Charles Richet - Thirty Years of Psychical Research

THIRTY YEARS OF
PSYCHICAL RESEARCH
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
NEW YORK BOSTON * CHICAGO DALLAS
ATLANTA SAN FRANCISCO
MACMILLAN & CO.. L im it e d
LONDON BOMBAT CALCUTTA
MELBOURNE
THE MACMILLAN CO. OP CANADA, L td.
TORONTO
Thirty Years of Psychical
Research
B E IN G
A Treatise on Metapsychics
BY
CHARLES RICHET, Ph.D.
Translated from the French

by
STANLEY D BRATH, M. I . C. E.
e n st
Formerly Assistant Secretary to the Government of

India, Public Works Department
j&tto got*
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1923
All rights reserved
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
CoratiGHT, 1023,
By THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.
Set up and printed. Published Match, 1923.
FEBBI9 PRINTING COMPANY

NEW YORK CITY
Omnia jam fient fieri qua posse negabam
This book is dedicated to the memory of my

illustrious friends and masters
Sir WILLIAM CROOKES
and
FREDERIC MYERS
who, equally distinguished by their courage and
by their insight, were the first to trace the
outlines of this science.
PREFACE
Those who may expect to find in this book nebulous discussions
on human destiny, on magic, or on theosophy will be disappointed.
I have endeavoured to write on science, not on dreams; and I
have therefore confined myself to a statement of facts and dis
cussion of their actuality, not only without advancing any theory,
but scarcely mentioning theories, for all theories as yet proposed
to account for metapsychic facts seem to me terribly frail.
It is possible or even probable that some day a tenable theory
will be formulated, but the time is not yet, for the facts on which
any theory could be erected are still in dispute. It is necessary,
first, to establish the facts and to review them in detail and as a
whole, in order to verify the conditions under which they occur.
This is our primary duty, and our only duty.
The task is a hard one; the phenomena being unusual, scientists
and the public have usually rejected them without examination.
Nevertheless the facts are facts; they are numerous, authentic,
and startling. In the course of this work there will be given
instances of these facts so numerous, so precise, and so evidential
that I do not see how any unbiassed man of science can cast doubt
upon all of them if he consents to look into them.
The three fundamental phenomena of this new science can be
summed up in three sentences.
1. Cryptesthesia (the lucidity of former writers) is a faculty
of cognition that differs from the normal sensorial faculties.
2. Telekinesis is a mechanical action that diifers from all
known mechanical action, being exerted at a distance and without
contact on persons or objects, under certain determinate condi
tions.
3. Ectoplasm (the materialization of former writers) is the
formation of divers objects, which in most cases seem to emerge
from a human body and take on the semblance of material reali
tiesclothing, veils, and living bodies.
These make up the whole of metapsychics. It seems to me
that to admit this much is to admit a great deal. To go further
is to go beyond the present limits of science.
vii
Vlll PREFACE
I do, however, claim that science, strict and inflexible science,
ought to admit these three strange phenomena that it has up to
the present refused to recognize.
In giving to this book the usual form of treatises on physics,
botany, pathology, and other sciences, it has been my intention
to remove from facts called occult, many of which are indis
putably true, the supernatural and mystical implications ascribed
to them by those who do not deny their actuality.
ABSTRACT OF PREFACE TO SECOND
FRENCH EDITION
Professor Richet notes that since the rapid exhaustion of the
first edition many fresh experiments have been made by him and
by others, notably those with M. Stepan Ossovietzki, which are
so decisive as to admit of no uncertainty whatever.
Referring to criticisms on the first edition, he remarks:
Complaint has been made, and I admit its force, that the
numerous experiments and observations recorded have been
abbreviated and condensed S9 that accounts that are very con
vincing when given in full detail lose much of their force by
being abridged.
This unquestionably is the case. I had to choose between
presenting a few selected facts in full detail, on the one hand;
or, on the other, giving summaries of a great number, interesting
alike by their variety and their multiplicity. I followed the latter
plan because those who desire fuller particulars can always refer
to the original sources, which I have been careful to cite.
Another criticism (which I take as laudatory) is that by giving
the facts without committing myself to any theory or inferences,
I have been led into strong contradictions. Such contradictions
could easily have been avoided if I had framed a complete theory
by bludgeoning every inconvenient fact, magnifying every favour
able one, glossing over awkward arguments, and making full
proofs out of half-proofs. This criticism has moved me the less
that I had already made it on myself, perhaps more severely than
N ote. F or the bibliography, w hich has no pretensions to be com plete, th e
following abbreviations have been ad o p ted : A. S. P, fo r th e Annales des
Sciences Psychiques; P. S. P. R. fo r the Proceedings of the Society for
Psychical Research; J. S. P. R. for th e Journal of the Society for Psychical
Research; and Am. S. P. R. fo r the Proceedings of the American Society of
the same name.
PREFACE IX
my critics could. Metapsychic science is in its very earliest stages,

and any theory claiming to be complete, methodical, and unshak
able is foredoomed to error.
I pay no heed to such criticisms as that in the Mercure de
France. The anonymous critic finds the F. N. T. B. T. experi
ment given on p. 170 very bad; but he suppresses altogether the
words immediately following it. I mention this experiment,
which, in comparison with the good ones described above, is
terribly poor, not to draw any inference from it, but only to show
that when the method of experiments is faultless, the calculus
of probabilities is very useful.
T. Bozzano objects strongly to the separation between sub
jective and objective metapsychics, which, according to him, are
combined in actual fact. I have much respect for Professor
Bozzanos opinion, but I cannot share it in this case. It seems
to me, on the contrary, that this separation is a real advance,
especially from the didactic point of view. Also, the separation
is marked with different mediums; Eusapia and Marthe present
exclusively physical phenomena. I have not heard that Mrs.
Piper has ever given any but subjective ones. Some mediums,
such as Home, Kluski, Stainton Moses, and Mme. dEsperance,
have shown both kinds of phenomena, but it would be a mistake
to consider them as necessarily linked. Many hypnotizable sub
jects have flashes of lucidity (this is quite commonly met with),
while the production of lights and ectoplasms is quite rare.
Further, the methods of investigation are quite different for the
two kinds, and this alone justifies the classification. I am even
inclined to think this necessary distinction a leading point in
my book.
"I very willingly concede to Professor Bozzano that as meta
psychic science advances, some relations will perhaps be dis
covered between these two functions that now seem very sharply
marked off from each other. Nothing is less intellectual in
itself than an ectoplasmic phenomenon.
TRANSLATORS NOTE
In rendering this admirable Treatise into English, it has been
my aim to make it available both to students and to average
readers. I have therefore retained the French references in the
foot-notes, as any student who might wish to look up these
references must obviously ask for them under their French titles.
The average reader will probably be content to see that Pro
fessor Richet has given authorities for all statements that he
quotes, and that he has winnowed out all statements that he
thinks doubtful.
It is not always possible to render in English the delicate
shades of meaning conveyed by some French expressions; I
have, however, endeavoured to give the exact sense of the
original by free translation; and knowing that Professor Richet
emphatically desires to keep clear of spiritualist or any other
theories, I have been particularly careful, when a choice was
open, not to employ any terms that could possibly imply a leaning
to any theory soever. I have, however, in my translation used
the term spiritualist where a religious implication seems
intended, and spiritist where no such implication exists.
The author having communicated the typescript of additions
to be made to the second French edition, most of these have been
abstracted and added as foot-notes, so that the first English
edition may be taken as parallel with the second French edition.
It has not been possible in all cases to refer to originals for
the quotations from English writers, and in such cases they have
been retranslated from the French, without, I trust, deviation
from essential meaning. I hope thus to have discharged the
honour of having been entrusted by the author with the trans
lation of a book that must surely have a powerful and far-
reaching influence.
Stanley D e B rath .
Weybridge, July, 1922.

CONTENTS
PAGE
Preface........................................................................................ vii
BOOK I
CONCERNING METAPSYCHICS IN GENERAL
1. Definition and Classification................................................. 3
2. Is There a Science of Metapsychics?.................................. 6
3. Historical Summary............................................................... 15
1. The Mythical Stage........................................................... 15
2. The Magnetic Stage..................................................... 21
3. The Spiritist Stage........................................................... 25
4. The Scientific Stage.......................................................... 30
4. Mediums................................................................................. 38
BOOK II
SUBJECTIVE METAPSYCHICS
C h apter I. O n S M
u b j e c t iv e e t a p s y c h ic s in G eneral . .. 49
1. The Limits of Psychic and Metapsychic Science.... 49
2. Chance and Mathematical Probability in Metapsychic
Facts ............................................................................ 55
3. Concerning Errors of Observation.............................. 59
C h apter II. O n C (L
r y p t e s t h e s ia )
u c id it y G
in eneral . . 64
1. Definition and Classification.......................................... 64
2. Connection of Cryptesthesia with Lucidity and Te
lepathy ....................................................................... 65
3. Phenomena of Normal Psychology Having Only the
Semblance of Cryptesthesia................................. 69
4. Classification of the Modes of Cryptesthesia.............. 82
C h apter III. E x p e r im e n t a lC ......................
r y p t e s t h e s ia 85
1. Cryptesthesia in Normal Individuals............................ 85
2. Cryptesthesia Under Hypnotism and Magnetic Treat
ment ............................................................. 99
(a) Magnetic Emanations:.......................................... 100
(b) The Development of Cryptesthesia by Hypnotism 107
xiii
XIV CONTENTS
PAGE
3. Cryptesthesia Under Hypnotism.................................. 114
(a) Experiments on Hypnotized Subjects.................. 115
(b) Conclusions......................................................... 134
4. Cryptesthesia Under Spiritist Conditions.................... 136
(a) Summary of the Facts............................................ 136
(b) Investigation with a Hidden Alphabet................. 167
(c) Cross-Correspondences ......................................... 173
5. Cryptesthesia Among Sensitives................................... 176
(a) Psychometry, or Pragmatic Cryptesthesia.......... 177
(b) Transfer of Sensibility.......................................... 185
(c) Crystal Vision........................................................ 200
6. Conclusions on Experimental Cryptesthesia................ 203
7. On the Identification of Spiritist Personalities..........208
8. Xenoglossis .................................................................... 220
C h apter IV. T D he -R
iv in in g ............................................ 228
od
1. Historical ...................................................................... 228

2. Summary of the Facts.................................................. 230
3. Concerning Rhabdic Force..............................................235
4. Deductions from the Point of View of Cryptesthesia. 238
C h apter V. M e t a p s y c h is m Ain ............................... 240
n im a l s
C h apter VI. S C
p o r a d ic ................................... 245
r y p t e s t h e s ia
A. Monitions ...................................................................... 245

I. On Monitions in General...................................... 245
1. Classification and Definition........................................... 245
2. Conditions Necessary that Monitions Should Be Re
garded as Such..................... 248
(a) The Hypothesis of Chance Coincidence............... 252
3. Conditions Under Which Monitions Occur...................256
4. The Symbolical Form Taken by Monitions.................. 260
5. Monitions and the Telepathic Hypothesis.................. 265
6. On the Frequency of Monitions................................... 267
II. On Certain Monitions (Not Collective) Other
Than Monitions of Death................................. 270
III. Monitions of Death............................................... 282
Conclusions ........................................................... 325
IV. Collective Monitions.............................................. 328
(a) Collective Monitions, Non-simultaneous and
Non-identical ............................................. 330
(b) Simultaneous and Collective Monitions___334
Conclusions .................................................... 342
CONTENTS xv
PAGE
C h apter VII. P .................................................. 344
r e m o n it io n s
1. On Premonitions in General............................................ 344

2. Auto-Premonitions ........................................................ 348
(a) Of Sickness............................................................. 348
(b) Of Accidental Death....................... 354
3. Premonitions, ProperlySo-called................................... 356
(a) Under Hypnotism......................................................356
(b) Spiritist Premonitions............................................ 361
(c) Accidental Premonitions........................................ 366
(a) Of Sickness and Death Due to Natural
Causes......................................................... 367
(b) Of Accidental Death...................................... 371
(c) Of Sundry Events.......................................... 376
4. Conclusion ...................................................................... 395
BOOK III
OBJECTIVE METAPSYCHICS
C h apter I. O O n M
b je c t iv e . G
e t a p s y c h ic s in eneral . ... 399
C h apter II. M ovem ents O of T

bjects ............ 401
e l e k in e s is
(a) Table-Movements........................................................ 401

(b) On Some Cases of Experimental Telekinesis..........405
(c) Of Noises and Raps.................................$...........*. 443
(d) On Direct Writing..................................................... 448
C h apter III. E ctoplasm s (M ) .................... 454
a t e r ia l iz a t io n s
(a) On Fraud in Ectoplasmic Experiments.......................454

(b) Leading Ectoplasmic Experiments.............................. 492
C h apter IV. L ........................................................ 546
e v it a t io n s
C h apter V. B ......................................................... 552

il o c a t io n s
(a) Objective Bilocations.................................................. 552

(b) Monitions of Approach............................................... 559
C h apter VI. H . ............................................... 563
a u n t in g s
1. On Hauntings in General.............................................. 563

2. On the Hauntings of Houses (Subjective)............... 571
3. Telekinesis in Haunted Houses.................................... 578
4. Conclusions..................................................................... 591
BOOK IV
Conclusion .................................................................................. 595
In d ex ..................... 629
%
THIRTY YEARS OF
PSYCHICAL RESEARCH
)
THIRTY YEARS OF PSYCHICAL RESEARCH
BOOK I
C o n c e r n in g M e t a p s y c h ic s in General
1. Definition and Classification

In all ages men have observed that sporadic, irregular, and un
predictable facts occasionally intermingle with the ordinary events
of daily life. Unable to find rational explanations for these they
have accounted for them by the intervention of supernatural
powersgods or demons.
With the growth of knowledge, faith in these divine or demoni
acal interferences in our little human affairs has lost ground. In
an aurora borealis, an eclipse, a comet, or a storm, we now see
only a natural occurrence, some of whose laws we have been
able to formulate. We no longer refer epilepsy and hysterical
outbreaks to spirit possession or to Satan.1
Nevertheless, in spite of the great advances in physics, chem
istry, and physiology, the laws of these sciences* as at present
known, do not account for certain exceptional phenomena, and
these phenomena being inexplicable by orthodox science, it has
been found convenient to ignore them. But these strange occur
rences, whether they be accepted or denied, still remain facts;
their actuality is unaffected whether we find a place for them in
recognized science or not.
It therefore seems desirable to present the mass of these phe
nomena methodically. However unusual in their occurrence
they must, as facts, be subject to laws and therefore be accessible
to study, i.e., to science. A science, or at any rate an orderly sur
vey, of the supernatural and the occult is at least possible.
The terms supernatural and supernormal (the latter due to
F. W. H. Myers) are, however, both inadmissible, for there can
*The bibliography of magical science is enormous. Those who desire to
form even an incomplete idea of its extent may consult Graesse, Biblica
magic a et pneumatica, Leipzig, Engelmann, 1843, 175 pp. ; -and R. Y ves-
Plessis,Essai dune bibliographie franaise de la Sorcellerie,
Paris, Chacornac,
1900.
3
4 PSYCHICAL RESEARCH
be nothing in the universe but the natural and the normal. From
the moment that a fact exists it is necessarily both natural and
normal. The terms supernatural and supernormal must
therefore be rejected along with the occult. This latter term
is indeed somewhat naive, for the occult simply means that
which is involved in mystery and therefore inaccessible to us.
In 1905,1 proposed the term Metapsychic,1 which has been unani
mously accepted. It has on its side no less an authority than
Aristotle. Aristotle, having discussed the physical forces, went
on to write on those great laws of nature that transcend physics.
He took the title Meta-physics, {nita rot cpviinoi).
This term must now be defined.
Metapsychic facts are marked off from the physical in that
they seem due to an unknown intelligence, whether human or
non-human. In nature we observe intelligence only among living
beings; in man we perceive no sources of cognition otherwise
than through the senses. We leave to normal psychology the
study of human and animal intelligence. Metapsychic phenomena
are quite different; they seem due to unknown but intelligent
forces, including among these unknown intelligences the astonish
ing intellectual phenomena of our subconsciousness.
Leaving aside the sharply demarcated field of normal psychol
ogy, metapsychics is the only science that deals with intelligent
forces. All other forces as yet studied by men of science, from
the point of view of cause and effect, are blind forces devoid of
self-consciousness and capricein other words, without person
ality or will. We cannot suspect the least intellectuality in the
combination of chlorine and sodium. Mercury expands by heat
without its being able to understand or modify its expansion. The
sun projects calorific, electric, and luminous rays without will or
choiceit has neither personality nor thought. But the forces
that govern presentiments, telepathy, movements of objects with
out contact, apparitions, and certain mechanical and luminous
phenomena do not seem to be blind and unconscious forces like
those of chlorine, mercury, and the sun. They have none of the
fatality that attaches to the mechanical and chemical reactions of
When, in 1905, I presented this word in the course of my presidential
address to the S. P. R., London, Mr. W. Lutoslawski pointed out to me that
(Wyklady Jagiellonskie,
in a Polish publication Cracow, 1902), he had already
suggested this word; but this was for somewhat different reasons. E. Boirac
has suggested the term Parapsychics, which has not found acceptance, while
the term Metapsychics is now generally adopted.
CONCERNING METAPSYCHICS IN GENERAL 5
matter. They appear to have intellectuality, will, and intention,
which may not be human, but which resemble human will and
intention. Intellectualitythe power of choice, intention, and
decision conformably to a personal willcharacterizes all meta
psychic phenomena.
I shall divide our subject-matter into Objective and Subjective
Metapsychics.
Objective metapsychics deals with certain mechanical, physical,
or chemical effects perceptible to our senses, not proceeding
from known forces, but seemingly directed by intelligence. It
states, classifies, and analyzes these material phenomena.
Subjective metapsychics studies those phenomena that are
purely intellectual. These are characterized by an indication of
some realities that are not revealed by our senses. Everything
takes place as if we had a mysterious faculty of cognition
luciditywhich the classical physiology of sensation cannot as
yet explain. I propose to call this faculty Cryptesthesia, i.e., a
sensibility whose nature escapes us.
Metapsychic science therefore treats of purely mental phe
nomena that can be admitted without reference to any known
laws of living or inert matter, or any change in our concepts of
the different physical energiesheat, light, electricity, gravitation,
etc., which we are accustomed to measure and specify.
Objective metapsychics, on the contrary, deals with certain ma
terial phenomena inexplicable by ordinary mechanicsthe move
ment of objects without contact, haunted houses, phantoms, mate
rializations that can be photographed, sounds, and lightsall of
them tangible realities affecting our senses.
In other words, subjective metapsychics is internal, psychic, and
non-material: objective metapsychics is material and external.
The boundary between the two orders of phenomena is some
times uncertain; often, however, it is sharply marked. For in
stance, the assassination of Queen Draga was announced in
Paris on the 11th of June, 1904, at the very minute that it was
committed in Belgrade, by a medium who could have had no
normal means of cognizance of thiscrime. This is a fact of
subjective metapsychics.
Eusapia Paladino placed her hands half a yard above a heavy
table; her hands, her feet, her knees, her waist, her head, and her
mouth were all held; the table rose off its four legs without con
tact. This is a fact of objective metapsychics.
Frequently the phenomena pertain to both kinds, and it is dif
ficult or impossible to distinguish between them. A. sees the
apparition of his dying father, B. If other persons present see
nothing, the vision is obviously subjective; but if the image of B.
is seen simultaneously by A., and by others, still more if the
apparition has been photographed leaving its impression on the
sensitive plate, this is not only a subjective but also an objective
fact, there being a material accompaniment, and A.s vision Can
no longer be considered merely subjective.
Subjective phenomena are much more frequent than the ob
jective ; mediums giving the latter are rare. Moreover when
material phenomena are produced they are nearly always accom
panied by noteworthy subjective facts.
Metapsychics can therefore be defined asa science dealing
with mechanical or psychological phenomena due to forces that
seem to be intelligent, or to unknown powers latent in human
intelligence. This science is therefore profoundly mysterious;
indeed, its mysteries are such that extreme scientific caution is
called for in dealing with them.
2. Is There a Science of Metapsychics?
This question must be put, for to many men of science none
of the alleged facts in the domain of magnetism or spiritualism
deserve serious consideration. They say, A science cannot be
constructed out of gossip; and the accounts you bring us are
nothing more. The hallucinations with all their wealth of detail
described by simple people are matter for the alienist, and the
performances of mediums are vulgar frauds. Mediums who
claim supernatural powers and allege that they are intermediaries
between the dead and the living are either hallucinated or trick
sters. As soon as precautions are taken against credulity and
fraud the error or the imposture is always manifest. No un
deniable fact of lucidity or movement of objects without contact
has ever been established before a committee of enquiry com
posed of men of scientific standing. If chance, mal-observation,
and trickery are eliminated, nothing remains of the so-called
metapsychics but a vast illusion. The stricter the conditions, the
slighter the phenomena become, till they vanish altogether. A
science that claims to be experimental but relies on experiments
that cannot be reproduced is no science at all. You affirm ex
traordinary and unbelievable things that upset all that science has
hitherto accepted as true, but you cannot prove them, for up to
the present such proof has evaded all methodical research. It is
not for us to prove that the facts you affirm are false; it is for
you to prove that they are true.
Further, even if we were to see these strange facts we should
think ourselves tricked or hallucinated, for your work lies among
impostors, and the things you affirm are too absurd to be true.
Such is the kind of language used by honourable men of science
who deny the reality of all metapsychic phenomena. If they
were right this book would be absolutely useless, even ridiculous;
and might be entitled A Treatise on an Error. But, as we shall
endeavour abundantly to prove, these facts exist, and are called
occult only because they are not understood.
We have read and re-read, studied and analyzed the works
written on these subjects, and we declare it vastly improbable,
and even impossible, that eminent and upright men such as Sir
William Crookes, Sir Oliver Lodge, Reichenbach, A. Russel Wal
lace, Lombroso, William James, Schiaparelli, F. W. H. Myers,
Zllner, A. de Rochas, Ochorowicz, Morselli, Sir William Barrett,
Ed. Gurney, C. Flammarion, and many others, in spite of their
close attention and their scientific knowledge, should all have been
duped over and over again a hundred times by tricksters or have
been the victims of an astounding credulity. It Is not possible
that they should all and always have been so blind as not to per
ceive frauds necessarily gross; so incautious as to form conclusions
where no conclusion was legitimately possible; and so unskilful
as never to have made a single unexceptionable experiment. A
priori, their experiments deserve careful consideration and not to
be contemptuously rejected.1
The history of all sciences warns us that the simplest discoveries
have been rejected a priori, as being incompatible with science.
Medical anesthesia was denied by Majendie. The action of mi
crobes was contested for twenty years by all the scientists of all
the academies. Galileo was imprisoned for saying that the earth*
*An eminent English scientist, Lord Kelvin, quoted by Myers (A. S. P.,
1904, xiv, 365), ventures to express himself as follow s:
I hold myself bound to reject everything that tends to the acceptance of
this wretched superstition of animal magnetism, turning tables, spiritualism,
clairvoyance, and rappings. There is no mystical seventh sense. Clairvoyance
and all the rest are but the results of mal-observation combined with inten
tional imposture practised on simple and credulous minds.
revolves. Bouillaud declared that the telephone was but ven
triloquism. Lavoisier said that stones cannot fall from the sky,
for tiere are no stones in the sky. The circulation of the blood
was only admitted after forty years of sterile discussion. In a
lecture in 1827 at the Academy of Sciences, my great-grandfather,
P. S. Girard, considered it folly to suppose that water could be
led to the upper floors of houses by pipes. In 1840, J. Mller
declared that the speed of nerve-impulses could never be meas
ured. In 1699, Papin constructed the first steamboat; a hundred
years later Fulton rediscovered the possibility of steam naviga
tion, but it was not applied till twenty years later. When in
1892, under the guidance of my distinguished master, Marey, I
made my first attempt in aviation, I met with only incredulity,
contempt, and sarcasm. A volume might be written on the
absurd criticisms with which every great discovery has been
received.
This is not a matter of the opinions of the crowd, which are
of no importance; they are the opinions of scientists, who imagine
that they have laid down boundaries that science cannot overpass.
These boundaries soon become milestones on the road of progress,
as Flammarion remarks. When such men declare that such and
such a phenomenon is impossible, they make an unfortunate con
fusion between what is contradictory of known laws and what
is new. This must be emphasized, for it is the cause of disastrous
misunderstandings.
Heat expands bodies; and if any one tells us that mercury,
copper, lead, or hydrogen under the usual conditions of experi
ment do not expand when heated I have the right to deny the
statement, for it is in flagrant contradiction with observed facts
frequently verified. But if a new metal is discovered and a
physicist tells me that it contracts instead of expanding when
heated I cannot deny this a priori. However improbable this
anomaly in the laws of physics may be, I must, if not guilty of
presumption, verify the exception, since it applies to a new
substance that may be different from all others.
Every new truth necessarily appears highly improbable; such,
however, are of frequent occurrence in the evolution of the
sciences, and as soon as a discoverer enunciates one it excites
opposition. Instead of testing, men deny it. Claude Bernard
states that the animal body generates sugar, and forthwith objec
tions are made. To admit this is to upset scientific conclusions.
Sugar is a vegetable product, animals consume it. The sugar
that has been found in animal organisms is sugar derived from
food, or from changes in a dead body. In short, sugar cannot
be generated by an animal organism. We know the fate of
these statements.
Again, let us suppose magnetic attraction to be unknown, and
the magnet a very rare object. A traveller who has seen a mag
net but cannot find another, states that he has seen a body that
attracts iron. His statement will provoke universal opposition
and denial. Why should steel have a property not possessed by
copper, lead, or any other known body? Nothing like it has ever
been seen ; if the thing were true it would have been known long
since.1
Everything of which we are ignorant appears improbable, but
the improbabilities of today are the elementary truths of
tomorrow.
Among the discoveries which by reason of my advanced age
I have seen developed under my own eyes, so to speak, I will
take four which in 1875 would have seemed absurdly inadmis
sible:
1. The voice of an individual speaking in Paris can be heard
in Rome. (Telephone.)
2 . The germs of all diseases can be bottled and ultivated in a
cupboard. (Bacteriology.)
3. The bones of a living person can be photographed. (X-rays.)
4. Five hundred guns can be taken through the air at a speed
of 180 miles an hour. (Aroplanes.)
Anyone who uttered such audacities in 1875 would have been
thought a dangerous lunatic.
Our routine-keeping intelligence is such that it rejects any
thing to which it is unaccustomed, and from a careful study of
the facts around us, we should be content to say, There are some
that are usual and some that are unusual. We ought to say no
more than this, and above all we should be careful not to make
two classesfacts that are understood, and facts that are not
understood. For in truth we really understand nothing, abso
lutely nothing, of the truths of science, whether great or small.*
*When tuberculosis was stated to be contagious, a professor of the Faculty
of Paris said, I f tubercles were contagious that would be known already,
and in 1878 his words were almost unanimously approved by the Medical
Faculty.
What is matter? Is it continuous or discontinuous? What is
electricity? Is the hypothesis of the ether really understood by
those who accept it? We see a stone fall back when thrown
upwards; do we therefore understand gravitation? Two gases
combine to form a new body in which the same atoms as in the
gases are found ; have we really understood what has taken place ?
Why should such and such an ovule fertilized by a certain zoo
sperm produce an oak-tree, a bear-cub, an elephant, or a Michel
angelo, according to its kind? How does the spider make its
web, or the swallows find their way across the seas? These
marvels do not astonish us because we are used to them. But
we ought to have the courage to admit that usual as they are,
they are none the less mysteries.
The facts of metapsychics are neither more nor less mysterious
than the phenomena of electricity, of fertilization, and of heat.
They are not so usual; that is the whole difference. But it is
absurd to decline to study them because they are unusual.1
We constantly find that the authors and observers who have
busied themselves with metapsychics show a very regrettable
tendency to consider only their own observations as exact, and
to reject all others. Thus (with certain exceptions) those who
have confined their studies exclusively to telepathy and the sub
jective side of metapsychics are prone to attach excessive im
portance to that aspect of the facts and to refuse credence to phe
nomena of telekinesis and ectoplasm, however well substantiated.
This is the case with several eminent members of the English
S. P. R. They are easily satisfied in cases of mental transmission,
even though that may be sometimes explicable by coincidence;
*1 have been able to observe a curious instance of the folly with which
this fear of the unaccustomed can afflict an honourable scientist. During the
Exhibition of 1900 at Paris, I presented to ' the Psychological Congress a
Spanish child, Pepito Arriola, aged three years and three months, who played
amazingly on the piano. He composed military or funeral marches, waltzes,
habaneras, minuets, and played some twenty difficult pieces from memory.
A hundred members of the Congress heard and applauded him. T his tiny
marvel of precocity came to my house, and in my drawing-room, on my piano,
twice during the day and in the evening before a number of persons, he
played at a distance from his mother. Then, four years later, comes an
American psychologist, Mr. Scripture, who announces that I was the victim
of an illusion, and that the music had been played not by Pepito Arriola, who
was too little to play, but by his mother!
Incredulity carried to such a point of aberration matches the credulity
of the celebrated geometer Chasles, who showed with pride an autograph
letter, in French, from Vercingtorix to Julius Caesar. The scepticism of
Mr. Scripture is of the same stamp as the credulity of Chasles.
but as soon as physical phenomena are in question they demand
impossible proofs even when such proofs are useless to the
demonstration.
Conversely, an experimenter who considers himself to have
seen a materialization will take it as well authenticated, though his
study may have been quite superficial; and will put forward
exaggerated and ridiculously severe criticisms of transmission of
thought or of materializations described by other observers per
haps quite as competent as himself.
When a phenomenon is unusual, even those who are open to
new truths do not admit it without personal verification. It seems,
however, that our criticism, severe as it may be (and should be),
ought to be exercised as much, if not more, upon our own ob
servations than on those of others. If I permit myself to criticize
the mentality of scientists towards metapsychic matters, I do so
because I have fallen into the same mistake myself. In working
at this subject I did not follow the procedure usual in the study
of other sciences. I made experiments before studying books;
so that I started by acquiring personal convictions, which were not
in the least bookish. Only subsequently did I read and meditate
on the works of ancient and modern experimentalists who have
devoted themselves to such researches. I was then astounded
at the volume and the completeness of the proofs. My own
experiments and those of others finally led me to a profound
conviction that metapsychics is a real science to be treated like
all other scienceslaboriously, methodically, and with respect.
These unusual phenomena are real: (1) There is a faculty of
cognition other than our usual faculties; ( 2 ) there are move
ments of objects other than those to which we are accustomed.
And it is irrational to refuse to study these unusual phenomena
by the methods of observation and experiment that have answered
so well in all other sciences. Claude Bernard has differentiated
the sciences that rest on observation from those that rest on
experiment. Metapsychics belongs to both classes. It is often
experimental, like chemistry and physiology; but it is often akin
to historical science and rests on human testimony.
Under its experimental aspect it should be treated as an ex
perimental science, by technical methods of research, with scales,
photography, by graphic methodsall the devices of exact meas
urement employed by physiologists. I perceive no essential dif
ference between the proper experimental methods, except that the
chemist and the physiologist are dealing with easily procurable
materials, whereas the student of metapsychics requires a
medium, a human subject difficult to find, easily put off his bal
ance, and highly capricious, who must at all times be handled
very diplomatically. But once an experiment has begun it should
be carried out as rigorously as one on arterial pressure or on the
heat generated by burning acetylene.
In no kind of experiment are all the conditions absolutely within
control. This axiom of scientific method applies more strongly in
metapsychics than in any other science. Darkness may be neces
sary, or silence; or perhaps noise? Perhaps some ill-defined
psychological conditions may be essential also? After all, this
applies to all infant sciences; in their embryonic stage the condi
tions requisite to the development of the facts to be proved are
not known. The experimenter falls into gross mistakes and the
experiment fails just when he naively imagines that he has pro
vided all the elements of success.
In so far as it is an observational and traditional science, meta
psychics has abundant documentary evidence. This is profoundly
unequal in value, and it is necessary to know how to choose the
material and to separate the wheat from the tares by severe criti
cism. But to condemn all recorded observation would be irra
tional; all historical science is derived from such records. Has
not medicine up to the time of Claude Bernard and Pasteur been
a science of observation? Is it not largely so today? A great
physiologist has said that a well-observed fact is as valid as a
good experiment. This is perhaps going a little too far, for the
certitude given by an observation is of inferior quality to that re
sulting from a good experiment. Nevertheless, the sciences that
rest on observations are valid, and it is folly to wish to reject
records.
But there is no need to set the one method in opposition to the
other. . When observation and experiment lead to the same re
sults they mutually confirm each other. In this book, therefore,
will be found two chapters on each variety of phenomena, one
dealing with experiments and the other with observations, whether
the matter in hand concerns lucidity (cryptesthesia), the move
ments of objects (telekinesis), or materializations (ectoplasmic
forms).
Experimental method is relatively easy, whereas the method
of observation is extremely difficult. The documentary evidence
is often doubtful. It is voluminous, far too voluminous; meta
psychic science is hampered by imperfect experiments and mal-
observation. Those who have cultivated it, instead of handling
it with scientific exactitude, have treated it as a religion for
adeptsan error that has had disastrous results.
Spiritualists have intermingled religion and science to the great
detriment of the latter,
Not that I would blame the efforts of spiritualists ; that would
be gross ingratitude. While official science, followed by the im
mense majority of the public, rejected disdainfully without ex
amination, and often with obvious ill-will, the work of Crookes,
A. R. Wallace, and Zllner, the spiritualists took up the facts and
set to work upon them. But instead of making them matters of
science, they made them matters of religion. They carried on
their sances in a mystical atmosphere, with prayers; speaking
of moral regeneration; preoccupied with mysteries; convinced
that they were conversing with the dead ; and losing themselves
in infantile discursiveness. They refused to see that metapsychic
facts are of the present, not of the beyond, for perhaps there is
no beyond. The beyond has been their ruin, and they have lost
themselves in puerile theology and theosophy.
When a historian studies the Capitularies of Charlemagne, he
is not thinking of the beyond ; when a physiologist is measuring
the muscular contractions of a frog he says nothing about ultra
terrestrial spheres; when a chemist determines the amount of
nitrogen in lecithin he says nothing about human survival. Meta
psychics must be treated after the same manner, without dreams
about ethereal worlds or psychic emanations; we must remain
on the earth, take all theory soberly, and only consider humbly
whether the phenomenon studied is true, without seeking to
deduce the mysteries of past or future existences.
For instance, when we are studying cryptesthesia and seeking
to discover whether a sensitive will give the name we are think
ing of, without any indication on our part, our whole attention
should be vigilantly concentrated on giving absolutely no sign
whatever, and on comparing the letters given by the subject with
those in the name thought of according to the mathematical prob
ability of 1:25, since there are twenty-five letters in the alphabet.1
If we are studying telekinesis, the limbs of the medium must be
xThe French alphabet has twenty-five letters only.
held firmly enough to make sure that the table cannot be moved
by her hands, her feet, or by any trick soever.
It does not interest me to go beyond this. I am keenly in
terested in these humble tasks which need no small courage
to undertake, without connecting them with the immortality of
the soul.
What valuable observations and marvellous experiments have
been distorted and deformed by the constant and dangerous de
sire of laying the foundations of a new religion! Spiritist religion
is inimical to science. I might borrow from the Bible the motto
for all our studies: Omnia in numero et pondere, says the preacher
an admirable principle, applicable to all science and the very
negation of religious mysticism.
If a creed be needed, it is the creed of truthnaked truth
without adornments and without verbiage. Let us verify phe
nomena, and try to link them together by any theory that has as
much verisimilitude as possible, but let us never sacrifice the facts
which are certainly true to the theory, which is probably false.
No doubt metapsychic phenomena often seem to impel us to
nebulous inferences as to human immortality, to emanations from
an unknown Will, to reincarnation, and to fluidic projections
from the living or the dead. I have endeavoured to set aside these
premature theories, though I have not been able to do this en
tirely. What purpose has been served by the ponderous volumes
on alchemy before Lavoisier? He did achieve more with his
scales than did all the dissertations of Goclenius, Agrippa, and
Paracelsus. If we desire that metapsychics should take rank as
a science, let us first establish its facts on a solid foundation. Our
successors will go further, no doubt, but our duty today is less
ambitious; let us have the intellectual modesty that befits our
ignorance.
Nevertheless, in certain respects metapsychics cannot be com
pared with any other science. No intelligence is apparent in the
various modes of energy, whereas both in objective and subjective
metapsychics the phenomena seem due to some kind of intelli
gence. The intelligence that pertains to metapsychic things may
be purely human; but if so it proceeds from a region of human
intelligence quite unknown to us, since it reveals things that our
senses cannot reveal and acts upon matter otherwise than by
muscular contraction. In any case the province of metapsychics
differs from that of all other forces, these latter being certainly
blind and unconscious. Perhaps it may eventually be proved
that the metapsychic forces producing the phenomena are as un
conscious as electricity and heat. Then metapsychics will form
a branch of physics and psychology. This would be a great ad
vance, and far from being saddened thereby we should rather
be glad; for there is a real mental intellectual distress, felt by
none more than myself, in the supposition that unknown, arbi
trary, and capricious powers are the only ones endowed with
intelligence.
But this day has not yet dawned and we must conclude pro
visionally: (1) That the metapsychic facts are real; (2) that
they are to be studied like every other science without religious
preoccupations, and (3) that they are seemingly directed by
human or non-human intelligences whose intentions we can only
partially perceive.
3. Historical Summary
Events and discoveries are so intermingled that any division
into distinct periods is necessarily artificial. Nevertheless, this
division must be made in. order to throw some light on this obscure
and tangled subject. I suggest, therefore, the following four
periods:
1. The Mythical, up to Mesmer (1778).
2. The Magnetic, from Mesmer to the Fox sisters (1847).
3. The Spiritist, from the Fox sisters to William Crookes
(1847-1872).
4. The Scientific,which begins with William Crookes (1872).
May I venture to express the hope that this book will help to
inaugurate a fifth, that of recognition as a science?
1. The Mythical Stage
It is for historians rather than for men of science to seek in
ancient religions and popular traditions all that has been said on
the supernatural, the occult, the magical, and the incomprehensible.
The perusal of sacred books, cabalistic and magical works has
but slight scientific interest.1
lA n able and very detailed summary of these has been given by C. de
Vesme, Storia dello spiritismo, 3 vols., Turin, Roux Frascati, 1896-1898.
Translated into German, Leipzig, 1904. Its bibliography will be found with
Manuel bibliographique des
a brief analysis in a fine work by Albert Caillat,
sciences psychiques ou occultes,3 vols., Paris, L. Dorbon, 1913.
Miracles and prophecies have played a great part in nearly
all religions. Real metapsychic phenomena, putting telekinesis
for the miracles and premonitions for the prophecies, are perhaps
at the root of some religious beliefs; but what can we build on
stories that date back twenty centuries, transformed by ignorant
and credulous priests? Dealing with a fact of the present day
studied in a laboratory by skilled experimentalists with all mod
ern technical instruments, we often hesitate to form any conclu
sions. How, then, can we affirm anything concerning an improb
able event said to have taken place two thousand years ago before
three fanatics and four adepts ? Probably it is not entirely false;
but we cannot discriminate between its falsehood and its truth. We
shall, therefore, deliberately set aside the miracles of all religions,
and all the prodigies connected with the death of Caesar, of Jesus
Christ, or of Mahomet.
Nevertheless there are, in this immeasurable period of credulity
and ignorance, some facts worthy of mention.
Firstly, the very curious story of the daemon of Socrates.
The two illustrious disciples of SocratesPlato and Xenophon
state formally that Socrates claimed to -have a familiar genius, a
daemon, who foretold events and sometimes prescribed his con
duct. Even Socrates believed this being to be other than him
self because it revealed things unknown. This daemon was what
spiritualists call a guide.
In the Theagetes, Plato makes Socrates say: By the favour
of the Gods, I have, since my childhood, been attended by a semi-
divine being whose voice from time to time dissuades me from
some undertaking, but never directs me what I am to do. You
know Charmides the son of Glaucon. One day he told me that
he intended to compete at the Nemean games. . . . I tried
to turn Charmides from his design, telling him, While you were
speaking, I heard the divine voice. . . . Go not to Nemea.
He would not listen. Well, you know he has fallen.
In the Apology for Socrates, Xenophon attributes to him the
words: This prophetic voice has been heard by me throughout
my life: it is certainly more trustworthy than omens from the
flight or the entrails of birds: I call it a God or a daemon. I have
told my friends the warnings I have received, and up to now the
voice has never been wrong. Socrates frequently insisted that
the predictions of his familiar genius were always verified.
Throughout antiquity the story of Socratess daemon has always
been perfectly well known.
Plutarch speaks of it: Socrates having a pure and clear
faculty of hearing could easily be affected, and this being so we
may conjecture that what reached him was not a voice or a
sound but the silent voice of a daemon touching the intelligence
of his soul. The intelligence of daemons having its own light,
shines upon those who are capable of receiving it, needing neither
the names nor the words which men use in speaking to one
another, by which they represent their ideas; but as for pure
intelligences these are known only to those who have an inner
and divine light.
Socrates, on hearing these voices, would break off his con
versation, or stop in his walk, saying in explanation that he had
heard the god.
Myers has written ably on this subject, comparing it (with
good reason, as I think) to the voices heard from childhood by
Jeanne dArc. He finds, however, only one instance of clair
voyance attributed to this daemon: As the philosopher was in
conversation with Eutyphron, he suddenly stopped and warned
his friends to turn into another street. They would not listen;
but misfortune overtook themthey met a drove of swine that
jostled them and threw them down.
In his treatise De Divinatione Cicero speaks without reserve of
predictions, as in the case of Socrates; but, strange to say, he
expresses no astonishment. Without believing in it he does not
reject it. He says, De Legibus, ii, 32, 33, I think there veritably
is a divination, that which the Greeks call fxavTiKrf. If we admit
that there are gods whose spirit governs the world and watches
over mankind, I do not see why we should refuse credence to
divination.
Referring to his brother Quintus he gives some instances of
premonition, notably a dream of Quintus, in which he saw his
brother Tullius fall from his horse (which was a fact). Tullius
replied, The anxiety you felt for me caused you to dream
of me. The coincidence of the dream and the accident was
a matter of chance ; and this answer appears to have satisfied
Cicero.
Cicero gives an account (De Divinatione, i, 27) of another
metapsychic phenomenon which I abridge as follows:
Two friends having arrived at Megara went to lodge, one in
an inn and one in a private house. The latter dreamed that his
comrade called him to save him from an assassin. He awoke,
thought it only a dream, and went to sleep again. But his friend
appeared to him and said: Since thou wouldest not save my
life at least avenge me, se interfectum in plaustrum a caupone
esse conjectum, et supra stercus injectum. . . . Hoc somnio
commotus mane bulbulco praesto ad portam fuisse, quaesisse ex
eo quid esset in plaustro, ilium perterritum fugisse, mortuum
erutum esse; cauponem, re patefacta, poenas dedisse. And
Cicero, without being beyond measure astonished, remarks, Quid
hoc somnio dici divinius potest ? 1
Further, in speaking of oracles, in which he nevertheless is
inclined to believe, he says, Multa falsa, imo obscura, idque
fortasse . . . nobis facilius evenit appropinquante morte, ut
animi futura auguretur.2 Tacitus {Annals, xi, 21) speaks of a
vision that appeared to Curtius Rufus: Oblata ei species muliebris
ultra modum humanun et audita est vox.8
A search through history would reveal many facts of a meta
psychic nature; but no serious inferences can be drawn from
them. Who today would venture to speak seriously of Simon
Magus, or Apollonius of Tyana, even of Cardan or Cornelius
Agrippa? Magi, magicians, and mystics have no place in the
science of today, nor in sane metapsychics as now understood.
The apparition to Brutus, recounted by Plutarch, deserves
mention: A little before he left Asia he was sitting alone in
his tent, by a dim light, and at a late hour. The whole army lay
in sleep and silence, while the general, wrapped in meditation,
thought he perceived something enter his tent: turning towards the
T ranslator ' s N ote T he passages quoted m ay be re n d e red a s fo llo w s:
" That he had been killed and thrown into a waggon by the innkeeper and
that manure had been thrown over his body. Alarmed at this dream in the
morning he had waited for the waggoner by the gate (of the town) and had
asked him what was in the w aggon; the man fled, terrified, and the corpse had
been uncovered. The innkeeper on the case being proved had paid the
penalty.
What clearer proof of the intervention o f Heaven can there be than
this dream?
*Much is false, I should rather say unintelligible, and this (i.e., premoni
tion) perhaps happens to us more readily on the approach o f death, that the
future of the soul may be forecast.
*There appeared to him the form of a woman of more than human size
and a voice was heard . . . The context runs, T u es Rufe, qui in hanc
provinciam proconsule venies. You are the man, Rufus, who will come to
this province as proconsul.
door, he saw a horrible and monstrous spectre standing silently
by his side. What art thou? said he boldly. Art thou God or
man, and what is thy business with me? The spectre answered,
I am thy evil genius, Brutus! Thou wilt see me at Philippi.
To which he calmly replied, Ill meet thee there. When the
apparition was gone he called his servants, who told him they
had neither heard any voice nor seen any vision. (Plutarch's
Lives, Brutus, Langhomes translation.)
The voices and visions of Jeanne dArc belong also without
doubt to the class of metapsychic phenomena. These voices and
visions were perceived by herself alone, and must therefore be
admitted as subjective. The explanation that they were hallucina
tions is much too easy, for they were followed by far too many
real facts and by too frequent verification of their predictions to
be accounted for by a disordered mind. It is impossible.to doubt
that Jeanne was truly inspired.
At the same time, as for the phantom seen by Brutus, the
apparitions at Lourdes, and the miracles of Apollonius of Tyana
and Simon Magus, any scientific appreciation of these ancient
testimonies is impossible, and it is better to admit with F. W. H.
Myers that it is probable that Jeanne possessed certain meta
psychic powers, without claiming to give an exact definition of
them.
There might be some profit in the study of hagiographies, for
saintly persons have certainly exhibited very real metapsychic
phenomena. Instances of aureoles about the head, bilocation,
the odour of sanctity, insensibility to fire, levitation, speaking
in strange tongues, and prophecy are to be found in the lives of
many saints: St. Francis dAssisi, St. Theresa, St. Helena, St.
Alphonso of Liguori, and St. Joseph of Copertino (1603-1663).
I set aside the stories of stigmata and all such organic phe
nomena, for these effects of mindthat is to say, of the central
nervous systemon the circulation and nutrition of various parts
of the body (the trophic nerves) do not fall within the province
of metapsychics. It will suffice to refer to the many publications
by medical men on this subject.1*
*M. Apte, Les stigmatiss, tude historique et critique sur les troubles
vaso-moteurs chez les mystiques, Th. de doctorat, Paris, 1903. Kohnstamm,
Hypnotische Stigmatisierung (Zeitschr . f.d. Ausbau d. Entwicklungslehre,
1908, ii, 314-321). Gr res, La mystique divine, naturelle et diabolique, trad.
fr., Paris, 1854, ii, 174-210. Bourneville, Science et miracles, Louise Lateau,
But I hesitate to deny all the ancient instances of levitation;
Gorres cites no less than seventy-two cases, and states, moreover,
that he does not give all of them. But it is impossible to deter
mine how much truth there is in these miracles. The saint
who had most is certainly St. Joseph of Copertino, beatified in
1753. Of him Gorres says, His ecstasies and ascensions were
witnessed not only by the people and the members of his order,
but Pope Urban VIII saw him one day in this state and was
intensely astonished. Joseph bethinking himself that he was in
the presence of the Vicar of Christ fell into an ecstasy and was
raised above the ground.
For a long time, and even today, it has been the custom to
scoff at these superstitionsthe levitations of saints, somnam
bulistic predictions, premonitions of death by dreams, ecstatic
healings, stigmata, haunted houses, apparitions, and the like
lumping them together with unmeasured contempt as unworthy
of any examination.
This seems to me a grave error. Assuredly everything in
these stories is not true, but neither are they entirely false. The
strange stories we hear provoke an incredulous smile and one is
apt to think the narrator not quite sane. But that is not so,
neither is he lying. The stories told us are scarcely ever lies
and very rarely complete illusions. People exaggerate, alter,
arrange their accounts, forget essential details and add imaginary
ones; but all these legends contain some fragment of truth.
The history of the sciences shows that it has often been necessary
to return to notions once thought to be puerile. The very exist
ence of hypnotism and of spiritualism shows that mere denials
without examination, instead of aiding, tend to fossilize science
routine rather than the desire of progress dominating the minds
of those who claim to be scientific. But for detail of all these
legends, from which we can scarcely hope to extract the truth
imbedded therein, I refer readers to the work of Gorres.1 It
is very complete, though naturally his credulity is limitless. It
ou la stigmatise belge, Paris, 1875. Carr de Montgron, La vrit des
miracles oprs par Vintercession du diacre, Paris, ii, Cologne, 1747. Alfred
Maury, La magie et Vastrologie, Paris, 1895. P. Janet, Bulletin de l'Institut
psychologique international, July, 1901. A . de Rochas, A. S. P., January, 1903.
*1 endeavoured to analyze a very curious old instance of possession
at Presburg in 1641, but could deduce nothing. (Phnomnes mtapsychiques
dautrefois, A. S. P., 1905, pp. 197-217; 413-421.)
is, however, interesting to note that nearly all present meta
psychic phenomena are to be found in it.
The nave imagination of the Christians of those days does not
refer all these metapsychic powers to God and good angels:
the devil also is capable of many marvels when he takes posses
sion of some unlucky woman: he is nearly as powerful as God,
and confers wonderful powers on his victim:
1. The power of perceiving the thoughts of others, even when
not expressed;
2. Knowledge of languages unknown to the possessed and the
ability to speak them;
3. Knowledge of future events;
4. Knowledge of events at a distance beyond the limits of sight;
5. Suspension in the air (levitation).
All these are real metapsychic phenomena; it is therefore
credible that such things should have occurred now and again,
alike to the saintly and the possessed, in all times.
Even divining tables are mentioned in antiquity (Mens divina-
tori). Tertullian speaks of chains and tables for divination,
and adds that this is a common fact (Figuier, Histoire du mer
veilleux, Paris, 1873, i, 18). According to Ammianus Mar-
cellinus a table was made and on it was placed a slab engraved
with the twenty-four letters of the alphabet. A ring suspended
by a thread was held over it which swung to certain letters.
These being written down gave an oracular message.
2. The Magnetic Stage1
With Mesmer all changes: he introduced animal magnetism,
which, though not to be confounded with metapsychics, is closely
allied to it.2 In 1766 Anton Frederic Mesmer (1723-1815)
produced, as his thesis for a medical degree, an essay on the
physiological influence of the planets. During the next ten years
'O n Mesmers work and the origins of magnetism see the remarkable
Hypnotism,
article by Ochorowicz, in the Dictionnaire de Physiologie, C. Richet,
Geschichte des neueren Occul-
Paris, 1909, viii, pp. 709-777 ; also K. Kiesewetter,
tismus; geheimwissenschaftliche Systme von Agrippa bis Karl du Prel, second
edition, Leipzig, 1907. The bibliography of animal magnetism and hypnotism
will be found in M. Dessoirs book.
*Cf. Figuier,Histoire du merveilleux, Paris, 1873, i, 18.
he studied, endeavouring to harmonize astronomy and medicine,
and to bring himself to notice. In 1778 he came to Paris and
published his first didactic work. It was immediately apparent
that new and extraordinary facts were involved. He rose into
vogue. The Royal Society of Medicine, the Academy of Sciences,
and the Faculty took the matter up and showed that Mesmers
methods gave rise to a certain psycho-physiological state which
might sometimes be efficacious in the curing of disease.1
The new doctrine obtained numerous adherents among doc
tors, magistrates, gentlemen, and scientists. Animal magnetism
was commonly practised. Puysegur, aided by dEslon and Deleuze,
the librarian of the Jardin des Plantes, modified the methods of
Mesmer and created animal magnetism (induced somnambulism),
such as we know it today. Mesmer, by adopting the word
magnetism, only meant action at a distance, just as Paracelsus
and Goclenius treated of the magnetic action of planets or of
substances. In this sense Mesmer was nearer to metapsychics
than his immediate successors.
With Puysegur, dEslon, and Deleuze magnetization became
a therapeutic method, though henceforth metapsychic facts
action at a distance, vision through opaque bodies, clairvoyance
or luciditywere observed facts; but strangely enough nearly
all the efforts of the magnetizers were concentrated on the diag
nosis and cure of disease. Petetin, a physician of Lyons, cited
a number of cases of cryptesthesia which he attributes naively
to epigastric sensibility: one of his cataleptic patients could
distinguish and name a card placed on the epigastric region.
Petetin is one of the old-time magnetizers who studied the psycho
logical, or rather metapsychic, phenomena that so often accom
pany hypnosis, with special care.
Baron du Potet, and Husson, a physician of the Paris Hos
pital and a member of the Academy of Medicine, made, in 1825,
some remarkable experiments on somnambulism induced from a
distance. A notable report was presented by Husson to the
Paris Academy of Medicine, and appeared in 1833.2
Mmoire sur la dcouverte du magntisme animal, Paris, P. F. Didot,
1779. Ochorowicz has done full justice to Mesmer who was a genuine dis
coverer and forerunner.
Maxime de Puysgur, Rapport des cures opres Bayonne par le
magntisme animal, Mmoires pour servir a ltablissement
Bayonne, 1784.
du magntisme animal, Histoire critique de magntisme
Paris, 1820. Deleuze,
Among the conclusions adopted, I give the following, which
will seem bold, even today:
An effort of will or a fixed gaze has sufficed to produce
magnetic phenomena, even when the subject was unaware.
A somnambulic state may give rise to new faculties, designated
as clairvoyance, intuition, or interior prevision.
By an effort of will it is possible not only to act on the patient,
but even to induce complete somnambulism and to dispel it,
unknown to and out of sight of the patient, through closed doors.
We have seen two somnambulists with closed eyes distinguish
objects placed before them; they have named the color and value
of cards, have read words of script or some lines in books selected
at random, and this when the eyelids were held down with our
fingers.
In spite of these declarations the scepticism of official science
prevailed. Hussons report was disputed and then forgotten,
and the metapsychic phenomena were taken up by novelists, and
denied or disdained by men of science.
In Germany Justinus Kemer,1 physician and poet, studied
for a long while Federica Hauff, a medium whose extraordinary
faculties were well worthy of attention. Federica Hauff was
undoubtedly a powerful medium; she saw spirits and produced
materializations. One day, says Kerner, I was conversing
with her brother, when he said: Hush! a spirit is crossing the
room going toward my s i s t e r Then I saw a vague form like
a luminous column about human height standing at the foot of
the bed of the seeress, whispering to her.
Around her spontaneous rappings were heard, and she could
even cause them on neighbouring objects, on tables, and on the
animal, 1813. Pttin, Electricit animale, mmoires sur la catalepsie.
Foissac, Rapport et discussions sur le magntisme animal, Paris, 1825.
Deleuze, Instruction pratique sur le magntisme animal. Final dition, Paris,
1853.
There is, however, a posthumous work by Deleuze, Mmoire sur la facult
de prvision, with notes by M. Mi elle, Paris, 1834.
Rapports et discussions de lAcadmie royale de mdecine sur le mag
ntisme animal, Paris, 1833.
1Die Seherin von Prevorst, Erffnungen ber das innere Leben d. Menschen
und ber das Hereinragen einer Geisterwelt in die unsere, Stuttgart, 1829,
fifth dition, Stuttgart, 1877. Die Seherin von Prevorst und ihre Geschichte
in der Geisterwelt, nach Juitinus Kerner von einem ihrer Zeitgenossen, Stuttgart,
1869. A . Reinhard, Justinus Kerner und das Kernerhaus, su Weinberg, Tbin
gen, 1886. J. Kerner, Bltter aus Prevorst Originalien und Lesefrchte fr
Freunde des innern Lebens, Stuttgart, 1831-1839.
wood of her bed. Different objects moved without contact, she
was levitated, and seems to have spoken in unknown tongues.
It was only during the years from 1826 to 1829 that these
remarkable phenomena were observed; during the whole of this
time she was very ill and could scarcely leave her bed. All
who studied Federica Hauff (such as the Magistrate Pfaffer
and Strauss, the celebrated author of the Leben Jesu), instead
of ridiculing her, were convinced not only of her good faith but
of the metapsychic phenomenathen called supernatural.
At this time there appeared, also in Germany, the works of
Reichenbach. These are obscure physiological rather than meta
psychic records, for the action of steel magnets on organic bodies
must not be confused with cryptesthesia or telekinesis. Unfor
tunately the work of Reichenbach has been more disputed over
than studied.
Belonging strictly to the metapsychic domain were the observa
tions made in France on lucid somnambulists such as Mme.
Pigeaire1 and Alexis Didier, but men of science, with the rarest
exceptions, concerned themselves with somnambulism only to try
to disprove it. Their attitude is easily understandable: somnam
bulic consultants, lucid or super-lucid, appeared in every town,
both in France and abroad, exploiting the alleged healing virtues
of magnetism. They were to be found at every fair, plying a
dubious trade; they told fortunes by cards, they saw the future
in coffee-grounds, and practised palmistry.
Credulous people visited them and men of science shrugged
their shoulders. In such a medley, the clairvoyance of persons
like Mme. Lenormand, Mme. Pigeaire, and Alexis Didier was
lost, though some serious notices were published.2
XA. de Rochas has published part of these in French with some inter
esting notes.
*Du Potet, Essai sur renseignement philosophique du magntisme animal,
Paris, 1845. Lafontaine, Lart de magntiser ou le magntisme vital consi
dr sous le point de vue thorique, pratique et thrapeutique,
Paris, 1847.
Fifth edition, 1887. A . Bertrand, Du magntisme animal en France, suivi de
considrations sur lapparition de iextase dans les traitements magntiques,
Paris, 1826. Teste, Manuel pratique du magntisme animal, Paris, 1840.
Elliotson, Animal Magnetism, Lancet, 1837, 1838, pp. 122, 282, 377, 400, 441,
516, 546, 615, 634. Esdaille, Reports of the magnetic hospital, Calcutta, 1848,
p. 761. Passavant, Untersuchungen ber den Lebenmagnetismus und das
Hellsehen, second edition, Franckfurt A . M., 1837.
Many journals, mostly ephemeral, appeared; others survived a consider
able time. The Journal du Magntisme, edited by Du Potet, 1845-1885. The
3. The Spiritist Stage
In 1847 an event took place, apparently insignificant, but really
of considerable import, introducing unforeseen facts and equally
unforeseen doctrines.
Animal magnetism, being of doubtful therapeutic value, was
making no progress. The coming of spiritism with its new
methods and new theories inaugurated a new era. This is the
third period in the development of metapsychic science. It runs
from 1847 to 1872.
In 1846, in the little town of Hydesville (Arcadia) near New
York, one Michael Weakman heard an unusual noise outside.
He went out and saw nothing; but as the noises continued and
disturbed him, he left Hydesville. His house was taken by John
Fox and his two daughters, Kate and Margaret, aged twelve
and fourteen. One night on going to bed the two girls heard
noises and raps, and discovered (December, 1847, and March,
1848), that these showed intelligence.
The phenomena soon developed, and several persons verified
that these intelligent rappings bore witness to certain facts that
had been kept secret. In August, 1848, the Fox family left
Hydesville for Rochester. Leah Fish, the elder sister of Kate
and Margaret, joined them for spiritualist manifestations.
Isaac Post suggested the use of an alphabet to converse with
these unknown powers which stated that they were spirits.
Many gatherings, sometimes enthusiastic, sometimes hotly
inimical, were held to verify the facts announced by the Fox
sisters, who were becoming more and more notorious. The first
scientific enquiry seems to have taken place at St. Louis (Mis
souri), in June, 1882; it appears to have reported favourably.
Nevertheless the Fox family were certainly not disinterested;
public sances were given at which places were paid for as at a
circus.
All these early stages of spiritualism, arising in the first place
from chance, and then pushed by shameless commercialism, are
very sordid.1
Zoist, a journal of cerebral physiology and mesmerism and their application to
human welfare, London, 1843-1853. Archiv fr den thierischen Magnetismus,
Altenburg and Leipzig, 1817-1822. Others might be cited.
lIt is, however, to be noted that the admirable discovery of surgical anes
thetics, also made in America, offers analogous features. It arose by a
But the start was made. First in America, and afterwards
in Europe, the practice of table-turning and spiritualist doctrines
made extraordinary progress during the next three years. As
for animal magnetism in 1780, so for table-turning in 1850, an
amazing infatuation set in; but it is simply puerile to see in this
nothing more than a huge and collective illusion. Moreover,
some reasoned conclusions were blended with the fanatical cre
dulity of blind and ignorant masses, and the equally blind and
ignorant denials by scorners. It was soon found that the phe
nomena of raps and telekinesis could be observed with other
mediums than the Fox sisters.1
Among these reasoned conclusions none was more influential
than those of Judge Edmunds, a senator respected throughout the
United States for probity and sagacity.
The mental instability of mediums is, for the most part, such
that their affirmations, whether positive or negative, have but
small value. That the Fox sisters, after the enormous develop
ment of spiritualism that followed on their early demonstrations,
should have tricked is possible or probable, not to say certain.
There are many instances of very strong mediums who pre
sented at first authentic phenomena, but later on, urged by
cupidity or vanity, finding their powers failing, have supple
mented them by fraud. It is difficult to suppose that the phe
nomena of rapping, which is certainly true, should have been
chance and immediately Horace Wells and Morton took out a patent in order
to draw profit from the discovery; but this greed of gain detracted nothing
from its reality. O. and W. Wright patented their aroplane, but this did
not diminish the value of their invention.
*A singular result followed. Margaret Fox, then become Mrs. Kane,
avowed in 1888 that all her revelations as a child and a young woman were
impostures. The sitting of the Musical Academy of Boston at which she made
this astonishing declaration provoked great indignation. T he other sister,
Kate, then Mrs. Joncken, afterwards Mrs. Sparr, and addicted to drink, made
the same confession in November, 1888, at Rochester. But in 1892 both
Margaret and Kate retracted their confessions. These unfortunate facts
prove nothing but the mental frailty of mediums.
In fine, when a fact has been affirmed, it is not enough merely to say that
there was lying and trickery ; it must also be shown how the trick was carried
out. A Mr. Blackman has told (Confessions of a Telepathist, J. S. P. R.,
October, 1911, p. xi6) how he in collusion with G. A . Smith deceived Gurney,
Myers, Podmore, H. Sidgwick, and Barrett. But in this so-called exposure he
certainly told some lies. I believe, too, that Marthe Braud once told a certain
lawyer at Algiers that she had tricked at the Villa Carmen; but later on she
denied this, and her statements have no value either way. A curious chapter
might be written on the pseudo-confessions o f mediums.
invented by the .Fox sisters without being real.1 Before 1847
these rappings were unknown; then these two young girls come
on the scene and give striking examples of them.
Then the same phenomenon is verified far and wide, and after
many such instances the girls say they were lying! It is
probable that the denial is the lie, and that seeing public favours
and money diminishing they thought to regain notoriety for
their puny personalities by a recantation.
In 1847 Margaret was fifteen and Kate twelve. Can we sup
pose that these two children organized a fraud that was tested
thousands of times during seventy-five years? The reality of
rappings does not depend on the Fox sisters. In 1888 it was too
late for denial and their recantation proves nothing.2
It is deplorable that from 1849 onward the Fox family should
have given theatrical spiritist performances for payment, but this
no more invalidates the facts than the patents taken out by Wells
and Morton for the use of ether contradict the facts of anesthesia.
The rapid development of spiritualism cannot be traced
here. A petition signed by fourteen thousand persons was pre
sented to the Senate of the United States in 1852, asking for a
scientific commission of enquiry. It had become a new religion;
spiritualist circles and journals were numerous.
Among the early American spiritualists, besides Edmunds,
must be placed Professors Britten, David Wells, Bryant, Bliss,
all of the University of Pennsylvania, and above all others Dr.
Robert Hare,8 professor of chemistry at Harvard, convinced
after having been sceptical.
In Europe spiritualism spread very rapidly; not without stir
ring up lively opposition. Scientific men, especially, refused to
admit the actuality of the phenomena, and to explain the un
deniable facts of raps and table-turning, they invented compli-*
(Les Sciences Psychiques, Revue de Paris,
*According to J. M axwell March
i, 1921) the bishop, Adrien de Montalembert, seems to have verified that
such raps took place with a nun of Lyons.
*The experiments by Aksakoff and Boutleroff with Kate Fox (of little
interest now) are mentioned further on (A. S. P., 1901, xi, 192). For
further details in the history of spiritualism, see E. Morselli, who gives
abundant and precise details (Psicologia e spiritismo,
Turin, 1908, i, 12-27).
sHare, Experimental investigations of the spirit manifestations demon
strating the existence of spirits and their communications with mortals,
Philadelphia, 1856. Makan, Modern mysteries explained and exposed, Boston,
1855 (University).
cated theories, and gave explanations, some of which were quite
correct, and others subtly erroneous.1
At that time, about 1854, the phenomena of unconscious mus
cular action, quite established today, was unknown. The credit
of an ingenious and rational explanation belongs to Chevreul.
He was supported by Babinet, Faraday, Carpenter, and by nearly
all physiologists and physicians.2
In point of fact the study of table-turning is one of the most
difficult in objective metapsychics, for nothing is harder than to
determine the part played by the unconscious in the oscillatory
movements of the table. Even when the good faith of the experi
menters is not in doubt, they evidently cannot be held responsible
for unconscious and involuntary muscular contractions. There
fore it was not possible at that time to prove in an unimpeach
able manner that movement could be produced without muscular
contraction.
Similarly for the raps. An eminent physiologist, M. Schiff,
showed in his own person that a crack, comparable to the raps
supposed to be produced by spirits, could be made by muscular
displacement of a certain tendon. This infantile explanation
that we smile at today was well received by scientists who prob
ably had never heard the raps which cause wood to vibrate some
times loudly, sometimes with musical rhythm, and have nothing
in common with the snappings of a tendon, even supposing that
other persons than the illustrious Florentine physiologist can
produce them. His assertions had been preceded by those of
xSee De Mirville, Pneumatologie des sprits et de leurs manifestations
diverses (fluidiques, historiques, etc.), Paris, first edition, 1853, fifth edition,
S vols., 1863-1864. Gasparin, Des tables tournantes, du surnaturel en gnral,
etc., Paris, 1854. Thiery (2) Les tables tournantes considres au point de vue
de la physique gnrale, Geneva, Kessmann, 1855. E. Hornung, Spiritualis-
tiche Mittheilungen aus der Geisterwelt, Berlin, 1859 and 1862. C. Kiesewetter,
Die Entwickelungsgeschichte des Spiritismus von der Urseit bis sur Gegen-
wart, Leipzig, Spohr, 1893. Leymarie, Histoire du spiritisme, compte rendu du
congrs spirite de 1889, Paris, librarie spirite, 1890, pp. 3-45. Malgras,
Les pionniers du spiritisme, Paris, Lib. des sciences psychologiques, 1906.
*Chevreul, De la baguette divinatoire, du pendule explorateur, et des tables
tournantes, Paris, 1854. Babinet, Etudes et lectures sur les sciences dobser
vation, Paris, 1856. Carpenter, Principles of mental physiology and psycho
logical curiosities of spiritualism (Pop. Sci. Monthly, 1877, Ui, 128).
Faraday, The table-turning delusion, Lancet, 1853. Cumberland, Fraudulent
aspects of spiritualism, Journal of Mental Science, 1881, xxvii, 280-628.
Morin, Le magntisme et les sciences occultes, Paris, 1855. See also on
Faraday's work the recent article by Fr. Grnewald, Faraday ber d. Tisch-
rcken, Psych. Stud., 1920, xlvii, 151, '295, 298.
Flint,1 another distinguished physiologist, who, after observation
of the Fox sisters, attributed the raps to the crackings of their
knee-joints.
Spiritualists made but poor replies to these experimental ob
jections; they ought, as was done later, to have met them by
experiment. Instead, they put forward theories and started a
new religion.
This theorization of spiritism was mainly due to L. H. D.
Rivail (1803-1869), a doctor of medicine scarcely known under
the name of Rivail, but celebrated under the pseudonym of Allan
Kardec.2
The spiritist theory of Allan Kardec is simple enough: The
soul does not die; after death it becomes a spirit and seeks to
manifest through certain privileged beings (mediums), capable
of receiving directions and impulses from spirits; the spirit seeks
reincarnation, i.e., to live again in a human form, of which it is
the soul; all human beings pass through successive transmigra-
tory phases, as Pythagoras had previously taught; their peri-
sprit can, under certain exceptional circumstances, materialize;
they know the past, the present, and the future. Sometimes they
materialize and can act on matter; from the moral point of view
we should let ourselves be guided by good spirits who lead us
towards right, and refuse to listen to bad spirits who lead us
into error.
The intellectual energy of Allan Kardec deserves unfeigned
admiration. Despite an exaggerated credulity he puts his faith
in experiment, and rests on that, so that his work is not only
a far-reaching theory but also a great collection of facts.
This theory has, however, a deplorably weak side. The whole
fabric of his system (which is that of spiritualism in general)
is based on the astonishing hypothesis that mediums, embodying
a so-called spirit, are never mistaken, and that automatic writ
ings, unless prompted by evil spirits, reveal verities to be ac
1A . Flint, On the discovery of the source of the Rochester knockings, and
on sounds produced by the movements of joints and tendons, Quart. Journ.
Med. Sci., New York, 1869, iii, 417-446. Schiff, Comptes rendus de VAcad.
des Sciences, A pril 18, 1859. Jobert, Velpeau, Cloquet, discussion on the
same, ibid., passim.
*Livre des esprits, Paris, 1857, first edition. Livre des mdiums, Paris,
1861, first edition. More than thirty editions have been issued of these cele
brated books which have been translated into all languages. Allan Kardec was
Iso the founder of the Revue Spirite, now in its thirtieth year.
cepted. If, then, we were to follow Kardecs theory, we must
take at face-value all the divagations of the subconscious, which,
with some exceptions, show a very primitive and puerile intelli
gence. To build a doctrine on the word of so-called spirits is a
very grave error. Nevertheless no influence between 1847 and
1871 was comparable to that of Allan Kardec, and no one has
made a deeper impress on metapsychic science.
Spiritualism was defended in England by Robert Dale Owen
and by Alfred Russel Wallace.1 Wallace was the man whose
genius anticipated Darwins work; his books bear witness to
his courage, for indeed much courage was required to write
in defence of a science that had so little scientific character.
In Germany Zllner stood alone. The time was ripe for the
appearance of the great pioneer of metapsychic scienceSir
William Crookes.
4. The Scientific Stage
Great as were the merits and the courage of Crookes, he was
preceded by the members of the Dialectical Society of London
who, to the number of thirty-six, met at the suggestion of Ed
munds, in January, 1869, to study mediumistic phenomena scien
tifically. Among them was the engineer, Cromwell Varley, the
distinguished naturalist, Russel Wallace, and an acute lawyer,
Serjeant Cox, all of whom seem to have played a leading part.
Well-known scientists such as Tyndall and Carpenter declined
to participate, and there were dissidents among the commission
itself; notably Lubbock and Huxley, who opposed the report of
the majority.2
The facts verified by the Dialectical Society were surprisingly
evidential: they did not, however, secure scientific assent, but
they had one excellent resultthey impelled William Crookes
to study the question. Fortunately he had the assistance of two
powerful mediums with whom to experimentFlorence Cook
and D. Dunglas Home.
1R. D. Owen, Footfalls on the boundary of another world, Philadelphia,
1877; The debatable land between this world and the next, N ew York and
London, 1871. A. Russel Wallace, A Defence of Modern Spiritualism Fort (
nightly Review), London, 1874, xv, 630-657. The Scientific Aspect of the
Supernatural, London, 1866. On Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, London,
1873.
*Report on Spiritualism by the Committee of the London Dialectical
Society, together with the evidence oral and written, and a selection from the
correspondence. (Longmans, London, 1871.)
Crookes was then thirty-seven years old, in the full vigour of
his age and powers. He had already a high scientific standing.
In 1863 he had discovered a new metalthalliumand had done
distinguished work in spectroscopy, astronomy, and meteorology.
He was editor of the Chemical News and of the Quarterly Jour
nal of Science, when he decided to study Homes remarkable
powers.
From 1869 to 1872 he published articles contrasting strongly
by the precision of their language and severe experimental
method with the usual style of spiritualist publications. It was
the beginning of the scientific period. I do not say that these
things are possible. I say that they exist, said Crookes.1
The idolatry of current ideas was so dominant at that time
that no pains were taken either to verify or to refute Crookess
statements. Men were content to ridicule them, and I avow
with shame that I was among the wilfully blind. Instead of
admiring the heroism of a recognized man of science who dared
then in 1872 to say that there really are phantoms that can be pho
tographed and whose heartbeats can be heard, I laughed.
This courage had, however, no immediate or considerable
effect; it is only today that Crookes work is really understood.
It is still the foundation of objective metapsychics, a block of
granite that no criticism has been able to touch. At the close of
a laborious and distinguished life he said, "I have nothing to
withdraw of all I have borne witness to.
Henceforward spiritualists will know that experiment is the
path of progress, rather than religious or mystical speculation.
The whole subject should now be an experimental science, scep
tical of theories and as exact on its own lines as chemistry,
physics, or physiology.
Animal magnetism has passed through a similar evolutionary
stage. Since Puysegur, Deleuze, and Du Potet it has made no
progress. James Braid of Manchester, by calling it hypnotism
did not change its mystical aspect nor its unfortunate association
with medicine. The result was that the doctors and physiologists*
*Many o f his writings are polemical; I will only cite the follow ing:
Experimental investigations on psychic force, London, Gilman, 1871. Re
searches on the phenomena of spiritualism, London, Burns, 1894. On
Psychical Research, Report Smithsonian Institution, Washington, 1898-1899.
pp. 185-205. Psychic force and modern spiritualism, A reply to the Quarterly
Review and other critics, London, 1872.
of 1875 gave little more credence to it than to the materializations
of Katie King.1
In 1875, while still a student, I was able to prove that we are
here concerned with a phenomenon of normal physiology; that
the intelligence in this induced state remains intact and is some
times super-excited, and that there is no need to imagine any
magical or magnetic action. Some years later I gave the first
examples of duplicated personalities, hinted at by Philips and
Azam.2 These changes of personality throw much light on so-
called spiritualist phenomena.
Nothing that I said in my article of 1875 was entirely new;
the old magnetizers had seen the same facts. So also when
Crookes established the reality of phantoms, he said scarcely any
thing that had not already been stated by spiritualists. The
novelty consisted in rigorous application of experimental method
to phenomena till then imperfectly verified and only partially
studied, and therefore given no place in science.
Following on my article many experiments were widely made,
and animal magnetism ceased to be an occult science.3
The efforts of those who study metapsychics should now be
directed to bringing this science out of the category of the occult,
as animal magnetism has been brought.
Another noteworthy event, as important as Crookess work, was
also of British origin. The Society for Psychical Research4 was*
*J. Braid, NeuryPnology, or the rationale of nervous sleep considered in
relation with animal magnetism. Illustrated by numerous cases of its suc
cessful application in the relief and cure of diseases, London, Churchill, 1843.
New edition, 1899. Power of the mind upon the body, London, 1846. Trans
lated into French and German.
*Ch. Richet, Du somnambulisme provoqu. Journ. de lanat. et de la
physiologie, 1875, xi, 348-378. Revue philosophique, 1880, x, 337-384.
A. F. pour lavancement des sciences, Reims, 1881, ix, 50-60. Azam , Le
ddoublement de la personnalit. Rev. scientif., 1890, xlvi, 136-141.
sHeidenhain, Zur Kritik hypnotischer Untersuchungen. Breslau aertstl.
Zeitschrift, 1880, 52-55, and Revue scient., 1880, xviii, 1187-1190. Chambard,
art. Somnambulisme du Diet, encycl. des Sc. Mdicales.
I need not, here mention the observations of Charcot and Bernheim, both
subsequent to my article of 1875, and manifestly prompted by it (1878-1885).
The very interesting history of suggestion does not pertain to metapsychics.
The complete bibliography up to 1902 will be found in the article Hypno
tism, in the Index Catalogue (2), 1902, vii, 743-766. (See also Morselli,
Il magnetismo animale, la fascinazione, gli stati hypnotici, second edition,
Turin, 1886.)
The presidents of this society have been Henry Sidgwick, 1882-84-92;
Balfour Stewart, 1885-87; A. J. Balfour, 1893; William James, 1894-95;
founded by the persevering efforts of E. Gurney and F. W. H.
Myers. A group of eminent persons drew together to make
investigations in the despised region of occultism, in order to
discover by rigorous scientific method the truths underlying these
strange facts. Thence has grown a colossal assemblage of facts,
experiments, and theories that has furnished data for the meta
psychic science of today.
This scientific reform was not limited to England. In France
a similar effort was made, following the example of Gurney and
Myers, though with lesser resources and fewer adherents. With
the help of Th. Ribot and L. Marillier the Socit de psychologie
physiologique was founded. Its existence was brief, for it aimed
at arousing interest in metapsychic research among psychologists,
physiologists, and physicians. They declined to take it seriously.
I then, with Dariex, founded the Annales des Sciences Psychiques
(1890-1920), C. de Vesme subsequently becoming the zealous
editor. This is now replaced by the Revue Mtapsychique di
rected by Geley, holding a just mean between the credulity of
the spiritualist publications and the blind ignorance of the jour
nals of official psychology.
However, important as are the psychical societies, and useful
as are their publications, their value still depends on experimental
research by single individuals. There can be no psychical re
search without a medium. The function of such societies is to
prevent the powers of remarkable mediums being lost to science
in unmethodical sances held without rigorous supervision.
Between 1885 and 1920 there were many powerful mediums:
Slade, Eglinton, Stainton Moses, Eusapia, Mme. dEsprance,
Mrs. Thomson, Marthe Braud, Stanislawa Tomczyk, Miss Gol-
igher, and Mrs. Leonard; but if I had to cite only two out of
these, I should take Mrs. Piper for subjective, and Eusapia Pala-
dino for objective phenomena.
William Crookes, 1896-99; F. W. H. Myers, 1900; Oliver Lodge, 1901-03; Sir
William Barrett, 1904; Charles Richet, 1905; G. Balfour, 1906-07; Mrs. H.
Sidgwick, 1908-09; A . Arthur Smith, 1910; Andrew Lang, 19 11; Carpenter,
1912; H. Bergson, 1913; Schiller, 1914; Gilbert Murray, 1915; Professor
Jacks, 19 17; Lord Rayleigh, 1919; W . McDougall, 1921.
The Proceedings published by Trbner & Co. form twenty-eight volumes,
to which must be added the Journal (1884-1920), printed for private circu
lation. A very good index appeared in 1904, giving the chief cases referred
to in Phantasms of the Living and in the Proceedings of the American
S. P. R. The headquarters o f the S. P. R. are at 20 Hanover Square.
Mrs. Piper, of Boston, studied with extraordinary patience by
William James, and afterwards by R. Hodgson, and then with
equal perseverance by Hyslop, and also by F. Myers, Sir Oliver
Lodge, and Sir William Barrett, has powers of clairvoyance and
cryptesthesia probably greater than any before observed. She
tells those who visit her, at once, and almost without hesitation,
the names of their relatives, with episodes in their lives, unknown
to her visitor, that can be verified only after long and painstaking
enquiry.
If there were no other medium in the world but Mrs. Piper
that would be sufficient to establish scientifically the facts of crypt
esthesia.
Eusapia Paladino1 has been studied hundreds of times by the
leading scientific men of Europe. Schiaparelli, Porro, Aksakoff,
G. Finzi, A. and F. Myers, O. Lodge, E. Feilding, Lombroso, A.
de Rochas, Ochorowicz, J. Maxwell, A. de Schrenck-Notzing, C.
Flammarion, Bottazzi, Morselli, Foa, Sabatier, A. de Watteville,
A. de Gramont, Carrington, and many more have all verified with
her the reality of movements without contact and materializations.
Even if there were no other medium than Eusapia in the world,
her manifestations would suffice to establish scientifically the
reality of telekinesis and ectoplasmic forms.
Both Mrs. Piper and Eusapia have always showed complete
readiness to comply with scientific tests, accepting all control
without taking offence. It is mainly through them that the
development of metapsychic science in recent years has been
possible. Scientific men of the future should recognize with
gratitude the debt they owe to them and to their predecessors,
D. D. Home and Florence Cook.
More recent experiments with Marthe Braud, Stanislawa
Tomczyk, and Miss Goligher have opened wide possibilities be
fore objective metapsychics.
Thus metapsychics has acquired the right to be held a separate
science under that name, differentiated from hypnotism on the
one hand and from spiritualism on the other. I gave it this name
and made this claim in 1905. Hypnotism is a nearly normal
accompaniment in animal magnetism; it is an induced mental
state such that normal consciousness is modified and transformed,
xThe complete bibliography of publications relating to Eusapia has been
Bibliografia Paladiniana,
given by Morselli under the suggestive title o f in a
remarkable book,Psicologia e spiritismo, Turin, Bona, 1908, 134-170.
and new phases of consciousness, sometimes multiple, appear
while the normal consciousness is asleep. But hypnotism still
belongs to psychology, so that somnambulism only pertains to
metapsychics on the emergence of faculties of cognition which
do not exist at all in the normal state. To these faculties I have
given the name of cryptesthesia.
It is in no way doubtful that cryptesthesia is developed by
means of hypnotism, magnetism, and somnambulism, but meta
psychics is concerned with hypnotism only through its intensi
fication of cryptesthesia.
At the other pole of the so-called occult sciences is spiritualism;
and here the facts must be dissociated from theories. Spiritual
ism, according to the formula of Allan Kardec and others, is a
theory leading to a religion; but this takes us very far beyond
science. Not that metapsychics should abjure all theory; no
science, however young, can dispense altogether with theories,
even hypothetical theories, but theory must always be subordinate
to the facts; it must never dominate them and look on them as
accessory to a religion. This was what the founders of meta
psychic scienceGurney, Myers, and Crookesendeavoured to
achieve.
Neither the magnetizers nor the spiritualists should be con
temned. That would be a grave injustice. They carried out
laborious investigations that are the foundation of metapsychics,
disregarding ridicule, hostility, and the rejection of their work
by official science.
But we have reached a new stage. It is no longer admissible
that a new medium should be developed by a small circle without
the methods employed in all sciencesscales, photography, cine
matography, and graphic diagrams. Similarly, rigorous and
exhaustive enquiry, such as is carried out by the S. P. R., is
indispensable for all subjective phenomena. Complete certitude
is required, half-certitudes will not do.
In fine, modern metapsychics should be limited on the subjective
side to the psychological phenomena that conscious human intelli
gence, however keen, is incapable of producing; and on the objec
tive side to material facts produced apparently by intelligent causes
that the known and classified natural forces (light, heat, elec
tricity, gravitation, and mechanical power) are unable to explain.
In this brief historical summary I have not been able to indi
cate the work that has been done. Its bibliography is already
enormous. I should like, however, to indicate, to those who wish
to study the spiritualism, the occultisms, and the metapsychics
of the half century that has now elapsed, the chief works dealing
with the subject, all of them useful and some indispensable. Only
leading works are here mentioned:
Aksakoff, Animismus und Spiritismus, Versuch einer Kritischen
Prfung der mediumnistischen Phaenomene, Leipzig, Mutze,
1890, 4th ed., in two vols., 1902, trad, fr., Libr. des sciences
psychologiques, 1895. E. Bozzano, Ipotesi spiritica e teorie scien-
tifiche, Genova, Donath, 1903. A. Brofferio, Per lo spiritismo, 1st
ed., Milano, Briola, 1892, 3d ed., Torino, Bocea, 1903, trad, all.,
Berlin, 1894. G. Delanne, Le spiritisme devant la science, Paris,
Chanuel, 1895, 5th ed., 1897, Les apparitions matrialises,
Paris, Leymarie, 2 vols., 8vo, 1911. Recherches sur la mdi
umnit, Paris, 1896. Fr. Myers, The human personality and
its survival to bodily death, London, Longmans, 2 vols., 8vo,
1902. Oliver Lodge, La survivance humaine. A. de Rochas,
V extriorisation de la motricit, Paris, Chanuel, 1896, 4th ed.,
1906. L'extriorisation de la sensibilit, Paris, Chanuel, 1895,
5th ed., Chacornac, 1905. Les tats profonds de l'hypnose, Paris,
Chacornac, 1892. Les tats superficiels de l'hypnose, Paris, Cha
cornac, 1902. J. Maxwell, Les phnomnes psychiques. Re
cherches, observations, mthodes, Paris, Alcan, 1905, MetaPsy-
chical Phenomena, London, Duckworth, 1905. E. Boirac,
L'avenir des sciences psychiques, Paris, Alcan, 1907. La psycho
logie inconnue, Paris, Alcan, 1915. Carmelo Samona, P siche
misteriosa: i fenomeni detti spiriticci, Palermo, Reber, 1910.
E. Flammarion, Les forces naturelles inconnues, Flammarion,
Paris, 1907. Linconnu et les problmes psychiques, Paris, Flam
marion, 1900. La mort et son mystre, Paris, 1920. Morton
Prince, A dissociation of personality, Boston, Turner, 1906. Zll
ner, WissenschafFtliche Abhandlungen, part iii, Die transeenden
tle Physik und die sogenannte Philosophie, Leipzig, Stachmann,
1878-1879. J. H. Hyslop, Science and a future life, Boston,
Turner, 1905. Innocenzo Calderone, La Rincarnazione, Milano,
dit. Veritas, 1913. Stainton Moses (Oxon), The higher aspects
of spiritualism, London, 1880. Spirit identity, London (Spirit
ualist alliance, 1902). G. Geley, De l'inconscient au conscient,
Paris, Alcan, 1919. L'tre subconscient, 4th ed., Paris, 1919.
J. Grasset, L'occultisme hier et aujourd'hui, Montpellier, Coulet,
1908. Osty, Lucidit et intuition, Paris, Alcan, s. d. Florence
Marryat, There is no death, Leipzig, Heinemann, 1892. Chev-
reul, On ne meurt pas, Paris, 1914. S. Ottolenghi, La sugges
tione a le facolta psichiche occulte in rapporto alla pratica legale
e medico forense, Torinb, Bocca, 1900. Amirai Usborne Moore,
Glimpses of the next state, London, Watts & Co., 1912. Du Prel,
Das Rthsel des Menschen, Leipzig, Mutze, 1885, trad, it., Mi
lano, Galli, 1894. Monistische Seeleneehre; ein Beitrag auf L
sung des Menschenrthsels, Leipzig, Gnther, 1888. L. Denis,
Aprs la mort, expos de la doctrine des esprits, dern. d.,
1918, Paris, Leymarie, trad, ital., Milano, 1914. Fr. Podmore,
Modem spiritualism; a history and a criticism, London, Methuen,
2 vols., 1902. Wahu, Le spiritisme dans lantiquit, et dans les
temps modernes, Paris, Leymarie, 2 vols., 1885. Schrenck-Notz-
ing, Physikalische Phaenomene des Mediumnismus, Munich, Rein
hardt, 1920.
Some idea of the volume of metapsychic literature may be
formed by adding to this short bibliography, which I shall have
occasion to supplement in the course of the present work, the
important articles published in Light (London), in the Banner
of Light (Boston), The Religio-philosophical Journal (New
York), the Harbinger of Light (Melbourne), the Revue Spirite,
Paris, Revue scientifique et morale du spiritisme (Paris), the
Luce e Ombra (Milan, a noteworthy record), the Zeitschrift fr
Spiritismus (Leipzig), and Psychische Studien (Berlin).
I cannot mention all the books that have appeared since 1920
on metapsychics; it will suffice to quote the following:
C. Flammarion, Aprs la mori, Paris, 1922. G. Voumiquel,
Les tmoins posthumes, Paris, Leymarie, 1921. M. Maeterlinck,
Le Grand Secret, Paris, Fasquelle, 1921. Freud, Introduction to
Psycho-analysis. Oesterreich, Der Occultismus im Modernen
Weltbild, Sibyllen-Verlag, Dresden, 1921. P. Heuze, Les Morts
Vivent ils f Renaissance Paris, 1922. F. Heslop, Further Mes
sages Across the Borderline, Taylor, London, 1921. L. Farigoule,
La vision extra-rtinienne et le sens paroptique, Nouvelle Revue,
1920. Tischer, Monismus und Occultismus, Mutze, Leipzig,
1921. Tassacher, Occultismus und Spiritismus, Stuttgart, 1921.
Lewis Baylis Paton, Spiritism and the Cult of the Dead in An
tiquity, London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1921. Evelyn Underhill,
The Life of the Spirit and the Life of the Day, London, Methuen,
1921. Walter F. Prince, Spiritualism and the New Psychology,
American S. P. R., 1922, p. 72. J. Maxwell, Magie, Paris, Flam
marion, 1921.
In most of these, Flammarions fine work excepted, there is
much more nebulosity than precision. Those who wish to be
informed of new facts will find them in the numerous reviews
that devote themselves specially to this subject.
4. Mediums
This term medium, which signifies an intermediary between
this world of the living and the world of the dead, is execrable,
but too firmly fixed to be abandoned. In the course of this book
many details will be found which have not found a place in this
chapter which is necessarily abbreviated to avoid repetition else
where. The history of mediums covers nearly all metapsychics.
There is a great difference between powerful mediums such as
Home, Eusapia, Stainton Moses, and Florence Cook, who mani
fest surprising objective and energetic phenomena, and those
who show only subjective phenomena. It is therefore necessary
to place physical mediums who show telekinesis and materializa
tions in a class by themselves.
Such mediums are very rare; even those who can give raps
without contact are not common.
Their psycho-physiology does not tell us much; it is not pos
sible to say whether they are more or less intelligent than average
persons. Nothing distinguishes them from others, except their
strange power of producing materializations (hands and shapes
of persons), and movements of matter (noises, raps, voices, and
scents) in spiritist sances.
The extreme rarity of telekinetic powers is not a matter for
suspicion; we must perforce admit that all men are not alike.
Some children show at a very early age astounding powers of
memory and calculation. It is easy to admit that in the mass of
humanity there must be exceptional individuals.
Cryptesthetic are much more common than the telekinetic fac
ulties. Cryptesthesia of all degrees is so widespread, and tele
kinesis is so rare, that the persons showing the latter powers
cannot be classed along with those showing the former.
We shall therefore class mediums in two distinct groups:
1. Mediums showing physical phenomena.
2. Mediums showing psychical phenomena.
Telekinesis is sharply defined; materialization still more so,
but the elementary form of telekinesis, rapping, which is a
sonorous vibration (without contact) in the wood of a table or,
a chair, without the power of raising objects or producing ma
terializations, is not infrequent; but even here it is difficult to
draw a precise line dividing those mediums who can and those
who cannot produce raps, for very slight noises are often heard
when a medium is scarcely touching the table, noises so slight
that one can hardly be sure of them.
It would be desirable here to touch on the biography of the
great mediums noted for materializations and telekinesis, but
we must defer this to the chapter on materializations.
To mention Home, Florence Cook, Stainton Moses, Eusapia,
Mme. dEsprance, Eglinton, Linda Gazzera, Slade, Marthe B
raud, Miss Goligher, and Stanislawa Tomczyk is to name nearly
all; it is obvious that they are but few. The number of those
who give raps is very much larger, but I have no statistics regard
ing them.
Unfortunately physical mediums often misuse their powers;
they think to enrich themselves and give public sances for profit.
The Fox sisters, the Davenport brothers, Eglinton, and Slade
all did this, and from thence to fraud is but a step that has often
been taken, so that professional mediums of this class are always
to be looked upon with suspicion and the most rigid precautions
must always be taken against trickery. Indeed this is always
necessary, even when there is no possible suspicion of conscious
fraud.
There are, however, excellent reasons for not refusing to
experiment with leading professional mediums.
1. At the outset of their careers the phenomena produced must
certainly have been genuine. Leah, Margaret, and Kate Fox
would not of set purpose have invented the Hydesville rappings
had they not originally had genuine ones.
2. Mediums like Mme. dEsprance, Florence Cook, Linda, Eu
sapia, and Marthe Braud had never had a lesson in legerdemain
or illusionism. They experienced some strange phenomena and
almost in spite of themselves followed the path opened before
them. Only in order to discredit the facts has extraordinary
skill been attributed to them, a skill greater than that of expert
conjurers like Robert Houdin, Hamilton, and Maskelyne, suffi
cient to deceive the most alert men of science in a way that
Houdin, Hamilton, or Maskelyne have not been able to imitate.
As to mediums producing psychical effects only, every shade
between them and normal persons is observable. It would even
seem that quite normal persons once in their lives may have
some passing lucidity; but not to depart overmuch from usual
language we will provisionally apply the term medium only
to those persons who consider themselves to be in relations with
extraneous personalities.
Conformably to this we have defined metapsychics as the science
whose subject-matter is phenomena which seem to arise from
an intelligence other than the human intelligence. Mediums are
therefore those persons who, in partial or total unconsciousness,
speak words, perform actions, and make gestures that seem not
to be under control of their will and to be independent of their
intelligence. Nevertheless these unconscious phenomena show
intelligence and system, and are sometimes most aptly co-ordi
nated. Therefore the first thing to be discovered is whether they
are due to a human or to a super-human intelligence.
To take a well-known and concrete example: Helen Smith
writes automatically long messages that she attributes to Marie
Antoinette. Is this done by Helen Smiths own intelligence, or
by another? Is it Marie Antoinette or some other that governs
Helen Smiths words, gestures, and writing?
We shall discuss these two hypotheses later on. For the pres
ent we shall show that there are gradual, almost indescribable
gradations between these so-called mediums and normal persons.
It is not only difficult, but impossible, to draw a line of demarca
tion ; whereas between physical mediums and normal persons there
is the chasm of an essential difference.
The grades of subjective mediumship may be classified as
follows:
(A) The first departure from the normal consists in slight,
almost imperceptible, muscular movements, sufficient, however,
to enable an experienced person to recognize unconscious sensa
tion and will in the subject under observation. There are cer
tainly more than fifty per cent, of normal persons who reveal
their thoughts by slight muscular tremors of which they are
unconscious, as in the willing game, which sometimes gives
surprising results. These involuntary movements are so fre
quently and clearly observable that they belong to normal physi
ology and not to metapsychics.
(B) The second degree consists in the creation of a new per
sonality by' hypnotism. The normal personality reappears on
awaking, but under hypnotism and hypnotic suggestion a new
personality appears which is evidently factitious, since the mag-
netizer imposes it at will and can maintain it by verbal suggestion.
This artificial and transitory personality also belongs to normal
official psychology.
(C) The third degree is a mediumistic state, i.e., a new per
sonality is created by auto-suggestion. Hypnotism acts through
hetero-suggestion; mediumship by auto-suggestion. There is
very little difference between the personality of Marie Antoinette
as assumed by Helen Smith of her own accord, and the same
personality as aroused by suggestion of a hypnotizer.
Automatic writings belong to this group and there is no ground
for giving this important psychological manifestation a place in
metapsychics, at least in regard to the mere fact of writing, for
in most of these cases the need for the hypothesis of an extraneous
non-human intelligence does not arise. Since I can suggest to
Alice that she is Marie Antoinette and she enacts admirably the
part of the unhappy queen, why should I suppose that the Queen
of France is incarnate in Helen Smith when she assumes that
character of her own motion and plays it equally well? The
supposition is gratuitous and infantile.
(D) The fourth step is when the new personality shows
cryptesthesia and really seems to know things unknown to the
medium, and even things that the secondary personality alone
could be aware of, as in the case of Mrs. Piper incarnating
Phinuit or George Pelham.
The guide of the medium (i.e., the new personality that ap
pears) then seems to be a genuinely extraneous intelligence.
These phenomena can rightly be called metapsychic because,
taking them all in all, the normal intelligence of the sensitive is
quite insufficient to explain the strange and potent cryptesthesia.
I need scarcely remark that the notion that an extraneous force
is in play is only a hypothesis.
(E) Perhaps it would be as well to reserve the name medium
for those who produce mechanical movement without contact and
materializations. This is the fifth degree; in which levitations,
telekinesis, hallucinations pertaining to the spiritist trance (akin
to the hypnotic trance) and materializations appear side by side
with cryptesthesia.
There is still nothing to prove that the secondary personalities
may not be exclusively human and due to modalities of human
intelligence; whereas the physical phenomena show something
really new and metapsychic, transcending normal psychology,
and by no means explicable without the intervention of unknown
powers that appear to be intelligent.
As this1book claims to be a working treatise, I shall, in order
to give clear ideas, instance some examples of transition from the
normal to the mediumistic state.
First degree. Antoinette is not hypnotizable; but if I take her
hand and ask her to think of some object that she has hidden
in a corner of the room, she is much astonished when I discover
that object, guided by her unconscious movements.
Second degree. Alice is hypnotized. If I suggest that she is
an old general, she caricatures an old generalcoughs, spits,
speaks roughly, swears, calls for a drink, etc. She will play this
simple farce for an hour at a time.
Third degree. Helen Smith has become Marie Antoinette by
auto-suggestion. She moves with dignity, speaks the language,
and reproduces nearly the writing and spelling of the queen. In
perfect good faith she plays this role for weeks or months.
Mme. Camus puts her hand on the table and feverishly writes
long phrases automatically; she does not know what she writes
and talks of other things while writing. A certain Vincent is
supposed to be the spirit-guide of these commonplace philosoph
ical and theosophical dissertations.
Fourth degree. Mrs. Piper gradually loses her normal con
sciousness ; then Phinuit, or George Pelham, Myers, or R. Hodg
son speak through her. But these personalities, though probably
imaginary and arising from auto-suggestion, have astonishing
cryptesthetic powers. The words spoken by them through the
voice of Mrs. Piper, show telepathy, monitions, premonitions, and
all kinds of lucidity, so that rationalism (which is itself perhaps
an error), finds the greatest difficulty not to ascribe the almost
superhuman intelligence displayed to some extraneous source.
Mrs. Leonard, Mme. Briffaut, Stella, and the Seeress of Pre-
vorst are all mediums of this kind.
Fifth degree. Eusapia falls into a trance without being hyp
notized. Then by the agency of John King, as she says, she
moves objects without touching them ; she materializes the hands,
and sometimes the head of John King. Other phantoms some
times appear. Home, Mme. dEsprance, Florence Cook, Stain-
ton Moses, Stanislawa Tomczyk, Miss Goligher, and Marthe
Braud are mediums of the same order. Frequently cryptesthesia
of divers kinds appears side by side with the physical and me
chanical results. The domination by an extraneous intelligence
seems complete, alike by the cognition of things unknown to
the medium herself and by the abnormal powers over matter.
Indeed true mediums (of the physical order) are often sensi
tives also ; they have remarkable cryptesthetic faculties. Stainton
Moses and Home showed this. Eusapia showed only mechanical
and physical phenomena, Mrs. Piper only psychological.
Without drawing any inference, it must be admitted as a fact
that powerful mediums attribute their powers to a guide,
whether those powers be mechanical, objective, or subjective; and
in order to carry out successful experiments, it is necessary to act
as though this guide were really existent and incarnated in the
medium. This is a working hypothesis in the strictest sense,
nearly always essential to the production of the phenomena.
Science, it has been said, is only accuracy of language. There
fore we ought not to use the same word to describe persons so
different as Eusapia and Mrs. Piper. We might call those who
give physical effects, mediums; those who show cryptesthetic
effects which they attribute to extraneous forces, sensitives; and
those who (without cryptesthesia), present, by automatic writ
ing, secondary personalities that seem spontaneous, but are doubt
less created by auto-suggestion, automatists.
This classification, like all others, is arbitrary. Sensitives are
always automatists also, though the converse is not true. Hun
dreds of cases might be cited of automatic writing which are but
moderately interesting examples of released subconsciousness,
destitute of cryptesthesia and lucidity, and in no way noteworthy
except for the extraordinary powers of the subconscious.
In spite of my strong desire to refer metapsychic phenomena
as far as possible to the domain of normal psychology, I do not
wish to curtail or misrepresent them on rationalist grounds. The
dominance of a single idea and the state of automatism induced
by trance, whether hypnotic or spiritist, creates such extraordi
nary aptitudes for cryptesthesia that one is really tempted to
believe in an extraneous intelligence in such cases as those of
Mrs. Piper, Mrs. Leonard, and Mrs. Verrall. This question will
not be discussed here; later on I shall treat it fearlessly.
Neither sensitives, nor automatists, nor even mediums show
any special signs; they are like other people. Age, sex, and na
tionality do not seem to influence the matter.
Hysteria has often been invoked; but unless we assign an
unwarrantable extension to this morbid state, it does not seem
favourable to the phenomena. Hysterics are often hypnotizable,
but so are most people. Mediums are more or less neuropaths,
liable to headaches, insomnia, or dyspepsia; but this signifies very
little. I entirely refuse to consider them morbid persons as P.
Janet is too disposed to do. Certainly they show some dissocia
tions of consciousness; but such analogous dissociations with par
tial automatism are common enough among artists, men of sci
ence, and many ordinary individuals.
J. Maxwell has insisted on a certain mark in the iris of most
mediums, and it might be worth while to make some statistical
research on this; but there will always be the difficulty of know
ing where to stop, for there is no line of demarcation possible
between sensitives and automatists on the one hand and normal
persons on the other. One automatist does nothing but trace
circles; another writes incoherent words; a third will write con
nected sentences; a fourth composes short poems; while a fifth
will write a book or a novel. There are all possible degrees in
automatism. The talents of the unconscious show even more
variety than those of consciousness.
Cryptesthesia also admits of many gradations. A person who
has been perfectly normal during the whole of a long life may
one day see a veridical apparition or hear a premonitory voice.
He cannot be called a sensitive, though he has been such for
a few minutes or seconds. Persons apparently normal look into
the crystal and after a short time perceive dramatic scenes in the
little glass sphere. One cannot say that they are sensitives, or
that they are not; but here also there is no need to invoke an
external agency, even to explain the fact.
Even great sensitives like Mrs. Piper or Stainton Moses have
no distinguishing physiological characteristics. These privileged
persons who, according to spiritualist ideas, enter into communi
cation with the dead, do not show any other physical or mental
superiority. The facility with which their consciousness suffers
dissociation indicates a certain mental instability, and their re
sponsibility while in a state of trance is somewhat diminished;
but these are only shades of character, and I infer that apart
from their visions, trances, and other manifestations they are
much as other people.
Their sensitiveness has usually been discovered by chance. It
would be very interesting to work out the details of the origins
of mediumship. Every prominent case would, no doubt, show
very different points of departure, but never that they have
become mediums of set purpose. The power develops spontane
ously.
It is curious, and discouraging, to find that their powers do not
increase. They arise spontaneously, no one knows how or why.
If the fancy takes them, so to speak, they simply disappear; no
effort can retain them. Katie King left Florence Cook and
Sir William Crookes, merely stating that she must leave them.
My regretted and learned friend, Dr. Segard, told me that his
young daughter of twelve showed remarkable telekinetic phe
nomena (levitation of a heavy table, raps, movements of objects
without contact) for three days only, after which the whole power
vanished. This was twenty-five years ago and the lady has never
had any such later experiences. Training seems inoperative; I
am even inclined to think that our efforts to regularize the phe
nomena bring more disadvantages than advantages. Hence in
my own experiments I have entirely given up all attempts to
indicate how the sensitive or the medium should act. A medium
must be left to take his own way; our influence, if we have any,
would probably be unsatisfactory. A powerful medium is a
very delicate instrument of whose secret springs we know nothing,
and clumsy handling may easily disorganize its working. It is
best to allow the phenomena to develop in their own way without
any attempts at guidance. It is probably a great mistake to try
to educate mediumship.
Why is this? It does not seem to me that we can necessarily
infer the intervention of an external intelligence. Even with
normal children and youths the power of education is, perhaps
fortunately, very limited.
Mediums have not hitherto been treated with justice; they have
been slandered, ridiculed, and vilified. They have been treated
as anitna viles for experiment. When their faculties faded away
they have been left to die in obscurity and want; when rewarded
it has been with a niggardly hand, giving them to understand
that they are only instruments. It is time that this inhuman treat
ment should cease.
If by any chance a powerful physical medium or sensitive were
discovered, instead of leaving such a one to the curiosity of the
ignorant, to journalists, and to ladies who consult them on a
lost dog or a faithless lover, they should be assured of liberal
board and lodging, or perhaps more, in order to prevent their
mediumship being degraded by base necessities. Mme. Bisson
has done this for Marthe Beraud; Lord Dunraven did the same
for Home, and E. Imoda for Linda. In short, mediums should
be claimed for sciencesevere, just, and generous sciencein
stead of allowing their wonderful faculties to be prostituted by
childish credulity or damaging contempt.
At the same time there should be no relaxation of scientific
strictness, without demanding astounding experiments, or excur
sions into the beyond. We must resign ourselves to earth-condi
tions. Metapsychic phenomena should be treated as problems of
pure physiology. Let us experiment with these rare, privileged,
and wonderful persons and remember that they deserve to be
treated with all respect, but also that they must never be trusted.
BOOK II
Subjective Metapsychics
CHAPTER I
On S u b j e c t iv e M e t a p s y c h ic s in G eneral
1. The Limits of Psychic and Metapsychic Science

A primary difficulty confronts us, for as soon as we can explain
any phenomena of lucidity by extreme acuteness of intelligence
or by systematic treatment of the subconscious, it is clear that
there is no need to refer it to metapsychics, i.e., to assume un
known faculties or the intervention of external intelligences. It
will suffice to say that it is only the effect of exceptional human
acuteness. We are therefore bound first to investigate the limits
to human intelligence.
This is exceedingly difficult, for many intellectual phenomena
occur quite apart from consciousness; and these have belonged
to normal psychology since the time of Leibnitz. The mind can
work without the assistance of consciousness; very complex intel
lectual processes take place unknown to us, and a whole world
of ideas vibrates in us of which we are unconscious. Probably
no remembrance of the past is completely effaced; consciously
we forget much, but memory forgets nothing; the mass of past
impressions is retained almost intact, though consciousness of
them has vanished. For the subconsciousness wakes and works
side by side with sleeping consciousness, and there can be no
doubt that comparisons, associations, and judgments are formed
in which the conscious self takes no part. The importance of
these phenomena of the subconscious cannot be over-emphasized;
but as everything that can be explained by normal psychology
should be eliminated from metapsychics, and as the subconscious
work of the mind pertains to normal psychology, we must lay
down and always remember the lawsubconsciousness is compe
tent to do everything that consciousness can do.
Our senses give us our notions of things, and we know those
things by what our senses bring usNihil est in intellectu quod
non prius fuerit in sensu; but rearrangements of sensorial data
may make our notions extremely complex. Thus the subcon-
49
scious can construct poetry, discourses, drama, and mathematics
everything that consciousness can construct. Nevertheless all
this wealth is reconstructive; intelligence, whether conscious or
subconscious, can never furnish more than it has been given unless
we suppose some new faculty of cognition to exist. Intelligence
can only work on material supplied by normal sensorial channels.
To quote a well-known simile, a mill is excellent for grinding,
but can never produce anything but what it has been given to
grind.
Let us suppose that Helen Smith has never heard a word of
Sanscrit nor read or seen any Sanscrit book. Then if she should
speak or write in Sanscriti.e., re-invent that languageI should
consider the event miraculous, and a metapsychic phenomenon;
for no human intelligence could do this.
Before drawing so extreme an inference, however, my reluc
tance to admit the supernormal will oblige me to make all pos
sible suppositions. It must first be established that she has never
opened a Sanscrit book, and such proof is not easy to get; for
even if her good faith is assured she may have forgotten that
one day in some public or private library she turned over the
leaves of such a book. Besides, the Sanscrit phrase must not be
a mere quotation, but have reference to present circumstances.
The conditions necessary to scientific conviction of the transcen
dental nature of the phenomenon are so onerous that I doubt if
they can often be found concurrent.
Similarly A., an unpoetical person who has never written any
verse, composes poems showing delicate and original poetic
faculty while in a mediumistic state. She thus writes several
volumes of verse, dictating so rapidly as to make it difficult to
follow. This is certainly very surprising; but before supposing
that some external intelligence intervenes I shall make the sim
pler hypothesis that she has subconscious poetic faculty. Her
verses, however good, do not transcend human intelligence.
I know that spiritualists and occultists will exclaim against
this as they did against my learned friend, T. Flournoy. But
their objections are not justified, for it lies on them to prove the
intervention of extraneous intelligence; and this proof can be
given only by establishing the absolute incapacity of subcon
scious intelligence to write the verse or to remember certain
scraps of Sanscrit.
Laplace says somewhere, The rigour of proof must be pro
SUBJECTIVE METAPSYCHICS 51
portionate to the gravity of the conclusion. Now to admit that
an extra-terrene intelligence moves the brain of Helen Smith
to inspire her with Sanscrit, or the brain of A. to dictate French
verse, is an inference so contrary to common-sense and logic
that I shall admit any hypothesis short of mathematical or physical
impossibility, rather than that of an extra-terrene mind. It is
reasonable to suppose that Helen Smith has retained in an im
peccable memory some phrases of Sanscrit read ten years before,
and that A. may subconsciously construct verses as rapidly as
a professional poet.
Every normal hypothesis must be exhausted, and also the sub
conscious work of the mind and the resources of an infallible
memory, before we can dare to affirm the intervention of another
intelligence. In the course of succeeding chapters I shall give
examples of this necessary rigour.
Stella, by the movements of a table, said to me in the name of
Louise, Give Stella the statuette that is in your drawing
room. Now I had never told Stella that I had such a statuette;
but all the same, though it is extremely unlikely that I had done
this, I cannot be absolutely certain that I had not. I would not
dare to condemn a man to death on such a belief, and the evi
dence for a scientific conclusion should be as rigid as for a death-
sentence. Moreover, some one may have told^Stella of the fact,
though it is unlikely, for I do not think she has ever spoken to
anyone who knows my drawing-room; and, lastly, she may have
used this phrase by chance. In fine, though all these hypotheses
are unlikely, there is one still more unlikelythat an extraneous
intelligence revealed to her the existence of the statuette in my
drawing-room.1
The demand for rigorous evidence must, of course, not be
pushed to absurdity. To resume the case of Helen Smith; if
she, being a woman still young, has not frequented libraries nor
ever been in the East, were to maintain a long conversation in
Sanscrit instead of mangling a few incoherent Sanscrit words
as she does; if she were to grasp the grammatical intricacies of
this complex language; if, in other words, she knew Sanscrit
lIt is true that when cryptesthesia has been established by great numbers of
incontestable proofs it will be possible to accept as fact much that cannot be
so received as y e t; but this demonstration has to be made. Hence the need
to eliminate pitilessly everything that is not unquestionable as a matter of
demonstration. Later on it may be possible to be less exacting.
without having learned it, the hypothesis of subconscious mem
ory would be untenable. It is certain that she has never studied
Sanscrit; if, then, she were to speak it well, I do not see how,
even if an unconscious and impeccable1 memory and complex
subconscious working be admitted, a complete language known
and spoken could be elaborated from a few data of the subcon
scious memory. Such a development would be a metapsychic
phenomenon.
On my asking Stella for the name of one of the women who
tended my infancy, she replied, Melanie. I was not thinking
of Melanie, and I am most positively sure that this name, which
disappeared out of my life fifty years ago, and which I have not
thought of for those fifty years, has never been uttered by me.
In this case I am obliged to infer a metapsychic phenomenon,
for neither pantomnesia nor subconscious mentation working up
old remembrances can account for this name emerging. I put
chance on one side.
It will then be no matter for astonishment if we refuse to
admit, as metapsychic, various phenomena that present a meta
psychic aspect to credulous persons.2 By the joint action of
pantomnesia and the subconscious working of the mind some
persons can produce poetical, fanciful, or scientific work of a
complex and very wonderful nature, but which ought not to sur
prise us more than if they were consciously produced.
Stella in her normal state never composes poetry, but in her
mediumistic state dictates, through the table, verses, sometimes
of high merit, on a subject given to her and in a prescribed
number of words. But I may say, without vanity, that I myself,
simultaneously, by a kind of collaboration with Petrarch, who
(according to the table) was speaking through Stella, was able
to compose four lines on a given subject in a required number
of words; and this poetry to order was neither better nor worse
than that of Petrarch. I prefer to suppose that Stella com
posed unconsciously what I was able to compose consciously;
xThe word impeccable is unsatisfactory. I propose pantomnesia to indi
cate that no vestige of our intellectual past is entirely effaced. Probably we
are all pantomnesic. In weighing metapsychic facts it should be taken for
granted that we do not absolutely forget anything that has once impressed
our senses.
*1 repeat here that I keep to the definition: a metapsychic phenomenon
presupposes the intervention either of an extraneous power, o r o f an unknown
faculty o f the. human mind.
at any rate, that is much simpler than to suppose the intervention
of Petrarch.
I shall quote, further on, the beautiful verse that Victor Hugo
addressed to the shades of Molire. Molires answer is very
fine, too, but quite in Victor Hugos style; but even if the style
were Molires, it is more rational to think that the medium by
unconscious and skilful mimicry composed and dictated verses
after Molires manner, than to suppose the actual intervention
of Molire. In a mediumistic state Victorien Sardou drew a
curious and well-known design entitled The House of Mozart.
Nothing could be more strange, but I shall always feel it simpler
to admit that the genius of Sardou did the subconscious work
than to imagine that the soul of Mozart moved Sardous muscles.
Every case must be carefully scrutinized before it is admitted
as genuinely metapsychic; but the delicate and difficult process
of analyzing such cases will lead us, as I shall show hereafter,
to the conclusion that there is a small number of subjective in
tellectual facts (much less numerous than spiritualists suppose),
which neither pantomnesia nor the subconscious elaboration of
remembrances can account for.
Nevertheless, even the facts inexplicable by pantomnesia do
not necessarily imply the presence of an external intelligence;
for yet another hypothesis is possiblethat human intelligence
has a greater range than that we are accustomed to attribute to
it. The axiom Nihil est in intellectu quod non prius in sensu is
itself a hypothesis. Some philosophers have added nisi intel
lects ipse, and the addition is justifiable, for perhaps the intellect
is much deeper than we imagine.
Moreover, we are not dealing with pure intelligence, but with
sensations perceived by the intelligence. There may be other
senses than the five known to us. Some animals, pigeons for
instance, have a sense of direction that escapes our analysis.
Why should there be no cognitive faculties other than our
senses? We think that the magnet, though it acts upon iron,
does not act on our nervous centres; but if it were discovered
that it does, I for one should not be greatly surprised. Wireless
telegraphy has shown us that messages can be transmitted
through space; it is therefore possible that by an analogous but
invisible mechanism to which our instruments and our senses are
insensitive, the brain may be affected without our being able to
perceive anything either of the transmitter or the receiver. It
is our ignorance that confines all possible knowledge of the ex
ternal world to our five senses.
Accordingly, before inferring the existence of extraneous in
telligence, I willingly admit, as a provisional hypothesis, that
there are in us cognitive faculties as yet undetermined, neither
usual nor of daily occurrence, but irregular in their appearance
and mysterious in their action.
That is metapsychics, and we have to decide between two
hypotheses:
1. Does an external intelligence act on ours?
2. Is our intelligence endowed with a new faculty of cogni
tion?
Subjective phenomena alone are not sufficient for a decision
between these two hypotheses; it will be necessary to examine, as
we shall do later, whether the aggregate evidence pointing to
extra-terrene intelligence is sufficient to prove either the hypothe
sis that human intelligence is endowed with faculties new to us;
or, that extraneous intelligences incorporate and incarnate them
selves in humanity.
From the point of view of method, it is extremely important
never to lose sight of Laplaces precept; and before we enter
upon metapsychics, all merely psychological possibilities must be
exhausted.
We learn from psychology that pantomnesia exists, and also
that the subconscious, perhaps even more than the conscious, is
capable of prolonged and skilful elaboration of its materials.
In fine, in order to distinguish between the psychological and
the metapsychic we shall adopt the criterion: Everything that
the human intelligence can do, even when it is most profound
and penetrating, is psychological. Everything of which such
intelligence is incapable belongs to metapsychics.
If Helen Smith, without having read or heard a single word
of Sanscrit, speaks it fluently and correctly, that would be meta
psychic, for no human intelligence can reconstruct a language.
A., thinking herself inspired by her guide, composes verses
quickly and well; this is psychological, for many persons, and
perhaps A., among them, can do the same.
Stella tells me the name of an old servant of my parents fifty
years ago. This is metapsychic, for she has certainly never
heard me pronounce that name; and no intelligence, conscious
or unconscious, could give that name without having heard it.
T. leaves his friend J. in good health. He see his friends
apparition, notes the hour, and says, J. died at nine oclock in
the evening. This is metapsychic, for no normal psychological
process could have revealed it.
Thus the work of analysis, demanding most scrupulous care,
will be to examine whether the facts under consideration are ex
plicable by known mental laws, or whether it is not necessary,
as I hope to demonstrate by many instances, to suppose the
existence of a special sensitiveness which I call cryptesthesiaa
new faculty of cognition, called lucidity by ancient authors and
telepathy by modern ones.
2. Chance and Mathematical Probability in Metapsychic Facts
In experiments on lucidity two cases arise : sometimes a com
bination having a probability = P, that appears spontaneously;
or the same combination having the same probability, but arising
on demand. The evidential value in these two cases is not the
same, and serious errors arise if this distinction is not observed.
I ask Andre: What is the name of the person who wrote
me this morning the letter I have in my wallet ? She answers,
It is the name of a flowerMarguerite. Now the name is not
Marguerite, but Helen. I suddenly remember having received
a letter which I left at home that was signed Marguerite in large
letters. I was not thinking of this letter. How is the probability
to be calculated?
If I had put the question having the letter from Marguerite
in my wallet, the experiment would have been conclusive and
the theory of probabilities would have had free play. It would
have sufficed to know that there are about fifty very usual names,
and the probability of a correct answer would then have been
1:50, about the same as for a card drawn from a pack.
But if I did not want the name Marguerite, conditions are
changed. In the former case either of the two names would
be correct ; which reduces the probability at least to 2 : 50. But
it is necessary to go much further, for if another name had been
givenLouise, Madeline, or Alicemight I not claim to have
received yesterday a letter from Louise, one from Madeline the
day before, and one from Alice three days ago ? I am therefore
hardly justified in saying that the experiment has been suc
cessful on a probability of 2 : 50. An answer which is not a direct
answer to the question put is always of low evidential value.
It is much as if I were to ask a candidate at an examination,
What gas combines with hydrogen to form water? and he were
to answer, Chlorine combines with sodium to form sodium
chloride. Although perfectly correct, I should not be satisfied
with the reply.
The mathematical theory of probability does not apply unless
the conditions can be most accurately stated, for the least ex
perimental defect will very greatly change the figures obtained.
On the other hand, if the experiment is unexceptionable (which,
by the way, is very seldom the case) the mathematical theory of
probability can be rigorously applied.
Let us suppose an experiment unexceptionable, and let us see
what ratio allows us to exclude chance as an explanation.
Men of science do not allow for chances in quantitative analy
sis. A chemist who is seeking the atomic weight of silver gets
108.42 ; he will not imagine that chance had anything to do with
that result. He will, however, repeat the experiment, and if he
gets 108.34 he will still not accept the idea of chance, but will
take the mean, 108.38, as the atomic weight of silver.
It is not immediately obvious why metapsychics should not be
permitted to draw a conclusion from two experiments, since this
is done in astronomy, chemistry, and physiology. Nevertheless,
it is easy to understand why, in metapsychics, the possibility of
chance always enters in, for no experiment can be repeated with
conditions so similar that a mean can be struck as in chemistry or
physiology.
If after 'finding 108.42 as the atomic weight of silver, the
chemist were to get 22.87 on the following day, he might feel
the former result due to chance; but as a matter of fact his
second and third experiments will give results very near the
first, so that none of a possible three108.42, 108.34, and 108.35
can be put down to chance ; they corroborate one another.
After Andre had given me tne answer Marguerite, I in
quired for another name on the following day ; she gave a wrong
answer. Again on the next day, a similar failure. I must, then,
take these failures into account, and I might, strictly speaking,
put down the correct result to chance, while in the chemical
experiment chance can have no place.
It is a terrible defect in metapsychic experiments that they
can never be repeated with certainty. One is never sure that
todays successes can be repeated tomorrow. A particular me
dium may have given a series of good results on lucidity, and a
few days later before a scientific committee every attempt to
repeat a single one of these experiments may be a lamentable
failure.
This does not imply that we must give up experiment nor
that we cannot use the mathematical theory of probability. We
must begin experiment afresh. We need not imitate Don Quixote,
who, having made his helmet, tested it by a heavy blow with his
sword and broke it. He made another, but forebore to test it,
lest it also should give way, and contented himself with it as it
was.
When a successful experiment has been made, we should not
fear to repeat it, whether the result be to confirm or to invalidate
it; on the contrary, we should apply some fresh test.
As the number of successful experiments mounts up, the
greater their value becomes. To take this instance of the names;
it has been shown that the probability might be. taken as 1 :50,
but were actually 2:50. Let us admit, for the reasons given
above, that it might be 5 : 50 or 1:10. These odds against chance
success are considerable, but not sufficient for a reliable conclu
sion; but if on ten successive days I obtain successful results,
each having the probability of 1 :10, this amounts to odds prob
ability of (yV)10, which is moral certainty.
However, though we never get an uninterrupted series of suc
cesses, we can still use the calculus of probabilities, blending
successes and failures by the classical formula for compounded
probabilities:
S!
------- a* 0
a l0 l
where S is the number of trials in which there have been a suc

cesses on probability p, and /S failures on probability q. Of course
S=a+j8.
The sign! indicates successive multiplication o flX 2 X 3 X ....X S .
E.g., from an urn containing six balls, five black and |one white,
twelve drawings are taken, the ball drawn being replaced after
each trial, for the white ball, and q^ for the black.
Let us suppose that in twelve trials we get five white and seven
black, that is, a =5, and 0=7. The probability of five white on
twelve trials will be
1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X 8X 9X 10X 11X 12
---------------------------------------------------- X (5)XX (7)X=aboutrij
'(1X 2X 3X 4 X 5 ) (1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X 5 X 6 X 7 )
The calculus of probabilities gives very interesting results, but
it must be used with extreme caution, for the smallest_experi-
mental error vitiates the whole result.
Mere good sense, apart from all arithmetic, can lead us to con
clusions. If the word Kerveguen is given by spelling over the
letters of the alphabet, that being really the correct word, it is
useless to work out the probabilities that chance has had no part
in the matter, for the odds against the result being by_chance is
Wr)9- Cryptesthesia in this case is a moral certainty.
It should not be objected that there is no absolute certainty,
since even with a probability of (^V)10 the mathematical cer
tainty would not be absolute. In fact the moral certainty is much
the same with (isV)9 or (ws)m>and would still be much the same
with (sV)8 for no one has had a chance success with any single
experiment when the real probability was only
It is much more important to exact the utmost scientific rigour
in the experiment itself.
To show how fallacious the calculation of probabilities may be
when the experiment is defective, I may instance the case of the
Misses Creery who presented a long series of results in mental
transmission whose probability was only io0,006,0o0,ooo:og5-
A few zeros more or less matter but little; what is important
is that the experiments should be faultless. Now, the Creery
girls admitted in the end that their answers were sometimes
tricky, so that the figures proved nothing whatever.
Even without any intentional trickery there may be some error
in the experiments, very slight perhaps, but enough to vitiate
all calculations of probability. In dealing cards, for instance,
the subconscious attention of the percipient, which is always
awake, may very well note certain minute points, unperceived
by most people, that would enable him to recognize some par
ticular cards. And who can say when the experimenter has seen
a card and called for it to be guessed, whether his facial expres
sion may not, in despite of himself, give a sharp-sighted medium
some clue which can consciously or unconsciously be made use of ?
At roulette all the niches are exactly equal, but if there is one
a little larger than others, even the tenth of a millimeter, this
imperceptible difference makes the calculus of probabilities inap
plicable. On 360 trials, for instance, the number that is a little
wider than others will come up twenty times instead of sixteen,
as it should.
The calculus of probabilities should be applied only when the
experiments are unexceptionable.
There is another reason for caution; some facts do not admit
of calculation. Mrs. Green sees two young girls drowning, their
hats floating on the water. At that moment two girls, one of
them a niece that Mrs. Green had never seen, were drowned in
Australia and their hats were seen floating on the water some
hours after. The improbability could not possibly be put into
figures.
When Stella is asked the first name of G.s son, and answers
"Jean, the probability may be considered comparatively easy to
calculate. Is it? Am I to take all possible masculine names?
There are about two hundred, about one hundred that are com
mon, and perhaps thirty very common. According to the data
chosen the probability will be 1 :200, or 1 :100 or 1 : 30. More
over, I must presume that there was not the slightest gesture
of a stop at the letter J by the person running over the alphabet.
In fine, we may use the calculus of probabilities; but with cau
tion, for it facilitates over-bold statements.
Further, it is a curious fact that calculation of probabilities
seldom produces definite conviction; by a kind of half-justified
instinct people refuse to admit inferences that are not evident
at first sight.
3. Concerning Errors of Observation
The calculus of probabilities is very easy of application, and any
schoolboy could solve the elementary problems in arithmetic
that arise from its application to metapsychic matters; but the
experimental precautions and the alert and sustained attention
that go to an unexceptionable experiment are as complex as
the actual calculation is simple.
I will here endeavour to give some cautions, for rigorous ex
perimental conditions are of the very first importance. To avoid
illusions is the crux of subjective metapsychics.
1. Mistakes of memory. Memory, whether one's own or that
of others, is unreliable. In observing subjective phenomena very
few persons will deliberately falsify; but very many give distorted
accounts of what they have seen and heard; they modify and
alter phrases, details, dates, and hours, and change words, all
quite involuntarily. We are all liable to this; and in such matter
I trust no one, not even myself. When firmly convinced of the
hypothesis of lucidity, a witness will relate some telling fact,
passing lightly over contradictory details and omitting awkward
ones, while insisting overmuch on those that support his theory.
One little word is passed over in silence, another is added, and
these may fundamentally change the conclusion to be drawn.
By repeated telling, a story becomes quite unconsciously dis
torted and gives rise to inferences that are wonderful indeed,
but fallacious.
No accounts can be relied on unless written down immediately
after the event to which they refer. If after several repetitions
we compare the verbal account with that written down at the
time, it will often be found that the cumulative effect of succes
sive mental changes has made the story very different from the
record. We should constantly remind ourselves that memory
is very treacherous. No observer soever can dispense with writing
down all the details of an experiment immediately it is finished.
And full details are never put down; it is important to de
scribe the smallest circumstances; notes must never be scanty.
In contrast to published work, notes should be prolix to the
point of being wearisome. A profusion of detail in notes written
for ones own use is never a mistake. Everything should be
noted, one always tends to be too concise. It is well that when
several persons have taken part in an experiment that all should
write records. During my experiments with Eusapia in con
junction with Ochorowicz I dictated notes throughout the ex
periments, to a secretary placed in a corner of the room, so
that all the circumstances of every phenomenon should be de
scribed without alterations of any kind. It is to be regretted that
this cannot always be done.
For these reasons records made long after the event or dealing
with ancient observations never written down at all, can never
have any but a very qualified value.
The best evidence is the conclusion of a good observer on the
facts, drawn at the time. The opinion formed during the ex-
priment while all subsidiary facts exercised their influence on
his mind will carry much more weight than any account given
ten or twenty years after. During the continuance of an ex
periment a rapid synthesis is made of all the surrounding con
ditions so that we reach a personal conviction, more intuitive
than definitely reasoned out indeed, but very valid. Many de
tails may escape our memory, but the remembrance of the con
viction produced remains.
For my own part I give great weight to the conviction so
produced (which should be written down immediately after the
experiment in the notes taken), for we find ourselves led (often
wrongly) by defective memory to modify first impressions either
in the direction of credulity or of scepticism, both of which are
equally regrettable.
To conclude: much error is due to scanty records and to
lapses of memory.
2. In the course of an experiment attention must be paid to
all the circumstances, even to those which seem irrelevant. In
dealing with subjective metapsychics, every word, every gesture
should be well considered. The slightest play of feature, a sigh
or a smile, an interjection, a slight movement of the hand, any
sign, however unnoticeable, of satisfaction, impatience, surprise,
or disappointment may possibly put the medium,on the track and
no slightest indications of the kind should be made.
All this is very difficult, and long practice is needed to reach
absolute impassiveness. I am inclined to think that the reason
why telepathic experiments seem to succeed more often than
those of simple lucidity is, that as in the former the answer is
known beforehand, the medium is helped by involuntary trifles,
while in the latter case no such assistance can be given. One
does not correct ones own trifling mistakes and signs of dis
satisfaction. Unfortunately it seldom happens, when we know the
word that ought to be given, that we are so self-controlled; we
are often so unskilful as to allow it to be seen whether the
answer begins well or ill.
Especially with table experiments extreme precaution is re
quired. Of course, the movements of the table are usually due
to the medium only, but if any other hands are upon it the
assistants may mechanically affect its jerks or levitations. The
slightest pressure is enough to reveal the thoughts of those who
have their hands on the table; and it must be repeated that
mediums, whether consciously or unconsciously, have their at
tention on the stretch; they are on the look-out for anything that
may reveal the word, the phrase, or the idea that is sought for.
Nothing escapes them, and the slightest pressure on the table
becomes a sign that they know how to interpret. This per
spicacity has nothing to do with fraud, for their interpretations,
deductions, observations, and conclusions are all subconscious;
but the effect in falsifying results is the same as if there were
conscious fraud.
Therefore, in order to make any serious experiment on lucidity,
it is inadmissible that any person who knows the answer to be
given should touch the movable object through which that answer
is to come. I have often been surprised by the astounding
credulity of some persons who exclaim at the wonderful answers
given through the table. Oh, yes, no doubt the answers were
correct but no way astonishing, since the questioner himself
furnished them! Many experiments in subjective metapsychics
are thus vitiated for want of the precautions necessary to deprive
the medium of all help from the face, the gestures, and the words
of the person who knows the answer.
Exquisite tact is needed if we are not to be misled by appear
ances. Good experiments in subjective metapsychics are very
difficult indeed; they can only be made by distrusting everything
and everybody, ones self included. A desire that the experiment
should be successful must never lead us to deceive ourselves.
3. Fraud is as rare in subjective phenomena as it is common
in the objective; for I take it for granted that no one will ex
periment with persons known to be tricksters. In most cases
the good faith of medium and assistants is above reproach.
But belief in the good faith of the operators should in no way
reduce the precautions to be taken. The experimenter should act
as if the medium were persistently fraudulent; for if conscious
good faith is the rule, unconscious bad faith is the rule also;
every medium makes desperate efforts by an unwearied subcon
scious mind to find the answer required and uses all possible
means to discover it.
For instance, I ask for the name of Marguerites brother. Now
it is possible that the medium has at some time or other heard
that Marguerite has a brother who is one of my friends. Then
her brain will work to find out who among my friends (whose
first names she, perhaps, knows)Henry, Louis, Charles, Gus
tave, Paul, Lucien, Gaston, Robertmay be Marguerites brother.
By means of some details subconsciously retained she knows that
Louis, Henry, and Charles have no sister. Five names only then
remain, and then if during the interrogation through the table all
the letters of the alphabet are passed over up to R without a
word or a sign, only the name Robert will remain; she will say
Robert ; and if I am not exacting I shall find this reply very
satisfactory.
Therefore, that lucidity may be really established there must
be an absolute impossibility, I say Absolute, of the utmost per
spicacity putting the medium on the track.
Only at this price can observations be taken as conclusive.
When we are dealing with objective metapsychics the dispositions
to be made to guard against possible bad faith will be equally
severe, but obviously of a different kind.
CHAPTER II
On C r y p t e s t h e s ia ( L u c id it y ) in G eneral
1. Definition and Classification

Nearly the whole of subjective metapsychics can be reduced to
a single phenomenon which the magnetizers of a past age called
lucidity or clairvoyance (hellsehen); which is now called
telepathy, with various shades of meaning attached to the term.
I propose to name it cryptesthesia. Myers has already used the
term telesthesia.
The Greek etymology of the word signifies a hidden sensi
bilitya perception of things by a mechanism unknown to us
of which we are cognizant only by its effects.
I shall endeavour to prove that human intelligence includes a
special and mysterious faculty which reveals certain facts, past,
present, or future, that the senses are unable to supply.
That Stella is able to state the name of an old servant Melanie
which she has never seen or heard, indicates (unless this be by
chance) that some vibration has reached her intelligence and
revealed this name to her. Therefore she possesses some cryptic
sensibility which acquaints her with what her normal senses
could not have told her. We do not know how or by what means
this happens, and shall endeavour to discover the method; but
even though we do not succeed, the bare fact is unquestionably
real. There is cryptesthesia.
The major part of this book is devoted to proving the existence
of this faculty; but before proceeding to the many and diverse
facts which constitute the history of cryptesthesia, two essential
points must be examined:
1. The relation of cryptesthesia to lucidity and telepathy.
2. The psychic phenomena that take the form of metapsychic
phenomena and might pass for such if superficially and imper
fectly analyzed.
64
CRYPTESTHESIA IN GENERAL 65
2. Connection of Cryptesthesia with Lucidity and Telepathy
Mesmer, Puysgur, and Du Potet verified a power that enabled
the subjects of their experiments to see objects in a closed box,
to read in closed books, to travel to and describe places unknown
to them, and to guess the thoughts of the magnetizer and his
assistants.
Later on, Myers invented the happy term telepathy, which
has been extensively adopted to signify that human thought can
act upon another person without any apparent external vibration.
But synergetic vibrations in two brains is a hypothesis that
must be examined somewhat closely, for many ideas on telepathy
are current which I believe to be erroneous.
People readily imagine that to refer a fact to telepathy is to
explain it. The magic of words leads them to think of telepathy
as a simple thing.
When, as previously mentioned, Andre tells me, You have
received a letter signed by a woman who is named after a
flower, Marguerite, it is always suggested that I was thinking
of Marguerite and that Andre has read my thought.
Two hypotheses then present themselves, setting aside chance
and mal-observation ; either that Andre said Marguerite be
cause the name was in my thoughts or that by a. special faculty
of lucidity she has read the name on the letter in my room a
mile and a half distant.
From the scientific point of view it is equally impossible to
understand how this name could be known, whether by the
unconscious remembrance in my brain of a letter received that
morning or by the fact of its being written at the foot of that
letter.
The problem is equally mysterious whether I have or have
not read the letter. Although the pole-star is many millions
of miles beyond Sirius, both are equally inaccessible. To read
my thought seems as difficult as to read a letter (open or closed)
on my desk two miles or two thousand miles distant.
It seems to me slightly less difficult to admit reading a signa
ture at a distance than to admit reading a word in my brain;
for, as we are dealing with the inexplicable, it is slightly easier
to imagine that piercing vision should traverse the intervening
distance and penetrate walls and papers than that the percipient
should be able to interpret the verbal sense carried by the modes
of vibration of cerebral cells in my skull. Both being hypotheses,
I prefer to imagine an amazing retinal vision of written words
than a reading of my brain wherein nothing is written, but in
which there ajre so many impressions, memories, and exceedingly
complex and evanescent combinations that are really ultra-
microscopic modifications of cellular protoplasm, none of which
have any relation, apart from my own consciousness, to the
sound or to the phonetic signs of the name.' To say telepathy
explains nothing. Cerebral vibration, conscious or unconscious,
is a profound mystery, much greater than a signature, which is
positive, real, and tangible, and would be visible to sight if
sufficiently penetrating ; whereas the reading of a thought cannot
be explained by any intensification of any of our senses.
There are many reasons, none very sound, why the telepathic
hypothesis should be so favourably received by unscientific (or
even by scientific) persons as if it were so simple that there
should be no need to press it further.
1. The first is that it agrees perfectly with the shortcomings
in experiment. It is obvious that if I do not know the word
Marguerite in an unopened letter I can in no way assist
Andre to say the word. But if I do know it and am not very
careful, if Andre hesitates, seeks, and guesses, I may very
naively furnish indications that she will not fail to use. I may be
putting her straight and becoming an unconscious accomplice.
There will not be the absolute inertia that must prevail if I do
not know the word. Having made very many experiments, I
know only too well how difficult it is to give no sign whatever
of approval or disapproval when one knows the word the medium
has to discover.
2. An equally bad reason is that spectacular exhibitions of so-
called thought-reading are given to the public. The skill shown
at these exhibitions is sometimes marvellous. A young woman,
A., with bandaged eyes, is seated facing the audience. Her
magnetizer, B., stands at her side, and calls for one of the
audience, G, who is certainly not an accomplice. C. shows his
visiting card without speaking; B. looks at it, and almost im
mediately A. spells out the card, sometimes with hesitation,
sometimes very quickly, without delay or mistake, even when
the words are unusual.
The experiment is an amusing one, but proves nothing except
the extraordinary skill of the operators. It is practically certain
that there is a code of signs, words, attitudes, movements of
the right or left hand or foot, of the body or the head that allow
A., whose eyes are more or less completely bandaged, to per
ceive signs that the public do not notice, and enable her, thanks
to an excellent memory, to state the numbers or words that B.
transmits. It is no more thought-reading than when a Morse
telegraph operator gets the sense of a message from the ticking
of the instrument.
Generally these exhibitions are so quick and so skilful as to
satisfy a public that loves to be deceived; people leave with an
unreasoned conviction that they have seen thought-reading, and
thenceforward when they have uttered the words thought-read
ing, mental suggestion, or telepathy, they fancy that they
have understood the whole thing and do not imagine that they
are speaking of one of the most terrifying mysteries of human
existence.
3. Another form of pseudo-thought-reading is also spectacular.
An individual, A., sensitive, or claiming to be sensitive, but cer
tainly very sharp, declares he will read the thought of anyone
who will hold him by the hand. He brings on the scene B.,
taken from the audience. The unfortunate B., shy at his posi
tion, hesitates, takes A.s hand, and A. makes him walk by his
side quickly or slowly, and by skilful guesses reaches the place
that B. thought of. He stops before some member of the
audience, searches in his pocket, and, still holding B.s hand,
withdraws a handkerchief which he takes to some other point
in the hall. All this to the amazement of the audience and espe
cially of B., who has willed the whole performance, and imagines
that A. has read his thought. In fact A. has merely interpreted
skilfully the unconscious and involuntary muscular movements of
poor B., who does not know that he has by such movements
given very clear indications; and the public leave the hall more
than ever convinced of telepathy. In this way belief in telepathy
as an obvious and simple fact becomes firmly fixed in the popular
mind; though in all this there is no more telepathy than in the
contraction of a frogs muscle by the electric battery.1
It is doubtless for such reasons that telepathy is accepted more
^ h e r e is a whole bibliography on unconscious movements. I cannot give
even a resume o f it here. It is the willing game, otherwise called Cumber-
landism, from Cumberland, who first gave these exhibitions. Grasset explains
it by his "polygon, which is simply an ingenious diagram of the subconscious.
readily than lucidity. The two are, however, not opposed; both
are probably true and real telepathy should be considered as a
particular and common mode of lucidity. It may be remarked
that nearly, if not quite always, when a percipient is asked a
question the answer is known to the questioner. When it is
unknown it is almost certainly known to someone else, and the
telepathic theory might be pushed so far as to say, If the per
cipient has read Marguerite in a letter that B. has not opened,
she could certainly not read in B.s mind a word it did not con
tain; but there is another personMarguerite herselfwhose
thought has been read, and not the word written in the letter.
Some go even further. As there are facts known to no living
person, but known to B., now dead, this can still be explained by
telepathythe thought of B., deceased, has been transmitted to
the percipient.
These wire-drawn explanations show amply that we know
absolutely nothing of the means whereby cryptesthetic cognitions
reach the mind.
The question whether there is telepathy (transmission of hu
man thought) or lucidity (cognizance of an external fact) is
specially applicable to the very frequent cases of monitions at
the moment of death.
I will take an instance that might have been invented for illustra
tion, though it is real. A. sees in his sleep on a certain night the
apparition of his friend B., pale as a corpse. A. writes down the
name in his diary, adding God forbid. At that very moment B.
was killed while out hunting on the other side of the world.
Again the same two hypotheses arise: Did A. perceive an ex
ternal event, or did the dying thought of B. traverse the inter
vening space and impress A.?
I do not venture to decide between these hypotheses, both of
which seem to me equally mysterious, but I infer a faculty of
cognition outside the order of normal faculties. I think it best
to keep within the limits of rigid science, and to sayAt certain
times the mind can take cognizance of realities which neither our
senses, our insight, nor our reasoning permit of our knowing.
This is not an explanation, but it leaves the door open to any
future explanation. Human thought is one among the realities
thus made known, but this is not a necessary condition; the
reality alone is sufficient, without its having passed through a
human mind.
CRYPTESTHESIA in g en er a l 69
Let us go no further, and in presence of these unusual facts
let us be content to say that our mental mechanism, even more
complex than it seems, has means of cognizance that escape
analysis and are even beyond surmise. This dispenses with all
hypothesis; it does not imply that cryptesthetic knowledge arises
from transmitted vibrations of human thought; it merely states
a fact, and it is more scientific to enunciate a fact without com
ment than to enmesh ones self in theories, such as telepathy,
which are entirely unproven.
Telepathy implies a hypothesis; cryptesthesia has the great
merit that it does not. If A. sees his dying friend at the moment
of death it is a hypothesis to say that the thought of 6. has been
transmitted to A. But it is no hypothesis to say that A. has
some special sensibility that makes him aware of the death of B.
Telepathy is not contradictory of cryptesthesia. As thought-
transference it comes into play in certain cases, but is quite
insufficient in others. In such obscure matters superfluous
hypotheses should be avoided as far as possible.
As there are few, if any, facts known to no human person
soever, all phenomena of lucidity, with scarcely any exceptions,
might be referred to telepathy. Theoretically, distance, whether
two yards or two thousand miles, does not come into the question.
But it is vastly improbable that when Mrs. Green, in London,
sees a niece whom she does not know, drowning in Australia,
the thoughts of that niece should have sought out her aunt.
Is it not much simpler to admit, without making any hypothesis,
that Mrs. Green possesses a special sensitiveness?
Therefore, when in this book telepathy is spoken of, as it often
will be, it must be understood as a particular form of lucidity
and not as a distinct phenomenon. Both are equally mysterious.1
3. Phenomena of Normal Psychology Having Only the Semblance
of Cryptesthesia
The necessity of not introducing facts explicable by normal
psychology into metapsychics has already been insisted upon.
It is noteworthy that in nearly all experiments mediums refer
the thoughts transmitted through a table, by planchette, or by
1I have just received the A pril (1921) number of the Proc. S. P. R., con
taining an excellent article by Mrs. H. Sidgwick (pp. 242-398), An Examina
tion of Book-tests. She reaches a similar conclusion. I regret that I cannot
here analyze this valuable notice.
writing, to personalities other than themselves. This is the
case even when they have but a very slight acquaintance with
spiritualist literature, or even at the commencement of their
mediumship none at all. It has seemed advisable to me, as to
all who have conducted such experiments, to admit their sup
positions in order to facilitate success. This does not imply a
belief in the reality of such notions; it is only a working hypothe
sis, as Claude Bernard said.
Personification characterizes nearly all spiritist experiments.
I borrow this word from J. Maxwell, who uses it to describe the
tendency of mediums to attribute their answers to separate per
sonalities. These are often multiple, but there is usually one
that takes precedence, and excludes others. This personality in
spiritualist parlance is called a guide or control. The re
markable object phenomena presented by Eusapia were referred
by her to John King. Similarly Mrs. Pipers subjective phenom
ena were attributed by her to Phinuit. These personifications
are sufficiently explained by the unconscious, which, like an un
known guest, has emotions, ideas, remembrances, will, and feel
ings quite beyond our consciousness. A study of the psychology
that deals with duplication of personality will show how far this
subconscious personality is real or imaginary.
Physicians have observed that in some rare cases the whole
mentality of the patient A. is changed. He takes another name,
B., loses remembrance of his former life, and builds up a new
set of associations in B.s name. A. and B. then seem to be two
separate persons, with differing tastes, feelings, and acts. Since
the well-known case of Azam, Dr. Prince has collected some
remarkable instances in America.
Magnetizers have declared, vaguely, that they could, by verbal
suggestion, transform a patient in this manner while in the hyp
notic state; but they seem never to have realized the bearings of
this experiment, and everything about it was doubtful. I made
a study of these alternations of personality in 1887, and since
then they have taken rank among the admitted phenomena of
hypnotism.
This singular fact may be thus described: I tell Alice, a young
girl in the hypnotic state, You are no longer Alice, you are an
old woman. It matters little whether or not I have made any
passes, verbal suggestion is sufficient. At once Alice takes on the
cough, the gestures, and the weak voice of an old woman, and
for an hour or two, if the patience of the observers is not wearied,
she acts in all respects like an old woman. It is acting, but in
voluntary acting proceeding from a docile mind under hypnotic
suggestion. Nothing can be more extraordinary and indeed
amusing than this complete adaptation to the new personality.
The question of simulation does not arise. It is universally
recognized that there is no simulation; and it matters little to
know whether there is or is not any faint remembrance at the
base of her consciousness that she is Alice. What is obvious and
certain is that she assumes the character assigned to her without
the ability to throw it off. That there remains some residue of
her real personality is more than possible, it must be so; but her
personality instantly adapts itself to the suggested personality
with a vigour and perfection not to be rivalled by the most accom
plished actress. The conformity to the new personality is so
complete that even the handwriting changes its character.
Any character can be imposed at will; she becomes a general,
a little boy, a pastry cook, a fine lady, or a market-woman, and
we get whatever comedy we may desire.
The experiment may be pushed still further. Some subjects will
take on animal similitudes. I hypnotize my excellent friend H.
Ferrari and tell him that he is a parrot. I ask him, Why do
you look preoccupied? and he replies, How can I eat the seed
in my cage? The words my cage are typical and indicate the
extent of the transformation.
I wish to make it clear that there is no reason for surprise if
spiritist messages seem to come from a real person. The human
mind is very prone to create a personality. The phenomenon is
the same whether it proceeds from external suggestion, from
some exterior event, or from auto-suggestion. It is not meta
psychic, but pertains to normal psychology; and when subcon
scious actions take place they group themselves round the per
sonality that has been created.
I compare this to crystallization from a saturated solution
the crystals form round a centre. Similarly remembrances and
emotions concentrate upon the personality invented.
These spiritoid personalities manifest themselves chiefly in
automatic writing or table movements, and (more rarely) by
raps. Sometimes they borrow the voice of the medium. The
conviction is so thorough, the representation so perfect, and the
unconsciousness so complete that the experimenters are won
over and cannot suppose that all these psychological phenomena
proceed from an imaginary being.
A woman takes a pencil and writes pages upon pages without
knowing or understanding what she writes in feverish haste; her
handwriting is quite different from the normal; she writes and
writes for ten minutes, for half an hour, or even longer. When
one sheet is finished she takes another and instantly covers it.
All this while she knows nothing of what she is doing, and
she can at the same time keep up a quite sensible conversa
tion with those round her. Everything happens just as if her
own personality were replaced by another that borrows her
hand.
In all good faith she says, It is not I who write, and in all
good faith those who see her agree that it is so. If only the
writing should be similar from day to day, moderately coherent
in style and ideas, if the imitation of the manner of some de
ceased person is fairly good, all are convinced that a spirit has
intervened and made his wishes known.
But it is no more possible to admit this than when I say to
Alice, You are now an old general ; and she speaks like an
old soldier. Whether there are or are not any traces of the
normal personality remaining, in no case at all can the reality of
an external personality be admitted.1
This is as true of mediums as of somnambulists, only in the
latter it is produced by external suggestion, and in the former
it is entirely due to auto-suggestion. But in both cases the new
personality is arbitrary and factitious, and has no more external
reality than poetic creationsthan Esmeralda, Carmen, Figaro,
or Don Juan.2
I will now give some examples of these automatic writings if
only to show the high improbability that they proceed from
spirits.
1The best instance of these alterations of personality is perhaps that of
Helen Smith becoming Marie Antoinette, of which Flournoy made a pro
found study.
'Mme. Noggerath, a kindly woman who lived to a great age and died some
years since, held many sances with different mediums, and devoted her
whole life to propagation of spiritualist doctrines which she most profoundly
believed. She published in a book, La Survie, sa ralit, sa manifestation, sa
philosophie Echos de l'Au-del,
. Paris, Flammarion, 1897, the messages claim
ing to be from the spirits of the dead. Pythagoras, Socrates, Buddha, Fnelon,
Bossuet, Molire, Ablard, Moses, St. John, Robespierre, Cuvier, Diderot, ail
appear. This list should by itself be enough to show the nullity o f this belief.
You neglect me, and forget me in the petty cares of your world. You
keep me waiting when I beg for a family reunion. You make a vacuum
for me, as it were; I cannot enter on an unknown void.
M olire .
0 Venice, of whom so many poets have sung. Venice, flower-like, what
remains of her glory and her gorgeous palaces? The glory of Venice is
no more; the vices of her proud rulers have killed her. Where are now
the sublime teachings of Jesus? All has vanished. The cross has cast a
deadly shadow, deadly because phantoms intercepted its rays.
P ythagoras .
Life on earth (la vie plantaire ) enables the resolutions taken in the
wandering statethat is, in sidereal lifeto be reduced to practice. In
the latter state, there being no bodily needs to force the spirit into action,
life can only be contemplative. ~ _ __
J. J. R ousseau .
What melancholy times! What sad daysl How veiled is my soul!
How have I fallen so low? Why can I not forget? Why do rays of
light fall on me, followed by utter darkness?the vague remembrance
of a past that I feel to be cruel, but cannot re-awaken! Oh, the cries of
terror, the flowing, steaming blood! _ _
F o u q u ier -T inville .
No doubt the words about steaming blood aroused the memory
of Mile, de Sombreuil in the mediums mind, for immediately
after Fouquier-Tinville Mile, de Sombreuil comes on the scene
and says some astounding things:
I love Fouquier-Tinville. I loved him from the moment he saved my
life. I recognized his beauty and his own kind of greatness. Yes, I love
him! I suffer when people praise my virtue and call him whom I love a
monster; O Love, Love! ,,
M lle . de S om breuil .
Let us put aside these divagations ; they would only be matter
for laughter if it were not for the melancholy fact that they have
been accepted as genuine by honourable men. In fact they are but
manifestations of the subconsciousness of the mediums, which
is often below mediocrity.
There are exceptions to this poverty of language in spiritist
communications. M. Carmelo Samona having asked a spirit why
nothing of the beyond was divulged, received by raps the follow
ing really fine symbolism: Non mangerai pane il cui seme non
abbia dormito prima nello nuda terra, la cui bionda spiga non
si sia curvata al soffio del vento, e non sia caduta poi sotti
linexorabile falca del mietitore (Psiche misteriosa, Palermo,
1910, p. 64).
In a few minutes, Laura speaking to Petrarch through Stella,
who in her normal state is not poetic, says:
Si jtais lair que tu respires,
Ami, comme je serais doux!
Jffeuillerais sur ton sourire,
Des baisers exquisement fous!
Among the most remarkable exceptions are the verses dictated
to Victor Hugo, who believed in spiritualism.1
Jules Bois gives, in Le Mirage Moderne (Paris, Ollendorff,
1907) some interesting details on Victor Hugos spiritualism.
He was converted by Mme. Emile de Girardin in Jersey, Septem
ber 6, 1853. At the first seance Vacquerie asked, What word
am I thinking of? The table answered, You mean suffering.
The word in Vacqueries mind was Love. The answer was
ingenious and unexpected. In later sances Victor Hugo was
not at the table: Charles Hugo was the medium. He knew no
English. An Englishman came in and called Lord Byron, who
replied in English:
Vex not the bard, his lyre is broken,
His last song sung, his last word spoken.
Strange apocalyptic answers are attributed to Ezekiel, and
to the lion of Androcles ! On the margin of the MS. Victor Hugo
writes the stupefying words, The volumes dictated to my son
Charles by the table contain an answer from the lion of
Androcles.
Each verse given is good in itself, but the development of the
poem is incoherent: schylus expresses himself thus:
Non, lhomme ne sera jamais libre sur terre:
Cest le triste captif du bien, du mal, du beau,
Il ne peut devenircest la loi du mystre
Libre quen devenant prisonnier du tombeau.
Fatalit, lion dont lme est dvore,
Jai voulu te dompter dun bras cyclopen,
Jai voulu sur mon dos porter ta peau tigre,
Il me plaisait quon dt : Eschyle nmen.
T h e moving or speaking table has been much ridiculed. Let us speak
out. ThiS' ridicule is pointless. It is easier to mock than to examine, butit
is not scientific. . . . Science knows very little and has no right to
dream. A scientist who ridicules possibilities is near to being a
fool. The
for . (Shakespeare by
Paris, .)
unexpected should always be looked in science Victor
Hugo, Lacroix, 18 6 4
Je nai pas russi : la bte fauve humaine
Dchire encor nos chairs de son ongle ternel.
Le cur de lhomme est plein encor de cris de haine,
Cette fosse aux lions na pas de Daniel.
Aprs moi vint Shakspeare, il vit les trois sorcires,
O Nme, arriver du fond de la fort,
Et jeter dans nos curs ses troublantes chaudires,
Les philtres monstrueux de limmense secret.
Il vint dans ce grand bois, la limite du monde;
Aprs moi, le dompteur, il vint, lui, le chasseur.
Et, comme il regardait dans son me profonde,
Macbeth cria: Fuyons, et Hamlet dit: Jai peur.
Il se sauva. Moilre, alors sur la lisire,
Parut, et dit: Voyez si mon me faiblit.
Commandeur, viens souper. Mais au festin de Pierre
Molire trembla tant que Don Juan plit.
Mais que ce soit le spectre, ou la sorcire, ou lombre,
Cest toujours toi, lion, et ta griffe de fer.
Tu remplis tellement la grande fort sombre,
Que Dante te rencontre en entrant dans lenfer.
Tu nes dompt qu lheure o la mort, belluaire,
Tarrache de la dent lme humaine en lambeau,
Te prend, dans la fort profonde et sculaire,
Et te montre du doigt ta cage, le tombeau.
Sometimes Victor Hugo interrogated the spirits, of course in
admirable poetry. One day he addressed Molire :
Les rois, et vous, l-haut, changez-vous denveloppe?
Louis quatorze au ciel nest-il pas ton valet?
Franois premier est-il le fou de Triboulet?
Et Crsus, le laquais dEsope?
But Molire did not reply : the answer came from the Shadow
of the Tomb.
Le Ciel ne punit pas par de telles grimaces,
Et ne travestit pas en fou Franois premier,
Lenfer nest pas un bal de grotesques paillasses,
Dont le noir chtiment serait le costumier.
Dissatisfied with the response, Hugo repeats his invocation to
Molire :
Toi qui du vieux Shakspeare as ramass le ceste,
Toi qui prs dOthello sculptas le sombre Alceste,
Astre qui resplendis sur un double horizon,
Pote au Louvre, archange au ciel, grand Molire 1
Ta visite splendide honore ma maison.
Me tendras-tu l haut ta main hospitalire?
Que la fosse pour moi souvre dans le gazon.
Je vois sans peur la tombe aux ombres ternelles ;
Car je sais que le corps y trouve une prison,
Mais que Tame y trouve des ailes.
The Shadow of the Tomb (probably annoyed), answers:
Esprit qui veux savoir le secret des tnbres,
Et qui, tenant en main le cleste flambeau,
Viens, furtif, ttons, dans nos ombres funbres,
Crocheter limmense tombeau!
Rentre dans ton silence, et souffle tes chandelles,
Rentre dans cette nuit dont quelquefois tu sors,
Lil humain ne voit pas les choses ternelles,
Par dessus lpaule des morts.
Fine verses, but not due to Molire or to schylus, any more
than to the lion of Androcles.
In the first sances given by Helen Smith, Victor Hugo is
supposed to be the inspiring influence; and as interpreted by
Helen Smith, his poetic faculty has strangely gone off:
Lamour, divine essence, insondale mystre,
Ne le repousse point. Cest le ciel sur la terre.
Lamour, la charit seront ta vie entire;
Jouis et fais jouir; mais nen sois jamais fire.
( F lo u r n o y , loc. cit .)
The lion of Androcles was a better poet than Helen Smith's

