{[London,] 25 February 1865 

Dear Frep, 

I quite forgot—*you must excuse me—to send _ back 
Weydemeyer’s letter. I enclose it. Ditto a letter of Dr Kugelmann 
with enclosure of wiseacre Miquel’s letter.’*! Ditto a prescription * 
from Kugelmann. Oddly enough the prescription arrived just 
after the disease had broken out afresh. (Nota bene, the passage in 
Kugelmann’s  letter, saying I wrote that I wanted to defend 
Lassalle, referred to Blind’s attack. I have now told him 
(Kugelmann) the plain truth.* Return the letters from Kugelmann 
and Miquel.) I have had the prescription made up and have 
already taken the powder, but I would still like Gumpert’s opinion 
of it. It’s a most troublesome business. Unlike last year, however, 
my faculties are not affected and (to the extent that sitting down for a 
long time is not physically troublesome) I am perfectly able to work. 
Incidentally, I have the feeling in every part of my capaver that the 
stuff is about to burst out all over. 

Strohn passed by here. He was still in Hamburg when your 
manuscript? came in, in the nick of time to recommend to 
Meissner that he should accept it. Strohn was informed that a 
manuscript from Rustow on the same topic was rejected. Apropos. 
Have you taken any steps yourself regarding your pamphlet in the 
newspapers, or am I to port? On this occasion, Eccarius himself was 
responsible for the incomprehensible siunper.’*° When his article 
arrived, I wrote to him at once (22 February) enquiring whether 
the thing had been falsified by Schweitzer? ''' Quod non.‘ 

When I sent our statement‘ to that jackass Wilhelm’ (23 
February), I wrote this to him: 

‘In the few brief excerpts, which Eccarius gives from my speech 
at the workers’ society,’ there are certain things that convey precisely 
the opposite of what I said. I have written to him about it, leaving it 

a See this volume, pp. 101-05. - > F. Engels, The Prussian Military Question and the 
German Workers’ Party. - © Not so. - 4 K. Marx and F. Engels, ‘To the Editor of the 
Social-Demokrat’. - © Wilhelm Liebknecht - £ German Workers’ Educational Society 
in London : 

6* 

to him whether to correct it or not in the next piece he 
contributes, as it is not very important in the present cir- 
cumstances.’ * 

My letters to Eccarius and Liebknecht have been written so that, 
if Schweitzer (who from the private letter he had just previously 
received from me? very WELL KNEW WHAT HE was ABOUT, Of course) should 
try to use Eccarius’ slander to defend himself, we could if necessary 
cut off this retraite‘ Meanwuite, I Have Toto Eccarius privately not to 
make any sotuer about the whole filthy business until such time as 
Schweitzer’s own behaviour requires it. Eccarius was very unwell, 
and that is probably to blame for the nonsense. On the other hand, 
I imagine that Schweitzer, who already had Wilhelm’s resigna- 
tion'* in his possession and was therefore prepared for a 
statement from us, was delighted to accept the report, 1. so as to 
show by means of the passage about Prussia what extravagant 
demands we were making of him, and 2. by means of the 
conclusion to the report that we did tw racr share his views. The 
galantuomo‘ is forgetting, by the way, that I have kept copies of my 
private letter to him.'*4 

I have informed Liebknecht that, if Schweitzer should turn it 
down, he should put the thing in the Berliner Reform and tell 
Schweitzer about this at the same time, and also that I have 
simultaneously sent the statement to two Rhineland papers, so that 
Schweitzer cannot procrastinate this time. I have in fact sent 2 copies 
to Siebel, instructing him to insert the thing in the Rheinische 
Zeitung and the Düsseldorfer Zeitung (the latter being the workers’ 
paper) two days after receipt of my letter, and to send us a report on 
any comments in.the local press.'** So, this time there is nothing 
Schweitzer can do about it any more. I would not be surprised if 
the Lassalleans, especially in the Hamburg Nordstern, declared we 
had sold ourselves to the bourgeoisie. But never mind! 

The ‘Internationa, Association’ has managed so to constitute the 
majority on the committee to set up the new Rerorm Leacue that 
the whole leadership is in our hands.'*> I have put the full details in 
a letter to E. Jones.'" 

