17
the great questions of the present in accordance with these theories, and at the same time investigating their relation to the proletariat. This division of the field of labor was natural, not pedantic; they often worked together and always exchanged ideas.
Engels gives proof in various places of his recognition of this relation which existed between himself and Marx in the scientific world. In the preface to the second edition of his book, "Eugene Duhring's Revolution in Science," he says: "The greater part of the point of view developed here was founded and worked out by Marx, and only a small part of it by me. Its presentation has not been made without his knowledge. I have read the whole manuscript to him before publication, and the tenth chapter of the section on Economics was written by Marx, and aside from some superficial observation was merely abridged by me. It was always our custom to assist each other reciprocally in our special fields."
It is well for the most part to say of this division of labor that while the Marxian studies are comprised in one principal work—"Capital"—the results of Engels' investigations are scattered in numerous small pamphlets. So it happens that while complaints are made about the unintelligibleness of Marx, and most people have read more about "Capital" than they have of "Capital" itself, Engels stands as a master of popular exposition; his writings are read by all thinking proletarians, and the majority of those who have accepted socialism have obtained their knowledge and understanding of the Marx-Engels theory from these writings.
A slight observation on this point. Most of our friends, as soon as they recognize that socialism is not a matter of sympathy but of science, at once throw themselves with fiery energy upon "Capital," break out their teeth on the theory of value, and then drop everything. The result would be entirely different if they first took up Engels' pamphlets, and only after they had thoroughly studied these betook themselves to "Capital."
Engels' writings for the most part concern passing events, but they are in no way of such temporary value as to be useless when the occasion has passed which brought them forth. One of these has especial value for us through its sharp characterization of the historical situation which produced it, and the more so since we are in a similar position to-day. This is true, for example, of "The Prussian 'Schnaps' in German Reichstag," which plays, if possible, a greater role to-day than
