{ title: 'Spiritual telegraph. (New-York [N.Y.]) 1852-1860, December 30, 1854, Page 1, Image 1', download_links: [ { link: 'http://www.loc.gov/rss/ndnp/ndnp.xml', label: 'application/rss+xml', meta: 'News about NYS Historic Newspapers - RSS Feed', }, { link: '/lccn/sn93062939/1854-12-30/ed-1/seq-1/png/', label: 'image/png', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/sn93062939/1854-12-30/ed-1/seq-1.pdf', label: 'application/pdf', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/sn93062939/1854-12-30/ed-1/seq-1/ocr.xml', label: 'application/xml', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/sn93062939/1854-12-30/ed-1/seq-1/ocr.txt', label: 'text/plain', meta: '', }, ] }
Image provided by: University of Rochester
DEMOTED TO THE ILLUSTRATION OF SPIRITUAL INTERCOURSE. YOL. III.—NO. 35. NEW YORK, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 30, 1854. WHOLE NO. 139. Cjre principles of |l;tfuvr. R H A P S O D Y A N D R E A S O N . M r . E ditor r 4T h e old G reek s un d e rstood th e p h ilosophy o f spiritual inedium s h ip. Y o u w ill find it se t forth, very beautifully, P lato 's D ialogue of Io n . T h e p e rso n s o f th e dialogue a S o c r a te s a n d Io n , a rh a p s o d ist. I ninko m y e x tr a c t s from Plato , tran s late d by B u rgess, V o l. iv. o f B o h n ’s C lassical L ib r a r y . T h e rh a p s o d ists w e r e a kind o f itin e r a n t m instrels * — s im ilar to th e troubadours o f th e m iddle a g e s — w h o stru n g to g e th e r , a n d su n g portions chiefly o f th e H o m e ric poeuii T h e y w o re a p a rticu lar d r e s s o f sc a r le t or purple— th e latter to re p r e s e n t th e c o lo r of th e se a , th e form e r o f blood— w h ile th e y w e r e c h a n ting p o r tions o f th e O d y s s e y and Iliad resp e c t ively ; and w h e n th e y h a d 'tt con test, the victor gained a lam b a s th e prize. A c c o rding to X e n o p h o n , S o c r a te s said they kn e w H o m e r in d e e d a c c u r a tely eno u g h , hut w e r e in o ther resp e c t s g r e a t sim p letons. W e have legions of rhapsodists co m ing on earth ag a in , in th e shape of m e d ium s o f all kind; I t is w e ll, perhap s , th a t w e should listen to Socrates,- on tjie su b je c t. I e x tr a c t su c h portions o f th e D ialo g u e s as boar upon the topic : Ion. Whrit can be the reason, Soerntes, that whenever any one is dis coursing upon any other poet, I begin to nod ; but when any ono brings Homer to my recollection, I am at no loss w h at to say. Socrates. It is not difficult, my friend, to guess the reason of this. For it is.o)car to every one th a t you are unable to speak about Jfomer by a rt or science For if you were able by a rt, yon would be able to apeak a bout all the other poets. W hy I say this, d o you, Ion, request . Ion. Yes. by Zeus, Socrates, 1 d o ; for I delight to hear you wise men: JSocntfts. You surely arc the wise men. Ion, you the rhapsodists and performers, and those whose poems you recite ; whereas 1 speak nothing b u t the simple tru th , os becomes a mere unskilled person. In the statuary’s a rt, did you ever see any one who as regards a single statuary was skilled in explaining w h at he had executed well, but as « regards statuaries in general, was at a loss, grew drowsy, os having nothing no say ? Ion. No, by Zeus, I never knew such a person os this, but of this I am conscious to myself, that as regards Homer I speak the best of all men, and am least a t a loss, and every body else soys that I do speak well, but not os regards the rest. Consider then, why is this! Socrates. I do consider, Ion, and I eommenee showing you how Ibis This faculty of speaking well about Homer is not an art, b n t power, w h ich moves yon, like that in the stone, which Euripides colls the rnognesion.