Anditisthisvaluethat，inpointoffact，Marx’sbookhas。\"
Whilstthewriterpictureswhathetakestobeactuallymymethod，inthisstrikingand[asfarasconcernsmyownapplicationofit]generousway，whatelseishepicturingbutthedialecticmethod？
Ofcoursethemethodofpresentationmustdifferinformfromthatofinquiry。Thelatterhastoappropriatethematerialindetail，toanalyseitsdifferentformsofdevelopment，totraceouttheirinnerconnexion。
Onlyafterthisworkisdone，cantheactualmovementbeadequatelydescribed。
Ifthisisdonesuccessfully，ifthelifeofthesubject—matterisideallyreflectedasinamirror，thenitmayappearasifwehadbeforeusamereaprioriconstruction。
MydialecticmethodisnotonlydifferentfromtheHegelian，butisitsdirectopposite。ToHegel，thelife—processofthehumanbrain，i。e。，theprocessofthinking，which，underthenameof\"theIdea，\"heeventransformsintoanindependentsubject，isthedemiurgosoftherealworld，andtherealworldisonlytheexternal，phenomenalformof\"theIdea。\"Withme，onthecontrary，theidealisnothingelsethanthematerialworldreflectedbythehumanmind，andtranslatedintoformsofthought。
ThemystifyingsideofHegeliandialecticIcriticisednearlythirtyyearsago，atatimewhenitwasstillthefashion。ButjustasIwasworkingatthefirstvolumeof\"DasKapital，\"itwasthegoodpleasureofthepeevish，arrogant，mediocre’EpigonoiwhonowtalklargeinculturedGermany，totreatHegelinsamewayasthebraveMosesMendelssohninLessing’stimetreatedSpinoza，i。e。，asa\"deaddog。\"Ithereforeopenlyavowedmyselfthepupilofthatmightythinker，andevenhereandthere，inthechapteronthetheoryofvalue，coquettedwiththemodesofexpressionpeculiartohim。ThemystificationwhichdialecticsuffersinHegel’shands，bynomeanspreventshimfrombeingthefirsttopresentitsgeneralformofworkinginacomprehensiveandconsciousmanner。Withhimitisstandingonitshead。Itmustbeturnedrightsideupagain，ifyouwoulddiscovertherationalkernelwithinthemysticalshell。
Initsmystifiedform，dialecticbecamethefashioninGermany，becauseitseemedtotransfigureandtoglorifytheexistingstateofthings。Initsrationalformitisascandalandabominationtobourgeoisdomanditsdoctrinaireprofessors，becauseitincludesinitscomprehensionandaffirmativerecognitionoftheexistingstateofthings，atthesametimealso，therecognitionofthenegationofthatstate，ofitsinevitablebreakingup;
becauseitregardseveryhistoricallydevelopedsocialformasinfluidmovement，andthereforetakesintoaccountitstransientnaturenotlessthanitsmomentaryexistence;becauseitletsnothingimposeuponit，andisinitsessencecriticalandrevolutionary。
Thecontradictionsinherentinthemovementofcapitalistsocietyimpressthemselvesuponthepracticalbourgeoismoststrikinglyinthechangesoftheperiodiccycle，throughwhichmodernindustryruns，andwhosecrowningpointistheuniversalcrisis。Thatcrisisisonceagainapproaching，althoughasyetbutinitspreliminarystage;andbytheuniversalityofitstheatreandtheintensityofitsactionitwilldrumdialecticsevenintotheheadsofthemushroom—upstartsofthenew，holyPrusso—Germanempire。KarlMarxLondonJanuary24，1873Footnotes[1]GeschichtlicheDarstellungdesHandels，derGewerbeunddesAckerbaus，&c……vonGustavvonGulich。5vols。，Jena。1830—45。
[2]Seemywork\"ZurKritik，&c。，\"p。39。
[3]Themealy—mouthedbabblersofGermanvulgareconomyfellfoulofthestyleofmybook。Noonecanfeeltheliteraryshortcomingsin\"DasKapital\"
