THOUGHT-READING

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 101, 22 January 1921, Page 7

THOUGHT-READING

A TEST PROSECUTION DECISION DELIVERED DEMONSTRATION IN COURT By Telegraph—Pre»« Association. Auckland, January *2l. Judgment was given in the Magistrate's Court by Mr. Poynton, S.M., in the case in which. Charles Louis Copeland, professional entertainer, and his son, “Argus” N. J. Copeland, aged 11 years, were charged with pretending to tell fortunes, pretending from skill and knowledge in occult and crafty sciences, to discover where and in what manner any goods and chattels supposed to have been stolen or lost might be found, and using subtle craft to deceive and impose upon His * Majesty’s subjects. The case was heard on Monday last, an adjournment being made to allow, the boy to demonstrate ' his alleged telepathic powers before the Magistrate and representatives of the Press. On that occasion the Magistrate stated that ho had personally tested the boy’s powers and had expressed regret that the subject had not re-' oeived scientific investigation. It deserved this. The demonstration was given in open Court before the judgment was delivered, the Magistrate ruling that only representatives of the police, officials of the Court, and representatives of the Press might submit tests, seeing that, if unofficial people were concerned it might be said that the defendants had' confederates, present. None of the tests involved alleged foretelling of future events, being confined solely to thought-reading. The method followed in most cases was to show to the father articles which, the boy, who was blindfolded and sat beside the Magistrate, usually described accurately. Cards selected from a pack were correctly named, and in several instances written questions were correctly answered. One Court official asked how many subjects ho had sat for in a recent examination, and in how many he had passed. The correct numbers were given. The questioner, of course, was in possession of the result of the examination. It appeared that the' boy could usually read his father’s mind, and occasionally the minds of other people, the demonstration being similar to that sometimes seen on the stage. In his judgment, the Magistrate said the boy was sometimes sensitive to thought-force emanating from his father’s brain. It was not a case of code or apparatus to convey surreptitiously the father’s impressions, but a genuine instance of telepathy. Dealing with the fact that at entertainments answers were given by the hoy to questions as to the future events, Mr. Poynton said that this pretended divination of the future was as old as humanity. In the present case, stress had been laid by the defence upon the evidence given by some witnesses .upon the correctness of the boy’s predictions. “That does not convince," said the Magistrate. “Every fortune-teller, astrologer, or .other humbug could bring similar evidence.” The father’s engagement, he proceeded, was to exhibit the boy’s telepathic powers, but the public had afterwards asked for more. The average theatre-goer was not so much interested in the scientific aspect of telepathy as in the result of the next horse races, a love affair, or business ventures, and it would be difficult, indeed,, to prevent fortune-telling creeping in. The father believed ini.the boy’s prophetic powers, so there; was no. intention to deceive on his part. The boy, under his suggestion, believed in his powers of divinition aaso. After citing cases on the subject, which, - said the Magistrate, gave but little authority, Mr, Poynton said that under the law, if, a person cutting cards, or reading lisa leaves, or otherwise indicating the future, had no belief in it, and said so, there was no offence. An offence consisted in undertaking to tell fortifhes, that was, professing to divine the, future, and it was immaterial whether the offender believed in his powers, or not. The law did not recognise such a power, and undertaking to exercise it was an offence in itself. ' In this case there was a pretence to divine the future. It was injurious to the public to rely on such forecasts. "What is the good-of doing anything? It is all written, in the Book of Fate,” was a had mental condition to get into. Apart from parasites encouraged by a belief in for-tune-telling, the self-reliance and resourcefulness of individuals were weakened if a belief in fatalism was developed. Progressive peoples were those who believed their futures were in their own hands. Although he thought an offence had been proved, he did not wish to convict the defendants. The father was sincere" in his confidence in his boy’s powers, and the bov was under his lather’s influence. lie was a fine lad in every way, and it would be wrong,* in the circumstances, to convict him. He would,,be admonished and discharged. As this was a test case the father would be discharged on payment of the costs of the prosecution. ' The Magistrate added that it was regrettable that the boy’s powers were not being investigated and recorded by scientific men. He was veryintelligent, and did not become unconscious during seances,* so his feelings and impressions, could easily be ascertained.’ Mr. Fleming, who, with Mr. Rodgers, appeared for the defence, thanked the Magistrate for the sympathetic hearing he hs<s given tlm case, but said he was not sure that he agreed with the judgment on law. and indicated that an appeal might ip lodged. His contention, as stated prior to the delivery of the judgment, was that the boy could foretell the future in so far as the fut-ui-e had its roots in the present.