NOTES AND INDEXES

Notes

Residual editorial notes

84 editorial note entries had no resolved in-text occurrence and remain here so no source note definition is discarded.

[32] glorifying Bohemian antiquity, which the Czech philologist and poet Vaclav

[53] A reference to the German Workers' Educational Society in London, which was

[57] Foreign Affairs Committees were public organisations set up by the

[63] published under the same title between December 1855 and February 1856 in

[76] Serials, an intention which failed to materialise.—57 75 This letter was written in reply to one from William Cyples, a member of the

[93] Roland Daniels came out of prison a sick man and died of tuberculosis in August

[98] unknown hand in the upper left corner is the date '27/28 Sept. 1856'. Being a

[104] France, supported by the governments of Austria and Russia, came out in

[106] Palmerston, the British Foreign Secretary, seeking to weaken France, prevented

[108] rapprochement with Russia. The rout of the Sonderbund army by the Federal forces on 23 November deprived the European powers of a pretext for further diplomatic moves in the Swiss conflict.—81 103 In October 1856 France and Britain, fearing that the reign of reaction and terror in the Kingdom of Naples (the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies) might set off a revolutionary explosion, demanded that Ferdinand II, the Neapolitan King, should pursue a more flexible policy. Ferdinand II, confident of Austria's backing, refused to comply, whereupon France and Britain put their naval squadrons in the Mediterranean on die alert. However, the planned expedition against Naples did not take place owing to differences caused by Napoleon Ill's intention to instal a prince of the Bonaparte dynasty on the Neapolitan throne. By the autumn of 1856, the struggle had intensified for the union of the Danubian Principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia and for an end to their dependence on the Ottoman Empire. The British government, apprehensive of France's intention to instal a member of the Bonaparte dynasty as head of the united state, and fearing the growth of Russian influence in the principalities, actively supported Austria's and Turkey's opposition to the movement for unification (this is what Marx had in mind speaking about Palmerston's alliance with Austria on die Turkish issue). However, despite the diplomatic complications and the resistance of the reactionary aristocrats, the principalities merged in 1862 to form the single state of Romania.—81, 107, 243 104 This refers to the Crystal Palace in London (see Note 89).—81 105 -j/he symptoms of economic crisis, die rise in unemployment and in the cost of living, the shortage of housing and food, and the increased taxation led to more frequent manifestations of the workers' discontent in Paris and other French cities, to which die government responded with mass arrests. Those arrested were accused of putting up posters in the streets threatening property owners, landlords, usurers and even Emperor Napoleon III. The article in the Moniteur mentioned by Engels (it appeared on 24 October 1856) protested against attacks in English newspapers on the French government and some of Napoleon Ill's entourage. It had broad repercussions in die British press.—82 106 Banks patterned on the French Crédit mobilier (see Note 45) were established widi die latter's participation in a number of Central European countries.—83 107 Marx used the data contained in Engels' letter and in The Manchester Guardian of 17 November 1856, also sent by Engels, in his article 'The Crisis in Europe' published in die New-York Daily Tribune on 6 December 1856 (see present edition, Vol. 15).—83 108 Engels means die wars Britain waged almost incessandy as a member of various anti-French coalitions against revolutionary and Napoleonic France in die late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries (from 1793, when the French Republic officially declared war on it, up to the final fall of Napoleon's empire in 1815). Spain, which originally fought against France and suffered a number

[112] revolutionary government in France during the Jacobin dictatorship (2 June

[115] on their release. In reply, Switzerland demanded that he should relinquish his