morestronglythanImyself。YetIwillforthebenefitandtheenjoymentofthesegentlemenandtheirpublicquoteinthisconnexiononeEnglishandoneRussiannotice。TheSaturdayReviewalwayshostiletomyviews，saidinitsnoticeofthefirstedition:\"Thepresentationofthesubjectinveststhedriesteconomicquestionswithacertainpeculiarcharm。\"The\"St。PetersburgJournal\"（Sankt—PeterburgskieViedomosti），initsissueofApril8（20），1872，says:\"Thepresentationofthesubject，withtheexceptionofoneortwoexceptionallyspecialparts，isdistinguishedbyitscomprehensibilitybythegeneralreader，itsclearness，and，inspiteofthescientificintricacyofthesubject，byanunusualliveliness。Inthisrespecttheauthorinnowayresembles……themajorityofGermanscholarswho……writetheirbooksinalanguagesodryandobscurethattheheadsofordinarymortalsarecrackedbyit。\"
1883PrefaceKarlMarxCapitalVolumeOne1883
PREFACETOTHE
THIRDGERMANEDITION
Marxwasnotdestinedtogetthis，thethird，editionreadyforpresshimself。Thepowerfulthinker，towhosegreatnessevenhisopponentsnowmakeobeisance，diedonMarch14，1883。
UponmewhoinMarxlostthebest，thetruestfriendIhad？andhadforfortyyears？thefriendtowhomIammoreindebtedthancanbeexpressedinwords？uponmenowdevolvedthedutyofattendingtothepublicationofthisthirdedition，aswellasofthesecondvolume，whichMarxhadleftbehindinmanuscript。ImustnowaccountheretothereaderforthewayinwhichIdischargedthefirstpartofmyduty。
ItwasMarx’soriginalintentiontore—writeagreatpartofthetextofVolumeI，toformulatemanytheoreticalpointsmoreexactly，insertnewonesandbringhistoricalandstatisticalmaterialsuptodate。ButhisailingconditionandtheurgentneedtodothefinaleditingofVolumeIIinducedhimtogiveupthisscheme。Onlythemostnecessaryalterationsweretobemade，onlytheinsertionswhichtheFrenchedition（\"LeCapital。\"
ParKarlMarx。Paris，Lachâtre1873）alreadycontained，weretobeputin。
AmongthebooksleftbyMarxtherewasaGermancopywhichhehimselfhadcorrectedhereandthereandprovidedwithreferencestotheFrenchedition;alsoaFrenchcopyinwhichhehadindicatedtheexactpassagestobeused。Thesealterationsandadditionsareconfined，withfewexceptions，tothelast[Engl。ed。:secondlast]partofthebook:\"TheAccumulationofCapital。\"Heretheprevioustextfollowedtheoriginaldraftmorecloselythanelsewhere，whiletheprecedingsectionshadbeengoneovermorethoroughly。
Thestylewasthereforemorevivacious，moreofasinglecast，butalsomorecareless，studdedwithAnglicismsandinpartsunclear;thereweregapshereandthereinthepresentationofarguments，someimportantparticularsbeingmerelyalludedto。
Withregardtothestyle，Marxhadhimselfthoroughlyrevisedseveralsub—sectionsandtherebyhadindicatedtomehere，aswellasinnumerousoralsuggestions，thelengthtowhichIcouldgoineliminatingEnglishtechnicaltermsandotherAnglicisms。MarxwouldinanyeventhavegoneovertheadditionsandsupplementaltextsandhavereplacedthesmoothFrenchwithhisownterseGerman;Ihadtobesatisfied，whentransferringthem，withbringingthemintomaximumharmonywiththeoriginaltext。
Thusnotasinglewordwaschangedinthisthirdeditionwithoutmyfirmconvictionthattheauthorwouldhavealteredithimself。Itwouldneveroccurtometointroduceinto\"DasKapital\"thecurrentjargoninwhichGermaneconomistsarewonttoexpressthemselves？thatgibberishinwhich，forinstance，onewhoforcashhasothersgivehimtheirlabouriscalledalabour—giver（Arbeitgeber）andonewhoselabouristakenawayfromhimforwagesiscalledalabour—taker（Arbeitnehmer）。
