MARX TO GEORGE MOORE 

IN LONDON 
(Draft] 

[London,] 28 March 1874 

To Mr G. Moore 

Your yesterday’s letter contains assertions which rest partly upon 
a misstatement and partly upon an erroneous interpretation of 
facts. 

Firstly. Your misstatement of facts. 

In the first statement of my solicitors in the hands of Mr 
Harrison at the time of his arbitration I declared not only that I 
had received the money collected from The Engineer and The 
Farmer (but of no other ‘etc.’ which figures in your letter) but that 
I had spent it (and something more) in paying Messrs Longuet 
and Griset.* On the first day of our examination I handed over 
the respective receipts to Mr Harrison in proof of my declaration. 

Mr Shaen having said in his counter-statement that I was not 
appointed liquidator of the concern, I replied that being the only 
creditor of the concern, I had a perfect right to act as my own 
liquidator. This declaration of mine is also contained in my written 
answer to Shaen’s counter-statement, which I handed over to Mr 
Harrison, on the second day of our examination, and which he 
has now returned to my solicitors. In his award Mr Harrison has 
literally endorsed my claim by appointing me my own liquidator. 
Moreover, Le Moussu having further stated in his own oath to Mr 
Harrison that I had already laid hold on the machines,— which 
was not literally exact, but true in that sense that you held then 
the machines for me—I denied in no way his statement. 

There was, therefore, on my part, no concealment of facts. 

Secondly. Your erroneous interpretation of facts. 

In order to prove Le Moussu’s mendacity in which he had the 
boldness to persist when being on oath before Mr Harrison, I 
proved that the money was not collected by him, that the money 
[was] collected in my name, [that] on the contrary the invoices were 
made out by you, handed over by you to Longuet, [and the mon- 

a Further the words ‘creditors of the concern’ are crossed out in the original.