[116] tide to Neuchâtel. Under the pressure of France, on whose initiative a European conference on the issue was held in March 1857, Prussia was forced to renounce her claims. In the eighteenth century the principality of Neuchâtel and Valangin (in German: Neuenburg and Vallendis) was under Prussian rule. It was ceded to France in 1806, during the Napoleonic wars. In 1815, by a decision of the Vienna Congress, it was incorporated into the Swiss Confederation as its 21st canton, while remaining a vassal of Prussia. On 29 February 1848 a bourgeois revolution in Neuchâtel put an end to Prussian rule and a republic was proclaimed. Prussia, however, laid constant claims to Neuchâtel up to 1857, thus causing an acute conflict with the Swiss Republic.—86, 88, 89 11 Marx presumably alludes to the fact that under the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna (1815) Prussia received what was known as Swedish Pomerania from Denmark. Denmark received in compensation the duchy of Lauenburg from Prussia.—86 12 The Polish region of Silesia, part of the Austrian Empire from 1526, was seized by Prussia during die War of the Austrian Succession (1740-48) caused by the claims of several European powers, above all King Frederick II of Prussia, to the Habsburg domains, which, in default of a male heir at the death of Emperor Charles VI, went to his daughter, Maria Theresa.—86 1S Pietism was a trend in the Lutheran Church that emerged in Germany in the seventeenth century. Distinguished by extreme mysticism, it rejected rites and attached special importance to personal religious experience.—86, 575 14 Marx developed these ideas on Prussia's history in his article 'The Right Divine of the Hohenzollerns' (see present edition, Vol. 15).—87 15 An allusion to the fact that in 1848 Valdenaire was a deputy to the Prussian National Assembly, in which the liberal majority favoured a constitution 'by agreement (Vereinbarung) with the Crown'. Marx and Engels ironically called the members of the Berlin Assembly 'agreers'.—87 16 Marx means the Imperial Constitution adopted by the Frankfurt National Assembly on 28 March 1849, but rejected by most of the German governments and in the first place by the King of Prussia. In May 1849 uprisings in defence of the Constitution flared up in Saxony, Rhenish Prussia and the South German states of Baden and Palatinate. In the last two a united insurgent army was formed, in which Frederick Engels fought. The movement was led by petty-bourgeois democrats, whose vacillation and passive defence tactics doomed it to defeat. The movement was finally suppressed in July 1849. Engels described it in The Campaign for the German Imperial Constitution and Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Germany (see present edition, Vols. 10 and 11).—90

[118] following pamphlets: Rußland und das Germanenthum, Charlottenburg, 1853;

[120] und das Germanenthum. Zweite Abtheilung. Die deutsche und die

[128] (see Note 121) growing into war.—95 126 Tij e letter is undated. But since it is Engels' reply to a letter from Marx of 20

[130] written on 21 or 22 January.—96 127 Marx alludes to the influence exerted on the New-York Daily Tribune editors by

[133] Tribune editors' rejection of some of his own and Engels' articles, and the delay in publishing others (see this volume, p. 81).—98 128 T h e New-York Daily Tribune did not publish the article.—98 129 This refers to the colonial war Britain was waging against Persia (Iran) in 1856-57. In October 1856 Persian troops seized the city of Herat, the centre of the principality of Herat, claimed by Persia and Afghanistan. Britain took advantage of this to declare war on Persia with a view to further expansion in the Middle East, directed against both Persia and Afghanistan. In November a British naval force captured several Persian strong points on the coast of the Persian Gulf. However, growing popular discontent in India compelled the British to hasten the conclusion of a peace treaty in March 1857, under which Persia relinquished her claims to Herat (later annexed to Afghanistan), while Britain withdrew her forces from the area.—98, 107, 134 130 Marx probably means the formation, in 1854, of the US Republican Party, which put forward a programme to limit Negro slavery in the Southern states, and the considerable success it scored in the 1856 Presidential election, its candidate getting over 300,000 votes, one-third of the total. Howard Greeley, the publisher of the New-York Daily Tribune, was one of the party's leaders.—98 131 A reference to the article 'Saint-Arnaud', which Engels wrote on the basis of C. L. Bazancourt's book L'expédition de Crimée (see Note 60).—100 132 Marx means the supporters of the currency principle, one of the schools of the quantity theory of money widely subscribed to in Britain in the first half of the nineteenth century. According to this theory, the value and pi ice of commodities are determined by the quantity of money in circulation, and economic crises are caused mainly by violations of the laws of money circulation. The proponents of the quantity theory sought to maiiu un the stability of money circulation by means of obligatory gold backing ol bank notes. The theory provided the economic justification for Peel's Bank Acts (introduced in England in 1844, and in Scotland in 1845). Under the 1844 Act, the Bank of England was divided into a Banking Department and an Issue Department and fixed proportions were laid down between t1,•• amount of bank notes issued and the bullion required to back them. How , the actual demand for currency forced the government to suspend the Act in 1847 and 1857 and to issue paper money in excess of the fixed limit. Marx showed the untenability of the currency principle in A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (present edition, Vol. 30). He discussed the 1844 Bank Act in a number of articles (present edition, Vols. 12, 15 and 16).—102, 126, 135, 202, 208, 215 133 The original of the letter has not been found. Only an excerpt reproduced in Freiligrath's letter of 26 February 1857 to Karl Weerth, a high sciiooi te?h<"-

