I have so far escaped any distinct attack of “blind staggers” such as I have usually had here and have been able to keep about my business every day. If the climate affects my health it is shown chiefly in an oppressive dislike to the prospect of a public struggle with Professor Sargent and his following and another with Waring. I hate public controversies; they always make me sick; and the more so in these cases because I have a friendship for Sargent and a pretty active neighborship; and Waring is a very old friend with whom I have been at times in close coöperation and for whom I have fought, who, in fact, is under some obligations to me, which makes a dispute with him a little harder. I hate a quarrel more than most men. Correspondingly, when forced to fight I want to win and am sure to be cast down more than I should be if I don’t win. I don’t know by what tribunal we are to be tried. I think by not either of the Park Commissions; probably in some way by the legislature. I take it that Waring is employed by Beacon Street capitalists. He has had a good deal of wordy fighting to do and likes it and is good at it. In fact I should think that both Waring and Sargent were of Irish blood. I feel that personally I am not in very good trim for fighting. All this only makes me the more anxious to make sure that we have a good cause and can make a good array for it.

Now, to say the truth, I have for some time been feeling that, in some way, I lost hold of the lower Charles River problem while I was in England and have not “caught on” since. I really had it in mind at one time to take Waring into council, and afterwards to discuss the question with the City Engineer, as I submitted to him my plan for Muddy River before saying anything about it to the Commissioners. One thing I should like to know presently is the view which the City Engineer and Howe take of the question. I think that we shall find them all right but I can not count upon it. Then, how shall we find the Engineer of your Commission? I think also that he will be right, but can’t count upon it. Really what we want to be sure of is that we have the weight of [851]expert testimony on our side, and we must not fail to have it through failure to look it up.

What shall be our position? What our fighting line? Can you not, before I get back, think out a brief? Of course your report will be the main object of attack. Also it will be our citadel and we must prepare outworks and do such skirmishing as we can in the open. Unfortunately it is to be a defensive engagement on our part. I only got the news last night and have not much deliberated upon it, but the question occurs to me whether there is not an essential analogy between our Charles River plan and our plans for the Back Bay Fens and Muddy River? That is not yet a full success but on the main point it is so, and it promises to be more so. It is generally regarded as successful. Think out in what degree the problems are analogous and if you can, before my return, write out a brief of our case that we may discuss it and if it promises well be prepared to present it to our counsel before he hurriedly and perfunctorily shapes a course for himself. I think that I am on pretty good terms with the Corporation Counsel who, I suppose, will appear for us and will examine the witnesses against us.