in, while dissensions continued to weaken the rebel camp. In the beginning of September the siege-train arrived, and the defensive position was changed into an offensive one. On the 7th of September the first battery opened its fire, and on the evening of the 13th two practicable breaches were opened. Let us now examine what took place during this interval. If we were to rely, for this purpose, on the official dispatch of Gen. Wilson, we should be very badly off indeed. This report is quite as confused as the documents issued from the English headquarters in the Crimea ever were. No man living could make out from that report the position of the two breaches, or the relative position and order in which the storming columns were arranged. As to the private reports, they are, of course, still more hopelessly confused. Fortunately one of those skillful scientific officers who deserve nearly the whole credit of the success, a

76

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Capture of Delhi

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

member of the Bengal Engineers and Artillery, has given a report of what occurred, in The Bombay Gazette, as clear and business-like as it is simple and unpretending. During the whole of the Crimean war not one English officer was found able to write a report as sensible as this. Unfortunately he got wounded on the first day of the assault, and then his letter stops. As to later transactions, we are, therefore, still quite in the dark. The English had strengthened the defenses of Delhi so far that they could resist a siege by an Asiatic army. According to our modern notions, Delhi was scarcely to be called a fortress, but merely a place secured against the forcible assault of a field-force. Its masonry wall, 16 feet high and 12 feet thick, crowned by a parapet of 3 feet thickness and 8 feet hight, offered 6 feet of masonry beside the parapet, uncovered by the glacis and exposed to the direct fire of the attack. The narrowness of this masonry rampart put it out of the question to place cannon anywhere, except in the bastions and martello towers. These latter flanked the curtain but very imperfectly, and a masonry parapet of three feet thickness being easily battered down by siege guns (field pieces could do it), to silence the fire of the defense, and particularly the guns flanking the ditch, was very easy. Between wall and ditch there was a wide berm or level road, facilitating the formation of a practicable breach, and the ditch, under these circumstances, instead of being a coupe-gorge for any force that got entangled in it, became a resting-place to re-form those columns that had got into disorder while advancing on the glacis. To advance against such a place, with regular trenches, according to the rules of sieges, would have been insane, even if the first condition had not been wanting, viz., a force sufficient to invest the place on all sides. The state of the defenses, the disorganization and sinking spirit of the defenders, would have rendered every other mode of attack than the one pursued an absolute fault. This mode is very well known to military men under the name of the forcible attack (attaque de vive force). The defenses, being such only as to render an open attack impossible without heavy guns, are dealt with summarily by the artillery; the interior of the place is all the while shelled, and as soon as the breaches are practicable the troops advance to the assault. The front under attack was the northern one, directly opposite to the English camp. This front is composed of two curtains and three bastions, forming a slightly ree¨ntering angle at the central (the Cashmere) bastion. The eastern position, from the Cashmere to the Water bastion, is the shorter one, and projects a little in front of the western position, between the Cashmere and the Moree bastions. The ground in front of the Cashmere and Water bastions was covered with low jungle, gardens, houses,

77

Friedrich Engels

&c., which had not been leveled down by the Sepoys, and afforded shelter to the attack. (This circumstance explains how it was possible that the English could so often follow the Sepoys under the very guns of the place, which was at that time considered extremely heroic, but was in fact a matter of little danger so long as they had this cover.) Besides, at about 400 or 500 yards from this front, a deep ravine ran in the same direction as the wall, so as to form a natural parallel for the attack. The river, besides, giving a capital basis to the English left, the slight salient formed by the Cashmere and Water bastions was selected very properly as the main point of attack. The western curtain and bastions were simultaneously subjected to a simulated attack, and this maneuver succeeded so well that the main force of the Sepoys was directed against it. They assembled a strong body in the suburbs outside the Cabool gate, so as to menace the English right. This maneuver would have been perfectly correct and very effective, if the western curtain between the Moree and Cashmere bastions had been the most in danger. The flanking position of the Sepoys would have been capital as a means of active defense, every column of assault being at once taken in flank by a movement of this force in advance. But the effect of this position could not reach as far eastward as the curtain between the Cashmere and Water bastions; and thus its occupation drew away the best part of the defending force from the decisive point. The selection of the places for the batteries, their construction and arming, and the way in which they were served, deserve the greatest praise. The English had about 50 guns and mortars, concentrated in powerful batteries, behind good solid parapets. The Sepoys had, according to official statements, 55 guns on the attacked front, but scattered over small bastions and martello towers, incapable of concentrated action, and scarcely sheltered by the miserable three-feet parapet. No doubt a couple of hours must have sufficed to silence the fire of the defense, and then there remained little to be done. On the 8th, No. 1 battery, 10 guns, opened fire at 700 yards from the wall. During the following night the ravine aforesaid was worked out into a sort of trench. On the 9th, the broken ground and houses in front of this ravine were seized without resistance; and on the 10th, No. 2 battery, 8 guns, was unmasked. This latter was 500 or 600 yards from the wall. On the 11th, No. 3 battery, built very boldly and cleverly at 200 yards from the Water bastion in some broken ground, opened fire with six guns, while ten heavy mortars shelled the town. On the evening of the 13th the breaches⎯one in the curtain adjoining the right flank of the Cashmere bastion, and the other in the left face and flank of the

78

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Capture of Delhi

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Water bastion⎯were reported practicable for escalade, and the assault was ordered. The Sepoys on the 11th had made a counter approach on the glacis between the two menaced bastions, and threw out a trench for skirmishers about three hundred and fifty yards in front of the English batteries. They also advanced from this position outside the Cabool gate to flank attacks. But these attempts at active defense were carried out without unity, connection or spirit, and led to no result. At daylight on the 14th five British columns advanced to the attack. One, on the right, to occupy the force outside the Cabool gate and attack, in case of success, the Lahore gate. One against each breach, one against the Cashmere gate, which was to be blown up, and one to act as a reserve. With the exception of the first, all these columns were successful. The breaches were but slightly defended, but the resistance in the houses near the wall was very obstinate. The heroism of an officer and three sergeants of the Engineers (for here there was heroism) succeeded in blowing open the Cashmere gate, and thus this column entered also. By evening the whole northern front was in the possession of the English. Here Gen. Wilson, however, stopped. The indiscriminate assault was arrested, guns brought up and directed against every strong position in the town. With the exception of the storming of the magazine, there seems to have been very little actual fighting. The insurgents were dispirited and left the town in masses. Wilson advanced cautiously into the town, found scarcely any resistance after the 17th, and occupied it completely on the 20th. Our opinion on the conduct of the attack has been stated. As to the defense⎯the attempt at offensive counter movements, the flanking position at the Cabool gate, the counter-approaches, the rifle-pits, all show that some notions of scientific warfare had penetrated among the Sepoys; but either they were not clear enough, or not powerful enough, to be carried out with any effect. Whether they originated with Indians, or with some of the Europeans that are with them, is of course difficult to decide; but one thing is certain: that these attempts, though imperfect in execution, bear a close resemblance in their ground-work to the active defense of Sevastopol, and that their execution looks as if a correct plan had been made for the Sepoys by some European officer, but that they had not been able to understand the idea fully, or that disorganization and want of command turned practical projects into weak and powerless attempts.

79

Friedrich Engels Artillery

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 2. New York 1858.

179 ARTILLERY. The invention of gunpowder, and its application to throwing heavy bodies in a given direction, are now pretty generally conceded to have been of eastern origin. In China and India, saltpetre is the spontaneous excrescence of the soil, and, very naturally, the natives soon became acquainted with its properties. Fireworks made of mixtures of this salt with other combustible bodies were manufactured at a very early period in China, and used for purposes of war as well as for public festivities. We have no information at what time the peculiar composition of saltpetre, sulphur, and charcoal became known, the explosive quality of which has given it such an immense importance. According to some Chinese chronicles, mentioned by M. Paravey in a report made to the French academy in 1850, guns were known as early as 618 B. C.; in other ancient Chinese writings, fire-balls projected from bamboo tubes, and a sort of exploding shell, are described. At all events, the use of gunpowder and cannon for warlike purposes does not appear to have been properly developed in the earlier periods of Chinese history, as the first authenticated instance of their extensive application is of a date as late as 1232 of our era, when the Chinese, besieged by the Mongols in Kaı¨-fang-fu, defended themselves with cannon throwing stone balls, and used explosive shells, petards, and other fireworks based upon gunpowder.⎯The Hindoos appear to have had some sort of warlike fireworks as early as the time of Alexander the Great, according to the evidence of the Greek writers Ælian, Ctesias, Philostratus, and Themistius. This, however, certainly was not gunpowder, though saltpetre may have largely entered into its composition. In the Hindoo laws some sort of fire-arms appears to be alluded to; gunpowder is certainly mentioned in them, and, according to Prof. H.H. Wilson, its composition is described in old Hindoo medical works. The first mention of cannon, however, coincides pretty nearly with the oldest ascertained positive date of its occurrence in China. Chand’s poems, about 1200, speak of fire-engines throwing balls, the

80

5

10

15

20

25

30

Artillery

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

whistling of which was heard at the distance of 10 coss (1,500 yards). About 1258 we read of fireworks on carriages belonging to the king of Delhi. A hundred years later the use of artillery was general in India; and when the Portuguese arrived there, in 1498, they found the Indians as far advanced in the use of fire-arms as they themselves were.⎯From the Chinese and Hindoos the Arabs received saltpetre and fireworks. Two of the Arabic names for saltpetre signify China salt, and China snow. Chinese red and white fire is mentioned by their ancient authors. Incendiary fireworks are also of a date almost contemporaneous with the great Arabic invasion of Asia and Africa. Not to mention the manjanik, a somewhat mythical fire-arm said to have been known and used by Mohammed, it is certain that the Byzantine Greeks received the first knowledge of fireworks (afterward developed in the Greek fire) from their Arab enemies. A writer of the 9th century, Marcus Gracchus, gives a composition of 6 parts of saltpetre, 2 of sulphur, 1 of coal, which comes very near to the correct composition of gunpowder. The latter is stated with sufficient exactness, and first of all European writers, by Roger Bacon, about 1216, in his Liber de Nullitate Magiæ, but yet for fully a hundred years the western nations remained ignorant of its use. The Arabs, however, appear to have soon improved upon the knowledge they received from the Chinese. According to Conde’s history of the Moors in Spain, guns were used, 1118, in the siege of Saragossa, and a culverin of 4 lb. calibre, among other guns, was cast in Spain in 1132. Abd-el-Mumen is reported to have taken Mohadia, near Bona, in Algeria, with fire-arms, in 1156, and the following year Niebla, in Spain, was defended against the Castilians with fire-machines throwing bolts and stones. If the nature of the engines used by the Arabs in the 12th century remains still to be investigated, it is quite certain that in 1280 artillery was used against Cordova, and that by the beginning of the 14th century its knowledge had passed from the Arabs to the Spaniards. Ferdinand IV. took Gibraltar by cannon in 1308. Baza in 1312 and 1323, Martos in 1326, Alicante in 1331, were attacked with artillery, and carcasses were thrown by guns in some of these sieges. From the Spaniards the use of artillery passed to the remaining European nations. The French, in the siege of Puy Guillaume in 1338, had guns, and in the same year the German knights in Prussia used them. By 1350, fire-arms were common in all countries of western, southern, and central Europe. That artillery is of eastern origin, is also proved by the manufacture of the oldest European ordnance. The gun was made of bars of wrought iron welded longitudinally together, and strengthened by heavy iron rings forced over them. It was composed of several pieces, the movable breech being fixed to the

81

Friedrich Engels

flight after loading. The oldest Chinese and Indian guns are made exactly in the same way, and they are as old, or older, than the oldest European guns. Both European and Asiatic cannon, about the 14th century, were of very inferior construction, showing artillery to have still been in its infancy. Thus, if it remains uncertain when the composition of gunpowder and its application to fire-arms were invented, we can at least fix the period when it first became an important engine in warfare; the very clumsiness of the guns of the 14th century, wherever they occur, proves their novelty as regular war-machines. The European guns of the 14th century were very unwieldy affairs. The large-calibred ones could only be moved by being taken to pieces, each piece forming a wagonload. Even the 180 small-calibred guns were exceedingly heavy, there being then no proper proportion established between the weight of the gun and that of the shot, nor between the shot and the charge. When they were brought into position, a sort of timber framework or scaffolding was erected for each gun to be fired from. The town of Ghent had a gun which, with the framework, measured 50 feet in length. Gun-carriages were still unknown. The cannons were mostly fired at very high elevations, like our mortars, and consequently had very little effect until shells were introduced. The projectiles were generally round shot of stone, for small calibres sometimes iron bolts. Yet, with all these drawbacks, cannon was not only used in sieges and the defence of towns, but in the field also, and on board ships of war. As early as 1386 the English took 2 French vessels armed with cannon. If the guns recovered from the Mary Rose (sunk 1545) may serve as a clue, those first ship guns were simply let into and secured in a log of wood hollowed out for the purpose, so as to be incapable of elevation.⎯In the course of the 15th century, considerable improvements were made, both in the construction and application of artillery. Cannon began to be cast of iron, copper, or brass. The movable breech was falling into disuse, the whole gun being cast of a piece. The best founderies were in France and Germany. In France, too, the first attempts were made to bring up and place guns under cover during a siege. About 1450 a sort of trench was introduced, and shortly after the first breaching batteries were constructed by the brothers Bureau, with the aid of which the king of France, Charles VII., retook in one year all the places the English had taken from him. The greatest improvements were, however, made by Charles VIII. of France. He finally did away with the movable breech, cast his guns of brass and in one piece, introduced trunnions, and gun-carriages on wheels, and had none but iron shot. He also simplified the calibres, and took the lighter regularly into the field. Of these, the double cannon was placed on a

82

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Artillery

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

4-wheeled carriage drawn by 35 horses; the remainder had 2-wheeled carriages, the trails dragging on the ground, and were drawn by from 24 down to 2 horses. A body of gunners was attached to each, and the service so organized as to constitute the first distinct corps of field artillery; the lighter calibres were movable enough to shift about with the other troops during action, and even to keep up with the cavalry. It was this new arm which procured to Charles VIII. his surprising successes in Italy. The Italian ordnance was still moved by bullocks; the guns were still composed of several pieces, and had to be placed on their frames when the position was reached; they fired stone shot, and were altogether so clumsy that the French fired a gun oftener in an hour than the Italians could do in a day. The battle of Fornovo (1495), gained by the French field artillery, spread terror over Italy, and the new arm was considered irresistible. Machiavelli’s Arte della Guerra was written expressly, in order to indicate means to counteract its effect by the skilful disposition of the infantry and cavalry. The successors of Charles VIII., Louis XII. and Francis I., continued to improve and lighten their field artillery. Francis organized the ordnance as a distinct department, under a grand-master of the ordnance. His field-guns broke the hitherto invincible masses of the Swiss pikemen at Marignano, 1515, by rapidly moving from one flanking position to another, and thus they decided the battle. The Chinese and Arabs knew the use and manufacture of shells, and it is probable that from the latter this knowledge passed to the European nations. Still, the adoption of this projectile, and of the mortar from which it is now fired, did not take place in Europe before the second half of the 15th century, and is commonly ascribed to Pandolfo Malatesta, prince of Rimia. The first shells consisted of 2 hollow metal hemispheres screwed together, the art of casting them hollow was of later invention.⎯The emperor Charles V., was not behind his French rivals in the improvement of field-guns. He introduced limbers, thus turning the two-wheeled gun, when it had to be moved, into a 4-wheeled vehicle capable of going at a faster pace and of surmounting obstacles of ground. Thus his light guns, at the battle of Renti in 1554, could advance at a gallop.⎯The first theoretical researches, respecting gunnery and the flight of projectiles, also fall in this period. Tartaglia, an Italian, is said to be the discoverer of the fact that the angle of elevation of 45° gives, in vacuo, the greatest range. The Spaniards Collado and Ufano also occupied themselves with similar inquiries. Thus the theoretical foundations for scientific gunnery were laid. About the same time Vannocci Biringoccio’s inquiries into the art of casting (1540) produced considerable progress in the manufacture of cannon, while the invention of the calibre scale by Hartmann, by

83

Friedrich Engels

which every part of a gun was measured by its proportion to the diameter of bore, gave a certain standard for the construction of ordnance, and paved the way for the introduction of fixed theoretical principles, and of general experimental rules.⎯One of the first effects of the improved artillery was a total change in the art of fortification. Since the time of the Assyrian and Babylonian monarchies, that art had made but little progress. But now the new fire-arm everywhere made a breach on the masonry walls of the old system, and a new plan had to be invented. The defences had to be constructed so as to expose as little masonry as possible to the direct fire of the besieger, and to admit of a strong artillery being placed on the ramparts. The old masonry wall was replaced by an earthwork rampart, only faced with masonry, and the small flanking town was turned into a large pentagonal bastion. Gradually the whole of the masonry 181 used in fortification was covered against direct fire by outlying earthworks, and by the middle of the 17th century the defence of a fortified place became once more relatively stronger than the attack, until Vauban again gave the ascendant to the latter. Hitherto the operation of loading had been carried on with loose powder shovelled into the gun. About 1600 the introduction of cartridges, cloth bags containing the prescribed quantity of powder, much abridged the time necessary for loading, and insured greater precision of fire by greater equality of charge. Another important invention was made about the same time, that of grape-shot and case-shot. The construction of field-guns, adapted for throwing hollow shot, also belongs to this period. The numerous sieges occurring during the war of Spain against the Netherlands contributed very much to the improvement of the artillery used in the defence and attack of places, especially as regards the use of mortars and howitzers, of shells, carcasses, and red-hot shot, and the composition of fuzes and other military fireworks. The calibres in use in the beginning of the 17th century were still of all sizes, from the 48-pounder to the smallest falconets bored for balls of 1/2 lb. weight. In spite of all improvements, field artillery was still so imperfect that all this variety of calibre was required to obtain something like the effect we now realize with a few middle-sized guns between the 6-pounder and the 12-pounder. The light calibres, at that time, had mobility, but no effect; the large calibres had effect, but no mobility; the intermediate ones had neither the one nor the other in a degree sufficient for all purposes. Consequently, all calibres were maintained, and jumbled together in one mass, each battery consisting generally of a regular assortment of cannon. The elevation was given to the piece by a quoin. The carriages were still clumsy, and a separate model was of course required for each calibre, so that it was next to

84

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Artillery

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

impossible to take spare wheels and carriages into the field. The axletrees were of wood, and of a different size for each calibre. In addition to this, the dimensions of the cannon and carriages were not even the same for one single calibre, there being everywhere a great many pieces of old construction, and many differences of construction, in the several workshops of a country. Cartridges were still confined to guns in fortresses; in the field the cannon was loaded with loose powder, introduced on a shovel, upon which a wad and the shot were rammed down. Loose powder was equally worked down the touchhole, and the whole process was extremely slow. The gunners were not considered regular soldiers, but formed a guild of their own, recruiting themselves by apprentices, and sworn not to divulge the secrets and mysteries of their handicraft. When a war broke out, the belligerents took as many of them into their service as they could get, over and above their peace establishment. Each of these gunners or bombardiers received the command of a gun, had a saddle-horse, and apprentice, and as many professional assistants as he required, beside the requisite number of men for shifting heavy pieces. Their pay was fourfold that of a soldier. The horses of the artillery were contracted for when a war broke out; the contractor also found harness and drivers. In battle the guns were placed in a row in front of the line, and unlimbered; the horses were taken out of the shafts. When an advance was ordered, the limbers were horsed, and the guns limbered up; sometimes the lighter calibres were moved, for short distances, by men. The powder and shot were carried in separate carts; the limbers had not yet any boxes for ammunition. Manœuvring, loading, priming, pointing, and firing, were all operations of great slowness, according to our present notions, and the number of hits, with such imperfect machinery, and the almost total want of science in gunnery, must have been small indeed. The appearance of Gustavus Adolphus in Germany, during the 30 years’ war, marks an immense progress in artillery. This great warrior did away with the extremely small calibres, which he replaced, first, by his so-called leather guns, light wrought-iron tubes covered with ropes and leather. These were intended to fire grape-shot only, which thus was first introduced into field warfare. Hitherto its use had been confined to the defence of the ditch in fortresses. Along with grape and case shot, he also introduced cartridges in his field artillery. The leather guns not proving very durable, were replaced by light cast-iron 4-pounders, 16 calibres long, weighing 6 cwt. with the carriage, and drawn by two horses. Two of these pieces were attached to each regiment of infantry. Thus the regimental artillery which was preserved in many armies up to the beginning of this century, arose by superseding the old small calibred, but compara-

85

Friedrich Engels

tively clumsy guns, and was originally intended for case shot only, though very soon it was also made to fire round shot. The heavy guns were kept distinct, and formed into powerful batteries occupying favorable positions on the wings or in front of the centre of the army. Thus by the separation of the light from the heavy artillery, and by the formation of batteries, the tactics of field artillery were founded. It was General Torstenson, the inspector-general of the Swedish artillery, who mainly contributed to these results by which field artillery now first became an independent arm, subject to distinct rules of its own for its use in battle. Two further important inventions were made about this time: about 1650, that of the horizontal elevating screw, as it was used until Gribeauval’s times, and about 1697, that of tubes filled with powder for priming, instead of working powder into the touchhole. Both pointing and loading became much facilitated thereby. Another great improvement was the invention of the prolonge, for manœuvring at short distances. The number of guns carried into the field during the 17th century, 182 was very large. At Greifenhagen, Gustavus Adolphus had 80 pieces with 20,000 men, and at Frankfort-on-the-Oder, 200 pieces with 18,000 men. Artillery trains of 100 to 200 guns were of very common occurrence during the wars of Louis XIV. At Malplaquet, nearly 300 pieces of cannon were employed on both sides; this was the largest mass of artillery hitherto brought together on a single field of battle. Mortars were very generally taken into the field about this time. The French still maintained their superiority in artillery. They were the first to do away with the old guild system and enrol the gunners as regular soldiers, forming, in 1671, a regiment of artillery, and regulating the various duties and ranks of the officers. Thus this branch of service was recognized as an independent arm, and the education of the officers and men was taken in hand by the state. An artillery school, for at least 50 years the only one in existence, was founded in France in 1690. A hand-book of artilleristic science, very good for the time, was published in 1697 by Saint Re´my. Still the secrecy surrounding the “mystery” of gunnery was so great that many improvements adopted in other countries were as yet unknown in France, and the construction and composition of every European artillery differed widely from any other. Thus the French had not yet adopted the howitzer, which had been invented in Holland and adopted in most armies before 1700. Limber boxes for ammunition, first introduced by Maurice of Nassau, were unknown in France, and indeed but little adopted. The gun, carriage, and limber were too heavy to admit of their being encumbered with the extra weight of ammunition. The very small calibres, up to 3 lbs. inclusive, had indeed been done away with, but the light regimental ar-

86

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Artillery

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

tillery was unknown in France. The charges used in the artillery of the times hitherto considered were, for guns, generally very heavy; originally equal in weight to the ball. Although the powder was of inferior quality, these charges were still far stronger in effect than those now in use, thus they were one of the chief causes of the tremendous weight of the cannon. To resist such charges the weight of a brass cannon was often from 250 to 400 times the weight of the shot. Gradually, however, the necessity of lightening the guns compelled a reduction of the charge, and about the beginning of the 18th century, the charge was generally only one-half the weight of the shot. For mortars and howitzers the charge was regulated by the distance, and generally very small. The end of the 17th and beginning of the 18th century was the period in which the artillery was in most countries finally incorporated in the army, deprived of its mediæval character of a guild, recognized as an arm, and thus enabled to take a more regular and rapid development. The consequence was an almost immediate and very marked progress. The irregularity and variety of calibres and models, the uncertainty of all existing empirical rules, the total want of well-established principle, now became evident and unbearable. Accordingly, experiments were everywhere made on a large scale to ascertain the effects of calibres, the relations of the calibre to the charge and to the weight and length of the gun, the distribution of metal in the cannon, the ranges, the effects of recoil on the carriages, &c. Between 1730 and 1740, Be´lidor directed such experiments at La Fe`re in France, Robins in England, and Papacino d’Antoni at Turin. The result was a great simplification of the calibres, a better distribution of the metal of the gun, and a very general reduction of the charges, which were now between 1/3 and 1/2 the weight of the shot. The progress of scientific gunnery went side by side with these improvements. Galileo had originated the parabolic theory, Torricelli his pupil, Anderson, Newton, Blondel, Bernoulli, Wolff, and Euler, occupied themselves with further determining the flight of projectiles, the resistance of the air, and the causes of their deviations. The above-named experimental artillerists also contributed materially to the advancement of the mathematical portion of gunnery. Under Frederic the Great the Prussian field artillery was again considerably lightened. The short, light, regimental guns, not more than 14, 16, or 18 calibres long, and weighing from 80 to 150 times the weight of the shot, were found to have a sufficient range for the battles of those days, decided principally by infantry fire. Accordingly, the king had all his 12-pounders cast the same proportional length and weight. The Austrians, in 1753, followed this example, as well as most other states; but Frederic himself, in the latter part of his reign, again provided his reserve

87

Friedrich Engels

artillery with long powerful guns, his experience at Leuthen having convinced him of their superior effects. Frederic the Great introduced a new arm by mounting the gunners of some of his batteries, and thus creating horse artillery, destined to give the same support to cavalry as foot-artillery did to infantry. The new arm proved extremely effective, and was very soon adopted by most armies; some, as the Austrians, mounting the gunners in separate wagons as a substitute. The proportion of guns with the armies of the 18th century was still very large. Frederic the Great had, in 1756, with 70,000 men 206 guns, 1762 with 67,000 men 275 guns, 1778 with 180,000 men 811 guns. These guns, with the exception of the regimental ones which followed their battalions, were organized in batteries of various sizes from 6 to 20 guns each. The regimental guns advanced with the infantry, while the batteries were firing from chosen positions, and sometimes advanced to a second position, but here they generally awaited the issue of the battle; they left, as regards mobility, still very much to be desired, and at Kunersdorf, the loss of the battle was due to the impossibility of bringing up the artillery in the decisive moment. The Prussian general, Tempelhof, also intro 183 duced fieldmortar batteries, the light mortars being carried on the backs of mules; but they were soon again abolished after their uselessness had been proved in the war of 1792 and ’93. The scientific branch of artillery was, during this period, cultivated especially in Germany. Struensee and Tempelhof wrote useful works on the subject, but Scharnhorst was the leading artilleryman of his day. His hand-book of artillery is the first comprehensive really scientific treatise on the subject, while his hand-book for officers, published as early as 1787, contains the first scientific development of the tactics of field artillery. His works, though antiquated in many respects, are still classical. In the Austrian service, Gen. Vega, in the Spanish, Gen. Morla, in the Prussian, Hoyer and Rouvroy, made valuable contributions to artilleristic literature. The French had reorganized their artillery according to the system of Vallie`re in 1732; they retained 24, 16, 12, 8, and 4-pounders, and adopted the 8-inch howitzer. Still there was a great variety of models of construction; the guns were from 22 to 26 calibres long, and weighed about 250 times as much as the corresponding shot. At length, in 1774, General Gribeauval, who had served with the Austrians in the 7 years’ war, and who knew the superiority of the new Prussian and Austrian artilleries, carried the introduction of his new system. The siege artillery was definitively separated from the field artillery. It was formed of all guns heavier than 12-pounders, and of all the old heavy 12-pounder guns. The field artillery was composed of 12-pounder, 8-pounder, and 4-pounder guns, all 18 calibres

88

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Artillery

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

long, weighing 150 times the weight of the shot, and of a 6-inch howitzer. The charge for the guns was definitely fixed at one-third the weight of the shot, the perpendicular elevating screw was introduced, and every part of a gun or carriage was made according to a fixed model, so as to be easily replaced from the stores. Seven models of wheels, and 3 models of axletrees, were sufficient for all the various vehicles used in the French artillery. Although the use of limber-boxes to carry a supply of ammunition was known to most artillerists, Gribeauval did not introduce them in France. The 4-pounders were distributed with the infantry, every battalion receiving 2 of them; the 8 and 12-pounders were distributed in separate batteries as reserve artillery, with a field-forge to every battery. Train and artisan companies were organized, and altogether this artillery of Gribeauval was the first corps of its kind established on a modern footing. It has proved superior to any of its day, in the proportions by which its constructions were regulated, in its material, and in its organization, and for many years it has served as a model. Thanks to Gribeauval’s improvements, the French artillery, during the wars of the revolution, was superior to any other, and soon became, in the hands of Napoleon, an arm of hitherto unknown power. There was no alteration made, except that the system of regimental guns was definitively done away with in 1799, and that with the immense number of 6-pounder and 3-pounder guns conquered in all parts of Europe, these calibres were also introduced in the service. The whole of the field artillery was organized into batteries of 6 pieces, among which one was generally a howitzer, and the remainder guns. But if there was little or no change in the material, there was an immense one in the tactics of artillery. Although the number of guns was somewhat diminished in consequence of the abolition of regimental pieces, the effect of artillery in a battle was heightened by its skilful use. Napoleon used a number of light guns, attached to the divisions of infantry, to engage battle, to make the enemy show his strength, &c., while the mass of the artillery was held in reserve, until the decisive point of attack was determined on; then enormous batteries were suddenly formed, all acting upon that point, and thus preparing by a tremendous cannonade the final attack of the infantry reserves. At Friedland 70 guns, at Wagram 100 guns, were thus formed in line; at Borodino, a battery of 80 guns prepared Ney’s attack on Semenovka. On the other hand, the large masses of reserve cavalry formed by Napoleon, required for their support a corresponding force of horse artillery, which arm again received the fullest attention, and was very numerously represented in the French armies, where its proper tactical use was first practically established. Without Gribeauval’s improvements, this new use of

89

Friedrich Engels

artillery would have been impossible, and with the necessity for the altered tactics, these improvements gradually, and with slight alterations, found their way into all continental armies.⎯The British artillery, about the beginning of the French revolutionary war, was exceedingly neglected, and much behind that of other nations. They had two regimental guns to each battalion, but no reserve artillery. The guns were horsed in single team, the drivers walking alongside with long whips. Horses and drivers were hired. The materiel was of very old-fashioned construction, and except for very short distances, the pieces could move at a walk only. Horse artillery was unknown. After 1800, however, when experience had shown the inadequacy of this system, the artillery was thoroughly reorganized by Major Spearman. The limbers were adapted for double team, the guns brigaded in batteries of 6 pieces, and in general those improvements were introduced which had been in use for some time already on the continent. No expense being spared, the British artillery soon was the neatest, most solidly, and most luxuriously equipped of its kind; great attention was paid to the newly erected corps of horse artillery, which soon distinguished itself by the boldness, rapidity, and precision of its manœuvres. As to fresh improvements in the materiel, they were confined to the construction of 184 the vehicles; the block-tail gun-carriage, and the ammunition wagon with a limber to it have since been adopted in most countries of the continent.⎯The proportion of artillery to the other components of an army became a little more fixed during this period. The strongest proportion of artillery now present with an army was that of the Prussians at Pirmasens⎯7 guns for every 1,000 men. Napoleon considered 3 guns per 1,000 men quite sufficient, and this proportion has become a general rule. The number of rounds to accompany a gun was also fixed; at least 200 rounds per gun, of which 1 /4 or 1/5 were case shot. During the peace following the downfall of Napoleon, the artilleries of all European powers underwent gradual improvements. The light calibres of 3 and 4 lbs. were everywhere abolished, the improved carriages and wagons of the English artillery were adopted in most countries. The charge was fixed almost everywhere at 1/3, the metal of the gun at, or near, 150 times the weight of the shot, and the length of the piece at from 16 to 18 calibres. The French reorganized their artillery in 1827. The field-guns were fixed at 8 and 12 lb. calibre, 18 calibres long, charge 1/3, weight of metal in gun 150 times that of the shot. The English carriages and wagons were adopted, and limber-boxes for the first time introduced into the French service. Two kinds of howitzers, of 15 and 16 centimetres of bore, were attached to the 8 and 12-pounder batteries, respectively. A great simplicity distinguishes this

90

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Artillery

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

new system of field artillery. There are but 2 sizes of gun-carriages, 1 size of limber, 1 size of wheel, and 2 sizes of axletrees to all the vehicles used in the French field batteries. Beside this, a separate mountain artillery was introduced, carrying howitzers of 12 centimetres bore.⎯The English field artillery now has for its almost exclusive calibre the 9-pounders of 17 calibres long, weight 11/2 cwt. to 1 pound weight of shot, charge 1/3 the weight of shot. In every battery there are 2 24-pounder 51/2-inch howitzers. Six-pounder and 12-pounder guns were not sent out at all in the late Russian war. There are 2 sizes of wheels in use. In both the English and French foot artillery the gunners are mounted during manœuvres on the limber and ammunition wagons.⎯The Prussian army carries 6 and 12-pounder guns, 18 calibres long, weighing 145 times, and charged with 1 /3 the weight of the shot. The howitzers are 51/2 and 61/2-inch bore. There are 6 guns and 2 howitzers to a battery. There are 2 wheels and 2 axletrees, and 1 limber. The gun-carriages are of Gribeauval construction. In the foot artillery, for quick manœuvres, 5 gunners, sufficient to serve the gun, mount the limber-box and the off-horses; the remaining 3 follow as best they can. The ammunition wagons are not, therefore, attached to the guns, as in the French and British service, but form a column apart, and are kept out of range during action. The improved English ammunition wagon was adopted in 1842.⎯The Austrian artillery has 6 and 12-pounder guns, 16 calibres long, weighing 135 times, charged with 1/4 the weight of the shot. The howitzers are similar to those of the Prussian service. Six guns and 2 howitzers compose a battery.⎯The Russian artillery has 6 and 12-pounder guns, 18 calibres long, 150 times the weight of the shot, with a charge of 1/3 its weight. The howitzers are 5 and 6-inch bore. According to the calibre and destination, either 8 or 12 pieces form a battery, one-half of which are guns, and the other half howitzers.⎯The Sardinian army has 8-pounder and 16-pounder guns, with a corresponding size of howitzer. The smaller German armies all have 6 and 12-pounders, the Spaniards 8 and 12-pounders, the Portuguese, Swedes, Danes, Belgians, Dutch, and Neapolitans 6 and 12-pounders.⎯The start given to the British artillery by Major Spearman’s reorganization, along with the interest for further improvement thereby awakened in that service, and the wide range offered to artilleristic progress by the immense naval artillery of Great Britain, have contributed to many important inventions. The British compositions for fireworks, as well as their gunpowder, are superior to any other, and the precision of their time fuzes is unequalled. The principal invention latterly made in the British artillery are the shrapnel shells (hollow shot, filled with musket balls, and exploding during the flight), by which the effective range of grape has been

91

Friedrich Engels

rendered equal to that of round shot. The French, skilful as they are as constructors and organizers, are nearly the only army which has not yet adopted this new and terrible projectile; they have not been able to make out the fuze composition, upon which every thing depends.⎯A new system of field artillery has been proposed by Louis Napoleon, and appears to be in course of adoption in France. The whole of the 4 calibres of guns and howitzers now in use, to be superseded by a light 12-pounder gun, 151/2 calibres long, weighing 110 times, and charged with 1/4 the weight of the solid shot. A shell of 12 centim. (the same now used in the mountain artillery), to be fired out of the same gun with a reduced charge, thus superseding howitzers for the special use of hollow shot. The experiments made in 4 artillery schools of France have been very successful, and it is said that these guns showed a marked superiority, in the Crimea, over the Russian guns, mostly 6-pounders. The English, however, maintain that their long 9-pounder is superior in range and precision to this new gun, and it is to be observed that they were the first to introduce, but very soon again to abandon, a light 12-pounder for a charge of 1/4 the shot’s weight, and which has evidently served Louis Napoleon as a model. The firing of shells from common guns is taken from the Prussian service, where, in sieges, the 24-pounders are made to fire shells for certain purposes. Nevertheless, the capabilities of Louis Napoleon’s gun have still to be determined by experience, 185 and as nothing special has been published on its effects in the late war, we cannot here be expected finally to judge on its merits.⎯The laws and experimental maxims for propelling solid, hollow, or other projectiles, from cannon, the ascertained proportions of range, elevation, charge, the effects of windage and other causes of deviation, the probabilities of hitting the mark, and the various circumstances that may occur in warfare, constitute the science of gunnery. Though the fact, that a heavy body projected in vacuo, in a direction different from the vertical, will describe a parabola in its flight, forms the fundamental principle of this science, yet the resistance of the air, increasing as it does with the velocity of the moving body, alters very materially the application of the parabolic theory in gunnery practice. Thus for guns propelling their shot at an initial velocity of 1,400 to 1,700 feet in a second, the line of flight varies considerably from the theoretic parabola, so much so that with them, the greatest range is obtained at an elevation of only about 20 degrees, while according to the parabolic theory it should be at 45 degrees. Practical experiments have determined, with some degree of precision, these deviations, and thus fixed the proper elevations for each class of guns, for a given charge and range. But there are other circumstances affecting the flight of the shot. There is, first of

92

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Artillery

5

10

15

20

25

30

all, the windage, or the difference by which the diameter of the shot must be less than that of the bore, to facilitate loading. It causes first an escape of the expanding gas during the explosion of the charge, in other words, a reduction of the force, and secondly an irregularity in the direction of the shot, causing deflections in a vertical, or horizontal sense. Then there is the unavoidable inequality in the weight of the charge, or in its condition at the moment it is used, the eccentricity of the shot, the centre of gravity not coinciding with the centre of the sphere, which causes deflections varying according to the relative position of the centres at the moment of firing, and many other causes producing irregularity of results under seemingly the same conditions of flight. For field-guns, we have seen that the charge of 1/3 of the shot’s weight, and a length of 16–18 calibres are almost universally adopted. With such charges, the point-blank range (the gun being laid horizontal), the shot will touch the ground at about 300 yards distance, and by elevating the gun, this range may be increased up to 3,000 or 4,000 yards. Such a range, however, leaves all probability of hitting the mark out of the question, and for actual and effective practice, the range of field-guns does not exceed 1,400 or 1,500 yards, at which distance scarcely 1 shot out of 6 or 8 might be expected to hit the mark. The decisive ranges, in which alone cannon can contribute to the issue of a battle, are, for round shot and shell, between 600 and 1,100 yards, and at these ranges the probability of striking the object is indeed far greater. Thus it is reckoned that at 700 yards about 50 per cent., at 900 yards about 35 per cent., at 1,100 yards 25 per cent. out of the shots fired from a 6-pounder, will hit a target representing the front of a battalion in column of attack (34 yards long by 2 yards high). The 9 and 12-pounder will give somewhat better results. In some experiments made in France in 1850, the 8-pounders and 12-pounders then in use gave the following results, against a target 30 metres by 3 metres (representing a troop of cavalry) at:⎯ 12-p’ders, hits, 8-p’ders, “

35

40

500 met. 64 p. ct. 67 “

600 met. 54 p. ct. 44 “

700 met. 43 p. ct. 40 “

800 met. 37 p. ct. 28 “

900 met. 32 p. ct. 28 “

Though the target was higher by one-half, the practice here remained below the average stated above. With field-howitzers the charge is considerably less in proportion to the weight of the projectile than with guns. The short length of the piece (7 to 10 calibres) and the necessity of firing it at great elevations, are the causes of this. The recoil from a howitzer fired under high elevation, acting downward as well as backward, would, if a heavy charge was used, strain the carriage so as to disable it after a

93

Friedrich Engels

few rounds. This is the reason why in most continental artilleries several charges are in use in the same field-howitzer, thus making the gunner to produce a given range by different combination of charge and elevation. Where this is not the case, as in the British artillery, the elevation taken is necessarily very low, and scarcely exceeding that of guns; the range-tables for the British 24-pounder howitzer, 21/2-pound charge, do not extend beyond 1,050 yards, with 4° elevation; the same elevation, for the 9-pounder gun, giving a range of 1,400 yards. There is a peculiar short kind of howitzer in use in most German armies, which is capable of an elevation of from 16 to 20 degrees, thus acting somewhat like a mortar; its charge is, necessarily, but small; it has this advantage over the common, long howitzer, that its shells can be made to drop into covered positions, behind undulations of ground, &c. This advantage is, however, of a doubtful nature against movable objects like troops, though of great importance where the object covered from direct fire is immovable; and as to direct fire, these howitzers, from their shortness (6 to 7 calibres) and small charge, are all but useless. The charge, to obtain various ranges at an elevation fixed by the purpose intended (direct firing or shelling), necessarily varies very much; in the Prussian field artillery, where these howitzers are still used, not less than twelve different charges occur. Withal, the howitzer is but a very imperfect piece of cannon, and the sooner it is superseded by an effective field shell-gun, the better.⎯The heavy cannon used in fortresses, sieges, and naval armaments, are of various description. Up to the late Russian war, it was not customary to use in siege-warfare heavier guns than 24-pounders, or, at the very outside, a few 32-pounders. Since the siege of 186 Sebastopol, however, siege-guns and ship-guns are the same, or, rather, the effect of the heavy ship-guns in trenches and land-defences has proved so unexpectedly superior to that of the customary light siege-guns, that the war of sieges will henceforth have to be decided, in a great measure, by such heavy naval cannon. In both siege and naval artillery, there are generally found various models of guns for the same calibre. There are light and short guns, and there are long and heavy ones. Mobility being a minor consideration, guns for particular purposes are often made 22 to 25 calibres long, and some of these are, in consequence of this greater length, as precise as rifles in their practice. One of the best of this class of guns is the Prussian brass 24-pounder of 10 feet 4 inches, or 22 calibres long, weighing 60 cwt.; for dismounting practice in a siege, there is no gun like it. For most purposes, however, a length of 16 to 20 calibres is found quite sufficient, and as, upon an average, size of calibre will be preferable to extreme precision, a mass of 60 cwt. of iron or gun-metal will be more

94

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Artillery

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

usefully employed, as a rule, in a heavy 32-pounder of 16–17 calibres long. The new long iron 32-pounder, one of the finest guns in the British navy, 9 feet long, 50 cwt., measures but 161/2 calibres. The long 68-pounder, 112 cwt., pivot-gun of all the large screw 131 gun-ships, measures 10 feet 10 inches, or a trifle more than 16 calibres; another kind of pivot-gun, the long 56-pounder of 98 cwt., measures 11 feet, or 171/2 calibres. Still a great number of less effective guns enter into naval armaments even now, bored-up guns of merely 11 or 12 calibres, and carronades of 7–8 calibres long. There is, however, another kind of naval gun that was introduced about 35 years ago by General Paixhans, and has since received an immense importance, the shell-gun. This kind of ordnance has undergone considerable improvement, and the French shell-gun still comes nearest to that constructed by the inventor; it has retained the cylindrical chamber for the charge. In the English service the chamber is either a short frustum of a cone, reducing only very slightly the diameter of the bore, or there is no chamber at all; it measures in length from 10 to 13 calibres, and is intended for hollow shot exclusively; but the long 68-pdrs. and 56-pdrs. mentioned above throw solid shot and shell indiscriminately. In the U. S. navy Capt. Dahlgren has proposed a new system of shell-guns, consisting of short guns of very large calibre (11 and 9 inches bore), which has been partly adopted in the armament of several new frigates. The value of this system has still to be fixed by actual experience, which must determine whether the tremendous effect of such enormous shells can be obtained without the sacrifice of precision, which cannot but suffer from the great elevation required at long ranges. In sieges and naval gunnery, the charges are as variable as the constructions of the guns themselves, and the ends to be attained. In laying a breach in masonry, the heaviest charges are used, and these amount, with some very heavy and solid guns, to one-half the weight of the shot. On the whole, however, one-fourth may be considered a full average charge for siege purposes, increased sometimes to one-third, diminished at others to one-sixth. On board ship, there are generally 3 classes of charges to each gun; the high charge, for distant practice, chasing, &c., the medium charge, for the average effective distances of naval engagements; the reduced, for close quarters and double shotting. For the long 32-pdrs. they are equal to 5/16, 1/4, and 3/16 of the shot’s weight. For short light guns and shell-guns, these proportions are of course still more reduced; but with the latter, too, the hollow shot does not reach the weight of the solid one. Beside guns and shell-guns, heavy howitzers and mortars enter into the composition of siege and naval artillery. Howitzers are short pieces intended to throw shell at an elevation up to 12 or

95

Friedrich Engels

30 degrees, and to be fixed on carriages; mortars are still shorter pieces, fixed to blocks, intended to throw shell at an elevation generally exceeding 20 degrees, and increasing even to 60 degrees. Both are chambered ordnance; i. e. the chamber or part of the bore intended to receive the charge, is less in diameter than the flight or general bore. Howitzers are seldom of a calibre exceeding 8 inches, but mortars are bored up to 13, 15, and more inches. The flight of a shell from a mortar, from the smallness of the charge (1–20th to 1–40th of the weight of the shell), and from its considerable elevation, is less interfered with by the resistance of the air, and here the parabolic theory may be used in gunnery calculations without material deviation from practical results. Shells from mortars are intended to act either by bursting, and, as carcasses, setting fire to combustible objects by the jet of flame from the fuzes, or by their weight as well, in breaking through vaulted and otherwise secured roofs; in the latter case the higher elevation is preferred, giving the highest flight and greatest momentum of fall. Shells from howitzers are intended to act, first by impact, and afterward by bursting. From their great elevation, and the small initial velocity imparted to the shell, and consequent little resistance offered to it by the air, a mortar throws its projectile further than any other kind of ordnance, the object fired at being generally a whole town, there is little precision required; and thus it happens that the effective range of heavy mortars extends to 4,000 yards and upward, from which distance Sveaborg was bombarded by the Anglo-French mortar-boats.⎯The application of these different kinds of cannon, projectiles, and charges, during a siege, will be treated of under that head; the use of naval artillery constitutes nearly the whole fighting part of naval elementary tactics, and does therefore not belong to this subject; it thus only remains for us to make a few observations on the use and tactics of field artillery.⎯Artil 187 lery has no arms for hand-to-hand fight; all its forces are concentrated in the distant effect of its fire. It is, moreover, in fighting condition as long only as it is in position; as soon as it limbers up, or attaches the prolonge for a movement, it is temporarily disabled. From both causes, it is the most defensive of all the 3 arms; its powers of attack are very limited indeed, for attack is onward movement, and its culminating point is the clash of steel against steel. The critical moment for artillery is therefore the advance, taking position, and getting ready for action under the enemy’s fire. Its deployments into line, its preliminary movements, will have to be masked either by obstacles of ground or by lines of troops. It will thus gain a position parallel to the line it has to occupy, and then advance into position straight against the enemy, so as not to expose itself to a flanking fire.

96

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Artillery

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The choice of a position is a thing of the highest importance, both as regards the effect of the fire of a battery, and that of the enemy’s fire upon it. To place his guns so that their effect on the enemy is as telling as possible, is the first important point; security from the enemy’s fire the second. A good position must afford firm and level standing ground for the wheels and trails of the guns; if the wheels do not stand level, no good practice is possible; and if the trail digs into the ground, the carriage will soon be broken by the power of recoil. It must, beside, afford a free view of the ground held by the enemy, and admit of as much liberty of movement as possible. Finally, the ground in front, between the battery and the enemy, must be favorable to the effect of our arms, and unfavorable, if possible, to that of theirs. The most favorable ground is a firm and level one, affording the advantage of ricochet practice, and making the shot that go short strike the enemy after the first graze. It is wonderful what difference the nature of the ground will make in artillery practice. On soft ground the shot, on grazing, will deflect or make irregular rebounds, if they do not stick fast in it at once. The way the furrows run in ploughed land, makes a great difference, especially with canister and shrapnell firing; if they run crossways, most of the shot will bury themselves in them. If the ground be soft, undulating, or broken immediately in front of us, but level and hard further on toward the enemy, it will favor our practice, and protect us from his. Firing down or up inclinations of more than 5 degrees, or firing from the top of one hill to that of another, is very unfavorable. As to our safety from the enemy’s fire, very small objects will increase that. A thin fence, scarcely hiding our position, a group of shrubs, or high corn, will prevent his taking correct aim. A small abrupt bank on which our guns are placed will catch the most dangerous of his projectiles. A dyke makes a capital parapet, but the best protection is the crest of a slight undulation of ground, behind which we draw our guns so far back that the enemy sees nothing but the muzzles; in this position every shot striking the ground in front, will bound high over our heads. Still better is it, if we can cut out a stand for our guns into the crest, about 2 feet deep, flattening out to the rear with the slope, so as to command the whole of the external slope of the hill. The French under Napoleon were extremely skilful in placing their guns, and from them all other nations have learnt this art. Regarding the enemy, the position should be chosen so as to be free from flank or enfilading fire; regarding our own troops, it should not hamper their movements. The usual distance from gun to gun in line is 20 yards, but there is no necessity to adhere strictly to any of these rules of the parade-ground. Once in position, the limbers remain close behind their guns, while the wagons, in

97

Friedrich Engels

some services, remain under cover. Where the wagons are used for mounting the men, they too must run the chance of going into effective range. The battery directs its fire upon that portion of the enemy’s forces which at the time most menaces our position; if our infantry is to attack, it fires upon either the opposing artillery, if that is yet to be silenced, or upon the masses of infantry if they expose themselves; but if a portion of the enemy advance to actual attack, that is the point to aim at, not minding the hostile artillery which fires on us. Our fire against artillery will be most effective when that artillery cannot reply, i.e. when it is limbering up, moving, or unlimbering. A few good shots cause great confusion in such moments. The old rule that artillery, excepting in pressing moments of importance, should not approach infantry to within 300 yards, or the range of small arms, will now soon be antiquated. With the increasing range of modern muskets, field artillery, to be effective, cannot any longer keep out of musket range; and a gun with its limber, horses, and gunners, forms a group quite large enough for skirmishers to fire at, at 600 yards with the Minie´ or Enfield rifle. The long-established idea, that who wishes to live long must enlist in the artillery, appears to be no longer true, for it is evident that skirmishing from a distance will in future be the most effective way of combating artillery; and where is the battle-field in which there could not be found capital cover for skirmishers within 600 yards from any possible artillery emplacement?⎯Against advancing lines or columns of infantry, artillery has thus far always had the advantage; a few effective rounds of grape, or a couple of solid shot ploughing through a deep column, have a terribly cooling effect. The nearer the attack comes, the more effective becomes our practice; and even at the last moment we can easily withdraw our guns from an opponent of such slowness; though whether a line of chasseurs de Vincennes, advancing at the pas gymnastique, would not be down upon us before we had limbered up, must still remain doubtful.⎯Against cavalry, coolness gives the advantage to artillery. If the 188 latter reserve their grape to within 100 yards, and then give a well-aimed volley, the cavalry will be found pretty far off by the time the smoke has cleared away. At all events, to limber up and try to escape, would be the worst plan; for cavalry would be sure to overtake the guns.⎯Artillery against artillery, the ground, the calibres, the relative number of guns, and the use made thereof by the parties, will decide. It is, however, to be noticed, that though the large calibre has an undoubted advantage at long ranges, the smaller calibre approaches in its effects those of the large one as the ranges decrease, and at short distances almost equals them. At Borodino, Napoleon’s artillery consisted principally of 3 and 4-pounders, while the

98

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Artillery

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Russians exulted in their numerous 12-pounders; yet the French small pop-guns had decidedly the best of it.⎯In supporting either infantry or cavalry, the artillery will have always to gain a position on its flank. If the infantry advances, it advances by half-batteries or sections on a line with the skirmishers, or rather in advance of it; as soon as the infantry masses prepare to attack with the bayonet, it trots up to 400 yards from the enemy, and prepares the charge by a rapid fire of case shot. If the attack is repelled, the artillery will re-open its fire on the pursuing enemy until compelled to withdraw; but if the attack succeeds, its fire contributes a great deal to the completion of the success, one-half of the guns firing while the other advances. Horse artillery, as a supporting arm to cavalry, imparting to it some of that defensive element which it naturally lacks altogether, is now one of the most favorite branches of all services, and brought to high perfection in all European armies. Though intended to act on cavalry ground, and in company with cavalry, there is no horse artillery in the world which would not be prepared to gallop across a country where its own cavalry would not follow without sacrificing its order and cohesion. The horse artillery of every country forms the boldest and skilfullest riders of its army, and they will take a particular pride, on any grand field-day, in dashing across obstacles, guns and all, before which the cavalry will stop. The tactics of horse artillery consist in boldness and coolness. Rapidity, suddenness of appearance, quickness of fire, readiness to move off at a moment’s notice, and to take that road which is too difficult for the cavalry, these are the chief qualities of a good horse artillery. Choice of position there is but little in this constant change of places; every position is good so as it is close to the enemy and out of the way of the cavalry; and it is during the ebbing and flowing of cavalry engagements, that the artillery, skirting the advancing and receding waves, has to show every moment its superior horsemanship and presence of mind in getting clear of this surging sea across all sorts of ground where not every cavalry dares, or likes to follow.⎯In the attack and defence of posts, the tactics of artillery are similar. The principal thing is always to fire upon that point from which, in defence, threatens the nearest and most direct danger, or in attack, from which our advance can be most effectually checked. The destruction of material obstacles also forms part of its duties, and here the various calibres and kinds of ordnance are applied according to their nature and effect; howitzers for setting fire to houses, heavy guns to batter down gates, walls, and barricades.⎯All these remarks apply to the artillery which in every army is attached to the divisions. But the grandest results are obtained by the reserve artillery in great and decisive battles. Held back out of sight and

99

Friedrich Engels

out of range during the greater part of the day, it is brought forward in a mass upon the decisive point as soon as the time for the final effort has come. Formed in a crescent a mile or more in extent, it concentrates its destructive fire upon a comparatively small point. Unless an equivalent force of guns is there to meet it, half an hour’s rapid firing settles the matter. The enemy begins to wither under the hailstorm of howling shot; the intact reserves of infantry advance⎯a last, sharp, short struggle, and the victory is won. Thus did Napoleon prepare Macdonald’s advance at Wagram, and resistance was broken before the 3 divisions advancing in a column had fired a shot or crossed a bayonet. And since those great days only can the tactics of field artillery be said to exist. (See also CANNON.)

100

5

10

Karl Marx Bugeaud

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

82 BUGEAUD DE LA PICONNERIE, THOMAS ROBERT, duc d’Isly, marshal of France, born at Limoges, in Oct. 1784, died in Paris, June 10, 1849. He entered the French army as a private soldier in 1804, became a corporal during the campaign of 1805, served as sub-lieutenant in the campaign of Prussia and Poland (1806–’7), was present in 1811, as major, at the sieges of Lerida, Tortosa, and Tarragona, and was promoted to the rank of lieutenant-colonel after the battle of Ordal, in Catalonia. After the first return of the Bourbons Col. Bugeaud celebrated the white lily in some doggerel rhymes; but these poetical effusions being passed by rather contemptuously, he again embraced, during the Hundred Days, the party of Napoleon, who sent him to the army of the Alps, at the head of the 14th regiment of the line. On the 2d return of the Bourbons he retired to Excideuil, to the estate of his father. At the time of the invasion of Spain by the duke of Angouleˆme he offered his sword to the Bourbons, but the offer being declined, he turned liberal, and joined the movement which finally led to the revolution 83 of 1830. He was chosen as a member of the chamber of deputies in 1831, and made a major-general by Louis Philippe. Appointed governor of the citadel of Blaye in 1833, he had the duchess of Berry under his charge, but earned no honor from the manner in which he discharged his mission, and became afterward known by the name of the “ex-gaoler of Blaye.” During the debates of the chamber of deputies on Jan. 16, 1834, M. Larabit complaining of Soult’s military dictatorship, and Bugeaud interrupting him with the words, “Obedience is the soldier’s first duty,” another deputy, M. Dulong, pungently asked, “What, if ordered to become a gaoler?” This incident led to a duel between Bugeaud and Dulong, in which the latter was shot. The consequent exasperation of the Parisians was still heightened by his cooperation in suppressing the Paris insurrection of April 13 and 14, 1834. The forces destined to suppress that insurrection were divided into 3 brigades, one of which Bugeaud commanded. In the rue Transnonain a handful of en-

101

Karl Marx

thusiasts who still held a barricade on the morning of the 14th, when the serious part of the affair was over, were cruelly slaughtered by an overwhelming force. Although this spot lay without the circumscription made over to Bugeaud’s brigade, and he, therefore, had not participated in the massacre, the hatred of the people nailed his name to the deed, and despite all declarations to the contrary, persisted in stigmatizing him as the “man of the rue Transnonain.” Sent, June 16, 1836, to Algeria, Gen. Bugeaud became invested with a commanding position in the province of Oran, almost independent of the governor-general. Ordered to fight Abd el Kader, and to subdue him by the display of an imposing army, he concluded the treaty of the Tafna, allowing the opportunity for military operations to slip away, and placing his army in a critical state before it had begun to act. Bugeaud fought several battles previous to this treaty. A secret article, not reduced to writing, stipulated that 30,000 boojoos (about $12,000) should be paid to Gen. Bugeaud. Called back to France, he was promoted to the rank of lieutenant-general and appointed grand officer of the legion of honor. When the secret clause of the treaty of the Tafna oozed out, Louis Philippe authorized Bugeaud to expend the money on certain public roads, thus to increase his popularity among his electors and secure his seat in the chamber of deputies. At the commencement of 1841 he was named governor-general of Algeria, and with his administration the policy of France in Algeria underwent a complete change. He was the first governor-general who had an army adequate to its task placed under his command, who exerted an absolute authority over the generals second in command, and who kept his post long enough to act up to a plan needing years for its execution. The battle of Isly (Aug. 14, 1844), in which he vanquished the army of the emperor of Morocco with vastly inferior forces, owed its success to his taking the Mussulmans by surprise, without any previous declaration of war, and when negotiations were on the eve of being concluded. Already raised to the dignity of a marshal of France, July 17, 1843, Bugeaud was now created duke of Isly. Abd el Kader having, after his return to France, again collected an army, he was sent back to Algeria, where he promptly crushed the Arabian revolt. In consequence of differences between him and Guizot, occasioned by his expedition into Kabylia, which he had undertaken against ministerial orders, he was replaced by the duke of Aumale, and, according to Guizot’s expression, “enabled to come and enjoy his glory in France.” During the night of Feb. 22–23, 1848, he was, on the secret advice of Guizot, ordered into the presence of Louis Philippe, who conferred upon him the supreme command of the whole armed force⎯the line as well as the national guard. At noon of the

102

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bugeaud

5

10

15

20

23d, followed by Gens. Rulhie`res, Bedeau, Lamoricie`re, De Salles, St. Arnaud, and others, he proceeded to the general staff at the Tuileries, there to be solemnly invested with the supreme command by the duke of Nemours. He reminded the officers present that he who was about to lead them against the Paris revolutionists “had never been beaten, neither on the battle-field nor in insurrections,” and for this time again promised to make short work of the “rebel rabble.” Meantime, the news of his nomination contributed much to give matters a decisive turn. The national guard, still more incensed by his appointment as supreme commander, broke out in the cry of “Down with Bugeaud!” “Down with the man of the rue Transnonain!” and positively declared that they would not obey his orders. Frightened by this demonstration, Louis Philippe withdrew his orders, and spent the 23d in vain negotiations. On Feb. 24, alone of Louis Philippe’s council, Bugeaud still urged war to the knife; but the king already considered the sacrifice of the marshal as a means to make his own peace with the national guard. The command was consequently placed in other hands, and Bugeaud dismissed. Two days later he placed, but in vain, his sword at the command of the provisional government. When Louis Napoleon became president he conferred the command-in-chief of the army of the Alps upon Bugeaud, who was also elected by the department of Charente-Infe´rieure as representative in the national assembly. He published several literary productions, which treat chiefly of Algeria. In Aug. 1852, a monument was erected to him in Algiers, and also one in his native town.

103

Karl Marx The Commercial Crisis in England

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5196, 15. Dezember 1857.

While on this side of the ocean we were indulging in our little prelude to that great symphonious crash of bankruptcy which has since burst upon the world, our eccentric cotemporary The London Times was playing triumphant rhetorical variations, with the “soundness” of British commerce as its theme. Now, however, it tunes another and a sadder chord. In one of its latest impressions, that of Nov. 26, brought to these happy shores by the Europa yesterday, that journal declares “the trading classes of England to be unsound to the core.” Then proceeding to work itself up to the highest pitch of moral indignation, it exclaims: “It is the demoralizing career pursued through eight or ten years of prosperity, before the consummation arrives, that works the deepest ruin. It is in calling into existence gangs of reckless speculators and fictitious bill drawers, and elevating them as examples of successful British enterprise, so as to discourage reliance upon the slow profits of honest industry, that the poison is infused. Each point of corruption thus created forms an everextending circle.” We shall not now inquire whether the English journalists who, for a decade, propagated the doctrine that the era of commercial convulsions was finally closed with the introduction of Free Trade, are now warranted in turning all at once from sycophantic encomiasts into Roman censors of modern money-making. The following statements submitted to recent meetings of creditors in Scotland, may serve, however, as matter-of-fact comment on the “soundness” of British commerce. John Monteith & Co., liabilities in excess of the assets, D. & J. Macdonald Godfrey, Pattison & Co. William Smith & Co. J. Inches Robinson & Co. Total

104

£430,000 334,000 240,000 104,000 75,000 £1,183,000

5

10

15

20

25

Marx: Krisenheft. Book of the Crisis of 1857. S. [39]

Marx: Krisenheft. 1857 France. S. [25a]

The Commercial Crisis in England

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

“It appears from this statement,” as The North British Mail says, “that on the bankrupts’ own showing, £1,183,000 have been lost to the creditors of five houses.” Still the very recurrence of crises despite all the warnings of the past, in regular intervals, forbids the idea of seeking their final causes in the recklessness of single individuals. If speculation toward the close of a given commercial period appears as the immediate forerunner of the crash, it should not be forgotten that speculation itself was engendered in the previous phases of the period, and is therefore, itself a result and an accident, instead of the final cause and the substance. The political economists who pretend to explain the regular spasms of industry and commerce by speculation, resemble the now extinct school of natural philosophers who considered fever as the true cause of all maladies. The European crisis has so far maintained its center in England, and in England herself, as we anticipated, it has changed aspects. If the first reaction on Great Britain of our American collapse manifested itself in a monetary panic, attended by a general depression in the produce market, and followed more remotely by manufacturing distress, the industrial crisis now stands at the top and the monetary difficulty at the bottom. If London was for a moment the focus of the conflagration, Manchester is so now. The most serious convulsion which English industry ever sustained, and the only one which produced great social changes, the industrial distress from 1838 to 1843, was, for a short period during 1839, accompanied by a contraction of the money market, while during the greater part of the same epoch the rate of interest ruled low, and even sunk down to 21/2 and 2 per cent. We make this remark, not because we consider the relative improvement of the London money market as a symptom of its final recovery, but only to note the fact, that in a manufacturing country like England, the fluctuations of the money market are far from indicating either the intensity or the extent of a commercial crisis. Compare, for instance, the London and the Manchester papers of the same date. The former, watching but the efflux and influx of bullion, are all brightness when the Bank of England, by a new purchase of gold, has “strengthened its position.” The latter are all gloom, feeling that strength has been bought at their expense, by a rise in the rate of interest and a fall in the price of their products. Hence, even Mr. Tooke, the writer of the “History of Prices,” well as he handles the phenomena of the London money and colonial markets, has proved unable not only to delineate, but even to comprehend, the contractions in the heart of English production.

107

Karl Marx

As to the English money market, its history during the week ending Nov. 27 shows, on the one hand, a continuous alternation between a day of failures and a day marked by the absence of failures; on the other hand, the recovery of the Bank of England and the downfall of the Northumberland and Durham District Bank. The latter bank, founded 21 years ago, numbering 408 shareholders, and disposing of a paid-up capital of £ 652,891, had its head office at Newcastle and its branch establishments at Alnwick, Berwick, Hexham, Morpeth, North and South Shields, Sunderland and Durham. Its liabilities are stated to amount to three millions sterling, and the weekly wages alone, paid through its instrumentality, to £35,000. The stoppage of the great collieries and ironworks carried on by the advances of this bank will, of course, be the first consequence of its collapse. Many thousand workingmen will thus be thrown out of employment. The Bank of England is stated to have increased her metallic reserve by about £ 700,000, an influx of bullion to be accounted for partly by the cessation of the drain to Scotland, partly by shipments from this country and from Russia, and lastly by the arrival of Australian gold. There is nothing remarkable in this movement, since it is perfectly understood that the Bank of England, by screwing up the rate of interest, will curtail imports, force exports, draw back a portion of the British capital invested abroad, and consequently turn the balance of trade and effect an influx of bullion to a certain amount. It is no less sure that on the least relaxation of the terms of discount gold will again begin to flow abroad. The only question is how long the Bank will be able to maintain these terms. The official reports of the Board of Trade for October, a month during which the minimum rate of discount was successively advanced to 6, 7, and 8 per cent, prove evidently that the first effect of that operation was not to stop manufactures, but to force their products into foreign markets and to curtail the importation of foreign produce. In spite of the American crisis, the exports for October, 1857, exhibit a surplus of £ 318,838, as compared with October, 1856, while the considerable decrease in the consumption of all articles of food and luxuries exhibited by the same returns proves that this surplus manufacture was far from being remunerative, or the natural consequence of thriving industry. The recoil of the crisis on English industry will become apparent in the next Board of Trade returns. A comparison of the returns for the single months from January, 1857, to October, 1857, will show that English production attained its maximum in the month of May, when the surplus export over that of May, 1856, amounted to £2,648,904. In June, consequent upon the first news of the Indian mutinies, the total produc-

108

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Commercial Crisis in England

5

10

tion sank down beneath that of the corresponding month in 1856, and exhibited a relative decrease in the exports of £30,247. In July, despite the contraction of the Indian market, the production had not only recovered the standard of the corresponding month in 1856, but exceeded it by no less a sum than £2,233,306. It is, therefore, clear that in that month the other markets had to absorb beyond their ordinary consumption not only the portion usually sent to India, but a great surplus over the usual English production. In that month, therefore, the foreign markets seem to have been so far overstocked that the increase in the exports was successively forced down from about two and one third millions to £ 885,513 in August, £852,203 in September, and £318,838 in October. The study of the English trade reports affords the only trustworthy clue to the mystery of the present convulsion in that country.

109

Karl Marx The Financial Crisis in Europe

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5202, 22. Dezember 1857.

The arrival yesterday morning of the mails of the Canada and the Adriatic puts us in possession of a week’s history of the European financial crisis. This history may be summed up in a few words. Hamburg still formed the center of the convulsion, which reacted more or less severely on Prussia, and was gradually reducing the English money market to the unsettled state which it seemed to be recovering from. Some distant echoes of the storm had reverberated from Spain and Italy. Through the whole of Europe the palsy of industrial activity and the consequent distress of the laboring classes are rapidly spreading. On the other hand, the comparative resistance which France still opposed to the contagion puzzled the political economists as a riddle harder to be solved than the general crisis itself. The Hamburg crisis was thought to have passed its climax after Nov. 21, upon the establishment of the Guaranteed Discount Association, the total subscriptions for which amounted to 12,000,000 marks banco, destined to secure the circulation of such bills and notes as should receive the stamp of the Association. Still, some days later, the recurrence of some failures, and events like the suicide of the bill broker Gorva, foreshadowed new disasters. On Nov. 26, the panic again had full swing; and as at first the Discount Association, so now the Government itself stepped forward to stem its current. On the 27th, the Senate proposed, and obtained leave from the freehold burgesses of the city, to issue securities bearing interest (exchequer notes), to the amount of 15,000,000 marks banco, for the purpose of making advances upon goods of a permanent description, or upon State securities⎯such advances to amount to from 50 to 66 2/3 per cent of the respective value of the pawned commodities. This second effort to right the course of commerce foundered like the first⎯both resembling the vain cries of distress which precede a shipwreck. The guaranty of the Discount Association itself was found to need another guaranty in its turn; and the advances of the State, limited

110

5

10

15

20

25

30

The Financial Crisis in Europe

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

in their amount as well as the description of commodities to which they applied, became, moreover, by dint of the very conditions under which they were made, relatively useless, at the same ratio that prices were going down. To uphold prices, and thus ward off the active cause of the distress, the State must pay the prices ruling before the outbreak of the commercial panic, and realize the value of bills of exchange which had ceased to represent anything but foreign failures. In other words, the fortune of the whole community, which the Government represents, ought to make good for the losses of private capitalists. This sort of communism, where the mutuality is all on one side, seems rather attractive to the European capitalists. On November 29, twenty great commercial Hamburg firms, beside numerous Altona houses, broke down, the discount of bills had ceased, the prices of merchandise and securities became nominal, and all business arrived at a dead lock. From the list of failures it appears that five of them occurred in banking operations with Sweden and Norway⎯the liabilities of Messrs. Ullberg & Cramer, amounting to 12,000,000 marks banco, five in the Colonial produce trade, four in the Baltic produce trade, two in the export of manufactures, two in insurance agencies, one in the Stock Exchange, one in the ship-building trade. Sweden depends so entirely on Hamburg as her exporter, bill-broker and banker, that the history of the Hamburg market is that of the Stockholm market. Consequently, two days after the collapse a telegram announced that the failures in Hamburg had led to failures in Stockholm, and that there too Government support had proved unavailable. What in this respect holds good for Sweden is still more true for Denmark, whose commercial center, Altona, is but a suburb of Hamburg. On the 1st of December extensive stoppages occurred, including two very old firms, viz.: Conrad Warnecke, in the Colonial trade, especially sugar, with a capital of 2,000,000 marks banco, and extensively connected with Germany, Denmark and Sweden; and Lorent am Ende & Co., carrying on business with Sweden and Norway. One ship-owner and general merchant committed suicide in consequence of his embarrassments. The general extent of Hamburg commerce may be inferred from the fact that at this very moment about 500,000,000 m.b. in goods of all kinds are held in warehouses and in port, on account of its merchants. The republic is now recurring to the only remedy against the crisis, that of relieving its citizens from the duty of paying their debts. A law granting a respite of one month on all bills payable at maturity is likely to be passed. As to Prussia, the distress of the manufacturing districts of the Rhine and Westphalia is hardly noticed by the public papers, since it has

111

Karl Marx

not yet resulted in extensive failures, the latter having been limited to the corn exporters at Stettin and Dantzig, and to about forty manufacturers at Berlin. The Prussian Government has interfered by authorizing the Berlin Bank to advance loans on goods deposited, and by suspending the usury laws. The former measure will prove as vain at Berlin as at Stockholm and Hamburg, and the latter puts Prussia only on a footing of equality with other commercial countries. The Hamburg collapse is a conclusive answer to those imaginative minds which presume the present crisis to have originated in prices artificially enhanced by a paper currency. In regard to currency, Hamburg forms the opposite pole to this country. There, there is no money but silver. There exists no paper circulation at all, but a medium of exchanges purely metallic is boasted of. Still the present panic not only rages there most severely, but since the appearance of general commercial crises⎯the discovery of which is not so old as that of the comets⎯Hamburg has been their favorite arena. Twice during the last third of the eighteenth century it exhibited the same spectacle as at present; and if it is distinguished by one characteristic feature from other great commercial centers of the world, it is by the frequency and violence of the fluctuations in the rate of interest. Turning from Hamburg to England, we find that the tone of the London money market was progressively improving from Nov. 27 to Dec. 1, when again an opposite current set in. On November 28 the price of silver had actually declined, but after Dec. 1 it again recovered and will probably advance, large amounts being required for Hamburg. In other words, gold will again be withdrawn from London to buy Continental silver, and this renewed drain of bullion will call for the renewed action of the Bank of England screw. Beside the sudden demand at Hamburg, there is looming in a not remote future the Indian loan, which the Government, however it may try to shift off the evil day, must necessarily resort to. The occurrence of fresh failures had also contributed after the 1st inst. to dispel the delusion that the money market had seen its worst. As Lord Overstone (the banker Lloyd) remarked in the opening session of the House of Lords: “The next occasion of pressure upon the Bank will probably occur before the exchanges are rectified, and then the crisis will be greater than that which we have shrunk from meeting on the present occasion. There are serious and formidable difficulties hanging over this country.” The catastrophe at Hamburg has not yet been felt at London. The greater easiness of the loan market had favorably affected the produce market; but, irrespective of the eventual new contraction of money, it is

112

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Financial Crisis in Europe

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

evident that the great fall in the prices of produce in Stettin, Dantzic and Hamburg cannot but bring down the London quotations. The French decree rescinding the prohibition of the export of corn and flour immediately compelled the London millers to reduce their quotations by three shillings per 280 pounds, in order to stem the influx of flour from France. Several failures in the corn-trade have been reported, but they have been confined to smaller houses and operators in grain for distant delivery. The English manufacturing districts exhibit no novelty, except that cotton goods adapted to the Indian demand, such as brown shirtings, jaconets, madapolams, as well as yarns suitable for the same market, fetch, for the first time since 1847, remunerative prices in India. Since 1847, the profits made by the Manchester manufacturers in that trade have been derived, not from the price realized on the sale of their goods in East India, but only on the sale in England of their East Indian returns. The almost total suppression of Indian export since June, 1857, occasioned by the revolt, has allowed the Indian market to absorb the floating English goods and even to open itself for new supplies at enhanced prices. Under ordinary circumstances such an event would have given extraordinary liveliness to the Manchester trade. At present, as we are informed by private letters, it has hardly raised the prices of the privileged articles, while it turned such an amount of employment seeking productive power to the manufacture of these particular articles as would suffice to overstock three Indias on the shortest notice. Such has been the general enlargement of productive power in the British manufacturing districts during the last ten years, that even the reduction of labor to less than two-thirds its previous amount can only be sustained by the mill-owners accumulating in their warehouses a large surplus stock of fabrics. Messrs. Du Fay & Co., in their monthly Manchester trade report, say that “there was a pause in business during the month; very few transactions took place, and prices were altogether nominal. Never before was the sum total of a month’s transactions so small as in November.” It is, perhaps, proper here to call attention to the fact that in the year 1858 the repeal of the British Corn Laws will first be put to a serious test. What with the influence of Australian gold and industrial prosperity, what with the natural results of bad harvests, the average price of wheat during the epoch from 1847 to 1857 ruled higher than during the epoch from 1826 to 1836. A keen competition of foreign agriculture and produce will now have to be sustained concurrently with a decline in the home demand; and agricultural distress, which seemed buried in the annals of British history from 1815 to 1832, is likely to appear again. It is

113

Karl Marx

true that the advance in the price of French wheat and flour, following upon the Imperial decrees, has proved but temporary, and vanished even before any extensive export to England took place. But with a further pressure on the money market of France she will be forced to throw her corn and flour into England, which will be at the same time assailed by forced sales of German produce. Then in the Spring the shipments from the United States will come forward, and give the British corn market its finishing blow. If, as the whole history of prices warrants us in supposing, several good harvests are now to follow each other in succession, we shall see fully worked out the true consequences of the repeal of the Corn Laws for the agricultural laborers in the first instance, the farmers in the second, and the whole framework of British landed property in the last.

114

5

10

Karl Marx The Commercial and Industrial State of England

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5206, 26. Dezember 1857.

