NOTE.—With regard to one or more of the psychic portraits taken
by Mr. Taylor on his own plates, in which he found that the
psychic image had not been formed by the lens at all, and with
regard to the important discovery made by Mr. Glendinning, in
a later experiment with his friend, the medium, it would be a
mistake to conclude that the psychic images on photographic
plates are always produced in this way. There are many spirit
photographs, regarding which all the evidence is in favour of
the theory that they are produced by the agency of the camera
at the same time as the sitters. With respect to one of the
pictures taken by Mr. Taylor, and shown by him on the lantern
screen, the sitter, after Mr. Taylor left the room to develop
the plate, stated to those present that there ought to be on
the plate a spirit form to his right and nearer the camera than
himself, as he felt “drapery like a robe of silky crape pass
him at the right side when the photograph was being taken.”
When Mr. Taylor appeared with the developed picture, it showed
a full-length female form, with a white robe, but no drapery
about the head or shoulders. The sitter further stated that,
during the exposure of the plate, his mind was occupied in
calculating some sums in arithmetic, so that the psychic form
could not be considered to be a photographic representation of
his thoughts.
PRESS NOTICES.
_From THE PRACTICAL PHOTOGRAPHER, April, 1893._[7]
Psychic Photography.—At a recent London and Provincial meeting, Mr. J.
Traill Taylor showed some negatives of what are commonly called “spirit
photographs,” which he had taken under test conditions. He had bought
ordinary commercial plates from a well-known commercial dealer, and
exposed them at a recent séance held in the north of London. He took
his own stereoscopic camera, opened the original packets of plates and
filled the slides himself in the presence of two gentlemen. He exposed
them by magnesium light upon two sitters, one of whom was alleged to be
a “medium,” and immediately developed them himself. On development some
of them showed other figures (in addition to those of the sitters) which
had not been visibly present when the exposure was made. The exposures
were made in the afternoon in an ordinary drawing-room, when it was far
from dark, and the magnesium light was supplementary to the daylight.
Prints from the resulting negatives, viewed in the stereoscope, showed
the sitters in relief, but the “ghosts” with the appearance of flatness.
We are almost surprised at Mr. Taylor’s temerity in bringing forward
such a subject before such an audience, when he knows full well the
unreasoning prejudice with which the subject is met. Like the brothers
of Dives, “they would not be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.”
We do not imagine that Mr. Taylor wished to convince his hearers of
anything, but surely he was over-sanguine if he even expected fair
investigation or criticism. Before he came forward in this matter, he
would have been taken as a competent investigator—in fact, the meeting
in question passed a resolution to the effect that he was a “reliable
person, and a gentleman well qualified to conduct such an experiment as
had been described.” Yet, when he states that fraud was impossible, he is
at once condemned as either an incompetent or an impostor—preferably the
former. A committee was appointed to investigate the matter. Will they be
believed if they give a report similar to that of Mr. Taylor’s? Or will
they only be believed if they give the report that is expected?
Referring to the unsuccessful attempt made in another photographic
journal to throw doubt upon Mr. Taylor’s experiments by raising a cry of
trickery, the _Practical Photographer_ makes this sensible observation:—
“Surely this is a miserable evasion of the main point at issue, which
is not whether the medium was capable of fraud if he got the chance, but
whether Mr. Taylor is believable when he asserts that the chance for
fraud was not given.”
In the May issue of the same journal there is the following:—
“Five correspondents write on this head; but they only bring forward
experiences of many years ago, references to the _News_ and _Journal_
of old dates, and similar evidence. The letters are interesting, but we
cannot find room for a correspondence on the subject. Of testimony there
is more than enough. Those who can be convinced by testimony are probably
convinced already, if they have examined the subject. If the matter is
to be advanced further, it must be by careful experiments under test
conditions, and such experiments will not satisfy the active objectors
unless they can be repeated to order, and, so far as we know, no one has
claimed to be able to do this. Only new tests, well authenticated, are of
use in our columns at present. Any such we are prepared to publish, with
reproduction of the alleged psychic photographs if desired.”