* For this stone not only attracts iron rings, h u t imports a power to the rings, so that they a rc nble to do the very same things as the stone does, and to n ltract other rings, and sometimes a very long series of iron rings h ang as in a chain, one from a n o ther; but from tliat stone depends the powerin all of them. Thus, too, does the Muse herself move men divinely inspired, and through them thus inspired, n chain hangs together of others inspired divinely likewise. For all the good epic pools eompose~n!l their beaalifol poems, not by a rt. hut by being divinely inspired and possessed (by tbe Muse); and so, too, the good lyric poets, just a s the Corybaiites dance, not being in their Bound senses, compose their beantiful lyrical poems, when they are not >t> their sound senses ; bnt when they go on according to the harmony and rhythm, they be come mad. possessed by’ a god, as are the priostesses of Bacchns, wlio, possessed by a god, draw from rivers honey and milk ; but are unable to do so, when in tlieir senses ; and the soul of the lyric poet docs that which they say they do. For assuredly they say to us. that drawing from fountains flowing with honey, and' gathering flowers from the gardens and glades of the Muses,-they bring us their songs, as bees do their honey, and are ever loo on the wing. And they tell us, too, what is true. For a poet is a thing light, and with wiugs, and sacred, and unable to compose poetry until lie becomes inspired, and is out of liis sober senses, and his imagination is no longer under his control. For to long as a person is in complete possession o f it, he is unable to com pose verses or td speak oracularly. Hence as they Compose not by art, they soy many beautiful tilings relating to their subjects, as you do about H o m e r; b u t each is able to compose that alone through a divine allotment to which the Muse has impelled them ; for they do pose by art, b u t through a divine pow er; since if they knew how to ■ peak by a r t upon the subject correctly, they would be.able upon all others. And 011 this account n deity has deprived them of their senses, and employs them as his ministers, and orocle-singcrs, divine prophets, in order that when,wc hear them, wo may know not they to whom sense is n o t present, who speak w h at is valuable, t|,e god himself who speaks, and through them addresses ns. And o f this assertion Tynniclms the Ghslcidinn affords the greatest proof ; who never compose! any other poem whielt sny one would think worth remembering, hut the Ptenn, which every body sings, of almost all hymns the most excellent, and as he himself stales, any thing of horror, my hairs stand erect through fear, and my heart Socrates. Know you tlm t you rhapsodista produeo this same effect upon the majority of .your spectators! Ion. I know i t very well. For I am constantly looking down from my standing-place above, upon those who are weeping, or looking fiercely, or astonished, in unison with w hat is narrated. Socrates. Know y ou not, then, that this spectator o f yours is the last 'f the rings, which, I said, receive their pow er from one another by means of the Hcraclcan stone! The middle ring are you the rhap sodist and tho acto r ; bnt the first ring is the poet himsolf. B y means of all these does the god draw, wherever i t pleases him, the souls of i, having suspended from each other the power. And as if from that stone there is suspended a very numerous scries of chorus-singcrs and dancers, and under-mnsters, hang the rings depending from the Muse But from one Muse one o f the pocls hangs, a nother from another. And this we call by the expression, “ he is possessed ; for the meaning is very sim ilar; since he is held fast. I have m a d e th is long e x tr a c t from th is D ialogue in o r d e r to show to y o u r rea d e r s , i f y o u think it w o rth w h ile to la y it before them , th a t th e phenom e n a of S p iritu a lism , a s developed in these la tte r day s , are b u t th e exhibitio n o f law s of th e hum a n soul w h ich e x p r e s s e d th e m s e lv e s in a m o st p o e tical form in the m y thology o f a n c ie n t G r e e c e , a s w e ll a s in all m y thologies th a t have e v e r existed. S p iritu a l com m u n ion is th e cau s e o f all religious im p r e s sio n s ; and th e w o rship o f a people in d ic a tes th e sp h e r e w ith w h ich th e y a re in con n e c tion. T h e g o d s o f a n c ie n t G reece w e r e th e s p i r i t s o f d e p a r ted h e r o e s , m o lding th