f

ABSTRACT
INARCHISM IN GERMANY: THE EARLY MOVEMENT

By
Andrew Raymond Carlson

There is a general agreement among most writers
of modern European history that anarchism did not play
an important role in Germany as opposed to the part it
played in France, Spain and Italy. It is the purpose of
this study to examine this premise. The period covered
is the late 1830's to 1890. There is a long and detailed
chapter on the develOpments of the 1830's and lBhO's; in-
cluded in this chapter is an analysis of the relationship
of Marxism to anarchism. Another introductory chapter is
devoted exclusively to Max Stirner(1806-1856). 'Ihe re-
maining eight chapters are on the period 187LL-1888.

A considerable amount of the data used came from
the Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Deutsches
Zentralarchiv Merseburg, Geheimes Btaatsarchiv Munich,
Hessischen Hauptstaatsarchiv Wiesbaden, Staatsarchiv Lud-
wigsburg, and the Labadie Collection at the University of

Michigan. The principal newspapers used were: Arbeiter-

 

Zeitung(Bern), L'Avant Garde(Chaux-de-Fonds), Bulletin de

 

’1
liFede’ration Jurassienne, Le Revolte’(Geneva and Paris),

gTravailleuereneva), Der Rebelleondon and Geneva),

 

Freiheit(London, Geneva and New York), Die Autonomie(lon-

 

don), and Der Sozialdemokrat(2urich and London).‘

I

Andrew Raymond Carlson

Numerous other anarchist and non-anarchist newspapers and
pamphlets were used as well as many published documentary
sources and innumerable histories and interpretations.

Contrary to popular belief, the anarchists did
play a significant role in Germany in the 1870's and
1880's, although the part they played was wholly negative.
The HBdel and Nobiling assassination attempts on the life
cfi’the German Emperor,‘Wilhelm.I, in May and June 1878
led to the passage of the Socialist Law. The German anar-
dflsts also played an important part in the anarchist con-
gross held in London in 1881 at which 'PrOpaganda by Deed"
amicommunist-anarchism were adopted as an official anar—
dflst program. In general these two themes, "PrOpaganda
by Deed,” and communist-anarchism dominated anarchism
mndng the remainder of the‘nineteenth-century. Violence
ami'Propaganda by'Deed" became synonymous with anarchism
hIthe public mind. The German anarchists also provided
Bismarck with the fuel necessary to kindle the fires of
runession to insure the renewal of the Socialist Law four
thus, as well as the passage of the Dynamite Law. While
an anarchists did not have a large following in Germany,
flmy nevertheless exerted an influence all out of proportion
to their numbers.

Significant new evidence was discovered in the
East German archives at Potsdam and Merseburg which helps
to document Bismarck's role in the crises precipitated

by the HBdel and Nobiling assassination attempts and the

Andrew Raymond Carlson

subsequent passage of the Socialist Law. Additional im-
portant information was uncovered regarding the part

played by Bismarck during the repressive period of the
Socialist Law, 1878-1890.

ANARCHISM IN GERMANY: THE EARLY I~IOVEI~IEII T

BY

ANDREW RAYMOND CARLS ON

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of His tory

19 70

 

 

("Z ) copyright by
ANDRE” RAYMOND CARLSON

1971

ACKN OWIEDGI‘TEIITS

I would like to thank Professor Vernon L. Lidtke
who pointed out to me the need for a study of the German
anarchist movement. This study has benefited from his
criticism, suggestions and generous assistance.

My work was aided by the Interlibrary Loan, and
Photoduplicati'on Departments of many libraries. I would
like to extend my gratitude to the Interlibrary Loan De-
partment of the Michigan State University Library and to
Mrs. Mary J. Thurman of the Interlibrary Loan Department
of Eastern Kentucky University. The following libraries
supplied me with microfilm cOpies of rare newspapers,
Pal'rrphlets, and books: University of Chicago, Newberry
Library, Midwest Interlibrary Loan Center, University of
Wisconsin, University of Minnesota, University of Michigan,
Yale University, Harvard University, Princeton University,
The Library of Congress, New York Public Library, the
Hoover Institute on War, Peace and Revolution, Columbia
University, University of Illinois, The British Museum,
Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, and the International Insti-
tute of Social History in Amsterdam. Mr. Edward Weber,
Curator of the Labadie Collection at the University of

Michigan, should be singled out for his assistance in

11

iii
supplying materials.

I am also in debt to Dr. Trumpp of the Bundes-
archiv, Koblenz; Dr. Weiss, Director of the Bayer.
Hauptstaatsarchiv Abt. II Geheimes Staatsarchiv; Dr.
Scherl, Oberarchivrat Bayer. Hauptstaatsarchiv Abt. V
Staatsarchiv ffir Oberbayern; the staff of the Staats-
archiv, Ludwigsburg; Dr. Ewald, Oberarchivrat Staats-
archiv, Hamburg; and the staff of the Hessisches Haupt-
staatsarchiv, Wiesbaden.

A special thanks is due to the staff of the
Deutsches Zentralarchiv, Merseburg; the Staatsarchiv
Potsdam, and the Ministerium des Innern, Ministerrat

der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION.................... 1
Chapter

I THE SPIRITUAL ANCESTORS OF THE GERMAN ANARCHISTS 19
II MAX STIRNER(1806-1856) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73'
III ANARCHISM IN GERMANY TO 1878 . . . . . . . . . 107

N 'HIE HCDEL ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT AND THE DEFEAT
OFTHESOCIALISTLAw. . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

V 'THE NOBILI‘NG ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT AND THE
PASSAGE OF THE SOCIALIST IAN o e e e e 0 ee 0 e 196

VI JOHANN MOST AND WIIEELM HASSELPLANN THREATEN TO
SPLIT TIE SPD 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 ans

VII SMUGGLING OF FREIHEIT AND THE FORMATION OF
ANARCHIST OELWUEREARY . . . . . . . . . . 2%

VIII PROPAGANDABYDEED.............. 360

II THE FAILURE OF PROPAGANDA BI DEED: THE MAGIC
CAREERS OF AUGUST REINSDORF AND JULIUS LIESKE . uh.

I THE DEMISE OF THE EARLY MOVEMENT . . . . . . . E72
CONCLUSION.....................508
APPENDIII.....................517
APPENDLXII..........'...........519
BIBLIOGRAPHICALESSAY................521
BIBLIOGRAPHY....................53h.

iv

INTRODUCTION

There is a consensus of opinion in many quarters
that there was little anarchism in Germany. These same
people are of the opinion that the German anarchists.
contributed nothing to anarchist thought. They also
contend that the German anarchist movement was ineffectual
and meaningless as far as producing any lasting results
are concerned. G.D.H. Cole writes: "In Germany Anarchism
never took hold; . ‘. . after Johann Most and Wilhelm
Hasselmanm had left the country, German anarchism lacked
leaders, and the Germans made no significant contribution
to Anarchist theory."1 Der grosse Brockhaus states: "In
Germany on the otherghand Es compared to other countriea
there were only insignificant anarchists."2 James Joll
in his recent book relates: "In Germany .8. . the anarchists
were limited to those individuals who had been in direct
contact with the followers of Bakunin and Guillaume in the
Jura."I After the assassination of police President Rumpf
in 1885 ”Anarchist ideas in Germany soon virtually vanished,

except among a few bohemian intellectuals such as the

k

v

1G.D.H. Cole, Socialist Thought. Marxism and
Angrchism, 1850-1890(London, 1961}, p. 330.

2(Viesbaden, 1953), I, p. 261.

1

L1

 

 

 

 

2

Bavarian writer, Gustav Landauer, and a few dissident Social
Democrats who were expelled from the socialist party for
advocating direct revolutionary action."3

This is the only time Landauer's name is mentioned
in Joll's book. Erich Mflhsam is not mentioned at all and
Rudolf Rocker is accorded only two references in the text.
Joll's book is not unusual in this reapect. Landauer, the
anarchist, until recently was nearly a forgotten figure in
Germany; however, Landauer, the Shakespearean scholar, has
continued to be very much alive.“

flhe Proud Tower, which Barbara Tuchman avers, is
“A portrait of the world before the war, 1890-1911;,” dis-
misses anarchism in Germany with the following remarks:
uThat sovereign [William Ii had little to fear, however,
from the Anarchists of his own country, for the last two
who had attempted to kill his grandfather [referring to
the attempts by H8de1 and Nobiling on the life of William I
in 1878:] were theiast and the only activists. Otherwise,

German Anarchists remained theorists, except for those who

‘

3James Joll, The Anarchists(London, 196M), pp. lhO-lhl.

hialter Laqueur, "Visionaries,’t Atlas, IX(January,
1965), p. 51. Landauer's-commentaries-en fiakespeare were
nearly completed when he was killed. Martin Buber, a long
time friend of Landauer, prepared the text of the comment-
aries for publication. For additional information on this
subject see Buber's preface and introduction to Gustav
Landauer, Shakes care, 2 Vols.,(Frankfurt/Main, 1920).
Landauer's Agfrug zum Sozialismus has been republished in
Frankfurt UK in 1967.

3
got away to America. Germans were not fit for Anarchism,
as Bakunin had said with disdain, for with their passions
for Authority, 'they want to be at once both masters and
slaves and Anarchism accepts neither."r5 Although over
one-tenth of the book is devoted to aidiscussion of anar-
chism, this short statement is the only mention of the
anarchist movement in Germany. To substantiate the contention
that the Germans were not ”fit for anarchism,” Tuchman
quotes Michael Bakunin. It would seem to be incongruent,
even ludicrous, to cite Bakunin, whose remains had been
molding in his grave since 1876, as an authority for the
susceptivity of the Germans to anarchism for the years
1890-191lg. Tuchman's remarks on the German anarchist
movement are shallow and misleading as this study will

demonstrate .

In the respected German encyclopedia, Handerter-

 

figch der Staatswissenschaft, Karl Diehl writes: "In‘comparison
to the Romance countries the anarchist movement in Germany

was never to attain great importance. To be sure, the ideas
of individualist anarchism found here in Stirner, one of

their important advocates. Anarchist ideas evoked a certain
amount of theoretical interest and discussion. But the
anarchist movement in Germany never achieved any signif-

icant political activity, nor did the group organizations

k

SBarbara W. Tuchman, The Proud Tower. A Portrait
of the World Before the War, I890-l9lh,.Bantam edition
{New IorE, 1967f, p.119.

h.

at any time approach a numerical size which could be con-
sidered important. Unquestionably the rigid centralization
in the Social Democratic organization, which dominated the
workers' movement and rejected all anarchist particularism,

contributed to this."6 The French encyclopedia, La Grande

 

lhmyplqpedie, relates that "Contrary to the countries
about which we have been Speaking France, Spain, Italy,
Switzerland, Belgium, it is not from the Hague Congress
mf1872; at which time the diSpute between Marx and Bakunin
resulted in a division of the International, that one must
mace the origins of the beginning of the anarchist move-
nmnt in Germany. It is much later, after the assassination
attempts of HBdelEMay 11, 187a and Dr. NobilingCJune 2,
187E , upon Emperor William, and after the enactment of
the Socialist Law Cactober 21, 187.8] , that the division
oftme German Socialist party resulted, less among author-
flmrians and anarchists than between parliamentarians and
zevolutionaries, moderates and extremists."7

There are grains of truth in both Of these state-
rmnts, but in the main they are misleading. The German
Mmrchists did.more than sit around beer gardens discussing
Mm theoretical aSpects of anarchism, There were groups

flmt were large enough to be considered important. There

__

611th edition(Jena, 19214.), I, p. 290.
7(Paris, n.d.), II, p. 953.

5,
were German anarchists active in both Germany and the
International long before the assassination attempts

Or 1878.

The writer is of the opinion that anarchism did
play a role in shaping the destiny of Germany in the
nineteenth and twentieth centuries. However, this in-
fluence cannot be seen if you only examine the positive
attainments of the anarchists in Germany. If, on the
other hand, you examine their negative influence you will
soon discover that many suppressive measures were enacted
as a result of an anarchist deed. The Socialist Law,
prompted by two attempts on the life of Hilliam I in 1878,
was the first such measure. This measure not only affected
the anarchists, but everyone who was interested in develop-
ing a reSponsible parliamentary government in Germany.

Substantial amounts of materials are available on
the leading anarchist figures such as Bakunin, Proudhon,
Godwin, Kropotkin, Elatesta, Goldman, Tolstoy, Reclus,
Tucker, and Stirner. A great deal of research is required
to locate material on the lesser known, though important,
anarchist figures. There is a considerable body of material
available on Landauer, Mfihsam and Rocker, but to locate it
requires patient searching. The great figures have been
studied in depth many times. The lesser known “characters”
and organizations have been all but forgotten, except in
the crumbling pages of some little-known anarchist monthly

of which only one cOpy is to be found in the entire world.

6
Many of the anarchist newspapers had a small circulation
and were printed on such cheap paper that they have not
survived the ravages of time. This is also true of the
pamphlets of the anarchists which were so important in
Spreading their message. Further information on this
problem can be found in the bibliography. Suffice it
to say that the large mass of periodical and documentary
material on the subject of anarchism in Germany has
scarcely been touched by anyone undertaking an investig-
ation of anarchism,

It is virtually impossible to undertake a serious
study of anarchism unless you have access to a large
number of anarchist newSpapers and pamphlets. Peter
KrOpotkin, (18h2-1921), points out the reason:

Socialistic [Kropotkin is not referring to our
present day concept of socialism, but that of the
19th century, when men anarchists considered them-
selves to be socialist literature has never been
rich in books. It is written for workers, for whom
one penny is money, and its main force lies in its
small pamphlets and its newSpapers. Mereover, he
who seeks for information about socialism finds in
books little of what he requires most. They contain
the theories or the scientific arguments in favor of
socialist aSpirations, but they give no idea.how the
workers accept socialist ideals, and.how the latter
could be put into practice. There remains nothing
but to take collections of papers and read them all
through,-the news as well as the leading articles,
the former perhaps even more than the latter.

Quite a new world of social relations and methods of
thought and action is revealed by this reading,

which gives an insight into what cannot be found
anywhere else,-name1y, the depth and the moral force
of the movement, the degree to which men are imbued
with the new theories, their readiness to carry them
out in their daily life, and to suffer for them.

All discussions about the impracticability of social-
ism.and the necessary slowness of evolution can only

7

be judged from a close knowledge of the human beings

of Whose evolution we are speaking. what estimate

of a sums can be made without knowing its components?

Kropotkin's assertion that it is necessary to '
read anarchist newspapers and pamphlets, in order to under-
stand anarchism, is a truism. German anarchist newSpapers
and pamphlets are to be found in many of the larger lib-
raries, but no single library possesses what could be
called a large collection. Therefore, the researcher
is forced to comb the libraries of the world to have
access to a sufficient amount of this type of material.
Perhaps it is for this reason that there is no

general work on the subject of anarchism in Germany.
Nothing of significance, in the historical sense, has
been written since Max Nettlau's attempt to write a
multi-volume history of anarchism. Nettlau does not
present a great deal of material on the movement in
Germany and nothing for the period after 1886.9 Another
difficulty which faces the researcher working on anarchism

in Germany is the unavailability of any bibliographies

 

8Peter Kropotkin, Memoirs of a Revolutionist(New
York, 1930), p. 275.

9The following three volumes contain some material
on the movement in Germany, presented in a chronological
manner: Der Vorfrfihlin der Anarchie: Ihre historische Ent-
wicklun von den Inffingen bis zum Jahre lBéETBerlin, 1925);
Der Inarchismus von Proudhon zu KropotkinlBerlin, 1927);
InarEHIsten und Sozialrevolutionfire: Die historische Ent-
WIcklung des Anarchismus in den Jahren 1880-1886(Ber1in,

.o
‘O I
.
.

....~
‘ c
.

. I
.0
‘1

,-

.u'

U
.
. I
> ~-‘
1:0;
0's o
I e.
‘ .
a ..
--- ,
-. el
‘ —

 

e

8
covering the materials published on the subject. The
only bibliographies which make an attempt at covering
the subject are dated and sometimes inaccurate or mis-

leading.10

Still another problem in this study is the
reliability of sources. Anarchist writers such as Johann
Rbst for example are not entirely reliable. Many articles
written by Most were for the purpose of either glorifying
or vilifying some person. Anarchist historians, too,
true to their belief in anarchism make poor historians
of the movement. They tend to ramble and lack the
degree of personal detachment necessary to write a sub-
stantial work of history. In certain cases contemporary
histories of the anarchist movement were written by paid
police agents. Needless to say their accounts are not
vfithout bias. Accounts by socialist writers, who viewed
the anarchists as their opponents, are also written from
a biased view point. Bourgeois writers usually write
vdth a less than complete understanding of anarchism.

Police files, too, must be used with caution.
Government officials in Germany were Slow to acknowledge
publicly that there was a difference between anarchism
and socialism. Separate files on anarchism were not

established.until 188A. Prior to this they were grouped

 

Iona; Nettlau, Bibliographie de L'anarchie(Brussels,

1897); Josef Stammhammer, Biblio raphie des Socialismus
und Communismus, 3 Vols., (Jena, I893-l909);

9
with socialist activity. In some cases a government
official would continue to maintain publicly that there
was no difference between anarchism.and socialism, while
in his personal correSpondence he acknowledged a differ-
ones.

In the final analysis the sources dealing with
anarchism.are no better or no worse than those on any
other topic. Partiality and bias enter into practically
all writing, and police reports, not only on anarchism,
but in other areas, are not the most perceptive pieces
of evidence. The burden of separating fact from fiction,
truth from lie, was at times a particularly eanperating
problem. No piece of evidence was accepted at face
value until it could be substantiated by another in-
dependent source.

Another problem.in relation to sources is the
lack of a substantial amount of material by persons who
participated in anarchist activity in Germany in the
1870's and 1880s. Many of them.died early and violent
deaths. The great majority of them.were ordinary working

nwn who usually are not noted for leaving behind Nachlass

 

that amounts to much. Furthermore, of necessity, the
nmvement was an undergrOund one of clandestine, occasional
meetings of members of the various groups. They met in
small groups and left little behind. To a great extent
tracing the German anarchists in the 1870's and 1880's

is like following the trail of a fox in the melting Snow.

10

Patches are available, patches have been swallowed up entirely
byrtime. .Accounts of activity by participants for the most
part do not exist. It would have been dangerous to put down
on paper admission to complicity in a crime committed in
Germany, even if living abroad, for this would.have pre-
cluded returning to the Fatherland.

It is a mistake to think of the anarchist movement
in Germany as a single coherent movement which exerted a
continuing force. Anarchists in Germany covered the entire
Spectrum.of anarchist thought: from highly individualistic
to communistic anarchists. The diversity in philosophy led
to the establiShment of many small Splinter anarchist groups.
Often a group would come into being, gain a reasonably good
sized following and then fall into demise without having
affiliated itself with the other anarchist groups. How-
ever, all anarchists in Germany acknowledged a common
brofiherhood. There were numerous individuals who can be
considered as being on the fringe of the movement. There
were those who transfered their allegiance, in part, from
the Social Democrats to the anarchists. Among the rank-
and-file followers there was much moving back and forth
between socialism.and anarchism, depending upon the mood
and circumstances of the individual involved. Complicating
this already difficult problem were groups such as the
Independent Socialists, who sometimes worked in close

collaboration with the anarchists.

11

Many of these individuals, who walked in the
penubra between anarchism and socialism, cannot be placed
in a pigeon hole labeled either anarchist or socialist.
Professor Lombroso of Turin University was able to solve
the problems of definition and categorization. After
having studied many anarchists he concluded that anarchists
possessed certain well defined physiological characteristics
which were easily discernable; for example, exaggerAted
plagiocephaly, facial asymmetry, cranial anomalies(ultra-
brachycephaly), large jaw bone, exaggerated zygomas,
enormous frontal sinus, anomalies of the eyes, ears,
nose and teeth, anomalous coloration of the skin, and
hours-pathological anomalies.11 This idea seems ludi-
crous today but around the turn of the century Professor
Iombroso's theories were considered to have a scientific
basis. Turin University at the time was a leading center
for the study of criminology. Lombroso's theories were

internationally reSpected and discussedpat the World Con-
ferences of Criminal Anthropologists which were held at

uCesare Lombroso, ”A Paradoxical Anarchist,”

gpular Science Monthl , 56(January, 1900), 312-315.-Cesare

mbroso, "IIIustratIve Studies in Criminal Anthropology,”
Monist, I(April, 1891), 336-3h3. See the reply to Lombroso's
artIcIe by Michael Schwae, "A Convicted Anarchist's Re ly ,
to Professor Lombroso,” Monist, I(April, 1891), 520-528)..
See also by C. Lombroso, "Der Anarchismus," Deutsche Revue
(October, 18914.): and "Anarchy. The Status of—Anarchism To-
day in Europe and the-United States," Ever bod 's Ma azine,
VI(1902), 165-168; Die Anarchisten(HamEurg, 1891;) which Is
adtrinslation from the Italian. here is also a French
e t on.

 

l\

12
Turin University. Lombroso was of the Opinion that,
although the anarchists possessed criminal physiognomies,
they were not common criminals and thus should not be
punished in the same way. He was of the Opinion that
their hereditary anomalities was the primary reason why
they turned to anarchism.

Anarchism, as a philosophy, has a certain stigma
attached.to it. The word itself has a bad connotation.
Anarchy has come to mean chaos. This is not anarchism
as viewed.by the anarchists. To the anarchists, anarchism
is a well ordered system.which can be achieved. On the
whole the anarchists were not insane neurotics, as they
are often pictured - though some of the terrorists un-
doubtedly were. The great majority of them.regarded
anarchism as the only method of ameliorating the wrongs
of modern society. Revolution held.out the hope to the
nmsses of an immediate end to their misery.

Anarchism.has a certain negativeness about it as
viewed from.any opposing philosophical point of view.

As a theory it is full of contradictions and inconsistencies
which are apparent, even to the anarchists themselves.

There is no single theory of anarchism which must be
accepted by all anarchists for this would be a fundamental
violation of the creed of any anarchist.

The question of, what is a German, was still
another problem.which.had to be dealt with. The solution

to this problem.was to consider all people born in the

 

 

O C.
-v
7 l
. .-
_I.
e ‘.
e
I C
, .s'
_, s
s
O
_..' 6'
.n . c
. l
"I _"
. V. .1
.... ..
-4
e
L.
|
' I-
'Is-s.
O
c. . .
..
‘7.
‘ee‘ .
" sue

 

 

~9. c"
-
.'_ .

.
'V
'0
K ' l
-. .
.I.
.‘ “
.
's.
.
...
.,
‘0
n
' h
A
a.
I' ‘
.\ '4
s
e. ‘
.
\
‘ .
'I
\
. \
s
.
‘Q
‘-
u
'I
A I
~ .
.
.‘
I.
.
v

 

13.

area that became known as the German Reich in 1871 as Ger-
nmns. It is apparent that this is an eXpedient answer to
a.difficmlt problem; but not a satisfactory one. The anar-
chists discussed in this study were born before Bismarck's
creation of the German Reich. There are large numbers of
people who Share the German culture who were left out of
the Reich. The German Speaking Czechs, Austrians, and.the
German section of Switzerland. There is a certain affinity
and a great deal of cooperation and.working together between
the Swiss Germans, Austrians and Czech Germans, with those
who come from.within the borders of the Reich. The German
anarchists felt no great ties of sentiment to the Reich.
By its very nature anarchism.is international rather than
national. The German anarchist sections in Switzerland
and London were composed of exiles from.the Reich, mixed
in.with Swiss, Czech, and Austrian anarchists. At times,
in this study, it was necessary to include Germans who
were born outside the confines of the Reich. This was
done only when it was necessary to explain more fully the
actions of the German anarchists. The German anarchists
played an important part in the rise of anarchism in
Austria and the develOpment of radicalism in the United
States, however, these t0pics, interesting though they
may be, are well beyond the scOpe of this study; however,
reference is made to both of these movements.

The exact number of sympathizers the anarchists

had in Germany will never be known; but circulation

1h»
statistics have been obtained for many anarchist news-
papers. In Germany it was more difficult, than in other
EurOpean countries, to publicly profess anarchism. This
'was eSpecially true in Prussia where administrative and
police efficiency maintained a close scrutiny of all
suSpicious activities. A Berlin police official related
to a correSpondent of the London Timgg that in Germany
anarchists were controlled through the system.which re-
quired all "new—comers to a locality . . . to register
their names and addresses with the police.” He went on
to say that "Berlin police are ex-soldiers who know how
to behave in~a moment of danger.” He also related that
"restrictions on immigration" into Germany helped to keep
the foreign anarchist element out of the country.12

The difficulty of being an anarchist in Germany
is further accentuated by the fact that it was common
practice for police Spies to attend all meetings sus-
pected of espousing the cause of radicalism. After the
meeting adjourned the spy wrote up detailed reports of
what was said at the meeting and who was in attendance.
The police kept long lists of peeple suSpected of being
anarchists. Many anarchist cells and anarchist periodi-
cals were smothered while still in the embryonic stage.
It was customary practice to confiscate an issue of a

newspaper if it contained an article that was offensive

12London Times(January S, 1911), p. 6, Col. b, c.

13

to the government.13

Today, we view anarchists as excessive, romantic,
dreamers of impractical schemes which could never be put
into practice. In the latter quarter of the nineteenth-
century they were not viewed in this way, by many of the
poor, to whom the total revolution, which the anarchists
promised, held out the only hope of any immediate improve-
ment of conditions. Life among the poor urban proletariat
was short, and at best "brutish."' To a sizeable prOportion
of the lower class, the piecemeal concessions of the bour-
geois and aristocratic dominated governments came too
slowly, as did socialist programs which held hope only for
the future. Only the anarchist revolution held any hope

 

13On the efficiency of Prussian administration see:
Frederic G. Howe, European Cities at WOrk(New Ybrk, 1913),
pp. h-7; H.G. James, Principles of PrusSIan Administration
(New York, 1913).

On the suppression of anarchist periodicals see:

Max Nettlau, Bibliographie de L'anarchie(Brussels, 1897),
pp. 157, 16k. More will be said‘Iater on the confiscation
of various issues of anarchist newSpapers; including the
reasons given for confiscation. Libraries in the United
States which contain German anarchist newspapers invariably
have the confiscated numbers. This is probably due to the
fact that newSpapers usually send out their subscription
copies before the issue appears on the street for sale to
the general public. Usually the confiscation was carried
out before the papers reached the newsstands; however, Ger-
man police found it more difficult to seize subscription
copies. German postal regulations prohibited capricious
seizure and opening of the mails. Anarchist newSpapers
were usually small enough that they could easily be mailed
in an ordinary brown paper envelOpe and thus were not con-
spicuous. Material will be introduced later to point out
the role of police Spies. This material is mainly from
the archives in Bavaria and Prussia as well as material
from the German Foreign Office.

 

 

 

16

of an immediate change in their deSperate condition.
Perhaps the surprising fact is, not that there were
anarchists in the 1880's, but that there were not more
of them. 8

For some unknown reason, as noted above, writers
tend to dismiss anarchism in Germany as an insignificant
force in the develOpment of the German nation in the nine-
teenth century. This is probably due to looking at things
in a "normal”way. Historians and writers tend to look for
positive political, economic, and social achievements.
Anarchists are, by nature, apolitical. Economically and
socially they are an anachronism to historians, whether
they be bourgeois or Marxist. In the fields of politics,
economics, and social legislation the anarchists achieved
nothing, nor did they try. Such ventures are anathema to
the Spirit of anarchism.

It is difficult, if not impossible, for writers
to think about anarchism in terms other than political.
Even Jchann Mest had.this difficulty. For a long time
he thought of anarchism.as a political philosophy. Anar-
chism is apolitical and this must be kept in mind. Yet
bourgeois and socialist historians point out the lack of
definite political programs and political organizations
among the anarchists, without realizing the apparent con-
tradiction in their words; for the word political is alien

to the vocabulary of a true anarchist.

 

17

As a force the anarchists in Germany exerted
power all out of proportion to their numbers. Prior
to 1890 they achieved little in the way of success, in
numerical strength, but nevertheless they aroused suf-
ficient anxiety to bring into being repressive legislation
which restricted the activities of everyone interested in
reforming the monarchial system in Germany. Credit for
improving the social condition of the poor in Germany is
usually given to either the monarchial government or the
socialists, depending on your point of view. If credit
is to be given, some of it must go to anarchists, who
though unsuccessful in their immediate objectives of
creating a new society either by revolutionary or peace-
ful means, nevertheless made it apparent to the govern-
nmnt that concessions had to be made to assuage the
masses.

This study was undertaken with the belief that
it would be more than a mere cataloging and description
of the activities of the German anarchists, although
their activities are of sufficient color and embellish-
ment to warrant such a narrative. It was done with the
belief that the anarchists exerted a substantial force
on the develOpment of EurOpe in the nineteenth-century,
and perhaps in no other country is this force more
demonstrable than in Germany, which most writers and

historians have felt was free from.anarchist activity.

.-o~.

18

lEven though there were differences of opinion
among the German anarchist groups, there was, neverthe-
less a general agreement among them that social conditions
in Germany needed to be changed. They were of the Opinion
that meaningful reforms could not be accomplished through
parliamentary means. In this reSpect, perhaps, the anar-
chists were able to see more clearly than the Socia1.Demo-
crats, that Germany could not be reformed by electing
representatives to the Reichstag. The system needed to
be changed, but the anarchists Offered no feasible

alternatives.

1"

CHAPTER I

THE SPIRITUAL ANGESTORS OF THE GERMAN ANARCHISTSI

All movements in history once they become
established make an attempt to ferret out their Spiritual
ancestors. If the movement tUrns out to be a rather per-
nicious one, as in the case of the Nazi movement, this
arduous task will be done for them.by historians both real
and pseudo. The German anarchists are no exception to
this rule. They sought to find their progenitors in the
German radicals of the 1830's and 18h0's. The German
government often confirmed their suSpicions by confis-
cating an issue of an anarchist newSpaper carrying a
reprint of an article written by one of these alleged
ancestors.

Many anarchist historians find in the sixteenth-
century German Peasant‘war the first signs of the kind of
social criticism which ends in anarchism, Both Joll and
Woodcock are of the opinion that too much is made of this
relationShip by anarchist historians.2 It would be futile

 

1Max Stirner is not discussed in this chapter.
Stirner will be taken up in Chapter II.

2James Joll, The Anarchists(London, 196A), pp. 21-
27; George‘HOodcock, Anarchism(Cleveland, 1962), pp. hO-k3.

l9

20

to argue whether Thomas MHntzer and Frederick Schiller
were predecessors of the anarchist mOvement in Germany.
One has only to leaf through an anarchist newSpaper and
to find the names of Schiller(l759’1805), Goethe(17h.9-
1832), Lessing(l729-1781), and Heine(l797-l8S6) appearing
again and again.3 Many German anarchists would like to
place the name of Frederick schiller at the head of the
list of their Spiritual precusors. Max Nettlau, in his
Bibliographie de L'anarchie, lists many of Schiller's
‘works as belonging in the eighteenth-century German anar-
Chist movement. It is true that the German literature of
the eighteenth-century, eSpecially the works of Goethe,

Iessing, Heine, and Schiller, are permeated by a strong

 

See also: Norman Cohn, Pursuit of the Millennium(London,
1957). p. 267. For anarchist thought on the subject see:
"Die zweite deutsche Bauernrevolution,“Der freie Arbeiter
(Berlin), No. 6, IXI(February ll, 1928);"18E8-I928," IEId.,
NO. 11, XXI(March 17,.1928); "Vierzig Jahre Maifeier,'IFId.,
No. l7,IXXII(April 27, 1929).- a

3For exam 1e see: nV’er war Leasing?" Der freie Arbei-
ter(Berlin), No. , XXII(February 23, 1929); “Heinrich Heine,"
IFId., No. 9,IXIIV(February 28, 1931); "Heinrich Heine,”
IIIEerarische Beila e zum. Sozialist”(Berlin), No. 6 III
e ruary , , - ;- o. , I(February 13, 1897),
27-28; No. 8, III(February 20, 1897), 30-31. Der arme Kon-
£3§(Berlin), No. 6, IV(February 11,.1899), 23 contains an
article on Goethe; and Gustav Landauer points out in “Barne
und der Anarchismus," Sozialistische Monatshefte(l899),-353,
that Schiller's thought'is close to anarchism even though
Schiller was not an anarchist. On this point see: A. Martin,
Egitere Aufsatze. Mit einem.Anhange: SOhiller und der Anar-
ghiSmus, Oder Ausruf aus Schiller's "fiber die Esthetische
EkzIehu der Menschen.:IE efner ReIhe von Briefen."(Dres-
en, ). _

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21
current of liberal ideas. This can be seen by reading

two of Schiller's works, Sturm und Dranj and Die RAuberfi

 

A

Early anarchist thought in Germany came from two
sources: native German thinkers and the influence of Proud-
hon. Patterns Of thought similar to anarchism began to
develop in Germany in the eighteenth-century. Max Nettlau
called Die Ideen zu einem Versuch die Grenzen der Wirksam-
keit dee Staates zu Bestimmen, written by Wilhelm von
Humboldt(l792-1835) in 1892, "A strange mixture Of essen-
tially anarchist ideas and authoritarian prejudices."§
Klaus Epstein, in tracing the origins of German conservatism,
related that "Some radicals did not stop at republican de-
mands, but went on to advocate outright anarchist ideals."6
In the lBhO's the battle between socialism and A

anarchism had not been fought yet and so no clear line

divided them. The German anarchists did not become

 

hFor a more complete treatment of this idea see:
E. Heller, Die Freiheitsbestrebungen der deutschen im 18.
gnd l9. Jahrhundert, in Zeugnissen ihreriiteratuNLeIpzig,
8’47).

5Max Nettlau, "Bibliographie der Anarchie in
deutscher Sprache," Jahrbuch der freien Generation far 1911.
Volkskalender und DoEumente defleltschauung des Sozialis-
mus-Anarchismus, Neue Folge, II(Paris, 1911), 119. For a
firther discussion of the relationship of von Humboldt's
views to anarchism see: Karl Diehl fiber Sozialismus, Kommu-
nismus, und Anarchismus(Jena, .1911),-pp. SB-Slf.

Klaus E stein, The Genesis of German Conservatism
(Princeton, 1966 , pp. 8m, in thch he traces for tfie
period 1770-1806 the "Illuminati" organization founded in
1776 by Adam weishauptu78h-183o].

22
reconciled to the fact that they could not work with the
German socialists until the Erfurt Party Congress in 1891.
In the International this fact was not accepted by the
anarchists until the International Congress held in London
in 1896'». In the 18(10'3 writers still referred to anarchists
as "anarchist-socialiSts."7 When KrOpotkin started his
paper Le Rgvolte! in Geneva on February 22, 1879, he placed
on its masthead "Organ Socialiste." This subtitle was
continued until March 2, 1881;, when it was changed to
”Organ Anarchiste," only to be replaced by the subtitle
§Organ Comuniste-Anarchiste" on April 13, 18811.

The German anarchists in constructing their family
tree would include all the individuals mentioned in this
chapter. For this reason and no other this chapter is in-
cluded. The brief biographical sketches which follow are
not intended to include all the facets and tenents of the
thought of the person being discussed. Enough bibliography
is presented to point the way toward a more complete study
of each individual discussed, should one desire to pursue
such a study. Only that part of his thought which touches
on, or influenced anarchist development is covered. Vilhelm
Marr and Karl Gran, of all the individuals discussed, would
probably come the closest to being called anarchists. It
should be noted that one would be hard pressed to find a

 

——._'—

7Ame’de'e Hennequin, Le Communisme et la Jeune-
Allemagne en Suisse(Paris, IBSOT, p. I.

 

—..-'—_.._-—

 

 

 

 

 

23

thread of continuity from the peOple discussed in this
chapter to the anarchist of the 1870's, even though
Jlater anarchists looked back on them.as their legitimate
ancestors in the German anarchist movement. A number of
the people discussed below are noted for other achieve-
Inents, and other patterns of thought. It is not gener-
ally known or usually brought out that many of them
went through a stage when their thought either resembled
or eSpoused anarchism.

Ludwig B8rne(l786-1837) is, in the Opinion of
(Bustav Landauer, one of the earliest of the German
thinkers whose thought is anarchist in nature.8 BBrne,
as Landauer*admits, was not an anarchist; however, his
thought process to a certain extent paralleled that of
the anarchists. A political pamphleteer and satirist,
Barne'was born in Frankfurt A/M, the son of a Jewish
banker. He studied medicine at the University of Berlin,
Halls and Heidelberg. While he was at Heidelberg he
turned to the study of ”political economy and the science

of government," as it was called at the time. He continued

these studies At Giessen and then worked for a few years

as a government official in his hometown of Frankfurt A/M.
BBrne decided that the boring routine of a gOvernment

Office was not for him and he turned to writing for a

 

8Gustav Landauer, "BBrne und der Anarchismus,”
Sozialistische Monatshefte(Berlin, 1899), 353-355. -

' 2k
lhnhg. In 1818 he renounced his Hebrew name LBb Baruch
amistarted on a career as a publicist, publishing a num-
MH'Of political journals which were quickly suppressed.
'Hw most famous, Die‘wage. Blfitter ffir BHrgerleben,‘Wissen-

mmaft und.Kunst, appeared during the years 1818-1821.

 

Barns was an able and caustic critic of the poli-
tical conditions Of Germany and after Die'wage was dis-
mwminued in 1821 he led a restless life in Paris, Heidel-
berg, Frankfurt A/M; Berlin, and Hamburg. In 1830, after
tme July Revolution, he went back to Paris where he re-
established Die‘Wage under the French title La Balance
Ipr the purpose of promoting a closer intellectual union
between France and Germany. Landauer concluded that to
Bflrne anarchism.meant the downfall Of the government and
the breakup of the state. This is based on a book which
BBrne published in Paris in 1825 entitled Nouvelles
lettres provinciales, ou lettres gorites par un pro-
gincial a un de ses amis, sur les affaires du temps.

In this book BBrne expressed Opinions with which the
anarchists would.have no quarrel:
The state is the bed of Procustus Procustus
was a legendary highwayman Of Attica, w O tied his
victims upon an iron bed, and stretched or cut Off
their legs to adapt them.to 133 lengfiEJ in which men
are stretched or mutilated to fit. The state, which
is the cradle of humanity, has become its coffin.
The state is at the same time, God and Priest, and
for which the sanctimonious God demands sacrifices
Of all, after which the priest lust . . .

PeOple have only liberties but no liberty.

liberties are the legal evidence Of the government.
For that reason one hears therefore above all the

29

power to speak only Of liberties and sees the word
liberty nervously avoided. They Speak of free in-
stitutions: liberty will be a so called free in-
stitution, and yet there is only the government. . .

It matters little, that the power is in this or
that hand: the power itself must be diminished, in
which ever hand it is to be found. But no government
has on its own voluntarily permitted the power it
possesses to be lessened. Government can only be re-
stricted when it is driven from power - Freedom arises
only out of anarchy. From.this necessity for revo-
lution we dare not turn our sight away or prevent,
even though it is sad. ‘We must, as men, look at the
danger with a firm and steady eye and dare not shake
before surgeon's scalpel. Freedom arises only out
of anarchie - this is our belief, this is the lesson
Ofihistory.9

A Special place is accorded in German anarchist

annals to Richard‘Wagner(1813-1881), the brilliant,

erratic, enigmatic and Often maligned poet-composer.10

However, it is not for the cadence of his poems nor the
effects Of his musical compositions that the anarchists
revere Wagner; it is for his writings on the German revo-

11

lution Of 18h9. The German government reinforced the

 

9Quoted by Landauer in Ibid., pp. 353-35h. See the
article "Die freie Generation," In Die freie Generation.
Dokumente der weltanschauun des Anarchismus, NO. 1, I
(July,1906), 1-3 in which rneTs writings are used as a
point of departure to explain the necessity Of anarchism.

10Some examples of anarchist Opinion of Wagner are
to be found in: Die freie Generation. Dokumente der Welt-
anschauung des Anarchismus(Berlin), IKOctober, 1906), 97-
99; Litterarische Beila e zum ”Sozialist"(Berlin), NO. 8
I(OctOEer 5, 1895}, 36-?2; and-NO. II, (October 26, 18953,
uh; Der Sozialist(Berlin), No. 16, IV(August, 1912), 125-
127; Freie Eiteratur. Monatsbeilage zur‘UOchenschrift "Der
freie IrbeiterulBerIin’, IlactOber, 1905); II(November,.l906).
11On‘w’agner's activities in the reyolution see: 8)
Ernest Newman, The Life of Richard wagner New York, 193 ,

I. pp. 51pm}; Ricfligrawegner, M L fe New York, 1911); ,
Hugo Dinger, Richard Wagners geistlicfie Entwickluzngwerlin,

 

 

 

 

 

 

\
...
Q
U
.0
I
' 9
n,.
l.’ ‘
n -
‘Q
. ' '
5. ~ '.
.I
I
I
‘.|
u i
‘0

 

 

a.

idea that Wagner was an ancestor Of the anarchists when
tmey confiscated the May 6, 1911 issue Of Der freie Ar-
be_i_t_e_r_(Berlin) which carried a reprint of Wagner's
article "Die Revolution.":L2 Max Nettlau argues that
Wagner'sthought at this‘epoch in his life can definitely
be called anarchist)”3 ”Die Revolution" first appeared
as an anonymous article in the Volksblfitter(Dresden)
April 8, 18h9. De3pite these claims,‘fiagner cannot be
called an anarchist, although he Openly covorted with
EMkunin and wrote articles which lean toward anarchist
beliefs.

In I'Die Revolution" Wagner said many things that
would appeal to an anarchist. He relates that "the Old

world is in ruins from.which a new world will arise. . . ."

 

1902); Georg Germann Maller, Richard Wagner in der Mai-
Revolution 18h9(Berlin, 1919); Heldemar Lippert, Richard
Hafners verbannunggund Rficklehr 18 9-62(Berlin, I927);
WIEhelm Altmann(ed.), Letters 0 .ar wagner, 2 Vols.,
(London, 1927); PrisciIIa RObertson, Revolutions of 18h8.
A Social Histornyew YOrk, 1960), pp.“181-185.

12The article was against articles 110 and 130 Of
the German penal code. _In the following issue Of Der freie
Arbeiter for May 13, 1911, there is a short article which
related that very few copies of the paper fell into govern-
nmnt hands. Germany was referred to in this issue as a
"house searching state." This issue was also confiscated
but not for this short article. The article which offended
the government was the lead article. The issue Of May 27,
1911, carries an article by Paul Luceny telling how the
police searched.his house in Gladbeck looking for the issues

for May 6, and May 13.
13Nettlau, Der Vorfrflhling der Anarchie, p. 165.

A

;: t.-
u u

1

Id

27

fine was brought about by a revolution which "shakes so
idolently . . ." that it will destroy "all that has been
mnlt for ages past. . . ," Revolution; according to
Wagner, is in itself "ever;rejuvenating, ever-creating
life. . . ." It is "the dream" and "the hope of all
who suffer.8 Revolution "destroys what exists" and
vmerever it turns, bursts forth "fresh life frOm the
(had rock. . . ." It ”breaks the fetters that oppress"
and “redeems man from.the embrace of death and pours -
rmw life into his veins. . . ." According to the law
of nature "whatever is, must pass away. . . ." The
present order which "has Sprung from sin will be destroyed"
because "its flower'is misery and its fruit is crime. . . .”

Revolution will "destroy the domination of one
over many . . . the_power of the Almighty, Of law, of
property . . .” and warfare between nations will cease.
It will mark the end of powerful people, Of the privi-
leged class, Of both rich and poor. It "will destroy
the order Of things that make millions the slaves Of a
few. . . .” Revolution will destroy the present order
which ”makes labor a burden and enjoyment a vice, makes
one man wretched through want and another, equally
wretched, through superfluity. . . .” The Old order
which."wastes men's power” and "condemns half of mankind
to inactivity or useless toil. . . compels hundreds of

thousands . . . to devote their youth . . . to soldiering"

would be destroyed and with it would vanish "every trace

Q

28
Oftmis insane order of things; force, lies, hypocrisy,

wmfin sorrow, suffering, tears, trickery and crime. . . ."

‘flagner then gave a ringing exortation for the Q
ngple to rise up, follow the goddess of revolution, and
(HMSh the existing order. Out Of the ashes Of the Old
order would arise a new one in Which.there would be no
distinctions between people.11L

On March 22 of the same year Wagner wrote a poem
entitled ”An einen Staatsanwalt"(TO a State Attorney).
inithis pOem, Wagner pours out his scorn on "the state,

that absolute great egoist," and on.the Attorney who has
been elected "to wrangle for its highest abstract

nothing."15
There are several other pieces Of evidence in

Hagner's writings that would tend to indicate his sym-

pathy for anarchism. In Kunstwerk der Zukunft(1850)

he gives his views of the ideal community(Gemeinschaft)

of the future:

In the common alliances Of the men of the future
the same law will make eternal need the Single de—
termining factor. A natural, not forceable, alliance
of a large or small number of men can only be brought
about through one Of these men by mutual need. The
satisfaction of this need is the sole purpose Of the
common undertaking: The actions Of each individual
will be governed by this goal, as long as the common
need is in itself the strongest factor: and from.this

 

1LEDer freie Arbeiter(May 6,1913).

1SGesammelte Schriften und Dichtungen(Leipzig, 1907),
XII, pp. 80-81.

29

need will emanate the law for common intercourse.
These laws are in themselves nothing other than

the means for the establishment Of a useful end.

. . . Natural alliances or associations have a

natural existence only as long as they strive after
the satisfaction of the underlying common need. . . .
All men have but one common need. . . . the need Of
living and being happy. Herein lies the natural

bond between all men . . . it is only the Special
needs which, according to time, place, and individual-
ity, make themselves known and increase, which in the
rational condition Of future humanity can serve as a
basis for Special associations. . . . These associ-
ations will change, will take another form, dissolve
and reconstitute themselves according as those needs
change and reappear. This rational condition of fu-
ture humanity . . . can be only brought about by
force, state alliances of our time will Oppose the
free alliances Of the future which in their fluid
change represent an extraordinary expansion toward

a more refined, closer formation of human life it-
self, to which the restless change holds out various
individual inexhaustibly rich attractions, which du- 16
ring the present uniform life are morally prohibitive.

In "Das BfihnenweihfestSpiel in Bayreuth,"(1882) he
expressed.his feeling for anarchism by saying: "This Cfihe
sure rendering Of all events on, above, under, behind, and
before the stag§7 anarchy accomplishes because each indi-
vidual does what he wishes to do, namely, what is right."17

A

In April, 1850, Hagner wrote his ex-wife:

Hflth all my suffering, with all my self-consuming,
I have within myself a great transcending faith, the
faith in the truth and splendor of the cause for which
I suffer and fight. . . . You cling to the peaceful-
ness and permanence Of existing conditions - I must
break with them to satisfy my inner being; you are
capable Of sacrificing everything in order to have a
reSpective position in the community, which I despise
and with which I don't want to have anything tO do;

 

16pp. 216-218.

8M 17cosamme1te sehrirten(Leipzis. 1883). X, ppm 383-
3 .

A...

30

you cling with all your heart to property, to home,

household, hearth - Ileave all that so that I can

be a human being. . . . I'have broken 16th everything

Old and fight it with all my strength.
fflfls gives a picture Of Wagner as a total revolutionary as
<fid.his article on revolution. He was willing to endure
all suffering for the cause in which he believed.

After the rise Of Hitler to power it became
gmpular to associate Wagner with the idea of the to-
talitarian state. However, one of his contemporaries,
a.French music critic, Henri Mahherbe, wrote in.his es-
say "RiChard‘Wagner, revolutionnaire total" that the
'Wnné of the Nibelungen,"’produced in 1876; eXpressed
8a savage gOSpel Of anarchy, it is SO deeply steeped in
poetry and dreams that its dangerous significance may
not be noticed. Thus its subterranian message, full of
imagery, can permeate the souls with greater ease. ‘Wag-
ner wishes to attach himself to an ideal Of guilelessness.
To that end.he sets out to cut all his ties with the human
family and to ruin utterly the civilization Of his time."19
Ibgner, of course, cannot prOperly be called an ‘

anarchist, but he did add fuel to the flame of anarchism.
Both in his writings and in his life he exemplified charac-

teristics admired and accepted by anarchists.

 

18Hans KOhn, The Mind Of Germagy(New YOrk, 1960),
p. 199.

nguoted in Hans Kohn, Ibid., p. 191.

31
Karl Heinzen(1809-1880), in the Opinion of George
Sdumm1"came as near being an anarchist as is possible
idthoutfibeing one." He "occupied ground next door to anar-
dflsm."20 The feelings that Heinzen conjured up in the
nfinds Of the anarchists is eXpressed in the following poem
twitten‘by Robert Reitzel:
WDem.Ged§chtnisse Karl Heinzens"

A

Halb g8nn ich ihm den Grabesfrieden
Halb wflnsche ich es sei ihm noch beschieden

Die Leiden dieser Zeit zu tragen

Der wahrheit goldnes‘WOrt zu sagen 21

Und Schuften auf den Kopf zu schlagen.

Heinzen, born in Grevenbroich, near Dfisseldorf,
in 1809, had a youth filled with revolt. He lost his
nmther at the age of four and with.her disappeared prO-
bably the only being that could.have had a moderating
influence upon the impetuous boy. The irritating in-
sistence Of his stepmother that he become a Catholic

priest aroused his antagonism and sowed the seed Of his

pronounced anticlericalism. From his father, who resented

 

20Geor e Schumm, ”Karl Heinzen and Anarchism,"
Libertv(BOston%, August 1, 1891, p. 2. Schumm, the son

0 mmfgrant German parents, was bi-lingual and used this
ability to prOpagate the writings of JOhn.H. Mackay, the
German individualist anarchist, in the United States, and
to translate the writings Of the American individualist
anarchist Benjamin Tucker(185h-1939) into German. Schumm,
himself, was an individualist anarchist and a close asso-
ciate of both Tucker and Mackay.

 

21Litterarische Beilage zum "Sozialist," NO. 10,
(Robert Reitzel-Number, 1898), MG. Robert Reitzel was
editor Of the anarchist paper Arme Teufel published in
Detr01t o

{1

t
I
a

bar.
.. -
I...

 

-
oi“.

d on

"-1

‘0'“ ‘

 

., -
*‘...._.;
.
-‘
".' .l-
-... a:

‘
"II
o - ‘
‘I ..

 

 

 

 

 

 

sf,
3‘ .‘-
‘
I
..
‘o.‘..
‘I - ‘.U
.‘ ‘
.
.
. .
~. ‘: c,’
. ‘~.
5‘ .
.

A“ .I
'~. '1
a

0.
t
0
.
.
..
‘ 0
.
‘4
s
' I
‘. .‘s
”Q
.
-.
. n.‘
.
Q
|'-,
Q
C
.‘
\
.
n
9‘ .-~
.n
‘
o
.
‘. .“
.
.1.
d
I Q
.
.
, .
‘-
I
n
'0
\
\

 

 

32
Rmmsia's absorption Of the Rhineland, young Heinzen re-
ceived his hatred of the Prussian Spirit that never left
amaze In Spite of great intellectual potential, Heinzen
fluled to complete his program Of study at the University
cfl'Bonn. He was expelled in 1829 for giving a Speech in
mnch he accused.his teachers of narrow-mindedness and
mmdemned the lack of academic freedom. Heinzen, who stood
:fix feet three inches tall and had exceptionally broad
mmulders and a very muscular frame was prime material
fin'the military but a short enlistment in.the Dutch Co-
1onia1.Army, during which time he was stationed in Batavia,
only strengthened his dislike Of all kinds Of coercion.
Fbllowing this his required year of service in the Prussian
army left him.with a life time hatred of militarism.
After separation from the army he entered the Prussian
civil service as a tax Official. His service was a con-
tinuous battle with his superiors, who, he felt treated
him unjustly, or with whose administrative methods he dis-
agreed. During his eight years as a tax Official he wrote
lyrical ballads and comedies in his Spare time, that is,
when he was not writing complaining letters to his superi-

ors, including the King of Prussia.23

221.13. Zucker, The Forty tighter-s. Political Re-
fugees of the German Rev51utIOns O 18Q§(New York, 1950),
p.‘I70. ,

23Itid., pp. 170-171; Carl wittke A ainst the
Current. TEE—Iife Of Karl Heinzen, l809-1880iCEicago, 19h5),

PP. 1’86.

 

 

 

 

33:

He resigned from the civil service and in lth
wants a pamphlet entitled Die preussische Barokratie in
‘Mfloh.he attacked the system Of espionage practiced with-
hithe government of Prussia. It was suppressed and he
tms summoned before a court. He fled to Switzerland tO
avoid fine proceedings which had been initiated against
him. IHis flight across the border was followed by a
warrant, which he answered with flaming articles making
a.return to Germany impossible. During his wanderings
Heinzen met Karl Marx for whom he develOped a very bitter
hatred. In Switzerland.he held discussions with Ludwig
Ftuerbach, Arnold Huge and many others who had fled from
Germany. He attempted, unsuccessfully, to publish a
magazine entitled Die Opposition, which he envisioned as

a weapon against Prussian reaction.2u

 

2#A.E. Zucker, The Forty Eighters, p. 171. Heinzen

was violently outsPOken in his hatred of communism. For
the reaction of Engels and Marx see: Friedrich Engels and
Karl Marx,‘flerke, VOl. u(Berlin-East, 1959), which contains
the following two articles: F. Engels, "Die Kommunisten und
Karl Heinzen,” pp. 309-32u. This article originally a pear-
ed in the Deutsche-Brfisgeler-Zeitun , NO. 79(0ct. 3, 18h7),
NO. 80(Oct. 7, 18H777- Karl Marx, Die moralisierende Kri-
tik und die kritisierende MOral. Beitrag zur deutschen Kul-
turgeschichte gegen Karl Heinzen," pp. 331-359. This article
originall appeared in the Deutscher-Brfisseler-Zeitun , NO.
86(Oct. 2 , 18h7), NO. 90(Nov. II, I8K7), NO. 92lNov. 18,
18h]), No. 9M(Nov. 25, 18h7). Earlier when Marx was editor-
in-chief of the Rheinische Zeitun he appointed.Heinzen as
This assistant. He had such con ence in him.that when the
fpaper came under fire from.the government he devised a plan
*whereby he (Marx) would accept full reSponsibility for the
articles which had caused the government to suppress the
'paper. Heinzen would become the new editor-in-chief Of the
Papersimus saving the paper, because Marx assumed that the

government would be satisfied with a change of editors.

Marx at this time also Offered to write an article about

 

 

3t

Heinzen, at first Opposed a bloody upheaval in
Germany, because he thought that the enlightenment of the
people would be sufficient to bring about reforms. He
was of the Opinion that any reforms in Germany had to be
undertaken in unison with all European nations. Slowly,
however, he changed his mind. In his publication Dig
teutsche Revolution" . . . he advocated tyrannicide and
recommended Open revolt and mutiny in the army, and re-
ferred to the hh9 princely drones and their bureaucracies
who could be hurled from their position of power only by
revolution."2S

In 18h? Heinzen went to the United States. When
the revolutions broke out over Europe in 18h8 he borrowed

money and returned to Germany, but once there he failed

 

himself which Heinzen would publish. Heinzen was not
satisfied with this idea, but he mentioned that Karl Grfin,
correspondent for the Mannheimer Abendzeitung, might dO-it.
Before a week had elapsed Grfin's article appeared in the
Mannheimer Abendzeitung_containing almost word for word all
that MaerHad wanted HEinzen to write. Marx was presented
to the public as a hero in regard to the suppression of the
Rheinische Zeitugg and many flattering things were said Of

m re erring tOIEhe "rare many—sidedness Of his talent,"
his ”sharp, incisive mind," his "truly amazing dialectic,”
his ?perfect diplomatic manner."- Carl Heinzen, Erlebtes -
(Berlin, l86h); Marx-Engels, Gesamt-Ausgabe, Erste AEtei-
lung, Band I, halb-Band 2, p. 152.

See also: Franz Mehring, Karl Marx(Ann Arbor, 1962),
pp. 133-13%; Herwig Farder, Marx und Engels am Vorabend der
Revolution BerlinéEast, 1960), pp. 217-238_Ih which'the dis-
pute Between Heinzen and Marx and Engels is discussed in de-
tail; and Hans Huber, Karl Heinzen; seine politische Ent-
géglgung und publizistfiche WirksamkeitIBern und Leipzig,

25

A.E. Zucker, The Forty;Eighters. p. 172.

35
to gain the confidence of the revolfitionaries. He was
unsuccessful in his attempt to be selected as a repre-
sentative from.Hamburg in the Frankfurt Parliament. In
18h9 he quarreled with Hecker over the political goals
Of the revolution. The moderate element branded him
"Bloody Heinzen" because he called for French military
aid to crush Prussia. In 1850 he returned to the United
States where he spent the last thirty years Of his life
editing and publishing a number of new3papers as well
as fighting for freedom. liberty, and justice as he

saw it.26

Carl Wittke, Heinzen's biographer, writes that it
is difficult to understand how Heinzen can be classified
as an anarchist. I'It is true that Heinzen was a great
admirer of Proudhon and Mikhail Bakunin. . . . Heinzen
wants to reduce the functions of the state to a minimum

in order to preserve the greatest amount of individual

initiative."27

 

26Ibid. In a Speech written in 1860, entitled
"The Germans and the Americans," Heinzen tells how he
longed to return.to Germany; He was disappointed that
the revolution had failed in.Germany and OXpressed doubts
that another revolution would occur in the immediate
future which would bring freedmm to the German peOple.
Labadie Collection, Vertical File, "Karl Heinzen,”
University Of Michigan Library(Ann Arbor, Michigan).
The Labadie Collection has both the first and second
handwritten drafts of this Speech which is twenty-five

very large pages long.
27Car1 wittke, Against the Current, pp. 2u7-2h8.

36
Schumm, on the other hand, see's a close affinity
of Heinzen's thought to anarchism for the following reasons:

. . . his uncompromising war on all forms Of
communism.together with his championship Of private
enterprise against State monopoly . . . he depreca-
ted all State meddling with the industrial affairs
of people . . . he utterly condemned and severely
criticized all attempts at and tendencies toward the
nationalization Of the ways and means Of communication
. . . he postulated the general principle that all
things that can be done by private individuals and
associations of individuals should be left to these
and not be usurped by the State. . . . It was princi-
pally in reference to the subject Of education that
Heinzen's enlightened and libertarian philosophy suf-
fered a defeat. Because he feared that education would
be neglected, if left to private enterprise, he made
Of it a State affair. But even here he was careful
not to grant the State tOO large powers. The State was
simply to provide schools and the Opportunity for edu-
cation, but there was to be no compulsion of citizens
to avail themselves Of the State's Offerings. Indeed
he abominated compulsory education and combatted it
with all his might. Nevertheless his position on this
question was not wholly in line with anarchism. For
we leave education entirely to private enterprise, con-
fident of thus securing for it a richer future than
will ever fall to the lot of State education. we tho-
roughly abjure the forceable taking of money from some
peOple for the education Of other peOple's children.

. . . Heinzen radically Opposed the principle of au-
thority, and with it the idea of government“ and de-
fined the State as a 'voluntary association for "the
Object of facilitating and securing the realization
of the life purpose Of each individual through the
prOper authorized agents by means Of their jointly-
created and supervised institutions, laws, and re-
sources." Strictly Speaking this is Anarchy pure and
simply notwithstanding Heinzen's disclaimer to the
contrary. . . . there is nothing whatever in the word
Anarchy to exclude organization, and that Anarchists
have never called upon people to choose between organ-
ization and no-organization, but between compulsory
organization and voluntary organization. It is per-
fectly prOper therefore to describe society based on
voluntary organization by the word Anarchy, while it
would be manifestly improper to designate it be the
word.State, which has in all history stood for society
based on compulsion. If, however, it should be Shown
that as Heinzen, in the brief summary referred to,
explicitly insisted on the voluntary principle for the

37

society of the future, he did so also implicitly in
his voluminous other works; if what he calls the

State was indeed to have been a voluntary association,
- I confess that I have no real quarrel with him, and
gladly claim.him.for the Anarchists. . . . when.he
talks of the State of the future doing this, that, and
what not, free of cost for the poor and thsaneedy, it
is a voluntary association he has in mind.

Wilhelm Weitling(l808-1871) today occupies a place
of honor in the Communist hall of fame.29 His differences

 

28George Schumm, I'Karl Heinzen and AnarChism,"'§i-
bert (Boston), August 1, 1891. p. 2. Eunice M. Schuster,
Native American Anarchism(Smith College Studies in History,
Vol. XVII), pp. IZE-Izg, refers to Heinzen as one "whose
enthusiasm.for reform brought him to a kind of anarchism."
After the state decapitated August Reinsdorf for his part-
in the Niederwald dynamite plot, which will be discussed
in detail in a later chapter, Jehann Mest, a very good friend
of Reinsdorf, printed an article Heinzen.had written thirty
years before entitled "Mord Contra Mord," Freiheit, March IA,
1885, p. 3, in Which.he discusses the idea that the use of
capital punishment by the state is nothing more than legaliz-
ed murdera Oddly enough although Most could have found other
writers who expoused the idea that the state did not have
the right to take the life of a man because "legalized mur-
der" by the state does not cancel out in a retributive way
a murder committed by an individual. He credits Heinzen for
having established this principle, which would indirectly
imply that Mbst considered Heinzen as a fellow anarchist,
of a sort.

Mbst printed this article again in the September 7,
1901, issue of Freiheit, which ironically appeared a day
after the assassination of President'William.MCKinley. The
Heinzen article concluded with the ringing call to action
"Murder the murderers! Through blood and iron, poison and
dynamite set humanity—free!" As a result of the article
Most on October 2, 1901, was sentenced to one year in prison.
For additional information on this subject see: J. Langhard,
Die anarchistische Bewegung_in der Schweiz von ihren Anffingg
bis zur Gegenwart(2nd edition, Bern, 1909), pp. 208-213;-and
RudoIf Rocker, johann Most(Berlin, 1925), pp. hOO-hlh.

agialtraud Seidel-Hflppner, Wilhelm Weitling: der
erste deutsche Theoretiker und Agitator ass Kommunismus
(Berlin-East, I951).

 

38
wdth Marx are overlooked, if not completely forgotten.
Ebrgotten also, is that at one stage in his develOpment
Weitling's thought bordered on anarchism. Even though
the thought process eventually turned toward utOpian forms
cfi'communism, he nevertheless left a lasting impression
<N1two of the most influential Russian anarchists; Bakunin,3O
andIHerzen.31 The German anarChists too like to claim at
least a portion of the early'W'eitling.32 They base their
claim on Weitling's Garantien der Harmonie und Freiheit
(Vevey, 18u2) in which he wrote "a perfect society has no
government but only an administration, no laws, but only
obligations, no punishments, but means of correction."33
This work and his earlier Die Menschheit wie sie ist und
wie sie seien sollte(l838) contain many ideas of a sketchy

anarchist kind.

 

3DELI-I. Carr, Michael Bakunin(New York, Vintage
edition, 1961), relates that weitling was "the most im-
portant figure who crossed Bakunin's path during his sojourn
in Switzerland . . ." Weitling's Garantien der Harmonie und
Freiheit(18u2) left an impression on Bakunin which was
"vivid and lasting." p. 127.

§

31Martin E. Malia, Alexander Herzen and the Birth

of Russian Socialism, 1812-1853(Cambridge, Mass., 1981)
relates that '2 . . the combined influence of Fourier,‘weit-
ling, Proudhon, and Bakunin did much to suggest to Herzen
the idea of the anarchist federation of communes." p. 363.

32”Hilhelm.weitling und seine Zeit," Der freie
Arbeiter(Berlin), XXVI, No. 2(January IA, 1933); No. 3
(January 21, 1933).

33p. 23.

 

 

 

K.

 

 

 

39

Heitling was born in Magdeburg on October 5, 1808,
the illegitemate son of a German.housemaid and an officer
in Napoleon's army, who had been quartered in the home
where she worked. He learned the trade of tailor, leaving
home at the age of twenty to evade military service. In
1830 he took part in the liberal movement in Leipzig, pub-
lishing a number of radical articles in the Leipziger Zei-
Eggg.3u During the next five years he traveled around
Europe from.city to city carrying his shoes in his hand,
using them only when the road was rocky and "carrying his
pack on his back like the snail carries his house;"35
living off fruit taken from orchards he passed.36 “In 1835
he settled in Paris where he studied the tenents of social-
ism and the practice of revolutionary propaganda. He was
expelled, after the uprising of 1839, together with the
other foreign associates of Blanqui, taking refuge in Swit-
zerland where he Spent the next four years founding secret
political societies of craftsmen and printing with his own

hands journals, and broadsheets in which he presented a

 

3hCailléz Wilhelm.Weitling theoricien_gu communisme
(Paris, 1905). This work contains a great deal of interest-
ing information, but is marred by numerous errors which are
probably typographical.

35H.‘Weitling, Die Menschheit wie sie ist und wie
sie seien sollte, p. u}. Wilhelm Marr described‘weitling
as "a fanatic . . . his enthusiasm for the cause has almost
the-character of a religious mania." Das junge Deutschland
in der Schweiz(Leipzig, l8u6), p. AS. ,

 

36U’eitling, Garantien, p. 11.

r———_—"

no

vision or a future utopia and of the social upheaval
through which it would be attained.37

Ieitling's writing eventually earned him a six-
month prison sentence in Zurich. After being released he
was expelled from Switzerland. At Schaffhausen, on the
German border, he was taken into custody by German officials
and sent to Nagdeburg where he was retained by the police
for having fled earlier to avoid military service. He was
examined, declared physically unfit for military service
and released. In August of 18th he left Hamburg for Lon-

don, where a great reception was given in his honor by

 

373eitling witnessed the first uprising instigated
and led by Blanqui, the so called Conspiracy of the Seasons,
which occurred on May 12, 1839, when several hundred of
Blanqui's followers took over the arsenals in the Paris
suburbs of Saint-Denis and Saint-Martin and threw up barri-
cades. It was a short lived uprising being put down that
same evening, Heitling, Garantien, p. 1h.

On ibitling's activities in Switzerland see: Franz
Hhhring, Geschidhte der deutschen Sozialdemokratie(Berlin-

last, 1960’, 1, pp. 205-220; Cari WittEe, The Ute ian Commu-
st. L Bio re of‘flilhelm,weitlin (Baton Rouge, 35.,

3 car, 00 a u as an Modern Socialism(Lon-
don,(1925), pg. 2 - 3 er, e e n ottin-
genyzuridh, 1 87), p. 33-71; WilheIm Marr, gas junge Deutsch-
land in der Sdhweiz Leipzig, 18h6); Georg Ad er, Ges c e
abr.ersten soziEI politischen Arbeiter Bewe un in Deutsafi-
InndlBFesIeu, 1885), pp. 52-H7; J. Langhard, Die anarchis-
EIEEha Bewe u in der Schweiz von ihren Anffin en Bis zur
GefienwEFt and §ie internationaien FEErerl2n3-e§ition, Eern,

3 e enne uln, ES communisme et la eune-Allema ne
en 8 isse(Paris, 18 0); Les communistes en Suisse d‘a r33
Is: a iers trouves chez Peitii lLausanne, IBES); Friedrich
Ifigeis, 'PFogress of SEciaI Reform on the Continent," No. II
'Bornany-and Switzerland," The New Moral whrlq, v, No. 21
(November 18, 18h3), 161-162; Robert Grimm, Geschichte der

Iozialistisdhen Ideen in der Schweiz(Zurich, 193i); Otto

ngger, 0 er e e n s ern, 1932); Otto Brug-
er, Gesdfiiafite Her deutsafien Handwerkervereine in der

dhw z ern, .

 

 

 

 

 

 

kl

the French, German and English socialists. Weitling's
trial in Switzerland had made him.a hero and international
celebrity among the socialists. weitling's influence in
Iondon'waned quickly though. In 18h6 he left London to
attend a socialist congress in Brussels where he got eme
Inpiled in a dispute with Marx which shattered their
relationship.38 Shortly after this Weitling left for
New York where he spent the remainder of his life except
fbr a short interlude, when he returned to Germany du-
ring the revolutionary years of 18u8-18h9. He proved to
be ineffectual in Berlin and returned to New York where
he spent his last years involved in creating new inventions
for the purpose of raising money, developing new scientific
theories, and being involved in the International, dying
on January 25, 1871.

It is quite prOper to place Weitling as a fore-
runner of later anarchists. His thought, which included
such inconsistencies as Proudhonian mutualism.and Blan-

quian conspiratorial organization, bore resemblance to the

 

38For the reasons why‘weitling's intellectual leader-
ship was rejected see: Max Nettlau, "Londoner deutsche kom-
munistische Diskussionen, 18h5," Archiv ffir die Geschichte
des Sozialismus und der Arbeiterbewegung,- .
85th Marx andefihgels were highly impressed with Heitling's
Garantien when it was published. On the dispute with Marx
see: Georg Stiekloff, Marx und die Anarchisten(Dresden, 1913),
PP. 12- 1h; Carl'flittke,iThe Utopian Communist, pp. 105-123,
Franz Mehring, Karl Marx(Ann Arbor, MiCHigan, 1962), pp. 8&-

85, 116-121; MaxiAdler, we weiser: Studien zur Geistes e-
schichte des Sozialismuslgiuttgart, I9IE), 173-199; Gus-
tav Mayer, Friedrich WEE§618: Eine Biographie(Haag, 193k),

I, pp. 116- ilberner(ed. 7,’Mbses Hess Brief-
wechse1(S'Gravenhage, 1959), p. 151.

 

 

1r..— .— A
____,_..r.,..

 

k

[:2

later school of anardhism.ca11ed communist-anarchism in
flmt he rejected both private prOperty and the wage system.
In wiShed to destroy the state as it existed, but wanted

to replace it with a utopian communist society that would
be highly regimental. After the 18h9 revolutions, though
he moved closer to Proudhonian mutualism. In his monthly
journal, Republik der Arbeiter(New York, 1850-185h), he
criticized the utopian experiments in the United States
while putting forth the idea of a Bank of Exchange as the
foundation stone of all co-operative efforts among workers.
The Bank would stock both raw materials and finished pro-
ducts and issue money based on labor value, which would be
used to provide for education, hOSpitals, and the care of
the aged and the disabled. The Bank would destroy the
capitalist monopoly supplanting it with an economic struc-
ture which would make political institutions unnecessary.
These ideas of Weitling had little impact in Germany, but
were influential in the neo-Proudhonian movement of the

nineteenth-century in the United States.39

Moses(Moritz) H688(1812-1875)h0 was born of Jewish

 

1962), pp. 152-153. u28-u29.

39George‘WOodcock, Anarchism(Cleve1and and New York,

 

“Ooh the life of Hess see: Edmund Silberner, Mbses

Iiess Geschichte seines Lebens(Leiden, 1966); Theodore Zlo-

tsiste, Nbses Hess ifidische’Schriften(Berlin, 1905); Theodore
Zlociste, Moses Hess der VorkEmpr? des Sozialismus und
Zionismus( er n, . Three recent editions ofiis col-
liected.writin§§ and letters are available: Horst Lademacher
Red”), Ausenw 1te Schriften(K31n, 1962); August Cornu and
“Olfgang nke(eds.), Philosophische und sozialistische
Sthriften.J837-18 0(Berlin-Eastjil9617;Edmund SiIEerner(ed.),

 

 

\ Moses ess Br e wec sel(S'Gravenhage, 1959).

.u'
.

o

g-
'4

 

a
e
u I '
- ‘I .
..
0‘! os-‘
.,- . ...
.r; 4..
.‘ . n. .
' I
n I, D.- .
.
.1... .. .
u
‘,..
..§l
"‘ u...‘
. .-
-‘ I. .-
u
..
.-
..
"u
‘ . .' -..
.h. vs-
‘nn .I‘
e2. ‘ "
. 4..
u
C
e n
,‘ a ‘ ..‘
‘ I...
V.: ~
.' ' -
..‘ ;
n
A".
c. .. o.
.'e ‘0
0.
"'-
-_ .
~. 0“.
.Q
.'
‘I e
o
n.y .'
.
e f‘
'.‘-.
a u.
‘
‘. .-
-'
1.
‘Q
I
0
‘0
. . v‘
\‘ .‘c
n
U...

U
- r

 

 

 

 

9

h3-

Imrents on June 21, 1812, at Bonn where he also received
his education. Hess, together with Karl Gran exerted, in
the early 18h0's, an important anarchistic influence in
Germany by developing and disseminating Proudhon's theories,
both with the pen and from the Speakers' platforms. Dis-
agreement with his orthodox father resulted in his leaving
home at an early age. After a precarious life in England
and.France he returned to Cologne, where reconcilement with
his father provided him.with employment in his father's
coupany. Sidney Hook describes Hess as ". . . a man of
singular purity of character. He was sensitive to every
form of injustice, passionate in his devotion to principles,
and almost saintly in his every day behavior. He was unable
to hate even those who harmed.him. Although subjected to a
life-long poverty, even more grinding than that of Marx,
he never wavered in his allegiance to revolutionary ideals.
. . . he . . . married a prostitute - 'in order to atone
for the evil society had done' -with whom he lived until
his death. His friends nicknamed.him 'the communist
rabbi."""'1

"His first published work, Die heilige Geschichte
der Menschheit von einem JHngen Spinoza's, appeared in
1836; in it he points out the necessity of a socialist

<3rdering of society. A volume entitled Einundzwanzig

 

IBogen.aus der Schweiz, published.in 18h3, carried two of

 

m"FromiHegel to Marx(New York, 1958), p. 187.

...
.0-

.a In! '
. o
”4 0.0 l

 

Q

i
s'.
‘4
u .. ,
‘. .0 ‘
'~~ ue .

 

.. .. ..7.‘.
J... _

- Q.

t:'. ...
.‘ 4 N
. 'h..,
‘l
- . . ‘
. .
\ ..I .
.
n
5".
.
..::
‘I‘..t
\ ‘ ‘
O. . ‘1
I .u .._
I
I
4
‘l
q
H
y'.
~ .
.3. m.
.
'1 .

 

I
N
v
C
a
' .
'~
.I ‘
' \

 

I‘ v
C
.\
' a
e
v-
c
, e
an.

uh

Hess' essays which demonstrate his anarchist tendencies
at this period of his development: "Socialismus und Commu-
nismus' and |'il'hilosophie der That."ii'2 In these two essays
Hess puts forth a far-reaching system of communist anar-
dhism.h3 Hess refers to his philosophy as "anarchy."
”he lies of religion and politics," he wrote, "must be
unmasked with one relentless blow, the refuges, the for-
tifications, the asses and devils bridges of the adversary
must, above all, be burned and destroyed. . . . Liberty is
morality, . . . Liberty and equality are beautiful words.
it have struck a blow for them, we stand for them and
shall rise up again for them."hu

Hes: did not maintain these views very long, for

ilready in May, 18hh, his view had become modified.h5 The

 

“2(Zurich and Winterthur), pp. 7h-91, 309-331.

They are reprinted in A. Cornu and W. M8nke(eds.), Philo-
so ische und sozialistisghe Schriften 1837-1850, pp. 197-

, . See also the editorsT introductidn on pp.
ZYIéxXIII. 'Philosophie der Tat," was reprinted in the
supplement to the anarchist paper_Beiblatt: I'Der freie Ar-
beiter," VIII, N0. 10, (March 11, I911) and No. 12,

r an, 1912).

“3m Nettlau, Der Vorrruhli der Anarchie
(Berlin, 1925), pp. 157- . -

 

thornu and Mfinke, Philosophische gpd sozialistische

Sdhriften 1821-1850, pp. 21

“5seo: 'Uber die sozialistische Bewegung in Deutsch-
1end,‘ Neue A ekdota(Darmstadt, 18h5), pp. 188-227. Prin-
ted in Cornu and HUEke pp. 28h-307. See also his article

or des Geldwessen,' Ibi ., pp. 329-3h8, which was writ-
ten in 18h5. -

 

 

 

 

 

W
np'.
" 5.
1 n
‘ . .
e
U i O
n ‘ .
.n “‘
a. .
.II .o .
-
. e
. o
~UQ
, ‘o e
...I u- '-
I l
.o n “u I
n... L...
.
-
.“ IQ .
‘ 'r-e '.
> QUI-
w...
'0
... ' '
.. ..
.
u“
v.
..- ‘

 

.u. .. .
-
"
e.‘: ,
”-l. .-
n.
.v e.
‘ n
. -...
s
7". v ‘1
c
.7 .
..

’. I. a
. . o
.

-
§‘ I
. . .
‘. s...
.
‘ ‘ 0"
"
-se
5.
J.
a
.. '
.. '.
‘ I
\ 'I,
~‘
‘-
v.‘
“..
I.
Q
s“ .
Q“:
.
s. I
n . .
.. . I
Ԥ
\.l
u
§.‘

 

D
s
‘I
I

it

V
~

.~\
|.:

x'q

 

 

 

 

' MS

flfllowing year he published a scathing anti-anarchist
pmmmlet, Die letzten Philosophie, directed against Max
surner. He also collaborated, in 18h5, with Marx and
Ehgels in writing Die deutsche Ideologie, attacking Stir-
ner.’46 Hess was allied with Marx and Engels in the
struggle against Bruno Bauer, Ruge, and Feuerbach, however,
due association came to an abrupt end in l8h8 over the
question of "true socialism)“-7

Hess had early in life turned his back On Judaism,
but after the Moslem atrocities at Damascus in 1860 he
advocated a general exodus of Jews to Palestine. His views
appeared in Rom und Jerusalem, die letzte Nationalitats-
faggg(Leipzig, 1862), in which he proposed a synthesis of
socialism.and Zionism.before there was a Jewish workers!
nmvement or a general Zionist organization. Thereafter,
he lived in two different spheres and wrote for two dif-
ferent circles: the general socialist and the Specifically
Jewish. The few Jews who sympathized with him considered

his socialism as a superficial appendage to his Jewish

 

héDie letzten Philosgphie is printed in Cornu and
Nfinke p . 381-393. For Stirner's reply see: John H. Mac-
kay(ed.§, Stirner's kleinere Schriften 2nd edition(Treptow-

bei Berlin, l91h), pp. 3874396. ‘SidneyiHook, From He e1
‘to Narx, p. 186, relates that part of the manuscript of

Die deutsche Ideologie, was in Hess' handwriting.

1L7On the Split with Marx see: Ibid., pp. 186-219;
F‘Brder, Marx und Engels am Vorabend der Revolution, pp.
238-2h1; and also Kaerarx and Friedrich Engels, The
Communist Manifesto. _—

 

 

.. .
e
..n..
Q
4 o. I
, ‘ o
l
e as
.1... .

.w. I
--'--‘oo- 0

 

. "'-‘

.--,‘.

   

 

‘e
.-
'I
\ .~
1 u ‘.
y. '
.
.e
b l
. .-,
‘e
n,
a
n
‘D
‘
.
.
- c
o
e
. .
~ .
Q
o
0‘ »
‘
.
e
o. .
\
.
o
I
.
'I
0.
1..

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lib

wudtings, while the socialists saw in his Jewish national

gmtriotism.only a whim. In 1863 he was actively connected

lath Lassalle. Afterwards he made France his adopted coun-

try, where he died on April 6, 1875, in the city of Paris.
The writings Of Hess are curiously muddled. He

was close to Proudhon, but not as close as Karl Grfin.

He quarreled with Bakunin, but agreed with him.in his

rejection Of the state and organized religion. He was

both an associate and an important rival Of Marx. All

free actions, according to Hess, must proceed from in-

dividual impulses, unmarred by external influence, which

is quite close to Max Stirner's basic assumption. Hess
envisaged a society in which men would work according to
inclination. The needs of all members Of the society
would be provided for automatically by the community.
This, Of course, rings of Kropotkin's idea of communist
anarchism; however, at the same time Hess entertained a
number Of ideas, such as universal suffrage and national
workshops, with which neither Kropotkin nor any other

true anarchist would agree.h8

Karl Grfin(l813-1887)h9 was born September 30,

hBWOodcock, Anarchism, pp. h29-h30.

ugGrUn also used the pseudonym Ernst von der Haide.
flfliere is a difference Of Opinion over his date of birth
vfliich Max Nettlau gives as 1813 in Der Vorfrfihling der Anar-
cflnie, p. 161. Hannes Skambraks, editOr ofczwischen 18 und
u endbriefe von Friedrich EngelsIBerlinéEast, 1965),
p. 2 gives the date as 181K as do the editors Of Marx-
Engels Werke(Berlin-East, 1962), Vol. III, p. 586.

 

 

1L7

1813, at LUdenscheid. After receiving a good education
kw turned to writing and wandering. Friedrich Engels was
nmch impressed with Grfin's writings, eSpecially his 239E
(wr‘Wanderungen. Ostsee und Rhein(l839). Engels writes
that Grfin.had deep thoughts but that they were eXpressed
in.”horrib1e Hegelian flowery language."SO Gan, in
addition to writing poetry, was editor Of the Mannheimer

Abendzeitung in 18h2, but was forced out of Baden at the

 

end of that year. Arriving in Cologne in 18h3 he met
imses Hess and became editor Of Sprechers. Later in the
fall Of the same year he collaborated on publishing the
Trierschen Zeitugg, eventually getting the controlling in-
fluence in his own hands. In April Of l8hh.he left for
Bielefeld where he continued.his writing.51

While in Cologne Gan met Engels through his friend-
ship with.Hess. Engels wrote to Marx, who was in Paris,

that Gran was leaving for Paris and "will have something
«52

«

to say to you on the tactics Of the peOple. In the same

I have accepted the 1813 date on the basis Of a
letter written by Engels on November 20,1839, in which
he says that Grfin was at the time "already 27 years Old.”
Zwischen 18 und 25, p. 133. For more information on the
pseudonym see werEe, IV, p. M76.

50Letter of November 20,1839, to Wilhelm Graeber,
see also the letter Of April 8,1839, to Friedrich Graeber.
Zwischen 18 und 25, pp. 72-133.

51FBrder, Marx und Engels am Vorabend der Revo-
lution , pp. -116-117.

52Zwischen 18 und 25, p. 23h.

[L8
letter he related that Hess, too, was leaving for Paris but
had to wait until he had sufficient funds. In 18% Gran
wrote, F. Schiller als Mensch. Geschichtsschreiben, Denken
und Dichter. Nettlau relates that in 18ml Grfin's thought

 

bore a fundamental likeness to a far reaching‘system Of
communist anarchism.S3 In Paris Gran became an ardent
disciple of Proudhon whose mutualist philosophy he shared.
Intellectually, he was closely allied with Hess, however,
he was much closer to Proudhon than Hess. During his early
acquaintanceship with Proudhon Gan wrote, Die soziale Be-
wegung in Frankreich und Belgfen(Darmstadt, 18,-L5), which
was the first work to introduce Proudhon's ideasito the
German public. Eventually Grfln would go “beyond Proudhon's
theories criticizing Proudhon‘"for not attacking the wage
system, and pointed out that the growing complexity Of
industry made it impossible to decide on each man's product
with any accuracy or justice. Therefore consumption and
production must alike depend on chance. 'Let us have no
right at all against the right Of the individual.'"51+
Today Gran is remembered, not for his anarthism,
but for the part‘he played in the split between Marx and
Proudhon. Marx, living in Brussels, wrote Proudhon on
May 5, 18116, relating that together with Engels and Philippe

Gigot he had organized a Correspondence Committee for the

 

S32egflorfrfihling der Anarchie, p. 161.

Sh\iloodcock,.Anarchism, p. h29.

 

  

 

he

purpose of putting the German socialists in contact with
the French and English socialists "to keep the foreigners
posted on the socialist movements that are going to take
place in Germany, and to inform the Germans in Germany Of
the progress of socialism in France and England. In this
way it will be possible to air differences of Opinion. An
exchange of ideas will ensue and impartial criticism se-
cured."55 Marx went on to point out that such an organiz-
ation would free the socialist movement "of its national
limitation,“ asking Proudhon if he would-undertake the
Paris and of the correspondence.

In a postscript to the letter Marx attacked Gran:

I here denounce to you M. Grdn, now in Paris.
This man is nothing but a literary hack, a sort Of
dharlatan who wants to make a living by eXploiting
modern ideas. He tries to hide his ignorance under
pompous and arrogant phrases, but he does nothing
but make himself ridiculous by his nonsense. This
man is dangerous. He abuses the acquaintance he has
made, by‘his impertinence, with celebrated authors
so as to make a pedestal for himself and to compro-
mise them with the German public. In his book on the
French socialists he dares to call himself 'Proud-
hon's tutor;' he claims that he has revealed important
axioms of German science to him. . . . Beware there-
fore Of this parasite. Perhaps I shgll have more to
say to you later of this individual.

 

' 55Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Selected Cor-
respgndence(Moscow, 1953). PP. 32-33.

56.1. Hampden Jackson, Marx, Proudhon and EurOpean
Socialismflondon, 1957), p. 61. On the relationship be—
ween and Proudhon see: Pierre Haubtmann,

Marx et
Proudhon leurs ra orts ersonnels 18yg-18gflraris, I9h7);
Henri de Eutoc, IiEe Ifin-Marxian Social st New York, 19h8),
PP. 129-139; Haw g r or, rx und E 613 am Vorabend der
Revel tion, pp. 135-1111; George Woodcock, Pierre-Jose H
fifir first?“ York, 1956), pp. hit-M, 86-93. 155453. in
oodcock points out Marx's early admiration of

 

50
Proudhon in his reply refused Marx's invitation:

Let us by all means collaborate in trying to
discover the laws of society, the way in which these
laws work out, the best method to set about investi-
gating them; but, for God's sake, after we have de-
molished all the dogmatisms a priori, let us not of
all things attempt in our turn to instill another
kind of dogma into the peOple. Let us not fall into
the contradiction Of your compatriot Martin Luther,
who, after overthrowing Catholic theology, addressed
himself tO the task Of building up, with all the
apparatus of excommunication and anathemas, a Pro-
testant theology. For three whole centuries Germany
has been doing nothing but pull down the plaster-
work of Martin Luther. Let us not, by contriving
any more such restrictions, leave any more such
tasks for the human race. With all my heart I wel-
come your idea Of eXposing all opinions to the light.
Let us have decent and sincere polemics; let us give
the world an example of learned and farsighted tole-
rance. But simply because we are at the head of a
movement, do not let us ourselves become the leaders
of a new intolerance, let us not pose as the apostles
Of a new religion - even though this religion be the
religion of logic, the religion of reason itself.
Let us welcome, let us encourage all the protests;
let us condemn all exclusions, all mysticisms. But
never let us think Of any question as closed, and
even after we have exhausted our very last argument,
let us begin again, if necessary, with eloquence
and irony. On that condition I shall be delighted
to associate with you - but otherwise, no

Proudhon also defended Grfin: I sincerely regret
the little divisions which, it appears to me, exist
in German socialism.and of which your complaints

 

Proudhon and the basis for his later attack. A succinct
appraisal of Marx's position and opinion Of Proudhon is
available in a letter of January 2h, 1865, which Marx wrote
to J.B. Schweitzer. It is printed in Karl Marx and Fried-
rich Engels, Selected Correspondence, pp. 181-192. For
'Engel's Opinion.see his letter of September 18, 18h6, to
'Marx which is available in Der Briefwechsel zwischen Fried-
‘Eich Enggls und Karl Marx lthfbis 1883(Stuttgart, 1921),
9 pp. '3qe

S7Letter of May 17, l8h6, gprreSpondance de P.J.
Proudhon(Paris, 1875), II, pp. 198-199.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

51

against M. Grfin give me the proof. I much fear that
you have seenathis writer in a false light, and I
appeal, my dear Monsieur Marx, to your reconsideration.
G. finds himself in exile, without any money but with
a wife and two children and nothing to live on but
his pen. What is there for him to make his living
out of, if not by eXplOiting modern ideas? . . .

Ah, if we were all millionaires, things would be dif-
ferent; we should all be saints and angels. But one
must live, that is to say, buy bread and meat and
fuel, pay for one's lodging; and, good heavens, the
man who sells social ideas is not more unworthy than
the man who sells a sermon.5

Proudhon goes on to relate that he is going to
Ikn;Gan translate his forthcoming book into German, and
asks Marx if he will withdraw his judgement he made on
Gran. Marx struck back immediately lashing out at Proud-
hon in Mistre de la PhilOSOphie, which was a parody on
Proudhon's title.59 Grfin was attacked in Die deutsche

Ideologie, which was completed in the summer of l8h6,

 

but not published in its entirety until 1932.60 Marx

 

SBIbide, pp. 200-2010

5C)Ibid., p. 202, the bookz§yst3me des contradictions
economiques, ou philOSOphie de la misdre was published in
October, 18h6, and immediately translated into German by
Grfin. At a conference held in Brussels to commemorate the
one hundredth anniversary of Proudhon's death, Georges Gur-
vitch, the leading French Proudhonian scholar, presented
an important paper entitled, "Proudhon et Marx. His con-
clusions are that Marx's, The-Poverty of PhilOSOphy, was
directed more against Hegel than Proudhon, and that the
antipathy between Marx and Proudhon was the result of purely
personal feelings more than it was the result of ideas.
L'actualité de Proudhon: colloqge des 2h et 25 Novembre

(Brussels, 1967)}

60Marx-Engels, werke, III, pp. h73-520. The sections
Of"this work on FeuerbacH and Grfin.have been translated
«wiini the title The German Ideologx(19h7).

e...‘

'17!

.

 

 

 

52
nmde a direct attack upon Grdn's book Die soziale Bewegung
thrankreich und Behgmn(Darmstadt, 18MB) because it con-
imined ideas which Marx called "true socialism." On April 8,
18h7, an article by Marx "Erklfirung gegen Karl GrUn"appeared
in the Deutsche-Brfisseler-Zeitung in which Marx attempts

to demolish an article in Triersche Zeitung_which was
61

favorable toward Gran.

Engels led the attack against Grfin in Paris during
the latter half of 18h6. In a letter to Marx he relates
that ”the stupid workers here, I mean the German workers,
believe that pfiffl . . . . Grfin.has so confused those
fellows that the most senseless phrase sounds more sen-
sible to them than the simplest fact used as an economic
argument. °.° . I won't let go Of those fellows until I
have driven Gran fromfthe field and cleansed their clog-
ged-up skulls ; . ."62 Engels in his letter of October
23 to the CorreSpondence Committee in Brussels relates
that he was engaged in a running battle against the "Grfi-
nists," which was being fought out in the workshops for“
the workers but when it came to a vote the "Grfinists"

.

were voted down by a margin Of thirteen to two;63

61Ibid., IV, pp. 37-39. See also in the same volu-

:me pp. 222-257 for Marx's attack on Grfin's fiber Goethe von
inenschlichen Standpunkte(Darmstadt, l8h6). -

62Der Briefwechsel zwischen Friedrich Engels und
Karl Marx WERE, I, pp.j7-38.

63ibid., pp. ho-hs.

 

 

S31

Toward the end of the lBhO‘s Grfin's disillusion-
nwnt'with anarchist ideas can be seen in his election to
am Prussian Nationalversammlung_in 18h8. The remainder
mfhis life was spent in wandering, writing and teaching;
serving as a professor at the Handels-und Gewerbeschule in
Frankfurt.A/M during the years 1862-65. He passed away in
Vienna in 1887. Gan.had achieved his greatest fame and
had produced.his best writing by lBhS. During the last
forty years of his life little in the way of original
thought was accomplished.

Wilhelm Marr(1819-190u) was born in Hamburg in
1819, which he left for Switzerland in 18h3 where he became
the leader of the Ybung German Clubs, which were Opposed
to authoritarian communism.6u Because of his activities
he was banished from.the Canton of Zurich in late l8h3,
traveling to Lausanne where he founded the monthly
Blatter der Gegenwart far soziales Leben in December lShh.
Eight issues of it appeared between December lth and
July lBhS when Marr was banished from the Canton of Waadt.65
In this journal Marr called for the destruction of the
state, church and private prOperty relating that once this
had been accomplished "then will dawn a better

‘

6ltFranz Mehring, Geschichte der deutschen Sozial-
chmnokratie(Berlin-East, 1960}, I, p. 217.

65J. Langhard, Die anarchistische Bewegung in der
Smfirweiz, pp. 1-2. On his banishment see: Die geheim deutschen
lféxfiaindungen in der Schweiz seit 1833. Ein Beitrag zur Ge-
scfliichte des modernen Radikalismus und KommunismusTBasel,

lBIX-fla P0 990

 

 

 

 

51+
flnure."66 Marr's banishment crushed his paper and plans
and deprived him-of his organization which he had hoped
touse to "reconstruct the world anew" once the eXplosion
ofanarchyfihad swept over Europe.67 In 18u6 Marr pub-
IUehed an account of his activities in the Young German
(Hubs in Switzerland in Das Junge Deutschland in der

&flmeiz. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der geheim Verbin-

dungen unserer Tage(Leipzig, lBhé).68

He continued his attacks on the state and all
Ibrms of authority in Der Mensch und die Ehe vor dem
Richtstuhl der Sittlichkeit(Leipzig, 18u8) and in the
weekly Mephistopheles, which he published during the years
18h8-1852. In his final work on the subject of anarchism,
Anarchie oder Autorit£t(Hamburg, 1852),69 Marr discusses
the question, after what should civilization strive, anar-
chy or authority? He concludes that liberty is to be

found only in anarchy,70 saying "make no more laws or

A

66Die geheim deutscher Verbindung in der Schweiz
seit 183;. pp. $8.60.

67Rapportgénéral adresse au conseil dIEtat de
EEuchatel sur la propaganda secrete allemande-et sur les
clubs delaJeune-Allemagne en SuisséTNeuchatel, lBhS),

ya 27.

68Marr was selective in the documents he published.
On this point see: Armédee Hennequin, Le communisme et la
Jeune-Allemagne en Suisse(Paris, 1850).

69Republished in part in Beiblatt "Der freie Arbei-
‘texfl'(Berlin), VIII, No. 1(January 7, 19117} and'No. 2(Jan-
uary 1h, 1911).. a ‘

7OAnarchie oder Autoritat, p. 128.

A

 

 

 

 

5,

\

SS"

mmstitutions and free us from the long established ones."71
Ikaanswers his critics who have called his anarchy nothing
nwre than a utopia by calling for a complete breakdown of
Hm barriers caused by the laws and institutions of socie-
ty, creating no new ones in their place.72 He ends the
book with the ringing appellation, which would later be
uttered by August Reinsdorf in 1885 as he mounted the
scaffold to be beheaded for his plot against the German
Emperor, "long live anarchy."73

Marr Spent the remainder of his long life wander-
ing; writing books and articles about his travels through
Central America and the United States, dying in the United
States in 190h. He had early in life developed a hatred
of authoritarianism; he dedicated.himself to the victory
of anarChy, but as the years produced no anarchist swell
to drown authoritarianism, he eventually became disillusi-
oned, turning to wandering and journalism.

There are a number of other well known Germans
who in one way or another, early in their lives in the
lBhO's-IBSO'S, were imbued with anarchist ideas. One in
particular is Karl Schurz(1829-l906), who is well known
to Americans.7u Once in America though his anarchist

 

71Ibid., p. 129.

72Ib1do, pp. 129-1300

73Ib1d., p. 132.

 

71"Nettlau, Der Vorfrflhligg der Anarchie, pp. 166-
167. Schurz's activities in-the United States are discussed

 

.CAJ'

 

 

 

56

leanings quickly vanished.

Edgar Bauer(1820-1886), one of the famous(to
ihrx infamous) Bauer brothers, is another person held
nihigh esteem.by later German anarchists. Edgar Bau-
er's Gesetz und Recht7S appealed to them. The Berlin
edition of his Der Streit der Kritik mit Kirche un Staat
(18h3) was completely seized by Prussian officials and
was not available to the public until lth when an edition
of the work was brought out in Bern. Edgar Bauer was
eventually imprisoned in Magdeburg for his attack on the
state.76 Marx and Engels in their composite work 232
heilige Familie(18uS), of which the greater share was
written by Marx, attacked the Bauer brothers. Mehring
has referred to it as one of the foundation stones of
socialism. Under the name Martin von Geismar Bauer pub-

liShed a Bibliothek der Aufklfirung des 18. Jahrhunderts

q

in detail in A.F. Zucker, The Fort Ei hters Political Re-
fugees of the German Revolution of IBEElNew York, I§§U),
pp. 220-250.

75Reprinted in Beiblatt "Der freie Arbeiter"(Ber-
lin), VIII, No. 1(January 7, 1911). An overview ETLEdgar
Bauer's activities is to be found in Gustav-Mayer, "Die
Anffinge des politischen Radikalismus im vormfirzlichen
Preussen," Zeitschrift far Politik, VI(1913): 1-113. On
p. h? Mayer remarks that-at one—time Edgar Bauer was an
anarchist. His activities in the "Freien"(discussed in
Chapter II in relation to Stirner) are brought out. Mayer
[prints the official program of the "Freien" on pp. 111-113.

76On his trial see: Press rocess Edgar Bauers .
(Bern, 1814.5); and "Die Reise auf en‘tliche Kosten—f' Die
Epigonenueipzig),-V(18LL7), pp. 99112. - .

 

 

 

 

57
(Lfipzig, 18h6—h7), and.Die politische Literatur der
dmnschen im 18. Jahrhundert(Leipzig, l8u7) and a number
ofcmher collections of works dealing with the history of
rmmlutions. In 18h? he published a political review,

DflaParteien(Hamburg), which was of a definite anti-autho-

 

ritarian character.

Arnold Ruge(1802-1880) is another who for a short
pwriod in the late 18h0's stood on ground that has since
bemiclaimed by the anarchists. Ruge associated with

BaMMdn, Hess, Gran, Proudhon, and Marx during his so-

journ in Paris. Politically he favored federalism. Never-

theless he sought an ultimate system which would be as
liberal as possible. He describes this system in a book
entitled Die Grfindung_der Demokratie in Deutschland oder
der Volksstaat und der sozialdemokratische Freistaat(Leip-
zig, 18h9). The sozialdemokratische Freistaat is Ruge's
theoretical utOpia. To Ruge's way of thinking ". . .
theoretical anarchic and theoretical liberty are the same.
From theoretical liberty practical liberty will be born.
Practical liberty is the dissolution of the lord or master,
the elimination of all extraneous administration through
self-regulation,tfie true Sense of anarchic." How was
Ruge’s Freistaat to be governed? "No overseer will be
pezwnitted to become a ruler, the authority will reside
in the community or corporate body and with the majority.
Elie inajority cannot make any decisions which will in-

fringe upon the rights of the minority. The use of this

58

mmhority must therefore be alternated constantly among
mm people who make up the community or corporate body.
Hm self-rule by the community of people corresponds to
imat in private life would constitute individual liberty
mwlhonor. Self-rule by the people is the abolition of
mfl.government, a regulation by the peOple, which in fact
is systematic anarchy, because there are no rulers only
overseers . . . the free community or association and
the working together among themselves of the appointed
men, who are in all ways equal partners. . ."77

Karl Vogt(1817-189S), another friend of Bakunin
78

and Proudhon, is revered by later German anarchists.

