■^
' -«.., ...
%. .-
,.#
%
-
.viT.!
-n
<
m
33
..y
o
<ril30N,
^ c^
\V
CO
iliv^^ ,ii^' '''"J
m -n Q^ — '
r^
c?
^^'
.xn:^
i
zm:
^
lYO/:
%
^
r-r*
so
■f'FO/?^.
J J CD
'^"^S/A
'Jr
^
.^WEUNP
.^WEUNiVERi-//,
r ,
<S "^
o
>- <
!5o
== -1
5-
CI
. ■ .
r-n
^
5"
#
C
r-*-
>[13WV
■^
I r r' t t I r /"'i rv
IfVj-dO
^>
^
\WEl!NIVERV/^,
^MEUNiVER%
ji-
■'J 13 jm JU I
'YQ/r,
-^
^(>
~
21
iO^
«>
C5 Oc
V
K 2 i
,1 I r 1 1 Lii\ Tiwr ,
THE EVIDENCE FOR
COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Demy 8vo. Cloth 8/6 net.
THE NEWER SPIRITUALISM
By Frank Podmore.
" Sums up the results of his prolonged inquires on the
subject of spiritualism. . . . Mr. Podmore, at any rate,
seems to have summed up the existing evidence in
the most critical, and at the same time, open-handed
manner." — Daily News.
"Here Mr. Podmore is at his best: sane, clear, and
wonderfully acute." — Morning Leader.
" We are greatly indebted to Mr. Podmore for this
clear, critical, and dispassionate survey of the whole
question. " — Inquirer.
LONDON :
T. FISHER UNWIN
THE EVIDENCE FOR
COMMUNICATION
WITH THE DEAD
BY
MRS. ANNA HUDE, PH.D.
T. FISHER UNWIN
LONDON: ADELPHI TERRACE
LEIPSIC: INSELSTRASSE 20
First published in 1 9 1 3 .
[All rights reserved.]
BF
The quotations in this book from the Proceedings of
the Society for Psychical Research are made by permission,
but it is of course to be understood that for all interpre-
tations and discussion of matter borrowed from the
Proceedings — that is, for everything beyond the actual
quotations — the author alone is responsible.
To the above statement I want to add my warmest
thanks to the leaders of the Society. If I have been
obliged to disagree with some of their opinions, this fact
has not diminished my deep esteem for their great and
noble work.
No less do I desire to thank the leader of the American
Society for Psychical Research, Professor James Hyslop,
who is indeed, as he has been called, the apostolic
successor of that prominent researcher and untiring
worker. Dr. Richard Hodgson, whose name will appear
very often in the following pages.
A. H.
CONTENTS
SECTION I
The Supernormal Powers of Man
CHAP. PAGE
I. THE ARGUMENT OF PROFESSOR FLOURNOY . . I
II. TELEPATHY ........ l6
III. CLAIRVOYANCE ....... 30
SECTION II
The Automatic Writing of Mrs. Verrall
IV, introduction, dr. verrall's experiment . 46
V. the symposium incident ..... 59
VI. cross-correspondences with MRS. FORBES . . 74
VII. PSYCHOMETRY AND PREVISION .... 85
VIII. CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES WITH MRS. PIPER . . 95
SECTION III
The Automatic Writing of Mrs. Holland
ix. spontaneous writing. ..... loi
x. the beginning of experiments . . . . i24
xi, cross-correspondences ..... i46
SECTION IV
The Mediumism of Mrs. Piper, I. The Phinuit
Period
y
XII. PHINUIT . . . . . . . .172
XIII. GEORGE PELHAM ....... I99
• • •
HI
CONTENTS
SECTION V
The Mediumism of Mrs. Piper.
II. The New
Regime
CHAP.
PAGE
XIV.
the hyslop sittings ,
.
223
XV.
THE JUNOT SITTINGS .
\
.
251
XVI.
THE HODGSON-CONTROL
• • •
267
SECTION VI
The Mediumism of Mrs. Piper. III. Experiments
XVII. cross-correspondences .....
XVIII. OTHER EXPERIMENTS ......
274
SECTION VII
Conclusion. New Mediums
XIX. conclusion
XX. NEW MEDIUMS
333
341
INDEX
349
N
The Evidence for
Communication with the Dead.
SECTION I
The Supernormal Powers of Man
CHAPTER I
THE ARGUMENT OF PROFESSOR FLOURNOY
With regard to the problem which is the subject of the
present book, the world of to-day stands divided into two
sharply defined factions. There are those who feel
convinced that a communication with the dead exists,
and those who — if they have given a thought to the matter
at all — consider it all but insane to assume such a com-
munication. The former group consists of the believing
spiritualists, who without much criticism accept most
things that purport to be messages from the departed ;
but it includes withal men and women who regard
psychical research as a science, and cultivate it in a
scientific manner. Of the latter and much larger group,
it may on the whole be said that its members know little
or nothing about the question ; as a rule, those who have
occupied themselves with it have left the standpoint
described above. After a thorough and honest study of
the subject, only a very few have maintained their
original opinion.
Among these few is M. Theodore Flournoy, Professor of
Psychology at the University of Geneva, perhaps the
CD. B
2 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
most important adversary of the spiritistic conclusion.
His scientific training, his eloquent language, and his
conspicuous fairness in discussion, combine to make his
treatment of the problem very valuable ; his works have
justly gained a world-wide reputation, and no psychical
student can omit pa3ang attention to them. I propose,
therefore, to commence my investigation of the question
with a revieV of his results.
Professor Floumoy's great merit is above all to have,
with respect to a large category of mediumistic communi-
cations, made out in a clear and convincing manner that
the source from which they proceed is to be found in the
medium's own self. Imagination, that power to create
figures and make up stories which all of us possess in a
degree, and which in the partially or entirely entranced
medium may assume vast proportions, is one factor ;
cryptomnesia, that emergence of forgotten memories
which we know from our dream-life, the other. In the
opinion of Professor Flournoy, they together explain so
completely the mediumistic utterances, that at any rate
with regard to those mediums whom he has himself
studied, nothing remains in support of other theories.
For this assertion, Professor Flournoy has produced
interesting evidence in his famous book From India to the
Planet Mars ; afterwards he has in the work Spirits and
Mediums ^ in divers ways strengthened the proof. What
the subconscious imagination of the medium Helen Smith
(pseudonym) was capable of inventing is already shown
in the title of the former book, which is consecrated solely
to her. It made her believe herself to be a reincarnation,
now of the queen of France, Marie Antoinette, now of an
Indian princess from the fifteenth century ; it transported
her to the planet Mars, and made her give detailed
descriptions, nay drawings, of the wonderful things she
saw there, and the human beings she met with. For the
planetarians resembled, strange to tell, the inhabitants of
' Esprits et Mediums, translated into English by Hereward Car-
rington under the title of Spiritism and Psychology.
ARGUMENT OF PROFESSOR FLOURNOY 3
this earth, and their language, of which she furnished
many examples, certainly consisted of odd words, but its
construction corresponded most accurately to the con-
struction of her own mother-tongue, French. The
Martian vocables translated one by one the French words.
Monsieur, Madame and Mademoiselle, were called metiche,
medachc, and metaganiche, and so on. The similitude
was so great that even the connecting t had its equivalent
— also when it was quite superfluous.
In a romance like this, it was not very difficult to
recognize a purely subliminal product, even if it required
a scientific mind like Professor Flournoy's to trace it back
to its source, and make clear the process that had produced
it. In Spirits and Mediums, however, the author has got
to deal with communications of a more ordinary type,
and in no wise does he disregard the difficulty of furnishing
an absolutely satisfactory proof of their origin. It is, in
fact, not only necessary to show that their contents may
have been derived from the medium, but that they cannot
have come from any other source. It is true that their
banality is often so great that all doubt must disappear.
For instance, on the occasion of the coming to Geneva of
a famous spiritualist, the great reformer Calvin introduced
himself with the following tirade :
" Yes, it is indeed the reformer of Geneva who is here. I am
pierced with pain at seeing what has become of the Huguenot
faith among the greater portion of my fellow-citizens. But
I see help coming, and I beseech you to seize it. It is cleri-
calism that has corrupted the masses, it is for the spiritualists
to repair the evil ! It is no easy thing, I know, to transform
suddenly the foundations of moral and religious life ; but even
if one's whole Hfe must be devoted to it, and all dreamed of
happiness must be sacrificed, it is the duty of all believers to
make the light penetrate as far as possible."
In the same manner it fared with the contemporary
celebrities of Geneva, when they departed this life. They
invariably came into new existence through the trance-
performances of one or more mediums, but always,
B 2
4 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Professor Floiirnoy states, these manifestations corre-
sponded to the medium's idea of the deceased persons,
and not to the image which he himself had of their
personahty. With crude colours was depicted the famous
corypheus of materialism, Carl Vogt, arriving to tell of
his death and his surprise at being still alive.
((
What ! Vogt, the sceptic who had believed himself to be
brain and nerves only ! And he lives, he thinks, he acts,
without the instrumentaUty of these things ! Woe, woe to
me ! To believe oneself competent in such a matter and to
have deceived oneself so grossly ! My poor head will jump
off ! "
And when shortly afterwards the old physiologist
Schiff, who when Professor Flournoy saw him in his
laboratory was always original, piquant, and full of
philosophical ideas, manifested through the same medium,
his speech consisted only of platitudes, after the style of
Vogt.
Here, then, the contents of the communications speak
for themselves, because the incongruity between the
alleged communicators and the utterances ascribed to
them is too evident. But of course there are cases where
this criterion fails. Professor Flournoy, however, con-
tends that when, with regard to a number of typical
" messages," he can show the impossibility of their
emanating from any other source than the medium, he
must be right in maintaining this simple explanation also
where their origin is less clear. He reproduces, therefore,
with special satisfaction, a series of messages which cannot
be assigned to the apparent communicator because this
person is still alive. A most characteristic case is that
of Mme. Dupond, a learned and highly educated lady,
who at the age of forty-five became interested in spiritism.
She read Allan Kardec, etc., and tried automatic writing
with some success. She had a friend, M. Rodolphe, a
young Frenchman, who to her great regret had recently
entered into a religious order in Italy. A few days after
ARGUMENT OF PROFESSOR FLOURNOY 5
she had obtained her first script, on April 24th, 1881, her
hand wrote as follows :
" I am Rodolphe ; I died at 11 o'clock last night, on
April 23rd. You must believe what I tell you. I am happ}',
I have ended my troubles. I have been sick for some days,
and I could not write. I had a haemorrhage of the lungs,
caused by a cold, which came suddenly. I died without
suffering, and I have thought much of you. I have left orders
as to your letters. I died at X., far from dom Bruno . . .
Your father brought me to you ; I did not know we could
communicate thus ; it makes me very happy ... A httle
before my death I called the director of the Oratory to me ;
gave him your letters, begging him to return them to you ;
he wil] do so. After communion I begged to see my colleagues,
and said good-bye to them ; I was peaceful ; I did not suffer ;
but hfe gradually became extinct. The passage of death
resembled that of sleep. I awakened near God, near parents
and friends ; it was beautiful, wonderful ; I was happy and
free. I have thought at once of those who loved me, and I
should have hked to speak to them, but I can only com-
municate with you. I remain with you, and I see you, but I
only notice your spirit ... I am devoted to you. Do not
fear that I love you less because I am no longer on earth ; it
is the reverse. I am in space, I see your parents, and I love
them also. Adieu ; I am going to pray for you ... I am no
longer Catholic ; I am Christian."
This first message was followed by others — until Mme.
Dupond, on April 30th, received a letter from Rodolphe
who, far from being dead, was in perfect health.
Professor Flournoy has with much fineness unravelled
the causes of Mme. Dupond's subliminal romance about
her young friend. She had met him in Italy, where he
was passing the winter on account of his health. They
had talked together about spiritual subjects, and Mme.
Dupond, who was a Protestant, nad wanted to convert
him to her own faith ; but instead of this she found that
the influence exercised over him by an Italian preacher,
the Father dom Bruno, prevailed over her own, and that
he became associated with a religious order under the
direction of this father. Now she expected a letter from
him ; it did not arrive, and a sudden fall in the tempera-
ture that followed a warm spell of spring might well make
6 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
her fear for him whose health was so delicate. Such is
the background of her n^mancc about his death ; perhaps,
in the depth of her soul she would have preferred to know
him dead rather than living with dom Bruno ; the remark
that he died far from this prelate suggests such a feeling.
His death made everything right ; he was happy and loved
her even more; than before ; he was no longer Catholic,
he was Christian. There is, in fact, as regards the sub-
stance, not much difference between Mme. Dupond's
automatic production and those day-dreams which many
people dream awake, though of course the process is more
alike to real dreaming. ^
Two other cases were communicated to Professor
Flournoy by the medium Mme. Zora. One referred to a
very old lady, Adrienne B., whom she had known in the
small town of Delemont, where she had resided at the time
before her marriage, and celebrated her wedding. Mme.
Zora's husband had gone to live in the tropics, and the
anxious wife had received, through another psychic, a
message which stated that he was dead. Probably, then,
her thoughts often went back to Delemont, and to that
period when she used to see Adrienne B. ; this lady was
at that time, sixteen years before, eighty years of age ;
thus it was natural that Mme. Zora more or less consciously
believed her to be no longer among the living.
Under these circumstances she one day automatically
wrote as follows :
" My very dear friend, for the first time I come to visit you ;
I shall be glad to talk with you if you will permit me to do so.
You have not yet recognized me, which surprises me ; it is
not so many years since I saw you, and you were very amiable
and full of reminiscences. It is eleven years since you paid
me a visit, and you have not been at Delemont since, so I have
not had the pleasure of speaking to you for a long time. It is
already some time since I pas^:ed away, and it is only to-day
that I learn that you are permitted to keep up the relationship
with this side of the grave ; I am very glad that you enjoy
this privilege, you deserve it, and I am also glad for my own
sake. You will tell me if you too have kept the memory of our
good little moments in the Rue du Midi, and of the last visit
ARGUMENT OF PROFESSOR FLOURNOY 7
I paid you at Moutiers ; it is already long ago, it was in 1871.
I believe that I remember rightly though it is not easy here,
nor yet on account of my great age ^ Good-bye, my dear
friend, it will be a pleasure to me to return some time. Your
old friend — Adrienne B."
Though Mme. Adrienne B. was at this time ninety-six
years of age, she did not die until two months after the
production of Mme. Zora's script. The latter was at
Delemont the day after her death and was told about it.
Without this coincidence she would have continued to
regard the old lady as the author of the script. This being
impossible, she believed that a deceiving spirit had made
use of her hand. That such a one should be cognizant of
the petty details upon which the message is based, and
which were all to be found in her own memory, does not
seem to have caused her any astonishment.
In the second case sent by Mme. Zora the cause of the
" message " was very evident. The automatist knew
that the alleged communicator, Mme. Leblanc, was dying,
and it was a lady whom she had very earnestly tried to
convert to spiritism, without success. While her mind
was filled with sad thoughts about her, one morning she
was seized with a strong desire to write. She took a
pencil, which immediately wrote the following lines :
" Yes, I am she of whom you thought. You were right.
You spoke truly. I did not dare to believe it, and behold, I am
here ! Glory be to our Father whom you love and whom you
glorify in your soul and in these pages . . . Yes, I am here,
happy to be so, to tell you that in spite of my great desire to
believe it, I had to experience it myself — to touch with the
finger, to put my hand in the side. I have not forgotten our
first meeting, and I have come to say ' Amen ' with you to all
the desires of your hearts, to all your experiences ... A. L."
Evidently the script represents the feelings which the
medium must imagine to be those of her sceptical friend
when she learned after death that spiritism had told the
truth, and no particle more. And yet Mme. Zora, when it
^ Omissions by the present author are indicated by dashes ; otherwise
by dots.
8 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
was ascertained that Mme. Leblanc had Hved forty-eight
hours after the production of the message, could not be per-
suaded to accept the theory of Professor Flournoy ; she
does not in this case seem to have felt certain that a
deceiving spirit had amused itself at her cost, but she
preferred to remain without explanation rather than
believe that she herself had been the unconscious author
of the communication.
In spite of their triteness I have given these " messages "
all but unabridged, because longwindedness is one of
their chief characteristics. In all of them, however, the
subconscious mind had shown a faculty of composing
which had at least imposed upon the waking sensitive.
And yet we have only reached the first stage of its
capability. We have as yet encountered nothing but
pure construction, founded upon details which the
mediums knew normally ; we have found no knowledge
which they could not recognize, and, therefore, with some
reason must ascribe to external beings. The next stage
is the one where such a knowledge supervenes ; a know-
ledge, however, which on closer examination turns out to
be, nevertheless,- that of the mediums themselves, though
it has been so completely lost by their waking conscious-
ness that they generally do not even recollect it when
reminded of it. We meet here the phenomenon called
cryptomnesia, hidden memory — that is, a memory which
exists only in the subconsciousness, and can only through
automatic speech or script, and the like, be made accessible
for other people and for the normal medium.
It is, as accentuated by Professor Flournoy, of course
extremely difficult to prove this purely subjective origin
of the mediumistic communications when they refer to
matters whose connection with the medium is hidden or
improbable. It is necessary to know the individuality of
the mediums, their past, their family, their acquaintances,
their reading and other occupations, in order to be able to
judge in some measure of " the contents of their bag."
ARGUMENT OF PROFESSOR FLOURNOY 9
Therefore Professor Flournoy has himself preferred to
confine his studies to the psycliics hving in Geneva, whose
relations he might have some hope of unravelling. And
here, as with regard to pure fabrication, he insists on his
right to apply the results of a few thoroughly analyzed
cases to the many similar ones which, on account of the
circumstances, it is less easy to dissect.
It is more specially in the book From India to the Planet
Mars that he has given us the result of a few analyses of
this kind. An interesting instance is his demonstration
of the origin of Helen Smith's statements about certain
deceased members of his own family. The medium was
in a semi-trance, communicating what she saw or heard
partly orally, partly by means of table-tippings. As a
typical case Professor Flournoy reports his very first
sitting with her, in 1894 ; at the time it caused him great
astonishment, as it was inconceivable to him how she
could be cognizant of things which had occurred even
before his own birth. His record is, slightly abridged, as
follows :
The medium describes that she sees two women, rather
handsome, dark, both of them in wedding-dress. " This
refers to you, M. Flournoy," she exclaims. They wear white
flowers in their hair, which is black ; they have dark eyes.
There is a certain resemblance between them. One of them
appears in two forms, in one she is young, about twenty-five
years of age, and dressed as described ; in the other radiant,
far away [i.e., dead], surrounded by a number of handsome
children, happy. The two women are going to be married.
The medium hears a name : "An . . An . . Dan . . Ran . .
Dandi . . Dandiran ! " Professor Flournoy asks to whom of
the two women the name refers. Answer : To her who had
two forms. The medium does not see the other so clearly, but
suddenly discerns a big man by her side. And the table
dictates : "I am her sister. We will return."
All this. Professor Flournoy says, is founded on the
fact that his mother and her sister were married on the
same day, in 1853, and that the latter, Mme. Dandiran,
died young and childless. The description " a big man "
fits his father. In five more sittings with Professor
10 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Flournoy, Helen Smith produced information concerning
his mother's family ; beyond that, however, her know-
ledge did not seem to reach. This for one thing is a proof
of her honesty ; she might easily have informed herself
of his father's or his wife's family relations. Moreover,
the case presented the pecuHarity that the medium, after
the first six sittings, never once in the course of five years
during whigh Professor Flournoy attended her seances
reverted to these circumstances. It was as if her first
contact with the new sitter had called latent memories to
the surface, and the subHminal " bag " had at once
exhausted its supply. Everything suggested that the
medium had at some time learned something about his
mother's family, the Claparedes, and at last he succeeded
in elucidating the matter. On apphcation to the former
husband of his long since departed aunt, Professor
Dandiran, at Lausanne, who was the one living member
of that generation of Professor Flournoy's family, he
obtained the following information :
" I recollect that my mother and aunt, especially the latter,
were much interested in a young woman of that name [Smith]
whom they had already known and employed as a seamstress
before her marriage I also believe that their interest
in the young woman made them introduce her to the
ClaparMes ."
Not until he had received this answer, Professor
Flournoy addressed himself to Helen Smith's mother,
who was most willing to reply to his questions about her
relation to his mother and aunt. Helen herself did not
remember to have ever heard anything about them. All
her statements, however, referred to two separate periods
in which the intercourse had taken place, before and after
the marriage of Mme. Smith, and were of a nature to make
it easily conceivable that they belonged to stories which
the mother might have told her child. It must, therefore,
be admitted that Professor Flournoy has proved that this
was the source of the medium's knowledge. That she
did not recollect anything about it is only one of many
ARGUMENT OF PROFESSOR FLOURNOY ii
instances of the subconsciously remembered things being
often those that are most thoroughly forgotten by the
normal self.
Likewise, Professor Flournoy found invariably that the
information given about deceased persons in Helen
Smith's trance referred to external things which might
easily be reported ; in a small town like Geneva, she must
doubtless have been told many stories about people
without consciously remembering them. Moreover, in
at least two cases besides his own, Helen's mother was
proved to be the source.
Under these circumstances, Professor Flournoy feels
justified in asserting that cryptomnesia alone suffices to
explain the knowledge of this medium. But of course it
was not always possible to obtain the proof of such being
the case. In the Indian romance, for instance, the
source seemed certain, but the medium's connection with
it was unprovable. Mile. Smith purported to be the
reincarnation of the princess Simandini, the wife of the
jealous prince Sivrouka Nayaka, living in the palace
Tchandraguiri in Kanara in India, in the year 1401.
Professor Flournoy — who, moreover, was alleged to be
the reincarnation of Sivrouka Nayaka — was of course
very eager to learn whether this prince had really existed,
and what was on the whole the foundation of Helen's
story. But he appUed in vain to various historians for a
confirmation of her statements ; they did not know
Sivrouka Nayaka. Great, therefore, was his excitement
when one day in the library of Geneva on turning over the
leaves of M. de Maries' voluminous Histoire de I'Inde, a
work published in 1828, he found the following passage :
" Kanara and the adjoining provinces next to Delhi may be
regarded as the Georgia of Hindostan. There the most
beautiful women are said to dwell ; also the inhabitants are
very jealous ; they scarcely permit them to be seen by
strangers.
" Tchandraguiri, whose name means Mountain of the Moon,
is a vast fortress constructed in 1401 by the Rajah Sivrouka-
Nayaca."
12 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
It turned out, however, that this discovery did not
secure the existence of the prince. The historians agreed
in declaring that the work of Maries was worthless, and
the statement about Sivrouka and his fortress pure fiction.
Nay, Maries himself only mentioned them in his geo-
graphical description of India ; in a later volume where
he deals with the history of the period 1200 — 1600, they
do not figi\re.
Such being the case, it seems impossible to doubt that
Helen Smith has made their acquaintance direct or
indirect through Maries' work ; the naming of a precise
year within the Christian era is in itself indicative of
literary origin ; and that the whole of it is incorrect, not
in accordance with fact, of course points decisively to
this very book. But Helen Smith's connection with the
old and rare work was in itself most improbable, and not
even a sagacity like Professor Flournoy's was capable of
discovering it.
Where Professor Flournoy sums up his estimation of
mediumistic performances, he strongly accentuates their
silliness or, as he more often prefers to call it, their
puerility. " The most striking thing in all these
mediumistic imaginings," he writes, " is their childish and
terribly fooHsh character. The medium no longer seems
to be the mature and serious person whom we knew in
normal life, but an inferior, degenerate personality, as if
the mediumistic state involved a spiritual deterioration,
a sort of relapse to a former level." " Everything forces
us to assume that the mind of the medium when pro-
ducing the messages is in a state of infantile regression."
As an illustration hereof, he mentions that Mile. X., the
medium through whom Calvin manifested, was a lady of
high culture, the authoress of philosophical and moral
writings ; if in her normal state she had proposed to
compose an essay on the ideas of the reformer, she doubt-
less would not have made him express himself in the
trivial and insipid manner that characterizes her auto-
ARGUMENT OF PROFESSOR FLOURNOY 13
matic product. Helen Smith, too, is described by Pro-
fessor Flournoy as a most intelligent woman. That her
romances are childish will be clear to all readers of From
India to the Planet Mars. Very infantile also is her
fabrication of the Martian language ; to make a new
language is in itself a feat which probably many people
will own to have tried to accomplish in their childhood.
A special want of intelligence was displayed by the
entranced Mile. Smith when Professor Flournoy had
pointed out to her normal self that the equivalent for the
connecting t in the sentence reviendra-t-il was quite
superfluous in the Martian translation herimir m hed ; a
week later the French words trouve-t-on were rendered by
bindie ide — without the connecting consonant, though in
this case it would have been anything but superfluous.
Her subconscious mind had entirely missed the point of
the professor's criticism.
Until now we have only discussed the mediums whom
Professor Flournoy had made the objects of his personal
study. With regard to those who constitute the chief
material for the research of the Psychical Society in
England, his views are different. Their performances he
does not think can be explained as a mixture of imagina-
tion and cryptomnesia only ; he sets up as a third cause,
telepathy, which furnishes the mediums with a knowledge
that is not to be found in their own mind.
With telepathy we have reached the supernormal
powers of man ; the faculty of speaking or writing auto-
matically, cryptomnesia, etc., no doubt are not normal
qualities, but they do not rank as supernormal. Professor
Flournoy, however, accentuates that he does not use the
term telepathy as an explanatory hypothesis, but simply
to design " the fact that a great many automatic com-
munications which are astonishing as coming from the
medium cease to be so when the sitters are reckoned with
as factors." There are mediums who draw not only from
their own forgotten memories, but from the knowledge of
14 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
the persons present. How it is done, Professor Flournoy
will not attempt to investigate ; he contents himself with
stating as an " empirical law " that telepathy takes place.
The group of memories which a sitter carries with him of a
dead person may emerge through the medium who did not
know that person ; " they are telepathically reflected in
the subconsciousness of the medium as in a living mirror,
and he immediately translates into words and gestures
this borrowed image, no doubt striking in its resemblance,
but one in which the defunct has not the slightest
share."
In the case, however, of the most famous among the
English-speaking mediums,^ Mrs. Piper, the theory of
telepathy from the present persons became insufficient.
" Doubtless," Professor Flournoy writes, " many of these
striking cases can be explamed by mental transmission,
the medium having only sent back to the sitters the
picture of the discarnate which they themselves carried in
their thoughts. But there are more complex facts, in
which it is necessary to admit an active and selective
telepathy, by the aid of which the hypnoid imagination
of Mrs. Piper can choose from the minds of many living —
present or absent — memories concerning only the dead
person in question, and reunite them in such a way as to
reconstruct a completer image than any of the partial
images which were left in any of the various persons of his
acquaintance."
Professor Flournoy admits that it is difficult to explain
this power of choice. He points at the possibility that
" the incomplete image of the defunct which one of the
sitters has transmitted telepathically to Mrs. Piper may
attract to itself, by some obscure psychological affinity,
other fragmentary images dispersed among other persons,"
and that all these by becoming fused in her subconscious-
ness may " give birth to reconstructions of an exact and
recognizable nature."
It is, then, through a wide-ranging assumption of super-
normal human powers that Professor Flournoy arrives at
ARGUMENT OF PROFESSOR FLOURNOY 15
his final conclusion which he lays down in his preface to
Spirits and Mediums when he writes :
" As for the supernormal incidents which are so often inter-
mixed with mediumistic phenomena, and which spiritism
interprets as implying the intervention of extra-terrestrial
intelligences, they denote, in truth, a veritable realm of
forces or of laws still mysterious, but a realm in which the
participation of the discarnate has not as yet been adequately
proved. Certainly it would be rash, a priori, to exclude its
possibility. But as there are a number of cases where super-
normal phenomena (telepathy, clairvoyance, etc.) occur which
obviously are not due to the departed, but to spontaneous and
natural faculties of the living in certain special states of their
personality, it is logical to suppose — provisionally, at least,
and until proof to the contrary be forthcoming — that it is the
same in cases where the circumstances are more obscure."
CHAPTER II
TELEPATHY
In the preceding chapter we have heard Professor
Flournoy assert that imagination and cryptomnesia were
the sole sources of a large number of mediumistic com-
munications. With regard to the remaining part, he
referred to the supernormal powers of man as a fact
which seemed to make superfluous the assumption of the
participation of the dead.
With a certain force the same opinion has been set forth
by the German philosopher, Eduard von Hartmann/
whose name is often mentioned by psychical researchers.
It is by means of telepathy, psychometry, and clair-
voyance, he argues, that the contents of the spiritistic
messages are obtained, which give them the appearance
of originating from the departed. Where the line is to be
drawn between the said phenomena is less certain, but
relatively of small importance ; clairvoyance exists at any
rate in the shape of prevision, as the perception of what
has not yet occurred cannot be due to the reading of other
people's thoughts.
Hartmann has made his argument against spiritism
famous by connecting it with his doctrine of a world-soul,
or central mind, in which all individual minds have their
root. Through it they can get into communication with
each other as over the telephone ^ — a simile he has no
hesitation in using — and from it they can draw, not only
the particulars of the present world-state in distant
1 See his two books : Spiritism (Der Spiritismus) and The Spirit
Theory (Die Geisterhypothese).
2 This explanation, however, is only applied to telepathy in its true
sense of mental intercourse at a distance ; thought-transference at close
quarters Hartmann ascribes to ether vibrations.
TELEPATHY 17
places, but also the particulars of future events. For in
the central or absolute mind the threads of all casual
series meet in one single all-seeing ; its omniscience
embraces implicitly in the present world-state the future
as well as the past.
By this theory, Hartmann believes himself to have
explained not only supernormal intercommunication
between human beings, or telepathy, but clairvoyance
and prevision. But, he adds, his argument against
spiritism is not dependent on the truth of his theory. It
depends solely on the existence of the said powers, not on
their explanation. Against one thing only he protests —
explaining them by means of spirits. That would not be
to solve the problem, but to push it one step back and
leave it there just as unsolved as before. For, he asks,
why should the discamate any more than the living be
able to look into the future ?
According to Hartmann, the question is solved if the
supernormal faculties of the living be acknowledged.
To ascertain with what right Professor Flournoy and
Hartmann appeal to the existence of such faculties, must,
therefore, be our next step, and the starting-point for the
discussion of the main problem. But it is clear that the
investigation must take place within another territory
than the disputed one. The statements which a medium
adduces in the name of a dead person in proof of his
identity cannot be evidence for telepathy or clairvoyance,
as the question at issue is just whether they are due to
these faculties or are what they purport to be.
As regards telepathy, a valuable material is given in
the Proceedings of the Enghsh Society for Psychical
Research,^ through the publication of a number of experi-
ments between the two sensitives. Miss Clarissa Miles
and Miss Hermione Ramsden. The intelligent working
method of the two ladies, the contemporaneous recording
» Vol. XXI., pp. 60—93.
CD. C
i8 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
of the experiments, and their careful annotation, combine
to make the results due to their psychical faculties a
golden mine for its research.
In the following review of the phenomena, I shall make
use of Hartmann's classification, which is very systematic.
He divides telepathy into four categories, according to
the part played by the will, or intention, respectively of
the agent \and the percipient. It will be seen that the
two of them constitute thought-transference, and the
others so-called thought- or mind-rea ing. To the first
belong the ordinary experiments in thought-transmission,
while the second comprises the more uncommon cases
where an agent tries to influence a percipient without the
will or knowledge of the latter.
I. Intentional Perception by Intentional
Transmission.
Illustrations of this category may be taken from the
first series of experiments between Miss Miles and Miss
Ramsden, which took place in the autumn of 1905. Miss
Miles was staying in London, Miss Ramsden twenty miles
from that city ; the two ladies had not met since the
14th of June. ,The arrangement was that the experiments
should be tried at 7 p.m. ; Miss Miles was agent, and made
at the time of the experiment a note of the word or image
which she wished to convey, while Miss Ramsden wrote
down her impressions, and sent the record to Miss Miles
before knowing what she had attempted on her side.
Experiment I.
Miss Miles's note :
" I sat with my feet on the fender, I thought of Sphinx, I
tried to visualize it. Spoke the word out loud. I could only
picture it to myself quite small as seen from a distance. —
C. M."
Miss Ramsden 's record :
" I could not visualize, but seemed to feel that you were
<(
<<
TELEPATHY 19
sitting with your feet on the fender in an arm-chair, in a loose
black sort of tea-gown. The following words occurred to me :
" Peter Evan or 'Eaven (Heaven).
" Hour-glass (this seemed the chief idea).
" Worcester deal box.
" Daisy Millar.
" X ^ arm socket or some word like it.
X suspension bridge.
X Sophia Ridley.
X soupirer (in French), which I felt inclined to spell
souspirer. There is some word with the letter S. I don't
seem quite to have caught it. — H. R."
Experiment II.
Miss Miles's note :
" I tried to visualize Sphinx again. — C. M."
Miss Ramsden's record :
" I received a letter from Miss Miles, saying, ' Letter S quite
correct, the hour-glass shape extraordinarily correct, also SS
at the end or something like it. I shall try again to-morrow
at seven. It will come all right.' After this I found it very
difficult not to try and guess the word instead of making my
mind a blank.
" Cossack.
" Cross.
" Compass (?).
" Luzac (the publisher).
" Luxor in Egypt.
" Here I gave up in despair, then suddenly came the word :
Whistle ! This I beheved to be correct. — H. R."
As may be seen, the percipient received impressions
partly of the sound, and partly of the idea. Whether
" hour-glass " was due to an impression of the shape of
the sphinx seems doubtful. But the s^'es in " suspen-
sion," and " souspirer," and the Sph in " Sophia," show
a similar approach to the word as that which will be
understood from one's own attempts to recall a forgotten
name. The idea the percipient is approaching when she
writes " Luxor in Egypt," which she gets hold of during
the second experiment in spite of her tendency to guess a
* A cross indicates that the impression was especially vivid.
C2
20 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
word with ss. Perhaps " Ridley " in the first experiment,
was ah'eady due to an impression of the idea,— Sphinx
being almost synonymous for riddle.
What Miss Ramsden did not get was, however, the
word itself. In spite of her remarkable faculties as a
percipient, she almost never received exactly what was
sent. To " hit the central mark," is, to employ an
expression ^which is often used when thought-transfer-
ence is discussed, doubtless very difficult.
Experiment III.
Miss Miles's note :
"I sat before the fire in my sitting-room and visualized a
lamp. One of those very old-fashioned lamps with a large
globe, which seemed to me to be a round ball of fire. — C. M."
Miss Ramsden's record :
" Scissors, X orangery, shaloop ? shawl, jalousie (blinds),
fretwork or sort of trellis in a garden, echantillon (pattern),
sleepers, x gum plant or pot ? verisimilitude, Paternoster,
tabloids, x orangery, x orange flower, x orange pips, horse-
whip, housewife (needlecase), verdigris, purple hedgerow,
beech, beatitudes, tea cosy, Burnham Beeches, heather in
flower, crown, small box, short deal ? infanticide, x maltese
oranges growing in a pot, Chinese slippers, x Cape goose-
berries, these look like oranges.
" The most probable seems to be a small Maltese orange
tree, such as I have seen in London houses. — H. R."
In this experiment, contrary to the preceding ones, the
vision evidently played the chief part. Between the
percipient's own ideas, which seem more or less explicable
by assonance or association, always and with increasing
strength the image of an orange or an orange-tree intrudes
itself, — no doubt Miss Miles's lamp with the globe like a
" round ball of fire."
Experiment VII.
Miss Miles's note :
•'Spectacles. — C. M."
TELEPATHY 21
Miss Ramsden's record :
" ' Spectacles.' This was the only idea that came to me
after waiting a long time, I thought of ' sense perception,'
but that only confirms the above. My mind was such a
complete blank that I fell asleep. — H. R."
Later on Miss Ramsden added : "I did not visualize
the spectacles, the word came to me as a sudden idea."
She had at this point determined to try to visualize, being
unsatisfied with her attempts to " hear." Miss Miles,
again, had on this occasion for the first time tried another
method which afterwards became the usual one. Having
found that it was easier to impress an idea when it was
something that she had seen, and thought of later in the
day, she resolved that in future she would make her choice
accordingly, and think of some object in connection with
Miss Ramsden, without specially sitting down to do so
at 7 p.m. On the day of the seventh experiment, she
attended a meeting, and had for her neighbour a gentle-
man who wore a curious pair of spectacles which attracted
her attention. These she fixed on as her subject.
The success that attended the first application of the
new method was not continued. This was the only time
that Miss Ramsden received the very word which her co-
experimenter had tried to transfer to her.
2. Non-intentional Perception by Inten-
tional Transmission.
This category does not, probably, number many
instances. For the present, I shall confine myself to refer
to a case which will be discussed later — Dr. Verrall's
attempt co impress his wife to produce automatically
some Greek words, while she did not in the least suspect
that he was trying to influence her. It bears a close
resemblance to the cases given above, where both the
transmission and the perception were intentional. There
was the same fragmentariness, the same unconscious
struggle to grasp now the sound, and now the sense,
22- COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
which we saw, for instance, in the Sphinx-experiment.
And as was often the case with Miss Ramsden, the result
was only approximative. Nay, Dr. Verrall's success was
inferior to that of the two ladies ; if his experiment had
not been continued for a length of time, it might have
been difficult to discover that he had succeeded in trans-
ferring anything whatever.
3. Intentional Perception without Inten-
tional Transmission.
With this category we have reached what Hartmann
designates as thought-readiilg. Of this also we shall
find excellent illustrations among the Miles-Ramsden
experiments. Already, during their first period of
experimenting, in the autumn of 1905, it happened that
Miss Ramsden obtained impressions without her co-
operator having executed her share in the programme.
Such, for instance, was the case on the fourth day appointed
for experiments, on October 22nd, Miss Miles notes
down :
" I never tried to visualize anything at all. About 6 o'clock
to 7.30 I was writing letters to friends. One I was pondering
over, for it required an answer. It was from a Polish
artist .— C. M."
Miss Ramsden wrote in a letter of October 25th :
" On Sunday night [October 22nd] I felt that you were not
thinking of me, but were reading a letter in a sort of half
German writing. The letters had very long tails to them
" Is there any truth in that ?— H. R."
The letter in question was written in a sloping and
obviously foreign hand, corresponding with the description
by Miss Ramsden.
On the ninth day Miss Miles had, to be sure, thought of
something, but Miss Ramsden caught something wholly
different. The former had in the afternoon had a visit
from a lady, and resolved to make her name the subject
TELEPATHY 23
of the experiment. Miss Ramsden did not receive this,
but records :
" I visualized : W. M M was more vivid. It suggested your
sister-in-law. E V L Evelyn ? or ' Evelina,' which is the
name of an old-fashioned novel. Were you thinking about
me at all ? These I saw, but no vivid impressions. Perhaps
they had been topics of conversation, and were still on your
mind.— H. R."
Miss Miles and her visitor had talked of an acquaintance
with the initials W. M., and of Miss Miles's sister-in-law,
Eveline, whose name Miss Ramsden did not know.
Other instances of Miss Ramsden being able to obtain
impressions of names without any intention on the part of
Miss Miles are, from a later period of experimenting,
" Tichbome," which she caught the day after a gentleman
had entertained Miss Miles about Lord Tichborne, and
" Lotherton " when the same gentleman had mentioned
Lotherton Hall to her.
There seems to be a certain difference between the
process when Miss Ramsden is influenced by the agent's
thinking of a word, and when this is not so. In the
former case she gropes her way with the right word, so to
speak, within sight, but generally without obtaining more
than an approximation. When, on the contrary, she
perceives something which Miss Miles has not intended
to transmit, it is no longer mere approximations that she
gives ; the perceived thing is in a wise correct, and is given
without hesitation. It seems, in fact, to be easier to
" perceive " of one's own accord than to grasp the
thoughts of an agent.
In the following autumn, 1906, the two ladies recom-
menced their experiments. Miss Miles during most of
the time was far from London, in places which were
wholly unknown to Miss Ramsden. She was staying
first at Blaise Castle, about 400 miles from the home
of her co-experimenter. The plan was, as before, that
Miss Ramsden should think of Miss Miles regularly at
7 p.m., while the latter on her side had no fixed time for
24 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
thinking of Miss Ramsden, but thouglit of her more or
less during the whole day, and in the evening noted briefly
what ideas had been most prominently before her mind.
The result was that she only succeeded occasionally in
transferring those ideas, but that almost every day some
of Miss Ramsden's impressions represented, more or less
closely, something that Miss Miles had been occupied
with, or tallying about, on the same day. Sometimes it
was her surroundings rather than her thoughts which were
perceived by Miss Ramsden. In the two cases cited
below. Miss Miles had sent no message at all.
On the third day of experimenting she wrote on a
post-card dated from Blaise Castle :
" At 7, 1 was so overcome with the heat that I sat in a white
dressing-gown and said I could send no message. You might
have seen a castle on a hill, or pencil heads, or a room full of
people at Kingsweston all having tea. — C. M."
On the same evening Miss Ramsden caught a series of
impressions from Miss Miles's surroundings, among which
were the following :
" Now I see a big, plain, old-fashioned English country-
house among trees ; it is rather a distant view, I am looking
up at it from below, standing in what seems to be a ravine full
of trees. There ^ are all sorts of precious curios in the
house "
The curious point is, that Miss Miles had " willed " her
to see, not the actual house, but a castle. She writes :
" I tried to make Miss Ramsden think I was living in a
castle, as the name of the house would make you think so. It
is a square, old-fashioned country-house situated close to the
woods. It is full of precious curios . A deep ravine full of
trees stands between you and the house "
Miss Ramsden, in fact, had believed Blaise Castle to be
a castle, and therefore did not suspect that her vision
referred to that building. She comments afterwards on
this case as follows :
" I am not a good visualizer, and although I sometimes see
visions in the same way as one sees the so-called ' hypnagogic
TELEPATHY 25
illusions,' which most of us have experienced, though perhaps
rarely, in the moments between sleeping and waking, I am not
able to visualize at will, nor can I see in a crystal. Blaise
Castle appeared to me after the manner of a hypnagogic
illusion ; it was a perfect picture in colour, in fact it was the
place itself — so it seemed to me — though I did not know that
it was Blaise Castle, as I had imagined the latter to be a real
old castle with turrets."
On the day for the thirteenth experiment, Novem-
ber I2th, 1906, Miss Miles, without the knowledge of Miss
Ramsden, had returned to London, and made no attempt
to impress her co-experimenter. The latter on her side
wrote as follows :
" A tree, a bay tree, a camp-stool, a wreath of bays or
laurels, a fir tree, a lawn-tennis net and people playing. I
don't know what to think of this evening's experiment ; either
it is a complete failure or else it is the best success we have
ever had. I saw the pattern of the tennis net, then it changed,
and I saw that it was a window with white dimity curtains
and a criss-cross pattern of green with little pink rosebuds in
the centre of each. [Drawing of a window with curtains.]
First the curtains were shut across the window, and then they
were drawn aside. It was a school-room, a big, long, low
room, with a long, wide window. Th6 height and width of
the room is not much more than that of the window. There is
a large table in the middle laid for tea. Two little girls with
their hair down their backs, loosely tied with blue and white
ribbons, are waltzing together very prettily. I can hear the
time they keep, but I cannot hear the music. You and
another lady are standing watching them, and I think there is
some one else in the room ; she is sitting down.
" I shall be very anxious to hear whether this is right. I
have my doubts because there were so many other impressions
first.— H. R."
Referring to this impression Miss Miles's sister, Mrs.
Coventry, wrote :
" My sister, Clarissa Miles, dined with me on Monday,
November 12th, at 7.30. My little girl, Nesta, came down on
puipose to see her, and she asked her many questions about
her lessons, and how she was getting on at her school and
about her dancing, of which she is very fond. The wall paper
in her bedroom, and nursery, has a trellis work of brown, with
bunches of pink roses and green leaves in the centre of each.
Also a window very like what Miss Ramsden drew. She
26 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
described exactly what had often taken place, Nesta dancing
with a little friend, and my sister and I often watching them,
and her nurse sitting sewing."
Miss Ramsden was afterwards shown the room, and
recognized the wall paper. The room was much smaller
than she saw it, but in other respects it was the same.
From her drawing of November 12th, it appears that it
was not tha curtains that had a pattern with rosebuds,
which might perhaps be inferred from the description.
The window in her sketch, however, is divided in two
parts which the real window was not.
In this case, then. Miss Ramsden saw a place and a
scene which Miss Miles had not seen recently, and did not
think of, but which of course may have been on the
threshold of her consciousness during her talk with the
child.
During the experiments with Miss Miles, Miss Ramsden,
as told above, had been led to try for visions instead of
auditory impressions ; before this, however, she had had
some interesting experiences of the latter type. These
are recorded in the Proceedings of the American Society
for Psychical Research,^ and partly belong to the category
dealt with here.
Miss Ramsden, staying in England, had proposed to a
friend in Copenhagen an experiment where she would be
the agent while he should be the receiver. It was to take
place on a pre-arranged day, September 24th, 1905, at
one o'clock in England, which is two o'clock in Denmark.
At the said hour Miss Ramsden, after fifteen minutes of
intense concentration, asked : " Are you there ? Do
you hear me ? " Then, to her amazement, she heard the
voice of her friend calling her name and saying in an
amused tone in Danish : " Are you there ? I cannot
hear, speak a little louder . . . your invisible wires ..."
Miss Ramsden says that the expression " invisible
* Experiments and Experiences in Telepathy, Vol. V., pp. 673
—753-
TELEPATHY 27
wires," was one that she had never thought of, and
certainly could not have invented in Danish. It turned
out, however, that her friend had not at all tried the
experiment ; but he had thought of her earlier in the day
when he read her letter, and had used the expression
" invisible wires," in Danish, in speaking about her to
another person.
In this case, then, the would-be agent, Miss Ramsden,
had in fact become percipient. It seems correct, though,
to interpret the phenomenon as intentional perception,
both on account of her question to her supposed co-
experimenter, " Are you there ? " etc., and on account
of the state of concentration she had produced in herself
for the sake of the experiment. That she caught some-
thing which was said at another time of the day is not
different from what she experienced with Miss Miles.
A few days afterwards Miss Ramsden tried to experi-
ment with a lady who was living at Newmarket. The
first day she had arranged to be percipient, and heard
then what she describes as a " soundless voice " that told
her several things which turned out to be a mixture of
truth and falsehood. In this case her friend had really
" telepathed " to her. But the next day Miss Ramsden
was to be agent. The result hereof was wholly negative ;
her friend did not receive anything at all. But Miss
Ramsden herself after fifteen minutes once more heard
the soundless voice, saying :
" I can't hear. Such a pity. I wonder if you heard me
. . . Packing ... off to-morrow ... so sorry I shall miss
your letter . . , mother's health . . . Nelly has a cough,
doctor advises change of air "
It was true that her friend could not " hear," but she
had not tried to communicate this fact to Miss Ramsden.
The latter knew that she was thinking of leaving, and was
anxious about her mother's health. It was not true that
her pupil, Nelly, had a cough ; nor had the doctor been
called in.
Miss Ramsden, then, cannot in this case be said to have
28 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
gained knowledge supernormally. It is interesting,
though, that she not only got impressions of, but even
heard, things which were partly false. Also it is note-
worthy that her attempt to be agent once more resulted
in a perception. It confirms what all the cases of this
category have shown — that it is the faculty to obtain
impressions which is the principal thing. The part of
the agent is bf minor importance ; his co-operation is not
indispensable, and he can effect nothing when the per-
cipient does not possess the necessary qualities.
4. Non-intentional Perception without Inten-
tional Transmission.