InFrench，too，theword\"travail\"isusedinevery—daylifeinthesenseof\"occupation。\"ButtheFrenchwouldrightlyconsideranyeconomistcrazyshouldhecallthecapitalistadonneurdetravail（alabour—giver）
ortheworkerareceveurdetravail（alabour—taker）。
NorhaveItakenthelibertytoconverttheEnglishcoinsandmoneys，measuresandweightsusedthroughoutthetexttotheirnew—Germanequivalents。
WhenthefirsteditionappearedtherewereasmanykindsofmeasuresandweightsinGermanyastherearedaysintheyear。Besidesthereweretwokindsofmarks（theReichsmarkexistedatthetimeonlyintheimaginationofSoetbeer，whohadinventeditinthelatethirties），twokindsofguldenandatleastthreekindsoftaler，includingonecalledneuesZweidrittel。
Inthenaturalsciencesthemetricsystemprevailed，intheworldmarket？Englishmeasuresandweights。UndersuchcircumstancesEnglishunitsofmeasurewerequitenaturalforabookwhichhadtotakeitsfactualproofsalmostexclusivelyfromBritishindustrialrelations。Thelast—namedreasonisdecisiveevento—day，especiallybecausethecorrespondingrelationsintheworldmarkethavehardlychangedandEnglishweightsandmeasuresalmostcompletelycontrolpreciselythekeyindustries，ironandcotton。
InconclusionafewwordsonMarx’sartofquotation，whichissolittleunderstood。Whentheyarepurestatementsoffactordescriptions，thequotations，fromtheEnglishBluebooks，forexample，serveofcourseassimpledocumentaryproof。Butthisisnotsowhenthetheoreticalviewsofothereconomistsarecited。Herethequotationisintendedmerelytostatewhere，whenandbywhomaneconomicideaconceivedinthecourseofdevelopmentwasfirstclearlyenunciated。Heretheonlyconsiderationisthattheeconomicconceptioninquestionmustbeofsomesignificancetothehistoryofscience，thatitisthemoreorlessadequatetheoreticalexpressionoftheeconomicsituationofitstime。Butwhetherthisconceptionstillpossessesanyabsoluteorrelativevalidityfromthestandpointoftheauthororwhetheritalreadyhasbecomewhollypasthistoryisquiteimmaterial。Hencethesequotationsareonlyarunningcommentarytothetext，acommentaryborrowedfromthehistoryofeconomicscience，andestablishthedatesandoriginatorsofcertainofthemoreimportantadvancesineconomictheoryAndthatwasaverynecessarythinginasciencewhosehistorianshavesofardistinguishedthemselvesonlybytendentiousignorancecharacteristicofcareerists。ItwillnowbeunderstandablewhyMarx，inconsonancewiththeAfterwordtothesecondedition，onlyinveryexceptionaleaseshadoccasiontoquoteGermaneconomists。
Thereishopethatthesecondvolumewillappearinthecourseof1884。FrederickEngelsLondonNovember7，18831886PrefaceKarlMarxCapitalVolumeOne1886
PREFACETOTHE
ENGLISHEDITION
ThepublicationofanEnglishversionof\"DasKapital\"needsnoapology。
Onthecontrary，anexplanationmightbeexpectedwhythisEnglishversionhasbeendelayeduntilnow，seeingthatforsomeyearspastthetheoriesadvocatedinthisbookhavebeenconstantlyreferredto，attackedanddefended，interpretedandmisinterpreted，intheperiodicalpressandthecurrentliteratureofbothEnglandandAmerica。
When，soonaftertheauthor’sdeathin1883，itbecameevidentthatanEnglisheditionoftheworkwasreallyrequired，Mr。SamuelMoore，formanyyearsafriendofMarxandofthepresentwriter，andthanwhom，perhaps，nooneismoreconversantwiththebookitself，consentedtoundertakethetranslationwhichtheliteraryexecutorsofMarxwereanxioustolaybeforethepublic。ItwasunderstoodthatIshouldcomparetheMS。withtheoriginalwork，andsuggestsuchalterationsasImightdeemadvisable。
When，byandby，itwasfoundthatMr。Moore’sprofessionaloccupationspreventedhimfromfinishingthetranslationasquicklyaswealldesired，wegladlyacceptedDr。Aveling’soffertoundertakeaportionofthework;
atthesametimeMrs。Aveling，Marx’syoungestdaughter，offeredtocheckthequotationsandtorestoretheoriginaltextofthenumerouspassagestakenfromEnglishauthorsandBluebooksandtranslatedbyMarxintoGerman。
Thishasbeendonethroughout，withbutafewunavoidableexceptions。
ThefollowingportionsofthebookhavebeentranslatedbyDr。Aveling:
（I）ChaptersX。（TheWorking—Day），andXI。（RateandMassofSurplus—Value）;
（2）PartVI。（Wages，comprisingChaptersXIX。toXXII。）;（3）fromChapterXXIV。，Section4（Circumstancesthat&c。）totheendofthebook，comprisingthelatterpartofChapterXXIV。，。ChapterXXV。，andthewholeofPartVIII。（ChaptersXXVI。toXXXIII）;（4）thetwoAuthor’sprefaces。AlltherestofthebookhasbeendonebyMr。Moore。While，thus，eachofthetranslatorsisresponsibleforhisshareoftheworkonly，Ibearajointresponsibilityforthewhole。
ThethirdGermanedition，whichhasbeenmadethebasisofourworkthroughout，waspreparedbyme，in1883，withtheassistanceofnotesleftbytheauthor，indicatingthepassagesofthesecondeditiontobereplacedbydesignatedpassages，fromtheFrenchtextpublishedin1873。[1]ThealterationsthuseffectedinthetextofthesecondeditiongenerallycoincidedwithchangesprescribedbyMarxinasetofMS。instructionsforanEnglishtranslationthatwasplanned，abouttenyearsago，inAmerica，butabandonedchieflyforwantofafitandpropertranslator。ThisMS。
wasplacedatourdisposalbyouroldfriendMr。F。A。SorgeofHobokenN。J。ItdesignatessomefurtherinterpolationsfromtheFrenchedition;
but，beingsomanyyearsolderthanthefinalinstructionsforthethirdedition，Ididnotconsidermyselfatlibertytomakeuseofitotherwisethansparingly，andchieflyincaseswhereithelpedusoverdifficulties。
Inthesameway，theFrenchtexthasbeenreferredtoinmostofthedifficultpassages，asanindicatorofwhattheauthorhimselfwaspreparedtosacrificewhereversomethingofthefullimportoftheoriginalhadtobesacrificedintherendering。
Thereis，however，onedifficultywecouldnotsparethereader:theuseofcertaintermsinasensedifferentfromwhattheyhave，notonlyincommonlife，butinordinaryPoliticalEconomy。Butthiswasunavoidable。
Everynewaspectofascienceinvolvesarevolutioninthetechnicaltermsofthatscience。Thisisbestshownbychemistry，wherethewholeoftheterminologyisradicallychangedaboutonceintwentyyears，andwhereyouwillhardlyfindasingleorganiccompoundthathasnotgonethroughawholeseriesofdifferentnames。PoliticalEconomyhasgenerallybeencontenttotake，justastheywere，thetermsofcommercialandindustriallife，andtooperatewiththem，entirelyfailingtoseethatbysodoing，itconfineditselfwithinthenarrowcircleofideasexpressedbythoseterms。Thus，thoughperfectlyawarethatbothprofitsandrentarebutsub—divisions，fragmentsofthatunpaidpartoftheproductwhichthelabourerhastosupplytohisemployer（itsfirstappropriator，thoughnotitsultimateexclusiveowner），yetevenclassicalPoliticalEconomyneverwentbeyondthereceivednotionsofprofitsandrents，neverexaminedthisunpaidpartoftheproduct（calledbyMarxsurplus—product）initsintegrityasawhole，andthereforeneverarrivedataclearcomprehension，eitherofitsoriginandnature，orofthelawsthatregulatethesubsequentdistributionofitsvalue。Similarlyallindustry，notagriculturalorhandicraft，isindiscriminatelycomprisedinthetermofmanufacture，andtherebythedistinctionisobliteratedbetweentwogreatandessentiallydifferentperiodsofeconomichistory:
