For the past few weeks (I think it's been), I've been keying in dozens of letters I wrote in my past life as Mathew Franklin Whittier, from New York City, to the editor of the Boston "Chronotype." Just now, I finished keying the last one.
Mathew had adopted the most revealing signature I've ever seen him use. He simply "x-ed out" his first initial, to sign with "X.F.W." He wrote as often as two or three times per week, from end July, 1847 until the third week of June, 1848, or about a year. At this time he briefly picked up with a new series--signed it once "B.," then thought better of it and left the rest unsigned. He soon moved to Philadelphia, and then back to Boston. Apparently, he had started out in some kind of mercantile business, perhaps selling or trading goods wholesale. For a portion of 1848 he traveled to a national anti-slavery convention (I'd have to check, I think it was in Cincinnati); then spent some time under cover in New Orleans, working as a reporter (as he had in 1846), and returned to Boston. In 1849, I think, he got a job as a traveling postal inspector, establishing his home base first in New York City, then briefly in Philadelphia, and finally, back in Boston.
While in New York City, he submitted a few pieces to the New York "Mirror." He also wrote several one-offs, plus a lengthy series of several chapters, for the humor magazine, "Yankee Doodle."
Before he moved to New York, he spent some time in Newburyport, Mass., very near his hometown of Haverhill. There, he wrote once with the name of the street he was on, "High Street," making some obvious references to himself as the author. In Newburyport, and also in Boston, he was also using his middle initial, "F."
This, in a nutshell, is what I've determined from keying in all these pieces. There's no question about his authorship, at all; and I say that, having immersed myself in a close study of his work for the past nine years.
I'm at the point, now, where I've flat-out proven (I know it's not in the dictionary, but "proven" sounds so much better than "proved" in that context) Mathew's identity, for work that was questionable, before. Mathew was cagey, when he was concerned about being identified by pro-slavery forces. For example, in his unsigned series after he had stopped using "X.F.W.," he begins describing his attendance at local meetings of the American Anti-Slavery Society, and he also visits a black-run organization spearheading the Underground Railroad. Because his activities were so dangerous--and it was so dangerous to report them--he would not only adopt more impenetrable pseudonyms, he would occasionally insert a false fact about himself, to throw people off. He might say that he had gone to school at the wrong town; or that he owned a large farm; or that he was old.
But all those researcher's headaches--the stumbling blocks that Mathew deliberately inserted into his letters, to throw off his enemies--have been figured out, in context. I was right--all of the letters I had felt were his, were, in fact, his.
This wouldn't mean anything to anybody, unless I could explain to them the chain of implications. I've tried to set this out in previous entries. Always I think, if only I could get through to people--if only I could explain this adequately--suddenly I would see book sales. I'm unlikely to sell enough books to make a financial difference. The significance of books sales would be that people finally took me seriously. Because that's what it's going to take. No-one who is secretly thinking to themselves, "I don't believe this," is going to buy my books. And the converse is also true--given how significant my conclusions are, anyone who took them seriously would almost have to buy these books.
Therefore, I have a very handy gauge of who takes me seriously, and who doesn't. I've sold only one copy of my e-book in the last year or two, and that was to a leader in the paranormal field to whom I wrote, suggesting it. Not a single person has read this blog, and taken me seriously.
But what my findings mean, is that Mathew Franklin Whittier was, in fact, writing this letter series, under "X.F.W." Once we accept that, the dominoes start to fall. Some of the dominoes that fall, are, that Mathew was working as an undercover agent, and specifically, a liaison, for William Lloyd Garrison. It was he, not Ossian Dodge (as historians will tell you) who was writing as "Quails" for the Boston "Weekly Museum." That means, when you see this writer report having met with Alonzo Lewis, and Elihu Burrit, and singer Jenny Lind, and the President, and several governors, and other heads of state in Washington, and Daniel Webster (two weeks after the passing of the Fugitive Slave Law), and then going overseas and visiting Victor Hugo at his home--these weren't social calls. He met with Lewis and Burrrit as fellow abolitionists. He met with Lind as a potential donor. He met with the others as a representative of Garrison.
