I have been in touch with a series of events in Americalately, and can vouch for the facts as much as any man can vouchfor facts which did not occur to himself. I have not the leastdoubt in my own mind that they are true, and a more remarkabledouble proof of the continuity of life has, I should think,seldom been published. A book has recently been issued byHarpers, of New York, called "The Seven Purposes." In this bookthe authoress, Miss Margaret Cameron, describes how she suddenlydeveloped the power of automatic writing. She was not aSpiritualist at the time. Her hand was controlled and she wrotea quantity of matter which was entirely outside her own knowledgeor character. Upon her doubting whether her sub-conscious selfmight in some way be producing the writing, which waspartly done by planchette, the script was written upside down andfrom right to left, as though the writer was seated opposite. Such script could not possibly be written by the lady herself. Upon making enquiry as to who was using her hand, the answer camein writing that it was a certain Fred Gaylord, and that hisobject was to get a message to his mother. The youth was unknownto Miss Cameron, but she knew the family and forwarded themessage, with the result that the mother came to see her,examined the evidence, communicated with the son, and finally,returning home, buried all her evidences of mourning, feelingthat the boy was no more dead in the old sense than if he werealive in a foreign country.There is the first proof of preternatural agency, since MissCameron developed so much knowledge which she could not havenormally acquired, using many phrases and ideas which werecharacteristic of the deceased. But mark the sequel. Gaylordwas merely a pseudonym, as the matter was so private that thereal name, which we will put as Bridger, was not disclosed. Afew months after the book was published Miss Cameronreceived a letter from a stranger living a thousand miles away. This letter and the whole correspondence I have seen. Thestranger, Mrs. Nicol, says that as a test she would like to askwhether the real name given as Fred Gaylord in the book is notFred Bridger, as she had psychic reasons for believing so. MissCameron replied that it was so, and expressed her great surprisethat so secret and private a matter should have been correctlystated. Mrs. Nicol then explained that she and her husband, bothconnected with journalism and both absolutely agnostic, haddiscovered that she had the power of automatic writing. Thatwhile, using this power she had received communicationspurporting to come from Fred Bridger whom they had known in life,and that upon reading Miss Cameron's book they had received fromFred Bridger the assurance that he was the same person as theFred Gaylord of Miss Cameron.Now, arguing upon these facts, and they would appear mostundoubtedly to be facts, what possible answer can the materialistor the sceptic give to the assertion that they are a double proofof the continuity of personality and the possibility ofcommunication? Can any reasonable system of telepathy explainhow Miss Cameron discovered the intimate points characteristic ofyoung Gaylord? And then, how are we afterwards, by any possibletelepathy, to explain the revelation to Mrs. Nicol of theidentity of her communicant, Fred Bridger, with the Fred Gaylordwho had been written of by Miss Cameron. The case for returnseems to me a very convincing one, though I contend now, as ever,that it is not the return of the lost ones which is of suchcogent interest as the message from the beyond which they bearwith them.