world will be the better for containing so much difficult polemic reading the less. I admit that your remarks are penetrating, and let air into the joints of the subject; but I respectfully submit that they are not _called for_ in the interests of the final triumph of truth. That will come by the way of displacement of error, quite effortlessly. I can't help suspecting that you unduly magnify the influence of Bradleyan Absolutism on the undergraduate mind. Taylor is the only fruit so far--at least within my purview. One practical point: I don't quite like your first paragraph, and wonder if it be too late to have the references to me at least expunged. I can't recognize the truth of the ten-years' change of opinion about my "Will to Believe." I don't find anyone--not even my dearest friends, as Miller and Strong--one whit persuaded. Taylor's and Hobhouse's attacks are of recent date, etc. Moreover, the reference to Bradley's relation to me in this article is too ironical not to seem a little "nasty" to some readers; therefore out with it, if it be not too late. See how different our methods are! All that Humanism needs now is to make applications of itself to special problems. Get a school of youngsters at work. Refutations of error should be left to the rationalists alone. They are a stock function of that school.... I'm fearfully _tired_, but expect the summer to get me right again. Affectionately thine, W. J. XVI 1907-1909 _The Last Period (III)--Hibbert Lectures in Oxford--The Hodgson Report_ The story of the remaining years is written so fully in the letters themselves as to require little explanation.