In an article ”Untersuchungen fiber Tierstaaten" Vogt
writes concerning anarchism "come then you sweet world
freeing anarchie, depress the soul of the ruler, only

the ruling clique will draw a breath to attempt to pre-
serve this present condition of dullness, come and free
us from the evil that one calls the state1"79 Vogt, like
many of the other German thinkers of the l8h0's, whose

thought bordered on anarchism, came into violent conflict

 

77Quoted by Nettlau in Der Vorfthlingder Anar-
chie, p. 16h. -

78"Eine Rede Karl Vogts aus dem Jahre 18h8," was
:reprinted in Beiblatt "Der freie Arbeiter"(Berlin),-VIII,
No. 11(March 18, 1911). -

79Deutsche Monatsschrift(Stuttgart, 1850), 129-

 

131.

S9

wfib.Marx and Engels.80

It can be said with certainty that Proudhon in-
fluenced many of the German exiles living in Paris. The
hfiluence he had in Germany proper is another question.
Ikahad a following in Germany in the 18h0's-1850's, but
it was probably not a large one. Those who translated
1H3 writings into German did so to disseminate his
nmssage. The profit motive was not a factor involved.

A cursory glance at the places of publication reveals
that publication activities were not confined to a
single publisher or a single area of Germany. Proudhon
exerted great influence over Hess and Gan, as noted
previously, but apparently this did not 8arry over into
Germany. It appears that the magnetism of Proudhon's
personality was an important factor in gathering his
group of followers in Paris.

The influence Proudhon's writing exerted in Ger-
many is difficult to judge. Proudhon's formal intro-
duction into Germany probably came by way of two short
lived radical publications which were semi-anarchist in
nature. The Allgemeine Literaturzeitung, edited by the
Bauer brothers, appeared in Charlottenburg, a suburb of
jBerlin, between December, 18h3-October, 18hh. In all

twelve issues were published. Edgar Bauer introduced

 

80For Vogt's side of the argument see: Karl Vo t,
Rein Prozess gegen die All emeine Zeitung(Geneva, 1895;
flcfgléolgiarx‘s rejoindér see: arl Marx, Herr VogfiLondon,

 

60

Proudhon to Germany with an article entitled "Proudhon."81

The other radical journal, edited by Adolf Riesz, was the
Norddeutsche Blfitter far Kritik,_Literatur und Unterhal-
3335(Berlin, July, lth-May, 1885). In all eleven numbers
appeared. In this journal an article by H.L. KBppen,
"P.J. Proudhon der radikale sozialist," attempted to
spread Proudhon's influence into Germany.82 Friedrich
Mann in 1850 in-the city of Wiesbaden also wrote in

favor of Proudhon.83 No doubt more such Opinion could

be found, but it would require a close scrutiny of the
local press of the period. Tracing out Proudhon's in-
fluence in Germany is beyond the scope of this study.

The writings of Proudhon which were translated
into German appear, at least on the surface, to have had
little effect as far as the develOpment of an anarchist
movement is concerned. F. Meyer translated Was ist das
Eigenthum2(Bern, l8hh). Grfin, as noted above, translated
Philosophie der Staatsoekondmie oder Nothwendigkeit des
Elends(Darmstadt, 18h7). Another translation of the same
work by H. Jordan carried the title Die WiderSprfiche der
Nationaloekonomie oder Philosophie der NothKLeipzig, 18u7).

Gran also translated "Die franzBsische Februarrevolution,"

‘ u. . -

81Number 5(April, 18hh), 37~52.

82Number u(October, lth), lh-éh; Number 5
(November, 18uh), 1-2h.

83Nettlau, Der Vorfrdhling der Anarchie, p. 16M.

 

61
which appeared in Heft I of Die Revolution im.Jahre 18h8.
In zwanglosen Heften(Trier, 18h8).

An eight page pamphlet of Proudhon's P.J. Proudhon,
Manifest. Einleitunggzu der von Proudhon redigierten Zeit-
schrift "Le Peuple" appeared in Leipzig in 18h8. The
following year DasARecht auf Arbeit, das Eigenthum um und
die Lasung der sozialen Frags was published in Leipzig.

In.the same year Theodor Opitz's translation Theoretischer

 

und praktischer Beweis des Socialismus oder Revolution
durch den Kredit appeared in Leipzig, and Ludwig Bamber-
ger's translation Die Volksbank in Frankfurt A/M. Arnold
Ruge's translations Bekenntnisse eines Revolutionars and
Revolutionfire Ideen were published in Leipzig in 1850.
Die sociale Revolution durch den Staatsstreich am 2. De-
cember erwiesen appeared in Bremen in 1852, followed by

Ludwig Pfau's two volume translation Die Gerechtigkeit in

 

der Revolution and in der Kirche(Hamburg, 1858). Additional
translations were made by Dr. Arthur MHlenberger at a later
time as will be brought out in Chapter III.

The flow of ideas was not a one way street. It
has already been pointed out that there was an active
battle going on in Paris between Gran and Engels for the
minds of the German emigres living there. To what extent
these ideas influenced the native Parisians and emigres
from other countries is difficult to ascertain with any
certitude. Nettlau relates that in Paris starting in the
late fall of 18h5 and continuing into 18h6 a neWSpaper,

 

62

Blfitter der Zukunft, was published which contained un-
signed articles which proclaimed anarchist ideas,
eSpecially the article "Deutschlands Menschentum," which
related that ". . . in Germany there is being set in
motion the movement of 'a real and genuine anarchic,
that is to say, the downfall of the government, Ger-
many desires to be ruled by all, not by a single ruler'
hense no doctrine will prevail any longer. It will A
plead for completely free communism."88 The term commu-
nism, of course, does not refer to the Marxian variety
with which the word is usually associated. Nettlau points
out that many of the unsigned articles in this new3paper
bear the mark of the writing style and influence of Hess
and GrUn.85 The extent of anarchist ideas in Germany in
the 1880's, Proudhonian or otherwise, is difficult to
assess with any degree of accuracy.

Strict press regulations made it difficult to dis-
seminate anarchist ideas in periodicals or neWSpapers.

The first German anarchist periodical was the Berliner

 

Monatsschrift(Nhnnheim, lth); edited by L. Bfihl. Only
one 322 page volume of this journal appeared. It was to
have appeared in Berlin in August, 18h3, but the consor
would not allow most of the articles, which were to be

included, to be passed. In the form in which they later

 

alts. 58st.
85Der Vorfrfihling der Anarchie, p. 162.

Q

63
appeared in Mannheim in l8hh they were not subject to the
censor because the size of the one volume edition of the
journal put it in a book class.

The threat of anarchism in Germany in the 18h0's
must have existed at least in the minds of some people.
Twelve numbers of a journal appeared during l8h8-h9 EEEEE
wieder'Wurst: Organ gegen anarchistische Bestrebungen.

A book by G.A. Fricke WOher kommt das anarchistische Trei—

 

ben und wie ist ihm.ab2uhilfen(Leipzig, l8h8) sought the

 

remedy against anarchism. P.H. Noyes also points out that
the Frankfurt Assembly wrestled with the idea of a threat
of incipient anarchism.86 At least some people in Germany
in the 18h0's were worried about anarchism. How many it
is difficult to determine.

A considerable portion of the voluminous writings
of Marx and Engels is concerned with refuting thinkers
whose thought was either anarchist or semi-anarchist in
nature. The high point of this open warfare with the
anarchists was reached in their battle with Bakunin which
resulted in the break-up of the lat International. The
differences of Opinion which Marx and Engels had with the.
anarchists and semi-anarchists have already been referred

to above and need not be repeated.here. Their quarrel

vdth Max Stirner will be dealt with in the next chapter.

 

86Organization and Revolution: WorkingyClass
Associations in the German Revolutions of 1848918h9
TPrinceton,—I966).

 

 

6h

A number of writers have argued that the writings
of Marx, outspoken enemy of anarchism, contain in them-
selves the seeds of anarchism. They base their claim
on the ultimate goal of Marxism; the withering away of
the state, followed by the advent of the classless so-
ciety.87 The value of a detailed analysis of this topic
is doubtful, because Marx, himself would be shaken to
hear his thought described as anarchism. Perhaps there
is not much difference between the ultimate goal of
anarchism and that of Marxism, even though the routes
to this end differ. Perhaps the ultimate goal of anar-
chism was appealing to Marx. It has often times been
asserted that many of Marx's violent diSputes came about
as a result of an opponent arriving at an idea before

Marx himself. If this be the case, and if the grapes

 

87On the relationship of Marxism to anarchism see:
Solomon F. Bloom, ”The 'Withering Away' of the State,"
Journal of the Histggy of Ideas, VII(19h6), 113-121; Max
Adler, Die Staatsauffassung des Marxismus: Ein BeitrAge
zur Unterscheidung von soziologischer und_jurf§tisdher
Pbthode(Darmstadt, 196h), reprint of 1922 edition pp. 217-
281; Luigi Fabbri, "Die historischen und sachlichen Zu-
sammenhfinge zwischen Marxismus und Anarchismus," Archiv
ffir Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik, XXVI(THEingen,
1908), 5594605; Hans Kelsen:;“Sozialismus und Staat,
Agchiv far den Geschichte des Sozialismus, IX(1920),-19-
57; B. de Ligt, Anarchismus und RevOlbtion(Berlin, 1922),
pp. 16-19; Karl Marx, Critiqge of the Getha Program(New
YOrk, 1938), pp. 12-13. See also in IbidT, appendix I,
pp. 27-3h which contains a letter of March 18-28, 1875,
from Engels to August Bebel, and pp. 3b-35 for Marx's letter
of May 5, 1875, to Wilhelm Bracke. Appendix II, pp. h7-65,
contains Lenin's remarks on the Gotha Program. Appendix III,
pp. 67-88, contains selections from Lenin's The State und
prolution; Georg Stiekloff, Marx und die AnardHisten(Dres-
den, 1913), pp. 66-69; Jean Maitron, Histoire du mouvement
gparchiste en France(1880-l9lh) (Paris, 1955), pp. h9h-51h.

 

 

 

65’

of anarchism were sour, as Marx has pointed out, then
logically the ultimate goal of his system, even though
it may resemble anarchism, could not bear such an ig-
nominous nomenclature. This is all very hypothetical
and I would be the last to attach the term anarchism to
Iarx's thought, but perhaps Marx "doth protest too
loudly." It should be kept in mind though that Marx
considered himself to be in a life and death struggle for
the minds of men and any and all opposition, regardless
of its potential threat, had to be not only discredited,
but demolished entirely. It should also be pointed out
that in the latter half of the nineteenth-century, When
the term anarchism was still a muddle of confusion in
the minds of most men(it still is today), that Marx was
Often times referred to as an anarchist. Michael Schaact
in Anarchy and Anarchists(Chicago, 1889) in writing about
the Haymarket affair attributes the develOpment of "Pro-
paganda by the Deed” anarchism to Marx. Such was the con-
fusion which prevailed.

Marx's deep contempt for anarchism is revealed
in a letter Of November 5, 1880, written to F.A. Sorge in
imich he refers to them as 'declasses" and "dupedtiorkers."88
In a letter of April 18, 1883, to P. von Patten, Engels
elaborates the difference between the Marxist doctrine of

the withering away of the state and the anarchist doctrine

 

88Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Selected Cor-
:gspondence, p. h03.

 

 

66
of the abolition of the state:

Marx and I, ever since 18h5, have held the view
that one of the final results of the future proletarian
revolution will be the gradual dissolution and ultimate
disappearance of that political organization called the
state; an organization the main object of which has
ever been to secure, by armed force, the economical
subjection of the working majority to the wealthy min-
ority. With the disappearance of a wealthy minority
the necessity for an armed repressive State-force dis-
appears also. At the same time we have always held,
that in order to arrive at this and the other, far more
important ends of the social revolution of the future,
the proletarian class will first have to possess it-
self Of the organized political force of the State and
with this aid stamp out the resistance of the Capital-
ist class and re-organize society. This is stated at
ready in the Communist Manifesto of l8h7, end of Chap-
ter II.

The Anarchists reverse the matter. They say,
that the Proletarian revolution has to begin by
abolishing the political organization of the State.
But after the victory of the Proletariat, the only or-
ganization the victorious working class finds ready-
made for use is that of the State. It may require
adaptation to the new functions. But to destroy that
at such a moment, would be to destroy the only organ-
ism by means of which the victorious working class can
exert its newly conquered power, keep down its capi-
talist enemies and carry out that economic revolution
of society without which the whole victory must end
in a defeat and in a massacre of tgg working class
like that after the Paris Commune.

 

891bid., pp. h36ff. The recent student revolts
in Germany have once again raised the question of the anar-
chism to be found in Marx's writings. Bernd Rabehl, a
member of the executive committee Of the Sozialistischer
Deutscher Studentenbund, concludes that the relation 6?—
Marx to anarchism’is abvious. Der Spiegel, XXII, No. 18
(April 29, 1968), 86. Rabehl concludes that "The scien-
tific and anarchistic components of Marxism are once again
completely cognizant for the first time since Lenin's
The State and Revolution of 1917." To Rabehl this is
being done by the S.D.§T' Anotheriattempt to explain the
anarchism in Marxism is: Richard Adamiak, "The 'Witherinq
Away' of the state: A Reconsideration," The Journal of PO-
litics(February, 1970), 3-18. Unfortunately, Adamiak does
not carry his analysis through to the economic aspects of
Marxian thought.

 

 

 

 

 

6?
During the decade of the 1960's scholars of

Marxism have set out, with varrying degrees of success,
to demolish, or explain the idea that Marxism contains
within it the seeds of anarchism. Adam B. Ulam contends
that "Marxism has something that is missing in anarchism.
Anarchist feeling is too formless, too much divorced from
the dynamic of economic development, to create objective
conditions and organizations capable of absorbing the
economic facts of life. The anti-authority premises of
anarchism hardly allow it to form an efficient political
90

movement to compete for power." This statement, even
though it may be true, is nothing more than Ulam's own
personal preference. It could be that Ulam's references
to "economic development” and "political movement" reveal
a less than complete understanding of anarchism.

- Another author, whose success in dealing with

the subject of anarchism in Marxism is not much more con-
vincing than Ulam, is Shlomo Avineri, who believes that
"For the anarchist the abolition of the state is a poli-

tical act, decreed by law and carried out by force. For

Marx Aufhebupg of the state is the ultimate outcome of a

 

lengthy process of economic and social transformation,

introduced and sustained by political power."91 The first

A

90The Unfinished Revolution(New York, 1960), p. 130.

91The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx
(Cambridge, 1968), pp.—208-209. See also: pp.2381239:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

68

part of this statement, regarding the anarchists, does
rmt make sense. It is nonsence, pure and simple, to
portray anarchists as decreeing the abolition of the
state "by law." Anarchists do not write laws, they seek
to get rid of them.

The best explanation of the anarchism found in
Phrxism is by Robert C. Tucker. According to Tucker
"Marx's normative position with regard to the state was
anarchism, which may be defined as the view that state
power, being evil in essence, cannot possibly be legiti-
mized."92 Tucker points out that this would seem to be
contradictory to Marx's attitude toward the proletarian
dictatorship, but it is not because Marx ". . . did not
hold the proletarian political order to be a good or a
just one . . . he considered it at best a necessary evil
on the road to man's entry into a higher form of society
which would be . . . stateless."93

Marx's anarchism, relates Tucker, was grounded
in the belief that the existence of the state is incom-
patible with the realization of freedom. But a "problem
emerges with the recognition that classical Marxism is
committed to an anarchist position in its political
philosophy. For if we consider anarchism.mot as an ab-

stract political philosophy but as a revolutionary movement

 

85 92The Marxian Revolutionary Idea(New York, 1969),
p10 0

93Ibid., p. 86.

69

associated with a political philosophy, then we are con—
fronted with the fact that Marxism was deeply at odds
with it."9u‘

The rivalry between Marxism and anarchism was, as
Tucker quite correctly points out, grounded in serious
theoretical as well as personal differences between their
leaders. It is in the area of clarifying the theoretical
differences that Tucker makes a great contribution.
". . . classical Marxism, while embracing anarchism as a
political philosophy, disagreed with anarchism as a
socialist ideology."95 He goes on to demonstrate that
the "two doctrines were at Odds over the issue of whether
a state was needed for the purpose of abolishing the state.
. . . But a deeper theoretical cleavage underlay this sig-
nificant strategic difference. Anarchism did more than
to declare the state . . . to be evil; it also singled
out the state as the principal evil in society, the de-
cisive cause and eXpression of human unfreedom. . . .
classical Marxism rejected this view. It saw man's un-
freedom.in the state as something secondary to, and de-
rivative from, his unfreedom in the polity of production.
The decisive cause and principal form.of human bondage,
and thus the supreme evil in history, was not subjection

to the state, but the imprisonment of man within the

 

9L“Ib1d., pa 87.
95Ibid., p. 88.

7O

division of labor in production. The supreme end . . .
was the 'economic emancipation of labor' . . . . The
emancipation of man from the state would follow as a matter
of course."96

Tucker concludes that "The special anarchism of
Marx and Engels must thus be seen as an anarchism directed
primarily against authoritarianism in the society of pro-
duction and only secondarily against authoritarianism as
exemplified in the state. The tyranny from which it aimed
to deliver man chiefly was that which he endured as a sub-
ject of the sovereign state of capital - the 'deSpotism
of capital.”97 'This explanation by Tucker adds an en-

tirely new dimension to the anarchism found in Marxism

by moving into the economic realm.
CONCLUSION

Even though the anarchist beginning in Germany
in the l8h0's was not followed up by an anarchist move-
ment, it is safe to say that it left a lasting influence
on the develOpment of Western philosophical thought.
During the decade of the 18h0's Karl Marx was finding him-
self. He Opposed or humilated everyone with whom he did
not agree. A large portion of Marx's writing of this

period was concerned with replies to books or articles

961bid., pp. 88-89.
97Ibid., p. 90.

71
written by anarchists or semi-anarchists. Many of his
attacks, as already noted, were on fellow Germans who
were of anarchist leanings. If nothing else they forced
Marx to sharpen his thinking and perhaps jell his thought
process at a time when he did not want to. The influence
of the individuals discussed in this chapter, and Stirner
discussed in the next chapter, on the develonment of Marx
is probably the most important contribution of these
thinkers. It is difficult to Speculate how Marx might
have develOped had there been no Gran, Heinzen, Stirner
or Proudhon to attack.

It would be more conjecture to discuss if and
how the thinkers discussed in this chapter contributed to
the 18h8-h9 revolution in Germany. This conjecture would
be difficult to substantiate with facts. The 18h8-h9 re-
volutions held a Special place in the hearts of later
German anarchists, as did the Paris Commune. Anniversaries
of these events were duly celebrated each year. Anarchist
newSpapers often devoted the entire front page to stories
concerning 18h8-h9.

Anarchism had a certain attraction for the German
radicals of the 18h0's, however, though being in agreement
with the philosophical ideals of anarchism, they saw the
impracticality and improbability of success of such a
system. The problem of the liberty of the individual in
Germany was undoubtedly one which many of them considered

in be beyond solution. This point was brought home to

 

 

 

 

72
'mem in the failure of the l8h8-h9 revolutions. Finding
their homeland to be inhOSpitable many of them Spent the
greater Share of their adult lives in foreign countries;
in many cases dying abroad.

In general it must be concluded then that even
though a number of theorists, whose thought bordered on
anarchism, eXpounded their ideas in Germany in the l8h0's
and early 1850's, they left little lasting impression.
Anarchism, which held an attraction to the German radical
thinkers in the 18h0's, never took hold of the soul of the
peOple. The number Of peOple who professed anarchism in

Germany at that time is all but impossible to determine,

but it was not large.

MMHERII

MAX STIRNER(1806-l856)

HIS LIFE
Max Stirner, nom de plume for JOhann Caspar
Schmidt, came into this world at six o'clock on the
morning of October 25, 1806. He was born in a house
at number 31, Maximiliansstrasse(Marketplatz) which was

the principal street Of the city of Bayreuth.1 He was

 

1John Henry Mackay, Max Stirner! sein Leben und
sein'We§k(Leipzig, 1898), pp. 3h-35. There are many
accounts of Stirner's life, but the all rely heavily on
Mackay's work. Mackay on pp. V-X, ~23 describes the ten
years of research which went into the book. On Mackay's
nwthod of research see also: "Max Stirner, sein Leben und
sein Herk. von John Henry Mackay. Die Geschichte meiner
Arbeit(l888-l897),” WOchenblatt der Frankfurter Zeitung,
NO. 10(March 5, 1898), l52-15h. He interviewed a number
of peOple who had known Stirner. Mackay was instrumental
in leading a drive to collect funds to place a marker on
Stirner's grave in Berlin in the Sophienkirchhof and a
bronze plaque on the house in Berlin in which Stirner died
at 19 Phillipstrasse. In 1906 Mackay led another drive
to raise funds to place a memorial plaque on the house in
Bayreuth in which Stirner was born. A OOpy of the mimeo-
graphed Berichtflber>die Anbringpng einer Gedenktafel an
dem GeburtShaus.Max Stirners in Bayreuth, which Mackay
sent to George Schumm.is preservedrin the Labadie Collection
of the University Of Michigan Library at Ann Arbor along
with some of Mackay's correSpondence relative to the pro-
ject. The Bericht contains a complete list of the names,
addresses, and amounts given by all who contributed as well
as many other details about the cost and installation of
the plaque.

Mackay's book received mixed reviews. A favorable
review is Rudolf Steiner, "Max Stirner," Das Magazin fflr

73

 

‘

7h
less than half a year old when his father, a maker of wind
instruments, died of tuberculosis on April 19, 1807, at
the age of thirty-seven. His mother, two years later,
married Heinrich Ballerstedt, a fifty-seven year old
pharmacist from.Helmstedt, and they all moved to Kulm on
the Vistula. Johann returned to his native town of Bay-
reuth in 1818 for his education, living with his godfather
and uncle Johann Caspar Martin Sticht after whom he was

named. He remained there for the next eight years,

 

Literatur(Berlin und Weimar), No. 26, 67(July 2, 1898)“

- . Two unfavorable reviews are: M. Kronenberg, Der
Philosoph des Anarchismus," Die Nation. WOchenschrift ffir
Politik, Volkswirtschaft und Literatur(Berlin,816(1898--
1889)91H8-51' and—Karl Jael, "Stirner," Neue deutsche Rund-
schau(Berlin , IX(1898),-995-1015; Otto Stoessl, "Die Le-
BensEeschreibung des 'Einzigen,'" Die Gegenwart, No. 26
(1899), h06-h09 is a mixed review. Another favorable re-
view is Bernhard Zack, "Max Stirner. Sein Leben und sein
Werk," Literarische Beilage des Sozialist(Berlin), IV
(April 9, 1898). Jbelis main criticiSmS of the book are:
It is padded with blank pages and title pages, which it
is; Mackay included too much material in the "Life and
Times” style of Lytton Strachey regarding the milieu in
which-Stirner lived. J8el believed this was not germane
to the subject. He also criticizes Mackay for not being
diSpassionate enough with his subject. Mackay in the for-
ward to his book related that he was writing from the
position of one who was enamored with the subject. Mac-
kay's biography of Stirner can best be described as a
labor of love. He researched every possible avenue to un-
cover any facts about Stirner. He included everything he
found about him.bringing out both his good and bad points.
Several reviewers criticized his biography of Stirner for
being too sketchy; this is due to the lack of information
he could discover about certain periods of Stirner's life.
Stirner was like an iceberg, most of him lay beneath the
surface. When he died he left few foottracks in the sand
Of time for the researcher to follow. Mackay Spent ten
years tracking down every iota of information he could on
Stirner. He is to be commended for his determination and
effort. Had he not undertaken his study of Stirner when
he did much more information on the elusive character of
Stirner would have been lost forever.

 

 

 

 

 

,.,<

75'
completing his studies in the gymnasium where he dis-
tinguished himself by always placing in the upper per-
centile of his class.2

In 1826 he left Bayreuth to study at the Uni-
versity of Berlin where he remained for the next two
years, In Berlin he met a fellow student, Ludwig Feuer-
bach, who was destined to be one of his future rivals.
At the University of Berlin Stirner studied logic under
Heinrich Hitter, geography under Carl Bitter, "Pindar
und Metrik" under Backh, and the philOSOphy of religion
under Hegel. _

Leaving Berlin on September 1, 1828, he went to
Erlangen where he matriculated in the university on Oc-
tober 20th, but only enrolled in two courses; one given
by the theologian Georg Benedict Wiener on the Book of
Corinthians, the other in logic and metaphysics by
Christian Kopp, the philosopher. Stirner then "drOpped
out" of school for three and a half years wandering
around Germany. During this period Stirner at one time
matriculated at the University of K8nigsberg but did not
attend a single lecture because he was called to Kulm to
care for his mother who had lapsed into insanity.

In October of 1832 Stirner returned to Berlin to
complete his studies. On June 2, 183b, he asked permission

to appear before the Royal Examination Commission for the

——_

2Mackay, Max Stirner, pp. 3h-39.

 

76
examination prg facultate docendi in the five areas in
much he had prepared himself: Ancient Languages, German
umguage, History, Philosophy, and Religion. The examiners
Ibund that he had two deficiencies. He was lacking in a
precise knowledge of the Bible, and did not possess the
basic qualities of logic necessary in history, philosophy
and philology. Because of this he was granted only a
mimited facultas docendi which qualified him to teach in
the PruSsian gymnasia. It should be brought out, in all
fairness to Stirner, that his examinations were delayed
by the visit of his insane mother to Berlin. Whether or
not this visit had an effect on the outcome of his exami-
nations is doubtful because a person of the type of un-
orthodox character which Stirner exemplifies in his writings,
would probably be found lacking in exactly the qualities
whidh the examination board found him deficient.

During 183h-35 Stirner served as an unpaid train-
ing teadher in the Berlin KBnigliche Realschule. Follow-
ing this internship he tried unsuccessfully until 1837 to
obtain a salaried teaching position from the Prussian
government. Lack of employment did not stop him from
marrying his land lady's daughter Agnes Clara Kunigunde
Burtz on December 12, 1837; a marriage which ended the
following year When his twenty-two year old wife died in
childbirth on August 29th along with the child.

Once again it was Stirner's lot to be called upon

to take care of his insane mother, a task which occupied

¥_L _

 

 

 

77

his time until 1839, when he found a teaching position
in Berlin at Madame Gropius' school for girls. He re-
mained there performing his duties satisfactorily until
18hh.3

During the five year period he taught at Madame
GrOpius' school Stirner frequented Hippel's Weinstube at
9h Friedrichstrasse where the Young Hegelians gathered to
refute the teachings of their master. They referred to
themselves as "Die Freien" - the Free Ones. The leaders
of ”Die FreienIi were the brothers Bauer, Bruno and Edgar.
Marx, Engels and the poets Herwegh and Hoffmann von Fallers-
leben were occasional visitors. Ludwig Feuerbach, Wilhelm
Jordan, C.F. K8ppenn, Dr. Arthur Muller, Moses Hess, Lud-
wig Buhl, Adolf Rutenberg, Eduard Meyen, and Julius Fau-
cher also frequented Hippel's. Arnold Huge, self-appointed
high priest of the Left Hegelians, carried on nightly
debates which were often very bitter.” A sketch by En-

S

gels of one of these nightly diSputations has survived.

0n the sidelines of the debate sits a lonely figure,

 

31bid., pp. u5-62.

hOn ”Die Freien" see: Ibid., pp. 67-93; and Gustav
Mayer, "Die AHange des_politiscfien Radikalismus im vor-
marzlichen Preussen," Zeitschrift fflr Politik, VI(1913),
#5-72. "On pp. lll-llBfiis a copy of.the program of "Egg
reien. -.

‘SEngels liked to illustrate his letters. See:
Zwischen 18 und 25 Jugend Briefe von Friedrich Engels
in whichimany of his sketches are reproduced.

 

 

78
high-browed, bespectacled, smoking a cigarette, this is
Stirner. Woodcock, on the basis of this sketch, con-
cludes that Stirner played the role of the silent, de-
tached listener in "Die Freien," on good terms with all
and a friend of none.6 It is doubtful if WOOdcock's
conclusion would hold true. Engels at the same time also
commemorated Stirner in poetry, writing:
Look at Stirner, look at him, the peaceful

enemy of all constraint.

For the moment, he is still drinking beer, soon

he will be drinking blood as though it were water.

When others cry savagely 'down with the kings'

Stirner immediately supplements 'down with the laws also.‘

Stirner full of dignity proclaims;

you bend your will power and you dare to call yourselves free.

You become accustomed to slavery
Down with dogmatism, down with law.7

At Hippel's'Weinstube Stirner met his second wife,
Marie Dfihnhardt; a pretty, brilliant, emancipated free
Spirit, whom he married in 18h3. The wedding ceremony,
if you want to call it one, took place October 21 in
Stirner's apartment. The pastor, a Reverend Marot,
arrived to find the bridegroom and the witnesses, Bruno
Bauer and Ludwig Bfihl, in their shirtsleeves, playing
cards. The bride arrived late, dressed in her everyday
street clothes. A Bible was not available so the neighbor-
hood had to be scoured to locate one. Since no one had

remembered to buy wedding rings, the ceremony was completed

 

6Woodcock, Anarchismus, pp. 97-98.

7Quoted in Henri Arvon, Aux sources de l'existen-
tialisme. Max Stirner(Paris, l95h), p. In.

 

79
with the c0pper rings from Bruno Bauer's purse. Stirner
continued to teach at Madame Gropius' until October 18,
l8hh, although he could have quit after his marriage be-
cause his wife, when she arrived in Berlin from Gadebusch,
was an heiress of some 20-30,000 thalers. Marie was a
petite, graceful blonde with heavy hair which surrounded
her head in ringlets according to the fashion of the
time. She was a striking beauty and became a favorite
at meetings of "Die Freien." She smoked cigars and some-
times donned male attire in order to accompany her husband
and his friends on their nightly excursions.

It is not known if Stirner was forced to leave
his position at Madame Gropius' school or if he left
voluntarily, thinking that his forthcoming book, 233
Einzige und sein Eigenthum(18hh), would win him literary
fame and fortune. His book won for him abuse from his
contemporaries whom he had attacked but very little for—
tune. In l8h5 Stirner went into the dairy business,
using the remainder of his wife's inheritance as capital.
This enterprise failed quickly because of a lack of
business experience. Stirner had seen to it that he had
a large supply of milk coming in from the dairy farmers,
but he had failed to solicit a list of customers to buy
it. Stirner's milk business was a never-ending source of
amusement among his circle of friends, but it embittered

‘Marie against him for squandering her inheritance.

o

 

80

In 18h? his wife, in disgust and anger, left him
and went to London. When Mackay attempted to interview
her in 1897 She replied tartly that she was not willing
to revive her past but added that her husband had been
too much of an egoist to keep friends and that he was
"very sly." Marx, in a letter of July 13, 1852, related
to Engels that "Madame Schmidt-Stirner" had left for
Australia in search of gold.8 In Australia she married a
laborer and took in washing to earn a living. Eventually
she went back to London where she used the name May Smith

and became a devout Roman Catholic refusing to discuss

 

8Briefwechsel zwischen Friedrich Engels und Karl
Marx. I(Stfittgart, 1921fj'p.’326; II p.4126. Marx followed
Stirner's life and that of his wife quite closely. He liked
to poke fun at Stirner's wife referring to her as Stirner's
"Gelfiflufinns" This was a pun directed at Stirner's dedication
of his book-which read "to my sweetheart Marie Dfihnhardt."
This dedication would tend to indicate that Stirner had be-
gun writing his book before his marriage.

Marx was not only interested in Stirner but also in
Stirner's wife's activities after she left him. It is pos-
sible that Marx knew her from his days in Berlin when he
frequented the meetings of "Die Freien." Did Marx and Stir-
ner ever meet? Franz Mehring In Karl Marx, p. 19, relates
that there is no evidence of such a meeting. Henri Arvon,
following Mackay's lead in Aux sources de 1'existentialisme
Max Stirner, p. 13, says probably not because Arvon relates
that Marx left Berlin in April, l8hl, and that Stirner pro-
bably did not become associated with "Die Freien” until the
end of that year. However, in a letter of November 19,
l8hh, to Marx, Engels writes as though Marx and Stirner may
have met. Zwischen 18 und 25. p. 237. At least Stirner's
(schmidt) name was known to Marx. »

Marx may have met Marie Dfihnhardt though because she
was associated with "Die Freien."~ If they did meet, and
what their relationship was I dolnot know but it does seem
that Marx had an inordinate interest in her activities. It
should.be noted that Mackay thinks that Marie probably came
-to Berlin in 18h3, but he is not certain of this. Her un-
:savory reputation could be one reason why Marx was interested
'in her activities. She was very attractive and Marx was hu-
xnan before he became a Soviet God.

 

‘0-

 

81
her earlier life, even with Mackay.

Deserted by his wife, Stirner gradually sank into
poverty and obscurity, living in a series of poor lodgings,
earning some kind of miserable living, often in debt.
During the years 18h5-18h7 Stirner had worked on a series
of translations of J.B. Say and Adam Smith which proved
to be an arduous but unremunerative endeavor. He spent
much of his time evading his numerous creditors but was
twice imprisoned for debt, from March 5 to 26, 1853, and
January 1, to February h, 18Sh, and often went hungry.
Stirner could bear hunger for he was a man of moderation
in his eating and drinking habits and had always lived
frugally. In 1852 he published his Geschichte der Reaction
in Berlin. It was not greatly successful and earned him
little money. It was too pedestrian in style to arouse
much interest.

The end came for Stirner on June 25, 1856, at the
age of forty-nine years, eight months, dying from the
bite of a "poisonous fly.” A number of his former friends
hearing of his impoverished condition collected enough
money to purchase a second class grave for their former
friend. It cost one thaler and ten greats, equivalent to
one American dollar at the time. Among those present at
his burial were Bruno Bauer and Ludwig Bfihl, who had been

iflne witnesses at his marriage to Marie Ddhnhardt.

 

82
EARLY‘WRITINGS
Many people are not aware that Stirner wrote a
large number of articles before he wrote Der Einzige und

sein Eigenthum. They view Stirner's book as a bolt out

 

of the blue. Nothing could be further from the truth.9

It is possible, by reading through these early articles,
to trace the development of Stirner's thought to the

point where it is expressed in Der Einzige und sein Eigen-
thum.1O It is not possible in this study to include a
detailed examination of everything Stirner wrote prior to
the appearance of his book.11 In his early writings Stir-
ner examined Hegelian principles and rejected them. His

ideas on religion, education, and the political and social

 

9Only Mackay and Arvon treat Stirner's early
writings in any detail. Atindranath Bose, A Histogy of
Anarchism(Calcutta, 1967) says that Stirner's book "Burst
like a bombshell,” p. 1&9. -

10See: Max Stirner's kleinere Schriften und seine
Ent e ungen auf die Kritik seines werkes "Der Einzige und
sein gigenthumf'aus den anren 18h2-18h8,-ed. by John Hen-
ry Mackay, 2ndfedition revised(Treptow bei Berlin, l91h).
This edition contains, in addition to both a number of
articles written before and after he wrote his book, the
material he wrote while he was the Berlin correspondent
for the Rheinische Zeitugg and Leipziger Zeitung in 18h2.
On Stirner's life as a correSpondent see: Gustav Mayer,
"Stirner als Publizist," Frankfurter Zeitupg(0ctober h,
1912 . _

11For a good examination of Stirner's early
writings see: Arvon, Aux sources de l'extentialisme Max
Stirner, pp. 19-h1. This entire book is marred—by‘the
translation of German titles into French, titles which
never appeared in French. Arvon even translates newSpaper
:étles into French. See also: Mackay, Max Stirner, pp.
7.1220

83
structure of society are to be seen in their incipient
stage. Stirner's book, when viewed from the perspective
of his earlier writings, is the logical outcome of a
carefully thought out course he was following, and not
the instantaneous aberration of a brilliant, misguided,
erratic mind as is often inferred. Stirner examines,
very carefully, both acceptable contemporary solutions
and contemporary preposals on the problems in which he
is interested before rejecting their solution as unsatis-
factory. This is what is accomplished in his early
writings. Once having discovered what he thinks to be
the faults of society he set out in Der Einzige und sein
Eigenthum to outline what he thinks is an acceptable
solution. The format for Stirner's assault on religion,
the state, and society is present in the early writings.
Stirner arrived at the conclusion that everything should

be determined by one guiding principle: egoism.

DER EINZIGE UND SEIN EIGENTHUM
The Ego and His Own, as the English translation
of Stirner's book is called, was not an immediate success
when it was published in 18hh.12 It was re-issued around

the turn of the century when the philosophy of Nietzsche

 

12In this study all references to The Ego and His
Own will be to the edition edited by James—J. Martin and
published by the Libertarian Book Club in New York in
1963. The translation in this edition was done by Steven
7T. Byington for the first English edition published by
iBenjamin R. Tucker in 1907.

 

81L
was pepular. Today Stirner's book is once again enjoying

some popularity among the student anarchists.l3 Der Ein-

zige und sein Eigenthum.has been analyzed many times.1u

 

 

13For example see: Bernard R. Miles, "Vomit-Makers
to Meet in Paris," Freedom Anarchist Weekly(London), No.
1h, XXIX(May 11, 1968), p. 1:7 Stirner's writings and Mac-
kay's books have been reprinted in Germany during the last
few.years.

luThere is a vast literature on Stirner. Much of
it is concerned with his book. Some of this literature is
worthless, but much is worth looking at. In addition to
the discussion by Henri Arvon and John Mackay already re-
ferred to see: Paul Eltzbacher, Anarchism(New York, 1960),
pp. 60-76; George Woodcock, AnarchismlNew York, 1962), pp.
9h-105; Carl Emge, Max Stirner. Eine teisti nicht be-
waltigte Tendenz(w1esbaden, l96h); Herbert Eead, fihe Tenth
Muse Essays in Criticism(New York, 1958), pp. 7h-82; Victor
Roudine, "Max Stirner,"'Port§gi§s d'hier(October 15, 1910),
65-96; Heinrich Romundt,_‘Max Stirner und die nachkantische
Philosophie,” Preussische-JahrbUcher, 133(1908), 33-h7;
Anselm Ruest, Max Stirner: Leben-Weltanschauung-Vermachtnis
(Berlin, 1906); Henri LdEhtenberger, "L'anarchisme en Alle—
magne. Max Stirner," La nouvelle Revue, 89(July-August,
189M), 233-2h1; Gustav Kahn, “Stirner et l'individualisme,"
La nouvelle Revue, th(September-October, 190h), 131-136;
A. Martin, Max Sgirners Iehre(Leipzig, 1906); Ernst Schultze,.
"Stirner'sche Ideen in einem paranoischen Wohnsystem,n
Archiv far Ps chiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 36(January,
W, 7 - ; rnst Seilli‘Ere, "La moralsimpérialiste
chez Stirner," Mercure de France,.60(March 15, 1906), 179-
198; Sigmund Kaff, “Der Philosoph des Egoismus," Sozialis-
tische Monatshefte(l907), lhl-lh8; George Plechanoff, Anar-
chism and Socialism(London, 1895), pp. 16-26; James Heneker,
Egoists(New York, 1932), 350-372; E. Horn, Max Stirners
ethischer Egoismus(Berlin, 1907); Ola Hannsson, Seher und
DEEtEfiTBerlin, 189k), pp. 92-136; E. Horn, "Max Stirner und
der Anarchismus," Die Zukunft, 11(1892) 252-256; Sidney
Hook, From Hegel-to Marx(New Ybrk, 1950), pp. 165-185; Karl
L8with,VFrom Hegel to Nietzsche(New Yerk, l96h); Max Nett-
lau, Derflvorfrflhlingfider Anaréhie(Berlin, 1926), pp. 169-
179; Francois Lugghesi, Ia philosophic de Stirror(Paris,
1932); Hektor Zoccoli, DieiAnarchie: ihre Verkfinder,_ihre
Ideen, ihre Taten(Leipzig, 1909), pp. 17ff; Max Adler,
‘Wegweiser: Studien zur Geistesgeschichte des Sozialismus
‘TStuttgart; 191.), pp. 173-199;fiJaEk Friedland, Max Stirner:
‘Versuch einer W rdigugg_seiner Bedeutugg(Hamburg, 1921);
Iiermann.Schultheiss, Stirner; Grundlagen zum Verstandnis
cies werkes "Der Einzige und sein Eigenthumi“ 2nd edition

 

 

 

HS

\ \.....\\ \.\

 

85‘

What does this book contain that keeps it alive today
nearly a century and a quarter after it was first pub-
lished? Why do students who feel a "generation gap"
between themselves and their parents feel an affinity
for Stirner's book? Why does James Heneker call it "the
most revolutionary book ever written?"

Stirner starts his book with a short introduction.
He uses the first line from Goethe's poem Vanitasl Vanitatum
Vanitasl as the title for this introduction. It reads:
"Ich hab' mein Sach' auf Nichts gestellt," translated
literally, "I have set my affair on nothing," or translated

more freely, "all things are nothing to me."~ This

 

(Leipzig, 1922); Victor Basch, L'individualisme anarchiste
Max Stirner(Paris, 190k); Max Messer, Max Stirner(Berlin,

a n Ser ant and Claude Harmel, Histoire de 1'anar-
chie(Paris, l9h9§,p .1h9-160; Martin Buber, Between Men
and —Man(London, 19h7,- E. V. Zenker, Anarchism(New York,

pp. 100-138 Camille Spiess, Max Stirner(Nice, l9h9);

Eduard Bernstein, Die soziale Doktrin des Inarchismus.
Stirner. Der EinzigeI und sein Eigenthum," Neue Zeit(Stutt-
gart), 10(1891-92),I , pp. 358-65, h21-28, 11, 589-9 6, 618-
26, 657-66, 772- 78, 813-19; Anselm Ruest, Stirnerbrevier.
Die starke des einsamen. Max Stirners indiv ua ismus und
e oismus(Berlin, 1906): Georg Struguresqu, Max Stirner.
Der ‘inzige und sein Eigenthum(Munich,1911); N. Stau rzh,
Es‘f'ia'EI—ners Philosoph e ass Tch(Berlin, 1923); K. A. Hautz,

e Philosophie M. Stirners 1m Gegensatz zum Hegelschen
Idea.Lismus(1936); W. Cuybers, ng Stirner als Philosoph
TWUFzEurg, 1937); D. Koigen, Zur vergeschichte des moder-
nen hilosophischen Sozialismus in Deutschland. Zur Ge-
EEHIEhte der Philosophie und Sozialphilosophie des Jugg-
hégellanismus(Bern, 1901), pp. 119-lh6; J.L. Kreibig,
Geschichte und Kritik des ethischen Skeptizismus(1896), pp.
lOO-ln2; H. Kronenberg, Moderne Philoso hen. Portraits und
Charakteristiken(Munich, ar Je
Ffiiloso henwege-Ausblicke und Rackblicke(Berlin, 1901), pp.
228 -251; an extensive bibliography of writings by or about
Stirner is found in Hans G. Helms, Die Ideologie der ano-
tiygen Gesellschaft(K81n, 1966), pp. 510-600°

 

 

 

 

86
introduction at once lets the reader know what the sub-
ject of the book is - self.

According to Stirner the supreme law for each
individual is his own welfare. Everyone should seek out
the enjoyment of life. A person should learn how to en-
joy and expand life. Everything a person does shall be
directed toward self-satisfaction. Nothing should be
done for the sake of God or for the sake of anyone else.
The earth is for man to make use of. Everyone and every-
thing mean nothing to Stirner. Things and people are to
be used and then when they are no longer of any utility
they are to be cast aside. Stirner loves mankind, not
merely individuals, but mankind as a whole. But he loves
them because of his own egoism, because it makes him
feel happy to love. It pleases him. Stirner is not
concerned with Christian or human values and morals.

If what Stirner wants to do gives him pleasure, then it
is justified. Everyone is using everyone else. The only
true relationship people have with each other is useable-
ness. Everyone you meet is food to feed upon.

Stirner rejects law. Laws exist not because men
recognize them as being favorable to their interests, but
because men hold them to be sacred. When you start to
speak of rights you are introducing a religious concept.
Since the law is sacred, anyone who breaks it is a cri-
minala Therefore there are no criminals except against

something sacred. If you do away with the sacrosanctity

 

 

8?
oftme law then crime will disappear, because in reality
a<ndme is nothing more than an act desecrating that
whidlvms hallowed by the state. There are, according
toffifirner, no rights, because might makes right. A
mania entitled to everything he has the power to pos-
sessaum.hold. The earth belongs to him who knows how
totmke it. Self-welfare should be the guiding principle
in debw rather than law. Stirner relates that you
cmugetfarther with a handful of might than you can
wid1a.bagfu1.of’right. The way to gain freedom is
thmngh,mhfllt, because he who has might stands above
‘flm Law A person only becomes completely free when
whatkm holds, he holds because of his might. Then he
isziself-owner and not a mere freeman. Everyone
fiKmld say to himself; I am all to myself and I do all
forum sake. I am unique, nothing is more important
to me than.myself. Stirner does not believe that a
pmrson is good or bad, nor does he believe in what is
trm% good, right, and etc. These are vague concepts
Whichhave no meaning outside a God centered or man
mammred world. A man should center his interest on
self and concentrate on his own business.

Stirner rejects the state. Without law the state
is not possible. The reapect for the law is what holds
the State tOgether. The state like the law exists not
because an individual recognizes it as favorable to his

welfar
e bUt because he considers it to be sacred. To

 

88
Sthxwr the state like the law is not sacred. Stirner
iS'ww mortal enemy of the state. The welfare of the
stauihas nothing to do with his own welfare and he
mwmldtherefore sacrifice nothing to it. The general
welfine is not;his welfare but only means self-denial
onlfis part. The object of the state is to limit the
indhfidual, to tame him, to subordinate him, to subject
him‘MJsomething general for the purpose of the state.
Theimmte'hinders an individual from attaining his true
valmh while at the same time eXploiting the individual
magetsome benefit out of him.

The state stands in the way between men, tearing
thmnapart. Stirner would transform the state into his
owngnbperty and his own creature instead of being the
EHWperty and creature of the state. He would annihilate
it361ml fomn in its place a Union of Egoists. The state
nmst be destroyed because it is the negation of the in-
<Hvidual will, it approaches men as a collective unit.
T%e Struggle between the egoists and the state is
inevitable,

Once the state is annihilated the Union of Egoists
will prevail. This union is not sacred nor a Spiritual
power above man‘s power. It is created by men. In this

u .
nion men will be held together by mutual advantages

thr d
ough Common "use" of one another. In joining the

union - ‘ “
an lndividual increases his own individual power.

Each
person will now through his own might control What

89
he awn It does not imply though that there will be a
rehyiof universal rapacity and perpetual slaughter, nor
domsit meme the wielding of power over others. Each
manvdll defend his own uniqueness. Once he has attained
selfqealization of true egoism he does not want to rule
overcfihers or hold more possessions than he needs be-
cmxm nus would destroy his independence.

Stirner's Union of Egoists is not communistic.
Itis a union that individuals enter into for mutual
gainikpm wie egoistic union which will be developed
lfithhlthe union. There will be neither masters nor
servmfim, only egoists. Everyone will withdraw into his
ownlxdqueness which will prevent conflict because no one
wilee trying to prove himself "in the right" before a
thymiparty. Egoism will foster genuine and spontaneous
union between individuals.

Stirner does not develop in any detail the form
of social organization that the Union of Egoists might
Ipllow. Organization itself is anathema to Stirner's
Union. Within the Union the individual will be able to
develop himself. The Union exists for the individual.
The union-0f Egoists is not to be confused with society
tdflch Stirner Opposes. Society lays claim to a person
whiCh 13 considered to be sacred, but which consumes an
indiVidualo The Union is made up of individuals who

consu
me the Union for their own good.

90

How is the abrogation of law, state, and property
totm realized so that men will be free to enter into the
Imimlof Egoists? It will occur when a sufficient number
ofnmn first undergo an inward change and recognize their
ownvmlfare as the highest law, and then these men will
brimginto being the outward manifestations: the abro-
gathxlof law, state, and property.

To Stirner revolution and rebellion are not
symxwmous. Revolution is an overturning of the condition
of mm existing state or society. Revolution is thus a
polnflcal or social act. Rebellion, on the other hand,
is ainansformmtion of conditions. Rebellion stems from
menwsdiscontent with themselves. It is not an armed
‘Undsing, but a rising up of individuals. Rebellion has
Holtgard for the arrangements that Spring from it. Re-
vohndon aims at new arrangements; rebellion results in
PWHHB no longer permitting themselves to be arranged,
butto arrange for themselves, placing no great hope on
eXiStins institutions. Rebellion is not a fight against
the established order, but if it succeeds, it will re-
mflt in the downfall of that order. Stirner does not
want-m3 overthrow the establishment of order merely to
Overnumn,1t. He is interested in elevating himself

ab
ove it. His purpose is not political, nor social,

bUt eSolstic.

T0 bring about the transformation of condition

and '
PUt the new condition in the place of law, the state

 

 

91

or property, violent rebellion against the existing con-
ditions is necessary. Force is necessary. If each man
is to have what he requires he must take it. This will
necessarily mean a war of each against all, for the poor
become free and proprietors only when they rebell. The
state can only be overcome by violent rebellion. Only
rebellion can succeed. Revolution will fail because it
will only result in setting up another unfavorable poli-
tical or social condition. Only rebellion can eliminate
entirely, unfavorable political and social conditionsand
permit man to enter into the Union of Egoists where he

will be able to achieve the highest realization of self.

STIRNER'S CRITICS
Stirner's critics did not take long to reply to
his book.15 His principal critics were Kuno Fischer,

k

b 15The main contemporary criticism of Stirner's
tgoif‘har‘e: Ludwig Feuerbach, ”fiber das 'wesen deS Chris-
thn $13 in Beziehung auf den'Einzigen und sein Eigen-
205m, Wi ands Viertel'ahrsschrift, Band 2(18Li5), 193-
Klei reprinted in Gustave Langeled.), Ludwig Feuerbach;
.ne Phil. Schriften 18h2-1 h5(Leipzi§, 1950), pp. 170-
repéiggses Hess, Die letzten Philosophenmarmstadt, 18h5),
Hess Bid in AuguStiCarnu and Wolfgang M8nke(eds.), Moses
WHOM; und sozialistische Schriften 1837-
Der Efrain-East, 1961), pp. 381-392; Sozeliga Bruno Bauer ,
‘ “2188 und sein Eigenthum," Norddeutschen Bldtter

Wrgtur ugd ggtzrhaltung(Marchiafiglii5)é 1-3h;
. s " o erne Op 3 en,‘r i onen , 77-
i113251§§§°h§180hem "Ein Agologet der Sophistik und ein
Karl Mari ,3?” Reaction 1“" E i-—0nen<18h7), 152-165;
III "Saint E Ffiiedrich Engels, Werke Berlin-East, 1962),
evenizhou ax, Pp. 101-h38. (Not printed at the time 7.
GeSchichtgh it Was written then); W. Friedensburg, "Zur
Einzi e ueddes neuesten PhilOSOphie. Max Stirner: Der
2m; Dien Sein Eigenthum," Grenzboten, I, (1815), 239-
“ deutsche PhiloSOphie seit Hegels Tode," 9.12.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

92

Ludwig Feuerbach, Moses Hess, Bruno Bauer, Marx and Engels.
Marx and Engels wrote an extensive, almost word for word
refutation of Stirner's book which was not accepted for
publication at the time. In the main his loudest critics
were his former friends from "Die Freien." Der Einflg
und sein Eigenthum, was not released until December, 18%,
but already in November Engels had obtained a copy from
Otto Uigand. In a letter of November 19, 181111., Engels
wrote to Marx that "we must not cast it EStirner's book]
aside," and that even though they were opposed to the
ideas in the book they should make use of what they found
there. "But what is true in his principle, we, too, must
accept. -And what is true is that before we can be active
in any cause we must make it our own, egoistic cause -
and that in this sense, quite aside from any material ex-
pectations, we are communists in virtue of our egoism,
that out of egoism we want to be human beings and not

“”911 individuals."16 On January 17, 1815, Hess wrote
x -

§§§§EEg§2(1851), 292-3ho; Bettina von Armin, "Die Auf-
189.3% es Einzigen durch den Menschen," i onen(l8h7)s
Feuerblz "Feuerbach und der Einzige. Die onsequenzen

sea at :chs und ihr Kampf gegen die Kritik und den Einzi-
staadeigands Vieteliahrsschrift(l8li6), 123-138; "Das Ver-
W (18 6m un as n v uum, Eva elische Kirchenzei-
fine it"), 8; "Derinnzige und sein Eigenthum, von Max
36 “dig .Bl tter far literarische Unterhaltung, No.'s

1n: m67(Fabruary,-m 11.6); Stirner replies to his critics
1'41 ph11030phischen.Reactionare, Die Epigonen(18h7),

rners k e

to ' ° Reprinted in Mackay, th Sti .nere Schrif-

n’ pp. [ml-11.1 ; "Recensenten StirnersIVWi ants Vierfil-
WUB 5), 1147-191... Reprinted in Mackay, _Max
M: PP- 3h6-396-

16
Zwischen 18 und 25, pp. 237-238-

 

 

 

'W
i

 

.I‘

 
    

 

93

to Mar: ditlining his proposed attack on Stirner.17
W16 me in a letter or December 6, 181111., to Ferel
“that Stirner's book was a good criticism of commu-
nfsials is his mother, Rugs wrote on December 17, 1811.11,
Newman'- book was the first readable work of phi-
losopfiy in Gomnyel9 Bruno Bauer's criticism appeared
in the article written by Sozeliga.20 Feuerbach'321

and Bauer's attacks were hurried denunciations, more

personal than philosophical.

 

17140803 Hess Briefwechsel, pp. 105-107.
18

. _ Arnold Ru 6 Briefwechsel und Ta ebuch-Blfitter
aurden «TEX: gggg-zggg. ed. By Paul NerrlIcHlBerlin,
9 a Pa -

" 1?Ib1d._, p. 386.

 

A 7 20800 note 111. Sozeligawas a pseudonym for
has: Sozeliga Zychlin von Sychlinsky(1816-1900) who at
futile worked for the Norddeutsche Blgtter in which the
article appeared. ' -
2JKThere are quite a number of interesti studies

°91rquorbaoh and Stirner. See: Friedrich Jodl, Stir-
norm“ Ludwig Peuerbach " Osterreichische Rundschau,
P“.rgan|lary-March, 1911 , mm ; rec t Rau, udwig
d nah and Max Stirner," Das Ma azin fflr die Literatur

. '1 \m uslandes(Berlin , o. , - ;

tirner und Ludwi Feuerbach(3tutt-
s c an e r

“it 191620 ’ a
a, 15.1111 us uoc, a en.Fr
”1&0? Stirnerueipzi? ; . vy, La 11080 is
'éif‘v“ 181‘ s. 19011 . pp. 338-379; “We n.
y _“L “Crash sein Verken und seine Zeitenossen(8tutt-
fl‘i- Krupp; "- 3 erner chu e auer, euerbach
{'1‘ X'U‘Harx. Zur Entstehu seschichte der maer -
' WW'- 31’ n, " :PPO .9 ' U
--185, 221, 225; Simon Rawidowicz,

~ und Schichsa1(Berlin, 1931)_

  

 

 

9h.
”‘1'“-mg2nflidently viewed Stirner's book as a
mi Wt. he attacked it systematically in D_i£
mm which is practically a word-for-

.gggg'criticiln, of Ber Einzige und sein Eigenthum. In
rm.” tounderstand fully. his attack you have to read

it gagethor with Stirner's book. Marx attempted to
”Mac the basis of Stirner's position. His comments
craggy-than a personal vendetta against Stirner, it is
outwit”; of thought clashing with another, with Marx
11331310 final outcome the benefactor. Marx, unlike the
QM”, when criticizing Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum,
Sized thepoaitive merit of Stirner's work as well as
tha‘nogativo.

:. w... fiQ-.uknowledged that Stirner was correct when
hfi. Muted out the failure of the existing system to deal
Jflxthtpqwrtlo Marx furthermore agreed with Stirner that
wmmtice of getting to the wealthy man's purse by
‘WJO hissense of piety and fair play, often re-
mfirkasn, ”sentimental and idealistic philanthropy,"
‘m ”emixitcient. He also agreed with Stirner's con;
met 1% process of man gaining his self identity
M 19? :EQqusityl, involve class warfare. He praised
maggflfiinting out the hollowness of slogans which

 

EMIntg.’
:3... 7 °1' tire interesting analyses see: Sidney Hook,

(“‘1 "‘1‘.“ .23., t dies in the Intellectual Develo -

L__rner, pp.

     

 

 

 

 
 

    

 

  

_ 95
A
w ”.mnity, country, reason, justice, or ab-
fible‘timr painted out that these ab-
W “Ir"tended to muddle and conceal the real
we? $5.3;th Stirner's attack on private property,
WJM'MM out that Stirner had little insight into
“with“ of private property. Marx also agreed with
M criticism of the doctrine of natural rights
flw‘he-,;hiuelf did not subscribe t6 Stirner's reasons
nomhimcwhnsis en egoism. Marx welcomed Stirner's
akin (that genuine freedom implied material power, be-
mhe reasoned that political democracy could never
mimic 'sooial democracy because in a political demo-
Wrflmw.‘mhasizes free competition the person with-
MManl means was in an unfavorable position from
“5.5;“th v‘Itj should be noted, however, that Stirner
u mm of social democracy which he viewed as a
mmffllroughvwhich the weak oppressed the strong.
“Winsome-cc with Stirner that revolution, which
mafia“; political reforms, can never guarantee
“M93?” people. _ Revolution can only guarantee
“I. m'¢~mtuma§en, which really means nothing he-
.“ Mfid’xfihfl: analysis,~ no state would permit it-
mufimatoqnothingness by this freedom of
Mt ‘ the . i ‘1
”M‘Mve aspects of Der Einzige und sein E -
“Mm flail, are that while Stirner rejects

 

  

  

1 9t

“Meir method. Stirner, according to Marx, has
‘mmla'OOd the abstractions of God with an even more

"Nth." abstraction - the ego. Marx related that
atint-Izmi-‘zawaoctod the ideals of patriotism, church, and
"Wynn empty abstractions which pretended to be some-
thmr'ihoy were not, however, Marx questions whether his
'“fltieh tofchd ego is really any different than devotion
to“ orcountry. Isn't a man more than merely his ego?
Ban yeasts-1p him of his social relationships and social '
dependencies, strip him to his bare ego, finding these

   
  

the source of his friendships, his love, and his work?

0 .
‘ ‘ l
Gawain! be done? Or would it not be more correct to if;
. ' ‘ ,I’
“planted“ you have done this you have destroyed him - M,“ 31-
'. Jr‘v'

p

. .< ‘c‘.
a;

atJUIsthis uniqueness is destroyed. Personality exists

0 f '.
-_ A

wit]!!! :“°1.tye- It is the effect of social life and not

4

r ~ -.
cu...

in puncon'dition thereof. Different social systems pro-
duce different types of personalities. To understand L
Mitywyou have‘rto understand the environment in -
mm functions. Il'herefore the pure, isolated ego .
10 amt-n3 which never was and never can be. ‘ 0 ‘11-:-
. 1‘35?“ 1; m tturther attacks Stirner's subjectivism which I
~msmbent from the contention that the ego conditions
imiflflunfller'than social life conditioning the ego.
w W Lthat inenot recognizing the sovereignty of
”gym was only deluding himself. Stirner,
”wmtim, could not effectively struggle

if ‘ 't the state because he did not realize what was the

 

97

Thai Esc>L1rce of its corporate abstraction. To do away with
“m stasise dialectically on paper means nothing. It is still
theres you cannot ignore this fact.

Marx also attacks Stirner for his belief that you
can iSolate an individual's state of mind from the society
1‘“which he lives. It is Marx's contention that a man's
atateofmind is something that is made up of a succession
of'states of mind; on the other hand, Stirner believed
amt this state of mind was controlled by self. Marx says
heis mistaken that the world does consist of more than
a state of mind. What a person sees and how he views it
is determined by something which is not a state of mind
at all. PeOple see different things because of their
different social environments. What is significant in
one society may or may not be important in another.

Marx concludes that: "Stirner's social nominalism, there-
fore, not only is incapable of explaining what the in-
dividual consciousness finds but cannot eXplain the sig-
nificant modes of the activity of consciousness proper -
its wishing, fearing and appraising. Stirner . . . is
electing the contemporary order of things and consciousness
into the historical invariant. Stirner's standpoint is
religious because what ever history it does treat of,
turns out to be a history of ideas. The world, as it
exissted before Stirner came on the scene, is eXplained

by a? «lauble inconsistency, as the result of man's

 

98
mfitelieeri religious ideas."23 This criticism of Stirner

“YVEXch is important for therein is contained the germ
°i his new philosophy of history:

The standpoint with which one satisfies himself
in such histories of the Spirit is itself religious,
for in it one is content to stOp short with Religion,
to conceive Religion as a cause of itself. This is
done instead of explaining Religion in terms of ma-
terial conditions; showing how certain determinate
industrial and commercial relations are necessarily
bound up with certain social forms, how these are

themselves bound up with certain forms of the state
and therewith with a certain form of religious con-
sciousness. Had Stirner acquainted himself with the
real history of the Middle Ages he would have dis-
covered why the ideas of the Christians in the me-
dieval world took the exact form they did, and how
it came about that these ideas later developed into
others. He would have found that 'Christianity' had
no history at all and that all the different forms
in which it was held at different times were not
'self-determinations' and progressive realizations
of the 'religious Spirit,' but that they were effed-
ted by completely empirical causes quite rem ved
from any influence of the religious Spirit.2fi

Marx attacked Stirner's egoistic anarchism by
attempting to demonstrate that it is self-defeating.
According to Marx the individual can gain greater free-
dom and develop his individuality better by associating
himself with the group, which will protect his individual

differences better than he himself can. The absence

23Hook, From Hegel to Marx, pp. 179-180.

2“Quoted in Hook, Ibid., p. 180. For an excellent

article on Marx's materialist philOSOphy of history as it

'was develOped in Deutsche Ideologie in response to Stir-
nez°'s book see: Inge Taubert, “Zur materialistischen Ge-
schj;chtsauffassung von Marx und Engels. Uber einige theore-
tiscfihe Probleme im ersten Kapitel der 'Deutschen Ideologiefi"
8611;:régegzur Geschichte der deutschen Arbeiterbewegung, _
§5EEfi§EEheft X(l968), 27-50.

 

 

 

99

Oi:gr-Qup support will in time deprive the individual of
the opportunity to capitalize on his individualized
abilisties. Then, according to Marx, man's individual
intBrest, economic as well as non-economic, lies in
thfi group. It is a sacrifice on the part of all in-
VQlVed‘but will result in harmony among men. This
1“larmony makes it possible to "create institutional
€Uarantees and mechanism by which the advantages of

am Specific capacities of all may be made available
for all."25

Maturally Marx disagreed with Stirner's concept

of "one's own." He pointed out that this is an arti-
fical abstraction, and that no man can make a claim for
what is exclusively his own. Marx also criticized
Stirner's concept of "self interest" or "one's inte-
rest." Furthermore, Marx demonstrates that the indi-
vidual "I," which Stirner considered to be above every
social limitation, whether proletarian or bourgeois, is
nothing more than the expression of the German petite

bourgeois who aspired to become bourgeois.

STIRNER'S INFLUEECE

It is difficult to assess accurately the influence

of Stirner. There is definitely a connection between his

thcpught and the school of individualist anarchism. The

ccn1,necting link between Stirner and other thinkers and

I

25Quoted in Hook, Ibid., p. 182.

 

 

 

100
governeatits is not so easily established; however, some
VWitmax~s.portray Stirner as a precursor of Nietzsche,
"kyle others point out that the seeds of fascism are
1‘0an in Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum. Still others
place Stirner as a forerunner of existentialism. I,
myself, can see a logical parallel between Stirner and
RDdiDutschke, contemporary leader of the Sozialistischer
geuMMmer Studentenbund. MUch is attributed to Stirner
today, but during his life time he was not able to
attract any disciples or school of followers.

Stirner's influence during his life time seems

to be limited to Julius Faucher(1820-1878), who repre-
sented Stirner's ideas in his newSpaper the Berliner
Abendpost. This paper was, of course, quickly suppres-
sed.26 Zenker gives us an example of Faucher's com—
prehension of Stirner's thought:

How strange and anomalous Stirner's individualism
appeared even to the most advanced Radicals of Germany
in that period appears very clearly from a conversation
recorded by Max Wirth, which Faucher had with the
stalwart Republican Schlefel, in an inn frequented
by the Left party in the-Par1iament in Frankfurt.
'Schlefel loved to boast of his Radical opinions,
just as at that time many men took a pride in being
as extreme as possible among the members of the Left.
He expressed his astonishment that Faucher held aloof
from the current of politics.’ 'It is because you
are too near the Right party for me,‘ answered Fau-
cher, who delighted in astonishing people with para-
doxes. Schlefel stroked his long beard proudly, and
replied, 'Do-you say that to me?‘ 'Yes,' continued

Faucher, 'for you are a Republican incarnate; you
still want a State. Now I do not want a State at

 

26E.V. Zenker, Anarchism(New York, 1897), pp. 130-
131»: Franz Mehring, Geschichte der Sozialdemokratie, I, pp.

250—251-

 

 

l_ H _A—m—/

101

aZLll , and, consequently, I am a more extreme member
the Left than you} It was the first time Schldffel

Oi?

'hiac1 heard these paradoxes, and he replied: 'Nonsense;
Vfl1<> can emancipate us from the State?‘ 'Crime,' was
lfallcher's reply, uttered with an expression of pathos.

Scllldffel turned away, and left the drinking party
“figbhout saying a word more. The others broke out
lilughing at the proud demagogue being thus outdone:
ut no one seems to have suSpected in the words of
This anec-

Faucher more than a joke in dialectics.‘
dote is a good example of the way in which Stirner's

ideas were understood, and shows that Faucher was the
only individual 'individugl' among the most Radical
politicians of that time.-7

Nettlau agrees with Zenker when he writes that

n O C
few books have been so misunderstood or subjected to so

‘ . . 8
many varying critical examinations."2'

Stirner's greatest influence came toward the end

of the nineteenth-century. It is generally acknowledged

that Stirner is the father of individualist anarchism.
The individualist anarchist movement, Which started in

Germany in the 1890's, can be traced directly to the

writings of Stirner.
was Nietzsche influenced by Stirner?29 In spite

27E.V. Zenker, Anarchism, pp. 131-32.
28Max Nettlau, Der Vorfrdhling der Anarchie, p. 169.

29Some of the literature attempting to solve this
question is: Falicien Pascal, "Du romantisme a l'anarchie,"
1e Correspondant, 225(November, 1906), 752-780; Gustave
Kahn, "Stirner et l'individualisme," La nouvelle Revue,
10h(190h), 131-136; Robert Schellwien, Max Stirner und
Friedrich Nietzsche(Paris, l90h); P. Lachmann, Protogoras,
L'uni-

Niéttsche, StirnerTBerlin, lalh); s. Jankelevitsch,
Hue et le surhomme. Le probleme de la personnalitg chez

:3tirner et chez Nietzsche," Revue d'Allemagne(January-
Juzne, 1931), 27-h0, 216-2h3; Anselm Ruest, Max Stirner
(Bearlin, 1907), pp. 287ff; Camile Spiess, Max StirnerfNice,
19L18); Charles Andler, Nietzsche sa vie et sa pensee
(fgzrois, 1958), II, 362-365, III, 377-379; Paul Carus,
1muet725°he and Other Exponents of Individualism(Chicago,

, pp. 7h-lOl; Arthur Drews, Nietzsches Philosophie

9 u}'

so

102

 

°t crane Brinton'330 protest to the contrary Nietzsche

Pmbnbly was influenced by Stirner. Although Stirner

1‘ “0t mentioned in Nietzsche's writings, numerous

““6198 have compared their writings. In the final

auslysis there is but one piece of evidence to prove
that Nietzsche knew Stirner.31 LBWith states the case:
‘atirner is nowhere mentioned in Nietzsche's writings:
but Overbeck's witness proves that Nietzsche knew of him,
and not only through Lange's history of materialism. And

Nietzsche was so 'economica1,' with his knowledge of T
Stirner because he was both attracted to and repelled by

him, and did not want to be confused with him. 32

 

Heidelberg” 1901+), pp. hou- 14.05; Wolfgang Wendler, Carl
Sternheim. Weltvorstellungund Kunstprinzipien(FranEfu rt
91. ., )'Anse1m Ruest, "Stirner und Nietzsche. Ein

e Aktion. Zeitschrift ffir freiheitliche Poli-

6
Vorwort," Di
tilt and Literatur, I(September, 1911), 916-917.

 

 

”Clarence Crane Brinton, Nietzsche(New York,
This book is a reprint of the 19111 edition.

1965): P0 2270

Brinton writes: "Nietzsche has even, by unenlightened

critics, been coupled with Max Stirner, author of The Ego
me

and Its Own." Brinton evidently did not spend muc
irner or he would know that the title of his

book is The Ego and His Own.

3:I‘Karl LBwith, F_r__om HegLel to Nietzsche, p. 187.

3aIbid., pp. 187-188. The question of Nietzsche's

relationship to anarchism is one that could be undertaken
Much time and paper has been devoured

with some profit.

by the question of Nietzsche's relationship to Nazism, the
same being true of Richard Wagner. Nietzsche early in
.1119 was a great admirer of Wagner, however, this admir-
ation did not last. The question of Nietzsche's relation-

;hfip with Usgner, his opinion on socialism, and his appa-

rem? affinity for anarchy are problems that would be well
A few meager attempts at

"or-(:11 tracing out in detail.
thi’ are: "The Ideals of Anarchy,"Litte11's Livi e,
211(1896),- 616-636; "Neue Aphorismen," Die Zukunft, i5

‘ ‘ .l I t. a ‘ j .

 

 
   
 
  
 
  
 
  
  
   
  
  
  
     
   
 
 
    
     

103

  

{Peon -: i zfiother interesting facet of Stirnerism is its

fihfifiiiiitos en the development of fascism, specifically
fimi‘eédrd to Mussolini. It is known that Mussolini
“Ham! Der: Einzige und sein Eigenthum and admired the
{"‘IVidualism.of Stirner. Laura Fermi only raises the
q-"“!.‘lltion of the influence of Stirner's thought on MUsso—
11b1, and does not go into detail. Her account suggests
that a thorough study of Mbssolini's writings would pro-
bsbly establish a firm connection.33

In recent years it has become fashionable to

consider Stirner as an early eXponent of existentialism,
as a forerunner of Kierkegaard. Karl L8with states

that :Kiorkegaard follows Stirner as the antithesis of
Ehrx. Idke Stirner, he reduces the entire social world
te'his own 'self.‘ But at the same time he finds him-

self 1h she‘olute opposition to Stirner; instead of

1: -41

(lggg),712-13; Bruno Ville "Vom rothen GBtzen," Die Zu-,
MSZ-hSB Fglicien Pascal, "Du romantisme

(189k
meorres ondant, 225(1906), 752-780;
Schurz, 'I'In div EduaIism me at l'anarchie," Revue
nde -132(August 15 1895). 775-805; Max Nor-
, era on(London, 1913).

_,-.-.'—v -

o1 , Phoenix edition(Ghica o, 1966), p .
‘1fi7-17fl. 00 w idh attempts to relate tirner to tfie
1nt0110¢fififl1 Origins of German fascism in Hans G. Helms,
der anon on Gesellschaft(Cologne, 1966).
enlrc s s ave een y critical of the
thalisu of this book. For example see: James J. Martin's
éfl’to the English translation. of Stirner's The
7- 1 1e of our Education or Humanism and Realis—
9. ’ ;

 

 

"\

 

   

.. 13H

“Inflecindividual upon creative nothingness, he
Mflwindividual 'before God,' the creator of the
MIC-fibulartin Buber also makesit a point to de-

Wto-Iierkegaard's debt to Eitirner.35 Both Herbert
Mex and Henri men37 pose the question, if Christian
.mfipatialisn recognizes Kierkegaard, why does atheistic
’mjeatiolisn continue to ignore Stirner? Even though
Wye; the. characters in the plays and novels of the
Imistio existentialist writers are constructed round a
philosophy which seems to be identical with Stirner's,
my. isqino way to prove this satisfactorily with con-
crete oxides»-
m . 3...; The atheistic existentialists may disregard
‘tirPPPQv.hl§ $tirner is popular today. The battles
_Ihigb m§.fought out with Stirner, Bakunin and other
Mayhem which he thought he had won, solved
FEM“? . .Iheigiants he slayed have once again come to
Malone illues raised by Stirner and countered by
Wye a definite relevance in the world today,
My in the United States, France and West Germany.

)dm~

3
WWW: fiIith, p. 214.9. See also pp. 318-19, 359.
“1“16 a Cb

in fitmenB Between Men and Manuondon, 1911.7),
a? I 7 :

 

lg’ti ‘
an abt§tgrgert Reed, The Tenth Meuse(New York, 1958).
(t 'q " .

     

75:. °h§z 3:13; sgurces de 1'existentialisme. Max

1:5»

 

 

105
yhr3isg once again is.engaged in a life and death struggle
wifhtanarchism. It would appear that the anarchists will
win,a victory over the Marxists at least in France, west
Germany and even in the United States where anarchism
seems to hold out more of a promise to the Radical Left
of solving the world's problems than Marxism. In West
Germany, France, and the United States anarchists and
other groups today advocate making use of rebellion to
bring down the state which they refer to as the Establish-
ment. Rudi Dutschke,38 in Germany would set up small
groups of people very similar to Stirner's Union of Ego-
ists. Dutschke, and other militants of the SDS have
pointed out that only rebellion can succeed in freeing
the individual. Revolution only succeeds in setting up
a new arrangement; it does not transform society. They
usd the example of the Russian Revolution to demonstrate
the failure of revolution as a vehicle for setting the
individual free. I do not know if Dutschke has studied
Stirner's writings, but there is a logical parallel

383ndolf Dutschke was Born March 7, 191,0, in
Schlnefeld, which is now in East Germany, the son of a
postal clerk. As a youth he was involved in both Commu-
nistic and Christian youth groups, graduating to a belief
in Christian Socialism. As a result of his beliefs he
refused to serve in the army and was not permitted to
continue his education so he went to work in a state owned
factory, where he remained for three years until he defec-
ted to list Berlin-in 1960. In Wbst Berlin he completed
high school, winning a scholarship to the Free University
fos*his excellent academic record. He has often said that
he has been influenced in his thinking by Marx, Engels,
loan qucnburg, Mao Tee-mung, Herbert Marcuse, the Bible
and other sources.

 

 

106
between his faith in rebellion, and the development of
small groups to set people free, and Stirner's similar

belief in the superiority of rebellion over revolution

and Stirner's Union of Egoists.

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER III

ANARGEISM IN GERMANY TO 1878

Anarchism in Germany in the early 1870's has to
be treated in conjunction with the International for
reasons which will become apparent in the course of this
chapter. ‘The 1850's and 1860's were not auspicious years
for the development of anarchism in Germany. Proudhonist
anarchism appealed chiefly to skilled workers, who hoped
to attain economic independence without resorting to any
illegal, or revolutionary means. In Germany, as early
as 1850, the methods proposed by the Proudhonists had
already lost much of their meaning in the wake of in-
dustrial development which had begun its determined take-
off before the middle of the century. Bakunin, who
appealed to the declassé'intelligentsia of the under-
developed countries of Europe, had few followers in Ger—
many. The revolutions of 18h8-h9 in Germany had demon-
strated the futility of insurrection. Bakunin, himself,
had been imprisoned for his part in the uprisings and
following the period of revolution the police kept a close
scrutiny on all revolutionary activity.

107

 

  

 

108

Not until the 1870's is it possible to pick up
the thread of the anarchist movement in Germany. After
the founding of the German Reich in 1871 the German
socialists started to move away from revolutionary acti-
vity in the direction of parliamentary action. The
policy of parliamentarian being followed by German
socialists was already starting to show signs of some
success by the mid 1870's.1 However, this policy, to
capturing seats in the Reichstag, was opposed by Bismarck.
It was one of the critical issues of the 1870's and will
be treated in detail in Chapter IV along with the question
of the passage of the Socialist Law. The German socialists
openly tried to discourage the anarchists, but nevertheless
by 1875 there were adherents of anarchism in Berlin, Leip-
zig, Magdeburg, Munich, and other places.2 The anarchists
in Germany in the years prior to 1875 were not very active.
A search of police files for this period does not indicate
great concern about anarchist activities.3

As noted earlier, the German anarchists of the

period exerted most of their influence on the international

 

I
llmile de Laveleye, "Le socialisme contemporain
egggnié; Revue des deux mondes, 156(September l,

 

en All
1876) 9
2Le Rgvolté, (December 10, 1881).

3Deutsches Zentralarchiv Merseburg. Rep. 89 H
(Geheimes.Zivilkabinett) Abt. XXI, Generalia Nr. 18,
Vol. I, 'Die Sozialdemokratie und Anarchie 1872-1909."

~

 

109

scene rather than in Germany, so it will be in the con-
text of the movement toward the establishment of an anar-
chist International that they will be discussed. The
first attempt to interest the German speaking workers in
an international anarchist organization came about as a
result of a step taken by the Jura Federation of the
International which, on May 2h, 187h, published the first
and only nmmber of the Sozialdemekratischen Bulletin
which appeared in Chaux-deéFonds. Six hundred cepies of
it were printed and distributed in Bern, Locle, Biel,
Heuchatel, Ghaux-deéFonds, 8t. Imier, Geneva, and fifty
cepies were sent to Germany by way of Mfilhausen.h

The German influence in the international move-
ment during these years was exerted by three individuals:
Erich Otto Rinke(1853-1899). usually called Otto Rinks,
mu womer(18h5- ), and Friedrich August Reinsdorf(18h9-
1885), who rarely used.hisfirst name. Rinks was born
in schmdegel in Posen, the son of a forest official.
He was a.huge man and.was often referred to as Big Otto.
By nature he was argumentative, gruff, and.heavy fisted.
Until 1890 he had the_respect, but not always the love
of those in the anachist movement. In 1872 he started

 

”Rudolf Rocker, Johann Most. Das Leben eines Re-
bellen(Berlin, 19214), pp. 97 -983 Ma'it' Nettlau 'EIEIIograp-
EIe der Anarchie in deutsche Sprache 1792-1897," Jahrbuch
der freien Generation far 191 , p. 1223 James Guillaume,

n erna ona cuments e souvenirs 1864-181_(Paris,
- , , . 3 9 re International Peri-
odiques 186h-1877gParis, 1958), I, p. .33.

110 y

to wander over Germany looking for work after completing
his apprenticeship and becoming a Journeyman locksmith.
It was during his wanderings in Saxony and‘Wflrttemburg
that he came in contact with the German workers and be-
came aware of the circumstances in which they lived. He
was called to complete his military obligation but deser-
ted shortly afterward on December 5, 1873, going to Swit-
zerland where he found work at his locksmith trade in
Bern and.Geneva. In.Bern Rinks came in contact with
groups who favored Bakunin and revolutionary activity.S

Emil-August'flerner, compositor by trade, was
born June 27, 18h5, in Frankfurt-amsOder. After comple-
ting his apprenticeship he left his home town, wandered
through Southern Germany, and eventually like Rinks,
ended up in Bern.where he too came under the spell of
anarchist ideas. His appearance and nature were in marked
contrast to that of Rinke. He was shorter, five feet
eight inches, more even tempered, more intellectual, and
was as fair in appearance as Rinks was dark. His blond
hair was separated from his blue eyes by a high, vaulted
forehead. The exceptional breadth of his face was

 

5Josef Peukert, I'Otto Rinks,” Jahrbudh der freien
(3eneration flr 1910, p. 83. There can—be no doubt thit
o upp, the principal character of Jehn H. Mackay's
Die Lnarchisten( Zurich, 1891) is Otto Rinke. Mackay spent
several years—in London in the late 1880's researching his
novel. He met Rinke at this time, and of the communist
anarchists was most impressed with him. On Mackay's method
of research see: Josef Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Prole-
tariers aus der Revolutionlren Arboiterbewegungflerlin,

0 pp- ‘ o

111
further accentuated by a long, thin, pointed nose, a small
mouth full of irregular teeth, and a full red beard.6
August Reinsdorf was born January 31, 1819, into
a petit bourgeois family in Psgau bei Leipzig in Saxony.
After completing the Volksschule he learned the compositor
trade. Having mastered it by Easter, 1865, the tall, thin,
fair haired young man set off on a period of'wandering
from place to place in search of employment. His first
employment was in Leipzig followed by short periods of
work in Neuruppin, Berlin, Stettin, Hannover, Naumburg,
Mains, and Mannheim. It was during this time, in 1869
in Leipzig, that Reinsdorf and Johann Most met for the
first time. This was a friendship that would last until
1885 when Reinsdorf was beheaded for his part in the
Niederwald dynamite plot. Most and Rsinsdorf, during the
years of their friendship, would have a great influence
on each other. heir friendship would also leave its
mark on the development of Germany during the 1880's.
Reinsdorf was a skilled compositor but could
not remain long in one place because he was a fugitive
from the military. In spite of this he did not attempt
to flee Germany immediately but went into Baden and

 

6Eitaatsarohiv Ludwigsbur , F 201 Stadtdirsktion
Stuttgart, 632, 'Anarchisten, 1885-1898,"?ersonlichksi-
ten welche als anarchistischer Gesinnungwerdlchtig be-
seichnst sind,‘ p. 6. I have been unable to date Werner'g
death. Rockermentions that Kropotkin spoke with him in;
Paris in 1913, but that he had withdrawn from the move-
ment years before. Rocker assumed that Werner was still
alive in 1921;. Rocker, Johann Most, p. 113.

112
“rttenburg working in Freiburg, Mannheim, Stuttgart,
Tabingen, Hesskirch, and Rudolfzett from which he went
to Hinterthur in Switzerland where he obtained employ-
ment in the then famous Bleuler-Haushsrrs'chsn printing
house where he remained a number of years. Following
this he was amployed in Geneva, St. Gallen, Zurich,
Bern, Lusern, Basel, Solathum, Frsiburg, Lausanne, and
a number of other smaller Swiss cities. During this
time he was associated with the Swiss compositors organ-
ization and was a prominent agitator in the blossoming
Deutsdhen Vereine. It was during these years that he
came in contact with exiles from many different countries
including Philipp Becker, Bakunin, Kropotkin, and Paul
Brousse the French Communard.

At the outset of 187k Rsinsdorf wrote to Most
that '. . . the only way to realize their goals and
aspirations would be through a second St. Bartholomeu's
night," this, according to Reinsdorf, ”was the only 8
possible solution to the social question."7 At this
period in.his life Reinsdorf was still a socialist, but
was rapidly changing his views toward anarchism. Most,
too, was not yet an anarchist, but was considered to be
a radical socialist.

Reinsdorf worked for a time during this period on
the staff of the Social Democratic paper Tagwacht, edited

 

7Johann Mbst, August Reinsdorf(Nsw York, 1885),
P. 13.

113
by Hermann Greulich(18h1-l925), with whom he was soon to
have a falling out. While working for Greulich, Reinsdorf,
through his writing and social agitation helped to further
the cause of socialism. Of this period in Reinsdorf's
life, Greulich, a quarter of a century later wrote that
I'August Reinsdorf was a robust young man and one of the
best compositors I ever knew, unfortunately he drank and
was a very unpleasant person, even though he was very
good natured and kind. Rsinsdorf was a comedian, though
he tended more to coarse comedy. He was entirely happy,
when a talented glass painter painted him a plate with
a picture of a homicide, the act of murder ends with the

decapitation of the murderer."8

The plate also had
written upon it the customary ”moral" to be gained.
Little did Reinsdorf realize at the time that before ten
years passed, he would meet a similar fate.

The first International Anarchist Congress in
which German delegates were present was the Brussels
Congress of the Anarchist International. The so called
Second Anti-Authoritarian Congress, which was referred
to by its participants as the Seventh General Congress
of the International‘Uorkingmen's Association, was held

in Brussels from September 7 to 13, 1871'..9 Germany was

 

 

8Volksrightflurich), July 28, 1900. Quoted in
J. Langha , s anarchistische Bewegung in der Schweiz,
pp. 250-251. _

9

For the proceedings of this congress see: Co te-
rendu officiel du septieme congrss general de l'assoc%ation

1114

represented at this congress by two Lassalleans, Frthme
and Fau8t(Paul Kersten),lo both of whom.were members of
the General Association of German.Werkingmen(A11gemeiner
deutscher Arbeitervsreig). Neither was an anarchist,

nor an anarchist sympathizer, and neither was able to
legally represent the General Association of Gsrman'Work-
ingmen at the congress because they had been delegated
by German groups living in Belgium. The congress itself
accomplished nothing of any significance, but it was not,
as Engels wrote to Marx, ”a.miserable failure."11 The
congress pointed out the road that anarchism was to fol-
low for the remainder of the century. The Italian and
Spanish.groups revealed their affinity for following a
jprogram of conspiratorial activity or, as it became
known, ”Propaganda by Deed."

‘The German Lassallean delegates revealed their
wholehearted support for conquest of the political power
‘by the working class. This policy of parliamentarism
‘wae one to which.the Social Democrats would adher more

and more as the century progressed and it was perhaps

 

Internationale des travailleurs(Vsrviers, 1875), and the
excel‘fent coverage Tven the congress by the London Times,
(Segtembsr 10, 1 71.3, p. 7: a, b, 0: (September 11, 1875:),
p. z c, d, as (September 1h, 187h), p. 7: d, e; (Septems
ber 15, 187h), p. S: c, d; (September 16, 187b,), p. 7:

a, by c.

No.31. Stekloff, History of the First International

11Briefwechsel, IV, p. 367.

115
the most basic distinction between the German socialists
and the German anarchists. The German delegates related
that the German workingmen, like the English, meant to
work out their social emancipation by means of political
power and that universal suffrage, even though it was
hampered by the three class system of voting and many
socialists were not twenty-five and old enough to vote,
was working in their favor and they would continue to
gain votes in the Reichstag. The German delegates could
never accept the anarchist ideas of abstention from.po-
litics because this would result in arresting the move-
ment in Germany because they felt that social emancipation
was dependent upon political emancipation and acquisition
of political power, explaining that without political
action the working classes in Germany would never have
arrived at the position they occupied at that time.
'. . . Taking part in elections was necessary for another
reason. It showed what support those who occupied theme
selves with public questions could reckon on from.the
working people generally, and it also showed the strength
of those opposed to the working classes. To wait till
the day after the revolution before the working people
were called upon to interest themselves would simply lead
to disappointment and defeat. To have representatives of
labour in a Legislature might not be of immediate benefit;
but it gave the movement dignity, and enabled the leaders
to proclaim their principles in places where otherwise

116
they would never be heard of."12

Schwitzgebel, the delegate for Jura, then pointed
out that ”in Germany it was considered revolutionary to
take part in politics because they wanted to transform
society downwards; they wanted to emancipate a community
that had grown up under restraint; whereas the collecti-
vists began with the free and independent individual who
associated with equals, and that would revolutionize so-
ciety from.below upwards."13

A German member, but not a delegate replied that
'. . . there was no great difference of Opinion. If it
were permitted in Germany to say publicly that one in-
tended to transform the state by force, they would care
little for politics. But to say what they wanted was
treason; they therefore went in for politics because to
transform the state by means of politics was legal, and
'was acknowledged so in the courts of law. Political
action in Germany was tantamount to an escape from.punish-
msnt.”1l'- He went on to point out that they now had ten
representatives in the Reichstag but even if they had a
nmdority it would mean nothing because if they legislated

contrary to the interests of the upper classes they would

12London Times,(Septsmbsr 11, 187k), p. 8: c.

13Ib1d.
lhlbid.

 

117
simply be put down by force. They expected nothing from
universal suffrage, but it was the only mode of action
possible. If they did elect a majority they would be
put down by force, but that would furnish the opportunity
for an armed revolt.

The next day's discussion was started by the Ger-
man delegate who stated.his conviction that the day of
the revolt of the fourth estate was at hand(the other
three estates being the clergy, nobility, and the bour-
geoisie). He went on to say that nothing short of a
revolution would settle the social question. The Social
Democrats wanted the Social Democratic State, and they
could not see their way of getting it without a revolution.
The working peOple were eighty percent of the pOpulation
in Germany, but they were dominated by the minority, a
condition which would not be tolerated mush longer.

Hhat the anarchists did not understand, he said, was

that with the disappearance of classes, the working

people could.maks the state as useful to themselves as

the other three classes had.made use of it for themselves.

Thus, it would be better to transform the German state by
pacific and legitimate action into a popular state. This
was the lesson of history that when ever a discontented
class of society had sought to elevate itself it had
always aspired to political power, and the ruler of so-
ciety had always maintained their disputed privileges by

nmans of their political power. Political power was a

118

means to work around repressive press laws and close
supervision of public gatherings. Eventually they would
hold a majority in the Reichstag and they would have to
be reckoned with. If anything should happen then that
the aristocracy and bourgeoisie endeavoured to put down
by armed force, they would be the rebels and treated ac-
cordingly. The Social Democrats would be on the side
of the law. This was the lesson of the seventeenth-
century English Revolution, and of the American Revolution.
This policy would take time and would be opposed by the
more impassionate people who longed for immediate results,
but no other policy would be effective except in the way
of bringing about disastrous events and results.15

The German position at this congress has been
explained in detail because essentially it established
the lines along which the future debate between the Ger-
man anarchists and the Social Democrats would be carried
on. The congress adjourned without any agreement on the
question discussed. It was decided to hold the next
congress the following year in the Jura mountains and the
Jura Federation was chosen to be the Central Bureau for
the ensuing year.

Bern in the mid 1870's was a center for contact
between PrenChp and German-speaking anarchists, although

only a few of the German radicals considered themselves

 

15 ‘
Ibid., (September 1h, 187k) p. 7: d, e' (Sep-
tember 16,"1'B‘u7 ), p. 7: a, n, o. .' ’

3

y"

\e

119

to be anarchists. At first the German anarchists met
within the Social Democratic Socidty of Bern(Sozia1demo-
kratischer Verein Bern). Emil'Uerner and Otto Rinks
took part in the meetings of the anarchists who fre-
quented this circle. At the time, in 1875, Reinsdorf
was still not an anarchist.16 A great deal of the dis-
cussion which.took place among the anarchists was in
reference to the "Volksstaat'I which.had been the burning
issue to the Lassallean delegation at the International
| Congress which had met in Brussels in September, 187h.

The end result of these discussions among the
anarchists was accomplished on October 2, 1875, when a
program, whidh Nettlau calls the first German anarchist
program, was drawn up, at werner's suggestion, and signed
by the twenty-five members of the group. The first sig-
nature was that of Emil'Werner, followed by Paul Brousse
and his wife Blanche, Otto Rinks, N. Landsberg, Frlulein
nAdsle Beck, and Rudolph.Khhn, It was also signed by
thirty-three- others, including a. Reichel and Bruno
Gulsmann.

The program stated that the existing society was
based.on personal property and had as its political or-

ganization the state, which it declared was nothing more

 

16Nettlau, Agarchisten_gnd Sozialrevolutionggg,
pp. 130-132. Reinsdorf was in Lausanne working with Ru-
dolph Hahn founding a section of the International, a plan
which was realized in February of 1876. Guillaume,
L'Internationale, III, p. 318.

120

[than a weapon in the hands of the ruling class. The
state, it went on to say, must disappear and make room
for the society of the future, which would be a society
based on the principle of the free formation of groups
of individuals. Such a society would have as its econo-
mic foundation the common possession of the soil, the
mines, capital, the great lines of communication, and
the tools of work.

History, the program contended, demonstrated
that a violent solution was necessary in order to achieve
the transition from.the unjust society of the past to the
Just society of the future. This would be the social
revolution. In order to be prepared for it, it was ur-
gent that all worker organizations, because of an un-
avoidable necessity, must form.themselves into an alliance
which would under no circumstances be permanent. Each
group would continue to possess its complete independence,
its absolute freedom, The best way to achieve such an
alliance would be through the International workingmen's
Association. The International would be used as a ve-
hicle for the dissemination of the social-revolutionary
principle through both the spoken and the written word.
Should a social revolution break out, the association
‘would place at the disposal of the revolutionary organis-
ation of the country in question its determined support.17

 

3 17Quoted in Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevo-
lution re,.pp. 131-132. For the complete text see Appen-
dix 1.-

121

A newspaper, the Arbeiter-Zeitung, was formed by
the members of the group for the purpose of spreading
anarchist prOpaganda in German-speaking areas. The Arbeiter-
Zeitung was published in Bern from.July 15, 1876, to Oc-
tober 13, 1877; in all thirty-three issues appeared.
Among those who helped found the Arbeiter-Zeitung were
Reinsdorf, Rinke,'Werner, Rachelhofer, Brousse and later
even Peter Kropotkin worked on it. Articles written by
Brousse and Kropotkin in.French were translated into Ger-

man by'Werner and Fraulein Landsberg.18 The first issue

outlined the objectives of the group:

'wo want the complete, definitive, absolute
emancipation of all workers. ‘We want those who
produce to have all that they produce, and those who
do not produce to have nothing. ‘We do not want that
the great majority of society which works to cringe
and suffer eternally under the ferule of a small mi-
nority which sleeps, eats, drinks and promenades. we
want most of all justice - the victory of the worker
over idleness. ‘wo desire still more - social brother-
hood. Hhen the entire produce of a man's lahor is
returned to him, economic justice will come into being
and with it freedom - a practical freedom.which is
useful, and not a theoretical freedom.which is found
in the law books and of which only those who possess
have need, but which for the poor always remain dead
words. ‘wo want it first of all because it is fair
and just, we want it also because then and only then
will it be possible to have brotherhood of the entire
human race.

The article went on to explain in detail the imp
practicality of trying to bring about such reforms legally
through a legally constituted majority pointing out that

it would take approximately two hundred fifty years to

 

18Rockdr, Johann Host, p. 100.

 

122
achieve such a majority to change the laws. This was too
slow for them. They wanted quicker results.19
The article advocated more violent methods because:
For he who possesses nothing
Freedom.ef the press is a lie
Freedom of speech is a lie
Fresdom.of thought is a lie
Freedom.of assembly is a lie
Freedom.of participation is a lie
All theoretical freedoms are open lies
For he who possesses nothing freedom means nothing,
for the lame the freedom.to walk, for the blind the
freedom to see, for it is not enough to permit some-
thing to happen or to only'have laws which allow it,
one must also have the necessary means by which posses-
sions can be obtained.
Each of these so called false freedoms is then
discussed at length with the specific meaning it had to
the workingman who worked an eleven or twelve hour day.
The statement ended by declaring that the Arbeiter-Zeitung
was founded to better explain the social revolution and to

encourage the economic solidarity of the workers.20

'In the last issue of the Arbeiter-Zeitung(0ctober 13,
1877) the editors announced that publication would be ceased
because the purpose of the paper had been fulfilled - the
spread of anarchist ideas in German speaking areas. The
group which founded the Arbeiter-Zeitung_had formed a
delegation to represent the German speaking peoples at

the meetings held in Verviers and Ghent in September of

 

19Arbeiter-Zeitung, No. 1, (July 15, 1876).

201mm.

If"

123

1877; they had spread the ideas of the anarchist revo-
lutionary program through Germany and were forming them-
selves into anarchist groups in Germany and Switzerland;
thetArbeiter-Zeitung served as a correspondence center
and confederation for these groups; the Arbeiter-Zeitung
was founded as the organ of a single undertaking and as
such had.to speak but the Arbeiter-Zeitung must give way
to another organ which would represent the entire German
speaking anarchist movement; they announced that a paper
soon would appear to fulfill this purpose and that there
would be additional German anarchist newspapers to re-
present the local groups.21

How successful was the group which founded the
Arbeiter-Zeitung in Born in spreading anarchist ideas
among the German speaking peoples? How many of the above
mentioned achievements had.the group actually accomplished
by Octeber, 1877, when the paper ceased te be published
and the small Bern group split up! To answer these
questions, the following examinationwill study two
aspects: (1) the influence of the Arbeiter-Zeitung and
the Bern.group on the international scene during the
period from.July, 1876, to September, 1877; and (2) the
influence the group had in making inroads into Germany
during this period. This will be prhmarily an examination
of the part played by Reinsdorf,‘Herner, and Rinks and it

 

2Tbid” No. 33, (October 13, 1877).

H>.I‘Hu\‘1i .

12h
is not intended to portray a complete picture of the
activities of the entire Bern group, but only those which
are related to the movement in Germany.

The decision.had been taken at the Brussels
Congress in September, 1871),, to hold the next congress
in the Jura mountains in 1875, however, this congress
did not meet until October 26-30, 1876, in the city of
Bern. The so called Bern Congress of the Anti-Authori-
tarian International, or as it was named by the social-
ists, the Eighth Congress of the International werking-

nmn's Association, met in very inauspicious circumstances.22

Represented at this congress were the Belgian
Federation, Dutch Federation, French Federation, Italian
Federation, Jura Federation and a number of fraternal
delegates including Julius Vahlteich(1839-l915)r a Ger-
man Social Demebrat and member of the Reichstag; and
Hermann Greulich, representing the Swiss Arbeiterbund.
In all there were twenty-eight delegates. One of the
delegates from the Jura Federation was August Reinsdorf,
who by 1876 had.aolidified his position as an anarchist.