[143] as a champion of British interests in his House of Commons speech of 20 June

[146] the merchant Pacifico, a Portuguese Jew and British subject. Lord Russell argued

[149] 'Palmerston and the Treaty of Unkiar-Skelessy', reproducing the content of

[153] foreign policy.—110, 111, 115

[156] 1816. It was strongly supported by the Free Traders, who held that, given

[157] peace, free trade would enable Britain to make full use of her industrial

[163] Daily

[172] Vol. 15).—133 171 'Social philosophy'('Sozialphilosophie') was the term Moses Hess used in his works

[174] (Saint-Simon, Fourier and others) and the petty-bourgeois social doctrines of

[176] Cyclopaedia (in the present edition they are in Vol. (18). In addition, Engels

[191] articles for The New American Cyclopaedia, has not been found.—159 190 This letter was published in earlier editions without the notes on Bennigsen

[199] The first and third fragments (written on separate sheets) were published in

[202] before. The approximate date of writing has been established on the basis of the previous letter of Engels to Marx, written on 10 September, and Marx's replies written on 15 and 17 September 1857. The order in which the fragments are presented in this volume is the order in which they are assumed to have been written.—164 197 At the battle of Grossbeeren on 23 August and of Dennewitz on 6 September 1813, the Prussian corps under Bülow defeated the French. Both battles took place during the war of the Sixth Coalition (Russia, Austria, Prussia, Britain, Spain, Sweden and other countries) against Napoleonic France. In the 1813 campaign Bernadotte commanded the allied Northern Army, which included Bülow's corps.—164, 274 198 At the battle of Leipzig (16-19 October 1813) die allied armies of Russia, Austria, Prussia and Sweden defeated Napoleon and his allies. This 'battle of the nations' led to Germany's liberation from Napoleon's rule.—165, 179 199 The Directory (consisting of five directors of whom one was re-elected every year) was the leading executive body in France set up under the 1795 Constitution. It governed France until Bonaparte's coup d'état of 1799 and expressed the interests of the big bourgeoisie.—165 200 Engels refers to the military operations in Transylvania (then part of Hungary) of a revolutionary army against the Austrian forces, Romanian detachments, provoked into action against Hungary by the Austrian authorities, and a Russian detachment sent by the Tsarist government to help the Habsburg Empire. Started under Bern's command in December 1848, during the 1848-49 revolution in Hungary, this campaign ended a few months later in the practically complete liberation of Transylvania from the counter-revolutionary forces. However, in the second Transylvanian campaign (mentioned below) called forth by a new concentration of counter-revolutionaries in the summer of 1849 and the arrival of fresh contingents of Tsarist troops, Bern's entire army was routed at the end of July 1849 and he himself had to flee to Turkey.—167 201 Bern's march into the Banat (a region in the Serbian Voivodina, then part of Hungary) was undertaken in the spring of 1849 to put down the Serbian movement for autonomy incited by the Austrian audiorities and influenced by the Serbian big bourgeoisie, nobility and clergy. As in Transylvania, the struggle in die Banat with its population of Hungarians, Germans and Romanians as well as Serbs, was complicated by clashes between Serbians and non-Serbians, and the erroneous stand adopted by the Hungarian bourgeois and aristocratic revolutionaries on the national question. Only on 28 July 1849, shortly before the fall of the Hungarian Republic, did they officially agree to recognise the equality of all nationalities inhabiting Hungary.—167 202 The last two of these articles, 'Blum' and 'Bourrienne', were not ready for