5

10

15

20

25

30

The commercial and industrial state of England during the week ending Dec. 10, of which we received full accounts by the Persia yesterday, exhibits a peculiar feature. While a decided improvement is apparent in the position of the Bank of England, due to a temporarily favorable turn in the bullion tide, everything else, save the public funds and the share market, looks more and more gloomy. Even the bullion market seems laboring under conflicting influences, its upward tendency having been checked on Dec. 10, as it had been on Dec. 4, by a high pressure for silver, raising the price of the latter to 5s. 23/8 d., while at the same time a continental demand, however small, had again set in for gold. The markets of railway shares, mining shares, and joint-stock bank shares, which at the opening of the week were all buoyant, had also declined on Dec. 7, and had not recovered. Still all these variations are bounded by too narrow limits to disparage the generally favorable aspect of the bullion, stock and security markets. The London failures occurring from Dec. 3 to Dec. 10 were, indeed, by no means unimportant, since they reach the number of twenty-one, and involve, for nine firms only, liabilities to the amount of £ 1,300,000. But apart from eight failures belonging to the Stock Exchange, the other disasters have mainly occurred in the German and Northern trade, and might, therefore, be fairly considered as the inevitable and comparatively cheap discount on the London market of the Hamburg and Baltic catastrophe. The important point upon which we wish to fix the attention of our readers, and which is of vital importance for this country, is the accelerated approach of the crisis in the English produce and industrial markets. What we have till now witnessed in England, apart from the commencing distress of the working population, and the restriction of productive forces, has in its main features been nothing but a monetary crisis, which consists still more in the inconvertibility of bills of exchange against bank notes than in the inconvertibility of bank notes against gold. Now the tightening of the terms of

115

Karl Marx

credit may certainly affect the produce and industrial markets in a serious manner, and may even work them up to an explosion; but, on the other hand, these markets possess movements of their own, in regard to which the movement of the money market appears not as a cause but as an effect. From 1839 to 1842 English industry went through the most direful trials, while the money market was easy and the corn market buoyant. In the year 1850 great losses were inflicted on the English produce market, while the money market was as little affected as industry. During the Autumns of 1854, 1855 and 1856, monetary pressure prevailed through the whole of Europe, while industry went on taking an unprecedented start and the quotations of every kind of products, raw materials, provisions and colonial produce, realized prices the standard of which was so exceptional as to be ascribed to a corresponding depreciation in the value of gold. At this very moment it is not the monetary pressure which keeps down the industrial and produce markets in England, but it is the commencing crisis in those markets that keeps down monetary credit. What leads astray the London money-article writers is the thoughtless comparison of the crisis of 1857 with that of 1847. In the latter year the general crisis subsided, indeed, consequent upon the suspension of Peel’s Act, and the cessation of the imaginary panic it had created. But why so? Because the crisis in the produce market, beginning as early as May, 1847, had long since burnt itself out; while the manufacturing districts, comparatively speaking, escaped unscathed, since the surplus capital of the nation had for the most part been invested in railways instead of in factories. The monetary panic of 1847 was the mere London epilogue of a drama whose five acts had been enacted from May to October, on the whole surface of the country, while the monetary panic of 1857 is the mere Lombard and Threadneedle street prologue to a drama whose principal scenes will be enacted at Manchester, Liverpool and in London itself, at Mark lane and Mincing lane. To commence with the produce market: its general feature, whether we take London or Liverpool, is that, the markets opening with a partial improvement on Friday, Dec. 4, the advance was again lost on Saturday, Dec. 5, and until the 10th went gradually but surely down. Sugar, for instance, having realized in some qualities a rise of 1s. to 1s. 6d., had on Dec. 9 sunk to a point lower than before Dec. 4, the fall in the better qualities amounting to 6d., and in lower ones to 1s. per cwt. The same tale may be told of coffee, tea, dyestuffs, saltpeter, wool, silk, hides, metals, cotton and breadstuffs. But how has even this decline been maintained within its actual bounds? The mere falling off in the demand for

116

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Commercial and Industrial State of England

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

raw materials in consequence of the check put upon their use by manufacturers, and for other produce in consequence of the general restriction of expenditure throughout the country, ought to have lowered the prices in a much greater proportion, even if the supply had remained the same, and even if these descriptions of commodity were not violently depreciated by the action of the Hamburg and Baltic collapse. But the supply has not remained the same, nor diminished, but on the contrary has vastly increased, the extraordinary prices of these articles having naturally led to an extraordinary increase in their production. Thus the London stock of sugar exceeded already on Dec. 7, by about 20,000 tuns, that of the corresponding day of last year; rice by 12,000 tuns; coffee by 14,000 tuns, and so on. In the departments where the deliveries are still comparatively small, as in cotton and corn, large quantities are known to be on their way, or to have come forward at a more or less distant date. The secret of the comparatively slow fall of the produce markets, after the first great and sudden collapse in general prices, is simply that the supply is artificially depressed to a low ebb, holders keeping their stocks back in the vain hope of catching, at the right moment, the occasion of an increased demand. This process, by dint of which supplies, absolutely and relatively large, are converted into small deliveries, could not fail to send prices up at a low ratio indeed for the day, and to restrict their decline on the following days. The fall itself, however, is not to be outmanœuvred, since the falling off of the demand is perpetually overtaking the curtailing of the supply, and since forced sales, resulting from the insolvency of individual holders, are continually breaking through the conventional checks which sellers put upon the market. The longer the play is continued, the more new supplies will have found their way to England, and the more actual demand for manufacturing purposes as well as for immediate consumption will be checked by the maintenance of artificially enhanced prices. Between the increase of the real supply and the decrease of the actual demand, all that holders can contrive to do is to moderate the fall, and to give it the quiet aspect of a sliding scale, temporarily interrupted by some slight advances. The apparent quiet of the movement contributes on its part to confirm them in their obstinate delusion, until at last the situation becomes untenable. That moment arrives as soon as the foreign bills drawn upon them for their stocks, and contracted at prices which rule from 35 to 40 per cent higher, will have fallen due. Then a panic will ensue and forced sales will carry all goods before them. No expansion of the money market, which the holders are anxiously expecting, will cure this mortal malady. Advances upon produce will go down with the prices of produce, and their relieving effect

117

Karl Marx

thus be paralyzed by the very decline of prices which they were to counteract. It should never be forgotten that in fact all merchants deal, not in the value of produce, but in its surplus value. As far as the value of produce is concerned, they do nothing but transmit it from the producer to the consumer. As soon, therefore, as prices have come down so low as to not only eat up the surplus value but to cripple the very value of the commodity, the merchant is a bankrupt, if he is not an exceptionally heavy capitalist. As far as from this distance we can observe the movements of the London and Liverpool markets, we are inclined to consider the execution of the holders of stocks of all kinds of raw materials at those two places as rapidly approaching. If we turn now to the manufacturing districts of England, we find, throughout, mills closing, short time extending, a growing number of operatives thrown on the street, and a frightful increase in the aggregate amount of pauperism. At Manchester, Preston, Accrington, Blackburn, Burnley, Chorley, Clitheroe, Darwen, Bacup, Moseley, Leeds, Halifax, Derby, Macclesfield, Stockport, Birmingham, Sheffield, Rochdale, Barnsley, Bolton, Oldham, Carlisle, everywhere the same tale. At Macclesfield, for instance, where tickets are issued to the workmen admitting them to soup kitchens, a provincial paper, representing the manufacturers, gives us the following description: “From all we can learn we have reason to believe that between three and four persons are on the average provided for by each ticket; a family of five or six receiving two, one of nine or ten, three, and so on. As the number of tickets now daily issued is 3,600, this gives us the number of 10,000 to 14,000 persons deprived of their ordinary means of support, and dependent upon the charity for their daily bread. Such a number, in a town of some 40,000 inhabitants, is truly alarming. We have heard statements on very high authority, according to which a far larger number than this have been deprived of their ordinary means of livelihood.” But in speaking of the impending crisis in the industrial districts, we mean less the distress of the working population than the downfall of their masters. Hitherto only a few and insignificant failures have occurred among that class, but they must be considered as mere symptoms of what is to happen. The cost of production for the manufacturers remains the same, as far as coals, oil, etc., are concerned, whether they run their machinery short or full time. The main item in which they are able to reduce their expenses is wages. Still, at the present moment, while stocks are accumulating in their warehouses, and they meet with a daily increasing difficulty in finding buyers, the money they realize from sales is absorbed. Their stocks of raw material are rapidly worked up, while

118

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Commercial and Industrial State of England

5

10

15

20

25

they are unable to renew them. A great part of them are short of floating capital of any kind, money included; indeed, most of them are said to have fixed all their capital in factories and machinery, while they have carried on business by the help of credit. Such must be the case, indeed, as the loanable capital of the country could bear no interest, if not to a great extent employed in the process of immediate production. Now there is no hope for them of a speedy recovery of foreign markets, and their workshops are built upon the market of the world as their basis. After the comparative shutting up of America, there remained three great markets, India, Australia and Germany. The sudden and unexpected demand sprung up in India has even sooner subsided than we anticipated. As to the Australian prospect, it will suffice to quote The Melbourne Argus of Oct. 15: “Stocks are far too heavy, and shipments still in excess. The value of the imports for the year amounted to £11,722,923; of the exports to £ 10,974,890. The imports amount far beyond the legitimate consuming power of a population of something under 440,000 men, women and children, and until some nearer calculation of the actual wants of the colony is arrived at, there can be no improvement. At present every description of imported merchandise, except Eastern produce, is selling at very low rates.” Then as to the German market, the Hamburg catastrophe has closed it more hermetically to England than the strictest continental system could have done. It is, therefore, only natural that the British manufacturers should anticipate a crash of a most profound and sweeping character. We find in all their organs the most gloomy anticipations of its approaching outbreak. Its effects will be deeply felt in this country, especially by those engaged in the raising and the selling of cotton.

119

Karl Marx The Crisis in Europe

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5213, 5. Januar 1858.

The mails of the Niagara reached us yesterday, and a careful examination of our files of British journals only confirms the views we have lately had to express with regard to the probable course of the crisis in England. The London money market is decidedly improving; that is to say, gold is accumulating in the vaults of the Bank of England; the demand for discount at the Bank is decreasing; first-class paper may be discounted in Lombard street at 91/2 to 93/4 per cent; the public funds are firm, and the share market participates to some degree in this movement. This agreeable aspect of things is, however, badly impaired by great failures, recurring every two or three days in London; by daily dispatches, sad messengers of provincial disasters; and by the thunder of The London Times, inveighing more than ever against the general and helpless corruption of the British mercantile classes. In fact, the comparative easiness with which unexceptionable paper is discounted, seems to be more than balanced by the growing difficulty of finding paper which can pass as unexceptionable. Consequently, we are told in the London money articles of the latest date, that at Threadneedle street the applications are extremely “limited,” and that at Lombard street but little business is doing. Still, as the supply on the part of the Bank and the discount houses is increasing⎯while the pressure upon them, the demand on the part of their customers, is decreasing⎯the money market must be said to be comparatively easy. Nevertheless, the Bank of England Directors have not yet dared to lower the rate of discount, convinced as it would appear that the renewal of the monetary crisis is not a question of time, but of percentage, and that, consequently, as the rate of discount sinks, the monetary crisis is sure to rise again. While the London money market, one way or the other, has thus got more easy, the stringency of the English produce market is increasing in intensity, a continuous fall in prices not being able to overcome the growing disinclination to purchase. Even such articles as tallow, for instance,

120

5

10

15

20

25

30

The Crisis in Europe

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

which had previously formed an exception to the general rule, have now, by dint of forced sales, been obliged to give way. On comparing the price current of the week ending December 18 with the weekly price current of November, it appears that the extreme depression in prices which prevailed in the latter month has again been reached; this time, however, not in the shape of a panic, but the methodic form of a sliding scale. As to the manufacturing markets, an earnest of the industrial crisis which we predicted has now been given in half a dozen failures of spinners and weavers in Lancashire, of three leading houses in the woolen trade in the West Riding, and an important firm in the carpet trade of Worcester. Since the phenomena of this double crisis, in the produce market and among the manufacturing classes, will by and by become more palpable, we shall content ourselves, for the present, with quoting the following passage of a private letter from Manchester, which has been communicated for our columns: “Of the continuous pressure on the market and its disastrous effects you can hardly form any notion. No one can sell. Every day you hear of lower quotations. Things are come to that pass that respectable people prefer not to offer their commodities at all. Spinners and weavers are weighed down by utter despondency. No yarn commissioners sell yarn to the weavers, except on cash or double securities. It is impossible for this state of things to go on without ending in a frightful collapse.” The Hamburg crisis has scarcely abated. It is the most regular and classical example of a monetary crisis that ever existed. Everything except silver and gold had become worthless. Firms of old standing have broken down, because they are unable to pay in cash some single bill that had fallen due, although in their tills there lay bills to a hundred times its value, which, however, for the moment were valueless, not because they were dishonored, but because they could not be discounted. Thus, we are informed that the old and wealthy firm of Ch. M. Schröder, before its bankruptcy, had offered to it two millions in silver, on the part of J. H. Schröder, the brother, of London, but replied by telegraph: “Three millions or nothing.” The three millions did not come forward, and Ch. M. Schröder went to the wall. A different instance is that of Ullberg & Co., a firm much spoken of in the European press, which, with liabilities amounting to 12,000,000 marks banco, including 7,000,000 of bills of exchange, had, as now appears, a capital of only 300,000 marks banco as the basis of such enormous transactions. In Sweden, and especially in Denmark, the crisis has rather increased in violence. The revival of the evil after it appeared to have passed away is to be explained by the dates on which the great demands on Hamburg,

121

Karl Marx

Stockholm and Copenhagen fall due. During December, for instance, nine millions of bills drawn on Hamburg by Rio Janeiro houses for coffee fell due, were all protested, and this mass of protests created a new panic. In January the drafts for the cargoes of sugar shipped from Bahia and Pernambuco will probably meet with a similar fate, and cause a similar revival of the crisis.

122

5

Karl Marx The French Crisis

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5219, 12. Januar 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

The successive reduction by the Bank of France of its rate of discount from 10 per cent, at which it stood after Nov. 12, to 9 per cent on Nov. 26, 8 per cent on Dec. 5, and 6 per cent on Dec. 17, is, of course, pointed out by the Imperialist organs as irrefutable proof that the commercial revulsion has entered its decreasing stage, and that “France will go through the severe trial without any catastrophe.” The financial system of Napoleon III. is said to have created “this evident superiority of the commercial state of France over that of all other nations,” and to insure the fact that France is, and always will be, “less injured in a time of crisis than the countries competing with it.” Now, 6 per cent is a rate of bank discount which, since the beginning of the present century, has never occurred in France save in February, 1800, some days after the foundation of the Bank by the uncle, until under the nephew, in the critical period of 1855 and 1856. But if the Bank of France continues to lower its rate of interest, say to 4 per cent, what then? The rate of discount was reduced to 4 per cent on Dec. 27, 1847, when the general crisis still lasted and the French crisis had not yet reached its climax. Then, as now, the Government congratulated France on its privilege of escaping general crises with nothing but scratches, and those not skin deep. Two months later the financial earthquake had overturned the throne and the wise man who sat upon it. We do certainly not contest the fact that thus far the crisis has had less influence on French commerce than was expected. The reason is simply that in transactions with the United States, Great Britain, and the Hanseatic towns, the balance of trade is, and has been for a long time, in favor of France. Thus, in order that the disasters occurring in those countries should directly recoil on France, large credits must have been given to them, or commodities for export to them have been speculatively accumulated. Nothing of the sort has happened. The American, English and Hanseatic events could, consequently, produce no drain of bullion

123

Karl Marx

from France; and if its Bank for some weeks raised the rate of interest to the English standard, it did this only for fear lest French capital should seek more profitable employment abroad. But it cannot be denied that the general crisis has, even in its present phase, told on France in a form agreeable to the commercial relations of that country with the United States, England and the Hanseatic towns, viz.: in the chronic form of distress. It has forced Bonaparte⎯who, in his letter of November 11, declared “the evil to exist in the imagination only”⎯to come out with another official message to the effect that “in spite of the prudence of French trade and the vigilance of the Government, the commercial crisis has obliged many branches of industry, if not to suspend work, at any rate to shorten their time or lower their wages,” so that “many workmen suffer from forced idleness.” He has consequently opened a credit of a million francs for the relief of the necessitous and finding them means of employment; he has ordered military precautions to be taken at Lyons; and, through his journals, has appealed to private charity. The withdrawals from the savings banks have begun by far to exceed the deposits. Heavy losses from failures in America and England have been sustained by many manufacturers, production is contracting to a disastrous degree at Paris, Lyons, Mühlhausen, Roubaix, Rouen, Lille, Nantes, St. Etienne, and other industrial centers, while serious embarrassments prevail at Marseilles, Havre and Bordeaux. The general stagnation of trade throughout the country is most evident from the last monthly report of the Bank of France, which shows for the month of December a decrease in circulation of 73,040,000 francs, as compared with October, and of 48,955,900 francs as compared with November; while the aggregate of discounts has fallen about 100,000,000 francs, if compared with October, and 77,067,059 francs compared with November. In the present state of the French press it is, of course, not possible to ascertain the exact state of the failures occurring in provincial towns, but the Paris bankruptcies, although certainly not yet serious, exhibit a tendency to grow not only in quantity, but also in the quality of the concerns involved. In the fortnight from Nov. 17 to Dec. 1 thirty-four Paris bankruptcies only occurred, of which not fewer than twenty-four were of dealers in second-hand clothes, milk-dealers, tailors, artificial flower-makers, cabinet-makers, reticule-makers, gilders, leather dealers, jewelers, fringe-makers, vinegar-makers, cap-makers, fruiterers, &c. From the 1st of December up to the 8th the bankruptcies were no fewer than thirty-one, and from the 9th to the 15th the number amounted to thirty-four, including some of greater importance, such as Messrs. Bourdon-Dubuit & Co., bankers; the General Company of voi-

124

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The French Crisis

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

tures de remise, a Company for Jacquard looms, an oil Company, &c. On the other hand, Bonaparte’s attempt at checking the ruinous fall in the prices of wheat and flour by the abrogation of the prohibition decrees, has proved a failure, prices having progressively sunk from the 26th November to the 21st of December, and despite a fair margin of profit on sales in London, no more than 3,000 sacks (of 110 kilogrammes) being shipped thither up to the 22d of December. If, however, the balance of trade is in favor of France in her dealings with the United States, England, and the Hanseatic towns, it is against her in her commerce with Southern Russia, the Zollverein, Holland, Belgium, the Levant and Italy. As to Switzerland, the temporary balance of trade is always against her, but France is so deeply indebted to her⎯most of the Alsatian manufactures being carried on by Swiss capital⎯that in times of monetary scarcity she may always heavily pull upon the French money market. At this period, as at every former one, there will be no active French crisis before the commercial difficulties in those countries have reached a certain hight. That Holland cannot tide over the present storm, will be understood on the simple consideration that her still large commerce is almost limited to that description of produce which has undergone and is progressively undergoing the most fatal depreciation. In the industrial centers of the Zollverein the premonitory symptoms of the crisis are already visible. Apprehensions of a crash in the Black Sea and Levantine trade are announcing themselves in the Trieste papers, and its first precursory flashes have sufficed to bring down some large houses at Marseilles. In Italy, finally, the monetary panic, at the very moment that it seems subsiding in the North of Europe, has burst out ablaze, as will be seen from the following extract from the Opinione of Milan, of Dec. 18: “The difficulties of the present time are very, very great; failures are occurring on a frightful scale, and after those of Palleari, of Ballabio and Co., of Cighera, of Redaelli, of Wechler and Mazzola, after the contrecoup of foreign cities, after the suspension of payments by the best houses of Verona, Venice, Udino and Bergamo, our strongest firms also begin to waver, and to make up their accounts. And the accounts are very sad. Let it suffice to remark that among our great silk houses there is not one that has in warehouse a less quantity than 50,000 pounds of silk, whence it is easy to calculate that at present prices every one of them must lose from half a million to two millions of francs⎯the stock of some of them exceeding 150,000 lb. The firm of Brambilla Brothers was supported by a loan of one million and a half of francs; Battista Gavazzi is liquidating, and others are doing the same. Every man asks himself what we have to

125

Karl Marx

look forward to; so many fortunes vanished, so many reduced by onehalf; so many families, lately in easy circumstances, now at their last shift; so many workmen without work or bread, or means of subsistence of any kind.” When the French crisis, consequent upon the growing pressure from these countries, comes to maturity, it will have to grapple with a nation of gamblers, if not of commercial adventurers, and with a Government that has played the same part in France as private commerce has done in this country, in England and Hamburg. It will fall severely upon the stock market and endanger the supreme security of that market⎯the State itself. The natural result of the contraction of French commerce and industry is to place money at the disposition of the Bourse, especially as the Bank of France is bound to make advances upon public funds and railway securities. Instead of checking stock gambling, the present stagnation of French commerce and industry has favored it. Thus we see from the last monthly report of the Bank of France, that its advances on railway shares have increased simultaneously with the decrease in discounts and circulation. Thus, in spite of the heavy decrease in the receipts of most of the French railways, their quotations are looking up, the receipts of the Orleans line, for instance, having decreased by 221/2 per cent toward the close of November, as compared with the corresponding period of last year; yet Orleans was quoted on Dec. 22 at 1,355, while it stood on 1,310 francs only on Oct. 29. When the depression of trade set in upon France some railway companies were at once compelled to interrupt their works, and a similar fate threatened almost all of them. To mend this the Emperor forced the Bank of France into a treaty with the companies, by dint of which it becomes in fact the real railway contractor. It has to advance the money upon the new bonds which the companies are authorized by the settlement of Nov. 30, 1856, to emit in 1858; and on that part which remained still to be issued for 1857; the authorized issue of bonds for 1858 amounting to forty-two and a half millions. The Credit Mobilier seemed also destined to succumb before the first shock, and had on the 3d of December to sell at an enormous sacrifice part of its immense amount of securities. There is now a project afloat of amalgamating it with the Credit Foncier and the Comptoir d’Escompte, in order to make it share in the privilege granted to those institutions of having their bills discounted and their securities received by the Bank of France. Thus the plan evidently is to weather the storm by making the Bank of France responsible for all these concerns⎯a maneuver which of course exposes the Bank itself to wreck. But what even Napoleon III. cannot think of, is, to make the Bank pay

126

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The French Crisis

5

10

15

the calls the private shareholders of the different joint-stock companies will have to encounter. Excluding petty affairs, the calls to be met toward the close of December were: Mercantile and Industrial Company of Madrid (Messrs. Rothschild), $30 per share; Franco-American Navigation Company, $10 per share; Victor Emmanuel Railway Company, $30 per share; Herserange Iron Works Company, $20 per share; the Mediterranean, $30 per share; the Austrian Railway, $15; the Saragossa, $10; the Franco-Swiss, $10; the Socie´te´ Ge´ne´rale de Tanneries, $10; the Compagnie de la Carbonisation de Houilles, $10, &c. At the beginning of the year there is a payment of $20 per share on the Chimay and Marienburg Railway, of $121/2 on the Lombard-Venetian Railways, and of $20 on the Belgian and South American Steam Navigation Company. According to the settlement of Nov. 30, 1856, the calls for French railways alone will, in 1858, amount to about $50,000,000. There is certainly a great danger that France may founder on these heavy engagements in 1858, as England did in 1846–47. Moreover, capitalists in Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands, are large holders of French securities, the greater part of which, at the progress of the crisis in those countries, will be thrown upon the Paris Bourse to be turned into money at any price.

127

Friedrich Engels The Siege and Storming of Lucknow

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5235, 30. Januar 1858

The last mails from Calcutta brought some details, which have made their way to this country through the London journals, from which it is possible to form a judgment as to Sir Colin Campbell’s performance at Lucknow. As the British press assert that this feat of arms stands forth in unrivaled glory in the history of warfare, the subject may as well be a little more closely examined. The town of Lucknow is situated on the right bank of the River Goomtee, which at that locality runs in a south-easterly direction. At a distance of from two to three miles from the river a canal runs nearly parallel to it, intersects the town, and below it approaches the river, which it then joins about a mile further down. The banks of the river are not occupied by crowded streets, but by a succession of palaces, with gardens and insulated public buildings. At the junction of the canal and river, but on the right or southern bank of both, are situated, close together, a school, called La Martinie`re, and a hunting-palace and park, called Dilkhoosha. Crossing the canal, but remaining on the southern side of the river, and close to its bank, the first palace and garden is that of Secundrabagh; further west come barracks and mess-houses, and then the Motee Mahal (Pearl Palace), which is but a few hundred yards from the Residency. This latter building is erected on the only high ground in the neighborhood; it commands the town, and consists of a considerable inclosure with several palaces and out-houses within it. To the south of this line of buildings is the compact portion of the town, and two miles south of this is the park and palace of Alumbagh. The natural strength of the Residency at once explains how it was possible for the English to hold out in it against far superior numbers; but this very fact at once shows also what class of fighters the Oudians are. In fact, men who, partly drilled under European officers and provided plentifully with artillery, have never yet been able to overcome a single miserable inclosure defended by Europeans⎯such men are, militarily

128

5

10

15

20

25

30

The Siege and Storming of Lucknow

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

speaking, no better than savages, and a victory over them cannot add much to the glory of any army, however great the odds may be in favor of the natives. Another fact which classes the Oudians with the most contemptible opponents to be met with, is the manner in which Havelock forced his way through the very thickest portion of the town, in spite of barricades, loopholed houses, and the like. His loss, indeed, was great; but compare such an engagement with even the worst-fought street-battle of 1848! Not one man of his weak column could have made good his way had there been any real fighting. The houses cannot have been defended at all; it would have required weeks to take as many of them as would have secured a clear passage. As to the judgment displayed by Havelock in thus taking the bull by the horns, we cannot form an opinion; it is said he was compelled to do so from the great strait to which the Residency was reduced, and other motives are mentioned; however, nothing authentic is known. When Sir Colin Campbell arrived he had about 2,000 European and 1,000 Sikh infantry, 350 European and 600 Sikh cavalry, 18 horse-artillery guns, 4 siege guns, and 300 sailors with their heavy ship-guns; in all, 5,000 men, among which were 3,000 Europeans. This force was about as strong in numbers as a very fair average of most Anglo-Indian armies that have accomplished great exploits; indeed, the field-force with which Sir C. Napier conquered Sinde was scarcely half as large, and often less. On the other hand, its large admixture of the European element and the circumstance that all its native portion consisted of the best fighting nation of India, the Sikhs, give it a character of intrinsic strength and cohesion far superior to the generality of Anglo-Indian armies. Its opponents, as we have seen, were contemptible, for the most part rough militia instead of trained soldiers. True, the Oudians pass for the most warlike race of Lower Hindostan, but this is the case merely in comparison with the cowardly Bengalees, whose morale is utterly broken down by the most relaxing climate of the world and by centuries of oppression. The way in which they submitted to the “filibustering” annexation of their country to the Company’s dominions, and the whole of their behavior during the insurrection, certainly places them below the level of the Sepoys, as far as courage and intelligence are concerned. We are, indeed, informed that quantity made up for quality. Some letter-writers say there were as many as 100,000 in the town. They were, no doubt, superior to the British in the proportion of four or six to one, perhaps more; but with such enemies that makes little difference. A position can only be defended by a certain number, and if these are determined to run away it matters little whether four or five times that number of similar heroes are

129

Friedrich Engels

within half a mile. There is no doubt that many instances of individual bravery have been seen, even among these Oudians. Some among them may have fought like lions; but of what avail were these in a place which they were too weak to defend after the mere rabble among the garrison had run away? There appears to have never been among them any attempt at bringing the whole under a single command; their local chiefs had no authority except over their own men, and would not submit to anybody else. Sir Colin Campbell advanced first on Alumbagh; then, instead of forcing his way through the town as Havelock had done, he profited by the experience gained by that General and turned toward Dilkhoosha and La Martinie`re. The ground in front of these inclosures was cleared of the Oudian skirmishers on Nov. 13. On the 15th the attack commenced. So neglectful had the enemy been that the preparations for intrenching the Dilkhoosha were not yet completed even then; it was taken at once, and without much resistance, and so was the Martinie`re. These two positions secured to the English the line of the canal. The enemy advanced once more across this obstacle to retake the two posts lost in the morning, but they were soon routed, with heavy loss. On the 16th the British crossed the canal and attacked the Secundrabagh Palace. The intrenchments here were in a little better order, consequently Gen. Campbell wisely attacked the place with artillery. After the defenses had been destroyed, the infantry charged and took the place. The Samuck, another fortified position, was next cannonaded for three hours and then taken, “after one of the severest fights ever witnessed,” says Sir C. Campbell⎯and, adds a wise correspondent from the seat of war, “few men have seen more of hard fighting than he.” We should like to know where he saw it. Surely not in the Crimea, where, after the battle of the Alma, he had a very quiet life of it at Balaklava, only one of his regiments being engaged at the battle of Balaklava and none at Inkermann. On the 17th the artillery was pointed on the barracks and mess-houses which formed the next position toward the Residency. This cannonade lasted till 3 o’clock, after which the infantry took the place by storm. The flying enemy was hotly pursued. One more position remained between the advancing army and the Residency⎯the Motee Mahal. Before dusk this, too, was carried, and the communication with the garrison was fully established. Campbell should be praised for the judgment with which he took the easier route and with which he used his heavy artillery to reduce the intrenched positions before he launched his columns. But the British fought with all the advantages of skilled soldiers obeying one chief over

130

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Siege and Storming of Lucknow

5

10

15

half savages commanded by nobody; and, as we see, they fully availed themselves of these advantages. They did not expose their men more than was absolutely necessary. They used artillery as long as there was anything to be battered down. No doubt they fought with valor; but what they deserve credit for is discretion. The best proof of this is in the number of the killed and wounded. It has not yet been published as far as the men are concerned; but there were five officers killed and thirty-two wounded. The army must have had, with 5,000 men, at least 250 to 300 officers. The English officers are certainly never sparing of their lives. To show an example of bravery to their men is in too many cases the part of their duty which they only know. And when in three days’ consecutive fighting, under circumstances and in positions which are known to cost more lives than any other to conquer, the loss is only one in eight or nine, it is out of the question to call it hard fighting. To take an example from British history alone, what is all this Indian fighting put together against the single defense of Hougemont and La Haye Sainte at Waterloo? What would these writers who now turn every little skirmish into a pitched battle say of contests like Borodino, where one army lost one-half and the other one-third of its combatants?

131

Friedrich Engels Campaign

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

314 CAMPAIGN. This term is very often used to denote the military operations which are carried on during a war within a single year; but if these operations take place on 2 or more independent seats of war, it would be scarcely logical to comprise the whole of them under the head of one campaign. Thus what may be loosely called the campaign of 1800 comprises 2 distinct campaigns, conducted each quite independently of the other: the campaign of Italy (Marengo), and the campaign of Germany (Hohenlinden). On the other hand, since the almost total disuse of winter quarters, the end of the year does not always mark the boundary between the close of one distinct series of warlike operations and the commencement of another. There are nowadays many other military and political considerations far more important in war than the change of the seasons. Thus each of the campaigns of 1800 consists of 2 distinct portions: a general armistice extending over the time from July to September divides them, and although the campaign of Germany is brought to a close in Dec. 1800, yet that of Italy continues during the first half of Jan. 1801. Clausewitz justly observes that the campaign of 1812 does evidently not end with Dec. 31 of that year, when the French were still on the Niemen, and in full retreat, but with their arrival behind the Elbe in Feb. 1813, where they again collected their forces, the impetus which drove them homeward having ceased. Still, winter remaining always a season during which fatigue and exposure will, in our latitudes, reduce active armies at an excessive rate, a mutual suspension of operations and recruiting of strength very often coincide with that time of the year; and although a campaign, in the strict sense of the word, means a series of warlike operations closely connected together by one strategetical plan and directed toward one strategetical object, campaigns may still in most cases very conveniently be named by the year in which their decisive actions are fought.

132

5

10

15

20

25

Friedrich Engels Cannonade

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

368 CANNONADE, in a general sense, the act of firing artillery during a battle or a siege. As a technical expression in tactics, a cannonade means an engagement between 2 armies in which the artillery alone is active, and the other arms are either passive or do not, at least, overstep the bounds of mere demonstration. The most celebrated instance of this kind is the cannonade of Valmy, in 1792. Kellermann awaited the attack of the Prussian army on a range of heights, his artillery placed in front of his troops. The Prussians drew up on the opposite range of the hills, brought forward their artillery, and the cannonade began. Several times the Prussian infantry formed for the attack and advanced a little; but, the French remaining firm, the Prussians withdrew again before coming within musket range. Thus the day passed, and the next day the Prussian army began their general retreat. In most general engagements such cannonades occur. They often form the 1st act of the performance; they serve to fill up the intervals between a repulsed attack and another attempt to dislodge the enemy; and they form the finale of most drawn battles. In most cases they serve more for purposes of demonstration than for any thing else, causing by a great waste of ammunition at long ranges that almost incredibly small proportion of hits to misses which characterizes the artillery practice of modern battles.

133

Friedrich Engels Captain

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

411 CAPTAIN, the rank designating a commander of a company in infantry, or of a squadron or troop in cavalry, or the chief officer of a ship of war. In most continental armies in Europe captains are considered subalterns; in the British army they form an intermediate rank between the field officer and the subaltern, the latter term comprising those commissioned officers only whose rank does not imply a direct and constant command. In the U. S. army the captain is responsible for the arms, ammunition, clothing, &c., of the company under his command. The duties of a captain in the navy are very comprehensive, and his post is one of great responsibility. In the British service he ranks with a lieut.colonel in the army, until the expiration of 3 years from the date of his commission, when he takes rank with a full colonel. In the old French service he was forbidden to leave his ship under pain of death, and was to blow it up rather than let it fall into the hands of an enemy. The title of captain is also applied to masters of merchant or passenger vessels, and to various petty officers on ships of the line, as captain of the forecastle, of the hold, of the main and fore tops, &c. The word is of Italian origin, meaning a man who is at the head of something, and in this sense it is often used as synonymous with a general-in-chief, especially as regards his qualities for command.

134

5

10

15

20

Karl Marx British Commerce

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5238, 3. Februar 1858.

British Commerce.

5

10

15

20

25

During the late extraordinary session of the British Parliament, Lord Derby declared in the House of Lords that, for the last three years the value of British imports had exceeded that of British exports to the amount of £159,000,000. This statement gave rise to a controversy, out of doors, some private individuals applying to Lord Stanley of Alderley, President of the Board of Trade, for information as to the correctness of Lord Derby’s statement. The President of the Board of Trade, in a letter addressed to his interrogators, replied: “The assertion made by Lord Derby in the House of Lords, that the value of our imports during the last three years had exceeded that of our exports by £159,000,000, is incorrect, and arises from Lord Derby having taken the total value of our imports, including our imports from the Colonies and foreign countries, while he has excluded the re-export of merchandize which has been received from the Colonies and foreign countries. Thus Lord Derby’s calculation shows: Importations Exports Difference Whereas it should be: Importations Exports Difference

£468,000,000 308,000,000 £160,000,000 £468,000,000 371,000,000 £97,000,000”

The President of the Board of Trade substantiates this assertion by adding to it a comparative statement of the value of the exports and imports of the United Kingdom during the years 1855, 1856 and 1857. This highly interesting document, which is not to be found in the London news-

135

Karl Marx

papers, we reprint below. First it will be seen that the case might be put in a shape confirmatory of Lord Derby’s assertion, viz.: Total imports British exports Excess of imports over British exports Re-exports of foreign produce Balance of trade against Great Britain

£468,000,000 308,000,000 £160,000,000 63,000,000 £97,000,000

Thus, there is actually an excess of foreign imports over British exports of 160,000,000, and after the ree¨xport of 63,000,000 of foreign productions, there remains a balance of trade against Great Britain, as stated by the President of the Board of Trade himself, of 97,000,000, or more than 32,000,000 for the average of the three years, 1855, 1856, and 1857. Hence, the recent complaint of The London Times: “The actual losses sustained by the nation have been going on for the last five or six years, and it is only now that we have found them out.” These losses, however, arise not from the excess of imports over exports, but from the specific character of a great part of the exports. The fact is, one-half the ree¨xports consist of foreign raw materials used in manufactures serving to increase foreign rivalry against the British industrial interests, and, to some extent, returned to the Britishers in manufactured goods for their home consumption. The decisive point, however, to be kept in view, is this, that the large ree¨xports of raw materials, resulting from the competition of Continental manufactures, enhanced the price of the raw material so much as almost to absorb the profit left to the British manufacturer. On a former occasion, we made some statements in this sense with respect to the British Cotton industry. As at the present moment the industrial crisis rages most violently in the British Woolen districts, where failure follows upon failure, anxiously concealed from the general public by the London press, it may be opportune to give at this place some figures showing into what effective competition for raw wool the manufacturers of the European Continent were entering with the British ones⎯a competition which led to the unparalleled enhancement in the price of that raw material, ruinous to the manufacturer, and fostering the now blown-up speculations in that article. The following statement comprises the first nine months of each of the last five years:

136

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Marx: Krisenheft. Book of the Crisis of 1857. S. [34]

Marx: Krisenheft. Book of the Crisis of 1857. S. [35]

British Commerce

5

10

15

20

Year. 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857

Foreign. lbs 37,586,199 27,006,173 17,293,842 22,377,714 27,604,364

IMPORTS. Colonial. lbs 46,277,276 50,187,692 53,896,173 62,148,467 63,053,100

Total. lbs 83,863,475 77,193,865 71,190,015 84,526,181 90,657,464

Year. 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857

Foreign. lbs 2,480,410 5,993,366 8,860,904 5,523,345 4,561,000

EXPORTS. Colonial. lbs 5,343,166 13,117,102 12,948,561 14,433,958 25,068,787

Total. lbs 7,723,576 19,110,468 21,809,465 19,957,303 29,629,787

The quantities of foreign and colonial wools returned for British home consumption appear, therefore, to have been, in the years: Year. 1853 1854 1855

Pounds. 76,139,899 58,083,397 49,380,550

Year. 1856 1857

Pounds. 64,568,878 61,127,677

On the other hand, the quantities of British home-grown wool exported were:

25

1853 1854 1855

lb 4,755,443 9,477,396 13,592,756

1856 1857

lb 11,539,201 13,492,386

By deducting from the quantity of foreign wools imported into the United Kingdom, first the quantity ree¨xported and next the quantities of English wools exported, we find the following real quantities of foreign wool available for British home consumption: 30

35

1853 1854 1855

lb 71,284,456 47,606,001 35,787,794

1856 1857

lb 53,029,677 47,635,291

While, therefore, the import into the United Kingdom of colonial wool increased from 46,277,276 lbs. in the first nine months of 1853 to 63,053,100 lbs. in the same period of 1857, and the total imports of all kinds from 83,863,475 lbs. to 90,657,464 lbs. during the same respective periods, such, in the mean time, had been the increase in the demand for the European Continent, that, in regard to the foreign and colonial wools, the quantities returned for British consumption diminished in the

139

Karl Marx

five years from 76,139,899 lbs. in 1853 to 61,127,677 lbs. in 1857; and taking into account the quantities of English wools exported, there took place an aggregate reduction from 71,284,456 lbs. in 1853 to 47,635,291 lbs. in 1857. The significance of these statements will be better understood when attention is called to the fact avowed by The London Times, in a money article, that, simultaneously with this increase in the export of wool from the United Kingdom, the import of Continental woolen manufactures, especially French ones, was increasing. From the figures furnished by Lord Stanley of Alderley we have abstracted the following tabular statement, showing the degree in which the balance of trade with Great Britain was favorable or unfavorable to different countries:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

140

Balance of Trade against England for 1855, 1856, 1857. United States £28,571,764 China 22,675,433 East Indies 19,605,742 Russia 16,642,167 Prussia 12,842,488 Egypt 8,214,941 Spain 7,146,917 Br. West Indies 6,906,314 Peru 6,282,382 Sweden 5,027,934 Cuba & Porto Rico 4,853,484 Mauritius 4,672,090 New-Brunswick 3,431,303 Denmark 3,391,144 Ceylon 3,134,575 France 2,696,291 Canada 1,808,454 Norway 1,686,962 Africa (Western) 1,432,195 Portugal 1,283,075 Two Sicilies 1,030,139 Chili 693,155 Buenos Ayres 107,676

Balance of Trade in favor of England for 1855, 1856, 1857. 1. Hansetowns £18,883,428 2. Australia 17,761,889 3. Turkey 6,947,220 4. Brazil 7,131,160 5. Belgium 2,214,207 6. Holland 1,600,904 7. Cape of G. Hope 59,661

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

British Commerce

5

10

15

20

25

30

The simple fact of the excess of British imports over exports, amounting in three years to £97,000,000 would by no means warrant the cry now raised by the Britishers “of carrying on their trade at a yearly sacrifice of $33,000,000,” and benefiting by that trade foreign countries only. The enormous and increasing amount of British capital invested in all parts of the world must be paid for in interest, dividends and profits, all of which are to be remitted to a great extent in the form of foreign produce, and consequently go to swell the list of British imports. Beyond the imports corresponding to their exports, there must be a surplus of imports, remitted not in payment for commodities, but as revenue of capital. Generally speaking, the so-called balance of trade must, therefore, always be in favor of the world against England, because the world has yearly to pay to England not only for the commodities it purchases from her, but also the interest of the debt it owes her. The really disquieting feature for England of the statements above made is this, that she is apparently at a loss to find at home a sufficient field of employment for her unwieldy capital; that she must consequently lend on an increasing scale, and similar, in this point, to Holland, Venice and Genoa, at the epoch of their decline, forge herself the weapons for her competitors. She is forced, by giving large credits, to foster speculation in other countries in order to find a field of employment for her surplus capital, and thus to hazard her acquired wealth in order to augment and conserve it. By being obliged to give large credits to foreign manufacturing countries, such as the Continent of Europe, she forwards herself the means to her industrial rivals to compete with her for the raw produce, and thus is herself instrumental in enhancing the raw material of her own fabrics. The small margin of profit thus left to the British manufacturer, still reduced by the constant necessity for a country the very existence of which is bound up with the monopoly of forming the workshop of the world, constantly to undersell the rest of the world, is then compensated for by curtailing the wages of the laboring classes and creating home misery on a rapidly-enlarging scale. Such is the natural price paid by England for her commercial and industrial supremacy.

141

Karl Marx

A Comparative Statement of the value of the Imports and Exports of the United Kingdom from and to the principal Foreign Countries and British Possessions in 1854, 1855, and 1856. IMPORTS.

Countries. Foreign. Russia

Sweden

Norway

Denmark

Prussia

Hanse Towns

Holland

Belgium

France

Spain

Cuba and Porto Rico

142

{ { { { { { { { { { {

Years. 1854 1855 1856 1854 1855 1856 1854 1855 1856 1854 1855 1856 1854 1855 1856 1854 1855 1856 1854 1855 1856 1854 1855 1856 1854 1855 1856 1854 1855 1856 1854 1855 1856

Computed real value of Imports. £ 4,252,288 473,169 11,561,924 2,509,539 2,825,171 2,031,861 1,369,440 1,099,642 947,934 2,706,186 3,086,979 2,201,831 9,055,503 10,242,862 4,534,815 6,221,524 4,816,298 5,302,739 6,731,141 6,460,932 7,433,442 3,631,161 2,533,732 2,936,796 10,447,774 9,146,418 10,386,522 3,594,501 4,799,728 3,645,083 3,369,444 2,332,753 2,654,580

VALUE OF EXPORTS. Declared Computed Value of Real Value Produce of of Foreign the United & Colonial Kingdom. Produce. £ £ 54,301 19,738 ... ... 1,595,237 1,775,617 334,518 249,792 545,384 279,515 629,697 300,795 402,290 106,244 487,400 102,551 488,489 143,080 758,228 230,010 756,967 260,624 1,033,142 352,173 798,434 1,717,285 1,100,021 2,016,650 933,715 624,908 7,413,715 2,720,274 8,350,228 3,344,416 10,134,813 3,260,543 4,573,034 2,320,877 4,558,201 2,611,767 5,728,253 2,434,278 1,406,932 1,948,740 1,707,693 2,239,514 1,689,975 2,323,042 3,175,290 3,216,175 6,012,658 4,409,223 6,432,650 4,038,427 1,270,464 165,642 1,158,800 135,192 1,734,483 377,820 1,073,861 4,727 1,077,745 22,933 1,398,837 25,190

5

Total. £ 74,039 ... 3,370,854 584,310 824,899 930,492 508,534 589,951 631,569 988,238 1,017,591 1,385,315 2,515,719 3,116,671 1,558,623 10,133,989 11,694,644 13,395,356 6,893,911 7,169,977 8,162,531 3,355,672 3,947,207 4,013,017 6,391,465 10,421,881 10,471,077 1,436,106 1,293,992 2,112,303 1,078,588 1,100,678 1,424,027

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

British Commerce

[IMPORTS. Computed real value of Imports.

5 Countries.

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Years.

£

VALUE OF EXPORTS. Declared Computed Value of Real Value Produce of of Foreign the United & Colonial Kingdom. Produce. £

£

1854 1855 Portugal 1856 1854 1855 Two Sicilies 1856 1854 Turkey Proper 1855 1856 1854 1855 Egypt 1856 United States 1854 (including 1855 California) 1856 1854 1855 Brazil 1856 1854 Buenos Ayres 1855 1856 1854 1855 Chili 1856 1854 1855 Peru 1856 China 1854 (including 1855 Hong Kong) 1856 W.C. of Africa 1854 1855 (exclusive of Br. & Fr. Pos.) 1856

2,101,126 1,962,044 2,164,090 1,411,457 1,281,940 1,505,582 2,219,298 2,294,571 2,383,029 3,355,928 3,674,682 5,753,518 29,795,302 25,741,752 36,047,773 2,083,589 2,273,819 2,229,048 1,285,186 1,052,033 981,193 1,380,563 1,925,271 1,700,776 3,138,527 3,484,288 3,048,694 9,125,040 8,746,590 9,421,648 1,528,896 1,516,729 1,657,375

1,370,603 1,350,791 1,455,754 563,033 921,220 1,202,183 2,758,605 5,639,898 4,416,029 1,253,353 1,454,371 1,587,682 21,410,369 17,318,086 21,918,105 2,891,840 3,312,728 4,084,537 1,267,125 742,442 998,329 1,421,855 1,330,385 1,396,446 949,289 1,285,160 1,046,010 1,000,716 1,277,944 2,216,123 646,868 839,831 666,374

148,997 184,580 433,470 109,258 175,221 197,925 317,476 419,119 291,991 113,895 117,235 43,151 923,034 744,517 698,772 119,982 128,550 179,979 32,565 26,383 43,892 43,589 56,688 64,492 22,236 60,278 26,154 26,400 26,052 70,611 174,073 219,827 223,842

1854 1855 1856

118,239,554 109,959,539 129,517,568

63,800,605 69,524,475 83,327,154

15,645,612 18,710,749 20,035,442

Total Foreign Countries

{ { { { { { { { { { { {

Total. £]

1,519,600 1,535,371 1,889,224 672,291 1,096,441 1,400,108 3,076,081 6,059,017 4,708,020 1,367,248 1,571,606 1,630,333 22,333,403 18,062,603 22,616,877 3,011,822 3,441,278 4,264,516 1,299,690 768,825 1,042,221 1,465,444 1,387,073 1,460,938 971,525 1,345,438 1,072,164 1,027,116 1,303,996 2,286,734 820,941 1,059,658 890,216 79,446,217 88,235,224 103,362,596

143

Karl Marx

[IMPORTS. Computed real value of Imports. Countries.

Years.

£

VALUE OF EXPORTS. Declared Computed Value of Real Value Produce of of Foreign the United & Colonial Kingdom. Produce. £

£

5 Total. £]

British Possessions.

{ { { { { { { { { { {

1854 1855 1856 1854 New-Bruns1855 wick 1856 1854 British West 1855 India Islands 1856 1854 British Gui1855 ana 1856 British Settle1854 ments in Aus- 1855 tralia 1856 1854 British East 1855 Indies 1856 1854 1855 Ceylon 1856 1854 1855 Mauritius 1856 Cape of Good 1854 1855 Hope & Brit. Pos. in S.Afr’a 1856

4,007,052 2,296,277 3,779,741 2,079,674 1,379,041 1,891,707 3,977,271 3,978,278 4,157,098 1,636,267 1,491,935 1,418,264 4,301,868 4,500,200 5,736,043 10,672,862 12,668,732 17,262,851 1,506,646 1,474,251 1,304,174 1,677,533 1,723,807 2,427,007 691,352 949,640 1,502,828

3,957,085 1,515,823 2,418,250 863,704 370,560 572,542 *1,870,674 1,389,992 1,462,156 † 421,398 411,241 11,931,352 6,278,966 9,912,575 9,127,556 9,949,154 10,546,190 382,276 305,576 388,435 383,210 303,173 420,180 921,957 791,313 1,344,338

180,569 90,298 123,591 40,273 27,718 34,322 166,690 136,022 180,799 31,779 35,189 41,248 1,474,634 942,659 1,759,814 493,154 404,321 478,328 31,228 20,321 22,660 17,936 14,772 16,977 63,309 45,437 73,127

4,137,654 1,606,121 2,541,841 903,977 398,278 606,864 2,037,364 1,526,014 1,642,955 31,779 456,587 452,489 13,405,986 7,221,625 11,672,389 9,620,710 10,353,475 11,024,518 413,504 325,897 411,095 401,146 317,945 437,157 985,266 836,750 1,417,465

Total of British Possessions

34,149,499 33,583,311 43,026,586

33,384,121 26,163,610 32,499,794

2,990,754 2,292,466 3,357,963

36,374,875 28,456,076 35,857,757

18,636,366 21,003,215 23,393,405

115,821,092 116,691,300 139,220,353

Canada

1854 1855 1856

Total Foreign 1854 152,389,053 97,184,726 Countries and 1855 143,542,850 95,688,085 Br. Posses’ns. 1856 172,544,154 115,826,948 * Including British Guiana. † Included with West Indies.

144

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Karl Marx Bolivar y Ponte

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

440 BOLIVAR Y PONTE, SIMON, the “liberator” of Colombia, born at Caracas, July 24, 1783, died at San Pedro, near Santa Martha, Dec. 17, 1830. He was the son of one of the familias Mantuanas, which, at the time of the Spanish supremacy, constituted the creole nobility in Venezuela. In compliance with the custom of wealthy Americans of those times, at the early age of 14 he was sent to Europe. From Spain he passed to France, and resided for some years in Paris. In 1802 he married in Madrid, and returned to Venezuela, where his wife died suddenly of yellow fever. After this he 441 visited Europe a second time, and was present at Napoleon’s coronation as emperor, in 1804, and at his assumption of the iron crown of Lombardy, in 1805. In 1809 he returned home, and despite the importunities of Joseph Felix Ribas, his cousin, he declined to join in the revolution which broke out at Caracas, April 19, 1810; but, after the event, he accepted a mission to London to purchase arms and solicit the protection of the British government. Apparently well received by the marquis of Wellesley, then secretary for foreign affairs, he obtained nothing beyond the liberty to export arms for ready cash with the payment of heavy duties upon them. On his return from London, he again withdrew to private life, until, Sept. 1811, he was prevailed upon by Gen. Miranda, then commander-in-chief of the insurgent land and sea forces, to accept the rank of lieutenant-colonel in the staff, and the command of Puerto Cabello, the strongest fortress of Venezuela. The Spanish prisoners of war, whom Miranda used regularly to send to Puerto Cabello, to be confined in the citadel, having succeeded in overcoming their guards by surprise, and in seizing the citadel, Bolivar, although they were unarmed, while he had a numerous garrison and large magazines, embarked precipitately in the night, with 8 of his officers, without giving notice to his own troops, arrived at daybreak at La Guayra, and retired to his estate at San Mateo. On becoming aware of their commander’s flight, the garrison retired in good order from the place,

145

Karl Marx

which was immediately occupied by the Spaniards under Monteverde. This event turned the scale in favor of Spain, and obliged Miranda, on the authority of the congress, to sign the treaty of Vittoria, July 26, 1812, which restored Venezuela to the Spanish rule. On July 30 Miranda arrived at La Guayra, where he intended to embark on board an English vessel. On his visit to the commander of the place, Col. Manuel Maria Casas, he met with a numerous company, among whom were Don Miguel Pen˜a and Simon Bolivar, who persuaded him to stay, for one night at least, in Casas’s house. At 2 o’clock in the morning, when Miranda was soundly sleeping, Casas, Pen˜a, and Bolivar entered his room, with 4 armed soldiers, cautiously seized his sword and pistol, then awakened him, abruptly told him to rise and dress himself, put him into irons, and had him finally surrendered to Monteverde, who dispatched him to Cadiz, where, after some years’ captivity, he died in irons. This act, committed on the pretext that Miranda had betrayed his country by the capitulation of Vittoria, procured for Bolivar Monteverde’s peculiar favor, so that when he demanded his passport, Monteverde declared “Col. Bolivar’s request should be complied with, as a reward for his having served the king of Spain by delivering up Miranda.” He was thus allowed to sail for Curac¸ao, where he spent 6 weeks, and proceeded, in company with his cousin Ribas, to the little republic of Carthagena. Previous to their arrival, a great number of soldiers, who had served under Gen. Miranda, had fled to Carthagena. Ribas proposed to them to undertake an expedition against the Spaniards in Venezuela, and to accept Bolivar as their commander-in-chief. The former proposition they embraced eagerly; to the latter they demurred, but at last yielded, on the condition of Ribas being the second in command. Manuel Rodriguez Torrices, the president of the republic of Carthagena, added to the 300 soldiers thus enlisted under Bolivar, 500 men under the command of his cousin, Manuel Castillo. The expedition started in the beginning of Jan. 1813. Dissensions as to the supreme command breaking out between Bolivar and Castillo, the latter suddenly decamped with his Grenadans. Bolivar, on his part, proposed to follow Castillo’s example, and return to Carthagena, but Ribas persuaded him at length to pursue his course at least as far as Bogota, at that time the seat of the congress of New Granada. They were well received, supported in every way, and were both made generals by the congress, and, after having divided their little army into 2 columns, they marched by different routes upon Caracas. The further they advanced, the stronger grew their resources; the cruel excesses of the Spaniards acting everywhere as the recruiting sergeants for the army of the independents. The power of resistance on the part of

146

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Marx: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Bolivar y Ponte“. S. [16]

Marx: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Bolivar y Ponte“. S. [24]

Bolivar y Ponte

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

the Spaniards was broken, partly by the circumstance of 3/4 of their army being composed of natives, who bolted on every encounter to the opposite ranks, partly by the cowardice of such generals as Tiscar, Cagigal, and Fierro, who, on every occasion, deserted their own troops. Thus it happened that San Iago Marin˜o, an ignorant youth, had contrived to dislodge the Spaniards from the provinces of Cumana and Barcelona, at the very time that Bolivar was advancing through the western provinces. The only serious resistance, on the part of the Spaniards, was directed against the column of Ribas, who, however, routed Gen. Monteverde at Lostaguanes, and forced him to shut himself up in Puerto Cabello with the remainder of his troops. On hearing of Bolivar’s approach, Gen. Fierro, the governor of Caracas, sent deputies to propose a capitulation, which was concluded at Vittoria; but Fierro, struck by a sudden panic, and not expecting the return of his own emissaries, secretly decamped in the night, leaving more than 1,500 Spaniards at the discretion of the enemy. Bolivar was now honored with a public triumph. Standing in a triumphal car, drawn by 12 young ladies, dressed in white, adorned with the national colors, and all selected from the first families of Caracas, Bolivar, bareheaded, in full uniform, and wielding a small baton in his hand, was, in about half an hour, dragged from the entrance of the city to his residence. Having proclaimed himself “dictator and liberator of the western provinces of Venezuela”⎯Marin˜o had assumed the title of “dictator of the eastern provinces”⎯he created “the order of the liberator,” estab 442 lished a choice corps of troops under the name of his body-guard, and surrounded himself with the show of a court. But, like most of his countrymen, he was averse to any prolonged exertion, and his dictatorship soon proved a military anarchy, leaving the most important affairs in the hands of favorites, who squandered the finances of the country, and then resorted to odious means in order to restore them. The new enthusiasm of the people was thus turned to dissatisfaction, and the scattered forces of the enemy were allowed to recover. While, in the beginning of Aug. 1813, Monteverde was shut up in the fortress of Puerto Cabello, and the Spanish army reduced to the possession of a small strip of land in the north-western part of Venezuela, 3 months later, in December, the liberator’s prestige was gone, and Caracas itself threatened, by the sudden appearance in its neighborhood of the victorious Spaniards under Boves. To strengthen his tottering power, Bolivar assembled, Jan. 1, 1814, a junta of the most influential inhabitants of Caracas, declaring himself to be unwilling any longer to bear the burden of dictatorship. Hurtado Mendoza, on the other hand, argued, in a long oration, “the necessity of leaving the supreme power in the hands of

149

Karl Marx

Gen. Bolivar, until the congress of New Granada could meet, and Venezuela be united under one government.” This proposal was accepted, and the dictatorship was thus invested with some sort of legal sanction. The war with the Spaniards was, for some time, carried on in a series of small actions, with no decisive advantage to either of the contending parties. In June, 1814, Boves marched with his united forces from Calabozo on La Puerta, where the two dictators, Bolivar and Marin˜o, had formed a junction, met them, and ordered an immediate attack. After some resistance, Bolivar fled toward Caracas, while Marin˜o disappeared in the direction of Cumana. Puerto Cabello and Valencia fell into the hands of Boves, who then detached 2 columns (1 of them under the command of Col. Gonzales), by different roads, upon Caracas. Ribas tried in vain to oppose the advance of Gonzales. On the surrender of Caracas to Gonzales, July 17, 1814, Bolivar evacuated La Guayra, ordered the vessels lying in the harbor of that town to sail for Cumana, and retreated with the remainder of his troops upon Barcelona. After a defeat inflicted on the insurgents by Boves, Aug. 8, 1814, at Arguita, Bolivar left his troops the same night secretly to hasten, through by-roads, to Cumana, where, despite the angry protests of Ribas, he at once embarked on board the Bianchi, together with Marin˜o and some other officers. If Ribas, Paez, and other generals had followed the dictators in their flight, every thing would have been lost. Treated by Gen. Arismendi, on their arrival at Juan Griego, in the island of Margarita, as deserters, and ordered to depart, they sailed for Carupano, whence, meeting with a similar reception on the part of Col. Bermudez, they steered toward Carthagena. There, to palliate their flight, they published a justificatory memoir, in high-sounding phraseology. Having joined a plot for the overthrow of the government of Carthagena, Bolivar had to leave that little republic, and proceeded to Tunja, where the congress of the federalist republic of New Granada was sitting. At that time the province of Cundinamarca stood at the head of the independent provinces which refused to adopt the Granadian federal compact, while Quito, Pasto, Santa Martha, and other provinces, still remained in the power of the Spaniards. Bolivar, who arrived at Tunja Nov. 22, 1814, was created by the congress commander-in-chief of the federalist forces, and received the double mission of forcing the president of the province of Cundinamarca to acknowledge the authority of the congress, and of then marching against Santa Martha, the only fortified seaport the Spaniards still retained in New Granada. The first point was easily carried, Bogota, the capital of the disaffected province, being a defenceless town. In spite of its capitulation, Bolivar allowed it to be sacked during 48 hours by his troops. At Santa

150

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bolivar y Ponte

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Martha, the Spanish general Montalvo, having a feeble garrison of less than 200 men, and a fortress in a miserable state of defence, had already bespoken a French vessel, in order to secure his own flight, while the inhabitants of the town sent word to Bolivar that on his appearance they would open the gates and drive out the garrison. But instead of marching, as he was ordered by the congress, against the Spaniards at Santa Martha, he indulged his rancor against Castillo, the commander of Carthagena, took upon himself to lead his troops against the latter town, which constituted an integral part of the federal republic. Beaten back, he encamped upon La Popa, a large hill, about gun-shot distance from Carthagena, and established a single small cannon as a battery against a place provided with about 80 guns. He afterward converted the siege into a blockade, which lasted till the beginning of May without any other result than that of reducing his army, by desertion and malady, from 2,400 men to about 700. Meanwhile a great Spanish expedition from Cadiz had arrived, March 25, 1815, under Gen. Morillo, at the island of Margarita, and had been able to throw powerful ree¨nforcements into Santa Martha, and soon after to take Carthagena itself. Previously, however, Bolivar had embarked for Jamaica, May 10, 1815, with about a dozen of his officers, on an armed English brig. Having arrived at the place of refuge, he again published a proclamation, representing himself as the victim of some secret enemy or faction, and defending his flight before the approaching Spaniards as a resignation of command out of deference for the public peace. During his 8 months’ stay at Kingston, the generals he had left in Venezuela, and Gen. Arismendi in the island of Margarita, stanchly held their ground against the Spanish arms. But Ribas, from 443 whom Bolivar had derived his reputation, having been shot by the Spaniards after the capture of Maturin, there appeared in his stead another man on the stage, of still greater abilities, who, being as a foreigner unable to play an independent part in the South American revolution, finally resolved to act under Bolivar. This was Louis Brion. To bring aid to the revolutionists, he had sailed from London for Carthagena with a corvette of 24 guns, equipped in great part at his own expense, with 14,000 stand of arms and a great quantity of military stores. Arriving too late to be useful in that quarter, he ree¨mbarked for Cayes, in Hayti, whither many emigrant patriots had repaired after the surrender of Carthagena. Bolivar, meanwhile, had also departed from Kingston to Porte au Prince, where, on his promise of emancipating the slaves, Pe´tion, the president of Hayti, offered him large supplies for a new expedition against the Spaniards in Venezuela. At Cayes he met Brion and the other emigrants, and in a general meeting proposed him-

151

Karl Marx

self as the chief of the new expedition, on the condition of uniting the civil and military power in his person until the assembling of a general congress. The majority accepting his terms, the expedition sailed April 10, 1816, with him as its commander and Brion as its admiral. At Margarita the former succeeded in winning over Arismendi, the commander of the island, in which he had reduced the Spaniards to the single spot of Pampatar. On Bolivar’s formal promise to convoke a national congress at Venezuela, as soon as he should be master of the country, Arismendi summoned a junta in the cathedral of La Villa del Norte, and publicly proclaimed him the commander-in-chief of the republics of Venezuela and New Granada. On May 31, 1816, Bolivar landed at Carupano, but did not dare prevent Marin˜o and Piar from separating from him, and carrying on a war against Cumana under their own auspices. Weakened by this separation, he set sail, on Brion’s advice, for Ocumare, where he arrived July 3, 1816, with 13 vessels, of which 7 only were armed. His army mustered but 650 men, swelled, by the enrolment of negroes whose emancipation he had proclaimed, to about 800. At Ocumare he again issued a proclamation, promising “to exterminate the tyrants” and to “convoke the people to name their deputies to congress.” On his advance in the direction of Valencia he met, not far from Ocumare, the Spanish general Morales at the head of about 200 soldiers and 100 militia men. The skirmishers of Morales having dispersed his advanced guard, he lost, as an eye-witness records, “all presence of mind, spoke not a word, turned his horse quickly round, and fled in full speed toward Ocumare, passed the village at full gallop, arrived at the neighboring bay, jumped from his horse, got into a boat, and embarked on the Diana, ordering the whole squadron to follow him to the little island of Buen Ayre, and leaving all his companions without any means of assistance.” On Brion’s rebukes and admonitions, he again joined the other commanders on the coast of Cumana, but being harshly received, and threatened by Piar with trial before a court-martial as a deserter and a coward, he quickly retraced his steps to Cayes. After months of exertion, Brion at length succeeded in persuading a majority of the Venezuelan military chiefs, who felt the want of at least a nominal centre, to recall Bolivar as their general-in-chief, upon the express condition that he should assemble a congress, and not meddle with the civil administration. Dec. 31, 1816, he arrived at Barcelona with the arms, munitions of war, and provisions supplied by Pe´tion. Joined, Jan. 2, 1817, by Arismendi, he proclaimed on the 4th martial law and the union of all powers in his single person; but 5 days later, when Arismendi had fallen into an ambush laid by the Spaniards, the dictator fled to Barcelona. The troops

152

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bolivar y Ponte

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

rallied at the latter place, whither Brion sent him also guns and ree¨nforcements, so that he soon mustered a new corps of 1,100 men. April 5, the Spaniards took possession of the town of Barcelona, and the patriot troops retreated toward the charity-house, a building isolated from Barcelona, and intrenched on Bolivar’s order, but unfit to shelter a garrison of 1,000 men from a serious attack. He left the post in the night of April 5, informing Col. Freites, to whom he transferred his command, that he was going in search of more troops, and would soon return. Trusting this promise, Freites declined the offer of a capitulation, and, after the assault, was slaughtered with the whole garrison by the Spaniards. Piar, a man of color and native of Curac¸ao, conceived and executed the conquest of the provinces of Guiana; Admiral Brion supporting that enterprise with his gun-boats. July 20, the whole of the provinces being evacuated by the Spaniards, Piar, Brion, Zea, Marin˜o, Arismendi, and others, assembled a provincial congress at Angostura, and put at the head of the executive a triumvirate, of which Brion, hating Piar and deeply interested in Bolivar, in whose success he had embarked his large private fortune, contrived that the latter should be appointed a member, notwithstanding his absence. On these tidings Bolivar left his retreat for Angostura, where, emboldened by Brion, he dissolved the congress and the triumvirate, to replace them by a “supreme council of the nation,” with himself as the chief, Brion and Antonio Francisco Zea as the directors, the former of the military, the latter of the political section. However, Piar, the conqueror of Guiana, who once before had threatened to try him before a court-martial as a deserter, was not sparing of his sarcasms against the “Napoleon of the retreat,” and Bolivar consequently accepted a plan for getting rid of him. On the false accusation of having conspired against the whites, plotted against Bolivar’s life, and aspired to the supreme power, Piar was arraigned before a war council under the presidency of Brion, convicted, con 444 demned to death, and shot, Oct. 16, 1817. His death struck Marin˜o with terror. Fully aware of his own nothingness when deprived of Piar, he, in a most abject letter, publicly calumniated his murdered friend, deprecated his own attempts at rivalry with the liberator, and threw himself upon Bolivar’s inexhaustible fund of magnanimity. The conquest by Piar of Guiana had completely changed the situation in favor of the patriots; that single province affording them more resources than all the other 7 provinces of Venezuela together. A new campaign, announced by Bolivar through a new proclamation, was, therefore, generally expected to result in the final expulsion of the Spaniards. This first bulletin, which described some small Spanish foraging parties withdrawing from Calabozo as “armies flying before our

153

Karl Marx

victorious troops,” was not calculated to damp these hopes. Against about 4,000 Spaniards, whose junction had not yet been effected by Morillo, he mustered more than 9,000 men, well armed, equipped, and amply furnished with all the necessaries of war. Nevertheless, toward the end of May, 1818, he had lost about a dozen battles and all the provinces lying on the northern side of the Orinoco. Scattering as he did his superior forces, they were always beaten in detail. Leaving the conduct of the war to Paez and his other subordinates, he retired to Angostura. Defection followed upon defection, and every thing seemed to be drifting to utter ruin. At this most critical moment, a new combination of fortunate accidents again changed the face of affairs. At Angostura he met with Santander, a native of New Granada, who begged for the means of invading that territory, where the population were prepared for a general rise against the Spaniards. This request, to some extent, he complied with, while powerful succors in men, vessels, and munitions of war, poured in from England, and English, French, German, and Polish officers, flocked to Angostura. Lastly, Dr. German Roscio, dismayed at the declining fortune of the South American revolution, stepped forward, laid hold of Bolivar’s mind, and induced him to convene, Feb. 15, 1819, a national congress, the mere name of which proved powerful enough to create a new army of about 14,000 men, so that Bolivar found himself enabled to resume the offensive. The foreign officers suggested to him the plan of making a display of an intention to attack Caracas, and free Venezuela from the Spanish yoke, and thus inducing Morillo to weaken New Granada and concentrate his forces upon Venezuela, while he (Bolivar) should suddenly turn to the west, unite with Santander’s guerillas, and march upon Bogota. To execute this plan, he left Angostura Feb. 24, 1819, after having nominated Zea president of the congress and vicepresident of the republic during his absence. By the manœuvres of Paez, Morillo and La Torre were routed at Achaguas, and would have been destroyed if Bolivar had effected a junction between his own troops and those of Paez and Marin˜o. At all events, the victories of Paez led to the occupation of the province of Barinas, which opened to Bolivar the way into New Granada. Every thing being here prepared by Santander, the foreign troops, consisting mainly of Englishmen, decided the fate of New Granada by the successive victories won July 1 and 23, and Aug. 7, in the province of Tunja. Aug. 12, Bolivar made a triumphal entry into Bogota, while the Spaniards, all the Granadian provinces having risen against them, shut themselves up in the fortified town of Mompox. Having regulated the Granadian congress at Bogota, and installed Gen. Santander as commander-in-chief, Bolivar marched toward Pamplona, where he spent

154

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bolivar y Ponte

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

about 2 months in festivals and balls. Nov. 3, he arrived at Montecal, in Venezuela, whither he had directed the patriotic chieftains of that territory to assemble with their troops. With a treasury of about $3,000,000, raised from the inhabitants of New Granada by forced contributions, and with a disposable force of about 9,000 men, the 3d part of whom consisted of well disciplined English, Irish, Hanoverians, and other foreigners, he had now to encounter an enemy stripped of all resources and reduced to a nominal force of about 4,500 men, 2/3 of whom were natives, and, therefore, not to be relied upon by the Spaniards. Morillo withdrawing from San Fernando de Apure to San Carlos, Bolivar followed him up to Calabozo, so that the hostile head-quarters were only 2 days’ march from each other. If Bolivar had boldly advanced, the Spaniards would have been crushed by his European troops alone, but he preferred protracting the war for 5 years longer. In October, 1819, the congress of Angostura had forced Zea, his nominee, to resign his office, and chosen Arismendi in his place. On receiving this news, Bolivar suddenly marched his foreign legion toward Angostura, surprised Arismendi, who had 600 natives only, exiled him to the island of Margarita, and restored Zea to his dignities. Dr. Roscio, fascinating him with the prospects of centralized power, led him to proclaim the “republic of Colombia,” comprising New Granada and Venezuela, to publish a fundamental law for the new state, drawn up by Roscio, and to consent to the establishment of a common congress for both provinces. On Jan. 20, 1820, he had again returned to San Fernando de Apure. His sudden withdrawal of the foreign legion, which was more dreaded by the Spaniards than 10 times the number of Colombians, had given Morillo a new opportunity to collect ree¨nforcements, while the tidings of a formidable expedition to start from Spain under O’Donnell raised the sinking spirits of the Spanish party. Notwithstanding his vastly superior forces, Bolivar contrived to accomplish nothing during the campaign of 1820. Meanwhile the news arrived from Europe that the revolution in the Isla de Leon had put a forcible end 445 to O’Donnell’s intended expedition. In New Granada 15 provinces out of 22 had joined the government of Colombia, and the Spaniards now held there only the fortresses of Carthagena and the isthmus of Panama. In Venezuela 6 provinces out of 8 obeyed the laws of Colombia. Such was the state of things when Bolivar allowed himself to be inveigled by Morillo into negotiations resulting, Nov. 25, 1820, in the conclusion at Truxillo of a truce for 6 months. In the truce no mention was made of the republic of Colombia, although the congress had expressly forbidden any treaty to be concluded with the Spanish commander before the acknowledgment on his part of the independence of the republic. Dec. 17,

155

Karl Marx

Morillo, anxious to play his part in Spain, embarked at Puerto Cabello, leaving the command-in-chief to Miguel de la Torre, and on March 10, 1821, Bolivar notified La Torre, by letter, that hostilities should recommence at the expiration of 30 days. The Spaniards had taken a strong position at Carabobo, a village situated about half-way between San Carlos and Valencia; but La Torre, instead of uniting there all his forces, had concentrated only his 1st division, 2,500 infantry and about 1,500 cavalry, while Bolivar had about 6,000 infantry, among them the British legion, mustering 1,100 men, and 3,000 llaneros on horseback, under Paez. The enemy’s position seemed so formidable to Bolivar, that he proposed to his council of war to make a new armistice, which, however, was rejected by his subalterns. At the head of a column mainly consisting of the British legion, Paez turned through a footpath the right wing of the enemy, after the successful execution of which manœuvre, La Torre was the first of the Spaniards to run away, taking no rest till he reached Puerto Cabello, where he shut himself up with the remainder of his troops. Puerto Cabello itself must have surrendered on a quick advance of the victorious army, but Bolivar lost his time in exhibiting himself at Valencia and Caracas. Sept. 21, 1821, the strong fortress of Carthagena capitulated to Santander. The last feats of arms in Venezuela, the naval action at Maracaibo, in Aug. 1823, and the forced surrender of Puerto Cabello, July, 1824, were both the work of Padilla. The revolution of the Isla de Leon, which prevented O’Donnell’s expedition from starting, and the assistance of the British legion, had evidently turned the scale in favor of the Colombians.⎯The Colombian congress opened its sittings in Jan. 1821, at Cucuta, published, Aug. 30, a new constitution, and after Bolivar had again pretended to resign, renewed his powers. Having signed the new constitution, he obtained leave to undertake the campaign of Quito (1822), to which province the Spaniards had retired after their ejection by a general rising of the people from the isthmus of Panama. This campaign, ending in the incorporation of Quito, Pasto, and Guayaquil into Colombia, was nominally led by Bolivar and Gen. Sucre, but the few successes of the corps were entirely owed to British officers, such as Col. Sands. During the campaigns of 1823–’24, against the Spaniards in upper and lower Peru, he no longer thought it necessary to keep up the appearance of generalship, but leaving the whole military task to Gen. Sucre, limited himself to triumphal entries, manifestos, and the proclamation of constitutions. Through his Colombian body-guard, he swayed the votes of the congress of Lima, which, Feb. 10, 1823, transferred to him the dictatorship, while he secured his ree¨lection as president of Colombia by a new tender of resignation. His

156

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bolivar y Ponte

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

position had meanwhile become strengthened, what with the formal recognition of the new state on the part of England, what with Sucre’s conquest of the provinces of upper Peru, which the latter united into an independent republic, under the name of Bolivia. Here, where Sucre’s bayonets were supreme, Bolivar gave full scope to his propensities for arbitrary power, by introducing the “Bolivian Code,” an imitation of the Code Napole´on. It was his plan to transplant that code from Bolivia to Peru, and from Peru to Colombia⎯to keep the former states in check by Colombian troops, and the latter by the foreign legion and Peruvian soldiers. By force, mingled with intrigue, he succeeded indeed, for some weeks at least, in fastening his code upon Peru. The president and liberator of Colombia, the protector and dictator of Peru, and the godfather of Bolivia, he had now reached the climax of his renown. But a serious antagonism had broken out in Colombia, between the centralists or Bolivarists and the federalists, under which latter name the enemies of military anarchy had coalesced with his military rivals. The Colombian congress having, at his instigation, proposed an act of accusation against Paez, the vice-president of Venezuela, the latter broke out into open revolt, secretly sustained and pushed on by Bolivar himself, who wanted insurrections, to furnish him a pretext for overthrowing the constitution and reassuming the dictatorship. Beside his body-guard, he led, on his return from Peru, 1,800 Peruvians, ostensibly against the federalist rebels. At Puerto Cabello, however, where he met Paez, he not only confirmed him in his command of Venezuela, and issued a proclamation of amnesty to all the rebels, but openly took their part and rebuked the friends of the constitution; and by decree at Bogota, Nov. 23, 1826, he assumed dictatorial powers. In the year 1826, from which the decline of his power dates, he contrived to assemble a congress at Panama, with the ostensible object of establishing a new democratic international code. Plenipotentiaries came from Colombia, Brazil, La Plata, Bolivia, Mexico, Guatemala, &c. What he really aimed at was the erection of the whole of South America into one federative republic, with himself as its dictator. While thus giving full scope to his dreams of attaching half a world to his name, his real power was rapidly slipping from his 446 grasp. The Colombian troops in Peru, informed of his making arrangements for the introduction of the Bolivian code, promoted a violent insurrection. The Peruvians elected Gen. Lamar as the president of their republic, assisted the Bolivians in driving out the Colombian troops, and even waged a victorious war against Colombia, which ended in a treaty reducing the latter to its primitive limits, stipulating the equality of the 2 countries, and separating their debts. The congress of Ocan˜a, convoked by Bolivar,

157

Karl Marx

with a view to modify the constitution in favor of his arbitrary power, was opened March 2, 1828, by an elaborate address, insisting on the necessity of new privileges for the executive. When, however, it became evident that the amended project of the constitution would come out of the convention quite different from its original form, his friends vacated their seats, by which proceeding the body was left without a quorum, and thus became extinct. From a country-seat, some miles distant from Ocan˜a, to which he had retreated, he published another manifesto, pretending to be incensed at the step taken by his own friends, but at the same time attacking the convention, calling on the provinces to recur to extraordinary measures, and declaring that he was ready to submit to any load of power which might be heaped upon him. Under the pressure of his bayonets, popular assemblies at Caracas, Carthagena, and Bogota, to which latter place he had repaired, anew invested him with dictatorial power. An attempt to assassinate him in his sleeping room at Bogota, which he escaped only by leaping in the dark from the balcony of the window, and lying concealed under a bridge, allowed him for some time to introduce a sort of military terrorism. He did not, however, lay hands on Santander, although he had participated in the conspiracy, while he put to death Gen. Padilla, whose guilt was not proved at all, but who, as a man of color, was not able to resist. Violent factions disturbing the republic in 1829, in a new appeal to the citizens, Bolivar invited them to frankly express their wishes as to the modifications to be introduced into the constitution. An assembly of notables at Caracas answered by denouncing his ambition, laying bare the weakness of his administration, declaring the separation of Venezuela from Colombia, and placing Paez at the head of that republic. The senate of Colombia stood by Bolivar, but other insurrections broke out at different points. Having resigned for the 5th time, in Jan. 1830, he again accepted the presidency, and left Bogota to wage war on Paez in the name of the Colombian congress. Toward the end of March, 1830, he advanced at the head of 8,000 men, took Caracuta, which had revolted, and then turned upon the province of Maracaibo, where Paez awaited him with 12,000 men, in a strong position. As soon as he became aware that Paez meant serious fighting, his courage collapsed. For a moment he even thought to subject himself to Paez, and declare against the congress; but the influence of his partisans at the congress vanished, and he was forced to tender his resignation, notice being given to him that he must now stand by it, and that an annual pension would be granted to him on the condition of his departure for foreign countries. He accordingly sent his resignation to the congress, April 27, 1830. But hoping to regain power by the influence of

158

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bolivar y Ponte

5

10

15

20

25

his partisans, and a reaction setting in against Joachim Mosquera, the new president of Colombia, he effected his retreat from Bogota in a very slow manner, and contrived, under a variety of pretexts, to prolong his sojourn at San Pedro, until the end of 1830, when he suddenly died. The following is the portrait given of him by Ducoudray-Holstein: “Simon Bolivar is 5 feet 4 inches in height, his visage is long, his cheeks hollow, his complexion livid brown; his eyes are of a middle size, and sunk deep in his head, which is covered thinly with hair. His mustaches give him a dark and wild aspect, particularly when he is in a passion. His whole body is thin and meagre. He has the appearance of a man 65 years old. In walking, his arms are in continual motion. He cannot walk long, but becomes soon fatigued. He likes his hammock, where he sits or lolls. He gives way to sudden gusts of resentment, and becomes in a moment a madman, throws himself into his hammock, and utters curses and imprecations upon all around him. He likes to indulge in sarcasms upon absent persons, reads only light French literature, is a bold rider, and passionately fond of waltzing. He is fond of hearing himself talk and giving toasts. In adversity, and destitute of aid from without, he is perfectly free from passion and violence of temper. He then becomes mild, patient, docile, and even submissive. In a great measure he conceals his faults under the politeness of a man educated in the so-called beau monde, possesses an almost Asiatic talent for dissimulation, and understands mankind better than the mass of his countrymen.” By decree of the congress of New Granada, his remains were removed in 1842 to Caracas, and a monument erected there in his honor.⎯See Histoire de Bolivar, par Ge´n. Ducoudray-Holstein, continue´e jusqu’a` sa mort, par Alphonse Viollet (Paris, 1831), “Memoirs of Gen. John Miller (in the service of the Republic of Peru),” Col. Hippisley’s “Account of his Journey to the Orinoco” (Lond. 1819).

159

Friedrich Engels The Relief of Lucknow

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5236, 1. Februar 1858.

