Re: Cipher letter
Jul 23, 2007 08:32 PM
by Pablo Sender
I've read the trial he underwent, and as far as I remember that was
not what he declared. Have you or anybody checked Tillet's
I think I already said that part of the letter was probably written
by him, because he acknowledged that he recognized part of it, but
not in its present form. What I think it happens is that someone got
the original letter and altered it. And I've certainly read that it
You have to remember that the legal trial declared him innocent.
And there is also another thing: I'm not trying to do any "historical
assertion". I didn't do any systematic research. When I read the
cases, it wasn't intended to do any report of it, so I have the
general idea, in it is possible that some details are wrong, and that
I arrived to that conclusion because other facts I don't remember in
this moment. Therefore, I'm sharing what I read, as a personal
commentary, and I'm do it because you are asking me about these
questions, since according to you nobody want to do it. I can stop
answering right now, because I don't want to convince anybody. I'm
only presenting the facts as I sincerely consider them.
--- In email@example.com, gregory@... wrote:
> Some advice for Pablo: if you are going to make historical
> (like Leadbeater said the cipher letter was a forgery, and that the
> was typewritten) at least check your facts.
> This is the text of the letter:
> My own darling boy, there is no need for you to write anything in
> for no one but I ever sees your letters. But it is better for me to
> in cipher about some of the most important matters?"
> [here follows some unimportant content]
> "Turning to other matters, I am glad to hear of the rapid growth
> strength of the results. Twice a week is permissible, but you will
> discover what brings the best effect."
> [Then follows the passage in cipher which translates as:]
> "The meaning of the sign is urethra. Spontaneous manifestations are
> undesirable and should be discouraged. If it comes without help, he
> rubbing more often, but not too often or he will not come well.
> happen when you are asleep? Tell me fully. Glad sensation is so
> Thousand kisses darling."
> Leadbeater was asked whether he had written the letter, but never
> (a) that he had not written it or parts of it, or (b) that it or
> it were a forgery. He stated that he "recognized it" but "did not
> in its present form", whatever that may have meant. Given that he
> shown a legally attested typed copy of the original handwritten
> this may have been a somewhat careful reply. Presumably if
> not written the letter, there was a simple response to be given. If
> someone accused me of writing such a letter to a teenage boy (and I
> not done so!) I would clearly, precisely and unequivocally deny
that I had
> done so.
> When Miss Edith Ward, in a circular letter to the British Section
> TS, called upon him to admit or deny that he had written the letter
> the legally attested copy), Leadbeater refused to do so, saying
> was a "gross impertinence" to suggest that he should!
> Dr Gregory Tillett
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application