THE IRISH TIMES

Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

27 April 1911

(page 7)

ROSICRUCIAN LIBEL CASE.

The hearing was resumed yesterday, before Mr. Justice Scrutton and a jury, of the action in which libel is alleged, brought by Mr. George Cecil Joness, a consulting and analytical chemist in London, against a weekly paper called The Looking Glass. He complained of statements in a series of articles dealing with the career of a Mr. Aleister Crowley. The defence was that the articles did not libel the plaintiff, but referred solely to Mr. Crowley.

Mr. Samuel MacGregor Mathers [MacGregor Mathers], cross-examined by Mr. Simons (for the plaintiff) said he was registered in the name of Mathers, though he was now known as MacGregor.

The witness said that there were secret chiefs, and he was the external head of the Rosicrucian Order, and exercised administrative powers. He was in communication with the secret chiefs, but he was sworn not to reveal their names. (Laughter.)

The witness stated that he had expelled members from the Rosicrucian Order, but declined to say how many. He had known the plaintiff for some time, and was on terms of friendship with him until he backed up Crowley on Crowley’s expulsion from the Order.

Counsel was questioning the witness with regard to Allan Bennett, a Buddhist monk, and also a member of the Order when His Lordship intervened with the remark—This trial is getting very much like the trial in “Alice in Wonderland.” (Laughter.)

Mr. William Migge, a merchant of Eastcheap, said he attended the first séance conducted by Crowley at the Caxton Hall, which had been described in The Looking Glass. He paid five guineas for a series of screen performances. He did not like them, and asked for his money back. They were supposed to be rites and rituals based on mysticism and planetary spirits. The performance he attended had something to do with the planet of Saturn.

The plaintiff was recalled regarding a certain interview, and was cross-examined about his knowledge of Mr. Crowley’s books, his attention being directed to an extract from a review in which one of the books was described as “revolting.” The extract was printed as an advertisement of the book.

His Lordship—Why does Crowley pick out a criticism which describes his books as revolting?

The Witness—He would like to sell his books. I have seen several criticisms, some one way and some another.

Captain Fuller [J.F.C. Fuller], who had been requested to remain out of court while Mr. Jones was giving his evidence, was the next witness. He said he was present at the interview referred to as a friend of the plaintiff.

In cross-examination, the witness said he was a friend of Crowley’s, and had known him for the last five years. He was a reader and admirer of Crowley’s books.

The jury returned a verdict for the defendants.