The Relief of Lucknow. We have at last before us the official dispatch of Sir Colin Campbell on the relief of Lucknow. It confirms in every respect the conclusions we drew from the first non-official reports on this engagement. The contemptible character of the resistance offered by the Oudians is even more apparent from this document, while on the other hand Campbell himself appears to take more pride in his skillful generalship than in any uncommon bravery displayed either by him or his troops. The dispatch states the strength of the British troops at about 5,000, of whom some 3,200 were infantry, and 700 cavalry, the rest artillery, naval brigade, engineers, &c. The operations commenced, as stated, with the attack on Dilkhoosha. This garden was taken after a running fight. “The loss was very trifling; the enemy’s loss, too, was trifling, owing to the suddenness of retreat.” There was, indeed, no chance of displaying heroism on this occasion. The Oudians retreated in such a hurry that they crossed at once through the grounds of La Martinie`re without availing themselves of the new line of defense offered by this post. The first symptom of a more obstinate resistance was shown at the Secundrabagh, a high-walled, loopholed inclosure 120 yards square, flanked by a loop-holed village about 100 yards distant. There Campbell at once displayed his less dashing but more sensible mode of warfare. The heavy and field artillery concentrated their efforts on the main inclosure, while one brigade attacked the barricaded village, and another drove back whatever bands of the enemy attempted the open field. The defense was lamentable. Two intrenched positions like those described flanking each other by their fire, in the hands of indifferent soldiers, or even of plucky undisciplined insurgents, would require a deal of fighting to take. But here there appears to have been neither pluck, nor concert, nor even a shadow of sense. We do not hear of any artillery used in the defense. The village (evidently a small

160

5

10

15

20

25

The Relief of Lucknow

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

cluster of houses) was taken at the first onset. The troops in the field were scattered without an effort. Thus in a few moments the Secundrabagh was quite isolated, and when, after an hour’s cannonading, the walls gave way in one point, the Highlanders stormed the breach and killed every soul in the place; 2,000 natives are said by Sir C. Campbell to have been found dead in it. The Shah Nuggeef was the next post⎯a walled inclosure prepared for defense, with a mosque for a reduit; again one of those positions which a commander of brave but half-disciplined troops would exactly wish for. This place was stormed after a three hours’ cannonade had opened the walls. On the next day, Nov. 17, the mess-house was attacked. This was a group of buildings inclosed by a mud rampart and a scarped ditch twelve feet wide⎯in other words, a common field redoubt with a slight ditch and a parapet of problematical thickness and hight. For some cause or other, this place appeared rather formidable to Gen. Campbell, for he at once resolved to give his artillery full time to batter it down before he stormed it. The cannonade accordingly lasted the whole morning, till 3 o’clock p.m., when the infantry advanced and took the position with a rash. No sharp fighting here, at all events. The Motee Mahal, the last post of the Oudians on the line toward the Residency, was cannonaded for an hour; several breaches were made and then taken without difficulty, and this ended the fighting for the relief of the garrison. The character of the whole engagement is that of an attack by welldisciplined, well-officered European troops, inured to war and of average courage, upon an Asiatic rabble, possessing neither discipline nor officers, nor the habits of war, nor even adequate arms, and whose courage was broken by the consciousness of the double superiority possessed by their opponents, as soldiers over civilians and as Europeans over Asiatics. We have seen that Sir Colin Campbell nowhere appears to have been opposed by artillery. We shall see, further on, that Brigadier Inglis’s report leads to the conclusion that the great bulk of the insurgents must have been without fire-arms; and if it is true that 2,000 natives were massacred in the Secundrabagh, it is evident they must have been very imperfectly armed, otherwise the greatest cowards would have defended the place against one assaulting column. On the other hand, the conduct of the fight by Gen. Campbell deserves the highest praise for tactical skill. From the want of artillery in his opponents, he must have known that his progress could not be resisted; accordingly he used this arm to its full extent, clearing first the way for his columns before he launched them. The attack upon Secundrabagh and its flanking defenses is a very excellent specimen of the mode of

161

Friedrich Engels

conducting such an affair. At the same time, having once ascertained the despicable nature of the defense, he did not treat such opponents with any unnecessary formality; as soon as there was a gap in the walls the infantry advanced. Altogether, Sir C. Campbell ranks from the day of Lucknow as a general; hitherto he was known as a soldier only. By the relief of Lucknow we are at last put in possession of a document describing the occurrences which took place during the siege of the Residency. Brigadier Inglis, the successor in command of Sir H. Lawrence, has made his report to the Governor-General; and, according to Gen. Outram and the unisono of the British press, here is a conspicuous case of heroism, indeed⎯for such bravery, such perseverance, such endurance of fatigue and hardships, have never been seen at any time, and the defense of Lucknow stands unparalleled in the history of sieges. The report of Brigadier Inglis informs us that on the 30th of June the British made a sortie against the natives, who were then just concentrating, but were repulsed with such heavy loss that they had at once to confine themselves to the defense of the Residency, and even to abandon and blow up another group of buildings in the vicinity, containing 240 barrels of powder and 6,000,000 musket cartridges. The enemy at once invested the Residency, taking possession of and fortifying the buildings in its immediate vicinity, some within 50 yards of the defenses, and which, against the advice of the engineers, Sir H. Lawrence had refused to raze. The British parapets were still partly unfinished, and only two batteries were in working order, but, in spite of the terrific and incessant fire “kept up by” 8,000 men, firing “at one time into the position,” they were enabled to complete them very soon, and have 30 guns in battery. This terrific fire must have been a very wild and random kind of firing, not at all deserving the name of sharp-shooting with which Gen. Inglis adorns it; how otherwise could a man have lived in the place, defended as it was by perhaps 1,200 men? The instances related to show the terrific nature of this fire, that it killed women and children, and wounded men in places considered well sheltered, are very poor examples, as they occur never oftener than when the enemy’s fire, instead of being aimed at different objects, is directed toward the fortification at large, and consequently never hits the actual defenders. On the 1st of July Lawrence was mortally wounded, and Inglis took the command. The enemy had by this time 20 or 25 guns in position, “planted all round our post.” Very lucky for the defense, for if they had concentrated their fire on one or two places of the ramparts, the position would in all likelihood have been taken. Some of these guns were posted in places “where our own heavy guns could not reply to them.” Now, as the Residency is on commanding

162

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Relief of Lucknow

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

ground, these places can only have been so situated that the guns of the attack could not fire at the rampart, but merely at the tops of the buildings inside; which was very fortunate for the defense, as that did no great harm, and the same guns might have been far more usefully employed in firing at the parapet or barricades. Upon the whole, the artillery on both sides must have been miserably served, as otherwise a cannonade at such short range must have been very shortly put a stop to by the batteries mutually dismounting each other; and that this did not take place, is still a mystery. On July 20, the Oudians exploded a mine under the parapet, which, however, did no damage. Two main columns immediately advanced to an assault, while sham attacks were attempted at other places; but the mere effect of the garrison’s fire drove them back. On the 10th of August another mine exploded, and opened a breach, “through which a regiment could have advanced in perfect order. A column charged this breach, flanked by the subordinate attacks; but at the breach only a few of the enemy advanced with the utmost determination.” These few were soon disposed of by the flank fire of the garrison, while at the flank attacks hand-grenades and a little firing drove the undisciplined masses back. The third mine was sprung on the 18th August; a new breach was formed, but the assault was even more spiritless than before, and was easily repelled. The last explosion and assault took place on the 5th September, but again hand-grenades and musketry drove them back. From that time to the arrival of relief, the siege appears to have been converted into a mere blockade, with a more or less sustained fire of muskets and artillery. This is, indeed, an extraordinary transaction. A mob of 50,000 men or more, composed of the inhabitants of Lucknow and the surrounding country, with perhaps 5,000 or 6,000 drilled soldiers among them, blockade a body of some 1,200 or 1,500 Europeans in the Residency of Lucknow and attempt to reduce them. So little order reigned among the blockading body, that the supplies of the garrison appear never to have been completely cut off, though their communications with Cawnpore were. The proceedings of what is called “the siege” are distinguished by a mixture of Asiatic ignorance and wildness, with here and there a glimpse of some military knowledge introduced by European example and rule. There were evidently some artillerymen and sappers among the Oudians who knew how to construct batteries; but their action appears to have been confined to the construction of shelter from the enemy’s fire. They even appear to have brought this art of sheltering themselves to great perfection, so much so that their batteries must have been very safe, not only for the gunners but also for the besieged; no guns could have been

163

Friedrich Engels

worked in them with any effect. Nor were they; or how is this unparalleled fact to be explained, that 30 guns inside and 25 outside worked against each other at exceedingly short ranges, some not more than 50 yards, and yet we hear nothing of dismounted guns or one party silencing the artillery of the other? As to the musketry fire, we first have to ask how it is possible that eight thousand natives could take position within musket range from the British batteries without being sent to the right about by the artillery? And if they did, how is it possible that they did not kill and wound every soul on the place? Still we are told that they did hold their own, and did fire day and night, and that in spite of all this the 32d Regiment, which could at the very outside count 500 men after June 30, and had to bear the brunt of the whole siege, still was 300 strong at its end? If this is not an exact counterpart of the “last surviving ten of the Fourth (Polish) Regiment,” which marched into Prussia 88 officers and 1,815 rank and file strong, what then is it? The British are perfectly right that such fighting was never seen as there was at Lucknow⎯indeed it was not. In spite of the unassuming, apparently simple tone of Inglis’s report, yet his queer observation about guns placed so that they could not be fired at, about 8,000 men firing day and night, without effect, about 50,000 insurgents blockading him, about the hardships of bullets going into places where they had no business to go, and about assaults carried out with the utmost determination, yet repulsed, without any effort⎯all these observations compel us to acknowledge the whole of this report is full of the most glaring exaggerations, and will not stand cool criticism for a moment. But then, surely the besieged underwent uncommon hardships? Listen: “The want of native servants has also been a source of much privation. Several ladies have had to tend their children, and even to wash their own clothes as well as to cook their scanty meals entirely unaided.” Pity the sorrows of a poor Lucknow lady! True, in these times of ups and downs, when dynasties are made and unmade in a day, and revolutions and commercial crashes combine to render the permanency of all creature comforts most splendidly insecure, we are not called upon to show any great sympathy if we hear of some ex-queen having to darn her own stockings, and even to wash them, not to speak of her cooking her own mutton-chop. But an Anglo-Indian lady, one of that vast number of sisters, cousins, or nieces to half-pay officers, Indian Government writers, merchants, clerks, or adventurers, who are, or rather were, before the mutiny, sent out every year, fresh from the boarding-school, to the large marriage-market in India, neither more nor less ceremoniously, and often far less willingly, than the fair Circassians that go to the Constantinople

164

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Relief of Lucknow

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

market⎯the very idea of one of these ladies having to wash her own clothes and cook her scanty meals entirely unaided⎯entirely! One’s blood boils at it. Completely without “native servants”⎯ay, having actually to tend their own children! It is revolting⎯Cawnpore would have been preferable! The rabble investing the Residency may have counted 50,000 men; but then the large majority cannot have had any firearms. The 8,000 “sharpshooters” may have had firearms; but of what description both arms and men were, the effect of their fire is there to tell. The twenty-five guns in the battery have been proved to have been most despicably served. The mining was as much at random as the firing. The assaults do not deserve the name even of reconnaissances. So much for the besiegers. The besieged deserve full credit for the great strength of character with which they have held out for nearly five months, the greater portion of which time they were without any news whatever from the British forces. They fought, and hoped against hope, as it behooves men to do when they have their lives to sell as dearly as they can, and women and children to defend against Asiatic cruelty. Again, full credit do we give them for their watchfulness and perseverance. But, after the experiences of Wheeler’s surrender at Cawnpore, who would not have done the same? As to the attempt to turn the defense of Lucknow into a piece of unparalleled heroism, it is ridiculous, especially after the clumsy report of Gen. Inglis. The privations of the garrison were confined to scanty shelter and exposure to the weather (which, however, did not produce any serious disease), and as to provisions, the very worst they had consisted in “coarse beef and still coarser flour!” far more comfortable fare than besieged soldiers are accustomed to in Europe! Compare the defense of Lucknow against a stupid and ignorant barbarian rabble with that of Antwerp, 1832, and the Fort of Malghera near Venice, in 1848 and ’49, not to speak of Todtleben at Sevastopol, who had far greater difficulties to contend with than Gen. Inglis. Malghera was attacked by the best engineers and artillerymen of Austria, and defended by a weak garrison of raw levies; four-fifths of them had no bomb-proof shelter; the low soil created malaria more dangerous than an Indian climate; a hundred guns played upon them, and during the last three days of the bombardment, forty rounds were fired every minute; still the fort held out a month, and would have held out longer, if the Austrians had not taken hold of a position necessitating their retreat. Or take Dantzic, where Rapp, with the sick remnants of the French regiments returned from Russia, held out eleven months. Take in fact any respectable siege of modern days, and you will find that more skill, more spirit, and quite as much pluck and

165

Friedrich Engels

endurance were shown against quite as great odds as in this Lucknow affair. The Oude insurgents, however, though contemptible in the field, proved, immediately after the arrival of Campbell, the strength of a national insurrection. Campbell saw at once that he could neither attack the City of Lucknow with his forces, nor hold his own. This is quite natural, and will appear so to any one who has attentively read the French invasion of Spain, under Napoleon. The strength of a national insurrection does not lie in pitched battles, but in petty warfare, in the defense of towns, and in the interruption of the enemy’s communications. Campbell accordingly prepared for the retreat with the same skill with which he had arranged the attack. A few more positions about the Residency were carried. They served to deceive the enemy as to Campbell’s intentions, and to cover the arrangements for the retreat. With a daring perfectly justified in front of such an opponent, the whole army, a small reserve excepted, was employed to occupy an extensive line of outposts and pickets, behind which the women, the sick and wounded, and the baggage were evacuated. As soon as this preliminary operation was performed the outlying pickets fell back, concentrating gradually into more solid masses, the foremost of which then retreated through the next line, again to form as a reserve to the rear. Without being attacked, the whole of this maneuver was carried out with perfect order; with the exception of Outram and a small garrison left at Alumbagh (for what purposes we do not at present see), the whole army marched to Cawnpore, thus evacuating the Kingdom of Oude. In the mean time unpleasant events had taken place at Cawnpore. Windham, the “hero of the Redan,” another of those officers of whose skill we are told that they have proved it by being very brave, had on the 26th defeated the advanced guard of the Gwalior contingent, but on the 27th he had been severely beaten by them, his camp taken and burned, and he himself compelled to retreat into Wheeler’s old intrenchment at Cawnpore. On the 28th they attacked this post, but were repulsed, and on the 6th Campbell defeated them without scarcely any loss, taking all their guns and train, and pursuing them for fourteen miles. The details of all these affairs are so far but scanty; but this much is certain, that the Indian Rebellion is as yet far from being quelled, and that, although most or all British ree¨nforcements have now landed, yet they disappear in an almost unaccountable manner. Some 20,000 men have landed in Bengal, and still the active army is no larger than when Delhi was taken. There is something wrong here. The climate must make terrible havoc among the newcomers.

166

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Friedrich Engels Carabine

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

412 CARABINE, or CARBINE, a short barrelled musket adapted to the use of cavalry. In order to admit of its being easily loaded on horseback, the barrel ought not to be more than 2 feet 6 inches long, unless it be breech-loading; and to be easily managed with one hand only, its weight must be less than that of an infantry musket. The bore, too, is in most services rather less than that of the infantry firearm. The carabine may have either a smooth or a rifled bore; in the first case, its effect will be considerably inferior to that of the common musket; in the second, it will exceed it in precision for moderate distances. In the British service, the cavalry carry smooth-bored carabines; in the Russian cavalry, the light horse all have rifled carabines, while of the cuirassiers 1/4 have rifled, and the remaining 3/4 smooth barrels to their carabines. The artillery, too, in some services (French and British especially), carry carabines; those of the British are on the principle of the new Enfield rifle. Carabine-firing was at one time the principal mode of cavalry fighting, but now it is principally used on outpost duty, and with cavalry skirmishing. In French military works, the expression carabine always means an infantry rifle, while for a cavalry carabine the word mousqueton is adopted. Several improvements in breech-loading carabines have recently been made in the United States, and submitted for trial to an ordnance board at West Point (July, 1858).

167

Friedrich Engels Carcass

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

423 CARCASS, a shell filled with inflammable composition, the flame of which issues through 3 or 4 holes, and is so violent that it can scarcely be extinguished. They are thrown from mortars, howitzers, and guns, in the same way as common shells, and burn from 8 to 10 minutes. The composition is either melted over a fire, and poured hot into the shell, or it is worked into a compact mass by the aid of liquid grease, and then crammed into the shell. The fuse holes are stopped with corks or wooden stoppers, through which a tube, filled with fuse-composition, passes into the shell. Formerly these carcasses were cast with a partition or diaphragm, like the present shrapnell shells, the bottom part being destined to receive a bursting charge of gunpowder; but this complication is now done away with. Another kind of carcasses was formerly in use, constructed like a light ball, on two circular iron hoops, crossing each other at right angles, over which canvas was spread, thus forming an imperfectly spheroidal body, which was filled with a similar composition, containing mostly gunpowder and pitch. These carcasses, however, have been abandoned, because their great lightness made it almost impossible to throw them to any distance, or with any precision. The compositions for filling our modern carcasses vary considerably, but they each and all consist chiefly of saltpetre and sulphur, mixed with a resinous or fatty substance. Thus the Prussian service uses 75 parts saltpetre, 25 parts sulphur, 7 parts mealed powder, and 3 parts colophony. The British use saltpetre 100 parts, sulphur 40 parts, rosin 30 parts, antimony 10 parts, tallow 10 parts, turpentine 10 parts. Carcasses are chiefly used in bombardments, and sometimes against shipping, though in this latter use they have been almost entirely superseded by red-hot shot, which is easier prepared, of greater precision and of far more incendiary effect.

168

5

10

15

20

25

Friedrich Engels Carronade

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

489 CARRONADE, a short piece of iron ordnance, first constructed at the Carron foundery, Scotland, in 1779, for the use of the British navy, and first employed against the United States. The carronades have no trunnions, but a loop under the middle of the piece, by which they are fastened to the carriage. The bore has a chamber, and the muzzle is scooped out like a cup. They are very short and light, there being about 60 or 70 lbs. of the gun to 1 lb. of the weight of the solid shot, the length varying from 7 to 8 calibres. The charge, consequently, cannot but be weak, and ranges from 1/16 to 1/8 the weight of the shot.⎯Carronades, on their first introduction, found great favor with naval men. Their lightness and insignificant recoil allowed great numbers of them to be placed on board the small men-of-war of those times. Their ranges appeared proportionably great, which was caused: 1, by a reduced windage, and, 2, by their great angle of dispart, arising from the thickness of metal around the breech, and the shortness of the gun; and the great weight of metal projected by them rendered them at close quarters very formidable. They were adopted in the U.S. service about 1800. It was, however, soon discovered that this kind of cannon could not compete with longer and heavier guns, throwing their projectiles with full charge and at low elevations. Thus, it has been ascertained that the common long guns of the British service have at 2° elevation, and the shell guns at 3°, the same range as the carronades of corresponding calibre at 5° (viz., about 1,200 yards). And, as the chance of hitting decreases as the elevation increases, the use of carronades beyond 1,200 yards and an elevation of 5° is completely out of the question; whereas, long guns may with considerable effect be used at ranges up to a mile, and even 2,000 yards. This was strikingly exemplified by the 2 contending squadrons on Lakes Erie and Ontario, during the Anglo-American war of 1812–’14. The American vessels had long guns, while the British were mainly armed with carronades. The Americans manœuvred so as to keep just out of range of the

169

Friedrich Engels

British carronades, while their own long guns told heavily on the hulls and rigging of their opponents. In consequence of these defects, carronades have now become almost obsolete. On shore they are used by the British, now and then, on the flanks of bastions and in casemates, where but a short extent of ditch is to be flanked by grape principally. The French navy possesses a carronade with trunnions (carronade a` tourillons); but this is in reality a powerful gun.

170

5

Friedrich Engels Cartouch

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

5

502 CARTOUCH, (Fr. cartouche), in old military works, used sometimes as synonymous with case or grape shot. It is also now and then used to designate the cartridge-box of the infantry soldier.⎯In architecture and sculpture, a block or modillion in a cornice, and generally an ornament on which there is some device or inscription.

171

Friedrich Engels Cartridge

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

502 CARTRIDGE, a paper, parchment, or flannel case or bag containing the exact quantity of gunpowder used for the charge of a firearm, and to which, in some instances, the projectile is attached. Blank cartridge, for small arms, does not contain a bullet; ball cartridge does. In all small-arm cartridge the paper is used as a wad, and rammed down. The cartridge for the French Minie´ and British Enfield rifle is steeped in grease at one end, so as to facilitate ramming down. That of the Prussian needle gun contains also the fulminating composition exploded by the action of the needle. Cartridges for cannon are generally made of flannel or other light woollen cloth. In some services, those for field service at least have the projectile attached to the cartridge by means of a wooden bottom whenever practicable; and the French have partially introduced this system even into their naval service. The British still have cartridge and shot separated, in field as well as in naval and siege artillery.⎯An ingenious method of making paper cartridges without seams has been lately introduced into the royal arsenal, Woolwich, England. Metallic cylindrical hollow moulds, just large enough for a cartridge to slip over, are perforated with a multitude of small holes, and being introduced into the soft pulp of which cartridge paper is made, and then connected with an exhausted receiver of an air-pump, are immediately covered with a thin layer of the pulp. This, on being dried, is a complete paper tube. The moulds are arranged many together; and each one is provided with a worsted cover, like the finger of a glove, upon which the pulp collects, and this being taken off with it serves as the lining with which the best cartridges are provided.⎯A kind of cartridge is in use for sporting pieces, made of a network of wire containing the shot only. It is included in an outer case of paper. The charge of shot is mixed with bone dust to give compactness. When the piece is fired, the shot are carried along to a much greater distance without scattering than if charged in any other way.

172

5

10

15

20

25

30

Friedrich Engels Case Shot

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

511 CASE SHOT, or CANISTER SHOT, consists of a number of wroughtiron balls, packed in a tin canister of a cylindrical shape. The balls for field service are regularly deposited in layers, but for most kinds of siege and naval ordnance they are merely thrown into the case until it is filled, when the lid is soldered on. Between the bottom of the canister and the charge a wooden bottom is inserted. The weights of the balls vary with the different kinds of ordnance, and the regulations of each service. The English have, for their heavy naval guns, balls from 8 oz. to 3 lbs.; for their 9-pound field-gun, 11/2 oz. and 5 oz. balls, of which respectively 126 and 41 make up a canister for one discharge. The Prussians use 41 balls, each weighing 1/32 of the weight of the corresponding round shot. The French had up to 1854 nearly the same system; how they may have altered it since the introduction of the new howitzer gun, we are unable to tell. For siege and garrison artillery, the balls are sometimes arranged round a spindle projecting from the wooden bottom, either in a bag in the shape of a grape (whence the name grape shot), or in regular layers with round wooden or iron plates between each layer, the whole covered over with a canvas bag.⎯The most recently introduced kind is the spherical case shot, commonly called from their inventor, the British general Shrapnell, shrapnell shells. They consist of a thin cast-iron shell (from 1 /3 to 3/4 inch thickness of iron), with a diaphragm or partition in the middle. The lower compartment is destined to receive a bursting charge, the upper one contains leaden musket balls. A fuse is inserted containing a carefully 512 prepared composition, the accuracy of whose burning off can be depended upon. A composition is run between the balls, so as to prevent them from shaking. When used in the field, the fuse is cut off to the length required for the distance of the enemy, and inserted into the shell. At from 50 to 70 yards from the enemy the fuse is burnt to the bottom, and explodes the shell, scattering the bullets toward the enemy precisely as if common case shot had been fired on the spot where the

173

Friedrich Engels

shell exploded. The precision of the fuses at present attained in several services is very great, and thus this new projectile enables the gunner to obtain the exact effect of grape at ranges where formerly round shot only could be used. The common case is most destructive up to 200 yards, but may be used up to 500 yards; its effect against advancing lines of infantry or cavalry at close quarters is terrible; against skirmishers it is of little use; against columns round shot is oftener applicable. The spherical case, on the other hand, is most effective at from 600 to 1,400 yards, and with a proper elevation and a long fuse, may be launched at still greater ranges with probability of effect. From its explosion near the enemy, by which the hailstorm of bullets is kept close together, it may successfully be used against troops in almost any but the skirmishing formation. After the introduction of the spherical case shot, it was adopted in almost all European services as soon as a proper fuse composition was invented by each, this forming the only difficulty; and of the great European powers, France is the only one which has not yet succeeded in this particular. Further experiments, accidents, or bribes will, however, no doubt soon place this power in possession of the secret.

174

5

10

15

Karl Marx The Approaching Indian Loan

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5243, 9. Februar 1858.

The Approaching Indian Loan. Correspondence of The N. Y. Tribune. London, Jan. 22, 1858. 5

10

15

20

25

The buoyancy in the London money market, resulting from the withdrawal of an enormous mass of capital from the ordinary productive investments, and its consequent transfer to the security markets, has, in the last fortnight, been somewhat lessened by the prospects of an impending Indian loan to the amount of eight or ten million pounds sterling. This loan, to be raised in England, and to be authorized by Parliament immediately on its assembling in February, is required to meet the claims upon the East India Company by its home creditors, as well as the extra expenditure for war materials, stores, transport of troops, &c., necessitated by the Indian revolt. In August, 1857, the British Government had, before the prorogation of Parliament, solemnly declared in the House of Commons that no such loan was intended, the financial resources of the Company being more than sufficient to meet the crisis. The agreeable delusion thus palmed on John Bull was, however, soon dispelled when it oozed out that by a proceeding of a very questionable character, the East India Company had laid hold on a sum of about £3,500,000 sterling, intrusted to them by different companies, for the construction of Indian railways; and had, moreover, secretly borrowed £1,000,000 sterling from the Bank of England, and another million from the London Joint Stock banks. The public being thus prepared for the worst, the Government did no longer hesitate to drop the mask, and by semi-official articles in The Times, Globe, and other governmental organs, avow the necessity of the loan. It may be asked why a special act on the part of the legislative power is required for launching such a loan, and then, why such an event does

175

Karl Marx

create the least apprehension, since, on the contrary, every vent for British capital, seeking now in vain for profitable investment, should, under present circumstances, be considered a windfall, and a most salutary check upon the rapid depreciation of capital. It is generally known that the commercial existence of the East India Company was terminated in 1834, when its principal remaining source of commercial profits, the monopoly of the China trade, was cut off. Consequently, the holders of East India stock having derived their dividends, nominally, at least, from the trade-profits of the Company, a new financial arrangement with regard to them had become necessary. The payment of the dividends, till then chargeable upon the commercial revenue of the Company, was transferred to its political revenue. The proprietors of East India stocks were to be paid out of the revenues enjoyed by the East India Company in its governmental capacity, and, by act of Parliament, the Indian stock, amounting to £6,000,000 sterling, bearing ten per cent interest, was converted into a capital no to be liquidated except at the rate of £200 for every £100 of stock. In other words, the original East India stock of £6,000,000 sterling was converted into a capital of £12,000,000 sterling, bearing five per cent interest, and chargeable upon the revenue derived from the taxes of the Indian people. The debt of the East India Company was thus, by a Parliamentary sleight of hand, changed into a debt of the Indian people. There exists, besides, a debt exceeding £50,000,000 sterling, contracted by the East India Company in India, and exclusively chargeable upon the State revenues of that country; such loans contracted by the Company in India itself having always been considered to lay beyond the district of Parliamentary legislation, and regarded no more than the debts contracted by the Colonial Governments in Canada or Australia for instance. On the other hand, the East India Company was prohibited from contracting interest-bearing debts in Great Britain herself, without the especial sanction of Parliament. Some years ago, when the Company set about establishing railways and electric telegraphs in India, it applied for the authorization of Indian Bonds in the London market, a request which was granted to the amount of £7,000,000 sterling to be issued in Bonds bearing 4 per cent interest, and secured only on the Indian State revenues. At the commencement of the outbreak in India, this bond-debt stood at £3,894,400 sterling, and the very necessity of again applying to Parliament shows the East India Company to have, during the course of the Indian insurrection, exhausted its legal powers of borrowing at home. Now it is no secret that before recurring to this step, the East India Company had opened a loan at Calcutta, which, however, turned out a

176

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Approaching Indian Loan

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

complete failure. This proves, on the one hand, that Indian capitalists are far from considering the prospects of British supremacy in India in the same sanguine spirit which distinguishes the London press; and, on the other hand, exacerbates the feelings of John Bull to an uncommon pitch, since he is aware of the immense hoardings of capital having gone on for the last seven years in India, whither, according to a statement recently published by Messrs. Haggard & Pixley, there has been shipped in 1856 and 1857, from the port of London alone, bullion to the amount of £21,000,000. The London Times, in a most persuasive strain, has taught its readers that “of all the incentives to the loyalty of the natives, that of making them our creditors was the least doubtful; while, on the other hand, among an impulsive, secretive and avaricious people no temptation to discontent or treachery could be stronger than that created by the idea that they were annually taxed to send dividends to wealthy claimants in other countries.” The Indians, however, appear not to understand the beauty of a plan which would not only restore English supremacy at the expense of Indian capital, but at the same time, in a circuitous way, open the native hoards to British commerce. If, indeed, the Indian capitalists were as fond of British rule as every true Englishman thinks it an article of faith to assert, no better opportunity could have been afforded them of exhibiting their loyalty and getting rid of their silver. The Indian capitalists shutting up their hoards, John Bull must open his mind to the dire necessity of defraying himself in the first instance, at least, the expenses of the Indian insurrection, without any support on the part of the natives. The impending loan constitutes, moreover, a precedent only, and looks like the first leaf in a book, bearing the title Anglo-Indian Home Debt. It is no secret that what the East India Company wants are not eight millions, or ten millions, but twenty-five to thirty millions pounds, and even these as a first installment only, not for expenses to be incurred, but for debts already due. The deficient revenue for the last three years amounted to £5,000,000; the treasure plundered by the insurgents up to the 15th October last, to £10,000,000, according to the statement of the Phönix, an Indian governmental paper; the loss of revenue in the Northeastern provinces, consequent upon the rebellion, to £5,000,000, and the war expenses to at least £10,000,000. It is true that successive loans by the Indian Company, in the London Money Market, would raise the value of money and prevent the increasing depreciation of capital; that is to say, the further fall in the rate of interest; but such a fall is exactly required for the revival of British industry and commerce. Any artificial check put upon the downward move-

177

Karl Marx

ment of the rate of discount is equivalent to an enhancement in the cost of production and the terms of credit, which, in its present weak state, English trade feels itself unable to bear. Hence the general cry of distress at the announcement of the Indian loan. Though the Parliamentary sanction adds no imperial guarantee to the loan of the Company, that guarantee, too, must be conceded, if money is not to be obtained on other terms; and despite all fine distinctions, as soon as the East India Company is supplanted by the British Government its debt will be merged into the British debt. A further increase of the large national debt seems, therefore, one of the first financial consequences of the Indian Revolt.

178

5

10

Friedrich Engels Berme

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

15

175 BERME, in fortification, a horizontal bank of ground left standing between the upper interior edge of the ditch and the exterior slope of the parapet of a work. It is generally made about 3 feet wide. Its principal object is to strengthen the parapet, and to prevent the earth of which it is composed from rolling down into the ditch, after heavy rain, thaw, &c. It may also serve sometimes as an exterior communication round the works. It is, however, not to be overlooked that the berme serves as a very convenient resting and collecting place for storming and scaling parties, in consequence of which it is entirely done away with in many systems of permanent fortification, and in others protected by a crenellated wall, so as to form a covered line of fire for infantry. In field fortification, or the construction of siege-batteries, with a ditch in front, a berme is generally unavoidable, as the scarp of the ditch is scarcely ever revetted, and without such an intermediate space, both scarp and parapet would soon crumble under the changes of the weather.

179

Friedrich Engels Blenheim

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

346 BLENHEIM, or BLINDHEIM, a village about 23 miles from Augsburg, in Bavaria, the theatre of a great battle, fought Aug. 13, 1704, between the English and Austrians, under Marlborough and Prince Eugene, and the French and Bavarians, under Marshal Tallard, Marsin, and the elector of Bavaria. The Austrian states being menaced by a direct invasion on the side of Germany, Marlborough marched from Flanders to their assistance. The allies agreed to act on the defensive in Italy, the Netherlands, and the lower Rhine, and to concentrate all their available forces on the Danube. Marlborough, after storming the Bavarian intrenchments on the Schellenberg, passed the Danube, and effected his junction with Eugene, after which both at once marched to attack the enemy. They found him behind the Nebel brook, with the villages of Blenheim and Kitzingen strongly occupied in front of either flank. The French had the right wing, the Bavarians held the left. Their line was nearly 5 miles in extent, each army having its cavalry on its wings, so that a portion of the centre was held by both French and Bavarian cavalry. The position had not yet been properly occupied according to the then prevailing rules of tactics. The mass of the French infantry, 27 battalions, was crammed together in Blenheim, consequently in a position completely helpless for troops organized as they were then, and adapted for line fighting in an open country only. The attack of the Anglo-Austrians, however, surprised them in this dangerous condition, and Marlborough very soon drew all the advantages from it which the occasion offered. Having in vain attacked Blenheim, he suddenly drew his main strength toward his centre, and with it broke through the centre of his opponents. Eugene made light work of the thus isolated Bavarians, and undertook the general pursuit, while Marlborough, having completely cut off the retreat of the 18,000 Frenchmen blocked up in Blenheim, compelled them to lay down their arms. Among them was Marshal Tallard. The total loss of the Franco-Bavarians was 30,000 killed, wounded, and prisoners; that

180

5

10

15

20

25

30

Blenheim

5

10

of the victors, about 11,000 men. The battle decided the campaign, Bavaria fell into the hands of the Austrians, and the prestige of Louis XIV. was gone. This battle is one of the highest tactical interest, showing very conspicuously the immense difference between the tactics of that time and those of our day. The very circumstance which would now be considered one of the greatest advantages of a defensive position, viz., the having 2 villages in front of the flanks, was with troops of the 18th century the cause of defeat. At that time, infantry was totally unfit for that skirmishing and apparently irregular fighting which now makes a village of masonry houses, occupied by good troops, almost impregnable. This battle is called in France, and on the continent generally, the battle of Hochstädt, from a little town of this name in the vicinity, which was already known to fame by a battle fought there on Sept. 20 of the preceding year.

181

Friedrich Engels Borodino

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

533 BORODINO, a village on the left bank of the river Kolotcha, in Russia, about 2 miles above its junction with the Moskva. From this village the Russians name the great battle, in 1812, which decided the possession of Moscow; the French call it the battle of the Moskva, or of Mozhaisk. The battle-field is on the right bank of the Kolotcha. The Russian right wing was covered by that river from its junction with the Moskva to Borodino; the left wing was drawn back, en potence, behind a brook and ravine descending from the extreme left, at Utitsa, toward Borodino. Behind this ravine, 2 hills were crowned with incomplete redoubts, or lunettes, that nearest the centre called the Rayevski redoubt, those on the hill toward the left, 3 in number, called the Bagration lunettes. Between these 2 hills, another ravine, called from a village behind it that of Semionovskoye, ran down from the Russian left toward the former ravine, joining it about 1,000 yards before it reached the Kolotcha. The main road to Moscow runs by Borodino; the old road by Utitsa, to Mozhaisk, in rear of the Russian position. This line, about 9,000 yards in extent, was held by about 130,000 Russians, Borodino being occupied in front of the centre. Gen. Kutusoff was the Russian commander-in-chief; his troops were divided into 2 armies, the 534 larger, under Barclay de Tolly, holding the right and centre, the smaller, under Bagration, occupying the left. The position was very badly chosen; an attack on the left, if successful, turned the right and centre completely; and if Mozhaisk had been reached by the French before the Russian right had retreated, which was possible enough, they would have been hopelessly lost. But Kutusoff, having once rejected the capital position of Tsarevoye Zaimishtche, selected by Barclay, had no other choice. The French, led by Napoleon in person, were about 125,000 strong: after driving the Russians, Sept. 5, 1812, N. S. (Aug. 24, O. S.), from some slight intrenchments on their left, they were arranged for battle on the 7th. Napoleon’s plan was based upon the errors of Kutusoff; merely

182

5

10

15

20

25

30

Engels: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Borodino“

Engels: Exzerpte für den NAC-Artikel „Borodino“

Borodino

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

observing the Russian centre, he concentrated his forces against their left, which he intended to force, and then cut his way through toward Mozhaisk. Prince Eugene was accordingly ordered to make a false attack upon Borodino, after which Ney and Davoust were to assail Bagration and the lunettes named from him, while Poniatowski was to turn the extreme left of the Russians by Utitsa; the battle once well engaged, Prince Eugene was to pass the Kolotcha, and attack the Rayevski lunette. Thus the whole front actually attacked did not exceed in length 5,000 yards, which allowed 26 men to each yard of front, an unprecedented depth of order of battle, which accounts for the terrible losses of the Russians by artillery fire. About daybreak Poniatowski advanced against Utitsa, and took it, but his opponent, Tutchkoff, again expelled him; subsequently, Tutchkoff having had to send a division to the support of Bagration, the Poles retook the village. At 6 o’clock Davoust attacked the proper left of the Bagration intrenchments. Under a heavy fire from 12-pounders, to which he could oppose only 3 and 4-pounders, he advanced. Half an hour later, Ney attacked the proper right of these lunettes. They were taken and retaken, and a hot and undecided fight followed.⎯Bagration, however, well observed the great force brought against him, with their powerful reserves, and the French guard in the background. There could be no mistake about the real point of attack. He accordingly called together what troops he could, sending for a division of Rayevski’s corps, for another of Tutchkoff’s corps, for guards and grenadiers from the army reserve, and requesting Barclay to despatch the whole corps of Baggehufvud. These ree¨nforcements, amounting to more than 30,000 men, were sent at once; from the army reserve alone, he received 17 battalions of guards and grenadiers, and 2 12-pound batteries. They could not, however, be made available on the spot before 10 o’clock, and before this hour Davoust and Ney made their second attack against the intrenchments, and took them, driving the Russians over the Semionovskoye ravine. Bagration sent his cuirassiers forward; an irregular struggle of great violence followed, the Russians regaining ground as their ree¨nforcements arrived, but again driven beyond the ravine as soon as Davoust engaged his reserve division. The losses on both sides were immense; almost all the general officers were killed or wounded, and Bagration himself was mortally hit. Kutusoff now at last took some part in the battle, sending Dokhturoff to take the command of the left, and his own chief of the staff, Toll, to superintend the arrangements for defence on the spot. A little after 10 the 17 battalions of guards and grenadiers, and the division of Vasiltchikoff, arrived at Semionovskoye; the corps of Baggehufvud was divided, one division being sent to

185

Friedrich Engels

Rayevski, another to Tutchkoff, and the cavalry to the right. The French, in the mean time, continued their attacks; the Westphalian division advanced in the wood toward the head of the ravine, while Gen. Friant passed this ravine, without, however, being able to establish himself there. The Russians now were ree¨nforced (1/2 past 10) by the cuirassiers of Borosdin from the army reserve, and a portion of Korff’s cavalry; but they were too much shattered to proceed to an attack, and about the same time the French were preparing a vast cavalry charge. On the Russian centre Eugene Beauharnais had taken Borodino at 6 in the morning, and passed over the Kolotcha, driving back the enemy; but he soon returned, and again crossed the river higher up in order to proceed, with the Italian guards, the division of Broussier (Italians), Gerard, Morand, and Grouchy’s cavalry, to the attack on Rayevski, and the redoubt bearing his name. Borodino remained occupied. The passage of Beauharnais’s troops caused delay; his attack could not begin much before 10 o’clock. The Rayevski redoubt was occupied by the division Paskiewitch, supported on its left by Vasiltchikoff, and having Dokhturoff’s corps for a reserve. By 11 o’clock, the redoubt was taken by the French, and the Paskiewitch division completely scattered, and driven from the field of battle. But Vasiltchikoff and Dokhturoff retook the redoubt; the division of Prince Eugene of Würtemberg arrived in time, and now Barclay ordered the corps of Ostermann to take position to the rear as a fresh reserve. With this corps the last intact body of Russian infantry was brought within range; there remained now, as a reserve, only 6 battalions of the guard. Eugene Beauharnais, about 12 o’clock, was just going to attack the Rayevski redoubt a second time, when Russian cavalry appeared on the left bank of the Kolotcha. The attack was suspended, and troops were sent to meet them. But the Russians could neither take Borodino, nor pass the marshy bottom of the Voina ravine, and had to retreat by Zodock, without any other result than having to some extent crossed Napoleon’s intentions.⎯In the mean time, Ney and Davoust, posted on the Bagration hill, had maintained a hot fire across the Semionovskoye ravine on the Russian masses. All at once 535 the French cavalry began to move. To the right of Semionovskoye, Nansouty charged the Russian infantry with complete success, until Sievers’s cavalry took him in flank and drove him back. To the left, Latour-Maubourg’s 3,000 horse advanced in 2 columns; the first, headed by 2 regiments of Saxon cuirassiers, rode twice over 3 Russian grenadier battalions just forming square, but they were also taken in flank by Russian cavalry; a Polish cuirassier regiment completed the destruction of the Russian grenadiers, but they too were driven back to the ravine, where

186

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Borodino

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

the second column, 2 regiments of Westphalian cuirassiers, and 1 of Polish lancers, repelled the Russians. The ground thus being secured, the infantry of Ney and Davoust passed the ravine. Friant occupied Semionovskoye, and the remainder of the Russians who had fought here, grenadiers, guards, and line, were finally driven back and their defeat completed by the French cavalry. They fled in small disorderly bands toward Mozhaisk, and could only be collected late at night; the 3 regiments of guards alone preserved a little order. Thus the French right, after defeating the Russian left, occupied a position directly in rear of the Russian centre as early as 12 o’clock, and then it was that Davoust and Ney implored Napoleon to act up to his own system of tactics, and complete the victory, by launching the guards by Semionovskoye on the Russian rear. Napoleon, however, refused, and Ney and Davoust, themselves dreadfully shattered, did not venture to advance without ree¨nforcements.⎯On the Russian side, after Eugene Beauharnais had desisted from the attack on the Rayevski redoubt, Eugene of Würtemberg was sent to Semionovskoye, and Ostermann, too, had to change front in that direction so as to cover the rear of the Rayevski hill toward Semionovskoye. When Sorbier, the French chief of artillery, saw these fresh troops, he sent for 36 12-pounders from the artillery of the guard, and formed a battery of 85 guns in front of Semionovskoye. While these guns battered the Russian masses, Murat drew forward the hitherto intact cavalry of Montbrun and the Polish lancers. They surprised Ostermann’s troops in the act of deploying, and brought them into great danger, until the cavalry of Kreutz repelled the French horse. The Russian infantry continued to suffer from the artillery fire; but neither party ventured to advance. It was now about 2 o’clock, and Eugene Beauharnais, reassured as to the hostile cavalry on his left, again attacked the Rayevski redoubt. While the infantry attacked it in front, cavalry was sent from Semionovskoye to its rear. After a hard struggle, it remained in the hands of the French; and a little before 3 o’clock the Russians retreated. A general cannonade from both sides followed, but the active fighting was over. Napoleon still refused to launch his guard, and the Russians were allowed to retreat as they liked. The Russians had all their troops engaged, excepting the 2 first regiments of the guards, and even these lost by artillery fire 17 officers and 600 men. Their total loss was 52,000 men, beside slightly wounded and scattered men who soon found their way back; but on the day after the battle their army counted only 52,000 men. The French had all their troops engaged, with the exception of the guards (14,000 infantry, 5,000 cavalry and artillery); they thus beat a decidedly superior number. They were, beside, inferior in artillery, having mostly 3 and 4-pounders,

187

Friedrich Engels

while 1/4 of the Russian guns were 12-pounders, and the rest 6-pounders. The French loss was 30,000 men; they took 40 guns, and only about 1,000 prisoners. If Napoleon had launched his guard, the destruction of the Russian army, according to Gen. Toll, would have been certain. He did not, however, risk this last reserve, the nucleus and mainstay of his army, and thus, perhaps, missed the chance of having peace concluded in Moscow.⎯The above account, in such of its details as are at variance with those commonly received, is mainly based upon the “Memoirs of Gen. Toll,” whom we have mentioned as Kutusoff’s chief of the staff. This book contains the best Russian account of the battle, and is indispensable for its correct appreciation.

188

5

10

Friedrich Engels Bridge-Head

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

693 BRIDGE-HEAD, or TEˆ TE-DE-PONT, in fortification, a permanent or field work, thrown up at the further end of a bridge in order to protect the bridge, and to enable the party holding it to manœuvre on both banks of the river. The existence of bridge-heads is indispensable to those extensive modern fortresses situated on large rivers or at the junction of 2 rivers. In such a case the bridge-head is generally formed by a suburb on the opposite side and regularly fortified; thus, Castel is the bridge-head of Mentz, Ehrenbreitstein that of Coblentz, and Deutz that of Cologne. No sooner had the French got possession, during the revolutionary war, of Kehl, than they turned it into a bridge-head for Strasbourg. In England, Gosport may be considered the bridge-head of Portsmouth, although there is no bridge, and though it has other and very important functions to fulfil. As in this latter case, a fortification on the further side of a river or arm of the sea is often called a bridgehead, though there be no bridge; since the fortification, imparting the power of landing troops under its protection and preparing for offensive operations, fulfils the same functions, and comes, strategetically speaking, under the same denomination. In speaking of the position of an army behind a large river, all the posts it holds on its opposite bank are called its bridge-heads, whether they be fortresses, intrenched villages, or regular field-works, inasmuch as every one of them admits of the army debouching in safety on the other side. Thus, when Napoleon’s retreat from Russia, in 1813, ceased behind the Elbe, Hamburg, Magdeburg, Wittenberg, and Torgau were his bridge-heads on the right bank of that river. In field fortification, bridge-heads are mostly very simple works, consisting of a bonnet a` preˆtre, or sometimes a horn-work or crownwork, open toward the river, and with a redoubt close in front of the bridge. Sometimes a hamlet, a group of farm-houses, or other buildings close to a bridge, may be formed into a sufficient bridge-head by being properly adapted for defence; for, with the present light-infantry tactics,

189

Friedrich Engels

such objects, when at all capable of defence, may be made to offer a resistance as great, or greater, than any field-works thrown up according to the rules of the art.

190

Friedrich Engels Buda

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

59 BUDA, or OFEN, a city on the west bank of the Danube, formerly the capital of Hungary, and now that of the circle of Pesth; pop. of the town and its 7 suburbs, including that of Alt Ofen, which was annexed in 1850, 45,653, exclusive of the garrison and the students. It is distant from Vienna, in a straight line, 135 miles S. E., and from Belgrade 200 miles N. W. It was formerly connected with the city of Pesth, which lies on the opposite side of the river, by a bridge of boats, and since 1849 by a suspension bridge 1,250 feet long; a tunnel to connect the bridge with the fortress has been in course of construction since 1852. Buda is about 9 miles in circuit, and built around the Schlossberg, an isolated and shelving rock. Its central and highest part, called the fortress, is the most regular portion of the town, and contains many fine buildings and squares. This fortress is surrounded by walls, from which the several suburbs extend toward the river. The principal edifices of the city are the royal palace, a quadrangular structure 564 feet in length, and containing 203 apartments; the church of the ascension of the virgin, and the garrison church, both Gothic structures; the arsenal, the state palace, and the town hall. Buda contains 12 Roman Catholic churches, a Greek church, and a synagogue, several monasteries and convents, a theatre, and many important military, educational, and benevolent institutions. There are several publishing houses and 3 journals established here. The observatory, with the printing establishment of the university of Pesth, is built upon an eminence to the south of the town, 516 feet above the level of the Mediterranean, and no expense has been spared to furnish it with the best instruments. There are in various parts of the suburbs sulphurous hot springs, and relics remain of baths constructed here by the Romans and Turks, the former tenants of the place. The principal trade of the town is in the wines (chiefly red wines, resembling those of Burgundy) which are produced from the vineyards upon the neighboring heights, to the amount, it is computed, of 4,500,000 gallons annually.

191

Friedrich Engels

There are also cannon founderies, and a few manufactures of silk, velvet, cottons, woollens, and leather. The boats of the Danube steamboat navigation company are built here, giving employment to about 600 persons. Buda is the usual residence of the governor of Hungary, and of the public authorities.⎯It has been thought that this city occupies the site of the old Aquincum mentioned in the “Itinerary” of Antoninus. During the Hungarian monarchy, Buda was the residence of its kings, by whom it was enlarged and adorned, especially by Matthias the Great. It was taken by the Turks under Solyman the Magnificent in 1526, but was recovered the next year. It fell again into the hands of the Turks in 1529, and remained in their possession till 1686, when it was finally recovered by Charles of Lorraine, and in 1784 was again made the seat of government. Buda has been beleaguered not less than 20 times in the course of her history. The last siege took place in May, 1849, when the Hungarian army under Görgey had driven back the Austrian troops to the western frontier of the kingdom. Two plans were discussed as to further operations: first, to follow up the advantages gained, by a vigorous pursuit of the enemy on his own ground, to disperse his forces before the Russians, then marching on Hungary, could arrive, and to attempt to revolutionize Vienna; or, to 60 remain on the defensive in front of Comorn, and to detach a strong corps for the siege of Buda, where the Austrians on their retreat had left a garrison. Görgey maintains that this latter plan was insisted on by Kossuth and Klapka; but Klapka professes to know nothing of Kossuth having sent such an order, and denies that he himself ever advised this step. From a comparison of Görgey’s and Klapka’s writings we must, however, confess that there still remains considerable doubt as to who is to be blamed for the march on Buda, and that the evidence adduced by Klapka is by no means conclusive. Görgey also says that his resolution was further determined by the total want of field-gun ammunition and other stores, and by his own conviction that the army would refuse to pass the frontier. At all events, all offensive movements were arrested, and Görgey marched with 30,000 men to Buda. By this move the last chance of saving Hungary was thrown away. The Austrians were allowed to recover from their defeats, to reorganize their forces, and 6 weeks afterward, when the Russians appeared on the borders of Hungary, they again advanced, 127,000 strong, while 2 reserve corps were still forming. Thus, the siege of Buda forms the turning point of the Hungarian war of 1848–’49, and if there ever really were treasonable relations between Görgey and the Austrians, they must have taken place about this time.⎯The fortress of Buda was but a faint remnant of that ancient stronghold of the Turks, in which they so often had repulsed all attacks of the Hun-

192

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Buda

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

garian and imperial armies. The ditches and glacis were levelled; there remained but the main ramparts, a work of considerable height, faced with masonry. It formed in its general outline an oblong square, the sides of which were more or less irregularly broken so as to admit of a pretty efficient flanking fire. An intrenchment of recent construction led down from the eastern front to the Danube, and protected the waterworks supplying the fortress with water. The garrison consisted of 4 battalions, about a company of sappers, and the necessary allotment of gunners, under Major-Gen. Hentzi, a brave and resolute officer. Seventy-five guns were mounted on the ramparts. On May 4, after having effected the investment of the place, and after a short cannonade from heavy fieldguns, Görgey summoned the garrison to surrender. This being refused, he ordered Kmety to assail the waterworks; under the protection of the fire of all disposable guns, his column advanced, but the artillery of the intrenchment, enfilading its line of march, soon drove it back. It was thus proved that an attack by main force would never carry the place, and that an artillery attack was indispensable in order first to form a practicable breach. But there were no guns at hand heavier than 12-pounders, and even for these the ammunition was deficient. After some time, however, 4 24-pounders and 1 18-pounder, and subsequently 6 mortars, arrived from Comorn. A breaching battery was constructed on a height 500 yards from the N. W. angle of the rampart, and began its fire, May 15. Previous to that day, Hentzi had bombarded the town of Pesth without any provocation, or without the chance of deriving any advantage from this proceeding. On the 16th the breach was opened, though scarcely practicable; however, Görgey ordered the assault for the following night, one column to assault the breach, 2 others to escalade the walls, and a 4th, under Kmety, to take the waterworks. The assault was everywhere unsuccessful. The artillery attack was resumed. While the breaching battery completed its work, the palisadings around the waterworks were shattered by 12-pounders, and the interior of the place was bombarded. False attacks were made every night to alarm the garrison. Late on the evening of the 20th another assault was prepared. The 4 columns and their objects of attack remained the same, and before daybreak on the 21st they advanced on the fortress. After a desperate struggle, during which Hentzi himself led the defence of the breach and fell mortally wounded, the breach was carried by the 47th Honved battalion, followed by the 34th, while Kmety stormed the waterworks, and the troops of the 3d army corps under Knezich escaladed the walls near the Vienna gate. A severe fight in the interior of the fortress ensued, but soon the garrison surrendered. Of 3,500 men, about 1,000 were killed, the rest were made prisoners. The Hungarians lost 600 men during the siege.

193

Friedrich Engels Windham’s Defeat

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5253, 20. Februar 1858.

While during the Crimean war all England was calling for a man capable of organizing and leading her armies, and while incapables like Raglan, Simpson and Codrington were intrusted with the office, there was a soldier in the Crimea endowed with the qualities required in a general. We mean Sir Colin Campbell, who is now daily showing in India that he understands his profession with a master’s mind. In the Crimea, after having been allowed to lead his brigade at the Alma where from the rigid line-tactics of the British army, he had no chance to show his capacities, he was cooped up in Balaklava and never once allowed to participate in the succeeding operations. And yet, his military talents had been clearly established in India long before, by no less an authority than the greatest general England has produced since Marlborough, by Sir Charles James Napier. But Napier was an independent man, too proud to stoop to the reigning oligarchy⎯and his recommendation was enough to make Campbell marked and distrusted. Other men, however, gained distinctions and honors in that war. There was Sir William Fenwick Williams of Kars, who now finds it convenient to rest on the laurels acquired by impudence, self-puffing, and by defrauding Gen. Kmety of his well-earned fame. A baronetcy, a thousand a year, a comfortable berth at Woolwich, and a seat in Parliament, are quite sufficient to prevent him risking his reputation in India. Unlike him, “the hero of the Redan,” Gen. Windham, has set out to command a division against the Sepoys, and his very first act has settled him forever. This same Windham, an obscure colonel of good family connections, commanded a brigade at the assault of the Redan, during which operation he behaved extremely phlegmatically, and at last, no ree¨nforcement arriving, twice left his troops to shift for themselves, while he went to inquire about them himself. For this very questionable act, which in other services would have been inquired into by a court-martial, he was forthwith made a General, and shortly afterward called to the post of Chief of the Staff.

194

5

10

15

20

25

30

Windham’s Defeat

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

When Colin Campbell advanced to Lucknow, he left the old intrenchments, the camp and the town of Cawnpore, together with the bridge over the Ganges, in charge of General Windham and a force sufficient for the purpose. There were five regiments of infantry, whole or in part, many guns of position, 10 field guns and two naval guns, beside 100 horse; the whole force above 2,000. While Campbell was engaged at Lucknow, the various bodies of rebels hovering about the Doab drew together for an attack on Cawnpore. Beside a miscellaneous rabble, collected by insurgent Zemindars, the attacking force counted, of drilled troops (disciplined they cannot be called), the remainder of the Dinapore Sepoys and a portion of the Gwalior contingent. These latter were the only insurgent troops, the formation of which can be said to go beyond that of companies, as they had been officered by natives almost exclusively, and thus, with their field-officers and captains, retained something like organized battalions. They were consequently regarded with some respect by the British. Windham had strict orders to remain on the defensive, but getting no replies to his dispatches from Campbell, the communication being interrupted, he resolved to act on his own responsibility. On the 26th November, he advanced with 1,200 infantry, 100 horse and 8 guns to meet the advancing insurgents. Having easily defeated their vanguard, he saw the main column approaching and retired close to Cawnpore. Here he took up a position in front of the town, the 34th Regiment on the left, the Rifles (5 companies) and two companies of the 82d on the right. The line of retreat lay through the town, and there were some brick-kilns in rear of the left. Within four hundred yards from the front, and on various points still nearer to the flanks, were woods, and jungle, offering excellent shelter to the advancing enemy. In fact, a worse position could not well have been chosen⎯the British exposed in the open plain, while the Indians could approach under shelter to within three or four hundred yards! To bring out Windham’s “heroism” in a still stronger light, there was a very decent position close by, with a plain in front and rear, and with the canal as an obstacle before the front; but, of course, the worse position was insisted on. On the 27th November, the enemy opened a cannonade, bringing up his guns to the edge of the cover afforded by the jungle. Windham, who, with the modesty inherent in a hero, calls this a “bombardment,” says his troops stood it for five hours; but after this time, there happened some things which neither Windham, nor any man present, nor any Indian or British newspaper, has as yet dared to relate. From the moment the cannonade was turned into a battle, all our direct sources of information cease, and we are left to draw our own conclusions from the hesitating, prevaricating and incomplete

195

Friedrich Engels

evidence before us. Windham confines himself to the following incoherent statement: “In spite of the heavy bombardment of the enemy, my troops resisted the attack írather novel to call a cannonade against field-troops an attackî for five hours, and still held the ground, until I found from the number of men bayoneted by the 88th, that the mutineers had fully penetrated the town; having been told that they were attacking the fort, I directed Gen. Dupuis to fall back. The whole force retired into the fort, with all our stores and guns, shortly before dark. Owing to the flight of the camp-followers, I was unable to carry off my camp equipage and some of the baggage. Had not an error occurred in the conveyance of an order issued by me, I am of opinion that I could have held my ground, at all events until dark.” Gen. Windham, with that instinct shown already at the Redan, moves off to the reserve (the 88th occupying the town, as we must conclude), and finds, not the enemy alive and fighting, but a great number of the enemy bayoneted by the 88th. This fact leads him to the conclusion that the enemy (he does not say whether dead or alive) has fully penetrated the town! Alarming as this conclusion is both to the reader and to himself, our hero does not stop here. He is told that the fort is attacked. A common general would have inquired into the truth of this story, which of course turned out to be false. Not so Windham. He orders a retreat, though his troops could have held the position at least until dark, had not an error been committed in the conveyance of one of Windham’s orders! Thus, first you have Windham’s heroic conclusion, that where there are many dead Sepoys there must be many live ones; secondly, the false alarm respecting the attack on the fort; and thirdly, the error committed in the conveyance of an order; all of which mishaps combined made it possible for a very numerous rabble of natives to defeat the hero of the Redan and to beat the indomitable British pluck of his soldiers. Another reporter, an officer present, says: “I do not believe any one can accurately describe the fight and retreat of this forenoon. A retreat was ordered, Her Majesty’s 34th foot being directed to fall back behind the brick kiln, neither officers nor men knew where to find it! The news flew rapidly about the cantonments that our force was worsted and on the retreat, and an overwhelming rush was made at the inner intrenchments, as resistless as the mass of water at the Falls of Niagara. Soldiers and Jacks, Europeans and natives, men, women and children, horses, camels and oxen, poured in in countless numbers from 2 p.m. By nightfall the intrenched camp, with its motley assemblage of men and beasts, baggage, luggage, and ten thousand nondescript in-

196

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Windham’s Defeat

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

cumbrances, rivaled the chaos that existed before the fiat of creation went forth.” Finally, The Times’s Calcutta correspondent states that evidently the British suffered on the 27th “what almost amounts to a repulse,” but that from patriotic motives the Anglo-Indian press covers the disgrace with the impenetrable veil of charity. Thus much, however, is also admitted, that one of Her Majesty’s regiments, composed mostly of recruits, one moment got into disorder, without however giving way, and that at the fort the confusion was extreme, Windham having lost all control over his men, until in the evening of the 28th Campbell arrived and “with a few haughty words” brought everybody to his place again. Now, what are the evident conclusions from all these confused and prevaricating statements? No other than that, under the incapable direction of Windham, the British troops were completely, though quite unnecessarily defeated; that when the retreat was ordered, the officers of the 34th Regiment, who had not even taken the trouble to get in any way acquainted with the ground they had fought on, could not find the place they were ordered to retreat to; that the regiment got into disorder and finally fled; that this led to a panic in the camp, which broke down all the bounds of order and discipline, and occasioned the loss of the campequipage and part of the baggage; that finally, in spite of Windham’s assertion about the stores, 15,000 Minie´ cartridges, the Paymaster’s chests, and the shoes and clothing for many regiments and new levies, fell into the hands of the enemy. English infantry, when in line or column, seldom run away. In common with the Russians, they have a natural cohesion which generally belongs to old soldiers only, and which is in part explained by the considerable admixture of old soldiers in both services, but it in part also evidently belongs to national character. This quality, which has nothing whatever to do with “pluck,” but is on the contrary rather a peculiar development of the instinct of self-preservation, is still very valuable, especially in defensive positions. It also, in common with the phlegmatic nature of Englishmen, prevents panic; but it is to be remarked that when Irish troops are once disordered and brought to panic, they are not easy to rally. Thus it happened to Windham on Nov. 27. He will figure henceforth among that not very large but distinguished list of English generals who have succeeded in making their troops run away under a panic. On the 28th the Gwalior contingent were ree¨nforced by a considerable body from Bithoor, and closed up to within four hundred yards of the British intrenched outposts. There was another engagement, conducted on the part of the assailants without any vigor whatever. During it an

197

Friedrich Engels

example of real pluck occurred on the part of the soldiers and officers of the 64th, which we are glad to relate, although the exploit itself was as foolish as the renowned Balaklava charge. The responsibility of it, too, is shifted upon a dead man⎯Col. Wilson of that regiment. It appears that Wilson advanced with one hundred and eighty men against four guns of the enemy, defended by far superior numbers. We are not told who they were; but the result leads to the conclusion that they were of the Gwalior troops. The British took the guns with a rush, spiked three of them, and held out for some time, when, no ree¨nforcement arriving, they had to retreat, leaving sixty men and most of their officers on the ground. The proof of the hard fighting is in the loss. Here we have a small force, which, from the loss they suffered, must have been pretty well met, holding a battery till one-third of their numbers are down. This is hard fighting indeed, and the first instance of it we have since the storming of Delhi. The man who planned this advance, however, deserves to be tried by court-martial and shot. Windham says it was Wilson. He fell in it, and cannot reply. In the evening the whole British force was pent up in the fort, where disorder continued to reign, and the position with the bridge was in evident danger. But then Campbell arrived. He restored order, drew over fresh troops in the morning, and so far repelled the enemy as to secure the bridge and fort. Then he made all his wounded, women, children and baggage cross, and held a defensive position until all these had a fair start on the road to Allahabad. As soon as this was accomplished, he attacked the Sepoys on the 6th, and defeated them, his cavalry and artillery following them up for fourteen miles the same day. That there was little resistance offered is shown from Campbell’s report; he merely describes the advance of his own troops, never mentioning any resistance or maneuvers on the part of the enemy; there was no check, and it was not a battle, but a battue. Brigadier Hope Grant, with a light division, followed the fugitives, and caught them on the 8th in the act of passing a river; thus brought to bay, they turned round and suffered severe loss. With this event Campbell’s first campaign, that of Lucknow and Cawnpore, is brought to a close, and a fresh series of operations must begin, whose first developments we may expect to hear of within a fortnight or three weeks.

198

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Karl Marx The Attempt upon the Life of Bonaparte

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5254, 22. Februar 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

Quos deus vult perdere prius dementat seems the judgment pretty generally passed in Europe on the French usurper, whom, but a few weeks ago, the numberless sycophants of success in all countries, and of all languages, concurred to magnify into a kind of sublunary providence. Now, all at once, on the first approach of real danger, the demi-god is supposed to have run mad. To those, however, who are not to be carried away by first impressions, nothing will appear more evident than that the hero of Boulogne is to-day what he was yesterday⎯simply a gambler. If he stakes his last card and risks all, it is not the man that has changed, but the chances of the game. There had been attempts on Bonaparte’s life before without producing any visible effect on the economy of the Empire. Why did the quicksilver which exploded on the 14th of January not only kill persons, but a state of things? It is with the hand-grenades of the Rue Lepelletier as it was with the greased cartridges dealt out at Barrackpore. They have not metamorphosed an empire, but only rent the veil which concealed a metamorphosis already accomplished. The secret of Bonaparte’s elevation is to be found on the one hand in the mutual prostration of the antagonist parties, and on the other in the coincidence of his coup d’e´tat with the entrance of the commercial world upon a period of prosperity. The commercial crisis, therefore, has necessarily sapped the material basis of the Empire, which never possessed any moral basis, save the temporary demoralization of all classes and all parties. The working classes reassumed their hostile attitude to the existing Government the very moment they were thrown out of employment. A great part of the commercial and industrial middle classes were placed by the crisis in exactly the same position which spurred Napoleon to hasten his coup d’e´tat; it being well known that the fear of the debtors’ prison at Clichy put an end to his vacillations. The same motive hurried the Paris bourgeois to the barricades in 1848, and would make him regard a political convulsion at this moment as a godsend. It is now per-

199

Karl Marx

fectly understood that, at the hight of the panic, the Bank of France, on Government order, renewed all bills due⎯an accommodation which, by the by, it was again compelled to afford on the 31st of January; but this suspense in the liquidation of debts, instead of restoring commercial activity, has only imparted a chronic character to panic. Another very large portion of the Paris middle classes, and a very influential one too⎯the petits rentiers, or men of small fixed incomes⎯have met with wholesale ruin, consequent upon the enormous fluctuations of the Bourse, which were fostered by, and contributed to enrich, the Imperial dynasty and its adventurous retainers. That portion, at least, of the French higher classes which pretends to represent what is called French civilization never accepted the Empire, except as a necessary makeshift, never concealed their profound hostility to the “nephew of his uncle,” and of late have seized upon every pretext to show their anger at the attempt to transform a mere expedient, as they considered it, into a lasting institution. Such was the general state of feeling to which the attempt of the Rue Lepelletier afforded an occasion of manifesting itself. This manifestation, on the other hand, has roused the pseudo Bonaparte to a sense of the gathering storm, and compelled him to play out his last card. Much has been said in the Moniteur as to the shouts and cries and the “public enthusiasm” lavished on the Imperial party at their exit from the Opera. The value of this street enthusiasm is shown by the following anecdote emanating from a chief actor in the scene and the authenticity of which is vouched for by a highly respectable English paper: “On the night of the 14th a person high in the Imperial household, but not that night on service, was crossing the Boulevards, when he heard the explosions, and saw people running toward the Opera. He ran thither also, and was present at the whole scene. Being recognized directly, one of the persons most nearly concerned in all that had occurred said, ‘Oh, Mr.⎯⎯, for God’s sake, find some one belonging to the Tuileries, and send off for fresh carriages. If you can find none, go yourself.’ The person thus addressed set to work immediately to find some of the household servants, which was no easy task⎯all, from high to low, chamberlains to footmen, having, with one or two admirable exceptions, taken to their heels with incredible alacrity. However, at the end of a quarter of an hour, he laid hands on a messenger, and sent him post-haste to the palace with the necessary orders. About five and twenty minutes or half an hour had elapsed, when he returned to the Rue Lepelletier, and made his way back to the peristyle of the theater with great difficulty, on account of the crowd. The wounded were still lying about on all sides, and apparently disorder reigned everywhere. At a little distance the gentleman alluded to

200

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Attempt upon the Life of Bonaparte

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

espied M. Pietri, the Prefect of Police, and called to him, in order to attract his attention, and prevent him from going away until he could rejoin him. When he did so, he instantly exclaimed, ‘Let me implore of you to get the street closed without loss of time. The fresh carriages will be here soon, and they cannot drive up to the door. Besides, see what confusion ensues. Let me entreat of you, get the streets cleared.’ M. Pietri looked at him with surprise. ‘The street cleared!’ he echoed; ‘why, the street is cleared; it was cleared in five minutes.’ His interlocutor stared at him. ‘But, then, what is all that crowd? What is that dense mass of men that one cannot elbow one’s way through?’ ‘Those are all my people,’ was M. Pietri’s reply; ‘there is not a stranger at this moment in this portion of the Rue Lepelletier; all those you see belong to me.’” If such was the secret of the street enthusiasm paraded by the Moniteur, its paragraphs on the “spontaneous illuminations of the Boulevards after the attempt” could certainly not mislead the Parisians who had witnessed that illumination, which was limited to the shops of the tradespeople employed by the Emperor and the Empress. Even these individuals were not backward in saying that half an hour after the explosion of the “infernal machine,” police agents paid them a visit, to suggest the propriety of instantly illuminating, in order to prove how enchanted they were at the Emperor’s escape. Still more the character of the congratulatory addresses and the public protestations of devotion to the Emperor bears witness to his complete isolation. There is not a single man who signed them who does not, one way or the other, belong to the Administration, that ubiquitous parasite feeding on the vitals of France, and put in motion like a mannikin by the touch of the Minister of the Interior. The Moniteur was obliged, day after day, to register these monotonous congratulations, addressed by the Emperor to the Emperor, as so many proofs of the unbounded love of the people for the coup d’e´tat. Some efforts were, indeed, made to obtain an address from the Paris population, and for that purpose an address was carried about by the agents of the police; but as it was found that the mass of signatures would not be sufficiently imposing, the plan was abandoned. Even the Paris shopkeepers dared to decline signing the address, on the pretext that the police was not the proper source for it to emanate from. The attitude of the Paris press, as far as it depends on the public, and not on the public purse, entirely responded to the attitude of the people. Either, like the unfortunate Spectateur, it muttered some halfsuppressed words on hereditary rights, or, like the Phare de la Loire, quoted semi-official papers as its authorities for the reported enthusiasm, or, like the Journal des De´bats, kept its congratulations within the rigid

201

Karl Marx

bounds of conventional courtesy, or limited itself to reprinting the articles of the Moniteur. In one word, it became evident that if France was not just yet prepared to take up arms against the Empire, it was certainly resolved to get rid of it on the first occasion. “According to my informants,” writes the Vienna correspondent of The London Times, “who have recently arrived from Paris, the general opinion in that city is, that the present dynasty is nodding to its fall.” Or as an eminent American, now in France, writes in a letter received by the Africa: “There is a frightful foreboding in the bosoms of the French themselves. I was talking with a friend the other day, a very devout and clear-headed woman, and she told me sotto voce that she talked with no one who did not feel a stifling fear of what was coming, of a day of vengeance too black to contemplate. She told me that the receipts of the mont-de-pie´te´ were falling off so much that the truth was becoming evident that the people had nothing left to dispose of, and this to her and her friends was a sure sign that the final crash was near.” Bonaparte himself, till then the only man in France believing in the final victory of the coup d’e´tat, became at once aware of the hollowness of his delusions. While all public bodies and the press were swearing that the crime of the Rue Lepelletier, perpetrated as it was by Italians solely, but served to put in relief the love of France for Louis Napoleon, Louis Napoleon himself hastened to the Corps Legislatif, there publicly to declare that the conspiracy was a national one, and that France consequently wanted new “repressive laws” to keep her down. Those laws already proposed, at the head of which figure the lois des suspects, are nothing but a repetition of the identical measures employed in the first days of the coup d’e´tat. Then, however, they were announced as temporary expedients, while they are now proclaimed as organic laws. Thus it is declared by Louis Napoleon himself, that the Empire can be perpetuated only by the very infamies through which it was produced; that all its pretensions to the more or less respectable forms of a regular Government must be dropped, and that the time of the sullen acquiescence of the nation in the rule of the Society of the perjured usurper has definitively passed away. Shortly before the execution of the coup d’e´tat, Louis Napoleon contrived to gather from all departments, and principally from the rural districts, addresses leveled at the National Assembly, and expressive of unlimited confidence in the President. This source being now exhausted, there remained nothing but to appeal to the army. The military addresses, in one of which the Zouaves “almost regret not to have had an opportunity to manifest in a striking manner their devotion to the Emper-

202

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Attempt upon the Life of Bonaparte

5

10

15

20

25

or,” are simply the undisguised proclamation of pretorian rule in France. The division of France into five great military pashalics, with five marshals at their head, under the supreme control of Pelissier as marshal general, is a simple consequence of that premise. On the other hand, the installation of a Privy Council, which is at the same time to act as Council during the eventual Regency of a Montijo, composed of such grotesque fellows as Fould, Morny, Persigny, Baroche and the like, shows France at the same time what sort of regime the newly-installed statesmen have in store for her. The installation of this Council, together with the family reconciliation, denoted to the astounded world by Louis Napoleon’s letter in the Moniteur, by virtue of which Jerome, the ex-King of Westphalia, is nominated President of the State Councils in the Emperor’s absence⎯all this, it has been justly remarked, “looks like the pilgrim about to set out on a perilous journey.” On what new adventure is the hero of Strasbourg then to embark? Some say that he means to relieve himself by a campaign in Africa; others that he intends an invasion of England. As to the first plan, it reminds one of his former notion of going to Sevastopol; but now, as then, his discretion might prove the better part of his valor. As to any hostility against England, it would only reveal to Bonaparte his isolation in Europe, as the attempt of the Rue Lepelletier revealed his isolation in France. Already the threats held out to England in the addresses of the soldiery have put the final extinguisher upon the Anglo-French alliance, long since struggling in articulo mortis. Palmerston’s Alien bill will only contribute to exasperate the already wounded pride of John Bull. Whatever step Bonaparte may take⎯and he must try to restore his prestige in some way or other⎯will only precipitate his ruin. He approaches the end of his strange, wicked and pernicious career.

203

Karl Marx The Commercial Crisis in France

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5270, 12. März 1858.

No argument can be required to prove that the precarious tenure of power by which Louis Napoleon still calls himself the Emperor of the French, must be seriously affected by the culmination in France of the commercial crisis which has already spent its fury in other parts of the world. The symptoms of this culmination are now chiefly to be found in the condition of the Bank of France and of the French markets for agricultural produce. The returns of the Bank, for the second week of February, as compared with those of the last week in January, exhibit the following features: Decrease of circulation Decrease in deposits Decrease of discounts at the Bank Decrease of discounts at the Branches Total decrease in discounts Increase in bills overdue Increase in bullion Increase in premium on purchases of gold and silver

francs 8,766,400 29,018,024 47,746,641 23,264,271 71,010,912 2,761,435 31,508,278 3,284,691

Throughout the whole of the commercial world the metallic reserve of the banks has increased as the activity of trade has diminished. At the same ratio that industrial life has grown fainter, the position of the banks has, generally, grown stronger; and so far the bullion increase in the vaults of the Bank of France would seem but one more instance of an economical phenomenon observed here in New-York as well as in London and Hamburg. Yet there is one feature distinctive of the bullion movement in France, viz: the increase to the amount of 3,284,691 francs of the premium on purchases of gold and silver, while the total sum spent in this way by the Bank of France for the month of February reaches the figure of 4,438,549 francs. The gravity of this fact becomes evident from the following comparison:

204

5

10

15

20

25

The Commercial Crisis in France

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Premiums paid by the Bank of France on purchases of gold and silver. February, 1858 francs 4,438,549 January, 1858 1,153,858 December, 1857 1,176,029 November, 1857 1,327,443 October, 1857 949,656 1st January to 30th June, 1856 3,100,000 1st July to 11th December, 1856 3,250,000 1st July to 31st December, 1855 4,000,000

Thus we see that the premium paid in February to procure temporary artificial additions to the bullion reserve of the Bank amounts to a sum almost equal to that expended for the same purpose during the four months from October, 1857, to January, ’58, and exceeds the aggregate half-yearly premiums paid during the years 1856 and 1855; while the total amount of premiums paid from October, 1857, to February, 1858, reaching the figure of 9,045,535f., exceeds the premium paid during the whole year of 1856 by almost one-half. Despite this apparent plethora, the metallic reserve of the Bank is, consequently, really weaker than for the last three years. So far from the Bank being incumbered with bullion, the influx is only artificially raised to its necessary level. This single fact proves at once that in France the commercial crisis has not yet entered the phase already passed in the United States, England, and the North of Europe. In France, a general depression of commerce exists, as is shown by the simultaneous decrease in circulation and discounts; but the crash is still impending, as is shown by the decrease of deposits simultaneously with an increase of premium on bullion bought, and of bills overdue. The Bank has also been forced to announce that a great part of its own new shares, on which the installments have not been duly paid up, will be sold. It has also been converted by the Government into the general railway contractor of France, and compelled to make within fixed periods large advances to the railway companies⎯advances which for January and February alone amounted to the sum of 50,000,000 francs. It is true that in return for these advances it has received the bonds of the companies, which it may sell when it can. The present moment, however, is peculiarly unfavorable to such a sale, and the weekly railway returns, testifying to a constant falling off in receipts, are far from warranting any sanguine expectations in this line. For the month of January, for instance, the Orleans presented a decline of 21 per cent, the Eastern of 18 per cent, the Lyons of about 11 per cent, and the Western of 14 per cent, compared with the corresponding receipts in 1857.

205

Karl Marx

It is a well-known fact that the resistance, on the side of the seller or the buyer, against a change from low prices to high ones, and still more from high prices to low, is always very considerable; and that frequently there occur intervals, of longer or shorter duration, during which sales are heavy and prices nominal, until at last the tendency of the market declares itself one way or the other with irresistible force. Such a transitory struggle between the holders and buyers of merchandise is nothing extraordinary; but the protracted contest, lasting from the beginning of November to the present day, between French merchants and French consumers, is perhaps unparalleled in the history of prices. While French industry is stagnant, great numbers of workmen unemployed, and the means of everybody stinted, prices, which have elsewhere declined on an average from 30 to 40 per cent, are still maintained in France at the speculative range of the period preceding the general crisis. If we are asked by what means this economical miracle has been worked, the answer is simply that the Bank of France, under Government pressure, has twice been obliged to renew the bills and loans which had fallen due, and that thus, more or less directly, the means of the French people, accumulated in the Bank vaults, have been employed to keep up inflated prices against that very people. The Government seems to imagine that by this exceedingly simple process of distributing bank notes wherever they are wanted, the catastrophe can be definitively warded off. Yet the real result of this contrivance has been, on the one hand, an aggravation of distress on the part of the consumers, whose diminished means have not been met by diminished prices; on the other hand, an enormous accumulation of commodities in the Customs entrepots, which, when ultimately, as they must be, they are forced upon the market, will collapse under their own weight. The following statement, extracted from an official French paper, of the comparative quantities of merchandise stored up in the French Customs entrepots at the end of December, 1857, 1856 and 1855, will leave no doubt as to the violent self-adjustment of prices still looming in the future for France:

Cocoa Coffee Cotton Copper Tin

206

1857. Metrical qtls. 19,419 210,741 156,006 15,377 4,053

1856. Metrical qtls. 17,799 100,758 76,322 1,253 1,853

1855. Metrical qtls. 10,188 57,644 28,766 3,197 1,811

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

The Commercial Crisis in France

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cast-Iron Oleaginous Seeds Tallow Indigo Wool Pepper Sugar (colonial) Sugar (foreign)

[1857. Metrical qtls.

1856. Metrical qtls.

1855. Metrical qtls.]

132,924 253,596 25,299 5,253 72,150 23,448 170,334 89,607

102,202 198,982 15,292 2,411 31,560 18,442 56,735 89,807

76,337 74,537 11,276 3,783 38,146 10,682 55,387 71,913

In the trade in bread-stuffs, however, the contest has already terminated with disastrous consequences for the holders. Still their losses are of far less importance than the general state of the agricultural population of France at the present juncture. At a recent meeting of French agriculturists it was stated that the average price of wheat for all France was 31fr. 94c. the hectolitre (about 23/4 bushels) at the end of January, 1854; 27fr. 24c. at the same epoch in 1855; 32fr. 46c. in January, 1856; 27fr. 9c. in January, 1857, and 17fr. 38c. in January, 1858. The unanimous conclusion arrived at was that “this state of prices must prove ruinous to French agriculture, and that at 17fr. 38c. the present average price, the producers in some parts of France have an extremely narrow margin of profit left them, while in others they sustain a serious loss.” One would think that in a country like France, where the greater part of the soil belongs to the cultivators themselves, and but a relatively small portion of the aggregate produce finds its way to market, a superabundance of grain ought to be considered a blessing instead of a bane. Yet, as Louis XVIII. told us in a crown speech on Nov. 26, 1821: “No law can prevent the distress resulting from a superabundant harvest.” The fact is that the large majority of the French peasantry are owners in name only⎯the mortgagees and the Government being the real proprietors. Whether the French peasant be able to meet the heavy engagements weighing on his narrow strip of soil depends not on the quantity, but on the price of his produce. This agricultural distress, taken together with the depression of trade, the stagnation of industry, and the commercial catastrophe still in suspense, must tend to bring the French people into that state of mind in which they are wont to embark in fresh political ventures. With the disappearance of material prosperity and its regular appendage of political indifference, every pretext for the prolongation of the second Empire also disappears.