_THE REVIEW OF REVIEWS, April, 1893._
In the _Review of Reviews_[8] for April, there is a reproduction of one
of the spirit photographs taken by Mr. Traill Taylor, and also of the
portrait obtained by Mr. Glendinning and Mr. Duguid, without the use of
a camera, and without exposing the prepared dry plate to light until
after it was developed and fixed. Mr. Stead refers to Mr. Taylor as a
well-known photographic journalist, of unquestionable good faith, and
prints the details of the experiments as given in Mr. Taylor’s paper.
Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace, F.R.S., who has had much experience in this
subject, and possesses a large collection of spirit photographs, thinks
the most interesting results of the recent experiments are those in which
the form of one of the sitters is blended with the form of the psychic
portrait; but Mr. Stead thinks the portrait obtained without the camera
the most interesting. He concludes his article thus:—
“Mr. Glendinning assures me most positively that the plate had not been
tampered with. If so, it is to be hoped Mr. Duguid will repeat the last
experiment under test conditions. It is much the most interesting of the
lot.[9]
“The illustrations are badly developed, but they suffice to show that the
plate was sensitive to the presence of entities invisible to the human
eye. Everything, of course, depends upon the accuracy and honesty of the
photographer; and the reputation of Mr. Taylor and Mr. Glendinning is
above reproach.”
_From THE MORNING, April 4th, 1893._
The recent lecture on “Spirit Photography,” given by Mr. J. Traill
Taylor before a large audience, composed of the members of the London
and Provincial Photographic Association and their friends, is being much
talked about in photographic circles. Mr. Taylor, whose personal _bonâ
fides_ in the matter are admitted to be quite above suspicion, showed
upon an ordinary lantern screen the results which he had obtained.
The conditions under which the spirit experiments were conducted were
as follows:—Mr. Taylor used his own binocular stereoscopic camera,
and provided himself with unopened packages of “Ilford” dry plates,
purchased from dealers of repute. He exposed the plates by means of
magnesium ribbon in the presence of a medium. At the first attempt,
between the camera and the sitter a female figure was developed. On
several of the other plates exposed various figures were also discovered.
It was distinctly asserted by Mr. Taylor that none of these were visible
to him at any time during the exposure in the camera, and he vouched that
no one had the slightest opportunity of tampering with the plates before
they were placed in the dark slide or immediately preceding development.
_From THE MEDIUM AND DAYBREAK, March 24th, 1893._[10]
THE EXPERIMENTS IN SPIRIT PHOTOGRAPHY.—We call attention to certain
important points in Mr. Taylor’s paper and the remarks which follow it.
The first consideration is, that nothing should be jumped at as fraud,
though it may appear to be so. Mr. Taylor has taken a strong, manly
position in exhibiting photographs which have all the appearance of being
spurious, and yet he knows they are not so. A man in a position less
eminent could not afford to be so bold. Mr. Glendinning dwells on this
feature of the investigation in an excellent manner.
The photograph obtained without exposure at all, described at the close
of the report, suggests a means of producing pictures quite unknown to
science or photographic art. It, in its way, resembles the direct writing
on closed slates, or on unopened packets of paper. But on carefully
examining Mr. Taylor’s negatives it appears as if the spirit figures had
not been cut out and stuck on, but there is a blending of the one picture
with the other, showing plainly that a different mode of operation was at
work.
We have often observed in our lectures that the nature of the image
differs in the pictures of every spirit photographer. Evidently the
photographers on the other side have taken up Mr. Taylor’s challenge
to investigate in a very serious manner, and have shown some of their
skill to set the brains of mortal photographers on the alert for a more
comprehensive knowledge of the possibilities involved in their art.