As an instance of this category, Hartmann refers to a
case which on account of the informant's authority ought
to be quoted with his own words. The renowned Swiss
philosopher, Heinrich Zschokke, in his autobiography,
writes as follows : ^
" It sometimes happened that at my first interview with a
person hitherto unknown to me, I saw his past life with many
small particulars, or perhaps only some scene from it, in a
dreamlike and yet clear manner pass before me, quite spon-
taneously and in- the course of a few minutes On a
market-day in the town of Waldshut, I returned in the even-
ing, tired after a forest-inspection, to the hostelry ' Zum
Rebstock ' in the company of two young students of forestry
who are still living. We supped at the table d'hote where the
numerous guests were in the act of making fun of the many
peculiarities of the Swiss, Mesmer's magnetism, Lavater's
physionomics, etc. One of my companions, feeling hurt in
his national pride, asked me to protest, especially against a
handsome young man who sat opposite to us and delivered the
most flippant jokes. The life of this youth had just passed
before me. So I addressed myself to him with the question
whether he would answer me honestly when I told him the
most secret thing of his life, though I knew him no more than
he me. That, I said, would be even more than the physio-
nomics of Lavater. He promised me to confess if I told him
the truth. Then I related what my dream vision had told
me, and the whole company was made acquainted with the
' Selbstschau, I., p. 227,
TELEPATHY 29
life story of this young merchant, his years of apprenticeship,
his little aberrations, and finally with a small defalcation from
his employer. I described the bare room with the white-
washed walls where the black money-box stood on a table to
the right of the door, etc. A dead silence reigned in the room
during the narration which I only interrupted now and again
to ask whether I spoke the truth. Each circumstance was
affirmed by the deeply moved youth, even — what I did not
expect — the last one."
A small incident which confirms the existence of such a
phenomenon where the percipient plays his part just as
unintentionally as the person from whom the impression
emanates, is the following, which Sir Oliver Lodge ^ quotes
about a connection of his own, Mrs. Fred. Lodge. Here,
moreover, the two parties were not in the same room,
but separated by many miles.
Mrs. Fred. Lodge was expecting her sister from South
America, but, being away from home, was unable to meet
her at Southampton. So a friend, Mr. P., had offered to
do so. While travelHng in the train on her way to her
home, about 3.30 p.m., Mrs. Lodge closed her eyes to rest,
and at the same moment a telegram form appeared before
her with the words, " Come at once, your sister is dange-
rously ill." During the afternoon Mr. Fred. Lodge received
a telegram from Mr. P. to his wife, worded exactly as
above and sent from Southampton at 3.30 p.m. Mrs.
Lodge had no idea of her sister being ill, and was not even
at the time thinking about her, but about the illness of
her own daughter whom she had just left. The hand-
writing she saw she recognized to be Mr. P.'s, but the
paper was the brown-coloured one of a telegram, while he
would have been writing on a white-paper form. Such a
mixture of true and false seems to characterize both
telepathy and clairvoyance.
* The Survival of Man, pp. 73 — 74.
CHAPTER III
CLAIRVOYANCE
As mentioned before, Hartmann was unable to draw a
decisive line between telepathy and clairvoyance. Theo-
retically he was clear enough, " Clairvoyance," he alleges,
" differs from thought-reading, in that it is not the
contents of another mind ^ which are perceived, but
objective facts." But how make sure of this in individual
cases ?
Hartmann himself stretched the theory of mind-reading
as far as possible. When a medium states particulars
concerning a sitter's past Ufe, which the latter at the
moment believes to be incorrect, but which turn out to
be correct, Hartmann contends that the right knowledge
was obtained from the sitter's subconsciousness. When
the sensitives, without desiring it, in a moment discern
the chief events of a person's whole life, it is because their
unconscious wilh to read characters and fates forces the
person's subconsciousness to recall just these events.
Knowledge about an absent person the medium procures
either by reading the thoughts of the people present about
him, or by entering into rapport with him through a
present person, and afterwards reading his own thoughts.
As an illustration of the last-mentioned phenomenon,
I may refer to an interesting series of experiments per-
formed by Andrew Lang.^ Lang demonstrated that
certain sensitives could, by looking into a crystal or glass
ball, pick up facts unknown to the sitter about people
whom they did not know, but who were known to the
sitter. He baptized this phenomenon " telepathy a
trois " after the three participators, — the crystal-gazer,
1 Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XV., pp. 48 seqq.
CLAIRVOYANCE 31
the sitter, and the sitter's absent acquaintance. He did
not, however, feel sure that the performance was not due
to clairvoyance, rather than to telepathy. But such
would not have been the opinion of Hartmann, — his
criterion of clairvoyance just being the absence of every
interconnection, or rapport, between the sensitive and the
thing perceived. That it is practically impossible to be
sure of such an absence is another matter. Hartmann, in
fact, finished by referring to prevision as the one kind of
clairvoyance about which there could be no doubt.
Somewhat inconsistently, however, he classified as
clairvoyance psychometry or, to cite his own words, " the
reconstruction of persons or characters by means of locks
of hair, written documents, and other articles to which
their personal aura is attached."
Psychometry, it would seem, is a rather common art
in the latter days, even if it be not easy to find well-
attested cases of it. Miss Miles and Miss Ramsden both
seem to practise it. Miss Miles says that since the year
1892, at which time circumstances " brought out all the
clairvoyant faculty that had been dormant " in her, she
has been able to see in crystals, psychometrize letters or
articles for people, and tell fortunes for her friends.
Miss Ramsden writes concerning her in 1906 that she is a
very good psychometrist, who has often held letters for
her and described scenes in connection with the life of the
writer. At a later time they made some very careful
experiments in psychometry of which Miss Ramsden
relates :
" I collected a number of articles such as pens, thimbles,
safety pins, watch chains, from relations and servants, allowing
her to choose one, while I sat on the other side of a screen, our
object being to test whether I should be able to recognize the
owner of the articles from her description, and also whether
her knowledge was really gained through contact with the
article, and not through reading my mind. The result was
quite satisfactory, she not only gave accurate descriptions of
the owners, but also detailed information of which I was
entirely ignorant, but was afterwards able to verify."
32 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
About herself Miss Ramsden writes that she has had
" several successes, and also many failures, in what is
called psychometry, i.e., holding an article and describing
the owner and scenes from his or her surroundings."
Among older accounts of the phenomenon may be
chosen the following, where Mr. Edmund Gumey vouches
for the trustworthiness of the narration.^ An acquain-
tance of his^ Mrs. Stella, of Chieri, Italy, hearing that there
was a " sonnambula" in the neighbouring town, went to
see her out of pure curiosity. The sitting, which com-
menced with the woman being placed in a state of trance
by a young girl who then left the house, did, however,
shake her disbelief, and she sent a description of it to
Mr. Gumey. She narrates as foUows :
" The woman first gave me a personal description of myself,
nationality, etc., with a description of character, which was
perfectly correct . I then gave her some hair which I had
combed out of a brush in my stepson's travelling bag, he having
just arrived from Spain. She took the hair in her hand,
placing it on her forehead, and at the same time leaving her
hold on my hand. At first she was puzzled and confused, but
soon her ideas seemed to become more distinct, and then she
told me his relationship to myself, giving an exact personal
description of his appearance, character, etc. She did not
call him my stepson, but ' a close relation without consan-
guinity.' I then-asked her where he lived, what he did, etc.
She told me aU, even to unimportant details. For instance,
she said, ' Yesterday, he rode into the country, got off his
horse, and bought some cigars. The tobacconist could not
give him change, so seeing two friends passing he asked them
to change the note.' I knew nothing of this, but asked my
boy when I returned home, and found it true."
Mr. Gumey suggested that this may have been a case
of reading the mind of a person not present through its
affinity to the person who was present ; no doubt it
makes, setting aside the " article," a parallel to Lang's
telepathy a irois. But it is worth noticing the Itahan
psychic's proceedings when going to psychometrize the
young man's hair. She not only took it in her Jdand and
1 Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. VII., p. 99.
CLAIRVOYANCE 33
placed it on her forehead, but, what is more significant,
she let go Mrs. Stella's hand which she had hitherto held.
If she meant to reach him through the stepmother, she
must have done quite the reverse. She, at least, must
have believed that it was from the article and not from
the sitter that her impressions were derived.
With a well-known English medium, Mr. Vout Peters,
a series of psychometrical sittings were held, under scien-
tific supervision, in the spring of 1908, at Helsingfors in
Finland. The inspecting committee afterwards published
a number of the stenographic records, annotated by those
sitters whose articles had been psychometrized.^ In this
manner were procured materials of evidential value, from
which no small amount of knowledge about the pheno-
menon may be gained.
Mr. Vout Peters regards his psychometric faculty as
something wholly apart from mind-reading. The com-
mittee that supervised his performances leaned to the
latter explanation — not because they could account for
their opinion, but because they found the psychometrical
theory too inconceivable. But the medium protested
emphatically against this. " I don't get before me what
you expect," he said ; " I get the actual facts." He
maintains that his impressions are due to an aura attached
to the articles. They crowd, he says, upon him with such
rapidity, that he can scarcely manage to translate them
into words. He not only sees and hears, but feels as if
the whole of his body knew about the things he is going
to tell.
Mr. Peters's utterances are confirmed and supplemented
by the published records. It seems as if he can feel that
which the person he speaks about is supposed to have
felt, nay as if he can feel his character or nature within
himself. His psychometrizing consisted of character-
descriptions and the telling of incidents from the life of
the owners of the articles ; at the same time, he seemed
1 Meddelanden utgifna af Sallskapet for Psykisk Forskning i Hel-
singfors. No. I.
CD. D
34 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
unable to describe their exterior ; in one case when,
contrary to his habit, he tried such a description which
was far from correct, he said : " I can't tell his com-
plexion, because I only feel him as within myself."
Generally he could not even tell whether it was a man or
a woman he psychometrized, unless the object itself gave
some indication of it. But he could feel whether the
person in question had been ill or infirm ; once he said
that he saw indistinctly as if the owner of the article had
been blind in his old age, which had, in fact, been the
case.
The committee published those among Mr. Peters's
performances which they considered the best ones ; they
were very unequal, and at least a fourth part are des-
cribed as failures. Also in the successful cases errors
did occur ; but on the whole they were of a character to
convince most people that his power of supernormal
perception was remarkable. I shall cite a few of them.
Some months before the arrival of Mr. Peters in Finland,
a young university student from Helsingfors, politically
interested, was found dead on the railway line, run over
by the train, but with traces of a revolver shot through
his head. Circumstances made it probable that another
person had fired the shot, and afterwards placed the body
on the lines. When it was found, it was covered with
snow.
Several objects which the young man had had upon
him when he died — a pocket-book, a watch, and some
money — were at three different sittings given to Mr. Peters
for psychometrizing, of course without his knowing that
they had belonged to the same person. It is true that it
was the same lady who brought them, but there were a
great many people present at the seances, and no likeli-
hood of the medium recognizing them individually.
Besides, the articles were not handed to him personally
by those who had brought them, and the same person
might of course bring articles from more than one owner.
At any rate there is not, either in this or in other cases.
CLAIRVOYANCE 35
anything which intimates that Mr. Peters suspected that
he spoke about a person whom he had characterized before.
In this case it is worth noting that he caught from each
object impressions that were partially new, although with
scarcely any exception they were consistent with the
facts.
With the pocket-book in his hand he gave the following
correct statements :
" The first impression I get is an impression of wanting to
throw away the pocket-book, an impression of death, of some
one who has passed away.
" When I hold the pocket-book, I feel that the person who
owned it used to do so [Mr. Peters walks rapidly to and fro on
the floor], when thinking.
" And he wanted, when thinking, to move something. He
easily became enervated. I have a sensation of immense
activity, of being tremendously busy and having much to do
in hfe. He writes rapidly.
" It was a very open nature, an honest nature, he could not
and would not tell a lie, nor do anything wrong, because he
could not.
" He used to do so when speaking [Mr. Peters pushes his hair
from his forehead] .
" This person had for a time had much to fight against.
And before he had won the battle, he died."
It was on this occasion that the medium said that he
seemed to feel the person within himself, and gave a
description of his appearance ; here the items which
referred to the young man's figure were correct, while
those which referred to his face were wrong.
With the young man's watch in his hand, Mr. Peters
at the next sitting said :
" The first impression I get with this watch is a pain in my
head, a pain just above the right eye.
" Whoever possessed it, was a very quick, impulsive,
energetic person who was capable of acting incautiously. He
stood in the midst of a danger, and went towards it though he
was warned. It seemed to overtake him suddenly, and for a
moment it was as if he became stunned, and then he gets that
pain in his head. I cannot tell what happened. I feel as a
blow against the head, and it is in a whirl, so to speak."
D 2
36 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
After an interval of three sittings some pieces of money
that had been found upon the young man's body were
handed to the medium. Mr, Peters objected that it was
difficult to psychometrize money, because it had been
handled by so many people, and asked whether they were
connected \dth some special incident. Having been
answered in the affirmative, he said :
" They belonged to someone who used to sing, who was a
bright and happy nature. It was a person who didn't care
much about money, or what people call practical things, but
took life joyfully. I do not, however, mean to say that it was
a careless nature. I don't know whether I can get much out
of this, but I feel as if this bright joy would be extinguished of
a sudden, as if something would suddenly happen. I have a
sensation as if water arose, and a feeling of intense cold. I
have the feehng that the spirit leaves the body without the
body lying in its bed. It is as if the body stood erect and was
dressed while life flees. I have a feeling of wanting to scream,
but not being able to. I feel it as if nobody would hear me
even if I screamed. And a sensation of absolute helplessness
comes over me."
All this would be correct if snow were substituted for
water as the cause of the feeling of cold.
Mr. Peters showed a certain preference for the psycho-
metrizing of letters, which he seemed to find specially
adapted to preserve the " aura." It is considered certain
that he did not try to obtain information by means of
the hand\mting. \\Tien dealing with an article, he used
to place it in his left hand ; he did the same with letters,
without unfolding or in any way examining them. Neither
did he care for the language used in them, as in no case
did he look at their contents. The letters which he
psychometrized in Finland were generally written in
Swedish. One of them came from a personahty well-
known in history, the hero of Sweden's fight with Russia
about Finland, von Dobeln, who died in the year 1820.
About this letter the medium spoke as follows :
" This letter, though old, is full of strength. Whoever
wrote it, is a person with a very strong character and a strong
individuality, vivid, quick, precise and somewhat exacting ;
CLAIRVOYANCE 37
who had a very strong will and was fond of governing, of being
the master of all with whom he got into contact. Neverthe-
less, beneath this hard exterior there was a very good nature,
a very good heart. It was someone who was fond of reading
and studying, and who was so to speak ahead of the age he
lived in. There was some difficulty for this person, — whether
it was a man or a woman, I will not decide,— but it was difficult
for him to be himself in the place where he stood.
" This person was a httle impatient. If he waited for some-
thing, he showed his impatience. I feel when I describe this
as if I must do so with my fingers [gesture]. I don't assert
that the person in question did so, but I express impatience."
The annotations, taken from historical and biographical
works, show in every particular an exact correspondence
to the characterization given by Mr. Peters. Von Dobeln
was not only a great commander with the temperament
of the born ruler, but intelligent and warm-hearted
withal. His spare time he employed in reading, quite
an unusual thing with Swedish officers of that period.
His greatest faults were impetuosity and impatience ;
it was better, people said, to commit a blunder than to
ask him twice about the same thing. To his misfortune,
his superiors were mediocrities to whom he would not
bow ; thus it might rightly be said that it " was difficult
for him to be himself in the place where he stood."
The mediumism of Mr. Vout Peters presents another
phenomenon, his so-called spirit-visions. During the
sittings, the psychometrizing is now and again interrupted
by the description of forms whom he generally alludes to
as standing beside some one among the sitters, and who
are in many cases recognized by the person designated.
It is seldom that the description refers to the owners of
the articles ; among fourteen descriptions of recognized
figures, published by the committee, this was only the
case with two. This phenomenon, however, carries us
beyond the subject of the present discussion — super-
normal perception without any alleged participation of
the dead. I have merely mentioned it to point out a
most remarkable difference between these visions and the
impressions obtained by the medium by means of the
38 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
articles. The latter were throughout, even when correct,
rather vague and not at all exhaustive. Thus in the case
of the murdered student we saw that the medium could
every time tell something new. Neither could he by
means of the articles describe the exterior of their owners.
The spirit-descriptions, on the contrary, refer above all
to the outward appearance, being in return so exact and
precise, that^ for instance, in a case where the same lady
was seen twice by Mr. Peters after an interval of two
sittings, the wording of the two descriptions was all but
identical. If these visions be due to clairvoyance, they
represent, in fact, a quite separate type of this pheno-
menon.
We have now reached the top rung of the ladder, the
apparently highest of the supernormal powers of man,
but at the same time the one which it is most difficult
to accept — namely the faculty of prevision. On men-
tioning this phenomenon in his book, The Survival of Man,
Sir Oliver Lodge cites Frederic Myers as one of those who
recognized its reality as a possibility worthy of serious
discussion. In eloquent and beautiful words this pioneer
of psychical research wrote :
" Few men have- pondered long on these problems of Past
and Future without wondering whether Past and Future be in
very truth more than a name — whether we may not be appre-
hending as a stream of sequence that which is an ocean of
co-existence Let us imagine that a whole earth-life is in
reality an absolutely instantaneous although an infinitely
complex phenomenon. Let us suppose that my transcen-
dental self discerns with equal directness and immediacy every
element of this phenomenon ; but that my empirical self
receives each element mediately, and through media involving
different rates of retardation ; just as I receive the lightning
more quickly than the thunder. May not then seventy years
intervene between my perceptions of birth and death as easily
as seven seconds between my perceptions of the flash and the
peal ? And may not some intercommunication of conscious-
ness enable the wider self to call to the narrower, the more
central to the more external, ' At such an hour this shock will
reach you ! Listen for the nearing roar ! ' " i
' The Survival of Man, pp. 159 — 160,
CLAIRVOYANCE 39
The poetical illustration of Myers suits especially those
cases where an important and sad occurrence is foreseen.
Such cases are probably those most often heard of ; death
plays the principal part in this strange phenomenon. Living
people who are seen dead though they have not been ill,
funeral processions where the visionary recognizes the
mourners and by this means can tell who is lying in the
coffin — previsions of this type abound. Allied to these
are the following cases which I reproduce from Mrs. Sidg-
wick's paper, " On the Evidence for Premonitions," ^ that
contains a carefully sifted material where only the best
attested instances have found admission.
A lady in India, who had lost several children, heard
a voice say, " If there is darkness at the eleventh hour
there will be death." About a week after, a little girl
was taken ill. Two or three days passed ; the sun blazed
above, and the child hovered between life and death.
At last, after more than a week of cloudless weather, a
few minutes before eleven in the morning a squall arose,
and the sky became black. That day, soon after one
o'clock, the child died.
A lady in London, Mrs. Schweizer, dreamed that she
was walking on the edge of a cliff, her son Fred and a
stranger a little in advance, when her son slipped suddenly
down the side of the cliff. She turned to the stranger and
asked for his name, and got the reply, " My name is
Henry Irvin." She said, " Do you mean Irving the
actor ? " " No," he replied, " not exactly : but some-
thing after that style." Her son was then on a journey,
but the anxious mother told her dream to his brotlier. A
week afterwards, Mr. Frederick Schweizer went for a ride
on horseback along with a casual acquaintance named
Deverell ; his horse shied, he was thrown on the road,
and expired three hours later. When his mother arrived
1 Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. Y., pp. 2S8 — 354. Mrs. Sidgwick employs
the term " premonition" as comprising more cases than " prevision."
Clairvoyance, however, being used to designate both what is heard and
seen supernormaMy, or caught by impressions, it seems permissible to
stretch prevision in a similar manner.
40 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
at the place of his death, she recognized in Mr. Deverell
the stranger of her dream, and asked him at once if his
name was Henry. When he answered, " Yes, my name
is Henry," she told the dream. He was extremely
impressed, and told her that he occasionally took part in
private theatricals, and was on those occasions introduced
as " Henry Irvin, junior."
Both case? are remarkable on account of the strange
details which cannot be explained as due to guessing or
chance. Noteworthy is in the latter case the mixture of
true and false ; only the main points are correct : the
fall of the son, the stranger's relation to the name Henry
Irvin ; the rest of the dreamed^of scene is construction.
A contrast to the previsions of death is presented by a
number of cases where the foreseen event is of quite an
ordinary and often extremely trivial character. I borrow
a few examples from Mrs. Sidgwick.^
An American lady saw a friend, Mrs. Conner, falhng up
the front steps in the yard of her house, about one mile
and a half distant, while a lot of papers which she had in
her hand were scattered around her. The vision took
place about two o'clock, the fall, with many minutely
foretold circumstances, at 2.40 p.m.
A lady, Mrs. Mackenzie, one morning at breakfast told
her house party that she had had the following dream.
She thought there were several people in her drawing-
room, among others Mr. J., and she left the room to see
if supper was ready, and when she came back she found
the carpet covered with black spots. She was very angry,
and when Mr. J. said it was ink stains, she retorted,
" Don't say so, I know it has been burned, and I counted
five patches." So ends the dream. Afterwards they all
went to church, and on their return Mr. J. came with
them to luncheon, a thing he had never done before.
And now everything happened as in the dream. Mrs,
Mackenzie went into the dining-room to see if things were
1 The first case is taken from her paper, " On the Evidence for
Clairvoyance," Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. VII., pp. 30 — 99.
CLAIRVOYANCE 41
ready, and then going back into the drawing-room she
noticed a spot near the door and asked who had been in
with dirty feet ; Mr. J. said it was surely ink, and then
pointed out some more spots, when Mrs, Mackenzie called
out, " Oh ! my dream ! my new carpet ! burnt ! " As
they afterwards discovered, the housemaid had carried in
live coals which she had dropped on the carpet, burning
five holes.
A lady in London dreamed that she found a brooch
upon a seat in Richmond Park, which she gave to her
maid. She mentioned the dream to the maid next
morning. Unexpectedly, she went to Richmond on the
following afternoon, and found the brooch on the seat as
in her dream.
The triviality of previsions such as these is of a special
interest, because it speaks loudly against connecting them
with spirits, or on the whole believing that they are due
to an intention. Mrs. Sidgwick justly remarks that we
have no reason to suppose " that premonitions, if they
exist, are a species of petty private miracles intended to
help us in conducting our affairs — temporal or spiritual."
Sir Oliver Lodge, too, is seen to share the opinion of
Hartmann, that the question of prevision has nothing to
do with the question of spirits, when he writes :
" The anticipation of future events is a power not at all
necessarily to be expected on a Spiritistic or any other hypo-
thesis ; it is a separate question, and will have important
bearings of its own. An answer to this question in the affir-
mative may vitally affect our metaphysical notions of ' Time,'
but will not of necessity have an immediate bearing on the
existence in the universe of intelligences other than our own.
A cosmic picture gallery (as Mr. Myers calls it), a photographic
or phonographic record of all that has occurred or will occur in
the universe, may conceivably — or perhaps not conceivably —
in some sense exist, and may be partly open and dimly
decipherable to the lucid part of the automatist's or entranced
person's mind." ^
By virtue of such a faculty of " dimly deciphering," it
is, then, that the ordinary clairvoyant displays his art
1 The Survival of Man, p. 151.
42 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
when people " consult " him. But well-attested cases
of such prophesying are no doubt scarce. As an instance
may be referred to a case mentioned by Mrs. Sidgwick,
where a medium in Boston told an English lady that she
had a picture of her children with her, and on seeing it
pointed to one of these, a boy of seventeen, saying that
he would die soon and suddenly. A few weeks after the
return of the mother to England her son was killed at a
game of football.
Mr. Vout Peters, too, often foretells the future when
psychometrizing articles whose owners are living. Miss
Miles is, as told above, not only able to psychometrize,
but also able to tell fortunes- for people. She is withal
spontaneously foresighted. Coming events, she writes,
are so distinctly impressed on her mental vision, that they
become a positive nuisance. As for Miss Ramsden, she
has had many premonitory dreams, and when she has
tried to write down impressions— being unable to write
automatically — the writing generally consists of prophe-
cies of evil to come. The proportion of truth to fiction
being about fifty per cent., she has found it to be a most
uncomfortable faculty, and so has discontinued the
exertion of it.
It appears, then, to have been in every particular
possible to find evidence to prove that Hartmann and
Professor Flournoy were right in their assertion about
the supernormal powers of man. Certain people can in
a more or less mysterious manner obtain knowledge about
others, about distant events, about the past, nay, about
the future.
The only point where it proved difficult to agree with
Hartmann was perhaps in his attempt to fix a boundary
between telepathy and clairvoyance ; an attempt,
however, which he was not himself able to carry through.
The greater number of psychical researchers acknowledge
the difficulty of distinguishing between the two pheno-
mena. Mrs. Sidgwick intimates that the fine drawn
CLAIRVOYANCE 43
between them has not much scientific value. Professor
Hyslop writes when referring to Miss Ramsden's experi-
ments that she has " access to the marginal data in the
mind of the agent, if ' in that mind ' rightly describes the
facts," and in another place : " There is a fragmentary
access to various facts belonging to the agent's mind, or
connected with her physical environment and possibly not
in her mind at all." And Sir Oliver Lodge accentuates
that " we must not too readily assume that the apparent
action of one mind on another is really such an action."
Possibly, then, there is reason to ask whether Hartmann
and others have not assigned to telepathy a larger part
than is due to it. Because it was possible to make inten-
tional thought-transference the subject of experiments, it
became for the researchers the natural starting-point for
the treatment of the whole problem. It seemed to be
scientifically correct to proceed from thought-trans-
ference to thought-reading as from the known to the less
known, and to cling to the utmost to this " explanation "
as preferable to the wholly mysterious clairvoyance. But
in reality the matter stands otherwise. It is the faculty
of perception that is the commencement of the whole
phenomenon. The percipient, the sensitive, the psychic,
the medium — whatever he is to be called — is the principal
factor also in intentional thought-transference. There
must be a more or less sensitive person to impress if the
agent shall effect anything at all. Nay, the agent is, in
fact, just as secondary as the percipient is important.
The percipient is even better able to catch things which
the agent is not thinking about than those which he is
striving to transmit with all his might. This was evident
in the Miles-Ramsden experiments. Intentional thought-
transference is so to speak an artificial scion, grafted into
the naturally growing tree of supernormal perception.
But with perception as starting-point the second class
of telepathic phenomena, thought- or mind-reading,
appears in a new light. That clairvoyance exists is at
any rate shown through prevision. Why then not give
44 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
it its due and admit that supernormal perception is
clairvoyance, and so-called mind-reading only an element
of it ? The impression must, doubtless, have some cause
besides the faculty of the sensitive. In psychometry
this cause seems to be an article, inconceivable as it may
be. In the apprehension of a present person's character
and life-story, his presence seems to be the cause. In
this case we may as well say that he is psychometrized as
that an article is. But this is not equivalent to his
thoughts being read. It is himself, the whole of his per-
sonality, that is psychometrized ; because his thoughts
are an element of the personality, they may slip in, but
only as one factor among many. On account of this,
things may be perceived which the psychometrized person
believes to be right, but which are wrong. On the other
hand, true facts may be perceived without regard to the
erroneous belief of the sitter.
In cases where the cause of the perception is neither an
article nor the presence of a person, it may often be
characterized as a rapport between the clairvoyant and
the thing perceived, and this rapport may be a person.
Such was the case with regard to the perceptions of
Miss Ramsden ; even when Miss Miles did not perform
her duty as agent, the once established connection— the
invisible wires, as Miss Ramsden's friend in Copenhagen
appropriately called them — continued to exist. And,
doubtless, in those cases where the cause cannot be dis-
covered, some unknown line of connection exists which
leads this impression just to this percipient.
For our problem, however, it may in a degree be said
to be of slight consequence whether the line drawn by
Hartmann between telepathy and clairvoyance is abolished
or not. Whether it is by mind-reading, psychometry, or
direct clairvoyance, that mediumistic individuals become
possessed of their supernormal knowledge, is unimportant
in proportion to the fact that all these powers exist, and
must be reckoned with as a possible explanation of the
alleged communications from the dead.
CLAIRVOYANCE 45
Still, one circumstance must be pointed out before the
discussion of the supernormal powers of man can be
completed. The evidence which we found for their
existence at the same time spoke loudly about their
limitation. Even Miss Ramsden's most successful per-
ceptions were only approximative. With regard to the
visionary impressions this is clearly seen in the cases
where she subjoins a sketch of her vision ; though it is
impossible to deny its resemblance to the real thing, it
most often turns out to be a far from correct reproduction
of it. As to the auditions, the incorrectness was even
greater. Neither are the achievements of the professional
mediums perfect. Of Mr. Vout Peters's performances
in Helsingfors at least a fourth part were failures,
and even the best ones contained errors. In cases which
are not given verbatim, as for instance Mrs. Stella's, we
cannot of course expect to get full information about the
incorrect statements. In the cases of prevision, too, we
find the same inaccuracy. Rightly Sir Oliver Lodge uses
expressions as " partly open " and " dimly decipherable "
when he metaphorically describes the relation between
the clairvoyant persons and the record which they are
reading. That kind of clairvoyance which the name
denotes does not seem to exist. A dim and clouded vision
would be a more correct designation for supernormal
perception.
Only with this reservation can we subscribe to the asser-
tion of Hartmann.
SECTION II
The Automatic Writing of Mrs. Verrall
CHAPTER IV
introduction, dr. verrall's experiment
The instances of supernormal perception by means of
which Hartmann's assertion was illustrated must neces-
sarily be taken from cases where no participation of the
dead was assumed. This, however, involved that it was
as a rule perception in a waking condition we had to deal
with. For with the trance state imagination sets in, and
most often gives birth to the idea of an extra-terrestrial
origin of the mediumistic productions.
With the trance, then, we have reached quite a new
territory. A state of concentration or otherwise abnormal
condition is probably the necessary accessory both of
telepathy, psychometry, and clairvoyance ; Miss Ramsden
accentuates the importance of concentration, and Mr. Vout
Peters says that he puts himself in a slight ecstasy when
accomphshing his performances. But this is very different
from the state which excludes the psychic's waking co-
operation and conscious apprehension of his perceptions.
Only in that state commences the production of those
romances which Professor Flournoy relates. Cryptom-
nesia, also, of course implies that the waking consciousness
is in abeyance.
What is said here, however, is not confined to real
trance, but includes as well that state in which the other-
wise waking individual is automatically producing speech
or script without knowing what he produces. Mrs. A. W.
Verrall, whose automatic script we are first going to
DR. VERRALL'S EXPERIMENT 47
examine, gives an account of the manner of its production
which shows how completely this is the case with her.
The words come to her as single things, she says, and
seem to vanish as soon as she has written them. She
perceives a word or two, but never understands whether
it makes sense with what goes before. Though she is
aware at the moment of writing what language her hand
is using, when the script is finished she often cannot say
what language has been used as the recollection of the
words passes away with extreme rapidity. She is some-
times exceedingly sleepy during the production of the
writing, and more than once she has momentarily lost
consciousness of her surroundings.
There seems to be no reason to doubt that this is a
state similar to trance as regards the co-operation of
consciousness. It is quite another matter when Miss
Ramsden describes her impressions, and reasons about
their being right or wrong, etc. Mrs. Verrall is just as
ignorant of her writing as she is irresponsible for it.
The problem, then, which will occupy us in the following
pages is, how to account for the origin of her productions.
Mrs. A. W. Verrall is a most inteUigent lady, with
extensive knowledge of modern and ancient literature, a
lecturer in Greek at Newnham College in Cambridge.
She has herself in the Proceedings of the Society for
Psychical Research^ published a report of her automatic
writing during the first four years of its existence (1901 —
1904). She has done this with a critical sense which is
both acute and fine, and which in many points makes her
clear-sighted as to the character of the script. That an
intimate connection exists between its contents and her
own mind is shown, she says, in the languages used? in
quotations from authors known to her, in allusions to
literary and other subjects familiar to her. She speaks
of " the extremely far-fetched nature of associations in
the region of her subliminal self " ; she points out the part
1 Vol. XX., pp. 1—432.
48 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
played by assonance, — as when Daphne seems suggested
by daffodil, and the like. But in spite of all this, she does
not believe that the script as a whole originates from her
own self. It can intrude upon it and often does so ; but
the chief part is due to other factors.
Mrs. Verrall had been interested in psychical pheno-
mena for many years before she herself succeeded in
producing automatic script. She had tried writing and
" planchette " as well as crystal-gazing ; her experiments
in the latter direction were published in the Pro-
ceedings ; but with a few doubtful exceptions the pictures
so seen were, she herself says, purely fantastical. She
was a very close friend of that eminent representative of
psychical research in England, Frederic Myers. Like
herself and her husband, Dr. A. W. Verrall, he resided in
Cambridge. His death in Rome, on January 17th, 1901,
was a double bereavement ; she not only lost a friend,
but the one who had more than any other been the
participator of her interest in psychical matters.
From January 19th, 1901, Mrs. Verrall recommenced
her attempts to obtain psychical phenomena. She sat
in the darkness, she held her hand on a planchette or
tried with a pencil. On March 5th her efforts were
crowned with success, and her first script was produced.
It contained about eighty words almost entirely in Latin,
but though the words seemed to make phrases, there was
no general sense in these. By degrees, though, the
script became more comprehensible ; besides Latin and
Greek, English too was employed.
When reading consecutively a large quantity of
Mrs. VerraU's script, one is struck at the same time
with its learned and poetical character, and with its
want of cohesion, its use of wrong quotations and self-
fabricated language, its apparent profundities which
most often turn out to be nonsense ; to all of which must
be added its faltering and seeking, its groping both for
words and ideas. All this can be explained in different
ways. The learning and the poetry may be due to Myers
DR. VERRALL'S EXPERIMENT 49
in whose name the script most frequently speaks, in a
more or less open manner. The confusion may be due
to Mrs. Verrall's automatic self that, like the dream-self,
lacks the reasoning power of the waking consciousness.
The groping and faltering may be due to the automatist's
defective power of perception. But the learning and
poetry may also be due to Mrs. Verrall's own high culture
and philological erudition. Her subconscious memory
may bring to light matter which she had normally for-
gotten, so that the script will in a manner give more than
she herself would be capable of giving, and at the same
time less, owing to the want of control on the part of the
waking intelligence. There remains, then, the question of
the origin of those things which the automatist gropingly
seems to seek.
It will be necessary, I believe, to analyze a large portion
of the script in order to answer these questions. It does
not suffice to give instances. There ought not to remain
anything after examination which might justly be
advanced in support of an opposite theory to that which
will be laid down here.
• • • • • ' •
One of the questions asked above referred to the cause
of the seeking and groping which was sometimes apparent
in the script. No doubt it is not certain beforehand that
it is due to an external source ; everybody knows from
personal experience what it is to search one's own memory
for a forgotten word. On the other hand, we have seen
how Miss Ramsden groped for the things which Miss Miles
tried to transmit to her. Now it happens that Mrs.
Verrall's script of an early period presents an instance of
her being made to receive an impression from a willing
agent, without willing it and without knowing anything
about it. The case has been mentioned as an illustration
of Hartmann's category of " non-intentional perception
by intentional transmission " ; it will later on be very
useful in the discussion of these problems. So I propose
to reproduce it at some length.
CD. E
50 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Not long after the inception of Mrs. Verrall's automatic
writing, in April, 1901, her husband decided to try whether
he could by thought-transference produce a certain thing
in her script. He chose for his subject a Greek sentence,
and though she partly wrote in Greek this no doubt
rendered the whole thing more difhcult. At the same
time, it was of course wise to choose something quite out
of the ordinary, in order that a possible success might not
be ascribed to chance.
The sentence was fxov67r(a>Xov es aw, and belonged to a
passage from the Orestes of Euripides set for translation
in the Tripos of 1873, the year of Dr. Verrall's degree ;
it had at the time caused some^mirth between himself and
his friends, among whom were Edmund Gurney, who died
in 1888, and Dr. A. T. Myers, who died in 1894. The
literal translation of the phrase is "to the one-horse [car
of] dawn " ; in Dr. Verrall's opinion the translation
ought to be " to the lonely wandering dawn." The
incident was never known, as far as they were aware, to
his future wife.
The result of the experiment was that Mrs. Verrall
never produced the phrase in her automatic script ; but
that in the course of the summer of 1901, from May to
September, it presented in so many different ways an
approximation now to the sound of the words, and now
to their sense, that it is impossible to doubt that she was
unconsciously influenced by her husband's thought. At
the same time it is seen that not only the sentence which
he wanted to get written, but other circumstances con-
nected with the episode from 1873, were reflected in the
script. Besides, other occurrences of his, but possibly
known to Mrs. Verrall, seem to have appeared in the script
as a consequence of her exertions to produce his Greek
words. Further, it is interesting to see that he himself
is often referred to during these exertions, as if her sub-
consciousness together with the impression received
quite a correct idea as to its origin, and this in spite of
Mrs. Verrall's own conception imprinting on the whole
DR. VERRALL'S EXPERIMENT 51
production the stamp of being derived from another
source.
It will appear from the following extracts that the efforts
of the script were with a single exception — ixovoxtToovos
on July 31st — for a long time directed exclusively towards
the notion of dawn. At that notion it aimed directly and
indirectly, the latter mostly by means of the symbols
cock and cock-crowing. Mrs. Verrall herself thinks that
the first allusion is to be found in a script of June i6th,
1901 ; I beheve it dates further back, and that the script
of May nth is already connected with Dr. Verrall's
experiment, although another element, of which account
will be rendered later on, intermingles with it. I com-
mence therefore with the earlier script which both alludes
to Dr. Verrall, and contains the drawing of a bird which
Mrs. Verrall interpreted as a cock and in jest dubbed
" the cocky oly bird."
May nth, 1901.
" Do not hurry date this hoc est quod volui — tandem [this
is what I have wanted — at last]. A. W. V. [in Greek :]
and perhaps some one else. Calx pedibus inhaerens diffi-
cultatem superavit [chalk sticking to the feet has got over the
difaculty]. "
"A. W. V." is in the script the usual designation for
Dr. A. W. Verrall, when it does not say " your husband."
As Mrs. Verrall beUeves that another personality makes
use of her hand, she addresses herself in the second person,
and means when she says " I " the invisible writer. The
sentence, " This is what I have wanted — at last," also
intimates that it is Dr. Verrall's phrase the script refers
to. But just like as in dreaming one matter is by a
E 2
52 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
desultory association of ideas interwoven with another ;
the idea of the cock leads to something wholly different ;
the words " Chalk sticking to the feet," etc., have their
own curious history. Altogether, it would be unjusti-
fiable to connect the script with Dr. Verrall's experiment
if the interesting bird did not reappear under circum-
stances which show that it is meant to symbolize the dawn.
The nejit writings referring to the experiment run as
follows :
June i6th, 1901.
" Five stars in the east that is not right. Can't you under-
stand — avis ille incredibilis redibit [the incredible bird will
return] Show it all to your husband
July 4th, igoi.
" Yellow is the colour of the dawn
July 31st, 1901.
" Longaevus senex barba alba /xovoxtTwvos [an aged man
with a white beard, one-garmented]
August 13th, 1901.
" [Drawing of a cock] cock a crested cock that crows is the
emblem — not a real bird, heraldic — with a motto^cano
canam albam [I sing the white dawn]."
The last script contained withal an allusion to an
incident connected with Dr. Verrall, the loss of a hat and
a hatbox some years previously : " Hat — a black hat in
a box belonging to him was lost." Afterwards follow
quickly one upon the other, a number of writings con-
nected with the experiment.
August 16th, 1901.
" Easier and easier, though you do not know. The cock is
inside a circle perhaps a coin. Try for the words again.
Cano canti clam no carmen cano [I sing a song] Canam some-
how belongs going towards the east. A. W. V. will under-
stand this — I think of him when I say it. You do not know.
August 20th, 1901.
" [Remarks in Greek about others being present.] Now you
must see that it is right. The long room with the many
windows is near this hot room — he was outside — how plain it
seems to me! but you don't know. Arthur [Dr. A. T.
Myers ?^ can tell you.
DR. VERRALL'S EXPERIMENT 53
August 2yd, 1901.
" Canta catechumen no that's not right But it looks
like canta and then something. The cock is really important
— crowing in a circle [circle drawn] there is writing round the
bird letters raised :jTrA something like that. And there
is something gold about it somewhere. Canticlere is nearer
[drawing of bell] a bell.
August 28th, igoi.
" [Drawing of cock in circle] Kikiriki ! it is better now — the
emblem is within the circle, golden I think Ask A. W.
he will recognize this Cappa or Cana is a word that
belongs. Cantilupe is more like — cant ilenam Cantiaris
[drawing of sundial] x x x in the east to the daylight —
happily. Now write the word — it runs round a dial or font."
As may be seen, the script of August i6th had placed
the cock within a circle or perhaps a coin. This idea was
followed up on August 23rd where it was said that there
were letters round the bird ; besides, a sundial was
mentioned, and on August 28th the two motives, the
cock and the sundial, were closely connected ; there
seemed to be a question of a sundial with an inscription
round the ring and a cock in the middle. This is another
interweaving like that which is known from dreams. But
the remarkable point is, that all the motives have some-
thing to do with Dr. Verrall. He had once composed a
Latin description for a friend of Frederic Myers ; it seems
that the object to be inscribed was a mantelpiece, but
that his recollection was that it was a sundial. It is of
course possible that it was the mention of a sundial in the
script, which was shown to him by his wife, that made
him connect the inscription with such a one ; if this be
the case, the placing of it in a circle is Mrs. Verrall's own
subliminal invention. But at any rate the fact remains,
that she in her script connected her husband's Latin
inscription with the cock of whose relation to him she was
normally ignorant.
After the conversation between Dr. and Mrs. Verrall
about the sundial and the inscription, the script no more
reverted to these subjects, but continued in the following
manner :
54 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
August 29th, 1 90 1.
" Cantilect — that is not so good as before — Cantuar CC
and a heraldic bird in colours — the light comes through, on
a window to the east
September 2nd, 1901.
" Canticlene has a word to say — one for him not you
There could be more. Malleson Don't give up. Listen
again — waly is the beginning — perhaps vale, two syllables
is TO follow the valy — it comes again."
This w^as the first of a series of attempts to produce the
identical Greek words, is acJ and ixoifoircoKov, of which
the following are the clearest :
September 4th, 1901.
" Find it and you will see — — /jlovoo-toXos — /Aovo;^tTa)vos /aovos
[single-vested — single-robed alone] There were others
but he knew more than the rest
September yth, 1901.
" Mol es to but the 6C is the end of the word c? there
are o and 1 before the es, o\ cs Tender es fusa a long word
like that.
September gih, 1901.
" 01 un c es that's not right — but the m comes before the
6s a g iles. I can't tell you the sense, only the letters. It
was someone else's words, not his — His are the other, quite
separate. — moleskin — that is more like, the look not the mean-
ing. Pye is a bird too but not ours Find the herb moly
that will help ''
Pye is the first intimation of the rr in ixovottcoKov. As
regards moly, Mrs, Verrall points out that this word is
found in a passage from Milton's Comus, which was the
subject for Latin hexameters in the Tripos examination
of 1873. Dr. Verrall, however, had completely forgotten
this circumstance, and it seems quite unjustifiable to
connect it with the " moly " of the script. The latter
exactly resembles the other approximations to ixovoiruiKov
— valy, mol, moleskin, etc. — which are given there.
Meanwhile the script continued its evident but not very
successful attempts at the words.
September 12th, 1901.
" — fjLo — €s eyu-oXcs mollis Pye gives one clue, but there
is another a dark man who smoked — Both were in it —
DR. VERRALL'S EXPERIMENT 55
which of them spoke ? not yours. In the long dull room —
with candles lighted. Pale when that is not sense, but not
very wrong.
September 14th, 1901.
" Moaves that is the old mistake — estote looks like a part.
On the wall, mola or molina is more like. Strange it seems
that you cannot read. On the left there are more A V E N T
then the word that ends in es and something after it
Pla net or play net. illustre vagatur caelo sine comite [bright
it wanders in the sky uncompanioned] palely loitering — I can't
get it to-night — wait — you will hear later "
In the latter script the passage about the uncom-
panioned planet is perhaps an echo of the one-horse dawn.
But with regard to the reproduction of the Greek the
progress was small. To forward matters Dr. Verrall, on
September i8th, while his wife was writing in one room
and he sitting in another, fixed his mind upon the notion
of horse, the only idea which had so far been entirely
absent. That he did not do so in vain, the following
script will show :
September 18th, 1901.
" There is a message for her — about a knife — on a table, with
letters engraved upon it — not in Enghsh J~H mTr c^- [one
horse] the letters look like that "
Possibly the reading ought to be evLiTTros, " of goodly
horses," but the notion of horse had at any rate appeared.
But with this nice instance of thought-transference there
was put an end to the success of the experiment. Dr.
Verrall on September 19th told his wife that in the above
writing there was an allusion to a point which he had long
looked for, and that when she went to write on the i8th
he had fixed upon this point. This communication
evidently changed the course of the experiment. The
automatic self seems to have been unable to continue its
exertions after Mrs. Verrall had learned that they were
caused by a living person. The following script is very
characteristic :
October 6th, 1901.
" But A. W. V. must be satisfied What is the word he
56 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
wants to complete, neither you nor I know it. so it is hard
to get. It all belongs to him but not to me, his friends but
not mine. No one here knows but one & her I have not
met. I will ask Arthur "
It is remarkable to see how the script clings to the belief
that it speaks in the name of a deceased person, viz., Myers.
As long as Mrs. Verrall thought that it was he who wanted
to express certain things by means of her hand, it ran :
" How plain it seems to me ! but you don't know," etc.
But as soon as she had learned that it was her husband
who tried to impress her, it was quite another part that
was assigned to the alleged communicator. Now it is no
longer he who knows the wanting word ; now he and
Mrs. Verrall are equally in the dark. " What is the word
he [A. W. v.] wants to complete ? " it now runs : " neither
you nor I know it, so it is hard to get." Formerly it was
Myers who urged her to write the words ; now he does
not know them. The automatic self does not shun any
inconsistency in order to preserve its leading idea.
It was not, however, until October of the following
year, 1902, that Dr. Verrall related the whole experiment
to his wife. In the meantime allusions to it had now and
again appeared in the script. But now it was evident
construction, and no longer anything due to the thoughts
of Dr. Verrall. As instances the following writings may
be quoted :
November 4th, 1901.
" It is the woman's name your husband wants — it was not
Clara — but I see the curve beginning it."
Clara seems to be a reminiscence of Canticlere and the
other attempts at words beginning with C.
March 10th, 1902.
" Your husband's cocks have gone away, but I will tell
more later,"
March 2yih, 1902.
" Your husband's thought was good but not complete. The
old man in white was the best part of it but I have not been
able to finish that, and now it has all gone away,"
The experiment was finished, but a good deal may be
DR. VERRALL'S EXPERIMENT 57
learned from it. A comparison with Miss Ramsden's
attempts to receive what Miss Miles strove to transmit
shows both resemblance and disparity. The resemblance
consists in the difficulty which the automatic writer no
less than the waking percipient has in grasping things
which really come from outside. As regards this, it seems
to make no difference whether the percipient knows that
someone tries to impress him, or, as Mrs. Verrall, is
ignorant of it. There is a strong contrast between this
difficulty and the fluency with which the words flow from
the automatist's hand when left to himself. Perhaps
one ought always on meeting such a groping, such a
desperate struggle to express something which the writer
does not even subconsciously seem to know, to stop and
ask : " What can be the origin of this that intrudes here
upon the psychic's mind ? "
The two phenomena further resemble each other
therein, that Mrs. Verrall, as well as Miss Ramsden, not
only receives impressions of the words and notions which
the agent intends to transmit ; she dimly discerns other
circumstances belonging to the distant episode which her
husband had in mind. He had after the translation of
the passage from the Orestes stood outside the Senate
house where the examination took place, and with his
friends laughed at the odd phrase " the one-horse dawn."
More than once this situation seems to have been dis-
cernible to the inner vision of his wife. " He was out-
side," the script relates on August 20th ; and on Sep-
tember 9th : " there were others there, but he knew more
than the rest." Of the words themselves it says on
September 9th : "It was someone else's words, not his."
This is correct, as the words were taken from Euripides.
To the examination the script seems to allude on Sep-
tember 12th when it says : "In the long dull room —
with candles lighted."
Mrs. Verrall, then, has shown herself not only able to
receive impressions supernormally, but clairvoyant, or
mind-reading if that term be preferred.
