{[London,] 10 November 1852 
28 Dean Street, Soho 

Dear Engels, 

Enclosed my wife’s report on yesterday’s Robert Blum meet- 
ing.”*? She was with Imandt in the gallery of the Freemason’s 
Tavern where it was held. 

a F, Freiligrath, ‘An Joseph Weydemeyer’, I and II. - © positively - © [Jenny Marx,] 
‘Der Volksbund für zerschiedene Welten in Poesie’, Philadelphier Demokrat, 
1 December 1852. 

As far as Bangya is concerned, just hold on to Collmann’s 
letter. Whenever he inquires after it, I shall say I kept forgetting 
to ask you to send it back. Had there been intentional deception 
on Bangya’s part he would have supplied the incriminating 
evidence himself. So much is clear. Originally Bangya was accused 
of having betrayed the Paris conspiracy ‘* and later of double- 
dealing in the Cologne affair. In both instances the contrary has 
proved to be the case. According to Schneider’s letter, Kothes’ 
address* would appear to have been betrayed by one of Kothes’ 
own acquaintances. Finally, as regards our pamphlet,” Weerth 
will by now have made inquiries about Collmann’s address and the 
thing will inevitably be cleared up. I have given Bangya a letter to 
Collmann in which I point out that, though his publication date 
for the pamphlet is contractually agreed, there is no contractual 
agreement forbidding us to publish the original manuscript—still 
in our possession—in Brussels or New York, should we so desire. 
Nor is there any contractual agreement forbidding publication in a 
fortnight of the 2nd part by another bookseller under a separate 
title if it is ready and of itself constitutes a complete whole, etc.?” 

Now for the Cologne affair. 

Had I been in Birgers’ etc. place, I should never have allowed 
Mr Becker‘ to flaunt himself so brazenly and at the expense of 
everyone else as l’homme supérieur, or to debase as he did the 
character of the whole proceedings, much to the delight of the 
democrats. To defend oneself is one thing but quite another to 
deliver an apologia for oneself at others’ expense. Becker. is one of 
the revolution’s epigones, possessed of a great deal of cunning but 
little intelligence and well able to calculate just how he can trick 
his way up to become a great man. His talents remain those d’un 
infiniment petit’ 

As you already know, the government has, out of sheer 
desperation, resorted to heroic means, namely Goldheim’s retro- 
spective report,’ only to find itself once again ensnared. 

Goldheim’s testimony furnished 2 data: ‘Greif’ and ‘Fleury’. 

I therefore instituted inquiries about Greif (to which end I myself 
engaged a Prussian informer). In this way I obtained his address and 
found out that he lived at 17 Victoria Road, Kensington. This, 
however, is Mr Fleury’s house. Hence it was established that Greif 
lives with Fleury. It further transpired that Greif’s official position 
here is not that of ‘police lieutenant’ but of attaché to the Prussian 

4 See this volume, p. 232.-> K. Marx and F. Engels, The Great Men of the 
Exile. - © Hermann Becker - 4 the superior man - © of an infinitely small one 

Embassy. Finally, that on Saturday, 6 November, he left here for 
a few weeks. Probably to go to Cologne. By his own account, he 
left because he was afraid of the Marxians, because Fleury 
had swindled him, etc. 

So much was now clear: Greif was Fleury’s superior and Fleury 
Hirsch’s superior. And so, indeed, it has turned out. 

On the other hand, Imandt and Dronke called on Fleury on 
Friday, 5 November, Kélnische Zeitung in hand. He, of course, 
feigned surprise, said he knew no one by the name of Greif, 
expressed his readiness to make any statement in the presence of a 
magistrate, but first wanted to consult his lawyer, made two 
appointments for Saturday, 6 November, one for 2 and the other 
for 4 o’clock, but took good care not to turn up and so gained for 
the police one more day on which we were unable to operate, 
apart from sending a few preliminary letters to Cologne. Finally, 
on Sunday, 7 November, Dronke and Imandt extracted from him 
a statement which you will see in the Kélnische?* I shall send you 
a copy but cannot at this moment lay hands on it. Having his 
statement safely in their pockets, they told him he was a spy, that 
Greif was living at his place, that we had known all about it and 
had been hoodwinking the police, whereas they had believed they 
were hoodwinking us. He, of course, continued to protest his 
innocence, 

Finally I sent round some fellows (among them the tipsy 
General Herweg) to track down Hirsch’s lodgings. It transpired 
that he also lived in Kensington, not far from Fleury. 

