MARX TO FERDINAND LASSALLE” 

London, 6 November 1859 

Dear Lassalle, 

You'd have had a reply from me sooner if my spare time hadn't 
been entirely taken up with a mass of repulsive domestic business. 

1. Thank you for your good offices with Duncker.** You're 
mistaken, by the by, if you think that I expected glowing tributes 
from the German press, or gave a rap for them. I expected to be 
attacked or criticised but not to be utterly ignored, which, 
moreover, is bound to have a serious effect on sales. Considering 
how vehemently these people have, at various times, railed against 
my communism, it was to be expected that they would now 
unleash their wisdom against the theoretical argument in support 
of the same. For after all, Germany is not without its specialised 
journals on economics. 

In America the first instalment* was discussed at length in the 
entire German press from New York to New Orleans. I only fear 
that it is too theoretical in tone for the working-class public there. 

2. ad vocem” Vogt. 

« K. Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy. - » as to 

You'll have been surprised by the information in the Augsburg 
Allgemeine Zeitung concerning Vogt’s law-suit *”? and by the strange 
company in which I find myself in that journal.* 

Here, in brief, is the story: 

Besides the Hermann, there used to be a so-called working-men’s 
paper here, Die Neue Zeit, whose last editor was Edgar Bauer. One 
of his colleagues on that paper was Biskamp, who was a 
schoolmaster out in the country. The paper was opposed on what 
is called principle to the Hermann. For Edgar Bauer thought it was 
time he played at being a communist. I, needless to say, had 
nothing to do with this. Bauer wrote and told Biskamp that, in 
order to rid himself of a rival, Kinkel had transferred his sheet to 
the printer of the Neue Zeit? which last, depending as it did on 
that printer’s credit, was completely in his power. On receipt of 
this letter, Biskamp rushed up to London to discover, not only 
that Kinkel had destroyed the Neue Zeit by swapping printers, but 
also that Edgar Bauer, the editor of the so-called ‘working-men’s 
paper’, had joined the editorial staff of the Hermann and gone 
over to Kinkel. 

A brief note re Biskamp: He was at one time a co-publisher of 
the Hornisse. He edited the Bremer Tages-Chronik in company with 
Dulon and Ruge. In Switzerland he joined the Communist 
League.** His relationship with Ruge meant that we never saw 
each other while he was in London. I took no notice of him, but 
he occasionally took notice in a polemical way of me. This man is a 
strange mixture of noble instincts, innate (and also physical) 
weakness, asceticism and idleness, Kantian mora] consciousness 
and tactless whimsicality. His nervous irritability makes him liable 
to surrender any position ‘on principle’, to precipitate himself 
suddenly into the most hopeless situation, to endure it passively 
and stoically for a while, and then suddenly perpetrate stupidities 
bordering on the iniquitous. The man as I paint him here is not, 
of course, the man I used to know. I am painting a portrait which 
experience has gradually pieced together for me. 

But to return to my story. Biskamp at once gave up his 
schoolmaster’s post to take up ‘the struggle of labour against 
capital’ (i.e. Kinkel), started Das Volk without any means what- 
soever except subsidies from a workers’ society, etc. So long as the 
thing lasted he was, of course, on the verge of starvation. He had 
secured work as correspondent to a couple of papers in Germany, 
but lost this as soon as his new function became known. A few 

a Allgemeine Zeitung, No. 298, 25 October 1859. - b Fidelio Hollinger 

private lessons barely enabled him to eke out the life of a 
Bohémien. 

Before continuing I should point out that I have had no 
connection whatever with any of the public workers’ associations 
(including the so-called communist one”) since 1851. The only 
workers with whom I foregather are 20-30 picked men to whom I 
give private lectures on political economy.**” Liebknecht, however, 
is chairman of the workers’ society which helped Biskamp to start 
Das Volk. 

A few days after the birth of this paper Biskamp and 
Liebknecht came to see me and invited me to collaborate. At the 
time I declined outright, partly for want of time and _ partly 
because I was about to leave London for a longish spell.** All I 
promised was to obtain a few financial contributions from friends 
in England, which in fact I did. On that same day I related to both 
of them what Blind had told me with great moral indignation the 
day before about Vogt, and also named my source. Biskamp used 
this for an article,* as I later saw. During my absence he reprinted 
in Das Volk Blind’s anonymous pamphlet,” which was printed by 
the same press as Das Volk. At the same time Liebknecht sent a 
copy of the pamphlet to the Augsburg Allgemeine Zeitung*” for 
which he supplies the English article. (As to this last circumstance, 
I should point out that the refugees here contribute to all papers 
indiscriminately. I believe myself to be the only exception to this, 
as I do not contribute to any German paper. Be it noted, by the 
by, that Palmerston, through the channel of the Prussian embassy, 
which in turn used Williams—the English bookseller—for its 
organ, has tried to get Liebknecht removed from the A. A. Z. on 
account of his ANTI-GOVERNMENTAL tendencies.) 