58 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
The difference between Miss Ramsden and Mrs. Verrall
is mostly due to the circumstance that the latter not
only " perceives," but constructs withal. This, and the
cause of it, the trance-like and irresponsible state which
accompanies the writing, has already been spoken of.
Dr. Verrall's experiment has shown that the supernormal
perceptions are woven into the dream-like fabrication
exactly in \the same manner as the automatist's own
normal or latent knowledge. They are used to support
the idea that the invisible power which employs her hand
and puts down words which her brain does not apprehend
is some other than herself.
This idea is the life-principle in Mrs. Verrall's writing.
When she addresses herself by yon, she does not see that
the one who does so is another part of her own self. But
is it, after having followed Dr. Verrall's experiment
through its different phases, possible to doubt this ? Is
it possible to doubt that when, for instance, the script
says : " A. W. V. will understand — I think of him when
I say it. You do not know," it is the lucid part of her
mind, to quote Sir Oliver Lodge,^ that thinks of Dr.
Verrall, while her normal self ignores that he is concerned
with the matter ? But this kind of dramatic play
between the writer and her automatic self is throughout
characteristic of Mrs. Verrall's script, and confirmed her
belief in its being another person who wrote. At the
outset, her hand refused to put the name of that other
person under the messages. Once even her own initials
were written under the words spoken to herself : " Can't
you see ? Can't you believe ? M. de G. V." A battle
seems to be fought between her subconscious knowledge
and the belief of her waking self ; but the latter gains the
victory, and many communications are signed with the
names of Frederic Myers or other departed persons.
' See above, p. 41.
CHAPTER V
THE SYMPOSIUM INCIDENT
A SHORT time before the death of Frederic Myers and
the commencement of her own automatic writing,
Mrs. Verrall had made the acquaintance of another lady-
automatist, Mrs. Forbes (pseudonym). The script of
the latter, which was partly produced by means of plan-
chette, was thought by her to originate fiom her son
Talbot (pseudonym) who had been killed in the South
African war in the beginning of the year 1900, and from
Edmund Gurney who had been known to her personally.
From February, 1901, Myers, who had been also known
to her, was added to these. The state of Mrs. Forbes,
also when she produced direct script, was less uncon-
scious than that of Mrs. Verrall ; she understood what
she wrote, and sometimes completed the words by
guesses ; it was, however, always carefully noted down
when such was the case.
A couple of months after becoming acquainted with
Mrs. Verrall, on February 24th, 1901, Mrs. Forbes obtained
at her house in the north of England in planchette-
writing what turned out to be a correct description of
Mrs. Verrall's contemporaneous situation in Cambridge.
The first words were : " Edmund Gurney writes for
Myers^ let us see our friends in Cambridge. Mrs. Verrall
is so strongly my friend that I can be with her." Plan-
chette then said that she was sitting in a chair near the
fire, very comfortable, and added : " but don't ask me
to look over her shoulder, for I can't see that she has got
a book."
Mrs. Verrall at the time was sitting in a low chair near
1 This commuiiicator is throughout Mrs. Verrall's report designated
by the initial H.
6o COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
the fire, close to her husband's chair ; they were together
looking over a typewritten manuscript of an article which
she had written ; her attitude and occupation were
suggestive of reading, but she held no book.
On March 4th Mrs. Verrall had a letter from Mrs. Forbes
giving the full account of this incident. The next day
she obtained her first script with real words. She herself
thinks that \ there is possibly a connection between
Mrs. Forbes's letter where the names of her supposed
communicators were given, and the marked improvement
in her own script.
At any rate, the connection with Mrs. Forbes became
of much importance in the next period. On March 17th
Mrs. Verrall's script contained the following words in
Latin :
" What is more difficult, not to say impossible, unless you
also wish it ? To-day I can, not without doubt. Write ' we
are in Diana's allegiance.' Note it again."
The reference is to a poem of Catullus ; but Diana is
the Christian name of Mrs. Forbes, and Mrs. Verrall took
the words to be a message from the persons writing
through this lady. In themselves they do not seem to
contain anything to support such an assumption. But
gradually there developed between the two automatists
a faculty of influencing each other supernormally which
recalls the relations between Miss Ramsden and Miss
Miles. These are described by Miss Miles as follows^ :
" There seems," says she, " an invisible cord attached to
Miss Ramsden. When the power is once fairly started
she seems to get any message whether I am thinking of
her or not. It seems to go on the whole time." At other
times, on the contrary, they " cannot get into touch at
all." With this the following account by Mrs. Verrall
ought to be compared : " On January nth, 1902, I noted
in my diary that I had felt on the day before that ' after
an interval I had again come into touch ' with whatever
1 Proceedings Am. S.P.R., Vol. V., p. 688.
THE SYMPOSIUM INCIDENT 6i
it was that produced my automatic script On
January loth, Mrs. Forbes automatically wrote a long
message for me from ' Edmund ' which I received after
I had made the above-mentioned entry in my diary.
Neither the subjective impression nor the contents of the
script are definite enough to be evidential. But the
coincidence between the reference to me after three
weeks' silence and my own sensation of having ' come
into touch ' is worth noting." It seems then as if Mrs.
Verrall could feel that Mrs. Forbes was once more engaged
with thoughts of her. No doubt she herself took her
sensation to mean more than this ; but the " message "
has evidently contained nothing to sustain her belief.
If it cannot be supported in other ways, the parallel to
the Miles-Ramsden cases must give the precedence to
the purely human interpretation.
In the planchette- writing of February 24th, Mrs. Forbes
had shown a supernormal power to perceive the surround-
ings of Mrs. Verrall of which several instances occur in the
time following. Essentially it did not differ from that
displayed by Miss Ramsden and other sensitives. Some-
times it had the character of a faculty to obtain impres-
sions about something which occupied Mrs. Verrall, at
other times it was of a more visionary nature. No
doubt it was further developed through experiments
made by the two ladies simultaneously trying for auto-
matic script, and the like.
This faculty of Mrs. Forbes became important in the
following case which in its way is as instructive as the
experiment of Dr. Verrall. " The Symposium incident "
presents an instance of subconscious fabrication which
must be acknowledged as such because it led to an actual
event, viz., the opening of a sealed letter left by Frederic
Myers, by which its real nature was unveiled. But the
part played by Mrs. Forbes as co-operating at a certain
point was a phenomenon which might well confirm
Mrs. Verrall's behef in the genuineness of her own script.
62 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
The incident, however, had a prelude which had nothing
to do with Mrs. Forbes.
On May 31st, 1901, Mrs. Verrall's script among other
things contained the phrase " Diotima gave the clue."
Mrs. Verrall states that she knew at that time nothing
about Diotima except that she was the one woman in
the Platonic dialogues, and that she was mentioned in the
Symposium. \ The dialogue itself she had never read, and
had very little conscious knowledge of its contents.
No doubt it does not in itself require a special explana-
tion that Mrs. Verrall's script, which so often refers to
classical subjects, mentioned a name from Plato which
she at any rate knew. A possible ground for its emer-
gence just at this point may, however, be adduced.
Diotima is mentioned in Myers's work, Human Personality
and its Survival of Bodily Death, which was just then going
through the press. The proofs v/ere in Mrs. Myers's
house at Cambridge where Mrs. Verrall was a frequent
visitor in the spring and summer of 1901. It is therefore,
as she herself states, not impossible that she should have
seen, without consciously noticing, the passage which
contains the name Diotima. She corrected the proofs of
a portion of the book, and must doubtless have been near
the remaining parf.
Nay it may even be contended that it is not only
possible, but all but certain that such was the cause of
the mention of Diotima in the script. At a later time,
but before the publication of the book, Mrs. Verrall
expressed through the script her belief that the passage
in question was to be found in it. This already intimates
that she had without knowing seen the passage. But,
moreover, the script of this period contains a case pointing
in the same direction. When Mrs. Verrall had written
of Diotima, she wanted to learn more about her ; so, on
June 1st, she looked up in the Symposium the passage
where Socrates says that Diotima, the prophetess, had
said that Love (Eros) was a spirit (daimon) and mediator
between God and man. The speech of Socrates comes
THE SYMPOSIUM INCIDENT 63
immediately after Agathon's panegyric of Love, at the
end of which are introduced two hexameter lines con-
taining the phrases " calm [<ya\rivrj\ on the sea, and
" stillness [vr]v€iiLav] of winds." Mrs. Verrall herself
thinks that she may unconsciously have seen these lines
on the day when she read about Diotima. Later she
automatically wrote as follows :
June 2yth, 1901.
" Quid coerces nenymon yaXT^vwv p^fx-qv [why dost thou
stay the might of the windless calm].
September 28th, 1901.
" Noenymus vt^vc/^os eo-rt yaX-rjvrj [windless is the calm].
December 12th, 1901.
" Nenymos yaXrjvrj — is the word but there is more It
is Greek but written in English letters — two words are plain.
I think there is something more. This is not your husband's
word — he wants a word but more than a name."
The latter script shows that Agathon's words from the
Symposium, which have nothing whatever to do with the
Diotima incident save that they precede the passage which
Mrs. Verrall looked up, had become for the automatist a
part of the usual notion of something that was to be
found and supplemented, i.e., the notion that her impres-
sions came from outside. Possibly the unconscious groping
for Dr. VerraU's phrase had taught the automatic self to
grope for words and seek for clues generally. But when
the idea of the " windless calm " undoubtedly had come
to Mrs. Verrall by a casual glance at something which did
not reach her waking consciousness, it is highly probable
that the same had been the case with the Diotima passage
in the proofs of Myers's book, which had at any rate been
in her immediate proximity.^
The Symposium incident's real history, however, does
not begin until November 26th, 1902, a year and a half
after the mention of Diotima in the script. It happened
1 Cf. Mrs. Myers's remarks about the proofs of Fragments from Prose
and Poetry, to which, other aUusions in Mrs. VerraU's script of the same
period seem due {Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XXVI., p. 229).
64 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
that the Diotima passage from the Symposium had been
set for translation by a lecturer at Trinity College, Cam-
bridge, and that Mrs. Verrall was in the habit of using the
Trinity College translation papers for her class at Newn-
ham College. On account of this she read on Novem-
ber 26th in the dialogue the context of the passage, and
on November 27th looked over some ten or twelve
translation? of it. " During these two days," she writes,
" my mind was full of the passage, of the reference to it
earlier in my script, and of the appropriateness of its
selection."
By the last phrase Mrs. Verrall means the appropriate-
ness of the selection of the passage by Myers as a message
on May 31st of the preceding year. When she could
make so much of the bare mention of the name Diotima
in her script, it is no wonder that the subsequent develop-
ment of the case must impress her greatly. For those
acquainted with the final result it must of course appear
in another light.
At this point Mrs. Forbes's receptiveness for impres-
sions concerning Mrs. Verrall had reached no small pro-
portions, and she had given several proofs of supernormal
knowledge about her doings and preoccupations. It had
been agreed bet\\^een the two automatists that Mrs. Verrall
ought to receive all of Mrs. Forbes's script which the
writer thought referred to her, while on the contrary.
Mis. Forbes never saw the other's script nor learned
anything whatever about her opinion of her own. Con-
sequently she knew nothing about the references to
Diotima or the Symposium. At the same time she of
course knew that Mrs. Verrall like herself was interested
in Myers, and hoped that her script had him partially for
its source. The importance of ascertaining this by means
of some test must likewise be clear to her. With this in
mind it is not difficult to understand that she could
produce the following scripts :
November 26th, 1902.
" Myers opens a book long closed.
THE SYMPOSIUM INCIDENT 65
November 2'jth, 1902.
" Will it be worth while to try to follow the clue of yester-
day ? Myers wishes Mrs. Verrall to open the last book she
read for him in which is the true word of the test. If she will
try to begin the sentence with this word he will be sm^e to
prove his being the writer — let the letter be sent to-night."
On the other hand, a supernormal element probably
intervenes. In view of the relations between the two
sensitives it is very likely that Mrs. Forbes has had a
vague perception of the matter which occupied Mrs.
Verrall during the same days — a book in which was a word
that was perhaps a test. But a real conformity is wanting ;
on the base of what is in itself a correct impression,
something wholly wrong or nonsensical has been con-
structed. It was wrong to speak about a book which
Mrs. Verrall had read for Myers. And even if we accept
an interpretation which Mrs. Verrall favours, and take
the phrase " open the last book she read for him " to
mean " open for him the last book she read," viz., the
Symposium, the result did not confirm that the instruction
to find a word there and begin a sentence with it came
from Myers. As proceeding from him the script is irre-
levant ; as built on an impression about the preoccupation
of Mrs. Verrall it is comprehensible and interesting.
Mrs. Verrall, however, was much struck with its con-
tents which seemed so clearly connected with her own
thoughts at the time of its production. She tried now if, by
fixing her mind upon iheSymposium before trying for auto-
matic script, she could obtain further instructions ; but this
attempt met with no success. On the other hand, the script
told her already on November 28th that " it must come
elsewhere " ; and her belief in this has possibly had a
stimulating effect on Mrs. Forbes, whose subsequent script
clearly reflects the ideas which filled her co-operator —
Diotima, Eros, the Symposium. She writes as foUows :
December iSth, 1902.
"... word . . . Myers make it — . . . with the — Diony-
sus {} y Dion — . . .
1 A query indicates that part of the word is a guess.
CD. F
66 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
" Edmund writes to tell the friend — who writes with Talbot
— word of the Test will be Dy . . . Will you give the sense of
the message. Write to Mrs. Verrall and say the word
will be found in Myers own . . . will you send a message to
Mrs. Verrall to say Myers will see with^ her on Friday
[December igth] — will you be so kind as to send this to-day ?
"... Talbot writes to say you can be sure ... it is
one of the most Hymeneal Songs — Love's oldest melody.
January 6th, 1903.
"... sou . . . son suspuro suspiro sryseo sym on Myers
eros."
Moreover, on January nth, Mrs. Forbes, who did not
know Greek, produced the following letters : w, e, p, a-, (p, s, a,
which were described as part of an uncompleted test.
It is not to be wondered at that Mrs. Verrall after this
apparent confirmation of her belief in " Diotima " as a
message sent by Myers produced one script after another
full of allusions to the co-operation of Mrs. Forbes, and to
the book of Myers, which was about to be published.
It began after she had received Mrs. Forbes's script of
December i8th.
December igth, 1902.
" In the sealed book is the word, the message to men, the
new and old Diatesseron.
December 26th, 1902.
" Mrs. Forbes will get the words I want, but wait, happy is
the hour, let your thoughts follow her, do not write.
January i^th, 1903.
" Mrs. Forbes has sent it to you — or should have by now ;
she has got nearer and will get the word. Write more often
this month — we can do more now for you. Your husband's
test goes forward, Mrs. Forbes gets that better than you do —
write regularly — there will be news for you to write next week
— good news before the month is out. The book will help —
our word is there contained.
January 21st, 1903.
" Wait for the word from Mrs. Forbes
January 22nd, 1903.
" In Myers' book is a word that ought to make things
plain — read it to see — not at the head of a chapter — but
quoted in the text — it should have been — and surely is.
1 This expression is in Mrs. Forbes's script the usual equivalent for
" communicate with " or " write by means of.'!
THE SYMPOSIUM INCIDENT 67
January 23rd, 1903.
" Read the book for me. Look there for the helping word.
January 2$th, 1903.
" Between God and Man is the ^aifrnviov n — you will see
that quoted in the book — Love is the bond.
January '^ist, 1903.
" Look for what I have told you in the book — Myers' book.
The passage is important ' To the ends of the earth.' That
is the countersign."
As may be seen, there is nothing supernormal in all
this. It is simply an expression of Mrs. Veriall's belief
that the Diotima passage was to be found in Myers's
book, whose pubHcation she awaited in much excitement.
She is, however, not blind to the fact that it is herself who
at times speaks in the script. She points out, for instance,
with regard to the remark on January 22nd : " not at the
head of a chapter," that she had corrected for press a slip
consisting of a list of quotations for the headings of the
chapters, adding : " Hence no doubt the allusion in the
script." Other things in the script characterize them-
selves as fabrications because they are wrong ; such a one
is the remark on January 14th on Dr. Verrall's test ; it
neither went forward nor had anything to do with Mrs.
Forbes ; and the phrase at the end of the script of
January 31st, about the important passage " To the ends
of the earth " ; it was not found in Myers's book.
But the Diotima passage was really found in Human
Personality. It is argued above that Mrs. Verrall had
seen it unconsciously in the proofs in the spring of 1901,
and had thus throughout had a latent knowledge thereof.
But for herself this explanation hardly existed as a
possibility. The genuineness of her script became for
her almost indisputable when she found on looking over
the book on February loth, 1903, that Myers in its first
volume "gives an abstract of the ' cosmical ' aspect of
Love, as described by Plato in the Symposium, calhng
special attention to the fact that this utterance is placed
by Plato in the mouth of Diotima, the prophetess."
With this apparent success the first chapter of the
F 3
68 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Symposium incident ends. Only Mrs. Forbes, who
normally knew nothing about the whole matter, continued
to dwell on the Symposium. She writes :
February 20th, 1903.
" All we write is really S Y M P— a the tic (?)
March 2nd, 1903.
" Write to Mrs. Verrall to say the word we want to send
her to-day is sympathy come y Epus [?] love [?].
April 1st, 1903.
" S y m p athy Seal s ym p athy write this."
The word seal, though, in the last script is possibly due
to a new impression from Mrs. Verrall. And its appear-
ance in Mrs. Forbes's script together with the attempt at
symposium might well confirni the former's belief that it
was Myers who continued to use the hand of her fellow-
automatist. Apart from this contribution Mrs. Forbes,
however, had no part in the further development of the
Symposium case.
Mrs. Verrall's script, on the contrary, had only two da^^'s
after the appearance of Human Personality continued in a
new line.
Several years before his death, in 1891, Frederic Myers
had given into the charge of Sir Oliver Lodge a sealed
envelope which was to be opened after his death if some
medium produced a communication about its contents in
a manner that made it probable that it came from him.
It was with the contents of this envelope that Mrs.
Verrall's script after the success with the Diotima passage
began to occupy itself. The automatist herself is of
opinion that she may unconsciously have been led to
think of this envelope by her script of December 19th,
1902 : "In the sealed book is the word " ; to the impres-
sion which the word sealed made on her subconsciousness
all the following utterances about Myers's sealed envelope
might be due. But although she was willing in this case,
where the result proved that the communications did not
proceed from the alleged source, to ascribe them to herself,
she did not from thence draw any conclusion with regard
THE SYMPOSIUM INCIDENT 69
to the remaining script. And yet there seems to be no
essential difference between other " messages " and those
referring to the sealed envelope. For the estimation of
Mrs. Verrall's script as a whole it is therefore very useful
to thoroughly study this case.
During the first two months after the publication of
Myers's book the following scripts were written :
February 12th, 1903.
" Hodgson will help . . . The key of the box is in a little
drawer upstairs The metal box is heavy not very small
— not a cash box to carry. The letter is tied with thread and
there is a word stamped on the seal, — not a figure — a word of
4 letters.
February 22nd, 1903.
" Direct Leaf and Pitherington to see open the chest and
this is the order of the rite — Seal green and irregular has a
word across it in an oval little print letters in English. Truth,
Light — no not those — Love you mistake — that is not outside
— you do not hear.
March lyth, 1903.
" Two high windows, with dark curtains — looking on a
street — and a table with a red cloth. The writing table is
in that room and the key in its drawer would fit Ask
Hodgson too —
March 20th, 1903.
" Now something else. You must find that drawer and get
the key. Then things will be plain. There are papers inside
and you will not find mine at once, you must look for it.
The seal is quite irregular — ragged in outline
March 26th, 1903.
" The device on the seal is distinctive — get that first
[drawing of oval seal] four letters ^s :r^ like that, pairs
[scrawls] no you don't understand. It is on the seal, an
oval shaped seal, with four letters on it — Roma or amor
perhaps — not a figure but a word with a meaning. Inside
is the sentence you know — but it is not in Greek — it is in
English letters — It is the word of the simposium — and the
greatest of these is Charity is like it — but the word is Love —
Crosst amor.
April igth, 1903.
" [Drawing of oval seal] sigillum. The envelope is square
square and white Go to the box for it — it lies there with
others and is not on the top. The paper inside is folded once.
The box has a handle on the middle of the top, — a sunken
handle. There is some double locking — two keys are wanted
70 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
— the small one and one on a bunch. Orotava or something
like that is the password Life is more like the word on the
seal. LIFE there is a little frame round of double lines.
Is not this enough ? The seal — the box — the 2 keys in
different places — the dark house & high windows the box
and something green."
Mrs, Verrall had thus gradually written down a great
many particulars which she thought referred to Myers's
envelope. It^ is true that most of them were quite
unimportant, as regards the test ; others were self -con-
tradictory ; now it is Dr. Leaf and Mr. Piddington who
ought to open the chest, now the assistance of Dr. Hodg-
son — who was in America — is invoked. However, on
March 26th the script had clearly stated the main point.
" Inside is the sentence you know," it ran, " it is the word
of the Symposium — the word is Love." To be sure, this
was a rather likely guess. Possibly Mrs. Forbes's script
of March 2nd had its share in it ; Mrs. Verrall, of course,
did not consider it an echo of the preceding ones.
On April 17th Mrs. Verrall 's script had given a very
clear description of a box in a bank as the place where the
letter was kept. This agreed with the normal knowledge
of the automatist ; Sir Oliver Lodge had, in fact, deposited
Myers's sealed envelope in a bank. But on the other hand
the script had mentioned Hodgson, and Mrs. Verrall
therefore thought that it did not at all refer to the envelope
in Sir Oliver's charge, but to some other letter left with
Dr. Hodgson. The allusions on April 17th to the pass-
word, " Orotava or something like that," also pointed to
Dr. Hodgson ; the exertions to produce a particular word
were continued for some time in the script and were in
fact connected with Dr. Hodgson, as will be seen later on.
But they had not, as believed by Mrs. Verrall, any con-
nection with a Myers envelope.
Mrs. Verrall's belief in such a connection was, however,
displayed in the following script :
August 18th, 1903.
" The box that I told of stands on a chair, squared with
metal clamps — yellowish wood. It is near a window. Hodgson
THE SYMPOSIUM INCIDENT 71
expects a message about it before he will open it — you have
sent part of the word to him but not all. The word you should
send is the name of a ship — Orinaria Orellaria, like that.
It ends in — ia. The message inside is from the Symposium
the passage you know "
After this most clear intimation of Dr. Hodgson being
the keeper of the envelope with the Symposium-passage,
Mrs. Verrall wrote to him telling him of the description
of the box. In his reply, dated September 17th, 1903, he
told her that he knew nothing of any box like that
described, and had no sealed envelope left him for
posthumous reading.
Mrs. Verrall's subsequent script contained among other
things divers messages that purported to come from
Professor Sidgwick who died in the year igoo. As a
consequence hereof, the subject of an envelope left by
him with his wife was introduced, though such a one does
not seem to have existed. References to this envelope
and to that of Myers were mixed in a confused manner.
In the script it was now Myers and now Professor Sidg-
wick who held the conversation.
September 22nd, 1903.
" In his [i.e. Myers's] envelope is a drawing, a curved line,
on one side of the paper, and a word or two on the other side
. . . ^L-yixa stands for Sidgwick elsewhere, why not there
too ? But you must give another message correctly first
and then ask her to open my envelope.
January lyth, 1904.
" S is the letter. S in the envelope S and on a seal. 2. In
Mrs. Sidgwick's letter a 2 — and three words on the paper —
not without hope. The question is answered. This must
succeed — the other is harder
July 13th, 1904.
" I have long told you of the contents of the envelope.
Myers' sealed envelope left with Lodge. You have not
understood. It has in it the words from the Symposium —
about Love bridging the chasm. They are written on a
piece of single paper — folded and put in an envelope. That
is inside another envelope which has my initial at the bottom,
left hand and there is a date on the envelope too, the outside
envelope not in my writing. The whole thing has been put
with other papers in a box a small box clamped with metal.
72 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
July i^th, 1904.
" It would be important that Hodgson should see the box
opened — with the double envelope. His own may wait.
July 18th, 1904.
" Let the trial be made as they desire — this is clear — that
the passage from the Symposium which you have found as
was told you in the book is in an envelope, sealed by me. I
should like Hodgson to know this but it is not in his envelope.
I wrote the words some time before the book was ready —
perhaps the tost is not very good, but it should help.
August 14th, 1904.
" And in one envelope the reference to Love in the other
to Hope. And you will not look— Faith is not yours. Though
I speak with the tongue of an angel, you have not heard or
hearing have not done. Surely this is plain.
November 2^th, 1904.
" Why will you not look for it. Tell them that. Long
have they waited we do not know why — but can do no more."
In the face of such earnest appeals — which Mrs. Verrall
did not realize came from one part of her own self while
another part was sceptical — it seemed at last right to
yield. The many contradictory statements, nay mistakes
of the script — among which were the references to an
envelope left with Dr. Hodgson that continued in spite
of Mrs. Verrall's knowledge to the contrary — were over-
looked. The sealed envelope entrusted by Frederic Myers
to Sir Oliver Lodge was opened in the rooms of the
Society for Psychical Research in London on Decem-
ber 13th, 1904, and proved to contain a sentence bearing
no resemblance to the phrase from the Symposium which
Mrs. Verrall's script had led her to expect.
Such was the end of this incident which has presented
a unique opportunity to substantiate the subHminal power
of construction. Here where circumstances made it possible
to compare the statements of the script to an actual fact,
it became evident that the script was fiction. Apart from
" Diotima " that was doubtless due to latent memory,
the whole series of " messages " proved to be nothing but
subconscious fabrication. Not even Mrs. Forbes had
influenced the script supernormally ; as Mrs. VerraU read
her writings, the impulses due to them were conveyed to
THE SYMPOSIUM INCIDENT 73
her in a wholly normal manner. Judging by this incident,
Mrs. Verrall's automatism would seem to be exactly of
the same type as those mediums who were the subject of
Professor Flournoy's studies. Cryptomnesia and imagi-
nation suffice to explain all.
From Dr. Verrall's experiment, however, it appeared
that she was capable of receiving impressions transmitted
to her by a " willing agent." In the sequel it will be
proved that her susceptibility went further than this ;
that faculty of obtaining impressions without a willing
agent which Mrs. Forbes displayed in the Symposium
case, Mrs. Verrall herself possessed in no less a degree.
CHAPTER VI
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES WITH MRS. FORBES
The results of a supernormal relation between two
sensitives, or two automatists, like that which was in the
Symposium case seen to exist between Mrs. Verrall and
Mrs. Forbes, have in psychical research obtained the name
of cross-correspondences. It is used in a narrower sense
about the appearance in the scripts of two automatists
of the same, or similar, words or notions, and in a wider
sense about all veridical impressions which one of them
receives concerning the other. Mrs. Verrall employs it in
the latter sense when speaking of her " cross-correspon-
dences with Mrs. Forbes." But she reports also those
cases where her script refers to Mrs. Forbes, and vice-versa,
but where the reference does not correspond to any fact.
Her paper, she says, is a record, not of successes, but of
incidents. ^
A classification of these incidents would show that they
constitute two groups of about equal size of which one
may be called successes. On the whole, there wiU here
be reason to dwell on the latter group only ; but I will
cite a few failures which throw light on the entire process.
This for instance applies to a number of allusions in
Mrs. Verrall's script to the assistance she will get from
Mrs. Forbes :
March nth, 1903.
" Mrs. Forbes has got the other word and will send it — not
Symposium but it helps and is clear. I don't think she knows
it is for you but you will understand.
March i^th, 1903.
" Mrs. Forbes is slow but she has something which you have
not seen.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES: MRS. FORBES 75
July lyth, 1903.
" Mrs. Forbes has something which should settle the date —
it fills your gap."
The last phrase, " it fills your gap," has many parallels
which will be mentioned later ; Mrs. Verrall during the
growth of her collaboration with Mrs. Forbes had con-
ceived the not unnatural idea that the " controls " gave
through one of them what they could not produce through
the other. But in none of the above cited cases was the
assurance of the script based on any reality ; Mrs. Forbes's
writings contained nothing that referred to Mrs. Verrall.
And other incidents confirm the conception that it was
the automatists themselves who had invented this
romance about their co-operation under extra-terrestrial
influence. For instance, Mrs. Forbes in the summer of
1904 wrote the following which, as Mrs. Verrall says,
" suggested that some episode was now closed and that
some distinct success had been accomplished " :
July 16th, 1904,
" Our dream of our own home will soon be realized. All
is written to the end of the first chapter. I was overjoyed —
our friends were here ; all I felt was great joy ; all I knew
was the end of the first chapter seemed come, with the next
page began the real story. Send Mrs. Verrall this message.
The end of the first chapter has come — all will be ready for the
next which begins — over the page . . . great joy sympathy."
It is not impossible that this " message " wliich expressly
mentions Mrs. Verrall is founded on a supernormal
impression of her conscious or unconscious sensations.
She had had a great success when the appearance of
Human Personality confirmed the statements of her script
about the Diotima passage which was to be found there.
Now she was filled with thoughts of that which seemed to
be the next chapter of the same story, the assurances in
the sciipt that the same passage from the Symposium
was contained in Myers's sealed envelope. But even if
Mrs. Forbes's writing reflected the feelings of Mrs. Verrall,
it was, as we know, anything but consistent with the real
circumstances.
76 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Instructive in another way is a case where Mrs. Forbes
appeared unable to be influenced by Mrs. Verrall's
thoughts. After the failure with regard to the Myers
envelope, Mrs. Verrall's script repeatedly assmed her that
the incident would be mentioned through Mrs. Forbes,
who normally knew nothing of the proposal to open the
envelope, nor of the event of December 13th, 1904.
Mrs. VerraU wrote :
December 21st, 1904.
" I will send a message about this through Mrs. Forbes —
do not ask for it it may take. time.
December 28th, 1904.
" Six days you must wait from now and other three — then
the message will make things "clear. Let it come then. I
want to confirm it through Mrs. Forbes but she has not under-
stood. I want her to write and sympathize with the failure
and not to know what it is. I shall try all this week — wait
for her letter and help. Think of her often, send a message
to her in mind to write and say she is sure you are disappointed.
January 6th, 1905.
" Mrs. Forbes has been anxious this week but the anxiety
is less now. I could not make her hear what I wanted her
to write to you — but ask to see what she wrote on Monday."
How clearly does the script express the desires of
Mrs. Verrall ! How evident is her need of a word from
Myers which might neutralize the effect of the envelope
failure and restore the certainty that they were in
communication with him ! But when she UTote to
Mrs. Forbes, this lady replied that she had written no
script on the preceding Monday nor had she had any
special impression about Mrs, Verrall or the opening of
an envelope. In vain had the latter, in accordance with
the request in her own script, tried to impress her with a
sense of her disappointment. As has been pointed out
before, and as will often be seen, it seems more difficult
for a sensitive to catch those things which an agent is
eagerly stiiving to transmit than the ideas that more or
less unconsciously fill his mind.
The incidents that deserve the name of successes
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES : MRS. FORBES tj
consist on the whole in Mrs. Forbes obtaining during the
production of her script veridical impressions about
Mrs. Verrall, and vice versa. In Mrs. Forbes's script
these impressions are most often clothed in words which
indicate that it is a discarnate, especially Myers, who
tells her about the situation which is described. A case,
of February 24th, 1901, has been mentioned above ;
Myers has seen Mrs. Verrall sitting in a chair near the
fire, possibly reading, though he cannot see any book.
Altogether more than a dozen times things that corre-
spond to a real situation are found in Mrs. Forbes's script.
I reproduce some of the clearest cases.
November 2^th, 1901.
" [Mrs. Verrall was to be told] that the friends were with
her when she was with Mrs. Sidgwick."
On November 22nd Mrs. Verrall's script had produced
an attempt to represent a communication from Mrs.
Sidgwick's deceased brother, which attempt had impressed
the automatist a good deal. The phrase in Mrs. Forbes's
script seems to reflect her attitude of mind between the
22nd and 25th.
December 16th, 1901.
" Mrs. Verrall to try to see for Myers. Myers says — to say
friends can wait is far from courteous . . .would it seem fair
for the spirits to sit for work for hours [while ?] she sat with
foolish . . ."1
Mrs. Verrall had by arrangement with Mrs. Forbes for
some days tried the experiment of writing every day at
a fixed hour. But during a visit at a friend's house she
was to her annoyance prevented from keeping the appoint-
ment both on December 14th and 15th. On the i6th she
wrote to Mrs. Forbes that she must abandon the experi-
ment. The latter had not known that she was away
from home, but had felt convinced that she wrote every
day. The remark of her script " she sat with foolish "
closely represented Mrs. Verrall's own feehng of annoyance
^ Dots in Mrs. Forbes's script indicate illegible words.
78 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
that she had been occupied in conversation when she ought
to have been writing.
November 2nd, 1902.
" Tell Mrs, Verrall to be sure I am the writer — the friend
was with her when she sat On the old seat ( ? ) when she felt
for (?) . . . in the dark she tried to find the Old — with
sympathy, Myers."
On Octqber 27th and 31st Mrs. Verrall had before
writing sat for some fifteen minutes in the dark, concen-
trating her thoughts on Frederic Myers. She imagined
him sitting on the corner of the seat in the drawing-room,
where he always sat when he called. There was a moment
on the 27th when she had sa clear a mental image of him
that she found herself looking towards the seat as if he
were actually sitting there. The case recalls Miss Miles's
efforts to visualize when wanting to transmit an idea to
Miss Ramsden.
January 20th, 1903.
" Myers writes to say Verrall . . . Verrall saw with Myers
on Sunday . . . Mrs. Verrall was with Myers on Sunday
when he (or she) sat with Mr. . . ."
Mrs. Verrall had on Sunday, January i8th, before
writing fixed her attention on talks with Frederic Myers
on certain days -in 1900.
January 25th, 1903, 6.30 p.m.
" You can tell her that Myers sat with her — when she sat
still in the . . . Mr. Verrall's room — with ... on her . . .
Mr. Verrall Dr. Verrall was with own work — say work work of
. . . Let us see first the Cambridge writer — on the chair lies
the Paper — the work is done ... no word Myers will ever
see ... it is too far for you to travel."
Dr. Verrall finished a paper on the afternoon of
January 25th, and put it when finished on a chair beside
him. His wife by appointment had been writing simul-
taneously with Mrs. Forbes, but her script contained no
reference to that lady.
February 2-^rd, 1903, 6 p.m.
[Planchette-writing] " Tell Mrs. Verrall to take care — to
go — Hove when she is visiting Brighton ALFRED. Tell
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES: MRS. FORBES 79
Mrs. Verrall Myers sees with a trouble of which he cannot
speak — you will know — when he writes — Hove."
For some days Mrs. Verrall had been much occupied
with a trouble connected with the illness of the daughter
of a friend of hers whose Christian name was Alfred, and
who was living at Hove, near Brighton. Neither
Mrs. Forbes nor another lady, Mrs. Baltimore, who assisted
at the planchette-writing, knew anything of this friend.
Mrs. Verrall by arrangement sat for automatic writing
simultaneously with Mrs. Forbes and Mrs. Baltimore.
Towards 6.30 p.m. she fell asleep for a moment ; when
she awoke, her script went on : "It has helped them and
you will get a message now plain to read. Send this to
her." Here then the influence seems to have been
reciprocal — i.e., Mrs. Verrall got the veridical impression
that Mrs. Forbes's script contained something referring
to her. But of course the utterance is so vague, that it
may be due simply to a guess.
June 30th, 1903.
" Mrs. Verrall is trying to see with Brighton friends who
send the letter to be read. Myers writes with sympathy."
At the end of June, or quite early in July, at least
before July 3rd, Mrs. Verrall received in Switzerland news
from Brighton of a very serious illness of a relative. If
it was really not until July, Mrs. Forbes may have got
the impression from a presentiment or expectation in
Mrs. Verrall. But the reference is too indefinite for
attributing much importance to the case.
The supernormal knowledge about Mrs. Forbes which
is displayed in Mrs. Verrall's script was in many cases
ascribed to the former's deceased son Talbot. The first
veridical impression which she at all obtained about her
collaborator, seems connected with the following script
which Mrs. Forbes had written a few hours earlier with
Talbot as the alleged communicator.
August 28th,. igoi.
"I am looking for a sensitive who writes to tell Father to
8o COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
believe I can write through you . . . I have to sit with our
friend Edmund to control the sensitive."
It was doubtless a deep desire with Mrs. Forbes which
had here gained expression through her automatic script ;
contrary to Mrs. Verrall after the envelope failure, she
did not, however, make any conscious effort to influence
her colleague. In the evening of the same day Mrs. Verrall
wrote in Latin as follows :
" Sign with the seal. The fir-tree that has already been
planted in the garden gives its own portent."
[signed]
y:
The two drawings in the middle are supposed to
represent a sword and a suspended bugle. Now a
suspended bugle, surmounted by a crown, was the badge
of the regiment to which the deceased Talbot had belonged.
Besides, Mrs. Forbes had in her garden four or five small
fir trees grown from seed sent from abroad by him and
called by her Talbot's trees. Both facts were entirely
unknown to Mrs. Verrall. Perhaps, then, Mrs. Forbes's
wish that her son would manifest through another sensi-
tive had really left its trace in these dim perceptions of
things which in the mother's thoughts were connected
with him.
From the alleged Talbot came also the following com-
munication, obtained with planchette by Mrs. Verrall and
her daughter.
May 4th, 1902.
" My mother has had a wounded man to stay with her.
Will not tell you his name. Want you to tell my mother my
message."
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES: MRS. FORBES 8i
A man who had been very bad with sciatica, and was
still suffering and Hmping, stayed with Mrs. Forbes from
May 3rd to 5th.
In the summer of 1902, Mrs. Verrall's script contained
veridical references to " Talbot's lihes " in Mrs. Forbes's
garden. An attempt, however, which Mrs. Forbes herself
made to impress her with the idea of the said lilies, was a
failure.
The next script with a possible reference to Talbot is
the following, written in Latin :
January gth, 1904.
" Nevertheless consolation for the same grief will concern
(?) neither me nor you — you ought to receive it from others :
after the seventh day you will be able to understand every-
thing."
On the seventh day, i.e., on January i6th, Mrs. Verrall
received a letter from Mrs. Forbes whose script had told
her to ask for the last week's writings. As the above was
the only piece which Mrs. Verrall had produced during
the week in question, she sent her a copy of it. In reply
Mrs. Forbes told her that January 6th was the anniversary
of her son's death and that her own script on January 5tli
had begun a message of consolation to her which was left
incomplete, and had then suggested that Mrs. Verrall had
some answer to send.
It seems, then, not improbable that Mrs. Verrall's
somewhat mysterious utterances on January 9th about
consolation were due to an impression about the feelings
of Mrs. Forbes in the preceding days.
In the following cases Mrs. Verrall's supernormal
knowledge about things concerning Mrs. Forbes appears
without connection with Talbot or others :
February 2nd, 1903.
" Harriet de Vane with another."
The two automatists had as was often the case sat
simultaneously by arrangement. Mrs. Forbes had in her
room where she was writing a pastel drawing of her great-
grandmother by Harriet de Vim. -
CD. G
82 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
July 31st, 1903.
" The picture in the picture-frame — upon the wall — and
no name upon it — in her room. Ask Mrs. Forbes. She has
thought lately of the picture, and will remember Go
into the gallery at Venice "
Mrs. Forbes had lately put a tiny sketch of Venice into
a frame. There was no name on the sketch. The
picture was not hung, but was resting against the wall in
the drawing-room. The mention of Venice, though, may
be due to the knowledge of Mrs. Verrall that Mrs. Forbes
was going to Italy in August, and not to any perception
of the sketch.
October 6th, 1903. ^
" Mrs. Forbes comes home this week She has had a
success while she was away — ask about it. Her mother will
want her much this winter — she will be in the south."
The statement about the success corresponded to
Mrs. Forbes's own feeling ; at Venice there came to her
an impression which explained some things unintelligible
hitherto.
The last statement also proved to be correct. On
November 30th, 1903, Mrs. Forbes told Mrs. Verrall that
her mother was ill. Mrs. Verrall did not mention her
script of October 6th. On December 2nd Mrs. Forbes
was called to her mother's house in the south, whence
she wrote to Mrs. Verrall, saying that she would have to
stay a long time away from home.
As regards Mrs. Verrall, the following case is of a
different type from the others :
October 16th, 1904, 10.30 p.m.
" Tell this. In the fire-lighted room she and the dog
alone, and the thought came to her as she held up the screen
before the fire — and the dog stirred in his sleep — he felt that
I was there. It was only for a moment — but the scene was
plain. Will this meet your point ? It is all that I can do
to-night."
As she finished her script, Mrs. Verrall had a mental
impression of Mrs. Forbes sitting in her drawing-room.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES : MRS. FORBES 83
with the door into the greenhouse open ; through that
door a shadowy figure, which she knew to be Talbot,
came and stood looking at Mrs. Forbes.
Mrs. Verrall had on the same day had a letter from
Mrs. Forbes who told her of a script she had produced
on October 14th, wherein was made the suggestion that
her colleague should sit on Sunday, October i6th, to obtain
" some story scene or episode." " Tell Mrs. Verrall," it
continued, " we will send the scene to her . . . write
this message I will send the scene to Mrs. Verrall to be
read by you. E. G." Afterwards, on October i6th,
^t 545 p.m., Mrs. Forbes wrote as follows :
" Gurney . . . write to you . . . from Cambridge G . . .
you will be written to for a test is being given — a very strong
evidence Gurney will be sure to give Mrs. Verrall a . . ."
This, though, is but a repetition of the announcement
in her former script, — that Gurney would give a test which
Mrs. Verrall would write to her about. The super-
normalness of the case is confined to Mrs. Verrall's per-
ception of the situation of Mrs. Forbes, not at 10.30 p.m.
when the script was produced, but earlier in the afternoon
when she herself was writing automatically. But
Mrs. Forbes's drawing-room and her usual place by the
fire were known to Mrs. Verrall, and her letter had sug-
gested that a scene would be shown to her co-operator.
Thus the whole might be put down to imagination with
no addition of clairvoyance. On the other hand, how-
ever, Mrs. Verrall used to associate Mrs. Forbes not with
her drawing-room but with her own sitting-room where
she did her automatic writing. Moreover, divers minor
circumstances agreed with her impression. Mrs. Forbes
and the dog were alone ; there had been two dogs con-
stantly with her when Mrs. Verrall last stayed at the
house, but only one was in the room on this occasion.
She was holding a piece of paper as a screen. The door
to the greenhouse was open, the room mainly fire-lighted ;
there was a small lamp but little light from it.
G2
84 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Altogether, Mrs. Verrall's impressions on this occasion
may thus be said to be of the same type as those about
her own surroundings which the script of Mrs. Forbes
several times reflected. But more than a proof of her
faculty of supernormal perception the incident does not
contain. Her romance about Talbot in his mother's
drawing-room is quite another thing than that which
Mrs. Forbe^'s script spoke of ; there it was Gurney who
would send some " story scene or episode." On the
basis of the impulse given by this script Mrs. Verrall had
dreamed on in a manner which under the circumstances
was very natural.
CHAPTER VII
PSYCHOMETRY AND PREVISION
Whether impressions like those of Mrs. Vcrrall and
her fellow-experimenter are due to mind-reading or to
direct clairvoyance is difficult to decide. It is even
possible that they have something to do with psychometry.
Mrs. Verrall constantly received letters from Mrs. Forbes
and vice versa ; the acquirement of knowledge super-
normally by means of a written document about the
writer, as well as by means of an object about the person
who makes use of it, is just what psychometric perform-
ances are aiming at. The different psychic phenomena
seem to have a tendency to merge into one another, and
Mrs. Verrall has in other cases been proved to possess an
unquestionable power to psychometrize.
A single but interesting instance hereof is found within
the period dealt with by Mrs. Verrall in her own report.
It belongs to those days when the question of opening
Myers's sealed envelope, in consequence of the statements
made in Mrs. Verrall's script, was discussed within the
Society for Psychical Research. A member of the
Society, Mr. Constable, heard about the proposal at the
council dinner on October 21st, 1904. It seemed to him
that not even such a test, if successful, i.e., if the envelope
contained the passage from the Symposium as stated in
the script, would be conclusive proof of Myers being the
source of the script. It was, he argued, not inconceivable
that the contents of the letter might become known to a
medium by clairvoyance. So he tried to devise a test to
distinguish between the effect on a medium of the actual
words written in a letter, to be read by clairvoyance, and
the thoughts of the writer, to be learned by mind-reading.
86 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
With regard to the question here at issue it is of no
consequence whether Mr. Constable could achieve his
object by such an experiment, which is disputable. He
knew himself the contents of the sealed letter which
Mrs. Verrall, whose assistance he had asked for, was even-
tually to read by clairvoyance ; thus the possibility was
not precluded that she might learn them by reading of
his mind. ^Nevertheless the experiment is instructive.
Mr. Constable had had a psychic experience following
upon his mother's death in 1867, in which the word
" fuchsia " was the important point. His sealed letter
which, on November 9th, 1904, was sent to Mrs. Verrall,
contained the sign O and the word fuchsia. Contem-
poraneously, he wrote another letter which was retained
in the custody of his wife, and in which he stated that he
had been thinking of his mother.
On three occasions, Mrs. Verrall held Mr. Constable's
sealed letter in her hand while trying for automatic script.
Contrary to her habit, however, after the first attempt,
on November i8th, she had a strong impression about
the contents, while her script had said nothing referring
to them. The impression was as follows :
1. That the contents of the letter were less important than
the circumstances of the experiment ;
2. That the experiment was suggested to Mr. Constable
by some one else ;
3. That it was connected with the Myers envelope ;
4. That the envelope sent to her was one of two and the
less important.
All this may, on the whole, be said to be correct.
Although in Mr. Constable's opinion the experiment was
not suggested to him by any one, it was at least devised
as the result of conversations with other persons. The
envelope sent to Mrs. Verrall was one of two and the less
important, inasmuch as it represented the written word,
and not the writer's thoughts. And, above all, " the
contents of the letter were less important than the cir-
cumstances of the experiment." The connection with
PSYCHOMETRY AND PREVISION 87
the Myers envelope may no doubt have been a conjec-
ture, or due to the great part it played in the thoughts of
the sensitive.
When Mrs. Verrall held the letter for the second time,
her hand wrote :
November 2^rd, 1904.
someone has written down a fM/^ ^^^^^^^ "'^^
word for you to read — a short
word like what is above."
" But it was not his own idea it was an experiment suggested
by someone else. Another person holds the other envelope.
The word inside one is mere nonsense just a test, but it is
all connected with the real test of the sealed envelope. But
what is clear is this There are 2 envelopes and the less important
is the one you hold."
The greater portion of this script is a repetition of
Mrs. Verrall's impressions on November i8th, which she
had at once noted down in her diary. But it gives,
withal, the important information that the envelope
contained a short word and a drawing, reproducing the
latter with approximative correctness ; © and m are
rather similar. That " another person holds the other
envelope " is also correct, as it had been given into the
custody of Mrs. Constable. The word itself is not repro-
duced ; but ysis — usis may be due to a vague perception
of fuchsia.
On the third occasion when Mrs. Verrall held the
envelope, the script ran :
November 2^lh, 1904.
" /Ti---* the sign is there — in this envelope as in the other.
Why will you not look for it. Tell them that. Long have they
waited we do not know why — but can do no more.^ Don't
touch her — let her work alone, the touch confuses. In
' These sentences have been quoted above, p. 73.
88 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
sleep to-night we will try. But there is less in the con-
tents than in the circumstances — another's suggestion. He
only carries out, and all devised as a preliminary to the real
trial."
Here the idea of Myers's envelope is entirely inter-
woven with that of Mr. Constable's. But the relations
between them are correctly described, the experiment
was in fact a " preliminary to the real trial." And even
if the possibiHty of guessing may detract from the value
hereof, this cannot be said with regard to the remaining
details.
As a whole the experiment stands out among the rest
of Mrs. Verrall's performances already through the cir-
cumstance that when she held the letter in her hand for
the first time she obtained impressions in an apparently
normal state. While the words of her automatic script
come to her singly and are forgotten immediately, those
impressions were coherent, and she could remember and
reproduce them in the usual manner of psychometrists.
