SEEING THE FUTURE

Taranaki Daily News, 22 January 1921, Page 5

SEEING THE FUTURE

BOY’S AMAZING POWERS. TEST DISPROVES QUESTION FOR SCIENTISTS. By TMflgraph.—Press Association. Auckland, Last Night. Judgment Was given in the Magistrate’s Court to-day by Mr. Boynton, S.M., in the case in which Chas. 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 their subtle craft to deceive and impose upon his Majesty’s subjects. The case was heard on Monday last, an adjournment bqjng 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 he had personally tested the boy’s powers, and he had expressed regret that the subject had not received the scientific investigation it deserved. This demonstration was. given in open Court before the judgment was delivered, the Magistrate ruling that only representatives of the police, officials of the CouFt, 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 of the 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 many subjects he had sat for in a recent examination and in how many he had passed. The correct numbers were given, the questioner, of bourse, was in possession of the result of the examination. It appeared that the boy could usually read his fathbrV niind, 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 a thought force emanating from his father’s brain. It was not a case of a code or apparatus to convey surreptitiously the. father’ia impressions, but a genuine instance of telepathy. Dealing ..with the fact that at entertainments "answers were given by the l?<?y to questions as to future events, Mr. Poynton said th.g,t this pretended diyination of the f,ut**r/ was as old as Jiumanity. In the phesei.c 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 theatregoer 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 in the boy’s prophetic powers, so there was no intention to deceive on his part. The boy, under hie suggestion, believed in his powers of divination also.

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 cardi?, or reading tea 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 fortunes. 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.

Tn 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 bad mental condition to get into. Apart from parasites encouraged by belief in fortune-telling, the selfreliance and resourcefulness of individuals were weakened if belief in fatalism was developed. Progressive peoples were those who believed their future w&5 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 of his son’s powers, and the boy was under his father’s influence. He was a fine lad in every way, and it would be wrong in the circumstances to convict him. He would bo admonished and discharged, as this was a test case, and the father would be discharged on the payment of the cost? of the prosecution. The Magistrate added that it was regrettable that the boy’j? powers were not being investigated and recorded by scientific men. He was very intelligent did not become unconscious during the 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 had given the case, but said he was not sure that he agreed with the judg-, ment on law, and indicated that an appeal might be lodged. His contention, as stated prior to the delivery of judgment, was that the boy could foretell the future in so far as the future had its roots in the present.