theperiodofmanufactureproper，basedonthedivisionofmanuallabour，andtheperiodofmodernindustrybasedonmachinery。Itis，however，self—
evidentthatatheorywhichviewsmoderncapitalistproductionasamerepassingstageintheeconomichistoryofmankind，mustmakeuseoftermsdifferentfromthosehabitualtowriterswholookuponthatformofproductionasimperishableandfinal。
Awordrespectingtheauthor’smethodofquotingmaynotbeoutofplace。
Inthemajorityofcases，thequotationsserve，intheusualway，asdocumentaryevidenceinsupportofassertionsmadeinthetext。Butinmanyinstances，passagesfromeconomicwritersarequotedinordertoindicatewhen，where，andbywhomacertainpropositionwasforthefirsttimeclearlyenunciated。
Thisisdoneincaseswherethepropositionquotedisofimportanceasbeingamoreorlessadequateexpressionoftheconditionsofsocialproductionandexchangeprevalentatthetime，andquiteirrespectiveofMarx’srecognition，orotherwise，ofitsgeneralvalidity。Thesequotations，therefore，supplementthetextbyarunningcommentarytakenfromthehistoryofthescience。
Ourtranslationcomprisesthefirstbookoftheworkonly。Butthisfirstbookisinagreatmeasureawholeinitself，andhasfortwentyyearsrankedasanindependentwork。Thesecondbook，editedinGermanbyme，in1885，isdecidedlyincompletewithoutthethird，whichcannotbepublishedbeforetheendof1887。WhenBookIII。hasbeenbroughtoutintheoriginalGerman，itwillthenbesoonenoughtothinkaboutpreparinganEnglisheditionofboth。
\"DasKapital\"isoftencalled，ontheContinent，\"theBibleoftheworking—class。\"
Thattheconclusionsarrivedatinthisworkaredailymoreandmorebecomingthefundamentalprinciplesofthegreatworking—classmovement，notonlyinGermanyandSwitzerland，butinFrance，inHollandandBelgium，inAmerica，andeveninItalyandSpain，thateverywheretheworking—classmoreandmorerecognises，intheseconclusions，themostadequateexpressionofitsconditionandofitsaspirations，nobodyacquaintedwiththatmovementwilldeny。AndinEngland，too，thetheoriesofMarx，evenatthismoment，exerciseapowerfulinfluenceuponthesocialistmovementwhichisspreadingintheranksof\"cultured\"peoplenolessthaninthoseoftheworking—class。
Butthatisnotall。ThetimeisrapidlyapproachingwhenathoroughexaminationofEngland’seconomicpositionwillimposeitselfasanirresistiblenationalnecessity。Theworkingoftheindustrialsystemofthiscountry，impossiblewithoutaconstantandrapidextensionofproduction，andthereforeofmarkets，iscomingtoadeadstop。
Free—tradehasexhausteditsresources;evenManchesterdoubtsthisitsquondameconomicgospel。[2]Foreignindustry，rapidlydeveloping，staresEnglishproductioninthefaceeverywhere，notonlyinprotected，butalsoinneutralmarkets，andevenonthissideoftheChannel。Whiletheproductivepowerincreasesinageometric，theextensionofmarketsproceedsatbestinanarithmeticratio。Thedecennialcycleofstagnation，prosperity，over—productionandcrisis，everrecurrentfrom1825to1867，seemsindeedtohaverunitscourse;butonlytolandusinthesloughofdespondofapermanentandchronicdepression。Thesighedforperiodofprosperitywillnotcome;