[215] Prussia, Britain, the Netherlands, Spain, Piedmont, Naples and other monar-

[234] there and in mid-1856 became editor of The Jersey Independent, whicn he devoted

[239] Harney in September 1857, and The Jersey Independent edited by him, came out

[248] postponements a joint conference of Chartists and bourgeois radicals was

[251] broke off their friendly relations with him until a few years later, when Jones

[258] he had taken part in publishing the democratic paper Neu« Oder-Zeitung, to which Marx also contributed throughout 1855. Not knowing the political line of Die Presse at the time, Marx did not agree, one of the reasons being probably the condition imposed by Friedländer: to criticise Napoleon Ill's policy and abstain from attacking Palmerston. In 1859 negotiations with Friedländer were resumed and lasted for a long time. Their success was hampered, on the one hand, by Lassalle's pro-Bonapartist statements during the Italian war of 1859 which evoked dissatisfaction on the part of Friedländer, who for a time thought that Marx approved of these statements, and on the other hand, by the editors' tendency to be duped by the pseudo-constitutional demagogy of the new Austrian government of Schmerling, which put Marx on the alert. Only in October 1861 when Die Presse criticised the government did Marx agree to be its London correspondent.—226, 227, 269, 272, 416, 418, 455, 571 255 Crédit fancier (Land Credit)—a French joint-stock bank set up in 1852 on the basis of the former Paris Land Bank. It granted short- and long-term loans on the security of immovable property at a definite interest. The Crédit foncier received considerable subsidies from the government. Comptoir national d'Escompte de Paris (National Discount Bank of Paris) was founded in 1848 by the Provisional Government of the French Republic. Originally it discounted bills and granted credits on the security of goods stored in public warehouses. Under Napoleon III it became a joint-stock society (in 1853) and acquired the privilege of making advances on government bonds and shares of industrial and credit companies.—230 256 The Zollverein, a union of German states which established a common customs frontier, was set up in 1834 under the aegis of Prussia. Brought into being by the need to create an all-German market, the Customs Union subsequendy embraced all the German states except Austria and a few of the smaller states.— 230 257 Some of the thoughts expressed by Marx in this letter were developed in his article 'The Crisis in France', published in the New-York Daily Tribune on 12 January 1858 (see present edition, Vol. 15).—232 258 Further Engels refers to an episode in the Indian uprising of 1857-59 (see Note 178). After the fall of Delhi and Cawnpore in the summer of 1857, the centre of resistance to the British shifted to Oudh. A British garrison was besieged in Lucknow, the capital of that state, by the remnants of the Sepoy army and Oudh insurgents. General Havelock's force sent to relieve the garrison reached it in September but was compelled to remain besieged with it. It was not until November 1857 that the garrison was relieved by a force under General Colin Campbell from Cawnpore (Engels describes this episode). However, the insurgents' successful operations in Campbell's rear compelled him to leave Lucknow and return to Cawnpore. Campbell undertook another campaign to Lucknow three months later and captured the city on 19 March 1858.—234 259 According to Marx's notebook, on 27 November 1857 he sent two articles to

[263] 'Cannonade' and 'Captain', which, according to an entry in Marx's notebook,

[264] were despatched to New York the next day with Marx's articles "The Siege and