e people w h o m th e y loved into social condition s , c o in c id e n t w ith th e ir ow n n a tu res. T h e m o d e rn ph e n o m e n a o f spiritu a l m e d iu m s h ip and t e le g r a p h ic com m u n ication w ith d e p a r ted souls furnish a k e y ;to th e m y s teries o f a ll th e ages. T h i s D ialog u e of P l a to is u tterly in c o m p r e h e n s ible, e x c e p t b y th e lig h t o f m e d iu m s h ip. A n y one a t all fam iliar w ith th e rhapsod ies of m e d ium s , w ill s e e th a t th e r e a re m a n y Io n s on e a r th again, and th a t the cool, calm w isdom of S o c r a te s is n e e d e d to tam e th e ir tran s p o r ts and red u c e t h e ir insp iratio n s to order. R e s p e c tf u lly y o u r o b e d ient serv a n t, j . w e s t n e v i n s . P hil a ., Dec., 1854. upon spiritual m a n ifestations, as receiv e d from th e spiritual w o rld, m a n y m ind s h a v ^ a c lea r view of the e x isten c e of s p ir it in th e form . E v e n th o s e w h o w o u ld argu e th a t a certain am o u n t of co n s c iou s n e s s does belong to m a tter, and th a t th e r e fore m a n is in tellig e n t by th e aggregation of th e m a terials w h ich go fo com p o se h is form , irresp e c tive o f a n im m o rtal d istin c t s p ir it, m u st s till ad m it th a t w ithout ch a n g e o f m a terial th e re can be no c h a n g e in such sen s ib ility of observation and active p o w e r o f thought. H o w , th e n , w ill th e y accou n t for th e fact th a t th e divine la w s , k n o w n b y som e a s natu re’s law s , a rc not und e rsto o d by all m a n k in d , b u t m a y be so understood under p r o p e r tuition? N o w tuition is b u t an o th e r w o rd for progression, and a s th e m a terial portion un d e rg o e s no p r o g ression, and th e sensible or spiritual portion is th e r e c e p tacle of stfch im p rovem e n t, it m u st be adm itted to hav e se p a r a t e p r o p e r ties, if not a separate e x isten c e , from the m a terial form . T h e r e a re facts in p h iloso ph y w h ich a re c lea rly estab lish e d as tru th s , not recognizable to o u r se n s e s . W h a t unprog ressed m a n can un d e rstan d th a t a thousand y e a r s o f tim e is o c c u p ied in the travel o f lig h t to our se n s e s from som e o f th e n e a r e r fixed sta r s , and still this tru th is w e ll u n d e rstood by m o re p r o g ressed m inds. D o e s th is not arise from an in c reased po w e r in th e s p irit o f su c h pro g ressed individuals, and h a s an y ph y s io log ical ch a n g e in th e i r form s th e slig h te s t connection w ith th e a s c e r t a in in g of th is f a c t ? W e th in k th a t all m u s t ad m it th a t natu ral law is divine law , and t h a t its e x e r c ise in th e S p irit-w o r ld is but pro g ression , in de g re e as com p a r e d w ith its e x e r c ise h e r e , and th e c h a n g e in its operation bu t conseq u e n t upon (he n e c e s s itie s o f th e case. For in him, moat especially, <loc« the god Been, to me to poiut out tm that we arc not to doubt about those beautiful poems being not bun hu t divine, and the work, not o f men, but o f gods ; and that poeU nothing else b a t interpreters of the god* (or Spirits, as we now call them) possessed hy whatever deity they m .y happen to he And in pointing out this, the deity ho* through a poet the m e t indifferent sung « melody the most beautiful Or do I not seem to you, Ion. U. sny what .. true » Ion To me a t Icaet yon do. Fori’you somehow, Socrates, touch my very sonl by you, argum ent. , and the good poeU seem to me, by divine allotment, to be in this way to n. the interp reter of the god. Socrates. Mind now. Ion, and tell me this W henever you arc .pout ing well, and astonishing your audiences most, at auch times are you quite in your senses or beside y ourself’ and does not your soul fancy itaelf carried away in a state of ecstasy by the deeds you are telling Ion. How clear a proof lmve you, Socrates, produced ! For when I __ am reciting any Ute of pity, my e y e. are filled with tear. ; but when | - tr e h g f c o f tta pow. D IV I N E L A W . W e are often ask e d how