207

Friedrich Engels Camp

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

312 CAMP, a place of repose for troops, whether for one night or a longer time, and whether in tents, in bivouac, or with any such shelter as may be hastily constructed. Troops are cantoned when distributed among villages, or when placed in huts at the end of a campaign. Barracks are permanent military quarters. Tents were deemed unwholesome by Napoleon, who preferred that the soldier should bivouac, sleeping with his feet toward the fire, and protected from the wind by slight sheds and bowers. Major Sibley, of the American army, has invented a tent which will accommodate 20 cavalry soldiers, with their accoutrements, all sleeping with their feet toward a fire in its centre. Bivouac tents have been introduced into the French service since 1837. They consist of a tissue of cotton cloth impregnated with caoutchouc, and thus made water-proof. Every man carries a portion of this cloth, and the different pieces are rapidly attached together by means of clasps. In the selection of a camp, good water within a convenient distance is essential, as is the proximity of woods for fire-wood and means of shelter. Good roads, canals, or navigable streams are important to furnish the troops with the necessaries of life, if they are encamped for a long period. The vicinity of swamps or stagnant water is to be avoided. The ground to be suitable for defence must admit of manœuvres of troops. As far as possible the cavalry and infantry should be established on a single line, the former upon the wings, the latter in the centre. The shelters or huts are arranged, as nearly as the nature of the ground admits, in streets perpendicular to the front, and extending from one end of the camp to the other. In arranging a camp, however, no universal rule can be laid down, but the commander must decide according to circumstances whether to form his army in 1 or 2 lines, and upon the relative positions of infantry, cavalry, and artillery. The guards of camps are: 1, the camp-guard, which serves to keep good order and discipline, prevent desertions, and give the alarm; 2, detachments of infantry and cavalry, denominated pickets, stationed in front

208

5

10

15

20

25

30

Camp

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

and on the flanks, which intercept reconnoitring parties of the enemy, and give timely notice of a hostile approach; and 3, grand guards, or outposts, which are large detachments posted in surrounding villages, farm-houses, or small field works, from which they can watch the movements of the enemy. They should not be so far from the camp as to be beyond succor in case of attack. Immediately after arriving on the ground, the number of men to be furnished for guards and pickets are detailed; the posts to be occupied by them are designated; the places for distribution of provisions mentioned; and, in general, all arrangements made concerning the interior and exterior police and service of the camp.⎯One of the most ancient camps mentioned in history is that of the Israelites at their exodus from Egypt. It formed a large square, divided for the different tribes, had in the middle the camp of the Levites with the tabernacle, and a principal gate or entrance, which, with an adjacent open space, was at the same time a forum and market-place. But the form, the dimensions, and the intrenchments of the regular military camps of the Hebrews, or their enemies, can scarcely be traced.⎯The camp of the Greeks before Troy was close upon the sea-shore, to shelter their ships drawn upon the land, divided into separate quarters for the different tribes, and fortified with ramparts fronting the city and the sea, and externally with a high mount 313 of earth, strengthened with wooden towers against the sallies of the besieged. The bravest of their chiefs, as Achilles and Ajax, were posted at the extremities. The camp of the Lacedæmonians was circular, and not without the regular precautions of sentries and videttes.⎯The Roman camp varied according to the season of the year, the length of time it was to be occupied, the number of legions, as well as the nature of the ground, and other circumstances. A historian of the time of the empire mentions camps of every shape, circular, oblong, &c.; but the regular form of the Roman camp was quadrangular. Its place was determined by augurs and according to the 4 quarters, with the front to the rising sun; it was measured with a gnomon; a square of 700 feet was regarded as sufficient for 20,000 men. It was divided into an upper and lower part, separated by a large open space, and by 2 chief lines (decumana and cardo), running from E. to W., and from N. to S., and by several streets. It had 4 gates, the principal of which were the decuman and the prætorian, which no soldier could pass without leave, under pain of death, and was surrounded with a rampart, separated by a space of 200 feet from the inner camp, a ditch, and a mound of earth. All these intrenchments were made by the soldiers themselves, who handled the pickaxe and the spade as dexterously as the sword or the lance; they levelled the ground, and fixed the palisades, which they carried along,

209

Friedrich Engels

around the intrenchments into a kind of hedge of irregular points. In the middle of the upper division was the pavilion of the general (prætorium), forming a square of 200 feet; around it the auguraculum, the quæstorium, or quarters of the treasurers of the army, the forum, serving as a market and meeting place, and the tents of the legati, those of the tribunes opposite their respective legions, and of the commanders of foreign auxiliary troops. In the lower division were the tents of the inferior officers and the legions, the Roman horse, the triarii, the principes, the hastati, &c.; and on the flanks the companies of foreign horse and foot, carefully kept apart. The tents were covered with skins, each containing 10 soldiers, and their decanus; the centurions and standard-bearers at the head of their companies. In the space between the 2 divisions, which was called principia, were the platform of the general, for the exercise of justice as well as for harangues, the altar, the sacred images, and the not less sacred military ensigns. In exceptional cases the camp was surrounded with a wall of stones, and sometimes even the quarters of the soldiers were of the same material. The whole camp offered the aspect of a city; it was the only fortress the Romans constructed. Among the most permanent memorials of the Roman occupation of Britain is the retention of the Latin castra (camp), as, in whole or part, the name of a great number of places first occupied by them as military posts, as Doncaster, Leicester, Worcester, Chester, Winchester, &c.⎯The camps of the barbarous nations of antiquity were often surrounded with a fortification of wagons and carts, as for instance, that of the Cimbri, in their last battle against the Romans (101 B. C.), which camp was so fiercely defended, after their defeat, by their wives.⎯An INTRENCHED CAMP is a camp surrounded by defensive works, which serves also as a fortification, and is intended accordingly for prolonged use.

210

5

10

15

20

25

Friedrich Engels Catapult

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

5

10

552 CATAPULT (Gr. κατα, against, and παλλω, to hurl), an ancient military engine for throwing stones, darts, and other missiles, invented in Syracuse, in the reign of Dionysius the elder. It acted upon the principle of the bow, and consisted of wood frame-work, a part of which was elastic, and furnished with tense cords of hair or muscle. Catapults were of various sizes, being designed either for field-service or bombardments. The largest of them projected beams 6 feet long and weighing 60 lbs. to the distance of 400 paces, and Josephus gives instances of their throwing great stones to the distance of 1/4 of a mile. The Romans employed 300 of them at the siege of Jerusalem. From the time of Julius Cæsar it is not distinguished by Latin authors from the ballista, which was originally used only for throwing masses of stone.

211

Friedrich Engels Coehorn

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 5. New York 1859.

431 COEHORN, or COHORN, MENNO VAN, baron, a Dutch general and engineer, born in Friesland in 1641, died at the Hague, May 17, 1704. At the age of 16 he received a captain’s commission, distinguished himself at the siege of Maestricht, and afterward at the battles of Senef, Cassel, St. Denis, and Fleurus. During the intervals of active duty he devoted much attention to the subject of fortification, with the view of equalizing the chances between besiegers and besieged, the new system of his contemporary Vauban having given great advantages to the latter. While comparatively a young man he gained a name as an engineer, and by the time he had reached middle life was recognized as the best officer of that arm in the Dutch service. The prince of Orange promised him a colonelcy, but being rather remiss in fulfilling the pledge, he retired in disgust with the intention of offering his services to the French. His wife and 8 children, however, were arrested by the order of the prince as hostages for his return, which quickly brought him back, whereon he received the promised rank, and was afterward appointed, successively, as general of artillery, director-general of fortifications, and governor of Flanders. His whole life was spent in connection with the defences of the Low Countries. At the siege of Grave, in 1674, he invented and for the first time made use of the small mortars, called cohorns, for throwing grenades, and in the succeeding year elicited the applause of Vauban by successfully crossing the Meuse, and carrying a bastion which was considered as protected by the river. After the peace of Nimeguen (1678), he was employed in strengthening various already strong places; Nimeguen, Breda, Mannheim, since dismantled, and Bergen-op-Zoom attest the value of his system. The last-named place he considered his masterpiece, although it was taken after a long siege in 1747, by Marshal de Lowendal. During the campaigns from 1688 to 1691, he was in active service. The siege of Namur, in 1692, gave him an opportunity to test his system against that of Vauban, for these two great engineers were there opposed to each

212

5

10

15

20

25

30

Coehorn

5

10

15

20

25

other, Coehorn in defending a work which he had constructed to protect the citadel, and Vauban in attempting to reduce it. Coehorn made an obstinate defence, but being dangerously wounded, was compelled to surrender to his rival, who handsomely acknowledged his bravery and skill. He was afterward engaged at the attack on Trarbach, Limburg, and Lie´ge, and in 1695 aided in retaking Namur. In the war of the Spanish succession he besieged successively Venloo, Stephensworth, Ruremonde, Lie´ge, and in 1703 took Bonn, on the Rhine, after 3 days’ cannonade of heavy artillery aided by a fire of grenades from 500 cohorns. Next he passed into Dutch Flanders, where he gained several successes over 432 the French, and directed the siege of Huy. This was his last service, for he died soon afterward of apoplexy, while waiting a conference with the duke of Marlborough on the plan of a new campaign. Coehorn’s greatest work, Nieuwe Vestingbouw, was published at Leeuwarden, in folio, 1685, and translated into several foreign languages. His plans are mostly adapted to the Dutch fortresses, or to those which are similarly situated on ground but a few feet above water level. Wherever it was practicable, he encircled his works with two ditches, the outermost full of water; the inner dry, and usually of the width of about 125 feet, serving as a place d’armes for the besieged, and in some cases for detachments of cavalry. The theory of his system, both of attack and defence, was the superiority of a combined mass over isolated fire. Professionally, Coehorn was accused of wasteful expenditure of life, in which respect he contrasted unfavorably with Vauban, who was sparing of men. Personally, he was blunt, honest, brave, and a hater of adulation. He refused inducements offered by several foreign governments. Charles II. of England knighted him. He was buried at Wijkel, near Sneek, in Friesland, and a monument was dedicated there to his memory.

213

Karl Marx The Rule of the Pretorians

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5270, 12. März 1858.

The Rule of the Pretorians. From an Occasional Correspondent. Paris, Feb. 22, 1858. “When is Ge´rard the lion-killer to be named Minister of Public Instruction?” Such is the cant phrase current in the faubourgs of Paris since the appointment of Gen. Espinasse of Dobrudja memory as Minister of the Interior and Public Safety. In Russia, it is well known, a general of cavalry presides over the Holy Synod. Why not Espinasse over the French Home-Ministry, since France has become the home of Pretorians only? By such apparent incongruities the rule of the naked sword is proclaimed in most unmistakable terms, and Bonaparte wants France to clearly understand that the imperial rule does rest not on her will but on 600,000 bayonets. Hence the Pretorian addresses cut out by the colonels of the different regiments, after a pattern supplied from the Tuileries⎯ addresses in which the slightest allusion to the so-called “will of the people” is anxiously shunned; hence the parceling out of France into five pashalics; hence the transformation of the Home-Ministry into an appendage of the Army. Here the change is not to stop. About 60 prefects are said to be on the eve of being disgraced, and to be replaced, for the most part, by military men. Prefectorial administration is to devolve upon half-pay colonels and lieutenant-colonels. The antagonism between the Army and the population is to be organized as the guarantee of “Public Safety,” viz: the safety of the hero of Satory and his dynasty. A great modern historian has told us that, disguise the fact as you like, France, since the days of the Great Revolution, has been always disposed of by the army. There have certainly ruled different classes under the Empire, the Restoration, Louis Philippe, and the Republic of 1848. Under the first the peasantry, the offspring of the revolution of 1789, pre-

214

5

10

15

20

25

The Rule of the Pretorians

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

dominated; under the second, the great landed property; under the third, the bourgeoisie; and the last, not in the intention of its founders but in fact, proved an abortive attempt at dividing dominion in equal shares among the men of the legitimate monarchy and the men of the monarchy of July. Still, all these regimes rested alike on the army. Has not even the Constitution of the Republic of 1848 been elaborated and proclaimed under a state of siege⎯that is, the rule of the bayonet? Was that Republic not personated by Gen. Cavaignac? Was it not saved by the army in June, 1848, and again saved in June, 1849, to be finally dropped by the same army in December, 1851? What then forms the novelty in the regime now openly inaugurated by Louis Bonaparte? That he rules by the instrumentality of the army? So did all his predecessors since the days of Thermidor. Yet, if in all the bygone epochs the ruling class, the ascendency of which corresponded to a specific development of French society, rested its ultima ratio against its adversaries upon the army, it was nevertheless a specific social interest that predominated. Under the second Empire the interest of the army itself is to predominate. The army is no longer to maintain the rule of one part of the people over another part of the people. The army is to maintain its own rule, personated by its own dynasty, over the French people in general. It is to represent the State in antagonism to the society. It must not be imagined that Bonaparte is not aware of the dangerous character of the experiment he tries. In proclaiming himself the chief of the Prætorians, he declares every Prætorian chief his competitor. His own partisans, with Gen. Vaillant at their head, demurred against the division of the French Army into five Marshalships, saying that if it was good for the cause of order, it was not so for that of the Empire, and would one day end in civil war. The treacheries of Napoleon’s Marshals, with Berthier at their head, were ransacked by the Palais Royal, which feels extremely vexed at the new turn of Imperial policy. The future conduct of the five Marshals, who hate each other cordially, at a critical juncture, may be best judged from their past. Magnan betrayed Louis Philippe; Baraguay d’Hilliers betrayed Napoleon; Bosquet betrayed the Republic, to which he owed his advancement, and to the principles of which he is known to be partial. Castellane has not even awaited a real catastrophe to betray Louis Bonaparte himself. During the Russian War a telegraphic dispatch reached him to this effect: “The Emperor is dead.” He instantly drew up a proclamation in favor of Henri V. and sent it to be printed. The Pre´fet of Lyons had received the real dispatch, which ran thus: “The Emperor of Russia is dead.” The proclamation was hushed, but the story got abroad. As to Canrobert, he may

215

Karl Marx

be an Imperialist, but then he is but a fraction, and, above all, lacks the capability of being a whole number. The five Marshals themselves, feeling the arduous task they were called upon to undertake, hesitated so considerably at accepting their respective commands that nothing could be settled with their consent; which seeing, Bonaparte wrote out himself the names of their separate destinations, gave the note to Mr. Fould to be filled up and sent to the Moniteur, and thus they were all gazetted at last, whether they would or not. Bonaparte, on the other hand, dared not complete his plan by Pelissier’s nomination of Marshal-General. Of his pentarchy of Marshals, we may say what Prince Jerome Napoleon is stated to have answered to Fould, sent by Bonaparte to present his uncle with his nomination to the first place in the Council of Regency. After having declined the offer in most impolite terms, the ex-King of Westphalia, as Paris gossip has it, bowed Mr. Fould out with the words, “Du reste, your Council of Regency is so framed as for you all to have but one object; that, namely, of arresting each other as promptly as possible.” We repeat that it is impossible to suppose Louis Bonaparte ignorant of the dangers with which his new-fangled system is fraught. But he has no choice left. He understands his own situation and the impatience of French society to get rid of him and his Imperial mummeries. He knows that the different parties have recovered from their paralysis, and that the material basis of his stock-jobbing regime has been blown up by the commercial earthquake. Consequently, he is not only preparing for war against French society, but loudly proclaims the fact. It tallies with his resolution to take up a warlike attitude against France that he confounds the most heterogeneous parties. Thus, when Cassagnac, in the Constitutionnel, denounced Mr. Villemain as a “provoker of hatred” to the Empire, and accused the Journal des De´bats of “complicity” in the attentat “through its silence,” this was at first considered to be an act of foolish zeal on the part of the man whom Guizot has described as the roi des droˆles. Soon, however, it oozed out that the article had been imposed upon the Constitutionnel by Mr. Rouland, the Minister of Public Instruction, who had himself corrected the proofs of it. This explanation, by the by, was given to Mr. De Sacy of the De´bats by Mr. Mire`s, the proprietor of the Constitutionnel, who did not choose to bear the responsibility of the article. The denunciation of all parties as his personal enemies enters, therefore, into the game of Bonaparte. It forms part of his system. He tells them, in so many words, that he indulges no delusion as to the general aversion his rule is the subject of, but that he is ready to encounter it with grape and musketry.

216

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Friedrich Engels Bidassoa

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

247 BIDASSOA, a small river of the Basque provinces of Spain, noted for the battles fought upon its banks, between the French under Soult and the English, Spaniards, and Portuguese, under Wellington. After the defeat of Vittoria in 1813, Soult collected his troops in a position, the right of which rested on the sea opposite Fuenterrabia, having the Bidassoa in front, while the centre and left extended across several ridges of hills toward St. Jean de Luz. From this position he once attempted to relieve the blockaded garrison of Pampeluna, but was repulsed. San Sebastian, besieged by Wellington, was now hard pressed, and Soult resolved to raise the siege. From his position of the lower Bidassoa it was but 9 miles to Oyarzun, a village on the road to San Sebastian; and if he could reach that village the siege must be raised. Accordingly, toward the end of Aug. 1813, he concentrated 2 columns on the Bidassoa. The one on the left, under Gen. Clausel, consisting of 20,000 men and 29 guns, took a position on a ridge of hills opposite Vera (a place beyond which the upper course of the river was in the hands of the allies), while Gen. Reille with 18,000 men, and a reserve of 7,000 under Foy, took his station lower down, near the road from Bayonne to Irun. The French intrenched camp to the rear was held by D’Erlon with 2 divisions, to ward off any turning movement of the allied right. Wellington had been informed of Soult’s plan, and had taken every precaution. The extreme left of his position, sheltered in front by the tidal estuary of the Bidassoa, was well intrenched, though but slightly occupied; the centre, formed by the extremely strong and rugged ridges of San Marcial, was strengthened with field-works, and held by Freyre’s Spaniards, the 1st British division standing as a reserve on their left rear near the Irun road. The right wing, on the rocky descents of the Pen˜a de Haya mountain, was held by Longa’s Spaniards and the 4th Anglo-Portuguese division; Inglis’s brigade of the 7th division connecting it with the light division at Vera, and with the troops detached still further to the right among the hills. Soult’s plan

217

Friedrich Engels

was, that Reille should take San Marcial (which he intended forming into a bridge-head for ulterior operations), and drive the allies toward their right, into the ravines of Pen˜a de Haya, thus clearing the high road for Foy, who was to advance along it straight on Oyarzun, while Clausel, after leaving a division to observe Vera, should pass the Bidassoa a little below that place, and drive whatever troops opposed him up the Pen˜a de Haya, thus seconding and flanking Reille’s attack. On the morning of Aug. 31, Reille’s troops forded the river in several columns, carried the first ridge of San Marcial with a rush, and advanced toward the higher and commanding ridges of that group of hills. But in this difficult ground his troops, imperfectly managed, got into disorder; skirmishers and supports became mingled, and in some places crowded together in disordered groups, when the Spanish columns rushed down the hill and drove them back to the river. A second attack was at first more successful, and brought the French up to the Spanish position; but then its force was spent, and another advance of the Spaniards drove them back into the 248 Bidassoa in great disorder. Soult having learned in the mean time that Clausel had made good his attack, slowly conquering ground on Pen˜a de Haya, and driving Portuguese, Spaniards, and British before him, was just forming columns out of Reille’s reserves and Foy’s troops for a third and final attack, when news came that D’Erlon had been attacked in his camp by strong forces. Wellington, as soon as the concentration of the French on the lower Bidassoa left no longer any doubt of the real point of attack, had ordered all troops in the hills on his extreme right to attack whatever was before them. This attack, though repulsed, was very serious, and might possibly be renewed. At the same time, a portion of the British light division was drawn up on the left bank of the Bidassoa so as to flank Clausel’s advance. Soult now gave up the intended attack, and drew Reille’s troops back across the Bidassoa. Those of Clausel were not extricated till late in the night, and after a severe struggle to force the bridge at Vera, the fords having become impassable by a heavy fall of rain on the same day, the allies took San Sebastian, except the citadel, by storm, and this latter post surrendered on Sept. 9.⎯The second battle of the Bidassoa took place Oct. 7, when Wellington forced the passage of that river. Soult’s position was about the same as before; Foy held the intrenched camp of St. Jean de Luz, D’Erlon held Urdax and the camp of Ainhoa, Clausel was posted on a ridge connecting Urdax with the lower Bidassoa, and Reille stood along that river from Clausel’s right down to the sea. The whole front was intrenched, and the French were still employed in strengthening their works. The British right stood opposed to Foy and D’Erlon; the centre,

218

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Engels: Zeichnung einer Karte der Schlacht bei Bidassoa

Bidassoa

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

composed of Giron’s Spaniards and the light division, with Longa’s Spaniards and the 4th division in reserve, in all 20,000 men, faced Clausel; while on the lower Bidassoa Freyre’s Spaniards, the 1st and 5th Anglo-Portuguese divisions, and the unattached brigade of Aylmer and Wilson, in all 24,000 men, were ready to attack Reille. Wellington prepared every thing for a surprise. His troops were drawn up well sheltered from the view of the enemy during the night before Oct. 7, and the tents of his camp were not struck. Beside, he had been informed by smugglers of the locality of 3 fords in the tidal estuary of the Bidassoa, all passable at low water, and unknown to the French, who considered themselves perfectly safe on that side. On the morning of the 7th, while the French reserves were encamped far to the rear, and of the one division placed in 1st line many men were told off to work at the redoubts, the 5th British division and Aylmer’s brigade forded the tidal estuary, and marched toward the intrenched camp called the Sansculottes. As soon as they had passed to the other side, the guns from San Marcial opened, and 5 more columns advanced to ford the river. They had formed on the right bank before the French could offer any resistance; in fact, the surprise completely succeeded; the French battalions, as they arrived singly and irregularly, were defeated, and the whole line, including the key of the position, the hill of Croix des Bouquets, was taken before any reserves could arrive. The camp of Biriatu and Bildox, connecting Reille with Clausel, was turned by Freyre’s taking the Mandale hill, and abandoned. Reille’s troops retreated in disorder until they were stopped at Urogne by Soult, who arrived in haste with the reserves from Espelette. While still there, he was informed of an attack on Urdax; but he was not a moment in doubt about the real point of attack, and marched on the lower Bidassoa, where he arrived too late to restore the battle. The British centre, in the mean time, had attacked Clausel, and gradually forced his positions by both front and flank attacks. Toward evening he was confined to the highest point of the ridge, the Grande Rhune, and that hill he abandoned next day. The loss of the French was about 1,400, that of the allies about 1,600 killed and wounded. The surprise was so well managed that the real defence of the French positions had to be made by 10,000 men only, who, on being vigorously attacked by 33,000 allies, were driven from them before any reserves could come to their support.

221

Karl Marx The Derby Ministry⎯Palmerston’s Sham Resignation

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5272, 15. März 1858.

If Orsini did not kill Louis Napoleon, he certainly killed Palmerston. Made dictator of England by a Chinese Mandarin at Canton, it is historically appropriate that this political gamester should finally be ruined by an Italian Carbonaro at Paris. But that he should be succeeded by Lord Derby is something above the range of mere historical propriety, and approaches the dignity of a historical law. It is in accordance with the traditional working of the British Constitution. Pitt was followed by Fox; Fox by Perceval, a weaker Pitt; Wellington by Grey, a weaker Fox; Grey by Wellington; Wellington by Melbourne, a weaker Grey; Melbourne by Wellington again, under the name of Peel; Peel by Melbourne again, under the name of Russell; Russell by Derby, the substitute of Peel; Derby again by Russell. Why should not Palmerston, the usurper of Russell’s place, be followed by Derby in his turn? If there be in England any new force able to put an end to the ancient routine exemplified by this last change of places between right honorable gentlemen on one side of the House and right honorable gentlemen on the other side; if there be any man or body of men able to confront and supplant the traditional governing class, the world has not yet found it out. But of one thing there can be no doubt; and that is, that a Tory Administration is far more favorable to every kind of progress than any other. For the last fifty years, all popular movements have either been initiated or consummated under Tory rule. It was a Tory Ministry which passed the Catholic Emancipation bill. It was under a Tory Ministry that the Reform movement grew irresistible. The imposition of an Income tax, which, however incongruous in its present state, contains the germs of proportional taxation, is the work of a Tory Ministry. The Anti-CornLaw League, weak and timid under the Whig Administration, assumed revolutionary dimensions under the Tories; and while Russell, in his most audacious flights, never ventured beyond the limit of a fixed duty, as moderate as himself, Peel could not but consign the Corn Laws to the

222

5

10

15

20

25

30

The Derby Ministry⎯Palmerston’s Sham Resignation

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

grave of all the Capulets. So, too, it is the Tories who have, so to say, popularized the aristocracy by bringing plebeian vigor and talent to reenforce its energies. Through the Tories, Canning, the son of an actress, lorded it over the old landed aristocracy of England; so did Peel, the son of a parvenu cotton spinner, who had originally been a hand-loom weaver; so does Disraeli, the son of a simple literary man, and a Jew into the bargain. Lord Derby himself converted the son of a small shopkeeper of Lewes into a Lord High Chancellor of England, under the name of Lord St. Leonards. The Whigs, on the other hand, have always proved strong enough to bury their plebeian tools in vain decorations, or to drop them by dint of haughty insult. Brougham, the soul of the Reform movement, was nullified by being made over to the Lords; and Cobden, the chief of the Anti-Corn-Law League, was offered the place of Vice President of the Board of Trade by the very Whigs he had reinstalled in office. In point of mere intellectual ability, the new Cabinet can easily bear comparison with its predecessor. Men like Disraeli, Stanley, and Ellenborough, suffer no harm when matched against people of the stamp of Mr. Vernon Smith, late of the Board of Control, of Lord Panmure, a War Minister, whom nothing but his “Take care of Dowb,” can ever make immortal, and of Sir G. C. Lewis, of Edinburgh Review dullness, or even against such moral grandeurs as Clanricarde of the Privy Seal. In fact Palmerston had not only replaced the Ministry of all parties by a Ministry of no party, but also the Cabinet of all the talents by a Cabinet of no talent except his own. There can be no question that Palmerston had no idea of the finality of his ruin. He believed Lord Derby would decline the Premiership now as he had done during the Crimean war. Russell would then have been summoned to the Queen; but with the bulk of his own troops serving under Palmerston, and the bulk of the hostile army arrayed under Disraeli, he would have despaired of forming a Cabinet, especially as he, a Whig, could not resort to the “ultimate reason” of dissolving a Parliament elected under the Whig banners. Palmerston’s return to office, after a week’s oscillation, would thus have become inevitable. This fine bit of calculation has been nullified by Derby’s acceptance. The Tory Ministry may hold office for a longer or shorter period. They may go on for several months before they are compelled to resort to a dissolution⎯a measure they are very sure to employ before they finally resign their power. But we may be certain of two things, namely: that their career will be marked by the introduction of exceedingly liberal measures in regard to social reforms (Lord Stanley’s course thus far, and Sir John Pakington’s education bill, are a pledge of this); and above all, that in

223

Karl Marx

foreign policy they bring with them a most beneficial and cheering change. It is true, many shallow thinkers and writers argue that Palmerston’s fall is not a damaging blow to Louis Napoleon, because several of the new Tory Ministry are personally on good terms with the French despot, and England [is] in no condition to wage war with a giant Continental power. But it is precisely because England is in no state to embark in a new war that we deem the answer given by Great Britain to the bullying menaces and exactions of Louis Napoleon’s satraps most significant. It was not because Malmesbury and Disraeli were to come into the Ministry that the independent Liberals in Parliament, reflecting the undoubted and emphatic sentiment of the Nation, answered the dispatch of Walewski by throwing out Palmerston’s Conspiracy bill. Lord Derby may stumble and fall, but the vote which carried Milner Gibson’s amendment will live and bear fruit, nevertheless. We do not believe in any cordial and lasting alliance between British Toryism and French Bonapartism. The instincts, traditions, aspirations of both parties revolt at it. We do not believe it possible that the new Cabinet will take up and press Palmerston’s Conspiracy bill, as the Paris journals so confidently anticipate. If they do, it will not be till after they shall have answered Walewski and De Morny, and answered them in the spirit of Pitt and Castlereagh. Toryism, with all its faults, must have changed its nature to be ready to change the laws of England at the beck of a Bonaparte. But the significance of the late vote is unaffected by any presumption of speedy feud between the two Governments. It is as a proclamation to Europe that Britain has ceased to play second to French Imperialism that we deem it most important. Thus it is understood at Brussels, at Turin, and even at Vienna; thus it will soon be understood at Berlin, at Madrid, at St. Petersburg. England, so long the jailer of the first Napoleon, has pointedly refused to be longer the jackal of his successor.

224

5

10

15

20

25

30

Friedrich Engels Burmah

The New American Cyclopaedia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

126 BURMAH, or THE KINGDOM OF AVA, an extensive state in the S. E. of Asia, beyond the Ganges, formerly much larger than at present. Its former limits were between lat. 9° and 27° N., ranging upward of 1,000 miles in length, and over 600 in breadth. At present the Burmese territory reaches from lat. 19° 25′ to 28° 15′ N., and from long. 93° 2′ to 100° 40′ E.; comprising a space measuring 540 miles in length from N. to S., and 420 miles in breadth, and having an area of about 200,000 sq. m. It is bounded on the W. by the province of Aracan, surrendered to the British by the Burmese treaty of 1826, and by the petty states of Tiperah, Munnipoor, and Assam, from which countries it is separated by high mountain ridges; on the S. lies the newly acquired British province of Pegu, on the N. upper Assam and Thibet, and on the E. China. The population, according to Capt. Henry Yule, does not exceed 3,000,000.⎯Since the cession of Pegu to the British, Burmah has neither alluvial plains nor a seaboard, its southern frontier being at least 200 miles from the mouths of the Irrawaddy, and the country rising gradually from this frontier to the north. For about 300 miles it is elevated, and beyond that it is rugged and mountainous. This territory is watered by three great streams, the Irrawaddy, its tributary the Khyendwem, and the Salwin. These rivers have their sources in the northern chain of mountains, and run in a southerly course to the Indian ocean.⎯Though Burmah has been robbed of its most fertile territory, that which remains is far from unproductive. The forests abound in valuable timber, among which teak, used for ship building, holds a prominent place. Almost every description of timber known in India is found also in Burmah. Stick lac of excellent quality, and varnish used in the manufacture of lacquered ware, are produced. Ava, the capital, is supplied with superior teak from a forest at 15 days’ distance. Agriculture and horticulture are everywhere in a remarkably backward state; and were it not for the wealth of the soil and the congeniality of the climate, the state would

225

Friedrich Engels

be very poor. Fruits are not cultivated at all, and the crops are managed with little skill. Of garden vegetables, the onion and the capsicum are the most generally cultivated. Yams and sweet potatoes are also found, together with inconsiderable quantities of melons, cucumbers, and eggplants. The young shoots of bamboo, wild asparagus, and the succulent roots of various aquatic plants, supply to the inhabitants the place of cultivated garden fruits. Mangoes, pineapples, oranges, custard-apples, the jack (a species of breadfruit), the papaw, fig, and the plantain (that greatest enemy of civilization), are the chief fruits, and all these grow with little or no care. The chief crops are rice (which is in some parts used as a circulating medium), maize, millet, wheat, various pulses, palms, sugar-cane, tobacco, cotton of short staple, and indigo. Sugar-cane is not generally cultivated, and the art of making sugar is scarcely known, although the plant has been long known to the people. A cheap, coarse sugar is obtained from the juice of the Palmyra palm, of which numerous groves are found, especially south of the capital. Indigo is so badly managed as to be entirely unfit for exportation. Rice in the south, and maize and millet in the north, are the standard crops. Sesamum is universally raised for cattle. On the northern hills the genuine tea-plant of China is cultivated to considerable extent; but, singularly, the natives, instead of steeping it, as they do the Chinese tea, eat the leaf prepared with oil and garlic. Cotton is raised chiefly in the dry lands of the upper provinces.⎯The dense forests of Burmah abound in wild animals, among which the chief are the elephant, the one-horned rhinoceros, the tiger and leopard, the wild hog, and several species of deer. Of birds, the wild cock is common; and there are also varieties of pheasants, partridges, and quails. The domestic animals are the ox, the horse, and the buffalo. The elephant also is used as a draught animal. The camel is not known. A few goats and sheep are found, but the breed is little cared for. Asses are also little used. Dogs are neglected in the Burmese economy, but cats are numerous. Horses are used exclusively for riding, and are rarely more than thirteen hands high. The ox is the beast of draught and burden in the north; the buffalo in the south.⎯Of minerals, gold, carried down in the sands of the mountains, is found in the beds of the various streams. Silver mines are wrought at Bor-twang, on the Chinese frontier. The amount of gold and silver obtained annually has been estimated to approach $1,000,000. Iron is abundant in the eastern portion of Laos, but is so rudely wrought that from 30 to 40 per cent. of the metal is lost in the process of forging. The petroleum pits on the banks of the Irrawaddy produce 8,000,000 pounds per annum. Copper, tin, lead, and antimony are known to exist in the Laos country, but it is doubtful if any of these

226

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Burmah

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

metals are obtained in considerable quantities, owing to the ignorance of the people of the methods of working ores. The mountains near the city of Ava furnish a superior quality of limestone; fine statuary marble is found 40 miles from the capital, on the banks of the Irrawaddy; amber exists so plentifully that it sells in Ava at the low price of $1 per pound; and nitre, natron, salt, and coal are extensively diffused over the entire country, though the latter is little used. The 127 petroleum, which is produced in such abundance, is used by all classes in Burmah for burning in lamps, and as a protection against insects. It is dipped up in buckets from narrow wells sunk to a depth of from 210 to 300 feet; it bubbles up at the bottom like a living spring of water. Turpentine is found in various portions of the country, and is extensively exported to China. The oriental sapphire, ruby, topaz, and amethyst, beside varieties of the chrysoberyl and spinelle, are found in 2 districts in the beds of rivulets. All, over $50 in value, are claimed by the crown, and sent to the treasury; and no strangers are allowed to search for the stones.⎯From what has been said, it is evident that the Burmese have made but little advance in the practice of the useful arts. Women carry on the whole process of the cotton manufacture, using a rude loom, and displaying comparatively little ingenuity or skill. Porcelain is imported from China; British cottons are imported, and even in the interior undersell the native products; though the Burmese melt iron, steel is brought from Bengal; silks are manufactured at several places, but from raw Chinese silk; and while a very great variety of goods is imported, the exports are comparatively insignificant, those to China, with which the Burmese carry on their most extensive commerce, consisting of raw cotton, ornamental feathers, chiefly of the blue jay, edible swallows’ nests, ivory, rhinoceros and deer’s horns, and some minor species of precious stones. In return for this, the Burmese import wrought copper, orpiment, quicksilver, vermilion, iron pans, brass wire, tin, lead, alum, silver, gold and gold leaf, earthenware, paints, carpets, rhubarb, tea, honey, raw silk, velvets, Chinese spirits, musk, verdigris, dried fruits, paper, fans, umbrellas, shoes, and wearing apparel. Gold and silver ornaments of a very rude description are made in various parts of the country; weapons, scissors, and carpenters’ tools are manufactured at Ava; idols are sculptured in considerable quantities about 40 miles from Ava, where is found a hill of pure white marble. The currency is in a wretched condition. Lead, silver, and gold, all uncoined, form the circulating medium. A large portion of the commerce is carried on by way of barter, in consequence of the difficulties attending the making of small payments. The precious metals must be weighed and assayed at every change of hands, for which bankers charge about

227

Friedrich Engels

31/2 per cent. Interest ranges from 25 to 60 per cent. per annum. Petroleum is the most universal article of consumption. For it are exchanged saltpetre, lime, paper, lacquer ware, cotton and silk fabrics, iron and brass ware, sugar, tamarinds, &c. The yonnet-ni (the standard silver of the country) has generally an alloy of copper of 10 or 15 per cent. Below 85 /100 the mixture does not pass current, that degree of fineness being required in the money paid for taxes.⎯The revenues of the empire proceed from a house tax, which is levied on the village, the village authorities afterward assessing householders according to their respective ability to pay. This tax varies greatly, as from 6 tikals per householder in Prome to 27 tikals in Tongho. Those subject to military duty, the farmers of the royal domain, and artificers employed on the public works, are exempt. The soil is taxed according to crops. The tobacco tax is paid in money; other crops pay 5 per cent. in kind. The farmers of the royal lands pay over one-half their crops. Fishing ports on lake and river are let either for a stated term or for a proportion of dried fish from the catch. These various revenues are collected by and for the use of the officers of the crown, each of whom receives, according to his importance, a district greater or less, from the proceeds of which he lives. The royal revenue is raised from the sale of monopolies of the crown, among which cotton is the chief. In the management of this monopoly, the inhabitants are forced to deliver certain articles at certain low prices to the crown officers, who sell them at an enormous advance. Thus, lead is delivered by the producers at the rate of 5 tikals per bis, or 360 lbs., and his majesty sells it at the rate of 20 tikals. The royal revenues amount, so it is stated, to about 1,820,000 tikals, or £227,500 per annum, to which must be added a further sum of £44,250, the produce of certain tolls levied in particular districts. These moneys keep the royal household. This system of taxation, though despotic, is singularly simple in its details; and a further exemplification of simplicity in government, is the manner in which the army is made to maintain itself, or, at least, to be supported by the people. The modes of enlistment are various; in some districts the volunteer system being adhered to, while in others, every 16 families are forced to furnish 2 men armed and equipped. They are further obliged to furnish to these recruits, monthly, 56 lbs. of rice and 5 rupees. In the province of Padoung every soldier is quartered upon 2 families, who receive 5 acres of tax-free land, and have to furnish the man of war with half the crops, and 25 rupees per annum, beside wood and other minor necessities. The captain of 50 men receives 10 tikals (the tikal is worth $11/4, or 21/2 rupees) each from 6 families, and half the crop of a 7th. The bo, or centurion, is maintained by the labor of 52 families, and the bo-gyi, or

228

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Burmah

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

colonel, raises his salary from his own officers and men. The Burman soldier fights well under favoring circumstances, but the chief excellence of a Burman army corps lies in the absence of the impedimenta; the soldier carries his bed (a hammock) at one end of his musket, his kettle at the other, and his provisions (rice) in a cloth about his waist.⎯In physical conformation, the Burmese appear to be of the same race which inhabits the countries between Hindostan and China, having more of the Mongolian than of the Hindoo type. They are short, stout, well proportioned, fleshy, but active; with large cheek-bones, eyes obliquely placed, brown but never very dark 128 complexion, coarse, lank, black hair, abundant, and more beard than their neighbors, the Siamese. Major Allen, in a memoir to the East India government, gives them credit for frankness, a strong sense of the ridiculous, considerable readiness of resource, little patriotism, but much love of home and family; comparatively little prejudice against strangers, and a readiness to acquire the knowledge of new arts, if not attended with too much mental exertion. They are sharp traders, and have a good deal of a certain kind of enterprise; are temperate, but have small powers of endurance; have more cunning than courage; though not blood-thirsty by nature, have borne phlegmatically the cruelties of their various kings; and without being naturally liars and cheats, are yet great braggarts and treacherous.⎯The Burmese are Buddhists by faith, and have kept the ceremonies of their religion freer from intermixture with other religions than elsewhere in India and China. The Burmese Buddhists avoid, to some extent, the picture worship practised in China, and their monks are more than usually faithful to their vows of poverty and celibacy. Toward the close of the last century, the Burman state religion was divided by 2 sects, or offshoots from the ancient faith. The first of these entertained a belief similar in some respects to pantheism, believing that the godhead is diffused over and through all the world and its creatures, but that it appears in its highest stages of development in the Buddhists themselves. The other rejects entirely the doctrine of the metempsychosis, and the picture worship and cloister system of the Buddhists; considers death as the portal to an everlasting happiness or misery, according to the conduct of the deceased, and worships one supreme and all-creating spirit (Nat). The present king, who is a zealous devotee to his faith, has already publicly burned 14 of these heretics, both parties of whom are alike outlawed. They are, nevertheless, according to Capt. Yule, very numerous, but worship in secret.⎯The early history of Burmah is but little known. The empire attained its acme of power in the 11th century, when the capital was in Pegu. About the beginning of the 16th century the state was split into several minor and

229

Friedrich Engels

independent governments, which made war upon each other; and in 1554, when the king Tshen-byoo Myayen took Ava, he had subdued to himself all the valley of the Irrawaddy, and had even subjected Siam. After various changes, Alompra, the founder of the present dynasty (who died in 1760), once more raised the empire to something like its former extent and power. Since then the British have taken from it its most fertile and valuable provinces.⎯The government of Burmah is a pure despotism, the king, one of whose titles is lord of life and death, dispensing imprisonment, fines, torture, or death, at his supreme will. The details of the government are carried out by the hlwot-dau, or council of state, whose presiding officer is the pre-nominated heir-apparent to the throne, or if there is no heir named, then a prince of the blood royal. In ordinary times the council is composed of 4 ministers, who have, however, no distinct departments, but act wherever chance directs. They form also a high court of appeal, before whom suits are brought for final adjudication; and in their individual capacity, they have power to give judgment on cases which are not brought up to the collective council. As they retain 10 per cent. of the property in suit for the costs of the judgment, they derive very handsome incomes from this source. From this and other peculiarities of the Burmese government, it is easily seen that justice is rarely dealt out to the people. Every office-holder is at the same time a plunderer; the judges are venal, the police powerless, robbers and thieves abound, life and property are insecure, and every inducement to progress is wanting. Near the capital the power of the king is fearful and oppressive. It decreases with distance, so that in the more distant provinces the people pay but little heed to the behests of the lord of the white elephant, elect their own governors, who are ratified by the king, and pay but slight tribute to the government. Indeed, the provinces bordering on China display the curious spectacle of a people living contentedly under two governments, the Chinese and Burmese taking a like part in the ratification of the rulers of these localities, but, wisely, generally settling on the same men. Notwithstanding various British embassies have visited Burmah, and although missionary operations have been carried on there more successfully than elsewhere in Asia, the interior of Burmah is yet a complete terra incognita, on which modern geographers and map-makers have ventured some wild guesses, but concerning which they know very little in detail.⎯(See “Narrative of the Mission sent by the GovernorGeneral of India, to the Court of Ava, 1855,” by Capt. Henry Yule. London, 1858.)

230

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Friedrich Engels Brescia

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

668 BRESCIA, a province of Lombardy, bounded N. by Bergamo and Tyrol, W. by Verona and Mantua, S. by Cremona, E. by Lodi and Bergamo. Area, 1,300 sq. m.; pop. 350,000. The fertility of the soil is favorable to the choicest productions, and one of the most important branches of industry is the trade in silk, of which 1,000,000 pounds are annually produced; the number of silk manufactories is 27, and of silk weaving establishments 1,046. About 70,000 lbs. of very superior wool are raised annually, and there are not less than 45 woollen manufactories, 40 manufactories of woollen and cotton goods, 13 of cloth, 27 of gold, silver, and bronze, 12 of hardware and porcelain, 7 printing establishments, 137 manufactories of iron and other metals (Brescia steel enjoying a worldwide reputation), and 77 of fire-arms and weapons, the excellency of which gave to Brescia, in former times, the name of l’Armata. Butter, cheese, wheat, maize, hay, flax, chestnuts, oil, and wine, afford additional elements of prosperity. The trade of the province is principally carried on in the capital of the same name.⎯The town (anc. Brixia) has a population of 40,000, and is situated on the rivers Mella and Garza, at the foot of a hill. The strong castle on the top of the hill was in former times called the falcon of Lombardy. It is a well-built, pleasant, and animated town, noted for its abundant supply of fountains, of which there are not less than 72 in the streets and squares, beside some 100 in private houses. The ancient cathedral, and the other churches, contain many paintings of the great Italian masters. The new cathedral, or Duomo Nuovo, was begun in 1604, but the vaulting of the cupola was only completed in 1825. The chief ornament of the church of Santa Afra is “The Woman taken in Adultery,” by Titian. There are, on the whole, over 20 churches, all noted for their treasures of art. Among the remarkable public buildings, is the Palazzo della Loggia in the Piazza Vecchia, intended for the town hall, the beautiful fac¸ade of which suffered much from the bombardment in April, 1849. The Palazzo Tosi was presented to the town by Count Tosi,

231

Friedrich Engels

and contains, among many famous pictures, the celebrated “Saviour,” by Raphael. The picture galleries in the Palazzo Averoldi, Fenaroli, Lecchi, Martinengo, and in other palaces, are equally noted for their artistic attractions. A whole street, Il Corso del Teatro, has the fronts of the 2d stories decorated with scriptural, mythological, and historical paintings. The Biblioteca Quiriniana, founded in the middle of the 18th century by Cardinal Quirini, contains upward of 80,000 volumes, beside a vast collection of curious manuscripts and objects of antiquity. The most unique monument of Brescia is the cemetery (Campo Santo), the finest in Italy, built in 1810, consisting of a semi-circular area in front, surrounded by tombs, and a row of cypresses. Brescia is the seat of the provincial government, of a bishopric, of a tribunal of commerce, and of other courts of law. There are various charitable institutions, a theological seminary, 2 gymnasiums, a lyceum, a botanical garden, a cabinet of antiquities and one of natural history, an agricultural society, several academies, the philharmonic being one of the oldest in Italy, a casino, a fine theatre, and a large booth outside of the town for the annual fair⎯a period of great activity and rejoicing. The weekly journal of Brescia is called Giornale della provincia Bresciana. A Roman temple of marble was excavated in the vicinity in 1822. Brescia is connected by railway with Verona, and other Italian cities. The town is supposed to have been founded by the Etruscans. After the fall of the Roman empire it was pillaged by the Goths, and eventually passed into the hands of the Franks. Otho the Great raised it to the rank of a free imperial city, but the contests between the Guelphs and the Ghibellines became a source of trouble to the town. Having been for some time under the sway of the lords of Verona, it fell in 1378 into the power of the Milanese. In 1426 it was taken by Carmagnola; in 1438 besieged by Picinino; in 1509 it surrendered to the French; in 1512 it was captured by the Venetian general Gritti, but eventually liberated by Gaston de Foix. Subjected to 3 more sieges during the 16th century, it remained in the possession of Venice until the fall of that republic. During the Napoleonic era it was the capital of the department of Mella. In the revolution of 1849, the Brescians rose in arms against the power of Austria, to which they had been subjected since 1814. The town was bombarded, March 30, by General Haynau, and held out until the noon of April 2, when it was compelled to surrender, and to pay a ransom of $1,200,000, in order to avert utter destruction.

232

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Karl Marx Portents of the Day

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5285, 30. März 1858.

Portents of the Day. From an Occasional Correspondent. Paris, March 11, 1858. 5

10

15

20

25

At Chalons-sur-Saone, on the night of Saturday, March 6, there was a Republican outbreak on a small scale; on Wednesday night, March 10, there was a seditious gathering in this city; since the 24th of February, the tenth anniversary of the Revolution of February, wholesale arrests have been carried on in such an Algerian razzia style that, as The London Punch says, there will soon be left but two classes in France, prisoners and jailers; there has appeared a semi-official pamphlet, “Napoleon III. and England,” and at the same time the Moniteur published extracts from the correspondence of Napoleon I.; and, lastly, half Paris has been on its legs to make sure of places to witness Orsini’s execution, which has not yet taken place. Commencing with the concluding article in this Imperial bill of fare, it ought to be remarked that by a concurrence of circumstances, not generally known, the question of Orsini’s “launching into eternity,” as the cynical Cockney phrase runs, has assumed proportions more fatal than even the execution of the Buzanc¸ais rioters in Louis Philippe’s time. In the latter case, a storm of popular indignation was roused because that bloody act, although judicial and in accordance with all the formalities of French law, laid bare the most disgusting features of Louis Philippe’s hypocritical reign. The Duke of Praslin had poison administered to him, in order to spare him the ignominy of a felon’s death, while these e´meutiers of famine, half-starved peasants who had committed manslaughter in an affray caused by the export of grain, were mercilessly surrendered to the executioner. Orsini, on his part, has manfully avowed his participation in the attempt, and taken all the responsibility upon himself. He has been condemned according to law, and whatever

233

Karl Marx

sympathy the mass of the Paris population may feel for him, there can be nothing in his doom, considered in itself, particularly damaging to the second Empire. Yet the whole face of the affair is completely changed by the circumstances accompanying it. Throughout the whole of the judicial proceedings, the curiosity of Paris was stirred by their exceptional management, unheard of in the annals of French political trials. In the act of accusation, mild and moderate expressions were used. The facts elicited by the Juge d’Instruction were only vaguely alluded to, while the long and repeated interrogatories of the police authorities, which used to play a principal part in that sort of trials, were altogether dropped. The less you say of them the better, seemed the prevailing notion. For the first time, a prisoner was decently treated in an Imperial court of justice. There was, as an eye-witness says, “little or no bullying, browbeating or attempt at declamation.” Jules Favre, Orsini’s advocate, was not even called to order when he ventured to give vent to this sentence: “I hate force when not devoted to the service of right. If a nation existed miserable enough to be in the hands of a despot, the poniard would not sever its chains. God, who counts them, knows the hours of the despot’s weakness, and reserves to tyrants catastrophes more inevitable than dagger of the assassin.” Neither did the low murmur which approved this passage afford occasion for a legal ebullition on the part of Mr. Delangle, the President. This was not all. It oozed out that the letter written to the Emperor by Orsini was carried to the Tuileries by Jules Favre himself, examined by the Emperor, who is said to have struck out two phrases of it, and allowed to be published. Hardly, however, had sentence been passed on Orsini, when the extremest severity was shown to him, and, on his asking permission to “set his papers in order,” he was answered by the immediate application of the camisole de force. It thus becomes evident that an infernal double game was here played. Orsini had revelations to make, and had made them to Pietri, relating to Napoleon’s participation in Carbonarism, and the positive pledges which, even after the coup d’e´tat, when still undecided in the course to follow, he had given to the Italian patriots. In order to give Orsini an interest in his own moderation, and thus prevent a great public scandal, promises of pardon were held out to him which were never meant to be kept. This manner of proceeding is no novelty in the annals of the second Empire. The reader will perhaps recollect the trial of Berryer, the son of the celebrated French advocate and legitimist. The question then at issue was frauds committed in regard to a joint-stock company enterprise⎯the Docks Napole´oniens. Well, Berryer, the father, had his hands full of documents proving Prince Napoleon and Princess Mathilde to have been the

234

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Portents of the Day

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

gainers largely by the same swindling tricks that had dragged his son to the criminal’s bench. If Berryer, the greatest artist in the French way of oratory⎯a way altogether dependent on the action, the tone, the eye, and the gesticulation of the performer, which turn words, that appear dull when glanced at in print, into speaking flames, into electric strokes when heard⎯if he had produced these documents and commented upon them, the Imperial throne would have tottered. Accordingly he was induced to abstain from so doing, by the interference of those nearest about the Emperor, who offered him his son’s certain acquittal as the price of his silence. He yielded; his son was condemned, and father and son were duped. The same maneuver has been repeated, and with the same success, in Orsini’s case. But this is not all. He was not only induced to spare Bonaparte a fearful scandal, but to break his silence and commit himself in Bonaparte’s interest. He received intimations of the Emperor’s secret leanings for Italian liberty, and was thus instigated to write his letter. Then the scene with Jules Favre was enacted. Orsini’s letter was inserted in the Moniteur. Austria was to be frightened into compliance with Bonaparte’s demands by showing her, unmistakably, how Bonaparte might still wield the patriotic aspirations of the Italians. She was even offended. Orsini’s head is to soothe her anger, and in payment for it she is to make herself still more detested in Italy, and to stifle the feeble germs of the liberty of the press at Vienna. Such, whether true or false, is the general interpretation put on the case of Orsini. As to the Chalons e´meute, it is but a premonitory symptom. If even all manhood was extinct in France, from a mere sense of self-preservation, men would resort to insurrection. To die in a street fight, or to rot at Cayenne, is the alternative left to them. The pretexts on which the imprisonments are carried on⎯and every arrest may lead to Cayenne, as every road leads to Rome⎯may be exemplified by one single instance. It is known that some time ago three Paris lawyers were arrested. The bar, or rather the council of the advocates, took up the business, and applied to the Minister of Justice; the answer was, that no explanations could be given, but that these three gentlemen were taken up for “intrigues and maneuvers” during the late Paris elections, ten months back. If the Chalons e´meute appears, therefore, fully due in the natural course of things, the behavior, on that occasion, of the officers of the garrison hardly tallies with the frantic addresses which the French army was ordered to send to the Moniteur. The barracks are situated on the right bank of the Saone, while the officers mostly live in lodgings on the left bank, where the rising took place. Instead of rushing to the head of their men in defense of the Empire, they cautiously adopted some diplomatic move-

235

Karl Marx

ments in order to ascertain whether or not the Republic was proclaimed at Paris. Even the Moniteur dares not altogether suppress the fact. It says: “The officers of the garrison, who had hastened to the sub-prefecture to obtain some information relative to the rumors already in circulation, forced their passage sword in hand.” The Patrie tries to turn the awkward incident that way, saying that those curious officers wanted “to arrest the sub-prefect, in case he should side with the Republic;” but the fact is that they ran to the sub-prefect to ask him if it was true that the Republic was proclaimed at Paris. It was only on his denial that they thought fit to exhibit their professional zeal. Castellane has already started from Lyons to investigate their behavior. In one word, the army shows symptoms of disaffection. The manner in which it was paraded in the Moniteur, and made the laughing-stock of Europe, then to be simply thrown overboard out of deference to John Bull; Bonaparte’s breaking it up into five armies, for fear of abdicating its supreme command into Pelissier’s hands, who has now become cold toward his master; the disdainful letters in which Changarnier and Bedeau have declined the permission to return to France; the raising of L’Espinasse, generally detested in the barracks since the Dobrodja affair, to a post of exceptional trust; and lastly, that dark presentiment of an impending turn in the tide which has always distinguished the “intelligent bayonets” of France; all this has contributed to estrange the calculating chiefs of the army. Beside the Chalons affair, there is Gen. M’Mahon’s conduct in the French Senate to bear witness to this strange and rather unexpected change. His remarks on the loi des suspects were most outspoken, and his was the one adverse vote among Bonaparte’s embroidered liverymen.

236

5

10

15

20

25

Friedrich Engels Bomarsund

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

5

10

15

451 BOMARSUND, a narrow channel between the island of Aland and Vardo, at the entrance of the gulf of Bothnia. The Russian fortifications to the harbor of Bomarsund were destroyed by the British and French fleets during the war of 1854. The channels leading up to Bomarsund were blockaded at the end of July by 4 British ships and a few small steamers. Shortly afterward strong detachments of the allied fleets arrived, with the admirals Napier and Parseval-Descheˆnes, followed, Aug. 7, by the line-of-battle ships with Gen. Baraguay d’Hilliers and 12,000 troops, mostly French. The Russian commander, Gen. Bodisco, was compelled to surrender on Aug. 16, the allies continuing to occupy the island until the end of the month, when the whole of the fortification was blown up. The trophies of the victors were 112 mounted guns, 79 not mounted, 3 mortars, 7 field guns, and 2,235 prisoners. The principal military interest offered by this siege is its setting completely at rest the question as to the employment of uncovered masonry in fortifications with land-fronts.

237

Karl Marx Bonaparte’s Present Position

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5287, 1. April 1858.

Bonaparte’s Present Position. From an Occasional Correspondent. Paris, March 18, 1858. “Risorgero nemico ognor piu crudo, Cenere anco sepolto e spirto ignudo.” (I shall revive from the dead a still more cruel foe, though but buried ash and a naked spirit.) These two lines of Tasso’s Jerusalem, which Orsini, after Favre’s speech, with a strange smile, whispered to his defender, are already beginning to be fulfilled. The attitude of the crowd witnessing the death of the Italian patriot is thus described by an eye-witness: “Such had been the alarm of the Government that an entire division was had out, under the personal command of a general officer, who assisted at the execution. Fifteen thousand soldiers were ready to act on the slightest signal, and every issue and outlet was guarded as in times of insurrection. In my estimation, between 90,000 and 100,000 men of the faubourgs, workmen in blouses, were assembled in the spaces and in the streets near the Place de la Roquette; but they were so grouped by the way in which the troops were stationed, that they could see little or nothing. When the dead, dull sound of the falling of the knife upon Orsini was heard, it was responded to by an immense but smothered reply of ‘Vive la Re´publique.’ I cannot properly describe this; it was like a gigantic mutter; it was not a cry or a shout, but it sounded like the breath or the sigh of thousands of human beings. It was well appreciated by the authorities, for, on the instant, the soldiers raised the most disorderly clatter imaginable, struck their horses, so as to make them plunge and kick, shook their arms, and contrived that the popular whisper should be stifled without being literally put down. But the words ‘Vive la Re´publique’ must have been clearly audible to every one. I purposely went home

238

5

10

15

20

25

Bonaparte’s Present Position

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

on foot, threading my way slowly through the groups wherever I found them thickest. I am bound to admit that everywhere I heard expressions of sympathy and admiration for Orsini, whose crime seems utterly forgotten, while only the effect produced by his courage and generosity toward his associates remains. Pieri’s name I did not hear once. The attitude of the populace was, I should say, extremely menacing, for it had the marks of a hate and a thirst for vengeance seated too deep for words. All the remarks I heard were made in an undertone, as though a police spy were dreaded at every instant.” It seems, then, that the measures of “general safety” intended to weed out the Republican element, the wholesale imprisonments and transportation, prove no more successful than the cite´s ouvrie`res, the newly-established workshops, and other attempts to purchase the conscience of the French working classes. The circumstances dwelt upon on a former occasion, which accompanied Orsini’s trial, have now become the general topic of Paris conversation. It has even oozed out that when the voluminous correspondence of Orsini and Pieri came to be examined, letters written by Louis Napoleon, and signed by himself, dated many years ago, came to light. If the French Constitutionnel was still in the agreeable position it held in Mr. Guizot’s time, we should, day after day, be treated with the solemn phrase, “L’horizon politique s’obscurcit.” And so it does, indeed. Great was the consternation at the Tuileries on ascertaining the conduct of the officers of the garrison at Chaˆlons, and excessive the anger at the naı¨vete´ of the Moniteur informing France and Europe that, instead of on the instant laughing at the whole affair, ordering out their men, or declaring that, even were the Republic proclaimed in Paris, they would fight against it for the Empire, the officers at Chaˆlons first ran to the sub-prefect and declined to risk their skins and their commissions for the Emperor, before having made sure whether or not the Republic was proclaimed. The fact proves that the mass of the army cannot be relied upon. Save its heads, which are too deeply compromised or have received too brilliant rewards to separate their destinies from that of the Empire, there is perhaps but one single portion of it altogether trustworthy, namely, the Guards. This corps is indeed very strong, and must be aware that, under any other government, it would be merged into the line, or altogether disbanded. Its infantry force consists of four regiments of grenadiers, two regiments of voltigeurs, one regiment of gens d’armes, one regiment of Zouaves and one battalion of chasseurs⎯altogether seventeen battalions of infantry. It musters, besides, two regiments of cuirassiers, two regiments of dragoons, one regiment of mounted grenadiers, one regiment of hussars, and one regiment of chasseurs, or twenty-one

239

Karl Marx

squadrons of cavalry; its artillery, too, being rather strong. Its whole numerical force amounts to about 20,000 men, with 40 to 50 cannons, a nucleus sufficiently powerful to counteract the tendencies to vacillation which might prevail in the line in the case of a serious struggle with the Paris people. Moreover, everything is provided for a sudden concentration of the troops from the provinces, as the most superficial glance at a railway map of France will prove, so that a movement which should not take the Government by surprise is sure to find arrayed against it the formidable force of from 60,000 to 80,000 men. But the very measures Bonaparte has taken to suppress an armed revolt, make it quite improbable that it should occur except on some great unforeseen occasion, when the decidedly anti-Bonapartist attitude of the bourgeoisie, the secret societies undermining the lower strata of the army, the petty jealousies, venal treacheries and Orleanist or Legitimist leanings dividing its superior layers, are likely to turn the scale in favor of the revolutionary masses. The worst thing that could happen to the latter would be a successful attempt on Bonaparte’s life. In that case the answer given by Morny, at the beginning of the Russian war, to Bonaparte’s question, what they intended doing on his sudden death: “Nous commencerions de jeter tous les Jeroˆmes par la feneˆtre, et puis nous taˆcherions de nous arranger tant bien que mal avec les Orle´ans,” íWe shall begin by throwing all the Jeromes out of the window, and then we shall arrange matters as well as we can with the Orleans family,î would perhaps turn out a prophecy. Before the men of the faubourgs could have decided upon the course to take, Morny might execute his palace-revolution, proclaim the Orleans, and thus draw over the middle classes to the anti-revolutionary camp. Meanwhile Bonaparte’s disappointments in the field of foreign policy vastly contribute to urge him on in his system of domestic terrorism. Every check he sustains from without, by betraying the weakness of his position, and giving new life to the aspirations of his antagonists, is necessarily followed up by new displays of what is called “governmental vigor.” And these foreign miscarriages have rapidly accumulated during the last weeks. There was first the great failure with regard to England. Then even Switzerland, although she had made very cowardly concessions, took courage to demur at the further steps urged upon her in the most unceremonious manner. It was formally declared to the Confederation that, if necessary, regiments of French infantry would enter and perform those police duties which the police of Switzerland could not do for themselves. At this point even Mr. Kern found it necessary to demand his passports, and the French Government to draw off. Belgium, having altered its law at Bonaparte’s dictation, declined to comply with

240

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Bonaparte’s Present Position

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

the demand for Gen. Changarnier’s expulsion. The Commission of the Piedmontese Chamber charged with the duty of examining the bill to assimilate the Sardinian institutions to the Ide´es Napole´oniennes, by a majority of five against two, proposed the pure and simple rejection of the Bonapartist project. Austria, fully aware that Orsini’s execution has bound over to her, hand and foot, the hero of Strasbourg, and that he can no longer alarm her through Italy, shows him the cold shoulder. To expose itself to ridicule is the surest way for a French Government to annihilate itself. Bonaparte is conscious of the grotesque luster which his last baffled attempts at playing the dictator of Europe have shed upon him. The more contemptible his European position grows, the more keenly he feels the necessity of appearing formidable to France. Consequently, the reign of terror is progressively extending. Gen. Espinasse, at the head of the Ministry of the Interior, is now backed by Mr. Boitelle, a former colonel in the hussars, at the head of the Prefecture of Police. The system adopted by these military myrmidons of the second Empire is thus described in The Continental Review: “They have taken the old lists of individuals who, after the troubles of 1848 and 1851, were designated by the police as dangerous, and they have arrested these persons en masse, both in Paris and in the departments. All this was done without the slightest inquiry being made as to whether or not these persons had since that period given ground of complaint, and the most cruel effects have ensued. Thus, honest citizens, who, being carried away in 1848 by the whirlwind which agitated the whole nation, professed advanced ideas, but who have since abandoned politics, and many of whom are now fathers of families and industrious tradesmen, were carried off by the police from the midst of their affairs and from their families. These are known facts which show how little ground there was for the arrests, and with what an absence of even the semblance of legality or necessity these measures of terrorism were carried out. Among the persons whom the agents of the police attempted to arrest, there were some individuals who had been no less than six years out of France, and who consequently could not have committed any offense, but who, if they had been in France at the present moment, would inevitably have been thrown into prison on pretense of ‘public safety.’ Nay, more, the police went to the houses of several persons who had been dead for some years, for the purpose of arresting them. Their names figured on the lists of persons formerly arrested (and many of these simply because they were among the crowd in the streets, and that was their only crime). It is therefore clear that it is not against the guilty that the police war, but against the suspected; and the manner in which

241

Karl Marx

the law is executed is of itself a justification of the title conferred upon it by public opinion. In the departments matters proceed pretty much as in Paris. The lists of the suspected were drawn up by the administrative authorities, and woe to those who, in the elections of June last, ventured to oppose the candidates supported by the Prefect, and who, looking on the Constitution, the electoral law and the circulars of the Minister of the Interior as serious realities, have believed that they might take measures for the election of the candidates of their choice. These latter are considered as the worst of culprits, and they must be either very rich, very influential, or very well protected by their friends, to escape the vengeance of those officials whose paths they had crossed. Among the persons arrested in the provinces appears the name of Gen. Courtais, who, after having played a part in 1848 as Commander-in-Chief of the National Guard of Paris, lived for the last nine years in the greatest retirement in a country house in the department of the Allier, removed from society, and altogether a stranger to politics or public affairs.” What with this system of “general safety,” what with the pangs of a commercial crisis that has become chronic, the French middle classes will soon be worked up to the point where they will consider a revolution necessary for the “restoration of confidence.”

242

5

10

15

20

Karl Marx Pelissier’s Mission to England

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5299, 15. April 1858.

Pelissier’s Mission to England. From an Occasional Correspondent. Paris, March 27, 1858. 5

10

15

20

25

Of all governmental positions, the most trying is that of a civilian at the head of a despotic military State. In the Orient, the difficulty is more or less met by transforming the despot into a god, theocratic attributes not allowing the ruler to be reduced to a measure common to himself and to his swordsmen. In Imperial Rome, the deification of the Emperors, while not affording the same defense, grew out of the same necessity. Now, Louis Bonaparte is a civilian, although he was the editor of a history of cannon, but he cannot adopt the Roman expedient. Hence the accumulating perplexities of his position. At the same rate that France grows impatient of the yoke of the army, the army waxes bolder in its purpose of yoking Bonaparte. After the 10th of December, Bonaparte could flatter himself that he was the elect of the peasantry, that is, the mass of the French nation. Since the attempt of the 14th January, he knows that he is at the mercy of the army. Having been compelled to avow that he rules through the army, it is quite natural that the latter should seek to rule through him. The parceling out of France into five pashalics, therefore, but preceded the installation of Espinasse as Minister of the Interior. The latter step was followed by making over the police of Paris to M. Boitelle, who was a non-commissioned officer in 1830, serving with M. de Persigny in the same regiment at La Fe`re and trying, when the revolution of July broke out, to make his comrades cry “Vive Napoleon II.” The glorification of Boitelle is backed by the nomination of Pelissier Duc de Malakoff, as his Imperial Majesty’s representative at the Court of St. James’s. This appointment means flattery to the army and menace to England. It is true

243

Karl Marx

that the Moniteur pretends to turn it into a compliment to John Bull, but Veuillot of the Univers, who is known to have his petites and grandes entre´es at the Tuileries, foreshadowed the event in a fierce article containing this significant phrase: “The pride of England is wounded. The wound is an old one. The wound was inflicted in the Crimea at the Alma, at Inkermann, at the Malakoff, everywhere where the French were the first at the field and penetrated the deepest into the enemy’s ranks. St. Arnaud, Bosquet, Canrobert, Pelissier, McMahon⎯these are the men who wounded the pride of England.” In one word, Napoleon III. has sent his Menchikoff to London, of whom, by-the-by, he is rather glad to get rid for a time, since Pelissier has taken up the attitude of a frondeur from the moment his appointment as Commander-in-Chief of the five pashalics was rescinded. The Paris Bourse, on the news becoming known, went down at once. Pelissier has more than one grudge to avenge upon England. In 1841, before his electors at Tiverton, Palmerston publicly branded him as a monster, and gave the signal to his general abuse by the London Press. After the Crimean campaign, General De Lacy Evans, in the House of Commons, more than hinted at Pelissier as the principal cause of the disgrace that had befallen the English army before Sevastopol. He was also roughly handled by the British Press, expatiating upon the intimations of Gen. Evans. Lastly, at a banquet given to the Crimean Generals, Pelissier simply appropriated the whole Crimean glory, such as it is, to the eagles of France, not even condescending to recollect John Bull’s cooperation. Again, the London Press, by way of reprisal, dissected Pelissier. Moreover, his temper is known to unfit him altogether for the part of that mythological Greek personage who alone was able to heal the wounds it had inflicted. Still we cannot share the opinion of those London papers which, working themselves up to a Roman state of mind, warn the Consuls to take care “ne res publica detrimenti capiat.” Pelissier means intimidation, but he does not mean war. This appointment is a mere coup de the´aˆtre. The broad ditch that separates perfide Albion from la belle France, is her Lacus Curtius, but Bonaparte is not the romantic youth to close the yawning chasm by plunging himself into the gulf, and disappearing. Of all men in Europe, he knows best that his frail tenure of power hinges upon the alliance with England; but this is a truth fatal to the revenger of Waterloo, and which he must do his best to conceal from his armed myrmidons by pulling hard on John Bull, and clothing the very alliance in the garbs of a vassalage, imposed by France, and accepted by England.

244

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Pelissier’s Mission to England

5

10

15

20

Such is his game, a most dangerous one, likely to hasten the issue it aims to put off. If Pelissier fails in his bullying mission, as he is sure to do, the last card has been played, the theatrical performances must make room for real ones, or Bonaparte will stand before his army a confessed impostor, hiding behind his Napoleonic airs the sorry figure of the London constable of the 10th of April, 1848. In point of fact, it was but the alliance with England which enabled the nephew for a time to mimic the uncle. The close connection of England and France, while giving the death-blow to the Holy Alliance and putting at nought the balance of European power, naturally invested Bonaparte, the Continental representative of that alliance, with the appearance of the arbiter of Europe. So long as the Russian war and the internal state of France allowed him to do so, he was but too glad to content himself with this symbolical rather than real supremacy. All this has changed since peace reigns in Europe and the army reigns in France. He is now called upon by the army to show that, like a real Napoleon, he holds the dictature of Europe, not in trust for England, but in spite of England. Hence his perplexities. On the one hand he bullies John Bull, on the other hand he insinuates to him that he means no harm. He rather implores him to look frightened, out of courtesy, at the mock-menaces of his “august ally.” This is the very way of stiffening John Bull, who feels that he risks nothing in giving himself heroical airs.

245

Karl Marx Mazzini and Napoleon

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5321, 11. Mai 1858.

Mazzini and Napoleon. M. Mazzini has recently addressed a letter to the French Emperor, which, in a literary point of view, must hold, perhaps, the first place among his productions. There are but few traces left of that false sublimity, puffy grandeur, verbosity and prophetic mysticism so characteristic of many of his writings, and almost forming the distinctive features of that school of Italian literature of which he is the founder. An enlargement of views is also perceptible. He has, till now, figured as the chief of the Republican formalists of Europe. Exclusively bent on the political forms of the State, they have had no eye for the organization of society on which the political superstructure rests. Boasting of a false idealism, they have considered it beneath their dignity to become acquainted with economical realities. Nothing is easier than to be an idealist on behalf of other people. A surfeited man may easily sneer at the materialism of hungry people asking for vulgar bread instead of sublime ideas. The Triumvirs of the Roman Republic of 1849, leaving the peasants of the Campagna in a state of slavery more exasperating than that of their ancestors of the times of imperial Rome, were quite welcome to descant on the degraded state of the rural mind. All real progress in the writing of modern history has been effected by descending from the political surface into the depths of social life. Dureau de Lamalle, in tracing the different phases of the development of landed property in ancient Rome, has afforded a key to the destinies of that world-conquering city, beside which Montesquieu’s considerations on its greatness and decline appear almost like a schoolboy’s declamation. The venerable Lelewel, by his laborious research into the economical circumstances which transformed the Polish peasant from a free man into a serf, has done more to shed light on the subjugation of his country than the whole host of writers whose stock in trade is simple denuncia-

246

5

10

15

20

25

Mazzini and Napoleon

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

tion of Russia. M. Mazzini, too, does not now disdain to dwell on social realities, the interests of the different classes, the exports and imports, the prices of necessaries, house-rent, and other such vulgar things, being struck, perhaps, by the great if not fatal shock given to the second Empire, not by the manifestoes of Democratic Committees, but by the commercial convulsion which started from New-York to encompass the world. It is only to be hoped that he will not stop at this point, but, unbiased by a false pride, will proceed to reform his whole political catechism by the light of economical science. His letter commences with this vigorous apostrophe to Louis Napoleon: “The fullness of time approaches; the Imperial tide is visibly rolling back. You do feel it. All the measures you have been enacting, since the 14th of January, in France⎯all the diplomatic notes and requests you have been, since the fatal day, scattering to the four winds abroad, are bespeaking the restlessness of terror. There is a Macbeth feeling of intense agony preying upon your soul, and betraying itself through all that you say or do. There is at work within a presentiment that summa dies et ineluctabile fatum are impending. The ‘Thane of Glamis, Thane of Cawdor, and King’⎯the Pretender, President and Usurper⎯are doomed. The spell is broken. The conscience of mankind is aroused; it gazes sternly on you; it confronts you; it sifts your acts, and calls to account your promises. From this moment, your fate is sealed. You may now live months; years you cannot.” Having thus announced the doom of the second Empire, Mazzini contrasts the present economical state of France with Napoleon’s glowing promises of general prosperity: “You promised, when you unlawfully conquered power, and as an atonement for its origin, that you would rule restless, perturbed, perturbing France to peace. Is imprisoning, gagging, transporting, ruling? Is the gendarme a teacher? Is the spy an apostle of morality and mutual trust? You told the French uneducated peasant that a new era was, with your empire, dawning for him, and that the burdens under which he groans would all, one by one, disappear. Has any disappeared? Can you point out a single amelioration to his fate⎯a single element of taxation removed? Can you explain how it is that the peasant is now enlisting in the Marianne? Can you deny that the absorption of the funds, once naturally devoted to the agricultural element, into the channels of industrial speculation opened by you, has deprived the laborer of the possibility of finding advances for the purchase of working implements and the improvement of the land? You allured the misguided working man by declaring that you would be the Empereur du peuple, a sort of remodeled Hen-

247

Karl Marx

ry IV., and procure to him perennial work, high wages, and la poule au pot. Is not la poule au pot somewhat dear just now in France? Is not house-rent, are not some of the first necessaries of life, still dearer? You have opened new streets⎯drawn for your strategic, repressive purposes new lines of communication⎯destroyed and rebuilt. But do the bulk of the working classes belong to the benefited building branch? Can you overturn Paris and the main provincial towns, indefinitely, for the sake of creating for the prole´taire a source of work and earnings? Can you ever dream of making of such a factitious, temporary remedy a substitute for regular normal progress, and requited production? Is the demand for production now in a satisfactory state? Are not three-fifths of the cabinet-makers, of the carpenters, of the mechanicians, out of employment now in Paris? You whispered to the easily frightened, easily fascinated bourgeoisie fantastic dreams, hopes of a redoubled industrial activity, new sources of profits, El Dorados of stimulated exportation, and international intercourse. Where are they? Stagnation hovers over your French productive life; orders to commerce are diminishing; capital is beginning to retreat. You have, like the barbarian, cut the tree to pluck the fruit. You have artificially over-stimulated wild, immoral, all-promising and never fulfilling speculation; you have, by self-puffing, gigantic, swollen schemes, attracted the savings of the small capitalists from the four corners of France to Paris, and diverted them from the only true permanent sources of national wealth, agriculture, trade and industry. These savings have been engulfed and disappeared in the hands of some dozens of leading speculators; they have been squandered in boundless unproductive luxuries; or they are quietly and prudently⎯I might quote members of your family⎯transferred to safe foreign countries. The half of these schemes have sunk into oblivious nonentity. Some of their inventors are traveling, as a precautionary measure, in foreign countries. You find yourself before a dissatisfied bourgeoisie, with all normal resources dried up, with the incubus of some five hundred millions of francs spent, throughout the principal towns of France, in unproductive public works, with a deficit of three hundred millions visible in your last budget, with an extensively indebted city of Paris, with no remedy to propose except a new loan of one hundred and sixty millions to be opened⎯not in your name, it would not succeed⎯but in the name of the City Council itself, and to meet the burden of interest, a widening of the barriers, therefore, of the hated octroi, to the extent of the outward fortifications. The remedy will weigh heavy on the working class, and embitter against you the hitherto devoted suburbs. Your artificial contrivances are at an end; henceforth, everything you do to meet the financial

248

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Mazzini and Napoleon

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

difficulty of your position, will mark a step in the fatal descent. You have hitherto lived on an indefinite series of loans and credit; but where is your guaranty for prolonged credit? Rome and Napoleon were ransakking a world; you have only France to ransack. Their armies lived on conquest; yours cannot. You may dream of conquest; you cannot, do not dare to venture on it. The Roman dictators and your uncle were leading the conquering armies; however fond of gilt parade uniforms, I doubt your being able to lead a few combined battalions.” From the material prospect of the second Empire, Mazzini turns to the moral, and, of course, is somewhat perplexed in summing up the evidence for the proposition that liberty wears no Bonapartist livery. Liberty, not only in its bodily forms, but in its very soul, its intellectual life, has shriveled at the coarse touch of these resurrectionists of a bygone epoch. Consequently, the representatives of intellectual France, by no means distinguished by too nice a delicacy of political conscience, never failing to gather around every regime, from the Regent to Robespierre⎯from Louis XIV. to Louis Philippe⎯from the first Empire to the second Republic⎯have, for the first time in French history, seceded in mass from an established government. “From Thiers to Guizot, from Cousin to Villemain, from Michelet to Jean Reynaud, intellectual France shrinks from your polluting contact. Your men are Veuillot, the upholder of the St. Bartholomew and of the Inquisition, Granier de Cassagnac, the patron of negro slavery, and such like. To find a man worth indorsing your pamphlet addressed to England, you have to look for one who is an apostate from Legitimism, and an apostate from Republicanism.” Mazzini then hits on the true meaning of the affair of the 14th of January by stating that the missiles which missed the Emperor pierced the Empire, and laid bare the hollowness of its boasts: “You boasted to Europe, only a short while ago, that the heart of France was yours, hailing you as her savior, calm, happy, undisturbed. A few months have elapsed, a crash has been heard in the rue Lepelletier, and through your wild, alarmed, repressive measures⎯through your half-threatening, half-imploring appeals to Europe⎯through your military division of the country, with a saber in the Ministry of the Interior, you declare now, after seven years of unlimited sway⎯with an overwhelming concentrated army⎯with the national ranks cleared of all the dreaded leading men⎯that you cannot live and rule unless France is converted into a huge Bastile, and Europe into a mere Imperial police-office. ... Yes; the Empire has proved a lie. You shaped it, Sir, to your own image. No man, during the last half century, has lied in Europe, Talley-

249

Karl Marx

rand excepted, so much as you have; and that is the secret of your temporary power.” The falsehoods of the savior of society are then recapitulated from 1831, when he joined the insurrectionary movement of the Roman population against the Pope as “a sacred cause;” to 1851, a few days before the coup d’e´tat, when he said to the army, “I shall ask nothing from you beyond my right, recognized by the Constitution;” to the 2d of December itself, the final result of the usurping schemes still pending, when he proclaimed that “his duty was to protect the Republic.” Finally, he tells Napoleon roundly that but for England he would have been already conquered by the Revolution. Then, having disposed of Napoleon’s claim to have inaugurated the alliance between France and England, he concludes with the words: “You stand now, Sir, whatever self-mouthed, self-disguising diplomacy may say, alone in Europe.”