Such a conflict has broken out in Paris between our own 
representatives that we have sent Lubez to Paris to clarify matters 
and effect conciliation.” His crepentiats state that Schily has been 
attached to him as an adjunct, and I have given Schily private 
instructions.!°* We could have sold 20,000 cards in Paris, but since 
one group was accusing the other of having Plon-Plon behind 

a See this volume, p. 101. - > ibid., pp. 95-96,- © retreat - 4 honourable man 

them, etc., the distribution of cards has had to be suspended for 
the time being. Under this military despotism, people are naturally 
highly suspicious of each other (my impression is that this time 
both sides are doing each other an injustice), and they are not 
capable of sorting out their differences and reaching an under- 
standing by meeting or through the press. A further factor is this: 
the workers seem to want to take things to the point of excluding 
any LITERARY MAN, etc., Which is absurd, as they need them in the 
press, but it is pardonable in view of the repeated treachery of the 
LITERARY MEN. Conversely, the latter are suspicious of any workers’ 
movement, which displays hostility towards them. 

(Apropos these ‘rerary men’, I am reminded that the workers 
here (English) want to make me editor when The Bee-Hive’ is 
transformed, which is to happen in 3 months time, and have 
already informed me of this. However, I shall mull over the 
matter in all its multifarious aspects, before making a move in one 
direction or another.) 

So, what we have in Paris is, on the one hand, Lefort (a literary 
man, well-to-do into the bargain, in other words ‘bourgeois’ but 
with an unsullied reputation, and, as far as La belle France? is 
concerned, the real founder of our Association), and, on the 
other, Tolain, Fribourg, Limousin, etc., who are workers. Wet, I 
shall let you know the outcome. At all events, Wolff, an 
acquaintance, who has just returned from Paris, tells me that there 
is growing interest in the ‘Internationa, Association’. The Débats‘ 
has also intervened in the matter. 

As far as the London tnions, etc., are concerned, every day 
brings about new apuesion, so that sy anp By we are becoming a 
force to be reckoned with. 

But that is where the difficulty begins as well. Already Mr Beates 
(THE REGISTERING BARRISTER Of Middlesex, one of the most popular people 
in London at present, President of the Potisn Leacur, co-founder 
of the new Rerorm Leacue, IN FACT THE GO-BETWEEN between WorkKINc- 
mMaN and Minne Crass, honest and well-meaning to boot) has got 
himself proposed as member for our Counc. The opportunity arose 
because as a sus-commitrer together with him we were to prepare 
the Polish meeting (Marquis Townshend in the chair) for next 
Wednesday.’*! This was most unfortunate for me. I could, of 
course, have prevented the matter by force, as all the Continentais 
would have voted with me. But I pip nor Like any sucu Division. SO, by 

4 See this volume, pp. 154-55. - > beautiful France - Journal des Débats politiques et 
littéraires 

means of private letters* to the principal, English Memsers, I have 
managed to persuade Beales’ proposer” not to bring forward his 
motion again. The ‘official’ reason given was: 1. that Beales wu 
stand FoR Maryiesone at the next parliamentary elections and that 
our Association must by all means avoid appearing ro serve THE 
INTERESTS OF ANY PARLIAMENTARY AMBITION; 2. that Beales and we ourselves 
can be of greater assistance to each other, if we sail our separate 
ships. Thus, the danger has been temporarily averted. Incidental- 
ly, other parliamentarians, such as Taylor, etc. (fellows, who have 
close links with Mazzini), had taken it into their heads to tell us 
that the time was not opportune for a Polish meeting. I answered 
through our Counci. that the workine ciass has rs OWN FOREIGN POLICY, 
which is most certainly not determined by what the middle crass 
considers opporrune. They always considered it opportune TO GOAD ON 
THE Poles AT THE BEGINNING OF A NEW OUTBREAK, TO BETRAY THEM DURING ITS 
PROGRESS BY THEIR DIPLOMACY, AND TO DESERT THEM WHEN Russia HAD THROWN 
THEM pown. In fact, the chief purpose of the mertine is to raise 
money to support them. Are the poor émigrés (this time mostly 
WORKINGMEN and peasants and thus not in the least prorectep By Prince 
Zamoyski et Co.) to starve because it appears to the Encuisu MIDDLE 
CLASS JUST NOW INOPPORTUNE TO MENTION EVEN THE NAME OF Povanp? 

Cutting enclosed by Mr Blind from The Morning Star’ 
Mazzini, who did tell Fontana that Blind was a liar, was absolutely 
furious that his Italian Workers’ Association here sent out the 
Italian version of my ‘Address’* into the world without the 
omissions Mr Mazzini had expressly demanded, e.g. the passages 
attacking the muppte crass. 

Your 
K. M. 

Apropos. Some port wine and claret would do me a world of 
good UNDER PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES.