--- Title: Marx to Collet Dobson Collet, [London, about 10 June 1857] (draft) Description: Draft: Marx explains to Collet the mistake in his account of contributions to The Free Press: chapter 34 had been reckoned at 4 columns instead of 5½. Author: Karl Marx Date: 1857-06-10 URL: https://marxismo.school/archivo/marx-engels/cartas/originales/1857-06-10%20Marx%20to%20Collet%20Dobson%20Collet --- *Transcription with doubtful readings: 18 of the 96 words of the final text (18.8 %) are marked as uncertain ([?]) or illegible ([ilegible]), and each of them is explained in a note. Draft of a letter from Karl Marx to Collet Dobson Collet, editor of The Free Press, written below Collet’s letter to Marx of 10 June 1857 (London, 10 June 1857 or shortly after). Manuscript kept at the IISG, Amsterdam (Karl Marx / Friedrich Engels Papers, inv. D 771-833, image 11, lower half), transcribed from the digital facsimile by the Escuela de marxismo, 2026 (double reading and collation with the image). A heavily corrected draft: the order of some additions and lines is conjectural and is explained in the notes. Nothing has been completed from other editions. Diplomatic transcription: spelling and punctuation of the manuscript; deletions as ~~text~~; additions above or below the line in their place, with a note; [?] after an uncertain reading, [ilegible] for what cannot be read. [Traducción al español](https://marxismo.school/archivo/marx-engels/cartas/1857-06-10%20Marx%20a%20Collet%20Dobson%20Collet)* Dear Sir, ~~If~~ I[?][^1] ~~[ilegible]~~ ~~[ilegible]~~ ~~not~~ had[?][^2] myself ~~not~~ not[^3] made up ~~the~~ ~~[ilegible]~~ but only copied[^4] the account ~~sent[?]~~ forwarded[^5] to you, [ilegible][^6] ~~[ilegible]~~ falls[?][^7] ~~the~~ annoyance[?] [ilegible],[^8] ~~matter[?]~~ [ilegible][^9], on receiving your ~~letter~~ note[^10] (last[^11] ~~by[?] mistake~~, ~~should have taken place~~ my claim should have been over~~[ilegible]~~[ilegible]ed.[^12] ~~It[?]~~ ~~for[?]~~ ~~[ilegible]~~ ~~Consequently I~~ ~~[ilegible]~~. ~~[ilegible]~~ ~~Consequently~~, ~~I calculated~~ my[?][^13] ~~[ilegible]~~ ~~[ilegible]~~ ~~[ilegible]~~, ~~I find[?] and[?] that~~. Consequently, I ~~[ilegible]~~ ~~[ilegible]~~ reexamined the ~~[ilegible]~~ [ilegible][^14] ~~[ilegible]~~ make[?][^15] 22½ columns, where ~~[ilegible] happy[?] to find that the only~~ The case is simply this[?][^16] that you ~~[ilegible]~~ ~~altogether~~ omitted ~~Cp. 34~~ that you have[^17] ~~(another[?]~~ (another[?])[^18] Cp. 34, ~~also[?]~~[^19] ~~[ilegible] on my~~ own[?] as[?] that[?][^20] part, thereby mistake, on[?] my [ilegible][^21] consists in having ~~put~~ put down 4 columns ~~only~~ for ~~that~~ ~~[ilegible]~~ Cp. 34, ~~[ilegible]~~ which really[^22] amounts to 5½ columns. Yours truly K. Marx ~~Mr~~ D. Collet, Esq. [^1]: A tall stroke rising to the right, after the struck-out “If” in the margin. [^2]: “had”: added above the line; a small loop and “ad” with the stem of a d (the first reading placed a “Had” elsewhere). [^3]: “not”: added above the line or in the margin. [^4]: “but only copied”: added above the line or in the margin. [^5]: “forwarded”: added above the line or in the margin. [^6]: A capital resembling B (or “It”), followed by a word that is struck out. [^7]: “falls”: added above the line; a tall stem with an initial loop, a short letter, an l and an s, four or five letters in all; the first reading had “else”. [^8]: Written between lines 1 and 2, to the right of “to you”, without a call sign, and placed at the beginning of line 2 by the sense. “annoyance”: a, n, n, o, y with a descender, a, n, c, e (the second reading had “answer”). The following word, of about six short letters ending in “-ded” or “-eed”, cannot be read (first reading “avoided”, second reading “needed”). [^9]: Six short letters without ascenders or descenders and a final curl of s or r; the first reading had “annoys”, the second “answer”. [^10]: “note”: added above the line or in the margin. [^11]: “(last”: added above the line or in the margin. [^12]: “my claim should have been over…ed.”: written just above the struck-out “should have taken place”, which it replaces; the order of reading of this passage remains conjectural. The root of the last word is struck out with a thick stroke; above it there is a piece ending in “-ted”, itself crossed by a line, and “ed.” is on the line: “overstated” (first reading) or “overrated” are possible. [^13]: m and y with a descender, outside the stroke that cancels the words around it; it may belong to the deletion. [^14]: r, e, a dotted i, an ascender (k or l), “-oni-” and a small blotted figure below: perhaps “reckoning”. [^15]: m, a, a letter with a descender (an elongated k, or p) and e. This line stands alone in the right half of the page, between lines 4 and 5; by the sense it continues “reexamined the …”. [^16]: “th”, one short letter without a visible dot and a final curl: “this” or “thus”. [^17]: “that you have”: added above the line or in the margin. [^18]: “(another”: written below the line, after a bracket: a, n, o, then a tall t and h, e, r; the first reading had “omitted”. [^19]: Added and struck out again. [^20]: Added above the line, all three words uncertain: “own” (o, w, n with a descending final stroke; or “my”), “as” (a and a curved stem; or “and”) and “that”. [^21]: Added above “mistake”: “on” (or “or”), “my” and a word with an initial ascender, “-e-”, an l and an f with a descender: “self” (or “part”, “behalf”). [^22]: “which really”: added above the line or in the margin.