w e can possib ly rea s o n on sp ir it ual m a tte r s in w h ic h w e have no prem ises, and th o s e asking such q u e s tio n s a r c evidently, u n d e r th e im p r e s s io n th a t divine law is d istin c t and se p a r a t e from na tu ra l law . W e c o n s id e r it f a ir to in f e r th a t all n a tu ral law is d ivine, and h e n c e w e are enabled by reason ing from th in g s know n to th in g s u n k n o w n , to advance a ste p in our c lea r n e s s o f th o u g h t, if n o t in our spiritual p r o g ression. E v ery’ m o v e m e n t w e m a k e is erp a r te to an y p r o p e r ly o f the m a tter m o v e d ; th e m e re raisin g of an arm m u s t be spiritual by a s s is ta n c e , o r an im b u ing influence not orig in a ting w ith the a rm itself. Indeed ; th is is equally true o f tho e n tire form of m a n . A m a n h a s no le s s w e i g h t im m e d iately after dcafliRhan before, and still w e find all h i s abilities for m otion are an n i hilated , and this, too, w ithout a p p a r e n tly partin g w ith any of h is m a terial organism , and w ith o u t any ch a n g e h a v in g taken place o ther than th a t o f a n invisible force or p o w e r hav ing been abstracted from his m o ss. W h e n w e com p a r e age w ith childhood, w e read ily perceive a d istin c t difl'erence in the a b ility of thou g h t, a h ig h e r pow e r to d e d u c e c o r r e c t resu l ts from few e r p r e m i s e s ; in othei w o rds, a p o w e r to give birth to new thoug h ts b y th e conjoining or com p a rison o f old ones. W e find also t h a t th e platform of thought is so enlarged th a t th e m i n d is m o r e rea d ily im p ressed w ith a new tru th , and still w e know th a t th is often o c c u r s a t a tim e of life w h e n th e quality of the m a terial o f th e body hqa deteriorated, still leaving th e pow e r s of m ind su p e rio r to those of the child, or even o f th e youth. W e call th is by th e va rious nam e s o f e d u c a tion, e x p e r ien c e , etc., and seem to forget th a t i t is separate and d istin c t from an y in h e ren t p r o p e r ties of m a tter. W e becom e ex p e r t in ju d g in g o f c h a r a c ter, ev e n by o u t w a r d indications, and o ther n e w functions e v id e n tly not be longing la m e re m a tter or its c o n figuration, a n d th is pow e r c o n tinues !« be developed even to th e v e ry h o u r o f dissolution. T h u s w e find very elderly perso n s , lq n g after the m ind has evinced deterioration in its ex e r c ise on p a rticu lar subjects, v e ry c lea rly q u ickened on those co n n e c ted w ith religious pirations, and not arising from any m o rbid sen s ib ility , bqt rather from an increased ability in abstractin g pleasuro from tb e ideal portion of th e m ind's e x e r c ise. W e m a y suppose th a t the sp ir it is active, in c reasing pow e r as it is progressed in subjects relating to itself an d its future d e s tin y , w h ich w e think proved by the c lea rn e s s of thought a n d argu m e n t m a intained by e ld e r ly perso n s after th e y have ceased to be active-m inded on o rdinary sub jects. T h e adm ission of such advancem e n t of sp irit clearly em b races th e thought th a t w h e n th e n e c e s s ity for co n s id e r ing all classos of subjects, e x c e p t th a t of s p ir itual ex isten c e , sh a ll have passed aw a y , as w h e n th e form is sep a r a ted from th e sp ir it, then the living sp irit shall still furth e r in c rease in th e activity and s a t le a s t as rap idly as before its separo- | tio n from tho form . T h u s , then , w ith o u t tho proofs c o n sequent S P I R I T U A L A N N E X A T I O N O N C E M O R E . P ar t r id g e an d B r it t a n : E s teem e d F r ien d s — T h e repo r t w h ich I.m a d e of th e doings o f th e S p i r i tu a l is ts in B rooklyn, and w h ich app e a red in your p a p e r o f th e 2 5 th u lt., h a s b e e n m a d e th e occasion, by J . II. W . T o o h e y , editor o f th e C h r is tian S p iritu a list, for pub lish ing in th a t p a p e r o f th e 9 th inst. an article n e a r ly th r e e col um n s in leng th , o f a m o st ex trao