It was obvious to everyone that the Anti-

Autheritarian International was on its last legs. The

 

‘ 220m this congress see: Compte rendu du huiticme
con res g6n6ra1 de 1'association-Tfiternaticnal des tra-
vai§leurs tenu‘ifBerne d6 26 au—BOOctobre, 1875(Bern,
1876); Nettlau, Der Anarchismus venTProudhon 264Kropotkin,
pp. 237-2h5; SteEIETT, History of the First International,
pp. 329-333; Guillaumeé-Ii‘Internationale W, pp. - ;

Arbeiter-Zeitung, No. (October 21, 1875 , No. 9(Octo-
61' g 0

125

Spanish.glsried in their political abstentionism and re-
ferred contemptuously to the use of the workers' funds
in strikes as an unproductive expenditure. The Italians,
following up their proposal sent by letter to the congress
in Brussels in 187h, boasted of their exploits in the
realm.of "Propaganda by Deed." Cesar de Paepe(l8h2-1890)
let the congress know that in Holland and Belgium the
trend in the workers' movement was toward social democracy
and the Volksstaat. 'The Volksstaat, which the Brussels
Congress had decided would be the society of the future,
was once again pushed by De Paepe who was gravitating
farther and farther away from.an anarchist position.
‘De Paepe defended the idea of the Volksstaat, however,
he said if the anarchists found the word I'state" to be a
connotation that was not palatable to them.he would glad-
ly substitue the term ”public administration." The
Bakuninists maintained their position that the state and
its institutions had te be destroyed and that the only
possible form.of social organization was a voluntary
federation of free corporations. Reinsdorf remarked
that the Volksstaat was in reality nothing more than
a Polizeistaat. The discussion of this question occupied
twe sittings ef the congress and end result was that the
matter was left open without a vote being taken on 'this
purely theeretical question." -

The Anti-Authoritarian International rather than

consolidating the workers' movement in the various countries

ulu

126

proved to be a hindrance to the international consolidation
of proletarian forces. Realizing this the Belgians intro-
duced a proposal that a universal socialist congress be
held in 1877. This suggestion aroused the apprehensions
of the anarchists who declared that there could be no
question of reconstituting the old International. The
majority at the Born Congress were not willing to follow
the anarchist suggestion and would not admit that it was
needless or impossible to resuscitate the old International.
vahlteich let it be known that he'hoped that it would be
possible to re-establish.the old International, either
on its former foundations or on new ones, and that the
German socialists would be glad to re-join. After a
lengthy discussion, the Belgian, Dutch, French, and Jura
Federations voted in favor of the Belgian proposal that
a universal socialist congress should be held in 1877.
The Spanish and Italian delegation did not vote against
the proposal, but abstained.

Reinsdorf, one of the delegates representing the
Born group, had taken two trips to Germany prior to the
convening of the congress. During the first trip, at the
beginning of August 1876, he traveled to Leipzig, Berlin,
and several other German cities for the purpose of coming
in contact with radical social democrats, hoping to or-
ganize the anarchist movement there. The trip was timed
to take place as the first issues of the Arbsiter-Zeitung

came off the press on July 15; Reinsdorf carried copies

12?

which.he distributed along his route, After a short
stay in Germany he returned to Lausanne where along with
his friend Rudolph Kahn he took part in the tailors'
strike. Reinsdorf and Kahn were seized by the police
and were forced to leave the Swiss Canton of‘Waadt.
He went to Geneva and then on to Bern where he remained
a few days before entering Germany once again under a
false name.23 The second trip took place sometime
between August 21st and September 18th. There is evidence
to place him.in Chaux-de-Fonds, where he delivered a
speech, on August 21, 1876,2h and on September 18, 1876,
he was back in Bern.25 During the course of this trip
Reinsdorf met with Mbst(who was still just a radical
socialist and not an anarchist) in Berlin and established
himself as a correspondent for the Berliner freie Presse:
he wrote under the name of Jchn Steinberg, only one of the
many alias he used in hislifetime.26

Most relates that he and Reinsdorf walked and
talked about the future of anarchism.and that Reinsdorf's

ideas on hopaganda by Deed” made a great impression upon

fivf

23Rocker, Jchann Most, pp. 101-10h; Guillaume,
L'Internationale, IV, pp. 55-56.

2l’rGuillaume, L'Intsrnationals, IV, p. 79.

2SNsttlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutiondre,
P0 133e -

26Nest, August Reinsdorf, pp. 22-23.

.1.

I a

l.-

128

him. Reinsdorf was critical of Most's socialism. He
addressed a pointed question to Mbst concerning the
Social Democratic Party, ”what are you then a voting
and newspaper reading party and nothing else?" Reins-
dorf‘went on to remark that "with that material you'll
never attract any dogs to the oven."27

It was also at this juncture that Reinsdorf got
in trouble with the Central Bureau of the Compositors
Association. In a meeting which.he called and presided
over Reinsdorf usurped the authority of the Central
Bureau of the Compositors Association and placed the
name of the printer Boechat in.Delemont on the index.
According to the statutes of the Association the Central
Bureau had.to be consulted before such action could be
taken.“'28 ‘Evidently the payment of a fine on the part of
Reinsdorf and.his compatriots was involved because in the
issue of Le Gutsnburg for October 1, 1876, an open letter
from the Central Bureau to all the various sections ap-
peared, which.indicatsd that Haussaner, who was involved
with Reinsdorf, had promised to make a ”reimbursement.”
Reinsdorf, however, wrote the Central Bureau a letter on
September 27 which was full of threats. Furthermore he

did not send the seven francs he owed the bureau.

 

27mm.

288cc the epen letter ef the Central Bureau in

Ie Gutenbur . Journal de la typographic Belgg(Brussels)
Tgeptember E5, 1876).

 

129

In September of 1876 after Reinsdorf returned from
Berlin he teok part in a meeting of the Central Committee
of the Arbeiterbund in Bern. Along with Werner and Rinks,
he put forward the ideas of anarchism; they were opposed
by Hermann Greulich. A few weeks later in the general
:meeting of the Berner ArbeiterfiUnion Reinsdorf continued
to dispute with Greulich and press for the adoption of
anarchist ideas but he was voted down, and along with the
other anarchists he left the meeting under protest.
Shortly thereafter he was voted out of the Sozialdemokra-
tischen.Verein of Bern when it became known that he
'would be a delegate at the Jura Congress representing
the anarchist position.29

Reinsdorf had been chosen on October 9, 1876,
along with Paul Brousse and Adhemar Schwitzgebsl, to re-
present the Born group at the Jura Congress. At the
congress Reinsdorf represented the anarchist position
by putting forth the mandate sketched by'Werner on the
question of ”Free Association of Individuals with groups

and the free-formation of these groups."30

 

29Rocker, Johann Most, pp. 105-106. See alse
Rsinsderf's letterfiin the Arbeiter-Zeitung, No. 7(Octo-
her 7, 1876), in which he replied to charges made by Greu-
lich in Taggacht that he was nothing more than a paid
agitator o s Jura Federation. Practically every issue

of the Arbeiter-Zeitu contains some material on this dis-
pute which existed wififi Greulich's Tagwacht.

30Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrsvolutionlre,

 

P 0 133e

130

At the meeting of the Jura Congress it was
evident to Reinsdorf that the anarchists could not hepe
to work in accord with either the German Social Demo-
cratic Party or the International as they were constituted.
In a number of articles written for the Arbeiter-Zeitung
Reinsdorf pointed out his position on the issues dis-
cussed at the congress. Reinsdorf first of all raised
the question: 'Is the International practical?" In this
article Reinsdorf pointed out that "the reactionaries,
dumbheads, liberals, radical correspondents, and social-
ists” say it is not practical and that many people have
swallowed this line. Reinsdorf thought that the Inter-
national was practical because "It wants the abolition
of the existing economic disproportion, the introduction
of economic equality, the common possession of the means
of work and of the production of work, the abolition of
private profit, the production of the people for the
people."31

‘In the Arbeiter-Zeitung of December 30, 1876, is

 

an article in which Reinsdorf portrays a discussion
between a Social Democrat and an anarchist. In this ar-
ticle Reinsdorf first off outlines what freedom of the
press, of assembly, and of speech mean to him; saying
that they are hollow phrases when this is all a man has.

Then.he continues to present his case by stating:

 

31’Arbeiter-Zeitung, No. 10(November 18, 1876).

131

The liberation of the oppressed is only possible
when the entire means of production of private profit
is removed, and regulated through the need of the ge-
neral public, in whose hand it should rest when all
preperty is collectivized. Is it possible though,
that with today's arrangement, which is based on the
narrow deformed idea of private property, that it can
be transformed in a peaceful way to a collectivized
preperty? How is it possible to transform.the million
threads which form the entire administrative apparatus
of private property with a single blow, to free it
without damage or offense? He who speaks of a great
evolution is a utopian, he had not yet considered
that the present state of affairs is founded on pri-
vate property, and that with the destruction of pri-
vate preparty will be followed in a logical way by
the destruction of the entire present day form of
society.

In the same article Reinsdorf also pointed out
the growing dissatisfaction of the German anarchists
with the German Social Democrats. He demonstrated the
need for the formation of a German anarchist party which
would openly oppose the Social Democratic Party.

The growing dispute with the Social Democrats was
carried one step further in the early part of 1877 when
the quarrel between.Hermann Greulich, editor of the $357
wgght, and Reinsdorf, developed into an open conflict.
Ever since the founding of the Arbeiter-Zeitung on July 15,
1876, the Tagwacht had gone out of its way to discredit
the founders of the anarchist paper.32 On February 27,
1877, Emil Werner held a meeting in Neuchatel which was
conducted in both French and German on the theme of
'Socialism.in Germany" in which.he pointed out the dif-
ference between the Volksstaat theory of the Social

 

3zsu111aume, L'Internationale, Iv, p. 110.

I1!

 

132'

D°morats and the theory of anarchism. Werner called the
\Vkastaat idea: a reactionary instrument of bourgeois
demOorats {which would result in the introduction of a
anger-o us dualism in the socialist movement. He conclu-

10qu by saying that the only thing that would be accom-

at! labed by erecting a Volksstaat would be the further
t
beamment of police power.33

at On May 5, 1877, Reinsdorf wrote regarding the Volks-
Q
”131 ‘3 "It is clear, that the idea of the Volksstaat in
Q -
Qqq b 171*). 6

tbs ”babe

 

will of the majority would surmount the laws,
the will of the majority must be thrust upon

6 h,

Q ”*‘SQ 1“? e taut minority in a continuing way by an army of
I: it

\b ”‘a— ts and police, it is clear, that if the Volks-

1.31 13
y hot allowed to develop to anarchism then enti-

c “on
1b.: Q M1 conditions will follow. How, under such

cg
his hoes can there be freedom of speech in such a
Sta
”11:10:.“ “‘I:, and where is the equality if an oppressed
sexistsflfi"

7%

Out that; einsdorf, in the same article, went on to point

do is“ on every side men are subjected to the degrading
V

t \ f the state and that the Social Democratic Party
song” \

‘Q follow the same course, thinking that mankind

’6
ist without the rules and regulations of the

 

33Becker, Johann Most, p. 110.
3""hteiter-Zeitung, No. 22(May 5, 1877).

 

133
state. To try to organize mankind from above is un-
natural because it results in the need for an authori-
tarian rule under which mankind can never hope to be
free, however, 'if you organize from below on the basis
of need then all rulers are unnecessary or detrimental.
The fight for freedom will never be ended until . . o
every authoritarian has been annihilated.”3§
Reinsdorf's writings point out quite clearly that
the German speaking anarchists in Switzerland had under-
gone a substantial change from their earlier program in
which the idea was presented that need alone should not
be a determining factor in the distribution of goods,
“1’. better phrased, he who would not work should not re-
“he. The contention that one ought to work in order
to receive is not found in Reinsdorf's writings which
Point the way to the next step taken by the German speak-
133 anarchists in Switzerland. This step was the forming
or the German speaking Anarchist Communist Party in May
“r 187?. Reinsdorf, who had left Switzerland in April of
:3:7 r9!“ Germany, on one of his propaganda trips did not
° part in the formation of this association in May and

“n
3 or 1877. However, Werner and Rinke were very instru-

 

mgnt
\3‘1 in the organization of the group.36
35Ibid.
€°tk1 q 36Enil Werner in a letter of May )4, 1877, to Kro-
he releted how he and Rinks were working to organize

Lil

B ‘3 Q
n1; Q 101W and draw up a list of statutes. Guillaume,
nun-0119.1, IV, po 208o

L

13h
The forming of the German speaking Anarchist
Communist Party was not without opposition. The oppo-
sition was led by Gutsmann and Bremeyer. On June 13,
1877, Rinks called together a meeting in which the prog-
ram of the group was presented. The statutes of the
Dmflschredenden anarchisch-kommunistischen Part9; stated
that the purpose of the organization was to unite the di-
verse elements of the German speaking peoples who recog-
nized the anarchist-communist principle and who were
associated with the International Workingmen's Association.
The eight articles of the program were concerned with per-
functery matters such as admission, dues, and the establish-
ment of a Correspondence Bureau to maintain a continuous
"latienship between the individual members of the or-
ganization}?
me new party was not destined to have a very
1958 111‘s. Several months before it was founded, on
”arch 18, 1877, the Rate Fahnen demonstration hgd taken
D1a°°- Following the Paris Commune a reaction set in
“v91. ‘11 of Europe against the Commune and the ideas for
which it stood and one of its prominent symbols was the
bed f 1&8. Eventually red flags were forbidden even in
Jitzorland, however, this did not stop the members of
o J“"‘ group from carrying them through the streets to

°°leb
. rate the sixth anniversary of the Commune. The

luti-a 2: 37Quotecl in Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevo-
\\lr_._, p. 1311.. For the complete text see Appendix II.

‘

 

L

135
Arbeiter-Zeitung on March 10, 1877, had carried an exer-
tation for all members of the International to gather
in Born on the 18th for the celebration of the anniver-
sary. The Arbeiter-Zeitung proclaimed that the red flag
should be the official flag of the International and
said that within a few years it would be the flag of the
proletariat and that the bourgeoisie would fall before
it.

Both the German and French speaking represen-
tatives were present at the gathering which took place
outside at ten o'clock Sunday morning on March 18th.
They met again at two in the afternoon in the Jeangros
Restaurant. It was decided that the march to the train
atultion should be led by the red flag followed by a
31""13 Of musicians who would be followed by the marchers.

Naturally the police could not permit such a march to

tairs place so they stopped in, halted it, and seized the

”lax-chore. They were not tried, however, until August 16

when sentences were handed down of from ten to sixty

d
‘lya 1111Prisonment: in addition to fines, damages had

‘:o
be Paid to pay the medical bill of a couple of police-

men

“'h. had been injured in the fracas. Rinks received

ty d‘ys, Usrner and Brousse thirty days each. In

tion to this Werner, Rinks, and Brousse were for-

b

Ida
9 n to enter the Swiss Canton of Bern for three years.38

\

 

30hr 381a
a ard Die anarchistische Beweguag in der
\15, ”fig-73$ r e er- s ung, o. are ,

L-

f 136
The banishment of Werner and Rinks struck a severe
blow at the Arbeiter-Zeitung. Reinsdorf was away in Ger-
many at the time and it had been decided already prior to
the trial that Brousse would start publication of a paper
in French that would be similar in format to the Arbeiter-
Zeitugg. L'avant-Garde was published by Brousse at Chaux-
de-Fonds from June 2, 1877, to December 2, 1878. In all
forty issues appeared. The establishment of L'avant-Garde
left Werner and Rinks as the mainstays of the Arbeitsr-
Zeitung, and when both of them were banished from Bern,
Publication of the Arbeiter-Zsitung was no longer feasible.
Their banishment and the probable realization that they
w0|:lld be considered as persona non grata elsewhere in
Switzerland probably, more than anything else, contributed
1" the demise of the Arbeiter-Zeitung. The last issue
’1‘ the paper which appeared on October 15, 1877, claimed
that the paper had accomplished its purpose of spreading
Q19 ideas of anarchism in Germany.
The final edition of the Arbeiter-Zeitung noted
1:?" °ther newspapers would be established elsewhere to
° 11:3 place; a claim that is at least partially true.

1.:
a
M: which Werner and Rinks made use of to

“at,
themselves heard, due to Werner's great facility

with
\ thB French language, can be considered a French

187
7) §
17 - James Guillaume, L'Intsrnationalg, IV, pp. 167-

IV n the trial see: Tames Guillaume, L'Internationalg,

. 1)
1‘ F52: 239-2h6; and the .deuble issue of mun den
Qration Jurassienne, No.'s 33-3MAugustm

 

L

‘
I.

.J

.~L

Elk.

137
cousin of the Arbeiter-Zeitung. Kropotkin's Le Revolté,

 

founded on February 22, 1879, and his Freedom, founded

in 1886, can quite logically claim to be offshoots of the
Arbeiter-Zeitung. Freedom is still published today in
London. Der Rebell, published in Switzerland and London
by Rinks in 1881, 18814-1886, and superseded by Die Auto-
£221.13: which was published during the years 1886-1893 by
the |'Grou‘p Autonomie,” of which Rinks was a member, may
also.be viewed as offshoots of the Arbsitsr-Zeitung.

Der Rebell, Dig;Autonomie, and the ”Group Autonomic"

 

W111 be discussed in chapter ten. These papers were
founded for the explicit purpose of Spreading the word
'1‘ anarchism in Germany.
Werner and Rinks left Switzerland on foot walking
n”Ply the entire distance to Verviers, Belgium, where a
Meeting of the anarchist members of the International
”1! to take place on September 6-8, 1877.39 At the In-
i:°I'IIB.1:1.oot:ia1 Anarchist Congress at Verviers, also called
121° Ninth Congress of the International Workingmen's
468"(xi-ation, Werner,and Rinks represented the Swiss

ao
\°:1°n8 and the newly formed anarchist groups in Germany,

EntionasglCrOpotkin, Memoirs of a Revolutionist, p. 3401i,

“811 that he attended the congress under the name
D. 252113 See also Guillaume, L'Internationale, IV,
pri‘ZSB. Evidently Werner and Rinks did not serve
Son sentences of thirty and forty days respectively
actor dmfln to them on August 18. Perhaps this is another
frugb h the demise of the Arbeitsr-Zeitun because
‘nd, ‘nd Rinks were now fugutives from justice in Switzer-

’K

/. l< “I,

138
which Reinsdorf had helped found.""0 At this congress
the question was raised of "the best and speedisst means
of realizing socialist revolutionary action." No de-
cision was taken on this point. It was decided that
"whenever the proletariat may secure a triumph, it is
absolutely essential that this triumph shall be extended
to all other lands.” The congress adopted a resolution
that whenever a revolutionary movement in a particular
country showed sighs of success, revolutionists in other
countries must give this revolution all possible support,
both material and moral and try to extend it to other
countries.

The main discussion at the Verviers Congress was
°°ncerned with the agenda of the forthcoming Universal
Socialist Congress to be held in Ghent on September 9-
161 1377. The delegates decided that at Ghent Congress

they Should present a united front on the principles dis-
c"“°do The main points of the agenda for the Universal
Sociaeliat Congress, along with the anarchist positions
‘dopted at Verviers, were: (1) Collective property - not
.8 a. distant idea, but as something that should be included

in
c"13'5'1'ent programs and every day manifestations;

1 a 1LONO official report of this congress was ever
hed, Accounts of the proceedin s can be found in

Bull

mils FSdération Jurassienne Se tember 23, 1877);

W, No. 32(September T, 1 77); Guillaume,

591' wins one s, IV, pp. 257-265; London Times(Septem-

gr 1213 a , p. 1;, col. b, c. For the complete agenda

t”“& 1 1.Or'thcoming Universal Socialist Congress see: _Ig

Mtg-_(Geneva), No. 3(Jyly, 1877), 5-7. An account of

Octbb 1"" ers Congress is also found in Le travailleur, No. 6
'81“. 1877), 10-11.

‘

pUbl

 

NI.
!

uA-l
,

3...

hi.

he:

.1“

he!

low
wt.

.
‘I

139
(2) Political parties - all political parties form a
single reactionary mass, and it is our duty to fight
them one and all; (3) Trade union organization - trade
union activities are inadequate as long as they are
directed at such trifles as increasing wages or reducing
hours. The unions should aim at the destruction of the
wage system and the seizure of the means of production.
In this resulution is contained the idea of replacing
the socialist parties by trade unions. (This idea of
the destruction of the wage system and the worker control
01' production was later incorporated in anarcho-syndica-
list thought). NJ.) Solidarity among working class and
social organization - decided that no solidarity could
b0 established between the International and organizations
differing from it upon essential points(refsrring to the
taarohists). (5) Foundation of a central correspondence
and statistical bureau - felt that the Federal Bureau
or the International could fulfill this function and
there was no need to establish anew bureau. By main-
tuning the bureau as it was, a bureau dominated by
March-ists, they would be able to dominate the world
”1.3, J~8Lb0r movement. A cha rgs would mean dominance by
the German Social Democrats.
a com The Verviers Congress adjourned on the note that
h 339683 would be held the next year in Switzerland,

0‘0»-
QI‘. the proposed congress was never held. The Ver-

Hug
Congress marked the death of the Anarchist International

L

 

Fi—

‘94

lilo
after an existance of only six years.

After the completion of the Verviers Congress
Werner and Rinke, along with nine other anarchists, went
to Ghent to attend the Universal Socialist Congress
September 9-16, 1877, representing groups at Leipzig,
Magdeburg, Berlin, Munich, Mullhausen, Thun, and ZurichJ‘u'

This was the first international meeting in five years
which represented the different shades of anarchist and

socialist opinion. The purpose of the meeting was to!

Bee if the forty-two delegates could bring the movement

back together and cement former ties. Before a pact of

Selidarity could be reached certain questions of prin-

c1ple had to be agreed upon. The agenda for the Universal

socialist Congress, already discussed above in relation
to the Verviers Congress, comprised the areas where some

agreement had to be achieved before there could be any

Possibility of solidarity.
On the first point "the tendencies of modern

p -
”Oduction from the view point of property" there was

1 -
Ittle divergence of opinion. All the delegates at Ghent

81171 “A privately printed account of this congress
do; 2% no date or place of publication‘is the Compte-rendu
W du congres socialiste term a Gant 93% septembre,
, g) or other accounts see: Enlaume,T'Int3rnfiionale,
tembep‘ 265-280° Bulletin de la fé'dération TuressiennelSBp-
1877 )1‘ 23, 1877 ; Arbeiter-Zeitung, No. 3213eptember 29,
°: (3 - Po 6, col. d e"133ptember 114, 1877), p. ’4, col. d,
N0. Seeptember 18 18773, p. 1;, col. c, 6; Le travailleur,
”Natl °°tOber, 1877), 11-13. Rocker, Johann Most, p. I59
" dc. Qua Reinsdorf's organization activitTes in Eermany
as .138 RévoltflDecember 1?, 1881), p. 3.

 

 

 

 

1&1
were advocates of collective ownership, but Opinion was
divided among the state communists(Socia1 Democrats) and
the collective federalists(anarchists). The great dif-
ference of opinion was over the best method to bring the
collective economy into being. The discussion eventually

degenerated into an argument of the Volksstaat versus a

 

voluntary federation of free production groups. In the
final vote on this point the anarchists lost by a vote
of sixteen to tea.

The second issue dealing with "political parties"
was another point on which the Social Bemocrats and the A
anardhists were irreconciably split. Some of the milder
anarchists, such as James Guillaume, representing Switzer-
land, were alarmed by the speeches of the Spanish anarchists,
who called for violent revolutionary activity, insurrec-
tion, and ”Propaganda by Deed." A resolution moved hy
Herner on this point stated: ”we deem.it necessary to come
bat all political parties, whether they call themselves
socialist or not, in the hepe that the workers who are
still enrolled in the ranks of these parties, enlightened
by experience, will open their eyes, and will abandon the
political path in order to enter the path of anti-govern-
mental socialism." This resolution was supported by all
of the anarchists‘but was voted down by the other delegates.
The resolution on this point which eventually carried
supported political activity as the best method to bring

about social emancipation.

1,."

“he

use.
u- n

#1..

bus

 

M...

c
In:-
‘s

I
'ru
"IL‘

I"

1&2

The congress passed a resulution supporting an
international federation of trade unions as a potent
instrument for the emancipation of the workers. The
discussion concerning whether solidarity should be
established amongthe various working-class groups and
socialist organizations ended in a defeat for the pro-
posal. fibwever, that evening in a private meeting, to
which the anarchists were not invited, a resolution was
adopted supporting united activity on the part of the
organization in all lands and promising material and
moral support for one another. The discussion on the
question of founding a central bureau for correspondence
and for the tabulation of working-class statistics ended
in a capitulation by all but three of the anarchists.

During the congress Werner delivered, what
.Rocker has called, a first rate speech, in which he
attacked the program, tactics and organization of the
German Social Democratic Party. The congress listened
attentively as he spoke and when the speech was finished
no one rose to their feet to speak in opposition, al-
though it should be noted that Idebknecht was not present
during'Werner's attack.""2

On the surface it would appear that the anarchist
position had been soundly defeated by the Social Democrats

at Ghent, however, Eropotkin relates that "we succeeded

 

“RockerLJohann Most, p. 110.

1&3

in checking the centralization scheme." Centralization,
however, was not the issue in the 1877 congress, and.the
socialists on all the items on the agenda carried the
day over the anarchists. Perhaps it is ironical that
at Ghent the socialists were victorious over the anar-
chists because thdy'had the voting power on their side,
though it should be pointed out that there were many
instances of cross over votes on both sides and the issue
was muddled further by a number of fence sitters who had
one foot in the socialist camp and the other in the anar-
chist. In the final analysis the Social Democratic po-
sition probably triumphed because it was the most reason-
able and appeared to have the greatest chance of success.
The delegates could see the concrete evidence of what
following such a program had achieved in Germany by 1877
in the form of twelve seats in the Reichstag. On the
other hand there was no evidence to demonstrate that
insurrection or ”Propaganda by Deed" could be successful.
The anarchists mid been dominant in-the International since
1872, but now they fell victim to what they originally
opposed, by trying to force the whole International Wor-
kers' Mbvement into their own narrow framework. In
attempting to do this they eventually isolated themselves
and lacking the necessary support were to be soon super-
seded on the international scene by the socialists.

One fact became abundantly clear at the Universal

Socialist Congress; if the anarchists pressed too hard in

 

«and

E11

‘-

 

 

lhh

Germany*they would be opposed not only by the state but
by the Social Democratic Party. This came out when Greu-
lidhKrepresenting Switzerland) said to‘Werner "it is easy
to preach.the ideas of anarchism in free Switzerland but
what would happen if you tried it in Germany." Werner
replied: “Yes, that is precisely what we plan to do
shortly.”- Liebknecht, infuriated by werner's remark,
Jumped to his feet, offering a counter-challenge, "If
you dare to come to Germany and attack our organization,
we shall annihilate you using any means necessary."u3
This advice evidently fell on deaf ears for after the
congress adjourned Rinke and Werner left for Germany.

It is now necessary to return to 1876 and pick

up the other half of the story; the results of the

 

hBQuoted in Le R3volt5(December 10, 1881). Lieb-
knedht did not like Rinke and used every opportunity to
get a dig in at him. It appears that Liebknecht, who was
forty-one at the time of the Ghent Congress, had more
respect for Werner. In reply to a question posed by‘Her-
ner regarding the feasibility of political activity Lieb-
knecht replied that at least when he returned to Germany
he would not have to change his name (this remark was
aimed at Rinke who at the time was only twenty-two years
old and a military deserter). Liebknecht then went on
to say that if he had wanted to be rich he would have
allied.himself with Bismarck. He also pointed out that
he had been imprisoned and in exile for the cause and that
”In order to fight an armed state it is necessary to form
an army." Rinke tried to reply to Liebknecht but his
voice was drowned out and no one heard his reply. Co te
rendu des ssances du congrfiss socialists tenu E’Gant gu §
au 16 septembre l§1£. p. 23. :The persodil anamosity be-
tween e no an Rinke lasted for many years. See:
Jbsef Peukert, Erinnerungen eines prolatariers aus der
revolutionlren Arbeiterbewe un (Berlin, 19I37, pp. 55-36.

eu ert was a close r on o inke's in the years following

1880 and his memoirs constitute the best source for infor-
mation on Rinke's activities in this period.

 

’ga"t

“m

.‘1 ‘U

New:
knot...
. .

1
Dal F.

In. ..

an. ..

0 t
ii‘fia 4
"‘a

“Jars,
\~.-'-.‘

“I‘M:
I.' e
l .n'.

J
L‘sh
‘. ‘

{3‘ 3: ,-
I fi’.l

«'1
5a.:e 1

"to
K“‘

1&5'
Arbeiter-Zeitungis campaign to disseminate anarchist
ideas in Germany and establish a number of anarchist
groups there. Archival material for this period is not
the best indicator of anarchist activity in Germany.
The archival materials examined for the early 1870's
are for the most part confused when dealing with anar-
chism, Social Democracy, and radical Social Democrats
and are consequently of little use.uh Evidence of
anarchist activity during the early period in Germany is
difficult to find for a number of reasons. The entire
Operation was, of necessity an underground, clandestine,
affair conducted for the most part by Reinsdorf, werner,
and Rinke, all fugitives from.the law. Detection by the
police would.have meant immediate arrest and imprison-
ment. One reason for the dearth of material is that the
principal participants did not leave their memoirs. Reins-
dorf was beheaded in 1885. Rinke died an untimely death
in St. Louis, Missouri, at the age of forty-six, by cho-
king to death on a piece of meat which he was eating in
haste in order to get to an anarchist meeting. 'Herner
left little record of his activities after he left.Ger-
many in the early 1880's. It is necessary therefore to
piece the story of anarchist activity in Germany in the
years 1876-78 through the use of the various anarchist

 

theutsches Zentralarchiv Merseburg, Rep. 89 H
(Geheimes Zivilkabinett), Abt. XXI, Generalia, Nr. 1 ,
Vol. 1-2, "Die Sozialdemokratie und Anarchie 1872-1909.”

4‘

 

.u1li

u“:

Itna‘

 

I e
“‘1
“I.

 

1‘

1&6
newspapers published at the time in Switzerland. The
correspondence written to these papers from.various
parts of Germany is very revealing concerning anarchist
activity in Germany.

In late August and early September, 1876, Reins-
dorf undertook the first of several propaganda trips into
Germany on behalf of the group which had founded the
Arbeiter-Zeitung. On his first trip Reinsdorf traveled
through the large cities of Southern Germany and eventu-
ally to Berlin where he met with his friend Johann Most,
not yet an anarchist. Reinsdorf established himself as
a correspondent for Most's Berliner freie Presse, sending
in contributions on such tOpics as the free formation of
anarchist groups and the Born Congress. Reinsdorf hoped
to halt the spread of Social Democratic ideas and replace
them.with his own anti-authoritarian ones.

During 1876-1877 Reinsdorf spent a good deal of
time in Leipzig, where he posed as an American, using the
name, John Steinberg, and attended Social Democratic meet-
ings to present the anarchist viewpoint. Converts came
slowly, but after a while Reinsdorf managed to gather a
group of adherents. It soon became known among his
followers that he was frmm near-by Pegau and eventually
the police began to watch his activities more closely
when they became suspicious of his local dialect, which
he spoke too well to be an American. One member of Reins-

dorf's small circle was Max H8de1, who tried to assassinate

.-

1h?

the German Emperor on May 11, 1878. It is very possible
that Reinsdorf also came in contact with Dr. Carl Nobiling,
who was still a student in Leipzig at this time. Nobiling
attended Social Democratic meetings during his stay in
Leipzig. (It will be pointed out in Chapter V that it is
possible that Nobiling knew werner). Johann Host claimed
that both Hadel's and Nobiling's attempts on the life of
William.I were inspired by Reinsdorf.h§ During this trip
into Germany Reinsdorf also traveled to Hannover, Berlin,
Breslau, Cologne, Dresden, Altenburg, Munich, Ddsseldorf,
Augsburg and other places. _

Kropotkin had great faith that the Arbeiter-Zei-
tggg’could be used as a base to found anarchist groups
in Germany. On April 29, 1877, he wrote to Paul Robin:
"The Arbeiter-Zeitung will become the center of a German
anarchist party. . . . we find.here many followers for
such a beginning(I am.speaking of Germans and not German
speaking Swiss). Besides we already have Reinsdorf,
G8rger and others in Germany, who are working in the same
spirit and who have succeeded in founding in Germany an
anarchist party, that will drive the peaceable Germans on

the road to revolution.h6

 

“SMost, August Reinsdorf, pp. 28-29.

ubQuoted in Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevo-
lutiondre, p. 135.

‘

1&8

The plan whieh the German anarchists were following
was to invade meetings Of the Social Democrats and use
the Opportunity to speak at these meetings to make con-
verts to anarchism. In general, then, the anarchists did
not seek out new territOries but went to the industrial
centers and cities of Germany where the Social Democrats
had already made considerable inroads. The principal
centers Of anti-authoritarianism.and anarchism in Ger-
many in the years 1876-1878 were Leipzig, Munich, "and
Berlin; Southern Germany, in general, was more receptive
to anarchist ideas than Northern Germany.

Reinsdorf re-entered Germany in April, 1877,
after first traveling to London, Brussels, and Paris.
In Leipzig he was able to find work as a compositor,
something he had been unable to do in London, Brussels,
or Paris, probably because he did not know the French
or English languages. During 1877 Reinsdorf and others
sent a considerable amount Of correspondence out of
Germany to the anarchist papers in Switzerland. The bulk
of this material can be placed into four categories:
(1) attacks on Social Democratic theory, (2) clarification
of anarchist theory, (3) Social Democratic activities in
Germany, (h) indications that anarchism.was spreading in

Germany.“7 Reinsdorf wrote that the German workers were

—_‘

h7For example see: Arbeiter-Zeitun , NO. 20(April 7,
1877); NO. 21(April 21, 1877)} NO. 22(Mhy E, 1877); NO. 26
(June 30, 1877); NO. 27(July 1h. 1877); NO. 28(Ju1 28, 1877);
No. 29(August 11, 1877): No. 30-31(August 25, 1877 3 Lg

 

 

l
mi
:

 

 

 

 

 

 

1&9

quick to understand the principles Of anarchism.and could
see the validity Of anarchist ideas over those Of the
Volksstaat, where the will Of the majority dominated the
minority.h8 In his articles Reinsdorf made vicious
attacks on Vorwlrts, the central organ of the Social
Democratic Party, published in Leipzig by Wilhelm.Lieb-
knecht.1+9 He also pointed out that the unification Of
Germany'had little meaning for the German working man
and that the Social Democrats had been unsuccessful in
their attempts to ameliorate the lot Of the working
man.50

Reinsdorf mentioned that there were visible signs
of revolutionary groups who wanted to abolish all signs
of governmental prejudice. The anarchists, he said,
would be assisted in forming a party in Germany by the
German government itself, because the state would prove
to the people how impractical legal methods are in
achieving equality for the workingman.51 In his corres-
pondence in June, July, and August of 1877 Reinsdorf

travailleur NO. 1(Mayé1877), 19-22; NO 3(Ju1y, 1877),
0. (August, 18 77). 26-2 29.

”BArbeiter-Zeitung, No. 22(May S, 1877).
the travailleur, No. 1(May, 1877), pp. 20-22.
Solbid., NO. 3(July, 1877), pp. 22-28.

51
Ride NO. 3(Ju1 , 1877) pp. 22.28; NO. '4.
(August, 13777},pp. 26-29.y ’

m

y..
E...

n.1.

:.: I

III.‘

'5?

(I

"l

~_.-_o:

150

was carried away perhaps with his enthusiasm for the
success of anarchism in Germany by the accomplishments
which he himself was beginning to have. In Leipzig
Reinsdorf continued to attend the meetings of the Social
Democrats, mouthing his anarchist sentiments until he
became a persona non grata. At the time Reinsdorf star-
ted to gather his own following. He related that ”One
day a young man, a street seller, came to me and asked
if I would give him.private instruction in the prin-
ciples of anarchism." From.this simple beginning a
group was formed which.included HBdel whom.Reinsdorf con-
sidered to be a Social Democratic spy until HBdel's at—
tempt on the life of the Emperor a few monthslater.52

Reinsdorf probably attended the Gotha Congress
of the Social Democratic Party in may, 1877. Brousse
wrote to him.offering fifty francs fothis expenses if
he would attend the congress and send a written report
of the proceedings to be printed in the Arbeiter-Zeitung.
Reinsdorf replied on May 23 that he could not attend the
congres”;3 however, Reinsdorf's correspondence frmm
Leipzig in the August, 1877, issue of Le travailleur in-

dicates that he was present at the congress. In addition

52Der Anarchistenprozess Reinsdorf und Genossen
Verhandelt_vor*dem.22 undi . Strafsenat des Reichs erichts
zu ESIBzigpvom.IS. 51s 22. Dezember lBBLIIeipzig, E8855,
Pp. - 6.

53Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutionflre,
P0 1350 ~

 

 

N

‘3

Is

‘5

 

H

 

't

(

 

151

to this the detailed coverage given the Gotha Congress
in.the Arbeiter-Zeitung of June 16, 1877, bears a strong
resemblance to Reinsdorf's style of writing.

Gotha is not a great distance from.Leipzig, but
Reinsdorf was employed and to attend the congress he
would have to quit his Job. Reinsdorf realized that
his days in Leipzig were nwmbered. The police were fol-
lowing his activities too closely and the whole Stein-
berg business had a fishy smell to it as far as the
police were concerned. This probably all played a part
in his decision to attend the Gotha Congress. Reinsdorf
was by nature a wanderer who did not like to remain long
in one place. Upon.his return from.the Gotha Congress
he left Leipzig for Berlin in August. It is possible that
he also paid a short visit to Munich because Reinsdorf was
very enthusiastic about the anti-authoritarian activities
which were starting to develOp in Mhnidh in the summer of
1877. He was interested in the paper the Zeitgeist, which
eXpressed anti-authoritarian ideas, favoring the free fede-
ration of groups.5h In this respect it appears that
Reinsdorf had reasons'to be Optimistic because the anti-
authoritarian groups in Munich.were strong enough that
they were producing concern among the Social Democratic

leaders.55

 

5hilrbeiter-Zeitung, No. 26(Julg 30, 1877); Lg
travailleur, fio. hIIuguit, 1877), p. 2 .

55Rocker, Johann Most, p. 110.

152‘
The group founded by Reinsdorf in Leipzig trans-
nutted their best wishes to the meeting of the Congress
of the Jura Federation which met at St. Immer on August 1;,
5,6” 1877. In the telegram.they affirmed their IIBrflder-
REVS! and 3011dar1tat-"S6 Reinsdorf also telegraphed a

57

greeting to the meeting from.Berlin. The congress thanked

the Leipzig group for their telegram, and replied ”to the
anarchists of Berlin" that they "thanked them from~the
bottom of their hearts for their-telegram," going on to
urge them.'to combine their efforts to form.a revolutionary
anardhist party in Germany, to endeavour to form free
groups and abolish the State. This they should do in con-
Junction with the masses who were growing more aware of
the favorable circumstances."58
The seed, which Reinsdorf had planted in Berlin

in 1876, was beginning to show signs of fruition. An
unknown.correspondent wrote from Berlin in the spring of
1877 that

many German workers, who are really revolutionaries

are beginning to arrive at the conclusion that they

have nothing to gain by following the methods of legal

propaganda, but everything to lose. There are many

German workers in the party [Social Democratic Part

who are anarchists, but in nearly all cases they are

not well acquainted with all the principles and values
of anarchism.because the newspapers and brochures

 

S6Arbeiter-Zeitung, No. 30-31(August 25, 1877).
S71bid.
SBIbid.

r-

_J

153

available in Germany speak only of the Volksstaat with

centralized organization. But those workers already

know that government and liberty are two words that

do not go together. It would be a good thing if a

brochure were written in the German language on the

principles of anarchism. This brochure would be very

useful because already in our party, as great numbers

believe, in spite of all to the contrary, that it is

the bourgeois who are respogsible for the centrali-

zation of our organization. 9

In Berlin in 1872 a new current of socialist

thought appeared on the scene, which was led by Dr. Eugen
Dflhring(January 12, 1833-September 21, 1921), a blind
Privatdozent at the University of Berlin. Dflhring's
Cursus der National und SozialBkonomie appeared in 1872
and was seized upon by Eduard Bernstein(lBSO-1932), who
sent copies of it to Wilhelm Bracke(18h2-1880), Friedrich
Wilhelm.Fritzsche(1825-19OS), Johann Mest(18u6-1906), and
August Bebel(18hO-l913). At the time Dflhring's writings
appealed to Social Democratic leaders because a theoreti-
cal vacuum.existed; Lassalleanism was declining and Marxism
was not yet understood. Bebel published an extravagant
review of Dflhring's book in the Volksstaat calling it the
best book on economics published since the publication of
Capital. This general attitude pervaded German Social
Democracy in spite of Dflhring's attacks on Marx and Engels.
Peter Gay contends that Dflhring "enjoyed such a degree of
popularity in German Social Democracy that he almost eclip-

sed Marx and Engels.“60 This was possible, Gay contends,

 

S9Le travailleur, No. 1(May, 1877), p. 19.

60Peter Gay, The Dilemma of Democratic Socialism.
Eduard Bernstein's Challenge toJMarXTNew York, 1952), p. 83.

151:-

because German Social Democracy in the 1870's was in-
tellectually immature and poorly equipped to distinquish
between conflicting claims of greatness, because none of
the leaders of the Social Democrats was trained in poli-
tical economy; Another factor involved was Dfihring's
blindness which aroused a certain amount of compassion
among the socialists .61

Dflhring came to the attention of the anarchists.
Reinsdorf called his writings an important symptom
pointing to the revolutionary tendencies in Germany, To
Reinsdorf, Dfihring had 'demonstrated the existing contra-
diction between.the governmental idea of the Social Demo-
crats and the idea of freedom.” Reinsdorf went on to
point out that demonstrating this contradiction DBhring
became the object of persecution by the Social Democrats.
Vorwlrts, Reinsdorf mentions, would not accept any ar-
ticles favorable to Dflhring or his ideas but it carried
for well over six months a long refutation by Engels.
Eventually the persecution resulted in Dflhring being ex-

pelled from.his chair at the university.62

 

elbid. Dflhring began his career as a Jurist,
but when he Became.bling at the age of thirty, he turned
to writing and teaching. His books published in the late
1860's and early 1870's on political economy and philo-
sophy were of a radically socialist tone, which involved
him.in constant arguments with his colleagues and superi-
ors at the university.

62Le travailleur, No. h(August, 1877), p. 28.

On Dflhring see: Friedrich Engels, Anti-Dflhrin (Moscow,
195k); Rocker, Johann Most, p. 51; Nettlau, Knarchisten

5.1. ‘7 hat. ‘o It. \IL.‘ ‘

a.-.

t‘

b

-IV‘IvQEC‘I.‘

‘11.—

‘I

155
One of Dfihring's strongest supporters was a
radical named Abraham.Ensz who wrote a series of articles
for the Berliner freie Presse, defending Dfihring against
Engels. The articles later appeardd in a brochure en-

titled Engels' Attentat auf den gesunden Menschenverstand

(Geneva, 1877)o63 Marx's Opinion of Dfihring and his sup-
porter is contained in‘a latter of October 19, 1877, to
Sorge:

. . . A rotten spirit is making itself felt in our
party in Germany, not so much among the masses as
among the leaders(upper class and 'workers'). The
compromise with the Lassalleans has led to compro-
mise with other halfway elements too; in Berlin(via
Most) with Dflhring and.his 'admirers,' but also
with a whole.gang of half-mature students and super-
wise doctors of philosophy who want to give socialism
a 'higher, ideal' turn, that is to say, to replace
its materialist basis(which calls for serious, ob-
Jective study by anyone wanting to make use of it)
by modern.mythology with its goddesses of Justice,

 

und Sozialrevolutionfire, pp. 139-lhh; Nettlau, Bibliographic
do 1'anarEhie, p. hlfiEduard Bernstein, Sozialdemokratische

Imhrjahre(Berlin, 1925), p . 52-59; Mehring, Geschichte der
oz a demokratie, pp. h7h-E83; Arbeiter-Zeitugg, No. 26
(June 30, 1877’; No. 27(July lu, 1877); Freie Generation
(July, 1907). pp. 12-20.
Reinsdorf was correct in his assumption that in Dfihring's
works he could see elements of anarchism. The relation-
ship of Dahring to communist-anarchism.is fully explained
in: Benedict Friedlaender, Der freiheitliche Sozialismus
im.Gegensatz zum.Staatsknechtsthum.der Marxisten. Mit be-
sonderer B—jeruck echti u der Werke und sch‘iokciifi Eugen
TDHhrings(BerIIn, 1892;. Ulhring was released from.his
position as a Privatdozent.at the University of Berlin be-
cause of personal attacks on his colleagues, however, the
socialists viewed his release as an attack on Dflhring's
socialist views and rushed to his support as did students,
instigated by socialists, demonstrated for his rot-ation,
but all in vain.

 

63Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutionlre,
p. 1hh3 Nettlau, Bibliographic d§:lianarchie, p.hl.

156

Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. Dr. H8chberg,
who publishes the Zukunft, is a representative of
this tendency and Has ‘Eought his way' into the
party - with the 'noblest' intentions, I assume,
but I do not give a damn for 'intentions.’ Any-
thing more miserable than his program of the fig-
kunft has seldom seen the light of day with more
'modest presumption.‘

The workers themselves, when, like Herr Most and
60., they give up work and become professional li-
terary men, always breed 'theoretical' mischief and
are always ready to join muddleheads from.the alle-
gedly 'learned' caste. Utopian socialism especially,
which for tens of years we have been clearing out
of the German workers' heads with so much effort and
labor - their freedom.from it making them theoreti§
cally(and therefore also practically) superior to the
French and English - utopian socialism, playing with
fantastic pictures of the future structure of society,
is again spreading in a much more futile form, not
to be compared with the great French and English
utopians, but with - weitling. It is natural that
utOpianism, which before the era of materialist-
critical socialism concealed the latter within it-
self in nuce(in the nutshell), coming now post
lestum(after the event) can only be sgfily - silly,
stale, and fundamentally reactionary. *

Marx's assessment of the situation was quite
correct. Today, DEhring is all but forgotten, but in
1877 he posed a great threat to Marx. The number of peeple
who were turning toward Dflhring's brand of socialism was
increasing so it was necessary to discredit him. One
casualty who fell in the discrediting of Dflhring was
Johann Most, whose name was mentioned prominently in
Mhrl's letter. In May, 1876, Liebknecht received a
‘manuscript from Most glorifying Dflhring, for publication
in'Vorwlrts. Liebknecht sent it off to London for Narx

 

6”Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Letters to
Americans lflB-lBifiWew York, 1953). PP0 116-117-

157
and Engels to review. At the time Marx was engaged on

volume two of Capital and Engels had to answer the
threat of Dflhring which he did in a series of articles
published in Vorwarts January 1877-July 1878, which had

 

the effect or destroying the Ddhring boom forever. The
relationship of Dflhring to the development of anarchism
in Germany is significant. He influenced the develop-
ment of Most's thought, a topic which will be treated in
detail below. The program of the Marxists to discredit
Dflhring embittered Most, forcing him in a more radical
direction.

Another current of anarchism in Germany starting
around 1870 was led by Arthur Mfilberger(18h7-l907), a
medical doctor from Warttemberg, who was a Proudhonist
and who exerted his efforts to make Proudhon known in
Germany. He did not achieve much in the way of a fol-
lowing but he managed to incur the wrath of the angry
pen of Friedrich Engels. Mfilberger's Zur'wohnungsfrage,

 

which appeared in the Volksstaat(Leipzig) in 1872, was
immediately opposed by Engels.65 He was not discouraged
by Engels' attack and he continued to write articles and

books in favor of Proudhonism.down to the turn of the

 

65For Engels' extensive comments see: Zur won-

nun sfra e(Zurich, 1872). The pamphlet in the original
conéainea twenty-eight pages, the 1887 edition with En-
iels' comment is seventy-two pages. See also: "Nachtrag
ber Proudhon und die wohnungsfrage" in Friedrich Engels
and Karl Marx, works, XVIII, pp. 26h-287.

u "w
wen-d.

.eio

‘ Q
I":‘

i’ioéI

I
lgv
‘~.'

158

century but with little success.66

The opposition to
Mfllberger came from.many other socialists, including
Bebel.67 Mfllberger was a pure Proudhonist, accepting
Proudhon's doctrines as unchangeable and immutable.
This is probably why Mfilberger had so little appeal in
Germany. He had nothing new to add to Proudhon and the
economic situation was changing rapidly in Germany in
the latter half of the nineteenth-century, a factor
which.soon_made Proudhon's theories incongruent with
the existing situation.

Following the completion of the Ghent Congress
in September of 1877 both Rinke and‘werner went to Ger-
many; Rinks to Munich, and'werner to Leipzig. In Munich
an open discussion was being carried on between the anar-

chists and the Social Democrats. This confrontation

 

66See his articles and books: ”Ein Hahlmanifest
Proudhons. Ein Beitrag zu Vergeschichte der Commune,"
Ge enwart(1877), 251-262; "Von und fiber Proudhon," Die
TE—TF—Tage er in, 1878-1879); "Die Theorie der Anarchie,""_fi_:_l_g
neue Gesellschaft(Zurich, March, 1878), 291-311; "Napo-
Icon 1," fieue freie Presse(Vienna, October 9 and 10,
1895); "Der Sozialismus und das Landvolk,' Die Zukunft
(Berlin, 1877); Zur Kentnisse des MarxismusTfikritische
Skitzzen(Stuttgart, 189E); Der Intum von Khrl Marx. Aus
Ernst Buschs Nachlass(Basel, 189K); Studien HEBrProudHon
(Stuttgart, 1891): F.J. Proudhons Leben und'Werke(IB99).
see his translation and commentary on KEpItaI und Kins.
Die Polemik zwischen Bastiat und Proudhon(Jena, I895);
F3} his influence in Gormany see: Nettlau, Bibliographic

de l'anarchie, 8p. 38-39; Nettlau, Der VorfFlEli der
.Anarchie, p. 16 ' Mchring, Geschichte der Sozial§emok§atie,
PP- EIs (4-799 7&6

67Gail and J} Franz, ”Eine deutsche Schrift fiber
Proudhon,” Frankfurter Zeitung( November 13, 1881).

 

159

would be continued until the assassination attempt by
H8del in May of 1878. The anarchists let it be known
that they intended to step up their activities with re-
gular propaganda campaigns to win more ground and in-
fluence among the workers.68 Rinke, however, did not
remain in Munich very long before he left for Cologne
where he lived under the name of Otto Rau. While in
Cologne in 1878-1879 Rinke was sentenced to jail under
the name of Rau. Why he was sentenced or for how long
is not known.69 Since he was a military deserter Rinke
had to travel with extreme caution in Germany.

In October of 1877, shortly after his arrival
in Leipzig from.Ghent, Werner delivered a speech on the
subject of ”The International Socialist Congress in Ghent
and the principles of anarchism." In this talk he pointed
out the difference between the Social Democratic Party,
which he likened to authoritarian socialism, and anar-
chism, which he likened to free socialism. A number of
converts were made among the workers present. In Decem-
ber of the same year Werner invaded a large meeting which
the Social Democrats had called. At this meeting, which

consisted primarily of trade union workers, Werner spoke

 

68Le bulletin de la faderation Jurassienne(Feb-
ruary Ml 13787.

69See footnote 123 in Nettlau, Anarchisten und
Sozialrevolutionlre, p. 138, for Victor; Dave's infor-
mation on Rau.

 

n1.
Iii

I‘.

A:

.7-

 

.3

's

 

v.
.s

 

160
out saying that I'the trade union idea is only an out-
flowing of the old bourgeoise theory of the harmony
between capital and labor and the Social Democratic idea
or the 91383 struggle."70 Immediately several of the
local leaders of the Social Democratic Party rose to their
feet, vehemently opposing Werner, and emphasizing the ne-
cessity for a concentrated campaign, to warn the workers
of the dangers of anarchism, lest their judgement be dis-
torted by werner's charges. In spite of this, a reso-
lution put forth by Werner managed to garner a third of
the workers' votes.

In February of 1878 the SPD held a large meeting
in the Ieipziger Tonhalle for the purpose of discussing
the Near Eastern question. At this meeting Liebknecht
spoke out on the Near Eastern question, in a speech which
was decidedly anti-Russian in tone. Liebknecht for over
a month had been printing anti-Russian articles in Vorwflrts
and the speech was the culminating point of his anti- -
Russian propaganda. He related that the apparent Oppression
of the Slavs in the Balkans by the Turks was only an in-
vention of the Russian subsidized press. The discussion
had reached rather striking prOportions among the rank-
and-file members of the Social Democratic Party, even be-
fore the anarchists got involved. In response to Lieb-

knecht's article in Vorwfirts, "Should Europe Become

Q .

7oRocker, Johann Most, p. 110.

q
.1!!!

U
.9. d
I
‘-

"Ouw

Ir.
s ‘.

I.‘-'

\
N b»-
‘O
‘1
h 0“
‘l .
I.
‘1
’8
W: “
‘ J
‘H
I
.
~_ ~
‘0' .
‘n
I
|
D‘-
s l
n

1'61

Cassacktized?" Levy wrote an article, "Should the Ger-
man‘Workers"Party Become Turkisch?" (It the meeting
Liebknecht presented his anti-Russian ideas and was
followed by Dr. Frankel, a National Liberal, who assaulted
the Turks as Liebknecht had the Russians. Following this
heated exchange Werner rose to his feet asking Liebknecht
"what in his Opinion should the suppressed peOples of the
Turkish Empire do?" Already in the 1870's the anarchists
were interested in abolishing war, and in championing the
cause of oppressed peoples. (A reading of any anarchist
paper of this period will point out their concern over
warfare and their proposals to stop it. werner then in-
troduced a resolution in which he proposed that the
oppressed Balkan Slavs had a right to be free of their
Ottoman overlords. This resolution was rejected by only
a small number of votes.71

In Leipzig Werner also came in contact with a
former member of Reinsdorf's circle, Max H8del. The
Italians and Spanish.had been the most ardent admirers
of "Propaganda by Deed," but it was to be a German, Max
HBdel, who would attempt the first "attentat" on the life
of a Royal Sovereign. 8' C

The situation in Germany in the spring of 1878
found Reinsdorf in Berlin, Werner in Leipzig and Rinke
in either Munich or Cologne. Anarchist groups had been

 

711bid., pp. 111-112- Bulletin de la rédération
Jurassienne(February 25, 1878).

162 _

formed in Leipzig, Munich, Berlin and a number of other
places. The stage was set for a series of events which
would change the entire course of the socialist move-
ment in Germany.

Anarchism.in Germany prior to the attempt, by
HBdel, on the life Of the German Emperor, was more of
a source of annoyance to the Social Democratic Party
than anything else. The threat that the anarchists
would take over the leadership of the labor movement was
never close to being realized. As far as the government
and the middle class citizenry of Germany were concerned
the anarchists were nothing more than a part of the odious
socialist movement. The confusion is not surprising be-
cause the majority of both the socialists and anarchists
were not certain themselves of their respective positions.
Part of the task of the next decade was to define their

ideologies and clarify their differences.

CHAPTER IV

THE HGDEL ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT AND THE DEFEAT OF THE
socmtxs'r LAW

THE HGDEL ATTEMPT

Saturday May 11, 1878, was a usual warm spring
day in Berlin. The sun was shining and the water venders
were busy plying their trade on the city's main through-
fare Unter den Linden. The German EmperOr, William.I(l796-
1888), as was his daily habit, was out taking his after-
noon constitutional in an Open carriage accompanied by his
daughter, the Grand Duchess of Baden. The aged Emperor,
fondly called by the peOple the Griese Kaiser, was a man
of fixed habits which varied little from.day to day.
Even though it was a common place event to see the German
Emperor, a crowd gathered along the sides of Unter den
Linden hOping to catch a glimpse of their beloved Kaiser.
He was returning from.a ride in the Tiergarten about three
thirty in the afternoon. As the carriage was passing No. 7
Unter den Linden, which was the site of the Russian Embassy,
located about half way between the Brandenburg Gate and
the Royal Palace, a tall, rather good looking young man

163

16m.
pushed.himself into the line of spectators. The young
man, Emil Heinrich Max‘HBde1(often referred to as Lehmann
and also Traber), picked a poor spot to inject himself

into the crowd.1 The place H8del wanted was occupied by

 

1HBdel in most accounts is portrayed as a slbm
person with thick dark brown hair parted in the middle,
having sinister appearing eyes, a long pale yellow face,
mmrose, sullen moldy grey eyes, which supposedly revealed
his true fanaticism, He was pictured as having a short
unfurrowed forehead which revealed that he had never done
any deep thinking, in short a laughing idiot. For such a
contemporary account see Berliner’Fremdenblatt, Ma 1k,
1878, 3rd edition. The contemporary accounts of H del
are for the most part followed by Bernstein in Sozialde-
mokratische Lchrjahre, pp. 60-61; Eduard Bernstein, Die
GQSchichte der Berliner Arbeiterbewegung(Berlin, 190777'1,
pp. - 3 E uard Bernstein, M ‘Years of Exile(New YOrk,
1921), p. 20; A classical accouni of HBdel is to be found
in Mehring, Geschichte der deutschen Sozialdemokratie, pp»
h92-h95, which portraysfifiadel asihaving congenitai syphilis,
being sick in body and soul, as a cheat and petty thief,
an idiot, a political fanatic in addition to being confused
politically; Rbhring claims that all his oral and written
statements proved that he was an incompetent which was
further demonstrated.medically by the fact that when.he
was beheaded, his head, which was severed from his body
on an angle, was examined, Mehring relates that the then
renowned Professor Rudolf Virchow, Director Of the Berlin
Pathalogical Institute since 1862, examined the severed
head which.is an absolute falschood. All of Mchring's
claims are without any specific evidence and do not hold
up in the light of documentary evidence.
Ebro recent accounts which tend to follow the same line are:
Wblfgang Pack, Das Parlamentarische Ri en am das Sozialis-

te esetz Bismarc s - sse dor , I, pp. 29- ;
Georg Eckert, Die Braunschweiwer Arbeiterbewe un unter dem
Sozialiste eseEz(BraunsEEweig, I95I), pp. II-IZ. These
accounts 0% Hadei do not hold up when the documents con-
cerning his case are examined. H8de1 was just under six
feet tall(l.76 meters) and had a medium build. Pictures
show that he had a thick neck, broad shoulders and a well
develOped chest. His hair was blond, eyes blue, even his
eye brows were blond. This information and much more on
his physical description is contained in the report of the
arresting officer. See: Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv
IPotsdam, Acta des KBniglichen-Polizei-Prdsidii zu Berlin.
I".Das Attentat das Klempnergesellen Emil Heinrich Max HBdel
gen, Lehmann auf das Leben Seiner Majestitdt das Raisers

 

‘<'-.J

is-‘.
.

13.".
5.4

"Vs I r

u.“

. I
. ‘n.

:3 g;

165
Frau Julius Hauch, who along with her husband Operated
a water wagon, selling water to strolling crowds on Unter
den Linden. H8del tried to push into the front row, but
Frau Hauch.stoOd her ground. The Emperor's Open carriage
was now passing less than nine feet away from the crowd,
H8del realized that if he waited his Opportunity would
be lost so he raised his revolver in his right hand and
pushed in as close as possible to Frau Hauch, firing
over her shoulder. Frau Hauch became annoyed at HBdel's
pushing, so she shoved.him just as he fired the first
shot at the Emperor. The shot missed its mark passing
behind the Emperor. Evidently incensed at missing, and
blaming Frau Hauch for this, HBdel hit her on the side
of the head with his revolver and jumped through the front
row of spectators and fired a second shot which also missed.
He then crossed over the street, firing a third shot at
a would be apprehender, where he assumed a semi-prone

position holding the revolver in both.hands and fired

 

und KBnigs am.ll. Mai 1878.” Geheime Prdsidial-Registratur.
Lit. A. No. 2h8(8626). Hereafter referred to as Pr. Br.
Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9k, Lit. A., No. 2u8(8626) H8del-
Attentat. In view of the fact that the folders are num-
bered I shall give the folder numbers in the footnotes
rather than the exact title of the document being referred
to. I shall indicate the nature of the document in the
text. For the arrest form see: Fol. 3. For‘Hddel's state-
ment upon his arrest see: Folders 23-27. This statement
reveals, as do his letters, which will be referred to later
in this chapter, that H8del wrote a reasonably good.hand
and that he was ccherent. It should be noted that my sole
purpose in revealing these errors regarding H8del's phy-
sical appearance is for the purpose of historical accuracy,
not to rehabilitate him,

I66

once again at the Emperor whose carriage by nowhad
stopped.2

The Emperor after stopping his carriage ordered
1113 chasseur to pursue the assailant. H8del fled up Unter
den.Linden, firing two more shots at his pursuers. One of
the pursuers, Herr thler, a senior clerk in the Prussian
‘Widows' Pension Institution, grabbed.him.and.held on mo-
mentarily only to be pushed aside by the stronger, younger

assailant.3 HBdel was finally apprehended in front of

 

2Most contemporary accounts tend to portray that
HBdel missed the Emperor by such a margin that the Emperor
did not realize he was the object of the shooting, however,
this is probably not the case. Frau Hauch in her first
statement revealed that they were standing three feet from
the Emperor as he passed by. Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit.
9h, Lit. A., No. 2h8(8626). H8del-Attentat, Fol. 6. She
said three paces in her later testimony. Frau Hauch related
in her testimony that she saw the bullet pass behind the
Emperor's head. Other witnesses substantiate that she did
indeed block Hadel's path of fire and that the bullet did
pass only a short distance behind the Emperor‘s head. It
is very possible that they did see the bullet which was
rather large and blunt. In 1912 Frau Hauch implored Em-
peror William.II to give her assistance in setting herself
up once again in the water business in Berlin because she
claimed that she had saved his grandfather's life. It is
possible that she did same'William.I's life by shoving HB-
del. Her claim was based on the fact that she had comp .
pletely lost her hearing in her left ear and nearly all of
it in the right ear as a result of the incident. She stated
that her husband.had died in 1883, and after being forced
out of business in Berlin by competitors she moved to‘Wies-
baden to live with a daughter, but on November 6, 1910,
she hurt herself while working as a scrub woman and could
no longer do hard work. Ibid., Folders 159-166.

3Kiflhler evidently received quite a beating during
the few seconds he grappled with.H8del because he fell
ill on the evening of May 11 and died on May 19 from.rup-
tured intestines as revealed by the autopsy. For the eye-
witness' accounts Of the assassination attempt and capture
see: Ibid,, Folders S-ll.

167

no. 5 Unter den Linden where the street is crossed by
the Shadow Strasse. A large number of peOple had.taken
part in the capture, including the Emperor's chasseur.
Once he was seized the captors immediately started to
beat on HBdel. Had it not been for the quick action of
a laborer, Carl Reinhold Gustav Kruger(B. Nov. 1, 18h9
in Berlin), the crowd would have beaten H8del to death.
Because he saved H8de1 from.the angry crowd, Kruger be-
came a suspect in the case but was later freed of having
any part in the shooting attempt.”

When.he was taken to the Mittelstrasse Police
Station it was revealed that the assailant was only
twenty years old, having been born in Leipzig on May 27,
1857,5 the illegitimate child of Charlotte Emilie H8del,

 

”On Krager and.his statement see: Ibid., Folders
12-13 0 .

SLeipzig at the time had a rather bad name be-
cause the last person to try to kill William.I was Oscar
Becker from Leipzig. It should be noted that Carl Nobi-
ling, who attempted to assassinate the Emperor on June 2,
also spent a number of years in Leipzig.

Assassination attempts on the German Emperor were
nothing new. On July 26, l8hh, the former Bfirgermaster of
Storkon, a man named Tscheck, wounded Friedrich William IV,
because the Prussian King had refused to give him.back:his
position as Bargermaster which he lost in l8u1 for con-
ducting himself in a reprehensible manner. Tscheck fired a
double barreled pistol at the King wounding him.slightly.
Tscheck was later beheaded at Spandau. A young man named
Ottensossen planned to kill Friedrich William IV in Decem-
ber, 18h6, but he tipped his hand and was seized by the
police before he got a chance to put his plan into Operation.
Again on May 22, 1850, Friedrich William.IV was wounded by
a shot fired by Max Joseph Sefeloge, a twenty-nine year Old
former artillery sergeant who had been dismissed from.the
service for physical reasons and was seeking reinstatement
but without success. The-King had seen his assailant and

 

168

 

raised his right arm to protect himself so the shot hit
him.in the arm rather than the chest. Sefeloge had been
a frequenter of radical clubs and organizations.

Becker's attempt on William I came on July It,
1861, while the King was taking the waters at Baden-Baden.
The King received a slight neck wound. Becker, a twenty-
one year old law student at Leipzig, said he wanted to
kill the King because he had not brought about the unifi-
cationfof Germany. Becker's Idol, as revealed at his
trial, was Orsini. Felice Orsini on January 1h, 1858,
had attempted to assassinate Napoleon III and the Empress
but killed two other peOple and wounded a.hundred more.
From his prison cell Orsini appealed to Napoleon III to
help free Italy. The effect of the episode was to move
Napoleon into action. Becker was given twenty years for
his assassination attempt, but was pardoned after serving
only five. ~
On May 7, 1866, as Bismarck was strolling down
Unter den Linden, when he arrived at the Shadow Strasse,
a man fired two shots from a revolver at him wounding him.
slightly. The assassin was a thirty-two years old agri-
cultural student named Ferdinand Blind(Cohen), who came
from.fiohenheim.in'WBrttemburg. He was the son of the
famous republican refugee Carl Blind. After a fierce
struggle, in which four more shots were fired, burning
Bismarck's clothing in the process, the assailant was
taken into custody. While he was being questioned.he took
out his handkerchief, pretending to wipe his brow, and cut
his throat from ear to ear. Blind wanted to kill Bismarck,
as he related in a letter he left, because Bismarck was
the worst enemy of liberty. He thought Bismarck would in-
tolve Germany in a series of disasterous wars. His assas-
sination of Bismarck, he thought, would make the leaders
of Germany rise to a sense of duty. Like Becker, Blind
was an admirer of Orsini.

In May, 1873, stories were circulated of another
attempt made on the life of William I at Insterberg by a
man dressed as a priest. The King was slightly wounded.
On July 13, 187h, another attempt was made on the life
of Bismarck while he was driving in the country near Saline,
slightly wounding him. The assassin was a cooper named
Kullmann from.Magdeburg. This attempt was supposedly part
of a conspiracy headed by a Priest Reverend Father'fiant-
haler who was arrested at Schweinfurt. Kullmann, tee, had
worn the clerical garb during his assassination attempt.
In May, 1875, a man.was caught prowling around the grounds
of Bismarck's mansion. He had a loaded pistol and it was
established that there was a plot to kill Bismarck, Dr.
Falk, and the Emperor. In November, 1877, a man named
Lubovski was arrested for planning to kill the Emperor.

169
who was little more than a girl when.she bore him in
Mackern near Leipzig. Her father was already deceased
when Mas was born and the infant lived with his grand-
mother in Mackern for the first two years of his life.
From the time he was three until he was six he lived
with an uncle in Schkeuditz which is also near Leipzig.
When.he was seven years old.his mother married a shoemaker
Johann Karl Eduard Traber with whonlhe lived in Leipzig
until he was eleven. On the occasion of his twelfth
birthday he was in jail in Magdeburg for having run away
from home. He was released on his twelfth birthday and
he walked.home to Ieipzig. When he was thirteen he ran

away from.home once again and when he was found.he was

 

He had.a loaded revolver when apprehended. It was said
that he was the son of Archbishop Iedochovski, an ardent
Ultramontane. Lubovski was already wanted by the police
for embezzling funds from his job as a law clerk at Schon-
lank.
More detailed information on these attempts on
the lives of Friedrich William IV, William I, and Bis-
:marck can be found in the London Times:(August 2,18hh),
.k, Col. 3(August 3, 18k?), p. T001. d; (Decemp
ber 30,186 p. 5, Col. May 25, 1850), p. 6, Col. a,
(May 27, 1 SO , p. 6, Col. e; (May 28, 18 50) p. 66 Col. b;
${ 30, 1850)é 6p. 6, Col. e; (Jyly ls, 1861)p Col.
July 16, 18 61), p. 9, Col. 0; (July 20, 1861),6 p. 9,
Col. d; (July 28,1861), p. 12, Col. 83 (September 2h,
1861), p. 7, Col. (September 25, 1861), p. 6, Col.
(September 26, 18 861), p. Col. c; (September 27, 1861),
p. 7, Col. e; (May 8,1 1866), p. 12, Col. a, (May 10,1866),
p. 12, Col. a; (Mayd12, 1866), p. 11, Col. c; (Mayb15,
1866), p. 10, Col. é(May 16,1866), p. 11, Col. (Oc-
tober 29, 1866), p. Col. (May 13, 1873), p. 7, Col.
b! (Jaly 1h! 187h 9 p0 59 601- 3; (JUIY 159 187h)18po 9s
C01. O; (July 17, 187M), 8.5 Col. a, (July 17, 18 7h),
Col.b ,(July 21, 1 7b), 5.10, Col. a; (May 6,
1875), p. 5, Col. a, (May 11, 1 75), p. 10, Col. ,(May 12,
18 75), p. 7, Col. b; (November 19, 1877), p. 5, Col. 6.

‘0‘

 

  

\.\...
:-

 

 

 

170

6 During this period

placed in the Zeitz reformatory.
he was also publicly flogged as a thief in Leipzig.

when he was placed in the Zeitz reformatory a school
certificate was produced, from a school which he had
once attnnded, which branded him as a confirmed thief.
After spending two years in the reformatory he was ap-
prenticed to a tin smith in Zeitz named Hartling. Hadel
was both quick and clever in learning the trade but his
behavior was so bad that he was once again placed in the
reformatory for a short period for beating a fellow tin
smith. When he qualified as a journeyman tin smith.he
went off on his own working for different masters, re-
turning to Leipzig in 1875 where he lived with friends
of his parents.

In Leipzig HBdel was quickly caught up in the
workers' movement, which was sweeping Germany at the time,
beginning his career as a constant frequenter of socialist
meetings. Evidently he showed signs of promise because
he was soon a paid "filler” at socialist meetings, quickly
advancing to a claque, and subsequently did wonders in
crying "Good" or IHear, Hear," as circumstances seemed
to demand. He then rose to the position of distributor

and.hawker of socialist papers, pamphlets, flying sheets

 

6This information on HBdel's early life is taken
from.an autobiography which.he-started to write before
he was executed. It is rinted in Die beiden letzten Ta a
des Hochverrlthers Max H8del(Kissingen, August, 1878),

pp. 15-169

171

which enabled.him to lead an easy life in taverns, beer
gardens and meeting halls. is was also employed by the
socialists in a traveling capacity which will be ex-
plained in more detail shortly. These trips took him
over most of Germany, Austria, France, Hungary, Luxem-
burg, Switzerland, Bohemia, and Italy. On one occasion
he is reported to have told a friend that “he would never
return to his craft, his present employment was so much
more profitable and pleasant than the drudgery of the
workshop. The leaders of the party, formerly poor devils
of compositors, glaziers, and locksmiths, were now
gentlemen at large with handsome incomes and nothing to
do. They had certainly to undergo imprisonment every now
and then; but what did it matter! Terms of imprisonment
nowadays were very lenient, and the more prosecutions
the greater the stipends paid the victim from party
funds."7

' HBdel had ambitions of being a spy for the Social
Democrats-and of eventually achieving a position of leader-
ship in the party. However, his hOpes were soon to be
dashed on the rocks and he had a falling out with the
socialists, According to Bebel, who did not know H8de1
personally, the circumstances of this falling out were
two-fold: one, HBdel was becoming too revolutionary for

the socialists; two, while working for Die Fackel, the

 

8 8) 7Quoted in Leipziger Tageblatt, No. 13h(May 1h,
1 7 .

"‘1
"a.

 

 

 

 

172

local organ of the Social Democratic Party, HBdel was
found culpable in the embezzlement of subscription funds
which he collected in his capacity as a subscription
agent for both Die Fackel and Vorwfirts. On April 5,
1878, Die Fackel carried the announcement that H8del

was no longer employed by the paper. ‘A few days later
at a meeting of the party members in Leipzig H8del re-
ceived a vote of censure, and a short time later was
eXpelled from the party by the Central Party Committee

in Hamburg. Vorwfirts, the Social Democratic Party Or-

 

gan, carried the announcement on May 9 that H8del had
been drummed out of the party. Perhaps it is ironical
that the announcement of his ejection from the party
appeared only a few days before his attempt on the life
of the Emperor.8
Bebel would lead you to believe that the real
burden of HBdel's guilt was his embezzlement of sub-
scription funds, a charge which is without substantiation.

iHBdel, as contemporary newspaper accounts point out, was

a‘tthief all his life, another unsubstantiated charge. If

 

8August Bebel, Aus meinem Leben(Berlin-East, 1968),
pp. 587-588. At a SociETLDemocratic meeting held in Gel-
senkirchen on May 27, 1878, and devoted to the topic of
Hadel's attempt on the life of the Emperor, one of the
speakers, CJW. FBlcke, from Dortmund, related that HBdel
became an entirely different person once he was thrown
out of the Social Democratic Party. Leo Stern(ed.), Der
Kampf der deutschen Sozialdemokratie in der Zeit des 33:
ziaITSEengesetzes 1878;1890. Die THtigkeit der ReiEhs-
‘Commission(Ber11n-East, I§§6), p. 710.

 

 

I73

H8del was a thief, the Social Democrats knew of it long
before the spring of 1878. The fact of the matter is
that Hadel was becoming too revolutionary for the SPD.
The SPD, which stressed attainment of power by legal
means, wanted to avoid any connection with anyone who
stressed revolutionary means.

At first H8del was a trusted party member and did
a great deal of traveling as a representative of the par-
ty. His first trip took place in October of 1875, when
he went to Berlin for eight days: the second trip in
1876 took him.to Frankfurt, Cologne and Koblenz; the
third in 1877 to Dresden, Prague, Vienna and Ends; the
fourth in March and April 1878, to KoblenzIMetz, Trier,
Colmar, Karlsruhe, Luxemburg, Frankfurt, Verdun, and
Chalons-sur-Marne. On various occasions he made trips
on behalf of the party to Chemnitz, Munich and Switzer-
land.

It has been noted in the previous chapter that
HBdel joined the small circle led by August Reinsdorf in
Leipzig in the Spring of 1877, perhaps thinking of him-
self as a SPD spy. His conversion to anarchism evidently
took place at this time. It has also been noted that in
the fall of 1877 he met Emil Verner with whom.he would
remain in constant contact for the remainder of the time
.he lived in Leipzig. When he was arrested Hadel claimed
to have led two anarchist meetings at Schkeuditz bei
Leipzig. Police reports substantiate that he did take

.0

Yaw"

‘l '-

‘J‘n

“l..‘
a I

<1.‘.

I—-

‘Va,

i..‘~

-
O
O"
n.

1

Q

-1-

«I7;
I.

4-)
O.-
l-

J

171+

part in two meetings there on February 2h, 1878, and
March 17, 1878, in which he spoke out for the impoverished
peOple in Germany. At these meetings he worked in con-
Junction with Emil Werner.9

After the meeting on March 17, 1878, he departed
on his fourth propaganda trip for the SPD. On this trip
H8del's revolutionary leanings occupied the central por-
tion of his activities. He Spoke out a number of times
against the king. On March 31, 1878, in Trier he said:
'We do not need a Kaiser, a King or any laws. Down with
tall of them, all must go, we want to be free. The state
must be abolished and everyone should perform the same
amount of labor."10 He pointed out that mere socialist
agitation and reform.were meaningless, what was needed
was to strike down all sovereigns. As a direct result
of this trip at the time of his arrest, following his
attempt on the Emperor, a charge was already pending
against HBdel in Naumburg for "coupling the Emperor's
name with insulting language." It is obvious that it
was in the best interest of the SPD to disassociate them-
selves completely with H8del because HBdel had in fact

become an anarchist. In his statement, which he made

 

9Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam,
Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., No. 2h8
(8626), HBdel-Attentat, Folder 108.

1°Ibid., Folders 108-110.

175

when arrested, he said: "I am.a friend of the Social
Democrats, but the anarchists are my men. I have also

read Bakunin.”1l

Rejected by the socialists H8del was attracted,
for monetary reasons, and reasons of personal revenge,
to the opponents of the SPD, the National Liberals.
Bruno Sparig, an agitator for the National Liberals, was
responsible for picking up H8del for the purpose of the
prOpaganda value they could wring out of him. Hadel's
association with the National Liberals and their organ
the Ieipziger Tageblatt was of Short duration because
Hadel was only of momentary value due to his difficulties
with the SPD. His affiliation with the National Liberals
could not have started before April 11, 1878, the day he
returned to Leipzig from his fourth trip. In his short
campaign against the socialists H8del was backed financi-
ally by the National Liberals. Aletter of his was prin-
ted in the Leipziger Tageblatt in which he gave his side
of the story regarding his difference of opinion with the
leaders and policies of the SPD.
After belonging to the Socialist Party for a

period of two years, during which time my business

as a distributor of fliers brought me in personal

contact with the principal leaders and officers of

the association, the insolent treatment awarded to

me at yesterday's meeting, on more suSpicion and

without any chance on my part, to defend myself,

compels me to anticipate the steps about to be taken
by the chief committee at Hamburg. I therefore

 

lllbid. , Folder 211.

II-
as.

Vt\

176

declare that, as a sincere socialist, I deem.it
beneath me to connive at the proceedings of certain
parties who, profiting by the present organization
of our society, do not scruple to procure large
salaries for the coryphies and officers of their
set. It is at the expense of the dues-paying meme
bers of the society that these gentlemen are enabled
to disburse fifty marks in three days when attending
congresses. There is an aristocracy forming itself
in the midst of our socialist society which beats
anything the bourgeoisie has produced, and which is
a bane to the poor, disinherited people. No real
socialist will tolerate this, and if his opposition
is to be met by coercion, he is compelled to have
recourse to hostile papers to announce his honest
opinion. Corruption prevails in our party. Such

a party is no better tgan that of the most re-
actionaryhypocrites.1

H8del, being of little further use to the National
Liberals,-was given enough money by Sparig and his associ-
ates to pay his fare to Berlin. He left Leipzig by train
on April 2h, 1878, but he did not travel directly to Ber-
lin. First he went to Dresden and then to Magdeburg.
There is no explanation for his itinerary because neither
Dresden nor Magdeburg lay on the route to Berlin. The
only possible reasons would fall into two categories:
one, to make some personal connection to obtain money;

or two, to collect subscription funds for Vorwfirts.

 

These suggestions are made because HBdel arrived in Ber-
lin on April 26 with one hundred marks. It is possible

that he made use of his position as a subscription agent
for Vorwlrts to accumulate some money because when he was

arrested, after the shooting attempt, he still had some

 

12Quoted in Magdeburger Zeitung, No. 222(May 13,
1878).

lab.“

'ulis

imam

ska-I
JV

ices '

{a .v

a .
I“ .
vdi '

la 0.,
'5 ad

0.“!

Ha. '

ride
“a“

't.‘-\

O'-
‘7'

177
subscription forms for Vorwlrts in his pocket, but this
suggestion is only hypothetical because the time factor
does not seem.to be in his favor for less than two days
elapsed from the time he left Leipzig until his arrival
in Berlin. Qerman laborers were not very prosperous in
1878 so it would seem.that it would take more than two
days to sell one hundred marks worth of subscriptions.
But the fact still remains that after he arrived in Berlin
on April 26 H8del did no work other than hawk a few pic-
tures and papcrs. The sum of money given him by the
National Liberals was little more than train fare and
H8de1 made some expensive business deals as will be
brought out. The money HBdel had, had to come from
somewhere and if he did net solicit it himself, he must
.have had some backers in Berlin, Magdeburg or Dresden.
At that time Reinsdorf was in Berlin but it cannot be
established that he associated with H8del. It will be
remembered that HBdel had taken part in Reinsdorf's small
circle in Leipzig but there is no evidence to place him
in any such circle in Berlin.13 The mysterious Mr.

 

13After HBdel's apprehension elaborate efforts
were made by the police to piece together his background.
See: Extrabeila e zu Eberhardts Allgem. Polizei-Anzeiger,
Ho. hSZ'IXXXVITETIB78), p.:l73. Therefis an unsubStanti-
ated char 6 by the London TimeS(May 23, 1878), p. 5, Col.
d, that H del stole a sum of money from.his parents be-
fore he left Leipzig. I have discounted this story for
the following reasons: one, HBdel did not live with his
parents after he returned to Leipzig in 1875; they evidently
did not approve of his activities so there was some animo-
sity between them. Two, his parents were very poor and

 

€6.14.

 

a..-
. I
.1-

a. l_‘.
0's". ’
n.1,

p-o

s s
‘C

178
Steinberg, as Reinsdorf called himself in Leipzig, was a
puzzle to the Berlin police; for a while they thought
that H8del, himself was Steinberg. At his trial, six
years later, Reinsdorf laid bare his past, acknowledging
his association with H8del in Leipzig. If he had played
a part in HBdel's attempt on William I, more than likely,
he would have claimed crddit for it. I am of the Opinion
that if H8del did, in fact, come in contact with Reins-
dorf in Berlin, it was only a casual or superficial meeting
and did not play a part in the assassination attempt. I
tend to believe that the assassination attempt was planned
in advance in Leipzig in conjunction with Werner, without
the knowledge of Reinsdorf.

HBdel arrived in Berlin on April 26, rented a
room.from.the widow Breiten, at Stallschreiberstrasse 13,
and, as his land lady later confirmed, occupied.himself
with socialist activities, and came and went at all hours
of the night. Bebel also relates that H8del attended
socialist meetings when he arrived in Berlin.1h On Ap-
ril 29 he started to attend meetings of the Christian
Socialists led by Stacker, one of the Emperor's Court

Chaplains. He took out a membership card in the

 

it is doubtful if they would have had one hundred marks.
HBdel evidently thought a good deal of his parents be-
cause he wrote a number of letters to them.while in prison
awaiting execution, however, they wrote him only one in
return.

lhAugust Bebel, Aus meinem Leben, p. 588.

-v

as

as

p -

‘I

IN“!

179
organization the same day and without payment voluntarily
distributed Christian Socialist tracts, especially one
entitled fiber die Liebe zu KBnig und Vaterland, a six-
page speech made by Stack r‘on February 15, 1878, in
the Salle of the Villa Colonna in Berlin.15 HBdel's
association with the Christian Socialists continued un-
til the day of his attempt on the life of the Emperor
and a cOpy of the above mentioned pamphlet wasibund on
him when he was arrested.

The fact that HBdel claimed to be a Christian
Socialist when he was captured has led many peOple to
believe that he was probably a confused young man; who
did not know the difference between a Social Democrat, a
Christian Socialist, and an anarchist. Rudolf Rocker
prefers to believe this and states that HBdel was not an
anarchist. HBdel would not measure-up to Rocker's conno-
tation of what an anarchist was, but Hade1.had read
Bakunin, associated with Reinsdorf andLWerner, and.his
belief in "Propaganda by Deed,” alone, was enough to
qualify him.as an anarchist in the late 1870's. This is
the direction in which anarchism.was moving in the 1870's.
The highly sophisticated theories of anarchism and anarcho-
syndicalism to which Rocker adhered appeared much later.

 

15Offic1a1 title was: Flugblatt No. 6 des Central-
Vereins far Social-Reform auf religioser und constitutio-
nellwmonarcfiischer Grundlago.

 

180

It is quite possible that H6del's association
with the Christian Socialists was only a cover up for
his anarchist sympathies. Christian Socialism would
not have been compatable with HBdel's personality. Be-
bel made a point to demonstrate that as a boy H8del had
not learned, in spite of repeated attempts, any religious
knowledge.16 At his initial arraignment, when questioned
about his religious preference, H8del replied: "Pro-
testant."17 The night before his execution a state
minister-talked with HBdel, and he revealed that as a
boy he had believed in a life after death, but he no
longer did. He did not want the minister to say any
prayers for him.and turned down all offers of any mi-
nistration, saying that after death there was nothing.18
HBdel, as already pointed out above, denounced the Emp
peror and Germany itself on a number of occasions so
it does not seem.possible that he could have been very
serious in his Christian Socialist activities. Further-
more it was not in line with his character to be so
eleemosynary. It is doubtful if he would have used his
time to distribute Christian Socialist literature unless

 

16August Bebel, Aus meinem Leben, p. 589.

17Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam,
Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., H8del-
Attentat, Folder 3.

18Die beiden letzten Tagen des Hochverrlthers Max
H8del, pp. 11-12. -

181

he had some purpose in mind. It is possible, although the
evidence does not prove it, that H8del's association with
the Christian Socialists was to establish them as a scape
goat for his nefarious deed.

HBdel was in Berlin exactly nine days when on
Saturday, May n, he purchased a six-shot revolver from
a pawn broker named Weblis for eight marks. The revol-
ver, which is usually described in most accounts as
worthless, functioned well enough for HBdel. He fired
it six times without a misfire and when he was captured
it was found that the chamber contained two rounds,
pointing out that HBdel was skillful enough with the
revolver to re-load it while in flight. On Menday, May 6,
iHUdel went to a photographer named.Dietrich and had a
p8rtrait taken, telling the photographer to make as many
copies as possible because within a week he would be
dead, but his name would be known all over the world and
his likeness would be in request wherever men took an in-
terest in current affairs.19 The purchase of the revol-
ver and the taking of the picture would tend to indicate
that the attempt was planned in advance and that he did
not expect to survive the attack.

There is still the unresolved question of finances.

Who was paying for.his room.rent and meals? Where did he

 

19Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin, C Tit. 9h, Lit. A., Hadel-Attentat,
Folders 18-21, 107-108. _

1. .‘ .
3... i“
ls‘:

.u .n

a
Ill? '3‘
. 'l .8.

.- '

' “was

.' "he!
.

”u .
"‘a'

‘M

a. .‘.
s. D.
I“

\..

3“» \
\“
i
.
u u
‘s I‘
a"-!
‘.
I
\g‘ 1
i
I
. ‘1
o‘!

182
get eight marks to purchase a pistol? Where did he get
the money to have a portrait picture taken? (He must
have paid for the picture because he had a cOpy of it on
him.when he was captured). Nobiling, as will be pointad
out in the course of the next chapter, tried to take his
own life after his attempt on the Emperor. If the two
attempts by'HBdel and Nobiling were masterminded by the
same person, and the evidence points in this direction,
it is reasonable to deduce that H8del, too, probably ex-
pected to take his own life after killing the Emperor.
His statement to the photographer that he would be dead
within a week would tend to substantiate this line of
reasoning.

It is my belief that both of the assassination
attempts were masterminded by Emil'Werner in Leipzig, but
that the stimulus for them came from.the German section
of thd Jura Federation in Switzerland. The evidence is
not as conclusive as one could hope for, but in the course
of the remainder of this chapter and next chapter materials
will be introduced which tend to indict warner and the Jura
Federation.

There is some evidence, scanty though it may be,
that Nobiling gave H8del some instruction in the use of
a pistol. H8del was no marksman, as Nobiling, and.he
'was jarred by Frau Hauch when firing his first shot at
point blank range. But he must have had some instruction

in the use of the weapon, because after missing the first

183
two shots, which.he fired while holding the revolver in
his right hand, he assumed a squatting or semi-prone
position holding the revolver in both hands to fire the
third Shot at the Emperor. The third shot was fired at
a greater distance and after a short run, so that HBdel was
probably in a state of excitement. I believe that H8del
probably'had some training with the revolver because: one,
the first two shots were fired in the customary way a
marksman fires by lowering his weapon on target and fi-
ring(eye witness' accounts bear this out); two, the third
shot was fired from a semi-squatting position, holding
the weapon in both hands to insure greater steadiness,
which reveals that HBdel had some experience with such
a weapon; three, HBdel partially re-loaded the weapon in
flight, while righting off would-be apprehenders.

It was evident to HBdel that he had failed in his
attempt and it would be senSeless to take his own life.
The fame to be afforded him.by assassinating the German
iEmperor faded with the three wild shots. At his first
Ihearing H8del related.that he was not firing at the Em-
peror, but was attempting to commit suicide in his pre-
sence to demonstrate the plight of the German poor, how-
ever, many witnesses were available who had seen him
leveling his pistol at the Emperor, so he quickly dropped
this pretense. In addition at his initial arraignment he
declared thatyhe was an anarchist, a fact which he seemed

proud to proclaim.

I
(a.

.
J“ .

‘\

II
1"

1811

When arrested, H8del had nothing in his possession
that would in any way connect him with the anarchists, but
he did.have Social Democratic and Christian Socialist ma-
terials. The contents of his pockets were useful to the
government because they established a firm connection
with the Social Democratic Party. In addition to the
items already referred to they contained: a revolver with
two rounds in it, two cartridges, a passport, photographs
of himself and of Bebel, Liebknecht and Most, a military
muster certificate, membership cards in the Social Demo-
cratic Party and the Christian Socialist Party, a copy of
Die Zukunft, the moderate Social Democratic magazine, a
list of names from.whom.money was to be collected for

their subscription to Vorwflrts, two pocket knives, three

 

letters, a birth certificate, a tax bill, a necktie, and
a handkerchief.

On the evening of the assassination attempt the
Emperor, after a formal dinner, accompanied by his children
the Crown Prince and the Grand Duchess of Baden, attended
the opera, the National Theatre, and a concert at the
Zoological Gardens. Wherever’he went the public gave him.
a jubilant reception. People rose to their feet and broke
out singing Deutschland fiber alles. Thousands of excited
Berliners filled Unter den Linden and the square in front
of the Royal Palace, cheering the German sovereign on as
he repeatedly drove through the multitudd. Flags were dis-

played and houses illuminated in the principal streets of

 

50 a.

V'- wk

3!! S

185-
the city. The Emperor received numerous telegrams from
throughout Germany and the entire world congratulated.him
on escaping unscathed from his brush with death. A Te Deum
was sung in the churches of Berlin for the escape of the
Emperor from the assassin's bullets. It was attended by
the entire diplomatic corps stationed in the German capi-

tal. Te Deums were sung to the German Emperor in many of

 

the capitals of other countries. The Emperor, himself,
‘was convinced that all was well on Maylh, when he publicly
thanked Berlin for this open display of feeling. To Show
his confidence in the people the Emperor continued.his daily
drives through the Tiergarten and along Unter den Linden,
riding in.the Open carriage accompanied by his daughter
the Grand Duchess of Baden. On May 16 a deputation from
the University of Berlin waited upon the Emperor and
"they afforded him.the conviction that the attempt upon
his life was the act of a solitary individual, and that
the mind of the mass of the people was healthy and un-
infected."20

There is some Speculation that HBdel, having
failed in his attempt, thought he would receive ten or
perhaps twenty years imprisonment, however, article
eighty of the German Penal Code was quite specific: "Mur-

der or attempted murder of the Kaiser is considered to be

 

ZQFor contemporary description see: London Times
(May 13, 1878), p. 9, Col. 6; and (May 17, 1878), p. 5,
Col. h, S; Berliner Fremdenblatt, No. 112(May It, 1878),
3rd edition.

 

 

‘0

‘-

 

186

a treasonable charge tO be punished by death."21

For his defence H8de1 selected Otto Freytag of
Leipzig. Freytag was willing to take H8del's ease but
requested that he be sent the documents in the case and
be given an eight day recess to study them, but both re-
quests were denied so Freytag did not defend H8del. He
was given a court appointed attorney, who knowing not
what else to do apologized to the Tribunal because it
had fallen his lot to defend a person accused of high
treason.22‘ Hadel's trial, sentencing and execution were
carried out with maximum.haste. He was tried on July 10,
sentenced on August 8, and executed on August 16. One Of
the most damaging pieces of evidence introduced at the
trial was a letter H8del had written while in prison to
his parents in which he said that he had sacrificed.his
life for the public good and his only regret was that his
shots had gone astray, but that he hOped that his failure
‘would not damage the cause. The court deliberated only
twenty minutes to find him.guilty. Throughout the trial
1H8del maintained an amused expression on his face. He
listened as the judge read the death sentence and reSponded
with a laugh. The death sentence was not signed by William
I, but by the Crown Prince Friedrich, due to the fact that

 

21Leipziger Tageblatt, NO. 13h(May 1h, 1878).
22August Bebel, Aus meinem Leben, p. 589.

4,}
a.»

Dis-s, a
sun:

0
'R!r{
chi.-

N1 1
as.

“r6
Vii

‘ngd.

'l‘.l

8| n

s! ‘1
t

1'!
u—

I.»
':

O
I‘-
an

187

the Emperor was unable to use his right arm because of
wounds inflicted by Nobiling on June 2.23

While he was imprisoned in MOabit HBdel wore hand
irons. They were joined by a chain, and connected to his
leg irons, which were chained to the wall. This was done
for two reasons - to prevent an escape, and also to pre-
vent a suicide attempt on H8del's part. He wore the
traditional German prison dress of the time, blue jacket,
vest and trousers, brown socks, cap and slippers. After
he was found guilty HBdel was asked if he did not want
to appeal his case, he replied "that wouldn't do any good,
Off with my head." Asked if he had any special request,
he replied that he was an inveterate smoker and wanted
the privilege Of smoking in his cell. Permission to smoke
was granted.him. He also requested to be executed on
Calvary, which was denied, and which would tend tO show
that Hadel thought Of himself as a martyr for a cause.
He was granted permission to write his parents which he
did several times. On one occasion he signed his letter
"Max H8de1, assassin Of His Majesty The German Kaiser."
.A request to see his parents was denied. He received
permission to wear his own clothing the final day before
the execution. When asked if he wanted something Special

to eat at his last meal he answered: "I am.hungry and if

 

23A description of the trial and execution can be
found in Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin, 0, Tit. Lit. 9t, A., HBdel-Attentst,
Folders 113-128.

188

you will put a menu before me I shall pick something out."
The jailer replied: "We don't have a menu here, but you i
can have a beef steak and some wine.“ H8de1 thanked him.
and proceeded to eat two beef steaks and drink the wine.
The first glass he raised.high in the air and toasted
"Long live the Commune," and then downed it. He then
wrote a letter to his parents telling them.not to grieve
for him, that he loved them very much and wished them
well for the remainder of their lives. Time, he said,
quickly heals all wounds. In his last letter he also
stated: "Long live the Commune." And then as a final
request he asked that all his possessions be sent to
his parentsszh

HUdel did not sleep very much the night before
his execution, spending most of the night smoking one
cigarette after another. When the jailer came to get
Ihim.just before six o'clock on the morning of August 16,
1878, he was sitting on a stool smoking a cigarette.
He got up and went quietly, after asking for a glass of
milk which was given him and.which he drank. It took
H8de1 three minutes to reach the scaffold from.his cell.
Gathered around the scaffold in the prison court yard
was a crowd of about fifty spectators. HBdel climbed
the four steps leading up to the scaffoldiand laid his

head on the block asking "here?" The sentence was

 

2""Die beiden letzten Tage des Hochverrathers Max
3830]., Ppome ‘

189
quickly read once more after which HBdel shouted "Bravo!"
He was then told to strip to the waist, and his arms and
upper body were fastened down to the block. The hooded
executioner, Scharfrichter Krautz, lifted.his axe above
his head and with one sure blow severed H8del's head
from his body; The head bounded off the scaffold onto
the ground where the eyes opened and closed twice very
rapidly before coming to rest. The whole process took
ninety seconds from the time HBdel arrived at the scaf-
fold. The remains of HBdel's body were removed and con-
cealed under the scaffold, until the crowd dispersed, and
were later buried along with the head in the prison grave
yard. Professor Virchow, Director of the Berlin Pathalo-
gical Institute, asked for HBdel's head to examine his
brain, but this request was denied. That afternoon no-
tices were posted throughout Berlin telling of the
execution and stating that the same thing would happen
to anyone else who shall try to kill the German Em-

peror.25

 

25A copy of this poster is preserved in Branden-
burgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30
Berlin 0, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., Hadel-Attentat, Folder 126.
There can be little doubt that the execution of HBdel
was intended to be an example. There had not been a
capital sentence handed down in Germany for a number of
years. William.I was opposed to capital punishment,
even in the case of Hadel, but Bismarck pushed for the
death penalty. On this point see: Paul Kampffmeyer and
Bruno Altmann, VOr dem Sozialistengesetz. Krise Jahre
des Obrigkeitsstaates(BerlinITl928), p. 166.

'v

I. .V
I..\ U

 

190

BISMARCK'S EXPLOITATION OF THE HUDEL ATTEMPT

The Chef der Reichskanzelei, Christoph von Tiede-
mann(1836-l907) informed Bismarck at Friedrichsruh, of
the assassination attempt, in a long telegram. This set
in motion a chain of events which culminated in Bismarck
telegraphing Bernhard von Bfilow(1815-1879), his State
Secretary of Foreign Affairs, at 8:32 on the evening of
the same day asking Bfllow to consult with the Prussian
Minister of the Interior Botho Graf zu Eulenburg(1831-
1912) concerning the possibility of using the attempt as
a pretext for repressive legislation against the socialists
and their press. On May 13 Herbert von Bismarck gave Bfilow
a note from his father in Which he said that it was the
time to move against the socialists, if they did not at
least attempt to pass restrictive legislation, they would
be guilty of dereliction of duty.26

On the day following the attempt the Berliner
freie Presse issued an extra devoted entirely to H8del,
repudiating him.and condemning his crime and stating em-
phatically that he was in no way connected with the soci-
alists, adding that "no political party should be held
responsible for his nefarious deed." The events following
the H8del attempt came as a surprise to some people.

26Christoph von Tiedemann, Aus Sieben ahrzehnten.
II Sechs Jahre Chef der Reichskanzelei untergemfFuriten'
BismarckILeipzig, 1909), pp. 256a258; Otto von BismarEk,
'fiie—Gesammelten‘Werke. Vol. 6 c 1811 his 1890(Berlin,

9 pp. "’ e

 

 

191

Mr. Bayard Taylor of the U.S. Legation in Berlin wrote:
"The recent attempt to assassinate the Emperor of Ger-
many has already led to results of wider range and of
greater political importance than could have been anti-
cipated.” Taylor also noted that "The Social Democratic
press throughout Germany, while disowning all sympathy
with the act, maintained an attitude of coldness and re-
serve, and failed to unite frankly in the general ex-
pression of congratulation." Taylor though was astute
enough to perceive that the German government took ad-
vantage of the assassination attempt, seeing it as "the
:mement favorable for the introduction of a repressive
:measure, aimed directly at the Social Democratic Party,
yet so constructed as to be caphble of a much more extended
application.”27 Enclosed with the letter was a copy of
the projected law which had been laid before the Reichstag
on May 20.28

:It is true that Bismarck seized upon the occasion

of the assassination attempt to introduce repressive

 

27Pa ers Relatin to the Foreign Relations of the
'United States 1878, pp. 212. A few days before the attempt
‘HUHEI had submitted an article to the Berliner freie Presse
in which he denounced the Christian Socialists, however,
Ignaz Auer, the editor, rejected it on the grounds that it

wgghgoo anarchistic. Freiheit(New York), No. hS(November 8,
1 .

 

 

28An English translation of this bill is found in
Ibid., pp. 213-21h. The German text is easily accessable

In Pack, Das parlamentarische Rin en um.das Sozialisten-
gesetz Bismarcks l878-1895, p. 25;.

 

 

192

measures which.he had wanted for some time to put into
Operation. There were four fundamental reasons why Bis-
marck wanted to crush the Social Democrats: one, in
constitutional political outlook they were republicans,
and a threat to the monarchy; two, in foreign affairs
they were internationalists, which to Bismarck meant that
they would be friends of Germany's enemies; three, in
domestic affairs the Social Democrats wanted to transform
the existing social and economic order which put them in
Opposition to the Junker foundation of German society;
four, in religious matters they were atheists, which
meant that they intended to undermine the religious and
moral structure of Germany.29 To Bismarck the political
goals of the Social Democratic program were the most
dangerous. He did not deny that the workers had legiti-
mate complaints against the existing economic structure.
Bismarck's ”repression of a dangerous political movement
was to be followed by ameliorative social legislation.

