TCDE-Team: Created page with "''Spiritualism'' is a letter written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle published in The Freethinker on 15 february 1920. == Letter == [[The Freethinker (15 february 1920, p. 109)]] TO THE EDITOR OF THE "FREETHINKER." Sir, — I am sorry to intrude a second time in your pages, but since my name is used so freely in connection with your arguments upon Spiritualism, I have to make some comment u..."

2024-09-20T15:53:38Z

Created page with "''Spiritualism'' is a letter written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle published in The Freethinker on 15 february 1920. == Letter == thumb|250px|right|[[The Freethinker (15 february 1920, p. 109)]] TO THE EDITOR OF THE "FREETHINKER." Sir, — I am sorry to intrude a second time in your pages, but since my name is used so freely in connection with your arguments upon Spiritualism, I have to make some comment u..."

New page

''Spiritualism'' is a letter written by [[Sir Arthur Conan Doyle]] published in [[The Freethinker]] on 15 february 1920.

== Letter ==
[[File:the-freethinker-1920-02-15-p109-spiritualism.jpg|thumb|250px|right|[[The Freethinker]] (15 february 1920, p. 109)]]

TO THE EDITOR OF THE "FREETHINKER."

Sir, — I am sorry to intrude a second time in your pages, but since my name is used so freely in connection with your arguments upon Spiritualism, I have to make some comment upon the imperfect and garbled statements put forward.

The only full account of the ''seance'' in which my son first came back to me appeared in the ''[[Two Worlds Publishing Co. Ltd.|Two Worlds]]'' of December 19. If your contributor had seen that he would have known how incomplete was his account. Facts which he has omitted are: 1. That the medium was unpaid; 2. That he was bound with six several lengths of thick twine which were found intact at the close; 3. That the voice was unquestionably my son's voice, in the opinion of his step-mother as well as of myself; 4. That ''while my son was talking to me'', Mr. Engholm, at the other end of the small semi-circle of six, was talking with a deceased friend, formerly a fellow-journalist in Fleet Street, who gave his intimate nickname as a proof of personality. When these facts are added to your contributor's account you have a fuller picture of what passed. My question is if it was not my son who spoke to me and expressed sorrow for our only disagreement, who was it?

I do not know where your correspondent gets my quotation as to the photograph or psychograph of part of the Codex Alexandrinus, but my account in the [[The Vital Message|Vital Message]] is as follows :—

: Professot Henslow ..... narrates how the inquirer subjected a sealed package of plates to the Crewe Circle without exposure, endeavouring to get a psychograph. Upon being asked on which plate he desired it he said "the fifth." Upon this plate being developed there was found in it a copy of a passage from the Codex Alexandrinus in the British Museum.

The plate is reproduced in the book.

This is absolutely correct, but in some passing allusion in an interview or otherwise it is likely enough that I may have said "page" when I meant "part of a page." Such criticism is paltry.

Finally, he is very severe upon me concerning the Head of Christ said to be done under Inspiration — an inspiration which was afterwards denied by the husband of the artist. I am not at liberty to tell the whole facts about this case, largely for the reason that what I learned was while I was enjoying the hospitality of the family. I would put, how ever, one very obvious question. Why was I asked by Lady Churchill to see the picture? I am not an art expert. I am in a way a psychic expert. Does not this fact alone show that I have nothing to withdraw in the case? Spiritualism is a vexed question upon which families disagree, and therein lay all the trouble.

Arthur Conan Doyle.

----
* [[Sir Arthur Conan Doyle|Back to Conan Doyle]]

Spiritualism (letter 15 february 1920) - Revision history