Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report

TradeName · 10-15-2013, 05:03 PM

Articles from the American Mercury can be found at unz.org. The January, 1936 issue contains an article by Havelock Ellis entitle "Studies in Sex: A History" which includes discussion of his dealings with Springmuhl (De Villier) as a publisher. Here are a couple of brief quotations offering some impressions of Springmhul:

"I sought out Dr. de Villiers and had a satisfactory interview with him. He was a large and gentle creature who entered the room with stealthy cat-like tread, but I had nothing to complain of in his reception of my visit." (Page 16.)

"His versatile fertility in expedients was extraordinary. He had a passion for mystification which he showed in all sorts of small ways, scarcely involving any self-interest. I have always regarded him as a man with a curious mental kink even more than a criminal, although in that latter capacity he was an amazing figure. He succeeded in duping us all." (Page 17.)

TradeName · 10-11-2013, 08:09 PM

As trustee of Sprimuhl's bankruptcy, George Hendry had a broker, one Sinclair, break into a warehouse sublet by Springmuhl's California associated, the American Concentrated Must and take property in order to satisfy claims for allegedly unpaid rent. I'm guess that this warehouse was located on one of Springmuhl's properties in Stoke Newington. The Must company challenged this action in court and won a judgment because the agent had broken through a locked outer door. In another case, a bonding company was ordered to pay an indemnity to the Board of Trade because Hendry had mishandled this aspect of Springmuhl's bankruptcy. The proceeds of the sell of the Must company's property had never been paid into the bankruptcy account but had been used, in part, by Sinclair to pay solicitors to defend against the Must company suit. By the time of the bonding case, Hendry was himself in bankruptcy. Hendry's gambling was a factor in his bankruptcy and he was found to have been guilty of misconduct in handling his assets.

The Law Journal Reports for the Year 1893, Volume 62, Pages 388-391

IN THE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION AND IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

1893. March 7, 14. May 4.

THE AMERICAN CONCENTRATED MUST CORPORATION V. HENDRY AND ANOTHER.

Coram [before] Lord Esher, M.B, Lopes, L.J., and Smith, L.J.

[...]

This was an action for damages for illegal distress tried before Bowen, L.J. without a jury. The question was whether the landlord had or had not broken an outer door.

The facts are fully stated in the judgment.

Finlay, Q.C., and T. H. Carson, for the plaintiffs.

Bigham, Q.C., and Muir Mackenzie, for one defendant (the head landlord).

Ashton Cross, for the other defendant (the broker).

BoWen, L.J. (on March 14), delivered a written judgment as follows: This was an action brought against a head landlord and his broker in respect of what was alleged to be an illegal distress levied for arrears of rent upon the plaintiffs, who were subtenants, holding from and under the head landlord's immediate lessees. The plaintiffs had duly paid all their own rent, hut the immediate lessees of the head landlord were in default to him, and he distrained accordingly on the plaintiffs as being in occupation of part of the demised premises. The entire premises demised by the head landlord to his immediate lessees were larger than and comprised the premises sub-let to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs' warehouse stood in a courtyard, which was included in their own sub-lease, and the regular entrance to which courtyard was from a lane outside. At the opposite side of the courtyard was a building still occupied by the immediate lessees under their lease, and not sub-let by them to the plaintiffs; and the immediate lessees also had retained, and had not sub-let to the plaintiffs, a strip of ground which went round the plaintiffs' warehouse, and was fenced off on the other side from the courtyard by a locked door, which had been erected by the immediate lessees themselves, and which did not belong to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs were in occupation accordingly of the warehouse in question and of the courtyard, and also of another warehouse also adjoining the courtyard, which need not be considered for the purposes of the point to be decided. The proper and usual access to the courtyard was by a gate opening on a lane, but, in levying the distress, this gate was left untouched by the broker. The manner in which he effected his entry into the courtyard was as follows: He went up the lane, and, passing by the outer gate of the courtyard, entered peaceably the building which had not been sub-let by the immediate lessees, but which still remained in their occupation. Through this building he found his way into the land which went round the warehouse, and keeping throughout on ground which was in the occupation of the immediate lessees, and over which the plaintiffs had no right, came, after going right round the warehouse, to the locked door, which belonged also to the immediate lessees. He broke this open, committing, however, as was said, and as appeared to be admitted, no trespass thereby on the plaintiffs. Having broken through this locked door, the broker found himself in the courtyard occupied by and sub-let to the plaintiffs. Once in this courtyard, he broke open the main door of the plaintiffs' warehouse and then distrained. It was not disputed before me that the door was, in fact, broken open. It was contended by the plaintiffs' counsel that the head landlord had mortgaged his reversion, and was no longer in a position to distrain, since foreclosure proceedings had been begun by the mortgagee at the date of the distress. I think there is nothing in this point, for no receiver had been appointed, and the head landlord was still mortgagor in possession. The real question in the case appears to me to be whether the forcible breaking of the main door of the warehouse was illegal.

The doctrine of the inviolability of the outer doors of a house and its precinct has long been established by English law. The principle is one which carries us back in imagination to wilder times, when the outer door of a house, or the outer gates and enclosures of land, were an essential protection, not merely against fraud, but violence. The proposition that a man's house is his castle, which was crystallised into a maxim by the judgment in Semayne's Case and by Lord Coke, dates back to days far earlier still, when it was recognised as a limitation imposed by law on all process except that which was pursued at the king's suit and in his name. A landlord's right to distrain for arrears of rent is itself only a survival of one among a multitude of distraints, which, both in England and other countries, belonged to a primitive period when legal procedure still retained some of the germs of a semi-barbarous custom of reprisals, of which instances abound in the early English books and in the Irish Senchus Mor. Later, all creditors and all aggrieved persons who respected the king's peace, the sheriff in a civil suit, and the landlord in pursuit of his private remedy for rent and services, were both of them held at bay by a bolted door or barred gate. To break open either was to deprive the owner of protection against the outer world for his family, his goods and furniture, and his cattle. "The law," says the Court in Semayne's Case, "abhors the destruction or breaking of any house." The landlord (like the sheriff in a civil suit) could only therefore enter by an open door or an open window�-per ostia et fenestras. The form of plea which he pleaded in his defence, if sued for trespass, was that he had found the house open-� trove la meason ouverte-� 1 Roll. 671; Bro. Abr., issue 26, Trespass, 226; see Kerbey v. Denby. It is possible that in earlier times the principle of the sanctity of the house was carried further still. In 34 Edw. 1 (A.D. 1306) it was suggested in argument at the Bar that no distress, by the law of England, could be levied inside a house at all, except for the king's debt. A horse had been distrained at the door of a house with two of its feet inside and two out, and it was argued on this ground that the distress was illegal; but the counsel for the horse's owner was afraid to stand on his demurrer. This immunity of the outer door extended not merely to dwelling-houses, but to all detached buildings and enclosures. "At common law," says the learned editor of the 1823 edition of Gilbert on Distress (p. 56), " the lessor could not enter a house to distrain if the door were not open, nor even a barn, nor throw down any gate or enclosure to get at a distress." In Penton v. Browne (3) it was indeed held that a sheriff, for the purposes of an execution, might break a barn which was in a field, as distinct from a barn which was parcel of a house; but the Court agreed that if the barn had been adjoining to a parcel of the house, it could not lawfully have been broken. The law so laid down in Penton v. Browne, as to the sheriff's rights with regard to a detached outhouse in a field, appears to me to be a departure from older law. The view, whether right or wrong, was, at all events, considered in Brown v. Glenn not to be applicable to a landlord's distress. I should (with submission) have myself supposed that the sheriff in the civil suit had no more right to break a detached enclosure than a landlord's bailiff. In Brown v. Glenn a locked stable door was broken open. The stable was not within the curtilage of the dwelling-house; but, nevertheless, the Court held that the fact of the stable door being locked of itself rendered the distress unlawful. In so doing they affirmed and followed a far older decision of Lord Chief Justice Hardwicke in the summer Assizes at Exeter in the year 1735, w^ho held that a padlock put upon a barn door could not be opened by force to take the corn by way of distress-� Vin. Abr. "Distress" (E 2), 6; cited also in Poole v. Longueville. It is a misconception to suppose that an outhouse within the curtilage enjoys less immunity than a disconnected outhouse. Penton v. Browne shews exactly the reverse; and in Ryan v. Skilcock it seems conceded that the landlord may not break open the outer door of any building whatever. The language of Lord Coke is general, to the effect that the landlord may not open gates nor break down enclosures. It was indeed contended before me that the law was only that the landlord might not break a door to enter on the demised premises, but that once lawfully on them he might break doors. This contention seems to me one utterly untenable. The doctrine of the law is far stricter. Lee v. Gansel only shews that an officer, in the execution of mesne process, who has gained peaceable entry through an outer door may break open the inner door of a lodger. The case does not impugn the ancient principle that the outer door of a building may not be broken open either by a landlord or sheriff except at the suit of the king.

Finally, it was urged on behalf of the defendants that the broken door of the warehouse was not its outer door within the meaning of the proposition. It was not, it is true, the outer gate of the courtyard. That opened upon the lane. But the fact that it was not one of the outer enclosures of the whole premises demised is nothing if it was the outer door of the building. It protected what was inside the building from persons who were in, or might obtain access to, the courtyard. As to this point the story speaks for itself. It was through this door, and this door only, that the broker entered the warehouse from outside. The plaintiffs, therefore, are entitled to succeed and to recover damages from the defendants. The general costs down to and including to-day must be borne by the defendants. The damages will be referred to the official referee. The costs of the enquiry must be reserved.

Judgment for the plaintiff's.

The defendant Hendry appealed.

Muir Mackenzie, for the defendant.� The door of the plaintiffs' warehouse which was broken open by the broker was, in one sense, an outer door, but it was not the "outer" door of the demised premises. The whole of the property demised to the immediate tenants must be taken to be the demised premises, and, as the broker entered peaceably through the warehouse which was not sub-demised to the plaintiffs, the other doors and gates which the broker broke open were really inner doors, within the meaning of the expression with regard to levying a distress. If the courtyard had been covered in, it could not have been said that the door of the plaintiffs' warehouse was not an inner door. The outer door of premises is that which is for their protection from the outside public. Lord Coke lays it down that a landlord cannot break open gates or break down inclosures to make a distress�Co. Lit. 161a; but here the broker entered peaceably upon the demised premises, and did not commit a trespass in breaking open the door of the plaintiffs' warehouse. [Gould v. Bradstock and Lee v. Gansel were also cited.]

Finlay, Q.C., and T.H. Carson, for the plaintiffs, were not called upon.

Lord Esher, M.R.-�The question is, what was the outer door here. I should say that the gate into the yard was not the door into the plaintiffs' building, and that there was but one outer door, namely, the door of the plaintiffs' warehouse, which was broken open. Therefore, according to the law stated by Lord Coke, that door was the door of the plaintiffs' castle which the broker was not entitled to break open. The appeal must be dismissed.

Lopes, L.J.-�If ever I heard of an outer door of a building, the door of the plaintiffs' warehouse here is an outer door. The "outer" door here is the one which was improperly broken open by the defendant, and the plaintiffs are therefore entitled to succeed.

Smith, L.J.�-The question here is whether the door into the plaintiffs' warehouse is the outer door, and there can be but one answer to that question, namely, that it is clearly the outer door of their warehouse.

Appeal dismissed.

Solicitors--Drake, Son & Parton, for plaintiffs; C. F. B. Brichall and George B. Crook, for defendants.

---end

The Law Times, June 23, 1895, Pages 562-563

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION.

Wednesday, April 10.
(Before Lawrance and Kennedy, JJ.)

The Board Of Trade V. The Provident Clerks And General Guarantee AssoCiation Limited,

[...]

Case stated by consent for the opinion of the court under Order XXXIV.

The facts and nature of the arguments appear fully in the written judgment of the court.

Muir Mackenzie for the plaintiffs.

A. R. Kirby for the defendants.

Cur. adr. vult.

