WHAT HANNEN SWAFFER TOLD THE MAGIC CIRCLE.
MAGICIANS and spiritualists are hereditary foes. When one considers how great a force these two bodies might become were their efforts united, one realises that the present state of affairs is indeed a tragedy. An amalgamation would be of immense value to magic as an art, and to spiritualism as a religion. I fear there is little hope of this taking place, for, to be quite frank, the magicians who attack spiritualism are as stubborn as mules, and are determined to see no further than the ends of their noses.
As a magician by profession, and a spiritualist by belief, I am regarded by many people as being just a trifle eccentric. I have gained this unenviable reputation simply because I openly confess to belief in things occult. Yet were I a grocer or a butcher instead of a magician, should I be thought "queer" because I believe in spiritualism?
The Magic Circle, that eminent body of illusionists to which I once belonged, have been "disproving" the Spiritualists ever since their erstwhile President, the famous Nevil Maskelyne, first set the ball rolling. Maskelyne himself was a secret believer, but for all that the present members carry on the traditions of their society in making all sorts of startling "disclosures."
On the 1st May, 1928, an historical debate took place at the Caxton Hall, Westminster, between two members of the Occult Committee of the Magic Circle, and two eminent spiritualists. In fairness to Messrs. Dingwall and Hocking, the two magicians in question, I must say they stated the case against spiritualism with a directness and conciseness which did them much credit. But their arguments were smashed to smithereens by the words of Hannen Swaffer, whose speech will go down as one of the finest ever made in the great cause of spiritualism. The other speaker for the spiritualists was Mr. Maurice Barbanell, whilst Professor A. M. Low occupied the Chair.
Hannen Swaffer needs no introduction to my readers. His name is known in theatrical circles the world over. He has been called "the most hated critic in England," and there is no doubt he has done something to earn this title. Swaffer has a habit of saying exactly what he thinks, whether it is pleasant or not.
I do not intend to record a long account of the proceedings at the Caxton Hall debate. Sufficient to say that all four speakers conducted themselves in a manner befitting the occasion. As far as I know, however, Swaffer's speech has never been permanently recorded, and I shall set down as many of his words as have a general public interest.
The first speaker of the evening was Mr. Hocking, who asserted "that the case for Spiritualism had not been proved." He instanced several séances which he had attended, and which, he said, had all been faked. Swaffer was then called upon to reply.
Before he commenced his speech, however, he astonished the audience by showing an egg from which he produced a coloured handkerchief. "I obtained this trick from a man who supplies apparatus to our leading magicians--Will Goldston," he explained. "I am dealing with conjurers to-night, and you see I am not entirely without some knowledge of the art." And with this novel introduction, he turned to outline the arguments for the spiritualists.
"Four years ago," he said, "I was being driven into materialism, due chiefly to the fact that, like many modern men, I was beginning to disbelieve in the miracles implied in inspiration. I had the good fortune to enquire as an honest man, with my eyes open, into the subject of spiritualism, and within five days of my inquiry starting I was convinced by the direct voice mediumship of an old friend of mine, to whom I paid no money, but to whose kindness I owe a great deal.
"I know nothing of those fraudulent mediums of whom Mr. Hocking has spoken. I stand here as a member of the Occult Committee of the Magicians' Club, a far more important body than that represented by the other side.
"I do not think I am a man who could be easily imposed upon. I was a crime investigator for a good many years, and I know a good deal of the secrets of this world as a result of my journalistic life. When I became convinced of the truth of spiritualism, I knew I had to tell it to the world, and with my career in my hands I stood on the platform at Queen's Hall and risked the consequences. The result was that nothing has happened and nothing would. I became convinced of the truth of spiritualism because in Mr. Bradley's [ Mr. Dennis Bradley, the well-known direct voice medium. ] room at Kingston Vale the voices of the so-called dead spoke to me in their own voices. I defy anyone to call Mr. Bradley either a fake or a fraud. Mr. Hocking has told us that he did not discover anything. I read recently of a girl from St. Kilda who had never seen a tram, a horse, or a motor car, but that proved nothing. "Fake" is a word which has been hurled at martyrs through all ages.
"In my own flat in Trafalgar Square in the last two years I have seen every kind of phenomena known to spiritualism, except spirit photography and materialisation. We never sit in the dark, we never pay any money, and we never deceive ourselves. Men like Mr. Hocking tell you that you go into a dark room wanting to be deluded. That is certainly not true of persons like myself. I am too used, as a journalist, to analysing facts.
"From the beginning of history there have been witnesses of the fact that so-called supernatural phenomena has taken place. St. Paul believed it. Roman Catholicism teems with it; Mahomet had evidence of it; and in my own drawing-room I have proved the same thing. What happens in our presence is what happened to Moses, or there would not be any Jewry. It happened to Christ and Paul, or there would not have been any Christianity. It happened to Wesley, or there would not have been a Wesleyan ministry. It happened to George Fox, or there would have been no Quakers. We had twenty kinds of phenomena in our flat last year--fourteen different kinds on Boxing Night, 1927, Mr. Dingwall will, no doubt, tell you--and it has been his business for five years as the paid research officers of the S.P.R.--that these phenomena do not mean that people survive death, but if these phenomena take place together, you can no more say that it is not evidence of life hereafter than you can say that, simply because you have discovered my skull, it is not evidence that I have lived. I have heard Northcliffe's voice speaking to me in Denis Bradley's house as loudly as I am speaking to-night."
At this point Swaffer instanced a large amount of evidence which had come before him and said that he felt indignant that at this late hour of the world's civilization there should be people who could not accept the all important truths of which he had told them. They were facts which were beyond dispute.
Mr. Dingwall then spoke for the Magic Circle and was replied to by Mr. Barbanell. A few members of the audience gave their opinion and Messrs. Hocking, Barbanell, and Dingwall made further speeches. Swaffer then resumed.
My difficulty this evening is the inability to relate in twenty minutes the experiences of four years. I could go on for hours explaining everything about my sittings and lay my cards on the table, but I cannot see why I should submit the luxury of my drawing room to the intrusion of a lot of people I do not know, and do not want to know.
"I recently called up Rear-Admiral Evans, who went with Scott to the Antarctic and said to him 'Will you tell me what proof you have that Captain Scott got to the South Pole?' He replied 'None.' I said 'The photographs produced could have been taken on Ealing Common last winter?' 'Yes,' he replied. 'Could the scientific records that were made have been faked?' 'Yes,' he said. 'What evidence have you got anywhere for the fact that Scott reached the Pole?' 'None,' he replied, 'except the word of men who could not lie.' We, too, quote the words of men who could not lie. That is our case.
"Since Captain Scott died in the far South, the snows of several winters have made white those terrible plains, and blown away all the evidence. Still, we believe his story is true although we cannot prove it. Indeed, we know that it is true. And the story of Scott, after that of Nelson, is the greatest of the country's heirlooms.
"My opponents talk of lies, fraud, deceit, self-deception. I do not believe that men of position and honour are deliberate liars. I am not afraid of Occult Committees. I only know that the evidence for spiritualism is piling up. Forty years ago men were ostracised for what I am now saying openly. It is easy to tell the truth to-night, for the spiritualists have already won."