There were four experimental tests made this day, the same when the
remarkable case of spontaneous telepathy occurred, in which Mrs.
Sinclair sensed that her husband was reading about flowers and described
them by drawings and script (p. 30).
In the 1st, Mr. Sinclair drew a fire hydrant (Fig. 74); Mrs. Sinclair
drew as in Figure 74a. This was certainly a partial success, as the
drawings compare. And for aught we know it may in fact have been a still
better success, since Mr. Sinclair in looking at his drawing may well
have imagined water bursting forth from the spout of the hydrant. Oddly,
Mrs. Sinclair first wrote “Peafowl,” and then drew what had nothing to
do with a peafowl. This is one of the many cases where it seems as
though Mrs. Sinclair had glimpses ahead in a series.
For the agent’s second drawing _was_ a peacock (Fig. 75). And the
percipient not only said “peafowl again,” which constitutes a complete
success, but she also drew what it seems likely are impressions of the
peacock’s long neck and of the “eyes” or spots of his wings (Fig. 75a).
The agent’s third drawing was of an hourglass, with sand running from
its upper to its lower part (Fig. 133). The resemblance in shape of the
percipient’s tree (Fig. 133a) to the upper half of the hourglass is
evident, its trunk may represent the slender line of flowing sand, and
“white” sand is placed relatively like the sand in the lower part of the
hourglass. The percipient’s results seem to be partly from the lines of
the original drawing, but also from Mr. Sinclair’s thoughts about the
sand.
Mr. Sinclair’s fourth drawing represents an animal (dog?) running after
a ball attached to a string (Fig. 9). Mrs. Sinclair’s drawing shows (a)
an animal, (b) also running, (c) in the same direction, (d) having a
short tail as in the original, (e) the tail represented by two diverging
lines, (f) a line extending from its nose, but touching the nose, while
there is a space between in the original, (g) the line running left and
at about the same angle from the horizontal. Besides the script which
appears in the cut (Fig. 9a) Mrs. Sinclair wrote “Long thing like rope
flung out in front of him.”
I should say that the addition of that “rope” drawn in front of the
animal at that angle made chance guessing of the combination at least
ten times as unlikely, and, on the basis of my hundreds of experiments
in guessing, I should not _expect_ in ten thousand such experiments on
the basis of the same original drawing one reproduction as good in the
summation of its correspondences.