SEEING THE FUTURE.

Taranaki Daily News, 12 April 1921, Page 5

SEEING THE FUTURE.

THE “ARGUS” CASE REVIVED. IS THERE A SIXTH SENSE? INTERESTING LEGAL ARGUMENT. By Telegraph.—Pre«rc Association Auckland, Last Night. “Argus”, the eleven-year-old boy, and his father, Charles Louis Copeland, who were before Mr. Poynton, S.M. in the Magistrate’s Court in January last, in connection with their fortune-telling entertainment, were under discussion at the Supreme Court to-day, Mr. Justice Adams presiding, when Mr. Fleming appealed, on the father’s behalf, against the conviction recorded against him by the magistrate. Mr. Meredith appeared for Detective-Sergeant Cummings, who was the informant in the original case. Mr. Fleming said the lower Court case had been taken under section 261 of the Crimes Act, and that section was a copy of the English Witchcraft Act of 1735. The whole point, therefore, resolved itself into a question of whether or not an intention to deceive was an ingredient in the offence. In the case of McGrath V. Vine, Mr. Justice Edwards had. held that an intention to deceive must be proved, and also that an intention to deceive formed an essential part of an offence. The judge, in that case, said if that was not the law then any person who playfully “cut the cards” to tell his friend’s fortune was guilty of an offence. He might have gone further, added Mr. Fleming, and pointed out that if his reading of the law was incorrect the prophets of old and the Apostles themselves, if on earth to-day, would have been liable to be indicted under the section. The Magistrate had found these facts: (1) That defendant and his son “Argus” had undertaken to tell future events; (2) the defendant honestly believed that, in conjunction with his son, he could tell the said future events; and (3) there was no intention on the part of defendant to deceive the public. Defendant and his son, continued counsel, usually appeared at picture houses, where they put on telepathic stunts”, the telepathic power being induced by hypnotism. “Argus” had reached a stage when he could hypnotise himself. The Magistrate had heard the case with an open mind, and had had an exhibition of the boy’s power, which had convinced him that the lad had wonderful telepathic powers. NO INTENTION TO DECEIVE. His Honor.- ,“I am bound to accept the Magistrate’s conclusion that there was no intention to deceive, and that the defendant honestly believed—although it might be difficult for some people to understand it—that his son could foretell future events. Mr. Meredith argued that the words of the Crimes Act, under which the proceedings were taken, were so different from those in the Vagrancy Act that eases decided on the latter had no bearing on the present proceedings. Mr. Justice Edwards had never intended to say that the intention to deceive was an absolute ingredient of an offence. The word “pretend” gave place to “undertake” to tell the future in the section in the Crimes Act, which had not been whittled down with the phrase “intention to deceive”.

His Honor: “You say the mischief is in the telling of fortunes, and not in the motive behind the fortune-telling?”

Mr. Meredith: “That is so. There is a class of impressionable and neurotic people who are weak enough not to exercise their judgment, who believe in fatalism, and who are quite capable enough to believe anything. Some fortunetellers say things so as to warp their judgment, interfere with their activities, and cause them to cease their struggles, resulting in a general effect on their moral and general character.” In answer to his Honor, Mr. Fleming said that the majority of those who saw “Argus” believed in his powers. There was no claim to supernatural power. IS IT SUPERNATURAL? His Honor: “Accurate prediction of future events is supernatural, in the sense that by no ordinary known process of the human mind can that be done. Is it not a claim to supernatural powers ?” Mr. Fleming: “No. There are five senses which we all possess, but it is considered there is another sense which is either developing or has been lost-—: a sense which a great many people possess in a greater or lesser degree.” His Honor: “In what sense can for-tune-telling be held to be other than supernatural ?” Mr. Fleming replied that the boy’s mental faculties under hypnosis became abnormal, and his powers, including his perception and logic, became abnormal, and, having perceived a germ of thought, he was able to some extent to pierce the future and tell what that thought would become. There was no profession to tell fortunes, but “Argus”, in many cases, could answer questions relating to the future. There was nothing supernatural in it. The question was purely one of law. His Honor said the case was one of some interest, and importance, and he would give his judgment to-morrow.