Victor Hugo.
The Shadow of the Tomb spoke in prose as finely as in verse.
As Victor Hugo complained of the use of symbolical expressions,
the Shadow replied:
O ill-advised! You say the Shadow of the Tomb speaks in human
language, and uses biblical figures and words, metaphors, and falsehood to
express truth. The Shadow of the Tomb is not a mask, I am a reality. If
I condescend to speak your jargon in which the sublime is so tempestuous,
it is because you are limited. Words are a fetter to the spirit; symbols
are the casket of thought; your ideals are restraints on the soul; the
sublime to you is a low blind-alley; your sky is the roof of a cave; your
language is a noise bound up between the covers of a dictionary. My
language is immensity, the ocean, the tempest. My library is of thousands
of stars and millions of planets and constellations. If you desire that I
should speak to you in my own tongue, ascend Mount Sinai, you will hear
me in its lightnings; go to Calvary, you will see me in its rays; descend
into the tomb, you will hear me in its mercy.
CR YPTESTHESIA IN GENERAL 77
If, as seems probable, the subconscious of Charles Hugo dic
tated both prose and verse, that subconsciousness emulated the
genius of Victor Hugo himself.
There are other interesting cases in which it is just as necessary
to suppose purely human intervention.
Hermanee Dufaux, a girl of fourteen, has given a Life of
Jeanne DArc, dictated by Jeanne, and Confessions of Louis
XI.1 Allan Kardec guarantees the honesty of this young girl
in her claim to have written these books by inspiration without
reference to historical records and documents.
Four hypotheses are possible:
1. Gross fraud, getting the needful particulars from public
libraries, or from easily procurable books ; just as Prosper Mri
me was able to write Le Thtre de Clara Gazul, without any
spiritist implication. This seems likely ; though it implies a clev
erness, skill, and dishonesty of which this respectable girl was
perhaps incapable (?).
2. An infallible memory, partially subconscious, so that Her
manee could recall at the moment required everything that she
had read and heard. Her subconscious intelligence, more able
than her normal mind, classifies, condenses, and verifies all the
detail she has read and heard, and attributes these to Jeanne
and to Louis XI. What could we not say and write if we could
thus recover all the details of all our reading ! Even at fourteen
years old a great deal might have been read!
Hermanee Dufaux, speaking as Jeanne dArc, resembles Helen
Smith who sincerely thinks herself Marie Antoinette or Caglios-
tro. I think this hypothesis almost as likely as the first, although
a third might possibly be taken.
3. By cryptesthesia, Hermanee, being a sensitive, knows facts,
names, dates, and events that have not come to her through her
normal senses. Then these metapsychic cognitions group them
selves around the personality created by auto-suggestion.
Before admitting this bold hypothesis in such a case, it would
be necessary to know the exact limits of Hermances reading;
which after an interval of half a century, is impossible.
4. The last hypothesis is that the consciousnesses of Louis XI
and Jeanne have not disappeared from the world and write
through Hermanee.
Revue Spirite
1
Paris, 1858).
, 1858, p. 73, and La Vrit, M ay 29, 1864 (1 vol., E. Dentu,
Here we have a terribly incredible hypothesis that cannot even
be considered unless the radical impossibility of the three former
hypotheses has been demonstrated.
I have dealt fully with the case of Hermance Dufaux because
it applies equally to all the cases of automatic writing which are
presumed to identify dead persons.
Bersot (cited by Grasset, ad loc., 195) states that there was
printed at Guadaloupe in 1853, Juanita, a novel, by a chair, fol
lowed by a proverb and some other ineptitudes from the same
source.
The story of Charles Dickens dictating the conclusion of his
novel, The Mystery of Edwin Drood, after his decease, is still
more astonishing.1
In 1872 a young working shoemaker named James, who had
received but little school education, found himself able to write
automatically. In this way Dickens, not long dead, expressed the
desire to complete the work left unfinished at his decease. James
set to work, i.e., to write under the dictation of Dickens. The
result is this volume, that some critics consider quite worthy of
Dickens. On this I am not competent to speak, nor to appreciate
the similarities in style, the use of the London dialect in place of
the American idiom, and the knowledge of the topography of
London; but it is well known that parodies are easy enough,
e.g., la Manire d e ------ by Muller and P. Reboux. Even
if the parody were more perfect I should not infer the inter
vention of Dickens. Even if Jamess good faith were established
and the incapacity of normal intelligence to create this able parody
were also proved, I should still not infer the survival of Dickens.
Any supposition seems to me preferable to the naive and simple
but terribly improbable hypothesis that Charles Dickens returned
from the other world to move the brachial muscles of James.
The Martian language invented by the ingenious mind of
Helen Smith shows how much the subconscious is capable of.
No one can suppose that the idiom is real, i.e., that the inhabitants
of Mars, if they exist, speak a language queerly derived from
the French. Flournoy has shown in his incomparable book the
mental mechanism that goes to the creation of a new language.
Helen Smiths Martian language leads us to suppose that the
xThe Mystery of Edwin Drood, 1873. (Clark Bryan, Springfield, M ass.,
U. S. A., The Spiritualist, 1873, 322.)
Sanscrit she spoke is derived from the same subconscious
source.1
Nevertheless the problem presented by Helen Smith's Sanscrit
is less simple than that of her Martian language, for Sanscrit
is a real tongue, and moreover unusually difficult. Now Sanscrit
books are not common, and Helen had none such at her disposal ;
she did not frequent public libraries, but what she said was San
scrita rudimentary, defective, and ungrammatical Sanscrit,
but still Sanscrit.2
M. de Saussure, addressing the innumerable readers to whom
Sanscrit is unknown, and wishing to put them in a position to
appreciate the kind of Sanscrit Helen wrote, drew out a Latin
parallel as follows: Meate domina mea sorore forinda indi deo
indesingodio deo primo nomine obra mina loca suave tibi offisio
et ogurio et olo romano sua dinata perano die nono colo desimo
ridere pevere nove.
It is barbarous and incomprehensible Latin, with here and there
some single Latin words.
However, and this is very strange, there being no letter f in
Sanscrit, there is none in Helens writing. It is true that there is
no u either, but ou, and Helen has written ou though she pro
nounced it as u.
This problem of Helen Smiths Sanscrit is a delicate one and
should not be lightly treated. I am inclined to admit, not the
incarnation of an Indian prince, but a certain cryptesthesia which
allowed of the use of some scraps of Sanscrit. This is the mature
opinion of Myers,* with which I concur under reservations.
Many other books have been automatically written. But it
would need a sickly and almost criminal credulity to think that
Thermotis, the daughter of an Egyptian king, had dictated the
work entitled Pharaon Menephtah3
Ânother attempt at a Martian language and a Martian novel, both very
poor, was made by Mrs. Smead, studied by J. Hyslop. Not much is inferable
from them. J. Hyslop, The Mediumship of Mrs. Smead, A. S. P., 1906, vi,
461-502.
sIn his Nouvelles Observations (pp. 212-213) Flournoy says that the person
in whose house Helen gave sances had a Sanscrit grammar in the room
where the sances were given. But how could Helen have found opportunity
in the course o f her sance to study this grammar unknown to those present
so as to acquire the elements of the language? Could she have taken this
book home secretly, perhaps even unconsciously ?.
8Pharaon Menephtah, 2 vols., Paris, Edit. Ghio, and in the Libr. des sciences
psycholog. Also Episode de la vie de Tibre, by the same author (L'abbaye
des Bndictins, 2 vols.).
The spirit, Rochester, who is supposed to have dictated,
conjointly with Thermotis, these strange pages, which proceed
from a mental automatism as human as it is mediocre in quality,
was, it appears, once upon a time a certain Caius Lucilius. Such
fantasies are not worth comment.
There is a whole literature of this kind: for instance the Letters
from a Living Dead Man, by X. (London and New York, 1914).
X. was an American magistrate (probably David P. Hatch of
Los Angeles, California), versed in philosophy. Mr. X. also
published the War Letters from a Living Dead Man (Rider,
London, 1918), by the automatist Elsa Barker. These show the
same vague and well-meaning idealism as most other writings
of the kind. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, to show the
presence of any intelligence other than that of the automatist.
Quite recently a book (the second of a series), entirely auto
matically written has appeared in New York; but though full
of high ideals, it contains no indication of anything beyond what
any cultivated mind could attain without difficulty.1
The characteristics of the literature of the unconscious are
distinctive enough to be recognized without difficulty. There
is in the first place a marked tendency to vague and mystical
phrases on the destiny of the soul and its imperishable powers.
These divagations of the subconscious are always markedly re
ligious, as if their purpose were to lay down the lines for the
rites and doctrines of a new religion. They are pervaded by a
love for humanity which would be touching if it were not ex
pressed as a rhetorical and cloudy philanthropy. Automatic
writings abhor precision, and shun precise indications, favouring
very ordinary commonplaces. They would seem to be the work
of poets ignorant of prosody, of philosophers who know no
philosophy, of priests ignorant of theology; all of whom make
laudable efforts to give us counsel on philosophy and precepts
on religion in poetic and nebulous language.
With the rarest exceptions and despite some comical puerilities,
these emanations from the subconscious are, as Myers points out,
marked by undeniable morality and tend to develop all that is
best in human nature.
An interesting little book on automatic writing has appeared,
1 To a woman from Meslom, a message from Meslom in the life beyond,
received automatically by Mary McEvilly (N ew York, Brentano, 1920). See
also A Record of Psychic Experiments.
by Mrs. Hester Travers-Smith, who tells the story of her own
mediumship. She worked sometimes by writing, sometimes with
a planchette. She had four guidesPeter, Eyen, Astor, and
Shamar. The results do not lead to any very clear inferences
whether as to pragmatic cryptesthesia (psychometry) or to pre
monitions; but there are some useful rules on the conduct of
sances for writing automatically or with the planchette.
There is automatic drawing as well as automatic writing, which
sometimes gives interesting results. Helen Smith has made some
curious spirit-drawings.1
She had a hallucinatory vision and reproduced it in form and
colour. As she took very long to complete these drawings, some
times only adding a few strokes of the brush in a day, their
execution took more than a year. They were ultimately com
pleted, however, and every time she was prompted to paint, the
vision reappeared. Other designs have been reproduced by M.
Claparde.8
Commandant Le Goarant de Tromelin has often sent me
strange spiritist designs made by himself in a semi-somnambulic
state. Every letter is composed of human or animal forms in
juxtaposition.
A lady known to Dr. Geley has shown him sheets of automatic
drawings representing abstract qualitiesanger, gluttony, avarice,
etc.by clever caricatures.
I have recently seen a number of drawings by Mme. Blocus
when in the mediumistic state. She is in no way a professional
medium, though her mother has long been able to write auto
matically. Her drawings, which are sometimes very charming,
are mostly ornamental designs, and are very rapidly produced.
Jules Bois has cited very many cases of mediumistic drawing;
such as that by Victorien Sardou, inspired by Bernard de Palissy,
entitled, The House of Mozart. (Sardou had written a play
under that title, which had been refused.) He drew another,
called, The House of Zoroaster, in the same style. Fernand
Desmoulin and Hugo dAlesi, both talented painters in their
normal state, have produced curious pictures and some remark
able designs subconsciously.
The mechanism of automatic drawing is the same as for auto-
1A. Lematre, Une tude psychologique sur les tableaux mdianimiques de
Mlle. H. Smith. (Arch, de Psychologie, Geneva, July, 1907.)
*Bull. de la Soc. Md. de Genve, June 3, 1918. A. S. P., 1909, xix, 147.
matic writing. The hand draws and paints instead of writing.
The impulse is irresistible, involuntary, and independent not only
of the will but also of the consciousness of the medium. Out
lines are drawn the meaning of which is not understood by any
one, neither by the medium himself nor by other persons, but
such outlines are curiously connected with others analogous to
them, which, standing alone, appear devoid of significance, but
taken together acquire a very definite meaning. Sometimes per
sons who have no artistic ability produce strange and complicated
designs, which are always of a symbolic nature. Such phenomena
are proper to somnambulism; it is difficult to see in them any
metapsychic influence.
Spiritualist literature abounds in productions of this kind, but
only credulity can see in them anything more than the lucubra
tions of the subconscious. Nearly all are characterized by vaguely
Oriental symbolism that is sometimes not without a strange
beauty.1
All these writings and paintings might have been done by
human faculty. Nowhere do we find the quid divinum that would
lead us to refer them to some intelligence above the ordinary
human level. Therefore, as we desire to exclude from meta
psychics everything of which human psychism is capable, we
shall not take them into account here, but none the less they con
stitute an extremely curious chapter in normal psychology which
should be carefully studied by psychologists.
4. Classification of the Modes of Cryptesthesia
These phenomena are so numerous, varied, and mysterious
that some classification must be attempted to reduce this chaos
to some sort of order.
Such groupings are necessary for study and for teaching, but
there should be no illusion as to their value: they do not give
any adequate interpretation of these complex phenomena. Real
facts can never be classified in our arbitrary schemes with the
precision we are apt to assign to them.
In the first place we shall discriminate between experimental
cryptesthesia deliberately excited, and accidental cryptesthesia oc-*
*See the mediumistic designs by Machner (A. S. P., 1908, xv, 86) and
by Petit Jean(A. S. P., 1911, xxi, 360).
curring unexpectedly. This latter might be called spontaneous,
but this term would not be quite accurate, for accidental crypt-
esthesia is induced by some exterior cause.
It is very possible that there is no essential difference between
the two kinds; but the mode of studying them must be different,
for they do not arise in the same way.
Experimental cryptesthesia can be more easily examined, in
principle at any rate, because it is voluntarily aroused, whereas
the accidental type occurs suddenly, without the intervention of
an experimenter, by chance, and without intention, in normal
persons either asleep, awake, or half awake, who are themselves
surprised by the occurrence.
The division shows that metapsychic science is both experi
mental and observational. To neglect either method would be
to maim the science disastrously.
Experimental cryptesthesia can be studied:
A. In normal subjects,
B. In hypnotized subjects,
C. In mediums,
D. In sensitives.
Hence come four distinct modes, even though the division be
tween them is not very well defined: for on the one hand mediums
go into trances strongly resembling the hypnotic state, and it
may sometimes even be necessary to hypnotize them in order to
bring out their mediumship; and on the other hand it is impos
sible to tell how near persons that we think normal may be to
mediumship or to hypnotic states.
There is, however, this difference, that in most cases, if not
in all, mediums speak, write, or move the table or the planchette
as if under the influence of an extraneous personality; whereas
hypnotized subjects invoke no guide. But this distinction is
more apparent than real, for without doubt the past training of
sensitives, mediums, and hypnotized subjects has played a pre
ponderant part in the maintenance or the suppression of their
normal personality.
Sensitives are apparently normal persons, who, without being
mediums or somnambulists, seem capable of lucidity and clair
voyance under certain conditions, not accidental but experimental,
such as crystal vision psychometry, etc.
Accidental cryptesthesia is that which supervenes suddenly in
quite normal persons who are neither in the mediumistic nor the
hypnotic state.
All accidental cryptesthesia may be called monition.
Monitions are the revelation of some past or present event
by other than the normal senses. Premonitions relate to an
event in the future.
As monitions are numerous and varied, we shall distinguish
between those referring to trivial events and serious ones, the
latter including all monitions of death. These latter indeed repre
sent a group of fairly homogeneous facts that it would be incon
venient to separate.
Collective monitions will be dealt with in a chapter by them
selves; for they are intermediate between the subjective and the
objective phenomena of metapsychics, and therefore deserve
special consideration.
Finally, we must assign the phenomena of the divining-rod
to cryptesthesia, and perhaps also some curious manifestations
of arithmetical intelligence apparent in certain animals.1
*If it should be thought that I am too severe on theories I will answer by
quoting Claude Bernard, the acknowledged master in experimental sciences:
In science faith is an error, scepticism is a progress. A ll the systems
. . . that have been created in the embryonic stages o f any science are
doomed to oblivion and vanish away as transitory methods, as the science
takes shape. Progress, therefore, does not consist in reviving past systems,
but in forgetting them and replacing them by a knowledge o f the law of the
phenomena (Lessons in experimental pathology, 1872, p. 399).
CHAPTER III
E x p e r im e n t a l C r y p t e s t h e s ia
1. Cryptesthesia in Normal Individuals

Many experiments have been made on normal persons, though
not as many as are required.
These give widely differing results according to the person
under experiment. Nevertheless if lucidity exists in certain ex
ceptional persons, as has been proved, it is probable that some
traces of it will be found in others. It is highly improbable
that along with those who are frequently lucid there should
not be others who have some share in this faculty, however
slight it may be.
It is therefore necessary to investigate whether some trace of
lucidity may be discoverable in normal persons. This trace of
cryptesthesia may be determined by the answer to the question,
When an individual indicates at random a fact, a number, or a
form whose probability is determinable, is the ratio of probability
changed by the occurrence of cryptesthesia?
Long since I suggested this method of investigation, and made
numerous experiments of the kind, which have been repeated
and confirmed by my learned colleagues of the S. P. R.1
These experiments on insensitive or barely sensitive persons
were made with playing-cards, drawings, and photographs. I
have sometimes made use of the divining-rod, showing uncon
scious muscular movements for these experiments. In all cases
the exact probability could be determined.
It was always found that the number of successes was slightly
in excess of the probable number. For instance ; on 2,103 guesses
of playing-cards there were 552 successes as against a probable
525. But for a sound inference it is well to eliminate those that
have been so many (say over 100) on any given day, as to
produce fatigue and confusion. Reckoning experiments not
tC, Richet, La suggestion mentale et le calcul des probabilits (Revue
philosophique, Phantasms of the Living, i, 31-70.
1884, xviii, 609-671);
85
exceeding 100 on any day, there were 315 successes against a
probable 280, the number of guesses being 1,132. This is still
inconclusive.
By experiments made in England by the same method with
17,653 guesses there were 4,760 successes, exceeding the probable
number by 347. This is more distinctive, but still not very con
vincing. It seems possible, however, to distinguish persons pos
sessed of more or less lucidity by this means.
My friends G. F. and H. F. were certainly slightly sensitive.
Working with the divining-rod when the odds were 1:8, 1:6,
and 1 :48, we had the results stated below on five trials:
x :8 i :6 x : 48
1st trial......................... Success. Failure. Failure.
2d trial.......................... Success. Failure. Failure.
3d trial..........................Success. Success. Success.
4th trial......................... Success. Failure. Failure.
5th trial.........................Success. Success. Success.
Thus, the probability being 1 to 8, there were 5 successes on 5
trials. The probability of five consecutive successes is only 1 in
32,000. Cryptesthesia in this case is a moral certainty.
On the other hand, A. P. and myself, who neither of us have
any lucidity, operating side by side with G. F. and H. F., obtained:
1. Success, failure, failure.
2. Failure, failure, failure.
Showing no appreciable difference between the probable number
and that actually obtained, quite different from the results by
G. F. and H. F.
A later series of trials made simultaneously by B., by S., and
by myself with cards seen by no one, B. had 5 failures, I had
1 success, and S., who has mediumistic powers, had 2 successes.
The compounded probability on two successes (each having the
simple probability of 1:52) is 1:250.
We cannot enter into all the details given in Sir William Bar
retts report (Proc. S. P. R., Experimental Telepathy, Phantasms
of the Lilting, i, 20-29; i, 47-65); but the importance of Sir
Oliver Lodges experiment with young girls who were neither
EXPERIMENTAL CRYPTESTHESIA 87
hypnotized nor mediums demands mention.1 Mr. Malcolm Guth
rie made the arrangements for the experiment, which was on the
reproduction of drawings. In one instance the drawing to be
guessed was the Union Jack, which was reproduced without
hesitation.
The conditions were perfect; and twenty years later Sir
Oliver writes: I declare positively that the experiment was
entirely conclusive, and I have had no Subsequent doubt of its
validity.
218 trials were made by six persons, the probability being 1:6.
In 54 guesses Mrs. H. and Mrs. B., both of whom had some
vague mediumistic power, had 22 successes, the probable number
being 10 on chance alone. The four other persons in 162 trials
had 45 successes against a probable 32; the ratio of the actual
number to the probable one being 220 for Mrs. H. and Mrs. B.,
and 140 for the other four persons.
In an experiment made by Mr. Herdmann, a Cambridge pro
fessor, the results were:
Actual drawing. As guessed.
Red. Red.
Yellow. Golden color.
R. R.
E. E.
Right-angled triangle. Isosceles triangle.
Tetrahedron. Pyramids of Egypt.
Five of clubs. Five of spades.
Such experiments are very cogent. So likewise are those given
by Ochorowicz in his excellent book on Mental Suggestion,
which all should read who desire to take note of the many pre
cautions that should be taken to eliminate causes of error.
At Brighton in 1882, with G. A. Smith as percipient, Ed.
Gurney and Myers obtained very remarkable results which the
strange subsequent denials of Mr. Smith do not invalidate (Proc.
S. P. R., viii, 536).2*
0
* . Lodge, Nature, xxx, 145, and The Survival of Man, French transla
tion, 1912, p. 26.
*Quoted by Delanne, loc. cit., p. 268.
Name thought of. First answer. Second answer.
Barnard. Harland. Barnard.
Bellairs. Hamphreys. Ben Nevis.
Johnson. Jobson. Johnson.
Regent Street. Rembrandt Street. Regent Street.
Hobhouse. Hanter. Regent Street.
Black. Drack. Blacke.
Queen Anne. Quechy. Queen.
Wissenschaft. Wissie. Wisenaft.
More recently Sir Oliver Lodge, experimenting with the Misses
de Lyro, found that they had a curious joint sensitiveness. They
held each others hands. The detail is given in The Survival
of Man, pp. 44-45, and strictly speaking something not quite
amounting to cryptesthesia might be admitted, not fraud, but a
transmission by contact, a transposition of sensibilitya phenom
enon very much akin to cryptesthesia. And the guesses changed
from frequently correct to quite wild, directly the knuckles
or finger-tips or any part of the skin of the two hands ceased to
touch. It was almost like the breaking of an electric circuit
(p. 45).
It is to be noted that the answers were given very quickly,
even for somewhat complicated figures. The number thought
of, 3,145, was given very rapidly as 3,146. The number being
715, the answer was 714; no, 715. Nevertheless, and notwith
standing the authority of Lodge, I think these very interesting
experiments fundamentally different from those in which there
is no contact.
In some good experiments by F. L. Usher and Burt, with
themselves as percipients (they not being sensitives in the ordi
nary acceptation of the word), they verified that the guessing
of a card was more nearly correct than chance would account
for even when the operators were very far apartLondon to
Bristol (120 miles), and London to Prague (960 miles). On
60 trials the results were:
Actual Probable
number. number.
Complete successes............................ 4 1.1
Value of the card.............. ..............14 4.5
Colour of the card............ .............. 28 30
At a smaller distance, in the same room, but full precautions
being taken that no indication could be given by the agent, there
were, on 36 trials:
Actual Probable
number. number.
Complete successes.......... ...............9 0.7
Value of the card.............. ..............15 2.7
Colour of the card............ ..............20 18
The totals are very satisfactory, for in 96 trials the number
of successes was 13 against a probable number of only 2; while
for the value of the card chosen the successes were 29 when
chance alone would have indicated 7.1
The fact that in the case of the colour of the card the actual
successes and the probable successes were both 48 shows that
the experiments were very well conducted. Other experiments
have been made with drawings; some of these are interesting
but do not lend themselves to a calculation by probabilities. We
shall return to these when speaking of clairvoyance by sensitives.
An important paper on lucidity was presented at Knigsberg
in 1913 as an inaugural address by Max. Hoppe ( Ueber Hell-
sehen, Berlin, Haussmann, 1916). His analysis of cases of
lucidity as applied to guessing of cards and numbers is methodical
and detailed. He establishes that even when operating with
sensitive subjects, the proof is not rigorously exact, which I
readily grant ; but it must also be admitted that definite proof of
cryptesthesia is not to be reached by this kind of experiment.
Mediums and somnambulists dislike these tests which do not
move their sensitive faculties like an automobile accident or a
fire. Nevertheless his criticism is acute. He criticizes my own
experiments on Lonie with justice; I had, however, no need
to wait for this criticism to admit their very moderate value.
Nor does he admit the lucidity of Mr. Reese. On this point,
however, his objections seem to me valueless. He made experi
ments with one single person with negative results, but that
proves nothing whatever. In short Mr. Hoppe confines himself
to criticism (quite legitimate criticism) of my old experiments
in 1884. I think he would find it difficult to maintain his position
in view of my later experiments and those of the large n u m b e r
of men of science who have made a study of lucidity.
Quelques expriences de transmission de la pense a grande distance
(A. S. P., 1910, xx, 14-21 and 40-54).
Dr. Blair Thaw of New York, experimenting with Miss Thaw,
has obtained very clear cases of cryptesthesia applied to colours,
the telepathic mental suggestion being very evident (Hyslop,
Science and a Future Life, pp. 25-30).
Colour thought of. First answer. Second, answer.
Light red. Light red. Light red.
Green. Green. Light red.
Yellow. Blue. Yellow.
Light yellow. Light yellow. Yellow.
Dark red. Blue. Dark red.
Dark blue. Orange. Dark blue.
Orange. Green. Heliotrope.
The Misses Wingfield, who certainly have remarkable medium
istic powers, made a series of 400 experiments which would be
equivalent to demonstration if there be no defect in the method
a point on which I am not able to judge.
In 400 trials the probable number of successes is 4 ; the number
obtained by thought-reading was 27. In 21 cases the digits
were reversed. The odds against both results are very large,
and the number of successes amounts to a moral certainty that
a cause other than chance was in play (Ph. of the L., ii, 653,
669). But were the experiments unexceptionable?
Miss Lindsay and Mr. Shilton also had a number of successes
far higher than the probable number (A. S. P., 1909, xix, 123).*
But however interesting the mathematical evaluation of prob
ability in such experiments, it must always be remembered that
the value to be attached to the figures depends entirely on the
absence of defect in the methods pursued. Absolute experimental
rigour is the essential condition.
One subject experimented on by Lombroso had his eyes and
ears completely sealed and words were written behind his back
^ h e bibliography is a very large one. I specially cite J. Ochorowicz, La
suggestion mentale, Paris, 1884. Ch. Richet, La suggestion mentale et le
calcul des probabilits, Rev. Philosophique, December, 1884. Fr Myers, On a
telepathic explanation of some so-called spiritualistic phenomena (P. S. P. R.,
1883-1884, 217). Automatic writing, ibid., 1885, p. 1, May, 1887, 209; June,
1889, 222. Other curious cases are noted in the second edition of Phan
tasms of the Living, ii, 670-671. The experiments by the Misses Creery
reported in the Phantasms of the Living, i, 25, must not be taken into
account, for fraud was proved (Note relating to some of the published
experiments in thought transference, P. S. P. R., 1884, 269-270).
for him to read. The first word was Margharita; he wrote
Maria and then Margharita. Amore was written; he wrote
Moirier, then Amore. Andrea was written; he wrote Andrea.
Dr. J. Ch. Roux, while a student, made some unexceptionable
experiments with a pack of 32 cards, definitely evidential of
cryptesthesia. He had 5 complete successes, the compounded
probability being 1: 3000.
In another series of 81 trials he had 54 successes, as against
20 if due to chance alone. There were also 8 successes when
chance would have given 1 only (A. S. P., iii, 1893, 295).
A schoolmaster whose name is not given made an experiment
with a class, not with cards, but with six letters. In 7 experiments
of 30 trials each with several scholars at the same time, the
probable number was -5-9-40, say 990; the number of vowels indi
cated by the percipients was 1050, slightly, but only slightly, in
excess of the chances. However, in all 7 experiments there
was some excess.
Probable result. Actual result.
180 196
170 180
150 154
140 149
40 44
175 179
135 148
The probability of excess over the single probabilities being y2t
it follows that the probability that there would be an excess of
y2 m 7 trials is, say 1:128.
If instead of taking the whole of the 39 trials, we take only
the first 12, the result is much higher.
Probable result. Actual result.
108 129
102 109
90 105
84 86
24 32
105 110
81 90
being 661 against a probable 594.
An experiment in telepathy with cards on a little girl of thirteen
by Oliver Lodge gave some interesting results. We will quote
only those in which the father of the child did not see the card
(Report on a case of telepathy; /. S. P. R., May, 1913, 103)..
Card drawn. Card named.
Five of diamonds. Five of clubs.
Four of hearts. Two of hearts.
Four of hearts. Three of hearts.
Four of hearts. Four of hearts.
Ace of hearts. Ace of hearts.
King of diamonds. An eight.
King of diamonds. A king.
King of diamonds. King of clubs.
King of diamonds. King of hearts.
Ten of diamonds. Ten of diamonds.
Ace of diamonds. Two of clubs.
Three of diamonds. Four of Spades.
Three of spades. Two of hearts.
Three of spades. Four of spades.
Three of spades. Two of spades.
Three of spades. Two of hearts.
Knave of clubs. Picture card.
Knave of clubs. Knave of clubs.
Ten of clubs. Picture card.
Ten of clubs. A six.
Ten of clubs. Nine of clubs.
Ten of hearts. An eight.
Ten of hearts. Picture card.
Ten of hearts. A seven.
Ten of hearts. Heart.
Ten of hearts. Ten of hearts.
It is very instructive that the child succeeded well when the
card had been seen by Lodge, and failed when he had not seen
it; so that Lodge is inclined to think (without expressly saying
so), that the case was one of telepathy and not of lucidity, in
other words, that the cryptesthesia was the result of mental
transmission.
The experiments of Mr. Henry Rawson with drawings are
quite conclusive and would involve absolute certainty of tele
pathic cryptesthesia if there were no defect in the experiment,
as to which I am unable to express an opinion, as in the case of
Miss Wingfield. In the first experiments Mr. Rawson only was
in the room with the percipient, Mrs. L. and the agent, Mrs.
B. Mrs. L. and Mrs. B. are sisters. Their backs were turned
to one another and it was absolutely impossible for Mrs. B.
to see the drawing made by Mrs. L. (Myers, Human Per
sonality, i, 614).
Analogous facts were observed by Mr. Kirk. He had remark
able success, though the percipient was very far distant, as
much as 360 miles (Myers, ibid., p. 620). There were some
very striking successes under these conditions; especially in one
case a hand drawn by Mr. Kirk was reproduced by Miss G,
(p. 621); in another a little dog. Later on Mr. Kirk, having
tried to magnetize Miss G., unknown to her, and at a distance,
seems to have failed.
Myers quotes from Mr. A. Glardon experiments in thought-
transmission at great distances, from Tour de Peilz in Switzer
land to Ajaccio in Corsica, or Florence, between Mr. Glardon
and a friend of his, Mrs. M. The results were sometimes very
good; there were failures, but the successes were such as to carry
conviction of real cryptesthesia.
We shall see in the sequel that cross-correspondences, analo
gous to these experiments, have also given good, though perhaps
less decisive, results.
M. Max Dessoir, who is profoundly experienced in hypnotic
phenomena, endeavoured to ascertain what guessing at drawings
would do in his own case. The results were barely greater than
would be due to chance {Phantasms of the Living, ii, 642).
Similar experiments, mentioned above, had been previously
made by Mr. Guthrie of Liverpool, with Miss Relph and Miss
Edwards, in October, 1883 {Phantasms of the Living, i, 38).
About 150 trials were made, the successes being sometimes very
complete; three of these are given in the figure to enable the
reader to judge. The percipient had her eyes bandaged, and the
drawing, instead of being placed in an opaque envelope, was
steadfastly gazed at by the agent.
Mr. J. Edgar Coover has written a voluminous account of the
results of many experiments made by him with playing-cards,
which are not entirely negative whatever he may say; they seem
to indicate that average persons have some degree of crypt-
esthesia (lucidity) though extremely slight. In 5,135 experi
ments in telepathy the numbers indicated by probability were
513 and 128 (complete success) ; the actual numbers obtained
being 538 and 153 (complete success). This is painfully small,
but it is something.
In 4,865 experiments on lucidity the probable numbers were
486 and 122 (complete success), the actual numbers obtained
being 488 and 141 ; which again is a very slight excess on the
probability.
It is as well to note that some persons are better endowed
with the faculty than others. Choosing fourteen persons who
seem to have some degree of lucidity their results were 119 and
54 on 711 experiments, the probable numbers being 71 and 18.
The excess over probability is considerable, but some reserves
must be made in regard to this plan of choosing only the best
of the experiments.1
We cannot follow out the very lengthy details given by Mr.
Coover. In spite of all his efforts his own results actually prove
a slight, though very slight, degree of something more than
chance in guesses at a card drawn, whether it be due to telepathy
or to lucidity.
Pickmann, who gave public sances in thought-reading, prob
ably by muscular indications from the person whose hand he
held, possibly had some degree of cryptesthesia. He seems to
have given a very successful exhibition of mental suggestion to
Lombroso.2
He came to visit me one day, and I tried an experiment that
seems unexceptionable. While Pickmann was in another room
I spread an entire pack of 52 cards on the table. I chose one
of these cards at random, looking at it closely but without
touching it, and endeavouring to visualize it. I then fetched
Pickmann from the next room, and placing him with his back to
the cards asked him to name the card I had thought of. He
succeeded at the first trial, 1 :52, which pleased us both. But
three further trials failed.
I will also mention, passim, another experiment, though it
stands alone and chance may have had something to do with it.
Experiments in Psychical Research, Stanford University (C a lif). Analys
in P. S. P. R. par F. G. S. Schiller; November, 1916, xxx, 261-273.
*Cited by Delanne (Gas. litt.,Turin, 1892), but being unable to refer to the
original, I cannot say exactly under what conditions the experiment may
have been made.
F ig . i . Three experiments by Mr. Guthrie and Miss Edwards. The drawings
on the right are the reproductions of Mr. Guthries original designs on the
left. Miss Edwardss eyes were bandaged, but she was too far away to see
anything even had this not been done.
That morning I had bought a pack of tarot cards in order to
use them in card-guessing experiments. During the day Henry
Ferrari came to see me. I said, Let us try an experiment.
Look carefully at one of these tarots; I will try to divine which
you have looked at. After a few moments, I said, without
knowing why, It is of peasants reaping or harvesting. The
card represented a skeleton holding a scythe. There was only
one card with a scythe in the pack, and I had not looked through
the pack.
It is to be regretted that studies of cryptesthesia in normal
persons are so seldom made, both because the calculation of
probabilities is very easy, and because it leads to the discovery
of those who possess some degree of lucidity. But it must not
be supposed that it is very easy to make unexceptionable experi
ments. On the'contrary, the experiments are exceedingly deli
cate and certain rules must be observed:
1. The agent must be absolutely motionless, be silent, and have
his back turned to the percipient. This is fundamental.
2. The choice of the number, the card, or the drawing must
be made by pure chance.
3. No result, whether success or failure, should be told to the
percipient before the end of the sitting.
4. Not more than twenty trials should be made on any one
day.
5. All results, whatever they may be, should be stated in full.
6. The percipient must be unable to see anything, directly
or indirectly; it is best that his eyes should be bandaged and
his back turned.
An important question then arises, which we shall deal with
later: Is the lucidity telephathic or non-telepathic? Telepathic
lucidity certainly exists; it has been proved by numerous experi
ments. Non-telepathic lucidity is also proven, but fresh experi
ments are required.1
These methods are not emotional or dramatic like experiments
made with powerful mediums, or records of monitions of death,
but they are precise, and, when the experiment is well designed,
lThe difficult but essential experimentation to clear up this arduous prob
lem might be attempted as follows: It might not be difficult to find some
intelligent and trustworthy teacher in a primary school who would undertake it.
To a class of 30 the teacher would show 36 pictures in six groups, each
group being composed of six different subjects of the same type such as the
following, which I suggest as suitable:
x. Vegetable kingdom. 2. Animal kingdom.
Oak, Fish,
Rose, Spider,
Mushroom, Horse,
Potatoes, Elephant,
Field of wheat, Pigeon,
Palm-tree. Flock of sheep.
3. Celebrated men. 4. Manufactured objects.

sop, Key,
Caesar, Book,
Christopher Columbus, Lamp,
Napoleon, Carriage,
Charlemagne, Ship,
President Carnot. * Gun.
5. Anatomical. 6. Historical pictures.

Ear, The Crucifixion,
Eye, Battle of Eylau,
Skeleton, Death of Caesar,
Hand, The Pyramids,
Heart, Millets Angelus,
Mouth and lips. , The Marriage at Cana.
The designs should be numbered from 1 to 36, and would be printed on 36

cards. The subjects chosen are such that no confusion is possible. In each
group there would be two in blue, two in red, and two in yellow. Probability
in choice would then be x : 6 for the group, 1 : 3 for the colour, and 1 : 36 for
the subject, and 1 : 1 8 for group and colour combined.
Experiment would be made in the following manner :
1. For telepathic lucidity. The teacher would draw ine of the 36 cards,
look at it attentively, mentally pronouncing the name; He would then ask
every pupil to write down his guess at the card without any communication
with those next him. This would be the first answer.
2. For non-telepathic lucidity. One or two minutes after the first experi
ment, the teacher would draw one of the 36 cards, but would not look at it,
so that no one would know what card had been drawn. The children would
then write a second answer.
By repeating this experiment with 30 pupils for ten days, we should have
600 replies, which would be enough for some inference.
W e hold such packs o f cards at the Metapsychic Institute, Paris, at the
disposal of any one who would consent to undertake this experiment.
O f course every answer must be included without any exception, and no
opportunity must be given to the pupils to see the face of the teacher during
the experiment for telepathic lucidity. The names of the children should be
attached to their answers to ascertain those who may have exceptional powers.
M. Carr, a teacher at Oissery, was obliging enough to make this experi
ment. W ith telepathy, i.e., when he knew the card chosen (probability 1 :3 6 ) ,
he obtained with 27 pupils, giving 1,2x5 answers, 31 successes, the probable
number being 33. This result is entirely due to chance.
When the teacher did not know the card, the number of answers was
1,125, with 25 pupils, and there were 48 successes, the probable number being
only 31. There were considerable differences between different pupils.
The probable number on 90 answers for each pupil being 2, there was one
undeniable. The results are clear. Chance is not a factor in
physical and chemical experiments; why should it be in meta
psychic science? If an event takes place against odds of 1:100,000
I shall not decide that it has come about by chance, and two
or three equally unlikely events occurring give a certainty that
there is some cause in action. The whole crux is that the experi
mental method should have been perfect. All our efforts should
be concentrated on this.
We conclude, therefore, from these experiments to which the
calculus of probabilities can be applied, that lucidity or trans
mission of thought is a reality even among normal persons,
without calling in hypnotism or spiritualism. In other words,
there is a faculty of cognition other than the usual faculties; it
exists in nearly all human beings, even those that seem least sensi
tive, but in these latter it is so slight as to be almost negligible.
This faculty is more readily called into play by keen emotion
or by some violent event than for the cognition of a number or a
card, though by these means it may be made apparent to some
small extent. In most non-sensitives it is so vague and so indis
tinct that it is difficult to verify, but by making a large number
of experiments a trace of its existence can be found.
It is probable that this cryptesthesia is often telepathic, but
the telepathy is but one of its forms, perhaps the commonest.
Experiments on normal persons indicate both telepathy and
lucidity, and both are probable, however feeble and imperfect
they may be. It follows that the thought of one man is mys
teriously linked to that of others. We are not isolated, but are
in some obscure connection with our fellows; there is some truth
in the idea of what has been called the soul of the crowd. A
current of sympathy or anger, of indignation or enthusiasm,
powerful though undeiinable, may lead to well-nigh unanimous
who was right ^ times and two who were right 6 times. T his would appear
to provide material for interesting research.
M. Warcollier has suggested an ingenious proceeding to utilize the old
game of "meeting : taking the 13 diamonds from the pack, lay them down back
upwards without the face having been seen. The player who has not seen
the diamonds takes 13 clubs in his hand and places one on each diamond.
The probability of success, i.e., that both cards will be of the same value, is
1:13. Interest may be given if the banker pays 13 pence at each success
and receives a penny for each non-success. The play is fair and amusing.
Would the problem be different according as the banker knows the diamond
(telepathy), or does not know it (lucidity) ? The club cards are seen by the
player, the diamonds are not.
E x p e r im e n t a l c r y p t e s t h e s ia 99
feeling in a theatre, in a court, or a Parliament, sweeping away
all barriers in its course. Is it permissible to compare this col
lective emotion to the mental transmission observable in the
experiments detailed above?
Unfortunately mathematical reasoning does not carry much
conviction. Chance is constantly put forward, and possibly
with reason, for the divergence between the probable number of
successes and those due to cryptesthesia is insufficient to convince.
But we shall see in subsequent chapters that this strange faculty
is very greatly developed by hypnotism and mediumship, and
this will bring complete conviction of its existence.
2. Cryptesthesia under Hypnotism and Magnetic Treatment
The history of hypnotism is curious and a striking instance
of a quite revolutionary change in ideas; for from 1790 to 1875,
somnambulism and animal magnetism were held to be occult
sciences unworthy of the attention of scientific men. It was
ill-omened and forbidden ground.
Mesmer, and after him Puysgur, Deleuze, Husson, Braid, and
Libeault, had, no doubt, made some remarkable experiments,
but these were not sufficiently exact to win official recognition
which is always slow and tardy; they were not such as to detach
the physiology of hypnotism from its mystical associations.
In 1875, while still a student, I was able to show that hyp
notism is not an illusion due to skilful or gross fraud, but a physio
logical and psychological fact, as natural and experimentally
demonstrable as the tetanus produced by strychnine or sleep
induced by opium.
To show the general state of mind in 1875 when, two years
before Charcot and Heidenhain, I published my researches, it will
suffice to quote the opening words: It needs some courage to
use the word somnambulism. Perhaps today less courage is
needed to speak of materializations.
Somnambulism is now a recognized and unquestioned fact
that no longer pertains to metapsychics.
There are, however, some episodes in its history that have to
do with cryptesthesia. It may well be asked: (1) Whether the
so-called magnetic action of the magnetizer is in any way specific;
in other words, whether there are magnetic emanations percep
tible only by sensitives; (2) whether the hypnotic state generates
cryptesthesia.
(a) Magnetic Emanations
The point to be determined is whether, when the old method
of passes, used by Du Potet, Deleuze, and Lafontaine (which I
have often practised and which is still frequently used), disen
gages some special human powera "magnetic fluidwhich
acts on human beings. To this important question no satis
factory answer can yet be given.
The simplest hypothesis, and the one that is current today,
is that when a subject goes to sleep, this takes place by sugges
tion, verbal or otherwise, and consequently that the so-called
magnetic passes are merely accessory or useless, unless as rein
forcing suggestion. It is said that silence, dim light, a certain
tension of mind caused by these preparations, and a series of
tacit or spoken suggestions^ all contribute to bring about the
hypnotic state without calling in any "magnetic fluid. The
somewhat dramatic emotion caused by the passes contributes to
the effect. Later on, when semi-unconsciousness has been ob
tained, custom and habit play a preponderant part in later
sleeps. Passes are always symbolical; if a person has once been
put to sleep he will always be more easily put to sleep, whether
by the same magnetizer or by another. There is no need to in
voke a magnetic fluid or a new form of energy. Such is the
opinion current among medical men (Babinski).
They state further that imitative suggestion is often enough
to explain hypnotic phenomena. If in a hospital ward, a barracks,
a school, or a cloister, one sick person, soldier, child, or nun
has been put to sleep it is easy to do the like with most of the
others. There is a real nervous contagion, as may be seen in
the demoniacal epidemics of the Middle Ages, or the convul-
sionists and hysterics of more recent times.
A kind of hypnotic sleep may be produced in animals by a sta
tionary and brilliant object. Fr. Kircher showed in the seven
teenth century that a hen could be paralyzed by putting the fowl
on its back and drawing a chalk line on the ground from its
beak. In the same way it is said the hypnotic state can be in
duced in certain persons by fixed gaze at a crystal ball or some
bright object.
I have never been able to verify anything of the kind. Mag
netic sleep can certainly be induced in those used to it by a
bright object; but with such persons anything will suffice. The
eyes soon close and loss of sensation supervenes, at first slight,
but increasing as consciousness disappears.
Hypnotism by fascination must be akin to that produced by a
bright object. A certain Donato had remarkable powers (or
skill) of this kind. He would choose from a large audience
five, six, twelve, or even twenty persons, who were certainly
neither confederates nor accomplices, would take them on the
stage, look fixedly into their eyes, and after half a minute or
less would turn them into automata having no will of their own.
If after half a minute he did not succeed (which happened often
enough) he left the refractory subject and went to another. In
a few minutes he thus collected some fifteen persons, often quite
young people, who obeyed the most absurd verbal suggestions.
These cases have been compared to the fascination exerted by
some animalsa snake, or a pointer ^dogbut such analogies are
very vague.
However, hypnotic sleep can be induced in many persons,
though not in all, by some means or otherby passes, by a bright
object, by a fixed gaze, or by verbal suggestion. Imitation and
repetition greatly favour success.'
But is this the whole story? Is there any positive proof that
any so-called magnetic vibration proceeds from the magnetizer
to the hypnotized person? If one were as little exacting and
as little precise as the magnetizers of 1840, some reasons might
be alleged in favour of the hypothesis of a human magnetic
fluid ; but nowadays we are less credulous.
I shall therefore set aside the notions of Reichenbach on odic
force, of Baraduc on effluvia, of Charazain on human polarity,
for these allegations, mystical rather than scientific, are founded
on imperfect data. Nevertheless, it would be somewhat rash to
reject off-hand the hypothesis of a magnetic fluid; and we shall
make a brief study of it.1
In the first place, it certainly appears that some magnetizers
have more power than others. This is unquestionable, however
little observers may have known how to study it.
If I may be permitted to quote my own experience, I may say
1Barty, Le magntisme animal tudi sous le nom de force neurique
rayonnante et circulante dans ses proprits physiques, physiologiques et thra
peutiques, Paris, Doin, 1887. H. Baraduc, Les vibrations de la vitalit
humaine, Paris, J. B. Baillire, 1904. La force vitale, notre corps vital,
fiuidique, une formule baromtrique, 1905. M. Benedikt, Die latenten Emana-
tionen der Chemikalien (C. Konegen, Wien, 1915)-
that formerly, when I certainly operated less skilfully than I do
now, I could induce the sleep quite easily even in insensitive
subjects, whereas at the present time I can scarcely ever produce
the least hypnosis in any person. Dr. Maingot and Dr. Emile
Magnan, who were once very powerful magnetizers, have ob
served the same thing. Formerly they could do what they
pleased, they told me; but now, though not old men, they were
surprised at their inability to induce deep hypnosis.
Under different circumstances when an attempt was made to
hypnotize me, I seemed to perceive that some persons, such as
J. Ochorowicz, the magnetizer Cannelle, and Dr. Faivre, acted
on me fairly speedily and produced a somnolent state, whereas
the efforts of others were fruitless.
Mr. Sydney Alrutz,1 a professor in Upsala University, is in
clined to think (and the opinion is shared by Sir William Bar
rett) that a certain fluid is emitted by the human body which
acts directly on the sensitive. Magnetizing a finger of the sub
ject through thick glass, the eyes of the subject being bandaged,
the finger becomes, absolutely insensitive. But it is nearly im
possible to avoid all suggestion and it is one of the most difficult
experiments to conduct satisfactorily.
The question must therefore be considered still open. It
would be interesting to study it exhaustively. Are the phenom
ena produced by a magnetic fluid, by verbal suggestion, by hyper
sensibility of the normal senses, or by telepathy? All these hy
potheses are admissible, and in despite of many investigations it is
impossible to say. Myers says, It is probable that magnetic
passes have per se a certain specific power. 2
I go a little further in doubting, and sayit is almost probable.
No great confidence can be placed in the statements of mag
netized persons when they say they see effluvia. Most som-
nambules, said Deleuze in 1813, see a bright and shining light
round their magnetizer emitted strongly from his head and his
hands. But this has not been repeated and is certainly a case
of suggestion. A. de Rochas, despite his undoubted talents and
persevering efforts, has been unable to demonstrate the exter-
nalization of sensibility in any rigorously scientific manner. I
xSydney Alrutz, Erscheinungen in der Hypnose (Zeitsch . fur Psychologie,
1909). W. F. Barrett, Some recent hypnotic experiments (/. S'. P. R., January,
19x2, 179-186).
zHuman Personality, i, 404. See also Mrs. Sidgwick and A. Johnson,
S. P. R., January, 1912, 184.
put aside the perception of effluvia from a steel magnet, for this
radiation is not within the province of metapsychics.
I cannot accept the ideas of A. de Rochas on exteriorization
of sensibility because I think he has not been sufficiently on his
guard against suggestion. Excepting the instance in which he
worked on sick people in the hospital at Luys, some of whom
certainly were fraudulent, his subjects were honest, but the suc
cesses he obtained seem due to suggestion; few have obtained
them after him.
According to J. Maxwell, it is possible, after sitting for a con
siderable time in complete darkness, to see luminous radiations
from the fingers. This question has been exhaustively treated by
De Rochas.1 He refers also to observations by Dr. Walter Kilner
of St. Thomass Hospital, London, and to others by Dr. ODon
nell of the Mercy Hospital, Chicago. It would seem that by
looking at the nude body of a human being through certain
screens in a darkened room luminous effluvia can be seen that
follow the outline of the body; but as these two doctors do not
state the exact nature of these screens, they do not really tell
us anything.2
On this subject A. de Rochas very aptly quotes Reichenbachs
careful experiments. These are disputable, but ought to be re
sumed and reconsidered.
As for the aureoles of saints and luminous hands, these cannot
be allowed any scientific value.
In fine, the whole of this question needs to be reopened ab ovo
with the rigorous methods of investigation that we have at our
disposal today.
This is not to allege that the problem is easy to solve. The
curious history of Blondlots N-rays shows how difficult it is
to avoid illusion and hypothesis.
The aura, the astral body, the perisprit, the odic effluvia are
all names for the same thinga human or animal radiation. It
may be that this radiation is a fact, anything is possible, but
up to the present no one has been able to prove it. If, or when,
it should at last be verified, all that Reichenbach, De Rochas, and
the old magnetizers have said would be linked up with it; and
1Les radiations lumineuses du corps hutnanin. (A. S. P., September, 1911,
xxi, 264.)
*Is it dicyanin? See G. de Fontenay, Laura humaine et les ecrans du
Dr. Walter Kilner A S. P.,
( . March, 1912, 74).
I should not be very greatly surprised if this discovery were
made; but this is not the case as yet; there is not even the be
ginning of a sound proof.
Dr. Joire has made some experiments of exteriorization of
sensibility which would seem to support the idea; but there are
no grounds for supposing that this sensitiveness is apparent at
one, two, or ten centimeters distance from the surface of the
skin. Probably it is but a special variety of lucidity or crypt-
esthesia. Its mechanism is certainly less simple than De Rochas
indicates in the schematic diagram he gives (Fig. A, p. 57, of
his book) showing a series of sensitive layers forming an imagi
nary envelope to the cutaneous surface.1
The magnetizers gave the name rapport to the relation that
they supposed to exist between the magnetizer and his patient;
this relation being such that the sensations of the former were
perceived by the latter, who could also divine the thought of the
magnetizer without the utterance of any word. P. Janet, a care
ful and sceptical observer, has verified that Lonie B., being put
to sleep by himself or his brother (from whom Lonie in her
sleep was unable to distinguish him) could recognize exactly the
substance that he placed in his mouthsugar, salt, or pepper.
One day his brother, J. Janet, in an adjoining room, scorched
his right arm above the wrist. Lonie, who could have known
nothing about it normally, gave signs of real pain, and showed
to P. Janet (who knew nothing of the occurrence) the exact
place of the burn. Evidently this was not due to chance, but
rather than admit a transfer of sensation I should call it a fact
of cryptesthesia, which involves no hypothesis.
G. Delanne quotes various instances in which sleep has been
induced from a distance without any possible knowledge by the
subject of the attempt of the magnetizer to put him to sleep.2
But the perspicacity of these subjects, both conscious and sub
conscious, is so acute that no certain conclusion can be deduced!
In the celebrated experiments by Dr. Husson with Mme. Sanson,
all necessary precautions do not seem to have been taken.8
XA. S. P., S. P. R., December, 1906, p. 533.
1897, see the discussion raised /.
See also : Reichenbach, Le fluide des magntiseurs, prcis dexpriences sur
ses proprits physiques et physiologiques, classes et annotes, by A . de
Rochas, dAiglun, 8vo, Paris, Carr, 1891.
*F. Delanne, Recherches sur la mdiumnit, 1902, 259-280.
*On this obscure subject see F. Myers, Human Personality, i, 524-533. There
are also some observations by J. Hricourt, De Dufay, D e Wetterstrand, and De
Man. de Tolosa-Latour ; but I repeat I am unable to come to a conclusion.
The existence, then, of a vital fluid or magnetic effluvium is
not demonstrated. Nevertheless, I should incline to the opinion
that if hypnotizable subjects who had not yet undergone the
experience were magnetized successively by two persons, A. and
B., the former known to have strong magnetic power, and the
latter devoid of it, but proceeding apparently in precisely the
same fashion, nearly all the sensitives would be put into the
sleep by A. and scarcely any by B. This is only a guess; I
mention it as it would seem to suggest an experiment that might
give a clear result, if correctly performed.
If Donato and some others brought about this quick and
crude fascination, how much is due to the skill acquired by long
experience, and how much to personal influence? I could not
say; but I imagine that to speak of Donatos skill scarcely covers
the facts and that some special physiological influence emanat
ing from him is not improbable. But all this is very vague.
Have magnetic passes any effect upon animals? Rabbits and
frogs can be hypnotized, or reduced to a state of torpor and
passiveness that somewhat resembles the hypnotic state in human
subjects. But even if the hypnosis of animals (the cataplexy of
Preyer) be absolutely true and easy to verify, that proves noth
ing as to the alleged human effluvia. If, as I have several times
observed, a frog after having been gently massaged for a few
minutes stands quite still and seems paralyzed,*'may not this be
the effect of slight cutaneous excitement exhausting its nervous
centres? Is fear a possible cause? Certain animals, insects
especially, feign death as a means of protection.
As to this physiological influence of magnetic effluvia we are
wandering in absolutely unexplored regions. I do not even see
how good experiments could be made to establish the reality,
of such emanations.
The magnetizer Lafontaine declares that he magnetized a lion.
The story is amusing, but certainly not proof against criticism.
Has human magnetism a healing power on the sick? Cer
tainly it often has; if the magnetizer places his hand on a pain
ful spot the pain is relieved. But what is the part played by
suggestion, since we know from Bernheim and other physicians
that certain neuralgic affections, headaches, and rheumatic pains
can be greatly relieved by suggestion alone?
Libeault was able to produce healing effects on children
under three years old; he quotes forty-six cases of treatment of
children under four; which excludes suggestion. Ochorowicz
has told me definitely that he has been able to relieve pain and
reduce morbid action by imposition of hands on children under
two years old. Healers proceed in this manner and perhaps the
curative action is not imaginary.1
All this adds up to very little, strictly speaking to nothing.
There is as yet nothing that clearly shows that a special fluid
is released by an act of will.2
The only demonstration that would tend to prove magnetic
action would be to prove that a magnetizer can put a subject
to sleep from a distance.
Unfortunately, the experiment is not at all easy to carry out,
for we must take account of the extraordinary vigilance dis
played by the subjects who, consciously or unconsciously, gather
the faintest indications and seek with quite disconcerting acute
ness (which is in no way metapsychic) to guess the intentions
of the magnetizer. The slightest noise, the least glance by
persons round them, suffices for them to guess the presence of
the magnetizer or his desires, to which they eagerly conform.
In a celebrated experiment, Du Potet in 1827 succeeded in put
ting Mme. Sanson to sleep without her being aware of his pres
ence, as he states. But is that quite certain? Husson and
Recamier were there; may not their presence have been an
indication to Mme. Sanson?
Many experiments have been made to verify this fluidic action
at a distance. I quote among the latest those by Pierre Janet,
Boirac, J. Ochorowicz, J. Hericourt, Dr. Dusart, and my own,
and I must say none carry conviction.8*
*1 cannot here touch upon the history of curative magnetism which begins
with Paracelsus and Goclenius,De magnetica vulneris curatione extra ullam et
superstitionem et dolorem et retnedii applicationem, Marburg, 1610. Faith
healing, the miracles at Lourdes, stigmata might here be examined ; but the
psychic action of the central nervous system is not within the domain of
metapsychics. It is likely that healing magnetism is not wholly suggestion, but
the part played by suggestion is not yet determined.
extriorisation de la sensibilit. Etude exprimentale el historique,
*L' by
A . de Rochas, i vol., 8vo, Paris, Chacornac, sixth edition, 1909.
Sur quelques phnomnes de somnambulisme, Bull, de
8P. Janet et Gilbert,
la Soc. de psychologie de Paris. Revue philosophique, 1886 (1), xxi,
190-198. Ch. Richet, Un fait de somnambulisme distance, ibid., 199-200.
J. Hricourt, Un cas de somnambulisme distance, ibid., 200-204. A.
Ruault, Le mcanisme de la suggestion mentale hypnotique. Revue philoso
phique, 1886, (2), 691. Boirac (cit par Flammarion),Linconnu et les prob
lmes psychiques, 310. Dusart (cit par Flammarion), ibid., 308.
And yet if, as will be abundantly demonstrated in the sequel,
there really is a special crypthesthetic faculty which reveals facts
that our normal senses cannot supply, it is easy to conceive that
the influence of the magnetizer may be more or less clearly per
ceived by a sensitive subject; so that magnetization from a dis
tance becomes but a mode of cryptesthesia.
Even admitting human effluvia, the emission of a special fluid,
or specific vibrations, there is nothing to show that this is com
parable to a rhabdic forcethat which turns the divining-rod,
a power emanating from things awaking cryptesthesia. The
emanations from things are probably not identical with those
from magnetizers. Will has nothing to say to them since they
proceed from inanimate objects. ^
Distance also counts for nothing. There have been cases of
lucidity at a distance of more than six hundred miles between
agent and percipient, so that exteriorization of sensibility by
spheres surrounding our cutaneous integument to a distance not
exceeding a few yards, is not even a plausible explanation.
Indeed the impression of a form, a name, or an image is some
times so precise that it is not sufficient to speak of an effluvium
that causes sleep. The cryptesthetic cognitions are detailed,
minute, and complete. In other words, it is proved that certain
individuals acquire by cryptesthesia knowledge that their ordi
nary senses do not give them; but that is all that is really V
demonstrated. No one has yet proved that there are human-
effluvia liberated by the will of the magnetizer, which have the
power to induce sleep.
As for the influence of one human thought on another, thought-
transference, mental suggestion, and telepathy do not belong to
hypnotism; they are the fundamental phenomena of subjective
metapsychics, and will be studied in full detail later on. From
this point of view somnambulic sleep at a distance and the action
of magnetic emanations pertain to cryptesthesia. But this latter
is proved whilst the former are not.
(b) The Development of Cryptesthesia by Hypnotism
In certain cases lucidity can be verified quite apart from any
hypnosis or any kind of sleep; and most of the monitions we
shall presently speak of refer to normal individuals. Similarly
certain very remarkable facts of experimental lucidity observed
in spiritist sances have been manifested by mediums that no
one had hypnotized, who were apparently (perhaps only ap
parently) in a quite normal state.
It is therefore evident that ciyptesthesia can exist apart from
the hypnotic state ; but it is not less well established that hypnosis
increases cryptesthesia. Various persons quite incapable of any
transcendental manifestations when their senses are awake, be
come lucid when hypnotized. Instead of supposing the (very
doubtful) existence of an unknown magnetic fluid arousing
cryptesthesia it is better to admit that the hypnotic state facili
tates cryptesthesia because it suppresses or reduces normal per
ceptions. This is a hypothesis, but a likely one.
In the normal state we are conscious of our existence, and
of many sensations that our senses bring to us. The sensations
of sight and hearing continuously reach our consciousness and
keep it aroused. These sensations are so numerous and so
strong that other vague and confused ideas that another mys
terious sense might give us And no place. We are like a person
walking in the sunlight who is unable to see the dim light of the
glow-worm in the hedge that becomes easily visible at night.
This is but an analogy, but one that explains why both hypnosis
and normal sleep, suppressing or reducing normal sensibility,
should favour lucidity.
Under profound hypnosis the subjects are insensitive, and
surgical operations can be performed on them without their
feeling pain. I have often seen a young woman, in deep hyp
notic sleep, making neither movement nor gesture when flies were
walking on her lips and nostrils. Sometimes the loudest noises
are unheard and do not awaken the person. Good subjects when
hypnotized are insensible to ordinary stimulation, and this may
render them more Sensitive to the stimulations of an unknown
kind that awaken cryptesthesia.
Similarly many monitions have been recorded, taking place in
normal sleep. M. Warcollier has drawn up statistics on the
frequency of monitions in sleep or when half awake. The senses
are then benumbed as in hypnotic sleep ; and the unknown vibra
tions, doubtless very feeble, that arouse cryptesthesia can be
more readily perceived. To hear a slight sound, other noises
that mask it must be absent. Hypnosis and sleep bring to con
sciousness the darkness and the silence necessary to the percep
tion of minute forces.
The so-caUed divinations by which somnambules diagnose dis
ease and its treatment find their place in a study of cryptesthesia.
I shall not insist on the therapeutic side; an exact estimate of
its efficacy, even in normal medicine, is such a delicate matter
that it is impossible to say what may be valid in the treatment
advised by somnambules. Moreover, it has been abundantly
proved that suggestion acts with great power on the sick. Every
one knows the stories of miraculous cures at Lourdes, resembling
those that were seen two centuries since at the tomb of Deacon
Paris. Perhaps it would be well to bring some of these authenti
cated cures into the domain of metapsychic science. Without
drawing any conclusions, I will mention three which by the com
plexity of their phenomena touch metapsychics in some measure.
The first case is one very carefully observed by M. Mangin.1
It was a case of paraplegia in Mlle. B., aged twenty-eight;
duration of the disease, twenty-five months; her arms only were
capable of some movement, she could barely turn her head;
there was double curvature of the spine, wheeze and dull spots
on the lungs. Temperature 102.2 in the evening. Three doctors
in succession gave the diagnosis following:
1. Paraplegia; prognosis serious.
2. Pottss disease ; compression of spinal column and paraplegia.
3. Paraplegia, medullary lesion ; prognosis very serious.
When M. Mangin saw her on the 26th of February, Mlle. B.
saw at his side the form of a beautiful woman who told Mlle. B.
that she would get well and that on the 8th of May she would
be able to get up. From the 26th of February to May 8th M.
Mangin magnetized her, and during her magnetic sleep she
always saw the beautiful woman. On the 8th of May she was
completely cured. She got up, put her feet to the ground, and
kissed the face of her imaginary friend, and by the 15th of May
seemed to be completely cured; the thoracic trouble and the
curvatures had disappeared. The cure was maintained ; she
married and has had two children.2
This case is most remarkable ; it is incredible that there should
have been three gross mistakes in the diagnosis and that the
case should have been one of hysteria.
1Devant le mystre de la nvrose. De la gurison de cas rputs incurables,
i2m o,Paris, V uibert, 1920.
*M. Mangin reports a curious instance of premonition made by Mlle. B.
In the two following cases also hysteria is equally insufficient
to account for the facts.
A workman named Derudder had both bones of his leg broken
in February, 1867. He became worse; there was much sup
puration, and no disposition of the bones to unite; the lower
part of the leg could be moved in all directions. Eight years
later, during a visit for prayer at the sacred grotto of Oostaker
near Ghent where there is a grotto similar to that at Lourdes,
Derudder felt himself cured, held himself upright, put his feet
to the ground and could walk, having been on crutches for
eight years.
The case is reported by two doctors and depends on the exacti
tude of their observations.
The second case is equally strange. In 1897 Gargam was seri
ously injured in a railway accident; paraplegia supervened with
muscular atrophy and the beginnings of gangrene. Two medical
certificates put in for the action against the railway company
(Paris-Orlans) stated the case as incurable and likely to become
worse. At Lourdes Gargam was cured almost immediately
when he entered the grotto ; he was able to make some tottering
steps. The next day the suppurating wounds in the feet seemed
cured ; he was able to walk without help, in spite of the withered
muscles. Three weeks later his weight had increased by twenty
pounds, and he could resume his work (A. S. P., December,
1907).
Even if both cases have been correctly reported they do not
prove the existence of a new metapsychic power; they only indi
cate that the central nervous system has an unusual and quite
extraordinary power on organic phenomena.
The question is complicated not only by the difficulty of esti
mating the curative power, but it has been further obscured by
considerations of another kind. The enthusiasm of the crowds
who visit Lourdes today and formerly went to the cemetery of
St. Mdard testifies that religious ideas dominate these miracu
lous cures.1
1Many faith cures are brought forward by Christian Science. This
society was founded about 1866 by Mrs. M ary Glover Eddy (December, 1910).
See Ramacharaka (Yogi), The Science of Psychic Healing, Chicago, Yogi
Publication Society, Masonic Temple, 1909. A dissident sect arose under
Bishop Oliver Sabin, who wrote a number of books that went through many
editions,Chrtstology, Science of Health and Happiness, etc. Washington,
thirty-second edition. But the point of departure of all these books is the
The cures claimed as resulting from advice by somnambulists
constitute a regular traffic, increasing in all countries, though
everywhere repressed by legislation as illegal medical practice.
The misuse of professional somnambulism is sufficient reason
for excluding alleged cures after such advice from the list of
authentic facts. It is, however, difficult to admit that the. in
numerable consultations of somnambulists in all countries could
have grown to such an extent and become so general if there
were not some small amount of medical clairvoyance in their
advice. In default of this they would soon be abandoned. More
over, these persons freely pass remarks on each other, such as
X. has great power of lucidity. Y. used to, but has not now.
2. has it but seldom, but on some days is very lucid. It would
perhaps be unwise to reject with contempt the record of healing
divination by somnambulists.
Still greater reserve should be observed in denying all clair
voyance in diagnosis. Somnambulists seem instinctively dis
posed to speak of the state of health of those round them. Even
when their advice is not asked for they are inclined to say that
such a one who speaks to them or touches them is suffering in
the heart, the head, or the chest. Everything happens as though
they felt the morbid affections of those near them by a kind of
telepathy which is organic rather than psychic. 1
This organic telepathy is clearly manifest in all their words.
Alice, who is neither a somnambulist nor a professional medium,
exclaims, I am stifled; I am distressed; it gives me spasms,
cramps, or a lump in my throat, when a lock of hair from a
sick person is given her. But all this is still too uncertain to
allow of any affirmations with regard to lucidity in this special
work of Mrs. M ary Eddy which in 1898 had gone through one hundred and forty
editions,Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures, Boston, Armstrong,
1898. For a history of the movement see H. W. Dresser, Health and the Inner
Life, New York, Putnam, 1906. For the miracles at Lourdes see Didays
Examen mdical des miracles de Lourdes, Paris, Masson, 1873. Boissarie,
Histoire mdicale de Lourdes, 1858-1891, Paris, 1891. Baugher, Lourdes et
un cas de tuberculose aigu gnralise (A. S. P., 1895, 156-158).
Berteaux, Lourdes et la science. Revue de lHypn. et Psychol. Physiologiques,
2
Paris, 1895, ix, 10-216 and 275-278. F. de Backer, Lourdes et les mdecins,
Paris, Maloine, 1905. E. Artus, Les miracles de Notre-Dame de Lourdes, guri
son de Juliette Fournier,Paris, Palm, 1872. Histoire complte du dfi la libre
pense sur les miracles de Lourdes, Paris, Palm, 1877. Noriagof, Notre-Dame
de Lourdes et la science de Vocculte, Chanuel, Paris, 1898, and above all the
works o f H. Lasserre (one of the first who were cured at Lourdes),Notre-Dame
de Lourdes, Paris, Palm, 1885, and new edition, Paris, Sanard, 2 vols., 1898.
form of cryptesthesia. If it were studied methodically and with
out prejudice, some curious results might appear. In fifty-three
experiments of diagnosis of disease by somnambulists under
taken by me with every care to avoid all suggestion on my own
part and all normal perspicacity by them, I had only very mod
erate results. Some were correct, but not so many as to exclude
chance coincidences. In a case of strong diarrhea Eugnie said,
Inflammation of the intestine. On a child with measles,
Helena said, It is measles, I saw his face all red. The best of
the experiments was number thirteen. Helena said, Severe
pain, choking, pain here (pointing to the epigastric region).
There seems to be a sac that ought to be emptied ; that sac under
my heart gives me great pain. The case was one of tuberculosis,
with an abscess full of pus, at the base of the left lung, accom
panied by suffocation, dyspnea, and esophagitis. In all these
cases the consultation was in the absence of the sick person ; the
investigation was psychometric (which I call pragmatic crypt
esthesia) ; I gave the sensitive some object, a lock of hair, or a
letter from the patient.
These results are imperfect, but in the numerous treatises on
animal magnetism that appeared from 1825 to 1855 there are
many records that should induce students of metapsychics
(among whom there are numerous physicians) to re-open these
experiments without fear of ridicule. The history of somnam
bulism and spiritualism shows how ill-advised official science
has been in rejecting a priori, without examination, facts that
have later on forced this acceptance.
There is a peculiar form of organic cryptesthesia which de
serves attention. It was called atoscopy by the magnetizers
of the first half of the nineteenth century; somnambulists seem
able to see their organs and to give remarkable descriptions of
them. This seems to belong to psychophysiology rather than to
metapsychics.
In a normal state the visceral organs do not awake any precise
sensations in our consciousness. The functions of the heart,
lungs, liver, intestines, and the brain are inappreciable by con
sciousness, though physiology proves that the viscera have sen
sory nerves that convey to the nerve centres some notion of the
state of these organs.
These impressions are indistinct. They certainly reach the
spinal cord and the brain, but they seldom touch the conscious
ness. Only when disordered are we aware of the stomach, the
intestines, or the liver. It is not for want of sensory nerves
that this is so, but because the sensory nerves do not affect the
consciousness. It may therefore be admitted as probable that
in certain special psychophysiological conditions (e.g., hypnosis)
the modified and amplified consciousness may be affected by
visceral sensations.
Although autoscopy was currently observed from the begin
ning of magnetism, it was Fere who first used the word ( ?),
though he applied it to the vision of his double by the patient
who was probably hallucinated.1
This kind of hallucination (external autoscopy), though so
interesting from the medical point of view, has no metapsychic
significance. Some spiritualist theorists have endeavoured to
ascribe to it an importance which it does not seem to me to
possess.
Internal autoscopy, mentioned by Du Potet, was carefully
studied by Dr. Comar2 and, later, by Dr. Sollier, who wrote an
interesting monograph upon it.3
There is no need to examine here the detail in the modalities of
autoscopy, for we are on the borderland between the psychic
and the metapsychic; nor is there any need to imagine some new
faculty of the mind or the nervous system to account for the
representation of the viscera to visual consciousness. All the
same, this leads to a curious inference.
If it is true that some persons, when hypnotized, hysterical,
or otherwise abnormal, have a visual perception of their organs
(and this fact, however unusual, must be considered proven),
it must be admitted that in certain cases the hypnotized or hys
terical patient can be aware of an organic lesion and diagnose
its site by seeing that lesion. In fact magnetized patients often
show a willingness to describe the extent and locality of their
malady and to suggest remedies.
xNote sur les hallucinations autoscopiques ou spculaires, et sur les halluci
nations altruistes (Bull, de la Soc. de Biol, de Paris, 1891, 451).
*Lautoreprsentation de lorganisme chez quelques hystriques, Revue
neurologique, 1901, 491.
sLes phnomnes dautoscopie, Paris, Alcan, 1903. To avoid confusion, a
distinction must be observed between external and internal autoscopy. It
is external when the hallucinated subject sees his double outside himself.
It is internal when the somnambulist perceives his own organs heart, liver,
intestines, etc., and describes them, whether pathologically or not.
It is even possible that the numerous and authenticated cases
of auto-premonition may be due to this internal autoscopy. These
auto-premonitions are not premonitions in the true sense of the
word as employed in this book. Autoscopy enables a somnambulist
to foresee the malady or death just in the same way as an
experienced physician can foresee them.
3. Cryptesthesia under Hypnotism
Experimental cryptesthesia can be studied in hypnotized per
sons and in mediums. The medium, during a sance, is usually
in trance; but this spontaneous trance is singularly allied to the
hypnotic state properly so called, as if the medium were self-
hypnotized, without the aid of a magnetizer.
There is, however, no essential difference. The chief difference
is that the medium thinks himself to be in relations with real
personalities distinct from himselfhis guideswho speak by
his voice or write by his hand. However, with the hypnotized
patient, as with the medium, there are different degrees in the
dulling of the senses and diminution of consciousness.
Nevertheless the consciousness of many mediums seems to
remain intact; they continue to converse with the persons who
may be present while their subconsciousness elaborates other
conversations and other acts manifest by muscular movements
they are aware of but can scarcely control, as in automatic or
planchette writing. I call this semi-somnambulism. Sometimes
the dissociation between the normal conscious personality and the
new personalities that appear is still more complex ; for in some
cases the medium will write coherent phrases answering to a
personality, D., with the right hand ; while with the left, he will
write other coherent phrases from a personality, G. And during
the whole time he appears normal, laughs, talks, sings, and dis
cusses with the various people present in the circle.
Again, this dissociation of personality, whether in somnam
bulism or in semi-somnambulism, is not metapsychical ; it belongs
to psychology. It can be accounted for by a doubling, or more
rarely, by a tripling of the personalitya fact that has often been
verified. We are here considering the manifestation of lucidity
(i.e., of cryptesthesia), rather than these variations in the per
sonality; and the proofs of this astounding cryptesthesia are so
numerous and so certain, that a selection must be made from
among them and only the chief ones quoted.1
(a) Experiments on Hypnotized Subjects
In the early days of animal magnetism the old magnetizers
insisted on the existence of clairvoyance or lucidity. I will cite
a few cases only.2
General Noizet (quoted by Flammarion, loc. cit., 339), states,
in 1842, that a somnambulist told him accurately what he had
done during the day, his acts not being at all usual. He had been
at the Tuileries in the apartments of the Duke de Montpensier,
the kings son; and thence in a carriage with the duke to the
Invalides to study certain models of fortifications. All was very
exactly detailed, but too much at length to be reproduced here.
According to a letter from Dr. Despine8 to M. Charpignon,
Mme. Schmitz being ill, at Geneva, asked Dr. Julliard to write
out an opinion for her. Dr. Julliard, in complete darkness,
placed the paper beneath her feet. She said, My light is there !
and read what Dr. Julliard had written. Charpignon cites other
cases of clairvoyance or transposition of the senses. But the
precautions then taken were not so stringent as they now are,
and doubt is permissible or even obligatory.
It is necessary to be very cautious in drawing conclusions. I
will here recall an instance of cryptesthesia that probably involves
an error; it will serve to indicate the precautions necessary for
a good experiment.
In the presence of M. Legludic, director of the School of Medi
cine at Angers, Dr. Binet Sangl made some experiments on
cryptesthesia. Two subjects, O. and M., were present. M. was
XI may be permitted a certain preference for my own experiments; and
must apologize for the large space here given to them, but some are unpub
lished, and I think, deserve to be remembered.
sIn old journals o f magnetism (German, English, French, and Italian)
numerous cases of lucidity are reported ; but it is not certain that the
blindfolding was such as always to obscure the sight completely. Even when
a wad of cotton-wool was placed on each side of the nose, the wad might
be displaced enough to permit some little vision. However little, it would be
too much. It is probable that the clairvoyance of Pigeaires little girl was
Journal du magntisme animal,
authentic, but the proof is insufficient. See by
J. J. A. Ricard, Paris, Bourgogne & Martinet, 1840, and Toulouse, 1839, vol.
I, p. 624.
Physiologie, mdecine et mtaphysique du magntisme
* . Paris, J.Baillire,
1848, 114.
put to sleep facing the wall, and her eyes bandaged. Dr. Legludic
then opened a book at random and underlined the word vulture.
Without saying anything Dr. Binet Sangl drew the head of a
vulture, and M. said, It is a curious bird, it has no wings, it is
a vulture. In another experiment, again opening the book at
random, M. J. underlined slug. M. said, It is a slug. In
a still more remarkable experiment M. J. underlined the verse,
Souffle bise, tombe flots, pluie! O, said S .. .S S .. .S ..
and at last, Souffle bise.. .
Finally in the same book, opened as before at random, M. J.
underlined, Le Dieu ne viendra pas. LEglise est renverse.
M. then said, Le Dieu ne viendra pas. 1
This experiment would be decisive if there were not possible
or probable complicity between O. and M., both of whom were
present. Neither can the experiments with the Misses Creery
be admitted as valid: wilful or unconscious complicity must al
ways be allowed for in such experiments on cryptesthesia.
William Gregory,l2 professor of chemistry at the University
of Edinburgh, verified that Major Buckley was able to develop
lucidity in several hypnotizable subjects sufficiently to enable them
to read correctly mottoes, letters, addresses, and postmarks, en
closed in envelopes or in shut boxes of wood or cardboard. In
one case Sir T. Wiltshire had written concert intending to
write correct. The seer read it as concert. Sir T. Wilt
shire said this was an error, but on opening the box the word
was seen to be concert. The statistics given by Major Buckley
would be decisive if there were no possibility of error in the
methods employed. Mottoes in 4,680 nut-shells, totalling about
36,000 words, were read.
Herbert Mayo, an eminent English doctor and physiologist,
sent to an American friend in Paris a lock of hair from one of
his patients, Colonel C. A somnambulist in Paris stated that
C. was suffering from partial paralysis of the hips and legs
and was in the habit of using a surgical instrument for another
ailment.
If I cite this case of lucidity, it is not that it is more remarkable
than many others, but because it is attested by an experienced
lExpr. sur la transmission directe de la pense, A. S. P 190** 131-
143.
2Letters to a candid inquirer on animal magnetism (1851) cit par E.
Boirac, in A. S. P., 1893, iii, 242.
physiologist, Dr. Mayo, and convinced him that lucidity is a
fact.1
Dr. Dufay of Blois had some good examples of cryptesthesia
with a non-professional somnambulist, named Marie.2
He received one morning a letter from an officer friend who
was laid up in his tent from dysentery. He enclosed the letter
in two blank envelopes and put it, the same evening, into the
hands of Marie. She said that it concerned a soldier suffering
from dysentery; and going to find him, she imagined herself
going on board ship, was sea-sick, saw some women in white
garments, with beards (Arabs, no doubt). She saw the officer,
very thin and pale, on a bed made of three planks on stumps
above the moist sand.
The other instance reported by Dr. Dufay is yet more remark
able: A prisoner in Blois jail had just committed suicide by
strangling himself with his necktie. Dr. Dufay cut off a piece
of this necktie, put it in several folds of paper, and gave it to
Marie. She declared that it was something that had killed a
man, a cordno, a cravat; it belongs to a prisoner who hanged
himself because he had assassinated a man. She said that he
had killed his victim with a hatchet, and indicated the place where
the hatchet had been thrown away. The hatchet was found in
the place described.
Bozzano (A. S. P., 1910, 120), quotes Dr. Vidigal of Sao
Paulo, Brazil, who brought to his house a young servant aged
twelve, who had just arrived as an emigrant from Spain. The
evening of her arrival she was put to sleep by a friend of Dr.
Vidigal and saw an old woman whose description tallied with
Dr. VidigaFs mother, three months dead. The girl added that
in this womans room there was a silk dress and in a pocket sewn
into it, seventy-five milreis. On entering this room, which no
one had entered for a long while, the silk dress and the seventy-
five milreis were found. It is to be noted that Dr. Vidigal had
barely been able to meet the expenses of his mothers funeral.
In 1837, at New York, Loraine Brackett of Dudley, a young
woman, who was completely blinded by an injury, when hypno
tized made mental journeys that showed her lucidity. She was
able to describe exactly a picture seen by Mr. Stone in another
town representing three Indians round an enormous tree-trunk
^Quoted by Boirac, La MStagnomie (A . 5*. P., November, 1916, 159-162).
*C. Wallace,loc. cit., tr. fr., 92.
with hieroglyphs upon it. Loraine said : Three Indians sitting in
a hollow tree which looks as if it had been dug out on purpose ; and
the tree filled with marks. Only Mr. Stone knew this picture.1
Mrs. E. H. Sidgwick mentions several cases of magnetic lu
cidity given by Jane (A. S. P., 1891, i, 280). They are very
interesting, and the article by Mrs. Sidgwick may be referred
to for the full detail. Dr. F. who magnetized Jane warned one
of his patients, Mr. Eglinton, that he would ask Jane what Mr.
E. was doing between eight and ten oclock that evening. Jane
said, I see a very fat man with a wooden leg, he has no brain.
He is called Eglinton. He is sitting before a table where there
is brandy, but he is not drinking. A very curious result: for
Mr. E. who is very thin, had made a corpulent dummy and
placed it before a table with a bottle of brandy.
Alexis, in a series of fourteen sances at Brighton, played at
cards, naming the cards of his opponents as well as his own,
though his eyes were blindfolded, gave lines out of a closed book,
and described the contents of shut boxes.
Robert Houdin, the celebrated conjurer, had an interview with
Alexis. Houdin drew a book from his pocket, and, opening it,
required Alexis to read a line eight pages back at a certain level,
which he marked by inserting a pin. This was done and Houdin
found the feat stupefying. He signed the declaration, I affirm
that the above facts are scrupulously accurate.
Houdin, after verifying that the phenomena of clairvoyance
displayed by Alexis could not be imitated by any conjurer, says
that Dr. Chomel, having shown Alexis a certain medal, Alexis
told him, That medal was given to you under peculiar circum
stances. You were then a student in a garret at Lyons. A
workman whom you had done a service offered you the medal
which he had found in some ruins. This was exactly true
(Delanne, Recheches sur la mdiumnit, 1902, 236).
Alexis gave President Sguier a proof of lucidity (not telep
athy) of a very curious kind. Alexis, mentally travelling to the
Presidents room, saw a handbell on the table. No, said M.
Sguier, there is no handbell. But on returning home that
afternoon he found that a handbell had been placed on his table.
The President had not given his name (Delaage, Les mystres
du magntisms).
Animal magnetism. Letter of Mr. Stone to Dr. Bighorn, P. A. S. P. R.,
1907, xo6.
Many other proofs of the extraordinary powers of lucidity
possessed by Alexis are reported by Flammarion; and Dr. Ber
trand, the magnetizers Pttin and Lafontaine, and especially
Dr. Frapart have noted so many varied and striking instances
that it is impossible to doubt the wonderful metapsychic faculties
of Alexis Didier.
Robert Houdin, who was certainly one of the most expert
conjurers of any day, verified and attested the clairvoyance of
Alexis, who not only told the cards that Houdin held in his
hand, but those he was about to draw from a new pack.1
Alphonse Karr and Victor Hugo obtained decisive proofs of
cryptesthesia with Alexis, hypnotized by Marillat. The testimony
of Alphonse Karr and Victor Hugo would be insufficient if it
referred only to a game at cards played with Alexis, for clever
prestidigitation can do anything of the kind, but there is much
more; Alexis told Alphonse Karr that he (Karr) had placed a
branch of white azalea in an empty bottle before leaving his
house ; which was the fact. Victor Hugo had prepared a packet
tied up with string in which he had written the word politique ;
this was read by Alexis. Alexandre Dumas also tells of a me
morable sance, but his testimony is less precise.
Alexis,2 when M. Vivant came to consult him, said that he
had come concerning some lost objectfour banknotes of one
thousand francswhich was correct, and he added, Do not
complain to the police, no one has stolen them, they have fallen
behind a drawer in your desk. M. Vivant, on returning home,
found them there.
I cannot at all understand why Hyslop declines to admit Alexis
cryptesthesia since he attests such complete and perfect crypt
esthesia in Mrs. Piper (Enigmas of Psychical Research, Boston,
1906, 274). M. Osty has given much evidence of the con
ditions of hypnosis and lucidity of Mme. M. (Lucidit et intuition,
Etude exprimentale, Paris, Alcan) ; he is also about to publish a
work in which the fine cases of lucidity by Mme. M. will be
completely described. I know of some that are striking. But
in the book already published representing so much patient work,
Confidences dun prestidigitateur, une vie dartiste, P a ris, lib r. N o u v e lle,
1859, 2 v o ls . I f th e jo u r n a ls o f th e tim e a r e in a c ce ssib le, th e stu d y b y C a m ille
La mort et son mystre,
F lam m a rio n , 1920, i, 209-233, m a y b e re a d w ith profit.
sCited by Delaage, Le sommeil magntique. A fter Bozzano, Dei fenomeni
di telestesia, Luce e Ombra, 1920, x x , 124.
there is not a single case that can be quoted as evidence of lucidity.
It is probable, according to what he says, that Mme. M. Freya
and M. Flourire gave him many, but we have to take his word
for them. However, on p. 304, he cites a case that seems positive,
but omits to tell us how far the statements of the sensitive were
correct.
Dr. Souza Cota of Lisbon, in a sance at which Dr. O., also
of Lisbon, was present, asked the entranced medium to visit
Dr. O.s house. The medium said that he (or she) saw two
ladies, one of whom was a girl, reading a bookLe Diable la
cour. He described the room, a dining-room containing two
vases, which he described, and a piano (A . S. P., 1905, xv,
707).
M. Melvil Roux, an architect, relates that he had the oppor
tunity of seeing a woman of about sixty, a servant, magnetized
by M. Salles, a bookseller of Nmes. Three years before M.
Roux had been charged with some repairs to the funeral crypt
of the college at Alais. The subject described this crypt, and
looked in, despite her fear; she said at once, There is snow
(it was chalk) and then, that there were some sacerdotal vest
ments. She also read some words (Flammarion, loc. cit., 329).
Dariex cites the lucidity of a woman named Marie. The
magnetizer gave her various orders which were carried out. One
day a watch was hidden in a bookcase. She went to the book
case, found the watch and returned, showing her pleasure. The
order had been given mentally. Another time, also in obedience
to a mental order, she fetched a glass, and filled it with water,
adding a few drops of eau-de-Cologne..
In 1850 eleven fishing boats left Peterhead for whaling; a
person in the magnetic sleep said that the first boat back would
be the Hamilton Ross, and that the second mate, Mr. Cardno,
had lost some fingers by an accident; both of which statements
proved correct (A. S. P., 1891, i, 270). One of my relatives,
a distinguished magistrate, told me that in his youth he had
heard the old nurse of one of his friends, in a somnambulic
state, announce that the brother of that friend, an officer of engi
neers, then before Sebastopol, had been seriously wounded in the
right arm; it was so.
The wife of a major in the artillery at Colaba, two miles from
Bombay, magnetized a Creole girlRuthwho saw in a glass of
water, and gave many proofs of lucidity. Before a great polo
tournament Ruth described one of the officers who would take

part in it, and finally named Captain X., saying that he would
be bitten on the leg by a horse; which came to pass. Another
time, before the judge of a neighbouring district, Ruth described
his room, the coffer that was in it, and said that certain papers
had been stolen by a person whom she described, whom the
judge recognized, and who was afterwards convicted.
Dr. Ferroul, the mayor of Narbonne and deputy for the Aube,
made some noteworthy experiments on the lucidity of Anna B.,
a young woman whom he put into the somnambulic state. An
amusing incident is related by him. Being editor of the Rpub
lique Sociale, a socialist paper of Narbonne, and having a crow
to pluck with the prefect of the Aude, he obtained through Anna
some confidential details which he published in his paper. The
prefect, supposing the revelations to have been made by two
agents of the secret police, dismissed them. They were proved
innocent. It was solely by the lucidity of Anna that the knowl
edge of the facts had come to Dr. Ferroul.
Some further interesting experiments were made with Anna,
which at first seemed to establish the fact of her vision through
opaque paper. A line was written, Your party is certainly
killing itself by subservience. This was folded, put into an outer
green envelope, enclosing another envelope, and the whole
wrapped in two pieces of squared paper. The writing was read
by Anna. Grasset, the eminent professor of the Medical Faculty
of Montpellier, subsequently gave Dr. Ferroul another opaque
envelope containing two verses that were immediately read by
Anna (A . S. P., 1896, vi, 145).
This experiment, which appeared decisive to Grasset, was fol
lowed by a failure. A commission was named, and no result
secured. It is well known that for various reasons scientific
commissions rarely reach a definite conclusion, but nevertheless
there is reason to doubt the experiments of Dr. Ferroul with
Anna.
Covers may be still more opaque without intercepting vision.
My learned friend, Abelous, professor of physiology in the Fac
ulty of Montpellier, placed a white envelope sealed with a red seal
and two unexposed photographic plates in a box of thick wood.
By the pressure of the seal the wax had extended into blisters
round the impression. A young sensitive, hypnotized by Dr.
Marqus, saw something round, red, which seems to have rays
round it. In another box Abelous had placed a casket contain
ing a medal of Professor Grasset. The seer said, It is a medal
representing a man with a beard and tangled hair. This was
characteristic of Grassets appearance. This is more probably
due to a new and unknown faculty than to hyperacuity of retinal
vision.1
The Rev. Mr. Lefroy, who disbelieved in lucidity, made an
experiment with Miss X. at Zermatt. He wrote the word Heau-
tontimoroumenos on a piece of paper that Miss X. could not
see. She said, It is a very long word, there are two ms, and
it begins with an H. He then tried easier words; he wrote
Ink, and Miss X. said, Ink. He wrote Toy, and Miss X. said
Yot (Phantasms of the Living, 1885, ii, 655).
Dr. Terrien, president of the Society of Medicine, at Nantes,
went to visit a patient at Chauche, about five miles from the
town where he lived. At Chauche he was detained by various
cases, among them that of a child that had hurt its knee by a
fall from a ladder. This was related to Mme. Terrien by a
young sewing maid working with her, who had occasional fits
of somnambulism.2
Mr. Adamson, who occupied a high position in the administra
tion of South Australia, having lost a pencil-case that he greatly
valued, asked a young girl presumed to be clairvoyant, who told
him that it had been found on the high-road, and placed in a box.
She described the house and the appearance of the finder. It
was returned to the owner next day; all the details related
being found perfectly correct.
Dr. Osty has studied in full detail one of the best cases
of cryptesthesia on record. For various reasons the names
cannot be given; I therefore use pseudonyms, and change dates
and places.
On the 23d of September, 1919, M. Nicholas Cordier, a mu
nicipal councillor, a well-to-do bachelor, and given to botanical
research, went for a botanical excursion in the Vosges Moun
tains. He failed to return in the evening. His mother and the
relations who lived with him became anxious, and during the
xSur une observation de vision extrd-sensorielle, Mlanges biologiques pour
le jubil de Ch. Richet, P a r is , A lc a n , 19 13 . PP* *- 5*
aEssai dinterprtation dun cas curieux de vision et daudition grande dis
tance chez une hystrique de quatorze ans durant ltat de somnambulisme
(A. S. P., Ju ly , 19 14 , x x iv , 198-203).
night of the 23d-24th they sought to discover where he had
gone. He did not reappear on the following morning, and all
they could learn was that two wayfarers had seen him at three
oclock in a precipitous and somewhat dangerous part of the
mountains. An active search was set on foot; not only the police,
but soldiers from a regiment near explored the district without
result. The local papers and also those of Paris mentioned the
disappearance of M. Cordier, and the family offered a reward
of 5,000 francs for the discovery of the body. Assiduous and
persistent search was made from the 23d of September to the
7th of October. On that day the brother of M. Cordier wrote
to Dr. Osty, asking him to submit the case to some somnam
bulist. Dr. Osty knew only by telegram the conditions under
which M. Cordier had disappeared. The clothes usually worn
by M. Cordier were sent him, and of these he took only a stock
ing-suspender, and without giving the least indication of the
person and his disappearance, placed it in the hands of Mme. M.,
she being in (magnetic) sleep. Mme. M. said at once that
this person, whom she described fairly correctly, had been in
the mountains, that he had in his hand some tufts of grass, that
he had fallen into a ravine that she described, mentioning a lake
and giving some other indications.
Further and more precise indications were given on the 8th,
and on the 9th, thanks to the descriptions given Dy Mme. M.
to Dr. Osty, and sent by him to M. Cordiers brother, the body
of M. Nicholas Cordier was found. Other very precise details
were given that I cannot mention here. It is sufficient to say
that it is absolutely impossible that Mme. M. should have become
aware by any normal means: (1) that M. Cordier was in ques
tion; (2) that he had been in the mountains, and (3) of the
exact place in which he had fallen.
The reward of 5,000 francs was not considered due, since the
actual finding of the body was by the family. I do not know
if Mme. M., who would seem to have had some right to it,
received the money.
M. Suhr quotes the case of a Mr. Bail, magnetized by Hansen,
a barrister of Copenhagen, who travelled (in imagination) to
find the mother of M. Suhr at Roeskilde. Bail saw her slightly
indisposed in bed, in a street named Skromerstrade. M. Suhr
considered this a double error, but it was proved that his mother,
against all anticipation, was actually ill in the street designated.
Bail had never been to Roeskilde. Two other instances of
clairvoyance were given by M. Bail (P. S. P. R., 1892, vii, 366).
A fine example of somnambulic cryptesthesia is reported to me
by Mme. D., a lady of high character and great intelligence.
For the first time in her life, she went with her daughter, Mme.
R., to consult a somnambulist (who did not know her name),
on a theft made from her. The somnambulist said to her: The
person who entered your house used the name of a dead man;
and what a man!a true hero, extraordinarily brave, who did
more than his duty; he sacrificed himself for another. This
was perfectly correct, far beyond any chance: the son of Mme.
D. had been mortally wounded at the Bois de Caillette in going,
under a fierce bombardment, to the help of one of his wounded
men. In 1919, on the anniversary of this deed, a certain person
calling himself the friend of Marcel D., Mme. D.s son, had
introduced himself, and while waiting for the lady had robbed
her of a picture, a Corot, which she valued highly. Curiously
enough the thief had given his real name, and brought back the
stolen picture on the following day.
During incidents of the major spontaneous hypnotism de
scribed by Charcot as showing the advent of an attack of hys
teria, cryptesthesia and lucidity sometimes occur. The visions
alleged in the lives of saints are mostly connected with their
times of crisis or ecstasy whether the form these take is cata
lepsy, lethargy, or convulsions. The cases of demoniacs who
speak in unknown tongues (?) and divine the thoughts of their
interlocutors (?) would give us many instances; but the credulity
of the witnesses deprives them of any scientific value.
In this connection a more recent observation is furnished by
Dr. Fanton (A . S. P., December, 1910). While at Marseilles, he
received a letter from Mr. X., announcing his return to Geneva,
where he lived. At the same time Dr. Fanton was called in by
Mme. X., living at Marseilles, for a violent hystero-cataleptic at
tack. As soon as he entered Mme. X. said, You were eating
an omelet, and you said Not at home !* which was true. She
added, My husband has sent you a telegram saying he is coming,
hut he will not arrive, for he has gone to sleep in the train.*
Mme. X., however, could not have known anything (normally)
about the omelet, nor the telegram, nor the singular fact (a premo
nition) that Mr. X. would be asleep in the train at Culoz.
I have reported a remarkable instance of lucidity in my own
experience that occurred long ago and impressed me very strongly
at the time. While a young student at the Htel-Dieu Hospital
I was in the habit of magnetizing a convalescent girl who was
still an inmate. One day I took with me an American fellow-
student who had never before been to the hospital, and I said
to T., in her sleep, Do you know my friends name ? She began
to laugh. Then I said, Look, what is the first letter f his
name ? She said, There are five letters ; the first is H, then E,
I do not see the third, the fourth is R, and the fifth is N. My
friends name was Hearn (Phant. of the Living, 1886, ii, 665).
I made experiments in sending some hypnotized subjects travel
ling as the old magnetizers did, and had some astonishing
successes, especially with Alice.
She went to visit the house of a Mr. C. at Mans, a house not
known to me, but very well known to Mr. P. Renouard, then pres
ent. She saw a walled garden and a swing (correct, but unknown
to Mr. Renouard, for the swing had been placed there since he
was last at Mans). She saw a clock with pillars which she de
scribed closely enough for me to make the rough sketch annexed,
which may be compared with Fig. 3 of the actual clock in Mr.
C.s drawing-room.
On another day Alice described the house of Dr. P. Rondeau,
then present. Draperies over the mantelpiece, a clock, and,
leaning on the wood, someone looking at the clock whose shoulder
is visible. A large painting of a landscape; between the town
and the sea something pointed, a tower, or the roof of a
church. . . In fact, in M. Rondeaus country house which
Alice could never have seen, there is a statue of Penelope whose
shoulder is prominent, looking at the clock towards which her
head is turned. The picture is a copy of one by Canaletti and
represents Venice, the canal in the foreground, and behind it
the church of San Giorgio Maggiore.
Some instances of lucidity came to me from Lonie B., though
these were very few in the course of a large number of experi
ments.
One day Pierre Janet set her travelling. In her hypnotic
sleep she went to Paris to see me and M. Gibert who had left
for Paris. On a sudden she said, It is burning. P. Janet
tried to calm her, she returned to sleep, but soon woke again,
saying, But, M. Janet, I assure you that it is burning.
In fact my laboratory in the Rue Vauquelin caught fire at six
that morning, November 15th, and was burnt out.1
F ig . 2. R ough sk e tc h m ad e fr o m th e d e s c rip tio n b y A lic e .
Leonie gave me one day a splendid example of lucidity, though

it was accidental rather than experimental, and the details referred
F ig . 3. T h e c lo c k in M r. C .s h o u se a s sk e tc h e d b y P . R e n o u a rd .
xT h e r e w e re tw o p re m o n itio n s ( o r m o n itio n s, f o r th e h o u r a t w h ic h the

d rea m s to o k p la ce is n o t r e c o rd e d ). T h a t n ig h t, b e tw e e n th e 1 4 th -!5 th of
N o ve m b er, tw o o f m y m o st in tim a te frie n d s , M . F e r r a r i a n d J. Hericourt,
both d ream ed, in d e p en d en tly o f e a c h o th e r, o f flam e s a n d fire .
to quite unimportant facts. Experimenting with her one even
ing, without success, with cards and numbers, I spoke to her of
my friend J. P. Langlois and said, What has happened to him ?
She at once said somewhat disrespectfully, He has burnt his paw.
Why is he not more careful in pouring out? Pouring out
what? A red liquor in a little bottle . . . hi s skin has
blistered at once. Nothing could have been more correct. Two
hours before, J. P. Langlois, who was my chief laboratory as
sistant, in preparing some hypobromide of soda had poured out
the bromine (the red liquor), too fast and some had gone on
his hand and arm, making an extensive blister. Leonie could
not have gone to the laboratory and no one had come from it
to my house. I was then alone in Paris and had said nothing
to any one about the accident that had happened two hours
previously.
Dr. Backmann, of Kalmar, Sweden, observed a young girl,
Alma L., who gave him many instances of lucidity in hypnotic
sleep. One seems to indicate something more than lucidity. She
was asked to go to the director-general of the pilot service at
Stockholm, where she had never been. She saw the director
sitting at his table, and described the room exactly. The order
was then given her to take the bunch of keys that she had seen
on the table and to place her hand on his shoulder to draw his
attention. Alma declared that the director noticed her. After
wards, the director, who had not the least suspicion that any
experiment was being tried upon him, said that he was conscious
of a strange feeling on the day and hour in question. He was
busy at his table, when, without any kind of reason, his eyes
fell on the bunch of keys near him on the table, which he was
not accustomed to put there. He thought he saw a womans form.
Thinking it to be the housemaid, he took no notice. But, on
the fact being repeated, he called (to her) and got up to see what
was the matter. Neither the servant nor any other had been in
his room. He heard no noise nor perceived any movement of
the keys (A. S. P., 1892, ii, 68).
A man having been arrested for murder, one of Dr. Back-
manns subjects, Agda Olsen, described very exactly the house
where the crime had been committed, and though she had never
seen the murderer, said that he had a cicatrice on his right hand.
The constable of Kalmar, Ljung, who had examined the accused,
had not observed the cicatrice, and only after Dr. Backmann had
told him did he verify the fact, resulting from an old abscess.
Alma having given notable proofs of lucidity I resolved to go
to Kalmar with F. and A. Myers to make some experiments with
her. The following is F. Myers account; his acuteness and
insight are well known (Notes on a visit to Kalmar, A. S. P.,
1892, ii, 160) :
M. Richet gave me a letter that he had just received of which
I knew nothing, and went out of the room where Alma (hyp
notized) was interrogated by Dr. Backmann. Alma said, The
writer of this letter expresses a desire. It concerns something
in metal; the thing can open and shut. There is some question
of time and opportunity. It is some scientific matter that will
be proved.* This was a letter from M. Tatin with whom I was
then (April, 1891) experimenting on aroplanes. The letter
said, We tried the little machine, it kept turning to the same
side. We had a satisfactory trial ; the blades worked perfectly.
It goes without saying that I had never spoken of my attempts
in aviation which (in 1871) I kept very secret.
Almas answer is only a partial success, but it would be difficult
to see in it mere coincidence. Alma, however, by reason of our
presence was emotionally excited ; when alone with Dr. Backmann
she was perhaps more lucid. She once read the first letter of
a word written by Dr. Kjelmann in the next room ; another time,
the word written being Land, she said, The first letter is M,
the second A, the third R or N, and the word suggests the idea
of springtime. This counts for very little, but in studying the
fine examples of cryptesthesia by Mrs. Piper, it will be obvious
that lucidity can carry much farther.
The proofs of lucidity given by reproduction or description of
drawings enclosed in opaque envelopes are of profound interest;
they have often led to remarkable results. But in such experi
ments more perhaps than in any others it is necessary to guard
against two possible causes of error :
A. Unconscious assistance given to the lucid subject.
B. The possibility of chance coincidence.
A. When the hidden drawing is known, no sign whatever of
approval or impatience must be given. This is very difficult.
When the subject feels about, questions, and hesitates painfully
for an hour, for two hours, or sometimes longer, one is tempted
out of sheer pity to give some help in order that the experiment
may succeed. It is, however, necessary to maintain rigid silence
and impassiveness. It is difficult to be absolutely mute and im
mobile. A disapproving silence may be maintained when the
subject is off the track, or he may be encouraged to go on when
he is not. I speak from long experience in saying that much
care is needed to reach the glacial impassiveness that is required;
thinking that those less habituated to experiment than myself
may not all of them and always be able to maintain the impartial
silence that is so necessary.
The best way to obtain unexceptionable results in experiments
on lucidity is that the contents of the envelope should be un
known. Mental transmission is thus excluded and non-telepathic
cryptesthesia is then the only explanation of a successful experi
ment. But as I have already said, mental transmission is only
a particular case of lucidity and if success is more frequent with
it than without it, that will often be because, knowing the answer
to be given, the experimenter works less strictly.
B. Even when there is perfect agreement between the original
and the reproduction the element of chance coincidence is not
to be neglected.
For instance: I tried about 180 drawings on different persons
with whom I was experimenting, and had in all about 20 successes,
some of which were very striking.1 Then, following out a series
of mathematical combinations, I carried out 5,408 trials, in
which chance alone was responsible for the association of any
two drawings. The number of successes was 192, among which
10 were remarkable for identity between original and reproduc
tion. Chance would give 3.5 successes per cent.; lucidity gave
12 per cent. The difference is noteworthy, but smaller than it
would have appeared d priori.
It should also be observed that the calculus of probabilities is
difficult to apply to the more or less exact reproduction of a
drawing, for the criteria to be used must be decidedly arbitrary,
whereas with cards or numbers, probabilities are easily estimated.
I cannot, of course, reproduce here all the drawings, though
that is almost necessary to a just appreciation of how difficult it is
to estimate the element of chance in successes.
Alice, who is not a professional medium and has never been*
*1 do not give here the details of these, which will be found in the article
published in the P. S. P. R.,
1888, xii, 18-168. Relation de diverses expriences
sur la transmission mentale, la lucidit, et autres phnomnes non explicables
par les donnes scientifiques actuelles.
hypnotized except by myself, has given me very good examples
of lucidity.
One day at the house of M. Hricourt, having made the sketch
of a photograph frame chosen by him (shown in Fig. 4), to
be submitted to Alice by me she said : It is a locket ( mdaillon),
an oval in a frame, the head of
a man. He has braid on his
chest, it is high-necked; it can
be closed. There are six or seven
lines of braid. He is not bare
headed, but wears a military cap
which has three stripes. There
are four stripes on the lower part
of the sleeve, round it. It is the
picture of some one who is thin,
perhaps seated. I recognize him,
but I cannot say who he is.
F ig . 4.
Representing the sketch of the frame containing the second (Fig. 5).
Fig. 4 was placed in a thick sealed envelope. A lice saw Fig. 5, though
this was not in the envelope, but was in the frame itself at M. Hericourts
house. There were therefore two distinct phases in the cryptesthesia.
The description accords with the photograph of which only

the frame had been sketched and placed in the sealed envelope
submitted to Alice. This photograph which Hericourt had under
his eyes when sketching the frame is of himself in uniform.
Alice had never seen him in this attire, and did not know he
had been an officer. If an inference can be drawn it would favour
telepathy rather than lucidity. Alice seeing the former, thought
in Hricourts mind, but not the sketch in the envelope.
My eminent friend, Th. Ribot, editor of the Revue Philoso
phique, was present at another experiment with Alice. He
brought a photograph in a thick envelope. I told Alice that it
was the photograph of
a town. She said, It
is not a street only; it
is a general view of a
town, a certain house is
the most prominent ob
ject. It was this house
t h a t t h e y wanted to
take more than the
rest; it dominates the
F ig . 6. F ig . 7.
Sketch by Ferrari (Fig. 6) and reproduction by Alice (Fig. 7)-
rest. To get to the house one has to go upwards and turn round
to the left. The photograph (of Toledo) agrees closely with
the description.
The sketch above (Fig. 6) was given me by H. Ferrari who
was not present. I did not know what was in the envelope,
which was taken at random from among twenty others. The
experiment is faultless and the reproduction very good (Fig. 7).
Comment is needless, except that the conditions being unexcep
tionable the result must be due to cryptesthesia or to chance.
M. Hanriot handed me a lightly made sketch on triple folded
paper in a closed envelope. I was absolutely ignorant of the
nature of the drawing. Alice gave a confused description, but
her words aroused the idea of a serpent. She said, Interlaced
curves along a stem, like an anchor. I then thought of the
imprint on the books published by dA. A. Renouard, my great
grandfather, and drew it. Hanriots sketch was of a serpent.
F ig . 8.
Drawing (a bunch of grapes) placed in an opaque envelope, the contents of
which I am ignorant of.
Drawing made by Alice. She made five drawings in succession (which I do
not give here,brevitatis causa),
each approaching nearer the final result.
On January 24, 1888, I gave Alice three sketches unseen by

myself :
(A) A sword; she drew two fencing foils, together.
(B) A drum; she said, A hat.
(C) A hat; she did not reply.
Fig. 8 was presented to Alice in a thick envelope (contents
unknown to me). She made five attempts, getting a little nearer
each time, the last being Fig. 9.
Eugnie, a professional somnambulist who sometimes gave
good instances of lucidity, said of another drawing, It is a
EX PR IM EN TA L CRYPTESTHESA 133
horses head, the small head of a sheep or an ox. The original
was the head of a gazelle in outline.1
Further details would take up more space than this aspect of
metapsychic phenomena warrants.
T hese experiments with Eugnie and Alice are of special in
terest, for in them there is no question of telepathy or mental
transm ission ; it is a matter of cryptesthesia. Even if one could
im agine that the luminous rays could filter through opaque bodies,
Last drawing given by Alice for the bunch of grapes.
such retin a l hyperesth esia would be a modality of cryptesthesia.

I will close this part of the subject with six examples:
S k e tc h in clo sed envelope. Description.
A ta b le . A n oval and a stick (Eugnie).
A n an ch or. A sw ord with cross handle (Eugnie).
A b o ttle , A bird with head and neck (Eugnie).
n a v e o f hearts, A M altese cross (Alice).
sw o rd . Foils (A lice).
h a t a n d drum . A hat (A lice).
1E xperim ents in Thought Transference; P. S. P. R., r 888, xii, - .
169 216
Messrs. Sehmoll and Mabire made one hundred and twenty-
one trials with drawings, apparently under less exacting condi
tions, since the guesser was surrounded by persons who all knew
the design to be reproduced by mental vision. Moreover, the
sketch was not in a closed envelope, the paper being open, though
the back of the subject was turned to it and the eyes closed.
The results were occasionally very good; there were six very
striking successes in the one hundred and twenty-one trials. This
is beyond the limits of chance, though not very greatly.
(b) Conclusions
A close study of these instances of cryptesthesia, of which I
could quote many more, no doubt will discover some that are
not very conclusive. Some may be due to chance, and others
to defective experiment; but there are so many that have been
so carefully observed and with such scrupulous exactitude that
doubt is impossible.
Looking at the whole evidence, no one can imagine a great
error lasting through a whole century, accepted by distinguished
scientific men, admitted by sceptics, and passing a multitude of
tests. Chances of 1:1000 or 1 :10,000 do not continually recur
in experimental work; and we are working against far more
remote probabilities. The event against which there are real odds
of 1 :1000 does not come to pass.
It has not been sufficiently considered that in daily life im
probable events rarely happen. We evolve in a connected series
of small and very likely events. The visits I receive, the letters
I write, the persons I meet, and the news given to me are very
rarely improbable. Probable and likely events rule our lives.
It is a simple truism to say so, nevertheless it must be said.
An inference must be drawn from thiswe do not foresee
the unlikely. Therefore when some unlikely event is indicated
by monitory or premonitory cryptesthesia there must be a cause
for it, and this cause is some unknown vibration received
subconsciously.
To take a concrete instance among hundreds, Mr. Fraser
Harris sees mentally his wife talking to a beggar who is hold
ing a broom. This is an unlikely event of which he would not
have thought unless something had conveyed this image to his
brain. It is absurd to refer it to chance. The case is analogous
to a cord stretched across a road. If a bicyclist falls at that
place no one would say that the fall was due to chance; it would,
of course, be ascribed to the cord. There are no uncaused effects.
When an unlikely event is foretold and duly comes to pass, that
can only be due to cryptesthesia, for in the course of our lives,
with but few exceptions, we do not foresee the improbable, and
the improbable does not happen.
If I make an experiment on the atomic weight of silver and
get 108.4 I do not attribute the result to chance. Why should
I do so when, on asking Stella for the name of Mr. N.s son, she
answers, Jean ?
Certainly it might be preferable to operate with cards and
numbers only instead of drawings, travels, names, and sundry
events, inasmuch as the former allow of exact calculation of
probabilities; but we must take account of the fact that som
nambulists do not readily lend themselves to this kind of experi
ment. M. Osty says that to do this is to require from lucidity
what it cannot give.
When I try to get correct guesses of cards or numbers from
Lonie I get only lamentable failures, perhaps because her will
masks the indications of her cryptesthesia; whilst a fire in my
laboratory or the accident to M. Langlois causes her to relate
the fact very accurately (though I did not ask for either), with
a precision whose probability is extremely small and cannot be
expressed in figures.
The facts of lucidity are usually as unpredictable as the fall
of an aerolite. With few exceptions one cannot count on suc
cess in a given experiment any more than one can foresee the
fall of a meteor. Actual facts inaccessible to our normal senses
are indicated, but unfortunately they are often not exact answers
to exact questions. Somnambules and mediums do not give pre
cise answers, though they state kindred facts that they could
not have known by their normal senses.
It may be regrettable that one cannot use a hypnotized subject
whose moral sensitiveness is very acute, like a calculating ma
chine. To set them travelling interests them much more than
the perception of an eight of spades. They are more interested
in seeing a burning house, or a boat coming in, than in counting
the number of black dots on a card. It may be unfortunate, but
one must accept the conditions. The experiments are decisive;
and taken by themselves are sufficient to establish that higher
and mysterious faculty of cognition that I have called crypt-
esthesia. Experiments with mediums confirm this much more
strongly.
4. Cryptesthesia Under Spiritist Conditions
(a) Summary of the Facts
I call the form of experimental cryptesthesia manifested in
spiritist circles, spiritist cryptesthesia.
Spiritualism is0a theory according to which the dead have not
lost consciousness; the mind continues to exist as a spirit, and
these spirits can enter into communication with mortals through
mediums. As a definition, it may be said that the spiritist state
is a psychological state such that the person experimented with,
called a medium, and retaining (or not retaining) consciousness
of his normal personality, makes movements (speech, writing,
movements, or noises in a table, or motion of a planchette) which
are not acts of his will. He claims that a personality other than
himself acts on him and influences him.
This definition must not be taken to imply anything as to the
reality of this extraneous personality. This will be examined
later on in full detail. In the present chapter we shall only in
dicate its results from the point of view of cryptesthesia, with
out discussing their mechanism.
In other words, we shall seek to discover whether, in experi
ments to that end, mediums are able by any procedure to reveal
or indicate facts that normal human intelligence could not be
acquainted with; that is, cryptesthesia.
It is a minor matter whether the fact of supernormal cogni
tion is manifested by raps, automatically written messages, by
direct writing, by voices heard, or by words spoken, provided
that the bare fact itself be duly proved. Now this fact has been
established by so many unquestionable proofs that it is surpris
ing that it should have been disputed or denied. Indeed, those
who deny it are those who have neither experimented, nor read,
nor studied, nor thought. Cryptesthesia which has been shown
to be probable, by experiments on normal persons, and extremely
probable, by experiments on hypnotized persons, becomes daz-
zlingly evident when it is studied under its spiritist modalities.
Richard Hodgson, summing up his experiences with Mrs.
Piper, says that he brought at least fifty persons that he knew
to be strangers to her and took every possible precaution to pre
vent her obtaining any particulars about them. In most cases
facts were alleged that could not have been known to Mrs. Piper ;
and he even employed detectives to make sure.1
In studying the accounts of her innumerable sances, we find
that over two hundred names have been given correctly; they
cannot, obviously, be given even in summary. Unless we imag
ine the monstrous absurdity of bad faith or imbecility on the
part of Mr. Hodgson and Professor Hyslop, the cryptesthesia
of Mrs. Piper must be considered to have been demonstrated
two hundred times.
A whole volume would be required to sum up Hodgsons ac
counts, and after reading them it is impossible to doubt the fact
of cryptesthesia, and even if this is generally of the telepathic
type (for the answers to the questions put were known to the
questioner), this is not always the case, as for instance when Mr.
Thaw took her some hair in a paper and Mrs. Piper stated it
to be a religious object; which was true, Mr. Thaw having made
a mistake in the thing chosen.
If Florence Cook, D. D. Home, and Eusapia are the most
remarkable mediums for objective phenomena, Mrs. Piper is
certainly first among all those who have shown subjective ones.
R. Hodgson, William James, J. Hyslop, P. Bourget, F. Myers,
Mrs. Verrall, and Sir Oliver Lodge, after many sances, formally
testified to her telepathic powers.
Myers says: Facts personal to myself and accessible by
printed records, collusion, or enquiry (though I do not think
any of these methods were used), were not stated more fre
quently than others; messages were given me as coming from
a friend many years deceased, and certain circumstances were
indicated that Mrs. Piper could not have known. I know some
facts that were suppressed as being of too intimate a nature, and
the statement of one or two such facts is more convincing of
supernormal cognition than giving dozens of names that the
consultant could have no motive to suppress. All observers will
agree that many of the facts stated could not have been dis-*
*M y p e rso n a l e v id e n c e d o es n o t c o u n t a m on g su ch v e r y n u m erou s te sti
m o n ies, b u t I m a y be p erm itte d to sa y th a t in th e o n ly e xp e rim en t th at I
m ad e w ith M rs. P ip e r, w h o m I sa w b u t on ce, sh e n am ed a little d o g " D i c k
th a t I h a d in m y c h ild h o o d ; a n am e th a t co u ld n ot h a v e re a ch e d h e r b y n orm al
ch a n n e ls. S h e m a d e s e v e r a l e rro rs b e fo re h ittin g on th e nam e.
covered even by a practiced detective and others could have
become known only by great outlay of time and money.
I am as absolutely certain, says William James, as I am
of any personal fact, that Mrs. Piper knows in trance things she
could not have known in her waking state.
Sir Oliver Lodge says: In introducing anonymous strangers
and questioning her myself in various ways, I am certain that
many particulars that she gives in trance are not acquired by
ordinary means. She can diagnose disease, and describe the
present or former possessors of small objects under conditions
that exclude the use of the normal senses.
The following instances are given by Sir Oliver:
Professor Gonner was introduced by him under an assumed
name; she spoke of his Uncle William as having died through
a wound in the head. This uncle had been killed in an electoral
riot by a stone striking him on the head, before Professor Gon
ner was born.
My wifes father, says Lodge, died in a dramatic and
affecting manner when she was fifteen days old. Phinuit gave
a thrilling account of the circumstances of this death. The state
ment of the death of her father-in-law by a fall into the hold
of his ship was also correct.
A Liverpool doctor slightly known to Sir Oliver and Lady
Lodge was presented under the name of Dr. Jones. Mrs. Piper
spoke to him of one of his daughters, whom she named as Daisy,
as being pretty but ailing; and added, There is a woman named
Kate by her, whom you call Kitty. Daisy is pretty, but deaf,
and the childrens nurse is named Kate.
A stenographer brought to the seance to take down Mrs. Pipers
words was called apart by Phinuit and told that he had a cousin
called Charley; he added, There are six children in your family,
four boys and two girls; you have a sister Minnie; and you are
called Ed. All which was correct.
Mrs. Piper recalls events long past, referring to the parents
and grandparents of her questioners, events often needing long
enquiries for their verification. One of the brothers of Lodges
father had a twin brother whose name was given by Mrs. Piper
as Jerry (Jeremiah); she also named the other twin, Robert;
she said that he was blind (correct), and that when a child he
had a serpents skin in his possession, a fact that happened sixty-
six years before, and of which Sir Oliver was ignorant, but which
he found to be true. She spoke also of Jerry having swum a
creek; this also was true.
In one of the earlier sances Mrs. Piper had sat down on a
certain sofa. Phinuit, touching this sofa, said that it had been
a gift from Aunt Annie, who had a son, Charley. Annie, speak
ing by Phinuit, said, I am sorry that Charley should have eaten
that bird; it made him 01.w All the above was correct, and at
that very time Charley, being in Canada, had shot a water-hen,
had eaten it, and been ill some days after.
The first communications of George Pelham through Mrs.
Piper are important, alike as evidence of cryptesthesia and for
the possibility of identifying him. I will summarize them.
In the presence of R. Hodgson, Mr. Hart, a friend of George
Pelham, deceased, received circumstantial details on the acts and
words of G. P. George Pelham (a pseudonym for Robinson)
told Hart, by the voice of Mrs. Piper, that Harts sleeve-links
had belonged to G. P. He gave the names of Mr. and Mrs.
Howard, friends of G. P., and the name of their daughter Kal-
rine, and added, Tell her, so that she may recognize me, that
I will solve the Kalrine problems. Mr. Hart, not understand
ing these words, went to the Howard family (which Mrs. Piper
did not know), and from them he learned that on the last occa
sion that G. P. saw Kalrine, a young girl of fifteen, he had
spoken to her of God, eternity, time, and space; and said that
one day he would tell her more.
After this sance the Howards had other meetings with Mrs.
Piper. The matters treated of, says Hodgson, were charac
teristic, highly intimate, and personal. Mutual friends were
named. The Howards, who took no interest in psychical re
search, became convinced that they had really spoken with the
personality of the friend they had known for so many years.
After Hodgsons death another able and conscientious Ameri
can psychologist, James Hyslop, the general secretary of the
American Society for Psychical Research, who died in June,
1920, studied Mrs. Piper. Her guid was then Hodgson him
self, and the evidences of cryptesthesia were startling.
Hyslop, having asked her concerning his own father, received
from Mrs. Piper many correct particulars. She stated where he
had left his spectacles when he died; she spoke of his books,
of a cap knitted for him, and of a pocket-knife with a brown
handle with which he used to pare his nails. She mentioned
divers walking-sticks that he had possessed, naming one with
a ring, another with a gilt scarab, and one with a bent handle
that had been broken; details of which all were correct and of
which Hyslop had no knowledge, not consciously at any rate.
Mrs. X. introduced herself as Margaret Brown, and brought
with her three locks of hair, x, b, and s, knowing only the origin
of s. Of the lock x Mrs. Piper said, It is from Fred . . .
Imogen ? Who is Imogen ? This lock was in fact from Imogen
Garnay, which Mr. Fred Day had cut to give to Margaret Brown.
Of the lock b Mrs. Piper said, This belongs to some one who
is very ill. In fact the owner of the lock died within the year.
Of the lock s she said, She is niggardly of her hair; she is
your mother, she has four children, two boys and two girls.
This was correct, and Margaret had cut off the lock of hair
by a trick (Bozzano, A. S. P., 1906, xvi, 546).
Hodgson, in a sance with Mrs. Piper, received a message from
Eliza who claimed to have helped Mr. F. at his death. Mr. F.
had died the day before, and his death had been announced in
the Boston papers. Two or three days later Hodgson learned
that at the time of his death, Mr. F. had said that he saw Eliza
who was calling him. Mrs. Piper did not know Eliza (A. S. P.,
1909, xix, 107).
A curious fact is the admixture of personalities. It would
seem (though this is doubtless a symbolization), that when any
personPhinuit, Hyslop senior, or George Pelhamcannot give
certain particulars, he appeals to some person better informed.
Professor Newbold gives a Greek phrase. Mrs. Piper knows
no Greek, but George Pelham says, I will ask Stainton Moses,
who is a Hellenist, and shortly after the translation is given.
Another time Rector and Hodgson, speaking by Mrs. Piper,
cannot give the name of Robert Hyslops mother-in-law. They
leave the machine, according to Mrs. Pipers picturesque
phrase; that is, there is a short silence, then George Pelham re
turns and says, She was called Margaret. But it is difficult
to believe in the reality of these personifications in the spirit
world who seek each other out and give information.
The curious case of Hannah Wild, analyzed by Mr. Sage, is
a good example of telepathy coincident with complete absence
of knowledge of facts known only to the deceased person. Mrs.
Blodgett interrogates Mrs. Piper and gets an answer from her
sister (Hannah Wild), two years deceased. Now Hannah Wild
had written a letter in which were some words that no one could
understand. Mrs. Piper could say nothing about this letter,
though the thoughts and secret acts of Mrs. Blodgett were cor
rectly stated; so that this experiment, so unsatisfactory as to
personal survival, was excellent for telepathy and cryptesthesia.1
Mrs. Verrall, an acute observer, obtained some good results.
Mrs. Piper said to her, Your grandfather was paralyzed; he
had a sister called Suzanne, and a son, Henry. This uncle mar
ried a relation, a lady named Keley. Mrs. Verrall, who was
not familiar with that branch of her family, made careful enquiries
and found the facts to be as stated (Hyslop, Science and a Future
Life, Boston, 1905, 157).
Paul Bourget, enquiring of Mrs. Piper (in the character of
Phinuit), showed her a small travelling clock. Mrs. Piper was
able to' say to whom the clock had belonged, his way of life,
and the mode of his death (suicide by poison). She described
with remarkable accuracy the flat I occupied in Paris, mentioning
the storey and an inner staircase. She saw on the wall an object
that she described, and on the mantelpiece a portrait that she
thought to be that of a young man; it is of a girl whose hair
has been cut short (A . S. P., 1895, v, 72).
Mr. Hyslop, speaking to his father through Mrs. Piper, asked
for news of Mr. H. C. The reply was that H. C. is preoccupied
about the church and its organ. Hyslop was unaware that H. C.
had ceased to attend the church because an organ had been placed
therein, of which he disapproved (Hyslop, loc. cit., 222).
Mr. Vernon Briggs, who had been in Honolulu, enquiring of
Mrs. Piper concerning a little native boy, Kalua, that he had
brought to America, received from her two words in the native
languagelei (a garland of flowers), and aloka (salutations).
When Mr. Briggs asked which island Kalua lived on she said
Tawai, but her hand wrote Kawai. Now the name is correctly
written as Kawai, but is pronounced Tamm by the natives.
For Mrs. M., a widow, Mrs. Piper wrote the names Brown
and Parker, these being the names of the doctor and nurse who
attended Mr. M. in his last illness. I was then addressed, says*
*If the original text contained in the bulky volumes of the S. P. R. and
the Am. S. P. R. in which Hodgson and Hyslop have recorded their studies
of Mrs. Piper are not available, sufficient information can be obtained from
M. Sages book, Madame Piper, fourth edition, Paris, Leymarie, 1902. It is
very readable.
Mrs. M., as only my husband could have addressed me, men
tioning matters that concerned him and that I alone knew. An
intimate friend of his was also named. He alluded to our last
walk in the park at T., and answered the question I put to him
when he was dying, and too feeble to speak. This answer was
made in a way that Mr. Hodgson or any stranger would not have
understood, but it was quite clear to me (Science and a Future.
Life, 1905, 179).
Mrs. William James and her brother were told by Phinuit at
a sance with Mrs. Piper, that their Aunt Kate had died at
two or two-thirty . . that morning, and that they would re
a m
ceive a letter or telegram to that effect. During the morning a

telegram arrived to say that Kate had died a few minutes after
midnight.
I could multiply such instances related by skilful observers
with minute care. The fact of cryptesthesia is undeniable. Mrs.
Pipers gift is amply sufficient to prove the existence of this mys
terious power of the mind. We can now go forward, and from
hundreds of examples given by other mediums, select some in
corroboration.
Those who wish to make a detailed study of these highly
instructive phenomena are referred to the Proceedings of the
American and the English Societies for Psychical Research, but a
good notion of them can be obtained from the works of Myers,
Lodge, and Hyslop.
Hyslop divides the lucidity of Mrs. Piper into three stages:
(1) First report of Hodgson; (2) second report of Hodgson;
(3) report of Hyslop. Already, after Hodgsons first report,
when George Pelham had not yet appeared but only Phinuit,
Hodgson said, The very complex and suggestive results estab
lish that names and incidents unknown to those present are indi
cated. This excludes telepathy as the sole cause of these
phenomena. After the second report most of those who assisted
at these sances had acquired indubitable evidence of super
normal action. Hyslop and Lodge appear to have come to the
same conclusion.
It is true that some scientists who had only a few sances
Weir Mitchell, James Mark Baldwin, Professor Trowbridge, and
Professor Eliot Nortonwere not convinced. I shall venture
to remind them that in so difficult a matter no conclusion can
be drawn, one way or the other, unless after a long series of
experiments. They did not continue their studies of Mrs. Piper,
which was a mistake on their part.
Hyslop, replying to Podmore, made a minute calculation of
probabilities as applied to Mrs. Pipers cryptesthesia.1 He was
easily able to show that the probability of success due to chance
alone is exceedingly small, denoted by some such number as
Now it has already been stated more than once that
the calculus of probabilities, correctly used, is an admirable check
provided that the experiments are well performed; and the ex
periments by Hyslop seem to have been unexceptionable.
To supply data for the calculation Hyslop conceived the in
genious idea of asking a large number of persons the same
questions that he put to Mrs. Piper, comparing these answers
of non-sensitives with those given by her. He selected one hun
dred and five questions which Mrs. Piper had answered correctly,
and rightly concluding that the answers by non-sensitives were
due to chance alone, he reached the enormous figure of a prob
ability of (inr)147.
To give an example of his method, I quote question 46:
Has your father travelled in the West?
(a) Was he then in a railway accident?
(b) Was he injured by it?
(c) Was your mother-in-law with him?
(d) Did the accident take place on a bridge?
(e) Is it some time since the accident took place?
(/) Was he ill in consequence of the accident?
Out of 420 persons, 105 answered the general question affirma
tively, 10 had been in a railway accident, one of these only,
on a bridge. None of the 420 answered Yes to all the ques
tions, so that the probability is certainly less than 1:420; but
on the separate probability of each question, compounded for
the whole, the figures come out as odds of 1 to 2,500,000,000;
which amounts to moral certainty that chance could not have
produced Mrs. Pipers results. The method that I employed
with Stella is simpler, but leads to the same conclusionthe
results cannot be explained by chance if the conditions of experi
ment are strict, as I believe both mine and Hyslops to have been.
William James relates (Am. S. P. R., 1909, iii, 470) some
experiments made with Mrs. Piper that seem to him to be
'Chance coincidence and guessing in a mediumistic experiment (Proc.
Am. S. P. R., August, 1919, xiii, 1-89).
proofs not only of lucidity but of survival, these having to do
with R. Hodgson deceased speaking through Mrs. Piper. He
cites the following fact: There is a person named Child, who
has suddenly come, and sends his love to William (William
James), and to his own wife who is living. He says L . .
Such were the words of Mrs. Piper to Miss Robbins. Now
neither Mrs. Piper nor Miss Robbins knew Child (deceased),
who had been a most intimate friend of William James. Mrs.
Childs Christian name begins with L. And William James
concludes that the facts are unquestionably supernormal.
Even the most sceptical must be moved by the consensus of
such men as Myers, Oliver Lodge, William James, R. Hodgson,
and J. Hyslop, who have all, after enquiries lasting over twenty
years, agreed in recognizing the lucidity of Mrs. Piper.
Although these experiments with Mrs. Piper demonstrate crypt-
esthesia quite conclusively they do not really demonstrate survival.
No doubt the personalities that present themselvesHodgson,
Hyslop (senior), Phinuit, George Pelham, Stainton Moses, and
F. Myersshowed impressive traits of psychological individuality,
and kept them distinctly in writing, voice, style, and thought.
But can this be considered sufficient proof? The factitious per
sonalities like the Marie Antoinette of Helen Smith show the
same.
And another conclusion follows: Since survival is not estab
lished with so powerful a medium as Mrs. Piper, so superior
to other mediums, still less can it be established by other mediums.
But there is no need to be disturbed; each period has its own
tasks. Ours today is to establish the real existence of a faculty
of supernormal cognitioncryptesthesia; and Mrs. Piper is un
questionably the one among all others who has given the most
numerous, striking, and decisive proofs of it.
Not only do the experiments with her prove the supernormal
faculty, but they show that telepathy is not a satisfactory explana
tion. It is clairvoyanceluciditythe knowledge of facts that
no living person knows.
Although D. D. Home was chiefly known by his objective
mediumship, he gave striking proofs of lucidity. At Hartford,
to visitors whom he saw for the first time, he spoke of a little
woman dressed in grey silk that he had half seen who seemed
to be a phantom, since she disappeared. Home then heard a
voice saying to him, It displeases me that another coffin has
been placed over mine. I will not allow this/ He did not under
stand this enigmatic sentence, but next day when a visit was
made to the tomb of the lady in grey the guardian of the ceme
tery, on putting the key into the lock of the vault, said, Forgive
me, but as there was a little space over the ladys coffin, we put
that of the child of L. there; we had no time to notify you.
Miss Andrews, a non-professional, but very lucid, received in
Homes presence a visit from Mr. Colley Grattam, a distinguished
author and consul at Antwerp and Boston. He was disposed to
laugh at spiritualism. Do not laugh, said Miss Andrews, you
have a spirit who calls herself Emma, standing at your side.
What do you know of her? said Mr. Colley Grattam, visibly
disturbed. She watches over you to protect you, for you were
good to her. On a stormy night you took her in and gave her
hot wine; you reproached her husband for his cowardly and
inhuman conduct. Yes, said Grattam, the brute deserved to
be hanged, though he was a member of Parliament. Adieu, I
can hear no more, but I will never laugh at this again (Home,
Light and Darkness, 1883).
Mr. Britton, a well-known writer, relates an experience with
Home at Greenfield: Unusually loud raps were made on the table
for Mr. Britton, giving the message, You are wanted at home;
your child is very ill. Go at once, or you will be too late.
Then, said Mr. Britton, I took my handbag and^went. In the
street I heard the whistle of the engine of the last train. Run
ning as hard as I could, I just caught it, gripping the last carriage
as it moved, and on arriving at home I found the facts as stated.
Hyslop made some experiments, interesting though less bril
liant than those with Mrs. Piper, with Mrs. X., who is not a
professional medium. He gave his name as Robert Brown. On
seeing him Mrs. X. called him James H., saying that Robert was
not his real name but that of his brother. She also gave Mary
as the name of Hyslops wife, then deceased (Hyslop, Science
and a Future Life, Boston, 1905, 255).
Prince Wittgenstein learned through a mediums message that
the will of his friend General v. Korff, some months dead, would
be found in a particular cupboard of the house where he died.
This will had been sought in vain, but on the arrival of Prince
Wittgensteins letter it had just been found where stated (A. S.
P., 1910, xx, 120).
Mr. Hereward Carrington tells the following: The father of
an English soldier, killed at Beaumont, after reading Sir Oliver
Lodges Raymond, decided to visit a mediumMr. Vout Peters
to whom he did not give his name. Peters gave him at once
four namesJohn, Elisabeth, William, and Edward. These were
the names of his father, his mother, his brother, and a nephew
long dead. He told him that his dead son was called Po.. r. The
sons name was Roger, but the curious fact is that he was famil
iarly called called Poger and not Roger (Psychical Phenomena
and the War, New York, 1919, 272).
Mrs. X. thought she had seen the phantom of her son one
morning in full daylight; she went the same day to consult
Mrs. Annie Brittain who said, Your son tells me to say that if
you saw him, it was himself and not a dream, and that Jeanne
saw him too. This girl Jeanne, who did not know Mrs. Brit
tain, had also seen the apparition.
Captain James Burton, writing automatically to communicate
with his deceased father, said, I did not know that my mother,
who lived about sixty miles away, had lost the dog that my
father had given her. That same night I received a communica
tion from him telling me of my mothers trouble. An intimate
secret known only to him and to my mother concerning a matter
that occurred some months before my birth was revealed to me,
with the instruction, Tell this to your mother and she will know
that it is I, your father, who is writing. When I told her this
she, who till then was sceptical, fainted (The New Revelation,
by Conan Doyle).
It is to be noted that Captain Burtons automatic writing is
so small as to need a lens to read it.
De Vesme relates the following incident which acted on him
so strongly as to decide him to devote himself to occult science.
The narrator was Albert de N., who saw it at Rome.
One night, in 1871, his mother began to shriek aloud. Young
Albert and his father hurried to her, and found her on the
ground terror-stricken: she said that spirits had taken her out
of her bed. The next morning at 7 oclock there was a ring at
the door. Colonel Baron Daviso, who was entirely unknown to
Mr. and Mrs. de N., came to ask what had occurred, saying that
at a spiritualist seance he had been told that the spirits would
play a trick on a lady in that house, and he had come to ascertain
the facts (A. S. P., 1909, xix, 109).
An incident of spiritist cryptesthesia obtained by table-tipping
was observed at Cambridge by Helen Verrall (/. S. P. R., March,
1907, 36). On the 29th of January, at 6 . ., the following
p m
words were dictated : Fellow of Royal Society Potter, dead this

afternoon, 4:30, Editor of Physiological Review London 43 Bel-
size Gardens Kensington, married, five children.
The message applied well enough to the eminent physiologist,
Foster (not Potter) an F. R. S., married, the father of five chil
dren, who lived in London (the address is incorrect), who died
in the night of the 28th, not at 4:30 on the 29th. The news
only reached Cambridge late in the evening of the 29th by the
London evening papers of that day; and Helen Verrall and Mr.
Bayfield, who was at the table with her, had seen no one or
looked at any paper. It is also to be noted that Mr. Michael
Foster had been professor of physiology at Cambridge and, like
Helen Verralls father, belonged to that university.
I had several very clear experiments with Stella, a young lady
who is not a professional medium and only took up spiritualism
by chance. One day she found that on putting her hand on a
table or planchette she obtained curious answers. She gave me
striking examples of lucidity ; I could not, however, decide whether
this was telepathic or otherwise.
I made my experiments as strict as possible. In these experi
ments three persons were presentStella, myself, and G., a
B.Sc., and a skilful physician who had neverisseen Stella. I
myself knew nothing at all of G.s family. During these experi
ments not only did G. not touch the table, but he had his back
turned to it, said no word, and made no sign. In the eight
sances held, Stella gave the first names of G.s wife, brothers,
son, father, and father-in-law, names of which both Stella and I
were entirely ignorant. Taking a probability of 1:40 based on
there being about 40 usual Christian names of men and the same
number for women, the odds against successful results by chance
are (^j-)8; that is, 1 to 25,000,000,000, which is moral, if not
mathematical, certainty.
The calculus of probabilities must be handled with caution,
for it is not quite accurate to say that there were no failures,
so that compounding failures with successes, the probability cannot
be placed so high as (-^tr)8. Exaggerating the failures, we will
admit six hesitations equivalent to failures. Then according
SI
to the formula ----- paqP, (see P- 57 ante), admitting six
a! /3!
failures and six successes, the compounded probability comes
out as gfi,oo6.x>5; which is just as much moral certainty as if
one thousand times, greater. Some of these failures are them
selves instructive: Thus, the name of G/s child was asked for.
The answer was Georgette, which is wrong, for the child
is a boy and is called Jean. Then G. told us that had the child
been a girl, his wife and he had intended to call her Georgette,
a fact that Stella and I of course did not know. G. asked the
name of a brother, deceased. The answer was Andr, but he
is living. Now the name of the dead brother is not Andr,
but there was a living brother Andr. This check is almost more
interesting than a success.
Stella and I both knew that G. was born in Brittany, but nothing
more. We asked the name of the town where he was born;
the answer was Loria. We at once thought of Lorient; but in
fact G. was born at Morlaix. As there is possible error between
adjoining letters (by table-tipping to an alphabet), L may very
well have been taken for M, and I for L. Although Stella and
I were both convinced that the coming word should be Lorient,
the fifth letter came as A in despite of us.
Stella was also able to give, through the table, the name of
a childhood friend of G., and the word Kerueguenthe name
of the house G. lived in at Morlaix. G. had just received a letter
about his little son who was feverish. It was asked what the
letter contained, these contents being unknown to us. The an
swer was Jean, fever, and there was added, laughs, carriage.
Now G. had recently given to his son a little carriage with which
the child had been greatly and unusually amused.
Various other proofs of lucidity were given me by Stella that
I do not reproduce here, although they seem to me to carry
proof, for I have only named those in which it was strictly
impossible that she should, consciously or unconsciously, have
been able to acquire her information by any normal means.
I will only cite two more facts :
1. I had taken a letter to my friend, Professor W. Stirling of
Manchester, who had just come to Paris, and was at the Boule
vard Saint-Michel. I had never mentioned Mr. Stirling before
Stella. On the following day I said to her, To whom have I
been taking a letter at the Boulevard Saint-Michel? She an
swered at once, To your London friend. Nothing could have
been more unlikely, for how could she suspect that among the
many letters I might have taken to that place this would be to
an English friend of whose existence she knew nothing?
The following instance is even more extraordinary. I saw
Stella on the 2d of December, during the day, and on leaving
I said, I am going to give a lecture on snake-poison. She
at once replied, I dreamt last night of snakes, or rather of eels.
Then, without of course giving any reason, I asked her to tell
me her dream, and her exact words were: It was about eels
more than snakes, two eels, for I could see their white shining
bellies and their sticky skin; and I said to myself, I do not like
these creatures, but it pains me when they are hurt. This
dream was strangely conformable to what I had done the day
before, December 1st. On that day I had, for the first time
in twenty years, experimented with eels. Desiring to draw from
them a little blood, I had put two eels on the table and their
white, shining, iridescent, viscous bellies had particularly struck
me. They had been fixed on the table for the removal of their
hearts. I had certainly not spoken of this to Stella, whom I
had not seen for some time, and she is not familiar with any
one of the persons who frequent my laboratory.
I will here note, as characteristic of Stellas mediumship, and
doubtless of that of many other sensitives, that she rarely gives
a precise answer to a precise question. I had not asked her any
thing about what I had been doing on the previou#day, and she
had no idea that her dream had any reference to me. She only
saw two eels. It is none the less a remarkable instance of crypt-
esthesia, for her words corresponded so well with the impression
strongly made on my mind, that chance can have had nothing to
do with the matter.
Lady Mabel Howard, writing automatically, was interrogated
by one of her friends who had lost some jewelry. She wrote
that it would be found under the bridge of Tebay, which seemed
altogether unlikely. A month later it was discovered there (P.
S. P. R., ix, 44).
Miss A., a writing medium, gave to Lady Radnor the name
of Anna Chambers. This name was entirely unknown to the
family. After minute research, it was found, through the Her
alds office, that a certain Lady Exeter, an ancestress of Lady
Radnor, had been Anna Chambers prior to her marriage.
Mr. Gordigiani, a student at the military school at Florence,
showed spontaneous mediumship from the age of fifteen. One
day in 1883, he being then seventeen years of age, an American
lady, a widow named Mrs. B. M., was having her portrait painted
by Signor Gordigiani, the young man's father, and expressed
a desire to have a sance with the son. He wrote, There is
enmity that I do not understand between the lady and her de
ceased husband. When this, written in French, was translated
to Mrs. B. M. she turned pale, stood up, and said, What! Still?
Then as a more conciliatory reply was asked for, the inexorable
writing answered, Impossible, he is in Nigritie ( ? Nigeria).
His mission is to influence the abolition of slavery. He is a
negro.
Mrs. B. M. withdrew, very much moved, and the next day
she said that her husband had been a coloured man, which had
brought about a long estrangement between them (A . S. P., 1898,
viii, 261).
On Friday, October 3, 1906, at Naples, Zingaropoli, at 8 . . p m
was in spiritualist sance with a young medium and Signor Mar-

zorati, the editor of the excellent review, Luce e Ombra. During
this sance the medium announced that a sub-lieutenant of in
fantry in the barracks at Piedigrotta, Guglielmo Paternostro, had
been killed by a revolver shot. This was the fact, reported in
the Mattino of Naples, October 4, 1906 (A. S. P., 1906, xvi,
718).
Professor Feijao of Lisbon, in spiritist sances with Mme.
Frondoni-Lacombe, received the name of his father by raps. He
withdrew his hands from the table but continued to obtain clear
and entirely correct replies to questions to which none of the
persons present could have given answers.1
Dr. Moutin had attended Mme. Joubert in cholera. A few
moments before her death, she cried out, The mirror, the mir
ror! pointing at a mirror on the mantelpiece. Her husband, a
sailor, was absent. Dr. Moutin wrote the facts to him, and he
knowing that the deceased often hid money, sought for it every
where without success. Fifteen months later the spirit of Mme.
Joubert stated at a sance to Dr. Moutin that a bond of the
Fraissinet Company was hidden behind a mirror that M. Joubert
had not examined, indicating its position. Dr. Moutin thereupon
wrote to M. Joubert and the bond in question was found (Boz-
zano, A. S. P., 1910, xx, 1222).
Experiments with Mme. Frondoni are almost all concerned with objective
later on.
metapsychics. They will be discussed more in detail
Lady Mabel Howard gave Myers some good instances of
clairvoyance. Myers had been invited to a certain lunch, con
cerning which Lady Mabel knew nothing, not even that it had
taken place, but she said that six persons were then present
and that the gentleman who sat next to Myers was called Mo----
There had been in fact six persons and Myerss neighbor was
named Moultrie.
In another experiment it was asked, Where is Don? The
pencil wrote, Don is dead, which was true and unknown to
anyone. Again, Who is the best friend of a little girl who is
there? The answer was, Mary, which was true. A book
was found which had long been sought in vain.
The Tausch case, observed by Hyslop, proves surprising crypt-
esthesia. Mrs. Chenoweth (the pseudonym of Hyslops medium),
was interrogated on the subject of a certain German whose
widow had written to Hyslop to get some communication from
her deceased husband. Hyslop, without saying anything to Mrs.
Chenoweth, obtained the name Taussh, Tauch, Taush; it was said
that Taush knew William James, that he was a philosopher, that
he was not in his home when he died, that he had a mania for
putting watches to the correct time, that he had a bag in which
he kept his spectacles and his manuscripts; minute details not
accountable for by telepathy, but only by clairvoyance.
Mr. Isaac Funk, the well-known New York editor, experi
menting with Mrs. Pepper, gave her a sealed letter in which he
had written the word Mother. Mrs. Pepper took the letter,
gave the Christian name of Mr. Funks mother, and said that she
walked on one leg, adding, Do you not remember that needle?
Mrs. Funk had run a needle into her foot. Mrs. Pepper also
saw at the side of Mrs. Funk her grandson, Chester. At the
moment Mr. Funk could not remember the name, but, on en
quiry, found that his mother had a little grandson of that name
who had died twenty years before in a Western State (A. S. P.,
1905, xv, 246).
Yza Trisk, in a spiritist sance at Stockholm, received the
following communication: I left the earth twenty-four hours
since, and I am come to thank you. There was also a medium
istic drawing which was recognized as the portrait of a Finnish
poet whom all thought to be living. This poet, whom Yza Trisk
knew slightly, the author of the Finnish national hymn, had just
died in Italy. Is it established that at the time of this seance
no announcement had appeared in any Stockholm paper? (Boz-
zano, A. S. P., 1910, 264).
Commandant Darget, accompanied by his wife and daughter,
visited Mme. Bonnard, a professional medium, who spoke on that
occasion as if she were Mme. Dargets mother. A proof of iden
tity being asked for, it was said, I am very glad to see that
white flowers have been put on my grave. Now a cousin visit
ing Poitiers, where Mme. Dargets mother was interred, had
placed white flowers on her tomb (Bozzano, A. S. P 1909,
xix, 322).
W. Stead, in presence of Mrs. R., wrote automatically (nomi
nally from Julia), that Mrs. R. had had a fall and injured her
spine. Mrs. R. denied this, but Julia (by the hand of Stead)
wrote, She has forgotten; it was seven years ago at Streaton
in Illinois; there was snow. On reaching Mrs. Buells house,
Mrs. R. slipped on the edge of the pavement, fell, and hurt her
back. Then Mrs. R. remembered the incident, which she had
completely forgotten (A. S. P., 1909, xix, 110).
In 1874, Stainton Moses, having been magnetized by Du Potet,
wrote automatically, I killed myself today. The writing was
accompanied by a very rough drawing, with the words, Under
the steam-roller in Baker Street where the medium passed by.
The next day, after enquiry, Stainton Moses learned that a man
had been crushed in Baker Street by the steam-roller (Delanne,
loc. cit., 34).
Mr. Mackenzie, though unaccustomed to shooting, spent a day
in the shooting fields; in the evening playing two games of bil
liards with his father, winning both. On the same day Mr.
Nicholson, who lived one hundred and twenty miles distant, and
hardly knew Mr. Mackenzie, obtained through the table the name
Mackenzie. He plays billiards with his father and wins both
games; he has been out shooting (A. S. P., 1919, xxix, No. 30).
Mrs. Effia Bathes was converted to metapsychism by the fol
lowing entirely demonstrative fact: She went one day to a
professional clairvoyant whom she did not know and who did
not know her. The medium described to her a deceased brother,
and he, speaking through the medium, said that he had been
to his old home and was sad to find that his collection of fossils
was no longer in his room. This brother, a student at Cambridge,
had made a fine collection of fossils. After his death part of this
collection had been given to the Cambridge museum; the rest
remained in his room. Some time later Mrs. Bathes learned
that their mother had presented these to the museum at Bristol.
At Vilna, January 15, 1887, at the house of the engineer Kaigo-
doroff, Miss Emma Stramm, acting as the medium, said that
Augustus Duvanel had died of a congestion of the blood. Then
another communication was received announcing that this was
not true, but that he had committed suicide at Zurich on the 15th
of January, 1887. It appears that the father of Emma Stramm
and also the guide who gave the table-messages both desired
to spare Emma the pain of learning that the young man had com
mitted suicide (by reason of disappointed love for Emma). This
romantic story signifies nothing; and it is to be regretted that any
serious work should take note of such tales.
An eminent physician, Dr. Santo-Liquido, director of the
Office of Hygiene at Rome, has analyzed very ably the phenomena
of cryptesthesia that he observed in a member of his own family
a distinguished ladywho without having desired them, pre
sented the phenomena of raps and automatic writing. Signor
Santo-Liquido, like all of us, was absolutely sceptical of so-
called spiritist phenomena; but he had to give in to the evidence
that mediums occasionally acquire knowledge that transcends the
normal. One day, Louise (the medium), said to him in trance,
"Instead of criticizing my experiments you would do better to
occupy yourself with your report which is not completed. Santo-
Liquido was absolutely convinced that this important report had
been sent to the Minister of the Interior fifteen days before; but
the following day he ascertained that through an incredible act
of negligence by a subordinate, it had been left in the portfolio
containing the case.
Many times Louise has correctly indicated unforeseen facts,
and has also given many instances of cryptesthesia. Once she
said to Signor Santo-Liquido, "You will be called to Genoa, but
Signor Giolitti will not let you go. Both were unlikely, but
the next day he was urgently called to Genoa by a member of
his family, and at the same time received a telegram from the
Premier that he must on no account leave Rome, as Signor
Giolitti needed him.1
M. Tola Dorian, during a spiritist seance, learned that his
friend H. de Lacretelle had just died in Paris, the phrasing being
Communicated to the International Metapsychic Institute of Paris, and
published in their bulletin No. i o f 1920.
that he was discarnate. He had in fact died that night, February
16, 1899, at Paris, and not, as M. Dorian thought, at Mcon
(A. S. P., xxix, 242).
Some instances of spiritist cryptesthesia are mentioned in M.
Cornilliers book.4 Unfortunately they are but few, and this
book being devoted less to the demonstration of clairvoyance
than to presenting the ideas of the subconscious on spiritualist
theories, it is difficult to cite much from it with reference to lu
cidity. It is the story of a young girl, Reine X., aged fifteen,
who, in a first spiritist experience, obtained raps without contact.
She was then magnetized by M. Comillier, and the subsequent
phenomena (all subjective) occurred in a state of somnambulism.
They must be classed as spiritist, for she had a guide (Vet-
tellini?) who dictated her answers. It is, however, a small matter
whether the classification is spiritist or somnambulist, for these
two modalities are often admixed.
The first time that M. Comillier magnetized Reine she went
(in imagination) to M. Cornilliers room, which was separate
from his studio, and into which she had never been, and described
various detailssome ivory brushes, an oval mirror, and two
small portraits on the mantelpiece.
Another time she went to see M. S. O., a friend of M. Cor-
nillier, whom she saw sitting at his desk writing a business letter ;
with a lady beside him in an armchair to the right of the desk.
All this was correct; but what does it prove?
Reine, sent to see the house of M. X. at B. (he had died six
years before), said that there was a very old tower (correct),
and speaking of M. X., she said, He likes to take long walks
and to paint, both being characteristic of M. X.
She seems also to have had a premonition (p. 417). On
the 26th of August, 1913, she saw M. Comillier taking a train,
dressed in black and looking sad, and this vision was repeated on
the night of the 28th. On the 30th she saw M. C. packing his
valise. On the 1st of September M. C. received news of the death
of a cousin, and he took the train to be present at the funeral,
wearing mourning. Unfortunately M. C. does not mention
whether Reine might not have learned of the cousins illness by
normal means.1
1P E. Comillier, La survivance de lme, et son volution aprs la mort,
Comptes rendus dexpriences, Paris, Alcan, 1920, 570 pp.
Reine was also able to give the name of a lady, Jeanne B.,
speaking through her (p. 504) who gave many correct particu
lars concerning her son, Marcel, a cavalry soldier, and of her
husband, who had caused her much sorrow, and whom she had
divorced. All these details were found true, but it is impossible
to admit the certainty, or even the likelihood, of cryptesthesia,
for we are not told that Reine could not have known Mme. B.,
who was a modiste.
All these facts have therefore very little weight; and despite
the pains taken by M. Cornillier there is so much lacking in his
book that we canhot build much upon it. The opinions of Vet-
tellini (i.e., the subconsciousness of Reine), on this world and the
other leave us very cold ; the exact demonstration of the smallest
fact of cryptesthesia or premonition would have a higher value.
The valuable reports of Mrs. Sidgwick, R. Hodgson, and J.
Hyslop are unexceptionable in this respect; and the admirable
report by Sir Oliver Lodge of his seances with Mrs. Piper are
models of what such reports should be.
M. Mamtchitch was present for the first time at a spiritist
sance at Kieff in 1875. Returning home, he placed himself
at the table and put questions by the alphabet. He got the name
Palladia, and the words, Put the angel back in its place, or it
will fall. On the following morning he visited, the cemetery,
where he had never previously been, and found th tomb, buried
in snow. The marble statue of an angel bearing a cross was
leaning much to one side (B'ozzano, A. S. P., 1909, xix, 324).
Mr. Massey, interviewing Miss Lottie Fowler, a medium, gave
her the glove of one of his friends, named Pigott, entirely un
known to Miss Fowler; she said, It is very funny, I can get
nothing but Pig, Pig (Myers, Human Personality, ii, 562).
Sir William Barrett, quoted by Miss Dallas (A. S. P.} July,
1916, xxvi, 112), gives a fact of cryptesthesia by the wife of
an eminent Irish doctor who had the faculty of automatic
writing. She wrote the name of a cousin of hers killed in action
and that he was betrothed to a lady whose full name and address
were given. The engagement had been kept entirely secret even
from the family of the deceased officer.
Dr. Speakman, experimenting with two young English ladies
at Pau with a planchette, mentioned a Mrs. Sarah Lamy, who
had died a few days previously. Sarah stated that her daughters
name was Rose (correct), and that she, Sarah, would manifest
her presence to her husband by rapping on the foot of the bed.
That very evening Mr. Lamy heard raps on his bed. She added
that there would be difficulties with the lawyers; and in fact
unforeseen difficulties, which had nothing to do with Mrs. Lamys
death, did actually arise. There were other veridical announce
ments (A . 5*. P., xix, 330).
Mrs. Leonard, who has given such admirable proofs of clair
voyance to Sir Oliver Lodge, gave also very good proofs of crypt-
esthesia to Miss Radclyffe Hall and Lady Troubridge.1
The memorandum is divided into five chapters.
1. A description of the communicator; i.e., of the person sup
posed to be speakinga Mrs. A. V. B.a friend of Miss R. H.
and Lady T., who died aged fifty-seven years and was quite un
known to Mrs. Leonard. She was exactly described by Feda,
Mrs. Leonards guide. Sometimes Miss R. H. touched the table
lightly, but the answers were mostly given verbally. Feda said
that Mrs. A. V. B. was paralyzed on the right side of her mouth
(correct), and the description of the lady was very exact.
2. Complete descriptions of places entirely unknown to Mrs.
Leonard which had been visited by Miss R. H. and Mrs. A. V. B.
during life; more especially Teneriffe and the Canary Islands.
She spoke of two little monkeys, of a climate neither too hot nor
too cold, of a path over cinders, and of a place named Cruth,
Vera. Vera Cruth, Teneriffe, Mazagal. (Mrs. A. V. B. and
Miss R. H. had visited Teneriffe, Santa Cruz, and Mazagra, in
Morocco, together.)
3. Other proofs of strong lucidity were given, as to which the
ladies can give no details, these being of too intimate a nature
for publication. The house of Lady T., her dining-room, and
her blue dressing-gown were exactly described.
4. Abundant details were given of Daisy (pseudonym) whom
A. V. B. had known, details of which neither Miss R. H. nor
Lady T. could be aware of.
Without entering into further circumstantial detail it is clear
that Mrs. Leonards cryptesthesia is very powerful, and, like Mrs.
Piper, she has cognizance of facts that no mental transmission
1On a series of sittings with Mrs. Osborne Leonard, by Miss Radclyffe Hall
and Lady Troubridge, P. S. P. R.,
December, 1919, xxx, 339-547. Although
confident of the mediums good faith, Miss R. H. and Lady T., who had never
frequented spiritualist circles, employed detectives to make sure that no
enquiries had been made by Mrs. Leonard.
can account for. These remarkable experiments prove once more
that cryptesthesia is a real faculty that cannot be explained by
invoking telepathy.
Mrs. Thompson gave some good instances of cryptesthesia
to Myers and to some other persons. This manifests itself in a
somnambulic state that comes on spontaneously when she wishes
to make an experiment. Then Nelly, a little daughter that she
has lost, speaks through her and talks in a baby language, as Feda
does with Mrs. Leonard. The phenomena presented are inter
mediate between hypnotic and spiritist cryptesthesia.1
Mrs. Thompson gave me an excellent proof of lucidity. Myers
had brought her to me for experiment. That evening my son
Georges handed his watch to her, asking if she could say any
thing about it. She replied after some hesitation, Three genera
tions mixed. It would have been hard to say anything more
descriptive, for the watch had been given by his grandfather, Flix
Aubry, to his son Georges Aubry. After the death of the latter
at the battle of Vendme in 1870, M. Flix Aubry had had the
watch back, and on his death he had left it to my son Georges.
Mrs. Thompson, being on the terrace at Monaco, saw an old
gentleman and an old lady playing with a dog. She walked
towards them and, without apparent reason, spoke to them, say
ing, soon after, that she had seen the word Carqueiranne over
their heads. Now M. and Mme. Moutonnier were due to go to
Carqueiranne with Myers to meet Mrs. Thompson herself. She
had never heard M. and Mme. Moutonnier spoken of.
Dr. Frederic van Eeden, a Dutch physician living at Bussum,
was introduced to Mrs. Thompson by F. Myers, but with great
care to concealhis name and nationality from her. In the course
of the sance Mrs. Thompson called him Mr. Bussum, said
that he had a relation named Frederic and was a gardener in
Eden. Dr. van Eeden had brought a piece from the clothes of
a young man who had committed suicide, without, however, tell
ing any one of the fact. Mrs. Thompson gave his Christian name
and described his character. She said that he had blood on his
throat, which agreed with the manner of the suicide. When Dr.
van Eeden spoke in Dutch, Mrs. Thompson understood him quite*
*See also Dr. Fr. van Eeden, Quelques observations sur les phnomnes dits
spirites, Congr. Univ. de psychologie de Paris, 1900 et A. S. P., i 90Ii
240-52.
well, though she did not speak that language.1 She recalled to
Dr. van Eeden the conversation he had had with the deceased,
and Dr. van Eeden in the end was absolutely convinced that there
had been real communication with the departed. This personal
conviction of an experienced psychologist like Dr. van Eeden has
much weight.
James Hyslop has studied with extreme care a case of crypt-
esthesia which seems to him a proof of personal identity: Mr.
Thomson, goldsmith and photographer, had known slightly a
distinguished painterRobert Swain Giffordwhom he had met
once or twice on the marshes of North Bedford. He had also
visited him once.
Gifford died in January, 1905, and Thomson that summer felt
a first impulse to sketch and paint. At an exhibition of Giffords
works he seemed to hear a voice telling him, Finish what I have
begun. Thomson then began to make pictures in Giffords style,
some of them strikingly so. If it were rigorously proved that
Thomson had neither seen, nor could have seen, Giffords un
finished sketches, the demonstration of cryptesthesia would be
astounding. But Thomson, whatever his honesty, cannot answer
for his subconscious recollections, so that the case does not prove
very much. It would be needful to prove that these unfinished
sketches were absolutely unknown to Thomson. Flournoy was
much more exacting with Helen Smith, and very properly so.2
It seems to us impossible to admit the possession of Thomson by
Giffords spirit.
Similarly the case cited by Aksakoff cannot be considered
demonstrative. A nurse, Anastasia Perelyguine, poisoned her
self and died in the little town of Tamboff on the 16th of Novem
ber. On the 18th the name Anastasia was given at a sance, with
details of her suicide. It does not affect the case that the medium
and sitters state that they knew nothing of the matter; it would
be quite enough that they had heard (and forgotten) between
the 16th and 18th some talk of it, for the incident to be referable
to subconscious memory. These are very doubtful cases that can
not be taken into account; for in metapsychics as in all other
sciences doubtful demonstrations do more harm than good.
Grasset, in his book published in 1908, would seem to have
deliberately omitted cases that prove telepathy; and as he only
*Cf.t p. 224.
zAmer. S. P. R., 1910 and A. S. P., 1910, xx, 193-264.
mentions poor and uncertain ones he has no difficulty in deducing
the nullity of telepathy (cryptesthesia). But this is not fair dis
cussion. The stories in LEcho du merveilleux, and likewise the
accounts given by Aksakoff, are often very questionable both as
observations and in their interpretation.1
Mrs. C., who is in no. way a professional medium, gave a
sance to Messrs. Venzano and Bozzano in the Minerva circle
at Genoa. At the outset the raps indicated to Mrs. C. that her
infant Robert, whom she had left at home quite well, was in
high fever. She at once left and found that the child was very
feverish, the servant being very anxious about him. The inci
dent is not demonstrative, for various reasons.
Mr. Venzano, experimenting with the Misses G. (non-profes
sional), whose hands were the only ones on the table (rappings),
was thinking of a friend some years dead. This name was given
and also that of a fellow-student of himself and his dead friend.
Near the close of the sance the name Cipriani was given.
Searching his memory, Venzano recollected that this was the
familiar name of an octogenarian relation several years dead.
Then, unrequested, the table gave the name Teresa Bartolini, who
was the wife of Cipriani (A. S. P., 1905, xv, 694).
At a private sance in the house of Mme. J. H. at Paris, Rue
Saint-Charles (xv arr.) near the fortifications, on July 31, 1914,
the Count Ugo Baschieri exclaimed suddenly, An important
person is about to be assassinated. What quantities of blood!
What is the time? The clock showed 9:40 . . Well, some
p m
thing has happened near the Boulevard des Italiens. On that

