Letter to Friedrich Engels, March 29, 1854

Author(s) Karl Marx
Written 29 March 1854


First published abridged in Der Briefwechsel zwischen F. Engels und K. Marx, Bd. 2, Stuttgart, 1913 and in full in Marx and Engels, Works, First Russian Edition, Vol. XXII, Moscow, 1929
Published in English for the first time in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Volume 39


MARX TO ENGELS

IN MANCHESTER

[London,] 29 MARCH 1854 28 Dean Street, Soho

Dear Engels,

I have not yet acknowledged receipt of the £5, or used the money for the intended purpose, or written—all for the same reason. I have been saddled with Pieper. Ten days ago he was thrown out of his lodgings and I OF COURSE had to take him in here. He has drawn a bill on the Union and, if it's not protested, one of the next mails from America should bring him the money. This week Freiligrath has, BESIDES, found him a German lesson which will bring in 15/- A WEEK. And he was to have secured a similar lesson at ABOUT 10/- through Meyer—who has gone back to Germany today and asks me to send you his regards. But he didn't turn up at the appointed place. Instead, he told Meyer that he was fed up with giving lessons. Feels his vocation is to be a writer. Le malheureux![1]

There's still much I don't understand about Lupus' adventure.[2]

Did it happen in the street? Doubtless after he'd been out on a drinking spree with you and Heise! What a DEEP IMPRESSION it made on my FAMILY you will gather from the enclosed letter of little Laura's, in which she relates the great événement[3] for Jenny and Edgar who were at school.[4]

The diplomatic part of Lassalle—aside from the information, which is well done—is as bad as his military one. What he says about Palmerston is simply the gossip current on the Continent.

Have you read the SECRET CORRESPONDENCE 498? If the ministers who conducted it are allowed to conduct the war—as everything seems to indicate—the affair can only end in England's utter disgrace, although AT ALL INSTANCES the Continent will be thrown into a welcome confusion.

Enclosed an article on the war by Urquhart, of yesterday's date,[5] and cuttings from an earlier pamphlet on his military plans. I should like your detailed opinion of both.

One of the Prussian instructors with the Turks, whom I met by chance yesterday, says that the Turkish artillery is excellent but the army as a whole no more than an ornament, inasmuch as any vigorous action has been frustrated by Constantinople.

In your essay on the Russian RETREAT from Kalafat you say that the purpose of this manoeuvre was to set up camp in Odessa, having regard to the Anglo-French army. According to the latest news, however, it would seem that the Russians have crossed the Danube on the opposite side, or intend to do so. There might be some more detailed information to hand tomorrow, in which case you could let me have something about it the day after.[6] In my letter of the day before yesterday[7] I forbade the Tribune, which was really overdoing things, to annex as LEADERS anything except military pieces—or else omit my name altogether, since I don't want it to appear only beneath indifferent STUFF. For it is essential—and now is the moment—to show them by military pieces that they cannot dispense with me.

If the Times commercial correspondent in Manchester has reported aright,[8] business must be in very poor shape. Serious FAILURES are expected down here any day. Likewise in Paris. It goes without saying that concerns which have long been laboriously staving off bankruptcy will choose the time when war is declared to go under with decorum.

I haven't yet seen your article in The Daily News and have certainly not overlooked it![9]

The Naval and Military Gazette maintains that the Russians bought a destructive device, invented in France and rejected by Louis Philippe's government, which continues to burn under water, and that they used it at Sinope, this being the explanation for the rapid and thorough destruction of the Turkish ships.

According to the Hamburger Correspondent, which must be regarded as a semi-Russian organ, Nicholas is to publish further documents, among them letters of Prince Albert.

No further news here. The 'Mader', mentioned by Mr Heinzen as being an editor of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, is an individual quite unknown to me.[10]

Totus tuus,[11]

K. M.

I now have in my possession Hammer's Geschichte des Osmanischen Reichs. Patience is needed to get through it. I've still got about 1/4 left to read. It's at your disposal IF WANTED.

  1. ↑ Unfortunate man!
  2. ↑ See this volume, p. 423.
  3. ↑ event
  4. ↑ See this volume, pp. 420 and 428.
  5. ↑ D. Urquhart, 'How is the War to Be Carried on? To the Editor of The Morning Advertiser', The Morning Advertiser, No. 19583, 28 March 1854.
  6. ↑ See this volume, pp. 426-27.
  7. ↑ Marx's letter to the editors of the New-York Daily Tribune of 27 March has not been found. It may have been sent off to New York on 28 March 1854 with the article 'Declaration of War.—On the History of the Eastern Question'
  8. ↑ [Report on the cotton market in Manchester,] The Times, No. 21700, 28 March 1854.
  9. ↑ Engels sent his manuscript 'The Fortress of Kronstadt' to The Daily News on 30 March with a letter in which he offered to contribute to this newspaper as a military observer (see this volume, pp. 423-26). 'The Fortress of Kronstadt' was not published during Engels' lifetime; in the present edition it is included in Vol. 13
  10. ↑ The reference is to Harney's speech at the Chartist meeting in London on 3 February 1852, the opening day of the English Parliament
  11. ↑ All yours