Richard Proctor was a man of some liberality. After a while we shall have a letter, which once upon a time we'd have called delirious--don't know that we could read such a thing now, for the first time, without incredulous laughter--which Mr. Proctor permitted to be published in _Knowledge_. But a dark, unknown world that could cast a shadow upon a large part of the moon, perhaps extending far beyond the limb of the moon; a shadow as deep as the shadow of this earth-- Too much for Mr. Proctor's politeness. I haven't read what he said, but it seems to have been a little coarse. Russell says that Proctor "freely used" his name in the _Echo_, of March 14, 1879, ridiculing this observation which had been made by Russell as well as Hirst. If it hadn't been Proctor, it would have been someone else--but one notes that the attack came out in a newspaper. There is no discussion of this remarkable subject, no mention in any other astronomic journal. The disregard was almost complete--but we do note that the columns of the _Observatory_ were open to Russell to answer Proctor. In the answer, I note considerable intermediateness. Far back in 1879, it would have been a beautiful positivism, if Russell had said-- "There was a shadow on the moon. Absolutely it was cast by an unknown body." According to our religion, if he had then given all his time to the maintaining of this one stand, of course breaking all friendships, all ties with his fellow astronomers, his apotheosis would have occurred, greatly assisted by means well known to quasi-existence when its compromises and evasions, and phenomena that are partly this and partly that, are flouted by the definite and uncompromising. It would be impossible in a real existence, but Mr. Russell, of quasi-existence, says that he did resist the conviction; that he had said that one could "hardly resist"; and most of his resentment is against Mr. Proctor's thinking that he had not resisted. It seems too bad--if apotheosis be desirable. The point in Intermediatism here is: Not that to adapt to the conditions of quasi-existence is to have what is called success in quasi-existence, but is to lose one's soul-- But is to lose "one's" chance of attaining soul, self, or entity. One indignation quoted from Proctor interests us: "What happens on the moon may at any time happen to this earth." Or: That is just the teaching of this department of Advanced Astronomy: That Russell and Hirst saw the sun eclipsed relatively to the moon by a vast dark body: That many times have eclipses occurred relatively to this earth, by vast, dark bodies: That there have been many eclipses that have not been recognized as eclipses by scientific kindergartens.