date, between 9:35 and 9:40, about three hundred yards from
the Boulevard des Italiens, M. Jaurs was the victim of a cowardly
assassination.
This cannot be classed as a premonition, for the event took
place simultaneously with the announcement. Of course chance
may be invoked as usual by persons who are resolved to deny
everything, but that is a very poor explanation.
This case much resembles that of the assassination of Queen
Draga mentioned later on, and also the well-known case cited
by De Vesme, of Apollonius of Tyana, who during a lecture at*
loc. cit.,
*Grasset, 316. The chapter on the detail of facts is but 13 pages,
of which two are devoted to Mme. Couesdon, the seeress of the Rue Saint-
Denis, and two to Mr. Dace, the well-known (?) young occultist. Is such
criticism worthy of M. Grasset?
Ephesus, suddenly broke off, saying that the tyrant Domitian had
been killed at Rome. The story is given by Philostratus and
Dio Cassius in his history; but can we believe it?
M. Lemaire, a professor at Geneva, experimenting with H.
Smith, says that the medium, at the outset of the sance, smelt
stones ; she said that one Jean had come for Mrs. N., who had
attended some previous sances. Mrs. N., searching her memory,
remembered that when a child this man Jean, a working quarry-
man, had a great affection for her. His work used to be to
prepare and light the fuses for blasting (A . S. P., 1897, vii.
74). It is an unimportant matter.
Mr. Arthur Hill reports some very conclusive experiments.
One of his friends, a Mr. Frank Knight, went (absolutely incog
nito), to Miss MacDonald, a professional medium, who told his
name (Frank), the name of his mother (Freda Katherine),
the names of his sister and brother (Janet and Herbert), and
of Benjamin, his uncle.
Another medium, Mr. Watson, gave Mr. Knight the name of
his mother (Mary Katherine), of his great-grandfather (Oliver
Upton), and of two of his relations (Kathleen Thornes and Ben
jamin Thornes), to which names Watson added the name Carter
which is a family name of Mr. Knight, but disused for more than
a century.
Other very numerous investigations with Watson were made,
which seem to have resulted in convincing even a person so
little inclined to credulity as Mr. Arthur Hill of the reality of
cryptesthesia. Even if we make the rather absurd supposition
that Watson made enquiry at the cemeteries so as to get informa
tion by the names on all tombs relating to the numerous family
of the Knights, that would not explain the whole. These investi
gations were very carefully studied in full detail by Mr. Arthur
Hill1 (pp. 113-116). I think therefore he is justified in saying:
1. That frauds due to extensive, difficult, and almost impossible
researches, very prolonged and numerous, made by mediums, the
better to deceive those who consult them, are extremely unlikely.
The detectives employed to watch Mrs. Piper discovered nothing.
It is also to be observed that any mediums making such enquiries
would always be risking discovery in flagrante delicto of prepared
imposture, which would ruin their reputation.
xNew Evidence in Psychical Research, with an introduction by Sir Oliver
Lodge, London, W . Ridder, 1911.
2. The observers are not hallucinated.
3. The probability of some successes in research on cryptes-
thesia is so small that chance cannot be invoked with decency.
4. In fine, everything depends on rigorous methods and con
ditions of experiment. If the experimenter remains absolutely
silent, refraining from the slightest signs of approval or negation;
if he is quite impassive and takes full notes on all that is said,
then the experiment is valuable. Such impassiveness and com
plete record of all the mediums speeches is, however, very
difficult.
Mme. Briffaut, of Paris, has given many and certain proofs of
lucidity. Among these, out of many others, I will quote the fol
lowing : Mme. G. de Montebello, visiting her, and quite sure that
Mme. Briffaut could not know her name or anything about her,
received a convincing proof of cryptesthesia: I see someone who
calls himself L. Louis, is it not ? Mme. de M. inclines her head
affirmatively. He is your son? Yes. He was killed in the
war? No. Nevertheless, said Mme. Briffaut, he signs to
me that he died suddenly and violently all at once. Now in fact
Louis de Montebello was struck by lightning before the war. If
Mme. Briffaut made a mistake it was only in the interpretation;
she had been made aware of sudden and violent death and con
cluded (wrongly but reasonably) that this took place in the war.
Other exact and valuable details were given. By the side of Mme.
de Montebello Mme. Briffaut saw an old lady steadily writing.
This referred very clearly to the grandmother of Mme. de M.,
who spent the last fifteen years of her life in writing her memoirs.
This experiment with Mme. de M. is a very satisfactory one,
but with some other persons Mme. Briffauts results were nil.
Such cases of clairvoyance seem to depend almost as much on the
percipient as on the agent. Mme. de Montebello usually gets
extraordinarily detailed and precise answers when she consults
a medium, a sensitive, or a somnambulist, so that I am inclined
to think that a mediums lucidity does not work indifferently for
everyone. There are some who inspire them, and some who
do not.
My daughter, Mme. A. G. Le Ber, whose name was known to
Mme. Briffaut, received a number of particulars the value of
which is scarcely diminished by the name being known. Indeed
to learn all that was said, Mme. Briffaut would have had to enter
on long and difficult enquiries, and in any case she indicated
verbatim a very private conversation that Mme. Le Ber had with
her brother Albert, killed in the war, and this private conversation
was known to no living person, except to Mme. Le Ber herself.
Arnaud de Gramont, under the pseudonym of Dr. X., went to
see Mme. Briffaut and told her that he had lost a son in the war.
Mme. B. said, He was killed by a wound in the head, he fell
from a great height; he was in the Flying Corps (correct). She
saw the name S ... mont. The first name of M. de Gramonts
son was Sanche.
The Bulletins Nos. 1 and 2 of the International Metapsychics
Institute (Paris), 1920, contain many interesting details on Mme.
Briffauts cryptesthesia. To Mr. Jean Lefebvre, who was quite
unknown to her, she gave the names of his brothers Pierre and
Joseph. She said that the wife of the latter had died less than a
year before from an operation on the liver (correct). To Mr.
Lemerle, a cautious and trained observer, whom she could not
have known, she said at once, I see Jacques! a young man who
died tragically. I hear him call: he writes Jean, Henri . . .
Both the sons of Mr. Lemerle had been victims of a serious ac
cident to an automobile. Henri was killed, but Jacques escaped
death. The Revue Spirite of May, 1921 (p. 144), contains a
notable case of Mme. Briffauts clairvoyance.
Analogous facts to those given by Mme. Briffaut in Paris and
by Mrs. Leonard in London were obtained by a sensitive named
Ludwig Aub, of Munich.1
A medical student went to see Aub, giving neither his name
nor his profession. Aub told him, You are a medical student,
you are fond of music, especially Mozart. Your father was a
physician, also your grandfather, at Stettin. To Dr. O. Aut
said, Your father was a philosopher, your mother is of English
birth but lived in Austria. You have recently been married
(all details correct). To Dr. S. he said, It is characteristic of
you that you have in your house a large picture of the time of
Albert Drer; it is valuable, and you take great pride in it
(correct). To Dr. G. he said, You have a predilection for
Gustave Flaubert. That very morning Dr. G. had written a
preface to the works of Flaubert.
Mr. Hayward has methodically analyzed the answers given by*
*Von R. Tischner, Eine physiologisch-okkultistische Studie (Psychische
Stjudien, xlvii,
1920, 598-612). Tischner cites various publications on Aub-that
appeared at Munich, by Dr. Dingfelder, G. W. de Surga, and others.
Mrs. K. near Montreal; but they do not show any very high
degree of lucidity (Fortune-telling, Am. P. S. P. R., 1921, 185).
To sum up: From all these experiences of cryptesthesia whether
with sensitives, mediums, or somnambules, one very clear con
clusion emergesthat there is a faculty of cognition by other
means than by the ordinary sensorial channels.
At the present time it cannot be doubted it has become
almost a commonplace and will soon be generally admitted; people
will then marvel that it should have been so long misunderstood,
ridiculed, and denied by official science.
I may be allowed to recall with some pride that in 1888 (P. S.
P. R., v) I clearly affirmed this strange fact that now dom
inates all subjective metapsychics: In certain persons, at certain
times, there exists a faculty of cognition which has no relation
to our normal means of knowledge.
I have nothing to alter in what I then said; unless that this
proposition, which then seemed so rash, is now on the point of
being universally accepted, it is accepted by Mrs. H. Sidgwick
and by Sir Oliver Lodge. Very soon it will seem so simple that
no one will think that there was any rashness in putting it
forward.
The phenomenon of cryptesthesia is as certain as any other
scientific fact; to deny it is to rebel against all scientific demon
stration.
All these experiments with Mme. Briffaut, Mrs. Leonard, and
Mrs. Piper seem to give some support to the spiritualistic theory;
and I make this avowal against the grain. The lucidity of these
seeresses appears to occur only because a spirit seems to intervene
to reveal such and such a fact to them. I am careful not to infer
that this is so, but everything happens as if the spirit of the de
ceased intervened to tell the medium his name, his relations, the
facts he knows, and to converse with the guide of the medium.
This is no doubt only a semblance; the means of cognition
remain mysterious. The hypothesis that the facts are communi
cated to us by a being seemingly human is a very anthropomorphic
hypothesis. We may allow it a place, strictly provisionally, and
on this delicate matter it is advisable to take the scientific ground
here adopted. I consider cryptesthesia absolutely demonstrated,
but I reject all hypotheses on the origin of these revelations and
divinations, considering the proofs insufficient.
There are many other interesting facts mentioned by Myers,
Bozzano, and others which I do not give here; because they can
be explained by forgotten, subconscious, but normal ideas, even
when this explanation seems improbable. To warrant the in
ference of cryptesthesia at all there must be absolute impossibility
that the information given should have come through any normal
channel. M. Heintzer, for instance, sees the apparition of his
father with a white beard and in a dress coat. He knew that his
father was dead and had never seen him when his beard was
white. While Mr. Heintzer was abroad his father had been
buried in a dress coat and during his last illness the beard had
turned white. Is it not possible that the son had heard of these
circumstances and forgotten them, though he might in perfect
good faith deny this?
Flournoy may be right in supposing that the name Burnier1
did not come to his medium by any process of metapsychics or
cryptesthesia. Although the explanation by normal means is ter
ribly involved and improbable, it must be admitted to be just
possible.
The extraordinary powers of the latent memory are such as to
make any illusion possible. Stainton Moses writes automatically,
by the dictation of Rector, Go to the bookcase and take the last
book but one on the second shelf, look at the last paragraph on
page 94, and you will find this sentence . . . A long sentence
follows. Stainton Moses gets up, takes the book, and verifies
that the quotation is correct and is on p. 94. But it is reasonable
to suppose that this may be a very complete and perfect subcon
scious reminiscence rather than a fact of cryptesthesia. Shortly
after, Rector writes, Pope is the last great writer, etc., . . .
Take the eleventh volume on the same shelf, open it, and you
will find this sentence. . . . Stainton Moses does as instructed
and finds the quotation on p. 145. The thing is very strange:
why did the book open at the very page quoted? Was this for
tuitous? Chance explains nothing. Could it be that Stainton
Moses had previously opened the book in a state of semi-som
nambulism?
Mme. R. has given me wonderful instances of cryptesthesia
that cannot be explained by telepathy. Mme. R. is a lady forty
years of age, a non-professional medium, married, and the mother
of a family. She is interested in spiritualism because while very
1See p. 773 (French edition).
young she says that she had a vision that preserved her from a
great danger. (Helen Smith had a similar experience early in
life.)
Mme. R.s communications are usually by automatic writing,
sometimes verbal, and (rarely) by raps. I will quote three that
are very clearly demonstrative:
1. This concerned one of my dear friends lately deceased,
whom she had not known, and whose name I believe I never
mentioned before her. She told me that his name was Antoine,
that I entered the room a few moments after his death and kissed
his forehead; she added that he used to call me Carlos. The
name, the detail of the kiss, and the fact that he alone of all my
friends called me Carlos are all characteristic.
Antoine, speaking by Mme. R., said that he had been at Fon
tainebleau with his wife Lucie, saying, We were sadly happy
there. His widow assured me that this fitted the facts. I did
not know of the visit to Fontainebleau. The name Lucie was
not quite wrong, for the lady told me that Antoine used often
to say to her, It is a pity that your name is not Lucie! That
is the name I like best!
2. The next case is still more striking. A near relation of
mine, a young man of one-and-twenty, poisoned himself with
strychnine. The cause of death was kept secret from everyone,
except from his father, his uncle, and myself. It was never men
tioned in any newspaper. Three weeks later I asked Mme. R.
for the name of a near relation lately deceased; she said, He
was called George; you were at his death-bed, there was a red
foam on his lips. This was absolutely true. Then she said,
Lulu, Lulu. In his family he was called Lolo. I set aside
numerous and serious mistakes, but there is one characteristic
detail: George, speaking by Mme. R., said, Stephen, Stephen i1
Oh, that writing! I thought I could never finish it! This re
ferred to an incident quite unknown to anybody, and was most
astonishingly precise. Before killing himself, the unhappy boy
had written a long letter to a friend, Etienne, which he had left
open on the table. No one but his father, his uncle, and I had
seen this letter. Now Mme. R., who lived a retired life, could
know nothing of all these facts which we had all three kept
strictly secret. I knew nothing of Etienne, Georges friend.
lThe name Stephen in English corresponds exactly to the French name
Etienne.
3. The third fact, which on thinking it over, appears to me
one of the most striking examples of cryptesthesia yet obtained,
is the following: I give the details, for it shows astonishing
lucidity acting at a distance of 1,200 miles, and exact notes were
taken. In June, 1906, at 10.30 p .m ., in presence of my friend
Octave Houdaille, Mme. S., Mme. R., and her twelve-year-old
daughter, after some incoherent phrases, we got the following
sentence by raps, more distinct than ever before. (In the whole
course of my experiments with Mme. R. the raps were unintel
ligible only twice or three times.) Bancalamo ; I could not
refrain from saying, Oh, it is Latin, calamo ! But the dictation
continued imperturbably, Banca la mort guette famille. Thence
onwards the answers were incoherent. I thought at first that the
first word must be in ItalianBianca=Blanche; but no one
present could interpret the words.
The next day, Thursday, at 2 p .m . the news of the assassination
of Queen Draga of Serbia was received at Paris. Some Serbian
officers, having bought over the palace servants, entered at mid
night and assassinated King Alexander, his wife, and her two
brothers; her two sisters escaping by a miracle. Not for a
moment did I connect this tragedy with the previous evenings
sance.
On Friday, reading in the paper some details relative to the
crime, I learned that Dragas father was named Panka, and this
came as a ray of light.
1. The word Banca is very near Panka. (I will return to
this later.)
2. The time at which the message was given, 10.30 p .m., is,
to a minute, the time at which the assassins left the Hotel de la
Couronne de Serbie; correcting for Belgrade time which is one
and one-half hours in advance of Paris time.
3. The words apply with startling exactitude to the peril men
acing the whole family of Panka ; the words Death lies in wait
family could hardly be more appositely chosen in view of the
situation at midnight in Belgrade.
Now to consider how far the five letters of the word Banca
are applicable to Dragas father. Of these five letters, each
carrying a probability of 1 to 25, three only are correct. The
compounded probability is therefore in round figures 1 to 1500.
But analyzing the entire word the probability is much less. That
the word should have five letters, neither more nor less, works
out to 1 to 7. For a chance name there might have been 4, 5,
6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 letters (Jean, Marie, Robert, Etienne, Julienne,
Eleonore, Marguerite). The compounded probability is then 1
to 10,500. But more than this, B for P is not totally wrong if
the communication were by sound: Germans interchange them
and say brophet for prophet and petter for better.
The error in the fourth letter is curious, for in the Serbian
alphabet the fourth letter in the name of Dragas father is a
single letter pronounced dj or dz, or tz that the French alphabet
(which we were using) does not contain and it would seem that
C comes nearest to it in sound. Even if we allow that B is quite
wrong, we must admit that C is not and the total compounded
probability then becomes 1 to 500,000, which is a moral certainty.
Only three hypotheses are possible in subjective metapsychics:
(A) Mal-observation, collusion or illusion; (B) chance; (C)
cryptesthesia. In the experience narrated above, collusion or il
lusion must be ruled out, for the message was given before the
event was known. No one in Paris knew at 10 . . on the 10th
p m
of June that there was a plot against Draga; and of the five
persons present, who had no relations at all with any Balkan
State, probably none even knew of Draga. The only hypotheses
remaining are chance and cryptesthesia.
Chance, however, is inadmissible: for not only was a name
given against odds of 1 to 500,000; but the fateful phrase Mort
guette famille probably applies only to the family of Panka
whose three children were in a few minutes to perish; out of the
fifty millions of families existing that evening in Europe. Gras-
set, however, has not hesitated to affirm that chance gave Banca
for Panca and that the words Mort guette famille might apply
to a thousand other families. The objection is really absurd.
In fact, if an intelligent force inspired this sentenceand ap
pearances favour this bold hypothesisit would seem that this
intelligence wished to make a declaration whose authenticity could
be verified. If Panka had been some old working baker of Bel
grade I could never have ascertained whether the monition were
veridical or fanciful. No one can investigate fifty million families,
a hundred at most would be the limit.
(b) Investigation with a Hidden Alphabet
Here I would indicate a new method which I devised for veri
fying cryptesthesia. It succeeded with me because I was ex
perimenting with a medium endowed with the special sensitive
ness required; but Sir William Barrett has shown that it may
succeed with others. In any case this method with a hidden
alphabet has great advantages and deserves trial, though I would
not insist upon it, as mediums are best left to act according to
their intuitions in choosing the method by which answers are
obtainable.1
These experiments were carried out with Gustave Ollendorff,
Henri Ferrari, Louis Olivier, Albert Pere, and Gaston Fournier
nearly all deceased, alas, my faithful and beloved comrades!
The medium was my deeply regretted friend, Gaston Fournier,
then aged thirty-two, a kindly man, clear-sighted and reliable.
The experiments were made in the following manner: G., the
medium, placed his hands on the table, every tilt setting in
F ig . 10. Arrangements for experiment with a hidden alphabet. E. D. C. are

at the tilting table with their backs to A . and B., who have the alphabet before
them. The bell is so fixed as to ring if the table tilts.
motion an electric bell. C. and D. also had their hands on the

table but did not influence it.
At three or four yards distance on another table, and behind a
sheet of cardboard, the alphabet was placed so that G., who had
his back turned to it, could not see it. A. and B. sit at this table.
A. runs over the alphabet with a pencil, B. writes down the
letter at which the table tilts, he being made aware of th:s by the
sound of the bell.
1See Ch. Richet, La suggestion mentale et le calcul des probabilits, Rev.
Philosophique, October, 1883, 609. Des mouvements inconscients (Hommage
M. Chevreul), Paris, Alcan, aot 1886 et Revue de lhypnotisme, 1886, 170 and
209. An excellent analysis has been given in P. S. P. R., 1884, fasc. vii, 239-
Relation of diverse experiences, etc., P. S. P. R., June, 1888, 138.
The letters indicated by this method give intelligible sentences ;
therefore, the tilts being due to unconscious muscular pressure
by G., these pressures, indicating the letter required, must be due
to lucidity. Everything happens as if G., wanting to send a
message, could see the alphabet to which his back is turned and
which is hidden by the cardboard sheet. The movement of the
pencil over the letters is both silent and irregular, and during
these experiments we intentionally talk, sing, recite verses, and
in fact make such a noise that B., who writes down the letters,
can hardly hear the stroke of the bell.
One day by excess of precaution I used a circular instead of a
rectilinear alphabet, and beginning, not at A but with some other
letter, and moving the pencil at very different rates, we got Fa
sol do. These are not chance letters but indicate intelligence, and
therefore cryptesthesia.
All answers that have a meaning at all, even if uninteresting,
indicate cryptesthesia, and that of a peculiar kindthe perception
by the medium of a hidden lettersuch perception being un
related to normal sight or hearing.
Complete sentences were given, transposed verses, such as
Tombe aux pieds de ce sexe qui tu dois ta mre.
Or Latin lines:
Infandum, regina, jubes renovare dolorem.
Or phrases in old French as when the soi-distant Villon O sont
les neiges dantan ? Louys le Cruel. Essai sur daemoniomanie.
The sentences are meaningless in themselves, but show cryptes
thesia, for it was quite impossible for Gaston, whose muscles
were moving the table, to know the letters pointed to by the
pencil which I was moving irregularly and silently over the
hidden alphabet.
Sir William Crookes came one day to be present at one of these
experiments. He put the mental question, What is the name
of my eldest son ? By the hidden alphabet we had the answer,
I know only the slang. The alphabet was not only hidden as
before described, but it was lit by a small lamp that barely allowed
us to see the letters. The answer might be to any question, but
the point is that the table-tilts corresponded with the movements
of the pencil that could not be perceived by Gaston by any normal
means.
These experiments also demonstrate the power of the sub
conscious, for Gaston, like the rest of us, sang, laughed, and talked
during the whole of these experiments, some of which were com
plicatedsuch as the dictation backwards of a Latin verse. The
whole of his conscious personality was in full activity, while the
subconscious part was no less active in quite another manner in
dependently of the consciousness.
Is this alphabetical cryptesthesia telepathic? It is possible,
there is no evidence one way or the other ; but in one case there
was certainly no telepathy from those present, though the result
calculated according to probabilities was not at all striking. I
said to a Mr. D. who was very sceptical, he not being present at
the experiment, Think of some name, either that of an historical
person or any unknown name, we will get it by the table and I
will tell it you tomorrow. The answer obtained was F.N.T.B.T.
If we take each preceding letter, as is quite permissible, we get
E M S A S.
The name thought of by Mr. D. was Cesar or Csar. On five
letters with a probability of 1 to 25, two being correct, the com
pounded probability is 1 to 42; but this is not all, for that the
answer should be a word of five letters corresponding to a word
of five letters thought of, gives a probability of 1 to 7. The
total then becomes 1 to 294; and if the table lagged behind the
movement of the pencil, the word comes out as D M S A R,
which passably approaches Caesar.
I mention this experiment, which in comparison with the good
ones described above, is terribly poor, not to draw any inference
from it, but only to show that when the methods of experiment
are faultless, the calculus of probabilities is very useful. For
my own part I prefer an unexceptionable experiment where the
odds against chance success are small, to one against which the
odds are very high, but where the experiment itself is vitiated by
a slight error which makes the calculus inapplicable.
I will mention one more experiment. Paul, the brother of
Gaston, in no way mediumistic and very sceptical, was present
at a sance without touching the table. We asked him to think
of a name. The name thought of was indicated by C H E V A L.
The name thought of was Chevalon. Mile. Chevalon, some time
deceased, was a friend of the family to which Gaston and Paul
belonged. We then asked the spirit Chevalon to give us some
thing characteristic, and by means of the table and the hidden
alphabet we got How is your mother? On which (it must be
acknowledged) Gaston was frightened; and neither that evening
nor afterwards would he act as medium. I could never persuade
him to try again.
Experiments with a hidden alphabet are, I think, very valuable
as giving decisive proofs of cryptesthesia. They have been re
cently repeated by Sir William Barrett very successfully.1
The mediums, who were personal friends of Sir William, were
completely blindfolded by a mask covering the whole face; the
letters of the alphabet, placed before them, could not be seen
at all by them and moreover these letters were placed at random
and covered with a sheet of glass and screened by a table-cloth.
Under these conditions coherent messages were received. The
actual sense of these is of no importance; it is sufficient to know
that the letters indicated by very rapid and vigorous movements
of the planchette were not chance combinations but had very
distinct meanings.
In one case, very carefully observed by Sir William, the medi
ums, Mrs. Travers-Smith and Mr. Lennox Robinson, were blind
folded and the letters of the alphabet were placed (anyhow),
under a sheet of glass. One evening a few hours after the tor
pedoing of the Lusitania, it was indicated by this means that Sir
Hugh Lane, a friend of the two mediums, had been drowned.
While the sance was in progress and after this announcement
had been made, one of the evening papers gave the name of Sir
Hugh Lane as one of the victims.
This case cannot be held to carry much weight, as the mediums
knew that the Lusitania had been torpedoed and that Sir Hugh
Lane had left America some days before. It would have been
easy for subconsciousness to conclude that he might be one of
those drowned. The full account of this experience is given by
Mrs. Hester Travers-Smith ( Voices front the Void, London,
Rider & Co., 1919, 35).
A better experience, analogous to the above, is also reported by
Mrs. Travers-Smith. One evening after a fruitless sance, there
came through the table, Ship sinking, all hands lost, William
East overboard. Women and children weeping and wailing;
sorrow, sorrow, sorrow ! At that moment a newsboy in the
street cried the news. Mrs. Smith went to get the paper which
xAccount by Miss Dallas. Expriences avec lOui-ja, les mdiums op
rant les yeux bands (A. S. P., March, 1916, xxvi, 45).
contained the shipwreck of the Titanic. William East might
well stand for William Stead.
Although the case of Sir Hugh Lane does not prove the
monition, it stands as evidence for the production of messages
by a hidden alphabet, and therefore is a good case of cryptesthesia.
Mrs. Travers-Smith has given several other decisive proofs.
A professor of the University of Groningen, Mr. Heymans,
undertook some experiments in a manner different from that
described above which gave very interesting results. His medium
was a non-professional, a student. He has not as yet published
anything, but he wrote me the letter given below: Our experi
ments in telepathy were carried out in two rooms at my laboratory,
one over the other. The blindfolded subject was placed in the
lower room behind a screen enclosing him on three sides, and
with an opening in front through which his hand could pass.
This hand can move over a board divided like a chess-board into
forty-two squares. In the ceiling of this room, made of rein
forced concrete, there is an opening about thirteen inches by
twenty-one inches, closed top and bottom by sheets of glass.
Looking through this window one of us in the upper room can
see the board and the hand of the subject, and he tries mentally
to direct the hand to a given square determined by lot. The
upper room being kept dark, the subject can see nothing even if
he were not blindfolded. No sound can penetrate the ceiling;
even by shouting one cannot make oneself understood. Never
theless the correct square (probability 1:48) was indicated 32
times in 80 trials. The mathematical probability of 32 successes
on 80 trials is (ftr)21.
There may be telepathy in this case, but there certainly is
cryptesthesia, for there are two factors involved, (1) the carry
ing out of the agents thought by telepathy, which is one of the
modalities of cryptesthesia; and (2) after the square has been
thought of, the movement to that square; which can only be
cryptesthesia.
The care with which this eminent psychologist has made these
experiments renders them very valuable.
It would be very interesting to resume experiments (using the
hidden alphabet) with powerful mediums, who might doubtless
be trained to correspond in this manner. In any case it is obvious
that cryptesthesia admits of great varieties in experimentation
and conceals unforeseen possibilities.
( c ) Cross-Correspondences
This is an ingenious proceeding to verify lucidity. It has been
much used of late in England and America.
The principle is as follows: Two persons, A. and P., agree
to write each other letters simultaneously to see if their thoughts
coincide. The letters are dated and carry the post-mark. The
experiment is unexceptionable, especially if the thought of the
agent, A., is determined by chance. But even if this is not so
chosen it is highly unlikely that two persons acting in good
faith should hit upon the same idea.
Miss Ramsden and Miss Miles have had some results worthy
of note.1 Miss Miles was in London, and Miss Ramsden at Bul-
strode, eighteen miles distant. Miss M. was the agent, and Miss
R. the percipient.
October 27th, Miss M., spectacles; Miss R., spectacles.
October 30th, Miss M., a watch; Miss R., a medal on a chain.
October 31st, Miss M., while combing her hair, sees the sunset
on the Brompton Oratory, with the cross standing out against
the sky. She desires to transmit this. Miss R. thinks that Miss
M. has wished to transmit a crucifixion; she is surprised to see
only the cross without the holy women at its foot.
November 4th, Miss Ramsden describes: Gothic arches like a
cloister; long-necked herons and water-birds; a row of guns fired;
a woman with a shepherds plaid; a long-haired dog, a grey
hound, and a fine retriever.
November 4th, Miss Miles went to the church at Malmesbury
where there were Gothic arches resembling a cloister. There
was some talk of rabbit-shooting; swans and a heron were seen;
there were greyhounds and retrievers. Mrs. de Beaufort, a
friend of Miss Miles, was wearing a shepherds plaid.
Other proofs of cryptesthesia have been given by cross-cor
respondence. I quote only one, given by Miss Johnson, who
is a research officer of the P. R. (Survival of Man, Sir Oliver
Lodge, p. 226). Mrs. Forbess script, purporting to come from
her son Talbot, stated that he must now leave her, since he was
looking for a sensitive who wrote automatically, in order that he
might obtain corroboration of her own writing. Mrs. Verrall
on the same day wrote of a fir-tree planted in a garden, and
the script was signed with a sword and suspended bugle. The
1P. S. P. R., October, 1907.
latter was part of the badge of the regiment to which Talbot
Forbes had belonged, and Mrs. Forbes had in her garden some
fir-trees grown from seed sent to her by her son. These facts
were unknown to Mrs. Verrall. In another case (Proc. S. P. R.,
xviii, 269-271), on October 16, 1904, Mrs. Verralls script
gave details, afterwards verified, of what Mrs. Forbes was doing;
and immediately afterwards Mrs. Verrall had a mental impres
sion of Mrs. Forbes sitting in her drawing-room, with the figure
of her son standing looking at her. Mrs. Forbess script of the
same day, purporting to come from her son, stated that he was
present and wished she could see him, and that a test was being
given for her at Cambridge.
The laborious studies by Mr. Hubert Wales must be considered
under this head.1 He received notes sent to him almost daily
from Miss Samuel, and he himself took daily notes at Hind-
head (about forty miles from London). The intention was to
see if there were correspondence in these notes relative to Mr.
Waless thoughts and occupations. The method is excellent; but
the results do not seem very demonstrative of cryptesthesia. Mr.
Wales classed the notes in three groups:
(1) Veridical, hardly attributable to coincidence, 16; (2) Par
tially and confusedly veridical, 200; (3) No connection, 159.
The whole observations, 375, extended over eight months. It
is not easy to draw a definite inference, even on the 16 cases con
sidered veridical; they are about 4 per cent, of the whole. But
there were some very encouraging results, especially of apparent
premonitory impressions.
The study of cross-correspondences has been pushed very far.
With inexhaustible patience, Mrs. Verrall, Miss Helen Verrall,
Mrs. Holland, Miss Alice Johnson, Mr. Piddington, Dr. Verrall,
and Mrs. Sidgwick have elaborated a long and remarkable series
that could be brought to a satisfactory conclusion only by persons
who, like Mrs. Verrall, unite scientific insight with a profound
knowledge of classical literature and exceptional powers of me
diumship. Any analysis of them, however, would be lengthy
and if not minute would be unenlightening.
The personality of Myers certainly seems traceable in some
words of Mrs. Pipers, and also in some writings of Mrs. Verralls.
M Report on a series of cases of apparent thought transference without
conscious agency, P. S. P. R., 1920, xxxi, 218-924.
Mrs. Piper knows neither Latin nor Greek, nevertheless she
makes quotations and allusions that are so numerous, so skilful,
and so complex that no trickery so perverse can be supposed.
It has thence been inferred that it was Myers, then recently
deceased and during his lifetime well versed in classical literature,
who was the inspirer of these writings. Numerous attempts were
made to establish a relation between the writings of Mrs. Verrall
(V. Myers) and the speeches of Mrs. Piper (P. Myers). Coin
cidence in these would not have been a proof of personal sur
vival, but might have been a beginning of such proof (S. P. R.
Proc., 1910-1914). It is not possible here to enter into further
detail. It will suffice to cite the diametrically opposite conclu
sions arrived at by J. Maxwell and Mrs. Sidgwick.1
Maxwell thinks that exaggerated weight has been given to
symbolism and that the interpretations of that symbolism are
sometimes fanciful, sometimes wire-drawn. He is inclined to
think that placing so much confidence in automatic scripts and
seeking to find in them far-fetched and complicated symbolism
would end in finding transcendental relations everywhere.
He therefore declines to admit the inferences drawn by Mrs.
Verrall and Mr. Piddington. It is impossible, he says, to
admit the intervention of a spirit. We want proof of facts;
and the system of cross-correspondences is founded on negative
facts and is an unstable foundation. Only positive facts have an
intrinsic value, which cross-correspondences cannot show; not
at present, at any rate.
Mrs. Sidgwick differs from Mr. Maxwell.2 According to
her the probability of personal survival is strengthened by the
general character of the communications which show in both
ideas and wording more similarity to the ideas of the supposed
communicators than with those of the mediums. This argument
of Mrs. Sidgwicks is not very strong, for the subtlety of the
subconscious in mediums is sufficient to reconstitute the person
ality of Myers or of any other person in a most striking manner.
Mrs. Sidgwick adds, with very good reason, that more positive
proofs are required.*
*J. M axw ell, Les correspondances croises et la mthode exprimentale, P.
S. P. R., p a rt lxv, 1912, 54-144.
2A reply to Dr. Joseph Maxwells Paper on cross-correspondences and the
experimental method, P. S. P. R., July, 1913, p a rt lxvii, 375-401.
Mr. Gerald Balfour1 concludes that this long and laborious
investigation leads slowly but surely towards the inference that
many facts appearing in this cross-correspondence can be satis
factorily explained only by the spiritist hypothesis.
Mr. Balfour states his conclusions on these long automatic
scripts simultaneously received, to the following effect: All
three mediums mention Euripides ; they all indicate more or less
clearly that Euripides is the subject of the cross-correspondences.
Two of them connect Euripides' with the Hercules Furens.
In another case which Mr. Balfour considers good, Mrs. Piper
says: Light in the West, and Mrs. Verrall says, The words are
from Maud (Tennyson), Rosy is the East. The true quota
tion is Rosy is the West (Maud, xvii).
These are certainly well-marked cases of cryptesthesia ; but
whether there is cryptesthesia, or lucidity, or telepathy, these do
not in any way imply survival of a conscious personality.
On the other hand Mr. Hereward Carrington concludes (and I
quote his words as agreeing with my own conclusions) the
total facts are all fully explicable upon purely psychological and
naturalistic lines. They almost invariably resolve themselves
into simple subconscious memory associations. Chance has played
a larger part than is allowed for. All these communications,
despite the great labour that they represent, carry less proof
of survival than the sances of Mrs. Piper speaking as George
Pelham (A. S. P., 1909, xix, 294). It seems that this judg
ment of Mr. Carringtons is justified: but we agree with him in
recognizing that many of the phenomena of cross-correspondence
abundantly establish telepathy and cryptesthesia, even if they do
not prove survival.
5. Cryptesthesia Among Sensitives
If we define as spiritist those phenomena in which an ex
traneous personality seems to intervene (maintaining all reserve
as to the reality of such personality), we see that cryptesthesia
appears with increasing intensity (l).in normal persons, (2) in
hypnotized subjects, and (3) in mediums.
But there are some of its manifestations in persons that cannot
be referred to any of these three classes. We will call these
persons sensitives. As the facts defy classification, such distinc-
1Some recent scripts affording evidence of Personal survival, P. S. P. R.,
1914, x x v ii, 221-243.
tions must be arbitrary; for mediums, even when not in trance,
are sensitives; hypnotizable persons, even when not hypnotized,
very often are sensitives; and certain persons who are not hyp
notizable and are not mediums, show powers of cryptesthesia
sufficient to prevent their being classed as normal. They, too,
are sensitives.
Moreover, the passage from the normal state to a state of
trance, and from the hypnotic to the waking state is always
gradual, often undefinable, and all transitional states are gone
through. Nothing is more artificial than to make sharp divisions
between the normal state, the hypnotic, mediumistic trance, and
a state of sensitiveness. These distinctions are only conveniences
for study. In order that experimental lucidity may be exercised,
certain exterior aids are sometimes necessarypsychometry and
crystal vision.
(a) Psychometry, or Pragmatic Cryptesthesia
The term psychometry (soul-measurement) is so detestable
that we cannot retain it in scientific language. It was invented
by Buchanan.1
Buchanans psychometry is really nothing more than a
method of developing cryptesthesia, and we shall therefore call
it pragmatic cryptesthesia (i.e., cryptesthesia by means of material
objects).
Pragmatic cryptesthesia must be understood in a different sense
than that understood by Buchanan at its inception. That incep
tion was very strange. Elizabeth Denton (Mrs. Buchanan) on
seeing and touching some fragment from a geologic stratum,
reconstructed a Silurian or Jurassic landscape ! Only a simpleton
would take this at face-value : it is nothing but the result of bril
liant imagination on the part of the wife of an expert geologist,
and all these accounts by E Denton have only a literary interest.
xOn this, see Buchanan, Manual of Psychometry, Boston. W. Denton and
Elizabeth Denton, Natures Secret or psychometric research, London, Houlston
Wright, 1863. W . Denton, The Soul of Things. L. Deinhard, Psychometrie.
Sphinx, x. Jos. Peter, Psychometrie (Die Uebersinnliche) Welt, trad, in
* . S. P.,
4 1910, xx, 231-240, 276-280. Thaneg (pseudonyme de DescormiersV
Mthode de clairvoyance psychomitrique, Libr. des Sc. Psych., Paris, 1902.
lames Coates, Seeing the invisible: Practical studies in psychometry, thought
transference, telepathy, and allied phenomena, London and New York, Fowler
& Wells, 1909, 8vo. Edmond Duchatel, Enqute sur des cas de psychomtrie.
La vue distance dans le temps et dans Yespace (preface by J. Maxwell),
Paris, Leymarie, 1910, 8vo.
Since then psychometry has been much extended. On any ob
ject being given to a sensitive, many curious details are furnished
concerning the persons to whom it belonged; and under these
conditions fine examples of lucidity are observable. The mag-
netizers of 1820 to 1850 experimented in this manner, and their
superiority to Buchanan lies in the fact that they did not use the
word psychometry.
Despite the lucidity so often observed it is not proved that the
presence of the object is indispensable. Just as it is not at all
certain that the so-called transmission of thought is anything
but cognizance of a real fact, known because it is real, so also
it is not certain that contact with a given object is necessary to
the metapsychic cognizance of that object. Cryptesthesia (the
reality of which cannot be denied), is almost as readily exercised
without material contact, as with it.
Nevertheless it is possible that things, despite their apparent
inertia, may emit some (unknown) vibrations that arouse crypt
esthesia (though to imagine such is scarcely a presentable hy
pothesis), and we are reduced to somewhat pitiful conjectures
as to what the forces that awaken the faculty can possibly be.
The seas are still disturbed by the track of Pompeys vessels.
Certainly, but how many others have disturbed them! Whenever
we speak of cryptesthesia we can only speak of the fact itself.
It is a fact, but we can define neither its modalities, its condi
tions, nor its limits.
Clairvoyance, says Delanne, is a faculty that certainly exists,
but to seek to explain everything by it is to transgress logic and
scientific method, and he adds, It obeys laws and is manifested
under determinate conditions.
That is so, but we are entirely ignorant what these laws may
be. They are not, alas! determined as yetwhatever M. Delanne
may claim. We know that some persons are more endowed
in this respect than others, and perhaps the faculty to some
minute extent is not entirely lacking in anyone. We know that
some subjects are slightly sensitive, and others very much more
so. We know that cryptesthesia is developed by hypnotism, that
mediums in spiritist sances show it much more strongly still,
and that with powerful mediums it becomes wonderfully intense;
but that is about all that we do know.
How did Gallet foresee the number of votes that Casimir-Prier
would obtain four hours later? How did Thoulet read the tele
gram that would be sent to his friend two days later? It is
just as hard to understand, neither more nor less obscure as
how Mrs. Piper could know so well everything relating to George
Pelham. When we speak of lucidity, clairvoyance, premonition,
and cryptesthesia we are dealing with a faculty that is quite
unknown to us, and we can only see its results; its conditions
escape us entirely.
Mrs. Green, in London, sees two girls drowning in Australia,
and their hats floating on the water. Mrs. R., in Paris, alludes
to the deaths of Pancas childrenthe family that the Serbian
officers are just about to assassinate in Belgrade. We can for
mulate no sort of explanation, and similarly we do not see what
possible mechanism can awaken cryptesthetic sensitiveness. Ap
pearances point very strongly to the inference that mediums in
some trance conditions are inspired by a guide temporarily in
carnate in them (I use the language of spiritualism without im
plying the least concurrence in its doctrines), and phenomena
of cryptesthesia sometimes become extremely marked.
With reference to psychometry it is impossible to state ac
curately what part the object held by the sensitive plays in the
result or in the sensation produced in her. Mrs. Thompson, in
the experiment given ante, taking my sons watch into her hands,
says, Three generations mixed, but this in no way proves that
this cognizance of the past is due to vibrations stored up in the
watch. Mr. Dufay has described how Maria B. in hypnotic
trance, on being given an object that had belonged to a murderer,
described the murder. But was the object indispensable?
Miss X. related to the S. P. R. (General Meeting, May, 1895,
/. 5. P. R., v, 247), that some papers were shown her that seemed
of no special significance, but that she felt an intense reaction
of blood and horror. The papers had been taken on the battle
field of Sedan. Mrs. Piper on many occasions after handling
locks of hair or other objects has given precise particulars of
the persons to whom they belonged.
I now select from among many others an excellent example
of pragmatic cryptesthesia given by Mrs. Piper to Sir Oliver
Lodge. A chain was handed to Phinuit by me, the package
having been delivered by hand to me the previous evening. I
had just opened the package, glanced at the contents, and hastily
read a letter inside, then wrapped it all up again. The chain had
been sent by Mrs. John Watson from Sefton Drive.
Mrs. Piper said, This belongs to an old gentleman passed out
of the bodya nice old man. I see something the matter with
the heart. . . . Give me the wrappers, all of them.
The papers (wrappers) were given her, the letter among
them. Medium held them to the top of her head, gradually flick
ing away the blank ones. She did not inspect them. Is there
J. N. W. here? Poole. Then theres Sefton, s-e-f-t-o-n, Pool,
hair. Yours truly, J. N. W. Thats it, T send you some hair.
Poole J. N. W. Do you understand that? Sir Oliver says, I
found afterwards that the letter . . . contained the words
Sefton Drive, and Cook so written as to look like Poole. It
also said, I send you some hair and finished yours sincerely J.
B. W ./ the B. being not unlike an N. (quoted verbatim from
The Survival of Man, p. 178).
E. Bozzano has studied the possible part of psychometry in
the experiments with Mrs. Piper1 and he thinks, with good rea
son as it seems to me, that neither telepathy nor cryptesthesia
accounts for everything in those experiments. He concludes that
the spiritualist theory alone covers all the facts. But why go
so far? Would it not be wiser to say with me that an unusual
faculty of cognition exists ? It is incautious to go beyond that by
referring to its cause and mechanism.
A commission of enquiry of the Society of Psychic Sciences
(of Paris), examined four psychometrists, of whom M. Phaneg2
was one; the report drawn up by M. Warcollier states that the
results were poor.
I am not aware of any systematic studies on individuals who
are neither mediums nor hypnotizable.
The handling of objects in this manner has been commonly
practised by all professed somnambulists, and appears to be one
of the conditions of their lucidity. The whole question is to know,
what purpose is served by the thing handled and on this we know
nothing at all. It is not absurd to suppose that the object emits
vibrations that can put the faculty in motion. This special form
of cryptesthesia is possibly connected with another singular prop
erty of some bodies to emit vibrations which affect the nervous
system and produce strong reactions without any known chemical
or physical cause. It cannot be denied that some apparently inert
tlpathie et psychomtrie en rapport avec la mdiumnit de Mrs. Piper,
A. S. P., November, 1911, xxi, January, 1912, xxii, 9-15.
3Enqute sur la Psychomtrie, A. S. P., 1911, xx i, 303-210.
substances are capable of moving some human sensibilities. The
fact of the divining-rod establishes that. It will be seen later
that it is now demonstrated that there is a rhabdic force that acts
indirectly by provoking subconscious muscular contractions and
causes the bending of the rod. It can be explained only by the
radiation of some unknown powera rhabdic force. Since this
power exists it is reasonable to suppose that its manifestation
may not be confined to acting upon dowsers with the rod actually
in hand.
The influence of chemical and other bodies has often been
studied ever since Reichenbach and the metallo-therapists; but
we will set aside those experiments to account for which electric
or magnetic forces may be alleged.
Drs. Bourru and Burot have studied the action of chemical
substances enclosed in well-stoppered flasks; but in spite of the
care with which these distinguished physicians have conducted
their experiments, it does not appear certain that the very dis
tinct effects produced may not have been due to verbal suggestion
and expectant attention.1
Messrs. Bourru and Burot experimented with hypnotizable
subjects showing all the phenomena of the major hypnotism.
Such subjects are extremely amenable to suggestion. If a her
metically sealed tube of laudanum is placed in their hands with
the injunction Attend now they will show strong physiological
reactions, without, however, justifying the hypothesis that vibra
tions from the drug have traversed the glass. The hypothesis of
suggestion can be eliminated only by proving that the effects
are specific, such as sleep from morphia, vomiting from an emetic,
convulsions from strychnine, intoxication from alcohol; then,
when the physiological effects are so sharply defined, the experi
menter, if himself ignorant at the time of the experiment of
the contents of the tubes, may refer the action to the drug.
This diagnosis, necessary to the inference of specific action
apart from all verbal suggestion, has not been made with suffi
cient precision. In a few cases I have tried this experiment with
vague semblances of success, but am unable to draw any con
clusions. In fine, Bourru and Burot have observed some very
lLo suggestion mentale et Vaction distance des substances toxiques et
mdicamenteuses, i v o l., la m o , P a ris , J. B . B a illi re , 1887. S ee also Revue
philosophique, M a rch , 1886. E . A llio t, same subject, P a ris, J. B . B a illi re , 1886.
strong and singular physiological effects, but these are possibly
to be explained by suggestion.
M. Wasielewski tried the same on Mile, de B., and the experi
ments were quite successful when odoriferous substances like
peppermint and brandy were used; so that I am quite satisfied
that the success was due to hyperesthesia of the sense of smell.
Whatever care be taken in closing a bottle with cork it is im
possible that there should be no trace of scent perceptible to a
super-acute sense. With four inodorous substancesquinine, dis
tilled water, citric acid, and saccharinthe two former gave
failures, the two latter successes (A. S. P., July, 1914, xxiv, 193).
Miss Edith Hawthorne has reported a good case of pragmatic
cryptesthesia. Mr. Samuel Jones sent her a fossil found by a
miner in a coal-pit. The father of this miner had been killed
in a mining accident. Miss Hawthorne says she had a horrible
vision of a dead man prone on the ground with blood issuing
from his mouth and nose. Other interesting, but vague, indica
tions were given on the numerous objects sent by Mr. Jones.
M. Pagenstecher (of Mexico) undertook some researches on
Mrs. Z. that seemed to him to indicate hyperesthesia so strong
as nearly to be cryptesthesia.1 But before pronouncing definitely,
further details must be awaited. The case seems to be con
firmatory of cryptesthesia under hypnotism.
These sundry results are not very satisfactory, though they
may well induce those who have good hypnotic subjects or me
diums at their disposal to make further experiments. The matter
is not exactly metapsychic, but it is possible that the action of
substances at a distance may throw some light on the meta
psychic phenomenon of cryptesthesia. The action of metals,
magnets, and toxic substances exerted at a distance seems well
worthy of re-examinations.2
Is it necessary to mention under pragmatic cryptesthesia the
superstitions on amulets, mascots, and the like which savages
and even some civilized men regard as protective? The old*
*A Notable Psychometric Test, Am. S. P. R., 1920, xiv, 386-418.
*Loc. cit., p. 240. On the origin of metallo-therapy and on the action of
metals from a distance which do not belong to metapsychic science, see V.
Burco. Etude exprimentale sur la mtallothrapie et la mtallo scopie, Rapports
faits la Socit de Biologie, 1877-1878, 8vo, Paris, 1876. J. Moricourt, Manuel
de mtallothrapie et de mtalloscopie, appliques au traitement des maladies
nerveuses, etc., i2mo, Paris, 1888. Dumontpallier, Mtalloscopie et mtallo
thrapie. Union mdicale, Paris, 1879, xxviii, 333, 381, 421, 457, 473, 567.
magnetizers believed firmly that water and other things might be
magnetized to give peculiar virtues; but they did not eliminate
suggestion. I can quote a personal experience which is a very
good instance. One of my pupils, Dr. Mar . . . a very trust
worthy young man, simple-minded, honest, and very sensitive
in his feelings, some weeks after taking his degree came to me
saying that he was haunted by ideas of suicide that gave him
great distress. He said, with tears in his eyes, I am sure I
shall end by suicide ; can you not save me ? There was no reason
of love, money, or health that would justify these gloomy antici
pations. A happy idea struck me: I had on my table a little
bronze figure of the Knight of Death, with the raised visor show
ing the face of the skull. I said, Take this statuette, it has
magic powers and will protect you. He thanked me effusively
and came to see me six months later completely cured, happy
and smiling and quite free from suicidal thoughts. He died a
natural death some years later.
Was this coincidence? Is it not rather suggestion? In any
case I am not so childish as to impute some actual influence to
the Knight of Death. It seems to me that amulets, mascots,
bits of coral, etc., act by suggestion alone. But suggestion is
not to be neglected, and, after all, who knows? It is well to be
as cautious in our denials as in our affirmations.
If there were even a shadow of proof of the efficacy of charms
and casting of lots, these would be connected with influences
proceeding from things. Of all popular superstitions these are
the most universal; there are still many countries in which sor
cerers and witches, maleficent objects, unlucky stones, the evil eye,
and other trash are believed in. If, however, inert objects are
inert only in seeming it is possible that some may be favourable
and some the reverse; but in this domain there is nothing, up
to the present, worthy of attention, and we must leave belief
in black masses and wax figures for wizardry to the contem
poraries of Catherine de Medici and Mme. de Montespan. The
witty and erudite writings of A. de Rochas on charms may be
consulted in his book, De YExtriorsation de la sensibilit.
But, I repeat, even in dealing with absurd superstitions, it is
well to be cautious in our negations. If we admit (as seems
proved), that there is sometimes an emanation from things that
acts on the faculty of cryptesthesia, it is not absurd to think
that there may be some vibration proceeding from them that may
act on our own mentality or that of others. Events are so closely
linked that anything is possible.
But we must not give ourselves up to such dreams; even if
we admit possible connection between such and such an object
and such and such an event, we are absolutely ignorant what that
connection may be, and the mystery remains as inaccessible as
if there were no connection.
Cryptesthesia in sensitives is helped by external conditions.
Professional somnambulists, who are occasionally lucid, for if
they did not now and then show real lucidity, they could not
succeed in their curious trade, frequently make use of cards
to fix their lucidity. It would be madness to fancy any relation
other than chance coincidence between the card and the fact;
but it is not insane to suppose that laying the cards is a prepara
tion for lucidity. A well-known fortune-teller admitted as much
to Dr. Osty.
Cheiromancy is a little nearer to sane physiology, for no one
denies that hands are quite different in different persons, and
that hands, like faces, betray something of the psycho-physio-
logical constitution, vaguely indeed but quite certainly. It is a
long step from past to future events ; the hand of a duchess may
easily be distinguished from that of a cook, but that is very
commonplace. Nevertheless palmists claim to read the lines of
the hand.1 If there are sometimes remarkable forecasts, these
must be put down to chance, or to lucidity stimulated by an
external fact; the external fact in this case being the scrutiny
of the hand by a sensitive.
Graphology resembles cheiromancy in some respects ; but it has
an unassailable physiological basis that has nothing to do with
metapsychics. Our gestures, and therefore our handwritings,
'V o y e z D e sb a ro lle s, Les mystres de la main, P a r is . G a r n ie r d A rp e n tig n y ,
La science de la main, P a r is , 18 57. E . M a g n in , Journal du magntisme et du
Psychisme exprimental, D e ce m b e r, 1 9 1 1 . I w ill c ite a lso a b o o k w h ic h is
cu rio u s i f o n ly f o r its t it le : H o p in g , Institutions chiromanticae, oder Kurtse
Unterweissung Wie man aus denen Linien Bergen, und Ngeln deren Hnde,
auch das Jahr, Monat, Wochen und Tage in welchen einem was Glck oder
unglckliches bevorsteht, muthmaslich judiciren kann, sampt einer gants neun
und ausfhrlichen Harmonia oder Uebereinstimmung aller Linien auch aus
fhrlichen Abmessung der Saturninae, des Berges Lunae, und anderer Berge,
mit Fleiss verfestiget, 3d e d it., 8vo, l n a , 16 8 1. S e e e s p e c ia lly N . V a sc h id e , La
Psychologie de la main, P a r is , 1909. C h ir o s Language of the hand: Complete
practical work on cheirognomony and cheiromancy containing the system,
rules, and experience of Cheiro ( C o m te d e H a m o n d ), N e w Y o r k , T e n n y s o n ;
L o n d o n , N ic h o ls & C o., 1897, x v > 162 p a ge s, w ith 32 p la te s.
correspond to feelings and characters. A drunken man will
show his intoxication by his writing, and it will be different
again according as he is excited or quiet. A very stupid person must
inevitably show some trace of stupidity. Dull and intelligent
persons cannot have the same handwriting: Quid mens ima ferat
scripto tua dextra notdbit. But all this has nothing to do with
metapsychics, and if sensitives such as Mme. Freya use graph
ology, that is doubtless to aid their lucidity. A letter sent to a
graphologist will show him many psychological traits of the
writer, if he has studied a great many handwritings, but lucidity
does not come into the matter.1
To cover the whole ground astrology should be mentioned. It
was in great honour in former times, but has no serious meaning
although some enigmatical journals (Nouveaux Horizons) still
advance obscure arguments in its defence.
We are, when all is said, still entirely ignorant what are the
conditions that determine cryptesthesia. We cannot even say any
thing that would be a beginning of scientific treatment, e.g., that
external objects have some motive power to produce a cryptic
sensation which by association of ideas awakens remembrances,
just as a scent may recall memory of the person who used it.
We must resign ourselves to ignorance of the means whereby
the faculty of cryptesthesia is stimulated to action.
(b) Transfer of Sensibility
There are cases in which tactile sensibility, greatly enhanced,
seems to play a part.
A physician of Lyons, Petetin2 (1774-1808), more than a
century ago observed the phenomenon of transposition of the
senses (the phrase is used here without implying any hypothesis).*
*011 graphology see Crpieux-Jamins LEriture et le caractre. There
is in France a good journal on graphology, issued by a society which has the
good sense not to mix up metapsychics with this fragment of normal
psychophysiology. M y experiment with H. Ferrari and J. Hricourt ( Revue
philosophique, 1886) has remained classical. With two hypnotisable persons
both entirely ignorant of graphology, we obtained complete transformation of
the handwriting and its adaptation to that of the new personality created by
hypnotic suggestion.
Pttin, pre, Electricit animale. Catalepsie hystrique ancestrale,
Dcouverte du transport des sens, dans Vpigastre lextrmit des doigts et
des orteils.Rapports du fluide nerveux, principe de ce phnomne, avec le
fluide lectrique. Expriences qui les confirment (Lyons, 1808).
He verified facts of hyperesthesia, or rather of cryptesthesia,
in serious cases of hysteria, and gives full details in the curious
phraseology of his day. The observations seem to have been
taken with precision.
The supposed auditory anesthesia must be put aside, for the
deafness was only apparent; the patients heard nothing when
spoken to at their ears but heard whispers at their finger-tips
or at the pit of the stomach. This insensibility to words at the
ear is one of those negative hallucinations that have been verified
by modern investigations on somnambulists.
It is not the same with regard to visual sensibility; the trans
position of the sense is obvious. Petetin thus expresses himself
(p. 44). His patient was a Mme. A., aged nineteen, in a cata
leptic, i.e., in a somnambulic state:
I slid under the bedclothes a card .that I kept covered by my
hand and placed it on her stomach. . . . Her expression
changed, showing attention, surprise, and pain. What illness has
come to me? I see the queen of spades. I withdrew the card
and showed it to the spectators; they turned pale on seeing die
queen of spades. I placed a second card with the same precau
tions. The ten of hearts, she said. A third card was met with
Hail to the king of clubs. I was quite upset and hardly re
marked the consternation on all the faces round me.
Like the hysteric of Tamboff, the hysteric of Lyons distin
guished by her fingers the taste of a cake, apricots, roast mutton,
bread-and-milk, and boiled beef. But were all the conditions
fully noted?
On the other hand, Mme. A. seems to have shown phenomena
of cryptesthesia and premonition that transference of sensibility
does not account for. She recognized objects in closed boxes.
If a thought were unexpressed in words, she knew it forthwith
and proceeded to act as had been intended she should.
On another hystero-cataleptic patient, Mme. de Saint P., aged
twenty-four, the results were less decisive; and, moreover, Pete
tin did not take the precautions that we now know to be necessary.
There were some interesting phenomena, but they are not reported
with sufficient accuracy.
The first observation is remarkable, the phenomena being strik
ingly identical with the Tamboff case; but we are now less easy
to satisfy on the metapsychic nature of phenomena than they
were in 1830.
EXPERIMENTAL CRYPTESTHESIA .187
Perhaps Mlle. Pigaire, a very lucid somnambulist, had sensi
tiveness of this kind. She read a sealed letter placed on her
forehead.
Experimenting with the Misses L., on mental suggestion from
the one sister to the other, Sir Oliver Lodge remarked that
the phenomena (reproduction of a drawing) were much more
distinct when contact was maintained, even when the fifth fingers
were barely touching, than when contact was broken.
Boirac1 has given a notable case of reading by tactile hyper
esthesia. Mme. V., a somnambule, had her eyes well bandaged
and in addition paper was gummed over her eyes. She read
small print without hesitation, and told the time from a watch
wrapped in a handkerchief. This was reported by Dr. D. G.
to Boirac, who determined to experiment with another subject
supervised by himself. This subject, Ludovic S., succeeded in
reading with his finger-ends as if there were exteriorization of
sensation. One reading was given in complete darkness, all light
being excluded from the room, Ludovics eyes being bandaged
as well. It seemed to me impossible to doubt, says Boirac, that
this phenomenon must be referred to touch alone, sight having
nothing to do with it.
E. Boirac made another experiment with still stranger results.
He seated Ludovic near him but with his back turned and his
eyes bandaged, and himself sitting close by, he asked Ludovic
to hold his elbow. Then Boirac, passing his finger-tips along the
lines of a newspaper, Ludovic read the words. The result was
the same when Boirac closed his eyes and could no longer see the
words that were under his fingers.
Further research should be made on this tactile hyperesthesia
which might permit of the conclusion that the sense of
touch sometimes becomes so acute as almost to become crypt-
esthesia.
We cannot here take into consideration the surprising re
searches, as yet incomplete, by Louis Farigoule. La vision extra
rtinienne et le sens paroptique (Nouvelle Revue franaise, 1920,
104).
Very notable cases of cryptesthesia, possibly explicable by
extraordinary acuity of sight and touch, have been noticed by*
*E. Boirac, La psychologie inconnue, Paris, Alcan, 1908, p. 245. Un cas
d'apparente transposition des sens.
Dr. A. N. C. Chowrin, director of the lunatic asylum at
Tamboff.1
The subject was a woman of thirty-two, cultivated and intelli
gent, unmarried and suffering from hystero-epilepsy. Dr. Chow
rin was led to examine into her case because one day having
received a letter in his presence she kept turning it over in her
hands without opening it, and began to weep, saying that there
was bad news in it. The letter announced the death of a niece.
Several ingenious experiments were then devised. Dr. Chow
rin, fully acquainted with the tricks of hysterical patients, took
strict precautions, assisted by his colleagues of the Medical Society
of Tamboff. Sealed letters written in characters so small as to
need a lens, and covered with aniline black, sometimes enclosed
in photographically sensitized paper, were read about forty times,
and Dr. Chowrin adds, If M. can open these letters and re
seal them so as to leave no external trace on the envelopes and
the unexposed sensitive paper, that is as extraordinary as being
able to read unopened letters.
In another set of experiments the same subject, M., read
hermetically sealed letters in the presence of several persons.
Sometimes the contents of the letter were given textually, some
times by figures of speech giving the sense. For instance, in
a letter written by Dr. Andreoff, the words actually written were,
In the sands of Arabia stand three palm-trees between which
there flowed a murmuring stream. M. said, An open space;
it is sand, white like snow but it is not snow; three tall trees;
I never saw any like them; few leaves but large ones, and a
spring of water whose murmur I hear distinctly,
In another experiment, Dr. Troitzki wrote on a piece of paper,
Sophie Alexandrovna is in bed and looks at the wall, and
folded it sixteen times. That day Sophie Alexandrovna (Mme.
M.) was in bed with a toothache. She took the paper, held it in one
hand, and said, I see a bed, it is I who am in bed, with a bandage
on my chin, and she looked fixedly at the wall. Troitzki and
Speranski,both present, never lost sight of the paper for a moment.
Other facts were very significant; Mme. M. could distinguish
colours by touch. Before the Medical Society of Tamboff she
xThese were published in Russian, in 1898. I know them only in the
German translation by A . de Schrenck-Notzing, Experimentelle Untersuch
ungen auf dem Gebiete des rumlichen Hellsehens, der Kryptoscopie und in-
adaequaten Sinneserregung, E. Reinhardt, Mnchen, 19x9, 80.
was able to tell the colours of thirty flasks, all different, wrapped
in paper and placed under a thick cloth. She could taste by the
sense of touch. Small pieces of paper were soaked in solutions
of soda, common salt, hydrochloride of quinine, sulphate of zinc,
placed under her armpit, and she at once perceived the salt, acid,
astringent, or bitter taste. As the experimenters did not know
which solution was used, all mental transmission and experimental
error are eliminated.
The experiments of Gilbert Murray on telepathy which seem
wonderful, but are only apparently so, must be explained by
extreme auditory hyperesthesia.1
Mr. Murray left the sitting-room and went into an adjoining
one. Then someone in the sitting-room, usually Mr. Murrays
eldest daughter, spoke some words that were at once written
down, indicating a picture, a gesture, a scene, or an event. Mr.
Murray then returned and said what had come into his mind;
his words being compared with those spoken by Miss Murray.
The agreements are striking, and it is needless to give instances
of unquestionable facts. Nevertheless, as Mrs. Verrall has said,
it is possible to explain all, or nearly all, by auditive hyperesthesia.
Mr. Murray was in no way conscious of having heard anything;
so that we are here dealing with subconscious auditive hyper
esthesia, a very curious phenomenon that ought to be thoroughly
studied. In any case, hyperesthesia pushed to such lengths is
very surprising and little removed from cryptesthesia. Some
times, moreover, the words pronounced by Mr. Murray, when
compared with the thing spoken of, went much further than the
words spoken aloud by Miss Murray.
These facts are insufficient to make the case one of crypt
esthesia, but there are so many other instances of metapsychic
cryptesthesia that it is not impossible that this may have come
into play here, though I prefer the hypothesis of extreme acuity
of hearing.
Visual hyperesthesia, no doubt, is in play in the case of M.,
a hysterical patient under the care of Dr. Frigerio2 in the asylum
*See the address by G. Murray & la 5*. P. R., July, 1915, and Mme. Verrall,
P. S. P. R., xxix. See also S. M. Kingsford : Psychical Research for the Plain
Man, London, Kegan Paul, 1920.
*Rari fenomeni osservati in una ipnotizzata ed in particulare della sugges
tione reciproca e della lettura ai occhi chiusi da essa presentati. (Arch, di psi
chiatria, etc., Torino, xv, 1894, 101).
at Alexandria. When her eyes were closed by fingers pressing
on her eyelids, she read at once the titles of books; and in a dull
light with her eyelids closed as before, she read the handwriting
on a post-card. With a book held so high that it would have
been impossible for her to read it even had her eyes been open,
the same results were obtained. But this case of retinal hyper
esthesia was not studied with the same precision as Chowrins
cases.
Dr. Naum Kotik1 secured some good instances of cryptesthesia
with Sophie B., a young girl of fourteen. Her father was
an inebriate who finally committed suicide in an asylum.
When this man was present, though no one could detect a
word or gesture to indicate anything, Sophie could guess her
fathers thought in a surprising manner; but these experiments
cannot be taken into serious consideration, for deception is too
easy; though occasionally, in her fathers absence, Sophie
was able to tell the thought of Dr. Kotik. Here are some
examples:
Dr. Kotiks thought. Sophies answer.
Spitschka. Spitschka.
Noshik. Noshik.
Plessimeter. Instrument like that used by
glass makers.
A coin. A button, a coin.
Patron. A P a .. .d a ...
Bulewka. Bulawka.
Noshnizy. Noshik.. .Noshiry.
(The Russian words signify matches, a knife, scissors, gum,
a ring, etc.)
The experiment succeeded even when Sophie, the percipient,
was separated from the agent (her father or M. Kotik) by a
closed door.
Dr. Kotik concludes absolutely for mental transmission; he even
goes so far as to indicate its laws, saying that it is mainly trans
mitted in a phonetic form and loses some of its energy in passing
through a wall.
He made some further experiments with Lydia W., a girl of
xDie Emanation der psycho-physischen Energie, Wiesbaden, 1908.
eighteen, well educated, and an automatic writer. The proofs
of spiritist cryptesthesia were many. To cite one only:
Dr. Kotiks thought. Lydias answer.
Lumire. Lumire.
Baiser. ?
Neige. ?
Daprer. Daprs.
Cheval. Cheval.
Journal. Journal.
There was always a phonetic resemblance between the thought
and the word indicated, even when Lydia was making a mistake.
This transmission, however, might be visual, for in another
series of experiments, Dr. Kotik looked at a post-card that Lydia
could not see, and she wrote automatically a description, some
times very accurate, of what the card contained. It would seem
that this mental transmission was improved when agent and
percipient were linked by a wire.
Finally Dr. Kotik tried fixing his thought (of an object, a
landscape, or a sentiment) on blank paper, giving the blank sheet
to Lydia to guess what his thought had been. The results were
astonishing. I will give one instance only.
Dr. Bernstein thought of a landscapethe seashore, a boat
with people in it; on the shore a building surrounded with ver
dure. Lydia sawA sheet of water like a mirror; on the shore
some houses surrounded by trees; a boat on the water. Chance
cannot account for this, though there was some sameness in the
pictures to be guessed, the similitude between the image mentally
impressed on the paper and that seen by Lydia is too marked.
Dr. Kotik draws the following inferences: Thought is a radiant
energy. This energy has physical and psychic properties. It
may be called psycho-physical. Originating in the brain, it passes
to the extremities of the body. It is transmitted through air
with some difficulty, more easily through a metallic conductor,
and can be fixed on paper.
According to him there are two conditions to be considered:
the sensitiveness of the subject, and the vibratory energy that
sets the sensitiveness into action. This vibratory energy was
specially studied by Dr. Kotik, but it does not seem distinctive
of human thought; it is possible that all things radiate certain
vibratory energies, since sensitives indicate not only the things
of which someone has thought, but also inert objects apart from
any thought. It seems more cautious to adopt no hypothesis
other than that of a special sensibility that enables hypnotized
persons and mediums to know that which exists, whether a
thought or an object. This may possibly be due to their very
strong subconsciousness.
Dr. Rudolph Tischener1 has recently published an important
work on lucidity. I shall not enter upon his theoretical disquisi
tions, the time is not ripe for them, and all such are distressingly
frail, but will keep to the facts recorded. Dr. Tischener cites
some very remarkable ones.
After having experimented with Mme. de B., who gave some
good instances of cryptesthesia to Wasielewski, Dr. Tischener
tried a man of thirty-two, named Re., the son of a postal employee,
and himself in business. Several words were written out of
Re.s sight, folded, and put into a sealed and opaque (lichtdicht)
envelope. (What was the degree of opacity?)
The results of many experiments were remarkable. There
could not be transmission of thought, for several of these sealed
envelopes were shuffled together, and Dr. Tischener did not know
the contents of those handed to Re. Out of 68 trials 24 gave
negative results; but this is of no import, for in the 44 that suc
ceeded coincidence is quite impossible as an explanation. Athen
for Athen, Barbara for Baelbara, Eberhard for Ebarhard, Mada-
lene for Madelene, and Pater for Dater.
Albert Hofmann (of Mehlen)2 made some curious experiments
in telepathy with a Dr. Freudenberg. M. Hofmann had been
the percipient in some of Tischeners experiments; in this case
he acted as agent, living in a house thirty yards distant. Ex
periment 1: Hofmann suggested Alaof Kln and Freuden
berg said Kln. Experiment 2 failed. Experiment 3, Hofmann
suggested Groenendael, and Freudenberg saw a pretty wood
with ponds which agrees with the wood of Groenendael near
Brussels. In a later series of experiments the agent and per
cipient were in separate houses 800 metres apart; the transmis
sion of colours and visions were both very distinct. The word
encrier (inkstand) was transmitted and among others a very
strange one: Freudenberg suggested Julius Caesar; Hofmann
thought of the bridge at Bonn where there is a statue of Julius
lber Telepathie und Hellsehen, Mnchen, Bergmann, 1920.
2Versuche ber Telepathie (Psych. Stud., January, 1921, 1-12).
Caesar. Unfortunately after these successful trials there was
a series of failures.
It is useless to multiply instances. It is not chance; it is not
telepathy. Is it retinal super-acuity pushed to the point of crypt-
esthesia? Or was there some experimental error by which Re.
might have seen what Tischener wrote? I do not suppose this
to be the case, for Dr. Tischener is well acquainted with possible
sources of fraud described by American psychologists.
Dr. Waldemar de Wasielewski1 has reported some cases of
pragmatic cryptesihesia which are akin to dowsing experiments.
Mile, von B., observed by him under conditions excluding fraud,
was often able to state the nature of objects enclosed in boxes
well tied with string, to say whether they were of wood or of
what kind of metal. In the very imperfect statistics that he gives
there were 6 failures in 50 experiments. But we ought to know
what was the mathematical probability of success. He also made
some experiments on drawings and words enclosed in boxes.
The details must be read in the original. Dr. de W. wrote in
reversed order and Mile, de B. read as though not reversed;
the writing in this instance being in an envelope and not in a box.
Dr. de W. thinks, with good reason, that an influence proceeding
from the things, rather than telepathy, is in playthat mysterious
rhabdic force which, proceeding from subterranean water or
metals, causes the muscles of the dowser to bend his hazel rod.
M. Warcollier, a chemical engineer, has made numerous and
very methodical experiments on telepathy, not yet published.
He has kindly permitted me to see his manuscript. Some of
these are on drawings, with himself as percipient, and are very
interesting. Among ten experiments, one (the fourth of the
series) was extraordinarily successful; the drawing was of a
dirigible balloon with a screw; the reproduction was also a
dirigible balloon with a screw. Other trials were half successful;
the drawing being a tricolour flag, nine successive sketches were
made, a tricolour flag being one of them. Experiment No. 8 was
on a drawing of a curved hunting-horn; among 5 sketches one
was of a snail shell resembling a hunting-horn. The tenth was
a parrot; the percipient among his 12 sketches drew a wounded
bird falling to earth. Summing up his experiments, M. War-
collier states that out of 35 trials, 13 were negative, 5 must be
xUn cas de lucidit spontane, A. S. P., June, 1914, xxiv, 165.
eliminated by reason of coincidence that seems really due to
chance, 10 were half successful, and 7 were complete successes.
The mathematical probabilities are, however, difficult to estimate.
Comparing the different modalities of telepathy that M. War-
collier has studied by methods that would take too much space
to detail here, he classifies the comparative facility of transmission
as under:
Colours..................... ................................... 70 per cent.
Attitudes........................................ 55 per cent.
Drawings ..................................................... 45 per cent.
O bjects....................... 38 per cent.
Ideas ............................................................. 37 per cent.
Mental images.............................................. 10 per cent.
Words and figures....................................... 10 per cent.
This is an interesting attempt at classification which requires
the fuller confirmation that can only be given by numerous ex
periments ; and it is not easy to find those who, like M. Warcollier,
are at the same time both sensitives and also competent to make
exact calculations and analyses.
That M. Warcollier is a sensitive is shown by an instance of
cryptesthesia happening to himself. Late one evening he went
to the house of a friend in the country. He went to bed, fell
asleep, and, partially waking up, he saw by the light of the night-
lamp a large quadrangular corded package in yellow packing
paper. He cried out, What is that package? Mme. War
collier, waking up, was astonished, for there was no such package
in the room; her husband then described the thing, which had in
fact been taken to that room by mistake and had been left there
some time before M. Warcolliers arrival, and then taken away.
M. Abronowski, quoted by M. Warcollier, out of 324 trials,
the odds in each separate case being 1 to 3, had 157 successes,
say 50 per cent., a total that greatly exceeds the probable number.
In these experiments there was hand-contact, which takes away
a good deal of their value. However, with one percipient more
sensitive than the other, Jeanne Hirschberg, 62 per cent, of suc
cesses were obtained without hand-contact. Both M. Warcollier
and M. Abronowski have advanced some timid hypotheses to
explain telepathy. There is good reason for timidity; the hypothe
sis that brain A vibrates by transmission of the vibration of brain
B is no adequate general explanation, for very often there is
lucidity without any vibration of brain B. Spiritualists have a
simpler explanationthat the spirits are omniscient and omnipo
tent; but this is childish. I prefer to avow absolute ignorance
what the mechanism and the cause may be.
Lombroso, quoted by Flammarion (La Mort et son Mystre,
1920, p. 255), reports the case of a young hysterical girl who
sometimes lost the power of seeing with her eyes, but saw with
her ears; she could read printed lines placed at her ears when
her eyes were bandaged. On this transposition of senses Flam
marion says that the subjects wrongly imagine that they see by
their forehead, ears, or stomach. I should rather be inclined
to think that, in certain cases at least, there is a real sensory
impression on the skin which is perhaps tactile in character.
These instances of hyperesthesia or paresthesia are as unques
tionable as the case of Ludovic S., reported by Boirac; but the
manifold phenomena of cryptesthesia cannot be referred to super
acuity of the senses; this explanation or by transposition of the
senses is applicable only to a very limited number of cases; and
even in them we cannot be sure that the explanation is correct.
A retina capable of perceiving luminous rays that have passed
through three sheets of thick cardboard is so different from the
normal retina that the study of it belongs more to metapsychics
than to physiology.
However, it is perhaps a step in advance to be able, even in
some exceptional cases, to attribute some phenomena that seemed
inexplicable to extreme acuity of the senses; and it will be very
interesting to study this with sensitives. One never knows on
beginning an experimental investigation to what unexpected and
unhoped-for results it may lead.
C. Lombroso has stated some clear cases of cryptesthesia. He
discovered a young commercial clerk called Regis, twenty-one
years of age, and in experiments in which he was assisted by
Drs. Ottolenghi, Sartoris, and Roncarini, he found that Regis
could reproduce some of the experiments of Pickmann, but with
out contact. Lombroso wrote the word Pitckerel on a slate.
Regis, ten yards distant, having his eyes and ears bandaged,
wrote Pitche on another slate. He was given a drawing in an
envelope, and he then (with bandaged eyes) made an astonish
ingly correct facsimile. There were some failures. Regis had
on that day drunk a pint of rum and was very drunk, which is
not a good condition in which to work a fraud. M. B. (of
Nocera), aged twenty, gave Dr. Grimaldi, with Lombroso pres
ent, some interesting instances of cryptesthesia.1
Other experiments on telepathy have recently been undertaken
by Drs. F. H. Van Loon and A. Weinberg.2
As their memorandum has not yet been published in its en
tirety, no definite opinion can be expressed. Seemingly it favours
telepathy, and emotional feelings seem to have been more readily
perceptible than names, numbers, and figures. With cards there
were failures. When one of the agents tasted sweets or hydro
chloric acid the result was a success. (But were full precautions
taken?) It is difficult to draw any conclusions from this laborious
series of experiments initiated under some very doubtful notions
drawn from thought-transference and the willing game.
The good faith of the percipients is unquestionable; but there
may have been slight subconscious sensorial stimuli awaking
vague perceptions, without any metapsychic influence. However
honest the percipients may be, conditions must always be as
severe as if they were under suspicion, for the subconsciousness
is always on the alert, and grasps at the very slightest indications
that may put it on the track. If the agent raises a weight and
the percipient says that he feels fatigue, extreme precautions
must be taken that the percipient, whose senses are hyper-acute,
should have no means of knowing that a weight is being lifted
behind him. All movement on the part of the agent must be
absolutely eliminated before we can conclude that cryptesthesia is
present.
The phenomena presented by Mr. Reese3 must be referred to
pragmatic cryptesthesia.
The facts which we shall now summarize have been recorded
by very well-informed observersCarrington, Schrenck-Notzing,
and J. Maxwellwho experimented separately with Reese. Mr.
Carrington has made a special study of prestidigitation, and is
an experienced psychologist.
Mr. Reese was sixty-two years of age in 1913. He was a
native of Posen in Prussian Poland, and then went to America,
W on enqute sur la transmission de la pense, A. S. P., 1904, x iv , 264-273.
*A Method of investigation into thought transference (J. S. P. R., Ja n u a ry ,
19 2 1, 3-23.
*A. S c h re n c k -N o tz in g , Un clairvoyant, A. S. P., 19 13 , x x iii, 65. J. M a x w e ll,
Mme sujet, ibid., 67. C a r rin g to n , Compte rendu dune sance avec Bert Reese
(ibid., 3 5 7 ).
where he lived for many years. He tells of many interviews
with prominent men, especially with leading American financiers,
for one of his gifts was the ability to discover springs of water
and also oil wells. He gave many striking instances of lucidity.
Edison reports experiences with Reese that seemed decisive to
him. He went into a room far from that in which Reese was
sitting and wrote, Is there anything better than hydroxide of
nickel for an alkaline electric battery? He then returned to
Reese, who at once said, No, there is nothing better than
hydroxide of nickel for an alkaline battery. Two years later
Edison received an unexpected visit from Reese. Edison then
wrote the word Keno in microscopic characters, and put the
paper in his pocket. He asked Reese, What have I written?
and Reese answered Keno, without hesitation.
Dr. James Hanna Thompson, an alienist and an avowed sceptic,
was absolutely convinced after a seance with Reese (A . S. P.,
August, 1913).
Schrenck-Notzing declares that Reese is one of the most ex
traordinary men of the time. Schrenck wrote on five pieces of
paper the questions : (1) What is my mothers name? (2) When
will you go to Germany? (3) Will my book be a success? (4)
An intimate question not detailed, and (5) What is the name of
my eldest son? Reese, without touching, or barely touching, the
papers answered four of the questions in as many minutes, and
all idea of thought-reading can be eliminated, for Schrenck-
Notzing, having mixed the papers, did not know the contents of
the one presented.
With J. Maxwell equally surprising results were obtained.
Reese did not touch the seven papers which Maxwell had written,
but answered each though Maxwell did not know what each as
given to Reese contained. The first name of Maxwells mother
(an uncommon one) was given with a slight error, Marie Ange-
line for Marie Angelie.
H. Carrington describes in great detail a similar experience;
he notes carefully that the regular tricks of legerdemain could
not be used, and after a very methodical investigation concludes
the case to be one of genuine clairvoyance.
Mr. F. Hollaender gives another very interesting account of
a sance that he had with Reese. According to him, Reese was
able to indicate to a commercial firm the page on which there was
a fraudulent entry. He was given 5 per cent, of the amount of
the fraud, this payment amounting to 2500 marks. He gave
Mr. Hollaender accurate answers to personal, intimate, and spe
cial questions that Mr. H. had written in Reeses absence, and
had kept in his pockets.1 According to Miss Scatcherd, the same
facts are confirmed by M. Drakoules.2 The same experiment was
made with the same success: M. Drakoules wrote various phrases
on eighteen papers which he folded and placed in different draw
ers. Reese read them all while still in the drawers, and gave
correctly the names of Mme. Drakouless three daughtersPenel
ope, Anastasia, and Giuletta.
In 1916 Reese was convicted, in New York, of disorderly
conduct. On appeal he convinced the judge, Rosalsky, not only
of his innocence, but also of his lucidity (A. S. P., May, 1916).
The testimony of the able, sagacious, and cautious men above
named leaves no doubt at all of the pragmatic cryptesthesia ex
hibited by Reese. It is a misfortune that he declines to submit
to fresh tests.8
Another remarkable case of lucidity is given by Professor
Schottelius, of Stuttgart; Ludovic H., a Jew, aged forty, gave
similar tests. Schottelius, alone in his room, wrote on three papers
what then came into his mind. He took one in his right and
one in his left hand, clenched, and Ludovic read both. A judge
of first instance, an alienist doctor, the medical councillor of the
district, and a legal authority, all persons not to be suspected of
credulity, made similar experiments with Ludovic (A. S. P.,
March, 1914, xxiv, 65). I have very recently verified crypt
esthesia in full force with Mr. O., a Polish engineer. At Warsaw,
in April, 1921, Geley, Lange, and I had the opportunity of
observing him with care, and we found that the marvellous
accounts given of his powers were in no way exaggerated. After
dinner one day Lange, remote from Mr. O., wrote some words
on a scrap of paper and put it in an envelope, which he closed.
Mr. O., crumpling the paper in his hand without opening the
envelope, said, It is written in English. I see one separate
letter, then cons and then vendredi. Mr. Lange had written,
I consider you are wonderful. This is particularly interesting
' Encore le voy ant Reese, le juif ternel, A. S. P., September, 1913, xxiii,
7-261.
international Psychic Gazette, March, 1916.
Max Hoppe ( Ueber Hellsehen, Diss. in., Berlin, 1916) has criticized
these experiments with Reese, but his hypothesis that they are due half to
chance and half to sagacity seems to me very feeble.
as it seems to indicate a visual perception rather than a reading
of the thought.
The next morning, at the Hotel dEurope, Mr. O. came to
visit me. I wrote a phrase that came into my mind without there
having been any conversation to arouse it, The sea never appears
so great as when it is calm. Its fury lessens it. Mr. O., stand
ing in the middle of the room, could see nothing of what I was
writing, and in any case could only have observed from afar and
upside down. I folded the paper, put it in an envelope, and
closed it. Mr. O. kneaded it in his hands feverishly without
opening it, and after ten minutes said, I see much water! much
water! You want to attach some idea to the sea. The sea is so
great that beside its motion . . . I can see no more. An
admirable result, although extreme criticism might say that he
might subsconsciously have partly seen what I was writing.
Such objections could not apply in the next experiment, which
is more demonstrative despite some marked mistakes. I took
two letters received the day before, and when alone in my room
placed them in envelopes that I carefully closed. Taking one
of them at random, whether it were A or B, I gave it to Mr. O.
on his arrival. He then said, It is a letter in French that does
not come from Paris; it is an answer to a letter of yours. A man
of fifty speaks of a lady whose name is German rather than
French; he invites you to come where he is, at the sea-side; it
is in his mind to go to Paris, and he added other details, some
not characteristic, and some erroneous. He then said, Keep
that letter. M. Geley can give it to me tomorrow and I will
finish reading it. The next day Geley, to whom I had given the
envelope, still closed and without saying anything of the contents
of the letter, got an immediate answer from Mr. O., It speaks
of a Mme. Berger. The letter is written by a man of fifty; it
is an invitation; it comes from the sea-side. Now this letter,
of which neither Mr. O. nor Dr. Geley knew anything, and of
which nothing could be seen by normal senses, was from a
German professor, R. Berger, at Berlin, in answer to a letter of
mine, asking me to see him on my return (from Warsaw). He
is about fifty.
Geleys experience was perhaps even better. He wrote on a
visiting card, holding it on his knee under the table, Nothing is
more moving than the call to prayer by the muezzins. The card,
still kept under the table, was put into a thick envelope, and closed.
Mr. O. said, There is a feeling of prayer, a call, from men who
are being killed or wounded. . . . No, it is not that. . . .
Nothing gives rise to more emotion than the call to prayer, it is
like a call to prayer, to whom? A certain caste of men, Mazzi
madz. . . . A card. I can see no more.
There were some other experiments equally astonishing, which
I shall not detail, as we shall shortly have the opportunity of
observing this cryptesthesia at the Metapsychic Institute with all
necessary minuteness.
In short, cryptesthesia in these exceptionally gifted beings
clairvoyantscannot be called in question.
(c) Crystal Vision
Vision by the crystal seems to be favourable to the development
of cryptesthesia in sensitives. This method seems to have been
used by magicians in all ages (the magic mirror).
Grasset (loc. cit., 135-143) mentions the ancient methods of
divination by the water of a spring (hydromancy) or by vessels
filled with oil (lecanomancy) by which Ulysses enquired of
Tiresias; or by mirrors, or crystal spheres. Sometimes a finger
nail covered with oil was used. In the sixteenth century Dr.
John Dee showed a small crystal in which the future could be
read. Saint-Simon tells in his memoirs how a rogue showed the
Duke of Orlans all that he wanted to know in a glass of water.1
When a sensitive looks into the crystal, objects, moving pic
tures, and persons are often seen. Mrs. Verrall says, The visions
obtained by looking fixedly into a glass of water or a crystal ball
differ from visual impressions; a certain amount of darkness*
*A very detailed summary has been given by M iss X., Recent experiments
in crystal vision, P. S. P. R., May, 1889, v, 486-504. See also Adeline Fr. von
May, Visionen im Wasserglasse, 1876. Hyslop, Experiments in crystal vision,
P. S. P. R., xii, 59. F. Myers, Experiments in crystal vision, P. S. P. R., viii,
459. P. Janet, On experiment in crystal vision, ibid., xv, 385. A . Lang, On
crystal vision, ibid., xv, 48-50. Fr. Myers, De la conscience subliminale,
A. S. P., 1897, No. 5 ; 1898, Nos. 2, 3, and 4 ; 1899, Nos. 3, 4, and 5 ; 1900, Nos.
1 and 2.
The Seeress of Prvorst sometimes saw whole scenes in soap bubbles blown
before her.
Besides the writings of Fr. Myers, Subliminal Consciousness, consult
P. Janet, Automatisme psychologique, and Andrew Lang, The Making of Re
ligion, 1897, trad, et anal, par E. Lefebvre, A. S. P.,1898, viii, 129-148.
Andrew Lang, Dreams and Ghosts, 1897. W. Stead, Real ghosts,1897, 65-66.
P. Joire, Mthode dexprimentation, etc., A. S. P.,
1901, xi, 329.
favours the appearance of the images. These images seem to be
made with the bright points in the crystal, and, once produced,
they have a reality that no imagination can invent. Sometimes
there is movement; sometimes I know that there is such and
such a colour, though I cannot see it optically.
Miss A., who is not a professional medium, and whose name
has not been published, thus describes her impressions: I knew
nothing about crystal vision, when one day, being at lunch
with some friends, the conversation turned on this subject. They
declared that visions could be seen in a glass of clear water. I
looked and seemed to see a small golden key at the bottom of my
glass. It was so distinct that I looked on the table-cloth, think
ing it was really there. Subsequently Miss A., having made
other experiments with a crystal ball, thus describes her sensa
tions: The crystal is wrapped in black material leaving only a
part open to the sight. The darkness does not matter. After one
or two minutes a bright light appears which fades, becomes a fog
in which landscapes appear, or letters, sometimes written re
versed. The scenes are very interesting, sometimes having no
connection with any real event.
According to Miss X., the things seen in the crystal have true
colours; they are like remembered scenes but more distinct.
Mr. Hyslop has given some instances of crystal vision (P. S.
P. R.} 1898, xii, pp. 259-276). These were obtained by Mrs. D.
and were very distinct. He verifies frequent coincidence of the
vision with real events, but does not think that chance coincidence
can be disregarded. The instances are, however, so numerous
and striking that they would seem to show true lucidity. In
one case Mrs. D. saw, near her sister, a person unknown to her
in a coffin, a friend unknown to Mrs. D. being then extremely
ill in the sisters house. The patient was recognized among seven
photographs brought by Mr. Hyslop (in this particular case the
vision was in a dream, not in the crystal). In another case, by
the crystal, Mrs. D. saw the cemetery, but different from what
she thought it to be. The new arrangement of the tombs was
really as she saw it, as she found on visiting the cemetery to
verify the facts. This is possibly a case of paramnesia (believing
that one remembers things not seen).
In fine, Mr. Hyslop concludes that crystal vision, in Mrs. D.s
case at least, does not give the certitude of supernormal cogni
zance that strict science demands.
The Rev. P. Lescceur (quoted by Grasset, loc. cit., 140) states
that he knew a woman who, on looking into a glass of water, saw
to her great surprise an apparition of the head of Christ, expres
sive of great pain. I drew back, with an exclamation of amaze
ment; but on looking again the Ecce Homo face appeared in
profile, then grew less distinct and vanished. It had lasted about
a minute. This is a hallucination brought about by crystal
vision, but has no connection with cryptesthesia.
Myers made a careful study of crystal visioil, especially with
Miss Freer. The subject is requested to look attentively, but not
so as to produce fatigue, in a mirror or some transparent object,
arranged so as to reflect surrounding objects or the face of the
observer as little as possible. If a crystal ball is used it is sur
rounded with black material.. It is best that the subject should be
alone in the room and should be mentally passive. After ten
minutes or so he sometimes sees that the glass or the crystal
becomes dim and some object seems to appear in it or on it.
About one person in twenty may succeed in this experiment, and
among twenty seers, perhaps one only is capable of developing
this faculty of internal vision sufficiently to receive veridical
impressions that could not be obtained by normal means.
Crystal vision does not produce the major hypnotic sleep as
has sometimes been affirmed. It seems to have no effect on
health other than fatigue if the experiment is prolonged.
Few phenomena, Myers states, are so fantastical and improbable.
The visions do not seem to follow any law; they are a mixture
of remembrances, dreams, telepathic or telesthetic recognitions
and precognitions. In short, crystal-gazing is an empirical
method of arousing cryptesthesia; the mechanism by which this
comes to pass is unknown.
Mrs. Leeds, whose husband is on night duty on the railway,
wakes up suddenly in the night; she raises a glass of water from
the night-table to her lips, and sees in the water the moving
image of a railway train with a guards look-out van at one end.
She then sees the trucks hurled on one another, and the guards
van damaged. Two hours later, Mr. Leeds comes in and tells
his wife that there has been an accident, the brakeman being
badly hurt (/. 5. P. R., December, 1903).
Myers quotes (A. S. P., 1901, xi, 297) the case of Miss A.,
looking into the crystal in presence of Sir Joseph Burnby; she
describes a tall dark lady in the room of a hotel; the door is
open and she is about to wash her hands. Sir Joseph thinks of
his wife. Miss A. adds, She is wearing a serge dress with a
great deal' of braid on the bodice and a band of braid on one
side of the skirt. Sir Joseph thinks that the figure cannot be
that of his wife ; but on returning to Eastbourne some days later
he found that Lady Burnby had bought such a dress and that
the description of her washing her hands in the hotel room with
an open door was accurate. Miss A. did not know Lady Burnby,
but some months later on seeing her entering a theatre said,
That is the lady in a serge dress that I saw in the crystal.
In certain cases, instead of looking into the crystal, a large
shell is held to the ear, as children do to hear the sound of the
sea. This is another empirical method of arousing cryptesthesia.
When Miss X. listens thus she hears confused noises, sometimes
musical notes, or human voices speaking distinct words. One day
she suddenly hears Endsleigh Street, a name she does not know.
A few minutes later she is told that Mr. H. has come to London
from Oxford. Is he living here as usual? She was told no,
he has taken a room in Endsleigh Street.
Another time Miss X. hears the words, Are you a vegetarian ?
as if pronounced by Mr. Smith whom she has just left; the fact
being that Mr. Smith a few minutes later asked Mr. M., whom
he had met by chance, Are you a vegetarian ? The letter of
enquiry addressed by Miss X. to Mr. Smith was written before
she had learned that these words had really been spoken.
Vision in the crystal or hearing by a shell seems to be restricted
to sensitives; it therefore does not pertain to cryptesthesia in
normal persons, but only to sensitives. The phenomena are slight
in comparison with those obtained at spiritist sances.6
6 . Conclusions on Experimental Cryptesthesia
Alike in normal persons, sensitives, somnambulists, and me
diums, the fact of cryptesthesia is beyond question.
Even if we were to make the absurd admission that three-
fourths of the reported facts are erroneous, there would still
remain a series of verified facts that defy criticism and render
it certain that there is a strange faculty of cognition in human
beings that brings information which could not possibly be ac- / / ^
quired by the normal senses.
It seems to me quite unscientific to attempt to fix limits to this
power, and to say that it will come into play on a given day or
hour and under given conditions. Since this faculty of higher
cognition exists (called supernormal by Myers), why not say,
Nihil a me alienum putof It has been shown that this faculty
of cryptesthesia is not limited by time or space. Let us then
use this discovery to denote the phenomena of monition, premoni
tion, and clairvoyance that are so numerous and undeniable. It
covers nearly all that seems so marvellous. As soon as it is
certain that by any means soever human consciousness can be
aware of the contents of a closed envelope, or of that which
moves the emotion of a person near us, or of a distant friend
who is thinking of us, I do not see what limits can be assigned
to this power. In presence of any fact of subjective metapsychics,
however marvellous, I dare not say, This is beyond the power of
lucidity.
Certainly cryptesthesia is very strange and we do not in any
way understand it, but that is no reason for introducing gods,
angels, demons, or spirits after the fashion of savages who ascribe
natural forces to a fantastic divinity rewarding or tormenting
poor mortals. It is hardly rational to call in the spirits of the
dead. We recognize in cryptesthesia a higher human faculty a,
yet unknown by our intellect; we must stop there, provisionally
at any rate.
We will, however, go a little further. In order that crypt
esthesia should come into action, something in us must be moved,
for every effect has its cause. There must therefore be some
mysterious external vibration that acts on our organism. It is
in this sense that cryptesthesia is necessarily pragmatic, for if
there were nothing external to set it in motion, the mind could
perceive nothing. But we are in absolute ignorance as to what
that vibration may be; and in the present embryonic stage of
metapsychics we shall not seek to discover it.
The important thing is the proven fact: that certain individuals
at certain times are aware of facts, and receive impressions that
cannot be referred to normal senses but which nevertheless agree
with real external events. This affirmation is based on various
proofs, which we will sum up at this point.
1. In making experiments of thought-transference or telepathy
(which is only a particular form of cryptesthesia) it is found,
even when experimenting with normal persons, that there is
always a small excess of correct results over the number that
chance alone would give according to the calculus of probability;
though this excess is not large enough for definite conclusions.
2. With hypnotized and hypnotizable subjects the divergence
between the probable and the real number of successes is so
large that the excess cannot possibly be referred to chance. Cer
tain somnambulists give answers so precise, reproduce words,
writings, and drawings with such exactitude and so abundantly,
that the cryptesthesia, indicated by experiment with normal per
sons, becomes undeniable.
3. In spiritist seances, in which an external personality seems
to dictate the answers, and especially with powerful mediums
such as Mrs. Piper, the proof of cryptesthesia is overwhelming;
though it is not possible to conclude, in any way satisfactory
to strict science, that an intelligent external personality intervenes.
4. Experimenting with sensitives gives many instances of crypt
esthesia, sometimes as striking as those with hypnotized persons
and mediums.
5. Cryptesthesia is most frequently manifested in the shape of
telepathy (thought-reading) but it also gives facts unknown to
any person present. And now, as the mass of facts proves the
existence of the faculty, we may make some attempt to under
stand it.
Let us suppose that no individual of the human race had the
sense of smell. No one could have the least idea what a scent
could be. Passing by a dung-heap or a field of violets we should
be unaware of either if they were out of sight, they being neither
visible nor making any sound. If, then, some exceptional indi
vidual should be gifted with the sense of smell, we should be
enormously surprised, if when passing the unseen dung-heap or
violets he could tell us, There is manure here, or violets there.
This exceptional individual could also, by his sense of smell,
be aware of facts long past. If a grain of iodoform had been
placed iii'a cupboard ten years ago, the scent of iodoform would
still be perceptible; and if our exceptional individual endowed
with transitory olfactory sense then said, There has been iodo
form in this cupboard, what extraordinary lucidity we should
consider it to be.
As it is, we find it difficult to understand the extreme acuity of
smell with which some animals are endowed; for instance, how the
males of certain moths are attracted from considerable distances
by the odour of the female moth, and how a dog can track a hare
that has passed an hour ago. We are surprised, but we under
stand more or less that these cases are the hyper-sensitiveness
of a faculty which we possess in a rudimentary state. If we
were entirely destitute of this faculty we should understand
nothing at all of the facts.
To return to the exceptional man who from time to time has
some vague olfactory sense; if he cannot analyze his imperfect,
rudimentary, and fugitive perceptions, he will find it very diffi
cult to explain how he was able to say, There were violets on
the right, and a dung-heap on the left. As his sensation is
transitory, he will try to recall it, but in vain; he has said, There
are violets, but the scent has vanished, and he does not even
know why hie made the statement. This knowledge that he can
not account for has crossed his mind in a flash, and he has now
become like to other men, having no olfactory sense. He does
not even know what a scent may be. He only knows that he
had the idea of violets. The more he tries the less he is able
*o say what made him exclaim, There are violets near.
This, of course, is an analogy and nothing more; but it enables
us to conceive how some vibrations from the external world
may reach us and, by awaking confused and transitory ideas,
may give us cognitions whose origins are unknown and perhaps
unknowable. These ideas and cognitions are in the realm of
the subconscious; the conscious self is hardly touched by them.
Lodge ingeniously compares the conscious and the unconscious
parts of the mind to a man who is swimminghis head alone
is out of the water, but the rest of him is there, unseen all the
while. It is probable that cryptesthesia is more especially mani
fested by those individuals whose conscious self is somewhat in
active. The subconscious movements of writing, with or without
the planchette, are mostly produced when the conscious self is
in a state of semi-somnolence. Unconscious sensations have then
more hold and determine more precise movements than when
the crowd of reasoned, voluntary, and purposeful ideas dominate
the consciousness. Lucidity is more common in the hypnotic
sleep that in the normal state, and monitions occur oftener in
sleep than in waking hours because during waking life the ex
terior influences of our environment impinge strongly on our
normal senses and prevent our perception of the unknown ener
gies (probably much feebler) that move our cryptesthesia.
But whatever theory we adopt, cryptesthesia exists; in other
words, the human intelligence has modes of cognition that are
unknown to us.
There is no ground for surprise, for the smallest reflection on
the immense fertility of nature will reveal that there are forces
unknown to us. No man of sense and intelligence can imagine
that there are no forces in the cosmos but those analyzed in our
text-books of physics. Since, then, there are unknown forces
in the universe, jt>is possible that these may influence us; the
whole crux of the matter is whether our being is now moved
by them. To affirm that unknown forces exist is not to prove
that cryptesthesia exists, but simply to demonstrate that crypt-
esthesia is possible.
It may be otherwise stated: There are forces that our normal
consciousness does not perceive, but that are occasionally per
ceived by our subconsciousness. If it were proved that there
are no forces in nature but heat, light, electricity, and gravitation
we should be almost justified in denying cryptesthesia, but as
soon as it is admitted that there are other forcesand that can
not be denied, whether they have or have not been described or
discoveredthen cryptesthesia becomes not merely possible but
likely.1
Does this imply that the fact of cryptesthesia will revolutionize
science and establish a new era in psychology, physiology, and
physics? From the theoretic point of view this may be so, but
practically, however interesting, it will only very slightly modify
social life. It seems to occur so rarely and to need such special
artifices in experimentation, that perhaps it plays but a minor
part in the daily life of each of us.
Nevertheless it is probable that the external world that lies
outside our normal perceptionsand in this I include the thoughts
of other menmay influence our acts, our wills, and our feelings,
because it acts continuously upon us without our being aware of it.
Though always weak and vague, and often ineffective, the human
thoughts and the unknown vibrations of things must yet exert
some influence. In any case, the fact that they are still pro-,
foundly mysterious is no reason for refusing to study them.
These unknown vibrations certainly exist. They can at rare
moments touch the subconscious elements of our mind and thence
lIn this connection see the admirable note by Sir William Crookes on the
probable continuity of vibratory phenomena, and the gaps in our physical
organization for the perception of the greater part of these vibrations.
come into consciousness. It is much to be able to make so precise
a statement in despite of the scornful denials of official science
and the mocking incredulity of the crowd.1
7. On the Identification of Spiritist Personalities
When dealing with automatic writing we made allusion to the
hypothesis that spiritualists advance almost as an article of faith
that a vanished human personality intervenes; that there is an
incarnation of a dead person whose intelligence animates the
body of mediums and writes or speaks through them. This iden
tification of spiritist personalities with the dead is a serious ques
tion that demands profound consideration; for the personalities
that appear seem real, and a great effort of rationalism is required
to withstand the simple and alluring hypothesis that the dead
return.
Helen Smith, the celebrated medium, studied by Flournoy, took
on the personality of Marie Antoinette, and played that part for
many months with a perfection that the cleverest actresses might
envy. But it is difficult to see in this anything more than a pro
longed and marvellous auto-suggestion. In the absence of very
weighty proofs (which Helen Smith did not give), I agree with
my learned friend T. Flournoy in refusing to admit that the
unfortunate queen animated the humble personality of Helen
Smith.
Mrs. Piper presented a first incarnationthat of a certain
French doctor of Metz, of the very curious name Phinuitas
her guide, who spoke by her voice. But the name has never
been discovered in the archives of Metz, and Phinuit could not
speak French. When asked how it came about that he had forgot-
1Many new facts of cryptesthesia have been reported which establish
conclusively the existence of the faculty without throwing much light on its
mechanism.
The best experiments are those with Stepan Ossovietzki. They are most
exact (Revue Mtapsychique, 1921, i, 420-431). A ll precautions were taken;
the sealed letter was never lost sight of by the experimenters, and Ossovietzki
does not seek to read the contents. He kneads it in his hands, rubs it, and
after having stated its contents, hands it back to the experimenters who
verify the seal and open it themselves. The envelope was thick enough to
preclude vision even by retinal hyperesthesia.
T h e r e fo r e h y p o th ese s o f d e fe c tiv e e x p e rim e n t o r re tin a l h y p e re sth e sia m u st
be fin a lly d ism issed . N o c o m p lic ity w a s p o ssib le , f o r n o n e o f th e e x p e rim e n te rs
k n e w th e co n te n ts o f th e e n v e lo p e s. S in c e th e r e c o u ld b e n e ith e r tr ic k e r y n o r
illu sio n , th e re is a b so lu te c e r ta in ty , a n d th e o n ly a lte r n a t iv e s a r e c ry p te sth e sia
o r c h a n ce (se co n d F re n c h e d itio n ).
ten his French, he answered in all seriousness that he had had so
many English patients at Metz that he had forgotten his maternal
tongue.
Between the first hypothesis, that Marie Antoinette was in
carnate in Helen Smith, Phinuit in Mrs. Piper, Dickens in the
medium James; and the second hypothesis, that these three me
diums had a subconscious intelligence acute enough to take on
the rles of Marie Antoinette, Phinuit, and Dickens, I do not
hesitate a moment in preferring the second. Human intelligence
is so wonderfully and mysteriously endowed that it may doubt
less be able to enact perfectly the most complex parts. That is
assuredly very strange; but this strangeness is not the enormous
absurdity that, despite the guillotine and the worms of the tomb,
Marie Antoinette and Dickens should return to visit us and that
their souls should intervene in our lives.
And, in addition, as many experiments show, the discarnate
souls (to use the spiritist phrase), are manifestly very different
from that which they were in earth-life. Such extraordinary
cases as Marie Antoinette and Dickens are the rarest exceptions.
Nearly always the discarnates show very moderate intelligence
indeed, and give utterance to commonplaces of a special kind
with a spiritoid complexionto use the picturesque barbarism
adopted by Flournoy and Lombroso. They hardly remember
what they were ; they give poor answers to the most elementary
questions. In a seance with Eusapia Paladirt (who, by the way,
never produced any subjective phenomena worthy of interest),
a hand touched me, alleged by John King to be that of my
father. As a preliminary sign of identity I asked for his first
name; but this, so very easy to supply, was not given.
In another experiment with a professional medium, to whom
I was absolutely unknown, I obtained by automatic writing a
long, verbose, and insignificant message ending in a pun. Je
fais une----- ; je dis, nous; jadmire lart; runis ces trois mots
et tu auras le nom de ta mre. Her name was Renouard ; (Raie,
nous, art). This cannot be fortuitous, but I absolutely refuse to
imagine that the soul of my mother had nothing to say to me
but this idiotic play on words.
The idea that Aristotle should return to us to tell us in French,
English, or Italian that the future of humanity is bound up with
the belief in spirits, will always fill me with strong repugnance
to the hypothesis that Aristotle is speaking. These dictated mes-
sages are so remote from Aristotles writings that they are cer
tainly not from him. The body and the mind make the per
sonality. Not to speak of the body which has been dust these
two thousand years, the mind of a human being is known by
its imaginations, its hopes, its will, its feelings, its language, and
above all its remembrances. If nothing remains of all these,
bound together by the consciousness that was himself, I have the
right to say that the mind, like the body, has disappeared.
Nevertheless I shall not allow myself to be blinded by ration
alism. I admit that there are some very puzzling cases that tend
to make one admit the survival of human personalitythe cases of
Mrs. Pipers George Pelham, of Raymond Lodge, and some
others, and in view of the importance of the question, fuller details
must be touched upon.
Mrs. Pipers case is the most interesting of all; in the whole
record of subjective metapsychics her mediumship is the most
remarkable. Her clairvoyance has been studied with more pa
tience and care than has ever previously been given to the matter.
Three thick volumes have resulted from that study by the Ameri
can S. P. R., of which only an abstract is possible in a work
like the present which covers the whole ground of metapsychics.1
Mrs. Piper had the good luck to be carefully observed for sev
eral years; first by Richard Hodgson and then by J. Hyslop of
Boston. Hodgson was anything but credulous. He had been
to India to study the strange phenomena attributed to Mme.
Blavatsky, and had decided that they were frauds. He also, too
hastily, inferred fraud in the Cambridge seances with Eusapia.
But Mrs. Piper convinced him of the reality of her metapsychic
phenomena. The distinguished psychologist, William James, also
convinced of Mrs. Pipers genuine powers, introduced her to his
notice.
Those powers are not in doubt; we have given in Chapter III,
ante some precise instances of them; but in the present chapter,
which deals with personifications only, and not with the proof
of cryptesthesia, we shall speak only of the personification of
George Pelham in Mrs. Piper.
Was there really an incarnation of George Pelham? That
A. S. P.,
lA partial analysis has been given by Marcel Mangin in the 1898,
I. xviii, 228-254, 268-294. The work by Sage may also be referred to. Sir
Oliver Lodge has given an excellent analysis which is a model of scientific
investigation.
is the question to be answered; not whether cryptesthesia was
manifested, of which full proof has already been given.
For a long while Mrs. Pipers guide was Phinuit, that astonish
ing French doctor from Metz who could speak no French. One
day Phinuit announced his approaching departure, and that he
would be replaced by another personality. That personality was
George Pelham (a pseudonym for Robinson), whose name was
barely known to Mrs. Piper. Robinson, on the 7th of March,
1888, had been present at one of Mrs. Pipers sances, but was
unconvinced. He died in February, 1892.
Phinuit, in one of his last sances, named George . . . John
Harts uncle, and suddenly said, There is another George who
wishes to speak to you. Forthwith the other George (George
Pelham) comes on the scene, gives his name, his Christian name,
the names of his intimate friends, and insists that his father and
mother should come to converse with him. He asks for the pres
ence of others also; and on following days not only his father
and mother but several of his friends obtained numerous and
precise details on various conversations that George Pelham
had had with them during his lifetime. He said to Mrs. Howard,
Do you still play the violin as badly as ever? He spoke to
Evelyn of a book given to her in which he had written certain
words. To Mr. H., a friend of George Pelhams, Mrs. Piper
(acting as G. P.), wrote a long letter dealing with very intimate
matters, and when Mr. H. had read it, she took it and tore
it up.
In thus transmitting the ideas and remembrances of George P.,
Mrs. Piper both spoke and wrote in his personality. The methods
of communication are not now in question ; the point is to decide
whether it is more rational to infer the survival of George Pelham
than to adopt the hypothesis of an extremely developed crypt
esthesia. For my own part I consider the latter hypothesis some
what less improbable than the former; for with Phinuit as her
guide, Mrs. Piper had already given decisive proofs of lucidity,(
though Phinuit had never been a living person.
Since therefore Mrs. Piper had such powers, there is no reason
to suppose them absent when George Pelham speaks through her.
Why should we believe any other intelligence present than that
of Mrs. Piper in a highly lucid state? Why not admit that this
lucidity crystallizes, as it were, round the personality of Pelham?
We shall later on examine what objective metapsychics can
teach us on the question of personification and survival; but for
the present some conclusions can be drawn from subjective data
alone.
However surprising the answers of George Pelham may be,
the hypothesis of his survival is very frail; for if apart from any
hypothesis of survival, we admit, as we are driven to do, that
there are faculties of cognition that outrange our usual senses,
then it is possible that Mrs. Piper should acquire knowledge of
things known to George Pelham and even to him alone. It is
easy to admit cryptesthesia, even very far-reaching cryptesthesia:
this faculty of the mind is much simpler than survival, for survival
implies a number of unlikely and unheard-of facts that clash
with admitted physiological truths and are contrary to the logic
that warns us that whatever has a beginning must have an end.
The tendency of the human mind to group its remembrances
and its notions (whether metapsychic and transcendental or not),
around a real or imaginary person, is not a hypothesis; it is a
fact. This makes the simple-minded idea that the consciousness
of Marie Antoinette or Charles Dickens has returned quite inad
missible in view of the other hypothesis (of cryptesthesia), for
this latter rests on two proved propositions:
A. The human mind has mysterious faculties of cognition.
B. These mysterious cognitions have an invincible tendency to
group themselves round a new personality.
It might perhaps be more pleasant (I say perhaps, for it is not
certain) to suppose that there is no death, that we are destined
to survive, and that those who have passed away are near us,
listen to us, and protect us; but it is not for us to seek what we
may desire as pleasant or convenient. In matters of science,
hypothesis for hypothesis, the more simple, the more likely, and
the more rational has most claim on our acceptance. The doc
trine of survival seems to me to involve so many impossibilities,
while that of an intensive cryptesthesia is (relatively) so easy to
admit that I do not hesitate at all.
I go so far as to claimat the risk of being confounded by
some new and unforeseen discoverythat subjective metapsychics
will always be radically incapable of proving survival. Even
if a new case even more astounding than that of George Pelham
were to appear, I should prefer to suppose an extreme perfection
of transcendental cognitions giving a great multiplicity of no
tions grouping themselves round the imaginary centre of a fac-
titious personality, than to suppose that this centre is a real per
sonalitythe surviving soul, the will and consciousness of a
self that has disappeared, a self which depended on a brain now
reduced to dust.
We are, moreover, at the very beginnings of a science that
is extremely obscure, so obscure that all affirmations and nega
tions are rash; but the greater the uncertainties the more cautious
should be our doctrinal pronouncements, and the bolder our ex
periments. In experimentation it is impossible to be too bold.
The principal proof of survival, indeed the only proof, is the
affirmation of the medium, I am George Pelham (after being
Phinuit), and I prove that I am George Pelham because I know
all that George Pelham knew. But granting that this is so,
the proof is insufficient, for it would be necessary to show that
Mrs. Pipers transcendental faculty cannot know what George
Pelham knew in his earth-life. This essential proof cannot be
given, and that is why I say, provisionally, that subjective meta
psychics cannot demonstrate survival.
Spiritualists, when confronted with the poverty of the messages,
their use of a language unknown in earth-life, their indifference
to, and astonishing ignorance of, matters in which the writers
were once passionately interested, say that the defect is in the
instrument. The medium, they say, is only the instrument
that the spirit can but imperfectly control. ^Tie finds it difficult
to make himself understood and to communicate his thought.
But except in a few rare cases, the inconsistency between the
past and the present mentality is so great that in the immense
majority of spiritist experiences it is impossible to admit survival,
even as a very tentative hypothesis. I could more easily admit
a non-human intelligence, distinct from both medium and dis-
carnate, than the mental survival of the latter.
Sir Oliver Lodge has published a remarkable book on survival,
which merits special notice both from the interest of the facts
themselves and the high scientific authority of the author,1 who
has carefully examined those facts. He will pardon me if, while
accepting the authenticity of the facts so well observed and ana
lyzed, I come to a different conclusion upon them.
Those facts are as follows: Raymond Lodge was a second
1Raymond, or Life and Death, b y S ir O liv e r L o d g e, M ethu en, W . L on don,
1918.
lieutenant in the South Lancashire Regiment, and fell near St.
Eloi in Flanders, September 14, 1915. The news of his death
reached London September 17, 1915. On the 25th of September,
his mother, Lady Lodge, in a seance with Mrs. Leonard, obtained
the name of Raymond and the words, Tell father I have met
some friends of his. The question was put, Can you give any
name? and the answer was, Yes, Myers (Raymond, p. 98).
On the 27th of September Sir Oliver had a sance with Mrs.
Leonard. The guide of Mrs. Leonard is a little girl of the name
of Feda. Many sances followed, some with Mrs. Leonard, some
with Mr. Vout Peters, some with other mediums, those who
took part in them being sometimes Sir Oliver, sometimes Lady
Lodge, sometimes Raymonds brothers and sisters.
A characteristic fact announced by the mediums was that there
was in existence a photographic group of officers in which Ray
mond appeared. No one in London suspected the existence of
this photograph. Many precise details were given before its
arrival in England, more especially the very unusual fact in such
groups that one of the officers behind Raymond has his hand on
Raymonds shoulder, Raymond being seated on the ground. This
episode of the photograph is one of the best instances of crypt-
esthesia ever recorded. The succession of the facts is as follows :
July 20, 1915, expiry of Raymonds last leave.
August 24, 1915, the photograph taken at the front. Ray
monds diary mentions this, but he did not write about it to hi
parents.
September 14th, Raymonds death.
September 27th, Vout Peters announces that there is a photo
graph.
October 15, 1915, Captain B. sends the negative to Aldershot
to be developed.
November 25, 1915, Mrs. Cheves (a stranger to the Lodge
family) writes to say that she has a photograph of the officers
of the South Lancashire Regiment and offers to send it.
December 3, 1915, Mrs. Leonard in sance gives a complete
description of this photograph.
December 6, 1915, Lady Lodge finds in Raymonds diary a
note stating that the photograph was taken August 24th.
December 7th (morning) Sir Oliver writes to Mr. Hill his idea
of what the photograph should show. This letter was prior to
the arrival of the group.
December 7th, the photograph reaches Mariemont (Sir Olivers
residence). In other sances, Raymond, speaking through Mrs.
Leonard and conversing with Feda, gives a number of small
but very significant facts that Mrs. Leonard could not know : the
name of one of his comrades, Mitchell, an officer of the Flying
Corps ; the names of Raymonds two sisters ; the song My Orange
Girl that Raymond liked to sing; and a vague indication on the
death of an old servant of the family. The episode of Mr. Jack-
son is curious. Feda says that Raymond speaks often of Mr.
Jackson, and mixes up his name with a bird and a pedestal; and
Raymond seems much amused and makes jokes on Jackson, the
bird, and the pedestal.
Now Mr. Jackson was the name that Raymond and the
other children gave to a peacock. It had died some time pre
viously, had been stuffed, and put on a pedestal.
In some cross-correspondences simultaneous at Edgbaston and
London, the word Honolulu was specifically mentioned at both
places. To estimate the value of the whole mass of proofs it is
obviously necessary to refer to the book itself, of which only these
very scant indications can be given here. From the whole of the
evidence Sir Oliver Lodge concludes that Raymond survives.
This inference has been fully discussed and rejected on considera
tion of equally valid facts in the case of George Pelham.
Many examples have now been adduced that establish incontest
ably that lucidity, cryptesthesia, and telepathy exist ; that is, that by
some channel which we do not understand, real facts are made
known ; but that does not prove that the big consciousness of Ray
mond has survived.
If we accept the two factsthat some mediums are aware of
things that normal channels cannot conveyand that they tend
to group both normal and supernormal knowledge round real or
imaginary personalities, that amply suffices to explain everything.
Mrs. Leonard and Mr. Vout Peters have perceived certain de
tails relating to Raymond; forthwith their subconsciousness has
invented the personality of Raymondimaginary in the sense
that Raymond no longer exists, real in the sense that round this
auto-suggestion they have grouped many actual facts that their
normal senses could not have supplied.
For, finally, if Raymond were really speaking by the inter
mediary of Feda, why should he be so reticent of proofs ? Why,
in such messages, are there so many obscure and symbolical allu
sions (like those relating to Faunus and Myers) and why so
many words? Why so few names, dates, and precise remem
brances? Cryptesthesia is always partial, defective, symbolical,
and so mixed with errors and puerilities that it is difficult to
believe that the consciousness of a deceased person can be limited
to such a degree, when more cogent witness would be required
to enable us to affirm scientifically a belief in immortality.
Mrs. Leonard says that Raymond has the hand of a comrade
on his shoulder. No one in London knows thisit is incontest
able lucidity, but I cannot conclude that Raymond himself gives
this detail. It is simpler to refer it to lucidity only, the rather as she
has given proofs of lucidity in cases where the intervention of a
deceased person cannot be invoked. Very probably if the gallant
Raymond had not been killed, Mrs. Leonard could have equally
well received knowledge of the photograph, for she has on several
occasions shown that she knows things by supernormal means.
Alas, no! survival is not to be proved thus; and despite the
genius of its author, and his noble faith in the future life, this
able book has not supplied the decisive data. If it were incumbent
on me to formulate a conclusion, the very fragmentary, symbolical,
and uncertain nature of these messages that claim to be from sur
viving minds, and their astonishing lack of precise detail, would
lead me to infer that there is no survival of consciousness. This
inference is made with deep regret, for it costs me much to
separate myself from Myers and Lodge who have my entire con
fidence and admiration.
Moreover, in the very midst of my negation, I feel it incumbent
to make full reservations; we are only at the dawn of meta
psychic science and all absolute negation should be ruled out.
In fine, there are three possible hypotheses: (a) Everything
comes from the mind of the medium; (b) the mind of a deceased
person intervenes; (c) a non-human intelligence is concerned,
an angel, a demon, or some other power.
On subjective data alone, the first hypothesis is certainly the
most likely, since the admission that the human mind has mys
terious powers of cognition covers the ground; the second seems
hardly admissible because it is in complete disaccord with all
physiology and implies innumerable psychological improbabilities;
and the third is absolutely useless from the point of view of sub
jective metapsychics taken alone, and there is no real reason for
putting it forward.
Later on we shall see whether the study of objective meta
psychics leads to a modification of this preliminary opinion.
A large number of so-called spirit identifications have been
published in spiritualist journals, notably in the Banner of Light.
Mr. J. Burns, editor of The Medium and Daybreak, has collected
many from J. Morses mediumship.
Unfortunately these cannot be used to any effect, either for
identification or to prove cryptesthesia, for the good faith of the
medium, which I should be disposed to accept, proves absolutely
nothing.
Pantomnesia1 accounts for Mr. Morse being able to write, I
am Thomas Waller, I lived at Chirfton Road, Manchester. I died
in May of this year aged over sixty. For this to be evidential,
rigorous proof is needed that neither consciously nor subcon
sciously could the medium possibly have known the facts alleged.
Even if this difficult and almost impossible proof could be given,
the inference might be that cryptesthesia and not the surviving
consciousness of Thomas Waller was the origin of the message.
The case of Abraham Florentine has been cited as a proof of
survival (Barrett, loc. cit., p. 208). It proves cryptesthesia but
not survival. In August, 1874, Stainton Moses received a mes
sage from one Abraham Florentine, an old soldier of 1812, who
had died at Brooklyn, aged 83 years, 1 month, and 17 days. After
much research it was discovered that an old soldier of 1812 had
actually died at Brooklyn at that precise age. No American or
English newspaper had mentioned the fact, so that it could only
have reached Stainton Moses by supernormal means.
It seems to me rash and unscientific to assume that survival is
the one and only explanation of facts that had reached Stainton
Moses by cryptesthesia. Several other hypotheses are possible,
improbable indeed, but less wildly improbable than the return of
Abraham Florentine to animate the hand of Stainton Moses.
If we allow to cryptesthesia its full force, it will be seen to
extend to all facts, however distant, and however trivial they |
may seem. The facts are there to establish that cryptesthesia
exists, even when no death is in question. It is therefore unnec
essary to suppose survival of the dead since other instances are
known in which such facts are revealed by this faculty without
any corresponding death. As in the cases of George Pelham and
d egression of memory: the imagination that a thing experienced has been
Seen before.* Translators note.
Raymond Lodge, the case of Abraham Florentine gives no ground
for the inference of survival. It is excellent clairvoyance, but
there is no need to go further.
Another inconclusive case is reported by Bozzano. In a spiritist
circle at Nancy, the spirit of Cauchy, who died in 1855, dictates
the Latin phrase which appears, so it seems, on his tomb in the
cemetery at Sceaux: Beatus qui intelligit super egenum et pau-
perem. It is proved that the inscription is really there, and that
it was covered with lichens that had to be removed before the
letters could be read. But what a number of things need to be
proved: (1) That no word or writing could have acquainted
the medium with the fact, consciously or otherwise; ( 2 ) that the
inscription was absolutely illegible one, two, or ten years pre
viously; (3) that no book or biography of Cauchy-mentioned the
epitaph.
I do not fear once more to emphasize that cryptesthesia should
not be admitted for any fact until every other possible normal
explanation has been exhausted.
A certain number of cases have been.collected by Bozzano (A .
5. P.f 1910, xx, 267-268).
It is probable that most of these give some evidence of crypt-
esthetic power, but they are often only pantomnesic illusions. In
any case they prove nothing as to survival of human conscious
ness; and notwithstanding their interest it is unnecessary to
mention them here. Perhaps the day will come when they will
find that explanation, but provisionally we shall not adopt the
hypothesis of survival, as yet quite undemonstrated and perhaps
undemonstrable. I will, however, cite the following very moving
incident which has only recently been published, though it oc
curred in 1904.
The guide of the medium was his father, Luigi. On that day
Luigi seemed terrified and declared that bad spirits were near
the medium. Suddenly L. D., the medium, glaring round, rushed
upon a certain X., who was present. He foamed with rage, and
tried to throttle X., crying out, I have found you at last,
wretch! I was a soldier of the royal marines. Do you remember
Oporto . . . you murdered me, and I will avenge myself and
strangle you. His violence was such that the unfortunate X.
was nearly suffocated, and was hardly liberated by the united
efforts of four of the onlookers.
X. had been an officer in the navy and had long since retired.
He left the navy under tragic circumstances. (It would be in
teresting to know whether, as seems probable, the facts were
known to those present; as to which Bozzano does not enlighten
us.) Some years previously X. was with his ship at Oporto.
Passing along a side street he heard some rowdy Italians singing
in a pothouse. He entered and found some half-drunken sailors,
one of whom abused him. He drew his sword and killed the
aggressor. For this he was condemned to six years detention
in a fortress and invited to send in his resignation. Did the me
dium know this terrible story ? Even if he did not, cryptesthesia
might have revealed it, and then the reconstruction of the scene
is explicable by that alone, more easily than by the return of the
soldier murdered at Oporto.
Myers took the greatest possible interest in the problem of
survival; he believed and hoped it to be true. He proposed to
certain of his friends of the S. P. R. to write certain facts known
to them only, in a sealed letter, to be opened when a medium sup
posed to be in communication with his spirit should have claimed
to have read the contents of the sealed letter. The result of this
experiment was negative, as Sir Oliver Lodge has testified. The
alleged promise of R. Hodgson to return also came to nothing
(A . S. P., 1906, 124 and 392).
Montaigne, in his Essays (II, vi, edit. Amsterdam, 1659, 571),
recalls the promise of Canius Julius, going to execution: I holde
myselfe readdie to percyve if in this briefe moment of dethe I
may knowe somewhat of ye departure of ye Soule and if shee
shd feele wrathe at her separation, for that if I learne aught
thereon I may warne my frends if it be so permytted. But
Canius Julius did not return. (I transcribe the old French into
old English.T ranslator .)
Is it necessary to speak of Gaston Cremieux, shot at Marseilles
in 1871? In prison before his execution he declared himself a
believer in the immortality of the soul and promised his friends,
of whom Clovis Hugues was one, to return. At the moment
when he was shot, Clovis Hugues, who knew nothing of the
death of his friend, heard in his cell distinct raps that seemed
directed intelligently.
Mr. Happerfield had promised his old friend, John Harford,
when the latter was on his death-bed, to look after his widow;
and he took measures to place her beyond want, confiding her
interests to one of his nephews. Long after, one morning towards
dawn Mr. Happerfield saw the apparition of his friend, who said,
You have not kept your promise, my wife is unhappy. Mr.
Happerfield, though not alarmed, woke his wife and instituted
enquiries. Mrs. Harford was living in great indigence.
It seems unnecessary to see in this incident anything but
the vague remorse of Mr. Happerfield taking a symbolical
form.
Many times two friends or married couples have promised that
the first to die would manifest to the survivor; but the rare cases
in which the promise has been kept belong to the well-attested
instances of cryptesthetic monitions.
Finally, I will make a remark, perhaps hitherto not put for
ward, against the. identification of metapsychic forces with the
defunct: Those who return are mostly well-known and dis
tinguished persons. Why do not mediums present everyday and
obscure persons? If consciousness persists it must persist equally
for the many as for the few; and the obscure are a hundred
thousand times more numerous than the distinguished; but the
incarnations are of fanciful personalities like Rector, Imperator,
John King, Phinuit, Katie King, or of notabilities.
In conclusion, it would be rash to deny survival, but a thousand
times more rash to affirm it. This negation of survival in no
way implies the negation of cryptesthesia; the two propositions
must be entirely dissociated. The extraordinary, supernormal
faculty of cognition is a fact; the survival of human conscious
ness is a hypothesis.1
8. Xenoglossis
The speaking of strange tongues must be included among the
phenomena of cryptesthesia. It is the understanding, reading,
writing, and pronunciation of a language that has not been
learned. I call it xenoglossis. There are cases of this, which,
though not admitting of a definite inference, are disturbing. Such
cases are cited by C. de Vesme (A. S. P., 1885, xv, 319).
In the first place we cannot apply this name to the imaginary
languages created by mediums.
'Even Aksakoff, in despite of his robust faith in a future life, says:
"Absolute proof of spirit-identity is impossible to obtain; we must be con
tented with relative proof." In plain French, a relative proof means a hypoth
esis.
The most celebrated case of the kind is the Martian language
of Helen Smith, so carefully analyzed by Flournoy. He demon
strated rigorously that this new language was modified French.
This new tongue shows an astounding memory and stupefying
powers of invention. Helen Smith in six months was able to
speak fluently in a tongue of her own invention. Flournoy having
advanced some objection she changed her Martian language and
made it ultra-Martian. Wonderful!
Inspired by Helen Smiths Martian novel, Mrs. Smead in
America invented yet another Martian tongue (Hyslop, A. S. P.,
1906, 461). These creations illustrate the fertility of the sub
conscious. They have nothing to do with cryptesthesia. True
xenoglossis consists in speaking in an existing language which
is unknown to the medium.
The most striking instance is that of Laura Edmunds, the
daughter of Judge Edmunds, president of the Senate and judge
of the Supreme Court of New York, a man of high intelli
gence and unimpeachable rectitude. Laura, a fervent Catholic
and very pious, spoke only English. She had learned at school
some words of French, but that was all she knew of foreign
tongues. One day, in 1859, Mr. Edmunds received a visit from
Mr. Evangelides, who conversed in modem Greek with Laura
Edmunds.
In the course of this conversation, at which several persons
were present, Mr. Evangelides was moved to tears, for Laura
informed him of the death of his son in Greece. She incarnated,
it would seem, an intimate friend of his, Mr. Botzaris, who had
died in Greece. If Edmunds is to be believed, Laura spoke in
modern Greek and knew of the death of Evangelidess son by the
intermediary of Botzaris. The announcement of death was correct.
Judge Edmunds adds, To deny the fact is impossible, it was
too well known; I could as well deny the light of the sun. Nor
could I think it an illusion, for it is in no way different from any
other reality. It took place before eight or ten educated and in
telligent persons. We had never seen Mr. Evangelides; he was
introduced by a friend that same evening. How could Laura tell
him of the death of his son? How could she understand and
speak Greek, which she had never previously heard ?1
xD e V e sm e , X n o g lo s sie , L'criture automatique en langues trangres,
A. S. P., 1905, x v , 3 17 -3 5 3 . La xnoglossie de Miss Laura Edmunds, A. S. P.,
1907, x v ii, 603.
Judge Edmunds also records the xenoglossis of Mrs. Young of
Chicago who, under control of German spirits, spoke and
sang in German to a circle in which no one knew that language.
Says Mr. Young, I begged Mr. Euler, a German medium, to
come. He came twice, and conversed with the medium for over
an hour at each visit. On other occasions Mrs. Young spoke
in Spanish and Italian. She was a working woman who had only
been to a primary school.
I have myself observed a curious case, difficult to interpret,
nearly related to xenoglossis. Briefly it is as follows:
Mrs. X., a young woman of about thirty, had never learned
Greek, and it is absolutely certain that she did not know it.
Nevertheless in my presence she wrote long sentences in Greek,
with some errors that clearly show mental vision of one or more
Greek books. After much research, aided by chance more than
by my own penetration, and thanks to my friends, M. Courtier
and Dr. Vlavianos, of Athens, I was able to discover the book
from which Mrs. X. had drawn most of the long Greek sentences
that she had written in my presence. The book is not to be found
in Paris except in the National Librarythe Greco-French and
Franco-Greek dictionary by Byzantios and Coromelas. As it is
a dictionary of modem Greek, it is not in use in any school.
Mrs. X. wrote before me some twenty lines of Greek with
about eight per cent, of small errors such as would be made in
transcribing Greek without understanding it. Thus instead of
6To\r)i<ffiobs, Mrs. X. writes ffroXiffpod?- instead of ojxiXovS,
d/AtXovS; instead of kvnapoSm, evnap instead of pinpov
pixpov; all of them mistakes that indicate a visual copy by some
one who does not know Greek and makes the errors consequent on
imperfect visualization. I am absolutely certain that in writing those
lines Mrs. X. had no text before her eyes; she was looking into
space as if she were copying from the text of a language unknown
to her of which she saw the characters without knowing their
meaning. Although she certainly did not understand the phrases
it is remarkable that they fitted the circumstances well enough.
One evening at sunset, she wrote a Greek phrase from the dic
tionary above-mentioned: AvareAXovToS non dvovros rov rjkiov
rf OKiat S K T e iva tT a i pocKpoLV . When the sun is at its rising or
setting shadows are thrown far. There is a slight error;
eKTeivarai for eKreivsrat.
There are but two solutionseither fraud, aided by an unheard-
of visual memory, or the hypothesis of extraordinary cryptesthesia.
Possihle fraud must always be reckoned with. Let us suppose
this in despite of the psychological improbabilities; let us admit
(1) that Mrs. X. bought secretly Byzantioss dictionary, the Apol
ogy of Socrates, Platos Phcedra, and the Gospel of St. John,
the four books from which the extracts came; (2) that she medi
tated over these to fix in her mind the visual image of letters
whose sense she did not understand.
Both hypotheses are admissible if we suppose long and
elaborate preparation, which is, after all, possible. But it is
singular that Mrs. X., who knows no Greek at all and could not
understand the sentences, should have retained so clear a visual
image as to be able to reproduce from memory six hundred
and twenty-two letters with six per cent, of errors. It is not
exactly a case of xenoglossis, for she neither spoke nor under
stood Greek. She wrote long sentences from mental vision; how
did she get this vision? This is very different from speaking in
a strange tongue, and to explain this strange case we must admit
either cryptesthesia or a prodigious visual memory that can no
where be paralleled.
Here and there other instances of xenoglossis are to be found:
The young daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Brown of Melbourne,
aged eleven, wrote automatically some Chinese characters, holding
her pen in the Chinese manner. It appears that this message is
badly written but is partly legible. Now Chinese writing is
extremely difficult as everyone knows. But even if the fact were
correctly observed, what is to be inferred from it ?1
A very striking case is adduced by M. Chedo Miyatovitch, a
Serbian diplomat. He went with a Croatian friend, a M. Hinko-
vitch, a lawyer of Agram, to consult Mrs. Wriedt, an American
medium (professional), in London. An old Croat doctor con
trolled her, spoke in Croat to M. Hinkovitch, and conversed for
some time in that language. Another time Mrs. Wriedt spoke
in Serbian in the name of M. Miyatovitchs mother. On another*
*A discussion on this was held by the S. P. R. (/. P. R., June, 1906, 276).
Sir William Crookes who presided thought that the writing was done "in a
visionary manner, copied from their visionary prototypes." There are some
interesting remarks by Mrs. Verrall, Sir Oliver Lodge, Mr. Piddington, and
Mr. F. C. Constable on the subject, and the very fair criticisms of M. Dessoir,
Vom Jenseits der Seele, 4th edit., Enfle, 1920, 97-100, should also be read.
occasion, Mme. Selenka, a German, being present, her deceased
husband, through Mrs. Wriedt, sang a German song.
Some aspersions have been cast on the authenticity of Mrs.
Wriedts mediumship to which Sir William Barrett has replied
emphatically. In any case it is difficult to suppose that she can
normally speak fluent Serbian and Croat.
Eglinton, who knew no German, has given messages in German
by direct writing. In a sance in which Mr. Gladstone, the illus
trious statesman, took part, there were answers by direct writing
in Spanish, in French, and in Greek. Eglinton knew not one
word of Spanish or Greek, and very little French ; but Eglintons
sincerity is doubtful (Emy, loc. cit., 57). Mrs. Thompson was
able, in hypno-spiritist trance, to speak in Dutch to Dr. van Eeden,
though absolutely ignorant of that language. Mr. Damiani, in
a report to the Dialectical Society of London, states that he re
ceived in Sicily many communications in German, French, Latin,
and English through an uneducated medium of the working class.
Mr. Burns, in a report to the same society, states that he has
seen his sister-in-law, Mary Burns, write messages in languages
that she had no knowledge of.
In the Revue Spirite (January 15, 1886), M. Didelot, a school
master, gives an account of an experiment by the canon of the
cathedral at Nancy, assisted by some venerable priests of the dio
cese, on a young boy who was the medium observed by M. Dide
lot. An answer was given in Latin to questions put by the priests
enclosed in a sealed envelope placed on the table.
Some facts of very transitory xenoglossis have been observed
by Dr. Cadello of Palermo.1
Minfa Filituto, a young girl of Palermo, aged sixteen, fell
into spontaneous somnambulism in 1849. In one of these attacks
she claimed to be a Greek, and wrote Italian sentences with
Greek letters. She did not know Greek, but a Greek grammar
had been lent to her. On the next day she spoke fluent French,
a language of which she knew scarcely anything. On the third
day, though she had never learned a word of English and no one
had ever spoken English in her presence (?) Dr. Cadello testifies
that she conducted a long conversation with two English gentle
men in their own tongue. On these three days she seemed to
have completely forgotten her mother tongue. On the fourth day
xStoria di un caso disterimo con segnatone spontina, Palermo, 1853,
A. S. P., 1901, 149-159.
Analysis by Hahn, in
she spoke Italian, which, being a Sicilian, she knows but imper
fectly and never speaks. On the fifth day, the attack having come
to an end, she resumed her Sicilian speech and completely forgot
the episodes of her xenoglossis.
What are we to think of the story related by Dr. Grand Bou
logne? A lady who knew no Latin wrote automatically with
unexampled speed, Sacerdos a deo dilecte, cur manifesta negas ?
Cur concedens omnia potenti Deo non fateris veritatem, oculorum
aciem perstringentem. Sacrae litterae memento, crebrae sunt
manifestationes angelis. Vide et crede. The style is surpris
ingly bad ecclesiastical Latin, which is all the more curious. But
to carry conviction, more must be known of the conditions of
the case, and above all the incident should have been repeated.
Dr. Grand Boulogne remarks that during this writing, blows
were struck on the table and the ceiling (cited by Delanne, Re
cherches sur la mdiumnit, p. 420).
Dr. Bhm1 observed a person who wrote with chalk on a black
board answers to questions put to her. She wrote in Greek, Latin,
and Hebrew, being ignorant of all three ; but the account of the
experiments is too imperfect to allow of any inferences.
Aksakoif (Animisme et Spiritisme, p. 618, French version)
quotes the case of the Rev. Shirman, who had lived in certain
islands in the Pacific and in some sances with Mrs. Allams, a
professional medium of Providence (Rhode Island), saw the form
of a native woman of the Marquesas Islands who spoke in her
mother tongue. But this case was very probably fraudulent,
for the phenomenon only occurred after Mrs. Allams had known
Mr. Shirman for six months.
Mme. dEsprance knew no Greek, but when she gave a ma
terialization, there appeared the form of a woman of rare beauty
who called herself Nepenthes. Nepenthes wrote in classic Greek
in Professor L.s notebook : I am Nepenthes, thy friend. When
thy soul is oppressed by overmuch pain, call on me, Nepenthes,
and I will speedily come to assuage thy trouble.2
Certain cases of pseudo-xenoglossis must be severely criticized.
Gibier (Delanne, Apparitions matrialises, ii, 505) cites the
case of Mme. Salmon who spoke no French, but said without
l ber wissenchaftlich durchfhrte Versuche uni Gedankenlesen (Psych.
Studien, 1917, x liv , 5 7 5 ).
*C ited b y B o zza n o , A. S. P., 1910, 9. T h e c ase o f N e p e n th e s is in te re stin g ,
b u t e x p e rie n c e s w ith M m e. d E sp ra n c e m u st be ta k e n w ith g r e a t re serve .
any foreign accent, Ma tante, ma tante, je suis si heureuse de
vous voir. It would be easy to learn these words and to repeat
them with a pure pronunciation. Mrs. Salmon is a professional
medium of questionable honesty.
I note passim the stories of the exorcists of the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries with cases of possession at Loudun and
elsewhere. The devils who deceived these poor hysterics an
swered the exorcists in fluent Latin; but how much are we to put
down to error and illusion? Cases in which children who did
not know their letters have written messages, must be classed
under xenoglossis. They are rare, but Bozzano reports several
and quotes others from Aksakoff (A . S. P., 1910, xx, 10).
Myers and Hodgson saw the words Your Aunt Emma which
had been written by a little girl of four who did not know a
single letter of the alphabet. Drs. Dusart and Ch. Broquet gave
pencil and paper to a child of three and a half, Celina, who though
quite ignorant of letters, wrote, I am glad to manifest through a
charming little medium of three-and-a-half who promises well.
Promise me not to neglect her. But one can deduce nothing
from these isolated facts. Dr. Quintard stated to the Medical
Society of Angers in 1894 the curious case of a child of seven,
who not only made intricate arithmetical calculations, but also
guessed his mothers thoughts. Perhaps sufficient care was not
taken to avoid all collusion, conscious or unconscious, between
mother and child. The precocity of the child is remarkable, but
other similar cases are known (Delanne, Recherches qu. supra,
Paris, 1902, 206).
I cannot consider as metapsychic the cases of musical precocity
reported by Mr. Gower and attributed by him to some mysterious
power, for the child in question was eleven years old (Eric Rom-
gold). Mr. Gower cites also the case of Blanche Cobacker, aged
twelve, who plays and composes marvellously. At eleven and
twelve everything is explicable by abnormally rapid development.1
Dr. Urysz reports the case of a peasant girl of fourteen who
could hardly read, who wrote for him as if she were one of
the patients he had attended at Lemberg six years before, Thank
V.S. P. R., 1913, 56. Pepito Arriola was a skilful musician at the age of
three years and three months, but neither I nor anyone else imagined the
intervention of a spirit to explain this marvellous precocity. I note here,
without drawing any inference, that Mr. Gower saw Pepito in 1911, the same
Pepito who in 1900 was already a real artist, and that Mr. Gower found to
Pepitos great surprise that the boy had the gift of automatic writing.
EXPERIMENTAL CRYPTESTH ESI A 227
you for the injection made on my death-bed, November 18, 1900.
Caroline C.
It is possible, though unlikely, that the child, then eight years
old, may have known Caroline C. (?). Caroline lived at Lemberg,
and the child at Bralyhanen. The childs writing in her normal
state was rude and infantile, but the message was absolutely in
the handwriting of Caroline C.; it was, moreover, by direct writ-
ing ( ?). This singular story is questionable at all points.
To sum up: None of these facts, whether of xenoglossis or of
automatic writing by children and unlettered persons, carries
sufficient weight of proof. We cannot, therefore, grant them full
rights of citizenship in the extensive kingdom of subjective meta
psychics. I am inclined to think that some day, perhaps soon,
some may be admitted as authentic. Meanwhile, however, better
instances must be sought and they must be presented in a less
fragmentary and imperfect manner than those known hitherto.
For the present we must limit ourselves to the facts which are
proved and established by thousands of cases, considering the rare
and curious phenomena of xenoglossis as milestones on the road
of progress to that fuller metapsychic science which cannot as
yet be written.
CHAPTER IV
T h e D iv in in g -R od
The curious facts relating to the divining-rod seem at the first

glance to have no connection with metapsychics ; but it will soon
be apparent that these phenomena, long known and now well
proven, suggest some interesting hypotheses on cryptesthesia,
warrant certain analogies, and throw some light on the unknown
forces that actuate the subconsciousness.
1. Historical
The use of the divining-rod1 is of high antiquity.
When certain sensitives hold in their fingers a flexible hazel
rod without moving it intentionally, it seems that under certain
conditions the rod bends, of itself as it were. It turns very
strongly in the hands of the holder, and, as it would seem, inde
pendently of the will of the operator.
When such persons walk over ground that covers unknown
water-springs the rod turns abruptly and with great force. This
fact has long been used to discover sources of water, and the
diviners have hence been called sourciers in French. M. Mager
proposed the name baguettisants (1908). In English they are
called dowsers.
In 1854, after M. Riondels monograph on the discovery of
springs, the Paris Academy of Sciences appointed a commis
sion to examine the subject. The celebrated chemist Chevreul
im portant monographs have been published on the subject; there is
even one devoted to its bibliography alone. There is much useful matter
in Henri Magers Les Baguettes des Sourciers et les forces de la Nature,
Paris, Dunod, 1920. Special mention should be made of the first work of a
La Physique occulte ou trait de la baguette
scientific nature on the subject,
divinatoire by the Abb de Vallemont, Paris, 1693. See also the work of
Chevreul, 1854, and J. Maxwell on the same (A. S. P.,
1904, xiv, 276-290,
and 337-358) ; and especially the excellent work of Sir William Barrett,
On the so-called divining-rod, P. S. P. R.,xiii and xiv. The bibliography
of C. v. Kling Kowstroem, Bibliographie der Wnschelruthe (Shnhuth,
Munich, 19x1).
228
THE DIVINING-ROD 229
was entrusted with the report of the commission. This report
was not presented to the Academy, but was published as an
independent book. It only averred that the movement of the
rod is not produced by physical forces but by the hands and
muscles of the dowser.
M. Chevreul, in fact, returned to the ideas that he had
enunciated in 1833 on subconscious movements as causing the
movements of the magic pendulum.
This is an instrument long used for divination, consisting of
a weight hung from a thread. The upper end of the thread is
held in the hand, and the movements of the weight (often a
ring) give the indications. Sometimes it is suspended at the
centre of a circle on which are inscribed the letters of the alpha
bet ; the ring then moves to the letters, thus spelling out a word
or a phrase. There is no need to insist on the fact that the
answers are due to the subconscious movements of the person
holding the thread. These are involuntary, but are, nevertheless,
actuated by intelligence. The phenomenon is essentially the
same as automatic writing, conversations by planchette, the
willing game, and other analogous facts well known today;
that is, involuntary and unconscious muscular movements organ
izing themselves by some kind of synthesis. This subconscious
synthesis is sometimes so coherent as to lead to the hypothesis
of the intervention of a new personality.
It is easy to make the following very instructive experiment
with a young, simple-minded boy: The pendulum is put into his
hand and he is told that it will indicate his age. Supposing this
to be twelve years, the pendulum will strike twelve times on a
screen placed near it; and the boy will be amazed, and will say,
I stayed quite still. Now, he did not stay quite still, and it
was really himself that struck the twelve strokes, but he did not
will to do this and was not aware of his own movements. He
could equally well have dictated a sentence by movements of
the ring to an alphabet; his subconsciousness after having thought
of the phrase would have translated it by almost imperceptible
muscular movements towards the letters.
These facts are now undisputed. To Chevreul belongs the
merit of being the first to indicate their principle.1 According
to him, and to Babinet, and to Barrett, and to most of the authors
lH. Mager, loc. tit., Paul Lemoine, Quelques observations sur la baguette
divinatoire {Bull, de la Soc. Philomathique de Paris), i 9* 3i v, io, if.
who have studied the question, the movements of the divining-
rod are determined solely by involuntary muscular contractions
of the dowser.
Thus regarded the question seems very simple, but this sim
plicity is only in seeming.
2. Summary of the Facts
The bending of the rod over water-springs or metals is incon
testably true. It has recently been fully verified, with all possible
care, and the phenomenon can no more be denied than any fact
of chemistry or physiology. I will quote only the more recent
experiments, those of M. Paul Lemoine made at Toulouse in the
chemical laboratory of the Catholic Institute. The Abb Caubin,
a very experienced dowser, was able to reveal the presence of
divers metallic masses. The kind of rod used has some influence
on the result. With a wooden rod there were eight successes
out of eight trials; with a copper rod four successes in seven
trials ; iron gave two in four ; and glass none in five trials.
The following experiments are very interesting: different
weights of gold induced movements of the rod at distances
greater or less according to the greater or less weight of the
metal. The Abb Caubin knew the amount of metal placed for
trial, but M. Lemoine convinced himself that voluntary move
ments by the operator did not enter into the matter. Further
trials resulted in the figures below:
Distance at which the
Mass of gold (grams?). rod began to turn (metres).
3 1.70
16 2.20
32 2.70
48 3.30
64 4.00
90 4.60
There was a series of trials, published in 1913 by H. Mager,
at the Forest of Vincennes at which it was clearly proved that
masses of metals buried in the ground could be discovered
equally well as moving water. The discovery of moving under
ground water has almost become a trade and cannot be doubted:
the government engineers in different lands use the faculty of
dowsers to discover water; this is done in various districts of
France, in Tunisia, Algiers, the United States, and in German
Africa. Differences of skill in dowsers are not due to the rod not
turning in their hands, but to unequal ability in interpreting its
movements as to the extent, depth, and direction of the flow.
Although the history of the divining-rod is only indirectly con
nected with metapsychics, the fact itself is of such import that
the recent works proving it must be mentioned here,1
To A. Martel, who was quite sceptical, Vir indicated exactly
(underlined by Martel) on the surface of the ground, for more
than a thousand yards, the course of a subterranean stream. It
matters little that he knew the country, for the surface gives no
indication of an underground flow. Martel also gives the suc
cesses obtained in German Africa.
Summing up his results, M. Vir has sent me an unpublished
note in which he gives the figures below from fully verified trials
since 1913 by Messrs. Plaprat, Probst, Jouffreau, A. Vir, Colonel
Vallantin, and the Abb Mermet :
Number of Percentage of
Experiments. Successes.
Subterranean water............... 19 89
Subterranean cavities........... 23 87
Metals and metallic veins---- 11 80
Coal ........................................ 9 55
Calculation by percentages underrates the successes, for a
remarkable positive result greatly outweighs many failures. The
probability is not 1 to 2, but very much less.
For instance, M. Plaprat and M. Vir (in an unpublished
experiment) showed Mr. A. C., councillor of state, where to
sink a well on his property at Juillac (Depart. Lot). Several
borings had been made without results. Messrs. Plaprat and
Vir indicated a thin stream of water thirteen metres below the
*1 g iv e p ro m in e n c e to th e w o rk o f M . A rm an d V ir , D . es-Sc., president
Bulletin d'histoire naturelle,
22, 9 3
o f A rch aeological S o c ie ty , w h o is a s k ilfu l dow ser,
an dComptes rendus de lAcademie des Sciences, D ecem b er i i > c lv ii,
Trait des Baux souterraines,
1460. S e e a lso E . A . M artel, P a ris, D oin,
Hydrologie Hydroscopie,
192 1, 740-752, a n d P . L an desq ue, et P a ris, D unod,
1920.
Verhand sur Kldrung der Wnschelruthfrage,
1. S e e S tuttgart, 1912.
Sanitary Record,
2. B e s id e s th e m o n ograp h b y B arrett, see M a y 2, 1913.
3. T h e a n a ly sis o f th e w o rk o f th e C on gress o f H a lle has been g iv e n by
VEau
E . N o e l in th e jo u r n a l Das Wasser
(N o v e m b e r 15, 19 1 3 ). V . (L e ip zig ,
1 9 1 3 ). M . A r g n e r is th e e d ito r o f a re v ie w d evoted so le ly to th is su bject,
Die Wnschelruthe, L e ip z ig (1909-1931)*
surface: a well was sunk, and the water was found in sufficient
quantity for the purposes required.
English results agree with those of French and German dowsers.
M. Landesque, of the French Government Engineering School
(Ponts et Chausses) gives an account of his experiences in
Tunisia, in a very interesting book from which I will cite only
the following characteristic incident: The military post at Ramsa
had a well outside the camp. M. Landesque indicated a spring
within the camp at a depth of six metres. The boring was made
but no water found. M. Landesque advised to go a little deeper
and one metre farther down the spring was discovered.
These facts are very important, and M. Martel on an impartial
summary of all opinions concludes in favour of a rhabdic force,
and adds that additional experiments are desirable; in which I con
cur, not to establish the undeniable facts, but to throw light on the
conditions under which they occur. The interesting fact, verified
by many experiments, is that the rod turns in the hands of the
dowser when over subterranean water; and this fact is pregnant
with many important theoretical inferences.
In one experiment (Mager, loc. cit., 24), two dowsers, Falcoz
and Probst, recognized metal plates wrapped in paper. Five
different metals were used. Both dowsers agreed in naming the
metals correctly. Therefore on ten experiments each having a
probability of 1: 5 there were ten successes, which gives the certi
tude of (% )10. But since the fact is established there is no more
need to calculate chances than to do so to establish the deflection
of the magnetic needle by an electric current.
That some persons still hesitate over the matter is due to a wish
to use the divining-rod as a measuring instrument. It is desired
to use it for industrial purposes, and then the depth and direction
of flow are important matters. This knowledge varies with the
skill of the dowser; but we are not here concerned with the exacti
tude of the revelations by the rod, but only whether there is an
emanation, or as I propose to call it, a rhabdic force acting on
the nervo-muscular system of the man and through him on the rod.
It seems to me that this cannot be in doubt (Marage, Revue
Scientifique, February 14, 1920); but is the problem one of
physics or of metapsychics?
By our definition of metapsychics the movement of the rod
would seem to be excluded from that science, since there can
not be any question here of intelligent forces setting human
sensitiveness into action. Nevertheless, the history of the divining-
rod is pertinent to our subject. For, if natural forces (under
ground water and metals) exercise an unknown action upon the
subconscious mind, there must be unknown vibrations that awaken
cryptesthetic sensibility; and we are brought back to the meta
psychic that deals with the unknown vibrations of things.
Is the bending of the rod due to unconscious muscular action
of the dowser, or is it a direct action of some physical force upon
the rod?
The hypotheses of trickery, chance, and conscious muscular
action can be at once dismissed. Dowsers discover water-springs
neither by chance nor by fraud; the rod turns strongly in their
hands in spite of themselves, so to say, giving indications by the
direction and strength of the movement as to the direction and
depth of the subterranean stream; though the indications are very
difficult to interpret correctly. There are therefore but two
hypotheses:
A. The movement of the rod is due to unconscious muscular
contractions.
B. They are independent of these muscular contractions.
The first of these is very simple, and doubtless the only one to
be generally accepted, as it is by Chevreul and Barrett. The
unknown physical force (rhabdic force) influences the subcon
sciousness of the dowser and induces muscular Contractions.
But certain difficulties are involved.
The movements of the hazel rod are sometimes strong enough
to break it, the parts of the rod held in the hands of the dowser
not moving at all when the middle part bends. P. Lemoine placed
each end in a sheath held in the hands. The rod turns in the
sheath, as shown in Paul Lemoines woodcut.
Despite the exactitude of this observation we cannot admit that
there is no muscular action. How can we suppose that the rod
is influenced physically and directly by water, metals, or metallic
salts? Is it possible that it should move by itself whilst the mus
cles of the hands are inert? If this were so the dowser would not
be required, a mere physical instrument to show the angular dis
placement would suffice. But under such conditions the rods do
not move at all. The presence of the dowser is required and his
personality is the necessary and preponderant condition.
H. Mager is inclined to think that using proper means everyone
might be a dowser; but he gives no proof of this. The positive
and undeniable fact is that in the hands of some persons the rod
turns very forcibly, while with others it does not turn at all.
Mager constructed a galvanometric instrument for the same pur
pose which has not as yet succeeded, but would seem to be actu
ated by the potential of electric forces that accompany moving
subterranean water, without the presence of a dowser. But these
small variations of the magnetic needle are not to be compared
with the powerful bending of the hazel rods. The action of a
stream of water on a galvanometer is a matter of pure physics
on which it is needless to insist. If there is any such action it is
extremely feeble, and it seems impossible to attribute the powerful
flexion of the hazel rod to these minute electrical reactions.
There is much more also that is very obscure. Rods of
different kinds are not equally suitable, which would seem to
indicate some physical action on the rod itself ; for if subconscious
muscular action were alone concerned it is not apparent why a
copper rod should function worse than one of hazel and better
than one of iron.
We must, however, conclude with Chevreul and Barrett that
there is no movement proper to the rod independently of human
muscles; and we still ascribe the phenomenon to unconscious
muscular contraction. The dowser often opposes, or seems to
oppose, the movement of the rod. Mr. Lemoine says that it
turns despite the will of the operator, sometimes so strongly that
he can hold it only with difficulty ; he may even find it impossible
to hold it at all.
This fact is analogous to the occasional violent movement of
a table when a powerful medium barely touches it.
Lemoine records that at the end of the experiments the hands
of the Abb Caubin were covered with callosities, not on the
palms only but at the articulations of the fingers also.
Some dowsers are convinced that the rod turns of itself
without muscular contractions, and it is to be noted that a silken
or woollen glove stops the action. But the opinion of these pro
fessional dowsers, though not to be disregarded, is not to be
taken on faith; they are evidently sincere, but they cannot be
aware of their subconscious movements. The matter is as difficult
to settle as whether the movements of a table are due to muscular
contractions when the medium is hardly touching the table.
It will be seen further on that some (exceptional) mediums
produce raps and movements at a distance. If the force acting
on the rod is not due to muscular contractions, might it not be
due to a special kind of telekinesis? Evidently the forces acting
on the rod only act through a human intermediary. It would be
interesting to carry out a methodical investigation whether
dowsers could act as table-mediums and conversely; that would
be a new experiment worth trying. It would seem not impos
sible. According to J. de Tristan and H. Mager, about 20 per
cent, or more of ordinary persons can act as dowsers. Experi
ments in this direction would certainly give useful data.
If it were proved that the rod is not actuated by human muscles
then it would be a true case of telekinesis. H. Mager has
attempted to show that forces capable of turning the rods emanate
from matter. He has even tried to indicate the direction and
potential of these forces. This would be a physical phenomenon
absolutely new and unknown; but his argument is feeble, or
even futile. A human agent has always been necessary, there
is no bending of the rod without the dowser. Therefore, as a
rod which can turn does not turn when put into a machine, and
as the hand of the dowser is indispensable, we must perforce
admit either that the action is muscular or that it is a human
telekinesis.
Between these two hypotheses I do not hesitate. Although I
have no personal experience, I put the opinipn of the scientists
above that of the dowsers; these think that the rod moves of
itself, those that it turns because the muscles of the dowser
turn it .1
3. Concerning Rhabdic Force
The movements of the rod, then, are due to the unconscious
muscular contractions of the individual holding it. It is therefore
averred that subterranean waters and metals deep in the earth
or hidden in boxes exert an action on our subconsciousness, and
that this mysterious action is an unknown physical force, for
it is neither humidity, heat, nor electricity.
Such a force emanating from objects is entirely unknown; its
existence is hypothetical, but the hypothesis is necessary, for
without it, if there were not some determinate energizing influ
xes Chapter XVI (very obscure) o H. Mager and J. de Tristan,
Recherches sur quelques effluves terrestres (1826), et les Comptes rendus du
Ile congrs international de psychologie exprimentale de 19*3
and undeniable fact is that in the hands of some persons the rod
turns very forcibly, while with others it does not turn at all.
Mager constructed a galvanometric instrument for the same pur
pose which has not as yet succeeded, but would seem to be actu
ated by the potential of electric forces that accompany moving
subterranean water, without the presence of a dowser. But these
small variations of the magnetic needle are not to be compared
with the powerful bending of the hazel rods. The action of a
stream of water on a galvanometer is a matter of pure physics
on which it is needless to insist. If there is any such action it is
extremely feeble, and it seems impossible to attribute the powerful
flexion of the hazel rod to these minute electrical reactions.
There is much more also that is very obscure. Rods of
different kinds are not equally suitable, which would seem to
indicate some physical action on the rod itself ; for if subconscious
muscular action were alone concerned it is not apparent why a
copper rod should function worse than one of hazel and better
than one of iron.
We must, however, conclude with Chevreul and Barrett that
there is no movement proper to the rod independently of human
muscles; and we still ascribe the phenomenon to unconscious
muscular contraction. The dowser often opposes, or seems to
oppose, the movement of the rod. Mr. Lemoine says that it
turns despite the will of the operator, sometimes so strongly that
he can hold it only with difficulty ; he may even find it impossible
to hold it at all.
This fact is analogous to the occasional violent movement of
a table when a powerful medium barely touches it.
Lemoine records that at the end of the experiments the hands
of the Abb Caubin were covered with callosities, not on the
palms only but at the articulations of the fingers also.
Some dowsers are convinced that the rod turns of itself
without muscular contractions, and it is to be noted that a silken
or woollen glove stops the action. But the opinion of these pro
fessional dowsers, though not to be disregarded, is not to be
taken on faith; they are evidently sincere, but they cannot be
aware of their subconscious movements. The matter is as difficult
to settle as whether the movements of a table are due to muscular
contractions when the medium is hardly touching the table.
It will be seen further on that some (exceptional) mediums
produce raps and movements at a distance. If the force acting
on the rod is not due to muscular contractions, might it not be
due to a special kind of telekinesis? Evidently the forces acting
on the rod only act through a human intermediary. It would be
interesting to carry out a methodical investigation whether
dowsers could act as table-mediums and conversely; that would
be a new experiment worth trying. It would seem not impos
sible. According to J. de Tristan and H. Mager, about 20 per
cent, or more of ordinary persons can act as dowsers. Experi
ments in this direction would certainly give useful data.
If it were proved that the rod is not actuated by human muscles
then it would be a true case of telekinesis. H. Mager has
attempted to show that forces capable of turning the rods emanate
from matter. He has even tried to indicate the direction and
potential of these forces. This would be a physical phenomenon
absolutely new and unknown; but his argument is feeble, or
even futile. A human agent has always been necessary, there
is no bending of the rod without the dowser. Therefore, as a
rod which can turn does not turn when put into a machine, and
as the hand of the dowser is indispensable, we must perforce
admit either that the action is muscular or that it is a human
telekinesis.
Between these two hypotheses I do not hesitate. Although I
have no personal experience, I put the opinipn of the scientists
above that of the dowsers; these think that the rod moves of
itself, those that it turns because the muscles of the dowser
turn it .1
3. Concerning Rhabdic Force
The movements of the rod, then, are due to the unconscious
muscular contractions of the individual holding it. It is therefore
averred that subterranean waters and metals deep in the earth
or hidden in boxes exert an action on our subconsciousness, and
that this mysterious action is an unknown physical force, for
it is neither humidity, heat, nor electricity.
Such a force emanating from objects is entirely unknown; its
existence is hypothetical, but the hypothesis is necessary, for
without it, if there were not some determinate energizing influ
e Chapter XVI (very obscure) of H. Mager and J. de Tristan,
Recherches sur quelques effluves terrestres (1826), et les Comptes rendus du
Ile congrs international de psychologie exprimentale de 19* 3*
ence, we could not connect muscular movements with a real
external fact with which they are obviously in close relation.
This rhabdic force has been studied sufficiently for some indica
tion of its laws to be even now possible.
Everything takes place as if there were conduction of this
force from the ground through the human body; and as if this
force, like electricity and heat, could be stopped by gloves of
silk or wool, or by india-rubber soles to the shoes.
This force does not emanate only from water. The old trials
were almost invariably to find water, but recent experiments
have shown that metals also have definite reactions.
These reactions differ according to the metal used. This has
been proved by J. de Tristan, H. Mager,1 and Paul Lemoine.
The results obtained independently of each other by H. Mager
and P. Lemoine, aided by the Abb Caubin, agree closely. Tak
ing one gram of gold as sufficient to act on the rod, the quantities
of other metals necessary to produce the same results are as
follows :
S ilv e r...................................... ........................... 1.2 grams
Nickel ............................... ............................... 6 grams
Aluminum......................... ........................... 15 grams
Z inc................................... ............................... 40 grams
Lead ................................... ........................... 75 grams
Copper .................. .......... ............................125 grams
These figures must not be taken as exact, like magnetic measure
ments, but they are sufficient to show that rhabdic force is amen
able to physical measurement.
This establishes a fact of the first importancethat a certain
force emanates from metals, sheets of water, and metallic salts,
and this force acts with sufficient energy on the organism of
certain persons to induce strong unconscious muscular contrac
tions.
There is no effect without its cause. If subterranean water
induces deflections of the rod, it must act as a causethat is, as
a forceon the rod. Evidently the action is by the intermediary
of the muscles, but that does not make it the less true that there
is a new physical force whose direction and conduction can be
measured.
lSee H. Mager, Les moyens de dcouvrir les eaux souterraines et de les uti
liser, Paris, Dunod, 1912.
This rhabdic force certainly does not act directly on the muscles,
but on the nervous system that moves them; the muscles are
the passive agents of the nervous system, and we are thus
brought to an inference whose importance no one can fail to
graspthat there emanates from metals, water, and metallic salts
a force that acts on the nervous system. This we will call
rhabdic force.
To study the phenomenon somewhat further : Is this a direct
action on the unintelligent nervous system? Or is it an action
upon the subconscious intelligence which then elaborates the
notion received?
These are not the same. A signal light only shows us the
way because we understand its meaning: its feeble light would
not, of itself, determine any motion ; and if the sight of it causes
us to quicken our pace that is because by a complicated psychic
reflex the intelligence has answered to the signal. It seems
probable that the inflection of the rod is of this kind, and if
the muscles bend it energetically that is not because the nervous
system is directly influenced but because the subconscious intelli
gence has been awakened by the rhabdic force. A notion has
been received by the subconsciousness, elaborated there, and trans
formed into muscular contraction; it is certainly not a crude
stimulus to the nervous centres. The subconscious intelligence
intervenes to transform a feeble stimulus into a powerful one.
The pendulum can be employed instead of the divining-rod
with similar results. In the hands of a sensitive, while seemingly
inert, it suddenly begins to vibrate on passing certain places;
sometimes this vibration is so powerful as to whirl it about. The
movements are due to unconscious muscular action, so absolutely
unconscious that the operator is himself much surprised. The
pendulum, like the rod, is only the indicator of a kind of nervous
excitement.
This excitement is sometimes so violent that certain sensitives,
as M. Vir tells me, are taken with a kind of convulsion on
passing over a subterranean spring whose location is unknown
to them. Such hyperesthesia is very rare; but a considerable
number of sensitives feel a shudder or tremor.
Thus the perturbation of the nervous system produced by
rhabdic force approaches cryptesthesia : instead of remaining a
simple sensation it is a sensation accompanied by a cognition of
actualities, this cognition being always subconscious. This is
proved by the fact that if a metal (e.g., iron, gold, or copper) is
placed in the hand holding the pendulum and causing it to oscil
late, the pendulum will only move on the sensitive passing over a
mass of the same metal. If water is sought it will suffice to hold
a bottle of water; if seeking a cavern or grotto the sensitive will
take a small empty tube in his hand, which is comic enough. The
fact of the ability to discern more or less accurately the presence
of bones, grottos, pieces of cast iron, ingots of gold, and water-
springs is more than nervous excitation; it is a knowledge of
actual thingsin a word, it is cryptesthesia. Therefore the
studies that have been made on the divining-rod are a most valu
able contribution towards a theory of cryptesthesia. Divination
by the rod is a form of pragmatic cryptesthesia.
No one can deny the existence of forces in being which have
been called telluric1but which I prefer to call rhabdic (Gr. a/38os
a rod), which move the cryptesthesia of the dowser, just as the
contact with a given object enables a sensitive to acquire cogni
tions that his normal senses could not reveal.
4. Deductions from the Point of View of Cryptesthesia
At first sight the study of the divining-rod would have seemed
outside metapsychics, but the existence of rhabdic force brings us
back into its full current.
In the chapter on pragmatic cryptesthesia (psychometry) I have
indicated that things certainly exert some action on intelligence.
If a medium or somnambule is given some object that has belonged
to a person, A., they will give characteristics of A. that could not
have been reached by normal means. I call this "pragmatic crypt
esthesia (Gr. Ileayfia a fact, a thing done), because it seems
connected with an unknown emanation from actual things. Prag
matic cryptesthesia is far fyom explaining all lucidity; in fact, it
explains very little; but it incontestably exists.
I conclude, therefore, that the divining-rod is an instrument
that can arouse pragmatic cryptesthesia: i.e., it can reveal facts
about things that our normal senses cannot reveal. The study
of the modes of transmission, the resistances and obstacles to this
flow of force show that careful analysis may give us precise data
on the unknown forces emanating from things, which, if they
T h is is th e w o rd u sed b y P r o fe s s o r M . B en e d ik t, Ruten und Pendellehre,
i vol., i2m o, H artleb en , 19 17.
cannot touch our consciousness, can at least react upon our
organs.
The analogy is remote between the force that proceeds from a
subterranean spring and causes the muscles of a dowser to con
tract, and the mysterious emanation from a lock of hair, a watch
or a ring which tells a medium that the article in question has
belonged to Marguerite, George, or Robert, and gives some indi
cations on these personalities. But both phenomena are of the
same order of magnitude.
I do not say that they are the same. I say that the movements
of the rod are pragmatic cryptesthesia, not that they explain the
movements of a table; but two laws emerge which, if well under
stood, give a definite point of departure for metapsychics:
A. Unknown forces emanate from things, and these forces are
amenable to measure and comparison by physical means.
B. These unknown forces do not affect our conscious senses
nor our physical instruments; nevertheless they act (according
to unknown laws) very energetically on the subconscious organ
ism so as to produce cognitions that the normal senses cannot give.
Dowsers may be compared to table-mediums, for there is con
siderable similarity between them. The rhabdic force that acts
on a human organism and produces muscular contractions reveals
to consciousness facts that consciousness alone could not reach;
and similarly a medium gets, through a table, answers that amaze
himself.
Therefore, alike for the divining-rod and the moving table, the
unconscious muscular action is a revealer of vibrations which
the emanations from actual things arouse in our subconscious
intelligence.
This chapter on the divining-rod is much abridged; this impor
tant question should have been developed at much greater length;
but my book is already so long that I could not give more space
to the subject.
CHAPTER V
M e t a p s y c h is m in A n im a l s
It may be questioned whether there is an animal metapsychism

distinct from the human. The question deserves consideration
because the strange phenomena presented by the Elberfeld horses
and the Mannheim dogs have been referred to mediumistic causes.
We think that this problemas interesting as it is obscuredoes
not belong to metapsychics. Nevertheless, mention of the facts
must be made, if only to decide whether to retain them or to
dismiss them.
About 1892, at Berlin, William von Osten made known some
strange facts; he had taught a horse (der kluge Hans) to reckon.
A scientific commission was appointed, which settled nothing.
The matter would have rested there had not an ingenious and
enthusiastic merchant of Elberfeld, one Karl Krall, resumed Von
Ostens experiments and devoted much skill and energy to devel
oping the arithmetical powers of certain horses.1
The facts relative to the power of horses to calculate are given
very briefly, as follows :
Four horses were trained by Mr. Krall, named Muhamad, Zarif,
a pony Hdnschen, and an old blind horse Barto.
These were able to solve simple arithmetical problems, and
even some very complicated ones. They gave their answers by
striking blows with their hoofs: thus to give 54 they would
strike 5 times with the left and 4 times with the right hoof.
They could add, subtract, and multiply, and also extract square
roots, which latter is perhaps only seemingly more extraordinary.
1The bibliography is already extensive. See Krall's Denkende Thiere.
The numerous polemical articles aroused by this work cannot be cited, but
O. Pfungsts book deserves special mention. Maeterlinck, who went to see
the horses, wrote on them in The Unknown Guest; and C. de Vesme has
summed up the questions raised (A. S. P., 1912, 352-363, and A. S. P.,
1913, 1x7-128). There are two admirable articles by E. Claparde in the
Arch, de Psychol, de Genve, 1912, xii, 263 and 1913, xiii, 244-284. See
also E. Duchatel on Les animaux savants de Mannheim (A. S. P., 1913
289*303). There are also several works in Italian. These references,
however, give only a slight idea of the volume of comment on the subject.
240
METAPSYCHISM IN ANIMALS 241
Mr. Assagioli, alone with the pony Hnschen, wrote on the
blackboard 33+44 and Hnschen answered 77. Then he wrote
12+33+33 and the animal replied 87, the digits 8 and 7 being
interchanged (which is often the case), 87 for 78.
In the absence of Mr. Krall and the groom, Muhamad gave
M. Claparde the fourth root ( !!) of 456,776, and the cube root
of 15,376.
Maeterlinck wittily describes how he named a chance number
for Muhamad to give its square root, but the horse did not reply,
the number having no exact square root ; a fact that vastly aston
ished M. Maeterlinck.
But there is more yet. The Elberfeld horses, by choosing cards
with letters on them, could carry on conversations ; they spoke, by
the alphabet, phonetically without vowels.
Their conversations are curious, as one may well imagine. One
day Muhamad denounced the groom for having struck Hnschen.
Sometimes they say they are tired and will not answer. They
knew one person present to be a lady because she had long hair.
All this is very odd ; but before going further we must enquire
whether there is trickery or illusion.
Trickery by Mr. Krall may be ruled out. All observers of
the horses, even the sceptical ones, agree in this. His honesty
is unquestioned; he often left the horse and the observer alone
together. This was the case in many exprimenta. The presence
of Krall or the grooms was not needed for correct replies.
Sometimes the horse was left quite alone in the stable and was
watched through a glazed chink in the wall.
The solution reached is often too quick even for a good arithme
tician. Mr. Krall wrote on the blackboard ^91125, the num
ber given him by M. Assagioli, and in a few seconds Muhamad
gave the correct answer.
In presence of these astonishing and improbable facts, the
official German scientists drew up an equally astonishing protest.
Twenty-four professors signed this ridiculous document and
among these there were only two who had seen the horses. Those
two had the right to say that Kralls observations were illusory,
the others had no right to say anything.
Their protest brings nothing new towards a solution; they
say that to allow that horses can calculate like men is subversive
of the evolutionary theory. This curious manifesto is reprinted
by Claparde (loc. cit., p. 265).
We may lay down the following provisional conclusions :
1. The hypothesis that the horses are trained to answer by a
system of signs can be completely put aside.
2. Neither is Pfungsts hypothesis, that they respond to uncon
scious signs by the experimenters, any more useful.
The horses have often answered when no witness at all was
with them and therefore no sign at all could have been made.
A methodical analysis of the conditions under which replies
were given has led Claparde to the following statements that
bear on a possible theory :
1. After four to six months of schooling the horses make
no further progress. Krall considers his pupils as having the
mind of intelligent but ignorant children, from six to eight years
old.
2. They can invent nothing and can only do what they have
been taught. However complicated the process of extracting cube
roots, it is not beyond the powers of any moderately intelligent
child of ten, after some months of teaching.
3. They are often unable to solve very simple questions ; such
as to say how many persons are present in the stable, though
this is much easier (to our anthropomorphic notions) than the
extraction of the fourth root of 456,776.
4. They do not seem to work out anything; they hardly look
at the figures on the blackboard. Ferrari and Probli have em
phasized this inattention on the part of the horse Tripoli whom
they endeavoured to train in Italy after the Elberfeld manner.
Tripoli replied after a careless look at the blackboard.
5. The errors made are often transpositions of figures, as if
they were errors in reading. When the animal is not sure of the
result it strikes a timid blow, but strikes strongly when sure
of the answer.
In view of these incoherent results, we must remain uncertain
as to the mechanism of the facts, as we have so often had to do
in other metapsychic questions.
Nevertheless, on the positive evidence of such good observers
as Claparde, Ferrari, Edinger, Ziegler, Assagioli, Hartkopf, and
others, I incline to think that the horses really calculate and that
the arithmetical operations are manifestations of their intelligence.
Moreover, it is not only horses that are capable of such calcula
tions. Krall thought that the elephant, which shows such remark
able intelligence, might give better results. He got a young
METAPSYCHISM IN ANIMALS 243
elephant, Kana; but the youngster was very lazy and gave only
blunders! The dog Rolf, of Mannheim, and the cat Daisy pre
sented some curious facts of the same kind. Rolf would appear
to have made it known of his own accord that he could reckon,
and had learned to do so by hearing the lessons given to a child
{Buchstabierende Hunde, Psych. Studien, 1918, xlv, 142).
We cannot suppose that Muhamad, Rolf, Hnschen, and Barto
were exceptional beings; if they gave proof of intelligence it is
fairly certain that other animals could do the like. Then why
are not these feats repeated? Why are they isolated facts, both
in science and legend?
If this arithmetical aptitude were a real phenomenon and no
illusion, it should be possible to make hundreds of calculating
horses. But this is not done, no others have followed. Why, if
it is not an illusion?
This seems to me the most serious objection that can be put
forward against the facts alleged by Krall, an objection so grave
that it almost negatives them.
The uncertainty of the facts makes any theoretical treatment
necessarily brief.
The opinion has been expressed that the phenomenon is tele
pathic. This is quite inadmissible: Grabow obtained exact answers
on numbers presented to the animal that he himself did not
know; and in certain instances the horse gave them when alone
in the stable. There is no valid reason for seeking to apply
telepathy; the obscure is not explained by the more obscure.
C. de Vesme has advanced the ingenious hypothesis that the
process is mediumistic. After all, since there are intelligent raps
producible from a table, why should not this power put the
brain and muscles of a horse into action much as it causes the
vibration in the wood of the table? In this connection De Vesme
quotes the instance of a young man of nineteen belonging to an
honourable family, who could readily obtain through the planchette
in three or four seconds the total of several numbers each of
six or seven figures that would have taken several minutes to
add up on paper. The subconscious automatism worked more
quickly than the conscious mind could do. De Vesme therefore
thinks that the Elberfeld horses show a mental automatism
similar to that of a medium, and this seems to me worthy of
acceptance; though, truth to tell, it is not an explanation.
In any case the automatic arithmetical intelligence of the animals
does not imply a metapsychical phenomenoni.e., the action of
an intelligent force differing from known forces.
We know little or nothing about animal intelligence; its limits
are undetermined, and if a horse or a dog can do what a child
of ten can do, when duly trained, that only indicates a great
extension of animal intellectuality.
I should therefore say that the arithmetical intelligence of the
Elberfeld horses (if it exists, as it is possible that it does) proves
that horses are capable of calculation and reasoning, but that this
does not exceed die capacity of young children. It is extraor
dinary, and seems unlikely, but this has nothing to do with the
metapsychic science that opens on unknown worlds.
CHAPTER VI
S p o r a d ic C r y p t e s t h e s ia
A. MONITIONS 1 (I. ON MONITIONS IN GENERAL)

