WCP2565

[1]

56 Regents Park Road

London N.W.

Oct[ober] 9/[18]77

Dear Sir,

I am obliged by your letters, and willingly accept you explanation of the 'manufacture' passage, as also of what I considered the depreciating reference ^{(in the absence of any others)} to me in the first page of myour Review. But if you did not mean to disparage my ^scientific character, I would ask the meaning of your last paragraph.

[2] Perhaps it will 'surprise you very much' to learn that the discontinuance of the séances at my house did not come from me. "The weathers" was given by Mr Kane f as a reason for the unfavourable^satisfactory results of the second sitting; and Mrs Jencken's cold was ^{given as} the ground of her not being able to evoke any manifestations. We separated, therefore, without making any other appointment; and I waited [3] in expectation of that one would be proposed by Mrs Jencken, when the weather should be more favourable and my ^{Mrs J's} cold betters. But no such proposition ever came.

I shall take care, in all my references to you, to quote your ipsissima verba. Your not having done so in referring to my statement about the Report of the French Academy, has led you to make a charge which is altogether untrue untenable.

[4] Mr Crookes's¹ reply to my "Radiometers" paper came out in the July No of the Fortnightly ^{concurrently with your Review.} At that time, as you might know from the "Sketch" I sent you, I was suffering under the heavy blows I had received in the sudden loss of two most beloved and distinguished members of my family. During the six weeks which followed, I was overwhelmed by the pressure of official and family business; and then found myself so completely[5] prostrated as to be utterly unfit for work of any kind, and to be obliged to devote my vacation to mental & bodily renovation. Since my return home, I have carefully reperused Mr Crookes's Papers; and so ^far, from finding that I have mis-stated his earlier opinions, I find the fullest confirmation of all that I said of them. I have drawn up the draft of a reply, which has been entirely approved by two eminent scientific friends, and which [6] I have just forwarded to Prof. Stokes², as the highest authority on the subject, and one fully conversant with the Royal Society history opis[?]. And any correction which he may offer, I shall adopt without question.

You will see, therefore, that I do not shrink from encountering either Mr Crookes or yourself; and that the same course which ^{has hitherto} prevented my replying to him, has also prevented my [7] replying to you.

As Mr Crookes has always seemed to place "full faith" in Mr Home³, I thought that he must regard his statements as trustworthy. I may mention that as gentleman of New York, has to whom I am an entire stranger, has written — as an act of justice to me — to let me know the sort of reputation which Col. Olcott⁴ bears there. His statements of the doings of the Theosophical Society and of [8] its President entirely bear out those of Mr D. D. Homes and as the extracts given ^{by the latter} from the "People from the other World" show the extravagance of Col. Olcott's doctrines, I thought it possible that you might consider his backing up of the Holmeses⁵ (whom the family of Robert Dale Owen⁶, my informant assures me, have utterly abjured) was a thing scarcely to be trusted. But if you stand to it, I shall of course point out what I hold to be the nature of the testimony on which you base ^that one of your charges against me.

Yours truly │ William B Carpenter⁷ [signature]

A.R. Wallace Esq