last night. And before I say anything further I may tell you that I
COULD NOT lay them aside, but was obliged to go on with them in my
bedroom until I got into a very ghostly state indeed. This morning I
have taken them again and have gone through them with the utmost
attention.

Of the beauty and power of the writing I say not a word, or of its
originality and boldness, or of its quite extraordinary constructive
skill. I confine myself solely to your misgiving, and to the question
whether there is any sufficient foundation for it.

On the last head I say, without the faintest hesitation, most decidedly
there is NOT sufficient foundation for it. I do not share it in the
least. I believe that the readers who have here given their minds (or
perhaps had any to give) to those strange psychological mysteries in
ourselves, of which we are all more or less conscious, will accept your
wonders as curious weapons in the armoury of fiction, and will submit
themselves to the Art with which said weapons are used. Even to that
class of intelligence the marvellous addresses itself from a very strong
position; and that class of intelligence is not accustomed to find the
marvellous in such very powerful hands as yours. On more imaginative
readers the tale will fall (or I am greatly mistaken) like a spell. By
readers who combine some imagination, some scepticism, and some
knowledge and learning, I hope it will be regarded as full of strange
fancy and curious study, startling reflections of their own thoughts and
speculations at odd times, and wonder which a master has a right to
evoke. In the last point lies, to my thinking, the whole case. If you
were the Magician's servant instead of the Magician, these potent
spirits would get the better of you; but you _are_ the Magician, and
they don't, and you make them serve your purpose.

Occasionally in the dialogue I see an expression here and there which
might--always solely with a reference to your misgiving--be better away;
and I think that the vision, to use the word for want of a better--in
the museum, should be made a little less abstruse. I should not say
that, if the sale of the journal was below the sale of _The Times_
newspaper; but as it is probably several thousands higher, I do. I would
also suggest that after the title we put the two words--A ROMANCE. It is
an absurdly easy device for getting over your misgiving with the
blockheads, but I think it would be an effective one. I d