1. Classification and Definition
A study of cryptesthesia that failed to take account of that
form of it which occurs in normal individuals apart from any
experimental intention, would be very imperfect both with regard
to the fact itself and to the various forms under which it is
manifested.
We shall apply the term monitions to these phenomena of
sporadic cryptesthesia, without implying the hypothesis of an
external monitory will; and shall treat them in three sections:
1. Monitions on trivial or serious matters other than death.
2. Monitions of death.
3. Monitions that probably have material objectivity, since they
are collectivei.e., observed by several persons at once.
I intentionally do not use the word hallucination, even quali
fied by the epithets veridical, telepathic, or symbolical. It
seems to me that the term hallucination should be reserved to
describe a morbid state when a mental image is exteriorized with
out any exterior reality.
In so-called veridical or telepathic hallucinations the fact of their
correspondence with some near or distant external event shows
that there is some objective external reality that conditions the
hallucination. It is of no consequence whether we know the
nature of the force or vibration that transmits the knowledge
or not.
In hallucinations produced by absinthe, or alcohol^ in those of
general paralysis, acute mania, somnambulic suggestion or
dreams, there is no external cause; the cause and effect are
Âccording to the Latin etymology, the word monition means no more
than warning. This does not necessarily imply an external intervention. _It
is applicable to a warning proceeding from the subconscious intelligence which
acquires, by cryptesthesia, the cognizance of an external event and presents
it by a symbol.
245
anterior to the brain. Hallucination is one of the most distinctive
symptoms of insanity, and occurs in nearly all forms of delirium.
It occurs after some forms of intoxication; under hashish the
illusions are so powerful that they become real hallucinations;
belladonna and atropine, in strong but not fatal doses, produce
passing hallucinations; long and persistent hallucinations can be
provoked in somnambulists, causing them to live in a dream, and
dreams much resemble hallucinations. To dream when awake
and not to know one is dreaming is to have a hallucination.
But all these have no objective reality. When a dipsomaniac
sees rats, hears their squeaks and feels their bites, there are no
rats. When a hypnotized subject is told to go up the steps into
a house and take a seat on the sofa, there is neither house nor
steps nor sofa. When a lunatic hears voices, there are no voices.
It is extremely rare that a person who is neither ill, nor drunk,
nor hypnotized should in the waking state have an auditory,
visual, or tactile illusion of things that in no way exist. The
opinion of alienists that hallucination is the chief sign of mental
derangement, and the infallible characteristic of insanity, seems
to me well grounded. With certain exceptions (for to every rule
there are exceptions) a normal, healthy individual when fully
awake does not have hallucinations. If he sees apparitions these
correspond to some external reality or other. In the absence of
any external reality there are no hallucinations but those of the
insane and of alcoholics.
But we must be clear what we mean by objective reality. To
take a concrete instance, when Mrs. Bagot at Mentone sees her
little dog Judy cross the room at the very time that Judy has died
in England, that is not a hallucination in the proper sense of the
word, for it corresponds to a real event. But we are not going to
imagine that there was a phantom Judy in the dining-room at
Mentone emitting the mechanical and luminous vibrations that
correspond to sight. The nature of the external fact that caused
Mrs. Bagot to see Judy is quite unknown and is probably quite
different to the genesis of a phantom. Nor shall I assert, like
some out-and-out spiritualists, that Judys astral body has appeared
in Mentone. All the same there is some relation between the death
of Judy and Mrs. Bagots vision. It is a monition which, by some
mysterious and unknown means, has touched Mrs. Bagots mind
and has presented itself under a form adapted to human intelli
gence, i.e., by a visual phenomenon.
SPORADIC CRYPTESTHESIA 247
The vision cannot be compared to that of a lunatic, for there
was an objective reality ( Judys death) which was causative of a
vision at once veridical and symbolical.
We shall therefore employ the word monition, not halluci
nation, to all these cases of veridical and symbolical hallucina
tion. Thus regarded monitions can be considered as cases of
lucidity ; but they differ from lucidity as previously studied in two
important respects:
1. They are not experimental but accidental. The data that we
have on them depend on sporadic observations and not on method
ical experiment. We shall therefore define monitions as phe
nomena of sporadic and non-experimental lucidity.
2. To move the mind of the percipient there must be an objective
phenomenon of some kind, but this (in most cases) has no ie-
semblance to usual objective phenomena.
When Mrs. Hutchins sees her husband and hears him call
Mary, Mary at the very time that he' has suddenly died, it must
be admitted that this is not the ordinary mechanical and physico
chemical fact of a bodily presence that speaks. It is some force in
action near Mrs. Hutchins, inducing the image by cryptesthetic
emotions whose bearing we cannot fathom. This unknown vi
bration has reached the mind of Mrs. Hutchins, but would doubt
less not have reached another person.
In certain analogous cases the exterior fact resembles ordinary
objectifications, and in such cases the effect is produced on other
persons collectively. Such is the case of Mme. Telechoff, whose
five children and dog perceive the apparition of a little boy,
Andr, floating high in the room, the child having died in a house
near by. In this case there certainly was a real phantom with real
outlines like a living person, which might probably have im
pressed a photographic plate.
It is therefore not possible to draw an exact line of demarcation
between the subjective and the objective; some monitions have a
close relation to both.
1. Monitions are all objective in a certain sehse, but it is
special kind of objectivity, having no relation to what we call
ordinary objectivity.
2. If we use ordinary language and limit the term objective to
those physical vibrations that ordinarily affect or senses, we
should then say that nearly all monitions are subjective.
While admitting, then, that all classification is artificial, we shall
class as subjective all the non-collective monitions in which a
visual, auditory, or tactile image has not been excited by an
external force similar to the mechanical, physico-chemical forces
of the usual known kinds.
But these sporadic monitions have certain characteristics too
closely analogous to collective monitions and to experimental ma
terializations for us to be justified in eliminating the hypothesis
of a materialization, or something like it in many monitions, sim
ply because it may be convenient to do so. This will be discussed
later on; in this present chapter we shall class monitions among
subjective phenomena, setting theory aside for the present, but
taking note of the two double characteristics ( 1) that they are
accidental and not experimental, and ( 2) that they are connected
with some real fact inaccessible to the percipient by normal means.
2. Conditions Necessary that Monitions Should Be Regarded
as Such
The first condition is the honesty of the witnesses. With the
rarest exceptions it is not possible to suppose that the stories have
been invented. It is possible, though unlikely, that among the
thousands of cases reported, perhaps ten may be due to practical
jokes, but I am disposed to think that there has scarcely ever been
intentional invention.
But, on the other hand, inaccuracy is as certain as honesty; and
this is a source of grave error.
A story that comes to us at secondhand, having passed through
two or three persons' imagination and memory, the one inventive
and the other treacherous, is sure to be distorted. In spite of
oneself, there is a tendency to make it more effective by adding
details and suppressing others. In the great majority of cases
the honesty is indubitable, but so is the inaccuracy. Wilful deceit
there is none, but self-deception is almost always present.
I will instance the log of the three-master Jacques Gabriel.
The log contains the following annotation, but written with
different ink, On arriving at the Mauritius, we learn the death
of the wife of the second officer, M. Penaud, deceased on the
same day and hour at which the noise was heard. In the log
under date of July 17th the entry states that while at sea the
voice of a woman had been heard on board. Now the register
of deaths at Paimbceuf indicates that Mme. Penaud died on
the 16th of June. So that Captain Mangot, commanding the
vessel, no doubt in good faith, but disregarding the necessity of
being absolutely accurate in all matters of science, mentions the
events as simultaneous, though there was a months difference
between them.
There are certainly a number of cases analogous to the fore
going which, as no written evidence was taken at the time, must
be accepted with considerable reserve; but these reservations
have less to do with the fact itself than with the moment of its
occurrence, which, if coincident with the event, would show a
connection in time with the objective reality. It would therefore
be injudicious to reject all the cases in which written documents
are wanting; for memory, which is unreliable as to precise dates,
is trustworthy for many other details.
It is also remarkable that monitions, whether because of their
somewhat dramatic character, or because they have been spoken
of several times, or for some deeper reason, are deeply graven
in the minds of the percipients, so that they are still vividly
and accurately remembered after the lapse of even as much as
thirty years. There will be some distortion, but the fundamental
facts are correctly retained; the narrator may forget whether
the lamp was alight or not; whether the weather was bright
or rainy; whether he spoke aloud or kept silence; but the essen
tial facts remain. No doubt illusions arise on the exact corre
spondence of hours, or even of days, but these variations from
accuracy, though they are not unimportant, do not change the
essential character of the fact itself.
Another point, which is perhaps more difficult to clear up, is
whether in any given case it was actually impossible that the
event in question should have reached the mind by any ordinary
channel. The following case, for instance, seems one in which a
subconscious rememberance seems sufficient to account for the
facts:
Mr. Newnham during a walk at Haughton had gathered some
violets for his sick wife. Twelve years later as he was walking
in the same place, and thinking of the violets once gathered there,
his wife said to him, I smell violets in the hedgerow. This was
no doubt a subconscious remembrance by Mrs. Newnham (or pos
sibly a coincidence). She said, no doubt quite sincerely, I had com
pletely forgotten the fact, but the subconscious memory forgets
nothing. Each case should be considered on its own merits.
Very often the facts relate to a person who is very ill or
near death, and then a real hallucination is possible; but this
possibility must not be exaggerated.
In the first place, people in a normal state do not have hallucina
tions; and further the correspondence between the hour of death
and that of the monition is sometimes so exact that it could not
be due to so-called hallucination. Mr. Williams knew that his
brother-in-law, George, was very ill, nearly dying. One morning
he sees George standing at his bedside, and says to his wife, I
have seen George, he came for a minute at sunrise. Far away
George had died in the arms of his father, who wrote, The sun
was rising when my dear son left us for the heavenly country.
The event and the monition were so exactly simultaneous that
Mr. Williamss knowledge of the imminence of death detracts
very little from the authenticity of the monition.
O. Houdaille, called to the bedside of his grandfather who was
very ill, while in the train taking him to Mirecourt, hears a
deep sigh, gets up, looks at the time, and says to his brother, It is
one oclock; grandfather must be dead or dying. Mr. B.,
the grandfather, entered into the death-throes at one oclock
precisely.
Even if we eliminate the cases in which a death is expected (and
there is no real reason to eliminate these), there remains a
large number in which the recipient of the monition believed the
person in question to be in good health or very slightly indis
posed. Thus when Mr. Z. left his young friend, B., B. was in
perfect health. They had talked of trivial matters; but two
hours later Z. had a terrible dream at the very moment that B.
committed suicide.1
Monitions might be divided into the foreseen and the unfore
seen; the former being those in which death was expected, and
the latter those referring to a person in good health; but the
resemblance, not to say the identity, of the modality of monitions
in both cases is such that the phenomenon is the same in both, and
it would be irrational to reject monitions of likely facts merely
because they are likely. Is the knowledge that a brother is very
ill or dying sufficient to evoke his wraith? Expectant attention,*
*1 have an impression, which should be supported by statistics, that
monitions are more frequent in cases of suicide. This might be better
known if families in such cases were not careful to conceal the fact and the
circumstances that led to it.
to which so many marvels are attributed, really cannot cause a
normal person to see a phantom or hear a voice. We must admit
monitions into the realm of metapsychics even when they refer
to probable facts.
Nevertheless, whenever a simple and non-metapsychic explana
tion of a so-called monition can be given, it should be adopted.
In other words, the criticism of such facts must be stringent.
Mr. Barwell and Mr. Earle see their friend W. at the carriage-
door of a train just as it is starting: W. waves his hand to them
and the train is soon out of sight. At that very moment W.
falls into syncope at his own house. But this is not enough to
establish that W.s double was in the departing train. It is
possible that some stranger who resembled W., seeing signs made
to him, answered them by a wave of the hand. This is much
more likely than an apparition; and this story must be rejected.
The very interesting case of M. Noell, a young student of
pharmacy at Montpellier, who saw one night his dying sister
and heard her call to him, has a defective side. Telegrams had
been sent him announcing his sisters serious illness, but the
servant who should have given him the telegrams had stupidly
put them into a drawer. One cannot be certain that M. Noell
had not half unconsciously opened the drawer and read the tele
grams. This is improbable but not impossibly and is sufficient to
make the case a doubtful one.
Even if the non-metapsychical explanations are far-fetched and
unlikely, provided they have some remote possibility, they should
be accepted in preference to calling in mysterious faculty.
Thus the Rev. Mr. Killick thinks he hears a voice telling him
that his daughter Etta is drowning. Some months later he learns
that at that very time his daughter had been in imminent danger
of being drowned. May not this be a fact of paramnesiaan
illusion of memory? May not the extent of the danger to Etta
have been exaggerated ?
Dr. J. Smith hears a voice that repeats three times, Send some
bread to James Gandy. He then sends the bread to Gandy, whose
existence he barely knew of, and finds him in a state of destitution
with his children crying for bread. But it is possible that Dr.
Smith may have known that Gandy was in want, and the auditory
admonition does not necessitate cryptesthesia.
Each particular case of sporadic cryptesthesia needs special
critical treatment. This has been done by the authors of Phan
tasms of the Living, by Camille Flammarion, by the editors of
the Annales des Sciences Psychiques, and by the members of the
S. P. R., before making public the facts recorded by them. This
criticism, however, has not prevented .the publication of some
weakly authenticated facts that seem to support others that are
quite well evidenced. I have endeavoured in this book to give
only those against which little can be alleged; but among them
are still too many which, if they stood alone, would have little
weight.
As our chief aim is to prove the reality of cryptesthesia, we
shall not take into account vague and indefinite cases. Thus,
Mrs. Martyn has an intense feeling of horror and fear. She
cannot assign any precise bearing to this; but next day she
learns that someone that she had not seen for two years has
died. This cannot be called a monition; it may have been one,
but there is no evidence for it.
The same must be said of the Rev. Mr. Wilson, who had a
vague but strong sensation of illness at the moment of death of
a twin brother. He says, It was a panic fear; I shuddered as
at the approach of death. My brother died fours hours before
this painful terror seized me. That this may have been a
monition is probable, seeing that the brothers were twins; but
Mr. Wilson did not connect his sensations with his brother, and
it is best to infer simple coincidence.
Vague monitions which do not connect with a real and definite
fact totally unknown to the percipient do not amount to lucidity.
We shall not call them monitions, for that word is reserved to
the cognizance of a real external fact. Cases in which the per
cipient has no intimation of the external fact itself cannot be taken
as monitions.
(a) The Hypothesis of Chance Coincidence
It is frequently objected that monitions may be due to chance.
It is desirable to give this objection its full weight:
In France, as in England, there are about 1,500,000 deaths
annually and a thousand times as many falls, wounds, serious
accidents followed by fainting, loss of blood, and delirium, with
out counting the minor incidents to which many monitions refer.
This amounts to some 1,500 million cases. As the enquiry extends
over about sixty years, there are about a hundred thousand
millions of casual events that might be the subject of monitions.
Now it has only been possible to ascertain (with difficulty) about
500 cases; therefore, the ratio of actual to possible cases is 500
to 100,000,000,000, or 1:200 millions or less. Therefore, alike
in France and in England only one two-hundredth-millionth, or
at most, one hundred-millionth, of possible cases has eventuated.
This is a very small number; so small as to be negligible, and if
all the inaccurate observations, exaggerations, and defects of
memory were eliminated, the number would be much smaller
still.
This objection somewhat resembles the remark of the sceptic
who, seeing the votive offerings of sailors saved from shipwreck
to their patron, St. Peter, asked to see the names of those who
were drowned in spite of their prayers.
N. Vaschide has been unable to obtain any positive evidence,
and his criticism is not very logical. Against all common-sense
he begins by denying probabilities, and then he invokes the calcu
lus of probabilities to support his denial. Then having found on
enquiry that the hallucinations he has brought forward were not
veridical, he concludes that the enquiry conducted by the S. P. R.
is illusory. But in such a case science cannot prove a negative
and I can only compare his negation to that of the Venetian doctor
who replied to Harvey that the heart might be heard to contract
in London, but that in Venice nothing of the sort could be
perceived.
We may reply to Vaschide :
(1) The number of persons who for one reason or another,
by indifference, laziness, inattention, or fear, do not give their
testimony is very great ; but the number who have never heard
of the enquiry is enormous. Among the persons passing through
Trafalgar Square in London or the Place de lOpra in Paris,
what is the ratio between those who have heard of an enquiry
on veridical hallucinations, to those who have not heard of it?
And how many among those who have heard would think of
writing a letter detailing personal matters? Add to this the
country-side and the small towns. It may be boldly averred, not
one in a hundred thousand. The ratio stated by M. Vaschide
then falls from one hundred-millionth to one ten-thousandth,
which is very different.
(2) If, instead of taking cases of telepathy and monition bear
ing on various matters, we take only the premonitions of death,
accepting only those that are well supported by documentary
evidence, we have about 250 cases. In sixty years there are said to
be 750 million deaths. If, then, only one in ten thousand persons
have been moved to action by the enquiry, the ratio is 250: 75,000,
say, 1:300. Such would seem to be near the proportion of
those who have had a monition among those who might be
expected to reply. One in three hundred is a small proportion,
but it is no longer a negligible quantity.
(3) The hypothesis of chance coincidence becomes quite unten
able when the time of the monition coincides exactly with the
event. J. has left his friend F., when F. was very slightly
indisposed. Soon after J. in his own home sees the apparition
of F., and asks his wife, What is the time? Twelve minutes
to nine. Then, says J., F. has died at 8.48. I have just seen
him. In fact, F. has died between 8.35 and 9 oclock, or, taking
the mean, at 8.45. The times are exactly concordant.
The probability that J. should have one, and only one, hallucina
tion in his whole life and that it should agree exactly with the
time of F.s death can be calculated fairly closely. There are
96 quarter-hours in the day, and 365 days in the year. Tak
ing twenty years of J.s experience that gives a probability of
1: 700,000 against a chance coincidence. C. Flammarion (Revue
Spirite, February, 1921), by another method of calculation
reaches a probability of 1 :800,000,000 on the same data; but
whether 1 : 700,000 or 1 :800,000,000, the moral improbability of
chance coincidence is the same.
Is it not much more rational to suppose that J., who is neither
a mystic nor subject to hallucinations, had at that precise minute
a monition, the only one in his whole life, because some actual
vibration awakened his dormant cryptesthesia ?
(4) But the chief reason for dismissing the hypothesis of
chance is that the details furnished by the monition are often so
exact and so abundant that fortuitous coincidence is out of the
question. Mme. Escourru at Paris, looking at the portrait of her
son, sees the left eye bleeding and the eyeball out of its socket;
and on the same day her son, a captain of Zouaves, is wounded
in this very manner at the assault on La Puebla in Mexico.
Mrs. Green dreams of two young girls driving in a one-horse
carriage drowned in a lake, their two hats floating on the water;
and at that very time, the girls, one of whom is her niece, having
gone for a drive with a friend, are drowned in Australia on the
SPORADIC CRYPTESTHESlA 255
other side of the world, the two bodies being located by the hats
floating on the water. The probability against chance is so great
that it amounts to moral certainty.
We never get mathematical certainty; it is not certain that a
bag of type emptied on a table will not fall into the first line of
the Iliad. This combination exists among those that are possible,
but if it should occur no one would believe it due to chance.
(5) In a small number of cases some objective phenomena have
accompanied the monitions; a fact which makes the hypothesis
of chance quite untenable.
Mrs. Bettany sees an old woman in a long cloak crouching
on the floor. Mr. Bettany sees the same, and both recognize
Mrs. X. Is it possible that there was no external phenomenon?
Is it likely that this was unconnected with the death of Mrs. X. at
the same hour?
( 6) The calculus of probabilities has been alluded to above.
This method of reasoning, which may be misleading even on
mathematical and abstract data, becomes entirely illusory when
the complex and intricate factors of a monition enter into the
problem. In such cases common-sense rather than calculation
will give the solution. Mr. Wingfield Baker writes in his diary
the initials of his brother, and adds "God forbid ; at the same
hour his brother is killed in the hunting-field. The most ele
mentary good sense will see a connection between the two events,
and that the apparition of his brother was not due to chance.
If this were an isolated case it might, at a stretch, be supposed
that chance might have induced an hallucination in a normal
person (however rare such may be) and that this hallucination
plight have occurred at the moment of the brothers death. It
is vastly unlikely, however. If the case were unique we might
hesitate to draw a definite conclusion; but there are some hun
dreds of such cases and the repetition of similar coincidences
excludes all idea of chance.
That at roulette the red should come up 80 times out of 100
on a particular day is enormously improbable, but no inference
could be drawn; but if this, or something like it, occurred for
a month, we should be quite sure that the wheel had been
tampered with. In the case of the wheel the probability is
calculable; in that of monitions it is not, but the inference is
the same.
The study of experimental lucidity showed that the human
soul has a mysterious faculty in virtue, of which cognitions other
than those due to normal senses and sensations reach the mind.
The study of accidental lucidity leads to the same conclusion and
corroborates it with irresistible force.
There are other channels of cognition than the habitual ones.
That is a conclusion as well established as the most certain
facts of physics, chemistry, and mathematics.
3. Conditions Under Which Monitions Occur
Monitions occur under the most varied conditions, nevertheless
there are some points of similarity that will appear from the
accounts here following:
(1) Visual monitions are usually in the shape of a nebulous
form which allows of the background being seen through it,
though in some cases the form is opaque enough to hide objects
behind it.
(2) The details of the face are often very clear; the eyes, nose,
wrinkles, the colour of the hair, and a happy or sad expression
are readily distinguishable. Everything occurs as if the vision
were of a living person in the material world.
(3) Sometimes the apparition speaks; sometimes a voice is
heard. Sometimes, though more rarely, there is a tactile phenome
non, so that the impression of reality is complete, all the senses
contributing to the perception. Often what the vision has wished
to say is clearly understood without any spoken words having
been definitely heard; just as in a dream one knows what is said
without any remembrance of particular words.
(4) Very often the monition takes the form of a dream; and
then the dreamer remembers the exact circumstances of the
dream. Often the dream awakes the sleeper, without immediate
disappearance of the apparition. Sometimes (rarely) as in
Dr. Orsis case, the monitory dream is repeated several nights
in succession. It often takes place between sleeping and waking
(Borderland, Maurys hallucinations).
(5) Recognition is variable; often the form seen is ill-defined,
so that the percipient does not at first connect it with any par
ticular person, but experiences vague disquiet and pain. Little
by little the notion becomes more precise, and the visual
phenomenon is linked to some person without that person having
been actually recognized. He knows and understands that the
apparition refers to that person without being able to say how
he knows it.
This difficulty in recognition is interesting, for it seems to
prove two successive intellectual processes. In the first, the
mind is influenced by some vibration that has a meaning, though
the meaning is obscure. Then the sensation becomes more precise,
but in order to become sothat is, in order to be transferred
from subconsciousness to consciousnessit must be manifested
under some form fitted to our mental constitutiona vision or
an audition. Till then it will not be understood. Recognition
has been secured because the subconscious has adopted the means
of a symbolical hallucination to reveal a fact to the conscious self.
When recognition is doubtful cryptesthesia must not be invoked;
it is therefore of primary import that the percipient should have
formally related the monition to a witness, or better still, should
have written it down, before the actual fact referred to has
come to him by normal means.
Without clear recognition lucidity cannot be admitted. For
instance, Mrs. Woodham sees*a figure before her so distinctly
that she wakes up and says aloud, so as to be heard by her
sister sleeping with her, Who are you? What do you want?
The next morning she hears of the death of an old servant of
whom she was fond, and then she says, It was she whom I
saw last night ; but as she did not recognize the apparition at
the time, the case is not evidential. Paramnesia is relatively
common, and no good faith in the narrator can bring this to
his knowledge, for the genuineness of the mistake constitutes
paramnesia.
( 6) Monitions usually refer to death, often to illness or serious
accidents, and sometimes to trivial matters. But these latter
also are monitions; and the monition of a trivial fact is as inter
esting per se as the monition of a death or a disaster, for monitions
of trifling facts are often accompanied by precise details which
certainly show cryptesthesia. For instance, M. sees his wife
talking with a beggar who is holding a broom.. The monition
is in itself quite meaningless, but interesting from the abundance
and accuracy of its detail.
(7) There is no essential connection between the vividness
of the hallucination or the dream and the definiteness of the
monition. There may be scarcely any, just as a very slight and
passing internal perception may reveal an important fact, whereas
sometimes a vision may be very clear and perceived very vividly
without being certainly referable to cryptesthesia. This contrast
is very apparent in dreams; some are very vivid, having all the
semblance of reality, but mean nothing at all, while other very
transitory dreams may convey monitions.
( 8 ) The period of latency between the event and the monition
is variable. F. Myers thinks (while admitting it to be merely a
hypothesis), that the telepathic impression is immediate, but that
this impression remains latent in the mind of its subject, only
emerging to consciousness after a certain interval either as a
waking vision, or as a dream, or in some other manner. In
nearly all cases, he says, in which a veridical phantom has pre
ceded death, it has been a case of illness but not a case of accident;
and then the process of dying, with its coma and convulsions, may
originate the telepathic impression and so precede the stoppage of
the heart that constitutes actual death.
In cases of accident the vision is almost always subsequent to
death. Myers cites two cases (p. 273) that seem exceptions;
but one of these may have been-a premonition and in the other
(suicide) Myers thinks that the mental agitation of the unhappy
man may have been sufficient to cause the telepathic phenomenon.
If the time-curve of post-mortem apparitions were drawn, it
would show a very rapid fall within the first few days after
death, becoming almost nil for longer periods.
Possibly when the casual fact is near, the lapse of time is less
than when it is distant.
M. Warcollier, analyzing the data of telepathic monitions
given in sundry enquiries, draws up the statistics given below:
Agents [ Men
A * *[ .. ...................... 194 64 per cent.
Women ..................... 106 36 per cent.

Men .. ...................... 161 54 per cent.

Percipients Women ..................... 139 46 per cent.
He has also compared cases occurring in the waking and
;eping states, including in the latter, fainting, coma, and dying.
Agent. Percipient. N o . o f cases.
Waking. Waking 7
Waking. Sleeping. 13
Sleeping. Waking. 19
Sleeping. Sleeping. 59
He concludes, borne out by many personal investigations, that
sleep or the borderland between sleeping and waking is favour
able to telepathy or clairvoyance.
(9) Visual apparitions are of short duration; they usually
last but a few seconds. Prolonged apparitions are very rare;
such as the case of the sailor Spring, who saw on his ship, during
a storm, the apparition of his father (who had just died on shore)
which remained beside him on the bridge for two hours.
(10) Some monitions are certainly objective, and are seen by
several persons. It is then very difficult, almost impossible, not
to admit some external phenomenon similar to those ordinary
phenomena that affect our physical senses.
M. Lemonnier, a chemist of Rennes, hears a loud noise at his
door, repeated thrice. He gets up and see nothing. In another
house, one of his friends, M. Nivot, at the same moment hears
a similar noise that wakes him up; and both think of the death
of one of their mutual friends who was dying at that time.
Must we suppose that both, at different places in the town, were
similarly hallucinated? Is it not likely that if other persons
had been there they, too, would have heard the noises?
The son of Lady X., aged twelve years, sees a form passing
across the room, and says, Mother, it is the major. Lady X.
also sees the form. I have already quoted the case of Mme.
Telechoff with her five children and her dog Moustache. Mr.
and Mrs. Bettany both saw the old woman in their room. Mrs.
Paget and her two daughters heard the steps of Arthur in the
passageway. Colonel Wynyard and Mr. Sherbrooke both saw
Mr. Wynyard. Mr. Weld and his daughter both saw Philip
Weld, who had just died, walking in the avenue. The mother
and sisters of Colonel Aylesbury heard his voice. Mr. and Mrs.
L. both heard the voice of their son. Mr. Done and Rosie
both heard Mrs. Eustance call them successively by name; but
it does not appear that Mr. Done heard Rosie called, nor that
Rosie heard the words, Uncle, uncle.
All the same, in spite of appearances, the existence of an
exterior fact of the same order as ordinary exterior facts cannot
be admitted in all these cases of collective perception, for the
hallucination was different.
(11) Monitions are certainly nearly always entirely subjective.
Mr. K. of the Royal Military College sees a woman being carried
along, but his companion sees nothing. Mrs. Taunton sees her
uncle in the theatre between her and the orchestra. Mr. Taun
ton, sitting beside her, sees nothing and asks, What is the
matter with you? Mr. B., taking tea with his son and daughter-
in-law, sees a face at the window, but they see nothing. Miss
Stella sees a boy enter; she speaks to him and offers him a cloak.
Dr. G., coming in at the moment, is astonished and says, To
whom are you speaking? Kate Sherman sees the apparition
of her brother, and speaks of it to her sister resting by her side,
but Elisabeth Sherman sees nothing.
Very often the percipient asks the people of the house if they
have seen anyone entering or leaving, but almost without ex
ception nothing has been remarked, though in all these different
cases the apparition presented all the semblance of reality.
The cases of veridical and purely subjective apparitions are
so many that if we had not to take into account experimental
materializations, we might conclude that all monitions are sub
jective. But this term also mugt be cleared up, and this I shall
endeavour to do in the section that follows.
4. The Symbolical Form Taken by Monitions
That a percipient should have cognizance of a fact that the
normal senses cannot reveal, it is obvious that there must be
some exterior vibration that has influenced his mind. It is
therefore possible that these vibrations should affect others, and
therefore that the monition should be perceived by more than
one person. Certain collective monitions, but not all, can be
thus explained. Mr. Done heard the voice calling, Uncle, uncle,
and at the same moment Rosie hears, Rosie, Rosie. It would
seem that the call heard by two persons at the same time used
a different symbolism for each.
The tendency to symbolism dominates all monitions. Even in
our normal state, as a great poet has said, we move in a forest
of symbols. Cryptesthesia has to express itself symbolically to
touch our consciousness: everything happens as though moni
tions, assuredly of mental origin, had to be adapted to our modes
of understanding by being dramatized; and the fertility of inven
tion displayed (for it is invention), which eventuates in a moni
tion, must move our wonder.
E. Bozzano, to whom are due so many acute studies on differ
ent points of metapsychics, has emphasized their symbolical
SPORADIC CRYPTESTHESIA 2 61
forms; for instance Mrs. Thompson, whose faculty of crypt-

esthesia is strong, instead of giving the name Merryfield says
Merry, .man, Merry thought, Happy field (A. S. P., 1907, 638).
I have mentioned the curious story of Mrs. X., who, being
alone in her home, endeavoured while in a lucid state to discover
the name of the person who had been speaking to me. She saw
a well-defined human form which gave the name Henry ; but
at the same time she saw a herald-at-arms with a halberd, dressed
in mediaeval style, stopping other spirits anxious to come in from
entering the room so that there might be no confusion with
Henry. 1
Mme. A. one night dreamed that there was a ring at the door,
and that the housemaid entered looking frightened, and said,
Madame, it is Death. Mme. A. felt that Death must not be
kept waiting, and forthwith sees a coffin, and in it Mme. Gaston
Tissandier, of whose recent decease she was ignorant.
Jean Jules Bigard dreams that he has died and that a clerk
at the town-hall showed him the certificate, causing him to laugh.
That same night his uncle Jean Jules Bigard was mortally wounded
in the war.
The Rev. Mark Hill sees a man advancing on him so threaten
ingly that he seizes a glass from the table and throws it at the
head of the phantom.
Emma Burger sees her fianc enter her room, the door opening
and shutting.
Longet, professor of physiology in the Paris Faculty of Medi
cine, sees in a dream his friend Cloquet (whose decease was
unknown to him) entering the room, throwing his books on the
floor, and saying, Now I need nothing more.
Mr. Weld sees his son Philip walking on the road with two
imaginary persons.
Miss Barr sees a hand drawing her bed-curtain and on this
hand a ring which she recognizes as belonging to her cousin,
Captain X., who was dying in Canada from an accidnt (Phant.
of the Living, 416).
Mr. Brighton in his cabin on shipboard has a very complicated
dream in which he sees two forms descending on the ropes that
held the hawsers of the boat. They ejnit musical sounds that*
, Proc.
*C. Richet, Presidential discourse to the S. P. R., February 6 1905,
S. P. R., iv. The name Henry was quite correctly given against (calculated)
odds of 1:20.
change into cries of triumph when they have cast the boat loose.
The boat then drifts away and is caught by a gust of wind. Mr.
Brighton wakes up, jumps from his berth, and goes on deck.
The night was calm, but the moorings were frayed. With much
trouble Mr. Brighton and his friend found other ropes and
secured the boat, thus avoiding a great danger. This is a good
example of a symbolical dream, but it is difficult to see in it any
cryptesthesia ; probably a subconscious idea of the peril reached
Mr. Brightons consciousness under this dramatic form (P. 6*.
P. R.} viii, 401).
Symbolical, too, is Mrs. B.s dream of a dinner at which all
the guests were talking except her uncle, A., who remained
dumb. The same night her uncle died ; she knew this only by
his silence at the dinner (A. S. P., xvii, 728).
Mrs. J. Adam sees the form of her grandmother, who shows
empty eye-sockets to indicate that she has died (Bozzano, A. S. P.,
1907, xvii, 716).
The excellent examples of symbolism collected by Bozzano
show the fertility of the subconscious mind for imaginative detail ;
a fertility much greater than that of the conscious mind. This
is well seen in the infinite variety of dreams.
Mrs. Johnson, whenever she is perturbed by anxiety, sees a
swarm of flies that fly up to her face. The illusion is so com
plete that she does not distinguish them from actualities.
Mrs. Wilve, wife of Dr. Wilve, sees a white and a black horse
galloping across country with a carriage in which is seated a
person about to have a serious accident.
Very often the idea of death is presented by coffins.
Mrs. A. sees in a dream her mother with three bouquets. She
reaches out to take the second, but it falls to the ground. Mrs.
A., who has three brothers, thinks of the second. He died
shortly after.
An unlikely case of symbolism is reported by Flammarion (La
Mort et son Mystre, p. 95). Mme. Marchal at Paris, in a night
mare between sleeping and waking, sees a spectre that takes her
by the arm and says, Either your husband or your daughter
must die. Choose! After a terrible struggle she mentally
decides to sacrifice her.husband to save her child. Five days
later, M. Marchal, till then apparently in good health, dies.
Flammarion says, I questioned Mme. Marchal and her daughter
separately and I have no doubt of the authenticity of the story.
Mrs. Wickham while undressing feels a hand on her head and
neck; cold lips are lightly pressed to hers and a voice says, Adieu,
adieu!
M. Bard sees Mme. Freville walking in the cemetery. Mr.
Jones sees a coffin and in it the form of his sister. Mme. Beau-
grand hears the sound of a terrible storm at the time when her
husband perished by shipwreck. Mr. T. sees a tomb on which is
inscribed the name of his friend. Lieutenant V. dreams that
his friend, Lieutenant L., has fallen into a shell-hole, is sur
rounded by enemies, and is calling for help. Mrs. Paget hears
the heavy step of her servant in the corridor stopping at the place
where a gas-jet ought to be shut off. Mrs. Matthews sees Suzanne
raise the bedclothes and lie down by her. The wraith of Springs
father comes on the bridge of the ship, touches his son on the
shoulder, and says, Look to your helm, Joe. Mr. Noell hears his
sister call to him in a plaintive voice, Come, Louis, do come.
All these appearances were monitions, for they corresponded
with deaths and actual events which the percipients could not
have known by any normal means.
It is probable, or even certain, that in all these cases there was
no external physical fact that would have affected a photographic
plate, a microphone, or balances. A phonograph would have
shown no record. The monition, whose mode of genesis is quite
unknown, was conveyed to the percipient by a^'symbol; and a
symbol is the converse of reality. It corresponds to a reality,
but it is not the reality itself.
One fact that seems to prove that hallucinations are symbolical,
in most cases, is that visual hallucinations are clothed; they wear
a usual (or an unusual) garb. They open and close a door. They
raise the bedclothes. If there were a materialization we should
have to admit a simultaneous materialization of clothes and divers
objects, appearing at the same time as the phantom. That may
indeed be possible, as is shown by experimental materializations,
but it is certainly simpler to consider that this is not the case,
but that all takes place in the mind of the percipient. It seems
obvious that most monitions are entirely subjective, though I
should not venture to say that all are; but those that are clearly
objective are rare, or at least the objectification does not present
the ordinary luminous, mechanical, and thermal phenomena. Even
when the objectification is seemingly complete its objectivity must
nevertheless be held doubtful.
Some minutes after the death of Mrs. L., three persons who
were in the death-chamberEliza W., Charlotte, and Dr. G., who
had attended the dying womanheard for several seconds three
womens voices singing softly, like the sounds of an aeolian harp.
Eliza W. even believed that she heard the words, The strife is
oer, the battle done. Two of those who had left the room re
entered to hear the music. The night was still, and there was no
one outside. Nevertheless, the phenomena were certainly sub
jective, firstly because Mr. L., who was present, heard nothing;
and secondly, because each of the persons who did hear the sing
ing heard it in a different manner (Phantasms of the Lwing, i,
446).
This case is particularly interesting, for it shows that there may
be hallucinations which are very definitely subjective though per
ceived collectively.
We have not distinguished monitions received during sleep
from waking monitions, for the borderland between sleeping and
waking renders any hard-and-fast classification impossible. Very
often they begin during sleep and are completed on waking; and
sometimes conversely, though this is rare. Sometimes the per
cipient is startled into a kind of stupor which curiously resembles
sleep.
Even when the percipient remains awake the vision resembles
a dream; the same state of credulity (as De Rochas felicitously
says) supervenesan absence of astonishment which accepts the
most unlikely things. The only difference between the mental
state when dreaming and when awake is that in the former state
the sleeper cannot fix his attention on the real objects around
him; he is carried into an imaginary world and cannot correct the
divagations of his thoughts by actual sensations. This absence of
control is the essential feature of dream-states. The dreamer
does not know where he is; he is not reminded of concrete reali
ties by the mechanical and physical energies of the world about
him. He cannot fix his attention and has no directing will. The
mental state of those who receive a monition is very similar.
It would be absurd not to regard most monitions as subjective
in the same way as dream-images are subjective. If in a dream
we were to see a funeral, a coffin, and a brother in that coffin, it
would be outrageously absurd to suppose any objectivity in these
things. Why, then, should it be otherwise with a veridical
hallucination? It is just a waking dream: and to say, But
I was wide awake is not a sufficient reason for thinking the
phenomenon objective; as if it were impossible to build up a
dream because one thinks oneself awake.
Whether produced in sleep, when awake, or in an intermediate
state, monitions are always symbolical. The details of the vision
have no more importance in themselves than the strange and
fanciful details of dreams. Nevertheless, the narrator is per
fectly right to insist on detail, for along with the essential monition
there are often very precise accessory facts that define the mean
ing. In this singular admixture of reality and fancy, lucidity
seizes not only on the central fact, but also shows a curious
predilection for the accessory circumstances. Therefore the
narrator should omit nothing, lest the most interesting point might
perhaps be passed over in silence. And this applies to dreams also.
The symbolic character of monitions should therefore excite
no surprise; nor should too much importance be attached to the
form of the symbolism. The important thing is the lucidity,
the cryptesthetic perception of a real phenomenona reality which
imagination dresses up with details that are sometimes true to
fact, and sometimes fanciful. I think that no better description
can be found for monitions that take a hallucinatory form than
to call them waking dreams.5
5. Monitions and the Telepathic Hypothesis
Although the authors of that admirable work, Phantasms of the
Living, consider monitions as cases of telepathy and incline to
think that there has often (if not always) been some effort on
the part of the agent to transmit his thought to the percipient, I
am far from holding this to be the most rational hypothesis.
Obviously it can be only a hypothesis. It is very easy to say
A.s thought is transmitted to B.; but as I have already indicated
more than once, this proposition is by no means simple. There
fore, in our present state of ignorance of laws and causes, I adopt
a hypothesis that prejudges nothing, and am content to keep
within the limits that circumscribe our imperfect knowledge by
saying B., by some unknown means, knows what A. has thought
of, but he also knows much more: he knows what A. has thought
of because that thought was itself a fact; and he can know that
which no one has thought of: he knows that which IS.
I say to Stella, Tell me the names of two servants who were
about me in my childhood. She answers (but only next day),
Mlanie. I was not thinking of Melanie; for fifty-five years
the name has never recurred to my memory. Is it not simpler
to suppose that Stella has perceived the realitythe factthan
to think that she has read a subconscious thought in the deepest
recesses of my mind ? As a matter of fact I had two other names
in mindDorothy and Louise. I did not think of the third
woman, Mlanie, at all.
When Mrs. Green perceives the death of two girls in Australia,
is it likely that these two girls who had never been to England
and did not know Mrs. Green (who was the aunt of one of them),
should have thought of Mrs. Green with such vigour that this
vibration travelled twelve thousand miles to her instead of affect
ing their parents quite close at hand ?
Mme. Frville barely knew M. Bard. Mr. Phibbs sees his dog
Fox mortally hurt at the foot of a wall. It is much more reason
able to suppose that the notion of the fact reached his mind than
that the soul of the dog went and acted on the brain of the man.
In fine, accidental lucidity, shown by monitions, leads us to the
same conclusion as experimental luciditythat human intelli
gence has methods of cognition different from those we habitually
use.
It is possible that in some families there is a hereditary apti
tude for lucidity: Dr. Ludwig1 cites an interesting case of the
kindtwo sisters and two brothers who all four show unmistak
able cryptesthesia.
M. Emile Laurent (A. S. P., 1907, xvii, 161-176) has very
properly emphasized certain general characteristics of monitions,
especially that they seem to cease as soon as the monition has
been understood. It seems that the mode selected by the mani
festing power is just that which is most certain to arouse atten
tion and least likely to pass unperceived. One is tempted to admit
that among all possible forms of manifestations a kind of choice
has been made of the one that could not have arisen from usual
causes. M. Laurent concludes that there is intelligence at the
back of monitions. This conclusion seems inevitable, but it does
not follow that the intelligence producing the monition is not that
of the percipient himself. Still, it must be admitted, provisionally
at least, that monitions are in most cases selected, and well selected,
whatever hypothesis we may adopt to account for them.
elep a th isch e V eran lagu n g (P sy c h isc h e S tu d ie n , xlvii, 1920, 456).
Let us add: (1) They are symbolical; (2) they impress the
mind of the percipient so powerfully that all details are long
remembered, and (3) that they do not cause the fear that might
have been expected.
Space does not allow of mention of the legends that tell of
monitory dreams in antiquity.
Sophocles, it seems, had such a dream: Hercules appeared to him
and indicated where a golden crown that had been stolen would
be found. Sophocles obtained the reward promised to the finder.
A celebrated monition to Swedenborg claimed the attention of
Kant: Sir Oliver Lodge (Survival of Man) mentions this case:
Mme. Martiville, widow of the Dutch ambassador in Stockholm,
was summoned by a goldsmith to pay for a purchase made by
her dead husband. Mme. Martiville, convinced that the money
had already been paid, has the impulse to write to Swedenborg
enquiring if by conversation with her deceased husband he could
get at the truth of the matter. Three days later, Swedenborg
went to Mme. Martiville, told her that the money had been paid,
and that the receipt would be found in a certain drawer of a
specified bureau in a certain room. The room, desk, and drawer
were all correctly indicated.
From all these facts we conclude yet again: There are un
known vibrations in nature which set human intelligence in
motion and reveal facts that the senses cannot convey.
If telepathy be admitted there is only one word to be changed
in this sentence; we need merely say vibrations of human
thought instead of unknown vibrations. But to limit crypt-
esthesia to the perception of human thought-vibrations is to
narrow its applications and change its entire nature.6
6. On the Frequency of Monitions
Monitions are much more frequent than is commonly thought.
When speaking to a sceptic on this point, he often replies, I
could tell you a very singular fact of this kind that happened to
me personally : and this singular fact which seems to him
evidential he will accept and recount with simple-minded satis
faction, while rejecting with infantile inconsequence other facts
perhaps more evidential because they did not happen to himself.
I do not hesitate to say that some instances of telepathy, more
or less evidential, could be gathered from nearly all families. If
268 PSYCHICAL. RESEARCH
they are not made public it is from a praiseworthy feeling they
are not sufficiently evidential, or from fear of ridicule, but chiefly
from reluctance to make the effort to confirm them by exact dates,
official certificates, and other data without which a mere story
has no great value. They seem nearly independent of age and
sex; they occur in the daytime rather less frequently than at night
on going to sleep or in dreams.
We may be confident that this psychological phenomenon is
much more common than is supposed, and when a person who
has received a monition is no longer branded as a visionary, in
stances will be multiplied. It is sheer idiocy to refer them to a
colossal fraud repeated for fifty years in all lands, or to a series
of gross illusions. It is equally unreasonable to think them due
to chance; the mass of precise and unlikely details given precludes
this supposition.
We are, then, in presence of a known but unexplained phenome
non : and is not this the character of most of the facts with which
science is concerned? When a new case of monition is reported
it is almost always possible to find analogous cases, just as a
botanist can always refer a new plant to known species. This is
characteristic of scientific knowledge. Experiment has given in
dubitable proofs of cryptesthesia. Observation has confirmed this
proof by different but equally sure methods.
To show how interesting these monitions are, I have collected
in the following pages a considerable number. They may be
monotonous reading, but in a scientific work it is necessary to
present a large number of duly attested facts. Their value ap
pears by their quantity as well as by their quality. It is not
possible, and it would be absurd to suppose, that all these facts
authenticated by laborious cross-examination and investigation
should be false or erroneous. Every unbiassed person who reads
the evidence will acquire the certainty that neither lying nor
exaggeration nor chance can account for all these monitions.
The facts are derived from various sources. The chief of these
sources, the most abundant and the most strictly tested, is the
investigation carried on by the Society of Psychical Research.
The scientific and conscientious authors of Phantasms of the
Living, Messrs. Gurney, Myers, and Podmore, have collected in
that book the results of their observations. They were, with
good reason, very exacting on the evidence, and have admitted,
with few exceptions, only the accounts of the percipients them
selves; and in cases of monitions of death they have taken the
trouble to verify them by the certificates of death.
The investigation of the S. P. R. is a model of perseverance,
courage, and scientific accuracy that other investigations can
scarcely hope to rival. These enquiries are still in progress. Each
number of the Proceedings contains data of extreme interest and
no author can hope to produce even passable work without con
sulting these documents and those of the American S. P. R.
Another valuable, courageous, and scientific work was under
taken by Camille Flammarion through the Annales politiques et
littraires, the Petit Marseillais, and the Revue des Revues. He
obtained 4,280 answers ; 2,456 negative and 1,824 positive. Many
imperfect answers had to be rejected, and out of the remaining
786, only about fifty deserve to be permanently retained, for, imi
tating the procedure of the S. P. R., it was resolved to eliminate
nearly all that were not first-hand evidence. These are detailed
in Flammarions excellent book, LInconnu et les Problmes
Psychiques (Paris, 1900), which abounds in facts and details,
though occasionally admitting some of doubtful authenticity.
The English enquiry elicited 5,705 answers, out of which there
were 590 subjective hallucinations and 423 in which the halluci
nation would seem to have been exteriorized. But statistics of
this kind are inconclusive, for most persons, if they have no inter
esting information to give, do not reply at all.
The little investigation that I conducted through the Bulletin
des Armes during the war, brought me about a hundred replies,
of which some thirty are w,orth preserving, and among these there
are seven or eight of very great interest that I shall quote
further on.
To the above must be added the facts indicated in special publi
cationsthe Annales des Sciences Psychiques, the Psychische
Studien, Light, the Religio-philosophical Journal, Luce e Ombra,
the Banner of Light, and others.
The aggregate is a weighty mass of documentary evidence.
Considering each case separately, we find some imperfect and
only vaguely demonstrative ; but that is inseparable from all obser
vational science. Observations can never give the same certitude
as experiment, and to warrant any conclusion a very large number
must be compared.
If, after carefully reading the instances here adduced, the
reader cannot decide that monitions exist, i.e., that there is a rela
tion, the working of which remains a mystery, between an external
event and its cognition which neither our senses nor our reason
can account for, if, I say, this conclusion is not accepted, then all
observational and historical science must equally be rejected, and
we must doubt the existence of aerolites or that Charlemagne
ever lived. Monitions (sporadic lucidity) confirm experimental
lucidity, and the latter corroborates the former.
II. ON CERTAIN MONITIONS (NOT COLLECTIVE)
OTHER THAN MONITIONS OF DEATH
William James cites and analyzes a most telling example of
cryptesthesia. A certain young girl, Bertha, disappeared from
Enfield (New Hampshire) October 31, 1898. The search for her
was keen, more than a hundred persons explored the woods and
the shores of the lake. She had been seen to go to the Shaker
Bridge, but had not been seen beyond. A diver searched the lake,
especially near the bridge, but found nothing. In the night
between the 2d and 3d of November Mrs. Titus, at Lebanon,
five miles from Enfield, dreamed that she saw the body in a certain
place. The next morning she went to the Shaker Bridge, and
indicated to the diver within an inch where the body should be
found, head downwards and so that only the india-rubber sole of
one of her shoes could be seen. The diver, following Mrs. Tituss
directions, discovered the body, caught in the branches six yards
under the water, which was very turbid. I was much impressed,
said the man; corpses in the water do not frighten me, but I
feared the woman on the bridge. How can a woman come five
miles and tell me where the body was? It was in a deep hole
head downwards, and in the dark I could hardly see it.
The Rev. Mr. Drake went one day to see a friend, Mr. Wilson,
whose daughter Jessie had gone to India a short time previously,
and said, Your daughter has reached India today, June 5th.
Mr. Wilson replied that that was impossible, the ship not being
due till the 15th, at soonest.
You disbelieve me? said Mr. Drake. Well, take your diary
and note the date. Mr. Wilson then wrote in his diary, Rev.
J. Drake and Jessie, June 5, 1860. It has never been known
how Mr. Drake could have had this dream or vision, or, as he used
to say, this clairvoyance, that had made him so sure.
M. Bachelot, of Angers, receives from Sergeant Morin a little
ring of aluminum such as soldiers in the trenches used to make
to beguile the hours. On the night of the 7th of March, M. Bache-
lot is awakened by a sharp pain in the ring-finger as if it were
held in a vice. Half asleep, he drew off the ring and next morn
ing thought he had lost it. He felt that something had happened
to his friend Morin and spoke of his fears to three persons, Mr.
G., Mr. S., and Mrs. S., who certify these details. On the follow
ing day he heard that Morin had been wounded (not severely)
at 4 a .m. on the 8th of March (Bulletin des Armes). The story
is curious but may have been a coincidence.
In the night of September 23d-24th, Mrs. K. writes to her
mother: What are you all three doing? I hope you are well,
though I have dreamed these days that mother had broken her leg.
Think of that! Now on Saturday, September 23d, Mrs. K.s
little girl who was on a visit to her grandmother (Mrs. K.s
mother) had broken her arm. In the- dream, among various dis
turbing incidents, Mrs. K. clearly distinguished her mothers
house and felt that some accident had befallen one of her own
people. This also is not very evidential, since there are two
marked errors, the broken arm of the child instead of the broken
leg of the mother.
Mrs. Claughton has given a good instance of lucidity, checked
with great care by Myers. This interesting story must here be
much abridged. It is even more remarkable as &premonition than
as a monition.
Mrs. C. lived at No. 6 Blake Street, in a house that belonged
to Mrs. Appleby. This house, it would seem, was haunted by Mrs.
Applebys mother, Mrs. Blackburn, who had died there. Mrs. C.
had been there five days when she saw a form resembling Mrs.
Blackburn. If you doubt that it is myself, said the phantom,
here is the date of my marriage in India. The phantom then
indicated to Mrs. C. that she should go to Maresby to see the
tomb of Mr. George Howard, whose name, dates of marriage,
and decease were given ; that in the church register would be
found the entry of the death of Robert Hart ; that on arrival at
Maresby Mrs. C. would not be asked for her railway ticket ; that
she would lodge at the house of a dark man, Mr. Wright ; that the
wife of this Mr. Wright had a child buried in the cemetery; and
that there would be white roses on the graves. Everything fell
out as predicted. It will be observed that Mrs. Claughton had
never heard of Maresby nor of any of the persons mentioned.
Mr. Frederic Marks, at Newhaven, sleeping on his bed during
the day, saw his brother, on a small sailing vessel about to founder
in a storm. He saw his brother and another man in the boat, the
one baling out water and the other trying to reef the sail. The
vessel righted herself and seemed to come to shore. On the same
day, 200 miles away on Oneida Lake, Charles Marks and a
friend narrowly escaped drowning in a terrible storm on the lake.
Dr. Marcel Baudouin, whom I know to be a careful and scru
pulous observer, had the rare opportunity of observing a case of
monition. Being on a visit to Mrs. X., he sees her burst into tears
during a casual conversation at half-past eleven in the morning.
An hour later news is brought that her sister is seriously ill. She
had been taken with a fatal attack of angina pectoris at the very
moment that Mrs. X., in the presence of Dr. Baudouin, had this
paroxysm of weeping, which was the more surprising as Mrs. X.
very rarely gives way to tears. Dr. Baudouin certifies that he had
never before or since seen her weep in this manner (A. S. P.,
1900, x, 129).
Captain M. was wounded August 27, 1914, by a bullet in the
chest about 11.30 p . m ., and left for dead. The same night at
that same hour, his daughter, aged fifteen, who was sleeping
soundly, woke up and told her mother, Mother, father is
wounded but is not killed.
Mr. Fryer hears his brothers voice call him Rod so clearly
that he searches all over the house. Some days later his brother
tells him that on leaving the train he had a bad fall at the same
hour when the voice was heard and called Rod.
Mrs. X., who is not mystical and has no tendency towards
occultism, goes to sleep for a few moments during a journey by
train, and sees a friend riding, putting his horse to clear a low
wall, and having a fall which had no serious consequences. This
was true, but could not have been foreseen by any ordinary
means.
Mrs. West, travelling in Norway with her father and mother,
dreams that she sees them in a sledge come into collision with
another sledge going in the opposite direction. She sees her
father causing the horse to rear. She wakes up, crying, Father,
father! In the morning on her fathers arrival she tells her
dream, saying, Then you are not hurt? I saw the horse rear,
but I could not see if you were hurt or not. In fact, Mr. Cowes
(Mrs. Wests father) in descending a hill crossed another carriole,
and to avoid a collision made his horse rear so that it fell back
wards. Mr. Cowess son, who was following, was much disturbed
and only reassured when he saw his father unhurt.
In the hospital at Munich, a soldier of the Aviation Corps under
treatment for a pulmonary affection wakes up in the middle of
the night and finds himself in the yard; he has been walking in
his sleep and dreamed that he had flown to Schleisheim and there
saw his friend N. on sentry duty who showed fear. A. then
said in his dream, Do you not know me? to which N. replied,
Oh, it is you; what are you doing here? Next morning A.,
convinced that there must be some reality at the back of his
dream, writes an account of it to N., and at the same time (as
proved by the post-mark), N. writes to say that being on sentry
that night, he saw A. and said, Is it you, Joseph? adding
that he heard his voice distinctly. The two letters crossed in
the post.1
Miss May Lichfield, reading one night in her room, suddenly
feels that some one has entered. She sees nobody, but feels a
long and tender kiss on her forehead; and raising her head per
ceives her betrothed standing behind her chair, bending forward
to kiss her again. The figure then disappeared, but she had been
able to see his features, his tall stature, and broad shoulders quite
distinctly. That day he had a fall from his horse, was insensible
for some time and ill afterwards. At the time of the accident
he thought, My little May, let me not die without seeing you
again.
Mrs. Paget goes down into her kitchen at 10 . . and suddenlyp m
sees her sailor brother coming towards her and about to sit
down, the water shining on his oilskin and cap. She thought he
had been wetted by rain and said, Miles, where have you come
from? Then in his usual voice he said, For the love of God
do not say that I am here, and vanished. I was very frightened,
says Mrs. Paget, and wrote down the date, without telling any
one. Three months later, Miles returned, and told his sister
that he had been almost drowned in the harbour at Melbourne,
having been taken out of the water insensible. The date was
correct, but allowing for difference in longitude there was an
interval of ten hours between the accident and the apparition.
Mme. A. Dudlay of the Comdie Franaise has reported various
xZwei deutsche Professorett gegen die Telepathie, par S . Psychische
Studien, x liv , 1917 3S-
C lericu s,
cases of monitions relating to the war, but the details are too few
and not sufficiently precise (A. S. P., 1919, xxix, 13-16).
Major Kobbe one day felt impelled- to visit the cemetery of
Greenwood, six miles from New York. Neither he nor any one
of his family was in the habit of going there; but on reaching
the place he found his father who had come for the disinterment
of a member of the family. The letter sent by his father asking
him to be present had not reached him. He arrived just at the
right time.
A case of monition at a sance by Mme. dEsprance is reported
in Light (1905, p. 43) ; it is very complex, being accompanied by a
materialization.
On April 3, 1890, Mme. dEsprance wrote automatically,
without knowing why, Svens Stromberg; neither she nor any
one present knew the name. Two months later, at a sance at
which Aksakoff and Boutleroff were present, it was said that
Stromberg, a native of Jemtland, had died on March 13th at
Wisconsin. At the same time there appeared (?) on a photo
graph (spiritist?) a face which Mme. dEsprances guide de
clared to be Strombergs, and stated that he had not died on
the 13th, but on the 31st of March. After long and laborious
enquiry it was found that a certain Svens Ersson, born in Jemt
land, had emigrated to Canada and had died on the night of
March 31st. The photograph was identified, and it was proved
that the news of his death could not have reached Gothenburg,
even by telegraph from New Stockholm, the town in Canada
where he died, at the time that the name was given at the
sance.
Bozzano considers this case one of the best substantiated, but
this seems an exaggerated view.
The following case is specially interesting, for it presents the
very rare feature of several successive apparitions expressing a
single monition :
Miss Minnie Wilson, aged 17, educated in a Catholic convent
in Belgium, when about to kneel at her prayers, saw her Uncle
Oldham coming towards her. She was extremely surprised. Her
uncle asked her to pray for him as he had shot himself by reason
of a disappointment in love. The next day, and the day following,
the vision was repeated; she felt the touch of his hand, but did
not hear his step nor hear the bench creak. He disappeared, not
suddenly, but by becoming slowly indistinct. She learned later
that he had killed himself with a pistol-shot for a love-trouble
(A. S. P., 1908, xvii, 266).
Monitions sometimes come as formal warnings. Hyslop (Am.
S. P. R., 1907, 487) has authenticated the curious story of Mr.
McCready, editor of the Daily Telegraph, who had a very strong
impression one Sunday while at the church of St. John (N. B.),
of a voice saying to him, Go back to the office. The order was
so peremptory that he ran from the church to the office, arriving
to the great astonishment of his sub-editors. He there found
a petroleum lamp blazing in his room and throwing out such
clouds of smoke that everything was covered with soot.
With reference to this and other similar monitions Bozzano
discusses whether such occurrences involve the intervention of an
external intelligence.
Mme. Tonelli, at San Marino, when trying to sleep one night,
saw her son thrown down by a passing carriage and much injured.
She rose, went nearly four miles along the road to Costa di Borgo,
and found her son at the foot of a declivity down which he had
rolled. Thus, despite the darkness and the storm and notwith
standing her age, and without having any normal reason for dis
quiet, she got up in the middle of the night to go to his assistance
(A. S. P., 1905, v, 170).
Mr. Searle, a lawyer, saw in his rooms at the Temple, as clearly
as in a mirror, the figure of his wife; her head thrown back and
her face pale as death. At that same hour, in consequence of a
great fright, Mrs. Searle had fainted. She had never fainted
before.
At Syracuse (N. Y.) Mr. Lee suddenly woke up from sleep,
having seen his father fall downstairs with a great noise. His
father was bishop at Iowa. He got up, waked his wife, asking
her if she had heard any noise, and noted the time by his watch,
2.45. At that hour Bishop Lee at Iowa fell on the stairs and died
soon after.
Mr. Hunter Watt dreamt that a cast of the Venus de Milo,
relegated to a corner of his garden, had fallen, the head being
broken off by the fall; which was found to be true (Myers,
Human Personality, i, 379).
Mrs. Severn woke at 7 a . m . feeling a sharp blow on her
mouth as if her upper lip had been cut and was bleeding. Putting
her handkerchief to her mouth she was surprised to find no blood.
At the same moment her husband who had gone for a sail on the
lake was caught by a gust of wind causing the handle of the rudder
to strike him on the mouth, cutting his lip and causing much loss
of blood (Chevreul, loc. cit., 53).
Mrs. Swithinbank saw her young son, aged ten, standing on a
high wall facing her window. She jumped up to ask him why
he had left school. The boy looked at her with fear in his eyes
and vanished. Search was made without result. A few minutes
later one of his classmates brought him in a cab in a fainting con
dition. It seems that in class he fell back insensible, saying,
Mother will know.
Mrs. Richardson, in India, dreams that her husband, 150 miles
distant at the siege of Multan (1848), has been severely wounded
and she hears his voice saying, Take the ring from my finger and
send it to my wife. About the same time (9 p . m .) the general
fell severely wounded and said those precise words to Major
Lloyd. General Richardson recovered from his wound.
M. Gignon, military commissary at Aurignac, was playing a
game at cards with friends at a cafe. Suddenly he got up much
disturbed and wrote to his wife, I have heard an anguished cry.
Oh, tell me what you want! Is there trouble? Is there danger?
At that hour, 9 p . m ., December 22, 1878, M. Gignons little grand
daughter had been severely scalded by a bottle of over-hot water
placed in the cradle.
Mrs. R. writes in her diary on March 15th, Last night, March,
1874. She had seen the head and shoulders of a man in a cloudy
form close to her. She cried out, It is Captain W. The cap
tain, who was a friend of hers, was then in New Zealand, and had
promised that if he were to die he would appear to her. The
time of the vision agreed exactly with a carriage accident which
injured Captain W. so severely that he remained a long time
insensible and made but a slow recovery {Tel. Halluc., p. 184).
Mr. Phibbs, at Ilfracombe, dreamt between 10 and 10.30 p . m .
that he saw his dog Fox stretched out, hurt and dying, at the foot
of a wall. He told his wife of this. At that time his dog had
been worried by two bulldogs and fell dying at the foot of a wall
(A. S. P., 1905, xv, 428).
M. J. P. was walking and reading, in the daytime, and suddenly
saw a comrade (Louis) falling backwards with his hand on his
heart with the usual gesture of a wounded soldier. He told this
vision to his family. Some days later he learned that Louis,
having accidentally wounded his brother when out shooting, had
fainted with emotion, saying, If Charles dies I shall kill myself
(Flammarion, 155).
M. Martial Lagrange dreams that he has a cancer of the
stomach and is operated on by Dr. Guinard. The same night, Dr.
Guinard (a hospital surgeon) could not sleep on account of severe
toothache and passed the night working at a treatise on the
surgical treatment of cancer of the stomach. He naturally thought
of visiting M. Lagrange, who was not, however, his usual dentist.
As soon as he entered M. Lagranges consulting-room, the latter
said to him, I dreamt of you last night; I had cancer of the
stomach and you were going to operate on me (A. S. P., 1893,
iii, 140).
Mr. Haggard had a very painful dream, feeling suffocated as if
drowning. Gradually the dream took more definite form. I
saw, he says, my dear old dog Bob stretched out among the
reeds of a pond. Bob was trying to call me, but failing to reach
me by his voice, sent me the idea that he was about to die. In the
morning he thought little of the matter, Bob having been quite
well the day before; but the dog did not reappear, and some
days after it was found that he had been struck by a passing train
and that the shock had thrown him into a pond close by. The
accident took place on the night of the dream (A. S. P., 1905,
xv, 424).
Count Nicholas Gomanys, a medical officer in the Greek Army,
was sent to the garrison of Zante. As he drew near to the island
he heard a voice saying in Italian, Go and see Volterra. He
says, This phrase was repeated so often that I turned dizzy and
was alarmed, thinking it an auditory hallucination. There was
nothing to make me think of Volterra who lived in Zante, whom
I had not seen for ten years, and to whom I had never spoken.
At the hotel, while unpacking my bag, the voice continued to
harass me. Just then they sent to tell me that Mi Volterra had
come. He begged me to go with him at once to see his son who
had been taken very ill ( A . 5*. P., 1905, xv, 424).
Commandant Grima went with his wife to a conversazione at
the Sorbonne and Chtelet, on the 14th of July, 1915, in Paris.
On returning to St. Denis, Mme. Grima perceived that she had
lost a diamond while in Paris. Next morning her young son said,
I dreamt last night that a little girl had found the ring and
brought it to you. Did you lose it, mother? The children had
been asleep when their parents came home. That, however, is
not the strange part of the story, for possibly the children when
half asleep had heard their parents speaking of the lost ring. Three
months later, by a great chance, a girl of twelve belonging to a
good family in Paris found the ring by the steps of the Sorbonne.
This is an extraordinary premonition (A. S. P., 1895, xv, 434).
Mrs. Bagot, at table dhte (Mentone) sees her little dog Judy
that she had left in England crossing the room. Without thinking
she exclaimed, What ! Judy here ! She told this to her husband,
her two daughters, and her mother, and there were jokes on
Judys ghost. She also noted the fact in her diary. It was ascer
tained that there was no dog in the hotel. At the same time
(there is some doubt about the date) the dog had died suddenly
in England (Bozzano, A. S. P., 1909, xix, 322).
Mr. G., of Boston, sees the living image of his dead sister,
and notices a scratch on her right cheek. He speaks of this to
his mother who nearly fainted on hearing it, for it seems that
Mr. G.s mother, preparing her daughters body for burial, had
made a scratch on the face, and no one but herself knew of the
accident (A. S. P., 1909, xix, 322).
Mr. G. Parent, mayor of Wiege, dreams that the farm at
Chevennes is on fire; he makes futile efforts to run there, and
sees the farm burnt down. Awaking, shaken and trembling, he
tells the dream to his wife. Next day a part of the farm was
destroyed by fire.
The next story (from the unpublished enquiry through the
Bulletin des Armes) is so evidential that I give in extenso the
letter received from Captain V., January 14, 1917 :
On September 3,1916, during the attack on the Chemin-Creux,
between Maulpas and Clry, Second Lieutenant D., of the 13th
battalion of the Alpine chasseurs, was wounded by a bullet in
both arms, and left the line to have his wounds dressed. That
evening and for fifteen days he was missing at roll-call, and was
sought in vain in the dressing-stations. On September 18th the
13th battalion returned to the same sector, the front line having
been advanced three kilometres. During the night of September
18th-19th Second Lieutenant V., an intimate friend of D.s, saw
in a dream his friend D. dying in a shell-hole at the edge of
the Chemin-Creux, under a willow tree, reproaching him vehe
mently for letting his best friend die unassisted.
V., a cool-headed and sceptical officer, was nevertheless
obsessed by his dream, and went to his commandant, S., who
at first did not take the matter seriously, but in the end, in kind
ness, and to finish with the affair, gave V. a short leave to search
the place. V. came to the Chemin-Creux and there found the
surroundings as seen in his dream. At the foot of a willow
was a stick with the label, Here lie two French soldiers/ There
was nothing to connect this with D., but on opening the grave,
D/s body was found, which had been buried about fifteen days
before. This strange fact could be attested by the officers of
the 13th, but they have other things to do.
Dr. Ollivier, at Huelgoat (Finistre) went on horseback at
8 p . m . on a dark night to visit a patient in the country, and was
thrown from his horse, breaking his collar-bone. At nine oclock,
his wife on retiring to rest was seized with violent trembling,
called the servant, and said, My husband has met with an acci
dent and is killed or hurt. It may have been a monition, but
chance coincidence is possible, or even likely, in this case.
A soldier, a peasant of La Creuse, told M. Raymond Mialaret,
in very simple words, that one morning his little girl of seven
had seen him in a dream lying on the ground bleeding from the
left arm. She told the dream to her mother, who said it was a
nightmare. That same night the soldier was wounded in the
left arm (Enquiry through the Bull, des Armes).
Mr. Fraser Harris, who had gone from London to lecture at
St. Andrews, went on Sunday to a small family hotel, and sud
denly saw the front of his house in London. His wife was on
the doorstep speaking to a workman who was holding a large
broom. She seemed troubled, and Mr. Harris made out that
this poor man was asking for help. At that very time Mrs.
Harris was speaking to a poor man seeking work, who offered
to sweep the snow from the steps and said he had nothing for
himself or his children to eat. On returning to London, Mr.
Harris found the man just as he had seen him in vision (Chev-
reul, 45).
Lieutenant G., at the front near Reims, had not heard from
his wife for three days. One night he dreamed that he saw her
pale as death on her bed. He woke up sobbing and waited impa
tiently for news. Three days later he learned that on the night
of his dream she had a narrow escape from suffocation by fire
in her room, which scorched all the bedding. Mme. G. felt the
result of the semi-suffocation for a long while (Enquiry through
the Bull, des Armes).
A little girl of ten, in a dream, sees her father, Lieutenant D.,
coming home on leave from the front, and added that he had
a rubber cape, which no one knew of his having. Next day the
lieutenant arrived, a month before he was expected, wearing a
waterproof that he had bought on his way home (Enquiry through
the Bull, des Annes).
Professor S. Venturi, in charge of the lunatic asylum at Garo
falo, left home for Pozzuoli, but under a strong presentiment,
determined, in spite of difficulties, to return to his house at
Nocera. He found his wife in great agitation. Their little girl
had a dangerous attack of croup, and Mme. Venturi had cried
out for her husband in her distress (Tamburini, A. S. P., 1893,
iii, 292).
M. Keulemans, a well-known artist of bird-life, narrates some
interesting instances of cryptesthesia. Without exactly going
into trance, he visualizes very clearly the head or eyes of a
bird when drawing. But the cases of telsthesia quoted by M.
Keulemans are not precise enough to carry conviction, though
interesting by their symbolical form (A. S. P., 1893, xii, 217).
In closing the foregoing very, incomplete record of monitions
not followed by a death, I may be permitted to mention one
personal to myself. It is not a case of cryptesthesia, for the
dates do not correspond and there was no recognition; but the
psychological phenomena resemble those accompanying lucid
monitions too closely to omit them here.
I was in Italy during the second month of the war, where I felt
the duty of carrying on an active propaganda for our holy national
cause from the beginning of the war. I was living on the first
floor of the Quirinal Hotel ; it was almost deserted and I was, I
believe, the only guest on that floor. On the night of September
22-23, 1914, I was awakened from sound sleep by three knocks,
very clear but not very loud, on the door of my room. I sat up
in bed and switched on the light. Again the three knocks were
heard. I called out, Come in. Then, behind the door but
seemingly close to me, I heard a womans voice speaking low
and plaintively, Doctor, doctor, drawling the last syllable. Then
thoroughly awake, I said aloud, Very well, I am coming. My
answer was almost automatic; for my first passing thought was
that someone wanted medical help. But nothing followed. I
opened the door (but of that I am not quite sure), and seeing no
one, I scribbled down the exact time, 1.20 a .m . (fo r I had just
thought it might be an hallucination) and being in no way alarmed,
was able in about half an hour to go to sleep again, though my five
sons were then at the front exposed to the gravest dangers. As
the voice had been a womans, and my daughter-in-law was
expecting her confinement, I thought it might be a monition of
that event. I even wrote down this in my note-book.
It was not any such monition, and it cannot be referred to any
specific event. Six days before, on the afternoon of the 17th of
September, my son Jacques had been seriously wounded and
taken prisoner, though the news had not then reached me.
By this experience I became aware of the character of an
auditory monition. (It matters little from the psychological point
of view whether it were lucid or not.) If I can judge from my
own case, it is as clear as any phenomenon of normal life. When
I first woke up, being between waking and sleeping, there was
some uncertainty; but in a few seconds the exteriorization was
precise, and it is to be remarked that all the details were firmly
fixed in my mind. They doubtless may have become slightly
twisted, but the general facts remain unchangeable.
It is absolutely impossible to prove that this was a monition of
the wounding and capture of my son ; nevertheless, I am convinced
(without asking anyone to share my conviction) that the moni
tion was real. The analogy with innumerable observed cases is
close. It is the only hallucinatory monition that I have ever
received. I have, however, in the course of my life had two
flashes of cryptesthesia, one when awake, the other in dream.
One winter evening in 1899 I was working in my library in the
Rue de lUniversit. My wife was at the opera that evening
with my daughter Louise. Suddenly, about 10.30, I thought for
the first time in my life, and without there being any smoke at all
in the room to suggest the idea, that there was a fire at the opera.
The impression was so strong that I wrote down Fire! Fire!
and a few minutes later, thinking this not enough, I wrote Att,
meaning attention. Not much disturbed I returned to my
work. Towards midnight, when my wife and daughter returned,
I at once asked them, to their great surprise, Was there a fire?
My wife answered, No, there was no conflagration, but we were
much frightened. Between the acts some smoke rose from the
orchestra ; there was a rumour of fire ; I left the box quickly to
learn what was the matter, telling my daughter, When I come
back leave at once without waiting for anything.* They reassured
me and the performance went on without incident.*
This is not all. At the moment when I wrote Fire in my
notes, my sister, Mme. Ch. Buloz, whose room opens off mine,
fancied that mine was on fire. She went to the door, but feeling
that her fears were groundless, stopped, saying to herself, No, I
will not disturb my brother for such a silly fancy.
Therefore my sister and I had an impression of fire at the same
moment; that is how I can best describe the vague notion that
came to me while my wife and daughter were at the opera nearly
a mile distant at which a real danger from fire arose. Is this a
coincidence ? Was there at my house an odour of smoke too faint
to be consciously perceived ?
Now for the dream: About 8 . . in 1907 I was still asleep
a m
and was dreaming that I was with Mme. Charcot. (Why Mme.
Charcot, to whom I have never spoken and whom I do not know ?)
We were in a motor-car driving in an avenue of plane-trees. The
car was going so fast that I feared an accident: the accident hap
pened and I woke.
The accident was simply that the postman had brought a regis
tered letter, and in taking this letter I fancied (though I have no
idea why) that there was some connection between my dream and
the letter. To signify this, and by way of memorandum, I made a
little cross on the receipt. The letter came from the Azores, and
was from my friend, Colonel Chaves, asking for an introduction
to Jean Charcot, whom I did not know, who was due to reach
the Azores a few weeks later in his yacht.
I think that these three personal cases were not mere coinci
dences but were due to cryptesthesia; but I think so only because
there are many other more evidential cases. In themselves these
cases prove nothing, but they reinforce the large number of proofs
collected by more favoured observers.1
HI. MONITIONS OF DEATH
Monitions of death often occur. I give a large number of
instances because I hope to carry conviction to the mind of the
reader by their variety and complexity, and especially by the very
great number of the witnesses.
'It has been necessary to abridge greatly the records of monitions and pre
monitions given above. This is to be regretted, for to appreciate their full
force ample details are necessary; the skeleton of facts does not carry the
weight of conviction given by circumstantial details. I sincerely hope that
those persons who are interested in these perplexing problems will not remain
content with these brief summaries, but will refer to the original documents.
Monitions of death do not differ essentially from other moni
tions, but deserve separate mention because of their frequency.
The cases reproduced here might have been much more numerous
had I not exercised a somewhat severe criticism. This criticism
might have been still more rigid, and I willingly admit that half
of the cases cited have not any absolute evidential value; but even
allowing for this, there remain a notable number of authentic
and indisputable facts that defy sceptical analysis.
If only from a historic point of view, it is interesting to cite the
very clear monition received by the eminent chemist, Chevreul.
It was in 1814, a little before the entry of the Allies into Paris.
In his room, between the two windows of his study, he saw a pale
white stationary form like an elongated cone surmounted by a
sphere. Shuddering slightly, he turned away his eyes and ceased
to see the phantom. Looking back at the same place, he saw it
again; and this he did three times. He then decided to withdraw
into his bedroom; and to do this had to pass in front of the
phantom, which vanished.
The vision was probably not recognized, but at the same moment
at a distance from Paris an old friend of his was dying, who
bequeathed his library to him. Chevreul adds, If I had been
superstitious I might have thought the apparition real.
Chevreul also narrates the story of a well-known anatomist of
the eighteenth century, who said to the barber who was attending
him, Why do you grasp my arm? The barber was amazed at
the question. At that very instant one of Chevreuls friends had
drowned himself. The scientist was so struck with the occurrence
that he never afterwards would enter the room alone.
Brierre de Boismont, in his book on hallucinations, tells the
story of a young girl who in a dream saw her dying mother, heard
her call, and described the whole scene in the death-chamber. The
details were correct, and her mother was dying at the time. He
adds, If we were to cite all the names of persons of sound judg
ment and extended knowledge, high in the ranks of science, who
have had such warnings, they would furnish much matter for
thought.
This book has been written for precisely that reason. There is
much matter for thought.
Mme. Juliette Adam, the distinguished writer, was in her
room nursing her child at 10 p . m . Roused by the childs crying,
she saw her grandmother at the foot of her bed. She said, Dear
granny, I am so glad to see you ; but the shade did not reply, and
raised a hand to her eyes. I saw, says Mme. Adam, two
empty sockets. I jumped out of bed and ran towards her, but
as I was about to clasp her in my arms, the phantom vanished.
The grandmother had died about two hours previously (Flam-
marion, p. 187).
Mrs. Allom, being then a young girl of seventeen, was at
school in Alsace. One day, when reading in the sitting-room,
she saw her mother dressed in her night-gown, lying down as if
in bed; she was smiling and raised one arm, pointing upwards.
The apparition moved slowly across the room, and rising higher,
disappeared. Two days later the mistress called the gill to the
study, who said, You can tell me nothing, I know that my
mother has died. Mrs. Carrick, her mother, had in fact died on
that day and at the same hour.
Alexis Arbonsoff, of Pskoff (Russia) dreamed in bed one morn
ing that his mother came, embraced him, and said, Adieu, I am
dying. He woke, shuddering, and looked at the time, 7.30.
Ten minutes later the whole house was aroused. His mother had
risen at 7 oclock, had gone to kiss her little granddaughter, and
then as she said her prayers before the icons, she had died sud
denly at 7.30 (Flammarion, 435).
Mme. Van B., at Ypres, waked up with a start at 4.45 a . m .,
feeling that her father was ill or dying. She awoke her husband,
who tried to calm her, thinking it a nightmare. Her father died
at the same hour (A. S. P., 1899, ix, 71).
The Rev. Mr. Ball of Cambridge dreamt that he was with his
friend Dombrain in beautiful country. A bright light appeared
before him; he woke up, and saw his friend Dombrain smiling in
the beam of light. Mr. Ball rose at once, calling Robert,
Robert, and the vision disappeared. It so happened that a young
house servant was named Robert, thought he was called, and
came. Mr. Ball then realized as clearly as if he had been at the
bedside that his friend Dombrain had died. He noted the time
three minutes past five. At that very moment Robert Dombrain
died.
The following fact, narrated by M. Pyrrhus Bessi (Revue des
Etudes Psychiques, 1901, 21-23; 97-168), is a case of monition of
death by accidental crystal vision. M. Bessi, at Panicola (in Italy,
near Perusia), working alone in his room one night, broke off to
rest for a moment. His lamp nearly went out, he tried to re-light
it, and it went out completely. Nevertheless, the room was filled
with a dim light; and in an old mirror he saw, as if through an
opening in the wall, another room differently furnished, and in
it an old lady whom he recognized, sitting at a table. She took
some paper from a drawer and began to write slowly, put the
paper in an envelope, rested her head on the back of the chair,
and went to sleep. Next day M. Bessi learned that this lady had
died in the night; her will, written in her own hand, was found
in the drawer of the table.
The next account has just been given to me by an eminent mem
ber of the Paris bar, whom I will call A., as I have no right to
give his -name. The fact is of ancient date, since it concerns his
grandmother.
Mme. A., who had been early widowed, had one evening been
too eagerly courted by a near relation, B., and had been somewhat
offended. Some months later, in the winter, being in the country
nursing a sick child, she found the room very cold on a particular
night, and not wishing to call up the servant, went herself to the
wood-store to get some logs. On opening the door of the wood-
store she saw B. before her. He knelt down, took her hands, and
said, Forgive me. She was speechless with astonishment, the
vision being as clear as fact; but in a few moments it vanished.
Next morning a telegram arrived announcing B/s death.
The Rev. Mr. Barker, being in bed at 11 p .m.^before going to
sleep perceived the smiling face of an aunt then in Madeira. He
shuddered and told the vision to his wife and to several other
persons. The aunt had died at the same hour, allowing for dif
ference of longitude.1
Mr. Baeschly, of Saverne, aged twenty, was alone with his
father in the house, when towards midnight they were awakened
by great noises. They got up, but could find no cause. They
returned to bed and the noises recommenced; they then found the
front door opened. This occurred a third time, and they then
fastened the door with rope. Some time later they received a
letter from America announcing the death of M. Baeschlys
brother. It appears that shortly before death, on awaking from a
1This case is referred to by Grasset as proving nothing; but this criticism
is baseless: he speaks of a commonplace dream "such as had probably occurred
to Mr. Barker some hundreds or thousands of times." But this is assuredly
not the case; the hallucination is so clear that he tells it to his wife and his
friends as a singular thing, perhaps unique in his life. Does the coincidence
of time count for nothing?
long coma, he had said, I have made a long journey, I have been
to my brother at Brunatte (Chevreul, 334);
Miss Beale, then aged fourteen, sees a man in a loose dressing-
gown in her room in the middle of the night. He seemed to be
feeling his way, and vanished. Miss B., much frightened, called
to another girl sleeping in the same room. The latter said, It
is doubtless my brother C. The next morning at breakfast C.
declared that he had not entered the room, but that he also had
seen a form enter his room whom he knew as that of a friend (in
poor health, but not thought to be in danger) who had agreed
with him that the first to die should appear to the other. He had
died that same night (A. S. P., 1891, i, 13).
M. Beaugrand, a journalist of Havre, known to me personally,
told me and produced documents confirming his story, that his
mother at Havre on the 2d of November, 1856, before going to
bed, heard what seemed a terrible storm and saw the chimney
shaken as if by a high wind. There was no storm nor wind, but
the same day at 11 p.m. her husband perished in a cyclone some
miles from New York on his passage to Havre. This old story
would not by itself be very evidential, for memories become
twisted out of shape as time goes on; but it is probable that these
old cases, so closely parallel with recent ones, are correct in the
main. Many good instances, too long to be reproduced here, will
be found in C. Flammarions paper, Les apparitions au moment
de la mort (Revue Spirite, February, 1921, 33).
Elsa Barker, the author of sundry novels (The Son of Mary
Bethel, etc.), being in Paris at the time, was suddenly moved to
write automatically, I am here, I can see you; I found myself
before the inevitable, etc. The signature was X., a person whom
she hardly knew, an American author and magistrate aged about
seventy. She asked her friends for details of X., whom she
had only seen at distant intervals, and learned that he had died a
few days before the message had come to her. She thinks that
she was the first person in Europe to learn the news. This
writing was followed by numerous others, published as Letters
from a Living Dead Man (Rider, 1917). The book has but slight
scientific interest, but should be read carefully as showing the
powers of the subconscious in a distinguished writer.
On May 4th Lord Beresford, steaming between Gibraltar and
Marseilles, saw a coffin containing his father in his cabin as dis
tinctly as if it were real. He spoke of it to his shipmates and on
arriving at Marseilles learned that his father had died April 29th
and was buried on May 4th (A. S. P., 1907, xvii, 727).
M. Berget, professor of physics at the Sorbonne, narrates that
his mother when a young girl suddenly heard the voice of a friend
living far from Paris, and fainted with fear. On recovering she
said, How horrible! Amelia is dead; I heard her sing as only
the dead can. Amelia died at that time, 3 p . m ., at Strasburg, in
the convent of which she was a member (Flammarion, 78).
The Rev. P. Beck, of Southbank, Yorkshire, felt an inexplicable
sadness one evening after dinner. At ten minutes to eight exactly
he saw a form descending the stairs. His wife who was with him
saw nothing. The apparition agreed in height and dress with
Mr. Becks mother, but Mr. Beck did not recognize it. Mrs. Beck
died some hundred miles away at the same hour (A. S. P., 1891,
i, 367).
M. Belbeder, of the Sixth Colonial Regiment, went on leave to
some friends at Riberac in the Dordogne. When going to sleep
he saw a white transparent shade move from the chimney-piece,
come towards him, and bend over the bed. He says, I fully
understood that she said, Always remain my sons friend. The
form slowly rose and I recognized the mother of one of my best
friends whom I had left in good health. I got up, lest I should
be under an illusion; the night was very dark and there was no
moon. The person whose shape was recognized had died some
two hours before (Enquiry through the Bulletin des Armes).
M. Binet, aged fifteen, was unable to sleep. About 12.30 he
seemed to see a ray of moonlight, and this luminous shadow took
the form of a person and moved towards his bed. He cried out,
Lontine! He spoke of this apparition before knowing that
Lontine had died at that very hour (Flammarion, 84).
The following monition is not more remarkable than others ; but
I give it because I was to some extent a witness of certain details
(October, 1919). It takes the usual form of such monitions.
In the night of October 22-23, 1919, Adle Bureau, a widow,
forty-one years of age, in the service of my daughter-in-law,
Mme. Albert Richet, at Carqueiranne (Var), heard in sleep, at
about 3 a . m ., a knock at her door. She tried to say Come in,
but seemed paralyzed, as if her night-dress were glued to the
bed, so that she could say or do nothing. Then she saw the form
of a woman dressed in white standing on the threshold as if the
door were open. She could not distinguish the face, for the shape
turned its back and vanished as she looked. It disappeared as if
through the door, which, however, had neither been opened nor
shut. Adle went to sleep again, though with difficulty. She
did not recognize the shape, but thought of a niece whom she
loved, who was seriously ill. On the next day, and after relating
the nightmare, as she called it, to my daughter-in-law, she
received a telegram announcing the death of her niece.
Adle told me that she did not recognize her niece, not having
seen the face, but had thought of her. The costume was like a
white bridal dress, and she thought that her niece (only a year
married) must have been so buried. The emotion caused was so
strong that Adle was quite ill with tears and headache.1
The next instance is not, strictly speaking, a monition of death,
but presents a remarkable monitory character {Jour. S. P. R.,
July, 1919). Father Brompton (a pseudonym) was due to go next
day to administer the last sacraments to a sick woman. He gave
his telephone number to the nurse in case the patient were worse.
At dawn he was awaked and saw a human form, which said,
There is a telephone message for you. It was 4.15 . . He a m
dressed hurriedly and arrived just in time to administer the sacra

ments. It was proved that the telephone had not been used and
that no one had called him.
Should we consider this a visual and auditory hallucination of
Father Brompton, preoccupied with his duty to the dying woman?
Given the many authentic monitions that are known, it is legitimate
to suppose that this was a true monition involving lucidity, and
not a morbid non-veridical hallucination such as occurs to alco
holics and insanes.
Mrs. Bishop, travelling in the Rocky Mountains, made the
acquaintance of a creole known as Mountain Jim. He said to
her, I will see you again when I die. Mrs. Bishop states, In
1874, ten years later, being at Interlaken, at about 6 . ., I was
a m
sitting up in bed, writing, when I saw Mountain Jim before

me. His eyes were fixed on me, and when I looked up he said,
very low but very clearly, T am come as I promised, made a sign
xThe telegram was Mme. Bureau, Carqueiranne, October 23d, Chissey en
Morvan (Sane et Loire. Jeanne, deceased this morning, funeral Friday
eleven. Berthelon. ) Adle had never before seen any apparition. Some years
ago, after the death of one of her aunts, she had nightmares in which she
thought herself pursued and suffocated by this aunt. She had masses said
and the dreams ceased. Adle Bureau is intelligent and responsible. The dead
girl was not interred in her bridal dress.
with his hand, and said, Adieu. Mrs. Ker, who was with me
in the hotel, and I both took a note of the date and hour. The
news of the death reached us later, and the time, allowing for
difference of longitude, agreed with that of the apparition.
The certificate of death of Mountain Jim shows that he died
at Fort Collins (Colorado) on September 7, 1874, at 3 p . m .,
which corresponds to 10 a . m . at Interlaken. Mrs. Bishop does
not say whether the vision was on the 7th or the 8th of Septem
ber; if the former the vision preceded death by four hours; if
the latter, twenty hours elapsed between the two events.
Mme. Stella, then aged seventeen, sees a young and some
what intimate friend of hers coming into her room. She writes :
The door opens and I see him come in. I get up to push an
armchair for him near the fire for it was snowing, and he seemed
cold, having no cloak. I began to scold him for coming without
one. Instead of answering, he placed his hand on his breast
and then on his head. I was still speaking when Dr. G. entered
and asked to whom I was speaking. I said, Here is this tire
some boy come out without a cloak, and he with such a cold
that he cant speak. Lend him your cloak and send him home.
I shall never forget the horror and stupefaction of the doctor;
for Bertie had died about twenty minutes before. I had heard
the handle turned and the door opened. The figure walked in
the room and sat down while I lit the candles. The apparition
lasted nearly five minutes (A. S. P., 1892, ii, 173).
The Rev. Mr. Field, in New Zealand, while asleep, hears him
self called, Harry, Harry, and clearly recognized his mothers
voice. She usually called him Henry, not Harry. It was the
28th of November, 1873. At the same time, given the difference
of longitude, his mother died in London, saying Harry, Harry
(A. S. P., 1892, ii, 175).
The following account is by a celebrated painter, A. Besnard.
It is at third-hand, and therefore must be accepted with great
reserve. On the 13th of July, 1842, Mme. B., ill and dying, woke
with a start and cried, What a misfortune, the Duke of Orlans
is dead. When Dr. Vidal came to see the dying woman he
said, Have you heard the news? The Duke of Orlans has
been killed at Neuilly in a carriage accident. M. Brmon said,
I knew, she told us.1
xLetter from A . Besnard to Jules Bois, LAu-Del et les forces inconnues,
Paris, 1903, 127.
Mme. Bloch, at Rome, was dressing at 7 a . m . when she saw
her nephew, Ren Kraemer, who said to her, Yes, I am dead.
Much frightened, she went to call her son, who tried to reassure
her. Ren Kraemer, aged fourteen, had died of acute peritonitis
the same morning ; death setting in at 7 a . m . and the end coming
at noon (Flammarion, LInconnu et les Problmes Psychiques,
70).
Mme. Boniface, a schoolmistress at Etampes, when a child of
seven at Niort, dreamt that she was in a dark room where there
was a coffin, that she rushed out, and in the next room felt a
hand on her shoulder. She recognized her father, whom she had
not seen for two years, who said to her, Do not be afraid, little
one, kiss me. Her father had died at Paris that evening (Flam
marion, 407).
Lord Brougham tells in his memoirs {Life and Times of Lord
Brougham, 1871, 201-203) that being at Gothenburg in Sweden,
in 1799, he was taking a bath and saw on the chair where he had
put his clothes an intimate friend, G., who had gone to India and
to whom he had not written for years, looking at him calmly. It
was the 19th of December, on which date G. had died.
Dr. Rowland Bowstear, running after a ball at cricket, suddenly
sees his brother-in-law by the hedge, in shooting clothes with his
gun on his arm. A friend with him saw nothing, though Dr. B.
pointed out the apparition, which disappeared. It was 1.10 p . m .
The day and hour coincided with the sudden death of his brother-
in-law, who was out shooting and was carrying his gun.
Dr. Bock went with his brother to a music-hall in Munich.
They were enjoying the entertainment, when between the acts he
heard a loud knock, and saw the figure of his mother stretched
corpse-like on the bed with a cross in her hands. Sure that his
mother had died, he left the hall, despite the protest of his
brother, who did not understand his fear, knowing that their
mother seemed well. But Dr. Bock said, My mother is dead, I
could swear it He made arrangements for a substitute at His
duties, ordered his mourning, and next day received a telegram
announcing that she had died at the hour of the vision (A. S. P.,
July, 1913,195).
Emma Burger, ladys maid to the Countess of Ussel, was sleep
ing on the night of August 15-16, in the room opening off that
of her mistress, the door being open. Suddenly she saw clearly
her fianc, Charles B., standing at the half-opened door into the
passage. He was in travelling dress and I saw his features and
the details of his clothes quite clearly. He smiled but said
nothing. I said, Oh, go away. Madame, who was in the next
room, heard me, and said, Emma, what is the matter? Are you
dreaming?* I then said in a low voice to Charles, Oh, do go
away.* He disappeared, not suddenly but slowly, as if closing
the door and leaving. Next day I asked if anyone had been sent
to my room. 1 On the 18th Emma received news that Charles
had died of heart seizure on the night of the 15th-16th of August
(Phantasms of the Living, ii, 1886, 696).
M. Basserole, a schoolmaster in Brittany, received a letter sum
moning him to his sick father. At the station of Redon at 4.40
p. m. he fainted, and when he came to himself, before seeing
anyone in the waiting-room, he saw the figure of his father, which
disappeared at once. Mr. Basserole died at 6 p . m . (Flamma
rion, 128).
M. Jacques C., at Grenoble, had gone to bed, when he saw the
door of his room open nearly noiselessly, and a girl, Martha, to
whom he had been engaged, entered. She was dressed in white,
her hair down on her shoulders. M. C. is sure he was not sleep
ing. She came to the bedside and bent over him. C. took her
hand. It was quite cold. He cried out and the phantom van
ished, and C. found that he had a glass of wter in his hand.
Martha had died at Toulouse at the same hotir (Flammarion,
164).
Miss Bibby, aged nineteen, woke up with the feeling of some
one in her room. She saw the figure of her grandfather, whom
she recognized. He called to her, Miss Nellie, maam, as he
was accustomed to do in jest. She spoke of the apparition next
day. Some time after she heard that he had died at that moment.
M. Bertrand, aged nineteen, dreamt that a cousin, a sub-lieu-
tenant in the infantry at Tonquin, was surrounded by enemies,
defending himself. He vanished in a cloud. He told the dream
to his mother and sister and thought no more of it. Three
weeks later they heard of the cousins death on April 30, 1888,
at Yon Luong, on the date of the dream (Enquiry through the
Bulletin des Armes).
On the night of July 13-14, 1916, Sergeant Jean Jules Bigard
of the 124th Regiment of infantry, while on leave, dreamt that
Emma Burger was in my service for fifteen years, and her good faith
is not to be doubted. (Ch. Richet.)
he had lost both legs in action and that the registrars clerk gave
the death-certificate to his parents. He laughed at the grisly
tale and told his dream to his father and mother, who thought
nothing of it. A short time later he learned that his uncle, also
named Jean Jules Bigard, had been killed at Biache, both legs
having been blown off by a shell (Enquiry through the Bulletin
des Armes).
Mr. Beresford Christman heard the following rather startling
story told by his uncle, J., to his father, G. The two brothers,
J. and G., were in their cabin on the way to St. Thomas. The
night was calm and the moon bright, almost like daylight. They
were awaked. (By what?) Both then saw for a short time (that
seemed long to them), the figure of their father, which they recog
nized. The form raised a hand and showed the sons that its
eyes were shut. They noted the facts in the log-book. It seems
that the vision coincided to a minute with the death of the father'
of J. and G. Christman (Phantasms of the Living, ii, 17),
A very interesting fact was related to Sir Oliver Lodge by Lieu
tenant Larkin of the Flying Corps {Jour. S. P. R., July, 1919,
76). On the 17th of December, 1918, Lieutenant D. M. Connell
came to Lieutenant Larkins room and said that he had to take an
aroplane to Tadcaster, but would be back at tea-time. About
three hours later, Larkin being in his room sitting at the fireside,
the door opened and Connell appeared, saying gaily, Hello,
boy! Larkin turned, saw Connell in aviators dress, and said,
Back already? Connell replied, It is all right, I made a good
trip. He shut the door and was gone ; it was then 3.30. Larkin
went to the mess-room and was surprised not to see Connell.
During the evening they learned that Connell had crashed near
Tadcaster at 3.25. It cannot be supposed that Larkin had spoken
to some other officer, mistaking him for his friend Connell ; the
room was small and well lit.
Mr. Vicary Boyle at Simla saw in a dream his father-in-law,
who lived at Brighton, stretched pale on the bed tended by his
wife. The vision soon disappeared. Mr. Boyle went on sleeping,
but on waking was firmly persuaded that his father-in-law had
died, though he was unaware of any illness and had not been
thinking of him. Mr. Boyles father-in-law had died nine hours
before the dream (Myers, Human Personality, i, 138).
Mrs. Collyer, of New Jersey, on January 3, 1856, feeling poorly,
went to bed early. She sat down on her bed and saw her brother
Joseph standing near the door. She said, He looked at me
gravely and sadly, his head was bandaged and he was wearing
a white garment, like a surplice, but very soiled. At that very
moment there had been a collision between two vessels on the
Mississippi 1,080 miles away. Mrs. Collyers brother Joseph, who
commanded the steamboat Alice, was killed by the fall of the
mainmast on his head. He was in his nightgown, having gone to
sleep in his cabin before the accident ( Telepathic Hallucinations,
Fr. Tr., 117).
Mme. Couesnon, of Jassy, when half asleep , sees a friend of
hers, A., sitting on his bed in night attire, sayin g, Oh! I am in
pain. It was then 2 a . m . That night A. died a t 2.20 in the
Tyrol (Flammarion, 419).
In 1913 P. Cotte, a student of horticulture at Villepreux, was
in bed and just going to sleep when he saw a dim form leaning
on the cross-rail of his bed. As it became clearer he recognized
his foster-brother, A., aged thirty-five and a long sufferer from
an incurable malady. He recognized the voice, which said, How
are you, Pierre? Adieu. I am going. C. then sat up in bed
and called to his friend but the form had disappeared. The appa
rition coincided exactly with the time of death (Enquiry through
the Bulletin des Armes).
Lieutenant R. Martin, being convalescent, was anxious about
his best friend from whom he had not heard for eight days. He
says : I had a dream ; my friend appeared to me. He seemed in
a hurry and said, Why dont you come with me? Are you
dotty? I was struck by the new decoration he was wearing.
I told this dream to two friends next morning. I afterwards
learned that my friend had been killed by a shell at Verdun at
5 p . m . some hours before my dream. I am a mathematical stu
dent at the Sorbonne; I never believed a word about occult
sciences (Enquiry through the Bulletin des Armes).
M. Conil, then a child of eleven, saw in a dream his dying uncle,
and heard his words as if he were in the room. The uncle died
at 2 a . m ., just when young Conil woke up. He says, I heard
his words distinctly and could repeat them, for the vision made
such an impression on me that it seems like yesterday. All was
exactly as seen and heard (Flammarion, 454).
Mrs. Cox relates the following: On the 21st of August,
1869, about 9 p . m ., I was in my bedroom when my little nephew,
aged seven, ran in and said, Oh, aunt, I have just seen my
father walk round my bed/ He was so frightened that he would
not go back to his room and I had to take him into my bed.
Towards midnight, I was not asleep, and saw my brother, who
was at Hongkong, quite clearly near the chimney-piece and
mortally pale. I was so frightened that I hid under the bed
clothes. A little later I heard his voice call me by name three
times. When I looked up he had gone. I noted down the facts.
Mrs. Coxs brother died suddenly the same day at Hongkong
of sunstroke (Telepathic Hallucinations, 372).
The wife of Colonel Craigie, in India, at 10 p . m ., was about to
undress when her daughter, who was with her, said, Oh,
mother, there is Mr. B.! Yes, dont you see him? He is saying,
Good-bye, sissy, good-bye/ Now he is going. He is gone.
The house was searched, Mr. B. was not there; he had killed him
self the same day at 8 p . m . (Phantasms of the Living, ii, 581).
On the 13th of November, 1914, at Fez, Lieutenant C. of the
Foreign Legion woke up, sobbing, and said to his comrade, M.,
sleeping in the same room, I have had a horrible dream; some
disaster has befallen one of my brothers, I dont know which,
but I am sure. M. wrote this to his colonel, from whom I have
this account: Commandant C., the brother of Lieutenant C., was
killed in action at Elhenni (Morocco) on the same day, probably
a few hours before the dream.
Mrs. H. D. dreamt that she saw a friend of hers, Maria, play
ing chess with Dr. D., but wearing a thick black veil. Mrs. D.
said, You will lose if you keep on that veil. Maria answered,
It is because I am dead. Look! She raised her veil and Mrs.
D. saw a deaths-head with empty eye-sockets. In the morning
she received a telegram, Come quickly. Maria has died in the
night. Maria was apparently in perfect health (Flammarion,
430).
Mr. D., a barrister in whom Mrs. Sidgwick has full confidence,
had thirty years ago a friend, X. Y., whom he often saw. He
says, I knew he might die suddenly, but he seemed in his usual
health. On the 7th I was in his room a long time chatting on
various matters. He was in good spirits, and I went home at
bedtime. On the morning of the 8th I woke, distressed. Day
had dawned and in my dream I saw X. Y. lying on the floor,
his knees drawn up, his hands thrown back and his jaw fallen.
I woke my wife, saying, I have seen X. Y. dead on the floor/
She replied, Oh, you are dreaming/ I went to sleep again. But
at eleven oclock, X. Y. not having come to the office, and his
housekeeper having had no answer to her knock on his door,
I got a ladder to enter by the window. X. Y. was dead on the
floor exactly as I had seen him in my dream. From that day to
this I have been certain that it was no dream. I was not uncon
scious from the moment I opened my eyes and saw the appari
tion. I had an indescribable feeling of distress, just as one might
on waking startled and seeing a terrible sight. This happened
thirty-three years ago and every detail is as clear in my memory
as if it were yesterday.
Another, Mr. D., dreamt that he saw one of his work-people,
R. Mackenzie, who said, I have not done what I am accused
of ; I am innocent, you will soon know. The dream was hardly
ended when Mrs. D. came into her husbands room to tell him that
a tragedy had taken place, Mr. Mackenzie had committed sui
cide. "No, said her husband, "he has just told me that he is
innocent. Mackenzie, in fact, had swallowed aqua-fortis in
mistake for whisky (A . S. P., 1909, xix, 324).
Mme. Deupes, at Nice, in the middle of the night, heard dis
tinctly a voice calling her by name, "Marie, Marie. She got up
and awoke her husband, who was sleeping in the next room,
asking if he had called her. On his denial she went to sleep
again. Once more the voice called her, and$she said to her
husband, "I am frightened; light the candle. She passed the
rest of the night with her husband. She said to him, "Remember,
we shall hear of the death of M. Gautier at Marseilles, I think
I recognized the tone of his voice.
M. Gautier had died at the time that Mme. Deupes heard him
(Flammarion, 132).
The Abb Dontaz, priest of Domdidier, near Fribourg,
Switzerland, then a young man of eighteen, dreamt twice running
that he saw his sister dying. His father appeared to him, say
ing, Your sister Josephine is dying; but your mother does not
know. Next morning on going to college he received a letter
from his father containing the same words (Flammarion, 132).
A most remarkable monition is given (Flammarion, La Mort et
son M ystre, p. 172). To understand it fully the original'must
be referred to. On Saturday, January 3d, Mr. Dickinson, a
Newcastle photographer, received, at 8 a .m ., a visit from a Mr.
Thompson, whose portrait he had taken. He referred to his
book for the name and address, and said to Mr. Thompson, "If
you will call again in a few days you shall have the proofs.
Mr. Thompson then left. The assistant, on being spoken to,
was surprised, Mr. Thompsons father having called the previous
day to press for the proofs.
It was proved (1) that on January 3d Mr. Thompson was
seriously ill of typhoid fever and likely to die during the day;
(2) that in his delirium he continually spoke of the photographs
and that was why his father had enquired; and (3) that the
person seen by Mr. Dickinson could only be Mr. Thompsons
double (A. S. P., ii, 310). This mysterious case is very well
supported by proofs that define it as an objective phenomenon.
Mr. Charles Demay, a professor at Dijon, saw one of his col
leagues, G., at Paris on July 10th, who made an urgent request
that Mr. Demay could not consent to. G., despairing, left him
at 11.30 p .m ., near the St. Louis bridge. In the night of the
12th-13th July, Mr. Demay being at Soulancourt, 210 miles from
Paris, dreamt that he was in a boat on the Seine at the St. Louis
bridge, and that he was trailing his hand in the water; that it was
bitten by a fish; on raising his hand the fishs head became that
of G. Mr. Demay woke up and looked at the time, 2.20 a . m .
He told the dream to G.s sister, and a few days later learned that
G. had thrown himself into the river on the night of July 12th-13th
and had been taken from the water at 2.30 a . m . (Boirac,
A. S. P., xxii, 1912, 178). This is a striking case of symbolical
cryptesthesia.
Justinus Kerner relates that Angelica Hauffe had a waking
vision of a coffin and pall on three successive days preceding the
death of her father whom she did not know to be ill, but with
whom she connected the vision {Seeress of Prevorst, tr. fr.,
p. 61).
Kerner also relates the story of a Mr. Hubschmann, of Stutt
gart. One morning at dawn his children woke him, saying,
Grandfather has come. This was not the case, but a few days
later his brother wrote from Strasburg expressing much anxiety
about their father, as he thought he had seen and recognized him
on the same day as the children thought they had seen their
grandfather at Stuttgart. Mr. Hubschmann senior had died in
Bothnia on the same day as the apparitions at Stuttgart and at
Strasburg.
Mrs. Duck, at 10 a .m ., picking up sticks in a wood, saw her
husband, David Duck, and called to him, Oh, David, what brings
you here? She went home and evinced no surprise when told
that he had been run over by a carriage and killed. She said,
I knew it; there was no need to tell me. I saw his ghost
{Tel. Halluc., 257).
The sister-in-law of Mr. Dyne, of London, saw during the day
of December 16, 1875, a dead man, with open eyes, lying on a
narrow bed. The room was bare, without carpet or furniture.
She thought of Mr. X., who had done her some kindnesses, and
had gone abroad about a year previously. On the same day, ten
hours earlier, Mr. X. had died in a little village hospital, in a
room exactly as seen by Mrs. Dyne {Tel. Halluc., 84).
M. E., a sub-lieutenant of engineers, returning from leave,
while driving from the train to meet the regimental train, saw
clearly a grave and cross bearing the words, X., adjudant in the
----- company of engineers, killed on the field of honour, June 14,
1917. This was unlikely, for X., the senior section commander,
being thirty-seven years of age and father of a family, had been
given a post of less danger than others. He had been killed June
7, 1917 (Enquiry through the Bulletin des Armes).
Mme. Galichon, at Paris, dreamt on the night of November 8-9,
1916, that her grandson, a cadet in the Sixth Battalion of the
Chasseurs Alpins, entered her drawing-room like a whirlwind
and went out again as quickly. The impression being very clear,
she told her servant of the dream. She soon received the official
notification that her grandson had been killed by a shell at St.
Pierre-vast on the evening of November 8th (Enquiry through
Mme. Escourru, looking at the portrait of her son, an officer
of Zouaves, then in Mexico, saw one of the eyes injured and
the face streaming with blood. The portrait seemed as if alive,
one eye being gouged out. It was probably about 1 p . m ., being
after lunch. On the same day, Palm Sunday, March 29, 1863,
Captain Escourru had been struck by a bullet in the left eye, at
5 p . m . This gives a difference of six hours, for 1 p .m . at Paris
corresponds to 7 a .m . in Mexico. This case has been investigated
with great care by Dr. Dariex, who visited M. and Mme. Escourru
several times {A. S. P., 1891, 152).
C. Flammarion, in the Revue Spirite, lxiv. 2d of January,
1921, reports a remarkably similar case, the authenticity of which
seems to me weak, for no documents are available and the date
is wrong, March 17th for the assault of La Puebla which took
place on March 29th. The story is, that in 1863, the Baroness de
Boislve received many guests to dinner, among others General
Fleury and President Devienne. Suddenly on entering the
drawing-room, Mme. de Boislve saw her son standing before
her with his left eye bleeding. Her son was a lieutenant of hus
sars in Mexico. She fell on the floor in a faint. Eight days
later she learned that her son had been killed in the assault on
La Puebla by a bullet in the left eye.
The similarity in the two cases is so great that I suspect that
the story refers to one and the same person, though Flammarion
adds: Dr. Nlaton gave a written account (procs-verbal) of the
event in the handwriting of President Devienne, and counter
signed by all the guests. It would be necessary that this docu
ment should be produced before we could be sure that this is not
a version of the Escourru case.
This case shows how necessary it is to demand documents,
and to check every statement. The S. P. R. is perfectly right to
insist on proofs and attestations; there are never too many, nor
even enough.
Mrs. Eustance, on her death-bed, spoke insistently of a father-
in-law whom she called Uncle Done. While she was dying,
Mr. Done, who knew her to be very ill, heard a voice calling
him, Uncle, uncle ; and at the same time his young niece, who
lived with him, heard herself called, Rosie, Rosie. She left
her room in the middle of the night, thinking that her uncle had
called her, and met her uncle who also thought that he had been
called (Tel. Halluc., 345).
Mr. Everitt was suddenly awaked in the middle of the night.
He heard a noise in the room but could see nothing. Then his
mothers voice spoke softly, saying Tommy three times, and
added Your mother has died. Mr. Everitt told this before
hearing of his mothers death, which took place at the time.
Archdeacon Farber, awaking in the night, saw a friend sitting
at the foot of his bed, dripping with water. The apparition shook
its head without speaking. It returned twice that night. Soon
after the news came that a short time before the apparition to
Mr. Farber, his friend had been drowned while bathing (Tel.
Halluc., 130).
Mme. Ulric de Fonvielle, the wife of the author of that name,
had been a few minutes in bed, but was still awake when she
saw the bed-curtain drawn aside, and a friend of her childhood
with whom she had had a quarrel three years before appeared
to her as clearly as in life, wearing a dressing-gown, and with
her dark hair down on her shoulders. She looked fixedly at Mme.
de Fonvielle, held out a hand, saying, I am going. Can you
forgive me? Mme. de Fonvielle held out her hand but the
vision disappeared. The clock struck twelve. Next morning
while she was telling the story a telegram was received at La
Haye, Marie died last night at 11.45 (Flammarion, 80).
The following fact is reported by my friend, Gaston Fournier,
who has several times shown me strong mediumistic powers.
It is possible that his presence conduced to the result.
Dining with his friends M. and Mme. B., Gaston was sur
prised that a mutual friend, dE., had not appeared as expected.
The dinner went off merrily. Gaston and his hosts were to go
to the theatre together; and madame went to her room to put on
her hat. She gave a cry of fear ; and said that standing before
the mirror she had seen dE. at the door reflected in the glass.
He appeared pale and sad, and was wearing his hat. Mme. B.,
without turning round, said, Oh, dE., so you have come at
last; sit down. As he did not reply, she turned round, and
seeing nothing, cried out in fear. She insisted on knowing what
had become of him. They went to his house; he had not gone
out. No one answering the bell, they forced the door and found
him dead by a pistol-shot. He had probably shot himself about
10 a . m . ( A .S .P ., 1921, i, 22).
M. Louis Noell, a chemist at Cette, states that when he was
a student at Montpellier, on the night of November 23-24, he
saw about 4 a . m ., while half asleep, his sister, pale, bleeding, and
inanimate, and heard her plaintive call, Louis, my Louis, come
to me 1 He was oppressed by the vision and told his comrades.
In the evening his elder sister came in deep mourning, and told
him that their sister Helena had died of acute diphtheria at
Perpignan, November 23d, at 4 . . Telegrams had been sent
a m
him which he had not received. (It may be supposed, though

it is unlikely, that Louis Noell had an access of somnambulism
during the night, and had then read the telegrams which the
servant had placed in a drawer.)
My friend, Manuel Tolosa Latour, a very distinguished physi
cian of Madrid, when a child was awakened in the middle of the
night by his mother weeping and saying to him, Pray for your
grandfather, who is dead. She had waked with a start, having
seen her father dead, in a dream. The news was true; M. Tolosa
Latour states that event preceded the dream by a few hours
(A .S .P ., 1891,i,35).
Mrs. G., having gone to bed early but not yet asleep, saw by
the light of a night-lamp the figure of Major G. pass across the
end of the room. He wore his usual dress. She says, It was
neither a dream nor delirium nor fevered imagination ; the time
was a little before 11 . . The major had died at 10.45; Mrs. G.
p m
knew him to be very ill, but had no close acquaintance with him
and was not thinking of him (Tel. Halluc., 140).
Lady G., who had left her mother in good health, woke in the
middle of the night and said to her husband, My mother is ill;
have the horses put to for me to go to her. When nearing her
mothers house she met her sisters carriage. She also having
been disquieted, had come. They arrived in time for the last
moments of their mother who had been taken suddenly ill
(Chevreul, On ne meurt pas, 40). Perhaps the two daughters
on the last occasion that they had seen their mother had sub
consciously observed some signs of impending illness.
Mrs. Gay, at Saint-Jean-de-Luz, had two monitory dreams,
interesting as showing a gradual transformation from one per
sonality to another. The first dream was of a Mr. X., about
eighteen months dead. Little by little the lineaments changed
to those of her father. The change took place several times in
the course of the dream. In the morning a letter arrived intimat
ing the death of her father.
On the 24th of March Mrs. Gay saw her father, then dead,
accompanied by a Mr. L., whom Mrs. Gay knew very slightly.
This dream made a profound impression on her, and she con
cluded that Mr. L. must have died. He had not died; but some
days later she received a letter from him telling her that her
brother, Captain Edmund, had died.
On April 5th, when they were still without news of Captain
Edmund, and very anxious, Mrs. Gays little girl, aged one year
and four months, said that she had seen Uncle Edmund in her
bye-bye, with a red stain on his head. Mr. L.s letter reached
her a few hours later, telling her that her brother, a captain in
the artillery, had been killed by a fragment of shell that had struck
him on the head March 23d.
Mr. Goodall woke up with the impression that he had said
aloud, I have lost my dear little May. Another voice that he
did not recognize, said, No, not May, but your youngest boy.
A short time later this was confirmed (Human Personality, ii,
213).
Miss Gollin, on January 25, 1896, at 12.30, working at the
office of the Evening Post (New York) felt that there was some
one behind her chair. She turned and saw her fiancee dressed
in black. The vision disappeared after a short time. She asked
a companion, Miss Burrows, did you see anyone behind my
chair? Miss Burrows saw no one. The young man died at that
hour. He had been ill some days but Miss Gollin thought him
only slightly indisposed (/. 5. P. R., May, 1908, 234). The
testimony of Miss Burrows shows that the vision was entirely
subjective.
Mrs. Green, in England, dreamt that she saw two women in
a small carriage, that the horse fell into the water, and that both
women were drowned. She did not recognize either, but saw
the hats floating on the water. This case has been already
described (p. 254). At the same hour both women, one of whom
was a niece of Mrs. Greens, were drowned in Australia. The
horse was drowned also. The bodies were located by the hats
floating in the water. Mrs. Green had never seen her niece and
therefore could not recognize her (A. S. P., i, 49). The abun
dance of detail makes this one of the most telling monitory dreams
on record.
General Fitch, in Burma, on getting up one morning, saw a
friend whom he thought far away enter his room in broad day
light, and then vanish. No one in the house had seen him enter
or leave. He learned that his friend had died suddenly about
the same time, six hundred miles away (A. S. P., 1891, i, 362).
Marian Griffiths left the family breakfast table one Sunday
morning, went into the garden, and without ostensible reason
looked long into a fountain there. Her sister came to look fop her,
and she said, Something terrible has happened; oh, my poor
dear H. Her brother H. was drowned while bathing in a shal
low river. There was no reason that Marian should be anxious
about him (A. S. P., 1891, i, 364).
Colonel H., in London, woke at dawn and saw in his room his
brother officer, Major Poole, in khaki uniform and wearing a
thick black beard, as Colonel H. had never seen him. The appari
tion was so clear that H. thought it real; he saw all the details of
the uniform. He spoke and P. replied, I am shot, raising a
hand to his breast. "The general sent me forward. Colonel
H. told the facts to some comrades, and the following morning
came the news of the action in the Transvaal at which Major
Poole had been killed by a shot through the right lung. The time
coincided with the vision.
Mr. Marius S. Griffin, in Jamaica, saw in a dream an old lady
for whom he had a great affection, dressed in white. The dream
ended in a vision very sharply defined at the foot of his bed. He
remarks, however, that the night being very dark he could not
have seen a living person there. He noted the dream in his
diary, and learned that his friend had died at the time he saw
the apparition. She had said, shortly before her death, Tell
Marius that I thought of him (Tel. Halluc., 160).
General H., in his tent at Bombay, saw his sister in night-attire
at two o'clock in the afternoon. He wrote at once for news of
her, and learned that she had died at the hour of the apparition.
He says, I am as sure of the fact as of my own existence
(Tel. Halluc., 246).
Mr. H., who was then at school in Geneva, relates that one
morning one of his schoolfellows said aloud, before several per
sons, that he had seen the brother of one of the masters (that
master being then absent from the school for a few days)
stretched on the grass with a dark hole in his forehead. The dream
made a great impression on the boys. On the next day they heard
that Mr. X. had been killed by his gun going off as he was crossing
a ditch, the charge entering his head. Mr. H. cannot state identity
of time between the dream and the accident.
Suzanne H., an old servant of Mrs. A., married and went to
live at a farm a long way from the town where Mrs. A. lived.
One night she waked up and said to her husband, Listen! Mrs.
A. is calling me. The husband heard nothing and Suzanne was
reassured; but Mrs. A. had been taken with sudden illness and
died at the hour when Suzanne had heard her voice ( Flammarion,
LInconnu, 140).
Clovis Hugues, a distinguished poet, was imprisoned at Mar
seilles after the events of the Commune. His friend, Gaston
Cremieux, condemned to death, was with him, and said, When
they shoot me I will come and prove to you the immortality of the
sold by manifesting in your cell. At dawn of day on November
30, 1871, says Clovis Hugues, "I was awakened by sharp little
knocks on my table. The noise ceased and I went to sleep again.
A few moments later they began again. I jumped out of bed, and
broad awake stood at the table. The knocks continued; this was
repeated once or twice. At that moment Cremieux had just been
shot (LInconnu, 76).
M. Martin Halle, of Cette, dreamed that he saw a girl fall from
a window. He told this horrible dream to his family. In the
morning the cabman who usually came to fetch him failed to come,
and another came in his stead, very late. That morning at 5
a m . the daughter of the cabman had fallen from a window and
been killed (LInconnu, 460).
Mme. Hers, entering her room at 2.30 p .m ., saw her mother on
the bed in a frilled cap, dead. She sobbed and nearly fainted.
A few minutes later a telegram was brought her from Strasburg
telling her that her mother was very ill. She said, She is dead,
I have seen her. The elder lady had died at 3.30, Strasburg
time. She had a frilled cap (LInconnu, 104).
The celebrated medium, D. D. Home, who gave the finest ex
amples known of ectoplasmic forms, showed occasional lucidity.
He states that at the exact time of the death of Allan Kardec, one
of the first promulgators of the spiritist doctrine, he received the
communication, I regret having taught the spiritist doctrine,
Allan Kardec. The message was received in the presence of
Lord Dunraven (Lights and Shadows of Spiritualism, by D. D.
Home). All the same, it would be interesting to know the pre
cise conditions under which this message was transmitted.
M. Octave Houdaille was called to Mirecourt (Vosges) by
the serious illness of his grandfather, left Paris with his brother
George at 10 p . m ., and went to sleep in the train. At 1 a . m .
he awoke suddenly, hearing a deep sigh. He got up and called his
brother, saying, It is 1 oclock, grandfather must be dead or
dying. I have just heard his last sigh. In fact the death took
place at 1.30 a .m . (A. S. P., 1891, 99).
Mrs. Hosmer, the sculptress, at Rome, waked at the moment
that the clock struck three and saw inside her bed-curtains the
form of a young Italian woman, Rosa, who had been her servant
and whom she knew to be slightly ill. It seemed to her that Rosa
said, Adesso son felice, son contenta. Next morning she told
her dream while at breakfast with Miss Lydia Child, who did
not believe it. They sent, however, to get news of Rosa and
found that she had died at 5 . . (Tel. Halluc., 146).
a m
Mr. Hutchins died suddenly at Cardiff, forty-eight miles from

the house where his wife was living. His son left in a carriage
to take her the sad news. She met him at the door, saying,
Daniel, your father is dead. How do you know that? he
asked. He called me, she replied, about 9 oclock, and dis
appeared immediately, I have not slept since; he called me by
name, Mary, Mary {Tel. Halluc., 297).
Dr. Jean, at Cogolin (Var), was called to attend a little boy
aged about seven, delirious with fever. At 10 a .m . the child
woke up, terrified, seeing water everywhere and crying, Help,
and saying that his father was drowning. In fact his father,
going to Nice, was drowned at that same hour (Enquiry through
Two employees at the same office, J. and F., were close friends.
One day, F., having an attack of indigestion, did not go to the
office, the doctor having ordered a few days rest. In the evening
J., on returning home, and sitting with his wife, saw distinctly
his friend F., dressed as usual and with a stick in his hand,
looking at him fixedly. The words of Job came to his mind, A
spirit passed before my face and the hair of my flesh stood up.
He asked his wife the time. Twelve minutes to nine, she re
plied. Then it is at 8.48 that F. has died ; I have just seen him.
In fact F. died by the rupture of an aneurism between 8.35 and
9 p .m . (A. S. P., 1891, i, 301). This monition is one of the most
remarkable by reason of the exactness of the details and unfore
seeable nature of the event.
Mr. Jukes heard in a dream one of his comrades say to him,
Your father, Mark, and Harriet have both gone. He waked
and his feeling was so strong that he wrote down the words. He
was so moved that he did not go down to breakfast in the morn
ing. At that time his father was dying of cholera in America, and
his sister-in-law, Harriet, died two days later {Tel. Halluc., 126).
Mr. Grant woke up in the night feeling a presence in his room,
but seeing nothing. He had the conviction that the father of his
friend Bruce had died. He looked at the time12.14 a . m . In
the morning he spoke of it to several persons, and in the evening
noted in his diary that he had so spoken. It was not Mr. Bruces
father, but his own brother, who had died in China some hours
before {Tel. Halluc., 93).
Mrs. L., at Farnborough, at 3 p .m ., saw an old gentleman,
dressed in a former fashion and carrying a cane, come into her
room. In spite of the rain his clothes were not wet. She recog
nized her uncle and spoke to him as if he were a real person; but
he, without answering, went out by the half-open door. The ser
vants when questioned said they had seen no one. At that very
time her old uncle, whom she did not know to be ill, died in
Leicestershire {Tel. Halluc., 93).
Captain Lagarrue, at St. Louis (Senegal), was going to sleep
when he felt a strong pressure on his chest. He raised himself on
his elbow, rubbed his eyes, and saw his grandmother looking at
him with dim eyes. He heard her say in a weak voice, I come to
bid you good-bye, dear boy, you will see me no more. He then
said aloud, Come, this is not a dream, and got up. The appara-
tion had lasted some seconds only. The time agrees with that of
the death of the captains grandmother. She was of an advanced
age, but her health gave no reason for disquiet {LInconnu, 182).
Jules Lermina reports the following case, not very evidential,
told him by a person whom he knows well {A. S. P., 1895, 202).
I had gone to fetch a dish from the kitchen, when I heard
the voice of one of my cousins at the window. I raised my eyes
and saw him nodding to me, and saying Good morning, Louie.
I answered, Good morning, Wenand, and went to open the door
to him. My father, surprised that the door should be opened
when no one had rung, came to see. When I told him that I had
seen Wenand, he said, That is impossible, and told me that
Wenand was dead, but that he, my father, had not wished to tell
me before.
In despite of Mr. Carringtons authority I cannot place much
reliance on the story he tells of Mrs. H., who would seem to be a
woman of the working class. She saw her son, who was at the
front, at her door, and was surprised not to see him that evening.
She left the door open but he did not return. The next day he
again appeared and was not seen again that day. On the next
day he came for the third time. This time she said, Now do
not leave me, my son, sit down and take tea with me. Her son
went up to the room, his mother following. He threw himself
on the bed and disappeared, leaving the bed covered with blood.
The first apparition coincided with the day of death. This story
is so highly improbable from a psychological point of view that it
cannot be accepted. At the very least some documentary evi
dence of Mrs. H.s state of mind is required.
In March, 1890, Countess Kapnist, on leaving the theatre with
her sister, and being about to enter her carriage, stopped, seeing
a diaphanous figure with indistinct outlines. The vision lasted
a moment .only, nevertheless the smallest details were distinguish
ablea large nose, hair parted at the side, blond beard somewhat
scanty, no hat, and a brown overcoat. The sister of the countess
saw nothing, though the latter had said to her, Did you see
nothing in front of you? Some time later Countess Kapnist
learned that a certain Mr. P., answering to the description, had
died after a long illness, two days after the vision. Mr. P. had,
in March, 1889, promised I. K., Countess Kapnists sister, to
appear before her, but not so as to frighten her (Human Per
sonality, ii, 49).
Dr. Liebeault reports the case of Mrs. B., of New Orleans, who
when magnetized by him soon gave proofs of lucidity by automatic
writing. One morning she felt an impulse to write. The message
purported to come from a certain Marguerite, who announced her
death while at school in Coblentz. The death was verified as
having taken place the same day (Phant. of the Living, i, 293).
One of my colleagues, a distinguished physician, in no way cred
ulous, writes to me that one night he dreamed of a young friend of
his, Mme. L., in tears and wearing a mourning veil. Next morning
he told his dream and expressed his surprise that the young lady,
who was usually gay and light-hearted, should have appeared in
mourning. Towards 8 a . m . my sister telephoned to us that her
sister-in-law, Mme. L., had lost her husband after an operation
for peritonitis. He adds that he had not seen M. and Mme. L.
for a fortnight, and that his sister (their only relation in com
mon), did not know that M. L. was ill. This monition is interest
ing as being symbolical. The image of the dead man himself was
not presented; it was an information, and this is important as
regards theory, for it seems to prove that so-called apparitions are
not phantoms of the dead, but only monitions.
Mrs. Frances Lightfoot was awakened by a loud noise. It
seemed to her that her door, which was locked, was violently
opened and that someone or something entered her room. A
figure appeared, lying over her bed, and an imperious voice said,
Frances, I want you. Come with me at once. She then
thought of Mrs. Reed, a dear friend in India, and imagined she
must-be dead. She noted down the dream in her diary. Next day
she told her sister that Mrs. Reed was dead. The vision took
place eight to nine hours after Mrs. Reeds death {Tel. Halluc.,
154).
At Holywood, Mrs. Kerr dreamed that one of her sons, a loco
motive driver, had fallen from his engine, had his head and leg
crushed against the parapet of a bridge, and that the train had
passed over his body. The time was about 10.50 p .m . A few min
utes earlier, at Paisley, Edward Kerr had fallen from his tender
at a bridge, his head and leg were crushed, and he died the fob-
lowing day.
This case was gone into by Sir James Crichton Browne and
Dr. Clarke, in the Am. S. P. R. (November, 1905, 145); and
though the incident dates back ten years, the details are so pre
cise, and Mrs. Kerrs good faith so evident, that it is difficult
to dispute its authenticity.
Mme. de Langenest one morning at eight oclock saw her
uncle, M. Bonnamy, whom she thought to be in good health,
standing before her in her room. She went to the other side of
her bed and the phantom moved to the place where she had been
standing. She went to find her husband on the ground floor, and
again the phantom moved in front of her. She said, Uncle,
why have you come ? Have you died ? The apparition Vanished.
Soon after there was a ring at the door, and Mrs. L. said to the
servant, Go and get the telegram, my uncle is dead. He had
died at 1.15 that night (A . S. P., 1900, x, 65).
Mrs. Macklin saw on March 27-28, 1918, in a very vivid
dream, her son David, a lieutenant of infantry, in the uniform
of a private, which much surprised her. He was wearing a hel
met, and she said, Oh, David, why are you no longer an officer,
why this Tommys uniform? She told her dream to two per
sons who witness to it. On April 3d she received the news of her
sons death on the night of March 27-28. His body was not
found: in night-attacks the officers often wore the uniform of
private soldiers (/. S. P. R., January, 1919, 3-7).
Mr. Marchant, of Redhill, saw someone come into his room at
2 a .m . The name of Robinson Kesley came to his mind, though
he had seen him but once in twenty years, and never thought of
him. He knew him by his long, tangled hair. The apparition
looked at himself in the mirror; and as soon as Mr. Marchant
spoke he slowly sank into the floor. Mr. Marchant told his
dream to several persons, before he learned that Kesley had died
at 2 a .m . the same night {Tel. Halluc., 12).
Moritz quotes the story of a woman who had received a letter
from her husband telling her that all was well; nevertheless she
dreamed that night that she saw him dying with a large wound
in his side, with an officer beside him. This was true. Four
months later she saw an officer at church and recognized him as
the one who had been with her husband in his last moments
(quoted by J. C. Passavant from Unters, ber den Lebensmag
netismus, 2d edit., Frankfurt, 1837, 132).
These old stories are probably true in the main, for they agree
well with more recent ones; but taken by themselves, they do not
carry conviction, for in those days the same care was not taken
as now in attestation and scrutiny.
Dr. Weir Mitchell states a case that he had from his father, the
doctor of a lunatic asylum. The wife of one of the patients had
died, and the doctor went to tell the husband, who said, You
need not tell me; my wife has died. I know it; she came to me
last night and spoke to me. On enquiry Dr. Mitchell found
that the patient had been speaking aloud during the night. The
warder came to silence him, and was rebuked by the patient for
driving away the wife who had come to see him and tell him of
her death (Hyslop, Science and a Future Life, 51).
In James Hyslops book many interesting examples will be
found; these are worthy of mention, both because he has chosen
cases in which the intelligence and good faith of the percipients
are above reproach, and because his acute and clear-sighted
criticism deserves to be taken as conclusive.
Mr. Andrew Lang states in his article on Apparitions in the
Encyclopaedia Britannica (10th Ed.) that he saw an eminent
member of an English university at the moment that this person
was dying one hundred miles away(?) (N. B. This does not
appear in the article as given in the eleventh edition.T ransl.).
M. Keulemans, the artist, heard when half awake in Paris one
morning the voice of his son Isidore, and saw him smile, both
seeming more real than in an ordinary dream. During the day
he again heard the voice, and told his wife that the child must
have died. The child had really died in London at the hour
of the apparition.
James Cotter Morrison and Professor Estlin Carpenter give
parallel experiences of their own.
Mr. Hensleigh Wedgwood, brother-in-law to Mr. Darwin, re
ports a veridical vision with very precise details that occurred to
his sister-in-law.
The Marquis of Bute and Dr. Ferrier have described the
phantom of a dead person whom they did not know. Their de
scription is quite sufficient to warrant the assertion that the hallu
cination was veridical.
The Rev. Mark Hill, one evening when sitting down to supper
saw a tall man about to attack him. He jumped up, went to the
other side of the table, and threw a glass at the figure, which van
ished. He then thought of one of his uncles, who had, in fact,
died that day, April 5, 1864 (Phantasms of the Living, ii, 1886).
Dr. F. de M., a student of medicine at Paris, dreamed that his
uncle in Havana, who stood to him in the place of a father, was
about to die. When the servant entered his room in the morning,
he found Mr. F. in deep distress, and was told of the dream.
The coincidence of the day is exact, if not the hour (Flam
marion, 413).
Sergeant Ngre heard his wife sobbing in her sleep by his side
on the night of November 8, 1912. He waked her, and she said,
My brother Alexis is dead. This was true. A month later, at
11 p.i., she was again weeping and when her husband asked
what was the matter, she said, Mother is dead, I am sure of it.
This also was the fact. The brother died on November 8th and
the mother on December 8, 1912.
Mme. A. Eugnie, of Lavadina (Italy) on June 8, 1916,
thought in her sleep that she heard the step of her son Alphonse,
a soldier in the Fifty-fifth Regiment. She got up, saying, At
last, dear son, I can kiss you. She seemed to feel her son sigh
ing in her arms, but it was only a shade. Convinced that he was
dead, she had the prayers for the dead offered. Alphonse, un
known to his mother, had embarked on the Principe Umberto,
which was sunk June 8th between 8 and 10 p . m . (Enquiry
through the Bulletin des Armes).
Mrs. Palliser, a widow, saw in a dream her only son,
Matthew, dead by drowning. Much distressed, she sought out
Mr. Clarke, a merchant of Hull, among other persons. He tried
to calm her and promised to write to New York to get news;
and for a month Mrs. Palliser came to see him daily. At last
news came that her son had been drowned on the day of the
dream (Tel. Halluc., 150).
At Chicago, Mrs. Paquet, about to pour out tea, saw her
brother, a stoker on a small steamboat, caught in the bight of a
rope, thrown overboard, and drowned. His trousers were turned
up so that the white lining could be seen. He was wearing no
coat, only a sailors jumper. All these details were exact. When
Mr. Paquet heard the news he broke it to his wife by saying,
Edmund is ill in hospital. She replied, No, he is drowned,
I saw him fall into the water (A. S. P., 1891, i, 208).
M. George Parent, mayor of Wiege (Aisne) travelling in a
carriage by night, heard his name pronounced in a stifled voice.
He stopped the carriage and got out but could see nothing.
When about to get in again he heard his name as if spoken by
some one in the carriage, and recognized the voice of an old
nurse who was very fond of him. As soon as he got in he again
heard the voice speaking low. About a hundred yards further
on he went into an inn to write this down in his pocket-book. On
returning home he found that old Sophia had died (Flammarion,
100).
An eminent psychologist, M. Pieron, relates a remarkable moni
tion, with full details (A. S. P., xii, 303-309). On June 25, 1902,
a young woman, X., was working in his psychological laboratory
at the asylum of Ville-juif. She seemed very depressed, and
Cohld not be consoled, having heard, at seven minutes past three,
the voice of Jeanne, one of her friends, whom she knew to be
very ill. On that day at three oclock, Jeanne had cried out for
her friend, X., and in dying she had asked for silence that she
might hear her friend come to her. At 4.06 she felt herself
Hying, and said, If it were to go and see ; she could not
finish, but gasped and died. X. knew that death was near, but
thought Jeanne might yet live for some time. M. Pierons very
circumstantial account mentions other facts that might be ex
plained by Jeannes cryptesthesia; but thiey may be coincidences.
Still, the fact remains that X. showed decided cryptesthesia, along
with a very clear auditory monition.
Mr. Rawlinson (Cheltenham), in his dressing-room one morn
ing, saw distinctly his friend X. to whom he had not written for
a long time. At that same moment X. was dying {Tel. Halluc.,
231).
At the beginning of August, 1878, my grandfather, M. Charles
Renouard, aged eighty-four, was slightly ill, but the indisposition
did not prevent his remaining up and going about as usual. He
was then living at a country house at Stors (Seine-et-Oise)
with Mme. Cheuvreaux, his sister-in-law. On Sunday, August
11th, I went to Stors and found him well. It was settled that
we were to go from Meudon near Paris where we were living
to visit him for a few days the following week. On the morning
of Saturday, August 17th, at 7 a . m ., as I was dressing, my wife
woke up weeping and said, It is terrible, I have just seen your
grandfather very ill in bed and your mother standing by him
(Proc. S. P. R., 1888, 162). I took no heed of the dream; at that
time I did not believe at all in veridical dreams. I easily reassured
my wife and we left in a carriage for Paris. I remember we were
quite in good spirits. On reaching Paris we found a telegram
telling us that on the previous night my grandfather had died
suddenly of heart disease about 3 a .m . We did not know that my
mother was at Stors; it was a chance visit. The dream was about
four hours after the death.
M. R., a clerk in the postal administration, when about to enter
an omnibus to return home on March 16th, suddenly saw his
mother lying back in her bed, very ill. He seemed to himself to
say, Wait, mother, I am coming. It was about five minutes past
six. On reaching home he found a telegram announcing his
mothers sudden and serious illness. He then told L., who was
with him, of the vision, and L. said that M. R. looked very strange.
Mme. R. was taken ill on the morning of March 16th and died
at 10 p .m . ( A . S . P ., 1899, ix, 77).
M. Riondel, barrister at Montelimar, on the night of April 1-2,
1894, heard a loud and unusual noise that woke him and his
mother also at 1.45 a .m ., with a feeling of fear. At the same
hour his brother, who had just written that he was in good health,
had died suddenly at Marseilles ( A . S i P ., 1895, v, 200-202).
Mr. Runciman gives precise details of a monition (Phantasms
of the Living, i, 433). It began by a dream in which he saw Mr.
J. H. Haggit lying in bed. He awoke, asking himself, Am I
awake or dreaming? There was a little light in the room from
the gas-jet. He writes, I was as much awake as I am now
while writing, when the apparition vanished. I was about to
speak to him when all disappeared. I spoke of it to several per
sons. Mr. Haggit, whom he thought he saw, had died the same
day at the same hour; he had been ill, but not seriously.
In November, 1904, there were riots at Rio de Janeiro with
much bloodshed. Among the students at the military college
was young Sylvestre Cavalcante who was killed by a bullet in
the head on the night of November 14-15 at 11 p.m. exactly. On
that night, about 2 a.m ., Mme. Rieken, whose daughter Maria
Luiza was betrothed to Cavalcante, saw him enter her room at
Copacabana (Brazil) wearing a khaki uniform, different from
his usual uniform, with a red handkerchief round his neck. He
said, Guarda Mimi (take care of Mimi), that being the name
by which he called his betrothed. He then vanished. Next morn
ing Mme. Rieken told the vision to her husband and her son. At
that time no one at Copacabana knew of the rising at Rio, nor,
a fortiori, of the death of Cavalcante (/. S. P. R., April,
1905, 59).
M. Anatole France tells in his vivid style a monition related to
him by his grandmother (Le Livre de mon ami, 98).
On the night of the 9th to the 10th Thermidor of the year
III (July 27, 1794) we had heard of stirring eventsthe arrest
of Robespierre and the tumults in the Convention and in the
city, but nothing more. My grandmother, says Anatole France,
kept her room with my father, Mme. de Laville and young
Amlie, her sister. At half-past one in the morning, Amlie,
leaning over a mirror, seemed to be looking on a tragic scene and
cried out, I see him ! I see him ! How pale he is ! The blood is
flowing from his mouth ! His teeth and jaws are shattered ! God
be praised ! The bloodthirsty wretch will drink no more blood but
his own; then she cried out with horror and fainted. At the
same hour Robespierres jaw was shattered by a pistol-shot at
the Hotel-de-Ville.
Of course this story, narrated a century after the events, must
be accepted with all reserve.
Mme. S., of Luxeuil, when half asleep, saw her brother in a
stone sarcophagus like those in the museum of Roman remains.
It seemed to be closing in upon him, while he looked at her at
first imploringly and then resignedly. Mme. S. then woke up, at
3.30 a m . At that hour her brother died. He had been ill for
some time (Flammarion, 408).
Miss Sanders when awake one morning heard herself re
peatedly called by her Christian name. She recognized the voice
of a friend of whom she had not thought for a long while. She
noted the date (October 27, 1879) in her diary. He had died of
cholera in India on that day (Tel. Halluc., 296).
M. Marcel Srizolles, a magistrate and man of letters, cites
some cases of monitions. During an excursion in the mountains
he felt a blow on his neck. He stopped and said aloud, There
is a message for me in the town; some misfortune has befallen
me. His father, seemingly in good health, had died suddenly,
about three hundred and sixty miles away. The telegram had
reached the town of L., where M. Serizolles was staying, at the
time of the monition (A. S. P., 1895, v, 277).
The wife of M. Serizolles also had a monition. Travelling to
Granada, she dreamt, and told her husband, that she had seen
Mme. de B. ill and dying. Mme. de B., though near her confine
ment, was otherwise in good health, but had died at that time
(exact dates are wanting).
M. Serizolles relates another interesting monitory dream. His
father was a magistrate at Montauban, and among his relations
was a young barrister named L. In 1883, after the death of M.
Serizolles senior, M. L. was appointed judge at N. (Dordogne).
Two or three years later M. Serizolles dreamt that he saw his
father as if floating in a cloud, from which a form resembling
M. L. emerged, and the sleeper clearly heard his father say, So
it is your turn, L., who answered, Yes, it is I ; and they
shook hands. Some days after, M. Serizolles learned that M. L.,
though still young, had died that day.
The wife of Marshal Serrano, Duke of La Torre, relates that
her husband, being very ill, and awaking from sleep induced by
morphia, rose up, calling out loudly in the silence of the night,
Quick, let some one take my horse, and hurry to the Prado, the
King is dead. He fell back, but repeated in a weaker voice,
My uniform, my sword! the King is dead. At that time Al-
phonso XII was dying on the Prado, at some distance from the
part of Madrid where Serrano was. This fact is cited with all
necessary reservations (Flammarion, 439).
Kate Sherman felt a hand on her shoulder as she lay in bed;
she looked up and saw her brother Stewart. She woke her
sister, who saw nothing and laughed at her fears. She went to
sleep again with her head under the coverlet, and again saw her
brother, whose image persisted for a time and gradually disap
peared. She awoke her sister again. Stewart died the same
night, July 4-5, at 1 a . m .
The following is from Victor Hugos Choses Vues. It is repro
duced textually. The case is doubly interesting, for besides the
fact of the monition it was addressed to a person who (though
only slightly ill) was about to die, and was asked, Are you
coming?
On the 27th of November last, an old woman named Mme.
Guerin, sixty-six years of age, living at No. 34 (fourth storey) in
the street Fosses-du-Temple, was slightly ill with an attack which
her doctor thought to be indigestion. It was five oclock in the
morning; her daughter, a widow named Mme. Gurard, had
risen early, lit her lamp, and was working by the fire at her
mothers bedside. While working, the daughter said to her
mother, Why, Mme. Lanne must have come back from the
country. (This Mme. Lanne, a good-natured stout woman of
sixty, had retired from a grocery business at the corner of the
streets St. Louis and St. Qaude, with an income of 40,000 francs
and lived on the first floor in the Boulevard Beaumarchais, in
a new house.) Mme. Gurard added, T must go and see her
today. No use to do that, said her mother. Why, mother?
She died an hour ago. Why, mother, what do you mean? Are
you dreaming? No, I am quite awake, I have not slept, but as
four oclock struck I saw Mme. Lanne pass, and she said to me,
T am going, are you coming? The daughter thought that her
mother had dreamed it; and later in the day went to see Mme.
Lanne, only to find that she had died at 4 a.m . The same evening
Mme. Gurin vomited blood, and the doctor said, She will not
last twenty-four hours. The next day at noon she had a second
attack and died.
I knew Mme. Gurin, and the story was told me by Mme.
Gurard, a pious, good woman who never told a lie in her life
(Victor Hugo).
Mr. J. Addington Symonds, while still at Harrow School, woke
in the middle of the night and felt he must look round. He then
saw between him and the door Dr. Macleane, dressed as a clergy
man, who said to him, I am going on a long journey; look after
my son. Then he vanished. Dr. Macleane died the same night
at Clifton. Young Symonds knew of his chronic illness, but did
not think him more ill than usual (Hyslop, Science and a Future
Life, 50).
Mr. Sings, a sailor of little education, left his father, also a
sailor, one Good Friday, to embark on a large sailing-ship. After
some very stormy days, in heavy weather, he saw his father on
the bridge near him, saying, as usual with him, Look to your
helm, Joe. He continued to see his father walking to and fro
on the bridge for three hours. His father several times clapped
him on the shoulder, and told him to be careful at the wheel. Joe
felt that his father must have been drowned to appear thus to him,
and would no longer remain at the helm. The date and hour
agree with the time of the fathers death {Tel. Halluc., 318).
Mr. Shirving, master mason at Winchester Cathedral, felt him
self irresistibly impelled to leave his work, which was pressing;
went home at 10 a . m . and found that his wife had been run over
by a carriage and was calling him (Chevreul, On ne meurt pas,
31).
Mme. de Thiriat, the aunt of M. dArbois de Jubainville, who
tells the story, was dying and seemed, four or five hours before her
death, to become composed. She said, I am calling Midon to my
funeral. Two hours later, Midon, an old servant who lived some
six miles away, arrived dressed in black, saying that she had
heard Mme. de T. calling her to her death-bed (Flammarion,
LInconnu).
Mme. Storia gives a very circumstantial dream (too long to be
detailed here), in which she saw her brother, William, lying on
the ground with the smokestack of a locomotive near his head.
Her brothers death in a railway accident took place the same day
at 9.55 on July 18, 1874 {Tel. Halluc., 112).
Colonel Swiney, at Shomcliffe Camp, saw in the daytime his
brother (who was in India), approach him, and then vanish. He
told his comrades. Taking account of the longitude, the hour of
the death and of the apparition coincide {Tel. Halluc., 253).
M. Tamburini, professor at the University of Rome, reports
several cases {A. S. P., 1893, iii, 292): Mme. V. Guicciardi, the
wife of the principal doctor of the asylum at Rome, while sleeping
at home, heard herself called loudly by name. She went into the
adjoining room to find her husband, and returned to sleep. She
then dreamt that her friend G., who was ill, but had written two
days before that she was slightly better, had died. It was 6
a . m . At eight oclock a telegram arrived announcing the death.
The next case is probably not a coincidence, though coincidence
is quite possible. A female patient in the lunatic asylum at
Reggio died on May 21, 1892, at 11 a . m . Her husband had not
asked for news of her since December 20, 1890; but on the 23d of
May a letter arrived from Mantua from the husband saying that
on the 21st he had felt a disturbance presaging some misfortune.
Dr. Giacchi, when a student, aged eighteen, at Pisa, saw his
father, pale and dying, who said to him, Kiss me for the last
time, I am about to leave you forever. He felt cold lips on his
mouth. With no other reason for apprehension, he left for
Florence next morning, and found that his father had died at the
time of the vision. This took place in 1853 when telegraphic
communication was imperfect. However, Dr. Giacchis story
refers to an event so long past that it must be taken with some
caution.
Dr. G. Orsi saw in a dream (July 2, 1858) the Adria Doria, on
which his brother had embarked, caught in a storm. The dream
was repeated on the two following nights. He saw the wreck,
but felt that his brother was among the saved. On July 8th he
received a telegram from Gibraltar announcing the loss of the
ship in the storm of the 2d and 3d of July, but that his brother
Alexander was safe.
Dr. Cornis, of Parma, relates that his sister, being then very
ill, was visited by her brother Henry, a lieutenant in the Ber-
saglieri, who was leaving for the war, but of this she was not
told. Some time later, before her death, she awoke from a half
sleep saying, Henry is killed. He had fallen at Custozza,
June 24, 1866.
Mrs. Teale, whose son Walter was returning from the Soudan
on sick leave to England, saw him bend over to embrace her
and disappear. Walter had died on that day some five or six
hours before {Tel. Halluc., 280).
A medical lady, Marie de Thilo, at Lausanne, heard knocks at
her door at 6 a . m . The door opened of itself and a form ap
peared covered with vaporous white stuff, like a veil over a black
ground. The cat in my room growled and hissed with all its
hair on end. Some time after Mme. de Thilo learned that one of
her best friends, of whom she had not thought at the time of the
apparition, had died of acute peritonitis in India on the night
following the dream (Flammarion, 156). As there was no
recognition no great importance can be attached to the dream as
a monition; but the episode of the cat seems to show that the
apparition was not perhaps entirely subjective; this episode was
perhaps misinterpreted or exaggerated, and is insufficient to
establish objectivity.
The soldier S. went to see one of his comrades in the am
bulance, who, as S. was leaving, said to him, Good-bye, and
think of me. In the night of March 27th S. had a dream which
he noted in his route-book: March 28th, I saw G. dying, a
bright light shone round him . . . his face was terribly
thin and disfigured . . . I shall see him no more . . . I
am afraid. On April 18th, It is true then, he died thirteen days
ago . . . no one near him to console his last moments, I
saw him in his coffin, and choirboys in red tickling each others
necks and laughing. It would appear from S.s letter that his
friend died on March 28th (Enquiry through the Bulletin des
Armes).
The soldier D., schoolmaster of Lieuron (Ille-et-Vilaine),
wrote from the front to his wife, Perhaps you will say I am
mad, but I think my mother has died . . . Tell me the
truth. With the letter Mrs. D. received a telegram announcing
the mothers death, though she had not been ill, but had resumed
her work after a short indisposition (Enquiry through the Bulle
tin des Armes).
The son of M. Viaud, professor in a school at Bordeaux, had
left with his regiment August 6, 1914, and news of him had come
regularly. On the 22d of August at 9.15 p .m ., having been im
pelled (by an external influence) to go to my bedroom, I had
hardly laid my head on the pillow and switched off the light, when
I saw clearly at the foot of the bed the image f my son with a
large black patch covering his left eye . . . I was convinced
that he had been mortally wounded during the day. The vision
still persisting I mentally exclaimed Enough, and the luminous
appearance vanished. It was not a dream (A. S. P., March,
1916, 60).
On August 24th there arrived a letter written on the 20th.
Young Viaud was missing after the battle of August 22d in
Belgium. No news has been since received, and the manner of
his death is not known.
Corporal Lebrun had a dream or nightmare which moved him
most profoundly. He noted the fact in his pocket-book, which
has been lost. He dreamt that he was at a funeral, many persons
in mourning, weeping, and he thought of a cousin to whom he
was greatly attached. She had just died suddenly (Enquiry
through the Bulletin des Armes).
M. Uranenko was asleep, and was waked by someone touching
his back. He opened his eyes and saw his sister, aged fifteen,
sitting on his bed; she said, Good-bye, Nadia, and vanished.
She had died at that hour, 5 a . m . (Flammarion, 436).
Mme. dUlric (the pseudonym of a distinguished writer), heard
repeated knocks on her table during the night of July 1, 1919,
about 11.30. She sat up to hear better. The rhythm was that
with which her son when a tiny boy was used to say, Maman,
Maman, then the knocking, becoming stronger, displaced two
small glass vases. She tried to persuade herself that it meant no
bad news, but that night, her son, then a sergeant of infantry,
had been killed (A. S. P., xxix, 24-29).
On November 8, 1864, in the morning, Sarah Wight heard
herself called by name from outside. Mr. Hazhatt, who was with
her, also heard it distinctly, but no one was there. The date of
her mothers death agreed with the time (Chevreul, 49).
L. V., at Bordeaux, working at his table, had the feeling that
the door had opened. He turned, and saw for a moment the form
of his uncle, G. A quarter of an hour later he had a telegram
telling him that his uncle had committed suicide. The monition
was at 9.30, the suicide at 5 a . m . The telegram reached Bordeaux
at eight oclock (A. S. P., 1897, vii, 114).
Valentine C. had in her room a photograph of her friend
Helena. One day having retired to her room after dinner, she
was studying a problem of geometry, but felt constrained to look
at the photograph. The eyelids seemed to move and the mouth
to open as if about to speak. The clock struck eight. Thinking
she must be dreaming, she rubbed her eyes and looked again.
She distinctly saw the lips move, the eyes open widely, and then
slowly close with a sigh. Much frightened, she dared look no
more, went to bed, but could not sleep. A telegram telling her of
Helenas death soon reached her. Helena, the day before her
death, had repeatedly said, Perhaps Valentine is looking at my
photograph (Flammarion, 165).
The next instance deserves note, though it is not told by the
percipient, Dr. Vogler, but by a friend who had it from him.
M. Vogler, travelling in Germany, heard the door at the foot of
the stairs open and shut. Then dragging footsteps came along
to the door of his room which opened, though there was no one
to be seen, but the steps were still heard and seemed to approach
the bed. At the same time he heard a deep sigh and recognized
the voice of his grandmother, whom he had left quite well in
Denmark. He still saw nothing, but noted the time. It was
proved that his grandmother had died at the same hour. The case
is interesting, not only because of the recognition, but by the
percipients clear dissociation of the sensorial phenomena (Flam-
marion, 72).
Mr. W. dreamt, early in the night, that he saw an old lady
with white hair but black eyebrows looking fixedly at him and
nervously fingering the ribbons of her cap. He did not recognize
her, but, still in the dream, his aunt came, and said, What, John,
dont you know your grandmother ? On waking he noted down
the fact; and soon after learned that his grandmother" had died,
far away in the Isle of Wight. She had white hair, which her
grandson, who had not seen her for a long time, did not know
(Tel. Halluc., 329).
The Rev. Mr. Wanley dreamt that he saw a friend, a professor
of mathematics in Guernsey. In the morning he told his wife
that he believed Mr. B. to be dead. The day, and probably the
hour of death, were correct.
Mrs. Wheatcroft, whose husband was a captain in the Dragoon
Guards, and had left for India, saw on the night of November
14-15, 1857, the form of her husband bending over her and trying
to speak. This occurred twice. In the morning she told her
mother, being sure that he was dead. A month later she received
official notice of his death on November 15th. She insisted that
the death must have been on the 14th, and after minute enquiry,
this was confirmed. The case is extremely striking and deserves
to be considered highly evidential, the metapsychic monition
having actually led to a change in the date of the registry of
deaths by the War Office (A. S. P., 1891, i, 51).
Mr. Williams was sleeping, his hands 6utside the coverlet, when
he was waked by the sensation that his hands were held and
pressed. He sat up and saw his young brother-in-law, aged nine
teen, whom he knew to be extremely ill. He looked at him with
affection and felt in no way frightened. The room was lit by the
rising sun. He rose and told his wife, I have seen George, he
came for a minute at sunrise. In another part of London George
expired in the arms of his father and mother, the former of whom
said, The sun rose just as our dear boy rose to the heavenly
kingdom (Tel. H a llu c 142).
Mrs. Williams (another case) heard the voice of her son cry
out, Mother, Mother ; she felt a hand on her breast and saw
the form of her son looking very ill. Mr. Williams, to whom she
told her vision, advised her to put no faith in it. Her son died
at sea of yellow fever at the same hour (Phantasms of the Living,
i, 440).
Mr. Wingfield Baker saw in a dream, on the night of March
25-26, his brother Richard Wingfield Baker. The impression
was so strong that he rose and went to see if his brother were not
really there. He felt sure that some disaster had happened, and
wrote in his note-book, Apparition, night of Thursday, March
25, 1880, R. B. W. B. God forbid! On that day his brother
was killed in the hunting-field.
This monition is one of the most reliable on record, on account
of the unforeseen nature of the event and the note taken at the
time (A. S. P., 1891, i, 45).
Mrs. Wright left her little girl, aged four and a half, playing
in the street. Crossing the yard a few minutes later, she saw the
child pass before her like a luminous shadow. She stopped, failed
to recognize the child, looking attentively at the form for half a
minute. A moment later they came to tell her that the child had
been run over and killed by a passing carriage. Although there
was no recognition, the case is interesting by the precision of the
details (Tel. H allu c268).
Dr. Woolcote, doctor on board the ship Plantagenet, going
from India to England, saw his dying mother in a dream, and by
her side, a cousin, a surgeon in the Royal Artillery, whom he
thought to be in China. The dream was so distinct that he went
to wake one of his friends. On reaching the docks, he saw his
father who was not in mourning, and thought, All is well, my
dream deceived me. Nevertheless the dream was true, his
mother was dead and his cousin had been present. The coinci
dence of time is somewhat uncertain (Tel. Halluc., 108).
Mrs. Wickham, at Malta, was anxious about the health of a
friend at Brighton. She went out to dine, but was still disquieted.
As she was undoing her hair that evening she felt the pressure
of a hand on her head and neck; and shortly after cold lips were
pressed to her cheek and she heard her friends voice saying,
Good-bye, good-bye. Nevertheless she went to sleep, and saw
her friend enter. He was very pale, kissed her, and disappeared.
She noted down the dream. Some days later she had news of
his death on the day and at the hour of her first monition, 10 a . m .
on March 13th.
Captain Calt, suddenly waking up, saw his brother, then an
officer in the Crimea (1854) looking at him affectionately. He
walked through the apparition, which then appeared behind him
with blood on the temple. Much disturbed, he went to a friends
room. Next day his father forbade him to speak of the apparition.
It took place a few hours after the death of Oliver Calt who had
been struck by a bullet in the temple in the assault on the Redan
(A. S. P., 1891, i, 166).
Mr. Bard, living at Hingston, passed by the cemetery on his
way home and saw there Mme. Frville who lived in the same
town, a rather eccentric person who interested herself in the
graves. She seemed dressed as usual, but her face was very
white. She looked fixedly at Mr. Bard, and soon disappeared
mysteriously. Mr. Bard ascertained that there was no open grave
into which she might have fallen., In point of fact, this lady, of
whose illness Mr. Bard knew nothing, was dying at that mo
ment. The vision was so clear that Mr. Bard was certain of the
identity (A. S. P., 1891, i, 171).
Mr. Jones, an English officer in Burma, while chatting with
his friends, suddenly saw a coffin and in it one of his sisters. He
stopped in the middle of his talk, and being very sceptical on
such matters, laughed at what he had seen. His sister had died
in England on that day (A . S. P., 1891, i, 173).
Signor Sebastian Fenzi, at the sea-side (Fortoula) about sixty
miles from Florence, under great disturbance of mind, saw his
brother, Senator Carlo Fenzi, whom he recognized by his large
white moustaches, walking quietly from rock to rock in spite of
the torrential rain and storm. He waved his hand and shouted
to the apparition, but it disappeared among the rocks. At this
moment a young cousin, black-bearded and quite different in ap
pearance from Carlo Fenzi, emerged from the woods, not having
passed by way of the rocks. On returning home Signor Fenzi
learned that his brother was dying. He left for Florence at
once, but his brother had already expired. Some months before
his death, Carlo Fenzi had said to his brother Sebastian, Which
ever of us dies first will come to warn the other, but I am sure
that I shall die before you ; in, three months I shall be no more.
This conversation took place in June, and Carlo Fenzi died Sep
tember 2,1881 (A. S. P., 1891, i, 174).
On December 28, 1906, at 11 p . m ., Mme. X. saw at her bedside
the form of a woman whose features and dress she could clearly
distinguish. The apparition spoke in a muffled voice, saying, I
am Helen Ram, I will come for you; we shall be together in the
other world. Helen Ram died at Hyeres, on December 28th, at
4 a . m . There was therefore a difference of twenty hours be
tween the time of death and the time of the apparition. The
details of the dress were correct. Mme. Ram had not been
ailing, and Mme. X. did not know her well (A . S. P., 1907,
xvii, 607).
General X., very highly placed in the French Army, wrote to
M. de Rochas: In 1832 I was five years old, and was sent to my
maternal grandmother, where I slept with a cousin of my own
age. We were prattling in bed, and when the light was put out
I saw the figure of my grandmother on the fathers side at the
foot of my bed. I had just left her and she was very fond of me.
She died at the very hour she appeared to me (A . S. P.,
1891, i, 260).
Mr. S. saw, in the daytime, in a corridor of his house, a kind of
mist which thickened and gradually took the form of a man
whose head and shoulders became more and more distinct. The
rest of the body seemed wrapped in a sort of gauze, like a mantle
covering the feet. The apparition was grey. The head turned
towards him with a gentle, peaceful expression and disappeared
like a jet of steam condensing. S. then remembered a friend
whom he had not seen for some weeks and had not thought of
that day. This friend had died suddenly at the same hour (Tel.
Halluc., 182).
M. A. Z., after a friendly chat on trivial matters with his young
friend, B., went home and began to read. He heard the outside
door noisily opened, followed by hurried steps clearly heard along
the road. Mr. Z. felt that there was something near him out
side the glass of the window. He heard short panting breaths
like someone getting breath before speaking. Then suddenly, like
a gunshot, a loud cry, followed by a moaning, and sobs of great
pain. His wife heard nothing, but, seeing her husbands alarm,
said, What is the matter? M. Z. replied, There is someone
outside, but it is so strange and horrible that I dare not go out.
At that very moment, but too far away for any sound to reach the
house, B. had poisoned himself with prussic acid and had fallen
with a loud cry {Tel. Halluc., 302).
Mrs. Meneer, wife of the principal of Torre School (Torquay),
dreamt one night that she saw her fathers head in a coffin at the
foot of the bed. Her father, Mr. Wellington, was in the Indian
Army, and had been taken prisoner by the Chinese, and had been
beheaded, his head being carried in triumph to their camp
{Human Personality, i, 424).
The following case, though not strictly a monition of death,
is so similar that it should be placed among these :
Dr. Bruce, of Micanopy (U. S. A.) on the night of December
27, 1883, dreamt that he saw a brawl in which a man was seriously
hurt, his throat being cut. He did not recognize the man, whose
hands were before his face, but Dr. Bruce saw his own wife by
the side of the wounded man, saying she would not leave him till
he were helped. That same night his brother-in-law had been
wounded in the course of a quarrel by a dagger-stroke through
his neck. It seems that on the same night, another sister of the
wounded man had dreamt of a man whose throat was cut, with
out, however, recognizing him (Myers, Human Personality,
i, 413).
Mme. Suzanne Bonnefoy, whom I knew as an intelligent and
large-hearted woman, relates that at Cherbourg in 1902, she
received a telegram telling her of the death of her husbands
mother, Mme. Bonnefoy, at Marseilles. Dr. Bonnefoy had then
been twenty-four hours in hospital, and when he heard' the
sad news, he said, My mother must have died about ten oclock
last evening, for when half awake in my bed here, it seemed
to me that someone kissed me; I even said aloud, Is it you,
Suzanne? Although entirely sceptical on metapsychic matters
Dr. Bonnefoy was convinced that there was some relation be
tween his very definite feeling and the death of his mother. The
exact agreement in time was verified {La Mort et son Mystre,
ii, p. 333).
Dr. Auguste Manceau, of Paris, saw in a dream the form of
an aunt who was very dear to him. She was very old but in quite
good health. The shape was not very clear, but he says no doubt
was possible, the vision was not like a picture butan image
formed by light. He sent a telegram and found she had died at
the hour of the dream ( Flammarion, loc. cit., ii, 408).
The husband of Mme. Belot, of Montpellier, was in Algeria.
One day at 4 pm . she was dozing and it seemed to her that she
saw her husband, looking pale and thin, who said, Good-bye, I
am going. The next day she learned by telegram that he had
passed away at that hour (Flammarion, loc. cit., ii, 355).
In 1893, Captain Moureau was at sea off the Antilles, and went
to his cabin about 11 p .m . Just as he was going to sleep he felt
distinctly a weight on his chest like a childs body, felt the two
arms round his neck and a kiss on his lips. He pushed the body
away and lit a match, but saw no one. He told his experience to
a friend next morning and on arriving at Gibraltar learned that
his little child, aged two, had died that night of diphtheria (A. S.
P., 1919, 71).
M. X., of Moutiers (Vende), dreamt that he went to his
parents, and saw in their room an improvised bed on trestles, with
a number of persons standing round, that he passed through
them and saw his fathers body on the mattress. He woke sob
bing and told his wife. The vision corresponded exactly with the
facts (Flammarion, 340).
M. Contamine, at Commentry, while dressing, saw in the mirror
his door open and one of his friends enter in evening dress. He
turned round, much surprised, and saw nothing. He asked the
servant who was on the stairs, but she had seen no one. This
friend had killed himself that same hour, being in evening dress
(Flammarion, loc. cit., 340).
The naval captain E. P. N. writes: On the 9th of January,
1892, sleeping at Toulon, I was waked by someone, and saw Ad
miral Peyron standing by my bed with his hands in his pockets.
He pushed his body against me and said, Good-bye, P., I come
to bid you good-bye. I got up and lit a candle but the appari
tion was no longer there ; but I had hardly begun to go to sleep
again when the same thing recurred ; only then the form became
veiled in cloud and disappeared like a vapor.
Captain N. was serving under Admiral Peyron, who was very
ill and died that night. Fleet Engineer G. had the same vision in
a dream that same night. Admiral Peyron appeared to him,
saying, My dear G., the time has come to part ; we all have to
go that way. Good-bye. The cryptesthetic character of this
double monition is not nullified by the fact that both Captain N.
and the chief engineer knew the admiral to be very ill (Flam
marion, 273).
Mme. Suzanne Ollendorff, the wife of my excellent friend, Paul
Ollendorff, relates that one morning she suddenly thought of an
aunt of hers, and said to herself, She is dead and the priest of
her parish is coming to tell me so. Paul Ollendorff, who was not
then married to Suzanne L., went to see her that day and she told
him the dream saying, If the parish priest of X. were at the door
now, I should not be surprised. Paul continued sceptical, but
during the day (he was then editor of the journal Gil Bias) he
received a visit from the priest who told him of the ladys death
by cerebral congestion (Flammarion, 273).
Mr. Leadbater says that his friend, Mr. X., in whom he has
entire confidence, had a very clear hallucination, repeated three
times the same night: he saw his fathers form by the light of a
bright fire burning in his room, first at 10.30, then again at mid
night, and once more at 1.50 a .m . He tried to touch the appari
tion but his hands met empty air, and the vision gradually dis
appeared. His father died that night, the death-spasms begin
ning at 10.30 and ending at midnight (Flammarion, 330).
Conclusions
We have now reached the end of this long list of facts. It is
decisive, for all these monitions, apparitions, and powerful sensa
tions cannot be explained by mental hallucination of the perfectly
normal persons who relate them. It would also be equally inept
to refer them to a long series of chance coincidences.
It is therefore well established that at the moment of death
some vibration takes place, moving something in nature, which
occasionally gives information of the death to those who are
sensitive. That is cryptesthesia, an unusual and supernormal
faculty peculiar to sensitives.
It generally takes an auditory or visual form, but most prob
ably the vision itself is a hallucinatory symbol. A. dies and the
notion of his death reaches B.s subconsciousness. But in order
that B. may understand, the creative power of subconscious
imagination elaborates a phantom resembling A. more or less and
surrounds the vision, which is really internal though seemingly
external, with detail which may be symbolical or veridical, just
as occurs in delirium and in dreams.
We may provisionally suppose that death being a more moving
event than the facts of daily life, it sets in motion a stronger
vibration than the latter. Let us, therefore, admit the fact of
cryptesthesia, but go no further; let us simply say: A.s death is
a reality, B., by his cryptesthetic faculty, perceives that fact and
represents it under the symbolical forms to which alone our in
telligence is open.
This involves no theory, and proposes no hypothesis; it merely
states the adaptation of B.s cryptesthesia power to the external
fact of A.s death.
It is obvious that the veridical monitions of death strongly
confirm all that has been said above on experimental cryptes
thesia. If those experiments left any doubt on the mind, the
mass of observed fact should dispel it. Human cognition is not
limited to the mechanism of the ordinary senses; there is a
cryptesthetic sensea mysterious faculty of cognition.
Let us, however, attempt a preliminary analysis. Does the will
of the dying play any part ?
If so, the thought of A., dying, would be directed to his friend,
B., to whom he has perhaps promised to appear; and this thought,
moving in space, would influence B.s thought.
The simple explanation that first occurs to everyone is that A.
has himself appeared in his astral body. This hypothesis is
difficult to sustain, for in many cases the monition is not given
by the apparition of the deceased, but by a third person who has
been present at the death.1
Sometimes details are apparent that the dying person could not
know, so that the inference seems to be that there is cognition
of a fact, whether by a symbol, or by a phantom, the phantom
itself being symbolical.
It would, therefore, seem most probable that the human soul
the intelligence of the percipientis moved by some power that
reveals the truth or a fragment of the truth; but it is very hard
to know whether this truth is announced by an intelligence that
wills to convey it, or whether it results only from vibrations set
in motion by the events.
If, instead of confining oneself to the study of instances, we
analyze them as a whole, we are often led to think that there
seems to be an intention in them, an effort to make the facts
understood, and therefore, that they present themselves under
symbolical forms. But to attribute such an intention to things
Voy. Mme. A . Sidgwick, J. S. P. R., November, 1906, 321. Case L. 1153
et Phantasms of the Liv., i, 357 et P. S. P. R., x, 261.
is perhaps an anthropomorphic mode of reasoning; as when a
peasant whose crops are perishing from drought sees the act of
a compassionate Deity in the welcome rain.
Nevertheless it is difficult to explain some collective monitions,
some premonitions, and some phenomena of haunting, without
seeing in them an effort by an exterior power to reveal a frag
ment of truth only realizable to our defective intelligence by
some representation symbolical of the fact itself.
Frequently there is actually a vague intention on the part of
A. that is perceived by B. Jeanne when dying calls on Mile. X.
and dies, saying, If it were to go and see . . . and X.
hears herself called.
Mr. Dickinson is preoccupied about his portrait while seri
ously ill, and his double visits the photographer. Mr. Noells
sister, when dying, calls vehemently on her brother. Jim had
promised to visit Mrs. Bishop at his death. The Rev. Field hears
his mother call, Harry, Harry, from her death-bed. Mr. D.s
workman is concerned to justify his conduct.
On the other hand, there are very many cases in which the
phantom (cryptesthetic symbol) has appeared to uninterested
persons. Mrs. Green was not interested in the Australian niece
whom she had never seen. When the Duke of Orleans died he
was certainly not thinking of Mme. Bremon; nor Robespierre of
Mme. X. When M. Halle saw the cabmans little girl fall from
the window the child certainly did not wish to communicate with
him, any more than Mr. Phibbs dog with his master.
We are wandering in the darkness, and it seems wise to reserve
judgment. Let us say only that in most cases the monition does
not seem to be intentional on the part of A., and that the notion
of A.s death reaches B. because it is a reality; his cryptesthesia
perceiving that reality.
To decline to admit the intention of the dying and the in
tervention of the astral body is not to maim the facts; it is
only a refusal to go beyond them. It is quite possible that some
day, when metapsychics is more advanced, we may come to
admit telepathy from the dying to the living; no one can foresee
what future science may reveal to our grandchildren, but as yet
no one is justified in making gratuitous assumptions or frail
theories.
Let us remain within the boundary of indisputable facts
that the death of a human being is often known to other human
beings by means outside the action of the normal senses; that
this monition of death is shown by a great variety of symbolism,
and that monitions are nearly always entirely subjective, al
though in exceptional cases they seem really to have objective
reality.
Such are the inferences that flow from monitions of death;
but, as Geley, Bozzano, and Lodge rightly point out, explana
tions that cover a series of facts are insufficient, if they apply to
that series only. All must be coherent. No theory can be built
on monitions of death, or on cryptesthesia, or on ectoplasmic
forms, each taken by itself. Any satisfactory theory must be
applicable to all the facts, at least in some degree. Any general
conclusion must therefore be deferred till all the facts have been
examined.
IV. COLLECTIVE MONITIONS
Collective monitions seldom take place.
Before studying these we shall show that some non-collective
monitions perceived by one person only have occurred under
conditions such that if there had been any external physical
phenomenon it must have been perceived by others present. Such
monitions are therefore indisputably subjective. And as it is
most important that the exact meaning of the terms objective
and subjective in metapsychic science should be clearly under
stood, I return to this matter.
The light of a rocket and the sound of a gunshot are objective;.
they can be mechanically recorded.
That a monition should be produced at all there must neces
sarily be some vibration of surrounding forces, and some ex
terior fact to produce it. But this objective phenomenon that
starts sensation in a sensitive is not objective in the same way
as the vibration of the air that produces sound, or that of the
ether that produces light; it is a special kind of objectivity whose
nature is quite unknown, and it has the peculiar property of
acting only on certain individuals and not on any physical
apparatus.
When Mrs. Thompson, taking my sons watch, says, Three
generations mingled, there is doubtless some vibration that has
given her this knowledge, but no other person could have per
ceived it.
The sensibility of individuals to cryptesthesia may vary as
1:100,000, whereas their sensibilities to sounds, colours, lights,
and odours may be as 10,000 to 10,001.
This is not all. When a vision appears to B., and he thinks
he sees A., it is not proved that the form A. that B. thinks he
sees is A., in the ordinary meaning of seeing. All we can say is
that he has the notion of A., and that he interprets this ob
jectively as A. Something that calls up A. in his mind reaches
him; but what is it precisely? The transformation of the vague
notion of A. into a visual image of A. is an entirely subjective
phenomenon.
There is no hypothesis here; it is mere fact. In some well-
authenticated cases B. has been surrounded by persons who see
nothing where B. sees something distinctly. Therefore B.s per
ception has been subjective in the ordinary sense of the word.
I give below some instances which should have been collective
if the phenomenon had not been entirely subjective.
Mrs. Taunton at a concert saw the apparition of her Uncle
W. between her and the orchestra. She did not know of his
illness, but he seemed to be lying in bed and calling her as if
dying. The apparition was not vaporous, but yet she could see
the orchestra through it. Her husband asked her why she was
fascinated in that way. The vision disappeared, and after the
concert Mrs. T. narrated what she had seen. Mr. W. died at
the exact hour of the vision.
Mrs. Purton hears a terrible cry and anguished moanings that
filled the house. She wakes up, terrified, goes over the whole
house, but finds all quiet and everyone sleeping. In the morning
she asks if anyone has heard an unusual noise, but no one has.
A few days later comes the news of the drowning of her son
Frank coming from Australia in the Royal Charter, lost with all
passengers at the hour of the monition.
Mr. King, of the Royal Military College, returning home with
his friends through the country at 10 . ., says suddenly, Look
p m
there, look there, pointing to a part of the wood. His friend

M. could see nothing. King fell to the ground groaning and
got up as if he were intoxicated. Then he cried out, Where
are they carrying her? I say they are carrying her. The next
morning he could remember nothing of all this; but he found
that an old lady of whom he was very fond had died of heart
disease at 10 . . precisely {Tel. Halluc., 247).
p m
Bertha Hurly frequently went to visit Mrs. Evans, an old

woman who was ill but in no immediate danger. One evening
at table she saw a form dressed like Mrs. Evans cross the room
and disappear. "I said, Who is that? and my mother replied,
What is the matter with you? I said, That woman who went
from one door to the other was Mrs. Evans/ They all laughed
at me. At that hour Mrs. Evans was in delirium and died the
next morning at eight oclock.
Mr. B., taking tea with his son and his sons wife, said sud
denly, Who is looking in at the window? No one could have
got up to that particular window, but Mr. B. insisted that he
had seen the'face of a pale woman with dark hair. He was
quieted only when they had gone round the house and found
no one. The time was 5:45 . ., and Mrs. B.s mother died in
p m
Guernsey at that same hour {Tel. Halluc., 180).

