FORTUNE TELLING.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XLI, Issue 9488, 12 April 1921, Page 5

FORTUNE TELLING.

THE CASE OF "ARGUS." APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION. '(P«r Pre*s Aurfouiauun.j AUCKLAND, April 11. Argus," the eleven-year-old boy, and his father, owies jU)UIs Copeland, who were ueiore Mr Poynton iS.M., m the Magistrate's Court m January last m connection with their rortuiie-teliing entertainment, were under discussion at the Supreme Court to-day, Mr Justice Adams presiding, when Mr Fleming appealed on the father s behalf against the conviction recorded against him by the-Magis-trate. Mr Meredith appeared far respondent, Detective-Sergeant Cummings, who was the informant m the original case..

Mr Iteming said the Lower Court ease had been taken under section 261 ■oi the Crimes Act. That section was a_copy of the English Witchcraft Act of 1735. The whole point, therefore, *esolved itself into a question of whether or not an intention to deceive was an ingredient m the offence. In the caseMcGrath y. Vine, Mi- Justice i^d wards had held that an intention to doceive must, be proved, and also that an intention to dece^ formed an essential part of the offence. The Judge ir t i * oase tnat J ' f that wa « not the law, then any person who playfully ' "cut the cards" to tell his friend's fortune was guilty of an offence. He might have gone further, added Mr Fleming, and pointed out that if his reading of the law "was incorrect, the prophets of old and the apostles themselves, if on earth today, would have been liable to be indicted under the section. The Magistrate had found these facts: (1) That defendant and his son "Argus" had undertaken to tell future events. " (2) The defendant honestly believed that, m conjunction with his son, he could tell the said future events. (3) There was no intention on the part of defendant to. deceive the public. The defendant -and his son, continued counsel, usually appeared at picture houses, where they put on a "telepathic stunt," the telepathic power being induced by hypnotism. "Argus" had reached the stage when he could hypnotise himself. The Magistrate had heard the case with an open mind, and had had an exhibition of the hoy's powers, which had convinced him that the lad had wonderful telepathic powers.

His Honor: I am bound to accept the 'Magistrate's conclusion that there was no intention to deceive' and that the defendant honestly believed (although it might be difficult for some people to understand, it) that his son could foretell future events.

Mr Meredith argued that the words of the Crimes Act, under which the proceedings were taken, were so different from those m the Vagrancy Act that cases decided* on the latter had no bearing on the present proceedings. Mr Justice Edwards had never intend- | ed to say that an intention to deceive was an absolute ingredient of the offence. The word "pretend" gave place to "undertake" to tell the future m I the section in' the Crimes Act which had not been whittled down. With the phrase "intention to deceive" there was an absolute prohibition. • His Honor: You say the mischief is m the telling of fortunes, and not m the motive behind the fortune-telling? . Mr Meredith: That is so. There is a class of impressionable, neurotic people who are weak enough not to exercise their judgment, who believe m fatalI ism ' anfl who are quite capable enough to believe anything some fortune-tell-ers say, so as to warp their judgment and interfere with their activities. In answer to his Honor, Mr Fleming said that the- majority of those who saw "Argus" believed m his powers. There was no claim to the supernatural m the sense that by no ordinary known process of the human mind can that be; done. ,

His Honor : Is "it not a claim to supernatural powers? ' ' Mr Fleming: No. There-are : five senses which we all possess, Tbut it is considered there is another sense which is either developing o*r has been lost, a sense which a 'great many people possess m greater or less degree. His Honor: In what sense can for-tune-telling be held to be other than supernatural? • Mr Fleming replied that the * boy's mental faculties, under hypnosis, became abnormal, and having perceived a germ of thought, he was able to aoine" extent to pierce the future and tell what that thought would become. There was no profession to tell fortunes, but f 'Argus" m many cases could answer questions relating to the future. There was nothing supernatural about it. The question was purely one of law f> ■ .\ :;('-'■•',:'•' , His Honor said? the case was one Of some interest .and importance, and he would give his judgment to-morrow.