{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_46942/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_46942","id":"gutenberg_46942","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/46942","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Psychiatry/Psychology","Category: Science - Biology","Parapsychology -- Investigation"],"text":"METAPSYCHICAL PHENOMENA\n\n\n\n\n_All rights reserved_\n\n\n\n\n  METAPSYCHICAL\n  PHENOMENA\n\n  METHODS AND OBSERVATIONS\n\n  BY J. MAXWELL\n  _Doctor of Medicine\n  Deputy-Attorney-General at the Court of Appeal, Bordeaux, France_\n\n  WITH A PREFACE BY CHARLES RICHET\n\n  _Member of the Academy of Medicine\n  Professor of Physiology in the Faculty of Medicine, Paris_\n\n  AND AN INTRODUCTION BY SIR OLIVER LODGE\n\n  _Also with a New Chapter containing_\n  \u2018A COMPLEX CASE,\u2019 BY PROFESSOR RICHET\n  AND AN ACCOUNT OF\n  \u2018SOME RECENTLY OBSERVED PHENOMENA\u2019\n  BY THE TRANSLATOR L.\u00a0I. FINCH\n\n\n  LONDON\n  _DUCKWORTH and CO._\n  3 HENRIETTA STREET, W.C.\n  1905\n\n\n\n\nNOTE BY THE TRANSLATOR\n\n\nThe Translator has to thank sincerely a literary friend, a well-known\nEnglish clergyman, who has been kind enough to revise the translation,\nand suggest many improvements.\n\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\n\nAsked by my friends in France to introduce the author, Dr. Maxwell,\nto English readers, I willingly consented, for I have reason to know\nthat he is an earnest and indefatigable student of the phenomena\nfor the investigation of which the Society for Psychical Research\nwas constituted; and not only an earnest student, but a sane and\ncompetent observer, with rather special qualifications for the\ntask. A gentleman of independent means, trained and practising as a\nlawyer at Bordeaux, Deputy Attorney-General, in fact, at the Court\nof Appeal, he supplemented his legal training by going through a\nfull six years\u2019 medical curriculum, and graduated M.D. in order to\npursue psycho-physiological studies with more freedom, and to be\nable to form a sounder and more instructed judgment on the strange\nphenomena which came under his notice. Moreover, he was fortunate in\nenlisting the services of one who appears to be singularly gifted in\nthe supernormal direction, an educated and interested friend, who is\nanxious to preserve his anonymity, but is otherwise willing to give\nevery assistance in his power towards the production and elucidation of\nthe unusual things which occur in his presence and apparently through\nhis agency.\n\nIn all this they have been powerfully assisted by Professor Charles\nRichet, the distinguished physiologist of Paris, whose name and fame\nare almost as well known in this country as in his own, and who gave\nthe special evening lecture to the British Association on the occasion\nof its semi-international meeting at Dover in 1899.\n\nIn France it so happens that these problems have been attacked chiefly\nby biologists and medical men, whereas in this country they have\nattracted the attention chiefly, though not exclusively, of physicists\nand chemists among men of science. This gives a desirable diversity\nto the point of view, and adds to the value of the work of the French\ninvestigators. Another advantage they possess is that they have no\n_arri\u00e8re-pens\u00e9e_ towards religion or the spiritual world. Frankly, I\nexpect they would confess themselves materialists, and would disclaim\nall sympathy with the view of a number of enthusiasts in this country,\nwho have sought to make these ill-understood facts the basis for a kind\nof religious cult in which faith is regarded as more important than\nknowledge, and who contemn the attitude of scientific men, even of\nthose few who really seek to observe and understand the phenomena.\n\nFrom Dr. Maxwell\u2019s observations, so far, there arises no theory which\nhe feels to be in the least satisfactory: the facts are recorded as\nobserved, and though theoretical comments are sometimes attempted\nin the text, they are admittedly tentative and inadequate: we know\nnothing at present which will suffice to weld the whole together into\na comprehensive and comprehensible scheme. But for the theoretical\ndiscussion of such phenomena the work of Mr. Myers on Human Personality\nis of course far more thorough and ambitious than the semi-popular\ntreatment in the present book. And in the matter of history also, the\nEnglish reader, familiar with the writings of Mr. Andrew Lang and Mr.\nPodmore, will not attribute much importance to the few historical\nremarks of the present writer. He claims consideration as an observer\nof exceptional ability and scrupulous fairness, and his work is\nregarded with the greatest interest by workers in this field throughout\nthe world.\n\nThere is one thing which Dr. Maxwell does not do. He does not record\nhis facts according to the standard set up by the Society for Psychical\nResearch in this country: that is to say, he does not give a minute\naccount of all the details, nor does he relate the precautions taken,\nnor seek to convince hostile critics that he has overlooked no\npossibility, and made no mistakes. Discouraged by previous attempts and\nfailures in this direction, he has regarded the task as impossible, and\nhas not attempted it. He has satisfied himself with three things:\u2014\n\n  1st. To train himself long and carefully as an observer;\n\n  2nd. To learn from, and be guided by, the phenomena as they occur,\n        without seeking unduly to coerce them;\n\n  3rd. To give a general account of the impression made upon him by\n        the facts as they appeared.\n\nFor the rest, he professes himself indifferent whether his assertions\nmeet with credence or not. He has done his best to test the phenomena\nfor himself, regarding them critically, and not at all in a spirit of\ncredulity; and he has endangered his reputation by undertaking what\nhe regards as a plain duty, that of setting down under his own name,\nfor the world to accept or reject as it pleases, a statement of the\nexperiences to which he has devoted so much time and attention, and of\nthe actuality of which, though he in no way professes to understand\nthem, he is profoundly convinced.\n\nEqually convinced of their occurrence is Professor Richet, who has\nhad an opportunity of observing many of them, and he too regards them\nfrom the same untheoretical and empirical point of view; but he has\nexplained his own attitude in a Preface to the French edition, as Dr.\nMaxwell has explained his in \u2018Preliminary Remarks,\u2019\u2014both of which are\nhere translated\u2014so there is no need to say more; beyond this:\u2014\n\nThe particular series of occurrences detailed in these pages I myself\nhave not witnessed. I may take an opportunity of seeing them before\nlong; but though that will increase my experience, it will not increase\nmy conviction that things like some of these can and do occur, and that\nany other patient explorer who had the same advantages and similar\nopportunity for observation, would undergo the same sort of experience,\nthat is to say, would receive the same sensory impressions, however he\nmight choose to interpret them.\n\nThat is what the scientific world has gradually to grow accustomed\nto. These things happen under certain conditions, in the same sense\nthat more familiar things happen under ordinary conditions. What the\nconditions are that determine the happening is for future theory to say.\n\nDr. Maxwell is convinced that such things can happen without anything\nthat can with any propriety whatever be called fraud; sometimes under\nconditions so favourable for observation as to preclude the possibility\nof deception of any kind. Some of them, as we know well, do also\nfrequently happen under fraudulent and semi-fraudulent conditions; but\nthose who take the easy line of assuming that hyper-ingenious fraud\nand extravagant self-deception are sufficient to account for the whole\nof the facts, will ultimately, I think, find themselves to have been\ndeceived by their own _a priori_ convictions. Nevertheless we may agree\nthat at present the Territory under exploration is not yet a scientific\nState. We are in the pre-Newtonian, possibly the pre-Copernican, age\nof this nascent science; and it is our duty to accumulate facts and\ncarefully record them, for a future Kepler to brood over.\n\nWhat may be likened to the \u2018Ptolemaic\u2019 view of the phenomena seems\non the whole to be favoured by the French observers, viz. that they\nall centre round living man, and represent an unexpected extension\nof human faculty, an extension, as it were, of the motor and sensory\npower of the body beyond its apparent boundary. That is undoubtedly the\nfirst adit to be explored, and it may turn out to lead us in the right\ndirection; but it is premature even to guess what will be the ultimate\noutcome of this extra branch of psychological and physiological study.\nThat sensory perception can extend to things out of contact with the\nbody is familiar enough, though it has not been recognised for the\nsenses of touch or taste. That motor activity should also extend into\na region beyond the customary range of muscular action is, as yet,\nunrecognised by science. Nevertheless that is the appearance.\n\nThe phenomena which have most attracted the attention and maintained\nthe interest of the French observers, have been just those which\nconvey the above impression: that is to say, mechanical movements\nwithout contact, production of intelligent noises, and either\nvisible, tangible, or luminous appearances which do not seem to be\nhallucinatory. These constantly-asserted, and in a sense well-known,\nand to some few people almost familiar, experiences, have with us been\nusually spoken of as \u2018physical or psycho-physical phenomena.\u2019 In France\nthey have been called \u2018psychical phenomena,\u2019 but that name is evidently\nnot satisfactory, since that should apply to purely mental experiences.\nTo call them \u2018occult phenomena\u2019 is not distinctive, for everything\nis occult until it is explained; and the business of science is to\ncontemplate the mixed mass of heterogeneous appearances, such as at\none time formed all that was known of Chemistry, for instance, or\nElectricity, and evolve from them an ordered scheme of science.\n\nTo emphasise the fact that these occurrences are at present beyond the\nscheme of orthodox psychology or psycho-physiology, in somewhat the\nsame way as the germ of what we now call Metaphysics was once placed\nafter, or considered as extra to, the course of orthodox Natural\nPhilosophy or Physics, Professor Richet has suggested that they be\nstyled \u2018meta-psychical phenomena,\u2019 and that the nascent branch of\nscience, which he and other pioneers are endeavouring to found, be\ncalled for the present \u2018Metapsychics.\u2019 Dr. Maxwell concurs in this\ncomparatively novel term, and as there seems no serious objection to\nit, the English version of Dr. Maxwell\u2019s record will appear under this\ntitle.\n\nThe book will be found for the most part eminently readable\u2014rather\nan unusual circumstance for a record of this kind\u2014and the scrupulous\nfairness with which the author has related everything he can think of\nwhich tells against the genuineness of the phenomena, is highly to be\ncommended. Whatever may be thought of the evidence it is manifestly his\nearnest wish never to make it appear to others better than it appears\nto himself.\n\nIf critics attack the book, as they undoubtedly will, with the\nobjection that though it may contain a mass of well-attested assertions\nby a competent and careful observer, yet his observations are set\ndown without the necessary details on which an outside critic can\njudge how far the things really happened, and how far the observer was\ndeceived\u2014let it be remembered that this is admitted. Dr. Maxwell\u2019s\ndefence is, that to give such details as will satisfy a hostile critic\nwho was not actually present is impossible\u2014in that I am disposed to\nagree with him\u2014he has therefore not attempted the task; and I admit,\nthough I cannot commend, his discretion.\n\nIt may be said that the attempt to give every detail necessarily\nproduces a dreary and overburdened narrative. So it does. Nevertheless\nI must urge\u2014as both in accordance with my own judgment of what is\nfitting, and in loyalty to the high standard of evidence, and the more\nstringent rules of testimony, inaugurated by the wise founders of the\nSociety for Psychical Research\u2014that observers should always make an\neffort to record precisely every detail of the circumstances of some at\nleast of these elusive and rare phenomena; so as to assist in enabling\na fair judgment to be formed by people who are not too inexperienced\nin the conditions attending this class of observation, and at any rate\nto add to the clearness of their apprehension of the events recorded.\nThe opportunities for research are not yet ended, however, and I may\nbe allowed to express a hope that in the future something of this kind\nwill yet be done, when the occasion is favourable, after a study of\nsuch a record as that of the Sidgwick-Hodgson-Davy experiments in the\n_Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research_, vol. iv. Our\ngratitude to Dr. Maxwell would thus be still further increased.\n\nAnd now, finally, I must not be understood as making myself responsible\nfor the contents of the book, nor for the interjected remarks, nor\nfor the translation. The author and translator must bear their own\nresponsibility. My share in the work is limited to expressing my\nconfidence in the good faith of Dr. Maxwell\u2014in his impartiality\nand competence,\u2014and while congratulating him on the favourable\nopportunities for investigation which have fallen to his lot, to\nthank him, on behalf of English investigators, for the single-minded\npertinacity and strenuous devotion with which he has pursued this\ndifficult and still nebulous quest.\n\n  OLIVER LODGE.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nThere are books in which the author says so clearly and in such precise\nterms what he has to say that any commentary weakens their import; and\na preface becomes superfluous, sometimes even prejudicial.\n\nDr. Maxwell\u2019s work belongs to this category. The author, who has long\ngiven himself up to psychology, has had the opportunity of seeing many\ninteresting things. He has observed everything with minute care; and\nhaving well thought out the method of observation, the consequences,\nand the nature itself of the phenomena, he lays bare his facts and\ndeducts therefrom a few simple ideas, fearlessly, honestly, _sine ira\nnec studio_, before a public which he hopes to find impartial.\n\nTo this same public I address the short introduction, with which my\nfriend Dr. Maxwell kindly asked me to head this excellent work.\n\nMy advice to the reader may be summed up in a few words. He must take\nup this book without prejudice. He must fear neither that which is new,\nnor that which is unexpected. In other words, while preserving the most\nscrupulous respect for the science of to-day, he must be thoroughly\nconvinced that this science, whatever measure of truth it may contain,\nis nevertheless terribly incomplete.\n\nThose imprudent people who busy themselves with \u2018occult\u2019 sciences are\naccused of overthrowing Science, of destroying that bulwark which\nthousands of toilers, at the cost of an immense universal effort, have\nbeen occupied in constructing during the last three or four centuries.\n\nThis reproach seems to me rather unjust. No one is able to destroy a\nscientific _fact_.\n\nAn electric current decomposes water into one volume of oxygen and two\nof hydrogen. This is a fact which will be true in the eternal future,\njust as it has been true in the eternal past. Ideas may perhaps change\non what it is expedient to call electric current, oxygen, hydrogen,\netc. It may be discovered that hydrogen is composed of fifty different\nbodies, that oxygen is transformed into hydrogen, that the electric\ncurrent is a ponderable force or a luminous emission. No matter what\nis going to be discovered, we shall never, in any case, prevent what\nwe call to-day an electric current from transforming, under certain\nconditions of combined pressure and temperature, what we call water\ninto two gases, each having different properties, gases which are\nemitted in volumetrical proportions of 2 to 1.\n\nTherefore, there need be no fear, that the invasion of a new science\ninto the old will upset acquired data, and contradict what has been\nestablished by savants.\n\nConsequently psychical phenomena, however complicated, unforeseen, or\nappalling we may now and then imagine them to be, will not subvert any\nof those facts which form part of to-day\u2019s classical sciences.\n\nAstronomy and physiology, physics and mathematics, chemistry and\nzoology, need not be afraid. They are intangible, and nothing will\ninjure the imposing assemblage of incontestable facts which constitute\nthem.\n\nBut notions, hitherto unknown, may be introduced, which, without\ncasting doubts upon pristine truths, may cause new ones to enter their\ndomain, and change, or even upset, our established notions of things.\n\nThe facts may be unforeseen, but they will never be contradictory.\n\nThe history of sciences teaches us, that their bulwarks have never been\noverthrown by the inroad of a new science.\n\nAt one time no notion of tubercular infection existed. We now know\nthat it is transmitted by microbes. This is a new notion, teeming with\nimportant conclusions, but it does not invalidate the clinical table of\npulmonary phthisis drawn up by physicians of other days. The discovery\nof Hertzian waves has in nowise shaken Amp\u00e8re\u2019s laws. Newton\u2019s and\nFresnel\u2019s optics have not been changed into a tissue of errors because\nR\u0153ntgen rays and luminous vibrations are able to penetrate opaque\nbodies. It appears that radium can throw out unremittingly, without\nany appreciable chemical molecular phenomena, great quantities of\ncalorific energy; nevertheless, we may be quite sure, that the law of\nconservation of energy and thermo-dynamic principles will remain as\ntrue now as ever.\n\nLikewise, if the facts called \u2018occult\u2019 become established, as seems\nmore and more probable, we need not feel anxious as to the fate of\nclassical science. New and unknown facts, however strange they may be,\nwill not do away with old established facts.\n\nTo take an example from Dr. Maxwell\u2019s work, let us admit that the\nphenomenon of _raps_\u2014that is to say, sonorous vibrations in wood or\nother substances\u2014is a real phenomenon, and that, in certain cases,\nthere are sounds which no mechanical force known to us can explain,\nwould the science of physics be overthrown? It would be a new force\nthrown out on to wood, etc., exercising its power on matter, but the\nold forces would none the less preserve their activity, and it is even\nlikely that the transmission of vibrations by means of this new force\nwould be found to be in obedience to the same laws as those governing\nthe transmission of other vibrations;\u2014the temperature, the pressure,\nthe density of air or wood would continue to exercise their usual\ninfluence. There would be nothing new, save the existence of a force\nuntil then unknown.\n\nNow, is there any savant worthy of the name who can affirm, that there\nare no forces, hitherto unknown, at work in the world?\n\nHowever impregnable Science may be when establishing facts, it is\nmiserably subject to error when claiming to establish negations.\n\nHere is a dilemma, which appears to me to be very conclusive in that\nrespect:\u2014Either we know all Nature\u2019s forces, or we do not. Now the\nfirst alternative is so ridiculous, that it is really not worth while\nrefuting it. Our senses are so limited, so imperfect, that the world\nslips away from them almost entirely. We may say it is owing to an\naccident, that the magnet\u2019s colossal force was discovered, and if\nhazard had not placed iron beside the loadstone, we might have always\nremained ignorant of the attraction which loadstone exercises upon\niron. Ten years ago no one suspected the existence of the R\u0153ntgen rays.\nBefore photography, no one knew that light reduces salts of silver.\nIt is not twenty years since the Hertzian waves were discovered. The\nproperty displayed by amber when rubbed was, until two hundred years\nago, all that was known of that immense force called electricity.\n\nQuestion a savage\u2014nay a fellah or a moujik\u2014upon the forces of Nature!\nHe will not know even the tenth part of such forces as elementary\ntreatises on physics in 1905 will enumerate. It appears to me that the\nsavants of to-day, in respect to the savants of the future, stand in\nthe same inferiority as the moujiks to the professors of the college of\nFrance.\n\nWho then dare be so rash as to say that the treatises on physics in\n2005 will but repeat what is to be found in the treatises of 1905? The\nprobability\u2014the certainty, one might say\u2014is that new scientific data\nwill shortly spring up out of the darkness, and that most powerful and\naltogether unknown forces will be revealed. Our great-grandchildren\nwill be amazed at the blindness of our savants, who tacitly profess the\nimmobility of science.\n\nIf science has made such progress of late, it is precisely because\nour predecessors were not afraid to make bold hypotheses, to suppose\nnew forces, demonstrating their reality by dint of patience and\nperseverance. Our strict duty is to do likewise. The savant should be\na revolutionist, and fortunately the time is over when truth had to be\nsought in a master\u2019s book\u2014_magister dixit_\u2014be he Aristotle or Plato.\nIn politics we may be conservative or progressive; it is a question of\ntemperament. But when the research of truth is concerned we must be\nresolutely and unreservedly revolutionary, and must consider classical\ntheories\u2014even those which appear to be the most solid\u2014as temporary\nhypotheses, which we must incessantly check and incessantly strive to\noverthrow. The Chinese believed that science had been fixed by their\nancestors\u2019 sapience; this example contains food for meditation.\n\nMoreover\u2014and why not proclaim it loudly\u2014all that science of which we\nare so proud, is only knowledge of appearances. The real nature of\nthings baffles us. The innermost nature of laws governing matter,\nwhether living or inert, is inaccessible to our intelligence. A stone\ntossed up into the air falls back again to the earth. Why? Newton\nsays through attraction proportional to bulk and distance. But this\nlaw is only the statement of a fact; who understands that attractive\nvibration, which makes the stone fall? The fall of a stone is such a\ncommonplace phenomenon, that it does not astonish us: but in reality\nno human intelligence has ever understood it. It is usual, common,\naccepted; but like all Nature\u2019s phenomena without exception it is _not\nunderstood_. After fecundation an egg becomes an embryon; we describe\nas well as we can the phases of this phenomenon; but, in spite of\nthe most minute descriptions, have we understood the evolution of\nthat cellular protoplasm, which is transformed into a huge, living\nbeing? What prodigy is at work in these segmentations? Why do these\ngranulations crowd together there? Why do they decay here to form again\nelsewhere?\n\nWe live in the midst of phenomena and have no adequate knowledge of any\none of them. Even the simplest phenomenon is most mysterious. What does\nthe combination of hydrogen with oxygen mean? Who has even once been\nthoroughly able to understand that word _combination_, annihilation\nof the properties of two bodies by the creation of a third body\ndiffering from the two first. How are we to understand that an atom is\nindivisible; it is constituted of a particle of matter, yet\u2014even in\nthought\u2014it cannot be divided!\n\nTherefore it behoves the true savant to be very modest, yet very bold\nat the same time: very modest, for our science is a mere trifle\u2014\u1f29\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f04\u03be\u03b9\u03ac \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u03af \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2\u2014very bold, for\nthe vast regions of worlds unknown lie open before him.\n\nAudacity and prudence: such are the two qualities, in no wise\ncontradictory, of Dr. Maxwell\u2019s book.\n\nWhatever be the fate in store for his ideas\u2014ideas based upon facts\u2014we\nmay rest assured that the facts, which he has well observed, will\nremain. I think I see here the lineaments of a new science\u2014though only\na crude sketch so far.\n\nWho knows but that physiology and physics may find herein some precious\nelements of knowledge? Woe to the savants who think that the book of\nNature is closed, and that we puny men have nothing more to learn.\n\n  CHARLES RICHET.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n                                                      PAGE\n  INTRODUCTION BY SIR OLIVER LODGE,                      v\n\n  PREFACE BY PROFESSOR CHARLES RICHET,                  xv\n\n  PRELIMINARY REMARKS,                                   1\n\n  CHAP.\n    I. METHOD:                                          23\n        I. Material Conditions,                         33\n       II. Composition of the Circle,                   42\n      III. Methods of Operation,                        48\n       IV. The Personification,                         64\n\n   II. RAPS,                                            72\n\n  III. PARAKINESIS AND TELEKINESIS:                     93\n        I. Parakinesis,                                 93\n       II. Telekinesis,                                 98\n\n   IV. LUMINOUS PHENOMENA,                             129\n\n    V. PSYCHO-SENSORY AND INTELLECTUAL PHENOMENA:      180\n        I. Sensory Automatism,                         181\n       II. Crystal Gazing,                             184\n      III. Dreams, Telepathy,                          205\n       IV. Tel\u00e6sthesia,                                211\n        V. A Complex Case by Professor Richet,         215\n       VI. Motor Automatism,                           235\n      VII. Automatic Writing,                          238\n     VIII. Phonetic and Mixed Automatisms,             251\n       IX. The Psychology of Automatism,               255\n\n  VI. SOME RECENTLY OBSERVED PSYCHICAL PHENOMENA.\n        By L. I. FINCH,                                268\n\n  VII. FRAUD AND ERROR:                                364\n        I. Fraud,                                      364\n       II. Error,                                      386\n\n  CONCLUSION,                                          392\n\n  APPENDICES,                                          398\n\n\n\n\nPRELIMINARY REMARKS\n\n\nI hesitated for a long time before deciding to publish the impressions\nwhich ten years of psychical research have left me. These impressions\nare so uncertain upon several points, that I wondered if it were worth\nwhile expressing in book form the few and sparse conclusions I am\nable to formulate. If, finally, I decide to publish my opinions, it\nis because it seems incumbent upon me to do so. I am not blind to the\nfact that my testimony is of very little importance; but however modest\nit may be, it seems to me that it is my duty to offer this testimony,\nsuch as it is, to those who have undertaken to submit to scientific\ndiscipline the study of those phenomena which are, in appearance at\nleast, so rebellious to such discipline. It might have been more\nconvenient and advantageous for myself had I continued my researches\nin peace and quiet. I do not try to proselytise, and it is really a\nmatter of indifference to me, whether my contemporaries share or do not\nshare my views. But the sight of a few brave men fighting the battle\nalone is by no means a matter of indifference to me. There is a certain\ncowardliness in believing their teachings, whilst allowing them to bear\nall the brunt of the fray for upholding opinions, which require so much\ncourage to champion. To these brave spirits I dedicate my book.\n\nI care naught for public opinion: not that I disdain it\u2014on the\ncontrary, I have the greatest respect for its judgment\u2014but I am not\naddressing the public. The question I am studying is not ripe for the\npublic; or the case may be the other way about.\n\nI address those brave men of whom I have just spoken, to let them know\nI am of their mind, and that _my_ observations confirm theirs on many\npoints. I also address those who are seeking to establish the reality\nof the curious phenomena, treated of in this book. I have tried to fill\na gap by showing them the best methods to adopt, in order to arrive at\nappreciable results,\u2014such results being far less difficult to obtain\nthan is commonly supposed.\n\nA word about the method I have followed. I have purposely refrained\nfrom giving a purely scientific aspect to my book, though I might have\ndone so had I chosen, for the usual scientific dressing is unsuitable\nto the subject in hand. It seemed preferable to relate what I have\nseen, leaving it to those for whom I write to believe me or not, as\nthey think fit.\n\nI might have accumulated not a little testimony and considerable\nexternal evidence, but to have done so would not have been the\nmeans of convincing a single extra reader. Those, whom my simple\naffirmation leaves sceptical, would not be convinced by reports signed\nby witnesses, whose sincerity and competence are frequently called\ninto question. Neither did I wish to adopt the method followed by the\nAgn\u00e9las, Milan, and Carqueiranne experimenters, in giving a detailed\nreport of all my sittings; this method too has its advantages and\ndisadvantages. However exhaustive a report may be, it is difficult to\nindicate therein all the conditions of the experiment; oversights are\ninevitable. Moreover, it would be useless to say that every precaution\nhad been taken against fraud, for in enumerating such precautions,\nthe omission of a single one would suffice to expose oneself to most\njustifiable criticism. Probably that very precaution was elementary and\nhad been taken, or was considered useless and put aside deliberately;\nnevertheless such circumstances would not escape criticism. We wish to\nconvince by pointing out the exact conditions of the experiment; but\nthose, whom we would most wish to convince, are the very persons least\nprepared to judge of the conditions in which psychical experiences are\nobtained. These are physicists and chemists; but living matter does not\nreact like inorganic matter or chemical substances.\n\nI do not seek to convince these savants; my book is unassuming and\nmakes no pretence of having been written for them. If they in their\nturn should be tempted to try for those effects which I have obtained,\nthe methods indicated will be easily accessible to them. It is in this\nway they can be indirectly convinced, though to convince them is not my\npresent aim. Others are better qualified than I am to try their hand at\nthis most desirable but, for the moment, most difficult task.\n\nDifficult! Ay, and for a thousand reasons. First of all because it is\nthe fashion of to-day to look upon these facts as unworthy of science.\nI acknowledge taking a delicate pleasure in comparing the different\nopinions which many young Savants (I beg the printer not to forget\na very big capital S) bring to bear upon their contemporaries. Here\nis a man surrounded by deferential spectators: solemnly he hands a\npaper-knife to a sleeping hysterical subject, and gravely invites him\nto murder such or such an individual who is supposed to be where there\nis really only an empty chair. When the patient springs forward to\ncarry out the suggestion, and strikes the chair with the paper-knife,\nthe lookers-on behold a scientific fact, according to classical\nscience. On the other hand, here is another man who, not a whit less\nsolemnly, makes longitudinal passes upon his subject, puts him to\nsleep, and then tries to exteriorise the said subject\u2019s sensibility;\nbut the onlookers in this case are not recognised as witnessing a\nscientific fact! I have never been able to see wherein lies the\ndifference between these two experimenters, the one experimenting with\nan hysterical subject more or less untrustworthy, the other examining a\nphenomenon which, if it be true, may be observed without the necessity\nof trusting oneself solely to the honesty of the individual asleep.\n\nIn fact there is a most intolerant clique among savants. Facts it\nseems are of no importance when pointed out by those who stand beyond\nthe pale of official science. Unfortunately, psychical phenomena\ncannot be as easily and readily demonstrated as the X-rays or wireless\ntelegraphy, incontestable facts which any one can prove to his entire\nsatisfaction. Therefore young savants rejoice in making an onslaught on\nthose who apply themselves to the study of these phenomena. It was the\nsame thing in olden times when budding theologians made their _d\u00e9buts_\nin the arena of theology against notorious arch-heretics, Arians,\nManicheans, or gnostics. _Nil novi sub sole._\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nI readily admit that many, who turn their attention to the curious\nphenomena of which I am going to speak, frequently lay themselves\nopen to criticism. Sometimes they are not very strict concerning the\nconditions under which their experiments are conducted: they trust\nna\u00efvely, and their conviction is quickly formed. I cannot too forcibly\nbeg them to be on their guard against premature assertions: may they\navoid justifying Montaigne\u2019s saying, \u2018L\u2019imagination cr\u00e9e le cas.\u2019 My\nremark is more particularly addressed to occult, theosophical, and\nspiritistic groups. The first-named follow an undesirable method.\nTheir manner of reasoning is not likely to bring them many adepts,\nfrom among those who are given to thinking deeply. In ordinary logic,\nanalogy and correspondence have not the same importance as deduction\nand induction. On the other hand it does not seem to me prudent to\nconsider the esoteric interpretation of the Hebrew writings as being\nnecessarily truth\u2019s last word. I do not see why I should transfer a\nbelief in their exoteric assertions to a belief in their talmudistic or\nkabbalistic commentaries. I can hardly believe that the Rabbis of the\nmiddle ages, or their predecessors, Esdras\u2019 contemporaries, had a more\ncorrect notion of human nature than we have. Their errors in physics\nare not valid security for their accuracy in metaphysics. Truth cannot\nbe usefully sought in the analysis of a very fine but very old book:\nall occult speculations upon secret hebraic exegeses seem to me but\nintellectual sport, to the results of which the words of Ecclesiastes\nmight well be applied: _Habel habalim vekol habel_.\n\nI may pass the same criticism upon theosophists. The curious mystical\nmovement to which the teachings of Madame Blavatsky, Colonel Olcott,\nand Mrs. Besant have given birth in Europe and in America has not yet\nbeen arrested. Many cultured minds and refined intelligences have\nallowed themselves to be led away by the neo-buddhistic evangile;\ndoubtless they find what they look for in the \u2018Secret Doctrine\u2019 or\nin \u2018Isis Unveiled.\u2019 _Trahit sua quemque voluptas._ I cannot help\nthinking that the Upanishads have no more a monopoly of truth than\nthe Bible has, and that every philosophy ought to hold fast to the\nstudy of Nature if it wishes to live and progress. This is, moreover,\nthe advice of a man whom theosophists and occultists alike respect\u2014I\nmean Paracelsus\u2014\u2018Man is here below to instruct himself in the light of\nNature.\u2019\n\nThat is what spiritists claim to do. Their philosophy, to use the\nterm which they themselves employ to designate their doctrine, is\nfounded, they say, upon fact and experience. It is not a revelation,\ncontemporary with the splendour of Thebes or the pomp of A\u00e7oka\u2019s\ncourt, which gives the foundation to their dogmas. It is an everyday\nrevelation, a real, continuous, and permanent revelation. Their ideas\nconcerning our origin and destiny, their certitude of immortality\nand the persistence of human individuality, are due to well-informed\nwitnesses. These are no less than the spirits of the dead, who come to\nenlighten them and to tell them what is done in the hereafter.\n\nI envy them their simple faith, but I do not altogether share it. I\nam persuaded that our individuality has an infinitely longer period\ngiven it for its evolution than one human existence. But it is not from\nspiritistic seances that I have derived my belief; no, my belief is of\na philosophical kind, and is the result of pondering over what I know\nof life, of nature, and of the extremely slow development of the human\nspecies. It is true the knowledge I possess is limited, and my belief\nwavers; yet the probabilities seem to me favourable to the persistence\nof that mysterious centre of energy which we call individuality.\n\nThis opinion, however, has not been derived from spiritistic\ncommunications: I think these have an origin other than that given them\nby Allan Kardec\u2019s disciples.\n\nNaturally I am only speaking of my own personal experience; I do\nnot permit myself to pronounce as erroneous those convictions based\nupon facts not seen by myself. Therefore I do not wish to say that\nspiritists are always the victims of delusion; I can only say that the\nmessages, received by me and purporting to come from the other side of\nthe grave, have seemed to me to emanate from a different source.\n\nAt the same time, to be exact and sincere I ought to add that,\nif my conviction has not been won, I have observed in one or two\ncircumstances certain facts which have left me most perplexed.\n\nUnfortunately for spiritism, an objection, which seems to me\nirrefutable, can be made to the spirits\u2019 teaching. In all parts of\nEurope, the \u2018spirits\u2019 vouch for reincarnation. Often they indicate\nthe moment they are going to reappear in a human body; and they\nrelate still more readily the past avatars of their followers.\nOn the contrary, in England the spirits assure us that there is\nno reincarnation. The contradiction is formal, positive, and\nirreconcilable. Those who are inclined to doubt the correctness of\nwhat I affirm have only to glance through and compare the writings of\nEnglish and French spiritists; for example, those of Allan Kardec,\nDenys, Delanne, and those of Stainton-Moses. How are we to form an\nopinion worthy of acceptance? Who speak the truth? European spirits\nor Anglo-Saxon spirits? Probably spiritistic messages do not emanate\nfrom very well-informed witnesses. Such is the conclusion arrived at by\nAksakoff, one of the cleverest and most enlightened of spiritists. He\nhimself acknowledges that one is never certain of the identity of the\ncommunicating intelligence at a spiritistic sitting.\n\nAlthough I do not share the views of occultists, theosophists, and\nspiritists, I can indeed say that their groups\u2014at least those which I\nhave frequented\u2014are composed of people worthy, sincere, and convinced.\nOccultists and theosophists devote themselves perhaps more particularly\nto the development of those mysterious faculties which, according to\nthem, exist in man, while spiritists are more inclined to call forth\ncommunications from their spirit friends, but the anxious care of one\nand all is the moral development of their groups.\n\nSolicitude for the ethical culture of humanity is characteristic of\nthese mystic groups. Occultism and theosophy draw their recruits\nmore especially from intellectual centres; the circle of spiritism\nis much wider. The simplicity of its teachings and methods attracts\nthose who shrink before the personal edification of a creed: for it\nis a painful undertaking and a heavy task for each individual to\nform his own philosophy. It is more convenient to accept indications\nwhich are already made, and to believe affirmations which are\u2014in\nappearance\u2014sincere and well informed. Long centuries of religious\ndiscipline have accustomed the human mind to certain acts of faith, and\nto shun all free discussion, as soon as there is any question of future\ndestinies. It is difficult to shake off this atavism.\n\nThis is what makes the success of spiritism; it comes at its appointed\ntime, and supplies a wide-felt need.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe psychological condition of society to-day is of an extremely\nperturbed nature, as slight reflection will suffice to show. Much has\nbeen said of the conflict between science and religion, but the truth\nhas not yet been sounded. It is no ordinary conflict which is now\ntaking place between science and revelation: it is a life-and-death\nstruggle. And it is easy to foresee which side will succumb.\n\nIt even seems as though the final death-struggles of Christian dogma\nhad already set in. What man, sincere and unbiased in his opinions,\ncould repeat to-day the famous _credo quia absurdum_? Are we not\ninsulting the Divinity\u2014if He exists\u2014when we refuse to make use of His\nmost precious gifts? when we abstain from applying the full force of\nour intelligence and reason to the examination of our destiny and our\nduties to ourselves and to others?\n\nThis abdication is nevertheless demanded of us\u2014by Roman Catholicism\nfor example, which exacts unqualified adhesion to its dogmas, blind\nbelief in its Church\u2019s teachings, blind belief in the affirmations of\nits infallible pope. It seems to me inadmissible that the God of Roman\nCatholics should approve of such indifference.\n\nIt is obvious that I do not wish to write a history of ecclesiastical\ncontroversy. I have too much respect for others to allow myself to\nattack what are still widely accepted creeds. My duty is but to\nstudy the general aspect of revelation, and to draw therefrom such\nconclusions as are necessary to my acquirements.\n\nIt is an easy study. The most enlightened intellects stand aloof from\nrevealed religions. I mean the majority, for there is still a small\nminority which remains faithful to dying creeds.\n\nEven the less cultivated intelligences are beginning to feel the\ninsufficiency of revelation. The Divinity\u2019s incarnation and death,\nin order to redeem a race so unworthy of such a sacrifice, begins to\nastound them; they wonder at such solicitude for the inhabitants of one\nof the least important spheres in the universe. They are also surprised\nat the inexorable severity of a God who, before granting pardon to\nmankind, demands his only son\u2019s death; a God who, for the petty\ntrespasses of beings far removed from himself, demands an eternity of\nsuffering as chastisement for such ephemeral insults. All this fails\nto satisfy those souls who are enamoured of truth and justice. These\ndogmas give man a cosmical importance which he does not possess, and\nimputes to God a susceptibility and cruelty altogether unworthy of the\nSupreme Being.\n\nWe could easily find other examples; but I do not think it necessary to\nbring them to bear upon my conclusion; a conclusion, moreover, which\nis admitted by the clergy themselves, who complain unceasingly of\nsociety\u2019s growing indifference.\n\nBut is society really so indifferent? I do not think so. We find\nindifference among the richer and more cultured classes, where some\ngive themselves up to pleasure, others to science, in reality each\none seeking only that which will amuse or interest him or herself;\nbut those who are without resources, those whom life molests and\nwearies, those who are afraid at the idea of death and annihilation,\nthose who have need of some consolation, of some hope, those people\nare not indifferent. If these forsake the churches and temples, it is\nbecause they do not find therein what they are seeking. The spiritual\nnourishment offered them has lost its savour; they ask for something\nmore substantial and less contestable.\n\nBesides, even in the most highly cultured classes, this need begins to\nmake itself felt. Such men as Myers, Sidgwick, Gurney, to speak only\nof the dead, took up the study of psychical phenomena with the desire\nof finding therein the proof of a future life. Myers died after having\nfound\u2014or thought he had found\u2014the sought-for demonstration.\n\nProfessor Haeckel of J\u00e9na drew up a philosophy for himself! His\nmaterialistic monism is the outward expression of his belief: but this\nis also ill-adapted to satisfy that longing, the extent and force of\nwhich I have just touched upon.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nNow spiritism lays claim to satisfying these longings; and it does\nsatisfy them, when only simple souls are concerned, simple souls who\ndo not dream of life\u2019s complexities. The phenomena of spiritistic\nseances\u2014and these are real phenomena\u2014are the miracles which come to\nconfirm the spirits\u2019 teachings. Why should they doubt?\n\nTherefore the clients of spiritism are increasing in number with\nextraordinary rapidity. The extent to which this doctrine is spreading\nis one of the most curious things of the day. I believe we are\nbeholding the dawn of a veritable religion; a religion without a ritual\nand without an organised clergy, and yet with assemblies and practices\nwhich make it a veritable cult. As for me, I take a great interest in\nthese meetings; they give me the impression that I am assisting at the\nbirth of a religious movement called to a great destiny.\n\nWill my anticipations be realised? The future alone can tell. My\nopinion has been formed on impartial and disinterested observation.\nNotwithstanding the sympathy that I feel for those groups which have\nbeen kind enough to admit me into their midst, notwithstanding the\nfriendship which binds me to many of their members, I have never\nwished to be of their propaganda, nor even to allow them to think that\nI shared their views. I have always plainly told them that I was by\nno means convinced of the constant intervention of spirits; I have\nnot concealed from them that other and, as I thought, more probable\nexplanations could be given to the phenomena they witnessed; perhaps\nthey have appreciated my frankness. In any case, I am very grateful for\nthe courtesy and kindliness with which they allowed me to observe the\nphenomena at their sittings, to listen to their mediums\u2019 teachings, and\nto express my opinions, which are so unlike their own.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nI am neither spiritist, nor theosophist, nor occultist. I do not\nbelieve in occult sciences, nor in the supernatural, nor in miracles.\nI believe we know as yet very little of the world we are living in,\nand that we still have everything to learn. The cleverest men in all\nepochs show an unconscious tendency to suppose that facts, which are\nincompatible with their ideas, are supernatural or false. More modest\nbut also more cruel, our forefathers, the theologians and lawyers,\nburnt sorcerers and magicians without accusing them of fraud: to-day\nmost of our savants, being more affirmative and less rigorous, accuse\nmediums and thaumaturgists of fraud, but without condemning them to\nthe stake. In reality their state of mind is the same as that of the\nancient exorcists; they have the same intolerance, and the different\ntreatment meted out to their subjects is only due to the progressive\nimprovement in manners and customs.\n\nEven those savants who are the most interested in psychical\nresearch are afraid of confessing their curiosity. It requires the\nbroad-mindedness of a Crookes or a Lodge, of a Duclaux or a Richet,\nof a Rochas or a Lombroso to dare to take a stand and openly show an\ninterest in this field of research. Some day, however, these same\nsuspicious researches will be their experimenters\u2019 best claim to fame.\nThe present attitude of official science towards medianic phenomena\nis to be regretted; its scientific \u2018cant\u2019 has grievous results. The\nhistory of the International Psychological Institute is instructive\nin this respect. What a pity that such learned, remarkable, and\ncompetent men, as Janet for example, should have shrunk from the\nepithet \u2018psychic\u2019! The need for a _psychical_ institute existed, not a\npsychological one, of which there are already enough.\n\nIt is precisely the attitude of respectable scientific circles which\nappears to me a mistake, demanding rectification. I understand\nperfectly and excuse this attitude. For so many incorrect things have\nbeen affirmed, so many ridiculous practices have been recommended by\nthe leaders of the occult movement, that official representatives of\nscience must have felt indignant. Unfortunately no one except Richet\nhas ventured to do for the phenomena vouched for by occultists and\nspiritists, what Charcot has done for the magnetisers\u2019 allegations. No\ndoubt, this other Charcot will come when the time is ripe.\n\nThe preparatory work will have been done, and he need only resume the\nexperiments of Richet, Crookes, Lodge, Rochas, Ochorowicz, and many\nothers.\n\nI class myself with these experimenters. Many of them are my friends,\nand, if our manner of thinking be not quite the same, my ideas upon the\nmethod to be used are much the same as theirs. And thus I find myself\nquite naturally led to say what my ideas are.\n\nI believe in the reality of certain phenomena which I have been able to\nverify over and over again. I see no need to attribute these phenomena\nto any supernatural intervention. I am inclined to think that they are\nproduced by some force existing within ourselves.\n\nI believe also that these facts can be subjected to scientific\nobservation. I say observation and not experimentation, because I do\nnot think that it is yet possible to proceed on veritable experimental\nlines. In order to experiment one must understand the conditions\nnecessary to produce a given result; now, in our case, we have a\nmost imperfect knowledge of the required conditions, which are,\nnevertheless, necessary antecedents to the sought-for phenomena. We are\nin the position of the astronomer who can put his eye to the telescope\nand observe the firmament, but who cannot provoke the production of a\nsingle celestial phenomenon.\n\nMy position is therefore very simple. It is that of an impartial\nobserver. The occult sciences and spiritism never aroused my curiosity,\nand I was more than thirty years of age, when my attention was drawn\ntowards psychical phenomena. I did not even try to turn a table before\nI was thirty-five, considering such facts as unworthy of serious\nexamination. It is only since 1892 that I have become interested in\nthese researches.\n\nI cannot remember to-day how I was led to take up the study; it was not\nabruptly. I am certain that no striking incident was ever responsible\nfor a sudden changing of my mind. As far as my recollection goes, I\nthink it was the chance perusal of some theosophical works, which\nmade me curious to know the extent of a mystical movement, whose\nexistence I had not even suspected. My discoveries astonished me, for\nI never thought that mysticism could find adherents at the end of the\nnineteenth century. The opening address pronounced by me at the Court\nof Appeal at Limoges in 1893 was upon this subject.\n\nThis address brought me many correspondents, and I was led to\nexperiment myself. My first results were negative, and except a few\ninteresting experiments made at Limoges with a lady of that town\u2014a\nremarkable medium\u2014and her husband, the phenomena which I observed were\nnot of a nature to convince me. In 1895 I went to l\u2019Agn\u00e9las, and took\npart in the experiments of MM. de Rochas, Dariex, Sabatier, de Gramont\nand de Watteville. The report of these experiments has been published\nin the _Annales des Sciences Psychiques_.\n\nSurprised at these manifestations, I became filled with the desire to\ninvestigate further; and soon afterwards curiosity prompted me to take\nadvantage of a leisure moment to resume the l\u2019Agn\u00e9las experiments. In\n1896 Eusapia Paladino was kind enough to spend a fortnight at my house\nat Choisy, near Bordeaux. MM. de Rochas, Watteville, Gramont, Brincard,\nand General Thomassin were present at all or some of these experiments.\nThe Attorney-General, M. Lefranc, my friend and chief, was also present\nat one of our sittings. M. B\u00e9chade and a Bordeaux medium, Madame\nAgullana, were also my guests. The results of these sittings have\nbeen noted down by M. de Rochas in a small volume which has not been\nmade public. More and more interested, and desirous of investigating\nstill further what I had seen with Eusapia, I begged her to pay me\nanother visit. She consented, and returned in 1897, giving me another\nfortnight, this time in my home at Bordeaux. The phenomena which my\nfriends and I obtained on that occasion were as demonstrative as before.\n\nEusapia is not the only medium with whom I have experimented. Madame\nAgullana of Bordeaux, with her customary disinterestedness, has given\nme many sittings: the results I obtained with her are of a different\norder. I also brought twice to Bordeaux the young mediums of Agen,\nwhere a previous opportunity had been given me of observing them; at\nAgen their phenomena had won for their home the reputation of being\nhaunted. Lastly, I have found some remarkable mediums at Bordeaux,\namong those who did me the honour of admitting me to their sittings.\nI also came across a large number of mediums manifesting automatic\nphenomena only; these, too, were interesting in their way, for they\nenabled me to note and understand the difference between so-called\nsupernatural phenomena and phenomena which are but the expression of an\nactivity, which, in appearance at least, is extraneous to the ordinary\npersonality.\n\nFinally, I have frequently come across fraud. This was instructive, and\nI observed the fraudulent with patience and interest. The tricks of\nvoluntary fraud deserve to be known and studied, as one is then better\nable to frustrate and checkmate them. Involuntary fraud\u2014far more common\nthan voluntary fraud\u2014is no less instructive, for it throws a vivid\nlight upon the curious phenomena of automatic activity.\n\nIt is not always becoming to entertain one\u2019s readers with\npersonalities, but I think I ought to infringe a little upon decorum,\nin order to specify the state of mind in which I have pursued\nmy observations. From the very beginning I was struck by a fact\nwhich seems beyond doubt. I saw that certain manifestations\u2014to all\nappearances supernormal\u2014could only be studied with the assistance of\nnervous and mental pathology. Therefore I went to school again, and for\nsix years I studied assiduously clinical medicine at the University of\nBordeaux. It is not within my present scope to write the panegyric of\nthe masters to whose teachings I listened, their names would seem out\nof place in a book like this. But I may say that the interest which\nI took in my medical studies became more lively, as I understood\ntheir importance better and better. Doubtless the notions which I\nhave acquired are most rudimentary, but however unpretentious they\nmay be, they have enabled me to understand the mechanism of certain\nmanifestations, and to bring a more precise judgment to bear upon their\npsychological value.\n\nI am, therefore, an interested but impartial onlooker. It matters\nlittle to me if a table or a chair moves of its own accord; I have no\nparticular desire to see them accomplish these movements. The only\ninterest, which I find in this fact, is its truth. Its reality alone\nis of value to me, and I have applied myself to establish this without\nany possible error. My unique preoccupation has been to make sure of\nthe reality of the phenomena which I observed. The pursuit of truth has\nbeen my sole concern.\n\nTrue, I sought it in my own way; for I preferred to build my conviction\nupon a basis which would satisfy my intelligence and my reason, rather\nthan impose _a priori_ conditions which the experiment ought to satisfy\nin order to convince me. I am ignorant of most of these conditions,\nand I think that every one else is also. Consequently, I consider\nit imprudent to establish beforehand the conditions under which the\nexperiments are to be made, in order to merit being recorded. It\nmight just happen, that one of the conditions thus laid down rendered\nthe experiment impracticable. Therefore I have observed rather than\nexperimented.\n\nMy manner of proceeding has been productive of many happy results; for\nthe curious phenomena which I have been able to observe are capricious;\nthey shun those who would force them, and offer themselves to those\nwho wait for them patiently. This behaviour, this spontaneity, is not\nthe least astonishing feature in this line of observation.\n\nI have always thought that there was nothing of a supernatural order\nin these phenomena. My conclusions have not changed; but let us\nunderstand the meaning of this expression. I do not mean to say that\nthese phenomena are always in accordance with nature\u2019s laws such as we\nunderstand them to-day. I am certain that we are in the presence of an\nunknown force; its manifestations do not seem to obey the same laws, as\nthose governing other forces more familiar to us; but I have no doubt\nthey obey some law, and perhaps the study of these phenomena will lead\nus to the conception of laws more comprehensive than those already\nknown. Some future Newton will discover a more complete formula than\nours.\n\nMy position, therefore, seems to me to be well defined. I have held\nmyself aloof from those who denied upon bias, and also from those who\nasserted too rashly. I have remained within the margin of science.\nI have endeavoured to bring to bear upon my experiments methods of\nscientific observation. I wish to go in neither for occultism, nor for\nspiritism, nor for anything mysterious or supernatural. Many who know\nme imperfectly may think that I have given reins to my imagination,\nthat I am an adept in theosophy, neo-martinism, or spiritism. Such is\nnot the case. I seek, and I have found-very little; others have been\nmore fortunate than I. Some day perhaps I shall have the same good\nluck. But I shall not touch upon what others have done, save as an\naccessory; I shall only speak of what I myself have seen and what I\nmyself think. My book is the statement of a witness\u2014it has no other\nsignification.\n\nOne word in conclusion. A great number of my experiments have been\nmade with people who wish to preserve their incognito. I have never\nbeen wanting in discretion when this was asked of me, and have never\ndisclosed the names of those who placed their confidence in me,\npermitting me to experiment with them whilst desirous of remaining\nunknown. I have sometimes found very remarkable mediums among these\nanonymous experimenters. Some of my sittings with them have been truly\nadmirable on account of the clear, distinct nature of the phenomena\nobtained. I beg these trusting friends to accept my heartfelt thanks.\n\nMay my book have the good fortune to contribute, however feebly,\ntowards removing the prejudices which keep away so many likely\nexperimenters from these studies and researches. These prejudices are\nmanifold: there is the fear of ridicule, the religious scruple, the\ndelusive dread of nervous or mental disease, the terror of an unknown\nworld peopled with strange, mysterious beings. But time will dispel\nall this, and I believe that a day will come, when these facts\u2014well\nstudied, well observed\u2014will change our conceptions of things in a\nway little dreamt of to-day. The sphere of \u2018Psychical Science\u2019 is\nunmeasurable. A few pioneers only are exploring therein to-day; when\nthe land has been tilled and cultivated it will yield, I am sure, a\nwonderful crop\u2014the harvest will surpass the dreams of imagination.\n\nBut let those who, thanks to a scientific education, are particularly\nwell qualified to undertake these studies, cease to consider them\nunworthy of their attention. In holding themselves aloof they commit\na mistake which they will bitterly regret some day. Allowing even\nthat the first experimenter may be guilty of mistakes, there will\nalways remain something out of the facts which they have observed.\nMistakes are unavoidable in the _d\u00e9but_ of a new science: the methods\nare uncertain, and the novelty of the phenomena makes their analysis\ndifficult; time, labour in common, and experience will remedy these\ninevitable inconveniences.\n\nIt would be very easy to give examples of the delay which scientific\nprejudice has brought to bear upon scientific progress. This criticism\nhas already been very frequently and wittily made. Even those men,\nwhose discoveries have placed them at the head of the intellectual\nmovement of their generation, are not altogether free from blame,\nyielding too often to the deplorable tendency of converting natural\nlaws into dogmas. They commit the same fault they object to in\ntheologians. Man has a wonderful aptitude for laying hold of his\nneighbours\u2019 faults and remaining blind to his own, and probably it will\nbe so for a long time to come. I would like to see science rid itself\nfor good and all of this theological habit of mind.\n\nScience has only to think about facts. There should be no distinction\nmade between the various phenomena observed: it is not beseeming\nto adopt certain facts, and refuse analysis to others, excluding\nthem on the ground, for example, that their examination belongs to\nreligion. Every natural fact ought to be studied, and, if it be real,\nincorporated with the patrimony of knowledge. What matters its apparent\ncontradiction with the laws of nature, such as we understand them\nto-day? These laws are not principles superior to our experience; they\nare but the expression of our experience: our knowledge is very limited\nand our experience is still young\u2014it will grow, and its development\nwill bring the inevitable consequence of a corresponding modification\nin our conception of nature. Therefore, let us not be too positive\nof the accuracy of present ideas, and arbitrarily reject everything\nwhich we think runs counter to them. Do not dogmatise; let our only\ncare be the impartial search for truth. Nothing will better enable us\nto understand the surroundings in the midst of which we are evolving\nthan facts, which are apparently irreconcilable with current ideas:\nthese facts betoken that the ideas are erroneous or incomplete; their\nattentive observation will reveal a more general formula which will\nexplain at one and the same time the new and the old. And thus from\nantithesis to synthesis, more and more universal, our scientific ideas\nwill tend towards absolute truth.\n\nAlas! how far away from this ideal do we seem to be to-day!\n_Laboremus!_\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nMETHOD\n\n\nA French proverb says, \u2018we must have eggs to make an omelette\u2019: in\norder to be able to study psychical phenomena we must have psychical\nphenomena. This seems an elementary proposition, and yet it is the very\none we most readily overlook. I have already said why and wherefore.\n\nTherefore, I deem it necessary to indicate at once the methods which\nhave appeared to me to give the most favourable results. Those of my\nreaders who may wish to verify the accuracy of my conclusions will, I\nam sure, have the opportunity of doing so, if they operate as I have\ndone. First of all, I must warn them against caring for the world\u2019s\nopinion. They must not be afraid of exposing themselves to ridicule. No\ndoubt there is temptation to make a jest of the methods which I advise;\nbut I strongly recommend them to think about the result, and not about\nthe means used to obtain that result.\n\nPsychical phenomena are of two orders: material and intellectual. The\nmethods best suited to the study of the first are not, in my opinion,\nadapted to the study of the second. There is a distinction, therefore,\nto be made in the beginning between these two categories of facts.\n\nPhysical phenomena are the least frequently met with; they include:\u2014\n\n1. Knockings or \u2018raps\u2019 on furniture, walls, floors, or on the\nexperimenters themselves.\n\n2. Sundry noises other than raps.\n\n3. Movements of objects without sufficient contact to explain the\nmovement produced. There is here a distinction to be made between (_a_)\nmovements produced without any contact whatever\u2014_telekinesis_: _e.g._\nthe rising or sliding of a table or chair, the swaying of scales, etc.,\nwithout their being touched; and (_b_) movements with contact, which is\ninsufficient to explain them\u2014_parakinesis_: _e.g._ the levitation of a\ntable on which the experimenters lay their hands.\n\n4. _Apports_: that is to say, the sudden appearance of objects\u2014flowers,\nsweets, stones, etc.\u2014which have not been brought by any of the\nassistants. This phenomenon\u2014if it exists\u2014supposes, in addition, the\nfollowing:\u2014\n\n5. Penetrability, or the passage of matter through matter.\n\n6. Visual phenomena, which are themselves subdivided into:\u2014\n\n  (_a_) Vision of the odic effluvium.\n\n  (_b_) Amorphous lights.\n\n  (_c_) Forms, either luminous or non-luminous.\n\n  (_d_) Lastly, the most complete phenomenon of all\u2014the\n        materialisation of a form, human or otherwise, luminous or\n        not.\n\n7. Phenomena which leave permanent traces, such as imprints.\n\n8. Alteration in the weight of material objects or of certain people:\nlevitation.\n\n9. Perceptible changes in the temperature: sensation of cold or heat;\nspontaneous combustion.\n\n10. Cool breezes.\n\nSuch are the chief psychical phenomena of the material order, which\nhave been pointed out by different experimenters. I have not verified\nall of them: raps, telekinetic, and a few luminous phenomena are all I\nhave obtained in a thoroughly satisfactory manner.\n\nIntellectual phenomena are those which imply the expression of a\nthought. I will class them in the following manner:\u2014\n\n1. Typtology: the table, upon which the experimenters lay their hands,\nleans to one side and recovers equilibrium by striking the ground.\n\n2. Grammatology or spelt-out sentences. Various methods may be used.\nThe principal are:\u2014\n\n  (_a_) Repeating the alphabet until a rap indicates the letter to be\n        retained;\n\n  (_b_) Pointing out the letters of the alphabet by means of a pencil\n        or stiletto, etc., until a rap indicates where to stop;\n\n  (_c_) Finally, the designation of the required letters by an\n        index-hand on a pivot fixed in the middle of a circle\n        composed of the alphabet, the index-hand moving with or\n        without contact.\n\n3. Automatic writing: _immediate_, when the subject writes without the\nintermedium of an instrument; _mediate_, when he uses an instrument,\nsuch as a planchette, a wooden ball with handles fastened to it, a\nbasket, a hat, a stand, etc. In this case, several people can combine\ntheir action by laying their hands all together upon the object to\nwhich the pencil is attached.\n\n4. Direct writing: _i.e._ writing which appears on slates, paper, etc.,\nwhether in or out of sight of the experimenters. If the letters seem to\nbe formed without the aid of a pencil we have _precipitated writing_.\n\n5. Incarnation or \u2018control\u2019: the subject, when asleep, speaks in the\nname of some entity or order, which _possesses_ him.\n\n6. Direct voices: when words are heard, appearing to emanate from vocal\norgans other than those of the persons present; some experimenters are\nsupposed to have conversed in this way with materialised forms.\n\n7. Certain automatisms other than writing are observable: _e.g._\ncrystal- and mirror-gazing; audition in conch-formed shells; sundry\nhallucinations, _telepathy_ and _telesthesia_: \u2018the communication of\nimpressions of any kind from one mind to another, independently of the\nrecognised channels of sense\u2019; perception at a distance of positive\nimpressions. These phenomena bring in their train _clairvoyance_\nor _voyance_, and _lucidity_, expressions which are by no means\nidentical. Lucidity designates more particularly the faculty which\ncertain people have, in magnetic sleep or in somnambulism, of getting\nexact impressions in a supernormal manner; clairvoyants or voyants are\nthose who see forms invisible to other people. _Clairaudience_ denotes\nphenomena of the same kind in the auditory sphere.\n\nI have paid scarcely any attention to these intellectual phenomena,\nwith the exception of automatic writing, crystal-gazing, typtology,\nand \u2018control.\u2019 If I have taken greater interest in material than\nin intellectual phenomena, it is because they struck me as being\nmore simple and easier to observe. This sentiment is not that of all\nexperimenters, and my colleagues of the London Society for Psychical\nResearch appear to be more affirmative in their conclusions, concerning\nsurvival after death and communication with the dead, than in their\nopinions on material phenomena. My personal experience has not led me\nto the same ideas.\n\nUndoubtedly, experiments demonstrating the persistence of human\npersonality after death would have an interest, in comparison with\nwhich all others would be blotted out. But the analysis of phenomena\nof this kind raises difficulties, which are much more complicated than\nis the simple observation of a physical fact. Intellectual phenomena\nalways suppose some kind of motor automatism or other; of course, I\nam not speaking of manifestations where the will of the sensitive\nintervenes: this automatism is manifested by language, writing, or\nthe less elevated motor phenomena, typtology for example; it may also\nbe sensory and manifest itself in hallucinations of various kinds.\nTo understand the infinite complication of intellectual phenomena it\nsuffices to indicate the conditions under which they are observed.\nBefore admitting that the cause of the apparent automatism is foreign\nto the sensitive, we must be able to eliminate with certitude the\naction of his personal or impersonal conscience. To what extent does\nthe subliminal memory intervene?\u2014a first difficulty which is scarcely\nsolvable!\n\nBut supposing it to be solved, the problem still remains almost intact.\nIf the knowledge of a positive fact, certainly unknown to the medium,\nappears in his automatic communications, we must not thereupon conclude\nthat this knowledge is due to the intervention of a disincarnated\nspirit. Telepathy may be able to explain it. Telepathy is, as we know,\nthe transmission of an idea, an impression, a psychical condition\nof some kind or other from one person to another. We are altogether\nignorant of its laws, and nothing warrants the assertion, that if\ntelepathy is a fact\u2014as appears most probable\u2014it is therefore necessary\nthat any particular motive condition should exist in the agent. We may\nsuppose with just as much reason, that the existence of a souvenir in\none mind can be discovered and recognised by another, under conditions\nsolely depending on the mental state of the percipient. This is,\nproperly speaking, telesthesia. Now it is very difficult to prove\nthat the fact, of which automatism marks the knowledge, is unknown to\neverybody. It is even impossible to prove it. But supposing this were\ndone, there would always remain the possibility of attributing the\ncommunication to some being other than human: by admitting even the\nexistence of spiritual or immaterial beings distinct from ourselves,\nnothing warrants us to affirm that such beings are our deceased\nrelatives or friends and not some facetious Kobolds.\n\nPrediction and precognition, of which I have had proof, raise just\nas complicated questions as the preceding ones. I confine myself to\nrecording without trying to explain these facts.\n\nTherefore, I have given my preferences to the study of physical\nphenomena, because in such I have not to consider the mental condition\nof the subject, nor have I any of those delicate analyses to make,\nthe complexity of which I have just mentioned. I have to defend myself\nagainst only two enemies, the fraud of others and my own illusions.\nNow, I feel certain of never having been the victim of either. When,\nfor example, in the refreshment-room of a railway-station, in a\nrestaurant, in a tea-shop, I have observed, in broad daylight, a piece\nof furniture change place of its own accord, I have a right to think\nI am not in the presence of furniture especially arranged to produce\nsuch effects. When the unforeseen nature of the experiment excludes the\nhypothesis of preparation, when, by sight and touch, I make sure of\nthe absence of contact between the experimenters and the article which\nis displaced, I have sufficient reasons for excluding the hypothesis\nof fraud. When I measure the distance between the objects before and\nafter the displacement, I have also sufficient reason for excluding the\nhypothesis of the illusion of my senses. If this right be refused me,\nI should really like to know how any fact whatever can be observed. No\none is more convinced than myself of the frailty of our impressions\nand the relativity of our perceptions; nevertheless, there must be\nsome way of perceiving a phenomenon in order to submit it to impartial\nobservation. Besides, the supposed reproach of illusion cannot be\napplied in a general sense; to admit its justice would be to do away\nwith the very foundations of our sciences. It can only be applied to\nme as an individual, and I willingly admit that it is impossible for\nme to exculpate myself. In vain might I plead that I am persuaded of\nthe regularity of my perceptions, in vain assert that I observe no\ntendency to illusion in myself, my testimony would remain none the less\nsuspected.\n\nConsequently, I have but one reply for those who mistrust my\nqualifications as an observer, and that is to invite them to take\nthe trouble of experimenting on their own account, using the methods\nwhich I have adopted. If, _a priori_, they wish to lay down their own\nconditions, they run the risk of receiving no appreciable results. When\nthey have obtained a few plain facts they will be able to vary the\nconditions of experimentation, and satisfy the legitimate exigencies of\ntheir own reason. That is what I did, and if I cannot solemnly affirm\nthe reality of the phenomena which I have observed, I can at all events\naffirm my personal conviction of their existence. Maybe I am showing\nan exaggerated mistrust of myself by thus only affirming my subjective\nconviction, and in not venturing to affirm with a like energy the\nobjective reality of the things I have seen. Yet I trust no one will\nblame me for my prudent reserve. What man can say he has never made a\nmistake?\n\nOnly those, who put themselves in the same conditions which enabled me\nto make my observations, have a right to criticise those observations.\n\nTo criticise without experience is unreasonable, and I recognise no\ncompetence in those judges whose decisions are made without preliminary\ninformation. For the rest, I have no wish to convert any one to my\nideas, and am indifferent\u2014respectfully indifferent, if you like\u2014to the\njudgment which may be formed about me.\n\nThe methods recommended by diverse occult schools vary a great deal.\nTheosophists do not reveal to the profane the means they use to\nobtain supernormal facts. This discretion astonishes me, for the\ntheosophical society is filled with a lively spirit of propagandism.\nIt has its chief centre at Adyar, and lodges or branches everywhere.\nThe theosophical reviews venture to discuss the most elevated problems\nof philosophy, and are not at all sparing of the most extraordinary\nrevelations of esoteric teaching; but they are remarkably sparing of\npractical indications.\n\nTheosophical phenomenonalism appears to derive inspiration from\nHindu-Yogism. I do not know the rules of training to which Yogis submit\nthemselves. The most severe abstinence seems to be recommended them.\nAdepts are generally initiated by their Gurus or masters, and I have\nnot been fortunate enough to be the chela of an initiated.\n\nThe French occultists who are connected with Eliphas Levy by Papus (Dr.\nEncausse), Guaita, Haven, Barlet, S\u00e9dir, recommend the practice of\nmagic. Descriptions of the necessary magical material will be found in\ntreatises by Papus and Eliphas Levy. The results which the Magi relate\nhaving been obtained are so vague, that I have had no curiosity to put\ninto practice the strange proceedings of magic ceremonial recommended\nby them. These have a serious inconvenience; namely, to strike the\nimagination of credulous folk, and to facilitate auto-suggestion,\nsensorial illusions, and hallucinations. To accomplish the rites,\nmoreover, it is necessary to dispose of rooms arranged in a particular\nway, and to submit oneself to a severe diet for a certain time. This\nmakes it a complicated matter. Well, I must admit I was ashamed to try\nthese methods. I lacked the courage to don the cloak and the linen\nrobe, to trace the circle, and with lighted lamp and sword in hand\nawait visions about to appear in the smoke arising from the burning\nincense. I own I was perhaps wrong not to try what are apparently the\nless rational methods. Only caring for the result obtained, I certainly\nwould not have hesitated to resort to white or even black magic, had\nI had any reason whatsoever to anticipate a positive result. In order\nto obtain an observable fact, I would not have hesitated laying myself\nopen to ridicule. But the statements of experimenters of the occult\nschool seemed to imply a poverty of practical results. If the magi\nof the present day had realised some operation easily accessible to\nobservation, they would not have omitted acquainting us of the fact\nin one or other of their numerous reviews. Their silence struck me as\nsignificant.\n\nMoreover, the very essence even of Hermetic doctrines, openly professed\nby occultists, is opposed to all such divulgence. The ancient doctrine\nexacted initiation. The Rosicrucians, if I am not mistaken, could only\ninitiate an adept. Then again, they were allowed to use this privilege\nonly upon attaining a certain age, and when convinced of having found\na discreet and trustworthy pupil. All that publicity made to-day about\nHermetic sciences is the actual negation of their first precepts. These\nindiscretions bring to my mind the words of one of my predecessors at\nthe Bordeaux Court [successor of the ancient Parliament of Guyenne],\nthe President Jean d\u2019Espagnet, one of the three or four adepts who\npass for having unriddled the great arcanum. \u2018_Facilia intellectu\nsuspecta habeat_,\u2019 he says, speaking to the seeker, \u2018_maxime in\nmysticis nominibus et arcanis operationibus; in obscuris enim veritas\ndelitescit; nec unquam dolosius quam quum aperte, nec verius quam quum\nobscure, scribunt philosophi_.\u2019\n\nThen, again, I had a decisive reason for choosing spiritistic methods:\nthey are not mysterious and they require no special subjective\npreparation. They are simple\u2014in appearance, at least\u2014and can be easily\napplied. Spiritists, and certain experimenters who have adopted\ntheir methods without sharing their theories, affirm having obtained\nsurprising results. Therefore, I had nothing better to do than choose\nthese same methods. Because of their simplicity, and the multiplicity\nof certified results, I considered it preferable to adopt the methods\nof spiritists. I will, therefore, indicate how I experiment when I am\nfree to direct the sittings\u2014which, unfortunately, is not always the\ncase.\n\nI shall divide my indications into three wide categories: 1. Material\nConditions; 2. Composition of the Circle; 3. Methods of Operation.\n\nI will add that these indications are not absolute.\n\n\nI. MATERIAL CONDITIONS\n\nResults are generally better, when operations are carried on in a room\nwhose dimensions do not exceed 15 to 20 square yards in area, and 12\nto 15 feet in height. Smaller rooms may be used, but then the heat is\nsometimes trying.\n\nThe _temperature of the room_ is an important factor. Heat, although it\nmay inconvenience the experimenters and the medium, appears to exercise\na favourable influence on the emission of the force. On the contrary,\ncold is an element of non-success. Of course, I am speaking of the\ntemperature of the room. I would advise operating in a temperature of\nfrom 20 to 25 degrees centigrade. It is decidedly necessary to avoid\nhaving cold hands and feet.\n\nIn winter the seance-room should be thoroughly warmed and the fire\nallowed to go out before the sitting, in case luminous phenomena should\nbe forthcoming.\n\nI fancied I saw an advantage, especially for movements without contact,\nin operating in an uncarpeted room. The carpet not only seems to be a\nbad element generally, it also hinders the gliding movements of the\ntable, which are often only very slight.\n\nAs for exterior meteorological conditions, I have noticed that a dry\ncold favours the production of psychical phenomena: it is, I believe,\nthe temperature _optima_. In any case, the dryness of the air is a very\ngood condition. I have noticed that the phenomena were more easily\nobtained, when outside conditions favoured the production of numerous\nsparks under the wheels of electric trams. I have often noticed this\ncoincidence between good sittings and the abundance of electric\nsparks above-mentioned. I believe that the hygrometrical state of the\natmosphere is an important factor in the production of these sparks.\nRain and wind are, on the contrary, causes of failure.\n\nThe lighting of the seance-room is one of the most important\nconsiderations in experimentation. Lamps and candles have the\ninconvenience of taking some time to light, and they do not allow of\neasy and rapid modification in the illumination of the room. Electric\nlighting is the best system, because, disposing of several lamps,\nit suffices to press a hand-lever in order to vary the quantity and\nquality of the light.\n\nMuch criticism has been passed on the particular kind of experiments\nI have undertaken to relate; one of the most frequently reiterated\ncriticisms is the reproach of always operating in obscurity. Nothing\ncan be more inexact. As far as I am concerned, I have never considered\nas convincing telekinetic and parakinetic experiments made in\nobscurity. Those movements without contact, which have brought about\nmy conviction, were obtained in full light, and more often in broad\ndaylight. Of course, it is evident that darkness is necessary for the\nobservation of luminous phenomena. To insist upon proving, in broad\ndaylight, the reality of the delicate phosphorescences which it has\nbeen given me to observe, is a glaring contradiction.\n\nOn the other hand, there is no doubt that darkness is particularly\nfavourable to phenomena of a physical order. On several occasions I\nhave had the opportunity of recognising this fact under conditions,\nwhich rendered the hypothesis of fraud extremely improbable. For\nexample, I have frequently obtained raps in the light, the number and\nintensity of which increased when the light was extinguished. It is\nthe same with movements of objects without contact; but, I repeat,\nobscurity is not necessary.\n\nIn a popular scientific review I once read a criticism of some\nexperiments in which I took part\u2014a criticism written by a medical man\nat Bruxelles, if my memory be correct. This doctor, a man of talent,\nimagined that our conclusions were founded upon experiments conducted\nsolely in total obscurity. He committed an involuntary mistake.\n\nPsychical phenomena can be obtained in broad daylight, and an\nendeavour should be made to obtain them in this way. There has been\na general tendency to put out all lights in order to procure more\nmarked phenomena. This is a wrong way of proceeding, if one seeks\nphysical phenomena such as raps or movements without contact. We must\navoid working without light, for the habit of only being able to emit\nthe nervous force in obscurity is most easily acquired; and it is by\nno means easy to suppress acquired habits. Eusapia Paladino had the\nhabit of demanding the gradual extinction of the light as her trance\ndeepened. In 1897 I was able to get through her the same phenomena,\nwith a certain amount of light and without the trance condition. I\nstill remember her astonishment at obtaining, in her waking state,\nphenomena which, until then, she had obtained in the second state\nonly. Sleep and darkness were the conditions this remarkable medium\nhad become accustomed to, but they were not necessary. My first\nrecommendation, then, is to operate with light, with as much light as\npossible.\n\nI repeat, however, that sometimes the lessening of light is\ndesirable\u2014often the medium demands it\u2014even its total extinction is\nsometimes necessary, as, for example, when sitting for luminous\nphenomena. It is therefore well to have a series of graduated electric\nlights more or less shaded. The simpler thing is to have a _Pigeon_\nlamp. These petroleum lamps do not give much light, but the graduation\nof the light is easily effected with them. Their great advantage is\nthis, when the electricity is turned off, their feeble light\u2014quite\nsufficient in certain cases\u2014is capable of being gradually reduced until\ntotal obscurity is obtained.\n\nColoured lights are often useful: I have not tried blue; yellow,\nviolet, and green are good; while red fatigues the eyes. For certain\nseries of experiments, I arranged my light so as to obtain white,\nyellow, green, or red, according to wish: the first three give\nsufficient illumination; it is not at all the same with red.\n\nI strongly recommend avoiding the concentration of the luminous source.\nTo avoid that inconvenience, dull glass may be used, or the lamps and\nlantern-sides may be covered with transparent paper\u2014the quantity of\nlight is not sensibly diminished, and the sight is less tried.\n\nThe quality of the light employed did not seem to me to have any very\nnoticeable influence on the phenomena, yet I think my best results have\nbeen obtained in the twilight hours, or in the afternoon between five\nand seven o\u2019clock, when the hard light of day had been tempered by\ndrawing the blinds together.\n\nThe most important question after that of illumination is the choice of\napparatus. I do not hesitate to say that the table is the best thing to\nuse. However, it must not be imagined this article is an indispensable\ntool. Movements without contact can be obtained just as well with\nchairs, baskets, hats, pieces of wood, linen, etc., but a table is more\nconvenient.\n\nI have obtained equally good results with round or rectangular tables;\nthe latter have perhaps given me the finest experiences. Eusapia\ngenerally uses rectangular tables; at l\u2019Agn\u00e9las the table we used\nweighed about 13 kilogrammes, at Choisy 6 or 7, at Bordeaux about 7 kg.\n500 grs. When sitting for raps or movements without contact, I think it\nis better to use lighter tables; for psychical force is mensurable:\nsome mediums incapable of moving a table weighing ten kilogrammes may\nbe able to obtain the levitation of a lighter one.\n\nSome of my recent results lead me to think, there might be an advantage\nin using tables made with a double top, a space of three or four inches\nseparating the two shelves. I have not experimented sufficiently to\nbe able to express an opinion on the advantages which, theoretically,\nthe double top seems to hold out. My impression is that the table acts\nsomething like a condenser, in which case the purpose of a double top\ncan be understood.\n\nThe legs of the table should be separated. One-legged tables should\nbe discarded, and especially tripods, their supervision being so\nvery difficult. When the legs are thin and apart, observation is\nuntrammelled.\n\nThe colour of the table did not seem to me to exercise any influence\nover the phenomena. I have been equally successful with black, white,\nred, and brown tables. They may be polished or unpolished. I do not\nthink it matters what kind of wood they are made of, though I have\nobtained my finest raps with an unpolished mahogany table.\n\nI have noticed there is an advantage in covering the table with some\nwhite material of light texture, which should not fall beyond the\nedges of the table more than one or two inches, as it would otherwise\ninterfere with the experimenters\u2019 reciprocal supervision. I do not know\nwhy the presence of a cloth should be favourable to raps and movements;\nat all events, it makes fraudulent raps and communicated movements much\nmore difficult.\n\nIt is well to curtain off one corner of the room in order to form a\ncabinet. If the room be narrow enough, it is more convenient to stretch\nthe curtains at the end opposite the window\u2014an arrangement I adopted at\nChoisy.\n\nThe dimensions of the cabinet ought not to exceed 3 feet 9 inches to 4\nfeet 6 inches in width, 2 feet in depth, and 6 feet in height. I think\nthere is an advantage in partially closing in the top.\n\nThe curtains should be made of some material of light thin texture. It\nis a mistake to think they should be of a dark colour; I have obtained\njust as good results with plain white sheets as with dark curtains.\n\nWhen studying movement of objects without contact, it is useful to\nplace in the cabinet light articles which produce a noise when shaken.\nThe common tambourine is very appropriate for this purpose, as are also\naccordions, toy-pianos, harmonicas, hand-bells, etc.\n\nThe experimenters ought to sit upon wooden chairs with cane seats.\nUpholstered chairs are not to be recommended.\n\nAn easy-chair should be placed in the cabinet for the medium, in case\nhe should wish to sit there. Mediums often express this wish, when in a\nstate of \u2018trance\u2019 or somnambulism. I give the name of \u2018trance\u2019 to the\nsleep or torpor which is generally noticed in the sensitive, when the\nphenomena attain their maximum intensity. I prefer the word \u2018trance\u2019\nto any other expression, because the condition of the entranced medium\ndoes not seem to me to be identical with that of the somnambulist;\nand for the particular experiments with which I am dealing, it is of\ninterest to use terms which do not lead to confusion.\n\nIt is extremely useful to have a registering apparatus, which will\nallow of making graphical descriptions of certain movements. Sir\nWilliam Crookes used this with success. I have not had the opportunity\nof using any; for I had no such apparatus at hand when I experimented\nwith Eusapia Paladino. Later on, in a series of promising experiments,\nthe health of the medium with whom I was operating obliged me to cease\nwork, before I was able to make use of my registers.\n\nI must, however, warn experimenters against the premature use of\nany kind of apparatus whatever. One of the most curious features of\npsychical phenomena is their apparent independence. The phenomena\ndirect us; they do not allow themselves to be easily led. Often they\nseem to obey some will other than that of the sitters; and it is this\nwhich forms the basis of spiritistic belief; but, though I have not\nbeen able to grasp its laws, my impression is that this spontaneousness\nis only apparent.\n\nSensitives, as a rule, exhibit great repugnance to mechanical\ntests. This repugnance is one of the difficulties which repel the\nbest predisposed minds, and quickly leads them to the conclusion of\ndishonesty, an unwarranted conclusion sometimes. I have come across\nmany mediums, who themselves offered me every help in their power\nwhen devising test conditions. It is true these mediums are private\nindividuals of position and education, and are extremely anxious that\ntheir psychic powers might not be made public in any way; for they do\nnot wish to expose themselves to the criticism and abuse which is so\nlavishly bestowed upon mediums. This is particularly the case with\nladies.\n\nCertainly, the attacks made on Eusapia Paladino by a badly informed\npress and public are not encouraging to the more highly gifted mediums.\nI owe it to Eusapia to say that, in my experiments with her, she has\nalways submitted to the exigencies of the most severe test conditions.\nIf she has sometimes given me suspicious phenomena, she did so only\nunder especial psychological conditions.[1]\n\n      [1] See Appendix B.\n\nThough I have not employed any registering apparatus, I have used\ninstruments of weight and measure\u2014particularly a letter-balance\u2014an\narticle as convenient as it is easily employed. Each experimenter\ncan and ought to vary the conditions of experimentation according to\nhis wishes, within the limits which frequent experimentation will\nvery quickly give him. The results obtained must be definite. To be\nsatisfied with approximate results in such a matter would be absolute\nloss of time.\n\nIn concluding my remarks about the paraphernalia of the seance-room,\nI will give one more recommendation which may seem extraordinary,\nbut which, I have reason to believe, is useful; this is that there\nshould be no metal about the table: it is better to fasten it together\nwith pegs rather than with nails. This is not an absolute condition,\nhowever, for I have obtained good results with nailed tables; yet my\nimpression is that the absence of all metal is an element of success.\nMediums are sometimes extremely sensitive to metals. Certain sensitives\ncomplain of their rings, which seem to make them feel uncomfortable,\ngiving them, at times, a sensation of exaggerated heat. This brings to\nmind certain facts met with from time to time in our neurotic cliniques.\n\n\nII. COMPOSITION OF THE CIRCLE\n\nThe most important thing in the organisation of a series of experiments\nis the choice of persons with whom we intend to operate. First of\nall, it must be remembered that without a _medium_ no phenomena will\nbe forthcoming. The presence of some one, gifted with the power\nof producing psychical phenomena, is perhaps the only necessary\nand indispensable condition of their realisation. Therefore,\nexperimentation ought only to be seriously thought of when in\npossession of that _rara avis_.\n\nWhat, then, is a medium? By what distinguishing features can he be\nrecognised? It is very difficult to answer these questions.\n\nI will give the name of \u2018medium\u2019 to any person capable of producing\nany of the phenomena previously mentioned. I adopt the word \u2018medium,\u2019\nbecause it is consecrated by custom and has received the precise\nsignification I mention. Some philosophers criticise this definition.\nTheir criticisms are, I think, misplaced. In metaphysics it is easy to\ngive definitions which, though elegant, are founded upon nothing. In\nphysics\u2014I use this word in its etymological and primitive sense\u2014a\nbeing can only be defined by its properties. Definitions of this kind\nstate a fact, which is all we can require of them; they serve one\npurpose, which is to avoid a long periphrase. Any other definition\nwould lead to the supposition, that the veritable knowledge of the\ncause of the phenomena observed or of the properties recorded, was\nknown; now, it seems to me impossible to affirm the real cause of the\nfacts I have observed. I confine myself to stating them without forming\nany hypotheses.\n\nA medium is, therefore, a person in presence of whom \u2018psychical\u2019\nphenomena can be observed. I use this word \u2018psychical\u2019 with regret,\nbecause it implies a hypothesis.\n\nAs a rule it is necessary to experiment with mediums in order to\ndiscover them. Their gifts are often latent, and only reveal themselves\nif conditions favourable to their manifestation are supplied. This is\nnot always the case, and there is generally a chance of coming across\na medium when experimenting with persons in whose presence certain\nirregular abnormal noises are heard, certain movements of furniture are\nspontaneously produced. Such things are far from being as uncommon as\none would think. This assertion may seem paradoxical, but such is not\nthe case.\n\nI have met with good mediums who were ignorant of the existence of\ntheir faculties; yet, when I questioned them, I discovered that they\nfrequently heard little \u2018raps\u2019 upon the wood of their bed or upon their\nnight-table, without attaching any importance to it. Others have often\nnoticed the displacement of ordinary articles. Sometimes, but more\nrarely, the facts observed are so intense that the house appears to\nbe haunted. We are often tempted to attribute to fraud the phenomena\nof haunting. I believe accounts of this nature are not all false,\nand I shall perhaps try and show this in a future work. We must not\nreason like one of my friends, a man of vast erudition and superior\nintelligence, who one day said to me: \u2018A little girl from thirteen to\nsixteen years old is always to be found in haunted houses\u2014as soon as\nthe little girl is taken away the phenomena cease!\u2019 Granted! Things\ngenerally happen thus; only the little girl may not be the voluntary\ncause of the phenomena: she may be the involuntary cause of them, a\nmedium in activity, producing supernormal phenomena of the nature of\nthose observed at spiritistic seances.\n\nHowever, it must be admitted that it is very seldom we have the\nopportunity of experimenting with these, so to speak, ready-made\nmediums. As a rule we must try on patiently, until the longed-for\nph\u0153nix has been discovered.\n\nAt the same time, I ought to point out that the chances of encountering\na medium will be greater if we look for him among nervous people. It\nseems to me that a certain impressionability\u2014or nervous instability\u2014is\na favourable condition for the effervescence of medianity. I use the\nterm \u2018nervous instability\u2019 for want of a better, but I do not use it\nin an ill sense. Hysterical people do not always give clear, decided\nphenomena; my best experiments have been made with those who were not\nin any way hysterical.\n\nNeurasthenics generally give no result whatever.\n\nThe nervous instability of which I speak is, therefore, neither\nhysteria, nor neurasthenia, nor any nervous affection whatsoever. It\nis a state of the nervous system such as appears in hypertension.\nA lively impressionability, a delicate susceptibility, a certain\nunequalness of temper, establish analogy between mediums and certain\nneurotic patients; but they are to be distinguished from the latter\nby the integrity of their sensibilities, of their reflex movements,\nand of their visual range. As a rule, they have a lively intelligence,\nare susceptible to attention, and do not lack energy; their artistic\nsentiments are relatively developed; they are confiding and unreserved\nwith those who show them sympathy; are distrustful and irritable if not\ntreated gently. They pass easily from sadness to joy, and experience\nan irresistible need of physical agitation: these two characteristics\nare just the ones which made me choose the expression of nervous\ninstability.