Once we have Mathew's unique style in "X.F.W." and his subsequent NY letter series, "Gossip from Gotham," and we have him seeing Garrison, and Wendell Phillips, and other abolitionists speak at these meetings, we also have him as "Quails." Once we have him as "Quails," we have him again, in 1856/57, as "J.O.B." And reading between the lines, when "J.O.B." travels with his "cherished brother," a recent resident of Detroit, this is black abolitionist William Lambert, head of the Underground Railroad there.
So all the pieces fall into place. Mathew's political activities are just one thread of the story, however. Another theme has to do with his romance, grief, and subsequent spirit-reunion with his soul-mate, Abby (which he couldn't sustain, in that lifetime). A third has to do with unveiling the dozens and dozens of pseudonyms he used; and a fourth, related to the third, is reclaiming his work that was claimed or stolen by other authors. Where people balk is where I can prove, to a pretty high standard of certainty, that Mathew and Abby were the original co-authors of "A Christmas Carol"; and that Mathew wrote both "The Raven" and "Annabel Lee" after her death. At last count, I believe I discovered two thefts of Abby's poetry, and something like 12 thefts of Mathew's work.
Finally, there is the reincarnation case, itself. It, too, is proven to a very high degree of certainty. But I can't just dip into a nine-year study and haul out facts that will convince people who have their mental heels dug in. For one thing, when people like this are presented with proof, as a last-ditch resort, they can simply "check out" and refuse to believe it, on an irrational basis. They can't lose. The kid who is prepared to knock all the chess pieces to the floor, can win even when he's checkmated.
I still have some of Mathew's works to key in, which were discovered in the process of typing up these letters. That may take me a few more days, or if I go easy on myself, a week or two. Next, it all has to be proofread (another few weeks), and archived. Then, I guess, I'm done. Really, it's a vast, well-organized, searchable archive of the work done by the real authors of "A Christmas Carol" and "The Raven." One would think the books describing the research and setting forth the results, would be worth $12, and $7 for the sequel. And it proves reincarnation, which is absolutely essential (if not sufficient, in and of itself) for the survival of mankind. Because we must get past philosophical Materialism; and we must free Christianity from the training wheels of the one life/eternal heaven or hell lie.
We must, because these things are dragging us into a hole of meaninglessness and despair.
And you probably think I do this as some kind of hobby, like antique toy collecting.
These days, I don't have a commercial TV feed, but I have to watch it when I visit my clients. What a bunch of superficial crap! It's like a sugar-coated shit bar, almost all of it. And then, I've been trying the TED and TEDx talks on YouTube. One lady starts out relating that she thought her house was haunted, only to discover that she had a gas leak which would have killed her. She became a paranormal investigator, and claims that 100% percent of the cases she has investigated, had a normal explanation.
Well, I honor people's personal learnings, you know. But anyone who has a 100% rate of normal explanations, has either chosen their cases for that result, or has jammed the round peg of a normal explantion into the square hole of the evidence.
How fascinating, that someone can make a flagrant statement of doctrine to a intelligent audience, and everyone claps and cheers as though it's rational--when any rational person who thought about it, would know it isn't. Nobody gets 100% results.
If you don't believe me, at this point, after years of blogging with convincing, rational evidence (including this blog, itself, which would be very difficult to write if I were delusional), you're on Channel Z. You just don't know it. That's fine. You can live there if you want to.
Incidentally, have you read about the Mexican-American War in the 1840's, when you took history? Did you know that the real patriots, the sane, compassionate, intelligent people of this country, fought that imperialistic nightmare with everything they had, in the press? Mathew was one of them. Nobody listened. America went ahead and took land from Mexico anyway, on a pretext. I vaguely remember this being covered in my Civics classes. I don't remember reading one dissenting opinion. Actually, the entire thing was kind of glossed over, I think. Either that, or my eyes were glassing over. But had they read out some of Mathew's scathing satires, I think I would have perked up.
Your textbooks told you that the paranormal was a "craze," or a "phase." They lied to you. All of your textbooks were produced on Channel Z.
Stephen Sakellarios, M.S.
Music opening this page: "Channel Z," by The B-52's,
from the album, "Cosmic Thing"