PART I

Produced by Suzanne Shell, Stacy Brown, and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net

[Illustration: The "Will Board"]

THE PROBLEMS OF

PSYCHICAL RESEARCH

EXPERIMENTS AND THEORIES IN

THE REALM OF THE SUPERNORMAL

BY

HEREWARD CARRINGTON, Ph.D.

AUTHOR OF

"The Coming Science," "The Physical Phenomena of Spiritualism,"

"Death: Its Causes and Phenomena," "Modern Psychical Phenomena,"

"Your Psychic Powers: and How to Develop Them," "Higher Psychical

Development," "True Ghost Stories," Etc.

NEW YORK

DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY

1921

Copyright, 1921,

By DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY, Inc.

VAIL-BALLOU COMPANY

BINGHAMTON AND NEW YORK

PREFACE

In the following pages I have dealt chiefly with the _mental_ or

psychological phenomena of psychical research, and have not touched upon

the "physical" manifestations to any extent. The book is mostly

theoretical and constructive in tone; and, because of its speculative

character, it may, perhaps, prove of value to future psychical

investigators. It represents the author's conclusions after several

years' experimentation; and, in a field so new as this, scientific

hypotheses and speculations are assuredly helpful--indicating the road

we must travel, and the possible interpretation of certain facts, which

have been accumulated in the past, as the result of years of laborious

research. I believe that practically _all_ the phenomena of spiritualism

are true; that is, that they have occurred in a genuine manner from time

to time in the past; that they are supernormal in character, and are

genuine phenomenal occurrences. But as to the further question: "What is

the nature of the intelligence lying behind and controlling these

phenomena?"--_that_, I think, is as yet unsolved, and is likely to

remain so for some time to come. I do not believe that the simple

spiritistic explanation--especially as at present held--is the correct

one, nor one that explains all the facts; for I believe that the

phenomena are more complicated than this. Nor are the ordinary

psychological explanations at present in vogue adequate to cover them.

The explanation is yet to seek; and the solution will only be found when

a sufficient number of facts have been accumulated and the various

explanatory theories have been tested,--to see which of them is really

adequate. My hope is that the present book may help to accomplish this

result by supplying a little in both directions!

The present edition of this book is to some extent an abridgement of the

first edition, which appeared some seven years ago. I have, for

instance, omitted a number of "cases" which were originally included,

and also my "sittings" with Mrs. Piper--which material will be published

at a later date in another volume. I have also omitted the original

First Chapter,--since much of this material was subsequently included in

my _Modern Psychical Phenomena_. On the other hand, I have included a

new chapter on Recent Experiments in Psychic Photography,--composed

partly of original and hitherto unpublished material, and partly of the

experiments undertaken, some years ago, by Dr. Baraduc,--in

"photographing the soul." The account of his experiments was originally

published in my book, _Death: its Causes and Phenomena_, but they are

now included here as being more in line with other experiments recently

undertaken in this field. I have also added a brief chapter on the

Scientific Investigation of Psychic Phenomena by means of Laboratory

Instruments.

A word, finally, as to the necessarily slow progress which has been and

is being made in the study of "psychics." As this objection is often

raised, I cannot do better, perhaps, than to quote an admirable passage

from Prof. William James (_Memories and Studies_, pp. 175-76), where he

says:--

"For twenty-five years I have been in touch with the literature of

psychical research, and have had acquaintance with numerous

'researchers.' I have also spent a good many hours (though far

fewer than I should have spent) in witnessing (or trying to

witness) phenomena. Yet I am theoretically no 'further' than I was

at the beginning; and I confess that at times I have been tempted

to believe that the Creator has eternally intended this department

of nature to remain _baffling_,--to prompt our curiosities and

hopes and suspicions all in equal measure, so that, although ghosts

and clairvoyances, and raps and messages from spirits, are always

seeming to exist and can never be fully explained away, they also

can never be susceptible of full corroboration.... It is hard to

believe, however, that the Creator has really put any big array of

phenomena into the world merely to defy and mock our scientific

tendencies; so my deeper belief is that we psychical researchers

have been too precipitate in our hopes, and that we must expect to

mark progress not by quarter-centuries, but by half-centuries or

whole centuries."

In the present book, I have endeavoured to show why this must

necessarily be so; also to indicate the manner in which the subject may

be studied in order to arrive at definite knowledge at an earlier date

than might otherwise be possible.

H. C.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

Preface v

I Is Psychical Research a Science? 1

II Investigating Psychical Phenomena with

Scientific Instruments 82

III Life: and Its Interpretation 93

IV The Human Will Is a Physical Energy (_An

Instrument which Proves It_) 110

V Modern Dissection of the Human Mind 138

VI Psychic Photography (_New Experiments_) 157

VII Hallucination and the Physical Phenomena

of Spiritualism 188

VIII The Problems of Telepathy 210

IX The Uses and Abuses of Mind Cure 237

X The Psychology of the Ouija Board 247

XI Witchcraft: Its Facts and Follies 261

XII Scientific Truths Contained in Fairy Stories 277

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

The "Will Board" _Frontispiece_

PAGE

FACING

1. "Psychic Photograph" 158

2. "Psychic Photograph" 158

3. "Thought Photograph" 170

4. "Psychic Photograph" 176

5. "Psychic Photograph" 176

6. "Psychic Photograph" 178

7. "Psychic Photograph" 178

8. "Psychic Photograph" 180

9. "Psychic Photograph" 180

10. "Psychic Photograph" 182

11. "Psychic Photograph" 182

12. "Psychic Photograph" 182

13. "Photograph of the Soul" 184

14. "Photograph of the Soul" 184

THE PROBLEMS OF PSYCHICAL RESEARCH

CHAPTER I

IS PSYCHICAL RESEARCH A SCIENCE?

Is Psychical Research a Science?

It seems to me that the answer to this question must be somewhat as

follows: If the phenomena be true, Yes; if not, No!

If _one_ single prophecy, clairvoyant vision, telepathic impulse, or

mediumistic message be true--if veritable supernormal information be

thereby conveyed--then psychical research is a science, and illimitable

avenues are opened up for further research and speculation.

More especially is this true in the case of mediumistic messages. If

these prove to be delusory--the result of subliminal activity and so

forth--if there be no spiritual world, then "psychics" may be said to be

"founded upon the sand." It can hardly be called a "science." Only when

the _fact_ of communication is proved, will the real study of the

subject begin. Much of the work, up to the present, has been undertaken

with a view to establishing the reality of the facts. But this is a

question of evidence, not scientific research. When the facts themselves

are established, then the real study--the work of the future--will

begin. It will probably be the task of future generations to attack the

problem from this standpoint.

Let me illustrate what I mean by a somewhat striking example. Take the

facts presented in the case of Mrs. Piper. Hitherto the question has

resolved itself into that of the _evidence_ for survival. Have or have

not the various personalities who have communicated through her

entranced organism proved their personal identity? That is the problem;

and, as we know, opinions differ! But, granting the reality of the

facts, granting that "spirits" really do communicate, as alleged--then

the study of the question, from the "scientific" point of view, will

only have begun. _How_ do they communicate? Why are these communications

so rare? Why such trouble with proper names? How do the "spirits"

manipulate the nervous organism, and particularly the brain, of the

medium? Upon what cells or centres do they operate? and how? Does the

psychic constitution of the communicator affect the results--and if so,

how? What is the condition of the communicator's mind while

communicating? Is the medium's spirit entirely removed from the body

during the process of communication? and if so, where is it, and what is

it doing? How does the medium's mind affect the content of the

communications--and to what extent? These, and a thousand other

questions of a like nature, immediately present themselves, and call for

solution, as soon as the reality of the facts be granted--as soon as

spirit communication be accepted as a fact. This will constitute the

work of the future--the detailed study of the facts--not merely

regarding them from the point of view of evidence. Real, scientific

psychical research will then begin. The subject will then, for the

first time, become a legitimate branch of human study.

Yet, even now, it may not be altogether unprofitable to adduce a few

reflections which have been suggested by a study of the facts, up to the

present time. If theories and speculations of this nature have in

themselves no value, they often stimulate others to experiment or to

reflect upon the same line--sometimes with strikingly important and

interesting results. It is chiefly with this object in mind that I offer

the following suggestions--the result of some years of thought and

research in this particular field.

(1) Before it is possible for any one to appreciate the importance and

significance of psychical research, it is necessary for him to become

"inoculated," as it were, with materialism! To one who admits, _a

priori_, the reality of a spiritual world, and sees no difficulties in

the way of accepting it, there is, of course, no need to convince him

further. But once admit the position held by modern science

(particularly biological science) that life is a function of the

organism, and that thought is a function of the brain, and the phenomena

assume a very different importance. To state the case in precise terms,

I could not do better than to quote the words of Professor John Lewis

March, when he says "Mind is not found to exist apart from matter" (_A

Theory of Mind_, p. 11). And it must be admitted that--apart from the

facts of psychical research--there is no evidence that it does so exist.

So far as we can prove, life and consciousness become obliterated at the

moment of bodily death. And the only way to prove the contrary is to

produce evidence that consciousness does so persist; and this is only

possible by the methods adopted in spiritism and psychical research. In

no other way can the facts be established; by no other method can the

persistence of human consciousness be scientifically proved.

(2) It may be contended that consciousness, as such, may persist, but

that individuality does not survive bodily death: the human is merged

into the All. But such a view of the case seems to be directly opposed

to evidence no less than to moral feeling. For, in the first place,

persistence without memory and individuality would not be worth having

at all; and secondly, this idea is, it seems to me, directly opposed to

evolution, which tends more and more to accentuate individuality, and

separate and perfect it.

(3) On the other hand, it might possibly be that our persistence depends

upon our _ability_ to persist. The theory of mind developed by modern

researches in psycho-pathology is that the mind of man--instead of being

a single "unit," as was formerly supposed--is composed of a number of

threads or strands, so to speak, held together by our attention and our

will. Once these are relaxed, the mind "unravels" and goes to pieces. A

single, strongly-woven, and well-bound rope might stand a sudden wrench

and shock, while a less perfectly-made one would tear and snap under the

strain. Similarly, it might be urged, if the mind be sufficiently

balanced, strengthened, and controlled, it might withstand the shock of

death; otherwise it would not. Whether or not we persist would thus

depend upon our ability to control and hold ourselves together, as it

were; upon our strength of will; upon the degree of development of the

central personality. When this is lacking, "psychical disintegration"

takes place, and we fail to survive the last great Ordeal.

While this theory may possibly be true, it seems to me that it is very

probably untrue, for the reason that this is not a question of moral

worth which we are considering, but of scientific law--of the

Conservation of Energy, of the ability of life and consciousness of any

sort--good or bad--to exist apart from brain-functioning. That is the

question! Once grant that mind of any kind can persist by and of itself,

independent of a physical organization, and you have so far broken down

the barriers of materialism that there should not be the slightest

objection to granting the persistence of consciousness of any sort--with

the probability that it _would_ so persist. Cosmic Law could hardly act

otherwise.

(4) I know well enough that psychic investigation is, at present at

least, in a chaotic and uncertain condition, and that little beyond

uncertainty and discouragement has been attained in the past. As Mr. F.

C. Constable remarked:

"Many of us who have devoted our lives to psychical research can

but have moments of profound depression. We _feel_ our labours

cannot be in vain, but we are faced by such a complexity of fraud,

deliberate and unconscious, mal-observation, denial of scientific

restrictions, and ignorance of what is trustworthy in evidence and

deduction, that at times our search for truth seems as futile as

the search of past alchemists for the philosopher's stone."

And even more forcibly Count Aksakof states the objections which have

occurred to him:

"As years went by, the weak points of spiritualism became more

evident and more numerous. The insignificance of the

communications, the poverty of their intellectual content, and

finally the fraud, etc.--in short, a host of doubts, objections,

and aberrations of every kind--greatly increased the difficulties

of the problem. Such impressions were well calculated to discourage

one, if, on the other hand, we had not at our disposal a series of

indisputable facts." (_Animism and Spiritism._)

While this is doubtless true, it is nevertheless a fact that psychical

research is, as yet, in its infancy; and it is in a sense unfair to

judge the results by the few years of progress which have been possible

in the past. For while other sciences--physics, chemistry, anatomy--are

more than two thousand years old, psychical research is but forty years

old--some of the original founders of the S.P.R. being still alive and

actively engaged in the work! It is, then, somewhat premature to

pronounce upon the ultimate outcome of the investigation, and we must

wait for at least a hundred years or so before it will be possible to

see whether or not the subject has proved its claims and justified

itself in the eyes of the world. And this view of the case is further

supported by the fact that, in so exact a science as cytology, but

little definite can be said. Thus, Professor E. B. Wilson, on p. 434 of

his work _The Cell_, says: "The study of the cell has, on the whole,

seemed to widen rather than to narrow the enormous gap that separates

even the lowest forms of life from the inorganic world." It will thus be

seen that the uncertain and unsatisfactory condition of psychics is

shared also by other branches of scientific investigation, and it is as

yet too soon to say whether or not the ultimate verdict will swing in

this direction or in that. We can only hope, and continue to experiment!

5. Psychical research, therefore, may continue to progress, in spite of

the innate difficulties and the obstacles with which the subject is

surrounded. It is our duty to see that it does! For it is certain that

the subject will receive serious set-backs, from time to time, in the

shape of unjust misrepresentations or bitter attacks from the outsiders,

determined to "prove a case," even if the cause of truth be abandoned in

order to do so. Take, e.g., the recent volume of Dr. Tanner and Dr. G.

Stanley Hall (_Studies in Spiritism_). They received certain "lying

communications," in spite of Professor William James' warning that "the

personalities are very suggestible" and that "every one is liable to get

back from the trance very much what he puts into it." Even Deleuze could

have told Drs. Tanner and Hall this fact--having ascertained it nearly a

hundred years before (1813); for he wrote in his _Critical History of

Animal Magnetism_ (pp. 134-5), in reply to those who would question the

somnambulist upon points of practical advantage:

"You will gain nothing; you will even lose the advantages which you

might derive from his lucidity. It is very possible that you could

make him speak upon all the subjects of your indiscreet curiosity;

but in that case, as I have already warned you, you will make him

leave his own sphere and introduce him into yours. He will no

longer have any other resources than yourself. He will utter you

very eloquent discourses, but they will no more be dictated by the

internal inspirations. They will be the product of his

recollections or of his imagination; perhaps you will also rouse

his vanity, and then all is lost; he will not re-enter the circle

from which he has wandered.... The two states cannot be

confounded.... These somnambulists are evidently influenced by the

persons who surround them, by the circumstances in which they are

placed."

And Dr. A. E. Fletcher, in _The Other World and This_, says:

"Trance mediums, more than any others, are the victims of the

embodied and the disembodied. If the medium is subject to the

influence of a spirit, how much more likely is he to be affected by

the character of those around him! Strong minds in the body may

take control of his brain, instead of spirit intelligences. Such

persons must be of a highly sensitive order, and cannot come under

the same line of human criticism and judgment as might be applied

to those in everyday life."

Even Maudsley, in his _Pathology of Mind_ (p. 77), says:

"The main feature which the abnormal states (trance, etc.) present

in common are: first, that coincident with a partial mental

activity there is more or less inhibition, which may be complete,

of all other mental action; secondly, that the individual in such

condition of limited mental activity _is susceptible only to

impressions which are in relation with his character and are

consequently assimilated by it_...."[1]

These passages illustrate, at least, the delicate and often-times

suggestible nature of the trance; and how inconclusive, to say the

least, are such experiments as those of Drs. Tanner and Hall!

6. On the other hand, it may be asked: If the messages we receive at

seances really _do_ come from the departed, why should they be so

fleeting and so uncertain as they are? And why should not many more

messages be received from the hundreds and thousands who die yearly, and

who are doubtless longing to communicate?

Answers to these questions are manifold. In the first place, it may be

pointed out that the ability to communicate may be rare indeed, and not

a universal possibility, as is generally supposed. As Dr. Hodgson

expressed it (_Proceedings_, xiii., p. 362): "It may be a completely

erroneous assumption that all persons, young or old, good or evil,

vigorous or sickly, and whatever their lives or deaths may have been,

are at all comparable with one another in their capacity to convey clear

statements from the other world to this." Further, it must not be

supposed that all "messages" received by mediums (even granting their

complete honesty) really issue from the "Great Beyond." Many mediums

simply tell their sitters the ideas, impressions, and "messages" which

come into their minds, and which they believe to come from external

sources, i.e., "spirits," but which, as a matter of fact, issue from

their own subconsciousness. These scraps of information resemble

"bubbles" breaking upon the surface of water--the finished product of

latent incubation, and doubtless have every appearance and every feeling

of external origin. Even if genuine spirit-messages are at times

received, it is highly probable that the bulk of the messages are the

product of the medium's subliminal, which catches up and amplifies the

original external impetus received from without. Professor William James

believed, e.g., the following: that "genuine messages have been given

through Mrs. Piper's organism, but he also contended that every time an

intelligence appeared, calling itself Hodgson, and beginning: 'Hello!

Here I am again in the witness-box! How are you, old chap?' etc., this

was not Hodgson at all, but Mrs. Piper's subliminal, and that genuine

supernormal information only came in 'touches' or 'impulses,' as it

were, as though the spirit could touch or come into contact with the

medium's mind at a number of points, making a number of 'dips down,' ...

as it were, imparting information at each dip which the medium's mind

thereupon seized upon, elaborated, and gave out in its own dramatic form

and setting." If this be true of Mrs. Piper (whose messages are shot at

you from a cannon's mouth, as it were), how much truer must it be of

other types of mediums, in which the communications are certainly far

less direct and impressive? Mrs. Piper might be styled the "possession"

type of medium--as opposed to the "subliminal" type--commonly seen; and,

as before said, if the messages be so indirect in the case of Mrs.

Piper, how much more fragmentary and indirect must they be in the case

of all other mediums--less developed and less direct than she? It is

hardly to be wondered at that the information given is of the vaguest,

the most hazy and indistinct character, and that recognition and proof

of identity is almost an impossibility.

7. As to the theory that comparatively few (of those who die) make good

communicators, I may be permitted to suggest, perhaps, a tentative

explanation of the rarity of good communicators (and communications),

based upon this principle. Certain it is that special adaptability and

idiosyncrasy are necessary to the one on this side--this constituting,

in fact, a "medium," as we understand it. It seems highly probable that

a medium is born and not made, that the gift is hereditary, and that it

depends but little, if at all, upon physical, mental, or moral

characteristics, but rather upon a peculiar and innate make-up which is

independent of all of these. A person is a good psychic or medium just

as another is a good painter or sculptor or pianist. It can be

cultivated by training, but the "germ" must be latent within the

individual, in order that its development may be possible at all.

Granting all this, it seems to me very natural to suppose that some

similar characteristic might be essential to the one on the "other

side," in order that _he_ might be a good communicator. Only a few might

possess this special gift--without which communication would be

impossible--no matter how gifted or clever the individual might be, in

other respects, or how much he longed to communicate. Further, it might

be that this deceased person could only get _en rapport_ with our world

when some one on this side was also and simultaneously endeavouring to

reach him. Neither alone could effect the communication, could bridge

the chasm.

Let me make the theory clearer by means of an analogy. One theory of

consciousness contends that it depends for its existence altogether upon

the touching or inter-connection of certain nervous fibres, without

which consciousness would be impossible, and is, in fact, abolished--as

in sleep. When these "dendrites" touch, communication is established;

when this contact is broken, it is non-existent.

