The Hodgson Report
The Theosophical
Society was part of a huge fraudulent system worked by Madame Blavatsky with
the assistance of the Coulombs and several other confederates.
The Coulombs assert that
a certain saucer was, according to agreement between Madame Blavatsky and
Madame Coulomb, to be "accidentally" broken and the pieces placed in
the Shrine, arrangements being made for the substitution, through the secret
back of the Shrine, of another similar saucer, unbroken, in lieu of the broken
pieces.
Now, it is not
disputed that the so-called "saucer phenomenon" did occur in the
presence of General Morgan. The only question is whether it was pre-arranged,
and if so, how it was performed. Here is General Morgan's own account of it,
published in the Supplement to the Theosophist for December, 1883.
In the month of
August, having occasion to come to Madras in the absence of Colonel Olcott and
Madame Blavatsky, I visited the headquarters of the Theosophical Society to see
a wonderful painting of the Mahatma Koot Hoomi kept there in a Shrine and daily attended to by the Chelas. On arrival at the house I was told that the lady,
Madame Coulomb, who had charge of the keys of the Shrine, was absent, so I awaited
her return. She came home in about an hour, and we proceeded up stairs to open the Shrine and inspect the picture.
Madame Coulomb advanced quickly to unlock the double doors of the hanging
cupboard, and hurriedly threw them open. In so doing she had failed to observe
that a china tray inside was on the edge of the
Shrine and leaning against one of the doors, and when they were opened, down
fell the china tray, smashed to pieces on the hard
chunam floor. Whilst Madame Coulomb was wringing her hands and lamenting this
unfortunate accident to a valuable article of Madame Blavatsky's, and her
husband was on his knees collecting the dibris, I
remarked it would be necessary to obtain some china
cement and thus try to restore the fragments. Thereupon M. Coulomb was
dispatched for the same. The broken pieces were carefully collected and placed,
tied in a cloth, within the Shrine, and the doors locked. Mr. Damodar K. Mavalankar, the joint
Recording Secretary of the Society, was opposite the Shrine, seated on a chair,
about 10 feet away from it, when, after some conversation, an idea occurred to
me to which I immediately gave expression.
I remarked that if
the Brothers considered it of sufficient importance, they would easily restore
the broken article; if not, they would leave it to the culprits to do so, the
best way they could. Five minutes had scarcely elapsed after this remark when
Mr. Damodar, who during this time seemed wrapped in a
reverie exclaimed, "I think there is an answer." The doors were
opened, and sure enough, a small note was found on the shelf of the Shrine-on
opening which we read "To the small audience present. Madame Coulomb has
occasion to assure herself that the devil is neither so black nor so wicked as
he is generally represented; the mischief is easily repaired."
On opening the cloth
the china tray was found to be whole and perfect; not
a trace of the breakage to be found on it! I at once wrote across the note,
stating that I was present when the tray was broken and immediately restored,
dated and signed it, so there should be no mistake in the matter. It may be
here observed that Madame Coulomb believes that the many things of a wonderful
nature that occur at the headquarters, may be the work of the devil hence the
playful remark of the Mahatma who came to her rescue.
It will be seen that
there is nothing in this account inconsistent with Madame Coulomb's assertion.
Moreover, it is a very suspicious circumstance that the china
tray should have been "leaning against one of the doors." This is not
the position naturally assumed by a saucer put into a cupboard in the ordinary
way through the doors.
The whole
"saucer" found in the Shrine was shown to me at Adyar at my request.
I examined it carefully, and I also examined carefully the broken pieces of the
saucer which Madame Coulomb exhibited as those for which the whole saucer had
been substituted. The two "saucers" manifestly formed a pair. The
incident happened in August, 1883. Madame Coulomb alleged that she purchased
the pair of so-called "saucers" at a shopi
in Madras for 2 rupees 8 annas each. On inquiry I found that "two
porcelain pin trays" (words which properly describe the so-called
"saucers") were purchased at this shop by cash sale on July 3 rd, 1883, and that Madame Coulomb had made purchases at the
shop on that date. If taken as referring to this purchase there was one slight
inaccuracy in Madame Coulomb's account; inasmuch as she said the
"trays" cost 2 rupees 8 annas each, instead of 2 rupees 8 annas the
pair.
