Articles

<< Return to Articles

A Lawyer Defends Sir William Crookes

"Great Spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Prof Albert Einstein

"I did not say it was possible, I said it happened." Sir William Crookes.

"There is a real concern among the physical scientists using mechanistic, reductionist scientific paradigm that Crookes· empirical psychic results and afterlife evidence will inevitably cause a revolution in science and shake the world out of its orthodox scientific complacency." Victor

Undoubtedly, Sir William Crookes, the discoverer of thallium and one of the world's greatest scientists, is also one of the most controversial and maligned figures in psychic history. Scientists from all over the world have showered him with honors for his brilliant scientific investigations. Critics have tried insidiously to destroy his credibility. Anti-psychic, anti-afterlife, conservative negatively prejudiced scientists unconscionably and most unfairly tried to dismiss his great psychic achievements. Yet over the last 125 years his experiments have been successfully repeated and his impact on the worldwide investigation of psychic phenomena has been most impressive.

What is the strongest evidence against one of the world's giants of science and psychic history?

Historically, the anti-Crookes skeptics state and impute that Crookes committed fraud, made misrepresentations, was not a competent investigator and worked with Florence Cook, a bogus materialisation medium, knowing her to be a fraud.

These conclusions come from at least four major claims:

1. That during a séance in December 1873, Crooks worked with Florence Cook, Volckmann had physically grabbed a materialized form which he alleged was Florence Cook.
2. That during a séance in January 1880, Crookes had worked with Florence Cook, Sir G.R. Sitwell had physically grabbed a materialized form which he alleged was Florence Cook.
3. That Florence Cook later "confessed" to Anderson about her cheating.
4. That Florence Cook "confessed" to Bois that she committed fraud during the Crookes experiments with her.

All these are very serious allegations.

However, contemporaneous circumstances reveal that on examination the alleged grabbing of Florence Cook on the two occasions does not have credibility and the "confessions" cannot be accepted as valid evidence and do not have any credibility at all.

In Defence of Crookes

The available admissible evidence is that Crookes conducted all experiments with Florence Cook with utmost scientific scrutiny and integrity. His experiments were witnessed by highly credible people. His experiments with Home and with Cook were successfully duplicated many years later and in other countries by other skilled investigators and that notwithstanding the grave injurious assaults and the plethora of negative propaganda against Crookes, his credibility to-day remains untarnished.

Further, historical persecution against Sir William Crookes occurred because as one of the greatest scientists ever in history with very high international reputation, enormously high credibility, authority, power and influence, he went public with substantive information that would have destabilized the contemporaneous establishment's orthodoxy in science and religion. Consistent with the historical adage, one extreme created by Crookes elicited an opposite extreme, the powerful retaliation of those who had a great deal to lose - the establishment.

Critical, balanced constructive criticism is always welcome but many critics, many skeptics over the last nine decades or so lied, cheated by imputation and unfairly misrepresented the work of Sir William Crookes by presenting information which has not been tested for validity. A few later critics then quote from negative interpretations of what happened as if they were fact.

Anyone can make allegations

Anyone, anywhere, anyplace can make allegations of fraud and confessions etc. but the information does not constitute technically admissible evidence until such time as it is tested for validity and credibility.

It is common knowledge that skeptics have attempted to negatively manipulate the perception of Crookes by omitting most relevant critical information which supports him.

When skeptics go public trying to willfully destroy the established reputation of Sir William Crookes, an internationally recognized scientist, and to defame him, it becomes mandatory that anything highly damaging and controversial must be referenced.

That is a duty; it is procedural and the decent thing to do - especially when any adverse information has not been tested for its truth or credibility or both. It is the greatest act of cowardice by mediocre or inferior minds to defame someone who cannot take action to protect his good name, character and reputation.

