[London,] 31 January 1860 

Dear Engels, 

Your article’ received. Very good. 

Herewith a letter from Lassalle which arrived yesterday and to 
which I replied immediately, if briefly.‘ Only a pamphlet written 
by us jointly will get us out of this business. I have also written 
secretly to Fischel in Berlin, asking whether it is feasible. to bring a 
libel suit against the National-Zeitung.*” Vogt’s piece‘ (not to be had 
at any booksellers in London; he has’ sent it neither to Freiligrath 
nor to Kinkel, nor to any of his other acquaintances over here. 
Obviously he wished to steal a march on us. I have thus had to 
order it) is, so far as we are concerned, clearly a de la 
Hodde-Chenusian concoction.** I have read the second article in 

4 See this volume, p. 9. - > Friedrich Engels, Sr., Frederick Engels’ father - © ‘Savoy 
and Nice’ - 4 See this volume, pp. 11-12. - © Mein Prozess gegen die Allgemeine Zeitung, 
Geneva, 1859. 

the Nat.-Z? from which I see inter alia that Lupus (described as 
Casemate Wolff, Parliamentary Wolff) is alleged to have sent a 
circular to a reactionary Hanoverian paper in 1850." It gives a 
réchauffé of all the foul refugee gossip of 1850-52. The jubilation 
of the bourgeois press is, of course, unbounded, and the tone of 
Lassalle’s letter—kindly show it to Lupus and then file it—clearly 
betrays the impression it has made on the public. 

Yesterday I saw Freiligrath for a moment. I approached him 
very ceremoniously (if he has the slightest sense of honour he 
must make an anti-Vogt statement), and all our entreview” 
amounted to was the following: ‘I: I’ve come to ask you to lend 
me the pamphlet on the Augsburg Allgemeine Zeitung lawsuit 
which I’ve been seeking in vain at all the booksellers and must 
certainly have been sent you by your friend Vogt. F. (very 
melodramatically): Vogt is not my friend. I: Lassalle has written to 
me that I must reply at once. You haven’t got the pamphlet, then? 
F. No. I: Good evening.’ (He held out his honest right hand and 
shook mine Westphalian-fashion.) Voila tout‘ 

I was assured by Juch (owner and present editor of the 
Hermann, whose acquaintance I made in connection with the 
Stieber affair and Eichhoff’s trial** in Berlin), that Kinkel hadn’t 
yet had a copy from Vogt either. This same Juch had, however, 
been sent numerous Vogtian tirades against us which he did not 
print. This chap—who is, incidentally, quite honest in his own 
way—has got to be kept mellow for the time being. Since only the 
Hermann is now appearing in London, it would have been 
dreadful to have to confront Vogt’s gang unarmed, here on our 
own ground. 

Apropos! As a result of my first meeting with Juch,“ on my 
advice, Eichhoff cited friend Hirsch, who is doing time in 
Hamburg for forgery, as a witness for the defence. Consequently, 
the trial, due to begin on 26 January (I read about this in the 
Publicist),-was again adjourned after a heated argument. Stieber 
has now done with Hirsch. 

Salut. Your 
K. M. 
Imandt has just told me that Heise is dead.