asoftenasweseemtoperceiveitsheraldingsymptoms，sooftendotheyagainvanishintoair。Meanwhile，eachsucceedingwinterbringsupafreshthegreatquestion，\"whattodowiththeunemployed\";butwhilethenumberoftheunemployedkeepsswellingfromyeartoyear，thereisnobodytoanswerthatquestion;andwecanalmostcalculatethemomentwhentheunemployedlosingpatiencewilltaketheirownfateintotheirownhands。Surely，atsuchamoment，thevoiceoughttobeheardofamanwhosewholetheoryistheresultofalifelongstudyoftheeconomichistoryandconditionofEngland，andwhomthatstudyledtotheconclusionthat，atleastinEurope，Englandistheonlycountrywheretheinevitablesocialrevolutionmightbeeffectedentirelybypeacefulandlegalmeans。HecertainlyneverforgottoaddthathehardlyexpectedtheEnglishrulingclassestosubmit，withouta\"pro—slaveryrebellion，\"tothispeacefulandlegalrevolution。FrederickEngelsNovember5，1886Footnotes[1]\"LeCapital，\"parKarlMarx。TraductiondeM。J。Roy，entierementreviseeparl’auteur。Paris。Lachatre。Thistranslation，especiallyinthelatterpartofthebook，containsconsiderablealterationsinandadditionstothetextofthesecondGermanedition。
[2]AtthequarterlymeetingoftheManchesterChamberofcommerce，heldthisafternoonawarmdiscussiontookplaceonthesubjectofFree—trade。A
resolutionwasmovedtotheeffectthat\"havingwaitedinvain40yearsforothernationstofollowtheFree—tradeexampleofEngland，thisChamberthinksthetimehasnowarrivedtoreconsiderthatposition。Theresolutionwasrejectedbyamajorityofoneonly，thefiguresbeing21for，and22
against。？EveningStandard，Nov。1，1886。
1890PrefaceKarlMarxCapitalVolumeOne1890
PREFACETOTHE
FOURTHGERMANEDITION
ThefourtheditionrequiredthatIshouldestablishinfinalform，asnearlyaspossible，bothtextandfootnotes。ThefollowingbriefexplanationwillshowhowIhavefulfilledthistask。
AfteragaincomparingtheFrencheditionandMarx’smanuscriptremarksIhavemadesomefurtheradditionstotheGermantextfromthattranslation。
Theywillbefoundonp。80（3rdedition，p。88）[presentedition，pp。
117—18]，pp。458—60（3rdedition，pp。509—10）[presentedition，pp。462—65]，[1]pp。547—51（3rdedition，p。600）[presentedition，pp。548—51]，pp。591—93
（3rdedition，p。644）[presentedition，587—89]andp。596（3rdedition，p。648）[presentedition，p。591]inNote1。IhavealsofollowedtheexampleoftheFrenchandEnglisheditionsbyputtingthelongfootnoteontheminersintothetext（3rdedition，pp。509—15;4thedition，pp。461—67）
[presentedition，pp。465—71]。Othersmallalterationsareofapurelytechnicalnature。
Further，Ihaveaddedafewmoreexplanatorynotes，especiallywherechangedhistoricalconditionsseemedtodemandthis。Alltheseadditionalnotesareenclosedinsquarebracketsandmarkedeitherwithmyinitialsor\"D。H。\"[2]
MeanwhileacompleterevisionofthenumerousquotationshadbeenmadenecessarybythepublicationoftheEnglishedition。ForthiseditionMarx’syoungestdaughter，Eleanor，undertooktocompareallthequotationswiththeiroriginals，sothatthosetakenfromEnglishsources，whichconstitutethevastmajority，aregiventherenotasre—translationsfromtheGermanbutintheoriginalEnglishformInpreparingthefourtheditionitwasthereforeincumbentuponmetoconsultthistext。Thecomparisonrevealedvarioussmallinaccuracies。Pagenumberswronglyindicated，duepartlytomistakesincopyingfromnote—books，andpartlytotheaccumulatedmisprintsofthreeeditions;misplacedquotationoromissionmarks，whichcannotbeavoidedwhenamassofquotationsiscopiedfromnote—bookextracts;hereandtheresomeratherunhappytranslationofaword;particularpassagesquotedfromtheoldParisnote—booksof1843—45，whenMarxdidnotknowEnglishandwasreadingEnglisheconomistsinFrenchtranslations，sothatthedoubletranslationyieldedaslightlydifferentshadeofmeaning，e。g。，inthecaseofSteuart，Ure，etc。，wheretheEnglishtexthadnowtobeused？andothersimilarinstancesoftriflinginaccuracyornegligence。Butanyonewhocomparesthefourtheditionwiththepreviousonescanconvincehimselfthatallthislaboriousprocessofemendationhasnotproducedthesmallestchangeinthebookworthspeakingof。Therewasonlyonequotationwhichcouldnotbetraced？theonefromRichardJones（4thedition，p。562，note47）。Marxprobablyslippedupwhenwritingdownthetitleoftheboop;[3]Alltheotherquotationsretaintheircogencyinfull，orhaveenhanceditduetotheirpresentexactform。