In true Junker fashion, Bismarck chose to apply the

 

29Pack, Ibid., p. 8. Bismarck had access to do-
cumentary evidence which demonstrated that H8del was no
longer a Social Democrat. The Police Commissioner in
Leipzi , Krflger, had telegraphed von Madai on May 13, 1878,
that H del had been thrown out of the local Social Demo-
cratic.organization for embezzlement and had gone over to
the anarchist camp where he was actively engaged as an
agitator in meetings at Schkeuditz. Brandenburgisches
Landeshauptardhiv Potsdam. Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit.
9h Lit. A., No. 2h8(86265, Hadel-Attentat, Folder h9.
Kréger is mistaken in his dating. It is true that HBdel
was in association with the anarchists in March, but.he
was not thrown out of the local Social Democratic organi-
zation until early April 1878.

'9

I93
whip before offering the carrot. But, because the whip
was so indiscriminately applied against almost all
workers' organizations, Bismarck's distinction between
the political and economic goals was blurred, and the
carrot could not achieve the purpose for which it was
intended."30 Bismarck wanted to crush the socialists
but he also wanted to weaken the liberal parties in the
Reichstag to clear the path for a shift in economic poli-
cies, which was necessiated by the economic crash of 1873
and the continuing slump in the subsequent years which
had created serious doubts about the practicality of
economic liberalism. There were demands for greater
state intervention in the economy. Bismarck thought
the German government should act to counter the de-
pression: being pushed by the industrialists and agri-
culturalists, he decided early in 1878 to push for
protective tariffs, which would be opposed by the free
traders among the National Liberals and Progressives.
The National Liberals would be cpposed to any special
law aimed at one party so Bismarck ”could confront the
free traders on an issue of patriotism.and the defense
of German society, while at the same time seeking to weaken

them.politica11y to clear the way for tariff legislation."31

 

30Vernon L. Lidtke, The Outlawed Party;Social Demo-
cracy in Germany,_1878—1890(Princeton, 1966), p.71.

31Ibid., pp. 71-72. See also: Guenther Both, The
Social Democrats in Imperial Germany. A Study in Working

19h

Bismarck knew he could not muster enough votes
in the Reichstag in May 1878, to pass an “exceptional
law" designated to outlaw one political party. He was
also aware that the safety of German society did not
warrant such a measure. He wanted an issue to use against
the liberal parties and for that reason he had to exagge-
rate his demands against the Social Democrats. "The tac-
tics Bismarck employed in May 1878, make it clear that he
intended not only to combat socialism.but also to provoke
the majority in the Reichstag into rejecting the exagge-
rated measures he presented for that purpose."32 The
German government admitted that the Social Democrats, at
best, were only indirectly responsible for H8del's act,
which demonstrated that the immediate cause for the

 

Class Isolation and National Integration(Totowa, New
Harsey,‘l963)} which points out that electoral gains by
the Social Democrats were as early as 187A followed up
by stepped up activity by police and courts, and Bis-
marck began maneuvering for more stringent repressive
legislation against the Social Democrats, pp. 108-109.

On January 27, 1876, Count Friedrich zu Eulenburg,
Prussian Minister of the Interior defended, before the
Reichstag, a government bill directed against the Social
Democrats. Eulenburg pointed to an article in the Las-
sallean Neue Sozialdemokrat of 1871, which developed the
idea of the inevitability of the class struggle, which to
Eulenburg contradicted the SPD emphasis on legality which
most SPD speakers professed. Eulenburg also quoted the
Eisenacher Volksstaat, pointing out that this paper was
actually prETEssing revolution, because it said that re-
volution was inevitable even if they followed parliamen-
tary activity and that the SPD considered christianity a
hindrance to social progress. Stenographische Berichte
fiber die Verhandlungen des Reichstags, pp.9Hl-95h.

an

 

32Lidtke, The Outlawed Party, p. 72.

"

O

‘n‘

 

19S

"exceptional law" had no foundation. "In this manner,
Bismarck himself intimated indirectly that the opponents
of the Socialist Law had legitimate reasons for rejecting
it. Yet, on the other hand, the government and conser-
vative parties argued that those who opposed the law would
be held responsible for permitting cenditions which led

to assassinations."33 As Bismarck expected, the Reichs-
tag on May 2h rejected the first Socialist Law with only
the conservatives supporting it, the Vote being two

hundred fifty-one nays to fifty-seven ayes.3u The same

day the Reichstag adjourned and was not to meet again
until January. Only a few elections were slated to fill
vacancies, but the Bundesrat could dissolve the Reichs-
tag, which would necessitate elections for all seats in
the Reichstag. Bismarck, even in his fondest hopes,
could not have expected that within a week a situation
would arise which would create new Opportunities for him

to exploit.

 

33Ibid., pp.21-73.

3h"Pack, Das_parlamentarische Ringen, p. 50. On

May 29, 1878, Bismarck at Friedrichsruh dictated a press
release to Tiedemann in.which.he chided the Reichstag
for failing to pass the Socialist Law. It appeared as

an editorial article in the Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zei-

tun , No. 128(June 1, 1878). *It is printed in Eismarck,

e Gesammelten Werke. Vol. 6 c, 1811 his 1890, pp. 113-

 

 

CHAP ER V

THE NOBILII s ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT AND THE PASSAGE OF THE:
SOCIALIST LAW ‘

William I continued to take his afternoon drives
without any extra precautions. The aged Monarch was of
the opinion that H8del's attempt was the act of a solitary
demented.mind and did not reflect the thinking of the ma-
jority of the German people. Unknown to William.I a second
assassin had been selected and was observing the Emperor
on Sunday afternoon June 2, 1878, as he drove down Unter
den Linden past the cafe National, situated on Grossen
Friedrichstrasse-Ecke.1 The assassin, Dr. Carl Eduard
Nobiling, was watching the Kaiser from the Hunters Club,
Jagerkeller, located under the cafe National. The Egg-

 

r8ckte Doktor, as he was called at the Hunters Club,

 

IAfter Nobiling was apprehended.he made a state-
ment in which he said that others were involved in the
assassination attempt, but that he had been selected to
carry out the act because of his skill in the use of weapons.
Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam. Acta des K8nig-
lichen Polizei-Prfisidii zu Berlin. "Das Attentat das Dr.
Phil. Carl Nobiling auf das Leben Sr. Majestflt des Kaisers
und K8nigs am 2. Juni 1878." Geheim.PrHsidial Registratur
C. Pol. Praes. Tit. 9h, Lit. A., No. 2&2, Vol. 111(8615),
Folders ll-12. Hereafter cited as Brandenburgisches Landes-
hauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h,

Lit. A., No. 2h2, Nobiling-Attentat, and the apprOpriate
volume and folder numbers.

196

:1

 

‘.
ll‘

 

197
spent many of his evenings at the club and ate many of
his meals there, often with strange luncheon guests.

Nobiling had spent an uneasy morning in his room
at number 18 Unter den Linden. About ten A.M. as his
land lady came upstairs waking guests Nobiling shouted
to her through his open door, "What do you want?" She
replied that she was waking guests and Nobiling quickly
threw his door shut. A couple of hours later the short,
slight, full-bearded, prematurely balding Nobiling went
out to enjoy a late luncheon at the Hunters Club where
he waited for the Kaiser to take his daily ride, which
would take him by the club. According to the statements
of two waiters in the club he left the club sometime
between 1:30 and 1:50. He then walked to his room at
No. 18 Unter den Linden which was located about half
way between Friedrichstrasse and'Wilhelmstrasse.

The preparations for his attempt had been com-
pleted days in advance so that once back in his room.he
had.anly to wait for the Emperor to return from his ride
in the Tiergarten, riding up Unter den Linden on his way
back to the Royal Palace. He did not have to wait long.
.At 2:30 the Emperor's carriage came into view and as it
jpassed the Kaiser Galleria, Nobiling leveled the sights
of his doubled barrelled.3hot gun on him, following the
IQaiser until he was directly in front of his third story
‘window. While the aged Monarch was acknowledging the

salutes of some bystanders Nobiling fired, the Emperor's

C

198
hand moved instinctively to his face as he half rose
from.his seat, and the carriage, which had been stopped
upon orders from.William I was about to turn around and
Nobiling discharged the second barrel. This time the old
Kaiser sank back into the carriage seat, bleeding profu-
sely from.facial wounds. He was also wounded in the head,
back, arms and.hands and some spectators imagined that he
had been killed.

A group of spectators then decided to capture the
person responsible for this attempt on the life of the
Kaiser. The assault on Nobiling's third story furnished
apartment was led by an inn keeper, Herr Holtfeuer, who
burst through the door of the apartment to see a small,
neat man, with large pointed ears which stood out from
his head like fans, seated on the opposite side of the
room by an open window with a revolver in his hand. Holt-
feuer moved in to capture Nobiling and the would be
assassin fired a shot into the inn keeper's face wounding
him.severely. He staggered back out of the room.and fell
down the stairway. The crowd, mistaking him.for the
assassin, seized him and nearly beat him.to death.

Immediately after firing a shot at Holtfeuer
Nobiling put the end of the barrel of the revolver to his
right temple and fired a shot into his head. His hand,
by now had lost some of its steadiness and the ball in-
stead of entering his head at the right temple entered

.at a point more above his right eye. It was not a fatal

was];
V‘s-H

any 1
vwdui

l‘

'0.
Ev“
o'Ulg.

N 3‘

" as

J ‘1
J. .L
E":-
.‘v
col,
35-:
18 a!
ho ‘.
6'. .
u! -
y
1‘
at .‘e

“:3!

s..-

.0”!

'N.

‘7.

k! I
fl

0

a: V.

199

wound. The "capture” of nobiling was accomplished by a
young infantry officer named Wilhelmy, who charged into
the room, saber drawn, and proceeded to crack the wounded
Nobiling on the head. The prison van or "Green Carriage,”
as it was called by Berliners, was summoned to carry off
the wounded prisoner. As the "Green Carriage" sped out
of the court yard at No. 18 Unter den Linden the driver
failed to notice the low archway. He struck his head
against it with such force that it broke his neck and
he died. Getting Nobiling to the hospital station of
the Mblken Market police district was not an easy matter.
It required the protection of the mounted police(Berittene
Schfltzleute) to protect him.from.the angry crowds. (Pro-
tection was also required when he was later moved to the
Charite Hospital).2

At the police station it was determined that the
assassin was Dr. Carl Eduard Nobiling. He was born at
Kolno bei Birnbaum.in the province of Posen on April 10,
lBhfl. He had two brothers serving as officers in the
Prussian army, one in the 59th Regiment, the other in the
79th. His sister was a Protestant Sister of Charity in.
the Elizabeth Hospital in Berlin. His father, a Major

in the Prussian army, was deceased and his mother was

 

2Local anzeiger der "Presse”(Vienna), XXXI, No.
155(June 7, 18781; TribuneYBerlin), XVIII, No. 128(June h,
1878): Brandenburgisches Ihndeshauptarchiv Potsdam. Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., No. 2&2, Nobiling-
Attentat, Vol. 1(8613), Folders l-lk, 32, 6k, 269; Vol. III
(8615), Folders 8-9, ZS-hl, kB-SO.

a

“.2

'0‘

3..

\
{deg

200
remarried to a Major von Gauvain. Nobiling was a pro-
testant by birth and came from.a family that was in good
financial circumstances. Several of his relatives had;
been employed in the Prussian bureaucracy.

The assassin received his early education from a
succession of private tutors, the last of whom was Fried-
rich Liebe, to whom.Nobiling, on the last page of his
doctoral dissertation in his curriculum vita, acknowledged
a debt for giving him.”a scientific training as full and
many sided as possible" and also for "qualifying him.for
the practical duties of life." He continued his education
with formal c1assroom.work at Zflllichau in lower Silesia
where he completed five years of school in four and one-
half years during the period from Easter, 1863, to
Michaelmas, 1867. The next three years he devoted him,
self to agricultural work before enrolling at the Univer-
sity of Halle where he studied agriculture and political
science for three sessions from.MichaeLmas, 1870, to
Easter, 1872. The following two years were again spent
in practical agricultural work except for several months
travel which he undertook to become acquainted with cur-
rent practices followed on farms and in industrial establish-
ments. He continued his studies again at Halle starting
with Easter, 187h, for another two sessions and followed
them up with three sessions at the University of Leipzig
in 1875-1876, where he completed his Doctor of Philosophy
- degree in May, 1876, with a dissertation entitled Beitrage

201
zur Geschichte der Landwirtschaft des Saalskreises der Pro—

vinz Sachsen(Contributions to the History of Agriculture

 

in the Saal District, Province of Saxony), which he dedi-
cated to Wilhelm.Georg Friedrich Roscher(1817-189h), a
renowned Professor of Political Economy at the University
of Leipzig.3

The Emperor's Open carriage had proceeded swiftly
to the palace after the second shot was fired and the
Emperor was put to bed and examined by a number of doc-
tors who discovered that he had seven pieces of shot in
his right forearm and wrist, five in.his head and face,
twenty in his upper left arm and shoulder and six in his
neck. The shot, which was quite large, was number four
and five according to the German standard of measurement.
The Emperor's military helmet had stopped so many of the
pellets that it was completely riddled and if he had not
been wearing it he probably would have been killed in-
stantly or at least have bled to death. During the week
the Emperor wore his officer's cap but on every Sunday,
according to regulation, he wore the helmet. The folds
of his thick military attire, which included a coat, waist-
coat, and shirt were also riddled with shot. The thick
clothing he was wearing helped to deaden the effect of

the two blasts. Nevertheless, the Emperor was seriously

 

3Times(London, June h, 1878), p. 5, Col. 5-6.
Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam. Pr. Br. Rep.
30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., No. 2h2, Nobiling-Attentat,
Vol. III(86lS), Folders 15-17.

202

wounded and had lost a lot of blood. At first he was in
tisomewhat unconscious state as could be expected of a man
eighty-one years old. However, he quickly gained his comp
posure and had word sent to the Shah of Persia, who was
visiting Berlin, that he would be unable to dine with him.
that evening as planned.

The doctors removed many of the grains of shot
but had to stOp when the muscles in the Emperor's arms
started to swell. However, his healthy constitution seemed
to be able to withstand the shock and loss of blood, but
there was a genuine concern on the part of the doctors for
the Emperor's life due to his advanced age. The Emperor,
who usually slept on a small iron bedstead in an unpre-
tentious back room of the palace, was moved to a front
room facing Unter den Linden, which contained a larger
bed. Some officials thought that in order to insure more
peaceful condition for the Emperor, they should prOhibit
the passage of carriages on the Opposite side of the
Linden and in the Opera Square, but the old Emperor would
not permit this.“

 

uIt appears that Nobiling's attempt on.the Emperor
had its beneficial side. Bismarck relates in.his memoirs
that in the middle 1870's the Emperor's intellect began to
decline and he had difficulty comprehending what others
said and in developing his own thoughts. At times he comp
pletely lost the thread of conversations in which he was
engaged. His remarks, like his mind, wandered. After the
Nobiling attempt he no longer suffered from these symptoms,
"the Emperor was freer, had more life, and was also more
easily moved.” ‘William, himself remarked, ”Nobiling knew
better than the doctors what I wanted-a good letti of
blood.” Otto von Bismarck, The Memoirs(NeI Ybrk, l9 6), II,

P- 3030

203

Nobiling's attempt on'william.I immediately turned
Berlin into a city that was garrisoned as though it were
in a state of siege. At once the measure for the suppression
of socialism was revived. ‘Within an hour the news of the
attempt was telegraphed to all the capitals of Europe and
telegrams of sympathy began to pour in to the old Kaiser,
however, he continued to receive a number of threatening
letters as did Bismarck. The heavy hand of the law fell
on everyone who suggested either by word or deed that he
sympathized with H8del or Nobiling. From.June to the
middle of August five hundred sixty-three persons were
tried for IBse Majesté for either insulting the Kaiser or
for approving of the attempts of H8de1 and Nobiling and
regretting that they had failed. In only forty-two in-
stances were the accused persons acquitted. In five hundred
twenty-one cases(including thirty-one women) they were con-
victed and sentenced to terms of imprisonment amounting in
the aggregate to eight hundred eleven years eleven and one
half months. In five cases the accused committed suicide.5

A few examples will point out just how ridiculous
some of the crimes of lBse Majests were. A drunken man
received two and one half years in prison for murmuring,
"Uillimm is dead, he lives no more." A woman talking

SBernstein, Die Geschichte der Berliner Arbeiter-
bewegung, I, p. kl. F3} the reaction to the attempt‘in
0 er parts of Germany see: Georg Eckert, Die Braunschweiger
Arbeiterbewegung_unter dem Sozialistengesetz; Heinrich’Lau-
linburg,‘G3schichte der Arbeiterbewe u ithamburg,gAltona
und Umgegend(Hamburg, , I , pp. h6.

 

 

.uh

Ad

‘
hon

20h_
about the Emperor's wounds was sentenced to a year and one
half for saying "the Kaiser at least is not poor, he can
afford to care for himself."6 A worker, Friedrich Car],
Sommer, while sitting on a bench along Unter den Linden,
was heard to say that, "HBdel is a dumb head, but Nobiling
planned his attempt well.” This slip of the tongue cost

him.four years of his freedom.7

In general though the great majority of the German
people felt genuine sympathy for their wounded Monarch and
expressed it openly in the streets, churches and.schools.
Most university professors denounced Nobiling's act when
they met their classes on Monday morning. The students
rose from their seats expressing sentiments similar to those
expressed by their professors. 'Church services were held
thrOughout Germany and prayer vigils were held asking Godis
help in healing the wounds of the Kaiser. All socialists,
however, were immediately suspect and domiciliary visits
were paid by the police to their residences. The editors
of the various socialist papers were particularly suspect.
The Berlin homes of the editors of the Berliner freie Presse
‘were searched and their papers confiscated.

It was understandable to most Germans that a man

of HBdel's background might try to kill the Emperor, but

 

6Mdhring, Geschichte der Sozialdemokratie, II,

 

p. 500.

7Bernstein Die Geschichte der Berliner Arbeiter-
bewegung, I, p. 368.

205

it was incomprehensible that a man of Nobiling's education,
background and breeding should attempt such an act. The
police immediately began an extensive inquiry into the
events of Nobiling's life in order to determine if there
was a connection between his attempt and that of H8del.
This meticulous search was extended over several European
countries including England, Austria-Hungary, France,
Switzerland, Belgium, Russia and Italy. Information poured
in from many other places including the United States. A
great deal of valuable information was turned up, however,
fer reasons which will be explained later the police failed
'u>apprehend the group which had backed Nobiling.

It was discovered that during the period from
April to August, 1877, Nobiling took an extended trip,
visiting Erfurt, Hannover, Ostende, London, Brussels,

Paris, Basel, Zurich, Vienna and Berlin.8 It was further

determined that after the H8del attempt Nobiling talked
about a forthcoming socialist revolution, relating that

he was associated with revolutionary groups in Frankfurt

A/M: Vienna and Munich.9 A number of witnesses had seen

him at socialist meetings in Berlin.10 The police in

8Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h. Lit. A., No. 2&2. Nobiling-
Attentat, Vol. III(8615). Folder 36.

9Ibid., Folder M7.

loIbid., Folder 59.

Ian

 

\fitn...

206
London and Paris were aware that something was going to
happen in Berlin on June 2. The French police notified
von.Philipshorn of this and he transmitted the message
to Berlin. The London police likewise has sent a warning

to the Berlin police that something was going to happen

11

on June 2. The newspapers somehow or other got wind

of this and made a great deal Out of it.12 Guido von

thai(l810-1892), Polizeiprfisident of Berlin, denied this
charge saying it was false and that Nobiling had never
been brought to their attention prior to his attempt on
the life of she Kaiser on June 2. In spite of this denial
the Tribune on June 15 continued to maintain the same
position.13

Letters were also discovered in St. Petersburg
addressed to Leon Lielsky and dated respectively, Paris
April 28, and London May 8, which revealed that soon
"a great blow would be struck for freedom in Berlin."1n
Another discovery made by the Berlin police was that“

Nobiling, for some unknown reason, sent copies of articles

 

111bid., Vol. I(8613), Folders huff.

12Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitun , No. 153(June 30,
1878); Tribune, No. 133(June 9, 1878.

13See also Blrliner Fremdenblatt, No. lh6(June 26,
1878) which maintains the same position as the Tribune say-
ing that the burden of guilt fell on the Berlin police for

their negligance in failing to heed the reports from Paris
and London.

Dr 1hBrandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam,
11. Hr. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h. Lit. A., No. 2h2, Nobi-
n ~Attentat, Vol. 1(8613), Folders l3h-135.

207

from.the Berliner freie Presse, written in code, to peOple
living in London and Paris. The Berlin police were able
to break his code.15

Many facts were uncovered about Nobiling's student
days at Halle and Leipzig. At Halle he attended Social
Democratic meetings and spoke out against class privilege
and.the King saying it would be better to abolish both of
them. He also said, as did Proudhon, that prOperty is
theft and the economic and political order must be over-
thrown. It must be replaced by a classless community in
which everyone would work and share equally in the products
of their labors. He maintained that if necessary dynamite
should be used to usher in this new era. Other students
who had known him.at Halle also revealed that he had a
collection of Social Democratic literature especially the
writings of Lassalle and that he had subscribed to 233_
neue Sozialdemokrat. Serious by nature, Nobiling told
other students that he wanted to do what he could for the
Social Democratic Party, but that when he achieved a re-
putation in Social Democratic circles he would found his
own party. At Leipzig he continued to attend Social De-
mocratic meetings and acquainted himself better with
Social Democratic principles. His interest in attending
Social Democratic meetings was not so much to hear what

was said, but to make himself heard and on several

 

15ibid., Folder 65.

208

occasions he spoke out on the subject of the Paris Commune.
At Leipzig he frequented meetings of the National Liberals
and was associated with the Statistical Society led by the
National Liberal Professor Wilhelm.Roscher. He also at-
tended the Academic Discussion Club led by Professor Karl
Joseph Eugen Birnbaum(1829-2), and was a regular at the
meetings of the Academic Agricultural Group. While at
Halle he was nicknamed "Petroleur," a name which followed
him to Leipzig. He wasalso called'the communist" by
fellow students. The term "Petroleur" was left over from
the Paris Commune and the burning of the monuments in
Paris during the last days of the Commune. Perhaps the
name had some association with a pOpular socialist song
of the times which.was set to the music of ”La Fille de
Madame Angot" and.had this chorus:

Hier Petroleum, da Petroleum,

Petroleum um.und um,

Lass die Humpen frisch1vgll pumpen
Dreimal hoch Petroleum!1

In Dresden Nobiling continued to attend Social
Democratic meetings for the purpose of disputing with
the speakers and putting forth his own ideas which
usually involved an admiration for the Commmne. His in-
volvement extended beyond attending meetings because he

was a member of the Arbeiter-Bildungsverein of Dresden,

 

16Quoted in Ernest Alfred Vizetelly, The Anarchists
(NOW York, 1911), p. “2e

209
lecturing there occasionally.17 Using Dresden as a
home base he traveled extensively during the months
April to August, 1877.. In July and August he went to
London, Paris, Brussels, Zurich, Vienna, Prague and
Cologne carrying letters from Social Democratic friends
in Dresden. In London he attended meetings of the figm—
munistische-Arbeiterbildunggyerein, and in Paris he
associated with the Social Democrat Carl Hirsch(18hl-l900).
In Brussels he associated with a Mr. Brismeel who was con-
nected with the First International. For a few days
Nobiling passed himself off as being associated with the
International even though he was not. Nobiling was em-
ployed at Dresden in the Saxon Statistical Department
from October, 1876, to October, 1877.18

 

17Leo Stern(ed.), Der Kampf der deutschen Sozial-
demokratie in der Zeit des Sozialistengesetzes 1878-1890.

DieLTHti keit der Reighs-Commission(Berlin-East, 1956)
II, p. 760; Freiheit(New Yerk), No. hS(November 8, 1888).

18Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., No. 2h2, Nobiling-
Attentat, Vol. 1(8613). Fodder 111.8, Vol. 111(8615), Fol-
ders 1h-15. At this time Carl Hirsch was the Paris corres-
pondent for the Social Democratic press in Germany. Later
it was speculated by some that Nobiling had gone to London
to see Marx, which of course was not his purpose in going
there. Mountstuart Grant Duff, a liberal member of Par-
liament, dined with Marx on January 31, 1879, at the Devon-
shire Club on St. James Street. He posed the question to
Marx, what if Nobiling had requested to see him? Marx rep-
lied that since Nobiling was employed in the Dresden Bureau
of Statistics, and he, himself, was interested in statis-
tics, he probably would have talked with him.

When the news of Nobiling's attempt arrived at
Marx's home, he was in his study with the Russian Historian
Maxim.Kovalevsky. Kovalevsky relates that Marx cursed No-
biling, not for the attempted assassination, but for fai-
ling. Marx also said, and he was proved correct, that the

210

In October, 1877, Nobiling moved to Berlin where
he first lived at hl Kochstrasse at the home of widow
Kflhler. He then moved to 131 Leipzigerstrasse to the home
of Frau Brochnau where he lived until January 2, 1878.
Frau Brochnau, as his other land ladies at Halle, Leipzig,
and Dresden, reported that he lived a quiet life. She
reported that he kept a loaded revolver in his room, and
that he read the socialist Berliner freie Presse, and

the two reactionary organs, the Kreuzzeitugg and the Reichs-

 

22323. On January 2 he left on a trip that took him to
Leipzig, Strassburg, Paris, Switzerland, and maybe to
London. When he returned he took up residence at number
18 Unter den Linden renting a third story furnished apart-
ment for forty-five marks a month. Upon.his return from
this trip he talked on several occasions about the for-
mation of an International Republic. Early in February
he took another trip to Leipzig, and in the early months
of spring he made a number of short trips to small
villages near Berlin.19
In Berlin he earned his living by writing for
agricultural and scientific journals, often under the

pseudonym of Ludwig. A search of his room after the
attempt revealed that he still read the Berliner freie

 

attempt could only lead to new persecutions of the
socialists. Erinnerungen an Marx und Engels(Berlin-
East, 1965), p. 398.

”gig” Vol. 111(8615), Folder 21ff.

211
Presse and also the Ultra-Mentane Germania, the Deutsche

Landeszeitung, and the Neue Badische Landeszeitupg. There

 

were also two shot guns, two revolvers, and a supply of
ammunition for all the weapons. A certificate indicated
that part of the arsenal had been purchased on April 26

20 Like H8del, Nobiling

from a Mr. Dreijse in Tommerda.
had his picture taken a few days before his attempt by a
Berlin photographer, P. Mahlmann, in his shOp at Mfiller-
strasse 1. After the attempt Mahlmann tried to capitalize
on this, by advertizing in many newspapers, selling cOpies
of Nobiling's picture. If you bought more than fifty
cOpies you received a thirty-three and one third percent
discount.21
A number of people came forth voluntarily to re-
late to the police that they had seen H8del and Nobiling
tOgether plotting their attempts on the life of the King.
Some of these accounts are pure fiction while others are
in the realm.of the plausible.22 Others claimed to have
seen H8del and Nobiling plotting the attempts with a man

who called himself Ieo Frankel.23

 

20Ibid., Folders 85-87.

21Local Anzeiger der "Presse"(Vienna), XXXI, No.
155(June 7, 1878). ~ -

22Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pf.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., No. 2 2, Nobiling-
Attentat, Vol. III(86lS), Folder 66, Vol. IV( 616), Fol-
ders 3-1h.

23Ibid., Vol. IV(8616), Folder 1.

212

Numerous peOple related to the Berlin police that
they heard Nobiling refer to H8del on various occasions
calling him a poor shot, an untrained marksman and an
ordinary laborer not worthy to undertake such a project
‘as the assassination of the Emperor. Nobiling maintained
that H8del had failed in his attempt because he did not
know hOw to handle a gun, but someone would soon come
along who did and he would not fail. Nobiling let it be
known that if he had such an idea in mind he could do
better than HBdel. A few days after HBdel's attempt No-
biling said to a girl working for his land lady that the
Emperor was certain to be shot some day by a more prac-
ticed.hand. The girl said that such an act would be use-
less and Nobiling replied, "no doubt the Crown Prince will
succeed but if he too is killed, and the next ten that
succeed.him.are promptly disposed of in like manner, we
shall have the Republic in no time." The girl thought
that this was all a bad joke, but she maintained that
she had always been somewhat suspicious of him because
of the practice he had of burning his letters immediately
after reading them. It should be noted in this respect
that no letters were found in his room after the attempt,
although according to his land lady he carried on a large
correspondence.2h

Exactly how large a circle of friends Nobiling

 

Zhlbid” Vol. III(8615). Folders hB-SS.

213
had is not known, but when the contents of his room were
examined twelve recently used beer glasses were found
standing on a table. His land lady related that she had
not noticed them in the room.prior to this time. This
would tend to give the appearance that some sort of final
celebration had been held on Saturday night before the
attempt. If such a celebration were held it is not known
who attended.

The police made meticulous searches of the re-
gistrar and guest books of the hotels and inns in which
Nobiling had stayed on his frequent travels to determine
the other guests present. The results of these investi-
gations were inconclusive but sometimes a known Social
Democrat was found to have spent the night in the same
hotel.25

The Berlin police uncovered evidence that the
German section of the Jura Federation was reSponsible for
the plot against the Emperor, and that both assassination
attempts had been directed from.Leipzig, but this evidence

was never followed up.26

Some additional revelations were
turned up, the significance of which it does not seem.the
Berlin police could have overlooked. But they did, perhaps
intentionally. Louis Pinday, a former communard and

friend of former communard Leo Frankel, received a letter

 

251bid., Vol. 1(8613). Folder LB-
26Ibid., Vol. IV(8616), Folder 33.

211:

from.Frankel dated May 20 in which Frankel related that
after the unsuccessful attempt by H8del a meeting had been
held in Neuchatel in which the German section of the Jura
Federation had decided to make another attempt on the
life of the Kaiser.27 It was also reported(date not spe-
cified) to the Berlin police that James Guillaume, living
in Switzerland, had remarked, "we know very well that
Nobiling is one of us."28

It is almost beyond belief that the Berlin police
did not attach greater importance to an undated letter
Emil Werner, living in Leipzig at the time, wrote to
Paul Brousse who was serving as editor of the Avant-Garde
in Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland. The contents of this
letter revealed that Leo Frankel had been arrested and
that, "It would be in the best interest of the cause if
Nobiling would soon die." The letter went on to say
that Nobiling was to have been initiated into the Inter-
national but that his sponsor, Paul Dentler, had died in

Berlin five to six weeks previously.29 The tone of this

 

2722123. Vol. 1(8613), Folders ist-155.
283333., Vol. I(8613), Folder 15h.

291bid., Vol. 1(8613), Folder 155. The Social Demo-
crat, Paul Dentler, died on April 2h, 1878, which means
that Werner probably wrote the letter sometime between June
6-13, or after Nobiling's attempt. Dentler was a young man
when he died in prison. He was the responsible editor of
the Berliner freie Presse and on January 18, 1878, was accu-
sed of several instances of lese Majestg and of allowing
other detrimental articles to be printed in the Berliner
freie Presse. On February 7 he was sentenced to twenty-one

sue YI.

\iN‘E

‘1?! .91

hr.‘ N4\

9.- a

at \Q

\

it

‘9

 

21;
letter leads me to believe that Werner was acquainted to
some extent with Nobiling, which is very possible conside-
ring the time Nobiling spent in Leipzig. It is amazing,
almost beyond belief, that the police did not investigate
Emil Werner more thoroughly in view of the fact that their
investigations had demonstrated that Hadel had associated

with.him.in Leipzig.30 There is nothing in the letter to

 

months in rison and later died in the prison section of
the Charite hospital, in which Nobiling also died on Sep-
tember 9. Dentler's funeral was held in Berlin on April 28
and was the occasion of a great outpouring of feeling for
the cause of the Social Democratic Party. The huge Dentler
funeral led some peOple at the time to Speculate that the
funeral was the catalyst that set off the attempts. On
this point see: Bernstein, Sozialdemokratische Lehrjahre,
pp. 62-63. Nobiling's association with Dentler remains a
mystery as does his sponsorship of Nobiling in the Inter-
national. What is meant by this sponsorship is not clear
from.werner#s letter. This naturally leads to the spe-
culation that perhaps there was a growing dissatisfaction
among the younger leaders in the Social Democratic Party.
Johann Mbst, and Wilhelm Hasselmann, who represented the
SPD in the Reichstag, were soon to be drummed out of the
party in 1880 after becoming too radical. Most's radi-
calism was already evident in 1878. How deep seated this
feeling was among the younger leaders is not known, but
many of them were dissatisfied with the methods of Bebel
and Liebknecht. They wanted to see things more more
rapidly even if it meant resorting to violence.

3oBrandenburgisches Iandeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., Hadel-Attentat,
Folders 108-110. After'werner's arrest in Berlin on De-
cember 25, 1879, in connection with the ublication of 233
Kampf, Der Sozialdemokrat(January 18, 18§0), carried an
article which said that Werner had been breaking laws for
years and that the police had done nothing about it. The
article also asserted that Warner's name was prominently
mentioned in the documents concerning the H8del attempt.
The writer of the article claimed that the police did not
arrest him.at the time because they were waiting for Her-
ner to commit a serious crime to press for more repressive
measures in the Reichstag. Rudolf Rocker, Johann Most,
p. 113, said that this charge was baseless. An examihation
of the documents proves that Rocker was wrong and

216

connect Werner directly with Nobiling but the implication
is there both in Werner's statement, that it would be in
the best interest of the cause if Nobiling would soon die,
and also in his statement that Nobiling had been slated
for membership in the International. The Berlin police
were cognizant of Nobiling's trips to Leipzig. Upon his
return to Berlin from these trips he talked to a number
of peeple about the International. The police had enough
circumstantial evidence to pick Werner up but did not.
It would appear, though, that his actions were more closely
watched after this because in 1879 he tried to publish an
underground anarchist paper in Berlin, Der Kamp , and was
apprehended by the Berlin police and sent to jail immedi-
ately after the first issue came off the press.

It is doubtful if Leo Frankel(18hh-1896) was
actually involved with the attempt on the life of the

Emperor even though his name is mentioned several times.

 

substantiates the article in Der Sozialdemokrat but they
do not contain any clue why Werner was not arrested. The
implication of the article in Der Sozialdemokrat is that
Werner was an unwitting tool of pfilice repression. One
fact not explained by the article is their source of in-
formation. It would appear that either the Social Demo-
crats had a spy in the government who had access to the
Geheime Prfisidial-Registratur which contained the HBdel
documents, or that the writer of the article made a bril-
liant assumption that Werner's name figured prominently in
the documents. However, the‘fact remains that there was
sufficient evidence connecting Werner with Hadel and Nobi-
ling that he should have been, at the least, picked up

and questioned by police, but they chose to do nothing.
Reinsdorf claimed that the reason the Berlin police did
not arrest Werner at the time was because they did not
know his whereabouts, a story that is difficult to believe.

 

217

Frankel was, it is true, a former communard and both HBdel
and Nobiling were imbued with enthusiasm for the ideas of
the Commune. However, after the Commune Frankel became
prominent in founding the Social Democratic Party in Hun-
gary and was quite closely associated with Marx. Frankel
attended the Universal Socialist Congress in Ghent from
September 9-15, 1877, where he came in contact with Rinke
and Werner. At the congress Frankel stood in Opposition
to the anarchists. He was forced to leave Belgium a
day before the congress adjourned and returned to his
native Hungary where he took part in the first socialist
congress held in Hungary during the period April 21-22,
1878. According to his biographer, Frankel was in Hun-
gary during the period of the two attempts; nowhere in
the biography is any mention made of the attempts. There
is also nothing to indicate that Frankel was arrested at
the time.31

The Leo Frankel reported to the Berlin police
supposedly was living at the time in Frankfurt a.M. It
is quite possible that when Werner related to Paul
Brousse, also a former communard, that Leo Frankel had
beehv arrested he was actually referring to Otto Rinke.
Werner does not say Where he was arrested. Victor Dave

a number of years later related that Rinke had been

 

31Magda Aranyossi, Leo Frankel(Berlin-East, 1957),
pp. 116-1h0, 390. Often times his name appears as Frankel,
however, for the sake of consistency I have used it as
does his biographer.

. 218
arrested in 1878 in the city of Cologne while using the
name Otto Rau. It was a common practice for anarchists

to use the name. of a well known Social Democrat as an
alias. Reinsdorf at this period called himself Bern-
stein.32 It is quite reasonable to assume that Rinke

might have used the name Leo Frankel. At Ghent Frankel

had sided with the Social Democrats against the anarchists.
Liebknecht had openly attacked Rinks at Ghent with the
approval of the rest of the Social Democrats. One way

for Rinke to retaliate against the Social Democrats and

at the same time to hide his identity would be to use

the name of a Social Democrat as an alias. He could not
use Liebknecht's name because Liebknecht was much older

and also his face was reasonably well known because it

was the practice of the time to sell pictures on the

street of prominent Social Democratic Party leaders.
Frankel, a Hungarian, was not popularly known and was close

to Rinke's own age.33

 

32There is also evidence stating that the Berlin
police were interested in a man named Bernstein who had
been seen associating with Nobiling. Reinsdorf at this
time was in EBerlin so it is very possible that the Bern-
stein reported to the Berlin police was Reinsdorf. On this
point see: Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., No. 2h2, Nobiling-
Attentat, Vol. 1(8613), Folders 87-88.

33Another piece of information which Pinday is sup-
posed to have allowed to leak out to police agents in Swit-
zerland, where he was living in exile after the Commune, is
that Leo Frankel masterminded the Nobiling attempt on
William I. More than likely this piece of information was
a pure fabrication thought up by some police informer.

219

It can be said with some degree of certainty that
there was some connection between H8del and Nobiling. At
least both of them were associated with the German section
of the Jura Federation, whose titular head in Germany was
Emil Werner in Leipzig. Another connection between H8del
and Nobiling and the Germans who helped found the Arbeiter-
Zeitugg in Bern is evident upon reading the lead article
in Paul Brousse's Avant-Garde(June 17, 1878) entitled,

 

“HBdel, Nobiling and Propaganda by Dead," in which the
acts of H8del and Nobiling are praised. The article also

implies that in some way the Avant-Garde should claim a

 

share of the glory for these two attempts. Brousse helped

found the Arbeiter-Zeitung_along with Warner, Rinks, and

 

a number of others. He continued to be a good friend of
Warner and Rinke and, as has already been noted, Avant-

Garde took the place of the defunct Arbeiter-Zeitung.

 

The Geneva section of the Jura Federation following H8del's
execution passed a resolution declaring HBdel to be at

martyr for the rights of mankind.3u

 

But it is possible that Pinday, who was an anarchist let
the information out to discredit Frankel who was a Marxist.
However, this explanation does not seem plausible if they
continued to correspond. But no police agent in Switzer-
land ever saw the letter from.Frankel to Pinday; they only
knew of its contents indirectly from hearing Pinday talk.
Perhaps there never was a letter. Probably he knew that
whatever he said was bound to end up in the police records
so he included the name Frankel to confuse the police.
Ibid., Vol. 1(8613), Folders lEh-lSS.

3hAvant-Garde(October 7, 1878).

220
The general tenor of the Nobiling documents tend
~to indicate that the Berlin police were aware that the
Nobiling and H8del attempts were connected, however, they
never succeeded in actually getting enough concrete eviden-
ce to prove it. They spent too much time looking in the
wrong places. If they had concentrated their efforts in
Leipzig, Frankfurt a.M., and Switzerland, they probably
would have found more information. Inttead they seemed
to be looking for some sort of international conSpiracy,
on a more grandiose scale, and Nobiling's travels pointed
them in this direction. They conducted no investigation
in Frankfurt a.M., and the investigation in Leipzig was
limited to Nobiling's student associates and his land lady.
For some unknown reason they failed to investigate Emil
Werner whose name appears in both the HBdel and Nobiling
dbtuments. The German police network in Switzerland does
not appear to have been very well developed in 1878. The
documents give the impression that they were primarily de-
pendant upon Swiss sources for information.

Actually, as events proceeded after the Nobiling
attempt, it became less and less desirable to find the
group guilty of masterminding the two attempts or to estab-
lish a connection between the two. A scape goat was named
the night of the Nobiling attempt, as it was after the
HBdel attempt and the burden of police efforts were aimed
not at solving the Nobiling case, but at proving that
Nobiling had connections with the Social Democratic Party.

221
The HBdel and Nobiling investigations were very similar;
however, the police demonstrated beyond the shadow of a
doubt that HBdel was an anarchist and that the SPD was
not to blame for his crime. Nevertheless, an attempt
was made to force through anti-socialist legislation on
the false premise that HBdel was a socialist. In the
Nobiling investigation the police turned up enough evidence
to demonstrate conclusively, as in the HBdel case, that
Nobiling had attended Social Democratic meetings and had
connections with the Social Democratic Party. They also
turned up conclusive evidence that Nobiling's act could
in no way be attributed to the SPD, but this evidence, as
in the H8del case, was not made public, and once again the
SPD was named the scape goat.

The afternoon extras which came off the presses
announcing the second attempt on the German Emperor did
not imply that the assassin was connected with the soci-
alists. The evening editions of the Eggt and Berliner
Tageblatt though carried information that Social Demo-
cratic writings were found among Nobiling's possessions.
During the night of June 2-3, or more precisely in the
early morning hours of June 3, a bomb shell was exploded
which would do irreparable damage to the image of the
Social Democratic Party in Germany. At two o'clock in
the morning of June 3 the Wolff Telegraph Bureau in Bar-
lin sent out over the wires a message which was described

an "official" government release on the Nobiling attempt.

222

The next morning Germans awoke to read in their news-
papers the text of the Wolff Telegram.which said: "Sub-
sequent interrogation of the assassin Nobiling has re-
vealed that he holds socialist inclinations, also that he
repeatedly attended socialist meetings here and that he
has intended for a week to shoot His Majesty the Kaiser,
because he maintains that it would be beneficial for the

common welfare to eliminate the head of thestate."3S

The arrival of this telegram at the news office
of Vorwarts in Leipzig sent a feeling of consternation
through Bebel, Liebknecht and Hassenclever who had gathered
there on the Morning of June 3 to determine if any of them
knew Nobiling. The Welff Telegram shocked them out of
their egrlier feeling of security which they had achieved
by receipt of an earlier telegram.which carried no mention

of Nobiling being connected with the socialists. Bebel

had remarked, "now, they can't hang us on his coat tails."36

This feeling of safety vanished when the Welff Telegram

arrived and they became aware of the implication it could

L

35Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h. Lit. A., No. 2h2, Nobiling-
Attentat, Vol. III(86lS), Folder 8k contains a printed
copy of the telegram.bearing the number 2512 assigned to
it by the Welff Telegraph Bureau and the date June 3, 1878.
Folder 10 contains a handwritten copy of the telegram with
no identification number assigned to it and it is dated
June 2, 1878, so it is assumed that the handwritten copy
is the original.

36Bebel, Aus meinem Leben, pp. S93-S9h.

 

223
have for their movement.

Both Bebel and Bernstein on a number of occasions
pointed out that this telegram was nothing more than a
bold faced lie.37 Bernstein maintained that Nobiling was
in no physical shape to be questioned or to reveal any
information after his capture because of his serious head
wound. He says that Nobiling was too severely injured to
be examined and that he was unable to speak.38 Bernstein's
opinion is actually the same as that of Babel, and it was
probably Bebel's defense of the Social Democratic Party
in the Reichstag which so firmly established this opinion
in his mind. This story, that Nobiling was too severely
injured to be examined and to explain the reason for his
action has been accepted without reservation by virtually
everyone who has written on the subject.39

The truth of the matter is that nothing could be
further from.the realities of the case. Nobiling was
questioned at length after his capture by the Public Pro-
secutor Jehl and the Judge of Inquiry Schramm. In his

 

37Ibid., p. 59h; Bernstein, Die Geschichte der
Berliner ArBeiterbewegung, p. 365.

38Bernstein, Die Geschichte der Berliner Arbeiter-
bewe un , p. 365.

39For example see: Pack, Das parlamentarische
Bi en, p. 15; Erick Eyck, BismarEk and the German Empire
(New York, 196M), pp. 238-239; Werner RiEhter, Bismarck
(New York, 1965), p. 219.

22h
answers to their questions Nobiling not only revealed
his reasons for the attempt but also said he was not a
Social Democrat. Nobiling said he wanted to kill the
Kaiser because he thonght it would be for the benefit
of all to get rid of the head of state. This part of
the WOlff Telegram.is taken almost verbatim.from Nobi—
ling's answers. Only a few verb tenses are changed.
Nobiling admitted having attended socialist meetings,
but he did not admit, as the Wolff Telegram claimed,
having socialist inclinations. Johl asked Nobiling if
he planned the attempt alone and he replied that he had
planned it with a number of accomplices whom.he refused
to name. Nobiling further added that it was a follow up
to the unsuccessful attempt by HBdel. Johl asked if the
Social Democratic Party was involved in the plot and
Nobiling answered simply "nein," but he did admit that
he had associated with Social Democratic Party members
and that he had attended Social Democratic Party meetings,
but that he was not interested in politics. Nobiling
also related that he had spoken at Social Democratic
Party'nwetings. When asked to name a Social Democratic
jParty member with whom.he has associated, he named

Friedrich Wilhelm Fritzsche.’+0

 

uOBrandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
ilr. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., No. 2h2, Nobiling-
iAttentat, Vol. III(8615), Folders ll-12. Naturally Fritzsche
denied.that he knew Nobiling. Evidently the story leaked out
though and Fritzsche felt obligated to give a public denial.

 

 

225

The Welff Telegram then was not a complete
fabrication. It was basically true, and what was not
true could be implied from Nobiling's statements. The
telegram was written in vague language and did not re-
fer to the Social Democratic Party specifically, but
only to the socialists. The Wolff Telegram was a fan-
rication to the extent that it did not give the complete
details of Nobiling's answers. If it had included the
fact that Nobiling had said that the Social Democratic
Party was not involved in the plot against the Emperor,
it would have gotten the SPD off the hook immediately.
If this fact had been included it would have altered the
entire meaning of the telegram. But the telegram was so
vaguely worded that the public could draw its own con-
clusions. It said Nobiling was a socialist and he was
to the extent that an anarchist is a socialist of sorts.
It said Nobiling had attended socialist meetings.. Nobi-
ling did attend Social Democratic meetings in Berlin

 

In the Volks-Zeitung, No. 16h(July 16, 1878) Fritzsche

said that he did not know Nobiling and that he had not
participated in any meeting with TNobiling on the theme

of Schutzzoll und Freihandel, as Nobiling claimed. Ac-
cording to an account which—ap eared in the Berliner

Ta eblatt, No. 157(July 7, 187 ) such a meeting Had taken
place In the late fall of 1877. It was held in the Andreas-
garten in the Andreasstrasse and the meeting ended with No-
biling speaking on the glories of the Paris Commune. Frit-
zsche replied in the Volks-Zeitung, No. léh(July 16, 1878),
that if someone had gotten up from the audience to speak
and announced himself as Dr. Nobiling, the title Dr. would
have stood out in a workers meeting and he would have
remembered it. More than likely Nobiling did, as he claimed,
have some association with Fritzsche, but perhaps he was
more of a thorn in his side than anything else.

226
as he had in Halle, Leipzig and Dresden. There is evidence
which proves that he often entered Social Democratic Party
meetings for the eXplicit purpose of putting forth his own
ideas. His purpose in attending was not to hear Social
Democratic theories prOpagated, but to diSpute them. The
telegram said he had socialist connections. He did, but
they were not responsible for the plot.

Why was the fact that the SPD was not responsible
for the attempt not included in the telegram? Why was
this official news release so vague? We must conclude
that someone wanted the telegram to imply that Nobiling
was connected with the Social Democratic Party, so there-
fore the entire Social Democratic Party was responsible
for the crime and should be punished. Who would benefit
from.auch a scheme? It is obvious that the telegram had
as its intention to heat up the fires of outrage against
the Social Democratic Party in Germany. In most minds in
Germany socialist referred to only one thing, the German
Socialist Democratic Party. It did not have to be written
out, the term "socialist" was sufficient.

Who then is responsible for this telegram which
may prOperly be called the "second Ems Telegram" because
the same thing was done with it as with the Ems dispatch
and it achieved a similar success. The results of Nobi-
ling's interrogation appear in the telegram in such a way

that no lies are told, but the truth was not revealed
either. The real heart of Nobiling's testimony is that

227

he acted with others in a plan to follow up the unsuccess-
ful HBdel attempt and that the Social Democratic Party was
in no-way connected to the plot. This information was all
missing in the Wolff Telegram. The falsification was
greater than Babel or Bernstein ever imagined because
they worked on the assumption that Nobiling's physical
condition would not permit questioning.

It can be assumed that the Wolff Telegram was
authorized by someone who wanted to deliberately place
the Social Democratic Party in a position of jeopardy.
In the Nobiling documents there are both a handwritten
cepy of the telegram and a printed copy. The handwritten
copy of the telegram is not signed, but it is written in
the same handwriting as the extracts from the Nobiling in-
terrogations which are signed by Lothar Bucher(1817-
1892).u1 The document signed by Lothar Bucher is a

 

uBucher was a Vortragender Rat in the Foreign
Office, 186h-1886. The part he played for Bismarck in
the Hchenzollern candidacy has been treated in detail by
Robert H. Lord, The Origins of the War of 1870(Cambridge,
Mass., 192h); and Lawrence D:_§teefel, BismarEk the Hohen-
onlern Candidacy and the Origins of the War of_1870
(Gambridge, Mass., 1962) and need not be repeated here.
Bismarck, according to Holstein, regarded Bucher as a tool
and "used him.to carry out all kinds of strictly confi-
dential and personal business." Norman Rich and M.H. Fisher,
The Holstein Papers, I, Memoirs(Campridge, 1955), pp. 52-53.
FBr the Congress 3? Berlin, which convened less than two
weeks after the Nobiling attempt, Bismarck named Bucher
the Senior Counsellor of the Political Division of the
Foreign Office. Norman Rich, Friedrich von Holstein.
Politics and Diplomacy in the Era of Bismarckzand7William II,
I(Cambridge,’1965), pp. 101-102. ‘Bucher resigned when Her-
bert Bismarck became Under State Secretary in 1885.
Herbert corrected some of Bucher's work in such a rude

 

I *.L

s 3"

ml. T. . 5.5!.

U! fl 0a....

228

summary of the interrogation of Nobiling by the £3333:
suchungsrichter Jehl. It is not a verbatim account but
it is accurate. It is greatly reduced in size which
leads me to believe that it was shortened for the purpose
of telegraphing it to someone. Numerous abbreviations
are also used. The news of the Nobiling attempt was tele-
graphed to Bismarck, and although it cannot be proven,
probably the telegram which was sent contained the summarized
version of the Nobiling interrogation which Bucher had
extracted.h2

On the afternoon of June 2 most of the important
government officials were not in Berlin including the Crown
Prince who was in France. Guido von Hadai(1810-1892),

the Polizeiprfisident of Berlin, was absent as was the

 

way that Bucher demanded his release which was granted

but Prince Bismarck saw to it that Bucher received a hand—
some pension of two thousand marks a year. Later in life
Bismarck sought, and received, the services of Bucher in
writing his memoirs. Ibid., pp. 122; Rich and Fisher, The
Holstein Papers, I, Memoirs, p. 68. There can be no doubt
that Bismarck used and trusted Bucher. Erich Eyck relates
that Bucher was one of the few persons for whom Bismarck
felt something like friendship and that Bucher knew more
of Bismarck's most intimate secrets than any other man.
Eyck, Bismarck, p. 16h. The obvious question that now has
to be asked, was the appointment of Bucher as Senior Coun-
sellor in the Political Division in the Foreign Office a
reward for services performed in Nobiling affair? The
question has to remain open, there is no answer, but the
fact remains that the original draft of the Welff Telegram
is in Bucher's handwriting which means that it had to come
from Bismarck.

thrandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., No. 2H2, Nobiling-
Attentat, Vol. III(8615), Folder 11.

229
Prussian Minister of the Interior, Friedrich Graf zu
Eulenburg(1815-l881). Chancellor Bismarck was at Fried-
richsruh.

At Friedrichsruh, Christoph von Tiedemann(l836-
190?), head of the newly formed Reichs Chancellery, re-
ceived the news and transmitted it to Bismarck. Tiedemann
has left an account of this episode. It was afternoon and
Bismarck was out walking with his dogs in the woods and
fields surrounding Friedrichsruh. Tiedemann walked out
to meet him.and said, "some important telegrams have arrived,"
and Bismarck answered, "are they so urgent that we have to 8
deal with them out here in the Open fields?" Tiedemann
replied, "unfortunately, they are. The Emperor has again
been fired at, and this time he has been hit. His Majesty
is seriously wounded.“ Bismarck stOpped dead in his tracks
and deeply agitated thrust his oaken stick into the ground
in front of him and breathing heavily said, ”now we shall
dissolve the Reichstagl"u3 Only then did Bismarck inquire
about the Emperor's condition and ask for details of the
attempt.

Surely Bismarck must have been aware that if the
second attempt were used properly it could open up new
avenues to accomplish what he had failed to do after the
Hadel attempt - namely the passage of an anti-socialist
law. He saw this possibility when HBdel made his attempt

as

1+3Tiedemann, Sachs Jahre Chef der Reichskanzelei
unter dem Farsten Bismarck, p. 2683

 

230
on the Kaiser. At that time he was also at Friedrichsruh
and the evening of the H8del attempt he telegraphed Bfilow
telling him.that the incident should be seized on as a pre-
text for introducing a law against the socialists."m Bis-
marck must have realized that if he managed the Nobiling
affair prOperly he could make a great deal of political
capital out of it, whip up feeling among the German pub-
lic and in the end ackiexe his objectives, the suppression
of the Social Democratic Party and the breaking of the
power of the National Liberals who had voted against his
bill to suppress the socialists after the HBdel affair.
The original draft of the Helff Telegram, written in
Bucher's handwriting, was more than likely transmitted to
Berlin from Bismarck after he had read the telegram he had
received which contained the summarized version of Nobi-
ling's interrogation. Bismarck probably sent the text
of the telegram to Bucher, authorizing him to release it
as an official statement on the assassination attempt.
Bismarck was actually the only one in a position to re-
lease an official statement. William I could not, and
until the Crown Prince could return home, Bismarck, as
Chancellor, was the only one in a position to authorize
such a statement. In view of the fact that the original
draft of the telegram, which was probably transmitted in
cipher, is in Bucher's handwriting, it is almost certain

 

“hibid., pp. 256-258.

231

that Bismarck wrote it and authorized that it be released.
Several days later Bismarck is rumored to have said to
one of his intimates: "Now I've got those fellows where
I want them." Somebody asked, "Your Highness means the
Social Democrats?" Bismarck replied, "No, the National
Liberals.“+5 In_hrder for Bismarck to accomplish his
goal of suppressing the Social Democratic Party he had
to first crush.his opposition, the National Liberals.

Bismarck realized that he no longer needed the
Reichstag as it was presently constituted. Twice it had
refused to pass his anti-socialist bill. He must have
realized that if he exploited the situation properly, he
could dissolve the Reichstag and have a new one elected
which would be more favorable to his will. The release
of the Wolff Telegram.was probably the first step in this
direction.

was it necessary for Bismarck to dissolve the
Reichstag and order an election to achieve this purpose?
The answer to this question is probably no. The evidence
shows that the National Liberals were weakening. The
Reidhstag deputies of the National Liberal Party, who
had voted against his bill for the suppression of the
Social Democrats, published in their party organ the
National Zeitung on the evening of June 6, 1878, the

 

uSEyck, Bismarck, p. 2&0.

232
following statement:

On May 2h many of those in the Reichstag who
voted with the majority acted upon the supposition
that H8del's attempt was the deed merely of a mi-
serable creature which would have no further con-
sequences, and that it would be possible to steer
clear of the threatening evil while adhering to the
principles of common right, by completing the legis-
lation on the subjects of clubs and associations,
and by filling the loopholes in the penal code.
This supposition has now fallen to the ground. The
preparations made by Nobiling, his network of coma
munication appearing to extend beyond the confines
of Germany, the systematic arrangement of his mur-
derous scheme, the Spread of the most abominable
Opinions over all classes of the peOple, the shame-
less threats directed against persons of high public
standing-all this combines to disclose to the eyes
the depth and breadth of a corruption which cannot
be Speedily and efficaciously encountered upon the
ground of equal rights alone. Rather must extra-
ordinary measures now be determined upon to save
and heal the state.

The paper added by way of editorial comment, "If
the Government comes before the Reichstag with the state-
ment that it must ask for extraordinary powers for the
safety of the dynasty of the country, we are convinced
that those powers will be readily granted to the Govern-
ment upon its constitutional responsibility by the majority
of the Reichstag. The decision whether such powers are
necessary we must, of course, leave to the Government."

The decision had been made by the "Government"
even before the Nobiling attempt. Now after the attempt
Bismarck was no longer, as before, the voice behind the
Government(the Emperor), he was the Government. The news
of the attempt on William I caught up with Friedrich, the

Crown Prince, at Calais and he hurried back to Berlin to

233

take up the reins of Government if this became necessary,
however, as he was soon to discover, Bismarck was in the
driver's seat holding the reins and steering his own course.
The nature and severity of the wounds of the eighty-one
year old Emperor led most people to believe that the Crown
Prince would be appointed Regent which would have vested
in him full sovereign power. However, this was not the
case, when the Crown Prince arrived in Berlin Bismarck
called on him with a document conferring on him the status
of Deputy which obliged him to carry on his father's
policies, or more accurately the policy of his father's
Chancellor.h6

Bismarck did not have to dissolve the Reichstag
if his only phrpose had been to achieve passage of the
same type of bill he failed to get passed after the H8del
attempt. The liberal deputies declared publicly, as I
shown above, their willingness to support such a measure.
Therefore it can be assumed that Bismarck had more far-
reaching ideas in mind -_the complete destruction of the
Social Democratic Party and the subordination of the
National Liberal Party. Furthermore, any measure which

the presently constituted Reichstag might pass would not

 

I‘LéThe Crown Prince never forgave Bismarck for this.
On June 18, 1885, he related: "He's done things to me
which can never be forgotten. -I still remember, for in-
stance how he called on me after Nobiling's assassination
attempt with the document conferring on me the status of
'Deputy.'" Rich and Fisher, The Holstein Papers, II,
Diaries, pp. 205-206.

23h

be severe, nor would it be the enduring bill which Bis-
marck sought. Any measUre the Reichstag as it then stood
might pass would be of a temporary nature and though it
prdpably would.have included repressive measures against
the socialists it more than likely would not have called
for their destruction, and surely would not have called
for the subordination of the National Liberals.

All power in the German Reich resided in the Em-
peror and now that he lay seriously wounded, Bismarck, as
Chancellor of the Reich, was able to wield it for his own
purposes to cure what he considered to be one of the
greatest illnesses in the Reich - the increase of soci-
alism and liberalism. If he could wield the power in
such a way that it would appear that he was doing it for
the protection of the Fatherland and the Kaiser, he would
have the majority of the German people behind him. In a
single stroke he could get rid of his opposition. It would
be an easy matter to discredit the National Liberals who
had killed his last measure on May 2h. They had more or
less accepted the blame for the defeat on June 6, in the
above mentioned statement by the National Liberal deputies
to the Reichstag, although this was not their intention.
The seeds of distrust of the socialists had been planted
in the minds of the peOple on the night of June 2-3 with
the wolff Telegram which inferred that Nobiling was a
socialist, a charge the Social Democratic Party could

deny, but one of which they were nevertheless guilty

235'
even if only by association and nothing else.

Under the German constitution the Reichstag could
be dismissed only by a decision of the Federal Council in
conjunction with the Emperor. Neither the Prussian Cabinet
nor the Federal Council was unanimously in favor of dis-
solving the Reichstag. Some members thought it was unne-
cessary and dangerous and were of the opinion that a new
socialist bill would now pass the present Reichstag. The
Crown Prince, representing his father, did not favor dis-
solution, but acting merely as Deputy and not as Regent,
he had to do what his father wanted. Bismarck had‘William
I's ear, because the old Kaiser was still lying flat on
his back in his sick bed, and the Reichstag was dissolved
on June 11.

New elections were called for July 30, 1878. In
the election the Social Democratic Party lost 56,000 votes,
polling h37,158 votes or eight percent of the total vote.
The large cities stood firm behind the Social Democratic
Party and they were able to increase the number of votes
they received in some. In Berlin the Social Democratic
vote rose from 31,522 in 1877 to 56,1h7 in 1878, however,
the number of Social Democratic Deputies in the Reichstag
dropped from twelve to nine. The National Liberals drapped
from 127 deputies to 99, the Progressives from 35 to 26,
while the Conservatives rose from no to 59 seats, the Free

Conservatives from 38 to 57 and the Center Party from 93

236

to 99.”? Bismarck was disappointed at the Social Demo-
cratic Party's show of strength but the back bone of the
liberals had been broken. Passage of a new anti-socialist
bill was assured in Spite of the still large number of
Reichstag deputies from the National Liberal Party. Meat
of them had been re—elected only by promising the voters
that they would support measures against the socialists.

The Government introduced a new socialist bill
into the Reichstag when it convened on September 9, 1878.
The Social Democratic Party, Center Party, and Progressives
opposed the bill, while the conservative parties and National
Liberal Party backed it. The Social Democratic deputies
went out of their way to demonstrate the peaceful reform
nature of their party during the Reichstag debates, ho-
ping to counter the charges of radicalism.fired at them.
They presented themselves as innocent victims, and August
Bebel pointed out that the Wolff Telegram was a lie from
start to finish. However,'Wilhelm.Hasselmann ruined this
image when in an excited outburst, which went on for two
hours, he defended the Commune and hinted that further acts
of violence could be expected if the bill were passed. He
ended his speech with the remark that Bismarck would do
well to consider how the revolution of l8h8 broke out. In
the and neither tactic of the Social Democratic Party, the

appeal to reason or the appeal to fear, was successful.

 

u7Lidtke, The Outlawed Party, p. 7h.

237

On October 19 by vote of 221 to 1&9 the Reichstag passed
the socialist bill; two days later it became the law of
the land.”8

In the form in which it passed it was not what
Bismarck, the Emperor, and the conservatives had hOped
for. It was not a permanent law, but would expire in
two and one half years, but it nevertheless contained
sweeping power of suppression. It contained broad powers
to aboliSh societies with social democratic, socialist,
or communistic tendencies. It prohibited the publication
of social democratic books, pamphlets, and periodicals.
Professional agitators, who violated the law, might be
expelled, byeourt order, from specific towns and districts,
but eXpulsion from a personal place of domicile was legal
only if he had lived there for less than six months. All
meetings had to be approved in advance by the police. Fines
and terms of imprisonment were to be levied on those who
broke the law.’+9

Even though the Socialist Law empowered authorities
to impose a minor stage of siege, it was not rigorous
enough for Bismarck who had heped for the power to dismiss

socialist civil servants without a pension and for a

 

uaIbid. , p. 770

ugFor the complete text of the law in German as
well as earlier versions of the bill see: Pack, Das ar
lamentarische Rin en, pp. 2h3-263. A complete English
translation is ound in Lidtke, The Outlawed Party, pp.

339-31450

 

 

238
prohibition against socialists running for public office.
At the time Bismarck said:
The majority of the poorly paid minor officials in
Berlin, the railroad signalmen, the switchmen, and
similar categories are socialists, a situation whose
dangers may become evident in times of insurrection,
in the transportation of trOOps. I believe, that if
the law is to be effective, then it is impossible in
the long run to allow any citizen, proved to be a
socialist, to retain the vote, the right to run for
office, and the enjoyment of the privilege of repre-
sentation in the Reichstag, . . . The bill as it now

stands does no serious harm to socialis and is com-
pletely inadequate for its suppression.

The Socialist Law lost some of its effectiveness
as a result of the suggestion made by the Liberal Deputy
Lasker and adopted by the Reichstag, which limited the
life of the law to two and One half years. Whenever the
law came up for renewal the Social Democratic Reichstag,
Deputies had a forum, in the Reichstag, from which they
could appeal to the workers.

The Socialist Law which Bismarck intended to use
to suppress the socialist movement did not achieve this
desired goal. JOhannes Ziekursch, liberal professor at
the Universities of Breslau and Cologne, is of the Opinion
that the passage of the Socialist Law marked the death

knell for the liberals. He maintains that there was a

 

50Quoted in JOhannes Ziekursch, Politische Ge-
schichte des neuen deutschen Kaiserreichs II Das Zeitalter
Bismarcks1187l-18901(Frankfurt a.M., 1928), pp. 332-333.
Evidently William I’was satisfied with the law Bismarck
was able to obtain. In a letter of November 6, 1878,
William.thanked Bismarck for passage of the Socialist Law
and awarded him by conferring on him a number of new or-
ders. The Correspondence of William I and Bismarck(New
YOrk, 1903), I, pp. 186-187.

 

 

 

 

239
belief among liberals in Germany, which prevailed since
1866, that after political unity was achieved then would
be the time for liberal developments. Ziekursch thought
that the passage of the Socialist Law indicated that the
liberals had rejected the workers, "Just as it had com-

pletely embittered the Catholics by the Kulturkampf, and

 

provoked the conservatives through the reforms of the
Prussian administration without weakening them."51 Bismarck

could, according to Ziekursch, safely dispense with the
liberal support in domestic affairs, upon which he had
relied up to this point.52

It is difficult to make an accurate assessment of
the long term efforts of the Socialist Law. The Socialist
law helped to shape the course followed by the Social Demo-
cratic Party in the period 1878-1890, a course which did
not alter greatly until the outbreak of World War I. The
course followed by the SPD was to capture as many seats
as possible in the Reichstag. 0n the eve of WOrld War I
the SPD was the largest single party in the Reichstag.
The success of the SPD in electing Reichstag deputies had
little meaning because the Reichstag, according to the
1871 Constitution, was not where the real center of power
in Germany lay. It was in the Emperor, the Chancellor and
the Bundesrat.

51Ib14., p. 333.

52mm.

2h0

Ziekursch sees a relationship between the Socialist
Law and the unsuccessful government of the Weimar period,
"the Socialist Law thrust a thorn into the flesh of the
German people; a festering wound was opened which has not
healed to the present time."53 Perhaps this statement is
an oversimplification, but it does point out what was an
Obvious fault of Wilhelmian Germany which became apparent
in the weimar period, the lack of meaningful participation
in Government by the mass of the German people. If, after
the unification of Germany, one had to put his finger on
a particular point where the German Government took a
turn, away from meaningful participation in Government,
it would surely have to be the passage of the Socialist
Law.

A great deal has been written about the Socialist
Law being unfair to the Social Democratic Party. Bebel
attempted, without success, to point out during the Reichs-
tag debates on the socialist bill that Social Democratic
Party was not guilty of the crimes of H8del and Nobiling.
His arguments fell on deaf ears which failed to comprehend
the subtleties of his defense. It was not an auspicious
time to appeal to reason. Guido weiss accurately summed
up the feeling in Germany following the Nobiling attempt

when he wrote in Die wage, "The Kaiser has the wounds

 

but the nation has the wound fever."s"L In the Reichstag

 

S3Ibid.

 

5I'LQuoted in Mehring, Geschichte der Sozialdemokratie,
II, p. LL97.

2h1
debates it was pointed out by the conservative deputy von
Kleist-Retzow on October 18 that both H8del and Nobiling
"had drunk from the intoxicating cup of Social Democracy."SS
. The public was in no mood to attempt to grapple
with the subtle differences between the Social Democratic
Party and other socialist or anarchist groups. It must
be remembered that the anarchists often referred to them-
selves as socialists. All were lumped under the heading
of revolutionaries by the public and it was assumed that
a revolutionary wanted to overthrow the state and kill
the sovereign who headed it. The French revolution had
amply demonstrated this. Even the educated people had
difficulty discerning the difference between the various
socialist groups. In some cases these differences were
perceptible only to those who belonged to the groups. In
the minds of most people an anarchist was a socialist, as
were the members of the Social Democratic Party. The ge-
neral public could not distinguish between the two. Po-
lice records were kept in much the same way: socialist,
anarchist, and revolutionary groups were filed tOgether.
It was not until 188k that the Berlin police established

separate files for the anarchists.56

SSBerichte fiber die Verhandlungen des deutschen
Reichstages(l878), Ed. I, p. 35h.

56Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., "Die anarchistische
Bewegung 188h-1885.” The Minister of the Interior though
had established a separate file as early as 1881 see: Deuts-
ches Zentralarchiv Nbrseburg, Rep. 77(Ministerium des

2&2

If the police officials, bureaucrats, and educated
people could not distinguish between socialists and anar-
chists it is no wonder that the great mass of the peOple
lumped them all together. They were instructed by the
press to think of them as a single unit and not as diverse
groups and different factions which had little in common.
If you look at the passage of the Socialist Law from.tbis

perSpective, the difficulty of distinguishing between

 

Innern), Tit. 2512, Nr. 8, Vol. 1-3, "Massregeln gegen die
anarchistische Bewe,ung." .

Prior to l88h anarchist activities were lumped
with either Social Democratic or revolutionary groups.
In many cases this method of filing persisted down to World
War I. For example see: Brandenburgisches Landeshauptar-
chiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 8.,
Nr. 1255, Vol. l-8(13,087/9h), "Die Ubersichten fiber die
all emeine Lage der sozialdemokratischen und revolution!-
ren?anarchisten) Bewegung 1878-1910,"and Ibid., Tit. 95,
Sekt. 7, Lit. J., Nr. ha, Vol. 1-u(15,87u/77), "Ubersich-
ten fiber die Lage der socialdemokratie und anarchistischen
Bewegung," Deutsches Zentralarchiv Merseburg Rep. H(Ge-
heimnis Zivilkabinett), Abt. XXI, Generalia, Nr. 18, Vol.
l-2,‘Die Sozialdemokratie und Anarchie 1872-1909,” and,
Hauptstaatsarchiv Stuttgart, E 150, Ministerium.des Innern
IV, 2055, "Bekampfung der Sozialdemokratie und Anarchie
1897-191h,” and Staatsarchiv Ludwigsburg, F 181, Oberamt
Ludwigsburg, 1k3b, "Umstflrzlerische Elemente, Anarchisten,
Linksradikale, 1880-1918," and, Ibid., F 201, Stadtdi-
rektion Stuttgart, 627-628, "Erfassung Stuttgarter Sozial-
demokraten und Anarchisten 1877-189b, and, Ibid., F 210,
Oberamt Waiblingen, 531, "Uberwachtung der SPD und anar-
chistischer Organisationen, 1832-1918." In general most
governmental agencies concerned with such problems started
to maintain separate files on anarchism starting with
1885, however, lest any reader be lead astray there are
numerous files that concentrate solely on Social Democracy
that pre-date the year 1885 by many years. For the years
1872-1885 anarchist records generally were filed together
with those of the Social Democrats. Exactly how the po-
lice or Minister of the Interior determined what should
be put in a purely Social Democratic file and what should
be placed in a mixed Social Democratic-Anarchist file is
not clear, unless it had something to do with the amount
Of radicalism or lack thereof demonstrated by the Social
Democrat in question.

2&3
socialism and anarchism, you have to conclude that its
passage was justified.

The results of the Socialist Law concerning the
suppression of periodicals, books and Social Democratic
organizations have been covered in detail elsewhere which
need not be repeated here.57 The Socialist Law had the
effect of increasing the importance of parliamentarism
in the Social Democratic Party. The law did not forbid
the election to the Reichstag of Social Democratic Deputies
because it was thought it would be unnecessary. Bismarck
noticed this loophole but was unable to close it. During
the period the Socialist Law was in effect, 1878-1890,
the Social Democratic vote increased as did their repre-
sentation in the Reichstag. The H8del-Nobiling attempts
led to another development, a reorganization of the Berlin
police. By the time the Socialist Law was on the books
the Berlin police had been reorganized to increase their
efficiency.58

The Socialist Law is, undoubtedly, one of the
most significant pieces of legislation passed in Germany

in the last quarter of the nineteenth-century. It is

u __

S7See: Lidtke, The Outlawed Party, pp. 78-82.
58For an account of this see: Dieter Fricke, Big:
marcks Praetorianer. Der Berliner politische Polizei im
Kam f: e en die deutsche Arbeiterbewegun (1811-1898),
{Berlin-East, I962), pp,50-62; Werner P s, 1"Staat und
Sozialdemokratie im Bismarckreich. Die Tatigkeit der po-
litischen Polizei beim Polizei rHsidenten in Berlin in der
Zeit des Sozialistengesetzes 1878-1890," Jahrbuch far die
Gpschichte Mittel- und Ostdeutschlands, 13(I96H}, 200-221.

 

 

21m
doubtful if Bismarck would have been able to achieve
passage of such a bill, had it not been for the back
to back assassination attempts of HHdel and Nobiling
on the life of William I. Even then, he had to mani-
pulate the evidence, in such a way, to attempt to de-
monstrate that the Social Democrats were responsible
for both acts. It has been amply demonstrated that both
HBdel and Nobiling were, at best, only indirectly con-
nected with the SPD, and that the SPD was in no way res-
ponsible for their actions. At the time H8del made his
attempt he had broken with the SPD and was in the anar-
chist camp, having been lured there by August Reinsdorf
and Emil Werner. Nobiling, although he attended SPD

meetings and was even a member of the SPD Arbeiterbildungs

 

Verein in Dresden, probably never adhered to SPD principles.
His purpose in attending SPD meetings was to propagate

his own anardhist message. The evidence is not as con-
clusive as one would like, but all indications point in

the direction that both the H8del and Nobiling attempts
were the work of the German section of the Jura Federation,
and that probably Emil Werner, in Leipzig, played the

chief role in planning of both of them. It has been de-
finitely established that Hddel worked in conjunction with
Werner in Leipzig. Nobiling's name has been tied to wer—
ner through a letter which Werner wrote to Paul Brousse.
The tone of the letter leads me to believe that Nobiling

was no stranger to'Werner. Nobiling in his confession,

2&5
after he was apprehended, admitted that there were
others involved, and that his attempt was a follow up
to HBdel's unsuccessful attempt. It is my contention
that both attempts were related, and that they were
planned by Emil Werner and the German section of the

Jura Federation.

CHAPTER VI
JOHANN MOST AND WILHELNfHASSELMANN THREATEN TO SPLIT TEE SPD

Johann M08t(18h6-1906)1 was born February 5, 18h6 in

 

lThe only full length biography of Most is Rudolf
Rocker, Johann Most. Das Leben eines Rebellen(Berlin, 1925).
In general it is a good book but in some cases Rocker is
not as objective as he could be. New evidence has also ten-
ded to modify some of his opinions. Most was in the process
of writing his memoirs when he died. The first four volumes
appeared under the title Memorien. Erlebtes,_Erforschtes und
Erdachtes, h Vols.(New York, 1903-1907)} Unfortunately they '
cover only the years 18h6 to the late 1870's. An earlier
work by Most, appeared as Anonymus Veritas, Acht Jahre hinter
Schloss und Riegel. Skizzen aus dem Leben Johann MggtIKew
YOrk, 1891) covers the period to 1886} A series of articles
written by Most entitled "Zur Geschichte der Freiheit," Frei-
heit(June 20-0ctober 3, 1896) relate his eXperiences in puE-
Iishing the paper. A short, but informative, account on
Most is found in Max Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolu-
tionfire, pp. 1&5-166. Nettlau also wrote a series of ar-
ticles, following Mbst's death, which a peared in Freedom.
A Journal of Anarchist Communism(London , No.'s 205-207,
XXiApril-June, 1906). These articles are marred by a number
of factual errors and tend to be excessively laudatory.
An article by Emma Goldmann, "JOhann Most,” American Mercury,
VIII(l926), 158-166, is valuable because of her personal
relationship, over many years, with Most, however, it is
highly inaccurate and should not be relied upon, except for
the author's personal recollections about Most. The longest
treatment on Most in English is found in Max Nomad, Apostles
of Revolution(Boston, 1939), pp. 256-301. In the main Nomad
tends to rely on Most's memoirs and Rocker's account. Gene-
rally for the earlier period of his life, all authors have
relied upon Mbst's memoirs. For the period of his life, af-
ter he came to the United States, the issues of Freiheit
should be consulted. Emma Goldmann's autobiography ravin
m. Life, 2 Vols.(New York, 1931) is also useful, in Eddfgéon
to the work by Rocker. A bibliography of works by and about
Most is: Ernst Drahn, Johann MOSt: eine Bio-bibliographie
(Berlin, 1925).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2&6

21L?

the Bavarian city of Augsburg. His father, who was a good
singer and who played the guitar and zither, worked in the
theater before he became dissatisfied with the wandering
and aimlessness that such a life involved, returned to the
city of Augsburg where he was able to obtain employment
as a copyist in a law office, a position which paid a
meager salary. His mother, formerly a governess, was an
educated and refined woman of liberal ideas. Johann was
a love child "conceived between the door and the sill" as
he remarked later in life to Emma Goldmann. His parents
wanted to marry but his father was too poor to obtain a
marriage license, thus they were not legally married until
18MB. Even though the family was poor Johann received a
great deal of love and attention from.his mother who also
gave him his first instruction in reading, writing, and
arithmetic. The atmosphere at the Mbst home was dominated
by his mother's free thinking and liberal ideas.2

The first tragedy in the life of little Hans was
the sudden loss of his mother who died in 1856 during a
cholera epidemic along with his sister and his maternal
grandparents. His father remarried to a woman who hated
Johann and she not only forced him to work extremely hard,
but starved and beat him. Young Johann sought release
from his stepmother's fury by often running away from

home, begging and stealing food, and sleeping in parks

2MOst, Memorien, I, pp. 9-10.

 

2h8

or hallways. His father sometimes intervened on behalf
of him and his younger sister, but during the day his
stepmother had free reign over the two young children.3
Most, later in life, remarked to Emma Goldmann, re-
garding this period of his life, "My whole childhood
was a nightmare. My soul was starved for affection and
my whole being was filled with the hatred of the woman
A

who had taken the place of my gentle, refined mother."

He claimed that his hatred of tyranny stemmed from the
eXperience of his unfortunate childhood.5

The second tragedy in his life occurred on March 8,
1859. At the age of seven he had contacted an inflammation
of the left jawbone and was experimented upon, for five
years, by a number of local quacks because there was no
competent physician in Augsburg and his parents were
too poor to take him elsewhere for prOper treatment.
It is possible that he might have died had not a leading
surgeon, Dr. Agatz, gotten hold of the case quite by
accident and saved his life, by Opening up the left side
of his face from.his temple to the corner of his mouth,
and removing three inches of his jawbone which left him

forever with a cruelly disfigured face, making him the

 

31b1do , pp. ILL-170

 

uGoldmann, "Johann Most," American Mercury, pp.

 

160-161.

SMOst, Memorien, I, p. 17.

 

‘13 I

...I

A

2A9

target of derision and ridicule, of insults and indigni-
ties at home, at school, and at work. Perhaps his dis-
figured face holds the key to the life of protest he
lived.6

Most greatly admired the theater and deprived
himself of the necessities of life in order to attend.
On one occassion after attending a performance of Th5
Merchant of Venice, given in New York starring the
famous German actor of the period, Possart, he remarked
to Emma Goldmann, with whom.he had viewed the performance,
"The cruelty of it, the bitter cruelty! To think that I
could have been in Possart's place, perhaps even greater
than he, but for my dreadful face. The blind cruelty of
itl."7 Emma Goldmann, who had the opportunity to view
Most's performance in the amateur theater, said he had
unusual gifts as an actor. She also concluded that he
had an inferiority complex which was caused by his dis-
figured face. That Most had great ability as Speaker
and rabble rouser cannot be denied, perhaps to some ex-
tent they served as an outlet for the frustrated actor
living inside him.

Johann's father, who had a great love of learning
and was self-educated, had great hopes for his son; how-

ever, these hOpes turned to despair, for at the age of

 

61b1do’ Pp. 11.1-15.

7Goldmann, "Johann Most," American Mercury, p. 159.

 

250
twelve Hans organized a strike against his French teacher,
Professor Bourier, who was particularly brutal and des-
potic. He was disliked by all his students, but Johann
being the ringleader in the strike was expelled from
school. His father decided it would be best for his
son to learn a trade so young Hans became an apprentice
in the workshop of a bookbinder. At first this situation
was welcomed by Hans because it enabled him to get away
from the persecution of his stepmother, but the bookbin-
der proved to be no better because he worked his appren-
tice from dawn to nightfall, half starving him, and gene-
rally treating him in an ill manner. During the period
of his apprenticeship he served his first jail sentence.
At the time in the Catholic sections of Germany confessional
was obligatory, but Hans being brought up in a secular
atmosphere paid no attention to this requirement. This
attitude resulted in a violent encounter with the town
priest who pulled Hans out from the bookbinder's home
into the street, holding him by the ear, and forced him
to kneel on the sidewalk. This only served to accentuate
his antagonism for the church, and he stOpped attending
churCh altogether. He was then broucht before the police
8

court and given a sentence of twenty-four hours in jail.

In 1863, at the age of seventeen, he completed his

apprenticeship, obtained his journeyman papers, and started

 

8Most, Memorien, I, pp. 17, 21-23; Anonymus Veritas,

Acht Jahre hinter Schloss und Riegel, pp. 7-10.

 

 

251

out on his Wanderschaft with fifteen Gulden in his pocket.

 

The Wanderschaft in search of employment was a compulsory

 

part of the life of all skilled workers in Germany in the
nineteenth-century. It was a tradition held over from

the age when the medieval guilds had dominated the skilled
trades in Germany. Mbst spent the next five years of his

life as a Wanderbursch, visiting practically every city

 

in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland in addition to sections
of northern Italy. He moved from place to place on foot,
working when he could, and begging when he could find no
work. His disfigured face and his delicate physique worked
against him, often making it impossible for him to hold a
job, much less to make friends. When he inquired for

work he was often told that a man with a face like his

was not wanted because customers would object to such a
sight, and furthermore if the wife of the employer should
happen to get pregnant she would give birth to a monster

if she had him around to look at, and what's more, he

really belonged in an asylum rather than in the bookbinding
trade. Humiliations such as these filled him with a bitter-
ness which was to prevade his whole life. Later, during
his most active years, this bitterness was expressed in a
hatred of the privileged class. In the final years of his
life, when he no longer held out any hope that a revolution
was just over the horizon, it found expression in an all-
embracing contempt for the human race. During the years

of his wanderschaft_thoughts of suicide often entered his

 

252

mind as he was rebuffed whenever he sought work. At one
time he thought of giving up all his ambitions and be-
coming a vagabond, but he had one final hope - he was con-
vinced that one day he would become a famous actor. He
hoped that the director of some theater and the public
would pay attention to his histrionic ability and not to
his misshaped face, but when he asked for a tryout he was
told that his face was more suitable for a clown than for
an actor. Nevertheless, this is one ambition he was to
hold for several years before he came to realize that it

9

was hopeless to ever hope to be an actor with his face.
In March, 1867, he was able to obtain employment
in Locle, in the French speaking Swiss canton of Neuchatel.
He Spent his Spare time reading the classics, history and
the natural sciences, accumulating a smattering of know-
ledge, to compensate for his physical inferiority.- His
store of knowledge, which he had been accumulating, was
soon to be put to use. One Sunday he went to La Chaux-de-
Fonds, an industrial community of h0,000, which was only
a few miles from Locle, where a branch of the First Inter-
national had recently been formed. The speaker, whom the
twenty-one year old Most heard there that Sunday afternoon,
filled him with an enthusiasm.that would alter the entire
course of his life. When the meeting was adjourned.he

purchased a number of brochures of Lassallean literature

 

9Most, Memorien, I, pp. 25-50.

 

253
to take home with him. He started to attend the meetings
in La Chaux-de-Fonds regularly, Speaking out from the
floor, as was the custom, and taking part in the discussion
clubs. The young convert was eager to spread his new found
ideas among the German workers in the area. He increased
the membership of the group from seventeen to seventy-two
and was soon elected secretary because of his eloquence
and restless activity. He devoted more and more of his
time to this "missionary“ activity, often times staying
up all night. As a result his performance on his job

suffered and he was fired.10

In his memoirs MOSt wrote of his conversion:

What I heard there I could endorse fully. It was all
perfectly logical. Such thoughts had often passed
through my own head, only I had not known how to put
them together, how to systematize them. The Speaker
called this simple teaching socialism. I soon realized
that, I too, was a socialist, and had been one for a
long time without being aware of it. From.that time

I began to really feel that I was a human being; there
was an aim before me, which went beyond the bare
struggle for existence and the satisfaction of momen-
tary individual wants; I began to live in the realm

of ideals. The cause of humanity became my cause, and
each step in advance that could be recorded filled me
with the greatest joy.

From.Locle, he moved to Zurich, where he found
work and new inspiration. A branch of the First Inter-
national was being formed there; it was here that he met

Hermann Greulich, also a bookbinder, who later would be

 

lOIbid., pp. so-su.

111Ibid., pp. 52-53.

251;

one of his most bitter adversaries. During the year he
Spent in Zurich Most and Greulich became good friends,
and Most, being an ardent pupil and admirer, learned a
great deal fromGreulich.12

In the fall of 1868 Most left Switzerland for
Vienna, where socialism was starting to make headway
among the Austrian workers. In Vienna, the energetic
young Most, soon became a well known figure at workers'
gatherings. His humorous and satirical style of Speaking
won him the admiration of those attending these affairs.
He was not, as yet delivering lectures, but would take
the floor and deliver a few pointed, sarcastic remarks
which were always well received by the audience. Some
of his impromptu remarks Spoken at one meeting earned him

a month in prison. During his trial he was referred to

in the Austrian press as the "impudent bookbinder."13

Late in 1869 the Viennese socialists sent dele-
gates to the German Socialist Convention which alarmed
Austrian authorities. The Austrian Minister of the In-
terior, Dr. Giskra, issued orders which were aimed at cur-
tailing the activities of the socialist groups in Austria.
The promulgation of this order was followed on December 13

by fifty to sixty thousand workers appearing before the

 

121bid., pp. 59-60.

13For the indictment see: Ibid., II, pp. 6-15.
The trial is covered in Ibid., pp. 16-51. For his imprison-
ment at Suber see: Ibid., pp. 55-57.

255

building in which the Chamber of Deputies was scheduled
to convene that day. A delegation was sent, from the
protestors, to the Prime Minister, presenting the demands
of the masses. In the meantime the popular socialist
orators, Mbst included, were addressing the assembled
crowd. The government struck back, arresting the members
of the delegation sent to the Prime Minister as well as
other known agitators, however, Most's arrest did not
come until March 2, 1870. Most was again in prison, ac-
cused of high treason for which he received a five year
sentence, but he was released after serving less than a
year, by a conservative regime which wanted to play the
workers off against the liberal bourgeoisie.

Throughout his life Mbst was to spend a great
deal of time behind bars, a fact of which he was proud.
Max mead thinks that the Austrian prison sentence had
the effect of giving MOSt stature and importance in the

workers' movement.

Ybung MOSt left the prison with a greatly en-
hanced ego. The heavy penalty for which he had been
singled out from a few score of other prisoners was
a distinct flattery. He was not only a pOpular Speaker
and entertainer, but a dangerous man as well, threate-
ning the existance of one of the greatest GMpires.

The Judge, in motivating this sentence, had particu-
larly emphasized Most's unusual intelligence and de-
termined character,‘ adding that his appearance in
Austria meant 'the personified prOpaganda for the Re-
public' . . . one of the important dailies wrote 'at
first one might believe oneself unwittingly reminded
of the first French Revolution . . . and one must
admit that this seemingly insignificant little man

256
must be taken seriously.'lh

Out of prison Most rose in the hierarchy of the
labor movement, primarily as a result of the Austrian
government singling him out as a dangerous man. The
ready wit he displayed at his trial and his service as
editor of a prison newspaper demonstrated to those in
the movement his versatile qualities which they now de-
cided to utilize to Spread the socialist message. He was
sent on a succesSful propaganda trip to Germany. A simi-
lar tour was planned for the German Speaking section of
Bohemia, but the Austrian government, being alarmed at
the activities of the Paris Commune, decided to expell
Most from.Austria "Forever." At ten o'clock on the
morning of May 2, 1871, Most, accompanied by a large
crowd(he claimed a thousand people were there)went to
the train station to leave Austria for Germany.15

Upon his return to Germany Mest found a socialist
movement which was torn by factional strife. He joined
the faction led by August Bebel and Wilhelm Liebknecht.
On June 3, 1871, he took over as editor of the sagging

Chemnitzer freie Presse which had a circulation of two

 

1uNomad, Apostles of Revolution, p. 262. At the
trial Mbst was singled out as the editor of a prison news—
paper Nussknacker which he wrote in code. The prisoners
had akey to the code and a single handwritten c0py of the
paper was circulated from hand to hand. Eventually prison
authorities were able to obtain a copy of the key. Most,
Memorien, I, pp. 70-71.

15M

 

 

ost,_Memorien, II, pp. 60-61.

 

257
hundred and was being printed on a hand press. Within
six weeks the circulation had risen to twelve hundred and
the hand press had to be replaced by one that could turn
out papers at a faster rate. His activities as prOpagan-

dist and editor of the Chemnitzer freie Presse resulted,

 

within one year, in no less than forty-three court summon-
ses.16 On February 26, 1873, he started to serve a prison
sentence in Zwickau, this time under charges on Isse Majeste
and insult to the army. While he was in prison Most worked
on producing a popular version of Karl Marx's Kapital,

which he entitled Kapital und Arbeit. EinpOpuldrer Auszug

aus 'Das Kapital' von Marx(Chemnitz, 1873). Unfortunately

 

Most did not understand what Marx was trying to convey in

Das Kapital and Engels was extremely harsh in his criticism

 

of Most's abstract. During his term of imprisonment Mest

also wrote a pamphlet entitled Die L83ung_der sozialen Frage

 

(Berlin, 1876), in which he related that Proudhon was "the
most confused among the third-rate social quacks." This
pamphlet points out his admiration for Marxism. Most's
later pronouncements on terrorism and violence were not
noticeable in his writing of this period. He thought

that violence was unnecessary. His radicalism was not to

come for two years.17 At this juncture in his life, Most,

evidently thought of himself as a potential leader in the

 

16Ib1do, III, pp. 8-1L}.
17Ibldo, Pp. 23-25.

258
international socialist movement because he made a de-
termined effort, while in prison, to learn foreign lan—
guages, especially French. On April 21, 1873, he wrote
to Bebel regarding his language studies, pointing out the
need for work to be done in France, adding, "I say to
you: if only there were one thousand men as you, or even
as I(without being presumptious) then EurOpe, not merely
Germany, would be socialist within five years."18 This

conveys the impression that in 1873 Mest must have re-

garded himself as being in the Avant-Garde of the socialist

 

movement.
His release, from prison, came on October 26, 1873.
Shortly afterwards he met with Bebel and Liebknecht in

Hubertusburg; at this meeting his abstract of Das Kapital

 

was discussed. Liebknecht's reaction to Most's work was
one of complete outrage, stating that there was not a
single word in Kapital which could be omitted because

Marx had already 'pared everything down to the bone and

it would be sacrilefie to change anything. In his memoirs
MOSt said that at the time he thought to himself that
Liebknecht was as sick as a religious zelot. Liebknecht
went on to tell Mest that there was no place in the German
socialist movement for any of his revolutionary phraseolo-

8Y-19

 

18Bebel, Aus meinem Leben, p. M61.

 

19Most, Memorien, III, p. 26; Rocker, Johann Most,

 

p. 147.

259
Shortly after his release from prison Most was

offered, and he accepted, the editorship of the SHddeutschen

 

V81kstimme(Mainz), an important socialist publication.
This position he held until 187M, when he was elected to
the Reichstag, which he soon came to call "The theater of
marionettes." In the Reichstag Most was looked upon as a
comic figure. When, after many efforts, he was given the
floor to Speak it was on a minor question of compulsory
smallpox vaccination which to Most meant "forceable mass
poisoning and possible syphilization." He opposed the
establishment of new vaccination stations and spoke out
in favor of increasing the number of public bath houses.
This particular Speech did little to enhance his prestige.
Parliament, to Most, was a disappointing experience, he
viewed it as a huge machine full of cogs and cranks, di-
rected by the government and party wire pullers, who them-
selves were directed by money and other vested interests.
He entered the Reichstag thinking that he would be able
to Speak out on behalf of socialism and the misery of the
workers, but never got an Opportunity to Speak on these
subjects. This demonstrated to him the fallacy of achieving
reform through parliamentary means, which Liebknecht thought
possible.

During the first recess of the Reichstag, late in
April 187M, Most was arrested in connection with a Speech
he had delivered in March on the third anniversary of the

Paris Commune. The fiery orator was sentenced to twenty-

260
six months in the Bastille am PlBtzensee, a prison near

Berlin. During his imprisonment he wrote Die Bastille am

 

PlBtzensee(Braunschweig, 1876), which was smug led out of
20

 

the prison and published.
Upon his release from prison, the party faithful
in Berlin, because of Most's popularity, gave him a po-

sition as editor of the Berliner freie Presse, a socialist

 

daily, which had been founded on January I, 1876. It grew
from an original circulation of two thousand to eighteen
thousand by the end of 1877. In addition to his editorial

work Most also contributed articles to Die neue Welt, Die

 

Zukunft(Berlin), Neue Gesellschaft(Zurich), and the Russian

 

revue Slovo. The style and general tenor of the Berliner

 

freie Presse was not liked by Liebknecht who was the chief

 

editor of Vorwfirts in Leipzig.21 The year 1877 was marked

 

by a polemical exchange between Most and Liebknecht, which
started as a result of articles Nbst had written for the

Berliner freie Presse. Exactly how serious this riff in

 

the socialist camp was, is beyond the scOpe of this study,
but it is a topic that deserves an in depth study. It
appears that a younger and more revolutionary socialist

group was forming in Berlin which resented the older

20For an account of the trial see: MOSt, Memorien,
IV, pp. S-h6. On his imprisonment see: Ibid., pp. El-IU7.

21Rocker, Johann Mest, hS-u7. Most's career as
editor of the Berliner frgie Presse is described in Bern-
stein, SozialdemokratiSche Lahrjahre, pp. 8h-86.

 

 

261

legaciership of Bebel and Liebknecht based in Leipzig. It

can only be speculated at what such a Split might have

done to the socialist movement in Germany because there
was not sufficient time for such a riff to become full
blown due to the HBdel and Nobiling attempts on the life

of Infilliam I and the subsequent passage of the Socialist
Law.

Most was a public speaker, par excellence, and held

forth often in the summer and fall of 1877. In July and

August of that year he delivered a series of lectures in
the S3313 of the Handwerkerverein in Berlin on the theme
of "The Social Revolution and Caesarism in Ancient Rome,"
whiéh were attended by workers, students, and academicians
such as the then renowned ancient historian Theodor Mommsen

(1817-1903). His lectures demonstrated considerable depth

of learning about ancient Rome which he had acquired du-

ring recent twenty-six months in prison. At this time

Most also debated with Stacker, with whom he violently dis-
agreed.22 In this periothost also ppenly defended Dah-
ring which earned him the wrath of Friedrich Engels.
ROCker is of the opinion that the influence of Dfihring

on Most's thought can be seen as early as July 1876 in

a 8‘Bries of lectures he delivered on the tOpio of "Die

Lasung der sozialen Frage." While he was imprisoned in

 

the Bastille am PlBtzenseeMost wrote a critique of

2‘2Rocker, Johann Most, pp. 148-19.

262

Duhring's thought which was to have appeared in Vorwfirts,

 

however, Liebknecht sent the manuscript to Engels for his
judgment. Engels, of course, said it should not be pub-

lished. Later it was printed in the Berliner freie Presse

 

with the title "Ein PhiIOSOph."23

The activities of Most continued in this same vein
until May 26, 1878, following the assassination attempt
by HBdel, when he Spoke in Chenmitz, though not in lauda-
tory terms, about the HBdel attempt. The meeting had
been infiltrated by police spies and Most was seized and
eight days later he was sentenced to six weeks in prison.
When he completed the sentence he was transfered to Berlin
where he was sentenced to five months in the Bastille am
PlBtzensee for remarks he had made in some of his earlier
writings. During his imprisonment he wrote a review of

Professor Schaffle's four volume work Bau und Leben des

 

sozialen KBrpers, which was later published in Richters

 

Jahrbuch fBr Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik(Zurich,
1879). He also wrote a number of other essays, but during
this term of imprisonment he was more closely confined
than during his earlier sentence in the Bastille. This
was due to his pamphlet Die Bastille am PlBtzensee in
which he revealed the leniency and laxness of the prison

conditions. Prisoners could, more or less, do as they

 

23Ibid., p. Sh. For a general account of his ac-
tivizies in the years 1877-1878 see: Most, Memorien, III,
pp. 1’72.

 

263

pleased. This condition did not prevail during his
second term in the Bastille. The greater share of his
second term was spent in solitary confinement. He was
forced to wear a face mask whenever he had to leave his
cell in order to conceal his identity.2u

On December 16, 1878, he was set free and given
twenty-four hours to leave Berlin. After a short visit
with some friends he left Berlin for Hamburg where he dis-
cussed with several party leaders tactics to be followed.
His appearence in Hamburg had an unnerving effect on the
party members there who advised him that it would be in
the best interests of everyone if he would go to America.
Realizing that he could no longer speak or write in Ger-
many, and being hounded for his earlier writings, he knew
his effectiveness was at an end in Germany. Shortly be-
fore Christmas he left Germany for England, never to see
his homeland again.25

In London Most was received with open arms by

the Kommunistische-Arbeiterbildungsverein. They backed

 

2h”Rocker, Johann Most, pp. 59-61.

25Ibid., p. 63; Bernstein, Die Geschichte der Ber-
liner Arbeiterbewegung, II, p. 26. His pamphlet Die sozial
Bewegung in alten Rom und der Casarismus was brou ht under
censure by the Reichs—Commission on December 9, 1878. Other
writings, by Most, soon to be placed on the same list are:
Die Bastille am PlBtzensee Die Pariser Kommune vor den Ber-
liner Gerichten, and Die ifisung der sozialen Frage. EiniVor-
trag gehalten vor Berliner Arbgiter. For more detailed in-
formation on the prohibition of his writings see: Stern, Der
Kampf der deutschen Sozialdemokratie in der Zeit des Sozialis-
figggfizgtzes 1878-1890. I, pp.1211h. M17. M23;826. u37-uu7.

 

 

 

 

 

26h
Most financially in the founding of a newspaper Freiheit.
Most was installed as the chief editor of the paper at
No. 6 Rose Street, Soho Square West, which served as an
editorial office, composition room, and living quarters.