\n\nI say instability, I do not say want of equilibrium. Many mediums whom\nI have known have an extremely well-balanced mind, from a mental and\nnervous point of view. My impression is that their nervous system is\neven superior to that of the average.\n\nThis will, no doubt, surprise many well-informed people. Medical men\nand psychologists, ill-disposed, as a rule, to the study of so-called\noccult phenomena, have the habit of looking upon all mediums as\nhysterics. It suffices to read the works of these savants to perceive\nthey have never been in the presence of veritable mediums. M. Paul\nJanet, for example\u2014in _L\u2019Automatisme Psychologique_\u2014propounds general\ntheories which cannot be applied to every case. It is a pity such an\neminent thinker should not have taken the trouble to make himself\nbetter acquainted with the facts. Perhaps he has acted like the\ncelebrated Abbot Vertot.[2] According to M. Janet\u2019s theories, all\nmediums are on the high road to psychological disintegration: the\nconstituent parts of their personality are dissociated under the\ninfluence of the weakening of the normal, personal activity.\n\n      [2] Vertot, an historian of the eighteenth century, failing to\n      receive, when he was ready for them, the documents upon which\n      he counted in order to write his _Siege of Rhodes_, finished\n      his work for all that; and when the documents were handed\n      to him, he contented himself with saying: \u2018I am very sorry,\n      but I have finished my siege.\u2019 He preferred leaving his work\n      imperfect to beginning it over again.\n\nI am sure the individuals observed by M. Janet have been very\ncarefully studied by him; but I regret that my learned colleague has\nnot encountered a genuine medium. I share his opinion concerning most\nspiritistic mediums; I have only found two interesting ones among them;\nthe hundred others which I have observed have only given me automatic\nphenomena, more or less conscious; nearly all were the puppets of their\nimagination. It is outside spiritistic circles that I have discovered\nthe best mediums.\n\nM. Janet\u2019s criticisms are only erroneous because they are too sweeping.\nHis conception of psychological disintegration is applicable to the\ngreater number of cases; but it does not apply to all. It is a very\ndifferent thing to study a crystal-vision, or an automatic writing\nrevealing nothing beyond the tenor of the sensitive\u2019s memory, or\nto observe a premonitory vision such as has been given me to do.\nThe indication of a future event cannot be explained by Janet\u2019s\nhypothesis. It reveals especial faculties that I can scarcely consider\npathological, unless I consider them as such in the same way as one\nconsiders genius to be a sign of degeneration.\n\nIt is more reasonable to think that our nervous sensibility will become\nmore and more refined. It is rash to believe that the present human\ntype is the definite end of evolution. Our species is only one link in\nthe series of beings; the causes, which have led up to the improvement\nof the human race, are still in activity, and it is logical to think\nthere are some natures above as well as below the average. The latter\nrepresent ancestral types\u2014a return to cast-off forms; the former are\nperhaps precursors, possessing faculties which are abnormal to-day, but\nwhich may become normal to-morrow.\n\nI must pause, for I see I am forsaking the domain of facts for that of\nhypotheses; I hasten to return thither. I have pointed out the signs\nwhich permit us to suppose that a certain given person is a medium;\nalthough these signs are not certain, they seem to me probable. In\nreality, there is only one sure way of testing the faculties of a\nmedium: that is to experiment with him.\n\nIt has been observed that certain people do not obtain phenomena\nwhen they operate alone, but obtain them, on the contrary, when with\nanother person. I myself have not had occasion to remark this fact,\nbut I have often noticed that the presence of certain people favoured\nthe attainment of results, while the presence of others troubled or\nstopped it. I have no explanation to offer for this fact. Certainly\ncredulity or incredulity has no influence whatever on the results of an\nexperiment. I have seen people who were very little inclined to allow\nthemselves to be convinced make excellent auxiliaries. At the same\ntime, I have seen convinced spiritists make detestable co-operators.\n\nIt seems as if the faculty of giving forth this unknown force were\nunequally distributed, that it constitutes a physical property of the\norganism; that, in relation to it, some persons will be positive and\nothers negative, some will emit and others absorb it.\n\nHence the importance of the choice of co-operators\u2014_of the composition\nof the circle_. The number of experimenters is comparatively\nunimportant; in principle, the more numerous the circle the greater\nthe force thrown out. But the presence of a large number of sitters is\na bad condition for observation; it also enhances the difficulty of\nthe realisation of, what spiritists call, the harmony of the circle.\nBut I ought to say that the finest luminous phenomena, which I have\nseen, have been obtained when there were from fifteen to twenty people\npresent. On the other hand, I have had the opportunity of experimenting\nseveral times alone with a non-professional medium, when I succeeded in\nseeing faces which I recognised. Unfortunately, this medium\u2014the only\none with whom I have obtained this phenomenon\u2014wishes to retain his\nincognito.\n\nI think the most favourable number is from four to eight. I would urge\nthose who wish to try to experiment to compose their circle, as far as\npossible, of an equal number of each sex; it is preferable to alternate\nthe masculine and feminine elements. These considerations lead us to\nthe examination of methods of operation, properly speaking.\n\n\nIII. METHODS OF OPERATION\n\nBefore discussing in detail those methods which appear to me to be\nthe surest, I think it well to make a few general recommendations.\nThe first relates to the state of mind in which it is necessary to\nexperiment. If interesting results are desired it is not advisable to\nlaugh, joke, or mock at those practices\u2014however ridiculous they may\nseem\u2014with which I advise compliance. Act seriously, do not make light\nof experiments, the exact import of which we are so ignorant of. I\nthink we should also avoid the other extreme, which we find in most\nspiritistic groups, and which impart to these seances all the solemnity\nof a religious service.\n\nThe foregoing might be considered a useless recommendation, which is\nnot the case. Spiritists, whose experience in such matters is not\nto be disdained, insist on the necessity of harmony in the circle,\nwhich is, they say, an essential condition of success. My personal\nexperience confirms their opinion on this point. I have often been\npresent at sittings which promised well in the beginning, and became\nsuddenly barren because of a futile discussion between the sitters.\nThe harmony recommended by spiritists is a kind of equilibrium between\nthe mental and emotional states of the sitters. Each sitter should be\nanimated by the same spirit\u2014I do not use this word in its spiritistic\nacceptation\u2014and seek only the truth; for I take it for granted they\nwill operate as I have done. This unity of views, this uniformity of\ndesires, this harmony between brains and hearts ensures the synergy of\nthe forces which each member of the circle develops.\n\nFor there is no doubt that some kind of force is emitted, and that if\nthe medium throws off more than the other experimenters, an equilibrium\nbetween him and the other sitters is nevertheless fairly quickly\nestablished. The medium takes back from the latter the force he has\nexpended. The result is that after a successful seance, the sitters\nare generally tired. I have noticed that certain persons give out this\nforce more readily than others, and this perhaps explains a medium\u2019s\npreference for certain experimenters as neighbours during the seance.\nWe must not attribute this choice to the greater facility, which\nsome people might offer for the execution of fraudulent phenomena.\nI have frequently been thus chosen, and I beg my readers to believe\nthat I have a horror of fraud and imposture. I am also accustomed to\nexperimenting; I feel no emotion whatever; I keep cool and observe with\ncare. I am well acquainted with fraudulent methods, and I take good\ncare not to be imposed upon.\n\nI repeat, it is a mistake to attribute to fraudulent intentions the\npreference shown by the medium for such or such an experimenter. In\nreality, it seems as though the medium, possessing an organism much\nmore sensitive than that of the majority, quickly recognises those\npersons who the more easily throw off the force which he requires to\nretrieve his losses. This more rapid emission may be the result of\nhabit, or may even depend upon individual constitution. Eusapia quickly\ndiscerns people from whom she can easily draw the force she needs.\nIn the course of my first experiments with this medium, I found out\nthis vampirism to my cost. One evening, at the close of a sitting at\nl\u2019Agn\u00e9las, she was raised from the floor and carried on to the table\nwith her chair. I was not seated beside her, but, without releasing\nher neighbours\u2019 hands, she caught hold of mine while the phenomenon\nwas happening. I had a cramp in the stomach\u2014I cannot better define my\nsensation\u2014and was almost overcome by exhaustion.\n\nThis, for me, extraordinary incident astonished me greatly, and since\nthen I have always carefully examined my sensations. This examination\nhas the fault of being purely subjective, but certain objective\nrealities have confirmed it. A special sensation accompanies the\nemission of this nervous force, and with custom the passage of the\nenergy expended in a seance can be felt, just as the interruption of\nits flow can be discerned. I have questioned several experimenters\nabout this, and their observations have often corroborated mine.\n\nTherefore I think I may say that some kind of force is emitted by the\nsitters, which is elaborated by the medium; that the latter restores\nhis losses at the expense of the experimenters, that certain people\nmore readily than others furnish the medium with the force he requires;\nand that a certain sympathy of ideas, views, and sentiments between the\nexperimenters is favourable to the emission of this force.\n\nI have no decided opinion upon the nature and origin of this force. I\nthink it is kindred to the energy which circulates in our nerves, and\nwhich provokes the contraction of our muscles. Further on I shall give\nthe reasons which lead me to think so.\n\nA second recommendation, no less important than the first, in my\nopinion, is to treat seriously, and note carefully all communications\ngiven through the table, through automatic writing or raps.\n\nI now arrive at the examination of one of the most curious facts which\nso-called \u2018psychical\u2019 experiences reveal. _To a certain extent_ the\nmanifesting force appears to be intelligent. Nothing permits me to\naffirm or even to think, that the manifestations are due to an entity\ndistinct from that of the sitters. It is not my province to discuss\nhypotheses: I confine myself to the relation of facts, and in the\ncourse of my recital, I will point out in detail the circumstances,\nwhich permit me to signalise the apparent individuality of the\nmanifesting force. As in such matters I have always thought it better\nto preserve an expectant attitude, I have always been careful never\nto slight the communications received through the phenomena. I have\nimposed on myself the habit of treating these manifestations in the\nmanner desired by them. Every time I acted otherwise, the results were\nindifferent.\n\nGenerally, the manifestations are attributed to a deceased person,\nknown or unknown to the sitters. This is not absolute, for I have\nwitnessed the table call itself the devil, or even pretend to be a man\nstill alive. Automatic writing has been signed by a Mahatma; but, as a\nrule, it is the soul of a deceased person who claims to be manifesting.\nThis usual attribution explains spiritistic belief. I have good reason\nfor thinking, that the spirits of the dead have had nothing to do\nwith my experiments; but as, in reality, I am ignorant of the cause\nof the phenomena which I have observed, I have politely accepted the\nexplanation these have given of themselves. It is thus we address\nthose whom we meet at table d\u2019h\u00f4te, calling them by the name they give\nthemselves without concerning ourselves as to who they really are.\n\nTherefore, whatever the changeable personification of the phenomena\nmay be, my advice is to accept it and to heed its observations. We must\nnot suppose the ideas expressed are due to the operators\u2019 unconscious\nmovements; that may be true when the communications are obtained\nthrough automatic writing, through a table or articles with which the\nexperimenters are in contact; but it is certainly not so when they are\nobtained by raps given without any contact whatsoever, as I have been\nable to prove many and many a time. As I confine myself to indicating\nthe results of my personal experience, it is perhaps enough to say\nonce more that the methods I recommend seem good to me. I have always\nnoticed the unhappy consequences of my refusal to take into account the\nspontaneous advice of the personification.\n\nThe most frequently given advice concerns the placing of the\nexperimenters.\n\nHowever, at the beginning of the sitting, the experimenters may seat\nthemselves as they please. I have already said it was generally\nnecessary to place the medium\u2019s chair against the curtains of the\ncabinet, and to alternate the sexes. The experimenters seated, the\nexperiment begins. It is a good plan to choose a manager. Nothing is\nworse than the absence of direction. When every one wishes to direct\nthe proceedings, confusion reigns in the circle, and results are bad.\nI have been present at seances where every one spoke at the same time,\neach one demanding a different phenomenon. As a rule, on such occasions\nnothing was received. Some one, therefore, ought to be appointed to\nconduct the experiment, especially to converse with the personification\nif it express a desire for conversation.\n\nWhen the sitters wish to make a report of an experiment, it is\nindispensable to intrust one of the experimenters with the task of\ntaking notes of the incidents as they occur. This experimenter ought to\nform one of the circle.\n\nIt must not be thought that the circle can be modified with impunity.\nMy personal experience has shown me it is bad to frequently introduce\nstrangers into the circle. It should be arranged that a series of at\nleast six sittings will be held without modifying the group: that\nno new experimenter will be admitted: and that none of the original\nexperimenters will miss even one seance. Then if at the end of six\nsittings nothing has been obtained, my advice is to change the\ncircle, to eliminate certain elements, replacing them by others. It\nis preferable to change the sitters one by one, and to make a few\nexperiments with the circle thus modified before making further changes.\n\nIf interesting results be forthcoming, and a desire be felt to show\nthem to other people, the new sitters must be introduced one by one,\nand, I repeat, at intervals of three or four sittings. Otherwise there\nwould be a risk of compromising the success of the experiments.\n\nThe personification sometimes asks for the addition to the circle of\na certain person; it is then well to invite him to the sittings if\ncircumstances allow of it.\n\nI now return to the seance which, I suppose, has begun. The sitters\nput their hands on the table; it is not generally necessary to \u2018form\nthe chain,\u2019 that is to say, to establish contact between the sitters\nby linking the little fingers. The hands in position, and the room\n_well lighted up_, we wait. Talking or singing may be indulged in. The\nemission of the voice, especially rythmical emission, is an excellent\ncondition: it is a good thing to play some music, organ-playing is\nparticularly effective. Why is the production of sonorous rythmical\nwaves favourable to these phenomena? I have no explanation to offer for\nthis fact, which I am not the only one to have observed.\n\nAt the end of a few minutes, the table often seems to be agitated.\nIf we are experimenting with spiritists or with people accustomed to\nspiritistic proceedings, the table, raising itself, will be seen to\nstrike the floor with one of its legs. I advise asking the table if\nit wishes to speak, and to arrange that two raps will mean \u2018no,\u2019 and\nthree raps \u2018yes.\u2019 Of course any other numbers or signs will do equally\nwell. The table, thus consulted, generally replies \u2018yes.\u2019 It can then\nbe asked, if the sitters are well placed: if it indicates any other\narrangement it is well to heed its advice.\n\nWe should then make known to the table what kind of results are\ndesired, and point out, particularly, that movements with contact,\nfailing to carry conviction, are undesirable. I have already said that\nthe personification\u2014it is thus I call the entity, whatever it may be,\nwho claims to be manifesting\u2014is generally very open to suggestion;\nand it suffices to indicate, at the beginning of the experiment,\nthe objection that is made to movements with contact to be almost\ncompletely rid of them.\n\nThere is no need to point out the object of the above suggestion. From\nthe special point of view of the observation of material facts, the\nmovement of a table upon which the hand rests means nothing at all.\nI look upon these movements as loss of time; they are sufficiently\nexplained by our own unconscious and involuntary muscular contractions.\nThe phenomenon is only worthy of a serious man\u2019s attention when it\nis produced without contact, or without sufficient contact; as, for\nexample, when the table is completely raised from the ground, the\nsitters\u2019 hands resting on top of the table all the time. It is better\nnot to experiment than to lose one\u2019s time in observing movements with\ncontact, unless, of course, we are seeking to analyse the tenor of\ntyptological messages.\n\nI strongly recommend most carefully avoiding the production of\nautomatic movements. I have excellent reasons for believing, that the\nagent which produces telekinetic phenomena only realises them, if it\nhas accumulated sufficient force to have acquired a certain given\ntension. I have already pointed out the close connection\u2014identity\nperhaps\u2014between this agent and that which causes our muscles to\ncontract; further on I shall indicate experiences which give weight to\nthis impression; at present it suffices to mention it, to understand\nwhy I so earnestly recommend sitters to avoid yielding to more or less\nsubconscious movements from the very outset. If, as I think, the energy\nwhich our nervous system elaborates is closely connected with that\nenergy, whose effects are seen in telekinetic phenomena, it is probable\nthat it will only produce these curious effects, in proportion as it\nis able to acquire a sufficient tension for its emission. My knowledge\nof physics is too rudimentary to allow me to draw precise comparisons\nbetween this force and electricity. Nevertheless, it has seemed to\nme to present some analogies with electricity, although the two are\ncertainly not identical; but the analogies are, perhaps, sufficient to\nenable me by a comparison to make my meaning clearer.\n\nAn electrical conductor, charged with a given amount of electricity,\nwill have an electrical density of \u03c3; if the amount increases, this\ndensity will be \u03c3\u00b4, and we will have \u03c3\u00b4>\u03c3; the tension in the\nfirst case will be T = 2\u03c0\u03c3\u00b2, in the second T\u00b4 = 2\u03c0\u03c3\u00b4\u00b2; T\u00b4 will be\ngreater than T.\n\nThe conductor will remain charged, as long as the tension does not\nexceed the resistance which the surroundings offer to the emission\nof electricity; as soon as this resistance becomes inferior to the\ntension, there will be emission of electricity.\n\nIn the case of a medium, the charge of energy increases with time and\nrelative immobility. If by making unconscious or voluntary movements,\nexperimenters do not allow this energy to accumulate, it will never\nreach the tension necessary for exteriorisation. There are, however,\nsome reservations to be made; for I have noticed, that when the tension\nis sufficient, simulated or executed movements determine the production\nof the motor phenomenon\u2014just as if the execution of the movement\nappeared to liberate a quantity of energy superior to that which was\nutilised by the working of the muscle; the excess of force was then\napparently employed in the realisation of the telekinetic movement.\n\nI have noticed that, every time we allow voluntary or involuntary\nmovements, telekinetic movements are difficult to obtain. One would\nthink, that the energy which determines them can only accomplish them\nwhen it cannot find a normal outlet; it has a tendency to expend itself\nnormally in ordinary muscular movements: this tendency is one of the\nmost frequent causes of involuntary fraud, and the habitual occasion\nof voluntary fraud. We must see that this tendency be checked: this\nmay call for some effort of attention at the beginning, but \u2018habit is\nsecond nature.\u2019\n\nThings being thus regulated, we wait. A first seance is generally\nwithout apparent result, unless one has the good luck to meet with a\nmedium straight away\u2014which is not always the case. Those who seriously\nwish to understand these facts must have a great fund of indefatigable\npatience. I can guarantee them success sooner or later, but I cannot\ntell how many barren experiments may be made before that success\ncomes. They must not grow weary; let them progressively modify the\ncomposition of the circle until the necessary element be met with.\nThey will then be rewarded for their trouble. I strongly advise them\nto avoid professional mediums. Some of them are sincere, and I think\nthat Eusapia Paladino is of that number. It is true that sometimes\nshe produces suspicious phenomena, but it is puerile to conclude\ntherefrom that she constantly cheats. The suspicious cases I have\nobserved with Eusapia are interesting, if studied impartially. They\nshow the r\u00f4le which the subliminal conscience\u2014impersonal or bound to a\nsecond personality\u2014plays in the phenomena, and give rise to attractive\npsychological problems.\n\nSpiritistic mediums, whose number is legion, form another category\nwith whom we should not experiment, except for purposes of especial\nresearch. Some of these mediums are trustworthy, and one of them,\nMadame Agullana of Bordeaux, has sometimes given me interesting\nsittings. The phenomena I have observed with this medium differ\ngreatly from Eusapia\u2019s; they are of an intellectual order, and raise\na very complicated problem. Madame Agullana\u2019s medianity must not be\njudged from seances with her groups. These seances have the religious\ncharacter of nearly all truly spiritistic meetings. It is difficult\nthere for an experimenter to observe at his ease; the curiosity of\nthose who seek only the objective demonstration of a fact may appear\nimpertinent and out of place at such meetings. The faithful have a\nright to look upon such people as intruders. Convinced of the truth\nof their doctrines, they ill brook the open discussion of them at\nmeetings, where discussion is not wanted. They prefer the discourses of\nan entranced medium to the needless interference of the profane. Their\nmeetings, nearly always consecrated to the acquiring of communications,\nhave the serious defect of developing unconscious automatism in their\nmedium. For me this is a conclusive reason.\n\nMadame Agullana, at some seances where only a few experimentalists took\npart, gave proof of the possession of certain supernormal faculties,\nwhich I have not observed in the same degree of intensity at the usual\nsittings of her group. This medium is also entirely reliable, and of\npraiseworthy disinterestedness. She never receives any remuneration\u2014an\nimportant consideration\u2014for, mediums who take fees are more open to\nsuspicion.\n\nMy most convincing results have been obtained with persons unacquainted\nwith spiritism and ignorant of its practices. Once I discovered a\nmedium most unexpectedly. He sat down with me at a table, invited to\nexperiment for the first time in his life. He had scarcely seated\nhimself when violent knockings resounded on the floor; this person,\nhonourable, well-educated and intelligent, is one of the most\nremarkable sensitives I have met with. But as he fears ridicule, has no\ndesire to be scoffed at in newspapers, and, moreover, dreads publicity\nof any kind, he does not wish his name to be mentioned. These are the\nresults of the malevolent criticisms heaped upon experiments of this\nnature.\n\nI am sure the number of mediums is much more considerable than we\nthink; in a circle of from eight to ten people chosen under the\ncondition I have mentioned, it is seldom we do not find a medium.\n\nOf whatever sex, to whatever social status he may belong, the medium\nis a sensitive. This must never be forgotten; and we must never lose\nsight of the fact, that the phenomena will be clearer and better in\nproportion as the medium\u2019s confidence and sympathy are won.\n\nThis statement will not surprise those who are familiar with hypnotic\nexperimentation, for they know how easy it is to induce sleep in a\nperson who lets himself go, and, on the contrary, how difficult it is\nin one who resists or who mistrusts the operator. I am persuaded that\nthe impersonal strata of the consciousness play a r\u00f4le in psychical\nphenomena similar to what they play in the phenomena of hypnotism.\n\nTherefore, I insist on the necessity for due regard being paid to\nthe medium. I have had much practice, and in all mediums I have\nmet with extreme sensitiveness. Those who have come under the\nrefining influences of education, instruction, or rank, are the most\nsensitive\u2014\u2018touchy\u2019; but this sensitiveness ought not to be interpreted\nas a sign of degeneracy. Certain contemporary savants consider every\ndeviation from the normal state as a blemish! Such a way of thinking\nimplies a veritable _a priori_ judgment, a begging of the question,\nwhich is detrimental to the true development of scientific thought. The\nnormal man is only a mean term; there are individuals who are inferior\nto the mean, there are others who are superior to it. Nature knows\nnot equality. She offers us, everywhere, inequalities, discrepancies,\ndiversities. It is the illusory unity of our own personality, which\nleads us to unify and to codify natural phenomena and even humanity\nitself. It is one of the conditions of the organisation of our\nSciences, that they become intelligible only on condition of adapting\nthemselves to our particular form of understanding. Nothing authorises\nour supposing that this form of understanding has any metaphysical\nreality; it may only be a subjective condition of our perception.\n\nIt is by an analogous mental process, that we give reality to the\nintellectual or physical type of the average man. Degeneracy, which is\noften a sliding backwards, a relapse into inferior types, is a negative\ndeviation from the average man: genius is a positive variation. In\nthe same way, the nervous system of the imaginary average man is but\nan abstraction; in reality, the sensibility of the nervous system\nof the different human individualities varies immensely. A negative\nvariation will give beings who are less sensitive, less delicate\nthan those of the average type; a variation in the positive sense\nwill give individuals of a more sensitive and more delicate type. To\nconsider either as abnormal is only grammatically true: the former\nare _infra_-normal, the latter are _supra_-normal. The first have not\nreached the average level, the second have passed it.\n\nTherefore, it is not astonishing that a more refined sensitivity of\nthe nervous system should have a correspondingly greater emotivity:\n\u2018touchiness\u2019 in itself is a function of emotivity. This seems to me\nto explain a fact which appears certain\u2014that the feelings of mediums\nare very easily hurt. A discontented, irritated medium is a bad\ninstrument\u2014as I have had occasion to prove with Eusapia and many other\nmediums.\n\nI have always noticed that discontent and moral discomfort, as well as\nfatigue and physical discomfort in the medium brought about failure.\n\nThe advice I give is important to follow. Win the confidence and\nsympathy of the medium by your own sympathy, your own deference, your\nown loyalty. If you detect fraud, which seems voluntary to you, do not\nhesitate\u2014after the sitting and at the first favourable opportunity\u2014to\ntell him frankly your doubts and your impression. If you perceive an\ninvoluntary fraud, put the medium on guard against himself, always\nact toward him with sincerity, but at the same time with kindness and\ncourtesy.\n\nAs already pointed out, fatigue and physical discomfort produce the\nsame effects as moral discomfort. It is unwise therefore to experiment\nwith a sick medium. The results would be bad from an experimental\nstandpoint, and the medium\u2019s health would suffer. Carefully avoid\nexperimenting too frequently with the medium. Even three sittings\na week are really more than is desirable. We may experiment three\ntimes a week when operating with a medium in good form, and when the\nexperiments are not likely to last for more than two or three weeks.\nIt would be bad to experiment so often or for a longer period with\na young sensitive. Two sittings a week seem the safest number to\nme; while only one ought to be made if the medium follows a trying\nprofession.\n\nI have seen mediums become ill through experimenting too often. The\nabuse of experimentation rapidly brings on nervous breakdown, and may\ncause serious disorders, of which neurasthenia is the most frequent and\nthe _least serious_. Therefore I have made it an invariable rule to\nexperiment with non-professional mediums, only on condition that they\nbind themselves to experiment with no other than my own circle as long\nas our series of experiments lasts. I am as persuaded of the absolute\ninnocuousness of experiments prudently conducted, as I am positive of\nthe dangers of experimentation when frequent, prolonged, or conducted\nby incompetent persons. I have no fear of assuming the responsibility\nof the first, but for no consideration whatever would I endorse, even\nindirectly, the second, and I cannot too strongly recommend the same\nprudence to other experimenters.\n\nA last recommendation remains to be made; experimentation with persons\nof doubtful morality must be avoided. I have no need to enlarge upon\nthe many inconveniences to which such an imprudent collaboration may\nexpose experimenters.\n\nTo sum up the indications I have just given in perhaps too complete a\nfashion, I will briefly recall to mind the conditions which have seemed\nthe best to me: sufficient light first of all\u2014the personification\nmust not acquire the habit of operating in darkness, for the brighter\nthe light, the more convincing the experiment; a small room; a light\ntable with four legs, put together with wooden pegs rather than with\nnails; a cabinet of soft thin curtains; the experimenters not to exceed\nas a rule eight in number; the experimenters to agree to experiment\nseriously, without turning into ridicule the practices to which they\nsubmit themselves. It is a good plan to allow only one of their\ncircle to direct the seance, to converse with the personification, to\ncontrol the proceedings. They must try and keep up a spirit of good\nunderstanding, and refrain from reciprocally accusing each other of\npushing the table\u2014novices do this regularly. Discussion should be\nrelegated to the end, and should never be provoked during the sitting.\nFinally, they should pay great attention to the susceptibility of the\nmedium\u2014whoever he may be.\n\nThe greatest patience will be required; the circle should be modified\nwith prudence, and only after a certain number of sterile experiments.\n\n\nIV. THE PERSONIFICATION\n\nI think it will be useful to indicate what has seemed to me the best\nway of treating the personification\u2014for this point is important.\n\nI give the name of \u2018personification\u2019 to the manifesting intelligence,\nwhatever this may be. As previously indicated, this intelligence, as a\nrule, claims to be the soul of a deceased person. This is not absolute,\nand the phenomena may personify God, the devil, angels, legendary\npersonages, fairies, etc. I need not say how far I am from believing in\nthe reality of the being thus manifesting, and I have, as I believe,\nexcellent reasons for doubting. I have noticed that the r\u00f4le played by\nthe personification varies with the composition of the circle. It will\nalways be the spirit of a dead or living person with spiritists. But\nthe r\u00f4les are more varied if the circle be composed of people who are\nnot spiritists; it then sometimes happens that the communications claim\nto emanate from the sitters themselves. I am inclined to believe this\nis the real origin of the communications, and that a sort of collective\nconsciousness is formed. I give my impression with the greatest\nreserve, for, I repeat, I have no decided opinion upon the subject; but\nthe experiments I have made leave me that impression, in a general way.\nThis forms part of an\u2014as yet\u2014undeciphered chapter on the psychology of\ncrowds. I confess I have no explanation to give of the action which\nsuch a collective consciousness appears to have upon matter; but this\ndifficulty seems to me less insurmountable than those attending the\nspirit hypothesis. If we attribute the phenomena to a being distinct\nfrom ourselves, having a will-power so much the more marked because\nit emanates from a spiritual being more enlightened than ourselves, I\ncannot understand the suggestibility of such a being. Now, I believe\nthe personification is, as a rule, extremely suggestible. I say \u2018as\na rule,\u2019 for there are occasions when it gives proof of remarkable\nobstinacy: this is the exception, and I ought to say that when the\npersonification shows a decided will of its own, there is no struggling\nagainst it. It is absolutely necessary to follow the directions it\ngives, for, in such cases, there is a very good chance of obtaining\nhappy results, while certainly nothing will be obtained by spurning\nthose directions.\n\nThere are very few people among those unaccustomed to this kind of\nexperimentation, who have the courage to treat the personification as\nit desires to be treated: this is a mistake. We must take a practical\nview of the proceedings; we must lay aside all pride and vanity. I\nam as well aware as any one of the comical aspect of a conversation\nbetween a grave experimenter and a being non-existent, and I had much\ndifficulty in conquering the repugnance with which this manner of\nproceeding inspired me. I saw therein a kind of jugglery unworthy of\na cultured intellect. Experience has clearly shown me I was wrong,\nwithout, however, demonstrating the reality of the being personified.\nEvery time I looked upon the personification as something not to be\nreckoned with, I have had bad or indifferent sittings.\n\nThis does not mean, that the results have always been in proportion\nto the attention I have paid the personification. Far from it! The\npersonification is generally lavish of promises\u2014excellent things in\ntheir way, but it would be extremely na\u00efve to put absolute faith\nin what it says: we must trust only in ourselves. I do not know if\nSocrates\u2019 demon ever played him false: those of his species whom I\nhave interviewed struck me as being of doubtful sincerity. It would be\nimpossible to commit a greater imprudence than to put practical faith\nin the advice of the personification, however good it may seem to have\nalways been.\n\nMy personal observations have generally brought me into connection with\npersonifications possessing more imagination and good-will than respect\nfor the truth. They have promised me marvellous demonstrations, which I\nam still expecting, particularly complete materialisations. Perhaps I\nam too hard to please, and ought to consider myself lucky to have seen\nwhat I have seen. But we are never content with our lot, and Horace\u2019s\ntime-honoured words are as true to-day as ever they were.[3]\n\n      [3] Qui fit, M\u00e6cenas, ut nemo, quam sibi sortem\n          Seu ratio dederit, seu fors objecerit, illa\n          Contentus vivat, laudet diversa sequentes?\n                                 Satyr, I. lib. i. 1.\n\nIf I strongly recommend people not to abandon the conduct of their\nlife or business affairs to the personification, I recommend just as\nstrongly treating the latter with the greatest possible attention. We\ncan only form hypotheses about its essence; and the scepticism which\nmy observations, taken as a whole, have instilled into me, may be\nill-founded; therefore it is better to treat it with the same courtesy\nwe show our fellow-experimenters. This attitude is prudent; it is\nalso the most profitable one. In practice, I have the same regard for\nthe personification as for the medium. I do not call it \u2018dear spirit\u2019\nas spiritists do, but I find I do well to make it clearly understand\nwhat I am seeking; whatever in reality the personification may be,\nits co-operation seems to me to be indispensable. The resemblance\nbetween the reaction of the personification and that of the subliminal\nconsciousness is so obvious, that I have no need to enlarge upon it.\n\nIn practice, the first manifestation of this\u2014probably fictitious\u2014being\nwill consist in a knocking on the floor with the leg of the table. It\nis well to agree upon a code of signals. The simplest is two raps for\n\u2018no,\u2019 three for \u2018yes,\u2019 five for the alphabet.\n\nAt the beginning, it will be difficult to avoid these knockings. I\nhave already said it is desirable to discourage them and to induce\nthe personification to manifest itself otherwise. It would be well\nto accept the typtological code of signals above mentioned for\nthe first conversations, but to abandon it as soon as it has been\nclearly explained to the personification, that movements with contact\nare unacceptable. I am, of course, speaking under the supposition\nthat telekinetic or parakinetic movements are desired. If the\npersonification, at the end of five or six seances of an hour each,\ndoes not begin to produce the desired phenomena, the circle must\nbe modified in the manner already pointed out. These modifications\nought to be patiently continued, until a medium has been met with.\nThe personification might be asked to name the sitter who is to be\nreplaced, and, if possible, to designate his substitute. Such a\ndesignation is often very useful. Once or twice I have seen the table\nname persons whom, at the moment of the experiment, no one in our\nmidst had thought of\u2014at least consciously. Various reasons prevented\nthe given indications from being followed, and the experiments were\ndiscontinued.\n\nMovements with contact can be eliminated by the process I have\nmentioned; their elimination, made with the consent of the\npersonification, presents no inconvenience, unless it be done too\nabruptly.\n\nI have already said that the personification is generally very open\nto suggestion. We must remember that this is a special kind of\nsuggestibility. In hypnotism a commanding tone of voice gives greater\nforce to the suggestion; it is not the same with the personification\nin question, which shows itself rebellious to all imperative orders.\nOn the contrary, it readily yields to suggestions made with gentleness\nand persistence. As a rule, I give the object I have in view, and my\nreasons for setting aside all phenomena which can be explained by\nunconscious muscular action. I repeat, I treat the personification\nas a co-experimenter. It is seldom that, thus exhorted, it does not\nwillingly consent to abstain from phenomena devoid of interest, and\npromise more demonstrative ones. I have already said too much faith\nmust not be put in such promises; at least nine out of ten experiments\nwill come to nothing, and will have to be worked out again on fresh\nlines.\n\nBut the experimenter\u2019s patience will not always be tried in vain.\nSooner or later he will meet with the indispensable medium; and his\nobservations will then be similar to mine.\n\nThe first supernormal phenomena are raps and oscillations without\ncontact. Sometimes the phenomenon, from the very outset, will manifest\nitself with intensity; this is the exception; generally the noises\nand movements, feeble in the beginning, will grow in intensity. As\nsoon as raps without contact have been obtained, certain signals must\nbe agreed upon. The simplest way, then, is to adopt the typtological\ncode of signals, _i.e._ two raps for \u2018no,\u2019 three for \u2018yes,\u2019 five for\nthe alphabet. The phenomena then become very interesting, for when the\nraps are given without contact, the hypothesis of involuntary movements\nbecomes insufficient to explain them.\n\nI have recently received very intelligent communications in this way.\nWe must not grow tired of having the words repeated. It often happens\nthat letters are left out, or that one letter is given instead of\nanother. This happens particularly with neighbouring letters. In\ncarefully noting down the letters a very clear sense will often be\nfound. For example, the raps will give MARTJN for Martin, HEORIETTE for\nHenriette, etc. We must not give up as soon as the word seems to become\nunintelligible. Wait until the sentence is finished, when it will\nsometimes suddenly clear itself. It sometimes happens that the letters\nare dictated backwards. When the sentence is incomprehensible, we\nmust begin all over again. Even in experiments whose aim is to obtain\nmaterial phenomena, we must not refuse to listen to demands for the\nalphabet, for the personification will then often advise on the manner\nof operating.\n\nVery often the personification complains of too much light, and during\nseveral sittings insists upon darkness. We must politely resist it, and\nmake it understand that psychical phenomena lose much of their value,\nas soon as they cease to be visible. I never hesitate telling the\npersonification, that experiments of this kind are not convincing when\nconducted in obscurity, since the good faith of the operators is then\nopen to suspicion, and, moreover, that phenomena can be obtained in\nfull light. These reasons often prevail on the personification not to\npersist in asking for darkness.\n\nIn some cases, it is the personification itself who refuses to operate\nin darkness. It is with personifications of this class that I have\nobtained the finest results.\n\nWhen the pseudo-entity asks one or other of the experimenters to leave\nthe circle, it is prudent to yield obedience to its behest, unless, for\nvarious reasons, the required elimination be unacceptable. In that\ncase, it is as well to explain these reasons to the personification,\nand then it rarely happens they are not accepted.\n\nSuch are the general rules which a fairly long experience has caused\nme to adopt, and I have always had reason to be glad of having\nfollowed them. In experiments conducted by me, I have never received\nobscene or absurd communications of which certain people complain.\nReflecting, perhaps, my own state of mind, I have generally encountered\npersonifications with scientific and serious tendencies.\n\nI have just exposed in detail, and perhaps too minutely, the\nconclusions arrived at concerning the method of operation. I now\ncome to the indication of the results which I have obtained, and the\nascertainments I have been able to make.\n\nI will examine in succession raps, movements without contact, luminous\nphenomena, and finally, intellectual phenomena.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nRAPS\n\n\nI will not stop to consider movements with contact. From a physical\npoint of view they have no serious signification whatever. They are\nso easily explained by the combined, unconscious, muscular movements\nof the experimenters, that it is really not worth while stopping to\nexamine them. The messages obtained by their intermedium may present\nan internal or clinical interest, but in that case they belong to the\ncategory of intellectual phenomena, properly so-called.\n\nThe first physical phenomena, which deserves attention, is that of\n\u2018raps.\u2019 It is generally the one most frequently obtained. We must,\nhowever, point out that the faculties of mediums are not identical:\nsome produce chiefly physical, others chiefly intellectual phenomena.\nThe former also manifest diverse qualities: some of them obtain raps,\nothers movements, others luminous phenomena. Still in a general way\n\u2018raps\u2019 have seemed to me to be one of the simplest phenomena of a\nmaterial order.\n\nIf we work with a physical medium of even only average force, raps will\nbe heard after the third or fourth seance. They will be heard much\nsooner if we have a powerful medium.\n\nAs a rule, raps seem to resound on the top of the table; but it is not\nalways so. They are frequently heard on the ground, on the sitters, or\non the furniture, walls, or ceiling. The raps I have heard\u2014of course\nI am speaking only of genuine raps\u2014have resounded near the medium,\nas a rule, either on the table, floor, walls, or furniture in close\nproximity to him.\n\nThe simplest way to obtain raps is to proceed as I have directed in\nsection ii. chapter 1. The experimenters, seated around a table, lay\ntheir hands upon it palm downwards, with outstretched fingers. This\nmethod is not, however, to be strongly recommended, for raps are easily\nimitated: and we must never lose sight of that fact when appreciating\nan experiment; further on, I will enumerate the usual fraudulent\nprocesses. Still, even when the hands are resting upon the table, raps\ncan be obtained of sufficient sonority to exclude the hypothesis of\nfraud, if not absolutely, at least with much probability.\n\nI have received raps in full light. I have received them so frequently\nin vivid light, that sometimes I cannot help wondering, whether\ndarkness facilitates their production to the same extent as it may\nother phenomena. It is, however, allowable to suppose, that the\nenergy which produces them prefers accumulating force in spots that\nare sheltered from strong light, _e.g._ under the table, or under the\nfloor, or in shaded corners of the room. What makes me suppose so is\nthis, I have frequently noticed that the raps burst forth under the\nmedium\u2019s hand, when they appeared to be produced on the top of the\ntable.\n\nContact of the hands is unnecessary when sitting for raps. I have\nprocured them quite easily, with several mediums, without such contact.\n\nWhen we have succeeded in obtaining raps with contact, one of the best\nways of obtaining them without contact is to let the hands rest for\na certain time on the table, then to raise them _very slowly_, palms\ndownwards, and the fingers loosely extended. Under such conditions,\nit seldom happens that raps do not continue to be heard for at least\na short time. I need not say that experimenters should not only avoid\ncontact of their hands with the table, but even of any part of their\nbody or clothing. The contact of clothing with the table is sufficient\nto produce raps, which have nothing of a supernormal nature. We must be\ncareful, therefore, that ladies\u2019 dresses especially do not come into\ncontact with the table; in taking these necessary precautions, raps can\nbe obtained under most satisfactory and convincing conditions.\n\nWith certain mediums the energy liberated is great enough to act at\na distance. I once heard raps upon a table which was nearly six feet\naway from the medium. On that occasion we had had a very short seance,\nand had left the table. I was seated in an armchair, the medium was\nstanding by, talking to me, when a shower of raps suddenly resounded\nupon the table we had just left. The experimenters are all personally\nknown to me, and I am persuaded that they are above suspicion;\nbut this circumstance is quite insufficient in itself to entail a\nfavourable conclusion of the phenomenon, for I cannot too strongly\nput experimenters on their guard against blindly confiding in their\nneighbours. Serious experimenters should exclude all susceptibility\namongst themselves, and agree beforehand that reciprocal verification\nand control will be freely exercised without any one taking offence.\nIn the case I am speaking of, the table on which the raps were heard\nwas about six feet away from the medium and myself; it was daylight,\ntowards five o\u2019clock on a summer\u2019s afternoon; the table had never been\ntouched by the medium or the experimenters before the seance; the raps\nwere loud, and were heard for several minutes.\n\nI have had several opportunities of observing facts of this kind. Once,\nwhen travelling, I came across a medium among my fellow-travellers.\nHe has not given me permission to name him, but I may say he is an\nhonourable, highly-educated gentleman, occupying an official position.\nHe had no suspicion of his latent faculties before experimenting with\nme. I obtained with him loud raps in buffets and restaurants. It would\nsuffice to observe these raps produced under the conditions this medium\noffered me, to be convinced of their genuineness. The unusual noise\nattracted the attention of persons present and greatly embarrassed us:\nthe result surpassed our expectations, for the more we were confused by\nthe noise of our raps, the louder they became; it was as though some\none of a teasing turn of mind was amusing himself at our expense.\n\nI have also heard, when in company with a medium, some very fine raps\ngiven on the floor in museums before the works of old masters, and\nespecially before religious pictures. I particularly remember the\nintensity of certain raps I once heard when standing before a painting\nrepresenting the burial of Christ,\u2014the work of a celebrated artist.\nI also heard some fine raps in a house which is celebrated as having\nbeen the last home of a famous writer; in the room in which he died,\nthe raps were so loud as to attract the suspicious attention of the\nguardian.\n\nI have also heard formidable raps with the two young girls, fourteen\nand fifteen years of age, who were called the Agen mediums. I observed\nthese mediums at their own home, and I also had them twice at Bordeaux,\nwhen on each occasion they remained for nearly a month. The raps\nproduced by them are interesting, but they do not seem to me to be\ndemonstrative. One of these girls obtained raps on the floor under her\nfeet; I verified the apparent immobility of the foot while the raps\nwere being produced. When the two girls were in bed, loud raps were\nheard near their feet, seemingly given on the wood of their bed. We\nwere able to observe the apparent immobility of the children. Raps\nwere also given on the blankets; we could feel the vibrations when\nlaying our hands on the blankets; the raps appeared to be produced\nunder our hands. I have heard diverse noises with these children in\nobscurity, but I draw no conclusion therefrom. I found out that they\nwere not always sincere, and that they had a tendency to take advantage\nof the confidence and friendliness of the people, with whom they were\nstaying. They have simulated some of their phenomena, especially raps\nin the ceiling. I have never been able to persuade these young girls to\nexperiment at a table with sufficient conditions of light. They were\naccustomed to go to bed in order to procure their raps. It is true I\nhave heard these raps in daylight, but I consider other conditions\nwere unsatisfactory on these occasions. I regretted exceedingly that\nthese mediums showed so little good-will, for even putting aside the\ngreater part of the suspicious phenomena they produced, there were\nstill some which seemed to be worthy of further examination.\n\nI have touched upon my observation of these children because it is\ninstructive, although it may be negative from my point of view. It\nshows the inconveniences of a bad method of development. I have noticed\nthat psychical phenomena has a great tendency to repeat itself, to\nfollow a certain routine: they tend to turn round the same axis. The\nchildren of whom I have just spoken had been allowed to acquire the\nhabit of going to bed, in order to obtain the sonorous phenomena they\nappeared to produce. Therefore they were able to obtain them only under\nthose conditions. They have never given me a \u2018rap\u2019 by means of a table,\nand yet, I am inclined to think that they, or at least that one of\nthem, had the constitution necessary for the emission of psychic force.\n\nMy failure with the Agen mediums was not altogether devoid of interest,\nfor I gained experience, and experience is only acquired with time,\npatience, and multiplicity of observations. It is useful to be able to\ncompare good, doubtful, and bad seances.\n\nAmong my most doubtful experiences, whose recital may be as instructive\nas the foregoing, I will choose, for brief discussion, a recent series\nof seances which I held at Bordeaux. Some of the phenomena I observed\nseem to me difficult to explain by fraud, especially lights which\nfloated about the seance-room; but the greater part of the motor\nphenomena was simulated. The personification had the habit of demanding\ntotal darkness, and as I was chiefly interested in luminous phenomena,\nI saw no inconvenience in putting out the lights. The personification,\nwhich made this request, was probably the personal consciousness of\none of the sitters. As soon as the lights were extinguished, the raps\nbecame noticeably louder. Many of them were certainly the work of two\nof our number\u2014I have not been able to analyse the mental state of\nthese two young men: one of them, who is neurasthenic, acted perhaps\nunconsciously. Nevertheless, though I observed the whims of these two\nmen with interest and attention, I noticed, at the same time, that\nraps were forthcoming in _total obscurity_ when I made imperceptible\nmovements, _e.g._ when I gently blew on the table, or when I pressed\nthe hand of one of my neighbours whose sincerity I could vouch for.\nThere was always this synchronism, which I have already pointed out,\nbetween the muscular movement and the rap. Without being able to\naffirm it absolutely, I think I may say that my co-experimenters were\nnot aware of the slight movements I made with my feet, hand, finger,\nor breath. In these sittings, otherwise bearing a most suspicious\ncharacter, there was, therefore, a residue of facts worthy of attentive\nanalysis. I was unable to make this analysis, having shortly afterwards\nceased to experiment with the group, which these young men frequented.\nIn some respects I am sorry for it, as the observation of this parcel\nof truth, and even of the two fraudulent experimenters themselves, was\ninteresting from various points of view.\n\nI will now reconsider the experiments I first touched upon\u2014viz.\nthose conducted in full light\u2014the only ones upon which I establish my\nopinion. I have indicated as fully as possible the conditions under\nwhich I have been able to observe raps. The raps most commonly heard\nare those given with contact on the table or floor, and then those\nwhich are given at some distance from the experimenters.\n\nSometimes, but more rarely, I have heard them on cloth, on the medium\u2019s\nor sitters\u2019 garments, etc. I have heard them on pieces of paper placed\non the seance table, on books, on the walls, on tambourines, on small\nwooden articles, and particularly on a planchette which was used\nfor automatic writing. I have also observed very curious raps with\na writing-medium:\u2014when he wrote automatically, raps resounded with\nextreme rapidity at the end of his pencil. I can affirm that the pencil\ndid not strike the table, for several times I very carefully put my\nhand on the opposite end of the pencil, and I was then able to verify\nthat the sound was produced at the point of the pencil, the pencil\nremaining all the time, steadily and firmly, on the paper\u2014the raps\nresounded on the wood of the table, and not on the paper. In this case,\nof course, the medium held the pencil in his hand.\n\nConsequently, raps may be given upon various articles, with or without\ncontact, and even at a certain distance from the medium. I have\nobserved some which burst forth as far as nine feet away from the\nmedium. I have not obtained any at a greater distance than nine feet,\nand it is not often I have been able to observe them at that distance.\nOne of the most curious cases I have observed is the following:\u2014I was\nexperimenting in a room where there was a screen. The table was about\nnine feet away from this article. Very clear, distinct raps resounded\non the floor behind the screen. It was broad daylight, but the raps\nwere given on the shaded side of the screen.\n\nI have frequently heard raps in the seance-cabinet, the medium seated\nin front of the curtains as indicated in section ii. chapter 1. Thus\nplaced, raps are easily obtained behind the medium: they may be given\non the floor, the wall, or on the articles placed in the cabinet. They\nare also frequently given outside the curtains, on the medium\u2019s chair,\nor on the floor under him. When raps are obtained, it is very easy to\nstudy them by varying, in many satisfactory ways, the conditions of the\nexperiment. This is one of the phenomena whose reality has been the\nmost clearly demonstrated to me.\n\nThe variety of form the raps may take is not less than the diversity\nof objects upon which they may be given, or the places in which they\nmay be heard. The sound of the usual rap, on a table, reminds you of\nthe tonality of an electric spark, while of course there are many\nvariations.\n\nIn the first place, we must note that the tonality of raps differs\naccording to the object upon which they resound. It is easy to\nrecognise by the sound if the raps are given on wood, paper, or cloth.\nThis is an interesting demonstration, because it indicates that\nthe sound is produced by the vibrations of the material substance.\nThe material molecules of the object struck are therefore put into\nmovement; they are not, however, always disturbed in the same way,\nfor the tonality of the raps given on the same object is susceptible\nof great variety. The raps, instead of being sharp and short, may be\ndull and resemble the muffled sound of impact with some soft body: they\nmay resemble the slight noises made by a mouse, a fret-saw, or the\nscratching of a finger-nail on wood or cloth: they may affect the most\ndiverse modalities. Their rhythm is as varied as their tonality.\n\nOne of the most curious facts revealed by the observation of raps, is\ntheir relation with what I call the personification. Each personified\nindividuality manifests its presence by special raps. In a series of\nexperiments which have now lasted for more than two years, I have had\nfrequent opportunity of studying raps personifying diverse entities.\nOne of these entities called itself \u2018John,\u2019 Eusapia\u2019s control, who has\nretained a friendly feeling for me, it appears, ever since my first\nexperiments with the Neapolitan medium. \u2018John\u2019 manifests by short,\nsharp raps, so very like the manipulation of the Morse telegraph,\nthat my co-experimenters and I wondered whether we were not actually\nlistening to the usual Morse signals. Unfortunately none of us knew\nhow to recognise letters by rhythm as exercised telegraphists can. A\ngroup, of four individualities, who call themselves the \u2018Fairies,\u2019\nmanifest their presence by raps resembling high, clear notes. These\npersonifications are particularly interesting, and, further on, I will\nhave occasion of relating how one of them showed herself to me. The\nfour fairies are fond of mingling in the conversation, approving or\ndisapproving of the ideas expressed by the experimenters. They appear\nto take considerable interest in the experiments, and I have often\nnoticed that it sufficed\u2014when the raps delayed in making themselves\nheard\u2014to turn the conversation upon psychical phenomena, their\nprobable explanation, their conditions of realisation, etc., in order\nto receive approving or disapproving raps at once. Sometimes the raps\nimitate a burst of laughter\u2014this coincides either with an amusing story\nrelated by one of the sitters, or with some mild teasing. Another\nentity personifies a man for whom I had the deepest affection: these\nraps are graver in character. This personality seems to have the\nclairvoyant perspicacity and the kindheartedness of the man I knew.\nHis intervention manifested itself under very curious circumstances,\nbut of too private a nature to be made public. I will cite another\npersonification of more recent appearance. It gives itself out to be\nthe astronomer, Chappe d\u2019Auteroche, and has related most accurately the\ndetails of his life and death in California. As a biographical notice\nconcerning this learned man appears in several dictionaries, notably\nin Larousse, it is impossible to affirm that the irruption of this\npersonification is supernormal. The raps which announce his presence\nare dull-sounding, and are given with a certain amount of force. In\nconclusion, light precipitated raps, weak but abundant, are the signals\nof certain personifications which we might call mar-joys\u2014troublesome\nguests, whose unwelcome intervention spoils the experience.\n\nLet it not be forgotten, that if I point out the connection existing\nbetween the personifications and the raps, it does not follow that I\naccept the reality of those personifications. I am making a statement,\nand I fill in all the details, so that experimenters, tempted to resume\nmy observations, may know exactly what I have observed. So far, the\npersonifications have not convinced me of their identity. It is true I\nact somewhat indifferently the r\u00f4le of listener to their fatiguing and\nrambling conversations, and that I do all I can to bring them back to\nmaterial phenomena, so much more important to me in that they are so\nmuch easier to verify. Were I, however, not to point out the r\u00f4le which\nthe raps play in relation to the personification, I would be omitting\none of their most significant features, and would not be giving their\nexact physiognomy.\n\nThey manifest themselves, then, as the expression of a will and\nactivity distinct from those of the observers. Such is the _appearance_\nof the phenomenon. A curious fact is the result\u2014not only do the raps\nreveal themselves as the productions of intelligent action, they also\nmanifest intelligence in response to any particular rhythm or code\nwhich might be demanded.\n\nOften the different raps reply to one another; and one of the most\ninteresting experiences one can have is to hear these raps clear and\nresonant, or soft and muffled, sounding simultaneously on the floor,\ntable, furniture, etc.\n\nI have had exceptionally good opportunities of studying very closely\nthis curious phenomenon of raps, and I think I have arrived at some\nconclusions. The first and most certain is their undoubtedly close\nconnection with the muscular movements of the sitters. I may sum up my\nobservations on this point in the three following propositions:\u2014\n\n  1. All muscular movements, however slight, are generally\n        followed by a rap.\n\n  2. The intensity of the raps does not strike me as being in\n        proportion with the movement made.\n\n  3. The intensity of the raps does not seem to me to vary\n        proportionately according to their distance from the medium.\n\nThe following are the facts upon which I build my conclusions:\u2014\n\nI. I have frequently found that when the raps were feeble or\ninterspersed, an excellent way of producing them was to form a chain\nof the sitters\u2019 hands round the table. One of the sitters, without\nbreaking the chain\u2014which he avoids doing by taking in the same hand\nhis neighbours\u2019 right and left hands\u2014makes, with his freed hand,\ncircular sweeps or passes a little distance above the circle formed by\nthe sitters\u2019 outstretched hands. Having done this, the experimenter\ndraws his hand towards the centre of the circle to a variable height,\nand makes a slight, downward movement with his hand; then he abruptly\narrests the movement at about five or six inches away from the table,\nwhen a rap invariably follows, corresponding with the sudden cessation\nof the movement. It is exceptional when this process does not give\na rap as soon as there is a medium in the circle who is capable, in\nhowever feeble a degree, of producing raps.\n\nThe same experiment can be made without touching the table, _i.e._ by\nforming the chain above the table. One of the sitters then experiments\nas in the preceding case.\n\nThis is not the only observation I have made. I have noticed that with\nmediums of decided power, it was unnecessary to adopt any special\nmethod for the production of raps, as they were forthcoming as soon\nas any sort of movement with hands or feet was executed. With strong\nmediums, it often suffices to move the hand above the table, to shake\nthe fingers, to gently press the foot upon the ground, in order to\ndetermine the production of a rap.\n\nNeedless to say with some mediums raps are forthcoming without the\nexecution of any movement whatsoever: with patience nearly all physical\nmediums can obtain raps without movement. But it seems as though the\nexecution of a movement acted in the nature of a determining cause: the\naccumulated energy then receives a sort of stimulus, the equilibrium\nis disturbed by the addition of the excess energy unemployed in the\nmovement, and a kind of explosive discharge of neuric force occurs,\ncausing the phenomenon of raps. This is, however, only a working\nhypothesis.\n\nThe synchronism between the raps and the movements made by the sitters\nis very interesting, as it reveals the connection which exists between\nthe organism of the experimenters and the phenomena observed. Richet\nhas already pointed this out. Eusapia Paladino, unconsciously perhaps,\nemploys a process analogous to that which I described a little further\nback. This synchronism may give, as it has given, equivocal phenomena,\nand may also give rise to many false accusations of fraud. This is\nperhaps how Dr. Hodgson comes to attribute certain raps produced by\nEusapia Paladino at Cambridge, to the latter striking the table with\nher head. Of course, I am unable to affirm the reality of the raps\nheard at Cambridge, seeing I was not present at the sitting of the\nSidgwick group. I can but say, that the reading of the few extracts of\nthe _proc\u00e8s verbaux_ of these seances\u2014most incomplete extracts\u2014does\nnot by any means indicate, whether the movement of the Italian medium\u2019s\nhead was the fraudulent physical cause of the rap, or whether this\nmovement was but a synchronous phenomenon.\n\nI cannot help thinking that the Cambridge experimenters were either\nill-guided, or ill-favoured, for I have obtained raps with Eusapia\nPaladino in full light, I have obtained them with many other mediums,\nand it is a minimum phenomenon which they _could_ have, and _ought_ to\nhave obtained, had they experimented in a proper manner.\n\nI will discuss these seances more fully further on.[4] Therefore,\neven in the appreciation of fraud, we must not forget to take into\nconsideration the curious synchronism I am pointing out.\n\n      [4] See Appendix B.\n\nThere is another useful observation to make known: namely that raps\nproduced by synchronous movements can be produced by the sitters\nthemselves. In many cases, I have seen experimenters, non-mediums,\nobtain louder raps than the medium; the presence of a medium, however,\nis necessary, for, the persons of whom I speak obtain no raps whatever\nwhen alone. Here is a subject for study which has not yet been touched\nupon.\n\nSometimes, in order to obtain raps, it suffices to touch the medium, or\nto make a slight movement with the hand above the table, or simply to\nplace the palm of the hand gently on the table; this is an excellent\nway to obtain clear, decided phenomena. The table must be moved away\nfrom the medium in such a way that contact is impossible. The observer\nputs himself beside the medium, takes both his hands in one of his own,\nand moves the other slowly over the table, or even keeps it quite still\nabove the table. Nothing is more demonstrative than this experiment.\nLet us remember I am speaking of experiments made in broad daylight.\n\nII. Secondly, I have verified that the intensity of the raps is\nnot in proportion with the synchronous movement. I am unable to\naffirm the accuracy of this statement with the same confidence as\nwith the preceding one; but I have observed the fact in a great many\ncircumstances. Thus, _e.g._ a very slight movement of the finger will\nsometimes determine a rap, quite as loud as the rap determined by the\nabrupt lowering of the whole arm.\n\nAgain, a simple muscular contraction also will bring about the\nrealisation of the phenomenon, without the execution of any apparent\nmovement.\n\nThis observation is of special interest, if I am not mistaken, for it\ntends to make one suppose that the energy which serves to produce the\nraps is independent of the movement executed in space, but is connected\nwith the cause of that movement, _i.e._ with the nervous influx. It\nwould be well if experimenters, more competent than I am in physiology,\nwere to study these observations carefully; I sincerely hope this will\nbe done some day. Richet might well undertake these researches, for no\none is more competent than he is to analyse the facts I am pointing out.\n\nI think there is a close connection between psychical phenomena and the\nnervous system. What I have just said about the production of raps by\nthe simple contraction of a muscle under a voluntary nervous influx is\none of the reasons upon which I base my hypothesis.\n\nThere are others. I have often questioned mediums about their\nsensations when the raps were being produced. They all acknowledged to\na feeling of fatigue\u2014of depletion\u2014after a good seance. This feeling\nis perceptible even to observers themselves. I have tried to analyse\nmy own sensations when the raps are heard; I have not arrived at any\npositive result. I cannot say I have any decided physical sensation;\nbut my negative observation is only of interest, if compared with the\ndifferent observations I made, in connection with the production of\nmovements without contact.\n\nOne of the mediums, with whom some of my best and clearest raps were\nobtained, tells me he experiences a feeling akin to cramp in the\nepigastric region when the raps are particularly loud. This medium is\na clever and highly-educated man, one quite capable of analysing his\nown symptoms. It seems to him as though something emanated from his\nepigastrum.\n\nIII. Regarding my third proposition\u2014the intensity of the raps is not\nappreciably affected by distance\u2014I have found that raps could occur\nas far as three yards away from the medium. The raps given at this\ndistance were as loud and clear as those given close to the medium.\nThis fact would at first seem to imply a difference between the action\nof psychic force and that of gravitation, light, heat or electricity,\nall of which act with an energy in inverse proportion to the square of\ndistances. However, such a conclusion would be premature, for secondary\ncentres of accumulation of energy may be formed at a distance from the\nmedium. The term \u2018accumulation of energy\u2019 is very vague and may be\nincorrect, but I dare not give a more precise one, and confine myself\nto simply stating, that the existence of such centres of accumulation\nand emission seems indicated, by the manner in which the phenomena are\nobtained.\n\nI have never verified any serious physical effects at a greater\ndistance than that of ten feet. I will add that if the phenomena are\nnot more intense, they are at least more frequent in the immediate\nneighbourhood of the medium.\n\nSuch are the observations I have been able to make. It may quite\nnaturally occur to my readers to think I have been the victim of\nillusion or fraud. This is not the case, however.\n\nThere is no illusion, simply because nothing permits me to suppose I\nam the victim of illusion. This assertion is insufficient, I admit:\nwe are bad judges of ourselves. And now I ought to say, that if up to\nthe present I have always clearly distinguished between real facts and\nsubjective impressions, I present, nevertheless, two phenomena which\nmay render my testimony suspect. The first is hypnagogic hallucination,\nthe second coloured audition. The latter is not very decided; sound\nsimply awakens in me the idea of colour, not the visual sensation\nof colour. My chromo-phonetic scale is _A_, white; _I_, black; _\u00c9_,\ngrey; _E_, blue; _on_, green; _er_, _air_, _\u0153il_, orange, etc.[5] This\nphenomenon was rather marked when I was a child; but, I repeat, the\nreading of vowels or diphthongs, or the audition of sounds has never\nawakened a complete sensation of colour; the idea only was evoked.\n\n      [5] This scale is applicable to the French pronunciation of the\n      vowels in question.\n\nOn the contrary, hypnagogic illusion is, with me, a decided phenomenon.\nThe illusion is exclusively visual. I have carefully observed this\ninteresting faculty on myself; it appears to me to have its origin in\ndream. It is a dream begun before sleep has taken complete possession\nof one. The hallucination disappears as soon as somnolence ceases.\nIt is with extreme difficulty that I am able to retain\u2014even for a\nsecond\u2014a hypnagogic picture, when I regain complete consciousness; in\nspite of all my efforts, the picture fades away or changes form as\nsoon as I fix my attention upon it. I have seldom been able to maintain\nthe illusory impression.\n\nWe must not conclude, that I am incompetent to distinguish a real\nphenomenon from a false one, because of the existence in myself of\nthese two subjective phenomena. I have indicated the results of my\nself-observation in order to be thoroughly sincere and complete, for\nI have the keenest desire to be an accurate witness. I do not think,\nhowever, that the observations I have been able to make upon myself are\nreally of a nature to cast suspicion upon my faculties of observation.\nQuite the contrary, I should say; because my personal experience\nenables me to recognise hypnagogic hallucinations, and, further on, I\nwill point out some phenomena which seem to me to be closely connected\nwith these hallucinations; but as for raps, they have quite a different\ncharacter, and their objectivity appears quite certain to me.\n\nI will add that every one present can and does hear them. Let me recall\nto mind what I said about the raps I heard in railway refreshment\nrooms, restaurants, and other public places. All who were in the same\nroom showed, by their demeanour, that they too heard the raps. This\ncircumstance suffices to exclude the hypothesis of hallucination.\nI propose registering these raps in a phonograph; this will be the\n_experimentum crucis_ as far as their objectivity is concerned.\n\nI have no manner of doubt whatsoever upon the authenticity of raps,\na phenomenon I have heard so frequently, and under such diverse and\nexcellent conditions. I have also taken care to study the different\nways of simulating raps,\u2014and these are indeed manifold.\n\nThe simplest and most perfect method is to gently glide\u2014an\nimperceptible movement\u2014the finger-tips along the table. The results\nare better when the finger is dry, when the natural grease has been\npreviously removed by turpentine or benzine: resin is good, but leaves\ntraces. Under these conditions, slight but clear raps may be obtained.\nThe movement of the finger is so slow, that, unless forewarned, no one\ncan discover it; but, with attentive observation, a slight vibration of\nthe finger may be perceived when the raps burst forth. They can also be\nsimulated with the finger-nails, but this process is easy to unmask.\n\nThe trickster finds greater security in darkness, where he has\nresources other than those just mentioned. In obscurity he can easily\nimitate the raps which resound on the floor; _e.g._ he can produce dull\nraps by skilfully striking his foot against the legs of the table or on\nthe floor; he can simulate the sharp, quick raps by allowing his boot\nto glide slowly along the feet of the table or chair.\n\nRaps are also very easily simulated by a gentle rubbing of clothing or\nlinen, especially shirt-cuffs. We should beware of this, for raps can\nthus be produced by slow unconscious movements, and the good faith of\nthe experimenters may be involuntarily taken by surprise.\n\nThere is yet another way of obtaining fraudulent raps; this is by\nleaning more or less heavily on the table. When the top of the table is\nthin, or when the table is badly put together, or the parts have too\nmuch play, the variations of the pressure of the hand determine noises\nwhich greatly resemble raps.\n\nLastly, I have sometimes observed raps produced in a way which should\nbe made known. Some people, by leaning the foot in a certain way, and\nby contracting the muscles of the leg, can imitate raps on the ground.\nThis fact has been indicated especially in connection with the sinews\nof the musculus peronaeus longus. I observed a medical student, an\nincorrigible cheat and neurotic, who obtained sounds very similar to\nauthentic raps by leaning his elbow on the table, and making certain\nmovements with his shoulder. There are also some people who can make\ntheir joints crack at will.\n\nBut force of habit soon teaches how to ferret out fraud, when working\nin daylight or with good artificial light. Besides, the tonality\nof authentic raps is characteristic, and the method of simulation\nindicated at the beginning of these remarks, _i.e._ finger-gliding, is\nthe only one able to reproduce some of the raps with even a fair amount\nof exactness.\n\nIt does not seem to me to be possible to simulate raps on the table,\nwhen they are produced without contact. It is easy to localise\nthem, and auscultation of the table enables us even to perceive the\nvibrations of the wood. Precautions, easily taken, enable us to\nmake sure of the absence of contact and communication between the\nexperimenters and the table.\n\nTo sum up, I am certain\u2014as far as it is reasonably possible to be\ncertain of anything in such a matter\u2014that knockings of variable rhythm\nand tonality are heard in the presence of certain persons\u2014knockings or\n\u2018raps\u2019 which cannot be explained by any known process. They are heard\nat diverse distances; they often seem to obey the expressed wishes of\nthe sitters, and to manifest a certain independent intelligence. On the\nother hand, their production appears to be intimately connected with\nthe nerve-energy of the medium and the sitters.\n\nI think I am able to express the foregoing conclusions with certainty\nand confidence.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nPARAKINESIS AND TELEKINESIS\n\n\nI. PARAKINESIS\n\nI apply the term parakinesis to the production of those movements where\nthe contact observed is insufficient to account for them. I thus more\nespecially designate the complete levitation of a table upon which the\nsitters are leaning their hands; also the displacement of heavy pieces\nof furniture which are but lightly touched by the medium alone, or\nwith other experimenters. Levitation is the raising of an object from\nthe ground without that object resting on, or being in any contact\nwhatsoever with, any normal support.\n\nI have frequently observed this phenomenon with Eusapia Paladino\nunder satisfactory conditions of light and other tests. She has given\nme several unimpeachable examples of parakinetic levitation, and, I\nrepeat, in full light. A detailed report will be found in the accounts\nof seances at l\u2019Agn\u00e9las, published in 1896 in the _Annales des Sciences\nPsychiques_.\n\nThese accounts, however, give only the physiognomy of the regular\nseances. We sometimes improvised experiments in the afternoon\nwith striking results; and I remember having observed under these\nconditions a very interesting levitation. It was, I think, at about\nfive o\u2019clock in the afternoon; at all events it was broad daylight\nin the drawing-room at l\u2019Agn\u00e9las. We were standing around the table;\nEusapia took my hand and held it in her left, resting her hand on the\nright-hand corner of the table. The table was raised to the level of\nour foreheads; that is to say, the top of the table was raised to a\nheight of about five feet from the floor.\n\nExperiences like this are very convincing. It was utterly impossible\nfor Eusapia, given the conditions of the experiment, to have lifted the\ntable by normal means. One has but to consider, that she touched only\nthe corner of the table to realise what a heavy weight she would have\nhad to raise had she done so by muscular effort. Moreover, she had no\nhold whatsoever of the table. And, given the conditions under which\nthe phenomenon occurred, she could not have had recourse to any of the\nmeans suggested by her critics, such as straps or hooks of some kind.\n\nIn ordinary seances, the table used to be raised to a lesser height;\nperhaps because we were seated, and could not therefore accompany it\nvery far. As a rule, the levitation was preceded by oscillations; the\ntable raised itself first on one side, then on the other, and finally\nleft the ground. Very often Eusapia, holding her neighbours\u2019 hands,\nwould abandon all contact with the table, and make several passes above\nit, when the table would rise, apparently of its own accord.\n\nI have only obtained parakinetic levitation under really good\nconditions with Eusapia. I have observed more decided movements without\ncontact with other mediums, but they have not given me levitations\nproperly so-called. I have once or twice obtained defective levitations\nwith a non-professional medium. The table drew near to her of its\nown accord, and raised itself while touching her dress. This fact\noccurred in the light, but the conditions under which I observed\nit were imperfect. I may say the same thing of some levitations I\nobtained at Bordeaux with rather an interesting professional medium;\nthese levitations took place in total obscurity, which rendered good\nconditions of control impossible; besides no one held the medium\u2019s\nhands and feet, as had been done with Eusapia.\n\nIn a series of experiments which gave me some results worthy of careful\nexamination, I obtained the levitation of the table under slightly\nbetter conditions. But some of the sitters cheated so barefacedly,\nthat I do not consider I ought to take any serious notice of the\nparakinetic movements I witnessed there; although I have the impression\nthat everything was not simulated which happened in this group. The\nunsatisfactory conditions under which I made this series of experiments\nled me to discontinue them.\n\nI consider that the levitation of the table, even with the contact of\nthe hands, is a difficult phenomenon to obtain under good conditions\nof observation. Up to the present, Eusapia Paladino is, I repeat, the\nonly medium with whom I have been able to verify the phenomenon in a\nsatisfactory manner.\n\nHer method is similar to the one I indicated and recommended to my\nreaders. Phenomena are often forthcoming when she raises her hand above\nthe table. Although I do not consider myself authorised to affirm\nthe reality of the effect this method appears to exercise upon the\nphenomenon of levitation, I indicate it because the positive results,\nwhich similar practices have given me in telekinetic experiments, lead\nme to think it may also answer for parakinetic experiments. Let me\nbriefly explain this method. When the experimenters have their hands on\nthe table, and the latter begins to sway about from side to side as if\nit were trying to raise itself, one of the sitters puts his hand above\nthe table, palm downwards, and approaches it to within two or three\ncentimetres of the top. Then he raises it very gently; while doing\nthis, the levitation sometimes takes place as though the hand drew the\ntable after it.\n\nI recommend experimenting with as much light as possible. We must\nnot forget that nothing is easier to simulate than a parakinetic\nlevitation. Force of habit will soon teach us how to recognise\nfraudulent phenomena of this kind, but it is nevertheless important to\nknow beforehand the principal systems of cheating. With the reader\u2019s\npermission I will indicate them.\n\nThe position, which the experimenters are obliged to assume around the\ntable when they are seated, has the consequence of almost completely\nhiding their feet. As soon as the lights are lowered, it is nearly\nimpossible to exercise that mutual control which it is indispensable\nshould be exercised. Now, when the hands rest a little forcibly on\nthe table, it is very easy, especially with a light table, to glide\nthe point of a shoe under one of the legs of the table and to raise\nit above the ground. This man\u0153uvre is all the easier, as the swaying\nof the table from side to side permits one to effect the movement,\nwithout much fear of detection. Needless to say that hooks attached to\nthe wrist, or specially contrived bracelets, also permit of raising\nand holding the table in the air. But it is easy to protect oneself\nagainst fraud of this nature. Let every one stand up and join hands\nin the centre of the table; the kind of fraud I indicate will then be\nimpossible. I myself have often obtained fine levitations in this way,\nbut unfortunately in obscurity.\n\nI will point out still another fraudulent process practised at times\nby professional mediums. It consists in the following man\u0153uvre. The\nmedium places himself at the narrow end of a table,\u2014in preference a\nrectangular one\u2014he promotes various oscillations, and when he has\nsucceeded in raising the end opposite to him, he spreads out his legs\nin such a way as to exercise a strong hold over the feet of the table,\nbetween which he is sitting. Once this pressure is exercised, there is\nnothing more for the medium to do, in order to obtain a levitation,\nthan to lean his hands heavily on the table. It is easy to understand\nhow the table, maintained in position by the trickster\u2019s knees,\nexecutes a rotatory movement around an axis the points of which are\nfixed by the pressure of the knees; consequently the table, becoming\nparallel with the ground, appears to be abnormally levitated. This\nsimulation can be successfully realised, even when some one is seated\non a chair on top of the table; under the pretence of offering a better\ncondition of control, the medium takes the hands of the person on\nthe table, and finds in him the point of support required to promote\nthe rotation of the table around its axis. We should keep this kind\nof fraud before the mind\u2019s eye when seeking to obtain levitations,\nespecially if operating in obscurity, for then this trick is most easy\nof execution.\n\nOnce again, I cannot too strongly warn experimenters against dark\nseances: they are absolutely worthless when paranormal phenomena\nare required. These ought to be obtained in full light; under such\nconditions the levitation of the table is a verifiable phenomenon.\n\n\nII. TELEKINESIS\n\nI will now relate my observations upon telekinesis, that is to\nsay, movements without contact. Telekinesis corresponds with\n_l\u2019ext\u00e9riorisation de la motricit\u00e9_, discovered by Colonel de Rochas.\nIt is a phenomenon which I have taken particular pains to verify. I\nhave had exceptionally good experiences in this phase of manifestation.\n\nI verified telekinetic phenomena with Eusapia Paladino first of all.\nWhen operating with this medium, the seance-table was often elevated\nwithout contact. As a rule, Eusapia formed the chain of hands around\nthe table without touching it; at the end of a few seconds, she would\nmake some passes over the table with her right hand, retaining her\nhold of her right-hand neighbour\u2019s hand at the same time: the table\nwould then leave the floor, and remain suspended in the air for several\nseconds. It fell to the ground heavily as a rule. This experiment was\nmade several times in my presence under satisfactory conditions of\nlight.\n\nIt was not only the table which moved with Eusapia: the curtains of\nthe cabinet were often thrown over the table, as if a strong wind\nhad blown them out. This phenomenon was particularly noticeable at\nl\u2019Agn\u00e9las, where we experimented in front of the curtains of one of\nthe drawing-room windows. These curtains were made of heavy silk\nmaterial, and nothing was more curious than to see them swell out and\nsuddenly stretch over us. The manner in which they were thrown over our\nheads was peculiar; it was as though they had been blown out. Without\nan adapted instrument of some kind, I do not think it was possible for\nthe medium to produce this phenomenon fraudulently with her hand. I\nobtained the same characteristic movements of curtains with another\nmedium.\n\nWith Eusapia, the sitters\u2019 chairs were frequently displaced, shaken,\nraised, and even carried on to the table. I cannot conceive how Eusapia\ncould have obtained such results normally, considering the strict test\nconditions exacted at l\u2019Agn\u00e9las. We had been courteously acquainted\nwith the results of the Cambridge seances, and our attention had been\nvery specially drawn to the fraudulent practices of this medium. One of\nus held her feet and her waist, while the mission of two others, seated\non either side of her, was to observe her hands. It is relatively easy\nto know if we hold a right or left hand: it suffices to carefully note\nthe position of the thumb, which ought always to be turned towards the\nobserver if the hand be directed palm upwards, and which ought to be\nturned towards the medium if the hand be directed palm downwards. It\nis unnecessary to hold the medium\u2019s hand tightly in order to be aware\nof its position: an ordinary contact, intelligently superintended,\nis quite enough; it is of course necessary to make sure of the\nsimultaneous contact of thumb and fingers. Now, in a certain number\nof cases, the check upon the medium was good, when the chair of one\nof the sitters was carried on to the table. It is also to be noted,\nthat Eusapia would have been forced to lean forward in a very marked\nmanner, in order to seize her neighbour\u2019s chair and carry it on to the\ntable; the inclination of her body would have been easily perceived,\nespecially as the chair was first of all drawn away from under the\nexperimenter and then raised on to the table, man\u0153uvres which occupied\nsome time.\n\nOther phenomena of the same kind were, however, produced in a more\nconclusive manner. I remember having seen the lid of a trunk, which was\nplaced behind the experimenters and to the left of Eusapia, open and\nshut of its own accord.\n\nLastly, I obtained with this medium a very convincing phenomenon, which\nM. de Gramont had already verified at l\u2019Agn\u00e9las after my departure.\nThis is the movement at a distance of the scale of a letter-balance. I\nmade the experiment at Bordeaux in the presence of a few intelligent\nand educated persons. We operated in a light which was strong enough\nto enable us to read the faintly marked divisions on the scale.\nThis object had just been purchased by me, and I had drawn it from\nits wrappings just prior to the experiment. Before our eyes Eusapia\nrepeatedly made the scale go down by raising and lowering her hands,\npalms downwards. Eusapia\u2019s hands were from three to five inches away\nfrom the letter-balance; she performed the movements described without\nabandoning her neighbour\u2019s hands. We obtained the lowering of the plate\nof the balance several times, each time varying the position of the\nmedium\u2019s hands, placing them in front of the apparatus in such a manner\nas to form a triangle of which the plate was the apex, and bringing\nthe medium\u2019s hands together so that the angle at the apex became very\nacute. This was done in order to obviate the possibility of the medium\nproducing the effect by means of a hair or thread between her fingers.\nI must point out, however, that a hair or thread would have been\nvisible.\n\nBy turning her hands round, that is to say by directing them palms\nupwards, Eusapia raised the plate of the letter-balance to its full\nextent when it was weighed down by a pocket-book. By measuring the\noscillations of the index-needle, we were able to ascertain that the\nforce employed was at least one ounce superior in weight to that of the\npocket-book.\n\nThe facts I verified with Eusapia, I was able to prove again through\nother mediums, non-professional. On two occasions, I obtained fine\ntelekinetic phenomena in a public restaurant. I was in the company of\na good sensitive, a highly intelligent man, but one who knew little\nor nothing of spiritism. The first time I was breakfasting with him;\nwe were seated at a fairly large table, near which was a small round\none; the cloth which was covering our table touched the small one. We\nfirst heard several fine raps, and then the small table drew gradually\nnearer till it touched the big one. There had been a displacement of\neleven inches. It was broad daylight, and the conditions under which\nI observed this fact completely exclude\u2014at least in my opinion\u2014the\nhypothesis of fraud. Another time we were lunching together. I was\nseated at the left-hand side of the medium, and we were alone at our\ntable. Two chairs were facing us, while a third one was on the medium\u2019s\nright, facing another table. The chair to the right of the medium\napproached the table, and then retreated at our request. The chair\n_facing me_ reproduced the same movements. The light was so bright\nthat I was able to observe the hands and feet of the medium with the\ngreatest ease.\n\n[Illustration]\n\nThese plain, decided, easily observable, and well-observed facts are\namong the most convincing I have received. The medium\u2019s position, the\nbright light, the full liberty of verification which was permitted me,\nrendered these observations extremely convincing to me. The measuring\nof the distances between the table and the object in movement excludes\nthe hypothesis of hallucination on my part. I therefore consider that\nall possibility of fraud or hallucination was out of the question.\n\nPrevious to the movements, I had established contact with the chair\nin front of me, by means of one of those wooden holders to which\nnewspapers are attached in restaurants and buffets. The chair in\napproaching us pushed the newspapers towards us, and we were thus\nenabled to watch the horizontal progression of the chair. The distance\ntravelled by the chair was from seven to eight inches. The objects\nmoved in a jerky, irregular manner.\n\nI have been able to observe telekinetic table movements on many\noccasions, and always in broad daylight. Perhaps the most curious\nmovement I have seen is the following: A lady and gentleman once did\nme the honour of inviting me to witness certain phenomena which they\nwere often able to obtain when experimenting together; these phenomena\nconsisted in slight displacements of a table. They reproduced these\nmovements without contact in my presence. I then begged them to form a\nchain with me around the table, always without touching it of course.\nThis table, a light tripod, the top of which measured eleven inches\nby twenty-one inches, was in contact with the dress of my hostess.\nAfter having executed several diverse gliding movements\u2014approaching or\nretreating at request\u2014the table began to raise itself and to strike the\nfloor with one of its feet. We spelt out the alphabet, and received a\ntyptological communication. During this performance, the table was in\ncontact with the dress only. The dress did not hide the feet of the\ntable, the contact was simply lateral, and the table could be seen in\nentirety. It was daylight, and it would have been easy to detect the\nslightest movement of the dress. Moreover, the table raised one of its\nfeet which was not in contact with the dress. I did not try\u2014because\nI did not wish\u2014to remove the contact of the dress, for I had often\nobserved this bulging out of women mediums\u2019 dresses: as soon as the\ngarment comes near the table and contact is established, the movement\nis produced. I have often checked the position of the medium\u2019s feet,\nwhile the phenomenon was happening, and I have been able to verify that\nthe slight contact was with the dress only, and not with the feet.\nThis curious fact has already been observed by Richet and others, in\nconnection with Eusapia Paladino. I will add that I have often obtained\nmovements without any contact whatsoever, even that of garments.\n\nAnother medium has enabled me to verify telekinetic movements of\ncurtains. They were less violent than with Eusapia, but more decided,\nand enabled me to make some observations which are not altogether\nlacking in interest. I was once experimenting with the medium in\nquestion, in subdued light, contrary to my usual custom. It was in the\ndaytime, but we had closed the shutters of the window and drawn the\ncurtains together, in order to form a kind of cabinet. We were trying\nto obtain luminous phenomena, which, however, were not forthcoming. The\nmedium had his back turned towards the curtains. I noticed that the\ncurtains stirred now and then. I drew the attention of an experimenter\nto this, and at first we attributed the movement to a slight draught.\nWe drew the curtains together completely, and then observed that only\nthe curtain close to the medium stirred. It was light enough to see the\nhands and feet of our medium, and we were able to convince ourselves,\nthat the movements were not normally produced by him. We then noticed\nthat the movements of the curtain corresponded with our movements.\nThe experiment was repeated with success twenty times. We varied the\nmovements and were able to observe, that the maximum disturbance of\nthe curtain occurred, when the medium rubbed the head of one of the\nexperimenters.\n\nThe curtain was not blown out over the table as with Eusapia. The\nmovements simply consisted of a species of undulatory trepidation,\nwhose amplitude did not surpass five or six inches: it was like the\nsinuous undulations of a rope, when shaken at one of its extremities.\n\nSuch are the principal facts which I have been able to observe. I\nwill not have much to say concerning the method of operation, for I\nhave already sufficiently indicated how I proceed habitually. I have,\nnevertheless, two important remarks to make.