WCP1574

[1]

Parkstone, Dorset. Sep.22nd. 1889

Dear Dr. Myers

I am very glad you like my "Darwinism" and I a[m], greatly obliged for your kind expressions with regard to it. I endeavoured to make it as interesting as I could and as intelligible as possible to the educated reader. Thanks also for your corrections. I had already noted some for the 2nd. Ed. just out, and will note yours for a 3rd. if we ever reach it.

I was very much pleased with your review of Home’s Life. I have always thought that his case offer[e]d all the guarantees usually demanded — he did not receive payment, the most wonderful things happen in other person’s’ houses where machinery &c. wat[sic] [was] impossible,— and during a long life, he was never once detected, or even accused of imposture. Very nearly the same can be said of Mrs. Volkman. There are a few of your concluding remarks that are I think, open to misconstruction.

When you say (p.16. 1.2) that you feel absolutely certain that all that occurred with Home was not "in any sense miraculous" you use language which Spiritualists accept, but not people in general. For surely all the alleged miracles of the Romish Church are disbelieved because, if true, as facts they would be miracles — that is occurrences which could not happen without the intervention of spiritual or non-human intelligences.

If the floating accordion playing beautiful music was not an elaborate trick, then it was necessarily the work of some invisible non-human intelligence,- therefore what is commonly termed a "miracle". The phrase "in any sense" will cause readers to think that you believe this will all be explained as a natural, phenomenon. in the ordinary sense of the term, or as a delusion. Again, your remark about — "ought to have been noted with careful accuracy"- seems to imply blame to some one for not doing so. But who could possibly have done so? No one or two persons were always with Home. And whose fault was it, mainly, that the phenomena that occurred were not more fully and accurately observed & recorded. Certainly that of the men of science. Sir David Brewster had the opportunity, but neglected it because — in his own words — "spirit was the last thing he would give in to". Faraday & Tyndall [2] both refused to investigate the phenomena except under absurd and insulting conditions. When Thackeray admitted Mr. Bell’s account of a seance into the "Cornhill" he was so laughed at & badgered by his scientific friends at the Athenaeum that he had to refuse all other articles of a similar kind. The scientific and literary world, during the whole period of Home’s wonderful career, treated his phenomena as tricks & himself as a vulgar imposter, and all fair record of them in the press was refused. Considering these facts I think it wonderful that so much has been preserved & record[e]d, and I should like to have had you state where the fault lay. Should you ever come to Bournemouth (where everyone seems to come) give me a call. I am close to Parkstone station.

Yours very truly | Alfred R.Wallace.