Moreover, it is noteworthy that Mrs. Verrall neither
directly nor through her script caught the idea of Mr. Con-
stable's deceased mother which constituted the second
part of the experiment. All her impressions were con-
nected with the pi€ce of paper which she held in her hand.
Not only the sign and the word but the circumstances
that had caused the production of the letter were dimly
perceived by her, while Mr. Constable's other thoughts
remained unknown to her. This, of course, is no con-
clusive proof against mind-reading, as Mr. Constable
knew all that she perceived. But that just those things
which concerned the letter, and nothing more, were
perceived, must nevertheless confirm the conception that
" the article " had a share in the result — and that a
special place must, among Mrs. Verrall's psychic faculties,
be assigned to psychometry.
We have now seen Mrs. Verrall's unquestionable
mediumistic power manifest itself as a faculty to receive
PSYCHOMETRY AND PREVISION 89
impressions from a willing agent — Dr. Verrall — to
" perceive " without intentional thought-transmission
from anybody — in her relations with Mrs. Forbes — and
to psychometrize. There remains to state that her
script also contains evidence for her faculty of prevision.
One instance of this class has been mentioned before —
the prediction that Mrs. Forbes would be obliged to stay
with her mother in the south. In most cases it was as
here ordinary occurrences which were foretold. Mrs.
Verrall rightly prefers to speak of " anticipations " rather
than prophecies. To characterize their type the following
examples will suffice.
I begin with a script which has already been mentioned
in another connection.
May nth, 1901.
" Do not hurry date this hoc est quod volui — tandem
[this is what I have wanted — at last]. A. W. V. [in Greek ;]
and perhaps some one else. Calx pedibus inhaerens difftcul-
tatem superavit [chalk sticking to the feet has got over the
difficulty] [drawing of a bird].'"
As pointed out before, this script was no doubt con-
nected with Dr. Verrall 's experiment ; " the cocky oly
bird " was the often returning cock that symboHzed the
daw7i of his Greek quotation. But, as the script itself
has it, " perhaps some one else " played a part in the
case.
On May i6th, 1901, Mrs. Verrall saw in the West-
minster Gazette an account from the Daily Mail of May 13th
of an incident occurring in the night between May nth
and I2th, which recalled to her the script of May nth.
The writer told how a friend of his had been compelled
to leave his rooms on account of " uncanny happenings " ;
so the writer and another friend had arranged to sit
through the night of May nth in the empty rooms to
watch. Powdered chalk had been spread on the floor of
two of the rooms to trace anybody or anything that might
come or go. Several times the two friends saw doors
opened or closed. The last opening took place at 2.9 a.m.
90 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
and at 2.30 the watchers examined the chalk and found
marks upon it. The marks were clearly defined bird's
footprints ; they might be compared to the footprints of
a bird about the size of a turkey.
It would be difficult to deny a connection between this
event, or the account of it, and the statement in Mrs.
Verrall's script about the sticking of chalk to the feet,
followed by t,he drawing of a bird with a jeer. But the
script was produced at 11. 10 p.m. on May nth ; the
statement therefore anticipated the event by some three
hours, and its publication by a still longer period. The
chalk may have been spread before 11. 10, but the
watchers had no expectation -as to the sort of marks
they might find in it.
As Mrs. Verrall remarks, the question of a connection
between the story and the script is not affected by the
value of the story. Whether or not a bird made marks
in the chalk in the early hours of May 12th, it is certain
that a story to that effect was printed on May 13th.
The parallel with another incident makes it more than
probable that it was the newspaper story, and not the
event, that was anticipated in Mrs. Verrall's script of
May nth, 1901. During a sojourn in Switzerland she
wrote as follows :"
June 2yth, 1902.
" Veni Creator were the words exultans cantavit apud
spiritus sanctos inter filios Dei [he (or she) triumphantly sang
at the place of the holy spirits among the sons of God]."
On July 4th she read in the Giornale d' Italia of July 2nd
that at Coursegoules, in the department of Alpes-Mari-
times, the Sisters of the Holy Spirit had been expelled,
and had left the convent singing the Veni Creator. Thus
it seemed to have been to this expulsion that the script
had referred. But when inquiries were made, Mrs. Verrall
learned that there was certainly a convent of the Sisters
of the Holy Spirit in the department of Alpes-Maritimes
(though at Juan les Pins and not at Coursegoules), and
that on June 29th, 1902, in conformity with the edict of
PSYCHOMETRY AND PREVISION 91
June 27th, the Sisters and orphans had left the Orphelinat
for the Oratory, but that at no moment did the Sisters
sing the Vcni Creator. In this case, therefore, it was
clear that Mrs. Verrall's script had anticipated the fiction
of a journalist, and not the event itself.
As an example of a very insignificant sort of prevision
the following may be cited :
September 4th, igoi.
" Madment Maidment
September yth, igoi.
" M AI M E N T I S W I T H I N. on the right-hand side
as you look — the window is behind, so it is not very plain to
read. But he knows it."
From September 26th till October 2nd, 1901, Mrs. Verrall
stayed with friends at Winchester. On September 30th
she went with her hostess to a shop and noticed the name
Maidment on a paper bag hanging up inside the shop on
the right-hand wall. The shop-window was, of course,
behind her when she was within the shop, but the name
was quite plain to read. But the script is as usual vague
and groping, and at the same time hinting at a greater
knowledge somewhere (" he knows it ").
Doubtless the most remarkable among Mrs. Verrall's
anticipations were the following two :
December nth, igoi.
" Nothing too mean the trivial helps, gives confidence.
Hence this. Frost and a candle in the dim light Marmontel
he was reading on a sofa or in bed — there was only a candle's
light. She will surely remember this. The book was lent
not his own — he talked about it.
December ijih, igoi.
" I wanted to write Marmontel is right. It was a French
book, a Memoir I think. Passy may help. Souvenirs de
Passy or Fleury. Marmontel was not on the cover — the book
was bound and was lent — two volumes in old-fashioned
binding and print. It is not in any papers — it is an attempt
to make someone remember — an incident."
Mrs. Verrall did not know the French author Marmon-
tel ; but -she had probably without noticing seen his
name in a list of books which she had glanced at before
92 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
December nth, and where she afterwards found it. On
March ist, 1902, she had a visit from a friend, Mr. Marsh,
who mentioned that he had lately been reading Mar-
montel's Memoirs. Mrs. Verrall asked for particulars
about his reading, at the same time explaining her
reasons for the question. He then told her that he got
the work from the London Library, and took the first of
its three volumes to Paris with him ; there he read it on
the evenings of February 20th and 21st, 1902. On each
occasion he read by the hght of a candle. On the 20th
he was in bed, on the 21st lying on two chairs. The
weather was cold, but there was no frost. The book was
bound, and not in modern binding, but the name Mar-
montel was on the back of the volume. As to " Passy "
and " Fleury," he added in a letter of March 4th that on
February 21st, while lying on two chairs, he read a chapter
describing the finding at Passy of a panel, etc., con-
nected with a story in which Fleury played an important
part.
On comparing the divers particulars, true and false,
in Mrs. Verrall's script with the actual facts, one gets the
impression that she has clairvoyantly caught a ghmpse of
the scene which as yet belonged to the future — a winter
day and some one" on something that resembled a sofa,
reading by candle-light in a book whose binding was old-
fashioned, and at the same time suggestive of a public
hbrary, and wherein the passage about Passy and Fleury
was visible. " He talked about it," on the other hand,
seems to anticipate that which took place in March,
Mr. Marsh's mention of his reading to herself. And the
whole of the prevision has in the usual way been put into
the mouth of the alleged communicator to serve as a
test.
The second remarkable prevision is the following :
April 2nd, 1903.
" Now draw on five stone steps a cross [drawing] and on the
cross hangs a wreath, a fresh green wreath. They have come
to see it there — out in the open on the hill side in the sound of
PSYCHOMETRY AND PREVISION 93
the sea. It is not a personal thing — but know («). This is
for evidence. There is an inscription fastened to the wreath.
In honour Jl » ^^ • ^^ ^^P^^ t^"^ ^^^^ banks of] Douern
I think it qJh^/\^ is for an old heroic deed. Grey sky
and sea and u ^ the grey gulls cry in the wind.
February 24th, 1905.^
" Wait now for this news. There is a grey stone cross on
the hill side close by the spot — a cross on stone steps. Volti-
gern no VoUernius ager is more like. Voltern's Field. Some
one could tell you of the cross.
March lyih, 1906.
" Stone I want to say. Stone a white stone and no inscrip-
tion but you would recognize if you saw. Can you not find
the cross on its five steps and the green wreath ? On
the banks of the stream — the Derwent water, not a lake —
wait and see yourself what I mean."
About a fortnight after the production of the last script,
on April 4th, Mrs. Verrall went on a visit to Miss Curtois,
in Westminster, a lady whose acquaintance she had made
in the preceding autumn. In her room she saw, hanging
on the wall, a photograph of a cross on stone steps which
reminded her of the cross described in her script. Asked
about it Miss Curtois gave her the following information.
In the churchyard of Washingborough, a village near
Lincoln, on the river Witham, was an old pedestal of five
stone steps. On this pedestal a modern cross was erected
in memory of Miss Curtois's mother, Ann Henrietta
Curtois, and dedicated on July 5th, 1903. There was no
inscription on the cross. A green wreath was once placed
on it, most probably at Christmas, 1903, but as it was
feared that it might injure the cross, the experiment was
not repeated. Miss Curtois did not know whether any
inscription was attached to the wreath. The village Hes
on a little hill near the top of which stands the cross.
Miss Curtois said that she had seen the country beneath
it flooded and dotted with seagulls, but the sea is some
thirty miles away.
* In order to complete this incident Mrs. Verrall has made an excep-
tion and passed beyond the period (1901 — 1904) on which she reports.
94 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Mrs. Verrall's script of April 2nd, 1903, to which the
two following add nothing of importance, thus seems to
have anticipated an event which had not yet occurred.
As in the Marmontel case, the prevision seems to describe
a definite situation, viz., the moment when they had
" come to see it {i.e., the cross with the wreath) there out
in the open on the hill side." Miss Curtois said that
there had been a great deal of discussion about the wreath.
As the cross was not dedicated until July 5th, 1903, the
scene which Mrs. Verrall perceived cannot at any rate
have taken place before this date. The supposition that
it took place at Christmas is supported by the description
of the winter landscape.
The remark in the script of February 24th, 1905,
" some one could tell you of the cross," makes an interest-
ing parallel to the one in the Marmontel case, " he talked
about it." Both contain the special prophecy that
Mrs. Verrall will meet some one who will elucidate the
incomprehensible things which her hand in both cases
had produced. Noteworthy is also the remark in the
Marmontel script of December 17th, 1901, " it is not in
any papers " ; it was in the newspapers that the explana-
tion of the script with " the cocky oly bird " had been
found. It seems as if Mrs. Verrall subconsciously knew
that she must meet somewhere in her real life that which
as yet only dawns in that part of her self that speaks in
her script.
One is reminded of Myers's words about the possibility
that the wider self with equal directness and immediacy
discerns every element of the phenomenon which we call
Life, and at times calls to the narrower, waking self.
CHAPTER VIII
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES WITH MRS. PIPER
Mrs. Verrall's report contains one thing more of some
interest, namely the so-called cross-correspondences with
Mrs. Piper. Cross-correspondences with this renowned
medium got to play a large part later on in the experiments
of the Society for Psychical Research ; it may therefore
be useful to inquire into their character at that time. It
was at a period when Dr. Richard Hodgson had the charge
of the sittings with Mrs. Piper in Boston, and in the few,
hardly more than two, cases where a connection seems to
exist between these sittings and Mrs. Verrall's script, the
plan of the " correspondence " was proposed by him. In
the first case it was suggested to him through an un-
verified assertion by Mrs. Piper's " control " that a vision
of a figure had been seen by Mrs. Verrall's daughter
Helen. This led to the following conversation at a
Piper-sitting :
January 28th, 1902.
" Dr. Hodgson. Can you try and make Helen see you
holding a spear in your hand ?
" Control. Why a sphere ?
" Dr. Hodgson. A spear."
The control promised to try, and at the next sitting, on
February 4th, claimed to have succeeded in making him-
self visible to Helen Verrall with a " sphear " [sic].
Miss Verrall had no such vision , Mrs. VerraU, however,
three days after the seance in Boston, having lunched
with Mr. Piddington in London, felt suddenly so strong
a desire to write automatically that she made an excuse
for not accompanying him and Sir Oliver Lodge to the
96 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
S.P.R. council meeting as had been arranged. After
their departure she wrote as follows :
January 315^, 1902.
Panopticon cr^aipSs aTirdXAet crvvSeyfxa jxvcTTiKov, TL ovK eSt'Scos ;
volatile ferrum — pro telo impinget [Universal seeing of a
sphere fosters the mystic joint-reception. Why did you not
give it? the flying iron — used as a weapon will hit]. "
She was interrupted by Mr. Piddington returning to
fetch her. But in the train on the way home to Cam-
bridge more script was produced. That script, however,
contained no verifiable statement, but was signed with
two crosses, one of them being the Greek cross used by
" Rector," one of Mrs. Piper's^chief controls.
Mrs. Verrall contends that there is strong reason for
thinking that her script of January 31st was in some way
affected by the experiment proposed in Boston. Probably
she is right ; but the question remains, in what manner ?
Mrs. Piper's control claimed to have made himself visible
to Miss Helen Verrall, and did not seem to know anything
about her mother's script. Besides, the character of the
latter speaks decidedly against interpreting it as the
result of intentional transmission. The commingling of
" sphere " and " spear " is more indicative of a vague
impression like those which, for instance. Miss Ramsden
got from Miss Miles without any intention on the part of
the latter. It is conceivable that it originated from
Dr. Hodgson, or rather from the " conversation " between
him and the control. In view of the interchanging of
letters between Dr. Hodgson and Mrs. Verrall, this would
hardly be more singular than Miss Ramsden obtaining
impressions of conversations between Miss Miles and her
friends. That the notion of " Rector " emerged with the
rest can only strengthen the supposition of such a con-
nection.^
In April, 1902, Dr. Hodgson proposed an experiment
1 Dr. Joseph Maxwell {Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XXVI., p. 60) points
out that " panopticon a-(paipas " occurs already in Mrs. Verrall's script
from March, 1901. That the expression had been used before might no
doubt facilitate its appearance.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES : MRS. PIPER 97
with Mrs. Verrall as agent ; she should look at a noticeable
group of flowers and try to get them mentioned to him
in Mrs. Piper's trance. This, however, led to nothing
except some allusions to flowers in Mrs. Verrall's own
script.
The next case is more like a real cross-correspondence.
On March loth, 1903, Dr. Hodgson gave to the entranced
Mrs. Piper what is described as " a pass- word for repro-
duction by other automatists " ; the intention being that
her controls should reproduce it in, for instance, Mrs.
Verrall's script. It was not a real word, but, as Mrs.
Verrall learned later, an arbitrary collection of letters,
stahdelta. Mrs. Verrall knew nothing about the experi-
ment, but thinks that the following scripts contain
attempts to produce the word :
March i^th, 1903,
" S is the first to be recognized but there are others. Write
yourself now Camilla inest [is in it] Cameloi or
Cameleon — Camus no there is an ilia or ella somewhere
But Hodgson would understand much that you write — he must
see it
March lyth, 1903.
" The word is Caldiona more like that. Capella Aurigae
seems much nearer. Find what constellation is marked with
y Ask Hodgson too —
April lyth, 1903.
" Orotava or something like that is the pass- word Life is
more like the word on the seal."
In the latter script it is plainly said that Orotava or
something like that is the pass-word. It seems, in fact^
as the automatist herself believed afterwards, that this
evident seeking for a definite word is connected with the
stahdelta experiment in Boston. At the time, however,
Mrs. Verrall took it to refer to a Myers envelope, and was,
as we have seen, led to believe that such a one had been
committed to the charge of Dr. Hodgson. Under these
circumstances she produced the following scripts :
August 18th, 1903.
" The box Hodgson expects a message about it before
he will open it — you have sent part of the word to him but
CD. H
98 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
not all. The word you should send is the name of a ship —
Orinaria Orellaria, like that. It ends in — ia. Oriana no
Oronia Auronia no Orona.
September gth, 1903.
" Coronaria Campanile — Coronella no but why the star ?
Auriga Capellae has the letters of it but is too long — and it
should be one word not two. Auricapella auricolorata
Oriflamma auricomata goldhaired Oritella Coronata
Ariadne's crown in the sky
September lyth, 1903.
" You have the key word now Hodgson will act, but
will not tell you till it is done."
These scripts did not, in the opinion of Mrs. Verrall,
refer to the pass-word experiment. It seems, though,
that Orellaria, Coronella, Oritella, are quite as good
approaches to " Stabdelta " as Camilla, Orotava, etc., in
the writings from the preceding spring. " Auriga
Capellae " appears both in March and September, and the
connection with Dr. Hodgson is indisputable in both
series.
But the problem is not solved even if it be admitted
that Mrs. Verrall for a long time worked persistently at
reproducing the word which Dr. Hodgson and the control
of Mrs. Piper had agreed to send her. The case differs
very much from that of " sphere." There at any rate
she was only pefceiving something which nobody had
wanted to transmit ; what she obtained was a vague and
dim impression, but it came out without any hesitation
in that manner which we have throughout found to be
typical of spontaneous perception. Just on the contrary,
the attempts at stabdelta exhibit all those criterions that
characterized Dr. Verrall's experiment with the one-horse
dawn. It was just as difficult, nay impossible, for
Mrs. Verrall to write stabdelta as it had been to reproduce
the Greek phrase. But she tried and struggled, reverting
again and again to the attempt ; it was as if a foreign
will had got hold of her and would not let go. As regards
the Greek words, we know that such was really the case.
But here the parallel with the pass-word fails ; Dr. Hodg-
son was not a " wiUing agent." He knew the word, but
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES: MRS. PIPER 99
he did not try to impress Mrs. Verrall to write it. The
assertion that he, nevertheless, was the transmittor cannot
be advanced with any show of reason.
For completeness' sake two more incidents that touch
upon Dr. Hodgson ought to be mentioned. As just said,
Mrs. Verrall did not connect the above scripts from the
autumn of 1903 with the stahdelta experiment. All the
same, she took them to refer to Dr. Hodgson, and thought
that the following script was a continuation of them :
October $th, 1903.
" Ariadne Stella coronaria hoc est omen et nomen — mitte
[Ariadne a crowned star this is the omen and the name —
send it]. Seven stars in the crown and Berenice's hair too
flava comam [yellow-haired] lilia Olympiaca non Romana
[Olympian lilies not Roman] "
To obey the instruction, Mrs. Verrall sent the script to
Dr. Hodgson. He replied that the phrase about " Olym-
pian lilies not Roman " had reminded him of the name
syringa, but that he could trace no connection. Syringa
blossoms, he added, had a special significance for him.
He had looked up syringa in a dictionary and found that
its Latin name is Philadelphus coronarius.
Mrs. Verrall who, as must be borne in mind, did not
connect the later attempts at producing a word with the
stahdelta experiment of which she had now been told, got
the idea on reading Dr. Hodgson's letter that Oritella
coronata perhaps represented attempts at the name
Philadelphus coronarius. Moreover, it occurred to her
that the introduction of Berenice was accounted for if
what was wanted was not only coronarius but Philadelphus
— because of the relationship of Berenice to Ptolemy
Philadelphus.
The idea of course falls to the ground when Oritella, etc.,
are seen to be attempts at stahdelta. As to " Berenice's
hair," that is the name of a constellation, it was probably
suggested by the mention of " Ariadne's crown," which
again was due, perhaps, to Auriga Capellae in the script
of September 9th that contains both.
H 2
100 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
This incident, then, cannot be used as evidence of a
supernormal connection between Dr. Hodgson and
Mrs. Verrall's automatic writing. At a later time her
script contained a reference to " Hodgson's constellation,"
after which came the following :
July 3rd, 1904.
" That star is visible in winter nights Auriga Capellae : it
was one wintfer night that the star and the resolve flashed out
together, & the shape of his life was thus determined,
though not carried out for four more years."
Mrs. Verrall says that " Hodgson's constellation " and
" Auriga Capellae " with the subsequent statement about
" four more years " were intelligible to Dr. Hodgson,
though meaningless to her. This might go to show that
she was capable of obtaining impressions about him.
But the account is incomplete, and, moreover, the possi-
bility of latent memory — of her having sometime without
remembering heard of the event to which the script is
presumed to refer — is too great to enable us to build
anything on an isolated incident like this. At any rate
it would be impossible from this case to draw a conclusion
to that of stabdelta, which is of quite another type. The
latter must be left standing as the sole incident that has
not been fully elucidated by a comparison with those
phenomena which do not pretend to be due to the inter-
vention of the dead.
SECTION III
The Automatic Writing of Mrs. Holland
CHAPTER IX
spontaneous writing
In the years following the period on which Mrs. Verrall
reports, her script presents a new interest on account of
its relation to another automatic writer whose faculties
in many respects resemble her own. This was a lady who
was introduced to the pubhc by the pseudonym of
Mrs. Holland, and whose productions are the subject of a
series of reports by the secretary of the Society for
Psychical Research, Miss Ahce Johnson, together with
those writings of Mrs. Verrall's which seem to be in some
way connected with them.^
The mediumism of Mrs. Holland is doubtless more
spontaneous and perhaps more extensive than that of
Mrs. Verrall. The disparity between them forms an
obvious parallel to that between Miss Miles and Miss
Ramsden. In the year 1893, Mrs. Holland in the Review
of Reviews, saw a reference to automatic writing, and when
she afterwards tried it herself, her hand began to form
words almost immediately. Also, she is able to see
pictures in a crystal. Moreover " she does see, hear, feel
or otherwise become conscious of beings and influences
that are not patent to all." The same was the case with
Miss Miles, but not with Miss Ramsden. Of her visions,
Mrs. Holland, referring to one of them, says, " By seeing
» Proceedings S.P.R.. Vol. XXL, pp. 166—391 ; VoL XXIV.,
pp. 2 — 10 and 201 — 263 ; and VoL XXV., pp. 218 — 303.
102 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
I do not mean standing in the room ; I saw it ' at
the back of the brain ' in the way that clairvoyant sights
come to me."
When Mrs. Holland writes automatically, she is always
fully conscious, but her hand moves so rapidly that she
seldom knows what words it is forming. She is, however,
immediately after their production more conscious of
them than ]\Irs. Verrall is of her script. She sometimes
asks questions of the writing power which she puts down
with full consciousness among the automatically written
sentences. It happens too that instead of writing auto-
matically she notes down impressions that come to her
when she is trying for automatic script.
Later she displayed during her writing a tendency to
become unconscious that even threatened to develop into
trance. In November, 1904, she spoke in the presence of
a friend in a trance condition for about a quarter of an
hour. She succeeded, however, in conquering this ten-
dency, which made her very uncomfortable. She had
never been present at seances or had to do at all with
spirituaHsm. Neither had she any first-hand knowledge
of psychical research nor of the publications of the
Society. As mentioned above, she had only read in
the Review of Reviews about automatic writing. Besides,
she had read some collections of ghost stories, and a
manuscript book of " spirit-writings " which she had
disliked very much.
Mrs. Holland was very familiar with English poetry,
and wrote verse herself. During a long period her script
was almost exclusively in verse. Contrary to her original
compositions they came with great rapidity as if swiftly
dictated, and there were never any erasures. In return
they were, as she says herself, " often childishly simple in
wording and jingling in rhyme."
Generally the verses did not deal with facts. As an
exception is mentioned a case where a clairvoyant per-
ception seems to have called forth the script. In Italy,
in the year 1901, the day after her arrival in an old palazzo
SPONTANEOUS WRITING 103
she had never before seen, the impulse to write came on
her, and she wrote as follows :
" Under the orange tree
Who is it lies ?
Baby hair that is flaxen fair,
Shines when the dew on the grass is wet.
Under the iris and violet.
'Neath the orange tree
Where the dead leaves be.
Look at the dead child's eyes ! "
On reading it to a friend she was told that there was a
tradition that a child was buried in the garden of the
palace.
Later she experienced a new form of automatic writing.
On several occasions her hand insisted on writing a letter
or message from some dead person whom she did not
know, to some one among her acquaintance. It was
clearly impressed upon her for whom the letter was
intended, and she felt compelled to send it. It was
always to a person with whom she had recently become
acquainted.
In 1903, Mrs. Holland, who was then living in India,
read Frederic Myers's recently published work. Human
Personality and its Survival of Bodily Death. This book
became for her what the author's death had been for
Mrs. Verrall, the commencement of a new era in her life.
She was greatly interested in it and, on July 2nd, wrote
to Miss Johnson, whom she did not know personally, and
told her of her own experiences. Miss Johnson answered
her letter, and the correspondence was continued during
the following winter. By agreement Mrs. Holland was
kept 'gnorant of the secretary's opinion about her script ;
on the whole the latter was careful not to mention any-
thing that might detract from the evidential value of the
productions. Mrs. Holland met her for the first time
during a sojourn in England about two years later.
But it was not only the acquaintance with Miss Johnson,
and the latter's interest in her automatic writing, which
104 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
became for Mrs. Holland the important consequence of
her reading of Human Personality. In her script itself
it left its mark in a most conspicuous manner. Hence-
forward it was Myers who spoke through it, with Edmund
Gurney to assist him as he had assisted him in their mutual
youth when both were full of enthusiasm for psychical
research. Also Mrs. Holland had got to know the third
confederate, Henry Sidgwick, by means of Human Per-
sonality, besides many of Myers's friends who were stiU
hving. What the book might teach her about Myers
himself, of his personaHty as well as of his opinions, every
reader of it will know.
Here, then, was plenty of material for the subconscious
imagination to work upon. Neither does the editor of
the script ignore this circumstance. Miss Johnson
writes : " Her first reading of Human Personality formed
an epoch in Mrs. Holland's life, and thenceforth her auto-
matic writing was coloured largely by the influence of
that book. The personality of the author strongly
appealed to her — it was not only natural but almost
inevitable that a great part of her writing should now
purport to be inspired by him, or — to a less extent — by
the two friends to whom his book is dedicated, Mr. Gurney
and Dr. Sidgwick.'- Later on she adds : "I am bound
to emphasize the large part played by Mrs. Holland's
normal knowledge in the construction of the various roles.
They came into existence first shortly after she had read
Human Personality, and it will be seen that passages from
this book are clearly to be traced in the script ; there is
little or nothing in the characterizations that could not
be derived from it directly or by inference by an intelli-
gent and sympathetic reader. There are, moreover, a
certain number of features that an intimate friend of
Mr. Myers's would see to be uncharacteristic or positively
incorrect. Further, the personahties become suddenly
more vivid and reahstic at a later date, after Mrs. Holland
had seen the portraits of Mr. Myers, Mr. Gurney and
Dr. Sidgwick."
SPONTANEOUS WRITING 105
We are then in the presence of a phenomenon which
seems to have the same origin as much of Mrs. Verrall's
script. A more or less conscious desire to come into
communication with Frederic Myers was the foundation of
the productions of both automatists — those of Mrs. Verrall
who had lost a friend, and those of Mrs. Holland who too
late, through his posthumous work, had made the acquain-
tance of a congenial personality. Also in details, their
scripts display a psychological resemblance. Mrs. Holland,
as well as Mrs. Verrall, had a great dread of being
imposed upon by her own self. Mrs. Verrall had hesitated
in putting the names of Myers and other alleged communi-
cators under the script. Mrs. Holland had a similar
struggle with the " invisible writer." The result of it
was in her case the most singular arrangements, numbers
instead of letters, dates made unrecognizable by being
scattered throughout the script, and names that could
only be read by substituting the preceding letters of the
alphabet for the written ones. She had as a child played
at a secret language made by using either the letter before
or the letter after the real one. One is reminded of
Professor Flournoy's Helen Smith and the Martian
language.
When the script of Mrs. Verrall made one part of her
personahty call itself " I " and address the other part as
" you," and made the "I" be knowing and somewhat
impatient with the other's want of comprehension, it was
implied, even when not expressly stated, that " I " was
a deceased person. With Mrs. Holland it is as a rule
distinctly indicated who the writer is ; Myers is gentle,
Gurney exacting and impatient ; the handwriting is
different ; one will only use a pen, the other a pencil,
etc. Often the automatist asks questions of them in her
own name and with full consciousness. But in spite of
all this it is, as with Mrs. Verrall, evident that she holds,
in fact, a conversation with herself. A great portion of
the script consists in admonitions to write more often
and regularly and not to dread that it is herself who
io6 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
produces the script, regret that she is alone with her
interest, advice with regard to the writing, and the Uke.
" It is such a pity to break the chain— Since you were out
in the morning yesterday why didn't you try in the after-
noon — a few minutes each day are not much to ask from
you." "Do try to forget your abiding fear of being made
a fool or a dupe It's a form of restless vanity to
fear that your hand is imposing upon itself as it were—
Leave youtself out of the matter." " I fear you will
never be really responsive trying alone." " The agent
[sic] is all alone and that makes it hard." " Try not to
wish too much for any particular topic— or you are more
likely to deceive yourself by supplying phrases from the
subhminal self." The subject is varied often and in many
ways ; it is evident that Mrs. Holland vacillates between
doubt and behef .
In the light hereof the lamentations must also be seen
which the script puts into the mouth of Myers of being
unable to reach his friends in England. " I cannot reach
them." " I cannot get into communication with those
who would understand and beheve me." " Surely you
sent them what I strove so to transmit." ^ Mrs. Holland's
fear that the script was not what it pretended to be made
her hesitate in sending it to Miss Johnson, These exhor-
tations from " Myers " thus seem to be the means found
by the automatic self to conquer her unwilHngness.
Miss Johnson, as said before, did not let the automatist
knov/ anything about her valuation of the script. It will
be seen later that in spite of her clear perception of the
influence due to the reading of Human Personality she
arrived at the conclusion that this could not explain
everything. The subconscious imagination of Mrs.
Holland was considerable, and her latent memory so
extensive that in all cases where there is the barest
1 It is clear that utterances like these do not agree with the belief in
Myers's communications through Mrs. Verrall. As there is, however,
no ground to accept the latter as genuine, the contradiction cannot
speak against the genuineness of his communications through Mrs.
Holland. They must stand or fall alone.
SPONTANEOUS WRITING 107
possibility for an appeal to cryptomnesia it is necessary
to make it ; but interspersed in her productions things
occurred which could neither be ascribed to one nor to
the other of these quahties. From whence they came,
and how far they can justify the assumption that Myers
or other discarnate communicated by means of her hand,
are questions which an investigation of the most impor-
tant among her writings will decide.
• •••••
The first script of Mrs. Holland's ascribed to Myers was
the following :
September 16th, 1903.
"F.
" Friend while on earth with knowledge slight
I had the hving power to write
Death tutored now in things of might
I yearn to you and cannot write.
17 I
" It may be that those who die suddenly suffer no prolonged
obscuration of consciousness but for my own experience the
unconsciousness was exceedingly prolonged.
I I
" The reality is infinitely more wonderful than our most
daring conjectures. Indeed no conjecture can be sufficiently
daring.
I 01
" But this is Hke the first stumbling attempts at expression
in an unknown language imperfectly explained so far away
so very far away and yet longing and understanding poten-
tialities of nearness.
"M."
One of the traits that characterize Mrs. Holland's
script — that it, as it were, wants to mystify herself — is
displayed here. The two initials of course stand for
Frederic Myers, and the numbers when put together
make " January 17th, 1901," which was the day of his
death, as stated in Human Personality. For the rest, in
this script the tone is already struck which for Mrs.
Holland gave her productions, so to speak, their raison
d'etre, — Myers's desire to communicate with the living.
But although he is represented as saying, " I yearn to
io8 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
you and cannot write," and speaking of " stumbling
attempts," the script is in fact exactly so fluent as auto-
matic compositions generally are when undisturbed by
any outside influence.
Later in the same day Mrs. HoUand wrote another
piece of script which like her earlier productions was
entirely in verse.
September i6th, 1903.
^ " 1888 F. E. HS. [in monogram]
" Believe in what thou canst not see
Until the vision come to thee
There were three workers once upon the earth
Three that have passed through Death's great second
birth
Their work remains and some of lasting worth
Long dead and lately dead shall be as one.
" 1888. 1888."
It is the idea that had impressed Mrs. Holland so
strongly, of the three friends, now all dead, and their
work, which has here gained expression. " F." is Myers,
" E." Gurney, and " H.S." Professor Henry Sidgwick,
that is, the author of Human Personality and the two
men to whom it is dedicated. The early death of Gurney
seems to have made a special impression upon her ; it
took place in the year 1888 as intimated in the script —
and stated in the" book.
In a following script she reverts to the same idea :
September 18th, 1903.
"1873. 30 years ago. Cmrde. A big. Youth.
" It has been a long work — but the work is not nearly over
yet — It has barely begun — Go on with it — go on — We were the
torch bearers — follow after us — The flame burns more steadily
now —
" E. G. 1888."
The mysterious letters "Cmrde Abig" are an
anagram for Cambridge. On one of the first pages of
Human Personality is the passage : "In about 1873
it became the conviction of a small group of Cambridge
friends that the deep questions thus at issue must be
fought out ."
SPONTANEOUS WRITING 109
So far everything must be explained as owing to the
reading of Myers's book. But very soon things appear
which cannot be so explained. By the handwriting
which is ascribed to Myers, Mrs. Holland writes as
follows :
September 21st, 1903.
" A room that is rather narrow for its length with three
windows and a long narrow table covered with a dull red
cloth rather faded.
" The walls need repapering. The ceiling needs white-
washing. There is a portrait over the fire-place of a man with
a high forehead — the background of it is very dark — A bust
on a pedestal stands in a very shadowed corner — The head is
not clear — round the shoulders is a kind of bath towel like
drapery. The pedestal is imitation greenish marble —
" There are a few good prints in the room — but it is not easy
to see them —
" Shelves on one side have a few books and a great many
papers and pamphlets on them — The room is not in the least
interesting in itself but very interesting things have happened
there and some men now dead still influence that room very
strongly — "
Mrs. Verrall, on reading this script more than two
years later, pointed out to Miss Johnson that the descrip-
tion applied closely to her dining-room ; only the portrait,
which represented Dr. Verrall, was beside the fire-place
and not over it, and there was no bust in the room. In
a dark corner, however, stood a large filter ; a friend of
Mrs. Verrall's, on being told of the description, exclaimed :
" But there is a bust in your dining-room " ; Mrs. Verrall
took him into the room and found that what he had taken
for a bust was really this filter.
Mrs. Holland thus seems to have had a clairvoyant
perception of a room that she had never seen, and of which
it was impossible that she could have read or heard.
Here at any rate we find a supernormal element in her
script. And it was not the sole case where, while still in
India, she saw a picture of something that existed far
away in England.
A few weeks later appeared the following which, after
no COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
the fashion of her earlier productions, was formed as a
letter :
November 'jth, 1903.
" My dear Mrs. Verrall
" I am very anxious to speak to some of the old
friends — Miss J. — and to A. W.
" There is so much to say and yet so very little chance of
saying it. Communication is tremendously difficult. The
brain of the agent though indispensable is so hampering I
think it might be better if the agent wrote the thoughts in her
brain instead of keeping a vacant brain and a passive hand — "
It is difficult to imagine another than Mrs. Holland
herself being the origin of this letter, which is interrupted
because she prefers to write down impressions in her own
name. Moreover, she has committed the mistake to
speak of herself as the agent ; no doubt she conceives her
writing as an action ; in Myers's language she would of
course have been called the percipient.
The remarkable point is, that the letter is addressed to
Mrs. Verrall, and that it refers to " A. W.," the use of
these initials being characteristic for the friends of
Dr. Verrall. Mrs. Holland, however, knew of Mrs. Verrall
from Human Personality, where she is mentioned as
" Mrs. A. W. Verrall, a lecturer at Newnham College " ;
thus it is probable that she has from thence got the idea
of her husband as " A. W."
The script goes on, Mrs. Holland having in reply to the
last remark declared that she will write down what she
is thinking of. This is as follows :
" I find myself picturing a tall man who seems about 60
years of age — He is rather thin and has bent shoulders — His
face is pale — not handsome — very intelligent — He has a
moustache — dark — with grey threads — more grey than his
hair — which is thin — parted at one side and pushed over the
top of the head — It has receded a good deal from the temples
— His eyes are grey — he wears pince nez — The nose is rather
long — the face narrow — the throat is long — He used to have
a nervous cough — When he is interested in what he talks of
he has a trick of leaning forward and gesticulating a good
deal — He has well shaped hands with long fingers — There is
a seal ring on the little finger of the right hand — but I can't
SPONTANEOUS WRITING iii
see if it has a crest or a monogram on it — His tie is rather
loosely tied — he wears no pin in it — It is more like looking
at a lantern picture than at a real man — I mean he seems to
be summoning up the appearance of what he used to be —
I can feel that he wants to say many things — but only confused
phrases reach me — that I can't note down — But what seems
to be an address is very clear — 5 Selwyn Gardens —
Cambridge."
Mrs, Holland — at any rate subconsciously — believed
that the man she had here described was Myers. There-
fore she ascribed the dimness of the picture to the circum-
stance that it was a deceased person she saw. " He
seems to be summoning up the appearance of what he
used to be," she writes. And therefore she believed she
could feel that he wanted to " say many things." On
November 21st, the script makes Gurney say about Myers :
" It was a tremendous effort to him to appear in your
mind's eye the way that he did a fortnight ago — and it
has weakened the messages ever since." Here, at any
rate, is evidence of pure fiction. For it was not Myers
who had " appeared in her mind's eye " on November 7th.
The description seems in almost all particulars to fit
Dr. Verrall. Miss Johnson writes : " In 1903 Dr. VerraU
was 52, but looked older on account of his delicate
health. He had a beard as well as moustache — more
grey than his hair ; when run down, he tended to have a
nervous cough. His hands were well-shaped with long
fingers which have become crippled and much bent from
rheumatism. He has never worn a seal ring. The other
points mentioned are correct." Mrs. Verrall adds :
" The attitude strikes me as particularly good. The
trick of leaning forward and gesticulating when interested
in what he talks of is very characteristic."
Thus Mrs. Holland once more seems to have had a
veridical impression, with the deficiencies that are usual
in " clairvoyance." The address that followed, as if
belonging to the impression, was that of the Verralls. It
is not given in Human Personality. Of course Mrs. Hol-
land may have seen it elsewhere, in Who's Who ? for
112 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
instance, as Miss Johnson intimates ; but it is at least
conceivable that it may have been caught supernormally
together with the impression of Dr. Verrall ; we have
seen that Miss Ramsden could obtain names as well as
pictures which belonged to the surroundings of Miss Miles,
and that without any intention on the part of the latter.
After the description of Dr. Verrall the script went on
as follows :
" I will write down the stray words and phrases that come
into my mind' —
" Edmund — the first to come Henry I had to wait some
time for — Those one most wants have often their own employ-
ments — S M [probably Stainton Moses] has not appeared yet —
Tell Miss J — that the compact is not forgotten —
" I knew the success at once^ — The Times — Is A. W. satis-
fied ? Pod — how the typewriter ?
" Only a little at a time — Practice is needed and sympathy.
The agent is all alone and that makes it hard.
" Eidolon [attempt at Greek letters] — Timor mortis [fear of
death].
" Lucy — Lucy. Agnes Lysaght 17 Manchester Square.
" Send to 5 Selwyn Gardens Cambridge.
" It is like entrusting a message on which infinite
importance depends to a sleeping person — Get a proof — try
for a proof if you feel this is a waste of time without. Send
this to Mrs. Verrall 5 Selwyn Gardens Cambridge."
Much of this is pure imagination. Not only was there
no Agnes Lysaght in Manchester Square, nor had the talk
of a compact and a success any foundation.
The remaining part does not differ from the preceding
constructions based on Human Personality. An excep-
tion is the word eidolon. Mrs. Holland, who did not know
either Greek or Latin, did not understand this Greek
term which if employed by Myers would be specially
appropriate. It returns in later writings and wiU be
discussed there.
The next script of interest contains the following
description given in the " Myers handwriting " :
January $th, 1904.
" She is not very tall — a slender figure often dressed in
green — dark hair — rather pushed from the forehead — straying
SPONTANEOUS WRITING 113
a little from the centre parting — very mobile brows — pince-
nez when she writes — A strong chin — mouth thin-lipped but
sympathetic — a strong but not a hard one — Mind admirably
well balance [sic] — Hands with long lingers — but the palms
well developed — No foolish impulses — but no fear of sudden
actions which seem the outcome of sudden impulse — Age —
32 — '^^ — I forget — what importance has age to me now — "
The description appears to fit Mrs. Verrall. That it is
due to supernormal perception seems clear, Mrs. Holland
ascribes it to Myers — the phrase " what importance has
age to me now," marks it as the product of a discarnate —
at the same time reproducing it with a womanly sense for
particulars which was characteristic, too, of her description
of the Verralls' dining-room, and which will reappear in
later cases.
The next writings refer to the eidolon. " Myers "
says :
January yth, 1904.
" I want to make it thoroughly clear to you all that the
eidolon is not the spirit — only the simulachrum [sic] — If M
were to see me sitting at my table or if any one of you became
conscious of my semblance standing near my chair that would
not be me. My spirit would be there invisible but perceptive
but the appearance would be merely to call your attention to
identify me — It fades and grows less easily recognizable as
the years pass and my remembrance of my earthly appearance
grows weaker the phantasm the so-called ghost is a
counterfeit presentment projected by the spirit . . .
January 8ih, 1904.
" The appearance of the simulacre [sic] does not necessarily
imply that the spirit is consciously present. It may project
the phantasm from a great distance. More usually however
it is present. On two occasions only I myself have been able
to perceive the surroundings I so desired to see — Once at a
meeting The next time was a few weeks ago at home.
" I wou^d try so hard on the anniversary that is only nine
days away now if I could be sure that you really wished and
desired my eidolon without any fear or reluctance "
The starting-point for these writings seems to be a
vision which Mrs. Holland had on the night of January 4th,
of a man sitting at a writing table. His head was so bent
CD. I
114 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
that she only saw " a fine brow, grey hair, the points of
his rather old-fashioned turned-down collar, and a loosely
tied dark tie." If this vision represented her subconscious
conception of Myers, the disparity between it and her
impression in November, which she also took to refer to
Myers, may well have caused her reflections about the
phantom not being the spirit itself. At the same time,
as Miss Johnson points out, " the theory here expressed
as to the true nature of a ghost is no doubt derived from
the first part of the chapter on ' Phantasms of the Dead '
in Human Personality, Vol. II."
Remarkable, however, is the correct use of the words
eidolon and simulacrum, whix;h do not occur in the said
chapter. Eidolon is used in Odyssey XL, v. 6oi, where it
is told that Odysseus in Hades meets " great Herakles,
his phantom {USooXov) ; himself rejoices amid the im-
mortals." The passage is alluded to by Plotinus, and this
allusion is quoted in Human Personality, Vol. 11. (p. 290) ;
but neither the Greek nor the Latin word is mentioned
there. Myers, however, employs the term eidolon in a
paper in the S.P.R. Proceedings, Vol. VI. (p. 64), in the
same sense as Mrs. Holland's script.^ Mrs. Holland felt
sure of having never seen any volume of the Proceedings ;
but she may have seen extracts from them elsewhere.
It is impossible to exclude the possibility of cryptomnesia
in questions regarding matter that has appeared in print.
Moreover, Mrs. Holland is a great reader, and reads very
fast : " I am," she herself narrates, " a proverb in my
family for ' tearing the heart ' out of a book or a paper in
a few minutes."
The initial M in the script of January 7th is supposed
to mean Margaret, and to refer to Mrs. Verrall, In later
scripts it is undoubtedly used in this sense. Here, again, as
with regard to the address, Selwyn Gardens, two explana-
tions are possible ; Mrs. Holland may somewhere have
seen Mrs. Verrall's Christian name, or she may have
1 See Miss Johnson's second report on Mrs. Holland's automatic
writing. Proceedings S.P.R. , Vol. XXIV., p. 3.
SPONTANEOUS WRITING 115
obtained it supernormally together with the impression
of her personahty.
On January 8th the writing had alluded to the anniver-
sary of Myers's death, January 17th. It had played a
part already in the first script of Mrs. Holland's that
purported to come from him ; it is on the whole charac-
teristic of her script to lay stress on dates. On the said
anniversary she wrote her next important piece in the
name of Myers :
" Thursday, January 17th, igoi.
" I have no wish to return in thought or memory to that
time but let the date stand for what it stands for to mine and
me
" The sealed envelope (1899) is not to be opened yet — not
yet—
" I am unable to make your hand form Greek characters
and so I cannot give the text as I wish — only the reference —
I Cor. 16-13 ... Oh I am feeble with eagerness — How can
I best be identified "
It seems certain that Mrs. Holland did not know any-
thing about the sealed envelope which Myers in 1891 —
not as the script has it, in 1899 — had given into the
custody of Sir OHver Lodge for posthumous reading.
She remembered, however, that he recommends in Human
Personality such experiments to be made. The Bible
text to which the script gives the reference is the following :
" Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be
strong." This text, with the omission of the last two
words, is inscribed in Greek over the gateway of Selwyn
College, Cambridge. The road in which Mrs. Verrall lives
is named Selwyn Gardens, on account of its proximity to
Selwyn College.
Mrs. Holland had never been in Cambridge, but of
course she might have read about the inscription.
Another possibihty is that it was perceived by her super-
normally in the same way as, perhaps, Mrs. Verrall's
address and the initial of her Christian name. That she
does not quote the text but only gives the reference is in
view of the tendency of her script to mysteriousness not
I 2
ii6 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
remarkable. She read the Bible constantly/ and may, no
doubt, have known subconsciously what the numbers
referred to.
But whether the reference to the " Selwyn text " was
due to cryptomnesia or to supernormal perception, there
seemed at any rate to be a supernormal connection between
the script of January 17th, 1904, and Mrs. Verrall.
On the same day the latter wrote as follows : ^
" S is the letter — S in the envelope — S and on a seal — 2.
" In Mrs. Sidgwick's letter a 2 — and three words on the
paper — not without hope. The question is answered. This
must succeed — the other is harder
" The text and the answer are one and are given "
It was in the period when Mrs. Verrall was full of the
thought of Myers's sealed letter, and at the same time of
a test question which, prompted by her script, she had
asked Mrs. Sidgwick to send her. We have seen how the
two things were interwoven in her script in a rather con-
fusing manner, and we know how the opening of the
envelope proved the statements concerning its contents
to be pure construction.
The test question which Mrs. Verrall had received from
Mrs. Sidgwick was this : " What was the last of Dr. Sidg-
wick's texts, the one that belonged to the latter part of
his life ? " Professor Sidgwick had in the different periods
of his life had different " texts " of this kind ; the last one
was : " Gather up the fragments that remain, that
nothing be lost." Mrs. Verrall's script of December 25th,
1903, had contained another text of a kindred nature,
namely : " Use the daylight hours, for the night cometh
when no man may work." Whether its appearance was
due to cryptomnesia, subconscious guessing, or an impres-
sion caught from Mrs. Sidgwick, is of minor interest in
the present connection ; the point is, that the automatist
was thinking of a text. Confused as her script of
January 17th was, it was equally filled with that matter
^ See below, p. 125.
2 Cf. above, p. 71.
SPONTANEOUS WRITING 117
and with the sealed envelope. Under these circumstances
it is that it produces the mystic announcement that
" the text and the answer are one and are given."
As may be seen, there is no possibility of construing
this into an allusion to Mrs. Holland's script. In the
latter, as in that of Mrs. Verrall, there is a reference to a
sealed letter and to a text ; but it is not the same text.
" Mrs. Holland's text," Miss Johnson writes, " has no
sort of connection with the text asked for by Mrs. Sidg-
wick, which Mrs. Verrall's script was trying to produce."
Moreover, Mrs. Verrall's script of January 17th has no
claim to be considered anything but a subconscious
production.