\n\nThe first is, that the presentation of the palm of the hand towards the\nobject, which we wish to displace, often brings about the movement. I\nproceed in the manner I have indicated for a parakinetic levitation,\nbut instead of presenting the palm of the hand to the top of the table\nand then drawing it slowly away, I direct it towards the side of the\ntable, and I act as though I wished to attract or repulse the table. I\nhave noticed that this practice gives good results.\n\nThe second remark I wish to make is, that when desirous of obtaining\nmovements without contact, it is helpful to form the chain around\nthe table by holding each other\u2019s hands. Still, I do not think this\nprecaution is indispensable, for I have obtained telekinetic movements\nwithout its aid. It seems to me, however, that it is a method to be\nrecommended, especially in the beginning of the seance.\n\nI have just said that the chain of hands is not indispensable. And, as\nan example, I remember having once verified some telekinetic movements\nwhich interested me very much. I was conversing with a private medium:\nby the way, all the telekinetic phenomena of which I have been\nspeaking, save those obtained with Eusapia Paladino, have been obtained\nwith private mediums. In the course of our conversation we pronounced\nthe name of a personification, whose irruption in our midst had been as\nsudden as unexpected. This personification behaves like a cautious and\nwell-advised experimenter, and conducts himself as, I think, I would,\nif I co-operated on the other side in the experiments I am speaking\nabout. Hardly had I pronounced this personification\u2019s name than the\ntable began to glide gently across the floor. We questioned it, and\naccording to our request, it approached or retreated from the medium.\nThe movements of the table alternated with raps. I content myself with\nmerely stating this curious fact, without allowing myself to draw any\nconclusions therefrom; it appears to me to offer a striking example of\nthat apparent spontaneity, which psychical phenomena sometimes present.\n\nFrom the account I have just given of some of my experiments in\nparakinesis and telekinesis, we may deduct the following propositions:\nthey resume, fairly exactly, the points of fact I have been able to\nascertain:\u2014\n\nI. There is a certain correlation between the movements of the medium\nor assistants and the movements of the objects used in experimentation.\n\nII. Certain peculiar sensations accompany the emission of the force\nemployed.\n\nIII. That force has a probable connection with the organism of the\nassistants.\n\nI. Nothing is easier to verify than the correlation existing between\nthe movements of the medium or sitters, and those of the object with\nwhich we are experimenting. I may say, that almost without exception,\nthe movements of the operators are, in a way, reflected by the table.\nI have already pointed out, that movements of attraction or repulsion\nattracted or repulsed the table. I have remarked this peculiarity\non several occasions. When, in a seance, the presence of a certain\nforce manifesting itself in raps and oscillations without contact is\nestablished, it often suffices for one of the sitters to direct his\nhand towards the table to bring about its immediate displacement. By\nproceeding in the manner indicated further back, I have noticed that\ncomplete levitations could be obtained; but it is then necessary for\nthe sitters to put their hands on the table, while one of their number\nputs one of his hands in the centre of the table, and palm downwards\nslowly raises his hand. Levitations without contact can certainly be\nobtained by the same method, by simply forming a chain of hands around\nthe table without touching it; but the results are less difficult to\nobtain when the hands are laid on the table.\n\nLevitation seems to me more difficult to realise than gliding\nmovements. I have frequently obtained the latter without contact, by\ndirecting the palm of my hand towards the table, and trying to draw it\nafter me as though an elastic thread united the table to my hand. Under\nthese conditions the table seems to obey a kind of attraction.\n\nI think I have some observations to make on this subject, but I cannot\nformulate them with much certitude, and I only point them out in order\nto provoke\u2014if that be possible\u2014the examination of these facts by\npersons more competent than I am. First of all, it is not always the\nmedium who obtains the best results in the man\u0153uvre I indicate. I have\nseen some experimenters obtain more marked movements than the sensitive\nhimself. This is not generally the case, but the fact does not appear\nto me to be rare. It is rather disconcerting, because those persons,\nwho in a seance manifest a force relatively greater than the medium\u2019s,\ncannot obtain any supernormal fact when alone; the presence of a medium\nis necessary for the energy of their action to be manifested. I wonder\nif this be not due to the medium\u2019s inexperience. I never observed this\npeculiarity in seances with Eusapia, although the sitters could, in her\npresence, produce certain phenomena themselves. I have only noticed it\nwith the non-professional mediums, who kindly consented to allow me\nto experiment with them. Nearly all of them had no notion whatever of\npsychical experimentation; most of them were altogether ignorant of\nthe practices of spiritism; and many were frightened by their first\nphenomena. These mediums have not the tranquillity and presence of\nmind of myself and friends, whom a long experience has freed from all\nkinds of bias. Perhaps, therefore, they do not operate under such good\nconditions as we do, or as more experienced mediums would. Whatever may\nbe the reason, I note the fact observed.\n\nA second interesting observation I have to make is the unequalness of\nthe radiations or emanations which appear to issue from the back or\npalm of the hand. The action of the palm is decidedly more energetic\nthan that of the back; as an example, I will recall to mind the\nexperiment with the letter-balance. To lower it, Eusapia lightly moved\nher hand from top to bottom, palm downwards; to obtain the contrary\nmovement, she turned her hand in the opposite direction. There are\ncertain obscure peculiarities to elucidate in this curious unequalness.\nIt is desirable to study it, for it is one of the rare points where\nexperimentation is really possible, in the studies of the kind I am\nsetting forth. It is to be noted, and this is I think a very important\nconsideration, that the innervation of the palm of the hand is much\nmore abundant than that of the back.\n\nIn what concerns movements without contact, I have not noticed any\nunequalness of action between the two hands: the left hand appears to\nact quite as well as the right.\n\nIn the third place I have verified a correlation, between the\nintensity of the muscular effort and the abnormal movement. This is an\ninteresting observation, for I have not observed it when studying the\nphenomenon of raps. As an example, I will cite an experiment which I\nhave often made. When the liberated energy is insufficient to provoke\nmovements, and the existence of a certain quantity of force has,\nnevertheless, been ascertained, if the man\u0153uvre of attraction does not\nsucceed, we can sometimes provoke the movement by shaking the hand\nabout at a certain distance above the table. This rapid movement of the\nhand and arm appears to me to develop a maximum of telenergy.\n\nAgain, rubbing the feet on the floor, rubbing the hands, the back,\nthe arms, in fact any quick or slightly violent movement appears to\nliberate this force. These man\u0153uvres often bring about the realisation\nof the desired phenomenon. It is evident that such man\u0153uvres must\nbe employed with discernment; some of them might hamper observation:\n_e.g._ rubbing the feet on the floor if telekinetic movements of\nthe table be desired, for this would render it difficult, if not\nimpossible, to check the position of the medium\u2019s feet.\n\nThe breath appears to exercise a great influence; things happen as\nthough in blowing on the object, the sitters emitted a quantity of\nenergy, comparable to that which they emit, in quickly moving their\nlimbs. This is a strange peculiarity, one which is apparently very\ndifficult to explain.\n\nA more thorough analysis of the facts permits us to think, that the\nliberation of the energy employed depends upon the contraction of the\nmuscles and not upon the executed movement. The fact which reveals\nthis peculiarity is easily observed. When the chain round the table is\nformed, a movement without contact can be procured by tightly squeezing\none another\u2019s hands, or by resting the feet very firmly on the floor:\nthe former is by far the better process. The limbs have executed an\ninsignificant movement, and we may say that the muscular contraction\nis about the only physiological phenomenon visible to observers; it is\nnevertheless sufficient.\n\nThese ascertainments all tend to show that the agent, which is the\ndetermining cause of movements without contact, has some connection\nwith our organism and probably with our nervous system.\n\nOther reasons also tend to prove this. Thus it is that the number\nof experimenters influence the phenomena to a certain degree. The\nlevitation of a table is easier to obtain with five or six persons\nthan with one or two. It is very difficult to arrive at any precise\nconclusion on this point, for the observations I have read are\ncontradictory. In so far as my personal experience is concerned, I\nhave the impression that, within certain limits, the quantity of force\nliberated varies in direct proportion with the number of experimenters.\nNevertheless, a certain number should not be surpassed if we wish to\nexperiment under good conditions. But I think that the diminution\nof results may have other causes than the diminution or increase of\nthe number of sitters. I believe that if we could assemble a number\nof homogeneous elements, we would obtain excellent results. This\nwould explain the so-called miracles, which are said to have occurred\nin certain primitive congregations, where beliefs were strong and\nconvictions profound. This unity of belief and ideas, and the material\nand moral regimen, to which every member of the community submitted,\ndetermined that harmony which is a fundamental condition for the\nproduction of good phenomena. It is in this way that historical and\ncontemporary \u2018miracles\u2019 may be explained. But in the present state\nof society it is very difficult to unite six or eight persons having\nidentical ideas and submitting themselves to an identical discipline;\nand I have always thought that the harmony of a circle was more\nimportant than the number of its members.\n\nI have just pointed out in detail certain purely physical processes\nfor provoking the production of paranormal phenomena. They give good\nresults when the force is feeble; but as soon as the force is abundant,\nthe simple manifestation of the will is sometimes sufficient to\ndecide the character of the movement; _e.g._ the table will move in\nthe direction asked for by the sitters. Things then happen as though\nthe force was handled by an intelligence distinct from that of the\nexperimenters. I hasten to say, that this seems only an appearance\nto me, and that I have observed certain similarities between these\npersonifications and secondary personalities of somnambulism. But I\nwould not be giving an exact physiognomy of the facts observed, did I\nnot lay stress upon this curious trait of their character.\n\nIn this apparent union between the _indirect_ will of the sitters and\nthe phenomena there is a problem, the solution of which escapes me so\nfar completely. I feel that there is nothing of a supernatural order\nin this union; I also feel, that the spirit hypothesis is altogether\ninadequate to explain it; but I am unable to formulate any explanation.\nThis is one of those points of fact which I confine myself to pointing\nout.\n\nThe attentive observation of the relation, existing between the\nphenomena and the will of the sitters, permits of the demonstration\nof other facts. Firstly, the bad effect of discord between the\nsitters. It often happens that one of them expresses a desire to\nobtain a certain given phenomenon; if the requested phenomenon be not\nimmediately forthcoming, the same experimenter will demand a different\none. Sometimes, several of the sitters ask for several contradictory\nthings at the same time. The confusion which reigns in collectivity is\ngenerally manifested in the phenomena, which, in their turn, become\nvague and confused.\n\nStill, things do not altogether happen as though the phenomena\nwere directed by a will, which was only an echo of the will of the\nexperimenters. The phenomena often manifest great independence, and\nrefuse decidedly to yield to the desires of the experimenters. By\nadmitting even Janet\u2019s hypothesis on the secondary personalities\nof mediums, stretching it from cases of somnambulism to cases of\ntelekinesis, a fact which is very curious from a purely psychological\npoint of view is to be met with occasionally: the secondary personality\nsometimes manifests itself at the same time as the normal personality,\nand a conflict between them is the result. I have seen this with\nEusapia, when, for example, she wanted to drink, and the table\nviolently opposed itself to her wishes.\n\nTo sum up my observations upon the first of my conclusions: There is\na close and positive connection between the movements effectuated\nby the medium or the sitters, and the displacement of articles of\nexperimentation; there is a relation between these displacements and\nthe muscular contractions of the experimenters; a probable relation,\nwhose precise nature I am unable to state, exists between the will of\nthe experimenters and paranormal movements.\n\n\nII. Certain peculiar sensations accompany the emission of the force\nemployed. I hesitated before deciding to formulate this conclusion,\nbecause, notwithstanding the great number of observations I have\nmade, I am only able to present this proposition with much reserve.\nThe sensations I am going to describe are purely subjective, and may\nconsequently give rise to all sorts of error and illusion. Some of\nthese sensations may be explained by fatigue or prolonged immobility.\nIn spite of these causes for error, which are, I acknowledge, very\nnumerous and very real, it seems to me, that the impartial analysis\nof the facts observed tends towards showing that illusion, error,\nfatigue, and immobility do not explain them all.\n\nI will put aside visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile, gustatory\nsensations; these are, moreover, very rarely observed. I will limit\nmyself to examining certain ill-defined sensations, which appear to\ndepend upon the general sensitiveness, and not upon the sensory organs\nproperly speaking. From the observations I have made, I am inclined to\ndiscern five principal sensations:\u2014\n\n  (_a_) The sensation of cool breezes, generally over the hands.\n\n  (_b_) The sensation of a slight tingling in the palm of the hand,\n        and at the tips of the fingers, near the mounts.\n\n  (_c_) The sensation of a sort of current through the body.\n\n  (_d_) The sensation of a spider\u2019s web in contact with the hands and\n        face, and other parts of the body\u2014notably the back and loins.\n\n  (_e_) The sensation of fatigue after strong phenomena.\n\n(_a_) The first is very frequently mentioned by experimenters. It is\nan impression of coolness, or even of cold, which they generally feel\nover the hands. I have not been able to settle with certitude, if this\nsensation be purely subjective, or if an element of real objectivity be\nblended with it. It is at times so marked, that I have some difficulty\nin believing that it is altogether imaginary. Though it often precedes\nthe production of a motor phenomenon, it more frequently happens, that\nthe sitters feel it without any paranormal fact being forthcoming.\n\nThis peculiar sensation is similar to what is felt in seances with\nEusapia Paladino, when approaching one\u2019s hand to the scar on her head.\nWhat she calls the _soffio freddo_ is very decidedly felt: it is as\nthough a current of air were escaping through the scar. The reality of\nthis sensation with the Neapolitan medium makes me think, that the cool\nbreeze mentioned in other seances may have some objectivity. It is to\nbe noted, that I have observed this phenomenon with mediums, who had no\nfamiliarity whatever with spiritistic seances.\n\nSometimes, the sensation of coolness or of cold extends to the whole\nbody. Mediums are more likely to feel this than other experimenters.\nThis sensation can bring on veritable shivering, in which case it often\ncoincides with a phenomenon.\n\n(_b_) A tingling sensation may seem to be solely due to immobility, or\nto other ordinary causes, such as prolonged contact of the fingers with\nthe table. I recognise that this explanation is true nine times out of\nten; but in certain cases it has appeared insufficient to me: either it\nwas felt too soon after the debut of the sitting to be due to fatigue,\nimmobility, or to prolonged contact, or its coincidence with certain\nwell-observed phenomena was too frequent to be fortuitous. Therefore\nit appears to me probable, that there is some connection between this\ntingling sensation and the emission of the force utilised.\n\nWhat is the precise nature of this tingling sensation? I have carefully\nquestioned those who felt it\u2014and nearly all experimenters feel it\nsooner or later\u2014and compared their impressions with mine. All the\ndescriptions tally: it is the sensation of a slight pricking, having\nits seat in the palm of the hand and its maximum intensity on the\nmounts at the finger-tips. Some persons compare it to the sensation one\nfeels, when lightly touching a mass of pin-points or a stiff brush:\nothers say it seems to them, as though their hands were pierced by\nsmall holes, through which something was escaping. The latter sensation\nis rarer than the former. This tingling sensation has no resemblance\nwhatever with the tingling of a benumbed limb.\n\nThe experimenters feel these impressions at the beginning of the\nsitting; they do not always indicate a good seance, but I have noticed\nthat if phenomena are going to be received at all, these sensations are\ngenerally perceived beforehand, although, as I say, they can also be\nfelt when phenomena are not forthcoming.\n\n(_c_) The sensation of a current passing through the body is less easy\nto describe. It is of a less precise nature than the preceding one.\nThe majority of persons I have questioned, compare it to the sensation\nwhich is produced on them by the passage of an electric current. To\nme this assimilation has generally appeared approximative. I have\nsometimes felt this sensation, and can only compare it to a very slight\nshiver, a kind of feeble vibration, running through the back and arms,\nespecially perceptible to me in my right arm. This sensation, as I feel\nit, is not continuous; it takes the form of waves rapidly succeeding\neach other. It is feeble, and, as a rule, I can only perceive it by\npaying great attention to it; in a few rare cases I have felt it very\ndistinctly.\n\nI think that in a great number of cases this sensation is purely\nsubjective, but\u2014as with cool breezes\u2014it does not always seem to be so.\nIt generally accompanies the production of phenomena relatively feeble\nand continuous, such as raps and gliding movements. I have not always\nfelt it when strong phenomena were forthcoming; but then I was not\nalways in contact with the medium, and often, though I did not feel\nanything, the medium mentioned having other curious sensations, which I\nshall speak of presently. Besides, the chain must be formed in order to\nperceive this sensation of a current with all the accompanying features\nI have just described; but it is not necessary for the medium to be in\nthe circle. This sensation can also be felt by simply leaning the hands\non the table without joining them. This case bears an analogy to the\npreceding one, if we suppose that the table, serving as a condenser for\nthe emitted energy, suffices in itself to establish a sort of indirect\ncontact with the experimenters. And things seem to happen as though\nthis were really the case.\n\nIf that be so, we can at once understand the relation, which appears\nto exist between the mediate or immediate contact of the observers\u2019\nhands and the sensation of a \u2018current.\u2019 There is something here which\nis very obscure and very delicate to analyse, but which, if the fact be\nreal, appears to me to indicate the circulation of some thing or other.\nIt is probable that what circulates is precisely the energy used for\nthe production of the abnormal facts I am relating. True, this is only\na hypothesis, and I again beg my readers\u2019 pardon for having allowed\nmyself to be drawn into the field of conjecture. I hasten to return to\nfacts.\n\nIf the sensation of the \u2018passage of the current\u2019 be feeble, it is not\nso with its abrupt interruption. When, for some cause or other\u2014a slight\ndiscussion between the operators, the medium\u2019s emotion, a sudden\nbreaking of the chain\u2014the sensation of the passage of the current is\ninterrupted, the interruption is easily felt. It may even cause a\nsensation of sudden indisposition, if the interruption coincide with\nthe phenomenon in course of production. This is a curious fact, and\none easily observable. The sensation of the breaking of the current is\ndistinctly felt; and it is this which makes me think, that the feeble\nimpression of the passage of the current is not altogether imaginary.\n\nThe sensitiveness of different experimenters varies very much. Some are\nmost susceptible to these influences, others are not at all so, or only\nvery slightly. I remember having recently assisted at a seance with\none of my friends, a man well known in the fencing world. My friend,\nalthough he is still young, had an attack of apoplexy some years ago.\nHe recovered, and has only retained a very slight hemiparesis of the\nright side. Medically, he comes under the category of hemiplegics. He\nappears to be extremely sensitive to the impression I call \u2018the passage\nof the current.\u2019 He compares it to the sensation, which the passage of\nan electric current produces upon him. He assured me that his right\narm was affected by it and benumbed. He told me that he experienced a\nsimilar effect when passing near powerful dynamos; he could not, for\nexample, stay long in the gallery of machines at the French Exhibition\nin 1900, because of the generators of electricity which were installed\ntherein. He had a disagreeable sensation in the right arm; the\nuneasiness extended from the arm to the neck, and he was obliged to\nleave the neighbourhood of these electrical machines. In the course\nof the seance\u2014a very uninteresting one, by the way\u2014he declared that\nhe felt an identical sensation, and he was even compelled to leave\nthe circle. I relate this observation, for the person who made it is\nan intelligent man, and quite capable of correctly analysing his own\nsensations. It is needless to add that he was cool and self-possessed,\nand observed everything free from bias, one way or another.\n\nThe medium\u2019s sensations are generally much more accentuated than those\nof the sitters. Sensitives say, they distinctly feel the passage and\nthe interruption of the current; I think it is a question of degree:\ntheir sensations differ from the sensations of other experimenters only\nin degree. There is, nevertheless, a category of sensations, which is\nalmost exclusively felt by the medium when a fairly strong movement is\nforthcoming: this is the sensation of a sudden emission of force. One\nof the most intelligent mediums I have come across describes it, as a\nsensation of cramp in the epigastric region; it seems to him at times\nas though he were on the verge of fainting. I have indicated a similar\nsensation, which I myself once felt during a levitation obtained with\nEusapia Paladino. I felt the same thing on other occasions, but not\nwith the same intensity. I remember, for example, an experiment made\nunder the following conditions: We were holding a seance on a winter\u2019s\nevening; the light on this occasion, though feeble, was sufficient. We\nhad covered the table with a woollen cloth which fell over our knees,\nand protected us slightly from the cold. Upon the seance table we had\nplaced a smaller one upside down. We touched the edge of the smaller\ntable. Having noticed that the small table appeared to be trying to\nraise itself on one side, I endeavoured to increase the amplitude\nof the movement by violently contracting the muscles of my arms and\nlegs. While I made this intense effort, we saw the little table slowly\nlean forward, and turn itself over without coming into any contact\nwhatever with ourselves. When the phenomenon was accomplished, I felt\nsuddenly very tired. It is possible, that the cause of this fatigue was\nsimply the violent effort I had made to contract my muscles; still, I\npoint out this observation\u2014which others of the same order appear to\nconfirm\u2014because the correlation between the effort, and the sudden\nsensation of fatigue is less regular than the connection between\nthat sensation and the phenomenon. Whatever may be the intensity of\nthe effort, the fatigue is felt with less abruptness and in a lesser\ndegree, when the phenomenon is not realised. I may add, that this\nsensation only appears to me to accompany telekinetic and certain\nluminous phenomena. It does not, as a rule, accompany raps or automatic\nmanifestations; the fatigue determined by these phenomena makes itself\nfelt progressively and more tardily. I will return to this however.\n\n(_d_) The experimenters, and particularly the medium, sometimes speak\nof a sensation, which they compare to that which is felt, by coming\ninto contact with a spider\u2019s web. This appears to be rarer than the\nabove-mentioned sensations, and, so far, I have not noticed that it was\nmanifested with certain phenomena rather than with others.\n\nThis sensation of spider\u2019s web is felt about the hands, the face, and\nat times the back and loins.\n\nI cannot give any other indication upon this curious sensation.\n\n(_e_) I have already said a few words about the sudden sensation of\nfatigue, which is felt when an important phenomenon occurs. I have\ncarefully examined the state of the assistants before and after the\nseances, and I have invariably noticed that most of the experimenters\nwere tired after a successful seance. This fatigue appears to be in\nfairly exact proportion to the results obtained. I speak of parakinetic\nand telekinetic results; for it must be noted that the fatigue\ndetermined by these abnormal movements is not identical\u2014at least in the\ncase of the medium\u2014with the fatigue which other phenomena appear to\noccasion.\n\nMovements without contact entail a lassitude, comparable to that\nensuing after a long walk or prolonged physical exercise.\n\n\nIII. The last observation leads me to the examination of my third\nproposition. This is, that the force employed in the production of\npara or telekinetic phenomena has, probably, a connection with the\norganism of the experimenters. The analysis I have just made allows one\nto surmise the very serious reasons, which lead me to formulate this\nconclusion so precisely. The first of these reasons is the correlation,\nexisting between the movements and muscular contractions of the sitters\nand the paranormal movements. I have pointed out that this connection\nappears, in reality, to reside in the muscular contraction rather than\nin the free movements of the limbs: this is a first ascertainment.\nThere is yet another, that provoked paranormal phenomena are,\napparently, approximatively proportional to the movement executed by\nthe experimenter and the effort he makes.\n\nThese two first points appear to me to be acquired, and the correlation\nobserved between the muscular effort and the paranormal movement,\nindicates reciprocal dependence between these two phenomena. We may go\nfurther, and try to discover whether the relation indicated resides in\nthe fact, itself, of muscular contraction, or in the physiological fact\nwhich provokes it\u2014that is to say, the nervous discharge. Observation\ntends to show, that it is with the nervous influx that the relation\npointed out appears to be made manifest. In support of this opinion I\nwill indicate:\u2014\n\n  (_a_) The attraction and repulsion which the palm of the hand\n        exercises to the almost total exclusion of the back of the\n        hand;\n\n  (_b_) The diverse sensations which I have analysed;\n\n  (_c_) The influence of the mental condition and dispositions of the\n        experimenters;\n\n  (_d_) Finally, the characteristic fatigue which follows successful\n        seances, fatigue similar to that which is felt after\n        prolonged or violent exercise, that is to say, exercise\n        necessitating a considerable expenditure of nervous force.\n        In a book, in which I am striving to exclude all manner of\n        theory, treating, moreover, of a subject where theoretical\n        hypotheses are premature, I cannot enlarge any further\n        upon these considerations. I must content myself with\n        pointing them out to the attention of those, who may wish to\n        experiment in their turn.\n\nTelekinetic movements are more difficult to simulate than levitations\nof the table with contact. By operating in daylight, as I have done,\nand with non-professional mediums, there is every kind of guarantee.\nBesides, it is very difficult for even a professional medium to\ntrick telekinetic phenomena in full light; he must be a terribly bad\nobserver, who lets himself be taken in under test conditions of light.\nThe slightest link between the medium and the object in movement is\neasily perceptible, and it is very easy to make sure, that no such\nlink exists. I recommend experimenters to force themselves to direct\nthe phenomena towards movements without contact. I do not advise them\neven to begin with levitations with contact, for it is a manifestation\nwhich is easily simulated; and I advise persons who are not accustomed\nto seances, and who are not familiar with fraudulent processes, to\nseek for telekinetic phenomena only. They are longer in coming, and\nmore difficult to obtain; but their demonstration will make it well\nworth while taking pains to realise them, and spending time to wait\nfor them. When we work in good light, when we can pass our hands in\nevery direction round the article of experimentation, when we operate\nwith articles not belonging to the medium, which have not been in his\npossession or handled by him, the hypothesis of fraud is inadmissible.\nI do not speak of the honourability and good faith of the medium: these\nare important elements of appreciation. But my principle is not to let\nthese considerations have any weight, when judging of a paranormal\nfact. For, if the observation is to have any serious value, every one\nought to be able to verify the conditions, under which that observation\nis made.\n\nTo sum up, the observations, I have so often made with diverse\nmediums, have thoroughly convinced me of the reality of movements\nwithout contact. I believe I have verified a connection between them\nand the organism of the experimenters. There is a _synergy_ between\ntheir movements and their muscular contractions and the forthcoming\nparanormal movements. I have already spoken of this coincidence in the\nchapter on \u2018Raps.\u2019\n\nThere is this difference, however, to be borne in mind, I have noticed\nthat, within a certain radius, the intensity of the raps is independent\nof the proximity of the medium. The raps heard at a distance of ten\nfeet appeared to me to be as loud as those which resounded near him\nor under his hands. I think it is not quite the same with movements\nwithout contact. I believe I have noticed, that distance exercises\na certain influence over the latter. I have not seen any movements\nwithout contact at a greater distance than that of three feet from the\nmedium, save, perhaps, the movements of the curtains of the cabinet.\nI have observed that the action appeared to reach its maximum at\nirregular distances. For example, I have obtained glidings of the table\nby slowly drawing the hand backwards: the movements occurred, when my\nfingers were about ten or twelve inches away from the table, and not\nwhen they were closer to it. Many circumstances may intervene to modify\nthe action of distance, _e.g._ the possible accumulation of force at\nthe end of a given time.\n\nI have often observed, that the intentional direction of a movement\nexecuted by an observer influenced the movement of the table. I have\nnot been able to ascertain whether the determination of the direction\nof the paranormal movement was due to the direction of the movement of\nthe experimenter\u2019s hand, or to the manifestation of his will. I have\nbeen prevented from solving this problem by the fact, that when the\nenergy is sufficient, the movements will occur in the direction desired\nby the assistants. The movements seem to be produced by an intelligent\nbeing.\n\nI have already pointed out this curious aspect of things, when\nanalysing the phenomenon of raps. Telekinetic movements present\nthemselves to observation in the same manner. They claim, as the\nraps do, to be the manifestations of personifications. I related\nan observation I was once able to make under some interesting\ncircumstances; out of seance hours, in broad daylight, in the course of\na conversation relative to a certain personification, the table near\nwhich we were seated glided of its own accord across the floor, when\nI pronounced the name taken by the personification. A conversation\nensued with the latter, by means of the movements of the table without\ncontact. I also related the typtological conversation without contact\nwhich I had with the same personification.\n\nThese personages who call themselves the authors of telekinetic\nphenomena present the same characteristics, as those who claim to be\nresponsible for the phenomenon of raps. I have nothing in particular to\nsay on this point at present.\n\nThe observation of the facts resumed in this chapter reveals another\ncircumstance which deserves pointing out. This is the apparent\nconductibility of certain bodies for the force employed. I gave some\nexamples: table-linen, wood, dresses, etc. I related having often seen\nwomen-mediums\u2019 dresses bulge out and approach the table, when the\nphenomenon was being produced; the sensitive\u2019s feet remained visible,\nand, in view of the conditions under which I have been able to test\nthis phenomenon, I consider as absurd the idea that an artificial hand\nor foot was introduced, as imagined by Dr. Hodgson to explain away this\nfact with Eusapia. I have frequently obtained movements without the\ncontact of the medium\u2019s dress, but I have certainly noticed that this\ncontact facilitates the realisation of the movement.\n\nDarkness favours it also; there is no doubt about this. Of course\nI am putting aside the greater facilities obscurity offers for the\nexecution of fraudulent phenomena; and though, in this book, I have\nonly taken into account phenomena observed in full light, I have often\nexperimented in obscurity; and it appears to me certain, that total\ndarkness is one of the conditions for the maximum development of the\nliberated energy.\n\nThe action of light is interesting to note. I have already stated\nthat the dynamic agency of psychical phenomena appeared to me to be\nanalogous with the nervous influx, and that the table seemed to play\nthe r\u00f4le of condenser. In that hypothesis, light would act like certain\nrays of cathodic origin, which discharge the electricised condensers\nplaced in their vicinity. The study of the influence of light upon\ntelekinetic phenomena will certainly enable us to learn their cause.\nThe little we already know permits us to suspect that the telenergic\nforce ought to have some _rapport_ with light and electricity, at least\nin that which concerns the amplitude of vibrations.\n\nThe study of this _rapport_ can only be taken up by an experienced\nphysicist. It will require delicate methods and special instruments,\nand I earnestly hope it will soon be seriously undertaken.\n\nAs for those who confine themselves, as I do, to simply seeking whether\nthe facts be real or not, they should avoid working in obscurity. Light\nmay hamper the production of telekinetic movements, but it will not\nprevent it. Experimenters should accustom themselves to holding their\nseances in the daytime, or in a light which is sufficient to permit of\nreading small print. Above all things, it is necessary to be personally\nconvinced of the reality of the facts; and this conviction is not so\neasily acquired, when the experiment is made in obscurity.\n\nIt is difficult to imagine to what a pitch audacity of certain\ntricksters will carry them. I once attended a series of experiments,\nwhich interested me greatly from that point of view. The group included\nthree young men, one of whom is a most remarkable medium. The other\ntwo, intelligent and well-educated young fellows, appeared to me to\nhave some medianic faculties, but I withhold my judgment, because they\ntried so hard to cheat, that it would not be prudent to seriously\nnotice those facts, where fraud did not strike me as coming into play;\nfor it was always possible. These young men had nothing to gain by\ncheating; in any case, I have not yet understood what aim they wished\nto attain. The levitations of the table were splendid\u2014in obscurity\u2014and\nall the furniture in the seance-room was more or less jostled about\nand displaced. This was all very fine; it was all very well done; and\nnovices were easily taken in. The \u2018spirits\u2019 caressed or struck the\nsitters, and I have seen sincere but inexperienced persons convinced\nof the reality of facts, for which the legerdemain of one of the young\nmen present was alone responsible.\n\nOne of these youths, a medical student, presents symptoms of nervous\ntroubles, and will become a hysteric if he is not one already.\nNotwithstanding my reproaches and exhortations, he could not stop\nhimself from cheating; and I have the impression that fraud is, in his\ncase, almost impulsive. I did not think I was authorised to examine\nhim from a medical point of view, but I observed him carefully. He has\nmanufactured spirit photographs very cleverly; they were wonderfully\nwell done, and only a professional eye would detect the trick. He\nproceeded by double exposure.\n\nWith this group, as soon as the room was lighted up, the phenomena,\nwhich were so violent in obscurity, ceased almost entirely. This\ncircumstance alone was suspicious; for the action of light is not\nsuch as to constitute an insurmountable obstacle to the production of\ntelekinetic movements. Whenever phenomena are intense in obscurity, we\nought to be able to obtain weaker ones of the same kind in light. This\nis a rule without an exception, as far as my experience goes.\n\nNeedless to add that the table, under the normal impetus which the\nyoung men gave it, insisted upon total darkness. Now, in truly good\nseances, on the contrary, I have always seen the table ask for light,\nif purely motor phenomena were desired. Naturally, it is otherwise with\nluminous phenomena, of which I am now going to speak.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nLUMINOUS PHENOMENA\n\n\nThe curious glimmering lights, which I am going to describe in this\nchapter, can only be obtained in total obscurity. They are generally\nfeeble, and appear to be at the limit of visibility.\n\nI will begin by describing a rather curious phenomenon, which is easily\nobservable. I am not quite sure of its objective reality; nevertheless,\nI will point it out, and give my reasons for doing so.\n\nCertain hand-movements are necessary to bring it into evidence; we must\nproceed in the following manner:\u2014\n\n1. Face the light.\n\n2. Put a dark object with a mat surface between yourself and the light.\nDo not place the object so as to screen the light from the operators,\nsimply place it between the experimenters and the light. An arm-chair\ncovered with dark velvet will suit; place it so that its back is turned\nto the light.\n\n3. Open the hands, put them against the dark background, palms turned\ntowards the chest. Join the hands at the finger-tips; withdraw the\nhands very slowly, always keeping the fingers stretched out.\n\n4. Place behind you the person with whom the experiment is to be made,\nhis head on a level with the operator\u2019s head, that is, in the centre of\nthe plane occupied by the hands.\n\nUnder these conditions, when the fingers are drawn apart, seven or\neight out of ten persons will see a sort of grey mist uniting the tips\nof the fingers. The person with whom we are experimenting must not be\ntold what he is expected to see; the experiment would be vitiated by\nintroducing therein a suggestive or imaginative element.\n\nThree-fourths of those with whom I have experimented perceived a slight\nmist, passing from the tip of one finger to another or corresponding\nfinger on the other hand. I myself perceive this mist very plainly:\nto me it resembles cigarette smoke; it has the same greyish colour,\nthe same appearance, but much more tenuity. The majority of people see\nit in this way; but I have met with some, who fancied it a different\ncolour. Those who see the effluvium as coloured are generally gifted\nwith psychic faculties. I have not been able to come to any positive\nconclusions on this point; but I have some reasons for believing\nthat the coloured perception of what I call, for want of a better\nterm, \u2018digital effluvium,\u2019 indicates a highly psychical temperament.\nA young doctor, who has remarkable medianic powers, sees it as red.\nI also found two persons who saw it as yellow. I have many reasons\nfor thinking that one of these two is a medium; but he refuses to\nexperiment, and declares _a priori_ that psychical phenomena are\u2014to\nuse his own familiar expression\u2014all \u2018humbug.\u2019 The other person is\nan eminent magistrate. I have found some people to whom the digital\neffluvium appears as blue. On the whole, from the experiments I have\nmade I reckon that out of 300 people of both sexes, 240 to 250 perceive\nthe effluvium; 2 to 3 out of 100 see it as blue. I have found two who\nsaw it as yellow; and one who saw it as red.\n\nI did not remark that the colour of the effluvium was different from\none hand to the other; but in reality I did not question much on the\nsubject, as I was most anxious to avoid anything like suggestion. I\nhave never therefore made inquiries upon the possible difference of\ncoloration in the two hands; but I think it would have been pointed out\nto me, had it been perceived.\n\nGenerally the effluvium appears to unite the tips of the fingers of\neach hand. But it is not always so. Often two or three digital effluvia\nconverge into one of the fingers of the opposite hand, instead of\nuniting the corresponding fingers.\n\nI noticed that the meteorological conditions and variations of\ntemperature had a decided influence upon the visibility of the\neffluvia. When the seance-room is very cold, or when the weather is\ndamp or rainy, the effluvia are scarcely perceptible. They appear to\nreach a maximum intensity in summer, when the temperature is high, and\nespecially when the air is sultry. When the weather is threatening\nand stormy, the effluvium is thick and clearly visible to me; when\nthe storm has burst, and the atmosphere has cleared, its intensity\ndiminishes.\n\nIt often varies according to the individual. Some people give forth an\neffluvium, which is more visible than that of others. I have not been\nable to seize any relation between the appearance of the effluvium and\nthe sex, age, and temperament of the various persons with whom I have\nexperimented; on the contrary, a relation seems to exist between the\nstate of health or fatigue and the emission of this mist; it is rarely\nvisible, when the person who emits it is tired or ill.\n\nSuch are the principal remarks, which observation of this curious\nphenomenon has allowed me to make. I have summed them up carefully,\nbut I ought to say, that to me the reality of this appearance does not\nseem to be demonstrated. After all it may only be due to an effect of\ncontrast. The conditions under which it is observed with the greatest\nconvenience are those, where the hands stand out clearly on a dark\nbackground. In drawing the hands away one from the other, the image of\nthe fingers persists perhaps on the retina, and gives rise, maybe, to\nan illusion; but this explanation is not always sufficient.\n\nThere is an _optima_ distance for the realisation of this effluvium. As\na rule the effluvium appears denser when the fingers are fairly close\ntogether; as they move away the density diminishes; it becomes thinner\nand more attenuated. But if the hands cease to move, the effluvium\ndisappears. This is the case as long as the tips of the fingers are\nnot more than 2 to 3 centimetres away. If the movement of withdrawal\nceases when the finger-tips are within 10 to 15 centimetres proximity,\nthe effluvium remains visible for a longer time. This is what generally\nhappens, but the facts have not always the same regularity. There is,\nin psychical phenomena, the same diversity and variability, which are\nobserved in other biological phenomena.\n\nI have said that the effluvium persists longer and is best seen when\nthe finger-tips of each hand are within 10 centimetres proximity. Under\nthese conditions, the movement of separation being suspended, the\nslight mist, which I described, persists several seconds. Sometimes the\neffluvium is clearly visible, when the fingers are 25 to 30 centimetres\napart.\n\nI am inclined to think, that this effluvium is not altogether an\nimaginary phenomenon. It seems to me to exclude, at least, the\nhypothesis of the persistence of the retinal image; for the false image\ndoes not last so long as the effluvium, under the conditions mentioned\nby me.\n\nThere is yet another explanation. This is that the eye automatically\nprolongs the clear impression of the fingers on the dark background\nseparating them. This would be analogous to the expansion by\nirradiation of clear images upon a dark background.\n\nOther reasons, however, make me discard this hypothesis. In the first\nplace, why do some people see the supposed false image vividly coloured\nand not white? Secondly, if the phenomenon is of retinal origin,\nwhy\u2014instead of being thinner, as is the case\u2014does not the image\nreproduce the form of the finger? Why is it a blue-grey colour and not\nblack, as should be the complimentary image of a finger which appears\nto be white?\n\nWhy is not the phenomenon produced with certain objects coloured in\nwhite? In vain might we experiment with them as with the hands; they\nwould never leave effluvium between them. There is an exception,\nhowever: if we hold cotton or wood in the hands, we will often perceive\nthis appearance of effluvium. It is not obtained, as far as I have\nbeen able to judge, with metal objects. From this, it may be inferred,\nthough I do not affirm it, as my experiments are not sufficiently\nconclusive\u2014that wood and cotton conduct the effluvium as well as flesh.\nThis seems to me very probable with cotton; by holding a crumpled\nhandkerchief in the hand, and presenting it to the background as I have\nrecommended doing with the fingers, we will notice a slight mist round\nthe cotton, which seems to soften off the outlines.\n\nFinally, another more serious reason for considering these effluvia\nas probably objective, is the frequent absence of parallelism between\nthe effluvia of corresponding fingers. I have often observed distinct\ndivergencies, and it sometimes struck me as though the will might be\nable to influence the direction of the effluvia to a certain extent.\nIt often happens that all the experimenters see the effluvia under the\nsame aspect. The phenomenon can show great variability in appearance,\nthe middle finger of one hand, for example, becoming connected with\ntwo, three, or four fingers of the opposite one.\n\nAs the aspect of this effluvium usually appears the same to the\nobservers, there is room to presume that its existence and direction\nare not illusory phenomena. In the contrary case, we would have to\nsuppose collective hallucination, or a most improbable transmission of\nimpression, which my personal observations do not dispose me to admit.\n\nThe phenomenon, which I have called \u2018visibility of the digital\neffluvium\u2019 for the sake of convenience, is very easy to observe. I make\ngreat reserves on its objectivity, although I think its reality is more\nprobable than its non-existence. It is most desirable that competent\nexperimenters should verify these observations, which I only present as\nuncertain.\n\nI would have no doubt whatever of the phenomenon, if the accounts of\nthe persons with whom I experimented had always concorded as to the\ndirection taken by the effluvia; but it was not so. Though there is a\ngood proportion of corroboration, I have often observed contradictions\nin the descriptions which were given me.\n\nAlthough the digital effluvium does not yet appear to me to be\ndemonstrated, I think it will be interesting to point out the analogies\nit presents with phenomena already mentioned by diverse experimenters,\nnotably by Reichenbach and de Rochas. These two experimenters operated\nunder very different conditions to mine. The one placed his sensitive\nin profound obscurity and left him there for a time; then he made him\nlook at living beings, flowers, magnets, ends of cords, and metal\nwires, opposite ends of which were in the sun; his sensitives generally\nsaw\u2014especially with human hands, crystals, and magnetic poles\u2014a kind\nof flame or luminous mist surrounding them, or issuing from them.\nRochas has chiefly experimented with sensitives plunged in deep sleep;\nevery one has read of his experiments,\u2014the blue and red coloration\nwhich his sensitives gave to the gleams of light which are emitted by\nmagnetic poles, and the right and left sides of the body. My conditions\nof experimentation were very different from those under which\nReichenbach and Rochas worked. I took the first comer and operated in\nbroad daylight. But my observations tend to confirm theirs, at least in\nwhat concerns the radiation of something at the finger-tips.\n\nAnother interesting observation remains to be made. I have shown that\nvery probably linen, and perhaps wood also, were easily impregnated\nwith that substance of which the effluvium is constituted. This fact\nmay be compared with those I pointed out, when dealing with telekinetic\nmovements: particularly the approach of a small table which touched\nthe cloth of the table at which I was breakfasting; the approach of\nthe chair which was touched by a wooden newspaper-holder lying on the\ntable; and lastly, the curious bulging out of mediums\u2019 dresses, which\ngrazed the feet of the table in some cases of telekinesis. Without\nforming any premature hypothesis, it is allowable to look upon the\ndigital effluvium as having some connection with the force, which is\nthe determining cause of movements without contact.\n\nThe effluvium is visible under other conditions, which are worth\nnoting. It can be seen, when passes are made over a person or an\nobject. The appearance is again similar to smoke; it is a bluish-grey\nmist, which seems to form prolongations of the fingers.\n\nThe effluvium is not a luminous phenomenon. I have described it in\norder to be complete, and not to omit a fact which is interesting for\nmore than one reason. It can, moreover, be seen by certain subjects in\nthe dark. Here is an interesting experiment, which I have sometimes\nrealised, but which presents certain difficulties.\n\nOne of the mediums, with whom I experimented, appeared to have an\nexceptional acuteness of vision in reference to the effluvium. He\nsaw it escape from the hands of the sitters, and spread itself over\nthe seance-table. Desirous of finding out what the medium would see\nin total darkness, I put out all the lights, and invited the medium\nto touch my hand if he saw it. The experiment did not succeed every\ntime, but the proportion of success was superior to probabilities; but\nas the medium might have been able to guide himself by the sense of\nhearing, I thought of testing him by touching the table. The sensitive\nquickly recognised the finger-tips, claiming to perceive a kind of\nmilky phosphorescence at the spot where my finger was. To make doubly\nsure I tested him still further by tracing letters on the table with\nthe tip of my forefinger, taking the precaution to avoid all sound. The\nmedium read nearly all the letters drawn. I then traced some words; he\nread them off also. I was able to make him read words of five letters;\nhe was not able to read longer words, he recognised the last letters,\nbut declared that the first were blotted out. Nearly all the words of\nthree or four letters were read correctly, and the errors were often\nsignificant: _e.g._ the word \u2018foi\u2019 became \u2018loi.\u2019 Now, in a running\nhand-writing, it suffices to suppress the lower part of the \u2018f\u2019 for the\nletter thus amputated to take the aspect of an \u2018l.\u2019 I cannot say if\nthe sensitive really saw what he claimed to see, or if he were guided\nby the sound of my finger. I am obliged to trust to his sincerity on\nthis point; but I have reason to believe that this medium is sincere\nand honourable. He is a man of education, and is not a professional\nmedium; he follows a liberal profession, and does not wish his name to\nbe mentioned. I have much esteem for him. On the other hand, his senses\nwould need to have been extraordinarily developed, to have enabled him\nto recognise the movement of my finger from the very slight sound it\nmay have made. No sound was perceptible to myself. I wrote on a small\nvarnished table of blackwood, on which my finger glided easily and\nsilently. Again, the errors made now and then\u2014by reading \u2018loi\u2019 for\n\u2018foi,\u2019 etc., seem to prove that the sense of sight and not sound was in\noperation.\n\nSometimes it happens, that it is no longer the effluvium which is\nperceived, but the whole hand itself becomes phosphorescent. Rays come\nand go like gleams on the back of the hands, or on the fingers, and\nsometimes, but very rarely, on the face or body of the sitters. These\nphosphorescences and the digital effluvia appear to me to belong to the\nsame order of phenomena. Frequently, they are but fleeting gleams seen\nat the finger-tips, when the hands are resting on the table. Though\nI and others who have experimented with me, have often verified this\nappearance, I have some doubts upon its reality. In obscurity, the eye\ntires quickly, and phosphenes soon appear; still, I have nearly always\nobserved, that these glimmering lights were perceived by other persons\nin the same spot I saw them in.\n\nI have rarely observed those glimmering lights, some people see, on the\ngarments and faces of sitters.\n\nI have not yet been able to verify, in a positive manner, the\nphosphorescence of the hands in ordinary seances; though observers\nin whom I have the greatest confidence, have assured me that they\nhad remarked it. We must not lose sight of the fact that the eyes\ntire quickly; when the obscurity is not complete, the white hands are\nvaguely perceived on the dark background, the eyes, growing tired,\naccentuate the contrast between the two shades, and the palest has a\ntendency to appear slightly luminous.\n\nSometimes, but very seldom, I have observed sparks which seemed to\ncoincide with raps. This phenomena appears to have an objective\nreality. I was not the only one to notice these sparks; others saw them\nalso; their apparition at the moment the raps were heard was constant.\nThese circumstances permitted us to think, that the phenomenon ought to\nhave an objective substratum of some kind.\n\nHowever, I have observed luminous phenomena which were decidedly\nobjective. At Choisy, we obtained them under special conditions, which\nRochas has indicated, and which are rather significative. These lights,\nwhich were very brilliant, looked like large phosphorescent drops\ngliding about on Eusapia\u2019s bodice, after having floated for some time\nin the air. This phenomenon did not appear to me to be very convincing,\nbecause during the sitting, a strong odour of phosphorus permeated the\nroom. When Eusapia had left, I returned to the room, where I found MM.\nde Gramont and de Watteville, who were as inquisitive as I was. We\nsearched but found nothing on the floor.\n\nOur suspicions had been aroused by the phosphorescent odour, which was\ndiffused in the room. Since then, I have noticed it in seances, where\nfraud seemed to be impossible. This odour is characteristic; it is\nmore like the odour of ozone than that of phosphorus. It is like the\nodour perceptible in the vicinity of static electrical machines when in\nactivity.\n\nThese flitting lights can be easily imitated. A prudent experimenter\nought never to lose sight of the fact, that it is possible to employ\ndiverse substances in order to produce phosphorescent effects. The\nuse of phosphorescent oil, for example, will give fictitious luminous\nphenomena. I remember a seance at which the medical student, of whom I\nhave already spoken, was present. I noticed that one of his finger-tips\nshone for a moment. I afterwards learnt, that this young man had a\nphial of phosphorescent oil in one of his pockets. On another occasion,\nlong narrow lights were, from time to time, seen on his body. I think\nthese were produced by matches or straws dipped in the luminous liquid.\nPhosphorescent preparations, as a rule, have the advantage of only\nbecoming very luminous, when they are shaken about in the air; for the\nlights, which are given forth by the phosphorus they contain, are only\nproduced when there are phenomena of oxydation.\n\nObjects coated over with sulphide of calcium, strontium, or baryum,\nbecome luminous in obscurity, when they have been previously exposed\nto light. This is the principle of luminous dials, match-boxes and\ncandle-sticks. There are also other substances which permit of\nsimulating luminous phenomena.\n\nI was once present at some seances, which were very curious from the\npoint of view of the luminous phenomena which I observed. These seances\nwere of the series of which I have already spoken. The two young\ntricksters, some of whose misdeeds I have related, were present, and\nas one of them is an excellent chemist, it is possible that the superb\nphenomena I observed were not altogether authentic. I confess, I do not\nsee how fraud was committed; but, given the conditions under which I\nexperimented, I think I ought to abstain from expressing a favourable\nopinion upon the reality of the facts observed. I will describe them\nsuccinctly, indicating the phenomena which could have been simulated,\nand those which did not appear to be so.\n\nThe medium is a young man of twenty-four years of age, of good family,\nand fairly well-educated. He has been well brought up, and his manners\nare good. He is a commercial clerk. He is a tall, strong, well-built\nyoung man, apparently in robust health. He is intelligent, but does\nnot strike me as having a very strong will. He is easily influenced\nby his comrades, and was particularly so by the medical student whose\nirrepressible tendency to cheating I have already spoken about. The\nstudent had a great ascendency over the medium, and, in spite of my\nadvice, induced him to experiment too frequently, almost daily. It\nwas easy to foresee the result: the imprudent student and medium\nboth presented visible nervous troubles at the end of a few weeks.\nThe seances were held in the evening with a round table which had a\ndouble top; they began in the light, but, in obedience to the behests\nof the table, total obscurity was speedily obtained. I have always\nthought that obscurity was asked for by one of the two tricksters,\nwho was then able to give himself up to his heart\u2019s delight, and do\nas he pleased with his confiding group. They had invited some of\ntheir friends\u2014students or doctors\u2014and I was extremely sorry for these\nnew-comers, in that they should have been present at such suspicious\nseances.\n\nTo be quite exact, I ought to say that, though I was convinced these\nyoung men frauded, I was not always able to bring it home to them. I\ngenerally seated myself beside the most turbulent of the two young men,\nand the hand which I held never once left mine. But the other hand and\nthe other trickster had more liberty, and some of my co-experimenters\nverified fraud.\n\nMoreover, I suspected fraud, because of the appearance of the\nphenomena, which were of an extremely rough character. The table,\nraised from the floor, was at times thrown against the observers with\nso much force, that they have occasionally been seriously hurt. This\nnever happens with true phenomena. The thin top of the table was\nbroken; a \u2018phenomenon\u2019 which was caused by exaggerated pressure or\nviolent blows destined to imitate loud raps. Real raps never break a\ntable; its feet are sometimes demolished, when the levitated table\nfalls abruptly, but this is the only damage I have ever observed at\nserious seances.\n\nNotwithstanding the more than suspicious conditions under which we\noperated, I am not sure that all the phenomena were simulated. In these\nseances, there seems to have been a mixture of much that was false with\na little that was true. A longer observation would have permitted me to\ncome to a more definite conclusion, but the seances were discontinued.\n\nOf the phenomena, the authenticity of which appeared probable to me, I\nwill mention raps. Many of them were obtained in the light and without\napparent contact; they had all the aspect of the authentic raps I have\nso frequently observed. But owing to insufficient control, I do not\nfeel able to affirm their reality.\n\nAs for luminous phenomena, I cannot help wondering how some of them\ncould have been simulated. In order to give a precise physiognomy of\nthe conditions under which they were observed, I will briefly relate\none of the most curious seances of the series.\n\nThere were about a dozen persons present. Five or six sat down to the\ntable, and raps were obtained, now on the table, now on the floor.\nObscurity was asked for and gradually given. The phenomena increased\nin intensity as the darkness deepened. When we could no longer see,\nthe usual levitations, violent knocking, and displacement of furniture\nhad their own way. The seance was discontinued for a few minutes, and\nresumed towards eleven o\u2019clock. The table requested that the medium\nmight be placed in the cabinet, which was in a corner of the room, and\nmade of white curtains. The medium was placed as requested. The table\nthen asked the experimenters to withdraw from the vicinity of the\ncabinet; when giving these directions, the table appeared to strike the\nfloor of its own accord. It told us to seat ourselves at a distance\nof 6 feet from the cabinet, and then asked us to sing. We droned out\nthe air, \u2018Fr\u00e8re Jacques, dormez-vous?\u2019 At the end of ten or fifteen\nminutes, milky-looking phosphorescent lights were seen on the curtains\nof the cabinet; then luminous hands appeared. One very luminous hand\nrose rapidly outside the curtains and seized a bell, which had been\nhooked on to a nail at about 7 feet 6 inches above the floor. This hand\nwas visible to every one.\n\nThen the milky-lights were again seen, larger and more brilliant\nthan before. One of these lights, the outlines of which were very\nindistinct, floated about the room, and withdrew to about 9 feet\nfrom the cabinet, along the wall opposite the one near which the\nexperimenters were grouped. This light appeared to be 4 feet above the\nground; it was about 3 feet high by 10 inches broad, and appeared to\nfloat in the air. It remained visible for several seconds.\n\nAfterwards, other lights were seen near the curtains; finally, one\nextremely brilliant light appeared above the curtains near the\nceiling. This light was about 1 foot 6 inches high by 1 foot 2 inches\nwide. The outlines of this luminosity were more clearly defined than\nthose of the light which floated about the room.\n\nThese phenomena were clearly visible to every one. Some of the\nexperimenters thought they could see shadowy forms in these lights.\nAs for me, I could distinguish no human appearance therein. The first\nlight I described gave me the impression of a luminous pillar; the\nsecond, whose outlines were better defined, awakened no idea of any\ndefinite form. We ceased experimenting shortly after this seance.\n\nWere they genuine, these phenomena? I am not sure, but I cannot\nhelp wondering how they could have been simulated! There are some\ndistinctions to be made between these appearances, of which I have\nonly described the principal. The luminous hand, which unhooked the\nbell, was well defined: it was very distinct and one mass of light. I\nquite understand that suspicion might fall on the medium; he might have\ncovered his own hand with some phosphorescent substance, and, thanks\nto his height, unhooked the bell himself. Let us try to find out what\nsubstance he could have used. We must, I think, put aside the idea\nof phosphorescent oil. This would have left traces on the medium\u2019s\nhands and clothes, on the curtains of the cabinet, on the bell, on the\nwall where the bell was hung. Now there was nothing of the sort. The\nmedium\u2019s hands and garments bore no trace whatsoever of oil. Besides,\nthe light which is given forth by preparations which have phosphorus as\ntheir basis, has neither the duration, nor the uniformity of the lights\nI observed.\n\nIs it a preparation with a basis of sulphides of the calcium class?\nSulphides, in order to be phosphorescent, ought to be in a dry state.\nThey are usually reduced to a powder, and this powder is pasted on to\nthe substance we wish to render luminous. The appearance of a hand\nmight be given by a glove done over with sulphide of strontium or\ncalcium. But I need not say how difficult it would be to put on this\nglove. True, the glove could be stuffed with horsehair, dipped in\npaste and sprinkled over with sulphide in the desired position. The\nphenomenon which I observed, could then be explained in the following\nmanner: The medium might have moved the luminous glove about with one\nhand, and unhooked the bell with the other. This is possible, and yet\nit does not appear to me to explain what I saw.\n\nIn any case, this explanation ceases to be satisfactory, when we\nconsider the case of the floating lights. I know of no system which\nallows of imitating the immaterial, fugitive, diaphanous appearance\nof these curious lights. My chemical knowledge, it is true, is very\nrudimentary; and one of the young men I speak of is a clever chemist;\nit may be he knows of a more perfect process than those just mentioned.\nNevertheless, it seems to me that a piece of cloth done over with some\nluminous preparation or other, would not have the aspect of the light\nwhich I saw floating about the room. I think it is very difficult\nto reproduce these vague, ill-defined lights, which are more like a\nluminous cloud than a phosphorescent material object.\n\nThe outlines of the last appearance I described were well defined,\nand in its upper part reminded one of the folds of material. Some\nof my co-experimenters thought they recognised a masculine, bearded\nhead therein, covered with a turban or burnoose. If we had been in\nthe presence of an artificial phenomenon, the luminous object should\nhave presented the same aspect to every observer. It was not so in\nreality; for some of us could distinguish no recognisable form in\nthe luminosity. I know that the imagination can be the cause of much\nvisual illusion. It makes us complete imperfect images, and see faces\nand forms in plays of light and shade which only faintly recall these\nforms and faces. I have not observed the curious phenomena which I\ndescribe, under conditions sufficiently precise to enable me to affirm\ntheir objectivity, and I can only repeat what I said just now, that\ntheir reality appeared probable to me, in spite of the frauds of\nwhich I knew, and those which I suspected; in spite of my intellect\u2019s\nprejudice, I was favourably impressed.\n\nI will add that the luminosity, which floated about the room, moved\nabout up and down, and lasted for several seconds. That part of the\nroom where it floated about was blocked up with the table, chairs and\nother furniture, which had been taken there from the recess adjoining\nthe seance-room. All the experimenters were grouped together in one\npart of the room. None of them left their seats during the production\nof these phenomena. Had the medium left the cabinet and man\u0153uvred\nthe light we perceived, he would have knocked against the scattered\nfurniture. We kept the strictest silence, when luminous phenomena were\nbeing produced, and we would certainly have heard the medium moving\nabout, had he left the cabinet. Now, we heard no noise whatsoever;\nneither of the footsteps he would have been obliged to make, nor of the\nfurniture which he would have knocked against, unless he be able to see\nremarkably well in the dark.\n\nSuch are the observations I have to present upon this curious seance.\nOne of my friends, an eminent savant, well acquainted with this kind of\nphenomena, had, like myself, the impression that those I have depicted\nwere real.\n\nMoreover, in other seances this medium gave us similar luminosities.\nI will even point out that one of the suspected sitters\u2014the medical\nstudent\u2014the clever chemist\u2014having been eliminated, and the experiments\ntaking place at the house of one of my medical friends, we observed\nglobular lights on the curtains of the cabinet behind which the medium\nwas sitting. These lights were much smaller than those I have just\ndescribed\u2014they were as large as a walnut\u2014but were easily observable.\n\nI hope to be able to resume my experiments with this medium; for to me\nhe seems to be one of the most powerful I have ever seen. It is really\na pity he should have fallen into the hands of imprudent and ignorant\nyoung men; they have abused his force, worn him out, and made him ill.\nJudiciously handled, he might have become extraordinary. It remains to\nbe seen, if the bad conditions under which he has been developed have\nnot had the effect of destroying the rare faculty he possessed. I will\nreturn to these considerations later on.\n\nThe lights produced by this young man were the most brilliant I\nhave ever seen. Their colour has been well compared to the light of\nthe nebula by one of my co-experimenters, a distinguished amateur\nastronomer. This experimenter had a good spectroscope, but he has never\nbeen able to succeed in analysing, spectroscopically, the lights we\nhave seen. They were too unsteady and fugitive.\n\nI now come to some visual phenomena, which have not the same luminous\nfeature as those I have been speaking about, but which present another\nvery curious feature: they give representations of objects or of human\nforms.\n\nI have not seen any phosphorescent human forms such as certain\nobservers affirm to have seen. I have said that the Bordeaux medium,\nin presence of whom I had seen such fine luminous phenomena, had also\ngiven us a luminous hand. At Choisy in 1896, I saw the same thing with\nEusapia. There was enough light in the room to see Eusapia\u2019s hands.\nUnder these conditions\u2014the hands of the medium being not only held by\nher right- and left-hand neighbours, but visible all the time on the\ntable\u2014we perceived at about 1 foot 9 inches above Eusapia\u2019s head a\nslightly phosphorescent hand, which shook about in the opening between\nthe two curtains. This appearance was very distinct, and was perceived\nby all those whose positions allowed them to see it.\n\nThis was not the first time I had seen the form of a hand. In 1895,\nat l\u2019Agn\u00e9las, I saw a hand and bare forearm, which showed itself in\nprofile above M. Sabatier, seated in front of me, and touched him\non the forehead. At the same moment, M. Sabatier mentioned having\nbeen touched on the head. My perception was clear and decided; I\nwas positive of having seen this hand and forearm. I remember that\nmy co-experimenters\u2014two of them at least\u2014hesitated to admit my\nobservation, because I had been the only one to see it. In 1895, I was\nnot so accustomed to seances as I became later on, and I was inclined\nto listen with deference to my friends\u2019 remarks, but I was so positive\nof the reality of my observation, that it was inserted in the report.\nSubsequent experience has multiplied observations of this order: they\nrecall to mind the round head seen at Carqueiranne. The hand and\nforearm which I saw at l\u2019Agn\u00e9las were black and opaque. They were\nprojected on to the clear background of the room where we experimented;\nwe were seated in such a way that only I could see them.\n\nI did not see anything quite like this in 1896; for, it will be\nremembered that the hand we saw at Choisy was slightly phosphorescent,\nand presented quite a different appearance to the dark, solid-looking\narm and hand which I saw at l\u2019Agn\u00e9las. I remember one day at Choisy,\nwhen M. de Gramont was in the cabinet behind Eusapia, the latter told\nus to blow hard. At the same moment, M. de Gramont saw the shape of a\npair of bellows.\n\nAt Bordeaux, in 1897, we again saw black, opaque forms under excellent\nconditions. A few extracts from the reports of these seances will be\nfound in the Appendix. I refer my readers to this for the detail of the\nmaterial conditions under which we operated. I will simply indicate\nhere that the room, in which we held our seances, is lighted up by\na very large bay-window. The persian shutters were closed for the\nseances; but the gas-light, from the kitchen premises, was reflected\nthrough the persians on to the window-panes, and cast a faint light in\nthe seance-room. In consequence of this reflection on the panes, the\nwindow formed a kind of clear background, upon which the silhouettes of\ncertain black forms could be seen by at least half of the experimenters.\n\nWe all saw these forms, or rather the form; for it was always the\nsame form which was shown, the profile of a long bearded face with\na strongly arched nose. This appearance is said to be the head of\n\u2018John,\u2019 Eusapia\u2019s habitual personification. It is an extraordinary\nphenomenon; and the first idea which presents itself to the mind\nis that of a collective hallucination. But then it remains to be\nasked, why it was manifested under the very special conditions I have\nindicated. Moreover, the care with which we observed this curious\nphenomenon, and\u2014it seems to me superfluous to add\u2014the calm with which\nwe experimented, render the hypothesis of hallucination a most unlikely\none.\n\nThe hypothesis of fraud is still less admissible. The head we perceived\nwas of natural size, and measured about 1 foot 6 inches from the\nforehead to the extremity of the beard. If the phenomenon is to be\nattributed to fraud, we must explain how Eusapia hid the necessary\nmask on her person; we must also explain how she could have drawn it\nout unknown to us, and further, how she man\u0153uvred it. Eusapia did not\ngo into trance at our Bordeaux seances. She sometimes saw the profile\nin question, and manifested her satisfaction at being able to look on,\nfor the first time I think, at the phenomena which was produced through\nher. The light from the window was sufficient to enable us to see\nEusapia\u2019s hands. I have no need to say that her hands were carefully\nheld by her right and left controllers. If this profile had been\nconcealed on her person, it would have been absolutely impossible for\nher to man\u0153uvre it. The profile we observed appeared to form itself at\nthe top of the cabinet, at a height of about 3 feet 9 inches _above_\nEusapia\u2019s head; it descended slowly and placed itself just above and\nin front of her; at the end of a few seconds it disappeared only to\nreappear later on under the same conditions. We always carefully\nassured ourselves of the relative immobility of the medium\u2019s hands\nand arms; and the strange phenomenon I relate is one of the most\nirreproachable I have ever verified, so utterly incompatible is the\nhypothesis of fraud with the conditions under which we observed it.\n\nTwo or three times a slightly luminous phenomenon was noticed. It\nwas formed on the curtain, near which my friend M. de Pontaud and I\nwere sitting; it was a whitish, milky-looking spot, visible to every\none, at least to those whose positions allowed them to perceive it\nconveniently. This luminosity appeared to shrink up quickly, and\ndisappeared on a level with our heads.\n\nEvidently I have no explanation to offer. The apparition of these human\nforms raises a problem, which is far more complicated than the problem\nof raps and movements without contact, and I think the study of this\nproblem cannot be profitably undertaken at present. Nothing authorises\nme to consider these curious phenomena as demonstrating the exactness\nof the spirit hypothesis; I think their cause lies elsewhere than in\nthe intervention of the spirit of a deceased person; but I am not\nyet able to formulate any rational opinion on this subject. However,\nI will point out the close connection, which appears to me to exist\nbetween the production of these forms, and the production of raps and\nmovements without contact. These relations tend to persuade me, that\nall these phenomena belong to the same order, and depend upon the\nsame agent, and the same cause. Before, however, analysing summarily\nthe observations on which I base this opinion, I ought to describe a\nseries of experiments, which have given me most curious results. These\nexperiments were made with a medium, a man of deep intelligence and\nrefined nature, of whose medianity I have already spoken, pages 74,\n79, 81-2, 101-3. I obtained with him: (_a_) raps, faint at first, but\nvery clear and well verified, with and without contact; (_b_) movements\nwithout contact of feeble amplitude, but very well observed; (_c_)\nfaint luminous phenomena; (_d_) finally, the production of diverse\nforms. The first two categories of facts have already been dealt with,\nI will now describe the last two. They confirm, to a certain extent,\nthe experiments already related in this chapter.\n\nThe first time luminous phenomena were seen, we were holding a seance\nin a small room, but were not using a table. The medium perceived\nseveral lights and even faces on the wall in front of him. These lights\nand faces were not visible to me. Sometimes I thought I saw lights, but\nextremely faint ones, and at the limit of visibility; I think these\nlights were subjective. And yet, I have often asked the medium where\nhe saw the light, to describe its shape, and the direction it took if\nit moved about, and I have remarked that the indications given by the\nmedium concorded with my own observations; but, curiously enough\u2014and\nit is my duty as a witness to point this out\u2014I could often see these\nlights, just as well when my eyes were closed, as when they were open.\nThis circumstance seems to me conclusive, and makes me think these\nlights were subjective. In reality, I do not think that the light\nemitted by the gleams I saw was of such a nature, that its rays could\npenetrate through closed eyelids. This interior visibility should exist\nin every case; now this is not so, and I have only observed it with\nthis particular medium, though I had once or twice suspected it in a\nformer series of experiments.\n\nOn the other hand, I cannot consider these visions as hallucinations,\nunless I also admit that this entoptic hallucination is collective. But\nthen, why are not these illusions met with in other seances? Why is the\nmanifestation of lights or forms accompanied by abundant raps without\ncontact? These raps immediately precede the apparition of the forms,\nand behave as though they were signals destined to draw the attention\nof the observers. This is a coincidence which is not fortuitous, for it\nis almost constant.\n\nThe first time that a more or less definite form was observed with\nthis medium, no seance was being held. The medium saw on the wall the\napparition of one of his \u2018personifications,\u2019 and the word _curtain_\ntraced in luminous letters. The sensitive could not interpret the\nmeaning of this word, for he had never been present at any spiritistic\nseance. I told him to continue observing, for I thought I understood\nthe meaning of this message. I immediately arranged, as well as I\ncould, a kind of cabinet in a corner of the room with the help of some\nblack curtains. We darkened the room and sat down before a table, the\nmedium having his back turned to the cabinet. In a short time we heard\nraps on the table, the medium\u2019s chair, the floor, and on the wall\ninside the cabinet. The medium, interested, turned half round towards\nthe cabinet, when all at once, after the production of some very faint,\nflitting lights, I perceived the beautiful face of a woman, pale, the\neyes up-raised as though in prayer. The eyes and hair were black; the\nhair was parted in the centre and dressed in the style of fifty or\nsixty years ago. The face was draped in a white veil which also covered\nthe head, forming a kind of frame for the face. The physiognomy was\nof the sweetest, and of rare beauty. The apparition appeared to be\nslightly luminous, of a whitish, milky hue. It showed itself to the\nleft of the medium, but high above him, near the ceiling. It remained\nvisible for a very short time. Prudently interrogated, the medium\ngave me the exact description of the face I had just perceived. The\ndetails concorded in every way. Inquiry as to who it was elicited the\ninformation, given in raps, that it was the face of one of the group of\nfour fairies of whom I spoke on page 81.\n\nIt is not often I have had such a clear vision. I have, indeed, very\nrarely obtained this curious phenomenon: still, I have observed it\ndistinctly three times with this medium. The second time, the faces\nseemed to be only partially materialised; I only saw portions of faces\nunknown to me: the medium recognised one of these faces. The third\ntime, the medium saw the apparitions plainly, and described them,\nbut I saw only faint lights; suddenly, however, I saw a face, the\nforehead, eyes, and nose, reproducing the traits of a very dear friend\nI had recently lost. The medium saw the whole face. He did not know my\nfriend when he was alive, but he has had curious and strange posthumous\napparitions of him under conditions which it would be interesting to\nrelate, but, unfortunately, I am not authorised to do so completely.\n\nIt is not only the forms of human beings which I have seen with this\nmedium, but also those of animals, more or less strange. I cannot\nhelp thinking that these are due to imagination. But the curious fact\nis, that there is concordance between the medium\u2019s visions and the\nappearances perceived by the sitters.\n\nFinally, under the same conditions, I once saw a copper lantern, of\nwell-defined shape, and in a particular position. This vision was\nalso seen by the medium in the same way. Here, again, I cannot form\nany satisfactory explanation. I am inclined to think, that I am the\nvictim of hallucination, though the circumstances do not favour that\nhypothesis. The vision of the lantern is analogous to that of the pair\nof bellows seen by M. de Gramont with Eusapia. I refer my readers to\nwhat I said further back concerning the concordance between the raps\nand the apparitions; this simultaneousness existed with the apparitions\nof animal-like forms and material objects, as well as with those of\nhuman faces. This is a fact which is of a nature to set aside the\nhypothesis of pure illusion. But then!\n\nI have mentioned these strange experiences in order to be complete and\nsincere. I do not conceal the fact, that it costs me much to relate\nthis, because I do not find herein the conditions of precision, which\nmy experiments in telekinesis, for example, appeared to present. I\nwill add that I do not try to obtain these phenomena of more or less\ncomplete materialisations. I suffer them: for the facts do not proceed\naltogether according to the liking of the experimenter. I cannot say\nthat these apparitions leave me indifferent; on the contrary, they\ninterest me immensely; but I have the impression of being in the\npresence of a fact, which is too complicated to be usefully observed.\nIt is not the same with raps and telekinesis: and I put forth all\nmy efforts in order to restrict my studies and researches to these\nphenomena; for I have the feeling that we may be able to arrive at\ndiscovering the conditions of their production. I imagine\u2014perhaps\nwrongly\u2014that, henceforth, we can submit them to scientific discipline;\nI think that the study of raps and telekinetic phenomena is the\nnecessary preliminary to the study of other, less comprehensible,\nfacts. Therefore, I have devoted myself almost exclusively to their\nobservation; nevertheless, I did not think I was able to dispense\nwith relating everything I had seen. I am entirely ignorant of the\nsignification of these diverse appearances; I may have made a mistake,\nthough I do not think so, but it seems to me I have not the right to\nmake a choice in my experiments, to withhold the one and relate the\nother. It behoves those who read me to put themselves in the same\nconditions under which I was placed, and observe in their turn. I\nconfine myself to relating what I have seen. I will add that certain\nfacts have appeared to me more certain than others, but my r\u00f4le of\nwitness ends there.\n\nThe ascertainments I have made in what concerns luminous phenomena,\npermit me to give some useful indications. The first concern the\nmethods of operation; the others are conclusions which I have drawn\nfrom my own experiences.\n\nWhen seeking for simple, luminous phenomena, it is advisable to proceed\nas I have done for parakinetic and telekinetic phenomena. The sitters\ngroup themselves around a table, leaning their hands on it, or form\na chain round the table without touching it. Needless to say, the\nobscurity ought to be as complete as possible. Under these conditions,\nlights can be obtained; and it is in this way, I observed the woman\u2019s\nface I have described.\n\nThe very fine lights which I saw with the young Bordeaux medium (pages\n141 and following) were obtained in another manner, which seems to\nme better still. It is, moreover, the method adopted by professional\nmediums, perhaps because it favours the execution of fraudulent even\nmore than genuine phenomena. This method consists in placing the medium\nin the cabinet and forming the chain, either round the table or in a\nhalf-circle, in which latter case the chain is not closed.\n\nI have noticed that music and singing in common have a favourable\ninfluence on the production of the phenomena. This circumstance is,\nhowever, another cause for suspicion, because the noise of music and\nsinging can drown that made by the medium in moving about.\n\nAlthough I cannot consider the reality of the luminous phenomena\nobserved by me as being so well established as that of certain other\nphenomena, I will none the less give the result of the ascertainments\nI think I have made thereon. I indicate them with every reserve; but\nthe analogy they present with the ascertainments I made relative to\nraps and movements without contact, appeared to me useful to point out.\nIt is one of the reasons which made me believe in their probability\nfirst of all; it is also the indication of the presumable existence of\nsome general law governing all these phenomena, however different in\nappearance they may be.\n\nThe most important observations I have to make are, as before, the\nsynchronism between the muscular action and the phenomenon; the\ntendency to personification; the physical fatigue experienced by all\nthe experimenters after a successful seance.\n\nThe reasons why I conclude in the existence of this synchronism, are\nbased upon a great number of observations made with Eusapia and other\nmediums. It seemed to me, in my experiments with Eusapia Paladino,\nthat this latter preferred the breath to any other movement for the\nproduction of lights. This conclusion is uncertain, because I have not\nhad occasion to examine many luminous phenomena with the Neapolitan\nmedium.\n\nMy observations were more precise with the Bordeaux medium. Rubbing\nthe hands together, rubbing the feet on the floor, breathing hard,\nsqueezing hands tightly when the chain is formed; all this provoked the\napparition of the curious luminosities I have spoken about. True, these\nwere also produced spontaneously; but the movements executed appeared\nto me to have an action upon their manifestation.\n\nHere again, the relation with the muscular contraction rather than\nwith the movement itself seemed to me to exist, but I could not verify\nthis point with the same certitude as with raps and movements without\ncontact.\n\nAt all events, all reserves made for fraud, which I recognise possible\nthough improbable, chanting or singing in common has appeared to\nme to have a favourable influence on the phenomena. I have had\noccasion of verifying this effect of intoned words; I am unable to\ngive its explanation, although we may suspect what it is likely to\nbe. I will simply recall to mind the r\u00f4le which intoning or singing\nplays in religious ceremonies and in magical operations: the words\n\u2018incantations,\u2019 \u2018enchantments,\u2019 are very significative, from that point\nof view. The erudite will remember the magic songs of the 11th eclogue\nof Theocritus, and of the 8th of Virgil. The Hindoo magicians intone\ntheir mentrams. Nothing is more widespread than this belief in the\nsupernatural virtue of singing, of the cadenced and modulated word. As\nthe supernormal facts which I relate appear to me to have been known\nfrom the earliest times\u2014however ill-interpreted they may have been\u2014I\nam inclined to believe, that the superstitions relative to the magical\npower of song are not without a foundation of truth. This appears most\nimprobable, and no one is more astonished than myself, to find myself\nadmitting this possibility. I admit it nevertheless. I am inclined to\nthink, that the greater part of popular beliefs have some foundation;\nthe particle of truth which they contain is often very feeble, because\nignorance, fear, imagination mask it under accessory and unreasonable\nbeliefs, which smother it. There would be many interesting analogies to\npoint out on this subject, if I had not systematically forbidden myself\nall manner of theoretical commentary. All the same, I will remark that\nthe most worthy spiritists recommend singing or music during seances. I\nwill cease, for I can only repeat here the considerations which I have\nalready presented concerning the relation between the nervous energy,\nwhatever it may be, and luminous phenomena; the connection appears to\nbe very close indeed.\n\nThe physiognomical aspect of these phenomena is similar to that of\nsonorous and motor phenomena: It tends to personification, and it is\nprobable, that imperfect luminous forms are but rude outlines of a\nreal form. That form is not always human, although it appears to be so\nas a rule. I have given examples, where the appearance was that of an\nanimal or of an object. I have never been able to converse with the\nform itself, when it was human; but I have experimented with mediums\nwho thought they conversed with the forms. These all claim to be the\nspirits of deceased persons. What renders this unanimity particularly\ninteresting is that one of the mediums, with whom I have observed the\nfinest phenomena of human appearances, is by no means a spiritist.\n\nIs he a victim of hallucination? It is possible; but then how are we\nto explain the fragment of truth which exists in his hallucination?\nI am well aware that impersonal memory is an inexhaustible source of\nknowledge, quite unknown to the normal personality; but there are\ncases, where the hypothesis of hypermnesia is scarcely acceptable. Here\nis an example. The medium, of whom I spoke a little while ago, has\nseveral times had the impression that a deceased person unknown to him,\nbut known to me, entered his bedroom. The apparition was preceded by\na noise of approaching footsteps, the door appeared to open, and the\nform entered. The form sat down at the foot of the bed, caressed the\nmedium\u2019s arm, and took his hand. The sensitive was alarmed at these\nvisions, which he looks upon as hallucinations, and does his best to\nrid himself of. At the end of three or four visits the form ceased to\nshow itself, to my great regret, for I had therein the occasion of\nmaking an observation of the highest interest. Unfortunately, I had not\nsufficient influence over this remarkable sensitive, to induce him to\nlend a hand to the development of this phenomenon. The person reputed\nto appear had a very characteristic walk, and it would be sufficient\nfor me to describe it, for those who knew the man to recognise him at\nonce; the vision had the same characteristic walk. Again, my friend\nwore whiskers. But the vision wore a full short beard, a detail which\nthe doctor who attended him in his last illness verified; my friend did\nnot shave towards the end of his life. I was not aware of this.\n\nThe medium, living in the same town, could have known the man; but if,\ncontrary to his assertions, he had known him, how could he have seen\nhim wearing a beard such as he never used to wear? Interesting detail!\nsince the apparition, purporting to be my friend, wore a beard just as\nmy friend had worn, not in his lifetime, but at the time of his death.\n\nFurther, the apparition appeared to manifest a desire to speak. It\ntried to reassure the alarmed medium; but the latter always got up\nand turned on the light, before the phantom had time to speak. Now\nat that moment, an event was brewing, of which I would have been\nthankful to have been warned. The incident occurred, and the apparition\nwas not seen again. This is an _ensemble_ of facts of a nature to\narouse attention. I have not been able to submit the case to thorough\nanalysis, and I give it with reserve. It is the nearest approach to\nclassical spiritism, which I have personally met with, but to me\nit does not seem to be convincing under the conditions in which\nI observed it; for the incident I refer to could easily have been\nforeseen by the medium.\n\nOther personifications manifested themselves to this medium, but their\ncharacter of apparent identity is less certain. One of them, with\ncurious energy, insists that he is the person he claims to be: namely,\nChappe d\u2019Auteroche, a savant of the last century. His name appears in\nLarousse\u2019s Dictionary. The personification gave his name correctly, as\nwell as the date of his death and where he died. He gave a Christian\nname which is not in Larousse, Adh\u00e9mar instead of Jean, which the\nDictionary gives. It would be interesting to know, if this name Adh\u00e9mar\nis mentioned in other dictionaries. I will add that the apparition\nexpresses itself in old French, but with a Norman accent. The medium\nhears it say \u2018mou\u00e9\u2019 for \u2018moi,\u2019 \u2018\u00e9tou\u00e9\u2019 for \u2018\u00e9tait,\u2019 etc. Now Chappe\nwas born at Mauriac in Auvergne; therefore I cannot explain why his\napparition should have a Norman accent. So far, however, I have not\ncarefully analysed this personification.\n\nI would like to have been able to experiment, more than I have been\nable to do, with the sensitive through whose medianity I have observed\nthese curious facts. Perhaps the publication of this book will interest\nhim, and induce him to give himself up to an attentive examination.[6]\n\n      [6] See Chapter vi., \u2018Recent Phenomena, etc.\u2019\n\nIt must not be concluded from what I have just related, that the\nintervention of my friend and of Chappe d\u2019Auteroche appears to me to\nbe real. Nothing in my experience authorises me to entertain this\nopinion. I relate these facts, because the emergence of these two\npersonifications occurred at seances where I was present, and because\nthey are closely associated with phenomena directly observed by me.\nI think we can draw a conclusion from these phenomena: it will be\nnoticed that in the manner in which these visions are produced, there\nare certain features, which recall to mind the symbolisation and\ndramatisation of dreams. This indication is only temporary; I have not\nenough elements of appreciation to be able to formulate it with any\ndegree of certitude, but I point out this feature to experimenters,\nwho, more favoured than I, may have opportunities for observing\nanalogous phenomena with more convenience and for a greater length of\ntime.\n\nI will terminate these remarks by the recital of another fact of\nthe same order, which I witnessed at Madame Agullana\u2019s. It occurred\nduring an afternoon seance at her house. The medium, and two or three\npersons whom I did not know, were seated round a small table. One of\nthe visitors was a small landed proprietor near Bordeaux. This visitor\ncame for the first time; he was accompanied by a rural constable, whom\nI knew. All at once Madame Agullana said to the newcomer, \u2018I see some\none, who says he is your uncle; he wears a cap; his face is red; he\nhas a long beard; he has sandy-coloured hair; he smokes a short pipe;\nhe seems to have something the matter with his right arm, it is bent\nacross his chest.\u2019 ... She also gave other details. The visitor did not\nspeak, a fact of which I took pains to assure myself.\n\nWhen the details were all given, the visitor said that if the\napparition claiming to be his uncle, was really his uncle, would he\nkindly say how he was addressed in his family. The table dictated\ntyptologically, \u2018Touton L.\u00a0P.\u2019 The stranger then said that Madame\nAgullana had given him the exact description of a second cousin[7] who\nhad been dead for some months, and who, because of his inveterate habit\nof smoking, was nicknamed \u2018Touton-la-Pipe.\u2019\n\n      [7] In France, a male cousin once removed is sometimes called\n      \u2018oncle \u00e0 la mode de Bretagne.