---
Title: Marx to Collet Dobson Collet, [London,] 23 October 1856 (draft)
Description: Draft of Marx's reply to Collet on the continuation of his articles in the enlarged Free Press, the printing of unpublished documents and the parallels with the present.
Author: Karl Marx
Date: 1856-10-23
URL: https://marxismo.school/archivo/marx-engels/cartas/originales/1856-10-23%20Marx%20to%20Collet%20Dobson%20Collet
---


*Draft of a letter from Karl Marx to Collet Dobson Collet, editor of The Free Press, [London,] 23 October 1856. The draft, unsigned and in another hand (according to the IISG inventory, that of Wilhelm Pieper), is kept at the IISG, Amsterdam (Karl Marx / Friedrich Engels Papers, inv. C 115-120, image 4); the date «23 Oct. 56», in a different hand, is written in the top margin. transcribed from the digital facsimile by the Escuela de marxismo, 2026 (double reading and collation with the image). Diplomatic transcription: spelling and punctuation of the manuscript; underlinings in italics; deletions as ~~text~~; [?] after an uncertain reading, [ilegible] for what cannot be read. Additions between the lines are given in their place, with a note. [Traducción al español](https://marxismo.school/archivo/marx-engels/cartas/1856-10-23%20Marx%20a%20Collet%20Dobson%20Collet)*

Dear Sir,  


Having been ~~rather busy~~ absent from London[^1] during the last ~~weeks[?]~~ month[^2], and seeing that your paper professed to be wanting space, I have deferred the continuation of my articles until to day. In transmitting the inclosed *new* manuscript it occurs to me that, from the differen~~t~~ce[^3] in[^4] size between the old & new Free Press, it would be desirable to come to a~~n~~ new[^5] understanding as to ~~what is to be the~~ ~~length of the column, and in what manner your paper~~ ~~it is to be measured.~~ the terms on which my contributions to your paper are to take place.

In answer to your last letter I have to state that it is indifferent to me whether you re[^6]print the *pamphlets* in large or small type, but as to ~~the~~ documents never before published I consider it would be spoiling the case ~~by~~ to[^7] ~~printing them~~ put th[ilegible] ~~them[?]~~ in in small type. Concerning ~~your remarks as to~~ the ~~desired[?]~~ alleged desirability of my own comments ~~or[?] [ilegible]~~ not taking the form of notes, you will see that this is being done only where really expedient, and that under the form of introductions to the different chapters they ~~are~~ occupy already the space of the text. Lastly ~~with regard~~ as[^8] to the suggestion of drawing parallelisms between the epoch I treat upon and the present time, ~~[ilegible]~~ it has been anticipated to a certain extent in the chapters ~~al[ilegible]~~ you published. To ~~carry~~ systematically ~~[ilegible]~~ trace[^9] these parallelisms more ~~fully[?]~~[^10] ~~too far~~ ~~is beyond~~ would be altering my plan, which is rather to give new materials ~~for~~ ~~in support of an[^11] established~~ ~~[ilegible]~~ ~~[ilegible] opinion, than new opinions for an hackneyed~~ ~~material.~~ for a new history, than ~~old~~ new[^12] reflections on well-known materials. To satisfy the wants of his readers in that respect I hold to be rather the duty of the editor.

[^1]: “absent from London”: added above the line.

[^2]: “month”: added above the line.

[^3]: “different” corrected to “difference” in darker ink.

[^4]: “in”: added above the line.

[^5]: “new”: added above the line.

[^6]: “re”: added above the line.

[^7]: “to”: added above the line.

[^8]: “as”: added above the line.

[^9]: “systematically trace” (with a word struck out between them): added above the line.

[^10]: “more”: added above the line.

[^11]: “an”: added above the line.

[^12]: “new”: added above the line.