On the other hand, it is more than probable that
Mrs. Holland's script is founded on an impression from
Mrs. Verrall. It can hardly be due to chance that the
references to the sealed envelope and to the text — a text,
moreover, which is connected with Mrs. Verrall's residence
— appear at a time when the latter was engrossed by the
same subjects. It is a cross-correspondence — but a cross-
correspondence that has an entirely human foundation.
Mrs. Holland's script of January 17th, 1904, contains
one more remarkable passage. She wrote :
" Dear old chap you have done so much in the past three
years — I am cognizant of a great deal but with strange gaps
in my knowledge — If I could only talk with you — If I could
only help you with some advice — I tried more than once did
it ever come — There's so much to be learnt from the Diamond
Island experiment "
Neither Mrs. Holland nor Miss Johnson understood the
meaning of this " letter," nor saw for whom it was
intended. More than four years after its production, in
1908, Mrs. Holland, however, got the idea that it referred
to wireless telegraphy, as there was a wireless station on
Diamond Island, in India. Mrs. Verrall now pointed out
that the person addressed must be Sir Ohver Lodge ;
inquiries proved that the Lodge-Muirhead system was in
fact at work between Burma and the Andaman Islands,
ii8 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
with a station on Diamond Island. The installation had
not begun until February, 1904, but the apparatus had
come from England in January.^
The discovery, however, lost most of its interest, as it
turned out that Mrs. Holland in all probabiUty had in the
winter 1903 — 4 read in the Indian papers about the
intended installation. She was interested in wireless
telegraphy, had heard a lecture by Marconi, and rather
regretted tliat an Itahan was, as she supposed, ahead of
Englishmen in this matter. That she had not on the
appearance of the script, connected it with the subject
was natural, as it did not contain anything that pointed
to it save the name of Diamond Island, and that name had
told her nothing ; in 1908, when the question was reverted
to, she confounded it with that of Diamond Harbour, in
Bengal.
The whole thing, then, is no doubt due to subconscious
memory. That Mrs. Holland by reading about the
Lodge-Muirhead system and the experimenting going to
be done on Diamond Island supplied her automatic self
with material for a " letter " from Myers, is not strange.
" Lodge " is mentioned by the Holland-Myers on
November 25th, 1903, and the automatist had recently
been reminded of .him by reading in the Review of Reviews
a letter from him to the editor of that periodical. At
any rate, it is less difficult to adopt this explanation than
to suppose that Myers was cognizant of the Diamond
Island experiment at a time when it still belonged to the
future.
• *••••
After this — for nearly a year — Mrs. Holland fought
against her tendency to write automatically. She did
not herself value her writings much. " She was con-
scious," Miss Johnson says, " of the superficially trivial
and incoherent nature of her script, and could not tell
whether there was anything in it beyond a dream-like
1 Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XXV., pp. 293 seq.
SPONTANEOUS WRITING 119
rechauffi of her own thoughts." Besides, she suffered by
being constantly exposed to interruptions when writing.
" The shock of any chance interruption seemed to her
out of all proportion to the value of anything she obtained."
From April, 1904, till June, 1906, she was in Europe.
She did not, however, make the personal acquaintance of
Miss Johnson and Mrs. Verrall until the autumn of 1905.
The correspondence with Miss Johnson had also ceased
after Mrs. Holland left India. But on February 15th,
1905, she had an unexpected impulse to write auto-
matically, and on the same day sent her script to the
secretary. It contained among other things the following
piece :
February isth, 1905.
'"Oh good Oliver ! Oh brave Oliver !
Leave me not behind thee ! ' ^
" Is your personal interest in me fading even as the years
lengthen between your present to-day and the January day
that ended time for me — Not the affection that endures I
know — but the interest perhaps — -Have I gone where the
failed experiments go —
" ' And all dead dreams go thither
And all disastrous things '
" Under other conditions I should say how much I regretted
the failure of the envelope test and I do regret it because it
was a disappointment to you — otherwise it is too trivial to
waste a thought upon
" Eternally
" F."
The sealed envelope left by Myers with Sir Oliver Lodge
had been opened on December 13th, 1904 ; an account of
the event had been printed in the Journal of the Society
for January, 1905, and had afterwards been referred to by
the papers, which did not, however, mention Mrs. Verrall,
but only Sir Oliver Lodge. In view hereof it is almost
impossible to help believing that Mrs. Holland had seen
one of the newspaper accounts, and that this was the source
of her script of February 15th. She did not herself
believe so ; she felt sure that her interest in Myers would
' Cf. Shakespeare, As you Like It, Act. III., Sc. iii.
120 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
have prevented her forgetting such an incident, if she had
seen a reference to it. But she may have seen the para-
graph without consciously noticing. In view of her
manner of reading there is nothing unhkely in this
supposition.
As regards this case, the explanation cryptomnesia
must, then, suffice. It may in this connection be men-
tioned that Mrs. Holland, in the course of the summer,
1905, produced a series of scripts that purported to come
from the deceased author, Laurence Oliphant, but which
in aU particulars can be explained by the circumstance
that she had, in 1903, read a biography of him. Of
course this and similar instances of unquestionable
fabrication must not be overlooked when reviewing her
production as a whole.
We have now reached a point where such a review ought
to take place with regard to the preceding writings.
The performances that are of interest in the following
period are mostly of another type ; they consist largely
in experiments, while the preceding ones were spon-
taneous. Besides, the personal acquaintance with Miss
Johnson and Mrs. Verrall presently intervenes. The
writings produced in India in 1903 — 4 form a separate
whole and must b^ considered separately. Outwardly,
the script of February 15th, 1905, belongs to them ; but
as it does not seem to contain any supernormal element,
it may be disregarded in this connection. The same will
apply to several pieces from the earlier period — for instance,
those of September i6th and i8th, 1903, and of
January 8th, 1904, and many that have not been
reproduced here.
The remaining scripts are those of September 21st and
November 7th, 1903, and of January 5th, 7th, and 17th,
1904. Of these, three pieces have been seen to contain an
undisputably supernormal element, while the same was
possibly the case with the two others. The supernormal
element was the description of the Verralls' dining-room
SPONTANEOUS WRITING 121
on September 21st, of Dr. Verrall on November 7th, and
of Mrs. Verrall on January 5th ; possibly supernormal
were the mention of the latter's initial on January 7th
and the reference to the Selwyn text on January 17th ;
besides, in the script of November 7th, the address of the
Verralls. The three last statements may be due to latent
memory ; but as it is impossible to prove this, it cannot
be absolutely denied that they may be of the same origin
as the three descriptions which cannot be ascribed to
cryptomnesia. They are, moreover, of a nature that
makes it possible to connect them with the descriptions.
The problem, then, is this, what is the source of these
descriptions ? It is a problem whose solution is greatly
simplified through the circumstance that it is one and the
same phenomenon that recurs ; a phenomenon, more-
over, which we have met before. Such " mental pic-
tures," or clairvoyant impressions, as those which
Mrs. Holland caught of Mrs. Verrall's dining-room, her
husband, and herself, had Mrs. Verrall obtained from
Mrs. Forbes, and vice-versa, or, to keep to the experi-
mental territory. Miss Ramsden from Miss Miles. Those
of Mrs. Holland were perhaps a little clearer and more
detailed — although, as all clairvoyant perceptions, not
whoUy correct — but essentially they were of the same
type as the others. Mrs. Holland's visionary powers
seemed altogether more developed than those of the two
other sensitives ; she was able to see things in a crystal,
and had experienced several visions when not writing
automatically.
But why did Mrs. Holland get these impressions about
people and places that she did not know ? We have here
to do with a similar phenomenon as that to which Andrew
Lang gave the name of " telepathy a trois." The visions
which Lang's sensitives saw in the glass ball referred
to people whom the psychics did not know but who were
known to some one among the persons present at the
experiment ; but this person might himself be ignorant
of the things that were perceived. His part was only to
122 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
put the medium in rapport with the absent person,
whose circumstances were revealed by means of the
picture seen in the crystal. It was the necessity of such
an intermediary that gave the phenomenon its name ;
only it ought to have been called clairvoyance d. trois — or
" clairvoyance with rapport " — rather than telepathy ;
Lang himself did not feel sure that the latter designation
hit the mark.
In the case of Mrs. Holland the intermediary must have
been Miss Johnson. This supposition is not so improbable
as it will perhaps appear at first sight. In a letter of
February 23rd, 1905, while Mrs. Holland did not yet
know the secretary personally, she begged her to send her
some paper that had been lying in her desk, and a pen-
holder that she had used for some time. She fancied that
it would help her script to use these things, and though
it seemed silly to her to ask for them, she felt that she
must do so. Is it possible to doubt that the sensitive
was here governed by an instinct, and that the paper
and the penholder did play a similar part for her as
the " articles " do for those who practise psychometry ?
On a later occasion she contends that she has get a veri-
dical impression by reading a letter from Miss Johnson,
and says : " The conviction came instantly, as an impres-
sion gained from" a letter often does come with me."
Thus letters too seem to convey knowledge to her super-
normally. Whether we shall call it psychometry, or
regard the objects — paper, penholder, letters — as lines
that bring about the connection, is unimportant ; most
likely it is a different mode of expressing the same thing.
At a later time it once happened that Mrs. Holland
caught a veridical impression about Mrs. Forbes's sur-
roundings by reading a letter from Mrs. Verrall.
Mrs. Holland did not know Mrs. Forbes, and Mrs. Verrall
was not near her when she wrote the letter. This is an
almost exact parallel to her obtaining, during the corre-
spondence with Miss Johnson in the winter of 1903 — 4,
veridical impressions about the surroundings of Mrs.
SPONTANEOUS WRITING 123
Verrall. That she did not know her correspondent person-
ally is of no consequence, as it was from the letters that
the influence emanated ; and no more did she know Miss
Johnson when in February, 1905, she asked for her paper
and penholder. Neither can it, with regard to this theory,
be of any consequence whether the distance between the
percipient and the things perceived is great or small.
In the moment when Mrs. Holland holds the letter in
her hand, she has obtained connection with the writer,
and it makes no difference whether it has travelled all the
way from England to India or only that from Cambridge
to London.
Still, it might be asked why it was just Mrs. Verrall and
her surroundings that were perceived by Mrs. Holland
through the intermediation of Miss Johnson. Was it
because this lady consciously or unconsciously had her
in her mind when writing to her fellow-automatist ?
Or was it due to the circumstance that Mrs. Verrall
herself was a sensitive ? The parallel with her perception
of Mrs. Forbes's surroundings cannot help us to solve
the question, because both explanations are possible also
in the latter case. When Mrs. Verrall wrote the letter
that led to Mrs. Holland's perception, Mrs. Forbes in all
probability was not far from her thoughts, as she was just
in the act of leaving home for a visit to her house in the
north of England. But on the other hand, Mrs. Forbes
too was a sensitive, and the possibility of this playing a
part in the phenomenon is not excluded.
Be that as it may, it seems certain that Miss Johnson
was the connecting hnk between the two automatists in
the winter 1903 — 4. The script of February 15th, 1905,
which was produced after the correspondence with the
secretary had been discontinued for about a year, con-
tained nothing that suggests supernormal perception.
CHAPTER X
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS
After the~^ renewal of the correspondence with Miss
Johnson in February, 1905, Mrs. Holland's automatism
entered upon a new phase, her correspondent having
suggested a series of experiments to take place between
her and Mrs. Verrall. These experiments confirm what
has been said above of Mrs. Holland's faculty to obtain
impressions about Mrs. Verrall, at the same time showing
that the latter, though in a lesser degree, possessed the
same faculty with regard to Mrs. Holland. At this time
there was no personal acquaintance between the two auto-
matists, nor did any of them know who her fellow-
experimenter was.
It was arranged that the two ladies on Wednesday,
March 1st, 1905, and on the following five Wednesdays,
but at the time of day that was most convenient to each
of them, ought to try for automatic writing. There was
no attempt made to produce a definite word or idea in
the other's script. The experiment must be characterized
as " intentional perception without intentional trans-
mission." On the first Wednesday Mrs. Holland wrote
as follows :
March 1st, 1905, 10.45 <^-^'
" There are cut flowers in the blue jar — jonquils I think and
tulips — growing tulips near the window — A dull day but the
sky hints at Spring and one chirping bird is heard about the
roar of the traffic —
Watch ye stand fast in the faith — quit you like men
be strong '
" Does Mrs. V. own herself worsted for once ? Or does she
wait for a triumph in May — The Banks in May I Ah me
Earth's glamour holds —
" A slender lady with dark hair drawn to a heavy knot at
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 125
the base of her long throat. Eyes like dark jewels in a pale
pale face — the outline of it ' hollowed a little mournfully.'
A very sensitive mouth — Long hands — a signet ring on the
middle finger "
This is a series of supernormal impressions concerning
Mrs. Verrall. It begins with a fairly correct description
of the flowers in her drawing-room. On asking, Miss John-
son received the following reply from her : " On March ist
the only cut flowers in my drawing-room were in two
blue china jars on the mantelpiece ; the flowers were
large single daffodils. On the ledge of the window looking
into the greenhouse — on the greenhouse side — were three
pots of growing yellow tulips ." On the other hand,
the writer cannot have had Mrs. Verrall 's residence in
mind when referring to the roar of the traffic ; there is
no traffic in Selwyn Gardens, which is not a thoroughfare.
The described lady is evidently Mrs. Verrall herself.
The question, " Does Mrs. V. own herself worsted for
once ? " might imply that the script connected her with
the envelope failure. But it is very unhkely that it
would speak with such want of sympathy about anything
that concerned Myers. The remark is probably due to
a general impression of failure, and to nothing more.
Mrs. Holland, then, has obtained impressions supernor-
mally of the drawing-room of her unknown colleague, of
her appearance and name, and of some disappointment
connected with her.
Besides this, the script quotes the " Selwyn text," or
rather the whole of the verse i Cor. xvi. 13 ; the two
words " be strong " are not included in the Greek inscrip-
tion over the gate of Selwyn College. Mrs. Holland had
in the morning of March ist read the beginning of i Corin-
thians xvi. ; when she continued her reading the next
morning she noticed that xvi. 13 had been quoted in her
writing the day before. It is highly probable, though,
that she had seen the verse without knowing on March ist,
and that she subconsciously at least had known that it
was the same text which had been referred to formerly.
126 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
As the reference was on that occasion associated with a
perception of Mrs. Verrall, it is only natural that the
verse was now quoted in connection with her. That the
last two words were added was a simple consequence of
Mrs. Holland's knowledge of the verse. It emerged as
an impression about Mrs. Verrall, not specially as the
Selwyn text, which the automatist hardly knew.
As regards Mrs. Verrall, her script of March ist, 1905,
written at 6 p.m., contains the following :
" V. iii black letter text ....
Don't identify it might alarm her."
The first words may be due to a vague impression about
Mrs. Holland. The latter tli^ught, when told of them,
that they must refer to i Cor. xvi. 3, which she had read
on the same morning and which runs : " For I verily,
as absent in body, but present in spirit ..." If these
words have consciously or unconsciously impressed her
specially, it might possibly increase the chance of their
being caught by Mrs. Verrall. But she would hardly
have been impressed with the number of the verse.
More likely it is the quotation of the Bible text in
Mrs. Holland's script that has been reflected — if a vague
correspondence hke that can be considered more than an
accident.
The second phrase is in itself quite meaningless, but a
very natural outcome of Mrs. Verrall 's knowledge of the
co-operation of another automatist.
None of the writings on the two following Wednesdays
contained anything intimating supernormal connection.
But on the latter day Mrs. Verrall had written as follows :
March i^th, 1905.
" Send these five notes [drawing of five notes].
" She will send you something like them — verse I think "
On March 19th, her script once more contained notes,
and on the following Wednesday Mrs. Holland wrote as
follows :
March 22nd, 1905.
" The ivory gate through which all good dreams come.
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 127
" Sono molto fatigato e ammalatto [sic] — Ho paura [I am
very tired and ill — I am frightened] [drawing of six notes]."
This represents impressions both of Mrs. Verrall's
script, namely of the notes, and of her occupations.
She had on March 19th and 20th spent a great deal of
her time in looking up descriptions by Virgil and Dante
of the " gate of hell," and in the course of so doing read
the passage in the sixth Aeneid about the gates of horn
and ivory and about the true dreams — which, however,
came through the former, not, as Mrs. Holland has it,
through the ivory gate. On the same two days she was
reading Itahan for the first time for months. So many
correspondences cannot be due to chance.
Meanwhile Mrs. Verrall, too, had caught an impression
about Mrs. HoUand. It was not on a Wednesday, but on
a Sunday :
March igth, 1905, 6.50 p.m.
" That lady has gone to church — go into her house with me
— up 3 stairs on the left into a room — and over the mantel-
piece hangs a picture a photograph Ruskin has written of it —
Carpaccio's Ursula She does not want us in her room-
come away — you have seen the Ursula which I meant to show
you—"
This little story has a supernormal perception for its
foundation. On asking, Miss Johnson was told in a letter
from Mrs. Holland that she was not at church on Sunday
evening, March 19th, and that the Dream of St. Ursula
did not hang in her room.. " But," she added, " on
Saturday evening I was going through the portfolio of
' Great Masters,' and the Carpaccio Ursula was the picture
I looked at longest and returned to most frequently
— so much so, indeed, that my father asked me if I would
like to have it framed and hung in my room."
In the same letter, dated March 24th, Mrs. Holland
sent to Miss Johnson the description of an impression
that had come to her very strongly within the last days.
It was not automatically written, and she did not know
why the impression had come into her mind. She did
128 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
not seem to suspect that she had twice before tried to
describe the same lady in her script. The impression was
as follows :
" A thin woman, not very young ; at least the further side
of thirty. Her dark hair is slightly rough or naturally fluffy
and begins to show threads of grey over the ears. She often
wears a pince nez with either no frame or a very slight one.
She has lost a great many people she loved both relatives and
friends, and the trinkets she habitually wears are more relics
than ornaments. A ring, a gold chain, both very full of
memories. Grey eyes ; the black lashes almost close when she
laughs. Ore}' dresses, green dresses, simply made — often with
wide belts. Not a ' tailor-made ' woman. Critical ; a little
too incisive in manner ; with a warm heart and a curiously
unexpected fund of shyness. Very well educated. Her college
career was attended with a good deal of distinction. She is
very highly strung ; but too self-controlled to be called
' nervous.' The mouth has mobile lips and she has a trick
of contracting the lower lip of which she is probably un-
conscious. Reserved to a fault. She is beginning to attain
to a faith she once thought she had outgrown."
The fullness of this description excludes all possibility
of chance coincidence. With the exception of the colour
of the eyes and lashes it seems in all points to fit Mrs.
Verrall, even to the trick of drawing in her lower lip, a
habit contracted on account of a criticism made on her in
her childhood. As for the description of her character.
Miss Johnson thinks that " her friends would consider it
in many points very apt."
This impression was the last real success occurring
during the period of experimenting. On the sixth
Wednesday, Mrs. Verrall's script seemed to reflect
vaguely Mrs. Holland's surroundings — a gate in a hedge
looking to the western sky, and a peaceful landscape.
That was all.
Mrs. Holland's script of March ist and 22nd, Mrs.
Verrall's of March 19th, and the former's impression about
her co-experimenter, were thus the essential result of the
experiments on these six Wednesdays. Only two of the
coincidences, however, occurred on the appointed days,
and it must on the whole be said that the successes
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 129
seemed due more to the circumstance that the two
psychics — as was formerly the case with Mrs. Verrall
and Mrs. Forbes — had got into touch with each other
than to their directing their thoughts towards each other.
The reciprocal sensitiveness is of the same type as that
which Mrs. Holland had displayed in India with regard
to Mrs. Verrall. That it was " clairvoyance a trois,"
and that Miss Johnson was the intermediary, must
then here as there be the one possible manner of inter-
preting it.
It is worth noting that a following series of experiments
of another type was a decided failure. During the next
six weeks, while Mrs. Holland was travelling on the Con-
tinent, she attempted every Wednesday to convey an
impression and one definite word to her fellow-experi-
menter ; but in no case did Mrs. Verrall's script show any
coincidence with the topics selected. After this, Mrs.
Verrall tried for a few weeks, with no better success, to
convey ideas chosen by herself to Mrs. Holland. This is a
repetition of what we experienced in former cases — that
it is much more difficult for a sensitive to grasp what
an agent strives to produce than to " perceive " what
is not intended for transmission. Neither the one-horse
nor the stabdelta experiment obtained a full success,
though the attempts left distinct traces in Mrs. Verrall's
script. But not even a faint trace was produced by
the latter's exertions with regard to Mrs. Holland, nor
the reverse ; evidently the rapport between them was
not strong enough for that, though permitting them
to obtain supernormal impressions about each other's
doings.
• •••••
In thj following autumn Mrs. Holland became per-
sonally acquainted with Miss Johnson. On October 6th,
1905, the two ladies met for the first time in the rooms of
the Society for Psychical Research in London and had a
long conversation. On November i6th, Mrs. Holland
met Mrs. Verrall at the same place in the presence of the
CD. K
130 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
secretary ; on November 21st she spoke with the latter
alone. After this she did not see her until February 21st,
1906, when Mrs, Verrall and Mr. Piddington were also
present.
To this first period of the personal acquaintance with
Miss Johnson belong some pieces of Mrs. Holland's script
which, in the opinion of Miss Johnson, strongly suggest an
influence from herself.
In the spectator for October 7th, 1905, Mrs. Holland
had read a review of Dr. Maxwell's book Metapsychical
Phenomena ; it is, Miss Johnson says, clearly responsible
for much of the matter of the script produced during this
period. But although Mrs. Holland had read the review
at any rate before October 27th, when she spoke of it in
a letter to Miss Johnson, it was not until several weeks
later that the script touched on the topic.
On November 19th, 1905, Miss Johnson had spent
most of the morning in looking out for Mr. Everard
Feilding, who was going to Paris to attend some sittings
with Eusapia Paladino, her own records of the sittings
at Cambridge with this medium. In the afternoon
of the same day Mr. Feilding was with her discussing the
matter.
It was on this day that Mrs. Holland's script commenced
a series of remarks about psychical phenomena, put into
the mouth now of Myers and now of Gurney ; for instance,
the following :
November iglh, 1905, 11 a.m.
" The phenomena that will shortly be induced are utterly
misleading — They will not be completely fraudulent — at least
not consciously so — but the influence will be of the poltergeist
type and the lowest forms of physical magnetism will be called
upon
November 20th, 1905.
" The properties apertaining [sic] to the deception wifl be
daringly simple — the old familiar trickery There will be
a piece of elastic in his shirt sleeve — No— nothing so elaborate
as a pneumatic glove Of course there is a great substratum
of truth but those two people won't help you to arrive at it.
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 131
The man is a charlatan — and the woman — though with a
good deal of sincerity at first has lost it through vanity and
the desire for effectiveness
" [?] Palladia — Mrs. Eustace Lucas — Annie Bird —
Euphronia — Katie King — Eustonia — Pallonia — "
Miss Johnson thinks that these descriptions of fraudu-
lent phenomena may have been partly due to "a
vague telepathic reflection " of her conversation with
Mr. Feilding.
On November 21st, Mrs. Holland brought her the script
in question ; she asked her then what she had read about
physical phenomena, but of course told her nothing of
her own views as to these. The conversation seems to
have given the impulse to some pieces of script in the
beginning of December where Miss Johnson is introduced,
nay where it is said that she " will be the best help in this
case."
This of course involves nothing supernormal. The
remarkable point is this, that when Mrs. Holland's script
after a long interval once more spoke of physical pheno-
mena, it was again after a conversation between Miss
Johnson and Mr. Feilding about the subject. On
March 13th, 1906, the secretary had received a paper
containing an attack on the Algerian " materializations "
reported by Professor Richet ; either on the same or on
the next day she discussed the matter with Mr. Feilding.
Mrs. Holland's script on this occasion contained among
other things the following :
March 14th, 1906.
"It is a pity R [ichet] has no sense of humour but not
unusual for his nationality. It gives him a certain power too —
some of us were too whimsical perhaps are "
This is followed by further remarks about fraudulent
performances. In all probability Mrs. Holland had in
the course of the winter read or heard more of physical
phenomena than what she had gained from the review in
The Spectator. The whole topic was, as Miss Johnson
writes, very much in the air at that time. But that her
K 2
132 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
script started the subject just when it was occupying
Miss Johnson's mind and conversation, and recurred to
it after an interval of more than three months, just at the
moment when she was once more discussing it, is a double
coincidence which can hardly be due to chance, but which
adds to the evidence for Mrs. Holland's faculty of obtaining
supernormal impressions from other persons.
On December 20th, 1905, Dr. Richard Hodgson, the
ardent psychical researcher who had for many years
supervised the sittings with Mrs. Piper, died suddenly in
Boston. Mrs. Holland knew his name at least from
Human Personality. On January 22nd, igo6, she learned
through a newspaper paragraph that he had " died at
Boston a month ago." This was all that she, to the best
of her belief, had heard about it.
About this time Mrs. Holland had the feeling that her
mediumism showed a tendency to enter upon a new phase.
She told this to Miss Johnson in a letter which she sent
her together with a piece of script of February 9th,
printed below. For some time, she said, a few moments
of writing had made her feel at once very sleepy and very
loquacious. She fancied that under favourable condi-
tions her automatic writing would change into trance or
semi-trance conditions with spoken words instead of
written ones. A few times, just before falling asleep at
night, she had heard fragments of speech which she knew
were not real, and she ascribed them to a possible new
attempt at communication.
Whether this state — which did not develop further —
was of any consequence with regard to the script, can
hardly be determined. It has seemed natural to men-
tion it as the automatist herself laid so much stress
upon it.
Under these circumstances the following script was
produced :
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 133
February gth, igo6.
"... Sjdibse Ipehtpo — only one letter further on —
18 8
9 15
3 4
8 7
I 19
18 15
4 14
" They are not haphazard figures read them as letters —
" The shortness of breath was the worst part of the illness
— worse even than the exhaustion —
" K. 57. Jessie — Grey paper —
" The (?) straggler (?) returns — a printed address on the
sheet of paper — Three small lines of writing — a wide margin
left — I cannot make it clear to you.
" Concejttrate hard.
" 1 3 initials.
" Nothing else upon the sheet —
" It's a wide prospect from the windows —
" A gold watch chain with a horse-shoe shaped cigar cutter
attached to it — An old seal not his own initials — A white
handled knife inkstained —
" Nitrate of amyl — probably too late even if it had been
thought of —
" A corpse needs no shoes — "
When the direction of the script is followed, and the
letters are replaced by those preceding them in the alpha-
bet, they give the name Richard Hodgson, while the
numbers read as letters give the same name. As we know,
Mrs. Holland had as a child played at a secret language
made by using either the letter before or the letter after
the real one. Besides, her script had always shown a
tendency to mystifi-cation. A similar tendency is said to
have characterized Dr. Hodgson ; but this coincidence,
of course, loses all importance, as the same quality is
displayed by the other alleged controls of Mrs. Holland.
The whole script, however, seems less fabricated than
Mrs. Holland's productions used to be. It appears to
1 The three lines represent writing which is too vague for identifica-
tion.
134 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
consist of a series of impressions put loosely down. They
are all of them of a nature that makes it possible to connect
them with Dr. Hodgson, and they are just as correct as
supernormal impressions use to be, i.e., there are some
incorrect things interspersed here and there. An illness
is mentioned, with shortness of breath ; Dr. Hodgson
died of heart-failure while playing a game of handball,
with no preceding illness ; but " nitrate of amyl," which
is mentioned with the addition that it probably would
have been too late even if it had been thought of, is given
for heart-failure. " The wide prospect from the windows "
may refer to the Union Boat Club in Boston, where
Dr, Hodgson died ; its windows overlook the Back Bay
to some hills beyond. Dr, Hodgson wore a gold watch
chain with a gold cigar-cutter, but the latter was not
horseshoe shaped. He had an old seal which had a female
figure cut on it, but it was not worn by him at the time of
his death.
One of these things, the cause of death, Mrs. Holland
no doubt might have heard or read about without knowing.
Most of the remaining statements are too indefinite or
common to be of much value. This, however, does not
apply to the name Jessie or to the mystic " K. 57,"
Jessie ^ was the first^name of Dr. Hodgson's much beloved
cousin, who died in Australia in 1879, She is mentioned
in the records of the sittings with Mrs, Piper by the
pseudonym Q ; Mrs, Piper's control Phinuit had once
remarked that the second part of her first name was sie ;
afterwards Dr. Hodgson had told him her full name, but
this had not been published. And in a still more remark-
able manner " K, 57 " seems to point to Dr. Hodgson.
During April and May, 1906, Mr. Piddington was in
Boston to assist in the arrangement of Dr. Hodgson's
affairs as the representative of the Society for Psychical
Research. Miss Johnson sent him a copy of the above
script, asking him to make inquiries about the divers
* The name is not given in Miss Johnson's report, but has been
published later.
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 135
particulars contained in it. After the reception of her
letter, Mr. Piddington found among Dr. Hodgson's papers
a dilapidated note-book, on the front cover of which was
written " The Eternal Life," while inside, on two loose
sheets. Dr. Hodgson had made notes for an article which
he had probably intended to write in answer to Professor
Hugo Miinsterberg's book of that name. On the back
cover of this note-book he had written in pencil as follows :
" R.H. R.H.
I K-6
4 K 52
6 K 8
3 3
4 K 6
52 K 6
K-ii K 7
K-52 K 52
10 K 13
K-30 7
3
" Mr. [or Mrs.] C.
8
14
2
7
7
10
Mr. Piddington declares that he feels " practically
certain that K followed by numerals refers to some par-
ticular series of Piper sittings, or to some particular
subject of the communications." At any rate, it is
mdisputable that the said combination had some signifi-
cance for Dr. Hodgson. In Mrs. Holland's script of
February 9th, " K. 57 " and " Jessie " are followed by a
reference to a grey paper. This would agree with the
conception of " K. 57 " as the designation of some memo-
randum. The passage about the sheet of paper, etc.,
perhaps points to the same, but it is too vague to found
anything upon.
But in any case it can hardly be denied that this com-
bination of references to Dr. Hodgson, " K. 57," and
136 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Jessie, is more than can be ascribed to chance. As
regards " K. 57," the explanation cryptomnesia, more-
over, is quite excluded. But if we must assume a super-
normal impression to be the cause, from whence does it
originate ? Nobody with whom Mrs. Holland can be
supposed to be in rapport, and perhaps no living person,
knew of the designations which the cover of his note-book
shows Dr. ^odgson to have used. That Mrs. Holland
through direct clairvoyance might read them in Boston,
nothing justifies us in asserting. Thus it must suffice to
say that we have here met with a phenomenon which we
are unable to place under the categories which we have
hitherto acknowledged ; ^ as it, is so solitary and slender,
it would be rash to make it the base of any theory.
Mrs. Holland's script held a few more references to
Dr. Hodgson in the following period. But they do not
contain anything that might not be due to cryptomnesia ;
besides, she had on February 21st talked of him with
Miss Johnson, and had no doubt got an impulse to write
about him that detracts from the significance of her pro-
ductions ; her attitude of mind is seen in a letter of
March nth where she, referring to a date given in her
script, writes : " How glad I should be if the date given
was a definite bit -of evidence from Dr. Hodgson." For
completeness' sake, however, I quote the pieces in
question :
February 28th, igo6.
" Dickon of Norfolk — is that far enough away from the
real name ? I'll describe R H [in monogram].
" A short man — but held himself well — broad shoulders —
1 The explanation which Dr. Maxwell [see his paper in the Pro-
ceedings S.P.R., Vol. XXVI., pp. 57 — 144] tries to give of " K. 57 " is
quite insufficient. " La lettre L," he says, " est employee, suivie d'un
numero pour designer une certaine cat6gorie d'hallucinations locales.
Or, la lettre K precede immediatement la lettre L ; une substitution
analogue a celle qui dissimule le nom de M. Hodgson au commencement
du texte I'explique bien simplement." But there can be no analogy
between a substitution that is intended to mystify, and the exchange
of one indifferent letter for another. Besides, there is no reason why
Mrs. Holland should use the letter L. And to the connection in which
" K. 57 " occurs, Dr. Maxwell pays no attention. " K. 37 " in a later
script is probably an echo of " K. 57."
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 137
thick grey white hair — thick grey brows — very straight — A
florid face — reddish brown — (though it was pale enough at
the end). Strong chin — mobile mouth.
" The young wife died so long ago — that perhaps some people
forgot her. Jessie."
About the description, if applied to Dr. Hodgson,
Mr. Piddington says that it is neither very good nor very
bad. Mrs. Holland had never seen a portrait of him ;
but she may, no doubt, have heard him mentioned.
" Jessie " is probably a reminiscence from the former
script. The term " wife " is incorrect; she was not the
wife of Dr. Hodgson, and is not known to have been
married.
March jth, 1906.
" Brittleworth — Brickeldale. Britleton — No — not him and
not James — Brit — Brittle Brick Brickleton — Hugo — H.M. —
Minster Berg. Hugo.
" Was he not aware ?
"R.
" Why are they so brutally dense.
"H.
" I always had a quick temper."
There is, of course, nothing supernormal in connecting
Dr. Hodgson with Professor James or Professor Miinster-
berg, who were both well known within the pale of psychical
research. Neither can I agree with Miss Johnson when
she speaks about the " various attempts made at the
name Hugo Miinsterberg " as a possible result of a
" telepathic effort," comparable with Dr. VerraU's experi-
ment. It is not the name Miinsterberg that is sought
for ; it is, on the contrary, given without groping, and
has nothing to do with the preceding attempts at Brittle-
worth, etc.
May 16th, 1906.
" When the deep red blood of the maple leaf
Burns on the boughs again.
" Spring on a Boston hillside. One clump of maples stands
alone — they are outlined against the sunset and the sunset
is no redder than they. — R. H."
In respect to this script, an American friend of Dr.
Hodgson says : " The foliage of one of our maples turns
138 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
a very brilliant red in the autumn, and its minute flowers
are a most brilliant red in the spring." Miss Johnson adds
that this spring red, which is specially referred to in the
script, is probably a far less familiar fact to English people
than the autumn red, and that Mrs. Holland believed that
she had never heard of it. But this, of course, is one of
the things which it is quite impossible to be sure of.
That she i^ust subconsciously connect Boston with
Dr. Hodgson goes without saying.
• •••••
In the spring of 1906, Mrs. Holland undertook a few
experiments which Miss Johnson in her report calls
" Experiments on the supposed influence of inanimate
objects." Mrs. Verrall's script of March 7th, 1906, had
among other things contained the sentence : " Send
[Mrs. Holland] something of yours, a ring, that would
help her." The suggestion interested Mrs. Holland, who
had received from Miss Johnson a copy of the script, and
she expressed her wish to borrow for a few weeks a ring
from Mrs. Verrall ; one that she had had a long time
would be the best, she added. Evidently Mrs. Holland,
just as when at an earlier time she asked for Miss Johnson's
paper and penholder, was guided by an instinctive under-
standing of the significance of " articles." That Mrs.
Verrall subconsciously had the same understanding, the
above script of March 7th testifies. A characteristic
contrast to this presents the non-mediumistic secretary,
who scorns the notion that objects might have influence.
The first result of the experiment with the ring has been
referred to above ; ^ only it was probably due to the letter
from Mrs. Verrall that accompanied the ring rather than
to the object itself. Mrs. Holland received it by the first
post on the morning of March 15th, and immediately
afterwards had an impression which she noted down at
once and sent to Mrs. Verrall. The latter on the same
day left her home for a round of visits ; Mrs. Holland did
* See p. 122.
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 139
not know where she was going ; she had written that her
letters would be forwarded. The impression was as
follows :
March i^th, 1906, 8.45 a.m.
" A dining room, narrow for its height, a long room. Dull
red paper on the wall ; brown wood dado or high wainscot.
A great deal of brass about the fireplace. Table laid for a
meal, bright fire. Something Egyptian in the room, or else
ornaments of an ' Egyptian pattern.' Lady in brown dress
reading letter. Is it Mrs. V. ? An elaborate coffee-making
machine and a silver urn. Green-handled knives. Honey-
comb. Indian tree patterned china."
In her letter to Mrs. Verrall she added : " The lady in
brown hardly seemed to be you, but the room had to do
with you."
Mrs. Verrall was on that day going to Mrs. Forbes's
house, where she arrived at about 5.45 p.m. Mrs. Holland,
as before said, was ignorant of this, and she knew nothing
whatever about Mrs. Forbes ; Mrs. Verrall's report in
which the latter plays a large part, had not yet been
published. The described room was, however, indis-
putably the dining-room of that lady as it looked on the
morning of March 15th. The greater part of the par-
ticulars are quite correct; on the other hand, a small
amount of errors have slipped in, as is usually the case
with clairvoyant impressions. As a characteristic instance
of their vagueness may be mentioned Mrs. Holland's
uncertainty whether there was an Egyptian object in
the room, or only ornaments of an Egyptian pattern.
In fact, there were both; Mrs. Forbes states that the
most conspicuous and distinctive object in the room is a
large Cairene screen which has the regular Egyptian
pattern work in dark wood.
Mrs. Verrall, of course, was not in the room. There
were two ladies in the house besides Mrs. Forbes ; one of
them wore a conspicuously brown dress — brown tweed,
brown shoes and stockings. They had breakfasted at a
little after eight.
Such was the prelude to the real experiments. The
140 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
significance of Mrs. Holland being able to obtain an
impression about the surroundings of a stranger through
an "article " — letter or ring — sent by an acquaintance of
that stranger, has been spoken about. Moreover, as
Mrs. Verrall had never seen the brown lady when Mrs.
Holland described her, it can be established beyond the
shade of a doubt that the impression was not due to
telepathy, X but presents an uncommonly clear instance of
clairvoyance by means of an intermediary.
Mrs. Holland's first script written while holding
Mrs. Verrall's ring consisted of a series of impressions
more or less veridical, interspersed with reflections. To
the ring itself the following seems to refer :
March lyth, 1906.
" It dates from more than twenty years ago One of
the first among the wedding gifts."
Both statements, however, may be due to subconscious
guessing. The ring had been sent in its original case,
marked with the initials of Mrs. Verrall while unmarried ;
it had been given to her on her last birthday before her
marriage, partly as a birthday and partly as a wedding
present. A description of her character followed, but is
of course of minor interest after Mrs. Holland had made
her acquaintance.
The most interesting portion of this script, no doubt,
are some remarks which seem to apply to the circumstances
of Mrs. Forbes. And in a script produced some days
later while Mrs. Holland was wearing Mrs. VerraU's ring,
there are several things which seem due to impressions
about Mrs. Forbes's house, where Mrs. Verrall was now
staying. For instance, the following :
March 21st, 1906.
" Two windows in the room — one very much smaller than
the other — Yes you can see the river.
" The honeysuckle is all right but the Jap passion flower
died in the frost
" There is gold inlay on the blade — the hilt is very worn —
It's in the hall "
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 141
There are two windows in Mrs. Forbes's drawing-room,
one a large bow, the other a small window. There is a
stream in the garden whicli can be seen from one of these
windows. There is honeysuckle outside the window on
the house, and there was a Pyrus Japonica, but all except
a small shoot had died. No passion flower.
On the day when the script was written, Mrs. Verrall
asked Mrs. Forbes if she possessed an inlaid musket.
Mrs. Forbes said she had an inlaid weapon of another
kind, and brought it in from the hall. It was a dagger,
part of which was much worn.
But of course these impressions are less remarkable
than the one of March 15th, when Mrs. Verrall was not in
the place. Whether they had anything to do with the
ring, it is impossible to decide. It must be remembered
that they were obtained by Mrs. Holland when writing
automatically, that is, in a state which in itself makes
the sensitive susceptible of impressions. Moreover,
Mrs. Holland was beforehand in touch with Mrs. Verrall,
who in this case was the owner of the article.
The next experiments, however, were made with objects
that belonged to Mrs. Forbes, whom Mrs. Holland did not
know. Through Miss Johnson a glove was sent her,
and while holding it she wrote the following :
March 315^, 1906.
" The greenhouse looks neglected now.
" There is a dull sound like a rushing river some distance
away
" God will forgive thee all but thy despair.
April 1st, 1906.
" Lincoln. The bronze is out of place it should be on the
shelf again."
Besides, she saw on the first day in a crystal among
other things " a small statuette — not at all clear — of a
woman with outstretched arms." She thought it was a
Madonna.
There is a greenhouse opening into Mrs. Forbes's
drawing-room. She can hear the noise of a stream at
142 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
night when she leans from her window. The quotation,
" God will forgive thee all but thy despair," is from
Frederic Myers's poem St. Paul, and Mrs. Forbes had
known it since she was twenty and " felt with " it very
strongly.
She had taken a little bronze statuette of Washington
to be mended, so it was missing from its place. A
statuette pi Victory, with outstretched arms, stands on
her writing-table.
As usual, impressions or remarks of a non-veridical
kind were interwoven. To the errors that characterize
clairvoyance belongs " Lincoln " instead of Washington.
On May 15th, Mrs. Holland's script contained, without
connection with any article, a description of a man,
identified as Mr. Forbes. Details like the following were
given : " His right hand is holding his left ankle —
inelegant but characteristic — — His eyes have a trick of
half shutting when he talks earnestly." Mrs. Verrall
testifies to the correctness of the description, saying
among other things : " He almost closes his eyes when he
speaks 1 have certainly seen him hold his left ankle
in his right hand."
The concluding experiment consisted in Mrs. Holland
receiving, through Miss Johnson, a glove that had been
worn by Mrs. Forbes's deceased son, " Talbot," and a
Japanese bronze bird which he had kept on his mantel-
piece at school. She did not know that the objects
came from the same person as the glove sent before.
As a matter of fact, she thought that they belonged to
Mr. Everard Feilding, whose acquaintance she had made
some time before.
While holding these objects she wrote :
May 22nd, 1906.
" In my own room — where the deep green colour predomi-
nates — and a trifle becomes a relic "
The small room in which Mrs. Forbes writes is papered
with a deep green colour. In it she had collected all the
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 143
little possessions of her son. The bronze bird came from
the chimney piece there.
On the next day, at the end of a script which showed
no connection with Mrs. Forbes, came the phrases :
May 2yd, 1906.
" The Winged Victory, Lime blossoms wait for June — The
sleepy bird has waked its way."
The bronze bird had its head turned round and lying
back, as if asleep ; " the sleepy bird " thus seems to
indicate that the passage referred to its owner.
Mrs. Forbes had given the " winged Victory " of Pompeii
to the chapel of her son's school as a memorial of him.
This last case seems to indicate that the objects are not
without influence ; the earlier references to Mrs. Forbes
had had nothing to do with her son, save indirectly
through allusions to her grief. Miss Johnson suggests
that Mrs. Forbes may have thought specially of him
after having sent the articles to be psychometrized ; but
as her mind was always full of him, this does not seem a
sufficient explanation of the coincidence. The objects
themselves could tell Mrs. Holland nothing ; moreover,
she fancied that they came from Mr. Feilding.
This opinion, for the rest, had a curious consequence.
The script which she produced on May 22nd, while holding
Talbot's glove and bird, began as follows :
" But it should not have been cleaned —
" It is the wiring — the electric lighting in the John St.
house that is dangerous — the terms of the fire insurance too
need supervising — Denbigh."
The first remark of course refers to the glove. But
the next sentences are connected with Mr. Feilding, who
lived in John Street and was the brother of Lord Denbigh.
Mrs. Holland had met him at a dinner, and though she
was confident that she had not heard either the address
of his house or the name of his brother, it is possible that
without consciously noticing she may have heard both
things mentioned. But it is not possible that she could
know of a matter which Mr. F^'dlding himself did not
144 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
know, but discovered when, in view of her statement, he
had the electric system in his house tested — that there
was a very serious leakage which might have proved
dangerous. As to the fire insurance, Mr. Feilding had
lately thought of getting the policies supervised.
In this case, then, Mrs. Holland had produced veridical
statements referring to a person whom she knew slightly
and had in mind at the moment, but with whom she was
not otherwise connected — unless Miss Johnson's letter
that accompanied the objects was " the line." One of
these statements, moreover^ referred to something which
nobody knew, and must be called clairvoyance in a true
sense, if it were permissible to disregard the possibility
that it was the thought of the fire insurance which led up
to it, and that it was only by chance that it coincided
with a real fact.
The last incident has, of course, nothing to do with the
possible influence of articles. But as Mrs. Holland's
impressions are obtained while she is writing automatically,
there is, as intimated above, no reason why they should
refer only to persons connected with the objects. These
may be one of the sources of her impressions, but nothing
more. -^
Miss Johnson, who does not believe in psychometry,
points out that the veridical statements in Mrs. Holland's
script " had little or nothing to do with the past history
of the objects, but were concerned rather with the past
or present doings or surroundings of their owners."
This is true, but quite consistent with what psychome-
trists themselves believe that articles can effect — namely,
give impressions about the owners and their circumstances ;
they can sometimes tell whether the object has had more
than one owner, but that is of course the same thing.
Furthermore, Miss Johnson insists that the whole series
of experiments "is of just the same character as the
writings produced without any such objects," and that
the veridical statements " point far more to telepathy
THE BEGINNING OF EXPERIMENTS 145
from Mrs. Verrall, Mrs. Forbes, or Mr. Feilding than to
any influence emanating from the objects."
As regards the first point, I believe, as said above, that
at least Talbot Forbes's objects had some influence. But
the boundary is no doubt floating when the would-be
psychometrist is beforehand in touch with the owners of
the articles, as Mrs. Holland was with Mrs. Forbes already
through Mrs. Verrall. Pure psychometry we cannot
expect to find unless the object belongs to some one with
whom the psychic is not otherwise connected, and even
then the statements ought not to be given through
automatic writing.
But even if it be in the above cases unjustifiable to
ascribe the results to the objects, it would be wholly
misleading to ascribe them to telepathy. The statements
point to clairvoyant impressions about the persons
concerned ; they were not agents, but, no doubt, as passive
as the objects themselves.
CD.
CHAPTER XI
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES
Meanwhile, in February, 1906, there had begun a
new series of experiments of the same type as in
the preceding spring ; on a certain day of the week,
Wednesday, Mrs. Holland and Mrs. Verrall were both to try
to get automatic script. The result was, as in 1905, divers
supernormal allusions to the circumstances of the writer's
co-experimenter. Besides, in a far higher degree than in
the preceding year, the script of one automatist, usually
Mrs, Holland's, gave a sort of reflex of something which
the other had produced. The same can in 1905 only be
said with certainty to have happened once, namely when
the notes in Mrs, Verrall's script of March 15th and 19th
were reflected in Mrs. Holland's of March 22nd,
Miss Johnson distinguishes sharply between the two
types : those in which one automatist refers to events
happening to the other, or to some feature in her sur-
roundings, and those in which references to the same topic
occur in the scripts of both writers. It is to the latter
type only that she applies the term cross-correspon-
dence,
I shall in the following dwell exclusively on this type,
which got to play a very important part in the later
experimenting, and review all cases from this first period
of its existence.
In an ordinary sense it was hardly of any consequence
that the two automatists now knew each other ; nothing
indicates that the cross-correspondences were a result of
their thoughts running along the same lines. On the
other hand, the supernormal rapport between them had
no doubt grown stronger with their personal acquaintance.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 147
Perhaps, also, the circumstance that they desired their
writings to correspond may have strengthened the rapport.
That they were animated by such a desire is seen from
Mrs. Verrall's script of February 19th, 1906 : " When
you see the same in the other scripts with your own eyes,
you will have belief in my words " ; and from a letter
to her of April 17th from Mrs. Holland, who says that
she cannot help believing that they will be " tuned into
accord some day and register the same messages." They
believed that such a correspondence would testify to the
scripts originating from Myers or other spirits.
The first series of experiments covered the seven
weeks from February 28th to April nth. Of the writings
which showed some correspondence, those of Mrs. Verrall
generally preceded those of Mrs. Holland, and were not
always written on a Wednesday. This, on the contrary,
was always the case with Mrs. Holland's script, and on
all of the seven Wednesdays something occurred in it
which at any rate mighi be taken to refer to something
written by Mrs. Verrall. Most often, however, the script
contained a quantity of other matter. I quote only the
most necessary passages, beginning always with the script
of Mrs. Holland.
