WCP2563

[1]

56 Regents Park Road

London – N.W.

Oct 5 – 1877

Dear Sir,

As I am now preparing a new edition of my "Lectures on Mesmerism, Spiritualism, &c", and intend to reply in it to your review¹ of the first edition,² I have to request that you will give me your authority for the statement [2] (p. 407) that I had "as usual, only one sitting".

You are of course aware that Mr. D. D. Home³ has recently denounced the "Absurdities", the "Delusions", and the "Trickeries", of Spiritualism, in language far stronger than any that I have employed; and that there is not a single thing that I have [3] said or hinted to its discredit, for which I cannot cite his authority. You must not be surprised if I make the fullest use of this, especially after your attempt to rehabilitate "Katie King"⁴ on the authority of Col. Olcott,⁵ and your suggestion that I h "manufactured" the evidence in the Belfast case. But if you [4] should wish, on further consideration, to withdraw any of the charges you have made against me on these or other points, I shall only be too glad to pass them by.

It is a matter of great regret to me that my imputation of an excess of credulity on your part in regard to these matters, accompanied — as it always has been — with expressions of respect for your Scien- [5] tific labours, should have provoked you to such an attack a depreciation of my scientific character as you have expressed at the beginning and ending of your Review, and to such an attacks upon the honesty and good faith of my incredulity as is ^are repeated over and over again in its pages. To these personalities I shall make no reply whatever. A [sic] past President of the British Association, as past Vice-President of the Royal Society, [6] and a Corresponding Member of the Institute of France, will not find his position in public estimation lowered by ^his being held up by Mess^rs Crookes⁶ & Wallace as a mere "expounder of popular and educational science",⁷ and ^as no better than a "trader in knowledge".

But I would suggest it to you, whether it would not be better that you should drop this kind of [7] writing; since I shall most assuredly ask the intervention of such mutual friends as Busk,⁸ Huxley,⁹ Lubbock,¹⁰ and Hooker,¹¹ if it is repeated. The question between us as I pointed out to you in a former note, is simply as to the trustworthiness of a particular kind of evidence; and this may surely be discussed without imputations of dishonesty.

Your Review came out [8] when I was at work upon what I now enclose to you. Possibly it may show you a side of my character of which the existence has been hitherto unknown to you.

I remain, Dear Sir, yours truly | Willm B Carpenter¹²[signature]

Alfred R. Wallace Esq