Manchester, 31 May 1860 

Dear Moor, 

I return Ephraim Artful* herewith. His proposal re yourself is 
truly crazy.” After all, there’s nothing you could say, either, about 
what happened in Cologne. However, Ephraim might be of some 
use in the matter. At least he has more piuck than the old women 
actually involved at Cologne, who always prefer to endure 
everything patiently. But it might also be worthwhile trying to see 
if there’s anything to be done from Cologne. 

Ad vocem* Fischel, perhaps we’d better tell the fool the more or 
less unvarnished truth and give him a bit of a lesson about the 
extent to which the word ‘reactionary’ has come to be [just] an 
empty phrase in his mouth. You might also take the opportunity 
of getting him to explain just why He, Ephraim the Profound, 
agrees in effect with our own and Fischel’s ‘anti-Palmerstonianism’. 
An enigma—at least so far. A private set-to between L. and F. in 
Berlin can’t possibly concern us, and F. has behaved too well for 
us to drop him on some pretext or other just to please L. The 
only thing to do, presumably, is to give the Dark Heraclitus“ a 
mysterious intimation or two to the effect that ‘reactionary’ cuts no 
ice in foreign policy, in which field much greater ‘jackasses’ than 
Fischel are of service, provided they know all the ropes. How 
horrorstruck our far-sighted revolutionary thinker and pragmatic 
Royal Prussian court democrat would be, if he heard that 
Urquhart proposes to extend the power of the Crown. So nice a 
speculative distinction may be drawn, by the way, between this 
separate field of roreicn poticy, on the one hand, and internal 
policy, on the other, that you'll certainly enjoy pointing out to him 
how, in foreign policy, the subjectively reactionary is, for the 
nonce, objectively revolutionary, thereby putting the man’s mind 
at rest. Just help the man make the transition and he’ll be satisfied 
theoretically, however much our connection with Fischel may rile 

@ Ferdinand Lassalle’s letter - > See this volume, p. 141. -° As regards - 4 ie. 
Lassalle. An allusion to his book Die Philosophie Herakleitos des Dunklen von Ephesos. 

71. Marx to Eduard Fischel. | June 1860 143 

him in practice, and rile him the more for the knowledge that it 
was Fischel who saw to my pamphlet.* 

You might also observe for his benefit how revolutionary a 
mode of action it is, first to deprive the Germans, or get others to 
deprive them, of their best territory and the very basis of their 
national existence on the pretext that the present rulers of that 
territory are reactionaries, and then to expect revolution. And it 
mightn’t be a bad idea to say something about superstitious belief 
in the revolutionary initiative of the crapauds.” The whole to be 
presented in the usual allusive manner so that he’ll have to chew it 
over for the space of four weeks and then wipe the slate clean by 
writing you a four-page letter to which you won’t reply. 

My coming up here on Saturday‘ was most useful. By Sunday I 
had already found out a great deal that is important to 
negotiations, and now have the draft contract to study. 

Best regards to your wife and children. 

Siebel wants to leave. 

Your 
F. E.