THE LOOKING GLASS

London, England

26 November 1910

(page 268)

AN AMAZING SECT.—NO. 3.

FURTHER DETAILS OF MR. ALEISTER CROWLEY.

Since our article of November 12, further information has reached us from an unimpeachable source as to put the past record of this man, who dares to put himself forward as a High Priest, who has the effrontery to defend his doctrines in the columns of a high-class journal such as the “Bystander,” and who has the impudence to attempt to draw a parallel between his own case and that of Jesus Christ.

By their Friends Ye Shall Know Them.

In addition to those details of Crowley’s career which we published in our issue of November 12, the following facts have come to our knowledge. In 1898 Crowley became a member of the Rosicrucian Order, a very ancient association, whose principal object is the study of the mystic philosophy of ancient religions, and which possesses a vast amount of traditional lore on this and kindred subjects, while requiring from its members due respect and honour for religious ideas, as well as good moral character. Two of Crowley’s friends and introducers are still associated with him; one, the rascally sham Buddhist monk, Allan Bennett, whose imposture was shown up in “Truth” some years ago; the other a person of the name of George Cecil Jones, who was for some time employed as Basingstoke in metallurgy, but of late has had some sort of small merchant’s business in the City. Crowley and Bennett lived together, and there were rumours of unmentionable immoralities which were carried on under their roof.

An Exposure in “Truth.”

Soon after this, Crowley began to shield himself under different aliases, and Allan Bennett swindled a lady, whose name we have, out of several hundred pounds, under the pretext of manufacturing rubies, and was expelled from the Rosicrucian Order. Bennett then went to Ceylon, and thence to Burmah, where he endeavoured to pass himself off as a Buddhist monk sent by the Ceylonese Himayana Buddhists to those of Burmah. Here, however, they soon found him out, and he was rejected by one Buddhist monastery after another as a sham and a fraud. Later he came to England with two Burmese ladies. He formed an association called the Buddhist Society, and made desperate attempts at advertisement, using the name of Macgregor, to which he had no shadow of title, and stating that he was an M.A. of Trinity College, Cambridge, which was a bare-faced falsehood, his education having been really of a very minor description. However, he was well shown up in “Truth,” both by its editor and by a very strong letter about him from the president of the Buddhist Society from Rangoon.

To his other vices was added that of drug-taking to excess, and it is more than likely that the incense used in Crowley’s rites is heavily steeped in drugs.

Many Aliases.

To return to Crowley. His aliases would grace an Old Bailey criminal. He called himself Macgregor, with an ignorance so astounding of the history of that name as to tempt one to believe that he had never even read the works of Walter Scott. Like his worthy associate Bennett, he endeavoured to use it for the purposes of advertisement. Count Svareff, Count Skellatt, Count Skerrett, Edward Aleister, Lord Boleskine, Baron Rosenkreutz, are a few of the aliases under which he has figured from time to time.

Expulsion from the Rosicrucian Order.

In 1900 he began to show up in his true colours. Being sent from Paris to London on certain matters connected with the Order, he enormously exceeded his instructions, and stole certain property of the Order, which he took up with him to Boleskine. His next exploit was to steal the jewels of a lady, the wife of an English officer. As well as top extort money by threats. She obtained a warrant for his arrest, but he fled the country, having in the meantime obtained a considerable amount from a well-known singer. He then remained abroad for some years, when he came to Paris. In our article of November 12 we related the circumstances which led to his marriage, his treatment of his wife, and her subsequent successful action for divorce. It only remains for us to add that he was formally expelled from the Rosicrucian Order as a man of evil character and acts, and that he was forced to retract a libel which he circulated about the head of the Order, and make a humble legal apology through his solicitors.

A Challenge.

Last year he went down to Cambridge and started some sort of rites there, in which he endeavoured to induce the undergraduates to join. The authorities, however, received a timely warning, and Crowley made no headway. Many of his poems are of the most obscene and revolting character. Other statements about him we refrain from printing, as they are of too horrible a nature, but we think we have said enough to show that our previous attacks on him and his orgies were more than justified, and we challenge Crowley to disprove any one of the statements we have made.

His article in this week’s “Bystander” is too unspeakably feeble to merit even passing comment. Moreover, we do not anticipate that this, or any other journal with any title to respectability, will open its columns to Mr. Aleister Crowley in the future.