Here，however，Iamobligedtoreverttoanoldstory。
IknowofonlyonecaseinwhichtheaccuracyofaquotationgivenbyMarxhasbeencalledinquestion。ButastheissuedraggedbeyondhislifetimeIcannotwellignoreithere。
OnMarch7，1872，thereappearedintheBerlinConcordia，organoftheGermanManufacturers’Association，ananonymousarticleentitled:
\"HowKarlMarxQuotes。\"Itwashereasserted，withaneffervescenceofmoralindignationandunparliamentarylanguage，thatthequotationfromGladstone’sBudgetSpeechofApril16，1863（intheInauguralAddressoftheInternationalWorkingmen’sAssociation，1864，andrepeatedin\"Capital，\"
Vol。I，p。617，4thedition;p。671，3rdedition）[presentedition，p。
610]，hadbeenfalsified;thatnotasinglewordofthesentence:\"thisintoxicatingaugmentationofwealthandpower……is……entirelyconfinedtoclassesofproperty\"wastobefoundinthe（semi—official）stenographicreportinHansard。\"ButthissentenceisnowheretobefoundinGladstone’sspeech。Exactlytheoppositeisstatedthere。\"（Inboldtype）:\"Thissentence，bothinformandsubstance，isalieinsertedbyMarx。\"
Marx，towhomthenumberofConcordiawassentthefollowingMay，answeredtheanonymousauthorintheVolksstaatofJune1st。
Ashecouldnotrecallwhichnewspaperreporthehadusedforthequotation，helimitedhimselftociting，firsttheequivalentquotationfromtwoEnglishpublications，andthenthereportinTheTimes，accordingtowhichGladstonesays:
\"Thatisthestateofthecaseasregardsthewealthofthiscountry。
Imustsayforone，Ishouldlookalmostwithapprehensionandwithpainuponthisintoxicatingaugmentationofwealthandpower，ifitweremybeliefthatitwasconfinedtoclasseswhoareineasycircumstances。Thistakesnocognisanceatalloftheconditionofthelabouringpopulation。
TheaugmentationIhavedescribedandwhichisfounded，Ithink，uponaccuratereturns，isanaugmentationentirelyconfinedtoclassespossessedofproperty。\"
ThusGladstonesaysherethathewouldbesorryifitwereso，butitisso:thisintoxicatingaugmentationofwealthandpowerisentirelyconfinedtoclassesofproperty。Andastothesemi—officialHansard，Marxgoesontosay:\"Intheversionwhichheafterwardsmanipulated[zurechtgestümpert]，Mr。Gladstonewasastuteenoughtoobliterate[wegzupfuschen]thispassage，which，comingfromanEnglishChancelloroftheExchequer，wascertainlycompromising。This，bytheway，isatraditionalusageintheEnglishparliamentandnotaninventiongottenupbylittleLaskeragainstBebel。\"
Theanonymouswritergetsangrierandangrier。InhisanswerinConcordia，July4th，hesweepsasidesecond—handsourcesanddemurelysuggeststhatitisthe\"custom\"toquoteparliamentaryspeechesfromthestenographicreport;adding，however，thatTheTimesreport（whichincludesthe\"falsified\"sentence）andtheHansardreport（whichomitsit）are\"substantiallyincompleteagreement，\"whileTheTimesreportlikewisecontains\"theexactoppositetothatnotoriouspassageintheInauguralAddress。\"
ThisfellowcarefullyconcealsthefactthatTheTimesreportexplicitlyincludesthatself—same\"notoriouspassage，\"alongsideofitsalleged\"opposite。\"