Working with Mest on Freiheit were a number of peOple;

 

some are all but forgotten, while others achieved con-
siderable fame in anarchist and socialist circles. Those
who were with Most at the start of the Freiheit venture
were Jehn Neve, G.C. Uhly, F.J. Ehrhart, A. Benek, F. Aut-
mann, W. Hoffmann and L. Weber. Sebastian Trunk, Wilhelm
Merten, and the brothers “Paul and Moritz Schultze and
many others soon joined forces with Mest. Freiheit was
founded for the purpose of disseminating information into
Germany. In its original format, when the first issue
appeared on January h, 1879, it called itself a Social
Democratic paper and claimed to be in complete agreement
with the Social Democratic Party program; however, the

appearance of Freiheit was in itself an act of revolt

 

against the discipline required of all members of the
Party. In reality since the passage of the Socialist

law the Party was officially nonéexistant. The leaders
of the Social Democratic Party had published a statement
announcing the dissolution of the Pady'and calling upon
the membership to disband. The leadership of the Party
was now vested in the socialist membership of the Reichs-
tag. Nbst had not consulted the Party leaders about

founding Freiheit and the socialist deputies in the

 

265
Reichstag were afraid that the revolutionary tone of the
paper might lead to further persecution.

Freiheit was written with verve, energy, and en-

 

thusiasm, in strong graphic language which gave it appeal
to the German working-class. It carried, besides the in-
famous police persecutions, no small number of acts of
cowardice and wavering on the part of some Social Democrats.
Nettlau claims that Karl Marx was discontented with the
Social Democratic tactics of feigned submission, and was
glad to see Mbst stand up and Speak freely, but the
official party leaders Liebknecht, Bebel, and Hasoas~
clever denounced Mpst as Speaking with impunity from a
safe asylum.26 If Marx felt this way at the outset, he
was soon to be disilluSioned with Freiheit for on Septem-

 

ber 19, 1879, he wrotd to FriedriCh Serge that Mest's

paper contained "no revolutionary content, only revolu-

tionary phrases."27 The Social Democratic Party soon

founded an official party organ, Der Sozialdemokrat, on

 

September 28, 1879, in Zurich, with Georg von Vollmar,

as editor, to counteract the views expressed by Mest

 

26Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutionfire,
pp. 1u3-1u7.

27F.A. Sorge, Briefe und Auszflge aus Briefen von
Joh. Phil. Becker, Jos. Dietzgen, Friedrich Engels,_Karl
Marx u. A. an FIA. Sorge u. AndereTStuttgart, 1906f,
p. 163. It Should be notedfithat Mhst had been in dis-
favor with Marx and Engels since the Dflhring affair.

 

266

in Freiheit.28

 

Bismarck quickly capitalized on both Freiheit

 

and Der Sozialdemokrat. In a memorandum, dated February 2h,

 

1880, prepared for the purpose of influencing the Reichstag
to renew the Socialist Law, Bismarck noted that the only
difference between the anarchists and the Social Democrats
was to be found in the tactics they followed. 'While E2217
hgit, in unrestrained language, constantly called for the
violent destruction of the state, the church, existing

society, and above all, all kings; Der Sozialdemokrat

 

called for the same thing, but pointed out, that with the
current situation in Germany the tactics advocated by the
anarchists were senseless, and other more peaceful tactics
Should be employed. This, of course, is an oversimplifi-
cation of the Social Democratic position, but it does de-
monstrate to what ends Bismarck would go to destort the
truth. If the end justifies the means, then Bismarck was
successful because by using such half truths and other
dubious methods he was able to renew the Socialist Law

four times.29

Freiheit began as a Social Democratic organ, but

 

soon underwent substantial changes in its content and

format. The tone of the paper was too radical for the

 

28On the founding of Der Sozialdemokrat see:
Lidtke, The Outlawed Party, pp.89-97.

 

29Bundesarchiv Koblenz, "Abwehr sozialdemokra-
tischer Ausschreitungen," Abteilung P. 135, Folder 5.

267
Social Democrats who wished to disavow themselves of Most

and his flamboyant sheet. This is not to say that Freiheit

 

was already an anarchist paper. The first genuine anarchist

article did not appear in Freiheit until the summer of 1880

 

and Most did not usher the paper into its most violent
phrase until it was published in the United States. The

conversion of Freiheit to an anarchist paper, espousing

 

the philosophy of "Prepaganda by Deed," will be discussed

in full in relation to the career of August Reinsdorf. I
In its initial stages Freiheit was thought of,

at least in Mbst's mind, as having the potential of be-

coming the official organ of the Social Democratic Party.

'With the suSpension of any meaningful Social Democratic

press in Germany after the passage of the Socialist Law,

Freiheit was virtually unchallenged, except by Die Laterne,

 

published in Brussels by Carl Hirsch, until the establish-
ment of Der Sozialdemokrat in Zurich. As a theoretical
organ which represented German Social Democracy, as en-

visioned by Bebel or Ldobknecht, Freiheit fell far short

 

of the mark; on the other hand as a source of influence

among the German workers it was more successful. Freiheit

 

was aimed at the workingman and it was written in language
which the workingmen could understand. There are no deep

philosophical questions presented in Freiheit. Actually,

 

the language is crude and often times vulgar, but it was,
nevertheless the language of the worker. As a theoretician

of socialism, and later of anarchism, Most leaves much to

268

be desired, but as a flamboyant Speaker and fiery journalist
few in the Social Democratic movement could equal his style
and vigor.

Today Most is viewed as a radical, a historical
oddity, who shot off obliquely from the socialist movement.
In the climate which prevailed in Germany in 1879-1880 he
posed a threat to the old leadership of the Social Democrats.
Starting early in February, 1879, Most began to downgrade
parliament as an instrument through which socialist goals
could be achieved. His discouragement with parliamentary
methods had.their origins from the time he served in the

Reichstag. In the sixth issue of Freiheit, February 6,

 

1879, Most began a course of action which resulted in his
being drummed out of the Social Democratic organization
in the summer of 1880. In this issue, in an article en-

titled "Revolutionsangstmichel," he declared that the

 

socialiSt victory could only be achieved through parliament,
without revolution, "if the governing classes are reason-
able." If they are not "reasonable," then the victory
would have to be achieved through revolution. Most does

not say it, but the implication is present, that the

Socialist Law demonstrated Ipso Facto that the governing

 

classes were not "reasonable." In the same issue of Frei-

 

heit Most remarked that the Reichstag had convened that
same week. He goes on to belittle the topics which they

are about to discuss, saying that the situation being What

269
it was in Germany, no one should expect anything of the
Reichstag . . . "Experience teaches us that Caesar Bis-
marck can in any case step anything with a simple 'I for—
bid that.'" He concluded his remarks on the convening of
the Reichstag by again downgrading parliament as a useful
institution.

The issue of Freiheit for March 13, 1379, was a

 

special, devoted to the dual anniversaries of the uprising
of March 18h8 and also to the start of the Commune of 1871.
On Thursday March 20, 1879, at eight in the evening a flagg-
‘ggigg celebration was held in the Princess rooms on Castle
Street. At this festive occasion speeches were given in
German, French and English. Mbst delivered the German
speech to the eight to nine hundred who had assembled, de-
claring that the social question could only be solved by

means of a violent revolution.3O

He followed this Speech up in May with a three

part article entitled "Ist die Sozialdemokratie eine Re-

 

volutionsparteif'31 in which he concluded that the Social

IDemocrats preached revolution and could back up their -

claim.that they were a revolutionay party with hundreds

of citations taken from speeches and articles; but the re-

volution was confined to the Spoken word and the printed

 

30"Die Maerzfeier," Freiheit, No. 13(March 29, 1879)-

 

3liFreiheit, No. 18(May 3, 1879); No. 19(May 10,
1879); No.“26(May 17, 1879).

270
page, and the actual "Putsch" was never attempted. He en-
ded the article with a quotation from Ludwig Barne: "They
are as thick skinned as an elephant, they are not sensiti-
ve to a tender touch, you have to hit them in the ribs
with a chain."32 This quotation reveals the tactics Most
thought necessary to use in dealing with the governing
classes.

In effect, Most was saying that the moderate par-
liamentary approach adopted by the Social Democrats in
Germany was a denial of socialist principles, and that
such an approach would not succeed. On the other hand,
it should be noted that Most's talk about revolution was
only talk; the situation in Germany was not ripe for a
revolution and any uprising would have been crushed
immediately. Following Nobiling's attempt on William I,
Berlin was turned into an armed camp. This could be
easily done again. Bismarck suggested that the Templehof
drill field to be turned into an area to garrison a large
number of troops who could be put into service in Berlin,
should Uhe need arise. The plan was vetoed, but if there
had been a series of uprisings in Berlin such a plan un-
doubtedly would.have been followed, with severe reprisals
taken against anyone of socialist leanings. The Social
Democrats were following the only course cpen to them -

moderate parliamentary means.

 

32Freiheit, No. 20(May 17, 1879).

271

Freiheit, which carried the subtitle Sozialdemo-

 

kratisches Organ, had a reasonably large audience in Ger-

 

many. Neither the government, nor the people made an
attempt to separate the radical writings of Most from

the peaceful, legal policies advanced by Bebel and Lieb-
knecht; they were lumped under the same heading - socialism.
The Social Democratic leaders in Germany feared adeption

by the government of more stringent anti-socialist measures,
unless they were able to do something to disassociate them-

" as Most was nicknamed.

selves from "General Bumbum,
Furthermore, unless something was done quickly, there was
the danger of alienating the moderate elements of the
Social Democratic Party, namely the "petty bourgeoisie

and the peasants who had supported the party in the
election of 1878."33

There was a danger that Most could build a base
of power in Germany which he could then use as a lever to
force the Social Democratic Party leaders along a more
radical path, which they were not inclined to follow. The

party founded Der Sozialdemokrat to counter the propaganda

 

in Freiheit, but such a course of action placed the Social

Democrats on the horns of dilemma. If they stressed legal

 

33A more detailed discussion of this dilemma which
faced the Social Democratic Party is found in Lidtke, Th3
Outlawed Party, pp. 111—112. Freiheit was read by pro-
minent members of the Social Democratic Party. In Chemnitz
the police found every issue of the first quarter of Frei-
heit in the home of Julius vahlteich(1839-l915). Rudolph
Strauss and Kurt Finsterbusch, Die Chemnitzer Arbeiterbe-
wegung unter dem Sozialistengesetz(Berlin-East, lQSu), p. uh.

 

 

272

methods and peaceful tactics too much there was the danger
of alienating the more revolutionary elements in the party;
on the other hand, if they adopted Mostian tactics and
language, there was the chance that more suppressive measu-
res would be brought against the socialists living in Ger-
many. It was rumored in Berlin that the Socialist Law,
which was about to be renewed, would be even more repres-
sive.3u

The parliamentary tactics of the Social Democrats
were, to Most, just so much nonsence and an admission of
weakness. A revolutionary party, as the Social Democratic
Party claimed it was, should be concerned with revolution,
and not whether What they were doing was legal.35

In 1880 Most was even more abusive in his articles
against parliament than he had been in 1879. He was
eBpecially outraged over the position taken by Bebel on
Bismarck's seven-year military bill(the Septennat) in
March 1880. Bebel.had guaranteed that the socialists
were ready to fight for Germany in a defensive war.
This explanation was not satisfactory to Nest, or to
those who sided with Most, who saw no reason to fight for
Germany in any instance because they reasoned that the

Fatherland was not worth fighting for. The Fatherland

 

31"F'or a more complete description of the par-
liamentary tactics by the Social Democratic Party see:
Ibid., pp. 112-115.

3SFreiheit, No. 11(March 13, 1880).

273

only represented arbitrary and capricious justice, heavy
taxation, and deSpotism. There was no freedom of Speech

in Germany, most people owned no land, the churches taught
the beliefs of yesteryear, the schools stunted the education
of the youth in addition to giving them a poor education.
How, asked Most, could you ever fight for such a Father-
land until the King and everything which he represented

in the government was destroyed.36

On the front page of Freiheit(May 15, 1880), Most

 

addressed an cpen letter to the voters in the fifth election
district of Berlin, in which he said that Germany had ar-
rived at a juncture when it was no longer feasible to Speak
of achieting reform through politics - only revolution could
change conditions. Society, as it was constructed, had to
be destroyed and replaced by another. He appealed to the
voters not to enter his name in the election and ended

on the note of "Down with the throne, altar, and gold sack.

Long live the social revolution."37

It would be easy to cite examples, ad infinitum,

appearing in Freiheit which could have hurt the image of

 

legality and peacefulness that Bebel and Liebknecht were

trying to portray. It is an understatement to say that

 

 

36Emil werner, "Unser Vaterland," Freiheit, No. 18
(May 1, 1880). , - -

37J'ohann Most, "Offener Brief an die wahler des V
Berliner Reichstagwahlkreises," Die Freiheit, No. 20
(May 15, 1880). .

 

271+
a state of animosity existed between Der Sozialdemokrat

and Freiheit. Der Sozialdemokrat was forced to the de-

 

 

fense, many times, disclaiming statements made by Mbst
which he claimed were representative of Social Democrat
Opinion.

In addition to Freiheit Most had another weapon

 

in Germany, Wilhelm.Hasselmann(18hh- 7), a member of the
socialist delegation to the Reichstag. In many reSpects
Hasselmann's early life paralleled that of Most. Physi-
cally he was the direct Opposite of his compatriot; he was
big boned, with a large frame, and he had a sharp bony
face that always had a hostile look about it. His youth
was spent in Bremen, where he lived in dire need. His
father left the family and his mother in Bremen and went
to America and was never heard from again. The lessons
of poverty and economic deprivation he learned at an early
age. Not many years after his father left his mother died
and he went to live with an uncle, who was well to do, and
who treated him.like poor relation which he actually was.
The only other person in the house was a sister of his
mother(the uncle was his mother's brother), who was a very
pious old woman. She, too, was supported by her brother.
She tried to train young Hasselmann in the ways of religion
but had little influence over him.

When Hasselmann was sixteen he left his uncle's
home to learn pharmacy because he was fascinated by chemistry.

He did not remain long at these studies and started wandering

275
about Germany on foot reading Blanqui and developing an
intense hatred of people who owned property and other
possessions. His wanderings took him to Berlin where he
associated with the Lassalleans. Because of his size and

youth his socialist friends referred to him.as Der lange

 

Student. Eventually he obtained a position as an assistant

editor on Der Sozialdemokrat, a Lassallean organ, which

 

was edited by Jean Baptiste von Schweitzer(l833-187S).
When Schweitzer left the movement Hasselmann took over
the éditorship. As a Lassallean, he reconciled himself
to the position Bebel and Liebknecht gained inthe party,
as a result of the Gotha Unity Congress of 1875. As a
speaker he was influential over the masses and was able
to get elected to the Reichstag from.the Elberfeld-Barmen
district. From Barman he poured out his wrath on Bebel,

Liebknecht, and Vorwflrts in his weekly Die rote Fahne.38

 

 

In Berlin in November, 1878, Hasselmann established

 

the paper Glfick auf and also the colorless weekly Berlin,
Organ far die Interessen der Reichshauptstadt. He was
able to obtain the subscription list of the Berliner freie

 

Presse which, as a result of the Socialist Law, had been

forced to stOp publication. The list contained fifteen

 

 

38Hasselmann was editor of the Lassallean Neue
szialdemokrat 187h-1877, and served in the Reichstag
during the years l87h-1880. The information on his early
life is from.his friend Karl Schneidt, "Vom ungen Anar-
chismus," Die Kritik(Berlin), No. 81(April l , 1896), pp.
717-721. Die Kritik was started by Schneidt in l89h.

 

276

thousand names but did Hasselmann no good because the
government confiscated Berlin and his plan fell through.
Following the closing of Berlin, Hasselmann, along with
a number of his faithful followers, left Berlin for
Hamburg.39

In the Reichstag, Hasselmann did not fall in with
the party line followed by the other socialist deputies.
Hasselmann, himself, as opposed to the other socialist
deputies, believed that the socialist victory was near
at hand. Having a tempestuous nature, he was not inclined
to sit by and wait for a victory which the party leaders
had promised for the future. His turbulent nature often
found him.on the Opposite side Of the law. The police
were not the only group who were interested in muzzling
Hasselmann; the Social Democratic deputies in the Reichs—
tag also wanted "tO isolate Hasselmann and render him
innocuousfimo '

Hasselmann was watched closely by police in Berlin,
Hamburg and Altona who cooperated to watch his every move.
He was under constant Observation during his trips to
Berlin to attend the meetings of the Reichstag and then

on the return trip to Hamburg. His publishing activities

 

39Laufenberg, Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung im
Hamburg, Altona und Umgebung, II, p. 159.

 

hoJfirgen Jensen, Presse_undgpolitische Polizei.
Hamburgs Zeitun en unter dem Sozialistengesetz 1878-
18§O(Hannover, 9667, p. 73.

 

 

277
were under continual police scrutiny.
In Hamburg he continued his publishing activity

with Glflck auf appearing on December 6, 1878, in an

 

edition of ten thousand copies. Hasselmann was seized
immediately in Altona, not becausd Of the contents Of
Glfick auf, but because he violated an order which had
been issued in Berlin forbidding him to publish the paper,
an order which he erroneously construed to apply only to
Prussia. After giving a judge a satisfactory eXplanation

he was released from prison and Glflck auf was permitted

 

to be published.in Hamburg, with Karl Schneidt(185h- ?)
as responsible editor; published by the publishing firm

of Wk'Wissmann. Gchk auf was a family paper, containing

 

historical novels, humorous stories, and poetry. In the three
years it was published only one issue, Number h8(December 1h,
1879), was confiscated by the Hamburg political police.

Glfick auf was joined at Christmas Of 1879 with a weekly
Seeschlange. Rezeptblatt gegen Trfibsal und Langeweile,

which appeared in an initial issue Of twenty thousand

copies. Glflck auf and Seesdhlang§_were two harmless papers

 

 

which supplied the money needed to publish a political or-
gan. On March 23, 1879, the first issue of the weekly
Deutsche Zeitung appeared with the Sunday supplement filflgk
53;, IHasselmann, Of course, had not consulted with the
Social Democratic Party leaders before venturing forth on
this project. The Berlin Control Committee of the Party

advised.him that he should let the Deutsche Zeitung perish

 

278
as quickly as possible, a policy he was not inclined to
follow. Unknown to Hasselmann his most recent publishing
scheme gained him the suSpicion of Botho zu Eulenburg
(1831-1912), the Minister of the Interior of Prussia,
who on July 10, 1879, wrote to Berlin Police President
von Madai, that he thought that the Deutsche Zeitung

should be watched more closelyfll The Deutsche Zeitugg

 

adhered rigorously to the regulations set down in the
Socialist Law and was able to publish thirty numbers
without difficulty before number thirty-one was seized
by the police.”2

On September 28, 1879, Hasselmann published the
first number of the Schleswig-Holsteinische Volkszeitung.
Freisinniges Oggan ffir Jedermann aus dem Volke, which was
a verbatim printing Of number eighty-two of the Deutsche
Zeitugg. The Schleswig3HOlsteinische Volkszeitung_appeared
after that as the cover page of the Deutsche Zeitupg_on
Sunday, Wednesday and Friday, and was published by W.'Wiss-
mann. All of the lead articles and all articles eXpressing

political views were written by Hasselmann even though

 

ulBrandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255 "Die Uber-
sichten fiber die allgemeine Lage der sozialdemokratischen
und revolutionfiren Bewegung 1878-1910," Vol. 1(13,087),
IFOlders 72-76.. Hereafter referred to as Pr. Br. Rep. 30
Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255 and the appropriate
volume and folder numbers.

AZMOre complete details of this suppression are
.found.in Jensen, Presse and politische Polizgi, pp. 76-77.

 

279
Karl Schneidt was the responsible editor. The purpose
of the new venture was to raise the circulation of the

Deutsche Zeitung, which had two thousand two hundred sub-

 

scribers, by appealing to the peOple living in the Schleswig-
Holstein region. The Schleswingolsteinische Volkszeitugg
ran afoul of point eleven of the Social Law in the first
issue, but when the case was brought before the court, the
judgment was in favor Of the paper and publication was
continued.’+3

Hasselmann's activities now came under even closer
scrutiny by the Berlin Police President von Madai, who noted
that there was a substantial difference Of Opinion between
Hasselmann and the other socialist deputies in the Reichs-
tag. Von Madai noted that Hasselmann, himself, thought
it would be better to drop the mask the Social Democrats
were wearing and "proceed immediately with forceable re-
volts" because this was the only way that the socialists
could hope to win the battle. Should such a revolution
misfire, it would, at least have the effect of bringing
the party back together. Hasselmann, von Madai noted,
thought it would be better to fight than to see the party
shaking in fear and falling into decay as it attempted to
change conditions in Germany through peaceful means. The
Police President further noted that there was a connection

between the distribution of MOst's Freiheit and Hasselmann's

h3Ibid., PP- 77-79.

 

280
organization in Hamburg. He went on to say that appro-
priate steps should be taken to infiltrate Hasselmann's
organization with police spies.ML
Encouraged by the decision Of the court in the

case of the SchleswigéHolsteinische Volkszeitupg, Hassel-

 

mann now decided tO spread his wings a little further.
On January 11, 1880, the first issue Of the Neuen Bremer

freien Zeitungappeared. The contents Of this paper were

 

identical with those Of the Deutsche Zeitung. Hasselmann

 

had hOped that the title of the paper would appeal to the
people living in Bremen and would add about five hundred

subscribers to the Deutsche Zeitupg, Evidently neither

 

the Schleswingolsteinische Volkszeitung nor the Neuen
Bremer freien Zeitung ventures were very successful in

Spreading the appeal Of the Deutsche Zeitung, because in

 

late January 1880 the Deutsche Zeitung, on account Of

 

financial difficulties, became a weekly and was printed
with a smaller sized page.

Hasselmann and Schneidt were still not at the end
of théir attempts to capture the neWSpaper reading market.
On March In, 1880, they brought out the HamburgrAltonaer
Hafenzeitung in an edition of one thousand. The contents

Of this paper were a happy smattering of the Deutsche Zei-

 

 

tugg, Glflck auf, and Seeschlange. It was colorless in

 

huBrandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 8., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folders 100-102, 133-13h.

281
tone and the police had no Objection to its contents.

The newSpaper publishing activities of Hassel-
mann were only part Of the threat which Hasselmann posed
to the Social Democrats. In the Reichstag, the socialist
faction had lost control completely over Hasselmann. His
language became more violent in tone and his thoughts in-
creasingly reflected the ideas of Blanqui and also of the
Russian anarchists. On May h, 1880, as the Reichstag was
about to renew the Socialist Law, he took the rostrum.and
declared that he was a "revolutionary socialist" and went
on to say that under the Socialist law the socialist de-
puties in the Reichstag were helpless to do anything to
ameliorate the suffering Of the masses. He predicted
that the German workers would rise up against their Oppres-
sors and strike a blow for liberty, as the French workers
had done, and as the anarchists in Russia, with whom.he
felt an affinity, were doing at that time. He concluded
with "the time for parliamentary chatter is passed and the
time for deeds begins."’4'S

The reference to the Russian anarchists was par-
ticularly damaging, though neither Hasselmann nor the
other socialist deputies were aware Of it. Throughout
the Nobiling documents runs a thread of trying to associate
Nobiling with the Russian anarchists.”6 The Prussian

 

RSStenographischeBerichte fiber dieIVerhandlun en
des deutschen Reichstagg, IV, 111(1880), Vol. II, p. 11 7.

MO

 

 

Brandenburgisches Iandeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.

282

Minister of the Interior was eSpecially concerned about
the Russian anarchists.)+7

The other socialist deputies in the Reichstag re-
pudiated Hasselmann's Speech. Auer, Bebel, Fritsche, Ha-
senclever, Kayser, Liebknecht, Vahlteich, and Wiemer
(Hartmann did not Sign) Signed a declaration which said
that Hasselmann was being excluded from the Social Demo-
cratic Party for the following reasons: 1) He was trying
to produce a Split in the party and create a more revo-
lutionary party. 2) He had established newSpapers with-
out the permission Of the party leaders. 3) In a private
letter, which.had fallen into the hands of the Social

Democrats, he had referred to Vorwfirts as Rfickwarts,

 

 

central organ Of the German petite bourgeois.“8

 

Hasselmann's Speech in the Reichstag revealed the
seriousness of the MosteHasselmann diSpute with the party
leaders. Viewed from the perspective of 1880 it was much
more serious than might be imagined today. In effect it
was outright power grab, although, neither MOst nor Hassel-

mann had the power to carry Off such a coup. Most and

 

Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 6, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., NO. aha, Nobiling-
.Lttentat, Vol. I(8613)-Vc1. IV(8616).

u7Deutsche Zentralarchiv Merseburg, Rep. 77(Minis-
terium des Innern), Tit. 2512, Nr. 8, "Massregeln gegen
die anarchistische Bewegung," Vol. I, Folders 1-21.

”8L6 RgVOItg, NO. 9(June 20’ 1880), pa 3.

283
Hasselmann did have a small base Of power and both of them
had drifted away from.the Opinions held by the party leaders,
in the direction Of anarchism. The actual danger was not
so much that Most and Hasselmann could seize control of
the reins of the party, but that Officials in Germany would
think that they Spoke for the party. Both Most and Hassel-
mann.had lashed out hard against the party leaders, pointing
out that their parliamentary activities were meaningless.
They wanted to Change the party into one with more revo-
lutionary fervor. It Should be noted that up to this
point neither Mbst nor Hasselmann had thought Of abandoning
the party; they wanted only to give it a more radical tone.

They had planned to use Freiheit and small cells of socia-

 

list revolutionaries to carry their case to the German
workingmen. Hasselmann had already started to develOp a
plan of secret organizations in the Blanquist fashion,
consisting Of groups of four or five men to a group, each
of whom.was to form similar groups. A member Of a group
would know only the members of his own immediate group,
SO as to avoid the possibility of too much damage being
done in the event of discovery by the police.LL9

In the spring of 1880 the Social Democrats had
made plans to hold a secret party congress in May at
Rorschach, Switzerland. Preparations had been made to

deal with the two mavericks, MOSt and Hasselmann, at this

 

ugNomad, Apostles of Revolution, p. 272.

 

28h
congress, but the congress never took place because the
party discovered that a police Spy had informed the Berlin

Police President, von Madai, of the secret meeting.SO

Langhard claims that had the congress taken place Most
and Hasselmann would have had considerable popular support
for their cause in the form of twenty-five to thirty dele-

gates. This figure is probably greatly exaggerated.51

Once it was deemed inadviseable to hold the congress
at Rorschach in May, as planned, plans were made to hold
the secret congress at the uninhabited ruined'Wyden Castle
near Ossingen, Switzerland, on August 21-23, 1880.52 Most
and.Hasselmann were not invited to the wyden congress as
they had been to the congress which was to have taken place
at Rorschach. They were invited to the earlier congress
so that they might confront the party leaders directly; at
the Hyden congress they would not have this privilege.53

 

5OFricke, Bismarcks Prfltorianer, pp. 95-96.

 

51Langhard, Die anarchistische Bewegpng in der
Schweiz, p. 218.

52Julius Mottler(1838-l908) had rented the castle
under the name of Mbretti.

S3Most had arrived in Switzerland before the Ror-
schach congress was cancelled. He was able to talk at
length with Eduard Bernstein and other Social Democrats
living in Switzerland, but this did nothing to bridge the
gap between them. For more detailed information see: Bern-
stein, Sozialdemokratische Iehrjahre, pp. 102-107; Freiheit,
NO. 22(May 29,i18807; Lidtke, The Ogtlawed Party, p. 118.

285
Precautions were taken to restrict the influence of Most
and Hasselmann at the congress by limiting the delegates
only to those who represented groups in Germany.

At the wyden only three delegates out or the
forty-five assembled Sided with the position taken by
Most and Hasselmann. One of these, Heufelder‘from.Ber-
lin, was in the pay of the Berlin Police President von
Madai.5u The other two delegates favorable to Most and
Hasselmann were Rudolf Tiedt from.Berlin and Winterberg
representing Barmen.SS

At the Wyden Congress the censure motion against
Meet and Hasselmann was introduced by Wilhelm Liebknecht
representing Leipzig and Carl Hillmann representing Elber-
feld; only Tiedt and Winterberg Spoke against it. When
the vote on the motion was taken only three votes were

cast on behalf of Most and Hasselmann.

 

SLl'Fricke, Bismarcks Prfitorianer, p. 98. A copy of
the Heufelder report to the Berlin'rolice President is found
in Stern, Der Kampf der deutschen Sozialdemokratie in der
Zeit das Sozialistengesetzes 1878-1890, I, pp. 39EFhOO.

The Official account of the congess, which is a summary Of
the Speeches, without the names Of the Speakers is Proto-
koll desKQngresses der deutschen Sozialdemokratie. Abgg-
halten auf Schloss Ryden in der Schweiz, vomfZO. bis 23.
August 1880(Zurich, 1886). For an account of the congress
written by Mottler see: Lidtke, The Outlawed Party, pp.
120-121. For another interesting account of the congress
see: Karl Kautsky, Erinnerungen und Eroerterungen(The Hague,

1960): pp. h56-h60.

SSStern, Der Kampf der deutschen Sozialdemokratie
in der Zeit das Sozialistengesetzes 1878-1890: I, pp.395-
398.

 

 

 

286

The action taken at the wyden Castle disposed of
the Most-Hasselmann threat to the Social Democratic Party,
but it had the effect of pushing MOst and Hasselmann over
the brink and down the road toward anarchism, a road, on
which Most never, during the course of his life, was at
ease. Max Nomad writes that "Most's expulsion from the
Social Democratic Party was the great tragedy of his life.
DeSpite his opposition to the tactics of the leadership,
in many respects he still fundamentally agreed with those
who had excommunicated him . . . he was a man of revo-
lutionary action . . . and not a politician. He was an
inspired preacher Of the ultra-revolutionary word. There
was no place for a man like him under a semi-absolutist

system.that was still afraid of slogans."56

Most's attempt to establish a following, that could
be called anarchist, was not started until the decision of
the Social Democrats to duvp him and Hasselmann from.the
party. These moves on the part of Most will be taken up
in the subsequent chapters.

The'Wyden Congress was important for another
reason. Peter Gay concludes that "the meetings" at wyden
'herved to reunite all prominent Sodial Democrats" and
i"also strengthened the morale of the party by expelling

Most and Hasselmann."S7

 

56Nomad, Apostles of Revolution, p. 270.

 

57Gay, The Dilemma of Democratic Socialism. Eduard
Bernstein's Challenge to Marx, p. 3.

287

The results of the congress at Wyden were not, how-
ever, all beneficial for the party. One resolution approved
at Wyden could be interpreted as a concession to the more
radical wing of the Social Democratic Party. A resolution
was passed to strike out the word "legal" from.the phrase
set down in the Gotha Program, "The Socialist Labor Party
of Germany strives to attain the Free State and the So-
cialist society by all legal means."58 Striking out the
word, legal, was not intended as a call to revolutionary
action, but merely the recognition of the existing state
of affairs in Germany, under which socialist activities
were illegal. On the other hand, the deletion of the word
legal, could be interpreted by German Officials that the
Social Democratic Party was advocating a revolutionary I
program. The statement was not intended as a concession
to the revolutionaries, but it nevertheless, proved to be
of inestimable value to the police, for they now had in
black and white a statement which demonstrated that the
Social Democratic Party was willing to use ”all means"
necessary to bring about the existence of a socialist
state in Germany. Berlin Police President, von Madai,
took Special notice of the deletion Of the word "legal"
and interpreted the omission to mean that the Social

Democratic Party was embarking on a program Of revolutionary

 

58Protokoll des Kongresses der deutschen Sozialde-
mokratie. Abgehalten auf Schlbss Hyden in der Schweiz, vom
20. bis 23. August 1880, pp. 27529.

 

288
tactics.59
Hasselmann, after his fiery Speech in the Reichs-
tag on May A, 1880, walked out Of the Reichstag building,
never to return; his activities in Germany were not yet
at a close though. On July 18, 1880, appeared the first
number of a Hasselmann-Schneidt collaboration with the

title Hamburngltonaer freies Volksblatt. The first issue
60

 

was limited to an edition of one thousand cOpies. Evi-
dently a copy Of this newspaper was in Bismarck's hands
immediately, for on July 19, 1880, he wrote to William I,
from.Friedrichsruh, that it was time something was done
about Hasselmann and his publications, suggesting that
article twenty-eight Of the Socialist Law could be invo-
ked.61 William.I replied on July 26 that it would be
better to use articles one through four against Hassel-
mann.62

The day before William I sent his reply to Bis-

marck, July 25, another number of the Hamburg-Altonaer

 

 

59Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 0 Tit. 9h, Lit. 8., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folders 178-179.

6OJensen, Presse und_politische Polizei, p. 80.

61Deutsches Zentralarchiv Merseburg, Rep. 89 H
(Geheimes Zivilkabinett), Abt. XXI, Generalia, Nr. 18,
"Die Sozialdemokratie und Anarchie 1872-1909," Vol. I,
Folders 262-265.

62Ibid., Folder 266.

289
freies Volksblatt came off the press and was sold out so
quickly that on July 28 it was necessary to print an
additional five hundred copies Of the issue. The paper
was too radical in tone and Berlin Police President, von
Madai, who on July 30, ordered Georg Ferdinand Kunhardt
(182h-1895) to prohibit publication Of the paper.63
The part of the paper which was found objectionable was
a column, written by Hasselmann, entitled "Zeichen der
pagi§," in which Hasselmann preached class warfare. “Here,
on the one hand, is the working-class - disinherited,
there, on the other hand, is the leisure class — rich.8
Each worker has suffered "all conceiveable toil, hard-
ships, insults, and need, while the members Of the leisure
class have indulged in pleasure and wantonness to the
point of excess." Another story carried in the same
issue Of the paper was that of a young pregnant girl
who had been seduced by a rich man. She had committed
suicide because she was pregnant and he refused to marry
her; yet the rich man, because of his wealth, remained un-
punished. Still another example was the story of a miner
with.five children who died of hunger. ”Isn't that atro-
cious, the diligent worker, the father Of a family who
died a wretched death from.hunger, while the mine owner

does not know what to do with all his worldly riches.

 

IKunhardt was duri the years 1869-1887 a judge, President

63Jensen, Presse und_politische Polizei, p. 80.
of the Hamburger B rgerschaft, and a Senator.

290

Horror, Horror1"6u

These statements were more than Kunhardt could
take, they rang of anarchism, and the publication of the
Hamburg-Altonaer freies Volksblatt was stopped.

Hasselmann was still to take part in another short
lived publishing adventure, the Neue deutsche Zeitugg,
which appeared on August 3, 1880. His choice of Karl
Emmerich, as responsible editor, was an unfortunate one,
for Emmerich was nothing more than a strawman for the
Berlin police Spy August Rudolf Wolf(d. 1883), also known.

as Richard Wolf.65 In his initial appeal for subscriptions

 

6”Quoted in Ibid.

65Ibid., p. 81; Fricke, Bismarcks Prdtorianer,
pp. 91-96. Wolf was a baker by trade, but served as an
agent of the Berlin Police. In this capacity he worked
as a Spy in the Hamburg area and also as a correspondent
for Freiheit. After he was exposed as a police agent he
offered to sell his memoirs to a publisher. When Police
Director Krflger heard of this he was outraged that Wolf
would consider offering his memoirs for sale because it
would.have revealed the entire spy network established by
the Berlin police. Wolf then told KrUger that he could
have his memoirs, but they would cost him twenty thousand
Marks. Krfiger Offered.him one thousand Marks and then
had WOlf thrown into jail in Berlin for blackmail. After
he was released from prison Wolf was again about to offer
his memoirs for publication when he was a prehended in
Altona and thrown in jail for LBse Majestg. A few days
later he was found hanged in his cell, apparently a suicide
victim. Since both Krfiger and the Altona Police Commissi-
oner, August Engel(18h0-l910) benefited from.Wolf's death,
as did the entire structure of the Berlin police, there
is always the possibility that Wolf was murdered and it
was made to look like a suicide. There is no evidence to
substantiate such a claim, but the death Of Wolf was timely
and convenient for maintaining the secrecy of internal
structure Of the political police. Eugen Ernst, Polizei-
spitzeleien und Ausnahmegesetze 1878-1910. Ein Beitraggzur
GESchichte der Bekapfungvderigozialdemokratie(Berlin, 19I1),
p. 260 -

 

291

for the Neue deutsche Zeitupg_Hasselmann blasted the

 

bourgeois press saying, "They, more or less, serve the
capitalist class, their editors worship the golden calf
and.humiliate themselves by kissing the feet of power-

ful people Of the world."66

This statement was against
the Spirit Of the Socialist Law and Kunhardt suspended
publication of the Neue deutsche Zeitung. This marked
the end of Hasselmann's attempts to seize control of the
workers' movement in Hamburg. His aim had been to gather
around him a large following. He thought this could be
done by Spreading his message in his newspapers. This
was no longer possible.

Hasselmann now became a wanted man. The police
Spent three days searching Hamburg and Altona for him and
Karl Schneidt, because a house search had produced papers
deemed to be revolutionary. In addition to this an im-
portant letter written by Hasselmann, and intended for
Most was found during the search. This was not the only
incriminating piece Of evidence the police had connecting

Hasselmann with Mest. On a number of occasions Hasselmann

had sent materials to Meet, in London, via Oskar Neumann,

a police spy. Neumann had been able to infiltrate a secret,

radical organization in Berlin, shortly after the passage
of the Socialist Law. After attending meetingsfor a while,

he informed the members Of the group that he had to go to

 

66Quoted in Jensen, Presse und politische Polizei,

 

p. 81.

u

.n..\ a \U.

292
London. Once in London he became close to Most, who did
not doubt his sincerity. Neumann was often used as a
courier to send messages and other items between Germany
and LOndOn. It can be assumed that the Berlin police were
fully aware Of the contents Of any message he carried.
Still another police spy played a role in the exposure
Of Hasselmann's activities in the Hamburg area. The paid
informer Of the Altona Police Commissioner August Engel
and Police Director Krfiger was W} Wichmann, who like'Wolf
served as a correspondent for Freiheit. All Of Hasselmann's
plans for the development Of cells(Gruppen) and the pro-
motion of his papers were revealed to Wichmann who promptly
turned them over to the police. Hasselmann and Most were
completely hoodwinked by the police Spies WOlf, Neumann

and Wichmann. Most in an article in Freiheit revealed.how

 

the police on October 16, 1880, had searched "Genosse"
‘Wichmann's house in Altona, finding nothing, and how '
packages which he had sent Wichmann.had been intercepted
by police officials. The police arrested Wichmann, held
67

him.for a short time, and of course released.him.

EXpelled from.the Social Democratic Party, unable
to compromise his own conscience with the provisions Of
the Socialist Law governing the press in Germany, and

being sought by the police, Hasselmann, early in August,

 

67Rocker, Johann Most, p. h57; Mehring, Gesbhichte
der Sozialdemokratie, pp. SSH-555. Sdhneidt, "Vom jungen
anarchismus," p. 721, Freiheit, No. h3(0ctober 23, 1880),
p. 2.

 

 

293

1880, left Hamburg, accompanied by Schneidt, for London.68
In London Hasselmann realized that he and Most, being Of
entirely different natures, could not work together. He
held a number Of meetings in which he Spoke in order to
raise money to travel to New York. In New York Hasselmann

was given a hero's welcome.69

In November, 1880, in the city of New York, Hassel-
mann founded a revolutionary club that had anarchist over-
tones. This club was composed of former members of the
Socialist Labor Party.70 Hasselmann's moment of glory in
the United States was to be Of Short duration. Only a
few bright Spots are to be found in his career in the
United States, and even they are not too brilliant. Early
in 1885, in New York City, he founded the so called Ngigg—

wissenschaftlichen Verein, whose members were instructed

 

in the secrets of chemistry, in order that they would be

prepared for the revolution Of the future. The whole

 

68Hasselmann on August 23, 1880, wrote an Open
letter entitled "Ein WOrt an die Arbeiter Deutschlands ”
which appeared in Die Freiheit, NO. 35(August 28, 1880 .
The purpose of this letter was to put to an end the Spe-
culation carried on in the press throughout Europe and
England as to why he left Germany. See also: Die Freiheit,
NO. 33(August 1h, 1880). Karl Schneidt did not go to Lon-
don, but remained in Brussels and later went to Northern
France and Paris. Schneidt, "Vom jungen anarchismus,"

p. 768.

 

69Schneidt, "Aus jungen Anarchismus," p. 769.

7OMOrris Hillquit, History_pf Socialism in the
United StatesfiNew YOrk, 1965), p. 213.

29L!-
affair was quite harmless and injury came to no one as a
result of it. In 1886 he founded the Amerikapigghen Ar-

beiterzeitung in New YOrk with himself as editor. The
71

 

paper failed after Six months.

His later circumstances are vividly described in
a letter of April 2h, 1889, written by Hermann Schlflter,
a former member Of the staff of Der Sozialdemokrat, who
had moved to the United States in 1889, to August Bebel:
"I visited him [Hasselmang in the cafe which he runs,
without disclosing my identity. It must go very badly
for him, and his cafe which he runs can in no case pay
for itself. His wife works, and certainly, to cover the
Eafe'a deficit. AS we, my wife and I, entered,.he was
busy in the kitchen cooking soup. With a very dirty
child on his arm, he finally came to bring us a glass of
beer. Everything was covered with the dirt of Hasselmann
and the fellow's appearance was disgusting. I almost

felt sorry, although he really deserves his fate."72

Hasselmann had no influence on the German anarchist
movement after he left Germany, as Opposed to Meet, who
exercised considerable influence from England and later

from.the United States. Most's influencd on the course of

 

71Rocker, JOhann Mest, pp. 160, 298. Hasselmann
by profession was a chemist.

 

72Quoted from the original letter found in the
International Institute Of Social History, Amsterdam, by
Lidtke, The Outlawed Pargy, p. 116.

 

.a‘.

gt‘o

295
anarchism in Germany in the decade Of the 1880's will

be taken up in subsequent chapters.

CHAPTER VII

SMUGGLING 0F FREIHEIT AND THE FORMATION OF ANARCHIST CELLS

IN GERMANY

Freiheit was founded for the eXpress purpose of

sending it to readers in Germany and Austria, which was

a dangerous and difficult task. The smuggling of Freiheit

into Germany is a colorful chapter in the history of Ger-
man anarchism and pOints out the determination and courage
Of the German anarchists of the decade Of the 1880's.
Iearly the entire printing of each issue of Freiheit was
destined for shipment to Germany and Austria. Exact cir-
culation figures are not available but I have been able
to piece together, from police records and from printed
sources, what I believe to be reasonably accurate figures
on the number of copies of Freiheit printed and the number
shipped to Germany. The circulation varied from issue to
issue, and the precise number of copies sent to Germany
by mail cannot be determined with complete certitude.
Police records do not usually reflect the number Of copies
sent in letters, which were more difficult to intercept,
however, it was not unusual for the German police, eSpeci-
ally at the border, Or in cities just over the German

296

\l

297
border, to intercept fifty or a hundred copies of Freiheit
sent in letter envelopes. The following chart is an
attempt to give the average circulation figures for
Freiheit for the years 1879-1886, but it must be kept

in mind that the figures varied from.issue to issue.

Number of 00- Number of Copies

pies Printed Sent to Germany
1879 1,000-1,500 BOO-1,200
1880 2,000 1,800
1881 goo-1,200 00-1,000
1882 2,000-2,700 1, 00-2,;00
1883 5,000 h,500(Including Austria)
188h 5,000 h,500(Including Austria)
1885 5,000 h,500(Including Austria)
1886 5,000 h,500(Including Austria)1

The smuggling Operation from London, and later
from New Ybrk, extended beyond Freiheit into the realm Of
leaflets, fly-sheets, pamphlets and even included some
booklets of nearly one-hundred pages. Often times single
fly-sheets were posted in public places in Germany where
they could be read by all who passed. When they were dis-
covered they were quickly taken down. One Of the favorite
leaflets, aimed at the young men of military age, was 53
unsere Berer in der Caserne, which was smuggled into Ger-
many in bundles Of 30,000 copies. Das Recht auf Revolution

was printed in Germany from plates smuggled into Germany

 

1Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h, Lit. 8., Nr. I(13,087),
Folders 137, 287, Vol. II(13,088), Folders A6, 106; Ano-
nymus, Sozialismus und Anarchismus in Europa und Nordame-
rika wghrend der Jahre 1883 bis l886TBer1ifi, 1887)} p. 38;
BisEagck, Die gesammelten Werke, Vol. 6 c, 1871-1890,
p. l .

298
in a cake of soap. Die Zeiten sind schlecht was another
favorite. Most's article on the assassination of Tsar
Alexander II, Endlich, was another favorite, as was a
collection of poetry taken from.Freiheit, entitled, §tg§m-
Egggl, It was a common practice to reprint articles from

Freiheit in leaflet form and smuggle them into Germany

 

for distribution. Most claimed that his pamphlet, gig
GotteSpest und Religionsseuche(New York, 1883), sold over
100,000 copies in Germany alone; his Die Eigenthumbestie
(New YOrk, 1883), August Reinsdorf und die PrOpaganda der
Thgthew YOrk, 1885), and Revolutionfire Kriegswissenschaft
(New YOrk, 1885), also sold well even though they were
thicker and thus more difficult f0r street hawkers to con-
ceal. Even though thousands of leaflets, fly-sheets,
pamphlets, and booklets were smuggled into Germany, this
operation was only secondary to the smuggling of Freiheit.
It was an easy matter to print Freiheit in London, at least
until the Spring of 1882, but getting it to the readers in
Germany was not so easily done.

At first, Freiheit was sent to Germany through

 

the mail in ordinary newSpaper wrappers. Before long
though it had to be sent in ordinary brown paper letter
envelopes, because copies sent in newspaper wrappers were
too conspicious and more liable to seizure by the police
than those in letter envelopes. The price of an overseas
subscription, sent out in new3paper wrappers, was 28. 6d.

(2% Reichsmarks) per quarter. The price of a subscription,

299

sent in a letter envelope was hS-(h Reichsmarks) per
quarter, which meant that a subscription for a year cost
16 Marks, a figure that was too expensive for the German
working man at whom the paper was aimed. The selling
price of individual copies in Germany was 2pf.(1%d. in
Iondon) which most workers could afford each week. The
problem.was how to get Freiheit to Germany in sufficient
quantities to distribute it among the workers for 2pf.
an issue.

The method of sending Freiheit through the mail
in ordinary letter envelopes was never discontinued even
after the paper was moved to the United States, but many
other methods were employed to smuggle Freiheit into Ger-
many in large quantities. Sailors, who sailed between
England and the port cities in Germany, eSpecially'Hamp
burg, Bremen and LUbeck, often carried bundles with them.
A favorite method that was successful for a time was for
anarchists working in a mattress factory in Hull England
to stuff cOpies of Freiheit into mattresses exported to
Germany. Once the mattresses arrived in Germany a contact
there Opened them, removed the c0pies of Freiheit, and
then sewed up the seam. It was also sent by the overland
route to Germany from.France, Belgium, Holland, Luxemburg,
Switzerland, and even from Hungary. It was brought across
the border in various ways: carried in packs on the back
of hikers, hidden in bundles of English newSpapers, sewed

in the lining of garments, in cigarette tins, sardine

300
cans, condensed milk cans, baby food cans, bamboo poles,
and in numerous other devices that could be used to con-
ceal a few copies. Some people living near the border
carried a bundle across the border every Sunday while
they were out for an afternoon stroll. Freiheit was
brought to France by ship and sent through the mail to
Germany. Often times bundles were smuggled into Germany
where they were broken down and mailed to individual sub-
scribers, from such places as Cologne, Aachen, Mfilhausen
and other points. The envelopes in which they were mailed
usually carried for the return address the name of some
local firm. A favorite scheme used when bringing Freiheit
across the border by train was to place the bundles on
the roof of the train, on the side away from.the platform,
while the custom agents searched the train. When the
search was completed the bundles would be brought back in-
to the train compartments. Suitcases containing bundles
were transfered from a train car being inapected to one
where the inepection was already completed. Smuggling of
IFreiheit always involved a certain amount of risk, but
Nest and his group in London tried their utmost to stay
one step ahead of the German police. Many cOpies of 322$?
ihgit fell into police hands, but many more reached their

destination - the German workers.2

 

2Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folders 61-62, 103-10h, 182-183, 287.

301

The second issue of Freiheit appeared on January 11,

 

1879, with a notice on the front page that the first issue
had been prohibited in Germany.3 The same issue also car-
ried a short notice that subscriptions would still be sent
to Germany in both ordinary brown letter envelopes and

newSpaper wrappers. The third issue of Freiheit, January 18,

 

1879, had on its front page an announcement that the editors
were pleased to see that the German officials had singled
out their paper by placing it on the proscribed list. The
readers in Germany were assured by Mbst that they would
continue to receive their copies of Freiheit in letter en-
ve10pes, but that it was no longer possible to send them

out in newspaper wrappers. He related that the paper would
be printed on extra thin paper so that it would fit well
into a letter envelope and would not appear conSpicious

by being too thick. The price of such a subscription was
still four marks a quarter. PrOSpective subscribers were
warned to use a false return address on the outside of all
correspondence sent to Freiheit. Most also told his readers
in Germany that they were not breaking any law by having
copies of Freiheit in their possession. It was not against
the law for an individual to subscribe to Freiheit, how-
ever, it was against the law, he related, to disseminate
copies of Freiheit, but not to possess them for your own

personal use. The dissemination of Freiheit, he said,

 

 

3Reichsanzeiger, Nr. 5(January 6, 1879).

302
would take place from London, which was beyond the pale
of Bismarck's law. Issue number four, January 25, 1879,
carried a notice on the front page that Freiheit was
permanently forbidden in Germany as a result of action
initiated by the Reichskanzler. Most assured Bismarck,
and the Minister of the Interior, Eulenburg, that he had
no intention of stopping the publication of Freiheit, and
he would continue to send it to Germany because the So-
cialist Law did not forbid individuals in Germany from
reading newspapers placed on the proscribed list.

Once again on February 16, 1879, Most reassured
his readers that possession of Freiheit was not illegal.
Granted, he wrote, it was against the law to sell it, or
distribute it in any way, including; placing it in lending
libraries, reading rooms, or at inns where a single 00py
could be read by several people, but an individual in his
own.home could have a COpy of it. Besides, he reasoned,
110w could the government prove whether a person ordered
:it or whether it was sent to him.as a sample copy. How
could.you punish a person in such a case, asked Mest,
tnecause a person has no control over What is sent to him.
111 the mail. FUrthermore, a person found guilty of dis-
'tributing Freiheit, according to Mbst, could not be held

 

responsible for the contents of the paper, which he had
ruajpart in writing. Most also pointed out an apparent
locqfliole in the Socialist Law. According to article nine-

teeni a person found guilty of "distributing or reprinting"

 

303
a prohibited publication was to be punished by "a fine
not exceeding one thousand marks or with imprisonment not
exceeding six months," while on the other hand article
twenty-one left an out for a person caught distributing
or reprinting a prohibited publication because if a person
did it "without knowledge of the prohibition, but after

the thification of the prohibition in the Reichsanzeiger"

 

the maximum penalty was a fine "not exceeding one hundred
fifty marks." The fiery little editor advised his dis-
tributors in Germany to make use of this 100pho1e and to

continue to distribute Freiheit.

 

An early devise used by Mbst to get Freiheit

 

through the mail was the use of various names for the
paper. Before postal officials could confiscate news-
papers, wrapped in ordinary newspaper wrappers, they had
to determine first of all that they were on the proscribed

list which appeared in the Reichsanzeiger. For several

 

weeks Most was able to keep ahead of the prohibited list

by sending Freiheit out under fictitious titles such as

 

Bismarck, Tessendorf, Eulenburg, Bitter, Forchenbech,
Madai, Iehmann and also in the names of other prominent
Germans. Franz Ehrhart in an article published in the

Pfalischen Post on Maroh 22, 1906, at the time of Most's

 

death, related that this scheme was used because of

the increased difficulty of getting Freiheit into

301+
Germany.u
This ruse came to an end when the German
officials were able to place a title on the proscribed
list before Most could get copies of it to Germany.
This, of course, meant that there was a Spy in the edi-

torial office of Freiheit in London. Frank Kitz, the

 

English anarchist eighteen years later revealed how the
problem was solved. "One fine evening, on the occasion
of a concert in the vicinity of Hamstead Head a man was
walking quietly when a shot was heard and our friend was

taken to a hospital to enjoy a long vacation. The Frei-

 

heit was not so easily prohibited after this incident;

and one spy had to retire from business."5

By the spring of 1879 Freiheit was already in

 

financial danger. In an article entitled "Soll unserer
Blatt in dritten Quartel weiter erscheinen" Most pointed

out that a cheaper method had to be found to smuggle the

 

uThe article by Ehrhart is reprinted in Rocker,
Johann Most, pp. hh7-hl9. Ehrhart, himself, was arrested
in Germany while on business for Freiheit early in the
summer of 1880. Additional information on the sending
of Freiheit out in the name of prominent German is found
in Freiheit, No. 7(February 15, 1879) p. 3; No. 10
(Marcht, 1879), p. 3; Zentralblatt ffir das deutsche Reich,
No. 7(February 1h, 1879); Brandenburgisches Landeshauptar-
chiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 8.,
Nr. 1255, Vol. I(13,087) Felders 61-62. Bitter referred
to Karl Hermann Bitter(1813-1885), who was Under State
Secretary in the Prussian Ministry of the Interior 1877-
1879, and Prussian Finance Minister 1879-1882. Lehmann
was a name used by William I, in l8h8, in his flight from
the revolutionaries.

 

 

 

 

SFreedom(London), (April, 1897), p. 31.

_ 305
paper into Germany.6 Berlin Police President,von Madai,
too, thought if Freiheit were going to survive they would
have to resort to smuggling it into Germany in larger
bundles, which was already being done to a certain
extent.7

The decision, to smuggle Freiheit into Germany
in larger bundles, was taken in May 1879. The distri-
bution would take place from within the country. Berlin
Police President von Madai was prepared for this move.
He knew in advance that the main routes for the smuggling
Operations would be Hamburg, Where bundles could be
brought in by ship, and the overland from Holland, Belgium,
and Denmark Where they would be brought in in the luggage
of travelers. Von Madai even knew the names of some of
the travelers whose luggage would contain bundles of Fagi-
Ihgit, He knew that Franz Ehrhart,. Friedridh Milke, Karl
Ulrich(1853-l933), and the paperhanger Kaufmann were in-
volved in the shipping of Freiheit across the German bor-

der in their luggage.8

The port of Hamburg was the place
‘where the great majority of the 00pies of Freiheit entered

(Germany in the years 1879-1880. From.Hamburg Freiheit was

 

6Freiheit, No. 19(May 10, 1879), p. l.

7Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.

Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folders 61-62.

81bid.

306

sent out to the subscribers in various parts of Germany.
Entire bundles were sent from Hamburg to the urban areas
such as Berlin and Munich. Copies brought in through
the overland route, by way of Belgium or Luxemburg, were
remailed in Cologne or Aachen. On the southern overland
route through Switzerland copies were mailed in MBlhausen.
Unfortunately for Meet the Berlin political police never
seemed to be lacking in ingenious methods to uncover his
smuggling schemes.

The Berlin political police had a spy, Oskar Neu-

mann, in the editorial office of Freiheit in London.

 

Early in May, Neumann notified the police in Hamburg that

a man named Saevecke was being sent to Hamburg with a

large shipment of Freiheit. Hamburg police acted quickly

 

and the house where Saevecke was staying was searched and
six hundred sixty-three copies of Freiheit were found, as
well as a number of letters, and a subscription list.9
This was followed by a series of arrests with forty-five

persons being imprisoned. At his trial four months later

 

9Jensen, Presse und politische Polizei, p. 66;
Laufenburg, Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung_im.Hamburg,
II, p. 105. Most maintained that no such subscription
list existed in Hamburg. In the same article he also re-
lated that a spy had been found in their midst, but he was
referring to the spy shot on the Hamstead Head, and not to
Neumann who was the real culprit. Most stated that neither
he nor any of the members of the editorial board of Frei-
heit were so stupid and naive as to let a new person in
their organization have access to the subscription list,
and furthermore all the people who carried Freiheit into
Germany were trusted members of the Kommunistisdhe-Arbeiter-
bildungsverein. "Die Feinde der 'Fréiheit' in mahren sidh,"
Freiheit, No. 21(May 2h, 1879), p.1.

 

 

 

 

 

307
Saevecke related that it was his job to ship Freiheit
from Hamburg, in large bundles, to Berlin and Munich.
He also supplied the court list of subscribers to Fagi-
{gzL§, one hundred fifty of whom lived in the Hamburg area.
Saevecke also revealed that he was assisted in this opera-
tion by a man named WBlky. The trial, at which only twelve
of the forty-three arrested were tried, concluded with
prison sentences for some, freedom for others; Saevecke
received three months in prison, WBlky two months, four
others received sentences of one month each, and the

remaining six were set free.10

A second trial in Hamburg involving the smuggling
of Freiheit took place in September 1879. The accused was
Carl Peterson and twelve of his associates, who had formed
a reading society, and who took turns purchasing a COpy of
Freiheit; in order to reduce the cost to each individual
only one copy was purchased and it was passed around among
the members of the grOUp. They were charged with distri-
bution of Freiheit, however, when they were brought to trial
the court decided that what they were doing was not distri-
bution in the sense intended in the Socialist Law and the

defendants were set free.11

 

10Jensen, Presse und pplitische Polizei, pp. 66-67;
Laufenburg, Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung im Hambupg, II,
pp. 110-112. Saevecke and Wylky, along with their families,
immigrated to the United States in 1881.

11Laufenburg, Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung im
Hamburg, II, p. 110.

308
The story of the smuggling of Freiheit in Germany
is marked with numerous accusations on the part of the
Social Democrats that Most's organization was infiltrated
with police spies. Some people have attributed these ac-
cusations to the competitiOn which existed between Egg;-

heit and Der Sozialdemokrat, or to the differences in

 

personality between Most and the leaders of the Social
Democratic PartY-lz It is true that there was a great
deal of friction between Freiheit and Dgr Sozialdemokrat.
It is also true, although it is not so apparent today,
that a battle was being waged for the leadership of the
Social Democratic Party. Freiheit was published a full

nine months before Der Sozialdemokrat appeared on the

 

scene. Freiheit had great appeal to the workers. Many

 

of those involved with Freiheit in the initial stages were

 

radical social democrats who felt they could no longer
associate With the party.13 On the other hand, it is also
true that the more research that is done into police files
the more is borne out the contention that Most's organi-
zation was infiltrated with police spies, but the Social
Democratic camp had their share as well.

The Berlin Political Police under the leadership

of von Madai conducted a relentless campaign against

 

12Rocker, Johann Most, pp. h51-h58.

 

l3Laufenburg, Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung im
Hamburg, II, p. 60.

309
Freiheit, making use of Spies and agents provocateurs.
The remuneration paid a police Spy was very good. German
agents, depending on their location, received from two
hundred to four hundred fifty Marks a month.lu' The
growth and budget of the Berlin Political Police in the
years immediately following the passage of the Socialist

Law was tremendous.

YEAR BUDGET(in Marks)
1877 5.900.
1 January-Julg 1878 h,850.
1 September 1 78-30 September 1879 86,388.

1 October 1879-31 December 1880 69,910.83

1881 70,786.19
1882 75,699.30
1883 71,738.52

Some of the correspondents for the Freiheit living

 

in Germany were actually in the pay of the German Minister
of the Interior and of the Berlin Political Police. Two

outstanding examples are August Rudolf Wolf and W} Wichmann.16

Wolf, editor of the SchleswingolsteiniSche Volkszeitung,
started his service as a Spy for the Berlin Police President
von Madai on October 19, 1878, the same day the Socialist

 

1LPFricke, BismarcksPratorianer, pp. 52-53.

 

151bid., p. 318.

16Fricke in Ibid., p. 393 gives Wichmann's first
initial as A, but Jensen, in Presse und politische Polizei,
p. 70, prints a facsimile of thSITirst page of7Wichmann's
unpublished memoirs ”Um.Ehre, Recht und'wahrheit oder
wahre und erwiesene Erlebnisse des damaligen Geheimpoli-
zisten W} Wichmann." On this basis I have used W.

 

310
Law was passed. On November 8, 1878, wolf sent von Madai
an eight page report on the socialist situation in Ham-
burg.l7 Hamburg, in the opinion of Bismarck, was after
Berlin, the place where the socialists were most likely

18

to start something. Shortly after this W01f abandoned

his position as editor of the SghleswiggHolsteinische

 

Volkszeitung and went on a long trip, at the expense of
the German government, which ended in Bohemia. This was
his first assignment; for the Berlin police needed an under-
cover agent in Bohemia. From.Bohemia he sent reports to
von Madai in Berlin, using a cover address. Von Madai soon
noted that a man of Wolf's ability was being wasted in
Bbhemia so in March of 1879 he was stationed in the Hamburg
area, which von Madai, like Bismarck, considered one of
the key Spy posts in Germany. welf's salary at this time
was two hundred fifty Marks a month.19

In.Hamburg Wolf worked with W} Wichmann, who served

as a correspondent for Freiheit in the Hamburg area. The

 

articles which Wichmann sent to Freiheit were written by

August Engel(18h0-1910), Police Commissioner and Criminal

 

17Fricke, Bismarcks Prfitorianer, p. 92. welf's
report is printed in Ibid., pp. 329-332.

18Deutsches Zentralarchiv Merseburg, Rep. 89 H,
Abt. XXI, Generalia, Nr. 18, Vol. I, Folder 261.

19Fricke, Bismarcks Pratorianer, pp. 92-93.

311

20 The articles which Wichmann

Police Inspector in Altona.
submitted were highly volatile in their nature, intended
to fan the flames of police and popular Oppression against
the socialists and anarchists living in Germany. The ar-

ticles were placed in Freiheit SO the Minister of the In-

 

terior, Robert von Puttkamer(1829-l900) could introduce
them.in the Reichstag as evidence to substantiate the re-
newal of repressive measures against the socialists and

anarchists. Articles from Freiheit, used in this manner,

 

were referred to as pieces from "Puttkamers Zittensack."

Some examples of the types of articles attributed
to Wichmann will help to demonstrate how they could be used
to promote their campaign against the socialists and anar-
chists. In one of his first articles he says that it iS
like throwing money out of a window to Spend it campaigning
for votes; it would be better to Spend it on arms. The
socialists should take up arms and kill everyone who stands
in their way or who hinders them from carrying out the
socialist revolution. The King, religion, and all capitalists

21

Should be destroyed. Following the assassination of TSSr

 

0Laufenburg, Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegpng im
Hamburg, II, p. 230; Ignaz Auer, Nadh sehn Jahren. ’Material
and Glossen zur Geschichte des SozialiStengesetzen(Nurem-
burg, 1913), p. 183; Jensen, Presse undgpolitische Polizgg,
p. 71; Ernst, Polizeispitzeleien und Ausnahmegesetze 1878}
1910, p.26; Richard Lipinski, Die Sozialdemokratie von
ihren Anffingen bis zu Gegenwart(Berlin, 1928), II, pp. 97-
98. Engels was rewardedifor HIS service by being awarded
the Kgl. Adlerordens h. Klasse in 1881, and the Toten
Adlerordens h. Klasse in 1908. Jensen, Presse undgpolitische
Polizei, p. 180.

21Freiheit, No. 86(November 13, 1880), p. h.

312
Alexander II he wrote, "May the day not be far off when
a Similar occurrence will free us from tyranny. we only
regret that the other scoundrels did not receive their

deserved reward at the same time."22 He went on to Say

that before very long the other monarchs of the world
would receive the same treatment given Alexander II be-
cause the social revolution was about to break out.
Wichmann's article amOunted to a verbal threat on the
life of William.I.

Again in 1881 he called'William I, whom he re-
ferred to as Lehmann, "the perjured hero of Rastatt" who
was now "shaking for his life" as a result of an "unbroken

chain of villainous actions and cruelties."23

Articles Of this sort had their effect and were
used by von Puttkamer to force a renewal of the Socialist
Law in the Reichstag, because, as he argued, if stringent
measures were not taken against the socialists, then
"throne, altar, and Geldsack" would fall under the social
revolution as Wichmann claimed. The value of such articles
cannot be overestimated because German authorities interes-
ted in suppressing socialism.could Show, printed in black
and white, what could be expected if the socialists and

the anarchists were allowed to multiply.2h

 

2233933., No. 23(June n, 1881), p. 1;.

23Ibid., NO. 39(September 28. 1881). P- 2-

ZuIn Spite of the service which Wolf and Wichmann
rendered to Germany both of them fell victims to the Reich.

313

The smuggling of Freiheit into Germany, for the
purpose of dissemination of its radical message, is usually
viewed as a haphazard affair. Nothing could be farther
from the truth. The goal was to establish thousands of
small cells(Gruppen). Hasselmann, as noted above, in
January, 1880, sent an article to Freiheit, with the police
Spy Oskar Neumann acting as courier. The article called
for the organization of cells, composed of five to six men
who were acquainted with one another. There would be no
list of members, nor would anything, such as minutes Of
meetings, be written down; this would eliminate the possi-
bility Of police using such records against them. The
members of one cell would not know the members of another.

Each cell would have at its head a Vertrauensmann, Who would

 

be the only person, who may Or may not know the Vertrauens-
mfinner of other cells. Even if a Spy were able to infiltrate
one cell, he could expose that cell, but he could not damage

the organization as a Whole. The purpose was to Spread the

 

The fate of Wolf has already been detailed in the previous
chapter. Wichmann, like Wolf, received no reward for his
services. The decorations were reserved for the superiors
for whom.they worked. The Altona workers eventually dis-
covered that Wichmann was a Spy, and being of no further

use to the Berlin police he was dismissed without a pension
or any other form of compensation. Like Wolf, Wichmann,
too, wrote his memoirs, but once again as in the case of
‘Wolf, they were never published. It cannot be established
that he was intimidated by the Berlin police, or if they
paid.him.not to publish them, but nevertheless the handwritten
copy of his memoirs "Ehre, Recht und wahrheit oder wahre

und erwiesene Erlebnisse des damaligen Geheimpolizisten'w.
‘Wichmann" is found in Acten des Senats der Freien und.Hanse-
stadt, Staatsarchiv, Hamburg. How did it get there?

31b.

ideas of the social revolution through both the Spoken and
the written word, by giving Speeches when possible and by
distributing neWSpaperS such as Freiheit and other printed
literature. Each cell would arm itself with rifles. Has-
selmann assumed that they would be able to organize about
four thousand such cells in Berlin alone. He thought that
the industrial cities of Germany would be fertile ground
for the formation of cells. He reasoned that, if they
worked at the organization of cells, when the revolution
came, they would have 100,000 armed men ready to strike
a blow for freedom.25

Some cells had been formed by Hasselmann before
he had to flee Germany in August 1880. He gave the ad-

dresses Of the Vertrauensmflnner of these cells to Most.

 

The most important cells formed by Hasselmann were in
Frankfurt a.M., and in Darmstadt. Most quickly got in
touch with the existing cells in Germany, either by sen-
ding his friend Victor Dave(l8h7-1922), or Theodor Eisen-

.hower to meet with the Vertrauensmfinner of the cells. In

 

the Christmas issue of Freiheit for 1880 Mest proudly an-

 

nounced that cells had been formed in Berlin, Hamburg,
Hanau, Frankfurt a.M., Mannheim, Darmstadt, Pforzheim,

.Augsburg, Nuremburg, Munich, and a number of other cities,

 

25Freiheit, NO. h(January 2h, 1880). These ideas
'were repeated in Most's Taktik contra Freiheit. Ein Wort
zum.Angriff und zur AbwehrILondon, OctOber, 1880), pp.
‘78-80.

 

315
eSpecially in the South of Germany.26 This wag actually
a hollow boast because the groups about which Most was
writing no longer existed, because the German police,
early in December, had successfully smashed Most's
organization of cells in Germany.

The facts surrounding the break-up of Most'S
organization in Germany, late in 1880, are not entirely
clear. On this issue, as on many others, the anarchists
and the Social Democrats are at Odds. Anarchist historians
tend to discredit Social Democratic evidence on the subject.
Research in police records helped to clarify the matter,
but not entirely. One fact, which iS undisputed by all,
is that Mbst's key man inside Germany the Belgian Victor
Dave, was captured by the police; beyond this there is
little agreement. The following account will attempt to
demonstrate what led to the capture of Dave and the
smashing of the cell organization.

Before starting with the events leading up to
Dave's capture, in view of the fact that he is a leading
figure in the German anarchist movement of the 1880's,
it would not be out of place to give a brief Sketch of

his early life.27 Dave was born February 27, 18h7, in Alost,

 

26Freiheit, No. 52(December 25, 1880).

27The account of Dave's life to 1865 is taken from
a handwritten fragment of a manuscript by Max Nettlau ”Vic-
tor Dave 1887-1922," Vertical File, Labadie Collection, The
University of Michigan Library. Nettlau met Dave in 1887
amd remained his close friend until Dave's death in Paris
in Ibvember, 1922.

316
Belgium. His family moved to Hasselt, a Short distance
away, where he received a good education. He was some-
thing of a linguist knowing, in addition to French,
Flemish, German, English, and Latin. At the age of four-
teen he discovered that one of his professors, a marked
clerical, who had written a history of the province of
Limbourg, had actually plagarized it from.an earlier
book. This was proven in a series of articles which

Dave published in a liberal neWSpaper, Vedette du Limboupg,

 

Which was published in the neighboring town of Tongres.
The editor of the paper encouraged Dave to look further
into the writings of his professor and from what he dis-
covered he wrote a series of articles "U.L. an Impudent
Plggarist," which had the effect of ruining the professor.
After the completion of this series of articles he con-
tinued to write for the paper, writing a history of li-
beralism, which was printed in installments. His research
for this work carried him into an acquaintanceship with
the liberal political writings of the time.

In 1865 he entered the University of Liege where
he studied for two years before leaving to continue his
studies at the University of Brussels. In the autumn Of
1865 the First International Student Congress was held in
Liege. A number of students from Paris, imbued with Proud-
honist ideas, attended the Congress and expressed these
ideas. At the age of eighteen, in the autumn of 1865, in

the city of Liege, Dave was thrust into the midst of a

317
flourishing republican, free thought, anti-clerical, so-
cialist current. From 1865-1873 Dave was associated with
the Belgian Socialist movement. During the years 1866-
1877 he worked for socialist newspapers in Belgium, Holland,
Switzerland, Italy, and Spain. After the fall of the First
International he became involved with the Anti-Authoritarian
International and was converted to anarchism. During the
First International he had served as the official journalist
of the movement and at the Hague Congress in 1872 he stood
on the Side of Bakunin. It was in Paris in the winter of
1878-1879 that he came under the spell of the German revo-
lutionaries living there. It was also in Paris in 1879
that Most and Dave met for the first time. Dave soon be-
came one of Most's trusted associates. The conversion
of Meat to anarchism is, at least in part attributed to
his association with Dave, a claim which Dave himself
doubted.

Dave was a journalist; in appearance, Speech, and
manners he looked the part of a respectable bourgeois
‘writer. He was of average height, on the thin Side, had
a full red beard, blue eyes, bright blond hair, and on his
small nOse he wore steel rimmed Spectacles. He Spoke and
'wrote well.

In 1880 he was forced to leave Paris and went to
London where he became associated with the Communistische
.Arbeiterbildungsverein, however, his first propaganda trips

in: Germany to assist in the organization of cells there

318
had already taken place in 1879.28
Rudolf Rocker, Most's biographer, tends to dis-
regard the accusations Of the imvolvement of police Spies
in the arrest Of Dave as being baseless and the opinion
of prejudiced witnesses.29 Unfortunately these charges
cannot be dismissed so lightly. Sufficient evidence existed
at the time Rocker wrote his biography of Most to de-
monstrate conclusively the involvement of police Spies
in the arrest of Dave, but Rocker chose to ignore it.
Likewise, Rocker ignored other evidence of police in-
filtration of Most's organization, which was available
when he was writing; Specifically evidence regarding
‘Wolf, Wichmann, and Neumann. The finger of guilt had
been pointed at them, by the Social Democrats, decades
before Rocker wrote his biography of Most, but Rocker
chose to ignore these claims. In fact WOlf, Wichmann
and Neumann are not even mentioned in Rocker's study,
although Neumannls name does appear in the Nachtrag to
the study, which came out the year following the publi-
cation of the biography. Needless to say, recent work

in police files has Shown that Rocker was wrong. Rocker

 

28 Rudolf Emil Martin Der Anarchismus und seine

Tra er(Berlin, 1887), pp. 60-63. Martin(1867él9l6) was a
police Spy stationed in London. He wroted a column for
the KBlnische Zeitung in which he exposed the anarchist
activities in London. This book was published anonymously.

29

 

Rudolf Rocker, Johann Nbst, pp. h53-hSh.

 

319

attempts to convey the impression that Most was too clever
to be outwittcd by any police Spy. Nest, himself, often
said so in the columns of Freiheit; however, on a number
of occasions Mbst was completely hoodwinked by police Spies.
By nature, Most was not a careful or cautious man. Other
men would have avoided many of the pitfalls into which
Iost fell headlong; often they were pits of his own making
as in the case of the PlBtzensee affair already referred
to above. Numerous other examples could be cited, but
Rocker tends to overlook these shortcomings that his sub-
ject possessed. In all fairness to Most it should be
Said that he was usually working under extremely undesirable
conditions. In England he was in a strange land and had a
very limited knowledge of the English language. He had to
trust someone and practically the only people he got to
know well were fellow Germans. The situation, at the time,
regarding the comings and goings of Germans in the city of
London was in a constant state of flux, so Most almost had
to trust a person until he was proved to be untrustworthy.
At the time police Spies of all nations lived in London
on the fringes of the anarchist and socialist groups Who
Operated there in exile. Many spies were able to operate
for years before being discovered.

Andreas Scheu, the Austrian socialist, who asso-
ciated with Most in the early days of Freiheit, has left
in his memoirs a detailed picture of Most at this juncture

in his life. Rocker considers Scheu to be a hostile

320

witness. It should be noted that Scheu did not write his
memoirs until forty years later, when the events about
which he is writing were hazy in his mind. Some points
are confusing and this is why Rocker tends to discount
Scheu's account of the story leading up the arrest of
Dave. In the main Scheu's memoirs are quite accurate,
except he does confuse some events. One difficulty in
reading Scheu's memoirs is that the people whom he men-
tions were all arrested many times in the course of their
life and he does not relate Specifically about which
arrest he is writing. Writing forty years after the events
happened Scheu's memoirs give the reader a sense of com-
pression; the events of a decade seem.to happen simulta-
neously. Perhaps it should also be considered that he
was writing his memoirs for people familiar with the
events and he did not feel the need for great description,
so the events of a decade are compressed into the space
of paragraphs. They are not written in good chronological
order. It takes many close readings of Scheu's memoirs,
and a knowledge of the events to which he is referring
to sort out the occurrences of a decade had put them in
their proper place. Once this is done Scheu's account
correSponds quite closely to other available evidence.

Scheu relates that he told Most that London was
crawling with police spies and that he should be careful
not to leave his correSpondence, telegrams, or personal

papers lying around, but Most did not head his warning.

321
Instead he held court at the Perry Street office of £3217
hgit Where he was surrounded by questionable people with
Whom.he shared information. The door to the editorial
office of the paper was never locked and access to the
house, in which the office was located, was easily ob-
tained by knocking on the door; and the housekeeper would
look out from a basement window and let anyone in who was
knocking.

Scheu tells that he and Most often dined together
at Madame Audinet, a French restaurant in Charlotte Street,
where good meals could be had for a reasonable price.

Many of the exiles of the Paris Commune ate there, but

the place was also frequented by police Spies, some of
whom were almost permanent fixtures. According to Scheu,
one afternoon Mbst came into Madame Audinet's as pale as

a ghost and whiSpered into his ear that his subscription
list for Freiheit was missing. Scheu asked him if he
suSpected anyone. At first Most said no, but then he
mentioned Oskar Neumann who had been recently exposed as

a spy. Thinking that there might still be time to retrieve
the stolen list, Most, accompanied by SSheu, went immediately
to the house on Gower Street Where Neumann rented a room,
jhowever, a girl working there informed them.that Neumann

had left, the same day, for the continent.30

 

30Andreas Scheu, Umsturzkeime, III, Auf freien
Boden. Quoted in Rocker, JohannIMOSt, pp. MSl-ESZ.

 

 

 

322
It cannot be determined exactly when this meeting,
between Most and Scheu, took place. In the October 16,

1880, issue of Freiheit there appeared a warning which

 

said "Recently Oskar Neumann was eXposed at a socialist
meeting as a spy from Berlin. He was beaten and set free.
Everyone is hereby warned to have no further dealings

with this man." Rocker, on the basis of this announcement,
concludes that the meeting took place before the publication
of the warning in Freiheit on October 16, 1880.

 

In reality a careful reading of the conversation
exchanged between Most and Scheu in the restaurant reveals
that Most was already aware that Neumann was a spy:

Scheu: "Don't you suspect anyone?"

Most: "No! Or I mean! - that damned Neumann."

Scheu: "What does he do for living?"

Most: "Confound it! I believe his main occupation is
Spying. He used to serve as an intermediary for
the office."3l

This conversation indicates that the meeting
between Sdheu and Most took place after the notice which
had appeared in Freiheit on October 16, 1880, because

 

Most knew that Neumann was a Spy and Most said that Neu-

mann had previously served as an intermediary for Freiheit.

 

At the time of the meeting Neumann was no longer with

Freiheit. Exactly when the meeting took place I do not

 

 

3IIbid., p. usz.

323
know, but it must have been much later than the time
assumed by Rocker, which was sometime before October 16.
The date the meeting took place is important because
Dave left for the continent on Notember 28, 1880. Since
Rocker assumes that the meeting between Scheu and Most
took place before October 16, he reasons, why then did
Dave wait until Notember 28 to go to Germany, In Rocker's
mind there is no connection between Neumann, the Spy, and
Dave's trip to Germany and subsequent arrest. More than
likely the meeting between Scheu and Mest took place after
October, probably on November 28, 1880, the same day that
Dave left for the continent.

Once it was didcovered that the subscription list
was missing something had to be done. Nbst thought that
the best thing to do would be to send someone out immedi-
ately to warn the leaders of the cells in Germany. Ac-
cording to the account by Scheu, M03t listed about thirty

names of his cell leaders(Vertrauensmfinner) in Germany

 

and gave the list to Dave, who was to travel to Germany,
going first to Aachen and then to other locations. Immedi-
ately, Scheu, pointed out to Most the danger to the cell
leaders, if Dave happened to be captured with such a list.
Scheu suggested that Dave should travel first to Berlin,
where the largest number of cells were, warn the leaders
there; and then proceed to warn the cells in other areas.
Then, if he were apprehended only part of the addresses of

the cell leaders would fall into the hands of the police,

32h

however, Scheu's pleading for caution fell on deaf ears.
Dave traveled to Germany with the names written in dis-
appearing ink. Eight days later a letter arrived in Lon-
don for Most, from Dave, in which he related that the ink
had disappeared, permanently, and could not be made to
reappear. Most, then sent a list, containing the names
of the cell leaders, written in regular ink, to Dave, but
the letter fell into the hands of the police and shortly
thereafter Dave himself was captured in Augsburg.32

Rocker does not find any credence in Scheu's
account of Dave's trip to Germany.33 He further doubts

that Neumann was able to obtain a copy of either the sub-

scription list, or a list of the cell leaders(Vertrauens-

 

manner) in Germany, although he does concede, as does
Most, that Neumann probably did obtain the subscription
31;

list for France, Switzerland, and other countries. The
assumption is made by Rocker that Jehn Neve, who was in
charge of the list for Germany and Austria, was too cau-
tious to permit it to fall into Neumann's hands, but
Wilhelm.Wentker, points out that Neumann was seen in

Neve's house at different times, and it was nothing un-

usual to see Neumann alone in the editorial office of

 

321bid., pp. usz-u53.
33Ib1d., pp. t53-t56.
Bulbido , p. LL57.

325'
Freiheit.35 Rocker claims that Most warned Neve not to

 

let anyone see the list of subscribers of Freiheit in

 

Germany. On the baSis of this warning, Rocker, concludes
therefore that the list could not have fallen into Neu-
mann's hands, which is a concluSion that is not based

on sound evidence. Furthermore, Rocker, ridicules the
use of disappearing ink, and discounts the possibility,
that the notebook kept by Dave in code, which contained
information on the cell organization in Germany, could
have been deciphered by the police if it had fallen into
their hands. According to Rocker, Max Nettlau, told him
that in conversations he had had with Dave, Dave had re-
lated to him that he had kept a notebook in code, which
was made up primarily of a French dialect and which the
police were never able to break. Nettlau also told
Rocker that some disappearing ink was used, but not to

36

send a list of names to Dave.

No evidence has turned up to Show that such a
list of names was sent to Dave by Most, or if there was
such a list that it ever fell into the hands of the
police. If such a list existed, it was not mentioned at
the trial, nor did the Berlin Police President von Madai
refer to it as a list, however, evidence introduced at

the trial, and police records, indicate that when Dave

 

3SDer Sozialdemokrat, (January 2, 1881).

 

36Rocker, Johann Most, pp. u57-h58.

 

326
was apprehended he was carrying a number of letters from

Most, a fact which Rocker did not deny.37

The Berlin police noted that when Dave was appre-
hended in Augsburg he had in his possession a quantity of
written material, including his travel plans written in
code. This tends to bear out the contention, by Nettlau,
Which was accepted by Rocker, that Dave used a code, but
the Berlin police criptographers had little difficulty in
deciphering the code and were fully aware of Dave's travel
plans. Police records also indicate that some of the
material Dave was carrying was written in disappearing
ink. The upshot of the police evidence is that Dave was
traveling around to organize groups and to announce that
a large meeting was going to be held on December S, 1880
in the city of Darmstadt.

The question of whether Dave had a list on him
when he was apprehended is to a large degree an extraneous
one, because it is questionable to what degree the Berlin
police had to rely on evidence received from London. From
their own sources, within Germany, they were able to fer-
ret out and put under surveillance, the leaders of many
of the cells, but information received from Neumann was

probably of great value in confirming their own investigations.

 

37G. Kflnzel(ed.), Der erste Hochverratsprozess vor
dem Reicthericht(Leipzig, 1881); Brandenburgisches Landes-
hauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h,
‘ Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vol. I(13,087), Folders 186-187; Rocker,
Johann Most, pp. uS7-u58.

 

327
The Berlin police were aware, already in 1879 that secret
38

cells were being formed in Germany. As a result of po.
lice surveillance in June, 1880, they were able to appre-
hend.Fl§uron in Leipzig, who had traveled there by way of
Paris, Pest, Vienna, Prague, Breslau, Dresden, and Lieg-
nitz. In Liegnitz he worked eSpecially hard for the es-
tablishment of a cell there. Also during the summer of
1880 the Berlin police keptfiEhrhart under complete sur-
veillance as he traveled around Germany visiting the cell
leaders.39
In August 1880 Theodor Eisenhower, one of the
leaders in the organization of cells in Germany was ex-
pelled by police, as an undesirable person, from both
Berlin and Hanau.u0 Eisenhower was one of the most dedi-
cated anarchists of the period and was responsible for
mush of the cell organization that existed in Germany.
He was based in Switzerland, but acting upon orders from

Mbst in London, he made a number of trips into Germany in

1880 to organize cells in Munich, Augsburg, Frankfurt a.M.,

Stuttgart, Karlsruhe, Pforzheim, Mannheim, Darmstadt, Offen-

bach, and Hanau. He was chiefly responsible for the

 

38Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.

Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9t, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folders 103-10h.

.39Ibid., Folder 185.

hOIbid.

328

establishment of a central control point for the cells in
the area from Karlsruhe to Hanau, including Mannheim,
Darmstadt, Bessingen, Frankfurt a.M., Offenbach, Stein-
heim, Pforzheim, Karlsruhe, and Hanau.J41 The group for
the Darmstadt-Bessingen area was well enough develOped to
authorize a delegate named Hahn to represent the group at
the Belgian Congress which took place in Brussels on
September 19, 188O.LL2

As a result of another piece of evidence uncovered
by the Berlin police in June, 1880, they were able to as-
sociate the stenographer Friedrich waterstraat with Fleuron,

Reinsdorf and Most. They were aware that Waterstraat

 

ulNettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutiongre,
PP. 160-161. ,.

 

hZEisenhower was a true believer in the cause of
anarchism. His death at an early age, from tuberculosis,
was a severe blow to the German anarchist movement. Like
Werner, he was associated with KrOpotkin in Switzerland
from.1879. Early in 1880 he was told by the doctors that
unless he gave up all his activities and took a complete
rest he would soon die from tuberculosis. This adVice was
ignored by Eisenhower and he continued to work for the or-
ganization of anarchist cells in Germany. Fortunately,
for Eisenhower, he was not caught when the German police
closed the net over the anarchist organization in Germany
late in 1880. In Switzerland he continued to work for the
cause of anarchism. Often times his Speeches were inter-
rupted by long coughing Spells, which forced him to pause
for a rest, but he always finished the Speech. His last
Speech was delivered in Geneva on Saturday afternoon, Feb-
ruary 12, 1882. The following day he died in a hospital.
An article by Eisenhower entitled "Zur Organisation" ap-
peared in Freiheit, No. 30(July 23, 1881), pp. 2-3. For
Most's and Kro 0tkin's eulogies see: Freiheit, No. 8(Feb-
ruary 25, 1882 , p. 1; No. 9(March h, 1882), p. h; Le R5-
voltE, No. 26(February 18, 1882), p. 2. At the grave
side Emil Werner delivered the eulogy on behalf of Eisen-
hower's German comrades.

 

329

corresponded with Most in London, as well as with other
revolutionaries, both within Germany and in other countries.
They maintained a constant watch on Waterstraat as he
worked in the Berlin area and in other sections of Ger-
many, developing cells. They also kept a close watch
on his communications with Reinsdorf and Most. Toward
the end of November, 1880, Most sent two letters to Water-
straat which fell into police hands. In these letters
Most wrote that the great breakthrough had been made in
Berlin and that the organization of cells in Berlin and
in other areas was proceeding well. Most cautioned Water-
straat 0f the need for strictestr caution. The role of
waterstraat was more in the sustaining of cells once they
had been formed than in the foundation of new cells.“’3

In May, 1880, the Berlin police were able to
implicate waterstraat with Eisenhower when a list of cell
leaders fell into police hands. Furthermore, a letter
sent to a comrade Lechhause fell into police hands which
told of the cell organization in Frankfurt a.M. as well
revealing nearly all the cells in southern Germany which
Eisenhower had organized. A letter written by Eisenhower
in Bern was discovered in Mannheim. In this letter Eisen-
hower told of his plans to organize cells in all the cities

between Hanau and Karlsruhe. These cells were to be used.

 

- . u3Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9k, Lit. 8., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folders 186-187.

330

for the distribution of anarchist literature and ideas.
Eisenhower in the return address on the envelOpe used his
alias, G. Franz, which was known to the police. His
address was, care of Chez Mr. Stein, Vevey, Rue d'Italie.
Eisenhower also related in the letter that he would soon
be traveling through other parts of Germany for the pur-
pose of organizing cells there. The trip was taken in
August, 1880, and Eisenhower was quickly forced by the
police to leave Berlin and Hanau.hh

The Berlin police were also informed of a meeting
which was scheduled to take place in Darmstadt on Decem-
ber S, 1880. At the meeting the cells from Frankfurt a.M.,

Hanau, i8nster, Pforzheim, Mannheim, Offenbach, and Augs-

burg were to have been represented.""5

In addition to these sources of information the
police had at least two spies well placed in the cell
organization. Wichmann, already referred to above, was
active in the organization of cells in the Hamburg-Altona
area. The name of the principal cell leader in Frank-
furt a.M., Joseph Breuder, was known to the police,
Hasselmann had told Wichmann of him and Wichmann promptly
turned in this information to the police, but the police
did not act for months after they were aware of Breuder's

activities. Shortly after Hasselmann's arrival in London

“fina-
my.

 

331
in August 1880 Most obtained Breuder's name from.Hasselmann
and got in touch with him by letter. Breuder replied that
there were a number of others in the Frankfurt a.M. area
who were interested in revolutionary activities. Inspired
by this reply from Breuder, Mbst immediately wrote to
Eisenhower in Switzerland instructing him to proceed to
Frankfurt a.M. for the purpose of forming a number of
cells there.86 Eisenhower went to Frankfurt a.M. and
organized a number of cells there, but Shortly after he
left the city the Frankfurt Police Chief, Dr. Rumpf, was
able to infiltrate the tailor Horsch into the cell or-
ganization there. Horsch was drafted by Rumpf from a
jail cell where he had been serving a sentence. Part of
his compensation for his service to Rumpf was the commuting
of his jail term.”7 Horsch was paid twenty Marks a week
by Rumpf to seek out the followers of Most and to assist
h8

whenever possible in the organization of cells. Follo-

wing the orders given him by Rumpf, Horsch was to organize
a plot among the anarchists to kill Rumpf. Another plot
concocted by Rumpf was to have Horsch attempt to throw

some sulphuric acid in Rumpf's face. A member of a cell

 

uéLipinski, Die Sozialdegpkratig von ihren Anffin-
gen bis zur Gegenwart, II, pp. 97-98. Schneidt, "Aus
jungen AnarCEISmus,” p. 770.

 

u7Rocker, JOhann Mbst, p. 90.

 

uBIbid. , p. 98.

332

in Darmstadt had obtained the sulphuric acid in a factory
and the plans to throw it into Rumpf's face were all set
but the actual attempt never took place, because Rumpf
only wanted evidence to present in court that someone was
preparing to throw acid into his face. The evidence con-
cerning Horsch's relationship with Rumpf is conclusive,
and it is presented in a series of three letters sent by
Rumpf to Hollmann, the examining magistrate in the Leipzig
trial.ug

When you take into account the evidence produced
by police Spies, and the evidence gained by the police
through normal police intelligence work, the presence of
a list, alluded to by Scheu, is inconseguential. All
evidence indicates that Dave, when he left London on No-
vember 28, 1880, had a definite mission to warn the cells
in Germany that a list, containing the names of the cell
leaders, had fallen into police hands. In 191k in some
notes Dave wrote, he related that he visited cells in
"Eupen, Aachen, Cologne, Koblenz, Neuss, Dfisseldorf,
Mainz, Ulm, and so forth. In these places not a single

one of our friends was arrested."so. It is quite clear

that Dave is trying to make a point that in the cells

 

u9"PolizeiSpitzeleien aus frfiheren Tagen," Der
Sozialist. Organ ffir Anarchismus-Sozialismus(BerlinI, No.

SIIDecemberIQ, 1896), p. 302.

50Quoted in Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialre-
volutiondre, p. 162.

 

333

which he was able to visit there were no arrests, while
in those which he was unable to reach there were arrests.
Another fact revealed by this set of notes is that Dave
knew nothing of the Ebersbacher Conference which was to
be held in Darmstadt, even though at the trial evidence
was introduced to prove that Dave was in Germany for the
explicit purpose of attending the Conference in Darmstadt.
This was the Opinion of the Berlin police, Rocker, like-
wise tends to believe that this was Dave's reason for going
to Germany, but the notes Dave wrote in 191u tend to
contradict this idea.51

On December 1, 1880, the German police started to
close the net over the cells. In Frankfurt a.M. the tai-
lor Breuder and six other persons were arrested. On De-
cember 2 four cell members were arrested in Darmstadt.
This was followed by arrests in Bessingen, Bockenheim,
Lechhausen, and Offenbach. Other arrests took place in
Pforzheim, Mannheim, Hanau, Berlin, and other places.
Dave, himself, was arrested in Augsburg on December 8.
In all forty-four cell members were arrested, but all
but fifteen of them were set free. The fifteen were accu-

sed of high treason against the constitutin of Germany

 

51The evidence against Dave introduced at the
trial is found in Anklageschrift in der Untersuchung wider
Breuder und Genossen wegen Hochverrats und anderer Ver-
mipzig, June 25, 1881). The police account is
ounn in Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folders 188-187.

33A

and for impingement of the Socialist Law and ordered to
stand trial before the Imperial Tribunal in Leipzig. They
were accused of having smuggled Freiheit and other revo-
lutionary writings into Germany for the purpose of dis-
seminating them among the people, especially in the army
barracks. Those who were ordered to stand trial were:

Josef Breuder(Shoemaker)

Hermann Baum(Shoemaker)

Gustav Kristupeit(Tailor)

Hermann Christ(Tailor)

Heinrich Jacobi(Iocksmith)

Georg Mahr(Gardener)

Paul B811(Shoemaker)

Albert Lichtensteiger(Miner)

August Peschmann(Tailor)

Wilhelm Braun(Baker)

Heinrich Dillich(Day Laborer)

Victor Dave(Journalist)

Friedrich Waterstraat(Steno rapher)

Maximilien Metzkow(Merchant
Martha Legel(Seamstress)S2

A young stenographer from Berlin, who was arrested
but not tried, named Heinrich Roller, is an interesting
side light of the case. It was assumed by the Berlin po-
lice that Roller was planning to throw a bomb from the
gallery of the Reichstag down onto the deputies while they
were in session. Also before he was apprehended it was
thought that he was planning to blow up the police station
in which the records of the accused were being held. Roller
actually did nothing and the police had only thread-bare

circumstantial evidence so he had to be released.

 

523. Kflnzel, Der erste Hochverratsprozess vor

_1

dem.Reichsgericht, pp. 1-11.

 

335

The fifteen accused were arrested in December,
1880, but the trial did not take place until October,
1881. In the meantime the Minister of Inquiry, Holl-
mann, made extensive use of informers who were placed in
the prison cells of the accused. One such informer was
a man named Schnitzer from Berlin. Hollmann promised to
pay him one thousand Marks for his services. During the
nine months while the accused waited in prison for the
trial they communicated with each other by sending notes
called Kasmber(clandestine communications between priso-
ners). Schnitzer, it seems, was allowed a great deal of
freedom and he was used to pass the Kassiber between the
prisoners. Naturally all the Kassiber were taken first
to the prison officials who wrote down the contents which
were presented to Hollmann. Incriminating evidence found
in the Kassiber was used against the defendants in the
trial. Schnitzer, was not the Only informer, Hollmann made
use of other criminals who presented evidence at the trial.
The criminals had been placed by Hollmann in the cells of
the accused and promised that their sentences would be
shortened if they could find some useful information to
be used as evidence at the trial. Hollmann also offered
some of the accused beer, coffee, and sandwiches and other
special privileges if they would give evidence against
their comrades at the trial. At the trial the accused
were bound by oath to answer all questions asked them by

the examining judge; many were actually incriminating in

336
nature. One council for the defendants said the whole
investigation and method of obtaining evidence was re-

53

miniscent of the Spanish Inquisition.

The trial itself opened before the Supreme Tri-
bunal in Leipzig, composed of fourteen members, on Monday,
October 10, 1881, at nine in the morning and continued
through October 18. The charges against the fifteen de-
fendents were: attempting, through forcible and overt
acts, to alter the constitutions of the German Empire and
the Federal States; they had met together in associations,
whose existence, constitution, and aims were kept secret
from.the government; they had disseminated and smuggled
into the barracks, within the shadow of the Emperor's
palace, publications of a revolutionary nature, eSpecially,

Freiheit, and a pamphlet entitled, An unsere BrUder in der

 

 

Caserne, a work which urged soldiers to disobeyorders,
and to kill their superiors on the outbreak of the revo-
lution; they had distributed another publication Die revo-
lutiondre Sozialdemokratie in Which Bismarck was described
in flamoyant terms as the greatest monster in the world.Su

The fifteen on trial were for the most part all

 

S3"PolizeiSpitzeleien aus frfiherer Tagen," Der
Sozialist, No. 51(December 19, 1896), p. 302.

 

5uHessischen Hauptstaatsarchiv Wiesbaden, MO? Po-
lizeiprasidium.Frankfurt, l7u "Untersuchung gegen den
Sozialdemokraten Joseph Breuder und Genossen in Frankfurt a.
2M. wegen Hochverrats, 1880-1881;" G. Kfinzel, Der erste
iHochverratgprozess vor dem Reichsgericht, pp. 11-28.

 

 

 

337
young artisans or Skilled workmen; Dave was the notable
exception. Eight of the accused declared themselves to
be protestants, five Catholics, and two claimed to have
no religion; Dave was in the latter category. During his
examination Dave was to shock the judges with his remarks
that he had no religion.

During the trial the fifteen prisoners were guarded
by twelve policemen who wore swords throughout the trial.
Most of the defendants pleaded guilty to the charge of
disseminating forbidden literature, but denied any con-
nection with secret societies or cells formed for revo-
lutionary purposes, alleging that the meetings they had
attended were merely for the purpose of collecting money
for the victims of the Socialist Law. It was presented
in evidence that cell members in Frankfurt a.M. in October,
1880, had passed out literature and posted some of it to
the gates of the city. They had done this on the same day
that the Emperor was to enter the city for the purpose
of Opening a new opera house, and cOpies of some of their
publications were attached to the triumphal arch through
which his Majesty had to pass. At the trial it was also
revealed that the favorite meeting places of the cells were
church grave yards late at night, as well as inns and
other public places.

It was also brought out at the trial that a general.
meeting of all anarchist cells had been hastily called for

December 1, 1880, in Frankfurt a.M. Messengers had been

338
sent out to notify other cells of the meeting. It was
not explained whether the meeting had been called be-
cause the list had fallen into Neumann's hands, but it
is plausible. The police were aware of this meeting and
arrested a number of men in Frankfurt a.M. as already
noted above. The meeting was then transfered to Darmstadt
but most of the cell members did not attend for fear of
being arrested.

All of the paraphernalia of a typical anarchist
trial was introduced as evidence to condemn the fifteen
accused: letters written in disappearing ink, secret
printing presses, revolvers, rooes, cipher-writing, poi-
son, rifles, daggers, dynamite cartridges, sulphuric acid,
strychnine and other assorted destructive chemicals. In
Martha Legel's home was found a poem glorifying dynamite.