250

5

10

Karl Marx The French Trials in London

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5309, 27. April 1858.

The French Trials in London. From An Occasional Correspondent. Paris, April 4, 1858. 5

10

15

20

25

When Victor Hugo marked the nephew as Napoleon the Little, he acknowledged the uncle as Napoleon the Great. The title of his celebrated pamphlet meant an antithesis, and, to some degree, did homage to that very Napoleon-worship on which the son of Hortense Beauharnais contrived to raise the bloody fabric of his fortune. What is more useful to impress on the present generation is that Napoleon the Little represents in fact the littleness of Napoleon the Great. The plainest illustration of this fact is afforded by the recent “painful misconceptions” between England and France, and the criminal proceedings against refugees and printers which they have led to on the part of the English Government. A short historical review will prove that during the whole of this miserable melo-drama Napoleon the Little has only ree¨nacted with anxious minuteness the shabby part invented and played before by Napoleon the Great. It was only during the short interval separating the peace of Amiens (March 25, 1802) from the new declaration of war on the part of Great Britain (May 18, 1803) that Napoleon could indulge his desire for interference with the internal state of Great Britain. He lost no time. Even while the peace negotiations were still pending, the Moniteur emitted his venom on all the London papers venturing to question “the moderation and sincerity of Bonaparte’s views,” and gave no very unintelligible hint that “such disbelief might ere long be followed with chastisement.” Nor did the Consul confine himself to a censorship over the language and sentiments of the British press. The Moniteur abused Lord Granville and Mr. Windham for the part they took in the discussions on peace. Mr. Elliot, a Member of Parliament, was called to account in the House of

251

Karl Marx

Commons by Perceval, the Attorney-General, for expressing his doubts as to Bonaparte’s intentions. Lord Castlereagh and Pitt himself pitched the key of submission, by inculcating, what had never been done on any former occasions, forbearance of language in debate as respecting the Consul of France. About six weeks had passed from the conclusion of the peace, when Talleyrand, on June 3, 1802, informed Mr. Merry, the British Plenipotentiary at Paris, that Bonaparte, out of consideration for England, had resolved to replace Mr. Otto, the French Plenipotentiary at London, by a real Embassador in the person of Gen. Andre´ossy; but that before the arrival of that exalted personage at London, it was the First Consul’s sincere wish “to see such obstacles removed which stood very much in the way of the perfect reconciliation between the two countries and their Governments.” What he demanded, was simply the removal out of the British dominions of “all the French princes and their adherents, together with the French bishops and other French individuals whose political principles and conduct must necessarily occasion great jealousy of the French Government. * * * * The protection and favor which all the persons in question continued to meet with, in a country so close a neighbor to France, must alone be always considered as an encouragement to the disaffected here, even without those persons themselves being guilty of any acts leading to foment fresh disturbances in this country; but that the Government here possessed proofs of the abuse which they were now making of the protection which they enjoyed in England, and of the advantage they were taking of their vicinity to France, by being really guilty of such acts, since several printed papers had lately been intercepted, which it was known they had sent, and caused to be circulated in France, and which had for their object to create an opposition to the Government.” There existed at that time an alien law in England, which, however, was framed strictly with a view to the protection of the British Government. In answer to Talleyrand’s demand, Lord Hawkesbury, the then Foreign Minister, replied that “His Majesty the King certainly expected that all foreigners who might reside within his dominions, should not only hold a conduct conformable to the laws of the country, but abstain from all acts hostile to the Government of any country with which his Majesty might be at peace. As long, however, as they conduct themselves according to these principles, his Majesty would feel it inconsistent with his dignity, with his honor, and with the common laws of hospitality, to deprive them of that protection which individuals resident in his dominions can only forfeit by their own misconduct. The greater part of the persons to whom allusion has been made in Mr. Talleyrand’s conversation, are living in retirement.” In delivering

252

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The French Trials in London

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Lord Hawkesbury’s dispatch to Talleyrand, Mr. Merry was by no means sparing of assurances calculated to “soothe, tranquilize and satisfy the First Consul.” Talleyrand, however, insisted upon his pound of flesh, stating that the First Consul had solicited no more than the British Government itself had demanded of Louis XIV., when the Pretender was in France; that he could not see any humiliation in the measure intimated, and that he must repeat “that the adoption of it would be in the highest degree agreeable and satisfactory to the First Consul,” and be considered by him as “the most convincing proof of his Majesty’s disposition to see a cordial good understanding established between the two countries.” On July 25, 1802, Mr. Otto, from his residence at Portman Square, addressed a letter to Lord Hawkesbury, requesting, in a very categorical way, nothing less than the suppression of the liberty of the English press, as far as Bonaparte and his Government were concerned. “I transmitted,” he says, “some time ago, to Mr. Hammond, a number of Peltier, containing the most gross calumnies against the French Government, and against the whole nation; and I observed, that I should probably receive an order to demand a punishment of such an abuse of the press. That order is actually arrived, and I cannot conceal from you, my Lord, that the reiterated insults of a small number of foreigners, assembled in London to conspire against the French Government, have produced the most unfavorable effects on the good understanding between the two nations. * * * It is not to Peltier alone, but to the editor of the Courrier Franc¸ais de Londres (Reignier), to Cobbett, and to other writers who resemble them, that I have to direct the attention of his Majesty’s Government. * * * The want of positive laws against these sorts of offenses cannot palliate the violation of the laws of nations, according to which peace should put a stop to all species of hostilities; and doubtless those which wound the honor and reputation of a Government, and which tend to create a revolt of the people whose interests are confided to that Government, are the most apt to lessen the advantages of peace and to keep up national resentments.” Instead of meeting these first reproaches of Bonaparte’s interference on the subject of the press with a firm and dignified reply, Lord Hawkesbury, in a letter to M. Otto on July 28, made a paltry apology for the existence of the liberty of the press. He says that it is “impossible his Majesty’s Government could peruse Peltier’s article without the greatest displeasure, and without an anxious desire that a person who published it should suffer the punishment he so justly deserves.“ Then, after lamenting the “inconveniences” of prosecutions for libel, and the “difficulty” of obtaining judgment against the offenders, he concludes by stating that he has referred the matter to the King’s Attorney-General “for his opinion whether it is or is not a libel.”

253

Karl Marx

While the British Government was thus preparing a crusade against the liberty of the press, in order to soothe the susceptibility of its great and new ally, there appeared suddenly, on August 9, a menacing article in the Moniteur, in which England was not only accused of receiving French robbers and assassins, of harboring them at Jersey, and of sending them to make predatory excursions on the coasts of France, but in which the English King himself was represented as a rewarder and instigator of assassination: “The Times, which is said to be under Ministerial inspection, is filled with perpetual invectives against France. Two of its four pages are every day employed in giving currency to the grossest calumnies. All that imagination can depict, that is low, vile and base, is by that miserable paper attributed to the French Government. What is its end? Who pays it? What does it effect? A French journal, edited by some miserable emigrants, the remnant of the most impure, a vile refuse, without country, without honor, sullied with crimes which it is not in the power of any amnesty to wash away, outdoes even The Times.” “Eleven Bishops, presided over by the atrocious Bishop of Arras, rebels to their country and to the Church, have assembled in London. They print libels against the Bishops and the French clergy.” “The Isle of Jersey is full of brigands, condemned to death by the tribunals, committed subsequent to the peace for assassination, robberies, and the practices of an incendiary. Georges wears openly at London his red ribbon, as a recompense for the infernal machine which destroyed a part of Paris, and killed thirty women and children, or peaceable citizens. This special protection authorizes a belief that if he had succeeded, he would have been honored with the Order of the Garter.” “Either the English Government authorizes and tolerates those public and private crimes, in which case it cannot be said that such conduct is consistent with British generosity, civilization and honor; or it cannot prevent them, in which case it does not deserve the name of a Government, above all, if it does not possess the means of repressing assassination and calumny and protecting social order.” When the menacing Moniteur arrived late at night in London, it produced such an irritation that The True Briton, the Ministerial paper, was compelled to declare, “That article could not have been inserted in the Moniteur with the knowledge or consent of the French Government.” In the House of Commons Dr. Laurents called upon Mr. Addington (afterward Lord Sydmouth) as to the French libels on his Majesty. The Minister replied that “he wished he could show to the learned gentleman the satisfactory explanations which had taken place on that head.” It was replied that while the British Government made a public matter of a jest on Bonaparte and his wife, and Mr. Peltier was, for his jokes upon those

254

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The French Trials in London

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

people, to be brought into the Court of King’s Bench and to be arraigned as a criminal; in the other case, when the British nation was libeled and its royal master, in the official gazette of France, styled the rewarder of assassins, the matter was to be settled by an “explanation,” and that explanation so secret, too, as not to admit of being communicated to Parliament. Encouraged by the apparent vacillation of the English Ministry, Otto, on Aug. 17, 1802, came out with a most impudent note to Lord Hawkesbury, in which the demand is formally put to adopt effectual measures for putting down all the unbecoming and seditious publications of the English prints, to send out of Jersey certain individuals, to expel the French bishops, to transport Georges and his adherents to Canada, and to send the French princes to Warsaw. With reference to the alien law M. Otto insists that the Ministry must possess “a legal and sufficient power to restrain foreigners, without having recourse to the courts of law;” and he adds, “The French Government, which offers on this point a perfect reciprocity, thinks it gives a new proof of its pacific intentions, by demanding that those persons should be sent away whose machinations uniformly tend to sow discord between the two nations.” Lord Hawkesbury’s answer, dated Aug. 28, sent in the form of a dispatch to the English Plenipotentiary at Paris, has during the late quarrel with Bonaparte III. been quoted by the London press as a model of statesmanlike dignity; but it must be confessed that in spite of the terms of virtuous indignation in which it is couched, promises are held out of sacrificing the French emigrants to the jealous fears of the First Consul. In the beginning of the year 1803 Napoleon took upon himself to regulate the proceedings of Parliament and to restrain the liberty of speech among its members. With respect to the ex-Ministers, Mr. Windham, Lord Granville, and Lord Minto, he intimated literally in his Moniteur, “It would be a patriotic and wise law which should ordain that displaced Ministers should not, for the first seven years after their dismissal, be competent to sit in the English Parliament. Another law, not less wise, would be that every member who should insult a friendly people and power should be condemned to silence for two years. When the tongue offends, the tongue must suffer punishment.” At the same time Gen. Andre´ossy, who had meanwhile arrived at London, complained in a note to Lord Hawkesbury that the despicable pamphleteers and libelers of the British press “have found themselves invariably supported in their insolent observations by particular phrases, taken from the speeches of some leading Members of Parliament.” Of these speeches it is said that “every reasonable Englishman must be humiliated by such unheard-of licentiousness.” In the name of the First Consul he expresses the wish

255

Karl Marx

“that means should be adopted to prevent in future any mention being made of what is passing in France, either in the official discussions or in the polemical writings in England, as in like manner, in the French official discussions and polemical writings, no mention should be made of what is passing in England.” While Bonaparte in this tone of mingled hypocrisy and arrogance privately addressed the British Government, the Moniteur teemed with insults against the British people, and also published an official report of Col. Sebastiani, containing the most injurious charges against the British army in Egypt. On Feb. 5, 1803, the French Commissaire des Relations Commerciales at Jersey, though acknowledged in no public capacity, had the insolence to prefer a complaint against some printers for inserting paragraphs from the London papers offensive to Bonaparte, and to threaten that if the practice was not punished, Bonaparte would certainly revenge himself upon Jersey. This threat had the desired effect. Two of the printers were brought before the Royal Court, and the positive injunction was laid on them not to publish in future anything offensive to France, even from the London papers. On Feb. 20, 1803, one day before Peltier’s trial, Lord Whitworth, the English Embassador at Paris, was summoned into the presence of the great man himself. Being received in his cabinet, Whitworth was desired to sit down after Bonaparte had sat down himself on the other side of the table. He enumerated the several provocations which he pretended to have received from England. “He adverted to the abuse thrown out about him in the English prints, but this he said he did not so much regard as that which appeared in the French papers published in London. This he considered as much more mischievous, since it was meant to excite his country against him and his Government. He complained of the protection given to Georges and others of his description; he acknowledged that the irritation he felt against England increased daily, because every wind which blew from England brought nothing but enmity and hatred against him. * * * As a proof of his desire to maintain peace, he wished to know what he had to gain by going to war with England. A descent was the only means of offense he had, and that he was determined to attempt, by putting himself at the head of the expedition. He acknowledged that there were one hundred chances to one against him, but still he was determined to attempt it if war should be the consequence of the present discussion; and that such was the disposition of the troops that army after army would be found for the enterprise. * * * To preserve peace the treaty of Amiens must be fulfilled, the abuse in the public prints, if not totally suppressed, at least kept within bounds and confined to the English papers, and the protection so openly given to his bitterest enemies must be withdrawn.”

256

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The French Trials in London

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

On Feb. 21, Peltier was tried before Lord Ellenborough and a special Jury, for libeling Bonaparte and “intending to excite the people of France to assassinate their ruler.” Lord Ellenborough had the meanness to terminate his address to the Jury with the following words: “Gentlemen, I trust your verdict will strengthen the relations by which the interests of this country are connected with those of France, and that it will illustrate and justify in every quarter of the world the conviction that has been long and universally entertained of the unsullied purity of British judicature.” The Jury, without retiring from their box, immediately returned the verdict of Guilty. In consequence of the subsequent rupture between the two countries, Mr. Peltier was, however, not called upon to receive judgment, and the prosecution thus stopped. Having goaded the British Ministry into these persecutions of the press, and wrung from them Peltier’s condemnation, the truthful and heroic Moniteur, March 2, 1803, published the following commentary: “A person of the name of Peltier has been found guilty, before a court of justice at London, of printing and publishing some wretched libels against the First Consul. It is not easy to imagine why the English Ministry should affect to make this a matter of so much e´clat. As it has been said in the English newspapers that the trial was instituted at the demand of the French Government, and that the French Embassador was even in the Court when the Jury gave in their verdict, we have authority to deny that any such things did ever take place. The First Consul was even ignorant of the existence of Peltier’s libels till they came to his knowledge in the public accounts of the proceedings at his trial. * * * Yet it is to be acknowledged that these proceedings, however useless in other respects, have afforded an occasion to the Judges who presided at the trial to evince, by their wisdom and impartiality, that they are truly worthy to administer justice in a nation so enlightened, and estimable in so many respects.” While the Moniteur in the same article insisted that the duty weighed on all “civilized nations in Europe” reciprocally to put down the barbarians of the press, M. Reinhard, the French Plenipotentiary at Hamburg, summoned together the Hamburg Senate, in order to consider a requisition from the First Consul to insert in the Hamburger Correspondenten an article most offensive to the British Government. It was the wish of the Senate at least to be allowed to omit or qualify the most offensive passages; but M. Reinhard said his orders were positive for the full and exact insertion of the whole. The article appeared consequently in its original coarseness. The French Minister desired that the same should be published in the papers at Altona; but the Danish magistrates

257

Karl Marx

said that they could not possibly permit it without an express order from their Government. In consequence of this refusal, M. D’Aguesseau, the French Minister at Copenhagen, received from his colleague at Hamburg a copy of the article, with the request that he would solicit permission for its publication in the Danish papers. When called upon with respect to this libel by Lord Whitworth, M. Talleyrand declared that “the British Ministers could not be more surprised than the First Consul had been at seeing such an article inserted by authority; that an immediate explanation had been required of M. Reinhard, etc.” Such was Napoleon the Great.

258

5

10

Friedrich Engels The Fall of Lucknow

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5312, 30. April 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

The second critical period of the Indian insurrection has been brought to a close. The first found its center in Delhi, and was ended by the storming of that city; the second centered in Lucknow, and that place, too, has now fallen. Unless fresh insurrections break out in places hitherto quiet, the revolt must now gradually subside into its concluding, chronic period, during which the insurgents will finally take the character of dacoits or robbers, and find the inhabitants of the country as much their enemies as the British themselves. The details of the storming of Lucknow are not yet received, but the preliminary operations and the outlines of the final engagements are known. Our readers recollect that after the relief of the residency of Lucknow, Gen. Campbell blew up that post, but left Gen. Outram with about 5,000 men in the Alumbagh, an intrenched position a few miles from the city. He himself, with the remainder of his troops, marched back to Cawnpore, where Gen. Windham had been defeated by a body of rebels; these he completely beat, and drove them across the Jumna at Calpee. He then awaited at Cawnpore the arrival of ree¨nforcements and the heavy guns, arranged his plans of attack, gave orders for the concentration of the various columns destined to advance into Oude, and especially turned Cawnpore into an intrenched camp of strength and proportions requisite for the immediate and principal base of operations against Lucknow. When all this was completed, he had another task to perform before he thought it safe to move⎯a task the attempting of which at once distinguishes him from almost all preceding Indian commanders. He would have no women loitering about the camp. He had had quite enough of the “heroines” at Lucknow, and on the march to Cawnpore; they had considered it quite natural that the movements of the army, as had always been the case in India, should be subordinate to their fancies and their comfort. No sooner had Campbell reached Cawnpore than he sent the whole interesting and troublesome community to

259

Friedrich Engels

Allahabad, out of his way; and immediately sent for the second batch of ladies, then at Agra. Not before they had reached Cawnpore, and not before he had seen them safely off to Allahabad, did he follow his advancing troops toward Lucknow. The arrangements made for this campaign of Oude were on a scale hitherto unprecedented in India. In the greatest expedition ever undertaken by the British there, the invasion of Afghanistan, the troops employed never exceeded 20,000 at a time, and of these the great majority were natives. In this campaign of Oude, the number of Europeans alone exceeded that of all the troops sent into Afghanistan. The main army, led by Sir Colin Campbell personally, consisted of three divisions of infantry, one of cavalry, and one of artillery and engineers. The first division of infantry, under Outram, held the Alumbagh. It consisted of five European and one native regiment. The second (four European and one native regiment) and third (five European and one native regiment), the cavalry division under Sir Hope Grant (three European and four or five native regiments) and the mass of the artillery (forty-eight field-guns, siege trains and engineers), formed Campbell’s active force, with which he advanced on the road from Cawnpore. A brigade concentrated under Brigadier Franks at Juanpore and Azimghur, between the Goomtee and the Ganges, was to advance along the course of the former river to Lucknow. This brigade numbered three European regiments and two batteries, beside native troops, and was to form Campbell’s right wing. Including it, Campbell’s force in all amounted to⎯

Europeans Natives

Infantry.

Cavalry.

15,000 5,000

2,000 3,000

Artillery and Eng’rs. 3,000 2,000

Total.

10

15

20

25

20,000 10,000

or in all 30,000 men; to whom must be added the 10,000 Nepaulese Ghoorkas advancing under Jung Bahadoor from Goruckpore on Sultanpore, making the total of the invading army 40,000 men, almost all regular troops. But this is not all. On the south of Cawnpore, Sir H. Rose was advancing with a strong column from Saugor upon Calpee and the lower Jumna, there to intercept any fugitives that might escape between the two columns of Franks and Campbell. On the north-west, Brigadier Chamberlain crossed toward the end of February the upper Ganges, entering the Rohilcund, situated north-north-west of Oude, and, as was correctly anticipated, the chief point of retreat of the insurgent army. The garrisons of the towns surrounding Oude must also be included in the force directly or indirectly employed against that kingdom, so that the whole of this force is certainly from 70,000 to 80,000 combatants, of which,

260

5

30

35

40

The Fall of Lucknow

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

according to the official statements, at least 28,000 are British. In this is not included the mass of Sir John Lawrence’s force, which occupies at Delhi a sort of flank position, and which consists of 5,500 Europeans at Meerut and Delhi, and some 20,000 or 30,000 natives of the Punjaub. The concentration of this immense force is the result partly of Gen. Campbell’s combinations, but partly also of the suppression of the revolt in various parts of Hindostan, in consequence of which the troops naturally concentrated toward the scene of action. No doubt Campbell would have ventured to act with a smaller force; but while he was waiting for this, fresh resources were thrown, by circumstances, on his hands; and he was not the man to refuse to avail himself of them, even against so contemptible an enemy as he knew he would meet at Lucknow. And it must not be forgotten that, imposing as these numbers look, they still were spread over a space as large as France; and that at the decisive point at Lucknow he could only appear with about 20,000 Europeans, 10,000 Hindoos, and 10,000 Ghoorkas⎯the value of the last, under native command, being at least doubtful. This force, in its European components alone, was certainly more than enough to insure a speedy victory, but still its strength was not out of proportion to its task; and very likely Campbell desired to show the Oudians, for once, a more formidable army of white faces than any people in India had ever seen before, as a sequel to an insurrection which had been based on the small number and wide dispersion of the Europeans over the country. The force in Oude consisted of the remnants of most of the mutinous Bengal regiments and of native levies from the country itself. Of the former, there cannot have been more than 35,000 or 40,000 at the very outside. The sword, desertion and demoralization must have reduced this force, originally 80,000 strong, at least one half; and what was left was disorganized, disheartened, badly appointed, and totally unfit to take the field. The new levies are variously stated at from 100,000 to 150,000 men; but what their numbers may have been is unimportant. Their arms were but in part firearms, of inferior construction; most of them carried arms for close encounter only⎯the kind of fighting they were least likely to meet with. The greater part of this force was at Lucknow, engaging Sir J. Outram’s troops; but two columns were acting in the direction of Allahabad and Juanpore. The concentric movement upon Lucknow began about the middle of February. From the 15th to the 26th the main army and its immense train (60,000 camp followers alone) marched from Cawnpore upon the capital of Oude, meeting with no resistance. The enemy, in the mean time, attacked Outram’s position, without a chance of success, on Feb-

261

Friedrich Engels

ruary 21 and 24. On the 19th Franks advanced upon Sultanpore, defeated both columns of the insurgents in one day, and pursued them as well as the want of cavalry permitted. The two defeated columns having united, he beat them again on the 23d, with the loss of 20 guns and all their camp and baggage. Gen. Hope Grant, commanding the advanced guard of the main army, had also, during its forced march, detached himself from it, and making a point to the left had, on the 23d and 24th, destroyed two forts on the road from Lucknow to Rohilcund. On March 2 the main army was concentrated before the southern side of Lucknow. This side is protected by the canal, which had to be passed by Campbell in his previous attack on the city; behind this canal strong intrenchments had been thrown up. On the 3d, the British occupied the Dilkoosha Park, with the storming of which the first attack also had commenced. On the 4th, Brig. Franks joined the main army, and now formed its right flank, his right supported by the River Goomtee. Meantime, batteries against the enemy’s intrenchments were erected, and two floating bridges were constructed, below the town, across the Goomtee; and as soon as these were ready, Sir J. Outram, with his division of infantry, 1,400 horse, and 30 guns, moved across to take position on the left or north-eastern bank. From here he could enfilade a great part of the enemy’s line along the canal, and many of the intrenched palaces to its rear; he also cut off the enemy’s communications with the whole north-eastern part of Oude. He met with considerable resistance on the 6th and 7th, but drove the enemy before him. On the 8th, he was again attacked, but with no better success. In the mean time, the batteries on the right bank had opened their fire; Outram’s batteries, along the riverbank, took the position of the insurgents in flank and rear; and on the 9th the 2d division, under Sir E. Lugard, stormed the Martiniere, which, as our readers may recollect, is a college and park situated on the north side of the canal, at its junction with the Goomtee, and opposite the Dilkoosha. On the 10th, the Bank-House was breached and stormed, Outram advancing further up the river, and enfilading with his guns every successive position of the insurgents. On the 11th, two Highland regiments (42d and 93d) stormed the Queen’s Palace, and Outram attacked and carried the stone-bridges leading from the left bank of the river into the town. He then passed his troops across and joined in the attack against the next building in front. On March 13, another fortified building, the Imambarrah, was attacked, a sap being resorted to in order to construct the batteries under shelter; and on the following day, the breach being completed, this building was stormed. The enemy, flying to the Kaiserbagh or King’s Palace, was so hotly pursued that the British

262

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Fall of Lucknow

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

entered the place at the heels of the fugitives. A violent struggle ensued, but by 3 o’clock in the afternoon the palace was in the possession of the British. This seems to have brought matters to a crisis; at least, all spirit of resistance seems to have ceased, and Campbell at once took measures for the pursuit and interception of the fugitives. Brigadier Campbell, with one brigade of cavalry and some horse artillery, was sent to pursue them, while Grant took the other brigade round to Seetapore, on the road from Lucknow to Rohilcund, in order to intercept them. While thus the portion of the garrison which took to flight was provided for, the infantry and artillery advanced further into the city, to clear it from those who still held out. From the 15th to the 19th, the fighting must have been mainly in the narrow streets of the town, the line of palaces and parks along the river having been previously carried; but on the 19th, the whole of the town was in Campbell’s possession. About 50,000 insurgents are said to have fled, partly to Rohilcund, partly toward the Doab and Bundelcund. In this latter direction they had a chance of escaping, as Gen. Rose, with his column, was still sixty miles at least from the Jumna, and was said to have 30,000 insurgents in front of him. In the direction of Rohilcund there was also a chance of their being able to concentrate again; Campbell would not be in a position to follow them very fast, while of the whereabouts of Chamberlain we know nothing, and the province is large enough to afford them shelter for a short time. The next feature of the insurrection, therefore, will most likely be the formation of two insurgent armies in Bundelcund and Rohilcund, the latter of which, however, may soon be destroyed by concentric marches of the Lucknow and Delhi armies. The operations of Sir C. Campbell in this campaign, as far as we can now judge, were characterized by his usual prudence and vigor. The dispositions for his concentric march on Lucknow were excellent, and the arrangements for the attack appear to have taken advantage of every circumstance. The conduct of the insurgents, on the other hand, was as contemptible, if not more so, than before. The sight of the redcoats struck them everywhere with panic. Franks’s column defeated twenty times its numbers, with scarcely a man lost; and though the telegrams talk of “stout resistance” and “hard fighting,” as usual, the losses of the British appear, where they are mentioned, so ridiculously small that we fear there was no more heroism needed and no more laurels to be gathered this time at Lucknow than when the British got there before.

263

Karl Marx The Financial State of France

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5312, 30. April 1858.

From an Occasional Correspondent. Paris, April 13, 1858. By mere force of circumstances the restored Empire finds itself more and more compelled to throw up its adventitious graces and show its real features in their native hideousness. The hour of confessions has broken in upon it unexpectedly. It had already dropped every pretense of being a regular Government, or the offspring of the “suffrage universel.” It had proclaimed itself the re´gime of the upstart, the informer and the 12-pounder. It goes now a step further, and avows itself the re´gime of the swindler. The Moniteur of April 11 contains a note stating that certain journals have announced prematurely the fixation of the dividend upon the shares of certain railway companies and other industrial societies, and have attributed to this dividend a lower figure than that which has been since determined by the Councils of Administration. “These are maneuvers against which the industry and the capital of the country must be protected. The editors of the journals referred to have been called before the Procureur Impe´rial, and warned that such facts will for the future be sent before the tribunals, as constituting the offense of publishing false views. The duty of the press is to enlighten the public, and not deceive it.” In other words, it is the duty of the press writers, at the peril of being transported to Cayenne, to bolster up the Cre´dit Mobilier, instead of warning the public of the impending breaking up of that monster imposture, as they have done of late, although in very timid and subdued tones. The Cre´dit Mobilier is to hold its general annual meeting April 29 and declare its dividend for the past year. While its directors shrouded themselves in impenetrable mystery, most disastrous reports were circulated as to the way in which the expected dividend was to be “cooked,” and one paper dared to hint at the fact that on the meeting of one company,

264

5

10

15

20

25

The Financial State of France

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

connected with the Cre´dit Mobilier, held some time before, the manager coolly announced that though he could only declare a dividend of 8 per cent, the company was in a far better position than the year before, when he gave 25. The writer ventured upon expressing his suspicion whether any dividend of this “and other” companies were not paid out of the capital rather than the profits realized. Hence the wrath of the Moniteur. The shares of the Cre´dit Mobilier, quoted from 957 to 960 frs. on Feb. 10, from 820 to 860 frs. on March 10, had fallen to from 715 to 720 frs. on April 10, and even this latter quotation was merely nominal. There was no means of concealing the ugly fact that Austrian and Prussian holders had resolved upon selling no fewer than 6,000 shares, and that the “Maritime ge´ne´rale Compagnie,” one of the fantastic creations of the Pe´reires, was in articulo mortis, from having engaged in speculations anything but “maritime.” It is a fine notion, quite worthy of a political economist of the force of General Espinasse, to imagine that menaces in the Moniteur will enforce credit as well as silence. The warning will act, but quite in the opposite direction, the more so since it emanates from a Government whose financial frauds have become a topic of general conversation. It is known that the budget drawn up by M. Magne, the Minister of Finance, represented a surplus, but, by the indiscretion of some member of the Cour de Re´vision, it oozed out that it showed in fact a deficit of some 100,000,000 francs. When summoned to the “savior of property” for an explanation, M. Magne had the grave impudence to tell his master that knowing his predilections for a “surplus,” he had “cooked up” a budget, as the Ministers of Louis Philippe had done before him. There the matter rested, but the notoriety given to this incident drove the Government into a confession. Having pompously announced in the Moniteur that an augmentation had taken place in the customs receipts for the month of February, it dared not stand by its own statement. The monthly customs returns, published at the end of March, show the import duties in February last to be, even in the official version, but 13,614,251 francs, while they amounted, in the corresponding month of 1857, to 14,160,013 francs; and to be for the months of January and February united only 25,842,256 francs, against 28,044,478 for the same months of 1857. Such is the official meaning of “protecting the industry and the capital of the country against maneuvers,” and of “enlightening the public,” instead of “deceiving it.” The ree¨nactment of the coup d’e´tat on an enlarged scale, the wholesale transportations, the parceling out of France into Prætorian camps, the rumors of war, the complications without and the conspiracies within⎯in one word, the convulsive spasms of the lesser Empire since the

265

Karl Marx

attempt of Jan. 14, have somewhat distracted the general attention from the financial state of France. Otherwise the public would have become aware that during that same epoch the factitious prosperity of the Bonapartist re´gime has already resolved itself into its elementary principles of peculation and jobbery. In proof of this proposition, I will content myself with enumerating such facts as have from time to time found their way into the European press. There is first M. Prost, the chief of the Compagnie ge´ne´rale de Caisses d’Escompte, which not only engaged in all sorts of Bourse speculations, but took upon itself to establish banks of discount all over France. The capital was $6,000,000, in 60,000 shares. It had effected an amalgamation with the Portuguese Cre´dit Mobilier, and was magna pars of the Cre´dit Mobilier of Madrid. All the capital is gone, and the liabilities amount to about $3,000,000. M. Damonieu, of the Compagnie Parisienne des Equipages de grandes Remises, was condemned by the tribunal of police correctionelle for having swindled his shareholders out of $100,000 in cash and shares, having plunged them into debt to the amount of $400,000, and squandered all the capital, amounting to $1,600,000. The manager of another company⎯the Ligne´enne⎯professing to make paper from wood, has also been condemned for embezzling the capital of $800,000. Two other Bonapartist “saviors of property” were convicted for having entered into an arrangement with some bankers to palm off on the public, for $10,000,000 or $15,000,000, some forests and mines far off on the banks of the Danube, which they had purchased for $200,000. In another case, it appeared that the managers of a mining company near Aix-la-Chapelle had sold to their shareholders for $500,000 mines which they were afterward obliged to admit were worth only $200,000. In consequence of these and other similar revelations, the shares of the Messageries Ge´ne´rales, once quoted at 1,510 francs, fell to about 500 francs. The shares of the Compagnie des Petites Voitures, shortly after their issue maneuvered up to 210 francs, have sunk to 40 francs. The shares of the Union Company have dwindled down from 500 to 65 francs. The shares in the Franco-American Navigation Company, once at 750 francs, may now be had at 30 francs. The Amalgamated Gas Company shares have receded from 1,120 francs to 620 francs. The shareholders of the Caisse des Actionnaires have been told by M. Millaud, their director, one of the mushroom millionaires of the lesser Empire, that “the operations of the last half-year have produced no profits at all, so that it would not be possible to declare a dividend, nor even to pay the ordinary half-year’s interest, but that he would pay this interest out of his own pocket.”

266

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Financial State of France

5

10

15

20

25

Thus the social ulcers of the lesser Empire are breaking up. The ridiculous conferences of Louis Bonaparte with the principal stock-jobbers as to the remedies to be applied to French commerce and industry have, of course, resulted in nothing. The Bank of France finds itself in a bad plight, since it is unable to sell the bonds of the railway companies, on the security of which it has been obliged to provide them with the money for carrying out their works. Nobody wants to buy these bonds at a moment when all railway property is rapidly depreciating in France, and the weekly railway returns exhibit a continuous falling off in receipts. “With respect to the state of French trade,” remarks the Paris correspondent of The London Economist, “it remains what it was; that is to say manifesting a tendency to improve, but not improving.” Meanwhile, Bonaparte clings to his old way of sinking capital in unproductive works, but which, as Mr. Hausmann, the Prefect of the Seine, has the frankness to impart to the Paris people, are important in “a strategical point of view,” and calculated to guard against “unforeseen events which may always arise to put society in danger.” Thus Paris is condemned to erect new boulevards and streets, the cost of which is estimated at 180,000,000 francs, in order to protect it from its own ebullitions. The opening of the continuation of the boulevard of Sevastopol was quite in keeping with this “strategical point of view.” Originally intended to be a purely civil and municipal ceremony, it was all of a sudden converted into a military demonstration, it being pretended that a fresh plot for the assassination of Bonaparte had been discovered. To explain away this quid pro quo the Moniteur says: “It was quite right that a muster of troops should mark the inauguration of such an artery of the capital, and, after the Emperor, our soldiers were the first who ought to have trodden a soil bearing the name of so glorious a victory.”

267

Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels Beresford

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 3. New York 1858.

161 BERESFORD, WILLIAM CARR, viscount, British general, born in Ireland, Oct. 2, 1768, died in Kent, Jan. 8, 1854. The illegitimate son of George, 1st marquis of Waterford, he entered the army at the age of 16, and served in Nova Scotia until 1790. During this period, he lost one of his eyes from an accidental shot by a brother officer. He served at Toulon, Corsica, the West Indies (under Abercromby), the East Indies, and Egypt, under Baird. On his return, in 1800, he was made colonel by brevet. He subsequently was employed in Ireland, at the conquest of the Cape of Good Hope, and (as brigadier-general) against Buenos Ayres, in 1806, where he was compelled to surrender, but finally escaped. In 1807 he commanded the forces which captured Madeira, and was 162 made governor of that island. In 1808 he became major-general, and, having arrived in Portugal with the English forces, was intrusted with the whole organization of the Portuguese army, including the militia. He was one of the commissioners for adjusting the terms of the celebrated convention of Cintra; was present during the retreat on, and battle of Corunna, where he covered the embarkation of Sir John Moore’s troops; and, in March, 1809, was appointed marshal and generalissimo of the Portuguese army, soon raised by him into an excellent force, whether of attack or defence. He fought all through the Peninsular war, until its close in 1814, vigorously supporting Wellington. On the only considerable occasion, however, when he held the chief command, at the battle of Albuera, in 1811, he displayed very poor generalship, and the day would have been lost but for the act of a subaltern in disobedience of his orders. He took part in the victories of Salamanca, Vittoria, Bayonne, Orthes, and Toulouse. For these services he was created a field-marshal of Portugal, duke of Elvas, and marquis of Santo Campo. In 1810 he was chosen member of parliament for the county of Waterford (he never took his seat), and, in 1814, was created Baron Beresford of Albuera and Dungannon; in 1823 he was advanced to the dignity of viscount. In 1814 he went on a diplo-

268

5

10

15

20

25

30

Beresford

5

10

matic mission to Brazil, where, in 1817, he repressed a conspiracy. On his return, he successively became lieutenant-general of the ordnance, general of the army, and (from 1828 to 1830) master-general of the ordnance. Having assisted Don Miguel, in 1826, he was deprived of his baton as field-marshal of Portugal. In politics, he was actively, though silently, a decided tory. His military efficiency chiefly consisted in his successful reorganization of the Portuguese troops, whom, by great skill and unwearied exertions, he finally rendered sufficiently firm and well disciplined to cope even with the French. In 1832 he married his cousin, Louisa, daughter of the archbishop of Tuam, and widow of Thomas Hope, the millionaire banker, and author of “Anastasius.” He left no children, and the title became extinct at his death.

269

Karl Marx Mr. Disraeli’s Budget

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5318, 7. Mai 1858.

Mr. Disraeli’s Budget. Correspondence of The N. Y. Tribune. London, April 20, 1858. Mr. Disraeli’s speech on the Budget in the Commons, on April 19, fills about ten columns of The London Times, but, at all events, it is pleasant to read, perhaps rather more so than the “Young Duke” of the same author. As to lucidity of analysis, simplicity of composition, skillful arrangement and easy handling of details, it stands in happy contrast with the cumbersome and circumlocutory lucubrations of his Palmerstonian predecessor. Neither does it contain or pretend to any striking novelty. Mr. Disraeli found himself in the happy position of a Minister of Finance who had to deal with a deficit not of his own making, but bequeathed by a rival. His part was that of the doctor, not of the patient. On the one hand, then, he had to meet a deficit; on the other, all serious restriction of expenditure was put out of the question by the ventures England had embarked in under the auspices of Lord Palmerston. Mr. Disraeli roundly told the House that, if they wanted a policy of invasion and aggression, they must pay for it, and that their loud cry for economy was a mere mockery, blended, as it was, with an unscrupulous readiness for expenditure. According to his statement, the charges devolving upon the financial year 1858–59 would be: Charge on the funded debt Permanent charge on the consolidated fund Army estimates Charge for the navy, including packet service Civil service

270

£28,400,000 1,900,000 11,750,000 9,860,000 7,000,000

5

10

15

20

25

Mr. Disraeli’s Budget

Revenue department Exchequer bonds to be liquidated in May, ’58 War sinking fund Total charge 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

4,700,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 £67,110,000

The revenue of the year 1858–59 was estimated as follows: Customs Excise Stamp duty Land & assessed taxes Post-Office Property and income tax Crown lands Miscellaneous Total revenue

£23,400,000 18,000,000 7,550,000 3,200,000 3,200,000 6,100,000 270,000 1,300,000 £63,999,000

A comparison between the estimated expenditure and the estimated income shows, despite the rather sanguine views taken by Mr. Disraeli of the eventual produce of the customs, the excise and the post-office, a clear deficit of £4,000,000. How was it to be met? The Palmerstonians had chuckled at the mere idea that Mr. Disraeli would be forced to suspend the decline in the next year of the income tax from 7d. to 5d. in the pound, a proposition which, when made by Sir Cornewall Lewis, he and Mr. Gladstone had distinguished themselves by opposing. Then the cry of factious opposition would have been raised, and the unpopularity of the tax turned to good account. In one word, the income tax was the rock which it was confidently predicted the Derby state ship must split upon. Mr. Disraeli, however, was too old a fox to be ensnared in such a trap. He told the House, on the contrary, that John Bull, during the last five years, had “behaved” like a good boy in financial matters; had borne the public burdens with great spirit, and should, therefore, under his present distressed circumstances, not be grieved by a tax he had always felt a peculiar aversion to, especially since, by the arrangement of the year 1853, resolved upon by an immense majority of the House, the good boy had been promised the progressive diminution of the tax, and its final extinction at the end of a certain number of years. Mr. Disraeli’s own prescriptions for meeting the deficit, and securing even a small margin of surplus income, amount to this: Postpone the liquidation of two millions of Exchequer bonds to a later period; do not pay the £1,300,000 for the war sinking fund until there is a bona fide surplus to be sunk in it; equalize the English and Irish duties on spirits, by raising the latter from 6s. 10d. to 8s. per gallon, which equalization would give an increase of

271

Karl Marx

£500,000 to the Exchequer; and, lastly, put a penny stamp on bankers’ checks, which would produce to the revenue a surplus of £300,000. Now as to the trifling new taxes imposed by Mr. Disraeli, no serious objection can be raised against them. Though the representatives of Paddy felt it, of course, their duty to protest, any check put upon the spirit consumption in Ireland must be considered a curative measure. In proposing it, the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not withstand the temptation of poking some fun at his Irish friends. “In the most cordial spirit” he asked “the high-spirited Irishmen” to concur in the proposition for taxing “Irish spirit,” and mingle their “spirits“ with those of Englishmen and Scotchmen, &c. The penny stamp on bankers’ checks was fiercely attacked by Mr. Glyn, the representative of the London banking and stock-jobbing interest. That unfortunate penny, he felt sure, would prevent the monetary circulation of the country from performing its duties; but, whatever terror Mr. Glyn might feel or feign to feel at the audacity of imposing a trifling duty on bankers and stock-jobbers, his feelings are not likely to find an echo among the mass of the British people. The serious feature of Mr. Disraeli’s budget is the stopping of the operation of the artificial sinking fund, that great financial sham reintroduced by Sir Cornewall Lewis, on occasion of the debts contracted during the Russian war. The genuine British sinking fund is one of those monster delusions which obscure the mental faculties of a whole generation, and the gist of which the following one is hardly able to understand. It was first in the year 1771, that Dr. Richard Price, in his observations on reversionary payments, revealed to the world the mysteries of compound interest and the sinking fund. “Money,” he said, “bearing compound interest, increases at first slowly; but, the rate of increase being continually accelerated, it becomes in some time so rapid as to mock all the powers of imagination. One penny, put out at our Savior’s birth at five per cent. interest, would, before this time, have increased to a greater sum than would be contained in 150 millions of earths, all solid gold. But, if put out at simple interest, it would in the same time have amounted to no more than 7s. 41/2 d. Our Government has hitherto chosen to improve money in the last rather than the first of these ways. A State need never be under any difficulties; for, with the smallest savings, it may, in as little time as its interest can require, pay off the largest debts. On this plan, it is of little importance what interest the State is obliged to give for money; for the higher the interest the sooner will such a fund pay off the principal.” Consequently he proposed “an annual saving, to be applied invariably, together with the interest of all the sums redeemed by

272

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Mr. Disraeli’s Budget

5

10

15

20

25

it, to the purpose of discharging the public debt; or, in other words, the establishment of a sinking fund.” This fantastic scheme, rather less ingenious than the financial plan of the fool in one of Cervantes’ novels, who proposed to the whole Spanish people to abstain for only two weeks from eating and drinking, in order to get the means of discharging the public debt, nevertheless caught the imagination of Pitt. It was avowedly on this basis that he built up his sinking fund in 1786, allotting a fixed sum of 5,000,000 sterling, to be paid every year “without fail,” for this purpose. The system was not abandoned until 1825, when the Commons passed a resolution that only the bona fide surplus revenue of the country was to be applied in payment of the national debt. The whole system of public credit had been thrown into confusion by this curious sort of sinking fund. Between what was borrowed from necessity, and what was borrowed from amusement; between loans that were to increase the debt, and loans that were to pay it off, there arose a tumultuous medley. Interest and compound interest, debt and redemption, danced before men’s eyes in such perpetual succession; there was such a phantasmagoria of consols and bonds, of debentures and exchequer bills, of capital without interest and interest without capital, that the strongest understanding became bewildered. Dr. Price’s principle was that the State should borrow money at simple interest in order to improve it at compound interest. In fact, the United Kingdom contracted a debt of 1,000 millions sterling, for which it nominally received about 600 millions, 390 millions of this sum being, however, destined not for the payment of the debt, but to keep up the sinking fund. This glorious institution, which marks the golden era of stockjobbers and speculators, the Palmerstonian Chancellor of the Exchequer had attempted to saddle again on the shoulders of John Bull. Mr. Disraeli has given it the coup de graˆce.

273

Karl Marx The Anglo-French Alliance

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5319, 8. Mai 1858.

The English Alliance. From an Occasional Correspondent. Paris, April 22, 1858. The Anglo-French alliance has taken a new turn since Dr. Bernard’s acquittal and the public enthusiasm that cheered it. In the first instance, being shrewd enough to understand that the “heart of England” spoke not “in the starched compliments with which the municipality of Dover overwhelmed the frank nature of the Duke of Malakoff,” but rather “in the infamous huzzas raised by the people in the Court of Old Bailey,” the Univers proclaimed England not only a “den of assassins,” but a people of assassins, juries and judges included. The original proposition of the colonels is thus affirmed on a broader basis. At the heels of the Univers, in steps the Constitutionnel with an article appearing at the head of its columns, and signed by M. Rene´e, the son-in-law of Mr. Mocquard, who in his turn is the known amanuensis, confidant, and factotum of Bonaparte. If the Univers had taken up the colonels’ definition of the English people, while enlarging its meaning, the Constitutionnel repeats their menaces, only that it tries to back the exasperation of the barracks by the alleged indignation of the “towns and rural districts.” Affecting that tone of wounded moral sensibility so peculiar to the meretricious literature of the second Empire, it exclaims: “We will not dwell at any length on such an acquittal, which throws an unheard-of scandal on public morality; for what man of honor in France or England could entertain a doubt of Bernard’s guilt? We will only inform those of our neighbors who desire the maintenance of good relations between the two countries, that if, by misfortune, the address pronounced by Bernard’s counsel⎯that address which was allowed to teem with calumny and insult against the Emperor, against the nation which elected him, against the army, and against our

274

5

10

15

20

25

The Anglo-French Alliance

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

institutions⎯was circulated in the towns, barracks, and rural districts of France” (a curious position this, of the barracks, between the towns and rural districts!) “it would be difficult for Government, with the best intention, to stay the consequences of public indignation.” So far so good. On the mere chance whether or not Mr. James’s speech, advertised by the Constitutionnel itself, be or be not circulated in France, it will then depend whether or not France shall rush upon England. But after this quasi-declaration of war, there follows, a day later, a curious and startling winding-up in the Patrie. The French invasion is to be averted, but only by a new turn to be given to the Anglo-French alliance. Bernard’s acquittal has revealed the rising power of anarchy in British society. Lord Derby is to save society in England in the same way as Bonaparte has saved it in France. Such is the upshot of the alliance, and such is its conditio sine qua non. The Earl of Derby, it is added, is a “man of immense talent, and of almost royal alliances,” and consequently the man to save society in England! The English daily papers cling to the weakness, tergiversation, and infirmity of purpose, betrayed in this alternation of rage, menace and sophism. The Paris correspondent of The Daily News imagines himself to have solved the riddle of these dissolving views exhibited in the Univers, the Constitutionnel, and the Patrie, by dwelling upon the well-known fact that Bonaparte has a double set of advisers⎯the drunken revelers of the evening, and the sober counselors of the morning. He smells in the articles of the Univers and the Constitutionnel the fumes of Chateau Margaux and cigars, and in the article of the Patrie the showers of the cold water bath. But the same double set acted during Bonaparte’s duel with the French Republic. The one, after January, 1849, threatened, in its little evening journals, with a coup d’e´tat, while the other, in the heavy columns of the Moniteur, gave them the lie direct. Still it was not in the “starched” articles of the Moniteur, but in the drunken “huzzas” of the Pouvoir, that the shadow of coming events was traced. We are, however, far from believing that Bonaparte is possessed of the means of successfully crossing the “broad ditch.” The comical lucubrations in that line, which The N. Y. Herald had taken upon itself to publish, are sure to raise a smile on the lips even of mere tyros in military science. But we are decidedly of opinion that Bonaparte, a civilian, it ought never to be forgotten, at the head of a military Government, has, in the Patrie, put the last and the only possible interpretation on the Anglo-French alliance which will satisfy his “colonels.” He finds himself in a situation at once the most grotesque and the most dangerous. To impose upon foreign Governments, he must clap on the sword. To soothe the sword-bearers, and prevent them from taking his rhodomontades in

275

Karl Marx

real good earnest, he must recur to such impossible fictiones juris as that the Anglo-French alliance means the saving of society in England in the approved Bonapartist fashion. Of course, facts must clash with his doctrines, and the upshot, if his reign is not, as we are inclined to think, cut short by a revolution, will be that his fortune is engulfed, as it has been raised, in mad-brain adventures in some expe´dition de Boulogne on an enlarged scale. The Emperor will subside into the adventurer, as the adventurer has been converted into the Emperor. In the mean time, while the Patrie has spoken the last word Bonaparte can utter as to the meaning of the Anglo-French alliance, it is worth the while to direct attention to the manner in which this alliance is now spoken of among the governing classes of England. In this respect an article of The London Economist, entitled “The French Alliance, its character, its value and its price,” claims peculiar notice. It is written with studied pedantry, such as fits the position of an ex-Secretary of the Treasury under Palmerston’s Administration, and an expounder of the economical views of English capitalists. Mr. Wilson sets out with the thesis that “the thing gained may not be exactly the thing bargained for.” “Scarcely,” he says, “any estimate of the value of a real alliance between France and England can be too high;” but then there exist different sorts of alliances, real ones and artificial ones, genuine alliances and alliances of a hot-house growth, “natural” ones and “governmental” ones, “governmental” alliances and “personal” alliances. In the first place, The Economist gives full swing to his “imagination;” and it may be remarked with respect to The Economist, what has been said with respect to lawyers, that the more prosaic the man the more tricks imagination is able to play with him. He can scarcely trust his “imagination to dwell on the influence which a real alliance between the two great peoples which stand at the head of modern civilization would exercise on the destinies of Europe and the fortune and felicity of all other lands.” Still he is forced to admit that, although he hopes and believes the two nations to be “ripening” for a genuine alliance, they “are not ripe for it yet.” If, then, England and France are not yet ripe for a genuine, national alliance, the question will naturally arise, of what sort is the present Anglo-French alliance? “Our alliance of late,” confesses the ex-member of the Palmerston Administration and the oracle of English capitalists, “has been to a great extent, we admit, unavoidably with the Government rather than with the nation⎯with the Emperor rather than the Empire⎯with Louis Bonaparte rather than with France; and further, in the value we have set upon the alliance and the price we have paid for it, we have somewhat lost sight of this material and weighty fact.” Bonaparte, of course, is the

276

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Anglo-French Alliance

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

chosen of French nation, and all that bosh, but, unfortunately, “he represents only the numerical and not the intellectual majority of the French people. By mischance, it so happens that the classes which stand aloof from him comprise precisely those parties whose opinions on nearly all the great questions of civilization, are analogous to our own.” Having thus in most cautious and civil language, and in circumlocutory sentences which we will not discomfort the reader with, laid down the axiom that the present so-called Anglo-French alliance is rather governmental than national, The Economist goes the length of confessing that it is more personal even than purely governmental. “Louis Napoleon,” he says, “has hinted more plainly than became the head of a great nation that he was our especial friend in France⎯that he, rather than his people, desired and sustained the English alliance; and it may be that we have acquiesced in this view of the matter more readily and fully than was perfectly prudent and sincere.” Take it all in all, the Anglo-French alliance is a spurious, adulterated article⎯an alliance with Louis Bonaparte, but not an alliance with France. The question, therefore, naturally arises, whether that spurious article was worth the price paid for it? Here The Economist beats his own bosom and cries, in the name of the English governing classes, Pater, peccavi! In the first place, England is a constitutional country, while Bonaparte is an autocrat. “We owed to ourselves that our frank and loyal courtesy toward the de facto sovereign of France should be allowed to ripen and to warm into cordial and affectionate admiration only as far and as fast as his policy turned out such as we could honestly and righteously approve.” Instead of applying thus a sliding scale to their Bonapartism, the English people, a constitutional people, “have lavished on an Emperor who had destroyed the constitutional liberties of his subjects, attentions such as were never before bestowed on a constitutional king who had granted and respected them. And when he was angry and irritated, we have stooped to soothe him by language of fulsome adulation which sounded marvelous from English lips. Our proceedings and our language have alienated all those sections of the French people in whose eyes Louis Napoleon is either a usurper or a military despot. It has especially irritated and disgusted the Parliamentary party in France, whether Republican or Orleanist.” The Economist discovers at last that this prostration before a lucky usurper was far from prudent. “It is impossible,” he says, “to believe that the existing re´gime in France can be the permanent one under which that energetic and restless nation will consent to live. * * * * Is it wise, therefore, so to ally ourselves with a passing phase of government in France as to excite the enmity of its future and more permanent development?” Moreover, the English alliance was

277

Karl Marx

more necessary to Bonaparte than his alliance to England. In 1852, he was an adventurer⎯a successful one, but still an adventurer. “He was not recognized in Europe; it was questionable whether he would be recognized. But England promptly and unhesitatingly accepted him; acknowledged his title deeds at once; admitted him to the circle of royal exclusiveness, and gave him thus currency among the courts of Europe.” “Nay, more, by the exchange of visits and cordial coalitions, our Court allowed acquaintanceship to ripen into intimacy. * * * * Those enterprising moneyed and commercial classes, by whom it was especially important to him to be supported, saw at once how vast was the strength he gained by the closeness and cordiality of the alliance with England.” That alliance was necessary for him, and he “would have bought it at almost any price.” Did the English Government prove their commercial acumen and wonted sharpness in fixing that price? They asked no price at all; they insisted upon no condition whatever; but, like Oriental satraps, crawled in the dust while handing to him the gift of the alliance. No infamy on his part was colossal enough to make them halt for one moment in their race “of thriftless generosity,” as The Economist calls it⎯of reckless flunkeyism, as we should call it. “It would be hard to prove,” confesses the English sinner, “that of all his various measures for discountenancing Protestantism, for repressing thought, for destroying municipal action, for reducing Senates and Chambers to a mockery, we have manifested our dissatisfaction with a single one by even so much as a passing coolness or a casual frown.” “Whatever he has done, whomsoever he has proscribed, how many journals he has seized or repressed, whatever the flimsy pretexts on which he has dismissed honorable and eminent professors from their posts⎯our language has still been the same; he has still been this great man, this wise and sagacious statesman, this eminent and firm ruler.” Not only have the English thus fostered, supported and promoted his abominable domestic policy, but, as The Economist avows, allowed him to hamper, modify, emasculate and degrade their foreign policy. “To continue longer in such a false position,” concludes The Economist, “may redound neither to our honor nor to our profit, nor to the benefit of the commonwealth of nations.” Compare this declaration with that of the Patrie, and there can remain no doubt that the Anglo-French alliance is gone, and with it the only international prop of the second Empire.

278

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Karl Marx Important British Documents

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5329, 20. Mai 1858.

Important British Documents. Correspondence of The N. Y. Tribune. London, April 30, 1858. 5

10

15

20

There have been recently issued on the part of the British Government several statistical papers⎯the Board of Trade returns for the first quarter of 1858, a comparative statement of Pauperism for January, 1857 and 1858, and lastly, the half-yearly reports of the Inspectors of Factories. The Board of Trade returns, as was to be expected, show a considerable falling off in exports as well as imports during the first three months of 1858, if compared with the same quarter of the previous year. The total declared value of all articles exported, which during the latter period amounted to £28,827,493, had fallen for the first three months of this year to £23,510,290, so that the aggregate decrease in British exports may be rated at about 19 per cent. The table of the values of the principal articles of import, given only up to the end of February, shows a decline, as compared with the first two months of 1857, from £14,694,806 to £10,117,920, the downward movement in imports being thus more marked still than that in exports. The comparative state of the export trade from the United Kingdom to the United States during the first three months of 1857 and 1858 may be ascertained from the following extract:

Exports from the United Kingdom to the United States. Quantities Declared Val. 1857. 1858. 1857. 1858. 25 Beer and Ale (bbls.) 9,504 6,581 £40,893 £29,269 Coal and Culm (tuns) 19,972 44,299 11,975 24,818

279

Karl Marx

1857.

Cottons (yards) 61,198,140 Hardw’s & Cutlery (cwt.) 44,096 Linens (yards) 18,373,022 Iron, Pig (tuns) 10,172 Iron, Bar (tuns) 70,877 Iron, Cast (tuns) 207 Wrought of all sorts 12,578 Steel, unwrought 3,607 Copper (cwt.) 11,075 Lead (tuns) 941 Oil Seed (gals.) 400,200 Salt (tuns) 66,022 Silk manufactures (lb) 66,973 Woolens, Cloth (pieces) 106,519 Woolens, mixed stuffs (ps) 9,030,643 Worsted stuffs (pieces) 212,763 Earthenware & Porcel’n Haberdashery & Millin’y Tin Plates

[Quantities 1858.

35,271,538 14,623 8,757,750 6,569 6,417 2,362 2,097 1,118 1,954 60 42,790 35,205 22,920 30,624 6,368,551 80,601

Declared Val. 1857. 1858.]

1,128,453 301,275 527,076 39,927 610,124 4,659 151,602 128,178 69,286 21,793 62,576 33,169 82,280 351,911 401,249 249,013 155,700 614,825 273,409

618,540 104,668 265,536 20,344 54,602 14,475 29,218 43,666 10,595 1,324 5,768 16,990 25,212 110,096 232,202 106,913 70,998 288,752 105,847

With some trifling exceptions, this list exhibits a general and heavy falling off; but what strikes us is that in most instances the decline in the value of exports hardly keeps pace with the diminution in their quantity. The United States proved in this respect a far better market than other countries whence the Britishers for an increased quantity fetched in return a smaller value. Thus, for instance, of wool there were exported to Holland, in 1858, 277,342 lbs. against 254,593 lbs. in 1857; but the former realized but a value of £24,949, while the latter had brought £25,563; and for 1,505,621 lbs. exported to France in 1858, as against 1,445,322 lbs. exported in 1857, the value returned amounts but to £103,235, while for the smaller export of 1857 it reached the sum of £108,412. Moreover, if we compare the returns for the whole of the first quarter of 1858 with those for the month of March, a tendency to recovery in the British export trade to the United States will be discovered. Thus, in worsted stuffs the falling off between March, 1857, and March, 1858, is only from £66,617 to £54,376, while on the whole quarter it is from £249,013 to £106,913. The only country, however, which forms an exception to the general rule, and shows a considerably increased instead of diminished absorption of British manufactures, is India, as will appear from the following figures:

280

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Important British Documents

Beer and ale, bbls Cotton, yards 5 Hardw’s & Cut’ry, cw Cotton yarn, yards Iron bar, tuns Cop’r sh’ts & nails, cw Woolens, cloth 10 Earth’ware & porcel’n Haberd’y & millinery Steam engines

15

20

25

30

35

Quantities. 1857. 1858. 24,817 51,913 120,092,475 151,463,533 10,642 16,776 5,185,044 10,609,434 20,674 26,266 18,503 23,313 12,123 19,571

Declared Val. 1857. 1858. £77,845 £166,567 1,385,888 1,787,943 42,849 67,287 276,469 531,567 191,528 217,539 115,927 132,156 63,846 90,584 9,989 19,631 21,350 31,427 31,408 36,019

The increase in the British exports to India may, for some items, woolens for instance, be accounted for by the war demand. Generally, however, the rationale of that ascending movement is not to be sought in that direction. The case is simply this, that the insurrection for some months had shut up the Indian market altogether, thus causing the commodities floating in the market to be absorbed and creating a vacuum now again filled up. With respect to Australia, the returns show also considerable increase in some articles of British export, but the letters received from Sidney and Melbourne leave not doubt as to the merely speculative character of those shipments which, instead of selling at their declared value, will have to be disposed of at a heavy discount. The comparative statement of Paupers in England and Wales, who received official relief in the fifth week of January, 1857 and 1858, shows their number, from 920,608, to which it amounted in the former period, to have increased to 976,773 in the latter one, thus exhibiting an aggregate increase of 6.10 per cent. For the North Midland, North-Western and York divisions, however, that is, for the industrial districts, the increase in the percentage of paupers rose respectively by 20.52, 44.87, and 23.13 per cent. Besides, it must be kept in view that a very considerable portion of the working classes stubbornly prefer starvation to enrollment in the workhouses. The following extract from the official returns is curious, because it proves how small a percentage even in England the strictly manufacturing population bears to the aggregate people:

281

Karl Marx

Industrial Statistics. Ratio per cent of persons aged 20 years and upward, occupied in

Divisions.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

The Metropolis South-Eastern South Midland Eastern South-Western West Midland North Midland North-Western York Northern Welsh

England and Wales

No. of persons aged 20 years and upward. 1,394,963 887,134 660,775 603,720 978,025 1,160,387 654,679 1,351,830 961,945 521,460 641,680 9,816,597

Mechanical Arts, Trade and Domestic Service. 47.6 30.7 28.8 27.4 28.6 29.1 31.8 29.8 25.2 27.7 21.8 31.0

5

Agriculture. 1.1 20.8 25.4 26.5 23.3 15.5 21.7 8.3 14.3 16.1 25.7 16.1

Manufactures. 6.0 2.5 7.1 4.0 4.6 5.2 6.4 21.5 17.5 4.2 2.5 8.4

Mining and Mineral Works. 3.5 2.4 2.4 2.3 5.6 12.6 5.3 5.4 7.3 12.4 12.4 6.3

The reports of the Inspectors of Factories, extending only to the end of October, 1857, are deprived of their usual interest, because, as the Inspectors unanimously state, the closing of mills, the working of short time, the numerous bankruptcies among mill-owners, and the general depression of trade, which set in at the very time when they drew up their returns, prevented them from collecting that reliable information, which on former occasions allowed them to prepare a statement of the number of new factories, of factories that had added to their motive power, and of those which had ceased to work. The industrial statistics, therefore, illustrating the effects of the crisis, must be looked for in their next reports. The only new feature exhibited in the present publication is limited to some revelations as to the treatment of children and young persons in printing works. It was not until 1845 that the British Legislature extended their interference from textile fabrics to print-works. The Print-Works act follows the provisions of the Factory acts in all those details relating to powers of inspectors, the mode of their dealing with offenders, and the various difficulties which might arise in the administration of the law, which are to be found in the Factory acts. It provides, in the same manner as in factories, for the registration of the persons employed; for the examination by certifying surgeons of the younger hands prior to their permanent employment; and for insuring regularity in the observance of the times of beginning and ending daily labor by a public clock. It adopts

282

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Important British Documents

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

also the nomenclature of the Factory acts in the division of the hands into classes, but differs widely from those acts in the definition of what persons shall constitute each class, and, consequently, in the amount of protection afforded by the restrictions upon labor. The three classes under the Factory acts are: 1. Males over 18 years of age, whose labor is unrestricted; 2. Males between 13 and 18 years of age, and females above 13 years of age, whose labor is restricted; 3. Children between 8 and 13 years of age, whose labor is restricted, and who are required to attend school daily. The corresponding classes in print-works are: 1. Males above 13 years of age, whose labor is unrestricted; 2. Females above 13 years of age, whose hours of labor are restricted; 3. Children of both sexes, between the ages of 8 and 13, whose labor is restricted, and who are required to attend school periodically. The Print-Works act differs essentially from the Factory acts, in containing no provisions of any kind for either of the following purposes: For setting apart times for meals; for the Saturday holiday; for the cessation from work on Christmas day and Good Friday; for periodical half-holidays; for the secure fencing of dangerous machinery; for the reporting of accidents, and compensation of injured persons; for the periodical lime-washing of the premises. The hours of labor in factories are now assimilated to the ordinary hours of work of mechanics and general laborers, i. e., from 6 a. m. to 6 p. m., with intervals of one hour and a half for meals. The hours of labor in print-works may practically be considered to be unrestricted, notwithstanding the existence of statutory limitation. The only restriction upon labor is contained in §22 of the Print-Works act (8 and 9 Vict., 29), which enacts that no child between the ages of 8 and 13 years, and no female, shall be employed during the night, which is defined to be between 10. p. m. and 6 a. m. of the following morning. Children, therefore, of the age of 8 years, may be and are lawfully employed in a labor analogous in many respects to factory labor, mostly in rooms in which the temperature is oppressive, continuously and without any cessation from work for rest or refreshment, from 6 a. m. till 10 p. m.; and a boy, having attained the age of 13, may, and is often, lawfully employed day and night for any number of hours, without any restriction whatever. The school attendance of children employed in print-works is thus provided for: Every child, before being employed in a print-work, must have attended school for at least thirty days and not less than one hundred and fifty hours during the six months immediately preceding such first day of employment, and during the continuance of its employment in the print-work must attend for a like period of thirty days and one hundred and fifty hours during

283

Karl Marx

every successive period of six months. The attendance at school must be between 8 a. m. and 6 p. m. No attendance of less than two hours and a half nor more than five hours, on any one day, shall be reckoned as part of the one hundred and fifty hours. The philanthropy of the masterprinters shines peculiarly in the method of executing these regulations. Sometimes a child would attend school for the number of hours required by law at one period of the day, sometimes at another period, but never regularly; for instance, the attendance on one day might be from 8 a. m. to 11 a. m., on another day from 1 p. m. to 4 p. m., and the child might not appear at school again for several days, when it would attend perhaps from 3 p. m. to 6 p. m.; then it might attend for three or four days consecutively or for a week; then it would not appear in school for three weeks or a month after that, upon some odd days at some odd hours when the employer chose to spare it. Thus the child is as it were buffeted from school to work, and from work to school, until the tale of one hundred and fifty hours is told.

284

5

10

15

Friedrich Engels Details of the Attack on Lucknow

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5333, 25. Mai 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

At last we are in possession of detailed accounts of the attack and fall of Lucknow. The principal sources of information, in a military point of view, the dispatches of Sir Colin Campbell, have not yet, indeed, been published; but the correspondence of the British press, and especially the letters of Mr. Russell in The London Times, the chief portions of which have been laid before our readers, are quite sufficient to give a general insight into the proceedings of the attacking party. The conclusions we drew from the telegraphic news, as to the ignorance and cowardice displayed in the defense, are more than confirmed by the detailed accounts. The works erected by the Hindoos, formidable in appearance, were in reality of no greater consequence than the fiery dragons and grimacing faces painted by Chinese “braves” on their shields or on the walls of their cities. Every single work exhibited an apparently impregnable front, nothing but loopholed and embrasured walls and parapets, difficulties of access of every possible description, cannon and small-arms bristling everywhere. But the flanks and rear of every position were completely neglected, a mutual support of the various works was never thought of, and even the ground between the works, as well as in front of them, had never been cleared, so that both front and flank attacks could be prepared without the knowledge of the defense, and could approach under perfect shelter to within a few yards from the parapet. It was just such a conglomerate of intrenchments as might be expected from a body of private sappers deprived of their officers, and serving in an army where ignorance and indiscipline reigned supreme. The intrenchments of Lucknow are but a translation of the whole method of Sepoy warfare into baked clay walls and earthen parapets. The mechanical portion of European tactics had been partially impressed upon their minds; they knew the manual and platoon drill well enough; they could also build a battery and loophole a wall; but how to combine the movements of companies and battalions in the defense of a position,

285

Friedrich Engels

or how to combine batteries and loopholed houses and walls, so as to form an intrenched camp capable of resistance⎯of this they were utterly ignorant. Thus, they weakened the solid masonry walls of their palaces by over-loopholing them, heaped tier upon tier of loopholes and embrasures, placed parapeted batteries on their roofs, and all this to no purpose whatever, because it could all be turned in the easiest possible manner. In the same way, knowing their tactical inferiority, they tried to make up for it by cramming every post as full of men as possible, to no other purpose than to give terrible effect to the British artillery and to render impossible all orderly and systematic defense as soon as the attacking columns fell upon this motley host from an unexpected direction. And when the British, by some accidental circumstance, were compelled to attack even the formidable front of the works, their construction was so faulty that they could be approached, breached and stormed almost without any risk. At the Imambarra this was the case. Within a few yards from the building stood a pucka (sun-baked clay) wall. Up to this the British made s short sap (proof enough that the embrasures and loopholes on the higher part of the building had no plunging fire upon the ground immediately in front), and used this very wall as a breaching battery, prepared for them by the Hindoos themselves! They brought up two 68-pounders (naval guns) behind this wall. The lightest 68-pounder in the British service weighs 87 cwt., without the carriage; but supposing even that an 8-inch gun for hollow shot only is alluded to, the lightest gun of that class weighs 50 cwt., and with the carriage at least three tuns. That such guns could be brought up at all in such proximity to a palace several stories high, with a battery on the roof, shows a contempt of commanding positions and an ignorance of military engineering which no private sapper in any civilized army could be capable of. Thus much for the science against which the British had to contend. As to courage and obstinacy, they were equally absent from the defense. From the Martinie`re to the Musabagh, on the part of the natives, there was but one grand and unanimous act of bolting, as soon as a column advanced to the attack. There is nothing in the whole series of engagements that can compare even with the massacre (for fight it can scarcely be called) in the Secundrabagh during Campbell’s relief of the Residency. No sooner do the attacking parties advance, than there is a general helter-skelter to the rear, and where there are but a few narrow exits so as to bring the crowded rabble to a stop, they fall pell-mell, and without any resistance, under the volleys and bayonets of the advancing British. The “British bayonet” has done more execution in any one of these onslaughts on panic-stricken natives than in all the wars of the English in

286

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Details of the Attack on Lucknow

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Europe and America put together. In the East, such bayonet-battles, where one party only is active and the other abjectly passive, are a regular occurrence in warfare; the Burmese stockades in every case furnished an example. According to Mr. Russell’s account, the chief loss suffered by the British was caused by Hindoos cut off from retreat, and barricaded in the rooms of the palaces, whence they fired from the windows upon the officers in the court-yards and gardens. In storming the Imambarra and the Kaiserbagh, the bolting of the Hindoos was so rapid, that the place was not taken, but simply marched into. The interesting scene, however, was now only commencing; for, as Mr. Russell blandly observes, the conquest of the Kaiserbagh on that day was so unexpected that there was no time to guard against indiscriminate plunder. A merry scene it must have been for a true, liberty-loving John Bull to see his British grenadiers helping themselves freely to the jewels, costly arms, clothes, and all the toggery of his Majesty of Oude. The Sikhs, Ghoorkas and camp-followers were quite ready to imitate the example, and a scene of plunder and destruction followed which evidently surpassed even the descriptive talent of Mr. Russell. Every fresh step in advance was accompanied with plunder and devastation. The Kaiserbagh had fallen on the 14th; and half an hour after, discipline was at an end, and the officers had lost all command over their men. On the 17th, Gen. Campbell was obliged to establish patrols to check plundering, and to remain in inactivity “until the present license ceases.” The troops were evidently completely out of hand. On the 18th, we hear that there is a cessation of the grosser sort of plunder, but devastation is still going on freely. In the city, however, while the vanguard were fighting against the natives’ fire from the houses, the rearguard plundered and destroyed to their hearts’ content. In the evening, there is another proclamation against plundering; strong parties of every regiment to go out and fetch in their own men, and to keep their camp-followers at home; nobody to leave the camp except on duty. On the 20th, a recapitulation of the same orders. On the same day, two British “officers and gentlemen,“ Lieuts. Cape and Thackwell, “went into the city looting, and were murdered in a house;” and on the 26th, matters were still so bad that the most stringent orders were issued for the suppression of plunder and outrage; hourly roll-calls were instituted; all soldiers strictly forbidden to enter the city; camp-followers, if found armed in the city, to be hanged; soldiers not to wear arms except on duty, and all non-combatants to be disarmed. To give due weight to these orders, a number of triangles for flogging were erected “at proper places.”

287

Friedrich Engels

This is indeed a pretty state of things in a civilized army in the nineteenth century; and if any other troops in the world had committed onetenth of these excesses, how would the indignant British press brand them with infamy! But these are the deeds of the British army, and therefore we are told that such things are but the normal consequences of war. British officers and gentlemen are perfectly welcome to appropriate to themselves any silver spoons, jeweled bracelets, and other little memorials they may find about the scene of their glory; and if Campbell is compelled to disarm his own army in the midst of war, in order to stop wholesale robbery and violence, there may have been military reasons for the step; but surely nobody will begrudge these poor fellows a week’s holiday and a little frolic after so many fatigues and privations. The fact is, there is no army in Europe or America with so much brutality as the British. Plundering, violence, massacre⎯things that everywhere else are strictly and completely banished⎯are a time-honored privilege, a vested right of the British soldier. The infamies committed for days together, after the storming of Badajos and San Sebastian, in the Peninsular war, are without a parallel in the annals of any other nation since the beginning of the French Revolution; and the medieval usage, proscribed everywhere else, of giving up to plunder a town taken by assault, is still the rule with the British. At Delhi imperious military considerations enforced an exception; but the army, though bought off by extra pay, grumbled, and now at Lucknow they have made up for what they missed at Delhi. For twelve days and nights there was no British army at Lucknow⎯nothing but a lawless, drunken, brutal rabble, dissolved into bands of robbers, far more lawless, violent and greedy than the Sepoys who had just been driven out of the place. The sack of Lucknow in 1858 will remain an everlasting disgrace to the British military service. If the reckless soldiery, in their civilizing and humanizing progress through India, could rob the natives of their personal property only, the British Government steps in immediately afterward and strips them of their real estate as well. Talk of the first French Revolution confiscating the lands of the nobles and the church! Talk of Louis Napoleon confiscating the property of the Orleans family! Here comes Lord Canning, a British nobleman, mild in language, manners and feelings, and confiscates, by order of his superior, Viscount Palmerston, the lands of a whole people, every rood, perch and acre, over an extent of ten thousand square miles. A very nice bit of loot indeed for John Bull! And no sooner has Lord Ellenborough, in the name of the new Government, disapproved of this hitherto unexampled measure, than up rise The Times and a host of

288

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Details of the Attack on Lucknow

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

minor British papers to defend this wholesale robbery, and break a lance for the right of John Bull to confiscate everything he likes. But then, John is an exceptional being, and what is virtue in him, according to The Times, would be infamy in others. Meanwhile⎯thanks to the complete dissolution of the British army for the purpose of plunder⎯the insurgents escaped, unpursued, into the open country. They concentrate in Rohilcund, while a portion carry on petty warfare in Oude, and other fugitives have taken the direction of Bundlecund. At the same time, the hot weather and the rains are fast approaching; and it is not to be expected that the season will be so uncommonly favorable to European constitutions as last year. Then, the mass of the European troops were more or less acclimated; this year, most of them are newly arrived. There is no doubt that a campaign in June, July and August will cost the British an immense number of lives, and what with the garrisons that have to be left in every conquered city, the active army will melt down very rapidly. Already are we informed that ree¨nforcements of 1,000 men per month will scarcely keep up the army at its effective strength; and as to garrisons, Lucknow alone requires at least 8,000 men, over one-third of Campbell’s army. The force organizing for the campaign of Rohilcund will scarcely be stronger than this garrison of Lucknow. We are also informed that among the British officers the opinion is gaining ground that the guerrilla warfare which is sure to succeed the dispersion of the larger bodies of insurgents, will be far more harassing and destructive of life to the British than the present war with its battles and sieges. And, lastly, the Sikhs are beginning to talk in a way which bodes no good to the English. They feel that without their assistance the British would scarcely have been able to hold India, and that, had they joined the insurrection, Hindostan would certainly have been lost to England, at least for a time. They say this loudly, and exaggerate it in their Eastern way. To them the English no longer appear as that superior race which beat them at Moodka, Ferozepore and Aliwal. From such a conviction to open hostility there is but a step with Eastern nations; a spark may kindle the blaze. Altogether, the taking of Lucknow has no more put down the Indian insurrection than the taking of Delhi. This Summer’s campaign may produce such events that the British will have, next Winter, to go substantially over the same ground again, and perhaps even to reconquer the Punjaub. But in the best of cases, a long and harassing guerrilla warfare is before them⎯not an enviable thing for Europeans under an Indian sun.

289

Karl Marx The Annexation of Oude

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5336, 28. Mai 1858.