Despiteallthis，however，theanonymousonefeelsthatheisstuckfastandthatonlysomenewdodgecansavehim。Thus，whilsthisarticlebristles，aswehavejustshown，with\"impudentmendacity\"andisinterlardedwithsuchedifyingtermsofabuseas\"badfaith，\"\"dishonesty，\"\"lyingallegation，\"
\"thatspuriousquotation，\"\"impudentmendacity，\"\"aquotationentirelyfalsified，\"\"thisfalsification，\"\"simplyinfamous，\"etc。，hefindsitnecessarytodiverttheissuetoanotherdomainandthereforepromises\"toexplaininasecondarticlethemeaningwhichwe（thenon—mendaciousanonymousone）attributetothecontentofGladstone’swords。\"Asifhisparticularopinion，ofnodecisivevalueasitis，hadanythingwhatevertodowiththematter。ThissecondarticlewasprintedinConcordiaonJuly11th。
MarxrepliedagainintheVolksstaatofAugust7thnowgivingalsothereportsofthepassageinquestionfromtheMorningStarandtheMorningAdvertiserofApril17，1863。AccordingtobothreportsGladstonesaidthathewouldlookwithapprehension，etc。，uponthisintoxicatingaugmentationofwealthandpowerifhebelievedittobeconfinedto\"classesineasycircumstances。\"Butthisaugmentationwasinfact\"entirelyconfinedtoclassespossessedofproperty。\"Sothesereportstooreproducedwordforwordthesentenceallegedtohavebeen\"lyinglyinserted。\"Marxfurtherestablishedoncemore，byacomparisonofTheTimesandtheHansardtexts，thatthissentence，whichthreenewspaperreportsofidenticalcontent，appearingindependentlyofoneanotherthenextmorning，provedtohavebeenreallyuttered，wasmissingfromtheHansardreport，revisedaccordingtothefamiliar\"custom，\"andthatGladstone，touseMarx’swords，\"hadafterwardsconjureditaway。\"
InconclusionMarxstatedthathehadnotimeforfurtherintercoursewiththeanonymousone。Thelatteralsoseemstohavehadenough，atanyrateMarxreceivednofurtherissuesofConcordia。
Withthisthematterappearedtobedeadandburied。True，onceortwicelaterontherereachedus，frompersonsintouchwiththeUniversityofCambridge，mysteriousrumoursofanunspeakableliterarycrimewhichMarxwassupposedtohavecommittedin\"Capital\"，butdespiteallinvestigationnothingmoredefinitecouldbelearned。Then，onNovember29，1883，eightmonthsafterMarx’sdeath，thereappearedinTheTimesaletterheadedTrinityCollege，Cambridge，andsignedSedleyTaylor，inwhichthislittleman，whodabblesinthemildestsortofco—operativeaffairs，seizinguponsomechancepretextorother，atlastenlightenedus，notonlyconcerningthosevagueCambridgerumours，butalsotheanonymousoneinConcordia。
\"Whatappearsextremelysingular，\"saysthelittlemanfromTrinityCollege，\"isthatitwasreservedforProfessorBrentano（thenoftheUniversityofBreslau，nowofthatofStrassburg）toexpose……thebadfaithwhichhadmanifestlydictatedthecitationmadefromMr。Gladstone’sspeechinthe[Inaugural]Address。HerrKarlMarx，who……attemptedtodefendthecitation，hadthehardihood，inthedeadlyshiftstowhichBrentano’smasterlyconductoftheattackspeedilyreducedhim，toassertthatMr。
Gladstonehad’manipulated’thereportofhisspeechinTheTimesofApril17，1863，beforeitappearedinHansard，inorderto’obliterate’
apassagewhich’wascertainlycompromising’foranEnglishChancelloroftheExchequer。OnBrentano’sshowing，byadetailedcomparisonoftexts，thatthereportsofTheTimesandofHansardagreedinutterlyexcludingthemeaningwhichcraftilyisolatedquotationhadputuponMr。Gladstone’swords，Marxwithdrewfromfurthercontroversyunderthepleaof’wantoftime。’\"