Let this thought dwell in the mind of every reader, that many of the
so-called “frauds” attributed to spiritual experiment have not been
frauds at all, but the hasty conclusions of that unworthy suspicion
which is begotten of ignorance. Such conclusions bring the subject to a
standstill, whereas a tentative and trustful investigation would lead to
most important discoveries. We rejoice to see the healthy direction which
the present experiments have taken.
_From LIGHT, March 18th, 1893._[11]
We invite the special attention of our readers to a report in our
present issue, of experiments in “Psychic Photography,” conducted by
Mr. J. Traill Taylor. Never before, so far as we are aware, has the
investigation of this, one of the most interesting of Spiritualistic
phenomena, been undertaken by a man so competent in every way for
the work, enjoying, as he does, a high reputation for his scientific
attainments in his own special department, and for his powers of keen and
careful observation. Using his own camera and plates, and conducting the
operations with his own hands, he succeeded in photographing figures,
“not one of which,” he avers, “had been visible in any form or shape
during the time of exposure in the camera.” But more than this, by
observing the results on the occasion when a stereoscopic camera was
employed, he arrived at the conclusion that—as some Spiritualists have
long thought to be probable—the figure developed had not been formed by
the lens, and the psychic image might be produced without the camera at
all. It will be interesting to observe what Mr. Taylor’s photographic
brethren will have to say to him; for ourselves we tender him our hearty
thanks.
_From LIGHT, March 25th, 1893._
The importance of this address can scarcely be exaggerated, and for two
reasons,—one, that we have a scientific photographer, of the first rank,
treating the subject publicly before a body of men, the majority of whom
would, presumably, be at least sceptical; and, next, that in the address
there were advanced certain speculations which may not only help to the
elucidation of the means whereby such photographs are produced, but also
throw light upon the great problem of Spiritualism itself.
Of the experiments which have been already described we have nothing
to say, except that, unless fraud be admitted as having been possible,
figures were produced on the plates which could only have got there in
some abnormal way. Fraud, however, seems to have been about as impossible
as it could be under any circumstances whatever. Mr. Taylor used his own
camera. The plates were bought from dealers of repute, and the parcel
was opened in view of two witnesses, witnesses above suspicion. Mr.
Taylor insisted that he should keep the plates in his own hands until
after development, and this caution he relaxed only so far as getting
one of those present to lift out from the dark slide the exposed plate
and transfer it to the developing dish held by himself, or to transfer
a plate from the manufacturer’s package into the dark slide held by his
own hand. Unless, therefore, there had been connivance on the part of
the “dealers of repute” who supplied the plates, which is out of the
question, or the persons present were all of them leagued together to
cheat, we are forced to the conclusion that the results were genuine....
A few more words must be given to Mr. Traill Taylor. The importance of
his lectures has been dealt with elsewhere, but it can bear emphasising
here. Facts, or what appear to be facts, we have in plenty, but the
explanation of these facts, except theoretically, is not so common.
Anything which sheds even the faintest glimmer on the meaning of these
facts is supremely welcome, and this glimmer, or more than glimmer, Mr.
Taylor has produced. It will be strange if that “fluorescence” which has
been so relied upon for the general theory of fraud should turn out to be
the means of demonstrating the opposite.
_From LIGHT, May 6th, 1893._
It was not to be expected that Mr. Traill Taylor’s photographs would be
left unchallenged. But as it is impossible to impute fraud to Mr. Taylor
or his associates, the objectors are thrown back on somewhat flimsy
arguments. A letter to the _Christian World_ may perhaps be taken fairly
well to represent the kind of argument. The letter is signed “F. Gass.”
Of course we know that fraudulent spirit photographs have been
plentifully sold, but because there is a large amount of falsehood in
the world it does not follow that there is no truth. But let us see how
Mr. Taylor is treated by this critic: “Mr. Taylor says these forms were
invisible to watchers in the room, and were, therefore, disembodied
spirits.”
There is no such “therefore” in Mr. Taylor’s address. What he did say
was: “In the foregoing I have confined myself as closely as possible to
narrating how I conducted a photographic experiment open to every one to
make, avoiding stating any hypothesis or belief of my own on the subject
generally.”
The writer takes exception to Mr. Taylor’s statement that the figures
when examined by the stereoscope were absolutely flat; because “the
figures were solid enough to obscure a view of the sitting medium when
they stood between him and the camera.” That is, Mr. Gass knows all about
solidity, and what could or could not be done by what Mr. Taylor is
careful to call a “psychic entity.” That there is any appearance of light
and shade in the engraving as it is in the _Review of Reviews_ proves
nothing; even if it is there, we have Mr. Taylor’s assertion that in
the photograph he examined with the stereoscope the “psychic figure was
absolutely flat.” As to the nonsense about the clothing of the figures
and the draper’s shops in Ghost-land we have nothing to say. Mr. Gass
then falls foul of photographs being taken without the employment of a
lens. Such a thing would be a miracle. So Mr. Gass knows what a miracle
is. “To obtain a portrait on a plate, light is imperatively necessary,
and to obtain an image of a figure it must be brought into focus by the
lens of a camera.” Of course, if these things “must” be so, there is an
end of the matter, but the experiment went to disprove the necessity
of this “must.” And what is “light”? Has Mr. Gass any knowledge of the
spectrum, and could he himself “see” the actinic rays which produce the
pictures on the sensitised plate?
_From the “TWO WORLDS” March 24th, 1893._[12]
Mr. Taylor is, perhaps, the most competent and reputable man who,
as an experienced and scientific photographer, has undertaken such
experiments, hence his testimony is all the more valuable. The medium was
Mr. David Duguid, and the results are of great importance.
Mr. A. Glendinning, who brought about the sittings, deserves the thanks
of all Spiritualists.
GHOSTS AND THEIR PHOTOGRAPHS.[13]
_By_ THE REV. H. R. HAWEIS, M.A.
“I suppose there is nothing more difficult than for scientific
people to realise that the dead are living.”—Rev. H. R. HAWEIS,
M.A.
Ever since the appearance of the more than sensational “Real Ghost
Stories” and “More Ghost Stories”—which are, like the ghosts, still
appearing—a great and calm tolerance of the occult made manifest seems
to have diffused itself throughout English society. People are bringing
out their own private little bogey stories, of which they used to be
quite ashamed, and, what is more curious, they are bringing out their
bogey photos, both of which things reveal the fact how many more ghost
stories and ghost photos are about than people seem generally to have
imagined. Only the other day I was told of a young lady who went down
to Brighton to an ordinary photographer. She sat as an ordinary sitter,
suspecting nothing. The plate came out blurred all over; photographer
surprised, and on point of casting plate aside, when sitter begs to see
it, and further begs to have it printed off. Result—photo blurred all
over, sitter unrecognisable; when subjected to high magnifyer, milky way
of blue reveals innumerable faces, but all the same face! Recognised by
young lady at once as face of dead lover. This is the kind of story which
is becoming tiresomely common, and often bewilderingly well evidenced.
Now, unless I had thought this question of alleged appearances—palpable
enough to be seen, perhaps photographed—might have a grave side to it,
I should not have for two Sundays rung the changes, and the _pros_ and
_cons._ in the pulpit, and pointed out the momentous connexion between
such manifestations and our interests here and hereafter. People seemed
much impressed with this view. The fact is that every time I announced
the subject at St. James’s, Westmoreland Street, Marylebone, crowds were
unable to get seats, and I was in a way compelled to resume the topic
next Sunday, while thousands struggled in vain to get into my tolerably
spacious vestry after the sermon to catch glimpses of the selected photos
and spirit drawings there exposed to view. Well, this shows, I suppose,
that I had, if possible, under-estimated the toleration which I solicited
for this dubious subject, but which I hardly expected to win.
_“WILL YOU SHOW ME THE GHOST?”_
The physical philosopher (and we are all physical philosophers, whatever
else we may be) naturally asks, when he is told that this or that person
has seen a ghost, “Will you show me the ghost?” Sometimes he is informed
that if he sleeps in the haunted room he will be quite satisfied.
Sometimes he does, and isn’t—sometimes he does, and _is_; when he _is_,
like a wise man he is apt to keep what he has seen (as Johnson said
every man did his religion) to himself. Perhaps he may have been in
the habit of laughing at ghosts and sneering at people who believed in
them, and doesn’t want to eat his own words. Perhaps he resembles the
man who said “he did not believe in ghosts, but was very much afraid of
them;” or, perhaps, he had no taste, after making a full confession about
what he may have seen, for the retort courteous, that he was probably
a fool or a liar—or both. Anyhow, the physical philosopher might next
inquire, Did several people see the ghost at once, or independently at
different times? Is there reason—that is to say—to suppose the ghost was
really an objective (external to the spectator) or merely a subjective
hallucination? A very reasonable inquiry. “Photograph me a ghost;
chemicals have no fancies, plates don’t get nervous, and lenses tell no
lies!” Good. So we proceed to get a medium into the studio; we photograph
away, and a ghost comes out behind the medium!
“Ah! but did you examine the plate before it was slipped in?”
“No.”
“Then the plate was cooked; the ghost was already on it.”
“Try again.” This time you bring your own plate; but again comes a ghost.
“Ah! but did you change the screen behind you—shift it, or put your own
screen?”
“No.”
“Well, the ghost was in chemicals on the screen.”
So next time you remove the photographer’s screen, and put your own, and
bring your own plate, too; but again comes a ghost.
“Ah! but did you examine the inside of the camera? Did you watch the
developing process? Did you watch your plate from beginning to end? Nay,
did you spy everything—windows, &c.—outside thoroughly? A ghost might be
shot on to the exposed camera. Did you allow any one to dress up in a
sheet behind you, and do the partial exposure trick?”
Well, next time you take every precaution, and if still you get a ghost,
“that gives to reflect,” as the French say; so let us reflect a little.
_“AUTHENTIC” GHOST PHOTOS._
The most authentic ghost photos are the hardest to get hold of. They
are in the hands of private amateur photographers, who are shy of
lending or showing them because they are shy of being accused of fraud
or folly; besides, to them these photos are often sacred, or they seem
to portray the features of the beloved dead. I believe Mr. Crookes,
F.R.S., one of the greatest scientists living—the renowned inventor of
the radiometer—has obtained spirit photos of a materialised form that
appeared apart from the medium, and moved about the room freely while a
continuous current of electricity was being passed through the entranced
medium, so that she could not move without betraying the motion. But,
like the wise man he is, Mr. Crookes, after having tasted the quality of
scientific bigotry, and already suffered somewhat for his ardour in the
pursuit of unpopular and novel truth—Mr. Crookes, I say, keeps certain
experiences, together with his abnormal photos, to himself, and will not
now even show them. It is of no importance to him what those who do not
and cannot know the facts think about them. They belong to his laboratory
work. Why should he bother himself with a crowd of outsiders? Of course,
no spirit photo, of itself, can bear conviction, nor is it possible to
produce about it in a journal any evidence that will. The two spirit
photos I have been prevailed upon to allow the Editor of the _Daily
Graphic_ to use with this open letter are, nevertheless, of considerable
interest. (1) The lady seated went with her daughter. She did not tell
the photographer who was in her thoughts. She thought of and longed for
her father to appear. She did not even tell her daughter or any one else
the mental test. She thought that her father should appear wearing a
peculiar black cap which he commonly used during the last days of his
illness. That test was never revealed before the plate was developed; but
it was answered, as may be seen in the photo (see opposite); the features
also are too marked to allow of any doubt.
[Illustration: LADY AND THE SPIRIT OF HER FATHER.
(_Lent by the Editor of “The Daily Graphic.”_)]
_THE LATE EDITOR OF “LIGHT.”_