Letter from Adrian Teng, Assistant to the Director, to Angus Graham to inform that his book is now in the process of script marking for the printer and to give details of the printing process.

Letter from Adrian Teng, Assistant to the Director, to Angus Graham to enclose some specimen pages for Graham to examine.

Letter from Angus Graham to Adrian Teng, Publications Office, Chinese University of Hong Kong, to give his editorial comments on italics, indentations, quotations, printed area and section reference numbers.

Letter from Adrian Teng, Assistant to the Director, to Angus Graham to explain about a move of premises, arguments concerning the costs of the book and a proposal for its funding.

Letter from Angus Graham to Adrian Teng, Publications Office, Chinese University of Hong Kong, in reply to Teng's letter concerning funding. Graham informs that he has passed the letter to his Publications Committee. With this letter is a copy of one that Graham sent to the SOAS Publications Committee.

Letter from M.J. Daly, Publications Officer, SOAS, to Adrian Teng, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, to ask for further information regarding Graham's publication. With the letter is a compliment slip from the Publications Officer.

Letter from Christoph Harbsmeier to Angus Graham concerning Harbsmeier's relief on receiving Graham's letter concerning his review of Graham's book. He writes about points of disagreement on 'gu' and his unsurety regarding 'fan'.

Letter from Angus Graham to Christoph Harbsmeier to argue his case to the interpretation he has included in the book and to raise other points concerning the Mohist canon.

Letter from Angus Graham to Christoph Harbsmeier to explain that he would be unable to write a review of Harbsmeier's book because of his poor grasp of German language. He then continues to further his argument concerning causation begun in the previous letter. With this letter is one from Christoph Harbsmeier to Diana Matias concerning editorial corrections for his new book and claiming that Graham had agreed to do a review.

"Were there Chinese philosophers who distinguished the sentence from the name?" by A.C. Graham, - an article refuting Chad Hansen's rejection of this hypothesis as examined by Graham in Later Mohist Logic, Ethics and Science. Two copies, one typed with handwritten annotations, in English and Chinese, 5 pieces, one typed, 62 pieces which includes an "Appendix: The Separability and Distinguishability of Form and Content".