I hear of the projected grand theosophical Conversazione — and if at that time you are still theosophists, of course it is better that it should be in your house. And now, I would like to say to you a few parting words. Notwithstanding the painful knowledge I have of your chief and almost one defect — one that you have yourself confessed to in your letter to me, I wish you to believe me, my dearest Brother, when I say that my regard and respect for you in all other things is great and very sincere. Nor am I likely to forget, whatever happens, that for many months past, without expecting or asking for any reward or advantage for yourself you have worked and toiled, day after day, for the good of the Society and of humanity at large in the only hope of doing good. And, I pray you, good Brother, not to regard as "reproaches" any simple remarks of mine. If I have argued with you, it was because I was forced to do so, since the Chohan regarded them (your suggestions) as something quite unprecedented; claims, in his position, not to be listened to for one moment. Though you may now regard the arguments directed against you in the light of "undeserved reproaches," yet you may recognise some day, that you were really "wanting unreasonable concessions." The fact that, your pressing proposals, that you — (not anyone else) — should, if possible be allowed to acquire some phenomenal gift, which would be used in convincing others, — though it may be accepted as standing simply, in its dead letter sense "as a suggestion for (my) consideration" and that it, "in no way constituted a claim" — yet for anyone who could read beneath the surface of the lines, it appeared as a definite claim, indeed. I have all your letters, and there is hardly one that does not breathe the spirit of a determined claim, a deserved request, i.e., a demand of that which is due and the rejection of which gives you a right to feel yourself wronged. I doubt not, that such was not your intention in penning them. But such was your secret thought and that innermost feeling was always detected by the Chohan, whose name you several times used, and who took note of it. You undervalue what you got so far on the ground of inconsistency and incompleteness? I have asked you: take notes of the former, beginning with the inconsistencies — as you regard them — in our first arguments pro and con the existence of God and ending with the supposed contradictions in respect to "accidents" and "suicides." Send them to me and I will prove to you that there is not one for him who knows well the whole doctrine. It is strange to accuse one in the full possession of his brains that on Wednesday he wrote one thing, and on Saturday or Sunday next had forgotten all about it and contradicted himself point blank! I do not think even our H.P.B. with her ridiculously impaired memory could be guilty of such a complete oblivion. In your opinion "it is not worth while to be working merely for the second class minds," and you propose following out the line of such an argument, either to get all, or leave off the work entirely if you cannot get out immediately "a scheme of philosophy, which will bear the scrutiny and criticism of such men as Herbert Spencer." To this I reply that you sin against the multitudes. It is not among the Herbert Spencers and Darwins or the John Stuart Mills that the millions of Spiritualists now going intellectually to the dogs are to be found, but it is they who form the majority of the "second class minds." If you had but patience, you would have received all that you would like to get out of our speculative philosophy — meaning by "speculative" that it would have to remain such, of course, to all but adepts. But really, my dear brother, you are not overloaded with that virtue. However I still fail to see why you should be disheartened with the situation.