\u2019\n\nI have seen several sincere, trustworthy people receive facts of the\nsame kind through Madame Agullana. There is notably the history of\nthe discovery of a lost debenture, which is curious and interesting;\nI was able to follow the different phases of this discovery. The\nindication appeared to emanate from the deceased husband of the\nowner of the debenture. Notwithstanding the interest which these\nobservations presented, I cannot analyse them seriously, for they are\ninsufficiently proved. The character of the medium has always seemed\nto me irreproachable, and her good faith above all suspicion; but the\ncircumstances do not permit of an exact judgment. Neither do I consider\nmyself authorised to affirm that the personality of \u2018Touton-la-Pipe\u2019\nwas quite unknown to the medium. The discovery of the debenture is\nperhaps only a coincidence. I have, however, related these facts to\nindicate the possibility of an order of research of a particularly\nsuggestive nature. Some of the more influential members of the English\nSociety for Psychical Research, Myers, Lodge, Hodgson, Hyslop, have\nentered upon these studies under excellent conditions of observation,\nand consider that they have been in communication with their deceased\nfriends. I have not had the same chances, and my own experiences tend\nto make me adopt a different way of thinking. It is very possible that\nmy colleagues are right, and I am wrong.\n\nFinally, the third statement which my observations permit me to\nmake, is that the production of forms and luminous phenomena is\naccompanied with much fatigue on the part of the observers. I have\nalready frequently pointed out this circumstance. On the occasion\nof the production of the facts described in the present chapter, I\nnoticed certain peculiarities, which I will point out to the attention\nof experimenters. Fatigue is not felt in an equal degree by all the\nsitters. Some seem to feel none at all; and, as a rule, these latter\nare not good auxiliaries. It looks as though some persons were not\ncapable of emitting the force employed. Others, on the contrary,\nemit it with great facility and tire quickly. I have not been able\nto study the relation which may exist, between the temperament of\nthese two kinds of sitters and the production of the phenomena; but\nI have the impression, that this relation ought to exist; it appears\nto me in a function of the organism rather than in a _rapport_ with\nthe mental condition or moods. This makes one think of the belief\nprofessed by spiritists concerning incredulity. In several spiritistic\ngroups failure is attributed to the presence of incredulous sitters;\nI am persuaded, that the beliefs of experimenters have nothing at\nall to do with the production of the phenomena observed, though it\nis certainly necessary to experiment seriously and without bias. I\ntouched upon the results of my observations in that respect, when\nspeaking about the harmony of the circle. The influence of bias would\nbe explained, if the apparent consciousness of the personification\ncould be considered as composed of the elementary consciousness of the\nsitters. This hypothesis does not appear to me to be demonstrated;\nbut some of my experiments have made me think of its possibility, and\nI consider it ought to be submitted to examination. Things seem to\nhappen, as though the nervous influx of the sitters created a field of\nforce around the experimenters, and more especially the medium: Each\nexperimenter would then act as a dynamogenic element, and would enter,\nfor a variable part, into the production of the liberated energy.\nThis energy would act beyond the apparent limits of the body, under\nconditions analogous to those governing its intracorporal action; that\nis to say, it would remain, to a certain extent, in connection with\nthe superior or inferior nervous centres, conscious or unconscious. In\nthis case we could understand, how the energy appears to depend, to\na certain extent, upon the will of the sitters or the medium. We can\neven explain that it should appear to manifest an independent will,\nif its production were due to the activity of the nervous centres,\nthe action of which is independent of ordinary consciousness. In that\nhypothesis, none of the sitters would recognise the trace of their\nnormal personality in the evolution of the phenomena; and this is what\ngenerally happens. Sometimes, however, the medium or one of the sitters\nhas the feeling, more or less precise, that a phenomenon is about to\ntake place. Eusapia Paladino often announces what is coming. In this\ncase the nervous energy, employed to realise the phenomenon, would be\nin connection with the conscious nervous centres of the medium only;\nand she would appear to the sitters to be subjected to an extraneous\npersonal will. Eusapia attributes it to \u2018John,\u2019 who seems to have the\ncharacteristics of a secondary personality. Such appears to me to be\nthe genesis of the personification, in the greater number of cases\nobserved by me. There are others, however, where this explication is\nless satisfactory.\n\nI do not hide from myself how difficult it is to admit the hypothesis\nI have just formulated. We are ill-prepared to consider the _psychic\nforce_ as identical, at least in its essence, with that which\ncirculates in our nerves; and we are no better prepared to believe,\nthat this force may be able to serve as a vehicle to a part of our\npersonal or subliminal consciousness, or to think that it can preserve\nany connection with our psychic centres, when it acts beyond the limits\nof the body. Nevertheless, it looks as though it were really so, in the\ngreater number of cases.\n\nThese data suffice to render comprehensible the possible mechanism\nof raps and movements without contact. It is not even necessary to\nsuppose that the nervous force acts beyond the limits of the body, if\nwe admit that the experimenters create around them a sort of magnetic\nfield. The nervous force would reach a maximum of potentiality in the\nexperimenters or in the medium; the objects placed within the field\nwould have a different potentiality; according to the conditions, we\nwould have phenomena of attraction or repulsion.\n\nIn this way we could understand motor phenomena. Raps are less easily\nexplained, unless we consider them as facts analogous to electrical\ndischarges. The rap would then be equivalent to the noise of a spark;\nit would be invisible, though in some cases it might be perceived.\n\nLights and forms raise problems much more difficult of solution. They\nmay be susceptible of the following explanation: we will suppose that\nparticles of a very attenuated substance, _e.g._ the ether or any other\nkind of rarefied matter, existed capable of being acted upon by nerve\nforce; they would become charged, and dispersed, according to the lines\nof force, and these lines would be determined by the action of nerve\ncentres, and would take form corresponding to those particular centres.\nThey would have a certain plasticity, if I may thus express myself, and\nthis plasticity would be in connection with those centres, possessing\npreponderating physiological activity.\n\nIf this connection existed with the superior ideative centres, we would\nhave intelligible, definite forms, such as faces of human beings, heads\nof animals, and objects; should connection with the inferior centres be\nestablished, undefined forms only would be obtained.\n\nTheir luminosity would depend upon the state of condensation of this\nrarefied matter of which they are constituted. Those subject to lesser\ncondensation would be the most luminous; and it might happen, that a\nform of greater density would be surrounded by a luminous atmosphere of\nlesser density.\n\nOne could, in this way, explain the relative independence of the forms,\nand phosphorescent nature of the pictures.\n\nThese are the hypotheses which might be made. I indicate them with\nmuch reserve, simply to show the theoretical route towards which my\nexperience tends to direct me. I set them forth summarily, without\ndiscussing them in detail. I do not conceal from myself the fact that\nmy ideas are far from being definite, and that the hypotheses I timidly\nexpress would fare badly under rigorous analysis. I have found no\nbetter, and I have the impression that they ought to contain a particle\nof truth.\n\nI beg to be excused for having again infringed upon the rule I imposed\non myself, for having presented purely theoretical considerations,\nwhich I am the first to acknowledge as premature. I have not seen the\ncurious facts I relate without trying to penetrate into their cause,\nnor have I been able to resist the desire to make known, not what is a\ndefinite opinion, but what is for me a hypothesis worth examining.\n\nBesides the phenomena described in this and preceding chapters, I have\nobserved others which might be compared with them, for they seem to me\nto have a certain connection with them. I refer to tactile sensations\nsuch as touch, contact, and stamped impressions, etc. I will briefly\ndescribe them.\n\nI. It is only with Eusapia Paladino, that I have felt tactile\nsensations in a positive manner. With this medium certain sitters,\nand especially those seated next to her, have the feeling of being\ntouched on the back, on the arms, and hands, on the head and body.\nThe phenomenon is usually produced under the following conditions.\nEusapia\u2019s hands being or appearing to be held by her neighbours, the\nlatter see the curtains come near them, and then feel themselves\ntouched. The touch is sometimes given without any movement of the\ncurtains. The sensation of the touch varies: it is now that of a finger\nwhich is thrust into the thigh, now of a large hand resting on the\nback, now fingers pinching you, or seizing you on the head, the neck,\nchin, etc. Numerous examples of these contacts will be found in the\nreport of the l\u2019Agn\u00e9las experiments (_Annales des Sciences Psychiques_,\n1896).\n\nIn our seances at Choisy 1896, the same phenomenon was often\nreproduced. In that series we were careful to have as much light as\npossible; we arranged a system of different coloured lights. One of the\nlights which gave us the best results was that of a lantern, the glass\nsides of which were replaced by parchment. It gave a softened yellowish\nlight. From the private account of these seances I take the following\nextracts. Seance of the 8th October:\u2014\n\n\u2018Eusapia\u2019s hands are still held and seen on the table. The Colonel then\nfeels several touches, and a large hand rubs him through the curtains,\non the top of his head.\u2019 ... A more curious phenomenon happened before\nthat; but only one of the medium\u2019s hands was visible.\n\n\u2018At the medium\u2019s request the lamp is turned in such a way as to\nlessen the light, which, however, is still sufficient to enable us to\ndistinguish faces and hands by their whiteness. MM. de Rochas and de\nGramont change places; Eusapia\u2019s hands are seen and held by General\nThomassin on the left and M. de Gramont on the right. Eusapia frees\nher left hand for a moment, brings a part of the curtain on to the\ntable, and glides her hand underneath it, in order to shelter it from\nthe light; the General regains possession of the hand\u2014under the\ncurtain\u2014and does not abandon it any more. The other hand, held by M.\nde Gramont, remains visible to every one. Almost instantly, General\nThomassin feels on his thigh\u2014and through the curtains, which bulge\nout in consequence\u2014slight contacts; then the sensation of a pinch;\nafterwards, he distinguishes the contact of a woman\u2019s small hand,\nfollowed by the contact of a man\u2019s large hand. After that, he is\nstruck with force on the shoulders and head by a large hand, outside\nthe curtains. Every one hears the sound of the blows, and sees the\nhand; but every one sees the hand in a different fashion. M. de Rochas\nhardly sees it at all; General Thomassin sees it as greyish green; M.\nWatteville and M. Gramont see it as grey; M. Maxwell as greyish yellow.\nEusapia determines different movements of the fluidic hand by mimicking\nthem with her right hand, which is held by M. Gramont in sight of every\none.\u2019\n\nThis observation is interesting, but at first glance it appears very\nsuspicious, because of the care taken by the medium to hide her hand\nunder the curtain. General Thomassin held her hand well; I do not doubt\nbut that it was Eusapia\u2019s hand he held; but let us accept for a moment\nthe hypothesis of an artificial hand, which Eusapia had adroitly given\nto the General to hold. This is Dr. Hodgson\u2019s explanation. In that\ncase, how would the hand, which touched General Thomassin, have been\nable to move over his back and head and strike him without any movement\nof the left arm being perceived? It is to be noted that the light was\nsufficient, and that the hand which gave the touches was seen by nearly\nall the observers. That hand was outside the curtains. I remember\nanother seance held in the afternoon, in the course of which touches\nwere lavished on all the experimenters, even on those who were furthest\naway from the medium.\n\nIn the three series of experiments, 1895, 1896, and 1897, made with\nEusapia, I have had occasion of repeatedly verifying the phenomenon of\ntouch. It appeared certain to me in a great number of cases. But it is\na suspicious phenomenon, because of the extreme facility with which it\ncan be simulated.\n\nI remember a series of fraudulent experiments, in the course of which\nseveral touches were given. The first touches, through the curtains,\nmade me think of the contacts obtained with Eusapia; but obscurity\nreigned complete, and I have reason to believe that the medium\u2019s\nleft-hand neighbour touched me with a stick. I was also touched on the\nknee, but it was by a very natural hand, which belonged to one of the\nexperimenters, a man of inferior intellect. Inexperienced people are\neasily deceived by these contacts; however, the marked difference which\nexists between the falsidical and the veridical is quickly perceived,\nwhen we have become accustomed to these phenomena. I do not advise\nexperimenters to put themselves under the conditions in which these\nfacts are observed, as they are very unfavourable for the examination\nof the phenomenon. These conditions, as far as I have been able to\njudge, are:\u2014(1) the formation of a chain around a table, the medium\nbeing seated with his back to the curtains of the cabinet; (2) an\nextremely feeble light, or none at all. It is only with Eusapia that I\nhave obtained touches with light, and even then the light was of the\nweakest.\n\nThese touches, besides having the inconvenience of carrying little\nconviction with them, because of the conditions under which they are\nobtained, have also the disadvantage of impressioning persons who\nare easily moved and frightened. I have seen very courageous people\naffected by these touches. Therefore we must not try to obtain them,\nuntil we are already familiarised with the observation of physical\nphenomena.\n\nIt is to be noted, that the phenomenon of _attouchement_ presents\nthe characteristics pointed out in those I have already examined. In\nthe first place, we note the correlation which exists between the\nmovements of the medium and the contact. I gave an example just now,\nwhen relating the phenomena of which General Thomassin was the object.\nThe movements of the right hand which touched him were mimicked by\nEusapia\u2019s right hand, which was visible, held by M. de Gramont, and\nseen by every one.\n\nHere is another example, taken from my notes, in which synchronous\nmovements were executed by one of the experimenters:\u2014\n\n\u2018John\u2019 (the secondary personality) \u2018then asks M. Rochas, who holds\nEusapia\u2019s left hand in his right hand, to put his left hand on\nEusapia\u2019s neck, the fingers stretched out as though in the act of\nmagnetising; he then tells him to lower his fingers. M. Rochas executes\nthe movement several times, and each time M. Maxwell, who holds the\nmedium\u2019s right hand, feels synchronous touches on his right shoulder,\nwhich is, at the very least, eighteen inches away from the medium.\u2019\nThis fact may be compared with those I indicated when dealing with\nraps and motor or luminous phenomena. We see how constant the relation\nis between the medium\u2019s movements and the phenomenon. This is a first\ngeneral ascertainment. If I might venture to use the expression,\nI would say that we are in the presence of one of the first laws\ngoverning the production of these paranormal phenomena. I have not\nsufficiently observed the phenomenon of touch to be able to say, that\nthe relation indicated exists between the muscular contraction and\nthe phenomenon, rather than between the phenomenon and the movement\nexecuted; but some facts, far too few, it is true, tend to make me\nthink it is so.\n\nFinally, the experimenters, and especially the medium, are very\nfatigued after the production of the phenomenon of touch.\n\nThe influence of light seems to be very unfavourable. I have not had\noccasion of observing touches in full light, as I have so often done\nwith raps and movements without contact. Almost total obscurity was\nnecessary with Eusapia. This circumstance brings the phenomenon of\n_attouchement_ into conjunction with that of materialisation. This is\ninteresting, for if the touches are due to the condensation of some\nmatter, as materialised forms appear to be, there is room to think\nthat the two phenomena are closely connected, and that it is the same\nsubstance which, in becoming condensed, produces them both. This is\nwhat I have observed, notably at l\u2019Agn\u00e9las, when I saw a hand and arm\ntouch M. Sabatier\u2019s head, at the moment the latter mentioned having\nbeen touched on the head.\n\nWe see how much a calm and impartial examination of the facts reveals\ncommon conditions for their production, and similarities between some\namong them.\n\nII. Stamped impressions or imprints bring us into the presence of\na category of phenomena of the same order. Pressure appears to be\nexercised upon a material substance instead of upon the sitters. If\nthat substance be soft enough, the impression of the form which has\nexercised the pressure may be left upon it. I have only twice observed\nthis phenomenon, and that was with Eusapia. It was at Choisy in 1896.\nThe first time, we obtained the impression of the mounts of the fingers\nin lamp-black. The conditions of observation were not good. The second\ntime, the impression was marked in clay. I take the following extract\nfrom our report:\u2014\n\n\u2018The dish containing the plastic clay is put in the centre of the\ntable. Almost immediately the dish, which weighs nearly four lbs., is\nlifted up and placed in equilibrium on the left arm of M. de Rochas,\nwhose left hand continues to hold Eusapia\u2019s right hand. M. de Rochas\nfeels three distinct, successive pressures of the dish resting on his\narm; then a friendly pressure on the back of his arm apprises him, that\nthe phenomenon is accomplished. We carry the dish away at once, and\nin the daylight we see finger-prints in the clay; the prints look as\nthough the fingers had been enveloped in some material of fine texture,\nthe woof being distinctly visible in the clay.\u2019 I did not observe this\nfact with enough precision to be able to retain it as a demonstrated\nfact. I point it out, nevertheless, because it permits one to preserve\nthe material trace of the phenomenon. Other observers have obtained\nbetter imprints with Eusapia. I have seen some which represent a\ndistorted likeness of the medium\u2019s face. I think this phenomenon ought\nto be observed with care, if one has the occasion to meet with mediums\ncapable of producing it. I will point out the following fact to the\nattention of possible observers: the almost constant presence of a\nkind of woof, as if the object which made the impression was covered\nwith thin gauze. This circumstance is at first sight suspicious; but\nhere, again, as always when we are in presence of these unfamiliar\nmanifestations, we must not be in too great a hurry to conclude in\nfraud, and say that the medium put a wet piece of gauze over face and\nhands, in order to avoid soiling the loam and bearing tell-tale traces\nof cheating. But I recognise that this is the explanation which ought\nto present itself before any other; and we must not put it to one side,\nunless we have sufficient reasons for doing so. At the same time, we\nmust not jump to the conclusion of fraud solely because of this gauzy\nappearance. There is something interesting in the presence of this\ngauze. The faces I have seen were all framed in a sort of milky-looking\nveil. Personally, I have rarely seen faces free of this. I have not\nobserved it around material objects nor around animals\u2019 heads. Neither\ndo I observe it in hypnagogic illusions. I will point out the following\nobservation of MM. Brincard and B\u00e9chade on the subject:\u2014\n\n\u2018M. de Rochas feels himself touched on the face as though by a beard,\nand sees standing out in relief, against the part of the room best\nlighted up by the window, a long black lock of wavy hair. MM. Brincard\nand B\u00e9chade have the sensation that their heads are enveloped in\ntransparent black gauze, which seems to fall on to their shoulders; it\ndisappears before they have time to seize it.\u2019\n\nI did not notice these traces of tissue, with the undoubtedly\nfraudulent impressions which have been shown me or done in my presence.\nI am going to give an example, to show how an attentive examination can\nreveal fraud.\n\nAt a seance, I was one day shown the impression in some plastic\nsubstance of a small death\u2019s head; a young man presented it to me as\nan authentic impression. This appeared abnormal to me, for a death\u2019s\nhead is not a common thing in serious seances, and for my part I have\nnever seen a repugnant or painful phenomenon. An attentive examination\nrevealed to me traces of the finger-tips, which had held the object\nwhile it was being pressed on the plastic substance.\n\nAt another seance at which I was present, one of the experimenters\nprepared some plates of cement. He placed them himself upon the top of\na wardrobe. At the end of the seance finger-prints were found in the\ncement. These prints had been made while the experimenter was placing\nthe plate on the wardrobe, and, of course, normally made by him. In\nthese two cases, the impressions were distinct and bore no traces of\nwoof. Therefore, such traces are not necessarily indications of fraud,\nsince tricksters do not always use material to preserve themselves from\nstains, when they make the fraudulent impression.\n\nAs for photographs, I have never obtained any paranormal ones. It is\ntrue I have given no attention to this order of experimentation. I\nwill say nothing about it therefore, since I have no personal fact of\ninterest to relate thereon. The existence of paranormal photography\nis affirmed by sincere and honourable men, and their experiments\ndeserve to be resumed. The method of operating is simple. The medium\nis photographed in daylight, when in a state of trance; photography\nby magnesium light is not to be recommended for many reasons, chiefly\nbecause it renders fraud particularly easy of execution. Never use\nany but your own plates, never let them out of your possession for an\ninstant, change the plates yourself, expose and develop them yourself.\n\nI remember one of my friends, a superior military officer, once showed\nme some extraordinary photographs, on which we saw abnormal forms\nbeside the medium. I told my friend he had been imposed upon. Too\nhonest himself to admit he could be the victim of disloyal trickery,\nthe officer put no faith in my criticisms, and assured me that the\nphotographs had been taken by himself with his own camera, and declared\nhe had not lost sight of the apparatus for a second. His affirmations\ndid not modify my opinion. Later on, when carefully discussing the\nconditions of the experiment, the officer acknowledged that he had\ninterrupted the seance for lunch, and had left his camera at the\nmedium\u2019s house in the meanwhile.\u2014The latter had taken advantage of his\nabsence either to change the plates and substitute exposed ones, or to\nmake a fraudulent exposure on my friend\u2019s plates.\n\nThe author of this fraud was, moreover, obliged to acknowledge the\nimposture. I wonder what motive this young man could have had in\ncheating! I believe he acted out of pure childishness\u2014having a\ntendency to hysteria.\n\nIn photography there are several ways of defrauding; the most usual\nis by double exposure. A shrewd use of sulphite of quinine permits of\ncertain curious operations, it appears. I have not verified this.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nPSYCHO-SENSORY AND INTELLECTUAL PHENOMENA\n\n\nUnder this somewhat vague title I am bringing certain facts together,\nwhich differ greatly from those I have been examining. In reality, the\nfacts so far related by me refer to material manifestations, and it was\nmerely as an accessory, that I pointed out the intelligent character\nsome of these manifestations presented. I will now describe the means\nbest adapted for obtaining not _physical_ but _intellectual_ phenomena,\nproperly so-called; that is to say, phenomena which are interesting\nsolely because of the ideas expressed, or because of the signification\nof the images produced, and not at all because of the conditions under\nwhich they are obtained.\n\nI have studied this category of phenomena with less interest than\nsonorous, motor or luminous phenomena, where observation is relatively\nsimple. Intellectual phenomena can only be studied indirectly, and\nin order to verify them, we are generally obliged to trust to the\nstatement of a third person. I think these are bad conditions of\nobservation. This reserve made, I will divide these phenomena into two\nwide categories:\u2014\n\n1. Sensory automatism.\n\n2. Motor automatism.\n\n\nI. SENSORY AUTOMATISM\n\nI thus designate phenomena produced by the spontaneous activity of\nour senses, and which do not appear to be due to exterior excitation.\nThey border on hallucination. They are observed in the different\nsensory spheres. I will only examine olfactory, auditory, and visual\nsensations; tactile impressions were studied in the last chapter. As\nfor gustatory sensations, they are very rare and without interest.\n\n(_a_) _Olfactory sensations._\u2014These consist of a special odour. I have\nnever observed any in the seances at which I have been present. In one\nseries, however, the medium associated the odour of Jasmine with the\nmanifestation of certain personifications. To me this sensation seemed\nto be purely subjective; it was constant.\n\nAn odour of ozone is often perceived after luminous phenomena have been\nobtained, a fact which ought to be borne in mind. It may be compared\nwith the odour of ozone, perceived in the vicinity of powerful static\nmachines, which give off electricity at _very high potentiality_. Here\nis an analogy which is, perhaps, not altogether fortuitous; these\nfacts, however, are unintelligible.\n\n(_b_) _Auditory sensations._\u2014I do not speak of sonorous phenomena.\nI now enter directly into the study of intellectual phenomena, that\nis to say, phenomena having a signification more or less precise and\nintelligible.\n\nAuditory phenomena may be divided into two categories: provoked\nautomatisms, and spontaneous automatisms or _clairaudience_. The first\nmay be considered as hallucinations induced by diverse methods. The\nsimplest method consists in the use of certain shells, horns, trumpets,\nor, in a word, any object capable of augmenting and allowing the\nperception of those external or internal sounds, which are not usually\nperceptible to the hearing. This is what is observed particularly with\nsome sea-shells. When we apply them to the ear, we hear a murmur or\na slight rumbling sound. This sensation is common to every one, and\nchildren are accustomed to play at \u2018listening to the sound of the sea\nin the sea-shells.\u2019\n\nSome people do not hear this sound, or rather, when they listen,\nit quickly disappears and makes way for words and phrases. I\nknow a subject with whom this faculty exists, but circumstances,\nunfortunately, have prevented me from studying him carefully. I point\nout, to the attention of observers, the interest which this automatism\npresents; the rapidity of communication is very great; in this way\nthere is a greater output than with automatic writing, and it is\nless tiring for the sensitive. The only precaution to observe is to\ntake down all he says in shorthand. We must accustom him to repeat,\ninstantly, everything he hears, because words heard in this way are\nspeedily forgotten\u2014as in dream\u2014but amnesia is not the sole point of\nresemblance between this automatism and dream. It has much analogy with\nvisual automatism, but it has an interesting advantage over the latter.\nVisual images are those which offer the highest degree of symbolism;\nthey are vague, wanting in precision, and require interpretation.\nAuditory hallucinations, on the contrary, have greater precision.\nPerhaps this is due to language, the usual manner in which auditory\nimages are revealed. On the other hand, they are not so rich, and\ncontain less detail than visual images do.\n\nThe meaning of auditory messages is seldom very clear; but there are\ncases where it is wonderfully so. Such are the chief features of\nprovoked auditory phenomena. I have given too little attention to\nthis phase of manifestation, to be able to enter into a more complete\nanalysis of it.\n\n_Clairaudience_ is more frequent; perhaps this is due to the negligence\nof experimenters, who do not think of using the methods of induction I\nhave just described.\n\nI have rarely observed the existence of isolated auditory\nhallucinations; I have always observed them associated with visual\nhallucinations; therefore I will study them after these last, when\nexamining mixed phenomena.\n\n(_c_) _Visual sensations._\u2014Observable, visual phenomena are very\nnumerous, and have already been the object of exhaustive studies. I\nwill again divide these into provoked and spontaneous phenomena. Of\ncourse, I am speaking of hallucinations experienced by sensitives out\nof seance hours. In this part of my analysis, I am replacing the word\n_medium_ by the word _sensitive_, which seems to me to define more\ncorrectly the distinguishing features, of those persons who have the\nfaculties I am going to describe. This word conveys the correct idea,\nthat the facts observed belong to the sphere of sensibility.\n\nOne of the oldest known methods of inducing visual hallucination is the\nuse of a crystal ball. I have no need to recall to mind the practices\nof former fortune-tellers, nor the history of John Dee, nor the\nnumerous recitals handed down to us by ancient chroniclers, novelists,\netc. The crystal ball and the black mirror are the best methods; but\nthe ordinary mirror, a glass of water, a decanter, a shoemaker\u2019s wooden\nball, the finger-nail, the watch-glass, any polished surface, in fact,\nmay serve to induce hallucination; but I only recommend the first\nmethods\u2014they are certainly the best; a glass of water, a decanter, a\nsyphon of seltzer-water, the thumb-nail, polished surfaces, etc., may\nserve to induce hallucination, but these last methods only succeed with\nvery highly sensitive subjects.\n\nI have carefully studied crystal-gazing, and though I have remarked\nindividual differences in each sensitive, I think I may say that, as\nfar as working methods are concerned, I have come to the following\nconclusions:\u2014\n\nThe material of which the object is composed is not a matter of\nindifference. Balls of rock-crystal have given me the best results. I\nhave seen people, incapable of receiving visions with ordinary glass,\nobtain them in a tiny ball of natural crystal. Objects in rock-crystal\nhave the inconvenience of being very expensive.\n\nOrdinary glass gives good results, but care should be taken that\nthe ball contains no air bubbles or other defects. They must be as\nhomogeneous as possible.\n\nThe ball may be spherical or egg-shaped. I think the elliptical form\nis, perhaps, the best; reflections are more easily avoided with this\nshape.\n\nThe size is a matter of indifference; personally, I prefer rather\nlarge balls. I have, nevertheless, obtained just as good results with\nballs of only one centimetre in diameter as with balls of six or seven\ncentimetres in diameter.\n\nThe crystal may be white, blue, violet, yellow, green; it may be\nopalescent or transparent; but, I think, the best results are obtained\nwith white transparent balls; blue or amethyst coloured crystals are\nalso very good, and tire the eyes less than others.[8]\n\n      [8] As crystal-gazing seems to me one of the most curious\n      phenomena to study, I will take the liberty of mentioning\n      that well-made crystal balls may be found at Leymarie, 42 Rue\n      Saint-Jacques, Paris; at the Society for Psychical Research,\n      20 Hanover Square, London, W.; or Mrs. Venman, Sugden Road,\n      Lavender Hill, London, S.W. The price of the globes varies from\n      6s. to 9s.; those of ovoids, from 8s. to 10s. The best thing to\n      do would be to look for a ball in rock-crystal, the price of\n      which would vary from 4s. to \u00a38. They must be cut to order, for\n      it is extremely difficult to find any ready made. M. Servan,\n      jeweller at Bordeaux, furnishes good ones.\n\nWhen looking into the ball, it should be sheltered from reflection, as\nit should offer a uniform tint, without any brilliant points. To obtain\nthis result, it may be enveloped in a piece of dark foulard or velvet,\nor held in the hollow of the hand, or even at the fingertips, provided\nthe conditions mentioned above have been observed. The object ought to\nbe placed within the range of normal vision; the gaze should not be\ndirected on to the surface of the crystal, but _in the crystal itself_.\nThe knack of gazing inside the crystal is speedily acquired.\n\nMirrors also give very good results. They can be made like ordinary\nmirrors, or black like the famous mirrors of Bhatta, which are made\nof a special composition. Sensitives say that the mirror should not\nreflect anything: it should present a uniform tint, _e.g._ that of the\nsky, blue or grey, but without the mixture of these colours as would be\nthe case with a cloudy sky; in a room the ceiling may be reflected, if\nit be monochrome.\n\nUnder these conditions of operation I have sometimes observed results\nso extraordinary, as to confound the imagination. They appeared to\nme to tend towards demonstrating Kant\u2019s idea of the relativity and\ncontingency of time and space. It is very difficult to admit, that\nthese two ordinates of our perceptions are exactly what they seem to\nbe, unless we push the theory of coincidence to the absurd. But this\nwould be shutting the door on all discussion, and on all intelligent\nexamination of a fact apparently abnormal.\n\nMy observations have been made with different persons, and a great many\nhave been pointed out to me. Sensitives, possessing the faculty of\nseeing in the crystal, are not rare. The analysis of the facts I have\nobserved, or of which I hold first-hand reports, allows me to class\nthese \u2018hallucinations\u2019(?) under six categories of increasing interest:\u2014\n\n_A._ Imagination\u2014images, ordinary hallucination.\n\n_B._ Forgotten souvenirs, recalled to memory in the form of visions.\n\n_C._ Passed events, of which the sensitive affirms to have always been\nignorant.\n\n_D._ Present events, certainly unknown to the sensitive.\n\n_E._ Future events.\n\n_F._ Facts of doubtful interpretation.\n\nThis grouping shows the curious gradation observed in these visions.\nFirst of all, disorderly and illogical activity as in dreams; then,\nmore orderly activity: knowledge of forgotten facts, knowledge of past\nevents unknown to the sensitive, knowledge of present events unknown to\nthe sensitive, apparent prescience. I will give some examples.\n\n_A._ Imagination\u2014images are by far the most frequent. This phenomenon\nis analogous to ordinary visual hallucination, and seems to me to\npresent the characteristic features of dream. This is hardly the place\nto discuss the state of consciousness during dream; for the form I am\ngiving my recital would not bear any long psychological analyses. I\nwill simply confine myself to resuming the conclusions of the detailed\nanalysis, which I made in a work dealing with this subject.\n\nThe consciousness which works habitually in us, that which is\nmanifested in our everyday life, is the _personal consciousness_.\nIt is around this that are grouped the souvenirs accessible to our\nnormal personality, to that part of ourselves which we call \u2018I.\u2019\nThis _personal consciousness_ asserts itself in the highest acts of\nthe psychic life, in the comparison of images one with another, in\nabstraction, judgment, and the voluntary selection of acts, which\nappear to us equally possible. This selection is the expression of\nour voluntary activity, personally conscious; it is determined by\nthe comparison of acts between themselves, by the examination of\ntheir probable advantageous or disadvantageous consequences, by the\nappreciation of their morality or immorality, according to the social\nlaws of the day, etc. Personal consciousness is the foundation of all\nour intelligent life; practically, it alone appears to exist, and its\ndisappearance seems to us to annihilate our own personality.\n\nIn reality, such is not the case. With certain invalids, complete or\npartial modifications of the personal consciousness may be observed.\nSometimes the notion of personality disappears. There are patients\nwho suddenly forget everything, even to their own name. All their\nantecedent life is effaced, and they appear to return to the state they\nwere in at birth. They have to learn again how to speak, to eat, and\nto dress themselves. Sometimes the amnesia is not so complete. I have\nbeen able to observe a patient, who had forgotten everything which had\nany connection whatever with his own personality. He was absolutely\nignorant of all he had ever done, did not remember where he was born,\nwho his parents were, or what his name was. He was thirty years of age.\n\nOrganic memory and memories organised apart from the personality\nsubsisted. He could read, write, draw, and displayed a certain amount\nof musical talent. Amnesia, with him, was limited to all facts\nconnected with his antecedent personality; it presented the type of\nsystematised losses of memory. This is what is called in medical\nphraseology _amn\u00e9sie de d\u00e9personnalisation_.\n\nIn a lesser degree, amnesia only affects limited periods of life.\nEpileptics and hysterics often present the phenomenon of _ecmnesia_,\na term chosen by the eminent professor of clinical medicine at the\nuniversity of Bordeaux, M. Pitres, who was the first to point out\nthis phenomenon with hysterical subjects. The patient forgets a part\nof his life, believes he is ten, fifteen, thirty years younger than\nhe really is, and behaves as though he were at the age he thinks he\nis. The souvenirs of his ulterior life cease to be accessible to his\nconscious personality, which finds itself brought back exclusively to\nthe elements which constituted it, at the time the ecmnesia carries\nhim to. Every idea, foreign to that diminished personality, remains\nunintelligible to him. In order to make him understand, we must speak\nto him only of what he knew at the epoch to which he has been brought\nback.\n\nBesides these disappearances or _amoindrissements de la personnalit\u00e9_\nof the personal consciousness, which may be permanent or transitory, we\nalso observe _qualitative_ without _quantitative_ alterations of the\npersonal consciousness. These are changes or variations of personality,\nwhich have been well studied in hysterical subjects, but which also\nexist in other invalids, notably epileptics and victims of certain\npoisons.[9]\n\n      [9] Interested readers will find a complete analysis of\n      these facts in Azam\u2019s celebrated work, _Hypnotisme et double\n      conscience_, Alcan; in Pitres\u2019 book, _Le\u00e7ons sur l\u2019hyst\u00e9rie_,\n      Alcan; and in Janet\u2019s _L\u2019automatisme psychologique_, Alcan. It\n      is essential to know at least these three books, if we wish to\n      observe, profitably, the delicate phenomena I am discussing in\n      this chapter.\n\nTo sum up, the personal consciousness is susceptible of total or\npartial disappearance, or of being replaced by another consciousness\nwhich can be absolutely foreign to the normal personal consciousness,\nor preserve more or less close relationship with it, _e.g._ the patient\nwho undergoes a change of personality may retain all the souvenirs of\nthe normal personality A and those of the new personality B. But in\nan almost absolute manner the normal personality A is ignorant of all\nwhich concerns B. This is the type of periodical amnesia.\n\nThe clinical study of diseases of personality permits observation\nof the above facts. I ought to say that, in practice, they do not\npresent the simplicity of the _sch\u00e9ma_ which I have just given. Curious\nproblems arise from the nature itself of amnesia, its degree, its\nmechanism, problems impossible to treat here.\n\nBut the facts I have summarily exposed already reveal an important\ntruth, which curable, transitory amnesia clearly demonstrates:\nthis is, that souvenirs can exist in a latent state in the general\nconsciousness, and be inaccessible to the personal consciousness. Let\nus suppose that A forgets the ten previous years of his life\u2014the result\nof a fall or nervous crisis. This amnesia will perhaps last for six\nmonths, during which period he will believe himself to have returned to\nthe age of fifteen, when he is really twenty-five. All the events of\nhis life between the ages of fifteen and twenty-five will have entirely\ndisappeared from his memory for six months; then they will, more or\nless abruptly, reappear. Their temporary disappearance clearly shows\nthat these souvenirs have been preserved somewhere, and that they were\nnot really lost. We cannot affirm that they were accessible to the\ngeneral and impersonal consciousness in every case; but nevertheless we\ncan affirm it for hysteria, according to the observations of Pitres,\nJanet, and others; and, according to R\u00e9gis, for certain poisons. The\nfacts studied by these savants show, that souvenirs inaccessible to\nthe normal personality were known to the general consciousness. For\nexample, an amnesic patient can recover all his souvenirs when he is\nput to sleep; this is what R\u00e9gis has demonstrated even in certain cases\nof amnesia from blood-poisoning. Janet, on his side, has established\nthat these souvenirs, forgotten by the personal consciousness, can be\nevoked by certain automatisms (notably automatic writing), and are\ntherefore at the disposition of the impersonal consciousness, that is\nto say, of that general consciousness of which personal consciousness\nseems to be only a part.\n\nThis fact, which the study of nervous pathology has demonstrated,\nis certainly general. The troubles of hysteria and other nervous\ndiseases only exaggerate a normal phenomenon. Our personality does not\nburden itself with all the souvenirs, which our general consciousness\nappears to possess: the greater part of the things we have seen,\nlearned, heard, etc., are forgotten; but this forgetfulness is probably\nrelative, and only extends to the personal consciousness. It is also\nvariable, and, according to circumstances, the souvenirs accumulated\nin the general consciousness are at one time more accessible to the\npersonal consciousness, and less so at another time. If the personal\nmemory be over-excited, _exalt\u00e9_, we have hypermnesia. The facts\nwhich spring up in the personal consciousness have been so completely\nforgotten by it that they sometimes appear to be new; souvenirs present\nthemselves to the consciousness without being identified by it, and\nwe commit errors on the localisation of the mnesic image in time and\nspace; this is what we call _paramnesia_.\n\nThe variations of the personal consciousness relative to memory,\nwhose r\u00f4le in the constitution of the personality of the _self_\nis preponderant, are therefore translated clinically by amnesi\u00e6,\nhypermnesi\u00e6, paramnesi\u00e6; but the variations pointed out are not limited\nto memory, they extend to other operations of the mind. I indicated\njust now, that the personal consciousness was only a facet of that\nmore general consciousness existing in us, a consciousness where all\nantecedent experiences are piled up, where all our sensations are\nregistered, be our personal consciousness aware or unaware of them.\nThis general consciousness is in itself impersonal, at least in\nrelation to our normal personality. This latter is only one of the\ncurrents which circulate in that consciousness, its preponderance,\nas Myers has indicated, is probably only a consequence of its greater\npractical utility in daily life, and not an indication of its absolute\nsuperiority; but there is one thing to point out, this is that we\nare accustomed to connect with that personal consciousness all the\noperations of our usual intelligence. Our reasonings, volitions,\njudgments, whatever they may be, are grouped around our conscious\npersonality, or rather are founded upon its apparent activity. The\nconsequence is, that every time the sentiment of personality in the\nconsciousness varies, our reasonings, volitions, and judgments will\nvary in the same proportion. Thoughts which come to us will cease to\nbe chosen by us, and will apparently come of their own accord; their\nassociations will escape all logic, their succession will be rapid and\nincoherent for our personality, which will look on at their evolution\npowerless to direct it. The weakening of the sentiment of personal\nparticipation, in the acts of the psychical life, is then translated\nby the diminution of our faculty to choose the images evoked in the\nconsciousness, by the diminution of our power of control over their\nevolution, by the helplessness in which we are, not only to judge them\naccording to the rules of reason, but also to reject the most illogical\ninterpretations, which offer themselves to us or impose themselves\nupon us. In a word, the weakening of the will, of the judgment, is\nassociated with that of the personal consciousness.\n\nWe also observe a corresponding attenuation in the faculty of\nabstraction. Ideas are accompanied by their pictured or motor\nrepresentations. Sometimes they are only expressed by pictures, and\nare presented in a symbolical form, or are dramatised; _e.g._ the idea\nof the death of a relative will not be expressed with precision, as\nis sometimes the case in verbal or written hallucinations, but by a\npicture representing the relation in a coffin, or depicting his burial.\n\nSuch are the psychological expressions of the weakening of the personal\nelement in the consciousness.\n\nWe must not conclude, therefrom, that the impersonal consciousness\nis incapable of intelligent operation. No such thing; and events\nprove that the impersonal or subliminal consciousness is capable of\naccomplishing, with great perfection, the most complicated intellectual\nacts, without the personal consciousness being aware of it. In these\ncases, when the result of the operation is transmitted to the personal\nconsciousness, this latter perceives it under the symbolical or\ndramatical form I pointed out.\n\nObservation shows, that all the features I have just described as being\nmet with in cases where participation of the personal consciousness\nwith our mental or physical activity is diminished, are to be found in\nhallucination and in dreams.[10]\n\n      [10] Readers, interested to know my ideas on this point, will\n      find them more extensively developed in my book, _L\u2019Amn\u00e9sie et\n      les troubles de la conscience dans l\u2018\u00e9pilepsie_.\n\nI beg to be excused for this digression; it was indispensable in\norder to develop, in a comprehensive manner, the analogies which are\npresented between dreams and hallucinations provoked by crystal-gazing,\nand the transcendental character which these visions can present,\nwithout being, however, supernatural. These considerations set forth, I\narrive at the recital of some facts I have observed.\n\nThe way in which imagination-images or hallucinations are induced,\nwith most of the sensitives I have examined, is nearly always the same.\nI will describe it, pointing out at the same time that the formation of\nthe hallucinatory image is the same in nearly every case, be the visual\nimpression imaginary, or be it the expression of a true fact, past,\npresent, or future.\n\nI have shown how to hold the crystal, and how to look at it. The\nsensitive, having fixed his eyes on the crystal for a few seconds or\nminutes\u2014the time varies according to individuals\u2014sees an opalescent,\nmilky tint come over the crystal. I know a sensitive,\u2014an intelligent\nand well-educated lady\u2014who compares this impression, to that produced\non the eye by rising mists and fleeting clouds. For her, the milky\ntint in the crystal is in movement. It breaks away like a cloud or\nmist, to disclose the hallucinatory image completely formed. To another\nsensitive, the cloud appears first of all immobile, and then becomes\ncondensed into grey forms, which gradually become coloured and mobile.\nThis sensitive enters so completely into the hallucination, that, as\na rule, he thinks he is transported to the landscape he is gazing at;\nhe has not only a hallucination of sight, but a hallucination of all\nthe senses. Most people see the image in the crystal, but believe they\nsee it life-size. The dimension of the crystal has no influence on the\napparent dimension of the image;\u2014at least, this is what I have nearly\nalways remarked.\n\nWhat I say of the mode of induction of the image in the crystal can\nbe applied to any other mode of induction\u2014mirror, glass of water,\ndecanter, etc.\n\nThe cause of the vision is sometimes an association of ideas or\nimages, which is easy to trace. Here is an example: I was once in a\nspiritistic group, and among those present were several sensitives\npresenting subconscious or paraconscious automatisms, with the features\nof ordinary somnambulism. I begged one young girl, of about fifteen\nor sixteen years old, to look into a white crystal ball of four\ncentimetres in diameter. Almost without transition she saw goldfish\nin the ball. Every one knows the spherical bowls in which goldfish\nare put; as it happened, there was a bowl of this kind in the room.\nThe idea of a transparent bowl was naturally associated with that of\ngoldfish; this subconscious association provoked the visual image of\nthe fish. Facts of this kind are the simplest; their psychological\nmechanism is easy to penetrate; the associations of images are almost\nlogical, and their dreamlike character is scarcely marked. In the\nabove case, the impossibility of placing the fish in a crystal ball is\nnot perceived by the consciousness, which suffers the succession of\nimages empirically associated; the globe of water containing the fish\nresembled in its form and aspect the transparent glass ball; therefore,\nthe latter evoked the image of the former, and the fish which it\ncontained. This association is very intelligible.\n\nHere is another example borrowed from experiments I made with a\nremarkable sensitive\u2014the one with whom the hallucination becomes\ngeneralised. This person, looking in the crystal, perceived a\nrailway-station, and saw portmanteaux in the luggage-room. He then\nplunged right into the dream, and imagined he was going to take away\nhis own portmanteau; he entered the luggage-room, took his trunk and\nopened it. It contained a particularly horrible dead body, which\nleaped out of the portmanteau, and bitterly complained of being\ndisturbed. It threw itself upon the sensitive, who immediately fled,\npursued by the dead body. After a desperate chase, the sensitive darted\ninto a road which crossed a park. This park, in reality, is situated at\nmore than six hundred miles from the railway-station, where he believed\nhe saw the portmanteaux: this distance had disappeared in the vision.\nThe dead body took a corresponding road; the two roads met on a hill,\nwhere the persecutor made a dead set at the sensitive; the latter fell,\nand the dead body stopped and bent down to strike him. The visionary\ngave him a kick in the stomach, and stretched him full length on the\nground. The hallucination then ceased abruptly, and the sensitive found\nhimself back in his room, in front of the crystal. The vision was so\nintense, that he was still upset with fright, and breathless from\nrunning.\n\nThis hallucination is of a dreamlike character, and reminds one of\ncertain kinds of delirium. I have often questioned the sensitive\ncarefully, in order to try to reconstitute the psychological elements\nof his hallucinations, and for this particular hallucination, as I have\nrelated it, I will indicate the result of my inquiry:\u2014\n\n1. The sensitive has often seen dead bodies. He is not afraid of them;\nhe feels no repugnance even when touching them.\n\n2. He has travelled a great deal, but has no souvenir of any\nconnection whatever between his portmanteau and dead bodies, except\nthe associations which stories of the nature of the Gouff\u00e9 affair may\nevoke.[11]\n\n      [11] A lawyer who was murdered, and whose dead body, much\n      hacked about, was found in a trunk in the luggage-room of a\n      railway-station in France.\n\n3. The chase occurred at a spot known to the sensitive, who had, as\nit happened, gone, one day, to that very spot on a walking expedition\nwith one of his friends, under some conditions recalling those of the\nhallucination, notably the choice of different roads; the two roads\ncorresponded and met as in the vision.\n\n4. He did not fall, and has no conscious souvenir, which can explain\nhis struggle with the dead body.\n\nThis curious hallucination shows us an admixture of true images and\nfantastic images, these latter, however, composed of real elements.\nThe duration of this hallucination, so full of events, was very short.\nThis is another feature observed in dreams. We see here the trace of\nqueer associations, some explicable, others not so. The idea of a\nrailway-station awakens that of portmanteaux; that of the dead body is\nalready abnormal, but comprehensible, the sensitive being sufficiently\nacquainted with contemporary criminal literature to know of the Gouff\u00e9\naffair. The leap of the dead body out of the valise, the flight of the\nsensitive, and the pursuit of the dead body after him, are abnormal\nassociations. The first is difficult to explain; the flight and pursuit\nare more easily explained. The first of these ideas naturally suggests\nthe second. The idea of pursuit awakens the idea of running; this, in\nits turn, awakens the idea of the place where the sensitive has really\nrun a race; and, notwithstanding its illogism, that association is\naccepted, though the railway-station, where the scene begins, be more\nthan six hundred miles from the park where the chase takes place.\n\nAll these associations bear the characteristic stamp of dreams.\n\n_B._ Visions of past and forgotten facts present a different\nappearance. The following is an example:\u2014The sensitive, in the course\nof conversation, was asked to sing one of Delmet\u2019s songs. He could not\nremember two lines of one of the verses, and was obliged to pass them\nover. I had the curiosity to improvise an experiment, and I begged the\nsensitive to look into a crystal. The forgotten lines were read by him\nin the crystal. Facts of this nature\u2014and they are very numerous in\ntechnical literature\u2014can be explained by the action of the impersonal\nor subliminal consciousness. The souvenir forgotten by the personal\nconsciousness exists in the general consciousness, which has need\nof scenic effects in order to transmit its message to the personal\nconsciousness; hence we have sensorial, automatic, visual activity,\nand the reading of the forgotten words, which appear printed in the\ncrystal. I will not dwell upon facts of this kind; they are so well\nknown.\n\n_C._ The third category of visions comprises the perception of past\nevents, which the medium affirms never to have known. It is evident\nthat these facts can, in the greater number of cases, come under the\npreceding category, and be but forgotten souvenirs. But I have reason\nto think it is not always so, and that a certain number of cases\nexists, in which knowledge of the past appears to be acquired in a\nsupernormal manner. This is only an impression, which I draw from the\nreality of certain premonitory facts observed by me.\n\nAs an example of the facts I am describing at present, I will cite the\nfollowing:\u2014\n\nA sensitive one day looked into the crystal; he suddenly saw the words\n\u2018Salon de 1885,\u2019 and a series of pictures, announced by their titles,\npassed before his eyes. The pictures, thus seen by him, had really been\nexhibited in the salon of 1885. In 1885 the sensitive was too young, to\nhave had any personal knowledge of the salon of that year; but nothing\nis easier than to read descriptions of past salons, or to procure\nreproductions of the pictures exhibited there. The sensitive, whose\ngood faith is above suspicion, affirms having no conscious souvenir\nof a like reading. He believes he has never seen or read anything\nconcerning the salon of 1885, but he confines himself to affirming the\nnon-existence of a conscious souvenir. It is, nevertheless, possible,\nas he acknowledges, that he may have glanced over a former catalogue or\ncriticism without remembering it.\n\nFacts of this kind are never convincing, for it is very difficult to\nknow exactly, if the sensitive has ever had knowledge of the fact,\nwhich emerges in the vision. I cite the above case, as an example only,\nwithout pronouncing an opinion on its signification.\n\n_D._ I have had no occasion of observing induced hallucinations\nrepresenting a scene actually happening; at least, I have never been\nable to verify any in a satisfactory manner.\n\n_E._ The cases of premonition I have obtained are, on the contrary,\nrelatively numerous. I have, personally, observed some of them,\nand have obtained first-hand accounts of others. Here are my most\ninteresting cases:\u2014\n\nI had given a crystal to Monsieur X., a friend of mine, who is much\ninterested in psychical researches. Madame X. has the faculty of seeing\nin the crystal, but I have never had the opportunity of interrogating\nher upon her visions. The fact, which her husband related to me,\nconcerns a woman who is cashier in a large restaurant at Bordeaux.\nMonsieur X., who sometimes lunches at this restaurant, one day showed\nthe crystal to the cashier; the latter looked into it and saw therein\na small dog. She did not recognise the dog, and the vision appeared to\nhave no interest.\n\nShortly afterwards, Monsieur X. was again lunching in the same\nrestaurant. The cashier called him up to her, and told him she was much\nastonished, because she had just received the present of a small dog,\nexactly like the one she had seen in the crystal.\n\nAnother lady sometimes sees visions in a mirror; these visions are\nformed on the glass of a wardrobe, which is placed facing a window,\nthus partly satisfying the conditions indicated further back. The\nrecital, which was given me of these visions by her friends, was\nconfirmed by the lady herself.\n\nShe saw a man seated on the footpath of a certain street, the man was\nwounded, in a particular manner, on the forehead; a piece of skin was\ntorn away and lay over the eye. Among other details about his costume\nwas a sack, which the man had rolled round his neck; on the sack the\nletters V.\u00a0L. were printed. The lady, in her vision, saw herself speak\nto the wounded man, take him to the hospital and have his wound dressed.\n\nShe went out on the morning of the next day, met the wounded man at the\nspot she had seen him the day before, and her vision came true to the\nletter, even to the detail of the sack around the neck, and the letters\nwhich were printed upon it.\n\nAnother time this lady perceived, always under the same conditions,\nthat is in the glass of the wardrobe, one of her friends, who is\nmarried to a government officer abroad, where he is consul of a\nsister-power. This lady, in the vision, appeared to be walking up the\nstreet Tourny at Bordeaux, just where it opens out into the square\nGambetta. The details of the costume were noted by the observer:\u2014a\nlight cloak, and a blouse made of Scotch plaid with gold trimming about\nthe neck. Two or three days afterwards, the percipient happened to be\nin a tram. As the tram arrived at the junction of the street Tourny and\nthe square Gambetta, she perceived her friend, exactly as the vision\nhad represented her.\n\nHere is another and last example, still more significative than the\npreceding, for the vision was related to me eight days before the event\ntook place, and I myself had related it to several persons before its\nrealisation. A sensitive perceived in a crystal the following scene:\u2014A\nlarge steamer, flying a flag of three horizontal bands, black, white,\nand red, and bearing the name _Leutschland_, navigating in mid-ocean;\nthe boat was surrounded by smoke; a great number of sailors, passengers\nand men in uniform rushed to the upper-deck, and the sensitive saw the\nvessel founder.\n\nEight days afterwards, the newspapers announced the accident to the\n_Deutschland_, whose boiler had burst, obliging the boat to stand to.\nThis vision is very curious, and as the details were given me before\nthe accident, I will analyse it with care.\n\nIn the first place, one thing strikes us:\u2014The premonition was not\nexactly fulfilled. The _Deutschland_ met with an accident, it is true;\nfrom the nature of that accident, it must have been surrounded with\nvapour; the crew and passengers would probably have rushed to the\nupper-deck; but happily, this magnificent vessel did not founder. On\nthe other hand, the sensitive read L instead of D; but this detail is\nof no importance, the foreign word being probably badly deciphered.\nLastly, one thing worthy of noting is the complete absence of personal\ninterest in this vision, for the sensitive has no connection whatever\nwith Germany, and was ignorant, at least consciously, of the existence\nof this boat, though he might certainly have seen illustrations of it.\nEvidently, we must not attach too much importance to this premonition,\nbut the same sensitive has given me many other curious examples of\nthe same kind; and these cases, compared with others I myself have\nobserved, or with those of which I have received first-hand accounts,\nrender the hypothesis of coincidence very improbable, but do not\nexclude it in an absolute manner. Such as they are, I think these facts\nare sufficiently interesting, for systematic observation of the visual\nphenomena I point out to be undertaken by competent persons, with true\nsensitives, and _not with hysterical subjects_, who seldom, if ever,\ngive good observations.\n\nThe facts of premonition which I have observed or controlled, and\nof which I have just given a few examples, cannot, I think, be\nreasonably regarded as coincidences. I have already said that this\nhypothesis, without being inadmissible, is insufficient. Think of the\nimmense proportion of probabilities, which accumulate in favour of\nthe reality of a fact, as soon as the details themselves accumulate.\nThe visions relative to the foreign friend, and to the wounded man,\nare instructive from this point of view, given the great number of\ncircumstances seen beforehand:\u2014exact locality, exact details of the\nwound, the costume, etc. It is a pity these facts were not observed\nunder good conditions. That of the _Deutschland_ is much less\ndemonstrative, because of the inaccuracy in the foreseen issue.\n\nIf we compare these facts with those which have been already registered\nby the Society for Psychical Research, we will come to a conclusion,\nwhich confirms the simple impression that my own observations have\ngiven birth to in my mind. What is the cause of these premonitions?\nWhat signification have they with respect to the reality of time? Why\ndo these visions come to people, who often have no interest whatever\nin knowing of them? These are all so many questions I am putting,\nwithout being able to indicate their solution. We must observe, with\nthe greatest care, the facts which are presented, accumulate them in as\ngreat a number as possible, and, before considering their causes, be,\nfirst of all, doubly sure of their reality.\n\nI have indicated, further back, the analogy of the greater part of\nthese visions with dreams. I will point out finally another resemblance\nwhich is, perhaps, not the least interesting. This is, that these\nvisions are often quickly forgotten. We must make the sensitives we\nobserve write down their visions immediately; for, in the greater\nnumber of cases, a rapid amnesia mixes up the details and causes them\nto disappear. These visions, therefore, react upon the memory in the\nmanner of dreams.\n\n_F._ Certain visions are of a doubtful character. Here are some\nexamples:\u2014Several times a sensitive sees, in the crystal, a long\nprocession of personages clothed in white enter a sort of crypt,\nwhich looks like the entrance to a tunnel. The vision presents no\nincoherence, but appears to have no signification, either as a souvenir\nevoked unconsciously or as a subconscious symbolical image admitting of\ninterpretation.\n\nAnd now, I am going to relate a vision, which, doubtless, will\nparticularly interest occultists. I was operating with a sensitive,\nwho was ignorant, I think, of their theories and those of spiritists;\nwho had no notion whatever about larv\u00e6, and the forms given to such in\nthe literature of occult sciences. Now the sensitive, of whom I speak,\ntwice saw the vision of a tree standing out detached from the others\nin a forest. The earth appeared white, the tree itself was white, and\nappeared to be covered with white pears hanging from its branches.\nIn his vision the sensitive drew near, and perceived that the pears\nwere in reality white beasts of hideous appearance; they were like\nheads without bodies, terminating in long tails. These beings were\nsuspended to the branches by their tails. This vision seems to me to\nbe purely imaginary, but I have related it because the curious forms\ndescribed concord, I believe, with the aspect given to larv\u00e6 by occult\nwriters. I cannot positively affirm the sensitive\u2019s absolute ignorance\nof mystic literature, but I have serious reasons to admit it. Must we\nsimply see herein a morphological association between the different\nforms of larv\u00e6, of tears embroidered on funereal garb and pears! This\nexplanation would be possible, if the sensitive knew the signification\nof the word larv\u00e6, and the form lent to these fabulous beings.\n\nI must now cut short the recital of these observations, and confine\nmyself to resuming the conclusion to which I have come:\u2014This is, that\nsensorial automatisms and especially visual hallucinations have the\nsame characteristic features we note in dreams, the same weakening\nof the power of control of the will and judgment over the selection\nof images, over their coherence, their likelihood, and the same\nrapid amnesia. These are characteristic features, which we observe\nin every case, where the sentiment of personality is impaired. This\nis just as noticeable in purely imaginary hallucinations, as in\nhallucinations which appear to have a real foundation. This fact seems\nto me of great importance, for it permits us to think, that one of the\nconditions of the transcendental perception of facts past, present\nor even future is the disappearance of the voluntary and personal\nactivity of the consciousness. Less fit to act actively, it would be\nmore inclined to be passively impressed by influences, which are at\npresent indeterminable; the transmission to the normal consciousness\nof the impressions perceived by the impersonal consciousness appears\nto take place in the same way as in a dream, that is to say by\ndramatisation,\u2014by a scene which expresses the idea in a concrete and\nsymbolical manner.\n\nThere is therefore a _rapprochement_ between these sensory automatisms\nand dreams and telepathy. Several premonitory dreams have been related\nto me by people of absolute good faith; I will give two, which were\ntold me by magistrates. The first concerns a man holding a high rank\nin the magistracy. He had sold, at an advantageous price, the wood on\na property he possessed in the neighbouring country, but the bargain\nwas not definitely settled, and was to be concluded in an interview\narranged for between the owner and the purchaser. On the eve of the\nday when the magistrate should have gone to the country, his wife\ndreamt that she was present at the woodman\u2019s visit. In her dream, the\nlatter offered a price, which was inferior to the price originally\nagreed upon, and covered his treachery with all sorts of periphrases,\ntrying to prove that the bargain remained excellent for the owner.\nFinally he turned towards Madame X., who was present at the interview,\nand said to her, \u2018This is fair speaking, is it not, Madame?\u2019 Madame X.\nrelated the dream to her husband, telling him also that she thought the\nbargain would not come off. Her dream was fulfilled literally, and the\nphrase heard in her dream was uttered by the woodman. I received this\naccount from the magistrate himself, an eminent man and one of the most\nbrilliant intellects I have known.\n\nThe second dream is, perhaps, still more curious; it was told me by one\nof my colleagues, a calm, positive man with not the slightest tendency\nwhatever to mysticism, employing his leisure hours in hunting rather\nthan with metaphysics. He is, moreover, an experienced magistrate,\nand occupies a distinguished position at a court in the centre of\nFrance. At the time he had the dream I am going to relate, he was\n_juge d\u2019instruction_ in a small town, where there are some important\nfactories. He was closely connected with a large manufacturer, and was\naccustomed to go and see him nearly every day. He knew the staff of the\nfactory, and notably an overseer, a native of Flanders; this man, after\nmany years of faithful service, wished to return to his birthplace and\nleft his employer, remaining, however, on the best of terms with him.\n\nSome months afterwards my colleague dreamt, he had taken his usual\npromenade and paid his visit to his friend. In his dream, he saw the\noverseer and manifested his surprise at seeing him; the overseer\nreplied, \u2018Yes, sir, it is I. I could not find any work in my own\ncountry, and i\u2019 faith, I came back here.\u2019 My colleague attached no\nimportance to this dream; on the morrow he went, as usual, to see his\nfriend, and in the factory found the overseer whom he had seen in his\ndream. He exchanged the same conversation he had held with him in his\ndream.\n\nFacts of this kind are very numerous. Perhaps they are only simple\ncoincidences, but, as with sensory automatisms already described, I\ncannot help thinking, that coincidence does not explain everything. The\nconcording details are often so numerous, that the probabilities in an\nextremely large proportion are against pure hazard. Richet, however,\nhas carefully studied the Calculus of Probabilities, and I will not go\ninto the question. I simply give my impression, persuaded as I am that\nthose who study these facts impartially will come to the conclusion,\nthat hazard does not explain everything.\n\nThe two dreams which I have taken as examples offer us cases of\ntelepathy, that is to say, the impression perceived in a way which the\nordinary senses do not explain. Telepathy has been carefully studied\nby Myers, Gurney, Podmore, Sidgwick, Ermacora, and discussion on this\nquestion can only be pursued, if the work of these savants has been\nstudied. Telepathy appears to me to be established in a definitive\nmanner, but I have no personal example to cite. However, a very great\nnumber of cases have been related to me, by persons who have received\ntelepathic impressions. I know of many people who have had veridical\nhallucinations, either during sleep or when awake. The following are\nsome examples borrowed from my circle of friends or relations:\u2014\n\nOne of my great-uncles had married a coloured woman at Martinique.\nThis lady, though highly respectable, was the victim of tenacious\nprejudice on the part of the white creole families on the island, and\nmy uncle\u2019s marriage aroused the displeasure of his family. He left\nSaint-Pierre, and came to Bordeaux. His wife\u2019s mind suddenly gave way;\nshe had dangerous attacks of fury, but the union between my great-uncle\nand his wife was so close, and their reciprocal affection so profound,\nthat my relation would not consent to a separation and have her cared\nfor in an asylum. He fell a victim to his devotion; his wife killed\nhim in an attack of high fever. One of my great-aunts, the dead man\u2019s\nsister, living at Paris, was awakened in the middle of the night by\nher brother\u2019s voice calling her. This hallucination coincided with the\ndeath of my great-uncle.\n\nAn intimate friend of my mother\u2019s, a creole living at Bordeaux, had\nbeen present at the embarkation of a family belonging to Martinique,\nthat was returning to Saint-Pierre. Some time afterwards she had a\ndream in which she saw a steamer founder; the stern of the vessel rose\nabove the waves, and she was able to read the name of the boat; it was\nthe one on which her friends had embarked. The vessel was lost and not\na life saved.\n\nHere is another interesting fact, in which (1) a sentiment of anxiety,\nthe cause unknown to the conscious personality, corresponds with the\nserious illness of a near relation; (2) the telepathic, premonitory\nhallucination of a telephonic call preceded the real call by two hours.\nThis fact was communicated to me by one of my friends.\n\n\u2018Here is the exact account of the fact I mentioned to you.\n\n\u2018On the evening of the 17th October 1901 I went to bed feeling greatly\ndisturbed; I could not define the cause of my mental anguish, for I was\nin perfect health. This trouble persisted, and my sleep was haunted by\npainful nightmare.\n\n\u2018At half-past four I suddenly awoke, having distinctly heard the\nsound of my telephone bell. I ran to the apparatus, and answered the\nring. The night operator replied that he had not rung me up, and that\nnothing unusual was happening. I had therefore been labouring under a\nhallucination, provoked by a particular haunting impression.\n\n\u2018At seven o\u2019clock in the morning, the telephone again sounded, and I\nwas put into communication with my brother-in-law residing at Biarritz.\nHe told me that my sister, Madame V., had, in the night, been struck\nwith congestion of the brain, and was in a critical state.\u2019\n\nAll these facts may be considered as coincidences; their attentive\nstudy, their thorough analysis, and their careful, thoughtful\ncomparison can alone make us suspect, that hazard has nothing whatever\nto do with their production.\n\nI may compare these cases of telepathy to facts of exteriorisation of\nsensibility, and of vision at a distance. I have given very little\nstudy to these facts, for they do not enter into the habitual plan of\nmy researches; I have sometimes observed them, but under conditions\nwhich do not satisfy me. My observations, however incomplete they\nmay be, tend, nevertheless, to make me think, that the phenomenon\ndescribed by de Rochas, under the name of _ext\u00e9riorisation de la\nsensibilit\u00e9_, is real. I have met with two sensitives, who presented\nthe phenomenon in a fairly clear manner in a waking state. I was led\nto make the following experiment with one of these sensitives. As soon\nas she entered the seance-room and had taken off her cloak, I took\nhold of the garment and pinched the lining. The sensitive mentioned\nfeeling a certain sensation, rather feeble however, in the part of her\nbody which had been covered by the garment in the place I had pinched\nit. The first time I tried this experiment, the sensitive had not been\nwarned, and was surprised at the sensation she felt. Needless to say, I\ntook precautions to make sure, this lady did not see what I was doing.\nI have observed, that this particular sensibility disappears very\nrapidly; at the end of forty or fifty seconds it has ceased to exist.\n\nI have asked a lady friend of this sensitive\u2019s to try the same\nexperiment with her more private garments, especially with the corsets.\nSensibility should then be greater.\n\nI think that the observation of this fact, which I point out with much\nreserve, not having submitted it to serious study, is easier than\nis supposed, by employing the method I indicate, that is to say, by\npinching or pricking garments which the sensitive has just thrown off.\n\nI have had occasion also of verifying this phenomenon, under the\ntechnical conditions indicated by Colonel de Rochas. Very few\nsensitives present it in a marked manner, and it has seemed to me\nnecessary to push the artificial sleep rather deeply. This expression\nmay seem somewhat antiquated, to those who have frequented our learned\nneurological cliniques; but I cannot help thinking, that a real\ndifference exists between the different phases of somnambulism, if they\nbe observed. I speak of a difference of degree. It seems to me that,\nonce the subject is put to sleep, the repeated action of the passes\ndetermines a particular state, pointed out by ancient magnetisers\nand exposed in detail by de Rochas, in which the subject appears to\nlose the notion of his personality, and be in close dependence upon\nhis \u2018magnetiser.\u2019 I have experimented very little in this order of\nresearch, and I can permit myself only to give indications; I am\nunable to affirm a personal conviction. The few experiments I have\nmade, however, tend to make me think that de Rochas is quite right in\nspeaking of superficial and profound states. I am not convinced that\nthe passage from the one to the other takes place with the regularity\nthat my eminent friend has observed, but the fact pointed out by him\nis, I think, true in a general way. I am going to support my opinion\nwith an example.\n\nI have already spoken of Madame Agullana. Those who have only been\npresent at her ordinary seances can have no idea of the curious\nfaculties, she sometimes presents. An experienced manipulator can\nobtain with her\u2014on condition of operating quietly and in the presence\nof very few people\u2014phenomena which are very interesting, in the sphere\nof what is called animal magnetism. I was at her home one evening with\nMonsieur B. We were expecting a tutor, a medium of whom I had heard\nmarvellous things. This tutor did not turn up; but, while waiting for\nhim, I put Madame Agullana to sleep; I wished to show Monsieur B.,\nwho had no experience of this kind, the effects of profound sleep.\nI prolonged my passes, made longitudinally from the forehead to the\nepigastrium, for more than twenty-five minutes. From time to time,\nevery seven or eight minutes, I asked Madame Agullana what was her\nname. She told me her name. At last the moment came when she could\nnot remember her name, and appeared to have lost consciousness of her\npersonality. I made a few more passes, and remarked to Monsieur B.\nthat, when Madame A. appeared to have cutaneous an\u00e6sthesia, she seemed\nto perceive pricks at a distance of two or three centimetres from the\nskin. The passes were continued for about another quarter of an hour;\nat that moment Madame A. appeared to present two peculiarities:\u2014\n\n1. Her sensitiveness appeared to be localised behind her, at about\nthree feet from, and twenty-one inches above the level of her head. She\nwinced, when\u2014care being taken that she did not see\u2014the air was pinched\nat the spot indicated.\n\n2. Only the persons _en rapport_ with her\u2014in the sense given to this\nword by de Rochas\u2014could make an impression upon her; contacts and\npinching by other people were not perceived by her. I did not observe\nthese two peculiarities under conditions sufficiently precise to\nwarrant me affirming, that my observation was good; but I indicate\nthem, for to me they appeared probable.\n\nThen, phenomena were forthcoming. Madame Agullana said she was in the\nstreet, outside of the house. I asked her to go and see what one of\nmy friends, Monsieur B\u00e9chade, was doing\u2014a man whom she knew well. It\nwas twenty minutes past ten o\u2019clock. To our great surprise, she told\nus that she saw \u2018Monsieur B\u00e9chade half-undressed, walking bare-footed\non stones.\u2019 This did not seem to us to have any sense. I saw my friend\nthe next day, and, although he is well acquainted with spiritistic\nphenomena, he seemed to be astonished at my recital, and said to me,\nword for word: \u2018I was not feeling very well yesterday evening; one of\nmy friends who lives with me advised me to try Kneipp\u2019s method, and\nurged me so strongly, that, in order to satisfy him, I tried last night\nfor the first time to walk barefooted on cold stone. I was, in reality,\nhalf-undressed when I made the first attempt; it was then twenty\nminutes past ten o\u2019clock; I walked about for some time on the first\nsteps of the staircase, which is built of stone.\u2019\n\nPerhaps this also is a coincidence, but this fact, which was witnessed\nby several people, presents very strange coincidences all the same.\nThe hour, the costume, the unusual operation, are circumstances of too\nspecial a nature for mere hazard to suffice to explain them, it seems\nto me. I cite this case because it came under my personal observation,\nand because it shows a variety of telepathic phenomena; it is what the\nancient magnetisers called lucidity, clairvoyance or, more exactly,\nvision at a distance. It appears to me to be a development of the facts\npointed out by de Rochas; it looks as though the entire sensibility was\nexteriorised to variable distances. This is tel\u00e6sthesia, a phenomenon\nin the sensitivo-sensorial domain, analogous to motor telekinesis.\n\nExperimenters, who might be desirous of verifying these facts, should\nnot forget, (1) it is necessary to have a sensitive who has often been\n_magnetised_\u2014I do not say _hypnotised_; (2) sleep must be pushed\nvery deeply\u2014passes must be continued for more than half an hour after\nsomnambulism sets in. The time is reduced with sensitives who are well\ndeveloped.\n\nIt would be easy to multiply examples of this kind, particularly\nthose of well-observed telepathic cases. The publications of the\nLondon Society for Psychical Research, Flammarion\u2019s book, _L\u2019Inconnu\net les probl\u00e8mes psychiques_, the _Annales des Sciences psychiques_,\ncontain a great number of them. This symbolism will always be met\nwith,\u2014this dramatic element, which I have indicated as the ordinary way\nby which the general consciousness transmits its information to the\npersonal consciousness. The assimilation which I make between sensory\nautomatisms and dreams, crystal vision and telepathy, appears to me\nto find support in these facts. These phenomena are of the same order\nand, in all probability, have their seat in the same strata of the\nconsciousness.\n\nI will not try to fathom the cause; once again I must repeat what I\nhave so often said already,\u2014the question is still so little known, that\nwe are not able to enter profitably upon the study of the apparent\ncause of the psychical facts examined in this present chapter. We must\nmultiply observations and verify the undeniable existence of the facts,\nbefore attempting to interpret them.\n\nI give here, both as an example of careful observation and as an\nillustration of the chief features of the phenomena of which I have\njust been speaking, the following account which Professor Charles\nRichet has kindly sent me.\n\n\nA COMPLEX CASE OF PSYCHICAL PHENOMENA.\n\nBY PROFESSOR CHARLES RICHET.\n\n\n  _April, 1903._\n\n\u2018DEAR DR. MAXWELL,\u2014The following is a brief account of the strange,\nbewildering facts, of which I promised you the narration.\n\n\u2018I. In the beginning of October 1900 I was at Carqueiranne, when I\nreceived a letter from Madame X. Madame X. had left Paris on the 1st of\nOctober for Fontainebleau, with the intention of spending a month near\nthe forest. In her letter to me she related, that on the arrival of the\ntrain at the station of Melun, she had a notion that some one entered\nher carriage and sat down opposite to her. This \u201cvision\u201d spoke to her,\nsaying he had known me very well, that he used to call me \u201cCarlos,\u201d and\nthat I called him \u201cTony\u201d; he told her, that he knew Fontainebleau very\nwell and would accompany her in her walks in the forest.\n\n\u2018After that letter I received others from Madame X., giving me\nnumerous details concerning this vision which called itself \u201cTony,\u201d a\nvision which was repeated several times during Madame X.\u2019s visit at\nFontainebleau. These details were particularly remarkable and abundant\nbetween the 20th and the 28th October. I will briefly enumerate them,\nafter which I will enter upon a discussion and appreciation of the\nchief details.\n\n\u2018\u201cTony\u201d showed me a tree to-day on which were engraved the letters\nA.\u00a0B. and a date 1880, or 1883\u2014the last figure was indistinct;\nunderneath the letters A.\u00a0B. was the name \u201cLucie.\u201d ... \u201cTony\u201d seems to\nhave had to do with machinery of some kind. He had hoped to construct\na machine, which would have been of great use to mankind. He seems to\nsay it was he who discovered the telephone,\u2014or, at least, that he was\non the right track.... I hear him say, \u201cI know Madeleine well.\u201d He says\nhe adored his father. He speaks about L\u00e9on, Sarah, and Marguerite, but\nespecially about Lucie. His wife\u2019s name was Lucie.... There were Jews\nin his family; he also talks about Louise.... He worked with telegraphy\nand electric wires.... He knew you remarkably well; he called you\n\u201cCarlos,\u201d and you called him \u201cTony\u201d; of this I am sure, for he speaks\nof it so often. He says he collaborated with you in some work. He says\nthat when he was dead, you went into his death-chamber and kissed\nhim on the forehead.... He had not been previously ill,\u2014a feeling of\nsuffocation in the chest and that was all. [_Quelque chose l\u2019a \u00e9touff\u00e9\n\u00e0 la poitrine, et ce fut tout._] He was only 30 or 32 years old when he\ndied.... I do not think he was married, that is to say, in the legal\nsense of the word; but he was very much attached to Lucie, by whom\nhe had a daughter, who was about three years old when he died. This\nchild seems to be still alive, but very few people know about it. He\nadored Lucie, who seems to have been very charming, for Antoine shows\nme her portrait,\u2014a medallion or locket which he used to wear\u2014in which\nshe seems to have beautiful dark eyes and hair. He lived for about\nfour or five years with Lucie; but Lucie had previously been married\nto a Jew [_un gros juif_], whom she did not care for. I think Antoine\nlived a long time with Lucie at Fontainebleau; they were sadly happy\nthere [_tristement heureux_]. The house they stayed at is no longer\ninhabited. It was a red and white cottage, quite close to the forest,\nwhich was just behind it.... The house stood alone; a tramway passes\nby there to-day.... \u201cTony\u201d also speaks about his father. His father\nloved his own fireside; he once lost a lot of money when Antoine was\ngrown up; but Antoine did not take much notice of this, for he did\nnot trouble himself about money matters. The house in which \u201cTony\u201d\nand his father lived together, is one which they seem to have always\ninhabited. \u201cTony\u201d seems to have always known this house. The furniture\nis old; the rooms look as though they had been occupied for a very long\ntime. He speaks of the Faubourg Montmartre; does that mean he used to\nlive there?... Antoine also had to do with engines of war. I think he\nwas wounded during the war [the Commune], because I hear the noise of\ncannon\u2014and your father dressed his wound....\n\n\u2018Antoine was a free-mason. He admired Claude Bernard. His political\nopinions were of a socialistic tendency. He did not care for the\nsociety of women. He was temperate, and did not drink wine; he was no\nepicure.... He has been to Geneva.... He has hunted with you.... He\nused to like reading _Titus Livy_.... He cared naught for the world\u2019s\nopinion, taking his conscience for his sole guide.... He often saw\nPhilippe. He also mentions Yvonne, Josephine, Georges, James, Clotilde,\nand Andr\u00e9.... He speaks about a pseudonym; he has written some things\nunder a _nom-de-plume_.... Antoine had beautiful dark eyes, large and\nmost expressive, full of resolution, but, at the same time, soft,\ndreamy-looking eyes. He had a frank, hearty laugh, and this merry\nsound was often heard [_Il riait souvent de ce bon rire_]. He had a\nhabit of putting his hands behind his head, and stretching himself\nout on a sofa, laughing merrily.... He has very long, thin fingers,\nwhich seem to be clever at mechanical work; indeed he seems to have\nbeen clever at everything, and to do all things well.... A short time\nbefore he died\u2014a Wednesday,\u2014you and he were at a banquet together, and\ndrank each other\u2019s health. \u201cTony\u201d then told you, that he had not been\nfeeling well, and that he was in great need of a holiday.... Antoine\ntold me again to-day, that he loved Lucie dearly; \u201cand,\u201d he said, \u201cI\nstill watch over her, even now; tell her no evil will ever befall her.\u201d\n[_Rien de mauvais ne lui arrivera._]\n\n\u2018II. The preceding are the most important of the data concerning my\nfriend Antoine B., given me in Madame X.\u2019s letters during the month\nof October 1900. I repeat Madame X. was at Fontainebleau, and I at\nCarqueiranne. Therefore, I could not have given her any hints by my\nwords, and I am particularly anxious to point out a fact, of which I am\nabsolutely certain, which is, that I had never pronounced the name of\nmy friend Antoine B. in the presence of Madame X.; I am positive that\nno word of mine could have afforded the smallest clue to Madame X. of\nmy acquaintance with Antoine B.\n\n\u2018I may also add that, though to-day four years after these visions\noccurred, Madame X. has become one of my friends, at that moment,\nOctober 1900, our acquaintanceship dated from a few months only; and,\nat Madame X.\u2019s own request, in order to avoid hints and suggestions,\nI abstained from ever speaking with her on anything save vague,\ngeneral topics. Madame X., at this time, lived a secluded, retired\nlife in a convent, seldom going out and receiving no visitors. She\nwas, moreover, almost an entire stranger to Paris, having arrived\nthere only a short time before I made her acquaintance. If Madame X.\nspoke of any one of my deceased friends to-day, it would be impossible\nfor me to affirm positively that I had never pronounced that name in\nher presence; but, thanks to the great care I took at that moment to\navoid all manner of confidences whatsoever, continually seconded in my\nefforts by Madame X. herself, I can certify that the name of Antoine B.\nhad not been pronounced up to the month of October 1900.\n\n\u2018Therefore my stupefaction was indeed great, when I discovered in\nMadame X.\u2019s letters so many precise and correct data, though mixed up\nwith occasional errors. And when I speak of precise and correct data, I\ndo not mean data, traces of which may have been left in printed matter.\nI speak of private, unpublished facts, facts known only to me or to his\nwife. Notwithstanding this, however, I was blind to the truth. And I\nsought to explain away these phenomena of lucidity, by an apparently\nrational explanation.\n\n\u2018Here is the fable I invented, for I think it may be useful to acquaint\nthe reader with my hesitations, and the manner in which I tried to\nexplain these facts. First of all, I supposed that Fontainebleau\nwas a mistake, since, as far as I knew, Antoine B. did not go to\nFontainebleau in 1883. At the same time, I thought I remembered he had\nbeen a pupil at the School of Artillery at Fontainebleau in 1874. But,\nI asked myself, why should Madame X. speak about Antoine B., whose name\nI was and am certain never to have pronounced in her presence? I found,\nor rather I thought I had found, the explanation. In the month of\nSeptember 1900, Antoine B.\u2019s daughter Madeleine, the wife of Jacques\nS., died, and one or two newspapers mentioned this sad and premature\ndeath. Now, I supposed that Madame X. had unconsciously glanced\nover one of these newspapers, that Antoine B.\u2019s name had appeared\ntherein with his biography more or less fully traced, our relations\nmentioned [he had been director with me of the _Revue Scientifique_,]\nand reference made to his term at the School of Application at\nFontainebleau. That was my fable.\n\n\u2018It is true there were several other facts awaiting explanation; but\nI did not let them hinder me,\u2014so dazed are we by the fear of meeting\nwith the truth just where it really is, when we find ourselves in the\npresence of facts, with which force of habit has not yet rendered us\nfamiliar.\n\n\u2018I will not dwell upon the absurdity of this manner of thinking; I will\nsimply repeat, that my first thought was that this vision of Antoine\nwas simply the souvenir of some sub-conscious reading, with here and\nthere a few gleams of lucidity, already very important in themselves,\nbut not exceeding in precision or in importance other proofs of\nlucidity, of which Madame X. had already given me numerous and decisive\nexamples.\n\n\u2018Well! I was altogether wrong! It was a conversation which I had with\nAntoine B.\u2019s widow, [she was now Madame L., having married a second\ntime] which showed me my mistake.\n\n\u2018During the summer vacation in 1901, she was staying at my house at\nCarqueiranne, and one day I happened to speak about Madame X.\u2019s visions\nconcerning Antoine. As soon as I began, Madame B. became agitated;\nthe recital wrought upon her feelings considerably. When I had\nfinished, she furnished me with the two following fundamental facts,\nfacts which entirely destroyed the point of view I had first of all\nadopted: 1. \u201cAntoine was never a pupil at the School of Application at\nFontainebleau\u201d; 2. \u201cIn 1883 he and I were at Fontainebleau together.\u201d\n\n\u2018Consequently the scaffolding I had erected in order to explain Madame\nX.\u2019s visions entirely collapsed. The connection between Antoine and\nFontainebleau\u2014connection discovered by Madame X.\u2014could not have been\nprovoked by the souvenir of the reading of any newspaper, and the\nhypothesis\u2014a very improbable one moreover\u2014of a sub-conscious souvenir,\nof the unconscious reading of a hypothetical newspaper, had therefore\nno _raison d\u2019\u00eatre_. So that the knowledge of a connection between\nAntoine and Fontainebleau could not have been due to any printed\nmatter\u2014since, naturally, no newspaper had mentioned this private\ndetail in Antoine\u2019s life\u2014or to any suggestion I might have given\ninadvertently\u2014since I was ignorant of the fact.\n\n\u2018Three other hypotheses remain:\u2014that of chance, and this is so absurd,\nthat it is useless even to mention it; that of collusion between Madame\nX. and Madame B., a hypothesis which is as absurd as the preceding\none, even if it were possible, for neither of these two ladies had\nor have ever seen one another; lastly, there is the hypothesis of an\nextraordinary lucidity, on the nature of which I will not dwell, in\norder to avoid theorising, but which I must, perforce, be content with\nsimply pointing out.\n\n\u2018There is not the slightest trace left of Antoine B.\u2019s visit to\nFontainebleau in 1883. At Barbizon, where he stayed with his wife from\nthe 15th May to 20th June 1883, he lived in a rustic inn, which has\nbeen demolished to make way for a tram-line. No writing, no letter,\nno souvenir of any kind whatever could have furnished a clue to this\nprivate detail in Antoine B.\u2019s life.\n\n\u2018III. I will now confront the reality, such as it was in June 1883,\nwith what Madame X. wrote me in October 1900.\n\n\u20181. In order to go to Fontainebleau, or rather to Barbizon, M. and Mme.\nB. left the train at _Melun_. It is impossible to say, whether the\ninitials of A.\u00a0B. and the name of Lucie are engraved on a tree in the\nforest.\n\n\u20182. \u201cThere is much resemblance between Antoine, as he was, and the\nphysical portrait drawn of him by Madame X., especially the soft,\ncaressing expression of the eyes. In politics he held advanced opinions\nfor his time, and, had he lived, he would, in all probability, have\nbeen a socialist to-day; at least his opinions would have been very\nfavourable to socialistic doctrines. The sentence, _Nous \u00e9tions\ntristement heureux_, is characteristically true; for at Barbizon, in\nspite of our long walks and our reveries in the forest, he was already\nvery weak and in the grip of the illness which, soon afterwards,\ncarried him off so rapidly.\u201d [The above was written and handed to me by\nMadame B. in October 1901.]\n\n\u20183. Lucie is not Madame B.\u2019s name. Her name is Marie. But Antoine\noften said to her, \u201cWhat a pity you are not called Lucie!\u201d It was his\nfavourite name.\n\n\u20184. It is quite true that, alone among all my friends, Antoine called\nme \u201cCarlos,\u201d and that I, on my side, called him \u201cTony.\u201d This is a fact\nknown only to me. It is also perfectly correct\u2014and I am not aware of\nhaving related this fact to any person whomsoever\u2014that, when Antoine\ndied, stricken to death in a few hours by a disease of the heart, I\nwent into his death-chamber and kissed him on the brow.\n\n\u20185. All the details relative to the construction of machines, electric\nwires, invention of the telephone, [before Gr. Bell\u2019s invention had\nbeen made known], collaboration with me in a scientific work, all these\ndetails are correct.\n\n\u20186. The house in which he stayed at Fontainebleau stood by itself, with\nits back to the forest; a tramway passes there to-day, the house having\nbeen pulled down to make room for it.\n\n\u20187. His daughter (who died in September 1900, at about the time when\nMadame X. says she first heard a voice call me \u201cCarlos\u201d) was called\nMadeleine. His sister\u2019s name was Louise. Louise married M.\u00a0H. of Jewish\norigin. [_There are Jews in his family._]\n\n\u20188. He was thirty-two years old when he died, and his death was almost\ninstantaneous. It would be impossible to describe his death more\ncorrectly than Madame X. does in the words: _Quelque chose l\u2019a \u00e9touff\u00e9\n\u00e0 la poitrine, et ce fut tout._ In fact, towards eleven o\u2019clock in the\nnight he was seized by a thoracic oppression, which made such rapid\nprogress, that he expired at four o\u2019clock in the early morning.\n\n\u20189. He was not wounded during the Commune; but once when, as a reserve\nartillery officer, he was assisting at gun-firing at Grenoble he lost\nthe hearing of the left ear, an affliction which saddened him very\nmuch. Probably I knew this, but, if so, I had completely forgotten it.\nIt was Madame B., who related this detail to me in October 1901, a\ndetail absolutely unknown to every one, for Antoine never spoke of it.\n\n\u201810. When Antoine was already grown up, shortly before his marriage,\nhis father, Louis, suffered heavy losses of money through a defaulting\ncashier. Antoine did not take this to heart; moreover, no one ever knew\nof the incident, which was carefully kept from the knowledge of every\none outside of the family.\n\n\u201811. He wrote under a pseudonym. He wrote a few insignificant plays in\n1876 or 1877; but it would be almost impossible to recover traces of\nthem to-day.\n\n\u201812. The house where he was born, and where he lived up to the time\nof his marriage, is very old (situated on the Quai de H., and not in\nthe Faubourg Montmartre); the furniture is ancient; the house is quite\nunlike a modern one.\n\n\u201813. The description of Lucie, his wife, is exact\u2014\u201ca very charming\nwoman with beautiful dark hair and eyes.\u201d Antoine had a portrait of her\nin a locket, which he used to wear on his person.\n\n\u201814. In a conversation I had with him a short time before his death, he\nspoke to me about the extreme fatigue which he felt, a kind of general\nlassitude, and of his great need of change and rest.\n\n\u2018In all the above facts there is an admirable and most unlikely\nconcordance between the reality and the indications given by Madame X.\n\n\u2018To be quite complete, I ought to mention the facts which I have not\nbeen able to verify, and those which seem inexact to me.\n\n\u2018Among the facts I have been unable to verify, are the names of Yvonne,\nJosephine, Sarah, Marguerite, Georges, Clotilde.\n\n\u2018The chief inexact details are the story of Lucie\u2019s true husband\u2014a\nJew (_un gros juif_)\u2014and of the child Lucie and Antoine had, of whose\nexistence hardly any one knew; also the detail of having been wounded\nduring the Commune and his wound having been dressed by my father.\nI ought also to add that Antoine and Marie B. were at Fontainebleau\nwith their three children. However, for reasons which I will develop\nfurther on, these errors have a great interest and merit an attentive\nexamination.\n\n\u2018When considering these phenomena we must, first of all, rid ourselves\nof commonplace prejudices. The question is, not whether such or such a\nphenomenon does or does not concord with recognised ideas, but whether\nthe phenomenon exists or does not exist\u2014always supposing, of course,\nthat it be not in flagrant contradiction with established and verified\ntruths.\n\n\u2018Therefore every effort of demonstration must be concentrated on this\none point: Can we explain the above facts by any known process? For\nthe sake of simplicity let us only take one of the facts, that of the\npresence\u2014\u201cor of the _thought_\u201d\u2014of Antoine B. at the Melun railway\nstation. We have seen that I fell into error by endeavouring to explain\nthis presence\u2014or this _thought_\u2014by a term at the School of Artillery\nat Fontainebleau; and I do not see what other explanation can be\nattempted, since not the slightest trace is left of Antoine\u2019s visit to\nFontainebleau with his wife twenty years ago.\n\n\u2018Even if an expensive detective inquiry had been set on foot, it is\nhighly doubtful if anything concerning Monsieur and Madame B.\u2019s visit\nto Fontainebleau could have been found out.\n\n\u2018Therefore, at the very outset, and without taking into account any\nof the other exact details in Madame X.\u2019s visions, we encounter\nthe material impossibility of establishing any relations between\nFontainebleau and Antoine.\n\n\u2018But, just for one moment, let us make the concession that the names\nof Monsieur and Madame B. had been somewhere met with at Barbizon\nafter an interval of twenty years; this would immediately entail the\nknowledge of many other details ever so much easier to gather than were\nthose very details given by Madame X., and not only easier but also\nmore exact. Had this visit become known to Madame X. by any normal\nmeans, there would not have been the story of an illegal union, and of\na residence of five years at Fontainebleau.[12] So even the mistakes\nare a confirmation of the truth, one of the most interesting of\nconfirmations; for, honestly, we cannot suppose that, knowing the real\nfacts, Madame X. would have taken it into her head to add facts, which\nshe knew to be incorrect.\n\n      [12] Let us, however, point out that Antoine had been\n      five years married when he died, and that he had been\n      at Fontainebleau with his wife, consequently the error,\n      which consists in saying five years of life together at\n      Fontainebleau, constitutes only a relative error.\n\n\u2018To put it in another way, even if we admit this absurdity of an\nextremely cleverly conducted detective inquiry making known to Madame\nX. the story of Antoine\u2019s life, she would not have distorted the\nresults of such an inquiry by introducing errors therein. To take an\nexample, when Antoine was at Fontainebleau with his wife and three\nchildren, she would have mentioned the other two children. She would\nalso have said\u2014and this was extremely easy to find out\u2014that the B.\nestablishment was situated on the Quai de H., and not in the Faubourg\nMontmartre.\n\n\u2018Therefore, every point carefully considered, I think it is absolutely\ncertain that normal means of knowledge could not establish any\nconnection between Antoine and Fontainebleau.\n\n\u2018In the second place, unpublished details were furnished. I will pass\nover all the details\u2014though they too be correct\u2014which might be found\nin biographical or necrological articles; I will simply draw attention\nto the following five extremely private details:\u2014\n\n  \u20181. The name of Lucie; and a locket containing her portrait which\n        Antoine always wore on his person.\n\n  \u20182. The names of \u201cCarlos\u201d and \u201cTony.\u201d\n\n  \u20183. A pseudonym.\n\n  \u20184. Money lost by his father.\n\n  \u20185. The circumstances of his death.\n\n\u2018Now, not one of these details could have been found out by any\ninquiry, however clever, however well-planned and well carried out such\nan inquiry might have been.\n\n\u20181. Madame B. was the _only_ living person who knew of Antoine\u2019s\npreference for the name of Lucie. She had never spoken of this to any\none; and it is a minute detail of which I was in complete ignorance,\nuntil Madame B. told me of it in 1901, after hearing about the visions\nMadame X. had related to me in her letters, a year before.\n\n\u20182. I was the _only_ person living who knew that Antoine called me\n\u201cCarlos\u201d; and this is not a very commonplace statement, since no one,\nsave Antoine, has ever called me \u201cCarlos.\u201d\n\n\u20183. No one ever suspected Antoine of having written under a _nom de\nplume_; the few insignificant things he wrote for the stage are so\nentirely forgotten, that Madame B. herself remembered nothing about\nthem in 1901; and it is even highly probable that what he wrote could\nnot be found again, the Bobino theatre, where he presented his plays,\nhaving disappeared years ago.\n\n\u20184. The monetary losses which his father, Louis B., sustained a short\nwhile before Antoine\u2019s marriage, had been carefully kept from the\nknowledge of every one. These losses were occasioned by a dishonest\ncashier. The man was not prosecuted. Notwithstanding the importance of\nthe sum involved, Antoine was relatively indifferent to the loss, as\nwas distinctly indicated by Madame X.\n\n\u20185. The circumstances of his death are described with striking reality.\nI kissed Antoine on the forehead when he was dead. Some little time\nbefore the end, he spoke to me about his health, saying he felt in\ngreat need of rest. He did not look ill, however, and he died, after a\nfew hours\u2019 illness only, from a cardiac affection: _quelque chose l\u2019a\n\u00e9touff\u00e9 \u00e0 la poitrine_.\n\n\u2018There is still another item of interest, which I wish to touch upon:\nthis is, the \u201cmessage\u201d from Antoine to his wife: _rien de mauvais ne\nlui arrivera_. These words were written by Madame X. in one of her\nletters to me, with the indication that Antoine had pronounced them\non a certain day. Now, on that very day, Madame B. was delivered of a\nstill-born child. She was, therefore, in a perilous condition at the\nvery time Antoine said: \u201cI watch over her, even now; tell her, no evil\nwill ever befall her.\u201d\n\n\u2018We have, now, to draw our conclusion. The hypothesis of chance is\nabsurd; the hypothesis of fraud is absurd; there remains but a third\nhypothesis, that of a phenomenon inexplicable by any of the existing\ndata of our knowledge. It is for this inexplicable phenomenon, that we\nare going to try and find an explanation.\n\n\u2018Two explanations at once present themselves: \u03b1, either this\nknowledge is entirely due to the intellectual faculties of Madame X.;\nor \u03b2, some other intelligence intervenes, which manifests itself to\nMadame X.\n\n\u2018\u03b1. This hypothesis is rather complicated, for it is not in the\nform of abstract knowledge that Madame X. learnt of all these real\nfacts concerning Antoine, but in the form of Antoine himself. So that,\nif it really be only a question of abstract notions, these abstract\nnotions have taken a concrete form in order to manifest themselves.\nThey would thus have constituted a sort of error in themselves. It\nhas been supposed that Antoine himself came into the railway carriage\nat Melun, that he accompanied Madame X. in her walks in the forest at\nFontainebleau during the whole month of October 1900, that he related\nthe story of his life to her; and there is something which shocks us\nin the thought that, though the story told to Madame X. be true, there\nwas no Antoine. At the same time, this objection is not paramount; for\nwe know so little of the ways in which supernormal knowledge flows into\nthe mind, that we are unable to make any negation concerning them.\n\n\u2018Moreover, it is, relatively, more rational, not to suppose the\nintervention of another force, since, _\u00e0 la rigueur_, a human\nintelligence, under extraordinary conditions of clairvoyance, may\nsuffice to explain everything.\n\n\u2018\u03b2. If other personalities intervene, they may be either \u03b2\u00b4,\nthe personality of Antoine B. himself, or, \u03b2\u00b4\u00b4, other forces\nnon-identical with human personalities.\n\n\u2018\u03b2\u00b4. Assuredly, the hypothesis that it is the consciousness of\nAntoine B. himself who came to Madame X. is the simplest, and at a\nfirst glance, it satisfies us. But then! what a number of objections\nsuch a hypothesis raises! How is it possible for the consciousness\nto survive after death? How can intelligences which suffer birth\nescape death? A beginning implies an end: Birth implies death, the one\ninvolves the other!\n\n\u2018\u03b2\u00b4\u00b4. Other forces such as genii, demons, angels, etc., may exist,\nas strict logic commands us to admit. There is a certain impertinence\nin supposing that, in the Infinite Immensity of Worlds and Forces, man\nis the only force capable of thinking. It seems to me necessary to\nadmit, that there exist intelligent forces in nature, other than man;\nforces, which are constituted differently to him, and are consequently\nimperceptible to his normal senses; these forces may be called angels,\ngenii, demons, spirits, no matter the name we give them. It is evident,\nhowever, that this hypothesis of intelligent forces ought not to be\nconfounded with the hypothesis of human personalities surviving after\ndeath. These are two absolutely distinct hypotheses. Now, I think that\nit is not the hypothesis of intelligent forces which is doubtful; what\nis extremely doubtful is that these forces can enter into communication\nwith man. Moreover, as in the case under notice, why should they take\nthe material appearance of a deceased human being, and declare their\nidentity with such?\n\n\u2018We see that all the explanations so far put forth are imperfect, and,\nfor my part, I find them so imperfect, that I am inclined to believe in\nsome other hypothesis which I do not know, which I cannot even guess,\nbut which, nevertheless, I am convinced exists, since here we have real\nfacts, which not any of the hypotheses heretofore presented can explain\nin a satisfactory manner. It is to this hypothesis _X_ that I attach\nmyself, for the present, recognising, while doing so, that there is a\ncertain amount of irony in proposing a hypothesis, of which I am unable\nto give the formula.\n\n\u2018In conclusion, we see that this case of Antoine B. involves the whole\nproblem of spiritism. It appeared to interest you, my friend, and I\nhave, therefore, related it to you, because the simple and complete\nnarration of facts ought to precede theories.\u2019\n\n\n  _November 1903._\n\n\u2018MY DEAR MAXWELL,\u2014The series of phenomena concerning Antoine B. do not\ncease with the recital I recently sent you. That recital comports an\nepilogue not less extraordinary than itself. I say an \u201cepilogue,\u201d for\nmost assuredly it has some connection\u2014of a psychological order\u2014with\nthe preceding recital. I will set it forth as concisely as possible:\n\n\u2018One evening in May 1903 I was dining with Madame X. and her family.\nAfter dinner we tried for phenomena, but received nothing. Towards the\nclose of the evening, shortly before I left, Madame X. pronounced the\nfollowing words\u2014words which I wrote down among my notes as soon as\nI reached home\u2014\u201cI see a woman standing near me; she has grey hair,\nshe is about fifty years of age, but looks older than she really is.\nHer hair is quite grey. I believe it is Madame B.\u201d (Antoine\u2019s widow),\n\u201cthough I am not quite sure yet. I see the figure 7 with her, which\nprobably means that she will die in seven months, or on the 7th of some\nnear month.\u201d Such is the copy of the very brief note I took of Madame\nX.\u2019s words. I ought to add that this note is a much abridged account of\nMadame X.\u2019s actual words, and that she also said:\u2014\u201cMadame B. is very\nill; she has some sort of chest complaint\u2014perhaps tuberculosis\u2014and she\nwill die very soon indeed.\u201d\n\n\u2018What renders this premonition extremely interesting is that Madame\nB., at that moment, was only very slightly ill. She was so slightly\nindisposed, that not for a moment did the thought ever cross my mind,\nthat her indisposition might turn into anything serious. Neither I\nnor any one in the world suspected any danger whatsoever. But fifteen\ndays after this prognostication had been made, the apparently slight\nbronchial affection from which Madame B. was suffering, and of which I\nhad, naturally, never said a word to Madame X., remained stationary,\nbut still the idea that the result might prove fatal never entered into\nany one\u2019s head.\n\n\u2018Nevertheless, the result did prove fatal. Madame B. died, within\nseven weeks after Madame X.\u2019s prediction, on Tuesday, 30th June 1903,\nafter a very sudden and irresistible aggravation of her previously\nslight indisposition, which carried her off in four or five days. The\nillness turned out to be a sort of pulmonary affection, the nature of\nwhich is still unknown to the doctors who attended her: (tuberculosis?\ninfectious _grippe_?).\n\n\u2018An interesting detail: Madame B. had black hair; I, who knew her well,\nhad never noticed any grey in her hair; I did not know she was grey.\nNow a few days before her illness took a serious turn, one of the\nmembers of my family who had just been paying Madame B. a visit, said\nto me: \u201cMadame B. does not dye her hair any longer, so that one can now\nsee how very grey she is!\u201d\n\n\u2018Here is a veritable premonition. The authenticity of this remarkable\nfact cannot be doubted, for it would have been impossible for me, or\nfor any one else, by means of telepathy, or in any other way, to convey\nto Madame X. the idea of a death, in which I did not believe, and which\ndid not, even for a moment, cross my mind, or any one else\u2019s mind.\n\n\u2018Such, dear Dr. Maxwell, is the epilogue of the recital I sent you.\nAlthough we cannot state precisely the link uniting the diverse\npsychical phenomena exposed in my two letters, I do not think we\ncan consider them as independent of each other. There are certain\nmysterious relations here, which the future, aided by our patience,\nwill certainly elucidate.\u2014Yours sincerely,\n\n  \u2018CHARLES RICHET.\u2019\n\n\n  _January 1905._\n\n\u2018DEAR FRIEND,\u2014During the revision of the above pages, whilst I was\nshowing them to Madame X., the latter told me that \u201cthe family B. were\nnot yet done with\u201d [_tout n\u2019est pas fini encore pour la famille B.!_];\nher words conveyed to me the impression of a presentiment of some\nmisfortune about to fall upon that family. These words were uttered\nbetween 3 and 4 o\u2019clock on the 23rd December 1904.\n\n\u2018Now, during the night of the 23rd-24th December, towards 11 o\u2019clock,\nLouis B. (the son of Antoine B.) narrowly escaped being killed in\na serious railway accident. That he was saved was little short of\na miracle. When, on the morning of the 24th December, I saw by the\nnewspapers that Louis had escaped, I was struck by the thought that\nMadame X.\u2019s prediction [_tout n\u2019est pas fini encore pour la famille\nB._] had been on the point of becoming realised.\n\n\u2018Alas! the presentiment was but too true; for Oliver L., the son of\nMadame B.\u2019s second husband, was in the same train as Louis B., and,\nthough the morning papers did not mention the fact, he was killed\ninstantaneously.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u2018I have another interesting point to mention in connection with this\npresentiment. On the 8th July 1903 Madame X. wrote to me saying,\nthat Madame B.\u2019s death (she had just died) would be soon followed by\nanother. She added: \u2018Some one tells me that one of the sons will soon\ndie,\u2014before the end of two years. I think it is Jacques B., but they do\nnot say so.\u2019 [_Quelqu\u2019un me dit qu\u2019un des fils mourra bient\u00f4t, avant\ndeux ans. Je pense que c\u2019est Jacques B., mais on ne le dit pas._]\n\n\u2018Thus this premonition\u2014somewhat vague it is true\u2014pronounced eighteen\nmonths before, was realised. It will be remarked that Madame X., by\nadding her own impression to her auditory perception, committed an\nerror; whilst the perception itself, though not very explicit, was\ncorrect.\u2014Yours very sincerely,\n\n  \u2018CHARLES RICHET.\u2019\n\n\nII. MOTOR AUTOMATISM\n\nThe observations which I have just laid before my readers, relate to\nfacts occurring in the domain of sensibility; the motor centres do not\nescape automatism, and there is a whole series of motor automatisms,\nsimple or mixed, to be noticed. For the sake of clearness, I will\ndivide them into four classes:\u2014\n\n1. Simple muscular automatism:\u2014Typtology; Planchette; and diverse\nalphabetic systems, ouija, etc.\n\n2. Graphic muscular automatism:\u2014Automatic script and drawing;\nPlanchettes, baskets, tables.\n\n3. Phonetic automatism:\u2014Automatic discourses.\n\n4. Mixed automatisms:\u2014Incarnations.\n\nI will remark, first of all, that the word automatism, borrowed from\nMyer\u2019s terminology, is not strictly correct. In reality, we can only\nspeak of automatism when we are in presence of mechanical acts,\nexcluding intervention of the will. Now this is not the case with the\nacts in question; these acts, which appear to be automatic if they are\nlooked at solely from the point of view of the personal consciousness,\nare in reality due to some sort of consciousness, parasitic or\nnon-parasitic, and offer the characteristic features of voluntary acts.\nThese reserves made, I will continue, for want of better, to use the\nword consecrated by custom.\n\n1. Simple muscular automatism.\u2014I designate thus those acts which\nrequire no association of complicated movements, such as the movements\nof writing and language exact. The simplest way of provoking this\nautomatism is in the ordinary spiritistic process of typtology.\n\nThe experimenters sit down round a table, and lay their hands lightly\non it. Sooner or later the table trembles, sways about from side to\nside, sometimes turns round, but more often raises one of its feet and\nstrikes the ground with it. A code of signals is arranged to express\n\u2018yes,\u2019 \u2018no,\u2019 \u2018doubtful\u2019\u2014_e.g._ three, two, and four:\u2014the manner in\nwhich the alphabet is to be pointed out is also agreed upon, either the\ntable will strike the number of the letter\u2019s rank, for example, one for\nA, three for C, 15 for O, 20 for T, etc., or it will strike the floor\nwhen the letter desired is pronounced.\n\nI rank this phenomenon with automatisms because, nearly always,\nit has appeared to me to be due to involuntary, or unconscious\nmovements. I do not like this kind of experiment; it does not carry\nconviction. Gasparian, and after him, Chevreul have given the correct\ninterpretation of it.\n\nIt is interesting only when the communications obtained reveal facts,\napparently unknown to the experimenters. Then the phenomenon is no\nlonger explicable by simple automatic action: the muscular movement\nis determined by the impersonal consciousness of the sitters or the\nmedium, and becomes the manner of transmitting the message addressed by\nthe impersonal consciousness to the personal consciousness. In fact,\nwe conceive that, if what I said concerning parakinesis be correct,\nthe movements of the table may be sometimes parakinetic. I have been\npresent at many seances for typtology, but I have never verified\ninteresting facts, except the one I related concerning _Touton la\nPipe_. When the experiments are conducted under the conditions which\nI consider indispensable, I am careful not to encourage typtological\nmanifestations.\n\nThere exists other means of inducing simple muscular automatism. The\nbest are instruments after the style of the psychograph. The alphabet,\nnumbers, and the words \u2018yes,\u2019 \u2018no,\u2019 \u2018I do not know,\u2019 are written on a\ndial in the centre of which a needle is placed. The displacements of\nthis index hand indicate the letters, numbers, etc., like the needle\nof the dial of a Br\u00e9guet telegraph. These dials are made of different\nsizes, and of different materials. It is best, however, to construct\nthem in the following manner:\u2014take a square piece of white wood,\nnon-resinous, from seventeen to twenty inches broad. Trace thereon a\ncircumference of seven to nine inches in diameter, and write around it\nthe letters of the alphabet, numbers, the words, \u2018yes,\u2019 \u2018no,\u2019 \u2018I do\nnot know,\u2019 and any other desired indications. Place in the centre of\nthe circle a bone or ivory pivot, the axis round which the needle will\nturn. Make the needle of wood, giving it enough thickness and solidity\nfor the hands to be able to rest on it. It is not necessary to give\nmuch mobility to the needle if the hands are to rest on it; in this\ncase, it will suffice to pierce a hole in it, through which the pivot\nmay pass.[13]\n\n      [13] Articles of this nature may be found at Leymarie\u2019s, 42 Rue\n      Saint-Jacques, Paris; and at the office of _Light_, 110 St.\n      Martin\u2019s Lane, London.\n\nI have been told of cases where the needle moved of its own accord; but\nI have not personally verified this fact. If movements of the needle\nwithout contact be desired, it would be well to give a more perfect\nsuspension to the needle: this may be accomplished by supporting it on\nsmall movable rollers, like those on the planchettes used for automatic\nwriting.\n\nI have rarely experimented with psychographs, for the same reasons\nwhich made me shun typtology.\n\nI will say the same thing of another kind of apparatus: the ouija, made\nin England. It is a board on which the alphabet and other signs are\nwritten. A small movable planchette supported on three or four feet\nis placed on the board; the sitters put their hands on the planchette\nwhich points out the letters, etc., with one of its feet, a process\nwhich is irksome, to say the least of it.\n\nThere are yet other means for inducing muscular automatism. I will\npoint out, as an example, the very ancient method of divination by the\nring. A metal, or better still an ivory ring, is suspended to a hair or\nsilken thread. The end of the hair or thread is held in the fingers;\nthe ring is held, thus suspended, in the centre of a small circle of\nthree or four inches in diameter on which the alphabet is written.\n\nAt the end of a certain time, the ring sways about, then strikes the\nletters, sometimes spelling out words. By placing the ring in a glass,\nit will strike against it, giving indications in this way. I have only\nused this method once or twice, for it seemed to me to present very\nlittle interest. This is in reality Chevreul\u2019s exploring pendulum.\n\n2. Automatic script.\u2014Automatic writing is, I think, one of the most\ninteresting of all phenomena; I have no need to bring to mind the\nimportant studies which Myers, Hodgson, Hyslop, Sidgwick, and others\nhave made on this phenomena. I have been able to make some observations\nof great interest, but the limits of this book do not permit me to\ngive a detailed report of them. The thorough examination I made of one\nparticular case of automatic writing\u2014a rather rudimentary case, it is\ntrue\u2014clearly revealed to me the play of the unconscious souvenirs of\nthe medium.\n\nThe methods for obtaining automatic writing are numerous. We can even\nmake a table write by fixing a pencil to one of its feet; the same\nwith a hat or basket, etc. More perfect methods exist, of which the\nfollowing are the best:\u2014\n\nFirst of all the planchette; an instrument in the shape of an oval\npiece of wood, resting on three movable tiny ivory rollers, with a\nsmall copper setting at one end, in which a lead-pencil may be screwed.\nWith the planchette two or three persons may write at the same time.\n\nAnother equally good method is the following: Fix two, three or four\nhandles on to a large wooden ball, of about seven inches in diameter.\nFix the pencil in a hole bored through the ball, each handle of which\nis held by an experimenter. Place a sheet of paper underneath the\npencil, the latter will then often move and write words and phrases.\n\nFinally, the best method of all is to write naturally, without any\ninstrument at all. The sensitive sits down with a pencil, as though to\nwrite, and waits.\n\nWhatever the method adopted may be, it is seldom that automatic writing\nis manifested at the outset. Generally one or several seances are\npassed in illegible scribblings, in making strokes, zigzags, in endless\nrepetitions of the same letter. But we must not be discouraged; on the\ncontrary, we must continue experimenting for a certain time, before\nconcluding to the impossibility of success. Whether we be trying to\nobtain collective or ordinary automatic writing, it is a good plan\nto consecrate ten or fifteen minutes every day, always at the same\nhour, to these trials. The phenomenon takes a long time to evolve, and\npeople, who have obtained most curious results with automatic writing,\nhave passed months in developing their faculty.\n\nAs I said before, I have chiefly directed my experiments towards the\nobservation of movements without contact; therefore, I have not sought\nvery assiduously to obtain automatic writing with my mediums. The\ngreater number of cases I have observed offer little interest, if we\ncompare them to the curious visual hallucinations which I related a\nlittle while ago. I will make an exception though for one which I am\nin the act of studying, and which makes me conceive some hopes, the\nsensitive having written in English, a language which I am positive\nhe does not know. This medium, like many I have met with, submits\ngrudgingly to these experiments, and has not yet consented to sit\nregularly for automatic writing. I hope I may succeed in persuading him\nto do so.\n\nThough my observations present very little relative interest, I will\ngive some examples of the results I have obtained personally. I will\ngive them simply as indications, for, none of the facts I have observed\npresent, so far, any real interest, except the one I was able to\nanalyse, and even this contains nothing of a transcendental nature.\n\nI myself have often tried to write with the planchette. I obtained\nwords and incoherent phrases, all extremely commonplace. I wrote\nalone or with others; alone, I obtained it with the left as well as\nwith the right hand. The left hand sometimes gives mirror-writing,\n_Spiegelschrift_; with the planchette, the left hand generally writes\nin the usual manner from left to right. One point to be noted with\nplanchette-writing, is the dissociation of the graphic elements. The\nletters are as a rule fairly large, varying from an eighth of an\ninch to nearly an inch. It is chiefly in capital letters we find the\ndissociation curious. The characteristics of my hand-writing are not\naltered. I will add that this manifestation does not present much\ninterest, for I am perfectly conscious of what I write when alone,\nand when I write with another person, the movements of the planchette\nindicate to me what letters are being formed.\n\nWith the ball and handles, of which I gave a description, I once\nobserved a curious fact. I was experimenting with a lady and her\nhusband; the former is a medium whose faculties are above the average.\nThe writing announced the reception of a letter from Hendaye on the\nmorrow. The letter came; but to demonstrate the premonitory feature\nof this fact, I have only the affirmation of my co-experimenters, and\nalthough they are people of unimpeachable probity, their affirmation\nalone would be insufficient to establish the reality of the premonition\nin a positive manner. Therefore, I only give it as a specimen of the\nfacts which may be obtained with automatic writing.\n\nI have often observed ordinary writing, but I have never obtained a\nveridic paranormal fact in this way. I have, as I said, studied a case\nof semi-automatic writing, and was able to analyse its psychological\nfeatures thoroughly. The writer was what spiritualists call an\n_intuitive_ medium, that is to say, he was conscious of what he wrote.\nHe was thirty-five years of age, and had never indulged in spiritistic\npractices before, though he knew the literature, especially Allan\nKardac\u2019s works. At the time the phenomenon manifested itself with him,\nhe was mentally overdone through excess of brain work. He occupied an\nimportant official position. Apparently he has no nervous defect, and,\nexcept for frequent headaches, his health is good. I have not been able\nto study his reflex movements, nor examine him from a somatic point of\nview.\n\nHe commenced writing with the planchette; he had a sensation of being\nguided, but knew what he wrote and what he was going to write. There\nwas, therefore, a beginning of dissociation between the mental images,\nproperly so called, and their motor action. This fact should be noted,\nbecause it seems to me to have an interesting signification, in so far\nas it demonstrates that the ideomotor image is not simple, but has\ncomplex elements, and, notably, that elements which are purely ideal\nand motor elements can become dissociated. In the example cited, the\nsensitive was fully conscious of the _ideas_ which were formed in, or\nwhich presented themselves to, his consciousness. On the contrary,\nhe was not fully conscious of the movements his hand made. The\nstereognostic perception and the muscular sense were intact; only the\nconsciousness of the origin of the accomplished movement was obscure;\ntherefore, it was only the sphere of voluntary motor power in the\npersonal consciousness which was touched.\n\nThe first manifestations of pseudo-automatic writing claimed to\nemanate from a deceased relation. This relation was quite disposed to\ncommunicate facts known to the sensitive, but manifested very little\neagerness to answer questions which the sensitive\u2019s consciousness\ncould not answer. Invited to justify his identity, the personality\nshowed itself incapable of giving the slightest proof.\n\nMeanwhile, the sensitive tried ordinary writing, and obtained\nit. It presented the same features as planchette-writing. A new\npersonification came and assisted the deceased relation\u2014he was nothing\nless than a Mahatma from India! At this time the sensitive was\nreading the works of Madame Blavatsky and Mr. Sinnett, especially the\nlatter\u2019s _Occult World_. The communications were signed _Hymaladar_.\nThis Mahatma presented nothing of transcendental interest, and was\nlavish with his promises. He declared he was ready to undertake the\nexoteric education of the sensitive, who, in his _na\u00efvet\u00e9_, yielded to\nthe Mahatma\u2019s advice. The Mahatma promised to transport him actually\nover to India, to precipitate letters, etc. The promises were never\nfulfilled.\n\nOther personifications manifested; the sensitive tried to obtain\nsome proofs of identity, but without success. On the other hand the\npersonifications were verbose on general topics, and gave proof of a\nlively imagination. Here are some specimens of their style and ideas.\n\nA guide, signing himself _Memnon_, expressed the following opinion upon\na certain mystic book:\u2014\n\n\u2018... Do not allow yourself to be led away by its descriptions: they\napply to all those who, in no matter what religion, devote themselves\nto a contemplative life, which is, assuredly, a blessing, but one which\nmust be won by patience and effort. When the duties common to every man\nborn of the flesh have been fulfilled, abstention from the imperious\nduty of procreation can, and really does, favour the faculty for\nprojection of the soul, and renders _ecstasy_ easier; but not only is\nsuch a development artificial, it is also reprehensible to arrive at\nthat contemplative life, without having founded a family in compliance\nwith the imprescriptible law of nature. Herein lies the original\nvice of all religious communities which offend creation\u2019s views; it\nwould suffice to generalise the doctrine to discover its falseness\nimmediately. Man has physical as well as moral duties to accomplish: he\nis composed of a body and a soul; he is culpable when he subordinates\none of his composing parts to the other. The senses have no more the\nright to command the body than the soul has of making the body suffer\nin its physical functions. The suppression of any natural function\nis criminal, and every religious order does this. This is their\ncapital error. He who has raised children and satisfied the physical\nevolution, he alone has the right to withdraw from the world, to lead\na contemplative life, when the body, worn out by old age, has finished\nits active r\u00f4le here below. It is only then that preparation is useful.\u2019\n\nThe pencil was verbose every time general subjects were broached.\nWhenever the sensitive pressed the personification on some given point,\nthe latter was silent\u2014he disappeared. The questions were written as\nwell as the replies. There are some amusing conversations, where the\n\u2018spirit\u2019 plays a r\u00f4le other than that of simple interlocutor. By way of\nspecimen, I note the following dialogue:\u2014\n\nQ. Do you see me?\n\nA. Yes, but badly; we do not see matter clearly; a long apprenticeship\nis necessary, and we have not been working long with matter.\n\nQ. Is it long since you left your sphere?\n\nA. Eight years.\n\nQ. Who are you?\n\nA. Monsieur A.\n\nQ. And?\n\nA. And Mamie Beaupuyat.\n\nQ. You have known me?\n\nA. Yes, I was one of your college friends.\n\nQ. Where?\n\nA. At N.\n\nQ. What college?\n\nA. Z. College.\n\nQ. Will you write your name again?\n\nA. Maurice B. (here the name of a street).\n\nQ. I do not remember having known you my friend. Remark this, you have\ngiven me two different names, Beaupuyat and B.\n\nA. Many details are forgotten in Paradise (_sic_).\n\nQ. Ah! strange ambassador! You come to see me without letters of credit!\n\nA. Good-bye.\n\nQ. Good-night.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe subconscious excuse for the contradiction pointed out is not\nwanting in humour.\n\nHere is another example:\u2014\n\nQ. Are my guides here?\n\nA. We are always at hand to help you, always.\n\nQ. Will you show yourselves to me?\n\nA. Ought you to ask us for anything before giving us tokens?\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nQ. Is it X. who is influencing me?\n\nA. Yes.\n\nQ. But he is dead?\n\nA. Yes.\n\nQ. But you forbid me to evoke the dead?\n\nA. We are the spirits of dead people.\n\nQ. But you told me you were Mahatmas?\n\nA. We are _Mahatmas_, but _Mahatmas_ are not living.\n\nQ. Is it again a trick of my subliminal?\n\nA. Yes, your subliminal is the will.\n\nQ. Yes, it is true, but the will is chiefly superliminal.\n\nA. You are right.\n\nQ. Why do you always make fun of me?\n\nA. We do so to please the Lord.\n\nQ. This is cruel. I am in earnest, and your lord, if he be just, will\npunish you severely for your farces.\n\nA. Yes, he will give us the whip.\n\nQ. I do not like this joking, leave me.\n\nA. Always ... (illegible).\n\nQ. What?\n\nA. Magician.\n\nQ. Am I a magician?\n\nA. Yes.\n\nQ. I did not know it.\n\nA. Always do good, and you will be happy.\n\nQ. Happiness is not so easy to obtain.\n\nA. Good-bye.\n\nQ. Who are you?\n\nA. A friend.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThis is simply nonsense. I have quoted these three examples in order\nto show the growing analogy found therein with the delirium of dream.\nIt is scarcely visible in the first quotation, which is coherent,\nlogical and of fairly elegant form. But the ideas which are expressed\nhave their sources in subconscious souvenirs: they will be found in\n_Spirit Teachings_, _Higher Aspects of Spiritualism_, _Occult World_,\nand _Esoteric Buddhism_.\n\nThe second quotation reveals decided oneiroscopic associations. The\nname Beaupuyat awakens no souvenir; the name of a street having nearly\nthe same assonance is then substituted for it; this is an illogical\nassociation, formed by phonetic elements. The explanation of the\ncontradiction between the names given successively is very illogical,\nbut it is what might be called \u2018a good hit.\u2019 This is one of our ways of\nreasoning with ourselves in dreams.\n\nThe third quotation shows a still more marked degree of incoherence.\nThe first replies are attempts at conciliation of contradictions\nimpossible to do away with: they are affirmations which are but echoes\nof the questions asked. I do not quite understand the association\nbetween subliminal and will; but the emergence of the idea of will\ngives place to a curious phenomenon: the evolution of a parasitical\nassociation of ideas bringing to mind the psychological phenomenon\nwhich A. Pick describes under the name of _Vorbeidenken_. We have\nnon-expressed stages, from will to \u2018God\u2019s will,\u2019 words which are often\nassociated together in religious language: \u2018to do the will of God, to\nbe agreeable to God.\u2019 The incoherent reply, which consists in saying\nthat the Mahatmas make fun of the subject in order to be agreeable to\nGod, is then the last link of a chain of latent associations; this\nlast link is the only one shown. Also, the incongruous idea of beings\nwho call themselves spirits and wise men, and declare they must be\nwhipped, is the result of an evident association between the idea\nof being severe consciously expressed, and the idea of severity,\nchastisement, whip, average latent terms. The psychological analysis,\ntherefore, reveals to us mental processes which are known and classed.\nIt shows us, that the dream character of subconscious messages\ndoes not differ from that observed in the mental operations of the\nconsciousness, as soon as the latter\u2019s personal and voluntary activity\nbecomes weakened or gradually gives place to spontaneous ideation.\nI think the three examples I have chosen show this progressive\ndebilitation very well, and also the corresponding accentuation of the\ncharacteristics of dream in the messages obtained. The case I examined\nis at the limit of paranormal facts, but the inquisitive reader has at\nhis disposal the weighty analysis of the transcendental cases published\nin the _Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research_, epitomised\nby M. Sage in his book _Mrs. Piper et la Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 Anglo-Am\u00e9ricaine des\nRecherches Psychiques_, to verify the accuracy of my conclusion, viz.\nthat the mental processes in simple cases, as well as in the more\ncomplex cases, are identical.\n\nI return to the case observed by me. The obstinacy of even the best and\nmost moral of these personalities in refusing to expose themselves to\nany control whatsoever, the falsehoods they were imprudent enough to\noverlook, and the critical attitude of mind of the sensitive himself,\nawakened a spirit of distrust in the latter. He began to observe\nhimself, and the first result of his observation of the conditions\nunder which the writing was produced, was the gradual disappearance\nof the sensation of impulse which he had felt: his pencil, he told\nme, had seemed to follow a magnet. As this sensation weakened and\ndisappeared, so the personifications affected to be either grievously\npained, or cold and dignified, or frankly insolent; they all deplored\nthe sensitive\u2019s incredulity. The relation bade him adieu and appeared\nno more; Hymaladar himself ceased to be interested in his _chela_. The\nsensitive soon saw the futility of his efforts, and the writing ceased\ncompletely to present the peculiarity it had offered during several\nweeks.\n\nThis case is instructive, because it is on the borderline between\nconscious and unconscious phenomena. Thanks to the clear and complete\nindications on the part of the sensitive, I was able to reconstitute\nthe genesis of every personality. That of the relation is easily\nexplained, but Hymaladar was more rebellious to analysis. Upon\ninvestigation it appeared to me to be the synthesis of the words\nHymalaya and Damodar. The one, which quite naturally evokes the thought\nof India, is the dwelling-place of the sages who, it appears, preside\nin a very secret manner at the evolution of the theosophical movement;\nthe disciple or _chela_ of one of them was the guru, the master of\nMadame Blavatsky. His name was Damodar. The associated ideas\u2014Blavatsky,\nIndia, Hymalaya, Damodar\u2014lead up to the word _Hymala_ (ya Damo) _dar_;\nthe genesis of the word is thus quite comprehensible.\n\nAt present I am observing a more complex case, in which paranormal\nphenomena accompany automatic writing. The sensitive, who is in the act\nof developing his medianity, unfortunately gives himself up rather\nunwillingly to observation. He does not know English, yet he has\nautomatically written certain phrases in English. However, we must not\nconclude therefrom, that these messages are of transcendental origin.\nThis sensitive is a well-educated person, and most probably English\nwords and phrases have fallen under his eyes from time to time; thus\nthe irruption of English in messages he obtains may be explained by\nthe emergence of subconscious souvenirs. The tenor of the messages\nis still vague; the writing is often difficult to read; no precise\nfact capable of being analysed and verified has so far been given. It\nappears to me useless, in these circumstances, to give examples of\nthese messages, but I will point out an interesting peculiarity which\nI have observed only with this sensitive. This is the concomitancy of\nraps and automatic writing. I have most carefully studied these raps;\nthey appear to me to occur on a level with the point of the pencil.\nThe phenomenon is forthcoming in broad daylight, and under excellent\nconditions of observation. An attentive examination shows that the\npoint of the pencil does not leave the paper. The raps are forthcoming\neven when I put my finger on the upper end of the pencil, and when\nI press the point on the paper. The pencil vibrates, but it is not\ndisplaced. As these raps are very sonorous, I have calculated that it\nwould be necessary to give rather a strong knock in order to reproduce\nthem artificially: the necessary movement would require raising the\npencil from the twentieth to the eighth of an inch, according to the\nintensity of the raps. Now, the pencil does not appear to be displaced.\nFurther, when the writing runs quickly the raps succeed one another\nwith great rapidity, and the close examination of the writing reveals\nno stops; the text is unbroken, no trace of pencil dots is perceptible,\nthere is no thickening of the characters. The conditions of observation\nappear to me to exclude the possibility of a trick. I will add that\nduring this automatic writing the arm and hand of the sensitive are in\na state of an\u00e6sthesia.\n\n3. Phonetic and mixed automatisms. I combine these two categories of\nautomatisms because the automatism is seldom purely phonetic. The\nsensitive makes gestures appropriate to the personage he represents,\nand the automatism is complicated; the muscles which regulate the\nemission of the voice are not the only ones in activity.\n\nThis kind of automatism is very easy to observe. It is the basis of\nordinary spiritistic seances; it is called \u2018incarnation\u2019 or \u2018control,\u2019\nand the sensitive, who produces this kind of phenomena, is called a\n\u2018trance medium.\u2019\n\nIts necessary condition is the trance or somnambulistic state. The\nsensitive falls asleep spontaneously, or is put to sleep artificially\nby passes. After a certain time, more or less long, and after diverse\nmovements, the most usual of which seem to be muscular contractions of\nthe face and pharynx, the sensitive enters into somnambulism and passes\ninto the secondary state. Some subjects fall asleep very quickly. It\nis not a rare thing in spiritistic seances, for two or three persons\nto enter into a state of somnambulism at the same time. The perfection\nof the sensitive\u2019s acting, when personifying diverse individualities,\nis most striking when they have known the persons they are imitating.\nObservation is extremely interesting. In spiritistic seances these\npersonalities, naturally, always represent spirits.\n\nI have seen nothing in this order of phenomenon which appeared to me\nworth noting. Everything is easily explained by the play of impersonal\nmemory and by imitation. Many transcendental facts have been related\nto me: personally I have observed none. But I have very rarely tried\nto provoke trance phenomena. They do not present the same interest to\nme as physical phenomena do. The most interesting I have seen, were\ngiven me by Madame Agullana, in private seances. This sensitive\u2019s\nmost curious personality is that of a doctor, who died about eighty\nor a hundred years ago: he has always refused to give any information\nconcerning his identity; the reason he advances for maintaining his\nincognito\u2014the existence of his family, members of whom are living in\nthe south of France\u2014does not satisfy me; I imagine he is withholding\nthe best. His medical language is archaic. He calls plants by their\nancient medical names; his diagnosis, accompanied with extra-ordinary\nexplanations, is generally correct, but the description of the internal\nsymptoms which he perceives is such as would astound a doctor of\nthe twentieth century. Matters, fluids, molecules, dance a strange\nsaraband. Nevertheless, my colleague from beyond the tomb\u2014not at all\nloquacious, by the way\u2014retains a serenity, which is proof against\neverything, and humbly recognises that there are many things he does\nnot know. During the ten years I have been observing him, he has not\nchanged, and presents a logical continuity which is most striking.\nPersons, who are not _au courant_ with the features of secondary\npersonalities, might easily be deceived and believe in his objective\nreality. Be he what he says he is, or be he what I suspect him to be,\nthat is to say, one of the sensitive\u2019s secondary personalities, my\n_confr\u00e8re_ Hippolytus is an interesting interlocutor, and, with his\nconversation, one could write a work on clinical medicine which would\nbe rather out of the common. This is not the place to study him, for\nhis examination only raises problems of psychological interest. In\nthese phenomena of mixed automatism, of \u2018incarnation,\u2019 we observe the\ncomplete development of _personifications_. These personifications\nare the feature common to all psychical phenomena. Raps claim to\nemanate from a given personality, paranormal movements have the same\npretension, automatic script assures us of a like origin: \u2018incarnation\u2019\nor \u2018control\u2019 puts forth the claim of being the personality himself, in\nfull possession of the sensitive\u2019s body, directing and using it as he\npleases.\n\nThe problem which these personifications set before us is, perhaps, the\nmost interesting of all those which are to be met with, in the kind\nof study to which this book is consecrated. I have pointed out, that\nthe general feature of these personifications is to present themselves\nas living\u2014or more usually deceased human beings. My observations\ndo not tend to make me think that this claim is well founded. It\ndoes not come within the scheme of my work to analyse the different\nhypotheses, which have been emitted by the different mystic schools.\nOccultists profess to see astral shells, in these personifications,\ndebris\u2014still organised\u2014of the body\u2019s astral double, which the superior\nprinciples have abandoned. Theosophists have about the same theory,\ndesignating these debris by the name of elementals. Spiritists\nattribute their phenomena to the spirits of the dead. Roman Catholics\nsee the intervention of the devil therein, while the greater number of\nsavants only see fraud or chimera. All these opinions are too absolute.\nThere is, certainly, something; but I think this something is neither\nspirit, shell, elemental nor demon. It is not my province to formulate\nin detail my theory: properly speaking, I have not any. I observe\nwithout bias of any kind, and the only indication I can give is the\nfollowing:\u2014in almost every case I have studied, I believe I recognised\nthe mentality of the medium and the sitters in the personification. It\nis true, there are certain cases which I cannot explain in this way;\nbut the spirit hypothesis explains them still less satisfactorily. We\nmust continue seeking.\n\nThe examples I have given of intellectual phenomena show that in every\ncase of which I have been able to make a thorough analysis, we discover\nthe action of the impersonal consciousness. This explains itself\nnaturally, since the personal and voluntary consciousness excludes by\ndefinition the co-existence of a second personality. Nevertheless, this\nis not absolutely true. The medium, of whom I have already spoken, he\nwho produces raps when writing, writes automatically while he speaks,\nin quite a natural way, of other things. In fact, he only writes well\nwhen his attention is drawn away from his hand. As soon as he is\nconscious of the movement, the writing ceases. Things happen with him,\nas though the normal consciousness lost all contact with the motor\ncentres of the arm and hand. A special consciousness appears to be\ndeveloped in these centres.\n\n\nTHE PSYCHOLOGY OF AUTOMATISM\n\nThe difficulty, which is raised by the interpretation of facts of\nthe kind exposed above, is considerable. It is to be remembered,\nthat the sensitive of whom I have just spoken, does not appear to\nsuffer any diminution of his normal personality; he converses with\nfacility, his normal personal souvenirs and his intelligence remain\nintact. His arm and hand alone, especially the latter, are withdrawn\nfrom consciousness, and this in the sensitive as well as in the motor\nspheres. Janet sees in these facts psychological disaggregation, and\nin many cases his explication is the correct one. But it cannot be\napplied to the case I am speaking of, for no diminution in the memory,\nintelligence or mental activity is perceptible. However, Janet seems\nto have only seen one of the phases of these curious phenomena. I\nattach so much importance to the establishing of the _point de fait_\nthat, before all analysis thereof, I desire to state it precisely,\nsuccessively with the discussion.\n\nThe first circumstance of fact which observation of the case I am\nexamining reveals, is the one I have just pointed out: an apparent\ndissociation of the normal personality, from the cenesthesic\nconsciousness of which a portion of the body is withdrawn. The second\ncircumstance is the relative knowledge of English\u2014with correct\northography excepting one mistake only\u2014which is shown by the apparently\nself-governed limb. Note also that I feel sure that this knowledge of\nEnglish is probably subconscious, and that I have supposed, although\nthis has not been proved, that the writer has now and then come across\na few English sentences, containing the phrases written by him. These\ntwo circumstances are, for me, observed facts.\n\nFrom these facts there results a third fact, the consequence of the\nfirst two: the consciousness, which directs the limb withdrawn from\nthe personality, appears to have more considerable resources\u2014at least\nfrom a memory point of view\u2014than the normal consciousness. If it be\ncorrect to speak of apparent disaggregation in that which concerns\nthe conscious normal personality, it seems to me that this expression\nceases to represent the facts, as soon as it can be demonstrated, that\nthe consciousness manifested by the automatism is more extensive than\nthe normal consciousness. If we are to attach a precise meaning to\nlanguage\u2014and Janet\u2019s language is so clear and simple that we may not\naccuse this elegant and remarkable writer of want of precision\u2014the idea\nof disaggregation implies the division of the personal consciousness\ninto elementary parts, according to definition, lesser than the whole.\nThis phenomenon is frequently observed, _e.g._ when automatic writing\nshows itself to be incapable of logical co-ordination, of which I have\ngiven examples; sometimes there is no trace of thought, properly so\ncalled, _e.g._ when the sensitive confines himself to repeating _sine\ndie_ the same letter, or traces nothing but lines, and strokes, etc.\nBut can we consider the case as one of veritable disaggregation where\nthe hand, withdrawn from normal consciousness, appears to dispose of a\ngreater mass of souvenirs than the normal consciousness does?\n\nJanet himself has verified the fact, and gives some examples of it\nin his work, _N\u00e9vroses et id\u00e9es fixes_, vol i. After that, is it\nnot contradictory to say (_Automatisme psychologique_, p. 452): \u2018The\nresult of our studies has been to bring back the diverse phenomena of\nautomatism to their essential conditions\u2014most of these phenomena depend\nupon a state of an\u00e6sthesia or abstraction. This state is connected with\nthe narrowing of the field of consciousness, and this narrowing itself\nis due to the feebleness of synthesis and the disaggregation of the\nmental compound into diverse groups smaller than they should normally\nbe. These diverse points are easy to verify; the state of abstraction,\nincoherence, of disaggregation, in a word, of suggestible individuals\nhas often been pointed out.\u2019 How can a group, smaller than the mental\ncompound of which it forms one of the parts, be more considerable\nthan that compound? How can a part be greater than its whole? This\nis, nevertheless, a fact easily verifiable in the domain of memory\nand sometimes in that of intelligence. Janet\u2019s theory explains only\nsome of the observable facts; it is only partially true. It suffices\nto compare the quotation I have just given with what he says in his\nwork, _N\u00e9vroses et id\u00e9es fixes_, vol. i. p. 137: \u2018The souvenir even in\nsomnambulism only exists if the patient be oblivious to everything and\nreplies automatically to questions, by the mechanical association of\nideas without reflection, without the personal perception of what he is\ndoing.\n\n\u2018... The souvenir, in a word, is only manifested unknown to the person:\nit disappears when the person has to speak or write in his own name,\nconscious of what he is doing.\u2019 For Janet this is the sign of mental\ndisaggregation.\n\nThe quotations I have just given define sharply Janet\u2019s opinion,\nand show up his mistake and his contradiction. That which becomes\ndisaggregated is the _personality_, the _personal consciousness_.\nBut it does not become resolved into groups smaller than they ought\nnormally to be, since these groups often show themselves to be more\ncomprehensive than the mental compound. It is, therefore, illogical to\nconsider them as a part which has become dissociated from the whole.\n\nI have already had occasion to express my manner of thinking in other\nwritings: nevertheless, perhaps I may be permitted to indicate the\ndirection which psychological interpretation should take in order to\navoid an encounter with facts.\n\nThe personal consciousness is only one of the modalities of the general\nconsciousness. Clinical observation reveals that, in a great many\ncases, it has been proved, that the souvenirs stored up in the general\nconsciousness are infinitely more numerous, than those which the\npersonal consciousness has at its free disposition. Myers has expressed\nthese ideas most happily in the following words (\u2018The Subliminal\nConsciousness,\u2019 _Proceedings, S.\u00a0P.\u00a0R._, vii. p. 301):\u2014\n\n\u2018I suggest, then, that the stream of consciousness in which we\nhabitually live is not the only consciousness which exists in\nconnection with our organism. Our habitual or empirical consciousness\nmay consist of a mere selection from a multitude of thoughts and\nsensations, of which some at least are equally conscious with those\nthat we empirically know. I accord no primacy to my ordinary waking\nself, except that among my potential selves this one has shown itself\nthe fittest to meet the needs of common life. I hold that it has\nestablished no further claim, and that it is perfectly possible\nthat other thoughts, feelings, and memories, either isolated or in\ncontinuous connection, may now be actively conscious, as we say,\n\u2018within me\u2019\u2014in some kind of co-ordination with my organism, and forming\nsome part of my total individuality. I conceive it possible that at\nsome future time, and under changed conditions, I may recollect all; I\nmay assume these various personalities under one single consciousness,\nin which ultimate and complete consciousness the empirical\nconsciousness which at this moment directs my hand may be only one\nelement out of many.\u2019\n\nHe appears to me to be nearer the truth than Janet is: I do not know if\nwe shall ever arrive at that complete consciousness which Myers hopes\nfor, but it seems to me probable, that our personal consciousness is\nonly one element of our general consciousness. This latter becomes\nconcrete and definite, but also grows less by becoming personal.\nThe apparent supremacy of the personal consciousness may be only an\neffect of the circumstances in which we are evolving; if Darwin\u2019s\nideas are true, we can understand that the necessities of life may\nhave favoured the development of the active, voluntary, personal\nconsciousness; we can imagine other conditions\u2014which the monastic life\nsometimes realises\u2014where the active and voluntary phases of the general\nconsciousness may be less evolved than its receptive and passive\nphases. Therefore, the psychologist finds the study of hagiography\nteeming with information.\n\nJanet\u2019s disaggregation is but the weakening of the sentiment of the\nconscious and voluntary personal activity, of what I called the\nsentiment of the personal participation in intercurrent psychological\nphenomena. It is no veritable disaggregation; it is a disappearance of\none modality of the consciousness, of one of its _limited expressions_,\nso to speak. However, I recognise, with Janet, that this mode of\nexpression of the consciousness is the necessary basis of our activity\nin _ordinary life_, and that it is legitimate to consider as invalids,\nthose persons in whom it is normally wanting. But the fact itself\nof its disappearance has more the features of an _integration_ than\nof a _disintegration_, since upon an attentive examination, the\npersonal consciousness is revealed as a limitation and a special\ndetermination of the general consciousness of which it is, in a way,\na dismemberment. If I dared to use metaphysical language, I would say\nthat rational and voluntary activity is in reality a disaggregation;\npersonality is only a contingent and limited manifestation of the\nbeing, or rather of individuality. This latter, to use the expression\nof an eminent philosopher, would be superior to reason itself, and of\nirrational essence, an idea which contains the first principles of a\nnew philosophy. I make this incursion into metaphysics merely to show\nhow narrow Janet\u2019s theories are, and what different consequences result\nfrom such a professional manner of thinking as his is, and from a\nmore general conception of that, of which his manner of thinking only\nconcerns one particular case.\n\nThe facts, moreover, condemn Janet\u2019s theory. I have too high an opinion\nof the distinguished man whose ideas I criticise, but whose works\nI admire sincerely, not to be convinced that he has only observed\nundeveloped subjects. What demonstrates this in my eyes is his timid\naffirmation, that \u2018nearly always (I do not say always in order not to\nprejudice an important question) these mediums are neurotics, when\nthey are not downright hysterics.\u2019 It is difficult to discuss an\nopinion expressed with so much reserve, and I can only commend him for\nhis circumspection, for my personal observations contradict his. I\nhave seen many mediums: the best were not _neurotics_ in the medical\nsense of the word. The finest experiments I have made have been with\npersons appearing to present none of the stigm\u00e6 of hysteria. Up to\nthe present Janet seems to have operated with invalids only, and I\nam not surprised, therefore, that he should assimilate the automatic\nphenomena of sensitives with those of his hysterical patients. It would\nbe surprising were it otherwise. I am not going to defend spiritistic\nmediums; they appear to me to present very poor interest\u2014at least in\nordinary seances\u2014but my duty is to protest against the generality of\nthe judgment which Janet brings to bear upon automatic phenomena. Those\nfacts, which are worthy of careful observation, differ essentially\nfrom those which ordinary hysterics present. They indicate no _mis\u00e8re\npsychologique_\u2014quite the contrary, and I will state the reasons why.\n\nThe discussion, in order to be clear, must be divided:\n\n1. The phenomena observable with good mediums are not those we observe\nin hysterical patients. I said I had obtained raps and movements\nwithout contact under conditions of control, which appeared to me to\nbe convincing. I added that I had obtained by raps, or by the rappings\nof a table without contact, words and phrases which were extremely\ncoherent. This is not quite the kind of phenomena to which hospital\npatients have accustomed us. What does Janet say on this point?\n\n\u2018The essential point of spiritism is indeed, we believe, the\ndisaggregation of psychological phenomena, and the formation beyond\nthe personal perception of a second series of thoughts detached from\nthe first. As for the means which the second personality employs to\nmanifest itself unknown to the first\u2014movements of tables, automatic\nwriting or speaking, etc....\u2014this is a secondary question (_sic_).\nWhere do those sounds come from which are heard on tables and walls\nin answer to questions? Is it from a movement of the toes, of that\ncontraction of the tendon supposed by Jobert de Lamballe...? Is it from\na contraction of the stomach and from a veritable ventriloquism as\nGros. Jean supposes, or from some other physical action yet unknown?\nAre they produced by the automatic movements of the medium himself, or,\nindeed, as appears to me most likely in some cases, _in the obscurity\ndemanded by the spirits_(!) by the subconscious actions of one of the\nassistants, who deceives others and himself at the same time, and who\nbecomes an accomplice without knowing it? It does not matter very much.\u2019\n\nThat is not my opinion. I think, on the contrary, it matters a great\ndeal. I am positive that every sincere and patient experimenter will\nobserve, as I have done, in broad daylight, and not in obscurity,\nsounds and movements which will not appear to be explicable by any\nknown cause. Those who, like myself, have verified these facts, will\nnot dream of attributing them to unconscious or involuntary movements,\nto the cracking of a tendon, to ventriloquism. The cases observed by me\nwill not admit of this explanation. Things happen as though some force\nor other were produced by the medium and the assistants, and could act\nbeyond the limits of the body. If this fact be correct, can we consider\nit as secondary and without importance? On the contrary, does it not\nopen to the psychology of the future the road of direct observation\nand experimentation, if, as I have tried to show, this force preserves\ncertain relations with our general consciousness? Does this not make\none think of those words of Proclus when speaking of souls:\u2014\n\n\u03a4\u03c1\u03af\u03c4\u03b7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f21 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f55\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03be\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\n\u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f55\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f11\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. Souls have a third force\ninherent to their essence, that of moving things which by their very\nnature are put into movement by an energy foreign to themselves.\n\nHas not Janet a singular way of reasoning? He makes a reserve on\nthe existence of another \u2018physical action yet unknown,\u2019 but quickly\nforgets it, and reasons as though that action were perfectly well\nknown. \u2018That action, whatever it may be, is _always_ an involuntary and\nunconscious action of some one or other: the involuntary word from the\nintestines(!) is not more miraculous than is the involuntary word from\nthe mouth; it is the psychological side of the problem which is the\nmost interesting, and which ought to be the most studied.\u2019\n\nI am sure that those of my readers, whose patience has not been\ntoo severely tested by my long analysis of facts observed, will not\nconsider my distinguished colleague\u2019s conclusion as acceptable. The\nmost interesting side of the phenomenon is, I think, the one which\nreveals to us an apparently new mode of action of the nervous influx\nupon matter.\n\n2. These phenomena, again, are not the indication of a _mis\u00e8re\npsychologique_, as Janet thinks.\n\nLet us discuss the cases observed by me. To follow my reasoning, it\nwill be necessary to be familiar with the works of Gurney, Podmore,\nSidgwick, Myers, Barrett, Hodgson, Lodge, Hyslop, du Prel, Perty,\nHellenbach, Aksakow, Richet, de Rochas. To-day, it is no longer\npossible to shun the work of such savants, (when dealing with a\nquestion of such a nature as that which engrossed Janet) by simply\nsaying as he did \u2018that he had not had occasion to read the _Philosophie\nder Mystik_ of a man like du Prel.\u2019 He should have read that book ...\nand many more.\n\nIt seems to me to be now quite an established fact, that the\nimpersonal consciousness is capable of perceiving accurate impressions\nindependently of the senses. It translates these impressions in diverse\nways in order to transmit them to the personal consciousness, but these\ntranslations are concrete and symbolical. It is a hallucination visual,\nauditory, or tactile. The form of _subliminal_ messages, to use one of\nMyers\u2019 expressions, is always the same, be the fact thus transmitted\ntrue or false, be it a reminiscence or a premonition. This is already a\npsychological ascertainment of great importance, for it puts us on the\nroad we must follow, in order to discover the mental process of this\npsychological phenomenon. But there is something else. The hysteric\nwho automatically simulates a drunkard, a general, a child, offers us\na very different spectacle to the one offered us by the sensitive who\ntelepathically sees an event happening afar off, or who predicts the\nfuture, or reveals facts unknown to himself and the assistants. There\nare thousands of examples of these facts; I have given a few which were\nobserved by myself or related to me first-hand.\n\nIs it possible to consider this extraordinary faculty as a\n\u2018disaggregation\u2019? Is it possible to class phenomena of this kind with\nthe commonplace phenomena of somnambulism and \u2018incarnation,\u2019 the only\nones Janet has observed? It suffices to put the question to receive\nthe answer immediately. The psychological mechanism of these facts, so\nunlike one to the other, is probably the same, but the cause of the\napparent automatism, motor or sensory, is certainly not the same. The\nsensitive, of whom I spoke, who sees in the mirror twenty-four hours\nbeforehand, the very scenes she actually sees the next day, presents\nto us a phenomenon of considerable importance. It intimates that time\nand space are forms of the personal thought and consciousness, but\nthat probably they have not the same signification for the impersonal\nconsciousness. It is a phenomenon which, if it be true, demonstrates\nexperimentally that Kant\u2019s theory upon the contingency of these\n\u2018categories\u2019 necessary to all conscious and personal perception is\nexact.\n\nI am quite aware of the nature of the reply I shall meet with: my\nobservations have been defective; and all those who before me affirmed\nthe existence of the same facts were also deceived. This simplifies\nthe discussion. The history of science offers us many an example of\nthe manner in which facts are received, when they contradict current\nideas. Kant said more than a hundred years ago, in his _Tra\u00fcme eines\nGeistersehers_, 1, i.: \u2018Das methodische Geschw\u00e4tz der hohen Schulen ist\noftmals nur ein Einverst\u00e4ndniss durch ver\u00e4nderliche Wortbedeutungen\neine schwer zu l\u00f6senden Frage auszuweichen, weil das bequeme und\nmehrentheils vern\u00fcnftige, \u201cIch weiss nicht,\u201d auf Akademien nicht\nleichtlich geh\u00f6rt wird.\u2019[14]\n\n      [14] The methodical idle prattle of the high schools is\n      often only an understanding to elude, by words of variable\n      acceptation, a question difficult of solution, for we do\n      not often hear in academies such convenient and ordinarily\n      intelligent words as \u2018I do not know.\u2019\n\nThe discussion on Janet recalled to my mind these words of Kant\u2019s. His\nexpression, _mis\u00e8re psychologique_ is one of those words of double\nmeaning, true, if we consider only a part of the facts and one aspect\nonly of the phenomenon, that which concerns the personal consciousness;\ninexact, if we study the facts in their totality and the phenomenon\nthey reveal in its generality. The being who would be capable of\nperceiving at a distance, by looking into space and into time, would\nhave faculties superior to the normal; he would not be the inferior\nbeing imagined by Janet.\n\nAn attentive and patient observation will show him, I am sure,\nthe reality of the facts which I point out; may he not deny this\npossibility without putting himself under the requisite conditions for\nobserving these facts.\n\nIt belongs to the future to decide the question, and I have no doubt\nwhatever upon the nature of the verdict.[15]\n\n      [15] See Appendix A.\n\nTo sum up, an attentive observation of the facts shows, that in\npsychical phenomena we observe the emergence of personifications\nwhich may be secondary personalities, but which in really clear cases\npresent particular features, and seem to possess information which\nis inaccessible to the normal personality. They may co-exist with\nthe latter, without any disorder manifesting itself in the sensitive\nor motor spheres; in other cases, they encroach upon the normal\npersonality, which may either lose the use and sensation of one member,\nor be deprived of several members. Finally, the personification can\ninvade the whole of the organism and end in incarnation or \u2018control,\u2019\na phenomenon of apparent possession. When it reaches this maximum\ndevelopment, the personification manifests a remarkable autonomy, and\nappears to be much less suggestible than in the intermediate stages of\nits evolution.\n\nWhat are these personifications? I do not know. The problem they raise\nin some cases is extremely difficult to solve. I can only say that\nthey do not appear to me to be what they claim to be. Is it collective\nconsciousness? Is it self-deception? Is it a spirit? Everything is\npossible, to me nothing is certain save one thing, namely, that we must\nnot put our trust in them.\n\nI say this for the benefit of spiritists, who have a tendency to\nbelieve blindly everything their good spirits tell them. These\n\u2018spirits\u2019 may make mistakes, though they may not wish to deceive\nyou. Never abandon yourself or submit the conduct of your life and\naffairs to their guidance: submit only to the rule of reason and sound\njudgment. Be not over-credulous.[16]\n\n      [16] See Appendix C.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nSOME RECENTLY OBSERVED PSYCHICAL PHENOMENA\n\n  _An account of some recently observed Psychical Phenomena produced\n    in the presence of Doctor Maxwell and Professor Charles\n    Richet. Arranged by the Translator from notes furnished by Dr.\n    Maxwell._[17]\n\n      [17] It is scarcely necessary for me to certify to the accuracy\n      of the phenomena mentioned in this chapter, especially when I\n      am spoken of as having been present.\u2014MAXWELL.\n\n\nDuring the last two years exceptional opportunities have been offered\nProfessor Richet and Dr. Maxwell of observing a medium\u2014whom we will\ncall _Meurice_\u2014who has furnished Dr. Maxwell with many of his most\nimportant examples of psychical phenomena. I refer to phenomena spoken\nof on pp. 74, 81-2, 101-3, 136-7, 152-5, 160-2, 195-9, 201-2, 250.\n\nDr. X.\u2014a friend of Professor Richet\u2014who does not wish his name to be\nmentioned, having been present with Professor Richet and Dr. Maxwell at\nsome of their experiments, has sent Dr. Maxwell a few notes concerning\nthose seances at which he was present. Dr. Maxwell has authorised me\nto put these notes in order, and to add to them a few extracts from\nletters written by Dr. Maxwell to Professor Richet and myself.\n\nThese notes and letters were written either during or immediately\nafter the seances, if I may so call the impromptu occasions on which\nthe phenomena to be spoken of were obtained.\n\nThere is, in these notes, a miscellaneous stream of evidence, the\ncomplexity and importance of which may be presumed, when it is pointed\nout that a useful combination of two orders of research has been\nat work therein. Dr. Maxwell was chiefly interested in the study\nof the facts concomitant with the phenomena, whatever they might\nbe, whilst Professor Richet devoted himself to the analysis of the\npersonifications, and to the study of the manifestations from a purely\npsychological point of view.\n\nEvidence is the touchstone of truth, and though the reading of parts\nof this chapter may sound more like pages out of a fantastic story\nthan the words of savants, yet the publication of these facts has been\njudged necessary by Professor Richet and Dr. Maxwell, in their belief\nthat no one is justified in setting aside facts which have been well\nattested. These facts have been observed\u2014let it not be forgotten\u2014in a\nspirit of pure scientific curiosity.\n\nIt is, therefore, hoped that this chapter will receive the thoughtful\nconsideration of many; and that careful analysis will be especially\ngiven to those very parts, the unreal-like romantic nature of which\nseems to render them, at a random glance, unworthy of serious thought.\n\n\nTHE MEDIUM AND HIS PHENOMENA\n\nAn acute analysis of a medium is of primary importance in the\nexamination and appreciation of his phenomena, therefore we will first\nof all dwell a little on the personality of M. Meurice, the medium in\nquestion.\n\nHe is a friend of Dr. Maxwell\u2019s\u2014a friend of some years\u2019 standing.\n\nHe is a slightly built man, the reverse of robust, but endowed with\nremarkable vitality and recuperative powers. He is thirty-two years\nof age; he is unmarried. He is highly sensitive and reserved in\ndisposition, and forms quick but lasting sympathies and antipathies. He\ngives one the impression of being always in a state of hypertension;\nhis nervous system is most finely strung, and he appears to experience\nan irresistible need of constant physical movement. He passes easily\nfrom the extremes of joy to the extremes of sadness. Highly nervous\nthough he be, Dr. Maxwell has never observed any signs of hysteria,\nor any symptoms of a lack of equilibrium in the medium\u2019s mentality.\nHe is not amenable to the hypnotic sleep, but Dr. Maxwell says he has\nsometimes thought that he might eventually succeed in inducing that\nstate. The few attempts so far made in this direction have given no\nresults; moreover, M. Meurice does not care to submit himself to this\nkind of experimentation. His cutaneous and other sensibilities are\nnormal; his reflexes also are normal.\n\nHe suffers occasionally from violent headaches and neuralgia; and has\nfrequent gastric attacks, notably after the production of telekinetic\nphenomena. Otherwise his health is good. During the production of\nphenomena, M. Meurice often acknowledges to a sinking sensation in the\nepigastric region, and says it is as though something material were\nbeing drawn out of him at such moments.\n\nHe is well read in every branch of literature, and has a most retentive\nmemory. One has the notion that this medium, to a great extent,\nhas under his conscious control a large range of what is generally\nsubmerged faculty.\n\nSubliminal operation is, no doubt, constantly going on with us all,\nbut it is most apparent in M. Meurice. One feels with him that his\nunconscious memory is always on the alert.\n\nAmnesia appears to follow rapidly in the footsteps of his visions, but\nseveral things seem to indicate that this amnesia is only apparent.[18]\n\n      [18] The amnesia, which appears to follow medianic phenomena,\n      bears a certain relation to the amnesia which follows dreams.\n      It is probably due to the weakness of the links between the\n      conscious personality and the forgotten images. The links\n      exist, but are not strong enough to bind those images to the\n      usual stream of personal consciousness. They serve as clues,\n      however, and the reappearance of the images at a given moment\n      is due to the working of the usual laws of association.\u2014MAXWELL.\n\nDr. Maxwell says he always thought he had a psychic in his friend.\nHowever, notwithstanding his medical studies, and wide range\nof knowledge of things in general, M. Meurice was ignorant of\nmetapsychical phenomena, and averse to becoming acquainted with the\npractices of spiritism or anything of that nature. Little by little Dr.\nMaxwell induced his friend to take some interest in these phenomena,\nand one day he persuaded him to put his hands on a table with a view\nto seeing whether the two of them together could obtain any phenomena.\nRaps were immediately forthcoming; they resounded on the floor. The\nmedium was startled by the unusual noise and quickly rose from the\ntable. Nothing more was received on that occasion or for some time\nafterwards. Then, for two years, M. Meurice reluctantly and irregularly\nyielded to Dr. Maxwell\u2019s persuasions to develop his medianity.\n\nFor some time he could not be made to see the importance of his\nphenomena, and Dr. Maxwell refused to give weight to his words by\nappealing to technical literature. He was desirous of keeping his\nfriend in ignorance of current notions on these phenomena, thinking the\nresults would be of greater value if the soil they sprang from were\nvirgin.\n\nM. Meurice has done all in his power to throw light upon his own\nphenomena. His co-operation has been precious, for often his fine\nintelligence and well-trained powers of observation have enabled him\nto bring into the research valuable analyses of his sensations and\nimpressions. For this medium not only does not lose consciousness\nduring the production of his phenomena, he is often at such moments\nmore thoroughly \u2018all there\u2019\u2014to use a Scotch expression\u2014than in his\nunproductive moments of abstraction. True, there have been a few\nexceptions, but, _as a rule_, he is keenly alive to all that is going\non when phenomena is forthcoming.\n\nThe passages I have indicated in Dr. Maxwell\u2019s work will acquaint\nthe reader with the order and degree of phenomena presented by M.\nMeurice, when Professor Richet made his acquaintance. Dr. Maxwell\nhad studied, almost exclusively, the physical aspect of the facts he\nreceived, and did not encourage phenomena of an intellectual order.\nThis scientific attitude, however, had not prevented the manifestation\nof the phenomenon of personification; and the \u2018raps\u2019 speedily put forth\nthe claims common to spiritualistic beliefs\u2014in spite of the medium\u2019s\nignorance of them. When Professor Richet began to experiment with M.\nMeurice, the \u2018raps\u2019 had already claimed to emanate from \u2018John King,\u2019\n\u2018Chappe d\u2019Auteroche,\u2019 a group of four entities calling themselves the\n\u2018good fairies,\u2019 and, lastly, from two of Dr. Maxwell\u2019s deceased friends.\n\nAs the capital interest of this chapter lies in the intelligent aspect\nof the phenomena, there is a fact of paramount importance to be pointed\nout with emphasis.\n\nOur medium is very amenable to influence, and his phenomena constantly\nshow the effects of suggestion and influence. I do not, by any\nmeans, wish to infer that M. Meurice is like wax in the hands of his\nfriends; on the contrary, if it were only a question of personal\nconsciousness, we might say he is almost impervious to the action\nof extraneous influences. His ways of thinking and acting bear the\nstamp of independence, and if he yields occasionally to the wishes\nof his friends, it is out of pure friendship and with deliberation.\nWhen, however, we are endeavouring to make a psychological study of\na medium, we strive to reach the lower strata at once; the surface\nis of little interest when we know that the secret lies below.\nTherefore, when I say that M. Meurice is most amenable to influence,\nI am bearing in mind that profound region, his general consciousness.\nThe personal consciousness may be rebellious to influence, but the\nsubliminal is reached by subtler means than is its grosser envelope,\nand is remarkably amenable to the charm of suggestion and the voice of\nsympathy. In all probability the reader will find sufficient evidence\nof the accuracy of my assertion in the phenomena to be spoken of in the\ncourse of this chapter; therefore, I will not dwell any further upon\nthis point, although it be an important one.\n\nWhen experimenting with Eusapia Paladino, Professor Richet had remarked\nand called attention to the synchronism which existed between her\nphenomena and her movements or muscular contractions. Dr. Maxwell, in\nhis turn, also remarked it, and forthwith bent his studies in that\ndirection. The conclusion appears to be evident that a profound and\nfar-reaching importance lies in the synchronism between the movements\nof the experimenters and the phenomena. It was observed that Dr.\nMaxwell was indeed able to produce phenomena of raps and telekinesis\n[of very feeble intensity, it is true] by tapping the medium on his\nhands or shoulder, by firmly squeezing the hands, joined in a circle\nabove the table, or by the simple contraction of his own muscles.\n\n_En passant_, it may be useful to note that Dr. X. was opposed to\nthe idea that synchronism _always_ existed between the phenomena and\nthe movements of the experimenters, that is to say, that muscular\ncontraction was _alone_ responsible for the phenomena. Dr. X. was\nso opposed to this notion, that his presence at seances where this\nsynchronism was being demonstrated, has often been observed to cause\nall manifestations to cease\u2014to nullify the results. If Dr. X. was able\nto exercise this power over one centre, it is highly probable that his\npresence would exercise a like inhibitory influence over other centres\nof energy, where like experiments were being conducted.\n\nThough Dr. Maxwell had obtained not a few phenomena showing\nintelligence (_e.g._ raps claiming to emanate from various\npersonifications), yet, as he says in his book, pages 26, 28, and 83,\nhe did not feel drawn towards that order of research, and did his best\nto keep the phenomena on physical lines. But since Professor Richet\nhas experimented with M. Meurice, the phenomena have developed rapidly\nalong the lines of intellectuality: a result which may, it is true, be\ndue to our medium\u2019s good-nature in allowing his power to be used as was\ndesired, or which may be the effect of influence and suggestion. We\nare inclined to think the latter is nearer the truth, an opinion which\nis supported by the fact that when Dr. X. and Professor Richet were\npresent\u2014that is to say, within a few days after Dr. X.\u2019s appearance in\nthe circle\u2014synchronous phenomena could rarely be obtained.[19]\n\n      [19] \u2018Vous voyez, cher ami, que depuis que nous avons\n      exp\u00e9riment\u00e9 ensemble, votre influence persiste et nos\n      ph\u00e9nom\u00e8nes physiques s\u2019orientent vers les messages\n      intellectuels.\u2019\u2014Extract from a letter written by Dr. Maxwell\n      to Professor Richet six weeks after the first series of\n      experiments with Professor Richet were held.\n\nNow, all unknown to Dr. Maxwell, Professor Richet had passed the\nprevious three years in the study of these same phenomena from a\npsychological standpoint, and at the moment of his first visit to\nBordeaux, he was particularly absorbed in the research and analysis\nof intelligent messages received by means of a physical phenomenon.\nHis desire, for the time being, was to receive messages\u2014of identity or\notherwise\u2014by means of _raps without contact_.\n\nAlready familiar with the fact of synchronism\u2014which a little experience\nsuffices to show is not due to self-suggestion or endosomatic\nactivity\u2014Professor Richet wished to get on to fresh ground; as before\nsaid, he wanted intellectuality in a physical phenomenon, and it was\nnot long before he got what he wanted with the medium in question.\n\nAnd, _\u00e0 propos_, perhaps I may be allowed to briefly relate at\nonce the first phenomenon containing intelligence, which Professor\nRichet obtained with M. Meurice. A short time after having made his\nacquaintance, the professor and Dr. X. thought they would try to\nobtain a \u2018test.\u2019 Supposing, for a moment, that an entity, who has\nseveral times claimed to be communicating with Professor Richet, really\nexisted, they \u2018evoked\u2019 him, and asked him to give them a sign through\nM. Meurice, which would denote that he had been listening to a certain\nconversation held two hours previously. The medium and Dr. Maxwell were\nunaware that this entity had a speciality of communicating in Latin\nor Greek. A few hours afterwards, during dinner, raps were heard on\nthe table and other furniture in the vicinity of M. Meurice; when the\nquestion was asked as to who was rapping, the Christian name of the\nentity was given, followed by the word _Confide_. No word, it appears,\ncould have borne more directly upon the conversation in question. There\nwas difficulty in obtaining these two words, the raps\u2014in such abundance\nwhen not requested to \u2018work\u2019\u2014came laboriously, as though some one were\npicking his steps among brambles, so to speak. The medium himself spelt\nout the alphabet on this occasion.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nDr. Maxwell has given an analysis of the raps obtained with M. Meurice,\nand we especially refer the reader to pages 79-82 and 250.\n\nWhen raps without contact delay in coming, M. Meurice takes a\nlead-pencil, holds it in his hands, and presses one end against the\ntable or on an experimenter according to desire; the raps then resound\nat the end touching the experimenter or the table.\n\nAn\u00e6sthesia is observed only in the hand and arm holding the pencil.\n\u201cOnce or twice,\u201d says Dr. X., \u201cI have observed something like cramp\nseize the hand and arm, and extend along the shoulder blade, to the\nnape of the neck. On these occasions, I saw the whole arm vibrate after\neach rap, like the rebounding of an elastic band, and I have sometimes\nthought it looked as though the \u2018fluid\u2019 passed down the nerves of the\narm into the pencil, as though it were flowing through a clear open\nchannel, until it reached the point of the pencil, when a jerk of some\nkind appeared to force it out on to the wood; not that the pencil or\narm _moves_ when the rap resounds, but one has the impression of an\n_interior_ jerk of some kind when, in moments of cramp, the rap is\nheard; this rebounding movement appears to be almost simultaneous with\nthe rap. Though the medium keeps his personality alive, _as a rule_, it\nseems to me,\u201d continues Dr. X. (whose opinion is shared by Professor\nRichet), \u201cto undergo a diminution of some kind, on these occasions;\nideation appears to be slower and more difficult. But, because his arm\nhurt him when this cramp came on, we have always begged him to cease;\ntherefore we cannot say whether, the experiment courageously continued,\ncomplete an\u00e6sthesia would eventually set in, accompanied by psychical\nphenomena.\u201d\n\nIt is of importance to point out that both Professor Richet and Dr. X.\n(though Dr. Maxwell does not altogether share their opinion on this\npoint) are inclined to believe that M. Meurice can tell _when_ raps\nare going to be given, when phenomena will be forthcoming and when\nthey will not be forthcoming; a conclusion which is drawn from many\nobservations.\n\nSome of the messages given in this chapter were obtained, when out\nwalking with the medium. On such occasions, M. Meurice would put his\nhand on a walking-stick or on an umbrella; he preferred the latter.\n\u201cThe raps on the open umbrella are extremely curious,\u201d writes Dr. X.\n\u201cWe have heard raps on the woodwork and on the silk at one and the same\ntime; it is easy to perceive that the shock actually occurs in the\nwood\u2014that the molecules of the latter are set in motion. The same thing\noccurs with the silk; and here observation is even more interesting\nstill; each rap _looks_ like a drop of some invisible liquid falling on\nthe silk from a respectable height. The stretched silk of the umbrella\nis quickly and slightly but surely dented in; sometimes the force with\nwhich the raps are given is such as to shake the umbrella. Nothing is\nmore absorbing than the observation of an apparent conversation\u2014by\nmeans of the umbrella\u2014between the medium\u2019s personifications. Raps,\nimitating a burst of laughter in response to the observer\u2019s remarks,\nresound on the silk like the rapid play of strong but tiny fingers.\nWhen raps on the umbrella are forthcoming, M. Meurice either holds the\nhandle of the umbrella, or some one else does, whilst he simply touches\nthe handle very lightly with his open palm. He never touches the silk.\n\n\u201cRaps without contact appear to require more force, and are not so\nfrequently forthcoming, as raps with contact\u2014which seem to be always\nat the medium\u2019s command; consequently\u2014and particularly as the tenor\nof the messages received constituted the chief interest for the time\nbeing\u2014the use of the pencil or umbrella has been encouraged.\u201d\n\nAll the messages given in this chapter, except where the contrary\nis expressly stated, have been received by contact with a pencil\nor umbrella\u2014with what Chappe, the chief personification, calls his\ntelephone.\n\nA marked trait in the phenomena is their spontaneity. Months will\npass away without the production of a single phenomenon worth\nmentioning\u2014raps through the pencil can generally be obtained, however.\nAfter the attraction of the fan (pages 357-8), nine months elapsed\nbefore another telekinetic phenomenon occurred. At other times, the\nenergy is so abundant that while it lasts, that is to say for two\nor three weeks, the medium may truly be said to live in a world of\nphenomena in more senses than one; for, at such periods, phenomena are\nconstantly forthcoming. Regular seances are not of much avail with M.\nMeurice; it is better not to seek, but to know how to receive, which\nmeans to know how to wait patiently and attentively.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nA brief analysis of the personifications is necessary before laying\nbare their work. The first to manifest was \u2018John King.\u2019 Subliminal\nlabour is very transparent herein. M. Meurice had heard not a little\nof Eusapia Paladino\u2019s secondary personality, which calls itself \u2018John\nKing.\u2019\n\nThen the raps announced the presence of a group of four entities\ncalling themselves the \u2018fairies\u2019\u2014_les bonnes f\u00e9es_. In fact, the\nlatter were the first to make their presence felt by M. Meurice, though\nJohn King was the first to manipulate the raps. The fairies gave the\nnames of Miriam, Yolande, Liliane, and Brigitte; the latter remained\nbut a short time; she said she had to go away somewhere; she was\nreplaced by \u2018Wicki,\u2019 who claims to be an ancestor of Dr. Maxwell\u2019s,\nand to have lived in Ireland during the fifteenth century. The medium\nassociates the odour of jasmine with the fairies. Perhaps the following\nmay suggest a clue to the origin of these entities:\u2014\n\nSome years ago, before Dr. Maxwell had commenced experimenting with\nhis friend, he was in the habit of bidding him good-bye with the\nwords, \u2018_Que les tr\u00e8s bonnes vous prot\u00e8gent_.\u2019 When the fairies\u2014_les\nbonnes f\u00e9es_\u2014appeared, they at once claimed to have been the means\nof bringing about the meeting of Dr. Maxwell with M. Meurice, and of\nhaving fostered their friendship. As for the odour of jasmine: on\none occasion, soon after experimentation had begun, the medium was\ntalking to the doctor about good influences; and he remarked that he\nsometimes perceived the odour of jasmine without being able to explain\nit normally. The next time the doctor saw his friend, the raps dictated\nthat the odour of jasmine was the signal of the presence of the good\nfairies.\n\nThe next personification to manifest was said to be S., a very dear\nfriend of Dr. Maxwell\u2019s (see pages 160-1). The genesis of this\npersonification is easy to follow. S. was one of the leading men\nin Bordeaux, where he occupied a very prominent position; he was\nextremely well known\u2014though M. Meurice did not know him, and says he\nnever saw him. M. Meurice witnessed Dr. Maxwell\u2019s grief when S. died,\nand heard the former say that he had been very fond of S. I again\nrefer the reader to pages 160-1 for further consideration of the S.\npersonification.\n\nFor a few months, the phenomena claimed to emanate chiefly from the\nfairies\u2014John King gradually fading away. Then \u2018Chappe d\u2019Auteroche\u2019\ncame on the scene, and has ever since kept the field pretty much to\nhimself,\u2014though he permits of the presence of the personalities already\nmentioned and a few others if _introduced_ by him. His first appearance\ntook the form of a vision in the crystal. The medium saw him in a\nforeign land, amidst large red flowers, savage tribes and queer-looking\nboats on canals; he gave his name, the exact day, month and year of\nhis death, and the cause of his death; he described what his work on\nearth had been\u2014all things which M. Meurice did not _consciously_ know.\nEverything, which was verifiable, was found to be correct.\n\nSome time after this, Chappe gave a long and coherent message by means\nof tilts of a table without contact\u2014in daylight; on this occasion, he\ngave his Christian name as \u2018Adh\u00e9mar,\u2019 which is, probably, an error, as\nbiographies do not mention it.\n\nChappe is, doubtless, a subliminal entity; but his evolution is more\ndifficult to explain than any of the medium\u2019s other personifications.\nPerhaps M. Meurice\u2014an _avide_ reader\u2014has come across some articles in\nperiodicals, concerning the measurements of the solar parallax, by\nmeans of the crossing of the sun\u2019s surface by the disc of the planet\nVenus. Chappe was one of the best-known observers; he went to Siberia\nin 1761, and to California in 1769, to observe those passages. His\nname must certainly have been mentioned in the newspapers, when the\nlast crossings took place\u2014that is in 1874 and 1882. But on these\noccasions, M. Meurice was only three and eleven years old! Has he seen\nthe biographical notice of Chappe in Larousse\u2019s dictionary? He has no\nconscious recollection of having read this, nor does he remember ever\nhaving heard of Chappe the astronomer. And there, for the present, the\nmatter must stand.\n\nAnother personification\u2014H. B.\u2014made its irruption towards the end\nof 1903. M. Meurice was certainly aware of Dr. Maxwell\u2019s profound\nesteem and affection for H.\u00a0B.; but for further consideration of this\npersonification, we refer the reader to Dr. Maxwell\u2019s notes thereon,\npages 287 and following.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nI perceive I am about to end these remarks on the medium and his\nphenomena without having said a word upon a vital point, one which\nmany specialists would require to be satisfactorily settled before\nconsenting to listen to an account of the phenomena. I mean the\nmedium\u2019s honesty. Professor Richet, Dr. Maxwell, and Dr. X. say that,\nfor diverse reasons, they cannot doubt this particular medium\u2019s\nhonourability. As for raps and telekinetic phenomena, there can be no\nshadow of doubt about their genuineness; the excellent conditions of\nlight, sight and touch which always prevail when his phenomena are\nforthcoming, joined to the intelligent co-operation of M. Meurice, who\nis as much interested in and capable of examining his own phenomena as\nare the observers, put mystification out of the question.\n\nIs there any evidence of identity, of survival, of intelligent forces\nother than human, in this chapter? Each one will answer this question\nafter his own manner of thinking. Some will say \u2018No.\u2019 If we could\nforget the extraordinary romance at the end of this chapter\u2014Series\nC\u2014we too might answer categorically \u2018No.\u2019 Though we have given all\nthe leading details of the case, family reasons have necessitated\nthe omission of much valuable material in this \u2018romance,\u2019 and\nperhaps readers will not see so much in it as those who watched\nits development. But even as it stands, it presents some baffling\ndifficulties. It really seems to indicate that there is activity in\nthe metethereal environment, and that the spirit can act in that\nenvironment. What matter, therefore, if it be the spirit of the living\nor of the dead? If one can demonstrate its independence of the body,\nwhy not the other?\n\n\n_SERIES A_\n\nVISIONS\n\nIt may be useful to give one or two of our medium\u2019s visions. If these\nsimple phenomena\u2014where so much of the personal consciousness seems\nat play\u2014be studied, some idea may be gained of how far, if at all,\nthe subliminal is responsible for the production of this particular\nmedium\u2019s more intricate phenomena, such as intelligent messages given\nby means of raps without contact.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nM. Meurice was once visiting Paris. He dined at my house on the evening\nof his arrival. This was the first time I met him. During dinner, an\nhour or so after his arrival, the medium said he saw a vision near me,\nand described a personage \u2018dressed in white and gold-embroidered robes,\nwho looks like a priest of ancient times.\u2019 The only interest in this is\nthat it corroborates what two other sensitives, unknown to our medium\nand to each other, have on two different occasions told me.\n\nM. Meurice also claimed to recognise in me and this bedecked personage,\ntwo persons who figured in a dream-vision he had had, three years\nprevious to meeting me. We give this dream chiefly for the sake of its\nrich symbolism.\n\nThe medium wrote an account of the dream at the time, at Dr. Maxwell\u2019s\nrequest, the latter being struck by its oddity. Here is the vision:\u2014\n\n\u201cI dreamt I was sleeping in a bed, the framework of which nearly\ntouched the ground; the bed was raised on a kind of platform. I was in\na large hall, which looked like a church. Suddenly a tall, fair woman,\ndressed in black, entered. A man wearing long, white, ancient-looking\ngarments, embroidered all over in gold, followed her. Then Dr. Maxwell\nentered. The man in white read aloud out of the book, which the fair\nwoman held open before him. I was suddenly overcome with emotion. I\nwept, and wept, and wept. My tears caused the flowers embroidered on\nthe counterpane to spring into life; they grew and multiplied with\namazing rapidity, completely covering the bed and, finally, burying\nme beneath their abundance and weight. The fair woman then said: \u2018We\nmust seek for him,\u2019 and set to work to remove the flowers. During this\noperation, Dr. Maxwell stepped on my body; I screamed with pain and\nawoke.\u201d\n\nWhen M. Meurice awoke, he was suffering from colic; this fact may\nexplain parts of the vision.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nOne day in December 1903, at the close of a seance when some fine raps\nat a distance had been obtained, M. Meurice wrote a few German words.\nHe does not know German. At the same time he saw, in the crystal, the\nwords: \u2018Kolbe, chimiste, mort \u00e0 Leipzig 1730.\u2019 A few hours after this\nseance, the medium had a vision of the personification Chappe, who\nsaid, \u2018Vous ne savez donc lire? C\u2019est \u201cmort \u00e0 Leipzig le 25 Novembre\n1884,\u201d et pas \u201c1730.\u201d\u2019\n\nKolbe the chemist died at Leipzig on the 25th of November 1884. This\ninformation is to be found in Larousse\u2019s dictionary.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe following is an experiment in the transmission of thought which Dr.\nMaxwell tried with the medium:\u2014\n\n\u201cI gave my hand to M. Meurice, to hold, and said to him\u2014we had been\ntalking, in a vague, general manner of the plurality of existences\u2014\u2018Try\nand see how I died in my previous existence.\u2019\n\n\u201cUnknown to the medium, I wrote down on paper the words:\u2014_Fall from a\nhorse!_\n\n\u201cM. Meurice answered: \u2018I see your life, then you fade away into\nnothingness; you die from an accident; a carriage\u2014no, a horse accident.\nI see you wearing a shield. You fall from your horse, he crushes you to\ndeath.\u2019\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe medium very often sees the same vision repeat itself in the\ncrystal. This is the vision of a procession of individuals clothed in\nflowing robes; they follow a long narrow path, which loses itself in a\ntunnel, into which the procession passes. The vision never varies, save\nthat at times after the procession has disappeared into the tunnel, the\npath seems to be strewn with the bones of skeletons.\n\nThis vision has also been seen, in the same crystal, by our medium\u2019s\nyoungest sister, a girl of twenty, who is absolutely ignorant of\nspiritistic phenomena. She attributed her vision to an optical illusion.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIt has been observed with M. Meurice that the last vision sometimes\nprecedes veridical hallucinations.\n\nThis and other facts would lead one to think that very probably, for\na medium, there is no test which can discriminate between falsidical\nand veridical hallucinations. The psychological process appears to be\nthe same, viz. dramatisation and concrete images, instead of abstract\nconcepts or ideas.\n\nMediums, as a rule, possess parasitic personalities which act in the\nsame way as the normal personality; this feature of hallucinatory\nphenomena is difficult to analyse, and introduces into the problem a\nnumber of unknown factors.\n\nIn the case of the medium in question, the secondary personalities are\nweak. They are always felt and objectived by the normal personality,\nwhich is never expelled from the scene\u2014a circumstance which is precious\nfor the observer as the visions are sometimes vivid to a degree. With\nM. Meurice the unknown factors, though existing, are reduced to a sort\nof minimum, and the psychological analysis is perhaps less difficult\nthan in the generality of cases. In this fact lies the value of his\nintellectual phenomena, though it is a drawback indeed from another\npoint of view, the persistency of the normal consciousness, of the\nnormal will, and even of the normal powers of attention, being probably\nthe cause of the impurities which so frequently stain his intellectual\nphenomena.\n\n\nNOTES ON THE PERSONIFICATION \u2018H.\u00a0B.\u2019\n\n_By Dr. Maxwell_\n\n\u201cH. B. died at a very advanced age. He was a man of great kindness of\nheart, and of deep intelligence. He had received a solid, classical\neducation. He was born in a foreign country, went, when a young man,\nto a North American state, where he lived for some time. He married,\nand finally came to Bordeaux\u2014a town to which his wife and all her\nfamily belonged. H.\u00a0B. lived for many years at Bordeaux; but during the\nlast six years of his life he was paralysed. He died at a time when\nthe medium was twenty years of age, and was pursuing his studies in a\nhospital at Bordeaux. H.\u00a0B. lived a very retired life, confined to the\nhouse because of his infirmity.\n\n\u201cThere is every probability that M. Meurice had never heard of H.\u00a0B.\nAlthough I had known my friend for some time before the irruption of\nthis personification, I had been extremely careful to avoid giving him\nthe slightest detail concerning H.\u00a0B. He had, however, heard me say\nthat H.\u00a0B. had been one of my dearest friends.\n\n\u201cI had been experimenting for about two years with M. Meurice, when\nthe personification H.\u00a0B. first manifested. His emergence took place\non the 2nd October 1903, in the form of a vision, which my friend had\nas he was going to bed. On the following day\u2014during a dark seance we\nwere holding in the hopes of obtaining luminous phenomena\u2014M. Meurice\ndescribed his vision of the previous night. His description vividly\nrecalled H.\u00a0B. to my mind. I was careful to say nothing, however.\nDuring the seance, the personification Chappe signified his presence\nby means of abundant and loud raps; at the same time M. Meurice told\nme he saw a face, and certain letters written above it; these letters\nformed a name, which indicated to me the presence of H.\u00a0B. Thereupon I\nasked M. Meurice to give me the Christian and surnames of the vision he\nclaimed to be looking at; in reply, the surname was instantly spelt out\nby raps without contact; the Christian name was given in French first\nof all, then it was correctly given in H.\u00a0B.\u2019s maternal tongue.[20]\n\n      [20] H. B.\u2019s Christian name finds its equivalent in French in\n      the name which had been \u2018rapped out\u2019 in the first instance. Dr.\n      Maxwell explained this fact to the rapping force, whereupon the\n      name was correctly given.\n\n      This detail of the Christian and surnames is not demonstrative\n      as identity, because (1) the remarks made by Dr. Maxwell were\n      sufficient to have \u2018fixed\u2019 any one who had the slightest\n      knowledge of the language in question; (2) because the\n      medium already knew the surname of Dr. Maxwell\u2019s friend. We\n      must not forget, however, that the raps were given without\n      contact.\u2014_Note by the Translator._\n\n\u201cH.\u00a0B.\u2019s first appearances occurred in M. Meurice\u2019s bedroom. From the\nindications given, I said I had quickly recognised H.\u00a0B. Unfortunately,\nunder the necessity in which I find myself placed of not bringing\nH.\u00a0B.\u2019s family into view, I am unable to mention the principal details.\nMay it suffice to say that I recognised H.\u00a0B. I may also add that\nthe description of the hair, eyes, beard, stature were exactly and\nunhesitatingly given.\n\n\u201cI may also mention one important detail: M. Meurice described the\nvision he saw as being seated in an armchair with a blue plaid\nshawl\u2014with a long fringe\u2014wrapped about his legs. I did not recognise\nthe chair\u2014though I well remember the chair in which H.\u00a0B. passed the\nlast six years of his life\u2014but the shawl was absolutely correctly\ndescribed. This is a detail which, I affirm, M. Meurice could not\npossibly have known; and I consider it highly improbable that fraud\ncould have found it out.\n\n\u201cSo much for the first appearance of this personification.\n\n\u201cThe visions continued. M. Meurice saw H.\u00a0B. at different periods of\nhis existence, at times infirm, at other times younger and standing\nupright. When he appeared young, he wore his beard in a certain\nfashion; when he appeared aged, he wore his beard differently; these\ndetails were correct.\n\n\u201cThe vision at first did not speak, and simply looked kindly at him,\nsaid M. Meurice.\n\n\u201cThe hallucination used to build itself up in the following manner: the\nmedium saw a bluish cloud floating about near a particular armchair\nin his bedroom; the cloud or shadow remained ill defined, \u2018as though\nseveral veils were being successively removed\u2019; and only one feature at\na time\u2014at a vision\u2014seemed to be distinctly shown, _e.g._ at one time,\nthe eyes were well shown, the rest of the vision being very indistinct;\nat another time, the nose was the prominent feature, or the mouth,\nthe hair or the beard, etc.; as though the personification wished to\nimpress one thing at a time upon the medium\u2019s perception.\n\n\u201cFinally on the 6th October 1903, in a short journey which M. Meurice\nmade one day to Arcachon, H.\u00a0B. appeared to him in broad daylight, in\nan avenue of the forest through which the medium was driving.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice saw, on the roadway a short distance ahead, a person\nwalking very slowly and peculiarly: \u2018he limped as though the right\nleg was shorter than the left.\u2019 He was a stout man with a round,\nclean-shaven face. He had a peculiar mark near one of his eyes. He was\nwearing a tall straw hat, a high collar, the ends rising and meeting\nin points under the chin, a yellowish walking-stick, the handle of\nwhich was made of ivory and fastened to the stick by a silver band; the\npersonage was reading a newspaper, the title of which was in Gothic\nlettering \u2018like the _Matin_.\u2019 He was wearing a thick gold chain and\ntrinkets. M. Meurice thought he was looking upon a real individual, and\nit was not until the carriage had driven past, and my friend saw the\nsupposed man suddenly disappear, leaving but a \u2018whitish blur on the\nground,\u2019 that he recognised H.\u00a0B. and the hallucinatory character of\nhis perception.\n\n\u201cI saw M. Meurice about five hours after he had had this vision, when\nhe gave me the above details; I recognised the following as being\ncorrect:\u2014\n\n\u201c1. The walk.\n\n\u201c2. A peculiar mark near one of the eyes.\n\n\u201c3. The newspaper; H.\u00a0B. took in the _Temps_, the title of which is in\nGothic lettering like the _Matin_.\n\n\u201c4. The walking-stick, every detail being exact.\n\n\u201c5. The description of the collar was correct.\n\n\u201c6. H. B. used to wear a straw hat.\n\n\u201c7. \u2018A stout man with a round, clean-shaven face\u2019 applies to H.\u00a0B.\nbefore his infirmity made an invalid of him.\n\n\u201cThe watch-chain and trinkets were imaginary.\n\n\u201cA few remarks about details 1 and 2: H.\u00a0B. had twice broken his right\nleg; the right leg was, as a result of these two accidents, shorter\nthan the left leg. He had therefore a very peculiar and characteristic\nwalk. When M. Meurice was relating the above vision to me, he imitated\nthe walk to perfection. Let it be remembered that H.\u00a0B. had not walked\na step for six years previous to his death; when he was attacked by\nparalysis, M. Meurice was but fourteen years of age, and was not then\nliving in Bordeaux.\n\n\u201c2. H. B. had a small and peculiar skin mark near his left eye.\nNow, when M. Meurice related his vision, I told him that he had not\nlocalised this mark accurately enough. Thereupon, raps resounded\nsimultaneously on his chair, on the floor, and on a table standing a\nfoot away from M. Meurice and myself; while these raps were resounding\nM. Meurice said he saw H.\u00a0B., and remarked that he was pointing to the\nsign in question. M. Meurice then correctly localised the mark.\n\n\u201cFurther, I told M. Meurice that he had made a mistake when speaking\nof a gold watch-chain and trinkets. The next vision my friend had of\nH.\u00a0B., the latter showed himself with a black silk ribbon attached to\nhis watch; this, I recognised as correct. H.\u00a0B. always wore a black\nsilk ribbon for a watch-chain.[21]\n\n      [21] M. Meurice was aware of the fact that H.\u00a0B. had bequeathed\n      many things to Dr. Maxwell. He knew, for example, that the\n      latter wears a watch which was given him by H.\u00a0B. And as Dr.\n      Maxwell also wears, attached to his watch, a gold chain and\n      trinkets, normal mental activity might here have been at\n      work.\u2014_Note by the Translator._\n\n\u201cIn subsequent visions, H.\u00a0B. showed the medium successively certain\ncorrect details in his costume, notably:\u2014\n\n\u201c1. Cravats, dark blue with white spots.\n\n\u201c2. Shoes of a peculiar make, without heels and with elastic sides.\n\n\u201c3. White stockings.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice tells me he feels that H.\u00a0B. very often tries to make\nhimself visible to him; when he fails to do so, he hears him say\nimpatiently: \u2018Thut! thut! thut!\u2019\u2014a curious coincidence, for this was a\nmost characteristic habit of H.\u00a0B.\u2019s when impatient.\n\n\u201cFrom that time the personification H.\u00a0B. has continued to mingle\nactively in our medium\u2019s life. His intervention is manifested daily. It\nwould be impossible to give a full account of this personification\u2019s\nmanifestations; I will simply confine myself to indicating the\nprincipal. It is to be pointed out, first of all, that H.\u00a0B. appears\nliterally to \u2018haunt\u2019 M. Meurice\u2019s house, especially the room above the\nlatter\u2019s bedroom.[22]\n\n      [22] M. Meurice\u2019s house bore the reputation of being haunted\n      before he took it. He was unaware of this, until the neighbours\n      told him of it some months after he was settled in the\n      house.\u2014_Note by the Translator._\n\n\u201cThe phenomena are of several kinds:\u2014\n\n\u201c_A._ Sonorous phenomena.\n\n\u201c1. Footsteps.\n\n  \u201c(_a_) A loud, quick, decided footstep, which M. Meurice attributes\n         to the personification Chappe.\n\n  \u201c(_b_) An unequal step, as though one leg rested more heavily than\n         the other; the imitation which M. Meurice made before me of\n         this step recalled to my mind H.\u00a0B.\u2019s step.\n\n  \u201c(_c_) A slow step as of a person who dragged his feet along: a\n         movement attributed by M. Meurice to, and which I recognised\n         as characteristic of, one of my deceased friends.[23]\n\n  \u201c(_d_) A quick, light step, like the step of a big bird.\n\n      [23] See page 160.\n\n\u201cThese footsteps are heard in the corridor of the second story of the\nhouse; a story which is not inhabited. Then the door of a bedroom,\nimmediately above M. Meurice\u2019s bedroom, seems to open and the footsteps\nresound in the room. M. Meurice has often got up\u2014these noises occur at\nabout two o\u2019clock in the early morning\u2014but he has never seen anything\nor any one.\n\n\u201cThe same noises are also heard in M. Meurice\u2019s own bedroom.\n\n\u201c2. The opening of doors and windows.\n\n\u201cBefore hearing footsteps in the bedroom on the second floor, M.\nMeurice hears the door of that room open. The noise of the opening of\nthe door is always preceded by a noise similar to that made by a hand\nsearching in the dark for the door handle.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice hears the same sounds on his bedroom door. There are three\ndoors to M. Meurice\u2019s bedroom: one leads into a dressing-room, one\ninto a clothes-room, the third into a study; it is at this third door\nthat the above-mentioned phenomena occur.\n\n\u201cSometimes M. Meurice hears the window of his own bedroom, as well as\nthat of the room upstairs, open and shut. He has got up repeatedly,\nand gone upstairs to see what was happening, but has always found the\ndoor closed, which he fancied he had heard being opened. Whenever, on\nreturning to his bedroom, he left the door of the room upstairs open,\nthe noise of footsteps would begin again as soon as he had left, but\nwithout the sound of the opening and shutting of the bedroom door.\n\n\u201c3. Noises as of furniture being moved about. The medium hears the\nchairs and tables of the room above him move about; his faculties of\nobservation are well developed, and he believes he recognises:\u2014\n\n  \u201c(_a_) Accompanying the noise of the displacement of chairs and\n         tables, Chappe\u2019s footstep.\n\n  \u201c(_b_) H.\u00a0B.\u2019s footsteps, on the contrary, are accompanied by the\n         noise a heavy person might make when sitting on a bed. The\n         medium hears the mattress creaking.\n\n  \u201c(_c_) Lastly, he hears a noise similar to what would be produced\n         by a person lying back in an armchair.\n\n\u201c4. Noises of material objects other than furniture: these noises are\nlike:\u2014\n\n  \u201c(_a_) A bag of corn or nuts emptied on to the floor of the bedroom\n         upstairs.\n\n  \u201c(_b_) Something hard striking the floor: these sounds are given\n         rhythmically upon request.\n\n  \u201c(_c_) Wings beating the air. M. Meurice compares these sounds to\n         the flapping of the wings of a turkey.\n\n  \u201c(_d_) The rubbing of paper.\n\n\u201c5. Diverse human noises:\u2014\n\n  \u201c(_a_) Sighs.\n\n  \u201c(_b_) Heavy breathing.\n\n\u201cAre these sonorous phenomena subjective? I have never been in the\nhouse at the hour, when these sounds are said to be heard; and the\nnoises I have heard from time to time are not sufficiently pronounced\nfor me to be able to form any conclusion. I have assured myself that\nno water-pipes exist in the upper stories of the house; the latter is\nisolated, but any loud noises made in a neighbouring house can be heard\nin M. Meurice\u2019s house.\n\n\u201cNo one sleeps in the second story. A domestic, who occupies a room on\nthe same floor as M. Meurice, has heard the noise of footsteps, and has\noften got up out of bed and gone upstairs to see who was moving about.\nNever finding any one, the domestic attributes these sounds to rats: an\ninsufficient explanation. Moreover, a close examination of the house,\nrepeated on several occasions, has revealed to me no signs of rats.\n\n\u201cA sister of M. Meurice\u2019s frequently pays him visits; she then occupies\na room on the same floor as her brother. On three different occasions\nshe has been awakened out of sleep by sounds of footsteps, and a\nfumbling noise on the door of her room, as though some one were feeling\nfor the handle. She has got up, gone into her brother\u2019s room, thinking\nit was he, searched about the house, but has never seen anything which\ncould explain the noises, neither has she heard the noises while thus\nmoving about.[24]\n\n      [24] Among Dr. Maxwell\u2019s notes is the following account,\n      written to Professor Richet, of a seance at which the doctor\n      was present; and of some subsequent phenomena which he did\n      not witness, but which the reader may consider interesting,\n      nevertheless:\u2014\n\n      19th March 1904.\u2014\u2018Yesterday afternoon I obtained some automatic\n      writing with our medium. Chappe and H.\u00a0B. were said to be\n      communicating, and giving me their views about the war. We\n      then used the commodious Chappe telephone\u2014my stylograph on\n      this occasion. The raps were excellent. The weather was good,\n      fairly cold, but dry. When the last word of a message was\n      being spelt out, Meurice suddenly threw away the pen and broke\n      up the seance, without going through the usual formalities\n      of good-bye. He rose up from his seat, complained of feeling\n      dizzy, and fainted. He quickly came to, however, and when I\n      left him he appeared quite well again. But soon after I had\n      left the house, he went into his sister\u2019s room, and again\n      fainted.\n\n      \u2018Now, I had often told him not to break off the communications\n      so abruptly. I think the fatigue he sometimes experiences after\n      phenomena\u2014fatigue often out of all proportion with them\u2014is\n      due to his _brusquerie_. On this occasion I am sure there\n      was some link between him and the table on which the rapping\n      occurred. Unfortunately, friendship mastered science, and I\n      rose up instantly to look after my friend, without stopping to\n      ascertain if there were any trace of exteriorised sensibility\n      in the table. It is very probable that such was the case,\n      because I repeatedly assured myself, during the course of the\n      seance, that there was absolutely no sensibility whatever in\n      the hand which was holding the stylograph\u2014the rapping implement.\n\n      \u2018During the seance Chappe had dictated that his medium was\n      going to give \u201cdisplacements of objects,\u201d and he bade him take\n      heed thereof. M. Meurice\u2019s house is, this week, filled with\n      visitors\u2014his sister and her children among others. For want of\n      room, he has taken his young nephew, a child of seven years\n      old, into his room to sleep with him. Now, last night he was\n      awakened towards midnight by his bed moving about. His sister,\n      sleeping in the next room, also heard these noises; thinking\n      her brother was ill, she got up and went into his room. She\n      saw a curious sight: the bed was gliding, of its own accord,\n      towards the window! She sat down on a sofa and watched; the\n      room was lighted up by the light of one candle. The bed moved\n      up to a table near the window, _i.e._ a distance of three feet;\n      the carpet was not disturbed. The bed returned slowly to its\n      former position. The child did not awaken. The sister is not\n      aware of her brother\u2019s powers; if she were told, she would\n      probably be much distressed, as she puts all such phenomena _a\n      priori_ down to charlatanry or to superstition. She was alarmed\n      at the manifestation, ascribed the movements to \u201cghosts,\u201d and\n      firmly believes that the house is haunted.\u2019 (This sister does\n      not live in Bordeaux, and has never been told of the reputation\n      the house enjoyed before her brother took possession of it.)\n\n\u201cShe has also heard the flapping of birds\u2019 wings, in the daytime, in\ndifferent parts of the house.\n\n\u201c_B._ Phenomena of touch.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice sometimes feels a hand gently stroke him on the head. On\none occasion, when he was suffering from a violent headache, he felt a\nhand move about on his head and forehead; the pain went away, and he\nfell asleep.\n\n\u201c_C._ Visual phenomena.\n\n\u201cSonorous and tactile phenomena nearly always precede an apparition,\nwhich is generally that of H.\u00a0B., either alone or with the Chappe\npersonification.\n\n\u201cThe following are a few examples of the visions relating to H.\u00a0B.:\u2014\n\n\u201c1. On the 31st October 1903 M. Meurice returned home from a visit to\nthe neighbouring village\u2014Arcachon, the same village, near which H.\u00a0B.\nhad appeared to him (p. 290). When he entered his bedroom, he perceived\nH.\u00a0B. seated in a chair, holding on his arm a mortuary wreath made of\nblack beads.\n\n\u201cOn the morrow\u2014All Souls\u2019 Day\u2014M. Meurice related this vision to me. I\nwas surprised\u2014but concealed my surprise; for, as a matter of fact, I\ndid not understand what a wreath of black beads could mean. At certain\nepochs I am in the habit of laying a wreath on H.\u00a0B.\u2019s tomb, but it\nis always composed of what were his favourite flowers. M. Meurice\nbegan to write automatically; he wrote: \u2018Bring me what you are in the\nhabit of bringing me; the other wreath was for T. Bring him one too,\nfor his family have almost forgotten him.\u2019 (I understood T. to be the\ninitial letter of a great friend of H.\u00a0B.\u2019s.) My surprise did not\ndiminish, because I know for a fact that T.\u2019s family cherish his memory\nprofoundly.\n\n\u201cHowever, following my usual custom, I treated the personification\nH.\u00a0B. as he desired to be treated and executed his commission. I then\nmade the following discovery: T. is buried in a vault over which lies\na sort of platform. The vault belongs to his own family and the family\nof a near relation. There were fresh flowers on the side of the vault\nbelonging to his relations; there were none on the side reserved for\nhis family.\n\n\u201cI believe this circumstance, as well as the friendship which existed\nbetween H.\u00a0B. and T., was unknown to M. Meurice; but I am obliged to\nadmit that my belief rests upon no proof.\n\n\u201cLet me add, in order to finish at once with the T. incident, that, on\nthe eve of my visit to T.\u2019s tomb, I had asked M. Meurice to give me the\nChristian and surnames of the person about whom H.\u00a0B. was supposed to\nbe talking. The surname was given; a curious mistake was made before\nthe Christian name was correctly given: the name of T.\u2019s son was given,\nand then came T.\u2019s own name. These indications were obtained in broad\ndaylight, by means of raps without direct contact. The raps resounded\nupon a table on which I had placed a shawl, one corner of which was\nheld by M. Meurice.\n\n\u201c2. A few days afterwards a seance was held in M. Meurice\u2019s bedroom.\nA portable cabinet had been used, which M. Meurice had not taken the\ntrouble to remove before going to bed. During the night he was awakened\nby taps on the head; he heard diverse noises, and saw the door of the\ncabinet open. H.\u00a0B. appeared, leaning on two of the \u2018fairies\u2019; the two\nother \u2018fairies\u2019 followed. These personages presented the appearance of\nliving people, said M. Meurice the next day when describing the vision\nto me. They rolled an armchair into the middle of the room; H.\u00a0B.\nsat down in it; the _fairies_ placed a shawl over his knees, and two\nof them sat down on the arms of his chair; the other two sat down on\nchairs. H.\u00a0B. spoke about my health, and then bade M. Meurice tell me\nthat I would be able to find all necessary documents on the history of\nreligions in my cousin Y.\u2019s library. The Christian names were correctly\ngiven, the surname approximately; but the approximation was such (the\ninitial letter of the name being the only incorrect one) that I had no\ndifficulty in recognising the name.\n\n\u201cIt is exact that my cousin Y. possesses documents on the history of\nreligions. M. Meurice knew that the question interested me; but it is\nextremely improbable, that he should have known of the existence of\nmy cousin Y., who lives in the strictest seclusion; it is still more\nimprobable, that he should have known the contents of his library. I\ncannot, however, affirm these two points, but I can at least affirm\nthat M. Meurice does not know my cousin Y.\n\n\u201cThe personification H.\u00a0B. shows a spirit of fatherly protection\ntowards M. Meurice; for example:\u2014\n\n\u201cThe medium was once out driving; a rather serious accident happened,\nin which his carriage was caught between a cart and a tram; the\ncoachman was thrown from his seat and wounded. As the tram struck the\ncarriage, M. Meurice felt himself seized by the arms, and carried out\nof the carriage on to the footpath by H.\u00a0B.[25]\n\n      [25] The reader may care to see Dr. Maxwell\u2019s detailed report\n      to Professor Richet of the above incident:\u2014\n\n      \u2018On Sunday morning Meurice was out driving. A short distance\n      from Bordeaux his carriage collided with a milk-cart; the\n      shafts of the latter crashed through one of the carriage\n      windows. At the same time an electric tram, unable to pull\n      up in time, struck the carriage in the rear. The coachman\n      was thrown from his seat on to the ground, where he lay\n      unconscious. He was wounded near the left eye, ... his face was\n      covered with blood.\n\n      \u2018At the moment the collision with the tram took place, Meurice\n      quickly opened the carriage door with the natural intention of\n      jumping out; but he felt himself suddenly lifted up and carried\n      on to the footpath, a distance of ten feet. He saw no one.\n\n      \u2018He probably jumped of his own accord, and the sensation he\n      experienced was but the symbolical expression of the solicitude\n      the personifications show for him. The protector was supposed\n      to be H.\u00a0B.\n\n      \u2018Now, on Saturday afternoon, the eve of the day on which the\n      above accident occurred, I had a seance with my friend. We\n      tried for luminous phenomena, but the experiment was null.\n      Towards the close of the seance, Meurice said he saw the face\n      of a dead man, with a wound on the left temple, the face was\n      covered with blood. I asked who it was, and received by raps\n      without contact: \u201cSuicide, victime d\u2019amour, Gaston\u201d; the raps\n      refused to give the surname. The aspect of the coachman\u2019s face\n      after the accident the next morning somewhat recalls the aspect\n      of the vision; if we accept this, there is a curious mixture\n      of true and false, the false showing forth when our personal\n      activity intervenes in order to question: a fact which I have\n      often observed.\n\n      \u2018The accident occurred between ten and a quarter past ten\n      o\u2019clock. My friend\u2019s youngest sister\u2014a young girl of twenty\u2014is\n      paying him a visit this week. Now, this Sunday morning she\n      went into the kitchen at ten o\u2019clock, looking very distressed,\n      and said to the servants that she felt sure an accident had\n      happened to her brother. The sister\u2019s and servants\u2019 versions\n      concorded absolutely when questioned a few hours later on this\n      coincidence.\u2019\n\n\u201cThe air of protection which this personification assumes is never\nabsent; it is difficult, M. Meurice says, to convey an idea of the\nstrange, fantastic impression which he feels, in presence of the\nfrequent intervention of H.\u00a0B., and other personifications.\n\n\u201cThis impression is the less easily understood, in so much as M.\nMeurice is not a spiritualist, and has received a scientific education.\nHe refuses to accept the explanations which the personifications\noffer of themselves: they claim to be human beings who have once\nlived on earth. Up to the present they have never pretended to give\nus any information touching the life beyond the tomb; the indications\nthey have given rather tend to direct our experiments, and to try to\nformulate premonitions. H.\u00a0B. seems to have given himself the task,\nchiefly, of establishing his identity; this desire appears to be his\nleading\u2014I scarcely dare to say generating\u2014idea. And we are obliged to\nadmit that from this point of view he has given some curious details.\nThese facts constitute the intellectual phenomena, which are the\ndominant ones in the H.\u00a0B. personification, although raps and movements\nwithout contact are also said to emanate from him sometimes.\n\n\u201cI have given some examples of psycho-sensorial messages in the visions\nwhich I have described. These are far from being the most interesting.\nH.\u00a0B. manifests also by automatic writing, and has given some messages\nof a highly interesting character in this manner. I cite the following\nas being the most characteristic:\u2014\n\n\u201cOn the 27th of November 1903, towards the close of a seance, I\n_mentally_ asked H.\u00a0B. where I happened to be, when he was laid up\nwith a certain serious illness. The medium wrote: \u2018You were a young\nmagistrate at Blaye, near Bordeaux.\u2019 M. Meurice knows what my career\nhas been, but it is extremely improbable, he should have known\nabout the illness\u2014much less the time of the illness\u2014of which I was\nthinking. At all events, the reply given to my _mental_ question was\ncorrect. Neither the conversation nor previous facts could have given\nthe slightest clue to my question. On another occasion, automatic\nwriting made an extremely characteristic allusion to one of H.\u00a0B.\u2019s\nmost inveterate habits: a glass of brandy and water every afternoon at\nhalf-past five, punctually.[26]\n\n      [26] The following is Dr. Maxwell\u2019s detailed report of this\n      incident as contained in a letter to Professor Richet:\u2014\n\n      \u2018... There was nothing we might say but twaddle in the writing\n      which followed, _e.g._ expressions of pleasure on the part of\n      H.\u00a0B. in that he was able to communicate with me, his long\n      efforts to reach me, etc., when suddenly, at 5.30, without any\n      rhyme or reason, so to say, our medium wrote (always under the\n      influence of the H.\u00a0B. personification): \u201cOffer me some brandy\n      and water....\u201d Now, during fifty years H.\u00a0B. had not been known\n      to miss taking a glass of brandy and water every afternoon\n      at half-past five. He was not in the habit of taking this\n      concoction at other hours of the day; so that the coincidence\n      is, to say the least, striking and curious....\u2019\n\n\u201cFinally, on the occasion of the death of the last surviving member of\nhis family, H.\u00a0B. on the 5th of October 1904 wrote: \u2018Poor L., no one\nis left now. It is a consolation for you to feel me near you.... Very\noften those left behind cannot see us.\u2019 (_Pauvre L., il ne reste plus\npersonne maintenant, c\u2019est une consolation pour vous de me sentir pr\u00e8s\nde vous. Souvent les survivants ne peuvent pas nous voir._)\n\n\u201cThis message was interesting because the last relative to die was not\nL. but C.\u00a0L. died before C.; but L. had been H.\u00a0B.\u2019s favourite brother.\nIt is quite correct that no one was left of H.\u00a0B.\u2019s generation after\nC.\u2019s death.[27]\n\n      [27] Neither L. nor C. have ever lived in Bordeaux. In fact\n      H.\u00a0B. was the only member of his family to leave his native\n      land.\n\n\u201cAt this same seance, H.\u00a0B. mentioned a very private detail in\nconnection with L. This fact, which _raisons de convenance_ prevent me\nfrom fully relating, defines the nature of the intercourse which had\nexisted between H.\u00a0B. and his brother L. The circumstances which the\nwriting recalled were known only to H.\u00a0B. and a few near relations.\n\n\u201cI am fully aware that the above details have no demonstrative value,\nfor I knew them all, and the hypothesis of thought transmission can\nexplain them quite as well as the spirit hypothesis. Here is, however,\na case which is less easily explained:\u2014\n\n\u201cOne of my friends is related to a lady, who lives with her husband in\nParis. My friend told me that this cousin of his had amused herself\none day with table-turning; and he added that the table had followed\nher without any one touching it. I had spoken of this incident to\nM. Meurice, but without mentioning names. The incident of the table\nfollowing the novice the first time she had tried table-turning was the\nonly thing mentioned.\n\n\u201cQuite recently, while pursuing my inquiry upon mediums\u2019 eyes, H.\u00a0B.,\nthrough automatic writing, told me that the afore-mentioned friend\nwould be able to give me some information on the subject; the writing\nthen named his cousin, but called her by her _maiden_ name, giving the\nname correctly.\n\n\u201cNow two or three days afterwards, M. Meurice had a vision or a\ndream\u2014often he cannot tell whether it be one or the other; he saw an\naged lady sitting before a large table, on the top of which a doll\u2019s\ntable was standing; two younger women were with her; one of these\nlatter made the small doll\u2019s table turn round three times without\ntouching it. The room in which these ladies were sitting was large,\nand M. Meurice thought it was in a country-house. The curtains were of\nrose-coloured velvet.\n\n\u201cThe scene described was the one my friend had related to me, but\nI pointed out to M. Meurice that one detail at least was certainly\nincorrect: viz. the doll\u2019s table. H.\u00a0B. immediately wrote: \u2018He has not\nmade a mistake, it was the small table which moved, and not the large\none.\u2019 (_Il ne se trompe pas, c\u2019est bien le mouvement d\u2019une petite table\nqui a eu lieu, et non celui d\u2019une grande._) I saw my friend the next\nday, and I related this incident to him. He assured me it was quite a\nmistake, that it was a large table, and not a doll\u2019s table, which had\nmoved. I saw him again a few days later, when he told me he had made\nfurther inquiries about the table-turning incident, and had found out\nthat it was indeed a doll\u2019s table placed upon the large table, which\nhad effected the movements in question.\n\n\u201cThe vision was therefore exact on this point; it was also exact\nconcerning the number and age of the persons present, but the room in\nwhich the seance took place was in Paris and not in the country; the\ndescription of the room was incorrect.\n\n\u201cIn this case, automatic writing confirmed the details seen\nhallucinatorily, or in dream; these details were most certainly\nunknown to M. Meurice as well as to myself. I will add that even had I\nmentioned my friend\u2019s name, which I can affirm I did not do, that name\nwould have been of no assistance to M. Meurice, inasmuch as he does not\nknow my friend, much less his cousin in Paris.\n\n\u201cThis is the most precise case, in which M. Meurice has given me\ncorrect details unknown to myself.\n\n\u201cIf we examine in a general manner the character of the H.\u00a0B.\npersonification, we are, perhaps, obliged to admit that it presents\na spiritistic appearance. This appearance is all the more singular,\nin that it manifests in a centre where the spiritistic hypothesis\nis looked upon with disfavour. I am well aware of the fact, that\ntendencies opposed to those of the normal personality are often\nobserved in secondary personalities.\n\n\u201cYoung girls of a most timid and reserved disposition, normally,\nsometimes show obscene parasitic personalities, under the influence\nof which they give utterance to the most filthy language, and perform\nmost indecent acts. The processes of the sixteenth and seventeenth\ncenturies are most instructive from this point of view, especially\nthose of Loudun and Louviers. It is not surprising, therefore, to see\npersonifications calling themselves spirits emerge in a non-spiritistic\ncentre; it is probably a phenomenon comparable to that of the secondary\npersonalities just spoken of. A different synthesis of psychological\nelements is formed, which follows an opposite bent to the one normally\nfollowed. It is as though the poles were changed, and a secondary\npersonality reveals itself as the very reverse of the first personality.\n\n\u201cThe interesting point to seek for, however, is not the genesis of the\npersonification, for there are so many hypotheses which might explain\nit, but to determine which explanation concerning the personification\nbest suits the particular circumstances.\n\n\u201cMy observations upon the H.\u00a0B. personification\u2014the most thorough\nI have so far been able to make\u2014do not permit me to form a definite\nconclusion; at the same time, they do not tend to make me look\nfavourably upon the spirit hypothesis. If we resume the details given\nby H.\u00a0B.:\u2014\n\n  \u201c_A._ About himself, his person, we find:\n\n    \u201c1. 2. Two ways of wearing his beard.\n\n    \u201c3. A peculiar mark near the eye.\n\n    \u201c4. 5. A very peculiar walk: right leg shorter than the left.\n\n    \u201c6. The hair was fairly well described.\n\n    \u201c7. The eyes were not well described.\n\n  \u201c_B._ Details about his clothes and habits:\n\n    \u201c8. An unusual shape of slipper.\n\n    \u201c9. The shape and colour of his cravats.\n\n    \u201c10. His walking-stick.\n\n    \u201c11. The manner in which he passed the last six years of his\n          life in an armchair.\n\n    \u201c12. The shawl which habitually covered his legs.\n\n    \u201c13. His habit of taking a glass of brandy and water every\n          afternoon at 5.30.\n\n    \u201c14. His allusions to his brother L. and to his death.\n\n    \u201c15. A gold chain and pendants which he never possessed:\n          followed, however, by the rectification of the error.\n\n    \u201c16. The detail of the _Temps_.\n\n\u201cThat is to say: two inexact, two doubtful, and twelve accurate details.\n\n\u201cIt may be of interest to draw attention to the process employed\nby this personification to prove his identity; it is worthy of some\nattention, because it touches on precise details. Those particular\nsigns which are of capital importance in the identification of\npersons, we find in details 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 13, 14, and it would be\nmost unjust to refuse to recognise in these indications at least an\nappearance of volition and intelligence.\n\n\u201cThe character of volition has been decidedly indicated. The H.\u00a0B.\npersonification began to manifest itself by giving details concerning\nhis physical appearance and his habits. When M. Meurice saw H.\u00a0B.,\nhe frequently perceived the apparition very indistinctly, with the\nexception of the particular point which the personification appeared\nto be desirous of impressing upon him; this occurred particularly with\ndetails 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, and for the rectification of the watch-chain\nincident\u201415.\n\n\u201cThe character of intelligence has not been less marked than the\ncharacter of volition. The personification gives the impression of\nhaving deliberately chosen the signs, by which he desired to prove his\nidentity. Everybody knows how difficult it is to recognise such or such\na person by the mere description of features; definite details and\npeculiar marks are, on the contrary, of the greatest value for purposes\nof identification: and these are precisely the details which H.\u00a0B.\n_seems_ to have chosen; these are the kind of details he _seems_ to\nhave shown with the greatest persistence.\n\n\u201cSuch facts as these plead in favour of the spirit hypothesis; it would\nbe unfair to deny it.\n\n\u201cIn the first place, there are some inaccuracies, _e.g._ 15. Can we\nattribute this to the iconogenical activity of the medium? This is the\ntheory which Dr. Hodgson has so finely developed, and the arguments\nhe appeals to are very serious. The sensorial or motor message is due\neither to the medium himself, or to an intelligence distinct from that\nof the medium, or to the combined action of the two intelligences.\nNotwithstanding Dr. Hodgson\u2019s weighty arguments, this explanation\ncan only be considered, at present, as a working hypothesis. It is\nrather difficult to understand why an extraneous intelligence could\ngive twelve accurate details, and make a mistake in two or three other\nimportant details; it is still more difficult to understand, if the\nidentity in question be present, why he should commit such mistakes;\nand it seems to me that the personal action of the medium explains\nthese errors even less satisfactorily.\n\n\u201cNevertheless, we must admit that even if we accept the hypothesis of\nthe personal action of the medium troubling the extrinsical action of\na foreign intelligence, this simultaneous blending of true and false\ndetails is little made to bring about a conviction of the intervention\nof an active intelligence, other than that of the medium.\n\n\u201cFinally, even in admitting as proven the intervention of an\nintelligence non-human, nothing permits us to affirm that it is really\nthe person in question who is manifesting and not an impersonation.\nThis distinction has been well put forward by theologians, though the\nrules they give for the discernment of spirits appear to us to be most\npuerile.\n\n\u201cTo sum up, the case of H.\u00a0B. has an appearance which is, frankly\nspeaking, spiritistic; but it is not possible to consider as certain,\nor even as probable, the pretensions manifested by this interesting\npersonification.\u201d\n\n\n_SERIES B_\n\nA. RAPS\n\nI propose gathering together, for the first part of this series, a few\ninteresting things scattered here and there among the notes before me.\n\nOn one occasion Chappe dictated by means of raps without contact\u2014in\nbroad daylight\u2014that 760 copies of a work of Dr. Maxwell\u2019s had been\nsold. Four days later, in the same manner, he said that 958 copies of\nthe said work had been sold; incorrect information as the following\nproves: the day after the seance in which Chappe had announced the sale\nof 958 copies, Dr. Maxwell received a letter from the publisher of the\nwork in question telling him that 800 copies had left him, including\nthe press service.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cWe had some good phenomena on Tuesday afternoon,\u201d writes Dr. Maxwell.\n\u201cI was talking to M. Meurice about my bibliographical researches,\nand of the best plan to adopt for the analytical indexes. A small\nmahogany table was near us, one leg of the table was touching a rug on\nwhich M. Meurice was sitting. Raps resounded on the table; Chappe\u2019s\nsignal was given, followed by some advice concerning the subject of\nour conversation. Telekinetic phenomena were also forthcoming\u2014the\ntable gliding towards us and then away from us according to request,\ntravelling a distance of from three to five inches.\n\n\u201cThen I tried an experiment, one I have been wishing to try for some\ntime: I bade M. Meurice sit in an armchair and lie perfectly still.\nI placed his arm at about one foot from the table, and told him to\n_fancy_ he lifted his arm and struck the table, without, of course,\nmaking the slightest movement.\n\n\u201cWe obtained some excellent raps in this way. This is a fine\nexperiment, for it shows clearly the production of raps by the will\u2014the\ndirect, conscious and personal will.\n\n\u201cWe tried three series of experiments; six raps in each series were\nwilled; we received four raps in each, that is to say, 66 per cent. of\nsuccess. The raps were loud, one was double. The medium nearly fainted\nafter this experiment, but came round quickly, though he has not been\nwell since.\n\n\u201cHis sensations were: (1) absence of sensation in the arm with which\nwe were experimenting; (2) a kind of breeze issuing from his shoulder.\nAfter willing the raps he was never sure of success, he did not feel\nthe wood had been touched. Sensibility appeared to be exteriorised.\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn another of Dr. Maxwell\u2019s letters we note the following:\u2014\n\n\u201cFor our seance yesterday we obtained, as usual, a quantity of raps\nthrough the lead-pencil. I succeeded in provoking them upon myself.\nSensation produced: when M. Meurice put the pencil on bone I had a\nsensation of a slight electric current; it produced no contractions\nin the muscles traversed; the sensation was at its maximum on bone,\nprobably because of the greater conductibility offered by solids to\nvibration.\n\n\u201cI have tried the raps upon several substances with the following\nresult:\u2014\n\n  the finger: good.\n  wood: very good, maximum.\n  ivory: good.\n  iron: bad.\n\n\u201cSensibility appears to be exteriorised during the production of raps\nthrough a pencil. Yesterday there was sensibility at a distance of\nfour centimetres from the periphery of the hand, which was holding the\npencil, when the raps were forthcoming.\n\n\u201cI asked Chappe to indicate in one word why it was easier to obtain\nraps with a lead-pencil. He dictated the answer, \u2018_Localisent_.\u2019\n\n\u201cBefore we separated we received the following message by raps _without\ncontact: \u2018Jeanne Bordes morte 7 octobre 1859 \u00e0 St. Pierre Martinique,\ndemeurant 37 rue St. Jacques_.\u2019 I do not know of any Jeanne Bordes,\nthough a family of that name lives at St. Pierre. I have questioned\nsome people who have lived in that town, but they do not recollect any\nJeanne Bordes....\u201d\n\nIn another letter the doctor writes:\u2014\n\n\u201cTowards four o\u2019clock this afternoon, in broad daylight, some very\nfine raps resounded on a table standing thirteen feet away from M.\nMeurice and myself. It was said to be H.\u00a0B. who was rapping. M. Meurice\nbecame nervous, and the experiment only lasted for five minutes. It was\nmagnificent as an example of raps at a distance.\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe following extracts are taken from Dr. X.\u2019s notes:\u2014\n\n\u201cOn one occasion Professor Richet and I were speaking about a relation\nof the professor\u2019s, A.\u00a0R., who was supposed to have communicated\nwith him through M. Meurice. The latter could not have overheard our\nconversation, for the simple reason that he was at least ten miles\naway from where we happened to be at that moment. Five or six hours\nafterwards, when Professor Richet was out walking with M. Meurice, raps\nsuddenly resounded on the latter\u2019s walking-stick, and the following\nwords were dictated: \u2018_Suis avec vous._\u2019 (Who are you?) \u2018_A.\u00a0R. Je ne\nvous ai jamais abandonn\u00e9._\u2019\n\n\u201cIn the course of the morning\u2019s conversation, the remark had been\npassed that the persistency of this personification\u2019s manifestations\nwould be looked upon by some as a sign of survival, and I had made use\nof the words: \u2018I wonder if he\u2014A.\u00a0R.\u2014has been near you lately.\u2019\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cThe medium was aware of certain experiments I had made with a\nsensitive at Nancy. He often heard me discuss with Professor Richet and\nDr. Maxwell, the phenomena I witnessed there. One day, in presence of\nProfessor Richet and myself, Chappe dictated that he followed me about\nsometimes, upon which I said: \u2018Were you with me in Nancy?\u2019 He replied\n(by means of raps _without_ contact): \u2018_Oui. D. s\u2019attire des ennuis en\ngroupant autour de lui des influences inf\u00e9rieures. D\u00e9fiez-vous de la\ndomestique. Fraude. Il y a eu autrefois un fort m\u00e9dium, Henri Dubuc, \u00e0\nNancy. S. n\u2019est pas un m\u00e9dium \u00e0 mat\u00e9rialisations._\u2019\n\n\u201cThis communication was given in broad daylight, by means of raps\nwithout any contact whatsoever. The raps resounded on a table which\nwas standing near, but which was not touched, either directly or\nindirectly, by the medium. From time to time Professor Richet and I\nleant on the table, but not with a view to aiding the phenomena\u2014I mean\nto furnishing \u2018force.\u2019 Our touching the table or not seemed to make no\ndifference to the rapping intelligence. The message was dictated with\nprecision and rapidity.\n\n\u201cIt is to be noted, that M. Meurice held a decided opinion concerning\nthe experiments at Nancy; he was not at all inclined to admit their\nauthenticity. The group, at whose seances I had been permitted to be\npresent, know of no Henry Dubuc.\n\n\u201cWhile the preceding communication was being given, one of the\nobservers made the remark, _sotto voce_, that he had a headache, and\nwondered if Chappe could suggest a remedy: immediately the somewhat\nlaconic reply, \u2018_Dormez_,\u2019 was rapped out.\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe following message contains an incident of a certain interest, if\nthe reader will kindly compare it with the efforts, related in Series\nC, page 359, to obtain a particular name.\n\n\u201cA letter had been received from Professor Richet, in which reference\nhad been made to a curious occurrence at Carqueiranne, very much like\nan orthodox haunting. During lunch, I spoke about this to the medium.\nAs often happened when the conversation turned on these grounds,\nraps mingled freely with our conversation. Thereupon I asked who\nwas rapping, and received the reply that C.\u00a0R. (Professor Richet\u2019s\ngrandfather) was present; whereupon the following conversation between\nthis personification and myself took place:\u2014\n\n\u201cQuestion: Can you explain the haunting at Carqueiranne?\n\n\u201cC. R.: _Oui_.\n\n\u201cQuestion: Who is it who haunts the place?\n\n\u201cC. R.: _M\u00e8re_.\n\n\u201cQuestion: Whose mother?\n\n\u201cC. R.: Grandmother Jacques. _M\u00e8re_ Charles.\n\n\u201c(Jacques is the name of the boy to whom the incident in question\noccurred.)\n\n\u201cQuestion: What is her name?\n\n\u201cC. R.: _Eug\u00e9nie_.\n\n\u201cThis name \u2018Eug\u00e9nie\u2019 is the one we had tried in vain to obtain four\nmonths previously.[28] It was now given without any hesitation\nwhatsoever, by raps without contact.\n\n      [28] See page 359.\n\n\u201cFollowing this word \u2018Eug\u00e9nie,\u2019 the raps predicted the death of one\nof my brothers in a month\u2019s time from an automobile accident. The\nprediction, happily, remains unfulfilled. When this message was\nreceived, I did not know if my brother ever rode in motor cars; and,\nfor several reasons, I did not consider it at all likely; but three\nweeks afterwards, I had a letter from him asking me to procure him\nseveral catalogues, as he had the intention of buying a motor car.\nMy brother lives in California. The medium knew I had relations in\nCalifornia, but did not know about my brother, much less his name.\u201d\n\nIn the following messages, the raps were obtained with and without\ncontact.\n\n\u201cI had been anxious about my youngest brother, and had openly spoken of\nmy anxiety, saying I had reason to fear that my brother and his tutor\ndid not get on well together. One evening, during dinner, Chappe rapped\nout the signal intimating his presence; the raps resounded on the table\nclose to where I was sitting, and at a distance of about three feet\nfrom the medium. Asked if he had anything to say, Chappe dictated: _Il\nfaut laisser le petit en repos loin de son tuteur_. I wish to draw\nattention to the last word, for it marks a curious error. When speaking\nto the medium of my brother, I always made use of the word _tuteur_,\nwhereas, in French, I should have said _pr\u00e9cepteur_. The two words have\nquite a different meaning; my brother was not with a _tuteur_ in the\nFrench sense of the word, but with a _pr\u00e9cepteur_.\n\n\u201cNow, a short time before, my brother had shown symptoms of a cardiac\naffection, and was undergoing a special treatment. Neither the medium\nnor Dr. Maxwell knew of this; they thought my brother was in the best\nof health, as indeed he appeared to be.\n\n\u201cAfter the last communication had been received, I asked Chappe if my\nbrother\u2019s health was good. My question was: _Est-ce que sa sant\u00e9 est\nbonne?_ The answer came: _Arythmie du c\u0153ur; s\u00e9parez-le de son tuteur_.\n\n\u201cAt the time, I myself did not know the precise nature of the weakness.\nI simply knew that my brother had had two attacks of spasms of the\nheart; but, I repeat, I had not mentioned this fact to any one. A\nfortnight after receiving the foregoing communication, I had a letter\nfrom the doctor charged to watch over my brother, in which letter the\nterm \u2018arythmie\u2019 was employed for the first time, in connection with\nhim.\n\n\u201cMy family thought of sending my brother to the Pyrenees for a few\nmonths\u2019 rest and change. I asked Chappe if he could tell me what\nwas contemplated; he replied: _Peut-\u00eatre ferez-vous bien de garaer\nRaoul aupr\u00e8s de vous; dans deux mois, Paris, campagne, Hy\u00e8res, Ile,\nArcachon_; all so many efforts, one would say, to read my thoughts\u2014but\nwithout success.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cA seance had been arranged for at which Dr. Maxwell, Professor Richet\nand I were to be present. Much had been expected from this seance,\nfor there were many signs of ample force. The raps were certainly\nexcellent, and, with a great show of dignity, asked: _Permettez-vous \u00e0\nun ami de_ (mentioning my name) _de venir_? Permission being given, it\nwas announced that \u201cGeorges R.\u201d wished to speak with me.\n\n\u201cI know of no Georges R.; the medium, however, was aware of the fact\nthat R. is one of my family names.\n\n\u201cThe raps (\u2018Georges R.\u2019) continued: _Votre p\u00e8re a eu un accident de\nvoiture; foie tr\u00e8s contusionn\u00e9; soaisr chute; (soir sa chute?)_.\n\n\u201cNo accident of any kind has happened to my father either at the time\nof receiving the above message, or since.\n\n\u201cThe rapping ceased abruptly, when this last message was given, and no\nfurther phenomena occurred at this particular seance.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cAt a short seance at which Dr. Maxwell and I were present, the medium\nsaid he could see Chappe walking about the room with a lady on his\narm; the lady was dressed in mourning. Raps accompanied the medium\u2019s\nwords and, the name of the lady in mourning being asked for, the word\n\u2018Marguerite\u2019 was dictated. Asked why she was in mourning, the raps\nreplied that it was for identity\u2019s sake, because \u2018Marguerite\u2019 was\nin mourning when she died. (_Signe identit\u00e9\u2014en deuil quand elle est\nmorte._) Asked for the name of the person for whom Marguerite was in\nmourning, when she died, the raps replied: \u2018Katey.\u2019\n\n\u201cNow, a favourite aunt of mine died a few years ago, whose name was\nMarguerite. My mother died a few weeks before my aunt; consequently my\naunt was in mourning for my mother, when she died. My mother\u2019s name was\nKate, but my aunt always called her Katey.\n\n\u201cI can affirm never having spoken of these details either to Dr.\nMaxwell or to the medium.\n\n\u201cDuring this seance it was Dr. Maxwell who spelt out the alphabet.\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nI will give one more quotation from Dr. X.\u2019s notes:\u2014\u201cChappe was\nrapping so noisily and abundantly one morning that, in default of\nother phenomena being forthcoming, I asked him if he would kindly\ntell me what was man\u2019s occupation after death. My exact question was:\n_Qu\u2019est-ce qu\u2019on fait dans l\u2019Au del\u00e0?_ Very quickly and unhesitatingly\nthe raps answered: _On est dans ravissement profond, et occup\u00e9\nuniquement de faire le bonheur de tous ceux qui sont chers et le souci\nd\u2019apporter des preuves d\u2019une vie future._\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn the exposition of the few facts in this, as well as in the other\nseries, we are trying to throw every light in our power upon the agency\noperating behind these messages. This necessitates personal details\nhere and there which, we hope, the reader will forgive. On every\noccasion, unless the reverse has been stated, M. Meurice was thoroughly\nwide-awake. It was often he who spelt out the alphabet, especially when\nthe observers had reason to suspect a name\u2014or the nature of the message\nto be given. He always permitted a constant and careful scrutiny of his\nevery movement, when the raps were produced with contact. When raps\nwere forthcoming without contact, they were given wherever requested,\n_e.g._ on a chair, the floor, the centre of the table or under such\nor such an observer\u2019s hand; in these cases the vibration was easily\nperceived. When the pencil was used, care was taken\u2014by holding M.\nMeurice\u2019s hand and the pencil\u2014to make sure of the fact that neither\nhand nor pencil stirred, while the raps were being produced.\n\nThere can be no doubt whatever of the authenticity of the raps, which\ngave the messages laid before the reader in this chapter.\n\nAll things considered, the chances seem great that these raps are not\naccidental, but significant of some fact in the complex and obscure\nstructure of human personality\u2014dare we say in the structure even of the\nCosmos?\n\n\nB. TELEKINETIC PHENOMENA\n\nThe following is Dr. Maxwell\u2019s _compte rendu_ of some telekinetic\nphenomena, which were forthcoming on the 25th and 26th July 1903. These\nnotes were written immediately after the phenomena occurred.\n\n\n  \u201c_25th July 1903_; 4.30 P.M.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice and I were working in a small study in the former\u2019s house.\nThe room is about eight feet long by eight feet wide. On the NE. side\nis a window; SW. a door; NW. a glass door. The window was closed, and\nthe shutters were half closed on account of the excessive heat and\nglaring light. The furniture consists of: a writing-table in the E.\ncorner; a divan against the NE. wall; a low chair in the S. corner; a\nrectangular table in front of the couch or divan; a small hexagonal\ntable near the rectangular table; a gilt cane chair in front of the\nwindow; a wooden stool in the W. corner; a chimney-piece in the N.\ncorner; an armchair in front of the rectangular table; a small gilt\nchair was between the latter table and the divan. It was drawn under\nthe table.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\u201cM. Meurice and I had been writing (correcting proof sheets) on the\nhexagonal table. M. Meurice was sitting on the edge _A_ of the divan, I\nwas at _B_ opposite him, when raps were heard on the writing-table\u2014with\nwhich M. Meurice had no contact. I measured a distance of two feet\nbetween him and the writing-table. At the same time, raps in quantity,\nbut of feeble tonality, resounded on the hexagonal table.\n\n\u201cWe removed our writing materials on to the rectangular table, for the\nsake of more room. The raps gradually ceased; they died out altogether\non the writing-table and began, though very feebly, to resound on the\nrectangular table. We worked for an hour and then rested a while. M.\nMeurice sat back on the couch, putting one of his feet on the chair\nbetween the divan and the table. Raps immediately resounded on the\nchair. I went and sat down beside my friend, and observed that the raps\n_appeared_ to come from his foot; I found that they were synchronous\nwith our movements; they also responded correctly to my mental and\nspoken request.\n\n\u201cI left the couch and sat on the armchair in front of the rectangular\ntable. M. Meurice drew his legs under him and sat on the divan,\ntailor-fashion. We decided to try to move the gilt chair standing\nbetween the divan and the table. There was a space of fourteen inches\nbetween the divan and the chair. I sat on the armchair. M. Meurice\nbrought his hands towards the chair, palms facing the chair; he kept\nhis hands still at a distance of seven to eight inches from the back of\nthe chair; I stretched out my arms above the table towards the chair.\nWhen I contracted my muscles, the arms and hands extended, the chair\nmoved. The amplitude of the movement was very small, scarcely a quarter\nof an inch, but the movement was abrupt and decided. It was a jerk,\nwhich took place shortly after the muscular contraction.\n\n\u201cThis movement was reproduced three times under the same conditions.\n\n\u201cThen M. Meurice and I changed places. I sat on the couch in the\nsame way as he had sat; M. Meurice made the same movements I had\nmade. The chair moved twice; the amplitude of the movement was much\ngreater than with me; the chair was displaced an inch each time. After\nthe second movement was produced, M. Meurice said he felt tired; he\nlifted his arms above his head and stretched himself; that is to say,\nhe pulled himself upwards; his feet did not go near the table. While\nstretching himself, the chair suddenly\u2014for the third time\u2014displaced\nitself a distance of an inch. The latter movement coincided with the\nextension of the back, at the moment when the muscles of the grooves\nand _lombo-sacr\u00e9_ contracted.\n\n\u201cThe direction of these movements was from the table towards the couch;\nthe chair receded from the table, whether M. Meurice or I sat on the\ncouch.\n\n\u201cSeeing how easily these movements without contact were being obtained,\nwe went downstairs into the dining-room with the object of trying to\nobtain some phenomena, which M. Meurice had obtained when alone the\nprevious day; namely, the attraction of wine-glasses.\n\n\u201cI took a liqueur-glass, and put it on the mantelpiece in the\ndining-room. M. Meurice made some passes around the glass, then put his\ntwo hands together meeting them at the finger-tips; he drew his hands\nslowly away, the glass followed his hands by jerks.\n\n\u201cWe then returned to the study. I sat down on the divan and prepared\nto resume my writing. M. Meurice was standing near the mantelpiece. In\na few minutes I heard him say he was attracting the chessmen. I got\nup and watched carefully. His hands were in the position described\nabove in connection with the liqueur-glass; he drew his hands slowly\nbackwards, and the red king followed his hands; this tiny piece is\nabout half an inch in height and a quarter of an inch in diameter.\nThe movement was slow and gliding. M. Meurice tried to reproduce the\nphenomena but failed. He said he was tired and would rest a while. In\na few minutes he renewed his efforts. I stood close beside him; again\nfailure. After a few more minutes of rest, he tried again\u2014I watching\nhim closely all the while\u2014and, this time, succeeded in attracting\nthe same piece\u2014the red king. The piece followed the direction of his\nfingers, as before, slowly and smoothly.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice again complained of feeling tired, and I urged him not\nto try for any more phenomena, but to lie down and rest. I went to\nmy writing once more, but M. Meurice was restless, and told me he\nwanted to try to move an empty beer-bottle, which was standing on the\nmantelpiece.\n\n\u201cHe took it from the mantelpiece and put it on the wooden stool. He\nknelt down in front of the stool, and made the same man\u0153uvres with his\nhands as for the liqueur-glass and the chessman. I remained sitting on\nthe divan, a distance of nearly seven feet from the stool. M. Meurice,\nafter the above-mentioned man\u0153uvres, _i.e._ passing his hands several\ntimes round the bottle, joined his hands together at the finger-tips,\nand drew them gently backwards as before. The bottle moved four times,\neach time from two to three inches.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice then said he felt sea-sick; and he was obliged to lie down\nfor a while. He soon rose up, however, and said he wanted to make\nsomething else move. He took a piece of sealing-wax, tried several\ntimes, but failed to move it. Thereupon I persuaded him to cease making\nfurther attempts.\u201d\n\n\n  \u201c_26th July._\n\n\u201cPhenomena of attraction similar to yesterday, occurred this afternoon.\nWe were in M. Meurice\u2019s bedroom. It was four o\u2019clock, the window was\nopen, the shutters were ajar; the light was excellent.\n\n\u201cThe mantelpiece is covered with plush. On one corner there is a\nstatuette in porcelain representing the Thorn; the child is seated\non a chair, and is pulling a thorn out of his foot; the statuette\nis five inches high. M. Meurice told me that he was going to make\nthis statuette move. I stood near him, with one hand on his back;\nI stooped down, and looked fixedly and narrowly at the statuette\nduring the whole operation. M. Meurice proceeded exactly as in the\npreceding experiments, and when his hands\u2014joined together at the\nfinger-tips\u2014were at a distance of six inches from the statuette,\nthe latter swayed, bent slowly forward, and fell over. I affirm most\npositively, that there was no hair or thread or normal link of any kind\nwhatsoever between the statuette and the medium\u2019s hands. I passed my\nhand all round the statuette, before the movement, during the movement,\nand after the movement; I thus verified by touch, what my eyes were\nwitnessing.\n\n\u201cNow, after M. Meurice had made some passes with his hands around the\nstatuette (without touching it, be it remembered), and when, after\nputting his hands together at the finger-tips, he slowly withdrew them,\nI heard a slight noise, like the rubbing of a hair on the statuette;\nat the _same_ time the latter swayed; this creaking sound did not\ncontinue, and only accompanied the first movements of the statuette.\nAgain I affirm, that there was no hair or thread whatsoever connecting\nthe medium\u2019s hands with the statuette.\n\n\u201cAfter the production of this phenomenon, we decided to have a dark\nseance, for the purpose of trying to obtain luminous phenomena.\nI closed the shutters and pulled down a dark blind, especially\nconstructed for dark seances. While I was doing this, M. Meurice\ncontinued trying to attract various articles on the chimney-piece.\nSeeing this I drew the dark blind away again and let in more light,\nin order to be able to see clearly. I took a stick of sealing-wax,\nbroke off a piece and put it on a small mirror, which was lying on\nthe mantelpiece. In this case M. Meurice did not make any preliminary\npasses as with the statuette, beer-bottle and liqueur-glass; he simply\njoined his hands together in front of the sealing-wax; the sealing-wax\nfollowed his hands several times, in fact every backward movement drew\nthe wax after the hands; he finally drew the sealing-wax to the edge of\nthe mantelpiece, when it fell to the floor.\n\n\u201cThe seance which followed was unproductive. A few raps were heard,\nbut that was all. After the seance, we lighted up the room, opened\nthe window, and M. Meurice again tried to move the sealing-wax. He\nsucceeded with great facility, the sealing-wax following every movement\nof his fingers.\n\n\u201cBy sight and touch, I assured myself of the absence of any link\nbetween the wax and M. Meurice\u2019s hands. I solemnly affirm that no such\nlink of any kind existed.\n\n\u201cI desired to write a letter, and, thinking that the phenomena were\nprobably exhausted for the time being, I begged M. Meurice to allow\nme to get off my letter. I was in the act of writing, when he said\nhe felt he could move another article. I watched him: he took up\nanother statuette, which stands a foot high; he put this statuette on\na small table which was near me; he kept his hands open, palms turned\ntowards the object in question. He moved his hands slowly backwards\nand forwards, and I observed the statuette bend forward when his hands\nreceded, and bend backwards when his hands approached it. His hands\nwere never nearer than ten inches to the object.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice then complained of feeling unwell, and threw himself on\nhis bed. His hands touched the head of the bed, on the woodwork of\nwhich raps at once resounded. Chappe gave his signal, and dictated:\n\u2018B. MENAGEZ.\u2019 Questioned as to what he meant, he said to take care\nof the medium, and not to take advantage of the power. We ceased\nexperimenting, therefore.\n\n\u201cI have a few remarks to make concerning the above phenomena. When I\nheld my friend\u2019s hands, I obtained nothing. M. Meurice says he saw\na thread, or rather a sheath of filaments, pass from his fingers on\nto the object of experimentation. As a rule, he made passes over the\nobject he wished to move, as though he were putting a thread of some\nkind around it. He did not always do this, _e.g._ if the object to be\nmoved were light and small, he made no passes over it.\n\n\u201cThis movement would be very suspicious, if observation were\nsuperficial; but apart from the purely scientific spirit in which\nM. Meurice views his own phenomena, the severe control I exercised\ndemonstrated the absence of any material link whatever.\u201d\n\n\n_More Extracts from Dr. Maxwell\u2019s Notes_\n\n\n  \u201c_3rd June 1903._\n\n\u201cA movement without contact was forthcoming this afternoon. I placed a\ntable upside down upon a linen sheet. M. Meurice and I put our hands\non the sheet, some distance away from the table. The latter turned\ncompletely over; the movement was performed slowly and gently. It was\nat four o\u2019clock, the sunlight was streaming in through the open window.\n\n\u201cWe also obtained the movement of a heavy wooden stool with slight\ncontact. M. Meurice and I were sitting on a couch, the stool was near\nus; abundant raps were heard on the stool. M. Meurice took up a piece\nof linen, put one end on the stool, putting a framed picture on top of\nit to keep it in place; he put the other end on his knees. In a few\nminutes, the stool swayed about and finally moved a distance of three\ninches away from M. Meurice. I watched him well and can affirm he moved\nneither hand nor foot during the production of this phenomena.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice experienced much fatigue after this movement. It occurred\nat half-past four; the light, I repeat, was excellent.\u201d\n\n\n  \u201c_11th June 1903._\n\n\u201cIt appears that M. Meurice attracted several objects\u2014pieces of bread,\nforks, etc.\u2014yesterday during lunch. But he could not reproduce the\nphenomena in my presence. We had, however, raps and numerous slight\nmovements without contact\u2014raps almost _ad libitum_. Automatic writing\nfollowed, but contained nothing of interest; it was impossible to\nobtain replies to mental questions: subjectivity.\n\n\u201c_P.S._\u2014I am adding a postscript to my letter from the medium\u2019s house;\nfor we have just received some fine phenomena. The raps were, as usual,\nvery abundant; but we also received two fine series of parakinetic\nmovements.\n\n\u201c1. I brought a small mahogany table up to the sofa on which M. Meurice\nhad thrown himself. I sat down beside him, taking a shawl which I threw\nover him and the table. Instantly, raps resounded on the table. M.\nMeurice could not possibly have touched the table without my noticing\nit.\n\n\u201cThe table swayed about, now on this side, now on that; and then\ndragged itself towards me by jerks, first one side, then the other.\nWhen I squeezed M. Meurice\u2019s hand or gave him a slight tap on the\nshoulder, there was a synchronous movement in the table. The latter\nalso moved in response to request. Then it gently raised itself up on\nthe two feet which were nearest to me; this side lost contact with the\nfloor and rose to a height of four inches.\n\n\u201c2. We were both carefully watching this interesting phenomenon, when I\nheard raps on another table which was about a foot away from the sofa\nand two feet away from the table with which we were experimenting.\nThis second table had no contact whatsoever either with the sofa or\nwith the shawl: it was isolated. Hearing the raps, I looked at the\ntable and saw it rise up, or to be more correct, sway about\u2014only\nthree of its legs touching the ground. M. Meurice had not noticed\nthis phenomenon; when I drew his attention to it, he became suddenly\nnervous, and complained of feeling tired. I pointed out to him how much\nthis sensation of fatigue was subjective and out of all proportion with\nthe energy expended. But new or unexpected phenomena always upset him;\nhe experiences a sort of anguish blended with something like fear in\npresence of a new phenomenon.\n\n\u201cThese movements of the second table lasted for several minutes; they\nwere synchronous with our own movements and muscular contractions, but\nwere also forthcoming at request. We were operating in broad daylight.\nChappe informed us, by raps, that he was the operator on this occasion.\u201d\n\n\n  \u201c_11th July 1904._\n\n\u201cI was obliged to make an early call on our medium this morning.\nLucky visit! for he was in a working mood and gave two fine movements\nwithout contact. We began by sitting at a table, where we received raps\nby means of the lead-pencil; the words: _Put yourselves against the\ndaylight_ were rapped out. We did not understand what this meant, and\nceased experimenting. We went downstairs and walked about in the garden\nfor a few minutes. When we went back to the study, we resumed our\nseance. M. Meurice sat down on the divan and I in front of him. Raps\nwithout contact dictated: _Lie down for a while, we want to try for a\nphysical effect_.\n\n\u201cThe raps directed that I was to lie down on the sofa and M. Meurice\nwas to take my place. We followed these directions.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice said he felt \u2018queer\u2019; that his hands seemed to be full of\nhair, or rather of spider\u2019s web, and he tried to rub the feeling away.\nI got up and took down from the mantelpiece the statuette of St. John,\nthe history of which you know.[29] He tried to attract it, but without\nresults. We waited, the spider\u2019s web sensation returned, and this time\nI prevented him from rubbing it off; he drew his hands together over\nand then in front of the statuette and\u2014his fingers at a distance of\nfive inches from the object\u2014attracted it to him. The statuette moved\ntwo inches.\n\n      [29] \u201cConcerning the statuette: the medium was\u2014two months\n      previous to the seance here spoken of\u2014given the catalogue of\n      a sale of antiquities to be held at Bordeaux. When going to\n      bed he took the catalogue to glance over it; but he says he\n      was so sleepy, that he did not get any further than the first\n      page. In the night, he dreamt that he was to buy No. 256 in\n      the catalogue, which\u2014he was told in his dream\u2014was the Christ\n      of whom he had seen the vision a few months previously, when\n      Madame Stephens was with us. (See Series C, page 349.)\n\n      \u201cWhen the medium awakened, he looked up No. 256, and found\n      that it was an ancient wooden statuette of St. John the\n      Baptist.\u201d\u2014_Note by Dr. X._\n\n\u201cM. Meurice felt ill after this movement, and was obliged to lie down\nfor a while. He soon got up, and tried again. But I stopped him,\nfearing he might over-tire himself; though the statuette did not move\nforward this time, it swayed about.\u201d\n\n\n  \u201c_18th July 1904._\n\n\u201cOn Thursday morning, M. Meurice again succeeded in attracting the\nstatuette of St. John. He told me he felt the cobwebby sensation,\nwhich\u2014in his case\u2014coincides with telekinetic phenomena; he took the\nstatuette in question and placed it on a table. He then proceeded as\nthough he were putting something behind the object, making several\npasses with his hands all round it. As he was drawing his hands away\nfrom the statuette\u2014they had reached a distance of nine inches\u2014I heard\nsomething like the crackling of a hair or silken thread on the wood of\nthe statuette, and then the latter moved.\n\n\u201cThe excellent conditions of light under which the experiment took\nplace, the control of sight and touch which I most carefully exercised,\nthe proximity of the statuette to my eyes, all this renders the absence\nof any hair or thread most certain for me. This is the second time I\nhave heard this scraping sound.\n\n\u201cM. Meurice was extremely fatigued after the production of this\nphenomenon, and fainted. On recovering himself, he insisted on trying\nonce more, and succeeded in making the statuette sway about.\n\n\u201cThe day following this experience, he attracted several small\narticles\u2014wine-glasses, bread, etc.\u2014near his reach on the\nluncheon-table. I was not present, however.\n\n\u201cYou perceive how very suspicious the phenomena sometimes _appear_ to\nbe. Nothing short of actual observation could demonstrate the absence\nof a connecting link of some kind between the medium\u2019s hands and the\nobject in movement.\u201d\n\n\nC. LUMINOUS PHENOMENA\n\n_By Dr. X._\n\n\u201cFor about eighteen months, Dr. Maxwell has been endeavouring to turn\nthe phenomena in the direction of luminosities or materialisations.\n\n\u201cWith that object in view, he has had a light portable cabinet\nconstructed. This fragile apparatus consists of eight pieces of\npinewood fitting into one another by means of hooks. When put\ntogether, there is just enough space inside the cabinet to allow of\nthe introduction of a small, straight-backed chair; a person sitting\nthereon, finds himself in contact with the back and sides of the\ncabinet, and his knees against the door. A large curtain of purple\ncloth has been made, which is thrown over the cabinet, covering it\ncompletely. The curtain is buttoned over the door.\n\n\u201cThe luminous phenomena already obtained with this medium and spoken of\nby Dr. Maxwell on pages 152-5, were sufficient grounds for hoping that\npatience and perseverance might, finally, obtain happy results capable\nof being repeated.\n\n\u201cFor more than a year nothing demonstratively objective was\nforthcoming. In the darkness, one often imagined one could see clouds\nof vapour moving about near the cabinet; but there was nothing to prove\nthat this appearance was anything more than an optical illusion. On\nthese occasions, the medium frequently complained of a disagreeable\nsensation on his hands and face, as though he were caught in a spider\u2019s\nweb. He has also said, that he perceived from time to time an odour of\nphosphorus or ozone in the cabinet; the medium has been the only one of\nthe experimenters to notice this odour, so far.\n\n\u201cWhenever I have been present at these attempts, I have observed that\nthey were accompanied by complete cessation of all other phenomena,\nsuch as visions, raps, telekinesis. Until November 1904, this\napparently negative result was about all that was obtained at these\ndark seances.\n\n\u201cDuring the first week in November, the medium being in good form,\nand the \u2018force\u2019 abundant, it was decided to devote a few days, which\nProfessor Richet was able to dispose of, to an effort to obtain\nluminous phenomena.\n\n\u201cThree seances in all were held. There were present, Professor Richet,\nDr. Maxwell, M. Meurice, and myself. The seances were held in a very\nsmall room on the top floor of the medium\u2019s house.\n\n\u201cThe following is a diagram showing the disposition of the room in\nwhich the three seances, of which I am giving the _compte rendu_, took\nplace.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\u201cThe door, which was shut, leads into another room, the two doors of\nwhich\u2014leading into a corridor\u2014were locked during the experiment. The\nwindow and shutters of this adjoining room were closed, and the room\ndarkened, so that no light therefrom could penetrate under the door of\nthe seance-room.\n\n\u201cThe seances were held between 5 and 6.30 o\u2019clock in the afternoon.\nTotal darkness was obtained by closing the outside shutters and\nthe window, and by hanging a large black curtain\u2014kept for the\npurpose\u2014across the window. No ray of light was visible on the sides of\nthe window; the position of the latter could be guessed at during the\nseance\u2014simply because we knew where it was\u2014but could not be perceived.\nThe darkness was profound. A candle and box of matches were placed on\ntable _A_. When the experimenters were seated, the candle was blown out.\n\n\u201c_Results._\u2014Tuesday, 1st November 1904. The four experimenters were\nseated around the table (see diagram); the medium (who is not marked\non the diagram, because he was in the cabinet whenever phenomena\nwere forthcoming) was seated between Dr. Maxwell (_M_) and Professor\nRichet (_R_), with his back to the cabinet: No results\u2014nothing\nwhatever\u2014neither raps nor anything else.\n\n\u201cThe medium goes into the cabinet. After an interval of a quarter of an\nhour, _M_ and _X_ think they see milky-looking clouds floating about\nnear the cabinet, but they are unable to affirm the objectivity of this\nappearance. At the close of the seance, feeble raps are heard on the\ntable; the raps dictate that Professor Richet is to sit in the cabinet\non the following day.\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n_Second Seance_\n\n\n  \u201c_Wednesday, 2nd November 1904._\n\n\u201cProfessor Richet sits in the cabinet. The medium sits at the spot\nmarked _M_ on the diagram; Dr. Maxwell sits at _R_. After sitting\nin this way for a quarter of an hour\u2014during which time nothing\noccurred\u2014the medium asked to be allowed to go into the cabinet.\nProfessor Richet then sits at _R_, and Dr. Maxwell at _M_. Almost\nimmediately _M_ and _X_ see a phosphorescent, milky-looking, amorphous\nlight, of about six inches in diameter in parts, floating about outside\nthe door of the cabinet. It was decidedly objective, lasted for about\none minute, and gradually disappeared.\n\n\u201c_R_ did not see the light.\n\n\u201c[From an experiment made on the following day, we have all three\nreason to believe, that Professor Richet did not see the luminosities\nat this seance because of his position. Let it be borne in mind that\n_X_ was in direct line of vision with the door of the cabinet, and that\n_M_ was also favourably placed for observation. These facts did not\nstrike us until the seance was over, and _R_\u2019s inability to see what\n_M_ and _X_ affirmed were objective lights was incomprehensible at the\ntime being.]\n\n\u201cWhen the medium took Professor Richet\u2019s place in the cabinet, he said\nthe latter appeared to him to be all lighted up; when Dr. Maxwell and I\nsaw the light outside the cabinet, the medium declared he was in utter\ndarkness. During the production of this phenomenon, M. Meurice was\nheard to breathe heavily; he said he did not know why he felt obliged\nto do this; he complained of feeling suddenly very cold; at the same\ntime, a cold perspiration broke out on his forehead. He also said that\nhe felt the need of stretching himself and yawning.\n\n\u201cAn interval of ten minutes now passed. Then _M_ and _X_ saw an\namorphous luminosity gradually form in front of the cabinet, and\nmake slight movements in the direction of the table at which the\nexperimenters were sitting. _M_, by the light of this luminosity, sees\nthe curtain slowly open, and close again as the light disappears.\n\n\u201c_R_ sees nothing definite. He thinks he sees a cloud-like substance,\nbut is not sure of its objectivity (because of his position?).\n\n\u201cAs in the case of the first luminosity, so for this second one, M.\nMeurice declares that the cabinet is lighted up within, becoming dark\nwhen _M_ and _X_ see the light. He has the same sensations of cold. In\naddition, he says he feels tired, and asks to be allowed to discontinue\nthe seance.\n\n\u201cNo odour of phosphorus was perceptible, although the lights we\nobserved had something of a phosphorescent appearance; but I think it\nwould be more correct were I to compare what I saw on this occasion\nwith the Milky Way; in fact, these luminosities presented an appearance\nalmost exactly similar to that presented by the Orion nebul\u00e6, when seen\nthrough the telescope.\n\n\u201cThe medium looked pale and tired, when we closed the seance, but he\nquickly recovered his vitality, and during dinner\u2014scarcely an hour\nlater\u2014some fine telekinetic movements of a heavy walnut dining-table\nwere forthcoming in, of course, full light. Seeing the table move,\napparently of its own accord, we joined hands two feet above the table,\nand succeeded in making it follow the direction our hands took: now an\ninch to the right, now three inches to the left, etc.; we had, finally,\na strong, rotatory movement of six inches. The medium\u2019s knees and feet\nwere under Professor Richet\u2019s observation, while these movements were\nbeing produced.\u201d\n\n\n_Third Seance_\n\n\n  \u201c_Thursday, 3rd November 1904._\n\n\u201cFor this seance, because of Professor Richet\u2019s inability to see the\nlights, which were visible to _M_ and _X_ at the preceding seance, the\nexperimenters change their places, and sit in the following manner:\u2014\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\u201cProfessor Richet goes into the cabinet at the medium\u2019s request,\nthe latter takes _R_\u2019s place at the table. After an interval of ten\nminutes, the medium goes into the cabinet and _R_ takes his new place\nat the table.\n\n\u201cAlmost immediately, lights are seen moving about on the door of the\ncabinet. _R_, _M_, and _X_ all see these lights. _M_ does not see the\nfirst two lights, which _R_ and _X_ mention seeing. He moves closer\nto _R_, and then sees distinctly. _R_ has the impression that a ray\nof light from twelve to eighteen inches long, and varying from one to\nthree inches wide, is placed at the opening in the curtains; he thinks\nhe sees the curtains held open, so to say, by the light.\n\n\u201cThe ray of light appears broader to _X_ than to _R_ and _M_. _X_\nsays he distinctly sees the curtains move, and open; he has the same\nimpression as _R_, namely that of the light holding the curtains apart.\n\n\u201cThis luminous ray was shown six times, at intervals of a few seconds\nonly. Its duration varied from ten seconds to a minute. In form, it was\nconstantly changing, though the long ray remained. _R_, _M_, and _X_\nhad the impression that the luminosity was forming around the ray. A\nlong, vertical streak of light was shown first of all; the succeeding\nlights appeared to be built up around this ray, which always remained\nthe centre of luminosity; _i.e._ the light, strong in the centre, died\naway to right and left, leaving no distinct outline to the luminosity\nwhich, besides being amorphous, was extremely mobile, though in a\nsense, fairly stationary. _R_, _M_, and _X_ saw slight differences\nin the shape of the lights, a fact which was perhaps due to their\nrelative positions; but all three agreed as to the vertical ray and the\n_general_ shape the luminosity appeared to be assuming.\n\n\u201cFrom time to time, M. Meurice complained of an oppressive, suffocating\nsensation, and said that he felt he must open the curtains, for a few\nseconds. Whenever he opened the curtains, _no lights were visible_. _M_\nand _X_ took hold of his hands when he opened the curtains, and closed\nthe latter themselves, when M. Meurice said he felt better.\n\n\u201cAt this seance, as before, the medium prepared us for each phenomenon,\nby announcing beforehand, that his cabinet was suddenly illuminated,\nand as suddenly darkened; the darkness inside corresponded to a\nluminosity outside the cabinet.\n\n\u201cThe six lights above mentioned were very distinct, and very luminous\n(phosphorescent).\n\n\u201cThe phenomena ceased for a few minutes. M. Meurice then asked to be\nallowed to change places with _X_. This is done; _X_ remains a quarter\nof an hour in the cabinet, during which time M. Meurice says he sees\nan oval-shaped light, about three times the size of an egg, floating\nabout on the curtains of the cabinet. _R_ and _M_ see nothing. The\nmedium returns to the cabinet, and _X_ resumes his seat. _Immediately_,\nlarge triangular-shaped luminosities are seen by _M_ and _R_ outside\nthe cabinet. _X_ has suddenly fallen asleep.\n\n\u201c_M_ and _R_ then see very mobile, amorphous lights, varying from\nthree to nine inches in diameter, floating about _X_\u2019s head for a few\nseconds; their luminosity is less great than that of the lights seen on\nthe curtains, but is sufficiently pronounced to light up _X_\u2019s forehead.\n\n\u201cThe phenomena again cease. _X_ awakens. M. Meurice asks Dr. Maxwell\nto change places with him. The doctor remains in the cabinet for ten\nminutes: no phenomena; M. Meurice returns to the cabinet, and _M_\nresumes his place at Professor Richet\u2019s left.\n\n\u201cVery quickly, the same phenomena as before occur. The luminous ray\nassumes a broad, oval-shaped appearance; it measures about ten or\ntwelve inches by about fifteen inches; it advances a few inches towards\nthe table, and then disappears, to show itself, a few seconds later,\nlarger, rounder in shape, and more brilliant. _M_ and _X_ think they\ncan distinguish the outlines of a human face in this luminosity, but\n_R_ says it appears amorphous to him.\n\n\u201cShortly after this, _M_ and _X_ see a faintly luminous ball of\nabout six inches in diameter, form outside the cabinet,\u2014on the\ncurtain\u2014approach and float over the table above the experimenters\u2019\nhands. _R_ sees this also, but compares it to a luminous fog. _R_\ncannot affirm the correctness of his last perception.\n\n\u201cThereupon the seance terminated.\n\n\u201cDuring the production of these phenomena, M. Meurice complained of\nexcessive cold; we heard him shivering, and his teeth chattering.\nHe yawned frequently, and stretched himself repeatedly; he breathed\nheavily, and constantly complained of feelings of oppression and\nsea-sickness.\n\n\u201cWhen the seance was over, he complained of intense thirst and drank\nseveral glasses of water.\n\n\u201cThe weather on these three days was very fine, dry, and fresh.\n\n\u201cThe conclusions arrived at by those who were present at these three\nseances, are:\u2014\n\n\u201c1. That the above-described luminosities were decidedly objective.\n\n\u201c2. That no oversight, no error of observation can explain them.\u201d\n\nThe above _compte rendu_ was drawn up by Professor Richet, Dr. Maxwell\nand Dr. X. at the end of the seances.\n\n\n_SERIES C_\n\n_By Dr. X._\n\nThe reader will, perhaps, kindly forgive a few probably uninteresting\nbut necessary details, before we enter upon the last series of these\npsycho-physical phenomena.\n\nMany reasons, chiefly of a family nature, have rendered a substitution\nof names imperative. In other respects, and as far as the phenomena\nthemselves are concerned, this series, like the foregoing, adheres\nmost strictly to the facts as they occurred.\n\nEarly in 1903 a gentleman, whom we will call Mr. Stephens, a man\noccupying a high official position in Europe, wished to marry a young\nSwedish girl. Mr. Stephens\u2019s parents having, it appears, made other\nmatrimonial arrangements for their son, were most strongly opposed to\nhis wishes. Mr. Stephens decided to follow his own inclinations, and\nwas quietly married to Miss Marie H. in the beginning of the year 1903.\nHe did not inform his family of the step he had taken, trusting to time\nand events for the strained relations between himself and his people to\ndisappear.\n\nA short time after his marriage, he received a peremptory call to a\nforeign country. It was impossible for his wife to accompany him, for\nthree excellent reasons: 1. Mr. Stephens was not supposed to have\na wife. 2. The spot he was ordered to is not a spot for a woman to\nvisit\u2014not being as yet civilised in the European sense of the word.\n3. Mrs. Stephens had reason to believe she might become a mother.\nMoreover, Mr. Stephens did not anticipate a longer absence than that of\nsix months.\n\nMr. and Mrs. Stephens had passed the interval between their marriage\nand the former\u2019s departure for abroad in Paris. They lived very\nquietly, and had trusted their secret to no one. In the dilemma into\nwhich this foreign mission plunged them, Mr. Stephens decided to make\na confidant of a particular friend, certain as he was that his secret\nwould be in safe custody. This friend was Professor Richet.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nDr. X. writes:\u2014\u201cMr. Stephens was anxious not to leave his wife alone\nin Paris, during his absence, and knowing that Professor Richet\nintended making a long series of experiments with Dr. Maxwell at W., he\ndecided, for diverse reasons, to send his wife to the same locality.\nThus it came about that Mrs. Stephens was invited by Professor Richet\nto join the investigating circle, a circle which it had been intended\nshould be strictly limited to Dr. Maxwell, Professor Richet, the medium\n[M. Meurice] and myself. _No_ one, save Professor Richet, knew of the\nforegoing details.\n\n\u201cWhen Mrs. Stephens arrived\u2014her husband came with her, but only\nremained a couple of days\u2014we saw a tall, slight, fair woman\nof twenty-two or twenty-three years of age,\u2014a quiet, gentle,\nrefined-looking woman. As she was, curiously enough, a spiritist, and\neven possessed \u2018intuitive\u2019 faculties of a pretty marked character,\u2014she\nhad had several veridical hallucinations, and occasionally indulged\nin spectrum gazing with fair results\u2014her addition to the circle was\nlooked upon by the other three members as having been decided by\nProfessor Richet, because of her nascent psychical powers. No suspicion\nof her situation\u2014of which even Mrs. Stephens herself was as yet\nuncertain\u2014ever dawned across our minds. She was an early riser, a good\nwalker, and apparently enjoyed the best of health. The most practical\nmedical eye could have detected nothing abnormal in her health.