Spiritualism.

Thames Star, Volume XII, Issue 4017, 12 November 1881, Page 1

Spiritualism.

The London Times in discussing, tho result of a late prosecution of- professed spiritualists says ": — The medium is a mere vehicle of, spirit communication; be cannot control,,the utterances of the spirits; he cannot,sum* mon them at will; he cenwot even distinguish good spirits from bad, lying spirits from truthful ones. The society of the spirits is, it seems, as mixed and teamy as that of the world we. live in—a statement hard to reconcile with the. rapturous happiness generally professed by them. It is a little singular, however,,,, that when there is any money to be made by the medium the right spirit is generally within call, and generally'_> delivers 'the appropriate message. Now, all this kind _- of thing may, as we bare said, be a matter worthy of strict and patient scientific investigation; but to ordinary, commoa sense, and still more to the eve of justice, dealing with accepted rules of evidence . and with incontestable principles of human nature, it is nothing more than imposture, gross, palpable, and revolting. If, morever, a medium is an impostor, he is a very clumsy impostor. A tenth rate conjuror can beat him on his own ground. It does not even need. a conjuror to go into a trance or get up a '' magnetic ' shiver." We often hear, it is true, strange stories of what private mediums can do or undergo in dark rooms or in hole-and-corner meetings. They do very curious things, no doubt, and things'very well calculated to impress unwary observers, and what is more, they generally get. very well paid fordoing them. But they never do anything in public or under, conditions of rigid and unbiassed investigation, and when they do come before tbe public at large it is not as discoverers of something wbich the public would care to know, or as revealers of what is going on at a distance, but as impostors who write ou a slate with, a piece of pencil inserted under the nail, as deceivers of foolish women, and obtainers of property under false pretences. No medium has ever yet revealed anything that was at once true, worth knowing, and knowable only by means not accessible to the rest of mankind. Their levitations, table-mov-ings, floating in the air, and the like are clumsy tricks at the best, easily wrought by a conjuror, and even if due to undetected natural agencies, they throw no light whatever on the 1 alleged communications of spirits ; while as to their actual spirit messages, they are so vulgar, fatuous, and puerile that if they could be believed by any rational b*iog, they would add a new -rciiifr-iu n*«th and fnrniefe -■*--« J»~-«=injur~ Huxlej'^ara, 4 new argument Tagams*—, suicide. The delusion of spiritualism is no new one, but, happily it i 9 a waning one. Tho Fletchers are now dismissed to join the Home?, the Slades, and other mediums whose vogue is past.. It is certainly a good, thing that the machinations of mediums, magnetic doctors, and tho like' should occasionally jome within the reach of the criminal law. Not merely is their conviction a warning to the public at large to have nothing to do * ith people professing mysterious arts*, who come from no one knows where and live no one knows how, but the glimpses we get in evidence nf their daily lift* and habits are sufficient to disgust all decent persons with the very name of medium and with pverything associated with" spiritualism. What " .spiritualism in its highest phases " may be we cannot pretend to say ; in the phase professed by the Fletchers and at least acquiesced in by Mrs ffart-Davies it is a matter of coarse imposture in purpose and of still coarser endearments, fondlings, "crunchings," and the like in practice, such as positively sickening'to read of. It is the old story of Mrs Lyon and Mr Home orer again. A foolish, fond, hysterical woman comes into court and tells the tale of her own degradation, of her falling under the disgusting' spell of vulgar inti.. macies and unbridled if not criminal pai-

sions. It would be well if the law were less tolerant than it is of such offences against public morals and public decency. But are the seances in which these things begin really less offensive to the public welfare? We punish and prohibit fortune telling and other practices of the kind. Spiritualism practiced for gain is as false as fortune-telling and far more mischievous. Why should we prohibit the old imposture and leave the field open for the new ?