The Spiritualist newspaper > No.208, August 18th 1876

&
Am. 18, 1876.
THE SPntITtJAlIST.
llortnj.
THESE TWO.
They stood together in the snn;
His glory shone around them both.
Two, did I say ? nay, they were one
By holy word and plighted troth.
A strong firm arm about her prest;
A tranquil light on sea and shore;
A golden head upon his breast—
A maiden smiling—nothing more.
A little churchyard on the hill;
A heavy cloud o’er sea and wave ;
A deathlike silence, sad and still;
Green turf above a new made grave;
A black -robed figure kneeling there,
A blissful dream now past and o’er,
A golden head bowed low with care—
A maiden weeping—nothing more.
Gasoline A. Burke.
A LYRIC OF THE GLEAMING SICKLE.
By J. T. Markley.
Hail, genii of the sheaves 1
Once more ring musical the holy blades!
A nation’s bread, fire-hued, on groaning glades,
Cerean beauty leaves!
Work on! ye god-called, song urged, sun lash’d swains
Brown Autumn’s affluent yield is on the plains,
Sweet days and cool calm nights,
The rare companionship of faithful moons
That follow playfully unmoistened noons—
These be the tokens of the harvest-tide!
Each field, earth’s heiress ! witness! lover! bride 1
Here labour is half love,
And merry-hearted toilers grumble not
Or frown upon their lot;
The seal upon their work is from above,
What rapture! hallow’d sweat! united glee!
Quaint snatches of the psalms that used to be,
The majesty of labour drunk with song,
The weak arm willing, and the willing, strong ;
What pleasing mystery!
A world supported by the breasts of hills,
As children helplessly
Turn to the blue-veined, snowy fountain rills
Of mothers’ paps, which feed
Dependents in their need.
Bless’d be those hills! which bear, in amber trail,
Rich com, awaiting punishment of flail!
Thrice bless’d Cerealia—feast of yearly good
Warm bursts of plenty where the spring plough stood !
Be this an August birth ?
Or is it not green beauty’s ripening day
Of age and fruitful worth ?
No more with April’s laughing suns to play.
’Tis now the gleaming sickle time,
The glad thanksgiving bells may chime ;
The proud and smiling farmer gathers in
What toil has sown, and toil can only win;
E’en Ruth, the hopeful gleaner, lingers at the gate,
Nor must the softly hooded maiden, empty wait 1
Peterborough Advertiser.
(Eomgponiience.
[Great freedom is given to correspondents, who sometimes express opinions diametrkaUy opposed
to those of this journal and its readers.]
ART MAGIC.
Sir,—Through the courtesy of an English friend, I have been favoured
with two copies of your journal, each containing letters which I can
simply characterise as abusive of the work which I have recently edited
and published entitled Art Magic. Truth to say, I find nothing in
either letter which would induce me to waste time and postage in an¬
swering ; but there are in this country several readers of Art Magic,
who, like myself, feel indignant at the reiteration of these senseless and
abusive letters, and who urge me, in the interest of truth and justice, to
put in a protest against this illiberal method of treating a work which
has excited the highest admiration and praise from hundreds of its
readers, both in this country and in Europe. I am entirely prepared
for all the bitterness which theological bigotry could vent on this work,
nor can I wonder that those who deem their idols are assailed by the
unanswerable truths put forth in Art Magic, should avail themselves of
any excuse they can find to denounce it; yet I am somewhat surprised
that so high toned and valuable a journal as The Spiritualist should lend
its columns to such merely illogical denunciation as that which appears
in the issue of June 14th over the signature of “John Rouse.” Mr. ij
John Rouse’s opinion of Art Magic is, “ that it is a mass of antiquated (
rubbish.” To those who adjust their methods of thinking by Mr. John j\
Rouse’s opinion, no doubt this is a piece of valuable information. The |)
same high authority states that he has “ read all that the book contains H
in other works.” Now, it is not for the sake of combatting Mr. John j(
Rouse’s opinions or statements—neither of which materially affect me— |
that I now write, but as straws will tell which way the wind blows, so \l
this great critic’s opinion furnishes me with a text for an inquiry which i
many others, besides myself, are disposed to make. It is this: Will !(
any of the great savants of my own country, those, for instance, who can j(
find nothing new in Art Magic, inform me what constitutes the real \)
! value of a book ? Might an ignorant individual like myself presume
! to inquire of the John Rouses of literature, whether it is the novelty of
the statements made, or the manner of their statement, which attaches
the stamp of merit to a work ?
| If it be the former, then “ Mother Goose,” and all the new ideas
j which pervade fairy tales and one-syllable legends, should be more
highly esteemed than Shakespeare, Byron, Goethe, and Schiller, none of
whom are especially distinguished, that I can learn, for putting forth
new ideas, although they have acquired some reputation for incarnating
i old and familiar ideas in super-excellent forms. With my very limited
powers of critical analysis, I am unable to discover any difference in the
| substance of the historical facts recorded by Peter Parley and Macaulay,
i yet somehow the manner of the two records seems to differ, constituting
| the one the historian of ten and twelve year old readers, and the other
; an authority even with the contemporaries of Mr. John Rouse.
