STARTLING INCONSISTENCY

Observer, Volume XXIX, Issue 42, 3 July 1909, Page 3

STARTLING INCONSISTENCY

The "Star" and the Seers

,"* — — — IN a recent issue, the Obseevee had something to say on the • subject of palmists, crystal seers, and other charlatans who make a living by preying upon the more gullible section of the community. The particular point that we wished to emphasise was that if the Press refused to publish advertisements emanating from these undesirable individuals, the business of the latter would soon languish, and ultimately die a natural death. We pointed out that the daily papers, by inserting such advertisements, were indirectly aiding these social pests and |* humbugs in imposing upon the more \ weak-minded memb&rs of the community. The " Star," upon reading our article, was apparently struck with remorse — to a limited extend (the " Star " has many limitations). Anyway, a week or so later, it filled up over two columns of valuabe space with an article surmounted by the following imposing captionr : "The Fortune Tellers — Charlatarry Exposed — Impudent Impostors end a Gullible Public." This' article emanated from tinpen of one of the "Star's" \\UAlectual young men, who hud apparently been told off to go th.> rounds 'of the various fortune-t iling establishments, and have hi* hi-ad read, and his palm tickled, or to li..w into crystal, and, ill fact, to run the whole gauntlet of the fortune-Idling coterie. So far as his adventures are concerned, they call for little remark, except that they only go to prove the truth of the statements contained 'in pur previous artick' concerni'g the gullibility of /the public, and the necessity for eradicating those who trade upon tliJt gullibility. It is to the opening remarks of the "Star's" article that we wish to draw particular attention, containing as they do a startling and striking example <>l inconsistency on the part of the evening paper. In order to make this, point clear, let us quote from the article in question. It commence tliius : "It is almost impossible to bcilieve that in this enlightened ago tlf'ere are thousands of gullible peoi/le willing to provide a lucrative livelihood for the charlatans and quack?/ who are prepared to play upon t)/e superstitious element inherent in human nature." Here, be it noted, tine "Star" ad..mits unhesitatingly tft a t these people Hre charlatans andfquaeks, or, in °Khev words, frauds! Further on, tb<-v article coilinues : "The m |sdiums. whether they be crystal gftzens. clairvoyants, astrologists, or Wsychometrists", ar| the people who Vnake the money, :Bid a gullible public suffers. No r|atter how often |exposure« are mi|f in the Police / Courts, and in tl|e Press, the extra- ,' ordinary' credulciisness of the pub- ' lie apparently remains unshaken. At any rate, be tha| as it may, the fact remains that .Auckland to-day provides an abiding place for a score or more of these quacks and tricksters." These sentiments do equal honour to the " Star's " jWul and heart. But this, unfortunately, is only one side of the picture./ a urn to the other. m ( • * The same issue of the " Star " as that in which 1 this condemnatory article appeared contained the following advertis'smente. As, unlike the "Star," we have no desire to push the business of "quacks and charlatans" (the phrase' is the "Star's") we suppress names and addresses : — nLAIRVOYANT Trance Seer, Mr . \J Daily all matters, seances nightly. Is, except Thursday. . Clairvoyant and Psychometrist. Hours, 2 till 8 p.m ; Saturday, 2 till 5 p.m , Spiritual Clairvoyant, Trance Medium, and Crystal Seer 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. Public Circle, Monday Night, Is , Clairvoyant. Bouts : 10 am. till 4 p.m Evening, from 6.30 till 9.30. . Fees, Is ; 2s 6d.

"No matter how of ton exposures are mad© in the Press," says the "Star," "the extraordinary credulousness (sic) of the public remains unshaken." Apparently, then, the

"Stars" idea of exposing these impostors is to write a condemnatory artid</ with one hand, and accept their advertisements with the other. Unde/ the circumstances, the value of th& alleged ' ' exposure is nullified./ Let it borne in mind that the " Stlx," in common with all newspapers, reserves to itself the right to refise any advertisements which it ma/ consider to be of an objectionable nature. Now, since the "Star" ha; publicly branded fortune-tellers aixi people of that class as frauds, elarktans and impostors, trading a urn the gullibility of the public, it sorely stands to reason that all advertisements emanating from such a ,'puroe are of an objectionable lature. "Wherefore, the obvious de.mction remains that it the "Star" js sincere in its desire to protect the public, if its sentiment about "the wrong that needs resistance " is anything but empty pretence, it will at once place a taboo upon all such advertisements. Is it possible that the "Star" places the consideration of L.s.d. before that of its duty to the public ? Surely not ?