Doyle in his book “The New Revelation” says:
“The days are surely passing when the mature and considerate opinions of such men ... can be dismissed with the empty ‘all rot’ or ‘nauseating drivel’ formulæ.”
Perhaps the most prominent man in this respect and whose conclusions, especially in his later years, were pointed to by Spiritualists as being beyond dispute was the eminent chemist, Sir William Crookes. He became intensely interested in Spiritualistic research work as early as 1870 and for the first four years devoted most of his attention to D. D. Home, who seemed successful in baffling Crookes’ super-knowledge of scientific investigation. In 1874 he turned his attention to Florrie Cook, a fifteen year old medium who had been commanding attention for about three years. She seems to have captivated him within the first month to such an extent that he went to her defense in print after a “disgraceful occurrence” had given rise to a “controversy,” after which he entertained her at his house. The most convincing test, though, took place at her home in Hackney. In February, 1874, he wrote:
“These seances have not been going on many weeks but enough has taken place to thoroughly convince me of the perfect truth and honesty of Miss Cook, and to give me every reason to expect that the promises so freely made to me by Katie will be kept. All I now ask is that your readers will not hastily assume that everything which is prima facie suspicious necessarily implies deception, and that they will suspend their judgment until they hear from me again on this subject.”
It was not long, evidently, before the scientist awoke from his dream, for on August 1st, 1874, he wrote to a Russian lady that after four years of investigation, including months of experience with Home, Katie Fox, and Florence Cook, he found “no satisfactory proof that the dead can return and communicate.” A copy of this letter was sent by Aksakoff to Light, and was published in that journal on May 12, 1900. “Sir W. Crookes did not dissent.”[107] Sometime along about 1875 forty-four photographic negatives which he had made of Katie King and her medium, Florrie Cook, together with what prints he had, were, for some reason not given, accidentally destroyed and he forbade friends who had copies to reproduce them. He must have made some sort of a discovery for he “buried himself in a sulky silence which he would not break” for forty years. “No one knew whether he was a Spiritualist or not,” his only statement being that “in all his Spiritualistic research he had ‘come to a brick wall.’”[108] In 1914 when asked plainly if he were a Spiritualist “he evaded the question.” Perhaps the change in his opinions came over him when he learned that Florence Cook (who became Mrs. Corner) was exposed[109] on a continental tour and sent back disgraced. But in 1916, notwithstanding his statement in 1900 and other previous statements, he went on record in the December 9th issue of Light as accepting Spiritualism.
All of this stands as proof that Professor Crookes, even after he was knighted, was of a vacillating mind and for some reason seemed to be deficient in rational methods of discovering the truth, or at least disinclined to put them in force outside of his particular line of science. Possibly, one of the convincing proofs to him may have been the “tricks” played on him by Annie Eva Fay, for if I am not in error his failure to detect her trickery was the turning point which brought him to a belief in Spiritualism. She told me that when Maskelyne, the magician, came out with an exposé of her work she was forced to resort to strategy. Going to the home of Professor Crookes she threw herself on his mercy and gave a series of special tests. With flashing eyes she told of taking advantage of him. It appears that she had but one chance in the world to get by the galvanometer[110] but by some stroke of luck for her and an evil chance for Professor Crookes, the electric light went out for a second at the theatre at which she was performing, and she availed herself of the opportunity to fool him. One of the tests was duplicated by Professor Harry Cooke, a magician.
There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that this brainy man was hoodwinked, and that his confidence was betrayed by the so-called mediums that he tested. His powers of observation were blinded and his reasoning faculties so blunted by his prejudice in favor of anything psychic or occult that he could not, or would not, resist the influence.[111] This seems more difficult to comprehend when one remembers that he did not accept Spiritualism in full until he was nearing the end of his earthly career. The weakness and unreliability of Sir William’s judgment as an investigator is further proved by the fact that he admitted that many of the tests he proposed were rejected by the mediums he was investigating. Such conditions made the test impossible and he did not seem to realize it, but notwithstanding all this he is one of the most quoted authorities in Spiritualistic realms, particularly by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
Another who was misled by the chicanery of mediums which he investigated during many years of research is Sir Oliver Lodge. He failed to find sufficient evidence to prompt him to spread the teachings of Spiritualism until 1904, after which he occasionally sent a “glow through the Spiritualistic world by some bold profession of belief.” In 1905 he was not quite ready to endorse but strongly commended mediums. But by 1916 he had become “the great scientist of the movement, the link between the popular belief and scientific theory.” It is extremely difficult, however, to understand how a leading scientist can permit his pen to lay before a thinking world such inconsistent impossibilities as the following:
“A table can exhibit hesitation, it can seek for information, it can welcome a newcomer, it can indicate joy or sorrow, fun or gravity, it can keep time with a song as if joining in the chorus and most notably of all it can exhibit affection in an unmistakable manner.”
What has all this to do with the spirit of the departed? How is it possible to accept such silly nonsense? Think of it! A table with intelligence, brains—a table with consciousness—a table with emotion. Yet that is the sort of reasoning used by Sir Oliver in his book “Raymond” and it is acceptable to all enthusiastic advocates of occult teaching. When we read of a mind of such high culture being overcome by such misfortune we are moved to compassion rather than censure and can only conjecture that the loss of his beloved son, Raymond, in an accursed war was the cause of it.