by A Student
[Reprinted from Light (London), November 17, 1883, pp. 505]
To the Editor of "LIGHT."
SIR, -- In your issue of September 29th, you were good enough to insert my letter on the parallel passages noted by Mr. Kiddle in Koot Hoomis letter as given by Mr. Sinnett, and in an address delivered by himself at Lake Pleasant in August, 1880. I have been rather disappointed that Mr. Sinnett has not followed up his remarks in your paper of September 22nd, by some further elucidation of the matter. His words, "for the moment all I can say is," seem to warrant your readers in expecting a further reply. Will you allow me a short space to refer to the letter of his apologist, Mr. W. T. Brown, which appears in your issue of to-day.
On looking again at the parallel passages as they stand in "LIGHT" of September 1st, I find, near the commencement, a sequence of nineteen words exactly alike in the two passages. Further on, there is another sequence of nineteen words exactly alike. Again, towards the end, there is a sequence of thirty words in Mr. Kiddles address which is exactly reproduced in Koot Hoomis letter, except for the insertion of one word in the latter, -- "uninitiated" before "mortals." Besides these, there are several other clauses almost identical.
These are the facts before us. I submit that the attitude of mind assumed by Mr. Brown, which I cannot help characterising as somewhat supercilious and patronising, is entirely out of place, and beside the mark. There is no occasion for Mr. Brown to inform us that "Mr. Kiddles letter is written conscientiously and in a good spirit." Although, if this is Mr. Browns opinion, I fail to see why he should say that it is "unpleasant to write letters of such a nature as this to unsympathetic and sceptical men." Finally, Mr. Brown takes credit for his "explanation" being "good-natured," and says, "the absence of knowledge on the part of Mr. Kiddle is assuredly his loss -- not ours."
Looking again at the facts, and re-perusing Mr. Browns letter, I venture to express the opinion that neither common-sense nor spiritual perception would be shown by accepting his remarks as a valid and satisfactory explanation. Knowing, or rather conceiving, the possibilities which may exist, I do not think we are justified at present in using hard words. If Mr. Sinnett has evidence that the identical letter in which the passage occurs, came to him; or was produced in an abnormal manner, a most interesting inquiry opens before us. If, on the other hand, he has no evidence as to this letter, however much he may have as regards others, we shall be bound to come to the prima facie conclusion that someone has imposed upon him, and has consciously adapted the passage from Mr. Kiddles previously-given address, and passed it off as coming from Koot Hoomi.
Hoping further light may yet be thrown upon the matter,
I am, yours faithfully,
November 9th, 1883.