Mr. Mouat, on reaching his office, saw an employee speaking
to the porter and also the Rev. Mr. H. standing at the door.
The clergyman, who worked at the same office, did not usually
arrive so early. Another clerk coming down the stairs also saw
Mr. H., and went out without getting any answer from him to a
jesting remark. Mr. Mouat, being left alone with Mr. H., looked
straight at him, was surprised at his melancholy expression, and
remarked that he was wearing no cravat. What is the matter ?
he said, You seem troubled. H. made no reply but continued
to look steadily. At this moment the clerk returned, but saw
nothing, and H. disappeared. On the one hand it is averred
that neither the clerk nor the porter saw H., and on the other,
that H. was out of London on that day (Tel. Halluc., 358).
This case is more perplexing than the others, for two persons
out of four saw Mr. H. and spoke to him, while two others saw
nothing. The materialization (to adopt this word provisionally)
only seemed to be such to two persons. It was therefore not an
objective fact, or rather it belonged to both categories.
(a) Collective Monitions, Non-simultaneous and Non-identical
The metaphor of a human race devoid of the sense of smell
will enable us to understand somewhat better the significance of
these mysterious phenomena.
Let us suppose that a gust of wind brings a whiff of violets to
twenty of these persons in a room. None of them will perceive
anything. But if one among them has the sense of smell for a
few seconds, he will get the notion of violets.
If now the same odoriferous breeze brings the same scent to
another exceptionally sensitive person near by, that person will
also have the notion of violets, alone among others there present.
This would be a collective but non-simultaneous monition; and
we may compare individuals endowed with permanent or transient
cryptesthesia to persons endowed with the sense of smell among
those devoid of it.
Mrs. Hunter, awake, and in the daytime, sees a large coffin on
the bed, and an old woman, tall and stout, at the foot of the bed,
looking at the coffin. The vision was so clear that she could
describe the clothing.
The figure vanished and Mrs. Hunter related the fact to those
who visited her. That evening the governess came in very
frightened, saying that she had seen an old woman in the sitting-
room who seemed to dissolve as she looked at her; and described
the dress just as Mrs. Hunter had seen it. Mrs. Hunters little
girl of five, pointing at a part of the room where her nurse saw
nothing, cried out, Go away, go away! Naughty ugly old
woman (Bozzano, A. S. P., 1907, xvii, 631).
The Rev. Mr. Jupp, director of an orphanage, waking in the
middle of the night, saw a light in the dormitory. A small
luminous cloud floated over the bed of one of the children. He
sat up and looked at his watch, it was 12.55, and was about to
get up to touch this strange light, when he felt rather than
heard the injunction, Remain in bed, you will suffer no hurt.
He went to sleep again. In the morning the child over whose
bed the light had been, said to him, My mother came to me last
night; did you see her? The child was four years old; his
mother had been dead six months.
Three brothers Swithinbank, though living apart from each
other, had the same dream on the same night, that their mother was
dying; she not being ill at the time (Phantasms of the Living,
ii, 382).
Miss Beale sees a man in a flowing dressing-gown enter her
room; and the same night, C., in an adjoining room, also sees
an apparition, which he recognized.
Mrs. Treloar, entering her room at 8 . ., sees on the further
p m
side of the bed a womans figure, very pale and with an expres
sion of suffering, wearing a hat and light cloak. The lamp
light on the face showed even the freckles on the nose. Mrs. T.
recognized her sister who gradually disappeared. Just then Mrs.
T.s little niece ran in, saying, I have seen Aunt Annie, I have
seen Aunt Annie. This apparition does not coincide with the
hour of death, but with an attack of acute diphtheria that carried
her off in twenty-four hours {Tel. Halluc., 290).
Popular superstitions and beliefs or religious legends carry
little or no weight with me ; but perhaps they should not all be dis
missed without consideration. The extraordinary facts related
in the lives of the saints are neither complete falsehoods nor
absolute errors, as, for instance, levitations. There is probably
some amount of truth imbedded in all such tales. But it is
better to try new experiments and make fresh observations than
to search for whatever small amount of truth these legends may
contain or than to deny them altogether.
Many popular superstitions exist relative to movements and
noises relating to deaths. There are many tales resembling
monitions, but the events chronicledbreakage of mirrors, fall
ing of pictures, blows on the doors, etc., presaging death or
disasterare rarely such as to carry recognition. I will merely
mention a few of these monitions; for even though there be no
recognition, one can, and even ought, to give weight to the
coincidences.
M. Jaff, at Berlin, in bed about midnight, but perfectly awake,
hears the ticking of the death-watch. He got up, and heard
the raps follow him to different parts of the room. The next
morning his wife said to him, I saw your mother in a dreani
with a handkerchief tied under her chin; her mouth was much
contorted. Soon after, M. Jaff heard of his mothers death,
accompanied by such strong contortions of the face that it became
necessary to tie up the jaw by a handkerchief passing round the
chin.
M. Lemonnier, chemist at Rennes, had two intimate friends,
M. Escolan and M. Nivot, a surgeon-dentist. M. Escolan, who
was in feeble health, was attacked by acute tuberculosis and was
taken to the hospital. One morning in September, 1891, at 5.45
. ., M. Lemonnier was awaked by violent blows on the shut
a m
ters of his pharmacy. He writes: I thought, Who can it be
who knocks like this instead of using the night-bell ? for he was
drumming on the shutters for one or two minutes. I dressed in
haste and went to open. There were only a few women sweeping
in the street, who said they had seen no one.
About an hour later his friend M. Nivot came at seven oclock,
who said, A singular thing has occurred; at 5.45 I was awakened
by knocking on the door of my room, and I called out, Who is
there? Dont knock so hard, I am not deaf. The noise con
tinued, I opened the door. There was no one, and the house
was asleep; the porter also said that no one had entered the
house.
M. Lemonnier and M. Nivot then thought that their friend
had died in the hospital. They went there and found that he
had passed away at 5.45 exactly.
Miss Matthews woke in the middle of the night and saw, to
her great alarm, a young girl, Suzanne, a housemaid like herself,
who had left the house some months previously. She was in
night-attire, came straight to my bed, lifted the clothes, and lay
down by my side. I felt a cold shiver, and I think I fainted.
When I came to myself the apparition had gone; but I am sure
it was no dream. The same night the son of Mr. Matthews
who lived with his mother felt a great terror. He looked, but
could see nothing, hid his head under the bedclothes and could
not sleep. Suzanne, who was in hospital for liver trouble that
did not seem very serious, died that night (Tel. Halluc., 350).
Mrs. Beilby relates that she and her husband heard one day
the voice of one of their young friends calling, Johnny, Johnny.
This young friend, Miss Snell, who was living in their house in
Victoria (Australia) had gone for a ride, and had met with a
serious accident about seven miles away. She had called out
to Johnny for help, the boy who usually rode with her. The
impression was so clear that Mr. and Mrs. Beilby called the
servants ( Tel. Halluc., 363).
The Rev. Mr. Tweedale, of the Astronomical Society of Lon
don, on January 10, 1879, saw his grandmother in the middle of
the night. The apparition lasted several seconds. She was wear
ing a cap of antiquated make. His father, Mr. Tweedale, also
saw the same apparition at his bedside. The sister of Mr. Twee
dale senior, eighteen miles away, saw the same apparition at 2
A.M., the hour being exactly noted. The vision of the Rev. Mr.
Tweedale w a s at 2.10 a . m . The grandmother had died at 12.15
(A. S. P., 1906, 610).
During the night in which X., a cousin of my children, poi
soned himself with strychnine, my son George, aged twenty, and
my daughter Louise, aged eighteen, told their impressions at
breakfast. Said George, I had a dismal dream. I dreamed that
one of my friends had died. I hope it is not X. or Y. But it
cant be either. I, too, said Louise, dreamed that our cousin
P. A. was dead, and that I said to my brother Jacques, He cannot
possibly be dead, you went with him to the opera. Now P. A.
holds the same degree of relationship to my children as does
X .; and X. had been to the theatre with Jacques on the previous
evening.
Mrs. Young, taking tea with her husband and children, heard
a violent noise on the floor above. She also seemed to feel a
strong wind. Her husband heard and felt nothing. Far away,
Mrs. Youngs brother, Captain Adams, then at sea, heard him
self called, John, John, and knew his fathers voice. He went
on deck, but no one had called him. At that time Mr. Adams,
their father, perished in a shipwreck (Phantasms of the Living,
ii, 632).
(b) Simultaneous and Collective Monitions
Monitions of this group are of fundamental importance; first,
because they strongly confirm the hypothesis of cryptesthesia, and
secondly because they seem to show that in certain cases the
monition assumes a normal objectivity, like a real materialization.
The following is an old story which may be considered exact
in the main, despite the deformations that time often brings when
the full details are not written down:
In the island of Cape Breton (Nova Scotia) Colonel Wynyard
and Sir John Sherbrooke were dining in barracks, when a form,
simply dressed, passed before them. God bless my soul, said
Sherbrooke, who is that? It is my father, I am sure he is
dead, Colonel Wynyard replied. The two officers verified that
no one could have come in, and the occurrence was noted down
in the regimental archives. Shortly after news came that Colonel
Wynyards father had been killed in the hunting-field.
Sir John Sherbrooke had never seen John Wynyard, but one
day in London he met a man who strongly resembled him and
was often mistaken for him. Sherbrooke said, That is the man
I saw {Tel. Halluc., 383).
Mrs. E. Wickham went daily to the hospital in Malta to visit
an officer, Mr. B., wounded at Tel-el-Kebir. The wound became
gangrenous and death was imminent; though not being expected
that night, Mrs. Wickham consented to go home. About 3 . . a m
her young son, aged nine, called her, crying out, Mother, mother,
here is Mr. B. Mrs. Wickham writes: I got up in a hurry;
the form of Mr. B. was floating in the room about six inches
above the floor, and disappeared through the window, smiling
at me. He was in night-attire, but the gangrened foot seemed
to me like the other; both my boy and I remarked this. Half an
hour later they came to tell me that B. had died (Phantasms
of the living; quoted by Flammarion). This case is one of the
most remarkable on record.
Several years ago, Mme. de Barreau, a lady of high character
and serene disposition, told me a similar fact witnessed by her
self. I unfortunately did not note it down at the time, but the
story struck me so powerfully that the main facts can be relied on.
Mme. de Barreau was tending a girl friend who was very ill.
The house was in the country and somewhat lonely, facing a
meadow through which there ran a brook bordered by willows.
The girl was dying and her mother and a professional nurse were
with her. The sick-room was on the ground floor, that of Mme.
de Barreau on the first story. One night, after watching some
time, Mme. de Barreau and the nurse went upstairs to take some
rest, and some time later both of them, looking out of the window,
saw a white form float among the trees and vanish into the dark
ness. Just then the death took place.
Mrs. Pearson and her sister, Mrs. Coppinger, were watching
at the bedside of their dying aunt, Mrs. Harriet. Suddenly Mrs.
Coppinger said, Look, Emma, there is Aunt Anna. The two
sisters than saw a little old woman wearing a shawl and an old-
fashioned hat entering the sick-room. This Aunt Anna was a
deceased sister; before her death Mrs. Harriet said that she had
seen this sister who came to call her (Bozzano, A. S. P 1906,
164).
Commander Aylesbury, being then a boy of thirteen, narrowly
escaped drowning and in his distress called loudly on his mother.
On the same day at a distance of some 6,000 miles (Batavia to
London) his mother and three sisters were working in their
room. All heard a faint cry, Mother! The girls said, Did
you hear ? Some one cried Mother! The voice called twice
more, quickly and as if in distress. They got up and ran out
into the street. All was quiet and the weather very calm. Mrs.
Aylesbury noted the date in her diary. The time corresponded,
so far as can be judged after thirty years and in the absence of
other written confirmation {Tel. Halluc., 365).
In October, 1916, Mme. R., of Montluôn, heard a cry of dis
tress, Mother. She hurried to her boys room and found that
he also had been startled by the same cry very clearly heard.
Two days later they learned that another son had been wounded
that night (Unpublished, M. Mialaret).
Mrs. P., before going to bed, saw a man in a naval uniform,
with his elbow on the foot-rail of the bed, looking at her hus
band who was sleeping. Mrs. P. woke her husband, who saw
the apparition, and cried out in astonishment, Sir, what are you
doing here? The form stood up and said, Willy, Willy, in
an imperious voice. This was Mr. P.s Christian name. He got
up to eject the stranger, but the form moved impassively across
the room, throwing a shadow on the wall (there being light in
the room), and disappeared through the partition. The door was
bolted. Mr. P. recognized his father who had been, a naval officer
in his youth, whom Mrs. P. did not know. Mr. P. died shortly
after (Bozzano, A. S. P., 1909, xix, 326).
Mrs. Bettany dreamt that one of her neighbors, Mrs. J., whom
she knew by name only, and who was not ill, had died. The
dream was so clear that she sent next morning to enquire for
Mrs. J., and found that she had really died during the night.
One of Mrs. Bettanys servants also had a terrible dream that
night in which some one told her that Mrs. J. was dead.
The following case is interesting from several points of view.
M. Sully-Prudhomme and I were able to gather all the authenticat
ing documents. Captain Mangot, commanding the three-master
Jacques Gabriel, outward bound, Bordeaux to Mauritius, notes
in the ships log, July 17, 1852, that he and his second officer,
M. Penaud, walking on the poop, heard a womans voice. The
steersman also heard it. He says, On arriving at Mauritius
we heard of the death of M. Penauds wife, who died on the same
day and hour at which the voice was heard. M. Penaud told me
that he had had a presentiment of misfortune, adding that each
time he had lost one of his family a similar warning had oc
curred. Later on the captain added that the cry he had heard
was heart-rending, and the fact impressed him so much that he
often spoke of it.
The ship left Bordeaux on April 16th, and the death of Mme.
Penaud took place, not on the 17th of July, but on the 16th of
June, according to the register of deaths at Paimbceuf. There is,
therefore, a manifest error in the statement of dates in the log
book. The voice was not heard on the day of the death, but a
month later. Still, the fact remains that a womans voice, strong
and clear, was heard by three persons on a ship at sea.
Mr. Falkinburg, returning home at 7 p . m ., was playing with
his little boy aged five, when suddenly the child exclaimed, Papa,
here is grandpapa. Mr. Falkinburg came and saw the very
lifelike figure of his father. Mrs. Falkinburg, however, could
see nothing, and tried to persuade her husband that it must be an
illusion. At ten oclock, the child, then in his bed, called again,
Papa, grandpapa is here. Mr. Falkinburg had died at 7.14
exactly.
This monition though collective cannot be objective, since it
was invisible to the third person present. It is open to question
whether collective monitions seen by several persons have really
the objectivity that they would seem to have, using the word
objectivity in its usual sense.
Mme. Focke at Dsseldorf, was taking tea with her daughters,
when she heard a cry, Mother, Mother! Her daughters and
Mme. Haskel, who was with her, heard the same cry, and the
voice was recognized as that of Anna Focke, another daughter.
They went to the window but could see no one. Anna Focke
had embarked for the Indies on a Dutch boat which was lost
that night with all hands (Phantasms of the Living).
Professor Knes and Dr. Obersteiner, well-known physicians of
Vienna, were together at the house of the latter, and heard a
knock at the door. They cried, Come in, but no one entered.
A few moments later they heard the door of the antechamber
open, and some footsteps, light, but distinct. Obersteiner opened
the door but saw no one. A third time they heard the further
door opening, the light footsteps and the knock on their door,
and Dr. Obersteiner exclaimed, This is really too much! At
that time Mme. S., the sick lady whom they were going to see in
consultation, was dying. She had died when they reached the
house (A . S. P., 1891, i, 162).
Mme. B., at the bedside of her dying mother, saw the phantom
of her godmother, an old governess long since dead, sitting by the
fire in her mothers usual place. She gave a cry, her sister came,
she and three other persons saw the phantom (Bozzano, A. S. P
1906, 166).
One night, Mrs. L., sleeping at her husbands side, heard
clearly the voice of their son. Both woke up completely. The
voice said, As I cannot come home to England, mother, I am
come to see you. They took note of the incident and some
days later learned of their sons death {Tel. Halluc., 364).
Maria Strieffert, schoolmistress, heard distinctly the word
Fraulein. Two pupils with her also heard it. She knew it
for the voice of a person who had behaved badly to her. Having
noted the time, it was verified that this person had died at that
moment. The case is not very evidential (Flammarion, 323).
Mme. Telechoff was in her sitting-room in Petersburg with
her five children and her dog Moustache. The dog suddenly be
gan to bark, and all present then saw a small boy about six years
old, dressed in a shirt, whom they recognized as the child of the
milkwoman. They knew this child to be ill. The apparition left
the stove, passed over the heads of the persons present, and dis
appeared by the open window after lasting about fifteen seconds.
The dog followed its movements, barking all the while. The
child died at the same hour (A. S. P., 1905, xv, 439).
Philip Weld, a boy of fifteen, was accidentally drowned on
April 16, 1845. Mr. Cox, the master of his school, went to the
boys father to give the sad news personally; but as soon as he
entered, Mr. Weld said, You need not tell me, I know that
Philip is dead. My daughter Catherine and I saw him on the
road, and by him a young man dressed in black. I could see,
through their forms, a peasant working in the fields. I have
said nothing about it so as not to alarm my wife {Tel. Halluc.,
376).
Mme. Obalecheff, at Odessa, was lying in bed with her infant;
her servant Claudine was sleeping on a mattress beside her on
the floor. Raising her eyes she saw her father-in-law slowly
enter, wearing bedroom slippers and a plaid pattern dressing-
gown that Mme. Obalecheff had never seen. He stepped over
the feet of the servant and sat down in an armchair. The clock
struck eleven. Being quite sure that I was looking at my
father-in-law, I said to the servant, Look, Claudine, I do not
know him. Claudine, trembling with fright, said, I see Nicolas
Nilovitch (my father-in-laws name). He then got up, again
stepped over the servants feet, and vanished. The lady went
to call her husband; they went through the flat but found no one.
Mr. Nilovitch died at Yver at that time (Flammarion, 194).
Mrs. Paget was at prayers with her daughters one evening
about 11 . . when the three of them heard the heavy steps of
p m
a man in the passage. The steps stopped at the end of the

corridor where there was a gas-jet, and then went away. Mrs.
Paget opened the door, and said, He has not put out the gas;
how his step resembled that of poor Arthur! This Arthur was
an old and faithful servant whom Mrs. Paget had sent to Ventnor
for a rest. She knew him to be ill, but thought him in no im
mediate danger. Before hearing the steps, Mrs. Paget had re
marked, Since poor Arthur has left us no one has put out the
gas punctually. The incident was noted in a diary, and it was
proved that no one had entered the passage. Arthur died at
Ventnor at the precise time, carefully verified. Just prior to
death he asked the time, and one witness affirms that he said,
It is time to put out the gas ; but this is not perfectly certain.
Mme. Weyer and her husband both heard one night three dis
tinct sobs, like those of a dying person. He got up, lit a candle, and
sought for the cause of the sound. They went to bed again and the
sobbing was repeated. The time was noted as 10.30. There was
no recognition, but Mme. Weyers brother died at the same hour.
Mrs. Elgee, staying in Cairo, slept in a large room of the
hotel, having carefully barricaded her door. One night she
woke suddenly, as if she had been called, and saw the form of
an old friend whom she knew to be in England. How did you
come here? she asked in astonishment. The form was so dis
tinct that she could see all details of the dress down to three
onyx shirt-studs. He came forward and pointed to Mrs. Dennys,
who was sleeping in the same room. She woke up and looked
at the apparition in great terror. The form then vanished. Mrs.
Dennys was able to describe the vision exactly, but did not recog
nize it. The person seen by both ladies with all the appearance
of life was a Mr. X., who was neither ill nor in danger. Mrs.
Elgee met him four years later.
Mrs. Lett entered one of the rooms of her fathers house, ac
companied by a young girl, Miss Berthon. The gas was alight,
and both saw the figure of Mrs. Letts father, Captain Towns,
reflected on the polished surface of a wardrobe. It looked like a
life-size portrait. The face was pale and thin, and he seemed
to be wearing the grey flannel jacket in which he used habitually
to sleep. There was no portrait on the walls. While they con
tinued to look stupefied at this image, another daughter of Cap
tain Towns entered and said, Why, good God, it is father!
A housemaid also came and said, It is the master. Graham,
the captains orderly, came, and said, Lord save us, Mrs. Lett,
it is the captain! They called the steward and Mrs. Crane, and
both said that they saw the captain. Then Mrs. Towns, the
captains widow, was called, who, seeing the apparition, put out
her hand to touch it; as she passed her hand over the panel the
image gradually disappeared.
Dr. Isnard, the son of the well-known military surgeon, who
was professor at the Val-de-Grace, while still a medical student,
had a vision of a phantom, perceived also by his sister and a
friend at the same time. His mother, Mme. Isnard, being then a
widow, was seriously ill and had been bedridden for four months
in her house in the Rue Jacob at Paris, in 1878. Her bedroom
wais next to the dining-room. Suddenly the door into the passage
opened wide. A gust of wind was felt though all the windows
were shut. In the doorway there appeared the shade of a woman
of small stature, bent, with bowed head and arms crossed on her
breast. She seemed to be wearing a grey and dusty veil. She
advanced gently into the room, gliding over the floor and her
face could not be seen. She passed close to us, turned by the
door and disappeared in the darkness of the passage-way. Mile.
Isnard and M. Menou Cornuet saw exactly the same phantom.
Mme. Isnard died a few days later (A. S. P., 1891, 193-203).
The very circumstantial evidence given by the three witnesses,
none of them at all superstitious, makes it clear that no illusion
was possible. This is one of the best cases of collective vision;
and its full force can scarcely be realized without reading the
whole evidence and the judicious notes that Dariex has added
upon them.
To establish the objectivity of a phantom perhaps the best
proof, apart from photography, would be the effect on animals.
On this there are valuable evidences, collected with much care
by Bozzano, who has brought together sixty-nine cases, mostly
gathered from the Proceedings and Journals of the S. P. R.
After eliminating the stories of phantasmal animals and haunted
localities (a very doubtful matter pertaining to haunted houses),
there remain thirty-five cases of cryptesthetic perceptions by
animals, though the evidential weight to be attached to them is
not very great.1
Mme. T., visiting M. and Mme. Yver, was conversing with
them on the subject of one of Mme. T.s relations who had com
mitted suicide. A little terrier at Mme. T.s feet began to whine
and tried to rush to the door; his hair stood up and he tried to
escape from his masters hands as if to attack some one. Mme.
T., but only she, saw a phantom before the door which she al
leged that she recognized as the form of the suicide.
Miss H. E. S., aged eighteen, having risen one summer morning
at five oclock, was lighting the fire to prepare tea, when a big dog
with her began to growl and look towards the door. Miss S. then
saw a tall, dark figure with shining eyes, that soon disappeared.
Miss K. was petting her kitten on her knees when the animal
suddenly showed disquiet, hissed, arched its back, giving all the
signs of terror. Miss K. then saw in a chair near her an old
hag, ugly and wrinkled, looking maliciously at her. The cat
rushed against the door, and Miss K., terrified, called for help.
Her mother came, but die phantom had vanished. It had been
visible to Miss K. for about five minutes. As soon as the door
was opened the cat had fled through. It seems that formerly
an old woman had hanged herself in that room.
lTo these facts of telekinesis should be added some that may be considered
as monitions. Professor Bozzano has published a most interesting article,
D e i fe n o m e n i d i te le k in a sia in rap p o rto con e v e n ti d i M o rte (L u ce e O m bra,
1922, 3 7 s ; 1922, 13). Twenty-five cases are reported of which some are very
striking. Myers has mentioned some of these in his H u m an P erso n a lity . They
resemble some cases on which Flammarion has dwelt apparitions of the dead
to the dying. These monitory and premonitory telekineses and hallucinations
should be noted. They do not simplify the problems, but demonstrate once
more the mysteries that surround our psychological and physiological life.
(Second French edition.)
If it is difficult to admit that collective hallucinations, perceived
in common by several persons, are purely objective, it is much
more difficult to admit this when animals show perception of an
external reality of some kind or other. As Bozzano well says,
the signs of fear or anger shown by cats and dogs do not prove
that they see the same phantom that is seen by human beings.
All the same, they do see something, and this unusual something
frightens them.
It is not unlikely that if in such cases a photograph could be
taken there might be an image on the plate. This proof would
be much more evidential for the objectivity of the phenomenon
than the terror of a dog, cat, or horse, which is difficult to verify,
still more difficult to analyze, and almost impossible to interpret.
Conclusions
It cannot be supposed that these forms, noises, and phantoms
that several persons can see have no mechanical objectivity; and
yet rigid and unquestionable proof is lacking. As in all the
sciences that depend on observation, the accuracy of the observa
tions is open to question.
Given the strange nature of the phenomena and the conse
quent need for rigorous demonstration, if we had to depend
solely upon collective hallucinations to determine the reality of
materialized phantoms we could not venture on a conclusion.
But the experiments on materializations are so evidential that
they reinforce the observations. On the basis of experimental
fact given by materializations (to be studied in detail later on),
it may be positively asserted that some collective hallucinations
are objective phenomena in the ordinary sense of the word.
Observational methods are not as precise as experimental
methods. Cameras, microphones, balances, and galvanometers
are not available. The only proof that can be given of a true
materialization with mechanical and visible reality, is that the
phenomenon has been perceived at the same time and with the
same details by several persons. It is highly improbable that
two persons should have the same hallucination at the same
moment, their good faith and intellectual honesty being admitted,
and in the absence of any external suggestion.
A photograph would, of course, carry scientific certainty; but
when two reasonable and normal persons describe the same form,
exclaim at the same moment, and utter their impressions even
while the apparition is still there it would be absurd to suppose
an identical wholly subjective hallucination.
When Mr. Weld and his daughter both see Philip Weld walk
ing on the road it is difficult to suppose that no phantom was
there. Mr. and Mrs. Beilby both hear Miss Snell call Johnny,
Johnny, and the servants also hear the same voice; it is almost
self-evident that there were sonorous vibrations of the air that
could have been recorded by a phonograph. When Mrs. Ayles
bury and her three daughters hear the cry, Mother, Mother!
how can this be understood unless the air really conveyed those
sounds? The two sons see the form of their father in their
cabin, and both their accounts tally, even though at second-hand.
How can this concurrent testimony be explained unless there
were some single objectification?
These collective hallucinations are often monitory, and might
be so classified. But certain cases show no lucidity in the per
cipients, and no recognition; it is just a phantom that some
persons have seen and described without connecting it with any
external event. The meaning, if any, has not been understood.
Such occurrences can hardly be called monitions; they convey
no warning and involve no recognition. Such collective visions
belong rather to the chapter on the uncertain and imperfectly
studied phenomena of haunted houses.
They constitute a transitional class between metapsychic sub
jectivity and objectivity.
Collective hallucinations confirm what has already been so
often reiteratedthat there is a special sensibility perhaps com
mon to all men but certainly existing in some individuals, which
conveys notions by other means than the normal senses.
But for this sensibility to come into play there must necessarily
be some external radiation; some power hidden in things or in
the human soul which finds out the percipient and sets some
tracts of his subconsciousness in motion.
We can state nothing as yet either on the nature of such
forces or on the modes of the sensibility by which they act, and
therefore we must abstain from theorizing.
Nor does this greatly matter! We have no warrant to deny
a phenomenon because we do not know its laws. If that were
the case we should have to close all scientific books.
CHAPTER VII
P remonitions
1. On Premonitions in General
We now approach the thorny problem of premonitory crypt-
esthesia. We may be just able to conceive of extremely piercing
sight, or super-acuity of hearing, a sensitiveness to vibrations
hidden in things, or the influence of one brain on another, but
what are we to say on a knowledge of what is yet to come?
Nevertheless, it seems to me that there are numerous and indis
putable cases of lucidity that involve a knowledge of future events.
Bozzano, who has published an excellent book on premonitions,
says, with good reason, that among all the phenomena of lucidity,
premonition is the one that has been most effectively proved.
If the long-continued belief of men in all lands and in all times
had any scientific value, divination of the future might be reck
oned as one of the most positive facts in metapsychics.
But we can definitely affirm the reality of premonitions, not
because all ancient writers, whether credulous or not, believed in
it, but because many testimonies to it have been obtained in our
own day. Oracles were given by the augurs, the sibyls, and the
priestesses of Cumae and Delphi; Socrates had a daemon who
warned him of dangers by a voice that he distinctly heard. Cicero
has written a whole book on divination, but does not discuss
whether it exists or not; he descants on its advantages and errors,
and he seems to conclude on a fatalistic note, saying it is better
to be ignorant of coming evils: ignoratio futurorum malorum
utiliorquam scientia est.
We shall not discuss whether a knowledge of the future is or
is not desirable, but shall only examine whether it is possible.
At the outset it may be shown that prevision of the future is
not so absurd as to warrant rejection a priori.
Let us imagine a man on a high mountain with a first-rate astro
344
PREMONITIONS 345
nomical telescope which shows every detail on the plains. He sees
a railway, and at the exit of a tunnel some villains placing a huge
stone on the rails. It is 10 . ., and the train is due there at
a m
noon. He knows that B. will travel first class in that train,

and he sees the train in the station, and B. entering a first-class
carriage in the forepart of the train. He foresees the accident
as a result of his momentary vision, and notes down, In two
hours B. will be in a terrible railway accident. Suppose the
means whereby this knowledge came to him is then effaced from
his memory; he will then have a premonition of the future with
out knowing how he came to have it.
If we knew the totality of things in the present we should
know the totality of things to come. Our ignorance of the future
is the result of our ignorance of the present.
Laplace, in his Analytical Essay on Probabilities, has said this
in precise terms: An intelligence knowing all the forces of
Nature and the respective positions of all beings in it, having also
the power of analyzing all the data, would comprehend under one
formula the movements of vast masses and of the smallest atoms.
Nothing would be uncertain, and the future would be as open to
it as the present.
Every future event of whatever kind is the consequence, perhaps
the inevitable consequence, of the actual state of things. The
present is pregnant of the future, for the future is dependent upon
the present. Now, cryptesthesia gives cognitions of realities, even
of far-distant realities. We are subconsciously moved by com
plex vibrations that bring to us complex notions to which our
normal psychological life is closed; so that the subconscious knowl
edge of the present may permit of a rapid perception of its con
sequences; that is, of things to come.
There is a curious, though very rare, medical fact which enables
us to form an idea of what a premonition may be. A photograph
taken of a person suffering from a slight attack of fever may
show signs of a rash or eruption on the face quite invisible to
ordinary sight. The eruption may then be foreseen.
These are but analogies, and scarcely lessen the enormous dif
ficulties of our inability to comprehend the facts. Whatever
sketchy theories we may make to explain premonition, they will
always be fragile and imperfect; and I shall not dwell on this
mystery but shall content myself with showing that premonition
is an existing fact. That is all that present science can do.
To permit of our speaking of premonition in the metapsychic
sense of the word, three conditions must prevail:
(1) The fact announced must be absolutely independent of the
person to whom the premonition has come.
For instance, many cases are known in which A., in a somnam
bulistic state, announces that he will have some illness, say a syn
cope, after ten days, a month, or even a year. This is not a
metapsychic premonition, for A/s subconsciousness is fully awake,
and is quite able to act on the internal organs and so -to bring
about the crisis at the predicted time. Such cases belong to hyp
notic auto-suggestion.
(2) The announcement must be such that it cannot be ascribed
to chance nor to sagacity.
The range of the latter is difficult to determine. An acute mind
in possession of the exact facts can to some degree foresee the
future event. In an academical election, for instance, he may say,
X. will be elected, and not Y., for M. and N. will both vote for
him. O. will not vote, and though Y. counts on M., N., and O.,
he will have three votes less than he counts on. X. will have 21
votes and Y. only 17. This is only shrewdness. So if a young
man is seen to enter a gambling house with two hundred-franc
notes it might be said, In an hour that young man will be cleaned
out.
But the predictions of shrewdness, however acute, are not neces
sarily correct. Y. may be elected in spite of A.s correct calcula
tions; the young man may possibly win. Genuine premonitions
are not due to shrewdness; they are often concerned with minute
details that no sagacity could foresee and no chance could
account for.
Before we can admit a metapsychic premonition, chance must
be completely eliminated.
A. goes to Monte Carlo and, looking at the roulette-table,
says, Red will come up. The probability is 1:2, and if he
is right the result is, of course, one of two probabilities. If he
says, 7 will come up, and again is right, the probability is 1 : 37.
But gamesters often have such anticipations which prove correct
and they are blind enough to forget the thirty-six cases in which
the anticipation failed.
Every alleged premonition is a special case to be studied and
analyzed in full detail to eliminate auto-suggestion, perspicacity,
and chance.
PREMONITIONS 347
To show how chance may intervene I will quote the following
personal fact which I do not in the least imagine to be a pre
monition, but consider entirely fortuitous: On the 20th of May,
1918, I was in Paris, and being about to start for the ambulances
at the front, I wrote in my pocket diary under the dates May 20th
and September 24th, Finis belli.
On the 20th of May no perspicacity could foresee the end of
the war. To all appearances, and my own opinion was in
agreement, the war would last another year; but on the 24th
of September the Bulgarian armistice was signed, and that date
is nearly as important with regard to the end of the war as No
vember 11, 1918, when the general armistice took effect.
If the calculus of probabilities be applied to the above, from
the 20th of May, 1918, to the same date a year later, there are
360 days, and since two dates are specified we may put the odds
against one of them being right as 2 : 360 or 1:180, a probability
fairly comparable to that of predicting that first the ace of hearts
and then a club would be drawn from a pack of cards, 1/52 x
say, 1/208. I have no notion why I wrote Finis belli under
September 24th. I never but once made any similar forecast,
and that turned out wrong. It would be absurd to consider this
a premonition; it is a mere coincidence, curious enough but
fortuitous.
I think that Dr. Conan Doyles Piave, to which I shall allude
further on, is similarly fortuitous.
(3) The conditions under which the alleged fact has been
received and noted down must be examined with the greatest
care. Paramnesiafalse memorythat leads a person to imagine
in all good faith that the event or the landscape that he sees
is not new to his eyes, plays strange parts and is sometimes so
strong as to lead a person to affirm a premonition when there has
been none.
The only answer to this serious objection is that before the
alleged prediction is realized it should have been written down,
or circumstantially told to two or three persons. If an exact
register were kept of dreams supposed to be premonitory, it
would be possible to compare the number of those that were
verified, with those that were not. Several investigators have
suggested classifications for premonitions-e.g., Mrs. Sidgwick,
F. W. H. Myers, and Bozzano.
Mrs. Sidgwick classes them according to subjective modalities;
Myers on an ascending scale of theoretical import. I shall hre
follow the classification adopted in previous chapters for moni
tions ; giving, however, one separate section to auto-premonitions,
which are subject to some reserves, inasmuch as they may some
times be explained as being due to auto-suggestion.
The classification to be followed will then be :
Auto-premonition, (a) of sickness, (b) of accidental death;
Real premonitions, (a) under hypnotism, (b) under spiritist
conditions, (c) casual premonitions of various kinds.
2. Auto-Premonitions
(a) Of Sickness
Of all kinds of premonitions these are the most questionable,
for there is nothing to prove that an act of willI may even say
of unconscious will (paradoxical though the words may be)does
not bring about the event. For instance, the case in which a
magnetizer suggested a crisis to supervene after 6,666 minutes.
The subject, on waking up, had no remembrance of the sugges
tion, but the crisis occurred as suggested.
The following case is taken from Dr. Testes Manuel pratique
de magntisme mimai, p. 140. Mme. M., being pregnant, an
nounced on May 8th that she would have a fright on the 12th,
and a fall that would have serious though not fatal results. On
the 12th, in magnetic sleep, she repeated the prediction, which
was completely forgotten on waking, and she was astonished
when her husband, fearing the consequences, forbade her going
out. She went to her room and gave a cry of fright. A rat
ran across the room and the fright caused her to fall, bringing
on a miscarriage.
The fact is thoroughly authenticated, but no deduction can
be made, for it may be supposed that if the rat had not been
there, some other cause would have produced the result.
Denise Blanche, aged eighteen, in blooming health, and belong
ing to a very honourable family at Aramon (Gard) pressed her
parents to have her portrait taken, saying that she had not long
to live. There was no reason for the apprehension. One day
while she was in the house, there was an alarm of fire. Alongside
of the house, separated by a small yard, there was a basket
factory which had caught fire, though the damage done was
unimportant. Denise was much frightened, felt a vague illness,
PREMONITIONS 349
and died in two months, the actual nature of the disease being
indeterminate (communicated by Mr. F. of Aramon).
I cite this case of auto-premonition (which is not evidential),
to show that such cases might well be called pseudo-premonitions.
Mme. Clary, very ill (of tuberculosis, doubtless), on being put
to sleep by Dr. Teste on the 15th of May, said that she would have
high fever on the 2d and 3d of June. Asked, And on the 4th?
she replied, I see no more. She died on the 4th of June. There
is no need to insist further; such facts prove nothing.
The artist Giovanni Segantini was painting an allegorical picture
representing deatha cottage on a snow-covered plain, and a
coffin in front of the cottage. One day he dreamed that he saw
himself in the coffin and told this dream to his wife. Some days
later he had acute peritonitis and died thirteen days after the
vision. The circumstances at the funeral at the cottage of
Maloja reproduced precisely those of the vision. This also is
a pseudo-premonition, for he may have vaguely felt some morbid
symptoms that no doctor could foresee.
Similarly the gruesome dream of Earl Hartington, who, while
in good Health, dreamed of a skeleton looking at him which
raised the coverlet and slipped between him and his wife. He
died fifteen days after.
The cases next following are taken from Bozzanos book, unless
otherwise signified; the roman numbers being Bozzanos.
The reservations applicable to all auto-premonitions should be
maintained for that of Mrs. X., carefully analyzed by R. Hodgson.
She saw in a dream on March 5th her father, who had been
dead eleven years: he showed her a calendar displaying the
date, March 22d. Mrs. X. was near her confinement, and thought
that the dream meant that she would be delivered on that date.
The confinement took place on the 12th, and her family jested
on her simplicity in believing prophetic dreams. The confine
ment was normal, but she died of meningitis on the 22d of March.
Auto-premonitions of organic phenomena are pseudo-premoni
tions, and may be referred to autoscopic cognitions, non
metapsychic, produced by the subconsciousness.
Mrs. S., married two years and a half, was distressed at having
no child. The planchette gave her, In six months your hopes will
be realized. Happiness to all three. At the end of six months
she found herself enceinte. It must be added that Mrs. S. had
had several interesting premonitory dreams.
Without minimizing the interest of this story, there may have
been subconscious organic perceptions reaching the subliminal
consciousness. This explanation is not very satisfying, but neither
is the hypothesis of chance, and the spiritist explanation is still
less so.
Bozzanos sixth case may perhaps be explained by subcon
scious organic sensations. Mrs. Norris was in good health. One
night she had a terrifying dream, which she told to her daughter
and to Dr. Lyon, her son-in-law. She dreamed that a friend long
dead, Mrs. Carleton, said to her, Your end is near; you will
die tomorrow morning at the same hour that you have seen
me tonight. Mrs. Norris ordered a bath to be prepared so that
her corpse need not be washed, and died at the hour indicated.
Flammarion, in his book Death and Its Mystery, reports several
significant cases of auto-premonitions that I cannot reproduce
here.
M. Fron, a lawyer of Cherbourg, dreamed that he would not
see the end of January. He told this and repeated it. He was
quite well to all appearance, but died suddenly on January 18th.
Edward Reed, director of the Natural History Museum at
Concepcin (Chile), dreamed that he saw a grave and cross, with
the inscription, Reed, Nov. 7, 1910, and he told the dream
jestingly to several persons. He died on the date mentioned.
Preferring rationalist explanations, I refer all these cases to sub
conscious sensations which give vague warnings to the nervous
centres of a defective state in one or other of the vital organs.
The following case of auto-premonition of sickness and death
is remarkable for the precision of its details. The story is so
dramatic that it would be open to some suspicion had the details
not been minutely checked by Dr. Geley (A. S. P., 1916, xxvi,
125-129).
The case is that of M. Dencausse, the father of Mme. Freya,
whose lucidity has already been alluded to. In May, 1916, M.
Dencausse, then aged seventy-six, and in fairly good health,
announced that he would die before winter. He was getting
thinner and his nutrition was defective. Towards October 24th
he declared that he would die on All Saints Day. On October
28th, Dr. Geley, who was called, found no organic lesion, no
fever, and very slight bronchitis. M. Dencausse then declared
that he would die on the stroke of midnight on All Saints Day
without suffering.
PREMONITIONS 351
On Monday the 30th he was going on well, but on Tuesday
pneumonia set in with some fever. On November 1st he was
weaker, but could speak and give his last instructions. About
11.30 p . m . he asked his wife, What is the time? Mrs. D., to
mislead him, said, Two oclock in the morning. The sick man
replied, No, it is not yet midnight. I shall die at midnight.
Close on the hour he turned to the wall. They came to him and
the clock struck; without speaking he raised his hand, pointed
to the clock, and expired.
Dr. Geley has noted that Mme. Freya told him her fathers
predictions from day to day.
A very distinct auto-premonition of death has been related by
Dr. W. de Sermyn.1
Jean Vitalis, aged thirty-nine, a strong and vigorous man,
was seized by acute rheumatic arthritis. On the sixteenth day
of his illness, Dr. de Sermyn who was attending him found him
sitting up in bed, smiling and half-way to recovery. Nevertheless,
Vitalis said to him, I have had a vision; my father, who died
some years ago, has been to visit me saying that I ought to receive
extreme unction ; for no doubt he wants me and will come to take
me at nine this evening. All day he was well, pain had dis
appeared, his temperature was normal, and he ate with appetite.
He received the unction for the dying, to the great astonishment
o f the priest. Dr. de Sermyn saw him at 8 p . m ., he was in good
spirits, laughing and talking with those about him. At one
minute to nine he got up from the sofa where he was sitting ; said,
The hour is come, jumped on to his bed, arranged the pillows,
bent his head, saying, Good-bye, good-bye, stretched himself
out and ceased to move, dying without a gasp or a sigh.
These organic subconsciousnesses sometimes assume the form
of an exterior hallucination. Dr. Minot Savage tells the story
(Flammarion, loc. cit., 99) of a student in New York who saw a
spirit appear and walk beside him in the street. He thought
he would die soon, and told his mother who tried to reassure him.
Three days later he had appendicitis, was operated on, and died.
It is, however, impossible to suppose organic subconsciousness
when the premonition takes place seventy years before the event.
Mr. Banister, then a schoolboy, dreamed about the year 1813
that he saw on a gravestone his own name with date of his
Contribution llude de certaines facults crbrales mconnues, L au
san n e, P a y o t, 1 9 1 1 , 13-16.
birth and death, the latter being Jun. 9th. Was it, however Jun.,
which is an unusual abbreviation for June, or was it Jan., for
January? On the 9th of June, 1835, his eldest son died. He
was then persuaded that the inscription must have read June
9th; but in fact Mr. Banister died on the 9th of January, 1883.
This is a strange fact among many strange facts, and it seems
even fantastic, but it is well authenticated. I cannot, however,
advance any explanation that would not be absurd.
Again, I shall now quote two more facts still more strange.
They would be curious and remarkable if each stood alone. But
they do not stand alone, and the resemblance between them, or
rather their identity in essentials, makes chance or fantastical
imagination alike untenable as an explanation.
The first of these (Bozzanos No. vii), refers to a child of two
years and seven months (1883), named Ray. A baby brother
of Rays had lately died. Little Ray had repeated visions; he
constantly saw his brother sitting on a chair and calling him.
Mother, he said, the little brother calls Ray; he wants him
with him. Another day he said, Dont cry, the little brother
smiles at Ray. Ray is going to him. The childs intelligence
was much above that usual to his age. He died two months and
seven days after the death of his brother. No one can doubt
that he had some kind of premonitory vision; and this is the
more extraordinary as that at his age he could not have understood
the meaning of death. The second case (unpublished) seems
almost modelled on Rays case.
Louise F., aged forty-eight, died after an abdominal operation
in January, 1896. During her illness she frequently asked that,
when cured, she might take her little niece Lily, aged three years
and three months, of whom she was very fond, to live with her
in the country. About a month after the death of her aunt, little
Lily who was intelligent and precocious and in quite good health,
often stopped in her play to look fixedly out of the window. Her
mother asked her what she was looking at, and she answered,
It is Aunt Louise, who holds out her arms to me and calls me.
Her mother, much frightened, tried to distract her attention, but
the child drew her chair to the window and continued to look for
several minutes. Her brother, M. F., who gave me these details,
said, I was then eleven years old and my little sister said, W hat!
Dont you see Tata? as she called her aunt. Of course I could
see nothing. For some months nothing further was seen by
PREMONITIONS 353
the child, the visions ceased. Towards May 20th, little Lily fell
ill, and when in bed she looked up to the ceiling saying that she
saw her aunt calling her, surrounded by little angels. Mother,
how pretty!" she said. From day to day her illness increased,
but she always repeated, My aunt has come to fetch me; she
is holding out her arms to me," and as her mother wept, she said,
Dont cry, mother, it is very beautiful, there are angels round
me.
--- _ $9
She died on the 9th of June of tubercular meningitis four and a
half months after the death of Louise F.
Such is the story told me by M. F., her brother, confirmed by his
sister G. F., and her mother. The family lived very quietly in
a country town. None of them know any English or anything
of psychic science.
I give the story as it came to me, without attempting any
explanation. A somewhat similar fact is given by Stainton Moses
(Luce e Ombra, xx, 1920, 19). Miss H., the daughter of an
English clergyman, was tending a dying child. His little brother,
aged three to four years, was in a little bed in the same room.
As the former was dying, the child woke up, and, pointing to the
ceiling with every expression of joy, said, Mother, look at the
beautiful ladies round my brother! How lovely they are, they
want to take him. The child died at that moment.
Another instance is reported by M. Pelusi, librarian at the
Victor Emmanuel Library at Rome (Luce e Ombra, 1920, 20).
A little girl of three, Hippolyte Notari, partly paralyzed, was in
the same room with her little brother of four months, who was
dying. The father, the mother, and the grandmother of the
two children were present. About fifteen minutes before the
death of the infant, little Hippolyte stretched out her arms, saying,
Look, mother, Aunt Olga. This Aunt Olga was a younger
sister of Mme. Notari who had killed herself a year previously
owing to a disappointment in love. The parents asked, Where do
you see Aunt Olga? The child said, There, there, and tried
insistently to get out of bed to go to her aunt. They let her get
up, she ran to an empty chair, and was much discountenanced,
because the vision had moved to another part of the room. The
child turned round and said, pointing to a corner, Aunt Olga
is there. Then she became quiet and the baby died.
Facts of this kind are very important. They are much more
explicable on the spiritist theory than by the hypothesis of mere
cryptesthesia. Among all the facts adduced to prove survival,
these even seem to me to be the most disquieting. I have there
fore thought it a duty to be scrupulous in mentioning them. But
in despite of their spiritoid nature, they are insufficient to make
me believe that the consciousness of the deceased persons is present
as a phantom at the death of their relatives. (! ! !)
Bozzanos cases, ix and x, do not seem to me worth record;
for an announcement of death to occur five years later is too
vague to have much value.
(b) Auto-Premonitions of Accidental Death
No effect of organic subconsciousness can'be invoked in such
cases: they are clearly metapsychic premonitions.
There are a dozen or so of these that are too ancient for criticism
or for any inferences from them (A . S. P., 1898, vii, 316).
Mr. D. (Bozzanos case xiii), dreamed that he was in an inn
where he met several friends, all of them being deceased persons.
They made him promise to return in six weeks. When he woke
up, Mr. D. told the dream, joking over it. Exactly six weeks
later he was riding and met his death in an accident.
If this case stood alone it would be reasonable to refer it to
chance, and this may always be done; but there are too many
such cases for the inference that chance plays so great a part
in our lives. Chance is the god of the ignorant.
Armand Carrel saw in a dream his mother clad in mourning,
and weeping. I weep for you, my son, she said. On the day
following this dream Armand Carrel wrote for the National the
famous article that resulted in the duel with Emile de Girardin
in which he was killed. No premonitory value can be attached
to this dream, for Armand Carrel must have known that the
article he had under contemplation would involve peril.
The following case, though not quite an auto-premonition, is
akin thereto, for it is of a doctor who foresaw the death of his child.
Possibly certain signs reaching his subconsciousness led to the
prognosis (?)..
Dr. de Sermyn saw, in a dream, his child of four fall into a
stove and burn to death. He woke up, went to his childs room,
and found him sleeping peacefully. Thank God, he said, it
is only a dream. In the morning the child was still in good
health, but at noon he was very feverish. Haunted by the dream,
Dr. de S. knew that his child was lost to him. A colleague called
PREMONITIONS 355
in by him thought the illness not serious ; but it grew worse from
hour to hour, developed into broncho-pneumonia, and the child
died on the fourth day.
In this, as in many cases of monition, I am inclined to think,
with Myers and Bozzano, that the phenomena are of a meta
psychic order; but rigorous proof is impossible.
Dr. von Gudden (case xv), before leaving for the castle of
Hochenswangen, dreamed that he was drowning and struggling
with someone in the water. He told the dream to his wife. Some
days later his body was found in the lake, drowned along with
King Louis of Bavaria. The premonition here is obvious.
It is still more so in case xviii, one of the most striking.
In 1895 M. Lukawski, of Petersburg, who was an official at
the Ministry of the Marine (which does not at all imply his going
to sea), dreamed that he was on board a ship, that there was a
collision, that he fell into the water with another passenger and
was drowned. From that moment he was convinced that he
would die by shipwreck, and put his affairs in order. However,
after some months, when the remembrance of the dream had
faded, he received the order to leave for a port on the Black Sea.
This recalled his dream, and before leaving he said to his wife,
You will see me no more; when you hear of my death put on
mourning, but not that black veil which I dislike so much.
Two weeks later the Vladimir, on which he was travelling, col
lided with another vessel and M. Lukawski was drowned. An
other passenger, M. Henicke, who escaped, says that he and M.
Lukawski were for a short time holding on to the same life-buoy.
Mme. Dudlay, of the Comdie Franaise, tells of a spiritualist
sance in which Irene Muza was the medium. Irene, in 1908, be
gan to weep when asked what would happen in 1909, saying, It is
horrible, but nothing more. She perished in the fire of February
23, 1909. This premonition is too vague to carry weight.
The little daughter of M. Domenico Fleres, barrister in the
Appeal Court of Palermo, leaving for Messina when she was
eight years old, said, Good-bye, grandma, we shall never see each
other again. Some hours before the Messina earthquake, when
her mother was putting on her night-socks, the child said, Why
do you put on these death-socks? and repeated, My death-
socks. She perished in the earthquake (case xviii).
Case xix, a boy of twelve, saw himself in a coffin, and told the
story in a semi-hypnotic state. Eight days later he was drowned
in the lake. The case is not very evidential, for the child was
sickly and the case is possibly one of suicide.
Auto-premonitions are always a little doubtful, for a non
metapsychic explanation can often be found; nevertheless, in
some, as in the Banister and Von Gudden cases, the cryptesthetic
premonition is obvious.
3. Premonitions, Properly So-called
True premonitions are those in which neither subconscious
organic sensation, nor will, nor auto-suggestion can be supposed
to intervene.
Instead of following Bozzanos classification, I shall deal with
them in three groups according as they occur, (1) under hypno
tism, (2) trader spiritist conditions, where an external personality,
a spirit, or guide ostensibly dictates the premonition, and
(3) as casual or accidental premonitions to normal persons,
either awake or dreaming. Premonitions that fall within the two
former classes are less frequent and less interesting than those of
the third class; it is also difficult to draw a line of demarcation
between them, for mediums are often in a semi-hypnotic state,
and, moreover, even when not in sance, their predictions seem
sometimes to be guided by a spirit. Also, normal persons fall
into a kind of auto-hypnosis at the moment of premonition.
(a) Premonitions Under Hypnotism
The Seeress of Prvorst, whose psychological state was that
of a medium rather than of a somnambulist, gave many prophecies
reported by J. Kemer (Bozzanos case xxv).
Bozzano cites five of these prophecies, the most striking of
which is the following:
She dreamed that Mme. L., whom she had never seen, came to
her weeping with a dead child in her arms. Six weeks later Mme.
L. was confined and lost her child.
In another instance (case cv) she saw in a dream a person
known to her who had died; he was anxious to speak of his
daughter, who was menaced by misfortune. Some weeks later
a tile fell on the head of this daughter and nearly killed her.
Dr. Rostan (case xxviii) relates that a somnambulist in her
sleep predicted that a friend of hers, then not very ill, would die
of hemorrhage in six days exactly. The prediction was fulfilled
both as to fact and time.
PREMONITIONS 357
Dr. Liebeault (xxix) cites a prediction by a young girl named
Julia, who in November, 1883, said that a certain lady, then in no
way ill, would die before the 1st of January. She died on Decem
ber 31st.
Liebeault also gives the following often-quoted fact: In 1879 a
somnambulist predicted to M. L. that he would lose his father
after a year; that he would be a soldier, would marry, and have
two children; and that he would die at twenty-six. All this was
exactly fulfilled, only the death prophecy was left. Then as the
approach of the twenty-sixth birthday threw L. into a state of
melancholy hypochondria, Liebeault prescribed a counter-sitting
and prediction arranged beforehand, which completely reassured
L. But, says Liebeault, no man can escape his destiny, and L.
died at twenty-six.
Mme. G. de.Montebello told me the following fact: In April
or May, 1884, she chanced to meet at the house of a friend of hers
a certain somnambulist who predicted that someone dear to her
would perish in a terrible accident. Mme. de M., much moved,
asked, Is it my grandmother? No, said the somnambulist,
it is not your grandmother, but someone very near you, who will
die by the falling of a wall.
Some weeks later my dear mother, who was an aunt of Mme.
de Montebello, perished by the bursting of a dam-wall and was
buried under its ruins.
Dr. Osty received, in 1912, the following details from a som
nambulist whom he then saw for the first time:
You live in a little town in the middle of France; your room
looks out on a small square. From thence you go to your office;
men come and go; it is a constant coming and going. What a
mass of papers! You look, you write, and you give the papers
back.
In 1914 Dr. Osty was appointed chief medical officer at Vierzon;
he lodged in a house answering to the description given; he had
administrative work during the war which involved the signing
of many papers. In 1912 he could not possibly have foreseen
these duties.
A clairvoyant somnambulist (lxxvi) predicted in 1887 that
Marie Thierault will live a life of pleasure, which will end in a
terrible way, before three moons after January 14, 1907. It is not
given to me to see the dreadful date, but January 14th rises
before me and I see the full moon shining.
On the 18th of January, 1907, Marie Thirault, who led more
or less the life of a light woman, was murdered by her friend,
Lucette Joquelet. Lucette was charged at the Assizes, and the
defending counsel produced the prediction given in 1887.
This is an amazing and quite unforeseeable premonition. Of
course, it may be maintained that the somnambulistic prediction
of 1887 was fabricated for the defence. The evidence as given in
the trial is perfectly authenticated.
Lady A. (case lxxvii) went to consult Mme. deE., a somnam
bulist and seeress, about a theft. Mme. deE., without the lady
having indicated anything about the purpose of the consultation,
said that the affair related to a theft of banknotes, and that within
two years the thief would suffer capital punishment. She could
give only the vaguest indications oi his person. Not till very
long after did it appear that the thief was the too famous Marchan-
don, who was executed two years later for murder.
The entire account of this surprising prediction should be read,
for it contains many extremely.Curipus details.
Lady Burton (case xciv) tells that when she was a young girl,
Isabel Arundell, she met a gipsy woman who gave her a written
prediction: You will cross the sea, and reach the town where
your destiny is awaiting you. You will marry a man of the name
of our tribe (Burton) and you will be proud of the name. An
astonishing prediction, especially as to the name.
Metapsychic stories told by novelists must be accepted with
reserve, but it is difficult riot to attach some credit to the story
given by Arsne Houssaye in his Confessions (p. 425). An
Italian seeress told his sister Ccile, at Toulon, that the sea would
be adverse to her. In 1870 Ccile for-this reason would not cross
into England. On October 10, 1870, she went for a walk to the
Point de Penmarch in Brittany to see the waves breaking on the
rocks. A huge wave washed across the promontory and swept
Ccile and three other girls into the sea.
Dr. A. Wallace (case cviii) received Mrs. Paulet at his house.
This clairvoyant said to his son, young Mr. Wallace, then twenty
years of age, who was a student of chemistry, There will be an
explosion in your laboratory in February or March and someone
will be injured. Another clairvoyant repeated the same predic
tion on the 20th of January. On the 9th of March a terrible
explosion took place and severely injured one of the students.
Mr. R. dreamed, on May 25th, that a somnambulist told him,
PREMONITIONS 359
"Your father will die on the 2d of June (1900)/' Next day he
told the dream to his parents who laughed over it, for Mr. R.
(senior) was in good health. On June 1st this gentleman went
to a funeral, and jestingly said, "If I am to die tomorrow I have
not much time to lose. He went to bed that night in his usual
health at 11 p .m ., was taken in the night with sudden illness and
died on June 2d, twenty minutes after midnight.
Dr. Charles Roux reports three astonishing premonitions made
by three different somnambulists to the same person.
The wife of Dr. A. met by chance a somnambulist, who said to
her, "In a short time there will be a catastrophe in your family
that will cause you much grief. Somewhat affected by this she
went to another clairvoyant, who said, "Your children (your
daughter) will be ill very shortly; abdominal pains; she will have
an operation, but will recover. The third, to whom Mme. A.
gave her glove, said, "This glove has been touched by a person
who is very ill; she has acute pain in the abdomen, diffused pain.
There is pus from peritonitis, but she will recover.
Ten days after the latter prediction Mile. A., aged fifteen, till
then seemingly in perfect health, was attacked by acute peritonitis,
was operated on and pus was withdrawn, but, contrary to the pre
dictions, the poor child died.
This triple premonition from three different persons is most
noteworthy; not only because of the high scientific authority of
Dr. Roux, who is very well informed on scientific matters and in
no way credulous, and verified the facts with the greatest care,
but because of the agreement of the three sensitives. This leads
to the inference not that the clairvoyants were exceptionally sensi
tive, but that there must have been some powerful exterior cause
(what?) that enabled them to foresee Mile. A.s illness.
The sensitive Alexis (case cxi) gave a wonderful instance of
lucidity and premonition. In 1847 he went, in hypnotic sleep, to
Rome and passing before the Pantheon, said, "This monument is
destined to a more solemn and wholly Italian purpose. Bozzano
rightly insists on the remarkable character of this prediction, made
in 1847 and printed in 1867, at a time when no one could foresee
that the Pantheon would be reserved as a mausoleum for the
kings of United Italy.
Alice gave me two good premonitions in hypnotic sleep. On the
10th of December, 1886, she spoke of someone who would shortly
be seriously ill. "Is it one of my children, one of my relations.
or one of my friends? The answer was, No, no, but do not
take this lightly, it will cause you much trouble. It is not one of
your friends, nor a relation, nor a woman, nor a child, and she
added these words, which I wrote down on returning home, He
will have shivers, high fever, trembling, suffocation, shudderings
of fever, like colic. The fever will come on without much pain,
there will be prostration and great lassitude; the head will be
affected (P. S. P. R., 1888, 181). Eight days later, about
December 18th, my colleague, Eugene Yung, whom Alice did not
know at all, editor of the Revue Bleue, connected with the Revue
Scientffique, and seemingly in quite good health, was taken with
shivering, fever, and renal colic due to abscess. The illness made
rapid progress, the urinary system became affected, coma set in
(Alice had said that the head would be affected) and he died.
The death of my eminent colleague involved me in much trouble
and my position as editor of the Revue Scientifique was near being
compromised.
I ought, moreover, to say that I had completely forgotten
Alices prediction, although I had noted it down, till she in
hypnotic sleep recalled it to my mind. She had seen in the news
papers an account of the death and the consequent troubles.
The other prediction is yet more extraordinary. As it is unpub
lished, I give all needful details.
It was my custom to leave her for some hours in hypnotic
sleep; she would then remain quite motionless and on my return
two or three hours later the clairvoyance seemed to me more
acute. On my return that day she said that something serious
would happen. You will be very angry, very angry indeed.
There are people there, and there, pointing with her hand as
though there were three or four persons near me. This did not
affect me, for I am seldom moved to anger; but she insisted and
seemed so troubled that I had to wake her. It was 2 . . on a
Wednesday.
p m
At six oclock the same day I went to the office of the Revue
Scientifique to correct proofs along with the secretary, Dr. Heri-
court. Henri Ferrari, editor of the Revue Bleue, was there also
correcting his proofs. All three of us were absorbed in our work,
when one of the contributors entered (I may note passim that he
afterwards became a colleague of mine). He looked at us with
some surprise, and I said, Excuse us a few minutes, we shall
soon have finished. He walked up and down while we went on
PREMONITIONS 361
with our proof-reading. Then some extraordinary whim took him,
he sat himself down before Ferrari and said, You are just like
a ----- wren, I dont care a -------for you. I saw Ferrari turn
pale, dumb with astonishment, and striking the table I said to X.,
You are an out-and-out cad; get out! and I went to the door
and opened it.
That evening X. sent me a challenge to a duel. It is the only
one I ever received. Of course, I left it unanswered, and some
years later we resumed our good relations.
The important fact is not this absurd and trivial incident, but
the prediction of a most unlikely event which provoked in me
violent and justified anger; this being one of the very few times
that I have been carried away by anger in the course of a long
life. Alice had predicted this four hours earlier, pointing to three
or four persons round me.
(b) Spiritist Premonitions
The premonitions to which I give this name are not always
markedly different from others. They are characterized by this
that the subject is making an attempt to know the future by the
planchette, by automatic writing, by psychometry, by crystal vision,
or by some other means, instead of remaining passive during his
normal life, whether sleeping or waking, and being dominated by
the metapsychic fact. He is not suffering an accident, but is
making an experiment.
Mrs. Piper (or Phinuit) has often made prophecies of deaths
or minor events which have been verified (Bozzanos cases xxi to
xxiv).
On May 10, 1892, Phinuit said that the brother of Mr. T.,
whom Mrs. Piper did not know, had kidney trouble, that his heart
would stop, and that he would enter the spirit-world. Soon after
it was established that he had kidney disease and he died of
syncope in his sleep, September 3, 1892.
Dr. Louis Cohen, of St. Louis (U. S. A.), visited Mrs. Leonard,
who described his father quite accurately and told him that his
father had died and that he himself would soon be summoned
back to America by cable. This was on April 20th; on the 23d
the prediction was exactly fulfilled.
Mr. S. Shaw (case xli) saw a professional medium in London,
who said, Your mother is dead, which was untrue. She cor
rected herself and said, She will die in three months. She is well
at present but work tires her and she needs to lie down in
the daytime. Her death will be sudden. Two months later Mr.
S. received a letter from his mother, saying that she was in good
health but needed a sleep during the day. She died suddenly
two and a half months after the premonition.
Mr. William Steads secretary, E. M., was in weak health and
irritable. Stead thought of closing the connection; but Julia,
writing by the hand of Stead, gave the message: Be patient,
she will come to join us before the end of the year. This predic
tion was repeated several times. In July E. M. was very ill.
Julia wrote, She will get well, but will not outlive the year.
In December E. M. had influenza, and Julia wrote, She will not
come over naturally, and it will be before the end of the year.
On January 10th E. M. was extremely ill and Julia wrote, I
may be mistaken by a few days, but all that I have told you is
true. Bid her good-bye. On January 12th E. M. threw herself
out of the window in her delirium and died.
A friend of Mr. Stead had come from India to England, and
intending to make a long stay had arranged for a series of lec
tures on free trade and other subjects, at Manchester and else
where. Julia, through the intermediary of Stead, told him that he
would return to India before the end of the year. This was
repeated on the 14th and the 16th of August, and on the 11th
of September Mr. Tracy refused to believe it, but a month later
he was recalled to India by the serious illness of a relation and
left before the end of the year (Stead, in Borderland, 1894, ii, 43).
A non-professional medium, the granddaughter of the celebrated
physiologist, Tiedemann, of Heidelberg, predicted to a young
man, Mr. S., that he would become a senator for Missouri in the
United States. This seemed so improbable that he laughed at the
prediction, but two years later he moved from Wisconsin, where
he lived, to Missouri and was nominated senator some time after.
A distinguished physician of Palermo, M. Carmelo Samona,
well acquainted with metapsychic science, lost his little daughter
Alexandrina, aged five, in 1910. Mme. Samona was wild with
grief. Three days after she saw the child in a dream, who said
to her, I have not left you; I have become tiny like that, desig
nating some very small object. A fresh pregnancy was the more
unlikely in that Mme. Samona had undergone a serious ovarian
operation a year previously. On April 10th, however, she became
aware that she was pregnant. On May 4th it was predicted by
PREMONITIONS 363
Alexandrina, communicating by means of the table, that Mme.
Samona would be delivered of twin girls, one of whom would
entirely resemble Alexandrina. This came to pass. One of the
twins had a mark on the left eye and another mark on the right
ear with asymmetry of the face, precisely like the deceased child
(Duchatel and Warcollier, Les miracles de la volont, p. 239).
This premonition wuld seem to imply the phenomenon that
spiritists call reincarnation. But the data on this perplexing
problemthe most obscure in the whole of all metapsychicsare
so fragmentary that they amount to nothing from the point of
view of strict science.
Dr. E. Waller relates a fact that seems to show cryptesthesia.
He saw in the crystal a lady, Mrs. D., well known to him, and with
her another person whom he did not know. A few days later he
met Mrs. D. with this other person in the place that he had seen
in the crystal under tragical circumstances which ended in a real
drama (A . S. P., 1905, xv, 133-141).
In February, 1890, impelled by a power that she could not
resist, Mrs. R. V. went to consult Zuleika, a professional seeress.
Zuleika told the lady that her husband would leave for South
Africa, would die there in November of the same year, and that
he ought to set his affairs and his insurances in order so as to
avoid heavy expenses and much trouble for all concerned. Mr.
V.s departure, which was uncertain, duly took place, and in
November, 1890, he died in Africa, in despite of his robust health.
The precautions indicated had not been taken, whence much
expense and trouble resulted;*'disastrous consequences Mrs. V.
calls them (Bozzano, liv).
Zuleikas premonition was noted down by Mrs. V. in her diary
in February, 1890.
Bozzanos cases (lvi and lvii) are authenticated by numerous
witnesses. They are as follows : On the 22d of April, 1877, the
eldest daughter of Mr. Maxfield, a very well-known hotel manager
in New York, said to Dr. Anthony (who made a written note of
the prophecy), I have just heard a voice speaking very clearly
at my ear : you will die first, then Harry, then your father ; and
Dr. Anthony will be present on each occasion. The three per
sons referred to were all in perfect health, but the daughter died
on November 9, 1879; Harry on June 22, 1884, and Mr. Maxfield
on July 2, 1884. Dr. Anthony was present at the three deaths.
A similar prediction was made by a medium to the eldest
daughter of Westland Marston. You will die first, then Nelly,
then Philip, and your mother last. All came to pass exactly.
Mr. Paige went to a medium without giving his name ; she told
him the name of his wife, Eliza Anne, and of her sister Maria.
She described accurately the very serious illness of the former,
and predicted that in three days Eliza Anne would see her
deceased mother at her bedside; which came true.
A lady known to Mrs. Sidgwick (case lxvii) went to consult a
medium, who told her, You are wearing a photograph of your
children, which was correct. Indicating two, she said, Those
two are dead, which was so, and pointing to another, This one
will soon be with us, and his transition will be sudden. Some
weeks later the elder son of this lady was killed in a football
accident.
J. Maxwell has published (case lxxiii) the remarkable premo
nition given to me by Mme. X. The personality speaking through
her mediumship purported to be my friend, Antoine B,, long since
deceased. Mme. X. predicted to me the death of Antoine B.s
widow, who had become Mme. L. by a second marriage. This
lady was in very good health, but Mme. X., on looking at a few
words of her handwriting, said to me, I see the figure 7, which
means that Mme. L. will soon die. Mme. L., who was quite
unknown to Mme. X., died just seven weeks later.
The premonition went further. On the 8th of July, 1903, Mme.
X. wrote to me, Someone tells me ( ?) that one of the sons of
Mme. L. will die before two years are past. I suppose it must be
Jacques B., but this was not told me.
On the night of December 23d Louis B. and Oliver L. (stepson
to Mme. L.) were in a disastrous railway accident on the Northern
of France. The former escaped by a miracle, the latter was killed
on the spot. The premonition was, however, still more exactly
fulfilled than by the death of this stepson. Fate is inexorable.
Mme. L. had a son, Gilbert L., who died suddenly a short time
later of cardiac failure after a slight attack of diphtheria that
seemed nearly cured.
Some instances of premonition are given by Rmy which are
the more interesting in that Rmy sets himself the task of proving
that nearly all so-called spiritist phenomena are due to tricks
played on simple people. Mlle. X., the daughter of a school
inspector of Lot-et-Garonne, was amusing herself and some
friends by making a table speak. Ask it when I shall retire,
PREMONITIONS 365
said her father, as a jest. In eight days, the table replied, and
everyone laughed, for Mr. X., then forty-five years of age and
in excellent health, had no thought of retiring.
Mr. X. died suddenly forty-five days later. I may observe that
M. Rmy, who is so severe on the experiences of others, is very
lenient to this premonition, which proves absolutely nothing.
An eminent writer, Paul Adam (Bozzanos case xci), could
write automatically messages which purported to come from
VEtrangre. One evening VEtrangre said to one of the friends
of Paul Adam, who was a hardened bachelor, In four years you
will marry a lady living at No. so and so, Avenue Marceau. At
that time the house designated by this number was being pulled
down. Four years later this gentleman met the lady in the house
built on this site and married her.
Case cxii is one of the most remarkable in metapsychic litera
ture. On December 11, 1901, Mrs. Verrall wrote automatically,
Nothing should be neglected, the most trifling facts may be use
ful ; be trustful. . . . The cold was intense and a single candle
gave a poor light. He was lying on the sofa or on a bed, and was
reading Marmontel by the light of a single candle. She will
remember (referring probably to Mrs. Sidgwick). The book
was lent him, it did not belong to him.
On December 17th Mrs. Verrall had a second message : The
name Marmontel is correct . . . a French book, I think his
memoirs. The name Passy may help him to remember Passy or
Fleury. The book was bound in two volumes, the binding was old,
and the book was lent him. The name Marmontel is not on the
cover.
On March 1st Mr. Marsh, a friend of Mrs. Verrall, related at
table in her house that he had read the memoirs of Marmontel one
bitterly cold night in Paris, the 20th of February, by the light of
a candle, once when in bed and again reclining on two chairs,
that he had spoken of its contents to friends in Paris, that the
book was in three volumes, of which he had borrowed two from
the London Library and that on February 21st he had read the
chapter in which Marmontel describes the finding of a picture
painted at Passy, and that the discovery was associated with M.
Fleury.
We have here a prediction of a series of unimportant events in
minute detail. These events could not possibly be anticipated
(nobody reads Marmontel), even the single light being specified.
The prediction was on December 11, 1901, and the events did not
take place till February 21, 1902.
Miss Freer (Bozzanos case c), looking in the crystal, sees a
mans head wrapped in some undefinable thing, looking in at the
small window of her room. Three days later there was a fire and
a fireman came to that little window, with his head wrapped in
a wet cloth, presenting exactly the image she had seen.
J. Maxwell cites an interesting case. A., looking in the crystal,
sees a large steamer with black, white, and red bands on the funnel,
bearing the name Leutschland, enveloped in smoke and sinking,
passengers and people in uniform running about the decks. Eight
days later the newspapers announced the bursting of a boiler on
board the Deutschland. A. was in no way concerned with mari
time affairs.
With the exception of the Saurel prediction, which will be de
scribed later, all the spiritist predictions relative to the Great War
are too vague for notice. Mrs. Chenoweth's premonitions, despite
the care with which Hyslop has collected them, are uncertain,
being little, if at all, beyond the reach of normal intelligence.
As for premonitions announcing serious events, generally
deaths, by noises and knocks, there are many, but few are evi
dential. It will suffice to mention that of the Rev. T. B. Wood,
who heard on the eve of his fathers death three distinct knocks
on the andirons. He, and also his servant Cyril, heard loud
knocks on October 20, 1919, and said, It is the Wood knockings;
someone is going to die. Three days later a cousin, till then in
good health, died suddenly.1
(c) Accidental Premonitions
I refer to this class all premonitions which occur unexpectedly
to normal persons, without experiment, without crystal vision,
planchette, automatic writing, or any other all-voluntary action.
The premonition comes to them unsought. These may be classed
(with Bozzano) as follows:
Premonitions
Of sickness and death due to natural causes.
Of accidental deaths.
Of sundry events.*
*P. Myers, S. P. R., xi and Kingsford, loc. cit., 161.
PREMONITIONS 367
(a) Premonitions of Sickness and Death Due to Natural
Causes
Miss B. was exceedingly anxious about her fathers health,
though medical opinion was that his indisposition was very slight.
She hurried back, whenever obliged to leave the house, fearing to
hear of misfortune. This lasted for some days. One day her
father fell in an apoplectic fit.
This case is not evidential, for the daughter might well guess
her fathers danger from various symptoms. I only mention this
case (Bozzanos xxvii) as a caution that none such should ever
be brought forward as having any value.
M. Salvatore Balsamo (xxxi), watching at the bedside of his
brother-in-law, hears a noise of breaking glass and china in the
next room a short time before the death. Several persons in the
sick-room heard the same and state that there were loud knocks
on the terrace, for which no natural cause could be found.
Here, again, the premonition is too vague and the brother-in-
laws death too likely to make the account worth consideration.
Only methodical study of a large number of such cases will
enable inferences to be drawn.
Mrs. Bakers sister sees a coffin before the piano in the drawing
room (case xxxiii). She nearly faints when telling her vision.
Three weeks later another sister died and her coffin was placed in
front of the piano, just where it had been seen.
Moritz gives the story of the pastor Ulrici, who saw in a dream
one of his clerical friends dead. He told the dream to his wife,
went to the church and preached, but was still obsessed by his
dream. Later in the day a servant came from the village of R.,
of which his friend was the minister, with the request that he
would come and baptize a child. He asked why their own pastor
did not perform the office. The answer was, Because he is
unable to do so. M. Ulrici said, It is because he has died.
M. Ulrici, therefore, saw the death of X. eleven hours before it
occurred, with all the attendant circumstances.1
The Rev. Mr. Dulley relates that Mrs. Jones, watching by her
sick child in the early days of September, saw three little coffins
put into a hearse, two white and one pale blue. Her little boy
Peter died on October 2d, and also a neighbors little son. Both*
*Cit par Passavant, Unters. fiber den Lebenmagnetismus, 2d edit., p. 135,
Frankfort, 1837.
funerals were on the same day, and at the last moment a third
coffin, a pale-blue one, was brought. It was that of a child in the
same parish whom Mrs. Jones did not know. When this last
coffin appeared, Mrs. Jones cried out, That was my dream.
She had already told her husband on the morning following the
dream.
M. Adrien Dufilhol relates that his grandfather heard a voice
saying, A death in the family. The grandfather thought in
silence, I am die eldest; is it I ? The voice answered No, it is
Adolphe Planes. Adolphe was Mme. Dufilhols brother and was
not ill; two months later he died unexpectedly.1
The next case may possibly be attributed to coincidence, though
this is unlikely. Mr. Lauritzen never made a memorandum of
any dream except this one of which he wrote in his diary: Three
days ago I dreamed that F. F. would be free in four years. The
phrase to be free was used to signify death. Mr. F. F. was
then in perfect health. He died four years and four days after
Mr. Lauritzens dream.2
The following premonition is somewhat vague, but the sym
bolism is very interesting. Mrs. Munro dreamed of her son, an
officer of the Flying Corps in Palestine. She saw him with a
serious wound in the forehead and heard a voice saying, He has
eaten an ice; it has given him a headache. Then she saw her son
as he had been at eleven or twelve years old. At that age he could
not eat ices, they gave him headache. Mrs. Munro was so dis
turbed by this vision that she sent for the doctor, who found her
ill from the emotion. Her son was killed on November 2, 1917,
by a bullet in the head (/. P. R., December, 1920, 272).
Mrs. Morrison, at Wellesley, in India, heard a voice saying,
When the darkness thickens at the eleventh hour death will pass.
Mrs. Morrison, who was in bed, got up in a fright; the words
were repeated again by the same voice, slowly and deliberately.
Two days later Mrs. Morrisons little daughter fell grievously ill.
For eight days there was no cloud in the sky, but on the eighth
day a terrible storm arose and a few minutes before eleven the
house was quite dark. The child died at 1 . . (A. S. P., 1907,
xviii, xxxv, 712).
p m
Bozzanos case xxxviii shows a strange symbolism. Mrs. Z.,

paying a visit on June 15th, saw (in imagination) an unknown
1Cite par Flammarion, loc. cit., 538.
*Case of Dream, Journ. S, P. R., D ecem b er, 19 x 1, 173.
PREMONITIONS 369
man by her hostess, who plunged a knife into her side. She told
Professor Andrew Lang, who laughed at her and said, Ill bet a
hundred pounds that this vision will not be realized.
Mrs. Z., again visiting her friend, met the man of her dream
on the stairs, to her great amazement. Her friend was dying and
the man in question was the surgeon who had operated on the left
side of her chest.
Mme. Buscarlet writes to Mme. Moratief, on December 11th,
a letter that has been preserved: I have had a queer dream. You
and I were in the country when a carriage passed us, and from it
there came a voice that called us. It was Olga Popoff, who said,
I have called you to tell you that Mme. Mitchinoff will leave the
Institute on the 17th. Two weeks later Mme. Mitchinoff died
of acute diphtheria on the 16th of the month, and on the morning
of the 17th the body was taken to an adjoining chapel for fear of
contagion.1
This is a well-marked case of premonition, rigorously authenti
cated, and so precise that no accidental coincidence can be alleged.
Mme. L. knew that a friend of hers, Mr. C., was ill. On a
Monday night she dreamed that the doctor in attendance came and
said gravely and sadly, Mr. C. will die on Thursday at four
oclock. She woke up, repeating Thursday at four. Her hus
band said to her, What do you mean? On Thursday Mr. C.
was better and seemed to be recovering, but had a relapse and
died on the following Thursday at four oclock (/. S. P. R.,
December, 1906, 340).
Mrs. Campbell (xlvi) dreamed that she was attending a funeral
in a snow-storm. She could not read the name on the coffin, but
saw an abundance of flowers and in the middle a large bouquet of
roses. She told the dream and it was considered prophetic of bad
news. Twenty minutes later she had a telegram recalling her to
Montreal, where her sister was taken ill. Some months later this
sister died, and during the funeral a heavy snow-storm came on.
The coffin was covered with flowers with a bouquet of bright
colored roses in the midst.
Alexandra S., aged nine, at Trieste, saw a hearse and dead
body just as she was about to go out for a walk. She threw her
self into her mothers arms, crying and saying, Someone is
xThis case is reported by Flournoy in the Arch, de Psychologie of Geneva.
He adds also some critical remarks that I cannot endorse; they seem to me
A. S. P., 1907,
insufficient. See also xvii, 710.
dead. All those about her were in perfect health, but three days
later her father was taken ill in the night. He looked at the child,
who said, Mother, how do people look when they are going to
die? Her father died a few minutes later (A. S. P., 1899, ix,
196).
The next case is very evidential, by reason of the number of
unlikely details exactly foreseen.
The Duchess of Hamilton had a kind of vision of Lord L.,
whom she only knew by sight, and did not know to be ill,
stretched on a sofa as if insensible, and a man with a sandy beard
bending over him. There was also a bathroom with a red light.
This was told by the Duchess of Hamilton to Dr. Cooper, who was
attending Lord L.
Lord L. recovered from his indisposition, but fifteen days later
a more serious illness supervened; and Dr. Cooper saw the scene
describedthe patient nearly insensible, the bathroom, the red
lamp, and an attendant with a sandy beard.
The good faith of the duchess and Dr. Cooper being unques
tionable, the premonition must be of a metapsychic nature, for
accidental coincidence is not to be thought of.
Bozzano places premonitions made long before the event in a
special class by themselves. A very remarkable one is as follows:
Mr. Edisburg was a medical student, who, in 1859, had a
dream of which he could only recall the date June 9, 1864. He
spoke of it to the assistant surgeon, saying, It is the date of my
death or of some great misfortune, and he wrote on the hat-
rack of the antechamber in the hospital, June 9, 1864, J. F. E.
Five years passed. Mr. Edisburg married, and his wife died on
the 9th of June, 1864. Returning to the hospital he and two of
his friends verified the date written on the rack.
If the calculus of probabilities be applied to this wonderful pre
monition, we might set the odds at 1 : 365 x 5, or say 1 : 1,800 (as
if the red came up eleven times running at roulette). This, how
ever, would be grossly against good sense, for it would omit all
consideration of the cause whereby this date was presented to the
mind of the dreamer. To return to the analogy of the roulette-
wheel, it is one thing to say, I know that the red will not come
up eleven times running and quite another to say that this has
happened in the course of a long series of trials. The premoni
tion consists in the fact that the date was indicated only once, and
correctly. If eighteen students were each to indicate some fateful
PREMONITIONS 371
date in the ensuing five years there might well be coincidences,
but in this case there was but one who had that prevision and the
prevision was verified. Chance cannot be invoked.
(b) Premonitions of Accidental Death
Premonitions of natural death, at any rate when not long before
the event, can be referred to some kind of cognition of the organic
condition of the person whose death or illness is foreseen. This,
however, in no way applies to accidental deaths ; hence the meta
psychic importance of premonitions of sudden, tragic, and unlikely
deaths that no mere perspicuity could foresee.
Captain de Montluc, in his commentaries, tells how he foresaw
by a dream the mortal wound of Henry II of France in a tourna
ment. The night before the tourney in my first sleep I dreamed
that I saw the King seated in a chair, his face all covered with
drops of blood, and I could neither discern what ailed him nor
see anything but the blood on his face. I seemed to hear others
say, He is dead and others He is not dead yet. I saw the doctors
and surgeons coming and going . . . and on awaking the
tears were on my face, nor for some time could I refrain from
weeping. My wife tried to console me, but I could not be per
suaded. Several persons living know that this is not a tale, for
I told it as soon as I was awake. Four days afterwards a mes
senger arrived at Nrac, bringing the letter from the Constable
of France to the King of Navarre, telling him of the wound and
the small hope of life (Flammarion, La Mort et son Mystre,
536).
Another historical document is quoted by Flammarion :
Nicolas Pasquier writes to his brother, Last year, on August
30th, about five in the morning, I dreamed that I was with our
father, who was in bed, whence he rose to pray to God, which
he did devoutly with both hands raised. When his prayer was
ended he changed colour and fell dead into my arms. I awoke,
trembling, told the dream to my wife, and to keep the memory of
it unfaded I wrote it down. Thus I saw our fathers death one
year exactly to a day before it happened (Etienne Pasquier died
August 30, 1615). On the actual date of his death I came across
the paper of which I had not thought again. The news only
reached me on September 3d. If you dissect this dream you will
see that all the circumstances were foreseenthat he would not
be long ill (he was only ill ten hours), that he would die a good
Christian and in full possession of his senses. Certainly the
approaching death of Etienne Pasquier, then aged eighty-six, was
not unlikely, but even so the coincidence of dates is noteworthy.
Baron L. Hellembach (Bozzano, lviii) intended to consult the
celebrated Hauer, his colleague, on a matter of science. During
the preceding night he dreamed that he saw a man (unrecognized)
pale and helpless, held up by two men. In the morning he went
to the geological institution that Hauer directed, and finding the
door shut, looked through the window, where he saw the exact
repetition of his dream. Hauer had poisoned himself with
potassium cyanide.
Recognition is wanting here; possibly, too, Baron Hellembach
did not tell his dream to anyone before verification, so that
paramnesia may account for much; or telepathy may be admitted.
Hauers mental agitation before suicide may have caused the
vision.
Recognition is also wanting in the next case:
Miss Bale heard a ticking in her room like that of a clock during
all the month of June, but this ceased as soon as anyone else came
in. After a month and a half she had become used to the sound.
On July 12th she saw a human form standing with outstretched
arms. It soon vanished. On September 23d she heard of her
brothers death by drowning (on July 12th), after which the
ticking ceased (A. S. P., 1907, xvii, 724).
Myers reports a good example of symbolical premonition:
Field Marshal Lord S. dreamed two days before his daughter fell
ill that he urged her to read the Life of Charles James Fox, but
that she replied, Oh, I do not need to read it; it is the end,
and that she showed the last page on which The End was
written in large black characters all across the page (P. S. P. R.,
1895, xi, 442).
The death of Miss S. was also the subject of a premonition.
Her sister saw her standing before her, saying, Remember, I
have called you, it is five oclock, and now I am going away; I am
going away, remember.
Premonition of death in which a double seems to appear are
not infrequent; e.g., the remarkable case of Dr. Isnard mentioned
above, p. 340.
M. Boisnard dreamed very clearly of a childs funeral, coming
away from a neighbouring house. The dream haunted him all
PREMONITIONS 373
day. In the evening one of the children from that house, aged
four, fell into a ditch and was drowned (Bozzano, lix).
The brother of M. Zipelius, a painter of Mulhouse, aged twenty-
five, said to his porter, If I do not return this evening seek me
at the mortuary. I dreamt that I was at the bottom of the water
with my eyes open. His mother had foreseen this misfortune
(how?) and when the bad news was brought her she said, No
need to say more; I know that my son is drowned. Zipelius had
at first refused to bathe in the Moselle because of his dream, but
in the evening he resisted no more and perished (lx).
M. A. Lavaut recognized during the war a place that he had
seen clearly in a dream in 1911. He then saw himself in an officers
uniform (though he had never been in the army) surrounded by
soldiers in blue. In 1918 his dream came true. It is certainly
not a coincidence, as he quite rightly says; but it may possibly be
a case of paramnesia. The testimony of those to whom the dream
was told in 1911 is required (Revue Spirite, lxvii, 1919, 267).
On Sunday, August 14th (case lxi) Mme. Thomas saw in a
dream the funeral of a child coming from the orphanage of
Treforest down the left-hand slope of the hill. The coffin was
borne by the other children. She went to the orphanage and was
told that none of the inmates had died. On the 17th (Wednes
day) a child of three, not belonging to thq orphanage, was
drowned; and the mother asked that the orphanage children
should come to the funeral. This was permitted, the procession
passing on the left side of the hill as seen by Mme. Thomas in her
dream. Bozzano remarks that premonitions dealing with funerals
are frequent.
Miss Gwendoline Janesson (pseudonym, /. S. P. R., February,
1920, 161) dreamed, on the night of August 2d, that she saw a
funeral and heard a voice saying to her, It is Leonard. She
saw Mr. V. and Mr. L., the two best friends of her fiance.
Leonard. She then found herself alone at the tomb, and Mr. L.
came and took her by the arm. She told this dream to her
mother. She spent the 5th of August with her fiance, who
seemed in good health, but next day collapsed in his chair and died
of heart failure. There was nothing to cause any anticipation of
his death.
I have myself had only one premonitory dream, and that a vague
one. Though I never dream of music (for good reasons), I
dreamed that I heard Chopins Funeral March. The impression
was clear and I wondered what eminent person might be dead.
Three or four days later I was invited to an important funeral
and I imagined that the dream might be an interesting premoni
tion. I went, perhaps for that reason, expecting to hear Chopins
march. I was much disappointed when nothing of the kind took
place. But returning home I came across a military funeral and
the band was playing Chopins march. This may have been a coin
cidence, but I am inclined to think that there was a premonition.
Dr. Haye, at Norwalk, dreamed that three of the boys at
his school were drowned, and he told the masters to take every
care. The next day, as the boys were going for a walk, he re
newed his caution; but the accident took place, and three were
drowned (lix).
Mme. Mastro Pietro, an aged peasant woman of Castel di
Guido, a lonely village near Rome, had terrifying dreams night
after night. She heard moans and distinguished the cries of
her married daughter Caroline, living in Rome. One morning
she made up her mind to go to Rome, and reached her daughters
house only to find that she had been burned and had just died
(case lxv).
M. Nolte sees his niece Hlne, a little girl (of six) run over
by a tram-car (5.30 p .m .) . He told his dream and advised close
care of the child ; but as if destiny were inevitable, the child was
run over and killed by the tram when crossing the street at that
hour.
Bozzanos case, lxviii, carefully studied by Hyslop, is of ex
traordinary interest and lends itself to much comment.
In July, 1897, Mrs. D., whose little girl Betty was aged two
years, heard a voice saying, She will not need it, every time
that she thought of the childs future. When she went to buy
shoes for the child, the voice said to her, She will not need
them. Several times, both when awake and in dream, she had
visions of the little ones cradle in fimes. Eight days before the
accident she smelt burning, though there was no fire in the house.
An hour before the catastrophe she had the idea of destroying
the matches in the room, but thought, I will do it after my son
comes in. At ten oclock she put Betty into her cot, and while
doing so heard a voice saying, Turn the mattress. As she was
in a hurry, she said jokingly to Betty, I will turn the mattress
when you have gone bye-bye. A few minutes later the cot was
PREMONITIONS 375
in flames and little Betty mortally burned. It is supposed that
the child had found a match, had lit it, and so started the fire.
The following striking occurrence has been given me by my
learned colleague, Professor Thoulet, of the Faculty of Sciences
at Nancy, who has confirmed it orally several times.
Thoulet, then a student, had gone to Italy to Rivazzano, to
assist a young French engineer, M. F., whose wife lived at
Toulon. Thoulet and M. F. slept in adjoining rooms. In the
middle of the night Thoulet got up, went into M. F.s room, and
said, You have a little girl: the telegram says . . . and he
began to read an imaginary telegram whose meaning he could
clearly perceive though the words disappeared by degrees. Some
time later (How longf C. R.) Mr. F. received exactly the
same telegram, the words and intention being the same as per
ceived by Thoulet in his momentary access of lucidity. I have
no material proof to give, he now says, and if anyone told me
the story I could not believe it, but I can only say that I must
admit to myself that it is true.
Etienne de Grillet, a member of the Society of Friends
(Quakers), relates that the Countess Toutschkoff, the wife of a
Russian general, dreamed before the French invasion of 1812,
that her father (living) came to her, holding her eldest son by the
hand, and said, Thy happy days are past; thy husband has
fallen at Borodino. This dream was repeated three times. She
told the general, and asked, Where is Borodino? The general
did not know of this obscure village and they could not find it
on the map. Some months after, her father came into her room
with her eldest son as in the dream and said, Thy husband is
dead, he has fallen at Borodino! (lxx).
Mr. Ivey, of Forney (Texas), waked one morning, December
19th, in a state of the utmost distress about his son, aged nine
teen, who had taken up his abode on a neighbouring estate and
was, as far as known, in no danger whatever. Mrs. Ivey also
dreamed at the same time that she went on a journey in a car
riage, that she was in a room in a house she did not know, sur
rounded by a large family, with a girl unknown to her and chil
dren about to leave for school.
In this dream there was both a monition and a premonition.
The son of Mr. and Mrs. Ivey had met with a serious carriage
accident on December 17th, so that his parents distress was
monitory and not premonitory. The premonitory features were
the arrival of Mrs. Ivey in a carriage, she having missed the
train, among the unknown family, at the bedside of her son,
who died on December 19th at 1 a m . All the details of her dream
were actually reproduced (Bozzanos case, lxix).
Some reservations may properly be made as to the metapsychic
bearing of the premonition, for the likelihood of the sequel to the
monition itself might possibly explain it.
Three times in the course of the year 1909, Mme. Brot, of
Alais, wrote to the Count de Tromelin to tell him of her presenti
ment that she would be widowed through a railway accident
before the years end. On December 10, 1909, her husband, em
ployed at the station of Alais, had his head crushed by the buffer
of a wagon (lxxxi).
Mme. Lolla, in Russia, dreamed that her mother came into her
room saying, Lolla, dont be frightened, but the barn is on
fire. Next day the dream came true; her mother using the
same words. (Is there a possibility of paramnesia here?)
Lolla, who afterwards married M. de R., went to a family
chapel in the cemetery. While on her knees, praying, she heard
a voice telling her, You will be widowed, but you will not have
the consolation of praying at my sons grave. She fainted with
emotion. Her husband, Colonel R., some months later was mor
tally wounded in the battle at Moukden. His body was not
recovered.
(c) Premonitions of Sundry Events
The first case adduced here is an excellent instance, because the
evidence is conclusive, verified before the event, and the proba
bility can be fairly well calculated.
M. Gallet, student of medicine at Lyons, was preparing some
examination work in his room about 11 a .m . He was obsessed by
a thought that distracted his work, and he wrote down in his
note-book, M. Casimir-Prier has been elected President of the
Republic by 451 votes. Gallet cared nothing for politics, and
the phrase dumbfounded him. He showed it to his comrade
Varay, with whom he was working. After lunch Gallet went to
his lectures, and meeting two fellow-students, Boucher and
Delorme, he told them the premonition, at which they only
laughed. After lecture, the four students went to a caf and
PREMONITIONS 377
shortly after the Paris newspapers arrived, announcing the
election of Casimir-Perier by 451 votes.1
Gallet is now a physician at Annecy, and a senator of Savoy;
Varay is a physician also, at Annecy; Delorme is a pharmacist
at Thonon; Boucher, a physician at Cruseilles. All four
certify to the strict truth of the fact, which they remember quite
clearly.
The candidature of Casimir-Perier was very doubtful, and
unlikely: the betting was on Brisson or Dupuy. The probability
of his election was very slight, but even admitting an equal
chance for the first three candidates the probability that one of
them would get 451 votes out of 845 is 1 : 845. But the basis of
calculation is very defective. Chance may always be invoked, it is
a convenient way of avoiding thought. What was the cause that
impelled Gallet to write on the margin of his anatomical notes,
Casimir-Perier has been elected by 451 votes ? This case is, to
my thinking, one of the most decisive proofs of premonition on
record.
Several cases of premonition on games of chance, lotteries,
and races have been noted.
A cousin of my own, living in the country, who never bet on
races, heard one evening, on putting out her lamp, loud plaudits
and shouts of Clamart, Clamart. She re-lit the lamp and all
was silent. On her putting out the light the plaudits began again.
She thought at first that it must be the name of the station on the
Paris-Versailles line shouted by the porters; but suddenly re
membered that a horse of that name was running. She staked on
Clamart, without knowing exactly what this bound her to.
Clamart was the winner.
Charles Cascel, two months before the ballot for military ser
vice, saw something undefined in his room on which there ap
peared the number 90 in large figures. He shut his eyes and
re-opening them still saw the figures 90. Frightened by this, he
T h e re su lts o f th e v o tin g w e r e :
V o t e r s : 845. V o te s
451
>95
C a s im ir -P e rie r ...............................................................
A . B riss o n ................................................................
97
33
D u p u y ..............................................................................
G n ra l F v r i e r ............................................................
A r a g o ................................................................................. 27
D iv e r s ......................................... 22
began to pray (sic). On the day of the drawing he announced
that he would draw number 90, which he did, to the amazement of
those present.
Several analogous cases have been collected by Professor Hulin
of the University of Ghent.
To estimate justly the value of such divinations we ought to
know how many have failed, for too often the successes are noted
and the failures are forgotten. The calculus of probabilities is
only applicable if strict records be kept of all trials, and if
failures are taken into account as well as successes, which is very
seldom done.
Some interesting facts relative to roulette at Monte Carlo were
collected by a friend of mine, an experienced physicist and
mathematician, who communicated to me the results of his
methodical enquiries and calculations of probability. His wife,
Lydia, aged thirty, and the mother of a family, had some occa
sional premonitions, of which only the following have been
accurately noted:
On the 2d of May, after seven or eight days on which Marcel
had steadily lost, she said, I dreamed that we should win on 14.
Marcel then staked eighteen consecutive times on twelve num
bers: the 14 won. On these twelve numbers of his system, four
only succeeded, among which was the 14. The odds were there
fore 4 :12 or 1 :3, which counts for nothing. But the 14 was
repeated twice, it came up a second time immediately after win
ning a first time. Gamesters make a practice of leaving their
stake on a winning number, and the probability of its coming up
again is 1 :37; so that the probability of the 14 turning up a
second time was 1/3X1/37, or 1/111; so that its turning up is not
very marvellous. But on May 3d Lydia dreamed again that she
would win on the 31. The event of the previous day with the
14 was repeated in exactly the same sequence; so that the two suc
cesses took place against odds of 1 :12,000.
It was observed that in the course of numerous trials Marcel
never had a repetition after winning on one number; the only
repetitions he had were of the 14 and the 31.
To realize how faint was the chance of correct prediction, it will
be found to work out that only once in thirty-two years of daily
trials would two named numbers come up in succession.
On the two following days Lydia named two other numbers
that did not come up at all.
PREMONITIONS 379
On the fifth day she said 32 and 35, without knowing why. On
124 trials the winning numbers that day were as follows:
34 8 times. 306 times.
35 7 times. 196 times.
327 times. 36 times.
Other numbers, less than 6 times.
The 32 and the 35 therefore came up nearly twice as often as
was to be looked for. It will be remarked that 34 is intermediate
between 32 and 35.
The probability can be roughly calculated as follows: Supposing
that the 32 and the 35 came up 14 times when they should have
come up 6, 8, or say 7 times, that would mean that they had come
up 7 times more than was probable. This is a probability of
(/4 )7, say 1 :128. To simplify matters we will suppose that
the compounded probability on the five days' play (with two
failures) is 1 :110 instead of 1 : 111. Then, according to the
recognized formula, the total probability in round numbers is
1:130,000.
The sixth day Lydia dreamed that she would win on the 16.
At a given moment she staked on the 16, which won, the proba
bility being 1 :37. So that on the six compounded trials the odds
against correct prediction by chance alone would be 1 : 5,000,000.
It is true that this calculation cannot be considered strictly
accurate, for the repetition is taken into account for the first two
days, the most frequent numbers on the fifth day and a single
number turning up on one trial only on the sixth day; all different
facts not strictly comparable.
It should be added that later on Lydia had only failures. Still,
taking into account the compound event when odds were so great,
the fact that the numbers were indicated before the event confirms
the conclusion that premonition may sometimes occur with
reference to games of chance. The problem is, however, too
obscure for anything more than a mere mention of the facts.
M. E. Desbeaux has published an interesting note on this sub
ject (A. S. P., 1909, xix, 127).
Lombroso mentions the case of Rosa Tirone, quoted by Boz-
zano (lxxxviii). In November, 1908, she dreamed that her
fiance, who had died not long before, said to her, I do not wish
you to be a servant any longer; play the numbers 4, 53, 25, and
30, and he added, I am thirsty, get some water in a bucket and
give me to drink. The four numbers named were winners, and
if Rosa had played the fifth number which corresponds, ac
cording to popular opinion, to giving drink to the thirsty, she
would have won on this also.
The previsions mentioned by E. Carreras regarding lotteries
(La Previsione dei Numeri. Luce e Ombra, 1919, xix, 127) can
not be considered evidential, for if R. could guess winning num
bers more often than chance would account for, he ought to have
realized considerable sums of money. It may therefore be inferred
that the list given by him to M. Carreras is not complete, as
indeed M. Carreras indicates (da vert indizi debbo credere che ve
ne furono alcune oltre che anderono perdute). On 150 drawings
of numbers with two figures, five such numbers at each drawing,
the probability is 1 :20. R. chose 106 times. The probable num
ber of successes was 5.3, say 6, but he had 19 successes. The
excess is notable, but not more than might be referable to chance,
especially if all the numbers played (probably losing numbers)
have not been given.
It has been remarked, not without reason, that if there were
any power of divination, even subconscious, with regard to games
of chance, lotteries, races, etc., fortunes might be won, whereas
nothing of the kind takes place. But it may be answered that
verified premonitions are extremely rare, sporadic, and very excep
tional. The spirit breathes where it will (spirat ubi vult), and the
fateful number will not be discovered by poring over a series
of figures with set purpose.
Not only is prophecy rare in those who have the power, but
those who have it are very few; so that if sometimes there really
are divinations, these are so infinitesimally few by comparison
with normal anticipations as to be practically negligible.
Charles Linnaeus relates in his autobiography (1823) that when he
was at college, where his intelligence was not highly rated, a seer-
ess told him, You will be a professor, you will travel to distant
lands, and will be the most celebrated man in the kingdom (xcv).
The following case is interesting, having been observed by the
great Schopenhauer (Flammarion, 133):
One morning, says Schopenhauer, having written a letter, I
laid my hand on the inkpot instead of the sand-box to dry the writ
ing. The ink was spilt on the floor. I called the servant to wash
the floor. While she did so she told me that she had dreamed the
previous night of doing this and had told her dream to the other
servant, who confirmed the statement.
PREMONITIONS 381
This story, whose truth I guarantee, says Schopenhauer,
puts the reality of such dreams beyond question. Therefore all
that happens is fated . . We may accept his evidence
without drawing his conclusion.
From the historical point of view we may quote a premonition
occurring to Charles Dickens, reported by Walter F. Prince
(Am. S. P. R xiv, 1920). He dreamed of a lady in a red shawl,
who said, I am Miss Napier. He wrote, Why Miss Napier?
I know no Miss Napier. Some hours later two persons came to
visit him to introduce a lady in a red shawl named Miss Napier
whom Dickens did not know at all.
Bozzanos case xcviii is extremely curious; it is well attested.
One John Lee was condemned to be hanged for murder at Babbi-
combe in February, 1889. The night before his execution he
dreamed that the trap-door would not work, whatever efforts
were made to open it. He told this dream to the warder. In fact,
the trap would not open, though it had previously been tried.
When Lee was upon it he was half unconscious, and did not
remember his dream.
M. Henri Buisson, on June 8, 1887, dreamed that he saw his
grandmother dead on her bed and above her a sun bearing the
words, June 8, 1888. The dream was told and noted down. One
year later, on June 8, 1888, the grandmother died in a quarter of
an hour.
He also had a premonitory dream with some strange details
which he narrated before the event. On the night of April 9th he
dreamed that he saw M. Lepine, the prefect of police, in the street
wearing one shoe and one slipper. At this moment in the dream
a fire broke out at which M. Buisson in his dream performed won
ders of courage. On the evening of the same day, twelve hours
after the premonitory dream, a real fire broke out in the Rue
Jacquemont, and M. Buisson actually saw M. Lepine wearing one
shoe and one slipper. The dream had been told on the morning
of April 10th to M. Buissons mother and uncle.
Mme. S. dreamed that she saw in her drawing-room a lady in
deep mourning by the side of her child's nurse; and immediately
after, in her dream, found herself in a taxi-cab, which stopped
near the Place Pigalle. On the same day she received the unex
pected visit of a friend, Mme. P., in deep mourning, who also
quite unexpectedly invited her to dine. Mme. S. went to her room
to dress, and on returning to the drawing-room saw Mme. P the
nurse, and the child in precisely the same positions as seen in her
dream. A few minutes later Mme. P. said, It is late, we will take
a taxi. The cab took them to the Rue Douai, quite near to the
Place Pigalle.
Mme. Ohmus had a horrible dream (xcix), which she told to
her husband. She saw herself stretched on the ground, both arms
crushed and bleeding. In the evening her little dog Nello was run
over by a train. Mme. O. then felt the same sensations as in her
dream. It would seem that in this case the premonition was of
the emotions produced by the accident and not of the accident
itself.
Sir A. Conan Doyle reports a personal experience, extremely
vague and non-evidential. Upon April 4, 1917, I awoke with a
feeling that some communication had been made to me of which
I had only carried back one word, which was ringing in my head.
That word was Piave. To the best of my belief I had never heard
that word before. As it sounded like the name of a place . . .
I looked up the index of my atlas . . . a river in Italy some
forty miles behind the front line which at that time was victo
riously advancing. . . . I could not think how any military
event of consequence could arise there, but none the less I was
so impressed that I drew up a statement that some such event
would occur there and had it signed by my secretary and wit
nessed by my wife, with the date April 4th attached (The New
Revelation, p. 112).
Six months later this river became the front line between the
Italian and the Austro-Hungarian armies.
As to this case it is impossible to prove that there was no sub
conscious remembrance of this geographical name, which must
certainly have fallen under Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's eyes some
time in 1915 or 1916. There may be a premonition involved, and
perhaps the time will come when such facts can be classed as
authentic premonitions; but as yet they can only be recorded
without drawing any inference from them.
A friend of Miss Violet Lloyd, a well-known English actress,
dreamed that Miss Lloyd's face was burned above her eyes. She
told this to another friend, who did not dare tell Miss Lloyd. The
next day Miss Lloyd, playing Flora in The Topsy Turvy Hotel,
had her face burned, with two wounds above the eyes (case ci).
Mrs. Carleton (Bozzanos case ciii) wrote to Colonel Coghill,
to whom she had not written for a very long while, to say that she
PREMONITIONS 383
had had a vision in which she had seen him thrown from his
horse and in a dangerous situation from which several strangers
were endeavouring to extricate him. The vision was on March
26th, the letter on the 28th. On the latter date the colonel
answered, Do not be anxious, there is nothing the matter, dreams
are vain. On the 30th, however, he had a terrible fall from his
horse which fell into a ditch and was extricated with difficulty
from his dangerous position by some friends.
Mr. O. dreamed, though he says it was a vision rather than a
dream, that his little nephew, aged six, fell under the wheel of a
carriage and was seriously though not mortally hurt. As the
dream was much on his mind, he recommended three different
persons to take great care of the child. Two weeks later, during
a carriage drive, the boy fell under a wheel and had his leg
broken.
Sir Oliver Lodge received from an eminent English minister
the following account (Bozzano, loc. cit., 343): In bright sun
shine and with a cloudless sky, Mr. X. directed his wife to put
forward the luncheon hour; for he had dreamed that there would
be a terrible storm; that globular lightning would enter the dining
room and would destroy the chimneys of the roof opposite.
Everyone jested at the dream, for the sky was quite clear.
Nevertheless a storm rapidly came up, a fiery globe entered the
dining-room and the chimneys of the neighbouring roof were
thrown to the ground.
The celebrated sculptor, Jean Dupre (Bozzano, 356) tells how,
driving at Londa, on the precipitous road to Rufina, he heard a
voice saying, Stop! He could see no one. Mme. Dupre, who
was with him, saw no one, but heard the voice. Twice running he
whipped up the horse and the voice came again, Stop! Stop!
He got down and found that the axle had nearly left the wheel
next the precipice. They had to finish the journey on foot.
This may be supposed to have resulted from a subconscious
observation producing this kind of warning, but how can the fact
that two persons heard the voice in this lonely place be explained ?
Mr. Young dreamed that a slater working on the roof of an
adjoining house would fall into the street, and in his dream he
was advised to tell this to Mrs. Young. He did so, and then
attended to his business without thinking any more of the matter.
At 4 p . m ., by a kind of instinctive impulse, he went into the street
to the place he had dreamed of and found that the accident had
taken place two minutes earlier and that the unfortunate workman
was nearly dead (xvi).
Lady Z. was awakened one night by a heavy thud, as if a
human body had fallen from the kitchen roof. She heard moan
ing, and woke her husband, Lord Z., who heard nothing. She
went to sleep again but again was waked up by the same sounds.
Her husband, then, at her desire, went out, but could find
nothing. The next morning a workman fell in the same place
and suffered much injury.
Miss A. MacLellen, of Bridgeport (Connecticut), had various
interesting premonitions, most of which, however, do not depart
sufficiently from normal probabilities to be evidential of a meta
psychic cause. There is one that deserves mention (/. 5*. P. R.,
March, 1920). On the night of July 8th, at Boston, she dreamed
of a terrible railway accident, and dead and wounded being car
ried to the Galen Hospital. In the morning she looked in the
newspapers to see if such an accident had occurred. On the 11th
of July this accident happened near Bridgeport, 12 persons being
killed and 48 injured, and these latter were taken to the Galen
Hospitala small private hospital in Boston.
The next case (Bozzanos cx) is one of the most remarkable
extant. It cannot be explained by paramnesia; most of its detail
was told before the event to Mme. de Figueroa, though it was
not written down.
Giovanni de Figueroa, one of the most brilliant fencing masters
of Palermo, had a most vivid dream and told his wife all that he
had seen: a road white with dust; a large cultivated field, a rustic
shed with a cart and harness; a peasant wearing dark-coloured
trousers and a black hat, who invites M. de Figueroa to come in.
They enter a small stable full of mud and dung. At the other
end of the stable some winding stone stairs. A mule tethered
to a movable manger obstructs the passage-way. M. de F. causes
the mule to be pushed aside and mounts the stairs. At the top
of the staircase is a room with a wooden floor and bundles of
maize, tomatoes, melons, and onions hanging from the ceiling.
In this room, two women, one old, the other young, also a little
girl, whose features were clearly seen and remembered. In the
next room a double bed, very high off the ground, higher than
M. de F. had ever seen.
M. de F. and his wife thought much over this very clear and
intricate dream, but could find no meaning in it (August, 1910).
PREMONITIONS 385
On the 12th of October of the same year M. de F. was asked to
assist a fellow-townsman in a duel.
They left, with the two seconds, in an automobile for Marano,
a little place of whose very existence M. de F. did not know. As
they were going through the country, M. de F. recognized the
white road seen in his dream, and said to his companions, I
have seen this before, we shall come to a wooden house and shed.
Then all the details of the dream were met with in realitythe
peasant in dark trousers and black hat, the mule tethered to the
manger that had to be displaced to allow them to reach the stairs,
the upper room with the melons, onions, and maize, the three
women, the high bed in the next room, etc. The sensation made
on M. de F.s mind was so strong that he says he completely for
got the duel about which he had come.
If some few of the minor details may be referable to param
nesia, there is none the less a mass of facts which have a strongly
metapsychic character. I have had to condense and summarize
the account and no adequate idea can be formed of the events
unless the narrative is read in the original version.
The case of the Abb Gamier (La Mort et son Mystre, 277)
is analogous to the Figueroa case. Garnier, in 1846, while at the
seminary, saw the whole of an unknown landscape with many
detailssheep, men with pointed hats, a foal, a pug-dog, children
playing, etc. Three years after, in 1849, when travelling in Italy,
he found the whole of these details reproduced in actuality. His
good faith is not in doubt, but can he be certain of details enu
merated four years later? We must consider some paramnesia
possible or even probable, some illusion of having seen before.
A premonition when not written down or told before the event
can never be taken as evidential.
Some other premonitions narrated by Flammarion (Princess
Carolath, p. 274 ; Mme. Lebas, p. 283 ; and Aime Roger, p. 284)
are open to the same objection.
M. Saurel, in 1911, dreamed that he saw a field and stream
beside a large building, in a part of the country unknown to
him. Soldiers were drawing water, camping, and lighting fires.
They were wearing a pale-blue uniform and a curious kind of
helmet. He himself was in officers uniform. On awaking he
told the dream to several friends. In 1918 this dream was com
pletely realized. This premonition, attested by M. Saurels father
and mother as having been told them in 1911, should be read in
the original; it is most interesting (Flammarion, Death and its
Mystery).
Another most interesting premonition, for which perhaps fresh
documentary proofs are needed, refers to one of the greatest
events of contemporary, indeed of all history. It is a premoni
tion relative to the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand at
Sarajevo, June 28, 1914, for this crime initiated the greater crime
of the war, 1914-1918.
Mgr. Joseph de Lanyi, Bishop of Grosswarden, dreamed on the
morning of June 28th, at 4 a .m ., that he saw on his study table
a black-edged letter bearing the arms of the Archduke. M. de
Lanyi had been professor of the Hungarian language to the
Archduke. In his dream he opened the letter and at its head saw
a street into which an alley opened. The Archduke was seated
in a motor-car with his wife; facing him was a general, and
another officer by the side of the chauffeur. There was a crowd
about the car and from the crowd two young men stepped for
ward and fired on the royal couple. The text of the letter ran,
Your Eminence, dear Dr. Lanyi, my wife and I have been vic
tims of a political crime at Sarajevo. We commend ourselves to
your prayers. Sarajevo, June 28, 1914, 4 a .m ."
Then, says Mgr. de Lanyi, I woke up trembling; I saw that
the time was 4.30 a .m ., and I wrote down my dream, reproducing
the characters that had appeared to me in the Archdukes letter.
At six, when my servant came, he found me seated at my table,
much shaken and telling my rosary. I said at once to him, Call
my mother and my host, that I may tell them the dreadful dream
I have had.
During the day a telegram arrived giving the terrible news.
Such is the letter that Edouard Lanyi, S. J., a professor at
Laufkirchen, received from his brother, Mgr. Lanyi. Hearing of
this letter, M. Grabinsky made certain enquiries which confirmed
all these facts. The results of this enquiry are given in
Psychische Studien, 1918, xliv, 324 and 465.
In this premonition all the details are very full and correct,
except as to the shots fired. Bombs were really used, and thrown
twice.
It may, however, be asked why this extraordinary premonition
was not published till 1918. It may be surmised also that Mgr.
de Lanyi knew that the Archduke would go to Sarajevo and that
some danger to him might be apprehended.
PREMONITIONS 387
Granting that it would be absurd to suppose an imposture on
the part of Mgr. de Lanyi and his brother, these objections do not
seem to me sufficient to warrant a refusal to consider this fine
instance of premonition as authentic.
I shall now give in fairly full detail one of the most remarkable
cases recorded in psychic science. It may be divided into two
parts, the first part having reference to facts which came to pass
after the prediction, but were published or told to us after they
came to pass; and the second, shorter and more vague, concerning
facts that were told me and published before they came to pass.
In November, 1913, I had a visit from Dr. Tardieu, a former
house-surgeon and then consultant at the Mont Dore Hospital,
who had been a pupil of my fathers, and said to me, I have some
very important things to tell you. According to certain indications
and revelations personal to myself, the time seems come to speak
of these things, and I think it necessary to tell you of them now.
He then gave me the narrative that here follows in an abridged
form; as he gave it, the detail was lengthy:
In 1868 I left the Medical School, as a young doctor. I had
a close friend named Sonrel, a brilliant mathematician and physi
cist, an astronomical student at the Paris Observatory. One day
in July, about 5 p .m., we were conversing as we walked in the
Luxemburg Gardens, when Sonrel suddenly stopped, as if in a
trance. He spoke, and spoke without heeding anything that I
said to him, and without seeing anything round him. He said:
How strange! I see you in uniform! Yes, you have a military
cap and in it you are counting money, and you are on a railway!
Where are you going? To Hirson? To Sedan? Oh, my poor
country! My country! . . . I, too, am in uniform, a superior
officer. Is it possible? I am mortally ill. . . . I shall die in
three days, but you are there, you come in time to see me before I
die, to watch over my children! Wait now, wait. . . . Years
pass. It is a vast war! What bloodshed! God! What blood
shed! Oh, France! Oh, my country! Thou art saved! Thou
art on the Rhine! Oh, France, thou art ever the queen among
nations! All admire thee!
I give these words of Dr. Tardieus from memory; he published
them in April, 1914, in the A. S. P. I have asked him to correct
anything that is inexact, but the version above is that which he
gave me in November, 1913. Dr. Tardieu added:
The whole of this astonishing prediction was realized. At the
end of August, 1870,1 was appointed by Nelaton to the charge of
a military hospital. I had a military uniform, and having collected
money for the wounded at the head of my detachment on the way
to the station, I was counting the amount received, in my cap.
Not till then did I remember my friends prediction, so that
when my comrades asked where we were going I said, I know,
to Hirson and Sedan.*
In September, 1870, Sonrel was appointed commandant of
engineers; but in the early days of the siege he fell a victim to
haemorrhagic smallpox. I arrived just in time for his last mo
ments. He was awaiting me and kept on saying, Tardieu will
come; I see him coming.
He had married in 1869, had one child, and in September,
1870, his wife was enceinte
Dr. Tardieu added also: The personal predictions that Sonrel
made to me are on the point of being realized, and I presume that
the second part of his prediction will come to pass like the first.
That is why I come to tell you.
At my repeated request, not without some reluctance, he con
sented to write out what he had told me verbally, and all these
premonitions were published in the A. S. P. for June, 1914.
The critical study of this now celebrated prophecy falls naturally
into two parts: For the events of 1870, which constitute the first
part, we have only the testimony of Dr. Tardieu; but his good
faith and sincerity are as unquestionable as my own, or that of
Oliver Lodge, or William James. I would willingly admit that
defective memory may cause some small details to be inaccurately
reported; but the essential facts, the prediction of the war of
1870, and Sonrels speedy death, were certainly spoken of in the
Luxemburg Gardens in July, 1868. Moreover, there is another
certain factDr. Tardieu has repeatedly told the story in the
same way. Therefore we are dealing with an authentic premoni
tion, very full of detail, and nearly unique in science by reason of
this abundance of detail which certainly did not originate in Dr.
Tardieus well-controlled and scientific mind.
The criticism of the second part of the prediction referring to
1914-1918 is of a different kind. There are much fewer details
to speak accurately, there are none. War, bloodshed, the Rhine,
victory are not details of events; but the premonition was written
and printed before the event, so that there can be no uncertainty
whatsoever about its authenticity.
PREMONITIONS 389
Certainly the political situation in Europe in 1913 was not reas
suring ; but in November of that year it was perhaps less strained
than in 1910, and Dr. Tardieu was induced to come and speak to
me, not by the European situation, but by the fulfilment of per
sonal prophecies that Sonrel had made to him and of which he
gave me only a very partial and vague summary. Certainly some
of the wording of the prediction is very applicable : What blood
shed! What slaughter! But France reaches the Rhine. Oh,
France, queen of nations, all admire thee !
Another premonition printed before the event in the journal
La Vie Nouvelle, of Beauvais (Nos. 324, 325), appeared in Febru
ary and March, 1914; communicated to the paper by the Abb
J. A. Petit, being utterances in trance by a simple peasant girl, who
during her trance spoke as if she were Jeanne dArc, the guide
of France. There is much irrelevant matter proceeding normally
from the single supposition of approaching war, already appre
hended in February, 1914. I quote only the interesting parts :
In a very short time France will be invaded by enemy masses
on the northwest (with respect to Domrmy). Their entry will
be victorious by reason of their number and the ignorance of
their designs that still prevails in France. When this invasion
begins our armies will not be expecting it. The invasion will
come by the northwest frontier of two departments, and the
invading forces will be so great that they will reach several towns
of a third department. It will be necessary to give up these towns.
The north and the east will suffer much. The enemy will advance
in a straight line parallel to the frontier.
Here comes in the account of a sanguinary battle or series of
battles round a fortress (Verdun?). The enemy will find that
place three times as strong as he expected.
But France is not alone. The violation of neutral territory has
displeased other powers who unite zvith the French, for it is clear
that this znolation has been made to take possession of that land
and to have a direct passage to the French frontier
I underline the more characteristic phrases of this confused but
curious prediction.
The allied powers will make themselves heard ; the enemy will
not heed them . . . but will persist in behaving on neutral
territory as in a conquered country. The struggle will continue in
this small nation and it will be bloody.
After various obscurely worded divagations, there comes:
The enemy wavers despite the objurgations of the leaders;
discouragement is followed by consternation and rout. They
scarcely defend themselves; they let themselves be killed. It is
the end. The French and their allies unite in laying down the
basis for an equitable treaty of peace, desiring to unite all nations
in justice and fraternity.
Does this refer to the League of Nations?
The above is an abridged, and therefore mutilated, summary
of this interesting premonition. There is not sufficient detail of
actual events to produce sure conviction that it may not be due to
normal penetration and chance combined; nevertheless, in certain
respects there is sufficient accuracy and prevision to give much
food for thought. To form a thoroughly well-grounded opinion
the original should be referred to. It seems weak, however, in
comparison with the Sonrel predictions.
Lady Hester Stanhope received some prophetic communications
from a certain French gentleman named Lusteneau, who an
nounced that Aleppo and Antioch would be destroyed by earth
quake. In 1822 Mr. Wolff was at Aleppo, and dining one day
with Mr. Barker, M. de Lesseps, and M. Maseyk, the Danish con
sul, a letter from Lady Stanhope to Mr. Barker was commented
on with much amusement as she warned Mr. Barker not to go to
Aleppo, as the destruction of the city was impending. Some days
after there was a terrible earthquake that destroyed Aleppo and
Antioch, and caused 60,000 deaths. Mr. Barker had a very
narrow escape.1
Premonitions of earthquakes are frequent but are generally too
vague to count.2
Dr. Santi states that a lady of the Roman aristocracy said, on
December 2, 1909, that she had seen in a dream the town of
Messina destroyed by an earthquake and a tidal wave, and that
this catastrophe would take place on the 8th, the 18th, or the
28th of that same month. She wrote to the King of Italy to the
above effect a letter which Dr. Santi saw and kept. Messina was
destroyed by an earthquake and a tidal wave on December 28,
1909 (Bozzano, 335).
At Nice, during the night of March 5, 1921, Mme. F. dreamed
that she was taken into a distant country, arid, deserted, and quite
unknown to her, where she could see nothing like what she was
xBozzano, 334, after William Howitt,History of the supernatural, ii, 26.
'See also the references to the Martinique earthquake in theA. S. P.
PREMONITIONS 391
accustomed to. In her dream her (deceased) father told her she
was in Brazil. While looking at the strange landscape she saw
people running away in terror, for the earth was torn up on all
sides. She told this dream to her husband and to her brother.
On the morning of March 6th the newspapers of Paris and Nice
announced (for the first time) that a terrible earthquake in China
had caused the deaths of 250,000 persons. Mme. F. could not
possibly have had any knowledge of this event on March 5th.
Conversation on that day had turned on Brazil, but not on
earthquakes.
Is this a case of cryptesthesia or mere coincidence? It is to be
noted (1) that Mme. F. never dreamed of seismic convulsions,
and (2) that the Chinese earthquake is one of the most serious
on record.
The following premonitions are of quite trivial events; their
interest lies in the precise details given.
M. Mittelmayer (Bozzanos xxvi), a schoolmaster at Dingolfing
(Bavaria), dreams that a peasant returning from early mass
comes to tell him that M. F. wishes to take him to Fosthart to a
small meeting of ecclesiastics and schoolmasters, and that at the
inn there he sees a gentleman take the Mnchener Post out of his
pocket. Mr. Mittelmayer told the dream to his wife. On the
following day the dream was fulfilled in every detail. When
M. F. came, M. M. told him the dream, but no atisfactory expla
nation could be found. At Fosthart there was a man reading
the Mnchener Post.
Mr. S. H. (case cxiv), on awaking, saw close to his table a grey
headed man, with his back to the door; he was in his shirt-sleeves,
and Mr. H. felt that he knew the man but could not place him.
He told the fact to his wife and three employees. He then went
to his office, and seeing from a distance someone coming towards
them he said to the employees, Here is my man coming along.
This man having entered the office found it very hot; he took off
his coat and appeared in his shirt-sleeves as Mr. H. had seen him
in the dream.
Mme. A., in a high fever and half delirious, sees a woman
bending over her. She sees only down to the waist and is aware
of the Christian name Marie; the surname she is unable to read,
but ends in et Two days later she was looking for quarters in
the country to rent, and in the little village of Crosnes, which she
did not know, she found what she desired, and in the same house
another lodger, whom she recognized. I am sure, she said,
that your name is Marie. Her name was Marie Gallichet (Boz-
zano, cxvii).
Mrs. Z. had a very vivid dream that she saw herself with her
sister in Richmond Park, and that she found on a chair a hatpin
with a head like a medal, which she gave to her housemaid. She
told the dream, which doubtless led her to go to Richmond, where
she found the hatpin and duly gave it to her housemaid.
This case is curious; there is the one most unlikely premonition
the finding of the hatpin. The rest seems to have been deter
mined by the dream itself. The interest of such events does not
consist in the importance of the matter referred to. Trivial inci
dents are often the most curious, by reason of their unlikelihood
and the amount of details.
Mme. Albert Richet, my daughter-in-law, tells me the follow
ing story: On Sunday, December 28, 1919, at about 5 p . m ., I
was in the Paris Metropolitan Railway, going from the Pasteur
station to Pigalle. The compartment was full of people, and I
was quite normal. At the Solferino station, the train had nearly
stopped, when I heard loud cries of distress from a woman and a
child in the next compartment behind us, and at the same time,
a hubbub as of many people rushing to the place. I got up to
look out on the platform for the cause of this tumult, but could
see nothing unusual. I asked a lady (unknown) who was in the
compartment with me, Do you not hear it? She looked aston
ished and said, No, I hear nothing. I then realized that the
whole had taken place in my imagination. It seemed to me, how
ever (though I cannot be sure), that the train was slower than
usual in starting.
A few moments later we reached the next station (Chambre
des Deputes), and when the train stopped, I heard exactly re
peated all that I had previously heardthe screams, the noise of
the crowd, etc. They said that a woman whose child was nearly
suffocated by the crowd had screamed. I could see nothing be
cause the people in my compartment all crowded at the door to
see what was occurring. This time the train stopped for a
considerable time.
A singular fact is that the unknown lady to whom I had
spoken said only, It is a premonition/ without further remark.
She got out at the next station, Concorde. This is the first time
that anything of the kind has happened to me; and though I
PREMONITIONS 393
often travel by the Metro this is the only time that there has been
any such accident. I was much affected by it and the whole de
tails are strongly impressed on my mind.
This case is very clear. There cannot be paramnesia, because
the auditory hallucination was spoken of before the event. It can
hardly be referred to chance; and finally, the hallucination is quite
decidedly subjective.
Two facts of the same kind, but not very evidential, are as fol
lows : A schoolmaster, M. Savelli, of Costa in Corsica, on return
ing home with a friend, heard cries and lamentations from a
house near by. M. Savelli and his friend ascertained that
nothing was wrong. On the following day passing the same
place they heard the same cries, but this time they were real; a
child had been taken with croup and had died.
The other story is told by M. Napoleoni, a retired sergeant-
major: Passing at midnight with a friend before two detached
houses, they heard hammering. Two days later they were passing
again, and heard the same sound, but real. The village car
penter was making a coffin for a shepherd who had died the
day before.
Mr. Bowring (Bozzano, cxx) dreamed that he saw his favourite
canary dead in its bath, with extended wings. He told his wife,
who at once went to look at the cage, and found nothing wrong.
Next morning the bird was found dead in its bath with its wings
spread out. Some other birds had occasionally been found dead,
but always with their wings closed.
Mrs. Johnson (cxxi), who is accustomed to note down her
dreams and visions (it would be well if all sensitives would do
this), saw herself leaving an empty shop in a strange country, and
in the shop a very large red tam-o-shanter cap such as a buffoon
might wear. Some time later she went unexpectedly to the
Riviera, and there going into an empty florists shop she recalled
her vision. Before her was a man in the huge red capit was
carnival timemaking her extravagant bows.
The story told by Mr. Tweedale, the astronomer, is very note
worthy. One morning at 4 a . m . he dreamed that he saw a comet
in the east just before sunrise. The impression was so strong
that he went at once to his observatory, and found the comet,
which was invisible to the naked eye. He then went to the tele
graph office before it had opened, to make his discovery known.
Shortly after the post brought him news that the comet had been
discovered by Barnard and Hartwig (/. S. P. R., November,
1906, 328). Was this a premonition or cryptesthesia?
The next case was communicated to me by Dr. Z., a Fellow
of the Medical Faculty. One evening he went to see one of his
friends. The friend was out, but his sister, Mme. E., was at
home. My colleague was starting on his holiday two days later,
and the idea came to him to invite the lady to the Faculty of
Medicine to hear a paper read. Then, being alone in Paris, he
said to Mme. E., I will take you to the cinema this evening.
They found, however, that the cinema was closed; and walking
on, came to the Grand Guignol, where they went in just as the
curtain was going up. Soon Mme. E., much disturbed, grasped
the hand of the doctor, saying, It is my dream. She had
dreamed that a man in hideous mask, and his cap drawn down
over his eyes and with a bottle in his hand, was pursuing her
with hostile intent. The piece ( The M ask ) represented an un
fortunate man whose face had been so mutilated by an accident
that he had to wear a mask and to pull his cap down over his
eyes, as in Mme. E.s dream. Between the acts, Dr. Z., to calm
the lady, asked her if she had had any other dream. Yes, she
said, I saw you coming towards me in a palace, with statues all
round. Just so, said Dr. Z., that, no doubt, is because you
sang the other day that song of Mignon about marble statues.
On the following day, in the Salle des Pas Perdus of the
Faculty, Dr. Z., going forward towards Mme. E., saw her again
much disturbed. This was what I dreamed of, she said. I
saw all thisthe statues, the railing, and you were coming towards
me, just as you have now done.
One interesting element has been omitted from our present
classificationthe purpose that might be called tutelary shown
by some premonitions. Bozzano has a special chapter on pre
monitions that save from dangers. These are relatively few, and
to be fair, we ought also to speak of those which do not save,
which are much more frequent. In some cases, however, the
premonitory warning has been so unquestionable that one might
almost be warranted in the strange inference that an external
protecting will had given the caution. This would only be in
cases where no subconscious notion can have conveyed any sort of
anticipation. In order that any premonition may be recognized
as tutelary, the danger against which a warning is given must be
quite unforeseeable.
PREMONITIONS 395
A few cases are given below:
Mr. Wiltshire was awakened very early one morning by a voice
calling him loudly and repeatedly. His son heard nothing. The
voice was not recognized by him, but seemed agitated; and the
impression given was that some misfortune was impending, and
that he would be urgently wanted. As he was a cattle-breeder he
went out to inspect his stables. There was no one in the settlement
but a young female servant who showed much mental distress;
she was walking very fast and Mr. W. soon lost sight of her; but
he heard cries of distress and was just in time to save her from
drowning in a deep well into which she had thrown herself. In
this instance the distinct hearing of the voice excludes the notion
of coincidence (Eozzano, 381).
The next case was communicated by C. de Vesme to Flam-
marion, and is remarkable for several reasons. It concerns a pre
monition publicly given long in advance to several persons. A
certain Vincent Sassaroli, the conductor of a musical band at
Sartano, announced that the building in which the musicians were
to play would collapse. The house belonged to a Canon Bacherini.
Sassaroli insisted on a careful survey by a skilful architect.
Nothing unusual was found and Sassaroli was ridiculed for his
folly and timidity. On the date fixed for the performance he
repeated his prediction; they all left the house laughing and
mocking the visionary, but they had hardly gone out when the
house crumbled down. This memorable event was the subject of
a report, certified by all the inmates of the house (Flammarion,
338).
Mrs. X. had a very clear dream that she was driving in Pic
cadilly, near Down Street, that her coachman fell from the box,
and that his tall hat was crushed. On the following day she went
driving and in Piccadilly at the corner of Down Street noticed
that her coachman was falling backwards, half fainting. She
stopped the carriage and the man fell, so that her dream was half
realized. Half only, for the hat was not crushed. A serious
accident was avoided, writes Lady Z., by the prompt action caused
by my recollection of the dream.
4. Conclusion
A definite inference arises from these facts, whether they be
important or trivial; an inference that no criticism of details can
invalidate. It is that premonition is a demonstrated fact.
In certain circumstances not as yet definable, certain individuals
(mostly, though not exclusively, hypnotizable persons or me
diums) can announce events to come, and give precise details on
these events that are not as yet existent; details so exact that no
perspicuity, no coincidence, and no chance can account for the
prediction.
We are therefore driven to infer that the special, mysterious
faculty that we have called cryptesthesia, whose nature and modes
of action are unknown, is not only manifested for past and present
facts, but also for future ones.
After all, the metapsychic cognition of existing distant facts is
so marvellous that cognition of the future is not so very much
more extraordinary. A. knows that B., six hundred miles away,
is drowned. How can A. know this ? We have not the least idea.
A. announces that B. will be drowned tomorrow. It is only a
little more marvellous. In the whole domain of metapsychic lucid
ity, so profound is the mystery and so impenetrable the obscurity
that a little more or less mystery should not appal us.
Are we then to conclude that time is only a notion of our de
fective mental constitution, that the future is irrevocably fated,
that free will is an illusion, and that there is no moral responsibil
ity? Long discussions might be raised on that text. I shall not
enter on arguments that pertain more to metaphysics than to
metapsychics, nor allow myself to be led into vain speculation. I
shall abide in the domain of strict facts. There are indisputable
and verified facts of premonition. Their explanation may or may
not come later; meanwhile the facts are thereauthenticated and
undeniable. There are premonitions.
Are these due solely to human intelligence, or to other intelligent
forces acting on our minds ? It is impossible to decide. We must
be content with exact observation of the facts.
And it would be inexcusably rash to affirm, as I have boldly
done, that there are premonitions, if abundant and formal proof
had not been advanced. This abundant and formal proof has, I
think, been given.
BOOK III
Objective Metapsychics
CHAPTER I
O n O bjective Metapsychics in General
The study of collective hallucinations bridges the gap between
the subjective and the objective facts.
When two persons see a phantasm and describe it in the same
manner, it is difficult to suppose that they have been simultaneously
and identically hallucinated.
Thus the fact that there are monitions that are completely and
simultaneously perceived by several persons leads us to suppose
that there must be some kind of materialization ; for it is impossible
to understand how several persons can have the same impression
if there is no exterior image of any kind. But instances of this
are neither sufficiently numerous nor recorded with sufficient care
as to make the demonstrationcomplete and rigorous. Experi
mental methods, however, supplement the inherent defects of the
observational method. The large number of experiments con
ducted with extreme precision which we shall presently describe
give decisive proofs of materialization.
Objective metapsychics may be treated under three heads :
1. Telekinesismovements of objects at a distance and with
out contact. Sounds and knocks without any visible materialized
form.
2. Ectoplasmic formsmaterializations of objects, of living
figures, and of persons.
3. Haunted houses.
Objective phenomena of a material nature are much more rare
than subjective phenomena. Only a very small number of
mediums can produce them. Even with these physical mediums
the phenomena are often limited to knockings and rappings and
do not extend to movements of objects without contact, still less
to materializations.
Physical mediums, being exceptional beings, usually become pro
fessionals as did the Fox sisters, the Davenports, Home, Eglinton,
Mme. dEsprance, Eusapia, and Marthe Braud. Some, as Stain-
399
ton Moses, Linda Gazzera, Stanislawa Tomczyk, and Miss Gol-
igher have developed their faculties in private circles without
accepting any emolument.
But in experimenting with either class, the same precautions
against fraud must invariably be taken. If I myself had any
mediumistic power I should exact the most rigid precautions of
the kind; for it is nearly certain that mediums in trance, and
especially if the trance is deep, lose all control over their move
ments, and despite the utmost good faith in their normal state,
become liable to deception of the worst kind. Only when control
of the medium has been sustained and rigid, can the results of
any experiment be held to be valid, whoever the medium may be.
This severity of precaution has a corollary. If an experiment
with a given medium has presented seeming fraud, that is not a
final reason for irremediably discrediting that medium. The con
ditions must be made such that all fraud is impossible, even if
the medium is suspected. When Mme. Roberts enters a cage of
which I alone possess the key, and if I am certain, mechanically
assured, of the solid construction of the cage, and that no one can
enter the room, once I have assured myself that Mme. Roberts
is inside, no devices of hers can have any effect. But if these pre
cautions have not been taken, if some forty persons are in the
hall, if the cage has not been made under my supervision but has
only been superficially examined by me, and is placed on a stage
at a distance, I cannot draw any inference; and my distrust will
be enormously increased if the exhibition is paid for. That is
quite sufficient to give me the feeling of certainty that Mme.
Roberts operates by some clever trick even though I may not be
able to discover in what the trick consists.
The numerous occurrences we shall now examine are those in
which all trickery has been made impossible.
CHAPTER II
M ovements of ObjectsT elekinesis
The movement of objects without contact, if not the most im
portant or the most extraordinary, is the most common phenom
enon of objective metapsychics. The reactions having a supposedly
metapsychic origin are most frequently manifested by the move
ments of a table or of a needle moving over an alphabet.
(a) Table-Movements
As far back as the time of Tertullian it was observed that tables
with (or without) contact of the hands would give intelligent
answers.
The essential point is to know up to what point the movements
are due to the muscular contractions, conscious or unconscious, of
the person placing his hands on the table. The problem seems
quite simple. It is really very difficult.
Assuredly in most cases there is no doubt that movement must
be referred to unconscious muscular action. So also, just as a
subject, hypnotized or not, whether in trance or awake, writes
pages automatically without knowing what he writes, the written
matter having, however, a definite sense, he may, by placing his
hands on a table, cause it to move at certain letters of the alphabet
and thus sustain consistent and methodical conversations that
seem to come from an external personality. Nearly always auto
matic writing and table-answers claim to express the thought of
a personality other than that of the subject making the experiment.
It is, however, not open to doubt that in most of these cases,
though not in all, these movements are to be explained by the
unconscious movements of the subject. His muscles can be seen
to contract, and as the least pressure will cause a table in unstable
equilibrium to move, no other cause can reasonably be assigned
either for table-movements or automatic writing.
The disturbing fact that sometimes leads one to hesitate in
drawing this necessary inference is that the table answers as if it
was alive; the emotions of the subconscious are faithfully trans-
401
lated by the kind of movements made by the inert object. This
lifeless table seems to have a mind: it hesitates, it shows irritation;
it affirms energetically; or it sways solemnly. No one who has
not witnessed such sances can imagine how well diverse senti
ments can be expressed by the frequency or the forcefulness, the
slow, hesitating, vigorous, or gentle movements. It is an actual
language, sometimes eloquent and always interesting, and the
simple-minded are easily led to conclude that some external in
telligence is moving the table.
But this would be a foolish inference. The emotions that one
is tempted to attribute to the table are the emotions that agitate
the subconsciousness of the medium; and its movements are those
which the mediums muscles communicate to it. The phenomenon
is one of normal psychophysiology which can be defined as follows:
There are subconscious movements, occasionally very energetic,
which may be systematic and claim to belong to a special person
ality that seems different to that of the medium.
The problem is very far from being an elementary one; and it
is a grave mistake to think that everything is explicable by un
conscious muscular action. Great movements of a heavy table,
when the muscular contractions are almost imperceptible, can
hardly be explained in this way; so that in some cases the dis
placements of the table cannot be referred to muscular contrac
tions alone. Very many times I have seen heavy tables displaced
strongly and quickly, when the medium was hardly touching them:
they turned, jumped, and went from one end of the room to the
other so quickly that it was difficult to follow them, while the me
dium was only lightly placing one finger on the middle of the table.
Among other experiments of this kind I will quote the following,
which is typical: For the experiments I was making at Ribaud
Island with Eusapia Paladino I had a square table made measuring
one metre each way and one metre high. The legs were pointed
so that it would be difficult to raise it with the foot. When
Ochorowicz and I saw the table brought by the joiner, we thought
it much too heavy (forty-four pounds), but we tried it the same
evening. As soon as Eusapia touched this heavy table with the
tips of her fingers, it tilted, swaying about, and without the legs
being touched at all, it rose up completely with all four feet off
the ground. All hypotheses that attempt to explain this by normal
mechanics are absurd. There were no hooks or cords. The thing
took place in half-light and we held Eusapias hands and head.
MOVEMENTS OF OBJECTSTELEKINESIS 403
I shall not, however, base any conclusions on these mysterious
experiences in which there is even a light contact by the medium;
for it is too difficult to differentiate between effects that are due
to normal muscular force and those which proceed from meta
psychic causes. The principle adopted in these studies is that
the normal explanation of every phenomenon is to be adopted
unless radically impossible; therefore at the risk of an exaggerated
scepticism I shall assume that in all cases when the hands of the
medium or sitters touch the table at all, however lightly, the
movements are due to unconscious muscular movements.
It is nevertheless probable that in many cases these movements
are mainly due to metapsychic forces; but it is impossible to differ
entiate accurately between the one cause and the other. If there
is any contact between hands and table, any other cause than the
muscular movements of the medium must be set aside; but when
there is movement without any contact at all, then we have true
telekinesis. Not tables only, but many other objects are displaced,
and sometimes moved from one place to another. I shall give
many instances of this, but before entering on such cases, I wish
to indicate briefly the conditions under which alone experimenta
tion gives valid results.
Nearly always these movements take place in darkness, and
precautions against fraud must be specially severe. There is the
more reason to apprehend fraud that the movement of objects
without contact is a comparatively rare phenomenon and almost
entirely confined to professional mediums.
Subjective phenomena often occur among persons who do not
use their powers as a trade, and therefore it is likely that they do
not deceive; but as soon as a medium is sufficiently powerful to
obtain movements without contact, he is naturally tempted to
make a profession of his mediumship, and then the temptation to
fraud is often well-nigh irresistible. This is the more likely be
cause, as has already been explained, the medium in trance is often
unable to distinguish between muscular movements and meta
psychic phenomena. The mental state is abnormal; and in the
course of an experiment mediums lose a part of their moral re
sponsibility, their moral consciousness is attenuated, even when,
as in Eusapias case, their good faith in the normal state is obvious.
Hence, in complete darkness, surrounded by credulous and often
ignorant persons, partly unconscious of the position of her limbs,
the medium is led to trick, to move things with her hands, while
claiming, possibly without intention to deceive, that she has not
touched them.
There must, therefore, be absolute certainty that the hands, feet,
and head of the medium have been so held as to make any super
fluous movement impossible. Tireless vigilance and long practice
are necessary to this certainty, for some mediums are in continual
movement; their hands are never still. Eusapia, the typical
medium for telekinesis, was never still for a moment, and it was
necessary to watch that her hands were never free; for as soon as
one hand escaped from control she made forbidden movements
and attributed to fluidic hands effects that were only due to
normal muscular movements.
Sometimes, instead of the mediums hands being held, her hands
and feet are strongly tied. Sometimes she is placed in sewn-up
garments; sometimes a thread is fastened to the finger-nails, or
the knots of thread with which the hands are tied are sealed with
wax. All these are useful precautions to be adopted according to
the nature of the experiment and the psychology of the medium.
It must not, however, be forgotten that although these pre
cautions are indispensable, they tend to reduce the phenomena.
Certitude is increased but results are diminished. If very effective
seances are wanted, the medium must be left comparatively free.
Just as in subjective experiments credulity and blind confidence
on the part of the sitters increase the phenomena, so in objective
experiments, if the medium is straightly tied up and rigid control
exercised, very often the results are slight.
This fact, which I have often observed, will cause sceptics to
smile; but yet I think that in this case the sceptics are wrong,
and that it is often well to leave the medium comparatively free.
But, of course, in such cases unwearied vigilance must be exer
cised on all that takes place; everything must be closely observed,
nothing taken for granted, and the inferences finally drawn must
be as rigorous as the conditions of the experiment are lenient.
The best method seems to be: first to leave the medium entirely
free so that there may be plenty of facts to judge by, then at the
next sitting to impose such checks as seem necessary, and at each
successive trial to make the restrictions more and more severe so
that in the end it becomes impossible to attribute the movements
to normal muscular action. Above all, experiments must be re
peated and varied.
A most valuable method of check is by flashlight photography,
the camera being focussed in advance; the exact position of the
medium and the displaced object are then clearly revealed.
The medium should, I think, be always warned that a photo
graph may be taken and even that it will be taken. There is a risk
of injury to the health or the faculties of the medium by the sud
den and unexpected glare of the magnesium light, during trance.
I have scruples (perhaps exaggerated) about surprising or
deceiving the mediums. No doubt, in certain cases, when there
is strong proof of the likelihood of fraud prepared in advance, it
is allowable to use the flashlight for detection; but as a general
principle I think that mediums should be treated with humanity,
and that the same good faith should be observed towards them
that we expect from them.
Sceptics often put forward an objection that the average man
considers final: Why darkness ? If you get nothing in the light
it is because the medium uses the darkness for trickery. When
you can produce the phenomena in full daylight or in good light
I will believe them; till then I shall think everything to be
trickery.
This objection is valueless, for two reasons:
1. It seems proved that many phenomena of telekinesis, if
not all, do not take place in full light. Everything happens as
though darkness were one of the necessary conditions for the
manifestation of the power. This is not absurd ; there are many
physical phenomena that do not take place in the light, as there
are others that do not take place in the dark. If a sceptic. On
photography were to object to the feeble red light by which
plates are developed, the photographer could reply that light inter
feres with the development. So likewise the experimentalist has
the right to reply that light interferes with telekinesis.
2. The second reason why the objection is not valid, is that
with some mediums, notably with D. D. Home, the movements
have been observed in full light, and in very many other cases the
darkness has not been so great as to prevent quite satisfactory
visual control.
(b) On Some Cases of Experimental Telekinesis
The phenomena here following are extremely interesting not
only in themselves, but because they are of old standing:
John W. Edmunds, a lawyer of reputation and a Supreme Court
Judge, began his enquiries in January, 1851. Not till April, 1853,
was he convinced of the reality of the phenomena. He says, I
had recourse to every expedient I could think of to discover im
posture and to guard against trickery. . . . I have seen a
mahogany table, with a central pillar and carrying a lighted lamp,
rise at least a foot above the floor in spite of the efforts of those
present to prevent it. . . . I have seen a mahogany chair turn
on its side and move backwards and forwards along the floor
without being touched by anyone, in a room where at least a dozen
persons were sitting, without any of them being touched by it.
It often stopped a few inches from me, having been moved so
quickly that had it not stopped, my leg would have been much
bruised (A. R. Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism).
We will now consider a few experiments with certain persons
that prove movement without contact.1
In 1854 A. de Gasparin published a book, Des Tables Tour
nantes, in which exact experiments on the movement of objects
and especially of tables, without contact, are reported. As soon
as a vigorous rotation of the table was set up, says De Gasparin,
we raised our fingers while keeping our hands linked so as to
form a chain an inch or so above the table, which still continued
to make two or three turns. On the following day we were able
to induce rotation from a state of rest. Sometimes the movement
stopped after a half revolution, sometimes it continued for two,
three, or even four turns. . . . On another day, on the hands
being removed from the surface, all contact being broken, the
small table moved seven times to order.
This book made a stir, and Professor Thury, of the University
of Geneva, who had taken part in De Gasparins experiments, pub
lished in 1855 a pamphlet on the relation of these to general
physics. He cites the following decisive experiment: Two per
sons by themselves, Mme. de Gasparin and Mme. Dort, drew
along a small table without touching it. The table turned and
swayed under their hands, held about an inch above its surface.
I saw the space between the hands and the table during the whole
time and I am certain that during the four or five revolutions
made there was no contact whatever. . . . No doubt was possible.
The experiments were confirmed by similar ones made by F. de*
Lextriorisation de la motricit
*On this subject the excellent book, ( P a r is,
Chanuel, 1896), by A. de Rochas should be consulted.
Rougemont in Switzerland, and by Hare, professor of chemistry
in the University of Pennsylvania (Experimental Investigations,
New York, 1855).
In 1868, Daniel D. Home, perhaps the most powerful medium
known, made some experiments before Mr. Varley, chief engineer
of the Atlantic Cable Company, and afterwards before the mem
bers of the London Dialectical Society then under the presidency
of Sir John Lubbock; and later, before Sir William Crookes.
Mr. Varley says:
In my house, where Mr. Home had never before been, seven
feet behind him there was a small table. Mr. Home asked me to
hold his hands, and placed his two legs over my left knee. After
a few moments the table began to move, and was pushed towards
me by an invisible power, no person being near it, and while I was
firmly holding Mr. Homes hands and feet. A large couch capable
of seating eight persons was pushed right across the room, and
obliged us to move aside. . . . He adds, Deception was
impossible.
The members of the Dialectical Society held fifty sances at
which thirty persons were present, and their conclusions were as
follows (I give only those which have reference to telekinesis) :
1. Sounds appear to come from pieces of furniture, from the
floor, and from the walls, often accompanied by vibrations per
ceptible to the touch, produced without any muscular or mechan
ical cause.
2. Movements of heavy bodies took place without any kind of
mechanical action, often without contact or connection with any
person.
3. Thirteen persons depose to having heard well-executed pieces
of music from instruments not manipulated by any ascertainable
agency.
In one experiment which they declared decisive, eleven members
of the society turned the- backs of their chairs to the table and
knelt on them, feet behind and away from the table, hands resting
on the chair-backs. The gas was alight above the table. Under
these circumstances the table moved four times, and then, when
the chairs had been placed a foot distant from the table, it again
moved thirteen times in different directions and in obedience to
verbal demands.
Fourteen witnesses depose to having seen hands or faces not
belonging to human beings, but which nevertheless seemed alive
and mobile. These were sometimes touched or held so that the
witnesses are certain they were not duped or illusionized. Five
witnesses certify that they were touched by some invisible being
on different parts of the body whilst the hands of all persons
present were fully visible.
The members of the Committee (who were for the most part
wholly sceptical before carrying out the experiments) declare
that they are convinced that there is a force capable of moving
heavy bodies without material contact, which force is in some
unknown manner dependent upon the presence of human beings
{Report Dial. Soc., p. 12).
Crookes made very exact experiments with Home, which should
be read in the original on account of their leading importance.
He arranged a board on a wooden knife-edge like that of a
balance, the board being maintained in position by a spring pro
vided with a scale and indicator. The movements of the indicator
could be mechanically registered so as to form a graph. Under
these circumstances Home placed his hands four inches above the
board, an assistant holding his hands and placing one foot over
his feet. A graph was obtained, and in a subsequent experiment,
Home being a yard distant, movement with the accompanying
graph was again obtained.1
Mme. X., observed by Crookes, also produced movements of
the indicator. On her placing her hands on a piece of parchment,
repeated crepitations were heard in it.
Boutleroff, an eminent professor of chemistry, at Petersburg,
made some experiments with Home in 1871. The normal tension
of his dynamometer being 50 kg. it rose to 75 kg., the hands of
Home being placed on the instrument in such a manner that any
effort on his part would have diminished the tension instead of
increasing it.
Crookes relates other striking experiences. My own chair
twisted round, my feet not touching the floor. Under the eyes
of all present a chair moved slowly from a distant corner of the
room. In another case an armchair came nearly up to where
1Researches in the Phenomena of Spiritualism, William Crookes (F. R. S.,
1874). The genuineness of Homes experiences has been impugned, but in
point of fact, no slightest proof of fraud has ever been advanced. (See
P. Petrovo Solovovo, On the Alleged Exposure of D. D. Home in France,
S. P. R.,xv, 1912, 274.) Moreover, no trickery could account for the results
obtained by Crookes, Varley, and Lord Duuraven.
we were sitting and at my request moved back about three feet.
On five different occasions, a heavy dining-room table rose from
a few inches to a foot and a half off the floor while I held the
hands and feet of the medium.
There were also experiments with an accordion which Home
held by the finger-ends of one hand in a cage made of wood and
copper wire. The instrument swayed about and played different
airs. Home then let go the instrument and placed his hand on
that of a spectator. The accordion floated about in the cage and
continued to play.
M. C., prefect of the Loire, speaking of Home, said: Home
appals me and I can find no explanation, but I have seen. He
ordered a handbell to climb up my leg, and when I tried to seize
it, it eluded my fingers. He ordered a table to answer by raps,
which was done; and, more extraordinary still, the raps also
came under the soles of my feet. . . . Another time he ordered
the table to rise off the floor; it then rose towards the ceiling; he
told Mme. B.s little girl to pull the table down, but each time she
let go the table again moved upwards. . . . Then he said,
Hold fast/ and the efforts of three men could not bring it down
(De Viel-Castel, quot. by Erny, A. S. P., 1902, xii, 147).
One of the most amazing things I have seen, says Crookes,
was the levitation of a glass water-bottle and tumbler. The room
was well lit by two strong alcohol-soda flames, and Homes hands
were far distant. The two objects remained suspended above the
table, and by tapping against each other answered yes to ques
tions. They remained suspended about six to eight inches above
the table for about five minutes, moving in front of each person
and answering questions. We verified that Home was entirely
passive during the whole time and that no wires nor cords were
employed. Home had not entered the room before the seance.
On another occasion, Crookes says, I was in a dark seance.
I was holding both hands of the medium in one of mine, his feet
resting on mine. I had a pencil in my other hand. A luminous
hand descended from above, and, having hovered for a few sec
onds, took the pencil from my hand, wrote rapidly on a sheet of
paper, dropped the pencil, rose above our heads, and was lost in
the darkness.
Another time, in the light, Mr. Home was present with some
friends, and some sheets of paper and a pencil were placed in the
middle of the table. The pencil rose on its point, and after ad
vancing by hesitating jerks to the paper, fell down. It then rose
and again fell. A third time it tried with no better result. After
three unsuccessful attempts, a small wooden lath, which was lying
near on the table, slid towards the pencil, and rose a few inches
from the table; the pencil rose again and, propping itself against
the lath, the two together made an effort to mark the paper. It
fell, and then a joint effort was again made. After a third trial
the lath gave it up and moved back to its place (Researches,
Edn., 1874, p. 94).
Another day the small lath before mentioned moved across the
table to me, in the light, and delivered a message to me by tapping
my hand; I repeating the alphabet, and the lath taping me at the
right letters. The other end of the lath was resting on the table,
some distance from Mr. Home's hands (p . 95).
To attribute these results to fraud, says Crookes, is absurd.
What I have reported took place in my own house, where nothing
could be prepared in advance. A medium sitting in another part
of the room with several persons observing him attentively, could
not by any fraud cause an accordion held in my hand, keys down
ward, to play, or make it float about in the room playing all the
time. . . . He could not bring an instrument to move the
window-curtains, tie a knot in a handkerchief, put it in a distant
corner of the room, cause the notes of a distant piano to sound,
raise a water-bottle and tumbler off the table, cause a coral neck
lace to stand up on one end, move a fan and fan the company, or
set in motion a clock shut in a glass case firmly cemented to the
wall.
These experiments, made by a renowned experimentalist, are
so striking and so exact that it is amazing that they should not
have been universally accepted. But I will make my confession:
Until I had seen Eusapia at Milan I was absolutely sure that
Crookes must have fallen into some terrible error. And so was
Ochorowicz; but he repented, and said, as I do, smiting my
breast, Pater, peccavi!
Mr. R. Dale Owen narrates an experience (quoted by Russel
Wallace, p. 191) in which the medium was probably Home: In
the dining-room of a French gentleman, the Count dOurches,
living near Paris, I saw on October 1, 1858, in full daylight,
towards the end of lunch, a table laden with fruit and wine at
which seven persons had been seated rise off the floor, all .the
guests standing round it without touching it.
The experiments with Home were made under unexceptionable
conditions and this gives them considerable value. Mr. E. W.
Cox, a serjeant-at-law, holding a high social position and a man
of strong good sense, wrote to Home in 1876 as follows:
My dear Home, in the experiments to which you submitted
yourself before me, there was nothing of the nature of precaution
or mystery. You sat down near me, anywhere, at any time in my
garden, in my house, day or night, always, with one memorable
exception, in daytime and in full light. You never refused to
submit to any desired control. . . . Y o u sat alone with me
and there came to pass things that the united efforts of four men
could not have obtained. Sometimes the phenomena took place,
sometimes they did not. The results were of such a nature that
no human hand could have produced, in my drawing-room, my
library, and my garden, where all mechanism was impossible.
Henry Slade, a very powerful American medium, has also given
many proofs of movement of objects without contact.
Zllner, professor of physical astronomy at Leipzig, relates
(Wissenschaftliche Abhandlungen) that without any visible con
tact with Slade, a wooden screen, half an inch thick, was violently
broken. Direct writing was obtained on several occasions. A
metal ball hung by a silk cord inside a glass globe, placed on the
table and well lit by the candles, began to swing and to strike at
regular intervals against the interior of the globe (evidently with
out contact with Slades hands).
P. Gibier also experimented with Slade (Le Spiritisme, Paris,
1882. Le Fakirisme Occidental).
Gibier first verified the force and frequency of the raps. On
one occasion, so strong a knock was delivered on the middle of
the table as to lead him to think it must be broken. During this
time the feet and hands of the medium were well in sight. In a
daylight seance a chair placed forty inches away made a half turn
and moved against the table.
Subsequently in full daylight, a chest placed twenty-five inches
away from his chair began to move, leaving the wall so slowly
that we could verify that there was no contact between it and
any other object; it then came and violently struck the table at
which we were sitting.
At ten different trials the slate held by Slade under the table
was broken into several pieces. These slates were framed in
very hard wood. We endeavoured to break them in the same way
by striking them against the table, but never succeeded in even
cracking them.
Several times we have seen a framed slate leave Slades hand,
pass right under the table to the other side, and, when taken hold
of, give the sensation of resistance as if another hand were holding
the slate. We kept the hands of the medium in sight, and could
see his two knees outside the table. 1
Mr. D. MacNab relates some experiments he made with a
medium, quoted by A. de Rochas. These were mostly in darkness,
which makes control very difficult and necessitates special pre
cautions : but by the light of a red lamp he saw a small table rise
from the floor, touch the hands held sixteen inches above it,
descend again slowly, and touch the floor without noise.
I now come to experiments with Eusapia Paladino. These are
very numerous, and I shall describe a few of them in some detail
of which I was an attentive observer, having attended over a
hundred of her sances, at Milan, Rome, Carqueiranne, Ribaud
Island, and Paris.
As to Eusapia herself : she was a very simple-minded woman,
but her simplicity did not exclude a certain shrewdness. She was
quite uneducated, could not read, and at the beginning of the
scientific experimentation she could only speak the Neapolitan
dialect and a little Italian. Being very intelligent she learned to
understand French and to speak it a little. She was rather below
the usual stature, plump, and had very small hands.
She had an unhappy life. Her father, a Neapolitan peasant,
was murdered by brigands : her husband bullied her and made a
profit out of her. Generous by nature, she gave much to the poor
and spent recklessly all that she earned, and so died in poverty
and neglect.
This excellent woman was a remarkable medium, extremely
good-natured, lending herself to the most diverse experiments,
and was studied by most contemporaneous men of science who
cared for such matters ; first by E. Chiaia, and then by Aksakoff,
Schiaparelli, Lombroso, Gerosa, G. Finzi, Morselli, Broferio,*
*1 saw Slade once with Gibier. Slade handed me a slate and put a small
fragment of slate-pencil on it. I held one end and Slade the other, and
we put the slate under the table. In a few moments we heard a noise as of
writing. There was some writing and the bit of slate-pencil was worn. But
I give this experiment (my only one of the kind) under all reserves; ( i) it
was long ago; (2) I cannot find the notes I took; (3) Slades honesty is open
to question, and (4) experiments with slates lend themselves to trickery.
Bozzano, Venzano, Carlo Foa, Bottazzi, A. de Gramont, A. de
Rochas, J. Maxwell, Sgard, Camille .Flammarion, Ochorowicz,
Schrenck-Notzing, P. Curie, Mme. Curie, dArsonval, Courtier,
Siemiradzki, Dariex, Watteville, Sabatier, F. Myers, Sir Oliver
Lodge, Mr. and Mrs. Sidgwick, Feilding, Carrington, Herlitzka,
Porro, and several others. The bibliography of experiments made
with her is large, and is given in Morsellis admirable work, to
which I refer readers.
Her seances were at first conducted in full light, then by degrees
(so that the phenomena should be more powerful) she asked that
the light might be reduced, meno luce.** Latterly, the sances
were almost in complete darkness, but as control was difficult
under these conditions, we used to place a lamp at some distance
so that the light should come through a half-opened door or
shutters.
Eusapia claimed to be directed by a guide, John King, said to
be the brother of Katie King, and the father of Eusapia herself
in a previous existence ( ?). The objective reality of this medium
istic personality is very probably null; it dates from the first ex
periments with M. Damiani at Naples when he first began to direct
her, and especially with Ercole Chiaia, her brave and persevering
protector who first made her known to the scientific world by a
letter to C. Lombroso, August 9, 1888.
The experiments with Eusapia have not been without their
use. All the men of science, without exception, who experimented
with her were in the end convinced that she produced genuine
phenomena. It is true that at Cambridge she gave a series of
semifraudulent sances, because the Cambridge experimenters, R.
Hodgson more especially, adopted methods of procedure that made
fraud possible and easy, i.e., almost encouraged fraud.1
At the moment in an experiment when a movement without
contact was about to take place, Eusapia gave warning that a
phenomenon was coming, so that these did not occur unexpectedly.
The full attention of the observers was awakened and all possible
precautions could be taken at the fateful moment that no trickery
should be possible. Professors of legerdemain do the exact op
posite, and endeavour to distract attention at the crucial moment
of their tricks.
1Ochorowicz has called attention to this unconscious fraud in a remarkable
memorandum in which he shows how greatly Hodgsons method was defective
in intentionally leaving one o f Eusapias hands free.
Every movement of an object at a distance seems induced by
Eusapias energetic muscular movements ; her arms, her legs, and
her body twitch, and everything happens as though the muscular
contractions were intended to act at a distance. She is not in
trance at the start, but in the course of the sance trance gradually
supervenes.
She is not easily hypnotizable. Ochorowicz used to magnetize
her after the sances, to induce restorative sleep; for after each
sance, often lasting two or three hours, she was much exhausted.
The metapsychic phenomena produced by her were very various.
There was little or no lucidity, but always objective phenomena,
especially movements of objects without contact and materializa
tions. In this chapter I shall speak only of the former.
In this case the essential point, indeed the only point, is to be
certain that the movement of the object could not be brought about
by the hands, the feet, the head, or the body of Eusapia. The
hypothesis that the experimenters were hallucinated is as grossly
absurd as to suppose that one of them was playing a practical
joke. There was neither apparatus, nor preparation, nor instru
ments. Eusapia was dressed in a close-fitting black garment
without pockets, nor was any object, any cord, or any wire within
her reach. If she played any trick it could only be with her bare
hands.
All those who experimented with her know this, and therefore
their one and only care was to hold her hands effectively.
In this connection I replied to Hodgson : To say that the hand
is held signifies in the first place that one has no doubt of its being
the right or the left. If, when my duty was to hold the right hand,
I was not absolutely sure that I had the right hand during the
production of the phenomenon, I at once stopped the whole by
saying I have let go the hand/ and the other experimenters did
the same. We arranged to hold the hands well, all the fingers in
our palms, or the wrist and part of the fingers. At each phenom
enon we reminded each other of this necessary exactitude, saying
ad nauseam a hundred times in each sance, T hold the right hand
or T hold the left hand/ Our only business was not to let the
hands escape. Well, without making extravagant claims to per
spicacity or skill, it seems to me that after three months of practice
one can be certain of holding fast a human hand.
In a very successful experiment in my house at Carqueiranne,
Mrs. Sidgwick held Eusapias left hand, and my lamented friend,
Fleet-surgeon Segard, held the right. At the moment that the
piano, placed fourteen inches from Eusapia, sounded, I asked him,
Are you sure that you have hold of the hand, the same hand?
and on his affirmation, I said, Take care, if you are mistaken, it
is complicity. In this experiment, Lodge (I think) held the feet.
H. Sidgwick then declared the experiment unexceptionable, but
that an object held in Eusapias teeth might strike the keys. I then
put my hand over her mouth, all other conditions remaining the
same. The notes sounded again.
Instances of the movement of objects, the table and other things,
were innumerable.
The first detailed account (Naples, 1891) was given by Lom-
broso: Eusapias feet and hands were held by Professor Tam-
burini and by Lombroso. A handbell placed on a small table
more than a yard distant from Eusapia sounded in the air above
the heads of the sitters and then descended on the table, thence
going two yards to a bed. While the bell was ringing we struck
a match an'd saw the bell up in the air.
A large piece of furniture approached us slowly from about
two yards distance; like the creeping of a huge lizard.
At Milan in 1892 in an ingenious series of successful experi
ments devised by G. Finzi many instances of movements and levi
tation of a table were verified. In one case, confirmed by photog
raphy, the table was maintained in the air for several seconds.
This photograph is reproduced in De Rochass book (p. 48), and
it shows that I was holding Eusapias left hand and her two knees,
while Lombroso held the right hand. In one case of complete
levitation Aksakoff notes that Eusapias hands were not in contact
with the table at all.
A heavier chair, weighing twenty pounds, a yard distant from
the table and behind the medium, approached Schiaparelli.
In darkness the phenomena were much more marked: the
knocks in the substance of the table and under it, which were
heard in full light, became much strongera noise like a heavy
blow with the fist on the table; knocks on the chairs, hard enough
to cause the chair with the person sitting on it to be twisted
round: transport of objects, some from several yards distance
and weighing several pounds; and flight of different things
through the airall these were observed.
Eusapias feet were on my knees and I held both her hands
when a tambourine was raised above our heads, and its surface
struck as though by a hand. Another time, when Eusapias
hands were tied, a handbell was placed on a chair at her right.
The light was extinguished with the request that the bell should
sound immediately. At once the chair was upset, the bell sounded,
and was moved on to the table. Light was restored, and the
knots were found perfect. Another time I held both of Eusapias
feet, Schiaparelli and Finzi held her hands while the table was
entirely levitated.
The experiments at Rome (1893 and 1894) by Siemiradzki and
Ochorowicz were equally evidential. While Eusapias hands were
held, a hand-organ floated over the table, sounding all the while
as if the handle were being turned. Once the piano behind the
medium was displaced, and its cover was raised. As Siemiradzki
had asked that high notes in the treble and low notes in the bass
should be struck at the same time, this was done, proving, as he
said, the action of two distinct hands. A glass half full of water
on the sideboard out of reach of our hands was carried to the lips
of Ochorowicz, of Eusapia, and of another person present, who
all drank of it. This took place in darkness with marvellous pre
cision. At the same time cracking noises were heard in the wood
of the table varying from slight knocks to heavy blows such as
might be given by a powerful fist.
At Warsaw, Ochorowicz, holding Eusapias hands and feet, was
careful that not even her clothes should touch the table. In light,
dimmed, but still quite sufficient to enable the experimenters to
distinguish forms, the table rose horizontally three times into the
air, without previous oscillations. Then Eusapia, pushing forward
one knee, said, I will raise the table with my knee, though the
table was separated from the knee by an interval of eight inches.
The knee was raised six inches and the table eight inches. The
same effect was produced when both legs were raised at a distance
from the tablethe table rose at the same time as the mediums
legs.
A dynamometer marked a force three times as great as Eusapias
and in excess of that of the strongest man present.
The following experiments were made in my house at Ribaud
Island and at Carqueiranne.
Ribaud Island, where I have a little villa, is a small island in the
Mediterranean inhabited only by the lighthouse-keeper and his
wife. I brought Eusapia there, and asked Ochorowicz to come
for experimentation. For three months we experimented three
times a week, and continually verified, fully, movements of objects
without contact and other phenomena to which I shall recur.1
After having recounted the success of our experiments, I in
vited my friends, F. Myers, O. Lodge, Schrenck-Notzing, and
Mr. and Mrs. Sidgwick, to come to Ribaud and judge de visu.
I will give extracts from Oliver Lodge only:
A chair placed near the window, several feet distant from
the medium, slid along, rose up, and struck the floor. The
medium was held and no person was near the chair. I heard
some notes on an accordion placed not far from us. A musical
box was floated through the air and carried above our heads.
The key was turned in the lock of the door, laid on the table,
and again replaced in the lock; a heavy table (forty-eight pounds)
was raised eight inches off the floor, the medium standing up and
placing her hands lightly on one corner of the table.
Other seances took place at Agnelas, in 1895, in the house
of M. de Rochas, in presence of M. Sabatier, dean of the Faculty
of Sciences (Montpellier); of J. Maxwell, Attorney-General at
Bordeaux; of A. de Gramont, member of the Institute of France,
and of M. A.-C. de Watteville, licentiate of sciences.
The results were the same, more clear, if that were possible,
than those obtained at Milan, Rome, and Ribaud.
The table was raised twelve inches from the floor, Eusapias
hands hardly touching it and sometimes not touching it at all;
her knees and feet were held by Dariex, the legs of the table
being quite free of all contact with the medium. A little pianola
weighing nearly two pounds (nine hundred grams), played a
few notes, then rose into the air while Eusapias hands, feet,
knees, and head were firmly held.
We heard the key of a chest creak in the lock while Eusapia
was held as above. A last experiment was very decisivea letter-
balance was displaced and was lowered and raised without con
tact. The light was strong; there was certainly neither a hair
nor a wire there.*
*1 have not published, and shall not publish, these notes; they are weari
some in their monotony v the hands are held I am touched on the right I
am touched on the left." To have an exact record I dictated to my secretary,
Bellier, who wrote in the adjoining room, all details as the experiments went
on, and he noted the exact times. The investigation was long and minute,
perhaps unnecessarily minute, but apart from systematic error that I cannot
imagine, it established completely the fact of movements without contact
In fine, the experimenters in their summing up say, Eusapia
can act on material bodies at a distance without contact. The
control has been as perfect as any control resulting from clear
and direct sight of an experimental fact can be.
Experiments at Genoa, 1901. Professor Morselli, who was at
first very sceptical, but like all who have experimented with
Eusapia, was afterwards completely convinced, gives the details
of the facts he observed in a book which is a model of erudition
(Psicologia e spiritismo, 2 vols., Turin, 1908).
I quote here only what concerns telekinesis, extensive quota
tion being impossible (p. 361) : In the first two hours of the
sance, movements and oscillations of the table: loud noises in
the dark or in weak light . . . raps corresponding with muscular
contractions or gestures, displacements of objects, sounds from
musical instruments, passage through the air of a ruler from
the cabinet which touched the arms and shoulders of the sitters
all repeated to satiety. A small table placed a yard away from
Eusapia was drawn to her, while I held her right hand and her
legs. Mme. Ferrero held her left hand. The table was twice
raised six to twelve inches from the floor.1
This experiment, says Morselli, was controlled with the
utmost rigour; everything was visible by red light, and I am
certain that the phenomenon is genuine.
In another experiment ( 1901 ) Eusapia was held on the left by
Porro, on the right by Morselli; the latter said aloud, I am
thirsty. Then a water-bottle and glass were moved on to the
table and a glass full of water was put to the lips of each sitter
in succession.2
Three eminent physiologists, doctors of the University of
Turin, Carlo Foa, Herlitzka, and E. Aggazotti, who studied under
the celebrated physiologist, Angelo Mosso, held a series of ex
perimental sances in the Laboratory of Psychiatry at Turin*
*A very good photograph (vol. ii, p. 363) was taken of this; both feet,
both hands, and the knees can be seen clear of the table, which is completely
levitated.
*Those who wish to see all that has been written on Eusapia may consult
theBibliografia Paladiana by Morselli (vol.i, pp. 134-170). It will be seen that
all the experimenters from 1889 to 1907, with the exception of Mr. E. Feilding
and Alice Johnson, were completely convinced. I do not know what Alice
Johnson now thinks, but Feilding has recanted his negations founded on
the defective Cambridge experiments. D Arsonval said he could not form an
opinion and remained doubtful. I think his uncertainty has now disappeared.
University, and were absolutely convinced of the genuineness of
the objective phenomena produced by Eusapia. Objects beyond
her reach were several times brought on to the table; graphic
recorders placed out of reach of her hands and feet gave records ;
a heavy and solid table was broken without being touched by
anyone; and a photographic plate wrapped in black paper gave
the impress of fingers.
Messrs. Foa, Herlitzka, and Aggazotti say with reason (as I
have often said, and as seems obvious) : If these phenomena
appear strange, it is because of their relative infrequency; they
are not more marvellous than the biological phenomena that we
daily observe (A. S. P., 1907, xvii, 294).
Another experiment was made in 1907 by Professor Lombroso,
Drs. Audenino and Norlenzki, the editor, Bocca, and other well-
known persons. The results were always the same. Register
ing apparatus placed too far away for the hands of Eusapia to
reach them gave records ; a mandolin played by itself. The form
of a head was seen (A . S. P., 1907, xvii, 212-218). It would
seem that under these conditions doubt should be impossible.
Messrs. Berisso and Bozzano relate that in May, 1900, in a
fully lighted seance at Genoa when everyone could see Eusapia
sitting with her hands on the table under control, objects were
transported, notably a trumpet which was seen suspended in the
air. Sounds came from it and it was at a greater height than
the hands of any person could have taken it. Similarly at the
next seance, when a guitar rose three yards above the floor (A . S.
P., 1907, xvii, 473-528).
M. Venzano saw a fluidic hand take shape and emerge from
the right shoulder of the medium to get a glass full of water and
carry it to the mediums mouth. Professors Morselli and Porro
were present at these experiments.
At the Psychological Institute, which devoted forty-three
sances in 1905, 1906, and 1907 to the study of Eusapia, the re
port of Courtier (in spite of his hesitations, reticences, and con
tradictions) ends by admitting that movements seem to be pro
duced by simple contact with the mediums hands, or even with
out contact; and that molecular vibrations (knocks) in external
objects at a distance can be positively asserted. The whole of
telekinesis is contained in these two basic admissions {Bull, de
l'Inst. Gen. de Psychol., 1909).
In the debate on this matter, Courtier adds the interesting
testimony that the objects moved do not follow straight lines, but
seem to move in curves as though directed by an intelligent me
chanical force.
The Cambridge experiments and the doubts they raised in the
S. P. R. may be considered as ineffective. Myers, at a seance
held in my house, formally admitted the phenomena as genuine:
later in 1909 Everard Feilding, Mr. Carrington, and Mr.
Baggally, an expert in legerdemain, made some decisive experi
ments at Naples. Mr. Feilding, while holding and seeing Eusa-
pias two hands, was touched behind the curtain by a living hand,
three fingers below and the thumb above, and grasped so that he
felt the finger-nails in his flesh. These hands occasionally became
visible. Mr. Baggally, while seeing and holding the hands of
the medium, was touched on the back of his own hand by a
hand stroking it and proceeding up his arm (Report of the Com
mission of the S. P. R. charged with experiments with Eusapia
Paladino).
I cannot do better than report textually the remarks upon
this medium prompted by the good sense of Mr. Hereward
Carrington.
In November and December, 1908, Mr. Everard Feilding and
Mr. W. Baggally and myself held ten seances in our rooms at the
hotel under perfect conditions of control, and we were convinced
that authentic metapsychic phenomena were produced that no
trickery could account for. The conviction produced was quite
contrary to my expectations. . . . I f there were doubtful
phenomena obtained in America the reason was that they did
not know how to conduct their experiments with Eusapia, and
that she was tired, exhausted, and disturbed. . . . It is my
belief that among American mediums for physical effects, 80 per
cent, practise trickery; but Eusapia produces genuine phenomena.
. . . Every one that studies these problems with her, giving
sufficient time and patience, will be convinced that among the
phenomena that she presents there are some that no known laws
can explain. These facts are beyond question.
Is it necessary to speak of bets on the reality of telekinesis such
as that made by M. Le Bon, who passes for an intelligent man?
These establish nothing, and science is not advanced whether
M. Le Bon wins or loses his wager. Who is going to bet that
he will make an aerolite fall in his garden?
I have insisted on the phenomena of telekinesis produced by
Eusapia because there have perhaps never been so many different,
sceptical, and scrupulous investigators into the work of any
medium or more minute investigations. During twenty years,
from 1888 to 1908, she submitted, at the hands of the most skilled
European and American experimentalists, to tests of the most
rigorous and decisive kind, and during all this time men of science,
resolved not to be deceived, have verified that even very large and
massive objects were displaced without contact.
To report the many experiments mentioned in the spiritist jour
nals on objective phenomena would extend this chapter beyond
measure; I merely refer readers to them, only remarking that the
conditions of control in such cases are obviously less complete
than in those reported above.
Movements of objects without contact have some connection
with the phenomena observed in so-called haunted houses. Dr.
Dariex has published interesting observations to this effect (A . S'.
P., 1892, ii, 189-208).
He heard during the night curious and inexplicable noises in
his study (No. 6, Rue du Beliay, Paris), and found in the morning
that chairs had been upset and displaced. Wishing to deal with
this scientifically and judicially, he and four friends, of whom two
were medical men, sealed up the door with six teals. Despite
this the chairs were noisily displaced in the room though no one
could enter either by the window or by the chimney, nor could
any wire be introduced under the door.
Dariex was able to observe table-movements without contact,
working with Mme. B., a non-professional medium. In the light
of a gas-fire turned full on, a table weighing thirteen pounds slid
sixteen inches along the floor, the hands of the medium being on
her knees, and twenty-four inches distant from the table. Dr.
Mercier adds that the table started of itself and that he could not
detect the least movement by the medium.
Victorien Joncieres, a well-known musician, relates that he went
one evening to visit a friend, a highly placed government official,
whose young niece had remarkable mediumistic powers. They
saw a chair rise above the table; the girl placed her two little
fingers on the edge of a very heavy table, which then rose well
above our heads, so that we had to stand up to follow its upward
course. It remained poised in the air for a few moments and
then descended noiselessly to the floor (Chevreul, p. 343).
Very marked movements of objects without contact were ob
tained with Stainton Moses, who was a remarkable medium. He
took a good degree at Oxford, was ordained priest, and took a
parish in the Isle of Man, and then became a master in University
College School. His sermons were highly thought of, and his
loyalty and honourable conduct won general respect. He had
great mediumistic powers, and in his book, Experiences in Spirit
ualism, he gave the results of his experiences which were remark
able both from the objective and the subjective point of view.
Dr. and Mrs. Stanhope Speer, who were his intimate friends,
have published careful and valuable notes on all the phenomena.
The movements of the table begin at once when it is barely
touched: it is then best to take the hands away and leave it to
itself. The tipping has been more marked when all present were
at some distance. It went backwards and forwards on the floor
and came back to its usual position when no one was touching it.
. . . Sometimes the knocks on it were like hammer-strokes,
heard in the room below and enough to make one think that the
table would be smashed. Sometimes the whole room was shaken
by the blows (A. S. P., 1895, 211).'
Stainton Moses cites the experiment that I give below
(abridged) as being conclusive:
At 6 p .m ., in full daylight, as I was with a friend who had
come to see me, my dining-room table which was an old and very
heavy one, placed on a carpet, was shaken by strong blows. It
moved and shivered as if it were coming to pieces, though we were
not touching it. We then got up and placed our hands eight
inches above the table, which rose to touch the hands.
Another experiment is given on page 219:
The room that had been illuminated by luminous psychic rays
suddenly became dark. The table, touched by no human hand, re
sounded to a series of knocks of varying force, some like blows of
a sledge-hammer, indicating an intelligence that showed itself im
patient or serious according to the nature of the communication.
The room was in complete darkness except that from time to
time a luminous vapour came and went round one of the legs
of the table.
Often, says Dr. Speer, we heard knocks on the door, the
sideboard, and the walls, at a distance from the table where we
were sitting. They could not be produced by any human means;
I satisfied myself of this by every possible method.
We got direct writing, and the movement of heavy objects
such as tables and chairs was not infrequent; the table being
sometimes drawn from a considerable distance off. The table (of
solid mahogany) was moved more easily than by our united
efforts: we often attempted in vain to arrest its movements.
Dr. Elliott Cowes and Mrs. Cowes relate (A. S. P., 1893, ii,
372):
Round a heavy table under a chandelier with two, three, or
four lighted gas-jets (the light being strong enough to read by)
all present stood two feet away. There was no contact of person
or clothing with the table, nothing nearer than twelve to eighteen
inches. Then the table raised one of its legs and let it fall to the
floor so heavily that the whole room shook and the gas-globes
rang. If this is not telekinesis, says Dr. Cowes, we cannot
trust our senses.
M. C. de Vesme has seen very clearly marked phenomena of
telekinesis with Count Ugo Baschieri (A. S. P., November, 1915,
xxv, 261-263).
I have never, he says, verified the displacement or levitation
of a small table under such good conditions for observation.
Everybody was a yard distant from the table, which moved
towards the medium, but the movements of the table and those
of the medium were not simultaneous. Another day, in a quite
private sance, at his own house, M. de Vesme saw a carnation
placed in a vase of flowers, bend, twist (and in one case), break
under the influence of magnetic passes, and M. de Vesme veri
fied that there was no thread. 1
M. Frmery, an artillery officer, and editor of the fortnightly
review, Tackoustig Leben, had some evidential experiences at
Mme. Huygenss house in presence of Dr. Floris Jansen, director
of the laboratory of psycho-physics of Amsterdam, and Dr. van*
*1 saw some cryptesthetic phenomena with Maxwell, De Vesme, and Count
Baschieri at my own house, during the war. No premonition worth remem
bering was given, but a curious thing happened which Count Baschieri con
sidered metapsychic. He placed his handkerchief to his eyes and withdrew
it stained with blood, perhaps five grams of blood, undiluted. His eyes had
sweated blood. I could not discover any conjunctival ecchymosis. I do not
make any comments, but only mention the fact, which, physiologically, is
quite abnormal, and hardly resembles stigmatizations. I could not affirm the
phenomenon to be authentic and not simulated, for, however unlikely, it is
possible that the handkerchief was already blood-stained. The movement was
too sudden and unlooked for to enable me to observe closely. C. R ic h e t .
Branen. There was enough light to see the hands of the medium,
which were held by the experimenters. A sofa approached the
table and moved away again; a guitar placed five feet above the
floor sounded; a palm-leaf moved all ways and floated up to
the ceiling, lit by a red lamp; it brushed against the ceiling
(twelve feet high) in wide sweeps, then came down again and
touched each of the sitters. All the while a musical box played,
and gave answers by raps to questions put (A. S. P., 1908, xviii,
251).
At Gratz a non-professional medium, Mme. S., in private
seances had very clear tipping and levitations of tables. A very
heavy table in massive oak was often displaced, and once while
the sitters joined hands, it rose into the air about a yard, swayed
a little, and dropped back.1
Erny states that from 1865 to 1869 he observed conclusive
proofs of telekinesis with the talented composer, F. P. A table
remained poised with one leg resting on a sofa and three legs in
the air. All our experiments took place by daylight or in the
evening in full light. There was no need to join hands; it was
sufficient for P. to place a finger on the middle of the table for it
to rise, very often at once, sometimes turning over on him (A.
Erny, loc. cit., 204).
The celebrated Russian chemist Boutleroff experimenting
through Kate Fox in his own rooms along with Aksakoff and
Mme. Boutleroff, observed movements without contact. Bout
leroff was very sceptical and Kate much open to suspicion, but a
musical box seemed to wind itself up and started to play. Kate's
legs were held by Mme. Boutleroff and her hands were visible on
a plate of luminous glass.
J. Ochorowicz has studied telekinesis with great care through
the powerful mediumship of a young Polish girl, Stanislawa
Tomczyk. I have myself been present at several experiments
with her that seemed quite conclusive. The illustrations (Figs.
11-13) show some of the photographs taken. Small objectsa
ball, a handbell, a needleare drawn towards the medium and
maintained in the air long enough for a photograph to be taken
even in a moderate light.
It cannot be supposed that these objects are held up by a
lNordberg, Geisterglaube, Spiritismus, und vierte Dimension (Psychische
Studien, October, 1918, 415).
F ig s . 11 a n d 11 a . T e l e k in e s is by S t a n is l a w a T o m c z y k '(A fter O c h o r o w ic z ) .
1. R aising a pair o f scissors.
2. R aising a box o f matches.
T h e negatives are so sharp that if there were a thread it would be visible.
thread, for a ball cannot be balanced on a thread, which would,
moreover, appear in the photograph. Stanislawa turns up her
sleeves to the elbow, washes her hands in soap and warm water,
after which her hands remain always in full view. A commis
sion at Warsaw composed of physicians, physiologists, and en
gineers carefully verified these facts and despite the furious
opposition of Professor Cybulski, who denied the facts while
declining to examine them, certified to their entire authenticity.
F ig . 12. T e l e k in e s i s b y S t a n is l a w a T o m c z y k ( A fter
S c h r e n c k - N o t z in g ) .
T he rising of a ball. T h e fluidic thread, by1 enlarging (F ig . ) becomes 13
visible, starting from the nail and showing swellings in its path.
In telekinesis with small objects even in full light, fraud is