COLONEL OLCOTT'S FLOWER VASES.
A window which had
originally been in the north wall of the Occult Room was transformed into a
cupboard with a secret double back allowing objects to be placed within from
the adjoining outside passage. This double back was one of the "trap
doors" discovered at the time of the expulsion of the Coulombs. Colonel
Olcott informed me that one day in 1883, when he was in the Occult Room with
Madame Blavatsky, a vase appeared in this cupboard-empty just before-as a gift
to Colonel Olcott from one of the Mahatmas. Colonel Olcott apparently wished to
duplicate this vase if possible, and made mesmeric passes before the closed
door of the cupboard. On re-opening the cupboard a second vase was there, the
facsimile of the first.
Madame Coulomb declared
that she bought these vases at a shop in Madras, and that they were placed in
the cupboard through the double back from outside the Occult Room.
The shop where the
vases had actually been obtained was, she said, Hassam's, though they were
purchased through M. Faciole and Co., Popham's
Broadway, Madras. I saw M. Faciole, who remembered
accompanying Madame Coulomb to Hassam and Co.; and the Chinese manager at
Hassam's, whom I also saw, showed me a pair of vases somewhat similar, as he
alleged, to the two pairs purchased by Madame Coulomb. I afterwards requested
Colonel Olcott to show me the vases, when he found to his surprise that they
were not in his bungalow, and he was unable to tell me when they had
disappeared. He sent a few words of inquiry concerning them to Madame
Blavatsky, to the main bungalow, about 40 yards distant, and in the meantime
gave me a description, which, as far as it went, in shape, height, and style of
ornamentation, exactly tallied with the description of the vases Madame Coulomb
had purchased at Hassam's.
Madame Blavatsky
herself then joined us, and after stormily denying that she had taken the
vases, alleged that, after Colonel Olcott had received them from the Mahatma,
Madame Coulomb had tried to obtain vases like them, but had failed; that Madame
Coulomb had purchased one pair of vases afterwards, and that these differed in
shape, &c., from those received by Colonel Olcott. Madame Blavatsky then
proceeded to sketch roughly the vases Colonel Olcott had received, and the
sketch differed greatly from the description Colonel Olcott had just given.
Moreover, the pair of vases which Madame Blavatsky said had been brought to her
by Madame Coulomb had also disappeared as mysteriously as Colonel Olcott's. The
only mention of the vases I could find in the books at Hassam's occurred in
connection with their payment by M. Faciole and Co.,
shortly after the date on which Colonel Olcott received them.
Under the date of May
25th (1883) occurs the following entry in the daybook of M. Faciole
and Co.:
(Rupees)
1 Pair Flower
Vase ...
... 7
1
Pair
"
"
...
... 6.
These items appear in
the account to Madame Coulomb, but have been struck out. Madame Coulomb's
explanation of this is that she wished them not to appear in the bill rendered
to headquarters, and she therefore paid cash for them.
Another entry, under
date May 25th, occurs in the receipt-book of M. Faciole
and Co.: -Received from Assam and Co.
(Rupees)
1 Pair Chapan Flower Vase 7 I sent to Mrs.
E. Coulomb
1 Pair
"
"
"
6
Madame Coulomb
therefore purchased the vases on May 25th; Colonel Olcott received them on May
26th.
Extract from Colonel Olott's
Diary.
"May 26th. Fine
phenomenon. Got pair of tortoiseshell and lacquer vases with flowers in a
cabinet a moment before empty."
It will be seen that
in order to explain the "saucer phenomenon" by ordinary human agency,
we require to suppose that there was a secret opening at the back of the
Shrine. It was important, therefore, to ascertain what ground there was for
this supposition, apart from the Blavatsky-Coulomb letters, in which its
existence is clearly implied. I now proceed to give the result of my
investigations in this direction.