To apply the analogy. When a medium goes into a trance, she throws out

(symbolically) psychic "arms," or pseudopodia, much as an octopus might

feel about him with his tentacled arms. On the other side, a

communicator would also stretch out these mental arms, feeling about for

something to grasp and cling to, something capable of receiving and

transmitting the messages he desired to send. Only when these two

groping arms find each other "in the dark," as it were, would

communication become possible. If only _one_ thus sought, nothing would

result. The rare combination of good sender and good recipient must be

found before this communication is possible at all, and even then, they

must both be striving to communicate at the same moment before any

results follow. It is because of the rarity of this combination and this

coincidence that mediumistic messages are so scarce. In addition to the

earnest desire and longing on the other side, there must be a medium on

this, capable of receiving the messages. And when this medium is lacking

(as is usually the case) no communications are received. This fully

explains to us, it seems to me, why it is that messages of this nature

are so rarely received: the necessary conditions on this side are

lacking.

8. Such a theory would also enable us to understand one fact, very

puzzling to most investigators in this field. It is that one's friends

and relatives are almost invariably present immediately the medium goes

into the trance! Sometimes there is a wait, it is true, and they have to

be "sent for." But as a rule they are "on tap" at once--and, no matter

where we may be, they are there _instanter_--ready to communicate!

Of course such facts naturally lead one to suppose, _a priori_, that

these personages are not present at all, in reality, but merely the

medium's subliminal, personifying these various personages--no spirit

being concerned, directly or indirectly, with their production. This, I

say, is the natural view of the facts.

But on the theory above outlined the genuine nature of these messages

may readily be assumed. Suppose our friends and relatives are more or

less _en rapport_ with us all the time (like "guardian angels"). Time

and space need not be considered factors in the problem--since all

spirits say that they do not exist in "their" world. Then, all we should

have to do, in order to effect communication, would be to supply the

necessary conditions on this side--when the chasm would at once be

bridged, and communication established.

(I wish it to be distinctly understood, however, that I consider the

vast bulk of such messages the product of the medium's subliminal, and

not at all coming from the source from which they claim to proceed. I am

only arguing on general grounds for the _possibility_.)

9. It will be seen that I have spoken throughout the above argument of

the _trance_ as a necessary condition for communication, or at least

assumed that it is invariably present. Why should the trance state have

this effect? What is the nature of the trance, and what peculiarity

within it renders these results possible?

The sceptic might begin by questioning the fact itself; but I think it

now so well established that argument on this score is unnecessary.

Further, the deeper the trance, _ceteris paribus_, the better the

phenomena. There is no denying that fact. While certain striking results

are often obtained while the medium is in light trance, they are not

nearly so striking as those which are obtained when the medium is in the

deeper stage. And this applies, I believe, to mediums producing both

mental and physical phenomena. The question therefore remains: What

happens in this trance state to render such results possible? _Why_

should the peculiar condition involved be instrumental in producing such

striking results?

It must be admitted at once that the innermost nature of this trance

state is unknown. Certainly no purely physiological explanation suffices

to explain the "medium-trance," even were it sufficient to account for

similar conditions better known. No matter what the condition of the

medium's nerve centres may be, this would not account for the

supernormal information given during the trance state. No matter how

much nervous or mental "instability" or "disintegration" were

postulated, it would not at all explain or elucidate the primary

question: _How is the supernormal information acquired?_

It seems to me that the answer to this question can only be found by

assuming some such theory of the facts as the following:

When a person falls asleep, he loses consciousness when _en rapport_

with _himself_.[2] When he is placed in the "mesmeric" trance, he

remains _en rapport_ with the operator, and the deeper the trance, the

more complete and effective this _rapport_ is. Explain it as you will,

the facts remain. The writings of the early mesmerists are filled with

records of cases of this _rapport_, in which "community of sensation"

was present, and various supernormal phenomena, such as clairvoyance,

etc., were manifested. No such phenomena are recorded in hypnotic

seances, as a rule, which makes me suspect most strongly that mesmerism

and hypnotism are not identical, in spite of the general belief that

they are fundamentally one--all mesmeric phenomena being due to

"suggestion." Of this, however, later. For the moment, I wish only to

draw attention to the fact that, during these deep trance states,

_rapport_ was noted, and supernormal information frequently given.

Now, it seems plausible to suppose that, by way of analogy, the medium

trance would represent a trance state induced by hypnotism _from the

"other side."_ We know that telepathic hypnotism is a fact--the numerous

cases recorded by Myers and Janet being good proof of this. Further, we

know that dreams may be induced experimentally, by means of telepathic

suggestion. (See Ermacora's paper, _Proceedings_, xi. 235-308.) Might we

not assume, then, that the medium-trance represents a certain condition

induced by influence from deceased minds--which would fully account for

the supernormal information given (for the medium would be _en rapport_

with these minds), and for the fact that the medium is not usually

susceptible to suggestion, pain-tests, &c., on _this_ side. The deeper

the trance, the more the medium is in touch with the other world, the

less with this; and _vice versa_. The medium-trance is, therefore,

probably a hypnotic or mesmeric trance, induced telepathically by

operators out of the body.

10. When the trance has been induced, however, how does the "spirit"

succeed in imparting information to the medium's brain and organism?

Inasmuch as the phenomena are usually of the motor type--speech or

writing--the motor centres in the brain must somehow be employed; _how_

they are employed, and whether other centres in addition to these are

used is a question calling for solution--but one which will take

probably years of patient research to solve.

As we know, Dr. Hodgson was of the opinion that the ordinary centres

were not used in the production of the automatic writing, for he said

(_Proceedings_, xiii. pp. 398-9): "What the precise relation is between

this consciousness and the movements of the hand I do not know. I do not

know whether or not the motor centres of the brain ordinarily concerned

in the movements of hand and arm are in operation or not. I incline to

think not--certainly not in the ordinary way...." The statement of the

"controls" is that they use the "empty corners" of Mrs. Piper's

brain--which probably means that certain unused areas are pressed into

service, as far as possible, in the production of the phenomena. Still,

this is not very definite information! Another theory offered by the

communicators is that they get into contact with the "light," think

their thoughts, and these thoughts are then registered or expressed in

motor phenomena--speech or writing. What the "light" may be, we have not

the slightest means of knowing, but it is a very significant fact that a

"light" of this nature is nearly always associated with spiritual

phenomena. We hear of the "interior illumination" of the saints and

martyrs, and of those who have experienced an influx of "cosmic

consciousness"; of the "halo" which surrounds the heads of holy persons;

of the "internal light" experienced by many who have had a special

conversion or illumination; of the "aura" surrounding the bodies of

certain individuals--always perceptible to clairvoyants, and lately (it

is asserted) to any one who observes the subject through specially

prepared chemical screens;[3] of the "light" diffusing itself over the

region of the forehead, which certain mesmeric subjects have inwardly

perceived,[4] and of the "aura" which may be produced experimentally by

means of high-tension electric currents. We must not forget, also, that

Christ Himself is called "the light of the world," and that He once made

the very significant remark: "If thine eye be single, _thy whole body

shall be full of light_." Lastly, it is somewhat significant, it seems

to me, that Andrew Jackson Davis used to see the nervous system of the

person he was studying, while in the "superior condition," as

_light_--as though it were illuminated by some interior glow, or was

more or less phosphorescent. (And we know that phosphorus is certainly

connected with the activities of the nervous system--even though it be

not so intimately as before supposed.) This string of coincidences is at

least remarkable; and it will be observed that the "light" is usually

associated with nervous centres and nervous activity--for the head,

e.g., is certainly the part most highly illumined, as a rule; while it

is certainly the seat of the most active self-consciousness.

11. These facts throw an interesting side-light, also, upon another

oft-observed phenomenon in psychical research. I refer to the fact that

apparitions ("ghosts") are nearly always seen to be clear and distinct

as to the head and upper portions of the body, while they taper off to

vapour and "filmy nothingness" in the lower limbs, so that often the

feet are not visible at all. While this may be due in part to the fact

that the observer's attention is not directed to the lower limbs, but

more or less centred upon the head and face, it appears to me that

there may be another interpretation of the facts, more in accordance

with the phenomena above mentioned, which is this:

During life we are conscious of our body in varying degrees--of the head

most of all, then of the arms and upper portions of the body; and

finally, of the lower limbs and feet, we are, a large part of the time,

hardly conscious at all. Now, if the light accompanies nervous activity,

and is present in proportion to it, it is obvious that those portions of

the organism would have most "light" which were most active

mentally--i.e., the brain and those portions of the nervous system

controlling the hands, face, and upper portions of the body--while those

portions which had become entirely automatic and unconscious in their

activity would have least light--being physiological to the point almost

of being mechanical. If this "light" corresponded in any way to

visibility, therefore, it would only be natural to suppose that the face

and upper portions of the phantasmal figure should be more or less

distinctly visible, to one at all sensitive to such impressions, while

the lower portions of the figure would fade into practical

invisibility,--owing to lack of "light." This explanation would

certainly be in accord with the facts, as we know them, regarding

phantasmal figures.

12. We are still far from the answer to our question, however: How does

spirit act upon matter, and in what way does the spirit manipulate the

nervous mechanism of the medium, during the process of communication?

Let us now consider this question further.

Andrew Jackson Davis, in his _Great Harmonia_, vol. i. pp. 55-65,

discussed this problem, and stated that "spirit acts upon the bodily

organism anatomically, physiologically, mechanically, chemically,

electrically, magnetically, and spiritually." The trouble with such a

statement is that it explains nothing (even as elaborated by him), and

that it is far easier to believe, e.g., that one part of the body acts

chemically and mechanically, etc., upon another part than to suppose

that "spirit" has anything to do with the affair whatever. To postulate

its activity would be merely to multiply causes without necessity.

Just here, it might be interesting to inquire what the modern conception

is as to the relation of mind and brain--of soul and body; and

particularly the question of the "seat" of the soul--that central point

which was, until late years, always considered necessary as a fulcrum or

point of contact upon which the soul might act.

The older psychologists and philosophers always took such a "seat" for

granted--Descartes, as we know, imagining that the pineal gland occupied

that important function. But as the science of psychology progressed,

this notion was more and more given up, until the prevailing opinion of

late years seems to be that the _whole_ of the cortex is equally the

seat of consciousness, and that its _total_ functioning is responsible

for the psychical activities which we know under the head of personality

or individuality or ego.

It is interesting to note, however, that Dr. Frederick Peterson, of

Columbia University, New York, has lately put forward the theory that

there is, or may be, a seat of consciousness, after all! In a striking

article in the _Journal of Abnormal Psychology_ (vol. iii. No. 5), he

says:--

"I will say at once that the 'seat' of that power which produces

the manifestations of consciousness is in the basal ganglia

(probably the _corpora striata_), and that consciousness is a

peculiar summation of energy at that point, capable of being

directed, like the rays of a searchlight, into this or that portion

of the brain."

Dr. Peterson then goes on to give some facts which seem to him to

support this view. Among these are the phenomena of sleep (the reasons

being too long to detail here); the fact that, although every

individual brain is stored full of experiences, only a small area

is illuminated by consciousness at any one moment; and the phenomena of

epilepsy--concerning which Dr. Peterson speaks in the following terms:

"The one disorder which has led me to think much of this subject is

epilepsy, in which disease, loss of consciousness is the most

extraordinary and often the only symptom. I allude chiefly to such

remarkable conditions as the _tic de salaam_ and the other forms of

_petit mal_, in which the patient drops suddenly to the floor with

loss of consciousness, and quite as suddenly rises again in full

possession of his faculties. I have watched such cases for hours,

and always with increasing marvel. The loss of consciousness is

complete, and often lasts but a fraction of a second. How account

for such phenomenon! If consciousness were a diffused attribute of

the whole brain, what spasm of blood-vessels or other physical

process familiar to us could act and be adjusted with such speed?

If, however, the 'seat' of consciousness be limited to some very

small portion of the brain, some physical process such as is

suggested could easily account for the instantaneous loss and

regaining of consciousness."

Other facts in support of this theory are given, and the statement of

Dr. C. L. Dana that, in poisoning by illuminating gas, the chief symptom

is loss of consciousness, and the only lesion discovered is softening of

the _corpora striata_; then the following:

"Assuming now that it were proved that the power which creates

consciousness has some definite seat, and that it is a summation of

energies physiologically varying in sleep and waking, which may be

directed to any part of our store of experiences for purposes of

illumination, what portion of the brain is so constructed as to be

in apparently intimate connection with every other? The _corpora

striata_!... There is no portion of the brain we know so little

of.... Here we have a portion of the brain which must be of

enormous significance, otherwise it would not be always present,

from the fish up to man."

It will be seen that Dr. Peterson is here opposed to the doctrine

maintained by both Lotze[5] and MacDougall,[6] who both maintained that:

"There are a number of separate points in the brain which form so many

'seats' of the soul. Each of these would be of equal value with the

rest; at each of them the soul would be present with equal

completeness." But whether there be one or several "seats" of

consciousness, it is obvious that there must be contact of _some_ sort,

at one or several points (granting the correctness of the theory that

spirit acts upon matter at all), and the question is: _How_ may this

action be supposed to take place?

In discussing this question in a former book[7] I said:

"It is more than probable, it seems to me, that there exists some

sort of etheric medium between mind and even organic nervous

tissue, upon which the mind must act first of all. Thus, we should

have the chain of connection: mind, vital or etheric medium,

nervous tissue, muscle, bone. So mind acts upon matter; and it will

be seen that there is an increasing density of structure, and that

just in proportion to this density is mind incapable of affecting

matter directly. We must, it seems to me, always postulate some

sort of etheric medium through which mind acts, in order to affect

and move matter--organic or inorganic. And without this vital

intermediary there can be no action, and consequently no

manifestation."

Now, it would appear rational to suppose that some action of this sort

takes place when mind acts upon, or influences, matter. Air is

invisible, and practically imperceptible to our senses--_when

stationary_. But set into motion, a current of air will close a door

with a bang--will have the effect of definitely moving a heavy mass of

inanimate matter, in the manner indicated. It may be that in somewhat

the same way mind affects brain. Mind may reside in a sort of etheric

vehicle, and be more or less stable or stationary, save at the times

when volition or intense, active conscious operations are in

progress--when, in short, _effort_ is exerted. At such times, it is

surely conceivable that what was static becomes dynamic; something is

set into motion which in turn brings into activity some more "physical"

energy, and so on, until sufficient material momentum has been gained to

affect that most unstable and mobile substance, nervous tissue. It is

certainly quite conceivable that certain nervous centres in the brain

(_which_ centres, we cannot say) might be set into actual operation by

some such process; or at least that the impulse or energy supplied in

this manner might be sufficient to release the nervous energy stored in

the cell, much as the trigger of a rifle would, when pressed, release

the energy contained within the cartridge. Such "hair trigger" action

has been postulated by both William James and Bergson, and is certainly

in line with modern speculations in this direction. There are also

certain analogies to be drawn from physical science to guide us here.

In electricity, e.g., what are known as "relays" are constantly

employed, and beautifully illustrate the principle here outlined. In

working over long lines, or where there are a number of instruments in

one circuit, the currents are often not strong enough to work the

recording instruments directly. In such a case there is interposed a

"relay" or "repeater." This instrument consists of an electro-magnet

round which the line current flows, and whose delicately-poised

armature, when attracted, makes contact for a local circuit, in which a

local battery and the receiving Morse instrument (sounder, writer, etc.)

are included. The principle of the relay is, then, that a current too

weak to do the work itself may get a strong local current to do its work

for it.

It may be the same in the case of mental action. Volition or thought may

be too weak, _per se_, to influence nervous processes; but, when

exceptionally active or potent, they may set into activity specific

nerve energies which manifest in the manner known to us as motor and

physical phenomena. Here is, it seems to me, a rational explanation of

the facts, and one which is in accord, not only with ordinary

psychological phenomena, but with those more puzzling and obscure

manifestations witnessed from time to time in psychic research.

13. It may be objected that such a conception of the facts supposes that

will (and conscious thought) are physical energies--for however _slight_

we make this energy, it is still energy none the less. The air which

closed the door would not move it _of itself_--unless some pressure were

exerted upon it from without. Could "life" act otherwise?

One reply to this objection is that the distinguishing characteristic of

life is this very power of original, spontaneous movement. It is life,

and life alone, which possesses this power. Were this doctrine true, it

would of course upset the present theory of the Conservation of Energy,

for it would admit the constant infusion into the world of energy from

without. Despite the theoretical difficulty thus presented, it seems

probable that life is, in a certain sense, a physical energy, or at

least its manifestation is. It is possible that the two states are

similar to the difference between potential and kinetic energy; and we

must remember that _energy is always noticed or experienced by us, as

energy, in its expenditure, never in its accumulation_.[8]

If life be a physical force, if vitality be a specific energy, then, it

seems to me, many things fall into line--many phenomena, hitherto

inexplicable, become at once intelligible.

Let me illustrate this conclusion by mentioning a few such facts:

Take, for instance, the phenomena manifested in the presence of Eusapia

Palladino. I shall not now stop to discuss the reality of these

manifestations, because I consider them just as certain as any

other facts in life, and not at all open to discussion. Now,

in these phenomena there is an intelligence _of some sort_

at work producing them; that is certain. But as to the _nature_ of this

intelligence--_what_ it is--that is altogether another matter, and a

much more difficult question to answer. Whether this be a low order of

deceiving and "lying spirits," as Professor Barrett and others are

apparently inclined to believe, or whether it be a fraction of the

medium's own mind (Flournoy, Morselli), or whether it be the spirit it

claims to be, or whether it belongs to some other even more doubtful

order of intelligence, such as postulated by the Theosophists and

certain Mystics and Occultists, _that_ is a question which we cannot at

present answer, and for which we may have to wait for several hundred

years before one can be satisfactorily given.

But, granting the reality of the phenomena, they themselves demand

solution, solely from the point of view of physics and physiology, and

quite aside from the nature of the intelligence with which they are at

times associated. The facts themselves still need elucidation.

Some years ago a gentleman of my acquaintance started out with the

intention of constructing a telephone by means of which it would be

possible to speak directly to the spirit world! He had in mind great

delicacy of apparatus, a system of "relays," by means of which it would

be possible to augment an initial stimulus, however slight, a magnifying

apparatus which would greatly increase the volume of sound, on the lines

of the ampliphone and the microphone, etc. I do not believe that very

definite results were ever achieved, and he is still at work upon the

problem. Needless to say, this idea of his was ridiculed in all

quarters; but I myself do not see any valid reason why some such device

should not succeed--provided, of course, that a spiritual world exists

at all. If such a world exists, if the intelligences which reside

therein can at times produce physical phenomena, then it is certainly

conceivable that some energy may be set into operation which may produce

the desired results--some energy which we, too, can utilize and which

the spiritual entity can also manipulate; in other words, _an energy

common to the two worlds_. Were such a common medium or mediator found,

communication would certainly be established, and it only remains for us

to discover the common energy. Personally, I believe that this

intermediary is most probably _vitality_--the life-force, without the

presence of which such manifestations would be impossible. A living,

human being is necessary, upon whose presence these phenomena depend,

and without whom they could not occur. It is thus obvious that there is

a definite connection between these phenomena and _life_, which can

hardly be due to chance; it must stand in some intimate and causal

relation.[9]

14. Many students of psychical phenomena believe that, in the case of

Eusapia Palladino, e.g., this connection is clearly discernible, and

that it is upon the externalization of her vital force that many of

these phenomena depend. Even the materializations are thought to be due

to this same cause--due to the moulding, in space, of this plastic

intermediary projected beyond the limits of her bodily organism. Certain

it is that such a projection does at times take place, and it seems

rational to suppose that "raps" may be due to the explosive expulsion of

this neural energy after it has reached a certain "tension." One quite

striking incident which has been narrated to me by a physician of my

acquaintance tends rather to confirm this view. It is that, when he was

trying on various occasions to move a table, _a la_ Palladino, he failed

to do so, but whenever he lifted his hands away from the table,

"sparkling" took place between his hands and the table-top, closely

resembling the electric spark which jumps from point to point when the

tension has reached a certain limit.