It was never proved that the adverse incidents claimed against Crookes actually occurred and if they occurred, we do not know if the incidents were exaggerated, misinterpreted or taken out of context. We do not have any independent evidence that the alleged confessions of fraud ever occurred and if they did, in what context. The damaging material includes innuendos negative malicious speculations and hearsay - all untested inadmissible material, much unsubstantiated anti-psychic propaganda.

Crookes' Credibility

Since all relevant witnesses are dead and cannot be cross-examined on their allegations and statements made, CREDIBILITY will be the most critical criterion by which Crookes' achievements are measured. Accordingly:

· Sir William Crookes' credibility as a world renowned hands-on empirical scientist who systematically used scientific method is unchallenged.

· He is internationally recognized and acknowledged. For many years he was honored by foreign universities for his exceptional skills in applied science and as a technically competent investigator of science.

· In any of his own writings on scientific matters he exhibits a high level of scientific rationale, technical procedure and tested professional integrity.

· There is universal agreement that Crookes' credibility, character and honesty in all his scientific research as scientist and empiricist are beyond question.

· Quack critics who are given generous coverage by the materialist media fail to make a most critical distinction between a "theoretical" scientist and a "hands-on" scientist.

· The list of honours bestowed on him (see last paragraph of this article) is most impressive and was unrivalled by any other scientist of his time.

· The top skeptical scientists of the time were the ones who actually nominated Crookes to investigate Spiritualism. Crookes before investigating stated that Spritualism: "lends itself to trickery and deception." Crookes here exhibits sensitivity, understanding and acceptance of an a priori - the presumption of trickery and deception in Spiritualism. This notice would have significantly increased his caution.

· Many critics ignorant of scientific method mistakenly claim or impute that he was "probably" or "maybe" or "perhaps" or "could have been" fooled by mediums. These scientifically uniformed and ignorant attackers are unaware of the strict technical procedures involved in Crookes' or any professional empiricist's scientific investigative methodology e.g. the different control of experimental variables- dependent, independent, extraneous, controlling any negatively intervening variables e.g. Crookes' use of galvanometer to control just one variable.

· No one can validly state that one's cumulative experience operates only some of the time. You either have the investigative competence, experience, and the exceptional skills - or you don't.

· The witnesses who substantiated the positive psychic results were eminent, respected professionals with high integrity and credibility. One of them, Edward Cox, was a most respected Sergeant-at-Law, an English barrister of the highest rank and an expert in the admissibility of evidence.

· There is no evidence that Crookes ever compromised with strict procedure or ever prevented any of the critics attending his psychic experiments.

· Crookes' exceptional skills in science and as an empirical investigator were recognized by the discoverer of the electron and Nobel Prize winner, Sir J.J. Thomson, who conceded that his own researches were inspired by Crookes. This gives Crookes the recognition by the top scientists of his day as a scientist AND as an active investigator whose exceptional skills were inevitably applied to psychic investigations.

- Crookes completely demolished his bitter negative critic and anti-psychic skeptic Dr Carpenter, when Dr Carpenter had to withdraw all the false allegations against Crookes.. In retrospect, Dr Carpenter's malicious attacks can be seen as professional jealousy and envy of Crookes internationally recognized, magnificent achievements.

Others duplicated his work

Crookes' materialisation experiments were not unique and he was not the only one experimenting in this field. There were others investigating materialisation mediums using ectoplasm in his time and later in England and Europe, the United States, Canada, Brazil.

· In France and Germany between 1909 and 1913 a series of carefully conducted experiments were carried out successfully by Baron von Schrenck-Notzing who independently confirmed Crookes' psychic findings.

· Nobel Laureate Professor Charles Richet, a Professor of Physiology at the Sorbonne, confirmed the existence of ectoplasm and inevitably validated Crookes psychic claims. About materialisation, this Nobel Laureate and expert empiricist definitively stated, " it is a fact."

· Professor W.J. Crawford from the University of Belfast conducted long and meticulous studies of ectoplasm and materialisation with the Goligher Circle and published three books about it all substantiating Crookes' claims.