About eighteen months ago, at Canton, the British Government propounded the novel doctrine in the law of nations that a State may commit hostilities on a large scale against a Province of another State, without either declaring war or establishing a state of war against that other State. Now the same British Government, in the person of the GovernorGeneral of India, Lord Canning, has made another forward move in its task of upsetting the existing law of nations. It has proclaimed that “the proprietary right in the soil of the Province of Oude is confiscated to the British Government, which will dispose of that right in such manner as it may seem fitting.” When, after the fall of Warsaw in 1831, the Russian Emperor confiscated “the proprietary right in the soil” hitherto held by numerous Polish nobles, there was one unanimous outburst of indignation in the British press and Parliament. When, after the battle of Novara, the Austrian Government did not confiscate, but merely sequestered, the estates of such Lombard noblemen as had taken an active part in the war of independence, that unanimous outburst of British indignation was repeated. And when, after the 2d December, 1851, Louis Napoleon confiscated the estates of the Orleans family, which, by the common law of France, ought to have been united to the public domain on the accession of Louis Philippe, but which had escaped that fate by a legal quibble, then British indignation knew no bounds, and The London Times declared that by this act the very foundations of social order were upset, and that civil society could no longer exist. All this honest indignation has now been practically illustrated. England, by one stroke of the pen, has confiscated not only the estates of a few noblemen, or of a royal family, but the whole length and breadth of a kingdom nearly as large as Ireland, “the inheritance of a whole people,” as Lord Ellenborough himself terms it. But let us hear what pretexts⎯grounds we cannot call them⎯Lord Canning, in the name of the British Government, sets forth for this un-

290

5

10

15

20

25

30

The Annexation of Oude

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

heard-of proceeding: First, “The army is in possession of Lucknow.” Second, “The resistance, begun by a mutinous soldiery, has found support from the inhabitants of the city and of the province at large.” Third, “They have been guilty of a great crime, and have subjected themselves to a just retribution.” In plain English: Because the British army have got hold of Lucknow, the Government has the right to confiscate all the land in Oude which they have not yet got hold of. Because the native soldiers in British pay have mutinied, the natives of Oude, who were subjected to British rule by force, have not the right to rise for their national independence. In short, the people of Oude have rebelled against the legitimate authority of the British Government, and the British Government now distinctly declares that rebellion is a sufficient ground for confiscation. Leaving, therefore, out of the question all the circumlocution of Lord Canning, the whole question turns upon the point that he assumes the British rule in Oude to have been legitimately established. Now, British rule in Oude was established in the following manner: When, in 1856, Lord Dalhousie thought the moment for action had arrived, he concentrated an army at Cawnpore which, the King of Oude was told, was to serve as a corps of observation against Nepaul. This army suddenly invaded the country, took possession of Lucknow, and took the King prisoner. He was urged to cede the country to the British, but in vain. He was then carried off to Calcutta, and the country was annexed to the territories of the East India Company. This treacherous invasion was based upon article 6 of the treaty of 1801, concluded by Lord Wellesley. This treaty was the natural consequence of that concluded in 1798 by Sir John Shore. According to the usual policy followed by the Anglo-Indian Government in their intercourse with native princes, this first treaty of 1798 was a treaty of offensive and defensive alliance on both sides. It secured to the East India Company a yearly subsidy of 76 lacs of rupees ($ 3,800,000); but by articles 12 and 13 the King was obliged to reduce the taxation of the country. As a matter of course, these two conditions, in open contradiction to each other, could not be fulfilled by the King at the same time. This result, looked for by the East India Company, gave rise to fresh complications, resulting in the treaty of 1801, by which a cession of territory had to make up for the alleged infractions of the former treaty; a cession of territory which, by the way, was at the time denounced in Parliament as a downright robbery, and would have brought Lord Wellesley before a Committee of Inquiry, but for the political influence then held by his family. In consideration of this cession of territory, the East India Company, by article 3, undertook to defend the King’s remaining territories against

291

Karl Marx

all foreign and domestic enemies; and by article 6 guaranteed the possession of these territories to him and his heirs and successors forever. But this same article 6 contained also a pit-fall for the King, viz: The King engaged that he would establish such a system of administration, to be carried into effect by his own officers, as should be conducive to the prosperity of his subjects, and be calculated to secure the lives and property of the inhabitants. Now, supposing the King of Oude had broken this treaty; had not, by his government, secured the lives and property of the inhabitants (say by blowing them from the cannon’s mouth, and confiscating the whole of their lands), what remedy remained to the East India Company? The King was, by the treaty, acknowledged as an independent sovereign, a free agent, one of the contracting parties. The East India Company, on declaring the treaty broken and thereby annulled, could have but two modes of action: either by negotiation, backed by pressure, they might have come to a new arrangement, or else they might have declared war against the King. But to invade his territory without declaration of war, to take him prisoner unawares, dethrone him and annex his territory, was an infraction not only of the treaty, but of every principle of the law of nations. That the annexation of Oude was not a sudden resolution of the British Government is proved by a curious fact. No sooner was Lord Palmerston, in 1831, Foreign Secretary, than he sent an order to the then Governor-General to annex Oude. The subordinate at that time declined to carry out the suggestion. The affair, however, came to the knowledge of the King of Oude, who availed himself of some pretext to send an embassy to London. In spite of all obstacles, the embassy succeeded in acquainting William IV., who was ignorant of the whole proceeding, with the danger which had menaced their country. The result was a violent scene between William IV. and Palmerston, ending in a strict injunction to the latter never to repeat such coups d’e´tat on pain of instant dismissal. It is important to recollect that the actual annexation of Oude and the confiscation of all the landed property of the country took place when Palmerston was again in power. The papers relating to this first attempt at annexing Oude, in 1831, were moved for, a few weeks ago, in the House of Commons, when Mr. Baillie, Secretary of the Board of Control, declared that these papers had disappeared. Again, in 1837, when Palmerston, for the second time, was Foreign Secretary, and Lord Auckland Governor-General of India, the King of Oude was compelled to make a fresh treaty with the East India Company. This treaty takes up article 6 of the one of 1801, because “it provides no remedy for the obligation contained in it” (to govern the coun-

292

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Annexation of Oude

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

try well); and it expressly provides, therefore, by article 7, “that the King of Oude shall immediately take into consideration, in concert with the British Resident, the best means of remedying the defects in the police, and in the judicial and revenue administrations of his dominions; and that if his Majesty should neglect to attend to the advice and counsel of the British Government, and if gross and systematic oppression, anarchy and misrule should prevail within the Oude dominions, such as seriously to endanger the public tranquillity, the British Government reserves to itself the right of appointing its own officers to the management of whatsoever portions of the Oude territory, either to a small or great extent, in which such misrule shall have occurred, for so long a period as it may deem necessary; the surplus receipts in such case, after defraying all charges, to be paid into the King’s Treasury, and a true and faithful account rendered to his Majesty of the receipts and expenditure.” By article 8, the treaty further provides: “That in case the Governor-General of India in Council should be compelled to resort to the exercise of the authority vested in him by article 7, he will endeavor as far as possible to maintain, with such improvements as they may admit of, the native institutions and forms of administration within the assumed territories, so as to facilitate the restoration of these territories to the Sovereign of Oude, when the proper period for such restoration shall arrive.” This treaty professes to be concluded between the Governor-General of British India in Council, on one hand, and the King of Oude on the other. It was, as such, duly ratified, by both parties, and the ratifications were duly exchanged. But when it was submitted to the Board of Directors of the East India Company, it was annulled (April 10, 1838) as an infraction of the friendly relations between the Company and the King of Oude, and an encroachment, on the part of the Governor-General, on the rights of that potentate. Palmerston had not asked the Company’s leave to conclude the treaty, and he took no notice of their annulling resolution. Nor was the King of Oude informed that the treaty had ever been canceled. This is proved by Lord Dalhousie himself (minute Jan. 15, 1856): “It is very probable that the King, in the course of the discussions which will take place with the Resident, may refer to the treaty negotiated with his predecessor in 1837; the Resident is aware that the treaty was not continued in force, having been annulled by the Court of Directors as soon as it was received in England. The Resident is further aware that, although the King of Oude was informed at the time that certain aggravating provisions of the treaty of 1837, respecting an increased military force, would not be carried into effect, the entire abrogation of it was never communicated to his Majesty. The effect of this reserve and want of

293

Karl Marx

full communication is felt to be embarrassing to-day. It is the more embarrassing that the canceled instrument was still included in a volume of treaties which was published in 1845, by the authority of Government.” In the same minute, sec. 17, it is said: “If the King should allude to the treaty of 1837, and should ask why, if further measures are necessary in relation to the administration of Oude, the large powers which are given to the British Government by the said treaty should not now be put in force, his Majesty must be informed that the treaty has had no existence since it was communicated to the Court of Directors, by whom it was wholly annulled. His Majesty will be reminded that the Court of Lucknow was informed at the time that certain articles of the treaty of 1837, by which the payment of an additional military force was imposed upon the King, were to be set aside. It must be presumed that it was not thought necessary at that time to make any communication to his Majesty regarding those articles of the treaty which were not of immediate operation, and that the subsequent communication was inadvertently neglected.” But not only was this treaty inserted in the official collection of 1845, it was also officially adverted to as a subsisting treaty in Lord Auckland’s notification to the King of Oude, dated July 8, 1839; in Lord Hardinge’s (then Governor-General) remonstrance to the same King, of November 23, 1847, and in Col. Sleeman’s (Resident at Lucknow) communication to Lord Dalhousie himself, of the 10th December, 1851. Now, why was Lord Dalhousie so eager to deny the validity of a treaty which all his predecessors, and even his own agents, had acknowledged to be in force in their communications with the King of Oude? Solely because, by this treaty, whatever pretext the King might give for interference, that interference was limited to an assumption of government by British officers in the name of the King of Oude, who was to receive the surplus revenue. That was the very opposite of what was wanted. Nothing short of annexation would do. This denying the validity of treaties which had formed the acknowledged base of intercourse for twenty years; this seizing violently upon independent territories in open infraction even of the acknowledged treaties; this final confiscation of every acre of land in the whole country; all these treacherous and brutal modes of proceeding of the British toward the natives of India are now beginning to avenge themselves, not only in India, but in England.

294

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Karl Marx A Curious Piece of History

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5352, 16. Juni 1858.

A Curious Piece of History. Correspondence of The N. Y. Tribune. Manchester (Eng.), May 18, 1858. 5

10

15

20

25

A very short time after the close of the last Russian war the public was informed that a certain Mohammed Bey, Colonel in the Turkish army, alias M. Bangya, ex-Colonel of the Hungarian army, had left Constantinople for Circassia along with a number of Polish volunteers. On his arrival, he at once became a sort of chief of the staff to Sefer Pasha, the Circassian chief. Those who knew the antecedents of this Hungarian liberator of Circassia could have no doubt that he had gone to that country for one purpose only: to sell it to Russia. The man had been, openly and unmistakably, proved to have been, in London and Paris, a spy in the pay both of the French and the Prussian police. Accordingly, about a month ago, the European papers contained the news that Bangya-Mohammed Bey had actually been detected in treasonable correspondence with the Russian General, Philipson, and that a Court-martial, held upon him, had sentenced him to death. Bangya, however, a short time after, appeared all at once in Constantinople, and, with his usual impudence, declared all these stories about treachery, courts-martial, &c., to be pure inventions of his enemies, and tried to pass himself off as the victim of an intrigue. We happen to be in possession of the most important documents relating to this curious incident of the Circassian war, and shall now give some extracts from them. These papers were brought to Constantinople by Lieut. Franz Stock of the Polish battalion in Circassia, and one of the members of the Court-martial which convicted Bangya. The public may then judge for themselves.

295

Karl Marx

Extracts from the Minutes of the Council of War held at Aderbi, Circassia, on Mohammed Bey, alias J. Bangya of Illosfalva. íNo. 1.î⎯Sitting of January 9, 1858.⎯Deposition of Mustapha, native of the Province of Natkhouatz. “ ... When the Colonel, Mohammed Bey, came to Shepsohour, he asked me to forward a letter to the Commander of the Cossack of the Black Sea, General Philipson. On my observing that I could not do so without informing Sefer Pasha, or without his permission, Mohammed Bey informed me that as Envoy and Lieutenant of the Padishah and Military Commandant in Circassia he had the right to exchange letters with the Russians; that Sefer Pasha was acquainted with the subject, and that his object was to mislead the Russians. ... When Sefer Pasha and the National Assembly forwarded to me the manifesto of Circassia, addressed to the Czar, Mohammed Bey gave me also a letter for Gen. Philipson. I did not find Gen. Philipson at Anapa, and I delivered the letter to the Major commanding at Anapa. The Major promised to forward the manifesto, but would not accept the letter, which was without address or signature. I brought back the letter, but feeling suspicious of the frequent correspondence of Mohammed Bey, and fearing myself to get compromised, I communicated the whole affair to the authorities. ... ” íNo. 2.î⎯Deposition of Achmet Effendi, formerly Turkish Secretary to Mohammed Bey. “ ... Mohammed Bey was very irate against Tefik Bey (Col. Lapinski) and spoke very ill of him, adding that he would block his path very long. The second night after our arrival at Aderbi ... it was early dawn when I was roused by Mohammed Bey’s groom. Mohammed Bey himself told me that a great noise of guns was heard in the direction of Ghelendjeek. He was up and seemed uneasy. ... The report that Col. Lapinski had been captured with all his party arrived at Aderbi, I know not how, even before the roar of the guns had ceased. I heard Mohammed Bey talk of it. When later news came that neither the Colonel nor his men had been made prisoners, Mohammed Bey said, very angrily, ‘That probably he had sold his guns to the Russians.’... ” íNo. 3.î⎯Deposition of the Officers and Soldiers of the Polish detachment stationed at Aderbi. “One day before Ghelendjeek was surprised, Mohammed Bey came to the camp and said he had received letters from Constantinople, informing him that it was entirely Col. Lapinski’s fault if they got no assistance anywhere. ... He caused spirits to be distributed to the soldiers, and made them all sorts of promises if they would abandon their Colonel and fol-

296

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

A Curious Piece of History

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

low him. ... When afterward the news (of the supposed capture of Lapinski) turned out false, Mohammed Bey came in person to the camp and harangued the detachment to induce them to refuse obedience to the Colonel. But when the Colonel came back, he pretended to know nothing about the matter, and abandoned several individuals who had attached themselves to him, and allowed them to be punished without interfering in their favor. Later, during the absence of the Colonel, Mohammed Bey endeavored to lead the troops into rebellion by the means of several Hungarians. The Hungarians drew up an act of accusation against the Colonel and endeavored to get the men to sign. With the exception of three men, who admit that they were seduced to sign, all the others declared on their oath that their signatures had been forged. ... This forgery was the easier since in the detachment only a few soldiers knew how to write.” íNo. 4.î⎯Confession of Bangya before the Court-Martial. “Tired of so long interrogatory, I present to the Commission this confession, written by my hand and signed by me. I hope that my judges, to whom I spare by so doing a long and difficult task, will be the more disposed to remember that with my fate is tied up also the fate of my innocent family.* Formerly my name was John Bangya of Illosfalva; my name now is Mohammed Bey; my age is forty; my religion was the Roman Catholic, but in 1853 I embraced Islamism. ... My political action ... was dictated by the ancient chief of my country, Louis Kossuth. ... Provided with letters of introduction from my political chief, I came to Constantinople on the 22d of December, 1853. ... I entered the Turkish army with the rank of Colonel. At this time I was frequently receiving from Kossuth letters and instructions concerning the interest of my country. At the same epoch Kossuth addressed to the Ottoman Government a missive, in which he warmly recommends the Turks to beware of the French, English or Austrian alliance, and advised them to link themselves rather with the revolutionary Italians and Hungarians. ... My instructions recommended me to get attached in some way or other to the troops destined to act on the Circassian shores. ... Arrived in Circassia, I contented myself for a time with studying the state of affairs in the country, and communicating my observations to my political friends. ... I tried to attach myself to Sefer Pasha. ... My instructions recommended me to prevent any offensive steps on the part of the Circassians, and to oppose all foreign influence in the country. A very short * By this he alludes to the Bangya family No. 3. He has one wife living in Hungary and another in Paris, beside the Islamic family he has in Constantinople.

297

Karl Marx

time previous to my departure from Constantinople Col. Türr, who receives his instructions from the same quarters as myself, and with whom I have been for years in political relation, received orders to join the Greek insurrection. Gen. Stein (Ferhad Pasha), who also belongs to our party, was directed to proceed to Anatolia. As for the plan of getting attached to Sefer Pasha, it succeeded, and very soon I gained his entire confidence. His confidence once acquired, it was easy for me to follow and execute my instructions. ... I persuaded Sefer Pasha that after the war Circassia would be restored to the Sultan’s rule. ... To the Turkish commanders I represented that all offensive measures with their troops would be dangerous, since the Circassians ... would desert them in the hour of danger. The circumstances were favorable for me, and although the Russians had sent their troops to the theater of war, and left unprotected their frontiers, they had not to suffer from any serious incursions of the Circassians. I forwarded regular reports of my secret action to my political chiefs. ... At the same time I found on my way men and circumstances just contrary to my plans. I allude to the arrival at Anapa of Mr. Longworth, British Consul. Mr. Longworth’s instructions ordered him to induce Sefer Pasha to organize 6,000 Circassians at the expense of Great Britain and to dispatch them to the Crimea. ... I received similar orders from the Turkish authorities, but at the same time my secret chiefs sent me the most positive order to do all in my power to annihilate the mission of the Consul. ... In a conversation which I had with Mr. Longworth ... I asked for a post in the British army with the rank of Colonel, or for the capital sum of £10,000. ... Mr. Longworth thought to gain me by an offer of 50,000 piasters. ... My intrigue succeeded. Prince Sefer, so often deceived by vain promises, became suspicious and roundly refused to the Consul what he wanted of his people. ... At this time I made an enemy in the person of Prince Ibrahim Karabatir, the son of Sefer Pasha, who had been named to command the 6,000 Circassians. ... The 21st of March, 1856, Sefer Pasha informed me that it had been decided in the General Assembly to send a deputation to the Turkish, French and British Governments to ask these Powers to reincorporate Circassia with Turkey. I induced Sefer Pasha to send me with this deputation. ... On my arrival in Constantinople ... I addressed to my political friends and to Kossuth a detailed account of the state of Circassia. ... I received in reply instructions ordering me to communicate with Col. Türr and Gen. Stein, and to conduct the affairs in common with them, and to engage in it as many Hungarians as possible. At the same time I entered into communication with Ismail Pasha, Postmaster of the Ottoman Empire, a Circassian by birth, who appeared to me patriotic and able to

298

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

A Curious Piece of History

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

make sacrifices for his country. I consulted with him on the manner in which it might be possible for us to send into Circassia arms, ammunition, tools for artificers, good officers and artisans. But the real plan of the expedition was arranged between Gen. Stein, Col. Türr and myself. Capt. Franchini, military secretary to the Russian Minister, was present at several of our conferences. The object was to gain over Circassia to Russian interests in a peaceable, slow, but certain manner. ... When once Circassia should have submitted to the direction of Gen. Stein and myself, our plan would be: I. To choose some native Prince who would bring the whole country under his rule; II. To persuade the Circassians that they are not to expect any assistance either from the Sultan or from any other Power; III. To demoralize the mountaineers by dint of defeats on the field of battle⎯defeats studied and prepared beforehand; IV. To bring them to recognize the Czar as their nominal sovereign without paying any tribute, but admitting garrisons into the country. ... The Hungarians imported into Circassia would be placed about the Prince; the more capable would be intrusted with the important posts. ... Capt. Franchini assured me that Russia required nothing more than apparent submission; ... the marks of Imperial favor, money and Russian orders would do the rest. ... The 22d of September, 1856, Ismail Pasha recommended me to engage for Circassia several hundred Poles who were barracked in Scutari, and who had formed part of the legion under Zamoiski. ... This proposal did not agree with our plans, but it was difficult to reject it. ... I had formerly known M. Lapinski, who had served with distinction in Hungary. ... He was living at Scutari. ... We agreed with Gen. Stein that the best plan would be to engage Col. Lapinski, who had absolute confidence in me. ... On Sept. 24 I notified in writing to Col. Lapinski that he was called upon by the Circassian patriots to form a Polish corps in Circassia. The Colonel, in reply, demanded arms and equipments for 700 Poles. ... We afterward consulted together⎯Gen. Stein, Türr, Franchini and myself⎯and it was decided that Türr should proceed to England to purchase tools and machines for making cartridges, but that he would delay sending any arms. We wanted to be sure of the Poles before we gave them any arms. ... The serious remonstrances of Col. Lapinski ... obliged me to hurry the departure, although I had not the means of taking with me the Hungarian officers I had engaged. ... In the month of January, 1857, I received letters and instructions from Kossuth and from my other political friends. My plan was approved. ... A short time before my depar-

299

Karl Marx

ture an apparent coolness was simulated between me and Gen. Stein. I still wanted to delay my departure to render possible that of a few Hungarians with me, but Capt. Franchini declared that there was not a day to be lost, because the expedition had become the talk of all Constantinople, and if the Russian Embassy did not interfere it might be accused of complicity. On the 15th of February Col. Lapinski embarked on board the English steamer Kangaroo. I embarked also. ... On my arrival at Dob (Kabardinsk of the Russians) I addressed letters to Sefer Pasha, to the Naı¨b, and to the other chiefs of the tribes; and in those letters I announced myself as sent by his Imperial Majesty the Sultan to command the military forces of Circassia. ... The conduct of Col. Lapinski was not very reassuring for me. ... A few weeks after the arrival of the Polish detachment at Shapsucho (Fort Tenginsk of the Russians), the residence of Sefer Pasha, Mr. Römer arrived at Dob with the brig laden with arms and ammunition which we had left in the Bosphorus. ... The irruption of the Russians by Attakum, in the month of May, brought together thousands of Circassian warriors from all parts of the country. For the first time the Circassians saw artillery of their own attacking with advantage the Russian artillery. This engagement, of little consequence in itself, gave importance to the Polish detachment and to me. ... I took advantage of this disposition of the people to act my part; I presented myself in public as the Envoy of the Sultan; I exacted obedience. ... I afterward learned that Col. Lapinski was working with all his might to upset my plans. ... I endeavored to gain partisans among the officers and men of his detachment, and the situation of the corps being precarious, I attributed this to the fault of their commander. ... The capture by a Russian vessel of a few sandals, in the ports of Sudjak and Ghelendjeek, gave me an occasion to remove the Colonel to a distance from the seat of war, near Attakum, and to isolate him completely. ... A few days later I received from Col. Lapinski a letter, by which he announced that there were no troops at Ghelendjeek, and that his position was not tenable. ... I went myself to Ghelendjeek, and on the spot Col. Lapinski represented to me the danger of his position and the imminence of an attack from the Russians. Nine days afterward his prediction was realized. ... The agitation which I kept up among the officers and soldiers at Aderbi, during and after the catastrophe at Ghelendjeek, was simply the consequence of the resolution which I had taken to sow discord between the detachment and Col. Lapinski. ... Through emissaries I was circulating among the Circassians reports that he had sold the guns to the Russians. ... I allowed myself to be taken in by the simulated sincerity of the Colonel, who was observing me with greater vigilance than ever. ...

300

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

A Curious Piece of History

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

In conformity with my instructions I was to form relations with the Russian General. ... My anonymous letter, which is actually in the hands of the Commission, was to be the introduction to a regular correspondence, but by the stupidity of the Russian commander it has fallen into your hands. ... All of a sudden Col. Lapinski threw off the mask, and abruptly declared to me at Sefer Pasha’s that he did not recognize me either as his superior or as military commandant in Circassia, broke off all intercourse with me, ... addressed also a general order in this sense to the Polish detachment. I tried to depose him by another order of the day addressed to the soldiers, but my efforts were vain. ... (Signed.) Mohammed Bey.” íNo. 5.î⎯Letter of John Bangya to General Philipson. “Would it not be in the interest of Russia to pacify Circassia? It might be possible to conquer the plains of Circassia momentarily by dint of enormous sacrifices, but the mountains and natural fastnesses will never be conquered. The Russian guns have lost their influence. The Circassian artillery will reply to the Russian with satisfactory results. The Circassians are not what they were five years ago; supported by a small regular force, they fight as well as the Russian troops, and for their religion and their country they will fight to the last man. Would it not be better to allow the Circassians a sort of mock liberty? to place Circassia under a national prince, and take this prince under the protection of the Russian Czar? In a word, to make of Circassia another Georgia, or something of the kind? Once Circassia intimately allied to Russia, the roads of Anatolia and of India are open to the Russians. Sapienti sat. It might be possible to open negotiations on this basis. Reflect and answer.” íNo. 6.î⎯Sentence, January 20, 1858. “After the reading of the confession of Col. Mohammed Bey, read at the sittings of the 2d, 3d, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 11th of January; after having heard the depositions of the witnesses at the sitting of the 9th of January, the Court-Martial declares, at its sitting of this day, Mohammed Bey, by his confession and by the depositions of the witnesses, convicted of treachery to the country, and secret correspondence with the enemy; declares him infamous, deprived of his rank in this country, and condemns him to death⎯unanimously. Signed: Jacob Beckert, soldier; Philipp Terteltaub, bombardier; Mathias Bedneizek, sergeant; Otto Linovski, gunner; Franz Stock, sub-lieutenant; Anton Krysciewicz, sub-lieutenant; Michael Marecki, lieutenant; Leon Zawadski, gunner; Stanislas Tanckowski, lance-corporal; John Ha-

301

Karl Marx

maniski, sergeant; Alexander Michicki, sergeant-major; Casimir Wystocki, sub-lieutenant; Josef Aranoski, lieutenant; Peter Stankiewicz, captain; Theophil Lapinski, colonel.” To the above documents we have merely to add that Sefer Pasha was loth to have the sentence of death executed upon a man who held the rank of Colonel in the Sultan’s army, and that he consequently had him escorted to Trebizond. The Hungarians in Constantinople declared Mohammed Bey’s treachery to be a pure calumny, but the Polish officers at once protested against this assertion and threatened an eventual publication of the documents relating to this affair. We now publish them, in extract, as they form by far the most interesting contribution to the history of the Circassian war. With regard to the conduct of the Russian Embassy during this affair, we may add the following facts: It was generally known in Constantinople that the Kangaroo was chartered to take troops and stores to Circassia. The Russian Embassy, however, did not drop one word with respect to that expedition to the Porte; but the very day the Kangaroo got clear of the Bosphorus, the Russian Embassador addressed a protest to the Porte, and caused an inquiry to be made to discover the promoters of the expedition. They strained every nerve to implicate Count Zamoiski, who was at Constantinople at the time; but they signally failed in this. Then, on the ostensible demand of Russia, Gen. Stein and Ismail Pasha were sent into exile for having been mixed up with the affair. After a banishment of some months, on the occasion of a festal day in the Russian Imperial family, at the request again of the Russian Embassy, Gen. Stein and Ismail Pasha were allowed to return to Constantinople.

302

5

10

15

20

25

Karl Marx Lord Canning’s Proclamation and Land Tenure in India

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5344, 7. Juni 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

Lord Canning’s proclamation in relation to Oude, some important documents in reference to which we published on Saturday, has revived the discussion as to the land tenures of India⎯a subject upon which there have been great disputes and differences of opinion in times past, and misapprehensions in reference to which have led, so it is alleged, to very serious practical mistakes in the administration of those parts of India directly under British rule. The great point in this controversy is, what is the exact position which the zemindars, talookdars or sirdars, so called, hold in the economical system of India? Are they properly to be considered as landed proprietors or as mere tax-gatherers? It is agreed that in India, as in most Asiatic countries, the ultimate property in the soil vests the Government; but while one party to this controversy insists that the Government is to be looked upon as a soil proprietor, letting out the land on shares to the cultivators, the other side maintain that in substance the land in India is just as much private property as in any other country whatever⎯this alleged property in the Government being nothing more than the derivation of title from the sovereign theoretically acknowledged in all countries, the codes of which are based on the feudal law and substantially acknowledged in all countries whatever in the power of the Government to levy taxes on the land to the extent of the needs of the Government, quite independent of all considerations, except as mere matter of policy, of the convenience of the owners. Admitting, however, that the lands of India are private property, held by as good and strong a private title as land elsewhere, who shall be regarded as the real owners? There are two parties for whom this claim has been set up. One of these parties is the class known as zemindars and talookdars, who have been considered to occupy a position similar to that of the landed nobility and gentry of Europe; to be, indeed, the real owners of the land, subject to a certain assessment due to the Govern-

303

Karl Marx

ment, and, as owners, to have the right of displacing at pleasure the actual cultivators, who, in this view of the case, are regarded as standing in the position of mere tenants at will, liable to any payment in the way of rent which the zemindars may see fit to impose. The view of the case which naturally fell in with English ideas, as to the importance and necessity of a landed gentry as the main pillar of the social fabric, was made the foundation of the famous landed settlement of Bengal seventy years ago, under the Governor-Generalship of Lord Cornwallis⎯a settlement which still remains in force, but which, as it is maintained by many, wrought great injustice alike to the Government and to the actual cultivators. A more thorough study of the institutions of Hindostan, together with the inconveniences, both social and political, resulting from the Bengal settlement, has given currency to the opinion that by the original Hindoo institutions, the property of the land was in the village corporations, in which resided the power of allotting it out to individuals for cultivation, while the zemindars and talookdars were in their origin nothing but officers of the Government, appointed to look after, to collect, and to pay over to the prince the assessment due from the village. This view has influenced to a considerable degree the settlement of the landed tenures and revenue made of late years in the Indian provinces, of which the direct administration has been assumed by the English. The exclusive proprietary rights claimed by the talookdars and zemindars have been regarded as originating in usurpations at once against the Government and the cultivators, and every effort has been made to get rid of them as an incubus on the real cultivators of the soil and the general improvement of the country. As, however, these middle men, whatever the origin of their rights might be, could claim prescription in their favor, it was impossible not to recognize their claims as to a certain extent legal, however inconvenient, arbitrary and oppressive to the people. In Oude, under the feeble reign of the native princes, these feudal landholders had gone very far in curtailing alike the claims of the Government and the rights of the cultivators; and when, upon the recent annexation of that kingdom, this matter came under revision, the Commissioners charged with making the settlement soon got into a very acrimonious controversy with them as to the real extent of their rights. Hence resulted a state of discontent on their part which led them to make common cause with the revolted Sepoys. By those who incline to the policy above indicated⎯that of a system of village settlement⎯looking at the actual cultivators as invested with a proprietary right in the land, superior to that of the middle-men, through whom the Government receives its share of the landed produce⎯the

304

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Lord Canning’s Proclamation and Land Tenure in India

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

proclamation of Lord Canning is defended as an advantage taken of the position in which the great body of the zemindars and talookdars of Oude had placed themselves, to open a door for the introduction of much more extensive reforms than otherwise would have been practicable⎯the proprietary right confiscated by that proclamation being merely the zemindarree or talookdarree right, and affecting only a very small part of the population, and that by no means the actual cultivators. Independently of any question of justice and humanity, the view taken on the other hand by the Derby Ministry of Lord Canning’s proclamation, corresponds sufficiently well with the general principles which the Tory or Conservative party maintain on the sacredness of vested rights and the importance of upholding an aristocratic landed interest. In speaking of the landed interest at home, they always refer rather to the landlords and rent-receivers than to the rent-payers and to the actual cultivators; and it is, therefore, not surprising that they should regard the interests of the zemindars and talookdars, however few their actual number, as equivalent to the interests of the great body of the people. Here indeed is one of the greatest inconveniences and difficulties in the Government of India from England, that views of Indian questions are liable to be influenced by purely English prejudices or sentiments, applied to a state of society and a condition of things to which they have in fact very little real pertinency. The defense which Lord Canning makes in his dispatch, published to-day, of the policy of his proclamation against the objections of Sir James Outram, the Commissioner of Oude, is very plausible, though it appears that he so far yielded to the representations of the Commissioner as to insert into the proclamation the modifying sentence, not contained in the original draft sent to England, and on which Lord Ellenborough’s dispatch was based. Lord Canning’s opinion as to the light in which the conduct of landholders of Oude in joining in the rebellion ought to be viewed does not appear to differ much from that of Sir James Outram and Lord Ellenborough. He argues that they stand in a very different position not only from the mutinous Sepoys, but from that of the inhabitants of rebellious districts in which the British rule had been longer established. He admits that they are entitled to be treated as persons having provocation for the course they took; but at the same time insists that they must be made to understand that rebellion cannot be resorted to without involving serious consequences to themselves. We shall soon learn what the effect of the issue of the proclamation has been, and whether Lord Canning or Sir James Outram was nearer right in his anticipation of its results.

305

Karl Marx Bonaparte’s Financial Maneuvers⎯Military Despotism

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5348, 11. Juni 1858.

From an Occasional Correspondent. Paris, May 27, 1858. The dilapidated state of the Bonapartist Exchequer cannot longer be said to form a matter of dispute. It has been openly proclaimed by the “savior of property” himself. In no other way is it possible to account for General Espinasse’s circular to the French Prefects, calling upon them to use their influence, and, “if need be, their authority,” in order to induce the trustees of hospitals and other charitable institutions to convert the real property from which they derive their revenues into three per cent consols. That property amounts to $100,000,000, but, as Bonaparte, in the name of the poor, bewails, does not report an income of more than 21/2 per cent. If invested in the Funds the revenue would improve by at least one half. In his paternal solicitude Bonaparte had recently bid the Council of State to initiate a law for this conversion of the landed property of the charitable establishments into funded property, but, strange to say, his own Council of State doggedly declined to take the hint. What he thus failed in effecting in the legislative way he now tries to get at in the “executive way,” by a military ordre du jour. There are some people silly enough to fancy that he only intends increasing the funds by the maneuver. Nothing can be further off the mark. If the above-named landed property was sold at its nominal value of $100,000,000, a great part of that purchase money would of course be forthcoming from capital till now invested in consols and other public securities, so that the artificially created demand for the funds would be met by heaps of them thrown into the open market. The operation might even result in a further depression of the security market. However, Bonaparte’s scheme is of a much sounder and more intelligible character. For the 100,000,000 of landed property he intends creating 100,000,000 of new Rentes. With the one hand he wants to seize the property of the charitable establishments,

306

5

10

15

20

25

Bonaparte’s Financial Maneuvers⎯Military Despotism

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

and with the other to indemnify them by drawing a cheque upon the “grand livre” of the nation. On a former occasion, when examining the French Bank act of 1857, we dwelt upon the enormous privileges Bonaparte had bestowed upon the Bank, at the cost of the State, with a view to secure himself a miserable loan of $20,000,000. We considered that Bank act as a financial cry of distress on the part of the savior of society, but since that time the disasters overwhelming French commerce, industry and agriculture have rebounded upon the Exchequer, while its expenses were increasing at an awful ratio. The different ministries for 1859 actually require 79,804,004 francs more than they did in 1853; the expense for the army alone amounting to 51 per cent of the total receipts of the country. The Cre´dit Mobilier, unable to pay a dividend to its own shareholders, and whose last report, if closely scrutinized, shows a considerable surplus of liabilities over assets, cannot, as it did in 1854 and 1855, come to the rescue and help raise loans on “democratic” principles. There remains, then, nothing for Bonaparte but to return, in financial matters, as he has been forced to do in political ones, to the original principles of the coup d’e´tat. The financial policy initiated by the theft from the Bank cellars of 25,000,000 francs, continued in the confiscation of the Orleans estates, is now to receive a further development in the confiscation of the property of the charitable establishments. The latter operation, however, would cost Bonaparte one of his armies, his army of priests, who administer by far the greatest portion of the charitable establishments. Already, for the first time since the coup d’e´tat, the Univers dares openly dissent from the savior of society, and even implores the Sie`cle to make common cause against this intended encroachment upon “private property.” While the “eldest son of the Church” is placed in this rather equivocal position toward his holy army, his most profane army simultaneously threatens to become unmanageable. If he should interfere, in real good earnest, with the amusements of such heroes as Messrs. De Mercy, Le´audais and Hyenne, he will lose his hold on the only portion of the army on which he can rely. If, on the contrary, he allows that pretorian corruption which he has so systematically fostered since the days of the Camp of Satory boldly to show its front, all discipline will be at an end, and the army prove unable to withstand any shock from without. Another such event as the assassination of the re´dacteur of the Figaro, and that shock will take place. The general exasperation prevailing may be inferred from the one fact, that when the account of the duel got to Paris about 5,000 young men flocked to the bureaux of the Figaro, requesting to be inscribed upon a list, as ready to fight with any sub-lieutenant who

307

Karl Marx

might be forthcoming. The Figaro, of course, is itself a Bonapartist creation, heading that literature of scandal and chantage and private slander which suddenly shot up after the violent extinction of the political press, and found in the soil and atmosphere of the lesser Empire all the conditions for a luxuriant growth. It is a fine trait of historical irony that the signal for the impending conflict should be given by the murderous quarrel between the literary and the military representatives of the Bonapartist swell mob.

308

5

Friedrich Engels The British Army in India

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5361, 26. Juni 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

Our indiscreet friend, Mr. William Russell of The London Times, has recently been induced, by his love of the picturesque, to illustrate, for the second time, the sack of Lucknow, to a degree which other people will not think very flattering to the British character. It now appears that Delhi, too, was “looted” to a very considerable extent, and that besides the Kaiserbagh, the city of Lucknow generally contributed to reward the British soldier for his previous privations and heroic efforts. We quote from Mr. Russell: “There are companies which can boast of privates with thousands of pounds’ worth in their ranks. One man I heard of who complacently offered to lend an officer ‘whatever sum he wanted if he wished to buy over the Captain.’ Others have remitted large sums to their friends. Ere this letter reaches England, many a diamond, emerald and delicate pearl will have told its tale in a very quiet, pleasant way, of the storm and sack of the Kaiserbagh. It is as well that the fair wearers ... saw not how the glittering baubles were won, or the scenes in which the treasure was trove. ... Some of these officers have made, literally, their fortunes. ... There are certain small caskets in battered uniform cases which contain estates in Scotland and Ireland, and snug fishing and shooting boxes in every game-haunted or salmon-frequented angle of the world.” This, then, accounts for the inactivity of the British army after the conquest of Lucknow. The fortnight devoted to plunder was well spent. Officers and soldiers went into the town poor and debt-ridden, and came out suddenly enriched. They were no longer the same men; yet they were expected to return to their former military duty, to submission, silent obedience, fatigue, privation and battle. But this is out of the question. The army, disbanded for the purpose of plunder, is changed for ever; no word of command, no prestige of the General, can make it again what it once was. Listen again to Mr. Russell:

309

Friedrich Engels

“It is curious to observe how riches develop disease; how one’s liver is affected by loot, and what tremendous ravages in one’s family, among the nearest and dearest, can be caused by a few crystals of carbon. ... The weight of the belt round the private’s waist, full of rupees and gold mohurs, assures him the vision (of a comfortable independency at home) can be realized, and it is no wonder he resents the ‘fall in, then, fall in!’ ... Two battles, two shares of prize-money, the plunder of two cities, and many pickings by the way, have made some of our men too rich for easy soldiering.” Accordingly, we hear that above 150 officers have sent in their resignations to Sir Colin Campbell⎯a very singular proceeding indeed in an army before the enemy, which in any other service would be followed up in twenty-four hours by cashiering and severest punishment otherwise, but which, we suppose, is considered in the British army as a very proper act for “an officer and a gentleman” who has suddenly made his fortune. As to the private soldiers, with them the proceeding is different. Loot engenders the desire for more; and if no more Indian treasures are at hand for the purpose, why not loot those of the British Government? Accordingly, says Mr. Russell: “There has been a suspicious upsetting of two treasure tumbrils under a European guard, in which some few rupees were missing, and paymasters exhibit a preference for natives in the discharge of the delicate duty of convoy! ” Very good, indeed. The Hindoo or Sikh is better disciplined, less thieving, less rapacious than that incomparable model of a warrior, the British soldier! But so far we have seen the individual Briton only employed. Let us now cast a glance at the British army, “looting” in its collective capacity: “Every day adds to the prize property, and it is estimated that the sales will produce £600,000. The town of Cawnpore is said to be full of the plunder of Lucknow; and if the damage done to public buildings, the destruction of private property, the deterioration in value of houses and land, and the results of depopulation could be estimated, it would be found that the capital of Oude has sustained a loss of five or six millions sterling.” The Calmuck hordes of Genghis Khan and Timur, falling upon a city like a swarm of locusts, and devouring everything that came in their way, must have been a blessing to a country, compared with the irruption of these Christian, civilized, chivalrous and gentle British soldiers. The former, at least, soon passed away on their erratic course; but these methodic Englishmen bring along with them their prize-agents, who convert loot

310

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The British Army in India

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

into a system, who register the plunder, sell it by auction, and keep a sharp look-out that British heroism is not defrauded of a tittle of its reward. We shall watch with curiosity the capabilities of this army, relaxed as its discipline is by the effects of wholesale plunder, at a time when the fatigues of a hot weather campaign require the greatest stringency of discipline. The Hindoos must, however, by this time be still less fit for regular battle than they were at Lucknow, but that is not now the main question. It is far more important to know what shall be done if the insurgents, after a show of resistance, again shift the seat of war, say to Rajpootana, which is far from being subdued. Sir Colin Campbell must leave garrisons everywhere; his field army has melted down to less than one-half of the force he had before Lucknow. If he is to occupy Rohilcund what disposable strength will remain for the field? The hot weather is now upon him; in June the rains must have put a stop to active campaigning, and allowed the insurgents breathing time. The loss of European soldiers through sickness will have increased every day after the middle of April, when the weather became oppressive; and the young men imported into India last Winter must succumb to the climate in far greater numbers than the seasoned Indian campaigners who last Summer fought under Havelock and Wilson. Rohilcund is no more the decisive point than Lucknow was, or Delhi. The insurrection, it is true, has lost most of its capacity for pitched battles; but it is far more formidable in its present scattered form, which compels the English to ruin their army by marching and exposure. Look at the many new centers of resistance. There is Rohilcund, where the mass of the old Sepoys are collected; there is Northeastern Oude beyond the Gogra, where the Oudians have taken up position; there is Calpee, which for the present serves as a point of concentration for the insurgents of Bundlecund. We shall most likely hear in a few weeks, if not sooner, that both Bareilly and Calpee have fallen. The former will be of little importance, inasmuch as it will serve to absorb nearly all, if not the whole of Campbell’s disposable forces. Calpee, menaced now by General Whitlock, who has led his column from Nagpoor to Banda, in Bundlecund, and by General Rose, who approaches from Jhansi, and has defeated the advanced guard of the Calpee forces, will be a more important conquest; it will free Campbell’s base of operations, Cawnpore, from the only danger menacing it, and thus perhaps enable him to recruit his field forces to some extent by troops set at liberty thereby. But it is very doubtful whether there will be enough to do more than to clear Oude.

311

Friedrich Engels

Thus, the strongest army England ever concentrated on one point in India is again scattered in all directions, and has more work cut out than it can conveniently do. The ravages of the climate, during the Summer’s heats and rains, must be terrible; and whatever the moral superiority of the European over the Hindoos, it is very doubtful whether the physical superiority of the Hindoos in braving the heat and rains of an Indian Summer will not again be the means of destroying the English forces. There are at present but few British troops on the road to India, and it is not intended to send out large re-enforcements before July and August. Up to October and November, therefore, Campbell has but that one army, melting down rapidly as it is, to hold his own with. What if in the mean time the insurgent Hindoos succeed in raising Rajpootana and Mahratta country in rebellion? What if the Sikhs, of whom there are 80,000 in the British service, and who claim all the honor of the victories for themselves, and whose temper is not altogether favorable to the British, were to rise? Altogether, one more Winter’s campaign, at least, appears to be in store for the British in India, and that cannot be carried on without another army from England.

312

5

10

15

Karl Marx The State of British Commerce

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5356, 21. Juni 1858.

The State of British Commerce. Correspondence of The N. Y. Tribune. London, June 8, 1858. 5

10

15

20

25

The trade and navigation tables just published by the British Board of Trade comprise an account of the declared value of the exports of the United Kingdom in the three months ending 31st March, 1858, compared with the corresponding period of the year 1857; an account of the number and tunnage of vessels entered inward and cleared outward, with cargoes, in the four months ending 30th April, 1858, compared with the corresponding period of the years 1856 and 1857; and, lastly, an account of the principal exports and imports for the four months ending 30th April, 1858. The amount of the exports for the month of April, 1858, is £9,451,000, against £9,965,000 in 1857, and £9,424,000 in 1856, while for the four months there is a reduction of nearly £6,000,000 in the year 1858. Accordingly the British exports of the month of April, 1858, would appear not only to have risen above to level of 1856, but closely to approach that reached in 1857, some months prior to the commercial explosion in the United States. Hence it might be inferred that the last traces of the crisis are rapidly disappearing, and that British commerce, at least, is again entering a new epoch of expansion. Such a conclusion, however, would be altogether erroneous. In the first place, it must be considered that the official statistics, as far as they relate to declared value, do not show the actual returns, but the returns as anticipated by the exporters. Moreover, a closer examination of the tables of exports proves that the apparent recovery of British commerce is mainly due to an over-importation of East India, which must lead to a violent contraction of that market. Already we read in the last commercial circular of Messrs. George Frazer & Company: “The later advices from the East

313

Karl Marx

show symptoms of reaction from the extraordinary high range of prices which have been current in Bombay and in Calcutta during the period when supplies there were so short. A not inconsiderable decline has already been submitted to upon the arrival out of cargoes which were shipped not later than December. The supplies since then have been to both markets most liberal, if not excessive; and it seems very probable, therefore, that for some time to come we must look for less support to prices from the great activity of the Eastern demand than has been so far experienced since the beginning of January.” Beside India, those European and other countries which till now had not been reached by the effects of the commercial crisis, have been blocked up by British merchandise, not in consequence of increased demand, but by way of experiment. The countries thus blessed were Belgium, Spain and its dependencies, some Italian States⎯principally the Two Sicilies⎯Egypt, Mexico, Central America, Peru, China, and some minor markets. At the very time when the most disastrous news was arriving from Brazil and put a check upon the aggregate export to that country, some branches of British industry, compelled to find an outlet for their exuberant produce, did not only not curtail, but actually augment their shipments for that market. Thus, during the month of April, linens, earthenware and porcelain, destined for Brazil, were increasing in quantity as well as declared value. Nobody can consider this bona fide exports. The same remark holds true with respect to Australia, which had acted as so elastic a center of absorption during the first months of the crisis. Australia was then and is still overstocked; a sudden reaction took place; the aggregate exports thither were diminished, but again some branches of British industry, instead of contracting, have actually expanded⎯speculatively, of course⎯their supplies in spite of the warnings of all the Australian local papers. The export tables of the month of April, therefore, must be considered not as the bona fide standard of the recovery of British industry, but as mere feelers thrown out in order to ascertain what pressure the markets of the world are again able to bear. The following table contains an account of the declared value of the British and Irish exports in the three months ending 31st of March, 1858, compared with the corresponding period of the year 1857:

314

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

The State of British Commerce

Foreign Countries to which Exported. 1857.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Russia, Northern Ports Russia, Southern Ports Sweden Norway Denmark Prussia Mecklenburg Hanover Oldenburg Hanse Towns Holland Belgium France Portugal proper Azores Madeira Spain Canary Islands Sardinia Tuscany Papal States Two Sicilies Austrian Territories Greece Turkey Wallachia and Moldavia Syria and Palestine Egypt (ports on the Mediterranean) Tunis Algeria Morocco Western Coast of Africa (foreign) Eastern Coast of Africa African Ports on the Red Sea Cape Verd Islands Java Philippine Islands China (exclusive of Hong Kong) South Sea Islands Foreign West Indies United States (Ports on the Atlantic) California Mexico Central America New-Granada

£3,015 72,777 48,007 30,217 92,046 133,000 9,502 228,648 3,520 2,318,260 1,305,606 515,175 1,631,672 380,160 10,793 9,955 496,788 18,817 290,131 189,534 69,953 284,045 253,042 40,860 969,288 111,052 199,070 449,497 865 4,790 55,826 235,527 301 1,130 2,419 234,071 144,992 290,441 ⎯ 620,022 6,231,501 50,219 112,277 22,453 88,502

1858. £8,853 42,493 3,717 5,911 40,148 78,917 3,099 236,669 1,957 1,645,419 975,428 546,033 1,035,096 356,178 12,581 16,245 584,287 8,475 293,138 257,508 123,059 375,177 323,086 69,570 821,204 98,135 81,874 483,516 2,323 4,831 37,206 196,484 1,927 567 3,965 149,493 212,942 389,647 585 521,435 2,565,566 94,147 151,890 46,201 117,411

315

Karl Marx

Venezuela Ecuador Brazil Uruguay Buenos Ayres Chili Peru Total to foreign countries

[1857.

1858.]

105,417 2,099 1,292,325 145,481 285,187 336,309 209,889

62,685 ⎯ 826,583 177,281 279,913 270,176 299,725

£20,636,473

£14,940,756

British Possessions. Channel Islands £136,071 Gibraltar 152,926 Malta 116,821 Ionian Islands 66,148 West Coast of Africa (British) 135,452 Cape of Good Hope 442,796 Natal 26,605 Ascension 3,832 St. Helena 3,837 Mauritius 142,303 Aden 11,263 British Territories in the East Indies (exclusive of Singapore and Ceylon) 2,822,009 Singapore 101,535 Ceylon 98,817 Hong Kong 133,743 West Australia 15,515 South Australia 180,123 New South Wales 706,337 Victoria 1,427,248 Tasmania 67,550 New-Zealand 96,893 British North American Colonies 818,560 British West India Islands 334,024 British Guiana 122,249 Honduras (British Settlements) 28,363 Total to British Possessions £8,191,020 Total to Foreign Countries and British Possessions

28,827,493

10

£120,431 210,575 131,238 52,849 62,343 403,579 23,106 2,308 8,416 164,042 11,996 3,502,664 308,545 153,090 242,757 13,813 249,162 682,265 1,056,537 82,942 93,768 439,433 426,421 95,385 31,869 £8,569,534

15

20

25

30

35

23,510,290

The Economist thinks that, from an accurate analysis of these figures, “the curious fact is disclosed that the entire decrease has taken place in the British trade to foreign countries as contrasted with the colonial possessions.” In fact, the above tables may be condensed as follows:

316

5

40

The State of British Commerce

Exports for three months. 1857. To foreign countries £20,636,473 To British possessions 8,191,020 Total

5

10

15

20

25

£28,827,493

1858. £14,940,756 8,569,534 £23,510,290

Yet the conclusion arrived at by The Economist seems a fallacy. According to the condensed statement there would appear to have taken place a reduction in the trade to foreign countries to the amount of £5,695,717, simultaneously with an increase of £378,514 in the colonial trade. However, if we deduct the increase in the trade of British smuggling-places such as Gibraltar, Malta, Hong Kong, and of mere depots for foreign countries, such as Singapore, a decrease in the aggregate colonial trade becomes evident; and if we deduct India, the decrease appears very considerable. Of the decrease in the trade to foreign countries, the main percentage falls upon the following countries: United States Brazil Hanse Towns France Holland

1857.

1858.

£6,231,501 1,292,325 2,318,260 1,631,672 1,305,606

£2,565,566 826,583 1,645,410 1,035,096 975,428

The accounts relating to navigation show a slight increase in the number as well as tunnage of the British vessels entered inward, but a decrease in the number and tunnage of the vessels cleared outward. Of foreign countries, the navigation of the United States continues to maintain the first rank. The following figures show the movement of their vessels to and from the British ports: Entered Inward. 1856.

1858.

Ships.

Tunnage.

Ships.

Tunnage.

Ships.

Tun’ge.

United States

382

383,255

367

366,407

366

366,650

United States

414

395,102

Cleared Outward. 440 427,221

343

321,015

30

35

1857.

According to the same accounts, Norway, Denmark and Russia seem the countries upon whose navigation the commercial crisis told with the most disastrous effect.

317

Karl Marx Political Parties in England⎯The State of Europe

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5359, 24. Juni 1858.

England offers at this moment the curious spectacle of dissolution appearing at the summit of the State, while at the base of society all seems immovable. There is no audible agitation among the masses, but there is a visible change among their rulers. Shall we believe that the upper strata are liquefying, while the lower remain in the same dull solidity? We are, of course, not alluding to the cynical attempts of Palmerston and his compeers to “loot” the Treasury. The battles between the exiles and their proscribers form no more a standing feature in the medieval annals of Italian towns than the conflicts between the Ins and Outs in the Parliamentary history of England. But now we have the Tory leader in the House of Commons winding up a speech with the ominous declaration that “There is one bond of union between us íthe Radicals and the Toriesî in this House and in this country; and that is, that we shall not any longer be the tools or the victims of an obsolete oligarchy!” There is the House of Lords passing one point of the People’s Charter⎯the abolition of the property qualification for the members of the Commons; there is Lord Grey, the descendant of the Whig Reformer, warning his noble compeers that they are drifting to “a total revolution in the whole system of their Government and in the character of their Constitution;” there is the Duke of Rutland frightened out of his senses by the vista of having to swallow “the whole hog of the five points of the Charter, and something more.” And then The London Times in sinister accents one day cautions the middle classes that Disraeli and Bulwer wish them no good, and, in order to master them, may ally themselves with the vile multitude; and then, the very next day, it warns the landed aristocracy that they are to be swamped by the shopocracy, to be enthroned through Locke King’s bill, which has just passed through its second reading in the Lower House, for the extension of the elective franchise to the £10 occupiers in the counties.

318

5

10

15

20

25

Political Parties in England⎯The State of Europe

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The fact is that the two ruling oligarchic parties of England were long ago transformed into mere factions, without any distinctive principles. Having in vain tried first a coalition and then a dictatorship, they are now arrived at the point where each of them can only think of obtaining a respite of life by betraying their common interest into the hands of their common foe, the radical middle-class party, who are powerfully represented in the Commons by John Bright. Till now, the Tories have been aristocrats ruling in the name of the aristocracy, and the Whigs aristocrats ruling in the name of the middle class; but the middle class having assumed to rule in their own name, the business of the Whigs is gone. In order to keep the Whigs out of office, the Tories will yield to the encroachments of the middle-class party until they have worried out Whig patience and convinced those oligarchs that, in order to save the interests of their order, they must merge in the conservative ranks and forsake their traditionary pretensions to represent the liberal interest or form a power of their own. Absorption of the Whig faction into the Tory faction, and their common metamorphosis into the party of the aristocracy, as opposed to the new middle-class party, acting under its own chiefs, under its own banners, with its own watchwords⎯such is the consummation we are now witnessing in England. If we consider this state of internal affairs in England, and couple with it the fact that the Indian war will continue to drain her of men and money, we may feel sure that she will be disabled from clogging, as she did in 1848, the European Revolution that draws visibly nearer. There is another great power which, ten years ago, most powerfully checked the revolutionary current. We mean Russia. This time, combustible matter has accumulated under her own feet, which a strong blast from the West may suddenly set on fire. The symptoms of a servile war are so visible in the interior of Russia, that the Provincial Governors feel themselves unable otherwise to account for the unwonted fermentation than by charging Austria with propagating through secret emissaries Socialist and revolutionary doctrines all over the land. Think only of Austria being not only suspected but publicly accused of acting as the emissary of revolution! The Galician massacres have, indeed, fully proved to the world that the Cabinet of Vienna knows, in case of need, how to teach serfs a socialism of its own. Austria, however, angrily retorts the charge, by the statement that her eastern provinces are overrun and poisoned through Russian Panslavist agents, while her Italian subjects are wrought upon by the combined intrigues of Bonaparte and the Czar. Prussia, finally, is keenly awake to the dangers of the situation; but she is bound hand and foot, and interdicted from moving in any direction. The royal power is, in

319

Karl Marx

fact, broken by the insanity of the King, and the want of full powers on the part of the Regent. The strife between the camarilla of the King, who refuses to resign, and the camarilla of the Prince, who dares not to reign, has opened a floodgate for the popular torrent. Everything, then, depends upon France, and there the commercial and agricultural distress, financial coup d’e´tat, and the substitution of the rule of the army for rule by the army, are hastening the explosion. Even the French press at length admits that all hopes of a return of prosperity must be abandoned for the present. “We believe that it would be foolish to tantalize the public with the chimerical hope of an immediate reaction,” says the Constitutionnel. “The stagnation continues, and in spite of the existing favorable elements, we must not expect any immediate modification,” says the Patrie. The Union and the Univers re-echo these complaints. “It is generally admitted that there has not been more commercial distress experienced in Paris since the Revolution of 1848 than at the present moment,” says the Paris correspondent of The London Times; and the shares of the Cre´dit Mobilier have sunk down to something like 550 frs., that is, below the nominal price at which they were sold to the general public. On the other hand, the emptiness of the Imperial exchequer forces Napoleon to insist on his plan of confiscation. “The only thing to be asked is,” says a clerical paper appearing at Anjou, “whether or not property is to be respected.” Property indeed! The only thing to be asked at this moment, answers Bonaparte, is how to make sure of the army? and he solves this question in his habitual way. The whole army is to be bought anew. He has ordered a general increase of its wages. Meanwhile England is alarmed and Austria in terror. On all hands, war is believed to be imminent. Louis Napoleon has no other means of escaping speedy destruction. The beginning of the end is at hand.

320

5

10

15

20

25

Karl Marx The British Government and the Slave-Trade

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5366, 2. Juli 1858.

The British Government and the Slave-Trade. Correspondence of The N. Y. Tribune. London, June 18, 1858. 5

10

15

20

25

In the sitting of the House of Lords on June 17, the question of the slavetrade was introduced by the Bishop of Oxford, who presented a petition against that trade from the Parish of St. Mary in Jamaica. The impression these debates are sure to produce upon every mind not strongly prejudiced is that of great moderation on the part of the present British Government, and its firm purpose of avoiding any pretext of quarrel with the United States. Lord Malmesbury dropped altogether the “right of visit,” as far as ships under the American flag are concerned, by the following declaration: “The United States say that on no account, for no purpose, and upon no suspicion shall a ship carrying the American flag be boarded except by an American ship, unless at the risk of the officer boarding or detaining her. I have not admitted the international law as laid down by the American Minister for Foreign Affairs, until that statement had been approved and fortified by the law officers of the Crown. But having admitted that, I have put it as strong as possible to the American Government that if it is known that the American flag covers every iniquity, every pirate and slaver on earth will carry it and no other; that this must bring disgrace on that honored banner, and that instead of vindicating the honor of the country by an obstinate adherence to their present declaration the contrary result will follow; that the American flag will be prostituted to the worst of purposes. I shall continue to urge that it is necessary in these civilized times, with countless vessels navigating the

321

Karl Marx

ocean, that there should be a police on the ocean; that there should be, if not a right by international law, an agreement among nations how far they would go to verify the nationality of vessels, and ascertain their right to bear a particular flag. From the language I have used, from the conversations which I had with the American Minister resident in this country, and from the observations contained in a very able paper drawn up by Gen. Cass on this subject, I am not without strong hope that some arrangement of this kind may be made with the United States, which, with the orders given to the officers of both countries, may enable us to verify the flags of all countries, without running the risk of offense to the country to which a ship belongs.” On the Opposition benches there was also no attempt made at vindicating the right of visit on the part of Great Britain against the United States, but, as Earl Grey remarked, “The English had treaties with Spain and other powers for the prevention of the slave-trade, and if they had reasonable grounds for suspecting that a vessel was engaged in this abominable traffic, and that she had for the time made use of the United States flag, that she was not really an American ship at all, they had a right to overhaul her and to search her. If, however, she produced the American papers, even though she be full of slaves, it was their duty to discharge her, and to leave to the United States the disgrace of that iniquitous traffic. He hoped and trusted that the orders to their cruisers were strict in this respect, and that any excess of that discretion which was allowed their officers under the circumstances would meet with proper punishment.” The question then turns exclusively upon the point, and even this point seems abandoned by Lord Malmesbury, whether or not vessels suspected of usurping the American flag may not be called upon to produce their papers. Lord Aberdeen directly denied that any controversy could arise out of such a practice, since the instructions under which the British officers were to proceed on such an occurrence⎯instructions drawn up by Dr. Lushington and Sir G. Cockburn⎯had been communicated at the time to the American Government and acquiesced in by Mr. Webster, on the part of that Government. If, therefore, there had been no change in these instructions, and if the officers had acted within their limits, “the American Government could have no ground of complaint.” There seemed, indeed, a strong suspicion hovering in the minds of the hereditary wisdom, that Palmerston had played one of his usual tricks by effecting some arbitrary change in the orders issued to the British cruisers. It is known that Palmerston, while boasting of his zeal in the suppression of the slave-trade, had, during the eleven years of his administration of foreign affairs, ending in 1841, broken up all the exist-

322

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The British Government and the Slave-Trade

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

ing slave-trade treaties, had ordered acts which the British law authorities pronounced criminal, and which actually subjected one of his instruments to legal procedure and placed a slave-dealer under the protection of the law of England against its own Government. He chose the slavetrade as his field of battle, and converted it into a mere instrument of provoking quarrels between England and other States. Before leaving office in 1841 he had given instructions which, according to the words of Sir Robert Peel, “must have led, had they not been countermanded, to a collision with the United States.” In his own words, he had enjoined the naval officers “to have no very nice regard to the law of nations.” Lord Malmesbury, although in very reserved language, intimated that “by sending the British squadrons to the Cuban waters, instead of leaving them on the coast of Africa,” Palmerston removed them from a station where, before the outbreak of the Russian war, they had almost succeeded in extinguishing the slave-trade, to a place where they could be good for little else than picking up a quarrel with the United States. Lord Wodehouse, Palmerston’s own late Embassador to the Court of St. Petersburg, concurring in this view of the case, remarked that, “No matter what instructions had been given, if the Government gave authority to the British vessels to go in such numbers into the American waters, a difference would sooner or later arise between us and the United States.” Yet, whatever may have been Palmerston’s secret intentions, it is evident that they are baffled by the Tory Government in 1858, as they had been in 1842, and that the war cry so lustily raised in the Congress and in the press is doomed to result in “much ado about nothing.” As to the question of the slave-trade itself, Spain was denounced by the Bishop of Oxford, as well as Lord Brougham, as the main stay of that nefarious traffic. Both of them called upon the British Government to force, by every means in its power, that country into a course of policy consonant to existing treaties. As early as 1814 a general treaty was entered into between Great Britain and Spain, by which the latter passed an unequivocal condemnation of the slave-trade. In 1817 a specific treaty was concluded, by which Spain fixed the abolition of the slave-trade, on the part of her own subjects, for the year 1820, and, by way of compensation for the losses her subjects might suffer by carrying out the contract, received an indemnity of £400,000. The money was pocketed, but no equivalent was tendered for it. In 1835 a new treaty was entered into, by which Spain bound herself formally to bring in a sufficiently stringent penal law to make it impossible for her subjects to continue the traffic. The procrastinating Spanish proverb, “A la man˜ana,” was again strictly adhered to. It was only ten years later that the penal law was carried; but,

323

Karl Marx

by a singular mischance, the principal clause contended for by England was left out, namely, that of making the slave-trade piracy. In one word, nothing was done, save that the Captain-General of Cuba, the Minister at home, the Camarilla, and, if rumor speaks truth, royal personages themselves, raised a private tax upon the slavers, selling the license of dealing in human flesh and blood at so many doubloons per head. “Spain,” said the Bishop of Oxford, “had not the excuse that this traffic was a system which her Government was not strong enough to put down, because Gen. Valdez had shown that such a plea could not be urged with any show of truth. On his arrival in the island he called together the principal contractors, and, giving them six months’ time to close all their transactions in the slave-trade, told them that he was determined to put it down at the end of that period. What was the result? In 1840, the year previous to the administration of Gen. Valdez, the number of ships which came to Cuba from the coast of Africa with slaves was 56. In 1842, while Gen. Valdez was Captain-General, the number was only 3. In 1840 no less than 14,470 slaves were landed at the island; in 1842 the number was 3,100.” Now what shall England do with Spain? Repeat her protests, multiply her dispatches, renew her negotiations? Lord Malmesbury himself states that they could cover all the waters from the Spanish coast to Cuba with the documents vainly exchanged between the two Governments. Or shall England enforce her claims, sanctioned by so many treaties? Here it is that the shoe pinches. In steps the sinister figure of the “august ally,” now the acknowledged guardian angel of the slave-trade. The third Bonaparte, the patron of Slavery in all its forms, forbids England to act up to her convictions and her treaties. Lord Malmesbury, it is known, is strongly suspected of an undue intimacy with the hero of Satory. Nevertheless, he denounced him in plain terms as the general slavedealer of Europe⎯as the man who had revived the infamous traffic in its worst features under the pretext of “free emigration” of the blacks to the French colonies. Earl Grey completed this denunciation by stating that “wars had been undertaken in Africa for the purpose of making captives, who were to be sold to the agents of the French Government.” The Earl of Clarendon added that “both Spain and France were rivals in the African market, offering a certain sum per man; and there was not the least difference in the treatment of these negroes, whether they were conveyed to Cuba or to a French colony.” Such, then, is the glorious position England finds herself in by having lent her help to that man in overthrowing the Republic. The second Republic, like the first one, had abolished Slavery. Bonaparte, who acquired his power solely by truckling to the meanest passions of men, is unable to prolong it save by buying day

324

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The British Government and the Slave-Trade

5

10

by day new accomplices. Thus he has not only restored Slavery, but has bought the planters by the renewal of the slave-trade. Everything degrading the conscience of the nation, is a new lease of power granted to him. To convert France into a slave-trading nation would be the surest means of enslaving France, who, when herself, had the boldness of proclaiming in the face of the world: Let the colonies perish, but let principles live! One thing at least has been accomplished by Bonaparte. The slave-trade has become a battle-cry between the Imperialist and the Republican camps. If the French Republic be restored to-day, to-morrow Spain will be forced to abandon the infamous traffic.

325

Friedrich Engels Cavalry

The New American Cyclopædia. Vol. 4. New York 1858.

600 CAVALRY (Fr. cavalerie, from cavalier, a horseman, from cheval, a horse), a body of soldiers on horseback. The use of the horse for riding, and the introduction of bodies of mounted men into armies, naturally originated in those countries to which the horse is indigenous, and where the climate and gramineous productions of the soil favored the development of all its physical capabilities. While the horse in Europe and tropical Asia soon degenerated into a clumsy animal or an undersized pony, the breed of Arabia, Persia, Asia Minor, Egypt, and the north coast of Africa attained great beauty, speed, docility, and endurance. But it appears that at first it was used in harness only; at least in military history the war chariot long precedes the armed horseman. The Egyptian monuments show plenty of war chariots, but with a single exception no horsemen; and that exception appears to belong to the Roman period. Still it is certain that at least a couple of centuries before the country was conquered by the Persians, the Egyptians had a numerous cavalry, and the commander of this arm is more than once named among the most important officials of the court. It is very likely that the Egyptians became acquainted with cavalry during their war with the Assyrians; for on the Assyrian monuments horsemen are often delineated, and their use in war with Assyrian armies at a very early period is established beyond a doubt. With them, also, the saddle appears to have originated. In the older sculptures the soldier rides the bare back of the animal; at a later epoch we find a kind of pad or cushion introduced, and finally a high saddle similar to that now used all over the East. The Persians and Medians, at the time they appear in history, were a nation of horsemen. Though they retained the war chariot, and even left to it its ancient precedence over the younger arm of cavalry, yet the great numerical strength of the mounted men gave the latter an importance it had never possessed in any former service. The cavalry of the Assyrians, Egyptians, and Persians consisted of that kind which still prevails in the East, and

326

5

10

15

20

25

30

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

which, up to very recent times, was alone employed in northern Africa, Asia, and eastern Europe, irregular cavalry. But no sooner had the Greeks so far improved their breed of horses by crosses with the eastern horse, as to fit them for cavalry purposes, than they began to organize the arm upon a new principle. They are the creators of both regular infantry and regular cavalry. They formed the masses of fighting men into distinct bodies, armed and equipped them according to the purpose they were intended for, and taught them to act in concert, to move in ranks and files, to keep together in a definite tactical formation, and thus to throw the weight of their concentrated and advancing mass upon a given point of the enemy’s front. Thus organized, they proved everywhere superior to the undrilled, unwieldy, and uncontrolled mobs brought against them by the Asiatics. We have no instance of a combat of Grecian cavalry against Persian horsemen before the time the Persians themselves had formed bodies of a more regular kind of cavalry; but there can be no doubt that the result would have been the same as when the infantry of both nations met in battle. Cavalry, at first, was organized by the horse-breeding countries of Greece only, such as Thessalia and Bœotia; but, very soon after, the Athenians formed a body of heavy cavalry, beside mounted archers for outpost and skirmishing duty. The Spartans, too, had the e´lite of their youth formed into a body of horseguards; but they had no faith in cavalry, and made them dismount in battle, and fight as infantry. From the Greeks of Asia Minor, as well as from the Greek mercenaries serving in their army, the Persians learned the formation of regular cavalry, and there is no doubt that a considerable portion of the Persian horse that fought against Alexander the Great were more or less trained to act in compact bodies in a regular manner. The Macedonians, however, were more than a match for them. With that people horsemanship was an accomplishment indispensable to the young nobility, and cavalry held a high rank in their army. The cavalry of Philip and Alexander consisted of the Macedonian and Thessalian nobility, with a few squadrons recruited in Greece proper. It was composed of heavy horsemen⎯cataphractæ⎯armed with helmet and breastplate, cuisses, and a long spear. It usually charged in a compact body, in an oblong or wedge-shaped column, sometimes also in line. The light cavalry, composed of auxiliary troops, was of a more or less irregular kind, and served like the Cossacks now-a-days for outpost duty and skirmishing.⎯The battle of the Granicus (334 B. C.) offers the first instance of an engagement in which cavalry played a decisive part. The Persian cavalry was placed at charging distance from the fords of the river. As soon as the heads of columns of the Macedonian infantry had passed the river,

327

Friedrich Engels

and before they could deploy, the Persian horse broke in upon them and drove them headlong down again into the river. This manœuvre, repeated several times over with perfect success, shows at once that the Persians had regular cavalry to oppose to the Macedonians. To surprise infantry in the very moment of its greatest weakness, viz., when passing from one tactical formation into another, requires the cavalry to be well in hand, and perfectly under the control of its commanders. Irregular levies are incapable of it. Ptolemy, who commanded the advanced guard of Alexander’s army, could make no headway until the Macedonian cuirassiers passed 601 the river, and charged the Persians in flank. A long combat ensued, but the Persian horsemen being disposed in one line without reserves, and being at last abandoned by the Asiatic Greeks in their army, were ultimately routed. The battle of Arbela (361 B. C.) was the most glorious for the Macedonian cavalry. Alexander in person led the Macedonian horse, which formed the extreme right of his order of battle, while the Thessalian horse formed the left. The Persians tried to outflank him, but in the decisive moment Alexander brought fresh men from the rear so as to overlap them in their turn; they at the same time left a gap between their left and centre. Into this gap Alexander at once dashed, separating their left from the remainder of the army, rolling it up completely, and pursuing it for a considerable distance. Then, on being called upon to send assistance to his own menaced left, he rallied his horse in a very short time, and passing behind the enemy’s centre fell upon the rear of his right. The battle was thus gained, and Alexander from that day ranks among the first of the cavalry generals of all times. And to crown the work, his cavalry pursued the fugitive enemy with such ardor that its advanced guard stood the next day 75 miles in advance of the battle-field. It is very curious to observe that the general principles of cavalry tactics were as well understood at that time as they are now. To attack infantry in the formation of the march, or during a change of formation; to attack cavalry principally on its flank; to profit by any opening in the enemy’s line by dashing in and wheeling to the right and left, so as to take in flank and rear the troops placed next to such a gap; to follow up a victory by a rapid and inexorable pursuit of the broken enemy⎯these are among the first and most important rules that every modern cavalry officer has to learn. After Alexander’s death we hear no more of that splendid cavalry of Greece and Macedon. In Greece infantry again prevailed, and in Asia and Egypt the mounted service soon degenerated.⎯The Romans never were horsemen. What little cavalry they had with the legions was glad to fight on foot. Their horses were of an inferior breed, and the men could not ride. But on the southern side of the Mediterranean a cavalry was

328

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

formed, which not only rivalled, but even outshone that of Alexander. The Carthaginian generals, Hamilcar and Hannibal, had succeeded in forming, beside their Numidian irregular horsemen, a body of first-rate regular cavalry, and thus created an arm which almost everywhere insured them a victory. The Berbers of north Africa are, up to the present day, a nation of horsemen, at least in the plains, and the splendid Barb horse which carried Hannibal’s swordsmen into the deep masses of the Roman infantry, with a rapidity and vehemence unknown before, still mounts the finest regiments of the whole French cavalry, the chasseurs d’Afrique, and is by them acknowledged to be the best war-horse in existence. The Carthaginian infantry was far inferior to that of the Romans, even after it had been long trained by its two great chiefs; it would not have had the slightest chance against the Roman legions, had it not been for the assistance of that cavalry which alone made it possible for Hannibal to hold out 16 years in Italy; and when this cavalry had been worn out by the wear and tear of so many campaigns, not by the sword of the enemy, there was no longer a place in Italy for him. Hannibal’s battles have that in common with those of Frederic the Great, that most of them were won by cavalry over first-rate infantry; and, indeed, at no other time has cavalry performed such glorious deeds as under those two great commanders. From what nation, and upon what tactical principles, Hamilcar and Hannibal formed their regular cavalry, we are not precisely informed. But as their Numidian light horse are always clearly distinguished from the heavy or regular cavalry, we may conclude that the latter was not composed of Berber tribes. There were very likely many foreign mercenaries and some Carthaginians; the great mass, however, most probably consisted of Spaniards, as it was formed in their country, and as even in Cæsar’s time Spanish horsemen were attached to most Roman armies. Hannibal being well acquainted with Greek civilization, and Greek mercenaries and soldiers of fortune having before his time served under the Carthaginian standards, there can scarcely be a doubt that the organization of the Grecian and Macedonian heavy cavalry served as the basis for that of the Carthaginian. The very first encounter in Italy settled the question of the superiority of the Carthaginian horse. At the Ticinus (218 B. C.), the Roman consul Publius Scipio, while reconnoitring with his cavalry and light infantry, met with the Carthaginian cavalry led by Hannibal on a similar errand. Hannibal at once attacked. The Roman light infantry stood in first line, the cavalry formed the second. The Carthaginian heavy horse charged the infantry, dispersed it, and then fell at once on the Roman cavalry in front, while the Numidian irregulars charged their flank and rear. The battle was short. The

329

Friedrich Engels

Romans fought bravely, but they had no chance whatever. They could not ride; their own horses vanquished them; frightened by the flight of the Roman skirmishers, who were driven in upon them and sought shelter between them, they threw off many of their riders and broke up the formation. Other troopers, not trusting to their horsemanship, wisely dismounted and attempted to fight as infantry. But already the Carthaginian cuirassiers were in the midst of them, while the inevitable Numidians galloped round the confused mass, cutting down every fugitive who detached himself from it. The loss of the Romans was considerable, and Publius Scipio himself was wounded. At the Trebia, Hannibal succeeded in enticing the Romans to cross that river, so as to fight with this 602 barrier in their rear. No sooner was this accomplished than he advanced with all his troops against them and forced them to battle. The Romans, like the Carthaginians, had their infantry in the centre; but opposite to the 2 Roman wings formed by cavalry, Hannibal placed his elephants, making use of his cavalry to outflank and overlap both wings of his opponents. At the very outset of the battle, the Roman cavalry, thus turned and outnumbered, was completely defeated; but the Roman infantry drove back the Carthaginian centre and gained ground. The victorious Carthaginian horse now attacked them in front and flank; they compelled them to desist from advancing, but could not break them. Hannibal, however, knowing the solidity of the Roman legion, had sent 1,000 horsemen and 1,000 picked foot soldiers under his brother Mago by a roundabout way to their rear. These fresh troops now fell upon them and succeeded in breaking the second line; but the first line, 10,000 men, closed up, and in a compact body forced their way through the enemy, and marched down the river toward Placentia, where they crossed it unmolested. In the battle of Cannæ (216 B. C.), the Romans had 80,000 infantry and 6,000 cavalry; the Carthaginians 40,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry. The cavalry of Latium formed the Roman right wing, leaning on the river Aufidus; that of the allied Italians stood on the left, while the infantry formed the centre. Hannibal, too, placed his infantry in the centre, the Celtic and Spanish levies again forming the wings, while between them, a little further back, stood his African infantry, now equipped and organized on the Roman system. Of his cavalry, he placed the Numidians on the right wing, where the open plain permitted them, by their superior mobility and rapidity, to evade the charges of the Italian heavy horse opposed to them; while the whole of the heavy cavalry, under Hasdrubal, was stationed on the left, close to the river. On the Roman left, the Numidians gave the Italian cavalry plenty to do, but from their very nature as irregular horse could not break up their close

330

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

array by regular charges. In the centre, the Roman infantry soon drove back the Celts and Spaniards, and then formed into a wedge-shaped column in order to attack the African infantry. These, however, wheeled inward, and charging the unwieldy mass in line, broke its impetus; and there the battle, now, became a standing fight. But Hasdrubal’s heavy horse had, in the mean time, prepared the defeat of the Romans. Having furiously charged the Roman cavalry of the right wing, they dispersed them after a stout resistance, passed, like Alexander at Arbela, behind the Roman centre, fell upon the rear of the Italian cavalry, broke it completely, and, leaving it an easy prey to the Numidians, formed for a grand charge on the flanks and rear of the Roman infantry. This was decisive. The unwieldy mass, attacked on all sides, gave way, opened out, was broken, and succumbed. Never was there such complete destruction of an army. The Romans lost 70,000 men; of their cavalry, only 70 men escaped. The Carthaginians lost not quite 6,000, 2/3 of whom belonged to the Celtic contingents, which had had to bear the brunt of the first attack of the legions. Of Hasdrubal’s 6,000 regular horse, which had won the whole of the battle, not more than 200 men were killed and wounded. The Roman cavalry of later times was not much better than that of the Punic wars. It was attached to the legions in small bodies, never forming an independent arm. Beside this legionary cavalry, there were in Cæsar’s time Spanish, Celtic, and German mercenary horsemen, all of them more or less irregular. No cavalry serving with the Romans ever performed things worthy of mention; and so neglected and ineffective was this arm, that the Parthian irregulars of Khorassan remained extremely formidable to Roman armies. In the eastern half of the empire, however, the ancient passion for horses and horsemanship retained its sway; and Byzantium remained, up to its conquest by the Turks, the great horse mart and riding academy of Europe. Accordingly, we find that during the momentary revival of the Byzantine empire, under Justinian, its cavalry was on a comparatively respectable footing; and in the battle of Capua, in A. D. 552, the eunuch Narses is reported to have defeated the Teutonic invaders of Italy principally by means of this arm.⎯The establishment, in all countries of western Europe, of a conquering aristocracy of Teutonic origin, led to a new era in the history of cavalry. The nobility took everywhere to the mounted service, under the designation of men-at-arms (gens d’armes), forming a body of horse of the heaviest description, in which not only the riders but also the horses were covered with defensive armor of metal. The first battle at which such cavalry appeared was that at Poitiers, where Charles Martel, in 732, beat back the torrent of Arab invasion. The Frankish knighthood, under Eudes, duke of Aquitania,

331

Friedrich Engels

broke through the Moorish ranks and took their camp. But such a body was not fit for pursuit; and the Arabs, accordingly, under shelter of their indefatigable irregular horse, retired unmolested into Spain. From this battle dates a series of wars in which the massive but unwieldy regular cavalry of the West fought the agile irregulars of the East with varied success. The German knighthood measured swords, during nearly the whole of the 10th century, with the wild Hungarian horsemen, and totally defeated them by their close array at Merseburg in 933, and at the Lech in 955. The Spanish chivalry, for several centuries, fought the Moorish invaders of their country, and ultimately conquered them. But when the occidental “heavies” transferred the seat of war, during the crusades, to the eastern homes of their enemies, they were in their turn defeated, and in most cases complete- 603 ly destroyed; neither they nor their horses could stand the climate, the immensely long marches, and the want of proper food and forage. These crusades were followed by a fresh irruption of eastern horsemen into Europe, that of the Mongols. Having overrun Russia, and the provinces of Poland, they were met at Wahlstatt in Silesia, in 1241, by a combined Polish and German army. After a long struggle, the Asiatics defeated the worn-out steel-clad knights, but the victory was so dearly bought that it broke the power of the invaders. The Mongols advanced no further, and soon, by divisions among themselves, ceased to be dangerous, and were driven back. During the whole of the middle ages, cavalry remained the chief arm of all armies: with the eastern nations the light irregular horse had always held that rank; with those of western Europe, the heavy regular cavalry formed by the knighthood was in this period the arm which decided every battle. This pree¨minence of the mounted arm was not so much caused by its own excellence, for the irregulars of the East were incapable of orderly fight, and the regulars of the West were clumsy beyond belief in their movements; it was principally caused by the bad quality of the infantry. Asiatics as well as Europeans held that arm in contempt; it was composed of those who could not afford to appear mounted, principally of slaves or serfs. There was no proper organization for it; without defensive armor, with a pike and sword for its sole weapons, it might now and then by its deep formation withstand the furious but disorderly charges of eastern horsemen; but it was resistlessly ridden over by the invulnerable men-at-arms of the West. The only exception was formed by the English infantry, which derived its strength from its formidable weapon, the long-bow. The numerical proportion of the European cavalry of these times to the remainder of the army was certainly not as strong as it was a few centuries later, nor even as it is now. Knights were not so exceedingly numerous,