Another interesting fact, related to me by the same physician, serves to

throw a light upon the connection of vital and physical energies. The

doctor in question was treating a patient, who was apparently

"obsessed," by means of electricity. The galvanometer needle showed what

slight variations in the current there were during the course of the

treatment. In the middle of the process, while the patient was

conversing with the doctor, she was suddenly "obsessed." _Coincidental_

with this obsession, the galvanometer showed a tremendous and permanent

fluctuation, indicating that the resistance of the body to the current

had suddenly and greatly changed!

Whatever view we may take of the facts, here is, at least, a striking

incident, which the current theories of the varying causes of bodily

resistance (in these psycho-galvanic reflexes) hardly serve to explain.

Can it be that the subject's "etheric body" was in some way disturbed by

an invading intelligence, and that this disturbance was manifested in

the fluctuations recorded? Is there a nervous fluid, after all, as the

magnetizers and mesmerists contend so strongly, but which has been

relegated to oblivion since the advent of suggestion and hypnotism?

Personally, I believe that there _is_, and I shall indicate very briefly

some of my reasons for thinking so.

In the _first_ place, the modern hypnotist can very rarely succeed in

cultivating clairvoyance in his subject, whereas the records of

mesmerism teem with cases which were developed under the old _regime_.

Surely the dissimilarity in the effect points to a dissimilarity of

cause. It has always appeared to me highly probable that mesmerism and

hypnotism are dependent upon entirely different causes, and were not at

all the same in the last analysis.

In the _second_ place, the exhaustion which "healers" sometimes

experience when treating patients of a certain temperament can hardly be

due altogether to suggestion. I have been informed by "magnetic" and

"spiritual" healers that this feeling of exhaustion is very great when a

self-centred, selfish person is being treated, and correspondingly less

whenever a generous, large-souled individual is receiving the treatment.

"Osteopaths" have told me the same thing. Those possessing an active

mind and brain, and who are analytical and unsympathetic by nature, are

far harder to treat, and leave a far greater exhaustion, than those who

are not so. This bears a very striking resemblance to the "good" and

"bad" sitters in the Piper case, and also the Palladino case; in fact,

it is true of everyday life, to a certain extent. The more active the

mind, the greater the _grasp_ over life and self which we possess, the

less susceptible are we to external or internal influences. Let us call

to mind in this connection the remark of Dr. Snow in his treatise on

_Anaesthetics_, that "the more intelligent the patient, the more

anaesthetic is required to put him under."

_Thirdly_, the phenomena presented by Eusapia Palladino completely prove

the reality of such a "fluid" to my mind, without any other proof being

necessary.

_Fourthly_, the impression said to be left in or upon objects or houses,

and the phenomena of "psychometry" seem to indicate the same thing.

_Fifthly_, the recent reinforcement of the evidence in favour of the

human "aura" strongly supports the same view.

_Sixthly_, the French experiments in "exteriorization of sensibility,"

"thought-photography," "radiographs," etc., point to the same

conclusion.

_Seventhly_, the successful experiments conducted by Professor Alrutz

and others with his instrument--which is thought to register "will

power"--is a long step towards recognizing the existence of a nervous,

vital energy, which can at times be externalized and made to pass into

and "charge" an inanimate object.

_Finally_, the facts of materialization and kindred phenomena, which

find so ready and complete an explanation on this theory.

For these and other reasons, therefore, it seems fairly certain that

there is a nervous "fluid" which can at times be externalized beyond the

normal bodily limits, which is operative in mesmeric "passes," and which

plays so large and hitherto unsuspected a part in the production of many

physical and psychical phenomena.

15. As we know, it is this "fluid" which is drawn upon, so it is said,

by materializing mediums for the production of their phantoms, and the

following interesting experience seems to confirm this view. I quote

_verbatim_:

"It was an autumn afternoon, about six o'clock. I had returned from

a stroll in the garden, and was in my own room, sitting on a

single-backed easy-chair, leisurely dipping into _Vanity Fair_.

While turning over the pages in search of some favourite passage, I

became aware of an abnormal and quite indescribable sensation. My

chest and breathing seemed inwardly oppressed by some ponderous

weight, while I became conscious of some presence behind me,

exerting a powerful influence on the forces within. On trying to

turn my head to see what this could be, I was powerless to do so,

neither could I lift a hand or move in any way. I was not a little

alarmed and began immediately to reason. Was it a fainting fit

coming on, epilepsy, paralysis--possibly even death? No, the mind

was too much alive, though physically I felt an absolutely passive

instrument, operated upon by some powerful external agent, as if

the current of nerve-force within seemed forcibly drawn together

and focussed on a spot in front of me. I gazed motionless, as

though fascinated, on what was no longer vacant space. There an

oval, misty light was forming, elongatory, widening--yes, actually

developing into a human face and form! Was this hallucination, or

some vision of the unseen, coming in so unexpected fashion? Before

me had arisen a remarkable figure, never seen before in picture or

life--dark-skinned, aged, with white beard, the expression

intensely earnest, the features small, the bald head finely

moulded, lofty over the forehead, the whole demeanour instinct with

solemn grace. The hands, too, how unlike any hands I knew, yet how

expressive! They were dark, long in fingers and narrow in palms,

the veins like sinews, standing out as they moved to and fro in

eager gesture. He was speaking to me in deep tones, as if in urgent

entreaty. What would I not give to hear words from such a figure!

But no effort availed me to distinguish one articulate sound. I

tried to speak, but could not. With desperate effort I shook out

the words, "Speak louder!" The face grew more intent, the voice

louder and more emphatic. Was there something amiss in my own

hearing, then, that I could distinguish no word amidst these deeply

emphasized tones? Slowly and deliberately the figure vanished,

through the same stages of indistinctness, back to the globular,

lamp-like whiteness, till it faded into nothingness. Before it had

quite faded away, the face of a woman arose, indistinct and calm.

The same emphatic hum, though in a subdued note, indistinct and

dim. The same paralysis of voice and muscle, the same strange

force, as if it were overshadowing me. With the disappearance of

this second and far less interesting figure, I recovered my power

of movement, and arose.

"My first impulse was to look round for the origin of this strange

force; my second was to rush to the looking-glass to make sure I

was myself. There could be no delusion! There I was, paler than

usual, and greatly agitated; I walked hurriedly to and fro. True,

there had been nothing alarming in the apparition itself, but the

sensation preceding had been vivid in the extreme. What was it? Was

it night, or had I been in some strange sleep? Certainly not! Was I

in my right mind? I believed so. Then, if so, and the conditions

being the same, would it be possible to bring back this strange

phenomenon that I might know it had really existed, whether

subjectively or objectively? Like an inspiration I determined that,

if this experience had a basis in objective or subjective fact, it

might certainly recur. I would sit down in the same position, try

to feel calm, open a book, and remain as still and passive as I

could. To my intense interest, and almost at once, the strange

sense of some power operating on the nerve-forces within, followed

by the same loss of muscular power, the same wide-awakeness of the

reason, the same drawing out and concentrating of the energies on

that spot in front, repeated itself, this time more deliberately,

leaving me freer to take mental notes of what was happening. Again

rose the same noble, earnest figure, gazing at me, the hands moving

in accompaniment to the deep tones of voice. The same painful

effort on my part to hear, with no result. The vision passed. Again

the woman's face, insignificant and meaningless, succeeded it as

before. She spoke, but in less emphatic tones. It flashed upon me

I _would_ hear. After a frantic effort, I caught two words--"land,"

"America"--with positively no clue to their meaning.

"I was wide awake when the first apparition appeared, and in a

highly excited state of mind on its reappearance."

This case strikes me as particularly interesting, for the reason that it

illustrates the possible manner of the externalization of forces, and

the possible manner of their guidance and manipulation by outside

intelligences, as postulated in _Eusapia Palladino_, p. 300. Here we see

the process actually at work, as it were, described by a careful

observer, who was perfectly conscious all the time of the phenomena

going on within him. This is, to my mind, a human document of no little

importance.

It appears quite credible, therefore, that a "fluid" of some sort does

exist, and that its liberation, under certain peculiar conditions,

should produce odd physical phenomena; and this conviction has been

rendered almost a certainty by the unique experiments of Dr. Ochorowicz

with his medium, Mlle. Tomczyk. A brief summary of that case will make

this apparent.

For many years experiments of the kind here recorded have been in

progress, but the path has always been blocked by fraud and innumerable

difficulties. Dr. Ochorowicz did, however, apparently succeed in

obtaining photographs of human radiations, of thoughts, and even of

materialized hands! What are they? Are they the hands of "spirits,"

inhabitants of the "Great Beyond"? Are they astrals or elementals? Are

they projections from the body of the medium? Of what can they consist?

Who directs and guides them? And how can a thought be photographed?

These newer researches into the fields of science have been undertaken,

for the most part, by French investigators, who have progressed very far

in their demonstrations and speculations in this direction--much

further, it may be said, than either the English or American

investigators have advanced--assuming, of course, the accuracy of their

conclusions!

Dr. Ochorowicz had been known for thirty years to all researchers as a

careful investigator. Professor Charles Richet of the University of

Paris spoke of him in the highest terms, and regarded him as "an

exceptionally careful and cautious investigator." His book, _Mental

Suggestion_, which was published early in the eighties, is considered an

authority, and his general erudition and scientific attainments no one

could question. For many years he was professor in the University of

Lemberg.

Several years ago a young girl, Mlle. Stanislaw Tomczyk, then about

eighteen years old, was sent to Dr. Ochorowicz for medical treatment.

She suffered greatly from nervousness. In order to bring about relief

Dr. Ochorowicz hypnotized her, inducing somnambulism; and in this state

she displayed, quite spontaneously, a number of "mediumistic" phenomena.

This proved to be the beginning of her mediumship. She possessed a power

unknown to herself; and it probably would have remained for ever unknown

had she not fallen into the hands of a man such as Dr. Ochorowicz. By

the average physician she would, most probably, have been treated as

hysterical or insane; but careful analysis and training caused her to

become, instead, one of the most remarkable psychics the world has ever

known.

Her early trials and tests were simple enough. A glass clock, possessing

a pointer, was hung up in the centre of the room, and Mlle. Tomczyk was

told to will that the pointer, when set revolving, should stop at a

certain number. Generally she pointed with her finger at the indicator,

keeping her hand a few centimetres distant. The indicator generally,

though not invariably, stopped at the number desired--at any rate, a far

greater number of times than Dr. Ochorowicz or any other person could

cause it to stop when trying the experiments themselves. The clock

belonged to Dr. Ochorowicz, and was innocent of trickery.

The next experiments consisted in raising or "levitating" small objects

from the table--by placing the medium's hands on either side of them.

Sometimes the object would be raised from Dr. Ochorowicz's hand

instead--while he was holding it. Of course the natural supposition is

that a thread or hair of some sort was employed, but this possibility

was eliminated in a number of ways.

It must be remembered that all these manifestations took place when the

medium was in a state of induced somnambulism. She remembered nothing

when awakened of what had occurred. But now something curious and

interesting demanded special attention. A distinct personality, calling

itself "Little Stasia," began to develop. This personality asserted that

she, and not the medium, was responsible for the physical

manifestations we have recorded. She said (through the mouth of the

entranced somnambule) that she was not an independent spirit, but a

creation, an individuality, similar to the "alternating personalities"

so well known to us. There would be no difficulty in accepting this

estimate, were it not for the awkward fact that this little being was

photographed on one occasion and seen to be a small, independent

creature, existing apart from the medium! This is how it came about.

Through the entranced medium instructions were given to focus a camera

upon a certain chair--having first placed a shawl over the back. This

was done. Dr. Ochorowicz and Mlle. Tomczyk then left the room together.

At the end of a certain length of time they returned, developed the

plate, and upon it was found the distinct imprint of a small child's

face, apparently belonging to a body, seated in the chair, and swathed

around with the shawl in question! The experiment was performed in the

hotel where they happened to be stopping; the photographic camera and

plates were Dr. Ochorowicz's own, and the medium was out of the room, in

the doctor's company throughout. It has never been explained.

Such is a brief account of the more interesting experiments conducted

during the early years of this medium's development. In later years her

powers, under the skilled guidance of (the late) Dr. Ochorowicz, took

another turn and provided some of the most interesting and striking

manifestations in the history of this subject, as, for example, his

experiments in the photography of "fluidic" or "materialized" hands, and

also in thought-photography.

These photographs of fluidic hands Dr. Ochorowicz calls "radiographs,"

because they can only be explained by supposing that the fluidic hand,

which is placed upon the photographic plate, is in some way radio-active

during the process. In no other way can the facts be explained. Even

supposing, for the sake of argument, that the psychic could in some way

have placed her own hands on the plates, they would not have produced

the results obtained--as any one can prove to his own satisfaction.

These impressions upon photographic plates were obtained

"mediumistically"--that is, in more or less complete darkness, and

without any apparatus. Not only were all known forms of radiation thus

excluded, but the impression was direct, and obtained without camera,

focussing, etc. The impressions of hands obtained were of various shapes

and sizes, both larger and smaller than those of the medium (who, of

course, was the only other person present), peculiarly deformed hands

and partially formed hands, according to the degree of success of the

experiment, and the desire of the medium.

These hands can only be produced in the presence, and with the

assistance, of a good "physical medium," in more or less darkness, and

are taken by means of a peculiar light which the hands seem to create

for themselves. Sometimes the hands were visible to both the medium and

Dr. Ochorowicz, sometimes visible only to the medium, sometimes

invisible to both. We are assured that in the series of tests under

consideration the impressions were obtained only when the psychic was

deeply entranced, and then only at certain times.

On a number of occasions the psychic placed her hand upon the plate,

and its impression was left upon it. The hands were photographed by

means of a form of light radiating from the hands themselves. On one

occasion, Dr. Ochorowicz held the plate against the medium's ear; the

ear itself was not photographed, but the side of the head, the hair, and

particularly the hairpins were. On two occasions a leaf was placed

between the hands and the plate, and the outline of the leaf was left

upon the latter. From these experiments it was concluded that the

rays--whatever they might be--were emitted by the "etheric body" (the

"astral" body, the "double") and not by the physical body, since their

intensity did not seem to correspond in any way to the anatomical

distribution of the nerves.

These rays may be centred and concentrated by the action of the will of

the subject. They radiate from the surface of the skin and reproduce a

simulacrum, as it were, of the surface. They throw a shadow of any

object placed between the subject and the photographic plate. They are

more penetrating than the rays discovered by M. Darget, and brought to

the attention of the French Academy several years ago. Interesting

analogies may exist here between these rays and the so-called "Black

Light" of M. Le Bon, which he describes at length in his work, _The

Evolution of Forces_.

It was now determined to attempt more interesting and startling

experiments. The medium was requested to hold her right hand in the air,

where it could be seen plainly, against the faint red light in the room.

It was not moved throughout the experiment. In his own laboratory Dr.

Ochorowicz then procured a fresh plate and held it in the air, at some

distance from the hand of the medium. The latter then said: "Ah, I see

another right hand detaching itself from my arm and approaching the

plate. How it pains me! Yes, it is placing itself over the plate--it is

done."

Dr. Ochorowicz then took the plate with him at once to the dark room

and, when it was developed, there was found the outline of an unformed

hand--one apparently in the process of condensation. It was, as it were,

a hand in embryo. It had apparently become detached, or had detached

itself, from the medium, and remained sufficiently solid to leave an

impression of itself upon the plate, held about half a metre from it. It

was, in fact, a form of materialization, but of so shadowy a texture

that it remained often quite invisible to the onlooker.

A long series of experiments is then described, which might be condensed

somewhat as follows:--

"The somnambule said that she did not see the double's hand leave

hers, but saw it placed upon the plate. It was placed upon it at an

angle of ninety degrees from the position taken by her own hand. At

my request the thumb was made particularly distinct, the whole hand

being quite different in contour from that of the medium.

"I take another plate, and hold it some distance from the medium's

hand. She makes an effort to impress it, with the result that an

immense finger, superhuman in size, is seen upon the plate when

developed. Upon the next plate, which I hold about twenty-five

centimetres from her hands, three fingers appear, non-luminous--the

light seeming to come from behind the hand, and shining through the

spaces between the fingers.

"I now hold a plate at a distance of one metre from her right

hand, which is held up in front of her. The red light is turned

slightly low. The somnambule sees a shadowy hand detach itself from

hers, which is at the same time, also, attached to a very long,

thin arm, and which approaches the plate. The hand is very large,

she says, and is a right hand. It places itself over the plate,

which I thereupon remove and develop. A large hand is distinctly

visible upon it. Finally, I hold a plate two and a half metres away

from the medium's hand. The somnambule shivers and feels cold in

her lower limbs, despite the fact that my laboratory is very warm.

She again holds out her right hand, and a left hand, attached to a

long, thin arm, is seen by her to detach itself and place itself

over the plate held in my hand. Upon being developed, the

impression of a very large left hand was found upon the plate--so

large that only a portion of the hand could be seen! The whole of

the medium's hand can easily be placed upon the plate. These are

very similar to the enormous hands frequently seen in the Palladino

seances, and said to be those of 'John King.'

"From the above facts I think we are justified in arriving at the

following tentative conclusions:

"1. That the hand of the double can be larger than that of the

medium.

"2. That a left hand can be projected from a right arm, drawing its

force from the entire body of the subject, this being accompanied

by a chilly feeling in the extremities and by congestion of the

head.

"3. That the arm of the double appears to shrink in size according

to its distance from the medium's body.

"4. That it is easier for the fluidic hand to imprint itself upon

the photographic plate (negative) in white than in black.

"5. That in the case of the large and shining thumb it is

surrounded by a clear halo of light.

"6. The etheric body of the medium, the 'double,' behaves as though

it were an independent spirit."

In a second series of experiments very small hands were produced by

request. These hands terminated abruptly at the wrist, but it was found

by a series of independent experiments that any hand would appear to do

so if the illumination came from a certain direction. In one case the

photographic plate was placed on the sofa, three feet from the entranced

somnambule. Dr. Ochorowicz took his seat by her side. A fluidic hand was

seen to approach the plate, then retreat into the medium's body,

avoiding the red light. Upon the plate being developed, the imprints of

two small hands were seen, somewhat resembling the hands of the medium,

though smaller. They were not typical children's hands. The medium had,

in fact, made two distinct efforts to impress the plate and have the

fluidic hand place itself upon it. These semi-materializations are very

interesting, since they form the connecting link between true

materialization, which is solid and substantial, and so-called thought

photography.

After this Dr. Ochorowicz wished to try another experiment. A pencil and

a sheet of paper were placed on the floor under the bureau by Dr.

Ochorowicz. The medium sat in her chair entranced. Soon the sound of

writing was heard; then the fall of the pencil. Upon the sheet of paper

being removed a word was found scratched across it--

"STANISL--"

The psychic then desired to obtain writing in full view of Dr.

Ochorowicz, so he placed another piece of paper upon the floor, and upon

it the pencil. The medium then exerted herself; the pencil stood on end,

and attempted to write. In this, however, it failed, and fell to the

floor. This was repeated several times, when the medium had to give up

further attempts, owing to her extreme fatigue.