always possible if the observers are not fully vigilant; for such
small objects may be displaced by a thread. Ochorowicz has
worked out this question in his experiments with Miss Tomczyk.
There are cases in which the object is moved without any thread,
and others in which a thread does appear; but this thread is
F ig . 13. E n l a r g e m e n t of F ig . 12.
not the hair or fine wire of a conjuring trick, it is a fluidic
thread. I have felt, says Ochorowicz, "this thread on my hand,
on my face, on my hair. When the medium separates her hands
the thread gets thinner and disappears ; it gives the same sensa
tion as a spiders web. If it is cut with scissors its continuity is
immediately restored (p. 262). It seems to be formed of points;
it can be photographed and is then seen to be much thinner than
an ordinary thread. It starts from the fingers. Needless to re
mark that the hands of the medium were very carefully examined
before every experiment (A. S. P.t 1910, xx, 208).
, Ochorowicz cites a curious observation made by the Chevalier
Peretti with Eusapia at Genoa. A glass having been raised by
Eusapia without contact, she cried out, "The thread, look at the
thread. Peretti took the thread and pulled it ; it broke and sud
denly disappeared.
This "fluidic thread should be compared with the fluidic
emanations from Marthe Braud. The minute details given by
Ochorowicz should be carefully studied.
Instead of quoting the experiments by Ochorowicz, I will cite
those by the Warsaw Committee (A. S. P., 1910, xx, 37) :
A celluloid ball, 6 cm. in diameter, was placed in full light on a
dynamometer. S. placed her hands two or three centimetres
from it and the ball began to roll off the dynamometer on to the
table. S. ordered it to return, which it did. There was then
another movement. In a second experiment the ball was screened
by a large celluloid funnel, but the movement was still produced.
The committee state that the facts are certain, but incompre
hensible. Incomprehensible? So be it! But is the attraction by
the earth or by a magnet any more comprehensible? We see a
leaden ball fall to the earth and a piece of iron attracted by a
magnet and we are neither astonished nor disturbed. These are
usual, and we give ourselves up to the illusion that we have
understood them.
. Ochorowicz has verified a case of telekinesis in full light with
Miss Tomczyk (A. S. P.} 1910, xx, 369) : "A chair behind me
suddenly moved. It was a garden chair, light, painted red, and
quite open in make. In full light it made little forward move
ments. I interrogated it. It raised itself on one side and gave
one knock, then advanced a few centimetres. I placed my hand
against the chair and felt a slight force pushing it. . . . All
took place in full light.
Such facts can be explained only by telekinesis, short of the
great absurdity of supposing Ochorowicz the victim of a halluci
nation.
Dr. Dariex, a careful and experienced observer, experimenting
under good conditions with Mme. B., she remaining absolutely
still, saw a table weighing some forty pounds give sudden, strong
movements, slide along, and upset. Some objects were also pro
jected from a shelf fixed to the wall about eight feet from the
floor (A. S. P., 1893, iii, 36).
Dr. Pierre Corneille has reported some extraordinary effects of
telekinesis at the house of Mr. X., of Fontenay-le-Comte (Ven
dee). The sitters were Captain L. and his wife, Professor V.
and his two children of twelve and fifteen. These are bad condi
tions for experiment, for children of twelve and fifteen are quite
capable of fraud. These experiments need not be further noticed
(Nouvelle Revue, December, 1907).
It is not sufficient that experiments should probably be genuine;
we demand more than that, and when dealing with experimenta
tion and not accidental phenomena, we demand repetition. Ex-
perientia una, experientia nulla. The first time that I saw the
surprising performances of Anna Roth, the Blumenmedium, I
was dazzled; at a second sitting I was perplexed; at the third
I was convinced that the thing was a fraud. I asked Anna Roth
to allow a more complete control which would have settled the
question. She refused.
Mary Graham, aged about seventeen, was making some table
turning experiments with her mother and younger brother of
fifteen. One evening when we had finished lights were brought
and we sat down to read. There was a scratching on the carpet;
my mother, and I looked up. Could it be our table moving of
itself? We began to read again, but the noise was heard again
and I distinctly saw the little table move towards us. My mother
also saw that it was displaced; all three of us felt uncanny and
took the table out of the room.
This movement took place a second time. I wished to see
what the table would do if I were rude to it; so I took a little
terrier lying on the carpet and went to put the dog on the table.
I was astounded to see the table jump at me right off the floor!
The dog was terrified and ran away. The table had moved about
six inches and risen off the floor by about as much (A . S'. P.,
1892, ii, 307).
Mr. W. J. Crawford, D.Sc., lecturer in engineering at the
Municipal Technical Institute, Belfast, has published an epoch-
making book on Telekinesis, Experiments in Psychical Science
(Watkins, 1919). His lamented death is a great loss to science.
In 1916-1917 he experimented in a private circle with a mon-
F ic s . 14, 15, 16, D ia g r a m s to E x p l a in t h e T h e o r y of a n E c t o p l a s m ic

C a n t il e v e r ( A f t e r C r a w f o r d ) .
T h e d o tted lin es in d ic a te th e c a n tile v e r . M is s G o lig h e r is su p p ose d
to b e sittin g on th e c h a ir, w h ic h is u p o n th e p la t fo r m o f a w e ig h in g
m ach in e. T h e e x tru d e d su b sta n ce a c ts o n th e ta b le a t P , so m e tim e s t a k in g
15
14
a p u rch a se on th e gro u n d , a s in F i g . , so m e tim es a c t in g a s a c a n tile v e r
( F ig . ).
I n F ig . 16, th e e cto p la sm is re p re se n te d a s it g e n e r a lly o c c u r s , e n la r g e d
w h e r e it p ro ce e d s fr o m th e m ed iu m a n d w h e r e it a c ts o n th e ta b le . It
is in v isib le , th o u g h it h a s w e ig h t, g iv e s a se n sa tio n o n c o n ta ct, a n d can
m a k e a n im p rin t o n p la stic o r c o lo u re d su b sta n ce s.
professional medium, Miss Kathleen Goligher. Table-movements
were produced without contact of any kind. I have seen, says
Mr. Crawford, hundreds of these levitations. Sometimes a chair
would rise off its four feet and remain in the air for several
minutes.
By different instruments that cannot be here described, Craw
ford measured the forces proceeding from the medium. When
she was placed on a weighing machine he found that during the
levitation of light objects their weight was added to that of the
medium. In other words, the effect as regards weight was as if
the medium were herself lifting the objects. Conversely when
the table is pressed downwards as if fixed to the floor, so that a
strong mart can only lift it with much effort, the weight of the
medium on the weighing machine is diminished, in one case by
thirty-seven pounds, in another case by fifty-nine pounds.
Crawford drew the inference that a rigid rod proceeds from
the body of the medium. This is quite conformable to our experi
ments with Eusapia. By this means heavy bodies can be psychic
ally raised. According to him there are two modes of procedure
according to the weight of the object to be raised. The cantilever
method is made use of for light bodies or when the applied forces
are small, and the strut method for heavy bodies or when the
applied forces are large (p. 108). It would seem also (as discov
ered by Ochorowicz and some others) that other sitters also lose
weight slightly during the levitation experiments.
No photographs were taken,1 and precautions such as were used
with Eusapia were not taken. But Crawford decided, with good
reason, that he would not exhaust his medium; he found that the
flashlight greatly disturbed her (p. 147). This prudent conduct
cannot be blamed, for he was able to observe the phenomena bv
good (red) light, and to verify again and again that there was
no contact. He says, All the phenomena can be demonstrated
with the greatest ease to be genuine to the last details.
Decisive value must be given to Crawfords experiments. Next
to those with Eusapia and Home, they are the most complete on
record. Professor Sir William Barrett, who was present at one
xIn his subsequent work, Psychic Structures at the Goligher Circle, photo
graphs were taken, and are here reproduced. Mr. Crawford personally told
me that the effects of the flashlight seemed to be upon the medium herself
rather than on the ectoplasm. It was possible to take flashlight photographs if
the medium were sheltered from the light by a black cape. T r a n s l a t o r 's
N ote .
of these sances, verified that the table moved without contact
and that there were raps inexplicable by usual mechanical causes
( P . 5\ P. R ., 1919, lxxvii, 335).
We shall refer again later to Crawfords admirable essay,
which throws a strong light on the causes and mechanism of
telekinesis.1
Mr. G. Arnsburg has seen a fairly heavy walnut pillar table
rise from the floor (A. S. P., 1892, ii, 352). Our fingers were
held several inches above it. I succeeded in raising the table
without contact just as an iron bar is raised by an electro-magnet.
The table swayed slowly in the air for several seconds, before
falling heavily back to the ground.
I will here mention some unpublished experiments of my own
with three other mediums who gave me fairly good instances of
telekinesis. Linda Gazzera, brought by my lamented friend,
E. Imoda, was in a room in my house with three other persons.
Her hands and feet were firmly held, in complete darkness. A
heavy chest weighing some eighty kilogrammes, which was about
ten inches from her, began to oscillate and crack, being displaced
so violently that I feared it would fall, and I had to stop the
experiment.
I copy textually from my notes: I hold Lindas two hands,
her head and knees. A hand seemingly from behind me strikes
me heavily. I think I can distinguish its fingers, and this is
repeated a second time. I hold the left hand firmly, Imoda hold
ing the right which I frequently verified by touch. The objects
were taken from the cupboard behind, a thimble was put on the
first finger of my left hand, a sheath (tui) was put on my nose,
and I felt fingers touching my nose and face.
In the last experiment, the best of any, no one was present but
Crawfords skilful studies lead to a beginning of exact knowledge on the
nature of the ectoplasm. His leading facts will be found in his last work,
posthumously published, P sy c h ic S tru c tu re s a t th e G o lig h er C ircle (Watkins,
London), of which Mr. S. de Brath has given a very good summary (R e v u e
M ta p syc h iq u e, 1921, i, 191). It cannot be said that the posthumous work
contains anything that had not already been established in his previous books,
though the photographs in it are new. But in so important a matter fresh
verification is always useful, and as the book is posthumous, Crawford cannot
be held entirely responsible for its contents and it is wise to maintain some
reserve.
It may now be definitely stated that we have abundant demonstration
(by Schrenck-Notzing, Mme. Bisson, Dr. Geley, and my own) of ectoplasm as
a half-living emanation from the body. (Second French edition.)
F ig . 17. E ctoplasm of L inda G azzera (A fter C harles R ic h et and
G eorge de F ontenay )
Experience of April 19, 1905.
De Fontenay at the right, Argentine on the left. I was holding my right hand
continuously without interruption. The hand which appeared high above behind the
curtain was released by a fluidic thread from the head of Linda. One could see
the nails and all the phalanges* Experienced at home in my library.
myself, Mme. Charles Richet, and Mme. F. I held Lindas hands
the whole time (underlined in my notes), so that I can be ab
solutely certain that she did nothing with her hands. Mme. F.s
chair was taken from her and removed to the middle of the
room, then given back to her; I received a flower that I had
placed on a shelf as high as the cupboard hardly to be reached
by the hand, and higher than the head. I was touched by some
thing from behind the curtain, though I could not affirm that it
was a hand.
Telekinetic experiments succeed well with Linda and she is
more easily controlled than Eusapia, for she scarcely moves at all,
while Eusapia is in continual jerky movement. In the first ex
periments the ectoplasmic hand that I felt was cold and stiff ; in
the fourth experiment it was warm, articulated, and supple.
J. Maxwell observed occasional movements of objects without
contact in the case of a certain medium, A. These were infre
quent, but as they took place in full daylight, even when Maxwell
only was present, and without the usual procedure of spiritist
sances, they could be verified under excellent conditions, leaving
no room for doubt.
The one phenomenon shown by A., devoid of all mysticism,
was as clear and simple as an elementary phenomenon of phys
iological physics. A. placed her hands near some object and
tried to draw it towards her; and sometimes the object moved
a few centimetres. When alone with A. I have seen her thus
move a fan. This was in full sunlight on a very warm day. The
movement was not strong, but the essential fact is that there
was movement.
With A., raps were very distinct; when she placed her hands
on a table, a walking-stick, or any bit of wood, crepitations and
raps were heard and vibrations were felt.
With S. Tomczyk I have seen good instances of movement
without contact; she could move and raise up a light ball from
a distance.
These experiments made with three different mediums might
hve been insufficient to convince me of movement without con
tact, had I not already formed my opinion after my long experi
mentation with Eusapia. The clear instances of telekinesis pre
sented by A., by S. T., and by Linda in no way surprised me and
strongly confirmed my convictions.
I am even inclined to think that phenomena of telekinesis are
not extremely rare, and have been verified fairly often in spiritist
sances, but unfortunately under unreliable conditions. Spiritual
ists publish nothing that has not a doctrinal bearing or is not
dramatic. They make the mistake of attaching slight importance
to other facts.
Telekinesis is really one of the most important facts in meta
psychic science. It is not to be despised because it is elementary,
any more than a chemist should despise the law of combination of
oxygen with hydrogen because it is an elementary phenomenon.
In any case we may claim to have established the proofs of the
reality of telekinesis.
However extraordinary it may seem, the many instances above
given establish it as securely as any facts of physics or physiology.
It may be defined as follows :
Under certain conditions, movements of objects, even of
massive and heavy objects, may take place without contact and
without the intervention of any known mechanical force.
Various explanations may be attempted. I will mention in
the first place an experiment which physicists have unfortunately
not studied at allthe magnetometer of Abb Fortin. If a piece
of paper cut to the shape of a compass needle is suspended by a
silk fibre inside a glass cylinder, it will turn either towards or
away from a hand approaching the glass. Is this phenomenon
electric or thermal ? I leave this for physicists to decide.1
It is surprising and regrettable that physicists should not have
consented to examine carefully this so-called vital action in
producing movement.2
M. Joire has constructed a very simple instrument that he calls
a sthenometer (Gr. ff&evos = strength).
This is a needle turning freely on a pivot over a graduated
circle, the whole enclosed in a glass cylinder, hermetically closed,
and placed on a base which is made truly level. If the hand is
burbled, Spiritualisme et spiritisme (Bibl. des sciences psychiques), 2d
edit., 1898, 160. Stenson Hooker, Sur les radiations humaines, A. S. P., 1906,
315. J. Rgnault, Phnomnes odiques et radiations nouvelles, A. S. P., 1905,
174. In the journal of Gaston Mry ( Echo du merveilleux) numerous
articles have been devoted to this question which is quite in the embryonic
stage, and as uncertain as the theories of the astral body, odic effluvia, human
radiations, and magnetization at a distance.
*H. Baraduc has imagined that each person has a special attractive or
repulsive power; and has written a thick book on the subject, quite sincere
and honest, but lamentably deficient in critical science ( aForce vitale, L'me
humaine. Ses mouvements ).
brought near the needle it turns on its axis through a certain
angle marked on the dial. M. Joire has been able to eliminate
every exterior mechanical cause, the shaking of the floor, any
thermal, electric, or luminous influence ; and still the movement of
the needle takes place.1
Unfortunately, instead of establishing the physica of the prob
lem, M. Joire has studied the effect of different states of health
as shown by the deflections. This is premature; the physiology
of the reaction should come first. If that is established the patho
logical applications will follow. It is very desirable that the
curious experiments, confused and even ridiculous as some of
them are, which Baraduc accepts with such simple faith should
be taken in hand and pursued methodically and systematically.
Even if they were successful and it were proved that a certain
force is exerted by the body, it would not be at all certain that
there is any relation between this infinitesimal involuntary force
and the large displacements of heavy objects voluntarily produced
by mediums. It is possible, of course, but the causes of move
ment in the two cases are probably totally different.
Since, moreover, interorganic combustion disengages electricity
which can be detected by a galvanometer through the tissues of
the hands, there is nothing absurd in supposing that the phenom
enon may be electrical. Dr. Waller has shown at the Paris
Physiological Congress (1920) that emotions produce changes
in the electrical conductivity of the tissues of the hand. It is
therefore possible, or even probable, that the phenomena of
movement without contact produced by approach of the hand to
a narrow strip of tissue-paper or a slip of elderpith may be an
electric reaction as in Coulombs balance.
This physical experiment throws no light at all on the move
ment of a heavy table, or a large melon, a handbell, a piano, or a
bottle; for these are certainly not electric phenomena, and have
no relation to any known electric phenomena. Although it is
imprudent to advance negative conclusions, I cannot think that
any solution of this problem of normal physiology will solve the
metapsychic problem of telekinesis.
Still we ought not to neglect the important fact that in full light
movements of very light electrifiable objects are produced by indi
viduals who have no mediumistic powers.
1Etude dune force extriorise por Vorganisme vivant, et observations faites
au moyen du sthnomtre (A . 5. P., 1904, xiv, 242-253 et 1906, 752).
Let us leave these small movements and return to the displace
ments of heavy objects, massive tables, etc.
If the telekinetic phenomena produced by Slade, Home, and
Eusapia Paladino are carefully studied, it will be found that they
run parallel with materializations, the mediums that give the one
give the other also ; and already we can deduce from this that there
is some relation between these two modalities of strong medium
ship.
On going deeper into the matter we find in all three cases that
these movements are produced through a human being and do not
exceed the limits of average human muscular power. They are
produced easily when the object is light, with more difficulty
when it is heavy, and are not produced at all when it is very heavy.
To say that the force that displaces objects is limited, and ap
proximates to human muscular power, advances the enquiry some
what, for if a transcendental force were essentially different in its
nature from known mechanical forces there would seem no reason
that a weight of a ton should not be raised as easily as a weight of
an ounce.
With Eusapia there are all the gradations between movement
produced by a materialized hand and movement produced at a
distance without the hand being seen. When in half-light a heavy
blow is heard on the table it is almost impossible not to think it a
blow from a fist. But usually the fist is invisible, and in the same
sance one experiences touches without being able to see anything.
And when a water-bottle is taken, water poured into a glass, and
the glass carried to the lips of the sitters, how can we understand
these movements otherwise than as performed by a hand?
Let us, then, advance a hypothesispermissible in face of these
strange factsthat materialization takes place in two phases: a
first phase in which the materialization is invisible (paradoxical
as that seems), but accompanied by mechanical action, and a
second phase with visibility and mechanical action. Everything
is then coherent, and we may resume the comparison between the
projection of mechanical energy and projection of luminous energy
hinted at the beginning of this chapter.
We place a hand before a mirror ; its image appears. We place
a hand above a balance ; if the scale is depressed that is the first
phase of materialization ; mechanisation, not yet made visible. If
the projection of the hand should be more intense the hand will
appear to sight, at first unshapen and surrounded by draperies,
but becoming by degrees more distinctively a hand than it was at
first.
We shall return to this hypothesis when treating of materiali
zations. But whatever hypothesis may be advanced to account
for them, the fact of movement without contact is undeniable, and
it would be puerile to deny it because it is not understood.
However, although the fact is proven as far as we are con
cerned, it is highly desirable that a thorough study of the facts
should be made anew, separating the phenomena from all con
siderations but those of cold mechanical physicsa delicate task
in view of the mental state of the mediums. Unfortunately these
phenomena, very rare when intense, are exceedingly undocile to
deal with. A medium seems necessary and results vary from day
to day. Darkness, or at least deep shadow, is usually indispen
sable. These conditions make experiment enormously difficult.
But in spite of these difficulties, the excellent experiments made
by Ochorowicz with Stanislawa Tomczyk, and by Mme. Bisson
and Von Schrenck-Notzing with Marthe Braud, and by Crawford
with Miss Goligher, confirming what had been suspected by
Crookes with Home and by ourselves with Eusapia, have estab
lished that movement without contacttelekinesisconstitutes
the first stage in materialization. This is a fact of primary im
portance; Schrenck-Notzing has summed up the evidence that can
be adduced in support of this proposition in an excellent book
that has just appeared.1
In that work theory has no placewhich is not less an
encomium than a criticismthe facts are set forth in good order,
and so well marshalled that they bring conviction.
As to simple telekinesis, the examples already given are suffi
cient; Schrenck-Notzing adds his own personal observations.
1. Stanislawa Tomczyk gave with him as good results as she
did with Ochorowicz. The experiments took place at his own
house and he was assisted by Colonel J. Peter, and Drs. Durig,
Specht, Franc, and sometimes other men of science. The red
light was sufficient to allow all movements by the medium to be
well seen. The light was behind her and her hands were examined
with a lens. Her arms were bare.
Under these conditions a celluloid ball (like a billiard ball)
was moved by her hands being brought near it, a letter-weighing
xPhysikalische Phaenotnene des Mediumistnus, Mnchen, E. Reinhardt, 1920.
scale was depressed, indicating a pressure of 50 grams; one scale
of a pair was lowered five centimetres, celluloid balls in a glass
were moved about, and a teaspoon in a glass was flung out of the
glass without being touched. All these were repeated several
times. The hypothesis of fraud is absolutely impossible, for the
whole attention of the observers was concentrated on the hands,
which remained motionless during the movement of the objects.
2. Eusapia Paladino gave some fine instances of telekinesis.
At Munich, in the presence of Professor Dessoir, who was pro
foundly sceptical, when no contact could possibly take place be
tween Eusapia and the curtain, it moved, and various objects
placed behind it moved also. Schrenck-Notzing mentions also
the experiment made at my house at Carqueiranne, where a
billiard ball was brought on to the table. A lamp placed behind
a folding screen allowed of all movements by the medium being
clearly distinguished: her feet were controlled by Dr. Beretta;
Oliver Lodge and I controlled the right side; Mrs. Sidgwick and
Schrenck the left side. In this fine experiment a large melon was
transported from one place to another; a musical box played;
and a decanter full of water was brought on to the table. Another
time, still at Carqueiranne, Eusapia put her two hands on Ochoro-
wiczs shoulder, and the table rose off all four feet about twelve
inches for four seconds. Flournoy describes an experiment that
he made with Schrenck at Munich, Eusapia being the medium,
and says that an invisible force maintained the table in the air
and caused it to oscillate without its being touched by Eusapias
hands or feet.
3. Mme. K., the wife of a painter, and a non-professional
medium, placed her hand lightly on a piano weighing thirteen
hundred pounds; the piano was displaced and one leg rose six
inches; Mme. K. not touching the piano with her feet or knees.
The light was sufficient to see clearly. Mme. K. only touched the
lid of this heavy instrument, the lid opened and shut noisily.
4. Willy S., a young student dentist, aged sixteen, a non-pro-1
fessional medium, gave numerous examples of telekinesis, and
these, as in the case of Marthe Beraud, were nearly always pro
duced by ectoplasms.
I have mentioned these cases of Schrenck-Notzings not only
because they are independent affirmations of the reality of the
phenomenon, but because I wished to specify, as Schrenck has
done, the relation between telekinesis and ectoplasms.
As early as 1895, in the course of my experiments with Eusapia,
I had verified that simultaneously with telekinetic movements of
objects there appeared barely visible and half-formed stumps, like
adventitious limbs, so to say, or efflorescences, for which I pro
posed the name of ectoplasms, a name now universally adopted.
In numerous cases what look like rigid rods have been seen pro
ceeding from Eusapias body. I have often felt on touching her
dress a resistant and mobile but formless object, while her hands
and feet were being held unmistakably. H. Sidgwick has verified
the same thing, as also Dessoir and Sir Oliver Lodge. Never
theless these observers were extremely sceptical, almost deter
mined to dispute the phenomena. The American experimentalists,
perhaps more sceptical still than Dessoir and Sidgwick, say that
on three occasions they have seen strange protuberances seeming
to proceed from Eusapias body (in one case from the middle of
her back), which subsequently were reabsorbed into her body.
These ectoplasmic pseudopods were screened by the curtain;
their form therefore could not be ascertained. On one occasion a
rod seemingly about thirteen inches long proceeded from
Eusapias foot, approached the table, touched its top, and upset
the objects upon it. The members of the Psychological Institute
of ParisCourtier, dArsonval, and Yourjevitchcame to a
similar conclusion.
Therefore coincident with telekinesis there are ectoplasms
formation of rudimentary limbs, rods, and more or less visible
material forces proceeding from the body of the medium.
The excellent observations by Ochorowicz reinforce these facts.
He was able to see and to photograph a kind of fluidic thread by
means of which the telekinetic phenomena connected with Stan-
islawa were effected. These forces, which he calls rigid rays,
can bend and displace and can be directed (according to the will
of the medium ?) to produce mechanical effects. This fluidic thread
cannot always be seen or photographed; but quite probably is in
a first phase of its formation when it can move objects, though
itself invisible.
These rigid rays seem to proceed from the hands or the finger
nails of Stanislawa. Close to her hand they appear like a bundle.
They cannot be compared to an ordinary thread, a hair, a silk
fibre, or sewing cotton, for along them there are swellings and
nodes like the waves in a vibrating cord. Their photographic
image is discontinuous. This last is a phenomenon of the greatest
importance ; for it absolutely excludes the absurd theory of fraud
in these carefully observed cases.
To move a round object such as a celluloid ball, a whole number
of filaments surround the object like a net, as if one single thread
were insufficient for the purpose (Schrenck-Notzing).
Schrenck-Notzing gives {pi. V., p. 547) an enlargement of the
photograph of this fluidic thread. He inclines to the opinion that
it is a bundle of fibres, while Ochorowicz thinks that the fluidic
thread acts mechanically by a kind of adhesion. Schrencks
observations with Willy agree with those we made with Stanislawa
and Eusapia. Using rigorous control, Willy being dressed in a
knitted woollen garment provided by Schrenck-Notzing and laced
up the back, the phenomena were similar to those produced by
Eusapia and by Marthe Braud. All the sitters felt a hand
which displaced objects near by, while Willys hands were care
fully controlled. This hand was felt before it was seen. It had
all the appearance of a living hand. It seemed cold and damp,
the skin rather rough, and was obviously larger than Willys
hand. Sometimes the fingers were mere stumps. In one case
the effect of sudden light was tried ; then the white tissue which
had formed round the mediums neck rapidly disappeared with a
crawling vermicular movement into the black: garment with which
he was clothed. The care with which the medium had been
searched renders the notion that the tissue had been fraudulently
introduced into Schrencks house quite inadmissible, and, more
over, this ectoplasmic tissue had the singular property of spon
taneous movement. ( ! !) In one instance they were able to get a
fragment of this tissue into a tube; it moved actively for some
time and then suddenly disappeared {Am 10 januar, 1920, hatte
Kap. K. einen Teil der Substanz bereits in einem Rhrchen aufge
fangen. Dasselbe bewegte sich innerhalb des Glases lebhaft und
verschwand blitzartig schnell, als der Beobachter die Rhre zu
schliessen versuchte).
The experiments of Crawford show the close relation between
telekinesis and ectoplasms better than anything hitherto recorded.
All his experiments were made with Miss Kathleen Goligher, a
young lady twenty-one years of age, non-professional. The light
was from a gas-jet covered with red paper, and was sufficient
for all movements to be seen.
At the beginning of the sances raps were heard, light at first,
then like hammer-blows, sometimes rhythmic. In some cases the
table was raised forty inches above the floor and, without being
touched by anything, swayed about in the air.
The new feature in Crawfords experiments was that he placed
his medium on a weighing machine and observed the alterations in
weight during levitation. The weight of the medium and chair
before the levitation was 136.7 pounds. During levitation the
weight increased by 3.05 pounds, the weight of the table raised
being 2.64 pounds. With other and heavier tables he obtained
similar results; the weight of the medium and chair was increased
by the weight of the table.
Everything takes place, said Crawford, as if there were a
mechanical link (invisible?) between the medium and the
table. It is impossible not to connect these important observa
tions with those verified in connection with Home, Eusapia, and
Stanislawa Tomczyk.
The substance that produces these telekinetic movements is a
kind of lever, cantilever, or rod which emerges from the body of
the medium and is reabsorbed into it (see diagrams, p. 430). It
can bend, turn, and direct itself, but cannot act at a greater dis
tance than about a yard and a half. It can change its texture,
becoming hard enough to give strong blows, and can lay hold of
objects. Its dimensions are variable. It can pass through gar
ments and woven materials if they are close to the body, but
cloths, paper, and woven materials at a certain distance from the
body prevent the action of the force. Its end can adhere to objects
to be lifted as though sticking to them. The composition of the
ectoplasm could not be determined, and although it certainly pro
ceeds from the body of the medium, no pressure is felt and no
reaction is perceived.
The importance of these extraordinary facts cannot be exag
gerated. They have been observed methodically and measured in
a rigorously scientific temper. The reality of ectoplasms, in
accordance with the phenomena presented by Eusapia, Marthe
Beraud, and Stanislawa Tomczyk, has been rigorously proved by
these experiments of Crawfords.
He gives in his last workPsychic Structures at the Goligher
Circle (Watkins, London, 1921)posthumously published, some
excellent photographs, following up his earlier work.1
See also S chrenck-Notzings remarks on this, Das Materialisations problems
(Psych. Studien, May, 1921).
The theory that ectoplasms cause telekinesis is probably correct,
but in any case, for the phenomena themselves, the proof is
irrefutable and ought to carry conviction.
The results given by the different mediums are concordant;
each has special personal modes, but the same general scientific
inference is to be drawn from the observations as a whole.
It seems fairly well established today that movements without
contact must be referred to fluidic projections, at first invisible,
that emerge from the body of the medium. The ectoplasms
emanating from Marthe, Eusapia, Willy, Stanislawa, and Kathleen
Goligher are doubtless analogous to the phantoms that came from
Florence Cook, Home, Eglinton, and Mme. dEsperance. Tele
kinesis is the first phase of materialisation.
Scientific investigation should now be concentrated upon investi
gation of this strange and subtle substance which is capable of
purposeful movements and such extraordinary changes. It is a
whole new world, still profoundly mysterious, and this world is
opened up by metapsychic science to physiology and physics.
We shall enter into some further detail when discussing ecto
plasmic forms.
(c) Of Noises and Raps
Displacements of objects do not usually show any intelligence
at work. It would seem that the whole effort of the force in
action is expended in producing mechanical effects, as strong and
astonishing as may be possible. But it is quite otherwise with the
slight noises produced in table or in other objects near at hand.
These noises were first heard by the Fox sisters, and were the
point of departure for modern metapsychic science. These noises,
produced by intelligent forces, have received the name of raps.
This phenomenon, at once simple and important, occurs when
persons are sitting round a table with a powerful medium. There
are shocks in the wood of the table, manifest by knocks, some*
times faint, but sometimes loud enough to be heard at consider
able distances.
To avoid admitting the telekinetic power that produces raps,
a number of ridiculous hypotheses have been advanced, of which
nothing now remains. M. Schiff explained the raps by a move
ment of a lateral muscle attached to the fibula, possible in his own
absolutely exceptional case. It would be senseless to think this
general. Mrs. Sidgwick (P. S. P. R., xiii, 145) says that abnor
mal crackings can be produced by the knee-joint. This also is a
most rare exception.
It is, of course, evident that if the medium can touch the table
with head, hands, or feet, he can get all the raps he wants. But it
is impossible to be certain that the medium is motionless when
he is not touching the table!
The raps are produced on contact, but in certain rare cases
they are produced without contact, and this is a most essential
and basic phenomenon that should be studied with more care than
spiritualists, blinded by their wish for miraculous and fantastic
phenomena, have given to it. The phenomenon of raps, when
unquestionable, is the signal proof that there are forces acting
mechanically on things, independently of human muscular con
tractions. For my own part I consider that this phenomenon, in
spite of its simplicity, or rather because of its simplicity, is the
most striking phenomenon of metapsychics.
Most frequently, it is true, the raps are produced when the
medium is touching the table and they may then be attributed to
various causes, but it must not be forgotten that at the moment
of hearing a rap the table vibrates, and a shock in the wood can be
distinctly felt. If the ear be placed to the table and the sitters are
silent, faint repeated raps can be heard like a drumming. In
some cases they become rhythmic, like a march or other music,
though the mediums hand is quite still and sometimes does not
touch the table at all.
J. Maxwell was fortunate enough to be able to observe a
medium who gave raps in full light, and he studied her very
carefully. I had the raps so often in strong light that I
doubted whether darkness favours their production as much as it
does other phenomena. Contact between the hands and the table
is not necessary in order to obtain raps. I have obtained them
very easily without contact. When they have come with contact,
one of the most certain ways of getting them without contact is to
keep the hands on the table for a while, and then to raise them
very slowly palms downward.
Maxwell obtained raps in restaurants and in railway refresh
ment rooms loud enough to attract public attention. In one
house, celebrated by reason of the man of genius who lived in it,
the raps aroused the suspicions of the caretaker. The tonality of
the raps is very variable; they may resemble the noise made by a
mouse, by sawing wood, by rapping on wood with the finger
nails, or scratching on woven stuffs. Each of the personalities
who claim to intervene has his own special mode of rapping.
These raps cannot be due to crepitation of the wood in process
of drying, for they are intelligent. The singular and marvellous
thing is that a table untouched by any person emits sonorous
vibrations that are not due to chance but mean something. A
kind of conversation can be kept up by this means. If the alphabet
is repeated, a rap will be given at certain letters and the sequence
of such letters will be found to make a word having a definite
meaning. A phrase is thus built up. No matter, for the moment,
what is said; it is enough to verify (1) that the raps are not due
to muscular contractions or any other movement of the medium,
since the medium is perfectly still, or is not touching the table at
all; (2) that the raps proceed from an intelligence that has some
thing to say.
Mr. W. J. Crawford thus expresses himself on the subject of
the raps obtained by Miss Kathleen Goligher (Experiments in
Psychical Science, Watkins, 1919). As soon as the seance be
gins we hear noisesrap, rap, rapon the floor near the me
dium. They become louder and louder, on the table, on the chairs
of the sitters. Sometimes they are like hammer-blows, so loud
that they can be heard outside, and they shake the floor and the
chairs. They can imitate different soundsthe step of a man, the
trot of a horse, the rubbing of a match, or the bouncing of a
ball.
The facts noted by Hyslop {Am. S. P. R. Journal, xiv, 252-257,
1920) are the more likely to carry conviction in that he is not to
be suspected of tenderness in handling objective metapsychics. Dr.
Creery corroborates the facts. An old, ignorant, and blind negro
obtained strong raps by placing his hand without the slightest
movement on the table, on a violin, or the door. These occurred
also when his hands were not in contact with anything and in ,
full light. The raps could be heard five or six feet away. Hyslop
says: We had fair evidence for the existence of raps under
unusual circumstances. Mr. Clawson had even better results
with the same man.
The reality of these raps is of primary importance, and this
phenomenon carries the implication of the whole of metapsychics.
If it is established that mechanical vibrations can be produced in
matter, at a distance and without contact, and that these vibrations
are intelligent, we have the truly far-reaching fact that there are
in the universe human or non-human intelligences that can act
directly on matter. For this reason, I repeat, it is a mistake not
to study these rappings more closely; the rather that the
phenomenon is not an exceptional one. No doubt very powerful
mediums are required to obtain, without contact, loud knocks that
convey a precise meaning, but even with relatively weak and
untrained mediums raps can be heard. If the ear be placed to the
table crepitations are perceptible, rhythmic or not rhythmic, which
have no connected sense, i.e., not conveying coherent phrases,
nor even words when the alphabet is repeated, but quite sufficient
to establish the fact of mechanical vibrations in the wood. I have
obtained these vibrations with many different mediumswith my
friend G. F., with Stella, with A., and with L. With Eusapia,
the raps were not very frequent, but occasionally (though rarely),
they were strong enough to shake the table. With A. they oc
curred not only on the table but on any object she might be hold
ing. It is true that these were mostly incoherentan irregular
and disordered drumming, preventing any connected conversa
tion. To obtain coherent answers an exceptionally powerful
medium is required.
With weak mediums the phenomena are sometimes limited to
such knocks, and if the connection with the medium is ignored,
one may be tempted to fancy the house haunted. Mr. Hyalmer
Wijk, of Gothenburg (Sweden), has made a careful study of a
case of this kind. Mme. N. Karin, a hysterical patient, but well
educated, heard resounding knockings in the house where she was
living, for nearly three months; Dr. Briere and Mr. Wijk heard
them also. Then they ceased entirely (A. S. P 1905, xv,
517-551). J. Hyslop, experimenting with Anna Burton,1 heard
raps and is inclined to think them supernormal because they were
produced in very varied ways and in very different places, some
times spontaneously, sometimes on demand by the experimenters.
In one case they could be heard at a distance of two yards, while
Miss Burton made no movement either with hands or feet. The
only possible hypothesis alternative to telekinetic raps is the
very unlikely one of collective sensorial illusion of all the sitters
{Journal, S. P. R., xv, 1912,190).
1Helene de C. Verrall, The case of Anna Burton, Journ. S. P. R., xv,
191a, 141.
The following occurrence is very extraordinary and does not
fall within the category of other known facts, so that, standing
alone, some uncertainty is permissible. Mrs. Davies received a
letter from India which she was directed to transmit to Mrs. W.
The letter was placed on the mantelpiece. Some time after Mrs.
Davies heard clear and loud raps from the chimney-piece. She
then placed the letter on another article of furniture. The raps
followed the letter. Mrs. Daviess father came and verified this,
soon after deciding that the raps carile from the letter or from a
point so near that they seemed to come from it. This letter
announced the death of Mrs. W.s husband (P. 5*. P. R., 1907,
xvii, 726).
Sir William Barrett adduces a case of rapping1 which carries
complete conviction to any careful reader.
Florrie C., the ten-year-old daughter of a distinguished Irish
barrister, having on different occasions produced raps, Sir William
tried experiments with her. In some instances the sounds and
vibrations were produced from a distance in tables remote from
the child. After several weeks of investigation Sir William con
cluded that all notions of fraud, illusion, or defective observation
must be given up. The raps were intelligent, but the intelligence
was childish. Florrie also displayed strong telekinesis ; a dining
room table to seat twelve persons was raised to a considerable
height, one leg only remaining on the floor.
Under equally good conditions with Miss L., Barrett had raps
and extensive movements of the table when no one was touching
it. One day the table pursued him, as it were, and imprisoned
him in his chair without being touched at all. These phenomena
were fully reproduced in his own house.
The opinion of F. W. H. Myers carries great weight. This is
what he says on the subject:
Spiritualists affirm that this is a very common phenomenon.
I can only say that having taken part in some hundreds of sances,
and prepared to note raps, I have often heard them with paid
mediums. Experimenting with friends I have often heard crepita
tions in the table; but only with four or five non-professional
mediums, worthy of full confidence, have I heard unquestionable
raps answering questions sufficiently well to bring to me the con
viction that they were produced by some unknown power
(Human Personality, ii, 454).
1On the Threshold of the Unseen, third edition, Kegan Paul, 1920.
I can entirely confirm Myerss opinion. Unintelligent crepita
tions are frequent ; intelligent rappings are very rare ; but the point
is to know that the phenomenon, though exceptional, is real ; and
this cannot be doubted.
It seems to me obvious that progress in metapsychic science is
not to be sought in the pursuit of extraordinary phenomena that
appeal to the imagination, but in the more modest and less per
plexing study of vibrations, intelligent or not, in a table which is
hardly touched, or, better still, not touched at all, by the medium.
It would suffice to attach to the board a moderately sensitive
microphone with an arrangement for a graphic record. But
unfortunately experimenters, and mediums more especially, have
no inclination for these arduous and technical experiments.
Spiritualists who in their frequent sances have often seen very
striking phenomena are more concerned to converse with the
dead in rhetorical and sterile phrases than to register the vibra
tions of a board under conditions of unquestionable precision.
(d) On Direct Writing
Among the different kinds of movements of objects without
contact a separate place must be given to a group of phenomena
so rare that they may be considered doubtful. I refer to direct
writing. This has no relation to automatic writing. In this
latter the medium writes unconsciously, but as his hand holds the
pen or pencil it is unnecessary to suppose the intervention of an
extraneous and superhuman power, since he writes with the
muscles of the hand like any other person.
But in direct writing a small piece of pencil is placed on a
slate, and after a few minutes the slate, blank when placed in a
box or otherwise closed up, is found to have writing upon it;
e.g., an answer to a question. Nevertheless, the hands of the
medium have been in sight, and there was no darkness except in
the box containing the slate and the pencil.
The striking case of direct writing observed by Sir William
Crookes with Home has already been quoted ; but cases of spon
taneous movements of the pencil are most extremely rare. Homes
case is nearly unique. The experiment is usually performed in
quite another way, as was done by Slade and Eglinton. In their
case a small fragment of chalk or slate-pencil was placed between
two slates locked together, or on a slate shut in between two small
boards. The whole apparatus was held in the hand and placed
under the table. A scratching noise was heard, and on with
drawing the box it was verified that the bit of pencil was worn and
that there was writing on the slate.
If the slate has not been lost to sight and the observer is skilful
enough to make legerdemain impossible, the experiment is deci
sive; but detestable trickery is possible.
In a very interesting memorandum, Mr. Davey gives the story
of a seance in which he deliberately simulated direct writing on a
slate without warning the sitters of his intention to do this trick.
The sitters in all simplicity signed a declaration attesting the
authenticity of the phenomenon. Mr. Davey had no difficulty in
proving want of vigilance and defective observation at several
moments during the course of the proceedings.
It cannot be affirmed that all the cases of direct writing pre
sented by Slade and Eglinton were fraudulent, but Mr. Daveys
experiment warrants great reserve in accepting any, and the
tricks of American conjurers described in detail by Mr. David
Abbott justify the utmost distrust of alleged slate-writing.1
If the medium (usually a paid medium) is allowed to use his
own slates, however blank they may seem, or if he is allowed to
hold or even to touch those that have been brought, nothing can
be guaranteed, for anything is possible by lever substitution. It
is very difficult to certify absolutely and incontrovertibly that the
medium has not touched the slates, for a single moment of inat
tention (and who can be certain that attention has not been relaxed
for a moment?) suffices for substitutions to be made. As Mr.
Abbott remarks, if the experimenter brings his own slate and the
putative medium does not touch it at all, no trickery is possible.
But how often has this been done ?
Stainton Mosess intense mediumistic power was occasionally
manifested by direct writing.2 Mr. and Mrs. Speer, who assisted
Stainton Moses in most of his experiments, placed paper and
pencil in a certain room, and locked the door, Stainton Moses
being in trance in a different storey of the house. At the end of
half an hour they came back to the locked room and found writing
on the paper.
sp ir it Slate-writing and Billet tests, Am. P. S. P. R., i, 1907* 148-160,
44-254,413-427.5*3-522.
*F. Myers, The Experiences of Stainton Moses, P. S. P. R., 1894, 1X> 265-
275.
In another experiment (loc. cit., 347) some letters were written
on a sheet of white paper placed in the table (in a drawer?
T ransl . ) . On that day the guide of Stainton Moses, irritated at
a proposal to admit some other person tothe restricted circle of
sitters, struck blows of such power, says Stainton Moses, that
we had the uncomfortable feeling that he could break our heads
if he wished. During the following days several lines of writing
were found on blank paper put under the table while Mr. and
Mrs. Speer held the hands of Stainton Moses (pp. 302, 303, 304).
Mr. Charlton Speer sums up the various experiences as fol
lows: We have often had direct writing, sometimes on a sheet
of paper placed in the middle of the table at equal distance from
all the sitters : one of us sometimes wrote his name on a sheet of
blank paper previously marked, and we usually found at the end
of a seance that a message had been written. Sometimes we
placed a pencil near the paper, sometimes some black-lead; in
either case the results were the same. Usually the message was
an answer to questions ; but sometimes there were short communi
cations independent of the questions, or a few words of
sympathy.
The spiritualist publications mention many cases of direct
writing, but in view of the ease with which frauds can be perpe
trated, some doubts may be felt, especially in the case of pro
fessional mediums.1
M. de Guldenstubb, with his sister as medium, on August 13,
1856, put blank paper and pencil in a box, and, after half an hour,
he verified that letters were written on the paper. He repeated
this experiment more than ten times. Later on, he was able to see
the letters being formed on the paper in the box when its lid was
left open. The Count dOurche, who was present at some of these
experiments, confirms them.
General de Brewern and the Marquis de Planty witnessed the
same phenomenon of direct writing on new packets of note-paper,
sealed up by the stationer who sold them.
The written words were in Greek, signed by Plato; in Latin,
I mention them, however, with all proper reservations. Delanne, R e ch erc h es
su r la m d ia n im it, Paris, Libr. des sciences psychiques, 1902. Aksakoff,
A n im ism e e t sp iritism e, p. 547, p. 438-455. Stainton Moss (M. A . Oxon),
P sych o g ra p h y. Guldenstubb, L a r a lit d e s e s p r its e t le p h n o m n e m e r
v e ille u x d e leu r critu re d irecte.
signed by Cicero. We are not to imagine that Plato and Cicero
had come ; the interest of the experiment does not consist in that,
but in the production of direct writing. M. Guldenstubbs sister,
who was the medium, in any case knew neither Latin nor Greek.
I mention these cases only to put them on record.
I made with Eusapia one experiment, which was very clear, but
which I could never succeed in repeating. At Ribaud Island one
evening, in presence of Ochorowicz, F. Myers, and Sir Oliver
Lodge, Eusapia gave us the following phenomenon. I think no
one will question the competence of the observers:
Eusapia took my right hand and grasped the first finger so
that it projected considerably beyond her small hand. She then
moved my finger over some white paper as if writing and the
trace of my finger appeared in blue chalk. Eusapia held a blue
crayon in her left hand raised high in air. The phenomenon took
place by the light of a candle placed close to the paper. I can
still see, as it were, Myers bending over the paper with his eye
glass and closely following all that took place. The same thing
occurred four or five times, the writing being on white envelopes.
I am absolutely sure that Eusapias hand did not touch the paper,
but only my first finger, on which there was not the smallest trace
of blue. The experiment went on for about ten minutes by the
light of the candle, the writing being produced both on paper and
on our white shirt-fronts. I have not the very slightest doubt of
the reality of the phenomenon: (1) The paper was blank; (2)
Eusapia could not have touched it ; (3) the blue marks were made
under my very eyes ; (4) this took place within sixteen inches of a
lighted candle; and (5) Myers, Ochorowicz, and Lodge were
joint observers.
A. de Rochas has testified to an analogous fact with Eusapia,
confirmed to me orally by A. de Gramont (LJExtriorisation de la
Motricit, pp. 140 and 162).
In many experiments on direct writing, phenomena of cryptes-
thesia take place along with the writing itself, as in the case of
Guldenstubb. But the distinction between the two must be ob
served even though both are associated in the fact.
Dr. Paul Gibier, an experienced physiologist and a careful
observer, testifies :
We have seen more than a hundred times letters, drawings,
lines, and even whole phrases produced by a slight touch on
slates held by Slade, and even between two slates with which he
had no contact. We had ourselves bought these slates in a shop
in Paris and marked them with our signature. When the writ
ing was produced on one slate only, this was usually done under
that corner of the table at which we happened to be. We kept
both the slate and Slades fingers well in view; we ourselves
placed the pencil on the slate, but we were never able to get a
sight of the moving pencil. The slate oscillated slightly as if by
the pressure of the invisible writer (Le Spiritisme, Paris, Doin,
1887).
The experiment that Dr. Gibier regards as perhaps the best is
the following:
I had brought several slates, among others two screwed to
gether, tied with string, sealed, and wrapped in paper . . . I
proposed that I should get an answer on two new slates that I
had brought in a napkin. I received permission, after having put
the traditional little pointer between the two, to sit on my slates.
Having then placed them on my chair I sat down and did not
let go of the slates till the whole weight of my body bore on
them. I then put my hands on the table along with Slades hands,
and I felt and heard very clearly that writing was taking place
on the slates with which I was in contact. When this ended I
myself withdrew my two slates, and read the following words,
'Slates are difficult to influence; we will do what we can. The
writing was bad, but it was writing, and legible writing. Slade
had not touched these slates.
M. Moutonnier has mentioned a writing given him by Miss
Bangs of Chicago, which is manifestly fraudulent.
Elliot Cowes and E. Coleman, experimenting with Mrs.
Francis of San Francisco as medium, saw the telekinetic move
ment of the pencil on the slate. In certain cases the slate was
partially under the table and partially open to sight; in other
cases, it was not put under the table but only covered with a
handkerchief, and a whole sentence was written under these con
ditions. It should be noted that Mr. Emmet Coleman is well
acquainted with legerdemain.
G. Encausse says that in a seance given by the magnetizer
Robert, he has seen in full light and before twenty persons a girl
of seventeen cause letters to appear on sheets of paperverses
with the signature of P. Corneille. It seems that on microscopic
examination, the writing was seen to be formed by globules of
blood. This is, therefore, not direct writing in the usual sense
of the words. P. Gibier was present at these experiments, but I
am not aware that he has said anything about them. The evidence
of Dr. Encausse can only be accepted with great reserve. Why
has this experiment not been repeated ?
Dr. Mysz has had examples of direct writing with an ignorant
little peasant girl of fourteen, who hardly knew how to write. He
describes this experiment as followsit seems to me very
defective :
A wooden box about twelve inches wide, open on one side only,
had this side closed by a conical bag of black silk ending in a
point. Into a small hole in this point a pencil was introduced so
as to leave only the end of the pencil outside. The child only
placed her hands on the outside of the box, and a few minutes
later the bag swelled out and the pencil began to write. There
is no need to say more; it counts for nothing.
Dr. Nichols obtained at his own house good proofs of direct
writing with the medium Eglinton. He put a marked sheet of
paper in a locked box between two slates, in full light, and writ
ing was produced while he held the box. This was one of Eglin-
tons usual phenomena.
I made the following experiment with Eglinton a long time
ago, so that the details are not clear in my memory, and I men
tion it, though not attaching any importance to it. I drew a
design on the slate so that Eglinton could not see the drawing.
The slate was reversed and a small piece of chalk placed on it. I
took the slate in my hand, and without letting it go held it under
the table, Eglinton holding the other end of the slate. After two
or three minutes a curious facsimile of my sketch was reproduced,
but I think that a skilful illusionist could have done as much.
Eglinton gave a celebrated sance with Mr. Gladstone in full
light with very positive results.
But all these slate-writings are open to suspicion; it is a form
of metapsychism very difficult to control.
In conclusion, phenomena of direct writing are very rare.
Some, those by Home and Eusapia, seem authentic; but there
has been so much trickery and illusion that direct writing must be
considered still very uncertain.
In any case, whether it is true or not, it does not affect the
reality of telekinesis and rapping.
CHAPTER III
E c t o p l a sm s ( M a t e r ia l iz a t io n s )
(a) On Fraud in Ectoplasmic Experiments

In metapsychic experiments the possibility of fraud must
never be lost sight of. Other sciences do not suffer from this
evil; they evolve peaceably, having only material difficulties to
face, whereas scientists who experiment with mediums are always
liable to be basely deceived. This makes their task one of great
difficulty, demanding careful and vigilant attention.
The difficulties that confront research into objective metapsy
chics and subjective metapsychics are not of the same kind. We
have already noted what precautions must be taken against the
trickeries, whether conscious or unconscious, that render the
study of cryptesthesia so complexerrors of memory, defects
in testimony, and paramnesia. We have shown the risk that the
experimenter himself, in spite of all good faith, may involuntarily
assist the medium. When studying objective metapsychics the
precautions to be taken are different, though they must be
equally stringent.
Soon after the Fox sisters had started spiritualism, and had
begun to make their mediumistic faculties a source of profit,
there arose everywhere, but especially in America, persons who
began to traffic in it. Everywhere the credulity of the public
aroused the cupidity of swindlers. Public sances were held and
money taken for entrance at which spiritualist exhibitions were
given, like performances at a circus or by a conjurer. Phantoms
appeared on the stage, and, profiting by the simplicity of the
sitters, came down from the platform to be recognized by some
unhappy mother who had lost a child.
Shops were opened by spirit-photographers, who presented
to their clients vague faces on the negative which the credulous
sitter always ended by recognizing. The medium who organized
these exhibitions would also take engagements to give sances at
peoples houses for high fees.
454
ECTOPLASMS (MATERIALIZATIONS) 455
The better to attract the favour and money of the public, these
mediums and photographers pretended to be genuinely scientific
researchers, and craftily invested their exhibitions with some
vague kind of religion, so that the whole thing became an actual
tradethe trade of mediumship, sometimes lucrative, but always
dangerous and in any case dishonourable.
This ugly trade and the consequent development of spiritualism
was made possible by the fact that very frequently these profes
sionals had at first some real powers, and vestiges of genuine
phenomena were admixed with their fraudulent practices.
The number of adherents to spiritualist doctrines steadily in
creased; journals sprang into being to celebrate the exploits of
professional mediums.
These insanities, encouraged by the blindness of the public and
by the credulity of some honourable scientific men, brought about
an inevitable reaction. In England, and especially in America, a
whole literature strained every nerve1 to unmask the strange sim
plicity of spiritualists and the perverse ingenuity of professional
mediums.*
Disgusted by these sham prodigies, and fully informed as
to the machinery of fraud employed by these pseudo-mediums,
scientific men in America and England ôbstinately refused to
accept the facts of telekinesis and materialization. It became al
most an article of faith among thema faith perhaps as blind as
that of the spiritiststhat there are no material phenomena.
The affirmations of honourable men, highly placed in public
esteem, such as Judge Edmunds, Dale Owen, and even so great
a man as Alfred Russel Wallace, were insufficient to outweigh
the nauseous impressions produced by the American trade in
mediumship.
Even the admirable work of William Crookes ( 1872) brought
no conviction; he, like Zllner, remained isolated. No one
would believe what these two eminent men of science asserted, ;
*1 will cite only a few : Abbott, Behind the scenes with mediums, Chicago,
1907. Fr. Podmore, Modern spiritualism, a History and a criticism, London,
Methuen, 1902, 2 vols. Schaikleton, Spookland, a record of Research in the
much talked realm of mystery. Carrington, The physical phenomena of spirit
ualism, Boston, Turner, 1907. Rainaly, Procs dun escamoteur, Paris, 1894.
Rmy, Spirites et illusionnistes,
Paris, Leclercq, 1911.
2Morselli quotes the writings of professional conjurers who have unmasked
the tricks of spirit-mediums (A. S. P.,
1908, xviii, 157, Hopkins, Keller, Snaw,
Williams, and others).
it was said that they had been deceived, illusionized, that they
knew nothing of legerdemain and had been humbugged.
The Society for Psychical Research, together with E. Gurney,
Myers, H. Sidgwick, and Podmore, started with the axiom and
fundamental principle that there are no material phenomena, that
everything is subjective. But in the forty years from 1880 to
1920 ideas have evolved. Sidgwick died without admitting either
telekinesis or ectoplasms. Myers, at first hostile, ended by fully
accepting and resolutely maintaining their objectivity. F. Pod-
more, it would seem, could never resign himself to believe in
them, while Sir Oliver Lodge, who at first only recognized the
full reality of subjective phenomena, accepts now the objectivity
of material phenomena.
By a singular evolutionary process, R. Hodgson, after having
cleverly unmasked in India the frauds of Mme. Blavatsky, was
completely converted to subjective spiritualism by his experiments
with Mrs. Piper; but if Hodgson admitted the incarnations of
George Pelham, he would not admit the telekinesis shown by
Eusapia. He it was who, at Cambridge, claimed to have exposed
Eusapia, while in fact his experiments were deplorably defective,
assisting, facilitating, and even provoking the clumsy, unconscious
frauds of that unfortunate medium. Hyslop, who succeeded
Hodgson at the American S. P. R., refused, like Hodgson, to ad
mit materializations.
This scepticism is comprehensible when one reads the descrip
tions of the extraordinary sances given by some mediums. Miller,
Bailey, Mrs. Williams, Eldred, Sambor, and A. Roth have all
been exposed. Eldred had an armchair in which he had collected
a whole arsenal of trick properties. The photographer Bours-
nell, although he had the support of W. T. Stead, was convicted
of cheating. So likewise was the French photographer Buguet,
though simple-minded persons, even after his trickeries had been
exposed, persisted in believing in the genuineness of these phan
toms. Mrs. Williams was unmasked at a sance in Paris; there
were found on her various things used to simulate phantoms, as
in Eldreds case. Sambors case is very strange ; one of the friends
of Petrovo Solovovo was actually his accomplice, though seem
ingly an honourable man. According to Grasset, Ebstein made up
a phantom with a painted doll.1
1See Paul Mathiex, Lex faux mdiums. Echo du Merveilleux, 190,6; 249.
Bailey, who claimed to make apports of living birds, was
caught at Grenoble buying the flame-coloured birds that he was
supposed to bring from India by magical means. Maddock was
condemned for cheating. I was able to show up Anna Roth who
brought concealed flowers. Before the sance she weighed one
hundred and sixteen pounds, but only one hundred and fourteen
afterwards ; the weight of the flowers she brought was two pounds.
Maxwell1 cites the very suspicious cases of Mrs. Wood and Lemb.
Haxby cheated impudently. I could heap up cases if need were ;
and indeed honest spiritualists recognize that these scoundrels
are the worst enemies of spiritualism, and all of us who believe in
ectoplasms and telekinesis are equally interested in getting rid of
these wretches.
But the question is not as simple as it seems : indeed no question
is simple when people will condescend to go into it deeply. Along
with fraudulent mediums having an outfit prepared in advance,
there are true, genuine, and powerful mediums who have recourse
to fraud when their powers diminish or they find an experiment
fail.
This probably came to pass in some degree even with Florence
Cook, with Slade, Eglinton, Eusapia, Linda Gazzera, Marthe
Braud, and Mme. dEsprance. It is necessafy, however, to un
derstand clearly what is meant by the exposure of a medium ( in
French, dmasquer; in German, entlarven).
In the first place, simple rustics like Eusapia do not understand
that simulation of a phenomenon is a serious crime; they do not
recognize the normity of the fraud. They say, People want
phenomena; well, well give them what they want. A lengthy
education is needed before they can be made to understand how
odious and unpardonable is a lie that brings wilful error into our
poor efforts at truth, where there are so many involuntary errors.
In the second place, mediums are in a state of semi-unconscious
ness which takes away much of their moral responsibility. Trance
turns them into automata that have but a very slight control over
their muscular movements. When a medium is nearly or quite in
sensible, his eyes shut, sweating and making convulsive move
ments, unable to answer questions put to him, I do not think he
ought to be reproached for anything he may do. He is not him
self ; he has not that poised and quiet consciousness which can de-
iLes phnomnes psychiques, 1903, p. 263.
cide between right and wrong. He has forgotten who he is and
what he ought to do.
Completely criminal are such acts as those of Eldred or Mrs.
Williams preparing paraphernalia for deliberate fraud, hidden in a
chair or upon their person; this is radically different from the
suspicious movements of an entranced medium.
Not only are mediums irresponsible, but telekinetic or ectoplas
mic movements are generally beyond their control. Little Stasia
the guide of Stanislawa Tomczykoften amused herself by play
ing tricks on Stanislawa herself to mystify Ochorowicz. Similarly
in the case of duplicated personality so well studied by Dr. Morton
Prince, the personality A., dissevered from the normal personality
B., was actively hostile to B., causing her pain and distress. The
ectoplasmic arms and hands that emerge from the body of Eusapia
do only what they wish, and though Eusapia knows what they do,
they are not directed by Eusapias will ; or rather there is for the
moment no Eusapia.
It is also quite easy to understand that when exhausted by a
long and fruitless sance, and surrounded by a number of sitters
eager to see something, a medium whose consciousness is still
partly in abeyance may give the push that he hopes will start the
phenomena.
At one of the conversaziones at the Paris Psychological Insti
tute, dArsonval told an amusing story of the celebrated electrician
Ampre. A new electrical demonstration was being given before
a scientific committee, and as the galvanometer needle failed to
move at the critical moment, he gave it a touch with his finger.
Repeating the experiment, successfully this time, he said trium
phantly, pointing to the needle, This time it goes of itself !
There is a quasi-identity between the medium and the ectoplasm,
so that when an attempt is made to seize the latter a limb of the
medium may be grasped ; though I make a definite and formal pro
test against this frequent defence of doubtful phenomena by
spiritualists. More frequently the ectoplasm is independent of the
medium, indeed perhaps it is always so; though I do not mean
to imply that the severance or capture of the ectoplasm can be
effected without danger to the medium (?). The case of Mme.
dEsprance (though she was open to suspicion) is on record to
show that a medium may incur a long illness by reason of such
an attempt.
In view of the known cases of fraud, the question is to decide
what confidence can be placed in the more or less marvellous ac
counts that are given us.
To sum up the conditions which seem necessary: they apply
equally to fraudulent and to honest mediums, if there are any who
can always be depended upon. The precautions must be as strict
in the one case as in the other, and if these precautions have not
been taken no scientific inference can be drawn.
Although Boursnell and Buguet found many disciples, and al
though there have been many frauds that have been accepted as
genuine phenomena, it is consoling to know that fraud always
fails in the long run; it cannot defeat prolonged and careful ex
periment. Fraudulent mediums, as soon as they leave the narrow
circle of the credulous, soon find careful observers that unmask
them. If they refuse just and reasonable conditions of experiment,
that is in itself a just ground for suspicion, and a reason for re
fusing to make experiments under bad conditions. But even so,
under bad conditions, fraud always ends in detection. It is not as
difficult as may be supposed to detect trickery; and I do not think
that any instance can be quoted of a medium behaving fraudu
lently for two years without being detected in flagrante delicto.
1. The sitters must be fewthree, four, or five at most. Even
five seems to me too many. Very good observations can be made
by one person only; for the hypothesis that the observer is hallu
cinated is absurd. If six are present, there will certainly be among
them some who are inattentive, unskilful, or practical jokers. Each
one will have his own fancies and will exact compliances which
will disturb the even course of the phenomena.
The good faith of all persons present must be absolutely un
questionable. Petrovo Solovovo was betrayed by one of his
friends, and no one should be admitted to an experiment of whose
honesty and good sense one cannot be as assured as of ones own.
Further, a certain competence is essential: it is not by any means
every one who is capable of observing well; that is, of observing
everything that takes place. To hold the right hand of a medium
for a whole hour so as to be quite certain that the hand has not
been released for a single second is not so very easy, especially if
the hand twists about and struggles. The sitters must be such
persons as are not liable to fear, nor to weariness, nor (which is
rare) to inattention, and who will also leave the experimenter to
follow his own line, merely giving their assistance without pre
tence of directing the experiment.
2. Photographs, impressions on blackened paper, on clay, on
plaster, or on paraffin wax have no value in themselves: every
thing depends on the conditions. There are photographs so skil
fully counterfeited that I should make no conclusions at all on any
such shown to me unless the circumstances under which they were
produced were given with such precise detail as to make all trick
ery impossible.
If the conditions are unsatisfactory, the very best photographs
are valueless as evidence, and I do not care to see them. But if
the conditions are unexceptionable, even poor photographs are
decisive; they reveal details that may escape the sight. Stereo
scopic photographs are more instructive than those which do not
show the relief they show relative distances. After the admirable
photographs by Schrenck-Notzing, Mme. Bisson, and G. de Fon-
tenay, it is not allowable to study materializations without the help
of one or two cameras; but it must always be remembered that
the value of photographs is strictly dependent on the conditions
of the experiment.
3. The experiments should not be made in a very large room;
the smaller the room, the greater the facility of close observation.
All the furnishings should be most carefully examined, turned
over, and searched; the doors must be locked so that no stranger
can come in. No appurtenances or objects of any kind soever
must be brought by the medium: a conjurer can do anything he
likes with his table, his pack of cards, his chair, or his stick;
but if he is given my table, my chair, and my pack of cards, and
has no other at his disposal and can make no interchange, he is
powerless.
4. Hence arises the absolute necessity that the medium be
scrupulously searched, dressed only in garments provided, and
never let out of sight from that moment. His every movement
should be followed till he is seated. He should then be tied (or
not, if he declines this). Then only can darkness be allowed. It
matters little that he should be behind a curtain, since he has no
mask, no appliance, and no stuff of any kind. If under such con
ditions a form enveloped in a white veil comes out from the cur
tain, I shall conclude with certainty that there has been a materiali
zation of a white veil, presuming, of course, that the search has
been so thorough that it has been impossible for the medium to
conceal any such veil.
The whole point, then, is to know whether one can be certain
whether anyone, medium or no medium, has concealed a large
white veil. It seems to me not impossible to ascertain this.
If all the prescribed conditions are fulfilled,and they can be
and have been fulfilledthe experiment is valid.
In some cases all the precautions enumerated are not indispen
sable. If, for instance in a locked room which has previously been
thoroughly searched, a living form is seen moving by the side of
the medium, there is no ground for doubt, since no one could have
entered. Obviously, then, we have to be sure that the form is not
a dummy, and that the entranced medium is not a dummy. When
Crookes saw Katie King by the side of Florence Cook, two living
beings were both present.
Again, if I hold the two hands of Eusapia in my two hands, and
I feel a hand stroke my face, pull my hair, and strike my shoulder,
I can be certain that it is not the hand of Eusapia ; and I am not
going to suppose that Myers, Sir Oliver, or Ochorowicz played
such a criminal practical joke on me.
There is, however, a point that seems to me highly important,
and I therefore insist upon it. Even if all the precautions above
named have not been taken, that is not a reason for refusing to
experiment; it is, however, a reason for making special observa
tions in each special case and looking very closely into everything
before drawing any conclusions. It is necessary to repeat ex
periments again and yet again. One sance counts for nothing,
two count for very little. To carry conviction I could not be satis
fied with less than five or six, or more. At each, one learns some
thing fresh and corrects some defect in the preceding ones. No
doubt this is troublesome, difficult, and tedious, but science is not
served by single observations ; they must be repeated. It may be
said that the first time one sees nothing ; the second time one sees
imperfectly; in a third, one sees fairly well; the fourth time one
sees accurately.
For telekinesis the matter is simpler; there is no need of so
many precautions to be sure that an object is moved without con
tact. A good light is sufficient, for in the dark the affair becomes
much more complicated. If, however, there is a distinct move
ment of the object in the light that is in itself sufficient, and
enough instances have been given to make it unnecessary to refer
to them again.
But for materializations which, with some exceptions, are only
produced in the dark, it is necessary to be very exacting as to
the conditions.
Among the numerous accounts published, which are those that
are worthy of acceptance ?
A primary distinction, which is fundamental, must be made be
tween professional and non-professional mediums ; that is, between
those who give paid sances to which the public are admitted, and
those who do not.
1. It is quite obvious that no seances to which all and any per
sons are admitted on payment count for anything. However as
tonishing the cabinet of the Davenport brothers may be it is very
certain that this cabinet does not differ from the trunk of metal
or even of glass in which Robert Houdin or any other conjurer
places a person who has been tied up by the audience. The trunk
is covered with a rug, and after a little patter to pass the few
minutes required for the trick, the rug is removed, the trunk
opened, and the bound man is no longer there but is found untied
in another box that was previously empty. This is an amusing
trick, like the cabinet of the Davenports, the thought-reading by
the Zancigs, by Lully, and others, but is no more scientific than
the witches dance in Faust.
Maskelyne and other clever conjurers have taken much pains
to show so-called spiritist phenomena on the stage. It is easy for
the operators and amusing for the public. By a system of skil
fully disposed glasses the magician causes phantoms to appear
he pierces them with a sword and finds empty air : the illusion is
complete. But these scenes in no way resemble our experiments :
within the four walls of a chamber that has been duly searched a
medium who has been undressed and clothed in a black smock can
do nothing like that.
Professor Grasset has written a book on occultism,1 very full
of detail. Though he does not believe in any metapsychic phe
nomena, whether subjective or objective, he makes a great effort
to be impartial, and his impartiality compares favourably with the
scepticism of the official scientists who refuse even to examine the
facts. Neverthless Grasset is certainly unjust; he omits the ex
periments by Gibier, by Home, and by Florence Cook. He thinks,
XV occultisme hier et aujourd'hui. Le merveilleux prscientifique, Mont
pellier, Contet, 1908.
like the ignorant public, that at the Villa Carmen, the coachman
Aresky got into the room, that the experiments with Eusapia were
nearly always fraudulent if not invariably so ; he thinks Maskelyne
right against Archdeacon Colley, though Maskelyne lost his. case
in a court of law. It is true that the second edition of Grassets
book dates from 1908, and great progress has been made in the
last fourteen years and the experiments of the present day in no
way resemble conjuring tricks. In some recent cases there seems
to me no room at all for fraud.
2. Professional mediums who give private sances, for re
muneration, more or less accessible to the public, are not to be
trusted much more than those who give public sances. Even if
the circle is a limited one, and composed of sincere and honourable
persons, it is possible that some of these persons may be child
ishly credulous. The medium can then do as he likes; the circle
believes in him and indeed no one who does not believe in him is
allowed to be present. Under plea that the health of the medium
must not be imperilled nor the brilliancy of the phenomena im
paired, no investigation is permitted. These private sances are not,
of course, absolutely of no account, but their results amount to
very little, precise conditions being wanting. The best that can be
said is that when a paid medium like Mme. Salmon with P. Gibier
gives a series of sances before a small number of experimenters,
in a room that does not belong to her, and submitting to rigorous
conditions, safe conclusions may be drawn, though still under dis
tinct reservations. When Miller came to Paris he would not
accept the conditions imposed; nor would Bailey, nor Anna
Roth.
For my own part I am inclined to think that the notable pro
fessional mediums have some real powers, for if they had not, they
would never have chosen this singular profession. They are gen
erally very ordinary men and women who have discovered in them
selves strange capabilities which surprise them at first, and then
are turned to a source of profit and made into a trade. The Fox
sisters did this from the very beginning of their surprising mani
festations.
It is therefore a mistake to neglect professional and paid
mediums under the pretext that they make a trade of mediumship.
They have to live, and it would be very unjust to reproach a
medium for not giving time and health gratis. A medium has a
right not only to considerate treatment but to payment, and this
payment is no more to be condemned than that accepted by a
physician who cures us or by a musician who teaches us music.
Powerful professional mediums are exceedingly few, though
there are many who have some moderate powers. In all countries
there are now private spiritist sances, to some of which it is ex
ceedingly difficult to gain access, at which some man or woman en
dowed with certain powers gives regular sances to a small group
of initiates. The number of such spiritualist circles is difficult to
estimate ; there are probably many more than is usually supposed.
The phenomena are sometimes very striking, but the credulity
of the circle is such and the imprecision of observation so great,
that these phenomena are lost to science. They are talked of here
and there inaccurately, imperfectly, and without the needful de
tail. In order to judge of them fairly we must go to such in
complete accounts as are published, and these ought to be very
strictly criticized. If all that is printed were accepted, to what
illusions and follies should we not be committed; if all is re
jected we may be neglecting important essential facts, useful to
the advance of metapsychic science.
Fortunately when a medium is very powerful he soon gets a
reputation, perhaps in spite of his own desires and those of his
own circle: really striking and dazzling mediumship cannot re
main secret. It is then the duty of experimentalists and men of
science to make researches. Then experiments can be carried out
scientifically like those conducted by Imoda, Schrenck-Notzing,
and Mme. Bisson, by Crookes and Varley, by General and Mme.
Noel, and numerous other observers such as A. de Rochas, Lom
broso, Finzi, Morselli, Foa, Oliver Lodge, Dariex, Maxwell,
Schiaparelli, Ochorowicz, Bottazzi, who experimented with Eusa-
pia, and Ochorowicz, with Stanislawa Tomczyk.
A true account of materializations is specially difficult because
of all experiments it is these that most lend themselves to fraud.
Thinking that they have a spirit before them, credulous persons
lose their presence of mind ; they are inclined to accept everything
and to be indignant at precautions to avoid trickery. For my own
part, having seen many materializations, I can declare that I have
never felt the very slightest awe. My only preoccupation, and
one that filled my whole being, was always not to be duped; and
I found it hard to understand the emotion of some sitters when
they have witnessed a good materialization.
Since fraud is the great danger in all such experiments, every
possible precaution must be taken against it ; the medium must be
under the closest observation from which nothing distracts the
watchers, all his clothes must be searched minutely, as also every
object within his reach; no medium who has once been detected
in gross fraud should ever be experimented with; photography
should be used to show the exact conditions under which the ap
parition has occurred; the experiment must be often repeated;
the control must never be relaxed ; and the idea that the medium
may be making efforts to deceive never be lost sight of and
should dominate the mind of the observers.
The only decisive proof is to be able, after making quite certain
that no stranger can have entered the sance room, to see, to touch,
and especially to photograph the medium and the apparition on the
same plate. Experiments of this kind are very few; it is there
fore desirable that there should be more of them. Unfortunately,
materialization is a phenomenon that few mediums can present
with such perfection that both medium and apparition can be
photographed on the same plate.
However, even when for various reasons it is impracticable
to have the photographic confirmation which gives certainty, very
good proofs can be obtained ; and among these I will cite the fol
lowing, which, after mature consideration, seems to me perfectly
valid.
At Ribaud Island, experimenting with Eusapia in company with
Sir Oliver Lodge, Frederic Myers, and J. Ochorowiczthree ob
servers whose competence and honesty cannot be called in ques
tionI held one of Eusapias hands firmly in each of mine. I then
felt a third hand touch my shoulder, my head, and my face. This
was not in darkness ; there was a lighted candle in the room.
All kinds of absurd hypotheses must here be eliminated: first
that I was hallucinatedthat is, disposed of by the fact that the
slap on the shoulder given by John King was heard by all pres
ent; then that Myers, Lodge, or Ochorowicz should have per
petrated this bad joke; then that I had let go one of Eusapias
hands, which could not be, for my friends could all see her hands
held far apart, one in each of mine. Further, the same phenome
non of the materialization of a hand while Eusapias hands were
held separate by one person has been observed by Oliver Lodge,
by Myers, and by Ochorowicz.
I will cite, later, other cases of materialization equally decisive ;
I mention here only this one which seems to me to defy criticism.
It is interesting to study the conditions under which materiali
zations are produced :
Firstly the need of darkness. For one reason or another, none,
or scarcely any, are produced in full light. This does not apply
to Home who gave astonishing materializations in the light; but
in most cases darkness is essential. Sometimes red light, such as is
used by photographers, can be used, and when the medium is very
powerful flashlight photographs can be taken. Nevertheless,
darkness is usually so necessary that the medium must be pro
tected by a curtain, notably at the beginnings of the phenomena.
Only behind this curtain, even when the room is darkened, can the
preliminary changes take place. This will cause sceptics to smile ;
but in point of fact what does darkness matter? Can darkness
create a living face and produce a white veil ?
As for the necessary physiological conditions, these are so in
constant, irregular, and fugitive that they cannot be indicated with
any precision. Before the sance it is impossible to know whether
the medium is in a satisfactory state to produce the phenomena or
not. On one day the results will be excellent, and on the next,
under the same conditions, nothing may occur.
Further, a considerable time, often a long time, is needed before
anything appears; it may be necessary to wait for an hour, two
hours, or even three hours before there is any manifestation.
Sometimes, though seldom, the appearances begin as soon as the
curtain is drawn. The materialized object is nearly always a shape
of something humana phantom. Sometimes, as with Eusapia,
only a hand; sometimes, as with Florence Cook and Marthe
Braud, they are entire figures. Although the appearance of a
whole figure is more dramatic than that of a stump taking shape
behind a curtain, both phenomena are essentially the same. A
warm, supple, resisting, articulated, and apparently living hand
identical with a human hand in all points is not more extraordi
nary than a human personality that looks, walks, and speaks. The
difficulty is the same : the abyss between normal and metapsychic
science is as great whether there be the big, half-formed hand of
John King behind the curtain or Bien Boa rising from the floor
in front of it.
I shall not waste time in stating the absurdities, almost the im
possibilities, from a psycho-physiological point of view, of this
phenomenon. A living being, or living matter, formed under our
eyes, which has its proper warmth, apparently a circulation of
blood, and a physiological respiration (as I proved by causing the
form of Bien Boa to breathe into a flask containing baryta water),
which has also a kind of psychic personality having a will distinct
from the will of the medium, in a word, a new human being!
This is surely the climax of marvels! Nevertheless it is a fact.
The criticisms that have been directed against my experiments
and those of Crookes and of Stainton Moses are entirely ineffec
tive. All that can be seriously alleged against them is that the phe
nomena are so exceptional that if they have been thought to be
substantiated the experimenters must have been the dupes of an
illusion.
I do not think this objection well founded. Crookes observed
Katie King for a long time; Eusapia lent herself with admirable
goodwill for twenty-five years to scientific investigation, even
when it took absurd forms. More than thirty very sceptical scien
tific men were convinced, after long testing, that there proceeded
from her body material forms having the appearances of life,
which I shall describe farther on under the name of ectoplasms.
Marthe Braud, as good-natured as Eusapia, has been experi
mented with by General Noel, by G. Delanne, and myself at Al
giers, by Schrenck-Notzing, J. Maxwell, Mme. Bisson, Dr. Geley,
Dr. Bourbon, and many others. Home gave extraordinary phe
nomena of materializations for twenty years, verified by most il
lustrious personages, without ever having been detected in trickery.
The alternative, then, is that the phenomena are genuine or that
they are due to fraud. I am very well aware that they are ex
traordinary, even so monstrously extraordinary that at first sight
the hypothesis of immeasurable, repeated, and continual fraud
seems the more probable explanation. But is such fraud possible?
I cannot think so. When I recall the precautions that all of us
have taken, not once, but twenty, a hundred, or even a thousand
times, it is inconceivable that we should have been deceived on all
these occasions.
It is true that some scientists say, I do not want to see or to
study these things, for I know beforehand that they are not
possible, therefore a priori, you have all been taken in by im
postors.
This, however, involves two inadmissible assumptions. In the
first place, it is not sufficient to say, You have been deceived ;
it is necessary to show how we have been deceived. When I hold
both of Eusapias hands and a third hand touches my forehead
and my shoulder, how can this miracle have taken place? Tell
me that, and I may revise my opinion; till then it is unshakable.
In the second place no one can rightly say a priori It is impos
sible. Human knowledge is so uncertain, so limited that the word
impossible should never be used.
I say that under certain exceptional conditionsand I admit
that these conditions are extremely exceptionalthe semblance of
a living hand is formed which has all the properties of a living
hand and seems to belong to a being similar to a human be-
ing (!!). The new data contradict absolutely nothing that is
taught us by science. It is a strange and astounding fact; but it is
not absurd, it is only unusual.
Assuredly it is possible that I may be mistaken, even grossly
mistaken, along with Crookes, De Rochas, Aksakoff. Myers,
William James, Schiaparelli, Zllner, Fechner, and Oliver Lodge.
It is possible that all of us have been deceived. It is possible that
some day an unexpected experiment may explain our prolonged
deception quite simply. So be it! but till it has been explained
how we have all been duped by an illusion, I claim that the reality
of these materializations must be conceded.
After all, on careful consideration, the absurdity does not seem
so portentous as it appears at first sight. When I place my hand
before a mirror, its image appearsreflection of light: the ther
mometer shows a reflection of heat; and a galvanometer, reflec
tion of electricity. It is true that no effect is produced on a bal
ance: but is it so very unreasonable to suppose that the projection
of light, heat, and electricity might be associated with a projection
of mechanical power? For the problem essentially and definitely
works down to that. If the hand can act at a distance on a bal
ance as it does on a thermometer, a mirror, or a galvanometer, it
may give the sensation of contact to another person close by.
Materialization is a mechanical projection: we already know the
projection of light, of heat, and of electricity; it is not a very long
step to think that a projection of mechanical energy may be pos
sible. The remarkable demonstrations of Einstein show how
close mechanical and luminous energy are to one another.
Many curious facts on the genesis of the materializations
are observable, for only very rarely do materializations appear
abruptly. They form by a concentration of matter round a
central nucleus; much as a planet forms in a nebula, or cells by
concentration of protoplasmic material.
It is probable, or rather it is certain, that the genesis differs
with different mediums and according to conditions as yet ill-
understood. I will endeavour to give an analytical summary,
based on the materializations given by Miss Goligher, Marthe
Braud, and especially by Eusapia in whose case I have frequently
and for a long time studied the process.
There first appears a more or less formless mass, which may not
be even visible, but which can be felt and seems capable of
mechanical action. One can hardly help imagining that move
ments of the table are due to this mechanical energy, this half
invisible hand which presses out the curtain and whose resistance
can be felt, while it persists in remaining in shadow. When the
table is raised off all four legs, there is always one leg that remains
in the shadow. These are the formations that I call ectoplasms,
for they seem to emanate from Eusapias actual body.1
This observation, which is a fact and not a hypothesis, has been
confirmed at all points by Crawfords excellent work.
Sometimes these ectoplasms can be seen in process of organic
zation; I have seen an almost rectilinear prolongation emerge from
Eusapias body, its termination acting like a living hand. Simi
larly in the formation of Bien Boa, at first the limbs appeared thin
and stiff, like narrow stalks ; little by little they thickened, taking
the form of more or less solid limbs similar to normal limbs.
I have also, like Geley, Schrenck-Notzing, and Mme. Bisson,
been able to see the first lineaments of materializations as they
were formed. A kind of liquid or pasty jelly emerges from the
mouth or the breast of Marthe which organizes itself by degrees,
acquiring the shape of a face or a limb. Under very good con
ditions of visibility, I have seen this paste spread on my knee, and
slowly take form so as to show the rudiment of the radius, the
cubitus, or metacarpal bone whose increasing pressure I could feel
on my knee.
These materializations are usually gradual, beginning by a rudi
mentary shape, complete forms and human faces only appearing
later on. At first these formations are often very imperfect.
Sometimes they show no relief, looking more like flat images than
bodies, so that in spite of oneself one is inclined to imagine some
fraud, since what appears seems to be the materialization of a
semblance, and not of a being. But in some cases the materiali-
*Sir Oliver Lodge published in Light (April 27, 1921) a very interesting
observation formerly made on this fact.
zation is perfect. At the Villa Carmen I saw a fully organized
form rise from the floor. At first it was only a white, opaque spot
like a handkerchief lying on the ground before the curtain, then
this handkerchief quickly assumed the form of a human head level
with the floor, and a few moments later it rose up in a straight line
and became a small man enveloped in a kind of white burnous,
who took two or three halting steps in front of the curtain and
then sank to the floor and disappeared as if through a trap-door.
But there was no trap-door.1
And now to conclude, and having indicated the conditions
necessary to a reliable experiment, to decide formally on an answer
to the urgent and disturbing question:
Is there such a thing as objective metapsychics?2
Strong arguments can be adduced for the reply, No, there are
no objective metapsychics ; no physical phenomena unknown to
normal physics are ever produced. The arguments advanced to
maintain this opinion may be stated as follows:
1I claim here to refute an absurd legend. I was in no way tricked as
some little newspapers of Algiers maintained. In the memorandum in which I
gave the facts I made some formal reservations, showing some of the more seri
ous objections that I myself made. But no notice was taken either of what I
affirmed or of my objections, so that the criticisms that I myself put forward
remain. They do not, however, seem decisive to me. A s for the objections
made by others, they count for nothing.
I conclude, as did my illustrious precursor, Sir William Crookes, I have
nothing to withdraw from what I said in 1904; but on the contrary, the ex
cellent experiments subsequently made with the same medium, Marthe, by
Mme. Bisson, Schrenck-Notzing, and Geley strikingly confirm our experiences
at the Villa Carmen.
A s to Eusapia, who has often been suspected of fraud, nothing was ever
proved against her. On the contrary, after some doubtful experiments at
Cambridge, I asked Myers to come back to see her. He came to my house,
and there was then a memorable sitting at which the phenomena were so dis
tinct that I solemnly adjured Myers to declare that there was no trickery, and
that the movement of objects at a distance without contact was authentic and
undeniable. My lamented friends, Professors Boirac and Flournoy, both of
them experienced men of science, were present at that sance and were com
pletely convinced of the reality of movements without contact, i.e., of a ma
terialization, since according to all likelihood, raps and movements of objects
are the first stages of materializations in their invisible aspect.
See the remarkable study by Petrovo Solovovo, Les phnomnes physiques
du spiritisme, quelques difficults, P. S. P. R., 1911, 413-447, with a reply b y
Oliver Lodge, "A priori arguments against physical phenomena, ibid., 447-
454. But it is permissible to think that Petrovo Solovovo was strongly in
fluenced by the deception he had resented when, in his experiments with Sam-
bor, it was proved that one of his own personal friends had deceived him; a
thing that is both unpleasant and infrequent. In most cases there are no
confederates.
1. As Laplace said, the more extraordinary the fact, the more
rigorous should be the demonstration. In this case the stricter
the conditions the fewer the phenomena become.
2. The more latitude there is for fraud (liberated hands, dark
ness, absence of scrutiny) the more apparent are the phenomena.
3. All mediums have tricked, perhaps even Home. In any case,
if they have not consciously deceived, they have done so uncon
sciously during their trances. Therefore fraud is always possible.
4. Conjurers, even those of quite moderate ability, can produce
much more remarkable illusions than the most powerful mediums.
Unless very well versed in legerdemain no one can imagine how
completely an ordinary trick conjurer can illusionize.
None of the experiments in direct writing carried out with me
diums are of value by reason of the many very easy tricks worked
every day, which have grossly deceived even distrustful persons.
5. No observers can maintain continuous attention and observa
tion for two or three hours.
6. All the wonders attributed to the Fox sisters, to Mme.
dEsperance, Florence Cook, Eglinton, Slade, Bailey, Eldred,
Miller, and A. Roth must be eliminated, for with them there was
evident fraud. There then remain only the experiments with
Home, Stainton Moses, and Eusapia. Now these with Eusapia
were vehemently contested at Cambridge tmd in America. The
facts recorded of Home were observed by Crookes only; and those
alleged of Stainton Moses are derived entirely from himself and
from Mr. and Mrs. Speer, who were his intimate friends and much
prepossessed in his favour.
In the final analysis, nothing at all remains where everything
is so strange and unlikely that multiplied and superabundant
proofs are necessary. In proportion as the control increases in
severity the phenomena diminish.
Conclusion. In the matter of objective metapsychics, the un
likely phenomena of telekinesis, ectoplasms, and apports have so
far never been proved. If anything is proved* it is that there are
no such things.
Such are the objections that can be alleged against objective
metapsychics; and it will be granted that I have not minimized
them. These doubts have occurred to me hundreds of times, and
I know, better than anyone else, the full force of these arguments.
Nevertheless, I do not think them well founded, and I am firmly
convinced that there are real physical metapsychic phenomena.
(1) Negative evidence can establish nothing. Certain and posi
tive facts, if substantiated, carry formal proof. When Crookes
saw, in full light, a pencil rise and write; when Ochorowicz, also
in full light, saw a chair come towards him; when a third hand
stroked my face while I held both of Eusapias hands; no doubt is
possible, and the demonstrations are valid per se. I quote only
these three facts; there are hundreds of others, some of which I
shall mention later on.
(2) Mediums are not, unless by some rare exception, skilled in
legerdemain. Movements of objects and raps have been verified
under unexceptionable conditions so often that even Petrovo Solo-
vovo, despite his scepticism, says (p. 415) a truly impartial in
vestigator cannot reject them. And if telekinesis and raps are
admitted, other physical phenomena are possible.
(3) Even if Home and Eusapia were the only mediums, tele
kinesis would have to be admitted. Thanks to these two excellent
mediums, we have such an assemblage of documents, proofs, and
rigorous experiments, conducted by so many different men of
science, that no doubt can outweigh them. Myers, Feilding, and
Carrington, all sceptical, have accepted them after careful ex
amination. In the whole of physics and physiology, there is no
phenomenon that has been more rigidly and repeatedly tested.
There are many other incontestable instances of telekinesis: for
instance, if all that Mr. and Mrs. Speer have written concerning
Stainton Moses is to be rejected, we must suppose that they were
not merely illusionized but were impostors; which is absurd.
(4) There are so many records of collective hallucinations,
collected with such care and attested with such exactitude by
persons of unquestionable good faith, that it is not possible to
reject them, any more than the non-collective hallucinations. Now
from the moment that there is collective perception, there is some
degree of objectivity.
(5) The facts of experimental (ectoplasmic) materializations
have been observed too often and with too much precision to re
ject them all.
The question is not properly framed; it is said, It is for you to
prove that a materialization has taken place. I reply, It is for
you to prove in any given case that there was fraud. It is not
sufficient to say, Fraud was possible, therefore there was fraud.
The fraud must be proved, and this has hardly ever been done.
The onifs probandi lies on those who discredit a given experiment.
(6) It is absurd, because the physical phenomenon occurring in
a direct experiment is not understood, to aver that all physical
phenomena are false. Taking the example of the attraction of the
magnet for iron, Cicero had already said, Fiat, necne fiat id
quaeritur . . . si rationem cur id fiat afferre nequeam, fieri om-
nino neges. Must a phenomenon be denied because we do not
understand its mechanism? This seems to me contrary to all
sound scientific method.
(7) That there are doubtful and even fictitious phenomena is
no reason for rejecting all. There might be telekinesis without
ectoplasms. There may be ectoplasms without apports. There
is no need to consider these phenomena indissolubly connected:
doubt with regard to one of them does not invalidate others.
Proofs of telekinesis that seem to me sufficient and even super
abundant, exist. Ectoplasms seem to me to be demonstrated with
equal rigor, though these phenomena are more dramatic and ex
traordinary. On the other hand, apports, levitations, and biloca
tions are doubtful. Slate-writing is almost always produced by
skilful legerdemain. Photographs of phantoms and moulded im
pressions in paraffin still call for more thorough study.
In fine, there are incontestable physical phenomena in metapsy
chic science.
To deny them at the present time is to ignore phenomena funda
mentally new that open up a promising avenue to new discoveries
in science; and to remain in the old ruts with which blind official
science has so long been satisfied.
And a definite conclusion follows. Since the proofs for some
phenomena of objective metapsychics (though not for all) are in
sufficient, experimentation must be started ab ovo, from the very
beginning.
Following the example of Descartes, we ought to make a clean
sweep of all that has been said and written on the subject. The
facts of ectoplasms and telekinesis are certain; but their medians
ism is profoundly mysterious; therefore let us experiment again
and again. We shall certainly reap the reward.
One of the most characteristic phenomena, which, when well
observed by a cool-headed experimenter, brings absolute convic
tion is that the materialized hand melts in the hand of the observer
(Delanne, chapter on phantasmal hands that melt, ii, 695).
Damiani, holding the hands of Eusapia, has felt the fluidic
hands of John melt and dissolve (Delanne, Apparitions matrial
ises, ii, 163).
"Once, says Crookes, I held one of Katies hands in mine, re
solved not to let it go. No attempt or effort was made to release
it, but little by little the hand seemed to dissolve into vapour, and
it thus disengaged itself from my grasp (Delanne, ibid., 167).
I have unfortunately never been able to verify this decisive
phenomenon. With Marthe Braud and with Eusapia I have
several times endeavoured to obtain it, but always in vain; but
that is no reason for denying the fact verified by Crookes, Damiani,
and others.
Morselli, experimenting with Eusapia, says, "If one grasps the
(fluidic) hands one feels the skin, the warmth, the mobile fingers
and then the hand seems to dissolve.
Venzano (also with Eusapia) says that the members are in all
respects similar to human members, but vanish from the grasp
without leaving a trace.
F. Bottazzi, a learned physiologist whose testimony is that of an
observer well used to delicate analysis of all experimental condi
tions, says that a hand (from Eusapia) melted and dissolved in
his grasp. A little later, another hand placed on his head van
ished from his hold. Again with Eusapia, M. Barzini, the dis
tinguished journalist of the Corriere della Sera, says, The hands
did not escape me, they seemed to melt ; they failed from between
my fingers, and collapsed, like hands that softened and vanished.
M. Falcomer, observing a medium named Rostagno, seized a
fluidic hand which collapsed. In an experiment that Crookes was
making with Florence Cook, Mr. Tapp took hold of Katies wrist.
He says, Her wrist gave way under my grasp like a piece of thin
card or paper, and my fingers met through her arm as if it were
fluid.
In a seance described by De Rochas (A. S. P., 1908, xviii, 280)
the circle joined hands round the medium, F. M. Montorgueil,
taking hold of a hand that was touching his face with some fabric,
called for light. The hand melted in his, and all of us, says De
Rochas, thought we saw a luminous trail from his hand to F.s
body. If one could be rigorously certain of M. Montorgueils
observation, that would be first-rate evidence.
These phenomena are very remarkable, not only from the theo
retical point of view with respect to ectoplasms, but because they
furnish decisive proof of their objectivity. No legerdemain can
produce a living hand that melts in the hand that holds it. I have
seen the form of Bien Boa disappear into the floor under my eyes,
but a visual sensation is not nearly so certain as a tactile one.
Many other observers have seen dematerializations; the best
known and best verified is still that of Katie King.
Mr. Oxley, experimenting with a medium named Mrs. Firmin,
claims to have seen the apparition of the materialized Betty
which seemed to dissolve: first the feet, then gradually the whole
body and the head disappeared leaving only a small white spot
which soon vanished (Delanne, loc. cit., ii, 268).
In a remarkable series of experiments, Dr. P. Gibier saw the
form of Lucie, which had grown under his eyes, subside at his
feet like a house of cards, disappearing exactly as Bien Boa dis
appeared before my own eyes. Lucie disappeared by degrees
in two seconds at most as she had come, but this time some twenty
inches in front of the curtains beside which I was standing. The
curtains did not move. . . . Just as the last white spot was
disappearing from the carpet where the figure had been, I stooped
down and put my hand upon it, but could feel nothing.
It is absurd to imagine a hallucination; and the only possible
normal explanation would be that the figure was an image re
flected by a mirror. But this will not hold, ior this phantasm of
Lucie breathed and spoke; she even caused the light veil that en
veloped her like a cloud to touch Dr. Gibier and Dr. L.
Materialized phantoms therefore disappear just like the sub
jective visions that so often accompany monitions of death. Are
they both constituted of similar substance?if we may speak of
substance which vanished without leaving a trace.
But the fundamental (not invariable) difference between ac
cidental and experimental ectoplasms is that in these latter there
is real matter, capable of exerting mechanical force, whereas in
the former (accompanying monitions of death) it would seem
that in the vast majority of cases there is nothing but a shade in
the popular sense of the word, a reflection, or simulacrum. The
experimental ectoplasms are in no sense shadows.
It has been asked how there can be materializations of clothes ?
This objection is somewhat naive, for the materialization of a
hand is no easier to understand than of the glove that covers it.
It is, however, clear that materialization may be of inanimate ob
jects and not of the human body only. The garments are usually
veils or draperies, usually white, like muslin, produced by the
gradual transformation of the whitish and more or less luminous
cloud with which the apparition begins. The striking experiments
of Mme. Bisson and Schrenck-Notzing give us valuable informa
tion on these ectoplasmic forms: there seems to be a genesis from
a embryo.
It would seem that the materialization of garments discredits
somewhat the hypothesis that a deceased human being should
materialize. Prima facie it was unlikely that a body dissolved by
putrefaction or disintegrated by cremation should be recon
structed, though the wild hypothesis of an astral body ( !) might
be advanced. But what about the astral presentment of a garment,
a hat, an eye-glass, or a walking-stick? This is the height of folly.
It seems to me much wiser to verify without pretending to under
stand, and to admit that any explanation we can give can hardly
escape being ridiculous.
Instead of claiming that unknown powers pertaining to deceased
humanity are capable of producing these phenomena, it is better
to admit that we are dealing with facts as yet inexplicable, and
await further elucidation.1 But there is no reason to deny a fact
because it is inexplicable. Can anyone have the unpardonable pre
sumption to claim to give an adequate explanation of all natural
phenomena ? In metapsychics we come up against the inexplicable
at every turn. True, but is it not much the same in physics, in
chemistry, and in physiology? Why, then, always try to put
forward a theory which is foredoomed to futility? We must
wait till new facts and fresh observations enable us to adopt some
new interpretation, which will doubtless be an unexpected one.
As regards the substance of materializations our ignorance is
painful. Some facts (too infrequent to allow of definite con
clusions) would seem to imply that this substance can outlast a
materialization. Katie gave Crookes a lock of her hair. I kept
the hair that Phygia permitted me to cut from her head. Mme.
dEsperance allowed sitters to cut off pieces of the drapery sur
rounding her.
Equally obscure is the question of apports. Either matter can
pass through matter, or matter can be created; and both of these
two statements are equally extraordinary.
As to the passage of matter through matter the most striking
*In the childhood of the race lunar eclipses were ascribed to a dragon de
vouring the moon. Our notion that materializations are produced by super
natural beings is not much more reasonable.
experiment is that made by P. Gibier, who having shut Mme.
Salmon in a cage constructed by himself, saw her come out from
it. Sundry alleged facts of the same kind are given in the spirit
ualist journals and in Mme. Frondoni-Lacombes book. They are
all very doubtful; possible, perhaps, but as yet unproven; the
accounts by Stainton Moses notwithstanding.
The same or greater uncertainty pertains to apports. Up to the
present there is not a single case whose genuineness has been es
tablished. On the contrary, as soon as close analysis is brought
to bear, fraud is disclosed, as in the cases of Bailey and Anna
Roth.
I do not deny apports. It would be rash to deny anything in
metapsychics: I only say they are unproven.
The materialization of hands is absolutely certain, and likewise
that of faces and whole bodies, though hands alone have been seen
much more often; but no satisfactory proof of apports or of the
passage of matter through matter has been brought forward and
it is wise to reserve judgment.
What does seem to be proved (and it is a relief to find a positive
fact in the midst of so much uncertainty), is that the ectoplasms
in most cases emerge from the body of the medium; hence the
word cfo-plasm. The experiments of Mme. Bisson and Dr.
Schrenck-Notzing establish this important fact. Gelatinous pro
jections come from the mouth or the shoulders of Marthe. I saw
the arm of Bien Boa formed in this way. At first it resembled a
thin, rigid rod covered with drapery. Little by little this rod
thickened under the drapery and became a stretched-out arm.
The same phenomenon was very clearly observable with Eusapia.
A kind of supplementary arm seemed to come from her body.
Once I saw a long, stiff rod proceed from her side, which after
great extension had a hand at its extremitya living hand warm
and jointed, absolutely like a human hand.
The ectoplasmic formations with other mediums were doubtless
of the same nature.
Russel Wallace, experimenting with Dr. Monck, saw a light,
whitish vapour appear on the left side of Moncks coat. Its density
increased. White flakes, like snowflakes, moved in the air extend
ing from the floor to the height of his shoulder. Then this cloud
separated from the medium sufficiently to take on the semblance
of a woman in flowing white draperies. Then all returned into
the body of the medium (Delanne, loc. cit., 644).
Mr. Mitchiner observed a white vapour emerge from Eglintons
side, wreathe itself round his feet, then gradually form a column
which took on the aspect of a tall, fine-looking man with a black
beard. Eglinton was perfectly visible during the whole time, and
a kind of umbilical cord connected him with the nebulous form.
After a short time, Eglinton being seated, the form seemed to dis
solve into his body at the level of the chest. A. de Rochas, ex
perimenting with Mme. dEsprance, saw a luminous vapour, like
the Milky Way, emerge from her breast.
It is not necessary that the sequence of materializations should
always be the same ; there may be differences of power in various
mediums. With the exceptionally powerful, such as Home and
Florence Cook, the materialization is rapid and complete, and the
ectoplasm is separate from the first ; with others, also very power
ful, like Eglinton, Mme. dEsprance, and Marthe Braud, sepa
ration from the ectoplasm does not take place at once and the
reality of the phantom is very transitory. With Eusapia and
Stainton Moses the forms are much less defined ; only very rarely
can an independent apparition, autonomous and separate from the
medium, be seen.
Provisionally, the sequence of materialization phenomena, as ob
served with Eusapia, may be stated as follows: At first, touches
and raps produced both easily and frequently; this is the first
stage, in which nothing is visible, for the material energy disen
gaged from her body is formless. In the second stage the hand is
formed, but still cannot be seen, though it can execute well-defined
mechanical actions, can take hold of a bell or a book, and can
touch ones head with fingers that are felt to be warm and jointed.
Finally in the third stage, which was rarely reached in my ex
periments with Eusapia, the hand becomes visible and can be
photographed.
In a still rarer, fourth stage, not only a hand but a whole body
is formed and detached. Vassallo, Porro, Morselli, and Bottazzi
have been able to witness these complete materializations.
Luminous phenomena are relatively frequent. I know that these
lend themselves to simulation, at least when they take the form of
wandering lights which move like sparks before the sitters and
disappear. I know that these can be imitated with little phos
phorescent projections, but no one has perceived any odour of
phosphorus after these lights, and the trick is not easy when both
hands of the medium are held as Eusapias were, and she con-
tinues to talk. This excludes the hypothesis of little particles
of phosphorus held in her mouth, which has actually been
advanced (??).
Such a use of phosphorus is, as a matter of fact, impossible
when the medium has been searched, undressed, her hands held,
and when, as with Eusapia at Ribaud Island, there was no phos
phorus at her disposal. On some occasions (though not very
often) Ochorowicz and I have seen small green lights, like eyes,
oblique in shape, floating about in the air. In Paris, in Milan, in
Rome, and Montfort-lAmaury, other observers have verified the
same. I have myself recently seen it at Warsaw with several
mediums under unexceptionable conditions.
Nearly all noted mediumsEglinton, Mme. dEsperance, and
Florence Cookhave produced luminous phenomena.
Mr. Livermore, experimenting with Kate Fox (a medium open
to suspicion), thus describes the phenomenon:1
A spherical ovoid of light rises from the floor as high as our
foreheads and places itself on the table in front of us. At my re
quest the light immediately became so bright as to light up that
part of the room. We saw perfectly the form of a woman hold
ing the light in her outstretched hand. Livermore does not say
if Kate Fox was herself also seen at this moment.
With Home, luminous phenomena were very frequently ob
served.1 Sometimes it was a small luminous ball floating in the
air; sometimes small phosphorescent lights, occasionally much
brighter effectsa bright beam of sunshine flooding us with
light, and a beautiful rainbow appeared in the heavens, sometimes
wandering lights touched the sitters and gave the impression of
' *At this point there occurred a singular instance of cryptesthesia. I had
broken off my writing at the word phenomenon' above, on Monday, Febru
ary 9th, at 4.30 p . m . Leaving the paper on my desk, I went out to make an
experiment with Stella, who had never been into my house. She knew in a
general way that I was engaged on a treatise on metapsychics, but had, of
course, never seen a line of it. That day I interrogated her with the plan-
chette on a lost will (result absolutely nil), and instead of an answer on this
subject I received Helios I make by radiation," a phrase which applies curi
ously to the last sentence I was writing at my own house.
This may be a coincidence, though I do not think so, but even so it is worth
noting. M y hands were not on the table and the word Helios" surprised me
greatly. Stella knows no Greek, but knows the meaning of Helios." The
phrase given by the planchette seems to be the logical sequel to the interrupted
sentence in my MS.
Êxperiments on spiritualism by Viscount Adare, 1 s. . n. d. (London, 1869),
pp. 13, 38, 52, 60, 65, 76, 83, 88, 89, 114, 124.
contact with a foreign body. In one remarkable case Lindsay and
Charlie saw, as it were, tongues of fire on Homes head.
With Stainton Moses the lights were frequent, sometimes very
bright,1 appearing like reflected lights (from what source?) col
umns of phosphorescent vapour or diffused light like that of a
comet, or like stars; in short, most varied forms. These lights
were observed sometimes by S. Moses himself, sometimes by Mr.
and Mrs. Speer. The good faith of these observers is not to be im
pugned ; though we may suppose that Stainton Moses, when alone,
may have been liable to visual hallucinations.
Hyslop (Am. J. S. P. R., 1912, 190) has reported that Anna
Burton produced lights when in a state of trance. Such lights
could not have appeared four feet away from her even if she had
had lucifer matches of phosphorized oil, for she had been carefully
undressed and clothed in special garments before the experiment.
It was, however, noticed that in one case her saliva was phosphor
escent, which detracts somewhat from the authenticity of the
phenomenon, though in view of the very poisonous nature of
phosphorus, it is difficult to imagine that she could keep phos
phorous matches in her mouth. Besides, even if this were ad
mitted, it is not easy to see how lights of the kind described could
appear.
E. Bozzano (A. S. P., 1909, xix, 82) has observed thin whitish
fluidic filaments proceeding from each of the joints of Eusapias
fingers.
J. Ochorowicz has insisted on the luminous flashes that pro
ceeded from Stanislawa Tomczyk, with whom he made some very
good experiments. He reminds us that MacNab had obtained
them also. Wandering lights are often seen with Eusapia, small
green lights which I have seen sometimes, but rarely. It is im
probable that these lights are akin to the luminous aureole more
or less like that of the. saints, which emanates from the body of
some mediums. Commandant Darget has studied these lights and
tried to photograph them, but, as G. de Fontenay has shown, it is
likely that there are photographic errors. The same holds good
for H. Baraducs negatives.
Photographic studies of luminous emanations from mediums,
resembling clouds, flashes, or bright vapour, are still too uncertain
1C on su lt esp e cia lly The experiences of W. Stainton Moses, P. S. P. R., xi,
1895, 24-114.
to allow of any definite conclusions. It seems, however, especially
since Ochorowiczs able work, that a series of valuable researches
might be undertaken on this; but there are two necessary con
ditions, both difficult to secure a powerful medium (for it is
averred that only mediums have this power) and an experimenter
who is at once a good psychologist and a skilled photographer.1
In certain cases, loud and extraordinary sounds, which are as
suredly objective, are heard. Near Stainton Moses very loud
sounds are described by Dr. and Mrs. Speer. The sounds that
Grocyn (the so-called guide of Stainton Moses) drew from his
invisible instrument were so powerful as to resemble those that a
giant might draw from a huge violoncello . . . they were some
times such as to produce terror . . . they were like a double
bass played on a big drum and plucked like a guitar. Dr.
Speer says, Up to then we had not heard the sound of wind-in
struments, when there resounded a loud trumpet-call between
Stainton and myself. This sound was repeated several times.
. . . One evening we heard the sound of bells in the garden
following us about . . . in the room, where there were no
xTo show the extreme difficulty of good photographic experiments, it
is sufficient to recall the fruitless and laborious endeavours of G. Le Bon,
an experienced photographer, with what he calls "dark light." So also the
N-rays, which have not been demonstrated, though atudied and described by
eminent physicists. In such matters experientia fallax, judicium difficile I
shall therefore not consider the photographs received by A. de Rochas from
one of his relations, a very sincere person, M. de B. (A. S. P., 1905, xv, 582).
Is it certain that M. de B.s brother-in-law has not imagined a spirit-photo
graph? which is so easy to make. Regarding faked photographs, consult A.
de Rochas ( .A S. P., 1908, viii, 9-15); Darget (A. S. P., 1909, xix, 20-26);
Julia Rosenkrantz (A. S. P., 1909, xix, 361-365). E. Morselli has published an
erudite and witty article on this subject, with some amusing photographs ( . A
S. P., ).
1908, xviii, ijso
The genuineness of so-called psychic photographs is still a matter of
dispute, for there have been lamentable trickeries. Mr. Allerton S. Cushman
obtained "A n Evidential Case of Spirit Photography" (published under that
5 P. R.,
title in the /. . April, 1922, pp. 132-147). Mr. and Mrs. Cushman of
Washington came to England quite unexpectedly without making their inten
tion known to anyone. They went to the British College of Psychic Science
at 59 Holland Park, London, and not finding Mr. Hope of Crewe, they had an
interview with Mrs. Deane, another psychic photographer. On one of the
negatives taken there appears a face very like that of a young daughter of Mr.
and Mrs. Cushman who had died eighteen months before. "It cannot be sup
posed that this portrait is a reproduction of any existing portrait for none
such was taken to the College, and the attitudes are different, especially the
direction of the eyes. The whole question is the degree of resemblance be
tween the psychic image and the dead girl. It must be admitted that the re
semblance to the normal portrait is so close as to be almost identical (Second
edition).
musical instruments, the carillon continued, giving the effect of a
brilliant concerto on the piano. 1
Stainton Moses showed many other objective phenomena which
must be considered genuine unless we admit the absurd hypothesis
of wilful deceit on the part of three honourable persons who
risked persecution, ridicule, and hostility by publishing them and
could get nothing by doing so but abuse and calumnies.
Sometimes perfumes exuded from his head, and the more they
were wiped away the more abundant they became.
Direct writing was obtained. Dr. Speer, being alone in the
room, took a sheet of music paper, placed it on a bureau with a
pencil, and left the room, locking the door after him. He never
lost sight of the door, and no one could enter the room; but on his
return the paper was covered with writing. This instance of di
rect writing, he says, is one of the most satisfying proofs we
have ever received.
There were also lights, weak at first, but gradually becoming
very bright, like torches. Mrs. Speer says that one of these
luminous nuclei came on to the table, skimmed round the heads
of the sitters, struck against the ceiling, and went to the top of
the door, giving out a sound whenever it touched anything. Some
times a hand could be seen holding the light, a hand quite different
from that of Stainton Moses. One day one of these lights rose
from the floor through the table as if it were no obstacle. Once
such a light remained visible for half an hour.
Mr. Podmore, convinced that there are no objective phenomena
and that there cannot be any, has tried, without adducing the sem
blance of proof, to maintain that Stainton Moses was a great
neuropath, a hysteric, deceiving for the sake of deceiving, moved
by a kind of half-morbid, half-unconscious knavery. These in
sinuations against the good faith and honesty of Stainton Moses
will not hold. F. Myers had a great admiration for him. Dr.
Johnson, his medical attendant, states that he was a man of great
intellectual capacity, methodical, well balanced, and a steady
worker. It would be necessary also to incriminate Dr. and Mrs.
Speer and other honourable witnesses.
In fine, it is not to be imagined that these luminous phenomena
are explicable as hallucination or as fraud. Hallucination is one
of those ridiculous hypotheses which are as inadmissible in meta-
1B o zza n o , Pour la defense de Stainton Moses, A. S. P., 1905, xv, 76-129.
psychics as in any other science. An observer is never hallu
cinated. When he reads 38.55 on a thermometer it is because that
is the temperature indicated. If he sees a light or hears a sound,
or perceives an odour, it is because there is an objective fact that
produces these sensations.
Fraud, of course, is always possible; but phosphorescent balls
which give no odour of phosphorus, luminous appearances round
the head, or luminous hands are phenomena that no medium can
produce by trickery after he has been carefully searched.
Neverthless, luminosity is so strange a fact that further proofs
must be required; methodical research is necessary. We must
wait till we have mediums capable of producing luminous phe
nomena, like Home, Eusapia, Stainton Moses, and Eglinton, and
then endeavour to scrutinize the conditions yet more closely than
our illustrious predecessors did.
The production of sounds and scents belongs to the same group
of physical phenomena as ectoplasms. Again it is from Home and
Moses that most of the data are drawn, and again new experi
ments to verify and intensify the effects produced by these cele
brated and powerful mediums are desirable.
It would have been valuable that these luminosities should have
been established by photography, but up to the present, apart from
the experiments by Crookes, Mme. Bisson, Schrenck-Notzing,
Imoda, and Ochorowicz, the results in this direction are but poor.
The painful imperfection of the old spiritist photographs may
be seen from the book published by Dr. Foveau de Courmelles at
the instigation of M. Emmanuel Vauchez.1 Despite all my good
will I cannot consider most of these faces as authentic.
Only very simple-minded persons could accept the photographs
by Dr. Th. Haumann of Washington. Almost all the photographs
which show doubles result either from photographic errors or from
a very easy trick. Double exposure, easily done by the least skil
ful, gives a very good imitation of a phantom or a materialized
face.
Photographs of a form that is visible to the experimenters is
totally different from these. Unless there is gross trickery (as in
the case of Ofelia Corrales at Costa Rica), photography has the
great merit that it defines the phenomenon and registers details
that a rapid glance may have passed over. However, in certain
xLa Photographie transcendentale, i vol., 8vo, Paris, Libr. nationale.
cases, methodical, prolonged, and conscientious observation is
nearly as valid as photography. The shock of the flashlight often
arrests the phenomena and then the successive stages of their
production cannot be followed, as I was able to do with Marthe
Braud.
But as to doubles, effluvia, portraits of the deceased, of phan
toms invisible to the sitters and perceptible only on the photo
graphic plate, I do not think that anything decisive has yet been
produced. What the eye does not see the plate rarely registers.
The whole question of human effluvia, thought forms (as Com
mandant Darget has endeavoured to demonstrate them) must be
studied anew from the very beginning. Whatever Sir A. Conan
Doyle may claim, it must be stated that, despite many attempts,
nothing reliable has been proved.1
Photographic evidence of this kind is always to be received with
caution, unless the exact conditions under which the negative was
taken are known. Mr. Arthui* Hill, in the Occult Review of
March, 1910, gives a remarkable case, though he raises some
doubts and with some reason. A photographer at S------in Lincoln
shire, named Binns, not a spiritualist and making no pretensions
to anything of the kind, when developing the photograph of a
clienta farmer named Warrensaw the superimposed face of a
certain Mr. Ground, a cousin of Warrens, of whose existence
Binns did not know. This man Ground was dying in a hospital
about fifteen miles away. The plate was taken from a fresh
packet. Mr. Ground had never been photographed since his child
hood. Everything seems to point to an authentic fact. But we
can scarcely draw this conclusion without further proof.
After a detailed study which is a model of methodical argument,
Mr. Walter F. Prince concludes that the number of so-called
spirit photographs representing Mr. Bocock are due to fraud:
and he adds, very justly, that there is not as yet any completely
satisfactory proof of spirit photography {Am. S. P. R., March,
1920, 585).
It is difficult to contest that pronouncement, but it applies only
to the cases when the head or the form is invisible to the sitters ;
in these latter cases criticism should be directed to the control
of the medium and not to the photographic process.
*To ju d g e o f th e e xtre m e difficu lty o f tran sc e n d en tal photography, the book
b y G . de F o n te n ay , La Photographie et ltude des p h n o m n es p sy ch iq u e s,
P a ris (G a u th ie r V illa r s , 1 9 1 2 ), m a y p ro fitab ly b e read.
After treating of ectoplasms, some other peculiar facts should
be mentioned that find no place among ordinary ectoplasmic
phenomena. These are mostly due to Home.
The most astounding experiments with Home, prior to those
by Crookes, are described in a very rare book1 of which only fifty
copies were printed. I owe my knowledge of it to J. Maxwell.
It deals with private experiments made by Viscount Adare in
1867 and 1868, when Home was at his house. Viscount Adare
did not intend these reports, which were letters addressed to his
father, for general circulation. In his introduction he says, I
have omitted mention of the precautions taken against trickery,
collusion, and other fraudulent acts; for I have been convinced
that precautions were needless, having invariably found that the
phenomena were such as could only be produced by an intelligence
invisible indeed but active and acting from reason.
The absence of such indications of the precautions taken against
conscious or unconscious fraud by Home causes some misgivings,
but as all the details have been very carefully noted by Viscount
Adare these wonderful sances can be reconstructed and we can
suppose that deceptions difficult, and by the nature of the phenom
ena, almost impossible, were not practised. We may admit that
Viscount Adare, Lord Dunraven, Mr. Jencken. Major Blackburn,
and the other honourable and educated sitters would have needed
to be terribly blinded by credulity to have failed in unmasking
gross and palpable frauds continued for two years. And it must
be remembered that when Crookes took many and rigorous pre
cautions nearly the same phenomena were produced.
To adhere strictly to the plan of the present book as a treatise on
metapsychics, the telekinesis, raps, levitations, and other singular
phenomena reported by Viscount Adare should be treated in
separate chapters ; but it is perhaps better, at the risk of depart
ing from the logical order, to summarize in one place the ex
traordinary facts that he narrates.
Movements without contact were frequent; an accordion, of
which Home only held one side, played a melody singularly well.
This was in the light. Raps were heard over the whole room at
the same time (pp. 2-4).
In a room completely darkened (p. 13) Home sat at the piano,
Experiences in spiritualism with Mr. D. D. Home, by Viscount Adare, with
introductory remarks by the Earl of Dunraven. Lon d on , T h o m as S co tt,
1869 (?).
and this piano, rose from the ground, first about an inch, and then
about fifteen inches. That day Homes body was elongated (??).
Viscount Adare says that no error was possible. His ordinary
height is five feet eight inches; he elongated to six feet five and
one-half inches.
The table rose into the air seventeen times, as stated in the
index to the chief phenomena at the beginning of the book (xxiv-
xxv). Once it rose seventeen inches and remained at that height
for a considerable time (p. 109). In the experiment of March
12, 1869, a table with four legs placed twenty-one inches from
Home's chair rose in the air while no one was touching it and
settled gently on another table on which were a number of ob
jects, without touching any of them. During all that time strange
noises were heard, like voices, and the table was shaken by strong
vibrations. On the 29th of March, in the light, the table rose to a
height of twenty-three inches, swaying in the air, and after re
maining at that height for a few seconds rose farther to at least
five feet and then came down with a noise like a railway train.
Levitations were frequent, and still more frequent the elon
gations, this latter a singular phenomenon very susceptible of
mistake, for which we have no parallel. Home was placed against
the wall, Adare being in front of him; then his arms seemed to
lengthen and his breast to swell. Home said to me, Adare, you
see the extension is from the chest. He again placed himself
against the wall and extended his arms to their ordinary stretch.
I made a pencil mark on the wall at the ends of his fingers. He
then lengthened his left arm and I made a fresh mark; then his
right arm, which I also marked. The total elongation, measured
in this way, was nine and one-half inches.
This experiment is much less conclusive than would appear at
first sight; for the voluntary power of extension of the arms is
variable so that this elongation is far from being an authentic
fact, and it is better not to make much of it.
Apparitions of hands, touches, and lights round the head were
frequent.
I will give only a few details of a levitation and a fire test, from
Adares book, slightly abridged.
On the 16th of December, at Buckingham Gate (p. 82) in
presence of Viscount Adare, Captain Charlie Wynne, and the
Master of Lindsay, Home elongated and rose into the air. Then
he said, Do not be frightened, and on no account leave your
chairs. Then Lindsay said, It is too horrible. He has passed
through the window to the next room, and is coming in at that
window. Then, says Viscount Adare, we heard Home in the next
room; he came back through the window, sat down, and began
to laugh. I laugh, said he, to think that if a policeman had
seen me how surprised he would have been to see a man come
through the window and float along the wall. Adare, come with
me. We went into the adjoining room. I opened the window
which he went through headfirst, his body being nearly horizontal
and apparently rigid. Then he returned and we went into the next
room. The rooms were on the third floor.
Other strange things were seena form like a bird flying and
whistling in the room, tongues and jets of fire from Homes head;
then as it were the blast of a strong wind, the most weird thing
I ever heard.
The fire test is more astonishing still. At Norwood in the house
of Mrs. Hennings (p. 68), Home first gave Adare the power to
raise a book by placing his hand flat above it: at one moment there
was an interval of more than two inches between the hand and the
book. Then he went to the fireplace, took out a burning coal
twice as large as an orange, put it on his hand and walked about
the room showing it. He then gave us his hands to smell, which
instead of having any odour of burning were scented; he replaced
the coal in the fire, and kneeling down placed his face right
among the burning coals, moving it about as though bathing it in
water!! Then he held his hands some time over the flame of a
candle. He took the lighted coal again into his hands and blew
on it to quicken it. He asked me to touch it: I did so and took
it into my two hands, he put his hands over it, and we held the
lighted coal in our four hands; I hardly felt any heat.
The same astounding experiment was repeated on April 3d at
Astley House (p. 147). This sance was remarkable; it is cor
roborated by Mr. S. C. Hall. A lighted coal was placed on Mr.
Halls head, and his white hair was combed over the coal, and left
four or five minutes (p. 178): the hair was not burned: a few
moments later this coal was so hot that one could not bear ones
face near it.
We must hold in suspense belief in these unheard-of facts till
new proofs have been given; but there have been so many rash
denials already in metapsychic matters that we ought to be cau
tious in our negations. These experiences are not comparable to
the celebrated ordeal by fire that certain fakirs1 provide for the
delectation of the public, for to them all verification is wanting,
and the precise conditions are not revealed. Possibly abundant
perspiration after quick walking might suffice to prevent burn
ing (??).
In any case, if the narrative of Lord Adare, corroborated by
Mrs. Hennings, Mr. and Mrs. Jencken, Mr. Saal and Mr. Hart, is
correct, no natural explanation seems possible
It is beyond doubt powerful mediums produce peculiar and
nearly unique phenomena which can hardly be classified. For in
stance : In a sance at Paris in the house of C. Flammarion, I was
holding Eusapias right hand, and Flammarion her left. I re
peatedly felt with my right hand Johns large hand through the
curtain. I said to Eusapia, I am going to prick that hand to see
whether it is really a living hand. The room was in half-light,
and a pin was given me. Taking the pin in my right hand I
pricked Johns hand through the curtain. I then felt a prick on my
left shoulder through my clothes, as if a pin were thrust in, with
out hurting me much, but enough to stop me, and I ceased to
prick the hypothetical fluidic hand. The prick I felt on my shoulder
was no hypothesis. Obviously no explanation can be attempted.
Another strange phenomenon, unique up to the present, is the
case of the letter announcing a serious event, which when placed on
the mantelpiece gave raps loud enough to call attention (p. 447).
The verification of such unique and isolated phenomena must
depend on a knowledge in minute detail of the lives of powerful
mediums. All hagiographies are certainly not illusions or im
postures ; but it is impossible to distinguish what is true from what
is false. It would be folly to accept all that is said in the lives of
the saints; but it would be equally rash to deny everything. As
there really are rare and well-nigh unique phenomena of which
verification is always more or less defective, it is well to wait be
fore forming a decided opinion. There are more surprises in re
serve in metapsychics than in any other science.
Meanwhile we must base our conclusions, not on exceptional
phenomena, but on the ectoplasmic facts that are, so to say, com
monplaces of metapsychics.*
*O r th e A issa o u a s. S ee J. D a v a n e , Les Aissaouas charmeurs de serpent,
P a ris , D e n tu , 1862, 2d d., e t D a v y l, P a ris , 1882.
ECTOPLASMS (MATERIALIZATIONS) 4i$y
Telekinesis and ectoplasms are degrees of the same thingthe

objectification or projection of an intelligent mechanical energy.
This mechanical energy is sometimes invisible, as when an ac
cordion moves without apparently being touched: sometimes
visible when the energy takes the form of a living moving hand.
But both are exteriorizations of motive powerextriorisations
de la motricitto borrow the excellent term devised by De
Rochas.
The tact that intelligent forces are projected from an organism,
that can act mechanically, can move objects and make sounds, is a
phenomenon as certainly established as any fact in physics. The
only difference between this telekinesis (revealed by movements
and raps) and ordinary commonplace mechanical effects is that
the former is exceptional, only producible by a very small numbei
of persons, and even by them only occasionally and with difficulty
All the same it is an assured factthe experiments with Home.
Eusapia, Stainton Moses, and Miss Goligher prove it definitely
It is doubtless grievous to a scientific man to have to admit that
there are exceptional phenomena; yet the magnet attracts iron!
That is exceptional, but no one denies it.
The materialization of a hand, of a body having all the sem
blance of life, of a face, or of a phantom, is a fact as assured as
telekinesis; and this makes it all the more difficult to understand,
for these forms seem to have all the attributes of life. Material
ized forms are intelligent, and have, at any rate in appearance, a
personality: the hand is warm and living, the eyes move in their
orbits and look, the voice speaks, the respiration disengages car
bon dioxide, the legs move, and the hands take hold of objects.
The genesis of seemingly living forms has been observed; they
begin like a nebula, they consolidate in the same way as a nebula
condenses into a planet. Garments, veils, and accessories are
formed simultaneously, and all have usually but a transitory exist
ence, vanishing as they cameceu fumus in auras.
To affirm all this is to affirm a great deal. Is it possible to
go farther? It may be possible in the future, but today it would
be imprudent to go beyond. Let us pause before the Beyond!
Photographs, direct writing, apports, the production of musical
sounds and of lights cannot be held to be established, fraud being
easy and frequent. Metapsychics presents so many strange facts,
that these also may be possible, and even for the most part ad
missible. No one would have thought of simulating them if they
had never really occurred. I do not hesitate to think them fairly
probable, but they are not proven. We must stop short, being in
the domain of strict science, and on the threshold of a mystery,
and we can affirm telekinesis and materializations, but nothing
more.
In speaking of lucidity it was said that experiences of lucidity
were of themselves insufficient to prove survival scientifically; for
cognition of things inaccessible to our senses is a simpler hypothe
sis than the survival of a dead person. We will now consider
whether materializations give the proof of survival that lucidity
alone cannot give.
In the first place the affirmation of a phantom that he is such
and such a person counts for little or nothing. When the phan
tom of Bien Boa appears and claims to be an Indian prince, al
though the objective reality of the apparition is certain in the given
conditions, there is nothing to prove that this phantom is animated
by the mind of a deceased Indian prince who remembers all his
past. Helen Smith says she is Marie Antoinette, but that does
not convince me that Marie Antoinette has returned to earth and
speaks by Helens vocal organs: the affirmations of Bien Boa and
John King have no more value. Up to the present the ideas,
gestures, and words of materialized forms do not entitle us to say
that their personality differs from that of the medium more than
the personalities evoked by Alice, when hypnotized, differ from
Alice in her normal state. It is therefore very rash to assume
that the consciousness of Bien Boa, Marie Antoinette, or John
King returns to us.
Unfortunately for the spiritualist doctrine no proof can be
given, or at any rate it has not yet been given. The case of
George Pelham, though there was no materialization, is vastly
more evidential for survival than all the materializations yet
known. I do not even see how decisive proof could be given.
Even if (which is not the case) a form identical with that of a
deceased person could be photographed, I should not understand
how an individual two hundred years dead, whose body has be
come a skeleton, could live again with this vanished body any more
than with any other material form.
Materializations, however perfect, cannot prove survival; the
evidence that they sometimes seem to give is much less striking
than that given by subjective metapsychics.
We must not be appalled at the idea of the materialization of

complete form. The problem is the same in the case of a hand or
of a whole body; it is as difficult to understand the materiali
zation of a living hand, warm, articulated, and mobile, or even of a
single finger, as to understand the materialization of an entire per
sonality which comes and goes, speaks, and moves the veil that
covers him. The improbability is the same.
Have these forms a personal psychological existence? If we
had only experimental materializations on which to answer this
question, we should be inclined to reply in the negative; for the
personalities that appear in the course of experiment do not seem
more conscious of themselves than those which manifest by auto
matic writing. They seem to pertain more or less to the conscious
or unconscious fancy of the medium.
But experimental materializations cannot be separated from ac
cidental materializations. There are haunted houses in which
a form appears that seems independent of the will or imagination
of persons there present. There are monitions that are not en
tirely subjective, since they are perceived collectively, so that if
the existence of beings independently of human beings cannot be
proved, neither can it be disproved.
It is extremely disappointing to find that our reasoning always
ends in uncertainty. But at least the uncertainty extends only to
the explanation and not to the facts of telekinesis and materiali
zation.
In any case we can, thanks to the experiments of Crawford,
Ochorowicz, Mme. Bisson, and Schrenck-Notzing, form some idea
on the genesis of these phenomena, and sketch out a kind of em
bryology. This embryogenesis may not be identical in all cases,
but in some that have been very exactly observed and illustrated
by photography, a kind of nebulous, gelatinous substance exudes
from the mediums body and gradually is organized into a living,
moving form. The ectoplasmic cloud would seem to become liv
ing substance while at the same time veils develop around it that
conceal the mechanism of its condensation into living tissues.
M. P. Lecour has compared the process to the condensation of
a nebula (A . S. P., June, 1913, 162). There is at first a conden
sation of cosmic matter into a more or less compact mass, in
spirals, sometimes in rings; it then condenses further into suns, or,
in the larger nebulae and under central forces, into planets. Ecto
plasmic formations are very similar to this; and M. Lecour re-
produces photographs by Ochorowicz and Aksakoff. Similar
clouds appeared at the Villa Carmen, and condensed; and likewise
with Linda, Eusapia, Mme. dEsperance, and at experiments by
Florence Marryat, Dr. Gibier, and Stainton Moses. The identity
of process in the condensation of whitish clouds and luminous
vapours is striking. Venzano describes a mass of vapour at the
side of Eusapia, in rapid swirling movement. One of the observers
at Algiers saw white flakes of vapour of differing brightness that
gradually condensed. Imoda describes a white cloud floating
round Linda. Courtier at the Psychological Institute saw phos
phorescent lights moving in the cabinet round Eusapia, which
came to the opening between the curtains and seemed to rise ver
tically as they condensed. M. Lecour observed round an unnamed
medium, luminous masses which gradually assumed ill-defined
corporeal forms, appearing and disappearing.
Further scientific knowledge will take us farther, and doubtless
metapsychic science has great surprises in store.
(b) Leading Ectoplasmic Experiments
Under this head we shall consider various cases of materiali
zation.1
Experimenting with Home, Crookes saw materializations. Mere
touches were frequent, but visible materializations were rarer.
His experiments are most decisive and it seems impossible to
doubt them. In a fair number of cases hands were seen in full
light. Home wished that all phenomena should take place in the
light. His powers were sufficient, says Crookes, to overcome
this adverse influence. With two exceptions, everything that I
witnessed with him took place in the light.
A little hand, very beautifully formed, rose from the table in
the dining-room and gave me a flower. It appeared and disap
peared three times, giving me every opportunity to convince my
self that it was as real as my own; this took place in the light, in
my own room, while I was holding the mediums hands and feet.
Many times I and other persons have seen a hand pressing the*
*W hen an e xp e rim en t ia d e scrib e d w ith to o f e w d e ta ils to a llo w a n y o n e w h o
d id n o t see it to fo rm a d ecid ed op in io n , I am c a r e fu l to sa y s o ; a n d a for
tiori, w h en a n e x p e rim en t seem s to m e d e fe c tiv e I d o n o t h e s ita te to in d ic a te
th is. I f, on th e c o n tra ry , th e e x p e rim e n t seem s to m e e v id e n tia l, I m ake th is
c le a r ; b u t I sh a ll u su a lly c ite th e fa c ts w ith th e ir b ib lio g ra p h ic a l r e fe r e n c e s
and le a v e th e re a d e r to ju d g e o f them .
keys of an accordion while we could see the hands of the medium,
or when they were held.
A finger and a form were seen plucking the petals from a
flower in Mr. Homes button-hole.
The hands and fingers did not always seem solid and as though
alive. Sometimes they rather resembled a condensed vapour; a
luminous cloud seemed to form round an object ; it then condensed
and took the form of a beautifully shaped hand, the flesh of which
seemed as human as that of any person present. At the wrist or
the arms it became vaporous and ended in a luminous cloud.1
I have held one of these hands in mine, resolved not to let it
go ; no effort or attempt was made to make me release it ; but the
hand seemed to dissolve into vapour and so disengaged itself from
my grasp.2
Another time in my own house I saw the window curtains some
eight feet distant from Home shaking, and a semi-transparent
dark shape resembling a human form was seen by all the sitters
standing up by the casement holding the curtain in its hand. While
we were looking at it, it vanished and the curtains ceased to move.
On another occasion a phantom form advanced from one
corner of the room, and, taking an accordion, moved forward into
the room playing the instrument. This form was visible for
several minutes by all present. We could see MfiHome also. The
phantom approached a lady who was sitting near ; she gave a little
cry and the shade vanished.
In a memorable letter (March, 1874) Crookes says: I have at
last obtained the absolute proof I have been seeking. On March
2d during a sance at my house, Katie (the apparition), having
moved among us, retired behind the curtain and a moment later
called me, saying, Come into the cabinet and raise my mediums
head. Katie stood before me in her usual white robe and wear
ing her turban. I went towards the bookcase to raise Miss Cook,
and Katie moved aside to let me pass. Miss Cook had slipped
T h is is e x a c t ly w h a t I o b se rv e d in th e m a te ria liza tio n s a t th e V illa C arm en
a lu m in o u s c lo u d w h o s e o u tlin e s becam e m o re defined an d to o k on hum an
su b stan ce a n d fo rm . I n c e rta in p h o to gra p h s ta k e n b y A k sa k o ff (perh ap s th e
on ly on es w h ic h h a v e som e v a lu e am on g th e old sp iritis t p h o to g ra p h s), a
lu m in ou s clo u d is se e n w h ic h fin a lly o rg a n iz e s its e lf an d d e v elo p s in to a nude
hu m an sh ape.
aT h is tr u ly c ru c ia l e x p e rim e n t did n o t su c ce e d w ith m e. C o n tra ry to w h a t
C ro o k e s fo u n d w ith H om e, th e flu id ic h a n d s fro m E u sa p ia an d M arth e m ade
g re a t e ffo r ts to re le a se themselves.
down, and I had the satisfaction of seeing that she was not dressed
like Katie but was wearing her usual dress of black velvet . . .
Not more than three seconds had elapsed between the time when I
saw Katie before me till I raised Miss Cook again on the sofa.
. . . The gas was then turned out, and Katie asked for the phos
phorus lamp; and after having shown herself by its light for
several seconds, she put it back in my hands, saying, Now come in
and see my medium. I went in and saw Miss Cook on the sofa.
F ig . 18. P hotograph of W illia m C rookesi and K a tie K in g