r d in a r y ch a r a c ter. D u ty to m y s e lf as w e ll as r e g a rd for th e cause o f spiritual tru th and pro g re s s , forbids th a t I should allow such an ebu lli tion of p a s s ion and preju d ice to p a s s w ithout p r o p e r rebuke. I t is painful for m e to stand in an antag o n istic position tow a rd an y one, and e s p e c ially before the public in connection w ith th e cau s e o f s o c ial and spiritu a l r e form , y e t a t tim e s it becom e s n e c e s s a r y , no t only to assum e a position of antagonism , but stoutly to m a intain it. In th e p r e s e n t in s tan c e I assum e m e re ly th e d e fensive, to r e p e l a w a n ton and gratuitous attack upon m y self, and, as I con c e ive, a co v e r t one upon the Brooklyn Spiritu a lists. T h e article in qu e s tio n is an extrao r d inary o n e in several resp e c t s , w h ich I propose to specify and su c c in c tly to ch a r a c te rize in a fitting m a n n e r ; and, after briefly rem a r k in g upon th e m e rits o f th e q u e s tion, w h ich the bellig e ren t propensities o f th e editor of th e C h r is tian S p iritu a list h a s prom p ted him to drag in as an issu e b e tw e e n us, to leave the s u b je c t forever. It is requ isite th a t I give th is assurance ; pu r e ly personal c o n sid e r a tion— th e m int, a n ise, nnd cum m in— .should give w a y to th e w e ig h tier m a tters of*the law . S p iritu a lists have a r i g h t to e x p e c t th a t th e colum n s of their jo u r n a ls w ill bo devoted to tho d issem ination o f th e facts and philosophy o f tho n e w unfold ings, rath e r th a n to th e discussion o f m e rely personal m a tters ; to the sp r e a d ing abroad of th e harm o n izing influences o f s p ir it ual tru th , ra th e r Ilian to giving facilities to gossiping scribblers to sharp e n the ap p e tites o f the lovers of scandal. I t is ex trao r d in a r y and anom alous, in th a t it p r o c e e d s from th e chosen niouth-pieco of a society professedly o r g a n ized on th e m o st C h r is t ian basis, put forth through its C h r is tian or g a n , and w h ich therefore m a y be r e g a rded as the exponent of the society its e l f ; how e v e r, the tone and sp ir it of the expo; tions m a y conflict w ith th e know n c h a r a c ter and q u a lities of th e m e n claim e d as constituting it. I t is furth e r ex trao r d in a r y , and I m a y say sim p ly ridiculous, w h e n it is co n s idered as p r o c e e d ing from a m ind p rofessedly qualified-hy p r a c tical exp e r ien c e in th e m o st holy th ings, im bued w ith a love o f truth, and w ith th a t bro th e r ly kindness th a t th in k e th no evil, y e t m a n ifests su c h rock lcss d isreg a r d of the proprieties and d e c e n c ies of life, as to lie w illin g to com prom ise itself and prostitute its talents, by bnndying such op probrious ex p ressions and statem e n ts as tho follow ing— “ tho in telligence th a t could allow itself thu s to dogm a tize,\ * * * “ th a t he m ight have a rig h t to bore th e next m e e ting.” * * “ So nearly false,\ • * • “ the fain test s h a d e o f truth,” * * * .. proved to bo a ruse,” * * * •« n | | th e bad faith and tric k e r y of th e political platform ,” * * * \ philosopher p a r excellence,\ * * * “ anti-m a rriage crusade,\ • * * “ no gov ernm e n t,\ * *• * “ w ire-pulling for office to g e t the sta r t of M r. T o w n s e n d and h is clique,” e tc. etc., in nauseous profu sion to th e end of the chapter. Its extrao r d inary c h a r a c ter is further evinced by its w ant o f logical consistency. A c c o rding to th e logic displayed, an insincerity so palpable and heartless is betray e d , that th e pos sesso r ap p a r e n tly w o u ld palm off upon the confiding believ e r s in Brooklyn a c o rrup t in s tru m e n t to labor am o n g th e m in es tablishing upon su r e foundations a w o rk of unexam p led benefi c e n c e ! W h a t other conclusion can be d r a w n from th e prem i se s laid do w n ? D id th e w r i te r in te n d to delib e r a tely a c t the h y p o c rite, or d id h e intend to affirm w ith double e m p h a s is the doctrine th a