marry--that the bride and her relatives were at the appointed hour at the church--that no bridegroom was there--that messengers sent to enquire for him brought back the frightful intelligence, that he was no more. He had suddenly expired. My dear Eusebius, with this story I terminate my long letter. Ruminate upon the contents. Revolved in your mind, they will yield a rich harvest of thought. I hope to be at the reaping. Ever yours, &c. [Footnote 34: The story given by Eusebius is very probably of his own manufacture. It is this. Some years ago, when all the world were mad upon lotteries, the cook of a middle-aged gentleman drew from his hands the savings of some years. Her master, curious to know the cause, learned that she had repeatedly dreamed that a certain number was a great prize, and she had bought it. He called her a fool for her pains, and never omitted an occasion to tease her upon the subject. One day, however, the master saw in the newspaper, or at his bookseller's in the country town, that _the_ number was actually the L.20,000 prize. Cook is called up, a palaver ensues--had known each other many years, loth to part, &c.--in short, he proposes and is accepted, but insists on marriage being celebrated next morning. Married they were; and, as the carriage took them from the church they enjoy the following dialogue. "Well, Molly--two happy events in one day. You have married, I trust, a good husband. You have something else--but first let me ask you where you have locked up your lottery-ticket." Molly, who thought her master was only bantering her again on the old point, cried--"Don't ye say no more about it. I thought how it would be, and that I never should hear the end on't, so I sold it to the baker of our village for a guinea profit. So you need never be angry with me again about that."] [Footnote 35: Supposing mesmerism true in its facts, one knows not to what power to ascribe it--a good or an evil. It is difficult to imagine it possible that a good power would allow one human being such immense influence over others. All are passive in the hands of the mesmeriser. Let us take the case related by Miss Martineau. She willed, and the water drunk by the young girl _was_ wine, at another time it _was_ porter. These were the effects. Now, supposing Miss M. had willed it to be a poison, if her statement is strictly true, the girl would have been poisoned. We need no hemlock, if this be so--and the agent must be quite beyond the reach of justice. A coroner's inquest here would be of little avail.