Spiritualism and Crime by Blewett Lee
This week I read about Spiritualism and Crime by Blewett
Lee. It is important to note that this article was written in 1922. The
thoughts and ideas presented in this article need to be taken in regards to the
decade in which it was written.
![]() |
D.D. Home "The Man Who Could Fly" |
The article starts out with an interesting quote to define
Spiritualism as a form of insanity
“ mischievous
nonsense, well calculated, on the one hand to delude the vain, the weak, the
foolish, and the superstitious; and, on the other, to assist the projects of
the needy and of the adventurer.” –Vice Chancellor Giffard (pg. 439).
Lee makes sure that readers know that the article is solely interested
in how the beliefs in spiritualism affect the law. Several times throughout the
article the author makes note that it is hard to say spiritualism phenomena doesn’t
occur because it is seen in the literature, especially sacred literature. The law
cannot also lawfully assumer every spiritualistic phenomenon is a delusion yet
assures the reader that there are several cases in which fraudulence can occur.
Fraudulent automatic writing in which the writer produces whatever they want
and claims it to be automatic, sham trances, and materialization just to name a
few.
Lee makes reference to Belshazzar’s feast in Daniel 5:5 as a resource of a genuine
case of spiritualistic happenings. I myself and not religious and had to do
some research on what Belshazzar’s feast was about I found http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel+5&version=KJV
. I located the verse that implied spiritualistic influences in the form of materialization
of a man’s hand.
![]() |
Belshazzar's Feast by Vasily Surikov |
“5 In the same hour came forth
fingers of a man's hand, and wrote over against the candlestick upon the
pilaster of the wall of the king's palace: and the king saw the part of the
hand that wrote.”
If you wish feel free to see the verse in its context by
clicking on the link.
The article does not come right out and say that mediums are
all frauds and that they are not any genuine ones out there. In the article it
mentions that many mediums could very well possess actual abilities but occasionally
produce fraud because the sitters attending the séance want results. Instant gratification
at its worst. It would be a denial of human liberty to NOT allow a genuine medium
to practice? But the never-ending paradox of genuine or not is always around. To
force a medium to prove their selves
would be a conviction in advance because if they are truly genuine and can
communicate with spirits that does not mean that spirits will come on demand.

Lee calls for the sensible route for the law to take is for
it to not deny a spiritualistic experience is possible but to call for proof. The
article ends in a manner that I think is remarkable. Lee makes note that in
regards to the law the communications should be looked at as if they were
delivered by a real person since the spirit in all actuality is a real person. If
the spirit does unlawful things then it, as a person, can be punished by law. On
page 449 it states that “if by any chance some of the acts or communications
should really come from dead men, that makes no difference from a legal point
of view; they would be human actions just the same.” An interesting thought to
ponder on.
* The article makes reference to a very famous male medium D.D. Home. I have included a link to an unscholarly websites that gives some background http://www.prairieghosts.com/ddhome.html. D.D. Home's is mentioned in this article because he did not charge for his services and therefore could not be charge for fraudulence by making his customers pay. D.D. Home's will show up again in my research.