t the “ end san c tifies th e m e a n s ?” L e t us see. P e c u liar s e n s itiv e n e s s is m a n if e s ted on th e su b ject of th e rep utation o f th e p r o m inent sup p o r ters of th e cau s e , as i t is said, “ s in c e w e th in k any m a n , ho w e v e r in tellectually qualified, h o w e v e r capable to in s tru c t in a school room or caucus, is not qualified to take a p a r t in th e develo p m e n t o f tru e S p iritualism , w h ich is m a n h o o d and h e roism , w h o is not a b o v e trickery and in tr igue,” and h e reg a r d s “ the developm e n t and, sp r e a d o f S p iritualism , the ono th in g to be d e s ir e d above all oth e rs.\ In p u r s u a n c e o f such exalted view s , it is but fair to suppose th a t he in tend e d to act, and he d istin c tly inform s th e public “ how the B roo k lyn so c iety had its origin .\ “ W e proposed to our f riend th a t h e should in te r e s t o th e rs, and g e t u p a m e e t ing lor th e n e x t Sund a y , w ith the understand in g th a t th e R e v . U . C lark sh o u ld le c tu r e m o rning and evening.’-’ “ A s this friend w a s w e ll k n o w n to u s , w e said m u c h m o re, to th e effect th a t he w o u ld in te r e s t h im s e lf and o th e rs, as M r. C lark w as rea d y and w illing to give th e helping han d w h e r e v e r th e re w a s any p r o s p e c t of su c c e s s , or doing good,” and it is further d e c lared th a t h e h a s “ know n ” th is individual for “ ten or tw e lve y e a r s . ” N o tw ith s tan d in g all th is, in th e sam e article it is alleg e d th a t h e is la c k in g in “ co n s is ten c y and integrity or p u r p o s e ,” so m u c h so as to be capable of “ w ire-pulling for office,\ * * “ so as to g e t th e sta r t of M r. T o w n s e n d and h is clique,” an d ch a r g e s him hy im p lication as a “ cast-off ^uid im m o ral” m a n , and d e s ir e s th a t h e “ w ill not only m e e t the is su e s o f th e U n iv e rsalists, and be very cautious in future how h e g e ts up sid e issu e s to h id e h i s ow n com e -shorts, for if he is blind to th e m o ral obligations to Spiritu a lism and the friends o f pro g ress, h e m a y be su r e d istrib u tive ju s t ice w ill sooner or la ter pu n is h all w h o attem p t to ignore th e m o ral o r d e r o f so ciety , and the stric t d e m a n d s o f eq u ity .\ In m y r e p o r t I gave no cause, or in any m a n n e r e ith e r p r e viously or subsequently to its publication, for the gross p e r so n a lities indulged in. N e i th e r w a s th e re any th in g in the report to give occasion, or th a t could p roperly form an excuse, for the severe and injurious personal reflections upon o thers w h o m i t w a s n e c e s s a r y to nam e in m a k ing a rep o r t o f the proceedings o f th e B rooklyn C o n f e rence. I t is very difficult to conceive o f a sta te of facts th a t coqld ju s tify su c h appa- ently m a licious a s p e r s io n s as are cast upon one o f the indi- iduals nam e d . I know n o thing personal o f h is antecedents or o f those of the editor o f th e C h ristian S p iritu a l i s t ; but w h at e r th e y m a y be, I can not discover any valid cause for him to thus trav e l out of th e w a y to fasten upon another, such a w e ig h t o f odium as w a s evidently intended in th is case ; and th a t there w as no sufficient c a u se is evidently c o n fessed, for it is alleged in th is ex traordin a r y production, that “ W e ,” (the edi tor o f the S p iritu a list) “ s a y bad, for it could bo nothing less, hen one p e rson m a k o s a false chargo for the purpose o f ju s tifying h is lack of consistency and in teyrily o f purpose ; and ano ther p e rson m a k e s su c h charge public in o r d e r to place an opposing p a rty in an objectionable position.” N o w , w h a t w a s this “ c h a r g e ” w h ich is so flippantly de nounced as “ f a ls e .” W h y , sim p ly this— th a t the “ S o c ie ty for tho D iffusion of S p iritu a l K n o w ledge” had through its “ r e p r e sentative” u n w a r r a n tab ly in terfered w ith tho course an indi vidual had m a rked out for him s e lf to follow. T h i s “ ch a r g e ” had b e t * m a d e by ono, and made public by another, and it is th is th a t r e n d e rs an “ explanation im p e rative.” T h r e e mortal colum n s are requ ir e d , and of course tlioro can be no “ conven ient c lap - tr a p s to dovolop sid e issu e s ” r e s o r ted to. T h e ju s tification for w h ich, and all th e gross personalities therein c o n tained, m a y be found in these w o r d s : “ I f therefore wo have to be som e w h a t d irec t and personal in our r e m a rks, th e blame m u st r e s t prim a rily w ith M r. C lark, w h o tacked sincerity and honesty in m a k ing tho issue he did w ith tliu society, or its r e p resentative (although such rep r e s e n tativ e n e v e r had a being) , and secondly, w ith M r. T n p p e u T o w n s e n d , w h o had ntsldtscrt- tion enough to le t a bad thing r e s t .” T h e “ issue,” th e n , w as H ie sim p le statem e n t by U riah C lark to the Brooklyn C o n ference, th a t his m ind had ch a n g e d , and th a t h e w as now opposed to the Brooklyn society becom ing auxiliary to any other, and this valiant r e scue of the “ so c iety” (, !• tho So c iety for the D iffusion of Sp iritu a l K n o w ledgo) bus boon perform ed ; th e \ im p e rative\ “ explanation\ m a d e, becuuso 1 had stated in my rep o r t, th a t th is c h a n g e of position by friend C lark “ w as occasioned by w h a t lie considered,” to use tho language of the report, “ an unw a r r a n table interference on tho p a rt of a ropresentitive of\ said society, “ w ith refer ence to h is ow n course since th e preceding m e eting.\ T h is, it s tr ik e s m e very forcibly, is tantam o u n t to a confession of no sufficient c a u se for th e attack, even though th e re m a y have been, for the sensible sp e e c h of T r ista m S h a n d y to the fly, w h ereby it is indicated th a t “ th e re is room enough in the w orld for both of u s \ w ithout a “ quarrel” “ w ith those differing from u s ” (him ). L e t us see w h a t th e g r o u n d s w e r e for th e “ charge',' and w h at ju s tification can be found for th e assertion th a t “ such rep r e s e n tativ e ne v e r h a d a being.” In th e first place, the Christian S p iritu a list is published by the “ S o c ie ty for the Diffusion of Spiritual K n o w ledge,” and is its acknow ledged organ ; in the second place, th e editor o f this paper appeared th e B rooklyn C o n ference from tim e to tim e , and finally pro posed for th e b a s is o f a n organization th e Pream b le and R e s o lutions w h ich w e r e em b o d ied in m y r e p o r t ; and in the third place, th e g e n e r a l form of said Pream b le and R e s o lutions h a d b e e n m a d e to co rresp o n d essen tially to th e sty le of the form u laries of said “ S o c ie ty for th e D iffusion o f Sp iritu a l K n o w l ed g e ,” and one o f the r e solutions d e c lared th e B rooklyn Society should be “ a u x iliary ” th e reto. Su p e r a d d e d to this, as soon as th e Pream b le and R e solutions w e r e adopted, and before the n e x t m e e ting— w h e n th e sam e were una n im o u s ly reconsidered — th is sam e editor, as w a s c h a r g e d by f riend C lark, “ im p e rti n e n tly ” r e a d him a private le c tu r e as to h o w th e child “ a u x iliary” to th e p a r e n t,so “ patern a lly ” c a r e d for, s h o u ld be “ brouyhten” up. F r ie n d C lark having m a d e su b s tantially th is statem e n t at th e m e e ting m y m o tion to reco n s ider w a s m a d e , “ the interferen c e ” w a s a p p a r e n t enough. T h e m o tion, how e v e r, w a s not m a d e at a ll, on account o f the “ unw a r r a n table in ter feren c e ,” or on account o f hostility to th e “ s o c iety”— b u t as stated in m y repo r t— b e c a u se but few individuals h a d partici p a ted in th e proceedings, and know ing, a s I did, th a t th e re w e r e stro n g objections to th e id e a o f sp ir itual centralization. H e r e , I think, a re sufficient grounds for th e report, th a t the e d itor appeared th e re (w h ich w a s by no m e a n s objected to) in som e so r t as the “ r e p r e s e n tativ e ,\ and few , 1 appreh e n d , in view