She confessed to being an assiduous reader of Freiheit

 

and a close friend of Mbst's current mistress in London,
but denied knowing anything about the cell organization.
Dave was considered to be the leader of the cell
organization. His examination is the most interesting of
all the defendants. He asked for permission to Speak in
'French, but was denied, because it was felt that he could
eXpress himself well enough in German. Dave's examination
before the tribunal was the high point of the trial. He
admitted being an anarchist, influenced by Proudhon and
Bakunin, but he denied any connection with the cell orga-

nization in Germany. Furthermore, he said, his business

339
in Germany had nothing to do with the cells. Dave's speech
was a clear, concise explanation of anarchism which the
judges failed to comprehend. They continued to question
Dave using the terms politics and party and were quite
surprised when Dave replied that these terms had no meaning
for an anarchist. Then he told the panel of judges that
he would like to see the aims of anarchism achieved peace-
fully, but had great doubts if this could be accomplished.
He pointed out that the lessons of history demonstrate
that the working class would eventually lead a revolution
to achieve the goals of anarchism, however, it would not
be a national revolution but an international one. He
went on to say that he no longer believed, as he once
did, that a compromise could be worked out between the
working-class and the bourgeois. When questioned about
Most's pamphlet Taktik contra Freiheit, he related that
the pamphlet was not anarchist at all, but that it contained
the ideas of Blanquism and Jocobinism. The ideas which it
contained, he said, were confused and that he, himself,
was in opposition to many of them.55 It should be noted
that Dave's appraisal of the pamphlet was an accurate one,
for Most at the time he wrote Taktik was more of a Blanquist
than an anarchist; but a Blanquism of words rather than a
true Blanquism which essentially stressed action.

The trial ended with four of the fifteen being set

____ 4‘

55Ibid., pp. 92-95.

3&0

free. Martha Iegel, the heroine of the trial, was freed
as were Hermann Baum, Hermann Christ, and Friedrich Water-
straat. Dave and Breuder were sentenced to two and one
half years in prison; Braun to two years and seven months;
Jacobi two years and three months; Kristupeit, Peschmann,
and Metzkow to two years each; Lichtensteiger to one and
a half years; Dillich and 3811 to one year each; and the
gardener Georg Mahr was sentenced to three months.56

The person the judges would like to have had on
trial was Johann Most. His name cropped up more often
than any other at the trial. Most and his paper Freiheit
were the primary reasons behind the trial; thus Most was
probably quite accurate when he claimed that his name was
mentioned in every treason trial in Germany and Austria
during this period.57 It was not empty bragging when
iost made such a statement. During the decade of the
1880's his name was known to most German officials, a
household word synonymous with violence. There are vast
amounts of material on Most in the German archives but it
does not alter our impression of him, beyond realizing
how intently his activities in London and in the United
States were followed. Historians of the German Social
Democratic Party reiterate the exploits of the early leaders

of their movement, without apparently realizing that Most

 

56Ibid., pp. 101-118.

57"Geschichte der Freiheit," Der Sozialist, No. MB
(October 24, 1896), p. 255.

 

 

314—1
was an integral part of the movement, or that his paper
Freiheit was at first widely read among the leaders of
the movement. During the period of the Socialist Law,
Mbst was better known than some of the less significant
members of the Social Democratic Party who have since
been enschrined.58
Once the trial in Leipzig was finished, Berlin

Police President von Madai expressed relief that they had
been able to break up the cell organization While it was
still in its incipient stages, because he feared that if
it had been allowed to function much longer it could

have gotten out of hand. He also pointed out that Most

had many friends in neighboring countries who could be

used to Spread revolution into Germany.59 Von Madai is

 

58In Chemnitz early in 1880 the police, in a
search to Julius Vahlteich's(1839-l915) house, found the
entire first quarter of Freiheit including the first num-
ber. Rudolf Strauss and Kurt Finsterbusch, Die Chemnitzer
Arbeiterbewegung unter dem Sozialistengesetz(Berlin-East,
I9Sh), pp. h3-h6; One file on Most, which contains some
interesting material, but nothing new, is Staatsarchiv
Lwaigsburg, 66h, "Die Freiheit; Another file, which con-
tains nothing new, but which reveals the significance con-
temporary officials attached to MOSt, is: Hessischen Haupt-
staatsarchiv Wiesbaden, MO? Polizeiprfisidium.Frankfurt,
177 Sozialdemokratisches Organ die "Freiheit" von Johann
MOSt. Intus: Verschiedene Zeitungsexemplare, 1879-189h;
a good example of police interest in the activities of Most
in England and the United States is found in Geheimes Staats-
archiv Munich, Ministerial-Extradiction 1921 II, Deutschen
Reich, Abteilung West I, Tit. II Polizeiweseng A, Sozial-
demokratie und Anarchismus, Ma7512, "Die sozialdemokratische
und anarchistische Bewegung," Folders ue-sé, 9h-110.

 

59Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9U, Lit. 8., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folder 187;

 

31:2

correct in his assessment of the situation; it was a sig-
nificant defeat for the cause of anarchism in Germany.
It did not stop the smuggling of Freiheit and other for-
bidden literature into Germany, but it smashed the ex-
isting cell organization there and made men more fearful
of joining or organizing future networks of cells. At
no time during the 1880's did the prospects look brighter
for the organization of a network of cells, than it did
before December 1, 1880. Cells were in existence in Ger-
many throughout the decade of the 1880's but probably at
no time did the number exceed fifty, with a total member-
ship of two to three hundred. New cells were being formed
even while the fifteen awaited trial, but these cells were
closely watched and never allowed to multiply beyond a
number which the government thought necessary for their
needs. In Berlin in the early months of 1881 ten new
cells were formed with a total membership of about sixty.
The police were fully aware of this and made no move
against them.60

At the same time in Stuttgart three pastry bakers
formed a cell for the distribution of Freiheit: the brothers
.Adolf(b. March 31, 1857 in Riedlingen), and Friedrich Sauter-
meister(b. April 16, 1860 in Riedlingen), and a friend
Franz xaver Vollmer(b. May 2, 1860 in Waldersee). Their

story is similar to that of a great number of anarchists

in Germany in the decade of the 1880's. The Freiheit cell

 

60Ibid., Folders 23h-23S.

313
which they formed in Stuttgart came under police sur-
veillance and they fled to Switzerland where they came
in contact with Hermann Stellmacher and were imbued with
ideas of "Propaganda by Deed." They returned to Stutt-
gart with the intention of carrying out a deed, but be-
fore they had an opportunity to put their plan into
action the police were once again after them and they
were forced to flee. They obtained employment on ships
that sailed the Mediterranean sea, eventually staying for
a while in Egypt for a while before returning to Switzer-
land in 1885, where they were apprehended by twenty poli-
cemen and a number of plain clothes detectives. After
five days of interrogation they were shipped over the
border into Germany as undesirable persons. In Germany
they were quickly arrested and brought to trial in Frank-
furt a.M. in March 1886; after serving short prison sen-

61

tences they left Germany for London.

December 1880 marked the high water mark of the
cell organization in Germany. After that date Dave was
finished in Germany, Eisenhower was deathly ill and was
soon to die, Most himself, left London late in 1882 for
America. The results of the treason trial had not dam-

pened Most's Spirits and he continued to smuggle Freiheit

 

61Staatsarchiv Ludwigsburg, F 201 Stadtdirection

Stuttgart, 632, "Anarchisten 1885-1898," Folders 1-82.

An account of their arrival is found in Waldsee'r Mechan-

blatt, No. 28(March 7, 1885), p. 109' an account othheir
is in Neues Tagblatt( (Stuttgarts, (March 12, 1886),

 

 

p. 30

31m
into Germany, but he got in trouble with English officials
over a story he wrote following the assassination of the
Russian Tsar, Alexander II. Most wrote an article entitled
"Endlich" on the assassination of the Tsar that so out-
raged Opinion in England that he was brought to trial and
sentenced to eighteen months in prison. The article ap-
peared in an issue of Freiheit that had a red border on it.
In the article Most described the final moments of Alexander
II concluding with "Endlich krepierte er." The court in-
terpreter had difficulty in translation, but finally ren-
dered the phrase with "at last he died like a dog." The

use of the verb krepieren, which is used to refer to the

 

death of an animal, or it can be used in a vulgar form
correSponding to "croak," is an indication of the style
of journalism used by Most.62

Once Most was imprisoned his faithful associate

John Neve took over the editorship of Ejeiheit, a position,

 

he held until he was forced to flee from.Bngland. On
May 6, 1882, Lord Cavendish was assassinated in Dublin's

Phoenix Park. In the May 13th issue of Freiheit appeared

 

an article entitled "Der Rebellen Antwort," which praised

the murder of Lord Cavendish. Following this, on May 16,

 

62Freiheit(March 19, 1881); on Mest's difficulties
with English officials see: Freiheit for April and May 1881.
, For an account of the trial see: The 'Freiheit' Prosecution.
The Trial of Herr Johann Most with Verbatim Rapport othhe
Address ofer. A.M. Sullivan M.P. for the DefenseTLondon-
June, 1881). For Bismarck's gleeful reaction to the trial
see: Die Gesammelten Werke, Vol 60, 1871 bis 1890, pp. 210-
213.

 

 

 

 

3115

the two compositors of Freiheit, w. Marten and Schwelm,
were arrested(Schwelm was eventually sentenced to sixteen
months in jail and Merten to three). John Neva barely
escaped being arrested. The police had gone to the rooming
house where he 1ived,and while they were standing at the
door, Neve's land lady saw him coming down the street.
She quickly invited the police inside to wait for Neve's
return, while she ran outside and warned Neve of the
waiting policemen. Neve made good his escape to Paris
and then to Switzerland. During the period May 20 to
June 3 the responsible editor of Freiheit was another
friend of Mbst, Johann Trunk.63 Eventually it became im-
possible to publish Freiheit in England, the police then
confiscated the issue for May 20th, and threatened printers
not to print the paper. This left only one avenue open,
if Freiheit were going to continue to be published, it had
to move to another country. The move was made to Switzer-
land and the first issue of Freiheit to be printed there
appeared on July 8, 1882. The last issue of Freiheit prin-
ted in London was on June 3, 1882.

Before continuing with the events surrounding the

printing of Freiheit in Switzerland I would like to return,

 

briefly, to the efforts to suppress Freiheit. The German
scene in the decade of the 1880's is a muddled and confused

one. The outward impression is that the government wanted

 

63Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutionfire,

 

P“. 311+.

3A6

to suppress the anarchists completely, yet, there is
evidence to demonstrate that when the anarchists reached
a low point, the German government, itself, through agents
provocateurs, subsidized the anarchist movement. The
cases of Hichmann and WOlf who wrote for Freiheit have
already been referred to above. In 1881 the merchant
Elias Schmidt from Dresden was hired by the Dresden.§3l-
minalrat weller and Kommissar Paul, as well as Police
InSpector Kaltenbach in MBlhausen. Schmidt was sent to
Switzerland and in Zurich he established an "assassination
fund" for the purpose of carrying out acts of'?ropaganda
by Deed" in Germany. The first twenty francs donated to
the fund were given by Schmidt which came from police
funds. He was not exposed as a police agent until Novem-
ber, 1882. The plumber, Weiss, from Dresden, who distri-
buted anarchist literature, in Liestal bei Basel in Swit-
zerland, glorifying robbery, murder, and "PrOpaganda by
Deed" was also like Schmidt a paid police agent.6h

Bismarck, early in April 1881, in a personal
.memorandum was delighted to see that the English were
going to do something about Most for his story on the
death of Alexander II. He hOped that they would impose

Im>re stringent measures against Freiheit and the followers

 

éuLipinski, Die Sozialdemokratie von ihrer Anffin-
gen bis zum Gegenwart, II, p. 99; Ernst, Polizeispitzeleien

 

 

 

und Ausnahmegesetze81878-1910, pp. 20-21.

 

3h?
65 .
of Most in England. On the other hand once the English

got Freiheit on the run for the publication of the article

 

glorifying the assassination of Lord Cavendish and the
paper had to leave England for Switzerland, there is con-
siderable evidence to Show that the Berlin police may

have paid for the printing of Freiheit. During the period

that Freiheit was in Switzerland the Berlin police made

 

considerable use of a cabinet maker named Karl SchrBder
whom they had hired in 1881 as a spy. He was paid two
hundred fifty marks a month. His duties were to gather
socialist and anarchist literature in Switzerland which

he mailed to von Madai in Berlin; he was also to attend
socialist and anarchist meetings and send accounts of these
meetings to Berlin, as well as the names of anyone involved
in the smuggling of anarchist or socialist literature into
Germany. In Switzerland SchrBder came in close association
with many of the leaders of the German Speaking anarchist
movement including Josef Peukert, Hermann Stellmacher,
Josef Kaufmann, Friedrich Kennel, Anton Kammerer. He also
wrote to Julius Schwab in New YOrk, John Neve and others.
SchrBder was able to supply Berlin with information which
led to the arrest of some anarchists in Germany, but more
important, he was able to infiltrate the Freiheit organi-
zation in Switzerland, where he had the confidence of

botll anarchists and socialists, not being exposed until

¥

65Bismarck, Die Gesammelten Werke, Vol. 60, 1821
his 1890, pp. 210-213.

‘—

3M3

late in‘l887.66

Another Spy active in Switzerland was the foundry

moulder Christian Haupt born in Bernburg(Anhalt). He was
employed by Adolf Hermann Krfiger in 1880 and after 188M

worked for the Polizeirat of the Berlin Political Police,

 

Gustav von Hake. Fricke maintains that Haupt was a Social
Democrat with anarchist tendencies. He entered the ser-
vice of the Berlin police in 1880 because he hated Bismarck
and wanted to register a protest against the Socialist Law,
by being a Spy for the Social Democrats within the Berlin
police system, but once he got into the service of the
police he sank deeper and deeper into police activities

and spied on, and turned in many of his former comrades.

He started out at a salary of one hundred Marks a month

but quickly rose to two hundred Marks a month. Haupt and
SchrBder were exposed as Spies at the same time. The

total cost of the services of Haupt and SchrBder to Germany
in wages alone was twenty-four thousand Marks, of which
SchrBder received ten thousand Marks and Haupt fourteen

thouSand.67

 

66
Fricke, Bismarcks Prfitorianer, p. 235.

67Ernst, PglizeiSpitzeleien und Ausnahmegesetze
1878-1910, p. 19; Langhard, Anarchistische Bewegung in der
Schweiz, p. 318. On December 16, 1901, Haupt, who at the
time was living in Buenos Aires, prepared a memorandum, at
the request of Julius Mottler, detailing his activities as
a police spy. This memorandum is preserved today among
Mottler's papers in the International Institute of Social
History in Amsterdam. Haupt was a miserable man for having
betrgged his former friends. Fricke, Bismarcks Prfitorianer,
p.1 0

 

 

 

 

 

319

The question of whether or not the Berlin police
paid for the publication of Freiheit in Switzerland, like
so many other questions involving the anarchists, has two
Sides; one, presented by the anarchists, and another by
the Social Democrats. Both sides strive to make a point.
The facts in the case are not entirely clear, but it can
safely be said that the period when Freiheit was published
in Switzerland was not a time of which the anarchists can
be proud. It is a sordid, dirty mess whether viewed from
the anarchist Side, or from the side of the involvement of
the Berlin police. The first inkling that the Berlin Po-
litical Police may have been involved in the publication
of Freiheit came on January 27, 1888, when the Social Demo-
cratic Reichstag Deputy, Paul Singer(18uh-l9ll) exploded
a bombshell during the debate on the renewal of the Social-
ist Law. Singer revealed that he had received information
from the Zurich Police Commandant Fischer that Karl SchrBder
and Christian Haupt had been employed by the Berlin Police
PrHsidium since 1880 and 1881 respectively; a charge which
Robert von Puttkamer(l828-1900), Prussian Minister of the
Interior admitted on the following day. In addition to
introducing an extensive listing of the activities of SchrB-
der and Haupt, Singer produced a written statement from
Fischer stating that they were all true. Singer also pre-
sented to the Reichstag a signed statement from the printer,
Wilhelm.Bfihrer of Schaffhausen, which related that in the

year 1882 he had printed Freiheit. In the statement,

350‘
BHhrer said that he was paid one hundred francs for each

iSsue of Freiheit which he printed in an edition of two

 

thousand c0pieS. According to Bfihrer, the group responsible
for the management of Freiheit, in addition to SchrBder,
were Hermann Stellmacher, Josef Kaufmann, and a painter
named Schneider. Bfihrer related that it was SchrBder who

always paid him for the printing of Freiheit, after which
68

 

he sent a receipt to John Move in London.
was Freiheit printed with Berlin police funds?
Nettlau says no, as did Mbst when he wrote his history

of Freiheit in 1896, and Rocker is of the same opinion,

 

however, none of them can produce any evidence to substan-
tiate their claims.69 On the other hand an examination of
the available evidence does not prove conclusively that
Freiheit was printed with police funds, but the evidence,
does demonstrate that something was wrong in Switzerland,
and that Most was aware of it.

Freiheit, Numbers 23(July 8, 1882) through 33
(October 7, 1882), were printed in Schaffhausen, Switzer-

land, but list the place of publication as London.

 

68Stenographische Berichte fiber die Verhandlungen
des deutschen Reidhstages, VII, 11(1887788), Vol. I, pp.
S32ls3h. The same material is reprinted in: Schulthess'
EurOpaischer Geschichtskalender(l888), pp. 16-17; Fricke,
Bismarcks PrHtorianer, pp. 3hO-3uh; Der Sozialdemokrat,
No. 6(F79bruary h, 1888), p. 2. ‘

69Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutionare,
pp. 316-317. Rocker, Johann Most, p. 132; "Geschichte der
Freiheit,"(July 18, 1596).

 

 

 

 

 

 

351
Numbers 3h(October 1h, 1882) through 39(November 18, 1882)
were printed in Paris, but carry the place of publication
on the mast head as Exeter. Number to never was printed
and Number A1 for December 9, 1882, was the first issue

70

printed in the United States. The editor of Freiheit

while it was in Switzerland was Hermann Stellmacher, who
was soon to be enshrined in the anarchist hall of fame by
Most, but in 1882 Most had a different opinion of him.

In a letter of November 1882 to Friedrich Kennel in Bern,
Most wrote that he was dissatisfied with Stellmacher's
work as editor of Freiheit and said that "The main thing
is to get the paper out of Stellmacher's hands as quickly

as possible."71

In the same letter Most also Spoke about
the "mess in Zurich" and went on to demean Stellmacher's
handling of the situation there. He also pointed out that
Stellmacher had ordered large printings of Freiheit with-
out authorization from London, and had even made advance
payments to the printer. Mest questions this, wondering
where the money had come from. (Most was in prison until
October 26, 1882). In addition to this, Most related that
Stellmacher took a weekly salary of thirty francs for himr

self, which Mest questions because he said no one else

.4

7OPeukert, Erinnerungen eines Prolitariers aus der
Revolutionflren Arbeiterbewegung, p. 316.

 

 

71Printed in Der Sozialdemokrat, No. 36(September 3,
18814») 9 p0 ’40

 

352

was receiving such a salary.72

Shortly after the publication of Singer's accu-
sations against Freiheit an article appeared in Die Auto-
ggmég_to refute his claims. According to the article
the income for numbers twenty-three through twenty-eight
was 7&0 fr. and the expenses 751 fr. uSc., or a debt of
11 fr. hSc; for numbers twenty-nine through thirty-nine
the income was 1599 fr. 7Sc., while the expenses were 1771 fr.
700., or a deficit of 171 fr. 930. The total deficit for
the time Freiheit was published in Switzerland was then
183 fr. u0c., which the article claimed the London office
paid. The article claimed that they received their in-

formation from a former editor of Freiheit, who was not

named.73 It should be noted that by 1888 the personages

 

involved in the publication of Freiheit in 1882 were either
dead or in prison. Stellmacher was dead, Neve in prison,
Kaufmann had been exposed as a police Spy, Schneider had

left the movement and faded into anonymity. Autonomic

 

does not reveal the source of its information, but it is
of doubtful value. The article iS not Signed. Whoever
wrote the article, and it is doubtful if it came from a
former editor, as claimed, did not have his dating correct.

Throughout the article he writes about the publication of

 

72Ibid.

 

73"Der Wahrheit die Ehre," Die Autonomie, No. 35
(February 25, 1888), pp. 1-2.

 

353
Freiheit in Switzerland as taking place in 1883. Anyone
who had been closely associated with Freiheit would have
known that the paper was published in Switzerland in 1882
and since December 1882, in the United States. The figures
given in the article appear to be too exact. The article
claimed that the London group paid everything owed on the
debt down to the last cent, but it has already been de-
monstrated that Most himself wondered where the money was
coming from for the publicatibn of Freiheit in Switzerland,
and he firmly stated that the London group would not be
responsible for the debt. Nevertheless Nettlau and Rocker
accept this article uncritically as being true. They both
assume that the debt was paid by the London group. Like-
wise both Nettlau and Rocker accept, without question, the
account given by Most in 1896. It Should be pointed out
that when Most wrote his account in 1896, he did not mention
his letter of November 1882. Long before 1896 Stellmacher
had met a "Martyr's death" in Austria and had been personally
enshrined as an anarchist saint by Most, and for a number

of years regular contributions had been made by Freiheit

 

to Stellmacher's widow and children.7u

Rocker admits that while SchrBder may have paid the
printer Bflhrer one hundred francs for the printing of each

issue of Freiheit, the money still came from London and not

7uNettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutionare, pp.

316-317; Rocker, Johann Mest, g. 132; Mest, fiGeschichte der
Freiheit," Freiheit(July 18, 1 96).

351;
from the Berlin police. He uses the letter written by

Most in November 1882, and states categorically that it
proves that the money to print Freiheit came from London.
The letter reveals that perhaps some of the money came
from London, but it also indicates that Stellmacher was
Spending more money than Ipndon had given him.75 While
not commenting on whether Freiheit was printed with police
funds, Peukert reveals another facet of the affair. Stell-
macher and Most had come into conflict because Stellmacher
wanted to keep Freiheit in Switzerland while Mbst wanted
to move it to the United States. Most won out and.F£gi-
heit was moved.76

 

The evidence neither proves nor diSproves the

allegation that Freiheit was printed in Switzerland

 

7SRocker, Johann Most, pp. 133-13M-

76Peukert, Erinnerung eines Prolitariers aus der
Revolutionfiren Arbeiterbewegugg, p. 183. while he was in
Switzerland during the year 1883, Peukert was a close
friend of both SchrBder and Kaufmann. Kaufmann(b.18u1
in Bludenz, Vororlberg) was also exposed as a spy by Singer
at the same time he exposed SchrBder and Haupt. AS early
as December 6,188h, Most in a letter to Victor Dave rela-
ted that Friedrich Kennel and Moritz Schultze in Switzer-
land had written telling him that Kaufmann was writing to
the Berlin police, but Kaufmann maintained that it was
only for the purpose of deceiving them. Schr8der later re-
lated that he was responsible for converting Kaufmann from
an anarchist to a police spy. On December 15, 188k, Kauf-
mann, along with John Neve and Peter Hauser, were expelled
from.Switzerland by the Swiss Bundesrat. Langhard, Anar-
chistische Bewegung in der Schweiz, p. 317; Brandenburgisches
Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit.
9h, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vol. II(13, 088), Folders 2h3-2hh.

 

 

 

 

355
with police funds, but one thing is certain; the Freiheit

group in Switzerland which was responsible for the pub-
lication of the paper was completely infiltrated by police
spies. It is also certain that Freiheit continued to be
published because it was to the advantage of the German
police to have it appear. If they had been intent on
putting Freiheit out of business or stopping entirely

the flow of the paper into Germany, they more than likely
could have accomplished these goals, with the help Of the
spies they had within the Freiheit organization. It seems
that after 1881 the only time that the German police moved
with force against Freiheit or the cells in Germany was to
capture an important person in the structure.

Even though Freiheit was printed in New York after

 

December 9, 1882, it continued to maintain an office in
London which was used as a central point for the distri-
bution of the paper to the continent, although the first
few issues printed in the United States were sent directly
to Germany in letter envelopes. Starting at the end of
1882 G. Knauerhase was in charge of Operations in London.
G. Brinkmann77 was also involved as were Wechsel, and in
1885 JOhn Neve. When Neve left London in 1885 to take

over the smuggling operations in Belgium Victor Dave took
over the London Office. Starting in 1883 and lasting until

Neve's arrest on February 21, 1887, Belgium was the main

 

88 ) 77For an account of his death see: Freiheit(April 3,
1 6 .

356
route used to smuggle Freiheit into Germany. It was a
route the Berlin police wanted to smash, and Neve was a
person they wanted to imprison, but it took them several
years of work and the assistance of Several police spies
before they were able to achieve these two goals. The
capture of Nova is the subject of a later chapter.

Once Freiheit was in the United States little
about the paper changed, at least for a few years; the
goal was still to smuggle it to the workers in Germany,
at whom Most aimed his writing. It was in Germany where
Nbst's heart and mind lay. At best, he only became re-
conciled to his life of exile in the United States. His
real interest throughout the first half of the decade of
the 1880's was in Germany; a reading Of Freiheit for the
period will reveal this. The productive years of Freiheit
were in this period when Most's attention was centered
on Germany.

Starting with Number 27(Ju1y h, 1885), Freiheit
underwent substantial changes in format and style. It
went from three columns, to five, from four pages, to
eight. The columns no longer had any Space between them,
but were crowded close together and were filled with small
print. The paper after that date also contained a full
page and a half Of advertiSing. In its new format, some-
times the paper would carry a full double page illustration,
but more often than not the columns were filled with use-

less information. The titles of the feature articles, and

357

there were fewer of them, were so small that nothing in
the paper, with the exception of the title of the paper
itself, stood out, as they had in earlier years. The sub-

title Of the paper changed from Organ der Revolutionaren

 

Sozialisten, to, Internationales Organ der Anarchisten

 

 

deutscher Sprache. With the same issue the old page

 

headings, that had appeared for years, were dropped: "Ge-
gen die Tyrannen sind alle Mittel berechtigt," "Agitation,
Organisation, Rebellion,” "Arbeiter aller Laender verei-
nigt Euch," "Nieder mit Thron, Altar, und Geltsack." In
its new form the paper was twice as large and less than
half as good. By the end of the decade of the 1880's

Freiheit was a very bland paper. The old slogans had

 

lost their meaning, the language was less violent, many

of the columns were filled with meaningless correspondence.
John Neve, Shortly before his capture, was thoroughly dis-
gusted with Most and Freiheit; he felt that the paper was

 

not worth the risk he was taking to smuggle it into Ger-
many, and he was probably correct.

What happened to Most that he changed Freiheit?

 

Probably by the year 1885, after the death of imprison-
ment of many of his former comrades in Germany, Austria,

and Switzerland, Most became reconciled to the hopeless-
ness of his cause. Even though outwardly he still expressed
a belief in ”PrOpaganda by Deed," inwardly he probably no
longer believed it. He probably realized by then that he

could never hope to return to Germany. The execution of

358

August Reinsdorf, who along with Victor Dave, had instructed
Heat in the principles of anarchism, must have been a de-
vastating blow. A still greater blow, the arrest and im-
prisonment of John Neve, was soon to occur. Since 1879
Most had dedicated his life and resources to the smuggling
of Freiheit into Germany, but for all apparent purposes,
the organization he hOped to create in Germany, among the
workers, eluded him.

Freiheit continued to be published until 1910,
four years after the death of its founder, but the im-
portant or creative years of the paper came before 1885.
In its heyday thousands of c0pies of each issue were
smuggled into Germany and read assiduously by the workers,
but Freiheit failed to ignite the Spark that was necessary
to start a mass movement. Whether this was out of fear
on the part of the workers following the smashing of the
cell organization in December 1880, or if it was from in-
difference, cannot be determined. One thing, Freiheit did
not offer to the workers was a concrete plan or a tangible
set of goals with which the workers could identify. If
Mest had offered more constructive alternatives and a
better organization perhaps he would have attracted more
support. The logical rejoinder to this line of thought
is that had Most done this he would have lost considerable
support among the true anarchists who already thought he
was too doctrinaire and stressed centralization too much.

Most was caught in the anarchist dilemma, which had often

359

been debated in the columns of Freiheit; how much organi-
zation can you permit, before it ceases to be anarchism.
One thing appears to be certain; the police in
Germany seemed to be able to regulate, at a desired level,
the amount of anarchism they wished to have in Germany.
To a great extent they were able to control the flow of
Freiheit into Germany; the notable exception being the
overland route through Belgium headed by thn Neve. The
German government appeared to Operate on the premise that
a little anarchism was good, as long as it were not per-
mitted to get out of hand. Some anarchism was necessary
to keep Puttkamer's "Zittensack" full for presentation
to the Reichstag and the country whenever the debate came
up on the renewal of the Socialist Law. There can be no
doubt that the German government used the actions of the
anarchists to enforce stringent measures against the‘
socialists. Additional information on government ex-
ploitation of anarchist activities will be introduced

in subsequent chapters.

CHAPTER VIII
PROPAGAKDA BY DEED

During the intervening period from the meeting
of the Verviers Anarchist Congress, September 6-8, 1877
to the meeting of the International Anarchist Congress
in London, July lh-20, 1881, no anarchist congress on an
international scale was held; there were anarchist con-
gresses, but they were small and for the most part were
attended only by anarchists living in Switzerland where
the meetings were held. These small annual congresses
of the Jura Federation were not without significance though,
for in the discussion which took place at these meetings
the two principal themes, later adopted by the International
Anarchist Congress in London in 1881, were hammered out:
"Propaganda by Deed," and communist-anarchism. These were
the dominant themes anarchism followed in the decade of
the 1880's, Before the close of the decade both ”PrOpa-
ganda by Deed" and communist-anarchism were to be the
source of great dissension within the anarchist movement.
"Propaganda by Deed" discredited the movement in theeyes
of the workers, and brought forth cries for further re-

pressive measures against the anarchists, from the

360

361
frightened bourgeois.

At the 1878 Congress of the Jura Federation, held
in Freiburg, Switzerland, on August 3-8, Paul Brousse and
Peter KrOpotkin disputed on the usefulness of "PrOpaganda‘
by Deed" in destroying the state. Kropotkin's view, that
all methods, including "Propaganda by Deed," which had
been brought up first at the Bern Anarchist Congress of
1876, must be used to destroy the state, was approved by
the congress.1 At the Congress of the Jura Federation on
October 12, 1879, in Chaux-de-Fonds KrOpotkin pressed
once again for local action, including "ProPaganda by
Deed.” As envisioned by him "Prepaganda by Deed" differed
from.the tactics of Bakunin who thought that the only need
was an organization of conSpirators, who at the proper
moment would capitalize on the revolutionary potential of
the masses. In the Spring of 1878, James Guillaume, who
had been the unofficial titular head of the movement since
the death of Bakunin in the summer of 1876, abdicated his
position and was succeeded by Kropotkin. Along with his
followers, Kropotkin replaced the Bakuninist idea of in-
surrection, with the idea of well-planned acts of terror
carried out by individuals or small groups who had been
educated in the techniques of ”PrOpaganda by Deed?
KrOpotkin assumed that such acts would arouse the spirit

 

1Avant-Garde(August 12, 1878); (August 26, 1878);
(September 9, 1878).

362
of revolt in the masses.

Again in 1880 the Congress of the Jura Federation
was held in Chaux-de-Fonds on October 9-10. The dominant
figures at the congress were Kropotkin, Elisee Reclus,
the French scholar-anarchist, and Carlo Cafiero, a wealthy
young Neopolitan anarchist. At this congress they struck
out hard against the collectivism of Bakunin, declaring
themselves, once again as they had at the 1879 congress,to
be in favor of communist-anarchism which they declared would
be the end result of the socialrevolution. According to
the doctrine of communist-anarchism there would be not
merely collective ownership of the means of production,
but complete communism in respect to the utilization of
the products of production. At the congress Kropotkin,
Elisee Reclus, and Cafiero were able to push through a
program of communist-anarchism which was accepted by the
anarchists present. A resolution was passed in Which they
declared that they would no longer refer to themselves as
"Anti-State Socialists," but as communist-anarchists. The
terms "Anti-Authoritarian Collectivists," and "Federalists"

A

were to be dropped from.their vocabularies.3

 

2Le Ravens, No. 18(October 18, 1879); No. 19(Novem-
ber l, 1879). The last issue of the Bulletin de la Federa-
tion Jurassienne appeared on March 15, 1878; for six years
it had been the leading organ of the Bakuninists. On May 1,
1878, James Guillaume left Switzerland for Paris and dropped
out of the anarchist movement. He was soon followed by others
fiho were anarchist leaders, such as Paul Brousse and Andrea
Costa.

3Le Revoité', No. 17(October 17, 1880).

 

363
Late in 1880 the need of resuscitating the Inter-
national was felt. .On December 25, 1880, a congress of
Belgian anarchists passed a resolution to the effect that
an International Anarchist Congress should be held in
1881. This resolution was accepted by anarchists of all
countries and the three leading anarchist newspapers of

I
the period, Most's Freiheit, Kropotkin's Le Revolté, and

 

Citizen Serreaux's La Revolution Socia1e(Paris), gave the

 

forthcoming congress, which was to be held in London, the
widest possible coverage to attract delegates.LL

The London Congress opened July IA, 1881, in the
meeting room of a Public House in Charrington Street,
Euston Road. Only the delegates were permitted to enter
the hall; the press and all other observers were not
allowed admission. The proceedings of the congress were
held behind closed doors to protect the delegates who had
come from the continent.5 According to Kropotkin the

forty-five delegates present represented sixty federations

 

hSerreaux was a pseudonym of Egide Silleaux. La
Revolution Sociale, which was the first anarchist paperrtb
appear in France after the Commune, was printed with funds
provided by the Paris Prefect of Police. Serreaux was at
the same time, both a police spy and an agent provocateur.
La Revolution Sociale ceased publication in September 1881
when Louis Andrieux‘Ieft his position as Paris Prefect of
Police. The first widely publicized act of violence in
France, an attempt to blow up a statue of Louis Thiers at
Saint-Germain in June, 1881, was planned by Andrieux and
Serreaux. Ipuis Andrieux, Souvenirs d'un Prefect de Poli-

22(Paris, 1885). I. pp. 337-3hfi7*

SPeukert, Erinnerungen eines Prolitariers aus der
figyolutionaren Arbeiterbewegupg, p. 37.

 

 

 

361+
and fifty-nine groups. More than likely this is an over-
estimation on the part of Kropotkin. The most important
role at the congress was played by the German delegates
who were in the majority, even though many of them repre-

6

sented countries other than Germany.
Of the forty-five delegates at the congress only
two represented anarchist groups within Germany; Carl
Henze, who had been in the anarchist movement since 1878,
represented the cities of the Niederrhein, and Balthasar
Hohn represented the socialrevolutionary groups in Darm-
stadt and Paris. There were many active German anarchists
at the congress who represented other groups; Sebastian
Trunk represented the Communistische-Arbeiterbildungsve-
3212_of London, John Neve represented a New Yerk group,
Fritz Kflrschner a German socialrevolutionary group in
Brussels. In addition to this there were a number of
Swiss and American Germans present, as well as other Ger-

mans living in exile in London who represented various

 

6L6 Revolte, No. 11(Ju1y 23, 1881). For the events
leading up to the congress see: Nettlau, Anarchisten und
Sozialrevolutionare, pp. 167-186. Accounts othhe congress
are given in : Freiheit, No. 30(July 23, 1881), p. 1; No. 31
(July 30, 1881), p.73; No. 32(August 6, 1881), p. 3; No. 33
(August 13, 1881), p. 3; Le Revolte, No. 10(Ju1y 9. 1881)
p. 1; No. 11(July 23, 18817} p. I:h; No. 12(August 6, 18él),
pp. 1-3; No. 13(August 20, 18 1), pp. 193; No. lh(Septem-
her 3, 1881), p. 1. In both of these accounts the delegates
are identified by number. Identification of the names of
the delegates and an account of the minutes of the congress
are found in: Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutionfire,
pp. 187-231. An account of the congress by a participant
is: Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Prolitariers aus der Revo-
lutionaren Arbeiterbewegppg, pp.'66-73.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

365
groups who were unable to send a delegate, and Austrian
German Speaking anarchists including Josef Peukert. None
of the earlier leaders of the German anarchist movement

who had worked on the Arbeiter-Zeitung in Bern were pre-

 

sent, although, Otto Rinke, now living in Paris, along
with Balthasar Grfin and J.A. Goosens signed the mandate

for Jean Miller who represented the Circle d'etudes sociale

 

de LavalloiS-Perret(Paris), and the Club International de

 

 

rais-
Kropotkin claimed that the congress was international
by virtue of the many different federations and groups re-
presented. However, a number of the federations and groups
represented at the congress existed only on paper and, what
is more, some of them sent no delegates but were represen-
ted by German exiles living in London. Nevertheless, Kro-
potkin and the other delegates met behind closed doors,
during the period of July 1h-20, and developed an anarchist
program.which determined, to a great extent, the route fol-
lowed by anarchism in the 1880's.
"Prepaganda by Deed" occupied a prominent place
in the discussion at the congress. The assassination
of Alexander II, earlier in the year, had made an impression
on the delegates, and they gave their approval to a program

of "Propaganda by Deed."7 KrOpotkin stressed the need to

 

7Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Prolitariers aus der
Revolutionfiren Arbeiterbewegupg, p. 70.

 

 

366
Spread the ideas of the anarchist movement among the farmers
because he reasoned that if the anarchists were going to

be successful they needed the support of the farmers.8

The congress declared itself to be opposed to parliamen-
tary activity and recognized the autonomy of both the in-
dividual and 0f the group.9 A vigorous discussion took
place in which all points of view were presented, from
revolutionary dictatorship to extreme individualism, but
in the end the congress united behind the principles of
communist-anarchism.10
The main ideas of the congress were expressed in
a resolution passed by the delegates. The resolution had
a drastic effect on the course followed by anarchism in
the 1880's. The adoption of a program of "PrOpaganda by
Deedfl had tragic consequences, especially in Germany and
Austria where it practically led to the elimination of
the leaders of the anarchist movement by the middle of
the decade. It also resulted in the loss of Switzerland
as an anarchist refuge and base of operations. In view

of the importance of the resolution it should be quoted

in its entirety.

 

8
9

Le Revolté, No. 13(August 20, 1881), pp, 1-3.
Ibid., No. 11(Ju1y 23, 1881), pp. l-h.

10Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Prolitariers aus der
Revolutionaren Arbeiterbewegupg, pp. 58-71.

367

Whereas the International'Workingmen's Association
deems it necessary to add 'PrOpaganda by Deed' to oral
and written propaganda; and, furthermore, whereas the
moment of a general conflagration is not far distant,
and the revolutionary elements of all countries will
be called upon to do their utmost - the congress urges
all organizations affiliated with the International
‘WOrkingmen'S Association to heed the following proposals:

It is absolutely necessary to exert every effort
toward propagating, by deeds, the revolutionary idea
and to arouse the Spirit of revolt in those sections
of the popular masses who still harbor illusions about
the effectiveness of legal methods.

Those who no longer believe that legality will
bring about the revolution will have to use methods
that are in conformity with that aim.

The persecutions directed against the revolutionary
press of all countries prove the necessity of organizing
an underground press.

Whereas the agricultural workers are still outside
the revolutionary movement, it is absolutely necessary
to make every effort to win them to our cause, and to
keep in mind that a deed performed against the existing
institutions appeals to the masses much more than thou-
sands of leaflets and torrents of words, and that 'Pro-
paganda by Deed' is of greater importance in the country-
side than in the cities.

Whereas the technical and chemical sciences have
rendered services to the revolutionary cause and are
bound to render still greater services in the future,
the Congress suggests that organizations and individuals
Affiliated with the International Workingmen's Association
devote themselves to the study of these sciences.11

The year following the congress in London the Jura

Federation held its annual congress in LauSanne, in the

Hall of the Hotel de France, on June nth. At Lausanne the

decisions taken at London were reinforced. Elisée Reclus

and Emil werner pushed through a resolution to the effect

 

11Le Ravolté, No. 11(July 23, 1881), pp. 1-2.

 

368
that the Jura group would henceforth use all means possible,
including "PrOpaganda by Deed," to Spread the anarchist
revolution. Once again delegates argued the necessity of
spreading the anarchist movement among "our brothers" in

12 A congress of the Jura and other anarchist

the country.
groups from France, Italy, Spain and Belgium met later
that summer(August 13-1u) in Geneva and again expressed
their adherence to the principles laid down by the London
Congress.13 During the year 1883 the Jura Federation held
its congress in Chaux-de-Fonds on July 7-9 and again re-
iterated their belief in the principles of the London
Congress.1u

As can be seen by the foregoing presentation the
change in the anarchist movement to anarchist-communism
and a commitment to "PrOpaganda by Deed" was not a hasty
one. It was well thought out and thoroughly debated by
the leading anarchist minds of the period; but more than
anyone else Kropotkin was responsible for the change.

"PrOpaganda by Deed" had an obvious appeal to

Johann Most, and he graSped its implications immediately,

 

lzIbid., No. 8(June 10, 1882), pp. 1-3; No. 9
(June 2b, 188?), pp. 1-3; No. 10(July 8, 1882), pp. 2-3.

13Ib1d., No. 13(August 19, 1882). pp- 2-3-

1”Ibid., No. 11(Ju1y 21, 1883), p. 2; No. 12
(August u,'1883), pp. 1-3; No. 13(August 18, 1881),

pp. 1-2-

369
but on the other hand it is doubtful if he ever fully under-
stood communist-anarchism. Late in 188 0 articles started

to appear in Freiheit which were intended to instill in the

 

readers the value of terrorism and "Propaganda by Deed,"
often giving eXplicit instructions in the manufacture and
use of explosives including dynamite and nitroglycerin.
”Instructions were also given in detail how to use flire,
poison, and knives in the most effective way.15 Most
told his readers that "The revolution has no respect for
things or people who are connected with the existing
system of robbery and murder. Such people are condemned

n16

and will sooner or later receive their just fate.

 

15A partial listingo of articles of this nature con-
tained in Freiheit is as follows: "Durch Terrorismus zur
Freiheit, " No. 50(December 11,1880), p. 1; P. Knauer,
"Die Taktik der revolutionaeren Arbeiter-Partei, "No. 29
(July 10, 1881), p. l; E. Nathan-Ganz, "Die Chemie und die
Revolution," No. 33(August 13, 1881), p. 2; Publicca, "Die
Propaganda durch die That, " No. h2(0ctober 15, 1881),
"Die Prepaganda durch die That, " No. 38(November 11, 1882),
p. 2; "Wissenschaftliche Winke," No. 3(January 20,1883),
pp. 3- , and No. 5(Februar 1883), pp. 1-2; 'Praktische
'Winke, No. 15(April 1M, 1883;, p. 1;RDynamit," No. 18
(May S, 1883), p. l; "Ein Salon-Blatt fiber Dynamitgolitik, "
No. 19(May 12,1883), pp. 1- 2; "Das Nitroglyzerin, No.
(June 30,1883), pp. 1- 2; "Zur PrOpaganda der That, " No. 2:7
(November 2h, 1883), 1-2; "Revolutionfire Kriegskunst,
No. 52(December 29, 1883), p. 2; "Zur Prepaganda der That,“
No. 2(January 12,188h), p. 1; "Zur Propaganda der That,
No. 7(February 16,188h), p. 1-2; ”Neue Kriegstaktik der
Revolution," No. 10(March 8,188h), p. 2; "Die Propaganda
der That, "No. 23(June 7, l88u), p. 1; Also on the mast-
head of Freiheit starting on Mhrch 25, 1882, was carried
the admonitionf“Gegen die Tyrannen sind alle Mittel gesetz-
lich." Evidently someone pointed out to Meet that the
word ggsetzlich had no meaning for an anarchist and it was
later changed to berechtig_.

 

 

 

16"Dynamite," Freiheit, No. 18(May S, 1883), p. l.

 

370
He called for the destruction of the means of communication,
the dynamiting of homes, offices, churches, stores, and
factories, saying that "lead and dynamite, poison and
knives are the weapons with which our brothers will Open

the skirmish."17 "All methods are justified to achieve
18

the social revolution" and "it was time for the atone-

ment of the crimes committed against society using the

'fllg

principle of 'an eye for an eye. To people living in

Germany of the temperament of Hadel and Nobiling Most
advised "Ready, aim, fire."2O
Most admonished the German aristocracy with "Every
prince will find his Brutus. Poison on the table of the
gourmet will cancel out his debt. Dynamite will eXplode
in the splendid, rubber tired, coaches of the aristocracy
and bourgeois as they pull up to the Opera. Death will
await them, both by day and by night, on all roads and
footpaths and even in their homes, lurking in a thousand

«21

different forms. "Shake you dogs, you blood suckers,

 

17"Neue Kriegstaktik der Revolution," Ibid., No. 10
(March 8, 188k), p. 2.

lBIbid.

19"Die PrOpaganda der That," gglg., No. 23(June 7:
18814.), p. 10 “

ZOandel und Nobiling," Ibid., No. 3u(Auaust 23:
1881—L), p. 20- ‘

21Ibid.

371
you violators of young girls, you murderers and execu-
tioners - the day of retribution, the day of vengenoe
draws near."22
Most said quite frankly "We will murder those
who must be killed in order to be free . . .. we do not
diSpute over whether it is right or wrong. Say what you

will, do what you do, but the victor is right. Comrades

of Freiheit, we say, murder the murderers. Rescue man-

23

 

kind through blood, iron, poison, and dynamite."
"We believe once and for all in powder and lead, poison,
knives, dynamite, and fire. With these the people will
be able to argue more loudly and stronger; with these
our goals will be attained more surely and quicker."2u

The columns of Freiheit for the period from late

 

1880 through July 1885 are literally full of articles
urging workers on to perform acts of "PrOpaganda by Deed."
Much of the information contained in these articles on

the production and deployment of bombs, explosives,
poison, knives and so forth were incorporated into a

seventy-four page book by Most entitled Revolutionflre

 

Kriegswissenschaft. Ein Handbfichlein zur Anleitugg‘

 

 

22"Justizmorderei," Freiheit, No.1“)(00t0berhw
1881+), pp. *1-2. A

23"Mord contra Mord," Ibid., No. 11(March 1h.
1885), p. 3. '

ZuIbid.

 

372
betreffend Gebrauches und Herstellung von Nitroglyzerin,
Dynamit, Schliessbaumwolle, Knallquecksilber,_Bomben,

Brandsatzen, Giften usw.25

 

Revolutionflre Kriegswissensohaft is both a handbook

 

and a do-it-yourself book for the person interested in "Pro-

paganda by Deed." One interesting aspect gives information
on how to burn down your own home to collect insurance and
donate it to the cause of anarchism. Most did his research

well on the writing of the book. In 188b, unknown to his

 

25Some ex mples of articles which appeared in Frei-

heit in the first half of 1885 are: "zur PrOpaganda der
That, " No. 1(January 3, 1885), p. 2; "Theorie und Praxis
der revolutionflren Kriegswissenschaft,” No. 3(January 17,
1885), p. 13 "Kriegswissenschaftliche Praxis," No. 8
(January 2A, 1885), p. 2; "Zittere Kanaille," No. h(Januar
2h, 188 5), p. 13 "Taktische Winke," No. h(January 2h, 1885),
pp. l-2; "Dynamit," No. 5(Januar 31,1885), pp. 1- 2;

Bomben," No. 6(February 7, 188 M) p. 3 "Stoff und Kraft,"
No. 7(February 11%, 1885), 2; "Spreng-Uebungen," No 8
(February 21, 85), pp. -23 "Einfache Chemie," No. 10

(March 10,1885), p. 2; "Mord contra Merd, " No. 11(March 14,

1885), p. 3 "Schliessbaumwolle und Nitrogelatin,“ No. 12
(March 21, 1885), pp. 1-23 "Knallquecksilber," No. 13

(March 28,1885), pp. 2- 3; "Kampf mit allen Mitt eln, " No. lb

(April h, 1885), p. 2; "weitere chemische Winke," No. 26
(June 27, 1885), p.23 Dynamit," No. 27(Ju1

"Der Prepaganda der That, No. 30(Ju1y 25, 1885) ), p. 13
.After this there is a marked change in Freiheit, as noted
in the previous chapter, the number of articles advocating
violence practically ceases.

Ironically Revolutionfire Kriegswissenschaft was
published at a time when Most was already starting to
doubt the usefulness of "Propaganda by Deed" as an in-
strument to bring about the social revolution. Although
She does not renounce "Propaganda by Deed, " Most's actions
and words in Freiheit point out that by the middle of 1885
Ice had.lost his confidence in violence. This facet of
Most's character was not brought out into the open, at the
time, even though many of his close friends suSpected it,
until Alexander Berkman's assassination attempt on the
Zlife of Henry Fricke in 1892.

 

 

 

1885), p. 1

o
’

373
friends, he took a job in an explosives factory in Jersey
City Heights where he received on the job training in the
production of explosives. More important, he was able
to steal dynamite wlich was more reliable than the home
made variety and, of course, cheaper. His object in
stealing the dynamite was to send it to Eurooe which he
quickly realized was for all practical purposes an im-
possible task, so he had to resort to his second plan
of action, to send instructions on the manufacture of
the "stuff" to Europe where it could be produced on the
spot. He Set about writing down in the columns of Egg;-
hgit, and later in book form, the knowledge he had acqui-
red both from.his practical on the job experience and
from various technical books dealing with explosives.
Even though detailed information was given in the book
on how to manvfacture explosives, Most advised against
it pointing out that it was safer to break into a factory
and steal factory produced dynamite or nitroglycerin
which was much more reliable. If possible the best way
to get the "stuff" was to purchase it. He went on into
elaborate details on how to make prOper use of eXplosives.
Also included in the book were chapters on; Revolutionary
Chemistry; Production of Invisible Ink; production of self-
igniting liquid compounds which could be used for starting
fires safely; the poisoning of bullets, nails, and daggers;
and various assorted hints about the placing of all kinds

of deadly chemicals in various delicacies which were to

371;
be served at the tables of the rich.

Freiheit was not the only German anarchist news-
paper venting its spleen on the issue of "Propaganda by
Deed." Der Rebell, which appeared in seventeen issues
from 1881-1886, proclaimed many times that it was better

to kill a tyrant than to give a thousand revolutionary

Speeches in parliament.26

A satisfactory discussion of the significance of
"Propaganda by Deed" in Germany is impossible without the
consideration of diverse elements which are only indirectly
concerned with the German scene. This has been amply de-
monstrated regarding the milieu in which the policy of
"Prepaganda by Deed" was adepted by the anarchists. Be-
fore proceeding with the implementation of "Propaganda by
Deed" in Germany it is necessary to sketch out the broad
outline of anarchist activities in Austria in the early
1880's. For several years in this period the activities
of the German and Austrian anarchists are so interwoven
that it is impossible to separate them.with any satis~
:factory results; the implementation of "PrOpaganda by Deed"
113 such a case. In order to make the situation in Germany.
Lumierstandable it is necessary to bring out the close co-
Operation that existed between the German and Austrian

anaiwfliists in Switzerland. This will necessitate bringing

 

26A complete discussion of Der Rebell and its place

ix) fine German anarchist movement will be taken up below in
reljrtion to the Bruderkrieg which breaks out in the movement.

 

 

375
into the picture a number of Austrian anarchists, but as
in the case of the Belgian anarchist Victor Dave, they
played an integral part in the development of the German
anarchist movement.

There was a strong connection between the workers
movement in Germany and Austria in the late 1870's. E331-
hgit_was well received in Austria although there too it
had to be distributed secretly. In Austria, as in Ger-
many, at the close of the decade of the 70's there was
a more radical element in the workers' movement rising

to challenge the moderates.27 In October 1879 Die Zukunft:

 

Zentralorgan der sozialdemokratischen Partei appeared as

 

the organ of the radical faction which had its largest
number of followers in the industrialized section of
Bohemia and in Vienna and Budapest.

When Josef Peukert(1855-1910) took over as editor
of Die Zukunft the radical movement was given a boost.
Peukert, an interior decorator by trade, was born Janu-
ary 22, 1855, in Albrechtsdorf bei Gablanz in Northern
Bohemia. As a young man, after finishing his apprentice-

ship, he went on his Wanderschaft in Germany where he be-

 

came imbued with the ideas of socialism. In 187&.he
returned to his home town and took over the control and

dissemination of socialist literature and ideas there.

 

27For more detailed information on the early move-
ment in Austria see: August Kreal, Zur Geschichte der Ar-
beiterbewegung 0esterreichs(Berlin, 189k)

 

 

376

He left home again in 1??? going to Metz, which was under
German rule at the time, where he remained only a short
time before traveling on to Bordeaux and Paris. While
he was in France he learned the French language well
enough to take part in the socialist movement in that
country. When he left home in 1877 Peukert was a Social
Democrat, but as he observed the Split taking place in
the German movement he sided with the Freiheit grOUp
against the Social Democrats. In Bordeaux he made plans
to enter Spain to familiarize himself with the tactics
employed by the revolutionaries in that country, but at
this juncture the French expelled around twenty social
revolutionaries from Paris, and he was called upon by
Most to go to Paris to undértake the reorganization of
the group there. This was an important assignment, for
Paris was a dissemination point for the smuggling of
Freiheit into Germany.

In Paris Peukert became acquainted with Otto
Rinke and worked in close collaboration with the French
communist-anarchist Emil Gautiers who is credited with
converting him to cormunist-anarchism. In July 1881,
Peukert was a delegate at the International Congress held
in London, representing the German groups in Switzerland.
After the completion of the congress he traveled to the
continent to work in the movement and working under Neve's
orders he smuggled Freiheit from Switzerland into Baden

and Bavaria in Germany and into Austria, traveling under

.1

’0
c2

.axv

.v‘H V

be
R

377

the alias of Schaufer't.2R Before long his activities
came to the attention of the Austrian police and he was
apprehended and detained for three months, but finally
had to be freed when they were unable to prove that he
had violated any law. Upon his release from prison he
returned to his home town in Bohenit for the purpose of
obtaining a passport which would enable him to return to
'Vienna. Arriving once again in Vienna he quickly put his
talents as a speaker to use stirring up audiences and be-
fore long began to play an important role in the radical
movement in Vienna. Peukdrt was an anarchist, but during
the entire period he worked in Austria he never openly
used the word anarchism. He was anti-parliamentary,
worked to establidh small secret cells, and to put into
action the policy of "Propaganda by Deed." At this time
there was a tendency to draw a parallel between the poli-
tical conditions in Russia and those in the Austro-Hungarian
Empire, concluding that the revolutionary activities being
employed in Russia should be used in Austria. The deeds
of the Russian terrorists which had captured the imagination
of the London Congress, held out a certain fascination for
anarchists world wide, and especially those in Austria.

In 1882 two members of the Radical Party, Josef

Engel and Franz Pfeger, committed the robbery-murder of

 

28

Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Prolitariers aus der
Revolutionflren Arbeiterbewegung, p. 75.

378
the shoe manufacturer Josef Merstallinger, using chloro-
form, but only succeeded in bbtaining a few hundred Kroner
which the victim.had on him. The upshot of the murder was
the arrest of Johann Richter who was subsequently senten—
ced to twelve years at hard labor because he had printed
fifty thousand copies of a leaflet which the police had
been able to seize before he could distribute a single
copy. The Radical Party now took on a new image as a
party of robbers and murderers and were Openly opposed by
the moderate faction of the Social Democratic Party. Seven
months passed before the robbery-murder trial of Engel and
Pfeger took place on March 9, 1883, and lasted until March 23.
Both of the defendants were sentenced to fifteen years each
at hard labor. A colleague of Pfeger named Berndt, who had
acted as the crown witness, received two years in prison.
It was also demonstrated at the trial that the Radical
Party as an organization was not connected with the crime.
As a member of the Radical Party, Peukert was charged
along with the party itself, as being an accomplice in
the crime of Engel and Pfeger. Peukert was the only mem-
ber of the Radical Party who availed himself of the oppor-
tunity to speak at the trial and he delivered a long and
eloquent speech on the treacherous manner in which the
trial had been conducted. The conclusion of the trial
marked the end of the Radical Party as a party; it now

became transformed into a group bent on a policy of

379
terrorism.29
After the trial the crescendo of violence was

stepped up in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was
followed immediately by the arrest of hundreds of radi-
cals and the censoring of the radical press. Prison
sentences of fifteen months were given out to those who
demonstrated, protesting the more stringent measures handed
down by the government against the radicals.

In April 1883 the shoemakers union in Vienna had
its treasury seized by the police who claimed that the
union leaders were participants in radical actions. The
workers gathered in front of their union hall to protest
What they considered to be an illegal act on the part of
the police. The government tried to break up the demon-
stration with peaceful methods, but when these failed
they called in cavalry to restore peace. Finally the
treasury was returned to the union and the laws which
the government had enacted against the unions were annulled.

This was followed by a large workers' demonstration
on the Schottenring in Vienna protesting police practices
and methods which the workers considered to be arbitrary,
capricious, and even brutal, especially in regard to the
imprisonment of workers. A bloody clash resulted between

the police and the workers and it was necessary to call

in the military to restore order. Many of the demonstrators

 

29Rocker, Johann Mbst, pp. 179-180.

 

380
were sentenced to the customary fifteen months in prison.
It was in this atmosphere, of violent confrontation
between workers and police, that the "Propaganda by Deed"
finally captured the minds of the workers, who were now
more willing to turn to conspiratorial methods and secret
organizations. They were of the opinion that the in-
effectiveness of legal methods of protest, which could
easily be broken up by police, had been amply demonstrated
and it was time to move on to different and more violent
tactics.

A secret meeting of the German-Speaking anarchist
groups was held in St. Gallen in August 1883. The con-
ferees came out in favor of the small group and against
the idea of a large international organization, deciding
that the small group would be less difficult for the po-
lice spies to infiltrate. They also resolved to promote
the spread of anarchist propaganda in Germany and Austria
and in their struggle against the ruling class to employ
all possible methods and all available weapons, admonishing
the peasants in their huts and the workers in the factories
to join together into groups of two or three peOple,
telling them that two people working together secretly
could accomplish that which a thousand men working in
the open could not. Small secret meetings were to be
the order of the day in the cities of Germany and Austria.
They declared that every movement which attempted to

cultivate the state in any form was their avowdd enemy.

381
They stated dogmatically that they could never hope to
win the struggle against the state unless they employed
all methods at their disposal in the struggle.

The meeting in St. Gallen was highly significant;
there the most violent anarchist crimes of the next few
years were planned. What transpired at the conference
was known to the authorities because at least two of those
present,Schr8der and Kaufmann, were in the pay of the Befifin
police. Also attending this conference were several anar-
chists who would soon undertake a series of anarchist
crimes which would shock and outrage the entire world,
Hermann Stellmacher, Anton Kammerer, and Michael Kumics.
Although the Berlin police were aware of what was going
to happen they did nothing to stop these heinous crimes.
Evidently the German government was more interested in
the propaganda value than in protecting the innocent vic-
tims of the crimes.30

Soon after the meeting in Switzerland a series
of violent acts occurred, which were precipitated by anar-
chists who had attended the St. Gallen conference, which
shocked even those in the workers' movement for whose be-
nefit they supposedly had been committed. On October 22,
1883, the pharmacist Lienhard was murdered in Strassburg.

During the same evening that this murder took place, a

 

3OFor accounts of the meeting in Switzerland see:
Ernst, Polizeispitzeleien und Ausnahmegesetze 1878-1890,
pp. 19-22; Rocker, Johann Most, pp. 198-220; Freiheit,
No. 35(September l, 1883).

382
soldier named Adels, who was on guard duty, was severely
beaten and left for dead. Before he died he related that
he had been attacked by four unknown assailants. In
Stuttgart on November 23 of the same year the robbery-
murder of the banker Heilbronner occurred. Three men
entered the bank about six in the afternoon. Heilbronner
was alone except for an acquaintance with whom he had
been talking.' Both men were beaten about the head with
severe blows; Heilbronner dying and his friend receiving
a severe skull fracture. The robbers seized some gold
and bonds and fled.

A short time after this Michael Humics was arrested
and charged with the murders in Strassburg and Stuttgart.
In Switzerland Kumics had been active in an anarchist group
in St. Gallen and had taken part in the smuggling of anar-
chist literature into Germany. He had also taken part in
the St. Gallen meeting held in August. The evidence against
him was overwhelming. It was demonstrated beyond a shadow
of doubt that he was one of the people responsible for the
crimes in Strassburg and Stuttgart. Police were able to
implicate Kumics in the cashing of bonds which.had been
stolen at Stuttgart. The funds received from the bonds
had been used for the promoting of anarchism so the robbery-
murder had a two fold purpose, to strike fear into the
hearts of the bourgeois, and to obtain money needed to

finance the propagation of anarchist ideas.

383

On December 15, 1883, Vienna Police Commissioner
Hlubek was shot. He had attended a workers meeting in
Florisdorf, an industrial suburb of Vienna; on his way
home he was followed by several men who had taken part
in the meeting, 31110118 whom were Johann Ondra, and Ferdinand
Schaffhauser, both members of the Radical Party. As
Hlubek approached a crossroad a shot rang out from the
darkness and the police commissioner fell dead, with
the assailant fleeing into the night. It was clear that
neither Ondra nor Schaffhauser had anything to do with
the murder, but nevertheless they were apprehended by the
police and after months of investigation were brought to
trial. At the conclusion of the trial Schaffhauser was
given a sentence of two years and Ondra was set free.

Even though the police had not been able to establish the
identity of the murderer they set out on a relentless
persecution of the Radical Party.

Goaded by the mounting evidence that the murders
in Strassburg, Stuttgart, and Vienna had been committed
by anarchists who had lived in Switzerland, Swiss authori-
ties started to move against the anarchists. This is im-
portant because the anarchist groups had been using
Switzerland as a base of Operations to smuggle prOpaganda
into Germany and Austria. The German and Austrian anar-
chists had also used Switzerland as a place where congresses
could be held and where future deeds to be carried out in

Germany and Austria could be planned in relative safety.

381+
Late in 1883 Swiss officials made a feeble effort against
the anarchists by searching a number of homes of known
anarchists, seizing letters and quantities of printed
literature. Public opinion in Switzerland became outraged
concerning anarc ist activities. Realizing that the
anarchists posed an immediate threat to Switzerland it-
self, Swiss officials, for all practical purposes, were
soon going to close down completely anarchist operations
in Switzerland. This will be discussed below in this
chapter.

Naturally the bourgeois press made great cOpy out
of the atrocious acts committed in StrassburgsStuttgart,
and Vienna. The Social Democratic Party did everything in
its power to demonstrate that they were in opposition to

such acts of violence. Peukert, editor of Die Zukunft,

 

was denounced by the moderate faction of the Social Demo-
cratic Party in Austria and held responsible for the
crimes which had been committed.

The most outrageous of the series of anarchist
crimes occurred on January 10, 188M, in Vienna, after
which not many Austrian workers had much stomach left for
“PrOpaganda by Dead." At five-thirty on the afternoon of
January 10 two men entered a home at No. 55 Mariahilferstrasse,
which was also the place of business of the money changer
Heinrich Eisert, saying that they wanted to exchange some
Russian Rubles. When Eisert turned around to assist them

they threw sand into his eyes and hit him on the head

385
with a heavy blow, but Eisert was only stunned by the blow
and tried to flee, but one of the assailants caught up with
him on the stairway and hit him in the head with an axe,
inflicting such damage that he died twelve days later.
While this was going on, in a neighboring room, which was
separated from the place of business by only a glass wall,
sat Eisert's two sons who were nine and eleven years old
respectively and their French tutor, sixty—five year old
Karolina Berger, observing all that had taken place. One
of the assailants, not wanting to leave any witnesses to
their nefarious deed, went into the room.and beat in the
heads of the three with an axe. The nine year old died
immediately, the eleven year old died fourteen days later,
but Karolina Berger later recovered from her wounds.

In addition to the two men inside the place of
business a third man had remained outside, acting as a
look out. Once the murders were committed, he came in-
side and assisted the other two in picking up all the
money they could find, in all about 3,755 Gulder in gold,
and k,OOO Gulder in bonds.

A month later in Budapest, a young houseboy was
apprehended while trying to pass one of the bonds stolen
in the robbery. He informed the police that he had pur-
chased the bond from a twenty year old bookkeeper Jonas
Julius Fried, a precocious young man who had already
traveled through Russia and the United States. Fried was

a member of the Radical Party in Budapest. The police

386
questioned him and shortly afterward picked up sixteen
more members of the radical circle in Budapest. Invas-
tigation showed that Fried had obtained the bonds from
Hermann Prager, editor of the Budapest newspaper Dig
Radikale. Prager told police he had gotten the bonds
from a man named Koditek, who related that the bonds had
been sent to him, wrapped in newspaper, from an unknown
person in Vienna. Later it was revealed that the anomy-
mous sender was Anton Kammerer. The bonds were sent to
Budapest to aid the families of members of the Radical
Party who had been imprisoned and also to assist in the

financing of Die Radikale.

 

Fried was a bookkeeper in a bank and Pragar had
entrusted him with the job of cashing the bonds. It
appears that Fried was aware that the bonds had come from
Kammerer, and that Koditek was telling the truth when he
said he did not know who had sent them to him, because
Koditek wrote to Peukert asking if he had sent them,
but Peukert replied that he had no knowledge of any bonds.

The next in the series of anarchist crimes occurred
between seven and eight o'clock on the morning of January 25,
188h, when the police agent B18ch was shot as he walked
to police headquarters past a stone quarry situated be-
tween Mflhlschflttel and Florisdorf. The assailant went
through Bchhs pockets, taking his notebook, revolver and
watch. A number of men who had seen the shooting ran

after the assailant who fled into the stone quarry where

387

some men were at work. When the assailant saw that the
men had him cornered on all sides he shot and wounded one
of the workers named Teloun in the foot, but to no avail
for the superior number of men seized and overpowered him
and turned him over to the police. A police search of the
assailant's pockets produced a matal-box-bomb which con-
tained two and one half kilograms of dynamite which was
not fused. In his coat pockets, in addition to the bomb,
he had two revolvers, a quantity of ammunition, a knife,
and two bottles filled with a liguid used to apply and to

remove a false beard.31

At ibis arraignment the assailant said he had
killed Bchh in the interest of anarchism because of what
the police had done to the families of many workers. The
Vienna police were unable to identify the assailant until
the police in Dresden sent a picture which identified him-
as Hermann Stellmacher(l8SS-188h). Soon the Swiss police
sent information on Stellmacher's activities in Zurich as
editor of Freiheit. At the same time the Swiss police sent
information that Anton Kammerar(186l-188h) was a very close
friend of Stellmacher and that Kammarer had been using a
passport with the name of Arnold Otter, deceased brother
of the anarchist Victor Otter.

A police net was set for Kammerer and on February 28,

 

31Langhard, Die anarchistische Bewegung in der
Schwaiz von ihre Aanhgen bis zur Gagenwart, p. 273.

fly

388

188h; he was seized by police, as he was about to enter
Austria, but it was not an easy matter to subdue him.for
Kammerer was young and strong and fought desperately,
wounding three policemen with his revolver before they
were finally able to hold.him down. While he was lying
on the floor and as the policemen were tying him he was
able to get off one more shot which struck the man knee-
ling on his chest in the thigh. On his person Kammerer
had, in addition to the revolver, a file sharpened to a
point and two kilograms of dynamite and some fuses.32

At the time of his arrest Stellmacher was thirty
years old. He was a married man and had two children ages
four and eighteen months. By trade he was a shoemaker and
had been born in Grottkau, Regierungsbezirk, Oppeln in
Prussian Silesia. He had served with distinction in the
military, achieving the status of a non-commissioned
officer, but was accused of abusive treatment of subor-
dinates and was punished for this. In Switzerland he
lived in Vevey where he served forty-five days in prison
and loss of civil rights for five years when he was found
guilty of swindling. In Vevey he was a member of the

Arbeiterverein but was thrown out because of his anarchist

 

tendencies. His last place of residence in Switzerland

was Flunters bei Zurich, Zfirichbergstrasse l2.

 

322212;, P- 272; Rocker, Johann MOst, pp. 185-

 

188.

389

Those who knew Stellmacher during the three years
he lived in Switzerland said he was an impudent and brutal
man. A friend of Rudolf Rocker's described Stellmacher as
an austere and reserved person who gave little outward in-
dication of his inner thoughts and feelings. Stellmacher
was very obstinate, dogmatic and easily incited to acts
of violence. He once threw a writer for Der Sozialdemokrat
into a lake by Zurich for writing an article which depicted
the anarchists in a bad light. On the other hand he was
also capable of acts of great self—sacrifice and gave him-
self ogenly to his associates, who for the most partcfid
not personally like him. Stellmacher spent very little
time at home with his wife, who was from Bern, but was
usually gone from morning until evening. When he was home
he shut himself up in his own room which was filled with
anarchist and socialist newspapers. He was unable to read
French so his wife had to translate the French papers into
(Eerman for him. He also held secret conferences at his
Ihome which were attended by his German comrades and which
lasted until late into the night.33

Some socialists have attempted, without success,
to prove that Stellmacher was a police spy. Evidence exists

to prove that Stellmacher tried to obtain a position as a

 

33Langhard, Die anarchistische Beweggng in der
Schweiz von ihre Angghgen bis zur Gegenwart, p. 26h; Rocker,
Johann Most, pp. 189-19Of—FHermann Stellmacher," Freiheit,
No. 12(March 22, 1881;), p. 1. ‘ ____..___

390
police spy, but he claimed that he only wanted to in-
filtrate the police organization. Late in 1882 or early
1883 Stellmacher wrote two letters to A. Knltenbach,
Police Chief in Mfilhausen, offering his services as a
spy. He offered to send copies of Der Sozialdemokrat
as they were printed and to turn in certain unnamed
people who were distributing literature in Germany. On
January 13, 1883, he wrote to the Austro-Hungarian Minister
in Bern, Baron von Ottenfels offering his services as a
spy. He said he would give the name of an Austrian who
had worked as an editor for Freiheit during the period
July 8 to August 12, 1882. He also related that he would
reveal the names of the individuals who were involved in
the operation of smuggling Freiheit into Austria, including

the routes they were using. In addition he would send

copies of Der Sozialdemokrat as soon as they were printed,

 

and would also give him a list of names of the peOple who
'were involved in smuggling it to Austria as well as the
route they were using. In a post script to the letter

118 cautioned Baron von Ottenfels not to send his reply in
van envelope bearing the ministerial seal because it would
gxrove to be very embarrassing to him. Stellmacher evidently
tfiuought his military service would demonstrate to von Otten-
fmfils his sincerity so he signed the letter: H. Stellmacher,

Cormhonnier. Res. - Unteroffizier d. Sachs. 2. Grenadierre-

391

giments lOl.3h

Later at his trial Stellmacher did not offer any
explanation for these three letters. The logical expla-
nation is that Stellmacher was probably sincere in his
attempts at seeking a position as a police spy. The
letters were written only a couple of weeks after Most
had dumped him as editor of Freiheit and moved the paper
to New York, a move which had been strenuously opposed
by Stellmacher, Stellmacher appears to have been bitter
over this rejection and sought revenge. To support his
family he needed money, which was no longer coming in
once he lost his position as editor of Freiheit. There is
no evidence to indicate that either Kaltenbach or Ottenfels
ever considered Stellmacher's offer. On the other hand
perhaps Stellmacher's offer was not sincere, but only an
attempt to obtain some quick money, while giving out as
little information as possible. If his offer was sincere,
it appears that it was rejected, and if this is the case
it could have had the effect of increasing his bitterness
against the bourgeois and aristocratic elements of society
who were his original enemies. Whatever his intentions,
along with Anton Kammerer, he went on a spree of vicious
murders.

Anton Kammerer was born in Florisdorf bei Vienna

in 1861. On December 31, 1882, he received the news that

 

BuLanghard, Die anarchistische Bewegpng_in der
Schweiz von ihre Anfghgen bis zur Gegenwart, pp. 265L267.

 

392

he had been assigned to the infantry regiment commanded
by Freiherr von Bauer. He was scheduled to go on active
duty on April 1, 1883, but before the date came to report
he fled to Switzerland as a result of socialist activities
in which he had been involved in Korneuburg. Several
weeks passed and he did not report for military service,
so on Nbrch 26, 1883, Kammerer's name was added to the
list of regimental deserters.

In Switzerland he worked as a book binder, first
in Thun and later in Bern. In Bern he soon associated him-
self with an anarchist group and was involved, among other
things, in the smuggling of Freiheit into Germany and Austria.
Kammerer was the ideal type of person to carry out acts of
terrorism; he was imbued with boundless energy, a strong
physique, and a bitter hatred of society. A friend of Ru-
dolf Rocker, who knew Kammerer, described him as young,
fanatical and unusually bold. He had. amild nature and was
'very'helpful, often being so generous that he gave away
whatever he had until he himself was left in need.35

Accompanied by several friends in October 1883 he
Ileft Bern for Mfllhausen to kill the Police Chief Kalten-
bacbu When that proved impossible, they went to Strassburg
vfldere on October 22, 1883, they killed the pharmacist Lien-
tuxrd and the soldier Adels. On November 21, 1883, they mur—

<kared.the banker Heilbronner in the city of Stuttgart.

 

3SRocker, Johann Mbst, pp. 189-190.

393

One of those traveling with Kammerer on this trip
was Michael Kumics, a cabinet maker from Czernich, Slavonia,
who had arrived in St. Gallen in May 1883. He immediately
joined an anarchist group and worked to smuggle anarchist
literature into Austria. Like Kammerer, Kumics fell under
the Spell of the more eXperienced Stellmacher who actually
planned the aborted murder of Kaltenbach and the subsequent
crimes in Strassburg, Stuttgart, and Vienna. An unnamed
friend of Rudolf Rocker, who was acquainted with the two
men, said that Hammerer and Kumics thought of anarchism
as a stateless society, but that its deeper significance

escaped them.

For the most part Kammerer and Kumics associated

36

anarchism with acts of terror and violence. Kammerer was

a true believer in the cause of "PrOpaganda by Deed." In
a letter written shortly before his attempt on Hlubek he
'wrote: "I will not rest until the last decadent stone of
the capitalist society is smashed by the blows of the
social revolution. Send me money as soon as possible; it
'will.be the last time I will ask for money because I am
gyoing to sacrifice my life, and for this need the aid."37
After the murder of Hlubek, Kammerer stOpped at

thsalnome of Josef Peukert in Vienna, asking Peukert to

 

36Ibid.

37"Ein Mann der That," Freiheit, No. h0(0ctober A,
18814.), p0 20 '

391+.
send a message to his parents. He related to Peukert that
he was responsible for the acts in Strassburg and Stuttgart
but that Stellmacher had planned them. Peukert claims in
his memoirs that he convinced Kammerer that such acts were
unfortunate for the cause of the anarchist movement. Kem-
merer, according to Peukert, related that he was in Vienna
waiting to meet Stellmacher in order to carry out further
acts of violence. When Peukert brought out the fact that
such acts could be injurious to anarchism, Kammerer sugges-
ted that perhaps, he, Peukert, should meet with Stellmacher
and talk about scaling down the violence. Peukert claims
that Stellmacher did not want to see him. A friend of
Peukert supposedly told him.that Stellmacher had said
that he would not be influenced by anyone in his actions
and deeds and especially Peukert. According to the story
Stellmacher was supposed to have told Peukert's friend
that Peukert was a "chatterer who was afraid to take part
in such acts" and what is more Peukert was "tea authori-
tarian" and ac Stellmacher refused to meet with Peukert
and talk about diminishing the violence.38 This story by
Peukert, that he was able to raise a doubt in Kammerer's
Inind about the effectiveness of "PrOpaganda by Dead," is
of course unsubstantiated, but it is possible that Peukert
could see the adverse effect that such crimes were having

on the anarchist movement. Peukert was basically an

 

38Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Prolitariers aus
der Revolutionfiren Arbeiterbewegung, pp. 183-186.

 

39S
intellectual, a speaker, and a writer and not an assassin.
If he had Kammerer alone for a while, being older and more
eloquent, perhaps he was able to convince Kammerer that
too much violence was not a good image for the movement.
On the other hand evidence will be introduced below to
show that Peukert, some time after this meeting with
Kammerer, was himself advocating "PrOpaganda by Deed."

Kammerer and Stellmacher were captured, tried,
and executed. Since Kammerer was considered to be a
military deserter he was tried by a military court. He
openly admitted killing Hlubek by himself, but said he
only shared in the crimes committed in Strassburg and
Stuttgart and in the Eisert murders. He was found guilty
and was hanged September 20, lEEH.

Stellmacher, at his trial, never lost his com-
posure even when the letters were introduced in which he
offered his services as a spy to Kaltenbach and Ottenfels.
.He, too, was found guilty and met his fate, by hanging,
‘with.quiet dignity at five o'clock on the morning of
.August 6, 188u.39

A great effort was made by Most to glorify Kammerer
ennd Stellmacher, calling them martyrs of the social revo-
Ithion. Most said that their deaths would be avenged by

atggeneral blood letting. The occasions of the executions

 

39For a complete account of the Stellmacher trial
sens: Prozess gegen den Anarchisten Hermann Stellmacher
(Vienna,]fi8§T.

396

of Stellmacher and Kammerer were accompanied by large
demonstrations of anarchists, especially in New York
City, but also in some cities in Europe. In an eulogy
delivered by Most in New York, he said that if he had
one thousand Stellmachers the social revolution would
be accomplished in three months.”0

The radical movement in Austria never recovered
from the acts of Stellmacher and Kammerer. The movement
was shattered because its leaders were either in jail or
exile. The violent crimes committed in Vienna resulted
in a severe repression of the radicals. On January 30,
188h, an exceptional law was passed which forbade all
meetings by the radicals and made all radical organizations
illegal. Radical presses were closed down and about five
hundred radicals, most of them family men, were forced to
leave Vienna; hundreds of others were arrested. Those
fortunate enough to be faced only with expulsion from
Vienna went to other parts of Austria, Switzerland, France,
England, and the United States. A ministerial decree de-
clared that henceforth all anarchist crimes would be tried
before a special tribunal. This decree was followed by a
number of treason trials in which the defendents were
given long terms of imprisonment. The radical organization

in Austria was not eliminated but what remained of it was

 

uO"Zum Gedfichtnis an den topferen opfermfitigen
Genossen Hermann Stellmacher," Freiheit, No. 33(August 16,
lEBh), p. 1; "Anton Kammerer,” Ibid., No. 39(September 27,
188k), p. l. -

397
infiltrated by police spies. For all practical purposes
anarchism in Austria was suppressed. The excess of
violence on the part of a few had caused such a general
feeling of outrage among the people that the government
had moved quickly to end the movement in Austria.

The policy of "Propaganda by Dead" soon made it—
self felt in Switzerland, but a police crack-down there
dealt a severe blow to the German anarchist movement.
Berlin Police President von Madai noted what was becoming
apparent to Swiss officials - that all of the anarchists
involved in the acts Of terror had spent some time in
Switzerland, often using the country as a haven for rest,

recuperation, and planning between acts of terrorism.1L1

The movement by the Swiss Bundesrat against the
anarchists started on March 22, 188h, with the expulsion
ofga number of noted anarchists. The initial expulsion
came as the result of a meeting of a Freiheit group which
took place February 1h, 188h in Zurich. The theme of this
meeting was the recent crack-down in Austria against the
anarchists. Peukert Spoke out at the meeting glorifying
Stellmacher saying that acts such as his would hasten the

day of the social revolution. He went on to point out

 

ulBrandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
IBr. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vol. II
(13,088), Folders 350-353. For an interesting article on
the anarchist operations in Switzerland see: Die Sozialis—
ten und Anarchisten in der Schweiz," Die Gegenwart, wochen-
sdhrift ffir Literatur, Kunst und Bffentliches Leben, XXV,
$13. 12(March 22, 18810, 177-180. -

 

398

that thanks to dynamite they were now able to kill thou-
sands with a single blow and could even paralyze an entire
artillery regiment. The compositor Mpritz Schultze
(B. 1860 Gottbus in Prussia) at this meeting said it was
necessary to use all possible means to spread the anar-
chist movement.h

Sufficient numbers of German anarchists were ex-
pelled from Switzerland in 188h and 1885 so that Switzer-
land could no longer be used as a route for smuggling .
Freiheit and Rebell into Germany and Austria. The anar-
chist cells which had been formed around 1880 in Switzer-
land for the smuggling of Freiheit were broken up, as was
the Jura Federation itself. Le Revolté left the country
for Paris where it published its first issue in that city
On April 12, 1885. Anarchists who tried to enter Switzer-
land were detained for questioning and subsequently shipped
out of the country. Not all anarchists were forced to
leave Switzerland, but a sufficient number of the leaders

and rank-and-file followers had to leave so that Switzerland

 

halt should be pointed out that the Bundesrat ex-
‘pelled undesirables from Switzerland before this, but star-
ting with 188h a determined effort was made to cleanse the
country of the leadership of the German and Austrian anar-
chist movements. For a list of those expelled see: Langhard,
iDie Abarchistische Bewegung in der Schweiz von ihren Anffin-
ggen bis zur Gegenwart, pp. h72-fl73. For an account offthe
Jneeting onFebruary 16 see: Neue Zuricher Zeitung(February l9,
1188h). Some of the important German anarchists expelled
in 188h were: Moritz Schultze, the tinsmith Friedrich Philipp
IKennel(B. 1852 Schwegenheim, Rheinbayern) and a close friend
’cxf Most, John Nave, the brazier Peter Hauser(b. 1859 Tutt-
Ilingeny Wfirttenburg), and Karl Schultze(b. 1852 Gottbus,
Prussia).

 

399

could no longer be considered a refuge for anarchists.

1&3

Another dimension of the crack-down on the anar-
chists was the amount of cooperation between the police
in Switzerland and other nations. International police
COOperation, especially between Germany, Austria and Russia
in matters relating to anarchism started in the late 1870's.
With the series of violent crimes in 1883-188h the Swiss
police became more cooperative; it was obvious to them
that violence planned in Switzerland could just as easily
be carried out there as in Germany or Austria. The police
official in Berlin, Gustav von Hake, who after 1885 became
Police Chief of Frankfurt a.M., worked in close cooperation
with the Swiss Procurator-General, Eduard MBller, who was
responsible for the expulsion of anarchists from.Switzer-
land. Of course the guiding hand behind von Hake was
Bismarck.hu

The soundness of the new Swiss policy against
anarchists was demonstrated in the summer of 188k when an
anarchist congress met in St. Gallen. The main tOpic dis-

cussed at this congress was the smuggling of anarchist

 

u3For the treatment accorded German anarchists
Who tried to enter Switzerland after this see: Staatsarchiv
Ludwigsburg, F. 201, Stadtdirektion Stuttgart, 632-633,
WAnarchisten 1885-1898," Folders 1-82. Two accounts of
the suppression of the anarchists in Switzerland are: "Ge-
gen die Anarchisten,“ wochenblatt der Frankfurter Zeitung,
iNo. 11(March 15, 1885), 82-83; 1"Die Schweiz und die Anar-
dhisten," Ibid., No. 26(April 26, 1885), 132.

h4Fricke, Bismarcks Praetorianer, pp. l6b-l72.

hOO

literature into Germany and Austria. This congress was
well attended by the Germans but more importantly it was
attended by the Hungarian shoemaker Karl Halbedl(b. 18h7),
who had already set up a laboratory in Switzerland and
was producing explosives. This was the first such labo-
ratory in Switzerland. The ramifications such a laboratory
could have on the international status of Switzerland were
of course evident to the SwissolLS

Naturally the new Swiss policy of expulsion was
not well received in the anarchist quarter; it could be
expected that a disgruntled anarchist would soon resort
to the use of "PrOpaganda by deed" in Switzerland. And
so it happened-that on January 25, 1885, the President
of the Federal Assembly, Schenk of Bern, received a mys-
terious letter announcing a plan to blow up the Federal
Palace while the Federal Assembly was in session. The
anonymous writer of this letter revealed that seventeen
Inen were prepared to carry out the plan and that they
Ihad.in their possession enough dynamite to raze all of
iBern to the ground. The writer said that the explosives
Ihad.already been put in position in the Federal Palace
and could be set off when an order was given. Furthermore
as a.sequel.to blowing up the Palace, von Madai in Berlin,

axui a number of police officials in Hamburg were going

 

”SLanghard, Die anarchistische Bewegung in der
Schwe iz , pp . 303-301;.

kOI
to be murdered. In all, four such threatening letters
were sent during the period of January 25 to MarCh 13,
1885. The first letter came from St. Gallen while the
others were postmarked Frauenfeld and Winterthur. It was
unknown to Swiss officials whether these letters pointed
to the existence of a real plot or whether they were the
work of a crank. They had to work on the assumption that
a plot was in the making for a number of dynamitings had
already taken place in Europe and it would have been
gross negligence on their part if they had not taken
the threat seriously. Swiss officials proceeded to
round up and question all known anarchists; homes of
suspicious people were searched, but nothing was turned
up on the alleged plot to blow up the Federal Palace.
Naturally Freiheit had to get involved with a statement
of over-kill by saying that they "would blow up the Palace

and sow the land on which it stood with salt."u6

An extensive investigation of the alleged plot
was undertaken by the Procurator-General, Mfiller. The
results of his preliminary investigation completed on
Pbrch 25 tended to point in the direction of a real plot,
but he had no idea who had sent the letters, or who was

involved in the plot. It was only by accident that the

h.

uéFreiheit, No. 8(February 21, 1885), p. 3; Eg-
szht fiber die Untersuchung betreffend die anarchistischen
Emtriebe in der Schweiz an den hohen Bundesrath. Eidgenos-

ggpschaft erstatter durch Bundesrat Eduard MUllerIBern,
1555). pp. 66:69. a

 

hOZ
identity of the writer of the anonymous letters was dis-
covered. On November 13, 188h, a young man named Wilhelm
Huff(1858-1885) had been arrested in St. Gallen for alle-
gedly stealing a pair of shoes in the thrin hotel. When
this charge could not be proved he was set free after
being detained for twelve hours. At the time it was the
custom in some of the Swiss cantons to grant a person, who
had been imprisoned on a charge that could not be proven,
an indemnity. Huff, however, had used the name of von
Strauss in registering at the hotel and in using the alias
automatically forfeited his right to the usual allowance.
He wrote several violent letters to local officials deman-
ding payment of the fifty francs which he claimed they
owed him, Which the police steadfastly refused to do.
fihfortunately for Huff the police kept the letters he had
written, and when Muller began his investigation facsimiles
of the letters, threatening to blow up the Federal Palace,
were circulated among the police agencies and Herr Maggion,
Commandant of the Police in St. Gallen, to whom.Huff had
addressed.his letters demanding payment of the indemnity,
identified the handwriting as that belonging to Huff. Hand-
writing experts soon corroborated the claims of Maggion,
and Huff was arrested on March 31 in Heiden. He immediately
repudiated the charge of writing the letters threatening
to blow up the Federal Palace, but his answers were contra-
diCtory and he was already considered to baa suspicious

person, so he was remitted to prison pending further

LL03

inquiry.u7

The Swiss authorities knew very little about Huff
so MUller contacted the German police who sent the follo-
wing-information on him. He was born in Freiburg in
Breisgau in 1858 and had received a solid elementary
education. In 1873 he went to Schopfheim, in the Duchy
of Baden, to learn the trade of hairdressing. After an
eighteen month period of learning the trade he took a job
in Ludwigsburg, where he remained for a year and a half,
before traveling on to Tfibingen where he stayed fourteen
months. Then, with the money he had saved from these
two jobs, he traveled through Northern Germany, Southern
Russia, Sweden, England, France and Switzerland. In
1877 he went to Switzerland and worked in a series of
places: Rastatt, Basel, St. Immer, Lausanne, Geneva, Bern,
Bad Schinznach, Rorschach, then back to Bad Schinznach,
and back to Rorschach, before going to St. Gallen, and to
Heiden where he was arrested}L8

Huff was well educated and fluent in several
languages. He also wrote well and intelligently using
the pen name von Strauss and published contributions in
magazines for hairdressers, Friseur(Leipzig), and the

Egue Coiffeur. On political subjects he wrote articles

_—

u7Ibido, pp. 77-119. 130'1350
LLBIbido ’ pp. 125‘126 o

LL01;

which appeared in Wellander, Rorschacherboten, Ostschweize-

 

 

rische wochenblatt, St. Gallen Volksblatt, Volkszeitung(Zu-

 

 

rich), and the Unterhaltungsblatt(Rorschach).ug

 

He also told different people various stories
about his early life ranging from picturing himself as a
student, a seminarian, a teacher in Baden who had lost
his position because of his views, to being a Doctor of
Philosophy, which he had told his girl friend Emilie.
At the same time he carried on a correspondence with
five or six different girls, promising his sole love to
each of them. His letters were in a very correct, pre-
tentious literary style, interSpersed with poetry, Latin
quotations, and nice phrases designed to appeal to the
feminine heart. In his letters he seemed more interested

SO

in vaunting his learning than in proving his love.

The investigation of Huff was concluded on May 13,
when he declared that he had not written the threatening
letters regarding the plan to blow up the Federal Palace.
He was then sent back to his cell, but half an hour later
the judge wanted to confront him with additional evidence
presented by another anarchist. A jailer was sent to his
cell to get him and found him dead; he had.hanged himself

On the door of the cell, which led many people at the time

_—

u9Ibid., pp. 126-127.

5°1b1d., pp. 128-130.

LL05

to believe that he probably knew much more than he had
mdmitted.51

MHller's investigation pointed out the danger that
unchecked anarchism could have for Switzerland. 0n the
other hand he found that the greater share of the workers
were repulsed by "PrOpaganda by Dead" and Mostian tactics,
and that some had even left the anarchist movement as a
result of these differences. The number of people who
favored Most and the violent tactics was declining rapidly.
MHller wisely did not recommend the complete suppression

of Freiheit, R5voite, or Rebell, because he said if they

 

were forbidden other titles would soon take their place.
He also said that it would be impossible to keep anarchist
newspapers from cirdulating in Switzerland unless they re-
sorted to a complete search of the mails which would be
very costly and time consuming and which would require
numerous additional policemen. What Mflller did Oppose

was the violence of the anarchists. Switzerland, he said,
would no longer be a haven for murderers, robbers, dynami-
ters, bombers, or for people who wanted to use it as a
base from which the dissemination of anarchist prOpaganda

could be sent into Germany and Austria}:2

Thus the effects of the adOption of a policy of

“PrOpaganda by Deed," and the subsequent crimes committed

—_.¥

S11bid., p. 37.
52 _
Ibid., pp. 175-189.

hoe
in the name of such a policy, resulted in the suppression
of anarchism by both the Swiss and the Austrian governments.
In Germany this had already been accomplished in 1878 with
the passage of the Socialist Law, however, more stringent
measures were called for and a special law was enacted to
cover the use of dynamite and the renewal of the Socialist
Law was guaranteed.

The violence preached by Most in the columns of
*Emsiheit did not go unnoticed in Germany. Every act of
"PrOpaganda by Deed" was highly praised by Most. On the
occasion of the dynamiting of the Frankfurt a.M. police
headquarters he said "Bravo!"S3 When Hlubek was murdered
he exclaimed "Long live PrOpaganda by Deed1”5u’ Following
the murder of Bchh he declared "Long live anarchist
terrorism."55 The weekly pronouncements of Most were
duly noted by the Berlin Chief of Police, von Madai, who
continued to claim that the Social Democrats and the
anarchists were both revolutionary groups; the only dif-
ference between them being the tactics they wanted to
employ to accomplish the revolution. Von Nadai noted that
Most emphasized the use of any tactics necessary to bring

about the social revolution as quickly as possible, while

 

S3Freiheit, No. hh(October 31, 1883), p. 2.
sulbid., No. 51(December 21, l883), p. l.
SSIbid., No. SCFebruary 2, 188h), p. l.

hOT
on the other hand the Social Democrats were willing to
wait, and take a longer, slower, but surer road. To
substantiate this claim von Madai brought out the
examples of Georg von Vollmar(lBSO-l922), who had often
said that he and his associates stood for revolution,
and Carl Grilienberger(18h8-1897), who in a meeting held
in Zurich, had declared that they should train their
followers in the use of weapons, so that in the event
that their peaceful methods should fail they could re-
sort to more violent tactics. On the basis of these
observations, von Madai noted that on the surface it

appeared that Freiheit and Der Sozialdemokrat cpposed

 

each other, but actually below the surface both of them
stood for revolution, Host for immediate revolution, and

the Social Democrats for a slow, gradual one.56 Feelings

of this sort among the German police reflected what was
probably the official policy dictated by Bismarck. The
reprecussions such opinions had on the willingness to
suppress socialism in Germany cannot be overlooked. The
part violence played in the renewal of the Socialist Law
has already been referred to in the previous chapter, and
will be treated in more detail in the next chapter.

In general the articles in Freiheit advocating
violence and terrorism.had the effect of frightening the

56Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.

Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vol. II
(13,088), Folders 166-169.

 

hOB

bourgeois and aristocratic elements of society, at whom
[most of the articles were aimed. These segments of so-
ciety possessed the power to demand protection and re-
pressive measures against such fanaticism. Being frightened
out of their wits they were not about to quibble over the
differences between the Social Democratic Party and the
anarchists. All of the violent articles in Freiheit were
voraciously devoured by the police, and read with great
trepidation by the people at whom the crimes were aimed.
Many of the articles written by Most started with "Shake
you dogs“ and the "dogs" were shaking, but in the end the
opposited of the desired effect was achieved.57

The effects of terrorism on one member of the
royal family was recorded by Friedrich von Holstein(1837-
1909) in a diary entry for August 27, 188h: "The Crown
Princess is terrified of attempts on her life. She re-
cently discussed with somebody in great detail the further
security measures which might be taken. She demanded a
considerable increase in the police estimates and the

formulation of a large and efficient secret police."58

 

57An excellent contemporary article which pOints
out the German reaction to "Propaganda by Deed" is "Die
anarchistische Gefahr,“ wochenblatt der Frankfurter Zei-
tung, No. 30(July 27, 188h7, p.“2§§ which called anardhism
a s ckness.

 

s8The Holstein Papers, II, Diaries, p. 158.

k09

The government reaped great prOpaganda benefits
as well by releasing to the press alleged attempts against
the life of the aged Emderor, some of which had enough
substance to them that they were investigated in detail
by the police. One interesting example is the case of
the young man from Koblenz who was arrested during the
Emperor's visit to Ems in June lQBM. The young man was
armed with a knife and a loaded revolver. The police
were unable to prove what he intended to do with the
weapons, but the newspapers assumed that he intended to
assassinate the Emperor.59 In general the press associated
any act of violence with the anarchists; for example, the
Mflnchener Allgemeine Zeitqu reported a story of a man Mao
entered the shop of a money changer in Munich, with the
pretense that he wanted to do business, but when the pro-
prietor turned around, the man fired two shots at the
store owner, neither of which hit their mark. The assailant
then ran from the place of business but was apprehended
outside. The writer of this article associated this appa-
rent attempted robbery with the murder of Eisert, the
Vienna money changer. More than likely the attempted
robbery in Munich was not anarchist inspired, as the Eisert
crime, but the confusion in the public mind is under-

standable.60

 

Sc)Mllnchener Allgemeine Zeitung, June 23, 188h.

60February 5, 188h.

 

 

th

Another widely circulated story was that the Em-
peror who had planned to visit Wiesbaden in the late Spring
of 188A called off his visit because police had warned
him that a woman with a "deep sonorous voice" was traveling
from New York to Bremen with four trunks which contained
explosives which were going to be used in a plot to blow
up the Emperor in Wiesbaden. This story was taken seriously
by the police who maintained a close watch on the passenger
list of the North German Lloyd ship Neckar, which sailed
from New York to Bremen, but they did not find the four
trunks containing dynamite or the woman with the "deep
sonorous voice" which were supposcd to be on board the
ship. Threatening letters from the United States were not
uncommon during this period so when a mysterious attentat
(assassination attempt) was about to occur it was often
rumored that it was coming from the United States. Stories
of this sort, whether true or contrived, achieved their
purpose of frightening the Emperor, the aristocracy, and
bourgeois. They were widely circulated in the popular
press and there was little reason why they should be doubted
by the German people, because Most and.his cohorts were

61

proclaiming that deeds of violence would occur.

 

61An extensive investigation by the police into

this supposed plot against the Emperor is found in: Bran-
denburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Polizei-Prasidii

zu Berlin, "Die Dynamit Attentate in Elberfeld, Frankfurt
a.M., RBdesheim, und auf dem Wege zum National Denkmal

auf dem Niederwald." Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Polizei
Prasidii, Tit. 9h, Geheime Prasidial-Registratur, Lit. D.,
Nr. h21, Vol. 1(9.588), Folders 2Sh-271. Hereafter referred

kll

It did not take many terroristic acts to create
a general feeling of uneasiness among the people who were
intended victims of the crimes. It was no secret that
those in positions of authority or those who possessed
substantial amounts of material goods were the prOSpective
victims. The Mayor's home in Walsenhausen was completely
demolished by two bombs, two policemen in Wattenschied
were shot; in Erfeld a factory owner was stabbed to death
,These crimes occurred in a three month period from December
188h to March 1885-62 These were not the only crimes
which took place, some even more sensational have already
been discussed and some which shocked the imagination of
everyone will be-discussed in the next chapter.

The adOption of "Propaganda by Deed" at the London
Congress of 1881 as the official policy that anarchism
was going to follow was a disaster. It sent anarchism
down a futile road, from which, in the case of Germany,
they did not recover until after 1890, and then only
slowly. The leadership of the anarchist movement in Ger—
many during the 1880's was either imprisoned, executed,
or forced into exile as a result of trying to follow

"Propaganda by Deed." Once the leaders were gone it was

 

to as Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br.
Rep. 30 “Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. D., Nr. M21, Vol. I
(9,588).

62Le Revoltg, No. 21(December 7 & 20, 188k), p. h;
Ibid., No.‘I(March 1 &1h, 1885), p. h.

 

h12

impossible to hope that any sizable movement could be
developed in Germany. "Propaganda by Deed" frightened
the aristocracy and bourgeois into a state of hysteria
which played into the hands of the German government, in
that it assured the continuation of the repressive measures
against the socialists. "PrOpaganda by Deed" Spelled the
end to a flourishing anarchist movement in Austria, and
eliminated Switzerland as a refuge and base of operations.

"Propaganda by Deed" left a permanent stain on
anarchism. It also encouraged actions by agents pro-
vocateurs. The London Congress assumed that "PrOpaganda
by Deed" would find its greatest reception among workers,
but the murder of the Eisert children generated a feeling
of revulsion among many workers who might otherwise have
been receptive to anarchist ideals. Anarchism, in the
mind of the public, stood for acts of violence which
they considered to be its main characteristic. Still
another adverse effect of "Propaganda by Deed" was that
many criminals started to think of themselves as anar-
chists, and the anarchists were reluctant to protest
against such claims because they believed that the cri-
minals were to an extent justified in their actions
because they were victims of the society which they them-
selves sought to destroy. The bourgeois press had tra-
ditionally presented the anarchists as criminals and
maniacs and now they were supplied with ample evidence

to prove their assertions. "PrOpaganda by Deed" was

LL13
essentially negative, adding nothing to anarchism, while
at the same time placing a powerful lever in the hands
of the German government which could be used against

the workers movement.

CHAPTER IX

THE FAILURE OF PROPAGANDA BY DEED: TEE TRAGIC CAREERS OF

AUGUST REINSDORF AND JULIUS LIESKE

The significance of "Propaganda by Deed" can be
brought into better focus by tracing out the.careers of
August Reinsdorfl and Julius Lieske. It is within the
framework of the lives and activities of these two men
that the most meaningful discussion of "Propaganda by
Deed" in Germany can be developed.