· Dr Glen Hamilton in Canada also confirmed ectoplasmic materialisations.

· Empiricist Gambier Bolton (Ghosts in Solid Form) conducted more than a hundred test materialisations with Florence Cook and other five other sensitives during a period of seven years which were all documented in detail consistently confirming Crookes' experiments.

· Eva C, famous French materialisation medium, duplicated Cook's materialisations in France. Dr Geley and Prof Richet attested to the genuineness of Eva C's materialisations. During one meeting some 150 people including scientists, witnessed materialisation (Fodor 1960:131)

· Further, Crookes' materialisation claims were successfully repeated later by materialisation mediums Helen Duncan and Rita Goold. I interviewed three of Rita Goold's sitters, Gwen Byrne, Pat Jeffries and Michael Roll, who witnessed Rita Goold's materialisations. All attested that their loved ones were fully materialized and that they held them in their arms and talked to them.

· Contrary to the negative malicious rhetoric and imputations by his uninformed critics, Crookes was NEVER found to be involved in fraud, NEVER found to have used any kinds of tricks, was NEVER charged with anything fraudulent and NEVER found anything that is not consistent with international findings about materialisations and ectoplasm.

High integrity as a scientist

Crookes' publication The Phenomena of Spiritualism (some of which appeared in the Quarterly Journal of Science 1871) contains Crookes' own statements about his work and his defenses against the most unfair dirty attacks on him. Careful content analysis of his statements shows he was a very captious scientist, very careful with scientific method, very careful with words, careful with statements and concepts- a behavior consistent with a professional scientist who was honest, empirically meticulous and someone who exhibited high integrity as a scientist.

· Crookes had the lifelong active support of other contemporaneous giants of science and psychic phenomena/afterlife evidence - Sir Oliver Lodge, Sir William Barrett et al.

· There was never any university around the world which ever envisaged that Crookes was in any way not a fit and a proper person to be awarded the highest honors and honorary degrees.

· Skeptics conveniently omit to mention the positive, highly commendable aspects of Crookes e.g. being the only British scientist in his time to have been given so much international recognition for his brilliant contribution to mankind.

· Procedurally, no university would have bestowed any honor if it had suspected the recipient was in any way taken in by fraudulent mediums.

· Retrospective sagacity tells us that Crookes' negative critics got it all wrong: scientists of Crookes' time tried to explain psychic phenomena as, "unconscious cerebration and muscular action" (from A Reply to the Quarterly Review). No one on earth to-day supports that.

· Crookes NEVER ever admitted to having done anything not consistent with scientific procedure and NEVER excluded independent highly credibile and cautious witnesses from attending his demonstrations.

· Twenty five years after his experiments and again toward the end of his life, Crookes stated that he would NOT retract anything he had stated in relation to the experiments with Florence Cook.

· There is no evidence that Crookes and Mrs Crookes ever had matrimonial conflicts about Florence Cook. Both remained on excellent terms with Florence Cook (afterwards Mrs Corner), her husband and two daughters for the rest of their lives.

Underneath all the historical dirty attacks against Crookes is the endeavour by the negatively prejudiced closed minded skeptics to resist the acceptance of non-physical energy and afterlife evidence. There is a real concern among the physical scientists using mechanistic, reductionist scientific paradigm that empirical psychic results and afterlife evidence will inevitably cause a revolution in science and shake the world out of its orthodox scientific complacency.

The most common attacks on Crookes.

"Scientists seldom notice the deception being practiced under their noses".
This is usually articulated by the ignorant uninformed negatively minded skeptical attackers and other cynics who try to score a cheap point and who know absolutely nothing about scientific method. As abovestated, Crookes was not a theoretician of science, he was a "hands-on" scientist and an empiricist. Given Crookes' brilliant achievements he would be classified as a first class professional expert with vast experience in scientific investigations. Detecting fraud is one of the key elements in basic scientific method.