[291] example, Marx's letter to Engels of 1 February 1858). There is no entry in Marx's notebook about their despatch to New York. It is quite possible that Engels sent Marx the article 'Coehorn' with 'Camp' and 'Catapult'.—267 286 A n excerpt from this letter was first published in English in Marx and Engels, Selected Correspondence, Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, 1955 and in full in The Letters of Karl Marx, selected and translated with explanatory notes and an introduction by Saul K. Padover, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliff, New Jersey, 1979.—268 287 After Orsini's attempt on the life of Napoleon III, Count Walewski, Foreign Minister of France, sent the British government a despatch on 20 January 1858 expressing his discontent at Britain's granting asylum to French political refugees. The despatch served as a pretext for Palmerston to introduce a new Aliens Bill, also called Conspiracy to Murder Bill (see Note 16), on 8 February 1858. According to this Bill, anyone living in the United Kingdom, an Englishman or a foreigner, who took part in a conspiracy to murder a person in Britain or any other country, was to be tried by an English court and severely punished. During the second reading of the new Aliens Bill the radicals Milner Gibson and John Bright, who had been defeated at the parliamentary elections in March 1857, when the Whigs, Palmerston's adherents, came to power, but were re-elected in the autumn of that year, moved an amendment censuring Palmerston's government for failing to give a fitting reply to Walewski's despatch. The House of Commons adopted the amendment by a majority vote, rejected the Bill and compelled Palmerston's government to resign.—273, 275 288 Marx analyses the state of France's economy, including agriculture, in early 1858 in his article 'The Economic Crisis in France' published in the New-York Daily Tribune on 12 March 1858 (see present edition, Vol. 15).—273 289 A reference to the second Anglo-Burmese war (1852) which resulted in the British capture of the Province of Pegu.—274 290 By '2 cives romani [Roman citizens]' Engels means the British Prime Minister Palmerston and Napoleon III. (He alludes here to the Latin expression 'civis Romanus sum'—'I am a Roman citizen' cited by Palmerston in his speech in the House of Commons on 25 June 1850.) Engels has in mind in particular their intention to send an English and a French squadron to the shores of Naples at the end of 1856 under the pretext of bringing pressure to bear on the reactionary regime there (see Note 103), and their repressive measures against democrats in France and Britain after Orsini's attempt on the life of Napoleon III.— 276 291 Neither this letter, sent off apparently at the end of February 1858, nor Marx's letter to Collet mentioned below have been found.—277 292 A cabinet noir (black bureau)—a secret Post Office institution in France,

[295] Besson and Talandier stated that the crowned personages who usurped

[307] During the Second Republic the Orleanists (see Note 124) and the Legitimists

[312] countries.— 305 312 Laissez-faire, laissez-aller—the formula of economists who advocated Free Trade

[316] of bombs and so on). The trial took place in London from 12 to 17 April 1858.

[317] Bernard was acquitted by the Central Criminal Court on 17 April.—307, 309 315 In April 1858 the Chamber of Representatives of the Kingdom of Piedmont

[323] Weydemeyer. Komp was a leader of the New York Communist Club, and his

[324] letter to Marx contained information and requests similar to those contained in

[331] entry in his notebook on 27 July about the despatch of the article to New York,

[338] ländlichen Einrichtungen Russlands (Th. 1-3, Hannover-Berlin, 1847-52), the

[340] 1840s, gave a false idea of the material well-being of the Russian peasantry. He