I. Electra.
February 28th, 1906, 2 p.m.
" No not in the Electra. M. will know better."
" M " stands for Margaret, i.e., Mrs. Verrall. The
latter' s script of the preceding weeks contained the
following :
February gth, 1906.
" Tell her this [in Greek :] Be sorrow sorrow spoken, but
let the good prevail
February 20th, 1906.
" Get her to write [in Greek :] sorrow sorrow ■
February 2&h, 1906, 11. 15 p.m.
" [In Greek :] Be sorrow sorrow spoken, but let the good
prevail."
The script from the day set off for experimenting,
L 2
148 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
February 28th, is hardly more than a repetition of the
preceding ones. Mrs. Holland's remark about " Electra "
may be due to the other's Greek quotation. This comes
from ^schylus' Agamemnon, but Mrs. Holland's impres-
sion had evidently not got beyond " Greek tragedy," and
she could do no more than indicate this impression through
her rejection of the Electra. That just this tragedy was
mentioned i^ no doubt accounted for by the circumstance
that Euripides' Electra was being performed in London
at about this time. The addition about " M " who
would know better, perhaps points to a subconscious
recognition of the source of the impression ; if so, it
corresponds to Mrs. Verrall's .former remarks about her
husband during his experiment. But it may, of course,
be due solely to Mrs. Holland's preoccupation with her
co-experimenter.
2. Ave Roma.
March 'jth, 1906.
" Not enough bulbs — and it's a pity the quincetree has
suffered so.
" Ave Roma immortalis [Hail immortal Rome]. How
could I make it any clearer without giving her the clue ?
" How cold it was that winter — Even snow in Rome — we
might have stayed at home for that —
" The sunshine has brought out the bees before the tulips
are ready for them — "
It is the passage Ave Roma immortalis that is important
in this script. The context makes it probable that it has
to do with Mrs. Verrall ; on March 7th the latter went to
the Botanical Gardens to see the bulbs, because on that
morning her own garden was full of bees, and she knew
bees meant open bulbs. About this Mrs. Holland thus
seems to have caught an impression, and " Ave Roma "
perhaps has come along with it. The allusion to " snow
in Rome " is no doubt owing to her knowledge that Myers
died in Rome in the month of January ; it is a memory
that emerges at the mention of Rome.^
1 Dr. Maxwell, in his above-mentioned paper, contends that " Ave
Ronaa," on the contrary, is due to the thought of Myers's death in
Rome. But then there is no ground for the emergence of this thought.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 149
Mrs. Verrall's corresponding writings are the following :
March 2nd, 1906.
" [In Latin :] Not with such help will you find what you
want ; not with such help, nor with those defenders of yours
First among his peers, himself not unmindful of his name ;
with him a brother related in feeling, though not in blood.
Both these will send a word to you through another woman.
After some days you will easily understand what I say.
March /[fh, 1906.
" Pagan and pope. The Stoic persecutor and the Christian.
Gregory not Basil's friend ought to be a clue but you have it
not quite right.
" Pagan and Pope and Reformer all enemies as you think.
[In Latin .•] The cross has a meaning. The cross-bearer who
one day is borne. [In English .•] The standard-bearer is the
hnk.
March 5th, 1906.
" [In Latin :] The club-bearer [or key-bearer] with the
lion's skin already well described before this in the writings.
Some things are to be corrected. [In English :] Ask your hus-
band, he knows it well."
The script of March 2nd, of course, refers to Mrs.
Holland and to the much desired cross-correspondence,
" the word to be sent through another woman." But
it is not clear who is meant by " Primus inter pares," the
first among his peers, or by the brother related in feeling
though not in blood. If the script had stood alone, it
would have been natural to guess that the expression
was due to a conception of Myers and Gurney as the
brethren who would send the word ; very probably
Mrs. Verrall might subconsciously take Primus inter pares
to mean Myers. But the waking Mrs. Verrall made no
such conjecture, and as she did not know to whom the
description referred, she asked her husband about it.
Dr. Verrall told her that the Pope is thus described,
adding, when his wife had read the script for him, that
he saw what it was driving at. It reminded him of —
what he did not, however, mention until March nth —
Raphael's famous picture of Attila, terrified by the vision
of St. Peter and St. Paul, when meeting Pope Leo, who
went out to save Rome from the onslaught of the Huns.
150 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
The preceding quotation from the Mneid, which refers
to the defence of Troy against the invading Greeks,^ had
contributed to recall the picture to his mind, doubtless,
he says, only because he was specially familiar with it.
In fact, the designation " Primus inter pares," in con-
nection with the phrase about the name which might
suggest Leo (lion), seems to be the only thing that can
lead to the^ supposition that the script is alluding to
Raphael's picture. It is, for instance, quite uncertain to
whom in that case the talk about the two brethren refers.
When the Pope is one of them, it cannot be to the two
apostles.
The script of March 4th, however, carried the matter
a great step further. It not only expressed the idea of
the Pope which Mrs, Verrall might have got normally
from the conversation with her husband, but it had also
got hold of the Pagan. To be sure, it is a pagan Emperor
(the Stoic persecutor — Marcus Aurelius) it seems to allude
to; but when it has been reminded through him of another
persecutor (Julian Apostata), and thus has reached
Gregory (Nazianzen), it protests against its own wan-
derings, and with an energetic " not Basil's friend," reverts
to the thought about the Pope : " Gregory ought to be a
clue." Through all this groping it arrives at something
which really points to Raphael's picture, the cross-bearer
and the standard-bearer. In the script of March 5th,
this leads to the club-bearer with the lion's skin, i.e.,
Hercules, which seems to be a confused result of the
attempt to get hold of the key-bearer Leo.
" Ask your husband, he knows it well," the script
concludes. One thing with another indicates that it is
his thoughts about the picture which constitute the basis
of the writings of March 4th and 5th. In this wise the
script used to refer to him in the one-horse dawn case ;
and his wife's faculty to obtain impressions from him
* The words are used by Hecuba when she sees the old Priam pre-
paring himself for the defence. Has Mrs. Verrall subconsciously made
a leap from Priamus to Primus .^
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 151
which he had not intended to transmit was sufficiently
proved through the same case.
The script of March 4th, which Mrs. Holland's script
of March 7th perhaps reflects, has thus an entirely human
source. Of course, there is also the possibility that it is
Dr. Verrall's thought, and not the script of his wife, that
has influenced Mrs. Holland ; but it is in this connection
of less interest. The mysterious addition in Mrs. Holland's
script : " How could I make it any clearer without giving
her the clue ? " is perhaps of the same kind as the various
remarks about clues in Mrs. Verrall's writings, which
originally expressed her subconscious sensation of groping
her way, but which gradually became rather stereotyped.
Or perhaps it was part of the impression received from
Mrs. Verrall.^ A tendency to mystification is, at any rate,
characteristic of Mrs. Holland's own automatic writing ;
in the script produced on the next day for experimenting
she speaks of the necessity of secretiveness in a connection
where it is absolutely meaningless.
3. RoDEN Noel.
Mrs. Holland's first contribution to the next cross-
correspondence was given in a script that was not
produced on the day for experimenting, but on a
Sunday :
March nth, 1906.
"This is for A.W. [Verrall]. Ask him what the date
May 26th 1894 meant to him— to me — and to F.W.H.
[Myers]. I do not think they will find it hard to recall but
if so — let them ask Nora.
" We no more solve the riddle of Death by dying than we
solve the problem of Life by being born I seek still I
am not oppressed with the desire that animates some of us
to share our knowledge or optimism with you all before the
time. You know who feels like that but I am content that
you should wait "
1 In the middle of April, 1906, Mrs. Holland saw some proofs of
Mrs. Verrall's report on her own script. Before this she had seen a
few of her writings, but hardly so much that she can have learned her
mode of speech in that way.
152 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
On the ensuing Wednesda,y she wrote :
March 14th, 1906.
" Eighteen fifteen four five fourteen — Fourteen fifteen five
twelve — Not to be taken as they stand. See Rev. 13-18 —
but only the central 8 words not the whole passage — It does
not do to be clearer under existing circumstances ....
" H.S. [in monogram] R.N. [in monogram] June ist 1881 (?)
Surely you will not need to ask about that . . . ."
The script of March nth purports to come from
Professor Sidgwick ; " Nora " is Mrs. Sidgwick. The
date is that of the death of his friend, the poet Roden
Noel. The numbers in the script of March 14th con-
stitute his name when read as letters. The eight central
words in Revelation, xiii., 18, are " for it is the number of
a man." H.S. and R.N., of course, stand for Henry
Sidgwick and Roden Noel. The date has found no
interpretation.
Mrs. Holland had recently, before March nth, in the
Westminster Gazette and the Daily Chronicle, read two
reviews of the Memoir of Professor Sidgwick ; one of
these contained extracts from a letter by him to Frederic
Myers, which, as Miss Johnson points out, is clearly the
basis of the passage in the script that the writer is not
animated by a desire to share his knowledge of life after
death with the living. It is, then, safe to assume that
the reading of these reviews has given the main impulse
to the script. But as regards Roden Noel, the cause must
be sought elsewhere, as his friendship with Professor
Sidgwick, though mentioned in the Memoir, was not
alluded to in the reviews.
The Memoir had appeared on February 27th, 1906, and
Mrs. Verrall had been highly interested in its mention of
two matters which seemed to have been referred to in her
ovm script. One of these was a conversation between
Professor Sidgwick and Sir George Trevelyan, the other
was his opinion, expressed in a letter to Roden Noel, that
hope of life after death is better than certainty. In
neither of the two cases, however, were the references in
her script congruent with the facts ; in all probability
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 153
they were due to cryptomnesia ; Mrs. Verrall might very
well have heard the utterances, upon which her script is
based, from the living Professor Sidgwick. While her
thoughts were occupied with this matter, she automati-
cally wrote the following verse :
March jth, 1906.
" Tintagel and the sea that moaned in pain
And Arthur's mount uplifted from the plain
And crowding towers of quaint fantastic shape
Ah ! never more to see
The ripples dance
Nor hear again the roar
On smitten shore
Where the huge wave rolls on
Amid the salt and savour of the sea."
The verse bears much resemblance to Roden Noel's
poem Tintagel. It was Miss Johnson who, at a much
later date, discovered this circumstance. Mrs. Verrall
did not think that she had ever read the poem, and Mrs.
Holland, who saw the script before March nth, had no
conscious thought of connecting it with Roden Noel ; as
far as she remembered she had only read a few of his
poems in a collection of English verse.
Be that as it may, it seems all but certain that Mrs.
Holland has got her impression about him either from
Mrs. Verrall's script, by means of subconscious recognition
of his verse, or else supernormally owing to her co-experi-
menter's preoccupation with him. The date of his death
is probably due to latent memory ; it is mentioned in his
Collected Poems, published in 1902 ; a description of him
in her script of March 28th, and divers other particulars,
point to this book, which contains his picture ; thus it is
impossible to disregard the possibility of her having seen
it in passing, without consciously remembering. That
she connects him with Professor Sidgwick is, however, a
circumstance indicative of an impression received from
Mrs. Verrall. But what her script intimates about
similar relations to Dr. Verrall and Frederic Myers is
imagination ; their acquaintance with Roden Noel was
154 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
slight, and the date of his death could not mean very
much to them.
As regards the remark referring to the cryptogram on
March 14th : "It does not do to be clearer under existing
circumstances," it looks as if the automatist played at
hide and seek with herself. It must be an easy matter to
see what the numbers stood for. As will be seen later,
Miss Johnson took the corresponding remark in the Ave
Roma case to mean that Mrs. Verrall must remain ignorant
of the meaning of her own script to prevent her from
" telepathing " it to her co-experimenter ; but it is
evident that a similar reason cannot in this case be
brought forward with regard to Mrs. Holland.
4. POSILIPO.
March 21st, 1906, 10.10 p.m.
" M [argaret] saw a real place that last time but she has
never seen the place itself and did not describe it very clearly."
On the same day at 11 p.m., Mrs. Verrall wrote :
" Posilippo [sic] and a terrace there — blue sea beyond the
marble balustrade. No I can see no more here."
As far as this cross-correspondence is more than a
chance coincidence, it presents the peculiarity that Mrs.
Holland's script apparently reflects something which Mrs.
Verrall had not yet written. It is conceivable that the
latter has before the production of her script had a sub-
conscious impression of the described place, and that it
is this impression which has influenced Mrs. Holland.
Mrs. Verrall had never been to Posilipo or Naples. On
looking in a guide-book, she found that there were views
from an inn and a terrace, but could find no marble
balustrade. At any rate, her description is too vague for
identification.
5. Fawcett.
The cross-correspondence on the two next Wednesdays,
on March 28th and April 4th, is very insignificant. Mrs.
Holland's script contained on both occasions allusions to
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 155
Henry Fawcett, the blind Postmaster-General, no doubt
in consequence of his associations with Salisbury, near
which town she was then staying. Commingled with
these were, on April 4th, some correct details connected
with Mrs. Verrall's relations of the name of Fawcett.
The correspondence with Mrs. Verrall's script is confined
to the circumstance that the latter had on March 20th
obtained in planchette-writing what she took to be
allusions to members of that family ; Mrs. Holland knew,
however, that Fawcett was the name of her mother's
cousin. The only possibly supernormal thing is therefore
the said details : " F. a blue jewel — set in a ring — or else
in a brooch ; " that may refer to a brooch with a blue stone
which Mrs. Verrall's sister Fanny had inherited from a
Mrs. Fawcett. The remark was followed by a reference
to Mrs. Verrall : " Tell Margaret not to loose another
earring."
6. Eheu Fugaces.
April nth, igo6, 11.30 p.m.
" A great black shadow and the sound of a wailing wind —
Eheu fugaces."
Half an hour earlier Mrs. Verrall had written :
" Bells and a whip, and snow upon the ground bright
sunshine and hard frost — they drive together over frozen
roads. I see their backs only, fair hair under the cap. Maloja
or near the Maloja. 7 years ago Something fluttered and was
gone — and the black bat night has flown
" That has been repeated — There is an effort to have the
same words this time. On bat's wings rides Queen Mab."
The few lines in Mrs. Holland's script may perhaps be
said to reproduce the ideas from that of Mrs. Verrall —
the black shadow corresponds to the latter part of her
script, the famous Horatian words to the description of
the flight. That there are two coincidences makes it
less possible to ascribe them to chance. Moreover, it is
perhaps in this case as in that of Ave Roma the thought
of Mrs. Verrall that makes Mrs. Holland, who is no
Latinist, quote familiar phrases from that language.
156 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
But this cannot be ascribed to a supernormal impression,
as Mrs. Holland was at that time no longer in ignorance
about her co-operator.
In June, 1906, Mrs. Holland departed for India, but
continued by appointment as far as possible to try for
automatic script every Wednesday, while Mrs. Verrall
on her side^did the same. As regards Mrs. Holland, the
first two cross-correspondences occurred, however, in
script that had been produced on other days of the week.
A few times in the period to be dealt with in the sequel,
June — October, 1906, Mrs. Holland's script reflects as
in the preceding spring something that had beforehand
appeared in that of Mrs. Verrall ; once it seems due to an
impression from Miss Helen Verrall, who also wrote
automatically. But at any rate in two cases it was
Mrs. Holland's script that came first. Here they will be
quoted with her script first in all cases :
7. Janiculum.
June 24th, 1906 {Sunday).
" The jagged outline of the Janiculum black against the
sunset sky. The final renouncement of the summit of belief
To you the half and . . . tion of the sentence — the sense
to be revealed."
On Wednesday, June 20th, Mrs. Verrall, who was then
staying in Switzerland, had written as follows :
" Sun on high summits — mist veils — then reveals the great
Eternities. The twin Eternities afar.
" The upstanding white majestic dome
On buttress borne on high
The cloudcapped towers of royal Rome
Against the Italian sky.
" But I have not made her see the point of union between
the mountain and St. Peter's rock. Upon this rock Super
hanc petram Leave it now."
" The jagged outline of the Janiculum black against
the sunset sky " seems a very clear reflex of Mrs. Verrall's
" cloudcapped towers of royal Rome against the Italian
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 157
sky." That Mrs. Verrall's script is influenced by her
surroundings — " partly inspired by the scenery of her
surroundings," Miss Johnson admits — can hardly be
disputed.
The peculiar allusions in both scripts to the co-operation
of the other are connected with a theory of Miss Johnson's
which will be mentioned below. There is nothing super-
normal in them, and nothing remarkable in their appear-
ance through both automatists, seeing that Miss Johnson
had communicated her idea to both before Mrs. Holland's
departure for India.
8. Yellow.
August 6th, 1906 {Monday).
" y e 1 o [scribbles]
" yellow ivory."
These words were written towards the end of a long
piece of script and marked off from the rest by a space
and a change in the handwriting. On Wednesday,
August 8th, Mrs. Verrall wrote :
" I have done it to night y yellow is the written word
yellow
yellow
" Say only yellow "
This case differs in several points from all earlier ones.
Mrs. Holland's script comes first, but is unconnected
with what goes before, and cannot be traced back to her
surroundings or train of thought, as was most often the
case with that of Mrs. Verrall, Furthermore, the cross-
correspondence is this time quite undeniable. One
script is not a reflex of the other, but both give exactly
the same, though not more than a single word.
Simultaneously with her mother, and sitting in the
same room, Miss Helen Verrall wrote :
" Camomile and resin the prescription is old on yellow paper
in a box with a sweet scent."
158 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
9. Franz Joseph.
September 12th, 1906.
" Franz Joseph— Sept 13th to 25th — a rally on the 21st
followed by a complete and unlooked for collapse — Hepatic
complications — "
This time it was once more Mrs. Holland's script that
came first ; but the cause of it was quite evidently the
circumstance that she had on the same day read in a
paper about the illness of the Emperor Franz Joseph.
On September 20th Mrs. Verrall, who had been unable to
write on Wednesday, September 19th, wrote with her
attention fixed upon Mrs. Holland as follows :
" Now say this Mrs. [Holland] had the warning more than
a week ago but may not have understood what was meant
surely there was a note of the day Sept. 21 — or 21st of some
month was named.
" But there is another message now for you Hildesheim,
Klosterli that is not right but it is a German name that
is wanted . . . Hildesbruder is more like Sept. 21 is a date
something has been hindered for this day "
It can hardly be doubted that this script is due to a
supernormal impression of Mrs. Holland's script of
September 12th ; there are correspondences both with
regard to " the warning," the date September 21st, and
the German name ; " Hildesbruder " is perhaps an
attempt at Hapsburger. That Mrs. Holland had the
warning " more than a week ago " (i.e., on the preceding
Wednesday ?) is probably a subconscious guess. It
turned out, however, to be nothing supernormal in this
warning ; September 21st brought neither a rally nor a
collapse, nor anything remarkable at all. Mrs. Verrall's
impression originated from a fancy of Mrs. Holland's.
10. Monks.
October 8th, 1906 (Monday).
" Ask his daughter about the dream — Grey monks of long
ago—"
In this case it seems to be from Miss Helen Verrall that
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 159
Mrs. Holland had received an impression. The former
had on October 6th, away from home, written as follows :
" Remember the word and the date. Carthusians two and
two the long black robes and the candles and the images the
bright sun and the gaping crowd she will remember "
It is true that she speaks of black robes, and of Car-
thusians that are white ; thus the correspondence with
Mrs. Holland's grey monks is not very exact. But the
words, " Ask his daughter," by whom Mrs. Holland
doubtless means Dr. Verrall's daughter, indicate that she
subconsciously feels that the impression emanates from
Miss Verrall. Of course, Mrs. Holland knew that she
was an automatic writer.
On Wednesday, October loth, Mrs. Verrall, without
having seen her daughter's script, wrote :
" See Savonarola all wrapped in black in threes and threes
they entered till the place was full "
This, too, seems a reflex from Miss Verrall's description,
the original of which is perhaps a procession with Savo-
narola, described in Romola.
II. Procession.
October lyth, igo6.
" The men with staves head the procession — the lictors —
About half way comes the litter — too heavy for the slaves
that bear it — Garlands — but not of triumph
" The noonday sun has dimmed the torches flare."
On Wednesday, October 3rd, Mrs. Verrall had written
the following script, evidently owing to the two circum-
stances that the husband of Mrs. Forbes was buried on
the same day at midday, as she knew, and that she was
herself much occupied by the arrangement of the proces-
sion in the EumenidcB, which was to be played by students
in Cambridge :
" The sun shone in the north at midday. [In Greek ;] Sing
songs of good omen, all of you. [In English ;] The propomps
wave their torches
" Perishing like the grass which to-day is and to-morrow
is not."
i6o COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
The Greek burden, as well as the term " propomps,"
are from the Eumenidce.
It is interesting to see that Mrs. Holland in her script
has caught both impressions from Mrs. Verrall : her pro-
cession seems a funeral procession. Even the allusion to
the time of day has been reflected : " the noonday sun
has dimmed the torches flare."
12. Blue Flower.
October 24th, 1906.
" [Drawing of a flower] The Blue Flower."
This was written in a line by itself and in a rather
peculiar hand. On the same day Mrs. Verrall wrote :
" The blue is to be preferred Blue is her colour
" Where others see the flowers blue
" the misty blue veiled flower. Let him that has eyes see."
There is some resemblance between this cross-corre-
spondence and that of yellow, and both of them are different
from all the rest. One script is not a vague reflex of the
other, but they give both clearly the same word or
words.
The above cross-correspondences undoubtedly prove
that the faculty of the two automatists to receive impres-
sions from each other had reached a considerable height.
There was some difference between them ; Mrs. HoUand
seemed to be the best percipient ; at any rate, the corre-
spondences were more often due to her obtaining an impres-
sion from Mrs. Verrall than the reverse ; but this is only
a difference in degree, and not in kind. The Franz
Joseph case, for instance, proves that Mrs. Verrall possesses
the same faculty.
Miss Johnson, however, saw in these correspondences
something far more important than a proof of supernormal
human faculty. In every single case, to be sure, she saw
clearly what might be alleged in favour of the latter
conception ; in the Ave Roma case, for instance, she did
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES i6i
not consider it impossible that Mrs. Holland might have
received the idea telepathically from Dr. Verrall, as in
other cases from Mrs. Verrall herself. But she rejected
this conception because she discerned behind the in-
dividual cross-correspondences a common plan which it
seemed impossible to ascribe to any of the automatists.
She had been much struck by the circumstance that the
corresponding scripts did not simply reproduce but, as it
were, completed each other. When Mrs. Verrall quoted
from Agamemnon, Mrs. Holland wrote : " not in the
Electra." When one alluded to Pope Leo's meeting with
Attila, the other exclaimed : " Ave Roma immortalis."
Mrs. Verrall imitates Roden Noel's Tintagel, Mrs. Holland
produces in a cryptogram the name of the poet. Mrs.
Verrall describes a flight, Mrs. Holland ejaculates :
" Eheu fugaces ! " Miss Johnson thought it possible
that she had found the clue to this phenomenon. The
occurrence of the same word or the same phrase in both
scripts might, she argued, be explained by telepathy from
one automatist to the other ; but it would be much more
difficult to suppose that the perception of one fragment
could lead to the production of another fragment which
could only " after careful comparison be seen to be related
to the first." So the plan of complementary correspon-
dences had been invented ; by this method the automa-
tists were prevented from communicating telepathically
with each other, and the experimenters from thinking
that they did so. But such a plan must needs be an
element imported from outside ; its existence proved that
of the controls.
Against this hypothesis important objections have long
ago been raised. Thus Professor A. C, Pigou,^ pointing
among other things to the parallel of Dr. Verrall's Greek
experiment, has contended that the apparent complemen-
tariness of the cross-correspondences is owing, so to speak,
to shots that have not hit the mark. " H we compare
' " Psychical Research and Survival after Bodily DQd^ih.," Proceedings
S.P.R., Vol. XXIII., pp. 286—303.
CD. M
i62 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
the word aimed at to the bull of a target," he says, " it is
in a high degree probable that attempts to hit the bull
would result in shots scattered widely round it." Thus
it had fared with Dr. Verrall's sentence ; in spite of the
many attempts, the " one-horse dawn " was never
attained. Similarly, Miss Miles's thought of Sphinx had
produced Luxor in Egypt instead. " Mildly complemen-
tary correspondences are likely to result from attempts at
simple cori'espondences."
Professor Pigou is no doubt right as regards his simile.
When Mrs. Verrall, under the influence of her husband,
wrote cock instead of dawn, or when Miss Ramsden
obtained the impression of an orange, while Miss Miles
thought of a lamp-globe like a fire-ball, the result may be
compared to that of a bad shot. But the application of
the simile to the cross-correspondences between Mrs.
Verrall and Mrs. Holland is not fully justifiable. In
Dr. Verrall's experiment there was an outside intelligence
at work. The cross-correspondences between his wife
and Mrs. Holland could only be compared to that case if
one of the automatists had purposely tried to influence
the other. Such attempts had been made in 1905, but
with no result whatever. In the above quoted experi-
ments both parts^were without conscious influence on the
production of the script of her co-operator. The com-
parison with the bad shot halts, because there is no one
who shoots.
On the other hand, there is an undeniable resemblance
between the faculty of Mrs. Verrall and Mrs. Holland to
produce " complementary correspondences," and that
displayed by the former during her husband's experiment
to perceive things which he had not intended to transmit.
No doubt his attempt to influence her had created a
special receptiveness in her with regard to him, and like-
wise it is probable that the constant experimenting made
Mrs. Verrall and Mrs. Holland specially sensitive towards
each other. This, however, only means that they were
in rapport, or touch, with each other. But Professor
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 163
Pigou's simile may apply to the resulting correspondences
as far as there was, of course, a greater chance of catching
an impression of something or other in the script of the co-
operator, or of her doings and surroundings, than there
would be of reproducing a particular word, or of mention-
ing particular things. To obtain through the plan of
complementary correspondences that which Miss Johnson
had in mind, its execution must in fact hit some bull.
The correspondence ought, for instance, to consist in each
automatist writing fragments of a sentence which could
only be comprehended when brought together. The
relation of the two scripts to each other ought not to be so
distant that it could only, as Miss Johnson writes, be seen
after careful comparison. So vague a correspondence is
not complementary, but simply the result of the vagueness
of the impression.
A concurrent reason for Miss Johnson, when shaping
her theory on cross-correspondences, was, however, the
circumstance that the writings themselves seemed, in her
opinion, to point to it. From the beginning Mrs. Verrall's
script had contained allusions to its own incompleteness
and mysteriousness. Sometimes it had referred to Mrs.
Forbes as the one who ought to complete it — " fill the
gaps " as it was once called — and the products of this lady
had in fact contained things that corresponded to those
of Mrs. Verrall. In Mrs. Holland's script, too, allusions
to the desirability of a co-operator occurred at an early
date. At the same time it says that " thought-trans-
ference would make another difficulty," and by so saying
" recognizes that what is desired is to transcend telepathy
between the living." Against this background is, in Miss
Johnson's opinion, the series of cross-correspondences
between Mrs. Verrall and Mrs. Holland to be seen. But,
above all, utterances that indicate a plan are connected
with the correspondences themselves. The necessity of
secretiveness is alluded to when it is said for instance in
the Ave Roma case : " How could I make it any clearer
without giving her the clue ? " And in a great many
M 2
i64 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
cases the cross-correspondence is accompanied by some
remark that calls the attention to its being a cross-
correspondence — so to speak signalizes it as such a one.
It is quite impossible, Miss Johnson argues, that the
automatists themselves, while writing, could suspect this,
and she regards it perhaps as the most decisive reason for
assuming the co-operation ot an outside intelligence.
On closer inspection, Miss Johnson's chain of argument
is, however, hardly strong enough to hold her theory.
The script of Mrs. Verrall, no doubt, especially in the
beginning, contained a great many remarks about its own
incompleteness ; there is much talk about " weaving
together," and " superposing one thing on another to
make the meaning clear " ; one piece of writing does not
in itself suffice. But all these utterances refer to Mrs.
Verrall herself ; it is her own script which is b3^ and by to
supply what is wanting. " Oh, if you cannot weave
together pertinaciously, write all you know," it says on
March 21st, 1901 ; and on March 28th : " What you have
done is always dissociated ; improve it by denying folds,
weave together, weave together always " ; "to one
superposing certain things on certain things, everything
is clear " (March 31st) ; " why do you not superpose all
in a bundle and f)erceive the truth " (April 4th). That it
is not the co-operation of another person that is meant, is
accentuated when it is said on March 8th, 1901 : " Some
day a later part will come, yours [ulterior veniet pars tua],
and the final explanation will commend itself to you."
And far later still, on July nth, 1905, it runs : " A broken
thread can you not mend and the scattered fragments
place to perfection you ought to unite the parts." The
last phrase is in Latin, and the singular number, debes,
proves that it is Mrs. Verrall alone who is addressed. It
is the subconscious sensation of the fragmentariness of the
productions that underlies all these exclamations.
In a similar manner, it is the sensation of the
mysteriousness of the script that finds vent in the per-
petual talk about " clues," or in utterings like the follow-
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 165
ing : " Explanation is at hand for you and some one
else " (August i6th, 1901) ; " in mysteries I weave
riddles for you and certain others for whom it is right "
(September 28th, 1901). These two phrases no doubt
allude to Dr. Verrall, and in the latter at least there is
nothing supernormal, seeing that he had at this point
given his wife cause to believe that he was at the bottom
of some of the riddles.
In the meantime, Mrs. Verrall had very soon got a co-
operator in Mrs. Forbes. The consequence hereof was
for one thing this, that her script was filled with allusions
to her, and amongst these were, as just mentioned,
several that foretold that her writings would complete
Mrs. Verrall's own productions. They were often clear
enough, as when it is said : " It is not wholly right ; try
to understand. Mrs. Forbes has the other words — piece
together. Add hers to yours " (October 27th, 1902), or :
" You have not understood all — try further. She has
had some words incomplete to be added to and pieced and
make the clue " (October 31st, 1902). No doubt it was
also here the feeling of the script's own incompleteness
that found expression. There is nothing that indicates
that Mrs. Verrall, consciously or subconsciously, had
comprehended the advantages of a complementary
correspondence. As a matter of fact, Mrs. Forbes's
writings did not in the above cases contain anything
whatever of that which the utterances in Mrs. Verrall's
script must make her expect. And, as regards the
veridical allusions to her doings and surroundings which
Mrs. Forbes's writings did contain, we have seen, for
instance, through the Symposium case, that a supernormal
faculty of obtaining impressions is the one possible
interpretation of the phenomenon.
The next point of support of Miss Johnson's theory were
divers remarks in Mrs. Holland's early script. They
referred mostly to the loneliness of the automatist ; " one
person alone, does so little " ; " the agent {i.e., Mrs.
Holland) is all alone and that makes it hard," and the
i66 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
like. They are easily explained by the fact that Mrs.
Holland, during her sojourn in India, had no one to whom
she could or would speak about her interest in psychical
subjects. As to the utterance about thought-transference
quoted above, it is so evident a result of Mrs. Holland's
own reflections, that it cannot claim any consideration
at all.
In fact, ^it is the remarks connected with the cross-
correspondences in the scripts of the two automatists in
1906 that have given birth to the theory, and on which
Miss Johnson is really resting it. That the cross- corre-
spondence is announced by a kind of signal, accompanying
those words of the script that correspond to the other
script, might indeed look like a remarkable circumstance.
But a closer examination of the signals will reduce their
importance very much.
There are, firstly, some cases where " the signal " is so
much a part of the cross-correspondence that there
would not be any cross-correspondence at all without it,
" Not in the Electra " could hardly be connected with
a quotation from ^schylus' Agamemnon, if Mrs. Holland's
script had not added : " M. will know better " ; in the
Fawcett case the slender possibility of " F." representing
the sister of Mrs.-Verrall rests on the subsequent mention
of " Margaret " ; nay, the Posilipo cross-correspondence
consists in Mrs. Holland writing : " M. saw a real place."
In these cases, then, Mrs. Verrall is, so to speak, a part of
the impression obtained by Mrs. Holland. The same
must be said of Miss Helen Verrall when Mrs. Holland,
on October 8th, 1906, writes : " Ask his daughter about
the dream." As to Miss Verrall writing in the same
cross-correspondence : " Remember the word and the
date," it is evidently the outcome of the tendency to
mysticism which is characteristic of the automatists
generally ; in themselves these words have not the
slightest meaning. The same applies, as shown above,
to the signal in Mrs. Holland's script accompanying the
cryptogram on Roden Noel's name : " It does not do
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 167
to be clearer under existing circumstances " ; as it is
only during the writing that the automatist need be
mystified, the remark is quite meaningless. Moreover,
Mrs. Verrall's Roden Noel script preceded Mrs. Holland's ;
thus it was wholly superfluous to prevent the latter
from " telepathing " to her.
The Ave Roma case has also been spoken of before. As
a signal, the exclamation in Mrs. Holland's script : " How
could I make it any clearer without giving her the clue ? "
is decidedly the clearest among them all. But as the
cross-correspondence to which it belongs can be shown
to have a human source, that reason alone makes it
unfit for supporting Miss Johnson's theory.
In the Franz Joseph case the signal : " Mrs. Holland
had the warning," is part of the impression itself, and the
source, as in the preceding one, is demonstrably human.
In the Procession case there is no signal. There remain,
besides the Janiciilum case, which will be spoken about
below, a few cases that speak directly against the theory
of complementary correspondences. On April nth,
1906, Mrs. Verrall wrote : " There is an effort to have
the same words this time." If this is a signal, it must
allude to Mrs. Holland's script ; but she gave just on
this occasion, with the words " Eheu fugaces," what
Miss Johnson characterizes as an " apt paraphrase " of
the idea expressed by Mrs. Verrall. To signalize a
complementary correspondence by announcing that the
same words would appear in the script of the co-operator
would certainly be strange. But, moreover, there are
the two cases where the same thing really appeared in
both scripts, viz., "yellow" and "blue flower." Here
it would seem that the signal was superfluous, as the
correspondence is evident ; nevertheless Mrs. Verrall
writes in one case : "let him that has eyes see," which
in the opinion of Miss Johnson must be a very clear
announcement of a complementary correspondence ; in
the other case the script even exclaims, apparently with
a special triumph : "I have done it to-night ! "
i68 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
The inspection of the signals thus shows that their
vahie for Miss Johnson's theory is somewhat dubious.
Besides, when judging them it must not be overlooked
that Mrs. Vcrrall and Mrs. Holland were themselves
very eager to produce cross-correspondences. Under the
experimenting in the spring of 1906 their hope was
directed to obtaining the same words : "I can't be
content till we get the same message," Mrs. Holland
wrote on April 12th to Miss Johnson ; and in Mrs.
Verrall's script of February 19th the same hope had
found expression.^ But after the completion of the said
series of experiments, the theory of complementary
correspondences was shaped by Miss Johnson, and soon
afterwards she mentioned it to both automatists. In
the following June it is said in Mrs. Verrall's script :
" I have not made her see the point of union," and in
that of Mrs. Holland : " To you the half— the sense to
be revealed." Is it possible to doubt that this is a result
of Miss Johnson's communication ? Of course, it could
not produce the "complementary correspondences" —
the cause of their occurrence has been spoken of before —
but that it is responsible at least for this " signal "
seems indisputable. And it is surely legitimate from
thence to draw the^ conclusion that most of these allusions
had an equally normal origin, namely, the desire of the
automatists that their scripts would correspond. The
only supernormal clement was, now and again, a sub-
conscious sensation in the automat ist that the impres-
sion she had received was connected with her co-operator.
Seeing that they had for a long time been experimenting
together, this was hardly as remarkable as had been
Mrs. Verrall's subconscious perception that it was her
husband who influenced her.
Miss Johnson's argument, then, cannot invalidate the
conception which the; examination of the cross-corre-
spondences themselves resulted in. The phenomenon is
1 C/. above, p. 147.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 169
not so mysterious as it appeared to Miss Johnson, She
thought it even possible that the objection might be
raised against her theory that the plan might be " a
subliminal invention of Mrs. Verrall's, since it is on her
script that the hypothesis is chiefly based." I doubt
that there is any analogy for the assumption of sub-
liminal plans ; but all cause for such an assumption
vanishes, of course, where it is impossible to discover
any plan. One automatist, most often Mrs. Holland,
obtained impressions about the other, perhaps less about
her script than about the occurrences which, with or
without her knowledge, had occasioned the script, just as
she caught at the same time or at other times impressions
of circumstances in the other's life which had not left any
trace in her script. This is the simple explanation of
the complementary correspondences — a systematized
" reading off " of impressions, which only because it
took place while the percipient was writing automatically
differs from that of Miss Ramsden and other sensitives
experimenting in a conscious state.
The inspection of Mrs. Verrall's and Mrs. Holland's
performances until the autumn of 1906 has shown that
both of them in a marked degree possessed faculties that
must be called supernormal. As good as all the cate-
gories enumerated above as constituting " the super-
normal powers of man," are represented by one or the
other of them. At the same time, thev illustrate well
the truth of an often advanced statement, that no medium
is like another. In several respects Mrs. Holland appears
to be the most mediumistic ; she " sees " more than
Mrs. Verrall, she seems more liable to become entranced,
and she is indisputably more able to obtain impressions
about Mrs. Verrall than vice-versa. In return, Mrs.
Verrall is foresighted, which at a first glance seems to
indicate a very high degree of supernormal faculty, and
which Mrs. Holland, judging by the reports, is not. On
the other hand, prevision, at least in dreams, is perhaps
170 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
just that supernormal power which most often occurs in
people who are not otherwise mediumistic.
The great difference between the psychics whom we
heard of in the chapters dealing with telepathy and clair-
voyance, and those with whom we have become acquainted
in the two following sections, Mrs. Verrall, Mrs. Holland,
and in a less degree Mrs. Forbes and Miss VerraJl, is,
however, that the last mentioned are all of them automatic
writers. The consequences hereof are great. In that
state of unconsciousness with regard to the things pro-
duced which characterizes automatism, imagination begins
its work ; what it is able to perform, all of us know from
our dreams, which can be more fanciful than anything we
are capable of creating in a waking state, and at the same
time, because the control of reason is wanting, are in-
coherent and nonsensical. What the automatic writing
effects is, above all, to fix the subconscious, dream-like
ideas to the paper. But the material out of which the
writer shapes his fabrications is richer than the conscious
contents of the same individual ; subconscious memory
encompasses a territory that reaches far beyond that of
the waking self. On this point, too, the automatic per-
formances must needs differ from those of the conscious
sensitives ; crypt^mnesia of course presupposes uncon-
sciousness.
Thus it is clear that it is not the possession of super-
normal faculties that makes the boundary line between
automatists and those sensitives who in a conscious state
obtain impressions otherwise than by means of their
senses. Here, on the contrary, the two groups join each
other, while the automatists alone have imagination and
latent memory to work with. It is the state that makes
the boundary. And we have seen the consequences.
While the persons who obtain supernormal impressions in
a conscious state do not connect them with spirits, even if
they write automatically at other times, the conception
seems to make its appearance as soon as the percipient is
acting automatically. When, for instance, Mrs. Holland
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 171
" saw " Mrs. Forbes 's dining-room, she wrote down her
impression in quite ordinary words, while Mrs. Verrall,
when she caught an impression about Carpaccio's Ursula
in connection with Mrs. Holland, in her script composed
a story about Myers conducting her to that lady's room
where it hung on the wall. The notion of deceased
communicators seems to be a natural consequence of
producing something which the conscious self cannot
accept as its own achievement.
But when we acknowledge that a supernormal element
in the writings cannot prove the co-operation of the dead,
all reason for assuming such a co-operation fails, as regards
the scripts we have here examined. The rest was easily
explained, and moreover was often so childish that it
justified Professor Flournoy's contention that the medium-
istic state represents a lower stage than that occupied by
the waking person. The intelligence and culture of the
automatic writers veiled the fact somewhat in the above
cases ; Mrs. Verrall's classical erudition and Mrs. Holland's
extensive reading, together with their poetical gifts, could,
in addition to the miracles worked by cryptomnesia, at
times produce a result which at first sight might impose
on the reader. But the more conspicuous glare the
incongruities — the false profundity, the naive mysticism,
the often quite meaningless speech. These things are not
consistent with the automatic writers' own stage of
development. How then is it possible to assign them to
Frederic Myers and his friends ?
SECTION IV
The Mediumism of Mrs. Piper
X I. The Phinuit Period
CHAPTER XII
PHINUIT
At the point at which we have now arrived with regard
to the EngHsh automatists, the Society for Psychical
Research commenced a series of experiments between
these and Mrs. Piper, the renowned medium from Boston,
who by arrangement with the Society passed her time
from November, 1906, till June, 1907, in England. Here,
then, is the moment for getting better acquainted with
this lady, whose mediumism is very different from the
types we have dealt with until now.
As just set forth, the principal disparity between auto-
matic writers and 4Dther sensitives is the circumstance
that the automatists are unconscious of their productions,
though otherwise awake. The next stage, as regards the
state of the sensitive, is complete unconsciousness, or
trance. The medium who is speaking or writing in a
deep trance, is in all other respects, setting aside the
speaking or writing, like the profound sleeper ; his per-
formances cannot, like those of the waking automatist,
take place when he is alone ; if he spoke in solitude
nobody would know it, and when he is writing, someone
must be present to take care of the writing material.
Mrs. Piper gradually developed into a writing medium ;
the proceedings were then as a rule that she sat behind
a table furnished with pillows in which her head sank
down at the commencement of the trance, her face turned
PHINUIT 173
to the left ; on another table to the right of her were
pencils and a block of paper ; a few minutes after the
trance had become complete, her right hand seized a
pencil and began to write. The experimenter in charge
must take care to tear off the paper and procure new pencils
and more paper when the block was used up, exactly as
if the medium was a machine to be served. When
Mrs. Piper, on awakening, began to speak, it was as if she
returned from distant places, and she knew nothing
whatever of what she had done in her sleep.
This disparity between the state of Mrs. Piper and that
of the waking automatists coincides with a marked
difference in the contents of their productions. As
we saw, the contents of the automatic scripts mainly
originated from three sources : imagination, cryptom-
nesia, and supernormal perception ; to which must of
course be added such matter as the writers also remembered
in their normal state. Both the latter and subconscious
reminiscences played a prominent part in their case.
With Mrs. Piper it is quite otherwise. When she is
entranced, her normal knowledge scarcely seems to exist.
Whether her statements are due to latent memory is more
difficult to decide. Contrary • to Mrs. Verrall and Mrs.
Holland, she is not much of a reader ; neither does it
seem probable that much knowledge is conveyed to her
orally ; one of the experimenters ^ expressly mentions
" the singularly limited range of her conversation."
Cryptomnesia, however, covers a wide territory ; hastily
read newspaper-stories, casual turning-over of books,
scarcely caught fragments of conversations between other
people, may all become material for it. It can only be
said with safety that the achievements of Mrs. Piper do
not generally make the impression of being due to latent
memory, but that it may no doubt sometimes be at the
bottom of them.
Compared to the automatic scripts, and to the possi-
' Dr. Walter Leaf {Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. VI., p. 559).
174 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
bilities set up by Professor Flournoy and Hartmann,
imagination and supernormal perception remain. It is,
when we exclude, as we must provisionally, the theory of
spirits, mainly on these that the performances of Mrs.
Piper must be said to rest. Supernormal perception
provides her with the material, imagination gives this
material its shape. But even as the material is infinitely
richer than t^hat which we found in the automatic scripts,
thus the shape is of another and more dramatic kind.
This, no doubt, is partly a consequence of the circum-
stance that the communicators converse with the sitters,
and not, as in the case of Mrs. Verrall and Mrs. Holland,
with the medium ; but still ipore it is due to the large
number of communicators and, above all, to the life-like
characterization by which they are distinguished from
each other, and in their relations to their present friends,
to the experimenter in charge, and to strangers. The
reports on the sittings with Mrs. Piper make on the reader
the impression of being scenes from a play.
Besides being an eminent medium, Mrs. Piper occupies
a unique position as one who has for a long series of years,
and under the most satisfactory circumstances, been the
subject of scientific study. In the middle of the eighties
Professor William^James happened to make her acquain-
tance ; she was then twenty odd years old, and her
mediumistic faculty had only recently made itself known.
By arrangement with Professor James, Dr. Richard
Hodgson came to Boston in the spring of 1887 as the
emissary of the Society for Psychical Research to investigate
the matter, and this investigation led to her being tied to
the Society by a sort of contract, while he got the entire
charge of her sittings on its behalf. In this position he con-
tinued until his death in 1905. In the winter of 1889 — 90,
however, Mrs. Piper had been in England, where the
leaders of the Society had held numerous seances with her.
A number of reports on the sittings with Mrs. Piper
during this long period (1887 — 1905) are published in the
Proceedings of the Society, and commented on by promi-
PHINUIT 175
nent researchers. To these must be added a " Report on
Mrs. Piper's Hodgson-Control," that is, on seances held
after Dr. Hodgson's death, which belongs here as far as it
deals with the first half of 1906, the period before her
going to England for the second time. Of course, there
can be no question here of an exhaustive perusal of this
large material. A selection must suffice, and of very
limited extent ; I think, however, that it ought to repre-
sent the whole number of reports, only in a less degree Dr.
Hodgson's record for 1887 — 91,^ as most accounts of the
sittings from this period are written down some time
after their occurrence, and are much abbreviated. The
reports from Mrs. Piper's sojourn in England^ are, on
the contrary, written down during the sittings, and with
great fullness, some of them even in shorthand. At that
time the trance communications were as yet given orally,
and thus did not register themselves.
As regards the method of selection, I do not intend to
dwell on the so-called evidential statements specially. It
is no doubt very valuable to establish that information
is produced in the trance which the medium cannot possess
normally, and which is not, perhaps, known to any present
person ; and many instances will occur hereof. But as
said above, this is only one remarkable feature in Mrs.
Piper's performances. To give an idea of them in toto, it
is at least equally necessary now and again to make the
extracts so copious that the dramatic play is done justice
to, even if it involves the admission of much that is quite
unevidential.
In conformity with the practice of the editors, the com-
municators will be called by the names of the persons who
they pretend to be. "This manner of speech," Dr. Hodg-
son says in one of his reports,^ " is the most convenient for
rendering the facts intelligible ; to attempt to give a full
1 " A Record of Observations of Certain Phenomena of Trance,"
1887—91 {Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. VIII., pp. i— 167).
2 " A Record of Observations of Certain Phenomena of Trance,"
1889 — 90 [ibidem, Vol. VI., pp. 436 — 659).
» Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XIII., p. 287.
176 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
description in each case of what is ' claimed ' or ' alleged '
or ' purported ' would involve a tedious and useless
repetition." Of course, the meaning hereof is not to
indicate any conception as to their real nature. For the
present, they must be conceived as " trance-personalities,"
and this, whether they purport to be well-known deceased
persons, or are figures whose identity it seems impossible
to establish, and who therefore must be specially suspected
of being creations of Mrs. Piper's subconscious imagination.
In itself, the word, of course, means nothing more than
that they are personalities who for us exist only through
a medium in trance.
• •••••
The first personality of whom we by means of the
reports make the acquaintance at Mrs. Piper's sittings,
and who completely dominates there during a series of
years, is of a very peculiar type. It is an elderly man who
calls himself Dr. Phinuit, or more explicitly Dr. Jean
Phinuit ScIiviUe, and states that he has been a French
physician who had, however, by associating with English-
men learned their language, and who at any rate through
Mrs. Piper only exceptionally uses French expressions.
His life-time is said to have been the first half of the nine-
teenth century. But in spite of his rather detailed state-
ments, the researchers have never been able to identify
him, and it seems impossible to attain to a satisfactory
hypothesis that accounts for his appearance in Mrs.
Piper's trance.