I In my early years I was in the habit of attending the church services of
I my own country, but I never remember anything particularly original
i falling on my listening ears, even when the utterances proceeded from
| the consecrated lips of Deans and Bishops, yet what orthodox individual
i would gainsay the value of the sacred platitudes I then heard, because
| they were not especially new or original?
I I presume Mr. John Rouse is too devoted a Bible student to have for-
| gotten that “ there is nothing new under the sun; ’’ poor Thomas Hood
| would have added, except “Christian Charitystill, I, in my ignorance of
i all that has ever been written on such subjects, deemed that the mode
i in which the author of Art Magic had brought together in one grand
i prospective view the records of ancient magic, their origin and progress,
| explaining and illustrating them with mediaeval mysticism and modern
| spiritual science, might form a record worthy even of the attention of
i such enlightened and universally informed Spiritualists as Mr. John
i Rouse.
Nay, more; in my misapprehension of the Vast expanse of knowledge
which Spiritualists of the “ Rouse ” type have attained to, I had deemed,
i as I stated in the editor’s preface to Art Magic, that “ the sublimity of
| the sentiments, the grandeur of the intention, and the high-toned
[ philosophy which pervaded this noble work,” might make amends for
[ the absence of that startling novelty, far more discoverable in a Christ-
I mas pantomime than in the ethics of John Stuart Mill or Thomas Car-
hj lyle. As to the chances that the Spiritualists of this generation will
|) I become lunatics through the study of Art Magic, I can only say with all
j j sincerity, it is a great pity but what they would try the experiment.
I j j Some few hundreds of the subscribers to Art Magic, who are as yet out-
j)i side of the lunatic asylum and likely to remain so, consider my friend’s
j (i work of such immense value that despite the stringent conditions he has
| j laid down for limiting its publication, they have informed me they are
In almost disposed to risk all consequences, and issue another edition, for
]{ that, in their opinion, this work sent broadcast over the world would
i) j do more to hinder many Spiritualists from acting as if they ought to be
ju in a lunatic asylum, than any publication of the age. To set Mr.
i 11 Rouse’s anxious mind at rest, let me state that the author of Art Magic
j)' is not only an accomplished magician himself, but a thorough “ adept ” in
| ! all the magical arts he describes, and yet some hundreds of people
nj almost as well informed as Mr. Rouse, deem what they term his “ mag-
|)I nificent work” a pretty good proof of his sanity. As to me, his humble
j j j follower, friend, and editor, although I have only seen, and learned, and
Hj practised, enough to be assured “ there are more things in heaven and
i | earth” than you, Mr. Rouse, dream of in your philosophy, I am
j(i still not quite mad enough to underrate the value of Art Magic
| \ | because it has not attained to the impossible discovery of something that
j)| Mr. Rouse does not know already. I can only say those who know
i everything that is in Art Magic had better set themselves seriously to
j work to apply their knowledge; they would then correct some of the
jlj idolatries to which my countrymen are addicted in their forms of
i (j worship ; they would improve their unscientific apprehensions of Spirit-
\)\ ualism by the new, clear, and scientific suggestions laid down in Art
j) | Magic, and they would certainly find their very narrow views of Spirit-
| ualism considerably enlarged by the author’s broad, reverend, and
I) | exalted ideas of spiritual existence throughout the universe. As a con-
|) I eluding piece of advice to your correspondent, Mr. Editor, permit me to
I \ | suggest that when he essays the office of a critic—(“ those butchers of
1| human character, whose chief delight is to exercise their carving knives
! upon the bodies of slain reputations, without regard to qualification for
| the act of dissection.” Vide author’s preface to Art Magic, page 8)—
he might take a valuable lesson in the art from one of the best, most
j philosophical, and highly informed writers of which our ranks can boast,
namely, “ M.A. (Oxon),’’ who, in his recent critique on Art Magic in
Human Nature, says—with all that modesty which belongs to true
• < i merit—“ I know my own ignorance of the subject too well to venture
\\\ on any theorising The book covers far too wide a surface for me
|)j to deal with it exhaustively, and I foresee that the author will anathe-
| - j matise me with all those arts in which he is such a proficient, for my
|{j ignorant and imperfect treatment of his book.” Again, this true gen-
j j tleman and learned scholar says—“ One says rudely, ‘It is a Yankee
sell; there is nothing new in it!’” “M.A. (Oxon),” goes on to say,
“ I can only say there is a great deal that I believe to be true—a great
deal that was new to me; a great deal, moreover, that I believe to be
very necessary for the world to know.” Not necessary, of course, for
critics who, having read it all through, can see nothing in it “ but a
mass of antiquated rubbish;” but necessary—0 most profound and
all accomplished student!—for poor ignoramuses like me; not wholly
despicable in the eyes of “ M.A. (Oxon),” and some four or five hundred
of the best informed Spiritualists of America—including the learned
linguist, scholar, writer, and traveller, Dr. G, L. Ditson, from whom I
am just now in receipt of his views of Art Magic, in which he con¬
cludes in these words—” Would that I had such a friend as its author!
I am profoundly moved by it; it throws light into the very depths of
nature; it opens new worlds of thought, and I feel Uke veiling my face