THE SHRINE
On my arrival at the
headquarters of the Theosophical Society, on December 18th, 1884, I was
informed by Mr. Damodar that he could not allow me to
inspect the so-called Occult Room or the Shrine until the return of Colonel
Olcott and Madame Blavatsky. Colonel Olcott had left the headquarters some days
previously in order to meet Madame Blavatsky at Ceylon on her return from
Europe. Two days later Madame Blavatsky had reached Adyar, and I again
requested permission to examine the Shrine. Madame Blavatsky professed
ignorance on the subject, saying she had been unable to discover what had been
done with the Shrine. Mr. Damodar and Dr. Hartmann
both denied having any knowledge of it, and it was only after repeated and
urgent requests to be told what had happened that I learnt from the halting
account given by Mr. Damodar and Dr. Hartmann that
the Shrine had been moved from the Occult Room (see Plan) into Mr. Damodar's room at about midday of September 20th, that on
the following morning, at 9 o'clock, they found the Shrine had been taken away,
and they had not seen it since. They threw out suggestions implying that the
Coulombs or the missionaries might have stolen it.
Moreover, the Occult
Room, when I first received permission to inspect it, had been considerably
altered; its walls were covered with fresh plaster, and I was informed by Mr. Damodar that all traces of the alleged "machinations"
of the Coulombs in connection with the Shrine had been obliterated. This was
not true, for the bricked frame and the aperture into the recess still existed.
However, under the circumstances it was impossible for me to test the accuracy
of much of the description given by Theosophists of the Occult Room and the
Shrine at the time of the "exposure" by the Coulombs. But by analysing and comparing the evidence given by various
witnesses, I was able to put together the following history of the Shrine and
its surroundings.
On December l9th,
1882, Adyar became the headquarters of the Theosophical Society. One large
upper room of the main bungalow was used by Madame Blavatsky (see Plan). The
Occult Room was built later, against the west side of Madame Blavatsky's room.
The north window on
this side was removed, and a layer of bricks and plaster covered the aperture
on the side of the Occult Room-a recess about 15 in. deep being left on the
east side. The south window was transformed into a doorway leading from Madame
Blavatsky's room into the Occult Room. Madame Blavatsky's large room was
divided into two by curtains and a screen; that adjoining the Occult Room being
used by Madame Blavatsky as her bedroom, and at the end of 1883 as her
dining-room also.... Measurements of my own show the positions, the Occult Room
being about 2 ft. lower than Madame Blavatsky's room. The general entrance to
the Occult Room was through Madame Blavatsky's sitting-room. The Shrine, as I
gather from comparing the accounts of different Theosophists, was a wooden
cupboard between 3 ft. and 4 ft. in width and height, and I ft. or 15 in. in
depth, with a drawer below the cupboard portion, and with corner brackets. The
Shrine was made with three sliding panels at the back. It was placed against
that portion of the wall in the Occult Room where the north window of Madame
Blavatsky's room had previously existed (see Plan), covering most of that
portion, a most unfortunate position to choose for it if there was no
fraudulent intention. It rested below on a plank or shelf, but its chief
support consisted of two thick iron wires which were attached to two hooks near
the ceiling. A certain space round the Shrine was enclosed by muslin curtains,
which were drawn aside from the front when any one wished to approach the
Shrine. These curtains were about 7 ft. high on the sides, but on the wall
behind the Shrine extended nearly to the ceiling.