April 10.�The judgment of the Court (Lawrance and Kennedy, J J.) was read by

Kennedy, J.�The claim of the plaintiffs in this special case is for a sum of 120l. 19s. due from the defendants upon a bond of the 17th March 1891, given to the plaintiffs by the defendants and George Hendry, the trustee in the bankruptcy of one Weissenfefd, appointed by the Board of Trade under sect. 21, sub-sect. 6' of the Bankruptcy Act 1883. By the bond the defendants became jointly and severally bound to the Board of Trade in the sum of 300l., the material words of the condition of the bond being: "If the said trustee shall and do from time to time well and sufficiently perform and execute all and singular the duties required of him as trustee by the Bankruptcy Acts 1883 and 1890, or any general rules made or hereafter to be made under such Acts, or if the said trustee shall fail therein and the said association shall make good any loss or damage occasioned by any such default made after the date hereof to the estate of the said bankrupt." The plaintiffs sue the defendants upon this bond, and the question is whether the trustee has failed in the performance of his duties, and loss or damage has been occasioned by his default to the estate of the bankrupt." It is unnecessary for the purposes of this judgment to recapitulate in any detail the circumstances which are fully set forth in the special case. Shortly stated, the material points are these: Rent to the amount of about 562l. was owing to the trustee as representing the bankrupt's estate. The trustee distrained by his agent, Sinclair, for this rent. Sinclair, in levying the distress, acted illegally by a forcible breaking. The tenant commenced an action against the trustee and Sinclair for this illegality, claiming (inter alia) a return of the goods seized under the distress. The trustee, with the sanction of the Board of Trade, defended the action. He directed Sinclair to sell the goods seized, and Sinclair did so, but only upon the trustee giving him in writing bis personal indemnity against the consequences. The goods were sold and realised 281l. 17s. The trustee was not authorised by the Board of Trade to give any indemnity. It was an act which, in our judgment, he could not properly do without that authority. We are further of opinion that under sects. 74 and 75 of the Bankruptcy Act 1883, and rule 295, it was the duty of the trustee, immediately the distress was realised, to require and procure the proceeds to be paid, into the Bankruptcy Estates Account, and that in not doing so, but allowing his co-defendant to keep these proceeds under his control, the trustee failed to perform his statutory duty. The tenant, who, as we have said, was suing the trustee and Sinclair for their tortious conduct, applied, after the sale to Stirling, J. for an order that the 281l. 17s. should be paid into court. The trustee appeared upon the summons and did not oppose, but explained that he was bound to pay the proceeds of the sale into the Bankruptcy Estates Account, and he gave an undertaking that the money when paid in should not be dealt with without notice to the plaintiff in the action. No order was made upon the summons. The trustee asked Sinclair for the 281l. 17s., but Sinclair refused to part with the money, and the trustee wrongly, in our opinion, took no steps to enforce payment of it. The action for wrongful distress was tried; judgment was given for the plaintiff for damages, and these were assessed by the official referee at 500l. The successful plaintiff, towards satisfaction of his judgment, sought, by the appointment of a receiver, to get possession of the 281l. 17s., which was still under the control of Sinclair and his solicitor, but failed to do so, upon the ground in the Divisional Court, to which the matter had gone on appeal from the vacation judge, who had made an order for a receiver, that the plaintiff in the action, having obtained judgment for damages, could not recover the money produced by the proceeds of the sale. The money was, in fact, used by Sinclair towards payment of the costs incurred to his solicitor in the action. In auditing the trustee's accounts the Board of Trade have surcharged him with this sum of 281l. 17s., and the accounts, being so surcharged, showed a balance of 120l. 19s. due from the trustee. This is the sum which the Board of Trade in the present action seeks to recover from the defendants. The trustee is now himself a bankrupt. We are of opinion that the trustee did fail and make default in his statutory duties, and occasioned loss and damage thereby, and that the plaintiffs are entitled to the sum which they claim from the defendants under the bond. It is clear to us, and, apart from the consequences of the indemnity, it is not seriously disputed, that the trustee ought to have insisted upon payment into the Bankruptcy Estates Account of these moneys, which really represented pro tanto the rent due to the estate. The giving of the indemnity, as has been already stated, was not an Act which the trustee could rightly do without the authority of the Board of Trade, which, as no committee of inspection was appointed, exercised the functions of a committee of inspection. But it is contended on behalf of the defendants that Sinclair, having got the indemnity, was entitled for his own security to retain the proceeds of the sale, which he consented to carry out only on the condition of receiving the indemnity, and that if the giving of the indemnity by the trustee was an unauthorised, and therefore an improper, act, yet that the Board of Trade, representing the creditors of the estate. cannot at the same time claim the proceeds of the sale and disaffirm the act of the trustee in giving the indemnity without which the sale would not have taken place. It appears to us that this argument is not well founded. Even assuming, with the counsel for the defendants, that, as between the trustee and Sinclair, Sinclair, having got the trustee's personal indemnity, was entitled as against him to hold the proceeds as security, which appears to us to be at least open to question, we do not see how the wrongful, because unauthorised, conduct of the trustee in making a bargain with his agent, can avail the trustee or the defendants in this action, as his guarantors, in answer to the claim of the Board of Trade, representing the creditors, that he was guilty of default in not getting payment of the proceeds of the distress into the Bankruptcy Estates Account. He cannot, and consequently his guarantors therefore cannot, be heard to plead, as an excuse for the loss of these moneys, that by an arrangement which he could not properly, as against the estate, enter into with his agent, he put it out of his power to pay into the funds of the estate moneys of the estate which came into the agent's hands. Indeed, this was the view of the trustee himself, as is clear from what passed on the hearing of the summons before Stirling, J., and from his subsequent request to Sinclair to pay over these moneys. It was further contended for the defendants that, if there was a default on the part of the trustee, it was not a "wilful" default. In our opinion the terms of the bond do not make the defendants liable only in the event of a "wilful" default; but, if they ought to be so construed, it appears to us that what the trustee did in this case may properly be so designated, and that the particulars set out in the special case are sufficient. The trustee knew that he had no authority to give the indemnity; he knew, and he stated to Stirling, J. that the proceeds of the distress, when realised, ought to be paid by him into the Bankruptcy Estates Account; he requested Sinclair to hand them over to him for the purpose of their being paid into that account, and then he took no steps to enforce the payment which he knew and had thus openly acknowledged ought to be made, but left this asset of the estate in the hands of his agent and his agent's solicitor. It seems clear to us that the trustee failed, with his eyes open, and not either inadvertently or by any oversight, to perform his statutory duty: that money was lost to the estate thereby: that a just claim on the bond for 120l. 19s. is thereby created, and that the plaintiffs are entitled to recover that amount from the defendants.

Judgment for plaintiffs for amount claimed.

Solicitor for the plaintiffs, Walter Murton. Solicitors for the defendants, Wansey, Bowen, and Co.

---end

The Weekly Notes, Volume 29, Aug 18, 1894, Page 399

Hendry, Geo, Oak-la, Limehouse, Coppersmith. High Ct of Justice in Bkcy. (No.1420 of 1893.) Ord. July 12. Discharge suspended for three years. Bankrupt. to be discharged as from July 12, 1897. Bankrupt's assets are not of a value equal to 10s. in the pound on the amount of his unsecured liabilities; that he had contributed to his bankruptcy by gambling; and had been guilty of misconduct in relation to his property and affairs, namely:�-That with and after knowledge of his liabilities under the trusteeship of one Von Weissenfeld, and with intent to defeat the claim of the Petitioning Creditors, the bankrupt disposed of the whole of his property, and has thereby deprived the said creditors of the benefit of their Judgment, and also of any available assets for the payment of their and his other creditors' debts.

TradeName · 10-06-2013, 07:54 PM

Summary of a case involving Springmuhl's bankruptcy. The judgment invalidated the transfer of certain of Springmuhl's personal properties to the Concentrated Produce Company and assigned them to the trustee. The justice declined to rule that the company was merely a front for Springmuhl, but noted that none of the directors were willing to appear in court. He also commented on the fact that Springmuhl, who fled to avoid bankruptcy proceedings, was able to evade a warrant for his arrest through the expedient of placing himself behind a locked door.

Reports of Cases Under the Bankruptcy Act, 1883 & 1890 (London: Sweet & maxwell, 1893), Volume 9, Pages 30-39
by Great Britain. High Court of Justice, Charles Francis Morrell

In Re Von Weissenfeld ex Parte Hendry

Bankruptcy Act, 1883, section 25.
Bankruptcy Rules, 1886, Rules 28 and 31

Before Mr. Justice Vaughn Williams. 1892.

January 15th, 19th, 20th, 21st 23rd and 26th

[...]

This was an Application by the trustee in the bankruptcy for an order (1) that notwithstanding the alleged execution by the bankrupt of an instrument dated December 3rd, 1890, whereby the bankrupt purported to transfer to the Concentrated Produce Company (Limited) certain freehold properties known as Stoneleigh House and Grafton House, situate at Clissold Park, Stoke Newington, it might be declared that such properties together with the plant, machinery, &c., on the said premises were the property of the bankrupt divisible amongst his creditors, and as such vested in the trustee: (2) that the furniture in the said Stoneleigh House which by a bill of sale purporting to bear date November 18th, 1890, the bankrupt purported to convey to the Concentrated Produce Company (Limited) was the property of the bankrupt divisible amongst his creditors and that such bill of sale was void under the Bills of Sale Act, 1882, or alternatively as fraudulent as against the creditors in the bankruptcy.

The debtor Dr. Springmuhl von Weissenfeld was an analytical chemist and was stated to be the discoverer of an invention, in respect of which he had taken out a patent, for concentrating grape juice at the place where the fruit was grown, so that wine could be produced from it in other countries and a considerable amount saved in freight.

The properties of Stoneleigh House and Grafton House were purchased in the name of the bankrupt in 1888, but on November 7th, 1890, judgment was recovered against him by the petitioning creditor in an action for goods and machinery supplied, a receiving order being made on January 16th, 1891, upon which adjudication followed.

The bankrupt did not surrender to the proceedings for the purpose of completing his public examination and a warrant was issued for his arrest, which, however, had not been executed.

It appeared that immediately before his bankruptcy the bankrupt had transferred the properties of Stoneleigh House and Grafton House and the furniture contained in the former to the respondents to the present motion, the Concentrated Produce Company (Limited), and the trustee now sought to set this transfer aside as fraudulent against him, it being in effect contended in support of the motion that the bankrupt was himself the Company and that the transfer was really made for the sole purpose of putting the property out of the reach of the creditors, and of enabling the bankrupt to retain possession of it notwithstanding his bankruptcy.

On the other side it was stated that the properties were not bought by the bankrupt for himself but as trustee for the respondent company, and that the transfer now sought to be set aside was only a transfer of property which actually belonged to them.

Muir Mackenzie (Cleave with him): for the trustee in bankruptcy.

Sidney Woolf, Q.C. (Herbert Reed and H. Jacobs with him): for the Concentrated Produce Company (Limited).

Muir Mackenzie: proceeded to open the case.

Mulligan: for the American Concentrated Must Company (Limited).

I have an objection to take to this motion being heard. I appear for the American Concentrated Must Company (Limited) who have purchased from the present respondents, the Concentrated Produce Company, certain of this property claimed by the trustee. I make this application under Rules 28 and 31 of the Bankruptcy Rules, 1886. Rule 28 provides that "Where any party, other than the applicant, is affected by the motion, no order shall be made, unless upon the consent of such party duly shown to the Court, or upon proof that notice of the intended motion and a copy of the affidavits in support thereof have been duly served upon such party: Provided that the Court, if satisfied that the delay caused by proceeding in the ordinary way would or might entail serious mischief, may make any order ex parte upon such terms as to costs and otherwise, and subject to such undertaking, if any, as the Court may think just; and any party affected by such order may move to set it aside." And Rule 31 provides that "If on the hearing of any motion or application the Court shall be of opinion that any person to whom notice has not been given ought to have, or to have had, such notice, the Court may either dismiss the motion or application, or adjourn the hearing thereof, in order that such notice may be given, upon such terms as the Court shall think fit." Property cannot be affected without service of notice of motion, and I am entitled to service and to be heard on this motion. It is asked to take my property away.

(vaughan Williams, J.: It is only asked to declare that as between the litigants the property is the property of the trustee. How will that order affect you?)

If an order is made according to the notice of motion that notwithstanding the execution of the transfer by the bankrupt these properties and all the plant, machinery and utensils on the premises are the property of the bankrupt, it will be a declaration that my property is the property of the bankrupt and nothing short of it.

(vaughan Williams, J.: It does not seem to me that any process could issue on the order which would bind you in any way.)

I should be affected by the order. This is really in the nature of an application in rem that the bankrupt is entitled to these specific chattels to divide amongst his creditors.

(vaughan Williams, J.: It is an application against someone to whom it is alleged the property does not belong that as against that person it belongs to the trustee.)

This application certainly seems to extend to my property, and I ask that the notice be limited so as not to affect my property, or that the motion should not be proceeded with without my being served and heard on it.

Vaughan Williams, J.:

I think there is nothing in this objection. In my opinion you nave no locus standi to be heard.

The case was then proceeded with on the merits, the contention of the trustee being supported by most voluminous documentary evidence and also by something like twenty witnesses who were examined and cross-examined at great length.

January 19th.

Sidney Woolf, Q.C.:

Before opening the case for the respondents I have an application to make that I may be enabled to call the bankrupt as a witness. He has not surrendered to complete his public examination and a warrant was issued by the registrar for his arrest. Under these circumstances he declines to come forward, and what I ask is that either he may come here and that upon proper submission the warrant may be discharged, or that at any rate he may come and leave the Court without being arrested.

Muir Mackenzie:

An application similar to this has been made to Mr. Registrar Linklater, and has been refused more than once. The bankrupt applied that the warrant might be withdrawn and that he might come and attend his public examination. The registrar said that he could not allow that to be done and that the bankrupt must appear and purge his contempt. Now the same application is made to this Court.

(vaughan Williams, J.: All I wanted to make sure of was that there should be no mistake as to what the present application is or as to the position taken up by the trustee. If that is understood I shall not interfere with the right of the trustee who obtained the warrant. At the same time I cannot help thinking that comment may very well be made that if the bankrupt had been called the case of the respondents might have appeared differently.)

The bankrupt has really refused to assist the trustee in any way. At the same time the trustee certainly does not desire in any way to prejudice the hearing of the present motion. What he wishes chiefly to guard against is the bankrupt coming and giving evidence Ex Parte here and then going away again.

Vaughan Williams, J.:

I shall not let that be done. What I should like to do would be to let the bankrupt purge his contempt by attending his public examination. If the bankrupt is produced, and I am satisfied he will really purge his contempt, I will do all the Court can do to prevent his imprisonment when once I am satisfied that he wishes to give his evidence and so bring about the result which is intended by the warrant. I cannot say more than this except that I might suspend the execution of the warrant if reasonable security were given for his appearance. The security I should require would be two sureties in �250 each.

January 20th.

On this day two gentlemen were present in Court who had executed bonds in the required amounts.

Sidney Woolf, Q.C.:

The bail bonds have now been executed. The bankrupt is also present in Court. I now ask that until your Lordship's further order there may be an order suspending the warrant of arrest.

Vaughan Williams, J.:

Of course the bankrupt understands all I relieve him from is the execution of the warrant. When he ultimately comes to attend his public examination he will attend it under the same circumstances as any other person whose examination has been so adjourned. What I mean by that is not that the warrant will be executed, but that he will have to purge his contempt in the ordinary manner. The order I now make is that until further order the warrant is not to be executed. I decline to hear any explanation from the bankrupt as to his reasons for not submitting. It must be understood that what I have done is not on the application of the bankrupt. If I were acceding to the application of the bankrupt I do not think I ought to have done it. But I was anxious that justice should be in no way defeated, and under those circumstances I have made such an order as seemed to me to be best in the interests of justice and to get all the facts before the Court. I can understand that the bankrupt may think it necessary to explain to the Court his conduct, but under the circumstances I do not wish to hear it. He will have an opportunity of giving an explanation when he comes up before the registrar.

The bankrupt was then examined and cross-examined at great length.

January 26th:

On this day judgment was given, the hearing of the case having occupied the Court for six days.

Judgment.

Vaughan Williams, J.: In this case a motion has been made by the trustee in the bankruptcy for a declaration that he is entitled to certain property for distribution amongst the creditors. I will deal with the paragraphs of the notice of motion one by one. The first paragraph asks that notwithstanding the execution of an alleged transfer by the bankrupt these properties of Stoneleigh House and Grafton House may be declared to be the property of the trustee as against the Concentrated Produce Company (Limited). I am particular to say the Concentrated Produce Company (Limited), because I wish it to be understood that my judgment to-day does not affect the right or title of anyone else but the trustee and the respondents. It is possible that the American Concentrated Must Company (Limited) have a claim on the property or on the machinery, &c, and the company asked the other day that the case might be postponed in order that they might be heard. I refused to postpone the present motion, and I told counsel that no order made here would affect the right or title of his company. I think it right now expressly to state that any order made to-day will affect the right of the trustee and the respondents only, and not the rights of any other person. Now as to the present case. It was at first contended on behalf of the trustee that there was no such company as the Concentrated Produce Company (Limited), but I expressed a doubt whether the evidence would justify the Court in coming to that conclusion. It was in my opinion impossible to say that the Concentrated Produce Company was a mere sham or veil to hide the identity of the bankrupt. But as the case went on it was plain that the trustee might shape his case in another form�-that although the Concentrated Produce Company had a real existence, yet the company had allowed itself to be used by the bankrupt as a transferee of his property for the purpose of shielding his property from his creditors. Looking at the case in that view I have to say whether this Stoneleigh House and Grafton House property has really been transferred to the Concentrated Produce Company as their beneficial property, or whether such transfer as it was effected was for the purpose of protecting the property and keeping it for the bankrupt. It seems to me on the really unanswered evidence of the trustee that I ought to hold that there has been no real transfer of this property to the Concentrated Produce Company, and that what was done has been done not for the purpose of transferring Stoneleigh House and Grafton House to the company as beneficial owners, but for the bankrupt's own purposes. I do not hesitate to say that I do not place the slightest credence upon the evidence of the bankrupt. Ample opportunity has been given to the company to come and prove their case, but not a single director of the company has been called, and not a single independent person connected with the company. They express unwillingness to come, and I can only think they do not choose to come because they know in truth and in fact what is contended cannot be supported. I come to the conclusion that the transfer is unreal and was a mere transfer to keep the property to the bankrupt. Then as to the furniture, I shall not deal with the bill of sale on any statutory or technical point. I declare the property to be the property of the trustee simply on the ground that I think the bill of sale was a sham. I, therefore, make the declaration asked for by the trustee, and the respondents must pay the costs.