(T a k e n p ro b a b ly in 18 72.)
Another day Katie said that she would show herself at the same
time as Miss Cook. . . . I saw Miss Cook, dressed in black
velvet, apparently asleep; she did not move when I took her hand.
Raising the lamp I looked round and saw Katie standing close be
hind Miss Cook. She was clothed in flowing white draperies.
Holding one of Miss Cooks hands and kneeling down by her I
raised and lowered the lamp so as to see Katies whole figure and
to convince myself that it was really Katie. She did not speak
but moved her head. Three times I examined Miss Cook carefully
to be sure that the hand I was holding was really the hand of a
living woman, and three times I turned the light on Katie and
regarded her attentively. At last Katie signed to me to leave. I
went to another part of the cabinet and ceased to see her, but did
not leave the room till Miss Cook had waked up and two of the
sitters had brought in a light.
Katie is six inches taller than Miss Cook ; yesterday, with bare
feet, she was four and one-half inches taller. Her neck was bare
and did not show the cicatrice that is on Miss Cooks neck. Her
ears are not pierced, her complexion is very fair, and her fingers
much longer than those of Miss Cook.
Later, Crookes says (p. 193) : I have often raised one side of
the curtain and then the seven or eight persons in the laboratory
could see both Katie and Miss Cook in the full light of the electric
lamps. We could not see the mediums face because of the shawl
covering it, but we could see her feet and her hands : we could
see her moving as if in pain and could hear her moans.
Katie King had long before announced that she would be able
to remain with her medium only for a short time, and that she
must soon bid her farewell. The last sance was on May 21, 1874.
There was then a dramatic scene at which Sir William Crookes
was present. Katie gave her last instructions, and went to Miss
Cook who was lying insensible on the floor. Katie touched her
and said, Wake up, Florence, I must now leave you. Miss Cook
awoke and with tears besought Katie to remain with her, but in
vain; Katie of the white robe disappeared. Crookes held up the
fainting medium and Katie was seen no more.
Other interesting experiments were made with Miss Cook by
various persons. Florence Marryat (quoted by Emy, p. 145)
says : Katie King stood by the wall of the room, with both arms
extended as if crucified. Three gas-jets threw a bright light upon
her. The effect was stupefying. She remained so for about one
second, then began to disintegrate ; her features became nebulous,
the eyes retreated into their orbits, the nose disappeared, and then
the brows, then the limbs seemed to drop apart to the floor; at
last only part of the head and some white garments remained, then
all vanished.
In a sance at Mr. Luxmores house, a Mr. Volkmann seized
Katie by the waist, crying, It is the medium. Henry Dunphy re
marked that Katie lost her arms and legs ; she escaped from Mr.
Volkmann, slipping from his grasp and leaving no trace. Im
mediately after, Miss Cook was found, tied, with the knots intact.
Mr. Varley attached a galvanometer to Miss Cook, so that any
movement made by her would be shown by a deflection of the in
strument ; but there was no indication when Katie appeared, show
ing only the upper part of her body, though Mr. Varley was able
to grasp her hand.
Eusapias materializations have been fully observed by many
competent experimentalists. I will speak of them at some length,
for I have been present at close on two hundred sances with
Eusapia.
Visible materializations are rare with her and in all my long ex
perience I have seen none; I cannot remember having ever seen
in these sances any human form, in whole or in part. Once I
saw a kind of prolongation from her body, a kind of rod that
touched my side, but this was in half-light and very fugitive. Per
contra, I have been touched more than two hundred times when
the control was excellent, by a seemingly human hand on my
hands, my face, forehead, neck, and shoulders.
One such case, which seems to me perfect at all points, is the
followingit took place at the Psychological Institute at Paris.
There were present only Mme. Curie, Mme. X., a Polish friend
of hers, and P. Courtier, the secretary of the Institute. Mme.
Curie was on Eusapias left, myself on her right, Mme. X. a little
farther off, taking notes, and M. Courtier still farther, at the
end of the table. Courtier had arranged a double curtain behind
Eusapia; the light was weak but sufflcient. On the table Mme.
Curies hand holding Eusapias could be distinctly seen, likewise
mine also holding the right hand. Long practice had taught me to
hold the hand firmly, and I could also see both of Eusapias white
cuffs.
We saw the curtain swell out as if pushed by some large object
behind it. It was said to be Johns hand. I asked to touch it, and
with my right hand, which was free, I touched this hand project
ing through the curtain, high above Eusapias head. I felt the
resistance and seized a real hand which I took in mine. Even
through the curtain I could feel the fingers, which seemed to me
(though I cannot positively say so) much larger than Eusapias
little hand. I held it firmly and counted twenty-nine seconds, dur
ing all which time I had leisure to observe both of Eusapias hands
on the table, to ask Mme. Curie if she was sure of her control, to
call Courtiers attention, and also to feel, press, and identify a
real hand through the curtain. After the twenty-nine seconds I
said, I want something more, I want uno anello (a ring) on this
hand. At once the hand made me feel a ring : I said adesso uno
braceletto, and on the wrist I felt the two ends as of a womans
bracelet that closes by a hinge. I then asked that this hand should
melt in mine, but the hand disengaged itself by a strong effort, and
I felt nothing further (the above is a combination of two separate
experiments).
It seems hard to imagine a more convincing experiment, for in
twenty-nine seconds the element of surprise is eliminated. In this
case there was not only the materialization of a hand, but also of
a ring. As all experiments demonstrate, materializations of ob
jects, garments, and woven stuffs are simultaneous with human
forms, these latter never appearing naked, but covered by veils
which are at first white semi-luminous clouds which end by taking
the consistence of real woven fabrics.
Having already described at full length the movements of ob
jects without contact, there is no need to return to them, but it
should be noted that the movements and materializations occur to
gether. Everything takes place as though these movements were
due to invisible materializations, paradoxical as that term seems.
In the course of a sance one is touched ten or twenty times
without being able to see anything, even though darkness is not
total.
At Milan, two hands were heard in the air, clapping against one
another. Raising ones hand very high one could feel what seemed
to be a human figure, and on three different occasions one of the
observers stated that he could see its hair and beard ; the hair be
ing stiff and short, the beard delicate, and the skin like that of a
man. A piece of smoked paper was laid on the table, and on re
storing the light, finger-marks were found on the paper, Eusapias
hands being quite clean. This was repeated three times, the third
impression being that of a whole left hand.
The notes of one of my experiments at Milan read : Eusapia
says, Hold me firmly ; Schiaparelli on the right and Finzi on the
left grip her hands well. I say to Finzi, You have hold of the
left hand? Yes. To Schiaparelli, You have the right? Yes.
To Finzi,You have hold of both feet? Yes. Then turning my
head slightly to the left I see the curtain swell, and am touched
on the shoulder by a hand that seems to be a right hand, presum
ing that it came from the medium. Nearly at the same moment
two fingers pulled my hair at the back of my neck, without hurting
me, so that I am certain that a hand touched me on the shoulder
and the neck.
At Agnelas, J. Maxwell saw a silhouette like that of a head with
curly hair outlined against the wall of the room ; and also, in the
same manner, a hand and arm above the head of M. Sabatier, who
felt himself touched at the same moment. The fore-arm was long
and thin, coming out of the dark.
At the sances on Ribaud Island and in Paris, visible phenomena
were few, the attention of the observers being devoted to observa
tions on movements of objects. They were frequent at Genoa.
Morselli says (vol. i, 255), I sat in a small armchair about two
yards away on Eusapias right. The invisible arrived 1 Twice
I was touched and clearly felt a hand in all respects like a living
hand. My senses were fully awake. I can affirm that the thing
that touched me was solid, resisting, impenetrable, and, in short,
material!
In the eighteenth sance at Genoa, the best of them all, in pres
ence of Morselli, Porro, L. Ramorino, L. Vassallo, and Dr. Ven-
zano, of the Minerva Circle, on December 23, 1901, in the dark,
two invisible forms manifested which were afterwards seen by
weak light. The first was a little deceased daughter of Porro who
felt a child under a veil. We heard the child speak in a baby voice ;
she kissed Porro. This form could not be seen. Then another
came, the son of Vassallo who died aged sixteen. This entity be
came visible; an almost phosphorescent ovoid appeared on Eusa
pias right, moved slowly to the left about twelve inches and van
ished. By red light an arm and hand were seen to proceed from
the cabinet towards Vassallo. A third and a fourth entity ap
peared. The third was distinctly seen, but identification was
doubtful. In a room lit by five candles we all saw the two black
curtains of the window near Eusapia stretch and swell out, e
avanzarsi verso me e verso Porro come se dietro vi fossero due
persone vive agenti con intelligenza e con volonta propria e dist-
inta. These two forms did not come beyond the curtains, but
only showed hands and well-formed limbs. Morselli distinguished
a right hand visible as far as the second finger : it was short, fat,
apd grey in colour, opening and shutting.
In another sance, the twenty-third, which was also a very im
portant one, held in M. Avellinos house, Eusapia was fastened
down on a bed placed behind the curtain. Then an apparition
was seen of a young girl ; the head, shoulders, and part of the
bust being visible and perhaps slightly phosphorescent. A turban
hid her ears, chin, and hair; she remained still for some twenty
seconds. A second apparition then showed a tall man, with an
abundant short beard, large head with prominent bones, and a
thick neck. Four more appeared, first the head of a young woman
in an oriental garb; the fourth was not completely formed, it
seemed imperfect on the right side. Says Morselli, 1 saw the
eyes looking at me; although bright enough for me to see the
reflection of the lights on the cornea, they seemed veiled. When
I approached her, she made no attempt to retreat, but made a
salutation with her arm and went. The fifth and sixth were
of a woman of about fifty and a young child; these appeared
together.
Previous experiments made with Eusapia at the house of Mme.
Peretti should be mentioned, but these showed only imperfect
forms, dark silhouettes, with heads hardly formed.
Although these experiments were under perfect control by very
well-informed observers, they would be insufficient if they stood
alone, but the innumerable instances of movements of objects with
out contact can be explained in no other way than by invisible
materializations, and thus, following the scheme already outlined,
we can assign three phases to these exteriorized phenomena, a
first stage in which they are invisible, a second in which they be
gin to be visible but are still more or less amorphous, and a third
stage in which they take on the semblances of a living organism
surrounded by veils which at first mask the imperfections of form,
but become thinner as the underlying form becomes more dense.
The experiments of F. Bottazzi, professor of physiology in the
University of Naples, are most evidential, and would give, if they
were wanting, decisive proofs of materializations and movements
without contact.1 These took place in the presence of Professors
de Amicis, Scarpa, Pansini, and Bottazzi himself, provided with
all modern instruments as for an experiment in physiology.
There were seen (p. 684) splendid levitations of the table to a
lDans les rgions inexplores de la biologie humaine, A. S. P., 1907, xvii,
645-664, 681-705, 749-771. Fenomeni medianici, 1 vol., 12010, Napoli, Perella,
1909.
height of two feet from the floor, swaying in the air, untouched by
Eusapia. Unknown to all present, Bottazzi had provided an
electric button, which if touched would light a lamp. Eusapia,
with her hands well held, repeatedly pressed the button with a
fluidic hand and lit the lamp. Similar electric pushes placed in a
cabinet behind the curtain were put into action while Eusapia
struck blows with her hand on the table.
In another sance, Eusapias hands and arms were tied with
strong cords fastened to iron rings in the floor and secured with
leaden seals. The fluidic hand then gave various objectsa trum
pet and a vase of flowersto Bottazzi.
In these sances numerous and striking materializations took
place. While Eusapia was bound with strong cords M. Galotti
saw two left arms (one natural and one fluidic) proceeding from
her shoulder. Bottazzi experienced the crucial test of an ecto
plasmic hand melting away in his grasp. He says, I saw and
felt at one and the same time a human hand natural in colour, I
felt with mine the fingers and the back of a strong, warm, rough
hand. I gripped it and it vanished from my grasp, not becoming
smaller but melting, demterializing and dissolving.
Under unexceptionable test conditions not only were there nu
merous touches, but fingers and hands, some frail and diaphanous,
some thick and strong, and diverse figures and shades outlined be
hind the curtain.1
Bottazzi, who entered on these experiments with a sceptical
mind, concludes : The certitude we have acquired is of the same
order as that which we attain from the study of chemical, physical,
or physiological facts. That the professor of physiology in the
University of Naples should express himself so strongly means
that he must be absolutely certain.
Mme. Bloch also describes fluidic hands proceeding from Eu
sapia (A. S. P., vii, 1897, 2-6). She says Eusapias hands were
held and were also in full view, and we saw a hand emerge from
the white cloth behind her; an arm without a shoulder touched
her head. Then the phenomenon increased, the hand came from
below and threw on the table some pieces of music taken from the
piano. The hand was not luminous, but was a hand of flesh simi
lar to our own. There would have been plenty of time to photo-
1*1 sa w the apparition, says Bottazzi (p. 691), "and shuddered. F o r m y
own part, though I have very often experimented with Eusapia, I have never
seen a distinct form. C . R .
graph it. The fore-arm was in a close-fitting sleeve of grey stuff:
Eusapia had wide sleeves. This hand came from her skirt and
not from her shoulder. Her hands were both seen and held the
whole time.
M. Venzano thus describes the formation of these phantoms
(A . S'. P., 1907, xvii, 514): "Some eight inches from my face
there formed a vaporous, globular, whitish mass which condensed
into an oval and gradually took definite shape as a head. The nose,
the eyes, the moustache, and a pointed beard could be clearly seen.
It came nearer to my face, I felt a warm and living forehead
against mine; the pressure of a caress, and a kiss; then the whole
dissolved in vapour towards the curtain. The other sitters saw
only a vague, luminous appearance, but heard the sound of the
kiss.
A. de Rochas narrates the experiments at Choisy, in presence of
General Thomassin, J. Maxwell, De Watteville, and A. de Gra-
mont. M. de Gramont saw a dark shadow like a hand outlined
against the window; and the holding of the medium's hands was
then verified. A moment later he felt his hand stroked by warm
fingers that he could not take hold of.
. These fluidic hands have been photographed under satisfactory
conditions. G. de Fontenay, a skilful photographer and experi
enced man of science, was able to obtain striking photographs, one
of which is reproduced here. The two haitds are seen above
Eusapias head, her own hands being firmly held at the time. M.
Cartier, one of the experimenters, says, I did not for a single
moment let go Eusapias right hand. The other, M. Drubay,
says, "I can affirm in the most positive fashion that during the
whole of the sitting I never let go the left hand. It is therefore
quite impossible that Eusapia should have been able to free both
her hands just at the moment when control was necessarily strict
est. An attentive study of the photograph shows that the hands
are notably larger than Eusapias hands.
Besides these photographs of hands there are others of the
luminous mass usually seen in metapsychic photographs. Without
insisting on the impossibility of Eusapias contriving to put a
handkerchief on her head and to take it away again while her
hands were held, it may be remarked that the contours of this
luminous hand are soft and indeterminate, while its brightness
is much greater, as De Fontenay observes, than could be given by
the handkerchief that it resembles.
Fig. 19. E usapia P aladxno . Photograph taken by G. de F o n t e n a y .
Eusapias tw o hands w ere held by the experim enters, nevertheless two hands are visible over her head.
Eusapias materializations have been demonstrated not only by
photography, but also by metapsychic moulds.1
Morselli reports one case of a mould of the face (very faint)
under test conditions;8 and he gives a reproduction of a much
clearer impression of hands,8 though in this latter case he thinks
there may have been unconscious fraud.
Per contra, the plaster impressions obtained by De Fontenay are
excellent. In an experiment during which Flammarion continu
ously controlled Eusapias head and bust, the impression of a face
was taken on plaster. It is manifestly Eusapias face.
At Naples, E. Chiaja obtained numerous impressions on clay.
Nevertheless these experiments are still open to discussion : those
made at the Metapsychic Institute with Franek Kluski seem more
conclusive, and we shall return to them later.
Traces of light gauze tissue protecting the face or the fingers
from direct contact with the plaster or the clay may often be ob
served. This does not detract from the genuineness of the im
press, for materialization of inert tissues always accompanies
the materialization of living tissue. Moreover, how could actual
gauze be handled and caused to disappear under the rigorous con
trol that is exercised ?
The materializations given by Marthe Braud are of the highest
importance. They have presented numerous facts illustrating the
general processus of materializations and have supplied meta
psychic science with entirely new and unforeseen data.4
After these strange facts had been verified by General and Mme.
Noel in a series of experiments lasting nearly two years, M.
Delanne, the editor of the Revue du Spiritisme, and myself were
invited to Algiers by him. The first experiments6 at which I was
present impressed me greatly, but I always distrust first impres-
xVoy. A. de Rochas, A propos dEusapia Paladino, Les sances de Montfort-
VAmaury, A. S. P., 1898, viii, 148. G. de Fontenay, Les sances de Mont-
fort-lAmaury, Soc. des dit, scientifiques, Paris, 1897.
aLoc. cit., i, 430.
aLoc. cit., ii, 348-349.
4Their bibliography is already voluminous, for they have provoked much
controversy. T he pros and cons will be found in Grassets Loccultisme hier
et aujourdhui, 2d edit., Montpellier, 370-374. After sixteen years the objec
tions put forward seem very poor, and deserve only disdain.
*A naval officer, Captain Dmadrille, and a physician, Dr. Decrquy, wit
nessed these experiments and corroborated them. Their narratives have been
published in part in theA. S. P. These notes and sketches confirm our later
experiments in a very interesting manner.
sions. In the following year I returned to Algiers resolved to
repeat the experiments under more rigorous conditions.
The medium was Marthe Beraud, the daughter of an officer, be
trothed to General Noels son, who died in the Congo before the
marriage. She is a very intelligent and lively young lady, wears
her hair short, and is a bright-eyed brunette. Subsequently to
the Algiers experiments she has given proofs of strong medium
istic powers. She was the subject observed by Mme. Bisson and
Dr. Schrenck-Notzing under the pseudonym of Eva.
The experiments at Algiers were held in a small, isolated build
ing over a stable. The window was blocked up and remained
shut at all times. The only door was locked at the beginning of
Fig. 20. Diagram of the cabinet at the V illa Carmen.
A B, the curtains, opening at M, N. M, Marthes chair ; N , that of Aischa.

W e were before the curtain. X, place of origin of the materialization that
moved to O.
every sance. It is the only room in the building, and before

every sance everything was minutely inspected by Delanne and
myself. Two curtains were stretched across one corner of the
room as shown in Fig. 20, the curtain being about two and a half
yards long, so as to make a kind of dark cabinet. We sat about
half a yard, or even sometimes nearer, in front of these curtains.
Those present were General and Mme. Noel, Mlle. X., Delanne,
and myself, also Marthe Brauds two younger sisters, Marie and
Paule, who sat far from the curtain. Light was given by a pho
tographers red lamp. Within the curtains were two chairs, mi
nutely inspected, one for Marthe and one for a negress, Aischa.
The part played by Aischa seems absolutely nil. Mme. Noel made
a point of her being present, but our best results occurred in
Aischas absence.
Everything that took place in the room could be seen perfectly
well, and I am absolutely certain that no stranger could enter
during the sances.1
As Marthe was not tied, nor her hands held, the conditions of
control were less severe than in Eusapias case; they were, how
ever, strict enough to allow of a definite opinion.
After a variable period, sometimes immediately, sometimes after
an hour, or even two hours, the curtains drew apart, and we could
see Marthe and Aischa each sitting on her chair seemingly asleep.
It is needless to add that after each sance everything was minutely
examined. Marthe was not undressed, but in that very hot cli
mate she wore only a thin dress, and as I made magnetic passes
over her to awake her from trance, I could be sure, by passing my
hand all over her body, that she had nothing on her but this thin
garment.
It is useless to incriminate Aischa, an unintelligent creature
sitting passively beside Marthe, to the great annoyance of the
latter; for in the tropical heat the odour of the negress was un
bearable: and in the more effective experiments Aischa was not
present.
It is therefore established that there was no instrumentation and
no theatrical accessories that the medium could use, and that no
stranger could enter the room.
The materializations produced were very complete. The phan
tom of Bien Boa appeared five or six times under satisfactory
conditions in the sense that he could not be Marthe masquerading
in a helmet and sheet. Marthe would have had not only to bring,
but also to conceal afterwards, the helmet, the sheet, and the
burnous. Also Marthe and the phantom were both seen at the
same time. To pretend that Bien Boa was a doll is more absurd
still ; he walked and moved, his eyes could be seen looking round,
and when he tried to speak his lips moved.
*1 make a point of this because of the assertions of Areski, an Arab coach*
man dismissed by General Noel for theft, who said that he played the ghost
A certain starvelling practitioner o f Algiers, Dr. R., was ill-advised enough to
entertain this man and to exhibit him in public at Algiers in a white mantle to
play the ghost before spectators. That is the most that has been said against
the experiments at the V illa Carmen. The general public, blinded by ignoble
newspaper tales, imagined that the fraud had been exposed. All that was
really proved w as: that an Arab thief could lie impudently, that he could put
on a sheet, could appear thus on a stage, and could get a doctor to endorse
his lies. It is averred also that Marthe confessed fraud to an Algerian lawyer
who took a pseudonym. But even if this anonymous allegation were true, we
know the value to be placed on such revelations, which only show the mental
instability of mediums.
He seemed so much alive that, as we could hear his breathing,
I took a flask of baryta water to see if his breath would show
carbon dioxide. The experiment succeeded. I did not lose sight
of the flask from the moment when I put it into the hands of Bien
Boa who seemed to float in the air on the left of the curtain at a
height greater than Marthe could have been even if standing up.
While he blew into the tube the bubbling could be heard and I
asked Delanne, Do you see Marthe? He said, I see Marthe
completely. Aischa was far off and could be seen clearly, asleep
in the other corner of the cabinet. I could myself see the form of
Marthe sitting in her chair, though I could not see her head and
her right shoulder.1
However striking this was, another experiment seems to me
even more evidential: Everything being arranged as usual (except
that Mile. X., being indisposed, was absent), after a long wait I
saw close to me, in front of the curtain which had not moved, a
white vapour, hardly sixteen inches distant. It was like a white
veil or handkerchief on the floor. This rose and became spherical.
Soon it was a head just above the floor; it rose up still more, en-
lftged, and grew into a human form, a short bearded man dressed
in a turban and white mantle, who moved, limping slightly, from
right to left before the curtain. On coming close to General Noel,
he sank down abruptly to the floor with a clicking noise like a
falling skeleton, flattening out in front of the curtain. Three or
four minutes later, close to the general, not to me, he reappeared,
rising in a straight line from the floor, born from the floor, so to
say, and falling back to it with the same clicking noise.
The only un-metapsychic explanation possible seemed to be a
trap-door opening and shutting: but there was no trap-door, as I
verified next morning and as attested by the architect.
Delanne saw the same phenomenon, but as he was a little farther
off than myself, he could not see the emergence of the phantom
from the floor as well as I could.
It seems to me impossible, however slight and supple Marthe
may be, that she should creep under the curtain without disturb
ing it and give the illusion of a person rising straight from the
floor ; and how can the head, standing as if decapitated, be ex-*
*A comical incident occurred at this point. When we saw the baryta show
white (which incidentally shows that the light was good), we cried Bravo.
Bien Boa then vanished, but reappeared three times, opening and closing the
curtain and bowing like an actor who receives applause.
plained, and the sinking into the floor afterwards? when very
shortly after we saw Marthe sitting quietly in her chair, asleep.
Several photographs were taken by Delanne and myself, stereo-
Fig. 21. Photograph of Bien Boa. Marthe is seen seated. Note the helmet
covered with drapery, the height of the figure which is in front of Marthe, not
apparently supported by lower limbs. Her stereoscopic photograph is much
better than this one.
scopic and other. They show some interesting details on which

Sir Oliver Lodge has made acute criticisms, saying that they were
the best metapsychic photographs that he had seen.
The softness and semi-vaporous outline of the hands are curi
ous ; likewise the veil surrounding the phantom has indeterminate
outlines contrasting strongly with the sharp outline of Aischas
shoulder. A thick, black, artificial-looking beard covers the mouth
and chin. A whitish fluidic mass is noticeable in front of the
curtain. This cannot be a photographic error, though we only
noticed it on the plate; it appears on both photographs taken with
different cameras. The plane of the phantom is in front of
Marthe. Bien Boa would seem to be a bust only floating in space
in front of Marthe, whose bodice can be seen. Low down, be
tween the curtain and Marthes black skirt, there seem to be two
small whitish rods like supports to the phantom form.
The only defective side to the experiment as evidenced by the
photograph is that Marthes left arm which seems resting on
Aischas chair appears empty, though the vacuity is not complete;
but Marthes bodice, knees, and body are so clearly discernible that
this apparent emptiness of the left sleeve does not seem to be a
serious objection, though I am careful to draw attention to this
point.
It is absolutely impossible that this phantom should be a stranger
invading the cabinet; and it is impossible that Marthe could have
invested herself with a helmet and sheet, and induce at the same
time the white cloud in front of the curtain. Everything happens
as though fluidic vapour emerged from her head and her right side,
masking both, and rising into the air without any means of sup
port but her head and body.
At the Villa Carmen I saw another very well-defined materiali
zation, now published for the first time.
On the day preceding my departure, after a long stay at Al
giers, Bien Boa, speaking by the voice of Marthe,1 said, in order to
detain me, Stay! You will see her whom you desire. It will
easily be understood that I stayed.
On the next day almost as soon as the curtains were drawn,
they were re-opened, and between them appeared the face of a
young and beautiful woman with a kind of gilt ribbon or diadem
covering her fair hair and the crown of her head. She was laugh
ing heartily and seemed greatly amused; I can still vividly recall
her laugh and her pearly teeth. She appeared two or three times
*Her voice was halting and wooden and guttural, a sort of P u n c h in e llo s
voice.
showing her head and then hiding it, like a child playing bo-peep.
Then she refused to return. The general said to me, Put your
hand behind the curtain and you can touch her hair, which I did;
and he added, It is soft like silk, is it not? I replied, Excuse
me, it is more like horse-hair, and in fact this was the sensation
produced. I then received a light tap on the back of the hand;
the hair was felt no more and a voice from behind the curtain said,
Bring scissors tomorrow. I brought the scissors next day.
The Egyptian queen returned, but only showed the crown of her
head with very fair and very abundant hair; she was anxious to
know if I had brought the scissors. I then took a handful of her
long hair, but I could scarcely distinguish the face that she kept
concealed behind the curtain. As I was about to cut a lock high
up, a firm hand behind the curtain lowered mine, so that I cut only
about six inches from the end. As I was rather slow about doing
this, she said in a low voice, Quick! Quick! and disappeared. I
have kept this lock: it is very fine, silky, and undyed. Microscopi
cal examination shows it to be real hair; and I am informed that a
wig of the same would cost a thousand francs. Marthes hair is
very dark and she wears her hair rather short.
It would seem that the purpose that this Egyptian princess had
in view was that I should cut off a lock of her hair (?), for I saw
her no more. Next day, on visiting Mme. Noel who was ill, I
half saw, very vaguely, a fugitive form in the dressing-room
which vanished as I approached. But my recollection of this is
very undefined.1
With other powerful mediums and before 1905, General Noel
had notable spiritist manifestations. Both he and Mme. Noel and
M. Demadrille, now a captain in the navy, clearly saw the phantom
of Bien Boa and by his side the medium Vincente, at the same
moment. Dr. Decrequy, also present, certifies the same. Sketches
were made that were reproduced in the Annales. Captain
Demadrille says; The curtain opened and Vincente came out: I
could see his whole figure; then B. B. came out of the cabinet,
seeming to hold it up with his right arm. The curtain fell to be
hind him and both remained standing. I took B. B.s hand; the
skin felt stiff and cold, the arm was very cold, stiff and cold like
that of a corpse.
Psychische Studien for 1906, various criticisms relating to these
*See in the
experiments. L. Deinhard, Die Materialisationssitzungen in Alger, pp. 74 and
137. Bormann, Bien Boa und der Wascheposantz, p. 200, col. 9.
M. C, a cavalry officer, with other mediums than Marthe, and
by strong red light, saw clearly the features of a living form only
a few inches from his eyes. The form was that of M. de Quillac
whose widow was present. Both mediums could be seen seated
asleep in their chairs at the same moment as the apparition.1
Our study of materializations has lately had the benefit of many
valuable observations very effectively made by Schrenck-Notzing
and Mme. Bisson.
Very numerous photographs, more numerous and more in
structive than have before appeared, accompany the text and en
able the sequence of phenomena to be intelligently followed.*
In these experiments, which lasted over four years and were
conducted with admirable care and patience, minute precautions
were taken against fraud. At each sance the cabinet was closely
searched, Eva was completely undressed and in presence of the
experimenters clothed in a close-fitting garment covering her from
head to foot. Her head was covered by a veil of tulle sewn to the
other garment. Her hair, armpits, nose, mouth, and knees were
examined ; in some cases even examination per rectum et vaginam
was resorted to. As the materialized substance frequently comes
from her mouth, syrup of bilberries was administered, whose deep
colouring powers are well known, but notwithstanding this the ex
truded forms were absolutely white. Experimental rigour was
even pushed to the point of giving her an emetic before a sance.
The light in front of the curtain was sufficient to allow large
print to be read. Behind the curtain were a red and a white light
that could be put on at will. Three cameras, one being stereo
scopic, were focussed on the cabinet ready to be worked at a
signal ; sometimes there were as many as nine. Eva, having been
undressed in full light and clothed as described above, was brought
into the cabinet and the curtains were drawn, the light reduced,
and the experiments began.
Under these circumstances it seems physically impossible that
XA. S . P ., 1906, 255. L e s d e rn i re s s a n c e s d e la v illa C a rm en .
*Les p h n o m n es d its de m a t ria lisa tio n , by Juliette Alexandre B isso n ,
w ith
preface by J. Maxwell, 8vo, 1 vol., Paris, Alcan, 1914. S c h re n c k -N o tz in g ,
M a teria lisa tio n sp h a en o m en e, E. Reinhardt, Mnchen, 1914. T h is w o rk w as
translated into English in 1919.
'Grasset, in his book published in 1908, accepts (without a d v a n c in g a n y
proofs) the idea that Areski intruded into the cabinet at A lg ie r s , ab su rd
as that notion is. He could not anticipate that Marthe w o u ld g iv e fin e in
stances of materialization five years later, confirming the r e s u lts a t th e V illa
Carmen, although her mediumship th e re and a t P a r is to o k v e r y d iffe re n t form s.
any fraud could occur. The notion that an accomplice could enter
is absurd; the hypothesis that Eva might bring various objects
with her is equally ridiculous. Moreover Eva lives with Mme.
Bisson, who rarely leaves her ; the two ladies take their meals to
gether and sleep in the same room. Even making the monstrous
supposition that Mme. Bisson is capable of bad faith, she could
not have deceived Schrenck-Notzing, Dr. Geley, J. Maxwell, Dr.
Bourbon, M. Chevreul, C. de Vesme, G. de Fontenay, and myself
for three years, and also others who assisted at the experiments.
Add to this that there were sances at Paris, Biarritz, and Munich
extending over four years.
The phenomena of materialization produced were most striking.
Essentially they consist in a luminous and plastic emanation
proceeding usually from her mouth, sometimes from her navel
(when alone with Mme. Bisson she was completely nude) ; some
times from her breast; sometimes from her armpits. It is a
whitish substance that creeps as if alive, with damp, cold, proto
plasmic extensions that are transformed under the eyes of the ex
perimenters into a hand, fingers, a head, or even into an entire
figure.
It is impossible to give all particulars. I therefore quote the
sance of April 15, 1912, in the presence of C. de Vesme and P.
Bisson.
The manifestations began at once. White substance appeared
on the neck of the medium ; then a head was formed which moved
from left to right and placed itself on the mediums head. A
photograph was taken (Figs. 73, 74, pp. 108, 109). After the
flashlight, the head reappeared by the side of Evas head, about
sixteen inches from it, connected by a long bunch of white sub
stance. It looked like the head of a man, and made movements
like bows. Some twenty appearances and reappearances of this
head were counted; it appeared, retreated into the cabinet, and
emerged again. A womans head then appeared on the right,
showed itself near the curtains, and went back into the cabinet, re
turned several times and disappeared.
On the 30th of August, 1912, another experiment was made at
Munich by Dr. and Mme. Schrenck-Notzing and Dr. Klapka,
which is specially interesting because a rough attempt was made
to detect fraud (Schrenck-Notzing, p. 329).
The white substance was seen on the mediums left shoulder,
then on her abdomen. Dr. Klapka verified that Evas hands were
Fig. 22. Ectoplasm of Marthe-Eva (After Mme. Bisson and Schrenck-
Notzing).
Enlargement of the negative. On the right the head o f Marthe, whose neck
and chin are clearly visible. Fluidic extended matter that seems to proceed
from her hair and neck hangs down like bonnet-ribbons.
On the left the beginning of a materialized face, still imperfect and covered
found
by a veil. The nostrils are barely (experiment of , )
December 30 1 9 1 1
in sight holding the curtain during the whole time. A white and
brownish mass was visible on Evas knees. On a sign Schrenck
entered the cabinet suddenly, put on the light, and took Evas
hands, while Klapka tried to seize the white substance, but could
grasp nothing, for it disappeared at once. The experiment was
resumed, in spite of the terror evinced by Eva of this attempt, and
the face of a man appeared, which vanished after a few seconds.
At the seance of June 13, 1913, in presence of Dr. Bourbon and
Mme. Bisson (see p. 208), the substance emerged from the
mediums mouth; at its end was a materialized finger. M. Bourbon
took hold of this as it came from Evas mouth, and verified the
bone in it, and also that it was flexible. This finger came right
through the tulle with which the mediums head was covered, the
tulle showing no sign of being torn (Schrenck-Notzing, PI. xxi).
The apparition (the form of a man, much larger than Eva, with
long moustaches) came out of the cabinet, began to speak, and
went to Mme. Bisson, who kissed him on his cheek. The sound
was quite audible.
The experiment of November 30, 1912 (Schrenck-Notzing, p.
379 and Fig. 107, PI. xi), is particularly interesting. Both of Evas
hands can be seen holding the curtain. The white substance then
exuded from the left shoulder, falling over the chest. This sub
stance became more and more dense and finally took the shape of
a human face; Schrenck, who up to that time had kept Evas hands
in sight or had held them, let go his hold at Evas request, and the
form then became clearer.
It is to be noted that these faces (and many others), as shown
by the photographs, are not in relief. They are like drawings;
and, more strange still, something like folds in the paper of a
drawing are visible; as if a drawing had been folded three or
four times and unfolded to be photographed, so that the materiali
zations are in these cases flat, or materialized drawings.
These folds in flat images gave immense suspicion of fraud.
But that presumes extreme stupidity in Eva, since she knew that
photographs would be taken. How should she have been so unskil
ful as to present such things to the camera along with the other
evidences of extraordinary faculty?
It must, moreover, be supposed that she had brought these
drawings and made them vanish again. This hypothesis of draw
ings brought and hidden cannot be sustained; for, in the first place,
the flat images appeared in cases when her hands were never out
of sight ; and, secondly, the extreme rigour of the conditions, and
the minute examination of her person before and after the sances,
makes it impossible to understand how she could have secreted
large drawings; thirdly, these appeared outside the veil of tulle
that covered her; and fourthly there were very evident move
ments, quite life-like, in these images that succeeded one another
rapidly and seemed to be living things.
The fact of the appearance of flat images rather than of forms
in relief is no evidence of trickery. It is imagined, quite mis
takenly, that a materialization must be analogous to a human body
and must be three-dimensional. This is not so. There is noth
ing to prove that the process of materialization is other than a
development of a completed form after a first stage of coarse and
rudimentary lineaments formed from the cloudy substance.
The moist, gelatinous, and semi-luminous extensions that pro
ceed from the mouth of Marthe-Eva are embryonic formations
which tend towards organization without immediately attaining it.
Perhaps with other mediums such as Home and Florence Cook the
organization into living form takes place more rapidly; but in
Evas case it is slow, progressive, and difficult.
Schrenck has examined microscopically residues of the amor
phous substance, and has found vestiges of epithelium, bacterial
forms, and a notable amount of fat. In certain cases it looked
like vegetable tissue ; in others like a filament of cotton surrounded
by a granular substance whose nature could not be determined.
These remarkable experiments by Schrenck-Notzing and Mme.
Bisson confirm yet once again the phenomenon of ectoplasm.
After the experiments by Crookes, Mme. dEsprance, P. Gibier,
and those at the Villa Carmen, it would seem impossible to cast
doubt upon this extraordinary and extremely rare but real phe
nomenon.1
Acrimonious (and ineffective) criticisms have appeared in Germany ; notably
that of Mme. Dr. Mathilde von Kemnitz. Schrenck-Notzing replied to her
vigorously, and also to Dr. von Gulat-Wellenburg, D e r K a m p f u n d d ie M a te ria -
lisa tio n sp h a en o m en e, V e rte id ig u n g ssc h rift (Mnchen, Reinhardt, 1914).
See also L a q u erelle d e s p h n o m n es d e m a t ria lisa tio n , by A . von Schrenck-
Notzing, A . S. P ., May, 1914, x x iv , 129-149. Schrenck has demonstrated that
a careful examination of the photographs shows that they are not reproduc
tions of those that appeared in the M iro ir. Mrs. Barclay, who in the Psychic
M a g a zin e thought to p ro v e fraud, merely proved that she had neither read the
detailed accounts of the experiments nor carefully examined the photographs.
Schrenck had, moreover, employed detectives for several months, who
sought by every possible means to discover or even to provoke fraud. They
got nothing.
The phenomena that Schrenck-Notzing and Mme. Bisson have
verified with Eva bring fresh evidence on the formation of ecto
plasms, evidence that is of high theoretical importance. The word
ectoplasm, which I invented for the experiments with Eusapia,
seems entirely justified. The ectoplasm is a kind of gelatinous
protoplasm, formless at first, that exudes from the body of the
medium, and takes form later. This embryo-genesis of materiali
zation shows clearly on nearly all the photographs. In the early
stages there are always white veils and milky patches and the faces,
fingers, and drawings are formed little by little in the midst of this
kind of gelatinous paste that resembles moist and sticky muslin.
To establish the truth of these phenomena of materialization and
their embryo-genesis by formal proof I will here give, almost un
abbreviated, the first notes of the experiments made by me with
Marthe at the house of Mme. de S., under conditions that rendered
fraud impossible, in September, October, and November, 1906.
I did not publish them at the time because they seemed to me
so extraordinary that I wished to confirm them further by fresh
experiment, but Marthe was then engaged on other studies with
Mme. Bisson.
In some respects my experiments give more detail than those of
Schrenck and Mme. Bisson; for I could follow the whole sequence
of the embryo-genesis. I took no photographs; a serious omission
doubtless, but one that is fairly compensated for by the fact that
I could follow with the eye the detail of organization without
those intermissions of observation while the curtain is drawn; this
continuous observation is not permitted by the medium when
waiting for the photograph, and herself giving the signal to the
photographer. Moreover, mediums are always more or less in
fear of the flashlight, and I have reasons to think that this terror
of the flash involves some check to the phenomena.
It is probable, too, that Marthes mediumistic powers have al
tered and that their modalities have varied. At Mme. de S.s
house the phenomena were different from those at Algiers, more
like those presented with Mme. Bisson and Schrenck-Notzing
some years later.
I quote textually my notes of 1906.1
xThese notes, which I intended one day to publish, seemed to me so im
portant that I confided them to my friend Georges Lyon, to be published after
my death. He returns them to me at my request.
In the quite small room which I search thoroughly, a corner,
curtains that can be closed and opened before the corner. A cane
chair in the middle on which Marthe sits. Mme. de S., whom I
will call A., is alone with Marthe and myself. We both sit close
to Marthe, so close that I can touch her hands without getting up.
The light is an electric lamp covered with red stuff, and gives light
enough to show all the white in Marthes garments and the white
ribbons in her hair. After about half an hour, I open the curtains
and see a faint luminosity on the floor, so feeble that I doubt its
reality. By degrees this light increases; it is like a small, luminous
handkerchief lying on the floor. Marthes whole body is motion
less. The luminous spot grows; its outlines are milky, undefined
and cloudy, less defined and softer than would be those of a
woven stuff. It approaches the chair, increases in size, and takes
a serpentine form which tends to rise towards the left arm of A.s
chair. Its outlines become sharper; it is like a mass of half-empty
fabric. Then follows an extraordinary sight: a point detaches
itself from the mass, mounts up, bends and directs itself to Mar-
thes breast, her hands being held the whole time. The point con
tinues to advance in a terrifying way like an animal pointing its
beak; and as it advances, on the rigid stalk there appears a thin
gauzy structure like a bats wing, so thin and transparent that
Marthes garments can be seen through it. The stem is easily dis
tinguishable from the membrane round it. Marthe is motionless
and speaks at intervals.
I can approach and look very closely, only an inch away. I
see what looks like a swollen substance, moving as if alive, and
changing its form. For five or six minutes I examine it atten
tively. I see extensions like the horns of a snail, which start up
to right and left; these horns are like transparent gelatine, they
project from and sink back into the more defined central mass.
Marthe gets up. I take her hands. By raising and lowering
her hands I seem to attract the point of the mass of substance.
There seems now only a sort of veil suspended from my hand
which holds both of Marthes hands; but I can feel nothing. I
made a slight movement with my little finger, the mass shortened
by a few inches and mounted once more.
This amazing experiment, the first, was followed by yet another,
the third, still more strange, on October 20th, which took place
during the day with quite enough light to see by. For the sake
of brevity I pass over experiment number two of the 18th, at
Ectoplasms o f Marthe (after my drawings).

23.
?ig.
which the phenomena above described recurred. There was light

enough, even in the cabinet, to read the title of a book.
After half an hours wait, the curtains open of themselves. On

the floor is a small white tract that grows into an ovoid, puts out
an extension, and mounts on the arm of the chair. At this
moment there are two horns like snails horns that seem to direct
the movements of a part, B, that climbs over the arm of the chair,
united to a mass, X, that lies on the floor. I can look at this very
closely: the stem is a greyish white, less white than the trimming
of Marthes bodice and softer in outline. There are swellings in
it like an empty snake-skin whilst the two masses, B and X, seem
to swell and get fuller. Slowly the mass X mounts up and the
mass B descends, so that X is on Marthes knees and B below it,
the latter becoming the base on which the whole formation rests,
for it spreads out like an amoeba on the floor, and takes the form
of a split base (two feet?). While these two parts continued to
flatten out on the floor I had plenty of time to look very closely
into the greyish, gelatinous, and barely visible mass X. I was not
permitted to touch it. It was then on Marthes knees. It then
slowly divided into clefts at its extremity, resembling a hand, in
embryo, but sufficiently clear for me to say that it is a left hand
seen from the back. Vide Fig. 23: Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are
rough sketches of the successive phases of the ectoplasm on the
floor: 6 shows the development of the snail's horn formation: 7,
8, and 9 are the series of forms taken by the ectoplasm mounting
on to Marthes knees: 9a shows the portion on the ground and the
disposition on Marthe's figure: 10 to 13 show the growth of the
hand. Nos. 14 to 17 are from another experiment analogous to
the preceding. The final result was a stump ill-formed but suffi
cient to show the embryo of a hand.
Another change sets in: the little finger separates from the
rest, and in the grey, cloudy mass a hand can be clearly seen from
the back, the fingers closed, the little finger extended, and a swell
ing resembling the carpal bones appeared, like a Rontgen-ray
radiograph of these bones. Soon the cloudy mass disappears and I
see an ill-formed hand like a cast in plaster. I think I see the folds
and creases in the skin slowly form. I am holding both Marthes
hands, and can see them.
The ectoplasmic hand seems solid, larger than a womans hand.
I am able to look at it very closely for ten minutes in quite good
light. Then Marthe gets up and everything vanishes.
The most extraordinary of all the experiments is certainly the
fourth (October 20th):
Fairly good light. The curtain remains closed for about an
hour. I open it; a white spot on the floor grows rapidly, and
two horns protrude from the mass X, from which other horns ap
pear, very mobile, pointing in every direction. The mass, then
much larger, disaggregates into particles, taking on the semblance
of a hand; it does not look like the cast of the previous day, it is
a greyish hand with ill-defined outlines.
This hand moves, looking like the hand of a mummy emerging
from some stuff; it raises and lowers itself like a hand. Marthes
hands are firmly held by me and are quite motionless. The fingers
of the ectoplasm, thin and spindly, seem to end in cloudy masses.
I can examine them very closely. I touch one of these spindles;
it feels like a cold liquid. I can press it and it feels like the bone
of a finger covered with skin. The hand rests on my knee and I
feel the slight friction of a body of little resistance. The hand
then rises of itself, swaying on a long stem that connects it with
the floor; it falls back on to the floor with a slight noise; it re
mains there and I think I see the two bones of the fore-arm as
though wrapped in cloudy muslin.
The hand then rises, bends, and moves towards me. The wrist
is lowered and the fingers pendant; they move and there seems a
torsional movement of this strange fore-arm. I still think I see
the carpal bones in the muslin-like cloud.
The hand rests on my knee again. I feel its weight (very
light), it makes little movements at my request that I can feel quite
well. Then Marthe says to me, That is the muscles beginning to
form, and I see, or I think I see, something dark in the space be
tween the two bones. The hand rises and moves very close to
me, having no connection with the ground but a slight white trail.
It then falls to the ground with a slight noise, rises from it and
suddenly disappears at the moment that Marthe gets up.
The final experiment is less striking. There would seem to
have been an endeavour to present a different phenomenon which
could not reach its full development:
After a long wait (an hour) Marthe opens the curtains. She
can be seen sitting quite still. On her left shoulder is a whitish
mass perhaps slightly luminous, though I could not state that it
was markedly so. This gleam, at first indistinct, gradually takes
the shape of drapery and disappears into Marthes body. Then
there appears a kind of cloud that seems to me weightless (?) as if
thrown across Marthes neck and bust, but this is very fugitive;
Then a phenomenon of great importance takes place, unfor
tunately much more rapid than those previously verified. About
half a yard from Marthe there appears a kind of doll without a
face, quite indistinct and barely a yard high. A very small head,
two long sleeves, and scarcely any legs, the whole under a kind of
drapery or shimmering light. This lasts about half a minute; the
whole form then sinks to the ground, and nothing remains but the
globular form of the head, which lasts about half a minute and
disappears.
The last of the phenomena was very distinct and fully visible
(I copy my notes verbatim) :
Luminous prolongation seeming to proceed from the junction
of the neck with the back, seen from behind. Marthes two
hands are visible and have hold of the drapery. This prolongation
is white and very luminous; it seems to me self-luminous, but I
cannot be sure of that. It is straight, very narrow, only about
one-sixteenth of an inch in diameter, at its end a mass, not
rounded but rather triangular. The external part of this mass is
frizzy, or rather its outlines are vague. At first it is quite still,
then it moves jerkily, as if the stem was being re-absorbed in the
body. It seemed to me that the luminous mass, in shape some
thing like an African native club, changed size, becoming now
larger and now smaller. In the end it returned into Marthes
neck and back, her hand remaining in sight the whole time.
Such are the experiments I made with Marthe in 1906. Being
corroborated by the subsequent admirable photographs taken by
Mme. Bisson and Schrenck-Notzing, they seem to me of the high
est importance.
In the first place no trickery was possible. The light was ample
for perfect visibility; the proximity very close indeed; the time
often very long, enabling me to observe closely every detail. These
conditions entirely preclude fraud. Even if, for the sake of argu
ment, we adopt the absurd supposition that Mme. de S., in whose
house the experiments took place, was an accomplice, it would
have been impossible to generate under my eyes these clouds
which developed into bony and mobile masses just in front of me.
Marthe was examined and searched before and after the ex
periments. I never lost sight of her for a moment and her hands
were always held and visible.
The phenomena were therefore authentic.
The outcome of these surprising observations is that we can
state the stages in the formation of ectoplasmsa whitish steam,
perhaps luminous, taking the shape of gauze or muslin, in which
there develops a hand or an arm that gradually gains consistency.
This ectoplasm makes personal movements. It creeps, rises from
the ground, and puts forth tentacles like an amoeba. It is not
always connected with the body of the medium but usually em
anates from her, and is connected with her.
Two phases can be distinguished: a rudimentary phase, a sort
of rough draft, and a phase of building up. With other mediums
the organized form may probably appear immediately without be
ing preceded by the indistinct cloudy phase.
To confirm the authenticity of the phenomena, I cannot do bet
ter than reproduce side by side the notes taken by me in 1906 and
those published by Geley in 1920. I have changed nothing in
C . R ic h e t ' s N otes ( 1 9 06 ). G eley ' s N ot^ s . " F rom t h e
U n c o n sc io u s to t h e C o n
On the ground a small white sc io u s ," 1 9 19 .
tract which grows, makes an
ovoid mass, and puts forth a From the mouth of Eva there
prolongation. This mounts on the descends to her knees a cord of
arm of the chair. At this mo white substance of the thickness
ment there are visible two horns of two fingers; this ribbon takes
like those of a snail which seem under our eyes varying forms,
to direct the movements. A lower that of a large perforated mem
mass, X, on the ground; and an brane, with swellings and vacant
upper mass, B, united to the spaces; it gathers itself together,
former, which has climbed over retracts, swells, and narrows
the arm of the chair. I can look again. Here and there from the
at this formation from a very mass appear temporary protru
short distance. The stem is grey sions, and these for a few seconds
ish white, with swellings like an assume the form of fingers, the
empty snake-skin. The mass X outline of hands, and then re
is on Marthes knees, while the enter the mass. Finally the cord
mass B spreads itself on the floor retracts on itself, lengthens to
like an amoeba. The mass X is the knees, its end rises, detaches
greyish, gelatinous, and barely itself from the medium and moves
visible. It is then on Marthes towards me. I then see the ex
knees. Little by little it seems to tremity thicken like a swelling,
split into digits at its end. It is and this terminal swelling ex
like the embryo of a hand, ill- pands into a perfectly modelled
formed but clear enough to en hand. I touch it; it gives a nor
able me to say that it is a left mal sensation; I feel the bones,
hand seen from the back. Fresh and the fingers with their nails.
progress: the little fnger sepa Then the hand contracts, dimin
rates almost completely: then the ishes, and disappears in the end
following changes, very quick of the cord.v (Page 57, English
but very clear : a hand with closed translation.)
fingers, seen from the back, with
a little finger extended, an ill-
formed thumb, and higher up a
swelling that resembles the car
pal bones. I think I see the
creases in the skin.
either. We experimented quite separately with Marthe, I in 1906
and Geley in 1910. We did not communicate our notes to each
other nor publish anything. They are therefore quite independent
results.
It is impossible to suppose that Geley (whom I hardly knew in
1910) and myself were similarly hallucinated five years apart by
the same illusion.
Geley, after describing very precisely the variations in the
gelatinous embryo-plastic mass, adds, I do not say merely There
was no trickery.' I say, There was no possibility of trickery.
Nearly all the materializations took place under my own eyes, and
I have observed the whole of their genesis and development. "
I can say exactly the same.
Other observations similar to those on Marthe-Eva are men
tioned by Schrenck in his fine work. These were with a young
Polish girl, Stanislawa P., who chanced to discover her medium
istic powers by suddenly seeing (when eighteen years old) the
apparition of her friend Sophie, who, unknown to her, had just
died.
At Schrenck's house in Munich Stainslawa produced ectoplasm
from her mouth, like Eva. She had been searched, dressed in
black tights, and her head covered with a veil of very fine mesh.
The ectoplasm emerged through the veil and formed three fingers.
Cinematograph photographs of these experiments were taken.
With Linda Gazzera many instances of telekinesis and ecto
plasmic forms have been observed. My learned and generous
friend, Dr. E. Imoda of Turin, has published a valuable book nar
rating his interesting and methodical experiments, made at Turin
in the house of the Marquise de Ruspoli.
Linda is a young girl of twenty-two, pleasant, well-educated,
lively, and gay. Her guide is a certain Vincenzo, who, it seems,
had been a cavalry officer, who died some years back, and concern
ing whom I have no precise particulars. Sometimes it was Car-
lotta, a child who died at the age of four. For all the experiments
Linda was carefully searched, undressed, and re-clothed, and the
cabinet where she sat was minutely searched. Her hands were
always held, and she made no attempts to free them.
The only omission in the experiments was that her feet and
knees were not as closely controlled as her hands. But it is im
possible that the phenomena observed should have been due to
movements of the feet, however skilful; such as winding up a
musical box, and putting a pipe in my mouth ( 1!).
Linda's mediumship is characterized by very rapid production
of the phenomena. The light is hardly extinguished when ob
jects are displaced, musical instruments are played, and various
white forms appear. At the same time the sitters feel touches of a
warm, moist, mobile, living member, though it cannot always be
identified as a hand.
Imoda was mainly concerned to photograph the ectoplasms;
this is quite laudable, but perhaps the desire to.concentrate on get
ting good photographs prevents minute observations by the naked
eye.
Imodas photographs show very different faces always sur
rounded by a white veil. When Linda visited me at Paris, G. de
Fontenay took some excellent photographs (pp. 175-179)a hand
and a face, the latter seeming to be that of the face of a pos
sessed man in one of Rubenss pictures in the Louvre.
As in Schrenck-Notzings photographs, those taken by De Fon
tenay are flat, wanting in relief. The hands look more like gloves
than real hands.1
The photographs taken by Caranzini are similar, the faces are
just like dolls faces and they and the hands are always veiled*
It cannot be supposed that Linda, unable to use her hands, and
after being carefully searched and re-dressed, could manipulate
cards, dolls, and drawings quickly and skilfully enough to risk
being photographed: and more than once she was searched again
as soon as a photograph had been taken, and nothing was found.
How could she hide an extraneous object?
In my preface to Imodas book I said: The fact that the
ectoplasms are not living faces is no objection; for there is noth
ing to prevent the ectoplasm being an image and not a living be
ing. The materialization of a plaster bust is not easier to under
stand than that of a lithographic drawing; and the formation of
an image is not less extraordinary than that of a living human
head.
Another evidential and, to my thinking, decisive experiment
took place at my house in Paris. There were present M. de Fon
tenay and myself, also Mme. C. Richet and Argentina (the Italian
nurse of one of my small children), whom I had desired to be
present so that Linda might have one of her own countrywomen
1Fotografie di fantasmi, 8vo, Torino, F. Bocca, 1912, preface by Charles
Richet.
A . S . P .j 1912, xii, 135.
near her. I was on her right, and De Fontenay on her left. The
sance lasted only thirty-five minutes.
During the whole time I kept firm hold of Lindas right hand
without any intermission, and some thirty or forty times I satis
fied myself by touch that De Fontenay was firmly holding her left
hand.
Even before Linda went into trance there were movements of
objectsthe musical box started, and in complete darkness, a
pipe placed behind Linda was placed in my mouth. A little later
still in total darkness this pipe was seized and forcibly thrown into
the middle of the room. Some heavy object dealt strong blows on
the back of my hand; some large object struck heavy blows on
the table; it also struck De Fontenay. A photograph was taken
on which a well-materialized hand appears, the nails and all the
fingers being visible. Round it there is a ribbon or some kind
of stuff. A thin thread connects it with Lindas head (see p. 434).
This experiment, together with very many more by E. Imoda
and the Marquise de Ruspoli, place the reality of the phenomena
beyond doubt.
Dr. Paul Gibier, an eminent physiologist and a director of the
Pasteur Institute in New York, had a decisive experience with
Mrs. Salmon {loc. tit., p. 1733, April 21, 1909).
He experimented in his own laboratory, using an iron cage
specially made to his instructions, with a door closing by a lock.
Mrs. Salmon was placed in the cage, the door locked, and stamp
paper gummed over the lock. He put the key in his pocket. A
very short time after the lights had been extinguished, hands,
arms, and living forms came out of the cagea man, a woman,
and more often a gay, lively little girl. Suddenly Mrs. Salmon
emerged from the cage and fell half fainting on the floor. The
seals were found intact and the door had not been opened.
In a second experiment, still more demonstrative, the cage was
replaced by a wooden cabinet, specially constructed and hermeti
cally closed. Mrs. Salmon was tied firmly by ribbon round her
neck sealed to the walls of the cabinet. The lights were scarcely
extinguished before a bare fore-arm and hand appeared outside the
cabinet, just twenty-four seconds after darkness was made. Then
another form moved outside.
After a few minutes of waiting, a white object about the size
of an egg appeared and grew in height. (This mode of develop
ment of the ectoplasm should be compared with what was seen
at the Villa Carmen.) Then a woman, seemingly alive, came out
of the cabinet and was recognized by Mme. D. and Mme. B.
This phantasmal personage spoke French very well (Mrs. Salmon
can only speak a few words of French, but this difference signifies
nothing). The apparition remained for about two minutes, and P.
Gibier could distinguish the features. She was slight in build,
seemed about twenty-five, though Mrs. Salmon is corpulent and
aged about fifty. Little Mandy came later, about a yard in height.
Then a tall man whose muscular, vigorous, and completely mas
culine hand P. Gibier was able to clasp. After a short time this
last form dissolved and seemed to sink into the ground.*
After this stirring sance, everything was found intact. Mrs.
Salmon was still bound; the silk ribbon round her neck just as
placed prior to the sance.
Several facts of great importance stand out from these notable
experiences. In the first place they were conducted by a scientific
man permeated by an enlightened scepticism, and were managed
so that even if we do not admit the honesty of Mrs. Salmon, fraud
would have been possible only by the introduction of several ac
complices, a supposition that is manifestly absurd. Secondly the
rapidity and multiplicity of the materializations would have to be
accounted for.
Thus Dr. Gibiers experiments strikingly confirm the other
materializations of which details have already been given. What
more is required to produce conviction?
There is an extensive bibliography dealing with the experiments
of Baron L. von Erhardt and the S. P. R. of Rome with the med
ium Carancini.2 This medium was studied not at Rome only, but
at Paris by De Vesme, Lemerle, M. Mangin, and at Geneva by
Claparde, Flournoy, and Batelli. There are several doubtful
points, not as to his mediumship, which seems tolerably definitely
proven, but as to his frauds (sometimes even conscious in despite
of minute precautions), which detract from experiments that
were apparently genuinely successful. Many photographs were
T h e se d e ta ils w e re to h a v e b een re a d a t th e I n te r n a tio n a l Congress of
P sy c h o lo g y held a t P a r is in 1900 ; b u t D r . G ib ie r 's p re m a tu re accidental death
Recherchas
in te rv en e d . T h is p a p er is th e r e fo r e p osth u m ou s, a n d is e n title d
sur les matrialisations de fantmes, la pntration de la matire et autres
phnomnes Psychiques (A . S. P., xi, 3-16, 65-92).
S ee e sp e cia lly E rh a rd t, Etude sur la mdiumnit de Carancini, A. S. P.,
A p ril, 1912, an d Luce e Ombra, 190 8 -19 13, A. S. P., 1 9 1 1 -1 9 x 3 , passim.
taken, but the flash was made only when Carancini gave the word
Fuoco.
Carancini was very tightly bound, and was found at the end of
the sances tied exactly as at their commencement, but many con
jurers seem to find it easy to do this trick.
The phenomena of telekinesis came about very soon after he
had been tied. Materializations were few; but one photograph
shows a hand which seems flat, as if cut out of paper. The most
remarkable experience was one in which a dinner-plate covered
with soot (from a smoky flame) out of the mediums reach, was
placed in a padlocked wooden box held in the hand of one of the
sitters. (Did he hold it in his hand during the whole time?)
Carancini showed levitations and movements of objects, but al
ways in darkness.
In short, the authenticity of the phenomena is not yet certain.
After careful perusal of the notes taken, I am inclined to think
the results genuine, but only because they resemble the unques
tionably authentic observations on Eusapia, for in themselves those
on Carancini are to be taken with reserve. To be accurate, there
were never any proofs of fraud, but only suspicions, and as M.
Erhardt remarks, the hypothesis of fraud implies that the experi
menters were absolute imbeciles.
Dr. Feijao, a professor of surgery in the Lisbon Faculty of
Medicine, assisted at a number of sances, which have been de
scribed by Mme. Frondoni-Lacombe.1
The medium was a non-professional one, Mme. dAndrade. Dr.
Feijao thus expresses himself (and the opinion of an eminent and
previously sceptical professor has great weight) : Formerly I
believed nothing of these things. Now I have seen and observed,
and I repent my incredulity.
In these experiments which were made in his own house, all the
sitters joined hands: the table rose six inches from*the ground,
and there were lights, touches, and movements of objects.
Two very striking phenomena are stated by Dr. Feijao: first
an apport, or rather, a transport. The door being locked, a rose
from a bouquet in the room was taken into the adjoining room.
But this must be taken with reserve, for the professor does not
seem to have verified that the rose taken was actually from the
* U n e srie de sances de matrialisations Lisbonne, A , S . P ., December,
19x8 and 1919, x x ix ,
5-12, 26-29. Oliveira Feijao, L e ttre M . Cam ille F la m -
morion, cit.,
loc. pp. 27-29.
bouquet. Even after his affirmation, I must agree with Sir Oliver
Lodge that no case of apport can be considered fully proved.
The other phenomenon was the apparition of a phantom. All
the doors were shut, a photograph was taken, and the plate showed
a French (?) officer. It was then ascertained, through the table,
that this figure purported to be that of a Lieutenant Catherin,
killed at Vitry-le-Franois, September 27, 1914. The photograph,
when shown to the widow of Lieutenant Catherin, did not re
semble her deceased husband, and the uniform does not agree with
that worn by French officers.
What gives importance to the experiment is not the photograph,
in taking which sufficient precautions were not observed, but the
sight of a phantom in a locked room before persons who were
certainly incapable of a skilful, conscious, and prearranged fraud
that would have necessitated the presence of an accomplice.
These observations of telekinesis and ectoplasms are described
in a book by Mme. Madeleine Frondoni-Lacombe of Lisbon. I
have the honour of knowing Mme. Lacombe, and hold her inca
pable of fraud. What object would there be in a fraud carried on
for five years against all hostile criticism, and resulting only in sar
casms and abuse? The facts narrated are supported by numerous
attestations, notably those of Dr. Feijao, at first sceptical but over
come by the evidence of other doctors, Dr. Souza Conto and an
other, by Captain dAbren of the Engineers, Captain Silva Pinto,
and other distinguished persons in Lisbon.
The medium who gave these remarkable metapsychic results is
not a professional medium; she is the Countess Castelvitch, who
gave these sances unknown to her husband.
Her mediumship was discovered as follows : On January 10,
1913, says Mme. Lacombe, when visiting my friend Countess
Castelvitch I proposed table-turning. There were three of us
the countess, Mme. Ponsa, and myself. These ladies had never
tried before. . . . That day the table rose up, and a person
A b st r a c t o r N o t e t o t h e S ec o n d F r e n c h E d it io n . M m e. L a c o m b e h a s
se n t m e a le tte r r e fe r r in g to m y p re v io u s re m a rk s o n h e r b o o k . S h e p o in ts out
th at th e san ces la ste d o n ly h a lf a n h o u r a n d th a t a ll p re c a u tio n s w e re o b se rv e d
th a t a ll th e sitte rs (th r e e o r fo u r a t m o st) sh o u ld h o ld h a n d s. A v e r y in cred u
lo u s P o rtu g u e se jo u r n a lis t (M . R o ch a , j r . ) w a s c o n v in c e d a n d w r o te a n a rtic le
The Initiation of a Sceptic.
e n titled S h e in s is ts stro n g ly o n th e a u th e n tic ity o f
th e apports, w h ic h sh e sa y s w e re fr e q u e n t a n d u n d en ia b le . E v e n a ft e r h e r
le tte r I ca n n o t c o n sid e r th e p a ssage o f m a tte r th ro u g h m a tte r a s b e in g dem on
s tr a te d ; th o u gh it is possib le th a t m y o p in io n m a y b e m o d ified b y fre sh
e xp erim en ts.
calling himself Lemos manifested by rapping. From that day
forward Mme. Lacombe and the countess made many trials and
finally obtained a series of extraordinary phenomena that I can
not give here in detail, for it would be necessary to quote the whole
volume, which I commend to the reader.
I will only summarize the principal facts, especially those that
were observed in presence of Dr. Feijao.
Touches were very frequent and sitters felt hands touching
them though the chain was unbroken: a heavy table weighing
one hundred and sixty pounds was raised on two legs when barely
touched: the movements of a small table were so violent that it
became necessary to replace it by one strengthened with sheet-
iron : when this second table was used it was rent into two hundred
(the exact number) small pieces which were piled telekinetically,
i.e., without anyone touching them, in a corner of the room. Dr.
Feijao thought at first that there must be secret doors to the room
by which some person had entered and done this. In other sances
a chair weighing thirty pounds moved by itself about four yards.
Strong blows were struck rhythmically at different places in the
room.
Dr. Feijao writes: Blows were struck, the loudest being
on the glass of the bookcase. Articles of furniture sometimes
moved. Heavy chairs moved about the room ; efforts were made
on the locked doors of the bookcase, which were opened; large
and heavy books were flung on the floor (our hands being linked
all the time) ; an office-bell and a handbell, the half-open piano, and
a guitar in its case all sounded loudly . . . the table rose as
much as twenty-four inches . . . At our request, and when
we had all removed our hands, the table still moved.
There were also, as Dr. Feijao thinks, and Mme. Lacombe af
firms she has often seen, transport of objects through closed
doors : In one sance we desired that a rose should be taken into
the adjoining room. We found this flower under a table, though
all the doors were locked as usual.
Despite these attestations, reserve must be maintained regarding
this latter phenomenon, which lends itself to illusion, not only by
reason of the unconsciousness of the medium but perhaps of some
of the sitters also. It is possible that the Countess Castelvitch or
Mme. Lacombe may more or less unconsciously effect these dis
placements. A rigorous and authentic verification is required of
the statement that, the doors being absolutely closed, a rose has
passed through them and been conveyed into another closed
room.
I make these reservations because these cases are quite excep
tional in metapsychic science, if indeed they have ever been veri
fied. But telekinesis is evident especially in the sance of April
24, 1917, at which Dr. Feijao was present and also one of his
students, M. Bianco, who was entirely sceptical. The hands of
all present were fastened together so that they could not be de
tached: and under these conditions blows were struck every
where, a hand was felt by several persons ; one string of the guitar
sounded loudly, the bookcase was opened, and a book on a distant
table was thrown about. Cases of telekinesis in Mme. Lacombes
book are too many for quotation.
It will suffice to cite the following, inasmuch as it took place in
full light. A table weighing one hundred and sixty pounds rose
on two legs and struck a blow when the countess was a yard dis
tant from it and standing up.
There were some ectoplasms : a phantom representing a French
officer, but wearing a uniform quite out of date, was photo
graphed; but the story is too long to be given here. Another
time there was a nun ; very often there were whitish lights more
or less shapeless; another time, a phantom with a deaths-head;
yet another time, an Arab soldier. All these were photographed.
As all the cases of ectoplasm cannot be quoted I select the fol
lowing. On December 18,1914, Countess Castelvitch, Mme. Ponsa,
Mme. Furtado, M. and Mme. Lacombe were present in the house
of the Countess Castelvitch. Through the table Mme. Furtados
husband was alleged to be present, but that he would not allow
himself to be photographed because he had forgotten what his
face was like, but he said that his companion would come in his
place. This companion was his mistress, he having been separated
from his wife; and in fact a veiled woman was photographed,
causing great fear in Mme. Furtado, who declared she would
never be present at any more sances. At the next sance (De
cember 27, 1914), M. Furtado announced his presence again and
said, I have no face, but I will make one, and the phantom
photographed is a tall person clothed in white, but the face is that
of a deaths-head (Fig. 24).
It is difficult or impossible to imagine that these are frauds or
illusions. Fraud was not easy. In order to show a French
officer, a nun, a phantom with a deaths-head, and an Arab soldier
a whole series of costumes would be needed, to be bought at a
shop and to be used at the sances where hands were held, if not
rigorously, yet sufficiently well. And why should this be done?
If Mme. Lacombe wished to deceive she might have given stranger
things. There is no reason to suspect the good faith of Mme.
Furtado, who was very sceptical, nor of Mme. Ponsa, who was
Mme. Lacombes intimate friend.
Although it is probable that Countess Castelvitch was the prin
cipal medium, Madeleine Frondoni-Lacombe also had remarkable
phenomena in full light when alone with her friend, Mme. d'An
drade (p. 208), who also had some manifestations that seem
genuine. Holding both of Mme. d*Andrades hands, Mme. La
combe saw in full sunlight a parasol rise up, lower itself, and ad
vance, rolling round with a waving motion. Raps were made at
a distance at request. It is therefore permissible to think that
Mme. Lacombe also is a medium.
I infer that the ectoplasms observed by her are genuine. If they
stood alone in metapsychic science they would certainly not suffice
to produce conviction, for Madeleine Lacombe has not the scien
tific standing to warrant our basing our conclusions on hers ; but
all that she has seen agrees too well with all we have learned from
the experiments with Home, Eusapia, Marthe Braud, Stanislawa,
and Miss Goligher for the Lisbon experiments to be rejected.
Though there may be exaggerations and inexactitudes here and
there, the facts can be taken as true in the main. Countess Castel-
vitch was a very powerful medium ; it is to be regretted that she
should not have been studied under conditions rather more strin
gent than those imposed by her friend, Mme. Lacombe.
These experiments are probably at an end. After a sance on
July 14, 1920, in which an apport (an owls head sculptured in
stone) is alleged (a phenomenon that must be strongly contested),
a sance was held on August 3d at which the spirit declared that
he was about to leave . . . H oja ultimo dia que posso mani
festt me (today is the last day on which I can manifest). In the
same way Katie King took leave of Crookes, we do not know why.
There were also some subjective phenomena, to which I do not
refer, as they are poor in comparison with the cryptesthesia al
ready described, and the Lisbon sances are mainly objective.
In the house of M. Corrals, an honourable merchant of San
Jos, Costa Rica, some seemingly fine materializations took place.
His daughter Oflia claimed great mediumistic powers. Several
sances were held at which various notables of San Jos were
present. Various materializations appeared (Don Constantino
and Mary Brown, who spoke very correct English).
Oflia was seen sometimes in full light at the same time as
Mary Brown who was touched, heard, and photographed (A . S.
P., 1910, xx, 324). The phantom Mary seemed to merge into
Oflia from whom she emanated, and to inspire her.
All this reads very well, but despite the imposing list of per
sons who attest the genuineness of the phenomena, all scientific
value must be denied to these experiences. M. Corrals, Oflias
father, says in so many words : It is proved that Mary introduced
an unknown girl into the room. This enigmatical statement leaves
open all kinds of possibilities. It would be an injury to science
to give any place at all to these fraudulent experiences.1
Experiments made with Lucia Sordi, which at first satisfied M.
Marzorati, did not stand Schrenck-Notzings severer test. Lucia
was enclosed in a wooden cage, and (in the dark) when in trance,
she emerged from it, but Schrenck had a wooden ball made of
the same size as her head and showed that it could easily be pushed
between the bars by bending them (Luce e Ombra, x, November,
1910, and A . S. P., xxi, January, 1911, 225-230).*
Colonel and Mme. Peters at the Lodge Psych in Berlin saw a
striking materialized form. The sance took place in a small room
sufficiently lit by a red light. The medium (a masked woman)
was asleep in a chair. First a masculine figure, whose body was
not visible below the knees, appeared beside her; then another
form, the so-called nun Cordula, taller by a head than the medium,
wearing the Dominician habit. Her face was entirely human, with
shining eyes. She swayed in the air, floated high in the room
for three minutes at a height of nearly three yards, making ges
tures and saying, Look how my eyes shine ! She then vanished
by degrees, the medium being all the time in the same place about
a yard and a half from the apparition (A . S. P., 1907, xxvii, 25-
35).
Eglinton was a very powerful medium, and though he has been
suspected of fraud, he was able finally to prove that the allega
tions of his enemies were calumnies. Moreover, the question is
not to establish that he was never guilty of trickery (which is not
easy in the case of a professional medium) but whether in certain
definite instances striking metapyschic phenomena have been pro
duced (Erny, loc. cit., 159).
M r. W illy R e ic h e l (Psychitche Studien, O c to b e r, 1910, a n d A. S. P., 1911,
xxi, 1 4 0 ) c o n sid e r s th e se a s m a n ife st fra u d s . C. d e V e s m e h a s d e fe n d e d th em .
B u t th in g s b e in g a s th e y a re , n o a c c o u n t sh o u ld b e ta k e n o f th e s e a lle g e d phe
n o m en a e v e n b y th e b e st n a tu re d p e rso n s (A. S. P., 1911, x x i , 214).
T h e a u th o r ita tiv e n e s s o fseances th a t g iv e m a te ria liz a tio n s sh o u ld a lw a y s
be co m p a re d w ith th o se a t w h ic h E u sa p ia s p h e n o m en a w e re o b se rv e d . For
tw e n ty y e a rs , a t M ila n , G en oa , R om e, N a p le s, T u r in , P a r is , R ib a u d Isla n d ,
C a rq u e ira n n e , l'A g n e la s , C a m b rid g e , M o n tfo r t-lA m a u r y , a n d W a s h in g to n ,
E u sa p ia w a s sc ru tin iz e d , a n a ly z e d , a n d th o r o u g h ly stu d ied b y su ch m en o f
s c ie n c e a s S c h ia p a r e lli, O liv e r L o d g e , L o m b ro so , M y e r s, A k s a k o ff, D e R o ch as,
A . d e G ram o n t, P . C u r ie , M o r se lli, B o zza n o , O c h o ro w icz , F o a , B o tta z z i, Vas-
sa llo , F e ild in g , C a r rin g to n , Maxwell, Dariex, a n d o th e rs . I t w ill p ro b a b ly be
lo n g b e fo r e a n e q u a lly im p o sin g lis t o f u n e x c e p tio n a b le w itn e s s e s c a n b e p ro
d u c e d in a n y o th e r case.
Miss Glyn, who did not believe in materializations, saw Eglin-
ton at her own house, at a sance at which her father, her brother,
and a friend were present. Eglinton was in the middle of this
little circle, and his hands were held. Two forms appeared that
could move and speak. Miss Glyn recognized them for her
mother and her younger brother. The forms slowly disappeared.
Phantoms are often too readily recognized, and the desire to
secure this recognition detracts much from the value of the
attestation.
Dr. Carter Blake, with five persons well known in English in
tellectual society, narrates that he saw by the side of Eglinton,
who was sitting in an armchair, a tall brown form that melted
into the medium's body.
The distinguished naturalist, Alfred Russel Wallace, in a letter
to Emy, states that he saw Eglinton at a sance in a private
house. By his side there appeared Abdullah, a materialized Ori
ental wearing sandals, a turban, and burnous; Eglinton being
visible at the same time sitting in an armchair in evening dress.
After the sance Eglinton was undressed and most carefully
searched but neither sandals, turban, nor burnous were found.
Important sances were held at the house of the artist, J. Tissot,
who has represented one result in a very beautiful picture. Eglin
ton sat in an armchair, close to Tissot, and stayed there the whole
time. The doors were locked. After a brief space two forms ap
peared by Tissots side. At first they were nebulous, but gradu
ally became clear so that all their features could be seen. The
male form had in his hand a kind of light with which he lit up the
feminine form. M. Tissot recognized the latter, and, much moved,
asked her to kiss him ; she did so several times and her lips were
seen to move.
Dr. Nichols experimented with Eglinton, putting him in a cage
with a net over it. The doors of the cage were closed with sealed
knots and the approaches to the cage were dusted with flour. The
forms appeared outside the cage. Another time, at Dr. Nichols's
house, in daylight, but behind closed curtains, there was a mate
rialization in human form, which, in order to be recognized, raised
the curtain to show itself in the daylight. It then slowly de-
materialized till there remained nothing but the lower part of the
body which vanished abruptly.
Florence Marryat and her husband assisted at a remarkable
private sance in which they saw a whitish, cloudy substance
emerge from the left hip of the medium; this cloud increased in
size, condensed, and became a materialized form that stood before
Eglinton. She also studied the materializations given by Mr.
Arthur Coleman who was not a professional medium. He was
tied with cotton threads that would break at the least movement.
Before the five sitters six forms appeared and were seen by the
light of a gas-burner. During this time Coleman was entranced
in the next room.
Mr. Stainton Moses often saw living forms about him. His
friend, Mr. Charlton Speer, reports, among many other facts, as
follows: I had my hand on the paper, writing, when Mr. Moses,
sitting just opposite me, said, There is a column of light in front
of you/ Shortly after he said that the column had grown into a
spirit, whose head and shape he described. It is very doubtful if
this figure was objective; apparently it was seen by Stainton
Moses only.
Heavy blows were heard in full daylight by Mr. Speer and
Stainton Moses out of doors on the rails of the line to Southend.
These knocks (which were intelligent) could be heard fifty yards
away. Mr. Moses notes also vague, luminous forms near the table
and simultaneous knockings. Reference has already been made to
telekinesis in his presence, but materializations were exceptional.
In 1905 the Rev. Mr. Colley, archdeacon of Canterbury, made
some astonishing experiments with the Rev. Monck, the medium
studied by Reiners and Oxley, quoted by Delanne (p. 521). The
gas-jet was fully lit and Colley was at the side of the entranced
medium, holding him up. A vapour emerged from the medium's
black clothes, and became a cloud which gradually condensed into
white draperies surrounding the apparitions. A child appeared
who moved in the room just like a living child, and was kissed
by those present, then returned to the medium and was gradually
absorbed by him and disappeared, melting into his body. On the
same day a beautiful woman appeared, born from a fluidic filament
emanating from Monck and re-absorbed by him. In another
seance an Oriental form calling itself the Mahdi was seen two
yards distant from Monck: The Mahdi wore a metallic helmet
that I could touch; it seemed to melt like snow at my touch, re
suming its form a moment later. This phantom was strong: Mr.
Colley one day seized it in his arms, and then, an irresistible force
flung me about six yards to the place where the medium was
standing; and I found myself clasping the medium, with white
muslin over his black coat. I was holding him in my arms as I
had thought to hold the Mahdi.
This statement led to the supposition that Mr. Colley was the
victim of a fraud ; but he had seen the vapour becoming a cloud
and materializing into garments covering a body.
One materialized form called itself Samuel, and the medium
was seen to clasp Samuels hand fraternally and walk with him
round the room. The archdeacon wrote : I publish these things
for the first time, having meditated over them in silence for
twenty-eight years, giving my word as a clergyman for things
which imperil my ecclesiastical position and my future advance
ment.
There was a celebrated lawsuit on this. The conjurer Mas-
kelyne undertook to repeat the phenomena by trick. He wagered
1,000 and lost his suit. The illustrious A. R. Wallace gave evi
dence in support of Mr. Colley.
Dr. Hirschmann, President of the Anthropological Society of
Liverpool, obtained most interesting results with a non-profes
sional medium, Mr. B. Many photographs were taken of appari
tions, their height was measured, their weight taken, and their
pulse observed, just as if they were living bodies. These appari
tions, he says, seemed to organize themselves from a nebulous
mass, and they disappeared suddenly. In one photograph a nebu
lous connection is seen between the chest of the medium and that
of the phantom.
At the house of Professor E., of Christiania, in 1893, M. de
Bergen arranged a series or sances with Mme. dEsprance, in
which many distinguished persons belonging to the university, the
magistrature, and the clergy took part.
In one of these sances an extremely beautiful female form ap
peared calling herself Nepenthes. She showed herself in the
light at the same time as the medium, who was sitting with other
persons outside the cabinet, and materialized in the midst of the
circle. She plunged her hand into liquid paraffin wax, leaving a
mould of rare beauty. The modeller who made the plaster cast
could not believe his eyes and spoke of sorcery, because he could
not imagine how the hand could have been extricated from the
wax glove.
"Nepenthes dematerialized in the midst of the circle. She
lowered her head on which her usual diadem shone, and little by
little became a luminous cloud like a human head (on which the
diadem still faintly showed) gradually fading away.
Professor Aksakoff published a memorandum of Mme. dEs-
prance1 to which it would seem too much importance has been
ascribed.
Mr. Carrington has shown that if there was no fraud, fraud
was quite possible. Professor Aksakoff very loyally gives the
evidence of several persons present at this alleged dematerializa
tion who did not accept it as genuine, for example, the engineer,
Schonelz (p. 92). The honesty of Mme. dEsprance may very
well be admitted while supposing that by an unconscious backward
movement of her legs she may have given rise to the notion or may
have herself thought that her lower limbs were dematerialized for
a time.
A medium named Sambor, a former telegraphist, gave a series
of sances from 1896 to 1902, which are recorded in the Russian
spiritist journal, Rebus. Petrovo Solovovo, a skilful experimental
ist and scientifically sceptical, had given an analysis of these
sances, especially of those at which he was present. But he has
since raised some justifiable doubts even on the latter.1
In 1899, in the house of Mme. de A., the materialized form of a
little girl appeared between the curtains, Sambor being in the
chain formed by the linked hands of the sitters. A white column
seemed to rise from the floor and move towards Sambor. This
materialized form (Olia) raised a table into the air, and a small
(childs) hand touched the sitters. On another occasion, only Mr.
S. and Mr. Bonjunski being present, a form, Friedrich, appeared,
quite different from Sambor both in stature and gestures; this
materialization and Sambor were seen together, walking about the
room. The light was good, and all took place in Mr. Bonj unskis
small room in Petersburg on June 20, 1899, at which time of year
there is practically no night. Among other phenomena, Fried
rich wrote something on the inside of the glass of Mr. S.s watch.
Mr. Erfurt, the director of a printing works at Petersburg,
prepared a cone of sheet-iron, with a piece of paper and a pencil
inside it. M. Zabasky and M. Eichwald, engineers, closed the
cone with an iron cover fixed on with special rivets. This cone
was left for several days in a room that Sambor had never entered.
In the sance of March 8, 1902, Sambor declared that something
had been written ; the cone was opened, not without difficulty, and
A . A ksakoff, U n cas de m a t ria lisa tio n partielle du corps d'un mdium.
1896.
3
E nq u tes et com m entaires, Paris, Libr. de l'A rt indpendant,
A . S . P ., November and December, 1899, ix, 105 and 109, xi, 243-256 ; 190s,
after having verified that everything was intact some words were
found written in pencil on the paper.
Mme. Youdenitch has communicated to A . S . P . (1904, xiv,
193) details on the sances that took place in the house o f M . Ol-
chowski. There w as alm ost com plete darkness. H ands were
joined, so that the hands o f the medium were never free. The
little girl Olia appeared at Sambors side. She could be seen and
touched and she was heard to speak. She w as lum inous and
bluish white in colour, and seemed to tremble the w hole tim e. H er
features were ill-defined, and she disappeared by degrees, vanish
ing like a tremulous ribbon. In an adjoining room, where there
was certainly no one, a mandolin had been placed, w hich began to
play of itself. T his white mandolin, visible in the faint light, was
seen to come from the room where it was and settle on the table
in the sance room.
The hypothesis of an accomplice will explain some o f these
phenomena, but not all. This hypothesis that seem s so unlikely
at first sight was actually proved. Petrovo Solovovo learned, later,
that one of the sitters intentionally released Sam bors hand that
he was supposed to be holding. There is therefore nothing to be
said on the so-called phenomenon o f the chair. B ut this does not
explain the phantom seen by all at Sambors side; for the com
plicity seems to have been limited to the release o f one hand. All
the same, legitimate doubts may be cast upon all Sam bors m e
diumship, for there is no certainty o f his probity nor that o f the
circle.
It is scarcely worth while to mention the very old experim ents
by Dale O wen in N ew York in 1860, and as the phenomena were
given by one of the F ox sisters, then M rs. Underhill, they cannot
be trusted. Still, it is probable, as in so m any cases w ith Leah
Fox, that there was an adm ixture o f genuine phenomena. Dr.
Gray cut off a piece o f the garm ent o f the m aterialized form,
which melted little by little in his hands (E m y , loc. cit., 133).
This must be accepted as genuine unless Dr. Gray were a low im
postor. A N ew York banker, Mr. Liverm ore, had about a hun
dred sances at his own house with Leah F ox and many times
recognized his deceased w ife whom he ardently desired to see.
A t a private sance in Australia, Mr. Brown, experim enting
with one of his friends who was a medium, hung a curtain across
one corner o f his room. The medium retired behind this curtain,
and twelve materialized form s appeared in succession am ong
whom Mr. Brown believed that he recognized tw o deceased sons
of his.
M. Stiegler narrates (A. S. P., 1905, xv, 641) a spiritist seance
at A rles directed by J. Bayol, an eminent surgeon o f the French
N avy, subsequently Governor o f Upper N igeria. The medium
was a young em ployee o f the Paris-Lyons Railway. L ights ap
peared on the ceiling and a greenish-blue ring appeared over the
heads o f the sitters. D etails given are few.
Baron Hillenbaeh o f V ienna had some seances there with M me.
Toeffer at his ow n house, Dr. Tieber assisting. M me. Toeffer,
sitting on a sofa, w as covered by a net nailed to the floor all round.
A form appeared which raised the curtain, and while so holding
it, M me. T oeffer could be seen in a state o f trance, with her
arms hanging down.
Lucy Stout witnessed a materialization in a wooden house in
Kansas City (M issou ri). She specially observed its demateriali
zation. T he form approached the mediums cabinet, became
cloudy and transparent, and was transform ed into a luminous
mass which finally disappeared.
M . Frem ery, at La H aye, in the house o f M me. H uygens, saw
a tall white form surmounted by a luminous sphere, the medium
being m otionless behind the curtains. By degrees this condensed
into a hand which rose to the ceiling, holding a palm-branch. The
luminous hand then descended to the table. O nly the hand and
arm were materialized and seemed to be those of a child of four
teen (A. S. P., 1908, xvii, 25 6).
Another experience was very interesting: A phosphorescent
cloud developed, m oving quickly towards us, rose up, condensed,
flowed to the ground, and disappeared behind the curtain. Then
a lum inous arm o f abnormal length em erged from the curtain, a
luminous disk in a phosphorescent cloud moved quickly towards
a chair which was displaced, whilst the medium remained visible
to all o f us sitting in the cabinet (A. S. P., 1908, xvii, 309).
A n Am erican sculptor, Mr. Brackett, experim enting w ith Mrs.,
F., o f Boston, thus describes the disappearance o f the phantom
o f his w ife: T his form did not resemble her; but told me inti
m ate things that she alone could know. Suddenly the form sank
down and disappeared through the floor which was covered with
a thick carpet; the head and shoulders remained visible to the
last. T he sim ilarity to the V illa Carmen phenomena will be
noted.
Mr. Brackett saw tw o materialized form s together w ith the
medium, and verified that they underwent transform ation. I saw
a tall young man who called him self the brother o f M rs. X ., who
was with me, and as M rs. X . said she could not recognize him
(having only known him as a ch ild), the form shrank little by
little till it assumed the form o f the little boy that M rs. X . had
known. Som etim es, says Mr. Brackett, the form dematerial-
ized before m e and I at once verified that the m edium was
sleeping.
These diverse experiments, which have not been repeated, and
which are testified to only by certain observers possibly devoid of
the necessary scepticism, do not seem to me such as to shake the
negative convictions o f scientists. But this is not the case with
the phenomena recorded o f H om e, Florence Cook, Eusapia, and
M iss Goligher which are unassailable. Those of M arthe-Eva, of
Linda Gazzera, Mrs. Salmon, Eglinton, and M me. Lacombe ac
quire full value from the others, and this value is considerable;
nor do I see reason to dismiss entirely those of M . Corrales, Sam -
bor, and perhaps those of Mme. dEsperance.
I think I have mentioned all the cases o f experim ental materiali
zation that seem worthy o f notice; but one can never be sure
o f giving a complete list, and I apologize in advance for any
omissions.1
N othing in the history of materializations would give m ore posi
tive proof than the production of moulds obtained under unexcep
tionable experimental conditions, from materialized form s de-
materializing themselves.
Aksakoff (A. S. P., 1897, vii, 28) cites various cases o f moulds
obtained by fluidic hands m aking impressions on flour, plaster, or
paraffin wax. According to him the first experim ents o f this kind
go back to 1855 (Banner of Light, April 1, 1855, and A ugust 10,
1867).*
The facts narrated by Aksakoff did not convince m e ; even the
putty cast of Eusapias head did not seem to m e certain, and I was
*1 prefer not to allude to the unpublished experiments which were told me
at Warsaw or described to me by letter, by persons o f good standing. They
are so stupefying and hugely improbable that I unfortunately cannot bring my
self to believe them. And yet . . .
*See also Z o lln e r an d W a g n e r (Psychische Studien, 18 77, 401; 1878, 4 9 2 ;
1879, 249) ; and Spiritualist, 1878, 134.
sure that w e had nothing really evidential in the way o f moulds,
when in 1921 w e were able to study these phenomena with a
Polish medium Kluski at the M etapsychic Institute.
Geley and I took the precaution of introducing, unknown to
any other person, a small quantity of cholesterin in the bath of
m elted paraffin w ax placed before the medium during the sance.
T his substance is soluble in paraffin without discolouring it, but on
adding sulphuric acid it takes a deep violet-red tint; so that w e
could be absolutely certain that any moulds obtained should be
from the paraffin provided by ourselves. W e therefore had cer
tain proof that the m oulds obtained could not have been prepared
in advance but m ust have been produced during the sance itself.
Absolute certainty w as thus secured.
D uring the sance the m edium s hands were held firmly by Geley
and m yself on the right and on the left, so that he could not liber
ate either hand. A first mould was obtained o f a child's hand,
then a second o f both hands, right and left; a third tim e o f a
childs foot. The creases in the skin and the veins were visible
on the plaster casts made from the moulds.
B y reason o f the narrowness at the wrist these moulds could not
be obtained from living hands, for the whole hand would have to
be withdrawn through the narrow opening at the wrist. P rofes
sional m odellers secure their results by threads attached to the
hand, which are pulled through the plaster. In the moulds here
considered there was nothing o f the sort ; they were produced by a
materialization follow ed by dematerialization, for this latter was
necessary to disengage the hand from the paraffin "glove."
T hese experim ents, which w e intend to resume on account o f
their importance, afford an absolute proof of a materialization fol
lowed by dematerialization, for even if the medium had the
means to produce the results by a normal process, he could not
have made use o f them. W e defy the m ost skilful modellers to ob
tain such m oulds without using the plan o f tw o segm ents sepa
rated by thread and afterwards reunited.
W e therefore affirm that there was a m aterialization and de
materialization o f an ectoplasmic or fluidic hand, and w e think
that this is the first tim e that such rigorous conditions o f experi
ment have been imposed.
There is ample proof that experim ental materialization (ecto
plasm ic) should take definite rank as a scientific fact. Assuredly
we do not understand it. It is very absurd, if a truth can be
absurd.
Spiritualists have blamed m e for using this w ord absurd ;
and have not been able to understand that to adm it the reality of
these phenomena w as to m e an actual p ain ; but to ask a physi
ologist, a physicist, or a chem ist to admit that a form that has a
circulation o f blood, warmth, and m uscles, that exhales carbonic
acid, has weight, speaks, and thinks, can issue from a human
body is to ask of him an intellectual effort that is really painful.
Yes, it is absurd; but no matter it is true.
Further, materializations m ust not be considered as isolated
phenomena. They m ust be considered along with telekinesis and
collective hallucinations. Taken together they carry indisputable
proofs before which the im perfect science o f today m ust bow. The
function of science is first of all to v erify ; and then, if possible, to
understand.1
*At the Copenhagen C o n g re s s (vid e R e v u e Mitapsychique, p. 364)
Mme. Bisson read a report of some astounding facts that must be admitted
in despite of their wild improbability, because of the known exactitude of Mme.
Bissons experimental methods. The events narrated took place on May 25,
1921, before six persons in full daylight. The ectoplasm, called the sub
stance by Mme. Bisson, was transformed into a tiny nude woman, beauti
fully formed, apparently alive and who moved her limbs. Her size changed
rapidly. Eva took her and placed her on the hands of Mme. Bisson where
she remained about ten seconds, long enough for those present to verify that
she seemed alive. Comment is needless.
I cannot forbear to mention here the observations on Eva made by certain
members of the S . P . R . in January, 19 22 Messrs. Dingwall, Baggalay,
Fournier dAlbe, Woolley, Feilding, and W bately-Sm ith; Mrs. Salter and Miss
Newton.
Elaborate precautions, quite justifiably minute, were taken against the possi
bility of trickery.
The official reports of the stances lead to very distinct inferences; it seems
that though the external conditions were unfavourable to success, some re
sults were very d ear and that it is impossible to refer the phenomena to
fraud.
Neverthdess our learned colleagues of the S. P. R. come to no condusion.
They admit that the only possible trickery is regurgitation. But what is meant
by that? How can masses of mobile substance, organized as hands, faces, and
drawings, be made to emerge from the oesophagus or the stomach ? No physiol
ogist would admit such power to contract those organs at will in this manner.
How, when the medium's hands are tied and held, could papers be unfolded, put
away, and made to pass through a veil?
The members of the S. P. R., when they fail to understand, say, " It is diffi
cult to understand how this is produced. Mr. Dingwall, who is an expert in
legerdemain, having seen the ectoplasm emerge as a miniature hand, making
signs before disappearing, says, "I attach no importance to this. W e may be
permitted to remark that very great importance attaches to Mr. Dingwalls tes
timony. The general conclusion is that there was probably no trickery, but
the phenomena were not sufficient to warrant acceptance.
Certainly every experimenter has the right to be very exacting as to proof,
but it is impossible not to be astonished at the glaring contradiction between
the reports o f these sances and the inferences drawn from them. However,
we willingly concede to the London experimentalists that for such surprising
phenomena it is advisable not to rest on past experiments, but to repeat them ;
there is all to gain and nothing to lose by increased rigour and frequency of
experiment.
M. Guy du Bourg de Bozas reports ( Revue M tapsychique, No. i, 1921) an
interesting variation in ectoplasmic experiments. W ith three different me
diums, in Paris, Copenhagen, and Warsaw, he has found that electric con
nection could be established between two electrodes. Electrical resistance be
ing easily measured, the new method may be expected to be very useful (second
French edition).
There is in Warsaw a professional medium called Burgik. He is a man
of about forty-five, thin, undersized, and seems in indifferent health. He gives
many sances and seems not to be at all interested in the phenomena, which
appear to be quite independent of his will. I had eight to ten sances with
him. He is quite motionless during the experiments, and his left hand was
held by me, the right being held by some other person. Lights, sometimes
very bright, appear and move about like will-o-the-wisps, close to our faces
and moving about the room up to the ceiling.
In the last sance that I bad with him the phenomena were very marked. I
held his left hand and M. de Gielski his right. He was quite motionless, and
none o f the experimenters moved at all. My trouser leg was strongly pulled'
and a strange, ill-defined form that seemed to have paws like those o f a dog
or small monkey climbed on my knee. I could feel its weight, very light,
and something like the muzzle of an animal ( ?) touched my cheek. It was
moist and made a grunting noise like a thirsty dog. Later on two strong
hands seized my two shoulders; and very bright lights came round a face.
No trickery seems possible, but it must be remembered that we were dealing
with a professional medium.
This medium ought not to be left to develop in unscientific, mystical, and
credulous circles. A ll such half-experiments are Slueless from a scientific
point o f view.
Further experiments were made with Kluski, resulting in fresh paraffin
moulds which prove conclusively that the 'gloves'* of paraffin wax were ob
tained during the sance, that these were of a living hand showing the tex
ture o f the skin, the veins, and the creases of the skin, and that a normal
hand could not have released itself from the glove.
These were the conclusions of practised moulders, called in as experts,
They say, "W e cannot understand how these paraffin moulds could have been
obtained; it is an absolute mystery to us." T h is mystery is dematerialization,
a correlative o f the materialization. The whole of this investigation made by
Geley with minute care is of the highest importance, fo r it gives irrefragable
scientific demonstration of ectoplasmic materialization (second French edition).
CHAPTER IV
L e v it a t io n s
Ectoplasms and telekinesis are proven phenomena, and with

these must be linked the still uncertain facts o f levitation.
This is an exceptional occurrence, even with pow erful mediums.
The word is not defined in Littrs dictionary; it is a partial or
total raising o f the body without any apparent m echanical m uscu
lar action, whether the body remains for som e tim e suspended
in the air, or whether it merely rises for a m om ent to a certain
height.
Many such levitations are mentioned in the Lives of the Saints;
and I do not know that this phenomenon, so frequently related in
legend, can always be controverted.
Many cases are related in Gorres Mystique Divine1 (transi.
Paris, 1894, ii, 29 1). H e cites St. Peter o f Alcantara, the admir
able Christine, Agnes of Bohemia, Bernard de Courlon, Dalma-
cius of Gironne, St. Francis o f A ssisi, and more especially St.
Joseph de Copertino. Abb Ribet also cites num erous cases St.
Paul de la Croix, St. Theresa, St. Philip de N ri, Dom inique San
D igo (w hose levitation is shown in a picture by M urillo at the
L ouvre), Salvator de Horta, and others.
M ore recently, religious books affirm the sam e o f A . H . Four-
nat (1752-1834), of Claude Dhiere (1757-1820), and o f the
Cur dArs, Jean B. Vianney (1786-1859). Reproductions o f pic
tures representing these will be found in D e Rochass book and
A. S. P.t 1901, xi, 17-47.
I will allude, and that but briefly, only to the levitations o f
Joseph o f Copertino. It cannot be supposed that all that has been
said o f him is entirely false ; for there is plenty o f documentary
testimony, and not of remote date, for he was bom in 1603 and
died in 1663. Fifteen years after his death Father N uti o f A ssisi
wrote his life, em ploying the testim ony o f m any w itnesses. Three *
*Lo M ystique D ivin e, Paris, Poussielgue, 1883 ; quoted by De Rochas in
an admirable little book, wise and erudite : R ecu eils de docum ents rela tifs la
lvitation du corps humain, Paris, Leymarie, 1897.
546
LEVITATIONS 547
successive investigations, in 1711, 1722, and 1753, were made by
successive popes prior to his beatification, and a life of St. Joseph
was published in 1753, only a century and a half ago, and in
this book alone the facts are attested by a sufficient number of
witnesses.
From all these documents it appears that he was often lifted
from the earth, som etim es remaining suspended in the air in
presence o f all the brothers o f his order. The monks round
him, doubting what they saw , passed their hands under his feet to
be sure that they were not touching the ground. Pope Urban
V III witnessed this levitation, as also Duke Frederic o f Bruns
wick in 1650. It would seem that in som e exceptional cases St.
Joseph could raise into the air those who had come to see him.
Gorres gives no less than twelve pages to these levitations o f St.
Joseph, and says that each was preceded by a kind o f ecstasy which
began by a cry, O h ! O h ! repeated several times, and that the holy
man was seized w ith trem bling followed by a period of stupor.
In the official report of proceedings to deliver a girl possessed
by the evil spirit" at Louviers in 1591, Franoise Fontaine, a young
servant o f Louviers, being on her knees, was fearsom ely raised,"
and another time was raised from the earth higher than the altar.
A third tim e she was raised over a bench in front o f the altar and
carried through the air, head downwards. The priest Pillet who
was exorcising Franoise showed much discernment! H e con
sidered that she w as raised by her hair, and had her head shaved,
which forthwith put an end to the levitations ( ??)
N o account can be taken o f this old document, nor of those re
ferring to the possessed persons of Langres (1 7 3 4 ). The credu
lity o f exorcists is som etim es unimaginable, and w e must assume
provisionally that all these formal attestations are only illusions.
Therefore though w e cannot absolutely deny all these stories, they
cannot convince.
A . de Rochas m entions some instances o f levitations observed in
the nineteenth century by various experim enters who were cer
tainly credulous but also men of good faith the m agnetizer La
fontaine, Dr. Cyriax o f Berlin, Mr. B ., a friend o f De Rochas, a
student at the Polytechnic; M. Paluzzi o f N aples; M onseigneur
dH u lst; Dr. Schm idt o f V ienna; and Justinus Kerner, with the
Seeress o f Prvorst. H e says with justice, The history o f science
is there to remind us that each generation has seen crumble down
the greater part o f the scaffolding o f know ledge o f which the
previous generation w as assured.
Although levitations cannot be placed am ong demonstrated
facts, they certainly m erit attentive exam ination. In fact, levi
tation is only a special case o f telekinesis an unknown mechanical
action on matter. O nly if it is mechanical, the fulcrum o f the
power is not apparent.
Sem i-levitations m ust be distinguished from total levitations.
In the former the body o f the medium loses w eight, or, almost
without muscular help, it is placed on a table. It is difficult to
verify the conditions, especially if the phenomenon takes place in
the dark : in that case even testim ony proves little ; for a medium,
even if not acrobatic, could quite well persuade credulous sitters
that it had taken place by supernatural powers. T here is no need to
make much of such semi-levitations as were given by Carancini.
According to K em er, when the Seeress o f Prvorst w as put into
a bath during her trances she floated on the top o f the water like
a cork. It is a pity that such stuff should be m ingled w ith serious
enquiries; they detract from them.
Eglinton at a memorable sance in presence o f the Em peror and
Empress of Russia, the Grand Duke o f Oldenburg, the Grand
Duke Vladimir, and other members o f the Im perial fam ily, rose
into the air. M y neighbours, says Eglinton, had to stand on
their chairs to follow m e. I continued to rise till m y feet touched
two shoulders on which I leaned; they were those o f the Czar.
Florence Cook relates that when fourteen years old she was
raised up to the ceiling, to her great alarm. T his w as at one o f
her first spiritualist sances. She was carried above the heads of
the sitters and deposited on a table.
Abb Petit, writing to D e Rochas, said that he w as once lifted
in a church; he resisted and his terror was such that he w as ill
afterwards. But he brings forward no witness, so the thing was
doubtless an illusion.
Dr. Nicolas Santangelo, o f Venosa, on giving his hand to tw o
mediums, R uggieri and Cecchini, was lifted into the air by R ug-
gieri. Feeling the ground fail under m y feet, I clung to the arm
o f Ruggieri, and was raised to a height o f about three yards; so
that I distinctly felt the chandelier w ith m y feet. On descending,
and light being restored, I found m yself kneeling on the table.
A ll these stories are highly doubtful. Som e others, here follow
ing, seem to deserve m ore credence.
LEVITATIONS 549
D r. L. Luciani, professor o f physiology in the University of
Rome, relates that at a sance with Eusapia, he holding one hand,
and M . E. Nathan, M ayor o f Rome, holding the other, she said
that she w as rising into the air. We felt a movement of ascent
that w e followed w ithout aiding it. Light was restored and Eu
sapia was sitting in her chair, both of its front feet being on the
table (A. S. P., 1906, xvi, 65 3).
Dr. L. Patrizi, also a professor of physiology, studied the levi
tations o f the medium, A. Zuccarino, and gave some interesting
photographs (A. S . P., 1907, xvii, 528-549). Zuccarino is a young
man o f about tw enty-tw o, a government employee, and therefore
not a professional medium. The phenomenon peculiar to him is
a very distinct levitation that lasts for about ten seconds. He holds
the hands o f the sitters who link hands round him, but in place of
leaning on their hands he tends to take them higher. During the
trance necessary for levitation he claims to be helped by his guides.
H e produces also some luminous phenomena.
D espite the authority of Professors Luciani and Patrizi, the levi
tations o f Eusapia and Zuccarino have been questioned ; but I am
not prepared decidedly to deny what two distinguished physiol
ogists attest.
Stainton M oses had levitations, which he describes as follow s:
O n August 30, 1872, I felt m y chair twist found from the table
to be raised from the floor to a height that I estimate as twelve
to fourteen inches. M y feet were about twelve inches from the
floor. T he chair remained suspended for a few moments and I
then felt m yself lifted higher and higher by a slow, steady m ove
ment. I felt no fear or uneasiness. I was perfectly conscious of
what was happening and described the phenomena to those who
were seated round the table. The m ovement lasted a considerable
time. I w as facing the wall and marked it at the level o f my
chest with a pencil. T his mark was about six feet above the floor.
I was not troubled, I seemed to be in a lift and the things round
me to be lowered below m e." 1
Stainton Moses describes other particulars as to his levitations.
Sometimes he was transported from his chair to a sofa at a con
siderable distance, and very quickly. Once he was raised so high
that his feet touched the head of one of the sitters, he then being
in a recumbent posture. On that day, after the levitation, a stool
^Researches on spiritualism during the years 1872-3, by M. A . O x on (pseudo
nym o f Stainton Moses) cited by Fr. Myers, P. S . P. i t , xi, 1894, 61.
was taken fro m one com er o f the room and knocked against a
chair near the door.
B u t S tainton Moses d islike d physical phenom ena; w hy, is not
very clear ( I discouraged them as m uch as possible, fro m a d is
lik e to vio le n t physical m anifestations ) , so th a t they occurred no
m ore.
Eusapia showed o n ly p a rtia l levitations. M o rse lli says, R aris-
sitno fenom eno, certam cntc sincero nel suo inisio, forse illusorio
per nostra nella sua continuasione aerca al di sopra del tavolo
mediumnico.**
A t Milan I saw a weighing machine on which Eusapia was
seated lose weight slowly by about sixteen pounds fro m one hun
dred and sixteen pounds to one hundred pounds; b ut I do not
think this very evidential, fo r it is difficult to read a Rom an
balance correctly, and in the dim light perhaps fu ll precautions
had not been taken to ensure that one o f Eusapias feet was not
touching the ground.
Morselli gives one instance in detail fro m w hich it w ould cer
tainly appear that Eusapia was raised in her ch a ir to a h e ig h t o f
thirty-two inches as if by an external power. P o rro , M o rse lli, and
De Albertis were witnesses to this. They passed th e ir hands be
tween the table and Eusapias feet, which were over the table. T he
movement took place rapidly and smoothly in a few seconds, and
the descent was gradual. Nevertheless as it took place in alm ost
total darkness, it is difficult to be sure.
Homes levitations are the most extraordinary of any; they
have often been described.
Mr. Home announced to us that he was about to be lifte d in to
the air. A moment later he passed over the table above the heads
of those present. I begged him to make a mark on the ce ilin g
with a pencil. As he had none, I got up to lend him mine and o n ly
at my utmost reach could I come at his hand w hich was quite
seven feet from the ground. I put the pencil into his hand w hich
kept hold of mine, I accommodating myself to his ae ria l p eregrin
ations (S om e Incidents in M y L ife, by D . D . H om e. A ccount
by Mr. James Watson, solicitor, of Liverpool).
The fo llo w in g account, by the e d ito r o f the Cornhill Magazine, is
stranger s till : By the fa in t lig h t in the room I saw H om e's head*
in d is tin c tly ; some m inutes la te r his voice seemed to come fro m
above: he then said th a t he w ould pass before the w ind o w and
against its pale lig h t we could see the opaque fo rm o f h is body s il
LEVITATIONS 551
houetted. We saw him right across the window in a horizontal
posture, feet first. He floated in the air for several minutes and I
felt his feet touch my hair. He went as high as the ceiling on
which he made a slight mark; after which he descended and re
sumed his place among us (loc. tit., p. 224).
These strange facts, whether related of St. Joseph, Stainton
Moses, or Home deserve to be borne in mind; but despite the
number and the authority of the witnesses, it seems to me that
rigid science cannot yet consider levitation as a proven fact.
To admit a fact as scientifically demonstrated, no less positive
proof should be required as would justify a death-sentence on
a man.
The future will perhaps remove our doubts.
This hesitation, which will perhaps appear overcautious to some
persons, should give weight to our absolute affirmation of tele
kinesis and ectoplasms as genuine metapsychic phenomena. Tele
kinesis is a proven fact. Ectoplasms are demonstrated. It would,
however, be illogical to regard these various phenomena, despite
their obvious kinship, as so intimately connected that affirmation or
denial of any should involve the affirmation or denial of others.
CHAPTER V
B il o c a t io n s
(a) Objective Bilocations

Just as levitation is connected with telekinesis, so bilocation
borders on ectoplasmic appearances. It is vaguely admitted by
popular opinion, but is very far from being a demonstrated fact.
It will even be seen that there are grave reasons for doubting it
and not even one sound proof in its support.
Bxlocation signifies the simultaneous presence of an individual
in two different places, near together or far apart. Those who
believe in it say that the double of the person is seen, so that the
study of bilocations is also the study of doubles.
So for other phenomena, a distinction must be made here also
between the subjective and the objective.
Bilocation would be objective if there were really a duplicated
living body showing material reality simultaneously in two differ
ent places. Such objective bilocations are as yet only fantastical
legends.
Bilocation is subjective when the form of an individual appears
with all the attributes of life to some sensitive at a distance from
where the person actually is. This will readily be perceived to be
one of the modalities of cryptesthesia, and stories of objective bi
locations cannot be given a place in objective metapsychics. The
reality of the subjective bilocations in no way implies the reality
of objective bilocations.
In the Lives of the Saints there are many instances of objective
bilocations, all very questionable; it would be unreasonable to
give them any scientific weight.
The best known case is that of Alphonse de Liguori who, on the
17th of September, 1774, remained quiet and dumb in his cell
at Arezzo, taking no nourishment and speaking to no one. On the
morning of the 22d he awoke, and said that he had been at the
bedside of the dying Pope. It seems that on the night of the
21st of September Pope Clement XIV died at Rome attended by
Alphonse de Liguori.
It is narrated also of S t Francis Xavier that in a shipwreck
55
BILOCATIONS 553
in the C hina seas he was seen sim ultaneously on board and in a
boat w ith several sailors. S im ila r stories are to ld o f St
Joseph o f
C opertino, S t. M a rie dA greda, and others.
Contem poraneous facts are no m ore definite than these legend
a ry histories. H ere is one th a t seems to me p a in fu lly inconclusive,
despite the a u th o rity o f W . T . Stead.1
In 1895, in a London church, W illia m Stead saw one o f his
frie n d s, M rs. A . N o w , Stead knew the lady, who lived in Bays-
w ater, to be ve ry ill, and was alarm ed at her im prudence. Stead
recognized her c le a rly ; he had tim e to look in her face and to see
a ll her features. H is tw o sons and M rs. Stead also recognized
M rs. A . In re a lity M rs. A . had not le ft Bayswater.
T h is observation is com pletely n u llifie d by the fa ct th a t a lady in
black w ith a la rg e hat, seen in church, m ig h t very w e ll be a liv in g
person q u ite d iffe re n t fro m M rs. A . A m istake by Stead and his
tw o sons is a thousand tim es m ore probable than the presence o f
M rs. A /s phantom m o ving and acting fo r over an ho ur before a
hundred persons.
A m ong the stories o f doubles, one o f the m ost astonishing

(th o u g h u n p ro ve n ), is th a t to ld by R . D ale O wen about a cen
tu ry ago. R . B ruce, a Scotsman, second officer on a ship going to
N ew foundland, was uncertain o f his co u rse / H e w ent to the
captains cabin and there saw an unknow n man, w ritin g . Bruce
returned to the b rid g e w here he found the captain, and they both
returned to the cabin. N o one was there, bu t they found a paper
w ith the w ords, Steer north-w est. The counsel so strangely
given was fo llo w e d , and a fte r some hours they fe ll in w ith a
vessel in distress on board o f w hich was a man Identified by the
second o ffice r as the m an he had seen in the captain's cabin
( Footfalls on the Boundary of Another W orld, p. 2 4 2).
H ow ever curious th is instance o f w ireless telegraphy so
strangely supplem ented, it is d o u b tfu l w hether th is story o f Bruce
can be tra n sfe rre d fro m the realm o f romance to th a t o f science.
T he n e xt case is considered im po rta n t by A ksa ko ff, though it

rests on a single w itness, M m e. de G uldenstubbi. I t also dates
fro m fa r back, so th a t the phenomenon at least is very question
able, to say no m ore.
L et apparitions materialities, i, also Stead, The etr*
of a double, Borderland, 1894, i, ? -* * .
iD e la n a e , *66. See
perience
The story is of a Mile. Sagee, a French schoolmistress in Liv
onia. Mme. de Guldenstubbe was then thirteen years old and was
one of the pupils at the school. It seems that the pupils sometimes
saw two Mile. Sagees side by side exactly resembling each other
and making the same gestures.
Other stories are told of Mile. Sagees bilocations, on which I
shall not dilate, for I do not believe them. The phenomena are
said to have lasted about eighteen months, but their duration is of
no importance and it seems to me impossible to take them seriously.
No better instance of the subjective nature of bilocations can
be given than the narrative of F. Hartmann, cited by Bozzano
( Luce i Otnbra, xi, 1911, 180). This, like all Bozzanos writing,
deserves to be thought over, even though objective bilocations
seem to me quite unsupported by reliable evidence.
The story is of a German lieutenant who was about to get into
his bed, when he suddenly saw himself there. He walked about
in the room, took a book and tried to read, but could not turn over
the pages; he wished to go into the next room, and suddenly
found himself there, where he saw one of his comrades. He tried
to speak to this man, to shake him and to breathe on him, but to
his astonishment this man did not answer. He then wished to go
to the railway station, found himself in a tunnel that he did not
know, and finally returned to his room where he saw his body
shaken by the servant who had found his master nearly lifeless.1
The evidence would show that the whole thing was a dream.
In the chapter on Monitions there are various cases of the ap
pearing of doubles. These are interesting as monitions but not as
doubles, for there is no proof of any objectification of the person
appearing. It is most frequently an objectification of an idea, in
Platos sense of the word, some knowledge of an external fact
having reached the percipient by cryptesthesia, and being then pre
sented under the symbolic form of an idea (image) in Platos
sense of the word. There is, in fine, only an impression made on
the percipient which he objectifies as an internal phantom. Unless
in the case of collective perception of a double, the only phenom
enon that can be admitted as genuine is the impression perceived
by the sensitive; and this is no true or material bilocation.
'l a Chapter III a n te (p. i i j ) the term "external a u to sc o p y " h a s b een ap
p lie d to v is io n o f oneself or of the double as in the classical c a s e o f G o e t h e ;
hut the word is also used for the vision that certain so m n a m b u lists have o f
their internal organs.
BILOCATIONS 555
The monitions of approaching death announced by bilocations
are not premonitions, there being no announcement of the impend
ing event. A hallucinatory vision occurs without any concomitant
announcement. What are we to infer from a hallucinatory vision
that reveals nothing? Probably there is some relation of cause
and effect, since the individual has had an hallucination doubtless
for the first time in his life, and that this is an indication of ap
proaching death even though death is not announced.
The following case is one of this type, interesting because it
was the personal observation on himself by a distinguished man
of science, the zoologist Romanes.
Mr. Romanes, at the moment of waking, the night being ended,
saw a veiled form pass in front of his bed. It raised its hands
to show its face and Romanes recognized his sister, whom he
knew to be slightly ill. Very shortly after this vision the malady
developed quickly, became very serious, and she died not long
after.
Numerous facts of this kind have been collected by Bozzano.*
Usually the phantom more or less resembles a double of the per
son whose death is near; but such facts always leave room for
doubt as to their objectivity, except in cases when the hallucination
is collective, as in the case of Mme. Isnard of the Rue Jacob.
Mme. Chapronire had a maid, Mme. Gregory, in her service
forty-one years. One night as Gregory was undressing Mme.
Chaproniere, her double appeared. What! said Mme. Chap-
roniere, I see your double! Mme. Gregory was in no way dis
turbed. Three days later she had a slight indisposition which soon
became serious and she died just eight days after her double had
been seen, at the same hour (P. S. P. R*, xi, 448).
Myers cites some similar cases.
There are a certain number of such cases which it is difficult to
classify; they are not premonitions, since the phantom makes no
announcement, and when entirely subjective they may be con
sidered mere hallucinations without connection with any external
event, so that they are neither veridical nor symbolical.
To all seeming, these visions of doubles are only cases of pre
monitory cryptesthesia. The cloudy forms sometimes seen at
death-beds as if an astral body were emerging from the material
*Considirations sur Us phinombtes de bilocation, A. S, P., 19 11 , xxi, 6 5 -7*,
109-116, 143-151*
body are probably not mere hallucinations. In point of fact:
(1) Pathological, non-veridical hallucinations are extremely rare
with normal persons who are neither alcoholics nor insane; (2)
in not a few cases such visions are collective, excluding the notion
of mere hallucination; and (3) veridical hallucinations whose
reality as monitions has been fully established, are in all respects
similar to these apparitions of doubles.
These, however, are but inferences. We shall not, therefore,
class premonitions of death by the apparition of a double, with
out any intimation of date or place, among the well-established
facts of metapsychics.
Mrs. Shagren was arranging her hair before the glass at ten
oclock in the morning, when a form resembling Mr. Hendrickson
approached her as if to put a hand on her shoulder. She turned,
and said, Is that you?" but the phantom vanished. She saw it
again in her room on the same day. Mr. Hendrickson, whom
Mrs. Shagren knew to be very ill, died some days later. On the
day that Mrs. Shagren thought she saw him, he had dreamed that
he visited her.
There are still more complex and disturbing cases which must
not be rejected on the fallacious pretext that they do not happen
to fit some particular theory.
The phantom of Mrs. Hawkins was seen by four personsher
two cousins, her nurse, and her son, at intervals more or less
considerable; in the first case by two persons at the same time,
whose version is identically the same ( Myers, Human Personality,
p. 230).
Two sisters playing the organ in a church both see the phantom
of a third sister who had intended to come but had not done so.
She appeared in the dress she was wearing and holding a roll of
paper which in fact she had in her hand at the time.
In Mrs. Halls case her own phantom appeared to her, to her
husband, and two of her relations as they sat at table.
Frances ReddeU, sitting by the bedside of a friend who was
seriously ill, saw the phantom of the mother of the sick woman
(whom she did not know), but whom she described so exactly
that when this lady arrived somewhat later she was recognized by
those to whom Frances had spoken. Miss ReddeU even de
scribed the night-dress and candlestick; confirmed by the parents
of the sick girl.
In some cases the bilocation would seem to have been volun
BILOCATIONS 557
tary, an e ffo rt having been made by A to appear to B . Facts o f
th is kin d are few and they are d iffic u lt to in te rp re t In some cases
th is a p p a ritio n o f the double is seen by several persons a t once
so th a t the bilo ca tio n is n ot e n tire ly subjective.
M r. A . B . m anifested to the tw o Misses V e rity , aged tw e n ty-
five and eleven. T h e evidence, ve rified w ith extrem e care by
M yers and G urney, seems to establish th is case as genuine (D e -
lanne, i, 2 5 ).
A ksa ko ff ( Animisme et Spiritisme, p. 316) quotes the case o f
M r. B enning, a clergym an and a mem ber o f a circle at T ro y
(U . S. A .). M r. B enning, being unable to come to a sance,
w rote a le tte r excusing h im self ; b u t fe a rin g th a t his le tte r w ould
not a rriv e in tim e, he had the curious notion o f m anifesting (as-
tra lly ) to the members o f the circle . H e was seen by several.
T w o persons not o n ly saw and recognized him (th is is the doubt
fu l p o in t, fo r there is probably a m istaken id e n tity ) bu t even
touched h im , and the phantom seems to have shown sufficient
v ig o u r to p u t one aside and to push the o the r so stro n g ly as nearly
to cause h im to fa ll on the stairs. T h is e xtra o rd in a ry n a rra tive
is la ckin g in the needful attestations, and m ust therefore be held
ve ry d o u b tfu l, to say the least.
T he case o f the Rev. C. G odfrey is ra th e r better authenticated.
O n N ovem ber 15th, M r. G odfrey wished to v e rify personally
the fa c t stated in Phantasm s o f the L iving, th a t in certain excep
tio n a l cases a liv in g person could appear to a sensitive. H e ac
c o rd in g ly sought to appear to M rs. X . H is w atch showed 3.40
a . m . M rs. X . w rote to h im on the m o rning o f the 16th o f N o
vem ber, 1886: A little a fte r h a lf-p a st three I awoke suddenly,
fe e lin g uneasy. . . . I lit a candle and w ent dow nstairs, then
returned to m y room , where I saw M r. G odfrey standing before
the w indow . H e w ore his usual dress. I raised the candle, looked
a t h im fo r three o r fo u r seconds, and he disappeared/'
M r. K irk , h a vin g made several attem pts to appear to M iss G .,
succeeded on one occasion. T he apparition was so d istin ct th a t
M iss G. could d istin g u ish every detail o f his dress. M r. K irk ,
how ever, was seen in miniature, a fa ct w hich shows th a t the vision
was e n tire ly subjective (D elanne, Apparitions matrialises, p.
2 0 6 ).
A . de Rochas quotes the case o f A lm a Haem m erle, w ho saw the
phantom s o f tw o o f her frie n d s, S tankevitch and S erboff, who had
trie d to appear to herself and her fa th e r : both she and her fa th e r
saw the doubles of the two men. This collective vision makes the
hypothesis of the purely subjective nature of the phenomenon
rather difficult to accept.
Moreover, as has previously been said, the transition between
objective and subjective is gradual; in a certain sense all are ob
jective, for in order to produce a veridical hallucination there must
be some kind of exterior cause or molecular vibration that starts
the cryptesthetic emotion. We must, however, conclude that the
phenomenon is subjective in the ordinary sense of the word, for
the unknown mechanical vibrations that produce the hallucination
do not resemble ordinary mechanical molecular vibrations.
It would be very useful to be able to discriminate more or less
accurately between what is objective and what is not. A visual
phenomenon might be termed subjective when it does not or
would not affect a photographic plate. But as this test can very
seldom be applied, a more practical criterion must be found; and
we shall call a phenomenon objective only when all the persons
present receive the same sensorial impression.
And yet there are grades of objectivity; for when two sensi
tives think that they see the same phantom there must be some
kind of objectivity, even though the phantom might not impress
a photographic plate.
If, however, several persons see the same apparition at the
same time; if cats and dogs show fear; if, above all, objects
are displaced, it is then impossible to deny objectivity in the usual
sense of the word. Several cases have been given in the chapter
on collective hallucinations.
In support of the reality of bilocation, photographs showing two
images, one sharp and distinct, the other nebulous, have often been
appealed to ; but trickery in photographs is so childishly easy that
no importance can be attached to them. Even if the good faith of
the photographer is certain, a slip of the camera or a momentary
inattention is enough to give two images on the plate. As a novice
in photography I often find doubles on my negatives, but this
does not cause me any emotion; they are only photographic
blunders. To infer a materialized apparition, just because of a
second image on a negative, is to show complete absence of criti
cal faculty.
The photographs of doubles as given in the works of Delanne,
A. de Rochas, of Commandant Darget and Aksakoff seem to me
anything but conclusive. I would not even accept that observed
BILOCATIONS 559
by m y em inent colleague and friend, Istrati (Delanne, 407). In
1893 he made an e ffo rt to appear through the camera of Mr.
Hasden, d ire c to r o f instruction at Bucharest, and in fact, at a
distance o f 180 miles, a small figure did appear on a fresh plate
developed by M r. Hasden.1 The doubtful point is that the little
fig u re is to o indistinct to permit of sure recognition.
It is hard to find any experimental defect in the photograph
taken by Ochorowicz, though it occasioned a controversy with
G. de Fontenay. That taken by Captain Volpi is not evidential.
We must finally conclude that there are not as yet any authentic
and unexceptionable instances of objective bilocation and that
entirely fresh investigations are required.
(b) Monitions of Approach
There are certain very common cases of monitions or premoni
tions accompanied by subjective bilocations that are difficult to
classify. They are connected with that common occurrence al
luded to in the proverbs of all nationsQuand on parle du loup
on en voit la queue speak of the devil and he will appear
,
Quando si parla del sole, il sole spunta. Probably all the persons
who read these lines have had some sort of warning of this nature.
The facts are numerous enough to require a special name. Myers
calls them Monitions of Approach and the name seems worth
retention.*
O n th is subject I w ill firs t adduce a fa ct personally experienced.
I t is n ot m ore e vid e ntial than m any others, bu t was m inutely
scrutinized by m yself, m y a tten tio n having been long given to
facts o f the kin d .
In 188 I was in the habit o f go in g to N o. I l l boulevard St.
G erm ain to the office o f the Revue Scientifique, o f w hich I was
the e d ito r, every W ednesday m orning. One day, about 9 a .m .
w h ile on the rig h t sidew alk, I saw on the le ft sidew alk P rofes
sor Lacassagne o f Lyons, who had w ritte n an a rticle fo r the
M.
Revue three m onths before, and I thought Lacassagne has
come to P a ris and he w ill come to see me. I knew him only
T his photograph may be seen in Baraduc* book, Umc Humaine, Paris,

1896. Fig. xxiva.
C
See also G. Prvision on prmonition rappel (A S. P.,
Ferrari, . 190s,
Note sur les prvisions de rencontre, Arch, de Psychol.,
* , i l s ) , and Dr. Roch,
Geneva, s 90S, y, 149. Dr. Roch fiv e s statistics, but on tan cases only, and
draws no positive conclusion
s lig h tly and o u r relations were d is ta n t A t 10 oclock, a fte r I had
interview ed several persons, his card was b ro u g h t to me a t w hich I
was no t surprised, having seen him as above m entioned. B u t as
soon as I saw him a t the door, I was aw are th a t It was n o t he
whom I had seen, and I asked him, W ere you on the boulevard S t.
Germain at 9 this morning? he replied, C e rta in ly not. I was
there at 7, and I came here direct from the V al-de-G race. So I
had thought (1) that I had clearly seen him; (2) I had no reason
to think that he was in Paris, and (3) it was not he that I saw.
However curious this fact of lucidity, no scientific inference can
be drawn from it, for it may well have chanced that some person
vaguely resembling him had passed at that time and thus aroused
a reminiscence of him in my mind.
But I do not think it was chance; I would rather attribute it to
a vague and passing cryptesthesia. If so, does the cryptesthesia
refer to the past or to the future? Was it because he had passed
that way or because he was going to do so two hours later?
Such cases are innumerable, and if I quote this one it is because
I have thought long over it and can find no reasonable solution.
Among the facts of this kind narrated by Myers, I w ill quote
some that seem to me important.
Mr. Carroll sees in his room at Towcester the image of his
brother who lived in London. He was frightened, but before he
could recover himself, he heard a knock at his door. This tim e
it was really his brother who had come unannounced from London
to see him. It should be added that his brother was not sure o f
the house and had knocked on the chance of being right.
Mr. Stevenson was sitting at home, by his wife, at seven in the
evening. All was quiet when he suddenly heard the words, David
has come. He thought his wife had spoken and asked her, but
she denied having said anything. Now David, his brother, usually
came in at 10 p .m . Three minutes after having heard th is voice
quite clearly, the door opened and David came in.
Mrs. A. was waiting for her husband who had been out to an
Indian village, and being uneasy, went with her younger sister to
meet him. At 6 p .m . they saw him driving up in a carriage draw n
by his grey horse. Suddenly nothing was visible, but an h o u r and
a half later he drove up with his grey horse.
In Human Personality, Myers gives (p . 229) the instance o f
Colonel Bigge who saw one of his colleagues in fish in g costum e
BILOCATIONS 561
and w ith an o u tfit o f w hich Colonel B igge had no know ledge
w hatever, ten m inutes before th is colleague appeared a t the place.
T h is is sim p ly a case o f cryptesthesia, possibly p re m o n ito ry; it
w ould be absurd to im agine bilocation.
M rs. M u n ro had in vite d D r. Jackson fo r a v is it; b ut he had re
fused. A t 2 a . m . one m o rn in g she awoke, hearing D r. Jackson
c a llin g a t the w icke t gate three hundred yards distant. U n d e r
o rd in a ry conditions no ca ll w ould be heard, there being houses in
te rve n in g. B u t M rs. M u n ro heard, and called her husband, who
a t firs t th o u g h t the m a tte r an illu sio n . B u t D r. Jackson a rrive d a
few m inutes later. I t is u n like ly th a t th is was a m onition o f ap
proach, and a double is m ore u n like ly s t ill; it was probably a case
o f a u d itive hyperesthesia d u rin g sleep.
The m onitions o f approach ra re ly take an a u ditive fo rm as in the
case o f M r. Saunders, an old and very deaf man o f 84, who, on
January 8 th, a t 7.30, heard a voice saying, Tom w ill a rriv e to
d a y." T om was a soldier in France d u rin g the w ar, and the day
before a le tte r had been received fro m him saying he w ould w rite
again. Some hours a fte r th is a u ditive m onition Tom a rrive d
( / . S. P. R., 1919, x ix , 30-32).
T he fo llo w in g is an unpublished m onition o | approach, very in

teresting, fo r it was accurately observed by S tella in her ow n case.
In the little tow n o f S., she was going w ith her b ro th er fo r a
ru n in an autom obile, and being late they h u rrie d to the place
w here it was to be w a itin g . S uddenly S tella saw, in fro n t and ap
proaching them , th e ir frie n d O liv ie r w ho was to meet them at the
same place. S tella said to her brother, H ere is O liv ie r," and made
a gesture o f re cognition w ith the cane she had in her hand; but
her b ro th er could see nothing. A t the ve ry m om ent th a t the
visio n disappeared, O liv ie r him self came up behind them and
touched S tella's b ro th e r on the shoulder. S tella and her bro th er
w ere va stly su rp rise d ; fo r they had not suspected his presence,
and as they were late they th ought to fin d him already at the
m eeting-place. T hey had not looked behind them once when com
in g up the street, as O liv ie r im m ediately asked th e m ; and he also
is q u ite sure th a t they d id n ot tu rn fo u n d once. T herefore they
could n o t have seen h im d ire ctly.
B u t even i f S tella by in d ire c t vision could have seen O liv ie r ap
proaching (th o u g h th is is u n lik e ly ) such vision m ust have been
subconscious. In such an event th is subconscious vision w ould
have been sym bolized by a ve rid ica l h a llu cin a tio n , w h ich w ould be
in stru ctive on the theory o f sym bolization; fo r S tella had seen
O liv ie r in front of her, ju s t as i f a liv e ; so m uch so th a t she had
saluted him w ith her cane.
I th in k , however, th a t she had caught no in d ire ct glim pse o f him
and th a t th is is an excellent instance o f m o n itio n o f approach; the
cryptesthetic notion being interpreted by a visua l h a llu cin a tio n,
w hich, m oreover, was e n tire ly subjective, since her b ro th e r saw
no th in g when she said, H ere is O liv ie r.
Cases o f auditive o r visual hallu cin a tio n announcing the ap

proach are rare, b u t illu sio n o f the approach is quite com m on. I t
w ould be valuable fo r m etapsychic science i f someone w o u ld take
the trouble to collect some kin d o f statistics o f these happenings,
bu t th is w ould not be an easy m a tte r; on the co n tra ry, it w ould
need a real scientific tra in in g and scrupulous exactitude. Cases
in w hich the m eeting w ith a p a rtic u la r person had been foreseen
should be entered in a note-book, and o n ly the cases so noted
taken account o f.
The d iffic u lty , one not easily avoided, w ould be th a t u n fo r
tunately one is tem pted to take in to account only the cases in w hich
the anticipation has been verified and to neglect the others.
These approaches are usually m anifested as illu sio n s. Some
person is seen, and we say, H ere comes A ., A . no t h a vin g been
seen fo r a long w hile and his presence being u n like ly. B u t soon
one perceives th a t it is n ot A . w ho has been seen, b u t some one
w ho is lik e him (o r even who is not lik e him , w h ich is strange
e n o u g h ); and a few steps fa rth e r on A . is seen in flesh and blood.
S tatistics on m onitions o f approach, both those w ith p o sitive and
those w ith negative results, w ould ce rta in ly lead to curious con
clusions; bu t the records we have on the subject are im perfect
and sparse.
W hatever the cause m ay be, instances such as those named
above show the re a lity o f cryptesthetic m onitions o f approach; but
every reservation m ust be m aintained on the o b je c tiv ity o f b i
locations, and though the m ystery is p ro fo un d we shall h old them
as non-objective.
V a rio u s theories m igh t be evolved, b ut w ith o u r present da ta it
is better to abstain. A ll th a t has been said about od ic perceptions,
astral rad ia tio n , hum an effluvia, and the lik e are so vague and un
satisfactory th a t it is m uch w iser to avow o u r to ta l ignorance.
C H APTER V I
H a u n t in g s
1. O n H auntings in General
I f tra d itio n s and superstitions could be appealed to , the haunt
in g o f ce rta in d w e llin g s w ould be one o f the most certain facts o f
m etapsychics; fo r in a ll countries and in a ll tim es, w ith o u t ex
ception, these phenomena have been recognized by popular
opinion.1
W ith o u t a ttach in g any w eight to th is popular unanim ity, it can
h a rd ly be supposed th a t at the back o f a ll these stories there is
n ot some vestige, how ever slig h t and obscure, o f tru th . I t w ould
th ere fo re be alm ost as absurd to re je ct w ith o u t exam ination a ll
The bibliography o f ancient c a s e s is enormous. Joseph Gian vil (Saducis-
mus Triumphatus, 1700) considered, even then, that poltergeist phenomena
otherwise haunted houses* could not be accounted for by fraud or hal
lucination. infestis ob molestantes damoniorum et
Petrus T hyraeu s: D e
defunctorum spiritus tois, Cologne, 1598. the
Dale Omen, F ootfalls on
di
Boundary o f A n o th e r W orld , Loodon, i860. Zingaropoli: G estospirito
uno
net m onastero dei PP. Gerolotnini Napoli; in Cronaca del secolo xvil, with
preface by E. Passaro; S u ite m am festosioni spontane misterioso, Napoli,
Detken, 1904.
More modern works will be indicated in the course of this chapter. I men
tion below, just by w ay o f curiosity, the towns in which there have been ap
paritions and alleged hauntings, according to Passaro:
G reat B rita in : Woodstock (1649); Ted worth (16 6 1); Epworth (17 16 ); Lea-
si nghall (16 7 9 ); Liverpool (1868); B. (Eosa) (18 6 s); Manchester (190s);
Beverley (1903); Guernsey (1903).
F r a n c e : Lyons (1328 ); Cideville (1850); Paris (1846); Saint-Quentin
(1849); A lgiers (1 8 7 1 ); Valence-en-Brie (1897); Brussels (1890); Grivegne
(Belgium) (1900); Bordeaux (18 6 7); Nice (1858).
I ta ly : Naples (16 96 ); Lanzo (1 y fiz); Florence (1867); Bologna (fS >)>9
Vicenta (187$ ); Malta (170 0 ); Genoa (1863); Pavia, Modena (1873); Rome
(1876 and 1881); Trieste (18 8 1); Turin (1903); Catania (1879)*
G erm a n y : Hudemuhlen (1584); Dibbelsdoiriff (1 7 6 s ); Orlach (18 3 1);
Weinsberg (1833); Bergsabern (18 3 s); Muncboff (1818); Groeben (1718 );
Schildbach (133 3 ); Berlin (1890); MuUdorff (1749); Cologne (1863); Resau
(1899); Billingheim (18 8 7); Mhthingen (1841).
O th e r countr ie s : L ip ty (Russia, 183s); Zurich (i8 60); Mustaja (Russia,
tS y o ); Silin (Russia, 1888); Riga (Russia, 1583); Constantinople (174 6 );
Philadelphia (1866); Guayaquil (18 7 1 ); Rota (Spain, 1870); Petersburg
Budapest
(ip o s ); (19 0 s); Nienadowka (1898); San Francisco (
1899); Slate*-
borougb (Georgia, Ceylon
18 9 1); (190s).
563
th a t has been said on haunted houses, as to accept it a ll w ith o u t
criticism .
Some men o f science who are interested in occu lt psychics have
endeavoured to study the q u estion ; b u t it has been fo un d th a t a ll
researches conducted in a scientific m anner on haunted houses
have given very poor results. The facts evaporate under severe and
rigorous in vestigation. T h is is a reason fo r doubt* b u t n o t fo r
denial. I t is n ot to be supposed th a t there should be any incom
p a tib ility between the phenomena o f h a un tin g and scien tific v e ri
fication ; so th a t the lack o f scientific evidence is in its e lf a stro n g
presum ption against the re a lity o f the phenomena.
B u t th is is on ly a presum ption, not a ce rta in ty. I t rem ains to be
seen i f the mass o f testim ony contains sufficient evidence to
w a rran t some o f the phenomena being accepted as tru e . W e m ust
lim it ourselves to a c ritic a l study o f the evidence, since u n fo r
tunately no experim ental analysis o f the phenomena is possible.
The h isto ry o f haunted houses contains ve ry little th a t can p rop
e rly be called exp erim e n ta l; there are o n ly observations.
M oreover it is d iffic u lt to d istin g u ish hauntings fro m o th e r m eta-
psychic phenomena. Some m ig h t be classed as h a llu cin a tio ns o r
collective m onitions, some under cryptesthesia, m ore o fte n , as
telekinesis. A ll classification is a rtific ia l, and as already o fte n
said, facts, when they occur, do not tro u b le them selves about fit
tin g in to any p a rticu la r section o f a scientific treatise.
T herefore it is exceedingly d iffic u lt to lay dow n d e fin itio n s and
delim itations o f h a u n tin g ; though the dom inant idea seems to be
spatial. The phenomena, w hether subjective o r objective, are o f
a m ixed nature, but they occur in a p a rtic u la r lo c a lity and no t
elsewhere: everything happens as though th is lo ca lizatio n in space
were one o f the conditions o f the phenomena.
T h is is obviously an essential fa ct to be seriously considered. If
the hauntings are genuine, they are localized in some o ld castle
o r in some p a rticu la r room o f a house so th a t we m ig h t alm ost
conclude th a t there is some em anation proceeding fro m in e rt
th in gs in th a t place; fo r it w ould be absurd to th in k th a t spirits
are chained by te rre s tria l m aterial lin k s to the places w here they
appear. I f they come in the blue room o f a ce rta in house, there
m ust be som ething in the blue room th a t retains them o r produces
them .
T h is is w hat Bozzano calls the psychom etric hypothesis o f in
festations. I should p re fe r to ca ll it the pragm atic hypothesis;
HAUNTINGS 565
b u t the Ita lia n w o rd infestatione seems to me preferable to
haunting.
I t seems im possible n ot to adm it th is hypothesis, p a rtia lly , at
any ra te ; tor we cannot g ra tu ito u sly a ttrib u te to spirits a fancy
never to leave a p a rtic u la r place when they m ig h t wander else
where.
A p ro vision a l d e fin itio n o f h a un tin g o r in fe station m ay be
given as: M etapsychic phenomena, objective o r subjective, pro
duced repeatedly in a given place.
T h is d e fin itio n is, however, somewhat defective, as it does not
apply to every case. T here are hauntings th a t seem to attach to
persons ra th e r than to places: and movements o f objects produced
in the neighbourhood o f a haunted o r infested person can
scarcely be classed as hauntings. They are phenomena o f tele
kinesis in v o lu n ta ry and non-experim ental, and thus d ifferentiated
fro m the experim ental telekinesis previously studied in th is book.
T h e y are n o t tru e hauntings under the somewhat a rb itra ry defini
tio n th a t lim its h a u n tin g to places.
W e shall th ere fo re consider hauntings under tw o heads; speak
in g firs t o f houses haunted by phantom s, and then o f m aterial phe
nomena a tta ch in g to persons rather than to houses. There w ould
th e re fo re seem to be no t o n ly haunted houses but haunted persons;
indeed it is probable th a t m any instances o f haunted houses really
are cases o f haunted persons.
Phenomena o f h a un tin g w hich consist o f an apparition having
w ell-defined specific characteristics, but seen by one person only
at a tim e and w ith o u t any m ovem ent o f objects, are classed as
subjective. O b je ctive phenomena are those in w hich movements
o f objects and e xte rn al m echanical action take place.
E ven th is d ivis io n is a convention, fo r the objective and the
subjective are fre q u e n tly in te rm ing le d , so th a t we m ust fo llo w
Bozzano and speak o f hauntings th a t are mainly objective, o r
mainly subjective.*
No r e a lly correct c la s sific a tio n can be made because o f this admixture.
H a v in g no personal e x p e r ie n c e to quote, I most r e ly o n those authors who have
C.
s e r io u s ly studied the facts: Ricerche sui f moment ipnoiici t
Lombroso,
piritici, Con fantomatiche,
Chapter X II, T u r in , 1909. F . Zingaropoli, Case
infestate dagli spiriti, Naples, Soe. Partonopea, 1907. P . S . P . R . and /. S .
P . R . passim. The admirable study by Bozzano, Dei fenomeni (Pinfestasione,
Rome, Ed. Luce 9 Om bro, 1919, should be specially consulted. I foil borrow
much from this striking synthesis, as I have d o st in the chapter on Pre-
momtsooa.
In certain very rare cases the phenomena are entirely subjective,
though there is cryptesthesia, and recognition too clear for the fact
to be referred to pathological hallucination.
Mrs. O'Donnell (/. S. P. R., viii, 326) goes to Brighton and
hires furnished rooms. She does not sleep in the same room with
her daughter. At one o'clock in the morning she hears steps on the
floor above so kmd that they seem due to a number of people,
lasting the whole night. In the morning she says to the landlady,
The people on the upper floor have no consideration for others,"
and is answered with some surprise that the upper floor is un
occupied. The following day after the same noisy tramplings
Mrs. O'Donnell sees a horrible spectre pointing to the next room.
She even feels a cold hand touch her and almost faints with
fright The phantom was that of a small, dark man. Her daugh
ter saw and heard nothing. On the night following the same
spectre reappeared though the door was locked.
After enquiry, it was ascertained that some weeks before, the
room had been inhabited by a small, dark man who had thrown
himself from the window of the next room (Bozzano, p. 77).
This is a good instance of subjective cryptesthesia, for the facts
were perceived by Mrs. O'Donnell only, and not by her daughter.
Bozzano describes auditive and visual phenomena as follows (I
give a very free translation, greatly abridged):
"Auditory phenomena consist of noises without any apparent
cause, varying from knocks of differing strength to crashes of
broken glass and crockery, falling of chairs, doors and windows
opening and shutting violently, rolling of heavy bodies and move
ments of chairs. Often there are footsteps, seemingly human, in
the passages and on the stairs, rustling of clothes, despairing
cries, sighs, sobs or religious psalmody, songs, and musical sounds.
"It is highly probable that these phenomena, though mingled
with objective facts, are mainly subjective; they are, however,
often heard by several persons, so that in many well-authenticated
cases they are frankly objective.
"Under their visual shape these phenomena appear as luminous
manifestations or phantoms. The luminous manifestations may be
of undefined shape, or lights by which the phantom is seen. In
some very few cases the light is in the hands of the phantom.
"Except for some very exceptional apparitions of animals, phan
toms are human, and clothed in the garments of the period of their
terrestrial life. Sometimes they seem solid as in Hfe, in other cases
HAUNTINGS 567
they are transparent and nebulous like shades; usually they seem
to enter by a door, proceed to another room, and vanish. They
often arise unexpectedly, dissolving into vapour and passing
through walls and closed doors. Sometimes they appear to walk,
sometimes to be suspended in the air. Usually the period of in
festation only lasts for a few years, a few months, or even a few
days; but die haunting is often prolonged over many years, with
long intervals.
The arrival of phantoms is nearly always heralded by a vague
sensation of horror, the feeling of a presence, coinciding with a
cold breath. They seem nearly always wholly indifferent to the
living persons present. Sometimes they enact some domestic
function, or make despairing gestures. Great differences are ob
servable in their behaviour.**
Do these phenomena correspond to an objective reality, or are
they merely hallucinations?
The hypothesis of trickery and fraud must first be eliminated.
Out of the 374 cases that Bozzano considers worthy of mention
there is perhaps not a single one which is attributable to fraud
and lying.*
To make our ideas clear, we will imagine a typical case as
follows:
A, arriving for the first time at a certain locality, M, sees a
phantom, which he does not recognize, and which he describes.
Some days later another person, B, coming to the same place, sees
a phantom similar to that seen by A. Further enquiry shows that
two or three years previously some individual disappeared under
tragic circumstances at M, and his description agrees with what
A and B have seen. A and B are both ignorant of the tragic as
sociations of the house, M, though they may have heard vaguely
that it is haunted. At no time in their lives have A or B had hal
lucinations, they are little disposed to mysticism, and they are per
sons of well-balanced intelligence.
Such are the usual conditions of subjective hauntings.
It seems improbable that the hallucinations of A and B are de
void of some veridical foundations; for (1) pathological hallucina
tions in normal persons are extremely rare; (2) the agreement in
the hallucinations is strong evidence; (3) there is a correspondence
thrown
I t is d iffe r e n t in th e case o f o b je c tiv e h a u n tin g s w h en o b je c ts a re
a b ou t, l o rgross f ran d soften occur in these cases, perhaps la most of them.
between the identical hallucinations and the tragic event, and (4)
monitions by veridical hallucinations are so frequent that they
must be considered scientifically established, and can be applied
with slight variations to hallucinations of hauntings; the sequence
in both cases being analogous.
If the evidence for the existence of phantoms rested only on the
evidence for hauntings, we would certainly be unable to come to
any conclusion; for despite the unquestionable veracity of the wit
nesses, they are neither sufficiently numerous nor is their standing
such as to warrant acceptance of the extraordinary and unlikely
phenomenon of a materialization. But materializations are abun
dantly proved from experimental data, and the notion may be ap
plied to phenomena of haunting; for all explanations of these
latter, except as a partial or complete materialization, are wire
drawn and scarcely defensible.
Since several persons see practically the same phantom it can
not be considered entirely subjective. In order that A, B, and C
should see the same figure, D, there must be some vibration ex
terior to them that arouses the image D in their brains. Conse
quently the image originates in an exterior phenomenon and is to
that degree objective, though that is not objectivity as we gener
ally understand it. When a phantom is seen by three persons
only, ten others present seeing and hearing nothing, an<} the photo
graphic plate shows nothing, the phantom is not objective in the
ordinary sense.
In daily life if there is a palm-tree and twenty persons round it
they will all see it; and if there were ten thousand they would all
see it, for it is frankly objective; it could be photographed, drawn,
described, the wind could be heard in its leaves and the trunk
could be touched. But a phenomenon of cryptesthesia is of a dif
ferent kind, for whether it concerns monitions or hauntings, the
faculty of cryptesthesia varies enormously in different persons,
dealing with cognitions of another order which do not reach the
intelligence by the usual channels, and can be perceived only by a
sensitive.
An absolutely deaf man would not hear a loud whistle beside
him and might deny its objectivity. His negation would not prove
that there was no whistle; and similarly the absence of sensation
among non-sensitives does not prove that there is no external
vibration.
HAUNTINGS 569
What are the external objective phenomena that arouse a ver