"Crookes was taken in by Dr Henry Slade, the spirit photographer."
More intentional misrepresentations by the sceptics to unfairly denigrate Crookes. There is no evidence that Sir William conducted any tests with Dr Henry Slade who was not in any event a spirit photographer. Crookes spoke of Slade before the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1876 and said among other things, "I was asked to investigate when Dr Slade first came over, and I mentioned my conditions. I have never investigated except under these conditions" (Fodor 1966:71). For the record, Slade was investigated in the United States, England and in Europe by a number of top investigators including Sergeant Cox, Robert Collyer in the USA, by Dr Carter Blake, Professor Johann Zollner, Professor of Physics and Astronomy, William Weber, Professor of Physics and Wilhelm Scheibner, Professor of Mathematics at Leipzig- all of whom confirmed Slade was a genuine psychic.

"Crookes was taken in by Rosina Showers."
Another of the skeptics egregious misrepresentations. Showers was allegedly detected in fraud in the summer of 1876 before Crookes began formally testing her. He was well aware of this but felt that the information was hearsay and he wanted to test Showers himself. He felt she was still worth investigating because five or six people whom he trusted had declared they had seen Rosina and her spirit guide at the same time.

However Showers failed the dye test (which Cook passed). Crookes met her privately to discuss her alleged cheating; her mother Mrs Showers went berserk and fraudulently forged letters over Crookes' name and spread scandals about him. Crookes had no alternative but to commence legal action to stop the dirty rumours and all allegations made by Rosina's mother were immediately withdrawn (Inglis1974:275-6).

"Volckmann grabbed Florence Cook in a séance and exposed her as a fraud".
So many skeptics grabbed onto this one thinking they now had all the evidence against Florence Cook and Crookes. Wrong! A close examination of this incident shows:

1. This incident happened before Crookes had begun to investigate Cook. According to Brian Inglis, Crookes had seen her once and wrote in her support initially on the basis that he had experienced materialized hands disappearing in his grasp while investigating Home. (Inglis 1977;268).
2. Volckmann acted most irresponsibly at a séance. There was a tacit understanding that he was there to observe NOT to do anything which could harm the medium by his aggressive transgression. During ectoplasmic materialisations mediums lose nearly half of their physical weight. Bolton claims that the measured actual weight loss to the sensitive at the time of a full materialisation was no less than sixty-five pounds (Bolton 1919:9) Contemporary empiricist George Meek investigated materialisation mediumship in Brazil. He found that in genuine materialisation both the medium and the sitters would temporarily lose a great deal of weight (Meek 1987:69).
3. There was NO evidence during the incident that the materialized person was not Katie King. Volckann did not ever claim that he ever saw the face of the materialized person (that of Katie King) or Florence Cook during the scuffle.
4. Barrister Henry Dumphy, stated inter alia, that Katie King "glided " out of Volckmann's grip, leaving no trace of corporal existence or surroundings in the shape of clothing.
6. When the cupboard was opened, Florence Cook was seen distraught, dressed in black still bound and with the tape around her waist as it had been at the beginning of the séance, the knots sealed with the signet ring of the Earl of Caithness and untampered with as at first.
7. Katie was always seen in white clothing; Florence Cook always dressed in black and although she was searched no white clothing was ever found.
8. Critically relevant: Volckmann married rival medium, Mrs Guppy, who was according to Inglis "paranoically jealous" of Florence Cook's success, immediately after this incident (Inglis 1977:268).