I also wish to say one word with regard to an incident which has occurred during the hearing of this case. The bankrupt failed to attend his public examination. He absconded, and during part of the time he absconded be appears to have been in this country and in London, and a warrant was issued for his apprehension. After the warrant was issued he seems to have been in London, and was known to have been in London. He was either at Stoneleigh House or at a place called Oak Lodge, I forget which, and the persons entrusted with the execution of the warrant went there and found that the doors were locked, and that they could not get in. I do not assent to any such proposition that a warrant for the arrest of an absconding debtor cannot be executed because he happens to be within a locked door. It is not right that a man, who has placed himself by absconding, prima facie in the position in which the Legislature treats him as a criminal, should be able to evade the warrant by going to a friend's or to his own house, getting the door locked and laughing at the officer. I am of opinion that the warrant of arrest would authorise the officer to break the door and go in and arrest the debtor inside. This question was not argued, but I think it right to make the remarks I have made because I do not like to pass by in silence the assumption that the warrant could not be executed, although the bankrupt was in the house, because the door was locked, and the house was claimed by the Concentrated Produce Company, or by Dr. Wild, or somebody, a friend of the bankrupt.

The warrant having been issued it was still unexecuted when this case came on, and it was put before me that the respondents, the Concentrated Produce Company (Limited), were persons acting distinctly from and in one sense antagonistic to the bankrupt, and that although by reason of their previous connection with him they had found out where the bankrupt was, yet they could not get him here as a witness on account of his fear of arrest. Under these circumstances I thought it best, in order that justice might not be defeated by the absence of a material witness, that the execution of the warrant should be suspended to enable the bankrupt to come and give evidence. He has come here and has given his evidence. I could only allow that to be done in the event of a bond being entered into for his due appearance hereafter. The trustee must now get an appointment for the public examination, and I hope that no injustice will result from my having ordered a suspension of the warrant. The order I made was merely a suspension until further order, and if it should become necessary by reason of any default on the part of the bankrupt, I can and will, on application, make the further order so that the warrant may be executed.

Application allowed.

Solicitor: C. F. B. Birchall, for the trustee.

H. B. Elton, for the Concentrated Produce Company,
Limited.

TradeName · 10-03-2013, 05:09 PM

Thanks, Jeff.

I notice that Geoghegan also defended Thomas Callan in one of the dynamite cases. Inspector Littlechild was involved in this case.

THOMAS CALLAN, MICHAEL HARKINS, Damage to Property > other, 30th January 1888

281. THOMAS CALLAN (46) and MICHAEL HARKINS (30) were indicted for feloniously conspiring with other persons to cause an explosion in the United Kingdom of a nature likely to endanger life and cause serious injury to property. Other Counts varying the form of charge.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (SIR RICHARD WEBSTER) with MR. POLAND and MR. R. S. WRIGHT, Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN appeared for Callan, MR. KEITH FRITH for Harkins.

[...]

GUILTY . � Fifteen Years' Penal Servitude each.

Mayerling · 10-01-2013, 06:46 PM

Mr. Geoghegan

The barrister who was prosecuting in the Von Weissenfeld libel suit was Mr. Gerald Geoghegan. Interestingly enough this once promising barrister is connected to three cases that are frequently mentioned on these threads.

In 1887 he was the junior barrister for the defense team that defended Israel Lipski in the poisoning murder of Miriam Angel that resulted in a conviction but a drawn out review of the trial facts when William T. Stead insisted that the case (before Mr. Justice James Fitzjames Stephen - father of James Kenneth Stephen, and the future murder trial judge against Florence Maybrick) had not been fairly presented. In the end Lipski confessed (although this has been questioned recently) and was hanged.

In May 1892, Geoghegan would be the lead barrister (supposedly with the young Edward Marshall-Hall) in front of the Privy Council for the appeal of Frederick Bailey Deeming on his murder conviction in Melbourne, Australia for the murder of his second wife Emily in January 1892. Despite a long list of precedents the Privy Council (under Lord Halsbury, the Lord Chancellor) cut to the chase and upheld Deeming's conviction.

In October 1892, Geoghegan would be defending Thomas Neill Cream for the murder of four prostitutes by strychnine poisoning in Lambeth and Stepney in 1891 - 1892. Cream too would be convicted and hanged.

Geoghegan had a drinking problem which destroyed his legal career - in 1903 he died by "misadventure" taking an overdose of a drug for his nerves (yes, some have suggested it was suicide).

Jeff

TradeName · 10-01-2013, 03:30 PM

Excerpts from the trial of Springmuhl on a charge of libeling one Flaxman, a clerk for George Hendry's solicitors. Springmuhl had claimed that Flaxman had indicated a willingness to act against his client's interest in exchange for a consideration of �10.

George Samuel Flaxman testifies about Hendry's dealings with Springmuhl and the bankruptcy proceedings. Note that he says Springmuhl spoke of going to San Francisco.

Springmuhl testifies in his own defense. Note that he claims to be an M.D.

GEORGE FERDINAND VON WEISSENFELD, Breaking Peace > libel, 4th April 1892.

Reference Number: t18920404-445
Offence: Breaking Peace > libel
Verdict: Guilty > no_subcategory

445. GEORGE FERDINAND VON WEISSENFELD was indicted for unlawfully writing and publishing a libel of and concerning Samuel George Flaxman, to which a justification was pleaded, and a replication put in (see page 623).

MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted, and MR. HODSON Defended.

SAMUEL GEORGE FLAXMAN . I am managing clerk and cashier to Mr. C. T. Birchall, solicitor, of 5, Mark Lane�I have been in that service about fourteen years�in the early part of 1890 Mr. Birchall was solicitor for Mr. Hendry in an action brought by him against the defendant to recover an amount for machinery made by order of the defendant�that action was tried before Mr. Justice Charles on the 7th and 8th of November, 1890�Mr. Davis, his present solicitor, was his solicitor in that action, and Mr. Ellis J. Davis his counsel�it resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff, Mr. Hendry, for �124, and the taxed costs came to �97�Mr. Justice Charles refused to stay execution�on 13th November the defendant called on me at the office�prior to that I had made inquiries about his financial position�I was not alone in the outer office�I saw him alone in the inner office�I said, "Permit me, Mr. Springmuhl"�Springmuhl was the name I knew him by; that was the name under which the machinery was made for him, and under which we sued him�the first action was brought in the name of Springmuhl, and then he entered appearance to that in the name of You Weissenfeld�I said, "Permit me to point out, before you make any statement, that you are legally represented, and that it is contrary to professional etiquette that I should hear what you have to say without your solicitor; let me see your solicitor, and any terms you have to offer let them come through him"�he said, "I have just come from my solicitor, and I have his approval"�I said, "If you say that that alters the case; what do you offer?"�he said, "� 100; I am to have the machinery; half the balance to be paid on 1st March, and the balance on 1st April"�I said, "I could not advise Mr. Hendry to do that, to part with �150 worth of machinery for �100"�he said, "If you don't take this you will get nothing; I have not �100 myself, but some friends of mine would Day it if they could get the machine"�I replied, "I have no doubt they would be pleased to take it at that price"�he said, "I have not anything myself; I have got a bill of sale on my furniture, so I am secured"�I said, "I know that; I found that out some time back, and it is all the more reason why I should advise Mr. Hendy that he has security for the due payment of the balance"�I told him that I had instructions to take proceedings in bankrupcy, that I was in the act of preparing the papers as he came into the office�the papers were before me, and I was preparing them�I did not point them out to him, because we were in the inner room at the time�I said, "I cannot,"or" will not take the responsibility of refusing your offer myself, and with a view of saving time I will write to Mr. Hendry to see Mr. Birchall, my principal, at his private house the first thing in the morning, and in the meantime I shall complete the papers in bankruptcy;"as I told him if the offer was accepted I would let him know�I said I should not hold out any hopes of its being accepted�it was only in the event of Mr. Hendry accepting his offer that I should write to him�that ended the interview�I have told the Jury all that took place�there is no truth in the suggestion that I said to the defendant that if he gave me a �10 note I would induce Hendry to accept a small amount in settlement; it is absolutely untrue�I communicated with Mr. Hendry, and received certain instructions from him�I mentioned to Mr. Birchall the defendant's call�on 27th November notice of appeal in the action was given; no notice had been given when he called�on 8th December the defendant's solicitors were told that bankruptcy proceedings would be taken, and on the 12th the petition was filed�the matter was adjourned till 1st January, and then till the 15th, and on the 19th I ascertained that the prisoner had gone before another Registrar, Mr. Registrar Hazlitt, on his own petition�I then went before the Registrar, and got his petition made the petition of Mr. Hendry�the prisoner in his own petition had omitted the name of Springmuhl on which he had got credit, and had gone by the name of Weissenfeld�on 1st January, I think, the Registrar agreed for adjournment till the 15th, provided two sufficient sureties were given to secure to Hendry any sum of money that should be found due to him�two such names were given to me�it was my duty to make inquiries as to their solvency, and I was not satisfied, and reported the matter to the Registrar�the prisoner and his advisers were very angry�the Registrar did not blame me, but said I had done my duty, and did not accept the sureties�the appeal from Mr. Justice Charles's judgment in the High Court was dismissed; on 4th March, I think, that was�there was an appeal from Mr. Justice Vaughan Williams to the Court of Appeal, which was dismissed against the prisoner on 25th March�in every legal proceeding taken by the prisoner he has always been defeated, and Mr. Hendry's representatives have been successful�on 10th February Mr. Burchall showed me these documents�the letter and envelope addressed to Mr. Burchall are in the prisoner's writing�the document containing the libel is printed. (The libel was put in and read; it stated that when he, the prisoner, went to Messrs. Burchall and Wood's and offered to pay the invoice price and taxed costs on delivery of the machine the prosecutor said that if Von Weissenfeld would pay him privately �10, he would induce their client to accept a small sum in settlement, but otherwise they would at once take proceedings in bankruptcy against him.)�Mr. Burchall showed me those�I communicated with Mr. Waddy, and showed him the correspondence and the libel�he was our counsel in the action before Mr. Justice Charles�in consequence of the advice he gave me, the first criminal proceedings I took against the prisoner were on 28th February, 1891, when I swore an information, and a summons for libel was granted�I could not serve that summons; the prisoner had disappeared�the bankruptcy proceedings were adjourned till a warrant was issued for him in the Court of Bankruptcy in July, 1891,1 think, but we did not see anything of him till January this year; he did not surrender to pass his public examination in bankruptcy, and the warrant was not served on him till then�we were unable to find him during the whole of 1891�then, in January, 1892, an application was made that the warrant should be suspended that he might give evidence, and Mr. Justice Vaughan Williams suspended it, and he came and gave evidence�Mr. Justice Charles refused to stay execution, and it was my duty, as clerk to the plaintiff's solicitor, to inquire what goods could be realised�I found the prisoner had a bill of sale and practically no assets�it was my duty to take action against him at the instance of Mr. Hendry; if he had satisfied the Registrar that he was solvent, the bankruptcy proceedings would have been stopped; the Registrar adjourned it on the last occasion for four days for him to bring money into court, and then he filed his own petition the next day�he says in the libel that he at once appealed against the judgment, but he did not appeal till the 27th�I heard the prisoner give evidence on the last occasion, when the Jury disagreed; he then said he offered �100 and the balance in two bills, at one or two, and two or three months; in the libel he said that he offered to pay the invoice price and the taxed costs on the delivery of the machine.

Cross-examined. My client, in addition to his judgment and taxed costs, still has the machine; an allowance was made for it in Mr. Justice Charles's judgment�the prisoner has had opportunities to have it, but he never has had it�I do not think that we commenced these bankruptcy proceedings against him after he had commenced his appeal�the file of bankruptcy proceedings is here�the notice of appeal was served on 27th November�we could not serve that notice, we had to get substituted service; we could not find the prisoner; he was denied to us at his house�we filed the bankruptcy petition on 12th December�we knew then that he was appealing from Mr. Justice Charles's decision, and in the face of that we proceeded in bankruptcy, because we did not feel it was a bond fide appeal, and we notified him to that effect�Mr. Justice Charles's judgment was not varied by the Court of Appeal; it' was an absolute dismissal�he did not after that ask us to hand up the machine, or complain of our keeping the machine and having judgment at the same time�the evidence in the action was that the prisoner used the machine and approved of it; Mr. Justice Charles found that�the conversation which resulted in the alleged libel might have lasted five, ten, or fifteen minutes; I cannot say�I did not say that my client was a "pig-headed Scotchman"�there is not a word of truth in the suggestion that I said I thought he was pig-headed; that he would not accede to the terms which the prisoner proposed to me, but that if he made me a present of �101 might be able to induce Hendry to accept the offer�the prisoner was abroad for some time�he said at the Bankruptcy Court that he had been abroad partly on business and partly to have an operation performed on his eye; he also said we could all go to the devil�on one adjournment he wrote to the Registrar that we could all go to the devil�he said he was going to San Francisco�we believe he had an operation performed on his eye years ago, and I don't think he went to have another�after the libel was published, in commenting on it I might have said Mr. Hendry was pig-headed.

Re-examined. This machinery was made for a patent taken out by the prisoner, and was useless except for that purpose�Mr. Hendry dare not sell it�Mr. Justice Charles treated it according to its value as old iron, and allowed �20, as its value, out of a judgment for �144�when that went to the Court of Appeal our side was not called on to argue, but the appeal was dismissed�the Master of the Bolls asked us whether we would deliver the machine on the money being paid, and we said, "Decidedly"; and that was added as an addenda to the order, but was no part of the order�the money has not been paid for the machinery�we were not going to give a machine to a man with a bill of sale on his furniture without having the money down; if we did agree to it Mr. Hendry would not do it, and perhaps an action would be brought against us.

[...]