332

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

and in many large battles we find that not more than 800 or 1,000 of them were present. But they were generally sufficient to dispose of any number of foot soldiers, as soon as they had succeeded in driving from the field the enemy’s men-at-arms. The general mode of fighting of these men-at-arms was in line, in single rank, the rear rank being formed by the esquires, who wore, generally speaking, a less complete and heavy suit of armor. These lines, once in the midst of the enemy, soon dissolved themselves into single combatants, and finished the battle by sheer hand-tohand fighting. Subsequently, when firearms began to come into use, deep masses were formed, generally squares; but then the days of chivalry were numbered. During the 15th century, not only was artillery introduced into the field of battle, while part of the infantry, the skirmishers of those times, were armed with muskets, but a general change took place in the character of infantry. This arm began to be formed by the enlistment of mercenaries who made a profession of military service. The German Landsknechte and the Swiss were such professional soldiers, and they very soon introduced more regular formations and tactical movements. The ancient Doric and Macedonian phalanx was, in a manner, revived; a helmet and a breastplate somewhat protected the men against the lance and sword of the cavalry; and when, at Novara (1513), the Swiss infantry drove the French knighthood actually from the field, there was no further use for such valiant but unwieldy horsemen. Accordingly, after the insurrection of the Netherlands against Spain, we find a new class of cavalry, the German Reiters (reitres of the French), raised by voluntary enlistment, like the infantry, and armed with helmet and breastplate, sword and pistols. They were fully as heavy as the modern cuirassiers, yet far lighter than the knights. They soon proved their superiority over the heavy men-at-arms. These now disappear, and with them the lance; the sword and short firearms now form the general armature for cavalry. About the same time (end of the 16th century) the hybrid arm of dragoons was introduced, first in France, then in the other countries of Europe. Armed with muskets, they were intended to fight, according to circumstances, either as infantry or as cavalry. A similar corps had been formed by Alexander the Great under the name of the dimachæ, but it had not yet been imitated. The dragoons of the 16th century had a longer existence, but toward the middle of the 18th century they had everywhere lost their hybrid character, except in name, and were generally used as cavalry. The most important feature in their formation was that they were the first body of regular cavalry which was completely deprived of defensive armor. The creation of real hybrid dragoons was again attempted, on a large scale, by the emperor Nicholas of Russia; but it was

333

Friedrich Engels

soon proved that, before the enemy, they must always be used as cavalry, and consequently Alexander II. very soon reduced them to simple cavalry, with no more pretensions to dismounted service than hussars or cuirassiers. Maurice of Orange, the great Dutch commander, formed his Reiters for the first time in something like our modern tactical organization. He taught them to execute charges and evolutions in separate bodies, and in more than one line; to wheel, break off, form column and line, and change front, without disorder, and in separate squadrons and troops. Thus a cavalry fight was no longer decided by one charge of the whole mass, but by the successive charges of separate squadrons and lines supporting each other. His cavalry was formed generally 5 deep. In other armies it fought in deep bodies, and where a line formation was adopted it was still from 5 to 8 deep. The 17th century, having completely done away with the costly men-at- 604 arms, increased the numerical strength of cavalry to an enormous extent. At no other period was there so large a proportion of that arm in every army. In the 30 years’ war from 2/5 to nearly 1/2 of each army was generally composed of cavalry; in single instances there were 2 horsemen to 1 foot soldier. Gustavus Adolphus stands at the head of cavalry commanders of this period. His mounted troops consisted of cuirassiers and dragoons, the latter fighting almost always as cavalry. His cuirassiers, too, were much lighter than those of the emperor, and soon proved their incontestable superiority. The Swedish cavalry were formed 3 deep; their orders were, contrary to the usage of the cuirassiers of most armies, whose chief arm was the pistol, not to lose time in firing, but to charge the enemy sword in hand. At this period the cavalry, which during the middle ages had generally been placed in the centre, was again placed, as in antiquity, on the wings of the army, where it was formed in 2 lines. In England, the civil war gave rise to 2 distinguished cavalry leaders. Prince Rupert, on the royalist side, had as much “dash” in him as any cavalry general, but he was almost always carried too far, lost his cavalry out of hand, and was himself so taken up with what was immediately before him, that the general always disappeared in the “bold dragoon.” Cromwell, on the other hand, with quite as much dash where it was required, was a far better general; he kept his men well in hand, always held back a reserve for unforeseen events and decisive movements, knew how to manœuvre, and thus proved generally victorious over his inconsiderate opponent. He won the battles of Marston Moor and Naseby by his cavalry alone.⎯With most armies the use of the firearm still remained the chief employment of cavalry in battle, the Swedes and English alone excepted. In France, Prussia, and Austria, cavalry was drilled to use the carabine exactly as

334

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

infantry used the musket. They fired on horseback, the line standing still all the while, by files, platoons, ranks, &c.; and when a movement for a charge was made, the line advanced at a trot, pulled up a short distance from the enemy, gave a volley, drew swords, and then charged. The effective fire of the long lines of infantry had shaken all confidence in the charge of a cavalry which was no longer protected by armor; consequently, riding was neglected, no movements could be executed at a quick pace, and even at a slow pace accidents happened by the score to both men and horses. The drill was mostly dismounted work, and their officers had no idea whatever of the way of handling cavalry in battle. The French, it is true, sometimes charged sword in hand, and Charles XII. of Sweden, true to his national tradition, always charged full speed without firing, dispersing cavalry and infantry, and sometimes even taking field works of a weak profile. But it was reserved for Frederic the Great and his great cavalry commander, Seydlitz, to revolutionize the mounted service, and to raise it to the culminating point of glory. The Prussian cavalry, heavy men on clumsy horses, drilled for firing only, such as Frederic’s father had left them to his son, were beaten in an instant at Mollwitz (1741). But no sooner was the first Silesian war brought to a close than Frederic entirely reorganized his cavalry. Firing and dismounted drill were thrown into the background, and riding was attended to. “All evolutions are to be made with the greatest speed, all wheels to be done at a canter. Cavalry officers must above all things form the men into perfect riders; the cuirassiers to be as handy and expert on horseback as a hussar, and well exercised in the use of the sword.” The men were to ride every day. Riding in difficult ground, across obstacles, and fencing on horseback, were the principal drills. In a charge, no firing at all was allowed until the 1st and 2d lines of the enemy were completely broken. “Every squadron, as it advances to the charge, is to attack the enemy sword in hand, and no commander shall be allowed to let his troops fire under penalty of infamous cashiering; the generals of brigades to be answerable for this. As they advance, they first fall into a quick trot, and finally into a full gallop, but well closed; and if they attack in this way, his majesty is certain that the enemy will always be broken.” “Every officer of cavalry will have always present to his mind that there are but 2 things required to beat the enemy: 1, to charge him with the greatest possible speed and force, and 2, to outflank him.” These passages from Frederic’s instructions sufficiently show the total revolution he carried out in cavalry tactics. He was seconded admirably by Seydlitz, who always commanded his cuirassiers and dragoons, and made such troops of them that, for vehemence and order of charge, quickness of evolutions,

335

Friedrich Engels

readiness for flank attacks, and rapidity in rallying and reforming after a charge, no cavalry has ever equalled the Prussian cavalry of the 7 years’ war. The fruits were soon visible. At Hohenfriedberg the Baireuth regiment of dragoons, 10 squadrons, rode down the whole left wing of the Austrian infantry, broke 21 battalions, took 66 stand of colors, 5 guns, and 4,000 prisoners. At Zorndorf, when the Prussian infantry had been forced to retreat, Seydlitz, with 36 squadrons, drove the victorious Russian cavalry from the field, and then fell upon the Russian infantry, completely defeating it with great slaughter. At Rossbach, Striegau, Kesselsdorf, Leuthen, and in 10 other battles, Frederic owed the victory to his splendid cavalry.⎯When the French revolutionary war broke out, the Austrians had adopted the Prussian system, but not so the French. The cavalry of the latter nation had, indeed, been much disorganized by the revolution, and in the beginning of the war the new formations proved almost useless. When their new infantry levies were met by the good cavalry of the English, Prussians, and Austrians, they were, during 1792 605 and ’93, almost uniformly beaten. The cavalry, quite unable to cope with such opponents, was always kept in reserve until a few years’ campaigning had improved them. Since 1796 and afterward every division of infantry had cavalry as a support; still, at Würzburg, the whole of the French cavalry was defeated by 59 Austrian squadrons (1796). When Napoleon took the direction of affairs in France, he did his best to improve the French cavalry. He found about the worst material that could be met with. As a nation, the French are decidedly the worst horsemen of Europe, and their horses, good for draught, are not well adapted for the saddle. Napoleon himself was but an indifferent rider, and neglected riding in others. Still he made great improvements, and after the camp of Boulogne, his cavalry in great part, mounted on German and Italian horses, was no despicable adversary. The campaigns of 1805 and 1806–’7 allowed his cavalry to absorb almost all the horses of the Austrian and Prussian armies, and beside, ree¨nforced Napoleon’s army by the excellent cavalry of the confederation of the Rhine and the grand duchy of Warsaw. Thus were formed those enormous masses of horsemen with which Napoleon acted in 1809, 1812, and the latter part of 1813, which, though generally designated as French, were in great part composed of Germans and Poles. The cuirass, which had been entirely done away with in the French army shortly before the revolution, was restored to a portion of the heavy cavalry by Napoleon. In other respects the organization and equipment remained nearly the same, except that with his Polish auxiliaries he received some regiments of light horse, armed with the lance, the costume and equipment of which were soon imitated in other armies. But

336

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

in the tactical use of cavalry he introduced a complete change. According to the system of composing divisions and army corps of all 3 arms, a portion of the light cavalry was attached to each division or corps; but the mass of the arm, and especially all the heavy horse, were held together in reserve for the purpose of striking at a favorable moment a great decisive blow, or, in case of need, of covering the retreat of the army. These masses of cavalry, suddenly appearing on a given point of the battle-field, have often acted decisively; still, they never gained such brilliant successes as the horsemen of Frederic the Great. The cause of this is to be looked for partly in the changed tactics of infantry, which, by selecting chiefly broken ground for its operations, and always receiving cavalry in a square, made it more difficult for the latter arm to achieve such great victories as the Prussian horsemen had obtained over the long, thin infantry lines of their opponents. But it is also certain that Napoleon’s cavalry was not equal to that of Frederic the Great, and that Napoleon’s cavalry tactics were not in every instance an improvement upon those of Frederic. The indifferent riding of the French compelled them to charge at a comparatively slow pace, at a trot or a collected canter; there are but few instances where they charged at a gallop. Their great bravery and close ranks made up often enough for the curtailed impetus, but still their charge was not what would now be considered good. The old system of receiving hostile cavalry standing, carabine in hand, was in very many cases retained by the French cavalry, and in every such instance were they defeated. The last example of this happened at Dannigkow (April 5, 1813), where about 1,200 French cavalry thus awaited a charge of 400 Prussians, and were completely beaten in spite of their numbers. As to Napoleon’s tactics, the use of great masses of cavalry with him became such a fixed rule, that not only was the divisional cavalry weakened so as to be completely useless, but also in the employment of these masses he often neglected that successive engagement of his forces which is one of the principal points in modern tactics, and which is even more applicable to cavalry than to infantry. He introduced the cavalry charge in column, and even formed whole cavalry corps into one monster column, in such formations that the extrication of a single squadron or regiment became an utter impossibility, and that any attempt at deploying was entirely out of the question. His cavalry generals, too, were not up to the mark, and even the most brilliant of them, Murat, would have cut but a sorry figure if opposed to a Seydlitz. During the wars of 1813, ’14, and ’15, cavalry tactics had decidedly improved on the part of Napoleon’s opponents. Though to a great extent following Napoleon’s system of holding cavalry in reserve in large

337

Friedrich Engels

masses, and therefore very often keeping the greater portion of the cavalry entirely out of an action, still in many instances a return to the tactics of Frederic was attempted. In the Prussian army the old spirit was revived. Blücher was the first to use his cavalry more boldly, and generally with success. The ambuscade of Haynau (1813), where 20 Prussian squadrons rode down 8 French battalions and took 18 guns, marks a turning point in the modern history of cavalry, and forms a favorable contrast to the tactics of Lützen, where the allies held 18,000 horse entirely in reserve until the battle was lost, although a more favorable cavalry ground could not be found.⎯The English had never adopted the system of forming large masses of cavalry, and had therefore many successes, although Napier himself admits that their cavalry was not so good at that time as that of the French. At Waterloo (where, by the way, the French cuirassiers for once charged at full speed), the English cavalry was admirably handled and generally successful, except where it followed its national weakness of getting out of hand. Since the peace of 1815, Napoleon’s tactics, though still preserved in the regulations of most armies, have again made room for those of Frederic. Riding is better attended to, though still not at all to the 606 extent it should be. The idea of receiving the enemy carabine in hand is scouted; Frederic’s rule is everywhere revived, that every cavalry commander who allows the enemy to charge him, instead of charging himself, deserves to be cashiered. The gallop is again the pace of the charge; and the column attack has made way for charges in successive lines, with dispositions for flank attack, and with a possibility of manœuvring with single detachments during the charge. Still much remains to be done. A greater attention to riding, especially across country, a nearer approach in the saddle and the seat to those of the hunting-field, and above all, a reduction of the weight carried by the horse, are improvements called for in every service without exception.⎯From the history of cavalry let us now turn to its present organization and tactics. The recruiting of cavalry, as far as the men are concerned, is not different upon the whole from the way the other arms recruit themselves in each country. In some states, however, the natives of particular districts are destined to this service: thus in Russia, the Malorussians (natives of Little Russia); in Prussia, the Poles. In Austria, the heavy cavalry is recruited in Germany and Bohemia, the hussars exclusively in Hungary, the lancers mostly in the Polish provinces. The recruiting of the horses, however, deserves especial notice. In England, where the whole cavalry does not require in time of war above 10,000 horses, the government finds no difficulty in buying them; but in order to insure to the service the benefit of horses not worked till nearly

338

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

5 years old, 3-year-old colts, mostly Yorkshire bred, are bought and kept at government expense in depots till they are fit to be used. The price paid for the colts (£20 to £25), and the abundance of good horses in the country, make the British cavalry certainly the best mounted in the world. In Russia a similar abundance of horses exists, though the breed is inferior to the English. The remount officers buy the horses by wholesale in the southern and western provinces of the empire, mostly from Jewish dealers; they re-sell those that are unfit, and hand over to the various regiments such as are of its color (all horses being of the same color in a Russian regiment). The colonel is considered as it were proprietor of the horses; for a round sum paid to him he has to keep the regiment well mounted. The horses are expected to last 8 years. Formerly they were taken from the large breeding establishment of Volhynia and the Ukraine, where they are quite wild; but the breaking them for cavalry purposes was so difficult that it had to be given up. In Austria the horses are partly bought, but the greater portion have of late been furnished by the government breeding establishments, which can part every year with above 5,000 5-year-old cavalry horses. For a case of extraordinary effort, a country so rich in horses as Austria can rely upon the markets of the interior. Prussia, 60 years ago, had to buy almost all her horses abroad, but now can mount the whole of her cavalry, line and landwehr, in the interior. For the line, the horses are bought at 3 years old, by remount commissaries, and sent into depots until old enough for service; 3,500 are required every year. In case of mobilization of the landwehr cavalry, all horses in the country, like the men, are liable to be taken for service; a compensation of from $40 to $70 is however paid for them. There are 3 times more serviceable horses in the country than can be required. France, of all European countries, is the worst off for horses. The breed, though often good and even excellent for draught, is generally unfit for the saddle. Government breeding studs (haras) have been long established, but not with the success they have had elsewhere; in 1838 these studs, and the remounting depots connected with them, could not furnish 1,000 horses to the service, bought or government bred. Gen. LarocheAymond considered that there were not altogether 20,000 horses in France between 4 and 7 years old, fit for cavalry service. Though the depots and studs have of late been much improved, they are still insufficient to fully supply the army. Algeria furnishes a splendid breed of cavalry horses, and the best regiments of the service, the chasseurs d’Afrique, are exclusively mounted with them, but the other regiments scarcely get any. Thus in case of a mobilization, the French are compelled to buy abroad, sometimes in England, but mostly in northern Germany, where

339

Friedrich Engels

they do not get the best class of horses, though each horse costs them nearly $ 100. Many condemned horses from German cavalry regiments find their way into the ranks of the French, and altogether the French cavalry, the chasseurs d’Afrique excepted, is the worst mounted in Europe.⎯Cavalry is essentially of 2 kinds: heavy and light. The real distinctive character of the 2 is in the horses. Large and powerful horses cannot well work together with small, active, and quick ones. The former in a charge act less rapidly, but with greater weight; the latter act more by the speed and impetuosity of the attack, and are moreover far more fit for single combat and skirmishing, for which heavy or large horses are neither handy nor intelligent enough. Thus far the distinction is necessary; but fashion, fancy, and the imitation of certain national costumes, have created numerous subdivisions and varieties, to notice which in detail would be of no interest. The heavy cavalry, at least in part, is in most countries furnished with a cuirass, which, however, is far from being shot proof; in Sardinia, its first rank carries a lance. Light cavalry is partly armed with the sword and carabine, partly with the lance. The carabine is either smooth-bored or rifled. Pistols are added in most cases to the armature of the rider; the United States cavalry alone carries the revolver. The sword is either straight, or curved to a greater or less degree; the first 607 preferable for thrusts, the second for cuts. The question as to the advantages of the lance over the sword is still under discussion. For close encounter the sword is undoubtedly preferable; and in a charge the lance, unless too long and heavy to be wielded, can scarcely act at all, but in the pursuit of broken cavalry it is found most effective. Of nations of horsemen, almost all trust to the sword; even the Cossack abandons his lance when he has to fight against the expert swordsmen of Circassia. The pistol is useless except for a signal shot; the carbine is not very effective, even if rifled, and never will be of much real use until a breechloading one is adopted; the revolver in skilful hands is a formidable weapon for close encounter; still the queen of weapons for cavalry is a good, sharp, handy sword.⎯Beside the saddle, bridle, and armed rider, the cavalry horse has to carry a valise with reserve clothing, camp utensils, grooming tackle, and in a campaign also food for the rider and forage for itself. The sum total of this burden varies in different services and classes of cavalry, between 250 and 300 lbs. for the heavy marching order, a weight which will appear enormous when compared with what private saddle horses have to carry. This overweighting the horses is the weakest point of all cavalry. Great reforms are everywhere required in this respect. The weight of the men and accoutrements can and must be reduced, but as long as the present system lasts, this drag upon the horses

340

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

is always to be taken into account whenever we judge of the capabilities of exertion and endurance of cavalry. Heavy cavalry, composed of strong but, if possible, comparatively light men, on strong horses, must act principally by the force of a well-closed, solid charge. This requires power, endurance, and a certain physical weight, though not as much as would render it unwieldy. There must be speed in its movements, but no more than is compatible with the highest degree of order. Once formed for the attack, it must chiefly ride straight forward; but whatever comes in its path must be swept away by its charge. The riders need not be, individually, as good horsemen as those of light cavalry; but they must have full command over their horses, and be accustomed to ride straight forward and in a well-closed mass. Their horses, in consequence, must be less sensible to the leg, nor should they have their haunches too much under them; they should step out well in their trot, and be accustomed to keep well together in a good, long hand gallop. Light cavalry, on the contrary, with nimbler men and quicker horses, has to act by its rapidity and ubiquity. What it lacks in weight must be made up by speed and activity. It will charge with the greatest vehemence; but when preferable, it will seemingly fly in order to fall upon the enemy’s flank by a sudden change of front. Its superior speed and fitness for single combat render it peculiarly fit for pursuit. Its chiefs require a quicker eye and a greater presence of mind than those of heavy horse. The men must be, individually, better horsemen; they must have their horses perfectly under control, start from a stand into a full gallop, and again stop in an instant; turn quick, and leap well; the horses should be hardy and quick, light in the mouth, and obedient to the leg, handy at turning, and especially broken in for working at a canter, having their haunches well under them. Beside rapid flank and rear attacks, ambuscades, and pursuit, the light cavalry has to do the greater part of the outpost and patrolling duty for the whole army; aptness for single combat, the foundation of which is good horsemanship, is therefore one of its principal requirements. In line, the men ride less close together, so as to be always prepared for changes of front and other evolutions.⎯The English have nominally 13 light and 13 heavy regiments (dragoons, hussars, lancers; the 2 regiments of lifeguards alone are cuirassiers); but in reality all their cavalry, by composition and training, are heavy cavalry, and little different in the size of men and horses. For real light cavalry service they have always used foreign troops⎯Germans in Europe, native irregulars in India. The French have 3 kinds: light cavalry hussars and chasseurs, 174 squadrons; line cavalry, lancers and dragoons, 120 squadrons; reserve cavalry, 78 squadrons, cuirassiers and carabineers. Austria has 96 squadrons of

341

Friedrich Engels

heavy cavalry, dragoons and cuirassiers; and 192 squadrons of light, hussars and lancers. Prussia has, of the line, 80 squadrons of heavy horse, cuirassiers and lancers; and 72 squadrons of light horse, dragoons and hussars; to which may be added, in case of war, 136 squadrons of lancers of the first levy of the landwehr. The second levy of the landwehr cavalry will scarcely ever be formed separately. The Russian cavalry consists of 160 heavy squadrons, cuirassiers and dragoons; and 304 light squadrons, hussars and lancers. The formation of the dragoon corps for alternate mounted and infantry duty has been abandoned, and the dragoons incorporated with the heavy cavalry. The real light cavalry of the Russians, however, are the Cossacks, of whom they always have more than enough for all the outpost, reconnoitring, and irregular duties of their armies. In the U. S. army there are 2 regiments of dragoons, 1 of mounted riflemen, and 2 styled cavalry; all of which regiments, it has been recommended, should be called regiments of cavalry. The U. S. cavalry is really a mounted infantry.⎯The tactical unity in cavalry is the squadron, comprising as many men as the voice an immediate authority of one commander can control during evolutions. The strength of a squadron varies from 100 men (in England) to 200 men (in France); those of the other armies also being within these limits. Four, 6, 8, or 10 squadrons form a regiment. The weakest regiments are the English (400 to 480 men); the strongest the Austrian light horse (1,600 608 men). Strong regiments are apt to be unwieldy; too weak ones are very soon reduced by a campaign. Thus the British light brigade at Balaklava, not 2 months after the opening of the campaign, numbered in 5 regiments of 2 squadrons each scarcely 700 men, or just half as many as one Russian hussar regiment on the war footing. Peculiar formations are: with the British the troop or half squadron, and with the Austrians the division or double squadron, an intermediate link which alone renders it possible for one commander to control their strong regiments of horse.⎯Until Frederic the Great, all cavalry was formed at least 3 deep. He first formed his hussars, in 1743, 2 deep, and at the battle of Rossbach had his heavy horse formed the same way. After the 7 years’ war this formation was adopted by all other armies, and is the only one now in use. For purposes of evolution the squadron is divided into 4 divisions; wheeling from line into open column of divisions, and back into line from column, form the chief and fundamental evolution of all cavalry manœuvres. Most other evolutions are only adapted either for the march (the flank march by threes, &c.), or for extraordinary cases (the close column by divisions or squadrons). The action of cavalry in battle is eminently a hand-to-hand encounter; its fire is of subordinate importance; steel⎯either sword or lance⎯is its chief

342

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

weapon; and all cavalry action is concentrated in the charge. Thus the charge is the criterion for all movements, evolutions, and positions of cavalry. Whatever obstructs the facility of charging is faulty. The impetus of the charge is produced by concentrating the highest effort both of man and horse into its crowning moment, the moment of actual contact with the enemy. In order to effect this, it is necessary to approach the enemy with a gradually increasing velocity, so that the horses are put to their full speed at a short distance from the enemy only. Now the execution of such a charge is about the most difficult matter that can be asked from cavalry. It is extremely difficult to preserve perfect order and solidity in an advance at increasing pace, especially if there is much not quite level ground to go over. The difficulty and importance of riding straight forward is here shown; for unless every rider rides straight to his point, there arises a pressure in the ranks, which is soon rolled back from the centre to the flanks, and from the flanks to the centre; the horses get excited and uneasy, their unequal speed and temper comes into play, and soon the whole line is straggling along in any thing but a straight allignment, and with any thing but that closed solidity which alone can insure success. Then, on arriving in front of the enemy, it is evident that the horses will attempt to refuse running into the standing or moving mass opposite, and that the riders must prevent their doing so; otherwise the charge is sure to fail. The rider, therefore, must not only have the firm resolution to break into the enemy’s line, but he must also be perfectly master of his horse. The regulations of different armies give various rules for the mode of advance of the charging cavalry, but they all agree in this point, that the line, if possible, begins to move at a walk, then trot, at from 300 to 150 yards from the enemy canter, gradually increasing to a gallop, and at from 20 to 30 yards from the enemy full speed. All such regulations, however, are subject to many exceptions; the state of the ground, the weather, the condition of the horses, &c., must be taken into consideration in every practical case. If in a charge of cavalry against cavalry both parties actually meet, which is by far the most uncommon case in cavalry engagements, the swords are of little avail during the actual shock. It is the momentum of one mass which breaks and scatters the other. The moral element, bravery, is here at once transformed into material force; the bravest squadron will ride on with the greatest self-confidence, resolution, rapidity, ensemble, and solidity. Thus it is that no cavalry can do great things unless it has plenty of “dash” about it. But as soon as the ranks of one party are broken, the swords, and with them individual horsemanship, come into play. A portion at least of the victorious troop has also to give up its tactical formation, in order to mow with the sword

343

Friedrich Engels

the harvest of victory. Thus the successful charge at once decides the contest; but unless followed up by pursuit and single combat, the victory would be comparatively fruitless. It is this immense preponderance of the party which has preserved its tactical compactness and formation, over the one which has lost it, which explains the impossibility for irregular cavalry, be it ever so good and so numerous, to defeat regular cavalry. There is no doubt that so far as individual horsemanship and swordsmanship is concerned, no regular cavalry ever approached the irregulars of the nations of horse-warriors of the East; and yet the very worst of European regular cavalries has always defeated them in the field. From the defeat of the Huns at Chalons (451) to the sepoy mutiny of 1857, there is not a single instance where the splendid but irregular horsemen of the East have broken a single regiment of regular cavalry in an actual charge. Their irregular swarms, charging without concert or compactness, cannot make any impression upon the solid, rapidly moving mass. Their superiority can only appear when the tactical formation of the regulars is broken, and the combat of man to man has its turn; but the wild racing of the irregulars toward their opponents can have no such result. It has only been when regular cavalry, in pursuit, have abandoned their line formation and engaged in single combat, that irregulars, suddenly turning round and seizing the favorable moment, have defeated them; indeed, this stratagem has made up almost the whole of the tactics of irregulars against regulars, ever since the wars of the Parthians 609 and the Romans. Of this there is no better example than that of Napoleon’s dragoons in Egypt, undoubtedly the worst regular cavalry then existing, which defeated in every instance the most splendid of irregular horsemen, the Mamelukes. Napoleon said of them, 2 Mamelukes were decidedly superior to 3 Frenchmen; 100 Frenchmen were a match for 100 Mamelukes; 300 Frenchmen generally beat 300 Mamelukes; 1,000 Frenchmen in every instance defeated 1,500 Mamelukes. However great may be the superiority in a charge of that body of cavalry which best preserves its tactical formation, it is evident that even this body must, after the successful charge, be comparatively disordered. The success of the charge is not equally decisive on every point; many men are irretrievably engaged in single combat or pursuit; and it is comparatively but a small portion, mostly belonging to the second rank, which remains in some kind of line. This is the most dangerous moment for cavalry; a very small body of fresh troops, thrown upon it, would snatch the victory from its hands. To rally quickly after a charge is therefore the criterion of a really good cavalry, and it is in this point that not only young but also otherwise experienced and brave troops are deficient. The British cavalry,

344

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

riding the most spirited horses, are especially apt to get out of hand, and have almost everywhere suffered severely for it (e. g., at Waterloo and Balaklava). The pursuit, on the rally being sounded, is generally left to some divisions or squadrons, specially or by general regulations designated for this service; while the mass of the troops re-form to be ready for all emergencies. For the disorganized state, even of the victors, after a charge, is inducement enough to always keep a reserve in hand which may be launched in case of failure in the first instance; and thus it is that the first rule in cavalry tactics has always been, never to engage more than a portion of the disposable forces at a time. This general application of reserves will explain the variable nature of large cavalry combats, where the tide of victory ebbs and flows to and fro, either party being beaten in his turn until the last disposable reserves bring the power of their unbroken order to bear upon the disordered, surging mass, and decide the action. Another very important circumstance is the ground. No arm is so much controlled by the ground as cavalry. Heavy, deep soil will break the gallop into a slow canter; an obstacle which a single horseman would clear without looking at it, may break the order and solidity of the line; and an obstacle easy to clear for fresh horses will bring down animals that have been trotted and galloped about without food from early morning. Again, an unforeseen obstacle, by stopping the advance and entailing a change of front and formation, may bring the whole line within reach of the enemy’s flank attacks. An example of how cavalry attacks should not be made, was Murat’s great charge at the battle of Leipsic. He formed 14,000 horsemen into one deep mass, and advanced on the Russian infantry which had just been repulsed in an attack on the village of Wachau. The French horse approached at a trot; about 600 or 800 yards from the allied infantry they broke into a canter; in the deep ground the horses soon got fatigued, and the impulse of the charge was spent by the time they reached the squares. Only a few battalions which had suffered severely were ridden over. Passing round the other squares, the mass galloped on through the second line of infantry, without doing any harm, and finally arrived at a line of ponds and morasses which put a stop to their progress. The horses were completely blown, the men in disorder, the regiments mixed and uncontrollable; in this state two Prussian regiments and the Cossacks of the guard, in all less than 2,000 men, surprised their flanks and drove them all pell mell back again. In this instance there was neither a reserve for unforeseen emergencies, nor any proper regard for pace and distance; the result was defeat.⎯The charge may be made in various formations. Tacticians distinguish the charge en muraille, when the squadrons of the charging line have none or but very

345

Friedrich Engels

small intervals between each other; the charge with intervals, where there are from 10 to 20 yards from squadron to squadron; the charge en e´chelon, where the successive squadrons break off one after the other from one wing, and thus reach the enemy not simultaneously but in succession, which form may be much strengthened by a squadron in open column on the outward rear of the squadron forming the first e´chelon; finally, the charge in column. This last is essentially opposed to the whole of the former modes of charging, which are all of them but modifications of the line attack. The line was the general and fundamental form of all cavalry charges up to Napoleon. In the whole of the 18th century, we find cavalry charging in column in one case only, i. e. when it had to break through a surrounding enemy. But Napoleon, whose cavalry was composed of brave men but bad riders, had to make up for the tactical imperfections of his mounted troops by some new contrivance. He began to send his cavalry to the charge in deep columns, thus forcing the front ranks to ride forward, and throwing at once a far greater number of horsemen upon the selected point of attack than could have been done by a line attack. The desire of acting with masses, during the campaigns succeeding that of 1807, became with Napoleon a sort of monomania. He invented formations of columns which were perfectly monstrous, and which, happening to be successful in 1809, were adhered to in the later campaigns, and helped to lose him many a battle. He formed columns of whole divisions either of infantry or of cavalry, by ranging deployed battalions and regiments one behind the other. This was first tried with cavalry at Eckmühl, in 1809, where 10 regiments of cuirassiers charged in column, 2 regiments deployed in front, 4 similar lines following at distances of 610 about 60 yards. With infantry, columns of whole divisions, one battalion deployed behind the other, were formed at Wagram. Such manœuvres might not be dangerous against the slow and methodical Austrians of the time, but in every later campaign, and with more active enemies, they ended in defeat. We have seen what a pitiable end the great charge of Murat at Wachau, in the same formation, came to. The disastrous issue of D’Erlon’s great infantry attack at Waterloo was caused by its being made with this formation. With cavalry the monster column appears especially faulty, as it absorbs the most valuable resources into one unwieldy mass, which, once launched, is irretrievably out of hand, and, whatever success it may have in front, is always at the mercy of smaller bodies well in hand that are thrown on its flanks. With the materials for one such column, a second line and one or two reserves might be prepared, the charges of which might not have such an effect at first, but would certainly by their repetition ultimately obtain greater results

346

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

with smaller losses. In most services, indeed, this charge in column has either been abandoned, or it has been retained as a mere theoretical curiosity, while for all practical purposes the formation of large bodies of cavalry is made in several lines at charging intervals, supporting and relieving each other during a prolonged engagement. Napoleon, too, was the first to form his cavalry into masses of several divisions, called corps of cavalry. As a means of simplifying the transmission of commands in a large army, such an organization of the reserve cavalry is eminently necessary; but when maintained on the field of battle, when these corps had to act in a body, it has never produced any adequate results. In fact, it was one of the main causes of that faulty formation of monster columns which we have already mentioned. In the present European armies, the cavalry corps is generally retained, and in the Prussian, Russian, and Austrian services, there are even established normal formations and general rules for the action of such a corps on the field of battle, all of which are based on the formation of a first and second line and a reserve, together with indications for the placing of the horse artillery attached to such a body.⎯We have hitherto spoken of the action of cavalry so far only as it is directed against cavalry. But one of the principal purposes for which this arm is used in battle, in fact its principal use now-a-days, is its action against infantry. We have seen that in the 18th century infantry, in battle, scarcely ever formed square against cavalry. It received the charge in line, and if the attack was directed against a flank, a few companies wheeled back, en potence, to meet it. Frederic the Great instructed his infantry never to form square except when an isolated battalion was surprised by cavalry; and if in such a case it had formed square, “it may march straight against the enemy’s horse, drive them away, and, never heeding their attacks, proceed to its destination.” The thin lines of infantry in those days met the cavalry charge with full confidence in the effect of their fire, and indeed repelled it often enough; but where they once got broken, the disaster was irreparable, as at Hohenfriedberg and Zorndorf. At present, when the column has replaced the line in so many cases, the rule is that infantry always, where it is practicable, form square to receive cavalry. There are indeed plenty of instances in modern wars where good cavalry has surprised infantry in line and had to fly from its fire; but they form the exception. The question now is, whether cavalry has a fair chance of breaking squares of infantry. Opinions are divided; but it appears to be generally admitted that, under ordinary circumstances, a good, intact infantry, not shattered by artillery fire, stands a very great chance against cavalry, while with young foot soldiers, who have lost the edge of their energy and steadiness by a hard day’s fighting, by heavy

347

Friedrich Engels

losses and long exposure to fire, a resolute cavalry has the best of it. There are exceptions, such as the charge of the German dragoons at Garcia Hernandez (in 1812), where each of 3 squadrons broke an intact French square; but as a rule, a cavalry commander will not find it advisable to launch his men on such infantry. At Waterloo, Ney’s grand charges with the mass of the French reserve cavalry on Wellington’s centre, could not break the English and German squares, because these troops, sheltered a good deal behind the crest of the ridge, had suffered very little from the preceding cannonade, and were almost all as good as intact. Such charges, therefore, are adapted for the last stage of a battle only, when the infantry has been a good deal shattered and exhausted both by actual engagement and by passivity under a concentrated artillery fire. And in such cases they act decisively, as at Borodino and Ligny, especially when supported, as in both these cases, by infantry reserves.⎯We cannot enter here into the various duties which cavalry may be called upon to perform on outpost, patrolling and escorting service, &c. A few words on the general tactics of cavalry, however, may find a place. Infantry having more and more become the main stay of battles, the manœuvres of the mounted arm are necessarily more or less subordinate to those of the former. And as modern tactics are founded upon the admixture and mutual support of the 3 arms, it follows that for at least a portion of the cavalry, all independent action is entirely out of the question. Thus the cavalry of an army is always divided into 2 distinct bodies: divisional cavalry and reserve cavalry. The first consists of horsemen attached to the various divisions and corps of infantry, and under the same commander with them. In battle, its office is to seize any favorable moments which may offer themselves to gain an advantage, or to disengage its own infantry when attacked by superior forces. Its action is naturally limited, and its strength is not sufficient 611 to act any way independently. The cavalry of reserve, the mass of the cavalry with the army, acts in the same subordinate position toward the whole infantry of the army as the divisional cavalry does toward the infantry division to which it belongs. Accordingly, the reserve cavalry will be held in hand till a favorable moment for a great blow offers itself, either to repel a grand infantry or cavalry attack of the enemy, or to execute a charge of its own of a decisive nature. From what has been stated above, it will be evident that the proper use of the cavalry of reserve is generally during the latter stages of a great battle; but then it may be and often has been decisive. Such immense successes as Seydlitz obtained with his horse are completely out of the question now; but still, most great battles of modern times have been very materially influenced by the part cavalry has played in

348

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cavalry

5

10

them. But the great importance of cavalry lies in pursuit. Infantry supported by artillery need not despair against cavalry so long as it preserves its order and steadiness; but once broken, no matter by what cause, it is a prey to the mounted men that are launched against it. There is no running away from the horses; even on difficult ground, good horsemen can make their way; and an energetic pursuit of a beaten army by cavalry is always the best and the only way to secure the full fruits of the victory. Thus, whatever supremacy in battles may have been gained by infantry, cavalry still remains an indispensable arm, and will always remain so; and now, as heretofore, no army can enter the lists with a fair chance of success unless it has a cavalry that can both ride and fight.

349

Karl Marx Taxation in India

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5383, 23. Juli 1858.

According to the London journals, Indian stock and railway securities have of late been distinguished by a downward movement in that market, which is far from testifying to the genuineness of the sanguine convictions which John Bull likes to exhibit in regard to the state of the Indian guerrilla war; and which, at all events, indicates a stubborn distrust in the elasticity of Indian financial resources. As to the latter, two opposite views are propounded. On the one hand, it is affirmed that taxes in India are onerous and oppressive beyond those of any country in the world; that as a rule throughout most of the presidencies, and through those presidencies most where they have been longest under British rule, the cultivators, that is, the great body of the people of India, are in a condition of unmitigated impoverishment and dejection; that, consequently, Indian revenues have been stretched to their utmost possible limit, and Indian finances are therefore past recovery. A rather discomfortable opinion this at a period when, according to Mr. Gladstone, for some years to come, the extraordinary Indian expenditure alone will annually amount to about £20,000,000 sterling. On the other hand, it is asserted⎯the asseveration being made good by an array of statistical illustrations⎯that India is the least taxed country in the world; that, if expenditure is going on increasing, revenue may be increased too; and that it is an utter fallacy to imagine that the Indian people will not bear any new taxes. Mr. Bright, who may be considered the most arduous and influential representative of the “discomfortable” doctrine, made, on the occasion of the second reading of the new Government of India bill, the following statement: “The Indian Government had cost more to govern India than it was possible to extort from the population of India, although the Government had been by no means scrupulous either as to the taxes imposed, or as to the mode in which they had been levied. It cost more than £30,000,000 to govern India, for that was the gross revenue, and there

350

5

10

15

20

25

30

Taxation in India

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

was always a deficit, which had to be made up by loans borrowed at a high rate of interest. The Indian debt now amounted to £60,000,000, and was increasing; while the credit of the Government was falling, partly because they had not treated their creditors very honorably on one or two occasions, and now on account of the calamities which had recently happened in India. He had alluded to the gross revenue; but as that included the opium revenue, which was hardly a tax upon the people of India, he would take the taxation which really pressed upon them at £25,000,000. Now, let not this £25,000,000 be compared with the £60,000,000 that was raised in this country. Let the House recollect that in India it was possible to purchase twelve days’ labor for the same amount of gold or silver that would be obtained in payment for one in England. This £25,000,000 expended in the purchase of labor in India would buy as much as an outlay of £300,000,000 would procure in England. He might be asked how much was the labor of an Indian worth? Well, if the labor of an Indian was only worth 2d. a day, it was clear that we could not expect him to pay as much taxation as if it was worth 2s. We had 30,000,000 of population in Great Britain and Ireland; in India there were 150,000,000 inhabitants. We raised here £60,000,000 sterling of taxes; in India, reckoning by the days’ labor of the people of India, we raised £300,000,000 of revenue, or five times a greater revenue than was collected at home. Looking at the fact that the population of India was five times greater than that of the British Empire, a man might say that the taxation per head in India and England was about the same, and that therefore there was no great hardship inflicted. But in England there was an incalculable power of machinery and steam, of means of transit, and of everything that capital and human invention could bring to aid the industry of a people. In India there was nothing of the kind. They had scarcely a decent road throughout India.” Now, it must be admitted that there is something wrong in this method of comparing Indian taxes with British taxes. There is on the one side the Indian population, five times as great as the British one, and there is on the other side the Indian taxation amounting to half the British. But, then, Mr. Bright says, Indian labor is an equivalent for about one-twelfth only of British labor. Consequently £30,000,000 of taxes in India would represent £300,000,000 of taxes in Great Britain, instead of the £60,000,000 actually there raised. What then is the conclusion he ought to have arrived at? That the people of India in regard to their numerical strength pay the same taxation as the people in Great Britain, if allowance is made for the comparative poverty of the people in India, and £30,000,000 is supposed to weigh as heavily upon 150,000,000 Indians as

351

Karl Marx

£60,000,000 upon 30,000,000 Britons. Such being his supposition, it is certainly fallacious to turn round and say that a poor people cannot pay so much as a rich one, because the comparative poverty of the Indian people has already been taken into account in making out the statement that the Indian pays as much as the Briton. There might, in fact, another question be raised. It might be asked, whether a man who earns say 12 cents a day can be fairly expected to pay 1 cent with the same ease with which another, earning $12 a day, pays $1? Both would relatively contribute the same aliquot part of their income, but still the tax might bear in quite different proportions upon their respective necessities. Yet, Mr. Bright has not yet put the question in these terms, and, if he had, the comparison between the burden of taxation, borne by the British wages’ laborer on the one hand, and the British capitalist on the other, would perhaps have struck nearer home than the comparison between Indian and British taxation. Moreover, he admits himself that from the £30,000,000 of Indian taxes, the £5,000,000 constituting the opium revenue must be subtracted, since this is, properly speaking, no tax pressing upon the Indian people, but rather an export duty charged upon Chinese consumption. Then we are reminded by the apologists of the AngloIndian Administration that £16,000,000 of income is derived from the land revenue, or rent, which from times immemorial has belonged to the State in its capacity as supreme landlord, never constituted part of the private fortune of the cultivator, and does, in fact, no more enter into taxation, properly so called, than the rent paid by the British farmers to the British aristocracy can be said to enter British taxation. Indian taxation, according to this point of view, would stand thus: Aggregate sum raised Deduct for opium revenue Deduct for rent of land Taxation proper

£30,000,000 5,000,000 16,000,000 £9,000,000

Of this £9,000,000, again, it must be admitted that some important items, such as the post-office, the stamp duties, and the custom duties, bear in a very minute proportion on the mass of the people. Accordingly, Mr. Hendriks, in a paper recently laid before the British Statistical Society on the Finances of India, tries to prove, from Parliamentary and other official documents, that of the total revenue paid by the people of India, not more than one-fifth is at present raised by taxation, i.e., from the real income of the people; that in Bengal 27 per cent only, in the Punjaub 23 per cent only, in Madras 21 per cent only, in the North-West Provinces 17 per cent only, and in Bombay 16 per cent only of the total revenue is derived from taxation proper.

352

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Taxation in India

The following comparative view of the average amount of taxation derived from each inhabitant of India and the United Kingdom, during the years 1855–56, is abstracted from Mr. Hendriks’s statement: 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Bengal, per head, Revenue North-West Provinces Madras Bombay Punjaub United Kingdom

£0 5 3 4 8 3 –

0 5 7 3 3 –

Taxation Taxation Taxation Taxation Taxation Taxation

proper. £0 proper. proper. proper. proper. proper. 1

1 0 1 1 0 10

4 7 0 4 9 0

For a different year the following estimate of the average paid by each individual to the national revenue is made by Gen. Briggs: In In In In

England, 1852 France Prussia India, 1854

£1 1

19 12 19 3

4 0 3 81/2

From these statements it is inferred by the apologists of the British Administration that there is not a single country in Europe, where, even if the comparative poverty of India is taken into account, the people are so lightly taxed. Thus it seems that not only opinions with respect to Indian taxation are conflicting, but that the facts from which they purport to be drawn are themselves contradictory. On the one hand, we must admit the nominal amount of Indian taxation to be relatively small; but on the other, we might heap evidence upon evidence from Parliamentary documents, as well as from the writings of the greatest authorities on Indian affairs, all proving beyond doubt that this apparently light taxation crushes the mass of the Indian people to the dust, and that its exaction necessitates a resort to such infamies as torture, for instance. But is any other proof wanted beyond the constant and rapid increase of the Indian debt and the accumulation of Indian deficits? It will certainly not be contended that the Indian Government prefers increasing debts and deficits because it shrinks from touching too roughly upon the resources of the people. It embarks in debt, because it sees no other way to make both ends meet. In 1805 the Indian debt amounted to £25,626,631; in 1829 it reached about £34,000,000; in 1850, £47,151,018; and at present it amounts to about £60,000,000. By the by, we leave out of the count the East Indian debt contracted in England, which is also chargeable upon the East Indian revenue. The annual deficit, which in 1805 amounted to about two and a half millions, had, under Lord Dalhousie’s administration, reached the aver-

353

Karl Marx

age of five millions. Mr. George Campbell of the Bengal Civil Service, and of a mind strongly biased in favor of the Anglo-Indian administration, was obliged to avow, in 1852, that: “Although no Oriental conquerors have ever obtained so complete an ascendency, so quiet, universal and undisputed possession of India as we have, yet all have enriched themselves from the revenues of the country, and many have out of their abundance laid out considerable sums on works of public improvements. * * * From doing this we are debarred. * * * The quantity of the whole burden is by no means diminished (under the English rule), yet we have no surplus.” In estimating the burden of taxation, its nominal amount must not fall heavier into the balance than the method of raising it, and the manner of employing it. The former is detestable in India, and in the branch of the land-tax, for instance, wastes perhaps more produce than it gets. As to the application of the taxes, it will suffice to say that no part of them is returned to the people in works of public utility, more indispensable in Asiatic countries than anywhere else, and that, as Mr. Bright justly remarked, nowhere so extravagant is a provision made for the governing class itself.

354

5

10

15

Friedrich Engels The Indian Army

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5381, 21. Juli 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

The war in India is gradually passing into that stage of desultory guerrilla warfare, to which, more than once, we have pointed as its next impending and most dangerous phase of development. The insurgent armies, after their successive defeats in pitched battles, and in the defense of towns and entrenched camps, gradually dissolve into smaller bodies of from two to six or eight thousand men, acting, to a certain degree, independently of each other, but always ready to unite for a short expedition against any British detachment which may be surprised singly. The abandonment of Bareilly without a blow, after having drawn the active field force of Sir C. Campbell some eighty miles away from Lucknow, was the turning point, in this respect, for the main army of the insurgents; the abandonment of Calpee had the same significance for the second great body of natives. In either case, the last defensible central base of operations was given up, and the warfare of an army thereby becoming impossible, the insurgents made eccentric retreats by separating into smaller bodies. These movable columns require no large town for a central base of operations. They can find means of existence, of re-equipment, and of recruitment in the various districts in which they move; and a small town or a large village as a center of reorganization may be as valuable to each of them as Delhi, Lucknow, or Calpee to the larger armies. By this change, the war loses much of its interest; the movements of the various columns of insurgents cannot be followed up in detail and appear confused in the accounts; the operations of the British commanders, to a great extent, escape criticism, from the unavoidable obscurity enveloping the premises on which they are based; success or failure remain the only criterion, and they are certainly of all the most deceitful. This uncertainty respecting the movements of the natives is already very great. After the taking of Lucknow, they retreated eccentrically⎯some south-east, some north-east, some north-west. The latter were the stronger body, and were followed by Campbell into Rohilcund. They

355

Friedrich Engels

had concentrated and re-formed at Bareilly; but when the British came up, they abandoned the place without resistance, and again retreated in different directions. Particulars of these different lines of retreat are not known. We only know that a portion went toward the hills on the frontiers of Nepaul, while one or more columns appear to have marched in the opposite direction, toward the Ganges and the Doab (the country between the Ganges and the Jumna). No sooner, however, had Campbell occupied Bareilly, than the insurgents, who had retreated in an easterly direction, effected a junction with some bodies on the Oude frontier and fell upon Shahjehanpore, where a small British garrison had been left; while further insurgent columns were hastening in that direction. Fortunately for the garrison, Brigadier Jones arrived with re-enforcements as early as the 11th of May, and defeated the natives; but they, too, were reenforced by the columns concentrating on Shahjehanpore, and again invested the town on the 15th. On this day, Campbell, leaving a garrison in Bareilly, marched to its relief; but it was not before the 24th of May that he attacked them and drove them back, the various columns of insurgents which had cooperated in this maneuver again dispersing in different directions. While Campbell was thus engaged on the frontiers of Rohilcund, Gen. Hope Grant marched his troops backward and forward in the South of Oude, without any result, except losses to his own force by fatigue under an Indian Summer’s sun. The insurgents were too quick for him. They were everywhere but where he happened to look for them, and when he expected to find them in front, they had long since again gained his rear. Lower down the Ganges, Gen. Lugard was occupied with a chase after a similar shadow in the district between Dinapore, Jugdespore and Buxar. The natives kept him constantly on the move, and, after drawing him away from Jugdespore, all at once fell upon the garrison of that place. Lugard returned, and a telegram reports his having gained a victory on the 26th. The identity of the tactics of these insurgents with those of the Oude and Rohilcund columns is evident. The victory gained by Lugard will, however, scarcely be of much importance. Such bands can afford to be beaten a good many times before they become demoralized and weak. Thus, by the middle of May, the whole insurgent force of Northern India had given up warfare on a large scale, with the exception of the army of Calpee. This force, in a comparatively short time, had organized in that town a complete center of operations; they had provisions, powder and other stores in profusion, plenty of guns, and even founderies and musket manufactories. Though within 25 miles of Cawnpore, Camp-

356

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Indian Army

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

bell had left them unmolested; he merely observed them by a force on the Doab or western side of the Jumna. Generals Rose and Whitlock had been on the march to Calpee for a long while; at last Rose arrived, and defeated the insurgents in a series of engagements in front of Calpee. The observing force on the other side of the Jumna, in the mean time, had shelled the town and fort, and suddenly the insurgents evacuated both, breaking up this their last large army into independent columns. The roads taken by them are not at all clear, from the accounts received; we only know that some have gone into the Doab, and others toward Gwalior. Thus the whole district from the Himalaya to the Bihar and Vindhya mountains, and from Gwalior and Delhi to Joruckpore and Dinapore, is swarming with active insurgent bands, organized to a certain degree by the experience of a twelve months war, and encouraged, amid a number of defeats, by the indecisive character of each, and by the small advantages gained by the British. It is true, all their strongholds and centers of operations have been taken from them; the greater portion of their stores and artillery are lost; the important towns are all in the hands of their enemies. But on the other hand, the British, in all this vast district, hold nothing but the towns, and of the open country, nothing but the spot where their movable columns happen to stand; they are compelled to chase their nimble enemies without any hope of attaining them; and they are under the necessity of entering upon this harassing mode of warfare at the very deadliest season of the year. The native Indian can stand the mid-day heat of his Summer with comparative comfort, while mere exposure to the rays of the sun is almost certain death to the European; he can march forty miles in such a season, where ten break down his northern opponent; to him even the hot rains and swampy jungles are comparatively innocuous, while dysentery, cholera, and ague follow every exertion made by Europeans in the rainy season or in swampy neighborhoods. We are without detailed accounts of the sanitary condition of the British army; but from the comparative numbers of those struck by the sun and those hit by the enemy in Gen. Rose’s army, from the report that the garrison of Lucknow is sickly, that the 38th regiment arrived last Autumn above 1,000 strong, now scarcely numbers 550, and from other indications we may draw the conclusion that the Summer’s heat, during April and May, has done its work among the newly-imported men and lads who have replaced the bronzed old Indian soldiers of last year’s campaign. With the men Campbell has, he cannot undertake the forced marches of Havelock nor a siege during the rainy season like that of Delhi. And although the British Government are again sending off

357

Friedrich Engels

strong re-enforcements, it is doubtful whether they will be sufficient to replace the wear and tear of this Summer’s campaign against an enemy who declines to fight the British except on terms most favorable to himself. The insurgent warfare now begins to take the character of that of the Bedouins of Algeria against the French; with the difference that the Hindoos are far from being so fanatical, and that they are not a nation of horsemen. This latter is important in a flat country of immense extent. There are plenty of Mohammedans among them who would make good irregular cavalry; still the principal cavalry nations of India have not joined the insurrection so far. The strength of their army is in the infantry, and that arm being unfit to meet the English in the field, becomes a drag in guerilla warfare in the plain; for in such a country the sinew of desultory warfare is irregular cavalry. How far this want may be remedied during the compulsory holiday the English will have to take during the rains, we shall see. This holiday will, altogether, give the natives an opportunity of reorganizing and recruiting their forces. Beside the organization of cavalry, there are two more points of importance. As soon as the cold weather sets in, guerilla warfare alone will not do. Centers of operation, stores, artillery, intrenched camps or towns, are required to keep the British busy until the cold season is over; otherwise the guerilla warfare might be extinguished before the next Summer gives it fresh life. Gwalior appears to be, among others, a favorable point, if the insurgents have really got hold of it. Secondly, the fate of the insurrection is dependent upon its being able to expand. If the dispersed columns cannot manage to cross from Rohilcund into Rajpootana and the Mahratta country; if the movement remains confined to the northern central district, then, no doubt, the next Winter will suffice to disperse the bands, and to turn them into dacoits, which will soon be more hateful to the inhabitants than even the palefaced invaders.

358

5

10

15

20

25

30

Karl Marx The Indian Bill

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5384, 24. Juli 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

The latest India bill has passed through its third reading in the House of Commons, and since the Lords, swayed by Derby’s influence, are not likely to show fight, the doom of the East India Company appears to be sealed. They do not die like heroes, it must be confessed; but they have bartered away their power, as they crept into it, bit by bit, in a businesslike way. In fact, their whole history is one of buying and selling. They commenced by buying sovereignty, and they have ended by selling it. They have fallen, not in a pitched battle, but under the hammer of the auctioneer, into the hands of the highest bidder. In 1693 they procured from the Crown a charter for twenty-one years by paying large sums to the Duke of Leeds and other public officers. In 1767 they prolonged their tenure of power for two years by the promise of annually paying £400,000 into the Imperial exchequer. In 1769 they struck a similar bargain for five years; but soon after, in return for the Exchequer’s foregoing the stipulated annual payment and lending them £1,400,000 at 4 per cent, they alienated some parcels of sovereignty, leaving to Parliament in the first instance the nomination of the Governor-General and four Councilors, altogether surrendering to the Crown the appointment of the Lord Chief Justice and his three Judges, and agreeing to the conversion of the Court of Proprietors from a democratic into an oligarchic body. In 1858, after having solemnly pledged themselves to the Court of Proprietors to resist by all constitutional “means” the transfer to the Crown of the governing powers of the East India Company, they have accepted that principle, and agreed to a bill penal as regards the Company, but securing emolument and place to its principal Directors. If the death of a hero, as Schiller says, resembles the setting of the sun, the exit of the East India Company bears more likeness to the compromise effected by a bankrupt with his creditors. By this bill the principal functions of administration are intrusted to a Secretary of State in Council, just as at Calcutta the Governor-General in

359

Karl Marx

Council manages affairs. But both these functionaries⎯the Secretary of State in England and the Governor-General in India⎯are alike authorized to disregard the advice of their assessors and to act upon their own judgment. The new bill also invests the Secretary of State with all the powers at present exercised by the President of the Board of Control, through the agency of the Secret Committee⎯the power, that is, in urgent cases, of dispatching orders to India without stopping to ask the advice of his Council. In constituting that Council it has been found necessary, after all, to resort to the East India Company as the only practicable source of appointments to it other than nominations by the Crown. The elective members of the Council are to be elected by the Directors of the East India Company from among their own number. Thus, after all, the name of the East India Company is to outlive its substance. At the last hour it was confessed by the Derby Cabinet that their bill contains no clause abolishing the East India Company, as represented by a Court of Directors, but that it becomes reduced to its ancient character of a company of stockholders, distributing the dividends guaranteed by different acts of legislation. Pitt’s bill of 1784 virtually subjected their government to the sway of the Cabinet under the name of the Board of Control. The act of 1813 stripped them of their monopoly of commerce, save the trade with China. The act of 1834 destroyed their commercial character altogether, and the act of 1854 annihilated their last remnant of power, still leaving them in possession of the Indian administration. By the rotation of history the East India Company, converted in 1612 into a joint-stock company, is again clothed in its primitive garb, only that it represents now a trading partnership without trade, and a joint-stock company which has no funds to administer, but only fixed dividends to draw. The history of the Indian bill is marked by greater dramatic changes than any other act of modern Parliamentary legislation. When the Sepoy insurrection broke out, the cry of Indian reform rang through all classes of British society. Popular imagination was heated by the torture reports; the Government interference with the native religion was loudly denounced by Indian general officers and civilians of high standing; the rapacious annexation policy of Lord Dalhousie, the mere tool of Downing street; the fermentation recklessly created in the Asiatic mind by the piratical wars in Persia and China⎯wars commenced and pursued on Palmerston’s private dictation⎯the weak measures with which he met the outbreak, sailing ships being chosen for transport in preference to steam vessels, and the circuitous navigation around the cape of Good Hope instead of transportation over the Isthmus of Suez⎯all these accu-

360

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Indian Bill

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

mulated grievances burst into the cry for Indian Reform⎯reform of the Company’s Indian administration, reform of the Government’s Indian policy. Palmerston caught at the popular cry, but resolved upon turning it to his exclusive profit. Because both the Government and the Company had miserably broken down, the Company was to be killed in sacrifice, and the Government to be rendered omnipotent. The power of the Company was to be simply transferred to the dictator of the day, pretending to represent the Crown as against the Parliament, and to represent Parliament as against the Crown, thus absorbing the privileges of the one and the other in his single person. With the Indian army at his back, the Indian treasury at his command, and the Indian patronage in his pocket, Palmerston’s position would have become impregnable. His bill passed triumphantly through the first reading, but his career was cut short by the famous Conspiracy bill, followed by the advent of the Tories to power. On the very first day of their official reappearance on the Treasury benches, they declared that, out of deference for the decisive will of the Commons, they would forsake their opposition to the transfer from the Company to the Crown of the Indian Government. Lord Ellenborough’s legislative abortion seemed to hasten Palmerston’s restoration, when Lord John Russell, in order to force the dictator into a compromise, stepped in, and saved the Government by proposing to proceed with the Indian bill by way of Parliamentary resolution, instead of by a governmental bill. Then Lord Ellenborough’s Oude dispatch, his sudden resignation, and the consequent disorganization in the Ministerial camp, were eagerly seized upon by Palmerston. The Tories were again to be planted in the cold shade of opposition, after they had employed their short lease of power in breaking down the opposition of their own party against the confiscation of the East India Company. Yet it is sufficiently known how these fine calculations were baffled. Instead of rising on the ruins of the East India Company, Palmerston has been buried beneath them. During the whole of the Indian debates, the House seemed to indulge the peculiar satisfaction of humiliating the Civis Romanus. All his amendments, great and small, were ignominiously lost; allusions of the most unsavory kind, relating to the Afghan war, the Persian war, and the Chinese war, were continually flung at his head; and Mr. Gladstone’s clause, withdrawing from the Indian Minister the power of originating wars beyond the boundaries of India, intended as a general vote of censure on Palmerston’s past foreign policy, was passed by a crushing majority, despite his furious resistance. But although the man has been thrown overboard, his principle, upon the whole, has been accepted. Although somewhat

361

Karl Marx

checked by the obstructive attributes of the Board of Council, which, in fact, is but the well-paid specter of the old Court of Directors, the power of the executive has, by the formal annexation of India, been raised to such a degree that, to counterpoise it, democratic weight must be thrown into the Parliamentary scale.

362

5

Karl Marx An den Redakteur der „Neuen Zeit“

Die Neue Zeit. London. Nr. 4, 17. Juli 1858.

An den Redakteur der neuen Zeit.

5

10

15

20

25

30

Wie ein deutscher „Volksmann“ und „Dichter“ das Angenehme mit dem Nützlichen zu vereinigen weiß. ––– Vor 4 Wochen ließ Dr. Kinkel folgende Anzeige in den „Manchester Guardian“ einrücken: TOUR THROUGH THE ENGLISH LAKES. READING GERMAN LITTERATURE. A Professor of German at one of the most distinguished educational establishments in this country will Read to a Party composed of Ladies and Gentlemen: Schiller’s Gedichte, Don Carlos, Auerbach’s Dorfgeschichten, and Hauff’s Bettlerin vom Pont des Arts. This Party being a select one, care will be taken to keep it so, and to connect by these means sociable and pleasant intercourse with instructive and entertaining reading. The Party to start from Kendall, Monday, July 5th. Early applications will oblige, as none will be received after June 19th. Address to the Publisher of this paper for Dr. K. Zur Erbauung derer unter den deutschen Lesern, die des Englischen nicht ganz mächtig sind, füge ich eine Uebersetzung dieses Machwerkes bei, das schon in stilistischer Hinsicht ein Curiosum ist. „Reise an den englischen Seen. Lesen von deutscher Litteratur. Ein Lehrer der deutschen Sprache an einer der ausgezeichnetsten Erziehungsanstalten Englands wird einer Gesellschaft von Damen und Herren Schillers Gedichte, Don Carlos, Auerbachs Dorfgeschichten und Hauffs Bettlerin vom Pont des Arts vorlesen. Da die Gesellschaft gewählt ist (wie republikanisch und wie grammatikalisch!) wird Sorge dafür getragen werden, daß sie so bleibt, und daß auf diese Weise (wie?) geselliger und angenehmer Verkehr mit belehrender und unterhaltender Lektüre verbunden wird. Die Gesellschaft geht Montag den 5. Juli von Kendall ab. Man melde sich gefälligst bald, da nach dem 19. Juni Niemand mehr angenommen wird. Man wende sich an Dr. K. per Adr. des Redakteurs dieses Blattes.“ Ein Ausschnitt mit der Originalanzeige kann Ihnen zur Einsicht vorgelegt werden. Anti-Humbug.

363

Karl Marx Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton (First Article)

New-York Semi-Weekly Tribune. Nr. 1377, 6. August 1858.

Correspondence of The N. Y. Tribune. London, July 16, 1858. Of all persons, poets are the most able to double their individuality so as to disable you from recognizing the poet in the man, or from tracing the man to the poet. Racine, whose very name awakes in the breast of a Frenchman the idea of tenderness, was a fellow coarsely brutal in his family relations; and Jean Jacques Rousseau, who wrote “Emil,” used to get rid of his children by anonymously dropping them into an orphan asylum. One would be almost tempted into the heretical belief that poets lavish their fine feelings too freely upon the world of fancy to retain an average stock for common use in common life. Sir Edward Lytton Bulwer, the present British Colonial Minister, the sentimental novelist, celebrated for his delicate delineations of sweet womanhood, is at this moment publicly accused of having falsely represented his own wife as a maniac, kidnapped her und buried her in a mad house at Brentford, near London, with the single view of ridding himself of a troublesome person. If anywhere, in Great Britain one should expect to find the Lunacy law fenced by an array of legal formalities, since the boundary line between eccentricity and insanity is nowhere so difficult to trace as in that country of fixed ideas, stubborn crotchets and cloudy spleen. Yet, to secrete an obnoxious person in a mad-house, British law requires nothing beyond the declaration in writing of a relative, countersigned by two medical men, with whom fees and personal influence may go a great length in directing their opinions. The amended law, indeed, admits the sequestrated individual to the benefit of a public inquiry, if he is possessed of friends who think it worth their while to protest in his name, and insist upon legal investigation. If such a proceeding answers the demands of justice, why not commit a person suspected of felony to the common jail on the secret declaration of a third party, countersigned by two solicitors,

364

5

10

15

20

25

Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton (First Article)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

an inquiry afterward to be compellable when demanded by the friends of the prisoner? The surest way of rendering a person mad is to take him to the mad-house. The feud between Bulwer and his wife is of old standing. The novels and pamphlets published by Lady Bulwer are so many philippics charging Sir Edward with atrocious injustice and wrong toward herself, and painting him as an accomplished disciple in the Titus Oates line of philosophy. Her pen, it must be owned, is dipped in vitriol rather than in ink, but if the old proverb says that ira facit poetam, it certainly does not mean the wrath instilled by the sting of personal suffering. Prone as the novel-reading public are to indulge in sympathy for the fancied woes of poetical heroes and heroines, the real grievances of a private individual, if again and again thrust upon us, are likely to prove a bore, and to be treated as such. Lady Bulwer, with her never-ceasing pleadings against Sir Edward, had been thus put down by the British public, and even the general attention given to the present catastrophe of her chequered life, seems to originate in political interest still more than in genuine compassion. According to constitutional usage, Sir Edward Bulwer, when appointed Colonial Secretary, had to meet anew his Hertfordshire constituents, in order to pass through the ceremony of a ree¨lection. Lady Bulwer resolved to confront him on that occasion, and, through circulars and placards, announced her purpose publicly. On the nomination day, after her arrival at Hertford, whither she had repaired in the company of a female friend, stratagems were employed to keep her from the meeting. Deceived as to the hour when the proceedings were to open, she still arrived just in time to hear Bulwer close his address “with a fervent tribute of admiration to the womanly beauty exhibited in the long line of open carriages, chaises and vans, drawn up in front of the hustings.” “An extremely handsome woman, of about 45 years of age, with fresh complexion and eyes of dazzling beauty,” she crossed the crowd, announced herself as Bulwer’s wife, had her voice drowned by the shouts of his supporters, but, nevertheless, advanced steadily toward the platform. Catching her eye, and losing at once color and pluck, Sir Edward suddenly disappeared below the platform, signed in all haste the usual declaration, and shut himself up in the private residence of the gentleman on whose grounds the election took place. Lady Bulwer cried “Coward” after him, and having addressed the audience for more than a quarter of an hour, wound up her harangue with the declaration that, instead of being appointed Secretary of the Colonies, Sir Edward ought to have been shipped to the Colonies long ago, at the expense of the country. She

365

Karl Marx

subsequently applied to the Mayor for the use of the town hall as a lecturing room, but on his refusal, left the town and returned to Taunton, a little town in Somerset, where she had resided for the last three years. Shortly after, it became known that she had been carried off to a madhouse. Before resorting to this extraordinary step, Lady Bulwer had published an “Appeal to the Public,” in which she draws up a bill of indictment against her husband, and, simultaneously, craves public support in the form of subscriptions for her latest novel, “Too Successful,” since, according to her statement, it formed part and parcel of the system of prosecution pursued against her to break her down by misery. At the time of her marriage she was possessed of a small property, worth about £400 per annum, which, as Sir Edward had not yet inherited his present large fortune, she transferred to him, in order to secure to him the property qualification required for Members of Parliament. On their separation in 1838, Bulwer consented to pay her £400 a year during his life, an annual income which, in consequence of liabilities successively incurred, had fallen below £180 a year. The literary publications with which she tried to eke out her income had, as she asserts, by the great influence Bulwer brought to bear upon publishers and critics, been shut out of the book market, and even become a new source of pecuniary embarrassment to her. This appeal fell flat upon the public ear. Uttered in a remote provincial town, it was hardly heard at London. Her repeated efforts to obtain an increase of allowance on the part of her husband, whose annual income had risen to £8,000 or £10,000, proving no more successful, she at last seized upon the Hertfordshire event as a proper opportunity for forcing her case into public attention. Her calculation has in fact proved to be far from “insane.” The rage at this public exposure and the infatuation of newly-got power combined to seduce Bulwer into a step which, to use Talleyrand’s bon mot, was not only a crime, but a fault. The novel-writer got the better of the politician. In a romance, of course, and peculiarly in a romance of the old style, it would have been a great stroke⎯the scene in the mad-house after the scene on the hustings; but Bulwer forgot that there were some prosaic people alive anxious to pair off Lord Clanricarde’s scandals against some great Tory crime. However, when he read the bits of insinuation in The Morning Post; when another metropolitan organ of Palmerston’s informed the Londoners that at Taunton an indignation meeting had been held and a committee of inquiry installed, while the conviction was generally expressed that “in Lady Bulwer’s transfer to a lunatic asylum she had been made the victim of a shocking outrage and crime,” and that as high a professional author-

366

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton (First Article)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

ity as Dr. Forbes Winslow had been consulted; when, finally, Palmerston’s metropolitan tap-room organ dedicated a leading article to “Our Colonial Secretary,” and asked “whether a Privy Councillor was exempt from the ordinary laws of English justice,” Sir Edward George Earle Lytton Bulwer Lytton became aware of his blunder, faltered, and, upon the bidding of his colleagues, at once advertised, through the columns of The Times, that he had come to an amicable settlement with Lady Bulwer, who, it is to be hoped, has all at once regained full possession of her intellectual powers. The following narrative of the adventures which occurred to Lady Bulwer since her intrusion on the Herts elections to her abduction to the Brentford mad-house is abstracted from The Somerset County Gazette: “For several months past, her ladyship was under an impression that she was closely watched, and she seems to be suspicious that the object of this espionage was the miserable fate which has at last fallen upon her. Circumstances occurred about a month ago that were of a character to confirm her apprehensions. At that time a gentleman came to Taunton, and took up his residence at the Castle Hotel, which stands in close contiguity to the house in which she resided. He had had a good deal to do with the subject of her separation from Sir Edward, being, in fact, the honorable baronet’s solicitor, and she held him in great aversion. He remained here for a short time, it is said, and then left, but not before his sojourn had become known to her ladyship. On the 12th of June, another gentleman arrived in Taunton, and, calling at Clarke’s Hotel, sent his card to Lady Lytton, with a request for an interview. This was a ‘Dr. Thompson,’ and he was accompanied by a nurse from a neighboring lunatic asylum. After some reflection her ladyship consented to his admission, but took the precaution to request the landlady’s presence during his stay. Mrs. Clarke was present accordingly, and we are informed that the conversation which ensued between Lady Lytton and Dr. Thompson, originated and sustained by him, referred wholly to subjects that were calculated to excite intense anger and indignation on her part. This interview lasted five hours, and at last she asked if he had not come from Mr. Loaden, Sir Edward’s solicitor, to which he answered, ‘I am.’ Her Ladyship, who had preserved unwonted calmness, then asked, ‘Is the farce played out?⎯and if not, how much longer is it to last?’ Dr. Thompson replied, ‘The farce is ended, and your Ladyship will not from this hour hear any more upon these painful matters.’ It may be stated that during the interview two police officers, a solicitor and a medical gentleman were in an adjoining room, the object of whose presence it is not difficult to imagine. But Lady Lytton’s calmness rendered

367

Karl Marx

their services unnecessary. Previous to his departure, Dr. Thompson requested her to put upon paper what demands she wished to make upon her husband, and she complied, writing in substance as follows: ‘Sir Edward to pay my debts, the interest upon which swallows up the greater part of my income; and increase my income to £500 a year. Upon his doing this, I solemnly promise never in future to molest him in any way, nor even to mention his name.’ Dr. Thompson promised to lay these requirements before Sir Edward immediately on his return to London, and then withdrew, Lady Lytton giving vent on his departure to her overwrought feelings in a flood of tears, which could not be restrained for a considerable period, notwithstanding the consolations offered by the landlady, whose kindness to her throughout these painful and sad proceedings has been very great, and even of the nurse, whose opinion as to the state of her Ladyship’s mind had undergone a considerable change during the time she was in her presence. Several days elapsed, and still no communication arriving from Dr. Thompson, Lady Lytton naturally became impatient, and she wrote to him reminding him of his promise, and requesting information as to his success with Sir Edward. No answer was received to her letter, and she again addressed him, again and again, with the same result. Unable to remain longer in suspense upon a matter of such moment, she at last wrote to him to the effect that she would go to London in the course of the following week, and hoped to be able to see him, with a view to a final arrangement. Unfortunately for her she carried out her intention. Accompanied by a cousin⎯Miss Ryves⎯and a lady of Taunton, who has always taken great interest in her affairs, and will hereafter be found, it is presumed, capable of rendering her very important service in the proceedings which are contemplated with a view to prove her sanity, Lady Lytton took an evening train, and arrived in London shortly after 5 o’clock in the morning⎯a dreary time to enter the great slumbering city, even when one’s business is of no such dreary character as theirs. The chief reason of their traveling by night, instead of by day, was the inability of the female friend referred to to remain away from her home more than one day; but another may have been a sudden desire of Lady Lytton’s to know without further delay what determination, if any, her husband had come to with respect to her written request, taken charge of by Dr. Thompson⎯an insatiable craving for the answer which should place her in comparative pecuniary case, or doom her still to the ‘shameful needs of poverty.’ Entering a hotel, they partook of refreshment, and whiled away as well as they could the lagging hours until what was deemed an appropriate time to call upon Dr. Thompson came round.

368

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton (First Article)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

They then set out, and on reaching his house were courteously received. It was remarked by the doctor, however, that they had come rather early; ‘would they do him the favor to postpone discussion of the subject which had brought them until 5 o’clock in the afternoon?’ Assent was of course given, and, at the hour specified, they were again at the door of his residence. On announcing their names they were shown into the drawingroom, and Dr. Thompson waited upon them. He had hardly closed the door, however, when it was again opened, and another gentleman entered⎯‘A friend of mine, ladies, who has casually dropped in.’ It was remarked that, notwithstanding the subject to be discussed, and which had been broached, was quite of a private nature, the friend kept his seat, and that, though he took no part in the conversation, he listened attentively to what was said. There being signs that the interview was near its close, he withdrew. Lady Lytton seemed to have, on entering the house, a presentiment that there was no favorable information for her, and after putting a few questions to Dr. Thompson, which he answered hesitatingly, she said, ‘You have not consulted Sir Edward, Dr. Thompson; tell me, is not that the case?’ He owned that he could not give her any satisfactory answer, and her ladyship arose with her friends to depart. Dr. Thompson expressed a desire that she would not hurry away, nevertheless she proceeded, and on getting outside the room was astounded to see before her two policemen, two women who had the appearance of nurses, and a gentleman who, it has since been found, is the keeper of a lunatic asylum in the neighborhood of London. Dissemblance or concealment being no longer necessary or possible, the purpose of this assembly was in a few words explained. There are not many persons in existence, mad or not mad, who, on a discovery of so horrifying a nature, would not have become wild with excitement, and fallen into a state closely bordering upon insanity; but Lady Lytton maintained throughout these most trying and frightful circumstances a calm and dignified demeanor. She was, indeed, the calmest of the two⎯herself and her Taunton friend⎯for her affrighted cousin had rushed into the street. She was ushered into another room, on entering which she observed a figure like that of Sir Edward’s hastily retreating by a door at the other end. At first she refused to yield up her liberty; but the policemen were called, and she then said, ‘Resistance being vain, I submit, but under compulsion.’ Her friend insisted upon accompanying her, and she saw on a table in the room a paper, which she presumed to be a ‘certificate’ of Lady Lytton’s insanity. Upon this were the names of two medical gentlemen, and, it is believed, of Sir Edward. Her ladyship, being requested to proceed to the door, where she was told a carriage was

369

Karl Marx

ready to receive her, again refused compliance except under compulsion; and on this the policemen, each taking an arm, led her forward, her friend⎯the only one she could in these moments of tremendous agony appeal to⎯endeavoring to console her, and seeming to comfort her by the confident exclamations: ‘Never mind, Lady Lytton, they may take you, but they cannot take me;’ ‘You may be inside the asylum, but I shall be out.’ One might suppose that under such circumstances some gentleman to whom her ladyship was known, some male friend, would have been requested to attend and witness proceedings which were so terribly to affect her⎯which were to convey her to a living tomb, to worse than death. But, beside the lady we have so often referred to, there was no one present on Lady Lytton’s part. The policemen did ‘their duty,’ and her ladyship was constrained to enter the carriage, her friend forcing herself in immediately after her, and refusing to leave it. One or two gentlemen also seating themselves within it, the party was rapidly driven to an asylum at Brentford, kept by a person of the name of Hill. Arrived at the gates of the gloomy abode, the ladies were told they must part; and after a short scene, which we will not attempt to depict, they separated⎯the gates closing on ‘The Insane,’ and her friend being driven back to her lodgings. Previous to this lady’s leaving London, she received a note from Sir Edward’s solicitor, in which it was stated that the Hon. Baronet would be glad to see her at his residence, No. 1 Park lane. She indignantly declined the interview. Shortly afterward the solicitor called, and represented that it might be advantageous to her to see Sir Edward; but she gave him a denial in similar terms, and immediately returned to Taunton. On the following day, the solicitor came to Taunton, and, calling upon Mrs. Clarke, demanded all the documents and other papers, and such other property as Lady Lytton had left; but Mrs. Clarke refused to deliver, and dared him to remove any of them, alleging as one reason that she had a lien upon them in the shape of a bill of £300 against her ladyship; but, in truth, she was fortified in her refusal by a letter from Mr. Hyde, Lady Lytton’s solicitor, who had previously informed her that if any attempt should be made to take the property, or any part of it, she would be justified in calling in the police and giving the party into custody. Mr. Loaden offered to pay the bill, but the answer to this was, ‘I would rather forfeit every shilling of it than deliver the goods to you. They are in my possession, and I will not allow of their removal.’ Finding persuasion vain, Mr. Loaden retired. We have said that Lady Lytton’s capture and the circumstances connected with it have caused a great degree of excitement among the inhab-

370

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton (First Article)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

itants of this town; and if any proof of this were called for, or any substantial evidence of the opinion generally entertained required, we could hardly give more indubitable testimony than is contained in the following resolutions, which were adopted at a meeting of inhabitants, called by a gentleman, who, though a perfect stranger to Lady Lytton, felt convinced that a monstrous injustice had been inflicted upon her, and determined to use the very considerable influence he possesses to obtain her freedom, if really not insane⎯or, at least, to force on such an inquiry into her mental condition as should satisfy the public that she is not in a fit state to be at liberty. The gentleman in question arrived in this town only a day or two before the case came to his knowledge, and immediately upon becoming acquainted with it he proceeded into the street, called together such of the more influential inhabitants as he met, and within an hour the meeting took place. After a discussion of the subject, the resolutions were thrown into the following form: ‘At a meeting of certain inhabitants of Taunton and its neighborhood, held at Clarke’s Hotel, on the 6th of July, 1858, Mr. W. R. Hitchcock in the chair, it was resolved, On the motion of Capt. Jones, seconded by R. Easton, esq., 1. That the removal of Lady Bulwer Lytton to a lunatic asylum or other place of confinement, and the circumstances under which she is said to have been incarcerated therein, call for a public expression of alarm for the rights and liberties of the subject, and particularly of distrust of the treatment to which her ladyship is said to have been subjected. On the motion of Mr. Trudell, seconded by Mr. Day, 2. That a Committee be now appointed to watch the result of the extraordinary measures reported to have been adopted in Lady Bulwer Lytton’s case to the end, that the public mind may be satisfied, through their report, that in her ladyship’s case justice is being done. And on the motion of Mr. B. Bluett, seconded by Mr. House, 3. That such Committee do consist of Capt. Jones, Mr. Easton and Mr. Hitchcock; and that they do report to this meeting, which is hereby adjourned to Tuesday, the 20th inst, at the above named place, at 7 o’clock in the evening, for that purpose. (Signed) W. R. Hitchcock.’ Here we will leave this miserable tale, but we are anxious, before closing our remarks, to avow that, in taking it upon ourselves to set it before the public, we are actuated only by a sense of justice and duty. For the truth of the narrative we can refer to the lady who accompanied Lady Lytton to London; the details are given just as they were furnished to

371

Karl Marx

us⎯without exaggeration or distortion. If her ladyship’s mind is in such a state that she is a fit subject for a lunatic asylum, and an asylum is the only suitable place for her, no harm can come from the publicity we give to her case; if not, then much good must inevitably arise from its publicity⎯to her chiefly, and in an immeasurable degree, but also to society, in no unimportant measure. The whole question is, of course: Is Lady Lytton, we will not even say dangerously, but is she actually, insane? We have said we firmly believe, from what we have seen and heard of her, she is not; and this view is entertained by all we have heard express any opinion upon the subject.”