The question now arises: Can these fluidic hands, which are thus

exteriorized, move of their own volition, or must they remain

stationary? To this question Dr. Ochorowicz addressed himself in a later

series of experiments.

In the first experiment, the somnambule saw a finger upon a plate, which

was self-luminous, and seemed to be writing. A large "J" was seen to be

traced upon it. In the second trial, neither the medium nor Dr.

Ochorowicz saw anything, but the letters "J. O." were seen to be

imprinted upon it when developed.

This proved that the intelligence guiding the finger at least possessed

memory and intelligence. The finger was to some extent self-luminous.

From these experiments Dr. Ochorowicz concluded that:

The actinic action of the emitted rays is feeble, comparatively

speaking; and that the visible light of the fluidic hands is less

actinic than the invisible light.

The relation of these rays to ordinary light is thus an interesting

question. It is well known that all mediums shun light, and there are

sound physiological and psychological reasons for this. Daylight has

been found to be more destructive to the success of phenomena than any

form of artificial light; moonlight is far better than sunlight. It has

lately been shown that light exerts a powerful physical pressure, and is

a disruptive agency, destroying protoplasm and many of the lower forms

of life. We only have to see the effect of sunlight upon a photographic

plate to appreciate its power. The absurdity of assuming that light

plays no part in such manifestations--where very delicate, subtle, and

little understood forces are in operation--is thus manifest.

Still, the fluidic hands emit a light of their own; and the question is,

Can this emitted light penetrate solid substances--"matter," as we

understand it? As the result of a number of experiments, Dr. Ochorowicz

ascertained that, in the majority of cases, these rays, like

ultra-violet light, did not penetrate solid substances, as do the

X-rays; yet their actinic action was found to be far stronger! Here is a

field for long-continued observation and experiment. In thought

photography, on the other hand, it has been ascertained that the rays

can pass easily through solid matter, like the X-rays.

The next question of interest which presented itself for solution was

this: To what extent can the fluidic hands change their form, size, and

contour at will? Experiments were first tried in the reduction of the

size of the hands, upon request.

Three plates were prepared and laid in a series upon the table at some

distance from the medium. Through the entranced somnambule the "double"

was then informed of the experiment, and asked to place its hand upon

the three plates in succession, willing on each occasion to make the

fluidic hand smaller. This was done. An impression of the same hand was

obtained on each plate, but it can be seen that, on each occasion, the

hand is smaller in size. This was all accomplished within a few seconds.

Of these experiments Dr. Ochorowicz says:

"We are therefore justified in arriving at the following

conclusions:

"1. At first, the double's hand is larger than that of the medium.

"2. It tends to decrease in length and general size.

"3. The palm of the hand, especially, tends to decrease.

"4. Only the little finger remains without appreciable change.

"5. The change is that of several millimetres, but not enormous.

"6. The fingers of the double tended to close nearer together, as

well as become smaller--just as an ordinary hand would probably

do."

The light which supplied the necessary illumination for these

photographs seemed to have been emitted from a sort of "egg," near the

wrist of the hand, which was intensely luminous. This was not expected,

and came as a surprise. Two suggestions as to its nature at once present

themselves: (1) that it is a self-created mediumistic light; and (2)

that it is a mass of matter from which the hand derives its material

sustenance.

In a further series of experiments, during which Dr. Ochorowicz was

repeatedly touched by a cold hand, impressions of large left hands were

left upon the plates--the medium's left hand being, meanwhile, a long

way removed from the plate. The fingers were very large, the thumb

enormous and abnormally shaped at the end.

Summing up the conclusions which, he thought, could be drawn from his

researches, Dr. Ochorowicz said:

"1. Fluidic hands are detached more or less rarely--according to

the condition of the subject's "forces." When these are strong,

hands may even be produced unknown to the medium.

"2. The direction and character of these hands are determined by

the subconscious mind of the medium; but also partially by the

conscious mind.

"3. The properties of the fluidic hands are not constant; they

change frequently.

"4. These changes represent transformations of energy--certain

forms of energy being transformed into other forms. When the

conditions are good, the forms of available energy are multiplied;

when weak, they are lessened. They alternate, but do not blend. The

mechanical effects are produced chiefly by the invisible hands,

while the visible hands are inactive.

"5. I have never seen more than two hands formed by one medium at

one time, and more usually only one. When there are two hands,

however, they may be quite dissimilar, one from the other.

"6. There are several degrees of materiality, which succeed each

other rapidly. The hands are so fugitive that it is almost

impossible to seize them. When the imperfectly formed hands are

grasped, however, they are cold, slippery, and unpleasant to the

touch. The better materialized hands, on the contrary, are warm

and life-like.

"7. The well-materialized hands can be photographed; even the

poorly-developed hands can give radiographs.

"8. The ultra-violet light necessary to produce these photographs

can be produced by the hand of the medium or by the double itself.

"9. Radiographs are difficult to obtain; a materialization

generally loses its luminosity.

"10. The hands are sometimes like, and sometimes unlike, those of

the medium.

"11. The fluidic hands can be moulded plastically, and altered as

to their dimensions."

To resume the experiments: Dr. Ochorowicz desired to see whether the

fluidic hand of the double could pass through a very small hole or

space. He accordingly proposed placing a rolled-up film in a bottle,

leaving only the small hole at the top, and see whether the hand could

impress itself under these circumstances. Upon this being proposed to

the medium, she exclaimed: "Make it more difficult than that; you will

make the double lazy! Cork up the bottle!"

Dr. Ochorowicz accordingly cut a film, rolled it into a small roll,

placed it in the bottle, and held the latter between his two hands, the

right-hand palm acting as a cork, the left supporting the bottle; the

medium placed her hands on either side of the bottle, on the outside.

She soon complained that her hands were paining her, seeming to swell

and get larger. She was soon after seized with cramps, and the

experiment was at this point discontinued.

Dr. Ochorowicz tried to draw the film from the bottle, but failed; he

was finally obliged to break the bottle to extract it. The film was then

developed, and upon it was the imprint of a hand--larger even than his

own, to say nothing of the medium's--clearly formed. Fraud was

absolutely out of the question. There seems only the alternative choice

of invoking the fourth dimension, or assuming that the fluidic hand

could curve itself round and round the film after having entered the

bottle in some manner! The facts seem incredible; but I give them as

recorded.

The question now arises: is the fluidic hand two-dimensioned? It could

hardly have any thickness, to accomplish the last experiment. Dr.

Ochorowicz determined to try a novel experiment, to test this theory.

Two photographic plates were placed face to face, separated by small

pieces of cardboard at the corners. The "double" was requested to insert

its hand between the plates when the medium was entranced. Upon the

plates being developed, the imprint of a hand (the same hand) was found

on both plates; i.e. a photograph of the top, and of the under side of a

hand. This was repeated again, under more stringent conditions. The hand

again appeared.

It was then decided to repeat the experiment with the rolled film in the

bottle. The experiment was again made; the film was developed when the

medium reclined on the couch on the opposite side of the room, and a

very large hand was again found to have impressed itself upon the film.

It had evidently succeeded in curling itself round the rolled film in

the closed bottle!

The question is: First, Do the facts occur? And if they do, what

is the cause of them? What is the nature of these fluidic hands?

To whom do they belong? Of what are they constituted? Are they

the hands of a spirit, or mere exteriorizations from the body of the

medium--materializations, only partially independent?

Without attempting to answer these questions in this place, I will

conclude by pointing out two facts, which seem to me of considerable

importance. The first is that many nervous and mentally abnormal

patients may be mediums were the pains taken to ascertain that fact. I

know of one famous alienist who confided to me his belief that a very

large percentage of mediumistic cases could be found in hospitals for

hysterical patients or in wards for the mentally unbalanced. The trouble

is that experiments tending to ascertain the truth of such a theory are

never tried. Had not Dr. Ochorowicz been interested in things psychic,

Mlle. Tomczyk would simply have been cured by him in the general routine

manner and dismissed. The world would thus have been deprived of one of

the most remarkable mediums on record!

In the second place, these fluidic hands are almost identical in many

ways with those presented by Eusapia Palladino at her best. The

materialized hands, of varying degrees of density and formation,

attached to long, shadowy arms, are exactly like the hands so often

materialized at her seances--hands which are at times small, and at

other times enormous. They no more resembled the hands of the medium

than chalk resembles cheese.

16. This brings me to a final reflection, which I should like to mention

before leaving this branch of our discussion. It concerns the question

of darkness and its effect upon genuine mediumistic phenomena. Whether

this effect be primarily physical, physiological, or psychological, the

_fact_ remains that it exists; and the researches of Dr. Ochorowicz have

tended to confirm this very strongly. His work has shown us (or rather

confirmed us more strongly in the belief) that the question of _light_

is a highly important one, and that the greater the degree of darkness,

_ceteris paribus_, the better and the more startling the phenomena.

Now, there has always existed a sort of _a priori_ assumption that this

should be so. Light, as we know, does bring about chemical reactions,

and even exerts a definite physical force or pressure. Even so gross and

so powerful a form of physical energy as wireless telegraphy is greatly

interfered with by reason of the sun's rays (ultra-violet rays), and, of

course, photographic plates are at once rendered useless by an instant's

exposure to the sun. Again, it is known that sunlight has a more or less

destructive influence upon all forms of animal and vegetable protoplasm,

and it is very soon fatal to many of the lower forms of life. This being

so, it has always appeared to me perfectly reasonable to suppose that

the energy of the light-rays should interfere most seriously with the

delicate and subtle forces and forms of energy which are liberated in

the seance room. The old objection: "Why must these things always be

done in the dark?" has appeared to me very short-sighted and

inconsistent with all the facts above mentioned.

But, further! It is highly probable that life of any kind can only

originate in the dark. Certainly, conception invariably takes place in

complete darkness, and the whole period of embryonic development is

passed in that condition. Again, inter-stellar space is, of course,

absolutely black and devoid of any form of light save the faint

twinklings of the far-off stars. Without the surface of some globe to

reflect the sun's rays, no light of any kind would be possible; so that

if life were conveyed across space, from star to star, upon

infinitesimal specks of dust, under the influence of light pressure, as

postulated by Arrhenius (_Worlds in the Making_, pp. 212-30), this life

must exist, and in a sense originate, in the blackness of inter-stellar

space.[10] And, finally, if life on our globe originated, as many think,

in the ocean's depths,[11] this must have been in the densest darkness,

since light penetrates but a few fathoms below the surface of the ocean.

Below that all is blackness, complete and eternal. No light penetrates

to that depth--nor has it for millions of years! Yet it is in this

region that life is thought to have originated! As G. W. Warder

expressed it (_The Universe a Vast Electric Organism_, pp. 60-1):

"During this period of primeval 'darkness upon the face of the

waters' the resistless electric waves of the sun were beating upon

the cloud-enwrapped surface of the planet. It was the formative

period of elementary life, and the descendants and successors of

that mighty host of living beings have to this day to lay the

foundations of their being in similar conditions of darkness.

_Creative energy in its first stages of living form operates in

dense darkness_, and the first life upon the planet began and

perfected itself in the age when midnight gloom enveloped the

globe."

This fact--that life originated in darkness, and that the power of life

can only be exercised in darkness--is, it seems to me, a most

significant one when viewed in the light of our studies, and seems to

point to the conclusion that the "darkness" said to be essential at

spiritistic circles is indeed necessary; and that, when delicate and

subtle forms of life and energy are being manifested, they are likely to

become disrupted by the sudden introjection of a coarse and powerful

form of energy, such as light, so that this "condition," said to be

necessary by all mediums, is probably in reality essential; and their

claim, far from being absurd, is well founded, and in accordance with

well-established scientific facts.

17. So far as to the physical phenomena. We must now turn to the mental

manifestations, and discuss one or two points in connection with them

before concluding.

Hitherto we have considered the process of communication (granting such

to exist) solely from the physical and physiological sides, and not from

the psychological. There is a great deal to be said in this latter

connection, however, though I shall endeavour to be as brief as

possible.

Take, for instance, the question of _symbolism_.

Our dreams, as we know, are largely symbolic, the work of Freud and

others having proved this beyond all doubt. It is highly probable that

the ravings of delirium are also of this nature, though no one, so far

as I know, has yet devoted any serious attention to their study.

Certainly it is true in mediumistic phenomena; for, in trance

conditions, a larger number of messages, tests, and visions seen are of

this nature and character--the symbolism often being so elaborate that

the original thought is not perceived. As Mr. Coates remarked: "When a

'psychometer' places a geological specimen to his forehead, and

describes an 'antediluvian monster,' roaring and walking about, no one

but a very shallow individual would imagine for a moment that the

psychometer was actually seeing the original," but rather that he

obtained a faint and dream-like impression of the world at that epoch,

and his subconscious impression was symbolized in the creature seen. A

better example is, perhaps, furnished by the following: a gentleman of

my acquaintance visited a certain trance-medium, and, among other

things, she described a large key. This meant nothing to him at first;

but later, and after some apparent effort, the medium succeeded in

catching (and conveying) the idea that the key was symbolic of

success--unlocking the door of happiness, etc.--whereupon all she had

said fell naturally into place.

Why this symbolism? The probable answer to this question is that the

"message" cannot be given _directly_, and that this symbolic method of

presentation must be resorted to in order to get the message through at

all. There is good evidence to show that a pictorial method is resorted

to, very largely, by the _soi-disant_ spirits--mediums seeing what they

describe, very often, when the more direct auditory method is not

resorted to. The "spirit" presents somehow to the mind of the medium a

picture, which is described and often interpreted by the medium. Often

this interpretation is quite erroneous--resembling a defective analysis

of a dream. Because of this the message is not recognized. Yet the

source of the message may have been perfectly "veridical."

Let me illustrate this a little more fully. Suppose you desired to tell

a Chinaman, who spoke not a word of English, to fetch a certain object

from the next room. It would be useless for you to say "watch," because

he would not know what the word meant. Probably you would tap your

waistcoat pocket, pretend to take out a watch, wind it, look at the

hands, etc., in your endeavour to convey to him your meaning. If this

was not recognized, for any reason, you would have the utmost difficulty

in conveying your meaning to him--and equal difficulty in telling him to

fetch the watch from the next room.

Now, suppose these antics--or somewhat similar ones--were resorted to by

a "spirit" in his attempt to convey the word watch--perhaps to remind

the sitter of a particular watch he used to wear. The medium might well

proceed as follows: "He taps his stomach, and looks at a spot over his

left side.... He seems to wish to convey the impression that he suffered

much from his bowels--perhaps a cancer on the left side. Yes, he seems

to be taking something away from his body; evidently they removed some

growth, and he wishes to convey the idea that something was taken from

him.... Now he is examining his hands; he is looking intently. He is

doing something with his fingers.... I can't see what it is ... a little

movement. Was he connected with machinery in life? Now he is pointing to

the door ..." etc.

Such an interpretation of the facts, it will be observed, while

describing all his actions, is wholly misleading in interpretation; the

symbolism has been entirely perverted and misconstrued. And inasmuch as

the subject probably never died of cancer, had no bowel trouble,

underwent no operation, and was never connected with machinery, it is

highly probable that the "message" would be put down wholly to the

medium's subliminal, or even to guessing or conscious fraud. Yet, it

will be observed, the message was, in its inception, wholly

"veridical"--the fault lying in the erroneous symbolic interpretation of

the medium.

There is evidence to show that other forms of symbolism are adopted

also--applying to the auditory as well as to the visual presentation of

the messages. _Names_ afford some of the best evidence for this; e.g. in

the sitting of Mrs. Verrall with Mrs. Thompson, November 2, 1899

(_Proceedings_, xvii. pp. 240-41), "Nelly," the control, gave the names

"Merrifield, Merriman, Merrythought, Merrifield," and later went on: "I

am muddled. I will tell you how names come to us. It's like a picture; I

see school-children enjoying themselves; you can't say Merrimans,

because that's not a name, nor merry people...." (Mrs. Verrall's maiden

name was Merrifield.) If I remember correctly, there was similar

symbolism with regard to the name Greenfield at another sitting.

18. Here, then, we see the full play of symbolism and its possible

extension to cover proper names. But there is another and a very simple

reason why names should be hard to recall and give clearly by "spirits."

Names are proverbially hard to remember, even in this life--and we know

that some persons naturally remember names far better than others. (This

may account, to a certain extent, for the differences in the ability of

communicators to give proper names.) But, with all of us, names are hard

to recall. We all resort to "what's-his-names," and "thing-o'-my-jigs,"

on occasion, in our efforts to discover within us the name in question.

And there are good physiological reasons for this. We learn names only

after many other parts of speech--which means that the brain-cells

corresponding thereto are laid down or brought into conscious activity

_last_; they are therefore more ephemeral and less fundamental than

others--hence the first to "go." This accounts for the increasing

difficulty in the aged for remembering names--theirs is a physiological

rather than a psychological defect. By analogy, therefore, there is

every reason to believe that proper names are hard to recall--every

reason for thinking that they should be--by "spirits" after the shock

and wrench of death. The necessary psychical mechanism would be so

shaken and disturbed that it would be impossible to recall names and

events, which seem quite straightforward and simple to the sitter. The

possibly pictorial method of presentation of proper names would greatly

add to the difficulty, as we have seen, and would be liable to lead to

misrepresentation and error.

19. Dr. Hyslop, in his second report on Mrs. Piper, (_Proceedings_,

Amer. S.P.R., pp. 1-812), calls attention to certain analogies which may

be drawn from everyday psychology, rendering the process of

communication far more intelligible, and the difficulties within the

process far clearer to our perception and appreciation. For example, he

calls attention to certain analogies with aphasia, which are most

instructive. He says, in part:

"The two traditional types of aphasia are motor and sensory.

Sensory aphasia is the inability to interpret the meaning of a

sensation ... motor aphasia is the inability to speak a word or

language, though the ideas and meaning of sensations may be as

clear as in normal life.... This latter difficulty is apparent in

several types of phenomena purporting to be associated with

communications from spirits. I have found them illustrated in four

different cases of mediumship, and they may be represented in three

types. They are: (_a_) The difficulties with proper names; (_b_)

The difficulties with unfamiliar words; and (_c_) The inability to

immediately answer a pertinent question....

"The analogies with aphasia, of which we are speaking, may comprise

various conditions affecting both medium and communicator. Thus the

abnormal physical and mental conditions involved in the trance may

affect the integrity of the normal motor action. Then the new

situation in which death places a communicator, in relation to any

nervous system, may establish conditions very much like aphasia.

Then there may be difficulties in the communicator's representing

his thoughts in the form necessary to transmit them to and through

a foreign organism."

Dr. Hyslop then offers the following diagram as a possible solution of

certain difficulties involved:

[Illustration]

A B C represents the normal consciousness; A B D the subliminal

consciousness. They intersect at E, which point represents the

"equilibrium of the controls." "The area A E B shows the condition in

which all sorts of confusion may occur, incidental to the infusion of

controls, and this confusion will vary with the relation with the

supraliminal and subliminal action of the mind." As one advances, the

other recedes. As one gains a greater control over the organism, the

other loses it, and _vice versa_.

[Illustration]

Extending this conception to cover the cases of spirit "possession," in

which this varying and fluctuating control is also manifested, we might

represent this by the above diagram, in which normal consciousness is

left out of account, for the sake of clearness, and the trance condition

(subliminal) only represented. The spirit control of the organism takes

its place in the diagram.

Here A B C represents the trance state--the subliminal consciousness. G

D F represents the sphere of the spirit's control. It does not begin at

all until the point F be reached. The space A E F represents the area in

which all kinds of confusion is possible, and it is within this area

that most of the mediumistic messages come. E is the "point of balance."