GEORGE FERDINAND SPRINGMUHL VON WEISSENFELD (the prisoner). I now reside at Stanley [Stoneleigh?] House, Paradise Road [Row?]�I am M. D. and M. A. of Leipsic�I take great interest in scientific matters�at the time I gave this order to Mr. Hendry I was consulting chemist to the Concentrated Produce Company and to the Californian Company�when I called at Mr. Burchall's office in November and saw Flaxman, I said, "I come here to settle this matter; I offer �100 in cash and the balance, for costs and so on, in two bills, "one, I believe, the 1st March, and the other the 1st April," and I want the delivery of the machine"�Flaxman said his client would not deliver the machine under any circumstances, because he had received judgment for damages; that I must go to the Court of Appeal; and he added, "I have very good means to prevent you succeeding in the Court of Appeal"�I did not ask what the means were, but he said there were two means to prevent me succeeding with the appeal; one was bankruptcy and the other was a prosecution for perjury�I said that was somewhat in the Dodson and Fogg line in "Pickwick Papers"�then Flaxman tapped me on the shoulder and winked with his eye, and said, "Well, if you can find a �10 note I shall settle the matter; our client is a pig-headed Scotchman"�he said he had plenty of bankruptcy forms in his desk�I had to deliver the machine to other parties, and I had not the money to pay for it without getting it�Flaxman said, "Oh! you have property"�I answered, "No, I have two houses, but there is a mortgage on them, and I have furniture, but there is a bill of sale on it"�I dont remember that anything else was said�I was there less than half an hour�no one was present but myself and Flaxman�subsequently, I instructed my solicitor to repeat the offer, and he did so�I went to his office, saw his clerk, and made a communication to him�I have written books under the name of Springmuhl�I have never, in any shape or form, attempted to conceal my right name as Von Weissenfeld�my right name is Springmuhl von Weissenfeld.

Cross-examined. I believe I had 200 of these publications printed; I don't know when, in 1891 very likely; in January or February�besides the three I sent out I have shown them to many persons�I don't remember if I have sent them to others�I have shown them to my solicitor�I believe I showed them to Messrs. Ashurst, Morris and Crisp, or their clerk; he was acting at the time as my solicitor�he was not acting for any one of my debtors�Mr. Davis was my solicitor in the action before Mr. Justice Charles�Ashurst, Morris and Crisp were solicitors in a sale of property to Mr. Willis and others; they acted for Mr. Willis, not for Mr. Dowden, who was nobody; he was nominally the purchaser�I may have shown the publications to other solicitors; very likely I have shown them to a number of people�a petition was presented against me by Mr. Hendry before one Registrar, and my solicitor went, with my sanction, to another Registrar and got me declared bankrupt on my own petition�my name was always Springmuhl von Weissenfeld, and I should sign a document in that name�when I went before the second Registrar I put George Ferdinand von Weissenfeld�I omitted the Springmuhl because I did not want to damage my name under which I wrote books�I slept last Saturday at a friend's, not at Stanley House�I was at Stanley House on Saturday; I left it as soon as I got a telegram from Mr. Davis to come here�I bought Stanley House in 1889�when I presented my own petition in bankruptcy I gave my address as 97, Portland Road, which is Nelson's Hotel�Mr. Hendry, in his petition, put me as residing at Stanley House�this petition is in my writing�I say, "Lately residing at Paris and at 5, Glebe Terrace"�5, Glebe Terrace is Stanley House�letters are addressed to both; 5, Glebe Terrace is the official name�I generally date my letters from "Stanley House"�I do not know if I gave this card to the Registrar�I have been unsuccessful in my principal action�I had no action in bankruptcy�I swore in the witness-box that Stanley House and Grafton House belonged to the Concentrated Produce Company�I think Mr. Justice Vaughan Williams said he could not believe that�in the Court of Appeal Mr. Justice Fry said he believed it�they did not upset the judgment of the Court below�I did not also say that certain furniture over which I had given a bill of sale was the property of the Concentrated Produce Company; there was a bill of sale on it, the bill of sale was with the Company�I said the Concentrated Produce Company had found the money for the fresh bill of sale; and so they did�the Court decided they did not�all the money of the Company was in my wife's banking account�I had no furniture or property to hand over to the trustee; I have not handed it over�I wanted the machine to be given to me on payment of the �100 and bills; on the �100 and two bills being given I expected to get the machine�my solicitor offered to secure the payment of the two bills, I believe�I told Mr. Flaxman I would give him the houses as security for the bills�he did not say, "Could you give me any security for the payment of those bills"; he only spoke about the houses�I believe he said, "If you don't pay us, and have got no security, we know you have a bill of sale on your furniture"�I told him my two houses were mortgaged; but the property was worth �450 more than the mortgage�the mortgagees were not actually in possession at that time.

[...]

GUILTY .�The JURY added that they found the plea of justification woe not true� Two Month' Imprisonment.

--end

Resolution of another case against Betts and Springmuhl:

ROBERT BETTS, Deception > bankrupcy, 17th October 1892.

Reference Number: t18921017-958
Offence: Deception > bankrupcy
Verdict: Guilty > pleaded guilty
Punishment: Miscellaneous > sureties

958. ROBERT BETTS PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully aiding and assisting Von Weissenfeld (not in custody), a bankrupt, in attempting to defraud his creditors.� Discharged on recognisances.

TradeName · 10-01-2013, 03:05 PM

From the Old Bailey Online, some excerpts from the perjury trial of Robert Betts, secretary of Springmuhl's Concentrated Produce Company. Betts was involved in efforts to shield Springmuhl's personal assets (furniture) from bankruptcy proceedings.

George Hendry testifies about Springmuhl's bankruptcy. The bankruptcy does not seem to be part of some clever scheme of Springmuhl's.

Henry Horton, an employee of the Concentrated Produce Company, testifies and claims that Springmuhl and Dr. Wilde were two different individuals.

Edgar Bryon Phelps testifies about sharing an office with Betts and Springmuhl.

ROBERT BETTS, Deception > perjury, 2nd May 1892.

Reference Number: t18920502-489
Offence: Deception > perjury
Verdict: Guilty > no_subcategory
Punishment: Imprisonment > no_subcategory

"bankruptcy of charles F. von Weisenfeld"

89. ROBERT BETTS was indicted for wilful and corrupt perjury, committed before Mr. Registrar Linklater.

MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted, and MR. GRAIN Defended.

GEORGE HENDRY. I carry on business at Oak Lane, Limehouse, as a coppersmith and brewers' engineer�in April, 1890, I recovered a judgment, with costs, against George Ferdinand von Weisenfeld for �250�Mr. Birchall was my solicitor in that action�I instituted bankruptcy proceedings against Von Weisenfeld�he was declared bankrupt in June, 1890�I was appointed trustee on 2nd April, 1891�a protracted litigation took place with reference to that bankruptcy, and with reference to some furniture in Stoneleigh; likewise as to a bill of sale that was set up respecting a claim by the Produce Company, Limited, to that furniture�the issue was, whether I or the trustee was entitled to that furniture�judgment was given by Justice Vaughan Williams; there was an appeal, and his judgment was affirmed�on that I took steps to compel the bankrupt to attend his public examination�he did not attend�he did not file any statement of affairs�a summons was taken out, under Section 20, for a private examination of the defendant Betts�that was issued on 7th May, and on the 28th he came before Registrar Linklater and gave evidence�I have never seen the furniture since, or recovered a farthing�I know that Von Weisenfeld had an interest in two houses, Stoneleigh and Grafton House, in Clissold Park, Stoke Newington�he was also supposed to rent Oak Lodge�I did not know of the furniture being taken there on 18th April or 20th May.

Cross-examined. There was no order of the Bankruptcy Court for this prosecution�I am prosecuting as trustee�there are several creditors�there is no committee of inspection�the Official Receiver and myself, as trustee, conducted the whole of the litigation�there were proceedings extending over nine or ten days about the bill of, sale�Mr. Justice Williams set it aside in my favour, and the Court of Appeal affirmed his judgment�the date of the information was 17th July, 1891�I first gave evidence in this matter a week or two after, at Bow Street�the case was adjourned by Sir John Bridge until the proceedings in the High Court had been adjudicated upon�after the judgment of the High Court I applied for a day to be fixed for the hearing of the criminal charge against the defendant�I cannot say when I first heard of the removal of the furniture from Stoneleigh House�it is twelve months ago; it may have been about the end of March, 1891�we could not take proceedings because we did not know where it went to�we took steps to watch Oak Lodge after we heard of the removal, I can't say the date�I took steps to try and recover my debt, and instructed my solicitor to proceed accordingly�the man bad become bankrupt, but we understood that he had a lot of property�my solicitor applied for authority to break into Oak Lodge and see if there was any property there belonging to me�I did not break into the place; I don't know whether my solicitor did; I was not there when they went in�I went there afterwards, but I never got in�I believe an inventory was taken�I left Mr. Birchall to take all necessary proceedings.

[...]

HENRY HORTON . I was living at Oak Lodge at the time of the examination before the Magistrate�I do not live there now�I am a bottler, and bottle wine for the Concentrated Produce Company; the defendant is the secretary; he pays me my wages�I am in the service now, and live at 2, Balfour Road, Highbury New Park�the Baroness Lydia de Frank does not live there; she comes there to stay when in London; she calls there for letters; she has not stayed there since I have been there�I know nothing whatever of her business; I have never seen her at the premises of the company; I never knew her by any other name�I was introduced to her when I went to live there�on 18th April Mrs. Wilde sent me to take a paper to the defendant�I had known Mrs. Wilde before, for twelve months; I saw her in January and February this year�I know Dr. Wilde; I saw him last December�I was examined at the Bankruptcy Court on the part of the company in support of their bill of sale�the proceedings were adjourned from day to day�I did not see Dr. Wilde about the Bankruptcy Court; he was not examined there to my knowledge�when I took the note to the defendant from Mrs. Wilde on 18th April I saw the furniture moved in�I came with it; it came from Stoneleigh House; Mrs. Wilde gave it to me there; Dr. Wilde was not present�there were three or four pantechnicon heavy vanloads�I remained at Oak Lodge until the furniture was finished removing, on the 18th�I was there on the 20th; I saw Dr. Wilde on the 20th�I became caretaker there about a fortnight after�I remained there until the 25th of March this year; people were not living in the house all the while; Dr. Wilde was living there occasionally�I knew the gardener next door; more's the pity�I know Von Weisenfeld�in June last year he stayed there�I remember two persons walking up and down outside the house; Von Weisenfeld was not there all the time�he has been there two or three weeks at a time; he never stayed there like Dr. Wilde; he paid occasional visits�they have been there together; they did not occupy the same bedroom�I saw Von Weisenfeld there on the 19th April; he is not Dr. Wilde�I had been to Stoneleigh House before the 18th of April�I had been in the dining-room, the drawing-room, and upstairs, and saw the furniture there; it was not the same furniture that went to Oak Lodge; it was not Von Weisenfeld's furniture�Mrs. Wilde paid me my money as caretaker; I can't say who she got it from, without it came from Dr. Wilde through the Concentrated Produce Company�Mrs. Wilde instructs me as caretaker, and there is Dr. Wilde and Mr. Betts; I take instructions from Mr. Betts when Dr. and Mrs. Wilde are away; they are generally away; I generally take my instructions from Mr. Betts�of the furniture moved from Stoneleigh House, I only saw two things belonging to Von Weisenfeld, a sideboard and a lookingglass in the hall�Mr. Betts lives at Stoneleigh House at present; on the 18th April Dr. and Mrs. Wilde lived there�I did not see Von Weisenfeld there then�I always understood that he left there in October, 1890, when he gave the house up�I don't know that that was after the action was heard; I did not know anything about the action then�I don't know that the looking-glass was his, but it was in his use, and so was the sideboard�the three or four vanloads of furniture were used at Stoneleigh House�Dr. Wilde lived there; I don't know where that furniture is now; I could not say where it was in March; there was no furniture there; I don't know where it had gone to�I was examined before the Magistrate three times, the last time was on 24th July, 1891�I told the Magistrate that the furniture which had been moved to Oak Lodge in April had remained there ever since, and was there then, at the time I gave my evidence�Mrs. Wilde had it moved away the first week in January, 1892�I remember the trustee calling on the 17th January�I did not know that Dr. Wilde had said he had a bill of sale on that furniture; I never heard it till I was told; I did not know that the sale was declared void, and a sham�I do not know that the furniture was removed directly the bill of sale was declared a sham�all I can say is that the furniture was taken away in pantechnicon vans; I don't know where it went to�I don't know what became of the mirror on sideboard�a search-warrant was issued and executed on the premises while I was caretaker�Mr. Birchall, the solicitor, came in under that search-warrant�he had a paper with him; he looked at some of the furniture while he, had the paper in his hand�I never heard of a schedule to a bill of sale.

Cross-examined. I was examined in a room at the Bankruptcy Court on 16th July, 1891, and on 24th I was at Bow Street; I gave evidence, and was recalled and cross-examined the following week�I joined the Produce Company in 1888, and was in the company's employ until 1891 as bottler�from time to time during that period I saw a person calling himself Dr. Wilde; I understood him to be a member of the company�I always took Von Weisenfeld to be the manager�I saw the removal of the furniture from Stoneleigh House�it was the last Friday in March, 1891; I was bottling at the rear of Stoneleigh House, the factory; the business was carried on there�Von Weisenfeld was there from time to time�it was a company to supply grapes and extract the musk; it is made into a kind of claret�I was going home to dinner about one o'clock, the pantechnicon van stood outside, being loaded with furniture, and when I returned it was gone�between four and five in the afternoon Mr. Betts came down and asked the meaning of it, and I told him�I saw no moving till the Tuesday afternoon, when I saw some furniture being unloaded and moved into the house; it came in a pantechnicon van; it came on a railway trolley�the furniture was being moved into the dining-room�I only saw one van there, it had "Paris" on it�I had occasion to go into the house with a letter; I saw Mrs. Wilde, and had a conversation with her, and then went back to my business�it was the same furniture that was moved into Oak Lodge�I was in the house after the furniture was there�I had occasion to be in the house nearly every day�I always went into the dining-room to see people I wanted to see�I saw Mrs. Wilde, Dr. Wilde, and Von Weisenfeld�I knew Von Weisenfeld well, and I know Dr. Wilde; they are not the same person�the only persons that came to Oak Lodge to ask me for any information was at eleven o'clock at night, and they gave the names of Flaxman and Edwards�that was about a week before the warrant�the furniture had not gone then; it was in the house, and was there up to January this year�I had nothing whatever to do with the removal of it in January�I last saw Mrs. Wilde on 23rd of March this year�I saw her at the house a day or two before the furniture was removed�I had a conversation with Mrs. Wilde as to who it belonged to�I knew from her where Dr. Wilde was generally living when he was not abroad�I have not seen her since 20th March.