of the circum s tan c e s , can doubt th e c o rrectn e s s of the ch a r g e o f “ u n w a r r a n tab le interferen c e ,” o r that, if he thus presum e d to in te r f e r e in h is cap a c ity as an individual, and not as “ r e p r e s e n ta tiv e ,” th a t th e “ in terferen c e ” w a s a s “ im p e r tin e n t” a s charged. O n e w o rd m o re and I have done. T h e am a z ing compla c e n c y and egotism w ith w h ich the su b ject o f organization is treated is rem a rkable. T h e sen s itiv e n e s s also ex h ib ited upon th is subject i t w o u ld be h a rd to acco u n t for, e x c e p t upon the supposition th a t th e w r i ter su s tained relation s w ith the “ s o c iety” a t le a s t as intim a te as those of a “ rep r e s e n tative.” T h e te n d e n c y to m a g n ify th e “ society” a t th e ex p e n s e o f other e n terp r is e s or plans o f effort ch e r is h e d by oth e rs, appears to m e to be in very bad taste, calculated to produce im p ressions unfavorable to the id e a o f disin terested n e s s , and fears that the sp irit o f p roselylism un d e rlies h is acts. T h e s e im p ressions a re d e e p e n e d by th e attem p ts to stigm a tize and ridicule all the proposed m o d e s of organization th a t a re based on the integral idea o f tho un ity o f m a n , a n d th a t h is ph y s ical as well spiritual w a n ts need attending to. T h e basis proposed for the o r g a n ization of the B rooklyn C o n ference by M r , R y e r s o n , so far from ignoring all “ a id s , au x iliaries, or help in g societies,” w as especially g u a rded by “ the w ise caution and holy pru d e n c e of social o r d e r and gradual p r o g ress.” A n d now , w ith the foregoing rem a r k s , I tak e m y leave o f tlip redoubtable J . H . W . T o o h e y , prom ising, h o w e v e r, to con tinue to read the good things that ap p e a r from tim e to tim e m the Christian S p iritua list, a s I have done hereto f o re, and I hope to see its colum n s m o re appropriately filled in future. In conclusion, allow me to add that the cause in B rooklyn is steadily progressing. T h e m e e tings continue to be wol attended, notw ithstanding tho absence of the e d ito r o f th e Christian S p iritu a list since the m e e ting la s t r e f e r r e d to. T h e in terest of the m e e tings has' been m u c h h e ightened by the frequent attendance of friends from N e w Y o r k ; and 1 know I am not a ssum ing too m u c h w h e n I s a y , that the Spiritu a lists o f Brooklyn fully ap p reciate th e ir labofs, are un d e r m a n y obliga tions to them , a n d hope th e y m a y continue to be the recipients of such fuvors. ta p p e n tow n s e n d . B rooklyn , Dec. 18, 1864. IM M O R T A L H I S T O R I A N S . If the S p i r i ts of m e n w h o poopled th e earth in past ages cun com e hack to us, and sp e a k intelligibly through tho very elem e n ts t h a t su r round and pervade our being, w h at m a y we not anticip a te from th e ir future disclosures B y pntient in vestigation o f th e law s th a t regulate this intercourse w ith im m o rtalized beings, th e ‘Anodes o f comm u n ication m a y bo p e rf e c ted, so that our inquiries concerning the p a s t m a y be satisfied. T h e antiquarian has long been seek in g to discovor, am ong tho ruins of a n c ient em p ires, the se c r e ts of th e ir a'fctual life ; but hitherto only the silent m onum e nts o f the dead, w ith •stical lore, have answ e red to th e earnest questionings o f the living. But w h y m a y not the representatives o f those buried nations, over whose earthly hom e s the w in d * o f time have sw e p t the dust of cen iu r ies, yet speak to us, and supply th e m issing page* of hum a n histo ry ? 8, B. B. Tiis CoNQoanoK Conqu«red—The Frenoh otHoer, Saint-Arnnud, be fore embarking at Constantinople, sent bis will to his attorney in France, with the order : “I f Sebastopol is not token on the 28th of September, you may execute my will on the 29th.\ On tho 29th tigs of Alnm yielded to the disease with which he had so long strug gled, and died in the hour of his military glory. We find this state meut in tbe Coumtr tits Elait Unit,