372

5

10

Karl Marx Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton (Second Article)

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5393, 4. August 1858.

Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton. Correspondence of The N. Y. Tribune. London, July 23, 1858. 5

10

15

20

25

The great Bulwer scandal, which The London Times thought to be “fortunately” hushed up by an amicable family arrangement, is far from having subsided into a state of quiescence. It is true that, despite the great party interest involved, the metropolitan press, with some trifling exceptions, did everything in its power to hush the case by a conspiracy of silence⎯Sir Edward Bulwer being one of the chiefs of the literary coterie which lords it more despotically over the heads of the London journalists than even party connection, and to openly affront whose wrath literary gentlemen generally lack the necessary courage. The Morning Post first informed the public that Lady Bulwer’s friends intended insisting upon legal investigation; The London Times reprinted the short paragraph of The Morning Post, and even The Advertiser, although it certainly has no literary position to hazard, did not venture beyond some meager extracts from The Somerset Gazette. Even Palmerston’s influence proved for the moment unavailing to extort anything from his literary retainers, and on the appearance of the flippantly apologetical letter of Bulwer’s son, all these public guardians of the liberty of the subject, while declaring themselves highly satisfied, deprecated any further indelicate intrusion upon the “painful matter.” The Tory press, of course, has long since spent all its virtuous indignation on Lord Clanricarde’s behalf, and the Radical press, which more or less receives its inspirations from the Manchester school, anxiously avoids creating any embarrassment to the present Administration. Yet, along with the respectable or would-be respectable press of the metropolis, there exists an irrespectable press, absolutely swayed by its political patrons with no literary standing to check them,

373

Karl Marx

always ready to coin money out of its privilege of free speech, and anxious to improve an opportunity of appearing in the eyes of the public as the last representatives of manliness. On the other hand, the moral instincts of the bulk of the people once awakened, there will be no need of further maneuvering. The public mind once worked into a state of moral excitement, even The London Times may throw off its mask of reserve, and, with a bleeding heart of course, stab the Derby Administration by passing the sentence of “public opinion” on such a literary chieftain even as Sir Edward Lytton Bulwer. This is exactly the turn things are now taking. That Lord Palmerston, as we hinted at first, is the secret manager of the spectacle is now un secret qui court les rues, as the French say. “On dit,” says a London weekly, “that Lady Bulwer Lytton’s best friend in this affair has been Lady Palmerston. We all remember how the Tories took up the cudgels for Mr. Norton when Lord Melbourne was in trouble about that gentleman’s wife. Tit for tat is fair play. But on reflection it is rather sad at this time of day to find a Secretary of State using the influence of his position to commit acts of oppression, and the wife of a Minister playing off the wife of another Minister against an Administration.” It is often by the crooked ways of political intrigue only that truth becomes smuggled into some corner of the British press. The apparently generous horror at a real outrage is after all but a calculated grimace; and public justice is only appealed to in order to cherish private malice. For aught the chivalrous knights of the inkhorn would care about it, Lady Bulwer might have remained forever in a lunatic asylum, at London; she might have been disposed of more quietly than at St. Petersburg or Vienna; the conventionalities of literary decorum would have debarred her from any means of redress but for the happy circumstance of Palmerston’s keen eye singling her out as the thin end of the wedge wherewith possibly to split a Tory Administration. A short analysis of the letter, addressed by Bulwer’s son to the London journals, will go far to elucidate the true state of the case. Mr. Robert B. Lytton sets out by asserting that his “simple assertion” must be “at once believed in,” because he is “the son of Lady Bulwer Lytton, with the best right to speak on her behalf, and obviously with the best means of information.” Now, this very tender son had neither cared for his mother, nor corresponded with her, nor seen her, for nearly seventeen years, until he met her at the hustings at Hertford on the occasion of his father’s ree¨lection. When Lady Bulwer left the hustings and visited the Mayor of Hertford in order to apply for the use of the Town Hall as a lecturing room, Mr. Robert B. Lytton sent a physician into the Mayor’s house

374

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton (Second Article)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

with the mission of taking cognizance of the state of the maternal mind. When, afterward, his mother was kidnapped in London, at the house of Mr. Hale Thompson, Clarges street, and her cousin Miss Ryves ran out into the street, and seeing Mr. Lytton waiting outside, entreated him to interfere and procure assistance to prevent his mother being carried off to Brentford, Mr. Lytton coolly refused to have anything to do with the matter. Having acted first as one of the principal agents in the plot laid by his father, he now shifts sides and presents himself as the natural spokesman of his mother. The second point pleaded by Mr. Lytton is, that his mother “was never for a moment taken to a lunatic asylum,” but, on the contrary, into the “private house” of Mr. Robert Gardiner Hill, surgeon. This is a mere quibble. As the “Wyke House,” conducted by Mr. Hill, does legally not belong to the category of “asylums,” but to that of “Metropolitan Licensed Houses,” it is literally true that Lady Bulwer was thrown, not into a “lunatic asylum,” but into a lunatic house. Surgeon Hill, who trades upon his own account in “lunacy,” has also come out with an apology, wherein he states that Lady Bulwer had never been locked in, but, on the contrary, had enjoyed the use of a brougham and driven almost every evening during her detention to Richmond, Acton, Hanwell or Isleworth. Mr. Hill forgets to tell the public that this “improved treatment of the insane,” adopted by him, exactly corresponds to the official recommendation of the Commissioners in Lunacy. The friendly grimaces, the smiling forbearance, the childish coaxing, the oily twaddle, the knowing winks and the affected serenity of a band of trained attendants may drive a sensitive woman mad as well as douches, straight waistcoats, brutal keepers and dark wards. However that may be, the protests on the part of Mr. Surgeon Hill and Mr. Lytton amount simply to this, that Lady Bulwer was treated as a lunatic indeed, but after the rules of the new instead of the old system. “I,” says Mr. Lytton, in his letter, “put myself in constant communication with my mother, ... and I carried out the injunctions of my father, who confided to me implicitly every arrangement ... and enjoined me to avail myself of the advice of Lord Shaftesbury in whatever was judged best and kindest to Lady Lytton.” Lord Shaftesbury, it is known, is the commander-in-chief of the host who have their head-quarters at Exeter Hall. To deodorise a dirty affair by his odor of sanctity might be considered a coup de the´aˆtre worthy of the inventive genius of a novel writer. More than once, in the Chinese business, for instance, and in the Cambridge House conspiracy, Lord Shaftesbury has been employed in that line. Yet Mr. Lytton admits the public only to a half confidence, otherwise he would have plainly declared that on the kidnapping of his mother an imperious note from

375

Karl Marx

Lady Palmerston upset Sir Edward’s plans, and induced him to “avail himself of the advice of Lord Shaftesbury,” who, by a particular mischance, happens to be at once Palmerston’s son-in-law and the Chairman of the Commissioners in Lunacy. In his attempt at mystification, Mr. Lytton proceeds to state: “From the moment my father felt compelled to authorize those steps which have been made the subject of so much misrepresentation, his anxiety was to obtain the opinion of the most experienced and able physicians, in order that my mother should not be subject to restraint for one moment longer than was strictly justifiable. Such was his charge to me.” From the evasive wording of this studiously awkward passage it appears, then, that Sir Edward Bulwer felt the necessity of authoritative medical advice, not for sequestrating his wife as insane, but for setting her free as mentis compos. In fact, the medical men upon whose consent Lady Bulwer was kidnapped were anything but “most experienced and able physicians.” The fellows employed by Sir Edward were one Mr. Ross, a city apothecary, whom, it seems, his license for trading in drugs has all at once converted into a psychological luminary, and one Mr. Hale Thompson, formerly connected with the Westminster Hospital, but a thorough stranger to the scientific world. It was only after gentle pressure from without had set in, when Sir Edward felt anxious to retrace his steps, that he addressed himself to men of medical standing. Their certificates are published by his son⎯but what do they prove? Dr. Forbes Winslow, the editor of “The Journal of Psychological Medicine,” who had previously been consulted by Lady Bulwer’s legal advisers, certifies that, “having examined Lady B. Lytton as to her state of mind,” he found it such as “to justify her liberation from restraint.” The thing to be proved to the public was, not that Lady Bulwer’s liberation, but on the contrary, that her restraint was justified. Mr. Lytton dares not touch upon this delicate and decisive point. Would not a constable, accused of illegal imprisonment of a free-born Briton, be laughed at for pleading that he had committed no wrong in setting his prisoner at large? But is Lady Bulwer really set at large? “My mother,” continues Mr. Lytton, “is now with me, free from all restraint, and about, at her own wish, to travel for a short time, in company with myself and a female friend and relation, of her own selection.” Mr. Lytton’s letter is dated “No. 1 Park lane,” that is, from the town residence of his father. Has, then, Lady Bulwer been removed from her place of confinement at Brentford to a place of confinement at London, and been bodily delivered up to an exasperated foe? Who warrants her being “free from all restraint?” At all events, when signing the proposed compromise, she was not free from restraint, but smarting under Surgeon Hill’s improved sys-

376

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Imprisonment of Lady Bulwer Lytton (Second Article)

5

10

15

20

tem. The most important circumstance is this: While Sir Edward has spoken, Lady Bulwer has kept silence. No declaration on her part, given as she is to literary exercise, has met the public eye. An account written by herself, of her own treatment, has been cleverly withdrawn from the hands of the individual to whom it was addressed. Whatever may be the agreement entered upon by the husband and the wife, the question for the British public is whether, under the cloak of the lunacy act, lettres de cachet may be issued by unscrupulous individuals able to pay tempting fees to two hungry practitioners. Another question is, whether a Secretary of State will be allowed to condone for a public crime by a private compromise. It has now oozed out that during the present year, while investigating into the state of a Yorkshire asylum, the Lunacy Commissioners discovered a man, in the full possession of his mental faculties, who, for several years, had been immured and secreted in a cellar. On a question being put in the House of Commons by Mr. Fitzroy, in regard to this case, Mr. Walpole answered that he had found “no record of the fact,” an answer which denies the record but not the fact. That things will not be allowed to rest at this point, may be inferred from Mr. Tite’s notice that “on an early day next session he would move for a select committee to inquire into the operation of the Lunacy act.”

377

Karl Marx How the Indian War has been Mismanaged

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5401, 13. August 1858.

How the Indian War has been Mismanaged. Correspondence of The N. Y. Tribune. London, July 27, 1858. At the beginning of the Anglo-Indian war, two curious questions were mooted⎯the one relating to the respective superiority of steamers or sailing vessels, the other as to the use of the overland route for the transport of troops. The British Government having decided in favor of sailing vessels against steamers, and for the voyage round the Cape of Good Hope against the overland route, the House of Commons, on the motion of Sir De Lacy Evans, ordered, on the 4th of February, 1858, a Committee to be appointed, under the chairmanship of the veteran General, which was to inquire “concerning the measures resorted to.” The formation of this Committee was completely altered by the intervening change of Ministry, consequent upon which three Palmerstonians were substituted for Lord Stanley and Sir John Pakington. The report of the Committee proving, on the whole, favorable to the late Administration, Gen. Sir De Lacy Evans had a protest printed and circulated, in which he asserts the conclusion arrived at to be at utter variance with the premises from which it pretended to be drawn, and quite inconsistent with the facts and evidence laid before them. An examination of the evidence itself must oblige all impartial persons to fully concur in this view of the case. The decisive importance of a short line of communication between an army in the field and its base of communication needs no demonstration. During the American War of Independence the principal obstacle England had to grapple with was a sea-line of 3,000 miles over which she had to convey her troops, stores and ree¨nforcements. From Great Britain to the mouths of the Indus and Ganges, to Calcutta, Madras, Kurrachee and Bombay, the distance, according to past arrangements, may be reck-

378

5

10

15

20

25

How the Indian War has been Mismanaged

5

10

15

oned at about 14,000 miles; but the use of steam offered the means of shortening it considerably. Hitherto on all occasions it had been the practice to effect the relief of regiments in India, by this long sea voyage in sailing vessels. This was considered a sufficient reason on the part of the late British Administration, for declaring at the beginning of the Indian troubles, that sailing vessels would still be preferred to steamers for the conveyance of troops. Up to the 10th of July, 1857, of 31 vessels taken up, nearly the whole were sailing ships. Meanwhile, public censure in England and unfavorable news from India effected so much that in the interval from the 10th of July to the 1st of December, among the 59 ships taken up for troops, 29 screw steamers were admitted. Thus a rough test was afforded of the relative qualities of steamers and sailing vessels in accomplishing the transit. According to the return furnished by the Marine Department of the East India Company, giving names of transports and length of passages to the four principal ports of India, the following may be considered the average results as between steamers and sailing vessels. From England to Calcutta. Days.

20

25

30

35

40

From August 6 to October 21, 1857, average of nine steamers, omitting fractions Average of 22 sailing vessels, from June 10, 1857, to August 27, 1858 Difference in favor of steamers To Madras. Average of 2 steamers Average of 2 sailing ships Difference in favor of steamers To Bombay. Average of 5 steamers Average of 9 sailing ships Difference in favor of steamers To Kurrachee. Average of 3 steamers Average of 10 ships Difference in favor of steamers Average of the whole of the 19 passages by steamers to the four ports of India Average passage of 43 sailing ships Difference between averages of steam and sailing vessels

82 116 34 90 131 41 76 118 42 91 128 37 83 120 37

379

Karl Marx

The same official return, dated Feb. 27, 1858, gives the following details: To Calcutta were conveyed by steamers By sailing ships Total to Calcutta To Madras, by steamers By sailing ships Total to Madras To Bombay, by steamers By sailing ships Total to Bombay To Kurrachee, by steamers By sailing ships Total to Kurrachee

Men. 6,798 9,489 16,287 2,089 985 3,074 3,906 3,439 7,345 1,351 2,321 4,272

It appears, then, from the above that 27 steamers carried to the four ports of disembarkation in India 14,144 men, averaging, therefore, 548 men in each ship; that in 55 sailing ships were conveyed 16,234 men, averaging 289 men in each. Now, by the same official statement of averages, it appears that the 14,144 men conveyed in steamers arrived at their respective places of destination on an average of 37 days sooner than the 16,234 men embarked on sailing ships. On the part of the British Admiralty and the other ministerial departments no arguments were adduced in favor of the traditionary transport but precedent and routine, both dating from an epoch when steam navigation was utterly unknown. Lord Palmerston’s principal plea, however, for the delay was expense, the cost of steamers in most of the above cases amounting to perhaps treble that of sailing ships. Apart from the fact that this great enhancement of charge for steamers must have gradually diminished after the first unusual demand, and that in so vital an emergency expense ought not to be admitted as an element of calculation, it is evident that the increased cost of transport would have been more than compensated for by the lessened chances of the insurrection. Still more important than the question of superiority as between steamers and sailing vessels, seems the controversy respecting the voyage round the Cape on the one hand and the overland route on the other; Lord Palmerston affirming the general impracticability of the latter route. A controversy in regard to it between his Board of Control and the East India Directors, appears to have commenced cotemporaneously with the first information of the Indian revolt reaching England. The question had, in fact, been solved as long ago as the beginning of this century. In the year 1801, when there were no steam navigation company’s agents to aid the military arrangements, and when no railway ex-

380

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

How the Indian War has been Mismanaged

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

isted, a large force under Sir David Baird proceeded from India and landed at Kosseir in May and June; crossed in nine days the desert of Kherie, on the Nile; proceeded down that river, garrisoned Alexandria, and in the following year, 1802, several regiments returned to India by Suez and the Red Sea, in the month of June. That force, amounting to 5,000 men, consisted of a troop of horse-artillery, six guns and small arms, ammunition, camp equipage, baggage, and 126 chests of treasure. The troops generally were very healthy. The march across the Suez Desert, from the lake of St. Pilgrims, near Grand Cairo to Suez, was performed in four days with the greatest ease, marching by night and encamping during the day. In June the ships proceeded to India, the wind at that season blowing down the Red Sea. They made a very quick passage. Again, during the late Russian war, in the Summer of 1854, the 10th and 11th regiments of Dragoons (1,400 horses, 1,600 men) arrived in Egypt from India, and were forwarded thence to the Crimea. These corps, though their transfer took place during the hot months, or monsoon, and though they had to remain some time in Egypt, are known to have been remarkably healthy and efficient, and to have continued so throughout their Crimean service. In the last instance there is the experience of the actual Indian war. After the waste of nearly four months, some thousand troops were dispatched by Egypt with extraordinary advantage as to economy of time, and with perfect preservation of health. The first regiment that was conveyed by this line passed from Plymouth to Bombay in thirty-seven days. Of the first regiment sent from Malta, the first wing arrived at Bombay in sixteen and the second wing in eighteen days. An overwhelming mass of evidence, from numerous trustworthy witnesses, attest the peculiar facilities, especially in periods of emergency, afforded by the overland route transport. Col. Pocklington, Deputy Quartermaster-General, appointed in October, 1857, to direct and superintend the transit of the troops, and who, expressly prepared by order of the War Department a report for the Committee of Inquiry, states: “The advantages of the overland route are very considerable, and the trajet is most simple. A thousand men per week can be conveyed across the isthmus by the Transit administration of Egypt without interference with the ordinary passenger traffic. Between 300 and 400 men can move at a time, and perform the distance from ship to ship in 26 hours. The transit by rail is completed to within almost twenty miles of Suez. This last portion of the journey is performed by the soldiers on donkeys in about six hours. [...] There can be no doubt as to the experiment having succeeded.” The time occupied by troops from England to India is, by the overland route, from 33 to 46 days. From Malta to India, from 16 to 18 or

381

Karl Marx

20 days. Compare these periods with the 83 by steamers, or the 120 by sailing ships, on the long sea route, and the difference will appear striking. Again, during the longer route, Great Britain will have from 15,000 to 20,000 troops, in effect hors de combat, and beyond counter orders for a period annually, of from 3 to 4 months, while, with the shorter line, it will be but for the brief period of some 14 days, during the transit from Suez to India, that the troops will be beyond reach of recall, for any unexpected European contingency. In resorting to the overland route only 4 months after the outbreak of the Indian war, and then only for a mere handful of troops, Palmerston set at naught the general anticipation of India and Europe. The Governor-General in India assumed that the Home Government would dispatch troops by the way of Egypt. The following is a passage from the Governor-General in Council’s letter to the Home Government, dated Aug. 7, 1857: “We are also in communication with the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company for the conveyance from Suez of the troops that may possibly have been dispatched to India by that route.” On the very day of the arrival at Constantinople of the news of the revolt, Lord Stratford de Redcliffe telegraphed to London to know whether he should apply to the Turkish Government to allow the British troops to pass through Egypt, on their way to India. The Sultan having meanwhile offered and transmitted a firman to that effect on the 2d of July, Palmerston replied by telegraph, that it was not his intention to send troops by that route. It being in France likewise assumed, as a matter of course, that the acceleration of the military ree¨nforcements must at that moment form the paramount object of British policy, Bonaparte spontaneously tendered permission for the passage over France of British troops, to enable their being embarked, if deemed desirable, at Marseilles, for Egypt. The Pasha of Egypt lastly, when, at length, Mr. Holton, the Superintendent of the Peninsular and Oriental Company in Egypt, was authorized to reply on the subject, answered immediately, “It would be a satisfaction to him to give facility to the passage of not only 200 men, as in the present instance, but to that of 20,000, if necessary, and not en bourgeois but in uniform, and with their arms, if required.” Such were the facilities recklessly thrown away, the proper use of which might have prevented the Indian war from assuming its formidable dimensions. The motives by which Lord Palmerston was prompted in preferring sailing vessels to steamers, and a line of communication extending over 14,000 miles to one limited to 4,000 miles, belong to the mysteries of cotemporaneous history.

382

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Karl Marx The Increase of Lunacy in Great Britain

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5407, 20. August 1858.

5

There is, perhaps, no better-established fact in British society than that of the corresponding growth of modern wealth and pauperism. Curiously enough, the same law seems to hold good with respect to lunacy. The increase of lunacy in Great Britain has kept pace with the increase of exports, and has outstripped the increase of population. Its rapid progress in England and Wales during the period extending from 1852 to 1857, a period of unprecedented commercial prosperity, will become evident from the following tabular comparison of the annual returns of paupers, lunatics and idiots for the years 1852, 1854 and 1857:

10 Date.

Population.

15 Jan. 1, 1852

17,927,609 18,649,849 19,408,464

Jan. 1, 1854 Jan. 1, 1857

20

25

Patients in County or Borough Asylums. 9,412 11,956 13,488

In With Work- friends houses. or elsewhere.

Total of Lunatics and Idiots.

Proportion to population.

2,584 1,878 1,908

5,055 5,713 6,800

21,158 24,487 27,693

1 in 847 1 in 762 1 in 701

4,107 4,940 5,497

The proportion of acute and curable cases to those of a chronic and apparently incurable kind was, on the last day of 1856, estimated to be somewhat less than 1 in 5, according to the following summary of official returns:

In In In In

County and Borough Asylums Hospitals Metropolitan licensed Houses Provincial licensed Houses Total Deemed curable

30

In licensed houses.

Deemed incurable

Patients of all classes in Asylums. 14,393 1,742 2,578 2,598 21,311

Deemed curable. 2,070 340 390 527 3,327

3,327 17,984

383

Karl Marx

There exist in England and Wales, for the accommodation of lunatics and idiots of all sorts and of all classes, 37 public asylums, of which 33 are county and 4 borough asylums; 15 hospitals; 116 private licensed houses, of which 37 are metropolitan and 79 provincial; and lastly, the workhouses. The public asylums, or lunatic asylums properly so called, were, by law, exclusively destined for the reception of the lunatic poor, to be used as hospitals for the medical treatment, not as safe places for the mere custody of the insane. On the whole, in the counties at least, they may be considered well regulated establishments, although of too extensive a construction to be properly superintended, overcrowded, lacking the careful separation of the different classes of patients, and yet inadequate to the accommodation of somewhat more than one-half of the lunatic poor. After all, the space afforded by these 37 establishments, spreading over the whole country, suffices for the housing of over 15,690 inmates. The pressure upon these costly asylums on the part of the lunatic population may be illustrated by one case. When, in 1831, Hanwell (in Middlesex) was built for 500 patients, it was supposed to be large enough to meet all the wants of the county. But, two years later, it was full; after another two years, it had to be enlarged for 300 more; and at this time (Colney Hatch having been meanwhile constructed for the reception of 1,200 lunatic paupers belonging to the same county) Hanwell contains upward of 1,000 patients. Colney Hatch was opened in 1851; within a period of less than five years, it became necessary to appeal to the rate-payers for further accommodation; and the latest returns show that at the close of 1856 there were more than 1,100 pauper lunatics belonging to the county unprovided for in either of its asylums. While the existing asylums are too large to be properly conducted, their number is too small to meet the rapid spread of mental disorders. Above all, the asylums ought to be separated into two distinct categories: asylums for the incurable, hospitals for the curable. By huddling both classes together, neither receives its proper treatment and cure. The private licensed houses are, on the whole, reserved for the more affluent portion of the insane. Against these “snug retreats,” as they like to call themselves, public indignation has been lately raised by the kidnapping of Lady Bulwer into Wyke House, and the atrocious outrages committed on Mrs. Turner in Acomb House, York. A Parliamentary inquiry into the secrets of the trade in British lunacy being imminent, we may refer to that part of the subject hereafter. For the present let us call attention only to the treatment of the 2,000 lunatic poor, whom, by way of contract, the Boards of Guardians and other local authorities let out to managers of private licensed houses. The weekly consideration per

384

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Increase of Lunacy in Great Britain

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

head for maintenance, treatment and clothing, allotted to these private contractors, varies from five to twelve shillings, but the average allowance may be estimated from 5s. to 8s. 4d. The whole study of the contractors consists, of course, in the one single point of making large profits out of these small receipts, and consequently of keeping the patient at the lowest possible expense. In their latest report the Commissioners of Lunacy state that even where the means of accommodation in these licensed houses are large and ample, the actual accommodation afforded is a mere sham, and the treatment of the inmates a disgrace. It is true that a power is vested in the Lord Chancellor of revoking a license or preventing its renewal, on the advice of the Commissioners in Lunacy; but, in many instances, where there exists no public asylum in the neighborhood, or where the existing asylum is already overcrowded, no alternative was left the Commissioners but to prevent the license to continue, or to throw large masses of the insane poor into their several workhouses. Yet, the same Commissioners add that great as are the evils of the licensed houses, they are not so great as the danger and evil combined of leaving those paupers almost uncared for in workhouses. In the latter about 7,000 lunatics are at present confined. At first the lunatic wards in workhouses were restricted to the reception of such pauper lunatics as required little more than ordinary accommodation, and were capable of associating with the other inmates. What with the difficulty of obtaining admission for their insane poor into properly regulated asylums, what with motives of parsimony, the parochial boards are more and more transforming the workhouses into lunatic asylums, but into asylums wanting in the attendance, the treatment and the supervision which form the principal safeguard of patients detained in asylums regularly constituted. Many of the larger workhouses have lunatic wards containing from 40 to 120 inmates. The wards are gloomy and unprovided with any means for occupation, exercise or amusement. The attendants for the most part are pauper inmates totally unfitted for the charge imposed upon them. The diet, essential above everything else to the unhappy objects of mental disease, rarely exceeds in any case that allowed for the healthy and able-bodied inmates. Hence, it is a natural result that detention in workhouses not only deteriorates the cases of harmless imbecility for which it was originally intended, but has the tendency to render chronic and permanent cases that might have yielded to early care. The decisive principle for the Boards of Guardians is economy. According to law, the insane pauper should come at first under the care of the district parish surgeon, who is bound to give notice to the relieving officers, by whom communication is to be made to the magis-

385

Karl Marx

trate, upon whose order they are to be conveyed to the asylum. In fact, these provisions are disregarded altogether. The pauper lunatics are in the first instance hurried into the workhouses, there to be permanently detained, if found to be manageable. The recommendation of the Commissioners in Lunacy, during their visits to the workhouses, of removing to the asylums all inmates considered to be curable, or to be exposed to treatment unsuited to their state, is generally outweighed by the report of the medical officer of the Union, to the effect that the patient is “harmless.” What the workhouse accommodation is, may be understood from the following illustrations described in the last Lunacy Report as “faithfully exhibiting the general characteristics of workhouse accommodation:” In the Infirmary Asylum of Norwich the beds of even the sick and feeble patients were of straw. The floors of thirteen small rooms were of stone. There were no water-closets. The nightwatch on the male side had been discontinued. There was a great deficiency of blankets, of toweling, of flannels, of waistcoats, of washing basins, of chairs, of plates, of spoons and of dining accommodation. The ventilation was bad. We quote: “Neither was there any faith to be put in what, to outward appearance, might have been taken for improvement. It was discovered, for example, that in reference to a considerable number of beds occupied by dirty patients, the practice exists of removing them in the morning and of substituting, merely for show during the day, clean beds of a better appearance, by means of sheets and blankets placed on the bedsteads, which were regularly taken away at night and the inferior beds replaced.” Take, as another example, the Blackburn Workhouse: “The day rooms on the ground floor, occupied by the men, are small, low, gloomy and dirty, and the space containing 11 patients is much taken up by several heavy chairs, in which the patients are confined by means of straps, and a large, projecting fire-guard. Those of the women, on the upper floor, are also much crowded, and one, which is used also as a bedroom has a large portion boarded off as a privy; and the beds are placed close together, without any space between them. A bedroom containing 16 male patients was close and offensive. The room is 29 feet long, 17 feet 10 inches wide, and 7 feet 5 inches high, thus allowing 2.39 cubic feet for each patient. The beds throughout are of straw, and no other description is provided for sick or bed-ridden patients. The cases were generally much soiled and marked by the rusty iron laths of the bedsteads. The care of the beds seems to be chiefly left to the patients. A large number of the patients are dirty in their habits, which is mainly to

386

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Increase of Lunacy in Great Britain

5

10

15

20

be attributed to the want of proper care and attention. Very few chamber utensils are provided, and a tub is stated to be placed in the center of the large dormitory for the use of the male patients. The graveled yards in which the patients walk are two for each sex, surrounded by high walls, and without seats. The largest of these is 74 feet long, by 30 feet 7 inches wide, and the smallest 32 feet by 17 feet 6 inches. A cell in one of the yards is occasionally used for secluding excited patients. It is entirely built of stone, and has a small, square opening for the admission of light, with iron bars let in to prevent the escape of the patient, but without either shutter or casement. A large straw bed was on the floor, and a heavy chair in one corner of the room. Complete control of the department is in the hands of an attendant and the nurse; the master seldom interferes with them, nor does he inspect this as closely as he does the other parts of the workhouse.” It would be too loathsome even to give extracts from the Commissioners’ report on the St. Pancras Workhouse at London, a sort of low Pandemonium. Generally speaking, there are few English stables which, at the side of the lunatic wards in the workhouses, would not appear boudoirs, and where the treatment received by the quadrupeds may not be called sentimental when compared to that of the poor insane.

387

Karl Marx The English Bank Act of 1844

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5409, 23. August 1858.

It will be recollected that in 1857 the British Parliament was hastily called together in consequence of the suspension of the Bank Charter Act, which, by letter of Nov. 12, in the midst of the monetary panic, the Premier and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had assumed the responsibility of decreeing. The Indemnity bill once passed, Parliament adjourned, leaving behind a select Committee appointed “to inquire into the operations of the Bank acts of 1844 and 1845, as well as into the causes of the recent commercial distress.” The Committee had, in fact, sat since the beginning of 1857, and had already published two heavy volumes, one of evidence, the other appendix, both relating to the operations and effects of the Bank Acts of 1844–45. Its labors were almost forgotten when the occurrence of the commercial crisis recalled it to life, and afforded it an “additional element of inquiry.” In the two heavy volumes to which we have referred, trade, just two months before its tremendous collapse, was declared to be “sound” and “safe.” As to the working of Sir Robert Peel’s Bank Act, Lord Overstone expressed himself before the Committee, on July 14, 1857, in these rather dithyrambic strains: “By strict and prompt adherence,” he said, “to the principles of the act of 1844, everything has passed off with regularity and ease; the monetary system is safe and unshaken; the prosperity of the country is undisputed; the public confidence in the wisdom of the act of 1844 is daily gaining strength; and if the Committee wish for further practical illustration of the soundness of the principle on which it rests, or of the beneficial results which it has insured, the true and sufficient answer to the Committee is, look around you; look at the present state of trade of the country; look at the contentment of the people, look at the wealth and prosperity which every class of the country presents; and then, having done so, the Committee may be fairly called upon to decide whether they will interfere with the continuance of an act under which those results have been developed.”

388

5

10

15

20

25

30

The English Bank Act of 1844

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Six months later, the same Committee had to congratulate Government upon having suspended this very same act! The Committee numbered among its members not less than five Chancellors or ex-Chancellors of the Exchequer, viz: Mr. Disraeli, Sir G. C. Lewis, Mr. Gladstone, Sir Charles Wood, and Sir Francis Baring, backed by Mr. Wilson and Mr. Cardwell, two men long accustomed to find brains for Ministers of Finance. Beside these, all the magnates of the English bureaucracy had been added to it. In fact, it mustered about two dozen strong, and was a remarkable conclave of financial and economical wisdom. The questions to be decided were, first, the principles of the bank act, of 1844; secondly, the influence on commercial crises of the issue of bank-notes, payable on demand; and, lastly, the general causes of the recent distress. We propose, succinctly, to review the answers given to these different questions. Sir Robert Peel, the Parliamentary godfather, and Lord Overstone, the scientific father, of the act of 1844, which prohibited the Bank of England from issuing notes beyond the amount of £14,500,000, save on the security of bullion, flattered themselves they had prevented such pressures and panics as had periodically occurred from 1815 to 1844. Twice in ten years their expectation has been baffled, despite the extraordinary and unexpected aid afforded to the working of the act by the great gold discoveries. In 1847 and 1857, as is shown by the evidence laid before the Committee, the panics were even of a more intense and destructive character than any ever witnessed before. Twice, in 1847 and 1857, the Government had to infringe the bank act, in order to save the bank and the monetary world revolving around it. The Committee, it would appear, had to decide on a very simple alternative. Either the periodical violation of the law by the Government was right, and then the law must be wrong, or the law was right, and then the Government ought to be interdicted from arbitrarily tampering with it. But will it be believed that the Committee has contrived to simultaneously vindicate the perpetuity of the law and the periodical recurrence of its infraction? Laws have usually been designed to circumscribe the discretionary power of Government. Here, on the contrary, the law seems only continued in order to continue to the Executive the discretionary power of overruling it. The Government letter, authorizing the Bank of England to meet the demands for discount and advances upon approved securities beyond the limits of the circulation prescribed by the Act of 1844, was issued on Nov. 12; but up to the 30th the Bank had, on a daily average, to throw into circulation about half a million of notes beyond the legal margin. On Nov. 20, the illegal surplus circulation had risen to about a

389

Karl Marx

million. What other proof was wanted of the mischievous futility of Sir Robert Peel’s attempt at “regulating” the currency? The Committee are quite right in affirming “that no system of currency can secure a commercial country against the consequences of its own imprudence.” But this sage remark is not to the point. The question was, rather, whether the monetary panic, which forms only one phase of the commercial crisis, may or may not be artificially aggravated by legislative enactments. In justification of the Bank Act, the Committee say: “The main object of the legislation in question was undoubtedly to secure the variation of the paper currency of the kingdom according to the same laws by which a metallic circulation would vary. No one contends that the object has not been attained.” We remark in the first place that the Committee decline to state their opinion as to the laws by which a metallic circulation would vary; because they were afraid “they would not be able to arrive at any conclusion without much difference of opinion.” In the opinion of the bullionists, led by Sir Robert Peel, a merely metallic circulation would contract or expand in accordance with the state of the exchange⎯that is to say, gold would flow in with a favorable exchange, while it would leave the country with an unfavorable one. In the former case, general prices would rise; in the latter, they would fall. Now, supposing these violent fluctuations of prices to be inherent in a purely metallic circulation, Mr. J. S. Mill was certainly right in stating before the Committee that the condition to be aimed at by a paper currency was not to imitate but to correct and supersede such disastrous vicissitudes. But the premises the bullionists proceed from in their reasonings have been proved to be imaginary. In countries where no credit operations exist, and consequently no paper circulation, as, comparatively speaking, was the case until recently in France, and is still the case on a much greater scale throughout Asia, private hoards of gold and silver are everywhere accumulated. When bullion is drained by an unfavorable exchange, these hoards open in consequence of a rise in the rate of interest. When the exchange turns, the hoards again absorb the surplus of the precious metals. In neither case, is a vacuum created in the currency, nor the opposite. The efflux and influx of bullion affect the state of the hoards, but not the state of the currency, and thus no action at all is exercised upon general prices. What, then, does the apology of the Committee amount to, that the Bank act of 1844, in periods of pressure, tends to create sudden fluctuations of prices which it falsely supposes would occur on the foundation of a purely metallic currency. But say the Committee, the convertibility of the notes, which it is the first duty of the

390

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The English Bank Act of 1844

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Bank to maintain, is at least guaranteed by Sir Robert Peel’s act. They add: “The supply necessarily maintained in the coffers of that establishment under the provisions of the act of 1844, is greater than that which was ever maintained under circumstances of pressure in former times. During the crisis of 1825, the bullion fell to £1,261,000; in 1837 to £3,831,000, and in that of 1839 to £2,406,000, while the lowest points to which it has fallen since 1844 have been, in 1847 £8,313,000, and in 1857 £6,080,000.” In the first instance, the convertibility of the notes was upheld in all those panics, not because the Bank possessed bullion enough to realize its promises, but simply because it was not asked to pay them in gold. In 1825, for instance, the Bank withstood the run by issuing £1 notes. If the comparatively greater bullion reserves in 1847 and 1857 are considered as simply the consequences of the act of 1844, then, on the same reasoning, to the same act must be attributed the fact that in 1857 the bullion reserve, despite California and Australia, had sunk by more than £2,000,000 below the level of 1847. But, although possessed of twice or thrice the amount of gold which it had owned in 1825 and 1836, the Bank of England, thanks to the provisions of Sir Robert Peel’s act, trembled in 1847 and 1857 on the verge of bankruptcy. According to the evidence of the Governor of the Bank, the entire reserve of the banking department on Nov. 12, 1857, the day of the issue of the Treasury Letter, was only £580,751, its deposits at the same time amounting to £22,500,000, of which near £6,500,000 belonged to London Bankers. But for the appearance of the Treasury Letter, the shop must have been shut up. To raise or reduce the rate of interest⎯and the Bank confesses that it had no other means of acting upon the circulation⎯is an operation which was applied before the passing of the act of 1844, and which, of course, might still have been applied after its repeal. But, says the Bank, the Directors want their virtue to be fortified by the act, and it would not be expedient “to leave them to their own unresisted wisdom and firmness.” In ordinary times, when the act is notoriously a dead letter, they want to be fortified by the fiction of its legal operation, and in moments of pressure, the only moments in which it can operate at all, they want to get rid of it by a Government ukase.

391

Karl Marx Commercial Crisis and Currency in Britain

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5414, 28. August 1858.

There is, perhaps, no point in Political Economy in which there exists more popular misapprehension than on the power which banks of issue are commonly supposed to wield, of affecting general prices through an expansion or contraction of currency. The idea that the banks had unduly expanded the currency, thus producing an inflation of prices violently to be readjusted by a final collapse, is too cheap a method of accounting for every crisis not to be eagerly caught at. The question, be it understood, is not whether banks may be instrumental in fostering a fictitious system of credit; but whether they possess the power of determining the amount of circulation in the hands of the public. A principle which is not likely to be contested is, that the interest of every bank of issue prompts it to keep in circulation the greatest possible amount of its own notes. If any bank can be supposed to join the power to the will, it is certainly the Bank of England. Now, if we consider the period from 1844 to 1857, for instance, we shall find that, except in times of panic, the Bank, notwithstanding the privilege of throwing its notes into the market by the purchase of public stocks, and notwithstanding successive reductions in the rate of interest, has never been able to keep its notes in circulation up to the legal margin. But there is another phenomenon more striking still. During the period from 1844 to 1857, the general commerce of the United Kingdom has perhaps trebled. British exports we know to have been doubled during the last ten years. But, concurrently with this immense increase of trade, the circulation of the Bank of England has actually diminished, and still continues gradually to decline. Take the following figures:

392

5

10

15

20

25

Commercial Crisis and Currency in Britain

5

10

15

20

25

1845 1854 1856 1857

Exports. £60,110,000 97,184,000 115,826,000 122,155,000

Thus, with exports increasing by £62,045,000, the circulation has fallen by £1,255,000, though during the same period, by dint of the Bank Act of 1844, the number of branches of the Bank of England was increasing, that of the country banks of issue competing with it was decreasing, and its own notes were converted into legal tenders for country banks. It might perhaps be supposed that the gold coin, supplied from new and fertile sources, was instrumental in displacing part of the Bank of England notes, by filling channels of circulation which these notes formerly occupied. In fact, Mr. Weguelin, in 1857 Governor of the Bank of England, stated to the Committee of the House of Commons that, on the part of the most competent persons, the increase in the gold currency for the six years then last elapsed was estimated at 30 per cent. The total gold circulation he believed now to amount to £50,000,000. This addition to the gold coin, however, was so little connected with the diminution of the paper currency, that on the contrary, the smaller denominations of notes, £5 and £10 notes, the only ones which could be superseded by coin in the retail trade and in the circulation going on between traders and consumers, have actually increased in number simultaneously with the increase of the metallic currency. The proportions of such increase are represented by the following table: Notes of £5 and £10.

30

35

40

Circulation of Notes. £20,722,000 20,709,000 19,648,000 19,467,000

1845 1854 1855 1856 1857

£9,698,000 10,565,000 10,628,000 10,680,000 10,659,000

Per cent. of total Note circulation. 46.9 51.0 53.6 54.4 54.7

The diminution has thus been limited to the higher descriptions of bank notes, notes of £200 to £1,000 performing functions of domestic circulation from which coin, properly so called, is almost shut out. Such was the saving effected in the use of those notes that, notwithstanding the extension of commerce, the general rise of prices, and the increase in the small paper currency, the aggregate note circulation went on gradually declining. From £5,856,000, to which they had amounted in 1852, the number of bank notes of £200 to £1,000 had sunk to £3,241,000 in 1857.

393

Karl Marx

While in 1844 they still formed 26 per cent, they furnished in 1854 but 20.5, in 1855 but 17.5, in 1856 but 16.9, and in 1857 but 16.7 per cent of the total circulation. This new feature in the paper currency of Great Britain arose from the growing competition of the London joint stock banks with the private banks, and from the accumulation of vast sums in their hands, consequent upon their practice of allowing interest on deposits. On the 8th of June, 1854, after a long but vain resistance, the London private bankers saw themselves forced to admit the joint stock banks to the arrangements of the clearing-house, and, shortly after, the final clearing was adjusted in the precincts of the Bank of England. The daily clearances being now effected by transfers in the accounts kept by the several banks in that establishment, the large notes formerly employed by the bankers for the adjustment of their mutual accounts, lost a vast field of employment, and were consequently in great part thrown out of circulation. Meanwhile the nine joint-stock banks of London had increased their deposits from £8,850,774 in 1847 to £43,100,724 in 1857, as shown in their published accounts. Whatever influence, therefore, banks may have exercised upon the general tendency of trade, and upon prices, must have been effected by the management of their deposits, that is, by credit operations, instead of by an over-issue of notes, which they proved unable to keep up even to the old margin of circulation. How little of real money, of Bank of England notes and gold, enters into the wholesale transactions of British trade, may be conclusively inferred from an analysis, forwarded to the Commons Committee by Mr. Slater, a member of one of the largest London firms, of a continuous course of commercial operations, extending over several millions yearly. The proportions of receipts and payments are reduced to the scale of £1,000,000 only, for the year 1856, and read as follows: RECEIPTS. In Bankers’ drafts and bills of Exchange payable after date In checks on Bankers payable on demand In country Bankers’ notes Total In Bank of England notes In gold In silver and copper In Post-Office orders Total Grand total

394

5

10

15

20

25

30

£533,596 357,715 9,627 £900,938 £68,554 35 £28,089 1,486 933 £99,062 £1,000,000 40

Commercial Crisis and Currency in Britain

PAYMENTS. By Bills of Exchange, payable after date By Checks on London Bankers Total 5 By Bank of England notes By gold By silver and copper Total Grand total 10

15

20

25

£302,674 663,672 £966,346 £22,743 9,427 1,484 £33,654 £1,000,000

These figures may be taken as an illustration of the British wholesale trade, which centers in London. It is here shown that of money received, Bank of England notes amount to less than 10 per cent., and gold and silver to only 3 per cent. of the currency. Of the payments made, Bank of England notes are but 2 per cent., and gold and silver only 1 per cent. of the currency. On the other hand, payments are received in a ratio of about 90 per cent., and are made at nearly 97 per cent. in that portion of the currency formed by the credit and the capital of the traders themselves. From an analysis of the issues of the New-York banks⎯say for the last six years⎯we must arrive at the same conclusion, viz.: that the amount of notes in circulation is beyond the control of the banks themselves, and was actually contracting during the very epoch when trade expanded, and general prices underwent a process of inflation, resulting in a collapse. The vulgar notion, therefore, which refers the recent crisis, and crises generally, to an over-issue of bank notes, must be discarded as altogether imaginary.

395

Karl Marx History of the Opium Trade (First Article)

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5433, 20. September 1858.

The news of the new treaty wrung from China by the allied Plenipotentiaries has, it would appear, conjured up the same wild vistas of an immense extension of trade which danced before the eyes of the commercial mind in 1845, after the conclusion of the first Chinese war. Supposing the Petersburg wires to have spoken truth, is it quite certain that an increase of the Chinese trade must follow upon the multiplication of its emporiums? Is there any probability that the war of 1857–8 will lead to more splendid results than the war of 1841–2? So much is certain that the treaty of 1843, instead of increasing American and English exports to China proved instrumental only in precipitating and aggravating the commercial crisis of 1847. In a similar way, by raising dreams of an inexhaustible market and by fostering false speculations, the present treaty may help preparing a new crisis at the very moment when the market of the world is but slowly recovering from the recent universal shock. Beside its negative result, the first opium-war succeeded in stimulating the opium trade at the expense of legitimate commerce, and so will this second opium-war do, if England be not forced by the general pressure of the civilized world to abandon the compulsory opium cultivation in India and the armed opium propaganda to China. We forbear dwelling on the morality of that trade, described by Montgomery Martin, himself an Englishman, in the following terms: “Why, the slave trade was merciful compared with the opium trade: We did not destroy the bodies of the Africans, for it was our immediate interest to keep them alive; we did not debase their natures, corrupt their minds, nor destroy their souls. But the opium seller slays the body after he has corrupted, degraded and annihilated the moral being of unhappy sinners, while every hour is bringing new victims to a Moloch which knows no satiety, and where the English murderer and Chinese suicide vie with each other in offerings at his shrine.”

396

5

10

15

20

25

History of the Opium Trade (First Article)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Chinese cannot take both goods and drug; under actual circumstances, extension of the Chinese trade resolves into extension of the opium trade; the growth of the latter is incompatible with the development of legitimate commerce⎯these propositions were pretty generally admitted two years ago. A Committee of the House of Commons, appointed in 1847 to take into consideration the state of British commercial intercourse with China, reported thus: “We regret that the trade with that country has been for some time in a very unsatisfactory condition, and that the result of our extended intercourse has by no means realized the just expectations which had naturally been founded in a free access to so magnificent a market. We find that the difficulties of the trade do not arise from any want of demand in China for articles of British manufactures, or from the increasing competition of other nations; the payment for opium absorbs the silver to the great inconvenience of the general traffic of the Chinese, and tea and silk must in fact pay the rest.” The Friend of China, of July 28, 1849, generalizing the same proposition, says in set terms: “The opium trade progresses steadily. The increased consumption of teas and silk in Great Britain and the United States would merely result in the increase of the opium trade; the case of the manufacturers is hopeless.” One of the leading American merchants in China reduced, in an article inserted in Hunt’s Merchants’ Magazine, for January, 1850, the whole question of the trade with China to this point: “Which branch of commerce is to be suppressed, the opium trade or the export trade of American or English produce?” The Chinese themselves took exactly the same view of the case. Montgomery Martin narrates: “I inquired of the Taoutai at Shanghæ which would be the best means of increasing our commerce with China, and his first answer to me, in presence of Capt. Balfour, Her Majesty’s Consul, was: ‘Cease to send us so much opium and we will be able to take your manufactures.’” The history of general commerce during the last eight years has, in a new and striking manner, illustrated these positions; but, before analyzing the deleterious effects on legitimate commerce of the opium trade, we propose giving a short review of the rise and progress of that stupendous traffic, which, whether we regard the tragical collisions forming, so to say, the axis round which it turns, or the effects produced by it on the general relations of the Eastern and Western worlds, stands solitary on record in the annals of mankind. Previous to 1767 the quantity of opium exported from India did not exceed 200 chests, the chest weighing about 133 lbs. Opium was

397

Karl Marx

legally admitted in China on the payment of a duty of about $3 per chest, as a medicine; the Portuguese, who brought it from Turkey being its almost exclusive importers into the Celestial Empire. In 1773, Colonel Watson and Vice-President Wheeler⎯persons deserving to take a place among the Hermentiers, Palmers and other poisoners of world-wide fame⎯suggested to the East India Company the idea of entering upon the opium traffic with China. Consequently, there was established a depot for opium in vessels anchored in a bay to the southwest of Macao. The speculation proved a failure. In 1781 the Bengal Government sent an armed vessel, laden with opium, to China; and, in 1794, the Company stationed a large opium vessel at Whampoa, the anchorage for the port of Canton. It seems that Whampoa proved a more convenient depot than Macao, because, only two years after its selection, the Chinese Government found it necessary to pass a law which threatens Chinese smugglers of opium to be beaten with a bamboo and exposed in the streets with wooden collars around their necks. About 1798, the East India Company ceased to be direct exporters of opium, but they became its producers. The opium monopoly was established in India, while the Company’s own ships were hypocritically forbidden from trafficking in the drug, the licenses it granted for private ships trading to China contained a provision which attached a penalty to them if freighted with opium of other than the Company’s own make. In 1800, the import into China had reached the number of 2,000 chests. Having, during the eighteenth century, borne the aspect common to all feuds between the foreign merchant and the national custom-house, the struggle between the East India Company and the Celestial Empire assumed, since the beginning of the nineteenth century, features quite distinct and exceptional; while the Chinese Emperor, in order to check the suicide of his people, prohibited at once the import of the poison by the foreigner, and its consumption by the natives, the East India Company was rapidly converting the cultivation of opium in India, and its contraband sale to China, into internal parts of its own financial system. While the semi-barbarian stood on the principle of morality, the civilized opposed the principle of pelf. That a giant empire, containing almost one-third of the human race, vegetating to the teeth of time, insulated by the forced exclusion of general intercourse, and thus contriving to dupe itself with delusions of Celestial perfection⎯that such an empire should at last be overtaken by the fate on occasion of a deadly duel, in which the representative of the antiquated world appears prompted by ethical motives, while the representative of overwhelming modern society fights for the privilege of buying in the cheapest and selling in the dearest markets⎯this, indeed, is a sort of tragical couplet, stranger than any poet would ever have dared to fancy.

398

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Karl Marx History of the Opium Trade (Second Article)

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5438, 25. September 1858.

5

10

15

20

25

30

It was the assumption of the opium monopoly in India by the British Government, which led to the proscription of the opium trade in China. The cruel punishments inflicted by the Celestial legislator upon his own contumacious subjects, and the stringent prohibition established at the China custom-houses proved alike nugatory. The next effect of the moral resistance of the Chinaman was the demoralization, by the Englishman, of the Imperial authorities, custom-house officers and mandarins generally. The corruption that ate into the heart of the Celestial bureaucracy, and destroyed the bulwark of the patriarchal constitution, was, together with the opium chests, smuggled into the Empire from the English storeships anchored at Whampoa. Nurtured by the East India Company, vainly combatted by the Central Government at Pekin, the opium trade gradually assumed larger proportions, until it absorbed about $2,500,000 in 1816. The throwing open in that year of the Indian commerce, with the single exception of the tea trade, which still continues to be monopolized by the East India Company, gave a new and powerful stimulus to the operations of the English contrabandists. In 1820, the number of chests smuggled into China had increased to 5,147; in 1821, to 7,000, and in 1824 to 12,639. Meanwhile, the Chinese Government, at the same time that it addressed threatening remonstrances to the foreign merchants, punished the Hong merchants, known as their abettors, developed an unwonted activity in its prosecution of the native opium consumers, and, at its custom-houses, put into practice more stringent measures. The final result, like that of similar exertions in 1794, was to drive the opium depots from a precarious to a more convenient basis of operations. Macao and Whampoa were abandoned for the Island of Lin-Tin, at the entrance of the Canton River, there to become permanently established in vessels armed to the teeth, and well manned. In the same way, when the Chinese Government temporarily succeeded in stopping the operations of the old Canton houses,

399

Karl Marx

the trade only shifted hands, and passed to a lower class of men, prepared to carry it on at all hazards and by whatever means. Thanks to the greater facilities thus afforded, the opium trade increased during the ten years from 1824 to 1834 from 12,639 to 21,785 chests. Like the years 1800, 1816 and 1824, the year 1834 marks an epoch in the history of the opium trade. The East India Company then lost not only its privilege of trading in Chinese tea, but had to discontinue and abstain from all commercial business whatever. It being thus transformed from a mercantile into a merely government establishment, the trade to China became completely thrown open to English private enterprise, which pushed on with such vigor that, in 1837, 39,000 chests of opium, valued at $25,000,000, were successfully smuggled into China, despite the desperate resistance of the Celestial Government. Two facts here claim our attention: First, that of every step in the progress of the export trade to China since 1816, a disproportionately large part progressively fell upon the opium-smuggling branch; and secondly, that hand in hand with the gradual extinction of the ostensible mercantile interest of the AngloIndian Government in the opium trade, grew the importance of its fiscal interest in that illicit traffic. In 1837 the Chinese Government had at last arrived at a point where decisive action could no longer be delayed. The continuous drain of silver, caused by the opium importations, had begun to derange the exchequer, as well as the moneyed circulation of the Celestial Empire. Heu Nailzi, one of the most distinguished Chinese statesmen, proposed to legalize the opium trade and make money out of it; but after a full deliberation, in which all the high officers of the Empire shared, and which extended over a period of more than a year’s duration, the Chinese Government decided that, “On account of the injuries it inflicted on the people, the nefarious traffic should not be legalized.” As early as 1830, a duty of 25 per cent would have yielded a revenue of $3,850,000. In 1837, it would have yielded double that sum, but then the Celestial barbarian declined laying a tax sure to rise in proportion to the degradation of his people. In 1853, Hien Fang, the present Emperor, under still more distressed circumstances, and with the full knowledge of the futility of all efforts at stopping the increasing import of opium, persevered in the stern policy of his ancestors. Let me remark, en passant, that by persecuting the opium consumption as a heresy the Emperor gave its traffic all the advantages of a religious propaganda. The extraordinary measures of the Chinese Government during the years 1837, 1838 and 1839, which culminated in Commissioner Lin’s arrival at Canton, and the confiscation and destruction, by his orders, of the smuggled opium, afforded the pretext for the first Anglo-Chinese war, the results of which

400

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

History of the Opium Trade (Second Article)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

developed themselves in the Chinese rebellion, the utter exhaustion of the Imperial exchequer, the successful encroachment of Russia from the North, and the gigantic dimensions assumed by the opium trade in the South. Although proscribed in the treaty with which England terminated a war, commenced and carried on in its defense, the opium trade has practically enjoyed perfect impunity since 1843. The importation was estimated, in 1856, at about $35,000,000, while, in the same year, the Anglo-Indian Government drew a revenue of $25,000,000, just the sixth part of its total State income, from the opium monopoly. The pretexts on which the second opium war has been undertaken are of too recent date to need any commentary. We cannot leave this part of the subject without singling out one flagrant self-contradiction of the Christianity-canting and civilizationmongering British Government. In its imperial capacity it affects to be a thorough stranger to the contraband opium trade, and even to enter into treaties proscribing it. Yet, in its Indian capacity, it forces the opium cultivation upon Bengal, to the great damage of the productive resources of that country; compels one part of the Indian ryots to engage in the poppy culture; entices another part into the same by dint of money advances; keeps the wholesale manufacture of the deleterious drug a close monopoly in its hands; watches by a whole army of official spies its growth, its delivery at appointed places, its inspissation and preparation for the taste of the Chinese consumers, its formation into packages especially adapted to the conveniency of smuggling, and finally its conveyance to Calcutta, where it is put up at auction at the Government sales, and made over by the State officers to the speculators, thence to pass into the hands of the contrabandists who land it in China. The chest costing the British Government about 250 rupees is sold at the Calcutta auction mart at a price ranging from 1,210 to 1,600 rupees. But not yet satisfied with this matter of fact complicity, the same Government, to this hour, enters into express profit and loss accounts with the merchants and shippers, who embark in the hazardous operation of poisoning an empire. The Indian finances of the British Government have, in fact, been made to depend not only on the opium trade with China, but on the contraband character of that trade. Were the Chinese Government to legalize the opium trade simultaneously with tolerating the cultivation of the poppy in China, the Anglo-Indian exchequer would experience a serious catastrophe. While openly preaching free trade in poison, it secretly defends the monopoly of its manufacture. Whenever we look closely into the nature of British free trade, monopoly is pretty generally found to lie at the bottom of its “freedom.”

401

Karl Marx Another Strange Chapter of Modern History

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5436, 23. September 1858.

Another Strange Chapter of Modern History. From an Occasional Correspondent. London, Sept. 7, 1858. Some months ago I sent you a series of documents relating to the attempted betrayal of the Circassians by Mohammed Bey, alias Col. Bangya. A new chapter has since been added to this strange episode of the Circassian war; declarations and counter-declarations from the different parties involved giving rise, first, to serious feuds between the Hungarian and Polish emigrations at Constantinople, then to angry debates at the London head-quarters of exiled Europe, as to the alleged complicity with Bangya of certain prominent personages. Fully aware of the interest attached by the revolutionary emigration of all shades and all nationalities to publications in THE TRIBUNE, I deliberately abstained from returning to the charge before the originals of some letters appearing in Constantinople papers, but the authenticity of which was afterward contested, had been shown to me, and before I had made sure of all the points at issue. However, I should consider it a breach of duty not to counteract the cowardly maneuvers intended to burke all further inquiry, and to throw a vail of mystery over the whole affair. If there exist a portion of the revolutionary emigration who think fit to conspire with the Russian Cabinet, and to side even with such professional spies as Bangya, let them come forward and have the courage of their opinions. You will recollect that Bangya’s confession, and the other papers attached to it, were brought to Constantinople by Lieut. Stock of the Polish detachment in Circassia, bearer of dispatches from Col. Lapinski, his chief, and a member of the Military Commission which tried Bangya, Lieut. Stock stayed four months in Constantinople, to bear testimony to the truth of Lapinski’s charges of treachery against Bangya, in case any

402

5

10

15

20

25

Another Strange Chapter of Modern History

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

judicial proceeding should be resorted to. In his confession, Bangya had identified Kossuth, Gen. Stein, Col. Türr, and the part of the Hungarian emigration, headed by Kossuth, with his own intrigues in Circassia. The Poles, at Constantinople, on receiving communication of the news and papers brought by Lieut. Stock, did not implicitly accept as true the charges made by Bangya against his countrymen, but distrusting their genuineness, resolved to keep the documents in their possession. While waiting for further news from Circassia, they limited themselves to the insertion in the Presse d’Orient of a short notice of the treason and condemnation of Mohammed Bey, alias Bangya. After the appearance of this paragraph they received visits from several Hungarians, amongst others from Col. Türr, who declared it to be an insult to himself, as a Hungarian, and to all the emigration. However, having read the papers which came from Circassia, Türr, after denials of a very unsatisfactory nature as to Bangya’s assertions relating to his own complicity, exclaimed that Bangya ought to be hung, and begged that an emissary be sent to Sefer Pasha to press him to confirm and execute the sentence of the Commission. He was then allowed by the Poles to take with him a letter from Bangya exhorting his countrymen to abstain from all intervention in Circassia and from all intrigue against the Poles. “As for our plans,” says Bangya in this letter, “they are forever ruined, and I am at the mercy of Lapinski.” The Poles, not content with communicating the papers afterward printed in THE TRIBUNE, to Türr and other Hungarians, gave another unmistakable proof of their good faith. To ingratiate himself, after his condemnation to death, with his judges, by proving to them that he was ready to make a clean breast of all he knew, Bangya had revealed to Lapinski, the President of the Court Martial, all the history of the preparations of his countrymen against Austria. He told him the nature of their resources, the cities where they were forming arm-depots, and the names of the individuals in charge of them. The Poles at once informed the Hungarians of the danger which menaced them, showed them all the papers they had received on these matters, which have never been published, and to assure them that they would ever be kept secret, proposed that they should be sealed up in their presence with their own seals. These papers are still in existence, with the seals unbroken. Among the individuals who put on these seals are Türr, Tüköry (Selim Agha), Thalmayr (Emin Agha) and other chiefs of the Kalmar emigration at Constantinople who subsequently signed manifestoes in vindication of Bangya. Shortly after Türr’s interview with the Poles, there appeared in the lithographed correspondence of Havas at Paris a telegraphic dispatch to

403

Karl Marx

the following effect: “A letter of Col. Türr, received at Marseilles, gives the lie to the assertions of the Presse d’Orient relating to the treason and condemnation of Col. Mohammed Bey.” This paragraph was reproduced in most of the European prints. At the same time some Hungarians produced letters from Circassia in the office of the Presse d’Orient stating that Mohammed Bey was free, and in continued relations with Sefer Pasha. Bangya was presented to the public as a martyr to the cause of liberty; Col. Lapinski was accused of forgery and other crimes, and the Poles at Constantinople were made to appear his accomplices. Even ridiculous attempts at intimidating the Poles were resorted to. It was only then that the latter gave publicity to Bangya’s confession and the papers attached to it in THE TRIBUNE and The London Free Press. Meanwhile, Bangya arrived at Constantinople, and presented himself at the office of the Presse d’Orient. The editors of that journal told him that they had published the news concerning him because they had not the least reason to doubt its veracity, but that they were ready to rectify it, if he was able to bring irrefutable proofs of its falsehood. Bangya contented himself with answering that all was false, that he was the victim of an intrigue, and then narrated a mass of details which he was not interrogated upon, as to the events in Circassia. On the question how he, a Turkish officer, the Circassian Commander-in-Chief, could have written a letter evidently destined for the Russian General Philipson, a letter sufficient to prove all the accusations preferred against him, he contrived to slip this dangerous ground by negligently replying that he was preparing an answer to the confession falsely attributed to him. He ended the conversation by promising to answer in the journal the charges brought against him; a proposal accepted on the condition that his letter should contain no individual attacks. A French officer, a French priest and an Armenian publicist were present at this meeting, and declared themselves willing to bear witness before any tribunal. In a second interview, on the 25th of April, Bangya handed over to the editors of the Presse d’Orient his letter, which, contrary to the agreement, vilified Col. Lapinski and Ibrahim Bey, while taking care to suppress the name of Lieut. Stock, who, unfortunately, was still remaining at Constantinople. After some alterations, insisted upon by the editors, had been made in the letter, it appeared in the Presse d’Orient. Its principal points are these: “I have been the victim of an infamous intrigue on the part of Ibrahim Bey and Mr. Lapinski. It was on the 31st December last, toward evening, that Ibrahim Bey sent for me to his house for a private conversation. I went unarmed. Hardly had I entered the room of Ibrahim Bey, where I found my enemies assembled, than I was arrested, and during the same

404

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Another Strange Chapter of Modern History

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

night conducted toward Aderbi. Being in the power of my enemies, my life and that of my whole family ran the greatest danger; but for the menaces of the Circassians I should have been assassinated. But at last, on the 19th of March, the Circassian chiefs set me at liberty, and it was the turn of Lapinski, Ibrahim Bey and Sefer Pasha himself, to trouble and to ask my pardon for all the evil they had done me. One word from me would have sufficed to make their heads roll in the dust. ... As to the seizure of papers which proved treason, or a council of Circassian chiefs and European officers, any condemnation whatever, ... all these fine things are the inventions of the correspondent, agent and gossip of Mr. Lapinski. ... The pretended historical memoir of which you have the copy under your eyes, is a romance fabricated in part at Constantinople by Mr. T⎯⎯, and revised by Mr. Lapinski. It is an intrigue prepared long since and combined since my departure for Circassia. This paper is destined to compromise an illustrious personage and to draw money from a great power.” Some days after the insertion of this his letter in the Presse d’Orient, Bangya, from reasons best known to himself, with a cool impudence characteristic of the man, declared in the Journal de Constantinople that the editor, of the Presse d’Orient had modified his letter in such a way as to disable him from acknowledging its authenticity. Now, I have seen the original letter, I know Bangya’s handwriting, and I can bear witness that all the modifications complained of are simply the substitution of initials for names and the addition of some introductory lines in which the editors of the Presse d’Orient are complimented on the exactitude of their information. All Bangya wanted was to throw doubts into the public mind. Unable to utter anything further, he, as if re bene gesta, resolved to wrap himself up in the stubborn silence of persecuted virtue. Meanwhile there appeared two documents in the London papers⎯the one signed by the chiefs of the Hungarian emigration at Constantinople, the other by Col. Türr. In the former, the same men who had put their seals on the papers proving Bangya’s guilt profess their belief that “Bangya will be able to justify himself,” affect to “consider the affair of Mohammed Bey as an individual matter,” and “as one devoid of all international character,” while they stigmatize the friends of Col. Lapinski as “demons whose aim it is to sow discord between the two emigrations.” Türr, who has, meanwhile, transformed himself into Achmet Kiamil Bey, declares in his letter: “Hardly had I heard of the arrival of Mohammed Bey at Constantinople, when I went to see him, accompanied by Capt. Kabat (a Pole), and categorically inquired of him if the confessions contained in the

405

Karl Marx

memorandum which has been published in the newspapers were true. He replied that he had treacherously been arrested, and had been taken before a commission consisting of Poles, but that, after two sittings of this commission, M. Lapinski, the commander of eighty-two Poles in Circassia, had come to see him in his confinement, and had told him that all his confessions before the commission would be of no use; that to serve his (Lapinski’s) plans it would be necessary for him (Mohammed Bey) to write with his own hand a memorandum, already written and arranged by Lapinski. He (Mohammed Bey) refused to write the first memorandum submitted to him, and which was the one the journals had published. Lapinski then modified it, and prepared a second, which he (Mohammed Bey) wrote and signed, under a threat to be shot, and thus to be disabled to defend himself against the accusations with which Lapinski was sure to stain his memory after his death. The original of this document has hitherto never been produced. After this declaration of Mohammed Bey, I am not in a position to know which of the two is the scoundrel.” Now it will be seen at once that Türr asserts Bangya to have only signed his confession when compelled and menaced by Lapinski, while at the same time Bangya himself declares that his confession was fabricated at Constantinople, and even before his departure for Circassia. All these maneuvers were at last put an end to by the arrival of letters of Sefer Pasha, and of a great number of Circassians. A deputation of the latter called on the editor of the Presse d’Orient, affirmed all the published details of Bangya’s treachery, and declared themselves ready to bear testimony, by an oath on the Koran, to the truth of their assertions, before Bangya himself and any number of witnesses. Neither did Bangya dare to present himself before this tribunal of honor, nor did Türr, Tüköry, Kalmar, Verres, and his other supporters, compel him to come forward and prove his innocence. Still, during the Russian war, Mr. Thouvenel, the French Embassador, had written to Paris for information concerning Bangya, and learned that he was a spy at the service of whoever would pay him. Mr. Thouvenel applied for his removal from Anapa, but Bangya defended himself by testimonials from Kossuth. To the appeal to the fraternity of nations in the Hungarian manifesto, to which we have referred, the Poles were justified in answering as follows: “You talk to us of the fraternity of nations; we have taught you that fraternity in the defiles of the Carpathians, on all the roads of Transylvania, in the plains of the Theiss and of the Danube. The Hungarian people will not have forgotten it, as forgot it those constitutionalists who,

406

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Another Strange Chapter of Modern History

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

in 1848, voted millions of florins and thousands of men against Italy⎯as forgot it those republicans who, in 1849, were begging a king from Russia⎯as forgot it those chiefs of the State who, in the midst of a war for independence and liberty, were crying out to expel from the Hungarian territory all the Wallachian people⎯as forgot it those market-place orators in their peregrinations through America. Did he at least tell the Americans⎯who paid him as they pay a Lola Montez, or a Jenny Lind⎯did he tell them that he, the orator, was the first to leave his dying country, and that the last who abandoned that blood-stained land, just about to be covered with sorrows, was an old general, a hero and a Pole, Bem?” To complete our relation we add the following letter of Col. Lapinski: Col. Lapinski to * * Pasha ⎯⎯ . íExtract.î Aderbi, Circassia, ⎯⎯ . Sir: It is now nearly two years since I arrived here, yielding to your request and trusting to your word. I need not remind your Excellency how the latter has been kept. I have remained without arms, without clothes, without money, and even without a sufficiency of food. All this, I trust, is not to be attributed to any ill-will on the part of your Excellency, but to other causes, and especially to your unfortunate connection with men who bear no interest to your country. During one year one of the most subtle of the Russian spies was forced upon me. With God’s help I baffled his intrigues, showed him I knew him, and now I have him in my power. I entreat of your Excellency to break off all intercourse with the Hungarians; avoid especially Stein and Türr⎯they are Russian spies. The other Hungarians serve the Russians, partly unknowingly. Do not let yourself be deceived by any projects of manufactories, mines, and extensive commerce. Every half-penny thus laid out would be thrown into the street, and that is just whither tend all the efforts of M. Türr, who only wishes your money to be spent in such a way that it may do no good to your country and no harm to the Russians. What we require here is: a gunpowder manufactory, a machine for striking money, a little printing press, a mill for grinding flour, and arms, which are not only bad here, but twice as dear as at Constantinople; even the bad saddles of the country cost twice as much as the French military saddles. As to mines it is altogether childish to think of them. Here every half-penny must be spent for the defense of the country, and not employed in speculations. Employ all your means in training troops; then not only will you be contributing to the welfare of your country, but you will obtain personal influence for yourself. Do not waste your means in trying to gain a party. The state of the country appears tranquil at pres-

407

Karl Marx

ent, but it is in reality fatal. Sefer Pasha and Naib are not yet reconciled, and that because the Russian spies prevent it. Do not regret the money you will spend in training troops here. It is the only money well spent. Do not think of cannons. Having been brought up in the artillery, I surely know their value. What I foretold before my departure, has happened. At first the Russians were surprised at the sound of them, now they laugh at them. Where I put two they put twenty; and if I have no regular troops to defend mine, the Russians will take them, as the Circassians do not know how to defend them, and we ourselves may be taken prisoners. One last word. My men and myself are ready, Pasha, to devote ourselves to the defense of your country, and in eight months from hence I shall increase my detachment to 600 chasseurs, 260 horsemen, 260 artillery, if you send me what is necessary to equip and arm them. If within two months I receive nothing, I shall embark and return to Turkey, and all the blame will rest upon you⎯not upon me or the Poles. I neither intend making use of nor deceiving the Circassians. If I cannot properly serve their cause and my own, I leave them. I have sent Stock to Constantinople. It would be better for you to give him all you can, and send him back immediately. May God keep you under his protection. Put off nothing till the morrow, I beseech you. Lose not a moment; for dearly will you yourself pay for the time that is lost. Lapinski.

408

5

10

15

20

Karl Marx The Anglo-Chinese Treaty

New-York Daily Tribune. Nr. 5446, 5. Oktober 1858.

5

10

15

20

The unsuccessful issue, in a commercial point of view, of Sir Henry Pottinger’s Chinese treaty, signed on August 29, 1842, and dictated, like the new treaties with China, at the cannon’s mouth, is a fact now recollected even by that eminent organ of British Free Trade, The London Economist. Having stood forward as one of the staunchest apologists of the late invasion of China, that journal now feels itself obliged to “temper” the sanguine hopes which have been cultivated in other quarters. The Economist considers the effects on the British export trade of the treaty of 1842, “a precedent by which to guard ourself against the result of mistaken operations.” This certainly is sound advice. The reasons, however, which Mr. Wilson alleges in explanation of the failure of the first attempt at forcibly enlarging the Chinese market for Western produce, appear far from conclusive. The first great cause pointed out of the signal failure is the speculative overstocking of the Chinese market, during the first three years following the Pottinger treaty, and the carelessness of the English merchants as to the nature of the Chinese demand. The English exports to China which, in 1836, amounted to £1,326,388, had fallen in 1842 to £969,000. Their rapid and continued rise during the following six years, is shown by these figures: 1842 1843

25

£969,000 1,456,000

1844 1845

£2,305,000 2,395,000

Yet in 1846 the exports did not only sink below the level of 1836, but the disasters overtaking the China houses at London during the crisis of 1847 proved the computed value of the exports from 1843 to 1846, such as it appears in the official return tables, to have by no means corresponded to the value actually realized. If the English exporters thus erred in the quantity, they did not less so in the quality of the articles offered to Chinese consumption. In proof of the latter assertion, The Economist

409

Karl Marx

quotes from Mr. W. Cooke, the late correspondent of The London Times at Shanghae and Canton, the following passages: “In 1843, 1844 and 1845, when the northern ports had just been opened, the people at home were wild with excitement. An eminent firm at Sheffield sent out a large consignment of knives and forks, and declared themselves prepared to supply all China with cutlery. They were sold at prices which scarcely realized their freight. A London house, of famous name, sent out a tremendous consignment of pianofortes, which shared the same fate. What happened in the case of cutlery and pianos occurred also, in a less noticeable manner, in the case of worsted and cotton manufactures. Manchester made a great blind effort when the ports were opened, and that effort failed. Since then she has fallen into an apathy, and trusts to the chapter of accidents.” Lastly, to prove the dependence of the reduction, maintenance or improvement of the trade, on the study of the wants of the consumer, The Economist reproduces from the same authority the following return for the year 1856: Worsted Stuffs (pieces) Camlets Long ells Woolens Printed Cottons Plain Cottons Cotton Twist, lbs.

1845. 13,569 13,374 91,530 62,731 100,615 2,998,126 2,640,090

1846. 8,415 8,034 75,784 56,996 81,150 1,859,740 5,324,050

1856. 7,428 4,470 36,642 38,553 281,784 2,817,624 5,579,600

Now all these arguments and illustrations explain nothing beyond the reaction following the overtrade of 1843–45. It is a phenomenon by no means peculiar to the Chinese trade, that a sudden expansion of commerce should be followed by its violent contractions, or that a new market, at its opening, should be choked by British oversupplies; the articles thrown upon it being not very nicely calculated, in regard either to the actual wants or the paying powers of the consumers. In fact, this is a standing feature in the history of the markets of the world. On Napoleon’s fall, after the opening of the European continent, British imports proved so disproportionate to the continental faculties of absorption, that “the transition from war to peace” proved more disastrous than the continental system itself. Canning’s recognition of the independence of the Spanish colonies in America, was also instrumental in producing the commercial crisis of 1825. Wares calculated for the meridian of Moscow, were then dispatched to Mexico and Colombia. And in our own day,

410

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The Anglo-Chinese Treaty

5

10

15

notwithstanding its elasticity, even Australia has not escaped the fate common to all new markets, of having its powers of consumption as well as its means of payment over-stocked. The phenomenon peculiar to the Chinese market is this, that since its opening by the treaty of 1842, the export to Great Britain of tea and silk of Chinese produce has continually been expanding, while the import trade into China of British manufactures has, on the whole, remained stationary. The continuous and increasing balance of trade in favor of China might be said to bear an analogy to the state of commercial balance between Russia and Great Britain; but, then, in the latter case, everything is explained by the protective policy of Russia, while the Chinese import duties are lower than those of any other country England trades with. The aggregate value of Chinese exports to England, which before 1842 might be rated at about £7,000,000, amounted in 1856 to the sum of about £9,500,000. While the quantity of tea imported into Great Britain never reached more than 50,000,000 lbs. before 1842, it had swollen in 1856 to about 90,000,000 lbs. On the other hand, the importance of the British import of Chinese silks only dates from 1852. Its progress may be computed from the following figures:

20

Silk imp’d. lb. Value £

1852. 2,418,343 ⎯

1853. 2,838,047 ⎯

1854. 4,576,706 3,318,112

1855. 4,436,862 3,013,396

1856. 3,723,693 3,676,116

Now take, on the other hand, the movement of the British exports to China, valued in pounds sterling. 25

1834 1835

£842,852 1,074,708

1836 1838

£1,326,388 1,204,356

For the period following the opening of the market in 1842 and the acquisition of Hong Kong by the British, we find the following returns: 30

35

1845 1846 1848 1852

£2,359,000 1,200,000 1,445,950 2,508,599

1853 1854 1855 1856, upward of

£1,749,597 1,000,716 1,122,241 2,000,000

The Economist tries to account for the stationary and relatively decreasing imports of British manufacture into the Chinese market by foreign competition, and Mr. Cooke is again quoted to bear witness to this proposition. According to this authority, the English are beaten by fair competition in the Chinese market in many branches of trade. The Americans, he says, beat the English in drills and sheetings. At Shanghae

411

Karl Marx

in 1856 the imports were 221,716 pieces of American drills, against 8,745 English, and 14,420 of American sheetings, against 1,240 English. In woolen goods, on the other hand, Germany and Russia are said to press hardly on their English rivals. We want no other proof than this illustration to convince us that Mr. Cooke and The Economist are both mistaken in the appreciation of the Chinese market. They consider as limited to the Anglo-Chinese trade features which are exactly reproduced in the trade between the United States and the Celestial Empire. In 1837, the excess of the Chinese exports to the United States over the imports into China was about £860,000. During the period since the treaty of 1842, the United States have received an annual average of £2,000,000 in Chinese produce, for which we paid in American merchandise £900,000. Of the £1,602,849, to which the aggregate imports into Shanghae, exclusive of specie and opium, amounted in 1855, England supplied £1,122,241, America £272,708, and other countries £207,900; while the exports reached a total of £12,603,540, of which £6,405,040 were to England, £5,396,416 to America, and £102,084 to other countries. Compare only the American exports to the value of £272,708, with their imports from Shanghae exceeding £5,000,000. If, nevertheless, American competition has, to any sensible degree, made inroads on British traffic, how limited a field of employment for the aggregate commerce of foreign nations the Chinese market must offer. The last cause assigned to the trifling importance the Chinese import market has assumed since its opening in 1842, is the Chinese revolution, but notwithstanding that revolution, the exports to China relatively shared, in 1851–52, in the general increase of trade, and, during the whole of the revolutionary epoch, the opium trade, instead of falling off, rapidly obtained colossal dimensions. However that may be this much will be admitted, that all the obstacles to foreign imports originating in the disordered state of the empire must be increased, instead of being diminished, by the late piratical war, and the fresh humiliations heaped on the ruling dynasty. It appears to us, after a careful survey of the history of Chinese commerce, that, generally speaking, the consuming and paying powers of the Celestials have been grea