Be that as it may, the image drawn of him through the
long series of seances is extremely living and consistent
with itself. He is a good-natured and very obliging old
man, in fact amiable, but a little coarse ; he swears not
a little, and is apt to grow sulky. He seemed to have
made it his task to answer the questions of all the people
that had sittings with Mrs. Piper, and he went to work
exactly as a medium — a psychometrizing or clairvoyant
medium like Mr. Vout Peters, for instance, of whom we
made the acquaintance in an earlier chapter. That he
PHINUIT 177
was in fact a medium of this type appears from every
sitting. The remarkable point is, that Mrs. Piper in her
ordinary state did not seem to possess supernormal
powers, and that there is among her other trance figures
no one who is mediumistic in the manner of Phinuit,
A good idea of Phinuit's psychometric faculty may be
got by reading what is said about it by Professor Hyslop,^
who is himself unable to believe in such a power in
human beings. Almost with indignation he m.entions
the experiments in which Phinuit " would undertake to
furnish the names and incidents in the lives of persons
intimately connected with some old rag or trinket of
whose ownership and history the sitter might be entirely
ignorant," even without caring whether the owners
were living or dead. If it had at least been confined to
the dead ! But, Professor Hyslop admits, there were
" instances in which Phinuit apparently read the minds
of certain persons at a distance, merely by having a
trinket of some sort in Mrs. Piper's hand that belonged
to the person." This was done in some cases in which
the sitter, Dr. Hodgson, had no knowledge of the owner.
There was no pretence of spirit communication in the
contents of the messages.
Professor Hyslop overcomes the difficulty by supposing
Phinuit to be what he himself claims to be, a discarnate
spirit, and thinks that this circumstance will " unravel
the mystery of his performances." For us, however,
there is no reason to doubt that living people may possess
such faculties ; neither can we accept the contention
that they would obtain possession of them as spirits if
they had not possessed them before. Phinuit himself
held a different opinion ; when a sitter. Professor Newbold,
asked him : " Does a person who has light [i.e., is medium-
istic] in the body, have in the spirit also more light than
others ? " he answered emphatically : " Yes, indeed."
As regards the remark of Professor Hyslop, that
» Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XVI., p. 251 seq
CD. N
178 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Phinuit apparently reads the minds of people by means
of the said articles, this neither is Phinuit's own opinion.
He is curiously at one with Mr. Vout Peters as to its
being not by mind-reading, but through an influence
emanating from the objects, that he obtains his know-
ledge. Again and again he asserts that he is no thought-
reader. " If I could read your head, I could tell you.
I can't," he says. "I get nothing from your mind ; I
cannot read^ your mind any more than I can see through
a stone wall," he answers a sitter who questions him.
However, he soon learned that the investigators were
specially anxious to be told things which they did not
know beforehand. " I tell y^ou this because you don't
know it, and that is the kind of thing you like," he says.
On another occasion he made downright fun of their
eagerness to make out whether or not his achievements
were due to mind-reading. It was during a sitting in
Liverpool ; it was planned that Phinuit, if possible,
should procure information about the doings of the
sitter's mother in London. Sir Oliver Lodge — then
Professor Lodge— was the experimenter in charge, and
the conversation ran as follows :
" Sir 0. Tell him about his mother and what she's doing
now. It's very im^portant.
" Ph. Ha ha ! I'll tell you why it's important, because
he don't know it himself. I read your thoughts then. I
can't generally."
On the other hand, there are many tokens of his being
in earnest when speaking of an influence that emanates
from the objects. " There is very little influence in that,"
he said about a lock of hair ; another, that was dyed, he
called " dead and devilish." Once, when he could say
next to nothing about the lock given him, he asked for a
*' better piece " ; when he got another piece of the same
hair, cut close to the head, he could tell a great deal. He
was very anxious that the influences should not get
mingled. Once when a letter was handed him by Sir
Oliver Lodge, he reproached him that he had kept it in
PHINUIT 179
the same pocket with the portrait of another person ;
" you mix things up if you do that," he said. A curious
instance of the consequences of such a commingUng is
the following. Dr. Hodgson had handed Phinuit a letter
from another person, but enclosed in an envelope addressed
to himself by Mrs. Piper. Phinuit gave a correct general
description of the writer of the letter, giving the name
William in connection with it. Then he went on to
describe a lady — tall, fair, etc. Dr. Hodgson now gave
him another envelope addressed by Mrs. Piper, and after
handling it he at once exclaimed that this was the in-
fluence he had described previously in connection with
" the gentleman " ; that it had nothing to do with him ;
that Dr. Hodgson had got them mixed. The description
of the lady did suit Mrs. Piper.
At the same time, it is evident that the sitters had a
similar significance for Phinuit as a source of knowledge.
Just like the objects, they were in possession of an
" influence " ; it was from this, and not from their
thoughts, that he obtained his information. A sitter
who asked him : " How do you get what you tell me
about > myself ? " got the reply: "I get it from your
astral light." It was, therefore, in their case, as in
that of the articles, necessary that they should be kept
away from each other. Once he begged Sir Oliver
Lodge not to admit two sitters at a time ; " can't sort
them out properly," he alleged in explanation of his
request.
While thus Phinuit, exactly like Mr. Vout Peters, had
his decisive opinion about " the mystery of his per-
formances," and declared that it had nothing to do with
mind-reading, the experimenters leaned to the opposite
view. The solid starting-point presented by experi-
mental thought-transference made them conceive mind-
reading a more likely explanation than the mysterious
notion " influence." To be sure, there were cases where
the connection between a person whose mind might be
read by the medium, and the latter, was so improbable,
N 2
i8o COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
that the hypothesis was fain to burst. But on the other
hand, it might happen that Phinuit gave information
which was wrong, but agreed with the sitter's opinion of
the matter. For instance, Phinuit once in Boston told
an English sitter that a big man with a dark moustache
was in his house, and had been put there to watch the
place. There had, before the sitter left home, been a
question of hiring a policeman to guard his house and live
there in his absence, and the sitter thought that the plan
had been realized, which, however, was not the case. On
another occasion, Phinuit was asked to describe what
Professor Sidgwick was doing, and declared that he stood
on his head. The Professor had, when the experiment
was arranged, said in joke that he would do this. In a
similar experiment with Dr. Hodgson, Phinuit said :
" He has taken a wreath and put it on his head." Dr.
Hodgson had thought of putting the wreath on his head,
but had confined himself to holding it in his hand.
All this does not, however, go to show more than that
the impressions which Phinuit obtains are dim and un-
certain, and that the thoughts of the sitter, or of other
people who are in contact with him, enter into their
composition. There are other cases where Phinuit's
statements are correct, while the sitter's thoughts are
wrong. Thus a sitter asked, after Phinuit had described
the young lady to whom he was engaged, if there was not
something peculiar about her hair. Phinuit said no, and
it turned out that it had not, as the sitter had been told
for fun, been cut short since he saw her last. Further-
more, it was shown through experiments that intentional
thought-transference did not succeed with Phinuit.
This agrees with all that we have formerly seen. The
percipient obtains impressions, among these at times
and by chance impressions of the thoughts of other
people ; but he is not especially susceptible to thoughts,
and to force them upon him is difficult, or even impossible.
Phinuit's conception of the phenomenon is not far from
hitting the mark.
PHINUIT i8i
But while contending that " clairvoyance " rather
than mind-reading is in this as in other cases the rubric
under which supernormal performances, generally speak-
ing, ought to be placed, we must as strongly as ever
accentuate the limitations of this faculty. Sir Oliver
Lodge says pertinently with regard to Phinuit's state-
ments : " We are evidently not in a region of clear and
exact knowledge. Events are dimly perceived, and
error is mixed with truth." This is a description which
would also fit Mr. Vout Peters's achievements, or Miss
Ramsden's characterization of her own perceptions.
Phinuit himself declares that he does the best he can,
but sometimes " everything seems dark to him," and
then he flounders and gropes, and makes mistakes.
The above view is confirmed through some experi-
ments which were made with Phinuit during Mrs. Piper's
sojourn in England, expressly with the object of ascer-
taining whether it was a case of direct clairvoyance, or
" only " of mind-reading. Apparently their success was
small. Sir Oliver Lodge handed Phinuit a box with
letters which were taken at haphazard from several
alphabets and had been seen by no one ; Phinuit named,
very reluctantly, a number of letters, but only two were
correct, a result so bad that chance might have done it
better. Of a similar type was an experiment which
Dr. Walter Leaf made with a closed envelope that con-
tained a slip of paper with the title of a book on it ; it
was drawn from among two thousand such slips, and no-
body knew of its contents. Before Phinuit got the
envelope, he called it " that book that you have in your
hand," and after it had been given him, he said : " That's
only a note ; it doesn't amount to anything." Both
things may of course be conceived as a perception of the
experimenter's knowledge of the matter. This is more
doubtful in two other instances where Dr. Leaf knew
the contents of the envelopes. In one case the words
on the enclosed paper were the following : " Charles L
was beheaded in 1649 " ; Phinuit said among other
i82 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
things : " It is written by some one named Charles."
In the other case the words were : " Weep no more — for
Lycidas is not dead " ; Phinuit said : " That's a letter —
there is an illness round that." In a third case where
the experimenter did not know the contents, which ran :
" Iliad. La France," Phinuit said that the envelope
contained a lock of Frank's hair. It is at least singular
that however far he may be from the right, he always
says something that has some sort of association with the
contents. If it be due to an impression from somebody's
mind, it is a highly distorted impression. And if it
have nothing to do with minds, but be due to a kind of
clairvoyance, it testifies strongly to its vagueness. Being
a faculty of clouded, not of clear vision, it evidently does
not suffice to read the contents of closed envelopes.
It would seem that Phinuit himself had a feeling of
the limitation of his powers. Sir Oliver Lodge says that
he does not much care for this kind of thing, but says it
strains him. After the unsuccessful experiment with the
letters of the alphabet he said in an excusatory manner :
" You see this is something new to me ; I am not accus-
tomed to do these things for people." Of course it is
impossible that he in such a case would find any of the
" influences " that used to guide him.
With this in mind it will not be difficult to comprehend
an accusation that was directed towards Phinuit by many
of the sitters, namely, that he acquired a large portion
of his apparent knowledge by guessing and " fishing " ;
by the latter appellation was meant the process that he
made the sitters unconsciously furnish him with informa-
tion which he afterwards tried to pass off as his own
knowledge. When it is recognized that his impressions
were dim and fragmentary, that he must often feel or
grope his way towards them, and that he must in a
degree have the sitter's assistance to be able to decide
whether they were right, his proceedings, however, look
different. No doubt he wanted to get as much credit as
PHINUIT 183
possible for his performances ; he desired to satisfy the
sitters, but it was also a personal satisfaction to him to
show off his faculties. Nay, it is certain that he some-
times supplemented his insufficient knowledge by self-
devised statements. But the frequent talk of fishing and
guessing is due to a misapprehension of the whole
phenomenon. It is, however, as shown above, not
shared by Sir Oliver Lodge, who has clearly characterized
the nature of Phinuit's perceptions.
There are, moreover, cases enough where Phinuit does
just the opposite of fishing or taking the hints of the
sitters. Once it is said that he " seemed so obstinately
bent upon some erroneous ideas of his own that he would
pay no attention to [the sitter's] leading questions."
On another occasion he kept to his own opinion in spite
of the sitter's denial, and it turned out that it was he who
was right. The episode is as follows :
" Ph. Who is this uncle of yours named John ?
" 5. I have no uncle named John.
" Ph. Yes yes you have — the man that married your aunt.
" 5. No you are wrong ; the man that married my aunt
was called Philip.
" Ph. Well, I think I know."
After this he, grumbling, changed the subject. But
the sitter afterwards discovered that an aunt of his had
in fact married a man named John.
And even if Phinuit sometimes invents things, he is
not destitute of a certain honesty. Often he downright
declares that there is something he cannot tell. " What
is his name ? " he is asked. " Don't get his name," is
the curt answer. Once a lady has asked him who it is
she calls " Mr, Man." Then he guesses openly on all the
membeis of her family. " It is not Harry ? nor George ?
nor your uncle ? do you call your gentleman [i.e., husband]
Mr. Man ? Then the gentleman's father ? I give it up.
WTiom do you call Mr. Man ? " The lady informs him
that it is her dog. Afterwards Phinuit spontaneously
reverts to the matter. " I could not tell you who you
i84 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
call Mr. Man," he says deprecatingly, though he had told
her a number of other things.
The following is an instance at the same time of his
honesty, and of the difficulties which he has to overcome.
Dr. Walter Leaf had had the charge of several seances
when one day his brother appeared as sitter. Phinuit
said to the latter : " There is a Charles about you. I get
the same influence with both of you ; why, you are
brothers. Charles must be your father." And addressing
himself to Dr. Leaf, he continued : " Walter, I thought
that William was your father till I got this other influence,
but now I see that Charles is your father and William is
your grandfather, your father's father." All this was
absolutely correct, and Phinuit, who evidently felt sure
of what he now said, had not been obliged to confess his
former mistake.
As may be seen, Phinuit could also give the names of
people. And it is evident that he partly obtained them
in the same manner as so many other things, namely, as
an impression, now vague, and now more distinct. Here
also he has therefore been accused of guessing and fishing.
For instance, it was pointed out that it was generally the
most common Christian names, as John, William, etc.,
that he produced. This, though, ought hardly to be
wondered at, especially as it is admitted that they w^ere
most often the right ones. And in the numerous cases
where the name was not common, it was only natural
that he could not feel sure of his impression being correct,
or could not at all get hold of the right name. But the
approximations might be obvious enough. " Gibbens
was announced first as Niblin, then as Giblin," Professor
James relates ; " a child Herman had his name spelt out
as Hcrrin." At a sitting with Mrs. Verrall, Phinuit
asked : " Ellums, Vellums, what is that ? That's you.
Mrs. Vennalls, Vernils Verils Veril." Even a mistake
as " Susan Mary " for Selma seems due to a perception of
the real name.
The names did not always come to him as sounds. At
PHINUIT 185
a seance he said that the sitter would get into intercourse
with a man whose name was " something Hke Atwood."
" The name is nearly right," he continued, " an A-t and
then two O's and a W. I see this myself. There are no
special spirits. I see it back of you just as plainly as if
it was before your eyes." Here, then, Phinuit had a
vision of the name. Exactly in the same manner, the
perceptions of Miss Ramsden were now auditory, and now
visual.
The remark of Phinuit on this occasion, " I see this my
own self. There are no special spirits," alludes to another
way in which he gained his knowledge. And, whatever
may otherwise be thought of it, one must for the sake of
clearness make a keen distinction between it and his
clairvoyant power.
In his report on his sittings with Mrs. Piper in Liverpool
in 1889 — 90 ' Sir Oliver Lodge strongly accentuates the
above-mentioned difference. " While Phinuit," he writes,
" frequently speaks in his own person, relating things
which he himself discovers by what I suppose we must
call ostensible clairvoyance, sometimes he represents
himself as in communication with one's relatives and
friends who have departed this life. The messages and
communications from these persons are usually given
through Phinuit as a reporter. And he reports sometimes
in the third person, sometimes in the first."
Thus we meet in Phinuit the same doubleness which
we found in the medium, Mr. Vout Peters. On one hand
his own performances, on the other spirits that he sees
and tells about or brings messages from. Occasionally
Phinuit seems to give up his place altogether to these
spirits ; but then we have exceeded his own territory.
It is not, however, always easy to decide whether they
speak directly, or it is Phinuit who speaks for them in
the first person. It is seldom that the change of per-
sonality is announced with such plainness as in the
following case, where Phinuit tells the sitter : " Here's
i86 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Newell, and he wants to talk with you. So I'll go about
my business whilst you are talking with him, and will
come back again later," and then addressing himself
to the spirit, says in his drastic manner : " Here,
Newell, you come by the hands while I go out by the
feet."
As regards his relation to the spirits, Phinuit alleged
that he saw objectively the persons he spoke of. Often
he described their appearance ; once more one is reminded
of Mr. Vout Peters and his accurate descriptions of his
spirit-visions in contrast to the more vague charac-
terizations of the non-present owners of the " articles."
Also the relation between the spirits and the objects
presents a parallel. At the seances in Finland many
spirits came to their friends and relatives among the
sitters ; but only in a few cases it was the owners of the
objects who came. Quite in accordance with this,
Phinuit seems to believe that the sitters have more power
to attract the spirits than the objects have ; for instance,
he says to Sir Oliver Lodge, who doubted that the
owner of a certain chain would appear as he was a
stranger to himself : " Oh well, he may recognize it.
Your own friends come to you. A strange spirit is
rather difficult, but they sometimes come to their
things."
A rather strange thing ought to be mentioned here,
namely, that Phinuit sees at times among the spirits that
surround him also persons that are not dead. But even
this has its parallel with other clairvoyants ; thus Miss
Miles relates that she when psychometrizing sees herself
surrounded both by living and dead people. Phinuit, for
instance, says to a sitter : " Now I am trying to get your
brothers and sisters nearer," and it turns out that some
among these, as he knows very well, are alive. In another
case he says about the sitter's, Mrs. H.'s, mother : " [She
is] here with me, right beside me. [She is] in the body, but
I get her spirit influence, so I can tell you about her."
In itself it is of course not remarkable that a clairvoyant
PHINUIT 187
can see the double of a living person. A curious instance
is the following. Dr. Hodgson handed Phinuit an enve-
lope addressed by Mrs. Piper, and asked among other
things whether the writer was in the body or in spirit.
" In the body," Phinuit replied, but went on : " Why
no — that's curious. There she is in the spirit talking to
an old lady." Whatever may else be thought of this, it
is correct from the dramatical point of view that the
entranced medium speaks in this way about her own
spirit.
On the other hand, Phinuit did not seem able to procure
information through speaking with the living. To a
question concerning a living lady he replied : " How
can she tell me, when she is in the body ? " About
such he must, as seen in the case of Mrs. H.'s mother,
procure his knowledge clairvoyantly by means of their
influence, just as he gained knowledge by means of
objects.
Is, now, this division of Phinuit's performances into
clairvoyantly obtained information and communications
from spirits founded on any kind of reality, or rather, is
the dramatic effect of the division supported by any
difference between the two kinds ?
If there is any sense in distinguishing between Phinuit's
own achievements and those things which are said to
originate from spirits, present or near at hand, that
produce information which they must be supposed to
have acquired in a normal manner, there must be
an essential difference between the two categories. The
knowledge of the departed may, of course, be deficient ;
they may have forgotten much, they may in the unaccus-
tomed situation find it difficult to keep their thoughts
together, and so on. But what they know will both
positively and negatively differ from the clairvoyant
knowledge of Phinuit. They will not falter and grope ;
their statements will not be founded on vague and inaccu-
rate impressions ; and they will not produce information
about any one but themselves and people they know, will
i88 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
in other words not speak about things which they
could be acquainted with only in a supernormal manner.
Of course it is conceivable that they may have learned
things from Phinuit or other spirits, and that on the other
hand Phinuit 's memory may fail him — for instance, when
he reports what he, presumably, has been told by spirits
before the sitting.^ But this knowledge and these
deficiencies ^it will be easy to distinguish from the infor-
mation due to supernormal perception.
This thorough and important difference exists in fact
between the two kinds of statements in Mrs. Piper's
trance. " Nothing d, la mode Phinuit at all," Dr. Hodgson
justly says about a case from 1889, referring to the con-
spicuous change that took place when a spirit was
announced. Sir Oliver Lodge experienced the same
change at his very first seance with Mrs. Piper, and
describes it in these words : " Next follows the most
striking and impressive element of the whole sitting ;
without which, indeed, it would have been vague and
unsatisfactory — too much apparent guessing and too
little precisely accurate ; but now the manner became
more earnest and energetic and continuous." Dr. Leaf
writes in his report that the series of sittings held by
Sir Oliver was remarkable, as compared with those
reported by himself, for a high level of success. Now a
perusal of the detailed record of the seances by Dr. Leaf
will soon show that it is quite exceptional that spirits
appear there. It is in fact due to their co-operation that
Sir Oliver's sittings look so much more successful than
the other ones. If only those portions, where Phinuit is
alone, be regarded, the disparity between the two series
will scarcely be perceptible.
The following extracts aim at giving a notion about the
whole phenomenon ; no special stress will be laid upon the
1 Cf. Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. VIII., p. 92 : " The best way to get
a good sitting, Phinuit said, was to have him talk with departed
friends and then see him again."
PHINUIT 189
so-called evidential things beyond stating that they belong
to that category.
The spirit that manifested at Sir Oliver Lodge's first
sitting was his aunt Anne, his mother's sister, who had
had the charge of him after the death of the former.
She appeared in all at six sittings. Phinuit gave the
following correct description of her exterior : " Hair on
top of head very plain, put back, tied up at back —
not frizzled, plain. Very neat in her dress, firm expression
about the mouth." At the first seance her own words
were :
" My boy, I am with you. I am Aunt Anne. I tried to
help you. I had little means, poor surroundings ; but I
did all I could. I would have done more if I could."
At her third manifestation she said :
" Isn't it curious that I can talk to you now ? You know I
told you that if ever I found it possible to communicate with
you I would."
Sir Oliver adds that his aunt is the only person who
ever said this to him. The next time she said about
a ring which he had put on his hand just before the
sitting :
" And Oily dear, that's one of the last things I ever gave
you. It was one of the last things I said to you when I gave
it you for Mary [i.e., Lady Lodge]. I said ' For her, through
you.' "
Sir Oliver writes : " This is precisely accurate. The
ring was her most valuable trinket, and it was given in
the way here stated not long before her death."
With another relative Sir Oliver specially wanted to
enter into communication, because he himself had hardly
known him and therefore thought it possible that things
might be told about him which could not be due to reading
of his own mind. That a medium might supernormally
obtain information by means of objects was at that time
less heeded than the danger of telepathy. Sir Oliver's
father had had a great many brothers, among whom was
190 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Jerry (Jeremiah), who had died more than twenty years
before the sittings. Three were still living ; one of these,
Robert, was the twin-brother of Jerry and lived in London.
From him Sir Oliver on asking received a watch that had
belonged to Jerry. In the course of the next sitting he
handed this watch to Phinuit, who in his usual groping
manner produced a quantity of information where false
was mingled with true, mostly about Jerry's family
relations. Afterwards, however, he said : "I will bring
him right up close to me " ; soon after he was said to be
there. But Phinuit went, on talking about different
things, until Sir Oliver asked whether his uncle was still
there, and Phinuit advanced^ the following explanation :
" One difficulty that I have is to make your uncle conscious
of this, and the other is getting the spirit to speak to you
Rather difficult for me to talk to him, do you see ? Because
he passed out when you were young and you do not know so
much about him^ and at the same time he does not seem to
take an interest in you."
When Sir Oliver replied, "No, but he does in Uncle
Robert," and told that the latter had sent him the watch,
he succeeded, however, in making Jerry speak.
" /. Very good. Say God bless Robert and I should like
to see him. You -are my nephew aren't you ?
" Sir 0. Yes.
" /. I know you, seems to me I do. Yes. I used to know
you, but you were a little shaver then ; a very deep thinker.
Used to think a great deal ; more than the rest of the boys.
What about Alfred and all those fellows ? "
Alfred was one of Sir Oliver's many brothers. As
regards the term " a little shaver," Mr. Robert Lodge
writes that it " fits Jerry's method of expression to a T."
At a seance in the evening of the same day Phinuit
said to Sir Oliver, whom he had given the nickname of
" Captain " :
" Hulloa, Captain, I have been talking to your friends.
1 This would seem a very naive remark by Phinuit ; it has evidently
escaped his attention that it might be interpreted as if he used to
obtain his information from Sir Oliver himself, by mind-reading.
PHINUIT 191
Had a long talk with Uncle Jerry. He remembers yon now,
as a boy with Aunt Anne, but you were kind of small. He
knew you, but he did not know me very well ; wondered what
the devil I wanted trying to talk to him and how I got here."
" This is exactly how he would remember me," is Sir
Oliver's comment on the remark about Aunt Anne.
Meanwhile, Sir Oliver had already in his first con-
versation with Uncle Jerry asked him if he could recall
something about his youth. He had at once said yes, he
remembered that he " pretty nigh got drowned," trying
to " swim the creek." He quite caught the idea, Sir
Oliver writes, namely, that the point was to produce
something which the nephew ignored, and at the following
sittings he related a number of experiences, trivial in
themselves, but well suited to identify him. Already the
day after his first appearance Phinuit said :
" Jerry says, Do you know Bob's got a long skin — a skin
like a snake's skin — upstairs, that Jerry got for him ? It's
one of the funniest things you ever saw. Ask him to show it
you."
Mr. Robert Lodge replied to Sir Oliver's inquiry :
" Yes, a crinkly, thin skin, a curious thing ; I had it in a
box, I remember it well. Oh, as distinct as possible.
Haven't seen it for years, but it was in a box, with his
name cut in it."
Sir Oliver lays much stress on this and other par-
ticulars which he did not know himself. Jerry's twin-
brother, Robert, did not remember many of them, but
some, as for instance the dangerous swdmming of the
creek, were affirmed by a third brother, Frank. A story
about the killing of a cat in " Smith's field " was reduced
to the cat being killed in another place, but it was verified
that there had been a field of the above name at Barking,
the scene of the youthful exploits of the brothers. Several
things from this distant past it was impossible to elucidate ;
but just the circumstance, that the trance-utterances
referred to matters so remote and so insignificant
that it proved next to impossible to verify them, gave
192 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
them, when they turned out to be correct, an increased
significance as regards the theory of telepathy which Sir
Oliver wished to eliminate. At the same time, these
reminiscences about trifles which were in themselves
trivial, are no doubt characteristic of what an old man
might light upon when thinking of his childhood. The
objection that they are not very peculiar may be answered
in the same way as that respecting the names given by
Phinuit ; the chances are that the common things are
the right ones.
A communicator who holds a place somewhat apart
was Edmund Gurney, who had died the year before the
sittings. He was one of the very few who seemed to use
the organism of Mrs. Piper instead of the intermediation
of Phinuit. When the latter had once said about a
spirit : " She can't come and speak herself," and Sir
Oliver objected : " Mr. Gurney does," Phinuit exclaimed
with some indignation : " You are greedy. Yes, Mr.
Gurney does, but Mr. Gurney is a scientific man,
who has gone into these things. He comes and turns
me out sometimes. It would be a very narrow place
into which Mr. Gurney couldn't get."
Edmund Gurney appeared for the first time at a sitting
where Sir Oliver had handed in a letter from him. This
circumstance, of course, detracts very much from the
evidentialness of the case. In return, it is rather dra-
matic. Sir Oliver writes : " The personality seemed to
change — the speaker called me ' Lodge ' in his natural
manner (a name which Phinuit himself never once used),
and we had a long conversation, mainly non-evidential,
but with a reference to some private matters which were
said to be referred to as proof of identity, and which are
well adapted to the purpose. They were absolutely un-
known to me, but have been verified through a common
friend."
Here, as is often the case in the reports on Mrs. Piper's
sittings, the most personal and, perhaps, most convincing
PHINUIT 193
things are left out. But some little scenes are dramatic.
Gurney appears, but has scarcely commenced speaking,
when he discovers that Sir Oliver is not alone. The
dialogue is as follows :
" G. Don't give up a good thing, Lodge . . . who is here ?
" Sir 0. This is my wife.
" G. How do you do, Mrs. Lodge ? I remember having
tea with you once.
" Sir 0. [introducing] Mr. and Mrs. Thompson.
" G. Yes, I remember you, I think. Good-bye, Lodge ;
don't divulge my secrets."
On another occasion, Sir Oliver, after a long conversa-
tion, which his sister had attended, said to Gurney :
" Sir 0. The Thompsons are waiting in the next room.
Shall I call them in ?
" G. The Thompsons ? Oh I know. I met them at your
house once at dinner, I think.
" Sir 0. Yes.
" G. No, I don't especially want to see them. Well,
Lodge, I must be going. Good-bye "
Afterwards the medium seemed to sleep for a few
minutes, until Phinuit, who had been absent during the
preceding conversation, which had partly concerned
himself, returned and began in the following manner :
" Eh ! what ! Oh, yes. All right. Look here, Mr. Gurney
has been here. He told me to express his regret that he had
not said Good-bye to Miss Lodge."
The remarks of Gurney agreed with the actual circum-
stances ; he had had tea with Lady Lodge, and he
had once met the Thompsons at her house. But no
less remarkable is the mise-en-sctne. Sir Oliver calls
attention to his characteristic demeanour — the natural
unwillingness of the man of sensitive temperament to be
thrown with strangers needlessly, and his friendliness
towards Miss Lodge. It is also dramatically correct
that a few minutes elapse before the return of Phinuit ;
they are necessary to permit him to talk with Gurney
" behind the- scenes."
CD. o
194 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
One of the subjects of Sir Oliver's conversations with
Gurney was, as intimated, the personahty of Phinuit.
Although the statements about him are, of course, non-
evidential, and may be pure fabrication on the part of
the medium, they present at least the interest that they
agree with the impression which the sittings themselves
produce of his activity, especially with regard to other
spirits.
In his fiYst conversation with Sir Oliver, Gurney had
already spoken of the doctor. " Very few," he said,
" you will get like Dr. Phinuit. He is not all one could
wish, but he is all right." At their next meeting, he
described him at great length in reply to a question
from Sir Oliver, saying :
" Dr. Phinuit is a peculiar type of man. He goes about
continually, and is thrown in with everybody. He is eccentric
and quaint, but good-hearted. I wouldn't do the things he
does for anything. He lowers himself sometimes — it's a
great pity. He has very curious ideas about things and people ;
he receives a great deal about people from themselves (?)
And he gets expressions and phrases that one doesn't care for,
vulgar phrases he picks up by meeting uncanny people
through the medium. These things tickle him, and he goes
about repeating them. He has to interview a great number
of people, and has no easy berth of it. A high type of man
couldn't do the work he does. But he is a good-hearted old
fellow. Good-bye, Lodge, Here's the Doctor coming."
At a later seance Sir Oliver asked whether Phinuit was
reliable. Gurney replied :
" Not perfectly. He is not a bit infalhble. He mixes
things terribly sometimes. He does his best. He's a good
old man ; but he does get confused, and when he can't hear
he fills it up himself. He does invent things occasionally,
he certainly does. He's a shrewd doctor. He knows his
business thoroughly. He can see into people "
Sir Oliver asked : " Can he see ahead at all ? Can
anybody ? " Gurney answered :
" I can't. I haven't got into that. I think Phinuit can a
little sometimes. He has studied these things a good deal.
He can do many things that I can't do. He can look up
PHINUIT 195
people's friends and say what they are doing sometimes in
an extraordinary way. But he is far from being infallible."
It is worth noting that Gurney did not seem to have an
eye for Phinuit's mediumism. He believes that he is
fore-sighted, and that he has " studied these things a
good deal," but else he only refers to the information
Phinuit gets from spirits, and his extraordinary faculty
to look up people's (living) friends and say what they are
doing. Sir Oliver's report contains an interesting in-
stance of the latter, namely, the above-mentioned
experiment of making Phinuit say in Liverpool what the
sitter's mother was doing in London. For the rest, it
tallies with the facts that Gurney, who died in 1888, did
not understand psychometry ; the non-spiritistic inter-
pretation of mediumistic performances had until then
been telepathy ; it appeared in an earlier instance, that
of Mrs. Stella's Italian psychic, that it was just Edmund
Gurney who could not accept any other explanation.
How much or how little influence, with regard to the
appearance of spirits, ought to be ascribed to the
" articles," they at any rate do not seem an indispensable
condition. At a seance where Mr. and Mrs. Thompson,
Sir Oliver Lodge's friends and neighbours in Liverpool,
were present for the first time, besides Sir Oliver himself
and his brother Alfred, Phinuit said : "Do you know
Richard, Rich, Mr. Rich ? " Mrs. Thompson replied :
" Not well, I knew a Dr. Rich." " That's him," said
Phinuit. " He's passed out. He sends kindest regards
to his father." A Dr. Rich had some time previously
died suddenly ; he was the son of the head of the Liver-
pool post office. Sir Oliver Lodge had never seen him,
but Mr. Thompson had, it seems, once or twice spoken to
him. His Christian name was not Richard ; but this
was hardly the opinion of Phinuit ; Richard is doubtless
a result of his seeking for Rich.
Some six weeks later, towards the end of a sitting with
the same Thompsons, Phinuit said suddenly : " Here's
o 2
196 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Dr. Rich," after which the latter himself commenced
speaking.
" Dr. R. It is very kind of this gentleman [i.e., Phinuit] to
let me speak to you. Mr. Thompson, I want to give you a
message to father.
]] Mr. T. I will give it.
" Dr. R. Thank you a thousand times, it is very good of you.
You see I passed out rather suddenly. Father was very much
troubled about it, and he is troubled yet. He hasn't got over
it. Tell hinj I am alive — that I send my love to him."
Some little facts were mentioned of an identifying
character, and admitted afterwards to be accurate. The
father, though inclined to be sceptical, confessed that he
had indeed been more than ordinarily troubled by the
sudden death of his son, becailse of a recent estrangement
between them which would otherwise no doubt have been
removed.
From among the sittings reported by Sir Oliver Lodge
may finally be chosen one which the sitter, a chaplain of
Liverpool, Mr. Lund, describes in anything but apprecia-
tory words. " Altogether," he writes, " there was such
a mixture of the true and false, the absurd and rational,
the vulgar commonplace of the crafty fortune-teller with
startling reality, that I have no theory to offer What
impressed me most was the way in which she [Mrs.
Piper] seemed to feel for information, rarely telling me
anything of importance right off the reel, but carefully
fishing, and then following up a lead." This is an un-
sympathetic, but on the surface not incorrect, description
of Phinuit's method. There was, however, one thing
that impressed Mr. Lund. In the midst of his pro-
miscuous talk of the sitter's family and their troubles,
of an upset carriage (wrong), and a burned carpet (right),
Phinuit asked : "Do you know Thomas ? " " I am
Thomas," replied Mr. Lund.^ And now came the words :
" He'll know me — Thomas — Lon — Lund — Tom Lund.
That's your sister that's saying it."
» Mrs. Piper did not know the sitter's name. Strangers were always
introduced anonymously.
PHINUIT 197
Afterwards Phinuit told that the brother had been
absent when she died, and described her appearance.
Her name he tried in vain to grasp, and went through a
long list ; it had " ag " in the middle, he said. At last
he succeeded.
" But it's your sister — Maggie — that's it — she says you are
brother Tom — no, her name's ' Margie.' Too bad you were not
at home — it was one of the sorrows that followed Tom all his
life. He'll never forget it."
Mr. Lund's sister Maggie had died of diphtheria in his
absence quite thirty years before this, and her death was
a heart-aching sorrow of many years. Margie had been
her pet name, which he had quite forgotten.
Thus it is here also, in the case of a specially unsuccess-
ful seance, seen that the statements connected with the
manifestation of a spirit were of another and more
impressive kind than Phinuit's own performances.
Of the sittings reported by Dr. Leaf it has already been
said that they were, on the whole, less satisfactory than
the Lodge series, and that spirits very seldom appeared
in them. An exception in both respects makes a seance
with a Mr. Clarke and his wife, " perhaps the most
remarkable of the series," Dr. Leaf writes. During this
sitting Phinuit mentioned as present two spirits, both
relatives of Mrs. Clarke, who was a German by birth.
The names indicated in the report by initials were given
correctly.
" Ph. I want to talk to you about your uncle C. There
is someone with him — E. He is your cousin. Well, he sends
his love to you.
" Mrs. C. How did he die ?
" Ph. There was something the matter with his heart, and
with his head. He says it was an accident. He wants me
to tell you that it was an accident. He wants you to tell his
sisters. There's M. and E. ; they are sisters of E. And there
is their mother He begs you, for God's sake, to tell them
that it was an accident — that it was his head ; that he was
hurt there [makes motion of stabbing heart] ; that he had
198 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
inherited it from his father. His father was off his head ;
you know what I mean — crazy. But the others are all right,
and will be."
Mrs. Clarke calls this " a most striking account " of her
uncle's family in Germany. The father was disturbed in
his mind for the last three years of his life in consequence
of a fall from his horse. The son committed suicide in a
fit of melancholia, by stabbing his heart as described. It
is true that Phinuit spoke as if the son had inherited the
insanity from his father ; nor did he seem to understand
the double cause of his death — both head and heart.
But as he is represented as reporting what E. says,
without personal knowledge oi the matter, his want of
comprehension rather enhances the dramatic effect.
Later he continued the conversation with Mrs. Clarke in
the following manner :
" Ph. Here's M. — She is your aunt — she is here, and
wants to speak to you.
" Mrs. C. What does she say about her husband ?
" Ph. She says he has changed his life since. She does not
like it that he married again.
" Mrs. C. Does she like the one whom he has married ?
" Ph. Oh, she loves her dearly. But she does not like
him to have married so soon. He married her sister. Two
brothers married two sisters. Her husband has children
now
This was an accurate description of the family of
another uncle of Mrs. Clarke's. His wife died childless,
and he soon after married her sister, by whom he had
children. His brother had previously married a third
sister. It is true that the sitter knew all these things,
and the facts connected with her cousin E.'s death came
to her mind as soon as Phinuit mentioned his name. But
that the assurance and fluency with which the German
names and peculiar circumstances are reported here,
where spirits are referred to as the source, differ essen-
tially from the vagueness that characterizes the clairvoyant
impressions, is at any rate indisputable.
CHAPTER XIII
GEORGE PELHAM
On March 22nd, 1892, Mr. John Hart (pseudonym)
had a sitting with Mrs. Piper in Boston, which was as
usual conducted by Dr. Hodgson.^ Mr. Hart had brought
some objects that had belonged to deceased relatives of
his, and Phinuit tried in his ordinary manner to dis-
entangle their relations. There were two Georges among
them. Suddenly Phinuit said to the sitter : " There is
another George, who wants to speak to you. How many
Georges are there about you any way ? "
This was the commencement, so to speak, of a new era
in the history of the Piper-trance. Mr. Hart had, a
month previously, through an accident in New York,
lost his friend George, in the reports called George Pelham,
or more commonly G. P. Mr. Pelham was at his death
thirty-two years old ; he was a lawyer by training, but
had devoted himself chiefly to literature and philosophy.
He was an Associate of the Society for Psychical Re-
search, and, four years before his death, had had a single
sitting with Mrs. Piper, one of a series arranged by the
Committee on Mediumistic Phenomena connected with
the Society. But neither the medium nor the Rev.
Minot J. Savage, who was on that occasion present
officially on behalf of the Committee, had learned his
name. A couple of years afterwards he had had a dis-
cussion vvith Dr. Hodgson on the possibility of a future
life, and on this occasion vowed that if he died before
him and found himself still existing, he would " make
things lively " in the effort to reveal the fact of his con-
^ " A Further Record of Observations of Certain Phenomena of
Trance," Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XIII., pp. 284 — 582.
200 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
tinued existence. The seance on March 22nd, 1892, was
the first at which any friend of his was present. His
relations with Dr. Hodgson had not been of an emotional
nature.
With Phinuit acting as intermediary, George Pelham
in the first sitting already gave a number of correct
statements, among other things his own name and the
names, bot^ Christian and surname, of several of his
intimate friends. Among these were Mr. James Howard,
his wife Mary, and their daughter Katharine. Referring
to the latter, G. P. said : " Tell her, she'll know. ' I'll
solve the problems, Katharine.' " Mr. Hart was aware
that Pelham had known the Howards, but did not under-
stand what this remark referred to. Mr. Howard,
however, to whom Mr. Hart gave an account of the sitting,
was very much impressed by the words. George Pelham,
when he had last stayed with them, had talked frequently
with Katharine, a girl of fifteen years of age, about the
great problems of existence, adding that sometime he
would solve them, and let her know.
This first manifestation was followed by a great many
others, nay it may be said that G. P. never entirely
disappeared from Mrs. Piper's trance. It is unnecessary
to repeat here much from the numerous sittings where he
tried to prove his identity, and in fact convinced most
people of it. The interest he presents reaches beyond
the question of identity. Besides, in this as in other
cases, the references that are said to be the most con-
vincing are omitted in the report as too personal for pub-
lication. But an idea about the strength of his claim to
be believed one gets on hearing that, out of at least one
hundred and fifty sitters whom in the following six years
he " met " at Mrs. Piper's, he recognized thirty whom
Pelham had known living, and never claimed acquaintance
with a sitter to whom Pelham was unknown. One of the
recognized persons, the Rev. Minot J. Savage, did not
himself know that he had ever met the deceased author ;
as mentioned above, the latter was not introduced under
GEORGE PELHAM 201
his real name when he, in March, 1888, attended a sitting
together with Mr. Savage. Once only a sitter appeared
at Mrs. Piper's who was not identified by G. P., though
Pelham had known her ; it was a young girl who had been
a child when he died five years previously. Phinuit could
tell a great deal about her ; but this was not the way in
which G. P. knew people. When he was told her name,
however, he remembered her well.
There is, on the whole, in this remarkable case, where
for the first time the same personality manifested beside
Phinuit through a long period, abundant opportunity to
observe the difference between an " ordinary " spirit and
the medium Phinuit. What a contrast there is between
George's correct use of the Christian and surname of his
friends, or of the surname only where this would have
been natural to Pelham when living, and Phinuit's groping
for names and his tendency to let the Christian name
suffice. Or between Phinuit's errors when speaking of
all these things which he had not himself experienced, or
heard of, but only got an impression of then and there,
and George's mistakes, which are most often slips of the
memory, and easily accounted for. How natural is, for
instance, his misrecollection when he says : " Lent a book
to Meredith. Tell him to keep it for me," while the rights
of the case were that Pelham had during a visit from his
friend Meredith, some months before his death, wanted
him to take away some of his books, but that he had not
done so. And how different is it from the manner of
Phinuit when G. P., after recognizing a picture of the
Howards' summer-house in D., which they had left eight
years before Pelham's death, said : " But I have for-
gotten the name of the town," adding afterwards :
" Then you bought a place at some ville " ; they had, in
fact, bought a place at Xville in 1886.
In spite of the great mass of verifiable statements — of
which many were unknown to the actual sitters —
presented in the G. P. case, it is, therefore, not these that
have given it its greatest import. The dramatic realism
202 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
which from the very first stamped the manifestations of
this personahty, the consistence of character maintained
through all the following years, did much more to con-
vince his friends and relatives who had originally all been
sceptical, not to speak of Dr. Hodgson himself. His
attitude towards the varying sitters, varying in accord-
ance with Pelham's relations with them when living, his
clear understanding of what was expected from him, his
intelligence and his wdllingness to sacrifice himself to the
cause he had espoused, this and much more made of G. P.
a figure worthy of representing the once living Pelham
in an altered situation. What change has been discernible
in this continuous living and persistent personality, says
Dr. Hodgson, is a change " not of any process of disinte-
gration, but rather of integration and evolution."
George Pelham's utterances in the first seance had
referred to his friends and his own affairs, which on account
of the suddenness of his death had been left in a certain
disorder. Though the most personal references are not
quoted, the reader gets a clear picture of the whole
situation. Above all he wished to speak with Mr. Howard.
" Tell Jim I want to see him," he said to Mr. Hart. Three
weeks passed befcJre his wish could be gratified, as the
interval was occupied by sitters for whom appointment
had been made previously ; but at each of these sittings
Phinuit represented G. P. as anxious to see him or other
friends, saying : " George says, when are you going to
bring Jim ? " or " George says he wants to tell you of
the philosophy of this life." At the Howards' first
seance, on April nth, he talked in a pertinent manner of
his sudden decease, and what happened afterwards, as
one who speaks to friends after a separation. Besides,
he besought them to bring his father. His mother was
not living.
But at this meeting the sitters had already, by request
of Dr. Hodgson, begun to put test questions to G. P.
These questions, which from the point of view of identifi-
GEORGE PELHAM 203
cation it was thought specially valuable to get answered,
but which referred to subjects he did not spontaneously
allude to, strained and worried him in no small degree.
Dr. Hodgson himself thought afterwards that the method
of proceeding had often been objectionable ; the com-
municator was interrupted instead of allowed to say
what he wanted, and confusion was created by a continual
change of subject. For instance, he was one day while
other things were discussed asked about a sitter's name ;
it was Professor Peirce, who had been known to Pelham.
The question was not answered, but when Mrs. Piper was
just coming out of trance, she whispered among some
incomprehensible words twice the name Peirce, and
on the next day G. P. said that he had " tried to tell the
medium just as she was coming into her body again."
Here then it became clear that he had not postponed the
reply because he did not know the name. But, of course,
the experimenters must be on their guard to avoid
deceiving themselves. The following case illustrates well
the difficulty of the situation for both parts. At a sitting
in May, G. P. acted as amanuensis for the sitter's deceased
sister. The Christian name of this lady had been given,
and G. P. went on to write some more statements at her
dictation. Dr. Hodgson interrupted him by a demand
for her surname, to which G. P. answered with some
impatience :
" Don't bother me while her sister [i.e., the spirit] is
speaking to me please, for I have quite enough to do without
this."
Dr. Hodgson writes hereof : " This, thought I, is an
evasion ; it would have been much easier to have written
the name, if it were known, than to spend so many words
in telling me not to interrupt." His suspicion seemed to
receive confirmation when the writing ended without
any reply to his question. But afterwards Phinuit, who
came to speak a few words about other matters, stopping
suddenly, spelled out the letters of the name,
204 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
MANNORS (pseudonym), adding that George was
" yelling at " him to say that !
In a single case, however, a similar suspicion seemed
well founded. G. P. was asked about the names of two
ladies who had formed a society together with Pelham
two years before his death, and said that he would put
off answering until he was alone with Dr. Hodgson, who
did not knoW the names, in order that the answer might
not be considered thought-transference. But the names
which he gave later were not correct ; thus the alleged
reason for not answering at once had probably been a
pretext to get delay. In view of the severity with which
he was treated, we ought perhaps to forgive him that he
tried to conceal his ignorance — what the researchers,
however, have not been willing to do.
G. P. once says about himself and the other spirits :
" Like as when in the body sometimes, we can't always
recall everything in a moment." But the experimenters
seem to have been prone to suppose that he possessed a
similar memory as that which is ascribed to the sub-
conscious mind. As an instance may be quoted that a
sitter more than two years after Pelham's death asked
G. P. a series of questions concerning the number of
pages of a manuscript of Pelham's on a philosophical
subject, the paper on which it was written, its division
into chapters, its external title page, and its first sentence
and dedication. It is characterized as a failure that G. P.
was unable to answer these questions.
But also in another respect strange achievements
were exacted from George Pelham. Dr. Hodgson counts
as failures divers unsuccessful attempts on his part to
answer questions about lost objects, and a few pro-
phecies. He adds about the former category, that
correct answers would have strengthened the evidence
for the possession of supernormal faculty, but that the
failures do not directly affect the question of identity.
The same applies in his opinion to G. P.'s prophecies,
" which were not many and were chiefly personal," and
GEORGE PELHAM 205
where Dr. Hodgson thinks his " success would outweigh
his failure." The remarkable thing is, that Dr. Hodgson
apparently would have found it natural, if supernormal
faculty had been the privilege of all departed. He does
not seem to have realized how different Phinuit is in this
respect from the other communicators in Mrs. Piper's
trance. As regards George Pelham, there is not much
reason to believe that he had mediumistic powers. But,
of course, it is not excluded that he may have been some-
thing of a psychic, though in a far less degree than
Phinuit. On the other hand, it is conceivable that
Phinuit has helped him with this kind of task. The
exact circumstances cannot be learned from the report,
where the cases in question are not recorded.
Of a wholly different type is a series of attempts to
make G. P. give information about the doings of some of
his friends or relatives ; this, of course, does not imply
any supernormal powers in a spirit. G. P. himself dis-
played a great interest in these experiments after they
had been suggested to him, and here he was several times
very successful. On April 13th, 1892, it was arranged
that he should watch his father, who lived in Washington,
and see him do something which the sitters (the Howards)
could not know about, and tell them at their next seance.
This came off on April 22nd, and G. P. said :
" I saw father and he took my photograph and took it to
the artist's to have it copied ... I went to Washington ;
my father will be hard to convince ; my mother [i.e., step-
mother] not so hard."
Asked about this, Mrs. Pelham wrote from Washington :
" His father did, without my knowledge, take a photo-
graph of him to a photographer here to copy — not enlarge.
The negative had been broken. Mrs. L. was going to
have it copied in New York, and Mr. Pelham thought he
would see what they could do here."
With the parents themselves it was at a sitting in New
York on Saturday, May 14th, arranged that George
should follow them in the afternoon of the same day.
