Manchester, 21 February 1860 
6 Thorncliffe Grove, Oxford Road 

Dear Sir, 

The power of attorney was not sent off to you immediately after 
my first letter* because, further on in that same letter, I had 
requested you to telegraph me. Having waited a few days, it 

4 K. Blind, ‘Gegen Karl Vogt’, Allgemeine Zeitung, No. 44 (supplement), 13 February 
1860. - > [E. Biskamp,] ‘Erkldrung’, Allgemeine Zeitung, No. 46 (supplement), 
15 February 1860. - © W. Wolff, ‘Erklirung’, Die Reform, No. 18, 11 February 1860, 
Allgemeine Zeitung, No. 44 (supplement), 13 February 1860, and Volks-Zeitung, 
No. 47, 24 February 1860. -¢ See this volume, p. 49. - © ibid., pp. 40-45. 

seemed to me best to wait until the latest date (namely yesterday, 
20 February) by which your written reply might be expected to 
reach London from Berlin. 

Since this did not arrive and since, on the other hand, you did 
not reject by telegraph my request that you should act as my 
lawyer, I assume that you have accepted my brief. To avoid 
further loss of time, I am therefore sending you the following in 
this registered letter: 

1. The power of attorney; 

2. 7 enclosures, together with translations where the original is in 
English. 

These enclosures comprise: 

1. A. Végele’s affidavit”; 

2. J. F. Wiehe’s affidavit’; 

3. My English anti-Blind circular.” 

4. and 5. Two letters concerning this matter from the Augsburg 
Allgemeine Zeitung to me.* 

6. Dr Schaible’s statement in the London ‘Daily Telegraph’ of 
15th February 1860, page 5, column 5, paragraph headed ‘The 
Vogt Pamphlet. 

7. A letter from K. Blind to Liebknecht dated 8 September 
1859." 

Tomorrow, by which time I shall, perhaps, have received a letter 
from you, I shall take the liberty of sending you some comments 
on these documents. However, you will see at first glance that the 
infamous conduct attributed to me in No. 41 of the National- 
Zeitung, where I am portrayed as the anonymous fabricator of 
papers allegedly circulating in other people’s names, is irrefutably 
shown in law to be an infamous libel. 

As regards the affidavits (statements made in court in lieu of an 
oath), all I would say is this: ‘ 

You will note that in affidavit enclosure LI, the words ‘upon oath’ 
have been deleted by the magistrate. For he explained to us that a 
statement made before him was the equivalent of a sworn 
statement, that a false statement was a felony and hence punishable 
with Transportation but that, under English law, an oath could 
properly be administered only in the presence of the defendant. 

The rest I shall leave for tomorrow, pending which I remain, 
aa Your very obedient Servant, 

Dr. K. Marx 

4 See this volume, pp. 31-32 and 37.- > K. Marx, ‘Prosecution of the Augsburg 
Gazette’. ; 

I am not certain how long I shall be staying up here and hence 
would request that all letters be sent to my home address, 

9 Grafton Terrace, Maitland Park, Haverstock Hill, London. 

On the power of attorney I have left a space for the names of the 
National-Zeitung’s editors.