After my return to London, Das Volk received from myself and 
Engels various contributions wholly unrelated to the affaire Vogt. 
Apart from a few attacks on Schleinitz’s diplomatic circulars, all I 
supplied was a humorous comment or two on Kinkel’s aesthetic 
dissertations in the Hermann, viewed from a grammatical stand- 
point.° Life here in London is too tough for one not to indulge 
in distractions of this kind every 8 years or so. 

a [E. Biskamp,] ‘Der Reichsregent’, Das Volk, No. 2, 14 May 1859. - © [K. Blind,] 
“Warnung zur gefalligen Verbreitung’, Das Volk, No. 7, 18 June 1859. - © Schleinitz’s 
despatches to the Prussian embassies in Britain, Russia and Germany (Berlin, 
June-July 1859) were reported in the Neue Preußische Zeitung, No. 170, 24 July (‘Zu der 
“Vermittlung”’), No. 171, 26 July (‘Preußische Depeschen’), No. 174, 29 July 1859 
(‘Deutschland’). - 4 Marx refers to his series of articles Quid pro quo and his reviews 
published in the section ‘Gatherings from the Press’. 

The paper came to a sudden end, mainly for lack of money. 
Biskamp, besides being wholly without means of subsistence, 
contracted a painful disease and had to go into the German 
hospital. When he was discharged he must literally have starved to 
death if I hadn’t taken care of him. During this period he wrote to 
several German papers in the hope of becoming their correspon- 
dent, but to no effect. Then he got a letter from the editorial 
board of the A. A. Z., whereupon he wrote them that shockingly 
discreditable epistle—behind the backs of his friends, of course.’ 
Naturally he believed he was writing a private letter. The idiot is 
now overcome with contrition and for a couple of days has neither 
eaten nor slept. I don’t know what will become of him. If I have 
told you all this at some length, it is not in order to justify the 
man’s behaviour, but to explain it. If he were so venal a fellow as 
most of the ‘democrats’ here, he wouldn’t have precipitated 
himself into a situation which he hadn’t the strength to endure. 

As to my statement in the A. A. Z.,> the circumstances are as 
follows: 

As you know, Blind published his denunciation of Vogt. At the 
same time an anonymous article by him‘ appeared in the London 
Free Press (Urquhart’s rarer), containing much the same informa- 
tion—I enclose the article with this letter—but omitting Vogt’s 
name and sundry other particulars.“ Now when Vogt brought his 
action against the A. A. Z., and the latter appealed to Liebknecht, 
he, being responsible to the A. A. Z., naturally appealed to me 
and I to Blind. The latter refused to answer for his statements. It 
was all due to a misunderstanding, he said. The whole thing had 
nothing to do with him. He even went so far as to give his word of 
honour that he had had nothing to do with the anonymous 
pamphlet. Repeated requests were of no avail. This conduct was 
all the more infamous in that the worthy fellow knew that Vogt 
was citing me—privately in London and publicly in Switzerland— 
as the source of the denunciation so as to represent the whole 
thing as deriving from the malicious ill-will borne by the 
communist towards the ‘eminent democrat’ and ‘ex-imperial 
regent’.*° I therefore began by turning to Collet, who made no 
bones about stating that Blind had written the article in The Free 
Press. Next, 1 obtained a statement from the type-setter who had 
set the type for the pamphlet.**’ Blind’s duplicity called for 

a E. Biskamp, {Letter to the Editor of the Aligemeine Zeitung, dated 20 October 1859,] 
Allgemeine Zeitung, No. 300, 27 October 1859. - > K. Marx, [Letter to the Editor of 
the Allgemeine Zeitung). - © [K. Blind,] ‘The Grand Duke Constantine to Be King of 
Hungary’, The Free Press, No. 5, 27 May 1859. - 4 A. Végele 

castigation. I had absolutely no intention of pulling this ‘republi- 
can’s’ chestnuts out of the fire for him. Indeed, it is only by 
forcing him and Vogt to attack one another that the truth will 
come out. Finally, like any paper which accepts a denunciation of 
this kind, the A. A. Z. deserves to be supplied with 
any information that can possibly help to throw light on the 
facts. 

I shall now have the whole of Germany’s vulgar democracy 
about my ears, and Biskamp’s folly will make this all the easier for 
them. Needless to say, it would never occur to me to skirmish in 
insignificant journals with all these insignificant scoundrels. 
However, I believe it necessary to make an example of one of 
them, namely Mr Eduard Meyen of the Freischiiiz,* pour encourager 
les autres” I'm sending one copy to the A. A. Z, one to the 
Reform in Hamburg and I’d lke the copy I sent you to appear in 
a Berlin paper. 

I must save up my exposé of the Italian war,’ an affair upon 
which I have in no way changed my views, for my next letter 
(shortly). 

Salut. 

85 

Your 
K. M. 

P.S. Much as I detest alluding to this point, my financial affairs 
are in a dangerously critical state—so much so that I can hardly 
find time for my articles for the Tribune, let alone the political 
economy.’ Admittedly I shall be receiving over £40 in 8 to 10 
weeks’ time. But for me the essential and crucial point is to 
anticipate its receipt. Can you help me with a bill transaction 
towards that end? In 8, or at most 10, weeks’ time I shall be good 
for £50.