Re-examined. The furniture that came from abroad was put into Stoneleigh House, and was afterwards removed to Oak Lodge�I only saw one van, but I was not there all the while; I had business out�at the time I was examined before Mr. Justice Vaughan Williams I knew that the ownership of this furniture was in question�I was not asked if it ceased to belong to Von Weisenfeld and belonged to Dr. Wilde�I saw Mr. Elton several times before I was examined before Mr. Justice Williams�I don't know whether he took my statement�I told him that I knew the furniture came from Paris in March, and was then removed to Oak Lodge�I don't think I was asked a single question by Von Weisenfeld's counsel about the furniture coming from Paris�I did not know that the whole question was who the furniture belonged to�I am sure that the furniture that was removed from Stoneleigh House to Oak Lodge was the same that came from abroad, except the two articles I have mentioned; I took particular notice of it�I had been in the dining-room frequently, and seen the furniture there�there was not a walnut wood buffet and a bookcase there of Von Weisenfeld's�I knew to whom each article belonged, because I minded the furniture when they were in the country�there was a dining-table�there were not twelve walnutwood chairs covered with velvet; I did not see such chairs at Oak Lodge�I saw a mahogany clock and a bronze five-light, a barometer and thermometer, a good many oil paintings, a piano, and a cabinet�I never went into the bedrooms; I don't know anything about the bill of sale�I was not aware there was a bill of sale.

By the COURT. I can't say that the articles in Stoneleigh House were the same that went to Oak Lodge�I say I saw some furniture removed into Stoneleigh House in 1891�I can't say whether it was the same�the furniture brought from Paris to Stoneleigh House was the same that Mr. Birchall saw at Oak Lodge�I don't know that it was the same as mentioned in the bill of sale�it was moved out from Stoneleigh House�I don't know where it went to�furniture went out in October and November, 1890; that was Von Weisenfeld's furniture�I don't know where it went to; it was not there when I went�I was there when the furniture from Paris was brought in�I don't know who brought it in; all I can say is that "Paris "was on the van in painted letters�I don't know whether the persons that brought it in were foreign or English�it was a two-horse van�I did not ask where they came from�I could not read the name of the owner, because it was in foreign letters, different from ours; the word "Paris" was in English�Madame Wilde is a foreigner, and Dr. Wilde also�I have never seen any foreign prints in their house�I never spoke to the persons that brought the furniture�the goods were packed; I could not see what they were.

EDGAR BYRON PHELPS . I am a manufacturing agent�about Christmas, 1890. I entered into the occupation of 58, Bishopsgate Street, with Von Weisenfeld�the prisoner used Von Weisenfeld's office, and I had the private office�I last saw Von Weisenfeld about March twelve months-after that the prisoner came to the office�letters came for Von Weisenfeld during his absence, which the prisoner would take away�as far as I know the prisoner represented Von Weisenfeld at those offices�since I last saw Von Weisenfeld the prisoner has given me a letter from him; if had an envelope, but when I saw it it was open, with no envelope; it was an enclosure apparently, delivered to me by Betts.

Cross-examined. I have a libel action against Von Weisenfeld, which is still pending, and I am also in litigation with the Concentrated Produce Company, I believe�I have the scrip of one share in the company, but I believe I am not entitled to it, from what my solicitor says.

Re-examined. The company brought the action against me last year, I think�I have heard nothing more about it�the statement of claim has been delivered, and I have not heard anything more about it.

[...]

GUILTY � Six Weeks' Imprisonment.

--end

The resolution of the libel case Phelps mentioned in his testimony:

GEORGE FERDINAND VON WEISENFELD, Breaking Peace > libel, 2nd May 1892.

Reference Number: t18920502-508
Offence: Breaking Peace > libel
Verdict: Guilty > no_subcategory
Punishment: Miscellaneous > sureties

508. GEORGE FERDINAND VON WEISENFELD was indicted for unlawfully writing and publishing a libel of and concerning Edgar Byron Phelps, to which a justification was pleaded.

MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted, and MR. GRAIN Defended. After MR. GEOGHEGAN had opened the case, the prisoner, in the hearing of the JURY, expressed his willingness to withdraw his plea of justification, and plead guilty to the indictment, and thereupon the JURY found him GUILTY .� Discharged on recognisances.

TradeName · 09-24-2013, 06:26 PM

Jeff,

Thanks for the info on Andr�e and Nobile.

As to drugs, Springmuhl published Havelock Ellis' book on "sexual inversion," and it appears that Ellis also experimented with a drug and published his observations. I don't know if he ever discussed this with "de Villiers."

New York Medical Journal, Volume 65, June 26, 1897, Pages 882-884

The Phenomena of Mescal Intoxication.�-Mescal buttons, says Mr. Havelock Ellis in the Lancet for June 5th, are eaten by the Kiowa and other Indians of New Mexico in connection with religious ceremonies. Recently the extraordinary vision-producing properties of this substance have been investigated in America by Prentiss and Morgan, and more especially by Weir Mitchell, who has published a very interesting record of the marvelous color visions by which he was visited when under the influence of mescal. There seems, however, to be at present no record of any experiment in the use of mescal in the production of visual phenomena carried out on the European side of the Atlantic. The phenomena are certainly of much interest he thinks�-perhaps even more so to the psychologist than to the physician, notwithstanding remarkable results recorded in the treatment of neurasthenia, etc., and for this reason he gives the following account of his personal experience with mescal:

"On Good Friday, being entirely alone in quiet London rooms, I made an infusion of three buttons (a full dose) and took it in three portions at intervals of an hour between 2.30 and 4.30 p. M. The first noteworthy result (and the only one of therapeutic interest which I have to record) was that a headache which had been present for some hours and showed a tendency to aggravation was immediately relieved and speedily dissipated. There was slight drowsiness before the third dose was taken, but this speedily passed off and gave place to a certain consciousness of unusual energy and intellectual power, which also quickly passed off, and was not marked and prolonged, as with Dr. Weir Mitchell. So far no visual phenomena had appeared, even when the eyes were closed for several minutes, and there was yet no marked increase of knee-jerk; there was, however, a certain heightening of muscular irritability, such as may be noted when one has been without sleep for an unusual period. The pulse also began to fall. After the third dose I was still feeling on the whole better than before I began the experiment. But at 5 P. M. I felt slightly faint, and it became difficult to concentrate my attention in reading; I lay down and found that the pulse had now fallen to 48, but no visual phenomena had yet appeared. At 6 p. M. I noticed while lying down (in which position I was able to read) that a pale violet shadow floated over the page. I had already noted that objects which were not in the direct line of vision showed a tendency to be heightened in color and to appear enlarged and obtrusive, while after-images began to be marked and persistent. At 6 p. M. there was a slight feeling of faintness as well as of nausea, and the first symptoms of muscular incoordination began to appear, but there was no marked discomfort. By 7 P. M. visions had begun to appear with closed eyelids, a vague confused mass of kaleidoscopic character. The visual phenomena seen with open eyes now also became more marked, and in addition to the very distinct violet shadows there were faint green shadows. Perhaps the most pleasant moment in the experience occurred at 7.30 P. M., when for the first time the color visions with closed eyes became vivid and distinct, while at the same time I had an olfactory hallucination, the air seeming filled with vague perfume. Meanwhile the pulse had been rising, and by 8.30 P. M. had reached its normal level (72 in the sitting posture). At the same time muscular incoordination had so far advanced that it was almost impossible to manipulate a pen, and I had to write with a pencil; this also I could soon only use for a few minutes at a time, and as I wrote a golden tone now lay over the paper, and the pencil seemed to write in gold, while my hand, seen in indirect vision as I wrote, looked bronzed, scaled, and flushed with red. Except for slight nausea I continued to feel well, and there was no loss of mental coolness or alertness. When gazing at the visions with closed eyes I occasionally experienced slight right frontal headache, but as I only noticed it at these times I attribute this mainly to the concentration of visual attention. In one very important particular my experience differs from Dr. Weir Mitchell's. He was unable to see the visions with open eyes even in the darkest room. I found it perfectly easy to see them with open eyes in a dark room, though they were less brilliant than when the eyes were closed. At 10 P. M., finding that movement distinctly aggravated the nausea and faintness, I went to bed, and as I undressed was impressed by the bronzed and pigmented appearance of my limbs.

"In bed the nausea entirely disappeared, not to reappear, the only discomfort that remained being the sensation of thoracic oppression, and the occasional involuntary sighing, evidently due to shallow respiration, which had appeared about the same time as the vision began. But there was not the slightest drowsiness. This insomnia seemed to be connected less with the constantly shifting visions, which were always beautiful and agreeable, than with the vague alarm caused by thoracic oppression, and more especially with the auditory hyperesthesia. I was uncomfortably receptive to sounds of every kind, and whenever I seemed to be nearly falling asleep I was invariably startled either by the exaggerated reverberation of some distant street noise (though the neighborhood was even quieter than usual), or, again, by the mental image (not hallucination) of a loud sound, or, again, as I was sometimes inclined to think, by actual faint hallucinatory sounds; this, however, was difficult to verify. At a later stage there was some ringing in the ear. There was slight twitching of the larger muscles of the legs, etc., and before going to bed I had ascertained that the knee-jerk was much exaggerated. The skin was hot and dry. The visions continued. After some hours, tired of watching them, I lighted the gas. Then I found myself in a position to watch a new series of vivid phenomena to which the previous investigators had not alluded. The gas�-i. e., an ordinary flickering burner�-seemed to burn with great brilliance, sending out waves of light which extended and contracted rhythmically in an enormously exaggerated manner. What chiefly impressed me, however, were the shadows which came in all directions, heightened by flushes of red, green, and especially violet. The whole room then became vivid and beautiful, and the tone and texture of the whitewashed but not remarkably white ceiling was immensely improved. The difference between the room as I then saw it and its usual appearance was precisely the difference one may often observe between the picture of a room and the actual room. The shadows I saw were the shadows which the artist puts in, but which are not visible under normal conditions of casual inspection. The violet shadows especially reminded me of Monet's paintings, and as I gazed at them it occurred to me that mescal doubtless reproduces the same condition of visual hyperesthesia, or rather exhaustion, which is certainly produced in the artist by prolonged visual attention (although this point has yet received no attention from psychologists). It seems probable that these predominantly violet shadows are to some extent conditioned by the dilatation of the pupils, which, as the American observers had already noted, always occurs in mescal intoxication. I may remark in this connection that violet vision has been noted after eye operations; and Dobrowolsky has argued that a necessary condition for such vision is the dilatation of the pupils produced by atropine, so that the color vision (chiefly violet, though to some extent of other colors) is really of the nature of an after-image due to bright light. Dobrbwolsky's explanation seems to fit in accurately with my experiences under mescal.

"I wished to ascertain how the subdued and steady electric light would influence vision and passed into the next room. Here the richly colored shadows, evidently due to the stimulus of the flickering light, were not obtrusive; but I was able to observe that whatever I gazed at showed a tendency to wave or pulsate. The curtains waved to a marked extent. On close inspection I detected a slight amount of real movement, which doubtless increased the coarser imaginary movement; this latter showed a tendency to spread to the walls. At the same time the matting on the floor showed a very rich texture, thick and felted, and seemed to rise in little waves. These effects were clearly produced by the play of heightened shadows on the outskirts of the visual field. At 3.30 A. M. I found that the phenomena were distinctly decreasing, and soon fell asleep. Sleep was apparently peaceful and dreamless, and I rose at the usual hour without any sense of fatigue, although there was a slight headache. A few of the faint visual phenomena with which the experience had commenced still persisted for a few hours."

Mr. Ellis states that motor incoordination and the thoracic symptoms of cardiac and respiratory depression were the only really unpleasant symptoms of the experiment. He thinks that the pleasure of mescal intoxication does not lie in any resultant passive emotional state, such as is produced by tea or alcohol, but strictly in the enjoyment of the color visions produced. Attention, he says, is impaired, but intellectual judgment remains Unimpaired. The visions seemed to him as beautiful in memory as when he experienced them. The sensory phenomena seemed to be due to great and general disintegration and exhaustion of the sensory apparatus. Mr. Ellis is convinced that all the senses were more or less affected. There were vague dermal sensations, and the body felt unfamiliar to the touch, just as everything seemed delightfully unfamiliar to the sense of vision. He noticed also that any marked casual stimulation of the skin produced other sensory phenomena�a heightening of the visions or an impression of sound. This is a phenomenon, he says, which may throw an interesting light on the syn�sthesi�, or "secondary sensations."

--end

The Contemporary Review, Volume 73, January, 1898, Pages 130-141

MESCAL: A NEW ARTIFICIAL PARADISE.

by Havelock Ellis

It has been known for some years that the Kiowa Indians of New Mexico are accustomed to eat, in their religious ceremonies, a certain cactus called Anhalonium Lewinii, or mescal button. Mescal�-which must not be confounded with the intoxicating drink of the same name made from an agave�-is found in the Mexican valley of the Rio Grande, the ancestral home of the Kiowa Indians, as well as in Texas, and is a brown and brittle substance, nauseous and bitter to the taste, composed mainly of the blunt dried leaves of the plant. Yet, as we shall see, it has every claim to rank with haschisch and the other famous drugs which have procured for men the joys of an artificial paradise. Upon the Kiowa Indians, who first discovered its rare and potent virtues, it has had so strong a fascination that the missionaries among these Indians, finding here a rival to Christianity not yielding to moral suasion, have appealed to the secular arm, and the buying and selling of the drug has been prohibited by Government under severe penalties. Yet the use of mescal prevails among the Kiowas to this day.

It has indeed spread, and the mescal rite may be said to be today the chief religion of all the tribes of the Southern plains of the United States. The rite usually takes place on Saturday night; the men then sit in a circle within the tent round a large camp-fire, which is kept burning brightly all the time. After prayer the leader hands each man four buttons, which are slowly chewed and swallowed, and altogether about ten or twelve buttons are consumed by each man between sundown and daybreak. Throughout the night the men sit quietly round the fire in a state of reverie�-amid continual singing and the beating of drums by attendants�-absorbed in the colour visions and other manifestations of mescal intoxication, and about noon on the following day, when the effects have passed off, they get up and go about their business, without any depression or other unpleasant after-effect.

There are five or six allied species of cacti which the Indians also use and treat with great reverence. Thus Mr. Carl Lumholtz has found that the Tarahumari, a tribe of Mexican Indians, worship various cacti as gods, only to be approached with uncovered heads. When they wish to obtain these cacti, the Tarahumari cense themselves with copal incense, and with profound respect dig up the god, careful lest they should hurt him, while women and children are warned from the spot. Even Christian Indians regard Hikori, the cactus god, as co-equal with their own divinity, and make the sign of the cross in its presence. At all great festivals, Hikori is made into a drink and consumed by the medicine man, or certain selected Indians, who sing as they partake of it, invoking Hikori to grant a "beautiful intoxication ;" at the same time a rasping noise is made with sticks, and men and women dance a fantastic and picturesque dance�-the women by themselves in white petticoats and tunics�-before those who are under the influence of the god.

