To A. N. Pleshcheyev, 6 October 1889. Moscow.

Chekhov writes from Moscow to Alexei Nikolaevich Pleshcheev (1825-1893), the poet and senior editor at Severny Vestnik (The Northern Herald), the journal that had been publishing Chekhov’s more serious fiction since 1888. The letter is carried by hand rather than sent by post: the bearer, one P. M. Svobodny, is entrusted with proof corrections of a piece Chekhov calls his "proclamation" (прокламация) – almost certainly proof of a story or article destined for the journal’s November issue, to be forwarded on to "Anna Mikhailovna," i.e. Anna Mikhailovna Evreinova, the journal’s editor/publisher of record.

The letter is short and businesslike but moves through several distinct threads in quick succession: (1) the errand with Svobodny and the proof; (2) an apology, gracefully accepted, for an earlier request about payment/fee terms that had evidently irritated Pleshcheev – Chekhov promises not to raise money matters again; (3) a favor for a student acquaintance, Gurland, whose poem Chekhov forwards with a joking warning that its opening lines use the word "navoz" (manure) twice, which he considers poor material for verse; (4) a proud, self-deprecating announcement that he has finished a comedy (almost certainly early work toward what would become The Wood Demon, first performed in December 1889) after an exhausting stretch of work, and that he now plans two weeks of rest; (5) a question about whether Vladimir Korolenko has sent material for the magazine, with a remark that the November and December issues need to be well stocked; (6) thanks for Pleshcheev’s editorial corrections to the proof, with an aside naming his only two "correctors" as Pleshcheev and Alexei Suvorin, and a wistful mention that Dmitry Grigorovich (an earlier mentor/patron) used to serve that role but no longer does; (7) a request that Svobodny report on Moscow weather in person; (8) closing greetings to Pleshcheev’s household; (9) a postscript joking that if Pleshcheev is short of money he should have gone into censorship work instead – a wry dig at the better pay (and implied corruption/ease) of state censorship posts compared to honest literary editing.