A F H represents the amount of subliminal action accessible to the

control, on the one hand, and related to the discarnate, on the other,

in its _rapport_. A F represents the amount of the discarnate

personality which is accessible to communication, so we have two fields

which are wholly inaccessible to each other, and are respectively

represented by B C H F and D G I A, the former a portion of the

subliminal personality of the living and the latter a portion of the

discarnate personality which cannot reveal itself.

This intermediate area, in which the control is liable to vary, and be

thrown on to one side or the other, also has an analogy in the

_hypnoidal state_ of Boris Sidis--this being an intermediate state (so

it is thought) which is convertible either into ordinary sleep, on the

one hand, or into hypnotic sleep on the other. It all depends upon how

this state is handled and controlled. It may be the same here; the

medium may sink into internal reverie, or introspective trance; or she

may be converted into a genuine "medium" by some influence exerted upon

her from without.

20. On this theory, the deeper the trance the greater the control by the

"spirit," and this corresponds very well with what has been said before.

There are always a number of obstacles to clear communication, and the

degree to which these are overcome would represent the degree of

clearness of the communications. The process of transferring a mental

picture to the medium may be attended with all kinds of difficulties of

which we know nothing. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that there is

a sort of etheric body, or double, and that this is in any way involved

in the process, we might have the following "difficulties" to encounter:

The difficulty in picturing the event clearly in the communicator's

mind; difficulty in transferring it to the light; difficulty in getting

this transferred to the medium's physical body; the difficulty of

manipulating the latter. We know that we often have great difficulty in

manipulating our own bodies properly; and, in paralysis and kindred

affections, we are unable to do so at all. Yet we are thoroughly

familiar with our own bodies, and know how they work. How much more

difficult would it be if we were suddenly transplanted in _another_

person's body, and had to manipulate _that_? We should have to "learn

the ropes," so to say; and all the little automatic tricks, and habits,

and slips of speech, and what not, would be liable to slip out without

our consent and before we knew it. We should "inherit," in fact, its

whole psychological and physiological "setting." This being the case, we

may readily see how difficult it would be for a discarnate spirit to

manipulate another organism; and how likely it would be to allow certain

tricks and habits of the medium herself to slip through, without being

able to control them. As one communicator said, through Mrs. Chenoweth:

"I do not like those 'don'ts'; they are hers, not mine." Here is a clear

recognition of the difficulty involved in controlling the organism, and

this is greatly accentuated when we remember that all such

communications must be given when the _soi-disant_ communicator is in a

constrained mental attitude--"gripping the light," "hanging on to the

medium's body," while giving the communications. There is a double

strain involved; and, as Dr. Hyslop said: "With what facility could I

superintend the work of helping a drowning person and talk philosophy at

the same time? How well could I hold a plough in stony ground and

discuss protection and free-trade?" It is small wonder that the messages

should be fragmentary and incomplete, were any such difficulties as

these experienced!

The three chief difficulties involved in mediumistic messages may be

summed-up under three headings: (1) intra-mediumistic conditions; (2)

intra-cosmic conditions; and (3) the mental conditions of the

communicators.

Under the first head may be placed all those difficulties which are

liable to interfere between the communicator and the amanuensis. If the

communicator is naturally a good visualizer this may help his visual

communications, but impede the others; an audile might be better in some

instances. Again, the impulse may come in some motor form, in which case

neither of these types would be that best suited to control the organism

of the medium. Whether the communicator is a good visualizer or not may

affect the communications to a great extent. Whether or not he had a

normally good memory would also have a great influence. In fact, the

whole construction of the mind might have great influence upon the

results. This is a subject which deserves to be studied very carefully

one day, when the mere fact of communication is established.

As is well known, both Drs. Hodgson and Hyslop wrote strongly in defence

of the theory that the communicator, at the time of communicating, was

in an abnormal mental condition, somewhat resembling trance or delirium

or secondary personality. They were, at least, not in full control of

their thoughts; and this was said to be established by the statements of

the communicators themselves; and by a study of the messages

communicated, wherein it was found that they became dreamy and vague;

that they showed the same rapid change of imagery and subject which is

manifested in dreams; an automatic tendency to capricious and confused

association, a general indifference to personality, etc., as manifested

in delirium. In dreams and sleep we have practically no control over the

body at all, any more than if we were dead; and Dr. Hyslop contended

that probably "somnambulism and hypnosis, dreaming, sleep, trance

conditions, and death are all simply different degrees of the same

state." Dr. Hyslop during his later years modified his views upon this

question, and came to the conclusion that other conditions play a

greater share in the results than the state of the communicator's mind.

But there can be no doubt that this has its results.

Then, too, the medium's subliminal has a great and very decided

influence upon the content of the messages. This was very small before

Dr. Hodgson's death, but increased very much after that time. In a

letter to me, dated January 27, 1908, Mrs. Ledyard, an old Piper sitter,

said:

"Dear Mr. Carrington,--... All sorts of false statements don't

necessarily tell against the spiritistic hypothesis. If you get

other evidences of personality, the false statements only confirm

R. H.'s belief that "they" are in a sort of dreamy, half-trance

state and _very suggestible_. My own opinion of the Piper trance is

that, since R. H.'s death, when Mrs. P. has been less carefully

guarded in many ways, and allowed to have so much voice in what she

would and would not do, that there is much more effect of Mrs.

Piper herself on the trance--and more _leaks through_ from Mrs.

Piper--though I have, so far, seen no special evidence that it

leaks the other way, and that what is told her by sitters during

the trance gets into the normal consciousness. But it does affect

her normal life, just as an hypnotic suggestion does, on which the

subject acts quite unconscious of its source...."

But Rector's[12] business seems to be more far-reaching and more

complicated than this. I quote from Dr. Hyslop's second Piper report (p.

197) the following interesting passage:

"I may notice a remark Dr. Hodgson once made to me regarding the

office of Rector in the phenomena of Mrs. Piper. It was not only as

control that he exercised an influence over the results, but also

both as intermediary between the communicator and the sitter, and

as an inhibitor of the influence of the sitter's mind and the

subconsciousness of Mrs. Piper upon this same result.... His view

was that Rector inhibited the thought-transference from the sitter

to Mrs. Piper's subliminal, on the messages, so far as that was

possible...."

From this it will, at all events, be seen that the relationship, and the

whole system of inhibitions and influences at work in the Piper case is

very complicated. It must be remembered that, on any theory, the

"messages" must come _through_ the medium's subliminal, which acts as a

sort of matrix in which the whole mould of the supernormal is cast; and,

this being the case, it is only natural to suppose that the results

would be most complicated and inextricably mixed in their relationships

and influences. If spirit communications influence the subconscious, we

have a right to suppose that the subliminal influences the

communications in turn. And this is apparently proved by the facts.

21. Now a few words as to the psychological processes of communicating,

and the interplay of minds one with another, which figure in this

process. Writing of this, Dr. Hyslop says:

"Psychology distinguishes between what it calls visuals, audiles,

and motiles. A visual is one in which visual experiences receive

such emphasis, and which prove to be of such predominant interest

to the subject that his habit of thinking about objects is

expressed mentally or mnemonically in visual terms--that is, in

the memory pictures of vision.... An audile is one in whom the

sense of hearing is predominant. [In motiles the impulse is towards

motor action.]

"Suppose the psychic is a visual and the communicator an audile,

might not that difference make a marked difficulty in the

adjustment necessary for communicating clearly?... A visual might

see apparitions more easily, and have more difficulty in automatic

writing; and an audile might easily hear voices and write with more

difficulty, etc.... A proper name is purely an auditory concept. It

has no visual equivalent whatever, except the letters which form

it. If, then, the process of communication at any time involves a

dominant dependence on visual functions of the mind, the sudden

attempt to interpose an auditory datum might meet with the

difficulty of prompt adjustment to auditory conditions for its

transmission, and it might even be that the psychic could not, from

habit in visual methods, adjust herself to all the needs of a

proper name, except by converting it readily into visual terms, as

the spelling of the name would express....

"In the lighter trance it is clear that visual phenomena play a

most important part in the communications. With Mrs. Piper the

phenomena seem to be more auditory. Mrs. Piper never sees

apparitions or phantasms in her normal state; none have been

reported of her as systematic experiences, as I have observed them

in Mrs. Chenoweth....

"What we gain in clearness of consciousness in the communications

when the message comes through the active subliminal of the medium,

we lose in the accuracy and specific value of the message, while

what we gain in the specific definiteness of the messages through

Mrs. Piper, where the subliminal, if intermediary at all, is

passive and automatic, we lose in the dream-like and disturbed

mental state of the communicator."

22. Another difficulty must be referred to in this place; and that is

the probable loss of control over the stream of thought by spirits, such

as we exercise in this life. Here, the checks and inhibitions are easily

accomplished, unless disease in some manner prevents them; but there are

strong indications that a "spirit"--at least when communicating--cannot

control his stream of thinking to the same extent; and that, if it is

constantly interrupted--by questions, etc., as it usually is--it tends

to break up and become automatic, echolalic, or useless. That even

experienced and careful psychic researchers will interfere with the flow

of consciousness in this manner I know to be a fact; I myself, though I

had been especially warned against doing so, did the same thing in my

Piper sittings! Some of these difficulties I endeavoured to make clear

in a letter, which I wrote to the English _Journal S.P.R._, and which

appeared in March, 1908. In it I said:

"For the sake of argument, let us assume that the intelligences

that communicate through the organism of Mrs. Piper--and perhaps of

some other mediums--are spirits of the departed, and that they

temporarily 'possess' the organism of the medium (at least in part)

during the process of communicating. That is the generally-held

theory, I believe, and the simplest one to account for the facts.

If this be true, it is to be supposed that the normal consciousness

of the medium is in some manner removed, superseded, or withdrawn,

and that only some "vegetable consciousness" remains, as it were,

sufficient to keep the organism going until the return of the

normal consciousness and normal control by the medium. Meanwhile,

the controlling intelligence is, by supposition, influencing the

nervous mechanism of the medium's body--directly or indirectly

through some etheric medium--and influencing it to write out

letters and words by the usual slow and laborious process. That

they _do_ find it slow and laborious is evidenced by the fact that

all possible abbreviations are adopted--'U.D.' being used for

'Understand'; 'M' is frequently written 'N,' and so on. Even in our

normal life we know that thoughts frequently flow faster than we

can put them on to paper, and this would almost certainly be the

case with spiritual intelligences who have no material brain to

hinder their flow of thought. It is probable that the brain is as

much an inhibitory organ as anything else; and when this inhibition

is removed, it is natural to suppose that the flow of thought would

be far less controllable and far more automatic than it is with us.

It would be impossible for spirits to check and go on with their

stream of thought at will, as we do on this hypothesis; they would

be far more automatic and less under the control of the will. If

this were true, it would account for much of the confusion present

in the communications. Suppose a spirit is trying to communicate

some fact or incident in its past life. It is endeavouring to force

this thought through, in the face of great difficulties, and while

trying to retain its grasp of the organism. Now, let us suppose

that this stream of thought is suddenly interrupted by the sitter

asking an abrupt question--referring to another incident

altogether, and perhaps related to another time in the

communicator's life. Is it not natural to suppose that, labouring

under these difficulties, and lacking the inhibitory action of the

brain, the communicator's mind should wander, and that he should

either think aloud to himself as it were (all this coming through

as confused writing, be it understood), or that the spirit should

lose its grasp of the organism altogether and drift away? The mind

cannot retain two vivid pictures at the same time; either one or

the other must grow fogged and dim; and this would certainly be so

in the case of any communicator, where we may suppose a certain

amount of mental energy--corresponding to a mental picture

perhaps--is necessitated in the very process of holding the control

of the organism. If communications take place at all in reality, we

may well suppose that the difficulties of communicating would be so

great that all clear, systematic thinking would be impossible.

People seem to imagine that the process of communication is as

simple as possible, instead of the most delicate and complicated

imaginable--the very difficulty being evinced by the rarity of the

intelligible communications coming through. If any one were to try

the simple subjective test of closing the eyes and attempting to

conceive his spirit controlling some _other_ person's organism, he

would very easily perceive the tremendous difficulties in the way

of controlling an organism other than his own!

"However, my object in writing this letter is not to point out

difficulties of this character, which are probably well understood

by the majority of the readers of the _Journal_. It is to draw

attention to another fact, and an analogy. Let us take a man in

good health, whose brain and mental functions are normal. Let this

man be all but killed in a railroad accident. In the jar and shock

of the collision this man was thrown (let us say) against an iron

post, and his head badly cut and bruised. He was knocked

insensible, and it was several hours before he returned to the

first dim consciousness of his surroundings. Gradually he would

revive. Objects would present themselves to his eyesight vaguely,

indistinctly; he would "see men as trees walking." Sounds would be

heard, but indistinctly; there would be a vague jumble of noises,

and no definite and articulate sounds would be recognized at first,

and until consciousness was more fully restored. Tactile

sensations, smell and touch, would probably come last, and be least

powerful of all; they would not be even distinguishable until

consciousness was almost completely normal. All intellectual

interests would be abolished, only the most loving and tender

thoughts would be entertained or tolerable, and these would be

swallowed up, very largely, in the great, central fact that the

body and head were in great pain; that the memory was impaired, and

that anything like normal thinking and a normal grasp of the

organism was impossible. Thoughts would be scattered, incoherent,

and only the strongest stimuli would focus the attention on any

definite object for longer than a few moments at a time, and

perhaps even these would fail. But if oxygen gas were administered

to such a person, in moderate doses, he would recover and rally

far more quickly and effectually than if no such stimulant were

employed. He would rally more quickly, and be enabled to think more

clearly and consistently--at least _pro tem._ In shocks to the

living consciousness this would almost certainly be the case.

"Now, when we come to die, the departure of the soul from the body

must be a great strain and stress upon the surviving consciousness,

and must shock it tremendously--just as the accident shocked it in

the case given above. Certainly this would be so in the case of all

_sudden_ deaths, and in those cases which 'die hard'; and it is

natural to suppose that it would be true also, more or less, in

every case of death, however natural--since the separation of

consciousness from its brain must be the greatest shock that any

given consciousness could receive in the course of its natural

existence. But after a time the spirit is supposed to outlive and

'get over' this initial shock, and to regain its normal functions

and faculties. In its normal life, it is then supposed to be once

more free and unhampered by any of the bodily conditions that

rendered its manifestations on earth defective. But when this

consciousness comes once more to communicate, it seems to again

take on the conditions of earth life, i.e. those conditions which

were present when the person died, and this would account for the

fact, often observed, that mediums 'take on' the conditions of

certain spirits who are communicating, i.e. they suffer _pro tem._

from heart or bowel trouble, pains in the head, etc. Further, this

seems to extend to the mental functions and conditions also. Idiocy

and insanity, e.g., are supposed to gradually wear off in the next

life, and a gradual return to normal conditions ensue. This is, at

least, the statement made through several mediums, and it is only

natural to suppose that such should be the case. The spirit

gradually returns to a normal mental condition; but when any

attempt is made to return to the 'earth plane,' and especially to

communicate, these conditions return with greater or lesser

force--varying with and depending upon the length of time such a

person had been dead, and other considerations. On any theory, the

consciousness must undergo some sort of temporary disintegration,

while communicating, and must be scattered over a wide field of

recollection, while at the same time attempting to 'hold on' to the

organism. It must also be remembered that the flow of thought is

far more automatic than with us. All this being so, we can readily

understand that any attempt at communication would be attended with

the greatest difficulties, and such a consciousness, if it were

constantly interrupted by questions, etc., would tend to go to

pieces--to lose its grasp of the organism, and to drift away--only

confusion and error coming through. This consciousness might be

strengthened and rendered clearer, perhaps, by the presentation of

some object belonging to the person when alive--as, no matter how

explained, this seems to clear the communications. Any means that

can be adopted to render clearer the mind of the communicator, on

the one hand, or improve the condition of the nervous mechanism of

the medium on the other, should therefore be of great utility and

should at least be tried. This being so, I now come to the heart of

the matter, and offer a suggestion which, if followed out, might

improve the physical body of the medium, and hence render the

conditions better from _this_ side--as the presentation of objects

might be supposed to render the conditions better from the other

side.

"I have pointed out before that, in certain cases, when it is

desirable to restore the consciousness and to render its renewal

more certain and clear (after an accident, e.g., that has knocked a

person senseless) a mixture of oxygen gas is sometimes administered

to the patient in order to produce these results. This being so, I

ask: why may it not be a good idea to administer a diluted mixture

of this gas to the medium when she is in a trance state--and when a

communicator is attempting to convey his thought to the sitter by

means of automatic writing? Might not such an experiment be tried,

since no _harm_ could come to the medium if the oxygen were diluted

and only sufficiently strong to effect the desired results? And

might not its administration tend to improve the tone of the

nervous system _pro tem._, and render clearer the consciousness

that is trying to use it and manifest through it--just as one's own

consciousness might be rendered clearer by the same device? Of

course such a process might have the effect (especially at first)

of breaking the trance altogether, and of reviving the medium. But

if the medium understood the experiment beforehand, and the process

were also explained to the controls, it is reasonable to suppose

that--after some trials at any rate--the trance would not be

broken, and that better, clearer results would follow. At all

events, when some of our physicians in America are experimenting

upon the effects of various electrical rays upon mediums in a

trance, might not this far simpler and better-understood method be

tried with more or less impunity? I at least suggest that it be so

tried."

23. It must not be thought that this "possession" theory of the Piper

and similar cases is the only one which has been held in the past. On

the contrary, as we know, there have been several others--Mrs.

Sidgwick's telepathic theory--from the discarnate; Mr. Andrew Lang's

theory of telepathy _a trois_; Mr. Podmore's theory of simple telepathy;

the theory held by Andrew Jackson Davis and other clairvoyants, that

there exists a sort of mirror-like sphere, upon which all thoughts and

acts are recorded, and which the medium is somehow enabled to "read"

during the trance state; the theory that discarnate spirits somehow

project their thoughts upon a wax-like surface of astral substance, and

that the medium is enabled to reinterpret them in some mysterious

manner; the Theosophical theory; the theory of the occultists and

mystics; the Catholic theory--that these manifestations are all the

result of evil, lying spirits--these are but a few of the hypotheses

which have been advanced in the past by way of explanation of these

phenomena. I may say that this latter theory has some respectable

evidence in its support, by the way, a few very remarkable cases having

come under my own observation, which I hope to detail at some future

time; and Dr. J. Godfrey Raupert has cited some impressive cases in his

_Dangers of Spiritualism_, _Modern Spiritism_, and _The Supreme

Problem_. This is assuredly a side of psychic investigation which

demands close study and prolonged investigation; and, in spite of the

masterly analysis of some of these cases by Professor Flournoy in his

_Spiritism and Psychology_ (chap. iii.), I cannot but feel that there is

yet much to be learned as to the nature of the intelligence manifested

in these cases. And this was, as we know, the opinion also of Professor

William James, for he wrote (_Proceedings of S.P.R._, vol. xxiii. p.

118): "The refusal of modern 'enlightenment' to treat 'possession' as a

hypothesis to be spoken of as even possible, in spite of the massive

human tradition based on concrete experience in its favour, has always

seemed to me a curious example of the power of fashion in things

scientific. That the demon theory (not necessarily a devil theory) will

have its innings again is to my mind absolutely certain.... One must be

blind and ignorant indeed to suspect no such possibility...." It must by

no means be taken for granted, therefore, that the intelligences

operating through Mrs. Piper and other mediums are all that they claim

to be, even if their externality to the medium were proved.... We must

be extremely cautious in accepting any messages coming through mediums

until the most certain and convincing proofs of identity be

forthcoming--and _then_ we should be cautious!

