Changes

  | next = 19

  | next = 19

}}

}}

{{Style P-Align center|{{Style S-HPB SB. HPB note|The Philadelphia Child ― Holmes Storm}}

 

{{Style S-HPB SB. HPB note|… I told so to Olcott before }}

{{Style S-HPB SB. HPB note|The Philadelphia Child ― Holmes Storm|center}}

{{Style S-HPB SB. HPB note|would not believe. The Holmes are {{Style S-Double underline|Frouds}}.}}

{{Style S-HPB SB. HPB note|… I told so to Olcott before would not believe. The Holmes are {{Style S-Double underline|Frouds}}.|center}}

 

}}

}}

{{Style P-HPB SB. Title|A Letter from “Honesty”<ref>The real name of the writer of the above accompanies the article. - Ed[itor] B[anner] of L[ight] {{Style S-HPB SB. HPB note|(Leslie)}}</ref>}}

{{Style P-HPB SB. Title|A Letter from “Honesty”<ref>The real name of the writer of the above accompanies the article. - Ed[itor] B[anner] of L[ight] {{Style S-HPB SB. HPB note|(Leslie)}}</ref>}}

''Philadelphia, Jan. 20th,'' 1875.}}

''Philadelphia, Jan. 20th,'' 1875.}}

 

{{HPB-SB-item

{{Style P-HPB SB. Title|A Challenge To Messrs. Robert Dale Owen and Dr. Child.}}

| author = Bloede, G.

| title = A Challenge To Messrs. Robert Dale Owen and Dr. Child

| source details = Jan. 30, 1875, p. 2

}}

We ought to arrive at the truth, and, if possible, the full truth in regard to the so-called exposure of the “fraud,” perpetrated, as they pretend, before the eyes of hundreds in the spirit-cireles of the Holmes media. I, for one, having assisted at one of the seances when Katie King appeared, and having accurately examined the locality and surroundings in Tenth street, have never believed in the alleged “fraud,” or in the pretended ''exposé''. A great many doubtful circumstances, contradictions, improbabilities and suspicions features in the silly “affidavit” of the false Katie King, have lately been pointed out by others, and confirmed the opinion of many, that indeed a “gross fraud” has been committed, though probably not on that side where the attempt to lay it has been made. The truth in this matter ought therefore to be brought out by all means. What simpler way could there be for this purpose than the identification of the alleged principal actress in the fraud by those who have seen her as Katie King? I would therefore suggest the following propositions:

We ought to arrive at the truth, and, if possible, the full truth in regard to the so-called exposure of the “fraud,” perpetrated, as they pretend, before the eyes of hundreds in the spirit-cireles of the Holmes media. I, for one, having assisted at one of the seances when Katie King appeared, and having accurately examined the locality and surroundings in Tenth street, have never believed in the alleged “fraud,” or in the pretended ''exposé''. A great many doubtful circumstances, contradictions, improbabilities and suspicions features in the silly “affidavit” of the false Katie King, have lately been pointed out by others, and confirmed the opinion of many, that indeed a “gross fraud” has been committed, though probably not on that side where the attempt to lay it has been made. The truth in this matter ought therefore to be brought out by all means. What simpler way could there be for this purpose than the identification of the alleged principal actress in the fraud by those who have seen her as Katie King? I would therefore suggest the following propositions:

''Brooklyn, N.Y., Jan. 5th,'' 1875. {{Style S-HPB SB. HPB note|Of course, dear doctor.}}}}

''Brooklyn, N.Y., Jan. 5th,'' 1875. {{Style S-HPB SB. HPB note|Of course, dear doctor.}}}}

 

{{HPB-SB-item

{{Style P-HPB SB. Title|Aт Earnest Word to Robert Dale Owen.}}

| title = Aт Earnest Word to Robert Dale Owen

}}

Hon. R. D. Owen—''Dear Sir'' : With profound respect for yourself, and gratitude for your services to humanity, I beg leave to suggest, in behalf of many of your friends, that we are looking ''impatiently'' for a more creditable ''denouement'' to the Katie King fiasco at Philadelphia. As it stands, you have virtually condemned all the manifestations at the Holmes’ séances as frauds. Such is the impression your letter to the Tribune will make upon ninety-nine hundredths of your readers. If such a condemnation is injurious to the reputation of spiritual phenomena with the public, it is vastly more damaging to your character and credibility as a writer and reporter of marvellous phenomena. It looks too much like a literary suicide.

Hon. R. D. Owen—''Dear Sir'' : With profound respect for yourself, and gratitude for your services to humanity, I beg leave to suggest, in behalf of many of your friends, that we are looking ''impatiently'' for a more creditable ''denouement'' to the Katie King fiasco at Philadelphia. As it stands, you have virtually condemned all the manifestations at the Holmes’ séances as frauds. Such is the impression your letter to the Tribune will make upon ninety-nine hundredths of your readers. If such a condemnation is injurious to the reputation of spiritual phenomena with the public, it is vastly more damaging to your character and credibility as a writer and reporter of marvellous phenomena. It looks too much like a literary suicide.

{{Style P-Signature|Candor.}}

{{Style P-Signature|Candor.}}

 

{{HPB-SB-item

{{Style P-HPB SB. Title|The London Katie King.}}

| title = The London Katie King

| source details = p. 4

}}

A correspondent sends us the following paragraph from the San Francisco Bulletin, Jan. 4th, 1875, and asks if there is any truth in it:

A correspondent sends us the following paragraph from the San Francisco Bulletin, Jan. 4th, 1875, and asks if there is any truth in it:

{{Footnotes}}

{{Footnotes}}