The activities of Reinsdorf prior to 1878 have
been brought out below. He dropped out of sight around
the time of the HBdel and Nobiling attempts on the life
of William I and does not appear again until late in 1879
when he and Emil Werner collaborated on the publication

of a clandestine anarchist newspaper, Der Kampf, printed

 

in werner's flat in Berlin at Planufer 20. The first
issue of this paper came off the press on December 25,
1879, but before a single copy could reach the streets

the police entered Verner's apartment and seized the

 

1An interesting poem glorifying the deeds of
Reinsdorf is: Erich Mflhsam, "August Reinsdorf," Fanal.
Organ der Anarchisten Vereinigupg, III, No. 5(February,
1929,, 118-119

hlh

1415

copies which had been printed along With the plates, and
the printing press.2
The police arrested Werner, the book binder Theodor
Anders, the shoemaker Franz Jurschitzka, and a student
Mbritz Krohn, all of whom were in Werner's apartment at
the time of the police raid; Reinsdorf was not apprehended
in the raid. Jurschitzka and Anders were friends of Wer-
ner and had both been members of the Bern anarchist group,
while Krohn was a curious student who was only coinciden—
tally present at the time the police raided the clandestine
press. Jurschitzka was released after a short time, but
the other three were held for nine months while an in-
vestigation was being conducted into the affair. In the
end Werner and Anders, after serving their terms, were
released and forced to leave Berlin on August 10, 1880.
Werner went to Leipzig Where a minor state of siege had
been declared. Unable to stay he traveled on to Switzer-
land, to work with Prince Peter Kropotkin on the printing

of Le Revolté, and took part in the Congress of the Jura

 

Federation where the policies of "Propaganda by Deed" and

2Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h, Lit. S.,Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folder 105. Police reports indicated that se-
veral hundred copies of the paper were found. All printed
sources on this subject claim that a thousand copies of
the first issue were printed, see: E. Bernstein, Die Ges-
chichte der Berliner Arbeiterbewegung, II, p. 36; Rocker,
Johann Most, p. 172.

hie
communist-anarchism were hammered out.3

After the raid on Der Kamppreinsdorf left Berlin

 

to travel around Germany, working in Bavaria and Wfirtten-
berg, before going into Switzerland, where he and a number
of friends organized a celebration of the Commune which
caused an uproar. He also helped to smuggle anarchist
literature into Austria and Germany. In May, 1880, he

met with Most in Freiburg, Switzerland. Most had traveled
to Rorschach for the purpose of defending himself before

a Social Democratic Congress that had been called to in-
vestigate charges against himself and Hasselmann. The
congress at Rorschach was not held as noted above and was
finally held at Wyden. When Most was informed that the
congress at Rorschach had been called off he spent some
time speaking at meetings in Switzerland. In Freiburg he
and Reinsdorf had a long talk. Karl Schneidt claims that
Reinsdorf converted Mest to anarchism at this time. Ac-
cording to Schneidt the process which had been started

by Dave was now completed by Reinsdorf. Certainly Reins-
dorf exerted considerable influence over Mest, but whether
he converted him to anarchism is doubtful. Victor Dave
even maintained that Most never understood the true meaning
of anarchism. Perhaps the implication of Schneidt's state-

ment is that Reinsdorf was able to convince Most of the

 

3Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 8., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folder 18h; Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin c, Tit. 9h,
Lit. D., Nr. h21, Vol. I(9,588), Folder 21.

1+1?

necessity of carrying out a program of violence in Germany,
because Schneidt claims, and quite correctly, that it was
Reinsdorf who acquainted Most with the theories of political
murder and "Propaganda by Deed."u

At their meeting, Most and Reinsdorf decided that
Reinsdorf should travel to Berlin and kill the Police Pre-
sident von Madai. Rinsdorf left Freiburg, Switzerland,
early in July 1880 and traveled to Hanau and Offenbach
where he Spoke with anarchists who were receiving Freiheit
by letter, directly from London, and discussed the possi-
bility of increasing the circulation of the paper in these
two cities. He then went to Frankfurt a.M. where he re-
mained for a short time, using the name Ernst Eckstein,
before traveling to Berlin.5

During the same period, starting with his meeting
with Meet, Reinsdorf contributed a number of articles to
Freiheit dealing with organization, tactics and his con-
ception of anarchism. Basically he opposed any system of
anarchist organization which would divide the peOple into

"the leaders" and "the led." He believed in freedom for

 

"Schneidt, "Vom jungen Anarchismus," pp. 676—677;
Johann Most, August Reinsdorf und die Propaganda der That
(New York, 1885), p. 32. This little book was written by
Most to glorify Reinsdorf and consequently is full of in-
accuracies and misrepresentations, which will be pointed
out in the course of this chapter, but it is useful for a
number of valuable letters that are printed in it.

5See Reinsdorf's letter of June 20, 1880 and July 17,
1880 to Mbst printed in Most, August Reinsdorf, pp. 33-35.

 

hla

the individual and autonomy for the group. He stated that
a network of cells should be developed in Germany to spread
anarchism, with the individual cells hsving the freedom
to join as they saw fit with other cells in the network.
He also pointed out that poison, knives, dynamite, and
any other method at their disposal must be employed to
free the individual. The local group, he said, should
have the power to make their methods fit their own indi-
vidual locality. His arrest in Berlin ended the series
of articles, but incomplete though they may be they are
nevertheless useful for revealing Reinsdorf's thought pro-
cess at this stage of his develOpment.6

Late in July 1880 Reinsdorf showed up in Berlin
using the name Adolf Gfeller and claiming he was a swiss;
before many days passed he was picked up by the Berlin
police for suspicious activities, but after a short period
of detention he was released. He told the police he was
a Swiss compositor and gave them.his false name. The po-
lice were cognizant of his true identity but released him
because they claimed he had done nothing wrong; however,
legally they could have held him for using a false name.
They probably released him to obtain further evidence:

 

6For the articles by Reinsdorf see: "Zur Organi-
zation," Freiheit, No. 28(July 10, 1880), p. 3; "Zur Or-
ganizationsfrage," Ibid., No. hl(0ctober 9, 1880), p. l;
Zur Organization und Taktik der Anarchisten," Ibid.,
No. 39(September 25, 1880), p. 1. See also his lengthy
articles in Freiheit on the make-up of a revolutionary in
No. 38(September 18, 1880), pp. 1-2 and No. 39(Septem-
ber 25, 1880), pp. 1-2.

M9

they were already aware that he had come to Berlin for the
purpose of killing von Madai.7

On September 1, 1880, Reinsdorf wrote Most of a
plan he had to blow up the Reichstag building during a
session. The plan called for Reinsdorf to dig a tunnel
under the building and set charges at the points of maximum
stress. If charges could be placed in these critical
places the entire structure would be brought down because,
as Reinsdorf pointed out correctly, much of the building
was only a facade, with only a few points supporting the
weight of the structure. The Spy Oskar Neumann in London
heard of this plan and informed the Berlin police who
quickly apprehended Reinsdorf on November 1h, 1880, in the
vicinity of von Madai's home carrying a long dagger. At
this time the police were able to determine that he was
also the mysterious Jehn Steinberg who had caused them

trouble earlier in Leipzig.8

 

7Brandenburgisches Iandeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.

Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13, 08?), Folder 18h.

8Ibid.; Most, Augpst Reinsdorf, pp. 37- 38; Ernst,
Polizeispitzeleien und Ausnahmegesetze 1878-1910, p. 57.
The arrest of Reinsdorf added to the battle taking place
between Freiheit and Der Sozialdemokrat. On November 21,
1880, Der Sozial ldemokrat printed a short piece stating
that Reinsdorf, alias Bernstein, alias Gfeller, had gone
to Germany to meet Fleuron, alias Peterson, for the pur-
pose of carrying out an act of "Propaganda by Deed," and
that they had received thirty pounds(600 Marks) from
London. Reinsdorf was already locked up when the article
appeared, but it was still considered by the anarchists
a journalistic low to print such an item.

 

 

 

uZO

During the three months Reinsdorf was imprisoned
the police closed their net over the cell network in Ger-
many apprehending Dave, Breuder and the others already
referred to above. The police tried, unsuccessfully, to
connect Reinsdorf with the cell organization, because
they wanted to place him on trial with the group being
tried for high treason in Leipzig. When he was released
from prison Reinsdorf was forced to leave Berlin; he went
to Leipzig, and was also forced out of that city; going
to'Witzenhagen bei Kassel where he worked for three weeks.
Now, Wherever Reinsdorf traveled in Germany the police
were after him. He was unable to remain in one place for
more than a few days, but nevertheless being a true anar-
chist he continued to work for the spread of anarchist
ideals and helped to distribute Freiheit. In Berlin once
again he was arrested on March 15, 1881, and held for
four weeks for using false papers. When he was unable to
find any work in Germany he finally traveled to Freiburg,
Switzerland.

In Freiburg Reinsdorf was involved in a morals
charge which Most ignores completely in his life of Reins-
dorf and Rocker calls the incident "an infamous comedy of
Justice."9 What occurred is as follows: in Freiburg Reins-
dorf lived with the tailor, Otter, on Murtentor, but took
his meals at the home of a widow F. at No. 239 Rud de

 

9Rocker, Johann Mbst, p. 115.

 

h21

Morat.h On the evening of October 10 when the widow was
returning home about eight thirty she looked in the window
of her living room and observed Reinsdorf having sexual
relations with her ten year old daughter. Widow F. swore
out a warrant for Reinsdorf's arrest, but he fled before
the police had an opportunity to apprehend him. A trial
was held and Dr. Schaller, who had examined the girl, saki
conclusively that the girl had had sexual relations. The
girl herself confirmed this and Reinsdorf was sentenced on
Notember 26, 1881, to three years "in Contumacian."10

When he left Freiburg in October Reinsdorf went
to Bern seeking a friend, but realizing that the police
were after him he decided to no to Munich where he assumed
the names Hackel and Beugel, and was quickly apprehended
for the distribution of forbidden materials. He had
brought with him from Switzerland eight hundred copies of

the pamphlet wahlenthaltugg. For this he was sentenced

 

to four months in Amberg prison.11 During the trial the
German officials requested, and received, from.Freiburg a
copy of the documents concerning the incident regarding
the ten year old girl. When these documents were placed

before the Landgericht Mfinchen I, the judge decided that

 

10Langhard, Die anarchistische Bewegung in der
Schweiz von ihren Aanngen bis zur Gegenwart, pp. 256-

257. .

11For a description of his life in Amberg prison
see his article in Freiheit, No. 36(October 28, 1882),
p. 10

 

h22
the evidence was not sufficient to substantiate such an
accusation; the judge concluded that the witnesses for the

12

prosecution were unreliable. This struck Reinsdorf as

ironical that German justice had found him innocent of
the charge.13
On March 30, 1882, Reinsdorf was freed and went
to his home town of Pegau. This was a difficult period
in his life; letters written at this time indicate that
he was very deSpondent, trying to rationalize all the
suffering he had gone through with what little he had
accomplished. He wrote a friend in America that if he

had the money he would leave Germany for the United States.lu

He was not in Pegau long before the police apprehended him

 

12Langhard, Die anarchistische Bewegung in der
Schweiz von ihren Aanngen bis zur Gegenwagt, p. 257.

 

 

13Letter of May 11, 1882, to a friend in America
printed in Most, August Reinsdorf, p. 50. Peukert claims
in his memoirs that he gave Reinsdorf the money to take
the trip to Munich, money which he himself had received
from John Neve. He also states that Reinsdorf told him
that Nest and Dave were too authoritarian; describing
Most as a tyrant who permitted no opinions other than his
own. Peukert claims that Reinsdorf told him that Mest was
as Opposed to anarchism as Liebknecht, and that he, Reins-
dorf, had broken with Most, even though his articles still
appeared in.Freiheit. Reinsdorf was supposed to have called
Dave an arrogant libertarian who pictured the workers as
nothing more than a bunch of dumbheads. Of course this is
Peukert's rendering of a conversation that took place in
Switzerland in October, 1881, and there is no evidence to
substantiate it. Peukert, Erinneruggen eines Proletariers
aus der Revolutionaren Arbeiterbewegpng, pp. 7h-76}

 

 

1“letter of May 11, 1882, printed in Most, August
Reinsdorf, pp. h9-SO.

MB
on a charge of stealing dynamite, but the man from whom
the dynamite had been stolen was not able to identify
Reinsdorf as the thief. Ie was then set free and wandered
to Berlin where he was placed in jail in June for a period
of ten days for using a false name. When he was released

after serving this sentence he returned to Pegau.ls

A hunted man in Germany, Reinsdorf decided to
leave; on foot he traveled to Nancy, France, arriving
there with well worn shoes and not a cent in his pockets.
His route, long and circuitous, had taken him.hy way of
Eisenach, Kassel, Elberfeld, Essen, Erefeld, Dflsseldorf,
Cologne, Bonn, Aachen, Verviers, Spa, Luxemburg, Trier,
Saarbrflcken, Metz, Pont-a-Mouson, and finally Nancy.

He had intended to go directly to Paris, but had to stop
in Nancy long enough to work and earn some money. On his
walking trip to Nancy, Reinsdorf came in contact with
many of his former comrades who gave him new hOpe for

the eventual success of the movement and invigorated his
low spirits. He abandoned his plan to go to the United
States, realizing that he was needed more in Germany. In
Nancy he bbtained employment that paid five francs a day
and spent his free time studying the French language,

reading Freiheit and Etendard revol, and attending the

 

free concerts given by the military bands. Having no

lsReinsdorf actually was innocent of the charge of
stealing dynamite. Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv

Potsdam, Pr. Br..Rep. 30 Berlin C Tit. 9 Lit. D N
I421, V01. I(g,588)’ FOldeI‘ 15. ’ LI" 0, 1".

LL21+
friends in Nancy, and since all his diversions cost him
nothing Reinsdorf saved enough money in a short time to
travel to Paris.

While he was in Nancy Reinsdorf wrote a friend
that he believed he did not have long to live, and that
before very long he was going to follow the same route
Eisenhower had and succumb to tuberculosis. This ob-
session with death is very important because it played an
important role in the decisions he later made which sealed
his doom.16

In the fall of 1882 Reinsdorf went to Paris where
he lived in squalid conditions until 1883, passing his

time by writing articles for Freiheit, and corresponding

 

with friends in Germany.17 Toward the end of February
1883 he left Paris and returned to Southern Germany re- .
newing acquaintances with former friends in Stuttgart,
Frankfurt a.M., Mannheim, and Hanau. In Mannheim.he
struck up a good relationship with Carl Mildenberger.
After traveling around Germany he decided to settle in
Elberfeld on March 19, 1883, using the alias of Jehn
Pelzenbach and claiming he was from Baltimore, Maryland.

His rationalization in selecting Elberfeld was that he

 

16Letter of August 28, 1882, printed in Most,
August Reinsdorf, p. 51.

 

17For examples of his writing in this period see:
Freiheit, No. 35(October 1h, 1882), and No. 36(October 28,

LL25

thought it would be an ideal place to sow the seed of
"PrOpaganda by Deed," due to the rapidly increasing num-
ber of workers who were coming to the city to work in the
expanding chemical and clothing factories. He reasoned
that the workers in these industries would be receptive
to anarchism and "Propaganda by Deed" because of the
Imiserable conditions in which they worked and lived. His
hOpes were not realized in the way he thought they would
be; he reported to a friend that years of misery, dire
need, and physical deprivation had robbed the workers of
their zeal for revolution. Reinsdorf concluded that the
workers were worn out, unnerved and their morale was at
too low a point to hOpe for revolution.18

He succeeded in gathering a small group of men
in the Elberfeld area who adhered to his ideas. In the
group were the compositor Emil KHChler(b. November 9, lth
Krefeld); the saddler Franz Reinhold Rupsch(b. March 19,
1863 Rathewitz, Kreis Naumburg a.d.s.); the weaver Karl
Bachmann(b. December h, 1959 Triplis, Sachsen-Weimar);
the shoemaker Karl Holzhauer(b. May 16, 1835 Weiderrode);
the forty-three year old weaver Carl Rudolf Palm; the
weaver Wilhelm Weidenmfiller(b. July 1h, lBhl Elberfeld);

and three factory workers; the ribbon maker Karl Rheinbach

 

18Letter of July 15, 1883, printed in Mbst, August
Reinsdorf, pp. 58-59; Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv
Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. D., Nr.

h21, Vol. 1(9,588), Folder 5.

 

u26

(b. December 3, 18h2 Ronsdorf); the button maker August
TBllner; and the dyer Fritz Sdhngen(b. October 3, 1851
Hafslinghausen). The meetings of the group were held at
the home of Karl Holzhauer.l9

In one of these meetings plans were maFe to dynamite
the Emperor Wilhelm I, the Crown Prince and a number of
other public dignitaries. The plan was discussed at length,
because there was a difference of opinion how it should be
carried out; since one of the people present at this meeting
was a police Spy we can assume that all the details of the
meeting were given to the police.20

The explosion was olanned to coincide with the de-
dication of the National Monument, which would be unveiled
by the Emperor on September 28, 1883. The monument was
situated high on the summit of the Niederwald, which rises

some eight hundred feet above the villages of Assmanns-

hausen and RHdesheim. The National Mbnument was a symbolic

 

19Der Anarchistegprozess Reinsdorf und Genossen Ver-
handelt vor dem 2. und 3. Strafsenat des Reichsgericht zu
Leipzig_vom 15, bis 22. Dezembeg, 18BQILeipzig,'1885), pp.
h, 26; Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br.
Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h, Lit. D., Nr. t21, Vol. I(9,588),
Folders 6, 87-88, 9h, 15?. Brandenburgisches Landeshaupt-
archiv Potsdam, Acta des KBniglichen Polizei-Prfisidii, Ge-
heime Prfisidial-Registratur, Lit. A. Nr. 286, Vol. I(86hl),
"Die anarchistische Bewegung, 188h-lé85," Folders h-lO.
Hereafter cited as Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Lit. A., Nr.
286, Vol. I(86hl).

 

 

 

20Ernst, Polizeispitzeleien und Ausnahmegesetze
1&78-1919, p. 57. Actually three of the members of the
group were working for the police as will be brought out
in the course of this chapter.

 

 

#27

"Wacht am Rhein" and faced toward the Rhine River at the
point where it rushes past Bingen, and the Mouse Tower of
legend which Southey put into English verse. The colossal
statue, designed by Johannes Schilling of Dresden, which
is said to be an idealized likeness of the sculptor's
daughter, represents Germania as a woman in a girdle-bound}
robe, her left hand resting on the hilt cf a drawn sword,
and her right hand holding a laurel—wreathed Imperial Crown.
The bronze figure, cast by von Mitler of Munich, was itself
thirty-six feet in height, and with the pedestal and socket
measured eighty feet. It cost 1,196,000 Marks, part of
which was raised by public subscription, and the remainder
came from a parliamentary grant.21

All of the celebrities of the reign of William.I
were to be assembled at the dedication of the Niederwald
Mbnument; his son the Crown Prince "Unserer Fritz," his
nephew William the "Red Prince," Prince Albert of Prussia,
the King of Saxony, Grand Duke of Baden, Grand Duke of
Hesse-Darmstadt, Prince Luitpold of Bavaria, von Moltke,
Bismarck, the surviving military leaders of Kdniggrfltz,
WBrth, Mars-1a-Tour, Sedan, and Metz, as well as numerous
other members of the aristocracy, government officials,
and dignitaries. This was perhaps the greatest opportunity

ever presented to eliminate so many members of the upper

\

21The Annual Register 18§§(London, 1883), pp. h0-

%i8$.E. Vizetelly, The Anarchists(New York, 1911), pp.

 

 

004:

h28
strata of German society with a single blow, and Reins-
dorf fully intended to avail himself of it.22 Reinsdorf,
for reasons which will be explained below, thought his
days on earth were numbered and he wanted to make a final
contribution to the freeing of mankind; a contribution
which he thought would shake the entire world from its
lethargy.

The plans for the attempt were made well in advance
of September 28, the day of the dedication. The dynamite
and some of the money needed for the trip to RBdesheim
were also gathered well in advance. The dyer Sdhngen
contributed eight Marks, the ribbon maker Rheinbach nine
Marks fifty pfennig, the button maker T811ner about two
Marks fifty pfennig, Rupsch pawned his trunk for ten
Marks, and Palm, the police Spy, gave Kfichler forty Marks
for the trip.23 I

Reinsdorf had intended to carry out the attempt
himself, but on September 8 he went to Barmen, and later
that evening when he returned as he departed from the
train and crossed the railroad tracks he sprained.his

ankle so severely that he had to be taken to St. Joseph's

 

22G. Valbert, "L'attentat du Niederwald," Revue
des deux Mondes, LXVII(February 1, 1885), p. 669.

23Ibid., p. 673; Der Anarchistepprozess Reins-
dorf und Genossen, p. 61; Lipinski, Die Sozialdemokratie
von ihren Anfyngen bis zur Gegenwart, II, p. 100.

 

 

1429

Hospital where he remained until October 21.21L

The date of the dedication was September 29, and
as the day drew near and his ankle was no better, Reins-
dorf summoned two members of his Elberfeld circle to his
bedside; the saddler Rupsch and the compositor Kfichler.
Originally the plan was to send only Rupsch on the mission
because he was single and because of limited finances,
but when Palm gave Kflchler, who had six children, the
forty Marks this enabled him to go along to watch the
young Rupsch. After a lengthy discussion with Reinsdorf
the two men agreed to carry out the plan and Reinddorf
gave them all the pertinent details of the plot, including
the location where the dynamite was hidden. The money
which had been collected and which was intended primarily
for travel funds was also turned over to them.

On September 26 Rupsch and Kfichler picked up the
sixteen pounds of dynamite where it had been hidden in
the woods and on the following day traveled to Assmanns-
hausen and to the site of the Niederwald Monument in order
to put the plan into operation. That night, when it got
dark, they concealed the dynamite in a drainage pipe which
traversed, about three and one half feet underneath, the
only roadway leading to the monument; to the dynamite they
connected a fuse that was nine meters long. The fuse was

led out of the culvert into the woods adjacent to the

 

21LBrandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. D., Nr. h21, Vol. I
(9,588), Folder 5.

h30

roadway. It was buried just under the surface of the
ground and led to a tree which was marked so that they
would be able to find the end of the fuse on the following
day. Reinsdorf had specifically instructed Kfichler to
purchase a waterproof fuse, but instead he obtained one
that was not waterproof because it was fifty pfennig
cheaper. Unfortunately for the conspirators a heavy
rain fell during the evening of September 27-28, and
the dynamite and fuse which had been laid in the drainage
culvert were soaked.25

The next day some time before the dedication
Rupsch and Kfichler returned to the area where they had
placed the dynamite to await the arrival of the Emperor

26 Kaohler acted as the

and his party-minus Bismarck.
lookout and when he saw the Emperor's party approaching

he signaled to Rupsch, Who was to have ignited the fuse,

 

25Ibid., Folders 312-313. Originally they had
planned to place the dynamite beneath the platform upon
which the dignitaries would sit during the ceremony, but
decided this was too risky.

26Bismarck, claiming ill health, did not attend
the ceremony. His absence leads to the unfounded specula-
tion, that, if he had been informed of the plot in advance
by the police Spy Palm, and he obviously did nothing to
stop it, if Kfichler and Rupsch had been successful, this
would have put Bismarck in charge of Germany. As noted,
this is only wild conjecture, but it is in the realm of
the possible. The Emperor was eighty-six years old and
could not hOpe to live much longer. Bismarck was aware
by this time that William's successor, Friedrich, felt
a deep seated animosity for him, so there was no hope
that he could ever control him the way he had the old
Emperor.

h31
but Rupsch was unable to get the wet fuse to burn.
Having failed in the first attempt, they tried once
again when the group returned after the dedication ce-
remonies, but once more were unsuccessful.27 Then the
two men took the dynamite from the culvert and carried
it to Rfldesheim where at eight in the evening they placed

the explosives against the wall of the Festhalle where a

 

concert was being given. The explosives were placed on
the wall adjacent to the Pitchen area of the hall and

the explosion was so loud that it caused the bartender,
Johann Lauter from.RBdesheim, to lose his hearing for
several hours. The caterer Porsberger from Mainz who was
also in the kitchen was covered by wine, goulash, veal
cutlets, and roasted veal loin which were blown into the
air by the shock of the bomb. Everything made out of
glass, in the kitchen was shattered, as was part of the
wall, but no one attending the concert was injured. The
Emperor and his party were not in the hall, but had gone
on to Wiesbaden after the dedication ceremony, so the
majority of those inside the hall were the ordinary citi-
zenry of Rfidesheim. After the explosion Rupsch and Kaoh-
ler returned to Elberfeld on money they had obtained from

pawning of Kflchler's watch. After a few days Rupsch, who

 

27Expert Opinion confirmed that the place where
the dynamite had been planted was such that if the ex-
plosion had gone off as planned it would have doubtlessly
killed all the intended victims. Der Anarchistenprozess
Reinsdorf uniGenossen, pp. 31-32.

 

 

LL32
came from a solid farming family, went home to help with
the fall harvest. His father was dead and he was the
middle son. He also had two sisters, one of whom had
been recently confirmed.28

One fact which is usually not brought out in re-
lation to the Niederwald attempt is that nothing was
mentioned about it in the press for several months. This
delay gave rise to the belief that the government, quite
by accident, stumbled onto the plot some months later
when arrests were made for other bombing attempts. This
assumption is false. The government knew about the plan
before the attempt was made and withheld the news, re-
leasing it to the press at an advantageous moment.

Reinsdorf was not released from St. Joseph's Hos-
pital until October 21, 1883, nearly a month after the
dedication of the monument, but only a few days before an
explosion severely damaged the Frankfurt Police Headquarters
building(Gleserne Hof) at 6 P.H. on October 29. The building
was unoccupied at the time of the explosion, but considerable
damage was done. Frankfurt Police Chief Rumpf tried to prove
that Reinsdorf was responsible for the explosion, but Reins-

dorf was able to show that he had been in Barman at the

time of the explosion.29 This was a source of amusement

 

28Volkszeitung, No. 185(August 9, 188h).

29Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h, Lit. D., Nr. h21, Vol. I
(9,588 , Folders 111-112; Hessischen Hauptstaatsarchiv

#33

to Der Sozialdemokrat which wrote "poor Rumpf, he can't

 

pin the dynamite eXplosion on Reinsdorf because he couldn't
possibly have been in Frankfurt a.M. on the day of the
30

explosion." The article also claimed that the explosion
had been planned and executed by Rumpf himself, to be

used against the Social Democrats in the campaign to re-

new the Socialist Law. There is no evidence to substantiate

this statement in Der Sozialdemokrat but many people thought

 

it was a strange coincidence that the building had been
completely empty when the explosion took place. Jehann
Most likewise stated dogmatically that Reinsdorf was not
in Frankfurt a.M. at the time the explosion took place.

Like Der Sozialdemokrat Meat claimed it was the work of

 

Rumpf and was nothing more than another example of police

31

harassment.‘

What was Reinsdorf doing between October 21, when
he was released from the hospital in Elberfeld, until he
was again hospitalized in Hamburg on November 7? He re-
mained in Elberfeld until October 27, working for a book
printer using the alias John Pelzenbach, from Baltimore.
He became ill after a few days and withdrew fourteen

Marks from the sick fund cf the book printer and went to

 

Wiesbaden, 5 Reichsstadt Frankfurt a.M., A 8 Politische
Parteien, 355, “Das Dynamit Attentat im Polizeidienstge-
baude zu Frankfurt," Folders 26-30

O 30No. 7(February 1h, 188k), p. 2.

3lFreiheit, No. 6(February 1h, 188k). p. 2.

LLBLL
Barmen.32 Barmen was the place to which the dynamite had
been shipped for the attempt at the Niederwald, as well
as the explosives used in the explosions which had occurred
in some of the local casinos and beer halls, such as the
"Erholung," “Deutsche Kaiser," "Frankfurter Beerhalle," and
the explosion carried out by Bachmann in the beer garden
of the Willemsen restaurant. Other explosions had occurred
during the same summer in the area; one at a social gathering
in Wupperthale, and another in the cellar of the Lutheran
Association. These were all preliminary to the Niederwald
attentat. Probably the great attraction that Barmen had
for Reinsdorf was that this is Where he could get the "stuff."
Dynamite was actually being produced in Wupperthale, which
was an industrial suburb of Elberfeld, but it was the home
made variety and very unreliable, and the quantities

available were limited.33

Reinsdorf traveled to Wiesbaden, where he planned
an explosion in the train station, but at the last minute
did not go through with it when he realized that many in—

nocent women and children would be killed or injured.3u

He then traveled to Hannover where he stayed for a few

 

32Die Post, No. 27(January 28, 188h).

33Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. D., Nr. M21, Vol. I
(9,588 , Folders 13k, 309-312.

3L"Ibid., Folders 157-158.

LL35
days using the name Johann Schmitt. From.Hannover he went
to Hamburg where he took sick on November 7, 1883, and was
hospitalized until January 9, 188h. This time he was con-
fined for tuberculosis, as he had been earlier in St.
Joseph's Hospital in Elberfeld during the period June 23
to July 30, 1883, before he injured his ankle. In Ham—
burg Reinsdorf used the name John Pelzenbach.35 On Janu-
ary ll, 188h, only two days after he was released from
thehospital, the Hamburg police, acting on orders from
Rumpf, arrested Reinsdorf. He was taken to Frankfurt a.M.
to be questioned about the dynamite explosion of October 29,
1883. Although Rumpf could not prove that Reinsdorf was
involved in the affair, he did not release him.36 In the

columns of Freiheit Most demanded to know why they were

 

holding Reinsdorf when it had been demonstrated that he
had nothing to do with the Frankfurt affair.37 Rumpf had

a good reason for not releasing Reinsdorf, but it was not

yet time to make it public.

 

351nm. , Folder 12.

36The announcement of the arrest of Reinsdorf did
not appear in the neWSpapers until January 15, when it ap-
peared in the Frankfurter Gen. Anzeigpr. The story was
reprinted in the Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, No. 26
(January 16, 188k7, supplementing the earlier account with
additional material obtained from.the Frankfurter Journal
and the Berliner Zeitung. In all cases Reinsdorf's name
appears as Rablsdorf.

 

 

 

 

37No. 9(March l, 188h), p. 3.

1136

Meanwhile the police rounded up the other members
of Reinsdorf's small Elberfeld circle, as well as a number
of other suspects. The Volkszeitung on March 8, 188h,
released a story which said that the weaver Carl Rudolf
Palm had been arrested in Elberfeld. According to the
account in the newspaper Palm also implicated Kfichler,
the weaver Wilhelm WeidenmfillerSenior, and CarlhBachmann.
Palm related that they had all taken part in the explosion
which had occurred in the beer garden section of Willem-
sen's restaurant on September A, 1883.38 Rupsch was not
arrested until April 20, 188h, in Rossbach, but it was

given the usual publicity.39

 

38A statement made by Palm to the police in Elber-
feld on March 6, 188h, does contain all this information
as well as information on Reinsdorf not contained in the
article. He told how, on the evening of September 3, he
saw Reinsdorf, Kflchler, and Bachmann meet in the Elberfeld
restaurant "Gemfitlichen Gottlieb," at which time Reinsdorf
gave a packet containing dynamite.to Bachmann as well as
a quantity of money to be used to leave Elberfeld after
the attentat. Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam,
Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9b, Lit. D., Nr. h21, Vol. I
(9,588), Folders 157-158.

39Neue Preussische Zeitung, No. 95(April 23, 188h).
Friedlaender tells an interesting story about the arrest
of Rupsch and Kfichler, but does not give the source of his
information. He relates that on the second day of Christ-
mas 1883 a workers' meeting took place in Elberfeld whidh
was attended by workers from Elberfeld and Barmen. The
group had a surplus in their treasury so Rupsch placed a
bill before it for ten Marks. He had pawned his trunk to
obtain money for the trip he and Ffichler had taken to Rfides-
heim and now needed the money to get his trunk out of hock.
According to Friedlaender both Rupsch and Kflchler were ar-
rested a short time after this, so he concludes that there
must have been a spy at the meeting. This is a nice sto-
ry, but hardly a factual one. Hugo Friedlaender, Interessen-
te Kriminal-Prozesse von Kulturhistorischer Bedeutung

 

 

 

#37

”New the stage was set. All of Germany had been
made aware of the explosion which had occurred in Frank-
furt a.M. and the several explosions which had taken
place in the Elberfeld area in the summer and early fall
of 1883. The police had gathered the cast, each of whom
was given full press coverage as they were apprehended.
Now the moment had arrived to start the production.

Information on the attempt to kill the Emperor
at the dedication of the Niederwald monument was made pub-
lic on April 2h, 188h. It had been withheld by Bismarck,
William I, and Puttkamer until the proper time. On April 23,
William I wrote to the Minister of the Interior Puttkamer,
‘giving clear evidence that they were about to make politi-
cal capital out of the attempt in conjunction with the
debate on the renewal of the Socialist Law; William wanted
to make sure that Prince Bismarck would make an official

news release for the illumination of the voters.u0 An

 

(Berlin, 1912), p. 16h. At the trial Rupsch told that he
had left Barmen on October 19, and had sent Holzhauer
thirteen Marks from Sangerhausen to get the trunk out of
hock, which Holzhauer did, sending the trunk to him along
with a number of copies of Freiheit. Kfichler, as noted
below, had pawned his watch to get back to Elberfeld from
Rfidesheim, and at the meeting, which Friedlaender alludes
to, he tried to obtain money to get the watch out of hock,
but there is no connection between this and his subsequent
arrest. Der Anarchistenprozess Reinsdorf und Genossen,

pp. 32-h7-

LLOFricke, Bismarcks Praetorianer, pp. 160-161; Karl
Braun4Wiesbaden,l"Das Attentat auf dem Niederwald und der
Hochverrathsprozess vor dem Reichsgericht," Nord und SUd,
XXXIII(1885), p. 66; P.M. "Das Verbrechen am Niederwald,"
Preussische Jahrbflcher, LV(1885), 116-123.

 

 

 

1138
announcement to the Reichstag committee on the renewal of
the Socialist Law was actually made by Eugene Richter, leader

of the Freisinnige Party.

 

The news of the Niederwald plot contributed to the
renewal of the Socialist Law in May 188u, and the subse-

quent passage of a dynamite law on June 9, 188h(Dynamitge-

 

setz. Gesetz gegen dem verbrecherischen undgemeingefahr-

lichen Gebrauch von Sprengstoffen). The latter made it

 

illegal to manufacture, possess, sell, or import explosives
without a license from the police. Those who possessed

such a license were required to keep a register accounting
for all explosives they had obtained and sold. If a per-
son through the use of explosives, including gunpowder,
caused destruction to the property, wealth, or life of
another he was liable to stringent penalties. In the case
of serious bodily harm the penalty was to be not less than
five years in prison. In the event that an explosion caused
the death of a person the penalty could range from ten

years to life imprisonment. If the explosion caused the
premeditated death of an individual then capital punish-
ment would be invoked. Even if it could only be established
that a person had merely agreed to carry out an explosion,
and even if no evidence could be produced that such an

act had taken place, he could still be sentenced to pri-

son for not less than five years. The possession, manu-
facture, procurement, ordering, or passing on to others,

of explosives for the purpose of committing an unlawful

139

act was punishable by five years imprisonment. Anyone,
who by public word or deed, incited another person to
commit a crime with explosives was liable to five years
in prison, as was any person who glorified or lauded any
acts involving explosives. Likewise, if a person were
privy to a plan to commit such an act, and did not give
the police an advance warning of the impending explosion,
he, too, was liable to five years in jail.“’1

The dramatic manner in which the renewal of the
Socialist Law and the passage of the Dynamite Law was
accomplished resulted in a wave of hysteria which swept
across Germany, especially among the aristocracy and the
bourgeois who had been frightened by Most's propaganda.
Now they had their worst fears reinforced by the public
exposure of Reinsdorf and his group and the passage of
the Dynami te Law J42

On the surface the German government maintained a
hard-line policy against explosives, a policy which was
aided by agents provocateurs. The Spy SchrBder, who was
involved in the publication of Freiheit in Switzerland,
was also involved in planning of dynamite attempts. He

obtained a case of dynamite from the German anarchist

 

ulThe text of the law is found in the Berliner
Tagblatt, June 11, 188h. The law in many respects follows
a similar law enacted earlier in England following a long
series of violent bombings.

uzFricke, Bismarcks Praetorianer, p. 161.

 

MAO

Ulrich Wbeeler(b. 1851 in Barnsdorf, Hannover), and Martin
Etter(b. 1859 in Gdnningen, WUrttemberg). They had stolen
the dynamite from a dynamite factory in Opladen near Dds-
seldorf and had given it to SchrBder in Switzerland, who
was holding it while waiting for orders from the police
official Adolf Kruger in Berlin as to when and where it
should be used.)Jr3

The trial of the Niederwald conspirators opened
in Leipzig on Monday December 15, lch, at nine in the

morning. The size of the court room of the Reichggericht

 

was not large enough to accomodate the number of people
involved in the trial so it had to be transfered to the

Landsgericht, where the case was heard before the Second

 

and Third Criminal Senates of the high court, with Drenk-
mann, presiding as President. The judges, fourteen in
all, occupied a dias at one end of the room, seated around
a horse-shoe shaped table which was covered with a green
cloth. The eight prisoners sat in a raised dock at one
side of this table, and they like the fifty-four witnesses
stood in the free Space in front of the dias when they
were being examined by the judges. On the other end of
the table was a press section full of reporters. The
audience, which was limited by the size of the room, and

which was admitted by ticket only, occupied the back of

 

uBIfiifioa PP. 23S-2h0; Langhard, Die anarchistische
ngegung_in der Schweiz von ihren Anfangen bis zur Gegen-
wart, p.V§17.

 

hhl
the room and the gallery. For the duration of the trial
all other matters in Germany were momentarily set aside
while all eyes were focused on Leipzig. The business of
the Reichs Chancellory, the Reichstag, and all other bu-
siness of state slowed down during the period of the trial

from December 15 to 22.L"}“L

The defendants were charred with the explosion
which took place in Elberfeld in the Willemsen restaurant,
the dynamiting of the Police Headquarters in Frankfurt a.

M., the explosion at the Festhalle in RUdesheim, and the

 

attempt on the life of the Emperor at the unveiling of the
Niederwald monument. The chief crown witness was the
weaver Palm, a police spy, who testified that he knew in
advance of the Elberfeld bombing and of the attempt that
was to occur at the Niederwald, but said that he was not
actually present at either of the affairs. The fact that,
no one other than Rupsch and Kfichler were present at the
111 fated Niederwald attempt could have been to the advan-
tage of the defendents, had they not been so willing to
fill in the missing gaps for the prosecution and thus put
the blame on Reinsdorf. Only Reinsdorf, of the eight

 

uu"Das Drama vor dem Reichsgericht," wochenblatt
der Frankfurter Zeitugg, No. 51(December 21, 188h) p. 03;
"Der Anarchistenprozess,“ Ibid., No. 52(December 28, 18 h),
p. hll. The trial also caught the imagination of Henry
James for the principal characters in his novel, The Prin-
cess Casamassima(London, 1886), bear a strong resemblance
to those who were on trial at Leipzig. For a study of this
see: W.H. Tilley, The Background of the Princess Casamas-
sima(University of Florida, Gainesville,gFlorida, 1961).

 

 

 

Aha
defendents showed any courage. If Rupsch and Kfichler had
not been so willing to volunteer information the pro-
secution would have had a weak case, especially on the
Niederwald episode. Although the government had a witness,
Palm, who knew in advance of the plan, only Rupsch and
Kfichler were there.

The testimony of Rupsch and Kflchler included a
long series of lies designed to make the judges view them
favorably; it should be noted that the judges did not
believe the stories told by Rupsch and Kfichler. Kflchler
claimed he had told Palm in advance that he was going
along with Rupsch for the purpose of frustrating Reins-
dorf‘s plan, because at the last minute he was going to
pull the fuse out of the sixteen pounds of dynamite they
had placed in the culvert, but that the wet fuse made
the preventive action unnecessary. Rupsch said he took
advantage of the paid trip to the Niederwald because he
wanted to see the Emperor, whom.he liked and also he
wanted to Spoil the plan. He claimed that when Kfichler
gave him the signal he put a cold cigar to the fuse and
that on the return trip he ignited the fuse only after
cutting it so that about two feet burned. Rupsch said
that he had read Freiheit, but did not understand it. He
said.he did not know what anarchism was nor could he ex-
plain the meaning of the phrase "Property is Theft." He
said.he was about to break off his association wittheins-

dorf and his group. Both Rupsch and Etchler placed the

M3
entire blame on Reinsdorf saying that if they had not
gone through with the plan he would have sought revenge
on them. Rupsch signed a long statement detailing all
aspects of the attempt and even took officials to the
scene to show them where the dynamite had been concealed.
Both Rupsch and Kfichler admitted setting off the explosion

at the Festhalle in Rfldesheim, but claimed that the dynamite

 

was placed ten feet from the building; due to the damage
done to the structure the judges did not believe the sto-
WAS

Reinsdorf tried to shield rather than incriminate
his accomplices. He said the only part Rheinbach, SBhngen
and lelner played in the Niederwald attempt was in con-

tributing money for travel expenses. He said that the

 

hSBrandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Re . 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9M, Lit. D., Nr. M21, Vol. I
(9,588 , Folders 312-313; Der Anarchistenprozess Reinsdorf
und Genossen, pp. 32-M7. The police1investigation was ex-
tensive but failed to turn up much new information beyond
what they already knew at the outset. Two of the more in-
teresting statements were made by Hermann Stellmacher and
Carl Grillenberger. Stellmacher related to the police that
he knew that Reinsdorf had some dynamite and that he was
planning an explosion and he thought it was to be in Frank-
furt. Grillenberger on February 16, 188M, in Nuremburg,
told all that he knew to the police about anarchist ac-
tivities, relating that he had known Reinsdorf in Leipzig
in 1879. Another person the police arrested was Karl Mil-
denberger, who was seized in Mannheim on January 19, 188M.
They tried to connect him with the explosion in Frankfurt,
but had to release him after fourteen days when they were
unable to associate him with the crime. Brandenburgisches
Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit.
9M, Lit. D., Nr. M21, Vol. I(9,588), Folders 102-103, 111-
112. For an account of Mildenberger's imprisonment see:
Carl Mildenberger, "In Sachen Rumpfs," Freiheit, No. 5
(January 31, 1 85), pp. 2-3.

 

 

mm

three factory workers read Freiheit and let him.use

their homes as cover addresses, but that they were not
involved in the planning of the explosions. On the other
hand, Bachmann admitted setting off the dynamite in the
Willemsen restaurant in Elberfeld, but denied that he in-
tended to hurt anyone. He only wanted to register a pro-
test! He blamed Reinsdorf, claiming that Reinsdorf

supplied him with the dynamite and the plan.M6

Reinsdorf put on an admirable show admitting he
had planned the Niederwald attempt, regretting his in-
ability to carry it out because of his injured ankle, and
explaining how he got Rupsch and Kfichler to put the plan
into Operation. He was highly critical of Rupsch and
Kflchler for bungling the job. Then he went on to describe
the developments which had taken place in Germany since
the unification in 1871, pointing out that workingmen had
not benefited from the unification. He called the con-
flict of 1870-71 a war of conquest and called upon the
workingmen in the Reich to rise up against the government.
Suffrage, he said, was meaningless; direct action by the
working masses was needed to help bring down the state,
even if it meant killing many peOple. The end would jus-
tify the means. He denounced the Social Democratic Party

as a bourgeois party, bound by parliamentarism, doing

 

uéner Anarchistenprozess Reinsdorf und Genossen,
pp. 17-22.

 

MS

nothing to improve the conditions of the working classes.
80 he proclaimed: "down with the ballot box; it is time
for you to act."u7i

Reinsdorf used the witness stand, and his own
personal cross-examination of the witnesses, as an oppor-
tunity to explain the meaning of anarchism. Several times
during the course of the trial his language became so
violent that the judge had to caution him that additional
charges would be broudht against him if he did not tone
down his remarks. He declared himself to be an anarchist,
and the judge asked: "What is anarchism?" Reinsdorf an-
swered by saying, "A society in which every person can
develop to the fullest extent of his abilities. In order
that this may be accomplished no one should be burdened
with excessive labor; want and misery should be banished
from the world; every form of force should cease to be;
all forms of ignorance and superstition should be elimi-
nated from the world.“L8

The judge asked him if he were guilty or innocent
of the charges presented against him. Reinsdorf refused
to answer with a simple yes or no, but replied: "I look
upon this matter as a question of power. If we, German
anarchists, had a couple of army corps at our disposal,

then I would not have to Speak to this court. I have

 

”71b1d., pp. 55-58.
hBIbid., p. 57.

hhb
nothing further to say. Do with me as you please."br9

Later in the trial, after the sentence had
been handed down, Reinsdorf said in response to the re-
marks of the judge that the hand of providence had saved
the Emperor from death. nI tell you the bungling hand of
Rupsch saved him. I am sorry to say that I had no one
else at my disposal. The only thing I have to regret is
that the attempt failed. . . . In the factories the wor-
kers are used for the benefit of the stockholders. These
honest christians swindle the working people out of half
of what they earn. My lawyer wanted to save my head, but
for a hunted proletarian as myself, the quickest death is
the best."50

He went on to point out that the excessive use
of house searches by the German police and the paying of
police spies such as Palm and Weidenmfiller demonstrated
how corrupt society had become. He told how Police Com-
missioner Gottschalk, who had employed Palm and Weiden-
maller, knew in advance of the Niederwald attempt and did
nothing to stop it. Reinsdorf claimed that it was Gott-
schalk who was responsible for Kfichler being of trial be-
cause he had instructed Rupsch to carry out the plan alone,
but when Palm gave KHChler forty Marks then there was

enough money for Kflchler to go along and keep an eye on

 

uglbido, pp. 58-590
50Ibid., p. 88.

hi?
the younger Rupsch. Reinsdorf maintained that the use by
the police of such people as Palm was sufficient evidence
of the decadence and corruption of society, "against such
corruption are not our deed justified?" If I had ten
heads I would offer them gladly and lay them on the block

for the cause of anarchism."sl

He ended this moving speech
with "The social revolution will never be abandoned, even

if there are a hundred tribunals. The people will one day
have enough dynamite to blow up all of you and every other

member of the bourgeois."52

There can be little doubt that Reinsdorf by his
actions at the trial hoped to establish himself as a mar-
tyr for the cause of anarchism. He acknowledged his con-
nections with H8del; he fully admitted responsibility for
the Niederwald plot. He defined anarchism, and from the
witness stand urged the workers on to violence, admonishing
them to bring down the government of the Reich, even if
it meant killing many people. It is evident that Reins-
dorf was aware that these voluntary assertions and his in-
cendiary speeches were to his detriment. There can be no
question that his conduct at the trial was heroic, something
to be emulated by future generations of anarchists. Reins-
dorf was seriously ill with tuberculosis and more than

likely he preferred a quick, heroic death on the scaffold

 

51Ibid., p. 89.
52Ibid.

khd
to the miserable and tuberculosis would soon bring him if
he were confined to prison. As early as August 23, 1882,
Reinsdorf thought that the end could come for him at any
time. He indicated in a letter to a friend that he was
going to see his parents for what he thought would be the
last time.53 From the time he arrived in Elberfeld on
March 19, 1883, until he left there on October 27 of the
same year he Spent June 23 to July 30 in the hospital for
tuberculosis, and September 9 to October 21 in the same
hospital for a sprained ankle and tuberculosis. He was
only out of the hospital for a few weeks before he was
again hOSpitalized in Hamburg on November 7, again with
tuberculosis, a stay which lasted until January 9, 188b,
being apprehended by the police only two days after his
release.5u To put it bluntly Reinsdorf knew he did not
have long to live and he wanted people to remember his
going.

The chief witness for the prosecution, the weaver
and police Spy Rudolf Palm, whose name appeared first on
a list of fifty-four witnesses, was introduced in such a
way that those present at the trial assumed that he had
purchased.his freedom by betraying his companions. The

prosecution accomplished this by not requiring him to swear

 

53Most, August Reinsdorf, p. 51.

 

ELLBrandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Re . 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. D., Nr. h2l, Vol. I
(9,588 , Folders h-S, 12.

1414-9
on oath before testifying, because of his supposed compli-
city in the crime, which is how the government intended
it should appear, but which was not the case at all be-
cause Palm's so called "complicity" in the attempt came
about as a direct result of his service as a police spy.SS
0n the witness stand Palm revealed how, where, and by whom
the plans had been made for the Niederwald attempt. He
further explained that the forty Marks he had given to
Kaohler, which were used for HHchler's traveling expenses
to the Niederwald site, were given to Kfichler to help his
family because Kflchler had six children and was out of
work and had asked him for money. In cross-examination
Reinsdorf asked Palm where he had gotten the forty Marks,
claiming that they had been supplied by the police, which
Palm of course denied. He also asked Palm where he had
obtained the seven hundred Marks to lease a large home in
Elberfeld, and Palm's reply was that it had come from his
mother-in-law. Palm's testimony was the capstone in pro-

ving the guilt of the defendents.56

 

SSFor example see: The Times(London), December 19,
188h, p. 5, Col. 0.

 

S6Der Anarchistegprozess Reinsdorf und Genossen,
pp. 22-27, 61-65. It appears that the police had two other
Spies or informers working for them in conjunction with
Palm in the Elberfeld area. The two men, both of whom were
weavers, were Jehann Schiebeck(b. July 28, 1852 in Langenau),
and Wilhelm'WeidennHller, already mentioned above. A de-
tailed statement by Schiebeck implicating Reinsdorf and his
associates is found in the police files. Brandenburgisches
Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit.
9b, Lit. D., Nr. A21, Vol. I(9,588), Folders 337-339. At
the trial Reinsdorf called Schiebeck,‘Weidenmfiller, and

 

#59
The outcome of the trial was practically a fore-
gone conclusion, but it was necessary to go through the

formalities. Much to the dismay of the police and the

 

Palm all police spies. Der Anarchistenprozess Reinsdorf

und Genossen, pp. 61-67. Weidenmfiller's name was mentioned
often at the trial and appears frequently in police docu-
ments on the case. He, along with Palm, was present at

the planning of the explosion which took place in the Wil-
lemsen restaurant, and also at the planning of the Nieder-
wald plot. The evidence against Weidenmfiller was substan-
tial. He played a greater role in the obtaining and hiding
in the woods of the dynamite than some of the individuals
who were on trial. Brandenburgisches Ipndeshauptarchiv
Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. D., Nr.
M21, Vol. I(9,588), Folders 135, 158, 220, 315. These

facts were brought out at the trial and Reinsdorf repeatedly
asked the Police Commissioner Gottschalk about Heidenmflller,
but received little information in the answers given him.
Reinsdorf claimed that Weidenmfiller was sent to the United
States to work as a Spy for the German police. This asser-
tation by Reinsdorf is probably correct because Weidenmfiller
was ”arrested" in March around the same time that Palm.was
"apprehended" by the police. Volkszeitung, No. 58(March 8,
188k). Even though there was a great deal of evidence
against him, Weidenmflller was released and ”emigrated" to
the United States. In the United States he remained in

New Yerk, joining the Freiheit group there, who found him

a job. His arrival is mentioned in a letter probably written
in late April, l88h(the date on the letter is 188M, but the
contents indicate that it was probably written in late Ap-
ril). The letter was from Friedrich Erlenkoller in New
Yerk to Richard Kfilpmann in Barmen. For the letter see:
Brandenburgisches.Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep.

30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h, Lit. D., Nr. h2l, Vol. I(9,588), Fol-
ders 218-219. A shortened version of the letter was read

at the trial. There can be little doubt that Weidenmnller
was sent to the United States to act as a spy. His arrival
in New York, shortly after that of Karl Mildenberger, who
had been held for questioning in the explosion which damaged
the police headquarters in Frankfurt, was heralded as an-
other hero who had barely escaped the clutches of the German
police. A Spy infiltrated the inner circle of Mest's group
in l88h. This unnamed spy sent many long and detailed re-
ports on Most and Freiheit to the Berlin police. Branden-
burgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Ber-
lin C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A., Nr. 286, Vol. I(86hl), "Die
anarchistische f3ewegung 188h-1885.”

 

 

 

MEI
prosecution they were not able to connect Reinsdorf nor
any of the other defendents with the explosion which had

damaged the Frankfurt Police Headquarters.S7
On December 22, 188h, Reinsdorf, Rupsch, and

Kflchler were sentenced to death, but on February 6, 1885,
Rupsch's sentence was commuted to life in prison because
of his youth and because it was felt that he had come
under the spell of Reinsdorf. Also he had been very help-
ful in proving the government's case against Kfichler.
According to Rocker, Rupsch was still in prison in 192k.
Bachmann and Holzhauer were given ten years in prison,
but Holzhauer hung himself soon after the completion of
the trial. The other three defendents Rheinbach, SBhngen,
and T811ner were set free.58 i

I The end for Reinsdorf and KUchler came at seven
o'clock on the cold winter morning of February 7, 1885.
Reinsdorf was reconciled to his fate and welcomed his
martyrdom, passing the days between the sentencing and
the carrying out of the execution smoking cigarettes and
singing a song which had been sung for years by universi-

ty students.

 

57The police never solved the question of who
blew up the Frankfurt Police Headquarters Building. In
1887 a group of anarchists captured in Mannheim claimed
that the explosion was set off by Julius Lieske. Die
Autonomic, No. 15(May 2, 1887), p. 3. -_—'

SBDer Anarchistenprozess Reinsdorf und Genossen,
pp. 90-97; Rocker, Johann Most, p. 211.

LL52

"Stiefel, du musst sterben
Bist noch so jung - Juchhe!
Stiefel, du musst sterben,
Bist noch so jung.
Wenn das der Absatz wfisst
Das der Stiefel sterben mHsst,
Wflrd sich betrfiben, .
Bis in den Tod - Juchhel
Wflrd sich betrfibeg
Bis in den Tod." 9

The executions took place at Halle prison with
Reinsdorf going first. Shortly before the execution he
ate a hearty meal and smoked a cigar; as he was led to
the execution block, he once again sang his little song.
He mounted the steps leading up to the scaffold, pealed
off his shirt, as requested, and stood stripped bare to

the waist in the cold February weather. The Reichsanwalt

 

approached him asking, "Are you August Reinsdorf," and
Reinsdorf replied, "Yes;" the sentence was then read and
the COpy of it signed by the Emperor was shown to the
accused. Reinsdorf was then strapped down to the block
and the executioner lifted the huge axe in the air, but
before he struck the fatal blow Reinsdorf said, "I die
for humanity, down with barbarism, long live anarchism."
With his last words still echoing around the prison court—
yard, where sixty peOple stood, the crack of the Scharf-
richter's axe was heard as it hit the block, and Reins-
dorf's head bounced off the platform and onto the ground.

The Scharfrichter turned to the Reichsanwalt and said,

 

 

 

59Karl Braun-Wiesbaden, "Das Attentat auf dem
Niederwald und der HochverrathSprozess vor dem Reichs-
gericht,“ p. 76.

163
"The sentence has been carried out."
Kflchler had been watching this whole process from
the window in his cell. He continued to watch as Reins-
dorf's head and body were picked up and placed in a cart

(Handwagen) and taken to the prison morgue. The blood

 

was then cleaned off the platform, and also from the axd,
and it was placed back in its sheath.

Once again the "Armensfinderglocke" struck and

 

Kfichler was brought out from.his cell; his step was un-
steady, his composure broken; he could scarcely be re-
cognized, because the short period of imprisonment had
reduced him to half of his former self. He practically
had to be carried by the three men who accompanied him.
The same process was followed as with Reinsdorf, but be-
fore the axe fell he said, "I die an innocent man, my poor
wife, my poor children." With the word children still on
his lips his head was severed from.his body. The whole
process of the two executions took only about fifteen

60

minutes.

 

6OIbid., pp. 76-82° A crowd gathered early outside
the prison gates hoping to see the execution, but were not
allowed in. Friedlaender, Interessante Kriminal-Prozesse
von Kulturhistorischer Bedeutung, p. 2h0. An interesting
sidelight to the Reinsdorf execution is the article, "Nie-
der mit den Barbarei," Der Sozialdemokrat, No. 7(February 12,
1885), p. 1, which Spoke out against the execution of Reins-
dorf and Kflchler. This added to the confusion in the pub-
lic mind as to just where did the Social Democratic Party
stand. While Reinsdorf was alive the Social Democratic Par-
ty went out of their way to malign him, now that he was dead
they were Opposed to his execution. Articles such as this
did little to clarify the differences between the anarchists
and Social Democrats.

 

 

 

L61;

Thus died Reinsdorf, greatest of the German anar-
chists of the decades of the 1870's and 1880's. The day
before he died he wrote three letters, one to his brother
Bruno, the second to his brother Franz, and the third to
his parents. To Bruno he wrote that he was deathly ill
and greeted his approaching death. He told him to take
care of their father and mother when they were old. In
the letter to his brother Franz he said, "I feel that I
have done my duty; and this is what makes my final walk
easy, to receive joyfully the everlasting sleep as some-
thing well earned." He advised his brother Franz against
following "The wandering existence of an anarchist," but
to "bear with strength, endurance and friendly submission
the burden which you have placed upon yourself, and try
to find satisfaction in it, so that you can raise your
children so that they may be useful and an adornment to
you . . . when you, therefore, in the years to come look
back upon the days of honest, peaceable labor, and of
difficult duties fulfilled, then you will be filled with
a joyful certainty and a quiet happiness that will repay
you for all your sufferings. . . . so do your duty as the
father of your family."61

Reinsdorf asked his parents to greet the remainder

of his brothers and sisters to whom he could not write

 

61The letter to Bruno is printed in Mest, August
Reinsdorf, pp. 75-76. The letter to Franz in Schaact,
Anarchy and Anarchists, pp. 98-99.

 

#55

individual letters. He said, "Sick as I am, and with a
prOSpect of long suffering, it should be looked upon as
a blessing when such an existence is put to a quick death.
And What an end it is? Whoever they are, progressive or
reactionary, liberal or conservative, they all hate the
anarchist Reinsdorf. As they have condemned his activities,
they cheer his death. . . . but his steadfastness, in de-
fiance of thousands of obstacles, no one can deny. And
this shall be your consolation. . . . My last thoughts are
of you and of my brothers and Sisters, and of the great
cause for which I die."62

These letters, if nothing else, reinforce the
impression that Reinsdorf thought he was deathly ill and
preferred to die the death of a hero and martyr then to
meet the miserable and of a consumptive in a prison cell,
and Most quickly elevated.him to the position as the

greatest hero of the German movement of the period.

JULIUS LIEShE
The career of Julius Lieske can best be thought of
as a corollary to the Niederwald attempt. Most called for
revenge to atone for the death sentences handed down by the
tribunal in Leipzig. On the night of January 13, 1885, the
hand of an assassin cut down the Frankfurt Police Chief

Carl Ludwig Franz Rumpf(b. February 9, 1822). Rumpf had

 

62Printed in Schaact, Anarchy and Anarchists,

p.99.

156
been in the army but a bad fall from a horse forced.his
early retirement in 1852. He then studied law, received
a Ph.D., and then Specialized in criminal investigation
and attained the position as Chief of Police in Frankfurt.
He was able and rigid, but also unscrupulous, as illustrated
above by his part in the High Treason Trial of 1881. He
was also responsible for much of the investigation into
the Niederwald attempt. The anarchists hated him, both
for his efficiency and for his duplicity. Many asserted
that Rumpf himself blew up the Frankfurt Police Headquarters
building, an unsubstantiated charge, but one that is at

least credible in view of his personality and tactics.63

Police Chief Rumpf lived at 6 Sachsenlager, a
street where the wealthy inhabitants of Frankfurt resided.
His home was large, and had an extensive garden in front
of it with a fence and gate separating the garden area
from the Sachsenlager. On the night of January 13, 1885,
Rumpf, a man of set habits, left Police Headquarters at
seven fifteen and walked home, arriving there sometime
between seven thirty and seven forty-five. He entered by
the front gate, walked through the garden, and was about
to enter the front door when an assailant struck him in
the chest with two vicious stab wounds from a long trian-

gular dagger. The fatal wound was made at a point three

 

63"Die Ermordung des Polizeirath Rumpf," wochenblatt
der Frankfurter Zeitung, No. 3(January 18, 1885), pp. 21-
22; Martin, Der Anarchismus und seineflrfiger, p. 101.

 

 

LL57

centimeters below the right collar bone and two centime—
ters to the right of the middle of his chest; it pierced
both the right lung and the heart and caused instantaneous
death. The blow must have been struck with great force
because it had to penetrate Rumpf's overcoat, suit coat,
vest, shirt, and undershirt, all of which were made of
heavy material. His body was found on the steps by a ser-
vant girl who returned home at eight o'clock. She summoned
the police and a doctor, but Rumpf had already died. The
only evidence found at the scene of the crime was a bloody
hand print on the gate. Robbery was ruled out immediately
as a motive, because Rumpf had not been robbed. The natural
suspects in the crime were the anarchists who had served
notice that they were going to settle their score with the
Police Chief.6u

This impression was reinforced on January 2h, by
Freiheit when Most wrote "Shake you dogs! Rumpf is dead -
stuck in the back like rat." The article declared that no
one was Safe anymore, not even in the Imperial Palace, the
Reichs Chancellery, or in any police station; at any moment
someone standing behind an official could plunge a knife
into his back. "Rumpf is dead, the anarchists have tried
him. Rumpf was only number one on a long list of those
who are to die, and blow by blow, stabbing by stabbing they

will follow." Le Révolte greeted the murder of Rumpf by

 

 

 

6”Martin, Der Anarchismus und seine Trdger, pp.
102“103 . ,

168

writing "Bravo to the German anarchists! They are not
much for threats, but oh the deeds! Deeds are much better
than ceaseless threats and pointless agitation."65

The police were very interested in capturing the
assassin of Rumpf and offered a reward of three thousand
Marks for information on the killing. The reward was
quickly raised to ten thousand Marks. Six days later in
Hockenheim a young man whose papers identified him.as
Heinrich Nau was captured by the police. On him were
found two revolvers and it was soon discovered that the
true identity of the twenty-One year old shoemaker they
had seized was Adolf Julius Lieske(b. February 1, 1863 in
Zossen, Kreis Teltow in the Mark of Brandenburg). He had

learned the Shoemaking trade in his native Zossen and in

1881 went on his Wandersdhaft, traveling to St. Gallen,

 

where he was introduced to anarchism by the Austrian anar-
chist Ondra. During his trial it was brought out by von
Hake that in Switzerland Lieske had been a member of anar-
chist groups in Lausanne, Geneva, Zurich, and Basel. In
Switzerland Lieske worked as a shoemaker and distributed
anarchist literature, including handbills which proclaimed
Stellmacher a martyr for the cause of anarchism. He also
made several trips to Germany at that time, telling his
fellow workers that he was going to visit his father in

Zossen. The last such trip took place on December 30,

 

65wo. 25(February 1-1i, 1885), p. h.

159

188h; however, he did not go to Zossen, but went directly
to Frankfurt a.M.66

The case presented against Lieske was only circum-
stantial; he steadfastly maintained his innocence, but
nevertheless, he was found guilty. Lieske registered
in an inn in Frankfurt named the "Deutscher Hof" at Maenzer-
gasse 16, using the papers of the cabinet maker Heinrich
Nau. He remained at the inn until the day of January 13.
He claimed that he spent the night;of the thirteenth on
the road walking; his statement is probably true, because
between seven and eight o'clock on the morning of January
1h he showed up in Bickenbach in a tavern owned by Anton
Rau. Prior to going to the tavern he went to the shop of
Frau Bentheim and purchased paper, envelopes, and stamps.
At the trial Frau Bentheim testified that his left hand
was wrapped in a handkerchief. At Rau's tavern Lieske
spent five pfennigs on Schnaps, ink, and a pen. While
drinking the schnaps, he wrote tWO letters. When the
tavern clientale had departed Lieske showed the owner and

his fifteen year old daughter the wound on his left hand.

It was about two and one fourth inches long, located

 

66"Der Prozess Lieske,“ Freiheit, No. 29(July 18,
1885), pp. h-S; "Der Prozess Lieske," WOChenblatt der
Frankfurter Zeitung, No. 27(July 5, 1885), pp. 20942IO;
Le Revolte, No. 8(Jyly 10-August 2, 1885), p. 3; Ludwig
Fuld, "Die Ermordung des Polizeiraths De. Rumpf in Frank-
furt a.M.," Nord und Sfld, XXXIV(1885), p. M76; Bericht
fiber die Schwurgerichts Verhandlung von 29. Juni bis I.
Juli 1885 gegen Julius Lieske(Leipzig, 1885), pp. lihC.

 

 

 

too
between his thumb and his index finger. He said he had
received the wound from falling on a sharp object. The
tavern owner and his daughter cleaned and dressed the
wound.

Lieske then left the tavern and Bickenbach and
walked down the main road to Zwingenberg where between
three and four in the afternoon he stopped at the office
of Dr. Weil, telling him that he was on his way to see a
friend in Mannheim, but that he had injured his hand.

The doctor treated the injured hand and gave Lieske twenty
pfennig because he thought he looked completely destitute.
At the trial the cut hand was a strong point used against
Lieske, even though Dr. wail testified that the cut could
have been caused by falling on a sharp object as Lieske
.claimed.67

From Zwingenberg Lieske traveled by foot to Lauten-
bach and on to Mannheim on January 15. On the 16th he was
in Heddesheim and about eight o'clock on the evening of
the 18th arrived in Schwetzingen. In Schwetzingen he told
an inn keeper that he had just come in on the train and
wanted a room, but the inn keeper told him that the inn
was full for the night. He moved on to the neighboring
town of Hockenheim, arriving there about nine thirty.

In Hockenheim a policeman asked to check his papers and

discovered that they were falsified. He asked Lieske to

 

67Ibid.

A61
follow him to police headquarters, but Lieske fled firing
two shots at the policeman who pursued him. Unfortunately
for Lieske he ran into the arms of two men who were stan-
ding nearby and they held him until the policeman caught
up with him.

Prior to being arrested, during his stay in Mann-
heim, Lieske had stopped at the home of Guttmann, a former
anarchist whom he had met in Lausanne. Guttmann gave him
a new purse with money so that he no longer had to travel
on foot; when he was captured the purse still contained
thirteen Marks. In addition to the purse and the two
revolvers, there was a brown stain six centimeters long
and two centimeters wide in his right coat pocket. An
analysis of the stain by a chemist showed that it was
blood. The shape of the stain demonstrated that the blood
could not have come from his injured left hand but pro-
bably from a bloody instrument which had been placed into
his pocket.

At Lieske's trial in Frankfurt a.M. from June 29
to July 1, 1885, a parade of witnesses was brought out to
testify against him. A worker named Hfiber testified that
he had met Lieske in Frankfurt. He told how he and Lieske
had discussed the Reinsdorf trial and how Lieske said that
he was going to avenge the sentence of Reinsdorf. Hfiher
also related that Lieske praised Stellmacher. The cabinet
maker Heinrich Nau related that he met Lieske in Frankfurt

on January h and that he had given him his identification

LL62
because he was an anarchist and Reinsdorf was his idol.
For letting Lieske use his identification Nau was later
sentenced to four months in prison.

A fourteen year old paper hanger's apprentice,
Schmidt, who was in the vicinity of Rumpf's home on the
night of the murder, said he had heard a scream, g garden
gate slam, and then saw a long lanky figure, about twenty-
four to thirty years old, without beard, run down the street
and turn the corner. Schmidt was unable to say for certain
that Lieske was the man he had seen.

The most damaging witness against Lieske was Frau
Kamphausen who said she was passing Rumpf's home at eight
o'clock on the evening prior to the murder. She was walking
with her thirteen year old daughter on the other side of
the street when she saw dhat she thought was a vagabond
lurking near the door of Rumpf's home. She and her daughter
crossed the street and Frau Kamphausen asked him What he
was doing there, and the man replied “None of your business.d
Frau Kamphausen retorted that she planned to make it her
business, and then the man leaped out at them. She de-
scribed him as being dressed in dark clothing, without a
beard, a cap on his head, and with piercing eyes. At the
trial she identified Lieske on the basis of his eyes,
saying they were the same eyes she had seen by the Rumpf
house the night before the murder. Her thirteen year old
daughter told the same story, but was unable to identify

Lieske for certain. Lieske denied being near the Rumpf

A63

house on the night of January 12th and said he did not
own a cap, even though one was found in his bag after he
was arrested. Another witness testified that he had the
cap over the injured hand while he was in Bickenbach.

Other people living on the Sachsenlager had seen
a man near the Rumpf house on the night before the murder,
but were unable to identify Lieske. It was assumed that
the murder had been planned for the night of January 12,
but that evening Rumpf brought a friend home with him so
the plan had to be delayed until the next night. Lieske
denied being in the vicinity of the Rumpf home on either
the 12th or 13th of January, but to no avail. The testi-
mony of Frau Kamphausen, placing him in the yard of the
Rumpf home on the night of January 12th, was very damaging.
That she could be so certain of Lieske's identity was dis-
puted at the time, due to the fact that it was dark, the
street was poorly lighted, and the suSpect was a considerable
distance away. Lieske also denied owning a shoemaker's
knife, for it was assumed that such a knife had been the
:murder weapon. However, witnesses were produced at the
trial who testified that they had seen a shoemaker's
knife in Lieske's possession, but it could no longer be
located.

That so much credence should have been placed in
Frau Kamphausen's testimony is remarkable when her past
is considered. An account of her earlier life was sent

to Der Sozialdemokrat by a number of socialists living in

 

héh

Cologne who had known her family for years. At seventeen
she was a prostitute, married at twenty to the gilder
Kamphausen, who left her after a short time to go to the
United States. She then returned to her old profession
and went to Belgium. "She returned from the trip so
syphilitic that her face was covered with sores" and went
to work in a house of prostitution in Germany. “She left
this house to return to Belgium, but later returned to
Germany "more syphilitic than the time before." Once
back in Germany she went to Bonn and eventually settled
in Frankfurt a.M. where she was hired by the police as a
witness to testify in the Rumpf murder. According to
this unsubstantiated account all the lines she spoke at

the trial were put into her mouth by the police.68

Although the evidence against Lieske was circum-
stantial, the fact that he had left Frankfurt in bad
weather on the night of January l3-1k, traveled on foot
to Bickenbach, was sufficient in the mind of the judge to
warrant the death sentence. When the sentence was handed
down Lieske stomped his feet, slammed his fist on the table
and shouted “Who will condemn me! 'Where is the evidence
against me?"‘ He then turned to the judge and said, "You
have handed down your last death sentence." The guards
in the room seized him and he shouted: "Ha! Rumpf is dead,

Rumpf is dead," as they dragged him from the court house

 

68Der Sozialdemokrat, No. k7(November 19, 1885):

 

p. 10

#65

he shouted to the crowd "Up with anarchy,"

and as they
pushed him into a waiting van he yelled, "Throw dynamite
bombslnég ‘

Lieske maintained his innocence, and Der Sozial-
demokrat said that the evidence did not prove his guilt

conclusively.7O Both Max Nettlau and Rudolf Rocker in-
clude Lieske as an anarchist but claim that he did not
murder Rumpf.71

Karl Lieske, brother of the accused, made an attempt

to save his brother's life. Der Sozialdemokrat printed a

 

letter dated October 25, 1885, which Karl said he had re-
ceived from.his brother Julius awaiting death in prison

in Wehlheiden near Kassel. Julius wrote: "If I had com-
mitted the deed I should receive the punishment, but I

swear to vou, dear brother, I did not do it myself, nor

did I take part in the murder. They have Condemned an inno-
cent man." Several other places in the same letter he
stated categorically that he did not murder Rumpf. The

letter had first appeared in Cri du Peup1e(Paris), before

 

it was reprinted in Der Sozialdemokrat. Karl Lieske related

that he had tried to send the letter to other papers but

 

69"Der Prozess Lieske," Freiheit, No. 29(July 18,
1885), p. h; Fuld, "Die Ermordung des Polizeiraths Dr.
Rumpf in Frankfurt a.M.," p. u80.

7°No. 28(July 9,1885), p. 1.

71Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutionare,
p. 332; Rocker, Johann Most, p.‘312. .

 

use

that they had refused to print it "because they want to
perpetuate the legend."72

The attempt oquarl Lieske to save his brother was
to no avail for the sentence was carried out at two minutes
after eight on the morning of November 17, 1885. According
to an account printed in Freiheit, the night before the
execution Lieske ate a good meal, and drank some schnaps,
and slept so well that he had to be awakened at seven in
the morning. His head was severed with such a blow that
it split the block, with blood Spurting out several feet
from the severed neck, and running down into the newly

formed Split in the block. Again Most called the letter

printed in Cri du Peuple and reprinted in Der Sozialdemo-

 

 

kggt a fake, and said that for Lieske's death ten peOple
would be killed as Rumpf had been killed for Reinsdorf.
He closed his article with "Proletarians, arm yourselves!
Prepare yourselves for battle! Use knives, poison, incen-
diary torches, and guns to free the earth from the scum
of humanity; from the exploiters, and tyrants."73

What is the truth about Lieske? Did he kill Rumpf
acting alone? Did he do it while acting in conjunction

with someone else, or was he, as Nettlau and Rocker

 

72Der Sozialdemokrat, No. h7(November 19, 1885),
p. 1. A reply came quickly from Most who said the letter
had been falsified, Freiheit, No k8(November 28, 1885), p. l.

 

73"An Grabe Lieske," Freiheit, No. h9(December S,
1885), p. 1; Ibid., No. 50(December 12, 1885), p. 1; £2
Revolte, No. lBlDecember 20-January 2, 1886), p. 2.

467

maintain, innocent? A final solution to this perplexing
problem is not possible, but there is one account that
is worth examination.

The most interesting account of the murder of
Rumpf is given by the police Spy Rudolf Martin, who asso-
ciated with many anarchists in London, and who claimed
that he had received his material from a source close to
the murderers themselves. According to Martin four per-
sons were involved in the murder, but only three of them
were actually in Frankfurt. He claims that the murder of
Rumpf was planned in London by Victor Dave, in November
of 188h, after his release from prison.7u The event was
still in the planning stages at the time of Reinsdorf's
trial in December in Leipzig. Dave organized a group in
London for the purpose of carrying out acts of "Propaganda
by Deed,n and for the purpose of coordinating all prOpa-
ganda efforts directed toward the continent. The members
of the group were Dave, who set himself up as the leader,
Sebastian Trunk, Gottlieb Knauerhase, Otto Rinke, and
Josef Peukert. Rinke and Peukert balked at the attempt
by Dave to establish himself as the leader of the group.
According to Martin, Dave wanted Rumpf murdered in revenge
for the prison sentence he had received at the Ieipzig

treason trial of 1881, because it was Rumpf, more than

 

7I'I'Dave was released from prison April 21, 188h,
and arrived in London in early May of the same year.
Nettlau, Anarchisten und Sozialfievolutiongre, p. 332.

.,

11,68

anyone else who was reSponsible for the prosecution's
success in the trial. Martin claims that Dave contributed
the largest share of the money to finance the project in
order to repay Rumpf for the part he had played in the
1881 trial and to avenge the sentence handed down to
Reinsdorf and his friends.

Of the four people involved in the murder of
Rumpf, according to Martin, only one, Guttmann, was ac-
tually inside Germany at the time the event was planned.
He was in Mannheim, and it was to him.that the money was
sent to finance the venture. The other three, who were
to carry out the murder, were in addition to Lieske, the
house servant Kratz, and the cabinet maker Heinrich Nau.
Martin claims that Lieske had the least important job in
the murder, and he was the only one of the conspirators
who had not already compromised himself with the law, so
he was sent to Frankfurt first, and for two weeks observed
Rumpf's actions. Kratz and Nau had to be more cautious
because their names were already on the police blotter.
Guttmann was to remain in Mannheim and receive the money
from London to be forwarded on to the conSpirators in
Frankfurt.

Martin says that on the morning after the murder
Lieske wrote two letters from Bickenbach to London asking
for fifty Marks; he instructed that the money be sent to
a cover address in the vicinity of Mannheim. According

to Martin four hundred Marks had been accumulated for

h69
the attempt on the life of Rumpf, but when they received
the two letters from Lieske, the problem which faced
them in Iondon was how to send the money to him. Suppo-
sedly Rinke was in charge and wanted to send it to a
cover address with which he was familiar, and Dave con-
curred; but unfortunately for Lieske, the money was not
sent to Germany. Dave later accused Rinke of embezzling
the money, but the charge could not be proven. According
to Dave Lieske was captured because he did not have suf-
ficient money to enable him to flee Germany.7s Dave hated
Rinke and Peukert so it is possible that the story is a
fabrication. On the other hand it was not beneath Rinke's
character to embezzle. One must conclude that Martin's
account of the murder of Rumpf, even though he may have
received his information from German anarchists in London,
was a product of the inner struggle going on at the time
in the German anarchist movement. It does not clarify
the issue of who murdered Rumpf, but only obfuscates it
further, and demonstrates the individual biases of the
German anarchists living in London at the time.

This account is unsubstantiated except for the

 

7SDer Anarchismus und seine Trager, pp. 113-119.
It should also be noted that Guttmann was arrested in
Mannheim a short time after the arrest of Lieske. He was
tranSported to Frankfurt a.M. where he underwent a long
interrogation in connection with the Rumpf murder. Evi-
dently the police were not able to establish that he had
taken part in the affair for he was returned to Mannheim
where he remained, for a period of time, under police cus-
tody for being an anarchist. Freiheit, No. 19(May 9, 1885),

p. u.

 

 

A70

revelation in Peukert's memoirs that such activities were
planned in London by Dave in conjunction with such a group,
but Peukert does not indicate if there was any connection

between this group and the killing of Rumpf.76

There is no final word on the Rumpf murder. One
cannot prove Lieske's guilt or his innocence, or demon-
strate that the murder was carried out by more than one
person. It would appear that Lieske was not the only
person involved in the murder, but the circumstances sur-
rounding the whole affair are not clear; if there were
others involved they escaped the notice of the police,
and after the trial and execution of Lieske it was no
longer in the government interest to investigate the matter
further.

The murder of Rumpf helped to bring out into the
open the widening Split in the German anarchist movement.
In Freiheit, Most claimed that Rumpf had been condemned
and ordered killed by the command of an executive commit-

tee.77 Le Revolte, replied by asking if the German anar-

 

chists were still institutionalized.78 Der Rebell answered

 

Freiheit by saying that the German anarchists did not

 

76Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Proletariers aus der
Revolutionaren Arbeiterbewegung, pp. lh-lS.

77No. 27(Ju1y A, 1885), p. 1.

78No. 8(July lh-August 2, 1885), p. 3.

LL71
follow the orders of any executive committee, but undertook
such ventures on individual initiative. Such acts were
Spontaneous and committed at the discretion of the individual
and were not influenced by other members, groups, or execu-

tive committees. Der Rebell maintained that they sought

 

to achieve the complete suppression of all authority and
for that reason would never acknowledge that an executive
committee had the right to order anything.79

These statements point out the diSparity of views

in the German anarchist camp, which were eventually going

to shatter what solidarity the movement had.

 

79October, 1885, p. 1.

CHBPTER X?
THE DENISE OF THE EARLY MOVEMENT

By the end of 1889 the early German anarchist
movement was dead. On the surface activity continued
but at a much reduced scale - newspapers were still
smuggled into Germany from.London and the United States
and there was a residual amount of anarchist activity,
however, the old leadership of the movement was gone as
was the organization in Germany. The break-up of the
early German anarchist movement can be traced to the in-
ternecine struggle which took place within the German
speaking anarchist movement starting in 188h. The de-
struction of the movement involved a struggle of both
differing personalities and Opposing ideologies which
degenerated into a number of personal feuds over the
issues which confronted the movement in the years lBBh-
1889. These feuds resulted in a polarization of the
German Speaking anarchist movement in which the leader-
ship of the motement fell victim to the multitude of
dharges and allegations the opposing camps leveled at one
another.

Personal antagonisms played a part in the struggle

h72

MB
but the basic question which needed to be resolved was -
who should be the leader of the movement? By lBBh the
opposing camps were clearly established with the rank-
and-file German speaking anarchists lined up behind their
leaders. In one camp was Johann Most, who thought of him-
self as the titular head of the movement even though he
had been in permanent exile in the United States since
late 1882. Allied with Most was Victor Dave, who had
returned to London in May 188h, after being released from
Halle prison in Germany on April 21, where he had been
incarcerated since his arrest in.Augsburg on December 8,
1880. Sebastian Trunk and John.Neve were also sympathetic
to the Mostian forces, but nevertheless remained on friend-
ly terms with the opposition which was led by the Austrian
Jesef Peukert and the Germans Otto Rinks and Gottlieb
Knauerhase. Like Dave, Rinke established permanent reu
sidence in London in October 1883 after his release from
'UL; prison on October 10, after serving a sentence for
his military desertion which had taken place in 1873.1
Peukert's flight to London in April 188h was prompted by
an.Austrian attempt to extradite him.from Switzerland.
Knauerhase and Trunk had been living in London for a number
of years, while Neve arrived in December 188k, after some

plating a Jail term at Hanau on June 20, 188h. Subsequently

 

1Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.

Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h, Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vol. I
(13,087), Folder 331.

am
he had gone to Switzerland and was forced by the Swiss
government to leave the country on December 15, 18814.2

The year 188k brought the principal participants in the
struggle, with the exception of Most, to London. In the
final analysis it was a struggle of Mbst and Dave against
Peukert and Rinks.

The contrasting personalities of Host and Peukert
played important roles in the struggle; they carried a
bitter'hatred of each other to the grave. Ostensibly they
were both fighting for the same cause, but in personality
they were direct opposites: a natural antagonism.erupted
between them.almost from their first meeting. Peukert
resented the favorable position Most held in the German
speaking anarchist movement, and, indeed, Most considered
himself to be the titular head of the movement and viewed
all who opposed.him as aspirants to his crown. Peukert
was more than willing to work within the established frame-
work of the movement, if he had been accorded a position
commensurate with what he considered to be his abilities.
Unfortunately, he estimated.his potential more highly
than most did.

Peukert lacked Most's flamboyant style of writing
and his ability to put things in the vernacular of the
worker, but what he had to say was better thought out, more

logical, and more accurate than what appeared in the

 

ZDer Sozialdemokrat, No. 10(March 6, 1881;), p. 1+-

LL75
columns of Freiheit. Accuracy and logic were not important
to Most; only the impact of the message was important.
Essentially Most was a revolutionary and.his talents lay
in the areas of emotional rhetoric and flamboyant yellow
journalism; as a theoretician or stickler for details he
had little ability. Most was an outgoing insecure extro-
vart, while Peukert was basically an introVert. To Peukert
anarchism.had a significant theoretical dimension, while
to Host it was a practical goal to be achieved. Peukert's
articles were often.highly theoretical and it would.have
been difficult for the ordinary working man to comprehend
the subtle implications of his arguments. On the other
hand, Most always hit at the core of a matter in simple,
direct language which the workers could understand. Peu-
kert stood for individualism and individual initiative,
against centralization in any form; he demanded that anar-
chism should place the initiative of the individual above
all else. By its very nature anarchism.meant the negation
of authority in all forms. These views were anathema to
Most who thought of the anarchist movement in terms of the
leaders, and the lad.

Before continuing it should be noted that despite
their deep seated theoretical and tactical differences the
relationship between Most and Peukert remained cordial un-
til Dave's arrival in London in May 188h. In a letter of
April 25, 188k, Most related to Peukert that an associated
Press dispatch, which he said.had been carried in many

#76
American newspapers, claimed that Peukert had been exposed
in Geneva as a police spy, a charge which most, himself,

3 Before the Bruderkrieg(as the

described as ludicrous.
struggle is referred to by the participants) was finished
Host considered Peukert a police spy. The influence that
Victor Dave had on forming Most's opinion of Peukert is a
factor which cannot be overlooked.

Before moving on to the actual events and issues
of the Bruderkrisg it should be made amply clear that in
the infighting which took place within the movement there
was more involved than merely a struggle of differing ,
personalities of an attempt by one side to dominate the
other; a basic ideological difference was at the root of
the trouble. Victor Dave was a product of the First Inter-
national, thoroughly indoctrinated in the ideas of Bakunin
and Proudhon. Those who opposed him, Peukert and Rinks,
were, on the other hand influenced by Kropotkin. Both of
themflhad worked in Switzerland in close collaboration with
the Russian anarchist prince during the developmental
period of communist-anarchism, At times Rinks had worked
on Le‘Revolté. In France both Rinks and Peukert traveled
in communist-anarchist circles, associating with the well-
known communist-anarchists Emile Gauthier and Eliseo Reclus.
Both Rinks and Peukert read and spoke French and kept

abreast of the most recent developments in anarchist thought.

 

3The letter is printed in Dar Sozialist. Organ dss
Sozialistischen Bundes(Berlin), No. 6lmarch 1g, l9lh), p.fih3.

 

1L7?

Peukert had little knowledge of Bakuninist anarchism.and
it is doubtful if Rinks knew much more about the old
master of the First International even though he was
in Switzerland before Bakunin's death in 1876.

On the other hand.Davs, even before his arrest
in December 1880, had lost touch with the movement on the
continent; spending his time in London where he worked in
conjunction with Mbst on Freiheit, also his earlier activi-
ties on the continent had been confined to areas and per-
sons which were outside the mainstream.of the newly deve-
loping philosophy of communist-anarchism, Since late in
1882 Mbst had been in the United States andwas also out
of touch with the new currents in anarchism; devoting
most of his time and energy to "Propaganda by Dead.”

Bakuninism had already started to disintegrate in
187h, and by 1876 new ideas in anarchism.startsd to deve-
10p under the guidance of Peter Kropotkin, Elissa Reclus,
Errico Malatesta, and Carlo Cafiero which gradually rejected
the tactical and theoretical tenants of "collectivist anar-
chism? as Bakunin's version of anarchism is usually called.
The new school of communist-anarchists concluded.that
Bakunin's ideas were not a formula for freedom, but a
collection of abstract, contradictory libertarian and
anti-authoritarian practices. The communist-anarchists
disagreed with Bakunin's demands for absolute submission
to his authority and to the forming of an "invisible dic-
tatorship” that would steer the revolution down the right

hJB

path. Kropotkin and the other adherents of communist-
anarchism wanted a form of organization that would have
no trace of a hierarchial principle in it. Everyone
would work voluntarily according to his abilities and
consume according to his needs. The communist-anarchists
based their hopes for success on a belief in the inherent
goodness of man and on the principle of mutual aid.

The Bakuninist ideology held out a greater appeal
to Social Democratic converts to anarchism than to neophy-
tes; Bakuninism, in the estimation of the converts was not

as radical as the "Ultra-utopian dreams of Kropotkin.”u

The Bakuninist appeal was especially strong in the United
States where the greater share of the German anarchists
were former Social Democrats. Jehann Most is the striking
illustration. He has been described as a "reluctant anar-
chist," who emphasized terror and whose philosophy was a
”hybrid of Bakuninist, Blanquist, Marxist and Lassallean
(Iron Law of Wages) idsas."5‘

Ideologically than the two camps in the Bruderkrieg
were separated by a wide chasm.which had been opening for
over a decade. In one camp Most and.Dave adhered to the
older ideas of anarchism, while in the other Peukert and

Rinks followed communist-anarchism, Ironically both camps

 

hMilorad Drachkovitsch, The Revolutionary Inter-
national 186ggl9h3(8tanford, 19667, p. 70}

51b1d., p. 72.

be

in
in

Ge

po
1r.-

Er;

of

m

#79
believed in "Prepaganda by Dead."

The Bruderkrieg existed underneath the surface of
the German anarchist movement for over a year before it
broke out into open. It existed in personal antagonisms,
which, at first, appeared to be important only to the
leadership of the waring camps. One factor which became
involved early in the struggle was concerned with the
publication of Der Rebell, an anarchist paper published

6 In 188h Freiheit was

in London by Rinks and Peukert.
in serious financial trouble because the money sent from
Germany and Austria did not cover the cost involved in trans-
porting the paper across the ocean, let alone the expenses
involved in smuggling it into Germany and Austria. The
deficit involved.had to be defrayed by contributions from
those within the movement living in the United States and
England. Although most, himself, welcomed the reappearance
of Der Rebel; in October 1883, there were those within the
movement who were not so enthusiastic. They consideredlygg
Rebell to be at best a financial risk and were doubtful if

it could succeed. Furthermore they thought that Der Rebsll
would siphon off from Freiheit funds which were badly needed

Der Rebell was not therefore welcomed with open arms by

 

6The first issue of Der Rebell. Organ Anarchisten

deutscher Sprache was published by Emil—warner and Otto
Rinks in Geneva, Switzerland in December 1881. It did not
appear again until October 1883, when Rinks brought out

the second issue in London. Brandenburgisches Landeshaupt-
archiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h, Lit.

8., Nr. 1255, Vol. I(13,087), Folder 331.

 

hBO
everyone in the German speaking anarchist movement, even
though it had received Nost's official endorsement in the
columns of Freiheit. Rinks, and later Peukert, were fully
aware of the financial risk involved in such a venture as
well as the significance it could have to the movement,
however, they persisted in pointing out a need for a
European anarchist newSpaper published in the German
language, claiming that Freiheit was too American and as
such could never hape to pay its own way in Germany. Like

'Freiheit, Der Rebell was plagued with serious financial

 

troubles. It was published irregularly with only seventeen
issues appearing in the period 1881-1886. The opponents

of the paper claimed that the editorial work was shabbily
done and that Rinks and Peukert were not suited to the

task of publishing a newspaper, claims which are not sub-

stantiated by an examination of Der Rebell. The fact that

 

the editorial work on Der Rebell often did not match that

 

of Freiheit was not as disturbing as the fact that the paper
threatened to cut into the readership of Freiheit in Germany
and Austria, a threat which especially Dave and the Freiheit
group in London could not afford to let go unanswered.

Soon after his arrival in London Victor Dave took
over the responsibilities for the distribution of Freiheit
in Germany and Austria. He came out in opposition to Egg,
Rebell, as did Sebastian Trunk and John Neve. Acting on
the advice of Dave, Neva wrote from Zurich, to Rinks and

Peukert in London, asking them to voluntarily cease

u81

publication of Der Rebell, telling them that it would be
in the best interest of the movement if the paper were
discontinued. In his letter Neva expressed the fear that
if the paper were continued to be published it would.have
the effect of Splitting the movement into two Opposing
camps.7

On December 15, 188h, Neva was forced, by Swiss
officials, to leave Switzerland and went to London. Soon
after his arrival in London a conference was held to dis-

cuss the fate of Der Rebell. At this conference Peukert

 

maintained that Mest would not permit any epinion other
than his own to appear in Freiheit. He related that, on
many occasions, he had sent articles to Freiheit, but Most
had refused to publish them. Neva, than rose to his feet
and said that this was not sufficient cause to start a new
anarchist newspaper which threatened to split the movement;
Dave and Trunk quickly expressed their agreement with this
opinion. At this juncture Rinks vehemently declared that
as long as he had ten fingers Der Rebell would continue to
be published. The conference Solved nothing. Der Rebell
continued to be published, and in the and the opponents
remained as they had been at the outset, with Rinks and

Peukert in opposition to Mast and Dave.8

 

7Rocker, Jchann Must, p. 232.

8Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Proletariers aus der
Revolutionlren Arbeiterbewegung, pp. 215-217; Rocker, g2:
hann Most,-pp. 232-233.

 

 

 

h82
There were other undercurrents involved in the

early stages of the Bruderkrieg. In April 188h, Nest

 

started to publish in Freiheit a series of articles which
appeared in July in pamphlet form with the title Die freie
Gesellschaft. Eine Abhandlung fiber die Prinzipien und Tak-
tik der Communistischen Anarchisten. The ideas set forth
in this series of articles did not coincide with the pre-
vailing themes of communist-anarchism, but more closely
resembled the ideology which Bakunin had espoused during
the First International. Strong objections to this Mbstian
interpretation of communist—anarchism were expressed by
Rinks and Peukert. In a letter written in August, 188h,
to Karl Halbedl, in'Wintsrthur, Peukert wrote that the
Mbstian articles on "freie Gesellschaft' were a "disgrace
to the movement" and that many German speaking anarchists
in London were beginning to question the acceptability of
Freiheit as their official organ.9 Ha1bed1 snowed Peukert's
letter to a number of his friends and eventually the con-
tents of it found their way to Host. This disclosure amp
bittered Meat even more against Peukert and his letters to
Dave seathed with hatred for his rival.10

Still another aspect of the undercurrent was the

charge made by Peukert that Dave wanted to centralize all

 

9Letter quoted in Rocker, Johann Most, p. 236.

1OFor a selection of these letters see: Ibid.,
pp 3 236-237 s

hBB

the threads of the German speaking anarchist movement in
his own hands in London, and that he also wanted to control
all contacts made with the continent. Dave had entered

the anarchist movement much earlier than Peukert and had
recaivad.his training in the First International. He could‘
see the value of organization, however, to anarchists who
had entered the movement at a later date, such as Peukert,
organization was considered as something to be avoided at
all costs.

The arrival of Dave in London, after his release
from prison, just about coincided with the implementation
of the Swiss policy of expelling anarchists from.their
borders. Before long this resulted in practically closing
Switzerland as a route that could be used to smuggle Frei-
hgit into Germany and Austria. The closing of this route
severely curtailed the distribution of Freiheit in southern
Germany and Austria. Shortly after his arrival in London
Dave wrote to Nave, who was still in Switzerland, asking
if it were possible to reOpen the Swiss smuggling route.
This proved to be an impossible task and on December 15,
188h, Neva, himself, was forced to leave the country. The
connections which had been established for the smuggling
of'Freiheit into Germany and Austria were thrown into a
state of complete disorganization because Switzerland was
the place from.which the smugglers operated and it was now
closed to them. Dave and Nave saw the need to rebuild the

smuggling routes completely to get Freiheit into Germany

ABE.

and Austria. As a result of this realization a so called
European Office of Freiheit was established in London with
Sebastian Trunk and Gottlieb Knauerhase in charge, with
the greater share of the work and responsibility falling
on the shoulders of Knauerhase.11

A conference was held in London to discuss better
methods to establish firmer ties with Germany and Austria.
At this conference Dave and a few of his associates set
up a commission which was to be composed of three or four
trusted and capable men. This small commission would be
responsible for the smuggling of Freiheit into Germany and
Austria. It would control all connections the London of-
fice made with the movement inside Germany and Austria.
Dave suggested.that in order to aid the commission all
German speaking anarchists should turn over to the group
all addresses and connections they had within Germany and
Austria. In the opinion of Dave such a commission would
serve two purposes; first, it would increase the number
of contacts that could be made with Germany and Austria
thereby'helping to develOp the movement there because it
would be better than the then prevailing system of unplanned
and occasional connections; two, by selecting only people
who had demonstrated that they could be trusted it would
make connections with Germany and Austria safer because it

would eliminate the chance that police spies might be used

 

11Ibid., p. 239.

 

as '
e11

Ger

and
to i
ini‘
be t
groa

cent

PM
on t
3&3

ber,
t5‘31:

EVA 4

" l

he at

iSSUS

has

as had been the case in the past. This plan would also
eliminate the need for making connections with people in
Germany and Austria who were unknown to the members in
London. Frequently an anarchist in Germany or Austria
had been arrested as a result of the haphazard system of
communication that existed between London and the con-
tinent.12

Of those present at the conference only two, Rinks
and Peukert, disagreed with Dave's plan. They objected
to it on the grounds that it would hinder individual
initiative in the movement and pointed out that it would
be dangerous to have all the connections to the anarchist
groups in Germany and Austria leading out from a single
central point in London.

Peukert said he would never surrender the addresses
and connections he had to the commission. He claimed that
the only reason his associates, Rinks and Knauerhase, took
part in the meeting was to see who Dave intended to place
on the commission. In the battle over the commission Trunk
was on Dave's side. When Neva arrived in London in Decem-
ber, 188h, both Dave and Peukert tried to sway him over to
their point of view regarding the commission, with Dave
eventually winning out on this point, however, it should
be noted that even though Neva favored Dave on this

issue, he continued to have a foot in each of the

 

laIbid., p. 2&0.

use

camps.13

The commdssion, as set up by Dave, was to be
composed of Peukert, Rinks, Knauerhase, Trunk and.Dave,
but Peukert refused to join because he would not hand
over his addresses and connections on the continent.
Rinks and Knauerhase joined it to see what Dave had in
mind. The commission members, being of such divergent
points of view, found it impossible to work together,
When the commission was formed Knauerhase was still in
charge of the distribution of Freiheit on the continent.
When it became apparent that Khauerhase's sympathies lay
with Rinks and Peukert, it was revealedby Dave that he
had spent ten pounds of club funds for conspiratorial
purposes without the permission of the First Section of
the Communistische-Arbeiterbildupgsverein. This money
had not been used for his own purposes, but was actually
spent in Germany to aid the movement there. Nevertheless,
he was held accountable for the missing funds and was
forced to give up the position he held in charge of dis-
tribution of Freiheit to the continent. He then joined
with Rinks and Peukert in publishing Der Rebell, saying

 

that Der Rebell was more suited for’his talents than Frei-

heit. When this occurred Rinks and Knauerhase were thrown

 

13Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Proletariers aus der

Revolutionaren Arbeiterbewe un , pp. 20h-206; TrauLschau,
wemi(London, 1886), pp.h-l§. This pamphlet does not
carry the name of the author but Peukert wrote it.

 

M37
off the commission which.Dave had established.1h

At this juncture an article appeared in Dar Sozial-
demokrat which was highly critical of Peukert and his
followers. The article called Peukert a common place
scoundrel who lived an idle life off funds which were in-
tended for the movement. Some of the information contained
in the article was known only to the commission Dave had
formed so Peukert immediately accused Dave of having
written the article, a charge which Dave categorically
denied, while saying he agreed none the less with the
article because everything contained in it was true.15

By the first week of May, 1885, it was obvious to
both sides that an impass had been reached and there was
going to be a split in the German speaking anarchist move-
ment. The inner-war was finally brought out into the open
on May 16, 1885, when Freiheit published a short notice
which said that henceforth only those addresses in Germany
and Austria which were contained on the list drawn up by

the commission in London would be considered to be safe.

 

lulu December 1885, when the pastry baker Karl
Scupin was apprehended while smuggling Der Rebell into Ger-
many he had in.his possession a letter from.BinEe which rs-,
lated that Rinks had severed his connections with Neva and
Dave because they had accused Knauerhase of being a swindler.
Rinke's letter also contained a charge against Dave, re-
lating that in 187k, while Dave was in Verviers, he had em,
bezzled workers' funds and had spent them on his own per-
sonal pleasures. When this charge leaked out into the open
it was immediately denied by Dave. Rocker, Jchann most, p. 237.