The wall immediately behind
the Shrine was covered by white glazed calico, tacked to the wall. Two widths
of the calico met in a vertical line passing behind the centre
of the Shrine. The remaining part of the walls of the Occult Room was covered
with red-and-white striped calico tacked to the wall. The upper part of the
Shrine was as close to the wall itself as the muslin and calico behind it would
allow. The lower part of the Shrine was near to the wall, at a distance from it
differently estimated by different witnesses, but which must have been
somewhere between 1/4 in. and "12 in., and was probably very little, if at
all, more than 1/, in. The Shrine and its appurtenances were fixed in February
or March, 1883. Shortly afterwards a four-panelled
wooden boarding was placed in Madame Blavatsky's room, at the back of the
recess. For some time an almirah (cupboard) stood in front of this recess. The
exact dates of the placing of the boarding almirah and of the removal of the
almirah I have not been able to ascertain. The almirah, and afterwards the
recess, were used by Madame Blavatsky as a closet for hanging clothes. The
above is put together from the statements of Theosophic witnesses.
M. Coulomb states
that he removed the Shrine just after it was originally placed against the wall,
sawed the middle panel in two, and attached a piece of leather behind to serve
as a handle, so that the top portion could be easily pulled up. The junction
between the two halves of the panel was, he says, hidden from those looking at
the inside of the Shrine, by a mirror which just covered it. Behind this
sliding panel a hole was made in the wall. A sliding panel was also made in the
wardrobe which stood in front of the recess in Madame Blavatsky's bedroom, and
one of the panels of the teak-wood boarding was also made to slide about 10
inches, so that easy communication existed between Madame Blavatsky's bedroom
and the Shrine. The panels in the wardrobe and in the teak-wood door were shown
by M. Coulomb to the Board of Control when he gave up the keys of Madame
Blavatsky's rooms in May, 1884.
The hole in the wall,
he said, had been blocked up in January, before Madame Blavatsky departed for
Europe. He states also that the two portions of the middle panel of the Shrine
were replaced by a new single panel, and that these changes were made at the
request of Madame Blavatsky, who was afraid that some examination might be made
of the Shrine during her absence in Europe. M. Coulomb's statement as to the
half panel cannot of course be verified, and must be taken for what it is
worth. What evidence there is in support of his other statements will be seen
from the remainder of my narrative, derived from other sources.
At the end of October
or beginning of November, 1883, Madame Blavatsky, in consequence of a doubt
expressed by Mr. G---concerning the panelled boarding
connected with the Shrine, ordered it to be removed, and the front part of the
recess, that towards Madame Blavatsky's bedroom, to be blocked up. The panelled boarding was placed on the outside of the
north-east opening into Madame Blavatsky's drawing-room, and formed the back of
a shelf, and there it was certainly found to have a sliding panel in it when
examined by the Theosophists in May, 1884. A wooden frame of about 8 ft. by 4
ft. was made, with cross-pieces, so as to fit the front of the recess. A single
layer of half-size bricks was placed in this frame, and the front then covered
with plaster, so that it was flush with the adjoining wall. The hollow left in
the wall between Madame Blavatsky's room and the Occult Room, was about I ft.
deep. The whole wall was then papered over, the work being completed about the
middle of December, 1883, or perhaps several days later. Directly afterwards a
sideboard, about 3 ft. high and 34 in. wide, was placed close against the
bricked frame forming part of the papered wall. It covered the lowest north
partition of the frame, and it was found on the expulsion of the Coulombs in
May, 1884, that the bricks from this partition had been taken out, so that
there was communication through the sideboard (in the back of which was a
hinged panel) with the hollow space. M. Coulomb states that he removed the
bricks as soon as the sideboard was in position in December, 1883. However this
may be, the sideboard remained there during the time of the anniversary
celebration in 1883; and Shrine-phenomena, which were in abeyance during these
alterations, began again immediately after their completion. They ceased
altogether, with two exceptions to be afterwards dealt with, about or shortly
before the middle of January, 1884. On May 17th or 18th, M. Coulomb gave up the
keys, and the various contrivances for trickery were investigated. The sliding
panel in the almirah, the sliding panel in the boarding, the hinged panel at
the back of the sideboard, the opening behind it where the bricks had been
removed, and the hollow space of the recess were all inspected. Mr. St. George
Lane-Fox then examined the west side of the party wall behind the Shrine, but
was unable at that time to find any traces of the hole which, according to M.