In 1891 Mr. James Mooney, of the United States Bureau of Ethnology, having frequently observed the mescal rites of the Kiowa Indians and assisted at them, called the attention of the Anthropological Society at Washington to the subject, and three years later he brought to Washington a supply of mescal, which was handed over for examination to Drs. Prentiss and Morgan. These investigators experimented on several young men, and demonstrated, for the first time, the precise character of mescal intoxication and the remarkable visions to which it gives rise. A little later Dr. Weir Mitchell, who, in addition to his eminence as a physician, is a man of marked aesthetic temperament, experimented on himself, and published a very interesting record of the brilliant visions by which he was visited under the influence of the plant. In the spring of the past year I was able to obtain a small sample of mescal in London, and as my first experiment with mescal was also, apparently, the first attempt to investigate its vision-producing properties outside America,* I will describe it in some detail, in preference to drawing on the previously published descriptions of the American observers.

=========

* Lewin, of Berlin, indeed, experimented with Anhalonium Lewinii, to which he gave its name, as early as 1888, and as he found that even a small portion produced dangerous symptoms, he classed it amongst the extremely poisonous drugs, like strychnia. He failed to discover its vision-producing properties, and it seems, in fact, highly probable that he was really experimenting with a different cactus from that now known by the same name.

=========

On Good Friday I found myself entirely alone in the quiet rooms in the Temple which I occupy when in London, and judged the occasion a fitting one for a personal experiment. I made a decoction (a different method from that adopted in America) of three buttons, the full physiological dose, and drank this at intervals between 2.30 and 4.30 P.M. The first symptom observed during the afternoon was a certain consciousness of energy and intellectual power.* This passed off, and about an hour after the final dose I felt faint and unsteady; the pulse was low, and I found it pleasanter to lie down. I was still able to read, and I noticed that a pale violet shadow floated over the page around the point at which my eyes were fixed. I had already noticed that objects not in the direct line of vision, such as my hands holding the book, showed a tendency to look obtrusive, heightened in colour, almost monstrous, while, on closing my eyes, after-images were vivid and prolonged. The appearance of visions with closed eyes was very gradual. At first there was merely a vague play of light and shade, which suggested pictures, but never made them. Then the pictures became more definite, but too confused and crowded to be described, beyond saying that they were of the same character as the images of the kaleidoscope, symmetrical groupings of spiked objects. Then, in the course of the evening, they became distinct, but still indescribable�-mostly a vast field of golden jewels, studded with red and green stones, ever changing. This moment was, perhaps, the most delightful of the experience, for at the same time the air around me seemed to be flushed with vague perfume�-producing with the visions a delicious effect�-and all discomfort had vanished, except a slight faintness and tremor of the hands, which, later on, made it almost impossible to guide a pen as I made notes of the experiment; it was, however, with an effort, always possible to write with a pencil. The visions never resembled familiar objects; they were extremely definite, but yet always novel; they were constantly approaching, and yet constantly eluding, the semblance of known things. I would see thick glorious fields of jewels, solitary or clustered, sometimes brilliant and sparkling, sometimes with a dull rich glow. Then they would spring up into flower-like shapes beneath my gaze, and then seem to turn into gorgeous butterfly forms or endless folds of glistening, iridescent, fibrous wings of wonderful insects; while sometimes I seemed to be gazing into a vast hollow revolving vessel, on whose polished concave mother-of-peail surface the hues were swiftly changing. I was surprised, not only by the enormous profusion of the imagery presented to my gaze, but still more by its variety. Perpetually some totally new kind of effect would appear in the field of vision; sometimes there was swift movement, sometimes dull, sombre richness of colour, sometimes glitter and sparkle, once a startling rain of gold, which seemed to approach me. Most usually there was a combination of rich sober colour, with jewel-like points of brilliant hue. Every colour and tone conceivable to me appeared at some time or another. Sometimes all the different varieties of one colour, as of red�-with scarlets, crimsons, pinks�would spring up together, or in quick succession. But in spite of this immense profusion, there was always a certain parsimony and aesthetic value in the colours prosented. They were usually associated with form, and never appeared in large masses, or, if so, the tone was very delicate. I was further impressed, not only by the brilliance, delicacy, and variety of the colours, but even more by their lovely and various texture�-fibrous, woven, polished, glowing, dull, veined, semi-transparent�-the glowing effects, as of jewels, and the fibrous, as of insects' wings, being perhaps the most prevalent. Although the effects were novel, it frequently happened, as I have already mentioned, that they vaguely recalled known objects. Thus, once the objects presented to me seemed to be made of exquisite porcelain, again they were like elaborate sweetmeats, again of a somewhat Maori style of architecture, and the background of the pictures frequently recalled, both in form and tone, the delicate architectural effects, as of lace carved in wood, which we associate with the mouchrabich work of Cairo. But always the visions grew and changed without any reference to the characteristics of those real objects of which they vaguely reminded me, and when I tried to influence their course it was with very little success. On the whole, I should say that the images were most usually what might be called living arabesques. There was often a certain incomplete tendency to symmetry, as though the underlying mechanism was associated with a large number of polished facets. The same image was in this way frequently repeated over a large part of the field; but this refers more to form than to colour, in respect to which there would still be all sorts of delightful varieties, so that if, with a certain uniformity, jewel-like flowers were springing up and expanding all over the field of vision, they would still show every variety of delicate tone and tint.

=====
*I pass lightly over the purely physiological symptoms which I have described in tnme detail in a paper on "The Phenomena of Mescal Intoxication " (Lancet, Juno 5, If97), which, however, contains no desciiption of tbe visions.

=====

Weir Mitchell found that he could only see the visions with closed eyes and in a perfectly dark room. I could see them in the dark with almost equal facility, though they were not of equal brilliancy, when my eyes were wide open. I saw them best, however, when my eyes were closed, in a room lighted only by flickering firelight. This evidently accords with the experience of the Indians, who keep a fire burning brightly throughout their mescal rites.

The visions continued with undiminished brilliance for many hours, and, as I felt somewhat faint and muscularly weak, I went to bed, as I undressed being greatly impressed by the red, scaly, bronzed, and pigmented appearance of my limbs whenever I was not directly gazing at them. I had not the faintest desire for sleep; there was a general hyperesthesia of all the senses as well as muscular irritability, and every slightest sound seemed magnified to startling dimensions. I may also have been kept awake by a vague alarm at the novelty of my condition, and the possibility of further developments.

After watching the visions in the dark for some hours I became a little tired of them and turned on the gas. Then I found that I was able to study a new series of visual phenomena, to which previous observers had made no reference. The gas jet (an ordinary flickering burner) seemed to burn with great brilliance, sending out waves of light, which expanded and contracted in an enormously exaggerated manner. I was even more impressed by the shadows, which were in all directions heightened by flushes of red, green, and especially violet. The whole room, with its white-washed but not very white ceiling, thus became vivid and beautiful. The difference between the room as I saw it then and the appearance it usually presents to me was the difference one may often observe between the picture of a room and the actual room. The shadows I saw were the shadows which the artist puts in, but which are not visible in the actual scene under normal conditions of casual inspection. I was reminded of the paintings of Claude Monet, and as I gazed at the scene it occurred to me that mescal perhaps produces exactly the same conditions of visual hyperesthesia, or rather exhaustion, as may be produced on the artist by the influence of prolonged visual attention. I wished to ascertain how the subdued and steady electric light would influence vision, and passed into the next room; but here the shadows were little marked, although walls and floor seemed tremulous and insubstantial, and the texture of everything was heightened and enriched.

About 3.30 A.M. I felt that the phenomena were distinctly diminishing�-though the visions, now chiefly of human figures, fantastic and Chinese in character, still continued�-and I was able to settle myself to sleep, which proved peaceful and dreamless. I awoke at the usual hour and experienced no sense of fatigue, nor other unpleasant reminiscence of the experience I had undergone. Only my eyes seemed unusually sensitive to colour, especially to blue and violet; I can, indeed, say that ever since this experience I have been more aesthetically sensitive than I was before to the more delicate phenomena of light and shade and colour.

It occurred to me that it would be interesting to have the experiences of an artist under the influence of mescal, and I induced an artist friend to make a similar experiment. Unfortunately no effects whatever were produced at the first attempt, owing, as I have since discovered, to the fact that the buttons had only been simply infused and their virtues not extracted. To make sure of success the experiment was repeated with four buttons, which proved to be an excessive and unpleasant dose. There were paroxysmal attacks of pain at the heart and a sense of imminent death, which naturally alarmed the subject, while so great was the dread of light and dilatation of the pupils that the eyelids had to be kept more or less closed, though it was evident that a certain amount of vision was still possible. The symptoms came on very suddenly, and when I arrived they were already at their height. As the experiences of this subject were in many respects very unlike mine, I will give them in his own words: "I noticed first that as I happened to turn my eyes away from a blue enamel kettle at which I had been unconsciously looking, and which was standing in the fender of the fireplace, with no fire in it, it seemed to me that I saw a spot of the same blue in the black coals of the grate, and that this spot appeared again, further off, a little brighter in hue. But I was in doubt whether I had not imagined these blue spots. When, however, I lifted my eyes to the mantelpiece, on which were scattered all sorts of odds and ends, all doubt was over. I saw an intensely vivid blue light begin to play around every object. A square cigarette-box, violet in colour, shone like an amethyst. I turned my eyes away, and beheld this time, on the back of a polished chair, a bar of colour glowing like a ruby. Although I was expecting some such manifestation as one of the first symptoms of the intoxication, I was nevertheless somewhat alarmed when this phenomenon took place. Such a silent and sudden illumination of all things around, where a moment before I had seen nothing uncommon, seemed like a kind of madness beginning from outside me, and its strangeness affected me more than its beauty. A desire to escape from it led me to the door, and the act of moving had, I noticed, the effect of dispelling the colours. But a sudden difficulty in breathing and a sensation of numbness at the heart brought me back to the arm-chair from which I had risen. From this moment I had a series of attacks or paroxysms, which I can only describe by saying that I felt as though I were dying. It was impossible to move, and it seemed almost impossible to breathe. My speedy dissolution, I half imagined, was about to take place, and the power of making any resistance to the violent sensations that were arising within was going, I felt, with every second.

"The first paroxysms were the most violent. They would come on with tinglings in the lower limbs, and with the sensation of a nauseous and suffocating gas mounting up into my head. Two or three times this was accompanied by a colour vision of the gas bursting into flame as it passed up my throat. But I seldom had visions during the paroxysms; these would appear in the intervals. They began with a spurting up of colours; once, of a flood of brightly illuminated green water covering the field of vision, and effervescing in parts, just as when fresh water with all the air-bubbles is pumped into a swimming bath. At another time my eye seemed to be turning into a vast drop of dirty water in which millions of minute creatures resembling tadpoles were in motion. But the early visions consisted mostly of a furious succession of coloured arabesques, arising and descending or sliding at every possible angle into the field of view. It would be as difficult as to give a description of the whirl of water at the bottom of a waterfall as to describe the chaos of colour and design which marked this period.

"Now also began another series of extraordinary sensations. They set in with bewildering suddenness and followed one another in rapid succession. These I now record as they occur to my mind at haphazard: (1) My right leg became suddenly heavy and solid; it seemed indeed as if the entire weight of my body had shifted into one part, about the thigh and knee, and that the rest of my body had lost all substantiality. (2) With the suddenness of a neuralgic pang, the back of my head seemed to open and emit streams of bright colour; this was immediately followed by the feeling as of a draught blowing like a gale through the hair in the same region. (3) At one moment the colour, green, acquired a taste in my mouth; it was sweetish and somewhat metallic. Blue, again, would have a taste that seemed to recall phosphorus. These are the only colours that seemed to be connected with taste. (4) A feeling of delightful relief and preternatural lightness about my forehead, succeeded by a growing sensation of contraction. (5) Singing in one of my ears. (G) A sensation of burning heat in the palm of my left hand. (7) Heat about both eyes. The last continued throughout the whole period, except for a moment when I had a sensation of cold upon the eyelids, accompanied with a colour vision of the wrinkled lid, of the skin disappearing from the brow, of dead flesh, and finally of a skull.

"Throughout these sensations and visions my mind remained not only perfectly clear, but enjoyed, I believe, an unusual lucidity. Certainly I was conscious of an odd contrast in hearing myself talk rationally with H. E., who had entered the room a short time before, and experiencing at the same moment the wild and extraordinary pranks that were taking place in my body. My reason appeared to be the sole survivor of my being. At times I felt that this, too, would go, but the sound of my own voice would establish again the communication with the outer world of reality.

"Tremors were more or less constant in my lower limbs. Persistent, also, was the feeling of nausea. This, when attended by a feeling of suffocation and a pain at the heart, was relieved by taking brandy, coffee, or biscuit. For muscular exertion I felt neither the wish nor the power. My hands, however, retained their full strength.