[344] carried out gradually because, he wrote, the necessary conditions for the wage labour system did not exist in Russia.—346 338 This refers to one of the main provisions of the Nanking Treaty Britain concluded with China as a result of the Anglo-Chinese war of 1840-42 (known as the first Opium War). It was the first of a series of unequal treaties imposed on China by the Western powers, treaties that reduced it to the status of a semi-colony. Under the Nanking Treaty five Chinese cities — Canton, Shanghai, Amoy, Ninbo and Fuchon — were opened to English trade.—347 339 Under the Aigun Treaty of 28(16) May 1858, the left bank of the Amur, from the confluence of the Shilka and the Argun to the sea, was recognised as Russian territory, while the question of the Ussuri Area, from the confluence of the Ussuri and the Amur to -the sea, was left open until the final fixing of the frontier between Russia and China. Navigation on the Amur, Sungari and Ussuri was prohibited to all states except Russia and Ching China. The treaty thus returned to Russia the left bank of the Amur developed by die Russians in the seventeenth century and taken from it under the Nerchinsk Treaty of 1689. Besides, it thwarted the British diplomats' attempt to exacerbate Russo-Chinese relations and closed the Amur to West-European shipping. The treaty was ratified by Russia on 8 June 1858.—349 340 This letter is dated only 'Friday'. The exact date of its writing was established on the basis of facts mentioned in it, in particular Marx's reference to an article on rifled cannon published in The Times on 22 October 1858.—350 341 Marx seems to refer to his article 'Mr. John Bright' printed in the New-York Daily Tribune on 12 November 1858 as a leader, without any heading. It bears signs of the editors' interference (see present edition, Vol. 16).—350 342 A reference to the conflict between France and Portugal caused by the seizure of the French merchant vessel Charles et Georges by the Portuguese authorities in Mozambique on 29 November 1857. The vessel had on board a number of East-African Negroes who were to be shipped, allegedly as free emigrants, to the French island of Réunion. The Franco-Portuguese talks continued for almost a year but brought no results. On 13 October 1858 Napoleon III, whom Marx calls here Quasimodo (a character from Victor Hugo's Notre-Dame de Paris), sent a special Note to the Portuguese Government demanding the return of the confiscated vessel and the release of its captain. The demand was backed by the despatch of two French warships to the Portuguese capital. Portugal was compelled to yield. Marx touches on the subject in his article 'The French Slave Trade' published in the New-York Daily Tribune on 1 December 1858 with considerable editorial changes (see present edition, Vol. 16, pp. 621-23).—351, 357 343 This presumably refers to Blind's articles published anonymously in 1858 under the general heading Flügblätter des Vereins 'Deutsche Einheit und Freiheit' in England.—351, 353 344 John Bright, a British radical and Free Trade leader, put forward a

[348] M.P.s), he retained only the demand for vote by secret ballot. The other demands

[349] were either omitted altogether or drastically moderated. Thus Bright suggested

[353] which he also described the state of Prussia's armed forces (see present edition,

[362] seems to have given an incorrect interpretation of the trend of the future

[373] price of commodities depended on the mass of money in circulation, a view

[375] to the Critique of Political Economy, Marx referred to this issue of the journal

[376] (present edition, Vol. 30).—377 369 In his article 'The French Army' sent to the New-York Daily Tribune on 31 January 1859, Engels opposed his calculations concerning the strength of

[377] the forces France could field in Italy in case of war to the exaggerated figures

[378] contained in Louis Boniface's article datelined Paris, 29 January 1859, which appeared in the Constitutionnel, No. 30, on 30 January 1859. Engels pointed out that the Constitutionnel data had been furnished by the Emperor himself (see present edition, Vol. 16, p. 171). A report of 31 January from Paris, published in The Times, No. 23219, on 2 February 1859, stated outright that Napoleon III, whom Marx calls in this letter Mr Boustrapa (see Note 40), was the author of the article in the Constitutionnel.—379 370 xhis refers to the war preparations of the Kingdom of Sardinia (Piedmont) and France against Austria. The war (29 April to 8 July 1859) was launched by Napoleon III, who under the banner of the 'liberation of Italy' strove for aggrandizement and needed a successful military campaign to shore up the Bonapartist regime in France. Piedmont ruling circles hoped that French support would enable them to unite Italy under the aegis of the Savoy dynasty. The war caused an upsurge of the national liberation movement in Italy. The Austrian army suffered a series of defeats. However Napoleon III, frightened by the scale of the liberation movement in Italy, abruptly ceased hostilities. On 11 July, the French and Austrian emperors concluded a separate preliminary peace in Villafranca. France received Savoy and Nice; Lombardy was annexed to Sardinia; the Venetian Region remained under the Austrians.—380, 399, 401, 405, 462, 537 371 Marx refers here to the Carbonari, members of secret political societies in Italy and France in the first half of the nineteenth century. In Italy they fought for national independence, unification of the country and liberal constitutional reforms. In the latter half of the 1850s a number of attempts were made on the life of Napoleon III, including one by the Italian revolutionary Orsini (see Note 271). Some of these attempts were attributed to the desire to teach Napoleon III a lesson for the breach of his commitments to the Carbonari organisation, of which he was a member in 1831. Part of the questions touched upon in this letter are discussed in the articles "The Money Panic in Europe' by Marx and Engels, 'Louis Napoleon's Position' by Marx and 'The French Army' by Engels (all three are in Vol. 16 of the present edition).—380 372 The Rubicon—the name of a river in Northern Italy, on the boundary between Umbria and Cisalpine Gaul, which Caesar crossed with his army in 49 B.C. thereby starting a civil war with Pompey. To cross (or pass) the Rubicon—to embark on an undertaking from which one cannot turn back.—381 3 , 3 Marx refers to the abortive Bonapartist coups in Boulogne on 6 August 1840