, 15Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Proletariers aus der
Revolutionaren Arbeiterbewegung, pp. 217-218; Rocker, g9-
hann Most, .pp. 2113-2141;.

 

h88
In the same issue Freiheit absolved itself of the solida-
rity it had declared for Der Rebell in the late fall of

 

1883. This blow was aimed directly at Peukert and his
followers whose addresses and connections on the continent
were now considered unsafe. When the news of the split
became public the popular press in London published articles
about it. One such article entitled "Die Spaltung in Lager
der Anarchisten” portrayed Peukert and his followers in
the worst possible light, while speaking very highly of
Dave. Naturally Peukert said the article had been placed
in the paper by Dave, which is probably true.16

Peukert answered the charges in this article by
writing the pamphlet Trau, schau,_wemi, a scathing indict-
ment of Dave. As a result of this pamphlet Peukert, Rinke,
Khauerhase, Prinz, Szimmoth and a number of their followers,
who believed in the principles of communist-anarchism, were

thrown out of the First Section of the Communistische-

 

Arbeiterbildungsverein. In all about fifteen people were
eXpelled including the six individuals whose names were
listed at the bottom of the pamphlet as subscribing to
the views contained in it; August Reeder, R.‘Walhausen,
Jakob Nowotny, F. Kirchhoff, H. Heinrich, R. Lieske( a
twenty year old brother of Julius).

Once they were thrown out of the First Section,

Peukert and his followers formed the "Gruppe Autonomic”

‘-

16Trau, 80hau,‘flemi, pp. 11-16.

h89

and established a club house at 32 Charlotte Street'West.
The membership of the group grew rapidly and soon the
club rooms on Charlotte Street became too small. A new
club house was needed but the ever present problem of money
was the stumbling block that stood in the way. Eventually
a home was purchased for one hundred pounds at Windmill
Street 6, which was very well located. Funds for the pur-
chase and remodeling of the house were raised by the club
memhers pawning their rings, watches, and other valuables.
The club house was similar to anarchist clubs of the period,
with the exception that a section of the house was set
aside for singing. In addition to this a club band was
organized.17

”The Club Autonomic was a very dingy, badly fur-
nished place. A few rough benches, chairs, and tables
were the only accomodations offered to regular freguenters
or the casual visitor. Anyone could enter unquestioned,

«18

and take part in the discussions. Meetings held at the

club were typical of anarchist gatherings of the period.
There was ”no chairman or president, anyone could speak
when and.how he pleased, so long as he received the appro-
bation of the meeting. Generally speaking the meetings

were very orderly."19

 

17Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Proletariers aus der
Revolutionfiren Arbeiterbewegung, p. 533.

18Feter Latouche, Anarchy, An Authentic Exposition
of the Methods of Anarchists and the Aims of Anarchism
(London, 1908), p. 63.

19Ibid.

#90

The rhetoric engaged in at the Club Autonomic
evidently was quite flamboyant because ”if half the threats
which made the rafters of the Club Autonomic resound . . .
had been meant, few rulers or millionaires would have been
left to end their days in peace."20 The club also had a
certain picturesqueness about it ”most of the men affected
sombrero hats and red neckties; the women usually cut
their'hair short, wore triby hats, short shabby skirts,
red rosettes in their mannish coats, and stout, business
like boots."21

The “Gruppe Autonomde” also decided to undertake
the publication of an entirely new newspaper. The paper
previously associated with Peukert, Rinke and their follo-
wers, Der Rebell, had been published irregularly, with
often times several months elapsing between issues. In
many respects Der Rebell resembled more closely a £228?
blgtt than it did a newspaper, since it contained little
news. In September, 1886, Die Autonomic. Anarchistisch-
ngmunistisches Organ was founded. The printing equipment
which had been used to print Der Rebell was not sufficient
to print the new paper so thirty pounds sterling had to
be raised to purchase additional printing supplies for

 

21Ibid., p. 6b.

201bid., pp. 63-61;.

A91
the new venture.22 The seventeenth and final issue of
Der Rebell appeared in October, 1886, and was soon follo-
wed by the first issue of Die Autonomic on Novebmer 6,
1886. The paper came out every other week. Its editorial
office was located at 96 Wardour Street, Scho Square, Lon-
don'W. In all two hundred and eleven issues of Die Auto-
nomig were printed before its demise on April 22, 1893.
Die Autonomic was well received, and rightly so because
it was well written, informative, and contained many in-
teresting articles and a great deal of news about the
anarchist movement. Mbst and Dave set out to undermine
the paper by discrediting it, claiming that the "Gruppe
Autonomic" had stolen the subscription list of Freiheit
and that the paper was printed with police funds supplied
by Berlin. These charges were examined by an impartial

panel of anarchists in London and found to be erroneous.23

John Neve, who had one foot in each camp, welcomed

Die Autonomic by writing to Peukert: ”Finally a paper,

 

whose distribution one need not be ashamed cf, while on
the other hand, most numbers of Freiheit with its smutty
articles I would liEe to throw in a cesspool."2h

 

zzPeukcrt, Erinneruncen eines Proletariers aus der

Revolutionfiren Arbeiterbewegung, pp. 225-221, 232.
23lbid., p. 232.
2“Quoted in Peukert, Ibid., pp. 232-233. At this

time Neve was living in Verviers and was involved in the
smuggling of Freiheit and.Die Autonomieihio Germany.

 

#92
The founding of Die Autonomic was another step in

the Bruderkrigg. As its subtitle clearly indicated it was

 

committed to the communist-anarchism in ideology. It had
the backing of the leading anarchists of the period inclu-
ding Kropotkin. As a newspaper it was on a higher level
than Freiheit, which had started to degenerate in mid-1885.
The purpose behind the founding of Die Autonomic was to
propagate the ideas of communist-anarchism.in Germany and
Austria. It was successfully smuggled into these countries
and cut into the already thin readership of Freiheit in
these places. In effect Die Autonomic constituted unwel-
come competition to Freiheit at a time when Freiheit was'
in financial trouble and could least afford to lose any
subscribers. Die Autonomic stood for individualism, group
sovereignty, and for the free formation of federations.
Mbst attacked such ideas by calling them ”the numbskull's
anarchism” and "sick ideas."25 I

By 1886 the stage was set for the final battle of
the Bruderkrieg. The differences in ideology and persona-

lity were out in the open. The personal mistrust that

 

 

Earlier he had also smuggled Der Rebell into Germany. In a
letter of December 1, l 85, to Dave, Neva called Rebell a
”rag“ and was critical of the editors of the paper saying
”these people don't know what they really want. The last
issue of Der Rebell was a sorry imitation of workers li-
terature,.those who work on the paper, including the edi-
tors, are not qualified for the positions which they hold.”
Quoted in Rocker, Johann Mbst, p. 230. .

 

25Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Proletariers aus der
Revolutionarcn Arbeiterbewegung, p. 2357*

-‘

h93
existed now reached a point where the occupants of the
opposing camps spent all their time in the meaningless
activity of printing allegations against their Opposition,
accusations which were met by counter charges. The co-
lumns of Freiheit, Der Rebell, and Die Autonomic are filled
with such barbed charges. Ewen Der SoziAldcmokrat managed
to get involved in the infighting, sometimes as an active
participant, other times in the role of an "unbiased”
observer savoring the dissension in the German anarchist
movement.

It is questionable, if by 1886, there was any hOpe
that the deep cleavage which had been cpened up in the
movement could be closed. Rudolf Rocker thinks the two
cpposing camps may have been able to heal their wounds
and rejoin forces if it had not been for the arrest of
John Nevc.26 Rocker's appraisal of the situation was un-
duly Optimistic becausc the split in the movement was based
on ideological differences which would.have required a
substantial change of position by one side. Most and Dave
were not about to make any concessions to Peukert and Rin-

ke, and after the founding of Die Autonomic, which was

 

reasonably successful, they had no reason to want to re-
Join forces with Most and Dave.

The capture of John Nevc by Belgian police on
February 21, 1887, ensured that the split in the movement

 

26Rocker, Johann Most,'p; 216.

M91;
would never be welded together. With the capture of Nevc
the opposing positions were solidified further and the
Bruderkrieg reached the white hot stage; little energy
remained for anything other than vicious infighting. By
the time the opposing sides finished washing their dirty
linen in the Nevc affair the German anarchist movement
practically ceased to exist.

The arrest of Nevc, who has been described as

”the soul of the German anarchist movement,” was a severe
blow to the movement. Since November, 1885, he had per-
sonally manned the operation in Belgium.which had insured
the successful smuggling of Freiheit, Der Rebell, Die Au-
tonomic, and dynamite and other explosives into Germany.27
After his capture by the Belgian police he was subsequently
handed over to the German police at the border. It was
suspected that a spy had played an important role in the
capture of Nevc, and the finger of guilt was pointed at

Peukert, who rose to the occasion to defendhimself.28

 

27Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin 0, Tit. 9h, Lit. N., Nr. 208, Vol.III
(11,971), Folder 292.

28The German police spy Max Trautner in an article
"Hie John Nevc der preussische Polizei in die Hande gclic-
fert wurde. Ein Beitrag zur Naturgeschichtc der Polizei-
Internationalc und ihrer Helfershelfcr,’ Der Sozialdemokrat,
No. 20(May 13, 1887), pp. 1-2, named Peukert as the man
who had pointed out Nevc to the police in Belgium. Research
in German police files proves that it was not Peukert, but
Franz Gross(b. November 28, 1856 in Crimmitschau) a colleague
of Nevc, who had been involved in the smuggling operation
since September 1882, who was the guilty party. Brandenbur-
gisches Iandeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr. Br. Rep. 30 Berlin

 

M95

The arrest of Nevc triggered a vulcanic eruption
in the German anarchist movement which had been seething
since 188h. The long simmering pot boiled over and ex-
tinguished what flame remained. The passionate exchange
of charges and counter-charges which followed the arrest
of Nevc consumed what energy remained in the movement
when it could least afford it as well as discrediting
the leadership. The arrest of Nevc was a blow to the Ger-
man anarchists in another respect, because it was impossible
to replace him with an equally competent and dedicated
person.~ The movement was running out of men of his sta-
ture and new men of talent were not being recruited to
replace those lost. The loss of Nevc was serious for still
another reason because he was probably the only man who
could have healed the split. He did not place himself
firmly in either camp; while it appeared that he tended
to favor Dave's side, at the same time he remained on
friendly terms with Peukert.

'The argument between Peukert and Dave over the
Nevc affair went on for several years and weakened the
German anarchist movement. All of the energy was expended
fighting each other rather than in the dissemination of

anarchist ideas in Germany. Dave was discredited, and

 

C, Tit. 9h, Lit. N., Nr. 208, Vol. III(11, 971), Fol-
ders 19-20, 292. .
Nevc was tried in October, 1887, and sentenced
to fifteen years in prison. He died in Moabit prison on
December 8, 1896, as a result of tuberculosis of the lungs.

has
Peukert fell from the position he held as editor of Die

Autonomic and his role in the German anarchist movement

 

was finished. Dave remained in London and worked as a
journalist but Peukert left in the fall of 1887 going to
France. Eventually in 1890 Peukert emmigrated to the
United States where he spent the last twenty years of his
life arguing with Most, trying to remove the stigma from
his name, and in various publishing ventures in New York
and Chicago where he published German language newspapers
orientated toward communist-anarchist ideology.

After Peukert's departure from London Rinke took
over the leadership of "Die Autonomid'group. He devised

and dirhctcd new smuggling routes over which Die Autonomic

 

and other literature was smuggled into Germany through
Belgium.and Switzerland. It appears that Rinke was quite
successful in his smuggling Operations because Berlin PO-
lice President von Richthofen noted that during 1888 the
police had not been able to seize many copies of Die Auto-
EQEEE’ nor were they able to arrest anyone for smuggling
the paper into the country even though it was apparent to
the police that smuggling activities were being stepped
up.29
The London police took notice of Rinke's important

position in the anarchist movement and kept a closer

 

29Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, Pr.
Br. Rep. 30 Berlin C, Tit. 9h Lit. 8., Nr. 1255, Vol. III
(13,089). Folders 15-16, 87-88.

1m _
surveillance on him. As a result of constant bounding and
harassment by the police Rinke early in 1890 left London
rather than go to jail, and went to the United States where,
like Peukert, he was lost to the movement.

The loss Of both Peukert and Rinke was a severe
blow to German anarchism, because it left the ”Gruppc

Autonomic” leaderless. _After Rinke left London Die Auto-

 

ggmig declined, and efforts to smuggle the paper into
Germany and Austria met with less success.30

The arrest of Neve practically signaled an end to
the distribution Of Freiheit in Germany and Austria. When
he fell nearly all the key figures in the distribution
system within Germany fell with him. Gone too, was the
organization which had received the papers from New YOrk
and then reshipped them to the continent. This made it
increasingly difficult to smuggle Freiheit into Germany
because the paper was printed such a long distance from
EurOpe. In addition to this Freiheit had been in the
United States since late 1882 and had lost contact with
the movement in Germany. Dave and his followers who had
been the principal mainstays of Freiheit in London had

fallen victims in the Bruderkrieg and were thoroughly dis-

 

credited.

 

301n the United States Rinke lived in St. Louis
where he held a position as a foreman in a factory which
produced electrical motors. ‘With a group of friends he
published six numbers Of a communist-anarchist newspaper,
Der Kampfer, in the period July 25 to August 29, 1896.

1+9 8
By late 1888 Die Autonomic had taken over the
territory in Germany which had been formerly served by

Freiheit. Die Autonomic was published nearer to Germany

 

and was in closer contact with the German mOvcment. As
already noted, Rinke was successful in smuggling large
numbers of the paper into Germany and workers there quickly
turned to it while turning away from.Freiheit. It was
impossible for Meet to try to print a newspaper in New
York that would appeal to the workers in Germany. It was
becoming increasingly apparent that Most wanted to do-
minate the movement and centralize the control of it in
his own hands. Even though he had burning ambition and

a flamboyant pen, it is virtually impossible for one man
to run a newspaper. It was apparent, even to the workers
that the brand of anarchism.which Most preached was not
well thought out when they compared it to what they read
in Die Autonomic. Die Autonomic was better written, con-
tained the most recent ideas Of communist-anarchism, and
was more readily accessible in Germany. For these reasons
by 1888 Freiheit was on the way out as an effective propa-
ganda organ in Germany and Austria.

By nature Mest was a bitter, spiteful, and vindictive
person so he lashed out at his competition, claiming that
Die.Autonomie was printed with funds supplied by the Berlin
police. Furthermore he said all of the troubles which had
plagued and weakened the movement in the past few years

could be attributed to Peukert. He called Die Autonomic

 

#99

an organ of repression, and said that Peukert had stolen
the subscription list of Freiheit in order to increase
their own circulatiOn in Germany. What is more he claimed
that Die Autonomic was partially responsible for the Nevc
affair and for the bitterness which accompanied it.31

The reply of the editors of Die Autonomic was a

 

complete disavowal of the charges leveled at them by MOst.32

At the urging of the "Gruppc Autonomic," a commission was
called together to investigate the financial backing of

the newspaper. On the commission were two members of the
Berncr Street Club from the East side of London, and eight
members of the First, Second, and Third Sections of the
Communistische-Arbeiterbi1dungsvcrein. Otto Rinke was

able to get Peter Kropotkin to take part in the proceedings
of the commission. The results of the investigation were
made public on March 9, 1889. After a thorough examination
of the books of the "Gruppc Autonomic," as well as their
sources of income, everything was found to be in order.
Nothing could be found to substantiate the allegations

that Mbst had leveled at Die Autonomig. The commission
went on to say that it would be in the best interest of

the movement if both factions of the German speaking anar-

chist movement would put aside their differences and stOp

 

BIZEEEEEEE: No. 50(Decembcr 29, 1888), p. 1;
Rocker, thann Most, p. 293,

32Die Autonomic, No. 62(Fcbruary 23, 1889), p. u.

500

the senseless haggling, because there was room in the
movement for both newspapers, even though they differed
in ideology.33

This was a blow to Most because essentially it
meant that he had been pushed to the periphery of the
German anarchist movement. KrOpotkin, had for some time
stood in silent Opposition to what he considered Most's
centralizing tendencies, but his silence was broken when

Mbst published his charge that Die Autonomic was published

 

with German police funds.3h In public Kropotkin tried to
appear neutral in the Bruderkrieg, but in private conver-
sations he admitted that he stood on the side of Peukert
against Mbst and Dave.35 This is understandable because
ideologically KrOpotkin and Peukert were in agreement
that the movement of the future would be communist-
anarchism oriented and would not follow the vague con-
cepts Of revolution and centralization which Most por-
trayed in his writings.

Thus the arrest of Nevc, resulted in more than the
loss of a key man and the exposure of the smuggling route

by which literature and explosives were brought into

 

33Die Autonomic, NO. 63(March 9, 1889), p. h.

BuSee Kropotkin's letter of December 19, 1888,
on the subject of Meet, printed in Die Autonomic, NO. 58
(December 29, 1888), p. h.

 

35Rocker, JOhann Mbst, p. 282.

501

Germany and distributed there; it brought the Bruderkrieg
to a climaxtic struggle in which the leaders of the German
anarchist movement fell victims to the senseless exchanges
Of vile allegations: gone were Nevc, Rinke, Peukert, Dave,
Mest, Trunk, Knauerhase and the countless subalterns who
had.manned the stations of the smuggling routes into Ger-
many. The German government, itself, could not have done
a more efficient job of destroying the German anarchist

movement. The Bruderkrieg_accomplished what the Socialist

 

Law, Dynamite Law, the beheading of HBdel, Reinsdorf,
Kflchler, and Lieske failed to do -it destroyed the German
anarchist movement.

Nevertheless it was not in the best interest of
the German government to have anarchism completely down-
trodden, because it would eliminate an important whipping
boy who could be brought out as cvidencd of the need for
more stringent measures against the anarchists and socialists.
When it became apparent that the German anarchists did not
plan to send a delegate to the anarchist congress being
held in Verviers on April 21, 1889, the Chief Of Police
in Elberfeld, Kammhoff informed the Minister Of the In-
terior, Ludwig Herrfurth, that he had sent an agent to the
meeting representing the German anarchists. This person
sent by Kammhoff was the only German delegate at the con-

gress. He presented a plan at the meeting to assassinate

502

36 In effect an artificial anarchist

the German Kaiser.
threat was created where none existed. That is not to
say'that anarchist attempts at "Propaganda by Deed" were
no longer carried out in Germany; they were and wohld be
for several decades, but these acts were only residual
effects of the Old movement, because the new movement,
which was finding its footing around 1890, was not com-
mitted to a policy of "PrOpaganda by Deed,” but none the
less had to live with the old reputation.

The Neve case also did considerable damage to the
Social Democratic Party. Part of the damage has already

been discussed in relation to the part the party leaders

played in the publication in Der Sozialdemokrat of the

 

article by the police spy Max Trautncr. Another facet

of the damage to the Social Democratic Party resulted

from the fact that the che trial, which began on Octo-

ber 3, 1887, coincided with the meeting of a secret party

congress being held in St. Gallen, Switzerland. There was

considerable interest in Germany in both events as eviden-

ced by the coverage they were given in the German press.37
Up to this time the Social Democrats had not been

successful in clarifying, in the mind of the German

 

36Lipinski, Die Sozialdemokratie von ihren An-
fangen bis zur Gegenwart, II, p.*IEO.

 

37For example see: Vossische Zeitung, NO. M62
(October h, 1887), and NO. H67(0ctober 7, 1887); Berliner
Basen Zeitung, No. h62(0ctober h 1887); Berliner Gerichts-
Chronik, No. 23(0ctober 16, 1887).

 

 

503

public, the difference between Social Democracy and anar-
chism. Attempts to do this were usually countered by
articles in which they appeared to be supporting the anar-
chists. Allusions to this subject have already been made
on a number of occasions, most recently in connection with
the decapitation of Reinsdorf which the Social Democratic
Party abhored.38

A good deal of the discussion at the St. Gallen
congress centered on the anarchists and the need for the
Social Democratic Party to distinguish itself from them.
Liebknecht attempted to clarify the difference between
the Social Democratic Party and the anarchists, after
which a resolution was unanimously adopted by the dele-
gates to demonstrate their total repudiation of anar-
chism.39

The German government did not accept the resolution
at face value, but continued to maintain that the extremists
controlled the Social Democratic Party. The German ambas-
sador in Bern, Otto von Bfilow, wrote that the resolution
against anarchism approved by the congress "was not taken

seriously by intelligent people," because it was only a

 

38An attempt to clarify the distinction is the
pamphlet, Anarchismus, Sozial-Demokratie und revolutionfire
Taktik(Zuri¢h, 1886). A -

39Lidtke, The Outlawed Party, p. 271. See also:
Verhandlungen des Parteitags der deutschen Sozialdemokratie
1nԤ%. Gallen. Abgehalten vom 2. bis 6. OktOber81887(Hottin-
gen-Zurich, 1888), pp. ROAHSZ

 

50h

maneuver to make the meeting appear "harmless.”h0 Dr.
Paul Kaiser, Vortragender Legationsrat in the Political
Division of the German Foreign Ministry, seconded Bfilow's
interpretation in a memorandum of October 25, 1887, en-
titled "Betrifft die anarchiste Esicfl Entwickeling der
deutschen Sozialdemokratie," in which he declared that
"concerning the anarchist development of German Social
Democracy the difference between Social Democracy and
anarchism is not qualitative but only one Of degree.”h1

In German government circles in the late 1880's
it was still widely held that there was not a great deal
of difference between the Social Democrats and the anar-
chists. The Social Democrats themselves reinforced this
idea on occasions by seemingly taking the side of the
anarchists by condemning the legal processes used to con-
vict them. The case of the Chicago anarchists, who alle-
gedly perpetrated the Haymarkct riot, is a case in
point.u2 On November 9, two days before the anarchists
condemned in the Chicago proceedings were to be executed,

Bebel, Liebknecht, Grillenberger, and Singer sent a

 

hOQuotcd in Lidtke, The Outlawed Party, p. 272,
from.German Foreign Ministry.Archives, microfilmed by the
University of Michigan, Roll 10h, Frames 79h-795.

hlIbid.

h2"w1c einen Justizmord,” Der Sozialdemokrat,
No. hh(October 28, 1887), p. 1.

505
telegram.to the Governor of Illinois, asking him for
clemency in the case of the anarchists. This appeal

h3

was also carried on the front page of Der Sozialdemokrat.

Der Sozialdemokrat was equally critical Of the

 

sentencing of Neve,hh and reiterated that in the Lieske
case the German government had murdered an innocent man
on the scaffold.’45

Quite obviously, despite their constant dis-
claimers to the contrary, it appeared that the Social
Democratic Party was following a deliberate policy of
duplicity; in their theoretical articles they sought to
distinguish Social Democracy from.anarchism, but when
the government punished an anarchist their sypmathies
appeared to be on the side of anarchism. This was a
problem with which the Social Democratic Party was going
to have to wrestle for several more years before they
were able to establish, in the public mind, a clear dis-
' tinction between themselves and the anarchists. Needless
tO say such confusion was to the benefit Of the German
government which wanted to see the growing Social Demo-

cratic Party constrained.

 

h3"Der Justizmord in Chicago," Ibid., NO. h?
(November 18, 1887), pp. 1-2. .

MILIbid., No. h2(0ctober in, 1887), p. 2.

3 ”S'Lieskes Geist,‘ Ibid., NO. 28(July 8. 1887):
p. O - '

506

Why did the early German anarchist movement wane
in the lgte 1880's? One reason brought out in this chap-
ter was the Bruderkricg_which resulted in the loss of the
leadership Of the movement, as well as diminished.con-
nections which the nerve center in London had with the
continent. The adverse effects of "PrOpaganda by Deed”
have been mentioned in previous chapters. Another face
tor, over which the anarchist had little control, was
also involved in the waning Of the movement.

In the period 1830-1890 Germany became an in-
dustrialized nation. The great majority of the followers
of anarchism came from.the handicraft occupations which
by the late eighties were either being absorbed into in-
dustry or were being replaced by machines. The number
of discontented handicraft workers was probably declining
by the late eighties, although no firm evidence is avail-
able On this point. In effect, this meant that the number
of recruits to fill anarchist ranks was diminishing and
the anarchists were unable to make any significant inroads
into the new industrial workers. Anarchism, which was
largely confined to the cities, had little appeal to the
rural population. Although Germany was becoming industrialized
at a rapid pace, by 1890 still close to forty percent Of
the pOpulation lived in rural areas which included villages
with a population Of less than two»thousand. The rural
population remained outside the effective realm of either

anarchist or Socialist Democratic influence.

507

Even though there was a large exodus to the cities
from the rural areas few of the new arrivals felt that
anarchiSm could ameliorate their lot; they, instead placed
their reliance on the Social Democratic Party which under-
went a rapid growth in this period.

That the Socialist Law hindered the development
of anarchism.in Germany is without saying. It was extre-
mely difficult to run a clandestine anarchist movement
within Germany from London. In this respect the Social
Democrats, who had their deputies in the Reichstag, pos-
sessed a distinct advantage over the anarchists. Also
the SPD could present a more concrete program to prOSpcctive
members, as Opposed to the vague concepts of anarchism.

Anarchism in Germany was in a state Of limbo at
the close of the eighties, but after the Socialist Law
was not renewed in 1890 it started a slow, but perceptible
rise, with a broadened base of appeal, which extended into
the ranks of the industrial workers, as well including a
number of disenchanted intellectuals and discontented

Social Democrats.

CONCLUSION

In the introduction a number of writers were
cited who stated emphatically that anarchism was not
important in the development of Germany. In the ten
chapters of this study the development of anarchism in
Germany has been examined pointing out why anarchism.played
a significant role especially after the creationzof the
Reich. All of the points and arguments made in the body
of this study will not be reiterated here, but quite brief-
ly, in broad categories, a few remarks should be made to
explain the long term significance that anarchism had in
Germany.

The German anarchist and semi-anarchist thinkers
of the 1830's and lBhO's, although they developed no school
of anarchism, nor did they have a following of any size,
were, nevertheless, influential in forcing Marx and Engels
to express their position. Most of the writing by Marx and
Engels in the early period was in response to writings of
anarchists. Few people would diSpute the influence of Marx
and Engels on the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Many

people are willing to accept their ideas uncritically, as-

cribing to them.the image of a set of immutable, well thought

laws, which, if followed will result in a utopia on earth.

508

509

The truth of the matter is that many of Marx's principles
were not well thought out, but were written down in haste,
during a fit of anger brought on by the publication of an
anarchist article, pamphlet, or book. The writings of
Marx and Engels were produced with the purpose in mind
of demolishing their opposition. Objectivity was not one
of their strong points. No grandiose, guiding principle
lay behind these diatribes. writings of this period by
Marx and Engels are more vindicative than scientific. ‘Yet,
there are still those in the world today who picture these
discourses, produced when Marx and Engels were venting
their spleen on an anarchist, as part of some well thought
out system.which would encompass the entire Spectrum of
what we call today the social sciences.

If Marx had not been goaded by the anarchists,
it is doubtful if he would have done much writing.
Usually the only time he could sit down and put his-
ideas on paper was when he was replying to something
with which he disagreed. A good share of his writings
were produced in this manner. Capital is the notable
exception, but this work was not finished in his life
time in spite of constant prodding by his friends and
family. Had it not been for the anarchists, the lite-
rature of Marxism would not be so vast, and perhaps Marx
would.have followed an entirely different route if he

had not been put on the defensive so early in life.

510

The German anarchists during the decade of the
1870's and 1880's were not a large group, yet, they ex-
erted a force in Germany that was entirely out of propor-
tion to their size. The attempts by H8del and Nobiling
enabled Bismarck to pass the Socialist Law, while at the
same time breaking the back of the Liberal Opposition.

If it had-not been for the assassination attempts on the
Emperor, it is doubtful if such a measure could have been
passed, or if Bismarck could have discredited the Liberal
Party.

The adOption of a policy of violence and "PrOpa-
ganda by Dead" on the part of the anarchists insured the
renewal of the Socialist Law as well as the passage of
more stringent measures against the use of dynamite. Ger-
man anarchists in Switzerland and the London Congress of
1881 were instrumental in the adoption of this policy which
dominated anarchism for nearly the entire remainder of the
nineteenth-century. The adoption of "Propaganda by Deed”
was soon followed by the introduction-of Bismarck's program
of State Socialism designed to wean the workers away from
socialism.and anarchism, Although the connection is per-
haps tenuous, it should be noted that Bismarck did not
push for such legislation until the stepped-up campaign
of terrorism and violence on the part of the anarchists.

The German anarchists discredited the Social Demo-
cratic Party. The public was confused over the difference

between the Social Democratic Party and the anarchists and

511
Bismarck and other public officials capitalized on the
confusion, using it to their advantage to suppress the
SPD. By the end of the 1880's the Social Democratic
Party was still in the process of attempting to clarify
the differences between themselves and the anarchists,

with mixed results. They were not able to accomplish this

 

until the decade of the 1890's.
The anarchists played a role in forcing the Social

Democratic Party into supporting a policy of parliamentarism

 

that it would continue to follow down to the outbreak of
WOrld War I; a policy which concentrated on capturing as
many seats as possible in the Reichstag. Unfortunately,
such a policy was a futile one and doomed to failure from
the start, for under the existing system.of government in
Germany the Social Democratic Party had no prospect of ever
playing an important role in the government of the Reich.
By 1912 the SPD was the largest single party in Germany,
but the reSponsibility for government lay in the monarch
and.his appointed officials. The government of Germany
was not responsible to the Reichstag in the real sense of
the word. The circles in which the decisions were made,
which controlled the destinies of the Reich, were beyond
the grasp of the SPD. As membdrs of the Reichstag the
Social Democrats could give their opinions on all prOposed
legislation and could even make contributions to the dis-

cussions on military matters, and possessed considerable

512
powers of the purse, but the upper bureaucrats, the army
officers and all the appointees of the monarch favored
the existing order and resisted any substantial changes
that the SPD would like to have implemented, and thus
the SPD was helpless to change the existing system, What
hope did the SPD have that the Emperor would appoint mi-
nisters or other officials from.the Social Democratic
Party? The SPD was following the only real alternative
cpen to them.- parliamentarism, however, Germany was
not a parliamentary state but a pseudo-constitutional
absolutism, and those in the power structure were proud
of it and looked down on countries such as the United
States, France, and Britain that were parliamentary in
compesition.

After the passage of the Socialist Law parliamen-
tarism was the only course cpen to the SPD. Any other
policy would have meant complete destruction of the par-
ty. Parliamentarism.was in itself a blind alley of self
deception; the party leaders could point to the increased
number of representatives in the Reichstag, but were any
actual gains made in the area of the control the party
had over the destiny of the individual in Germany? The
Social Democratic Party had to adher to this policy of
parliamentarism.Which was the only legal avenue open to
them, to have done otherwise would.have been to indicate
that they were tainted with anarchism, as Bismarck and

otherpublic officials proclaimed them to be. The SPD

513
was trying to disassociate itself from.the anarchists and
the stain they had placed on the socialist movement. They
made a conscious effort to stress the legality and peace-
fulness of their movement, perhaps too much.

The actions of Bismarck and the German government
in the period under study are anything but admirable. Su-
rely one could not agree with the methods and tactics of
the anarchists, but on the other hand neither should the
policy followed by the German government be condoned. It
was not intended at the outset of this study that such a
large portion of it would be concerned with Bismarck; the
documentation and evidence determined the course followed
pin this study rather than any predetermined hypothesis.
Bismarck emerges from.this study greatly tarnished; he rigged
the Nobiling affair to make it appear that the Social Demo-
cratic Party was responsible for the assassination attempt;
he hired numerous Spies who wrote inflamatory articles for
anarchist newspapers, articles which were introduced as
evidence for the necessity of renewing the Socialist Law;
he made use of agents provocateurs to insure that the level
of anarchist activity would be maintained at a level neces-
sary to insure the continuance of repressive measures against
the socialists. 'It was in the interest of Bismarck and the
German government to always maintain the visible appearan-
ce of a potential anarchist threat. The bourgeois and
aristocracy, at whom.the anarchist threats were directed,

were frightened by the violence preached in the columns

 

slit
of the anarchist newspapers and were willing to accede to

practically anything to insure their own safety. Bismarck

 

realized this and played on their fears, by creating an
artificial anarchist threat through the use of agents pro—
vocateurs.

There are many historians who praise the accomp
plishments of Bismarck. They readily point out that he
was able to avoid a general European war after 1871, but

how do you explain his domestic policy, which.was based

on lies, duplicity and suppression. How do you rationalize
using a spy to infiltrate and anarchist meeting for the
apparent purpose of obtaining information that a crime is
going to be committed, and then once you have the knowledge
do nothing to stop it; but in fact assign agents who ac-
tually assist in the preparations for the crime to insure
that it would be carried out so as to make use of the pro-
paganda value that could be obtained from it. If there
any way to give a satisfactory explanation of why a govern-
ment should subsidize a man, through a spy, to take part
in a plot to kill the head of state, and then put him.an
trial and execute him as an example? Should not a respon-
sible government put down immediately any threat to its
citizens to insure their peace of mind, rather than create
an artificial threat to keep them.in a state of uneasiness?
much has been written about Bismarck, and there I

are thousands of volumes which try to explain what happened

515

to Germany in the twentieth-century. One theme, which
runs through much of this literature, is that Bismarck
had the Reich on the proper course and William II steered
it onto the shoals. One thing that is wrong with this
line of reasoning is that Bismarck, before his fall from
power, created the image of the Emperor and established
the foundation stones on which the Reich was to be built
in the next two and one half decades. If William.II r
possessed more power than one man should have, it was to q
Bismarck that he owed his omnipotence. Bismarck's selection a
of the foundation stones of the Reich was unfortunate as
his dealings with the anarchists demonstrates, because here
he followed a deliberate policy of lies, duplicity and
suppression of all opposition. This is not a firm basis
on which to develop a government. Perhaps Bismarck was
able to avoid a general European war, but what did his
policies do to Germany?

Bismarck ran a tight ship and steered a straight
course, but the German ship of state foundered in the
storm of Wbrld'War I; it came unglued and attempts to
put it back together in the weimar period ended in
failure, followed by dictatorhhip. There are many fac-
tors involved in the failure of the Weimar Republic,
but one stands out, the inability of the German electo-
rate and politicians to replace the monarchy with a
viable form of government. The immaturity of those in

political life played a part in this because power was

516
thrust into the hands of those who were not prepared to
deal with it. The real cause of the failure of the poli-
tical immaturity of the Weimar period is to be found in
the decades of the 1870's and 1880's. At this critical
Juncture in German development Bismarck seized upon oppor-
tunities presented to him by the anarchists to suppress
political life, especially the Social Democratic Party,
forcing them to follow a policy of parliamentarism.
This policy was followed by the SPD to the outbreak of
the First Werld war. The goals of the Social Democratic
Party.were unrealistic because they did not come to
grips with the essential problem that faced Germany -
the concentration of power in the hands of the Emperor.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I
FIRST GERMAN ANARCHIST PROGRAM, OCTOBER 2, 1875

Article one - Society as it is presently con-
stituted is based on personal property and has as a poli-
tical organization the state, which is only a weapon in a
the hands of the ruling classes. It must disappear and
make room for the society of the future, which has as a
political principle the free formation of groups of in-
dividuals and has as an economic foundation the common
possession of the soil, the mines, capital, the great
lines of communication, and the tools of work.

Article two - Instructed by the lessons of history,
which are not revealed in the Social Democratic Association,
that in order to achieve the transition from the unjust
society which is in decline, to the just society of the
future whose establishment is taking place before our
eyes in the form of trade unions and local groups, a
violent solution will be necessary, which will be a social
revolution.

Article three - The association believes that in
order to be prepared for this urgency, an alliance between

all worker organizations is an unavoidable necessity, and

317

518

is regarded under no circumstances as permanent; each in-
dividual group will continue to possess its complete inde-
pendence, its absolute freedom. It appears to us that the
best way to realize this alliance, particularly in countries
that are somewhat free, would be through Article thirty-one
of the revised General Statutes(1873) of the International
‘Ubrkingmen's Association and Article sixty-four of Federation
Statutes of the Jura Federation. Nevertheless certain
groups hesitate, at least in public, to place themselves
on an international basis as declared by the association
from Bern. Those resolutions taken at the Congress of
Geneva will be put to use to make practical the moral and
material solidarity of all workers' organizations.

Article four - The Association as such will take
no part in the elections in Switzerland, consequently it
should not express itself on the political dividion of
votes. It leaves, however, to its members complete free-
dom.of action in this area. The most important method of
agitation for the Association is through propaganda of both
the spoken word and the press of the social-revolutionary
principle, which all members support to advance. In the
event that a social revolution is declared in some way or
another in a country, the Association for its part will
place at the disposal of the revolutionary organization

of the country in question its determined support.

APPENDIX II

STATUTES OF THE GERMAN SPEAKING COMMUNISTqANARCHIST PARTY,
JUNE 13, 1877

Article one - In order to unite the diverse elements
of the German Speaking peoples who recognize the anarchist-
communist principle, is here-by founded an anarchist-
communist party for the German speaking peoples who are
associated with the International‘Uorkingmen's Association.

Article two - Hhoever becomes a member of the party
must acknowledge the program and the statutes as binding,
where upon the person in question must apply through.a
reference in the form of a written declaration to the
Correspondence Bureau, requesting that his declaration
for>membership be submitted to a vote of the membership.

Article three - Selection is by a simple majority
of the written votes.

Article four - Each member is to make a yearly con-
tribution of one Mark which is to be paid upon admittance
to the party and yearly thereafter, when it falls due, on
December 31st of each year. Failure to do so will result
in being stricken from the membership list.

519

520‘

Article five - In order to examine a motion by
one member for the exclusion of another member the Cor-
respondence Bureau must submit the motion to the party
membership for a decision.

Article six - In order to maintain a continuous
relationship between the individual members, one out of
every three members will be appointed to the standing
Correspondence Bureau. The number of places and members
of this Bureau will be decided each year by a vote of
the membership.

Article seven - The Bureau has no authorized power.
It has as its sole purpose the maintaining of communication
between members. It must submit all motions put forth by
any of the members to a decision of all interested party
members. It should also take the lead in important matters
beyond this scOpe; in other countries it should work for
the development of anarchist-communist ideas. It should
instruct the members as frequently as possible through
correspondence describing what is taking place. This cor-
respondence should be maintained by the Correspondence
Bureau and should be sent to the home of each member.

Article eight - These statutes can be terminated
at any time by a decision undertaken by the membership.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY

In the following essay some of the principal sources
used in preparing this study will be discussed. In the text
and in the footnotes I have already given detailed evalu-
ations of many sources. These comments will not be repeated
here. The divisions, within this essay, correspond to those
in the bibliographical listing which follows; therefore,
it was not deemed necessary to give complete bibliographical

information for each source being discussed.
Bibliographies

For the most part bibliographies which contain
materials on the German anarchist movement are dated, al-
though Max Nettlau, Bibliographie de L'anarchie(Brussels,
1897): and, Josef Starrmzhamner, Bibliograpge des Sozialis-
1mus und Communismus, 3 Vols.(Berlin 189h-1909) are useful
for older materials. or the two Stammhammer is more comp
plete; the title is misleading because it is a valuable
guide for materials on anarchism. 0n the other hand the
bibliography by Nettlau is more convenient to use because
it is arranged by topics. Useful for the newspapers of

the early period is La Premiere International Periodiques

521

522
IBthIBZZ(Paris, 1958). Ernest Drahn, Johann Most: eine
Bio-bibliographie(Berlin, 1925) is a good listing of the
writings of Most but is far from being a competent guide

to the secondary materials on the subject.
Archival Sources

This study would not have been possible except
for the valuable materials found in the Brandenburgisches
Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam, and in the Deutsches Zentral-
archiv Merseburg. The police files and records of the
Minister of the Interior, in these archives, contained
highly significant materials on the German anarchist
movement for the period of the late 1870's and 1880's,
especially concerning the assassination attempts by H8del
and Nobiling, the Niederwald dynamite plot, John Nave, the:
smuggling of anarchist literature into Germany, and the
develOpment of the cell organization.

The Geheimes Staatsarchiv in Munich provided some
useful information on Jehann Mbst, while the Hessischen
Hauptstaatsarchiv Wiesbaden proved to be helpful for
tracing out the develOpment of the cell organization
and the dynamite explosion at the Police Headquarters
building in Frankfurt a.M. The Staatsarchiv Ludwigsburg
contained materials on the smuggling of Der Rebell and
Freiheit_into Germany as well as some good information

on attempts to organize anarchist groups in the Stuttgart

523
area in the middle 1880's. The Bundesarchiv Koblenz was
not very useful but a few documents were found which
helped to explain Bismarck's actions.

The Labadie collection at the University of Michi-
gan contained a manuscript of a Heinzen speech, the cor-
respondence of John H. Mackay, and a Nettlau manuscript
on the life of Victor Dave. It should also be noted that
many of the books, pamphlets and newSpapers used in this

study are located in the Labadie collection.
Published Documents

The trial records of the proceedings against Reins-
dorf and his accomplices, Lieske, Stellmacher, Breuder and
fourteen others accused of high treason helped to fill in
the picture of the anarchist movement in Germany in the
1880's. The scene in Switzerland for the 1830's and lBhO's
is ccvered by a number of accounts printed by the Swiss '
government notably Les communistes en Suisse d'fipres les
pgpiers trouves chez Neitling(Lausanne, 18h3); Die geheim
deutschen Verbindung in der schweiz seit 1833. Ein Beitrgg

zur Geschichte des modernen Radikalismus und Kommunismus

 

(Basel, 18h7); and Rapport general adresse au conseil d'Stat

 

Neuchatel sur la propaganda secr3te et sur les clubs de

 

la Jeune Allemagne en Suisse(Neuchatel, 18h5). For the
activities of the German anarchists in Switzerland in the
1880's Bericht fiber die Untersuchung Betreffend die anar-

52h
chistischen Umtriebe in der Schweiz an den hohen Bundes-
rath(Bern, 1885) contains much useful information es-

pecially on the Freiheit group in Switzerland.

 

The published accounts of the meetings of the
International held during the period 1875-1877 were ex-
tremely valuable for tracing the rise of anarchism.in

this period. The Protokoll of Social Democratic congress

 

held at Wyden in 1880 was used to show why the SPD wanted
to eliminate Most and Hasselmann from the party. The Ver-

handlungen des Parteitags der deutschen Sozialdemokratie

 

in St. Gallen. Abgehalten vom 2. bis 6. Oktober 1881(Hot-

 

tingen-Zurich, 1888) points out the attempt of the SPD
to disassociate itself from the anarchists.

The archival material edited by Leo Stern, 235
Kampf der deutschen Sozialdemokratie in der Zeit des So-
zialistengesetzes 1878-1890. Die THtigkeit der Reichs-
Commission(Berlin-East, 1956) was useful for anarchist
Inaterials placed on the proscribed list as was the Reichs-

_§nzeiger and the Zentralblatt ffir das deutsche Reich.

 

IRecords of the Berlin Police President are found in Dig
Ilaterlandslosen Gesellen. Der Sozialismus im.ldcht der
ggeheimberichte der preussische Polizei 1898-191h, Vol. I
(Cologne and Opladen, 19611.). Unfortunately the editorial

vcork by Reinhard.H8hn is poorly done.

525
Contemporary materials: Including Contemporary Articles

There is a large body of materials for the period
of the lBhOIs, much of which.has been reprinted in recent

years. The edition of Moses Hess' writings Philosophische

 

und sozialistische Schriften 1837-1850(Berlin-East, 1961),
edited by August Cornu and‘Wolfgang Mdnke is far superior
to the volume edited by Horst Iademacher, Ausggwdhlte Schrif-

 

tegWologne, 1962). The first eighteen volumesof the £9332
of Marx and Engels published in East-Germany contained
many items which would otherwise have been difficult to
obtain elsewhere. In spite of pro-conceived bias the
editorial work on these volumes is well done. The English
translation of the complete works of Marx and Engels is in
progress at the present time and will be welcomed by the
English speaking part of the world.

A number of Stirner's most important writings
which reveal the develOpment of his thought prior to

writing Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum. is Stirners klei-

 

nere Schriften(Treptow bei Berlin, l9lh), edited by thn
H. Mackay.

The writings of the Bauer brothers, Wilhelm.Marr,
and Wilhelm‘weitling were all useful for explaining deve-
lopments in the 1830's and lBhO's. It would be a service

to scholarship if these works could be reprinted.

526

Newspapers

Without the Arbeiter-Zeitung(Bern), L'avant-Garde
(Chaux-deéFonds), Bulletin de la Federation Jurassienne,

Le R5volté(Geneva and Paris), and Le Travailleur(Geneva)

 

it would.have been impossible to reconstruct a picture of
the German movement in the late 1870's. For the period
of the 1880's Der Rebell, E391h312, Der Sozialdemokrat,

 

and Die Autonomig_were indispensable. Many anarchist news-

 

papers of a later period were used as well as innumerable
non-anarchist newspapers. Much time was spent in searching
out scarce newspapers and in microfilming them.but it can
be safely said that without these newspapers this study

would not have been possible.
Published Correspondence

Bismarck's published works, while containing some
significant information, are not as useful as could be ex-
pected. One gets the feeling that in spite of their great
bulk much is missing. The Holstein Papers were especially
revealing concerning Friedrich III's attitude toward Bis-
marck, and the fear the Crown Prince's wife had of the
anarchists .

Various collections containing the correspondence
of Marx and Engels were used but none was so useful as

Zwischen 18. und 25. Jugendbriefe von Friedrich Enggls

527
(Berlin-East, 1965). This collection of letters, edited
by Hannes Skambraks, helped to fill in many gaps in the
lives of Stirner, Hess, and Gran all of Whom.were associates

of Engels.
meoirs and Biographies

Jehann Most's memorien. Erlebtes, Erforschtes und

Erdachtes, u Vols.(New Ybrk, 1903-1907); and his Acht Jahre

 

hinter Schloss und Riegel(New York, 1886) are the only
sources available on his early life. They are detailed
and contain many important documents. For the later life
of Most,Emma Goldmann, Living My Life, 2 Vols.(New York,
1931) is a useful supplement. Eduard Bernstein's Sozial-
demokratische Lehrjahre(Berlin, 1925); and his My'Years
of Exile(New York, 1921); along with August Bebel, £33
meinem.Leben(BerlineEast, 196k) give accounts of the events
of these years from.the Social Democratic point of view.

An indispensable source for anarchist activities

in the years prior to 1878 is James Guillahme, LfiInterna-

 

tional: Documents at souvenirs 186h91878, h Vols.(Paris,
1905-1910). Most's short biography August Reinsdorf und
die Propaganda der That(New York, 1885) contains many
exaggerations, but prints a numbdr of valuable letters.
Information on HBdel not found elsewhere is related in
the slender pamphlet Die beiden letzten Tags des Hochver-
rathers Max H8de1(Kissingen, 1878).

528

An important source for the decade of the 1880's
is Josef Peukert, Erinnerungen eines Proletariers aus der
Revolutionaren Arbeiterbewegung(Berlin, 1913). Peukert
was deeply involved in anarchist activities and was one
of the few peOple at the center of the German speaking
anarchist movement to leave his memoirs. In general the
anarchist historians Max Nettlau and Rudolf Rocker are
skeptical of the account left by Peukert. On the other
hand, Gustav Landauer, an anarchist of the new German
movement thought they were reliable. Research in the
archives has tended to substantiate Landauer's belief in
Peukert's rendering of events. An informative article
by Peukert, "Otto Rinke," Jahrbudh der freien Generation
far 1910, Neue Folge, I(Paris, 1910), 83-86 is a useful
supplement to Peukert's memoirs.

While Bismarck's memoirs are in themselves not
very revealing, those of his assistant Christoph von Tie-
demann, Aus Siebeglghrzehnten, II Sechs Jahre Chef der.
Reichskanzelei unter dem.FHrsten Bismarck(Leipzig, 1909)
detail Bismarck's actions in the two crises prompted by
the assassination attempts of H8del and Nobiling in may
and June 1878. ‘

Rudolf Rocker, Johann Most. Das Leben eines Re-
bellen(Berlin, l92h) is more than a biography of Most.

It contains much material on the German anarchist move-
ment, although some of his conclusions have been modified

by research in the archives. As noted in the text there

529'
are a nwmber of places where Rocker’has overlooked
evidence that was detrimental to his subject.
There are many biographical type studies of
Max Stirner, but only Hohn.H. Mackay, Max Stirner, sein

 

Leben und sein Wegk(Leipzig, 1898) can claim much origi-

 

nality. While all of the studies of Stirner differ in
their interpretation of the significance of Stirner's
writings, nevertheless they all rely heavily on Mackay's
study for the details of Stirner's life. Additional

facets of the character and life of Stirner can be brought
out by referring to the many collections of letters and
memoirs published since Mackay wrote his biography. Un-
fortunately many writers who have written on Stirner since
1898 proceed with the false assumption that Mackay had
accumulated all the evidence available on the life of Stir-
ner, which was true in 1898, but no longer is. Mackay's
biography was a labor of love and much important information
would have been lost if he had not been so diligent in his

research.

Histories and Interpretations

The large number of histories and interpretations
used in this study precludes an individual examination of
the great majority of them, but a few should be singled
out for their merit.

The anonymously published account Sozialismus und

 

530 _
Anarchismus inTEurOpa und Nordamerika wfihrend der Jahre
1883 his 1886(Berlin, 1887); andEiudoldemil Martifl, pg};
Anarchismus und seine Trfiger(Berlin, 1887) are valuable
sources of information. Although some of the statements
made by Martin, a police spy, were designed to be mis-
leading his book nevertheless contains a great deal of
contemporary material on the German anarchist movement
by an ”insider.” Karl Schneidt, "Vom.jungen Anarchismus,"
Die Kritik(Berlin), III(1896), 583-591, 622-632, 665-677,‘
717-721, 767-826 is extremely useful for information on
Hasselmann and the early development of the cell organi-
zation in Germany under’Hasselmann.

A number of studies of the Social Democratic move-
ment in various German cities also contain helpful infor-
mation on the anarchists. Especially useful were Eduard
Bernstein, Geschichte der Berliner Arbeiterbewegung, 3 Vols.
(Berlin, 1905-1910); Georg Eckert, Die Braunschweiger Ar-
beiterbewegungpunter dem Sozialistengesetz(Braunschweig,
1961); Jfirgen Jensen, Presse und_politische Polizei. Hams
burgs Zeitungen unter dem Sozialistengesetz 1828-1899
(Hannover, 1966); Heinrich Laufenburg, Geschichte der Ar-

 

beiterbewegunggin Hamburg, Altona und Umgegend, 2 Vols.
(Hamburg, 1911, 1931); and, Rudolf Strauss and Kurt Finster-
brusdh, Die Chemnitzer Arbeiterbewegung unter dem Sozialis-
tengeset2(BerlinéEast, l95h).

Other studies on the Social Democratic Party and
the Socialist Law which were useful were: Eugen Ernst,

531
Polizeispitzeleien und Ausnahmegesetze 1838-1910. Ein Bei-
trag zur Geschichte der Bek!mpfung_der Sozialdemokratie

 

(Berlin, 1911) which contained a good deal of information

on the activities of police spies; Peter Gay, The Dilemma

 

of Democratic Socialism. Eduard Bernstein's Challenge 3Q
MgngNew York, 1952) explained Dflhring's activities in the
1870's; while Paul Kampffmeyer and Bruno Altmann, Vor dem
Sczialistengesetz. Krisejahre des Obrigkeitsstaates(Berlin,
1928) has an interesting section on the assassination
attempts of 1878. Vernon Lidtke, The Outlawed Party.
Social Democracy in Germany 1878-1890(Princeton, 1965)
covers in detail the activities of the Social Democratic
Party during the years of the Socialist Law with some
emphasis on anarchism. Another book useful for the same

period is welfgang Pack, Das parlamentarisches Ringen um

 

das Sozialistengesetz 1878-1890(Dfisse1dorf, 1961). The

sociological study by Gunther Roth, The Social Democrats

 

in Imperial Germapy. A Study in WbrkinggClass Isolation
and National Integration(Totowa, New Jersey, 1963) is
more broadly conceived, covering the Social Democratic
movement from.the 1860's through werld'war I. Franz
thring, Geschichte der deutschen Sozialdemokratie, 2 Vols.
(Berlin-East, 1960) is dated but still contains useful
information.

The detailed account, based on a great deal of
archival research, by Dieter Fricke, Bismarcks Pratcrianer.

iDer Berliner pplitische Polizei im.Kampf gegen die deutsche

532
Arbeiterbewegung_1871-1898(Ber11n-East, 1962) is a mine
of information. It can be supplemented by the essay by
Werner Pals, "Staat und Sozialdemokratie im.Bismarckreich.
ih Berlin in der Zeit des Sozialistengesetzes 1878-1890,”
Jahrbuch far die Geschichte Mittel- und Ostdeutschlands,
13(196u), 200-221. 8

Max Nettlau's Der Vorfrfihling der Anarchie: ihre
historische Entwicklung von den Anflngen bis zum Jahre
lgégflBerlin, 1925); Der Anarchismus von Proudhon zu Kro-
potkin(Berlin, 1927); and Anarchisten und Sozialrevolu-
tionfire: Dhe historische Entwicklung des Anarchismus in
den Jahren 1880-1886(Berlin, 1931) are the first three
volumes of what was to have been a history of anarchism
prior to World'War I. The final volume covering the
period 1886-191k is available in manuscript form at the
International Institute of Social History in Amsterdam.
Like Rocker's work, some of Nettlau's conclusions have
been modified by archival work. Also it must be kept in
mind when using Nettlau's histories that he was an anar-
chist and active in the events he is describing. He does
strive for objectivity, but often his analyses of events
are shallow. Many times his histories are little more
than bibliographical essays, but nevertheless his books
form a useful background for the anarchist movements in
various countries, but they should not be relied upon as
the final word on the subject. In recent years peOple

who have rediscovered Nettlau have tended to consider his

533
works as sort of "definitive studies" which they are not;
all considered though they form a valuable starting point
for most studies on anarchism. Another title which con-
tains useful material on the movement in Germany if J.
Langhard, Die anarchistische Bewegung in der Schweiz von

flhren Anffingen bis zur Gegenwart und die internationalen
FEhrer(2nd ed.; Bern, 1909).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Listed in the bibliography are the principal
sources used in the preparation of this study. Literature
on certain subjects peripheral to the tOpic of German
anarchism.is not contained here, but can be found in the
footnotes. Many newspapers were used in this work and
are listed by title only. Specific references to news-
paper articles are to be found in the footnotes. Under
the heading Contemporary Literature are listed articles,
pamphlets, and books written by those who played a role
in the German anarchist movement either as a participant

or as an opponent.
Bibliographies

Drahn, Ernsg. Johann Most: eine Bio-bibliographic. Berlin,
192 .

La Premiere International Periodigues l86h-1877. Paris,
IIBEBo

Nettlau, Max. Bibliographic de L'anarchie. Brussels, 189W.

0 "Bibliographie der Anarchie in deutscher Sprache,"
Jahrbuch der freien Generation far 1911. Volkska-

lender undT Dokumente der'WeltansChauun des Boil-
alismus-Anarchismus, Neue Folge II(Par§s, I911),
118-128. .

 

 

 

. "Bibliographic der Anarchie in deutscher S rache
‘1792-1897," Jahrbuch der freien Generation fgr 19 91},

531k

535
Neue Folge IV(Zurich, 1913), 121-127.

Stammhammer, Josef. Bibliographic des Sozialismus und
Communismus.'3 vels. Jena, 1893;1909.

 

 

Archival Sources

Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv Potsdam. Acta der
Kflniglichen Polizei-Prflsidii zu Berlin. "Das
Attentat das Dr. Phil. Carl Nobiling auf-das
Leben Sr. Majestfit des Raisers und Kdnigs mm
2. Juni 1878,” Geheime Prflsidial Registratur,
g5 E)t. 9h, Lit. A., Mr. 2&2, Vols. I-IV(8613-

l .

. Acta des K8niglichen Polizei Prfisidii zu Berlin.
"Das Attentat das Klempnergesellen Emil Heinrich
Max H8del gen. Lehmann auf das Leben Seiner Majes-
tat das Kaisers und K8nigs am 11. Mai 1878,” Go-
heime PrQsidial-Registratur, C, Tit. 9h, Lit. A.,
Nr. 2h8(8626).

. Acta des KBniglichen Polizei-Prflsidii zu Berlin.
"Die anarchistische Bewegung 188h91885," Geheime
Prfisidial-Re istratur, Tit. 9h, C, Lit. A., Nr.
286, Vol. 1(86h1).

. Acta des KBniglichen Polizei-Prfisidii zu Berlin.
"Die Dynamit Attentate in Elberfeld, Frankfurt a.
M., Rfidesheim.und auf dem Wege zum National Denk-
mal auf dem.Niederwa1d,".Geheime Prfisidial-Regis-
tratur, C, Tit. 9h, Lit. D., Nr. h21, Vol. I(9,588).

. Acta des KBniglichen Polizei-Frasidii zu Berlin.
‘__“Der Redakteur Jehn Neve. Die Reise Neves," Gehei-
me lrfisidial-Registratur, C, Tit. 9h, Lit. N.,
Nr. 208, Vol. JII(11, 971).

. Acta des K8niglichen Polizei-Prflsidii zu Berlin.

“Die fibersichten fiber die allgemeine Lage der so-
zialdemokratischen und revolutionflren(anarchisten)
Bewegung 1872-1910.” Geheime Prfldidial-Registratur,

c, Tit. 9h. Lit. 3., Nr. 1255, Vols. IAVIII(13,O87/9h).

. Acta des KBniglichen Polizei-Prlsidii zu Berlin.
'Bbersichten fiber die Lage der sozialdemokratie und
anarchistischen Bewegung," Geheime Prflsidial-ngis-
tratur. C, Tit. 9S, Sekt. 7, Lit. J., Nr. ha, Vols.
I-Iv(15.87h/77).

536

Bundesarchiv KOblenz. "Abwehr sozialdemokratischer Aus-
schreitungen,”,Abteilung P. 135.

Deutsches Zentralarchiv Merseburg. Rep. 77(Ministerium des
Innern). ”Massregeln gegen die anarchistische Be-
wegung 1881-1907.” Tit. 2515, Nr. 8, Vols. I-III.

. Rep. 89 H(Geheimes Zivilkabinett). "D16 Sozial-
demokratie und Anarchie 1872-1909," Abt. XXI,
Nr. 18, V0130 I-II. -

 

Geheimes Staatsarchiv Munich. Ministerial-Extradiction 1921
II, Deutschen Reich, Abteilung West I, Tit. II,
Polizeiwesung A, Sozialdemokratie und Anarchismus
MA 7512 "Die sozialdemokratische und anarchistische
Bewegung."

Hessischen Hauptstaatsarchiv'Wiesbaden. A 8 Politische
Parteien. 355, "Das Dynamitattentat im.Polizei-
dienstgebfiude zu Frankfurt."

. h07 Polizeiprfisidium.Frankfurt. 177, "Sozialde-
mokratische Organ die 'Freiheit' von Johann Most.
Intus. Verschiedene Zeitungsexemplare, 1879-189A."

 

. h07 Polizeiprasidium.Frankfurt. 17h, ”Unter-

suchung gegen den Sozialdemokraten Schumacher

Josef Breuder und Genossen in Frankfurt a.M.'wegen
Hochverrats, 1880-1881."

Staatsarchiv Ludwigsburg. F 201 Stadtdirektion Stuttgart.
632-633, nAnarchisten 1885-1898."

. F 201, Stadtdirektion Stuttgart. 658, "Zeitungs-
verbote 'der Rebell.'" -

 

 

 

. F 201, Stadtdirektion Stuttgart. 66a, "Die Frei-
‘heit." .

. E 175/78 Regierung des Schwarzwaldkreises. 5A7,
‘BAnarchisten 188h-l9l3.”

 

Labadie Collection. The University of Michigan Library.
Max Nettlau manuscript "Victor Dave 1857-1922,”
Vertical File.

. Jchn Henry Mackay correspondence. Vertical File.

 

. Karl Heinzen manuscript of speech. Vertical File.

 

537

Published Documentary Sources

Anarchistenprozess Reinsdorf und Genossen Verhandelt vor
figm.2. und_3. Strafsenaildes ReiEtherights zg
lpipzigvom 15} bis 22. Dezembef’lBfiE} Leipzig,
1885.

Anklageschrift in der Untersuchung_wider Breuder und.gg-
nossen we on Hochverrats und’anderer Vergehen.
IEIpzig, 88f.

Bericht fibe£_die Schwur erichtsverhandlung vopI29. Juni
bis 1. Juli 188 gpgen Julius Lieske. Leipzig,
1885.

Bericht fiber die Untersuchungbegreffend die anarchigr
tischen Umtriebe in der schweiz an den hohen
Bundesrath. Eidgenossenschaft erstattet durch
Bindesrat‘Eduard MfiIler. Bern, 1885}

 

 

Compte rendu des séance du congQEs socialiste tenu 3 Gant
9-16‘Sgptembre 1877. No place of—publication, no
date of publication; printed privately.

 

Compte rendu du huitiéme congres engral de l'association
InternationaI des‘travafl eurs tenu'E'Berne du 26
au 50 Octobre,,1876:Bern, 1876.

 

 

Compte rendu officiel du septieme congrengnéral de
' 'association InternatiOnal des travailleurs.
verviers, 1875.

Les communistes en Suisse diapres lesppapiers trouves
chez Weitling. Lausanne, 18u31

 

Das Dynamitattentat bei des Enthfillungdes Niederwald-
denkmals, in Hugo Friedlaender,Interessante
KriminaIppozesse von Kulturhistorischer Bedéutung.
volume VII(Berlin, 1912), 153-2h3.

 

Der erste Hochverrats rozess vor dem.Reichsgericht. Edited
by G. Kfinzel. Leipzig, 1881.

The'Freiheit' Prosecution. The Trial of Herr Johann Most
with verbatim.Ra ort of the Address of_Mr. A.M.
SuIIIvan M.P. for the Defense. London, 1831.

Die geheim.deutschen Verbindungen in der Schweiz seit 1833,

_Ein Beitgag zur Geschichte des modernen Radikalis-
nms und Kemmunismus. Basel,18h7:’

538

Der Kampf der deutschen Sozialdemokratie in der Zeit des
BSOZialistengesetZes 187B-1890.DieTHtigkeit der
Reichs-Commission. Editedby Leo Stern. Berlin-
East,’1956.

 

Papers Relatingito the Foreign Relations of the United
States 1878. washington, 1879.

Pressprozess Edgar Bauers. Bern, 18MB.

 

Protokoll des Kongresses der deutschen Sozialdemokratie.
Abgphalten auf Schloss Wyden in der Schweiz, vcm
20. bis 23. August 1880. Zfirich, 1880.

 

Prozess egen den Anarchisten Hermann Stellmacher. Vienna,
88;.

 

Rapport_g6néral adressé.au conseil d'état de Neuchatel sur
la ropgganda secféte et sur les clubs de la Jeune
Kilemagne en Suisse. Neuchatel, 18h5.

 

 

Reichsanzeiger.

 

Reichs-Gesetzblatt.

 

Stenographische Berichte fiber die Verhandlungen des
Reichstags. .

 

Die Vaterlandslosen Gesellen. Der Sozialismus im.Licht der

Geheimberichte der preussische Polizei1878-Iggg.
Edited by Reinhard H n. o ume - . o-

logne and Opladen, 196M.

 

Verhandlungen des Parteitags der deutschen Sozialdemokratie
in St. GaIIen. Abgehalten vom 2. bis 6. Oktober
IBBZ. Hottingen-Zurich, 1888.

Zentralblatt ffir das deutsche Reich.

 

Contemporary Materials: Including Contemporary Articles

Einundzwanzig Bogen aus der Schweiz. Zurich, 18h3.

 

Engels, Friedrich. Anti-Dfihring. Moscow, 195k.

. aProgress of Social Reform on the Continent,’
No. II "Germany and Switzerlandé” The New Moral

werld, V, No. 21(November 18, 1 M3), [SI-152.

 

539

Engels, Friedrich. Zur wohnupgsfrag_. Zurich, 1872.

Feuerbach, Ludwig. "fiber das 'Wesen des Christenthumfi in
Beziehung auf den 'Einzigen und sein Eigenthum,'"
Wigands Vierteljahrsschrift, 11(18h5), 170-176.

. Ludwig Feuerbach: Kleine Phil. Schriften l8h2-
18QE. Editedby Gustave Lange. Leipzig, 1950.

Fischer, Kuno. "Ein Apologet der Sephistik und ein philo-
sophischer Reactionfir," Epigonen(l8h7), 152-165.

. "Moderne SOphisten,” Epigonen(l8h8), 277-316.

Grfin, Karl. Die soziale Bewe ung_in Frankreich und Bel-
gien. Darmstadt, 18E .

Hess, Meses. Ausgewahlte Schriften. Edited by Horst Lade-
macher. Cologne, 1962.

.‘Philosophische und sozialistische Schriften 1831-
8 0. Edited by August Cornu and W6 gang n e.
or in-East, 1961.

 

 

Humboldt, Wilhelm.von. Die Ideen zu einem Versuch die
Grenzen der'Wirksamkeit des Staates zu bestimmen.

Marr, Wilhelm. Anarchie oder Autoritfit1. Hamburg, 1852.

 

 

 

 

.8Das unge Deutschland in der Schweiz. Leipzig,
1 E5.

. Der Mensch und die Ehe vor dem Richterstuhl der
Sittichkeit. Leipzig, 18h8.

Marx, Karl. Critique of the Gotha Program. New Ybrk, 1938.
. Herr Vogt. London, 1860. '

Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. worke. Vols. I-XVIII. Ber-
lin-East. 1958-1963.

. The German Ideology. New Yerk, 19h7.

Most, thann. Taktik contra Freiheit. Ein wort zum.Angriff
und zur Abwehr. London, 1880.

 

. Revolutionfire Krie swissenschaft. Ein Handbfichlein
zur Anleitung betreffend Gebraucfies und HersteIIun

von Nitroglyzerin, Dynamit Schiiessbaumwolle, Knaél-

q§peksilber,BomEen, Brandsfitzen, Giften, usw. New
ork,*1885.

 

 

SMO

Peukert, Josef. Trau, schau, weml London, 1886.

 

Stirner, Max. The Ego and His Own. New York, 1963.

. "Die philosophischen.Reactionfire," Epigonen

. "ReCensenten Stirner," Wigands Vierteljahrschrift
(18u5). 1u7-19u. .

. Stirners kleinereSghriftep. Edited by John Henry
Mackay. 2nd—edition. Treptow bei Berlin, l9lh.

 

 

 

Trautner, Max. Wie John Neve verheftet wurde. Ein Blick
hinter die Cofilissen des Herrn Josef Peukert.
London, n.d.(1869).

Vogt, Karl. Mein Prozesspgegen die Allgemeine Zeitung.
' Geneva, 1859.

Weitling, Wilhelm. Garantien der Harmonie und Freiheit.
Vevey, 18h2.

. Die Menschheit wie sie ist und wie sie seien
sollte, Vevey, 18h2.

 

Magner, Richard. Gesammelte Sphriften'und Dichtunggp.
Vol. XII. Leipzig, 1907.

Newspapers(including dates of publication and locations
of anarchist and socialist papers)

Allgemeine Literaturzeitung(Charlottenburg, 18hh),
British Museum.

The Anarchist(London, 1885-1888), British.Museum.

Arbeiter_Zeitung(Barn, 1876-1877), Midwest Interlibrary
Loan.

Arbeiter Zeitggg(New Yerk, 1890-1902), New Yerk Public
Li rary.

Der Arms KonradlBerlin, 1896-1899), Labadie Collection,
University of Michigan.

Die Autonomie(Londcn, 1886-1893), Midwest Interlibrary
Loan.

 

5m
L'Avant-Garde(Chaux-de-Fonds, 1877-1878), British.Museum.

befrei blfitter ffir anarchistische weltanschauun Epic},
W :11...
Berliner Bfisen Zeitung,

Berliner Fremdenblatt.

Berliner Gerichts-Chronik,

Berliner Zeitung,

Bulletin de la Fédération Jurassienne(Chaux-de-Fonds, 1872-
1878), Bibliothéque Nationals.

Deutsche Monatsschrift.
Extrabeilage zu.Eberhardts allgemeine Polizei-Anzeiger.

Fanal. Organ der Anarchisten‘VereinigungfiBerlin, 1926-
1931): New Yerk Public Library.

Frankfurter Gen. Anzeiger,.

Frankfurter Journal.

Frankfurter Zeitung,

Freedom. A Journal of Anarchist-Communism(London, 1886-1936),
Columbia UniverSity, Library 6f‘Uongress, Hoover

Institute.

Der Freie Arbeiter(Berlin, 190h-1933), International In-
stitute of Social History, Amsterdmn.

Die Freie Generation,pDokumente der Eeltanschauungpdes Anar-
chismusTBerlin, 1906-1908), Library of Congress.

Freie Literature. Monatsbeilage zur Wochenschrift 'Der
Freie Arbeiter'(Berlin, 1905-1906), International
Institute of Social History, Amsterdam.

Freiheit(London, Switzerland, Paris, New York, 1879-1910),

University of Minnesota; Labadie Collection, Uni-
versity of Michigan. ‘

Le Gutenburg, Journal de la Typographic Belgg(Brussels).
Kfilnische zeitugg.

Léipziger Tageblatt.

Liberty(Boston, 1881-1908), University of Illinois.

5&2

Litterarische Beila e zum.'Sozialist'(Berlin, 1895-1899),
Library of éongress.

Local Anzeiger der “Presse"(Vienna).

 

Londoner Arbeiter Zeitung(London, 1886-1890), British
iuseum.

Magdeburg,Zeitung.

National Zeitung(Berlin).

Neue Zuricher Zeitung, ‘

Neues TagblafitfiStuttgart).
Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung.

Norddeutsche Blfiyter ffir Kritik, Literatur, und Untegg
haltggg(Berlin).

 

 

 

Die Post.
Der Rebell(Geneva, London, 1881-1886), Staatsarchiv Ludwigs-
r80
Le R6volt§(Geneva, Paris, 1879-l89h), University of
Wisconsin.

Der Sozialist. Organ ffir Anarchismus:Sozialismus(Berlin,
1891-1899), Library of Congress.

Der Sozialist. Or an des Sozialistischen Bundes(Berlin,
. I909-l915), Labadie Collection, University of
Michigan. '

Der Sozialdemokrat(Zurich, London, 1879-1890), Midwest
Interlibrary Loan Center.

Le Travailleur(Geneva, 1877-1878), University of Illinois.
lggmg§(London).

Tribune(Berlin).

Volks zoitggmerlin) .

Vossische Zeitupg. 8

Waldersee'r Nochenblatt.

Wochenblatt dertFrankfurter Zeitung.

ShBa
Die Zukunft(Berlin, 1877-1878), British Museum.

Encyc10pedias and Annuals

La Grande Encyclopgdig. Paris, n.d.

Der Grosse Brockhaus. Wiesbaden, 1953.

5&3

Handwfirterbuch der Staatswissenschaft. hth edition. Jena,
192A.

The Annual Register.

 

 

Sdhulthess' Europfiischer Geschichtskalender.
Published Correspondence

Bismarck, Otto von. Die geSammelten‘Werke. Vol. 6c 1871
bis 1890. Berlin, 1935.

 

 

Bismarck, Otto von and William I. The Correspondence of
William I and Bismargg. 2 V013. New York, 1903:

 

The Holstein ngers. Edited by Norman Rich and MQH. Fischer.
u Vols. Cambridge, 1955-1963.

Letters of Richagd Wagner. Edited by Wilhelm.Altmann.
2 Vols. London, 1927.

Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. Der Briefwechsel zwischen
Friedrich Engels und Karl Marx.wD.VBIs. Stutt-
gart311921.

 

. Letters to Americans 18h8-1895. New Yerk, 1953.

 

. Selected Corregpondencg. Moscow, 1953.

Hess, Moses. Briefwechsel. Edited by Edmund Silberner.
S'Gravenhage,81959.

 

Proudhon, Pierre Joseph. Correspondence de P.J. Proudhon.
II. Paris, 1875.

Ruge, Arnold. Arnold Huge. Briefwechsel und Tagebuch-
blfitter aus den Jahren 1825-1880. Edited by
Paul Nerrlich. Berlin, 1886.

Sorge, FtA. Briefe und Auszuge aus Briefen von Jch. Phil.
Becker, Jos. DieEden,jFriedrich EngeIs, Karl .
Marxpu.a. an.F.A. Serge und andere. Stuttgart, 1906.

Zwischen 18. und 25. Jpgend Briefe von Friedrich Engels.
Edited by Hannes Skambraks. Berlin-East, 19651

5111+

Memoirs and Biographies

Andler, Charles. Nietzsche sa vie et sa pensée. II.
Paris, 1958.

 

Andrieux, Louis. Souvenirs d'un Prefect de Police.
Paris, 1885.

 

 

Anonymus Veritascgohann Meet). Acht Jahre hinter Schloss
und Riege . Skitzzen aus dem Leben Jehann Most.
New York, 1886.

 

Aranyossi, Magda. Leo Frankel. Berlin-East, 1957.

 

Bebel, August. Aus meinem Leben. Berlin-East, 196M.

 

Die beiden letzten Tape des Hochverrfithers Max Hfidel.
Kissingen, 1878.

 

Bernstein, Eduard. Sozialdemokratische Iehrjahre.
Berlin, 1925.

 

. My Years of Exile. New Yerk, 1921.

 

Bismarck, Otto von. The Memoirg. 2 Vols. New Yerk, 1966.

 

Brinton, Clarence Crane. Nietzsche. New York, 19h1.

 

Caillg, F. Wilhelm.Weitling theoricien du communisme.

Carr, E.H. Enchael Bakunin. New York, 1961.

 

 

Erinnerungen an Marx und Engels. Berlin-East, 1965.
Eyck, Erich. Bismarck and the German Reich. New York, 196k.
Fermi, Laura. Mhssolini. Chicago, 1966.

 

Friedlaender, Jack. Max Stirner: Versuch einer Wfirdigung
seiner Bedeutupg. Hamburg, 1921.

Goldman, Emma. Living My Lifg. 2 Vols. New York, 1931.

 

Guillaume, James. L'International: Documents et souvenirs
186g-1878.—h Vols. Paris, 1905-1910.

 

Heinzen, Carl. Erlebtgg. Berlin, 186M.

 

Huber, Hans. Karl Heinzen; seine politische Entwicklun und
publiiistische Wirksamkeit. Bern undLeipzig, I932.

5A5
Kaler, Emil. Wilhelm Weitling. Hottingen-Zurich, 1887.

 

Kautsky, Karl. Erinnerungen und Eroerterungen. The
Hague, 1960.

 

Kropotkin, Peter. Memoirs of a Revolutionist. New Yerk,
1930.

Luboc, Henri de. The Un-Marxian Socialist. New Ybrk, 19h8.

 

 

Mackay, Jehn Henry. Max Stirner, sein Leben und sein Werk.
Leipzig, 1898.

 

 

Mayer, Gustav. Friedrich Engels: Eine Biographie. 2 Vols.
The Hague, 193h. .

Mehring, Franz. Karl Marx. Ann Arbor, 1962.

 

Messer, Max. Max Stirner. Berlin, 1907.

 

Most, Jahann. August Reinsdorf und die Propaganda der That.
New Ybrk, 1885.

 

. Memorien. Erlebtes,_Erforschtes und Erdachtes.
H‘Vols. New York, 1903-1907.

 

Mfilberger, Arthur. Studien fiber Proudhon. Stuttgart, 1891.
A . P.J. Proudhons Leben und Werke. Stuttgart, 1899.

 

Neumann, Ernst. The Life of Richard Wagner. 2 Vols. New
York, 1938.

Peukert, Josef. Erinnerungen eines Proletariers aus der
Revolutionlren Arbeiterbewegung. Berlin, 1913.

 

. "Otto Rinke,” Jahrbuch der freien Generation
ffir 1910, Neue Paige, I(Paris, 1910), 83-86.

 

 

Rawidowics, Simon. Ludwig Feuerbachs Philosophie. Ur-
gprung und SchicksaI. Berlin, 1931.

Rich, Norman. Friedrich vonjHolstein. Politics and Dip-
lomacy in the Era of Bismarck and William II.
2 Vols. Cambridge, 1965.

Richter, Werner. Bismarck. New York, 1965.

 

Rocker, Rudolf. thann Most. Das Leben eines Rebellen.
Berlin, 192h.

Ruest, Anselm. Max Stirner. Leben-Weltanschauung-
Vermachtnis. BerIin,1906.

5&6

Seidel-Hfippner, Waltraud. Wilhelm Weitling: der erste
deutscher theoretiker und agitator des‘Kommunis-
mus. Berlin-East;_1961.

 

Silberner, Edmund. Moses Hess Geschichte seiner Lebens.
Leiden, 1966.

 

Spiess, Camile. Max Stirner. Nice, 19h9.

 

Tiedemann, Christoph von. Aus Siebenjahrzehnten, II Sechs
Jahre Chef der Reichskanzelei unter dem Ffirsten
Bismarck. Leipzig, 1909.

 

 

'Wagner, Richard. My Life. New York, 1911.

Wittke, Carl. A ainst the Current. The Life of Karl Hein-
zen, 1 931880. Chicago,_19h5.

. The Utopian Communist. A Bio raphy of Wilheym
Weitlipg. Baton Rouge, La., 1950

WOodcock, George. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, 1956.

Zlociste, Theodore. Moses Hess, der Vorkfimpfer des Sozi-
alismus und Zionismus. Berlin, 1922.

Histories and Interpretations

L'actualite de Proudhon colloque des 2Qet 25 Notembre 1965.
BrusseIs, I967.

Adamiak, Richard. "The 'Withering Away' of the State: A
Reconsideration,” The Journal of Politics, XXXII
(1970). 3-18.

Adler, Georg. Geschichte der ersten sozial politischen
Arbeiter Bewegung_in Deutschland. Breslau,i1885.

Adler, Max. Die Staatsauffassung des Marxismus: Ein Bei-
trgge zur unterscheidupgvon soziale ischer und
jpristischer Methode. Darmstadt, 19

 

. Wegweiser: Studien zu Geistgeschichte des So-
zialismus. Stuttgart, 191E.

Anarchismus, Sozial-Demokratie und revolutionfire Taktik.
Zurich, 1885.

Sh?

Anonymus, Sozialismus und Anarchismus in Europa und Nord-
amerika fiflhrend der Jahre 1883 his 1856. Berlin,
1887.

 

 

Arnim, Bettina von. "Die Aulessung des Einzigen durch den
Menschen," Epigonen(18u7), 189-251.

Arvon, Henri. Aux sources de 1'existentialisme. Max Stirner.
Paris, l9§h.

Auer, Ignaz. Nach zehn Jahren. Material und Glossen zur
Geschichte des Sozialistengesetzen. Nuremburg, 1913.

 

Avineri, Shlomo. The Social and Political Thought of Karl
Marx. Cambridge, 1968}

 

Balin, Wilhelm. Ludwig Feuerbach, sein Werken und seine
Zeitgenossen. Stuttgart, 1891.

Basch, Victor. L'individualisme anarchiste Max Stirner.
Paris , 19013.0

Beer, Max. Social Struggles and Modern Socialism. London,
1925}

Bernstein, Eduard. Die Geschichte der Berliner Arbeiter-
bewegung. 3 Vols. Berlin, 1905-1910.

 

 

. "Die soziale Doktrin des Anarchismus. Stirner.
Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum," Neue Zeit(Stutt-

gart), 10 1891-1892), I, 358-365, —E21:E28_'II,
589-596, 618-626, 657-666, 772-778, 813-819.

Bloom, Soloman F. nThe Withering Away of the State,"
Journal of the History of Ideas, VII(19M6),.113-121.

 

Bose, Atindranath. A History of Anarchism. Calcutta, 1967.

BraunAWiesbaden, Karl. "Das Attentat auf dem Niederwald
und der HochverrathSprozess vor dem Reichsgericht, "
Nord und Sad, XXXIII(1885), 65-82.

Brugger, Otto. Geschichte der deutschen Handwerkvereine
in der Schweiz. Bern, 1932}

 

. Die werksamkeit'Weitlingg. Bern, 1932.
Buber, Martin. Between Men and Man. London, 19h?

Carus, Paul. Nietzsche and Other Exponents of Individualism.
Chicago, il9lu.

Cohn, Norman. Pursuit of the Millennium. London, 1957.

5118

Cole, G. D.R. Socialist Tho_ght. Marxism and Anarchism,
1§50-1890. London, V1961.

 

Cuybers, W} Max Stirner als Philosoph. Wflrzburg, 1937.

”Die deutsche Philosophie seit Hegels Tode," Gegenwart

Diehl, Karl. Uber Sozialismus, Kommunismus,_und Anarchis-
mus. Jena, 1911.

Dinger, Hugo. Richard Wagners_geistliche Entwicklung.
Berlin, 1902.

Drachkovitsch, Milorad. The Revolutionary International
186u-l9h3. Stanford71966.

 

Drews, Arthur. Nietzsches PhilosoPhie. Heidelberg, 190A.

Duboc, Julius. Das ich und die Ebrigen. Ffir und wider
Stirner. Leipzig, 1897..

Eckert, Georg. Die Braunschweiger Arbeiterbewegung unter
dem Sozialistengesetz. Braunsdhweig, 1961.

 

Eltzbacher, Paul. Anarchism:_New York, 1960.

 

Emge, Carl. Max Stirner,_eine geistig nicht bewflltigte
Tendenz. Wiesbaden, 196E:

 

"Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum.von Max Stirner," Blatter
far literarische Unterhaltu_g(February, 18KB}.

Epstein, Klaus. The Genesis of German Conservatism. Prin-
ceton, 1966.

 

Ernst, Eugen. Polizeispitzeleien und Ausnahme esetze 1878-
1910. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der BeEHmpfugg

der Sozialdemokratie. Berlin, 1911.

 

Fabbri, Luigi. "Die historischen und sachlichen Zusammen-
hange zwischen Marxismus und Anarchismus," Archiv
far Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik,

TTEbingen,l908), 559:605.

"Feuerbach und der Einzige. Die Consequenzen Feuerbachs
und ihr Kampf gegen die Kritik und den Einzigen,"
Wigands Vierteljahrschrift(18u6), 123-138.

 

FBrder, Herwig. Marx und Engels am Vorabend der Revolution.
Berlin-East, 1962.

5119

Fricke, Dieter. Bismarcks PrHtorianer. Der Berliner poli-
tische Polizei im Kampf gegen die deutsche Arbei—
tErEEwegungng7l-139B.*Berlin-East,il962.

 

 

Fricke, G.A. Woher kommt das anarchistische Treiben und
wie ist ihm abzuhi1TEn. Leipzig, 18u8.

 

Friedenburg, W. ”Zur Geschichte des neuesten Philoso hie.
Max Stirner. Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum,’
Grenzboden, I(18h5), 239-2u1. ,

 

Friedlaender, Benedict. Der freiheitliche Sozialismus im
Gegensatz zum Staatsknechtsthum des MarxisEEn. Mit

besonderer Beruckfechtigung der Werke und schick-
sale Eugen DEEringg. Berlin, 1892.

 

 

Fuld, Ludwig. "Due Ermordung des Polizeiraths Dr. Rumpf
in Frankfurt a.M.,‘t Nord und Sad, XXXIV(1885),
h76-h82. _

Gay, Peter. The Dilemma of Democratic Socialism. Eduard
Bernstein's Challenge to Marx. New York, 1952.

 

 

Goldman, Egmaé6"J6hann Most," American Mercury, VIII(1926),
l .1 o A

Grimm, Robert. Geschichte der sozialistischen Ideen in der
Schweiz.i2urich, 1931.

Hannsson, 01a. Seher und Deuter. Berlin, 189M.

Haubtmann, Pierre. Marx et Proudhon leurs ra orts
personnel IBEX-IBET. Paris, I9H7.

Hautz, K.A. Die Philosoghie NL:§tirners im.Geggnsatz zum
Hegelschen Idealismus. Leipzig, 1936.

 

 

Helms, Hans G. Die Ideologie der anonymen Gesellschaft.
Cologne, 1966.

Hennequin, Amedee. Le Communisme et la Jeune-Allemggne en
Suisse. Paris, 1850.

Hillquit, Morris. History of Socialism.in the United States.
New York, 1965.

Hook, Sidney. From.Hegel to Marx. New York, 1950.
Horn, E. Max Stirners ethischer Egoismus. Berlin, 1907.

. "Max Stirner und der Anarchismus,” Der Zukunft,
II(1892), 252-256.

 

 

550
Howe, Frederic G. EurOpean Cities at WOrk. New YOrk, 1913.

"The Ideal: gféAnarchy," Littell's Living_Age, 211(1896),
61 - 3

Jackson, J. Hampden. Marx, Proudhon and EurOpean Socialism.
London, 1957.

James, H.G. Principles of Prussian Administration. New
York, 1913 e

Jankelevitsch, S. "L'unique et 1e surhomme. Le probleme
de la personnalite chez Stirner et chez Nietzsche,"
Revue de Allemagne(January-June, 1931), 27-u0,
216:2h3.

Jensen, Jfirgen. Presse und politische Polizei. Hambur
Zeitungen unter dem Sozialistengesetz 187841 9 .
Hannover, 1966.

Jodl, Friedrich. "Max Stirner und Ludwig Feuerbach, ” Ester-
reichische Rundschau, XXVI(January-MarCh, 1911!
h20-H28.

 

. Max Stirner und Ludwig Feuerbach. Stuttgart, 1916.

 

 

‘JBel, Karl. Philosophenwege-Ausblicke und Rackblicke.
4 Berlin, 1901.

Joll, James. The Anarchists. London, 196M.

 

Kaff, Sigmund. "Der Philosoph des Egoismus," Sozialistisdhe
Monatshefte, (1907), lhl-lh

Kahn, Gustav. "Stirner et 1'individualisme," La nouvelle
VRevue, 10h(3eptembIr-October, 190M), 131-136.

 

Kampffmeyer, Paul and Bruno Altmann. Vor dem Sozialisten-
gesetz. Krisejahre des Obrigkeitsstaates. Berlin,
1928.

Kelsen, Hans. ”Sozialismus und Staat," Archiv far den Geschichte
des Sozialismus, IX(1920), 19957.

 

Kohn, Hans. The Mind of Germany; New Yerk, 1960.

Koigen, D. Zur Vorgeschichte des modernen philosohhischen
Sozialismus iniDeutSChland. Zur Geschichte der
PhiIOSOphie und Sozialphilosophie des Jungheg_-
lianismus.iBern, 1901:

Kreal, August. Zur Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung Oester-
reichs. Berlin, 189E.

551

Kreibig, J.L. Geschichte und Kritik des ethischen Skepti-
gismus. Berlin, 1896.

 

Kronenberg, H. Moderne Philosophen. Portraits und Charak-
teristiken. Munich, 1899.

 

Kronenberg, M. "Der PhilosOph des Anarchismus," Die Nation.
Wochenschrift far Politik Volkwirtschaft una Li-
teraturIBerlin): 16(189861899),488-51.

 

Iachmann, P. Protogoras, NietzscheJ Stirner. Berlin, l91h.

 

Landauer, Gustav. "BBrne und der Anarchismus,“ Sozialis-
tische Monatshefte, (1899), 353-355. ""'—"_

 

Langhard, J. Die anarchistische Bewegung in der Sdmweiz
von ihren Anffingp bis zur Gegenwart. 2nd editiEn.
Bern, 1909.

Laqueur,3Walter. "Visionaries," Atlas, II(January, 1965),
0-51.

Latouche, Peter. Anarchy. An Authentic Exposition of the
Methods o?9Anarchists and’the Aims of AnarChism.
London, 1908.

 

Laufenburg, Heinrich. Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung in
Hamburg, Altona und Umgegend. 2 V013. Hamburg,
1911, 1931.

Laveleye, Emile. 'Le socialisme contemporain en Alle gne,"
Revue des deux Mondes, 156(September 1, 1876 .

Levy, A. La philosophie de Feuerbach. Paris, 1908.

Lichtenberger, Henri. "L'anarchisme en Allemagne. Max
Stirner,“ La nouvelle Revue. 89IJu1y-August, 189A),
233-2u1.

Lidtke, Vernon L. The Outlawed Party, Social Democracy_in
Germany, 1878-1890. Princeton, 1966.

Ligt, B. de. Anarchismus und Revolution. Berlin, 1922.

Lipinski, Richard. Die Sozialdemokratie von ihren Anfangen
bis zur Gegenwart. 2 vols. Berlin, 1928.

Lippert, Woldermann. Richard Wagners Verbannung_und Rack-
lehr, 1849- 1862. ’Berlin, 1927.

Lombroso, Cesare. "Anarchy. The Status of Anarchism Today
in Europe and the United States," Everybody's
Magazine, VI(1902), 165-168. 1

 

552
Lombroso, Cesare. Die Anarchisten. Hamburg, l89u.

 

. "Der Anarchismus," Deutsche Revue(October, 189k).

 

 

. "A Paradonical Anarchist," POpular Science Mbnthll,
56(January, 1900), 312-315.

 

. "Illustrative Studies in Criminal Anthropology,"
Monist, I(April, 1891), 226-3h3. -

 

'Lord, Robert H. The Origins of the War of 1879. Cambridge,
Mass., l92h.

 

L8with, Karl. From.Hegel to Nietzsche. New York, 1968.

 

Lugghesi, Francois. La philosoPhie de Stirner. Paris, 1932.

 

Mackay, John Henry. Die Anarchisten. Zurich, 1891.

 

Maitron, Jean. Histoire du movement anarchiste en France

(1880-191E).Paris, 1953.

Malia, Martin E. Alexander Herzen and the Birth of Russian
Socialism, 1812-1855. Cambridge, Mass., 1961.

{artin, A. weitere Aufsfitze. Mit einem Anhan e: Schiller
und der Anarchismus, oder Ausruf aus Schillers
"fiber die Esthetische Erzeihung_der Menschenf' In
Einer Reihe von Briefen. Dresden, 1907.

 

 

 

 

. Max Stirners Lehre. Leipzig, 1906.

 

 

@mrtin, Rudolf Emi . Der AnarChismus und seine Trager.
Berlin, 18 7. -

 

Mayer, Gustav. "Die Anfflnge der politischen Radikalismus
im vormarzlichen Preussen," Zeitschrift far Poli-
tik, v1(1913). 1-113. .

 

thring, Franz. Geschichte der deutschen Sozialdemokratie.
2 Vols. Berlin-East, 1960.

Mfilbcrger, Arthur. "Ein wahlmanifest Proudhons. Ein Beitrag
zu Vorgeschichte der Commune," Gegenwart, (1877),
251-262. 6

. "Die Theorie der Anarchie," Die neue Gesellschaft
‘FTZurich) (March, 1878), 291-311.

 

 

. "Eon und fiber Proudhon," Die Wag§(Berlin), (1878-
1879). -

553

Yfilberger, Arthur. Zur Kentnisse Intum von Karl Marx. Aus
Ernst Buschs Nachlass. Basel, 189h.

 

 

Mflller, Georg. Richard wagner in der Mai-Revolution. Ber-
lin, 1919.

 

Nettlau, Max. Der Vorfrflhling der Anarchie: Ihre historische
Entwicklung von den Aanngen bis zum Jahre 186E;
Berlin,gl925.

 

. Der Anarchismus von Proudhon zu Kropotkin. Ber-
lin, 1927.

 

 

. Anarchisten und Sozialrevolutionfire: Die his-
torische Entwicklung des Anarchismus in den Jahren
1880-1886. Berlin, 1931.

 

 

 

. "Londoner deutsche kommunistische Diskussionen
l8h5," Archiv ffir die Geschichte des Sozialismus
und der Arbeiterbewegungj91119227,9336-391.

 

 

"Neue Aphorismen," Die Zukunft, 32(1900), 12-13.

 

Nomad, flax. Apostles of Revolution. Boston, 1939.
. Aspects of Revolt. 'New York, 1959.

Nordau, Max. Degeneration. London, 191M.

Noyes, P.H. Organization and Revolution: werkin -Class
Associations ih the German Revolutionsggf—IBEEF

18H9T—frinceton, 1966.

Pack, WOlfgang. Das parlamentarische Rin en um das So-
zialistengesetz 1878-1890. Dflsse dor , 1961.

 

 

Pascal, Felicien. "Du romantisme E'lianarchie," Le
CorreSpondant, 225(November, 1906), 7524780.

 

Plechanoff, George. Anarchism and Socialism. London, 1895.

P.H. "Das Verbrechen am Niederwald," Preussische Jahr-
baeher, LV(1885). 113-12u.

P81s,'Werner. "Staat und Sozialdemokratie im Bismarckreich

- in Berlin in der Zeit des Sozialistengesetzes 1878-

1890," Jahrbuch ffir die GeschiChte Mittel- und Ost-
deutschlands, 13(196u), 209-221.

IRau, Albrecht. "Ludwig Feuerbach and Max Stirner," Das
Magazin far die Literatur des In- und Auslandes
(Berlin7;-fi67‘EIT1888),6u3-6u6.

IReed, Herbert. The Tenth Muse. Essays in Criticism. New
York, 1958.

55h

"Die Reise auf Bffentliche Kosten," Epigonen, V(l8h7),
9-1120 1

 

Reust, Anselm. Stirnerbrevier. Die starke einsame. Max
Stirners Individualismus. Der Einzige und sein
Eigenthum. Munidh, 1911.

 

 

. ”Stirner und Nietzsche. Ein Vorwort," Die Aktion.
Eeitschrift ffir freiheitliche Politik und Literatur,
I(l9ll), 916Q9I7.

 

 

Rbbertson, Priscilla. Revolutions of lena. A Social His-
tory. New YOrk, 1960.

Romundt, Heinrich. "Max Stirner und die Nachkantische Philo-
sophie," Preussische Jahrbflcher, 133(1809), 33-u7.

 

Roth, Gunther. The Social Democrats in Imperial Germany.
A Studyfiin‘Working Class Isolation and National
Integration. TBtowa, New Jersey,'1963.

 

 

Roudine, Victor. "Max Stirner," Portraits d'hier(Octo-
ber 15, 1910), 65-95.

Schaact, Michael. Anarchy_and Anarchists. Chicago, 1889.

 

 

Schellwien, Robert. Max Stirner und Friedrich Nietzsche.
Paris, l90h.

 

 

Schneidt, Karl. "Vom iungen Anarchismus," Die Kritik
(Berlin), III 1896), 583-591, 622-632, 665-677,
717-721, 767-826.

Schuffenhauer, werner. Feuerbach und der junge Marx. Zur
Entstehungsgesichte der Marxistischen Weltan-
schauung. Berlin, 1965.

 

 

Schultheiss, Hermann. Stirner; Grundlage zum Verstandnis
des'Werkes 'Der Einzige und sein Eigenthum.‘
Leipzig, 1922.

 

 

Schultze, Ernst. "Stirner'sche Ideen in einem paranoischen
thnsystem," Archiv fur Psychiatrie und Nerven-
krankheiten, 36(January, 1903), 7933818.

 

 

’
Schuré; Edouard. ”L'individualisme et l'anarchie,” Revue
des deux Mondes, 132(August 15, 1895), 775-805.

Schuster, Eunice. Native American Anarchism. Northampton,
Mass., 1932:

Schwae, Michael. "A Convicted Anarchist's Reply to Pro-
fessor Lombroso," Monist, I(April, 1891), 520-52h.

I

SSS

SeilliDre, Ernest. "La morale imperialists chez Stirner,"
Mercure de France, 60(Mardh 15, 1906), 179-198.

Sergent, Alain and Claude Harmel. Histoire de 1'anarchie.
Paris, 1989.

"Die Sozialisten und Anarchisten in der Schweiz," Die Ge-
§%gwart,WOChenschri§t far Literatur,gKunst und
fentliChes Leben, XXV, No. 12(March 22, 188M),
177-180.

Staurzh, N. Max Stirners Philosophie des Ich. Berlin, 1923.

Steefel, Lawrence D. Bismarck and.the Hohenzollern Can-
didacy and the Ori ins of9the‘War o 7 .
Cambridge, Mass., 962.

Steckloff, G.M; History of the First International. New
York, 1928.

Stiekloff, Gebrg. Marx und die Anarchisten. Dresden, 1913.

Steiner, Rudolf. "Max Stirner," Das Ma azin ffir Literatur
(Berlin, Weimar), 67, No. ZEIJuIy 2, 1898’, 601-605.

Stoessl, Otto. "Die Lebensbeschreibung des 'Einzige,'" Die
Gegenwart, No. 26(1899), h06-h09. i

 

Strauss, Rudolph and Kurt Finsterbrusch. Die Chemnitzer
Arbeiterbewegung unter dem Sozialistengesetz.
Berlin-East,’195h.

Taubert, Inge. "Zur materialistischen Geschichtsauffassung

von Marx und Engels. Uber einige theoretische Prob-

leme im ersten Kapital des 'Deutschen Ideologie,'"
Beitrage zur Geschichte der deutschen.Arbeiterbe-

wegung, Sonderhe?t X11968), 22-50.

Tilley, W.H. The Background of the Princess Casamassima.
University of Florida, Gainsville, 1961.

 

Tuchmann, Barbara. The Proud Tower. Bantam.edition. New
York; 1967.

Tucker, Robert E. The Marxian Revolutionary Idea. New
Yerk, 1969.

Ulam, Adam. B. The Unfinished Revolution. New Ybrk, 1960.

Valbert, G. ”L'attentat du Niederwald," Revue des Deux
Mbndes, LXVII(February 1, 1885), 669-680.

a —-"‘W" . ‘-

 

556

"Das Verstandesthum und das Individum,” Evangelische
Kirchenzeitung(18u8), A8.

Vizetelly, Alfred. The Anarchists. New York. New York, 1911.

 

Wendler, WOlfgang. Carl Sternheim. Weltvorstellung und Kunst-
prinzipien. Frankfurt a.M. und Bonn, 1966.

Neller, E. Die Freiheitsbestrebungen der deutschen im.l8.
und‘l9. JahFhunderthin Zeugnissenfiihrer Litera-
tur. Leipzig, 18h7.

Wille, Bruno. "Vom rothen G8tzen," Die Zukunft, 7(189h),
MSZ-hSB-

WOodcock, George. Anarchism. Cleveland, 1962.

 

Zenker, E.V. Anarchism. New YOrk, 1897.

Ziekursch, thannes. Politische Geschichte des neuen
IICDas‘Zeitalter—Bii-

deutschen Kaiserreichs
marckslIB7I-1890}. Frankfurt a.M., 1928.

Zoccoli, Hektor. Die Anarchie: ihre Verkflnderg ihre Ideen,
ihre Taten. Leipzig, 1909.

 

 

Zucker, A.E. The Forty Eighters. Political Refugees of the
German Revolutions of_18u8. New York, 1950.