The newspaper reports are fairly correct but not at all ample. The reporters write out their own report of the testimony and their own story of the trialEditorial 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.. Only one like myself who is on the insideEditorial Note: On January 17, 1901, Mary Baker Eddy had requested that Edward A. Kimball assist in representing her in the Woodbury suit. See L00267. of the whole history can understand how thoroughly Peabody was beaten yesterday on the generalship of the case. All of his hopes and threats to the effect that they would expose Christian Science and reveal its unfavorable workings, were utterly shattered yesterday because the Court ruled over and over again that all of those outside matters t had no relation to the issue in hand at all. Peabody was in a state of almost constant discomfiture. He did not get anything of the slightest value to his case during the entire day, but on the other hand damaged it. He is managing his case very badly. He has none of the sympathy of the Jury and our lawyers have secured it at once. I do not think that the case will last more than ten days. When I see you, I may be able to explain ever so many things which do not appear in the paper but which would be of great interest to you.
We are all feeling a sense of great relief now that we have learned what the plans of the plaintiff are and that they will be largely circumvented by the Court.
I send by this bearer a letter to Miss Shannon in relation to a witness in MontrealEditorial Note: Montreal, Quebec, Canada. If she does not speak to you about it, please call her attention to it. The plaintiff has a very bad look. I feel quite confident that she will inevitably betray herself.