The only plausible theory which in any way accounts for the Piper and

similar phenomena--short of the spiritistic--is one based upon the

existence of independently fluctuating strata of the medium's mind,

acquiring their knowledge by means of telepathy, clairvoyance, and other

supernormal means. This view of the case is held and defended with

extreme ingenuity and persuasiveness by Professor Flournoy in his

_Spiritism and Psychology_--a book which I myself think should be read

by every one interested in psychics or inclined to "dabble in

spiritualism." The complete isolation and individuality of the various

personalities involved could only be explained, it seems to me, by

postulating a series of subliminal strata, between which there would be

no memory connection--very much like Mr. Gurney's strata obtained by him

and described in his paper on "The Stages of Hypnotic Memory"

(_Proceedings_, vol. iv. pp. 515-31). In this way alone could we account

for the facts; but even so, are they explained?

When psychical research becomes a recognized science there will be ample

room for "specialization," and for many years of study in each branch of

the work. Consider, for instance, the many ramifications and

possibilities which would be thrown open to the researcher! A man might

become a "specialist" in haunted houses, in the investigation of such

cases, and in their "treatment" and "cure." He would then have to

investigate the nature and character of the phenomena which occur in

them, and of the intelligences which manifest themselves. The nature of

the figures seen in such houses would form a special branch of research,

and the degree of their objectivity or subjectivity in any particular

case. Numerous experiments might be tried, such as crystal-gazing,

automatic writing, seances, induced dreams, etc. Experiments should be

tried in photographing the apparitions, and in getting them to register

their presence upon delicate and sensitive instruments of all sorts.

Phonographic records of the "footsteps" of the ghost (if such occur)

should be made, and a record taken of all the sounds and noises which

occur in the house. Clairvoyants should be sent on "trips" to ascertain

the character of the haunting, if possible, in order to "check off"

their descriptions against the experiences of those living in the house.

Communication should be established with the "haunting spirits," if

possible, by means of raps, table-tipping, etc. The character of the

phenomena should be studied, and the _physical_ separated from the

_mental_. The nature of the intelligence "haunting" the house should be

investigated psychologically. The dreams of those who sleep in the house

should be recorded and analysed. Animals should be taken to live in the

house, to see whether or not they perceive anything unusual. The effect

of suggestion, exorcism, etc., should be tried and noted. Experiments in

hypnotism, "magnetism," etc., should be conducted in the house. Red

lights and lights of other colours should be tried, to see whether they

affect the phenomena in any manner. These are but a few of the many

tests and experiments that might be made, and which would doubtless

suggest themselves to the mind of the investigator as soon as the

legitimacy of the subject were once granted.

Again, in the case of telepathy. Once the facts were proved, the

fascinating study of the laws and causes would begin. Under what mental,

physical, and, possibly, spiritual conditions does telepathy operate?

What is the best mental condition of the agent? of the percipient? What

would be the effect of hypnotic trance? What of dreams? (These are not

original ideas, but they have never been followed out as they should be,

and might be, if the subject were pursued scientifically as other

questions in science are.) Again, might not telepathy be facilitated if

we chose individuals of the same general temperament? If we chose two

individuals to whom the same chord on the piano appealed (say the common

chord of G minor or C sharp), and this chord were struck repeatedly,

might not telepathic transmission be facilitated under such conditions?

If both subjects were hypnotized, and the agent were told to "will"

certain figures, etc., might not the percipient receive them more

easily? If both agent and percipient were placed in a strong magnetic or

high-tension electric field, might not this in some way influence

communication? Again, these are but a very few of the experiments which

might be tried, once telepathy became an accepted fact.

In the case of clairvoyance the field is even greater, but here more

original work has been done, owing largely to the fact that many of the

experiments have been conducted upon subjects in the hypnotic trance,

and hence more fully resembled "laboratory experiments." Still, much

remains to be done, particularly in the realm of the _explanation_ of

clairvoyance, and in the investigation of the neural and general

physiological concomitants of the condition.

In the field of "thought-" and "spirit-photography," the possibilities

of research and experimentation are obvious and almost unlimited. The

recent researches of Dr. Ochorowicz in "radiographs," and of Commandant

Darget in thought-photography and the so-called V-rays, are of extreme

importance, if true. Here is a field which any one may invade; and, with

the aid of a camera and specially sensitive plates, might accomplish

really valuable and striking results. Very rarely have attempts been

made to photograph apparitions (probably because they were too fleeting

and unexpected), and the forms at seances have been photographed on only

a few occasions. The human "aura"--granting it exists--should certainly

be capable of being photographed, under certain conditions, as well as

the radiation said to issue from magnets, crystals, etc., as explained

by Reichenbach.

The human "aura" itself should be made the subject of special study.

Here is a perfectly tangible thing, so to speak, which physicists can

work on to their hearts' content, without becoming "contaminated" by the

general run of psychic manifestations! Is the aura a form of physical

radiation? Does it affect the atmosphere? Can it be photographed? Is it

connected with the phenomena of exteriorization of sensitivity or

motivity? Will it affect the galvanometer needle, or other delicate

electrical or physical instruments? Is it connected with the "astral" or

"etheric body"? What is its condition when the subject is asleep? Can it

be altered at will? Is it affected by passing a high-tension current

through the body of the subject? (We know that these high-tension

currents will themselves create an electric aura around the body.) What

becomes of the aura after death; and what changes, if any, does it

undergo at the moment of death? Such are a few of the questions which

the psychic student might ask himself, and which certainly call for

solution.

Once more: is "psychometry" a fact? If objects can retain certain

"influences" within them, what is their nature, and how are they

retained? How does the sensitive perceive these impressions? Is there

not a connection between these phenomena and haunted houses? or between

the "charging-up" of a table or planchette board before it proceeds to

answer questions and behave in the manner it is often reported to do?

What is the nature of the "cold breeze" which is so often experienced,

not only at seances, but during very many psychic phenomena, both of the

experimental and spontaneous types, in all parts of the world? Is it a

physical breeze, or is it purely "psychical"? Could it be collected and

analysed, as was suggested in the case of the cold breeze issuing from

the scar on Eusapia Palladino's forehead? What is its source? And what

is its object? On this subject alone much suggestive and valuable

research might be undertaken.

Take the simple phenomena of _raps_. What produces them? What is the

bond between the hand of the medium which makes a gesture in the

direction of the table, and the table itself? What is the nature of the

physical impact upon the table? Are these raps due to exteriorized vital

force? If so, does this energy exude from the nerve termini, or is it

connected only with the etheric body or double? Can these raps be

controlled at will, or directed and controlled when the subject is under

hypnosis? Can this energy be directed at will? Could it not impress

delicate physical instruments? Might not a connection be thus

established between these phenomena and the impressions of hands and

faces, etc., occasionally seen in the presence of Eusapia and other

mediums?

Then the phenomena of materialization! Here is a wide field for study

indeed! How can such an organism be built up? Out of what materials is

it constructed? What degree of density can be attained? What is the

power which manipulates this matter? and what is the structure of the

matter itself? How can _will_ plastically mould matter in space? On what

framework, so to speak, is the body constructed? What is the nature of

the vital drain upon the medium and the sitters? What is the nature of

the intelligence animating the materialized figure? What is the

connection between so-called "thought-forms" and materialized phantoms?

These are but some of the questions which would suggest themselves, and

call for solution when "psychics" is recognized as a legitimate science,

as it surely will be one day. These are problems mostly on the physical

plane; but the psychological problems are just as many and just as

alluring! I have referred to some of these elsewhere; and would content

myself with again saying, that only when the _facts_ of psychical

research are recognized will their real, scientific study begin.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] The copy of this book in my possession is the copy once owned by Dr.

Hodgson--having his name in the front, and the date, April 1881. This

passage is marked with a thick red pencil stroke, showing the importance

which Dr. Hodgson attached to the point here made.

[2] Might not this account for the fact that trance or "spirit control"

practically never occurs during the hours of sleep? Even "obsessed"

patients find peace and rest during their sleeping hours. Is this not,

in all probability, due to the fact that the mind is, at such times,

forced in upon itself; as it were--instead of being directed

outwards--away from the centre of being, as it is daily, during

conscious life? It is probably nature's protective device--ensuring the

stability and integrity of the psychic "self."

[3] Kilner, _The Human Atmosphere_. I myself have conducted a number of

interesting experiments in this direction, which I hope to make public

at a later date.

[4] Townsend, _Facts in Mesmerism_, p. 215.

[5] _Metaphysick_, bk. iii. ch. v.

[6] _Body and Mind_, pp. 299-300.

[7] _Eusapia Palladino and her Phenomena_, pp. 293-301.

[8] _Vitality, Fasting and Nutrition_, p. 41. For discussions of this

question from a variety of different points of view, see _Life and

Matter_, by Lodge; _The Riddle of the Universe_, Haeckel; _The

Correlation of Spiritual Forces_, by Hartmann; "Consciousness and

Force," _Met. Mag._, Oct. 1910; the article on "Consciousness and

Energy," by Professor Montague, in _Essays in Honour of William James_,

and pp. 283-5 of _The New Realism_, etc.

[9] Bulwer Lytton, with his usual remarkable foresight in things

psychic, clearly perceived this. In his story, "The Haunters and the

Haunted," he says: "In all that I had witnessed, and indeed in all the

wonders which the amateurs of mystery in our age record as facts, a

material human agency is always required. On the Continent you will

still find magicians who assert that they can raise spirits. Assume for

a moment that they assert truly, still the living, material form of the

magician is present, and he is the material agency by which, from some

constitutional peculiarities, certain strange phenomena are represented

to your natural senses.... Accept again as truthful the tales of spirit

manifestation in America, produced by no discernible hand--articles of

furniture moved about without visible human agency--or the actual sight

and touch of hands to which no bodies seem to belong--still there must

be found the "medium," or living being, with constitutional

peculiarities capable of obtaining these signs. In fine, in all such

marvels, supposing even that there is no imposture, there must be a

human being like ourselves, by whom, or through whom, the effects

presented to human beings are produced."

[10] It should be said, however, that--apart from its innate

difficulties--this theory has recently received its death-blow by the

discovery of the fact that space is filled with ultra-violet rays, which

would soon prove fatal to all forms of life.

[11] See, especially, Duncan, _Some Chemical Problems of Today_, pp.

63-83 and 97-104.

[12] "Rector" is the name of Mrs. Piper's chief control and amanuensis,

during her trance sittings.

CHAPTER II

INVESTIGATING PSYCHICAL PHENOMENA WITH SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS

It is generally conceded that Aristotle possessed the greatest single

intellect the world has ever known; yet any schoolboy today knows more

of the structure of our universe than did Aristotle! The reason for this

is that Science has more fully penetrated the secrets of Nature, and we

now know approximately the constitution of matter and a good deal

concerning life and mind. How has this progress been possible? Only in

one way. Improvement in the _mechanical instruments_ by means of which

we study Nature. We might "speculate" as to the constitution of matter

for a thousand years, but we should never have arrived at our present

positive _knowledge_ had it not been for the delicate and sensitive

instruments which are today in the hands of the physicist and the

chemist, and employed by him in his laboratory.

Doubtless much the same law will be found to apply in the realm of

"psychics." Until we can apply definite "laboratory methods," and study

psychical phenomena by means of physical instruments far more delicate

than our senses, it is probable that the present state of things will

continue to exist; but it is my firm belief that, were a laboratory

fitted up with physical and electrical apparatus, suitable for this

work, and if we could by their aid study a promising case of "psychic"

or "mediumistic" phenomena, we should (within ten years or so) arrive

at some definite conclusions! We should then know something about the

_laws_ and conditions under which telepathy, clairvoyance, telekinesis

(the movement of objects without contact), et cetera, operate, and not

until this is done, I believe, will such positive conclusions be

reached.

Of course the reader may object, just here, that I am assuming such

phenomena to be _true_--while the tendency of many present-day

scientists is to regard them as unreal, hallucinatory, and the result of

fraud. I cannot spare the time in the present place to argue the point.

While I admit freely that a very large percentage of such phenomena

_are_ so produced, and while I freely admit that probably 98 per cent of

so-called "mediums" are fraudulent; I am equally emphatic in declaring

that a residuum of genuine phenomena exists--that supernormal

manifestations _do_ occur, and that every one who investigates

_carefully enough_ and _long enough_ will find them. This has been not

only my own experience, but that of every person who has investigated

this subject with an impartial mind for any length of time. As Sir

Oliver Lodge said, in writing of this very question:

"The result of my experience is to convince me that certain

phenomena, usually considered abnormal, _do_ belong to the order of

Nature, and as a corollary from this, that these phenomena ought to

be investigated and recorded by persons and societies interested in

natural knowledge."

Based on this conviction, Sir Oliver Lodge wrote, as far back as 1894,

in a paper entitled "On Some Appliances Needed for a Psychical

Laboratory":

"If the investigations are to go on easily and well, special

appliances must be contrived and arranged conveniently for use,

precisely as is done in any properly fitted laboratory. It has

already doubtless been realized that one of the needs of the future

is a _psychical laboratory_, specially adapted for all kinds of

experimental psychology and psycho-physics...."

Sir Oliver Lodge suggested at the time, among other necessary

appliances, a delicate registering balance,--so adjusted that it would

record the medium's weight, unknown to her, at all times during the

seance--the fluctuations in weight, if any, to be recorded on a

revolving drum. Means ought also to be provided for studying the

temperature, pulse, muscular exertion, breathing, etc., etc. The

lighting of the room should be carefully attended to and capable of the

slightest gradation. Means should be provided for obtaining moving

pictures of the seance from without the room, unknown to the medium.

Were the sittings held in complete darkness, these photographs could be

obtained by means of ultra-violet light, with which the room might be

flooded. In addition to these devices, we may add others--such as X-ray

tubes, high-frequency currents and a delicate field of electric

force,--while instruments for testing the ionization of the air (if it

exists) in the immediate vicinity of the medium, during a seance, should

also be employed,--together with the more strictly psychical instruments

and devices which have been utilized of late years.

Electrical apparatus _has_, in fact, been utilized on several occasions

to test so-called "physical mediums" in the past. Italian investigators,

particularly, have excelled in this. In a series of seances conducted in

Naples, the following apparatus was employed. (Fig. 1.)

[Illustration: Fig. 1]

A telegraphic key (b) was connected by wires (a,a) to a battery (d) and

to two screws, connecting them with an electro-magnet (e) to the

opposite end of which was attached a needle. The point of the needle

touched a revolving drum (f), with a smoked surface, driven by two

interlacing, cogged wheels. The whole of this registering apparatus was

enclosed under a glass bell-jar (g). The telegraphic key itself (b) was

covered by a cardboard box (c). The "powers" manifesting were asked to

press the telegraphic key _without_ tearing the cardboard box (that is,

_through_ it). When the key was depressed, this would be instantly

communicated to the electro-magnet, and cause the needle to

oscillate,--these oscillations being marked upon the smoked surface of

the revolving drum. A number of successful tests were conducted by means

of this apparatus.

[Illustration: Fig. 2]

A variation of this was then employed (Fig. 2). A cylinder filled with

water (a) was connected by means of tubing (b) to a U-tube, or manometer

(c), filled with mercury. Upon the further side of this tube floated a

bent wire (e) inserted into a small cork. The point of this wire, again,

was so adjusted as to come into contact with the smoked surface of a

revolving drum (f), driven as before. The top of the cylinder (a) was

covered with a rubber cap (d), and this whole apparatus was inserted

under a wooden box (g) having a cloth top.

Now, if the rubber covering (d) were pressed upon, this would force some

of the water, in a, along the tube, b, and the added air-pressure would

depress the column of mercury in the manometer, causing the floating

needle to rise on the opposite side, and scratch upon the revolving

drum. Fig. 3 shows some of the tracings which were obtained in this

way--the force acting through the cloth top, g.

[Illustration: Fig 3]

The instruments thus recorded a _definite physical, intelligent force_.

It may interest my readers to know that, at the time of his death, M.

Curie,--who had been completely convinced of the reality of these

phenomena,--was busy devising an instrument which would register and

direct _psychic power_ liberated from the body of a physical medium when

in trance.

Dr. Imoda, the assistant of Professor Mosso, has also conducted a number

of experiments in the discharge of an electroscope, by means of "rays"

issuing from the medium's body. It was found that, if the medium held

her fingers at a distance of an inch or so from the knob of the

electroscope, some form of energy, apparently _radio-active_ in

character, issued from her fingers, and _gradually discharged the

electroscope_. This is the "radiation" or "emanation" issuing from the

body, which has been studied extensively by students of the occult. Dr.

Imoda concluded--as the result of his experiments--that "_the radiations

of radium, the cathode radiations of the Crookes' tube, and mediumistic

radiations are fundamentally the same_."

Some other very interesting facts have been observed by means of the

electroscope. For example, Dr. W. J. Crawford (D.Sc), in his

experiments, noted that:--

"... In seance rooms where tables are moved without physical

contact, I found that after a sitting was well started, I was

always _unable_ to charge an electroscope, even though I tried to

do so in the corner of the chamber farthest from the medium. In

order to charge it I had to take it outside the room. I asked the

'operators' (intelligences 'directing things,' apparently, in the

seance-room) if there was any 'power' in the seance-room so far

away from the medium, and they answered in raps that there was. By

'power' I understand them to mean particles of matter taken from

the medium...."

Again, in his _Reality of Psychic Phenomena_, he says:

"I took the electroscope to the table in the corner; then placed it

in the circle near the medium. I asked the operators to touch the

disc of the instrument very gently. They did this almost at once,

the 'touching' consisting of a metallic scraping upon the brass

disc, quite audible, similar in type to the imitation of the floor

being rubbed with sand paper, a phenomenon I quite often observed.

"Result:--On examination, the electroscope was found to be

completely _discharged_!

"I took the electroscope to the table in the corner of the room and

tried to recharge it, but found I was unable to do so even after

repeated trials. Accordingly I asked the 'operators' to put back

into the body of the medium the matter they had taken out (for the

production of the sledge-hammer blows) and to give a few raps when

they had done so. In a minute or two some _very light raps_ were

given, and when I asked if the process was complete I received _no

raps in reply at all_, which seemed to indicate to me that all the

matter used for rapping had been returned to the medium. At any

rate, I found that I could now charge the electroscope; which done,

I placed it on the floor as before within the circle, and asked

that the disc should be touched lightly. After a little time, there

was the metallic scraping as before, and on examination the

electroscope was found to be completely _discharged_."

It will be at once apparent to the reader that two problems confront the

investigator, when once he is called upon to solve such problems as the

above: (1) the _physical miracle_ itself; and (2) the nature of the

_intelligence_, lying behind and directing or controlling the

manifestations. This latter is purely a _psychological_ question, which,

immensely important as it is intrinsically, does not enter into the

_physical_ problem. It need only be said that this is _the_ baffling

question in psychical investigation, and the most puzzling. Whether it

be an independent "spirit," as it claims to be; or the subconsciousness

of the medium; or whether it is a sort of compound consciousness, made

up of the collected minds of those forming the circle at the time; or

whether some other interpretation is open to us--this is all a moot

question, which is referred to here, merely to draw attention to the

fact of its existence.

It will be at once apparent to the reader, also, that physical and

electrical apparatus have played an important part in such

investigations, in the past, and are certainly destined to occupy a far

more important place in the future. These curious phenomena--like all

others in our world--depend upon invisible forces or energies for their

production. Those interested in electricity should realize, more than

all others, the power of the invisible; and the fact that _the invisible

is the real_. Anything that we see consists merely in a bundle of

"phenomena"--of _effects_. The real cause is always behind, and is

always invisible.