idical hallucination?
The uncertainty here is so absolute that all hypotheses can claim
consideration.
A. Is it an impression left on things, an emanation from them ?
B. Is it the astral body of a deceased human being?
C Is it an intelligent but non-human force that comes to notify
its presence?
These three hypotheses will now be briefly discussed.
A. It is possible that an effluvium that we do not know proceeds
from things. The magnet seems an inert object till a piece of iron
is brought near it; but it reveals great energy in presence of the
iron. Similarly apparently inert objects might reveal hidden ener
gies. The ring long worn by an individual might accumulate
properties characteristic of the wearer which it had not when it
left the jeweller's hands. A dog recognizes his master's glove,
for the glove has taken the scent of the hand, imperceptible to our
imperfect sense but perceptible to that of the dog. Could there
not be mysterious energies stored up in things that may awaken
precise images in sensitives? If it were so, the principal cases of
haunting might be thus explained; though this is not an explana
tion, but a verbal expression given to a phenomenon that is not
understood.
Bozzano has discussed this psychometric hypothesis" (which I
prefer to call pragm atic) and decides that it is insufficient, giving
his reasons for this conclusion. I shall here mention two only,
which seem very serious:
Firstly, there are phenomena of infestation in places that have
no relation (as far as can be known) with the suicide, murder, or
other tragical fact that seems to have originated the haunting.
Secondly, and more especially, because these apparitions seem
to show an intention, a purpose, a monition, sometimes a pre
monition and occasionally have a periodicity characterized by a
certain rhythm and in any case show the action of a personality
which does not seem to be that of the sensitive, and still less the
property of an inert object
It seems to me puerile to endeavour to penetrate farther, and in
short the pragmatic hypothesis is plainly insufficient Moreover
its weakness is apparent in that it is applicable only to subjective
facts of haunting, and in no way to the objective facts.
Do the other hypotheses show more likelihood ?
B. The phantoms are those of deceased persons: ghosts, raven-
ants, in the textual sense of the word. And at first sight this
explanation seems simple.
But what absurdities it involves!
Why those persons only and not others? For millions of tragic
events occur continually, everywhere, without causing any haunt
ing whatsoever. Often insignificant causes would seem to have
decided the ghost to return. And this ghost seems to have a very
curious mentality; he throws stones, breaks bottles, and opens
doors with violence. He is frankly inept, and shows an ineptitude
that belongs to the animal rather than to the man. Since intelli
gence has vanished with the brain, and the body has undergone
putrefaction, how can the dead man live again, even under a
nebulous phantasmal form?
We have already seen that the identity of spirits with such and
such a deceased person (which implies human survival) is very
difficult to accept, even with such seemingly strong proofs as those
in connection with Raymond Lodge and George Pelham. How
much weaker and tenuous are the few proofs of indentity given
by ghosts!
C. There remains the third hypothesis that there are spirits
(angels or demons) who are intelligent powers, entirely different
from humanity, able to do anything objectively or subjectively.
This hypothesis is convenient, even much too convenient, for to
admit all-powerful and omniscient beings is much the same as to
admit our entire ignorance. I prefer to suppose a human energy
similar to the ectoplasm coinciding with a certain degree of lucid
ity, causing such and such forms to appear. But this, too, is un
satisfactory and wire-drawn; even ridiculous. Nevertheless, be
ing unable to see any cause, I would accept this opinion provision
ally as a working hypothesis such as one is obliged to use in a
dawning science.
As to the character of these forces, if they exist (which is not
at all certain), I will not allow myself any hypothesis at all. Most
religions admit the existence of evil spirits. The hypothesis of
the devil explains everything to some minds. Haunted houses are
exorcised. The devil becomes the Dens tx machma.
HAUNTINGS 571
Even spiritualists, followers of Allan Kardee, believe that there
are evil spirits, a notion that disposes of all psychological diffi
culties and contradictions with a word. The discords of the sub
conscious, the trivialities, the coarse jests, deceiving for the sake
of deceiving, are, according to spiritualists, the work of evil
spirits. All the disturbances in haunted houses, according to them,
are made by bad spirits. According to certain ecclesiastics it is
the devil who makes all the noise.
But all this hypothesis of the devil and evil spirits is really
very primitive anthropomorphism.
Even if I were to admit (which I cannot bring myself to do)
that there is any intervention by non-human intelligent powers, I
should refuse to believe that these share our imperfect notions on
good and evil.
I will say no more on these theories, for they are all so feeble,
so essentially and necessarily feeble, that we must await new facts
and fresh evidence before building on the old. I shall therefore
relate as briefly as possible some of the facts of haunting, but I
shall not criticize each in detail, preferring to leave them to the
reader's own judgment. I shall, however, permit myself a (timid)
expression of personal opinion by drawing the inferences that may
be deduced from them.
2. On the Haunting* of Houses ( Subjective)
Hauntings, properly so called, are those in which an apparition
manifests itself in a house said to be infested.
Up to what point is the phenomenon entirely subjective? This
is an obscure question to which the facts, poor in quality and few
in number, do not permit a decided answer.
An English ecclesiastic1 went with his wife to take up his duties
in a new parish, and entered their vicarage, a comfortable house at
some distance from the village. They had no servants, a woman
came in to do the housework; and in the evening they locked the
house up.
During the night they heard great crashes like cannon-shot rott
in g on d ie floors, which woke them up and lasted for part of the
' C u e o f B o u a a o , Refort of committee
the on Haunted Hon**, P. P.S. It.,
M a rc h , 1SS4, p. 144. T h e m e m b ers o f th e com m itte e w e r e : R e v . Bucbett,
H u g h e s, A . P . P e r c e v a l K e e p , F . P o d m o re , H e m le ifh W ed gew oo d , s a d E d . R.
P e a ce .
night. They got up but could find nothing abnormal. The woman
who came to do their work would not stay a night in the house.
The next evening at 8 p . m . the noises began again; this time
human footsteps "walking slowly but firmly." Then, for two
weeks, there was nothing. Then the noises began again; knocks,
sometimes very loud and quick, sometimes feeble and hesitating.
Every week on Saturday night at two oclock in the morning the
disturbance began againknocking*, footsteps, and fall of metal
lic bodies. This went on for a year, and in the end the vicar and
his wife left the village.
A friend who came to the house also heard the noises, and as
they were perceived both by the vicar and his wife, they must be
admitted as objective. Possibly complicity of the servant is not
absolutely disproved.
The noises heard by Dr. Kinnaman cannot be considered as
proving anything. It is the queer story of a young student named
Adams who bequeathed his skeleton to his friend Dr. Kinnaman,
on condition that the latter would keep it for his anatomical
studies. Some years later, as the skeleton was in the way, it was
relegated to a shed; and then such noises and crashes were heard
that a better place had to be found for Adamss bones. Adams
would then seem to have been satisfied, and kept quiet.
This improbable and amusing tale is more like a comic novel
than a real fact.
Miss R. Morton.' a medical student, came in 1882 to live in a
house at Clifton. In this house there had been a domestic drama
twenty years before. One evening, Miss Morton hearing noises
at her door went into the passage and saw a tall lady in a widow's
cap and a black wooden dress, holding a handkerchief to her face.
Between 1882 and 1884 Miss Morton saw this shape five or six
times. Her sister, her brother, the housemaid, and a child saw it
too. "Sometimes," says Miss Morion, "she tried to speak to me,
but only gave a slight sigh." The subjectivity of the phantom, al
though it was seen by the brother and sister, is proved by the fact
that sometimes Miss Morton could see it distinctly when other
persons present saw nothing. Neverthelessand this is highly
important as proving that Miss Morton's hallucination was not
entirely subjectiveone evening in August at 8 p.m. four per
sons saw the phantom at the same moment From 1884 to 1885
'M jrcrt, /*. S. F. Jt, vfii, j i i . B ouuoi ease ti.
HAUNTINGS 573
the apparition showed itself most frequently. From 1886 it be
came more nebulous and indistinct ; in 1889 nothing could be seen
though steps were still heard as late as 1892.
This case is instructive, for it shows that objectivity may be in
complete. The phantom was subjective, for it was not seen by
all the persons present, but yet was sometimes seen by several
persons as a collective visualization. The persistence in one lo
cality will also be noted.
There is a very curious and ancient case of haunting reported
by Pliny the Younger ( Letters, vii, 27).
Erat Athenis spatiosa et capax domus, sed inf amis et pestitene.
Per silentium noctis sonus ferri, et, si attender es aerine, strepitus
vinculomm longius primo, deinde e proximo reddebatur: max
apparebat idolon, senex macie et equatore confectus, promissa
barba, borrenti caputo; cm ribus compedes, manibus catenas gere -
bai et quatiebat.
It seems that the house was abandoned ; no one would buy it or
Uve in it. The philosopher Athenodorus, however, did not hesi
tate to brave the phantom. He installed himself in the house with
his tablets and a light and started writing. At midnight the phan
tom came. MStobat effigies innuebatque digito, simitis vocanti;
hie contra ut pautum exspeclaret manu significai, rursusque certs
et stiio in am bit. (If the story is true, AtheUOdorus showed re
markable coolness.) Ilia scribentis capiti catenis insonabat. Res-
picit rursus idem quod prims innuentem, nec moral us tollit lumen
et sequitur. bat ilio lento gradu quasi gravis vinetdis. . .
In short the phantom disappeared, leaving Athenodorus in a lonely
place, which the philosopher marked so as to know it again. Next
morning the magistrates made excavations and a skeleton was
found, which was publicly buried. From that time the haunting
ceased.
No verification can be had for an event two thousand years old,
but the similarity, or rather the identity, of the ancient haunting*
with those of today should make even the most sceptical think
over them.
At St Boswell a phantom appeared to several personsto Miss
Scott and to her sister Louise Scott and to Miss Irvine. About
ten other persons also saw it between 1893 and 1901. The form
was that of a man dressed in black, with a long black cloak of
ancient fashion, a white cravat and a broad-brimmed hat. He
was thin and pale, and appeared in the open street. Miss Scott
having tried to overtake him he moved before her, too quickly to
be overtaken. It seems that two boys of the village once saw him
appear with a threatening gesture; they fled and the phantom van
ished. The people of St. Boswell are not inclined to risk them
selves in that street at night.1
Miss Bedford (/. S. P. R., xii, 18; Bozzanos case 8) saw at
W., on the road near a river, the form of a man looking despair
ingly at the water. Her friend Miss Locke had also seen him
some time previously. It seems that at that very place a man had
thrown himself into the river through a disappointment in love.
Mrs. Locke (Miss Lockes mother) saw the same phantom several
times.
Mrs. Vatas Simpson relates that when a child, playing with her
brothers and sisters, she saw an old woman slowly mounting the
stairs at the top of which she disappeared without opening the
door facing the staircase. She then saw her on the other side of
the door. Though all happened long ago she remembers quite well
that her brothers also saw the same form and not on that day only,
but on following days. Her mother noted the fact in her diary,
adding that in this house, which had the reputation of being
haunted, she had seen not only the old lady, but others. There
were sounds of footsteps and the wailing of an infant. One day
Mr. Vatas Simpson was annoyed by footsteps in his room, though
the servants had allowed no one to enter. He went in and saw an
old woman, small, thin, and very pale, wearing a large hat whose
ribbons were tied under her chin. Her hands were clasped. He
thought her a real person, but she vanished in front of him.
When a child, Mrs. Louise du Cane, and also her brothers and
a sister, saw the reflection of a phantom in a mirror, but this case
is not very evidential (communicated by Dr. Kingston, J. S. P.
R., v, 223; Bozzanos case 10).
Bozzano cites the case of a phantom seen by several persons in
full daylight for some minutes and on several occasions. It was
a woman dressed in black that Mr. W.-D. G. saw sitting before
the toilet-glass. It is curious that the mirror did not reflect the
phantom.
If this case was well observed, which is problematical, it is in
teresting as showing that the image was subjective, produced by
auto-suggestion. If the phantom had been objective it would
i/. S. P. R., vi, 146 and ix, 298, case V . de Bozzano, 47.
HAUNTINGS 575
have been seen in the mirror. Its objectivity was therefore not of
the same order as that of normal objects.
Miss Lucy Brown and Mary Brown (pseudonyms) were re
siding in a house where tragic events had taken place, a woman
having hanged herself. Besides this a part of the house had been
destroyed by a fire, and a woman had perished in the flames. Ac
cording to the summary of the depositions of the Misses Brown
given by Myers the phantom of the woman who had been burned
was seen by Mary and Lucy Brown simultaneously three times,
and once by each of them singly. The servants had seen it also,
but their testimony was not available. Mrs. Jones, whose, phantom
was seen, was unknown to the Brown sisters, but their description
corresponds well with that of Mrs. Jones by those who knew her.
The phantom seemed to repeat the despairing gestures which Mrs.
Jones had been seen to make in the burning room (Myers, /. 5\ P.
R., iv, 1899, 27-30; Bozzanos case 13).
The fact that a person long dead may manifest to several per
sons in the place he had lived in is borne out by the following
story told by two sisters, Mrs. Judd and Mrs. Dear (Caroline and
Mary), both very trustworthy (Delanne, Les apparitions matrial
ises, 1911, ii, 81) :
Three weeks after her grandmothers death, Caroline, on wak
ing one morning in October, 1866, saw distinctly the form of her
grandmother, as she well remembered it, tall, calm in aspect, with
her large dark eyes fixed on the face of the old clock. Caroline
closed her eyes for a few seconds, then slowly reopened them. The
form was still there, then quickly vanished. Mary had the same
vision in the same room at the same hour. She only spoke of it
in the evening, having kept silence all day from fear of ridicule.
Ten or twelve officers were dining in their mess at Aldershot.
Suddenly all saw a young woman in bridal dress, soiled and worn,
who passed slowly before the window. No one could have passed
there, for the window is thirty feet above the ground ( Telepathic
hallucinations, 356).
L. Tyre saw in her room about 6 p . m . an old woman lying down
fully dressed on the bed, her face being turned towards the win
dow. Mrs. Tyres two sisters who came in saw nothing, the bed
was empty and the coverlet undisturbed ; Mrs. Tyre, however, still
continued to see the old woman and described her. She again saw
the phantom two days later, she alone perceiving it. She saw it
very often, so often that they became used to it and called it L.'s
old woman. But it was never seen but by her ( Delanne, Appar.
matrialises, ii, 26). We are therefore compelled to think that it
was a hallucination ; but possibly it was veridical, for it seems that
the description given corresponds exactly with an old woman who
died in the house some years previously. These recognitions are,
however, so uncertain that they have no value, and one must sup
pose that this was a mere hallucination without any objective
reality.1
Miss A. sees in her room a cousin, Mrs. X., six months dead,
sitting in a white dress, with a pleated neck-tie. Fifteen days
later the same phantom returned, walked to the bed where Miss
A. was lying, and threw the bedclothes to the ground. Miss A.,
terrified, lit the gas and saw nothing (Delanne, ii, 102).
Some time later, in a neighbouring house, Mr. X., the husband
of the deceased woman, twice saw the form of a woman whose fea
tures he could not distinguish. There was a loud crash in the
room, waking Mr. X.s young son.
Mrs. X.s sister saw the same phantom which tried to lift the
bedclothes as in Miss A.s case. The phantom reappeared three
times, at intervals of several days. Doors opened, and footsteps
were heard on the stairs.
Thus, says Delanne, an apparition was seen seven times by four
different persons. Most of the appearances were too long after
the death for them to be ascribed to the emotions of a recent loss.
All the same, the authenticity of these phenomena is very doubt
ful; for the scientific standing of the witnesses is insufficient to
warrant the acceptance of such extraordinary facts.
Miss H., at Malta, aged eight years, saw, eight days after her
mothers death, the phantom of her mother standing by her bed,
weeping and wringing her hands. The child cried out, and her
Maltese nurse came, who felt something terrible but undefinable,
and fell on her knees to pray. The father of Miss H. also saw
the same apparition (Delanne, ii, 84).
Mrs. R. of Philadelphia, widow of Dr. R., being in the central
hall of her house with her eldest daughter aged nineteen, saw
(and her daughter also) a woman dressed in black with a white
neckerchief over her head enter the hall, carrying a white silk
^ t h o u g h su ch a re v e r y ra re , th e re m a y be h a llu c in a tio n s a m o n g n orm al
p erson s. M r. M a r illie r h a s d e scrib e d a p e rson al e x p e r ie n c e : f o r a w h o le
m on th h e h ad th e h a llu c in a tio n o f a w o m an e n te r in g h is ro o m a n d sta n d in g
b y h im (Revue philosophique).
HAUNTINGS 577
purse. A younger daughter also saw the apparition, but less dis
tinctly. The form stopped a moment before the portrait of Dr.
R., and seemed to be looking at it for about half a minute, then
disappeared without the door having been opened. The form
was recognized as that of the grandmother of the girls, who had
died ten years previously. It is to be noted that she had not lived
in the house where she appeared (R. Dale Owen, The Debatable
Land, 319).
In his valuable study, Dei fenomeni dJinfestazione, Bozzano
gives different cases in which the ghost seems to indicate his
wishes, or to show regret for an act done in life. But as these cases
are not of collective visions, it is more rational to suppose that
they are hallucinations, illusions, and imaginings. Provisionally
at any rate they must be excluded from metapsychic science. All
the intentions attributed to phantoms are too fanciful and too
simply anthropomorphic to be insisted upon.
The lights that appear in certain places pertain also to phe
nomena of haunting. M. Duchatel has collected numerous state
ments regarding a light that appeared at Busso, in Corsica, near
Bocognano. Was this a natural phenomenon? A priori this seems
highly probable. It seems that the light vanished as soon as any
one approached the place where it seemed to be. All this is very
vague, and cannot be taken seriously (A. S. P., February, 1913,
34-40).
Similar facts which rest on the slight foundation of popular
legend have been alleged at Berbenno (Valteline); at Vo; in
Italy at Padua; at Saint-Julien (Soissons); in Cardiganshire; at
Quargento (Piedmont) and Grand-Fougeray (Ille-et-Vilaine).
Nothing can be founded on these tales, but it seems well to men
tion them, in the event of similar phenomena being made the sub
ject of careful scientific investigation.
The following is a fact equally difficult to accept or to reject
it is reported by Mrs. Sidgwick (P. S. P. R., iii, 76, 1885):
Two ladies, Mrs. F. and her sister, saw in the street during a
thick fog numerous human forms passing by. Some were tall
persons which seemed to enter the body of one of the two sisters.
The servant who was with the two ladies cried out in terror. In
this crowd of phantoms there were men, women, and dogs. The
women wore high bonnets and large shawls of old fashion. Their
faces were livid and cadaverous. The whole phantasmal troop ac
companied Mrs. F. and her sister about three hundred yards.
Sometimes they seemed to be lit up by a kind of yellow light.
When Mrs. F., her sister, and the servant reached their house
only one single individual of the crowd, taller than the others and
hideous in appearance, remained. He then disappeared also.
This hallucination is unique of its kind, and therefore cannot be
used, though it was collective and simultaneous. It seems difficult
to refer so precise a description to an effect of fog.
To this singular story may be added another, also insufficiently
supportedthat of a somewhat similar hallucination of two ladies
who, at the Trianon (Versailles) thought they saw a reunion of
personages dressed in the fashion of 1785 in the time of Marie
Antoinette (Bozzano, 143). It is difficult not to suppose this a
prolonged hallucination; somnambules under hypnotism could tell
many such stories.
Occurrences of this kind must not be admitted into the annals
of metapsychics. In every isolated exceptional case, we ought to
wait, without trying to explain or to understand, and provision
a llyto take these cases as not having occurred.
3. Telekinesis in Haunted Houses
The causes of error (which should always be considered first)
are not the same for objective as for subjective infestations. The
subjective phenomena depend on the good faith, never doubtful,
of the observers, but good faith is not enough; an aberration, a
hallucination, or an illusion is always to be suspected. It concerns
us, then, to know whether everything can be explained by illusion.
This hypothesis must be admitted when the observer is only one
person, but it is difficult to imagine four or five normal persons
having the same hallucination again and again for several months.
But with objective phenomena the difficulty is quite otherwise.
In such cases all kinds of frauds are possible, and experience
shows that such frauds are very frequent. When in a house said
to be haunted crashes are heard, the opening and shutting of doors,
rolling furniture, breakage of crockery, and all the train of ridicu
lous manifestations common to such cases, the idea naturally oc
curs of a practical joke made by ill-disposed persons, by dismissed
servants, or by those interested in getting rid of some of the in
mates. Very usually the cause of such infestations must be attrib
uted to very young persons of either sex, half idiots and half
vicious, who throw stones, and break windows without fully under
HAUNTINGS 579
standing what they are doing, who hide their actions and let people
think that they have not moved, without any other motive than a
wish to deceive.
Therefore all hauntings accompanied with a displacement of
things must be subjected to the severest criticism, the rather that
when such strict scrutiny has been made, the miracles, with some
few exceptions, have evaporated.
Nevertheless, despite our scepticism, which is considerable,
there remain some facts, infrequent, but too clear to make it pos
sible to deny them real objectivity.
I will give in the first place a somewhat detailed account of the
events that came to pass at the chateau of T., in Normandy, near
Caen. M. de X. noted down day by day all that happened, and his
diary was communicated to M. J. Morice, doctor of laws, who
published it in the Annales de Sciences Psychiques, 1892, 212-213,
and 1893, 65-90.
M. de X. inherited, in 1867, a house that passed as being
haunted. In 1868 there were abnormal noises, which ceased, but
were resumed more vigorously in 1875. From the 13th of October,
1875, to the 30th of January, 1876that is, for over three months
abnormal noises, sometimes very loud, continued to be heard.
M. de X. took every precaution not to be tricked. He always kept
his revolver handy and it was well known that hejprould not hesi
tate to use it. On one occasion a friend of M. de X., hearing in
the night noises in his room, fired several times by guess ; the
bullets were found in the wall. The cellars and the walls were
carefully searched ; two formidable watch-dogs were loosed every
night. There was no possible doubt of the objectivity of the
noises, heard sometimes by twelve persons who composed the en
tire personnel of the chateau. There was certainly no imposture
on the part of the servants, for they were all terrified and gathered
together ; and when all were thus assembled, the phenomena were
sometimes loudest.
Moreover, in certain cases, the fraud of one servant would not
have produced the results. Extremely violent knocks were heard
in one part of the house, and one second later, in another part.
One day Mme. de X., hearing a noise, came out to investigate.
Before she touched the door, she saw the key turn quickly in the
lock, come away, and strike her left hand. The Abb Z., tutor
to her young son, witnessed this. I copy from the diary of M. de
X. relative to the events of the 25-26th of January (p. 75) :
One oclock. Twelve blows followed by a long drumming, then
thirty rapid single knocks, one would have thought that the house
was shaken; we were rocked in our beds on every story . . .
then a long rush of feet; the whole lasting only five minutes. A
minute later the whole house was shaken again from top to bot
tom; ten tremendous blows on the door of the green room.
Twelve cries outside, three bellowings, followed by furious out
cries. Very loud drumming in the vestibule, rhythmical, up to
fifty knocks. 1.30 a . m . The house shaken twenty times; strokes
so quick that they could not be counted. Walls and furniture alike
quivered; nine heavy blows on the door of the green room, a
drumming accompanied by heavy blows. At this moment bellow
ings like those of a bull were heard, followed by wild non-human
cries in the corridor. We rang up all the servants and when all
were up we again heard two bellowings and one cry.
Several priests were then called upon for ritual exorcism. The
phenomena diminished but did not entirely cease.
I do not know what became of the chateau T. in the sequel. The
story is disturbing; a prolonged and violent mystification by the
servants of M. de X., by his young son, or by the tutor would
seem nearly impossible as an explanation of all that took place.
C. Lombroso (Ricerche sui fenomeni spiritici, Turin, 1909, 247)
tells the story of a certain hostelry of Turin where very violent
noises occurred, especially breakages of bottles and crockery.
Chairs were broken noisily; objects suspended from the walls fell
to the ground. Lombroso himself, by the light of a candle, saw
bottles roll on the ground before him and finally smash. He made
sure that there were no strings to move them. One day when
glasses and plates had been set on the table for dinner, the whole
were broken and dinner had to be served in another room. In
full light at 8 a . m . objects flew through the air, going into the
next room and breaking at the feet of two travellers who had come
to the hostelry. A bottle of soda-water, in full daylight and under
the eyes of several persons, moved through the air four to five
yards, slowly as if held by a hand; finally it fell to the ground
and burst.
It seems that these phenomena were connected with the pres
ence of a boy of thirteen; for when he had been sent away all the
phenomena ceased.
This, however, in no way implies that there was trickery. It
is extremely probable that there are mediums who do not know
HAUNTINGS 581
themselves to be such, and produce telekinetic phenomena by the
mere fact of their presence, quite apart from any experimental in
tention. Many so-called haunted houses are not haunted at all;
they are inhabited by mediums unconscious of their powers.
A very singular case has been narrated by Major B. Moor of
the Royal Society of London (I have not been able to consult his
book, Beatings Bells) and give the details from Bozzano (p. 164):
On the 2d of February, 1834, the bells of his house in Ipswich
began to ring loudly during the day without any apparent cause.
This continued for fifty-three days. They were not electric bells.
Sometimes the whole twelve bells of the house rang together, even
those whose bell-pulls were completely visible except where the
wires entered the walls. Mr. Moor often tried to ring the bells
equally loudly by pulling the cord as strongly as possible but could
never equal the extraordinary violence in the other case. When
we pulled the bell, says Mr. Moor, its movement was slow and
quite visible; but when moved by an occult power the movement
was so rapid that nothing could be seen. This was verified by
more than twelve persons, so that the hypothesis of hallucination
will not hold. Sometimes the bells rang when there was no one
in the house. Major Moor concludes definitely that the move
ment was due to no human cause.
He wrote to various persons to ascertain whether similar phe
nomena had been observed before, and obtained many answers.
He collected fourteen similar cases, of which Bozzano quotes only
that of Mrs. Milnes, who, at 4.30 . ., in her house at West
p m
minster, found all her family alarmed. The bells rang with such
energy that the servants and children were terrified. Mr. Milnes,
on arriving at the house, examined everything minutely and
watched all the wires. The ringing continued furiously for two
hours and a half.
In connection with bells, the still more doubtful case given be
low may be mentioned:
The two women, Mme. Martillet and Mme. Claudet, who nursed
Alfred de Musset in his last illness, say that as he lay in his arm
chair they saw by the light of the lamp that he was looking at the
bell near the mantelpiece. But he was so feeble that he could not
rise. At that moment, says Mme. Martillet, we were surprised
and frightened; the bell-pull that the sick man had not reached,
moved, as if by an invisible hand, and my sister and I took each
others hands saying, Did you hear? Did you see? He did not
leave his chair. . . The servant came, having heard the bell
(Lefvre, Musset sensitif, A. S. P., 1899, 106).
Should the singular phenomena mentioned in all ages as ac
companying a death or serious event be considered as akin to
hauntings? There are legends of clocks stopping, pictures falling,
some object noisily breaking, etc., but it is difficult to determine
the part played by chance coincidence.
Cheiro (Count Hamon) says that on Monday, June 5, 1915, as
he was sitting chatting with two friends in his country house at 8
oclock in the evening, some heavy object fell with a crash in the
adjoining room; it was a large oaken shield bearing the arms of
Great Britain that had been broken by the fall. The fracture was
in the part representing England and Ireland; and Cheiro said,
there has doubtless been some naval disaster in which Ireland is
concerned. At that very time Lord Kitchener, an Irishman,
perished in the Hampshire (A . S. P., July, 1916, 122). It is need
less to criticize ; this is mere coincidence, and not very cogent.
Aksakoff (Animisme et Spiritisme, 1895, 286) cites various
cases of persecution much resembling hauntings ; but his observa
tions must be taken with some reserve; his credulity is no more
to be doubted than his honesty.
The case of the Rev. Mr. Shelp related by Mr. Capron (Modern
Spiritualism) is very open to suspicion; for it does not seem cer
tain that Mr. Shelp took all the necessary measures to ensure that
his son, aged eleven, was not the voluntary agent in the phenom
ena. Chairs rose in the air and fell with crashes, a chandelier was
taken from the mantelpiece, knocked against the ceiling several
times, and broke; a brush was thrown through the window; a
glass left the worktable and broke the last pane left intact; gar
ments moved about the room, inflated as if to resemble human fig
ures ( ! !). As Dr. Shelp and his son Harry were out driving six
teen stones as large as eggs were thrown into the carriage.
Aksakoffs other story of persecution is more interesting, and
seems to have been carefully observed by M. Schtcharoff (against
whom the persecution seems to have been directed) and by M.
Akoutine, chemical engineer of Orenburg. The medium was
probably M. Schtcharoffs wife, unknown to herself. Akoutine
tried to divide the phenomena into those of attraction and repul
sion, but no law could be discovered. Sometimes things flew from
HAUNTINGS 583
the table at which people were sitting; at other times, when a cup
board was opened, the things would fall on Mme. S., moving to a
greater distance afterwards. These improbable facts were re
peated during several months, sometimes very energetically. A
sofa weighing one hundred and eighty to two hundred pounds on
which Mme. S.s mother was reclining began to dance, raising it
self into space with the lady ( !). Garments often took fire in a
way that could not be explained and some very strange facts are
related by M. S., who discusses very coolly whether there can be
hallucination on his own part or trickery by his wife; and con
cludes in the negative in both cases. We shall be still more pru
dent, and conclude (always provisionally) with a large note of
interrogation.
We can draw no other conclusion from the case of Lillian F.
(Carrington, The Problems of Psychical Science, London, 1914,
p. 341.) In the various houses in which she lived, she had to en
dure real hauntings from her childhood onwards. In an old house
at Memphis (Tenn.) doors opened; there were knockings on the
windows, on the mirrors, and on the beds. Heavy steps were
heard in the hall. Lillian and her mother both heard these noises
and were terrified by them. In Maryland similar phenomena tes
tified to by other persons than Lillian F., as also at Lafayette
Street (Baltimore), Memphis, Maryland, and New York.
Miss Mary Savage, on retiring to rest, heard knocks on the bed,
soon becoming very loud and seeming to move round her in cir
cles. Her friend, Miss Sarah Soothywoode, who was in the next
room, heard a tremendous noise ; so hallucination cannot be ac
cepted as an explanation (Carrington, p. 288).
Ada Sinclair reported phenomena of telekinesis and haunting
the details of which are of interest. They are not to be classed as
entirely accidental since they occurred in connection with experi
ments in spiritist rapping-messages. Mrs. L., a friend of Ada Sin
clair, was present. Objects were plucked off the wall and pro
jected violently. A porcelain vase was thrown to the ground and
broken. On other occasions, in presence of several persons, small
articles such as pins and matches were moved; the pins being
stuck into walls and clothes. The phenomena were strongest
when Mrs. L. was present, but they did not cease when she had
gone into the next room (Carrington, p. 306).
The Count de Larmandie has published an account of haunting
in his chateau at Sudrie. A piece of wood lying in the corner of a
room struck the ceiling and fell at the feet of the count and his
sister. It bounded about several times, striking the door, the
floor, and the walls. All this in full daylight. When the count
or his sisters entered the haunted rooms, there was a hail of little
stones (A. Erny, Le Psychisme exprimental) .
The following fact was not told till forty years after its oc
currence, but is quite clear in the memory of the narrator, M.
Kouprejanoff, on the superior staff of the Ministry of Public In
struction in Russia. When a young boy, he and his mother and
sisters heard logs falling in the shed where they had been placed.
They all went to see, taking a lantern and three candles. Twelve
persons in succession came to look in the locked shed and saw the
logs thrown against the wall, then fall to the ground one after
another at short intervals. This lasted close on forty minutes ; and
the logs came from the middle of the stack, though even a strong
man could not have taken them from the lower part of the pile
(A. S. P., 1899, ix, 174). But what conclusions can be based on a
story written forty years after the event ?
Mr. Bristow was working with two comrades in a carpenters
shop. One of the two then accused him of throwing a bit of wood
at him, which Mr. Bristow denied. Other pieces were thrown,
striking all those present. Nothing could come from outside, for
the shutters were not moved and were thickly covered with dust.
More than this, Mr. Bristow saw a piece of wood, two fingers
wide, come jumping towards him, make a bound of two feet and
hit his ear. A piece of wood lying on the ground jumped into
the air, and began to dance among our tools, but when we tried
to catch them they evaded our hands. Sometimes they moved
about in the air with a waving movement.
These phenomena went on for six weeks and were testified to
by several persons ; the bits of wood seemed living and intelligent :
they arranged themselves in a pile in one corner of the workshop.
They moved most when not looked at ; and despite the speed with
which they were projected into the air, describing complicated
circles and spirals, they fell without noise (P. S. P. R., vii, 383;
Bozzano, 186).
Mrs. H. E. Sidgwick and F. Myers analyzed this case with the
greatest care and obtained detailed explanations from Mr. Bris
tow: they connect this haunting with a certain John Gray, a
nephew of the proprietor of the workshop, who had not paid his
creditors. His uncle, also named John Gray, had not paid them
HAUNTINGS 585
either. As soon as he had paid his nephews debts the manifes
tations ceased.
This case is complex and hard to interpret; and though very
difficult to accept,. it is almost as difficult to reject the formal
depositions of Mr. Bristow and his companions.
At Absie (Deux-Svres) in 1867, according to the police reports
(A. S. P., 1905, 86), there was a hail of stones in an unoccupied
house. The reports referred to would seem to have been des
troyed. No fraud could be discovered. Constable Mousset testi
fied: (1) that the stones fell without doing arty harm; (2) that
a glass lamp was knocked from the table to the floor by a large
stone without being broken; (3) that the stones fell in all direc
tions and were only seen when they rolled on the ground; (4),
that the stones continued to be heaped up in the room even when
some one was standing at the chimney-piece to observe and there
was not the smallest hole in the walls or the windows.
But Moussets evidence is quite insufficient.
Similarly with the case of Oels (Pomerania). The lights, noises,
and phantasmal appearance are testified to by various persons
(1916), but after enquiry, a magistrate concluded that they were
natural facts due to the conscious or unconscious trickery of chil
dren in the house (Psych. Studien, xlvi, 1919, 84; 140). The as
sertions of Bohn were, however, vigorously combated by Derter
(Das Gheimnis des Spukhausen in Oels im Lichte des Uebers-
innlichen (A. S. P., 1895, v, 94).
At Niedelsdorf in Switzerland, M. Joller, a national councillor,
relates that for twelve days from the 15th to the 27th of August,
1862, mysterious happenings took place at his house. Tables and
chairs were upset; heavy hammer-strokes shook the house; objects
were taken from the walls, latches were broken off, pictures were
reversed on the walls under our very eyes; stones were thrown
from all sides despite locks and bolts. These strange things went
on for six weeks in full daylight. There were also inarticulate
noises, melodies, singing, noises of splitting wood, of counting
money, and winding a watch. All these facts are described by M.
Perty, a professor in the "University of Berne (Die mystischen
Erscheinungen der menschlichen Natur).
The facts observed by Hector Durville with Raymond Charrier,
aged fourteen, at Saint-Sauveur, Yonne, are parallel with the
phenomena of hauntings. The usual phenomena are all there
objects projected in the room, mattress and bedclothes thrown on
the ground, shoes thrown about. One day at breakfast things
were thrown at sitters from all parts of the room. M. Durville
took Raymond to his own house at Montmorency. Pamphlets,
books, kitchen utensils, and all kinds of objects were projected
from all sides. Raymond went out of the room and was already
in the passage, when Mr. Durvilles walking-stick came off the
peg where it was hanging, and was flung after Raymond and fell
behind him (A. S. P., 1910, xxi, 116-124).
That such things should happen without Raymond having been
caught in the act implies either that they are true or that M. Dur
ville was blind. Nevertheless, he adds the serious remark, I have
never seen any phenomena produced in entirety under my eyes.
The whole responsibility for the assertions rests with M. Durville,
for there is no other witness to them.
Mr. J. Proctor noted in his diary all the phenomena that oc
curred in a certain house abandoned because of the strange and
disagreeable facts that took place there. As soon as Mr. Proctor
took up his abode there, noises, cries, and footsteps were heard
which other lodgers could perceive. Two months later, a figure
appeared at a window; on another evening the caretaker, his wife,
and his daughter saw a priest wearing a stole, who appeared for
ten minutes. Knocks were then heard, and were continued for six
months at intervals. One night a friend of Mr. Proctors got up,
being frightened by the sight of a phantom and by terrific noises.
Invisible beings called lodgers by name. New tenants suffered in
the same manner by noises and phantoms and the owners had to
give up letting the house (A. S. P., December, 1892, and Lom-
broso, 259).
Phenomena of haunting would seem to have occurred in the
military school at Ypanema (Brazil) in May, 1914. Plates, cups,
and saucers were flung about as by an invisible hand. This was
verified, says the Diario de Sorocaba, by all the officers and the
colonel commanding the school. The phenomena were, however,
of brief duration; a scientific committee saw nothing and could
verify nothing; the facts therefore remain very doubtful (A. S.
P., April, 1916, 70-72).
A question arises, interesting from a practical point of view. It
is discussed with documentary evidences by Zingaropoli (Case in-
festate dagli Spiriti, Naples, 1917) : Does haunting confer a right
to the cancellation of a lease?
The Parliament of Bordeaux formally decided that it does. In
HAUNTINGS 587
our own day there have been several lawsuits over thisin 1915
at Altavilla (Italy); in 1907 at Naples; in 1896 also at Naples; in
1907 at Egham (England). In the latter case the house had been
hired by Mr. Stephen Philips, a well-known dramatic author and
poet. He complained that during the night heavy knocks shook
the walls and doors, and figures appeared on the stairs and in the
passages. The house had already been said to be haunted. The
Daily Mail and Light which had spoken of these facts were sued
and fined for depreciating the value of the house; though the sen
tence was reversed on appeal, the newspapers proving that the
hauntings were matter of public notoriety.
At Ancona in 1903 the public prosecutor, M. Marracino, states
that he and his two sons who are barristers, witnessed singular
facts connected with jets of liquid. During the night hats were
filled with water; during the day water was thrown on the beds.
The walls were examined by engineers who discovered nothing
unusual. Milk, wine, and coffee were spilt on the floors. In a
locked buffet objects were displaced. It seems that the phenomena
were due to the young daughter of M. Marracino who was a
medium unknown to herself. One day a book rose up and touched
her on the shoulder. (Si sollevo e ando a battere sulla spalla di lei,
quindi, cadde a terra e cominci a saltarellare ( M) comme mosso
da una forza impulsiva, percorse sei o sette volte la camera e, alz-
andozi di nuovo, undo ad applicicarsi al muro.)
In such cases when the phenomenon is due to a medium who is
not aware of the fact (usually a very young child) fraud is often
mingled with the phenomena. Maxwell says, with good reason
(Bull, de lInst. Psych., 1905, 376), that at first there are doubt
less genuine phenomena that lead the child to simulate them later
on. The unstable mentality of mediums explains this fraud, the
more readily that they scarcely know how to distinguish volun
tary from involuntary acts: the uncertain state of their conscious
ness deprives them to a considerable degree of their sense of
responsibility.
Kemer observed with the Seeress of Prevorst many mediumistic
phenomena that entirely resemble those in haunted houses from
which it is difficult to dissociate them. They constitute an ab
normal whole that borders on the pathological; hypnotism, leth
argy, cryptesthesia, premonitions, experimental telekinesis, and
such telekinesis as occurs in haunted houses. Kemer says, There
were knocks and noises like stones thrown, once a table moved
jerkily across the room without any visible contact, tin plates were
thrown across the kitchen. These stories would have provoked in
me a pitiful smile had I not been an ocular witness to the facts.
However improbable they may seem, I think it rash to deny them;
we do not understand them and cannot explain them, we can only
take note of them.
Dr. Hart Raines (quoted by Barrett, P. S. P. R., 1911, xxv,
404) mentions a very curious case. In January, 1911, three young
men were sent to a small telegraphic station at Dale in Georgia,
and took possession of their new domicile. Shortly afterwards they
found that they could not keep the door shut; it opened despite all
their efforts, nails and iron bars were of no use. Stones and other
things were thrown into the room; a box of condensed milk rose
into the air and passed into the room untouched by anyone; a
lantern also rose up and was broken against the wall; a chair was
thrown from before the window with such force that it was
broken. The three young men were panic-stricken. One of them
walked several miles to the nearest town to resign his position,
and he assured Dr. Raines nothing would induce him again to go
through the experience he had suffered.
Mr. Murphy, hearing that a house at Enniscorthy (Ireland)
was said to be haunted went with Mr. Owen Devereux to pass a
night there in the same room with the two young men who lived
in the house. It seems that one of them, Mr. Randall, was the
agent, for most of the movements of objects and noises took place
round him. During the night that Mr. Murphy passed there, re
peated noises, becoming more and more rapid, took place, and then
Randalls clothes were taken off him. He cried out, Hold them,
hold them, they are taken off me! and added, I cannot hold
them; they are going, and I am going with them, there is some
thing pushing me from inside, I am going, I am going, Im gone!
A light was struck and Randall was seen to be in great terror and
bathed in sweat. Randall, in the absence of Murphy, had felt
strange phenomena, and likewise his room-mate, Mr. Sinnett.
After having heard all night the sound of hurried footsteps, they
lit the lamp, and then' what added to our fright, he says, was
a chair dancing (!) in the middle of the floor without a thing near
it. His bed and Sinnetts were raised into the air! (P. S. P. R.t
xxv, 1911, 380).
After Randall had left the house, nothing further occurred to
him. It seems therefore that the phenomena could only be pro
HAUNTINGS 589
duced in a given locality and with a certain person. It would be
important to know what degree of confidence can be placed in
Randall, and up to what point he was normal.
In the same issue (P. S. P. R., p. 397) Sir William Barrett gives
a methodical investigation of some other phenomena, which,
though of but moderate intensity, derive interest from his testi
mony. He passed several nights in a haunted house at Derry-
gonnelly in Ireland about nine miles from Enniskillen. The phe
nomena seem to have been associated with Maggie, a girl of
twenty, the daughter of Jack Flanigan, the owner of the house.
When everybody was still, loud noises were heard on the walls, on
the bedsteads, and on the doors. A large shovel fell on the bed
and Sir William heard hammer-blows. He verified that these
were intelligent; four times he got an exact answer to a number
(between 1 and 10) which he mentally asked (probability 1 to
10,000).
The following case is remarkable from several points of view.
The phenomena took place at Portland (Oregon) at the house
of Mr. and Mrs. Savoyer, living at 546 Marshall Street with their
grandson Elwin March, aged eleven. Two medical men and many
other persons saw with their own eyes movements of heavy ob
jects without contact. Chairs and telephones were displaced in
open day, no one being near them. Nevertheless there is no doubt
that the boy lent himself to these games. Dr. Gilbert of Portland
got him to avow that he had played many tricks. A severe inves
tigation seems to have proved that the trickery only began later
and that some of the movements took place when March was not
in the room. There is no incongruity in admitting the genuine
ness of the earlier phenomena and also young Marchs trickery,
made possible when his movements were not watched. But how
ever that may be, the fact of fraud, even subsequent fraud, makes
the whole doubtful. Maxwell, who has studied deeply some of
these phenomena, considers, I think correctly, that at the outset
the telekinesis is real, but that the medium who at first produced
them spontaneously simulates them afterwards. The story is
given in Am. J. S. P. R., November, 1910.
Grasset (p. 396) verified, with Dr. Calmette, that the extraor
dinary displacements observed in a so-called haunted house ceased
completely when the medium, a hysterical girl of fifteen, was sent
for treatment to the hospital at Saint-Eloi (Montpellier).
In the A. S. P. (1919, xxix, p. 96) there is a story of extradr
dinary facts testified to by a Mr. X. and his nephew, two artists
whose honour and good faith are not in doubt. Objects moved by
themselves, metal boxes knocked together, furniture moved, nails
drew out from the walls, pincers were heard mounting the stairs.
This was in the department, Maine-et Loire and Sarthe. At
Cannes a still more astounding thing came to pass: A little man,
formed like a key, a head of hair taking the place of the key-ring,
appeared in the room . . . he came on the marble top of our
night-table and seemed to sit down on it; when we tried to catch
him he dodged as quickly as a mouse. On the next day this
little sprite wore a blue costume with white spots. He always
came to visit us, appearing from the radiator (!!).
It is impossible to put any faith in these stories that Mr. X.
and his nephew have illustrated with sketches more extravagant
than anything in the Thousand and One Nights. Still, in mat
ters metapsychic, so many strange phenomena have been denied
and afterwards found to be true, that though I greatly desire
formally to deny these insanities, I feel constrained to make some
timid reserves in my bold denial.
The following incident took place in the jungle of Sumatra
(/. S. P. R., May, 1906, xii, 261). Mr. Grottendieck, alone with
his native boy in a tent, was awakened by noises of stones falling
round him. He lit his lamp and waked his boy who was sound
asleep, and told him to find out the trickster or enemy. While
the boy was outside, the stones continued to fall. He saw them
slowly follow a parabolic course. He tried in vain to stop them;
they avoided his hand. The boy came back saying there was no
one, but the stones continued to fall. Mr. Grottendieck then fired
five shots from his carbine from the window, but the stones still
came. The servant was so frightened that he ran away into the
jungle.
In a later letter Mr. Grottendieck says he is absolutely sure that
his boy did not throw the stones; but is inclined to think that the
slowness of their fall was an illusion, a mere semblance; for he
says while the phenomenon took place, time seemed to be slowed
down. I feel now inclined to suggest that there might have been
something abnormal in my own condition at the time.
This is highly probable, sufficiently so to deprive his testimony
of all value.
HAUNTINGS 591
I might multiply these poltergeist cases by citing many facts
new and old, from many authors; but those I have given will
suffice to show how obscure the matter still is. Before giving my
personal opinion I will state in an abridged form the conclusions
arrived at by Professor Barrett in his excellent article on haunted
houses and poltergeists (P. 5\ P. R., xxv, 1911, 377) :
1. Fraud and hallucination are not sufficient explanations of
all the phenomena.
2. The noises, movements of objects, and other physical effects
seem to be connected with an invisible intelligence, which, for all
its imperfection, has some resemblance to human intelligence.
3. The phenomena are usually associated with a place or a
person, so that some kind of fulcrum seems necessary to their
production.
4. The phenomena are sporadic and temporary, lasting from a
few days to a few months, beginning and ceasing without any
known cause.
4. Conclusions
Before all things it is necessary to know if the facts are genu
ine; in presence of such extravagant phenomena theoretical dis
cussions are of minor importance.
The testimonies are too precise for it to be possible to deny
everything. Many of these cases, even when severely examined,
establish that there have been movements of objects without con
tact, and more especially noises that no ordinary mechanical cause
can explain. Is it not absurd to suppose that for weeks and
months cool-headed and responsible persons, closely watching the
so-called haunted house, have seen things that did not exist and
heard loud and terrifying noises produced by no living being? If
there were but one such case, and one such person, illusion or
hallucination might be invoked; but that is a childish explanation.
People say hallucination to dismiss a disquieting fact by a
convenient word; this is much too simple.
Collective hallucination is next advanced. But in this sense
there are no collective hallucinations. Alienists do not know of
any such phenomena.
I am aware that hysterics in a convent have often told wonder
ful stories of what one and another claim to have seen; I know,
too, that the inventions of myth-making hysterics have a large
place in their psychology, but these witnesses are neither nuns
nor hysterics.
It may be best to limit the recognized facts of haunting to acci
dental telekinesis.
Experimental telekinesis has been amply proved : then why not
admit that the phenomena in haunted houses are of the same order,
and that they are accidental phenomena of the same kind? That
makes them neither more nor less mysterious.
The striking similarity of the facts verified in Normandy, in
Ireland, in Scotland, in Georgia, in Russia, in Italy, and in Sicily
shows that even these unusual facts show definite sequences. If
they were purely fanciful the accounts would not be thus con
cordant.
In fact, all these matters belong to metapsychics. Formerly,
from 1885 to 1895, the members of the S. P. R. were inclined to
accept only telepathy as demonstrated and to deny clairvoyance
(non-telepathic cryptesthesia) and also all physical phenomena.
Podmore in particular reached the conclusion that there was noth
ing genuine but telepathy. But little by little our learned colleagues
of the S. P. R. have had to admit clairvoyance and physical phe
nomena. Short of wilful blindness, how can the facts produced
by Home and Eusapia be denied ?
Therefore, as experimental telekinesis is proved, accidental tele
kinesis must be admitted as being at least possible.
The principal objection advanced against accidental telekinesis
is not hallucination but trickery. It is said that when there are
strange, noises and displacements of objects, these are due to the
pranks of some vicious and malicious child who amuses himself
by practising on the curiosity of observers. But only in excep
tional cases can this hypothesis hold, for in most cases distrust was
intense and progressive.1
I remember once being asked the nave question, Have you
thought that you may have been hoaxed ? This fear has been my
chief, or even my only, anxiety throughout my experiments; and
I cannot imagine that in a haunted house, when strident noises and
cries are heard, when doors open and shut, that the sole concern
of straightforward and sensible persons should not be to find out
whether they are being hoaxed by some practical joker or some*
5
*T h e ju stifia b le s e v e r ity sh ow n in in v e stig a tio n c a n b e seen by reading F.
P. R.,
P o d m o re s c ritic ism ( P . ". The Alleged Haunting
x v , 98) o f the bo ok ,
of B. house, R ed w ay, 1899, b y M iss G o o d ric h Freer and the Marquis o f B u te.
HAUNTINGS 593
rogue who wants to rob them. Hallucination and trickery are two
hypotheses that are the refuge of those who do not wish to admit
the facts; for no one zvishes to admit them, and we naturally re
fuse to accept an unusual phenomenon. Nevertheless the unusual
does occur. Once the facts are admitted, the next thing is to ex
plain them; but their very strangeness defeats our endeavours.
When a phantom appears it seems natural to connect the fact
with some old tragedy, or even with an apprehension of death that
has survived its event. One is tempted to suppose an intention of
the deceased to prove his presence. This, however, is probably a
narrowly anthropomorphic notion; and rather than suppose the
problematical survival of a human consciousness and vague sym
bolism of human intentions, I prefer to say without false shame
that I do not understand. I therefore prefer to remain undecided,
remarking that my indecision is not directed to the facts, but only
to their explanation.
The stone-throwing, broken crockery, banging doors, and terri
fying cries are all so absurd, from the human point of view, that
the hypothesis of intention in the forces that produce this upset
of domestic objects is ridiculous and deserves no further con
sideration.
All hypotheses apart, the facts that emerge iron* a study of
hauntings may be summed up as follows:
1. In some places phantoms appear, sometimes to several per
sons in succession, sometimes collectively, keeping the same form
for weeks, or even months together. This affirmation is not yet
fully established and some scientific doubt is necessary.
2. In certain houses, usually without any phantom being per
ceptible, there are noises and movements of objects that cannot
be explained rationally. Most frequently these phenomena are
dependent upon some person who, perhaps without knowing or
willing it, plays the part of medium. Just as a medium in a spirit
ist sance causes displacements of chairs and musical boxes, so
mediums (who do not know themselves to be such) cause stones
to fall and violent blows to be struck on the walls.
This second statement seems to me impossible to dispute.
In other words most phenomena of haunting are due to spon
taneous telekinesis; but just because experimental telekinesis rests
on indisputable proofs, for the same reason should spontaneous
telekinesis, which rests on relatively infrequent and frail testi
594 PYSCHICAL RESEARCH
mony, be subject to rigid criticism. The phenomena of haunting
cannot be denied; we must even admit that they are very probably
true. But to say that they are probably true is to say that they are
not certain. Of all metapsychic phenomena these are the most
questionable.
We might even feel constrained to deny them resolutely were
it not that they are buttressed by the absolutely certain facts of
ectoplasms, premonitions, telekinesis, and monitions.
BOOK IV
C o n c l u s io n
I
I have now reached the end of this long investigation. I have
endeavoured, while giving a place, possibly too large a place, to my
own researches, to collect the documentary evidence very widely
scattered in many records, and to put some order into a matter
which up to the present has never been synthetically studied. I
have tried to extricate the sciences anathematized as occult from
the chaos in which they were involved, and to put in a clear light
knowledge that official science, in the pride of its reputation, has
refused to consider. It has seemed to me that the time has come
to claim for metapsychics a place among recognized sciences by
making it conform to the rigour and the logical treatment which
have given them their authority
Scientific men will be surprised, and perhaps indignant. But if
they have the wisdomthe elementary wisdom, as it seems to me
to consent to read this long and laborious study, they will be
obliged to give way before the evidence.
My intention will be evident from the contents of the book. I
have desired, while eliminating as far as possible everything
notoriously uncertain, and expressly stating my doubts as to cer
tain experiments, to present facts and observations, for these
are the foundation of every science.
Finally, it has appeared to me, as it will doubtless appear to
every impartial reader, that there are too many well-verified facts
and rigorously conducted experiments that chance, illusion, or
fraud should always be attributed to all these facts and experi
ments without exception.
But as the facts are very strange and the experiments seem to
clash so often with current scientific dogmas, the affirmations made
will give rise to strongly adverse criticism and to mocking in
credulity. This is the lot of all new ideas, and it moves me not at
595
all. I only hope, and surely this is not asking too much, that I
shall not be condemned unread. No one can form a serious and
considered opinion worthy of respect by casually turning over the
leaves of a book that sums up the labours of two hundred honest
and skilful workers. I would like to say to my critics, as did
Themistocles, Strike, but listen.
It troubles me more than in the camp of those who are not
sceptical I shall meet with very strong opposition. On the one
hand I have been willing to narrate many surprising facts admitted
by spiritualists, and on the other hand I have not felt able to adopt
their theories; for I have always sought to plant my feet firmly
on the earth and have preferred a rationalist explanation even
when it seems improbable. And, frankly, my position causes me
some pain.
In very many cases the spiritist hypothesis is obviously absurd
absurd because it is superfluousand again absurd because it
assumes that human beings of very moderate intelligence survive
the destruction of the brain. All the same, in certain casesrare
indeed, but whose significance I do not disguisethere are, ap
parently at least, intelligent and reasoned intentions, forces, and
wills in the phenomena produced; and the power has all the char
acter of extraneous energy (see p. 352, childrens death-beds).
In these cases the spiritualist explanation is much the simplest;
or, if some will not hear of that, the hypothesis that there are in
telligent beings that interpose in our lives and can exercise some
power over matter.
I do not seek to attenuate the bearing of these facts; but I can
not adopt the inference that there are spiritsintelligences out
side human intelligence. My inference is a different one; it is
that the human personality has both material and psychological
powers that we do not know.
And as this hypothesis by no means satisfies me, I will add, as a
final remark, that in our present state of knowledge we are not in
a position to understand.I
II
Our evolution takes place in the midst of the unknown; but
nevertheless two leading facts have been placed beyond doubt:
1. The human mind has other sources of cognition than the
normal sensescryptesthesia.
CONCLUSION 597
2. There are materializationspowers that, emerging from the
body, can take form and act as if they were material bodies
ectoplasms.
It seems to me that we can go no farther than cryptesthesia and
ectoplasms without being lost in mists.
What amazing stories I have heard, told me by witnesses of un
questionable good faith! But they had observed with greater
enthusiasm than critical accuracy, and when the matter concerns
highly improbable facts we cannot be satisfied with half proofs,
with experiments that are almost conclusive, or inferences that
are nearly certain. I have not included these allegations in my
book, even when I have reason to think them not unfounded. I
have not busied myself with problematical narratives, so that while
some may think me too credulous, many will think me too severely
critical.
Movement without contact, clairvoyance, phantoms, and pre
monitions are so very unusual that when we first hear of them we
are inclined to laugh at them. Till we have studied them we laugh
and deny. This was my state of mind for a very long time as it
was that of Crookes, Lombroso, Russel Wallace, Zllner, Oliver
Lodge, Morselli, and Bottazzi, and I shall therefore be in no way
surprised should my account of parallel facts provoke incredulity
and mockery. The less attention is given to reading, the greater
will be the disposition to ridicule.
Moreover, it is not argument that will bring conviction. Even
severe mathematical demonstration does not always convince. We
must be accustomed to a phenomenon before we can accept it.1
Ill
Perhapsand I admit itthe innumerable experiments pub
lished by eminent men of science would not have convinced me,
had I not been a witness of the four fundamental facts of meta
psychics. I was an unwilling witness, in no way enthusiastic, very
critical, extremely distrustful of the facts that forced themselves
upon me. I was able to verify, under unexceptionable conditions
1M. Thiers, ex-president o f the French Parliament, having determined to
acquire a knowledge o f mathematics in his old age, rebelled when his teacher
showed him that the section o f any cone at any angle with the axis showed a
regular ellipse. N ot possible," he said. "When a sugar-loaf is cut obliquely,
there must be a big and a little end." Not till an actual sugar-loaf had been
brought and cut would he admit conviction.
and despite my desire to disprove them, the four essential facts of
metapsychics.
These four personal experiences, all four of which carry ob
vious proof, determined my belief, and that not at once, but after
long consideration, meditation, and repetition:
A . Cryptesthesia. Stella, in presence of G., whose family she
does not and cannot have known, gave the first names of his son,
of his wife, of a deceased brother, of a living brother, of his
father-in-law, and of the locality where he lived as a child.
B. Telekinesis. While Eusapias head and hands were held, a
large melon weighing six pounds was moved from the sideboard
to the table, the distance between them being over a yard.
C. Ectoplasms. Eusapia was in half light, her left hand in my
right and her right in my left tightly held, and before Lodge,
Myers, and Ochorowicz, a third hand stroked my face, pinched my
nose, pulled my hair, and gave a smack on my shoulder heard by
Ochorowicz, Myers, and Lodge.
D. Premonitions. Alice, at 2 . . told me, for the first and
p m
only time, that I should soon give way to violent anger before
one, two, three persons whom she designated with her hand as if
she saw them. At 6 . . the unlikely and unforeseeable imperti
p m
nence of a person absolutely unknown to Alice provoked me to one

of the strongest and most justifiable fits of anger of my whole life
before two other persons, an anger that led to my receiving a chal
lenge to a duel, the only one I have ever received.
These four experiences, by their precision and faultlessness,
sufficed, if not to produce conviction, at least the beginnings of
conviction. As will be obvious, from reading the book, I have had
many other proofs, but in this summary I mention only one of
the most characteristic of each kind.IV
IV
These four personal experiences amount to nothing, just noth
ing, compared with the multiple proofs that other men of science
have brought forward. An edifice cannot be built on four little
stones, however solid they may be; and the reader who has not,
like me, had the happy opportunity of similar experiences will re
quire proofs, if not stronger, at any rate more numerous, and will
need other testimony than mine.
Testimony is abundant and proofs innumerable. Decisive
CONCLUSIONS 599
proofs are repeated daily. In this book, which is a collection of
facts rather than an exposition of doctrine, I have intentionally
multiplied instances at the risk of producing weariness and bore
dom. The authority of the witnesses and the mass of repeated
proofs are such that doubt is not warranted. Cryptesthesia, tele
kinesis, ectoplasms, and premonition seem to me founded on
granite; that is to say, on hundreds of exact observations and
hundreds of rigorous experiments. The thing is a certainty; and
even though among these thousands of observations there may be
defects, gaps, errors, and illusions, sometimes mistakes of testi
mony, occasionally trickeries, more often casual coincidence, still
more often ill-considered assertions, still the thing is certain. It
is not possible that all these observers should never have made
mistakes, but the whole constitutes a sheaf of testimony so large
and homogeneous, that no criticism of details, however acute, will
be able to disintegrate and disperse.
Therefore:
1. There is in us a faculty of cognition that differs radically
from the usual sensorial faculties (Cryptesthesia).
2. There are, even in full light, movements of objects without
contact (Telekinesis).
3. Hands, bodies, and objects seem to take shape in their en
tirety from a cloud and take all the semblance of life (Ecto
plasms).
4. There occur premonitions that can be explained neither by
chance nor perspicacity, and are sometimes verified in minute
detail. Such are my firm and explicit conclusions. I cannot go
beyond them.
V
Thus it seems to me that the general conclusions of meta
psychics are rigorously true. I even go so far as to think that
many phenomena indicated in this book as still doubtful (for when
proof has seemed to me less than rigorous I have suspected and
gone near to denying them) may soon be recognized as authentic.
Metapsychic science will go much farther than I have ventured to
think. I have wished to err on the side of prudence, accepting
only that which has been proved, and well proved, twenty times
or more. Official scientists will certainly find me too credulous;
still more certainly spiritualists and occultists will find me terribly
sceptical.
To imagine that all metapsychics are but illusion is to suppose
that William Crookes, A. R. Wallace, Lombroso, Zllner, F. W.
H. Myers, Oliver Lodge, Aksakoff, J. Ochorowicz, J. Maxwell,
Boutleroff, Du Prel, William James, Morselli, Bottazzi, Bozzano,
Flammarion, A. de Rochas, A. de Gramont, Schrenck-Notzing,
and William Barrett were all, without exception, liars or im
beciles ; it is to suppose that two hundred distinguished observers
less eminent, perhaps, but persons of high and acute intelligence,
were also liars or imbeciles.
VI
Why should men of science, whether mathematicians, chemists,
or physiologists, oppose cryptesthesia and ectoplasms? Are these
new facts in contradiction with the old facts?
I lay stress on this, because men do not distinguish sufficiently
between a contradiction and a new affirmation.
Nothing in metapsychics is in contradiction with official science;
but there are new affirmations.
Psycho-physiology teaches that cognizance of things reaches
us through our senses; that if the retina is excited there is a visual
sensation; if Cortis membrane, an auditive one. But psycho
physiology has never attempted to demonstrate, and could never
demonstrate, that no other (unusual) channels of cognition can
exist. It would be a contradiction to say that excitation of the
retina does not produce a visual image, but it is not a contradic
tion to maintain that there may be a visual image without retinal
excitation.
In other words, Science establishes positive facts, and there she
is all-powerful. She is not, however, justified in formulating one
single negation, for at every moment she is confronted by pro
found mysteries. Therefore when new facts supported by many
irrefragable proofs are brought forward, the new facts being posi
tive facts that do not contradict the old positive facts, lovers of
truth ought to bow before them and receive them joyfully.
Taken for all in all nothing is simpler than cryptesthesia; no
more need be accepted than that the human mind has means of
cognition other than our five poor senses. This is not an extraor
dinarily bold assertion, and cannot be rejected a priori. To deny
this a priori is to dare to assert that those five poor senses delimit
the knowable.
CONCLUSION 601
The case for ectoplasms and telekinesis is the same. No more
need be accepted than that in the immensity of the Cosmos there
may be intelligent energies (human or non-human) that can act
on matter. This also is not a very rash hypothesis. What is rash
is not to suppose that such forces exist, but to affirm that they
do not.
What man of science worthy of the name could affirm that
science has classified, analyzed, and penetrated all the energies of
immeasurable nature, or could make the strange and pretentious
claim that we know all the dynamic manifestations in the world!
A mere glance over the list of possible vibrations of the Ether,
itself a hypothesis and a mystery, shows many of which we know
nothing; and is it not foolish to aver that all the phenomena in
the universe can be only vibrations of Ether?
To admit telekinesis and ectoplasms is not to destroy even the
smallest fragment of science; it is but to admit new data, and that
there are unknown energies. Then why be indignant, when, on
the basis of thousands of observations and experiments, we affirm
one of those unknown energies ?
Everything that is not in formal contradiction with known
facts is possible. Well, materializations and telekinesis do not
contradict one single established scientific fact. That a hand
having all the attributes of a living hand should fee formed from
a whitish cloud in no way nullifies the laws of circulation, nutri
tion, and structure of a normal hand. It is new fact but not a
contradictory one.
VII
It is true that in this terrifying science of metapsychics there
is one fact more terrible than othersPremonition. This is estab
lished by sure proofs, but it is incomprehensible by us. Our
psychological constitution forbids the concept that future events
are as determinate as past events, and that inexorable fatality
regulates human and non-human affairs shown to the smallest de
tail. We shall not seek to explore farther into this abyss. Un
questionably premonition is not in contradiction with scientific
data; but (and this is perhaps more formidable) it clashes strongly
with our consciousness, for that consciousness refuses to admit
the inevitability of that which is yet to come.
We shall therefore attempt neither explanation nor justification
of premonitions. We shall keep within the boundary of positive
facts; establishing these without concerning ourselves with the
inferences they involve and without deducing nebulous theories.
Our function is to know what actually is, not what is possible.
Sir William Crookes so stated the problem, and we shall follow
his lead.
VIII
We have demonstrated the reality of the facts, but this is only
a first step. A fact by itself is a small thing unless it be linked
logically with homologous facts, so that a coherent relation with
seemingly disparate phenomena emerges to view with an outline
at least of a tenable theory. We are therefore constrained, the
facts being demonstrated, to discuss theories if only to discover
the profound significance of the facts.
We shall be brief, though innumerable ponderous volumes have
been written on metapsychic theories.
At the outset it must be laid down that in order to construct a
complete theory of metapsychics it is not sufficient to establish
one that satisfies cryptesthesia, another for telekinesis, and a third
for ectoplasms. Any tenable theory must give some sort of syn
thetic explanation of all three. The more we study the complex
details of these phenomena, the closer their connection is seen to
be.
Many scientific men, notably the distinguished members of the
S. P. R. (especially F. Podmore and H. Sidgwick) thought at
first that everything could be reduced to telepathy; that is, in final
analysis, to a cerebral vibration in an individual A, corresponding
to a cerebral vibration in another individual, 6. According to them
telepathy explained everything. But today Sir William Barrett
and Sir Oliver Lodge think quite otherwise.
Telepathy is a phenomenon whose extent may be fantastically
exaggerated. Distance counts for nothing, and an emotion in A
may be transmitted to B, even if there is a thousand miles between
them. And moreover for this transmission to occur it is not
necessary that either A or B should be conscious of the vibrations
that move their minds. Will and consciousness have no part in the
phenomena; it suffices that an ancient memory of which it is
entirely ignorant should be buried in As consciousness for it to
be transmitted to B. The consciousness of both may equally be
CONCLUSION 603
unaware of the whole proceeding. This clearing-house is in the
subconsciousness.
If all that is claimed for telepathy is to be accepted, the full
implications of this ambitious but frail theory must be realized.
Since a human thought, however unconscious, however distant,
or however ancient, can react upon another human thought, it
suffices that as soon as B experiences an emotion or a cognition,
there should be anywhere on this planet another person, A, having
the same emotion or cognition, to explain that of B. It follows
that telepathy can always, or nearly always, be invoked, and that A,
however indifferent, however distant, or however unconscious
he may be, has transmitted this emotion to B. The facts that
are or have been unknown to any living person are few indeed.
This theory seems to me dangerously exclusive. In several of
the preceding chapters, instances of super-normal consciousness
(cryptesthesia) have been given that cannot be explained by
telepathy.
In the first place, premonitions, without exception. In these
there is no room for telepathy, since neither A nor B can know
the future by ordinary means.
But even outside premonitions there are sometimes astonishing
divinations, reproductions of drawings taken at random from
among many others, and cognitions of words that no one knows
of. Drawings in an envelope have been presented to a sensitive
for reproduction, and occasionally (the experiment being then
still more rigorous) the experimenter has been unaware of the
contents of the envelope, so that no person living or dead knows
the particular design to be guessed by B. Second-sight, lucidity,
clairvoyance (hellsehen ), cryptesthesia, as I prefer to call it, are
therefore actualities that telepathy cannot explain. In the numer
ous experiments with Mrs. Piper many curious and very pre
cise details were given on distant families, details that were un
known to the persons questioning Mrs. Piper.
To read the many accounts of monitions given above is to per
ceive that in at least one-third of the cases, telepathy (even allow
ing it an extreme and almost absurd extension) does not suffice
to explain the cognition sometimes shown by a sensitive of things
that no normal intelligence could be aware of.
Far from denying telepathy we strongly affirm that it exists,
and even that it is one of the most incontestable facts of meta
psychology. An emotion, a thought, and (more extraordinary
still) a name, a number, or a drawing can be transmitted from
A to B. If, as it seems to me, cryptesthesia is the cognition of
the actual, then human thought, being itself an actuality, can pro
voke cryptesthesia.
Telepathy is therefore only a particular case of cryptesthesia.
I even think that among the unknown vibrations that bring crypt
esthesia into action, human thought is one of those that can most
easily be transmitted.
If the word telepathy is held to mean that there is synchronous
and synergetic vibrations of two human thoughts, it is a hypothe
sis. Cryptesthesia, on the contrary, is not a hypothesis. It is a
word indicating a fact. Truth to tell, it is nothing but a word,
since it signifies a means of cognition unknown to us. But till the
true theory comes, the fact must suffice.
In any case, telepathy presupposes cryptesthesia, since the
faculty that enables it to receive the vibrations of anothers
thought implies a new and incomprehensible function. That a
drawing known to A, enclosed in an opaque envelope, should be
reproduced by B is entirely mysterious, and the mystery is no
deeper if A holding the drawing has no idea what it may be; per
haps, indeed, the mental vibration of A in visualizing a drawing
is actually, in itself, more obscure than the clear outlines of a
drawing locked away in a box.
After all, it does not signify whether one or the other difficulty
is the greaterthe facts are there, the brutal facts, ordering us
to accept both cryptesthesia and telepathy. All that can be con
ceded is that telepathy is a special and frequent case of cryptes
thesia.
IX
When we speak of a mysterious faculty of cognition, saying
no more, we do but state our ig n o ran ce : and this ignorance is
coextensive with cryptesthesia; we cannot assig n limits to it.
Mrs. Piper speaks to Mrs. Verrall of an Aunt Susan, born in
1791, who had in her house a portrait of her son painted in oils.
This was a fact that Mrs. Verrall did not know and never had
known. How did this precise and insignificant fact reach Mrs.
Pipers mind? A hypothesis has been put forward that so-called
inert things emit special vibrations, emanations of some kind,
which excite cryptesthesia in sensitives, though they do not affect
the normal senses.
CONCLUSION 605
The emanations from subterranean springs or metals moving
the dowsers rod are good examples of this. Since there is one
rhabdic force some of whose laws are known, why should there
not be others?
A ring worn by Martins grandmother has retained some ef
fluvia of this woman so that the sensitive to whom this ring is
given will say something about hera name, a detail of her dress,
a long-forgotten accident, a trait of character. This has been
called psychometry, a very incorrect term, to which I prefer "prag
matic cryptesthesia, meaning a sensibility to emanations from
things.
It is quite possible that there may be emanations from things;
but in many cases lucidity comes into play without (apparently)
any material object to awaken it. If, for some few cases of haunt
ing, it may be supposed that the objects in a house have retained,
as it were, a vapour emanating from those who have dwelt in it,
this supposition is very far from accounting for all the phenomena,
and the hypothesis applies only to a very few particular cases.
The hypothesis of emanations is perhaps partially applicable,
but is nearly always inadequate; it may help to explain some cases,
but for most of the phenomena of cryptesthesia it is inoperative.
X
As a second hypothesis, it may be supposed that sometimes the
normal human senses may attain a prodigious acuity; so that
visual sensibility may become so sharp as to distinguish clearly a
drawing in an opaque envelope, or auditory sensibility may be
come so keen as to hear the ticking of a watch 600 miles away.
This hyperaesthesia is not altogether absurd; it would only
be an extraordinary extension of a normal faculty, and there are
some very rare cases of cryptesthesia that seem of a kind best to
be explained by superacuity of the senses, or perhaps of their
transposition. But in most cases no sensorial hyperaesthesia, how
ever great, would cover the facts, for there is very much more
than vision and audition at a distance.
XI
A third and very simple hypothesis now presents itself. It has
been adopted from the first with unreflecting enthusiasm. It is that
the mind of the sensitive is invaded, possessed, and replaced by
another mindthat of a deceased person whose intelligence and
consciousness are not dead. George Pelham after his death con
tinues to exist as a spirit, which then speaks by the brain, the
larynx, and the lips of Mrs. Piper, who is the intermediary (med
ium) between the world of the living and the world of the dead.
We have now come: to the spiritist hypothesis.
It is neither to be desired nor feared. When we devote our
selves to the high task of seeking pure truth, we ought not to be
intimidated by the opinion of the crowd, nor allured by any ob
scure desire for personal immortality.
The spiritist theory, disencumbered from superstitions that
weaken it, may be expressed in a few words.
The human mind is not annihilated at the moment of death.
It continues to evolve in a world that is not conditioned by space
and time. This mind, retaining some of the characteristics that it
had during lifeits individuality, its consciousness, and its per
sonalitycan manifest itself through certain privileged living per
sons, by taking possession of their body (brain, muscles, and
nerves); it then writes, sees, thinks, and speaks as in the time
when it was incarnate in flesh. The minds of the dead know things
near and far, past, present, or even future. They can speak
languages unknown to their medium, can compose verses, solve
problems, and discuss questions, when the medium, left to him
self, would be incapable of composing those verses, solving those
problems, or discussing those questions. The consciousness of
the Self has not disappeared; for there is no true survival without
consciousness of the Self.
Thus, when the consciousness of George Pelham is substituted
for that of Mrs. Piper, Mrs. Piper knows all that the discarnate
knew. When George Pelham takes possession there is no more
Mrs. Piper; there is only George Pelham.
To account for all that George Pelham does by lucidity is to
give lucidity an enormous and improbable extension; it is simpler
to make one single hypothesisthe survival of George Pelham,
and his incarnation in Mrs. Piper.
Since man does not die, he cannot be born. It follows that
there is no birth for minds (Allan Kardec). Discarnate minds
are incorporate in children who have just been born. Till then
they wander in the world, in the Beyond, painfully seeking to
manifest, sometimes incarnating in young children about to be
born, sometimes acting through mediums.
CONCLUSION 607
There is no death said Florence Marryat. On ne meurt
p a s wrote Chevreul.
The hypothesis is frank and clear. By conferring omniscience
on spirits it explains most of the facts, but it involves so many
improbabilities that, despite its seeming simplicity, I find myself
unable to adopt it. Nevertheless I oppose it half-heartedly, for I
am quite unable to bring forward any wholly satisfactory counter
theory.
1. Everything seems to prove that the intelligence is a function
of the brain, that it depends on the integrity of the cerebral
mechanism, and on the volume and quality of the blood that
irrigates it.
It is possible, it is even probable, that there may exist in nature
other intelligences under other conditions than the physical con
ditions of terrestrial life; but they would no longer be human in
telligences. Consequently, should they desire to enter into rela
tions with us, they would pity our coarse but inevitable anthro
pomorphism, and, in order to be understood, would have to clothe
themselves in human names and human sentiments. But they
would not belong to humanity, since the mind, whether human or
animal, can possess the human psychological characteristics of
consciousness, memory, sensibility, reason, and will only if the
brain exists. Thousands and thousands .oLexperiments establish
so close a relation between the brain as organ and intelligence as
function, that it is as impossible to admit the persistence of the
function (mind) without the organ (brain) as the renal secretion
without the kidney.
2. The word survival means survival of consciousness; for
in the absence of consciousness and memory, survival has no in
terest for us. We are well aware that the atoms of carbon, phos
phorus, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and sulphur that make up
our bodies are immortal, but what is that to us? The animistic
survival of some hypothetical vital force or soul, if the memory
of my Self has vanished, concerns me no more than the survival
of the phosphorus in my brain. Now innumerable facts have
proved that memory is a function that very soon disappears, that
asphyxia, anaemia, and poisons impair it immediately; it is ex
tremely frail; it diminishes rapidly with advancing age. To sur
vive without remembrance of the old Self is not to survive at all.
And what is it that is to survive? Will the old man who has
fallen into second childhood have the Self of his intellectual prime
or the Self of his decrepitude? Will the Self of a person who
stammered continue to stammer in the Beyond ? What puerility!
Materlinck has expressed this in admirable words, This T / so
uncertain, so fugitive, and so precarious, evading all definition, is
so entirely the centre of our being, and interests us so exclusively,
that all the realities of life fade when confronted with that
phantasm. If remembrance of certain facts, nearly always in
significant, does not accompany us . . . it is nothing to me that the
highest, freest, and noblest parts of my mind should shine, living
and eternal, in supreme bliss; they are not Me; I do not know
them. Death has cut the links of nerves, or the memories that
bound them to that unknown central point at which I feel myself
complete.
This does not signify negation of any intelligent energies apart
from a brain; but such hypothetical intelligent forces, independent
of a material substratum, have nothing in common with human
minds.
3. There are all degrees between the almost perfect re-consti
tution of a vanished human personality such as George Pelham
(though this is very rare and G. P.s case nearly unique) and the
creation of obviously factitious personalities, which is very com
mon and frequently observed.
I suggest to A. that she is a little girl named Madelon Martin,
neither the name nor personality having any reality except in my
fancy, and forthwith she becomes Madelon Martin. If by chance
a Madelon Martin has existed, or still exists, and A. has known
her, she will at once reproduce her characteristics with marvel
lous fidelity. What is, then, the cause for surprise if, by some
unforeseen auto-suggestion, Mrs. Piper has thought herself to
be George Pelham, and then, by her wonderful powers of crypt-
esthesia, she should reproduce the tastes, the intonations, the pas
sions, and the remembrances of George Pelham?
Assuredly if George Pelham was never known to A ., and she
faithfully reproduces his thought, we must ascribe to A. intense
and amazing powers of cryptesthesia. (This is permissible, for
its limits are unknown.) Then the personality of George Pelham
will seem to be reconstituted integrally, and yet this personality,
in spite of his reiterated affirmations, may be as factitious as the
Others. Perhaps this personification of George Pelham is due only
to a splendid and far-reaching lucidity.
As all degrees of personification are observed, the manifesting
CONCLUSION 609
personalities rarely or never show such strong individuality as did
George Pelham, so conformable to the actual person who lived.
Sometimes, as in the case of Phinuit, G. P.s predecessor, the per
sonalities produced are imaginary. John King is probably a fanci
ful creation of Eusapia; and Rector, Imperator, and Mentor are
fanciful creations of Stainton Moses. The queerest personalities
can easily be evoked by hypnotic suggestions. The only difference
between the somnambule and the medium is that while the actions
Fig. 25. Comparison of the authentic signatures of the Syndic Chaumontet and
the Cur Burnier with those written by Helen Smith. The top and
bottom lines are from Helens hand.
( A f t e r F lo u rn o y , loc. cit., p. 409.)
of the former are due to the verbal suggestion of the magnetizer,

those of the latter are due to an auto-suggestion whose origin is
unknown. Since it is impossible to accept as authentic the child
ish personifications of common hypnotism, why should we accept
those that are a little more perfect ? The transition from the one
to the other is gradual; where are we to stop? What criterion
have we for saying This one is true, that is imaginary ?* We see
so many that are obviously imaginary that we can scarcely avoid
the inference that all are.
The ease and frequency with which factitious personalities are
produced renders the production of real personifications very
doubtful.
We may hesitate a moment when Helen accurately reproduces
Burniers signature, for she signs like Burnier, whose writing she
has doubtless never seen; but she also incarnates Cagliostro and
Marie Antoinette! Why, then, should the personification of Bur
nier be more real than that of Marie Antoinette, of Cagliostro, of
an Indian prince, or any other of the manifestly imaginary crea
tions? The similitude of writing need not trouble us; for there
is nothing to show that cryptesthesia may not extend even to that:
Helen Smith sees before her the signature of Burnier by her
cryptesthesia and then she imagines herself to be Burnier in virtue
of the natural tendency of mediums to impersonate.
T. Flournoy, to whom we owe an admirable study of Helen
Smith, does not even go so far as to admit cryptesthesia. He
supposes that there is a revival of an old remembrance, and thinks
(without, however, advancing any proof) that Helen Smith must
have seen a signature of Burnier at some time or other. In order
to reach this point he is obliged to make a long series of unlikely
suppositions. It seems to me more reasonable to admit cryptes
thesia, proved by thousands of observations and experiments, and
extremely probable in an excellent medium like Helen Smith.
Therefore though I hold the opinion of Flournoy in much re
spect, I cannot agree that the name and the signature of Burnier
are to be accounted for by accumulated and forgotten impressions.
It seems to me a phenomenon of lucidity. But I shall not infer
incarnation because there is lucidity.
Highly also as I esteem the opinions of my distinguished friend,
Sir Oliver Lodge, I cannot think survival the most probable ex
planation in Raymonds case. It seems, on the contrary, that if
hashes of lucidity are admitted (and the reality of lucidity is not
disputed) and also symbolization; if it is recognized that mediums
have an invincible tendency to reconstitute former personalities, we
come in the end to less improbable hypotheses than that of survival.
4. Cryptesthesia comes into play without any necessity for sup
posing that a discamate human being is speaking by the voice or
writing by the hand of the medium. Details about living persons
have been furnished which in no way imply the existence of a
vanished entity. When Mrs. Thompson sees the word Carquei-
ranne on the forehead of M. Moutonnier it is unnecessary to
CONCLUSION 611
suppose that Nelly showed her this. The hypothesis that Nelly
has survived serves no purpose. Nelly is an imaginary being
who greatly facilitates experiment, but is not necessary to it; it
is scarcely a working hypothesis, since this complication is not
required. Mrs. Thompson on taking my sons watch says, Three
generations mingled. Nelly is speaking, but Nelly is only a sym
bol; the reality is Mrs. Thompson speaking and using her fine
faculty of cryptesthesia; there is no need to bring in the person
ality of her granddaughter.
Phinuit, speaking by the voice of Mrs. Piper, has given extraor
dinary instances of cryptesthesia, as good as, if not better than,
those of George Pelham, but Phinuit is obviously a creation of
Mrs. Pipers mind. There was never any French doctor at Metz
by the name of Phinuit. Phinuit never existed; he is Mrs. Piper.
George Pelham, who is neither more nor less lucid than Phinuit,
is Mrs. Piper in a lucid state. Then everything that she knows
by cryptesthesia about George Pelham, who once existed but
whose consciousness vanished when his heart ceased to beat, crys
tallizes round this personality of George Pelham.
5. When these entities manifest they make mistakes, trifle so
childishly, forget so much, and show such reticences, that it is im
possible to suppose that the spirit of a deceased person has
returned.
It is true that there is nothing that obliges us to attribute to
the personalities of the departed the same feelings, the same
modes of reasoning, and the same judgments that they had on
earth. But then the resemblance of sentiments and reasonings
verified in certain cases must not be brought into the argument,
since in the majority of instances this resemblance is outrageously
wanting. These personages take pleasure in absurd jokes and
childish plays on words, and make up sentences that resemble
puns. I do not know who it was that said, If survival involves
having the mentality of a discarnate, I prefer not to survive.
These are rags and tatters of intelligence, and, with few excep- '
tions, of a low-grade intelligence. These discamates have
forgotten essential things and busy themselves with minutiae to
which they would not have given a moment during life. That
one should come back to earth to speak of a sleeve-link is not
merely feeble; it has no likelihood at all. This is a strong argu
ment against the spiritist doctrine.
This poor spiritist personality is not in any way incoherent; it
is simply low grade and very low grade, being, with few ex
ceptions, much below average intelligence; but it remains consist
ently the same for many monthsinfantile like Feda and Nelly;
facetious like Vincenzo; erudite and mystical like Myers P .; jovial
like Phinuit.
The rejoinder is made that the relation of spirits to a human
brain is probably not very easy; that the brain of the medium is
an imperfect instrument, and the incoherences are due to want of
co-ordination between the instrument and he who plays on it.
But what a mass of hypotheses and symbolical interpretations,
bristling with obscurities and fancies, in order to evade the evi
dence that the psychological personality of the discarnate is quite
different from that of the person during his life-time.
Not only is this psychological personality different from what
it was in life, but it is nearly always notoriously inferior at any
rate from our anthropomorphic point of view.
Everything can be very simply explained if we admit that there
is never anything whatever at work but the thoughts of the
medium, a being very human indeed and exclusively human,
whose subconscious mental operations are rudimentary, and, so to
say, amorphous. In our simplicity we think we hear the words of
a discarnate, when in fact we are witnessing the waves of subcon
sciousness grouping themselves round a fictitious personality.
6. Another characteristic of spiritist personalities is that they
shroud themselves in mystery; as if the mystery of their presence
were not enough. There are reticences, implications, and veiled
allusions that need much sagacity to understand. At certain
times they seem to know a great deal, and then when becoming
most interesting, they suddenly stop and go wandering. It may
legitimately be inferred that if they do not tell more it is because
they do not know more. They rarely give a plain answer to a plain
question. If they were before a board of examiners they would
not pass, for they answer badly and not to the point.
That is doubtless the reasondisastrous to the spiritist hypoth
esiswhy nothing has been revealed by deceased personalities
that was not already known to the generality of mankind. They
have not helped us to a single step forward in geometry, in physics,
in physiology, or even in metaphysics. They have never been able
to prove that they know more than the ordinary man on any sub
ject soever. No unexpected discovery has been indicated; no
revelation has been made. The answers, with the rarest excep
CONCLUSION 613
tions, are desperately commonplace. Not the smallest atom of
scientific knowledge has been anticipated.
There are wonderful imitations of style, such as Dickenss ro
mance, and the verses of Molire dictated to Victor Hugo. But a
parody is not authorship. It is clever literary work, but it does
not come from a Beyond. The human intelligence that composes
this prose and verse is in no way beyond human powers. It is not
the semi-divine inspiration that we might expect from spirits.
The lucidity of some mediums is amazing, but lucidity is not
survival. Survival implies the continuance of personal conscious
ness. F. Myers lived on the earth; he was himself and no other,
with intentions, habits, tastes, thoughts, remembrances, hopes, and
an intelligence which made him a definite personality very differ
ent from all others. But when Mrs. Verralls hand writes, I am
Myers, or Mrs. Pipers voice says, I am Myers, it is useless
to try to find vague or even exact analogies between Myers V.,
or Myers P., with the real Myers ; even if such analogies are dis
coverable, they are not enough to prove that, independently of
Mrs. Verrall or Mrs. Piper or any other lucid medium, there is
somewhere in space a human consciousness that says I, identical
with the consciousness of our greatly regretted friend, and retain
ing his primordial intellectual character and coherent remem
brances as we knew him at Leckhampton House.
All the indications transmitted by discarnates on their actual,
material, or psychological state inspire me with very limited con
fidence, for it is needful first of all to prove that there are any
discarnates. I do not share the robust faith of one of Sir A. Conan
Doyle's correspondents, Mr. Hubert Wales, who writes with
simple anthropomorphism, that spirits have bodies, which, though
imperceptible by our senses, are as solid to them as ours are to
us . . . that they have no age, no pain, no rich and poor; that
they wear clothes and take nourishment; that they do not sleep,
though they spoke of passing occasionally into a semi-conscious
state . . . that people of similar thoughts, tastes, and feelings j
gravitate together; that married couples do not necessarily re
unite . . . {The N ew Revelation, Conan Doyle, p. 148).
I cannot, alas! share the deep convictions of my large-minded
friend, W. Stead, who, when I went to see him after he had lost
his son, said to me, Why should I be sad ? I wrote to him this
morning and he will answer me this evening. He is quite happy
and we are in daily relations as formerly.
In my humble opinion proof of survival has not been given by
subjective metapsychics, but I hasten to add that a near approach
to that proof has been made. If proof of surviving consciousness
could have been given it would have been given.
Can such proof be given ? I really do not see what better argu
ments can be furnished than the cases of George Pelham and
Raymond Lodge; and I cannot imagine any experiments that
would be more decisive, or any observations that would carry more
weight.
Truth to telland one must be as cautious in denial as in as
sertionsome facts tend to make us believe strongly in the sur
vival of vanished personalities. Why should mediums, even when
they have read no spiritualist books, and are unacquainted with
spiritualist doctrines, proceed at once to personify some deceased
person or other? Why does the new personality affirm itself so
persistently, so energetically, and sometimes with so much verisi
militude? Why does it separate itself so sharply from the per
sonality of the medium? All the words of powerful mediums are
pregnant, so to say, with the theory of survival. These are sem
blances, perhaps, but why should the semblances be there ?
These hesitations must be forgiven me. On the threshold of a
mystery we may well be troubled and decline to use trenchant
words and peremptory phrases in ludicrous contrast with our inner
painful uncertainty.
If we had nothing to go upon but subjective metapsychics we
might stop at cryptesthesia as a simple and necessary hypothesis
covering everything. Let us therefore admit, as the only fully
demonstrated proposition, that there actually is an intense form
of cryptesthesia, defined by unmeasured powers of cognition, and
a sensibility of the soul to subtle vibrations that none of our physi
cal instruments can reveal.
There is, then, no need to call in the intervention of external
energies and my inference will bethe human mind is much more
powerful and more sensitive than we know or think.
XII
The hypothesis involved is very simple; to admit an extension of
our intellectual powers is scarcely a hypothesis at all. But we can
go no farther, for the more we try to analyze this inaccessible
faculty of cryptesthesia, the less we understand it. Telepathy,
CONCLUSION 615
superacuity of the senses, actual emanationsif these explain
some of the phenomena they do not account for anywhere near
all of them; and we must recognize that we know only the effects,
and not the cause of cryptesthesia: its modalities and its mechan
ism escape us entirely.
The transition from subjective to objective phenomena is not
so abrupt as might be thought; for to produce a cryptesthetic sen
sation there must be some external phenomenon, probably a vi
bration, since energy is transmitted by vibrations. (Of the
Ether?) If, then, a notion arises due to cryptesthesia some ex
ternal power must have been in action.
Monitions, of death or any other, can be accounted for only by
a vibration of some unknown kind impinging upon our subcon
sciousness. There must therefore be some external thing that has
acted upon us. This external thing which moves the subconscious
Self is objective; our instruments register nothing, but it is ob
jective all the same.
Then we have to consider that strange power of symbolization,
which is one of the corner-stones in metapsychic science.
In order that any notion may be understood by us, it must take
a form comprehensible by our conscious mind. For instance an
announcement of the death of A will only be understood by the
consciousness of B if conveyed by some intelligible representa
tion. Then the truncated and barely outlined notion that A is
dead is visualized as a phantom, or externalized as a voice, and
many details are added, sometimes incoherent, but sometimes very
synthetic, that complete the embryonic idea. These symbols that
one is tempted to take for realities have no reality in themselves;
they are but the translation by a symbol of the particular notion
that arouses the cryptesthesia.
Even when, as in a haunted house, the same personage appears
to different persons successively under the same form, this does
not prove that there is a real external phantom. It is possibly be
cause the symbolization has been exercised in the same way by two
different percipients. In all this we are only talking in hypotheses.
I do not allow myself to be deceived by the mirage presented by
words. Cryptesthesia is a word that does not even hide our igno
rance. To say that cryptesthesia exists does not in any way solve
the very troubling questions that we cannot answer. These may
perhaps be answered by future metapsychic science, provided that
it remain strictly experimental.
1. Have all persons some rudimentary cryptesthesia ?
2. Why is it so developed in certain mediums? Why does
hypnotism favour its appearance ?
3. In spiritist seances why does the medium show from the
outset an invincible tendency to assume the existence of a guide
that seems to have an intelligence distinct from that of the
medium?
4. Why, in the case of powerful mediums, are objective phe
nomena (materializations and telekinesis) nearly always associated
with subjective phenomena (cryptesthesia)?
5. By what channel does cognition of things beyond sensorial
perception reach the human mind? Is it the vibration of human
intelligence that travels? Or do the vibrations of things present
themselves to our intelligence?
6. Must we suppose that only living human minds are in play
and that no others intervenethose of the dead, or of angels,
demons, or gods? - It
In the actual state of our embryonic science these are insoluble
problems. I call a halt at the facts, and decline to be led beyond
them. I do not condemn the spiritist theory. It is certainly
premature, and probably erroneous. But it has the immense
merit of having stimulated experiment. It is one of those work
ing hypotheses that Claude Bernard considered so fruitful. In
any case, theory is by no means proved, since it is frail, incon
sistent, and incoherent; we will, provisionally at least, content
ourselves with saying that transcendental modes of cognition ac
tually exist whose extent we cannot define, and therefore that all
the powers that spiritualists ascribe to spirits should be attributed
to that superior knowledge with which the human brain sometimes
appears to be endowed.
We shall presently consider whether materializations and tele
kinesis may give some support to the spiritist theory; but from
this time forth we can say that, taking subjective facts alone, it is
not demonstrated; and the trying thing is that one does not see
how it could be demonstratedhow it could be proved that human
consciousness with its remembrances and its personality could
survive the death of the brain.
Still, an immense step forward has been made; it has been
proved that a whole world of powers, sometimes accessible, vi
brates around us. We cannot even suspect the nature of those
powers; we only see their effects. These effects are, however, so
CONCLUSION 617
clear that we can assert the reality of the forces; if some mediums
and some somnambulists can know things that their senses have
not shown them it is that unknown forces have reached and acted
upon their sensitiveness. That is all that we can say today.
X III
Consequently the phenomena that we call subjective are only
apparently so. Every phenomenon of cryptesthesia must be pre
ceded jby an exterior energy that has started it, some unknown
vibration that has set in motion the latent energies of our human
mind, unaware of all its powers.
X IV
There is something more than subjective metapsychics; some
thing more than great superacuity of the senses and mysterious
depths of mind: there is the action of intelligence on matter. And
the appalling obscurity of the whole question, when we extend
cryptesthesia without limits, becomes more appalling still.
There are the facts: they compel us to admit movements at a
distance; and strange as this phenomenon may be it is not the
strangest. It is even the most elementary fact in this embryonic
and terrifying science.
That a mechanical energy of an unknown kind should emanate
from the human body and move a table, and shake a piece of
board with knocking, is not entirely incomprehensible. But that
this force should produce word-making sound, lights, and living
human formsthis indeed goes beyond all our concepts of the
possible. A warm and living hand, a mouth that speaks, eyes that
see, and thought that thrills, like the hand, the mouth, the eyes,
and the thought of a human beingthese are phenomena that
put us to utter confusion.
We are in thick darkness. It was already impossible to under
stand how Banca, at the very moment that his family was about to
perish a couple of thousand miles away, could speak of death
lyin g in w a it fo r his fa m ily; or how Figueroa could see, six
months before the event, a peasant dressed in black strike a mule
aside to let him pass up a spiral stair. But objective metapsychic
is more puzzling still; it is an unmitigated mystery, and all at
tempts at explanation seem puerile.
Nevertheless no one has the right to withdraw these facts
from scientific investigation.
Metapsychic science will certainly pass through many phases.
It is at present in travail of greater things; but it is much that
the facts have been well proved and are too plain to be denied.
Unfortunately they cannot yet be built into a consistent and ten
able theory; it beseems us to examine what may be inferred from
all these astounding observations and amazing experiments with
out fear, but also without arrogance that our human limitations
would render laughable.
As to materializations and telekinesis our opinion may be
summed up by saying, These phenomena may he attributed to
energies of human origin.
XV
Thanks to Ochorowicz, Schrenck-Notzing, Mme. Bisson, and
Crawford, who carried on Crookess work, it seems now fairly
proved that materializations are ectoplasms; that is, sarcodic ex
tensions emanating from the body of a medium, precisely as a
pseudopod is projected from an amoeboid cell. All zoologists are
aware that an amoeba can project a sarcode to seize upon ali
mentary matter and infest it. In a similar fashion fluidic filaments
or extensions like clouds, veils, or stems may proceed from the
body of the entranced medium, can then become organic, and take
on the semblance of human limbs and occasionally of whole bodies.
In their first stage these ectoplasms are invisible, but can move
objects and can give raps on a table. Later on they become visible
though nebulous and sketchy. Still later they take human form,
for they have the extraordinary property that they change their
forms and their consistence and evolve under our eyes. In a few
seconds the nebulous embryo that exudes from the body of the
medium becomes an actual being; though the human ovum re
quires thirty years to evolve into the adult form.
Sometimes the phantom appears suddenly, without passing
through the phase of luminous cloud; but this phenomenon is
probably of the same order as the slower development.
This ectoplasmic formation at the expense of the physiological
organism of the medium is now beyond all dispute. It is prodig
iously strange, prodigiously unusual, and it would seem so unlikely
as to be incredible; but we must give in to the facts. I am confi
CONCLUSION 619
dent that twenty-five years hence orthodox science will admit tele
kinesis and ectoplasms as undisputed phenomena. The profound
changes in ideas on this subject that have taken place the last
twenty-five years warrant this assurance.
XVI
To state facts is not enough; we must summon up courage to
outline some kind of theory, imperfect though it will necessarily
be.
It has been shown that as regards subjective metapsychics the
simplest and most rational explanation is to suppose the existence
of a faculty of supernormal cognition that we have called cryptes-
thesia, setting in motion the human intelligence by certain vibra
tions that do not move the normal senses.
Similarly in objective metapsychics the simplest and most
rational explanation is analogousto suppose that the human or
ganism has a faculty of external projection, of ectoplasmisation,
the emission of a material substance that can become organic.
It follows that the most reasonable hypothesis is that there are
in the human body energies capable of being exteriorized.
But though this hypothesis is the most simple that can be ad
vanced it is not really simple at all. It implies a new physiology,
a new chemistry, and a new physics.
Beings with a human shape, that begin and end in white veils,
that come and go like clouds, are not human beings.
Man is so close to the animal that everything proper to a human
being must be allowed to animals also, in part at any rate. We
have no essential function that is not possessed by any other
mammal, nay even by any vertebrate or invertebrate. The gen
erative, circulatory, nutritive, and digestive processes are prac
tically the same in all. The difference between the animal and
man is that man has a slightly more penetrating intelligence, o f.
larger scope, and capable of remembering, analyzing, and ab
stracting. But this difference is not essential: man merely pos
sesses a higher degree of intelligence. That is all; he is a highly
intelligent animal, but he is an animal. Now, to transform matter,
to become a living ephemeral being, and to create ephemeral living
matter, is to open a new world. We are evolving in another
dimension. Man is no longer man. He no longer belongs to the
animal kingdom. He even transcends the mechanical world in
which we move where chemistry, physics, and mathematics reign
supreme.
Anything is possible. Perhaps human powers, whether moral
or material, go far beyond what habitual and daily experience
would lead us to think. It is demonstrated that fluidic emanations
can proceed from the body and develop into human forms. It is
demonstrated that this exteriorization is one of the properties of
living matter.
Geley, in an able book, maintains the subconscious to be a kind
of creative energy determining the histological mutations whereby
the larva is transformed into a chrysalis and the chrysalis into the
perfect insect. The subconscious produces stigmata and miracu
lous cures. It is the subconscious that directs materializations.
Certainly to connect metapsychic phenomena with the most
positive data of embryology and zoology is bold and deep think
ing. But this does not seem to me to bring explanation. This
powerful subconscious, so omnipresent and efficient, is an undem
onstrated energy, it is always the quid ignotum.
Even for Geley the subconscious is insufficient, and he is inclined
to admitwithout definitely affirming thisthat the high and
complex phenomena of mediumship seem to show external direc
tion and intention that cannot be referred to the medium or the
experimenters.
Such is Geleys opinion; it is not altogether mine. I shall say,
with Lodge, that we must select the least extravagant among all
the possible explanations. None of them, he says, fits all the facts.
To frame theories is as premature as it would have been for Gal-
vani to attempt to explain the nature of electricity.
In his fine work on human personality, F. Myers sketched out a
theory that in some points resembles Geleys, for elementary
metapsychic phenomena at any rate. According to Myers there
are many personalities, subliminal centres, co-existing, working,
thinking, comparing, and analyzing side by side with the principal
centre (consciousness) which scarcely knows of their existence.
These secondary centres are more open to influence by cryptes-
thetic vibrations than the central consciousness.
Certainly. But immediately afterwards, in order to explain the
higher phenomena, Myers finds himself obliged formally to admit
survival, and to infer that in many cases of automatic writing or
speaking, these secondary centres are invaded by discamate spirits.
CONCLUSION 621
The more these complex phenomena of monitions, premonitions,
and collective veridical hallucinations are studied in detail, the
more one is inclined to favour the hypothesis of an unknown ecto
plasmic energy pertaining to human beings; and this hypothesis
is so strange that all other possible hypotheses must first be
exhausted.
And in the first place we can well suppose that other beings than
man may move around us and influence our movements although
they may not be subject to the mechanical, physical, chemical, and
anatomical conditions that limit us.
Why should there not be intelligent and puissant beings dis
tinct from those perceptible by our senses ? By what right should
we dare to affirm, on the basis of our limited senses, our defective
intellect, and our scientific past as yet hardly three centuries old,
that in the vast Cosmos man is the sole intelligent being, and that
all mental reality always depends upon nerve-cells irrigated with
oxygenated blood ?
That there should be intellectual powers other than those of
mankind and constructed on a wholly different plan is not only
possible but highly probable. It might even be said to be certain.
It is absurd to suppose that ours is the only mind in nature; and
that inevitably every intelligent power is organized on the human
or animal model with a brain as its organ.
It is obvious how deep is the mystery. For when we speak of
mind, we implicitly (by our necessarily anthropomorphic way of
looking at things) take it to connote memory, logic, verbal ter
minology, and emotion; but mind (in the human connotation) is
so imperfect, so special to humanity that we cannot be fully cog
nizant of intelligent powers except by assimilating them more or
less to mankind. This is probably a serious error, and to say an
angel is intelligent (in the human sense) is about as logical as
if a piece of red cloth were to say, An angel is red. Our notions
of spirits, whether as to their form or their thoughts, are neces
sarily grossly anthropomorphic.
As we are now in the realm of hypotheses, we need not fear to
push our thought to its logical extreme. The basis of animal
intelligence is the nerve-cell; but this by no means proves that
nerve-cells, or even the chemical elements that we call material,
are necessary to all phenomena of mind. Very different beings in
very different worlds are conceivable where mind would exist
without nerve-cells or any material substratum. The proof that
such beings exist has not been given, but their possibility is
clear.
It is said: Man only shows his mind by his brain; therefore
there can be no mind without a brain. Such is the amazing logic
of those who accuse us of working against science.
If it be admitted that in the universe, under conditions of space
and time of which our rudimentary psychology is unaware, there
are intelligent beings, interfering at certain moments in our lives,
we have then a convenient hypothesis explanatory of many of the
facts detailed in this book.
Mysterious beings, angels or demons, existences devoid of form,
or spirits, which now and then seek to intervene in our lives, who
can by means entirely unknown mould matter at will, who direct
some of our thoughts and participate in some of our destinies, and
who, to make themselves known (which they could not otherwise
do) assume the bodily and psychological aspect of vanished human
personalitiesall this is a simple manner of expressing and un
derstanding the greater part of the metapsychic phenomena.
This is the more plausible, seeing that under a close analysis of
monitions and premonitions there seem to be vague intentions be
yond and outside us, which transcend human concepts, as if the in
telligent forces chose to stop on the threshold of the mystery, un
willing to tell everything, speaking in symbols and enigmas, out
lining misty affirmations when they might be more explicit; mov
ing plates, tables, and wooden logs, when they might (at least
according to our normal thinking) operate in a chemical or physi
cal laboratory, or at least tell us something of the mysteries of life
continued after the death of the body. But they deal in a verbose
theosophy; they tell us nothing useful, and do not even indicate
with any precision favourable conditions for experiment.
That such spirits should be the consciousness of defunct human
beings is, strictly speaking, possible; but I venture to say, with
all the caution that should guard every negation, it is not at all
probable. These discarnate souls are too fundamentally different
from those of living men that they should be the same; and as for
the material, how should the disintegrated body after three years
in a coffin be more able to find the clothes that it wore when living
than to reconstitute its heart, its liver, and its eyes, which have all
become formless matter?
If then (as I cannot believe) there are spirits, and they are en
dowed with mysterious powers (that I do not understand) and
CONCLUSION 623
have mysterious intentions (which I understand no better), in any
case they cannot be the consciousnesses of deceased persons.
They belong to other worlds, different from our material world
and from our moral world, and if they put on human semblances
it must be to make themselves partially known to us.1
To sum up: There are three hypotheses in the field.
1. The phenomena are due to the dead, whose consciousness
still persists without any material substratum. This is the spiritist
theory which seems to me the least likely of any.
2. There are angels, spirits (SaifJioves) who can act on matter
and on human minds, and intervene in human affairs.
3. The human intelligence (body and soul) is sufficiently power
ful to produce both material manifestations (ectoplasms) and the
subjective manifestations (cryptesthesia) that amaze us.
If I admit this third hypothesis as obviously superior to the
others, it is not that I believe in it very strongly. Far otherwise.
I am well aware how frail it is, how incredible, almost as incredible
as the two former. But can anything better be put forward ?
Perhaps; and I adopt without reserve a fourth proposition
which has every chance of being truewe have as yet no satisfac
tory hypothesis to put forward.
In fine, I believe that future hypothesis that I cannot formulate
because I do not know it.
XVII
Bewildering powers vibrate around us. The facts seem
strangely inconsistent with ascertained truths. They are not.
Since the facts are facts, the disharmony must be only seeming
the necessary consequence of our ignorance. This ignorance will
*In o rd e r to m ake th is seem ingly m onstrous hypothesis in some degree
acceptable, le t u s suppose th at m en do no t know m uch m ore about the
un iv erse th a n a colony of a n ts know s about the earth-planet. They do not
know th a t th e re a re beings fa r superior to them in pow ers and intelligence;
th ey a re u n aw are o f seas, ships, libraries, telephones, theatres, arm ies, courts
o f justice, a n d stars. T hey live as though th ere w ere nothing in the world
b u t little b its o f w ood, m oss, old tree-trunks, the insects th at they feed upon,
and th e stream lets th a t inund ate th eir nests. A nd if som e a n t w iser than its
fellow s w ere to tell them th a t there is m ore, in th e w orld than this he would
doubtless be th o u g h t m ad, and his fellow s would have no difficulty in certi
fying him as insane. A nd being m yself convinced that, w hen all is said, we
know less o f th e Cosm os th an a n est o f ants know s of this planet, I am in
clined, thoug h w itho ut tangible proof, to thin k th at other w orlds m ay exist be
sides o u r little physico-chem ical w orld. T he notion is surprising but not
unlikely.
not last for ever: the day will come, perhaps it is not far distant,
when some unexpected discovery will open a new horizon to our
eyes. A man of genius, a powerful medium, a happy chanceany
one of these would suffice to reveal a whole series of new truths,
whence will emerge not only new solutions, but further problems
of which we now have no notion.
XVIII
The final outcome will be much more surprising and unexpected
than our limited imagination can dream. Science, we must admit,
will be transformed from top to bottom beyond our boldest
anticipations.
We must advance resolutely, using exact scientific methods,
being neither credulous nor timid, but trusting the marvellous
power of science. Let us endeavour to recall the state of human
mentality in the time of Paracelsus and Gutenberg, only four
hundred years ago. Twelve generationsa very short time for
the transformation of the world!
Chemistry is a marvellous science that reveals the most secret
motions of the atoms, and indicates the places that these imponder
able entities will take up in space by their combinations, by creat
ing new substances. Nevertheless Chemistry began as Alchemy
own sister to Astrology.
If I had lived in the fifteenth century, I might have believed in
Alchemy and Astrology; and I should have done wisely, for they
have become our sciences of today. Now, I have complete con
fidence in metapsychics, and I do not think it will require four
hundred years to grow into as exact a science as Chemistry now is.
Metapsychics has, however, to encounter a very grave diffi
culty special to itself that does not beset other sciences: its subject
matter is not the blind forces of chemistry and physics but intelli
gent forces, capable of freakish, and possibly hostile, intentions.
How, then, are the problems presented to be attacked ? Everything
seems to turn on the fall of the dice.
Fortunately it is most improbable that these intelligent forces
should not be subject to definite laws, and therefore accessible to
our researches.
Our aim must be to discover these laws; and who knows but
that instead of being hindered by these intelligences themselves
CONCLUSION 625
from getting to know them, as has hitherto seemed to be the case,
we may not be aided by them ?
However this may be, the numerous scattered facts that have
now been collected show plainly that a new mentality will per
vade human society as metapsychics gains influence. Not long
since we were disposed to think that there could be nothing beyond
the material facts verified and studied by men of science, and
there was a disposition to assign limits, and not very remote limits,
beyond which we held that science could not pass. More power
ful microscopes and telescopes, more sensitive galvanometers and
thermometerssuch things bounded our limited view. Our hopes
are now vastly greater; we have a glimpse of a whole unexplored
world full of mysteries before which we stand as dumb and dense
as a Hottentot might before Poincares vortices, Herzs waves,
Pasteurs microbes, or Einsteins relativity.
This new world is the unknown, the future, and our hope.1
As Frederic Myers and Oliver Lodge have well pointed out,
perhaps a new view of human duty will emerge from these studies,
which are as yet in a most elementary stage. We can scarcely
foresee the subversive effects that metapsychics will have upon our
ideas of the final purposes of human existence. The sciences
that deal with atoms and physical forces, gravitation, heat, elec
tricity, and chemical affinity will not be ups#t, for they rest on
unshakable foundations. But many and great things will be added
to them.
And perhaps the goal of humanity will be better understood. If
we have been able to bring some of the more coherent facts of this
new knowledge within the domain of positive science, that goal
will be hidden in less impenetrable darkness.
At the present hour, while all is yet quite dark, our duty is plain.
Let us be sober in speculation; let us study and analyze facts; let
us be as bold in hypothesis as we are rigorous in experimentation.
Metapsychics will then emerge from Occultism, as Chemistry
emerged from Alchemy: and none can foresee its amazing career. |
But we must keep clear of illusions: the fragments of uncom-
1Pascal said as much in deeply significant words: "The secrets of Nature
are hidden ; although ever in action, the effects she produces are not always
seen , time reveals them from age to age. . . . W e may affirm the opposite
to what the ancients have said without therefore contradicting them; and what
ever authority their antiquity may have, that of truth is always greater, even
when newly discovered, for truth is always more ancient than any opinion
soever (Fragment of a Treatise on vacuo, 3
Ed. Havet, ii, 27 )*
prehended truth that the science of the occult offers to us reveal
the poverty of the human understanding. The study of the
heavens soon convinces an astronomer that man is an infinitesi
mally small object in the universe. Similarly in metapsychic
science, when pale and fugitive gleams reveal intellectual worlds
circling around us and in us, we feel that these worlds may perhaps
ever remain as distant and incomprehensible as the far, incompre
hensible stars in the depths of space.
But that is no reason for refraining from increased efforts and
labour. There are great depths to be sounded. The task is so noble
that, even should it fail of success, the honour of having attempted
it gives fresh value to life.
INDEX
INDEX
Abbott, D., 449, 455. Andreoff, 188.
Abdullah, 536. Andre, 55, 56, 65, 66.
Ablard, 72. Andrews, 145.
Abelous, 121, 122. Anna, 121.
Abren, Captain, d, 530. Annie, Aunt, 138.
Abronowski, 194. Anthony, Dr., 363.
Adam, J., 262, 283, 284. Antoinette, 42.
Adam, P., 365. Apollonius, 18, 19, 159.
Adams, 334, 572. Appleby, 271.
Adamson, 122. Apte, 20.
Adare, Viscount, 485-488. Arago, 377.
schylus, 74, 76. Arbonsoff, 284.
Aggazotti, 418, 419. Aresky, 463, 505, 508.
Agnes of Bohemia, 545. Argentina, 526.
Agrippa, 14, 19. Argner, 231.
Aischa, 503, 508. Aristotle, 4, 209, 210.
Akoutine, 581. Arnsburg, 432.
Aksakoff, 27, 34, 36, 158, 159, 220, Arpentigny, d, 184.
225, 226, 274,412,415,424,450, Arriola, Papito, 10, 226.
468, 492, 493,535,539,542,553, Arsonval, a, 413, 418, 440, 458.
557, 558,582, 600. Artus, 111.
Albe, d, 544. Assagioli, 241, 242.
Albertis, d\ 549. Athenodorus, 573.
Alesi, d, 81. Aub, 162.
Alexander, 315. Aubry, F. and G., 157.
Alexandra, 369. Audenino, 419.
Alexandrina, 362. Avellino, 499.
Alexandrovna, S., 188. Aylesbury, 259, 335, 343.
Alexis Didier (see Didier). Azam, 32, 70.
Alice, 41, 42, 70, 71, 111, 125, 126,
129-133, 359-361, 490, 598. Babinet, 28, 229.
Allams, 225. Babinski, 100.
Alliot, 181. Bachelot, 270, 271.
Allom, 284. Bacherini, 395.
Alma, L., 127, 128. Backer, F. de, 111.
Alphonso XII, 313. Backmann, Dr., 127, 128.
Alrutz, S., 102. Baeschly, 285.
Amicis, d\ 499. Baggally, 420, 544.
Ammianus Marcellinus, 21. Bagot, Mme., 246, 278.
Ampre, A., 457. Bailey, 456, 457, 463, 471, 477.
Andrade, d, 529, 533. Baker, R., 255, 320.
629
630 INDEX
Baker, Mme., 367. Beres ford, Lord, 286.
Baldwin, 143. Beretta, 439.
Bale, 372. Bergen, de, 538.
Balfour, A. J., 33. Berger, 199.
Balfour, G., 33, 176. Berget, 287.
Ball, 284. Bergson, 33.
Ball, 123, 124. Berisso, 419.
Balsamo, S., 367. Bernard, Claude, 8, 11, 12, 70, 84,
Banca, 617. 616.
Bangs, 451. Bernard de Courlon, 546.
Banister, 350, 356. Bernheim, 32, 105.
Baraduc, 101, 435, 436, 480, 559. Bernstein, 191.
Bard, 263, 266, 321. Bersot, 78.
Barty, 101. Berteaux, 111.
Barker, 285, 390. Bertha, 270.
Barker, ., 80, 286. Bertheion, 288.
Barclay, Mme., 514. Berthon, 340.
Barnard, 394. Bertie, 289.
Barr, 261. Bertrand, 24, 119, 291.
Barreau, Mme. de, 335. Besnard, 289.
Barrett, Sir W., 7, 26, 33, 34, 86, Bessi, 284, 285.
102, 155, 168, 171, 217, 224, 227, Bettany, 255, 259, 336.
229, 231, 233, 234, 431, 447, 588, Betty, 475.
589, 591, 600,602. Bianco, 532.
Bartolini, T., 158. Bibby, 291.
Barwell, 251. Bien Boa, 466, 467, 469, 475, 477,
Barzini, 473. 490, 505-509.
Baschieri, U., 159, 423. Bigard, J., 261, 291, 292.
Basserole, 291. Bigge, 560.
Batelli, 528. Binet, 287.
Bathes, E., 152, 153. Binns, 484.
Baudouin, M., 272. Bishop, 288, 289, 326.
Baugher, 111. Bisson, D., 46, 432, 438, 460, 464,
Bayfield, 147. 467, 469, 470, 476, 477, 483, 491,
Bayol, 541. 504, 510-515, 523, 544, 618.
Beale, 286, 331.
Beaufort, Mme., 173. Blackburn, 271, 485.
Beaugrand, 263, 286. Blackman, 26.
Beck, 287. Blake, C , 536.
Bedford, 574. Blanche, 347.
Beilby, 333, 343. Blavatsky, Mme., 211, 450.
Belbeder, 287. Bliss, 27.
Bellier, 417. Bloch, Mme., 290, 500.
Belot, Mme., 323. Blocus, Mme., 81.
Benedikt, 238. Blodgett, 140, 141.
Benning, 557. Blondlot, 103.
Braud, Marthe, 26, 33, 34, 39, 43, Bocca, 419.
46, 399, 428, 438, 439, 441-443, 457, Boch, 290.
466, 467, 469, 470, 474, 477, 478, Bocock, 484.
484,503-517,520-525, 534, 542, 544. Bohn, 584.
INDEX 631
Bhm, 225. Bristow, 584, 585.
Boirac, E., 4, 36, 106, 116, 117, 187, Brittain, A., 146.
195, 470. Britten, 27.
Bois, J., 74, 81, 289. Britton, 145.
Boislve, Baroness de, 298. Brofferio, 36, 412.
Boismont, de, 283. Broquet, 226.
Boisnard, 372. Brompton, P., 288.
Boissarie, 111. Brot, Mme., 376.
Boniface, Mme., 290. Brougham, Lord, 290.
Bonjunski, 539. Brown, 540, 541.
Bonnamy, 307. Brown, M., 140, 534, 575.
Bonnard, 152. Browne, J., 307.
Bonnefoy, S., 323. Bruce, Dr., 323.
Bormann, 509. Bruce, R., 553.
Bossuet, 72. Brutus, 19.
Bottazzi, F., 34, 413, 464, 474, 478, Bryant, 27.
499, 500, 535, 597, 600. Buchanan, 177.
Botzaris, 221. Buckley, 116.
Boucher, Dr., 376, 377. Buddha, 72.
Bouillaud, 8. Buell, Mme., 152.
Bourbon, Dr., 466, 511, 512. Buguet, 456, 459.
Bourget, P., 137, 141. Buisson, 381.
Bourneville, Dr., 20. Buloz, 282.
Boursnell, 456, 459. Burco, 183.
Bourru, Dr., 181. Bureau, A., 287, 288.
Boutleroff, 27, 274, 408, 424, 600. Burger, E., 261, 290, 291.
Bowring, 393. Burgik, 545.
Bowstear, Dr., 290. Burnby, Lady, 202, 203.
Boyle, 292. Buraier, 164.
Bozas, de, 545. Burnier, Cure, 609, 610.
Bozzano, E., 36, 117, 140, 150, 152, Burns, 217, 224.
155, 159, 164, 180, 218, 219, 226, Burot, 181.
260, 262, 274, 278, 328, 331, 335, Burrows, 300.
336, 338, 341, 342, 347, 349, 350, Burt, 88.
352, 354-356, 359, 361, 363, 365- Burton, A., 446, 480.
368, 370-376, 379, 381-384, 390-395, Burton, J., 146.
413, 419, 480, 482, 535, 554, 555, Burton, Lady, 358.
564-567, 569, 571, 574, 575, 577, Buscarlet, Mme., 369.
578, 580, 584, 600. Bushell, 571.
Brackett, L., 117, 541, 542. Bute, Marquis de, 308.
Braid, J., 31, 99. Byron, Lord, 74.
Branen, van, 424. Byzantios, 222, 223.
Brath, de, 432.
Brmon, 289, 327. Cadello, Dr., 224.
Brewern, de, 450. Caesar, 10, 16, 170, 192, 193.
Brire, Dr., 446. Cagliostro, 77, 610.
Briffaut, Mme., 42, 161-163. Caillat, A., 16.
Briggs, V., 141. Calderone, I., 36.
Brighton, 261, 262. Calmette, Dr., 589.
Brisson, H., 377. Calt, Captain, 321.
632 INDEX
Campbell, Mme., 369. Chevalon, Mlle., 170.
Camus, Mme., 42. Cheves, Mme., 214.
Canaletti, 125. Chevreul, 28, 37, 227, 229, 233, 234,
Cane, du, 573. 276, 279, 283, 300, 315, 318, 421,
Canius Julius, 219. 511, 607.
Cannelle, 102. Chiaia, E., 412, 413, 503.
Capron, 582. Child, L., 144, 303.
Carancini, 526, 528, 529, 548. Chomel, Dr., 118.
Cardan, J., 18. Chopin, 373, 374.
Cardno, 120. Chowrin, Dr., 188, 190.
Carleton, Mme., 350, 382. Christine, 546.
Carlotta, 525. Christman, B., 292.
Carolath, Princess, 385. Christmas, 292.
Carpenter, 28, 30, 33. Cicero, 17, 18, 344, 451, 473.
Carpenter, E., 308. Cipriani, 159.
Carr, 97. Claparde, 81, 240-242, 528.
Carr de Montgron, 20. Clarke, 309.
Carrell, A., 354. Clarke, Dr., 307.
Carreras, E., 380. Clary, Mme., 349.
Carrick, Mme., 284. Claudet, Mme., 581.
Carrington, H., 34, 145, 176, 197, Claudine, 338, 339.
305, 413, 420, 455, 472, 535, 539, Claughton, Mme., 271.
583. Clawson, 445.
Carroll, 560. Clement XIV, 552.
Cartier, 501. Clericus, 273.
Cascel, C, 377. Cloquet, 29, 261.
Casimir-Prier, 178, 376, 377. Coates, J., 177.
Castelvitch, Countess, 530-534. Cobacker, B., 226.
Catherine de Medici, 183. Coghill, Colonel, 382.
Catherin, 530. Cohen, Dr., 361.
Caubin, 230, 232, 236. Coleman, E., 452.
Cauchy, 218. Coleman, A., 537.
Cavalcante, S., 311, 312. Colley, Archdeacon, 463, 537, 538.
Cecchini, 548. Collyer, Mme., 292, 293.
Celina, 226. Commar, Dr., 113.
Chambard, 32. Conil, 293.
Chambers, A., 149. Connell, Lieutenant, 292.
Chanuel, 36, 111. Constable, F., 223.
Chapronire, 555. Contamine, 324.
Charazain, 101. Conto, Dr., 530.
Charcot, 32, 99, 124, 282. Cook, F., 31, 34, 38, 39, 43, 45, 137,
Charmides, 16. 443, 457, 461, 462, 466, 471, 474,
Charpignon, 115. 478, 479, 493-495, 496, 514, 542,
Charrier, R., 585, 586. 548.
Chasles, 10. Cooper, Dr., 370.
Chaumontet, 609. Coover, E., 93, 94.
Chaves, Colonel, 282. Coppinger, Mme., 335.
Cheiro, 184, 582. Cordier, N., 122, 123.
Chenoweth, Mme., 151, 366. Cordula, 535.
Cheuvreaux, Mme., 310. Corneille, Dr., 429, 452.
INDEX 633
Cornillier, P., 154, 155. Deane, Mme., 480.
Cornis, Dr., 316. Dear, Mme., 575.
Coromelas, 222. Decrquy, 504, 509.
Corrals, O., 483, 534, 542. Dee, Dr. J., 200.
Cotte, P., 293. Deinhard, L., 177, 509.
Couesdon, Mme., 159. Delaage, 118, 119.
Couesnon, Mme., 293. Delanne, G., 36, 87, 94, 104, 118,
Coulomb, 436. 152, 178, 225, 226, 450, 467, 473-
Courmelles, Dr. de, 483. 475, 477, 504, 506, 507, 537, 553,
Courtier, 222, 413, 419, 420, 440, 492, 557-559, 575, 576.
496, 497. Deleuze, 22, 23, 31, 99, 100, 102.
Cota, Dr. Souza, 120. Delorme, 376, 377.
Cowes, 272, 273, 423, 452. Dmadrille, 504, 509.
Cox, 338, 411. Demay, C., 296.
Cox, Mme., 293, 294. Dencausse, 350.
Cox, Serjeant, 30. Denis, L., 37.
Craigie, Colonel, 294. Dennys, Mme., 339, 340.
Crawford, W., 430-432, 438, 441, Denton, E., 177.
442, 445, 469, 491, 618. Denton, W., 177.
Creery, 58, 90, 116, 445. Derter, 585.
Crmieux, G., 219, 302, 303. Derudder, 110.
Crpieux-Jamin, 185. Desbarolles, 184.
Crookes, Sir W., 7, 13, 15, 30-33, 35, Desbeaux, M., 379, 384.
44, 169, 207, 223, 407-410, 438, 448, Descartes, 473.
455, 461, 464, 467, 468, 470-472, Descormiers, 177.
474, 476, 483, 485, 492-495, 514, Desmoulin, F., 81.
534, 597, 600, 602, 618. Despine, Dr., 115.
Cumberland, 28. Dessoir, M., 21, <93, 223, 439, 440.
Curie, M., 413, 496, 497. Detken, M., 563.
Curie, P., 413, 535. Deupes, Mme., 295.
Curtius, Rufus, 18. Devereux, O., 588.
Cushman, A., 481. Devienne, 298.
Cuvier, 72. Dhire, Claude, 545.
Cybulski, 426. Dickens, C., 78, 209, 212, 381, 613.
Cyriax, Dr., 547. Dickinson, 295, 296, 327.
Diday, 111.
Dace, 159. Didelot, 224.
Dallas, Mme., 155, 171. Diderot, 72.
Dalmacius of Gironne, 545. Didier, A., 24, 118-120, 359.
Damiani, 224, 413, 473, 474. Dingfelder, Dr., 162.
Darget, 152, 480, 481, 484, 558. Dingwall, 544.
Dariex, 33, 120, 297, 413, 417, 421, Dio Cassius, 160.
429, 464, 535. Divers, 377.
Darwin, 30, 308. Dombrain, R., 284.
Davane, J., 487. Dominique San Diego, 546.
Davenport, 39, 399, 462. Domitian, 160.
Davey, 449. Donato, 101, 105.
Davies, Mme., 447. Don Constantino, 534.
Daviso, Colonel, 146. Done, 259, 260.
Day, F., 140. Dontaz, Abb, 295.
634 INDEX
Dort, Mme., 406. Encausse, Dr., 452, 453.
Dorian, T., 153, 154. Erfurt, 539.
Doyle, Conan, 146, 347, 382, 484, 613. Erhardt, Baron, 528, 529.
Draga, Queen, 5, 159, 166, 167. Erny, 224, 409, 424, 495, 535, 536,
Drake, 270. 540, 584.
Drakoules, 198. Escolan, 332.
Dresser, H., 111. Escourru, Mme., 254, 297, 298.
Drubay, 501. Esdaile, 25.
Duchatel, E., 177, 240, 363, 577. Eslon, 22.
Duck, Mme., 296. Esprance, Mme. d, 33, 39, 43, 226,
Dudlay, Mme., 273, 355. 274, 399, 443, 457, 458, 471, 476,
Dufaux, H., 77, 78. 478, 479, 492, 514, 538, 539, 542.
Dufay, de, 105, 117, 179. Eugnie, 112, 132, 133.
Dufilhol, Dr., 368. Eugnie, Mme., 309.
Dulley, 367. Euler, 222.
Dumas, A., 119. Euripides, 176.
Dumontpallier, 183. Eusapia Paladino, 5, 33, 34, 38, 39,
Dunphy, 495. 42, 60, 70, 137, 209, 210, 399, 402-
Dunraven, Lord, 46, 303, 405, 485. 404, 410, 412-421, 428, 431, 433,
Dupr, J., 383. 437-443, 446, 4SI, 453, 456-458,
Du Prel, 37, 600. 461, 463-467, 469-474, 477-480, 483,
Dupuy, 377. 488, 489, 492, 496-500, 502, 503,
Drer, A., 162. 505, 515, 529, 534, 535, 542, 549,
Durig, Dr., 438. 550, 592, 598, 609.
Durville, H., 585, 586. Eustance, Mme., 259, 298.
Dusart, Dr., 106, 226. Eutyphron, 17.
Duvanel, A., 153. Eva (see Marthe Braud).
Dyne, 297. Evangelides, 221.
Earle, 251. Evans, Mme., 330.
Ebstein, 456. Everitt, 298.
Eddy, M., 110, 111. Ezekiel, 74.
Edinger, 242.
Edisburg, 370. Faivre, Dr., 102.
Edison, 197. Falcomer, 474.
Edmund, Captain, 300. Falcoz, 232.
Edmunds, Judge, 26, 27, 30, 221, 222, Falkinburg, 337.
405, 455. Fanton, Dr., 121, 122, 124.
Edmunds, L., 221. Faraday, 28.
Edwards, 93. Frber, Archdeacon, 298.
Eeden, van, 157, 158, 224. Farigoule, L., 37, 187.
Eglinton, 33, 39, 118, 224, 340, 443, Fechner, 468.
448, 449, 452, 453, 457, 471, 478, Fda (see Mrs. Leonard).
479, 483, 535-537, 542, 548. Feijao, O., 150, 529-532.
Eichwald, 539. Fnelon, 72.
Einstein, 468, 625. Fenzi, Sebastian and C., 321.
Eldred, 456, 458, 471. Ferdinand, Archduke, 386.
Elge, Mme., 339. Fr, 113.
Eliza, 140. Fron, 350.
Elliotson, 24. Ferrari, G., 558.
INDEX 635
Ferrari, H., 71, 96, 126, 131, 132, Fox Sisters, 15, 25-27, 29, 39, 399,
168, 185, 242, 260, 361. 424, 443, 454, 463, 471, 479, 540.
Ferrero, Mme., 418. France, A., 312.
Ferrier, 308. Franc, Dr., 438.
Ferroul, Dr., 121, 122. Francis, Mme., 452.
Fvrier, General, 377. Frapart, Dr., 119.
Field, 289, 327. Frederic, Duke, 546.
Fielding, E., 34, 413, 418, 420, 472, Freer, Mlle., 201, 366, 592.
535, 544. Frmery, 423, 541.
Figueroa, G. de, 384, 385, 617. Freud, 37.
Figuier, 22. Fredenberg, Dr., 192.
Filituto, M., 224. Frville, Mme., 263, 266, 321.
Finzi, G., 34, 413, 416, 417, 464, 497. Freya, Mme., 120, 185, 350, 351.
Firmin, Mme., 475. Frigerio, Dr., 189.
Fish, L., 25. Frondoni-Lacombe, Mme., 150, 477,
Fitch, General, 301. 529-534, 542.
Flammarion, C., 7, 8, 34, 36-38, 106, Fryer, R., 272.
115, 120, 195, 252, 254, 262, 269, Fulton, 8.
277, 284, 286, 290, 291, 294, 295, Funk, L, 151.
297-299, 302, 310, 312, 313, 315, Furtado, 532, 533.
316, 318, 319, 323-325, 335, 338,
339, 341, 350, 368, 371, 380, 385, Galichon, Mme., 297.
386, 395, 413, 488, 503, 600. Galileo, 8.
Flanigan, 589. Gallet, 178, 376, 377.
Flaubert, 162. Gallichet, M., 392.
Fleres, D., 355. Galotti, 500.
Fleury, 365. Galvani, 620.
Fleury, General, 298. Gandy, J., 251. i
Flint, 29. Gargain, 110.
Florentine, A., 217, 218. Gamay, I., 140.
Florrie, C., 447. Garnier, Abb, 385.
Flournoy, T., 50, 78, 79, 158, 164, Gasparin, 28, 406.
209, 221, 369, 439, 470, 528, 609, Gaston, B., 299.
610. Gautier, 295.
Gay, Mme., 300.
Flourire, 120. Gazzera, L., 39, 46, 400, 432-434,
Foa, 34, 413, 418, 419, 464, 535. 457, 492, 525-527, 542.
Focke, Mme., 337. Geley, G., 33, 36, 81, 198, 199, 327,
Foissac, 23. 349, 350, 432, 467, 469, 470, 511,
Fontaine, F., 546. 524, 525, 543, 545, 620.
Fontenay, G. de, 103, 434, 460, 480, Gerosa, 412.
484, 501-503, 511, 526, 527, 559. Giacchi, Dr., 315, 316.
Fonvielle, Mme. de, 298, 299. Gibier, 225, 411, 412, 451-453, 462,
Forbes, Mme., 173, 174. 463, 475, 477, 492, 514, 527, 528.
Fortin, Abb, 435. Gielski, de, 545.
Foster, 147. Gifford, R., 158.
Fouquier-Tinville, 73. Gignon, 276.
Foumat, A., 545. Gilbert, 106, 125.
Fournier, G., 168-170. Gilbert, Dr., 589.
Fowler, L., 155. Giolitti, 153.
636 INDEX
Girard, P., 8. Gurin, Mme., 314.
Girardin, E. de, 354. Guicciardi, Mme., 315.
Girardin, Mme. de, 74. Guinard, Dr., 277.
Gladstone, 224, 453. Gulat-Wellenburg, Dr., 514.
Glanvil, J., 563. Guldenstubb, de, 450, 451, 553, 554.
Glardon, A., 93. Gurney, E., 7, 26, 33, 35, 87, 268,
Glaucon, 16. 456, 557.
Glyn, 536. Gutenberg, 624.
Goclenius, 14, 22, 106. Guthrie, M., 87, 93.
Godfrey, 557.
Goethe, 554. Haemmerl, A., 557.
Goligher, Mlle., 33, 34, 39, 43, 400, Haggard, 277.
430, 431, 438, 441, 443, 445, 469, Haggit, 311.
489, 534, 542. Hahn, 224.
Gollin, 301. Hall, S., 487, 556.
Gomanys, Count, 277. Halle, M., 303, 372.
Gonner, 138. Hamilton, 39, 40.
Goodall, 300. Hanriot, 132.
Gordigiani, 149, 150. Hansen, 124.
Grres, 20, 21, 546, 547. Happerfield, 219, 220.
Gower, 226. Hare, R., 27, 407.
Grabinski, 386. Harford, J., 220.
Grabow, 243. Harriet, Mme., 335.
Graesse, 3. Harris, F., 134, 279.
Graham, M., 429. Hart, 138, 271, 488.
Gramont, A. de, 34, 162, 413, 417, Hartington, 349.
451, 501, 535, 600. Hartkopf, 242.
Grand-Boulogne, Dr., 225. Hartmann, F., 554.
Grant, 304. Hartwig, 394.
Grasset, J., 37, 67, 78, 121, 122, 159, Harvey, 253.
167, 200, 202, 285, 456, 462, 463, Hasden, 557.
504, 510, 589. Haskel, Mme., 337.
Grattam, C., 145. Hatch, D., 80.
Gray, Dr., 540. Hauer, 372.
Gray, J., 583. Hauff, F., 23, 24.
Green, Mme., 59, 69, 179, 254, 266, Hauffe, A., 296.
301, 327. Haumann, T., 483.
Gregory, Mme., 555. Hawkins, Mme., 556.
Gregory, W., 116. Hawthorne, E., 182.
Griffin, M., 302. Haxby, 457.
Griffiths, 301. Haye, Dr., 374.
Grillet, E. de, 375. Hayward, 162.
Grima, Commandant, 277. Hazhatt, 318.
Grimaldi, Dr., 196. Heidenhain, 32, 99.
Grocyn, 481. Heintzer, 164.
Grottendieck, 590. Helena, 112.
Ground, 484. Hlne, 374.
Grnewald, F., 28. Hellembach, Baron, 372.
Gudden, von, 355, 356. Hendrickson, 556.
Gurard, Mme., 314. Henicke, 355.
INDEX 637
Hennings, Mme., 487, 488. Husson, Dr., 22, 23, 99, 104.
Henry II, 371. Hutchins, 247, 304.
Herdmann, 87. Huxley, 30.
Hricourt, J., 105, 106, 126, 130, 131 Huygens, Mme., 423, 541.
185, 360. Hyslop, J., 34, 36, 79, 90, 119, 137
Herlitzka, 413, 418, 419. 139-145, 151, 155, 158, 200, 201
Hers, Mme., 303. 210, 221, 275, 308, 314, 366, 374
Herz, 624. 445, 446, 455, 480.
Heslop, F., 37. Hyslop, R., 140.
Heuze, P., 37.
Heymans, 172. Imoda, E., 46, 432, 464, 483, 492,
Hill, A., 160, 484. 525-527.
Hill, M., 261, 309. Irvine, 573.
Hillenbach,* 541. Isnard, 340, 372, 555.
Hinkovitch, 224. Istrati, 559.
Hirschberg, J., 194. Ivey, 375, 376.
Hirschmann, 538.
Hodgson, R., 34, 42, 136, 137-144, Jacks, 53.
155, 210, 219, 226, 349, 413, 414, Jackson, Dr., 561.
456. Jaff, 332.
Hofman, A., 192. James, 78, 209.
Hollaender, F., 197, 198. James, W., 7, 33, 34, 137, 138, 142,
Holland, Mme. 174. 143, 144, 151, 270, 388, 468, 600.
Home, D. D., 31, 34, 38, 39, 43, 46, Janesson, G., 373.
137, 144, 145, 303, 399, 405, 407- Janet, J., 104.
411, 431, 436, 437, 442, 443, 448, Janet, P., 20, 44, 104, 106, 125, 200.
453, 462, 466, 467, 471, 472, 478- Jansen, Dr., 423.
480, 483,485-487, 489, 492, 493, Jaurs, 159. *
514, 534, 542, 550, 551, 592. Jean, Dr., 304.
Hooker, S., 435. Jeanne, 310, 327.
Hping, 184. Jeanne d'Arc, 17, 19, 77, 389.
Hopkins, 454. Jencken, 485, 488.
Hoppe, M., 89, 198. Jerry, J., 138.
Hornung, E., 28. Jim, Mountain, 288, 289.
Hosmer, Mme., 303. Jobert, 29.
Houdaille, O., 166, 250, 303. Johnson, A., 102, 173, 174, 262, 393,
Houdin, R., 39, 40, 118, 119, 421. 418.
Houssaye, A.j 358. Johnson, Dr., 482.
Howard, 139, 211. Joire, Dr., 104, 200, 435, 436.
Howard, G., 271. Joller, 585.
Howard, Lady, 149, 151. Jondres, V., 421.
Howitt, W., 390. Joncken, Mme. (see Fox).
Hubschmann, 296. Jones, 321.
Hugo, C., 74, 77. Jones, Dr., 137.
Hugo, V., 53, 74-77, 119, 313, 613. Jones, Mme. 367, 368.
Hugues, Clovis, 219, 302, 571. Jones, S., 182, 263.
Hulin, 378. Joquelet, L., 358.
Hulst, d, 546. Joubert, Mme., 150.
Hunter, Mme., 331. Jouffreau, 231.
Hurley, B., 330. Jubainville, dAde, 315.
638 INDEX
Judd, Mme., 575. Kraemer, R., 290.
Jukes, 304. Krai, K., 240, 241, 243.
Julia, 357, 362.
Julliard, Dr., 115. Lacassagne, 559.
Jupp, 331. Lacombe (see Frondoni-Lacombe).
Lacretelle, H. de, 153.
Kaigodoroff, 153. Lafontaine, 24, 100, 105, 119, 547.
Kalerine, 138. Lagarrue, Captain, 305.
Kalua, 141. Lagrange* M., 277.
Kane, Mme., 26. Lamy, Mme., 155, 156.
Kant, 267. Lane, Sir H., 171, 172.
Kapnist, Countess, 305, 306. Landesque, P., 231, 232.
Kardec, Allan, 29, 30, 35, 77, 303, Lang, A., 33, 200, 308, 369.
571, 606. Lange, 198.
Karin, N., 446. Langenest, Mme., 307.
Karr, A., 119. Langlois, J., 127,135.
Keep, A., 571. Lanne, Mme., 314.
Keisewetter, C., 21, 28. Lanyi, J. de, 386, 387.
Keley, 141. Laplace, 50, 54, 345, 471.
Keller, 455. Larkin, Lieutenant, 292.
Kelvin, Lord, 7. Larmandie, de, 582.
Kemnitz, Dr. von, 514. Lasserre, H., 111.
Kemer, J., 23, 296, 346, 547, 548, Laurent, E., 266.
587. Lauritzen, 368.
Kerr, Mme., 289, 307. Lavaut, 373.
Kesley, R., 307. Laville, Mme. de, 312.
Keulemans, 280, 308. Lavoisier, 8, 14.
Killick, 251. Leadbater, 325.
Kilner, Dr., 103. Lebas, Mme., 385.
King, J., 42, 43, 70, 209, 220, 329, Le Ber, Mme., 162.
413, 465, 466, 474,488,490,496,609. Le Bon, G., 420, 481.
King, K., 32, 45, 220, 413, 461, 467, Lebrun, Corporal, 317.
474-476, 493-495, 496, 534. Lecour, P., 491, 492.
Kingsford, S., 189. Lee, 280, 381.
Kingston, Dr., 574. Leeds, Mme., 202.
Kinnaman, Dr., 572. Lefbvre, J., 162, 582.
Kircher, F., 100. Lefroy, 122.
Kirk, 93, 557. Legludic, 115.
Kitchener, Lord, 582. Leibnitz, 49.
Kjelmann, Dr., 128. Lemaire, 160.
Klapke, Dr., 511, 512. Lemaitre, A., 81.
Kling-Klowstroem, C. von, 227. Lemb, 457.
Kluski, F., 503, 542, 545. Lemerle, 162, 528.
Knes, 337. Lemoine, P., 229, 230, 233, 234, 236.
Knight, F., 160. Lemonnier, 259, 332, 333.
Kobbe, Major, 274. Lenormand, Mme., 24.
Kohnstamm, 20. Leonard, Mme., 33, 42, 44, 156, 157,
Korff, General von, 145. 162, 163, 214-216, 361, 612.
Kotik, Dr., 190, 191. Lonie, 89, 104, 125, 126, 127, 135.
Kouprejanoff, 584. Lpine, 381.
INDEX 639
Lermina, J., 305. Lydia, 378, 379.
Lescur, P., 202. Lydia, W., 190, 191.
Lesseps, de, 390. Lyon, Dr., 350.
Lett, Mme., 340. Lyon, G., 515.
Leymarie, 28. Lyro, de, 88.
Lichfield, M., 273.
Libeault, 99, 105, 306, 357. McCready, 275.
Lightfoot, Mme., 305. McDougall, W., 33.
Lillian, F., 583. MacDonald, 160.
Lily, 352. MacLellan, 384.
Linda (see Gazzera). MacNab, 412, 480.
Lindsay, 90, 480. Mabire, 134.
Lindsay, Lord, 485, 487. Machner, 82.
Linnus, G, 380. Mackenzie, 152, 295.
Littr, 545. Macklin, Mme., 307.
Livermore, 479, 540. Maclean, Dr., 314.
Ljung, 127. Maddock, 457.
Lloyd, Major, 276. Maeterlinck, M., 37, 240, 241, 608.
Lloyd, V., 382. Mager, H., 228-230, 232-236.
Locke, 573. Magnan, Dr., 102.
Lodge, Sir O., 7, 33, 34, 36, 86-88, Maingot, Dr., 102.
92, 138, 142-144, 146, 155, 156, 161, Majendie, 7.
163, 173, 180, 187, 206, 210, 214- Makan, 27.
216, 219, 223, 267, 292, 328, 383, Malgras, 28.
388, 413, 415, 417, 439, 440, 451, Mamtchitch, 155.
456, 461, 464, 465,468-470, 505, Manceaux, Dr., 323.
530, 535, 597, 598, 600, 602, 610, Mangin, M., 109, 110, 184, 210, 528.
620, 625. Mangot, 249, 336.
Lodge, R., 210, 214-216, 218, 570, 610, M ar..., Dr., 83.
614. Marage, 232.
Lolla, Mme., 376. Marcel, 378.
Lombroso, 7, 34, 90, 195, 196, 209, March, 589.
379, 412, 413, 415, 419, 464, 535, Marchandon, 358.
565, 580, 597, 600. Marchant, 307.
Longet, 261. Marchal, Mme., 262.
Louis XI, 77. Marey, 8.
Louise, 51, 153, 352. Margurite, 55, 56, 62, 65, 66, 68, 306.
Lubbock, 30, 407. Marie, 117, 120.
Luciani, Dr., 549. Marie Antoinette, 40, 41, 72, 77, 144,
Lucie, 475. 209, 212, 490, 578, 610.
Lucilius, C., 80. Marillat, 119.
Ludovic, H., 198. Marillier, L., 33, 576.
Ludovic, S., 187, 195. Marks, F., 272.
Ludwig, Dr., 266. Marmontel, 365.
Luigi, 218. Marqu, Dr., 121.
Lukawski, 355. Marracino, 586.
Lully, 462. Marryat, F., 37, 492, 495, 536, 607.
Lusteneau, 390. Marston, W., 364.
Lutoslawski, W., 4. Marston, W., 364.
Luxmore, 495. Martel, A., 231, 232.
640 INDEX
Martillet, Mme., 580. Moore, U., 37.
Martin, R., 293, 605. Moratief, Mme., 369.
Martiville, Mme., 267. Morice, M., 579.
Martyn, Mme., 252. Moricourt, J., 183.
Marzorati, 150, 535. Morin, 28, 270, 271.
Maseyk, 390. Moritz, 307, 367.
Maskelyne, 39, 40, 462, 463, 537. Morrison, Mme., 368.
Massey, 155. Morrison, J., 308.
Mastro-Pietro, Mme., 374. Morse, J., 217.
Mathiex, P., 445. Morselli, 7, 27, 32, 34, 412, 413, 418,
Matthews, 263, 333. 419, 455, 464, 474, 478, 481, 498,
Maury, 20, 256. 499, 503, 535, 550, 597, 600.
Maxfield, 363. Morton, 26, 27.
Maxwell, J., 27, 34, 36, 38, 44, 70, Morton, R., 572.
103, 175-177, 197, 227, 364, 366, Moses, 72.
413, 417, 423, 433, 444, 457, 464, Moses, Stainton, 33, 36, 38, 39, 43,44,
467, 485, 498, 501, 510, 511, 535, 140, 144, 152, 164, 217, 353, 400,
587, 589, 600. 422, 449, 450, 467, 471, 472, 477,
May, A. von, 200. 480-483, 489, 492, 537, 549-551, 609.
Mayo, H., 116. Mosso, A., 418.
Melanie, 52, 64, 266. Mouat. 330.
Meneer, Mme., 323. Moultrie, 151.
Menou-Cornuet, 340. Moureau, Captain, 324.
Mercier, Dr., 421. Mousset, 485.
Mrime, P., 77. Moutin, Dr., 150.
Mermet, 231. Moutonnier, 157, 452, 611.
Mry, G., 435. Mozart, 53, 81, 162.
Mesmer, 15, 21, 22, 65, 99. Mller, J., 8, 78.
Mialaret, R., 279, 336. Munro, Mme., 368, 561.
Mielle, 23. Murillo, 545.
Mignon, 394. Murphy, 588.
Miles, 173. Murray, G., 33, 189.
Miller, 456, 463, 471. Musset, A. de, 581.
Milnes, Mme., 580. Muza, I., 355.
Mirville, de, 28. Myers, A., 34,128.
Mitchell, W., 142, 308. Myers, F. W. H., 3, 7, 17, 19, 26, 33-
Mitchiner, 478. 36, 42, 64, 65, 80, 87, 90, 93, 102,
Mitchinoff, 369. 105, 128, 137, 142, 144, 151, 155-
Mittelmayer, 391. 157, 163, 174, 175, 200-204, 214,
Miyatovitch, C., 223. 216, 219, 226, 258, 268, 271, 275,
Molire, 53, 72, 73, 75, 76, 613. 292, 323, 347, 348, 355, 372, 413,
Monck, Dr., 477, 537. 417, 420,447-449, 451, 456, 461,
Montaigne, 219. 465, 468, 470, 472, 482, 535, 555,
Montalembert, A. de, 27. 556, 559, 560, 572, 575, 584, 598,
Montebello, Mme. de, 161, 357. 600, 613, 620,625.
Montespan, de, 183. Myers, P., 366, 612, 613.
Montluc, de, 371. Mysz, Dr., 453.
Montorgueil, 474.
Montpensier, de, 115. Napier, 381.
Moor, Major, 581. Napoleoni, 393.
INDEX 641
Nathan, M., 548. Osty, Dr., 119, 122, 123, 135, 184,
Ngre, 309. 357.
Nlaton, Dr., 298, 386. Ottolenghi, S., 37, 195.
Nelly (see Mrs. Thompson). Ourches, d\ 410, 450.
Nepenthes (see Mme. dEsprance). Owen, R. D., 30, 410, 455, 540, 553,
Newbold, 140. 563, 577.
Newnham, 249. Oxley, 475, 537.
Newton, 544.
Nichols, Dr., 453, 454, 536. Pagenstecher, 182.
Nicholson, 152. Paget, 259, 263, 273, 340.
Nilovitch, 339. Paige, 364.
Nivot, 259, 332, 333. Paladino (see Eusapia).
Noel, E., 231, 464, 467, 504-506, 508, Palissi, B. de, 81.
509. Palladia, 155.
Noell, L., 251, 263, 299, 327. Palliser, Mme., 309.
Noggerath, Mme., 72. Paluzzi, 547.
Noizet, General, 115. Pansini, 499.
Nolte, 374. Papin, 8.
Nordberg, 424. Paquet, 309, 310.
Noriagof, 111. Paracelsus, 14, 22, 106, 624.
Norlenzki, 419. Parent, G., 278, 310.
Norris, Mme., 350. Parker, 141.
Norton, E., 142. Pascal, 624.
Notari, H., 353. Pasquier, N., 371, 372.
Nuti, F., 546. Passaro, E., 563.
Passavant, 25, 308, 367.
ODonnell, Dr., 103. Pasteur, 12, 625.
ODonnell, Mme., 566. Paternostro, G., 150.
Obalecheff, Mme., 338, 339. Paton, L., 37.
Obersteiner, Dr., 337, 338. Patrizi, Dr., 549.
Ochorowicz, 7, 21, 22, 34, 60, 87, 90, Paulet, Mme., 358.
102, 106, 402, 410, 413, 414, 416, Pearson, Mme., 335.
424, 426, 428, 429, 431, 438-441, Pease, E., 571.
451, 458, 461, 464, 465, 472, 479- Plaprat, 231.
481, 483, 491, 492, 535, 559, 598, Pelham, G., 41, 42, 139-142, 144, 176,
600, 618. 179, 210-213, 215, 217, 456, 490,
Oesterreich, 37. 570, 606, 608, 609, 611, 614.
Ohmus, Mme., 382. Pelusi, 353.
Olchowski, 540. Pnaud, 248, 336, 337.
Olivier, 561, 562. Pepper, Mme., 151.
Olivier, L., 168. Pre, A., 168.
Ollendorff, G., 168. Perelyguine, A., 158.
Ollendorff, P., 324, 325. Peretti, 428, 499.
Ollivier, Dr., 279. Prier, C. (see Casimir-Prier).
Olsen, A., 127. Perty, 584.
Oporto, 218, 219. Peter, J., 177, 438.
Orlans, Duc d\ 200, 289, 326. Peters, V., 146, 214, 215, 535.
Orsi, Dr., 256, 316. Pttin, 22, 23, 119, 185, 186.
Ossovietzki, S., 208. Petit, Abb, 389, 548.
Osten, W. von, 240. Petit-Jean, 82.
642 INDEX
Petrarch, 52, 53, 74. Puysgur, de, 22, 23, 31, 65, 99.
Peyron, Admiral, 324. Pythagoras, 29, 72, 73.
Pfaffer, 24.
Pfungst, O., 240, 242. Quillac, de, 510.
Phaneg, 180. Quintard, 226.
Phibbs, 266, 276, 327.
Philips, 32, 587. R., Mme., 152, 164-166.
Philostratus, 160. Radcliffe Hall, 156.
Phinuit, 41, 42, 70, 138-142, 144, 179, Radnor, Lady, 149.
209, 211, 213, 220, 361, 609, 611, Rainaly, 455.
612. Raines, Dr., 588.
Phygia, 476. Ram, H., 321.
Pickmann, 94, 195. Ramacharaka, 110.
Piddington, 174, 175, 223. Ramorino, L., 498.
Pieron, 310. Ramsden, 173.
Pigaire, Mlle., 115, 187. Randall, 588.
Pigaire, Mme., 24. Rawlinson, 310.
Pigott, 155. Rawson, H., 92, 93.
Pillet, 546. Ray, 352.
Pineau, 336, 337. Rayleigh, Lord, 33.
Pinto, S., 530. Reboux, P., 78.
Piper, Mme., 34, 41-44, 70, 119, 128, Rcamier, 106.
137-145, 155, 156, 160, 163, 174- Rector, 140, 164, 220, 609.
176, 179, 180, 205, 209-213, 361, Reddell, F., 556.
456, 602, 604, 606, 608, 611, 613. Reed, E., 350.
Planes, A., 368. Reed, Mme., 306.
Planty, de, 450. Reese, 89, 196-198.
Plato, 16, 450, 551. Regis, 195.
Pliny, 572. Rgnault, J., 435.
Plutarch, 17, 19. Reichel, W., 535.
Podmore, F., 26, 37, 143, 268, 455, Reichenbach, 7, 24, 101, 103, 104,
456, 482, 571, 592, 602. 181.
Poincar, 625. Reine, 154, 155.
Pompey, 178. Reiners, 537.
Ponsa, Mme., 530, 532, 533. Reinhard, 23.
Poole, Major, 301, 302. Relph, 93.
Popoff, O., 369. Rmy, 364, 365, 455.
Porro, 34, 413, 418, 419, 478, 498, Renouard, dA., 132.
550. Renouard, C , 310.
Post, 25. Renouard, P., 125, 126.
Potet, Baron du, 22, 24, 25, 31, 65, Ribet, Abb, 546.
100, 106, 113, 152. Ribot, T., 33, 131.
Prel, Du (see Du Prel). Ricard, J., 115.
Preyer, 105. Richardson, Mme., 276.
Prince, Dr., 36, 70, 458. Richet, Mme. A., 287, 392, 525.
Prince, W., 38, 381, 484. Richet, C., 21, 32, 33, 85, 90, 106,
Probli, 241. 128, 168, 261, 291, 423, 433, 524,
Probst, .231, 232. 526.
Proctor, J., 585. Rieken, 311, 312.
Purton, Mme., 329. Riondel, 227, 311.
INDEX 643
Rivail, L., 29. Sage, 141, 210.
Robbins, 144. Sage, 553.
Robert, 138, 158, 452. Saint-Simon, 200.
Roberts, Mme., 400. Salles, 120.
Robespierre, 72, 312, 327. Salmon, Mme., 226, 463, 477, 527,
Robinson, L., 171. 528, 542.
Roch, Dr., 558. Salter, Mme., 544.
Rochas, A. de, 7, 20,24, 34, 36, 102, Salvator de Horta, 546.
103, 104, 106, 183, 264, 322, 406, Sambor, 155, 539, 540, 542.
412, 413, 415, 417, 451, 464, 468, Samona, G, 36, 73, 362.
474, 478, 481, 489, 501, 503, 535, Samuel, 174.
546-548, 557, 558, 600. Sanders, 312.
Rochester, 80. Sangl, Dr., 115.
Roger, A., 385. Sanson, Mme., 104, 106.
Romanes, 555. Santangelo, Dr., 546.
Roncarmi, Dr., 195. Santi, Dr., 390.
Rondeau, P., 125. Santo-Liquido, Dr., 153.
Rorngold, E., 226. Sardou, V., 53, 81.
Rosalsky, Judge, 198. Sartoris, Dr., 195.
Rosenkrantz, J., 481. Sassaroli, V., 395.
Rostagno, 474. Saunders, 561.
Rostan, Dr., 356. Saurel, 385.
Roth, A., 429, 456, 457, 463, 471, Saussure, de, 79.
477. Savage, M., 351, 583.
Rougemont, F. de, 407. Savelli, 393.
Rousseau, J., 73. Savoyer, 589.
Roux, Dr., 91, 359. Scarpa, 499.
Roux, M., 120. Scatcherd, 198.
Ruault, A., 106. Schakleton, 455.
Rubens, 526. Schiaparelli, 7, 34, 412, 415, 416, 464,
Ruggieri, 548. 468, 497, 534.
Runciman, 311. Schiff, 28, 29, 443.
Ruspoli, de, 525, 527. Schiller, F., 33, 94.
Ruth, 120. Schmidt, Dr., 547.
Schmitz, Mme., 115.
St. Alphonso de Liguori, 19, 551. Schmoll, 134.
St. Francis dAssisi, 19, 546. Schonelz, 539.
St. Francis Xavier, 552. Schopenhauer, 380, 381.
St. Helena, 19. Schotelius, 198.
St. John, 72. Schrenck-Notzing, A. de, 34, 37,
S t Joseph de Copertino, 19, 20, 546, 188, 197, 413, 417, 426, 432, 438-
547. 442, 460, 464, 467, 469, 470, 476,
St. Marie dAgreda, 553. 477, 491, 504, 510-515, 523, 525T
St. Paul de la Croix, 546. 526, 535, 600, 613.
S t Peter of Alcantara, 546. Schtcharoff, 582.
St. Philip de Nri, 546. Scott, 573.
St. Theresa, 19, 546. Scripture, 10.
Saal, 487. Searle, 275.
Sabatier, 34, 413, 417, 498. Seeress of Prvorst, 42, 200, 296,
Sabin, O., 110. 356, 547, 548, 587.
644 INDEX
Segantini, G., 349. Sophie B., 190.
Sgard, Dr., 45, 413, 415. Sordi, L., 535.
Sguier, Dr., 118. Span*, Mme., 26.
Selenka, Mme., 224. Speakman, Dr., 155.
Serboff, 557. Specht, Dr., 438.
Srizolles, M., 312, 313. Spear, M. and Mme., 422, 449, 450
Sermyn, de, 351, 354. 471, 472, 480-482, 537.
Serrano, M., 313. Speranski, 188.
Severn, Mme., 275. Stanhope, Lady, 390.
Shagren, Mme., 556. Stanislawa, P., 525, 534.
Shakespeare, 74, 75. Stankevitch, 556.
Shaw, 361. Stead, W., 152, 172, 361, 456, 553,
Shelpt 581. 613.
Sherbrooke, 259, 334, 335. Stella, 42, 51, 52, 54, 59, 64, 74, 135
Sherman, 260, 313. 143, 147-149, 266, 446, 476, 56l!
Shilton, 90. 562, 598.
Shirman, 225. Stella, Mme., 289.
Shirving, 315. Stevenson, 560.
Sidgwick, Mme. A., 326. Stewart, B., 33.
Sidgwick, H., 26, 33, 413, 415, 417, Stiegler, 541.
440, 456, 602. Stirling, W., 148.
Sidgwick, Mme. H., 33, 69, 102, 118, Stone, 117.
155, 163, 174, 175, 294, 347, 364, Storia, Mme., 315.
365, 413, 414, 417, 439, 444, 577, Stout, 541.
584. Stramm, E., 153.
Siemiradzki, 413, 416. Strauss, 24.
Simon Magus, 18, 19. Strieffert, M., 338.
Simpson, V., 574. Stromberg, 274.
Sinclair, A., 583. Suhr, 123.
Sings, 314, 315. Sully-Prudhomme, 336.
Sinnett, 587. Surbled, 435.
Slade, 33, 39, 411, 412, 437, 448, 449, Surga, G. de, 162.
451, 452, 457, 471. Swedenborg, 267.
Smead, Mme., 79, 221. Swiney, Colonel, 315.
Smith, A., 33. Swithinbank, 276, 331.
Smith, G., 26, 87. Symonds, J., 314.
Smith, Mme. H., 81.
Smith, Helen, 40-42, 50, 51, 54, 72, Tacitus, 18.
76-79, 81, 144, 145, 158, 160, 165, Tamburini, 280, 315, 415.
209, 221, 490, 609, 610. Tapp, 474.
Smith, J., 251. Tardieu, Dr., 387-389.
Snaw, 454. Tassacher, 37.
Snell, 333, 343. Tatin, 128.
Socrates, 16, 17, 72, 344. Taunton, Mme., 259, 260, 329.
Sollier, Dr., 113. Tausch, 151.
Solovovo, P., 408, 456, 459, 470, 472, Teale, Mme., 316.
539, 540. Telechoff, Mme., 247, 259, 338.
Sombreuil, de, 73. Terrien, Dr., 122.
Sonrel, 387-390. Tertullian, 21, 401.
Soothywoode, 583. Teste, 24, 348, 349.
INDEX 645
Thaw, Dr., 90, 137. Ulysses, 200.
Themistocles, 596. Underhill, E., 37, 540.
Thermotis, 80. Uranenko, 317.
Thirault, 357, 358. Urban V III, 20, 547.
Thiers, 597. Urysz, Dr., 226.
Thiery, 28. Usher, F., 88.
Thilo, M. de, 316.
Thiriat, Mme. de, 315. Vacquerie, 74.
Thomas, Mme., 373. Valentine, C., 318.
Thomassin, 501. Vallantin, 231. -
Thompson, Dr. J., 197, 295, 296. Vallemont, 227.
Thomson, Mme., 33, 157, 179, 224, Van Loon, Dr., 196.
261, 328, 610, 611. Varay, 377.
Thomson, 158. Varley, C., 30, 407, 408, 464, 496.
Thoulet, 178, 375, 379. Vaschide, N., 184, 253.
Thury, 406. Vassalo, 478, 498, 535.
Thyrus, Petrus, 563. Vauchez, E., 483.
Tieber, Dr., 541. Velpeau, 29.
Tiedmann, 362. Venturi, S., 280.
Tiresias, 200. Venzano, 159, 413, 419, 474, 492,
Tirone, R., 379, 380. 498, 501.
Tischer, 37. Verity, 556.
Tischner, von R., 162, 192, 193. Verrall, Dr., 174.
Tissandier, Mme. G., 261. Verrall, H., 147, 174, 447.
Tissot, J., 536. Verrall, Mme., 44, 137, 141, 174-
Titus, Mme., 270. 176, 189, 200, 223, 365, 604, 613.
Toeffer, Mme., 541. Vesme, C. de, 33, 146, 159, 220, 221,
Tolosa-Latour, 105, 299. 240, 241, 395, 423, 511, 528, 535.
Tomczyk, Stanislawa, 33, 34, 39, 43, Vettelini, 154, 155.
400, 424, 426, 428, 433, 438-443, Vianney, Cur dArs, 546.
458, 464, 480. Viaud, 317.
Tonelli, Mme., 275. Vidal, 289.
Toutschkoff, Countess, 375. Vidigal, Dr., 117.
Towns, 340. Viel Castel, de, 409.
Tracy, 362. Vincente, 42, 509.
Travers-Smith, Mme., 171, 172. Vincenzo, 525, 611.
Treloar, Mme., 332. Vir, A., 231, 237.
Trisk, Yza, 150. Vitalis, J., 351.
Tristan, J. de, 235, 236. Vivant, 119.
Troitzki, Dr., 188. Vlavianos, Dr., 222.
Tromelin, L. de, 81, 376. Vogler, Dr,, 518.
Troubridge, Lady, 156. Volkmann, 495, 496.
Trowbridge, 142. Volpi, 559.
Tweedale, 333, 334, 393. Volterra, 277.
Tyndall, 30. Voumiquel, G., 37.
Tyre, L., 575.
Wagner, 542.
Ulric, d\ 318. Wahu, 37.
Ulrici, 367. Wales, H., 174, 613.
646 INDEX
Wallace, A. Russel, 7, 13, 30, 358, ! Wilson, M., 274.
406, 410, 455, 477, 536, 538, 597, Wilson, Rev., 252.
600. Wiltshire, 116, 395.
Wallace, G, 117, 358. ! Wilve, 262.
Waller, Dr., 363, 436. J Wingfield, 90, 93.
Waller, T., 217. <Wittgenstein, Prince, 145.
Wanley, 319. Wolff, 390.
Warcollier, 98, 108, 180, 193, 194, Wood, T., 366.
258, 363. : Wood, Mme., 457.
Warren, 483. I Woodham, Mme., 257.
Wasielewski, 182, 192, 193. ' Woolcote, Dr., 320.
Watson, 160, 550. . Woolley, 544.
Watson, Mme., 179. i Wriedt, Mme., 224, 225.
Watt, H., 275. ! Wright, 271, 320.
Watteville, A. de, 34, 413, 417, 501. j Wynne, G, 486.
Weakman, M., 25. I Wynyard, Colonel, 259, 335, 336.
Wedgwood, H., 570.
Weinberg, Dr., 196. i Xenophon, 16.
Weld, 259, 261, 338, 343. I
Wellington, 323. Youdenitch, Mme., 540.
Wells, D., 27. i Young, Mme., 222, 334, 383.
Wells, H., 26, 27. j Yourgevitch, 440.
Wenaud, 305. Yung, E., 360.
West, Mme., 272. Yver, 341.
Wetterstrand, de, 105. Yves-Plessis, R., 3.
Weyer, Mme., 339.
Whately-Smith, 544. i Zabaski, 539.
Wheatcroft, Mme., 319. ; Zancigs, 462.
Wickham, Mme., 263, 320, 335. Ziegler, 242.
Wight, 318. Zingaropoli, 150, 562, 565, 586.
Wijk, 446. Zipelius, 373.
Wild, H., 140. Zllner, 7, 13, 30, 36, 411, 455, 468,
Williams, 250, 319. 542, 597, 600.
Williams, Mme., 319, 320, 456, 458. : Zoroaster, 81.
Willy, S., 439, 441, 443. Zuccarino, 549.
Wilson, 270. , Zuleika, 363.

Charles Richet - Thirty Years of Psychical Research

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Charles Richet - Thirty Years of Psychical Research

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Charles Richet - Thirty Years of Psychical Research

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THIRTY YEARS OF

CHARLES RICHET, Ph.D.

Translated from the French

Formerly Assistant Secretary to the Government of

Set up and printed. Published Match, 1923.

FEBBI9 PRINTING COMPANY

This book is dedicated to the memory of my

my critics could. Metapsychic science is in its very earliest stages,

Weybridge, July, 1922.

1. Historical ...................................................................... 228

A. Monitions ...................................................................... 245

1. On Premonitions in General............................................ 344

C h apter II. M ovem ents O of T

(a) Table-Movements........................................................ 401

(a) On Fraud in Ectoplasmic Experiments.......................454

C h apter V. B ......................................................... 552

(a) Objective Bilocations.................................................. 552

1. On Hauntings in General.............................................. 563

1. Definition and Classification

1. The Limits of Psychic and Metapsychic Science

where S is the number of trials in which there have been a suc

1. Definition and Classification

The lion of Androcles was a better poet than Helen Smith's

1. Cryptesthesia in Normal Individuals

3. Celebrated men. 4. Manufactured objects.

5. Anatomical. 6. Historical pictures.

The designs should be numbered from 1 to 36, and would be printed on 36

tournament Ruth described one of the officers who would take

F ig . 2. R ough sk e tc h m ad e fr o m th e d e s c rip tio n b y A lic e .

Leonie gave me one day a splendid example of lucidity, though

xT h e r e w e re tw o p re m o n itio n s ( o r m o n itio n s, f o r th e h o u r a t w h ic h the

The description accords with the photograph of which only

On January 24, 1888, I gave Alice three sketches unseen by

Last drawing given by Alice for the bunch of grapes.

such retin a l hyperesth esia would be a modality of cryptesthesia.

ceive a letter or telegram to that effect. During the morning a

words were dictated : Fellow of Royal Society Potter, dead this

was in spiritualist sance with a young medium and Signor Mar-

thing has happened near the Boulevard des Italiens. On that

F ig . 10. Arrangements for experiment with a hidden alphabet. E. D. C. are

motion an electric bell. C. and D. also had their hands on the

The curious facts relating to the divining-rod seem at the first

It may be questioned whether there is an animal metapsychism

A. MONITIONS 1 (I. ON MONITIONS IN GENERAL)

Men .. ...................... 161 54 per cent.

forms; for instance Mrs. Thompson, whose faculty of crypt-

dressed hurriedly and arrived just in time to administer the sacra

sitting up in bed, writing, when I saw Mountain Jim before

him which he had not received. (It may be supposed, though

Mr. Hutchins died suddenly at Cardiff, forty-eight miles from

there, look there, pointing to a part of the wood. His friend

Bertha Hurly frequently went to visit Mrs. Evans, an old

Guernsey at that same hour {Tel. Halluc., 180).

a man in the passage. The steps stopped at the end of the

noon. He knows that B. will travel first class in that train,

Bozzanos case xxxviii shows a strange symbolism. Mrs. Z.,

In telekinesis with small objects even in full light, fraud is

F ic s . 14, 15, 16, D ia g r a m s to E x p l a in t h e T h e o r y of a n E c t o p l a s m ic

(a) On Fraud in Ectoplasmic Experiments

Telekinesis and ectoplasms are degrees of the same thingthe