Again, in June, Maynard returned to this subject, saying that men must become “strong enough to let the other fellow live and prosper, without fearing him.” After mentioning “fear of what may come, or lust for what may be seized,” as motives making for destruction, he added: “Neither is constructive or progressive, and neither can win in the end.” “We have purpose to progress beyond the vision of man,” he went on, “but even material progress, to be constructive and permanent, must be governed by a vision beyond the day. We are trying to extend that vision. “Co-operation in individual enterprise has succeeded. Co-operation in national enterprise would succeed no less. More and more, men are recognizing the value of united effort in commercial enterprise, however long it took the truth to dawn. Must other centuries pass, other wars be fought, other dynasties rise and fall, before the larger truth ushers in a new day? Will co-operation in business, co-operation in war, teach them to study and practise co-operation in world welfare and progress? Will they learn that it is not only in war that a weakened Belgium means an endangered England, that a hungry France means short rations in America, that a link weakened means the chain weak? “How many times must this premise be demonstrated before the argument is carried to its logical conclusion, and national co-operation, free and voluntary, provide for the good of one by protecting and developing all? “This is not a Utopian fantasy. It is common sense.” XIII Talking about the Lessons one day, Mr. Kendal mentioned his impression that Zoroaster had said something approaching the first one in theory, and then asked, a whimsical gleam in his eye: “Mary, has Professor James said anything about Zoroaster in this connection?” “Manzie, Mr. James has no philosophical library here to refer to,” was the prompt retort. She told us, however, that he would soon come himself to talk to this former pupil of his, adding a characteristic glint of humor in the assurance that he would then give “a demonstration of a philosopher simplified to a force.” A night or two afterward (May 13th), she announced: “Manzie, here is Mr. James.” There was a brief delay, and when the pencil moved again, it was with a changed application of force and a new movement, the first words being personal. Referring to an early period in his own investigation of psychic phenomena, he said: