WCP2567

[1]

Rosehill, Dorking

Oct[obe]^r. 10th, 1877

Dear Sir

You ask me the meaning of the last paragraph in my review. It seems to me plain enough. It implies my opinion that in your treatment of the subject under discussion you have not "loved truth better than ^{allowed your "law of truth" to be overcome by your _____} "your system",— and I ask the public to judge whether my opinion is correct ^{the facts I have adduced will bear any other interpretation.} It applies strictly to this subject, & not to your general scientific reputation at all. A. over

A.¹ If my facts will bear no such interpretation I will withdraw the imputation, but I must say that your [4 words illeg.] ^{taking up} on ^such a mere side issue as the whether the unsupported statement of a woman of bad character proves ^the imposture of the ^Holmes, and you proposed to devote yourself to pitting Mr. Horne against Col. Olcott, does not favourably impress me. Such a discussion may throw dust in the eye of the public but it will [1 word illeg.] ^not touch the main question ^{between us} which is whether or not you have given the public ^{your readers} to understand that the [4 words illeg.] ^______ evidence [1 word illeg.] as our side [1 word illeg.] ^{supported by the numerous} unimpeachable witnesses, does not exist to whom I have referred, does not exist.

I did not ^{(in my letter)} refer to all to the recent Radiometer discussion. That is of little importance. But I referred to your the Quarterly Review article of Oct. 1871, to Mr. Crookes' reply,— and to the correspondence [2]² [3] published by him in his "Researches in the Phenomenon of Spiritualism".

That the article in question was anonymous makes the ^personal attacks in it in my opinion all the worse, and an apology for them the more needful.

³This article is universally attributed to you from internal evidence, and was so attributed by Mr. Crookes in a letter to the Royal Society. No contradiction of this imputation has been made it is of course taken to be correct I have however never publickly referred to you as the author and the internal evidence is such that I cannot doubt your authorship of it.

My "charge" against you ^{As it regards the alleged "Katie King" exposure} is of the the very wildest ^{slightest of all} — viz — that you have "brought forward and helped to perpetuate" which I believe to be an unfounded, or at all events an unproven charge. Mr. Horne's opinion of the extravagance of Col. Olcott's doctrines will not disprove the latter gentleman's facts, or rehabilitate the character of the alleged [1 word illeg.] of "Katie King" performed on whose unsupported word the whole accusation rests.

I greatly regret that my article should have appeared at a time when you were suffering such severe domestic bereavement, but the proofs were then out of my hands.

I remain | Yours faithfully | Alfred R. Wallace [signature]

W. B. Carpenter. C.B. &c.