Report of the 1884 Adyar Committee
Jun 07, 2006 12:49 PM
REPORT OF THE ADYAR COMMITTEE ON THE COULOMBS'
FORGERIES AGAINST THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT.
The 1884 Annual Convention of the Theosophical Society, in Adyar,
appointed a broad Committee to advise H.P. Blavatsky as to the best
course of action with regard to the Coulombs' attacks against the
Those were the same attacks which Mr. Daniel Caldwell and Mr. John
Algeo have been publicizing for some years now.
The Chairman of the 1884 Committee was Mr. Norendra Nath Sen. Its
secretary, Alfred Cooper-Oakley.This is their Report, dated
December 28, 1884:
"Resolved: That the letters published in the Christian College
Magazine under the heading `Collapse of Koothoomi' are only a
pretext to injure the cause of Theosophy, and as these letters
necessarily appear absurd to those who are acquainted with our
philosophy & facts, and as those who are not acquainted with those
facts could not have their opinion changed even by a judicial
verdict given in favour of Madame Blavatsky, therefore, it is the
unanimous opin ion of this Committee that Mdme Blavatsky should not
prosecute her defamers in a court of law."
[Signed:] "Alfred Cooper-Oakley (Secretary), Norendraneth Sen
(Chairman), P. Iyaloo Naidu, Franz Hartmann, M.D., Nobin K.
Bannerji, Rud. Gebhard, S. Ramaswamier, P. Sreenevasa Row, S.
Subramani Iyer, Naoroji Dorabji Khandalvala, R. Ragoonath Row,
Gyanendra Nath Chakravartti, M.A., T. Subba Row, H. R. Morgan, M.
So far, the document.
The important fact in this report is that its clearly states the
obvious reality : those slanders against HPB and the Masters of
the Wisdom are only "a pretext to injure the cause of Theosophy".
Also, it is said that the forged letters "appear absurd to those
who are acquainted with our philosophy & facts". The Committee is
What are the motives, then (more than one century later) for John
Algeo, Daniel Caldwell and a few others to try to adopt those
slanders as if they had been written by HPB herself? I will leave
that to the reader.
The Coulombs at least had the trouble to forge the letters they said
were written by H.P.B. But Soloviof didn't even present any
forgeries. He just published the libellous texts that he himself
had created, mixed up with some sentences from authentic letters,
but he never showed any "originals". All his work of libels
followed the same lines established by Emma and Alexis Coulomb.
The Coulombs did received a bribe for their "pioneer" work. This is
well-documented. They took at least 150 rupees.(2) Yet it is not
known whether V. Soloviof worked "on a volunteer basis" for the
Vatican and other powerful enemies of the movement, or if he
received a bribe ? and of how much.
This is the stuff John Algeo and Daniel Caldwell have been making
propaganda of, in the last few years.
Best regards, Carlos Cardoso Aveline
(1) Reproduced from "The Coulomb Case", by Michael
Gomes, "Theosophical History Occasional Papers", Vol. X, Fullerton,
California, 2005, 73 pp., see p. XV.
(2) "The Coulomb Case", by Michael Gomes, "Theosophical History
Occasional Papers", Vol. X, Fullerton, California, 2005, 73 pp.,
see document at the p. 49, and footnote 78, at p. 29. See also pp.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application