There is nothing inherently absurd or impossible, therefore, in these

odd manifestations,--however bizarre and unusual they appear to us at

first sight. An unusual combination of circumstances might bring them

about. Stones do not ordinarily fall out of the air; yet at times they

_do_ (meteors). Water does not usually rise above its own level, yet it

can be made to do so. The curious freaks of lightning are well known.

There is nothing inherently impossible, therefore, in supposing that a

table can be "levitated" into the air, under unusual conditions; it is

simply the manifestation of an unknown energy--of which, doubtless,

there are many. We can manipulate and control the electric current; but

we do not know yet precisely what it _is_. Similarly, we can study the

effects of many of these curious biological forces, without

understanding their true nature. Above all, it behooves us to keep an

open mind, and not to cry "impossible," just because we have never seen

such facts, or because they appear to us innately improbable.

Here, as elsewhere, we depend upon hidden and unknown energies. Could we

but find an _energy common to the two worlds_--the spiritual world and

the material world--we should have here a means of direct communication,

possibly by instrumental means. _Delicate physical and electrical

apparatus may be the means, after all, by which such communication will

ultimately be established!_ At all events, when subtle causes and forces

are in operation (as they doubtless are during a seance) it is only

natural to suppose that instruments, _far more delicate than our

senses_, should be the logical method of detecting them, and, as yet,

such experiments have rarely been attempted.

When we take into consideration, finally, the electrical theory of the

nature of matter; when we remember the many striking analogies between

electricity and the life-force; when we remember that the science of

electricity is yet in its infancy, it should hold out to us the hope

that, _here_, we may find a solution of many of these obscure problems,

and that further investigations in the field of electricity may serve to

explain to us many of these unknown and mysterious secrets of our inner

nature, and the still more mysterious secrets of the seance-room. No

more interesting and profitable researches could be attempted than those

which endeavour to establish a connection between known and unknown

phenomena; between physical and electrical manifestations, on the one

hand, and these curious "psychical" phenomena, on the other. The crying

need of the day is a "Psychical Laboratory," wherein such experiments as

these could be conducted. It is my sincere hope that, some day, I may

assist in the foundation of such a laboratory.

CHAPTER III

LIFE: AND ITS INTERPRETATION

(_In the Light of M. Bergson's Philosophy_)

The philosophy of life which M. Bergson advocates is more than a mere

philosophy--more than a metaphysical doctrine; for, in so far as it

endeavours to account for the "phenomena" of life, it entrenches upon

biology; and M. Bergson himself is the first to acknowledge this. His

own books are filled with interesting scientific data, which he has

interpreted most ingeniously; and no broad-minded biologist can afford

to neglect his work in the future. Two points of his theory call for

special mention, however, it seems to me, and are subject, not to

criticism but to discussion. One of these is that M. Bergson has not

gone far enough in his interpretation of the facts; in the other he is,

I believe, wrong in his interpretation--though his is the one commonly

advanced and accepted. A few remarks on these two points may not,

perhaps, be without interest.

It is apparent to any student of these problems that the interpretation

of life which M. Bergson has adopted is very different from that usually

held. The _facts_, the phenomena of life, are the same on either theory,

the difference lying in their explanation. All the facts of life are the

same; they may be interpreted equally well on either theory. It is

important to bear this in mind for reasons which will become apparent as

we proceed.

Now, the difference between M. Bergson's theory of life and that

commonly held is this: that, whereas one[13] regards life as created or

resulting from the total functioning of the body, the other regards it

as something separate and distinct--merely utilizing the body for the

purposes of its manifestation. In the one case, life is, as it were,

made; in the other, it exists apart from the body it animates, and is

merely associated with it. To sum up in two words, one is the

_production_ theory of life; the other is the _transmissive_. One theory

leads direct to materialism; the other allows all sorts of

possibilities, which are readily perceived by any student of these

questions.

Thus stated, the situation at once reminds us of the controversy which

raged some years ago as to the relation of brain and mind, as the result

of the publication of James' lecture on _Human Immortality_. He then

showed that it was quite possible to accept all the facts as to the

relation of brain and consciousness, yet interpret them in a different

manner; that there might be a transmissive function of the brain as well

as a productive or secretive function; and that the undoubted fact of

the inter-relation of the two sets of phenomena might just as well be

interpreted in one way as in the other. The mere facts proved no theory

true. As James so well said: "The psychologists noticed a connection,

and at once assumed that it was the only possible _kind_ of

connection"--which was not at all the case. Mere coincidence, in two

sets of phenomena, does not prove that they are _causally_ related; that

one produces the other. They may be quite separate from one another

(psycho-physical parallelism), or both may be aspects of something else,

etc. It is all a matter of interpretation, not of fact. But this is a

view of the case which is seldom perceived, it seems to me, by

psychologists generally. Seeing a coincidence, they at once postulate

causal relation, and then proceed as if this had been thoroughly and

scientifically established!

I have spoken of this analogy, drawn from psychology, because it bears

upon the problem before us in the clearest possible manner. Just as

consciousness is usually conceived to be due to the functioning of the

brain; so life is conceived to be due to the functioning of the body;

but just as mind can be shown to exist apart from brain, and merely

manifest _through_ it, in the same way, M. Bergson suggests, life may

exist apart from matter, and merely animate it in its passage through

it. It is all a question of interpretation.[14]

Is the interpretation correct? As Hamlet said: "That is the question!"

To use the words of the Right Hon. A. J. Balfour (_Hibbert Journal_,

October 1911, p. 18):

"M. Bergson regards matter as the dam which keeps back the rush of

life. Organize it a little (as in the protozoa)--i.e. slightly

raise the sluice--and a little life will squeeze through. Organize

it elaborately (as in man)--i.e. raise the sluice a good deal--and

much life will squeeze through. Now this may be a very plausible

opinion if the flood of life be really there, beating against

matter till it force an entry through the narrow slit of

undifferentiated protoplasm. But is it there? Science, modesty

professing ignorance, can stumble along without it, and I question

whether philosophy, with only scientific data to work upon, can

establish its reality."

It would seem to me that the only way to settle this question one way or

the other is to bring forward certain _facts_ which can be accounted for

more fully and rationally on one theory than on the other. If facts

could be produced which one theory could not account for at all, the

alternative theory might be said to stand proved. Do such facts exist

which tell in favour of M. Bergson's theory as against the other? I

believe they do. Before coming to them, however, I must draw attention

to certain weaknesses in the generally held theory of life, which are,

it seems to me, also shared by M. Bergson's theory. Until these are

disposed of, I do not believe that any definite forward step will be

taken towards proof either in one direction or in the other. So long as

certain fundamental tenets are held, it seems improbable that any one

theory of life will be proved more than any other theory. M. Bergson has

gone part of the way, in his demonstration, but he has stopped there

instead of carrying his train of argument to its logical conclusion. At

least so it appears to me; for I think it obvious that the chain of

argument which M. Bergson adopts can be carried much further than he has

carried it, in his various writings.

The view which M. Bergson adopts is somewhat as follows: Life is

directive and creative; it utilizes the chemical and physical forces of

the body for the purposes of its manifestation. It is the "spark" which

sets off the explosive; it is the "hair-trigger" which liberates the

enormous energy contained in the cartridge, etc. To apply the analogy:

life utilizes and directs the energy obtained from food (by a species of

chemical combustion) so that the bodily energy, as such, is, so to say,

a "physical" energy, and subject to the law of conservation; while the

power that guides, controls, and directs it is conscious life--the power

of choice, the guider, the controller.

This view of the case is, I believe, unsound, and for two reasons. In

the first place, it does not, I think, go far enough in its

interpretation; and, in the second place, we are face to face with a

paradox--the problem of no-energy affecting energy. Let us take the

second of these objections first.

If a solid body, a fluid or a gas, be moving in a certain direction, a

certain amount of energy must be exercised in order to divert its

course--for otherwise it would continue in a straight line. Similarly,

any energy will continue to exert itself in one direction, unless its

course of activity be diverted into another channel; and this

"divertion" constitutes a pressure, as it were, upon the energy; and

this "pressure" can only be brought about by a "physical" force or

energy--and so be within the law of conservation. No matter how _slight_

this pressure--this guidance--may be, it is nevertheless _there_; and in

so far as it directs the flow of energy, it must itself _be_ energy--for

otherwise it could not direct or divert it. Even the analogy of the

banks of a river fails us, because in that case every atom of the banks

is acting upon the body of the water by a material pressure; and hence

the banks as a whole are. Either life must be energy, or it must be

no-energy. If the first of these suppositions be true, things would be

intelligible; but if the second were true, they would not be, because

no-energy cannot effect or guide or control energy without itself being

energy; and this would either make life a "physical" energy, or remove

its power of guidance altogether. I do not see how these alternatives

are to be avoided.

M. Bergson apparently tries to evade this issue by supposing that life

only affects the energies of the body (derived from food) _very

slightly_ by a sort of "hair-trigger" action, which releases a vast

amount of energy, quite disproportionate to the energy of direction

applied. But surely this is a mere begging of the question! One is

reminded of Marryat's character, who asked to have her illegitimate baby

excused "because it was such a little one!" No matter how _slight_ the

amount of energy may be, if it is capable of affecting energy at all, it

_is_ energy, and hence subject to the law of conservation. Life, as

energy, must lie wholly outside the law (in which case all talk of

"control" and "guidance" must go by the board), or it must lie wholly

within it (in which case life becomes a purely "physical" energy, like

any other, and cannot well be thought to exercise this "guidance").[15]

We have thus seen that the second of our two alternatives (that life is

no-energy) is untenable. Let us now return to the first--that life _is_

energy--and see whither it leads us.

If life be a form or mode of energy, it might affect, guide, and direct

other modes of energy, or the matter of the body (and, through it, of

the inorganic world) readily enough. It would affect them, but blindly.

It could have no intelligent action. If life be an energy, it must be

like all other energies in this respect; it must fall within the law of

conservation and be non-intelligent. Otherwise it would be something

different from all other forms of energy; and so we should have energy,

plus intelligence, in the case of life; and only energy for all other

forms. But in that case life could not simply be converted into or

derived from any other mode of energy; because we should have

"intelligence" left over, in our equation--which was created _de novo_

whenever life was derived from other energies, and plunged into

extinction and nothingness whenever life passed into any other mode of

energy--in the course of our daily lives. But this is contrary both to

experience and to all legitimate scientific thinking! Life, therefore,

cannot be an intelligent or a directive energy. And so this argument

also goes by the board, and we have left to us only the old

materialistic conception of a non-intelligent, blind, life-force, or

energy, derived from food, by a process of chemical combustion, and

essentially no more mysterious than any other energy. This, therefore,

is the conclusion to which we seem driven.

But such a conclusion is not only contrary to M. Bergson's philosophy,

but to daily observation and scientific knowledge; for we know that life

_is_ directive, purposive, and progressive, and if evolution teaches us

anything, it tells us that it must have been so always. We are thus

driven into this dilemma: life must be an energy--but, as such, it

cannot be purposive! Life _is_ purposive, yet it must be an energy--for

otherwise it could not affect the bodily energies and the material

world! Here then is an apparent paradox--a flat contradiction--incapable

of solution or further elucidation.

M. Bergson (and before him Sir Oliver Lodge and others) has attempted to

meet this difficulty by supposing that the energy of the body is a

"physical" energy, derived from food, and, as such, blind and subject to

the law of conservation. This energy, they assert, is however

manipulated and directed by the power of life or consciousness, which

makes "use" of it, directs, and guides it. But this theory is, it seems

to me, refuted by the arguments just advanced, which show that life and

consciousness cannot affect energy in this way unless they themselves be

energy; and thus we are in a "vicious circle" again, with no hope of

ever getting out.

The whole difficulty has arisen, it seems to me, because of the

conception of the nature of life usually held. Were this altered these

problems would be found to have a ready solution. M. Bergson has gone

half way toward finding this solution, but has stopped there; he has

clung to the most fallacious part of the theory, and for this reason has

been unable to emerge altogether from the difficulties above mentioned.

Only when we change our conception of the nature of the life-force will

these problems become clearer--these questions find their true solution.

Have I, then, any theory to offer as to the nature of this power of life

which is essentially new to physiology and biology? I believe that I

have--not new as to facts, but as to the interpretation of facts (the

latter remain the same on either theory).

In order to make the theory which follows plain in as few words as

possible, it will be necessary to refer for a moment to the current

conception of vital energy--of life--in the human body. It has been

stated by Bergson himself with admirable clearness (_Hibbert Journal_,

October 1911, pp. 35-36; _Creative Evolution_, pp. 253-54, etc.), and is

briefly this:

Food, when broken down and oxidised in the body, gives forth or

liberates energy--just as coal liberates energy when burned in the

engine. In both cases energy (contained in the food or the coal, as the

case may be) is liberated, and this energy is utilized to drive our

engine--the human body or the steam-engine (it makes no difference to

the argument). The energy thus gained is, it is contended, again given

off as heat and work--muscular and mental work in the case of the human

engine (the body); mechanical work of all sorts, and heat, in the case

of the steam-engine. Thus one is essentially no more mysterious than the

other--the body no more so than the steam-engine--vitality no more so

than steam! Both are "physical" energies, subject to the law of

conservation, and as such transmutable one into the other. This is the

generally accepted theory, which likens the human body to a

steam-engine, and is the theory all but universally adopted by

scientific men, held as proved and adopted without question by M.

Bergson!

But such a view of the case is, I believe, essentially untrue. It is

_one_ interpretation of the observed facts, truly; but not the only

interpretation. The facts remain equally true on either theory; the

difference lies in their explanation. It is the old error of confusing

coincidence with causation--and not only that, but a particular _kind_

of causation, and "treating it as the only imaginable kind." Just as the

psychologists reasoned upon the acknowledged facts of the relation of

brain and consciousness; so do the physiologists, in our own day, reason

upon this question of the causation of vital energy by food. In both

cases there has been one-sided and partial reasoning.

If, however, we reject the prevalent notion of the causation of vital

energy by food, we must have another theory to offer in its place. It

is, I know, presumptuous thus to run counter to the whole of accepted

teaching, in this respect, and my excuse must be that I believe my

theory represents the truth, while that universally held does not!

Again, I must emphasize that I speak, not of facts, but of inferences

drawn from facts. With this apology, I shall state my own view of the

case as follows:

Instead of comparing the human body with the steam-engine, it should be

compared with and likened to the _electric motor_. Just as the motor is

recharged, or receives its energy from some external source, just so, I

believe, is the human nervous system recharged from without, during the

hours of sleep. It is placed into a peculiar, receptive condition, in

which this "recharging" process takes place. Our energy is derived

through sleep, and not from food. Food merely replaces broken-down

tissue (and, if you will, the animal heat) but never supplies or creates

its vital energy. This depends upon its nervous mechanism, and upon

sleep, and not upon the muscular system and chemical combustion. What

differentiates the steam-engine from the human organism is the fact that

one needs sleep while the other does not (in other words, one is living

and vital, and the other is not), yet, in spite of this obvious

difference--which is so great that it really destroys all the

analogy--physiologists have continued to disregard it, and to treat the

human body as a mere machine--such as a steam-engine--which requires no

sleep, and derives its energy solely by combustion! To my mind, this is

one of the most curious paradoxes of modern science.

To place the theory in as clear a light as possible, then, it is this:

Food supplies or replaces broken-down tissue (and heat) to the body; but

not vitality, or the power of life, which comes only from rest and

sleep. No matter how much food we may eat and perfectly oxidise, there

comes a time, nevertheless, when we must go to bed, and not to the

dining-room, to recuperate our strength and energies. During sleep,

vital energy flows into us (our nervous systems), and all animals need

sleep--this fact differentiating them, at once, from any form of

mechanical engine. Life, vital energy, is not due, as is universally

thought, to chemical combustion, but to vital replenishment. No energy

is _created_ within the body; it is merely _transmitted_. The body, in

fact, acts as a means of transmission--as a sort of "organic burning

glass" which transmits and focuses the sun's rays on one focal point.

And just as any crack, or blur, or clouding, or other accident to the

burning glass would interfere with its power and capacity from

transmitting the rays, so, any accident or disease or pathological state

of the organism would interfere with or altogether prevent the passage

or flow through it, of the life or vital energy. "The more perfect, the

better these conditions, the greater the influx of vital force, and vice

versa. We must see that all the electrodes and avenues and channels are

bright and clear, so that there shall be as little hindrance as possible

to either the inflow of energy in the form of power, or to its outflow

in the form of work done." My theory of the relation of body and bodily

energy is, in fact, an extension of James' "transmission theory" of

consciousness to the _whole_ of our life and vital energy. And I believe

the one is as defensible as the other.

But, I shall be asked, is there any evidence for such a theory? There is

much evidence, there are many facts, which I have adduced in full

elsewhere.[16] This is not the place to discuss the physiological

intricacies involved, and I can only refer those interested to the work

in question. At present, I shall assume its accuracy--or at least its

validity--and proceed to show in few words why it is that this theory is

not contrary to any known facts, but is capable of explaining them just

as fully as the generally accepted theory, and other (disputed) facts

far more readily.

The facts upon which the current theory is founded are well known, and,

apparently, thoroughly established. Briefly, they are these: So much

food, oxidised or burned outside the body, can be shown to yield so much

heat and energy. The same foods, oxidised within the body, yield

approximately the same amount of energy. Further, the energy which the

body expends (in conscious and unconscious muscular activity, thought,

emotion, and as heat, etc.) is, it is contended, practically equivalent

to the energy which is thus supplied. There is, therefore, an

equivalence, a balance, between income and outgo of energy: so that the

recently conducted experiments in calorimetry are held to prove beyond

question the causation of vital energy by food.

I shall not in this place stop to question the accuracy of the figures

obtained--to point out that the results do not always tally; that far

too little allowance has been made for mental and emotional states, etc.

I shall assume that the figures are accurate and prove all that they are

held to prove. The question then arises: Do the figures prove the

causation of vital energy by food? Apparently they do, no doubt, and

they are held to do so by the majority of experimental physiologists;

but I do not believe that this is at all the case. Admitting the facts,

admitting far greater accuracy than the figures really show, we have to

consider the question of their _interpretation_. And this brings us back

to the remarks made at the beginning of this paper--that coincidence

does not prove causation; and that the same set of facts may often be

interpreted in an entirely different manner--one which would show that

life is not directly dependent upon food combustion at all, as is

generally supposed. The alternative method of interpreting the facts

would be as follows:

Life is a _power_ which acts upon organized matter, under certain

conditions, in a variable and fluctuating manner. Whenever energy acts

upon substance, substance wastes. Whenever work of any kind is done by

the body, therefore, the tissues are broken down, and to supply this

waste, this destruction, food material is needed. The more waste, the

greater the need for repair, and _per contra_ the less waste, the less

the need of repair. So far as the material equivalent (food) is

concerned, therefore, it will be seen that this is only what we should

expect on either theory; and tells no more in favour of one than the

other.

But what of the energy? The greater the expenditure of energy, the more

work done, the more tissue destroyed. The more tissue destroyed, the

more food needed, and the more ingested. But this does not prove that

the extra amount of food has _created_ the extra energy! That would be

putting the cart before the horse with a vengeance! And yet this is what

is universally done by physiologists in considering these experiments!