Coulomb, had previously existed between the hollow space and the Shrine.
He also examined the
sideboard, and found that he could discover no signs from without of the
aperture which led into the hollow space, showing that this aperture would
remain undetected unless examination of the sideboard were made from within.
The Theosophists contended that the structures for trickery revealed by the
Coulombs, who had had exclusive charge of Madame Blavatsky's rooms during her
absence, had been made after she had left; that they had never been and could
not be used in the production of phenomena that the hollow space and the
aperture leading to it were too small to be utilised
in any connection with the Shrine, and moreover that Mr. Coulomb's work was
interrupted before he had time to make a hole through the wall between the
hollow space and the Shrine itself.
To establish these
points, the Theosophical Board of Control sent round a circular inquiry in
August, 1884, to various Theosophists who had been at headquarters, requesting
them to state what they knew of the condition of the Shrine, adjoining walls,
&c., prior to and after the expulsion of the Coulombs. I was allowed by Dr.
Hartmann to read the packet of replies to this inquiry. I also questioned in
detail all the important witnesses who professed to have made an examination of
the Shrine and its surroundings;-the result being that if we except Madame
Blavatsky and the Coulombs, Madame Blavatsky's native servant Babula, and Colonel Olcott there is no evidence to show
that any person ever removed the Shrine from the wall or saw it removed from
the wall after it was first placed there, until the expulsion of the Coulombs;
that, therefore, no careful examination could ever have been made of the back
of the Shrine or of the wall in immediate juxtaposition. Further, that no such
examination was ever made of the east side of the party-wall as would have
sufficed to discover the sliding panels and apertures. I must add that the
testimony offered appeared to me to be characterised
by much mal-observation, sometimes implying a ludicrous lack of ordinary
intelligence, and much equivocation sometimes amounting to absolute dishonesty.
The ultimate fate of
the Shrine, according to a statement made by Dr. Hartmann to Mr. and Mrs.
Cooper-Oakley, Mr. Hume, and myself, was as follows. After the expulsion of the
Coulombs, Mr. Judge, an American Theosophist, then residing at the headquarters
of the Society, was desirous of examining the Shrine. Mr. Damodar,
who possessed the keys of the Occult Room, avoided this examination several
times on one pretext or another; but, eventually, a party of Theosophists
proceeded to the inspection of the Shrine. The Shrine was removed from the wall
and its doors were opened. Mr. T. Vigiaraghava Charloo, (commonly called Ananda) a Theosophist residing in
an official position at the headquarters, struck the back of the Shrine with
his hand, exclaiming, "You see, the back is quite solid," when, to
the surprise of most of those who were present, the middle panel of the Shrine
flew up. It seemed undesirable to some of the witnesses of this phenomenon that
the discovery should be made public, and they resolved accordingly to destroy
the Shrine. To do this they considered that the Shrine must be surreptitiously
removed, but such removal was inconvenient from the Occult Room. The Shrine was
therefore first removed openly to Mr. Damodar's room,
and, on the following night, was thence removed secretly by three Theosophists,
concealed in the compound, afterwards broken up, and the fragments burned
piecemeal during the following week. Dr. Hartmann had only retained two
portions of the back of the Shrine, which he had enveloped in brown paper and
kept carefully concealed in his room, substantial pieces of cedar wood,
black-lacked. It was of such wood, according to a previous statement of M.
Coulomb, that the back of the Shrine was made.
Dr. Hartmann has
since furnished me with a statement in writing which is of interest as
affording evidence respecting the hole between the recess and the Shrine. That
this hole had manifestly existed and had been blocked up, I had been assured by
another Theosophist who is particularly observant, and who discovered its
traces independently of Dr. Hartmann. The following is an extract from Dr.
