Yours of even dateEditorial Note: This letter is not extant. was brought to me this morning and I confess I find difficulty in understanding what you desire. I have revised the interrogatoriesEditorial Note: This is a reference to a libel suit against Mary Baker Eddy by Josephine Curtis Woodbury. The suit was filed on July 31, 1899 and concluded in Eddy’s favor on June 5, 1901. and sent them to you by messenger this morning and also by express to Mr. Elder. I asked you to look them over and return them to me with your suggestions tomorrow As Written: to-morrow morning. I have asked Mr. Elder to call me by telephone this afternoon or tomorrow As Written: to-morrow morning, for the purpose of arranging a conference with him on Saturday. As I have stated to you, I think these interrogatories when revised should be filed not later than next Monday.

With reference to one portion of your letter, I have to say that the interrogatories have not been exposed to anyoneAs Written:any one in the office and that Mrs. Woodbury cannot know of them through any means or agency with which I am acquainted. When she receives the interrogatories from the clerk of the Superior Court, in which they will be filed (unless you otherwise direct), they will be new to her in my judgment.

During the last three or four weeks, I have taken from my other business ten days or more of time for a careful examination of the material furnished me by your people. I have done for you that which it was my duty to do, namely, put your case in the way of preparation and advancement. After this work has been done and the interrogatories ready (excepting a final revision) for filing, I now receive today As Written: to-day your letter asking me to "strictly heed" what you write and that if, as you hope, "Mrs. W. does not know your interrogatories, then drop them, go no further with my consent, in that direction."

You also say "I need not write more nor see you, I know what I say is correct."

You also say "through mental silent suggestion, according to hypnotism, she can impress the minds of my counsel to show their hand, as she used to call it".

By the last statement, I infer that you think Mrs. W. has, "through mental silent suggestion" influenced my mind (as well as that of Mr. Elder) to show our hand,- that is, file the interrogatories,- and when you say "go no further with my consent in that direction", I understand you to instruct me that I am not to see Mr. Elder on your behalf about filing these interrogatories and that the same are not to be filed. Is this what you really mean? If it is, I ought to advise you that you should have counsel whose mental balance cannot be influenced to mismanage your case through the mental silent suggestion of a woman like Madam Woodbury.

I, as one of your counsel, am not conscious of being influenced by Mrs. W. to take any action prejudicial to the interests of the case which I, with Mr. Elder, have been employed to defend. I know of but one way to protect your interests and that is to deal with this plaintiff's case in the same way and by the same methods that I would deal with any plaintiff's case in which such a vicious and selfish attack has been made on my client as Mrs. Woodbury has made on you.

From a careful review of the whole case, I am satisfied that these interrogatories ought to be revised and filed. I base that belief upon some small knowledge and the experience which I have acquired in other litigation. I believe your case will be harmed by a failure to proceed in the way we have recently marked out, but I must remember that it is your case, and having advised you as fully and frankly as it is possible to do by written words, I shall conform to any definite instruction which you may see fit to give.

Mr. MannEditorial Note: Probably Joseph G. Mann is waiting for this letter and I will not undertake to write further or give in detail the reasons which lead me to believe that the withholding of the interrogatories would be unwise.