"'Katie' was none other than Miss Cook."
This is the core attack by skeptics on Crookes. If the materialized Katie was simply Florence in a white dress how would we account for the following evidence:
1. In many of the photographs that were taken, Katie King looking between 30 to 40 years whereas Cook was in her teens.
2. Katie being six inches taller than her medium.
3. The absence of a blister on Katie's neck.
4. The absence of perforations in Katie's ears (Florence always wore earrings).
5. The difference in complexion.
6. The difference in bodily proportion (Katie more voluptuous.)
7. The fact that Katie and Florence were seen together by eight people beside Crookes. One of them was Aksakoff, a Russian aristocrat, who reported how in one séance Katie King invited him to see for himself the medium Florence Cook 'deep in trance … sitting on a chair, with both her hands bound fast behind her back' (Cit. G. Zorab (1964: 174-5).
8. Katie King being reported to have appeared in Canada during the famous Dr G Hamilton materialisation seances.
9. Katie King appearing in Rome in 1974 (Noah's Ark Society website).
10. Katie King having dye on her hand which did not appear on Florence Cook's hand.
11. Katie King being observed dematerialising "like a wax doll melting before a fire": (Fodor 1966:222).
Crookes made points 1 to 8 in public repeatedly at the time and they were not contradicted by the many quality eye-witnesses. (See Crookes, Fodor, Medhurst and Bolton)

Florence Cook was detected in fraud when Sir G.R. Sitwell grabbed "Marie" who really was Florence Cook.

Skeptics claim this newspaper report to be strong evidence proving Cook's fraud and by implication Crookes. However it must be remembered that this incident happened in 1880, six years after Crookes had ceased to investigate Cook.

1. It is also well known that newspapers are in the business of shock, drama, exaggeration and taking things out of context AND are the least reliable sources! Further, that the reports in the newspapers were written by the skeptic Sitwell himself who stood to be a judge in his own cause. Sitwell's account was rebutted by contemporaneous other writers including the editor of The Spiritualist.
2. As a result of Sitwell's action Florence Cook insisted that someone was to stay with her in the cabinet and thereafter Mrs Marryat was tied to Florence Cook in the cabinet throughout her séances in which successful materializations continued.
3. Further, in 1899, Florence Cook was invited to Berlin by the Sphinx Society to undertake séances under test conditions. The materialisations from these séances were most successful (Fodor 1966:63).
4. One has to see the Cook sittings in their respective longitudinal perspective - as long term credibility is more acceptable than an allegation of a one-off subjectively reported fraudulent claim.
5. In 1900 a number of sitters testified in writing that they has seen Florence Cook and 'Marie' at the same time and that "Before this seance, Florence dressed in the garments provided, was not left a moment alone. She was most securely bound to her chair, which was fastened to an iron ring in the floor and each hand was tied to an arm of the chair...everything was found intact afterwards' Cit. Medhurst and Goldney (1964) pp 84-85.
6. Gambier Bolton in his documented Ghosts in Solid Form (Bolton 1919) provides primary evidence that he himself repeatedly tested Florence Cook (then Mrs Corner) when she was in her forties. He states that her materialisations were genuine, proved and repeatedly witnessed by highly critical sitters in the light, NOT in darkness.
7. Bolton applied the same stringent controls on to Florence Cook as Crookes did himself: the séances took place in the homes of himself or a friend which was searched prior to the sitting by an architect; the medium herself was searched in her clothes and body by a doctor before the sitting; the medium was dressed totally in black (even underwear); the medium was bound with all knots sealed; the medium was seated on a self-registering weighing machine to which an electrical alarm was secretly hidden. (Bolton 1919: 15-68).

"Florence Cook confessed to Anderson and M Bois that she and Crookes committed fraud during the séances."

These alleged confessions have NOT been independently substantiated. The alleged confessions have not been tested for validity. We allegedly have claims by two people, Anderson and M Bois, who allegedly were Florence Crooks' lovers. I submit the reasonable person uncommitted to this issue would NOT accept Anderson and Bois' allegations of confessions - especially, when it is not credible that a person would say these things against themselves. Indeed Mrs Goldney who apparently was acquainted with Anderson and witnessed his allegations did not accept them (see below).

Besides, as has been discussed above, identical experiments were successfully repeated by other investigators in the UK and in Berlin many years after Crookes retired.

Experts in security disinformation will tell you that it would be relatively easy to set up incidents to look genuine, using bribed "witnesses" the effect of which would be to destroy the credibility of a targeted person who could in Crookes' context, raise more than reasonable doubt about the validity of traditional reductionist science. There are allegations that this is being done even to-day.

"It does not explain why people, even in Crookes' lifetime suspected that his interest in Katie/Florence strayed beyond the coolly scientific [as claimed by] such respected commentators as Trevor T.Hall, E.J.Dingwall and K.M. Goldney."

Undoubtedly, this is one of the dirtiest bits of mud and lies thrown at Crookes. Here the skeptics are maliciously caught lying and cheating. The skeptics give the impression that Goldney agreed with the adverse assessment on Crookes. Instead, in Mrs Goldney's general introduction to Crookes and the Spirit World she states clearly that Trevor Hall was way out of line and further mentions that Dr Robert Thouless attacked Trevor Hall for making those defamatory, unsubstantiated statements against Crookes. In fact, Goldney says the opposite, "Crookes was known to be a very devoted to his wife throughout his life" and later continues, "No; I agree with Dr Thouless in rejecting this surmise (against Crookes)." John Beloff, researcher and writer from the British SPR also offers a number of reasons for rejecting these accusations (Beloff 1993:53-55).

Of course the skeptics willfully omit to give references supporting Crookes. The anti-Crookes statements are either untrue or taken out of context or intentionally misrepresented or all three, as we have just seen.

Trevor T Hall is not a "respected commentator" as some skeptics try to mislead. First of all his book The Medium and the Scientist is published by Prometheus Books, the notorious skeptic press. Prima Facie this is an indication that he is not perceiving information with equanimity. His book pushes cowardice to its extreme by willfully giving an unbalanced view which does NOT have the full support of decent traditional psychic historians - see Medhurst Crookes and the Spirit World.

Hall's blatant negative bias against Crookes (Hall 1984) can be clearly seen by the fact that he does not even mention the specific empirical evidence of Gambier Bolton who states in Ghosts in Solid Form that he worked with Florence Cook and repeated Crookes' experiments - which fundamentally contradicts everything Hall says. Nor does Hall rebut Nandor Fodor's voluminous evidence supporting Crookes- he quotes him once but out of context. He cites (Hall 1984:99-100) as his "prosecution witness" against Crookes Mrs K. M. Goldney, the person quoted above as rejecting Hall's surmise. Nor does Sir E J Dingwell have credibility - he actively assisted Hall with the writing of the book against Crookes a fact which Hall acknowledges!

With absolute certainty, if Crookes were alive to-day he would slaughter his vile and cowardly attackers with a number of court summonses.

'Mrs Fay, the medium tricked Crookes." Skeptics' Journal

We are led to believe by the skeptics, that a professional medium Mrs Fay, (whom Crookes by-passed for systematic mediumship because she charged money) allegedly stated that she - Mrs Fay - herself confessed that she concocted with her own and Crookes own' enemies that she cheated, lied, deceived, misled, misrepresented and acted fraudulently to fool Crookes. No jury on earth would accept such a confession from a psychic. Why? Because it would have meant instant death to her credibility, loss of income, loss of prestige and be perceived as a traitor to the Spiritualists and psychic phenomena generally. The skeptics' report was taken from other skeptics' inadmissible allegations, innuendoes and pure gossip.

"The truth is that from an early age, following the death of his brother Phillip, he [Crookes] was satisfied that contact with the spirit world was possible."

Crookes was very cautious in his attitude to acceptance of the afterlife and in any event never allowed his personal convictions to intrude on his consciousness as an empirical scientist. However toward the end of his life he became convinced that he had received genuine communication from his much loved deceased wife and continued to have sittings with a materialisation medium- (Scatcherd 1924)- something that would be unlikely had his earlier experiences with materialisation been deliberate frauds.