[386] Prussia and Russia signed a treaty incorporating Cracow in the Austrian

[387] Empire.—401 385 Further events showed that Marx's forecast was true. In April 1859 the British

[388] Parliament was dissolved and new elections in June 1859 brought to power

[394]

[395] 50-100 copies of the German edition of the book in America. Dana also

[401] caused by setbacks in the Crimean War, cost Russell the post of Foreign Secretary, while Palmerston headed the new, Whig government. During the second Derby ministry (1858-59), opposition by Bright and Russell contributed to the government's resignation, clearing the field for Palmerston's second cabinet.—411 S95 On 31 March 1859 the House of Commons rejected, after a second reading, the Reform Bill proposed by the Tory government of Derby-Disraeli, which led to the government's fall. In the preceding debate, on 24 March, Bright and Gibson spoke against the Bill. Gibson quoted Bright, who said in one of his earlier speeches that 'there was no Bill so revolutionary as a bad Bill'. While favouring the preservation of some elements of the obsolete system |of 'rotten boroughs', Gibson opposed the new distribution of electoral districts! proposed by the government. j The ideas expressed in this letter were probably discussed in greater detail in Marx's article on the Reform Bill written on 1 April 1859, which was not published by the New-York Daily Tribune editors.—411 396 f h e l ett e r w a s first published in an abridged English translation in K. Marx, On Colonialism and Modernization, New York, 1969.—412 397 xhis letter to Charles Dana has not been found.—412 398 while a member of the House of Commons, Thomas Chisholm Anstey, together with David Urquhart, repeatedly criticised Palmerston's foreign policy. As Attorney-General of Hong Kong in 1854-58, he came out against corruption and abuses by the British colonial administration, for which he was virtually removed from office. Upon his return to England in 1859, The Times printed, on 9 April, a statement by M.P. Edwin James announcing his intention to publish documents bearing on Anstey's dismissal.—412 399 Marx refers to the India Loan Bill introduced in the British House of Commons on 14 February 1859 by Secretary of State for the Affairs of India Stanley. The loan of £7,000,000 was required to cover the extra expenses of the British administration in India. Marx wrote about the Bill and India's financial position in general in his article 'Great Trouble in Indian Finances' (present edition, Vol. 16).—413 400 Marx means the Shanghai Anglo-Chinese trade agreement of 8 November 1858, which supplemented the Tientsin Anglo-Chinese Treaty of 1858. It established general rules of trade and listed goods free from export and import duties (articles of consumption intended for foreigners) and those subject to duties. The import of opium into China was formally allowed only in the form of foreign medicine which, however, was tantamount to the legalisation of the opium trade, though on a restricted scale.—413 401 On 5 April 1859 the New-York Daily Tribune, No. 5602, printed a reader's letter signed 'Asboth' with comments on Engels' article 'Chances of the Impending

