{London,] 25 June* 1860 

Dear Frederick, 

I am still ‘very poorly’, as red Wolff? used to say, though for the 
past week or so I’ve no longer been dosing myself. However, I am 
making ‘forced marches’ every day on Allen’s orders and shall 
doubtless be fit again before the week is out. 

Lina‘ is with us on ‘holiday’. Will be here for asoura month. 
Still no news from Siebel. 

1 would be grateful if, by Friday or Saturday,’ you could [write] 
an article for the Tribune either on the verences or ENGLAND, OF ON 
Garibaldi or on Indian traps. Since Wilson became the Inpran 
CHANCELLOR oF THE ExcHequer, the wretched Economist has said virtually 
nothing about India. Nor should you forget (although it won't yet be 
necessary this week) to let me have asoura quarto page or so on the 
military significance of Bohemia to Germany or rather Russia, to 
whom Vogt proposes to cede her. 

Apropos: 

Have just received Pro domo und Pro patria gegen Karl Vogt by 
Jakob Venedey, Hanover 1860 (40 pages). Considering this 

4 In the manuscript, mistakenly: July. - > Ferdinand Wolff - © Lina Schéler - 4 29 or 
30 June - © See this volume, p. 168. - f in his Studien zur gegenwartigen Lage Europas, 
Geneva and Berne, 1859 

fellow’s point of view it is not altogether bad. Has some Facts about 
Vogt’s cowardice. 

Jakob’s passages relating to ourselves are as follows. 

A friend writes obligingly: 

‘It is disgraceful that in his triumph over the Augsburg Zeitung? and 
the “Brimstone Gang”, this man Vogt should also drag Venedey in his wake’ 
(p. 4). 

‘No more than a word or two pro domo.» Could Karl Vogt have forgotten that all 
the stale, insipid morsels he dished up to his readers in his Erkla@rung against 
me—“noble Jakob”, “blond soul”, “imperial teardrop” and sundry other epithets — 
had been dished up ten years ago fresh, fragrant and seasoned with the spice of 
wit by Marx, Engels and company in the Rhenish newspaper.¢ Do | have to remind 
him that in the self-same article, ‘Der Reichsregent, which the Augsburger 
[Allgemeine Zeitung] used as the point of departure for its accusations against Vogt, 
this “dirty gang, a handful of malicious vagabonds in London”, as Vogt describes 
it, gave battle along lines identical to those adopted by Vogt in his Erklarung 
against myself? Nevertheless, Karl Vogt did not feel that this prevented him from 
accusing me of having borrowed from Messrs Marx, Engels and company the 
“defamatory statements” 1 made about him. Vogt is well aware that, in jibing at 
me, he is simply repeating their words’ (p. 7). 

‘This pamphlet of Vogt’sf about his Jawsuit has al] the air of a triumphal march 
and, indeed, Karl Vogt—not that he himself appears the more justified in 
consequence—has consigned to London in complete disarray the A. A. and 
likewise the “London Brimstone Gang”’’ (p. 6). 

Voila tout. 
Salut. 

Your 

[On the back of the letter:] 

Fred. Engels, 7 Southgate, St. Mary’s, Manchester.