"It was painful for me to keep my eyes open above a few seconds; the light of day seemed to fill the room with a blinding glare. Yet every object, in the brief glimpse I caught, appeared normal in colour and shape. With my eyes closed, most of the visions, after the first chaotic display, represented parts or the whole of my body undergoing a variety of marvellous changes, of metamorphoses or illumination. They were more often than not comic and grotesque in character, though often beautiful in colour. At one time I saw my right leg filling up with a delicate heliotrope; at another the sleeve of my coat changed into a dark green material in which was worked a pattern in red braid, and the whole bordered at the cuff with sable. Scarcely had my new sleeve taken shape than I found myself attired in a complete costume of the same fashion, mediaeval in character, but I could not say to what precise period it belonged. I noted that a chance movement�-of my hand, for instance�-would immediately call up a colour vision of the part exerted, and that this again would pass, by a seemingly natural transition, into another wholly dissimilar. Thus, pressing my fingers accidentally against my temples, the fingertips became elongated, and then grew into the ribs of a vaulting or of a dome-shaped roof. But most of the visions were of a more personal nature. I happened once to lift a spoonful of coffee to my lips, and as I was in the act of raising my arm for that purpose, a vision flashed before my closed (or nearly closed) eyes, in all the hues of the rainbow, of my arm separated from my body, and serving me with coffee from out of dark and indefinite space. On another occasion, as I was seeking to relieve slight nausea by taking a piece of biscuit, passed to me by H. E, it suddenly streamed oat into blue flame. For an instant I held the biscuit close to my leg. Immediately my trouser caught alight, and then the whole of the right side of my body, from the foot to the shoulder, was enveloped in waving blue flame. It was a sight of wonderful beauty. But this was not all. As I placed the biscuit in my mouth it burst out again into the same coloured fire and illuminated the interior of my month, casting a blue reflection on the roof. The light in the Blue Grotto at Capri, I am able to affirm, is not nearly as blue as seemed for a short space of time the interior of my mouth. There were many visions of which I could not trace the origin. There were spirals and arabesques and flowers, and sometimes objects more trivial and prosaic in character. In one vision I saw a row of small white flowers, one against the other like pearls of a necklace, begin to revolve in the form of a spiral. Every flower, I observed, had the texture of porcelain. It was at a moment when I had the sensation of my cheeks growing hot and feverish that I experienced the strangest of all the colour visions. It began with feeling that the skin of my face was becoming quite thin and of no stouter consistency than tissue paper, and the feeling was suddenly enhanced by a vision of my face, paper-like and semi-transparent and somewhat reddish in colour. To my amazement I saw myself as though I were inside a Chinese lantern, looking out through my cheek into the room. Not long after this I became conscious of a change in the visions. Their tempo was more moderate, they were less frequent, and they were losing somewhat in distinctness. At the same time the feeling of nausea and of numbness was departing. A short period followed in which I had no visions at all, and experienced merely a sensation of heaviness and torpor. I found that I was able to open my eyes again and keep them fixed on any object in the room without observing the faintest bloe halo or prism, or bar of glowing colour, and that, moreover, no visions appeared on closing them. It was now twilight, but beyond the fact of not seeing light or colour either without or within, I had a distinct feeling that the action of the drug was at an end and that my body had become sober, suddenly. I had no more visions, though I was not wholly free from abnormal sensations, and I retired to rest. I lay awake till the morning, and with the exception of the following night, I scarcely slept for the next three days, but I cannot say that I felt any signs of fatigue, unless, perhaps, on one of the days when my eyes, I noticed, became very susceptible to any indications of blue in an object. Of colour visions, or of any approach to colour visions, there was no further trace; but all sorts of odd and grotesque images passed in succession through my mind during part of the first night. They might have been the dreams of a Baudelaire or of an Aubrey Beardsley. I would see figures with prodigious limbs, or strangely dwarfed and curtailed, or impossible combinations such as five or six fish, the colour of canaries, floating about in air in a gold wire cage. But these were purely mental images, like the visions seen in a dream by a distempered brain.

"Of the many sensations of which my body had been the theatre during three hours, not the least strange was the feeling I experienced on coming back into a normal condition. The recovery did not proceed gradually, but the whole outer and inner world of reality came back, as it were, with a bound. And for a moment it seemed strange. It was the sensation�-only much intensified�-which every one has known on coming out into the light of day from an afternoon performance at a theatre, where one has sat in an artificial light of gas and lamps, the spectator of a fictitious world of action. As one pours out with the crowd into the street, the ordinary world, by force of contrast with the sensational scenes just witnessed, breaks in upon one with almost a sense of unreality. The house, the aspect of the street, even the light of day appear a little foreign for a few moments. During these moments everything strikes the mind as odd and unfamiliar, or at least with a greater degree of objectivity. Such was my feeling with regard to my old and habitual self. During the period of intoxication, the connection between the normal condition of my body and my intelligence had broken�my body had become in a manner a Btranger to my reason�-so that now on reasserting itself it seemed, with reference to my reason, which had remained perfectly sane and alert, for a moment sufficiently unfamiliar for me to become conscious of its individual and peculiar character. It was as if I had unexpectedly attained an objective knowledge of my own personality. I saw, as it were, my normal state of being with the eyes of a person who sees the street on coming out of the theatre in broad day.

"This sensation also brought out the independence of the mind during the period of intoxication. It alone appeared to have escaped the ravages of the drug; it alone remained sane during a general delirium, vindicating, so it seemed, the majesty of its own impersonal nature. It had reigned for a while, I now felt, as an autocrat, without ministers and their officiousness. Henceforth I should be more or less conscious of the interdependence of body and brain; a alight headache, a touch of indigestion, or what not, would be able to effect what a general intoxication of my senses and nerves could not touch."

I next made experiments on two poets, whose names are both well known. One is interested in mystical matters, an excellent subject for visions, and very familiar with various vision-producing drugs and processes. His heart, however, is not very strong. While he obtained the visions, he found the effects of mescal on his breathing somewhat unpleasant; he much prefers haschisch, though recognising that its effects are much more difficult to obtain. The other enjoys admirable health, and under the influence of mescal he experienced scarcely the slightest unpleasant reaction, but, on the contrary, a very marked state of well-being and beatitude. He took somewhat less than three buttons, so that the results were rather less marked than in my case, but they were perfectly definite. He writes: "I have never seen a succession of absolutely pictorial visions with such precision and such nnaccountability. It seemed as if a series of dissolving views were carried swiftly before me, all going from right to left, none corresponding with any seen reality. For instance, I saw the most delightful dragons, puffing out their breath straight in front of them like rigid lines of steam, and balancing white balls at the end of their breath! When I tried to fix my mind on real things, I could generally call them up, but always with some inexplicable change. Thus, I called up a particular monument in Westminster Abbey, but in front of it, to the left, knelt a figure in Florentine costume, like some one out of a picture of Botticelli; and I could not see the tomb without also seeing this figure. Late in the evening I went cut on the Embankment, and was absolutely fascinated by an advertisement of 'Bovril,' which went and came in letters of light on the other side of the river; I cannot tell you the intense pleasure this moving light gave me, and how dazzling it seemed to me. Two girls and a man passed me, laughing loudly, and lolling about as they walked. I realised, intellectually, their coarseness, but visually I saw them, as they came under a tree, fall into the lines of a delicate picture; it might have been an Albert Moore. After coming in I played the piano with closed eyes, and got waves and lines of pure colour, almost always without form, though I saw one or two appearances which might have been shields or breastplates�-pure gold, studded with small jewels in intricate patterns. All the time I had no unpleasant feelings whatever, except a very slight headache, which came and went. I slept soundly and without dreams."

The results of music in the case just quoted�-together with the habit of the Indians to combine the drum with mescal rites, and my own observation that very slight jarring or stimulation of the scalp would affect the visions�-suggested to me to test the influence of music on myself. I therefore once more put myself under the influence of mescal (taking a somewhat smaller dose than on the first occasion), and lay for some hours on a couch with my head more or less in contact with the piano, and with closed eyes directed towards a subdued light, while a friend played, making various tests, of his own devising, which were not explained to me until afterwards. I was to watch the visions in a purely passive manner, without seeking to direct them, nor was I to think about the music, which, so far as possible, was unknown to me. The music stimulated the visions and added greatly to my enjoyment of them. It seemed to harmonise with them, and, as it were, support and bear them up. A certain persistence and monotony of character in the music was required in order to affect the visions, which then seemed to fall into harmony with it, and any sudden change in the character of the music would blur the visions, as though clouds passed between them and me. The chief object of the tests was to ascertain how far a desire on the composer's part to suggest definite imagery would affect my visions. In about half the cases there was no resemblance, in the other half there was a distinct resemblance which was sometimes very remarkable. This was especially the case with Schumann's music, for example with his Waldscenen and Kinderscenen; thus "The Prophet Bird" called up vividly a sense of atmosphere and of brilliant feathery bird-like forms assing to and fro; "A Flower Piece" provoked constant and persistent images of vegetation; while "Scheherazade" produced an effect of floating white raiment, covered by glittering spangles and jewels. In every case my description was, of course, given before I knew the name of the piece. I do not pretend that this single series of experiments proves much, but it would certainly be worth while to follow up this indication and to ascertain if any light is hereby thrown on the power of a composer to suggest definite imagery, or the power of a listener to perceive it.

It would be out of place here to discuss the obscure question as to the underlying mechanism by which mescal exerts its magic powers. It is clear from the foregoing descriptions that meecal intoxication may be described as chiefly a saturnalia of the specific senses, and, above all, an orgy of vision. It reveals an optical fairyland, where all the senses now and again join the play, but the mind itself remains a self-possessed spectator. Mescal intoxication thus differs from the other artificial paradises which drugs procure. Under the influence of alcohol, for instance, as in normal dreaming, the intellect is impaired, although there may be a consciousness of unusual brilliance; haschisch, again, produces an uncontrollable tendency to movement and bathes its victim in a sea of emotion. The mescal drinker remains calm and collected amid the sensory turmoil around him; his judgment is as clear as in the normal state; he falls into no oriental condition of vague and voluptuous reverie. The reason why mescal is of all this class of drugs the most purely intellectual in its appeal is evidently because it affects mainly the most intellectual of the senses. On this ground it is not probable that its use will easily develop into a habit. Moreover, unlike most other intoxicants, it seems to have no special affinity for a disordered and unbalanced nervous system; on the contrary, it demands organic soundness and good health for the complete manifestation of its virtues.* Further, unlike the other chief substances to which it may be compared, mescal does not wholly carry us away from the actual world, or plunge us iuto oblivion; a large part of its charm lies in the halo of beauty which it casts around the simplest and commonest things. It is the most democratic of the plants which lead men to an artificial paradise. If it should ever chance that the consumption of mescal becomes a habit, the favourite poet of the mescal drinker will certainly be Wordsworth Not only the general attitude of Wordsworth, but many of his most memorable poems and phrases cannot�-one is almost tempted to say�-be appreciated in their full significance by one who has never been under the influence of mescal. On all these grounds it may be claimed that the artificial paradise of mescal, though less seductive, is safe and dignified beyond its peers.

=====

* It is true, as many persons do not need to be reminded, that in neurasthenia and states of over-fatigue, symptoms closely resembling the slight and earlier phenomenal of mescal intoxication are not uncommon; but in such cases there is rarely any sense of well-being and enjoyment.

=====

At the same time it must be remembered that at present we are able to speak on a basis of but very small experience, so far as civilised men are concerned. The few observations recorded in America and my own experiments in England do not enable us to say anything regarding the habitual consumption of mescal in large amounts. That such consumption would be gravely injurious I cannot doubt. Its safeguard seems to lie in the fact that a certain degree of robust health is required to obtain any real enjoyment from its visionary gifts. It may at least be claimed that for a healthy person to be once or twice admitted to the rites of mescal is not only an unforgettable delight but an educational influence of no mean value.

--end

A paper which mentions Ellis and his circle:

Medical History, 1988, 32: 51-64., link
THE ORIGINS OF THE ENGLISH DRUG "SCENE"
1890-1930
by
VIRGINIA BERRIDGE

Robert · 09-23-2013, 05:11 PM

Hi Jeff

And if you save it in your documents then even if you have a power cut you'll still have your post in your files.

Mayerling · 09-23-2013, 01:16 PM

Hi Robert,

What you say makes sense. I'll try it. Thank you.

Jeff

Robert · 09-23-2013, 03:34 AM

Hi Jeff

Why not write your response on Microsoft, then if it doesn't go through first time you still have the response to try again. It's just copy and paste.

Mayerling · 09-22-2013, 10:01 PM

This is my third attempt to write a response due to defects on this web site.

1) On Andree: See Alec Wilkinson's "The Ice Balloon" (New York, A.A. Knopf, c2012) for a good account. It does not mention Cheyne. The balloon "Ornen" was, as it turned out, impractical for flight to the Pole due to heavy amounts of ice building up on the bag, forcing it to crash. Andree and his companions Fraenkel and Nils Strindberg (cousin of playwrite August Strindberg) survived and tried to reach the Russian coast - they got as far as White Island where they died possibly of eating tainted bear meat (from trichonosis) or from a defective stove (from asphyxiation). The exact cause remains unknown. They left journals and film that was discovered in 1930 (some of the pictures were still developed including one famous shot of the "Orgen" lying down on it's side). Their remains were partly eaten by polar bears. They were buried with honors back in Sweden.

It was not until 1926 that the "Norge" (a non-rigid airship built by Col. Umberto Nobile of Italy) flew to the North Pole with Nobile, Raoul Amundsen, and Lincoln Ellsworth. Nobile went on his own private expedition in 1928 in a new non-rigid, the "Italia", but it crashed near the Pole. An international expedition rescued Nobile and the survivors, but there were many men who died (one under odd circumstances suggesting he was killed by companions in an act of cannibalism) so that Nobile was disgraced by the Mussolini Regime when he returned. Amundsen took off in an airplane to help in this rescue, but his plane disappeared with him and his crew. Some wreckage was later found. See Alexander McKee's "Ice-Crash" for that story. Also see the movie, "The Red Tent" (1969) with Peter Finch as "Nobile" and Sean Connery as "Amundsen".

As for Von Weissenfeld, his use of morphine in that drug he peddled suggests he may have been a quack. But then Freud also pushed some drugs (including cocaine and heroin) on patients for awhile too.

Jeff

TradeName · 09-22-2013, 05:31 PM

George Hendry of Limehouse built a piece of machinery to order for Springmuhl, based on the latter's patent. Springmuhl was unable to pay, and Hendry won a judgment and forced Springmuhl into bankruptcy, becoming the trustee in the action.

The Directory & Chronicle For China, Corea, Japan, the Philippines, Indo-China, Straits Settlements, Siam, Borneo, Malaya States &c. (Hong Kong: 1892) Page 729

Chemist & Druggist, Volume 40, June 18, 1892, Page 857

An article which summarizes some of the issues in Springmuhl's bankruptcy:

History of the Concentrated Produce Company.

At Bow Street, on Wednesday, George Ferdinand von Weissenfeld, described as a doctor of medicine, living at Compton House, Compton Road, Canonbury Square, and Robert Betts, secretary to the Concentrated Produce Company, were charged with various offences under the bankruptcy laws. It was alleged that Von Weissenfeld having failed to pay 224l. damages and costs in respect of legal proceedings, a petition in bankruptcy was filed; and that in his examination he had failed to disclose the fact that he was the owner of Grafton House and Stoneleigh House, Stoke Newington, and that he was possessed of wine of the value of 70l. or 80l.; that, when questioned on the subject, he stated that the Concentrated Produce Company held a bill of sale on his furniture. When spoken to about the houses at Stoke Newington, he alleged that they had been conveyed to the Concentrated Produce Company, and in support of this produced what the prosecution termed a bogus conveyance. It was contended by the prosecution that the prisoner was in his own person the company, no one else having any interest in it. The prisoner Betts was the secretary of the so-called company, and it was stated that although he knew of the proceedings in bankruptcy he superintended the removal of Von Weissenfeld's furniture, and thus assisted him to defraud his creditors. It was further stated that Betts had already undergone six weeks' imprisonment for committing perjury with respect to the bankruptcy proceedings. The prisoners were remanded. Betts was admitted to bail in one surety of 50l. Mr. Yaughan consented to accept two sureties in 250l. each for the appearance of Von Weissenfeld, but declined to accede to an application on his behalf to allow the money to be paid into Court.

The Concentrated Produce Company introduced to the drug trade some six years ago "hopeine," which turned out to be a mixture of morphine and other substances.