One of the best accounts I have read of Crookes' attitude to survival is that compiled from primary sources by Dr Medhurst and Mrs K.M. Goldney who make it clear that Crookes' attitude to survival 'underwent some fluctuations over the years' (Medhurst 1972:227). In the extract from Crookes' Diary New Year's Eve 1870 Crookes (then aged 38) talks about the death of his brother three years earlier (is 35 really - 'an early age'!!) and the hope that he will continue to receive spiritual communication from him.

Conclusion

The damaging allegations against Crookes are untested. We can never have the definitively accurate information as to what really happened unless the information is subject to cross examination, something which unfortunately cannot be done retrospectively. Because the allegations are untested, unsubstantiated, technically, they cannot be taken seriously and are technically inadmissible.

Notwithstanding the noise made by Crookes' critics over the last 125 years, his substanstive credibility remains untarnished.

This problem is augmented by the fact that in the Victorian age, there was the "presumption of fraud" in relation to psychic phenomena. There was an assumption by many in Victorian society that since psychic phenomena do not exist, anyone who claimed success in demonstrating it must be committing fraud. One can understand the huge problems which faced Crookes and other psychic empiricists in his time.

Again, whilst the mediocre skeptics and dilettantes can poke fun at genius, defame the dead, ridicule by imputation, repeat other skeptics' venom against Crookes, those who accept Crookes' contribution know that one day, when all the world accepts the existence of non-physical energy, a new era in science will emerge, a new global perception will welcome psychic phenomena and more importantly, the non-physical energy will irretrievably remove the cancer of materialism.

Crookes' legacy of having the courage to make public his investigations of psychic phenomena had global impact. The increase in the acceptance of "psychic force" and afterlife evidence is universal; foreign governments including those in China, Russia and the US sponsor experiments into psychic phenomena. Psychic research is being conducted at universities by professors, some physical scientists, many psi scientists and other psi researchers. Grass roots level support for psychic force around the world is just huge and is dramatically increasing. By all objective criteria, Crookes' discovery has and is having global impact.

Crookes' experiments into the afterlife add to the cumulative objective and subjective evidence that we survive death and that communication between those who passed on and us here on earth is possible. This I believe is the greatest discovery in human history and will give mankind the confidence that love will survive and that inevitably we will be reunited with our loved ones - love being the most powerful force in the universe.

Sir William Crookes' extensive honors and recognition by foreign universities: http://www.chem.ox.ac.uk/icl/heyes/LanthAct/Biogs/Crookes.html