Perhaps I cannot do better than to quote, just here, a portion of the

excellent Introduction which Dr. A. Rabagliati, F.R.C.S., F.F.C.P.,

etc., wrote to my book, and which really states the case more clearly

than I stated it myself. He says in part:

"To take an analogy: It seems to me it would be as pertinent to

argue that because the strings of a violin or harp waste in

proportion to the quantity of music evolved through or by means of

them, therefore the waste of the strings is the cause of the

music, while in fact it is the hand of the player, and even the

spirit behind the hand, which is the real and efficient cause of

the music. So the form of the infinite and universal energy, which

we may call erg-dynamic, is the cause of the waste of the body

through which it works; and this is at once made good by the

increased trophic metabolism which occurs, to replace the

waste--this increased trophic metabolism showing itself in

increased O_2 intake and coincidently or correspondingly with

increased CO_2 output. If the strings of a musical instrument were

self-repairing, we might perhaps be induced to think that the

material which fed the strings was the _cause_ of the music, since

in that case some measure of the waste would probably be

discoverable in the _debris_ emitted; and we might imagine that the

_debris_ was the measure of the music, while what it really was,

was the measure of the waste of the strings, when they were made

the instrument of the music. If a spade is used in digging, the

spade wastes in proportion to every spadeful of earth it is made to

lift. The more it digs, the more it wastes. If we could arrange

that a stream of fine steel particles flowed into the spade, to

replace the waste caused by each act of digging, we might perhaps

come to think that these fine steel particles were the cause of the

digging, especially as the quantity of them required would always

be exactly proportioned to the amount of work done. Nevertheless,

this would be a very inconsequent assumption. Yet this is the

assumption invariably made by modern scientists."

It will thus be seen that another interpretation might easily be placed

upon the observed facts, and that, while the latter are accepted without

question, it is yet possible to conceive the relationship as quite other

than usually imagined; and consequently of life as an energy independent

of the food supply,[17] and outside the law of conservation--a force

absolutely distinct, separate, _per se_. M. Bergson has gone so far as

to speak of life as a "power," as a "vital impetus"--utilizing matter

for the purposes of its manifestation, etc. I have merely extended this

conception in what appears to me a logical and necessary direction. It

appears to me certain that life is a sentient power--different from any

other mode of energy of which we have any knowledge, and as such no

longer subject to the objections raised earlier in this paper (to other

conceptions of life), which might also be advanced, it seems to me,

against M. Bergson's theory. Were the theory of life here defended true,

it would not only enable us to account for life in a satisfactory

manner, but it would render clear many obscure and sporadic phenomena

which the current theories are quite incapable of explaining (and hence

often ignore!); and it would also practically assure us continuity of

life beyond the grave--after the dissolution of the body--because mind

and consciousness are shown to be independent of physical energy, even

in _this_ life! This, however, is a subject which requires special and

lengthy treatment, and I cannot touch upon it now. All that I can aim to

do at present is to show that there may be a spiritual source even for

our _physical_ life and energy here. And, were this true, psychic

phenomena might readily be accounted for--since there would no longer

remain any valid objection to their occurrence.

FOOTNOTES:

[13] The orthodox, scientific theory.

[14] See _Mind Energy_, chapters 1 and 2. This view has also been

adopted by Mr. W. Whately Smith (see his _Theory of the Mechanism of

Survival_) where he says (p. 114): "This latter (the transmissive

theory) is the view held by M. Bergson, by Mr. Carrington and by

myself."

[15] It might be contended that life is an _intelligent_ force--both a

physical energy and intelligence; but if that were the case we should

simply have energy _plus_ something, and the "plus something" would

constitute the whole mystery. We should be no better off than we were

before. All the energies known to us are certainly non-intelligent, and

if you superimpose anything else on the energy you at once differentiate

it from all other energies--which you are not entitled to do (see

below).

[16] See my _Vitality, Fasting and Nutrition_, pp. 225-350.

[17] The question has been asked, What becomes of the potential energy

contained in the food, if it is not converted into bodily energy? I

reply, it is given off or imparted to the body as heat (not energy), but

this heat is again given off by the body. The more imparted to the body,

the more is again given off. We know that the body possesses a

self-regulating apparatus which keeps the body, when alive, always at a

constant temperature. (When dead, of course, the "corpse" cools to the

temperature of the surrounding air.) The equivalence is again

maintained, it will be observed, because the more heat we impart to the

body the more it in turn gives off.

CHAPTER IV

THE HUMAN WILL IS A PHYSICAL ENERGY

AN INSTRUMENT WHICH PROVES IT

PART I

The Facts

That the human will is a definite physical energy, which can be

registered by means of a scale or balance, may appear so incredible that

the bare statement of the case would seem to carry with it its own

refutation! Yet I firmly believe that this is a fact; that the energy of

the will may be registered by means of an instrument I am about to

describe; and that any one can prove this,--any one, i.e., who cares to

take the time to repeat these experiments, and to try a sufficient

number of subjects until the right ones be found--who are capable of

affecting the balance in the manner described.

Such a fact--if fact it be--is of the utmost importance to science and

to philosophy; even more important and more far-reaching in its

implications than may at first sight appear. Not only is the fact itself

of extraordinary interest, but the very origin and structure of our

universe is called into question--and shown to be capable of an

interpretation very different from that usually offered by modern

science. And, further, if it be true that the human will is a physical

energy, we have here the discovery of a _new force_--a force just as

new to science as magnetism or electricity--and vastly more interesting,

since it is intimately associated with all of us, and subject to our

direction, guidance, and command--a force for us to wield and

manipulate--for weal or woe!

It may be thought, by some, that this is no new discovery; that the

human will is a physical energy is a fact of common observation; and

that we all feel the liberation of this energy whenever an act of

volition is performed. I may reply at once to such critics that (common

sense as it may appear) this is not at all the attitude of modern

psychology; and that, by _savants_ the will is not considered an energy

at all, but rather a choice of actions or an effort of attention. It is

a state of consciousness merely, possessing intrinsically no more energy

than any other state of the kind. This may, perhaps, be made clear by

the following brief quotation from James' _Psychology_:

"We can now see that attention with effort is all that any case of

volition implies. The essential achievement of the will, in short,

when it is most "voluntary" is to attend to a difficult object and

hold it fast before the mind. The so doing _is_ the _fiat_; and it

is a mere physiological incident that when the object is thus

attended to, immediate motor consequences should ensue. Effort of

attention is thus the immediate phenomenon of will." (p. 450.)

This, then, is the attitude of psychology. It contends that the will is

by no means an energy, in the sense in which physicists use that term;

but rather that it is a mere state of mind, or of consciousness. As

such it is, of course, helpless; a mere witness of the drama of life,

incapable in itself of affecting or changing the external world. So far

as the physical world is concerned, it is a mere by-product, a useless

adjunct--the feeling of energy-expenditure being delusory. Such is the

attitude of modern psychology, and a very hopeless and unattractive

belief it is!

As opposed to this view, I propose to show that the human will _is_ a

definite physical energy, which forms an essential part of our human

personality--and forms, indeed, the very core of our being, so far as

its expression into the physical world is concerned. This view of the

case, I may say, is not altogether new; several competent neurologists

have, of late, defended this conception in no measured terms. Thus, Dr.

William Hanna Thomson, in his _Brain and Personality_, says:

"An important conclusion is led up to by these facts, namely, that

we can _make our own brains_, so far as special mental functions or

aptitudes are concerned, if only we have wills strong enough to

take the trouble. By practice, practice, practice, as in Miss

Keller's case, the Will stimulus will not only organize brain

centres to perform new functions, but will project new connections,

or, as they are technically called, association fibres, which will

make nerve centres work together as they could not without being

thus associated.... It is not the power of the brain, it is the

masterful personal Will which makes the brain _human_. It is the

Will alone which can make material seats for mind, and, when made,

they are the most personal things in a man's body.... Man can

always do what he chooses, or, in other words, wills. Therefore

this very different thing, his Will, makes man different from every

other earthly living thing."

Such a view of the case certainly gives a far greater dignity and power

to the will; but is it true? That is the question; it is a mere matter

of interpretation, without any means of settling the facts one way or

the other. It may be "pleasant" to believe this or many other things;

but that does not make them true!

It is obvious that arguments such as this might go on for ever. The

nature of the human will would never be settled by such means. We desire

a more definite and concise method--one capable of settling the case one

way or the other--and settling it, not by argument, but by fact.

Arguments convince no one; facts every one! It is only by an appeal to

fact, therefore, that this question can be settled one way or the other.

The difficulty has been that, until now, no direct method has been

devised capable of solving the problem. This has now been rendered

possible for the first time, by means of the instrument described in

this chapter. The experiments herein narrated settle, to my mind, the

question of the nature of the human will; they prove it to be a definite

physical energy--as much so as any other energy we know. The majority of

these facts have been before the scientific world for some time; and why

their philosophic interpretation and implications have not been seen is

to me a great mystery. One can only account for it by assuming that most

scientists are not at the same time philosophers; they do not see the

full _meaning_ of the facts they observe. Only in this manner can one

account for the apathy with which the scientific world has, so far,

accepted the facts in question--why it has utterly failed to see their

tremendous philosophic and even religious value and significance.

My attention was first drawn to the instrument in question by Professor

Th. Flournoy, of Geneva, the author of _From India to the Planet Mars_,

_Spiritism and Psychology_, and other works, well known to English

readers. Immediately I learned of the experiments in question, I wrote

to Professor Alrutz, and obtained from him one of his instruments, by

means of which the experiments described below were performed. Writing

of the early results obtained by him, Professor Alrutz says ("Report to

the Sixth Congress of Psychology," etc.):

"In spite of the knowledge we have gained of the electrical and

chemical phenomena of the central nervous system, we must confess

that we know little indeed of the inner nature of the

psycho-physical processes. What is happening in the

brain--especially in the psycho-motor centres--when we move an arm

by means of an act of will? What are the forms of nervous energy

which are employed? Are these entirely electrical and chemical

forces, the neural impulses being mere electrical currents? Or are

there other forms of energy which experimental physiology has not

as yet brought to light? Might there not be, perhaps, some form of

energy more closely allied to the psychic acts, constituting a sort

of bridge or transition between psychic phenomena, on the one

hand, and electrical and chemical phenomena, on the other?

"When we wish to study the electrical charge contained in any body,

we obtain exactitude only when we succeed in transferring this

charge to another body; we may then study the nature of the charge

under varying circumstances, and establish the influence of the two

charges upon one another. It is only in this way that

experimentation becomes truly fertile. Should we not apply the same

laws to the phenomena of the nervous system, and institute a

similar mode of experiment for the nervous energies? Under what

conditions can we conceive this transference?

"The most natural supposition seems to be that it would occur, if

at all, in labile organizations; in those subjects which, according

to Janet (_Les Nevroses_, p. 339), possess an excessively unstable

personality; and whose psychic life is characterized by great

suggestibility, by instability, and a certain peculiar mobility.

Such individuals are also characterized by the great facility with

which the functions vary and react upon one another. Binswanger has

said that the nervous system of these individuals is characterized

by the variability of the dynamic cortical functions; that is to

say, by the fact that the nervous segments of their cerebral cortex

present a _melange_ of greater or lesser irritability...."[18]

Professor Alrutz goes on to say that, guided by this idea, he

constructed an instrument designed to test his theory--based in part,

but not wholly, upon the earlier instruments employed by Hare, Crookes,

etc., to test the same thing. As is well known, these experimenters

spent much time in their investigations--both of them coming to the

conclusion, after years of patient research, that physical apparatus

could be definitely influenced and moved by the will of certain persons,

when exercised in the direction of their movement, and without

sufficient contact to account for the observed facts. Crookes'

experiments, in particular, are very conclusive in this direction--his

apparatus being very similar to that designed by Professor Alrutz. He

employed a board, one end of which was attached to a spring balance,

while the other end of the board rested upon a solid table. The subject

placed his hands upon the board, and a definite pressure was registered

by the balance--far more than could be obtained in any normal manner.

These experiments of Crookes are classical, and have never been

"explained away." With the present instrument, there seems every

likelihood of confirming these earlier experiments.

The apparatus employed is of the simplest possible construction. A solid

board, some 10-1/2 by 13-1/2 inches, and 1 inch thick, forms the base of

the apparatus. In this, at a distance of some 6 inches, two holes are

drilled, into which are inserted pegs, 3-1/2 inches long, and sharpened

at their top edges to a fine knife-edge. This constitutes the

fulcrum--the upper board resting on these knife-edges, and being

unevenly balanced on them. (See Frontispiece.)

The upper board, resting on these edges, is some 19 inches long by 13

inches broad at the lower end, and 10 inches broad at the upper end. The

narrowing takes place about 6 inches from the end of the board (broad

end), in the form of a rapid inward curve. It is here that a groove is

cut, and, 7-1/2 inches from the broad end of the board, two pointed

grooves are also cut, which allow the board to rest nicely upon the

knife-edges of the two pegs below it. In this position the board would

naturally assume a downward slant, owing to the greater length of the

board on one side of the fulcrum than on the other. (See Frontispiece.)

When the long end of the board is supported, by means of a piece of

string, to a letter scale, however, the board is made to assume a

horizontal attitude, parallel to the table top. In this position the

board weighs just 5 ounces, and if the balance registers more than 5

ounces, it shows that a weight or pressure or force has been applied to

the long end of the board. If force be applied on the _short_ end of the

board (where the hands rest), it would have the effect of merely

depressing this end of the instrument, and causing a _lessening_ of

weight, as registered by the balance. This is noted invariably whenever

pressure of the hands is made upon the board near the sitter.

With this little instrument, Professor Alrutz tried a number of

experiments, on several occasions, which he divided into groups or

series. The history of his initial experiments is, as briefly as

possible, as follows:

_1st Series._--No results.

_2nd Series._--The board, after a short interval, lowered, showing a

pressure of 40 grammes. This was at the first trial. It descended

slowly, remaining at this point for about 5 seconds. It again descended

several times, making at one time a depression of 120 grammes. On

another occasion the board was depressed, and showed a pressure of 100

grammes, which lasted for 35 seconds. On other occasions lesser

depressions were noted, but for longer periods of time. On several

occasions the balance registered a downward pressure for two minutes or

more. This was in good light, and was carefully observed by two

physicians, as well as by Professor Alrutz. The "subjects" were, in this

case, ladies of good Swedish families, who had never seen or heard of

the instrument before. They were, however, during the experiments,

treated as professional "mediums," and every precaution was taken to

prevent fraud. The following were some of the precautions observed:

The light was sufficiently good to enable the observers to _see_ that no

threads or hairs were attached to the board or any part of the apparatus

or balance. They also ascertained this with their hands. It was also

seen that none of the subjects lifted the board by slipping their

fingers under the edges of the board and pulling it upwards. (It may be

remarked in this connection that even had they done so this would not

account for the results noted; since, in several instances, the downward

pressure recorded was more than the weight of the entire board.) As the

eyes of the observers were close to the board and to the fingers of the

subjects, it was clearly seen, however, that nothing of the sort took

place. Besides, as before said, the subjects who tried the board were

ladies, and not professional "psychics" in any sense of the word.

It was also ascertained that no sticky material was upon the fingers of

the subjects; they were carefully examined both before and after each

experiment. Further, to test this hypothesis fully, thin strips of wood

(shavings) were on several occasions introduced between the subjects'

fingers and the board, which was depressed. Had they lifted their

fingers, therefore, they could not possibly have lifted the board, which

would not have adhered to them under these circumstances.

_3rd Series._--Two "functionaries of state" attended this series, the

principal subject tried being the wife of one of these dignitaries. He

himself was extremely sceptical of his wife's ability to move the board,

and remained so until convinced by the facts! The board was lowered, and

the balance showed a pressure of from 70 to 100 grammes. The subject was

extremely fatigued after these tests, and went to sleep almost

immediately. Others who tried the board could obtain a registration of

only 2 or 3 grammes.

_4th Series._--Several very successful trials were made in this series

with two ladies as subjects. Both placed their hands on the board

together, and the depressions were of very long duration. In these

experiments sooted paper was placed under the hands of the

experimenters. It was noted that better results were obtained if one of

them cried "Now!" when the board was to be depressed. The desire to

sleep was strong after these trials, and in one instance the subject

really did fall asleep during the experiment! An odd fact which should

be noted in this connection is that no results were obtained unless the

subject _looked_ at the long end of the board while the "willing" was in

progress.

_5th Series._--This series of experiments was attended by a well-known

physician and a psychologist. The light was good as before. From 40 to

50 grammes were registered by the balance on several occasions, the

downward pressure lasting from 20 to 30 seconds. Clearly, therefore,

none of these depressions could be attributed to mere oscillations of

the board, but denoted a definite and persistent downward pressure.

Nausea and a strong desire for sleep were experienced by the subjects in

this series of experiments, as before.

The above is a very rapid summary of the report drawn up by Dr. Sydney

Alrutz, and read to the Sixth Psychological Congress, which met at

Geneva in August 1909. Professor Alrutz also attended the Congress in

person, and brought with him one of his instruments, which he desired to

try upon some of the members in the presence of a number of

psychologists. In several instances these attempts were entirely

successful; and Professor Flournoy, editor of the _Archives de

Psychologie_, was enabled to say of these experiments:

"Professor Alrutz invited me to assist in two seances, in which we

experimented upon some of the feminine members of the Congress who

desired to try it. The first, in which the subject was Mme. Glika,

yielded nothing conclusive. But at the second, at which Professor

Alrutz attempted to increase the force by adding two other members

of the Congress (strangers who had appeared to him to possess

suitable temperaments), it succeeded fully, and I was able to prove

conclusively after three trials, and under conditions precluding

all possibility of fraud or illusion, that the will of these

ladies, concentrated upon a certain material object with a desire

to produce a movement in it, ended by producing this movement as if

by means of a fluid or an invisible force obeying their mental

command." (_Spiritism and Psychology_, p. 291.)

So much for the testimony of Professor Flournoy and Professor Alrutz. In

view of the facts and the well-known caution of these investigators, we

may assuredly take it for granted that there is here no room for doubt,

and that the manifestations really took place as recorded.

My own experiments with this board have not, unfortunately, proved

nearly so conclusive as those of Professor Alrutz--owing, doubtless, to

the rarity of good "physical mediums" or those capable of exercising

their will in the desired manner. It must not be thought that any one

possessing a "strong will" can manipulate the board--as Professor Alrutz

has pointed out. It is only a peculiarly endowed person who can move the

board, one capable not only of exercising the necessary will power, but

also of externalising it--a very rare power. Hence the small number of

successes. Out of all those tried, I have found only two who could

(apparently) move the board at all, and even in their cases the results

were far less striking than in the cases reported by Professor Alrutz.

In one case a number of slight depressions were obtained; but these were

so fleeting, and lasted for so short a time, that it was almost

impossible to be certain that the results were not due to mere

oscillations of the board. In the second case, however, more definite

results were obtained. On several occasions, depressions of half an

ounce were noted; and, on two occasions, of more than an ounce, lasting

for several seconds. I was enabled to assure myself at the time that

these depressions were real, and were not the result of fraudulent

manipulation of the board. Although these results are few and meagre

compared with those of Professor Alrutz, still they tend to confirm his

views, and add to the testimony adduced by him and by Professor

Flournoy, in favour of the reality of the facts--of the actual physical

pressure by the Will upon the board in question.

In view of these results, then--of this apparently mutually confirmatory

testimony--it seems impossible to doubt the fact that we have here

definite and conclusive proof that the human will has succeeded in

depressing the board in question--in being registered upon the balance,

and, consequently, that it is a physical energy, capable of affecting

the material world just as any other physical energy does.