THE WAIKATO ARGUS

Hamilton, New Zealand

15 June 1911

(page 3)

THE "ROSICRUCIANS."

Remarkable evidence was given recently in a London Court, when Mr Justice Scrutton and a jury concluded the hearing of the libel action brought by Mr George Cecil Jones, an analytical chemist of Great Towers street, City, against the Looking Glass Publishing Co., Ltd., and its editors and printers.

The plaintiffs alleged libel in a series of articles entitled “An Amazing Sect,” in which charges were made against Mr Aleister Crowley, who had been expelled from the Rosicrucian Order. The Looking Glass accused Mr Crowley of immorality. “Two of Crowley’s friends and introducers,” continued the article complained of, “are still associated with him—one, the rascally sham Buddhist monk, Alan Bennett [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 by Basingstoke in metallurgy, but of late has had some sort of small merchant’s business in the City.”

When the court adjourned at the previous sitting, Samuel McGregor Mathers [MacGregor Mathers] was under examination by Mr Schiller, for the defence. Referring to Mr Crowley’s expulsion from the Rosicrucian Order, the witness now said that he was expelled because he worked against witness, and also on account of his moral character.

Cross-examined by Mr Simmons (for the plaintiff), Mathers admitted that he himself was christened in the name of Samuel Mathers.

You assumed the name of McGregor?—Yes, in 1603 the name was forbidden to be used under pain of death.

You name in 1603 was McGregor (laughter)?—Yes, if you put it that way.

You have called yourself the Chevalier McGregor?—No (emphatically).

Have you ever suggested to anybody that you have some connection with James IV, of Scotland?—I do not understand what you mean. Of course every Scotsman of ancient family must have some connection with James IV, and other Scottish Kings.

Have you any occupation?—That is as you like to take it. I may say that for a man of no occupation I am probably the busiest man living.—Laughter.

You have no profession or business?—I have given the best years of my life to the work which your friends have stolen.

What work is that?—The establishment of the Rosicrucian Order. It required a knowledge of many languages and an enormous amount of work.

There are others who assert that theirs is the true Rosicrucian Order?—Yes, that is why you have two other forms of it. “Rosicrucian” was a general term to indicate the Order, which was a secret one, added the witness.

How many members are there in the Rosicrucian Order?—I refuse to give you the actual numbers. There are more than 200.

In answer to further questions, witness said that there were secret chiefs but he was the external head of the Order, but declined to say how many powers. There were secret chiefs with whom he was in communication, but he was sworn not to reveal their names.

Witness admitted that he had expelled members from the Rosicrucian Order, but declines to say how many, though counsel suggested that he had expelled 15 at one time. He had known the plaintiff doe some time, and was on terms of friendship with him until he backed up Mr Crowley.

Counsel was proceeding to put questions with regard to Alan Bennett, when the judge interposed 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 Mr Crowley at the Caxton Hall, which had been described in the Looking Glass. He paid five guineas for the series of performances. He did not like the performances, and asked for his money back.

Mr Schiller: Is the account in the Looking Glass an accurate account of what took place?—So far as the sketches are concerned I think they are pretty accurate.

Witness added that he did not think the performance was worth the money. The performances were supposed to be rites and rituals based on mysticism and planetary spirits, and that sort of thing. The one he attended had something to do with the planet Saturn.

The Judge. What was Saturn being invoked for?—I do not know, but I think each performance had a bearing on a particular planet.

Mr Schiller then put in as evidence many of the works written by Crowley including the “Holy Aspiration of Adolescence” and “The Mother’s Tragedy.” The subject matter was described by a reviewer as being treated in a “revolting fashion.”

This concluded the evidence for the defendants.

In summing up the judge said he proposed to leave four questions for the consideration of the jury:

Were the words complained of defamatory of the plaintiff, and if so, were they substantially true? Were the statements, so far as they consisted of opinions, fair comment on the facts? And what damage had the publication caused the plaintiff?

The jury answered the first three questions in the affirmative, and the judge gave judgment for the defendants with costs.