Brentano vs. Marx

Marx lies to his readers that we had wanted to give the impression that we were quoting The Times according to his translation!

But against this, he naturally suppresses our proof (in No. 28) that the glaring contradiction, according to Marx, between

Gladstone's claim about the improvement in the condition of the British working class and the officially established facts, does

not exist in reality; instead he repeats once again this accusation.

 Apart from this, Marx, in his reply in the Volksstaat of August 7, produces two further witnesses to the correctness of his

reading of Gladstone's budget speech: The Morning Star and The Morning Advertiser of April 17, 1863. But we do not need to

check whether Marx has quoted the two papers without fresh falsification. [Note by Brentano: Additional note on republication:

Here too Marx omits the same sentences which he suppressed in his reproduction of the Times report. See the two reports at the

beginning.] For these papers, even as he quotes them, speak for us. After Gladstone had said, according to both papers, that he

did not believe this intoxicating augmentation of wealth and power is confined to the classes which find themselves in pleasant

circumstances, he continued: "This great increase of wealth takes no cognizance at all of the condition of the labouring

population. The augmentation which I have described is an augmentation entirely confined to the classes possessed of

property." The context and the use of the expression "take cognizance" show clearly that this increase and the augmentation of

the increase cited, and the citing, are intended to indicate those discernible in the income tax returns.

 But the introduction of these new alleged witnesses is only an expression of the faked thoroughness, intended to perpetuate the

faith of Volksstaat readers in their oracle. Marx's article in the Volksstaat of August 7 is a model of this, and worthy of perusal

by our readers in person. We need only quote one more example of this, in order to deprive Mr. Marx of the argument that we

wished to conceal from our readers that he had corrected us on a point of minor import. We had stated that in England persons

with an income under 150 pounds sterling paid no income tax. Mr. Marx taunts us that we do not know this tax only ceases on

incomes under 100 pounds sterling. In fact the law of 1842 left all incomes under 150 pounds sterling quite free of tax, but in

1853 the tax was extended downwards to 100 pounds sterling, although the newly included incomes were treated more lightly,

since they were subjected to a lower rate of tax than those of 150 pounds sterling and above. In 1863 the favored sector was

extended to 200 pounds sterling exclusive upwards, and the tax reduction granted in the manner that for every income from that

figure down to 100 pounds sterling inclusive, 60 pounds sterling could be subtracted as tax-free.

 Mr. Marx closes his article by telling us that lack of time forces him to end, once and for all, his pleasurable exchange of

opinions with us. We understand that Mr. Marx welcomes the opportunity of avoiding somebody who uncovers his forgeries.

When Mr. Marx finally ends his article by breaking into abuse, we can assure him that his opponents could desire nothing more

than the confession of guilt which lies herein. Abuse is the weapon of those whose other means of defence have run out.

 

III

SEDLEY TAYLOR AND ELEANOR MARX

No. 8.

ATTACK BY S. TAYLOR

 THE TIMES, NOVEMBER 29, 1885

To the Editor of "The Times"

 

Sir, -- I ask leave to point out in The Times that the Origin of the misleading quotation from Mr. Gladstone's Budget speech of

April 16, 1863, which so eminent a publicist as Professor Émile de Laveleye a has been led to reproduce through reliance on

German sources, and with respect to which he inserts a correction in The Times of this day, is to be found as far back as 1864 in

an address issued by the council of the famous International Working Men's Association.

 What appears extremely singular is that it was reserved for Professor Brentano (then of the University of Breslau, now of that

of Strassburg) to expose, eight years later in a German newspaper, the bad faith which had manifestly dictated the citation made

from Mr. Gladstone's speech in the address.

 Herr Karl Marx, who as the acknowledged author of the address attempted to defend the citation, had the hardihood, in the

deadly shifts to which Brentano's masterly conduct of the attack speedily reduced him, to assert Mr. Gladstone had

"manipulated" (zurechtgestümpert) the report of his speech in The Times of April 17, 1863, before it appeared in "Hansard", in

order "to obliterate" (wegzupfuschen) a passage which "was certainly compromising for an English Chancellor of the

Exchequer". On Brentano's showing, by a detailed comparison of texts, that the reports of The Times and of "Hansard" agreed

1891: Brentano vs. Marx -- The documents

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1891bren/2-docs.htm (16 of 30) [23/08/2000 18:00:38]

---

in utterly excluding the meaning which craftily-isolated quotation had put upon Mr. Gladstone's words, Marx withdrew from

further' controversy under the plea of "want of time"!

 The whole of the Brentano-Marx correspondence is eminently worthy of being unearthed from the files of newspapers under

which it lies buried, and republished in an English form, as it throws upon the latter disputant's standard of literary honesty a

light which can be ill spared at a time when his principal work is presented to us as nothing less than a fresh gospel of social

renovation.

 I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

 Sedley Taylor

Trinity College, Cambridge,

November 26th [1883]

 This letter appeared in The Times on November 29, 1883. On November 30, Eleanor, Marx's junior daughter, sent her reply to

The Times. Her letter did not appear. She again wrote in vain to the editor. Then she addressed herself t9 the Daily News, but

once more without success. Then she published both Mr. Sedley Taylor's accusation and her reply in the February 1884 issue of

the socialist monthly To-Day. We publish her reply below.

 

No. 9.

ELEANOR MARX'S REPLY

 TO-DAY, FEBRUARY 1884

 

To the Editor of "The Times"

 Sir, -- In The Times of November 29th Mr. Sedley Taylor refers to a certain quotation of a speech by Mr. Gladstone,

 

"to be found as far back as 1864, in an address issued by the council of the famous International Working Men's

Association".

 

He continues: (I here quote Mr. Taylor's letter from "What appears" to "want of time").

 The facts are briefly these. The quotation referred to consists of a few sentences from Mr. Gladstone's Budget speech of April

16th, 1863. After describing the immense increase of wealth that took place in this country between 1853 and 1861 Mr.

Gladstone is made to say:

 

"This intoxicating augmentation of wealth and power is entirely confined to classes of property."

 

An anonymous writer, who turns out to be Professor Brentano, published in a German paper, Concordia, of the 7th March,

1872 a reply in which it was stated:

 

"This sentence does not exist in Mr. Gladstone's speech, Marx has added it lyingly, both as to form and contents" (formel

und materiel hinzugelogen).

 

This was the only point at issue between my father and his anonymous opponent.

 In his replies in the Leipzig Volksstaat, June 1st and August 7th, 1872, Dr. Marx quotes the reports of Mr. Gladstone's speech

as follows:

 

1891: Brentano vs. Marx -- The documents

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1891bren/2-docs.htm (17 of 30) [23/08/2000 18:00:38]

---