Sir William Crookes - from Who's Who:
Awards: OM 1910; Kt 1897; FRS 1863; Hon. LLD Birmingham; Hon. DSc (Oxon, Cambridge, Ireland, Cape of Good Hope, Sheffield, Durham).
Positions: Proprietor and editor of Chemical News; President, Royal Society, 1913-1915 (Foreign Secretary, 1908-1912).
Personal Details: Born 17 June 1832; son of late Joseph Crookes; married 1856, Ellen (died 1916), daughter of W. Humphrey of Darlington; four sons one daughter; died, London, 4 April 1919.
Education: Royal Coll. of Chemistry. Work Professor of Chemistry, Training Coll., Chester, 1855.
Achievements: Discoverer of the Selenocyanides; Thallium, a new element, 1861; Repulsion resulting from Radiation, 1873; the Radiometer, 1875; Illumination of Lines of Molecular Pressure, 1878; Radiant Matter, 1879, an ultra-gaseous, fourth state, of matter; Radiant Matter Spectroscopy, 1881; New Elements in Gadolinite, etc, 1886; Genesis of Elements, 1887; Some Possibilities of Electricity, Wireless Telegraphy, 1892; Fixation of Atmospheric Nitrogen, 1898; the Spinthariscope, 1903; Eye-Preserving Glass for Spectacles, 1913.
Awards: Past President, Chemical Society, Brit. Assoc., Inst. Elect. Eng., Soc. Chem. Industry; Hon. Member, Roy. Phil. Soc. Glasgow, Roy. Soc. NSW, Pharm. Soc., Chem. Metall. and Mining Soc. of South Africa, Amer. Chem. Soc., Amer. Philos. Soc., Roy. Soc. Sci. Upsala, Deutsch. Chem. Gesell. Berlin, Psychol. Soc. Paris, Antonio Alzate Sci. Soc. Mexico, Sci. Soc. Bucharest, Reg. Accad. Zelanti; Foreign Mem. Accad. Lincei, Rome; Corresp. Inst. de France (Acad. Sci.), Corresp. Mem. Bataafsch Genoots., Rotterdam, Soc. Encouragement pour l'Indust. Paris; For. Assoc. National Acad. Sciences, Washington; Foreign Mem., Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. International Exhibition, 1862, medal; Acadèmie des Sciences, 1880, gold medal and prize of 3000 frs; Electrical Exhibitions, Paris, 1881, medal; Society of Arts, 1885, Fergusson Gold Medal; Exposition Universelle, Paris, 1889, medal; Society of Arts, 1899, Albert Gold Medal; Franklin Institute, Philadelphia, 1912, Elliott Cresson Gold Medal; Soc. Chem. Industry, 1912, gold medal. Royal medallist, Davy medallist, Copley medallist, and three times Bakerian Lecturer of the Royal Society.
Publications: Select Methods in Chemical Analysis, 4th edition, 1905; Manufacture of Beetroot-Sugar in England, 1870; Handbook of Dyeing and Calico-Printing, 1874; Dyeing and Tissue Printing, 1882; Kerl's Treatise on Metallurgy, 1868, with Ernst Rohrig; Wagner's Chemical Technology; Auerbach's Anthracen and its Derivatives, 2nd edition, 1890; Ville's Artificial Manures, 3rd edition, 1909; A Solution of the Sewage Question; The Profitable Disposal of Sewage; The Wheat Problem, 1899, 3rd edn 1917; Diamonds, 1909.

References

Beloff. J (1993) Parapsychology: A Concise History Continuum International Publishing Group - Athlone Press
Bolton, Gambier (1919) Ghosts in Solid Form-An experimental Investigation of Certain Little-Known Phenomena (Materialisations) (1957 edition Psychic Book Club Old Bailey London)
Carrington, Hereward (1973) The World of Psychic Research, A.S. Barnes and Co London ISBN 0-498-01299-9. Library of Congress Card Number 72-6371.
Originally published in 1946 as The Invisible World.
Crookes, William (1874) "The Phenomena of Spiritualism" London Quarterly Journal of Science
Fodor, Nandor (1966) An Encyclopedia of Psychic Science, The Citadel Press New Jersey (Originally published 1933 London: Arthur Press Limited)
Goldney, K.M. (1972) "General Introduction" in R.G. Medhurst's Crookes and the Spirit World
Hall, Trevor T (1985) The Medium and the Scientist Prometheus Books Buffalo, New York.
Inglis, Brian (1977) Natural and Supernatural- A History of the Paranormal from Earliest Times to 1914 Hodder and Stoughton London
Medhurst, R. G. and Goldney, K. M. (1964) "William Crookes and the Physical Phenomena of Mediumship", PSPR, 54 (1964), p.69.
Medhurst R.G.(1972) Crookes and the Spirit World Souvenir Press London
Meek, George (1987) After we Die What Then? Ariel Press Columbus Ohio
Scatcherd, F.R. (1924) Survival Putnam London.
Thouless, Robert H. (1963) "Crookes and Cook" SPR Journal, 42
Zorab,G. (1964) "Foreign Comments on Florence Cook's Mediumship" PSPR, 54 (1964)

-- Victor Zammit (May 2003)