|
THE EVENING STANDARD London, England 1 May 1935 (page 18)
Aleister Crowley and "Boycott":
Complains That Public Cannot Get His Books
An allegation that his works were boycotted in England was made by Edward Alexander Crowley, Aleister Crowley, the author, at the London Bankruptcy Court to-day.
He appeared for his public examination in bankruptcy. His statement of affairs shows liabilities £4710 (ranking £4695), and assets a doubtful book debt of £15,000.
Examined by Mr. Bruce Park, Assistant Official Receiver, Mr. Crowley said that he had been known by many other names, hundred in fact, because every time that he wrote a book he invented a name to fit it.
In 1926 he and other persons formed a
“pool” the objects of which, roughly speaking, were to
publish the results of his research work and begin a world
movement based on his theory of philosophy.
LIVING ABROAD
Afterwards he was mainly dependent for living expenses on money derived from the “pool,” the work of which was discontinued in 1932.
Mr. Crowley said that no income-tax papers had been sent to him since before the war. He never inquired the reason for that, but he was living almost all the time abroad.
Since January 1932 he had received only £78 from the sale of books and £134 from the writing of articles. He had also received £450 from a family trust.
The Official Receiver.—In those three years have you ever had any remunerative work or occupation except the sale of those books and the writing of two or three articles?—Not directly.
Mr. Crowley added that he had been living on money borrowed from a person whom he had promised to repay. Such repayment he hoped to make out of a reconstruction of the “pool.”
LIBEL ACTION
In 1932 he issued a writ for libel against certain parties, but in April 1934 judgment was given against him. His appeal was dismissed.
He attributed his insolvency to the boycott of his work and writings in this country, to the non-receipt of capital which his associates in the “pool” had agreed to provide for it, to the loss of the libel action and to other causes.
The Official Receiver: Would it not be fairer to say that the public did not buy the books?—It would be grossly unfair and untrue.
Mr. Crowley asserted that he could not get to the public and that the public could not get to him; but he admitted that certain books mentioned had not been boycotted.
Do you agree that you have been grossly extravagant in your living?—No.
Mr. Crowley said that he had never paid more than three guineas a week for a flat. His tobacco cost him approximately six shillings a week.
What are you doing now?—Well, I am under examination.
Someone in court laughed.
Mr. Crowley explained that he did not quite know what the Official Receiver meant.
The Official Receiver.—Are you earning your income now?—Yes; that is to say, I am not incurring any debts. I do not owe a penny to anybody except to these unfortunate creditors.
The examination was concluded. |