\n\n\u201cVery much had been expected from this particular series of\nexperiments; but, for reasons which are beyond our comprehension,\ncomparatively little was received. There was every evidence of abundant\nforce, and the medium was, at times, almost unnerved by our systematic\nlack of success.\n\n\u201cThroughout the whole of this particular series, more than ever did the\nagency manipulating the energy act like an independent intelligence,\ngiving striking evidence of power when it cared to do so and, when not\ndisposed to communicate, shutting off all communication most decidedly\nand completely.\u201d\n\nWe propose setting forth succinctly, but in detail, the results, both\nmediocre and superior\u2014_and just as they occurred_\u2014of these few\nweeks of experimentation, leaving it to the reader to bestow an acute\nanalysis upon them in his own guise. It was only as the time allotted\nthis series drew to a close, that the phenomena took a personal turn,\nand bore so directly, and so intimately, upon Mrs. Stephens\u2019s life.\n\nThe notes which are quoted in this series by Dr. X. are, without\nexception, Professor Richet\u2019s.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n  _First Seance. Time 8 to 10.30 p.m._\n\n\u201cBefore sitting down,\u201d continues Dr. X., \u201cDr. Maxwell had placed on the\ntable a small cardboard box, in which were two amethyst crystal balls.\n\n\u201cThe small table was six inches away from M. Meurice, and three inches\naway from Professor Richet. Contact had been purposely established\nbetween the two tables by means of a small white cloth\u2014which did not\ninterfere in any way with the control of eyesight. A bright, electric\nlight was burning.\n\n\u201cSeveral visions were described; they offered little interest. Then\nthe small table moved abruptly; it approached the seance table in\njerks, covering, in this manner, a distance of two and a half inches.\nIt was verified that no contact whatever existed, save that with\nthe white cloth; the latter was not touched by M. Meurice. Then for\nnearly an hour there was complete cessation of all phenomena, with the\nexception of perpetual rapping without intelligence. Thinking nothing\nmore would be forthcoming, Dr. Maxwell and Professor Richet rose\nfrom the table, and went out on to the balcony of the room in which\nthe seance was being held. Mrs. Stephens, the medium, and I remained\nat the table. I asked M. Meurice how he proceeded when he wished to\nattract articles\u2014up to that moment I had not witnessed this interesting\nphenomenon. He replied, \u2018I have an odd sensation in my fingers, and I\ndo this\u2019\u2014accompanying his words by certain hand movements; that is, he\ndrew his hands together in front of and quite close to the cardboard\nbox still lying on the table; he withdrew his hands\u2014joined together\nat the finger-tips\u2014very slowly, and, when the tips of his fingers\nwere at a distance of six inches from the box, the latter began to\nmove. It moved slowly and smoothly, without any jerking whatsoever,\nexactly as though it were being dragged across the table by a cord. I\nthought I perceived a tiny ray of light\u2014something like a dewy spider\u2019s\nweb with the sunlight gleaming through it\u2014connecting M. Meurice\u2019s\nfingers with the box, but this was probably an illusion, as there was\nnothing palpable to the touch. I passed my hands around the box, and\nall over the medium\u2019s hands and arms, but there was no thread of any\nkind whatever. M. Meurice said he had not seen the box move, though I\nobserved he appeared to be gazing fixedly at it during the operation,\nand though the box travelled a distance of six inches.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\u201cWithout leaving my seat I called in Dr. Maxwell and Professor Richet,\nand told them what had happened. M. Meurice was asked to try again,\nwhile Professor Richet put out some of the lights, thinking thus to\nhelp the force, which might have been too severely tried by its last\nefforts. I take the following extract from Professor Richet\u2019s notes:\u2014\n\n\u201c\u2018The same phenomenon was reproduced in my presence, but with less\nlight\u2014quite sufficient, however, to see everything, and every movement\ndistinctly. The box, slowly and without any apparent jerking, followed\nthe medium\u2019s fingers. I saw the box slowly displace itself, and drag\nitself over the plush-covered table, for a distance of nearly five\ninches. There was absolutely no contact of any kind whatsoever, either\nmediate or immediate. A strong gastric attack, quickly over, seized the\nmedium after this experience.\u2019[30]\n\n      [30] This phenomenon may be considered of such importance as\n      to necessitate Professor Richet\u2019s exact words being given; I\n      therefore append them:\u2014\n\n      \u2018Un autre ph\u00e9nom\u00e8ne d\u2019attraction tr\u00e8s remarquable. Une petite\n      bo\u00eete en carton carr\u00e9e de 0.02 de c\u00f4t\u00e9 environ est attir\u00e9e,\n      d\u2019abord en pleine lumi\u00e8re devant Dr. X. Le m\u00eame ph\u00e9nom\u00e8ne\n      s\u2019est reproduit devant moi avec beaucoup moins de lumi\u00e8re....\n      La bo\u00eete \u00e9tait lentement et sans secousse, pendant 2 \u00e0 4\n      secondes, attir\u00e9e par les doigts du m\u00e9dium et je l\u2019ai vue se\n      d\u00e9placer ainsi lentement, en tra\u00eenant sur la peluche jusqu\u2019\u00e0\n      12 centim\u00e8tres environ. Il n\u2019y a absolument aucun contact, ni\n      m\u00e9diat ni direct. (Crise gastrique forte et passag\u00e8re du m\u00e9dium\n      \u00e0 la suite de cette exp\u00e9rience.)\u2019\n\n\u201cOn resuming the seance the raps were asked, \u2018Who is rapping?\u2019\n\n\u201cReply: \u2018Antion.\u2019 \u2018Is it Antoine?\u2019\n\n\u201cReply: \u2018Yes, Antoine Br.\u2019 We arrested the communication at the letter\nr, understanding it to mean Antoine B. of _A Complex Case_, p. 214. The\nraps then predicted the death of Madame B.\u2019s second husband to take\nplace in March 1904.\u201d\n\n[This premonition was not realised. The gentleman in question is\nin remarkably good health to-day, April 1905; but, at that time,\nProfessor Richet was anxious about him. Dr. L. was utterly prostrated\nby the sudden death of his wife Madame B. Neither Dr. Maxwell nor the\nmedium knew that Antoine B.\u2019s widow had married a second time; nor\nwere they aware of Professor Richet\u2019s anxiety concerning Dr. L.\u2019s\nhealth.[31]\u2014_Note by the Translator._]\n\n      [31] \u2018Since the above was written, Dr. George L.\u2019s son,\n      Olivier, a youth of nineteen, has been killed in a railway\n      accident (see p. 234). Notwithstanding the errors, there is\n      a certain interest in the fact that the rapping force seemed\n      to sense some near tragic occurrence to some member of the\n      family. The raps first of all gave the surname L. of the person\n      destined to die shortly; it was only after much hesitation that\n      the name of George was given. The raps at first refused to give\n      the date, but, after much pressing, dictated March 1904.\n\n      \u2018Professor Richet did not tell any one that Madame X. had\n      already predicted the early death \u201cof one of the sons.\u201d\u2019\u2014_Note\n      by Dr. X._\n\n\u201cThe communicating intelligence, purporting to be Antoine B., was then\nasked: \u2018What was the nature of Madame B.\u2019s illness?\u2019 Reply: \u2018Ness,\nfoie.\u2019 (The doctors who attended Madame B. when she died have not been\nable to agree as to what the malady was, though they think it was\nprobably of a tubercular nature.)\n\n\u201cWe asked Antoine B. for another sign of identity, and received the\nword \u2018Carlos.\u2019 (Professor Richet considers it highly probable that\nevery one present knew that Antoine B. called him by that name.)\n\n\u201c\u2018When the raps dictated the name of Antoine B., the medium said he\nsaw standing near me a young man of about thirty years of age; he had\nvery soft blue eyes, and a short pointed beard. As far as it goes, this\napplies to my friend Antoine B.\u2019, says Professor Richet.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cThis first seance gave some fair results. We were now destined\nto pass several weeks without receiving a single phenomenon worth\nmentioning. We cannot account for this; though Dr. Maxwell is inclined\nto think, that the energy was spent in efforts made to obtain psychic\nphotographs. The weather was excellent, every one was in good, even\nexuberant, health and spirits; the circle was very homogeneous; no _a\npriori_ conditions had been laid down. Great things had been promised,\nbut the great things were not forthcoming; and the \u2018force\u2019 did not\ndeign to explain why, though it gave occasional signs of being to the\nfore, and ready to work if it cared to do so. For example, it would rap\nout as many airs and rhythms as requested, but took refuge in complete\nsilence, or disorder, or pleaded fatigue, if asked for telekinetic\nphenomena or intelligent messages. It acted like a lazy child asked to\naccomplish a possible but difficult task.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cPhotography was tried, but without success. On one of these occasions,\nwhen M. Meurice was re-entering his room after having sat for\nphotography, he heard footsteps beside him, and had the vision of a\nform which interposed itself between himself and the door, as though\ndesirous of preventing him from entering his room. He heard the words:\n\u2018Pardon, je n\u2019ai qu\u2019un moment, vous avez d\u00e9j\u00e0 entendu parler de moi; je\nsuis Antoine. Je viens voir mon fils.\u2019 ... He then perceived the form of\nan old man, clean-shaven save for short whiskers; he was wearing the\ncrimson robe of a magistrate. The hallucination quickly disappeared.\n\n\u201cNo one, save Professor Richet, knew that this day was the anniversary\nof the death of his maternal grandfather, whose father\u2019s name happened\nto be Antoine. But we were all aware that Professor Richet had received\nvarious communications purporting to emanate from these two ancestors\nof his. It was also known that his grandfather had presided over the\nlaw-courts at Paris.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cOn one occasion, we had all five made an excursion into the country:\nand here I quote from Professor Richet\u2019s notes:\u2014\u2018Coming home\u2014it was\nmoonlight, and still twilight\u2014we got down from the carriage\u2014a private\nomnibus\u2014to walk a while. Dr. Maxwell and M. Meurice lagged behind,\nand Dr. X., Mrs. S., and I got into the carriage again, before they\nhad caught us up. As she was stepping in, Mrs. S. told me she felt as\nthough a woman were running behind her, and were helping her into the\ncarriage; seated, Mrs. S. continued to perceive this vision; it was\nwearing a hood on its head, and a cross on its breast; the vision\nbent its head over Mrs. S.\u2019s hand, pressing its teeth on it \u201cas though\nto show she had died in agony, stabbed to death,\u201d said Mrs. S. When\nDr. Maxwell and M. Meurice rejoined us, the former told me, in an\nundertone, that M. Meurice had just had a vision of a woman running\nbehind Mrs. S.; the vision was wearing a hood on its head. M. Meurice\nand Mrs. S. continued to see this vision for above five minutes longer,\nwhen they both saw it disappear into a clump of trees. M. Meurice\nand Mrs. S. communicated their impressions to Dr. Maxwell and myself\nrespectively.\n\n\u201c\u2018A few minutes afterwards, they both had another simultaneous vision.\nMrs. S. saw a man astride one of the carriage-horses; M. Meurice, with\nan identical description of dress, saw a man not seated on, but running\nbeside, the same horse holding the reins. He thought it was Chappe.\nThen everything disappeared.\n\n\u201c\u2018Neither visionary communicated their impressions to the other.\u2019\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cException made of the attractions of the box and table, the foregoing\nresults will probably be considered as demonstrative of nothing in\nparticular. We were now to receive something more interesting.\n\n\u201cLet it be said, _en passant_, that Mrs. Stephens never once saw the\nmedium alone. There had not been the slightest break in her reserve.\nAnd all, save Professor Richet and herself, continued to think she\nhad been invited by Professor Richet solely because of her psychical\npowers. M. Meurice sometimes remarked, seeking a reason for the\ninexplicable failure of the experiments, that he believed the cause\nlay in a super-abundance of power, that the psychic force was too\ngreat, that Mrs. S. gave forth too much power, etc.\n\n\u201cNow, early one morning, three weeks after we had begun this series,\nMrs. Stephens remarked to Professor Richet that [I again quote from\nProfessor Richet\u2019s notes] \u2018during the night she had been thinking a\ngreat deal about the Christ, and had said to herself, if the spirits of\nthe deceased can appear to man, why not the Christ? And she said she\nhad asked for a sign to be given her that this could be. Mrs. Stephens\nhad scarcely pronounced these words, when Dr. Maxwell came into the\nsitting-room and said: \u201cI have just seen M. Meurice, he had a vision\nwhile I was conversing with him. He said he perceived the form of a\nman with short hair and beard; a halo of light behind him, a circle\nof gold on his head; he was dressed in white; M. Meurice says it was\nthe Christ. With an imperious air, the form showed him a thick yellow\nmanuscript\u2014a papyrus\u2014covered with writing. As M. Meurice was trying\nto decipher the characters for me, the vision disappeared. M. Meurice\nwas suddenly exhausted, and had a fit of weeping before recovering his\nnormal condition.\u201d\n\n\u201c\u2018A few mornings afterwards the medium had another vision. This time\nit was Chappe who came, it appears, to tell him that it was not _the_\nChrist whom he had seen, but _a_ Christ.\u2019[32]\n\n      [32] See note, p. 329.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cI must pause a while. It seems that Mrs. Stephens did not care about\nreturning to Paris during her husband\u2019s absence; and\u2014in the event\nof her hopes being well founded\u2014had expressed to Professor Richet\nher great desire of passing the rest of the year near Biarritz, a\nplace for which she had a great liking. She begged Professor Richet\nto write for her to a house agent to procure her a villa in that\ntown. It seems also, that Mrs. Stephens\u2014though her manner had never\nbetrayed this\u2014had taken a fancy to the medium and his family; one of\nhis sisters is an experienced hospital nurse, and Mrs. Stephens was\nwondering\u2014in quiet conversation with Professor Richet only\u2014if it would\nbe possible to persuade her to come and live with her at Biarritz. Upon\nthis conversation Professor Richet obtained the address of an agent,\nand wrote to him according to Mrs. Stephens\u2019s wishes. He showed the\nletter to Mrs. Stephens. The latter said [again I quote from Professor\nRichet\u2019s notes]: \u2018Since I spoke to you about Biarritz, Chappe has told\nme something. He wants me to go to Bordeaux. Do not post that letter\nyet, let me wait a little while; if my intuition be correct, if the\nidea of Bordeaux really came from the spirits, they are quite capable\nof finding a way of indicating it to M. Meurice and Dr. Maxwell. I do\nnot wish to speak of it myself to M. Meurice; this must come from the\nspirits themselves....\u2019\n\n\u201c[We are endeavouring to give a faithful account of what actually\noccurred, and beg to be forgiven the unscientific language, which is\noccasionally unavoidable, if we are to convey a correct notion of the\nphysiognomy of the phenomena.]\n\n\u201cNow the morning (a Thursday) following the day on which the above\nconversation had taken place, Mrs. Stephens came to Professor Richet,\nand told him she had passed a very strange and perturbed night. She\nsaid that, towards eleven o\u2019clock, she was suddenly awakened by a\nsensation that some one was in her room; she was filled with fear. She\nturned on the light, but saw nothing. She kept the light burning, but\nstill felt unaccountably frightened. She heard raps on the head of\nher bed. Gradually her fear quieted down, and she said she began to\nfeel as though there were a host of spirits in her room, and a Great\nPresence was among them. \u2018And she imagined,\u2019 writes Professor Richet,\n\u2018that a voice spoke to her in these terms: \u201cA powerful spirit is here,\nbe not afraid; it is the child\u2019s guide; your child will be a boy; he\nhas a great destiny before him, he will be a reformer. We counsel you\nnot to force his inclinations, to choose no career for him, but to let\nyourself be guided by the child himself, when the time comes to think\nof his education.\u201d\n\n\u201c\u2018Mrs. Stephens was still speaking of her night\u2019s experience, when Dr.\nMaxwell came into the room, and handed me,\u2019 continues Professor Richet,\n\u2018some verses which, he said, had just been written by M. Meurice\u2014a\nkind of quasi-automatism\u2014in a state of semi-somnolence. He could not\nunderstand what it meant, and simply stated the fact without offering\nany comment on it.\u2019\u201d\n\nHere are the verses. For the sake of brevity we omit five of them,\nthey are in the same strain as those given. We believe the reader will\nprefer to see these verses in the original:\u2014\n\n    Quand un enfant vient au monde,\n    Vient au monde d\u2019ici-bas,\n    Il faut qu\u2019un ange en r\u00e9ponde,\n    Et le suive pas \u00e0 pas.\n\n    Pas \u00e0 pas il faut qu\u2019il guide\n    La petite \u00e2me en chemin,\n    La petite \u00e2me timide,\n    Qu\u2019il doit prendre par la main.\n\n    Et les anges se querellent\n    Autour des b\u00e9b\u00e9s naissants,\n    S\u2019ils sont de ceux-l\u00e0 qu\u2019appellent\n    Vers la Clart\u00e9 les Puissants.\n\n    Dans la foule qui l\u2019assaille\n    La petite \u00e2me choisit;\n    Elle est \u00e9mue et tressaille,\n    Et la crainte la saisit.\n\n    Il faut qu\u2019autour de la m\u00e8re,\n    De la m\u00e8re qui l\u2019attend,\n    Seuls les anges de lumi\u00e8re\n    Guettent le petit enfant.\n\n\u201cDuring the course of the day, Professor Richet said to Mrs. S. that it\nwould perhaps be well if she spoke to the medium about his sister; but\nMrs. Stephens answered: \u2018No. Wait a little longer. I would have spoken\nto M. Meurice, had I been encouraged to do so by the spirits; but I\nthink it better to let the spirits tell them.\u2019\n\n\u201cThursday passed away without any further incident, and nothing was\nsaid to Dr. Maxwell concerning Mrs. Stephens\u2019s experiences in the\nnight, or the concomitant nature of the automatic script with those\nexperiences.\n\n\u201cOn Friday morning, Dr. Maxwell told Professor Richet that he had\njust obtained more automatic writing through M. Meurice. This writing\npurported to be a communication from Chappe. The communication\nconcerned Mrs. Stephens, said Dr. Maxwell, but was not to be given to\nher for the time being. Chappe asked that a sitting might be arranged\nfor on the same afternoon, as he had something to say. The sitting\ntook place; it lasted from two to six o\u2019clock, during the whole of\nwhich time Chappe did not once make use of his well-known subterfuges\nof \u2018fatigue,\u2019 \u2018silence,\u2019 \u2018no power,\u2019 etc.; and, though as the seance\nwore on M. Meurice was very visibly fatigued, the operating agency\nmanifested absolute indifference to such fatigue. It was as though\nChappe had indeed something to say and meant to say it. The messages\nwere given by means of raps without contact to begin with, but in order\nto diminish the chances of fatigue to the medium, we begged him to use\nthe pencil as a rapping instrument. The light was strong,\u2014an afternoon\nsummer sunlight shining into the room; the pencil did not move when\nthe raps were heard. The latter were given with force and without any\nhesitation; they were as strong at the end of the seance as at the\nbeginning.\u201d\n\n(In order to afford the reader every assistance in his appreciation and\nanalysis of these messages, we will give them in the original.)\n\n\u201cChappe gave his special signal intimating he was present.\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018You wish to speak with us, Chappe?\u2019\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Je veux demander \u00e0 vos amis la permission de vous parler de\nce qui vous int\u00e9resse.\u2019\n\n\u201cActing on the advice of Chappe, we then traced the \u2018magic circle\u2019\nin order to prevent, as Chappe said, the intervention of too many\ninfluences, and to preserve purity in the phenomena.\n\n\u201cObserver, after an interval of ten minutes: \u2018Are you ready, Chappe?\u2019\n\n\u201cMuch confusion in the raps, and impossibility of obtaining an\nintelligent answer; after half an hour of confusion came the\nlaboriously spelt out message:\u2014\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Peut-\u00eatre que vous \u00eates isol\u00e9s.\u2019\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018Why?\u2019\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Parce que vous les avez renvoy\u00e9s, cercle magique.\u2019\n\n\u201cWe were led to understand by this that the magic circle had had too\ngood an effect, and prevented even Chappe from communicating with\nhis companions. Once more we followed his instructions, inviting our\n\u2018friends\u2019 into the circle. It was then announced that Robert, one of\nMrs. Stephens\u2019s deceased relatives, was present and wished to speak.\nWhen asked what he had to say, we received:\u2014\n\n\u201cRobert: \u2018Bonnes f\u00e9es qui entourent et qui m\u2019emp\u00eachent de vous\nrejoindre.\u2019\n\n\u201cWe begged the \u2018good fairies\u2019 to be so kind as to allow this friend to\ncommunicate. The raps indicated that the favour was accorded, and that\nour friend could now communicate with us.\n\n\u201cRobert: \u2018VOS ESP\u00c9RANCES SONT RE\u00c7UES AVEC JOIE PAR TOUS.\u2019\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018What do you mean? Give one significative word.\u2019\n\n\u201cRobert: \u2018ENFANT PR\u00c9DESTIN\u00c9 \u00c0 FAIRE SCIENTIFIQUEMENT DE GRANDES CHOSES.\u2019\n\n\u201cMrs. Stephens: \u2018What child?\u2019\n\n\u201cRobert: \u2018Le v\u00f4tre; il arrivera, il faut \u00eatre heureuse, vous aurez tant\nde bonheur.\u2019\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018Have you anything more to say?\u2019\n\n\u201cRobert: \u2018Appelle ton enfant Ch\u00e9tien Alexandre.\u2019\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018Is Ch\u00e9tien Alexandre correct?\u2019\n\n\u201cRobert: \u2018Alexandre Chr\u00e9tien.\u2019[33]\n\n      [33] \u201cThe medium has frequently said that if he ever had\n      a son, he would call him Chr\u00e9tien. The name Alexandre was\n      also constantly on our lips, for two personifications, who\n      frequently claimed to be communicating, were called Alexandre.\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018Can you predict on what day he will be born?\u2019\n\n\u201cRobert: \u2018Oui. \u00c9piphanie.\u2019[34]\n\n      [34] \u201cMrs. Stephens had a preference for the Epiphany, and she\n      told us, after the seance, that she had mentally asked her\n      child might be born on that day\u2014the 6th of January.\u201d\u2014_Note by\n      Dr. X._\n\n\u201cMrs. Stephens: \u2018Do you know who the child\u2019s guide is?\u2019\n\n\u201cRobert: \u2018Oui.\u2019\n\n\u201cMrs. Stephens: \u2018What is his name?\u2019\n\n\u201cRobert: \u2018R\u00e9ponse plus tard.\u2019\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018Have you anything more to say?\u2019\n\n\u201cRobert: \u2018Prudence.\u2019 For whom? \u2018Marie\u2019 (Mrs. Stephens). \u2018Au revoir.\u2019\n\n\u201cAt the end of the above seance Dr. Maxwell handed Professor Richet the\nautomatic script he had received in the morning. It read: \u2018... (Mrs.\nStephens) est en voie de famille. Elle d\u00e9sire aller \u00e0 Biarritz et que\n(the name of the medium\u2019s sister) l\u2019accompagne. Mais dites lui d\u2019aller\n\u00e0 Bordeaux, o\u00f9 elle sera mieux soign\u00e9e et o\u00f9 les influences sont\nbonnes.\u2019\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cA few days after the above messages had been received, the raps again\nsignified their desire to communicate. The following conversation then\ntook place.\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018Who is here?\u2019\n\n\u201cReply: \u2018Robert. M\u00e9nagez Marie. Marie ... Aesotheu ...\u2019 (change of\ntonality, and Chappe\u2019s signal was given).\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Restez un moment tranquille. Il y a trop de monde.\u2019\n\n\u201c(Another change of tonality in the raps, followed by C.\u00a0R.\u2019s\nsignal\u2014Professor Richet\u2019s grandfather.)\n\n\u201cC. R. \u2018Quelque force mauvaise m\u2019emp\u00eache de vous parler.\u2019 (Confusion\nfor some time; raps of various tonalities and in great number resound\non the woodwork of the foot of the medium\u2019s bed\u2014we were holding the\nseance in his room by Chappe\u2019s express desire.)\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Je ne veux pas qu\u2019on se serve de cette chambre.\u2019\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018Why?\u2019\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Parce que Meurice y couche.\u2019\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018Where shall we go then?\u2019\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018O\u00f9 vous voudrez.\u2019\n\n\u201cThis was not by any means the first time we had held a seance in M.\nMeurice\u2019s room, no objection had ever been made to this proceeding\nbefore, which, in fact, had been recommended by Chappe.\n\n\u201cIt was impossible to obtain another sign of any nature whatsoever.\nProfessor Richet, Mrs. Stephens, and I went out of the room, leaving\nDr. Maxwell and the medium alone. We had scarcely left when the latter,\nit appears, turned to Dr. Maxwell and said: \u2018I see Professor Richet\ntearing up some printed matter and burning it. I think it is the bad\ninfluence Chappe was speaking about.\u2019\n\n\u201cWe three alone, commenting upon these messages, laid stress upon\nthe excuse of \u2018bad influences,\u2019 and thought it was probably one of\nChappe\u2019s tricks to avoid working, when it did not suit him to work.\nBut suddenly Professor Richet remembered a piece of newspaper which\nhe had put into his inner breast coat-pocket early that same morning,\nand on which was the name of a man who had been drowned the previous\nweek\u2014drowned before our eyes. This event had left a great impression\non us all, every one had made strenuous efforts to save the man, and\nthe medium in particular had striven hard to restore life. Professor\nRichet, coming across the man\u2019s name in a newspaper, had cut it out,\nand put the slip into his pocket-book, for reference sake, in case\nthe phenomena should turn upon the drowned man. No one was near or\ncould possibly have seen Professor Richet do this; he also took\nthe precaution of destroying the paper from which he had taken the\nannouncement.\n\n\u201cNow Professor Richet took the cutting out of his pocket-book, tore it\nup and burnt it before Mrs. Stephens and myself, laughingly saying:\n\u2018Let us see if that will destroy the bad influence.\u2019\n\n\u201cIt was not till some hours afterwards, that he was told of what M.\nMeurice had said relative to the \u2018burning of printed matter,\u2019 etc.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cThe next day, M. Meurice gave a fine phenomenon of attraction in\npresence of Professor Richet and Dr. Maxwell. It was two o\u2019clock in\nthe afternoon; the two latter were playing chess; M. Meurice was lying\non the floor reading; a fan was on the floor near him. He said: \u2018I\nbegin to feel the cobwebby sensation in my fingers; let us see if I can\nattract this fan.\u2019 Dr. Maxwell and Professor Richet left the table,\nand knelt down on the floor beside M. Meurice; the latter proceeded,\nfirst of all, as though he were enveloping the fan with something;\nthen, meeting his hands at the finger-tips, he drew them back very\nslowly. When his fingers were about six inches away from the fan, the\nlatter moved, and slowly followed his fingers for a distance of five\ninches. Professor Richet and Dr. Maxwell assured themselves by sight\nand touch, that the fan was not normally connected with the medium. The\nlatter had a violent gastric attack immediately after the production of\nthis phenomenon.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cProfessor Richet\u2019s birthday occurred during these investigations,\nand, when the day arrived, we ventured to express a hope that he might\nbe favoured with some good phenomena. We tried, and received abundant\nsigns of energy in the shape of raps. Chappe was asked if he had not\nsomething to say or offer Professor Richet as a birthday present.\n\n\u201cReply: \u2018Depuis votre naissance vous avez grandi! Vous aurez des\ncommunications plus int\u00e9ressantes, que celles que vous avez re\u00e7ues.\u2019\n\n\u201cAt this point some one asked the medium if he felt tired, and Chappe\nat once dictated:\u2014\n\n\u201c\u2018Il faut pour un moment se reposer si on est fatigu\u00e9.\u2019 However, no\nnotice was taken of this advice.\n\n\u201cProf. R: \u2018Why has my mother never communicated?\u2019\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Parce que vous ne l\u2019avez jamais appel\u00e9e.\u2019[35]\n\n      [35] \u201cTrue; but then neither was C.\u00a0R. nor Antoine B. nor any\n      other personification ever evoked.\u201d\u2014_Note by Dr. X._\n\n\u201cHere the raps indicate that \u2018C.\u00a0R.\u2019 wishes to communicate.\n\n\u201cC. R. (Prof. Richet\u2019s grandfather): \u2018Je suis tr\u00e8s content d\u2019\u00eatre avec\nvous.\u2019 Much confusion and meaningless rapping. \u2018Ici.\u2019\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018G. ne vous reverra pas.\u2019\n\n\u201cProf. R.: \u2018Can you tell me my mother\u2019s name?\u2019\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Je pourrai le dire quand je le saurai.\u2019\n\n\u201cThere was a brief silence, during which Chappe was supposed to be\nasking C.\u00a0R. for the desired name.\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Ad\u00e8le.\u2019 Wrong. But it was known that this was a family name.\n\n\u201cC. R.: \u2018Veux-tu voir ta m\u00e8re? Fais attention. Cette nuit elle\nt\u2019appara\u00eetra en r\u00eave.\u2019 This promise was not fulfilled.\n\n\u201cProf. R.: \u2018Try again for my mother\u2019s name.\u2019\n\n\u201cC. R.: \u2018A\u2014o\u2014a\u2014m\u2014e; Marig; Antoine; ther.\u2019\n\n\u201cThere was no approach to the desired name. There was plenty of\nenergy, and the raps flowed quickly and without hesitation in certain\ninstances, such as \u2018Veux-tu voir ta m\u00e8re?\u2019\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Prudence.\u2019\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018Why?\u2019\n\n\u201cObserver: \u2018Can you now give the name of the child\u2019s guide?\u2019\n\n\u201cChappe: \u2018Plus tard. Adieu.\u2019\n\n\u201cThe communicating intelligence frequently manifests\u2014a fact which was\nparticularly noticeable during this series of experiments\u2014a supreme\nindifference to scientific aspirations, to furnishing proofs of\nidentity or of any desire to meet the investigator halfway, and help\nhim in his researches.\n\n\u201cSince the communications concerning Mrs. Stephens had been received,\nwhenever it was intimated that \u2018they\u2019 had something to say, that\nsomething was generally the word \u2018Prudence\u2019 or terms of a like\nsignification.\n\n\u201cThe agency at work allowed it to be clearly seen that\u2014for the time\nbeing at least\u2014it interested itself in no one save in Mrs. Stephens.\nThis solicitude was continued up to the last; time after time the word\n\u2018Prudence\u2019 was uttered, so often in fact as to lose all meaning from\nsheer force of repetition; and no out-of-the-way heed was taken of the\nadvice.\n\n\u201cThis series of experiments came to an end.\n\n\u201cMrs. Stephens took a villa on the outskirts of Bordeaux, where the\nmedium\u2019s sister joined her.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cIt appears that Mrs. Stephens looked forward with unusual joy to the\ncoming event, and was much opposed to the idea of a wet nurse. I was\nnow at Bordeaux; I often saw Mrs. Stephens, and it is highly probable\nthat M. Meurice, like myself, knew of Mrs. Stephens\u2019s very legitimate\ndesire. Now Chappe had, for some time, given no sign of his presence;\nbut one day, when M. Meurice, Mrs. S., and I were out walking, sharp\nraps suddenly resounded on the medium\u2019s walking-stick. Mrs. S. begged\nhim to touch the handle of her umbrella\u2014which was open; raps were then\ngiven on the outstretched silk. With loud decided raps, Chappe quickly\ndictated: \u2018Retenez bien ceci, il ne faut pas laisser Marie allaiter.\u2019\nWe asked the wherefore, but the silence was complete; do what we would,\nnot another rap could be obtained.\n\n\u201cOn another occasion, when raps were forthcoming, we asked Chappe for\na word which would portray the state of mind of those present, and\nreceived the very appropriate reply: \u2018Paix absolue.\u2019 This message was\ngiven on the silk of the open umbrella, M. Meurice lightly touching the\nhandle only.\n\n\u201cAs the 6th of January drew near, Chappe began to get nervous about\nthe fate of the prediction, and, by means of automatic writing, he\nindicated that we were to remember, that it was not he, but Robert,\nwho had predicted that the birth would take place on the 6th January.\nThereupon, he added that the event would not occur before the 15th of\nJanuary\u2014that it would take place on the night of the 14th-15th January.\nDuring the last fortnight this was often referred to by Chappe, by\nmeans of automatic writing\u2014which perhaps gives more scope for the play\nof the subliminal. Chappe washed his hands, so to say, of Robert and\nhis doings.\n\n\u201cTowards the 20th of December, Mrs. Stephens received news that her\nhusband was on his way home, but was feeling rather unwell. In the\nletter, the word \u2018n\u00e9phrite\u2019 was made use of. Mrs. S. did not mention\nthis to any one; she said, however, that her husband had a slight\nkidney worry. The next day, the following communication, bearing upon\nMr. S.\u2019s anticipated arrival in Bordeaux, was received from Chappe by\nraps through the pencil:\u2014\n\n\u201c\u2018Il faut que vous l\u2019emp\u00eachiez de se mettre en route pour Bordeaux.\u2019\n\n\u201cWhy? \u2018Maladie s\u00e9rieuse s\u2019il avait froid.\u2019 What is he suffering from?\n\u2018N\u00e9phrite. Recommandez repos absolu; bonsoir.\u2019\n\n\u201cOn another occasion, always referring to the same subject, Mr. S.\u2019s\nindisposition, Chappe said: \u2018Pas sage de faire le trajet de Londres \u00e0\nBordeaux. Rassurez-vous. Maladie pas grave.\u2019\n\n\u201cThe child\u2014a boy\u2014was born at 2.15 on the afternoon of the 5th January,\nthat is, on the eve of the Epiphany\u2014and not on the Epiphany as was\npredicted (page 355).[36]\n\n      [36] \u201cOn the 4th January, Mrs. Stephens was particularly\n      anxious about her husband, and insisted on driving into\n      Bordeaux and personally sending him a telegram. Without a\n      doubt, the anxiety and physical restlessness of the previous\n      few days hastened the event.\u201d\u2014_Note by Dr. X._\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cMrs. Stephens desired to add the name of Quentin to the names of\nAlexandre Chr\u00e9tien. I happened to mention this to M. Meurice, and by\nso doing awakened Chappe and a salvo of raps. He would not say what he\nwanted, and M. Meurice remarked: \u2018We are to go into Mrs. Stephens\u2019s\nbedroom.\u2019 We were admitted. M. Meurice stood near the head of the bed,\nbut did not touch it. The raps resounded on the wood of the bed. Chappe\ndictated: \u2018Il ne faut pas appeler Quentin.\u2019 The force was abundant,\nand this message had been given quickly and with decision; yet, when\nwe asked why the child should not be called Quentin, we could get no\nreply. It was for all the world as though a distinct intelligence was\nbehind those raps, one, who, like ourselves, knew, on occasion, how to\nsay: \u2018I have said; let that suffice.\u2019\n\n\u201cFor a week, all went well with mother and child. Seven days after the\nchild\u2019s birth, Mrs. Stephens was seized with a violent and inexplicable\nfever. The following day, a thoughtless servant handed her a telegram;\nthe telegram announced the death of her husband. The fever regained\npossession, and Mrs. Stephens died the same night.\n\n\u201cPerhaps in conclusion, and as our only comment on this history, it\nmay not be out of place to recall to mind Chappe\u2019s oft-repeated word,\n\u2018Prudence.\u2019\u201d\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nAnd now, lest in the relation of the foregoing experiences, say\nrather in this simple registration of a few ascertained facts, we be\nreproached for a language which carries associations from which certain\nminds of a scientific bent may shrink, may we be permitted to say that\nthere is more appearance than reality in our backsliding\u2014if backsliding\nthere be. We have given an exposition of facts, touching upon unknown\nforces and arduous problems; the magnitude and complexity of which we\nrealise but too deeply\u2014problems which cannot be solved by academic\nmethods. Time and patient constancy of research are needed to bring\nthem to a successful issue.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nFRAUD AND ERROR\n\n\nThis work would be incomplete, if I did not carefully examine fraud\nand errors of observation. The first should always be considered as\npossible. Errors of observation are even more numerous than fraud, and\ntheir sources are manifold. We should study them, learn their causes,\nand suspect them until the contrary has been proved.\n\n\nI. FRAUD\n\nFraud can be conscious, unconscious, or mixed. I have no need to say\nhow frequent the first is, especially with paid mediums. Spiritistic\nreviews, notably the Revue Spirite, Revue Morale et Scientifique du\nSpiritisme, Light, Psychische Studien, give many examples of fraud\ndiscovered by spiritists themselves. Unconscious fraud is no less\ncommon than conscious fraud; as for the third, mixed fraud, this is\nalso very often observed.\n\n_Conscious fraud._\u2014(_a_) _Raps._ Nothing is easier to imitate. I have\nindicated the diverse ways of reproducing them artificially: gliding\nthe finger or nail along the top of the table, with or without the help\nof resin; rapping with the feet; gliding the foot or dress\u2014especially\nsilk dresses\u2014against the legs of table, etc. These diverse movements\nimitate feeble raps to perfection, if they be slowly made. For that\nreason I have always refused to consider raps as convincing when\nproduced with any contact whatever. Consequently I exclude raps\nproduced on the floor from those phenomena which have determined my\nconviction. Certain persons seem to be able to move their tendons at\nwill, even making a considerable noise in that way. I observed this\nwith a medical student who, by resting his elbow on the table, produced\nvery sonorous raps; but the movement of his arm was easily seen. I know\nanother person who could crack his joints at will.\n\nThe play of the knee-joint has been especially incriminated by Mrs.\nSidgwick in her article \u2018The Physical Phenomena of Spiritualism\u2019\n(_Proceedings of the S.P.R._ xiii. 45). She recalls to mind the\ninterpretations given by Drs. Lee, Flint, and Coventry, who observed\nMrs. Kane and Mrs. Underhill, two of the famous Fox sisters. Mrs.\nSidgwick experimented with the third sister, Mrs. Jencken, and accepted\nthe explanation of the American doctors. For them, the double raps\nwere produced by a rapid movement of dislocation and readjustment of\nthe knee. By placing in such a position as to render that voluntary\ndislocation impossible, _e.g._ by making the medium sit down with\noutstretched legs and heels resting on a soft cushion, no raps were\nforthcoming. It is possible that the explanation of the American\ndoctors may be true concerning the case examined by them. In those\nwhich I have studied, it is certainly not acceptable. I have obtained\nraps on a table without any kind of contact whatsoever. I have obtained\nthem on the floor, by placing the medium in positions which excluded\nthe play of articulation. The kind of fraud in question was not\ntherefore in operation. I have even made some mediums sit on my knees\nwhen raps were forthcoming; I then made sure the raps were produced on\nthe table, and that the latter was not touched. My conclusion as to the\nreality of the phenomenon of raps is the result of nearly two hundred\nobservations.\n\nIn obscurity, the means of cheating are unimaginable. I saw a young\nmedium, who had succeeded in concealing a stick, simulate raps on\nthe ceiling with it. I have known two others hit the table with\ntheir fists, kick it with their feet, etc. Everything is possible in\ndarkness, and with certain confiding observers.\n\n(_b_) _Parakinesis_, or abnormal movements of objects with contact.\nI have often said that all movements with contact\u2014except certain\nlevitations which are, however, difficult to observe with precision\u2014are\nworthless. I have indicated the chief ways of simulating levitations,\neither by the hands, the feet or the knees. I will not revert to this.\n\nThese methods are difficult in full light, but when the experimenters\nare placed in such a position as to be unable to keep a reciprocal\nwatch over the feet, the second method is still easily brought into\nplay.\n\n(_c_) _Telekinesis._\u2014Fraud is more difficult to perpetrate here. A\nconnecting link of some kind or other would be required to move objects\npossessing a certain weight and bulk. I look upon this phenomenon as\nmost convincing, when it is obtained in full light; in obscurity, it is\nto a certain extent unverifiable.\n\n(_d_) _Luminous phenomena_ are easily simulated; phosphorescent oil\nand certain sulphides give excellent imitations of hands and forms.\nI have seen a photograph taken by magnesian light in a seance for\nmaterialisation. The medium, by way of imitating a materialised garment\nof some kind, had wound a white cloth around his neck, and moreover\nwore a false beard. Those present at this seance will not admit they\nwere cheated. One of the sitters, a friend of mine, one familiar with\npsychical matters, but too honest himself to suspect fraud in others,\ndid not think my judgment in this case was correct. It was necessary to\nhave it confirmed by the celebrated Papus!\n\nAs for the phenomenon of _attouchements_, this is of all phenomena the\nmost easily simulated in obscurity.\n\nEvery one knows the r\u00f4le played by dolls, disguises and confederates\nin seances for materialisation. The trickster\u2019s imagination is of\ninconceivable fertility. The recent Rothe trial gives us a fresh\nexample of this.\n\n(_e_) _Motor and sensory automatisms_ can be imitated with extreme\nfacility, and their efficacious control is impossible. A careful\nanalysis of the messages is necessary in order to appreciate their\nvalue. On the other hand, well-observed premonitions are of immense\nimportance.\n\nFrom the preceding, we see that all psychical phenomena can be\nsimulated; this does not mean that every psychical phenomenon is\nsimulated. Those who wish to explain away everything by fraud make as\ngreat a mistake, as those who trustingly accept everything without\ncontrol.\n\nThere is an important general observation to be made concerning the\nphenomena I am treating in this book. It is of historical order, but\nnevertheless it gives a much wider signification to these facts than\nis usually accorded them. Many writers, Janet among them, imagine that\n_spiritistic_ phenomena, as they call them, date from the celebrated\nevents of Rochester, about the year 1847, where the Fox sisters were\nthe objects of diverse manifestations. But in reality these facts date\nmuch further back. One of the best observed cases is the one spoken\nof by Dr. Kerner in his book _Die Seherin von Prevorst_, which has\nbeen translated by Dr. Dusart into French, probably from Mrs. Crowe\u2019s\nEnglish translation. Kerner observed raps and movements without contact\nfrom the year 1827, when he had Madame Hauff staying in his house.\n\nPhenomena of the same kind are to be met with in accounts of haunted\nhouses. There are stories of this kind dating from remote epochs, and\ndiverse decrees of parliament exist cancelling leases for this cause.\nThese phenomena were criticised at the end of the eighteenth century.\n\nIt is only the metaphysical system founded upon these facts which is\nnew. It is in that, and in that only, that spiritism or spiritualism\nconsists. It is undeniable that the doctrine embodying the essence of\nthese teachings has attained a considerable extension. I pointed out\nthe radical differences existing between the beliefs of Anglo-Saxon\nspiritists and those of spiritists of other nationalities, particularly\nin that which concerns reincarnation. I will not go back to this;\nbut in order to specify the point in question, I will recall to mind\nthat the only new phenomena which spiritistic forms of contemporary\nmysticism offer, are their constitution into a body of religious\ndoctrines and their rapid extension. These phenomena are of\nsociological, not biological order. The facts upon which they are based\nbelong, on the contrary, to biology.\n\nFurther, it is not absolutely true to say, that the metaphysical\ntheories established upon the revelations of spirits are new. The\nlife of some of the \u2018saints\u2019 in the Roman Church offers us several\nexamples, one of the most celebrated being the devotion to the _Sacr\u00e8\nC\u0153ur de J\u00e9sus_,\u2019 a special kind of worship based upon revelations\nclaimed to have been accorded to a nun named Marie Alacoque, who\nlived in the eighteenth century. Monastic life has not the monopoly\nof such experiences. Commerce with spirits appears to be likewise one\nof the elements of the religious ceremonies of the Shakers; even the\nMormons seem to indulge in practices similar to those of spiritism;\nJ\u00e9r\u00f4me Cardan, John Dee, Martinez de Pasqually pass for having held\nintercourse with immaterial beings; members of the order of the Red\nCross have also been looked upon as holding frequent intercourse with\ndiverse genii. If we study the history of human thought, we see that\nnothing is really new, nothing save perhaps the contemporary extension\nof spiritism. From many points of view, spiritism appears to play a\nr\u00f4le in the civilised, sceptical, material society of to-day, analogous\nto the simple r\u00f4le which Christianity played in the second and third\ncenturies of our era.\n\nBut this is a sociological problem; its examination, however\ninteresting it may be, would lead me beyond the limits I have traced\nfor myself. I will confine myself, therefore, to drawing from the\nbrief historical account I have just given, the conclusion it admits\nof. The facts studied by Janet and others are anterior to spiritism,\nand cannot be legitimately designated by this name. I have already\nindicated that this word expresses an _ensemble_ of metaphysical and\nreligious doctrines explaining psychical phenomena by the intervention\nof spirits, and drawing their teachings from the revelations attributed\nto these same spirits. It is terminologically incorrect to designate\nthese facts by a word which has a wider signification, since it\nexpresses an explanatory hypothesis of these same facts.\n\nCustom has consecrated the word \u2018psychical\u2019 facts or phenomena: this\nterm is also imperfect, and it seems to me preferable to adopt the new\nterm _Metapsychical_ which Richet recommends.\n\nTherefore, in the actual state of research, the scientific problem, it\nseems to me, is not whether spiritism be true or false, but whether\nmetapsychical phenomena be real or imaginary.\n\nAs Richet and Ochorowicz have said, every medium may defraud, and the\nanalysis of fraud is one of the most complicated problems which the\nstudy of psychical phenomena presents. It is also one of the most\ninteresting. The Cambridge[37] experiments with Eusapia Paladino put\nclearly before us the question of fraud and its signification.\n\n      [37] See Appendix B.\n\nBefore entering upon the psychological examination of fraud, it appears\nto me necessary to explain the signification of the terms I am going to\nuse, and after that to classify medianic phenomena.\n\nIt is of primary importance to determine the correct signification\nof the expression _consciousness_.[38] There are few words in\nphilosophical language which have such diverse acceptations. As my\nconception of consciousness is somewhat special without at the same\ntime being peculiar to me, I owe it to my readers to say what I mean to\ndesignate by this term.\n\n      [38] The French have but one word to express what is meant in\n      English by the word _Conscience_ (_i.e._ the principle which\n      decides on the lawfulness or unlawfulness of our actions or\n      desires), and the word _Consciousness_ (_i.e._ the being aware,\n      the knowing of one\u2019s own thoughts). Nevertheless we consider\n      this chapter could ill spare this masterly synthesis.\u2014_Note of\n      Translator._\n\nI conceive consciousness, _lato sensu_, as a function of living matter.\nIt is the particular state which determines in organised and living\nmatter another state of the centre where this matter lives. It is,\nif you like, a kind of reaction of the living matter in harmony with\nexternal phenomena. This mode of reaction, like every other mode of\nreaction, allows of two conditions: some sort of sensibility to the\naction of the ambient, permitting variations thereof to be felt; some\nsort of activity which permits of realising an adaptation to the\nambient, and of producing internal modifications corresponding, in\nsome measure, to the perceived external modifications. In order that\nthe internal modifications may realise this equilibrium, they must not\ngo beyond a certain amplitude, whence the theoretic necessity for the\n_sensibility_ to be always apprised of the internal modifications of\nthe living substance, as it perceives the external modifications of the\nambient.\n\nExperience proves that in reality things do happen in this way.\nIn fact, we are able in the animal kingdom to prove the existence\nof special organs, some of them destined to the perception of the\nsuccessive states of the ambient and of the individual, the others to\nthe active realisation of the latter to the former. The different\nmodifications provoked in the _receptive_ system by the variations of\nthe ambient, determine in their turn the intervention of the _active_\nsystem which realises the internal variations. This is the principle of\nthe nervous and muscular systems, the latter being only put into play\nby the former; natural history shows us the progressive specialisation\nof these nervous and muscular elements. At first non-differentiated\nin appearance, the animal cell presents in more complicated animals a\nsensitive pole and an active pole, the one nervous, the other muscular.\nThe myo-epithelial or neuro-muscular cells offer us a classical example\nin the hydra.\n\nThe examination of the development of the nervous system and of\nthe muscular system in the vertebrata shows us their growing\nspecialisation. The nervous cells are associated in systems more\nor less dependent the one upon the other; the muscular cells are\naccumulated into masses. This is the application of that law of the\ndivision of labour, the constant operation of which we observe in all\nthe phenomena of life. The nervous cells are grouped together in a\nheap, in a nucleus, and send their prolongations to the periphery or\nto the organs. These prolongations are of two kinds: some transmit\nimpressions towards the cell (dendrites prolongations), others transmit\nexcitations proceeding from the cell (cylindraxes prolongations).[39]\nThe centres themselves are hierarchised, so to speak, and are divided\ninto two wide categories: the first destined to the functions of\norganic life, circulation, secretions, digestion, etc.; the second\nto those of the life of relation. These two categories include the\nsensitive cells and the motor cells; the one transmits to the other\nthe stimulus born of excitations provoked by the internal or external\ncentres.\n\n      [39] _Dendrites_, nerves conducting the influx towards the\n      centre of the cell.\n\n      _Cylindraxes_, nerves conducting from the cell towards the\n      periphery or towards another cell.\n\nIn superior animals, at any rate in man, we observe that the activity\nof certain nervous centres is accompanied by a particular phenomenon,\nwhich is designated under the name of _personal_ consciousness. It is\nthe notion we have that the phenomenon is perceived by us, that the\nmovement executed is executed by us.\n\nPersonal consciousness does not accompany all perceived phenomena, nor\nall executed movements. Certain given conditions of diverse orders\nappear necessary, for the consciousness to become aware of these\nphenomena. This conscious consciousness is translated by the connection\nof the impression or of the movement with a personality.\n\nThis personality looks to us as though it were continuous. It is around\nit that our past impressions are grouped in the form of souvenirs. It\nis that which continues the \u2018self.\u2019\n\nThe consciousness I have just described is what I call the _personal\nconsciousness_. The notion of personality which characterises it is not\ninvariable, and is not necessary.\n\nIt is not invariable, because the study of morbid psychology reveals\nto us that different personalities can succeed one another in the same\nindividual, or even appear to be concomitant. This is notably the case\nwith secondary personalities in hysteria or in epilepsy.\n\nIt is not necessary, for diverse phenomena can be perceived and stored\nup in the memory without the personal consciousness being conscious\nthereof; in the same way, movements adapted to a certain purpose may\nbe executed without the personal consciousness being warned thereof:\nsuch are notably the reflex and complicated movements, which custom has\nrendered automatic.\n\nThe result of these facts is that the personal consciousness is\nmanifested as a limitation of the general consciousness, of what I\nwill simply call _the consciousness_. The study of the alterations of\nmemory notably\u2014diverse amnesi\u00e6, hypermnesi\u00e6, paramnesi\u00e6\u2014shows us that\nthose souvenirs of which the general and impersonal consciousness has\nthe free disposition are incomparably more numerous than those at the\ndisposal of the personal consciousness. This is incontestable as far\nas memory is concerned; is it so with intelligence? It is hard to say;\nthere are, however, numerous examples of problems solved and of work\naccomplished without the knowledge of the personal consciousness.\n\nAnatomy and physiology inform us, that personal consciousness is\nmanifested in phenomena, which appear to have their seat in certain\nregions on the surface of the cerebral hemispheres. The cortical\nregion seems to be appropriated, at least in part, by psychological\nphenomena, of which personality is the centre, active memory,\nattention, judgment, abstraction, will. It is for this reason that\nthis region is called \u2018the superior centres.\u2019 Underneath this region\nthe cerebral sub-cortical ganglions, the bulbous and medullary nuclei,\nthe sympathetic ganglions, and the plexus constitute the inferior\ncentres which preside over certain functions foreign to the personal\nconsciousness.\n\nHowever, it must not be thought that the activity of the cortical\ncentres is always perceived by the personal consciousness. That of\nthe motor centres, for example, may exist unknown to the personal\nconsciousness. I have already given the indication of certain\ncomplicated movements which can be voluntary and personally conscious\nin the beginning, and become, in the end, unconscious and yet\nvoluntary; _e.g._ the playing of a musical instrument. Likewise,\ncertain involuntary movements can sometimes be perceived by the\npersonal consciousness; _e.g._ the rapid movement we make in chasing\naway a fly which is worrying us. If the centre motors of the arm which\ndrives away the fly be sub-cortical or medullary, it is none the less\ntrue that the movements executed, even when they appear to be pure\nreflex movements, can sometimes be perceived.\n\nMovements executed without the participation of the personal\nconsciousness and will are called _automatic_. This expression\nsignifies for me, that the voluntary activity of the personality\nremains foreign to the movement executed.\n\nTherefore, in the motor sphere, that is to say in movements, we\nmay have different relations between the movement executed and the\npersonal consciousness. We have, first of all, conscious and voluntary\nmovements; then involuntary or impulsive movements, perceived or\nunperceived by the personal consciousness.\n\nThese diverse movements are normal: that is to say, they are executed\naccording to the recognised rules of muscular activity; they do not go\nbeyond the peripheral limit of the body; the nervous influx is diffused\nalong the nerves in the ordinary manner.\n\nIf the nervous influx, or more correctly speaking, the mode of\nenergy which constitutes it, goes beyond the material limits of\nthe body, we have phenomena designated by de Rochas under the name\nof _ext\u00e9riorisation de la motricit\u00e9_. These are again automatic\nphenomena for me, since the personal consciousness and the will do not\nparticipate in them. But they present a feature which distinguishes\nthem from normal automatisms: they are _exosomatic_, if I may use that\nexpression, while the others are _endosomatic_. These two expressions\nsignify for me, the one exosomatic, that the movements are produced\nbeyond the limits of the body; the other endosomatic, that they are\nproduced within the limits of the body, that is to say by muscular\nactivity acting physiologically. The first, which are apparently\ncontrary to the ordinary data of experience, are paranormal phenomena,\nthat is to say, outside the usual rule; the second, on the contrary,\nare normal. Parakinesis is a paranormal movement with contact;\ntelekinesis is a paranormal movement without contact.\n\nSensibility presents the same categories of facts. Properly speaking\nthere is no veritable automatism in phenomena of sensitivity; but\nwe can nevertheless distinguish therein, first, normal sensitive\nphenomena\u2014that is to say, phenomena produced under physiological\nconditions, more or less well-known, but frequent, such as\nhallucinations, hypermnesi\u00e6; and second, paranormal phenomena, that is\nto say, phenomena which imply the existence of modes of perception to\nwhich the normal personality is foreign\u2014clairvoyance, clairaudience,\ntele-\u00e6sthesia, telepathy (Myers, Gurney, Podmore), exteriorisation of\nmotor power (de Rochas).\n\nI have already indicated that these perceptions appear to depend upon\nthe _impersonal_ consciousness, and that the impressions thus perceived\nare transmitted to the personal consciousness in a given form analogous\nto that of dream perceptions\u2014that is to say, in a dramatic form,\nwith a concrete and symbolical setting. The impersonal consciousness\nseems, therefore, to be affected in a vague, general manner: the\nperceptions only assume an appearance of precision in those strata of\nthe consciousness, where the notion of personality is determined. Hence\nthe following conclusions, which I only give as probabilities: (1) that\nthe notion of personality is susceptible of diverse degrees; (2) that\nthe impressions perceived by the general consciousness are agreeable or\ndisagreeable\u2014that is to say, only impart to the personal consciousness\na very vague message, moral comfort or indefinable discomfort; that,\nin rarer cases, the transmitted message is more precise, and takes the\nform of a detailed hallucination; (3) that, if telepathy exists, the\ngeneral consciousness is capable of being affected by channels other\nthan those of the ordinary senses, which have only a value in ratio to\nthe personal consciousness of which they are, perhaps, the condition.\n\nThis last consideration brings us back to the definition which I gave\na little while ago of consciousness, which is, for me, the common\nproperty of all living matter: its sensuality is limited and specified\nby the _senses_, is limited and specified by the personality and the\nwill.\n\nI beg the reader to excuse me for having entered into these\nexplanations. I wished, as I said before, to state as clearly as\npossible the meanings I attach to the terms I use; I have still another\ntask to accomplish somewhat similar to the last: which is to classify\nmedianic phenomena before studying their relations with fraud. In the\nfirst place I divide them into two wide categories, each capable of\npenetrating into the other, for, with the exception of luminosities,\nphysical phenomena are rarely devoid of all meaning, and intellectual\nphenomena have always some fact of a physical nature as substratum.\nTherefore, these two categories are two _different aspects_ of the same\nphenomena rather than two distinct categories.\n\nIf we consider the purely physical side, we have the following\napproximate series:\u2014\n\n\nPHYSICAL PHENOMENA\n\n_Sonorous._\u2014Raps; diverse noises.\n\n_Motor._\u2014Normal; paranormal; parakinesis; telekinesis.\n\n_Luminous._\u2014Amorphous; definite forms; psychic (?) photography.\n\nIf we consider the form of communications, in appearance intelligent,\nby adhering to the mode of expression of the _intellectual_ sense of\nthe phenomena, we have the following classification:\u2014\n\n\nINTELLECTUAL PHENOMENA: ENDOSOMATIC AUTOMATISM\n\n_Muscular._\u2014Typtology; grammatology; automatic script; automatic\nspeaking.\n\n_Sensorial._\u2014Visual, auditory, tactile, gustatory, olfactory phenomena.\n\n_Vaso-Motor._\u2014Secretory phenomena; vascular phenomena; perspirations,\netc.\n\n\nEXOSOMATIC AUTOMATISM\n\n(_Exteriorisations_): _Motor._\u2014Telekinesis; psychography (direct\nwriting); psychophony (direct voice).\n\n\u2014\u2014 _Sensitive-Sensorial._\u2014Telepathy; tel\u00e6sthesia.\n\n\u2014\u2014 _Plastic._\u2014Materialisations; apports, etc.\n\n\nOn the other hand, if we examine fraud in a general manner, we\nwill notice the following correspondences: the words conscious and\nunconscious are taken in the sense of the personal consciousness:\u2014\n\n  _Motricity: normal._    1. Conscious and         Conscious voluntary\n                               voluntary             fraud. Simulation;\n                               movements.            responsibility.\n\n     \u2014\u2014         \u2014\u2014        2. Conscious but         Conscious impulsive\n                               involuntary           fraud. Simulation;\n                               movements.            irresponsibility.\n\n     \u2014\u2014         \u2014\u2014        3. Unconscious and       Impulsive and\n                               involuntary           unconscious fraud;\n                               movements.            irresponsibility.\n\n     \u2014\u2014    _paranormal._  4. Exteriorisation of    No fraud.\n                               motricity and\n                               plasticity;\n                               telekinesis;\n                               materialisations.\n\n  _Sensibility: normal._  5. Voluntary             Voluntary and\n                               falsehood.            conscious fraud.\n                                                     Simulation;\n                                                     responsibility.\n\n  _Sensibility: normal._  6. Illusions;            No fraud; no real\n                               hallucinations;       phenomenon.\n                               hypermnesi\u00e6;\n                               paramnesi\u00e6.\n\n     \u2014\u2014    _paranormal._  7. Exteriorisation of    No fraud; real\n                               the sensibility;      phenomena.\n                               clairaudience;\n                               telepathy;\n                               clairvoyance.\n\nAs for true exosomatic automatism, there can be no question of fraud\nas far as it is concerned. This classification, which I only give as\nan experiment, appears to me more complete than that of Ochorowicz\u2019s\n(_Annales de Sciences Psychiques_, vi. 97). The latter distinguishes\u2014\n\n  (_a_) Conscious fraud.\n  (_b_) Unconscious fraud:\n        in the waking state      }  Medianity of an\n        in the trance state      }   inferior order.\n  (_c_) Partial, automatic fraud }  Medianity of a\n  (_d_) The pure phenomenon      }   superior order.\n\nIf we compare Ochorowicz\u2019s table with mine we will notice that his\nconscious fraud corresponds to Nos. 1 and 5 of my classification.\n\nHis unconscious fraud to No. 3.\n\nI divide his partial, automatic fraud into the classes 2, 3, and 6.\n\nThe pure phenomenon into the classes 4 and 7.\n\nHis superior medianity includes all exosomatic automatisms (Nos. 4 and\n7); his inferior medianity, the classes 3 and 6.\n\nThese general indications given, it is easy to see that I divide\nfraud into three categories, which are, moreover, susceptible of\nco-existing and of forming mixed types: this is the ordinary case. We\nhave, first of all, the guilty, voluntary and conscious fraud; then\nthe impulsive, but conscious, frequent fraud; then the unconscious and\ninvoluntary fraud, veritable normal automatism: the author cannot be\nheld responsible for this last order of fraud, which is, moreover, very\nfrequent with many excellent mediums.\n\nIf we study the psychological mechanism of fraud, we will find variable\nand diverse causes.\n\n\n1. CONSCIOUS AND VOLUNTARY FRAUD\n\nThe most usual cause is self-interest. This is the case with\ncharlatans, who speculate upon the credulity of the public. We must\nnot think this is the only motive; each impostor obeys motives which\nare peculiar to himself. The medical student, who gave me such curious\nexamples of fraud, was not actuated by motives of self-interest. I\nthink it was simply for the pleasure of cheating, of taking me in, for\nI had often spoken to him about my suspicions. He often cheated simply\nas a prank; this is what happened in a seance given by a spiritistic\ngroup to convince some new converts, when my student, it appears, gave\nthem manifestations somewhat out of the common!\n\nHowever, conscious and voluntary fraud raise no real psychological\nproblem.\n\n\n2. CONSCIOUS AND INVOLUNTARY OR MIXED FRAUD\n\nOn the contrary, the problem originates in this order of fraud. It\noften happens in circles, though composed of honourable persons, that\nsome of the sitters, who would be incapable of voluntarily committing a\nfraud, do not dare to accuse themselves of an involuntary movement made\nby them, and of which they are conscious. This can only be applied to\nfairly rapid movements, such as those which imitate raps or parakinetic\nmovements. In serious seances, the sitters should give themselves the\nhabit of openly acknowledging every involuntary movement; it will be\nnoticed that certain persons are very prone to these movements. They\noften end by being ashamed of accusing themselves so often, and thus\nfraud from timidity: I have met with this, especially among women. It\nis one of the reasons which make me condemn all experiments for the\nproduction of movements with contact.\n\nTimidity is the usual cause of this kind of fraud: the psychological\nproblem raised is simple.\n\n\n3. UNCONSCIOUS AND INVOLUNTARY FRAUD\n\nHere the problem becomes complicated. I will not distinguish, as\nOchorowicz does, fraud committed in the waking state from fraud\ncommitted in the trance or second state. The psychological mechanism\nis the same in both cases, and appears to me to depend upon\nself-suggestion, or what has been called _mono\u00efdeism_, that is to say,\nthe mind is invaded by one idea, which ends by stifling all others, and\nby realising itself: it is, in reality, a phenomenon analogous to that\ndetermined by suggestion.\n\nIt is in unconscious or involuntary frauds, that the psychological\ndisaggregation of the medium which Janet has studied, is best observed.\nThese frauds present phenomena which are without interest from a\nmedianic point of view.\n\nWhat is the mechanism of unconscious and involuntary frauds? It appears\nto me to be the following: the subjects\u2014they may have been good\nmediums in their day\u2014who commit this kind of fraud sit down to the\ntable, or give a seance in view of obtaining supernormal phenomena.\nBut the production of these phenomena is often difficult, sometimes\nimpossible. Immobility, expectation, and obscurity act powerfully upon\nthe nervous system of these mediums, and particularly so when they are\nhysterical. They determine the trance; the desire for the phenomenon\nbecomes a fixed idea, and then a self-suggestion. If the supernormal\nphenomenon delays, the inferior strata of the consciousness\u2014_whose\nmorality often differs greatly from that of the active personal\nconsciousness_\u2014realises it normally.\n\nIn the same way, even if the sensitive does not fall into the trance\nstate, there is, nevertheless, a particular state manifested which is\nnot sleep, neither is it the full, genuine waking-state. The active\nand voluntary personal element of the consciousness, as well as the\njudgment, becomes weakened. The sphere of the personality is reduced,\nand personal activity gives place to automatism. Every degree between\nconscious and involuntary fraud and pure automatism is to be met with.\n\nTherefore, it is prudent to take measures to guard against fraud with\nall subjects who become entranced, or with those who become somnolent\nin obscurity, silence, immobility, and expectation; but we should be\nfrank with our sensitives: let us not offer, in ourselves, an example\nof dissimulation to the medium; neither must we let him have the\nimpression of not being controlled: this would be to expose him to a\ntemptation, all the greater in that his personal power of volition is\nweakened.\n\nAdd to this, that we do not in the least know what influence the mental\nstate of the experimenters has upon the medium, although some kind\nof influence appears to me to exist. We do not know to what extent\nan ill-founded certitude of fraud can be responsible for its birth.\nOchorowicz says on this subject:\u2014\n\n\u2018After having recognised that the medium is only a mirror, who reflects\nand directs the ideas and nervous forces of the assistants towards an\nideoplastic end, we will not be surprised to see that _suggestion_\nplays an important r\u00f4le therein. There is no doubt but that the\nassistants can suggest the desired act to the medium; neither is it\ndoubtful that the manifestations bear the stamp of surrounding beliefs.\nIn a society of materialists I have seen \u201cJohn\u201d (with Eusapia Paladino)\nbecome dissolved into an impersonal force, which the medium simply\ncalled \u201cquesta forza,\u201d while in intimate spiritistic circles it took\nthe form of deceased persons, more or less clumsily. In the same way,\nwith controllers imbued with the idea of fraud as Messrs. Hodgson and\nMaskelyne were, the medium will remain under the empire of a suggestion\nof fraud.\u2019\n\nWithout completely sharing Ochorowicz\u2019s conviction, I have reasons for\nthinking that his theory comes very close to the truth. I have myself\nindicated how _suggestible_ the personification is.\n\nThere is something else. In cases where force is lacking, or is feeble,\nit is easier for the medium to obtain the phenomenon normally\u2014that\nis to say, by fraud\u2014rather than by veritable exteriorisation. I have\nremarked, that often the paranormal movement has to be normally\nsimulated before it is supernormally realised. This is frequently the\ncase with Eusapia. We can conceive how the movement of simulation can\nend in fraud, when the medium is in a hemisomnambulistic state.\n\nIn short, the energy which sets an object in movement appears to me\nto be of nervous origin, and I believe it to be of the same nature\nas that which provokes muscular contractions. Therefore, this is what\nfollows: the force only becomes exteriorised if accumulated and wrought\nup to a sufficient tension. In proportion as its tension increases,\nso it tends to expend itself in the form of impulsive movements;\nthe medium must resist this tendency to be able to obtain the pure\nphenomenon. Therefore experimenters ought to keep the medium in this\nresistance, and not allow him facility for expending the energy which\ntends to realise itself in muscular movements.\n\nSuch are the conclusions to which the observations I have made with\nseveral mediums have led me. Unconscious and involuntary fraud is\nfrequent, and in order to avoid it, the conditions likely to favour it\nshould be carefully put aside, especially in the beginning of a series\nof experiments, and when experimenting with an undeveloped medium.\nMedianity is powerfully influenced by acquired habits.\n\nThere exists, finally, another kind of unconscious and involuntary\nfraud: that which is due to illusion. It is constantly found in\nspiritistic seances, where ninety-nine times out of a hundred mediums\nproduce no real phenomena. They are, nevertheless, in earnest, but they\ndo not take into consideration the r\u00f4le of memory and imagination. This\nis particularly the case with _intuitive_ writing mediums and \u2018control\u2019\nmediums. With this order of phenomenon we rarely obtain verifiable\nindications; the \u2018spirits\u2019 utter plenty of commonplace generalities,\nbut give no precise information.\n\n_Fraud_ is a misnomer in this case: being unconscious and involuntary,\nit cannot, correctly speaking, be called fraud; therefore it is better\nto reserve the word \u2018illusion\u2019 for it.\n\nI cannot think of analysing the question of fraud in detail. If\nexamined closely it is extremely complicated. But, like Richet, I deem\n\u2018it possible that in states bordering on trance, and in trance itself,\nthe psychology of a medium may be very different from ours.\u2019 I confine\nmyself simply to indicating the result of my reflections, which are the\nfruit of a long series of observations. Let me renew my oft-repeated\nrecommendation for avoiding fraud: Experiment with light, the greatest\npossible amount of light, and seek for simple phenomena, difficult,\nperhaps, to obtain, but easy to observe, such as raps and movements\nwithout contact.\n\n\nII. ERROR\n\nIf I insist so much upon the necessity, especially in the beginning,\nof seeking only for phenomena observation of which is easy, it is\nbecause error of observation is facile. We need to be much accustomed\nto seances to be able to distinguish rapidly between probable phenomena\nand those which are certainly tricked. It is with this, as with\neverything else, a question of time and reflection.\n\nOne of the causes of error, which it is highly important to avoid,\nis obscurity. For many simple phenomena darkness is unnecessary;\ntherefore, from the very outset, we should exhort the personification\nto accept light. I have already frequently said that personifications\nare very suggestible. I know well it is not always so, and that at\ntimes the personification displays much obstinacy. Personifications of\nthis class are especially observed with mediums who have long-acquired\nhabits. It was so with Eusapia, who was only accustomed to giving\ndark seances. But even when the personification appears to have very\ndecided ideas, it is possible, with a little ingenuity, to induce him\nto change. It is with them as with secondary personalities, or subjects\nto whom we have given a suggestion. We must enter right into the circle\nof suggested ideas in order to break it; it is a question of tact only.\n\nWith Eusapia we succeeded in operating in a good light by appealing to\n\u2018John\u2019s\u2019 vanity. We explained to him that obscurity stood in the way\nof the observation of the phenomena, that he was just as capable of\nworking in the light as the \u2018guides\u2019 of other mediums were. In this\nway, we lead him to change his habits with us; the _meno luce_ to which\nthose who have experimented with this medium are accustomed, was still\ndemanded, but only when the seance was well advanced. At Bordeaux,\nwhere there was a large bay-window in the seance-room, the reflection\nthereon from the lights burning in the kitchen and winter-garden\nenabled us to see a little. In that case, Eusapia or John did not\ndesire total obscurity, and we always had this feeble light, allowing a\nvisual control which was sometimes satisfactory.\n\nWhen we are lucky enough to meet with an undeveloped medium, it is easy\nto give him the habit of operating in full light. This has occasionally\nhappened to me.\n\nI need not enlarge upon the influence of obscurity upon error. With\nsome very rare exceptions we can never be certain of the authenticity\nof a phenomenon obtained in a dark seance.\n\nObscurity is, however, necessary for luminous phenomena. When once we\nhave observed decided luminous forms, or really characteristic lights,\nit is easy to distinguish between them and illusion. A cool, calm\nobserver does not make a mistake; it is not quite the same with excited\nexperimenters. These latter give veritable suggestions to one another,\nand they end by having curious collective hallucinations. This is one\nof the most interesting facts of observation in spiritistic seances,\nso rich in purely psychological curiosities. I have frequently heard\na sitter say that he saw a light in a given direction; the others\nlooked in their turn and also saw it. Then one declared he perceived a\nform; soon others also saw a form. And from exclamation to exclamation\nthe description of the form is completed. This is the genesis of a\ncollective hallucination.\n\nI need hardly say, that experimenters who are so suggestible are not\ngood elements: in purely scientific researches they should be reduced\nto a minimum.\n\nPersonal experience has shown me, that of all the senses, that of sight\nis the most liable to imaginary impressions; after sight, the sense\nof touch is the most prompt to receive illusion. There are constant\nexamples of this in spiritistic seances; the _cool breeze_, which is\noften really felt, is more often only imaginary. One person says he\nfeels it; others at once imagine they feel it also. Sometimes it is not\nan error of imagination, but an error of attribution, the sensation of\na cool breeze being caused by the breath.\n\nThe sense of hearing has seemed to me to be refractory to suggestion\nin seances, though it does not altogether escape. I know of very few\nexamples of imagined raps or noises.\n\nOn the contrary, the muscular sense is one of the most unfaithful.\nUnless one has experimented oneself, it is impossible to imagine how\nfrequent unconscious and involuntary movements are. These movements are\nof very feeble amplitude; they are slight, but they end by acquiring a\ncertain amount of force. It will then be noticed that the assistants\naccuse each other reciprocally of pushing the table, and it is not rare\nto see angry discussions arise on these occasions. This is a frequent\nfact of observation. I have also very frequently noticed tactile\nhallucinations with impressionable experimenters, who easily imagine\ndiverse contacts.\n\nThe sense of smell sometimes perceives imaginary odours, but it is\nsomewhat rare. I have not observed any hallucinations of taste.\n\nAnother cause of error which requires pointing out is fatigue on the\npart of the experimenters. Every phenomenon which is produced after a\nlong period of waiting stands many chances of being badly observed. The\nattention kept for a long time on the _qui vive_ becomes weary, gives\nplace to abstraction, and often the phenomena takes the experimenters\nby surprise; hence they are unable to examine the conditions with\ncertitude. It is also bad to hold very long seances, fatigue quickly\nsetting in.\n\nSuch are the principal causes of positive errors; that is to say, of\nerrors tending to persuade one of the existence of an imaginary fact;\nnegative errors, that is to say, those which tend to make one look upon\na real fact as an imaginary one, are not less dangerous than positive\nerrors.\n\nIn the first place, _parti pris_ is to be pointed out. If we wish to\nexperiment with success, we must experiment without credulity, without\nfaith, even without confidence; but we must not be determined only to\nmeet with fraud.\n\nWe must not experiment na\u00efvely. If, at the beginning of a seance, it\nbe useful to allow freedom in order to put the force _en train_, as\nOchorowicz wisely recommends, once the phenomena are established,\nwe must control them with the greatest care. But we should make our\nintentions known to the medium and to the personification. This,\nI think, is an indispensable precaution. The personification will\nalways consent to it; but this does not mean we will always obtain the\nwished-for result. We must not allow the medium or the personification\nto think we are their dupes if they fraud; we must tell them, gently\nbut clearly, that they are not giving anything good. Equivocation is to\nbe carefully avoided, all misunderstanding is to be shunned.\n\nWe must not, however, place the medium under such conditions that the\nexperiment cannot be realised. We do not understand these conditions,\nand, perhaps, apparently simple phenomena may not be realisable. I\nremember that at Choisy in 1896, a lady, a member of my family\u2014she\nhas an insurmountable bias against psychical experiments, which she\ndeclares _a priori_ are fraudulent\u2014declared to Eusapia that she would\nbelieve in her phenomena, if she could make a doll\u2019s table move before\nher eyes. Eusapia placed this small table on top of the seance-table,\nbut did not succeed in making it move. Why could not such an\napparently simple phenomenon be obtained?\n\nWe must, therefore, observe, but we must not wish to impose beforehand\nthe conditions which the phenomenon should fulfil in order to be\naccepted.\n\nMany experimenters tie up the medium, put him into a sack, and seal\nhim therein. If he consents to this, well and good; if he refuses,\nother means of control must be found. We must not indeed suppose that\nthe medium\u2019s refusal is always due to a desire to fraud. The slightest\nfetters may sometimes be very painful, especially when there be\ncutaneous hyper\u00e6sthesia.\n\nBefore bringing a negative judgment to bear upon the phenomena, the\nexperimenters should always hold a certain number of seances, and\nshould not found their judgment upon one bad seance alone; by so doing\nthey would expose themselves to a wrong course of action.\n\nIt is especially in psychical experimentation that inexhaustible\npatience is necessary.\n\n\n\n\nCONCLUSION\n\n\nAnd now my task is accomplished. I perceive that in the latter part\nof my work, I have broached complex and difficult problems, and have\nallowed myself to be drawn into\u2014not theorising\u2014but combating certain\ntheories which appear to me to be incorrect or insufficient; for which\nI beg my reader\u2019s pardon. In conclusion, I wish to repeat that I am\nconvinced of having, in a sure, positive manner, observed raps and\nmovements without contact. I have seen many other phenomena; but I will\nnot venture to be so affirmative concerning them, at present.\n\nI make no pretension of demonstrating the reality of the facts I have\nobserved. In publishing my conclusions, I have had but one object in\nview, that of bringing my testimony to those, who, long before me,\nattested to the facts which I in my turn affirm. Does that mean that\nI have not been mistaken? most assuredly, no! And it is very possible\nthat my observations may have been imperfect. I am, nevertheless,\nso convinced of their exactness, that I can only advise those who\nmay impugn the accuracy of my statements, to experiment as I have\ndone, with the same method, and the same patience. I have had many\noccasions to pronounce these words in the course of my work, and now in\nterminating it, I pronounce them once again with stronger emphasis than\never.\n\nI doubt, though, whether my voice will be heeded, where others, more\ninfluential than mine, have remained unheard. However, I do not\nregret having expressed my opinion about these facts. I am persuaded,\nthat some day, _perhaps very soon_, they will come under scientific\ndiscipline, and this, in spite of all the obstacles which obstinacy and\nfear of ridicule accumulate in the way.\n\nOne of these obstacles, and it is not the least, is due to the fashion\nin which many savants estimate mediums. Their judgment is summed up in\nsuch expressions as hysteric, cheat, physically or morally tainted,\ndegenerates. Such a judgment is iniquitous, absurd and false in its\ngenerality, and baneful in its consequences. It is founded upon a\ndeplorable error, for I know mediums who possess faculties superior\nto the average, and who present absolutely no stigma of degeneracy. I\nhave said, and I cannot repeat it too often, my finest phenomena were\nobtained with subjects who were sound and healthy in mind and body. It\nis with hysterical subjects that we observe fraud, side by side with\ngleams of true phenomena; but with a medium who has no nervous taint,\nwhose well-balanced intelligence knows how to offer resistance to\nself-suggestion, and _l\u2019id\u00e9e fixe_, we have real phenomena or none at\nall.\n\nThe opinion of savants, who, ill acquainted with the facts, inform\nus that mediums are hysterics and victims of nervous disorders, is\ntherefore erroneous; unfortunately the consequences of such an opinion\nare lamentable. I know many remarkable subjects who absolutely refuse\nto experiment outside a tested and restricted group, because they fear\nto be regarded as neurotics; they are afraid of being stigmatised\nas insane, they are afraid of compromising their commercial position\nor their professional interests. I will never succeed in convincing\nthem that they are above the average; doubtless I will succeed still\nless in inducing others to believe it: though in many respects it be\ntrue. If the relative perfection of their nervous system renders these\npersons more sensitive than the average, it would be wrong to conclude\nthereupon, that they were degenerate specimens of humanity. This\nargument is lacking in common-sense; we might just as reasonably insist\nthat Europeans are in degeneration, because they are more emotional\nand more sensitive to pain than certain savage tribes. How ignorant,\ntactless, and incautious we are! The attitude of certain learned\ncentres\u2014it is with intention that I do not say the most cultured\u2014is,\nto me, similar to that of ecclesiastical authorities in the middle\nages. The novelty of a thing frightens them. They treat independent\nscientific thought as the inquisitors treated free thought in days\ngone by. Like their prototypes of other times, they have the same\nintolerance, the same hate for schism and heresy. Their accumulated\nerrors ought to make them cautious: but, no! If they no longer make a\npariah of the arch-heretic or schismatic, if they no longer deliver\nhim up to the executioner, they treat him with the same relative\nvigour. They excommunicate him, in their fashion, and cast him out\nof sane healthy humanity as a degenerate, a mystic, an _exalt\u00e9_. The\nfuture will have the same opinion of them as we have, to-day, of their\npredecessors. Their attitude prevents the most cultured, the most\ncapable mediums from allowing their psychic faculties to become known.\nIf these mediums spoke of visions, a douche would be recommended! If\nthey caused a table to move without contact, the words hysteria and\nfraud would be heard. Is it surprising they should hide their gifts?\n\nWe ought to consider mediums as precious beings, as forerunners of the\nfuture type of our race. Why should we only see degeneracy around us?\nWhy should we not see superior beings ahead of us, beacons, as it were,\non the route we have to follow? Does not simple common-sense suggest\nthat humanity has not yet arrived at perfection\u2014that it is evolving\nto-day just as it has always been doing? All men have not attained the\nsame degree of evolution. As there are types representing the average\nstate of former days, so there are advanced types representing to-day\nthe average state of the future. The progress of the race seems to\nmake for perfection along the lines of the nervous system, in the\nacquisition of more delicate senses, of greater nervous sensibility,\nand of vaster means of information. If the discovery of implements, new\ninstruments of investigation, such as the telescope and microscope,\nfor example, aid in the progress of the race, they are of no use for\nthe evolution of the individual himself. Now, veritable progress is\nindividual; it is the improvement of the individual which assures\nthe evolution of the race, and this progress should be determined by\nheredity. Do what we will, we shall never be born with a microscope\nat the eyes, and a telephone at the ears. Progress of this kind is\nnot transmissible; only physiological acquisitions are transmissible.\nThe sensibility of the nervous system of mediums is a progress on\nour relative obtuseness; it is not the same thing with the bad sight\nof him who makes an improper use of the microscope. If Virchow were\nstill alive, there would be many disagreeable things to be said to him,\nconcerning the inaptitude of the ordinary type of savant to personify\nthe desirable progress of the race towards health, force, sensibility,\nand the perfect form.\n\nThe intolerance of certain savants is equalled by that of certain\ndogmas. To take an example, Catholicism considers psychical phenomena\nas the work of the devil! Is it worth while at this hour to discuss\nso obsolete a theory? I think not. However, superior ecclesiastical\nauthorities, with the tact and sentiment of opportunism which they\noften show, permit many Catholics to undertake the experimental study\nof psychical facts. I cannot blame them for recommending prudent\nabstention to the mass of the faithful; spiritism appears to me to\nbe an adversary with which they will have to reckon very seriously\nsome day. The simplicity of its doctrines ensures it the _client\u00e8le_\nof simple souls enamoured of justice, that is to say, of the immense\nmajority of mankind.\n\nBut this question is foreign to psychical facts themselves. As far as\nmy experience permits me to judge of them, these phenomena contain\nnothing but what is natural. The devil does not show his hoof here,\ntimorous souls may feel reassured; if the tables claim to be Satan\nhimself, they need not be believed; summoned to prove his power, this\ngrandiloquent Satan will be a sorry thaumaturgist. Religious prejudice,\nwhich proscribes these experiments as being supernatural, is just as\nlittle justified as scientific prejudice, which sees therein nothing\nbut fraud and imposture. Here, again, the old adage of Aristotle finds\nits application: Justice lies midway.\n\nMay my book determine a few experimenters of goodwill to try to\nobserve in their turn. May it help to dispel from the mind of gifted\nmediums their fears of being ranked with insane and disordered\nintelligences, or looked upon as being in partnership with the devil.\nMay it especially contribute to make metapsychic phenomena come to\nbe considered as natural facts, worthy of being usefully observed,\nand capable of enabling us to penetrate more deeply than any other\nphenomena into a real knowledge of the laws which govern Nature.\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX A\n\n_An Appreciation on Certain Documents published on the subject of\nFraud._\n\n\nThe question of fraud is so important that I feel I should not only\ngive the results of my own observations, but also my appreciation of\nsome of the principal documents published on the subject.\n\nWith the exception of Richet and a few others, representatives of\nscience in France are very ill informed on this question, as I have\nendeavoured to show. They overlook the immense work which has been done\nin the United States and in England; consequently it is very difficult\nto discuss the question with these savants, they are either ignorant or\nfeign to be ignorant of what others have done. I have shown that their\nexperiments are defective and their methods open to criticism.\n\nIf all serious discussion be impossible with certain savants, it\nis not so with those who have taken the trouble to verify psychic\nphenomena for themselves. This is the case with the principal members\nof the Society for Psychical Research, Crookes, Lodge, Barrett, Myers,\nSidgwick, Gurney, Podmore, Hodgson, Hyslop, and others. The first three\nare persuaded of the reality of the facts observed by them. The others\nhave a tendency to attribute to fraud all _physical_ phenomena; they\nadmit, on the other hand, _intellectual_ phenomena, and explain them\neither by telepathy as Mr. Podmore does, or by the intervention of\nspirits as spiritists themselves do, though they were at one time the\nlatter\u2019s adversaries; this is notably the case with Myers, Hodgson,\nand Hyslop. The great respect I have for the remarkable men who direct\nthe Society for Psychical Research, obliges me to examine their\nexperiments very carefully, for their judgment has a great value in\nmy eyes; at the same time, I have too much regard for the research of\ntruth to conceal from them the errors of experimentation, which they\nappear to me to have committed.\n\nIn the fourth volume of the _Proceedings_ will be found a series\nof papers by Mrs. Sidgwick, Messrs. Lewis, Hodgson, and Davey upon\nfraud. The last-named deal particularly with the production of direct\nslate-writing. This phenomenon is very easy to simulate; it suffices to\nread the papers mentioned, especially Davey\u2019s document, to understand\nunder what suspicious conditions the phenomenon was produced.\n\nA long time ago I myself artificially produced this kind of\nmanifestation by fixing a pencil into a hole in the table, and\nthereupon moving the slate about. With practice a certain amount\nof facility can be acquired; you can write fairly well and give\nregularity to apparently spasmodic and involuntary movements; but only\ninexperienced or credulous people are taken in by this trick; and\nthough they may be more complicated, Mr. Davey\u2019s methods are not by any\nmeans more difficult to expose.\n\nI wonder how a man of Dr. Hodgson\u2019s intelligence could have based\nhis judgment upon such superficial observations as those of the\nexperimenters he cites. Here are men, without doubt honourable and\nwell educated, who hold seances with the object of obtaining direct\nslate-writing through Mr. Davey. Instead of taking the elementary\nprecaution of never abandoning their slates, they allow the medium to\nmanipulate them, permit him to leave the seance-room for a moment,\nconsent to allow other slates than their own to remain on the table\nat the same time as those which are used for the experiment, and\nlastly when they examine, only examine it on one side. This is not\nmal-observation, it is absence of observation. (See R. Hodgson, \u2018Mr.\nDavey\u2019s Imitations by Conjuring of Phenomena sometimes attributed to\nSpirit Agency,\u2019 _Proceedings_, vi. 253.)\n\nMr. Davey has also produced raps and materialisations fraudulently.\nIt is necessary to read, in Dr. Hodgson\u2019s paper, the conditions\nunder which he operated to see what ill-placed confidence his\nco-experimenters had in him (Davey). They do not verify, although\nthey are invited to do so, the contents of a trunk precisely where\nthe material essential to fraud was concealed; they allow Mr. Davey\nto close the door of the room: he gives two turns of the key, the one\nlocking, the other unlocking the door, which is carelessly sealed with\ngummed paper; no one thinks of verifying if the door is well closed.\nThe most elementary precautions are neglected by the assistants who,\none would really think, had been chosen by Mr. Davey for their very\ncredulity. Frauds as easy to prevent as those from which Dr. Hodgson\ndraws his argument, cannot be considered as being able to take in a\nprudent, shrewd observer, accustomed to experimentation, and knowing\nhow to preserve a little _sang-froid_. Was it not enough that the\nmedium should have asked one of the observers: \u2018What do you want the\nspirit to write on the slate? In what colour do you want the writing\nto appear?\u2019 for these very questions alone to suggest imposture? Dr.\nHodgson\u2019s argumentation is inoperative, and the faults, accumulated\nby the deceived observers whose impressions he cites, are excessive.\nOne would think he had had to do with very convinced spiritists,\ninclined to admit _a priori_ the reality of the forthcoming phenomena\nwithout troubling themselves about the precise conditions of their\nobservations; this is what the perusal of the reports of these seances\nmakes one think, for I read textually (p. 296): \u2018It may be interesting\nto compare the reports given by spiritualists of a sitting with Mr.\nDavey with his account of what really occurred.\u2019 Can one draw an\nargument from these accounts of spiritists? Some spiritists, convinced\nof the reality of the facts, appear to care very little indeed about\nany sort of control. To reason from their methods of observation, to\ngeneralise this reasoning and to extend it to all observers, is rather\ntoo easy a form of discussion.\n\nThere are certain phenomena which lend themselves badly to observation:\nthis is particularly the case with those which require obscurity and\narrangements of a nature likely to hinder or interfere with the best\ncontrol which can be exercised, that of the eyesight. In my opinion\nthe phenomenon has no demonstrative value whenever it occurs out of\nsight, as is the case with slate-writing, when the slate is held under\nthe table. Neither has it any great signification when it requires\nsustained observation in order to control it. Errors are easy, for\nabstraction almost inevitably follows, if it does not accompany,\nsustained attention. Hodgson, in \u2018The Possibilities of Mal-Observation\nand Lapse of Memory from a Practical Point of View\u2019 (_Proceedings_,\niv. 381) gives examples of this, but his paper only points out facts\nwell known to those who are familiar with human testimony. In order\nto observe with a minimum chance of error, the phenomenon we intend\nto study should be simple, and repeated often enough to prevent the\nattention from becoming weary from waiting. From this point of view,\nthe production of raps and telekinetic movements with the aid of\nthe experimental man\u0153uvres I have described, permit, by specifying\nthe moment when the phenomenon is going to occur, of bringing the\nwhole attention to bear upon the examination of the conditions under\nwhich the phenomenon is obtained. Raps and movements without contact\nappear to me to lend themselves admirably to observation; with these\nphenomena, by operating as I have indicated, experimentation is almost\npossible; but a veritable medium must be sought for in the first\ninstance.