The editors of the *Allgemeine Zeitung* were so kind as to publish, early in February 1860, a declaration by me which began with the following words:

“I hereby give notice that I have taken preparatory steps for instituting a libel action against the Berlin *National-Zeitung* in respect of leading articles Nos. 37 and 41 on Vogt’s pamphlet ‘Mein Prozeß gegen die Allgemeine Zeitung’. I reserve a literary reply to Vogt for a later date.”

In the course of February 1860 I brought a libel action in Berlin against F. Zabel, the responsible editor of the *National-Zeitung*. My lawyer, Herr Justizrat Weber, first chose the preliminary investigation procedure. By order of 18 April 1860 the public prosecutor refused to “take proceedings” against F. Zabel, since there was no public interest warranting it. On 26 April 1860 his rejection was confirmed by the senior public prosecutor.

My lawyer then resorted to civil proceedings. By order of 8 June 1860 the Royal City Court prohibited me from proceeding with the action, because the “truly defamatory utterances and assertions” of F. Zabel consist in mere quotations from other persons, and also because “the intention to insult” does not prevail. The Royal Kammergericht, for its part, declared by order of 11 July 1860 that the alleged form of quotation did not alter the punishable character of the articles, but that the defamatory passages contained in them did not refer to my “person”. Moreover, “in the present case” the intention to insult was “not to be assumed”.

The Royal Kammergericht accordingly confirmed the rejected order of the City Court. By an order of 5 October 1860, which reached me on 23 October of this year, the Royal Supreme Tribunal found that “in the present case” no “error of law” on the part of the Royal Kammergericht “is apparent”. Thus the prohibition against suing F. Zabel stood and there was no public court hearing.

My Reply to Vogt will appear in a few days.

Karl Marx

London, 24 November 1860