[405] Asbôth's second letter the date was given incorrectly as '14th inst'). The later letter largely repeated the first. Asbôth considered die assessment of Austria's possibilities in the impending war given by Engels in his two articles insufficiently thorough and exaggerated.—417 402 In a letter which has not reached us, Engels may have informed Marx of a review of American newspapers published in a supplement to the Allgemeine Zeitung, No. 102, on 12 April 1859. Much space in the review was devoted to the New-York Daily Tribune which, in the words of the author, had published 'a number of interesting military-scientific articles on the North Italian theatre of war'. The review stressed that the Tribune editors were strongly influenced by the ideas of German revolutionaries.—417 4 0 3 Marx wrote this letter in reply to one from Lassalle of 8 April 1859. In his letter Lassalle forwarded a postal order to Marx, informed him of the publication of Engels' pamphlet Po and Rhine and asked for Marx's opinion on his drama Franz von Sickingen. He had sent Marx tihree copies of his drama (for Marx, Engels and Freiligrath) on 6 March 1859, together with a note explaining the 'tragic idea' of the drama. The aesthetic principles formulated in the note and in the preface to Sickingen, and embodied in the drama, were at variance with the demands Marx and Engels made upon realistic art, namely, truuSfully to depict in the idiom specific to it the concrete reality of a definite social environment at a given period of history. Lassalle saw the essence of drama in the tragic conflict of the hero — the bearer of a certain abstract idea, in this case a revolutionary one — with the masses, who are incapable of grasping this idea in an adequate form owing to their backwardness and ignorance. This compells the hero to deviate from his ideals in practice and resort to 'cunning' (Pfiffigkeit), and ultimately dooms him to defeat. In his reply Marx gave a critical analysis of Sickingen from a dialectical-materialist standpoint and, in effect, argued against Lassalle's principles and the political tendency of the drama. In English this letter was published, abridged, in Marx and Engels, Selected Correspondence, Foreign Languages Publishing House, Moscow, 1955, and in full in The Letters of Karl Marx, selected and translated with explanatory notes and an introduction by Saul K. Padover, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliff, New Jersey, 1979.—418 404 This refers to the Polish national liberation uprising of November 1830-October 1831. Its participants belonged mostly to the revolutionary gentry, and its leaders to the aristocracy. The uprising was crushed by Tsarist Russia aided by Prussia and Austria. Lack of support by the peasants, due to the leaders' refusal to abolish serfdom, contributed to its defeat. See also Engels' speech 'On the Polish Question' (present edition, Vol. 6, pp. 549-52), and his The Peasant War in Germany, where he writes about the failure of the nobility to win over the peasants in Germany in 1522 and in Poland in 1830 (Vol. 10, p. 444).—420 405 This refers to the withdrawal of the French troops that had occupied Rome during the suppression of the Roman Republic in 1849 and stayed on in subsequent years, as did the Austrians, who in 1849 had occupied the territory of the Legations, Marke and part of Umbria, belonging to the Roman Republic — 425 406 At a reception of the diplomatic corps in the Tuileries on 1 January 1859,

[411] Savoy and Nice in exchange for participation in the forthcoming war against

[416] and military stand which most easily proves its favourable neutrality towards

[417] France' and not to object to the enlargement of the Kingdom of Sardinia in the

[419] the other. Information about this secret treaty leaked into the press but the

[426] Germany, reactionary circles made vain attempts to revive the Federal Diet,

[436] In all, sixteen issues appeared. The newspaper ceased publication for lack

[442] With these lines Engels opens his work The Campaign for the German Imperial

[443] Constitution, in which he criticises the petty-bourgeois democrats' attitude during

[449] press. However, indirect polemic against him could be found in their

[457] Free Press, in the New-York Daily Tribune (early August) and in Das Volk (late

[476] common struggle against Bonapartism. The court dismissed Vogt's action (see

[482] Ferenc Pulszky) which was an attempt to justify Kossuth's ties with Napoleon

[492] sent to the editor of the Allgemeine Zeitung on 19 October 1859 in connection

[497] defeat of the revolution, it was reorganised and continued its activities. In the

[501] which had aggravated the contradictions between Britain and France, was not

[508] New-York Daily Tribune later (see F. Engels, 'The British Volunteer Force',

[523] edition, Vol. 16).—553 520 In a letter published in the Hermann on 17 December, Borkheim maintained that