\n\nNow this is what my colleagues of the Society for Psychical Research\ndid, but they did so under conditions which were far from satisfactory.\nMrs. Sidgwick, a woman of brilliant intellect, has given an account\nof the attempts made by herself, her husband, and friends to obtain\npsychical phenomena. They went to Eglinton and Slade for slate-writing,\nto the Misses Wood and Fairlamb and a Mr. Haxby for materialisations.\nThe first two gave phenomena which were suspicious, not to say worse;\nas for Haxby, he frauded shamefacedly. Mrs. Sidgwick\u2019s account is\ndemonstrative on this point, and it is enough to read it to be\nconvinced that no shrewd observer could be taken in.\n\nThe first mistake, committed by the distinguished members of the\nSidgwick group, was to suppose that psychical phenomena can be obtained\nat will. Whenever a paid medium gives regular seances, there are a\nhundred chances to one of downright fraud. If there be a positive\nfeature in these supernormal facts, that feature in my opinion is their\napparent irregularity. I have been able to experiment with intelligent,\nwell-educated mediums anxious for a thorough investigation of their\npowers: I have made very many experiments with them, and I have\nobserved that often whole weeks passed away without a good seance; at\nother times, the force was so abundant that phenomena were forthcoming\nwithout seance. I have related some curious facts in this respect,\n_e.g._ the table moving spontaneously in the course of a conversation\nbearing upon psychical phenomena (p. 106).\n\nWhat are the conditions which impede or favour the production of this\nunknown mode of energy? I cannot specify them; but I think I have\nnoticed concordances, which confirm in a measure the conclusions of\nOchorowicz (_Annales des Sciences Psychiques_, vi. 115):\u2014\n\n1. Action of temperature. Dry cold weather is the most favourable. Damp\nor close weather is most unfavourable.\n\n2. Health of the medium and sitters. If the medium does not feel well,\nthings happen as though he exteriorised no force whatever. It is the\nsame thing with the sitters, but in a lesser degree; in the latter case\nit suffices to eliminate the experimenter who feels ill.\n\n3. Mental condition of the medium and sitters.[40] Ill-humour, anxiety,\nsadness\u2014especially a sadness without any specific cause, a kind of\nmental discomfort\u2014are prejudicial. Joy, gaiety are often favourable.\n\n      [40] There are _apparent_ exceptions to this rule.\n\n4. Nervous exhaustion. This condition is too often overlooked. I have\nnot unfrequently had occasion to conduct several series of experiments\nat one and the same time. I generally noticed that the results were not\ngood. I have not been able to understand the cause of this want of\nsuccess; it is probably other than that of simple nervous exhaustion,\nalthough this may have an action in prolonged series of seances.\n\nNeither do seances held too frequently with the same medium give good\nresults; in this case, nervous exhaustion is certainly in play.\n\nThe English experimenters do not appear to have taken these diverse\nelements into consideration; I am persuaded the results of their\ninvestigations would have been different had they shunned \u2018paid\nmediums,\u2019 and sought for fresh or undeveloped mediums, persons\nuninfluenced by private considerations, intelligent and capable of\nbringing a correct analysis of their subjective impressions into the\nresearch. These mediums are rare, but they are to be found.\n\nNone of these conditions were fulfilled by the Sidgwick group. These\nexperimenters, acting with the best of intentions, took a wrong\ncourse. Eglinton, Slade, Haxby, have perhaps been genuine mediums in\ntheir time, but as soon as they made it a business to give regular\nseances, they were at once prepared to give fraudulent phenomena with\nregularity. At Newcastle, the group operated at one and the same time\nwith Miss Fairlamb and with Miss Wood. These two parallel series of\nexperiments could not help being prejudicial one to the other, even if\nthese two mediums had been honest, which does not appear to have been\nthe case, judging from Mrs. Sidgwick\u2019s account.\n\nI cannot think of discussing in detail all the experiments of the\nSidgwick group; but I will study their experiments with Eusapia\nPaladino at Cambridge more carefully, for their judgment on this medium\nappears to me unjustified. Every one knows under what conditions\nMessrs. Myers, Hodgson, Sidgwick, etc., invited Eusapia to England, in\norder to resume experiments previously made with her at Ribaud. These\nexperiments had obtained a favourable report from Dr. Lodge; Mr. Myers\nand Mr. Sidgwick associated themselves with Dr. Lodge\u2019s conclusions.\nDr. Hodgson\u2014who is a doctor of law and not a doctor of medicine, as\nsome people suppose\u2014criticised the experiments summarised by Dr.\nLodge. He was met with the reply that his criticisms contained nothing\nnew; that what he said had been already pointed out by Richet and\nothers, and that the experimenters were acquainted with every possible\nsystem of fraud; that the substitution of one hand for another,\nthe substitution of an artificial foot for the medium\u2019s foot, were\nwell-known systems of imposture, against which every precaution had\nbeen taken. Nevertheless, and notwithstanding the fact that the report\nhad been drawn up by such competent men as Richet, Ochorowicz, Lodge,\nand Myers, it was criticised with an undeniable appearance of logic\nand justice by Hodgson: the latter reproached them for insufficiently\ndescribing the manner in which the diverse controls were ensured, for\nomitting to dwell upon the precautions which were taken, and for the\nlack of a minute description of all the movements of the medium. In his\narticle (_Journal_, vii. 49) he expressly says:\u2014\n\n\u2018Professor Lodge makes the following declaration concerning the raising\nof the table:\u2014\n\n\u2018\u201cIt appears to me impossible for any person to lift a table of this\nsize and weight while standing up to it, with hands only on top,\nwithout plenty of leg action, and considerable strength and pressure of\nhands. It was quite beyond the possibility of Eusapia.\u201d\n\n\u2018Now let us suppose,\u2019 continues Hodgson, \u2018that Eusapia used a form of\nsupport which, with some variation or other, I fancy is not altogether\nunknown in the Italian race. Let us suppose that she had, next to her\nbody, a light strong band round her shoulders and across her chest,\nwith a pendant attached of a black band or cord, with a hook or other\ncatch at the end which could be tucked out of sight in her dress front\nwhen not in use. (By the way, in a photograph which I have seen of\nEusapia at a sitting, when the table is supposed to be completely off\nthe floor, one of the buttons of the bosom of her dress seems to be\nunfastened.)\n\n\u2018She fixed this catch\u2014either stooping or bending her legs slightly\noutward\u2014to one of the sideboards of the table, or to some point in\nthe neighbourhood of the junctures of, for example, sideboards and top\nof table. She straightened herself out, stiffened her shoulders and\nher body back, and pushed forward with her foot against the leg of the\ntable, close to which she was standing. The light touch of one of her\nhands may have helped to steady the table, the edge of which may also\nhave been in contact with her body. Was this hypothesis or any kindred\nhypothesis tested by Professor Lodge?\u2019 etc.\n\nThis long quotation shows how Hodgson reasons. Conscientious savants\nomitted to indicate, explicitly, in their report, that every hypothesis\nof fraud had been studied and put to one side; they omitted to analyse\neach hypothesis, because their implicit affirmation of the reality\nof the fact appeared sufficient to them, and a detailed examination\nof each hypothesis would have given exaggerated dimensions to their\nreport. No matter. Analysts like Dr. Hodgson will not spare them,\nand will not hesitate to indicate hypotheses, even those the least\ncompatible with the conditions of observation.\n\nHowever, the Cambridge experiments were decided upon, and although\nHodgson had taken a decided stand in the matter, he was invited to\nassist. These experiments gave bad results, and Sidgwick was able to\nsay, in spite of the contrary observations of other experimenters, who\nwere his colleagues in the Society for Psychical Research (_Journal\nS.\u00a0P.\u00a0R._, vii. 230): \u2018It will be seen that at our last meeting a\nquestion was asked with regard to \u201cphenomena\u201d obtained by Eusapia\nPaladino subsequent to the exposure of her frauds at Cambridge. It may\nbe well that I should briefly state why I do not intend to give any\naccount of these phenomena.\n\n\u2018It has not been the practice of the Society for Psychical Research\nto direct attention to the performances of any so-called \u201cmedium\u201d who\nhas been proved guilty of systematic fraud. Now, the investigation at\nCambridge, of which the results are given in the _Journal_ for November\n1895, taken in connection with an article by Professor Richet in the\n_Annales des Sciences Psychiques_, for January-February 1893, placed\nbeyond reasonable doubt the facts that the frauds discovered (_sic_) by\nDr. Hodgson at Cambridge, had been systematically practised by Eusapia\nPaladino for years. In accordance, therefore, with our established\ncustom, I propose to ignore her performances for the future, as I\nignore those of other persons engaged in the same mischievous trade.\u2019\n\nSuch a judgment made a considerable and lamentable stir: if it were\nexact, it was just to pronounce it; if it were not thoroughly exact,\nSidgwick should have suspended his verdict. This is what Myers\nadvised\u2014this is what Lodge and Richet advised. But the experimenters\nwho followed Hodgson\u2019s impulse did not do this. They made a mistake,\nand subsequent events have proved they were wrong.\n\nI have said that their judgment was not quite accurate. Professor\nSidgwick said, addressing a general meeting of the Society for\nPsychical Research on the 11th October 1895 (_Journal S.\u00a0P.\u00a0R._, vii.\n131):\u2014\n\n\u2018I consider it to be proved beyond a doubt that the medium used\nsystematic trickery throughout this series of sittings. Her _modus\noperandi_ I will leave to Dr. Hodgson to describe, who\u2014though only\npresent during a part of the sittings\u2014has had better opportunities\nfor personally observing the actual process of fraud. When this\ntrickery was discovered, the greater part of the phenomena offered as\nsupernormal at these sittings were at once explained; and, this being\nso, I think it, in the circumstances, unreasonable to attribute\u2014even\nhypothetically\u2014to supernormal agency the residuum that was not so\neasily explicable. And considering the great general resemblance\nbetween the performances of the medium at these sittings and those\nI witnessed last year, I am now disposed to think that my earlier\nexperiences are to be similarly explained; I therefore wish to withdraw\naltogether the limited and guarded support which I gave last year to\nthe supernormal pretensions of Eusapia Paladino.\u2019\n\nSo Sidgwick declares that his former experiments were null and void, as\neverything could be explained by trickery!\n\nHodgson, at that same general meeting, explained the means used by\nEusapia, the surreptitious freeing of foot and hand, and some simple\napparatus such as a handkerchief and a small object, such as a coin\nor a piece of paper, covered with some phosphorescent preparation.\nHodgson\u2014and Myers reminded him of this\u2014forgot to say that he had\ninvented nothing, and that these trick devices had been discovered and\npreviously pointed out by others, notably by Richet, who has often\nexperimented with Eusapia Paladino. Sidgwick remarks that a portion of\nthe phenomena are not easily explicable by fraud. It would have been\ninteresting to know which. I suspect that certain levitations were\namong the number of these phenomena. But the notes published in the\n_Journal S.\u00a0P.\u00a0R._, vii. 148, only mention _attouchements_, and it is\nadvisable to limit the discussion to this fact, though it appears to me\nthe least demonstrative.\n\nLet us take the seance of the 1st September. We read p. 153:\n\u20187.25.\u2014R.\u00a0H. says, phenomenon preparing. _Enormous hand shaking\nMrs. M.\u2019s head, hand clearly felt._ H.\u00a0S., hand well held, but not\ncompletely. R.\u00a0H. has hand completely held, gap and then grasp again.\nHand holds H.\u00a0S. well. Right hand, thumb and finger clutch R.\u00a0H.\n(On nearly all occasions after the first few hand-touch phenomena,\nI informed the sitters of a coming phenomenon in some such words\nas that a phenomenon was preparing, before the phenomenon actually\noccurred, and usually immediately prior to its occurrence. I made this\nannouncement as a rule when I felt the right hand leaving mine, but\nsometimes when I felt it preparing to leave. After the phenomenon was\nover, and the hand returned, I described usually what I felt at the\nmoment of my description, so that E. might not become aware, through\nsome partial appreciation of my English, that I knew that her hand was\naway from mine during the production of the phenomenon. In some cases,\nwhen it was necessary, I added a few words about the state of holding\nduring the phenomenon.)\u2019\n\nI confess that I do not understand. Hodgson has shown himself so severe\nfor others, that he will not be annoyed with me for exacting the same\nprecision from him that he requires of others. Now, in the passage\nquoted, we read: first, that Mrs. Myers is touched by an enormous hand,\na hand which is \u2018clearly felt.\u2019 Either it is Eusapia\u2019s hand, released\nby Hodgson, in which case it ought to be _small_, for Eusapia\u2019s hand\nis small, or Mrs. Myers did not \u2018clearly feel\u2019 the hand which shook\nher. If Mrs. Myers has correctly described her impression, then Hodgson\nmakes a mistake in seeming to indicate that it is Eusapia\u2019s hand which\ntouched Mrs. M.; if not, then Mrs. M. has made a mistake. At any rate,\nthere is a contradiction here between the two observers.\n\nSidgwick acknowledges that Eusapia\u2019s tricks do not explain everything,\nyet he allows Hodgson to expatiate complacently upon fraudulent\n_attouchements_. The learned lawyer even mimicked Eusapia\u2019s tricks\nfor freeing her hands and feet before members of the Society for\nPsychical Research. But all this was already known by Continental\nspecialists. Hodgson had invented nothing; why did he confine himself\nto partial criticisms? why did he not discuss each fact, and especially\nthose which appeared inexplicable? He is very severe with Eusapia;\nwhy not treat her as he treats Mrs. Piper? He carefully discusses\nthe Neapolitan\u2019s errors and attempts; but does he think that there\nis no conscious or unconscious fraud with the American medium, and\nthat defunct Phinuit is alone responsible for the inaccuracies and\nfalsehoods observed in Mrs. Piper\u2019s mediumship, whilst Eusapia\u2019s fraud\nis conscious and voluntary?\n\nAs far as his experiments with Eusapia Paladino are concerned, I\nwill reply to him that, in a great measure, he and his friends\nwere responsible for her frauds, and almost wholly responsible for\nthe failure of the experiments. They appear to have neglected the\npsychological side of a medium\u2019s r\u00f4le, and forgot that a medium is not\na mechanical instrument.\n\nEusapia was not at her ease, and, if my memory serves me right, she\nfound the Cambridge centre rather disdainful and haughty, save Mr. and\nMrs. Myers. She was dull and lonely. I think she was not admitted to\nthe same table. But I will not affirm this detail; it seems to me she\ntold me, she was usually served apart from the members of the household.\n\nThe seances were too numerous (there were twenty seances held in\nless than seven weeks\u2014a seance every other day) if we take into\nconsideration her not being very well, and consequently unfit for\nanything for a few days. This was making sure of bad results,\nespecially as the seances sometimes lasted two and a half to three\nhours. It was impossible for the medium to recruit her strength\nphysically or morally, especially in a country where the manners, life,\nlanguage, and even the cooking were so different from those at Naples.\nShe was not well when in England. Was she long ill? I cannot say; but I\ncan affirm that she did not go home satisfied.\n\nIt appears, however, that the first seances were pretty good; there\nwere some suspicious things, as is often the case with Eusapia.\nHodgson\u2019s arrival changed everything: it was then that fraud was\ndiscovered, but a long time after Richet and Toselli had pointed it out.\n\nHow did Hodgson go to work? He appears to have conceived the\nsingular idea not to control Eusapia at all, and to leave at her\nfree disposal the hand he was supposed to hold. Every time he ceased\nto feel the contact of her hand, he announced a phenomenon; the\nphenomenon produced, he related his impressions in _English_ to his\nco-experimenters. These were two capital mistakes. The first passed\neven unconscious fraud: for though severe control sometimes stops the\nphenomena, at least it effectually prevents trickery. The second,\nby arousing Eusapia\u2019s jealous susceptibility, was bound to worry\nand irritate her. These considerations may appear to be secondary\nto persons, who are not acquainted with the difficulties which the\nobservation of psychical phenomena present; those who are familiar\nwith them will not gainsay me. However, if the Cambridge experimenters\nhad not gone any further than this, we might excuse them, and simply\nconsider they had blundered touching the necessary conditions; but they\nwent further. They invited to the seances Messrs. Maskelyne, father\nand son. These men, the well-known directors of the Egyptian Hall\nin London, have made it a speciality of producing by conjuring the\nphenomena called \u2018spiritistic.\u2019\n\nMr. Maskelyne, senior, did not conceal his bias, to judge by his\nletters in the _Daily Chronicle_ (29th Oct. 1895, and following days).\nThis conjurer explained certain levitations in a singular fashion.\nA small table had been carried on to the seance-table. According to\nMaskelyne, Eusapia had seized it with her teeth by bending backwards,\nand by this feat of dental strength had herself carried and placed\nthe smaller table on the larger one! Mr. Maskelyne felt the movement,\njust as Dr. Hodgson felt he had lost the contact of the hand, when a\nphenomenon was going to be produced. From this negative observation,\nMr. Maskelyne, like Hodgson, deducts the positive conclusion, that\nthe phenomenon was normally and fraudulently produced. I retain Mr.\nMaskelyne\u2019s affirmation, that the backward movement Eusapia made when\nthe small table was carried on to the larger one, revealed her method\nto him. Hodgson has the same impression as the conjurer. In concluding\nas they do, they both forget this circumstance, often observed with the\nItalian medium, that synchronous movements of her limbs accompany the\nphenomenon. If Mr. Maskelyne is excusable in not having studied and\nexamined this circumstance, Dr. Hodgson, well acquainted with psychical\nmatters, is unpardonable in having neglected it. This omission is a\nfundamental gap in his reasoning; and I think it robs it of all serious\nvalue.\n\nLet us take another example in the rare indications given by the\nCambridge experimenters (Extracts from report of seance of 1st Sept.\n1895, _Journal_, vii. 151-153):\u2014[\u2018The Report consists of notes taken\nby Mr. Myers at the time from the dictation of the sitters, with\nsupplementary statements added by some of the sitters afterwards; these\nare placed in square brackets, and all except those to which Mrs.\nSidgwick\u2019s initials are appended were written by Dr. Hodgson on Sept.\n2nd and 3rd. The italics refer to the descriptions of phenomena, the\nordinary type to the conditions of holding, etc.]. [Sitters arranged\nas follows:\u2014\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\u2018Mrs. Myers goes under the table, has the medium\u2019s feet on palms of\nhands far apart.]\n\n\u2018=7.= 6. _Three knocks_ [which sounded as if made on the top of the\ntable]. Right hand lies across R.\u00a0H. and holds H.\u00a0S.\u2019s three fingers\nwith at least two. Left hand holds F.\u00a0D. and Mrs. S. Three movements\nmade with left hand beforehand. Knees not moved and feet held tight.\n[Medium was asked to repeat this phenomenon.]\n\n\u2018=7.= 7. _Three knocks, rather loud and dull_ [resembling the\npreceding]. Right hand moving, holding H.\u00a0S.\u2019s and R.\u00a0H.\u2019s. Left hand\nwell off the table; holding satisfactory, held by F.\u00a0D. and Mrs. S.\nFeet well held, knees not moved.\n\n\u2018[Both series of three knocks were doubtless produced by Eusapia\u2019s\nhead. On the second occasion, I succeeded in getting her head between\nme and a slight light from the curtains behind, and observed the motion\nof her head part of the way forward and back. She moved her right hand,\nwith H.\u00a0S.\u2019s hand and mine, forward, outward, and upward somewhat,\nand possibly made a similar movement with her left hand, thus giving\nherself a free space to bend her head forward and down, and at the same\ntime having the hands which were holding hers, in a position from which\nit would be more difficult to grab.] [And had practically six hands out\nof the way of an accidental contact with her head. E.\u00a0M.\u00a0S.].\u2019\n\nSuch is the _proc\u00e8s-verbal_. Dr. Hodgson, I repeat, has been so severe\nwith others, that he will forgive me for being exigent with him.\n\nIs it admissible to reason in this way? to consider that she has,\n_perhaps_, made a movement with the left hand similar to the one\neffected with the right hand, and afterwards to hold that supposition\nas a demonstrated fact? Should he not have remembered that such a\nmovement, in a big woman like Eusapia, cannot be easily made without\nher arms betraying the movement of the spinal column, and the muscles\nof the neck, without the knees revealing the movement of the body?\n\nNow, the knee did not move; and Hodgson points out no movement of the\narm.\n\nThe movement of the head might have been one of those synchronous\nmovements of which I have spoken. Dr. Hodgson has omitted to consider\nthis hypothesis.\n\nTo sum up, limiting ourselves simply to published documents, we see\nthat the English experimenters paid no attention to the conditions\nunder which it is expedient to operate, that they tired out the medium,\nsurrounded her with elements of suspicion, encouraged her to fraud\u2014Dr.\nHodgson especially\u2014and finally concealed from her the severe judgment\nthey had formed about her. As Richet says, the Cambridge experiments\nprove only one thing, which is, that in that particular series of\nseances Eusapia frauded with her well-known methods, but it is rash to\nconclude thereupon that she has always frauded.[41]\n\n      [41] \u2018_A Cambridge Eusapia pendant une s\u00e9rie de s\u00e9ances a\n      fraud\u00e9 avec ses proc\u00e9d\u00e9s connus._ Voil\u00e0 la premi\u00e8re conclusion.\n      Et voici la seconde. _En mettant Eusapia dans l\u2019impossibilit\u00e9\n      de frauder, pendant cette m\u00eame s\u00e9rie d\u2019exp\u00e9riences de\n      Cambridge, Eusapia n\u2019a pas pu produire un seul ph\u00e9nom\u00e8ne\n      vrai...._\n\n      \u2018Il me para\u00eet qu\u2019il est t\u00e9m\u00e9raire de conclure que tous les\n      ph\u00e9nom\u00e8nes produits ou pr\u00e9sum\u00e9s produits par Eusapia sont\n      faux.... Sous des influences morales et psychologiques\n      dont la nature nous \u00e9chappe, pendant un tr\u00e8s long temps\n      Eusapia est incapable de pouvoir exercer une action vraie\n      quelconque, et peut-\u00eatre, \u00e0 Cambridge elle s\u2019est trouv\u00e9e dans\n      ces conditions.... J\u2019en conclus qu\u2019il n\u2019y a encore rien de\n      d\u00e9montr\u00e9, ni dans un sens, ni dans l\u2019autre, et qu\u2019il faut\n      courageusement poursuivre la recherche; et exp\u00e9rimenter\n      encore.\u2019\u2014CHARLES RICHET. (_Journal S.\u00a0P.\u00a0R._, vii. 179.)\n\nThe analysis of the documents published permits me to ascertain:\u2014\n\n  1. Demonstration of fraud in certain hypothetical cases.\n\n  2. Omission to indicate if the medium was conscious or in trance.\n\n  3. Omission to discuss phenomena non-explicable by fraud.\n\n  4. Apparent contradiction between Dr. Hodgson\u2019s statements and\n      those of other experimenters.\n\n  5. Omission to analyse if Eusapia\u2019s suspicious movements were\n      not muscular movements synchronous with the phenomena. This\n      omission is capital, and demonstrates the relative inexperience\n      of the Cambridge group.\n\n  6. Evident bias of Dr. Hodgson, who had taken up a decided stand,\n      and treated Eusapia\u2019s phenomena as fraudulent before having\n      seen them.\n\nIn a word, the Cambridge experimenters operated under bad conditions:\nthey could not obtain any good results by acting as they did. But,\neven under these wretched conditions, they ought to have received\nsome veridical phenomena, and the reading of their publications leads\nus to presume they did receive some. In any case, their report does\nnot demonstrate that everything was explicable by fraud, and is not\nsufficient to justify the sweeping judgment they brought to bear upon\nEusapia Paladino.\n\nNow, if we compare the Cambridge results with those obtained by other\nexperimenters, the conclusion we draw from these documents becomes more\nprecise. I refer my readers to the reports of the experiments at Milan\n(_Ann. des Sc. Psych._, 1893), and at l\u2019Agn\u00e9las (_Ibid._ 1896). I will\nonly dwell upon my personal experience with Eusapia. I experimented\nwith this medium in 1895, 1896, and 1897, and I obtained undeniable\nphenomena with her.\n\nLike other Continental experimenters, I tried to put Eusapia at her\nease, to win her confidence and sympathy; and the results of my seances\nwere convincing.\n\nAt l\u2019Agn\u00e9las, out of seance hours, and in full light, I saw the table\nraised to the height of my forehead. Every one was standing up,\nEusapia\u2019s hands were held and seen; her left hand, held by me, rested\non the right angle of the table.\n\nAt Choisy, in 1897, we received doubtful phenomena, notably the\n_apport_ of a carnation which appeared most suspicious to us; but we\nspoke openly of our doubts to Eusapia. At other times the phenomena\nwere of extraordinary intensity. One afternoon, Sunday, 11th October,\nall the sitters, even those furthest away from the medium, were touched.\n\nBut it was at Bordeaux, perhaps, in 1897 that the phenomena were most\nintense. I find in my notes\u2014which are not, and make no claim to be,\nreports\u2014the following recital:\u2014\n\n\u2018P. is vigorously touched. Eusapia gives him the control of her hands\nand feet. P. receives slaps in the back every time Eusapia presses his\nfoot. The noise is distinctly heard. P.\u2019s chair is shaken and drawn\nfrom under him. Eusapia rubs her feet on the floor, to give fluid, she\nsays. Finally P.\u2019s chair is slowly carried on to the seance-table.\nThe persons (Dr. Denuc\u00e9, Madame A., and I) for whom P. is between\nthe table and the window (a light from outside streams through the\nPersian shutters) see the chair very clearly outlined on the window\n(a large bay, six feet wide). After having been placed on the table,\nthe chair is taken back to the floor, and, a second time, carried on\nto the table. The movements were slowly produced; while they were\nbeing produced, the hands, feet, and head of the medium were under\ncontrol. If any part of the medium\u2019s body had touched the chair, the\ncontact would have been seen on the silhouette of the chair, the latter\nstanding out well against the lighted-up window. While the chair is in\nmovement P. is crouching down on his heels; he is touched on the back,\nhis garments are pulled, he is tickled; at the same time the table is\nlevitated. _These three manifestations were produced simultaneously._\u2019\n\nThis phenomenon is, perhaps, the most convincing Eusapia has given\nme in demi-obscurity; it was impossible to produce these three\nmanifestations simultaneously with a free hand and foot (admitting\nthere had been substitution): knowing the possible frauds, I had\nindicated to my co-experimenters Eusapia\u2019s ordinary tricks. Moreover,\nDr. Denuc\u00e9 and P., a barrister at Bordeaux, were both _au courant_ with\nthe usual frauds, and were experienced experimenters. I draw special\nattention to the visibility of the chair suspended in the air. We only\nsaw the outline of the chair, but we saw it plainly.\n\nHere is another levitation obtained under conditions which exclude\nevery device pointed out by Messrs. Hodgson and Maskelyne: teeth,\nstrap, hook, foot, hand holding the table, pressure of the knees,\netc.:\u2014\n\n\u2018Afterwards Eusapia makes us get up. She pulls the table into the\ncentre of the room (telling us she is doing this herself). She\ninvites M. to hold her feet; M. goes under the table. Eusapia becomes\nimpatient, and says to him \u201c_dietro_\u201d because the table would hurt her;\nM. stoops down behind Eusapia, and seizes her by the feet. Eusapia then\nsays she is going to raise the table without touching it. A circle is\nmade around the table, which, after several oscillations, rises up\nvertically. The top of the table reaches as high as our foreheads.\n\n\u2018A second time the table is levitated under the same conditions, and\nto the same height. The experimenters are all standing up around the\ntable, and no hand at all touches it.\u2019\n\nThe table stood out plainly against the window. It would have been easy\nto see the limb or instrument which was in contact with it, had there\nbeen any such contact.\n\nProfessor Sidgwick \u2018often asked Eusapia\u2014or rather John\u2014to favour him\nwith a hand-grasp when he was holding the two hands of the medium in\nhis two hands, since he regarded this as the only mode of holding the\nhands which could ever be perfectly satisfactory to him.\u2019 He solicited\nin vain. Now we obtained this phenomenon frequently:\u2014\n\n\u2018Eusapia takes Dr. D.\u2019s two hands, and gives him her two hands to\ncontrol. Under these conditions Dr. D. is touched. Eusapia does the\nsame thing with P., who is several times touched.\u2019\n\nHere are some phenomena obtained with a bright green light. \u2018One side\nof the table rises up, followed by two good levitations: the table is\nlevitated to a height of about one foot six inches, and remains from\ntwo to three seconds in the air. Eusapia\u2019s hands are well controlled\nand visible; her feet do not move. The feet of the table (visible to\nme) are not in contact with Eusapia\u2019s dress during the levitation. I\nsee the dress distinctly; it is motionless. When the levitation took\nplace no hand was touching the table.\u2019\n\nFinally, here is a crucial experiment, an account of which M. de Rochas\nhas published in the _Annales des Sciences Psychiques_ in 1898. At that\nmoment I still suspended my judgment, not that my opinion with regard\nto the phenomena produced by Eusapia and verified by me was uncertain,\nbut because I wished to study other mediums before pronouncing my\njudgment. My studies are now sufficiently complete, from the point of\nview of the observation of these facts, to permit me to declare my\nopinion. The reasons of prudence, which led me to beg M. de Rochas to\nwithhold my name from his report, no longer exist. Here is the extract\nfrom my notes made at the time of the experiment:\u2014\n\n\u2018I had bought, during the day, a letter-balance, which I brought to the\nseance. Eusapia makes us sit for two or three minutes with our hands\non the table. Then she approaches her hands to the letter-balance,\nplacing her left hand on top of Dr. D.\u2019s right hand. Dr. D. mentions\nthe sensation of a cold breeze, which ceases and recommences. Eusapia\u2019s\nhands are at about fifteen centimetres away from the letter-balance.\nShe makes two or three ascending and descending movements with\nher hands, palm directed downwards. At the second movement the\nletter-balance is pushed to the limit of its course, requiring for this\na force of more than one hundred and seventy grammes. Eusapia takes\nP.\u2019s left hand, and tries the experiment with him. She asks if he feels\nthe cool breeze. In a few seconds P. feels it over the third and fourth\nfingers. (P.\u2019s left hand is under the medium\u2019s right hand.) The tray is\nlowered, and the hand stops at the division 20.\n\n\u2018Eusapia takes Dr. D.\u2019s hand again. She forms a triangle with her\nhands. Dr. D. has always his right hand in Eusapia\u2019s left. The latter\u2019s\nhands are about fifteen centimetres away from one another, and about\nten centimetres away from the edge of the apparatus. The tray of the\nlatter is lowered; the hand marks 90 grammes, and _slowly_ returns to\n0; in the two preceding experiments it had returned abruptly.\n\n\u2018Eusapia tries to raise the scale. She directs her hands palms upwards.\nThe scale raises itself.\n\n\u2018P. puts a black pocket-book weighing seventy grammes on the tray.\nEusapia begins the last experiment over again. After two or three\nmovements of her hands, palms upwards, the tray is raised to its\nuttermost limit.\u2019\n\nThese experiments were made in a good green light.\n\nIn conclusion, we never hesitated to act openly with Eusapia, telling\nher what we thought. For example, at one time, in obscurity, Eusapia\ndrew the table to her without announcing it was she who did it. P.\nimmediately said: \u2018It is the medium who\u2019s drawing the table.\u2019 Eusapia\nwas not annoyed, and said that P. was right to speak of what he noticed.\n\nThese experiments at Choisy and Bordeaux, in the course of which there\nwere both good and bad seances, convinced me that I had not been the\nvictim of illusion at l\u2019Agn\u00e9las in M. de Rochas\u2019 house.\n\nMy judgment will convince no one. In such matters we must see for\nourselves in order to be convinced. Mr. Hodgson himself knows\nthis to-day. My testimony contradicts formally and explicitly the\nconclusions of the Cambridge investigators. Eusapia does not always\ndefraud; with us, she rarely defrauded.\n\nLet me terminate this discussion with Richet\u2019s words: \u2018Malgr\u00e9 les\napparences qui sont en effet souvent contre Eusapia, je ne suis fix\u00e9\nen aucune mani\u00e8re sur ce que j\u2019ai appel\u00e9 jusqu\u2019ici fraude.... Il est\npossible, que dans l\u2018\u00e9tat de trance, ou dans les \u00e9tats voisins, la\npsychologie d\u2019un m\u00e9dium soit tr\u00e8s diff\u00e9rente de la n\u00f4tre.\u2019\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX B\n\n\nI have criticised somewhat lengthily M. Janet\u2019s opinions: will the\nreader kindly allow me to make yet another incursion into scientific\nground. For it is perhaps necessary to reply to some objections which\nare advanced\u2014doubtless in all sincerity\u2014by certain savants who are\neither ill informed, or lacking in adequate knowledge of the subject.\nProfessor Grasset of the university of Montpellier, for whose talent\nand earnestness I have the greatest respect, has just published a long\narticle entitled _Le Spiritisme et la Science_ in the last volume of\nhis _Le\u00e7ons de clinique m\u00e9dicale_ (t. iv., 1903, p. 374). He begins\nby stating that he is going to take Janet as his guide, because the\nlatter\u2019s \u2018luminous ideas are and remain for him the sole scientific\nbasis now existing of these questions.\u2019 Though we see it in print,\nthis assertion is so extraordinary, that we wonder if we be not\ndreaming when reading it. Professor Grasset, then, is going to take\nJanet as a guide, Janet who has never seen anything! It makes one\nthink of the fable, only, this time, it is the blind man who climbs on\nthe paralytic\u2019s back. Grasset is going to deal with matters of such\nimportance, so prolific probably in new and unexpected consequences,\nwithout consulting the writers who have described the phenomena he is\ngoing to study! The authors from whose works he quotes\u2014Jules Bois,\nPapus, P\u00e9ladan, Mme. de Th\u00e9bes, L\u00e9o Taxil!\u2014have more to do with the\ncharms of fancy than with the gravity of science. The task of refuting\ntheir assertions is far too easy a one, and the learned professor ought\nto have chosen other and better representatives of psychical research.\nHis argumentation falls short of the mark.\n\nProfessor Grasset\u2019s case is, however, instructive. I consider\nhim as one of our best-informed scientists, and he seems to look\nupon psychical research without prejudice. Nobody can doubt his\nearnestness, his learning, his talent; but, in spite of these\nqualities, he shows himself to be unfamiliar with the serious work\nwhich has been done, and which is being done in psychical matters. When\nhe quotes Myers, he misquotes him. When he discusses the Piper case, he\nsums up the account given of the case by M. Mangin in the _Annales des\nSciences Psychiques_, and does not say a word of the careful reports\ndrawn up by Hodgson and Hyslop. It is not to be wondered at, therefore,\nif the professor\u2019s statements do not agree with the facts. He does\nnot appear to have studied either the original reports or M. Sage\u2019s\nremarkable summary of these reports.\n\nProfessor Grasset simply says: \u2018Four months after the death of Mr.\nRobinson (George Pelham), Mrs. Piper gave a seance in the house of one\nof Mr. Robinson\u2019s friends and fell into a trance.\u2019 [A slight mistake,\nthe seance took place at Mrs. Piper\u2019s.] \u2018P., the secondary personality,\nsaid that George Robinson was ready to communicate; and henceforth this\nspirit took part in Mrs. Piper\u2019s seances as another familiar spirit.\nSuch an example shows how _polygonal_ incarnations are formed during\nthe medium\u2019s trance.\u2019\n\nAnd no more! Professor Grasset does not see the real problem: did the\nmedium show any knowledge of facts known only to the deceased? This is\nthe problem. The mode of formation of the secondary personality is but\nan accessory question.\n\nThis kind of reasoning is common to savants. They keep aloof from\nthe real psychological problem, and only discuss its side issues.\nI am sorry to see a man of Professor Grasset\u2019s worth fall into the\nusual errors, and pronounce a judgment upon facts before thoroughly\nacquainting himself with those facts.\n\nProfessor Grasset speaks of _spiritisme scientifique_ as belonging\nto the realm of biology, and demanding the serious attention of\nscientists. But why speak of spiritism? Spiritism is a religion, it is\nnot a science; it is the _systematic explanation_ of the _ensemble_ of\ncertain facts, so far very ill understood, but it is not the assertion\nof those facts. Are the alleged facts true? That is the question which\nbiology has to examine. Spiritism, on the contrary, that is to say, the\n_ensemble_ of metaphysical doctrines founded upon the revelations of\nspirits, cannot be considered, at least for the present, as belonging\nto biology. I beg Professor Grasset not to confound the impartial,\nunbiased research for scientific truth with spiritism.\n\nThe little influence which the criticism of savants\u2014of even the\nmost renowned among them\u2014has had upon contemporary thought (_e.g._\nit has not been able to prevent or put a stop to the quest in the\ndomain of psychical sciences), is due precisely to their lack of\ncorrect information. They have always reasoned beside the question,\nanalysing the facts imperfectly, admitting only those which they can\neasily explain, and rejecting all others as fraudulent or doubtful.\nTo those who have studied these \u2018fraudulent and doubtful\u2019 facts,\nthey are neither doubtful nor fraudulent, and the only effect, which\nthe obstinate negation of certain savants has, is to rob their words\nof all serious influence and value. And this is a pity, for the\nsavants themselves first of all, and afterwards for the public who,\nill enlightened, become the prey of charlatans or the victims of\n_illumin\u00e9s_.\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX C\n\n\nIt is to the kindness of M. Braunschweig that I owe the following\nstory, which is instructive from several points of view. M.\nBraunschweig, a retired business man, intelligent and highly educated,\nis well known in his town. The phenomena, of which he guarantees\nthe authenticity, have not been observed by me; but the disastrous\nconsequences of his and M. Vergniat\u2019s too great confidence in a\n\u2018spirit\u2019 taught him such a useful and serious lesson, that I thought I\nwould do well to make it known. I only give it with that object, for I\ncannot personally vouch for the extraordinary facts in this interesting\nrecital. I give this recital _in extenso_ without changing anything, in\norder not to alter its physiognomy.\n\n\n_A Mystery_\n\n  Canius Junius when walking to the scaffold said to his friends:\n    \u2018You ask me if the soul is immortal; I am going to find out, and\n    if I can, I will return to tell you.\u2019\n\nThese notes, written in haste, and, as it were, off-hand, have no other\nclaim than to bring a few strange facts together, leaving every one\nfree to appreciate them as they think best.\n\nFor a while I was swayed by a preoccupation; I hesitated in the face\nof incredulity, which thrusts aside all which is neither matter nor\nnumber, to unveil phenomena of the nature of those which have been\nverified by so many persons already; but the duty imposed upon me of\npreserving my children from trials similar to mine, has triumphed over\nmy hesitation, and I will proclaim the truth without any fear of their\never doubting their father\u2019s veracity.\n\nIn writing these lines, I yield to a feeling that the witness of\nmysterious facts ought to give, in the interests of humanity or\nscience, a scrupulously exact narration of what he has seen. And\nparticularly so when his revelations are likely to preserve the\ninexperienced from the pitfalls of an occult power which it would be as\nsenseless to deny the existence of as to doubt of its power for good or\nevil, according as it desires good or evil. I therefore accomplish what\nI believe to be a duty. This conviction suffices to brave the spirit\nalways more or less strong, which is ever inclined to deny what it\ncannot explain.\n\nThe fear of being accused of seeking for sympathy, by relating these\nfacts of which I have been the victim, might also have stopped me from\nspeaking; but for the loss of a few worldly goods, my mind, my soul,\nfinds ample compensation in that certitude of a future life, which\nresults from the facts the Master permitted me to witness.\n\nIt was in 1867. Attracted by the noise of a trumpet, I crossed _La\nPlace Saint-Andr\u00e9_, and went down the dark, narrow street which, at\nthat time, skirted the Cathedral, and where _bric-\u00e0-brac_ dealers used\nto spread out their wares. At the corner of the street Palangues, I\ncame across a crowd gathered around an auctioneer who was holding a\nsale of statuary.\n\nI was passing on indifferently when the auctioneer held up a statuette,\nthe outlines and graceful pose of which immediately struck my fancy.\n\nWas it a Virgin? A _mater dolorosa_? I do not know. But I still see\nthat beautiful face, stamped with sadness, the eyes upraised, two\ngreat tears tremblingly seeming to implore me to put a stop to this\nprofanation. The general appearance of the statue\u2014its head bent\nslightly forward\u2014and the graceful drapery denoted a work of art.\n\nI bought it, yielding simply to the desire of possessing an artistic\nwork, and not to satisfy any religious sentiment, which, I must own,\ndid not exist.\n\nI also bought a bracket to support the statuette, and a few minutes\nafterwards, everything was arranged in my room, Rue du Palais Tallien,\nNo. 147.\n\nMy wife, Madame Vergniat, was at P\u00e9rigord. When she returned home,\nshe was surprised to see, in the most conspicuous spot in my room, a\nreligious object which I myself had bought.\n\nHer surprise was legitimate, for strong prejudices against religion\nleft little room in my mind for religious practices.\n\nNothing strange happened in that house, although we lived in it for\na long time after the purchase of the statuette. But I always felt\nsuch great pleasure in admiring my Virgin, that I have often wondered\nwhether this ill-defined attraction were not the prelude, and, in some\nmeasure, a first influence of the mysterious facts which were going to\nhappen.\n\nWe left our residence in the Rue du Palais Tallien to go to a house I\nhad bought in the Rue Malbec, No. 116.\n\nIt was a detached house surrounded by a garden; it contained two\nbedrooms, a sitting-room, and a vestibule which served as a dining-room.\n\nIn order to make my recital intelligible, I am obliged to give a few\ndetails about the furniture and its arrangement.\n\nA night-table separated my bed from the fireplace. Above the table was\na holy-water fount; above the latter an oil painting representing the\nVirgin; finally, near the ceiling, the statuette on its bracket.\n\nTo the left of the night-table, in the recess beside the chimney, there\nwas a panoply composed of swords and sabres.\n\nWhen we were settled, Madame Vergniat again visited P\u00e9rigord. It was\nduring her absence that the first manifestation took place, but I\nattached no great importance to it.\n\nHere are the circumstances under which the phenomenon occurred.\n\nI was awakened in the night by the sound of a violent blow as of some\none hammering at the front door. I promptly lit the candle, and looked\nat the time; it was one o\u2019clock.\n\nThis visit was not of a reassuring nature, for, to be able to knock at\nthe front door at this hour of the night, it was necessary to leap over\nthe gate, which, securely closed, barred access to the house.\n\nBefore proceeding to open the door, I waited for a second knock, but\nin vain. I was awakened, at the same hour on the following night, by a\nsimilar rap.\n\nThe nurse, sleeping with the children in the next room, hearing the\nknock, got frightened. I tried to reassure her by saying: \u2018_To-morrow\na loaded gun will receive the individual who takes such a pleasure in\narousing us._\u2019\n\nI underline these words, because further on we will have occasion of\nseeing them repeated in a surprising manner.\n\nA few months later, and without any new incidents occurring in the\nmeantime, our nurse was discharged, and replaced by a strong healthy\ngirl from the Pyrenees.\n\nThe nocturnal visit had been quite forgotten, when on the 23rd January\n1868, Madame Vergniat and the nurse, who were busy in my room, heard\nsomething like a rustling on the window-panes, and saw the statuette\nbow twice, as though saluting them. At first they thought an earthquake\nhad happened, and when I entered they related the incident to me in\nscared tones.\n\nThe statuette was indeed displaced; but was that sufficient to convince\nme? No.\n\nI laughed at the story, convinced that my wife and the nurse were\nvictims of an illusion.\n\nHowever, on the morrow and following days, the same phenomena occurring\nat the same hour, that is to say towards eleven o\u2019clock in the morning,\nI determined to stay at home and verify _de visu_ this marvellous fact.\n\nI got what I wanted; for on that day, the statuette turned about now\nto the right, now to the left, twelve or fourteen times. Sometimes it\nadvanced and balanced itself on the edge of the pedestal.\n\nThe evolution was so prompt and so unexpected, that the eye could\nscarcely follow the movement.\n\nI was not long in ascertaining that, before executing these movements,\nthe mysterious power awaited the moment when the attention, tired of\nremaining on the _qui vive_, was off its guard. Then a sharp sounding\nrap, similar to the discharge of an electric spark, denoted that the\nevolution had taken place.\n\nThe picture hanging under the statuette lost its equilibrium, the\n_b\u00e9nitier_ fell over, and the swords swayed about like so many clock\npendulums.\n\nI noticed that the presence of my wife and the nurse aided these\nmanifestations considerably; I even noticed that the appearance of\neither of them on the threshold of the room sufficed to provoke the\nphenomena.\n\nI tried to dissimulate the preoccupation these manifestations caused\nme, and I pretended to attach no importance to them, in order to react\nagainst the exaltation and fear which were taking hold of Madame\nVergniat and the nurse, and of the two work-women, who were also\nconstant witnesses of this disorder.\n\nBut instead of aiding me in my efforts, the Virgin no longer contented\nherself with simple evolutions on her pedestal. She began to let\nherself fall down on the eiderdown of my bed, and would remain buried\nthere until a sharp sounding rap announced that she had returned to her\npedestal.\n\nIn a short time, the raps became more frequent, and did not always\nindicate displacements. We heard them on the doors, on the cupboards,\netc., and even in the middle of the garden.\n\nThus on returning home one day, such a formidable rap resounded, that\nthe neighbours ran to their windows, and called out to me: \u2018Well, M.\nVergniat, one would think you were being saluted.\u2019\n\nThese facts, already so extraordinary, were to be succeeded by others\nmore extraordinary still.\n\nThe watchmaker, M. Ouvrard, who wound up our clocks every fortnight,\nhaving at one time taken up the study of somnambulism, thought he\nrecognised in our nurse a subject who would be susceptible to magnetic\ninfluences, and proposed putting her to sleep.\n\nA few minutes sufficed to obtain the state of prostration and\ninsensibility which characterises magnetic sleep. For the first few\nseances, Marie\u2019s replies were unintelligible, but she very soon began\nto express herself clearly and even with volubility.\n\nConsidering the state of mind the manifestations of the statuette kept\nus in, it will be readily understood that the first question put to the\nsomnambulist was, \u2018Do you see who it is who moves the Virgin about?\u2019\n\n\u2018I see him,\u2019 she replied, \u2018he is close to me on his knees, praying. It\nis a man dressed in a brown coat, holding a dark-covered book in his\nhand. I do not see his face. I only see a part of his moustache, for he\nis turning his back to me.\u2019\n\nFor several days her answers were always the same. But having insisted\nupon knowing the name of the man in prayer, the somnambulist at last\nreplied, \u2018I am Madame\u2019s father.\u2019\n\nHowever, this assertion was soon contradicted by a more explicit\ndeclaration.\n\nIt was so easy to produce the magnetic sleep with Marie, that, once\nwhen she asked me to put her to sleep, I succeeded in doing so without\nhaving any other notions about such things than those I had gathered\nfrom our few seances; but I found it impossible to awaken her, and was\nobliged to send for the watchmaker, hoping he would help me out of my\ndilemma. He arrived, but his efforts were in vain.\n\nThe somnambulist made fun of us, and teased the watchmaker about his\n_embonpoint_.\n\nThis fact is to be noted, for it contradicts the current belief that\nthe subject obeys the will of the magnetiser: but what follows reveals\na phenomenon of vastly different interest.\n\nMarie ceased to speak in her own name. A spirit having taken possession\nof her will, declared that all our efforts to awaken the somnambulist\nwould be useless.\n\n\u2018I am quite comfortable here,\u2019 said the spirit, \u2018and it pleases me to\nstay. But at four o\u2019clock, I am wanted elsewhere; the somnambulist will\nthen awaken of her own accord. Have the patience to wait.\u2019\n\nAt the hour mentioned, at the exact moment, the somnambulist returned\nto her normal state.\n\nFrom that day forth the somnambulist remained constantly under the\ninfluence of the spirits who took possession of her during her sleep.\nThus, as soon as she was asleep, the spirit sometimes said, \u2018I have\nonly a few minutes to stay\u2019; and when the time was up, Marie would\nawaken without any intervention.\n\nDuring these more or less lengthy conversations, the spirit took a\nfancy to calling me his son. His advice testified to a disposition of\ngreat benevolence, and was chiefly of a profoundly religious character.\nIt is incontestable that, by an inexplicable phenomenon, Marie\u2019s\nfaculties were replaced, during these communications, by a spirit whose\nsuperiority it was impossible not to recognise, a superiority revealed\nby the tone of the discussion and the choice of expressions.\n\nPressing him one day for an explanation, I resolutely asked him, \u2018But\nwho are you, then?\u2019\n\n\u2018I am he, you wanted to receive with a loaded gun, when I knocked at\nyour door at one o\u2019clock in the morning.\u2019\n\nRemember the somnambulist was absolutely ignorant of this fact, as she\nwas not in our service when the strange nocturnal visit occurred.\n\nAs for the Virgin, she was not at a standstill all this time; she\ncontinued to turn five or six times every day.\n\nThe good advice of the spirit, the purity of his principles, most\ncertainly interested me; but I confess the statuette interested me\nmore. Had I not a tangible, undeniable fact before me, just as stubborn\nas my reason tried to be? Stamping my feet I repeated, \u2018And still she\nturns.\u2019\n\nEver on my guard, even in face of evidence, I gave myself the\nsatisfaction of imprisoning the Virgin, but in such a way as to be able\nto verify her evolutions.\n\nI had a niche of wire made, covered with transparent gauze, and,\nsealing it to the wall, I securely shut up the statuette therein.\n\nMy work done, I left my room. At once a formidable rap resounded: I ran\nto the room, everything had disappeared, the pedestal alone was still\nin its place. The Virgin, thrown on to the bed, was found buried in the\neiderdown, whilst the casing was at the side of the bed.\n\nMy precautions having incurred displeasure, I took care not to renew\nthem. When consulted on this, the next day, the somnambulist, or rather\nthe spirit acting through her, said, \u2018Never touch the Virgin, leave her\nthere; otherwise she will be transferred,\u2019 adding, \u2018he who takes her\naway from her pedestal will know very well how to put her back again.\u2019\n\nThis recommendation was followed; but one day the statuette\ndisappeared. Madame Vergniat having quite got over her first fears,\nsearched for it actively everywhere, and after having turned the house\nupside down in her quest, found it in a cupboard behind the children\u2019s\nbed. This cupboard, being dissimulated by tapestry, had never been\nused, and we did not even know of its existence.\n\nHow had the Virgin got into it?\n\nThe displacements became more and more frequent. For instance, the\nstatuette took it into its head to change rooms, and the sitting-room\nbecame its favourite resort, but it never let a whole day pass without\nreappearing upon its pedestal.\n\nThe doors opened and shut before it with the same sharp sound which\nfollowed each evolution. All this went on so rapidly that we were more\nsurprised than inconvenienced.\n\nUnder the influence of these phenomena, the ordinary sleep of the\nsomnambulist became heavier. At night she was often heard speaking\naloud. She awakened with difficulty, and having shaken off her torpor,\nshe could not open her eyes. \u2018They feel as though they were glued\ndown,\u2019 she used to say. But placing her fingers on Marie\u2019s eyelids,\nMadame Vergniat used to pray, and the difficulty would disappear.\n\nIn her ordinary sleep, the conversation was not serious; it was more\noften commonplace, full of jesting, sometimes even of bad taste;\nwhereas in provoked sleep, we constantly found a serious spirit,\nprofessing the purest maxims, and giving advice full of sincere charity.\n\nI asked this mysterious spirit if it were true that he was Madame\u2019s\nfather, as he had once declared himself to be.\n\nHere is his reply, I give it word for word: \u2018My son, I read in your\nmind (for you cannot hide your thoughts from me) that not having enough\nfaith to attribute to God the happiness of the visit you receive in\nyour house, you seek its explanation in absurd suppositions. _Do not\nbelieve in spiritism, my son._\n\n\u2018God, who is essentially good, could not permit your spirit-friends,\nafter having gone through all the trials of earth, to be condemned to\nlook on at the turpitudes and the sufferings of those who are dear to\nthem. This is a torture which God did not wish to reserve for you.\n\n\u2018Yes, a Spirit exists; but He is alone, unique, and that Spirit is\nmine. It is He who breathes into all things, who animates all things;\nHe who makes you act, walk, stop when you believe that your own will is\nall-powerful.\n\n\u2018That Spirit, I repeat, is unique. It is the Master\u2019s.\u2019\n\nLet us remark, _en passant_, that this is the opinion of Mallbranche,\nwho claims God to be the immediate Author of the union we admire\nbetween soul and body.\n\n\u2018I see that you doubt my words,\u2019 added the spirit, \u2018(for I have already\ntold you that you cannot hide your thoughts or actions from me), and\nyou are saying, \u201cWhat presumption! to suppose that I have deserved such\na visit, and that the Divine Spirit has knocked at my door!\u201d\n\n\u2018You prefer, therefore, my son, to doubt my words and to stand aloof\nfrom the truth. So be it! but do not forget, whatever your appreciation\nmay be about me and the object of my visit, be assured that I am only\nable to visit your home in pursuance of a supreme will, and that all\nyour efforts to drive me away, and even my desire to leave you before\nthe accomplishment of my mission, would be equally useless.\n\n\u2018Welcome me, therefore, as a kind father who comes to help his son to\ntread the painful path of life. I have never left you since you came\ninto the world. We have gone through many worries together, we have\nborne many sorrows; but better times are at hand, and I am able to\nreveal to you, my child, that from the moment I am able to make my\nvoice heard, the blessing of the Master will assure you the repose of\nbody, soul, and spirit.\n\n\u2018No more worry for you, your father is here to shield you. But in\nexchange for the good which my mission is to bring you, I ask you to\nturn your thoughts to the Creator, and thank Him for the immense favour\nHe has accorded you. For, learn that no man has ever before received\nsuch a Visitor in his home.\n\n\u2018I desire you to attend divine service regularly, and to go to\ncommunion.\n\n\u2018I also desire you to help those people whose addresses and needs I\nwill make known to you; but as I am a protector, if I impose charges\nupon you, I will also procure you the means of providing for them.\u2019\n\nImagine what an influence these mysterious facts already exercised\nover me, when I say that I promised everything, and, like a submissive\nchild, took the communion with fervour.\n\nFrom that day forth the benevolence of the unknown was extended over\nevery one and every thing, from the household to the house needs. His\nsolicitude, for the somnambulist especially, drove him sometimes to\ncharge me with delicate missions, of which I will give an example.\n\nI had once just put Marie to sleep, when the spirit manifested itself,\nsaying:\u2014\n\n\u2018I am going to speak to you about some of the private affairs of the\nsomnambulist, and I beg you to follow my instructions.\n\n\u2018This girl thinks of marrying a carpenter, named Toussaint, who has\nbeen following her about for a long time. But Marie\u2019s parents, who are\nhonest folk, will never consent to this marriage. First of all, because\nToussaint is a worthless fellow, and in the second place, because\nToussaint\u2019s brother was condemned _yesterday_ to pay an ignominious\npenalty for a foul crime he has committed.\n\n\u2018Therefore, Marie must cease to know this young man; moreover, his\njealous and violent character might soon endanger her life.\n\n\u2018Marie is ignorant of these details. Therefore, when she awakens, take\ncare not to repeat our conversation; but to-morrow, when returning from\nBordeaux, tell her about this as though it were some news you had heard\nof in town.\n\n\u2018Marie will deny everything, first of all; she will pretend not to know\nthe individual; but insist upon it, and she will confess everything.\u2019\n\nAnd this, in fact, is what happened.\n\nThe spirit went on to say:\u2014\n\n\u2018This workman has recently wounded his hand, and is consequently\ndebarred from working; he is always prowling about the house, and I\nadvise you to be on your guard against him.\u2019\n\nMarie often used to ask me to put her to sleep in the evening. Then,\nstrange to say, she would tell us when and how many times this man\nToussaint would pass the door, the next day.\n\nThis information was always correct. However, one day, our man did not\nturn up at the given time\u2014he was two minutes late. Marie was asleep\nin the sitting-room, and I went backwards and forwards from her to\nthe terrace. I was nearly losing patience, when she cried out, \u2018He is\ncoming\u2014you will barely have time to get to the terrace.\u2019 And so it was;\nas soon as I reached my post of observation, the carpenter came into\nthe Rue Malbec out of the Rue B\u00e8gles.\n\nA few days afterwards, the spirit, whom the somnambulist called \u2018Grand\nFather,\u2019 warned us that Marie ran a great risk. Toussaint having had\nthe door shown to him everywhere because of the disgrace which had\nfallen upon his family, had made up his mind to avenge himself.\n\nAnimated with the worst designs, he had shaved off his beard in order\nto make himself unrecognisable; and hiding a large knife under his\ncoat, he was bending his way to the house, with the fixed purpose, said\nthe spirit, of striking Marie.\n\nWhen giving us this information through the somnambulist, our\nmysterious friend added: \u2018Do not allow this girl to go out to-day. I\nwill deliver you from this dangerous man very soon, by making him wish\nto go on a long voyage, from which he will never return.\u2019\n\nTwo or three days afterwards, Marie heard that this individual had left\nfor Algeria.\n\nFirst of all we have seen, by the substitution of the spirit to the\nfaculties of the somnambulist, how our free-will is subordinated to\noccult influences. And if the objection be made that in that case,\nmagnetic influences facilitated this substitution, there still remains\nthe case of the carpenter, whose free-will was absolutely subjugated\nafter premeditation, as is shown by the spirit\u2019s declaration that he\nwould \u2018make him wish to take a long voyage from which the individual\nwould never return.\u2019\n\nIn proportion as these strange facts succeeded each other, we yielded\nfurther and further to an influence from which it was impossible to\nescape\u2014I may even say we were happy to obey.\n\nHow could we thrust aside advice which was always thoroughly honest,\nand with which the name of God was constantly associated?\n\nAfter the somnambulist, Madame Vergniat was the one who felt the\neffects of this mysterious atmosphere the most strongly.\n\nFor my part, I had, at first, confined myself simply to observing the\nphenomena, to accepting them only as a study; but under the influence\nof surprise upon surprise, filled with admiration, I ended in blind\nsubmission. And yet, we were only at the beginning of our marvellous\nmanifestations.\n\nOften, during a meal, if we had need of something or other, Marie would\nbring it to us before we asked for it. A voice, which she thought was\nat times mine, at times Madame Vergniat\u2019s, transmitted our desire\nto her before it was expressed. It was a splendid case of thought\ntransference.\n\nIf the maid\u2019s work was not quite properly done, he who watched over\nthe house so assiduously, punished her immediately, by removing with\nremarkable dexterity the foulard she wore on her head. And if she ever\nhappened to be wanting in politeness towards us, she was instantly\ncalled to order in the same way, without any consideration for the\nplace or circumstances she might be in at the moment. I have often seen\nher foulard thrown on the ground, to remind her that she should allow\nus to pass before her into a carriage, omnibus, etc.\n\nI have also had occasion to witness a very surprising manifestation,\nsurprising because of the facility shown for displacing a piece of\nfurniture the weight of which was relatively considerable.\n\nOften, after retiring to rest, the somnambulist would feel her bed\ngently rolled into the centre of the floor, and then back again to its\nplace. This to-and-fro movement used to be repeated as often as three\nor four times in the same evening; the movement was slow, we could see\ndistinctly that great mass moving about under the impulsion of some\ninvisible force.\n\nThe somnambulist, as I said in the beginning, was a big, stout girl\nfrom the Pyrenees. She could neither read nor write, and the sight\nof all these supernatural things astounded and alarmed her. I have\nremarked that, in her normal state, she often forgot what she had seen\nthe previous day. But what she really did understand was that \u2018Grand\nFather\u2019 was not satisfied with her when a crust of bread or some cheese\nwas thrown at her head; this was a sure sign that there was a hitch\nsomewhere.\n\nIn the vestibule, which we used as a dining-room, a small Louis xv.\nlustre was suspended; it often swayed about when we sat down to meals,\nand the movement, which was always preceded by a rustling on the metal\nchains, was slow or accelerated according to my wife\u2019s expressed or\nunexpressed wish.\n\nIf we had visitors, everything was so quiet that no one would ever have\nsuspected what strange things happened to us habitually. It looked as\nthough these manifestations were reserved for the inmates of the house\nand for a few privileged guests, whose attention was, perforce, aroused\nby the noise.\n\nTwo young girls, one Anna \u2014\u2014, from P\u00e9rigord, the other Mathilde \u2014\u2014,\nfrom Bordeaux, who worked almost constantly in our house, were present\nat most of these occurrences, and \u2018Grand Father\u2019 even testified much\naffection for these girls.\n\nIn the beginning, I said that when the statuette turned on its\npedestal, the swords had moved about in the contrary direction. One of\nthem was unhooked and deposited in a corner of the wall, but in the\npresence of Madame Vergniat an invisible force almost immediately put\nit slowly back again in its place.\n\nThe oscillations of the lustre, the movements of the swords, the\ndisplacements of the bed were the only phenomena which the eye was able\nto follow; all the others were so rapid that they escaped even the most\nvigilant attention.\n\nOur presence in the house was not necessary to produce noises and\nother phenomena. The fact which I am going to relate contradicts the\nopinion emitted by some spiritists, that spirits borrow the force which\nis indispensable to produce these displacements from the mediums or\nassistants.\n\nWe once went to spend a day in the country, taking the nurse with us,\nand leaving the house empty for the day. Returning in the evening, the\nneighbours came out to meet us saying that they feared all our crockery\nwas broken, because ever since our departure a dreadful noise had\nreigned in the house. We searched all the rooms, but no damage had been\ndone, and everything was in its place.\n\nWhere, therefore, in that empty house had the spirit taken the\nauxiliary force which we are told is necessary for its manifestations?\n\nI was very reserved respecting these facts. I did not care to noise\nthem abroad, for had I done so controversy would certainly have arisen.\n\nAnother reason for remaining silent was, that once after having spoken\nof these events to the member of a reputedly religious family, the\nVirgin refused to make any evolution before this visitor. But scarcely\nwas the incredulous person out of the house when the statuette was\ndisplaced.\n\nThe same evening I put Marie to sleep, and reproached the spirit\nseverely.\n\n\u2018What happens here is for you alone,\u2019 he replied, \u2018and ought not to be\nexhibited as a spectacle.\u2019\n\nHowever, this apparently severe admonition was soon infringed upon by\nhimself under the following circumstances:\u2014\n\nM. Bossuet, a hairdresser in the Rue Bouffard, at Bordeaux, was\ndressing Madame Vergniat\u2019s hair in the sitting-room: my wife heard\nthe sharp rap which usually announced a displacement of the Virgin.\nShe got up, and without saying anything went into the room, followed\ninstinctively by M. Bossuet. The Virgin was balancing herself on\nthe edge of the bracket. M. Bossuet, quickly understanding what was\nhappening, cried out in admiration, \u2018_Mon Dieu!_ how glad I am to have\nseen such a thing!\u2019\n\nM. Bossuet is dead now; who can say whether he has found the solution\nof the problem which engages us?\n\nI took advantage of this incident to ask why the Virgin had moved\nduring M. Bossuet\u2019s visit, since it was told me that these favours were\nexclusively reserved for the household.\n\n\u2018I choose my company,\u2019 replied the spirit, \u2018and I had to reward M.\nBossuet for having patiently reproduced the features of Christ in some\nhair.\u2019\n\nI do not know if it be true\u2014though many have since assured me it is\ntrue\u2014that M. Bossuet was the author of such a work. I confine myself,\nas a faithful reporter, to recording the reply which was given me.\n\nOur house had one inconvenience\u2014a very disagreeable one in winter\u2014that\nof obliging the maid to cross the garden in order to open the gate for\nthe milkman, who rang every morning at daybreak.\n\nWe were looking for a combination which might enable us to avoid this\ninconvenience, when our kind protector came to our aid.\n\nThis fact is one of the most curious of our long series of surprising\nadventures.\n\nHenceforth, when the milkman\u2019s cart stopped at the gate and before he\nrang, a mysterious power shot back the bolt in the lock. Then the gate\nopened, and the milkman placed on the window-sill the jug of milk,\nwhich the domestic took in later on.\n\nPerhaps the milkman thought a special mechanism allowed us to open the\ndoor. However that may be, his imagination was evidently at work, for\nhe was heard to say aloud, when getting into his cart, \u2018All the same,\nthis is a very queer house.\u2019\n\nSometimes, after having attended vespers either at Sainte-Croix or at\nthe Vieillards, we used to take a long walk, and often we returned home\ntired and impatient to sit down and rest a while.\n\nSo that we might not have to wait, an invisible hand used to knock at\nthe door before we arrived there.\n\nThis fact could not be hidden, and our neighbour, Madame Pardeau, in a\ngood position for observation, laughed at the attentions shown us.\n\nAt about this time there was a strange substitution, one which would,\nhenceforth, render the intervention of the somnambulist unnecessary.\nMadame Vergniat and I were returning home after visiting Talence. On\nthe way, my wife turned round quickly, saying: \u2018Some one has just\ncalled me: twice I heard a voice say, \u201cH\u00e9lo\u00efse! H\u00e9lo\u00efse!\u201d\u2019\n\nFrom that day forth, Madame Vergniat asked questions mentally and a\nforeign voice answered them.\n\nVery soon the voice took the initiative of conversations, and absorbing\nMadame Vergniat\u2019s faculties, spoke through her.\n\nThere was no being deceived; it was easy to recognise the same\nbenevolent spirit, which had only changed his dwelling-place, as it\nwere.\n\nThe first recommendation given through Madame Vergniat was to cease\nputting Marie to sleep. \u2018Henceforth you will not be able to do so,\nwithout incurring much unpleasantness.\u2019\n\nBut my keen desire to see and to observe everything was so great, that\nit got the better of this last advice, and I put the somnambulist\nto sleep as usual. Ill came of it. To the charitable and benevolent\ndiscourses succeeded a dishevelled language, which I thought I could\nput an end to by awakening the somnambulist; but it was impossible to\ndo so.\n\nShe walked about the room with her eyes closed, crying out: \u2018I will\nwake up when it suits me to do so. I am here, and I want to stay just\nbecause my staying annoys you.\u2019 Then she tried to go out to walk about\nin the garden, and I was obliged to lock the door.\n\nThis scene, which lasted for several hours, took away my wish for\nfurther experimentation with Marie.\n\nFrom that time, Marie was subjected to several ill-defined influences\nduring her ordinary sleep; she spoke aloud, sometimes she used serious\nlanguage; sometimes she seemed to be filled with mad joy. The former\ndepth and goodness in advice given through her had disappeared.\n\nMoreover, I was amply compensated by the new situation which rendered\nthe somnambulist\u2019s intervention unnecessary, and I thought no further\nof risking the disagreeable scene of which I have spoken. I may even\nsay that all magnetic attempts and experiments with Marie ended here.\nThere was no further question of them.\n\nSometimes the spirit when consulted did not answer. Madame Vergniat\nwould then say, \u2018I speak to him, but he does not reply.\u2019 But he never\nkept us waiting very long.\n\nThe spirit often announced his departure. \u2018If you have something to ask\nme, or to tell me,\u2019 he would say, \u2018be quick, because I am obliged to\ngo away, and will only be able to return to-morrow at such and such a\ntime.\u2019\n\nAnd, until the time indicated had arrived, all questioning was useless.\nThere were no replies.\n\nHundreds of times I had had occasion of verifying the exactness of\ninformation furnished by means of Marie; but it remained to me to find\nout if the information given by the new channel had the same value.\n\nI had not long to wait before attaining certitude in that respect.\n\nIt was on a winter\u2019s evening, the night was pitch dark, it was pouring\nin torrents. Returning home from business, the maid came to tell me\nthat a small Havanese dog, which a neighbour had kindly given us, had\ngone astray. As I said, the weather was fearful, and we could not\nthink of going out to search for the tiny animal. But, as I appeared\nto be troubled about the matter, Madame Vergniat, who so far had\nsaid nothing, raised her head, and addressing me in the peculiar way\nwhich announced an official communication, said, \u2018So you were really\nattached to that little animal! Very well! do not be sad, you will\nfind it again. I see it; a workman is holding it under his jacket in a\nhairdresser\u2019s establishment in the Rue B\u00e8gles (the little hunchback).\u2019\n\nThe information was precise; given by the somnambulist, I would not\nhave hesitated believing it; but I now needed further proof; therefore,\nin spite of the weather, I went out in search of the dog. My quest\nhaving led me to the hairdresser\u2019s, I looked timidly in at the\nwindow, when the hunchback perceived me, and called out: \u2018Do you want\nsomething, M. Vergniat?\u2019 I replied, \u2018If you should happen to hear that\na small Havanese dog has been found, be kind enough to let me know.\u2019\n\nA workman, who was in the shop, said: \u2018Five minutes ago I held it in my\njacket trying to warm it. I had picked it up sopping wet, in a corner\nof the street, where I dropped it again.\u2019\n\nSome few steps further off, I observed a white spot in the darkness. It\nwas Fleurette crouching down in the shelter of a doorway.\n\nI returned home triumphantly, carrying the children\u2019s happiness with\nme, as well as the confirmation of the infallibility of our protector.\nThe influence of this power, which revealed itself as unlimited, will\nbe easily understood. Always gaining fresh ground by new supernatural\nphenomena, its will entirely superseded ours. What in the beginning it\nformulated as a desire, soon became an order. It paid attention to the\nsmallest details; designated the necessary provisions for the day and\nfixed the prices thereof. If a more important purchase than usual had\nto be made, he indicated the shop and price beforehand.\n\nThese facts gave rise to some curious incidents. Thus, for example,\nwhen a shopkeeper charged too high a price. \u2018Grand Father,\u2019 always\nat hand, used to whisper to Madame Vergniat, \u2018Tell that woman her\ngoods only cost her such and such a price. Offer her so much. That is\nsufficient profit....\u2019\n\nThe shopkeeper, dumfounded, could not deny, and the bargain would be\nconcluded.\n\nI reveal all these facts without hesitation, persuaded that the study\nof such persistent and varied manifestations may help to lift the\nmysterious veil surrounding us. Moreover, why should I hesitate or keep\nsilent? Have I not seen? The more incomprehensible the facts may be,\nthe greater the duty to reveal them.\n\nI will, perhaps, be accused of weakness by showing so much submission\nto this occult power, which, however, only put forth the claim of\ncoming from God, and expressed none but honourable sentiments. To\nmy accusers, I will reply, \u2018Go through the same trial, then I will\nrecognise your right to criticise.\u2019\n\nAs for weakness, this was never one of my failings, unless I should\nmake an exception for the sentiment, which makes me bow before the\nMaster\u2014a sentiment I mean to preserve.\n\nI said my wife and I went regularly to vespers, sometimes at Talence,\nsometimes at Sainte-Croix; but more often at the Vieillards.\n\nI remember that once when gazing upon these latter poor creatures, ever\nat the mercy of public charity, our mysterious guest confided to us:\n\u2018Without my visit, my children, that fate might have been yours.\u2019\n\nIn the beginning, I said I had promised to take the communion; I did\nso with fervour, so profoundly had these mysterious facts impressed\nme; I carried submission to the extent of giving up theatres, and all\namusements, obeying the express desire of the unknown.\n\nTo make up for this, I was permitted to join every pilgrimage.\n\nOne morning, as I was starting for my office, Madame Vergniat, with\nan inspired air, dictated the following order to me: \u2018You must send a\ntelegram to Paris this morning, bidding the agents to sell out 6000\nfrancs worth of French stock at 3 per cent., and buy in 10,000 francs\nof Italian stock.\u2019 He added: \u2018Did I not tell you, that when it would\nplease me to impose an obligation upon you, it would never be at your\nown expense? Now, I have need of a few thousand francs, the use of\nwhich I will point out to you when the time comes.\u2019\n\nIn spite of the strange things I had already seen, I was bewildered.\nMadame Vergniat, although the wife of a stockbroker, had never\ninterested herself in business affairs, and was absolutely ignorant of\nfinancial combinations.\n\nThe terms used to dictate the transaction, indicated that the operation\nwas planned by a mind accustomed to this kind of business.\n\nAs the advice was not dangerous, and, in case of failure, would not\ncarry me very far, I telegraphed to Paris without hesitating. Before\nI returned home in the evening, I had the reply, and wished to\ncommunicate it to my mysterious client. \u2018Useless,\u2019 he said to me, \u2018I\nknow it.\u2019\n\nI took advantage of this circumstance of talking business with him,\nwith the object of finding out just how far the spirit\u2019s knowledge, in\nmatters of speculation, went.\n\n\u2018Do you know,\u2019 I said to him, \u2018that your transaction is founded on two\nliquidations. The Italian stock is in liquidation for the 15th inst.,\nand the 3 per cent. for the end of the month.\u2019\n\n\u2018I did it purposely. The Italian will be liquidated first, for the\nprofits thereof are urgently required. Whoever procures the French\nstock for the end of the month is destined to offer a present to his\ndaughter. I will give you a few instructions on this subject.\u2019\n\nI risked the question: \u2018You then believe in the rise of the Italian and\nfall of the French stock?\u2019\n\n\u2018Your Father is not one who doubts, who believes, or who only hopes; He\nis always sure, because He is the Master.\u2019\n\nFrom the day the exchange transaction was made, the two contrary\nmovements, favourable to the arbitration, were not belied; and (an\nimportant fact to take note of) every morning, with mathematical\nprecision, the unknown predicted the stock-list which the telegraph\nonly brought at four o\u2019clock in the afternoon.\n\nI wish to insist upon this fact, because some people seem to question\nthe spirits\u2019 possibility of foretelling the future.\n\nAlways preoccupied in studying these facts, I sometimes asked, the\nevening before, what the rate would be the following day. \u2018I cannot\ntell you before to-morrow morning. I have need of the night to gather\nmy information.\u2019\n\nOne day, there was a difference of a farthing between the rate\npredicted in the morning, and the official rate received at four\no\u2019clock. When I made the remark, the unknown said to me: \u2018It was a bad\nhead who rang down the changes at the stroke of the bell.\u2019 The spirit\nevidently even possessed the slang of the stockbrokers\u2019 ring.\n\nSeeing so much penetration, I meekly asked if he could be useful to me\nin my own business. He replied: \u2018I did not come for that; my visit has\nanother object in view; nevertheless I think I can be useful to you,\nand when the opportunity occurs, I will not forget.\u2019\n\nThis declaration seemed to contradict the first one. At the outset of\nthese manifestations, the \u2018Master\u2019s\u2018 blessing assured the repose of\nbody, soul, and spirit: \u2018No more worries for you: your Father is here\nto turn them all aside.\u2019 There was now a slight deviation which we\ncannot help observing.\n\nLet us, however, return to this power of penetration; it was such,\nthat, consulted upon the state of my cash-box, he at once told me how\nmuch it contained. For him, it was mere child\u2019s play to tell any one\nthe contents of their purse.\n\nDuring the arbitration process, I sometimes asked him, \u2018What profit\ndoes your stock operation give you this evening?\u2019 He mentioned it at\nonce, and, without omitting a farthing, he even counted brokerage and\nthe price of telegrams.\n\n\u2018Your business affairs,\u2019 said he, \u2018should no longer trouble you, for\nthey are mine. I will look after them: you have only to obey, and to\nsatisfy me in order to be rewarded.\n\n\u2018You may be sure that nothing would be easier for me than to load you\nwith riches any day; and, if I make you wait, it is because you made me\nwait a long time before I was able to bring you to me.\u2019\n\nThis is another remark which is not any clearer than the one I quoted a\nlittle while ago.\n\nWhilst the arbitration was proceeding favourably, the Virgin continued\nher evolutions; however, they were soon to cease.\n\nOne afternoon she made some evolutions noisier than usual, and going\nout of the house, went and placed herself upon some grape-vines in the\ngarden.\n\nAt that moment, one of our former servants, a girl named Caroline T...,\nthe same who was in our service when the nocturnal visit occurred,\nhappened to come up to the house; seeing the statue in the garden, she\nand another servant decided to put it back again on its pedestal.\n\nIt was scarcely replaced when a violent rap resounded, and the Virgin\nfell on the ground broken to pieces.\n\nGreat was Madame Vergniat\u2019s grief when she heard of the accident.\nI must own that I, too, was vexed. The debris were gathered up and\npreserved with veneration for a long time.\n\nBut the pedestal remained vacant. Then the thought came to me of asking\nour protector if it would be possible to find a similar statuette.\n\n\u2018I will see about it to-night,\u2019 he replied. The spirit often begged\nme to leave him the night for reflection. He said it was then that he\nfound the necessary information.\n\nThe next day, faithful to his promise, he gave me the following\ninformation: \u2018There is, in Bordeaux, a Virgin like the one which is\nbroken. You will find it at a sculptor\u2019s in the Rue Bouqui\u00e8re (a small\nshop situated in a corner of the street). There is only that one\nspecimen, and the tradesman has no cast.\u2019\n\nI quickly took one of the fragments, and went to the Rue Bouqui\u00e8re.\nI found the shop, and the tradesman told me he had a Virgin similar\nto the one I desired, but that he had no cast of it. \u2018I will look for\nit, and you may come and fetch it this evening.\u2019 The same evening I\nreturned to Malbec with the statuette which was going to stifle all\nregrets.\n\nMy arrival with the statuette was the occasion for another official\ncommunication: \u2018My son, that Virgin will be displaced. I will not tell\nyou where I shall carry it to; she herself will reveal it to you. Now,\nas she will go very far away, you must put your name and address inside\nthe statuette.\u2019 This was done.\n\nPlaced upon the pedestal, the new Virgin turned round three times the\nday after her arrival; since that day she never stirred.\n\nI do not know if she will ever go on this journey; in any case, she is\na long time making her preparations.\n\nAll the incidents touching the statuette end here: the circumstances of\nthe _ann\u00e9e terrible_ caused it to pass into other hands.\n\nWe said that the stock transaction was going on better and better. And\nwith his facility to foretell the future, the unknown sold out the\nItalian stock at the highest rate, whilst he waited for several days to\nbuy back his 3 per cent. favourably.\n\nAll this was done with astounding precision; with a power equal to his,\nfortune was simply without bounds.\n\nThe profits of these two transactions amounted to about three thousand\nfrancs. With the funds resulting from the liquidation of the 15th I\nwas given the mission to reserve one thousand francs for the father of\na large family. And the souvenir of this good action, for which, in a\nway, I was but an agent, rejoices me still.\n\nOther less important distributions were ordered to be made.\n\nFinally, to crown everything, we were told to illuminate our garden in\nhonour of the Virgin.\n\nThe profits of the second liquidation followed afterwards, and gave\nrise to a curious incident.\n\nOn pay-day, when the profits were at the disposition of the mysterious\nspirit, he begged me to return to Bordeaux to buy a piano, which he\noffered to my daughter. (This was the \u2018present\u2019 which had been spoken\nof in the beginning of these bourse transactions.)\n\n\u2018Go,\u2019 he said, \u2018to M. Caud\u00e9r\u00e9\u2019s, All\u00e9es de Tourny, No. 50, where you\nwill buy a second-hand piano; you will be asked six hundred and fifty\nfrancs for it.\u2019\n\nUpon making the remark that I needed precise indications in order to\navoid all confusion, he replied: \u2018It is not necessary. I will be there\nto see that they offer you the piano I want. You will not be obliged to\nbargain, for the price is less than the value of the instrument.\u2019\n\nHow could I resist the commands of such a kind-hearted friend, whose\npower seemed to have no other limit than that of his will?\n\nMoreover, was it my province to discuss the manner of employing money\nwhich did not belong to me?\n\nTherefore I arrived at All\u00e9es de Tourny. Madame Caud\u00e9r\u00e9 was alone in\nthe shop. I followed my instructions, and was offered a second-hand\npiano for six hundred francs. It was fifty francs below the stated\nprice. I hesitated taking it, but, remembering his own words, \u2018_I will\nbe there_,\u2019 I concluded the bargain on the express condition that\nthe instrument might be delivered the same evening, according to our\nbenefactor\u2019s will.\n\nI arrived home quickly, impatient to have an explanation concerning the\nfifty francs.\n\nIt was the first time I had observed an irregularity, and as my\nsubmission was only the result of an infallibility which, until then,\nhad never been belied, the absolute and regular continuation of these\nfacts was required in order to keep up that blind confidence which\nalready impaired so seriously my free will.\n\nIt was with almost a triumphant air I announced that the piano had only\ncost six hundred francs.\n\n\u2018I know it,\u2019 said the unknown; \u2018but Madame made a mistake.\u2019\n\nOn the morrow, when settling the account, the shopkeeper said to me:\n\u2018You got a bargain yesterday; my wife made a mistake in selling you for\nsix hundred francs a piano I had fixed at six hundred and fifty.\u2019\n\nAbsorbed in these supernatural incidents, I did not think of replying.\nI walked slowly home wrapped in thought. I related to the mysterious\nbeing what had happened to me at the piano-shop.\n\nIf my mystical preoccupations had made me forget my duty for an\ninstant, he was not long in recalling it to me.\n\n\u2018I apprised you of it,\u2019 he answered. I understood, and brought back the\nfifty francs to the tradesman, not caring to benefit by a mistake.\n\nAt that time my daughter\u2019s musical knowledge was limited to the \u2018_Bon\nRoi Dagobert_,\u2019 and yet, when she sat down to the piano, her fingers,\nyielding to some mysterious influence, moved involuntarily over the\npiano, and played unknown airs whose accompaniments were in accordance\nwith all the rules of harmony.\n\nConvinced that the child was playing from memory, the pianoforte-tuner\ncomplimented her upon her musical dispositions.\n\nThis phenomenon was only produced three or four times; it is true, I\nalways took care to take the child away from the piano as soon as I\nsuspected the approach of the influence.\n\nThe stock transaction accomplished, other business, patronised and\nadvised by the protector, succeeded as well as the first. The object\nwas always charity. These operations were not important; but for all\nthat, their results increased the importance of the help every day.\n\nThe spirit had reserved to himself the right of designating the persons\nhe wished to help. Sometimes he indicated the name, but more often he\nconfined himself to mentioning the street, the number, and flat.\n\nI remember one Sunday, while breakfasting, I was suddenly told to go\n_immediately_ and visit a family living in a tiny house behind the\nRue Fran\u00e7ois-de-Sourdis. It was a long way off, and notwithstanding\nthe indications given me, I went up and down several streets in that\nquarter of the town in vain, and I returned without having been able to\nfulfil my mission.\n\n\u2018You must go back again,\u2019 said the unknown, \u2018and before breakfasting;\nfor you yourself can wait; but it is not the same there, where the\nchildren are hungry...!\u2019\n\nEvery morning, when leaving home to go to my office, I was commissioned\nto do a good work. \u2018In such and such a street, at such and such a\nnumber and flat, at the door to the right, etc., lives a widow; you\nwill give her five francs, or ten francs, and so forth....\u2019\n\nIn the beginning, fearing to be led astray, these missions made me feel\nrather uncomfortable, especially when he sent me to places where there\nwas no apparent misery; but he never made a mistake.\n\nTo provide for these distributions, and carry out certain religious\nprojects, which he acknowledged to me\u2014such, for example, as the\nerection of a chapel on the ground of \u2018Malbec,\u2019 in order to perpetuate\nthe memory of his visit\u2014to provide, I say, for so much expense, he\nconsiderably increased the figure of his operations.\n\nIt is true that an affair undertaken by his order always the same\nevening gave good results. And it was necessary it should be rigorously\nso, if he wished to maintain the blind confidence he seemed so desirous\nof preserving.\n\nIt was then that he changed his tactics. Instead of taking his profits\nat each liquidation, he now opposed himself to any realisation\nwhatsoever.\n\nIn the face of such a dangerous system, I timidly risked some remarks:\u2014\n\n\u2018No one could guide me better than you do, and I would be already\n_too rich_ if, as before, you took advantage of every fluctuation of\nthe market, instead of opposing yourself to the realisation of the\nprofits. It is true there is a large margin on your purchases, but our\nprosperity is only artificial, since it is but the result of recharges\nand not of liquidated operations. That is to say, by this system we are\nconstantly laying ourselves open to emergencies.\u2019\n\nIt was also under this mysterious inspiration that I then took an\nengagement to buy out the interest of my sleeping partners.\n\nAlways under the same guidance, our business affairs rapidly created an\nopulent position for me. The upward movement of stocks continued, and\nif at times a slight reaction arose, it could only touch a small part\nof the profits already acquired, and constantly carried over.\n\nThe dangerous system of non-realisation, we see, had not been abandoned.\n\nI often complained.\n\nIt was thus that on the 1st January 1870 (a Sunday, I think), the\n_Coulisse_ having quoted on the boulevards 75\u00b705 francs, and this\nrate assuring us a profit of 30,000 francs on one affair alone, I\nimplored him to consent to realising. He refused energetically, saying,\n\u2018Money-jobbing does not suit me, I have put you in a position which\nwill be your last affair.\u2019 Moreover, he affected a great dislike to\nmy profession, saying he desired to see me leave it as speedily as\npossible.\n\nSometimes the spirit dropped certain exclamations, aside, as it were,\nthe most frequent of which was, \u2018_What a struggle!_\u2019\n\nI paid no attention to this, and it was only after the tragic\n_d\u00e9nouement_ of this affair that the souvenir of these exclamations,\nalthough so frequently repeated, came back to my memory.\n\nThe circumstances which follow sadly demonstrate that during two and\na half years the aim, so patiently followed, was simply to bribe my\nconfidence with strange revelations, and to keep me under his thumb.\n\nThis result obtained, he had only to use influence in order to keep me\nin a position whose importance could not help being fatal, in view of\ncoming events, and which the unknown\u2019s power of penetration permitted\nhim to foresee.\n\nIt was in the midst of all this, in a way, borrowed prosperity, since\nit only resulted from non-realised operations, that I took possession\nof my new residence, Rue d\u2019Enghien, No. 11.\n\nFor several months, although it was impossible for stock to rise above\nseventy-five francs, faithful to his system, the unknown refused to\nsell out.\n\nIt was therefore necessary to continue. But could I complain if funds\nremained stationary? The profits entered into cash as a consequence of\nthe rise of stocks, which seemed a sufficient guarantee against any\nevent whatsoever.\n\nMoreover, it seemed to me mean to reproach him with not giving me more,\nwhen I owed him already such unhoped-for prosperity.\n\nMy tranquillity was, therefore, absolute when complications with\nGermany broke out. Then, from the first day, I wished to liquidate.\n\n\u2018There, are your fears beginning again as at the time of the Luxembourg\nincident? Believe him who is the Master, and who for nearly three years\nhas never deceived you.\u2019\n\nNotwithstanding his affirmations, two days afterwards war was decided,\nand in taking possession of the telegraph lines, the light-hearted\nminister put the finishing-stroke to my ruin, for it placed me in the\nimpossibility of communicating, and therefore of limiting my loss.\n\nWhatever may be the danger of a struggle, we succumb with less regret\nwhen we have fought on equal terms; but here, without speaking of the\nstrange circumstances, the suppression of telegraphic communication\nplaced me in the position of a man bound hand and foot, who is thrown\ninto the sea and reproached for not swimming.\n\nIn this critical moment, the unknown was absolutely dumb. He answered\nnone of the questions I asked him. And yet the situation was most\ncritical; for twenty years of labour disappeared into the gulf, and,\nmoreover, to this material loss was added the grief of being forced to\nremain separated from my daughter, who was dangerously ill.\n\nA last explanation took place: \u2018There, then,\u2019 I said to him, \u2018here is\nwhat you have brought me to, and I do not know who you are; I only know\nthat you have appealed to honourable sentiments, in order to make me\nyour dupe, and that you have not hesitated using the name of God when\nlaying your snares.\u2019\n\nI was too irritated to heed his reply; and I have only a vague souvenir\nof the word \u2018_trials_\u2019 faltered out in answer to my upbraidings.\n\nThus ends this long and sad \u2018story.\u2019\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nI have given this curious self-observation _in extenso_. The\npersonification is liable to errors which may be dangerous if we\nabandon ourselves to its direction, as too many people are tempted to\ndo.\n\nThe extraordinary facts with which Madame Vergniat\u2019s life was filled\nare not confined to those just related; she appears to have possessed\nsupernormal faculties right up to the last. It might be of considerable\ninterest if her family would give a detailed account of her life.\n\n\n  Printed by T. and A. CONSTABLE, Printers to His Majesty\n  at the Edinburgh University Press\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber\u2019s note\n\n\nWords in italics have been surrounded with _underscores_, some bold\nletters with =signs=, and small capitals were changed to all capitals.\n\nA few missing page numbers were added to the table of Contents, but\nother omissions and inconsistencies were preserved.\n\nSome missing punctuation has been corrected, also the following\nchanges were made, on page\n\n   24 under point 6 \u201ca\u201d changed to \u201cd\u201d ((_d_) Lastly, the most\n      complete)\n\n   64 \u201cIV.\u201d added (IV. THE PERSONIFICATION)\n\n   95 \u201cis\u201d changed to \u201care\u201d (Phenomena are often forthcoming)\n\n  368 \u201cPhenomenon\u201d changed to \u201cPhenomena\u201d (Phenomena of the same\n      kind).\n\nOtherwise the original was preserved, including inconsistent spelling\nand hyphenation and possible errors in languages other than English.\nAdditional: Mallbranche, on page 429, should probably be Malebranche.","title":"Metapsychical Phenomena: Methods and Observations","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":129333}