{Draft} 
[London,] 28 October 1880 

Mr H. Kaulitz 

I return herewith Mr Burleigh’s letter. 
As to the matter of Mr Lafargue, you concede the chief point, 

 Der Sozialdemokrat 

namely that you have given his name as a reference without his permis- 
sion. The rest is beside the point. 

With regard to Beust,* I do not propose to go into the question of 
when you offered to give the said lessons elsewhere. This much is cer- 
tain: that after our return from Bridlington Quay °° you again offered 
to give lessons to Beust, that you promised, in the presence of myself 
and Schorlemmer, to set about the thing in the manner stipulated, 
that you did the opposite of what you had promised, and that Beust, 
far from attacking his ‘very dear friend Kaulitz’ behind his back, told 
him in Trafalgar Square exactly what he thought of him, adding 
quite rightly that all three of us had been convinced from the outset 
that you wouldn’t do a single thing you had promised. I should have 
written you off there and then had it not been for the fact that I avoid 
making private matters a cause for breaking with people with whom 
I have been in any way connected politically. 

Concerning the tittle-tattle in the Central News, I will not labour 
the point as to whether it was you or Most who disseminated it, since 
I am not permitted to divulge my sources, and since, on the other 
hand, I lay no store at all by the agent’s letter. 

If one is compelled to make a decision such as mine in regard to 
yourself, one bases it not on this or that particular indiscretion, but 
rather on the other’s whole mode of behaviour, observed over a con- 
siderable period. And in any case your almost daily intercourse with 
Most and Co., which you freely admit, is quite enough to supply, i in 
place of the fact you contest, another that is no less convincing. 

Yours very truly