--end

TradeName · 09-19-2013, 05:14 PM

Major B. Baden-Powell remembers the Balloon Society:

Ballooning As a Sport (Edinburgh and London: William Blackwood, 1907), Pages xii-xiii
by Major B. Baden-Powell

Next a fillip was given to the matter when Commander Cheyne came forward with a scheme for going to the North Pole by balloon. Several ascents were organised with the idea of testing the suitability of balloons for arctic use, and during this boom "The Balloon Society" was started. This came in with a flourish of trumpets, was well advertised, and held many well-attended meetings. But it was badly run, and rapidly deteriorated. After a few years, during which the Society lost nearly all its more prominent members by resignation, it became nothing more than an agency for popular lectures on any topic that might be going, and it soon afterwards died a natural death.

--end

Commander Cheyne writes about the Balloon Society:

The British Journal of Photography, November 5, 1880, Pages 531-532

BALLOONING.

by John P. Cheyne,
R. Commander, R. N.

The practice of ballooning, hitherto, has generally been conducted as an amusing spectacle for holiday people, comparatively few ascents having been made upon any scientific basis. A new era, however, appears to have commenced relative to aerial navigation unless we greatly mistake the signs of tho times. Following the siege of Paris in 1870-71�-when no fewer than sixty-two balloons escaped, freighted with passengers and a total of 2,500,000 letters for the outer world�-the subject began to occupy the serious thoughts of reflecting men, especially those belonging to our military departments. The result has been that sundry balloons are at the present time in actual commission in Her Majesty's military service, and a general disposition has been engendered in the public mind to throw off old prejudices and to accept the broad fact that balloons may soon be destined, under skilful management, to play an important part in the development of meteorological science, in the art of war, and, under certain favourable conditions, turned into account as means of transport, besides being brought into play for exploration of countries which may prove inaccessible by ordinary means.

The public is pretty generally aware that very lately a society called "The Balloon Society of Great Britain" has sprung into existence for the purpose of carrying on experiments in the air in aid of science. The Society really emanated from the Arctic Committee, with the ostensible design of instituting certain tests for developing the use of balloons intended to be supplied to the proposed new Arctic Expedition, under my own leadership, in which my idea is that polar exploration should be conducted by the aid of balloons as auxiliaries in the attempt to reach the North Pole. The Society firstly organised a contest between several English aeronauts, this being supplemented by an international contest between an English and a French aeronaut.

So far as the contests themselves were ooncerned all was satisfactory; but on the latter occasion a great desideratum in ballooning was tried, viz., photographing the country over which the balloon traversed. The results were not satisfactory, though no reasons appear why the photographic art should not give results eminently practical and beautiful. With our instantaneous plates and shutters, and a lovely panorama of country throwing its gradations of tone with great actinic force through a rapid lens, the artist surely must have at his command all he can require for a series of beautiful and useful pictures, capable of being viewed with pleasure and interest either with the naked eye or by the aid of a magnifying lens or microscope. War balloons will eminently require the assistance of photography in bringing to light the works thrown up by an enemy. With wide-angle lenses a large tract of country can be projected in a single small photograph, having its water-courses, roads, and all details clearly delineated, whilst for particular spots of high importance�-such as a fortification or other place�-a second lens could be brought into immediate play. The rotary motion of the balloon and oscillation of the car may be antagonistic to an otherwise ready facility in securing good photographs; but with some skill this impediment can be overcome. There are times when the balloon becomes steady, and these times can be seized by careful observation. Steadiness in the car at the time of action, and a practised eye for intersection of objects, will give the required moment for exposure; but should other aid be required, then a little vertical rod of metal, surrounded by an arc with divisions, which can be attached to the camera itself, will define the steady moment (when the sun is shining) by the shadow thrown on the arc from its vertical.

The camera might easily be attached to the side of the car by means of light outriggers, which would hook on to the upper edge; and from the other end, at a convenient length, a supporting piece would hinge and rest against the lower edge of the car. This is, however, a simple matter of detail which might be carried out in various ways. Balloon cars might be made with a small hole or two in the bottom for pointing a lens or lenses through. The tell-tale or vertical rod and arc might then be observed on the edge of the car. I must confess I see nothing to interfere with obtaining brilliant results by photographs taken from balloons; and the sooner photographers secure seats in the cars of the Balloon Society of Great Britain the better for aiding the motives of the Society itself.

A few words now on the late contests. On Friday, Sept. 3rd, the Meteorological Department sent a forecast of wind and weather for the evening of Saturday, the 4th September, to the office of the Balloon Society, stating that "the balloons would probably take a N.N.E. to N.E. course; the force of wind at starting, viz., at 5 p.m., would be fifteen miles an hour, with a gradual increase of velocity." This forecast was fulfilled to the letter; for the balloons took a course N.E. by N., started at a rate of fifteen miles an hour, and increased their speed, so as to make an average on the whole distance run of twenty-six and a-half miles an hour. Taking the case of the "Owl" balloon, which started from the Crystal Palace, the distance made was forty-three miles in one hour and thirty-eight minutes. This fact shows that though balloons can neither be driven nor steered, yet by proper meteorological observations beforehand, the arc of a wind circle can be defined on which the course of the balloon can be previously announced, making good what I have invariably put forth in my lectures, viz., that I can start my polar balloons on the curve of a known wind circle from my winter quarters to the North Pole.

The late international contest has demonstrated that two balloons starting together, though independent of each other, can travel sixty miles in two hours and drop close to one another, thereby showing that the polar balloons need not be actually connected, but may all start at the same time, and with a little common care work well together; indeed, the difficulties of arctic ballooning will not be so great as those to be met with in this country. I am glad to say that there is every prospect of a new British arctic expedition being organised to compete with expeditions about to leave the shores of other countries; and I am also pleased to record the success of the late balloon trips--so encouraging, as it must be, to the prospects of the new enterprise.

--end

Journalist Pullan recalls the Society's Balloon race:

The Young Man, October, 1894, Page 333-335

Travelling in the Air
by J. Pullan

[...]

Having thus obtained an interest in ballooning, I was engaged through Mr. Glaisher to take the notes of the meetings of the Aeronautical Society in London; and when some years later the Balloon Society, an entirely different body, organized a balloon race for eight balloons to start simultaneously from different parts of London and the suburbs, I felt bound to volunteer to ascend in one of them. The manager of the Daily News declined to incur the responsibility of sending me up as one of his staff. but intimated that if I were determined to go he would make special payment. I need hardly say to journalists who know the generous management of the paper that I was paid handsomely and still more highly rewarded by appreciative acknowledgment. Of the eight balloons entered for the race five got fairly away, the others failing for want of gas or other causes. One was from the Alexandra Palace, another from Clapham Skating Rink, another from Epping Forest, and another from North Woolwich. My luck was to sail on �The Owl � from the Crystal Palace with Mr. Wright, a practical aeronaut of experience. With us also were Commander Cheyne, of Arctic fame, and a substantial young gentleman from Denver, Colorado. We were further favoured at the start with the presence on the ground of Mr. Le Fevre, President of the Balloon Society, to see us off, and with the presence also of a number of scientific men and a large surrounding of holiday spectators. The conditions were that we were to travel from 5 p.m. to half-past 7 p,m., and were to receive a medal if we made a better voyage than any of the other balloons. It was an autumnal evening, and the wind was blowing from the south-west.

We were a few minutes late in getting off, due, as I afterwards learnt for my comfort, to a leak in the �Owl,� which had to be repaired before we could start. We three passengers crouched in the swaying car whilst the ballast bags were adjusted. The signal was given for the men holding the ropes to let go, and the balloon sprang up rather languidly into space, just missing the top of the Crystal Palace water-tower. After that, being then unaware of any repaired leak and consequent possibility of re-opening, I thought we were safe, but yet I cannot honestly say that my nerves settled down so readily and steadily as did those of Captain Cheyne, who had faced six white bears at different times on their native ice, those of the American who sat nonchalantly on the edge of the car, or those of the acronaut, who knew that the �Owl� might leak again. We sailed away towards the north-east. London passed slowly some twelve hundred feet beneath us with her vast range of housetops, with here and there the oasis of a park, the outline of a square, and the specks of St. Paul�s, Westminster Abbey, and the Houses of Parliament. Immediately beneath, as we crossed the Thames, were the long ranges of docks and of shipping, all dummies to us, and giving no sign of the busy life going on amongst them. Our course took us over the Isle of Dogs, and over Ilford, where the aeronaut resided, and where he said he saw his wife waving her handkerchief. I hope she did not see Captain Cheyne and I wink at this statement, and I don�t believe she did. Then, as we went over the cemetery, Mr. Wright told us it contained all that remained of two former fellow-voyagers in the �Owl.� They had, however, departed this life in the natural way and had not come to grief by accident, and it was perhaps wrong of the commander and I to wink again. But we did, and so did the American as he descended from the edge of the car.

What is one�s sensation in a balloon? First, that if one could conveniently get down to earth again without falling one would be glad to do it. Second, a feeling of instability from the consciousness of having a few thousand feet of nothing underneath one. Thirdly, the same feeling from having nothing but a bag of gas and a few small ropes to prevent one from falling through that nothing. And fourthly, a sense that we are all too heavy for our supports, and that we ought not to move about much. But it is immensely interesting to watch the scenes of earth passing away under you like a huge panorama. From our eyrie height of some two thousand feet we could see the silver streak of the Thames from Southend to Richmond, and long after London had passed away we could still see the same silver streak glittering and shimmering like a thread until it too commingled with the horizon and disappeared. Villages, homesteads, fields, copses, woods and forests, highways, railways, towns, passed under, sometimes within earshot, sometimes barely visible, as our altitude varied. How Liliputian cattle, sheep, and pigs scampered, snorted, and grunted as the Brobdingnagian monster floated over their happy feeding grounds! How poultry of the tiniest type fluttered and cackled in terrorem at the sight of the monstrous hawk, or rather owl, threatening to gobble them all up! So we went on, the aneroid barometer telling us the height, the throwing out of scraps of paper showing us whether we were ascending or descending at the moment, the apparent rushing of the earth underneath giving us an idea of the pace, and the appearance of towns and villages a notion of locality. �Come down here,� cried they of Dunmow, sacred to connubial harmony, as we swooped within a few hundred yards of their chimney stacks. But there stood a thick wood, and we could not risk our balloon in that thick wood even for a fiitch of bacon. Chipping Ongar might have been approached but for telegraph wires. So up we darted 1,300 feet like a shot. But descend we must, and did. The valve was opened and out rushed the gas, but not enough. It was opened again, and out rushed too much gas. We descended with appalling rapidity, the sand thrown out as ballast flying up in our 'faces because we fell faster than sand.

And here let me do myself a simple act of justice. While sailing serenely aloft I was nervous, not to say timorous. In this real danger, when a few seconds or minutes at the most would decide our fate, I was cool as a cucumber; I unfastened the seat in the car, and calmly did whatever I was told. Up rose the hard earth rapidly, menacingly, towards us. Our grapnel struck a field of clover. So did we with a deadening thud that shook every bone and fibre of our frames and took away our breath�-and our hats. Up again we bounded a hundred and fifty feet. The grapnel had not caught. We dragged our anchor, and as we sped over a highroad we spied telegraph wires. Mr. Wright was, to use expressive slang, � all there," and was equal to the occasion. Standing at the edge of the car with hair flying in the wind, he drew from his pocket a large clasp knife and cut the rope just in time to prevent the grapnel hooking on to the wires. We dragged bumpingly through a field of standing barley and pulled up in the midst of a group consisting of a gentleman farmer, his wife, family, and servants. A charming and vivacious young lady, Kate by name, was much excited at the arrival of visitors from the clouds. She would have forgiven us, she said, if we had descended in the garden in front of the mansion, and I verily believe she would have signed articles as one of a feminine crew for a balloon voyage with Captain Cheyne to the North Pole. We had run to earth near the village of Bardfield, in Essex, and had travelled forty-five miles in an hour and a half as the crow flies. There was no train available that night, and only just time to telegraph. I had prepared two telegraph forms, one addressed to the Balloon Society and the other to my home. In the hurry of the moment I wrote the messages on the wrong forms. That for the Society, giving a slight account of the voyage, went to my domestic hearth. That intended for home went to the Balloon Society and was sent to the Observer, informing a charitable world that I �shall not be home to-night.�

--end

Brief obit for Cheyne:

Current History and Modern Culture, Volume 12, April, 1902, Page 191

CHEYNE, JOHN POWLES, commander, R. N.; died in February, which event removes an Arctic explorer who was the first to seriously suggest the use of a balloon, in the search for the North pole. Commander Cheyne served in three Arctic expeditions in search of Sir John Franklin; first in the Enterprise; second in the Resolute and third in the Assistance. Cheyne Islands and Cheyne Point in the far North remain as a testimony to this officer's connection with the various Arctic expeditions. He retired in 1870. Commander Cheyne was an expert in balloon navigation, and from him Andr�e received much encouragement to make his unfortunate attempt to find the North pole. A scheme for exploring the Arctic Ocean was brought before the Royal Geographical Society by Commander Cheyne, in 1880, but without result.

TradeName · 09-15-2013, 06:40 PM

Thanks, Jeff.

FWIW, here's another mention of Powell in connection with the Balloon Society:

The United Service Magazine, Volume 158, March, 1882, Pages 362-363

Ballooning.�The time is rapidly approaching when all hope in the safety of Mr. Powell and the missing balloon "Saladin" must be abandoned, for the average length of time occupied in the longest voyage under sail is drawing to a close. It may be remembered that Captain Bedford Pim, at a meeting of the Balloon Society of Great Britain, expressed his sanguine hope that Mr. Powell had descended in safety with the "Saladin" close enough to some outward bound ship to be taken on board, and that the wind being fair the ship would have pursued her voyage, and in the ordinary course of maritime events might not be heard of for months. A glance at the ocean routes will suffice to show the correctness of Captain Pim's theory, to which no doubt his well-known practical experience gave great weight; at the same time it must be admitted that port after port has now been eliminated from the calculation; for instance, it is scarcely possible that the supposititious ship would not before this have reached any part of the American coast between New York and Monte Video, or any part of the African coast, including the Mozambique and Mauritius. There still remains, however, certainly up to the first week in March, all Pacific ports, Chinese, Australian, and even Indian, to reach which a voyage of ninety days is no uncommon occurance. The balloon "Saladin" was last seen with Mr. Walter Powell, M.P., seated in the car waiving his hand at dusk on the evening of Saturday, the 10th of last December (1881); the balloon then had a sustaining power sufficient to carry it at the outside, say 100 miles. The space contained within a circle, of which Bridport (close to which place the balloon disappeared) is the centre, and 100 miles the radius, has been closely searched without success, and inasmuch as many outward-bound ships with a fair wind were passing at the time, it is only fair to live in hope, at least until the first week in March, that the gallant aeronaut and useful Member may, as expressed by Captain Bedford Pirn, be restored in safety to his many friends.

Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment:

Leave a comment: