MRS. BOOTH'S GHOST.

The Booth family have all keen eyes for business. If they shut their

eyes you can see it by their noses. It is not surprising, therefore,

to find Mrs. Booth-Tucker capping Mr. Stead's ghost stories with a fine

romance about her dead mother. While the "Mother of the Salvation Army"

was dying, the Booth family made all the capital they could out of her

sufferings; and when she expired, her corpse was shunted about in the

financial interest of their show. Perhaps they would be exhibiting her

still if there were no law as to the disposition of corpses. But as that

avenue to profit is closed, the only alternative is to make use of Mrs.

Booth's ghost, and this has just been done by one of her daughters.

Mrs. Booth-Tucker contributes her ghost story to the Easter number of

_All the World_. No doubt Easter was thought a seasonable time for its

publication. Christians are just then dreaming about the great Jerusalem

ghost, and another "creeper" comes in appropriately.

Mr. Stead catches up Mrs. Booth-Tucker's ghost story and prints it

in the _Review of Reviews_. He admits the want of evidence "as to its

objectivity," which is a euphemism for "no evidence at all," and then

observes most sapiently that if it was only a dream, "the coincidence

of its occurrence at the crisis in her illness is remarkable"--which is

precisely what it is not.

Mrs. Booth-Tucker was very ill on board a steamer when she saw her

mother, fresh from "the beautiful land above." "Those with me," she

says, "thought I was dying, and I thought so too." When a person is in

that state, after a wasting illness, the brain is necessarily weak. But

this was not all. "I had not slept," the lady says, "for some days, at

any rate not for many minutes together." Her brain, therefore, was

not only weak, but overwrought; and in ingenuously stating this at the

outset the lady gives herself away. Given a wasted body, weakness "unto

death," a brain ill supplied with blood and ravaged with sleeplessness;

does it, we ask, require a "rank materialist" to explain the presence of

"visions" without the aid of supernaturalism?

"Suddenly," Mrs. Booth-Tucker says, "I saw her coming to me." But how

"coming"? The lady tells us she was lying in "a small sea cabin." This

does not leave much room for the "coming" of the ghost. We should also

like to know why a lady thought to be dying was _left alone_. It is

certainly a very unusual circumstance.

Mrs. Booth's ghost, after as much "coming" as could be accomplished in

"a small cabin," at last "sat beside" her sick daughter "on the narrow

bunk." No doubt the seat was rather incommodious, but why should a

ghost sit at all? It really seems to have been a mixed sort of ghost.

Apparently it came through the ship's side, or the deck, or the

cabin-door, or the key-hole; yet it was solid enough to touch Mrs.

Booth-Tucker's hand and kiss her? Nay, it was solid enough to carry on

a long conversation, which does not seem possible without lungs and

larynx.

Mrs. Booth's ghost said a great deal. "_Wonderful words_ they were,"

says Mrs. Booth-Tucker. This whets our curiosity. We are always

listening for "wonderful words." But, alas, we are doomed to

disappointment. The lady knows her mother's words were "wonderful," but

she cannot reproduce them. Here memory is defective. "I can remember

so few of the actual words," she says. Nevertheless, she gives us a few

samples, and they do not seem _very_ "wonderful." Here are two of the

said samples: "Live, live, live, remembering that night comes always

_quickly_, and all is nothingness that dies with death!" "Fight the

fight, darling; the sympathy of Christ is always with you, and every

effort you make is heaping up treasure for you in Heaven."

We fancy we have heard those "wonderful words" before. For all their

wonderfulness, ghosts are seldom original. Mrs. Booth-Tucker reminds

us of the gushing lady novelist, who describes her hero as divinely

handsome and miraculously clever, but when she opens his mouth, makes

him talk like a jackass.

"General" Booth's daughter does not see that she found words for her

mother's ghost. She is not so sharp as Dr. Johnson, who carried on a

discussion with an adversary in a dream, and got the worst of it. For a

time he felt humiliated, but he recovered his pride on reflecting that

he had provided the other fellow with arguments.

When Mrs. Booth-Tucker tells that "the radiance of her face spoke to

me," we can easily understand the subjective nature of her "vision," and

as readily dispense with a budget of those "wonderful words."

Nor are we singular in incredulity. Mr. Stead cannot put his tongue

in his cheek at a member of the Booth family, but the _Christian

Commonwealth_ says "the story is both improbable and absurd," and adds,

"it is just such fanaticism as this that brings religion into contempt

with many educated people." Our pious contemporary, like any wretched

materialist, declares that many persons have seen ghosts "when under the

influence of fever or in a low state of health."

All this is sensible enough, and in a Christian journal very edifying.

But if our pious contemporary only applied this criticism backwards,

what havoc it would make with the records of early Christianity! Mrs.

Booth-Tucker is not in all points like Mary Magdalene, but she resembles

her in fervor of disposition. Out of Mary Magdalene we are told that

Jesus cast "seven devils," which implies, rationalistically, that

she was strongly hysterical. She was more likely to be a victim of

"fanaticism" than Mrs. Booth-Tucker. Yet the ghost story of Mrs. Booth's

daughter is discredited, and even stigmatised as discreditable, while

the brain-sick fancies of Mary Magdalene are treated as accurate

history. She was at the bottom of the Jerusalem ghost story, and her

evidence is regarded as unimpeachable. So much do circumstances alter

cases!

Our pious contemporary regards all modern ghosts as "fever dreams." So

do we, and we regard all ancient ghosts in the same light The

difference between ancient and modern superstition is only a question of

environment. Superstition itself is always the same; it no more changes

than the leopard's spots or the Ethiopian's skin. But the environment

changes. From the days when there was no scientific knowledge or

rigorous criticism we have advanced to an age when the electric

search-light of science sweeps every corner and criticism is

remorseless. Hence the modern ghosts are served up in Christmas

"shockers," while the ancient ghosts are worshipped as gods. But this

will not last for ever. The rule of "what is, has been," will eventually

be applied to the whole of human history, and the greatest ghost of the

creeds will "melt into the infinite azure of the past."

Flowers of Freethought (Second Series) · 第 37 / 63 题