[London,] 15 February 1859 
Dear Engels, 

Herewith: 

1. Letter from my brother-in-law (the Cars man)? from which you 
will see that the fellow will be landing in London tomorrow. Since 
I am sans sou” (only last Saturday I had to pawn my wife’s last 
‘spare’ skirt in order to send Eccarius some comforts) and have got 
to entertain the man decently——he is going to Trier and carries 
some weight in the Transactions with my mother‘—I must once 
again press you to mail me ar.east £1. Luckily I have what is 
known as mumps, which means that I only have to entertain the 
man here at home and, as an invalid, can refuse to do any 
gadding about. 

2. Letter from Eccarius. I had told the latter (who seemed, I 
thought, to be improving a little) that if he needed wine he was to 
let me know. So you should send him about 2 bottles of port wine. 

3. 2 enclosures from The Free Press (the more important for 
having been reprinted from The New York Herald) will give you 
some idea of the Chinese war*? and Mr Palmerston’s policy.* 

a Johann Carl Juta - » penniless - « Henriette Marx - 4 ‘Revelation by a Russian of 
the Object of the Chinese War and Treaty’, The Free Press, No. 24, 22 Decem- 
ber 1858. 

t4* 

Ad vocem* Freiligrath. 1 came, most opportunely for him, on the 
very day he got your letter.” He gave it to me to read and excused 
himself for the non-political nature of the poem‘ on the grounds 
that he was a ‘poet’. Also said he had written to you about the 
Hermann simply as a ‘joke’.“ WELL, AFTER THESE VERY MEAGRE EXPLANATIONS, 
he said he would write and tell you that he had made everything 
ALL RIGHT With me. By the by, your letter ‘tickled’ him tremendously. 
I told him that it was ‘very well written’ and he, of course, couldn’t 
help laughing at me for looking to ‘style’ first of all on such an 
occasion. The racy is, Freiligrath realises that Kinkel has used him 
and, having used him, is actually becoming somewhat uppish 
towards him. (Thus, to Freiligrath’s intense annoyance, the 
‘Schriften von Gottfried und Johanna Kinkel’ figure in large type 
among the Hermann’s advertisements and, under the same 
heading, ‘F. Freiligraths Gedichte’ in small type, so that Freiligrath’s 
poems are annexed to the works of Gottfried and Johanna. This 
greatly riles our philistine.) On the other hand, Freiligrath is very 
much beholden to Kinkel for having, apparently against all 
expectations, again put him in the way of a political purgative 
which, sy rae sy, and if I am not mistaken, has earned him high 
praise and even, it is said, presents from philistines in Germany. 
Nota bene: Mrs Daniels wrote to Lina‘ (in reply to some quips 
about the Kinkel cast the latter had sent her): ‘We’ (she and 
Heinrich, the quiet one‘) ‘are delighted and entranced by Freilig- 
rath’s poem’ and the day-dreaming Heinrich, who had grown ‘still 
more self-confident and still more energetic’, had actually discov- 
ered that ‘the perfidious’ Kélnische Zeitung had suppressed the 
‘most important verse’, a verse which existed only in Heinrich’s 
Olympian imagination. 

What’s this about Blind? 

Apropos. Did you and Lupus see in the papers (maybe a month 
or six weeks ago) that Madame Bangya in Paris had been sentenced 
to six months hard labour for soliciting? 

Salut. Wau 

K. M. 

I’ve lost Lupus’ address again. It’s 59 Boundary Street, 
Greenheys, isn’t it? At any rate I sent him a letter to that 
address. °” 

a As regards - > See this volume, pp. 370-71. -¢ F. Freiligrath, ‘Nach Johanna 
Kinkels Begrabnis’. See also this volume, p. 359.-4 See this volume, p. 
372. - © Caroline Schdéler - f Heinrich Burgers 

216. Marx to Engels. About 22 February 1859 389 

Schapper’s wife has produced a son, and the old fool, who now 
goes in for phrenology, has discovered that the seven days’-old imp 
has a sanguine-choleric temperament.