Cologne, April 26. We have to report a fact which testifies that en 
fait de justice? there is no longer anything impossible. Herr 
Nicolovius, Public Prosecutor General, clearly intends to surpass 
even the laurels which Herr Hecker in his time won for himself. 

From our previous reports” it will be recalled that during the 
criminal court trial against Lassalle, von Ammon I, deputy Chief 
Public Prosecutor in Dtisseldorf, for three weeks concealed in his 
office desk and withheld from the examining magistrate a letter of 
Lassalle’s in which the latter requested a farmer‘ from Schonstein to 
arrange for a reinforcement of some 100 men to march to 
Düsseldorf in the event of a struggle and that von Ammon only 
handed the letter to the examining magistrate when the latter 
informed him that the investigation had been concluded. It will be 
recalled that because of this letter—which, incidentally, was so far 
from containing a direct call for an uprising that neither the Court 
nor the indictment board included it among the grounds for 
prosecution —the investigation had to be begun afresh, and this was 
the reason why Lassalle’s trial was not already concluded in the 
previous session of the Assize Court. 

Lassalle protested at the time to the Public Prosecutor Gen- 
eral against this deliberate dragging out of the case by Herr von 
Ammon I. 

The Public Prosecutor General, instead of making any reply to 
Lassalle, sent the latter’s complaint to the Public Prosecutor’s office 

in Dusseldorf with instructions to instigate proceedings against 
Lassalle for this complaint on the basis of Article 222 because in it 
Herr von Ammon had been insulted! 

Pends-toi, Figaro, tu n’aurais pas inventé cela!* 

Thus, a letter to Herr Nicolovius is alleged to constitute an insult to 
Herr von Ammon within the meaning of Article 222! Already once 
before, on the occasion of the trial of the press, which we had the 
pleasure of conducting against Herr Zweiffel and Herr Hecker, we 
explained that Article 222 does not even apply to public insults by 
the press but only to insults levelled at officials when they are actually 
present.” 

But even if Article 222 were also applicable to insults through 
printed matter, it would still certainly not occur to anyone to maintain 
that a letter to a third person could be an insult to an official. 
According to the practice adopted hitherto in the police courts, it was 
always requisite that the material containing the insult should be 
addressed to the insulted person himself or that it should be publicly 
disseminated. Herr Nicolovius now discovers that if one writes in 
insulting terms to a third person about an official, that is an insult to 
the official! It seems, therefore, that one must beware of speaking 
about officials in a disrespectful tone in one’s private correspon- 
dence! 

The fact that Lassalle’s letter was addressed to the official authority 
superior to Herr von Ammon and was therefore a complaint, a protest, 
makes the matter still more impossible. 

For the law even makes it obligatory for complaints against 
wrongful actions of officials to be addressed to the superior 
authority. If, therefore, the substance of the complaint was true, it 
was perfectly in order; if it was false then the Public Prosecutor 
General should have instituted legal proceedings on the basis of 
Article 373—because of a calumniatory complaint. But in that case it 
would be the easiest thing in the world for Lassalle on the basis of the 
documents to prove the truth of his complaint, whereas this proof is 
of no avail to him when brought before a police court on a charge of 
insulting an official. 

The case came before the Court in Düsseldorf. But this Court, too, 
found that an insult has to be made either publicly, or in the 
presence of the insulted person, and dismissed the case. The Public 

Prosecutor’s office opposed this, and our local Cologne indictment 
board, which has often been tested and has always proved reliable, 
actually decided to institute legal proceedings based on Article 222 
against Lassalle, who is now happily burdened with a police court 
case. 

What else will be achieved with the help of Article 222, if things 
continue in this way? 

Incidentally the Lassalle case will come before the Assize Court on 
May 3.