Hartmann's written account: At what time the hole in the wall was made is as
much a mystery to me as it is to you; but from a consideration of all the
circumstances as laid down in my pamphlet, I came to the conclusion, and am
still of the opinion, that they were made by M. Coulomb after H. P Blavatsky
went to Europe, and I am now inclined to believe that M. Coulomb made them to
ingratiate himself with Madame Blavatsky to facilitate her supposed tricks. All
the traps are too clumsy, and it would tax the utmost credulity to believe that
such phenomena as I know of could have been made by their means. In fact I do
not know of a single phenomena [sic] that happened in
my presence where they would have been of the slightest use.
Of the existence of a
movable back to the Shrine and a filled-up aperture in the wall, none of us
knew anything, and although superficial examinations were made, they divulged
nothing; because to make a thorough examination, it would have been necessary
to take the Shrine down, and we were prevented from doing this by the
superstitious awe with which Mr. Damodar K. Mavalankar regarded the Shrine, and who looked upon every
European who dared to touch or handle the sacred" Shrine as a desecration.
At about the time
when Major-General Morgan sent his invitation to Mr. Patterson to come to
headquarters, that examination was made, and it was found that the back of the
Shrine could be removed, and on moistening the wall behind the Shrine with a
wet cloth, it was found that an aperture had existed, which had been plastered
up.
Why these discoveries
should have thrown any discredit on Madame Blavatsky I cannot see, because they
as well as the other traps were the work of M. Coulomb, and there was no
indication whatever that H. P Blavatsky knew anything of their existence, and
moreover the testimonials of such as claimed to have examined the Shrine went
to show that they were of recent origin.
Nevertheless, I must
confess that it seemed to me that if at that inopportune moment this new
discovery, to which I then alluded in the papers (see Madras Mai-, would have
been made public, it would have had a bad effect on the public mind. If I had
been here as a delegate of the Society for Psychical Research, or as a
detective of the missionaries, I would, perhaps, not have hesitated to state
the exact nature of the new discovery; but in my position I had to look out for
the interests of Madame Blavatsky, and I did not, therefore, consider it prudent
to speak of this discovery; neither was I authorised
to do so, neither did I (as I then stated) feel justified in letting the
enemies of H. P Blavatsky invade her private rooms without her consent.
A gentleman who was
present, and who shared my opinions, was of the opinion that the Shrine had
been too much desecrated to be of any more use, and he burned the Shrine in my
presence ... I never told Colonel Olcott nor Madame Blavatsky, nor any one else at headquarters up to that time, what had
become of the Shrine. But when you and Mr. Hume, besides a lot of other absurd
theories, also asserted your conviction, that Madame Blavatsky had sent her
servant, Baboola, for the purpose of doing away with
the Shrine, and that he had done so by her orders, 1 thought it about time to
show you that even a member of the Society for Psychical Research may err in
his judgment.
We learn from Dr.
Hartmann that any thorough examination of the Shrine was prevented by the
"superstitious awe" with which Mr. Damodar
regarded it. Dr. Hartmann's assertion is corroborated by the testimony of Mr.
Lane-Fox, who has also very emphatically expressed to me his conviction that no
examination of the Shrine by native witnesses can be considered as of the
smallest value, in consequence of the exceeding reverence in which it was
universally held. But it will be observed that in one part of his account Dr.
Hartmann appears to lay some stress on "the testimonials of such as
claimed to have examined the Shrine." Dr. Hartmann himself, indeed, was
one of those "who claimed to have examined the Shrine" before the
exposure; he gave me, on different occasions, accounts of his examinations, and
these accounts, besides being inconsistent with one another, are inconsistent
with his final statements,-as he at once cheerfully admitted, retracting all
his previous utterances on the subject.
The above is part 2
of the first major internet publication of the famous "Rapport of the
Committee Appointed to Investigate Phenomena Connected with the Theosophical
Society" also called the Hodgson Report, of which currently a feature
movie is in production to hit the movie theater boxes later in 2003.
P1 Search For Astral Projection: The Investigation
P3 The Esoteric World of Madame Blavatsky
P4 The Esoteric World of Madame Blavatsky
For updates
click homepage here
July 23, 2003