One more thing before I go on. The whole of Goldheim’s testimony 
becomes perfectly explicable if you consider that, 1. Goldheim was 
here on 30 October (Saturday) and, in company with Alberts, 
secretary at the Prussian Embassy, went to see Greif and Fleury; 2. 
that on the morning of that same 30 October our statement about the 
forthcoming revelations* appeared in 5 English papers; 3. that 
Fleury had arranged a rendez-vous with Imandt and Dronke for 
that same 30 October because Dronke was to take over French 
lesson for him instead of Imandt. 4. But that before Stieber made 
the revelations about London at his 2nd interrogation and 
immediately after his first interrogation on the subject of Cherval, 
etc., I had sent to the Kélnische Zeitung, the Frankfurter Journal and 
the National-Zeitung, a statement in which Stieber was already 
threatened with the disclosure of his letter to me.’ Admittedly this 

aK. Marx and F. Engels, ‘Public Statement to the Editors of the English 
Press’. - > See this volume, pp. 225-26. : 

statement did not appear in any of the papers. But both post 
office and police had incontestably taken note of it.” 

This provides a highly prosaic explanation for Stieber’s ‘clair- 
voyance’ and the omniscience of his police agents in London. 
Everything else Goldheim said was ‘fabulae? I have conveyed such 
information as is necessary about these things to Cologne by 
diverse channels, together with Fleury’s statement.” 

But the best is yet to come. 

It was, of course, my intention to take out a warrant against 
Hirsch, for which purpose I made inquiries about his lodgings. 
But it was not till Saturday that I obtained the address. I felt sure 
that, if I could get the warrant against Hirsch, he would implicate 
Fleury, and Fleury Greif. 

What happens? On Friday Willich, very secretively, betakes 
himself with Hirsch to the court in Bow Street where, in 
Scharttner’s presence, he obtains from Hirsch what is purported to 
be a written confession in triplicate stating that some six months ago 
he and Fleury fabricated the spurious minutes, he then sends off the 
3 documents, 1. to Gobel, the presiding judge at the Assizes, 2. to 
Schneider, 3. to the Kélnische Zeitung—and gives Hirsch the 
money to escape, indeed, even has him accompanied to the 
steamer, ostensibly so that he can confess in person in Cologne. 

We all only heard of this through the inquiry we had set on foot 
about Hirsch, and partly, too, at Bow Street, where we went to 
take out the warrant. Schapper himself told Liebknecht that Willich 
had breathed not a word to him of all this. Thus, our intention of 
initiating proceedings of our own in London was thwarted by Mr 
Willich’s sleight of hand. To what end? The answer is very simple 
if we reflect that for the past year he has been the merchant 
Fleury’s homme entretenu‘ and that in any case, therefore, some highly 
compromising things must have emerged had we had Fleury apprehended. 

An instance, by the by, of the high esteem in which this man 
Fleury (I have never set eyes on him) is held by the democrats— 
Techow, leaving for Australia and already on board ship, wrote him a 
letter in which he commended him for having both heart and head in the 
right place. 

The money Hirsch was given for his journey by Willich had 
undoubtedly been handed to the latter for this purpose by Fleury. 

Hirsch has admitted that he tried to copy Liebknecht’s writing 
and that he was working under the direction of the merchant 
Fleury (this cur is, besides, a man of substance and has married into 

@ fabrication - > See this volume, p. 235. - © kept man 

a very respectable English Quaker family), just as Fleury himself 
was under the direction of Greif. This confirms in every particular 
what I deduced straight away from the content and dates of the 
original minute-book published in the Kélnische Zeitung, and which 
none of the lawyers has hitherto duly exploited.?” 

To my mind there is no doubt that the Cologne accused will all, 
without exception, be acquitted. 

I should be grateful if you could write and tell Strohn that he 
would greatly oblige me if he could send me a few pounds 
forthwith, Of the £4.10/- received through you, nearly £3 has 
been spent on errands, informers, etc. Our impoverished League 
friends naturally took advantage of the many errands, appoint- 
ments, etc., to tot up pretty substantial faux frais de production* 
for beer, cigars, omnibuses, etc., which I, of course, had to make 
good. 

You will be receiving Freiligrath’s poems.” 

Apropos, Reichenbach has issued a ‘Lithographed Statement 
all American papers in which a dirty trick is played on 
Willich-Kinkel. It discloses that Kinkel claimed, inter alia, £200 for 
his journey alone. I shall get hold of the document and let you 
have it for the archives.”” 

9299 to 

Your 
K. M. 

Greetings to Weerth. Vehse left yesterday. Have already 
written to Frankfurt about our pamphlet.*” Unless we write 
something, Becker will seize upon all this business ad majorem 
gloriam Beckeri<