2o6 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
during which they should do something special having
relation to him. At a seance on the following Monday,
where they would not be present, he should then describe
what he had seen. On this occasion he said as follows :
" I saw him take some notepaper and write an explanatory
letter to Frank about what I had said to him in or on that
day [i.e., Saturday] . . . The flowers which I saw mother
put before my photo, she and father will understand . .
In connection with this I saw them open my book and place
therein a picture of X. Y. That is all of importance that I
saw them do."
All these details were correct, only Mr. Pelham had not
written the explanatory letter to Frank, the brother of
George. He had intended writing such a letter on the
said afternoon, and had consulted his wife about the
proposed contents, but had not found time to do it. It is
conceivable that George had heard their conversation,
and so thought that the plan had been executed. There
are several instances where he claims to have heard
something which had really been spoken ; thus. Pro-
fessor Newbold ^ relates that G. P. once told him that he
had heard him and Dr. Hodgson speak about " the
memoriam Rogers," i.e., Mr. Rogers's preface to Pelham's
poems ; "I caught it as you were telling him and it
attracted me," G. P. had said. They had in fact con-
versed with each other on this subject.
Another successful experiment of this kind referred to
Mr. Howard. Phinuit had in the beginning of a seance,
in December, 1892, said that George had gone to find
Jim and would come back and tell Hodgson what he was
doing. Afterwards G. P. himself appeared and wrote
through the medium's hand, while Phinuit simultaneously
spoke with another person, as follows :
" Hello, I am with you now and, Hodgson, Jim has seen
Fenton — — Jim is reading, or was a short few minutes ago."
Both these statements were correct. Mr, Howard had
gone into the country to visit a friend named Fenton.
» Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XIV., p. 48.
GEORGE PELHAM 207
Later in the sitting G. P. said in reply to a question from
Mrs. Howard, this time using the voice :
" G. P. He has gone to see his friend Fenton, saw him
not three quarters of an hour ago, as near as I can go by the
time.
" Dr. H. It was more.
" G. P. That I can't specify."
Mrs. Howard asked what Fenton and Jim talked
about, and G. P. gave what proved to be a correct
answer :
" About this very subject and about me. They have been
discussing it, but Fenton is as hard-headed as Orenberg [a
friend of Pelham's] "
Further must be mentioned an experiment, the result
of which was very curious. In the commencement of a
seance, on April 28th, 1892, Dr. Hodgson asked G. P.
to visit the Howards and return to inform him what they
were doing. Towards the end of the sitting, Phinuit
interrupted his talk with the sitter. Professor Peirce,^ to
give a number of statements about things which G. P.
had seen Mrs. Howard do. He spoke as follows :
" She is writing, and [has] taken some violets and put them
in a book. And it looks as if she's writing to my mother . . .
Who's Tyson . . . Davis ... I saw her sitting in the chair
sitting before a little desk or table. Took httle book,
opened it, wrote letter he thinks to his mother. Saw her take
a little bag and put some things in it belonging to him, placed
the photograph beside her on the desk. That's hers. Sent
a letter toTASON TYSON. Mrs. She hunted a
little while for her picture, sketching. He's certain that the
letter is to his mother. She took one of George's books and
turned it over and said : ' George, are you here .'* Do you see
that ? ' These were the very words. Then she turned and
went up a short flight of stairs. Took some thing from a
drawer, came back again, sat down to the desk, and then
finished the letter."
It turned out that Mrs. Howard had done none of
these things that day, but all of them on the evening of
1 It was at this sitting that G. P. would not give his name at once ;
see above, p. 203.
2o8 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
the 26th and the afternoon of the 27th April. On both
days she had written to Mrs. Pelham. On the 26th she
had had George's photograph before her while she wrote,
and had afterwards put it in an envelope with the letter
and another photo of him. It was also correct that she
had hunted a little for her picture, namely, one she had
painted of George. All that was said about her taking
George's b6ok, etc., was true, but she could not tell at
what time she did that. While writing to his mother she
went and took some things from a drawer, and came back
again and finished the letter. On the 27th, in the after-
noon, she wrote to Mrs. Tyson, a lady she had not written
to for weeks, perhaps for months, declining an invitation.
Later she wrote to Mrs. Pelham, and seeing " George's
violets " by her in an envelope gave them to her daughter
to put in a drawer. They were not put into a book.
As may be seen, Phinuit's representation, though
precise in most details, interweaves two series of doings
in a perplexing manner, beginning by the latest. Con-
cerning this Dr. Hodgson writes that G. P. seemed to
have a very obscure perception generally of our physical
world, and to have mistaken for contemporary physical
events a series of recent scenes in Mrs. Howard's subcon-
scious mind. But the latter explanation does not agree
with George Pelham's other achievements. In no other
instance has he proved himself able to see, by a sort of
retrospective clairvoyance, or by mind-reading, something
that has actually occurred, but at an earlier time. Either
he sees the events contemporaneously with their taking
place, though with varying clearness, or he cannot see
them at all. It is conceivable that he had seen those
events when they occurred, and reproduced his recollec-
tions of them, perhaps without a clear understanding as
to the time of their occurrence. They might have
" attracted " him, as he states that the conversation
between Dr. Hodgson and Professor Newbold about the
preface to his book did, because they concerned himself,
while Mrs. Howard, perhaps, at the time of the sitting on
GEORGE PELHAM 209
April 28th, did not perform anything that could do this.
Likewise, all that he reported about his father's doings
had been things that had some relation to himself ; on the
first occasion he had seen his father take his photograph to
the photographer, in the second case he had observed a
series of doings which were purposely performed by the
parents as related to him. The same connection between
the events which a communicator appears to have seen,
and their relation to the deceased person whom he purports
to be, is found in other cases, and was regarded by
Dr. Hodgson as one of the circumstances that testified
to the identity of the spirits. That Phinuit can see things
which do not concern himself is, of course, another matter.
It might also, perhaps, be conceived that it was Phinuit
who clairvoyantly saw Mrs. Howard's past doings, and
reported them to help G. P., but it is hardly so probable
an interpretation as the other one. But in any case, it
is evidently Phinuit who is responsible for the form in
which they are presented ; it is thoroughly Phinuit-ese
to say : " Who's Tyson ? " and to call an envelope " a
little bag." It is as if he got the description from G. P.
through impressions, and not by means of words.
Dr. Hodgson's report contains several more contribu-
tions to the elucidation of the manner in which G. P. saw
things. At a sitting on December 22nd, 1892, the following
conversation took place between them on account of an
experiment performed by the latter :
" G.P. I followed you on a railway train for some distance,
and then I thought you were in New York [correct], but am
not sure ... I could not be too positive, as things look
differently to me now from what they did when I was in my
material body.
" Dr. H. I suppose that you don't see the physical universe
directly, but come into relation with our perception of the
physical universe ?
" G. P. Yes, absolutely in a spiritual sense ; in fact it is,
and must necessarily be, through the spiritual that I see you,
and can follow, and tell about what you are doing from time
to time."
CD. P
210 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
What G. P. says here is not, perhaps, very clear. But
he seems to take no notice whatever of Dr. Hodgson's
speech about our perception o/the universe. His explana-
tion has nothing to do with seeing by means of other
people's minds ; in this respect he seems to agree with
Phinuit, who always denied being a mind-reader. And
at a sitting on January 24th, 1893, his words were clearer.
The dialogue on this occasion is the following :
" Dr. H. Well, George, I want to go away very shortly
while you are still here, and I want you to either go yourself
or to get Phinuit to go, and if possible tell them here where I
am going and what I am doing.
" G. P. Yes, I will try my best, but it will depend wholly
on my seeing your spiritual bo^y, so please send out your
spiritual body to me as much as you possibly can while you
are doing the trick."
Nothing of what G. P. on this occasion reported about
Dr. Hodgson's doings was correct ; thus it must be
supposed that the latter has not understood the art of
" sending out his spiritual body." An experiment with
an acquaintance of Pelham's, Miss M., failed likewise ;
Dr. Hodgson himself connected these two failures with the
circumstance that neither his own nor Miss M.'s relations
to Pelham had been of an emotional nature such as those
of his parents and the Howards. G. P.'s words,, perhaps,
expressed a similar thing ; if he could only see people
in the moments when they sent out their " spiritual body "
to him, i.e., were filled with thoughts of him, his nearest
friends and relatives must of course be those he most
often saw.
Perhaps this too is the explanation of the following case
from a sitting with Mr. Howard on December 9th, 1892 :
" G. P. I saw you in Marte's library a few days since.
''^ Mr. H. All three of us ?
" G. P. No, simply you, Jim."
Mr. Howard had been in Mr. Marte's library on Decem-
ber ist, but all the time with the latter ; besides, Dr.
Hodgson had been there part of the time. Has G. P.
GEORGE PELHAM 211
been able to see his friend, but not his more remote
acquaintance, Mr. Marte ?
A few experiments aimed at making G. P. read letters,
of course to the exclusion of Mrs. Piper seeing the con-
tents. On December 7th, 1892, a letter from Mrs. Pelham
to Mrs. Howard, who was present, was put into the hand
of the medium. After handling it G. P. said :
" G. P. Oh I see father is not well Where is it that she
says in that letter she is going ?
" Mrs. H. First to New York and then perhaps to come
here, George, to see you. Now what is the place that they
are going to dispose of, what does it say in the letter,
George ? Tell me the name.
" G. P. The house and property in New York "
All this was correct and written in the letter. But the
name of the place in New York, a very peculiar one, G. P.
was unable to give, though it was also written in the letter,
and though he had given it correctly in the spring.
If G. P. could see the contents of the letter, it seems
then to be in a similar imperfect manner as that in which
he on the whole saw the physical universe. At the next
experiment, a fortnight later, he evidently saw nothing
at all. Mrs. Howard had intended to bring a letter from
his father discussing " George's reappearance at the
sittings." By mistake, and without knowing it, she had
instead of this letter brought a business letter from
Mr. Pelham, which she handed to Mrs. Piper. The
following conversation ensued :
" Mrs. H. I want you to see your father's letter, because
there is something in it that will please you.
" G. P. This does not sound as father would talk when I
was in the body . . He believes that I exist [calls for
Dr. Hodgson, complains of being ' muddled ']. He was pained
but he is no longer pained, because he feels that I exist.
" Mrs. H. That's right ; I have read it.
" G. P. That brings me nearer to my father ; now
tell him that I am very near him and I see him and hear
him when he is talking of me, hear him discussing with mother
certain things about my life, some things that perhaps pained
him, and some things that perhaps pleased him "
P 2
212 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
G. P. did not here say more than what he knew pre-
viously, and what Mrs. Howard's remark, that the letter
would please him, might lead up to. Possibly the letter,
which was at any rate coming from the father, had given
him an impression of the latter's mood ; he says of it that
it " brings him nearer to his father." In that case the
performance must be classed with psychometry. That
he got no suspicion of the real contents of the letter
agrees with the hypothesis that the non-emotional was
inaccessible to him.
• •••••
With the greatest possible eagerness, and with a
touching gratitude towards D>. Hodgson, G. P. had
undertaken all these tasks. " Words can never express
what I feel towards you for trying to get me to do things,
to explain to you where I am, and all for your all," he
said to Dr. Hodgson in the spring of 1892. But, as said
above, the method of the experimenters was not always
rational. G. P. must often beg them to pay more regard
to himself, and he could sometimes feel a little annoyed
with them. " You all want me to work for you, but you
don't care a straw about helping me," he exclaimed at a
seance in December, 1892, when two sitters overwhelmed
him with questions without giving him time to answer.
"It is hard work, Hodgson, but I have got courage to
brave it out," he said a few days afterwards to Dr. Hodg-
son. Seven years later he still remembered this period
with a certain bitterness. " I know how you confused
me, by Jove, and I don't want any more of it," he said to
Dr. Hodgson in the summer of 1899 at a sitting where he
acted as the helper of other spirits.^
What was really amiss, however, was no doubt the
circumstance that George Pelham, in spite of all their
demands for " tests," did not understand that it could
be seriously doubted who he was. This appears clearly
at two sittings in December, 1892, of which the former
> See below, p. 248.
GEORGE PELHAM 213
contains, so to speak, a making-up with Dr. Hodgson,
and the latter the same with Pelham's dearest friend,
Mr. Howard. The conversation between Dr. Hodgson
and G. P. took place in the presence of Mrs. Howard on
December 19th, and ran as follows :
" G. P. I want Hodgson to speak his mind fully to me
personally now.
" Dr. H. Well, I have not got anything specially on my
mind now, George.
" G. P. Have I said anything to trouble you ? Be frank,
please.
" Dr. H. No, you have not said anything to trouble me,
except the things that make it difficult to reconcile to your
identity. You said things that easily contradict, George
" G. P. I think you will find my statements contradictory
only when you confuse me by all talking at once, or when I
do not fully understand your questions.
" Dr. H. Well, George, I am going to go over all the
things that appear to be contradictory, and ask you about
them
" G. P. That is what I want. It has worried me far more
than it has you, my dear fellow.
" Dr. H. Well, I suppose it must have, George. I can
understand that.
" G. P. Now just let me illustrate. When I began to
speak about my existence here and was ready to quote it
philosophically, you interrupted me continually.
" Dr. H. Well, we are very sorry, George ; we would like
you to go straight on without our saying a word for an hour,
if you could.
" G. P. Don't you know you did it ? Please be frank.
" Dr. H. No, I am not aware that we did, George, except
you seemed as though you needed us to speak to you
occasionally.
" G. P. Have you not got the things written ?
" Dr. H. Yes.
" Mrs. H. [to Dr. H.]. Yes, I think he was interrupted a
good deal by Marte at the last sitting.
" G. P. Well, please read them carefully . . . and see if I
am not right.
" Dr. H. Well, we will take care, I think, George, not to do
an injustice.
" G.P. Thank you."
Dr. Hodgson, on examining the records, arrived at the
conclusion that the statements made by G. P. were fully
214 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
justified, though he had not thought so at the time of
their conversation.
The scene between G. P. and Mr. Howard took place
three days later ; Dr. Hodgson was present, and had, as
will be seen from his very first remark, learned something
from the sitting on the 19th :
" G. P. No^w, what will I do for you ?
" Dr. H. Well, George, is there anything that you would
like to give us, any special message that you thought it would
be desirable for us to have, or anything about philosophy, we
should be glad to have that !
" Mr. H. Well, George, before you go to philosophy — you
know my opinion of philosophy —
" G. P. It is rather crude, to be sure.
" Mr. H. Tell me something, you must be able to recall
certain things that you and I know ; now, it makes no
difference what the thing is ; tell me something that you and
I alone know. I ask you because several things I have asked
you, you have failed to get hold of.
" G. P. Why did you not ask me this before ?
" Mr. H. Because I did not have occasion to.
" G. P. What do you mean, Jim ?
" Mr. H. I mean, tell me something that you and I alone
know, something in our past that you and I alone know.
" G. P. Do you doubt me, dear old fellow ?
" Mr. H. I simply want something — you have failed to
answer certain questions that I have asked — now I want you
to give me the equivalent of the answers to those questions
in your own terms.
" G. P. What were they ?
" Mr. H. The questions were about where we dined, and
that you did not remember ; now tell me something you do
remember.
" G. P. Oh, you mean now."
Mr. Howard had in the beginning of the seance asked
G. P. where they on a certain occasion had dined together
in New York ; G. P. had given the names of two common
friends, but not that of the friend with whom they had
dined. It is evident that it is only at this point of the
conversation that it dawns upon him. that this is the
failure to which " Jim " is referring ; until then he had
believed that he spoke of former sittings. Mr. Howard
continues :
GEORGE PELHAM 215
" Mr. H. Tell me something now that you remember that
happened before.
" G. P. Well, I will. About Arthur [one of the friends
mentioned] ought to be a test. How absurd . . . what
does Jim mean ? Do you mean our conversation on different
things, or do you mean something else ?
" Mr. H. I mean that we spent a great many summers
and winters together, and talked on a great many things and
had a great many views in common, went through a great
many experiences together
" G. P. You used to talk to me about ..."
What G. P. afterwards said has not been published.
" Several statements were read by me," Dr. Hodgson
writes, " and assented to by Mr. Howard, and then was
written ' private,' and the hand gently pushed me away.
I retired to the other side of the room, and Mr. Howard
took my place close to the hand where he could read the
writing. He did not, of course, read it aloud, and it was
too private for my perusal. The circumstances narrated,
Mr. Howard informed me, contained precisely the kind
of test for which he had asked."
For the readers who are not made acquainted with the
test, the dramatic character of the incident must suffice.
There is something pathetic in G. P.'s dawning compre-
hension of his friend's doubt about his identity — and
something tragi-comic in his surprise when he begins to
realize that the difficulty is that he cannot remember
where they dined together some time in New York !
And it is touching that he after he has given all the
desired tests reverts to this forgetfulness, and says
deprecatingly :
" Jim, I am dull in this sphere about some things, but you
will forgive me, won't you ? . . . but like as when in the
body sometimes we can't always recaU everything in a
moment, can we, Jim, dear old fellow ? "
• •••••
There has in the preceding pages almost exclusively
been talked about George Pelham's communications on
his own behalf, and about his attempts to prove his own
identity. He was, however, going to play a greater part
2i6 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
than this merely personal one. He became in the following
years Phinuit's co-operator and, partly, his successor as
the one who assisted other spirits in communicating.
With the clairvoyant part of Phinuit's activity he had
nothing to do ; but as a helper of others he displayed an
ability which soon threw Phinuit into the shade.
About the time of George Pelham's first manifestation
a development had taken place in the trance-phenomena
which was in itself of great importance, and, moreover,
enhanced the value of G. P.'s assistance. Hitherto the
communications had been oral, both when Phinuit spoke
on his own account or in the name of some other spirit,
and when occasionally another spirit was himself " con-
trolling " the medium. This happened also in the case
of G. P. ; in the beginning Phinuit was intermediary,
i.e., the medium spoke with the voice which characterized
Phinuit, either in the first person representing G. P. or
in the third person about him ; but gradually G. P.
himself learned to use the voice, Phinuit, however, had
been wont to write down now and again something by
the hand of the medium ; this was also done at the first
sittings where G. P. manifested. A short time previously
it had occurred that some other spirit made use of the
hand simultaneously with Phinuit speaking through the
mouth of Mrs. Piper. Dr. Hodgson experienced this
phenomenon for the first time on March 12th, 1892, ten
days before the manifestation of G. P. ; a private sitter
had been a witness to it already in 1891.
By degrees this led to Phinuit using the voice and the
other communicators the hand. An instance of its taking
place simultaneously has been mentioned above. But
even apart from this double utilization of the medium,
it was no doubt the increased use of writing that made it
possible for G. P. to co-operate in a satisfactory way with
Phinuit. The latter continued as a rule to be the inter-
mediary when the voice was employed, while G. P. acted
as amanuensis by the use of the hand. Already at some
sittings in May and June, 1892, he rendered assistance by
GEORGE PELHAM 217
writing for other communicators ; a case has been quoted
above. From the autumn of 1893 until a new change
occurred in 1896, he assisted almost constantly in the
Piper-trance, either by writing for other communicators or
by advising those who tried to communicate directly
themselves.
Also in other respects, namely, the exchanging of the
trance-speech for trance-writing had proved an improve-
ment. Not only it secured without intervention of
stenographer or note-taker an exact rendering of the
communications, but it appeared to be a means of
communication of which the spirits could more easily
make use than of the voice. It would seem, however,
that until instructed in some way they were unaware that
they were writing. The hand was like a machine which
registered automatically their speech — if it were speech ;
several expressions intimate that the communicators
were only thinking. On the other hand, it was of course
far more difftcult for the experimenters to hold a con-
versation with the hand than with the voice, and this
might occasion some confusion. At the same time, the
communicators suffered from the slow manner of pro-
ceeding, and from the constant interruptions when the
writing was difficult to decipher. A helper on their side
like George Pelham was almost indispensable.
Meanwhile, Phinuit went on in his old way, especially
when alone, mingling false statements with true, and
often incurring the old accusations of fishing and guessing.
Upon much of what had formerly been conceived in
this manner, George Pelham's intervention had, however,
thrown a new light. When spirits were present, he
seemed far better able to manage matters than Phinuit
had been. It is a curious thing that Phinuit seemed to
be far less self-confident after G. P.'s appearance on the
stage. He seemed better able to understand the im-
portance of the cause, and to see his own deficiencies ; he
might be quite downcast when G. P. was absent. Such
was, for instance, the case at a sitting on January 3oth^
2i8 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
1893, where, besides Dr. Hodgson, the Howards and a
stranger were present. Phinuit spoke a little of the
stranger's character, and said there was a young man
and an older one who wished to communicate with him.
The latter tried to write a few words, but they were
almost illegible, and Phinuit said he would go and try to
get George to help him. There were further vain attempts
at writing", accompanied by much violent movement in
the hand. At last Phinuit exclaimed :
" Ph. What is the matter ? I don't know what they are
doing with me, any way.
" Dr. H. Seems to be a regular stream of them now.
" Ph. I can't help it ; they say these things, and they will
say them, Hodgson. I can't help it."
The scene ended by Mrs, Howard asking for George,
who then made his appearance.
The usefulness of the writing and its advantages over
his own proceedings were also humbly acknowledged by
Phinuit. Thus, in a dilemma at a sitting in April, 1893,
he said :
"It is hard for me to understand. If you can get him
[the communicator] to use the hand, you can get the messages
more direct. They often get confused, coming through me."
On the whole, it became under the new circumstances
easier to distinguish between the different causes that
might lead to confusion. It became evident that it was
in a degree due to the communicators themselves. Dr.
Hodgson lays much stress on the fact that the success of
a sitting seemed to depend on the communicating spirit,
and not on the sitter. If the performances varied with
the sitters, it would, he argued, tell in favour of the
explanation telepathy ; that, on the contrary, the indi-
vidual communicator displays the same clearness, or
want of clearness, in the presence of all sitters, seemed to
his mind an important argument against the said explana-
tion. And such is what his experience had told him.
There were, he says, mainly three causes that might
occasion confusion in the communicators : the difficulty,
GEORGE PELHAM 219
or impossibility, of using the organism of Mrs. Piper, the
contact with earthly conditions, and circumstances con-
cerning their death. But all this was more or less indi-
vidual, i.e., characteristic of the individual spirit. Some
persons would begin to understand " the machine " at
once, others never attained to the direct use of it. The
contact with the human sphere — " your sphere," G. P.
calls it — was a more general cause of a certain confusion ;
even habitual communicators often allude to their feeling
muddled or weak during the sitting. Finally, there
was the confusion due to quite special conditions in
the individual communicator. Dr. Hodgson mentions,
among others, a case where a gentleman who committed
suicide in a moment of temporary aberration, due to a
trouble from which he had suffered for a year before his
death, tried in vain to communicate coherently, though
the information he gave sufficed to indicate who he was ;
in the course of some years, however, this confusion
cleared away and the sittings with him became excellent.
In the case of a friend of Dr. Hodgson's, who also took his
own life, there was much confusion when he first came
into communication, which was a year after his death,
but later on he gave information, unknown to the sitters,
of a private and personal kind, well suited as a proof of
identity. Dr. Hodgson asserts that there are a number
of such cases, and concludes as follows : "In all these
cases the confusion persisted through varying conditions
of Mrs. Piper's trance, and whUe clear communications
were received from other persons ; and yet, so far as the
sitters' minds were concerned, there seemed no assignable
reason why the communications were not clear originally,
or did not soon become clear, if dependent upon living
persons." A similar relation he finds between the
confusion and a too short distance from the moment of
death ; but this kind of derangement, presumably due
to the shock of death, disappeared as a rule in the course
of a short time.
Dr. Hodgson's observation on this point is of some
220 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
interest even apart from its importance as an argument
against the explanation mind-reading — which cannot, at
any rate, be an argument against that of clairvoyance.
If it be not based on such reality as Dr. Hodgson believed,
there seems to be one alternative only — that the dramatic
sense of the entranced Mrs. Piper is so eminent that she,
when it serves the characterization, does not even hesitate
to make the communicators confused and ignorant, con-
cealing the knowledge which it is otherwise the most
important object of the sittings to display.
• •••••
The last report from the Phinuit period is due to
Professor William Newbold, and embraces sittings from
the years 1894 — 96.^ Professor Newbold is an acute
critic, and is of opinion that a large portion of the pheno-
mena may be explained as a " weaving together by Mrs.
Piper's nervous mechanism of all the complex suggestions
of the seance room, supplemented by telepathic and clair-
voyant impressions got in connection with the sitter and
with the articles which he brings." But he does not
think that they, taken as a whole, can be so explained.
It is evidently Phinuit's performances that he has in
mind above ; the description does not fit all the pheno-
mena. It does not, above all, fit the cases where a distinct
personality comes forward with proofs of his identity and
in a manner that must seem characteristic just of his or
her individuality.
Such a communicator whose manifestation made a
strong impression on Professor Newbold, was for instance
his " Aunt Sallie," his mother's sister who had died when
he was not ten years old, and had been dead twenty years.
She showed her knowledge of his rather peculiar family
relations by alluding to a lady who was at the same time
his aunt and his grandmother. This was quite correct ;
a sister of his mother and of Sallie had been the wife of
his paternal grandfather after the death of his grand-
1 " A Further Record of Observations of Certain Phenomena of
Trance," Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XIV., pp. 6 — 78.
GEORGE PELHAM 221
mother. A curious trait was, that the communicator
wanted that he should himself explain the relation so
that she might feel sure of his being really her nephew —
entirely the reverse of the usual process. " Evidence of
this sort," Professor Newbold concludes, " suggests the
actual presence of the alleged communicators." Nor was
he able to reconcile to a telepathic theory the circumstance
that just this half-forgotten aunt, whom he had not thought
of during the sittings, would manifest, while he vainly
desired to get into communication with a very near friend
who had died a few years previously, nay even applied to
George Pelham about this without result.
Professor Newbold's report further deals with the
transition to a group of new controls that definitely
supplanted Phinuit. They appeared in the end of 1896,
and after January, 1897, no more is heard about the
mysterious doctor who had been a thorn in the side of
many people, also among those who believed in the
genuineness of the other spirits. To conceive him as a
sub-personality of Mrs. Piper's was prevented, for one
thing, by the other communicators, so to speak, vouching
for his independent existence. This applies, as has been
seen, for instance, to Edmund Gurney ; and it applies to
George Pelham, who from the first mentions him with
much respect and a ceremonious use of his surname,
" Dr. Scliville." Thus it seems necessary to accept or
reject them together ; either they are all of them fancy
creations — sub-personalities if that name be preferred — or
they are all of them real, and the difference is only that
Phinuit has not been able to prove his identity. That
he was a medium is hardly sufficient to establish his being
Mrs. Piper's second self.
Though they are of course quite unevidential, I shall
finish by quoting some utterances about Phinuit which
occurred in the Piper-trance ten years later. Sir Oliver
Lodge, who had always felt more friendly towards Phinuit
than the other experimenters, one day during Mrs. Piper's
222 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
sojoitm in England in igo6 directed a question concerning
him to his successor " Rector." The conversation was
the following :
" Sir 0. Does ' Phinuit ' mean anything to you ?
" R. You mean Dr. Phinuit ? Oh yes, we see him
occasionally ; he is in another sphere of this life, no longer
earth-bound, very well and very happy.
" Sir 0. He was a friend of mine.
" R. Cpuld you by any possibihty be the friend whom he
called ' Captain ' ?
" Sir 0. Yes indeed —
" R. Would you like to see and speak with him ?
" Sir 0. If it did him no harm —
" R. Oh no harm in the least ; he is beyond harm, friend.
He has so progressed "
Such was the not undramatic end of Phinuit's history.
Sir Ohver desisted from " seeing " him, as he feared it
might injure the medium whose trance had been of a less
agreeable kind in the time of Phinuit than it had after-
wards become.
SECTION V
The Mediumism of Mrs. Piper
II. The New Regime
CHAPTER XIV
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS
The old doctor's disappearance in one respect did not
improve the situation ; he was succeeded by some at
least equally mystic personalities. George Pelham was
evidently incapable of undertaking the management
alone ; it looks almost as if it was necessary to employ
more extraordinary spirits for that task. The introduc-
tion of " the band," as the new managers are often called,
was, however, apparently due to chance. Besides, it
took place under circumstances which in the beginning
threw a somewhat singular light on its members.
At a sitting in 1895, Professor Newbold had by the help
of George Pelham got hold of Stainton Moses, the well-
known English medium, who had died in 1892. In a
manuscript left with Frederic Myers, and which nobody
else had been allowed to see, Stainton Moses had given
what purported to be the real names of his controls, or
guides, who were in his automatic writings called Impera-
tor, Rector, Doctor, etc. The alleged Moses was now at
divers sittings with Professor Newbold and Dr. Hodgson
questioned about these names, and replied, though reluc-
tantly and with difficulty, to their questions ; but the
names turned out not to be identical with those found in
the manuscript. In other respects, however, the com-
municator had, in the opinion of Professor Newbold, " an
air of verisimilitude " ; Dr. Hodgson states that he later
224 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
" did furnish some private information unknown to the
sitters, and afterwards identified in England." Besides,
George Pelham vouches for him ; the same argument
appHes to him as to Phinuit and the new controls — they
must stand or fall together.
On the other hand, it appears that George Pelham had
no great regard for the performances of the alleged Moses
when aHve. " He had light," G. P. said, " but deceived
himself ; he was not far progressed." Stainton Moses
himself admitted at a Piper-sitting that much of his
teachings were his own theories ; " as I thought this very
strongly, I felt sure of having been told this," he said.
In reality, his productions can hardly bear a critical
examination, and the names left by him may like other
things be fabricated by his automatic self. The names
that were given by the Piper-Moses were those of ordinary
people, and seem due to a confusion which characterized
his first manifestations.
There remains, however, the fact that the Imperator-
band emerged at Mrs. Piper's in consequence of Dr.
Hodgson having, in 1896, pointed out to George Pelham
the importance of making Stainton Moses " clear," and
getting the answers to his questions. " The final result,"
Dr. Hodgson writes, " was that Moses professed to get
the assistance of his former ' controls,' who after com-
municating on various occasions directly in November
and December, 1896, and January, 1897, demanded that
the control of Mrs. Piper's ' light ' should be placed in
their hands." That they were not really the controls of
vStainton Moses seems, however, quite certain ; they were
wholly ignorant about the automatist himself and what
they were supposed to have written through him ; this
was not the case with the Piper-Moses himself, and cannot,
therefore, be ascribed to the ignorance of the medium.
As regards their real identity, the more secondary members
of the band seem to have given varying and quite impos-
sible names, while Rector and Imperator did not even
try to satisfy the curiosity of the experimenters. In the
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 225
opinion of the researchers, they did not seriously claim to
be identical with the controls of Stainton Moses whose
names they had adopted.
Be that as it may, the consequences of the innovation
were at any rate beneficial. Imperator claimed that the
indiscriminate experimenting with Mrs. Piper's organism
should stop, and promised that he and his assistants
would repair it as far as possible. Dr. Hodgson then for
the first time explained to the normal Mrs. Piper about
Stainton Moses and his alleged relation to Imperator, and
got her sanction to the change. This led to ever happier
results ; the new managers were able to keep foreign
" influences " away ; Mrs. Piper's trance became more
agreeable for herself, and former sitters were all struck by
the improvement in the clearness and coherence of the
communications.
The first fruits of the new reign are, as regards the
published records, to be found in Professor James Hyslop's
report on three series of sittings which he, or Dr. Hodgson
on his behalf, had with Mrs. Piper in 1898 — 99.^ Tliey
are described with a greater completeness than any earlier.
All remarks by the sitter himself or by Dr. Hodgson are
entered, and nothing that occurred during the trance is
omitted. All arrangements with the managers, all their
introductory or concluding speeches, are given unabridged,
and the reader is thus able to judge fully of the character
and proceedings of the new controls.
There is, undeniably, a great difference between these
and their honest but uncouth antecessor, Phinuit. Impe-
rator is exalted and majestic ; Rector gentle, old-fashioned
in his speech, helpful and kind. Rector has got the real
work, having succeeded George Pelham as amanuensis at
the writing ; as a rule the communicators were no more
allowed to write themselves. The confusion which the
contact with earthly conditions produced, Imperator
^ " A Further Record of Observations of Certain Trance Phenomena,"
Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XVI., pp. 46 — 49.
CD. Q
226 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
seemed specially able to remove. " I am all right, when
Imperator is near," says Professor Hyslop's father at one
of the sittings. " Doctor " is the medical member of
the band, who diagnoses diseases and offers advice as
Phinuit did formerly. Another member is " Prudens " ;
he seems to have got the special task of " bringing light,"
like a kind of medium on the other side. At Professor
Hyslop's second sitting Rector says : " We bring Prudens
and more light will be given," and during the third one
he appears after a pause, saying : "I am Prudens, and I
give light."
In one respect, however, the new order was inferior to
the period when George Pelham acted as secretary. It
was often hard for Rector to understand the things he
was to write down ; especially he had difficulty in grasping
names, and this easily led to misunderstandings. In
many cases, therefore, G. P. must step in and help. His
free and easy mode of address makes an interesting con
trast to Rector's dignified tone of language, and adds to
the dramatic effect. When Professor Hyslop arranged
with Dr. Hodgson that he was to have sittings in December,
1898, to the number of four, all precautions were taken
to conceal who he was, and Rector, for want of another
name, called him, in his discussions with Dr. Hodgson,
" the four times friend." G, P.'s opinion about all this
secretiveness resounds in a half-sarcastic remark to
Dr. Hodgson at a seance in November : " How are you,
H. ? Imperator asked me to ask you whether I could
help you out a bit when your almighty friend arrives."
His occasional irritability, too, makes an effective con-
trast to the unchanging patience and gentleness of
Rector.
For the rest, the habits of the Phinuit period were not
entirely broken. It was still the practice that the sitter
brought articles which had belonged to the person with
whom he hoped to get into communication. But at the
same time the part played by these articles seemed to
have changed somewhat. Phinuit had been able to tell
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 227
a great deal about their deceased owners, but as often as
not they did not seem to be present. On the other hand,
spirits might manifest without being attracted by objects,
nay, even without being much acquainted with the sitters ;
an instance hereof was Dr. Rich's manifestation at one
of Sir Oliver Lodge's sittings with the Thompsons. It
may therefore be said that the articles at that time served
mostly to procure information about people, deceased or
living, who were not present.
Under the new reign they were valued for another
reason, namely, as a means of supplying their former
owners with strength to communicate. The Hyslop
sittings contain many instances hereof. " Can't you
give me something belonging to him ? " Rector asks at
the second seance, after the manifestation of Professor
Hyslop's father. At the fourth sitting the son will read
something to the father which occasions Rector to say :
" Give me something of his, that I may hold him quite
clearly." And when Rector, in January, 1899, is going
to make an appointment with Dr. Hodgson about future
sittings for Professor Hyslop, the following conversation
takes place between them :
" R. Canst thou not let us know at this point whether he
can meet us or thee . . either him or thee, as we desire to
prepare his father or friends for this
" Dr. H. Yes. It will be most convenient that I should
have the days on his behalf in his absence.
" R. Yes, Well, friend, then we would have thee arrange
at once for articles We would like some articles if
possible worn by his father when in the body, also some one
object handled a good deal by him we are desirous of
keeping him as clear as possible, friend."
On a later occasion Rector says to Dr. Hodgson that
Professor Hyslop's father will be " better able to recollect
his earthly experiences, through coming into contact
with his objects." This, no doubt, is only another mode
of expression for his " getting clearer." But of course
the demand for objects must create the suspicion that it
is the medium who wants them, in order to procure by
Q2
228 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
psychometrizing the information that is passed off as the
" recollections " of the communicators to prove their
identity. As regards Mrs. Piper, it ought, though, to be
pointed out that there are a number of cases where there
are no articles, but where the communicator is both
unexpected and uncalled for ; — such were, for instance,
Dr. Rich and " Aunt Sallie," not to speak of the large
number of ^ spirits that only appear for a moment to
disappear again. As a case where there was not even an
attraction to the sitters, may from a later period be
mentioned that of Isaac Thompson,^ who had had sittings
with Mrs. Piper in Liverpool in 1889-90. He had died
in 1903, and his son, duHng a stay in Boston in
December, 1905, had a single seance where messages
purported to come from his father, but which was on
the whole unsatisfactory. He was, however, obliged to
leave America immediately afterwards ; the medium, of
course, had not been told who he was. Two days later
Rector asked Dr. Hodgson : " Have you the influences
[i.e., articles] of the young man's father ? " There were
no articles, and Dr. Hodgson had never met Mr. Thompson
living. Nevertheless, the latter appeared, and succeeded
in identifying himself. But previously George Pelham
begged Dr. Hodgson to encourage him : " If he says
anything clearly, congratulate him, help him by words of
encouragement only, remember he has nothing or no one
except yourself to attract him here." Here it is plainly
stated what significance the objects and the sitters are
considered to have for the communication, but at the
same time, it is seen that everything does not depend on
them.
• •••••
The chief communicator at Professor Hyslop's sittings
was his father, Robert Hyslop. He was born in 1821,
and had lived on a farm in Ohio until 1889, when he moved
west into a neighbouring State. He returned to his old
1 Sir Oliver Lodge, The Survival of Man, pp. 267 seqq.
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 229
home, and died in the house of his brother-in-law, James
Carruthers, in August, 1896. He had lost his first wife,
Martha Ann, in 1869, and was married a second time, in
1872, to Margaret, usually called Maggie, who outlived
him. His children were by his first marriage Professor
James Hyslop and four more sons, and a daughter, and
by his second marriage one daughter. Besides, three
daughters and a son had died as children, the daughters
respectively four months, two years, and three years old,
the son four and a half years old. The two last men-
tioned, Anna and Charles, died at about the same time in
1864, when their brother James was ten years old. These
two are among the communicators. Other relatives who
communicated were Professor Hyslop's uncle by marriage,
James McClellan, who died in 1876, and the husband of
his father's sister Eliza, James Carruthers, who died in
December, 1898. The husband of another aunt had also
died a short time before the sittings, but did not manifest.
James McClellan's son Robert, who died in 1897, made
his appearance at several sittings. Of Professor Hyslop's
mother, who had been dead for thirty years, only a few
glimpses are caught.
Regarded from an evidential point of view, the mani-
festation of all these persons, each of them in an identi-
fying manner, no doubt presents a great interest. But
the strongest impression left upon the reader by these
sittings, which made Professor Hyslop himself a believer
in the communication of the dead, is due to the image
presented of his father there. In the extracts of the
dialogues given below it will, therefore, above all, be
attempted to produce an idea of this image, while with
regard to the remaining communicators, only a few
suggestive points will be indicated. That at the same
time many evidential statements will get in, goes without
saying. Mrs. Piper did not suspect who the sitter was ;
she did not even see him in her normal state. So small
a thing, say, as his being addressed as " James," is
evidential.
230 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
It is not until the second sitting, on December 24th,
1898, that we make the acquaintance of the old farmer.
The first seance had taken place on the day before, and
had made a very confused impression. Of the Hyslop
family, nobody but perhaps the brother Charles seemed
able to get in a word. Professor Hyslop said during the
sitting to Dr. Hodgson : " There's nothing with any
possibility in the whole thing except Charles." It
turned out ^at a later time, after the report had been
published, that it was the communicators from the
seances of an earlier sitter who had put in an appearance.^
Not even George Pelham could master the situation on
this occasion.
But the next day brought a change. " It was,"
Professor Hyslop writes, "as if the trance personalities
had consulted over the situation, and had become assured
of the right communicators." After some introductory
remarks by Rector, etc., the hand wrote as follows :
" James, James. Speak James. James, speak to me-
I am not ill. Oh, oh, I want you so much 1 want to
see you. I want to tell you everything They tell me I
will soon be all right and able to help you I heard you,
James, and I am glad. I heard you say something."
During the whole of the sitting Professor Hyslop kept
silent as far as possible, for fear of advancing statements
that might detract from the evidentialness of what
occurred in the trance. By degrees, as the sittings pro-
gressed, this caution, no doubt, grew less necessary ;
but quite openly he did not speak until the very last of
his twelve seances, in June, 1899. His taciturnity
makes a strange contrast to the father's yearning to
speak with him and difficulty in understanding his
silence. Not less oddly does the son's suspiciousness
and constant desire to obtain " tests " contrast with the
father's longing to talk of things which seem more im-
portant to him, above all of the opinions he held before
his death about a future life, and their relation to his
^ Proceedings Am. S.P.R., Vol. IV., pp. 3 seqq.
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 231
present knowledge. This disparity between the feelings
of the communicator and the sitter's object in experi-
menting is the tone which pervades both Professor
Hyslop's and many other sittings. Even if the com-
municator has fully grasped the aim of the sitter, it is
often difficult for him to conceive that it is, above all,
proofs of his identity that are wanted. But it enhances,
no doubt, the dramatic effect that such is the case.
Especially in the beginning, Mr. Hyslop was unable to
communicate for any length of time. He was replaced
for a moment by his son Charles.
" Ch. I will ask you if you remember brother Charles.
" Dr. H. Is that brother Charles ?
" Ch. I say yes. I do not want to be put out, because I
can help the rest to come. Don't send me away. Don't. I
want to tell you about father."
Charles seems to have been present already at the first
sitting ; and on a later occasion his father said : " Charles
saw the light and spoke of it before he came here, James."
Thus he really seemed to be justified in demanding that
they should not send him away.
After Charles the recently departed uncle Carruthcrs
appeared. He was sufficiently identified through his
mention of his wife Eliza, etc., but did not give his own
name. When Mr. Hyslop returned, he asked : " Do you
know Uncle Charles ? He is here." Professor Hyslop
did not understand whom he referred to ; but it turned
out at later sittings that it was the name Carruthers,
pronounced " Crothers," which Rector had been unable
to reproduce. He persisted in calling this uncle Charles,
or else Clarke ; only by degrees it dawned upon Professor
Hyslop who was meant when these names were given.
In the following part of the sitting Mr. Carruthers
discovered Dr. Hodgson and asked :
" Mr. C. You are not Robert's son ? You are not George
[Professor Hyslop's brother], are you ?
" Prof. H. No, I am not George.
" Mr. C. No, James, I know you very well, but this one
. . did you know the boys ? Do you know me ? "
232 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Dr. Hodgson conceived it to be Mr. Hyslop speaking ;
so he explained who he himself was, and profiting by the
occasion introduced the question of tests. He asked the
communicator to think over some striking incidents so
that his son might feel his presence by his recalling old
memories. Mr. Hyslop understood him very well :
" Mr. H. I thank you for helping me. I see better now,
and I will help him in every possible way to know all that we
both know. I could not hear very well before, but I under-
stand better now.
" Do you recall your lectures, and, if so, to whom do you
recite now ? I often hear them in my own mind Do you
remember what my feeling was about this life ?
" Prof. H. Yes, I do.
" Mr. H. Well, I was not so far wrong after all. I felt
sure that there would be some knowledge of this life, but you
were doubtful, remember.
" Prof. H. Yes, I remember.
" Mr. H. You had your own ideas which were only yours,
James.
" Prof H. Yes, I know.
"Mr.H. Well, it is not a fault "
After a short absence Mr. Hyslop returned, and Rector
said :
" R. We see thy father returning to thee He will
recall every fact he ever knew. He says he thought even
more, if possible, of you than all the rest. Do you think so ?
Tip ssk^
" Prof H. Yes, I do think so.
" Mr. H. It is my feeling, James, and why not express
it?
" Prof. H. That is right, father.
" Mr. H. Do you recall the fact of my being frank ?
" Prof H. Yes, I do.
" Mr. H. Sincerity of purpose . . . my sincerity. I
recall the struggles you had over your work well, very well.
Everything in life should be done with sincerity of purpose.
I know well all the difficulties which you encounter. But
keep on as you have been and you will master them ere long.
So many different ideas are not easily managed. But never
mind, do not be troubled about it, it will not last for ever, and
I am getting stronger.
" Prof. H. No, I will not trouble any more about it.
" Mr. H. Well, do you really think you understand ?
And I will come again with more clearness with the help of
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 233
this man who wears the cross [i.e. Imperator]. James, my
son, James my son, speak to me, I am going far away.
" Prof. H. Yes, father, I shall be pleased to see you again.
I shall have to go now.
" Mr. H. I am too far off to think more for you. J. H. H.
{R.} "
The initials are those of Professor Hyslop. In the
waking stage the medium whispered " Hyslop."
Professor Hyslop states that many of the expressions
used by the communicator were characteristic of his
father, for instance : recite, " I was not so far wrong,"
" you had your own ideas," "it is my feeling, and why
not express it." Mr. Hyslop had given his son James an
education in the hope of seeing him as a minister ; his
apostasy nearly broke his heart, but what reconciled him
to it was that he saw how " terribly in earnest " the son
was about his opinions. When discussing them the father
would always insist that the great thing was the " sin-
cerity of purpose." He had himself. Professor Hyslop
says, a remarkably clear insight, and saw well the intellec-
tual difficulties of his own faith.
The third sitting, two days later, was long and important.
Mr. Hyslop soon appeared.
" Mr. H. James, James, James, speak my son, to me. I
am coming, coming to you, hear . . hear Where are you,
James ?
" Prof. H. I am here, father, is that you ?
" Mr. H. Yes, it is I, James, I who is speaking to you. It
is I who is speaking to you.
" Prof. H. Yes, I am glad to see you or hear from you.
" Mr. H. I wanted to ask you before I got too weak of the
story I used to tell of a fire
" Where are my books, James ? I want something to think
over and I will keep quite near you."
This was taken to mean that he wanted an " article,"
and such a one was produced.
" Mr. H. I see clearly now, and oh if I could only tell you
all that is in my mind. It was not an hallucination, but a
reality, but I felt it would be possible for me to reach you.
" Prof. H. Do you remember more about that fire ?
234 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
((
Mr. H. Oh yes, the fire. Strange I was forgetting to go
on. Yes. Were the books destroyed ?
"Prof.H. No
" Mr. H. I wish you had them. I remember all. I am
thinking ..."
Here he was interrupted by Dr. Hodgson saying some-
thing to Rector, which led to the following remark by the
latter about the communicator :
" R. He^s a very intelligent spirit and will do a great deal
for us when he realizes where he is now and what we are
requesting him to do.
" Mr. H. James, are you here still ? If so I want very
much to know if you remember what I promised you. I told
you if it would be possible for me to return to you I would.
" Prof. H. Yes, I remember,
" Mr. H. 1 remember well our talks about this life
and its conditions, and there was a great question of doubt
as to the possibility of communication ; that, if I remem^ber
rightly, was the one question which we talked over. Will
return soon. Wait for me."
Professor Hyslop had visited his father in the beginning
of 1895, having been lecturing on psychical research in
Indianapolis a few days before. He had talked much
with the father on the subject, and found his attitude
towards it more receptive than he had expected. After-
wards he had written to him on his deathbed, and begged
him " to come fo him after it was all over." His step-
mother, on reading the letter, had asked her husband
what was meant by this, and he had answered : " Oh, I
don't know," an expression, Mrs. Hyslop says, which he
always used when he did not want to tell what was on his
mind. In the reply which was dictated to his wife and
written by her, he did not refer to it. A promise, then, he
had not made.
At this point of the sitting, Pnidens, as alluded to above,
made his appearance to improve upon the conditions for
communicating :
"P. I am Prudens, and I give light I am thy friend and
thou will call for me when thou dost need help. P.
" Prof. H. Thank you.
"P. Mr. H. [sic] returns.
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 235
" Mr. H. I feel better now, James. I felt very much
confused when I first came here. I could not seem to make
out why I could not make you hear me at first I would
like to hear you speak.
" Prof. H. Yes, father, free your mind, I shall listen and
understand.
" Mr. H. I will leave nothing undone, but will reach you
clearly and talk as we used, when I could speak independently
of thought. I have not yet found out why it is that I have
difficulty in speech."
This made Professor Hyslop think of his father's last
illness, which was probably cancer of the larynx but
thought to be catarrh only. He asked a question which
was misinterpreted by the father, and led to a touching
remark on his part :
" Prof. H. Do you know what the trouble was when you
passed out ?
" Mr. H. No, I did not reahze that we had any trouble,
James, ever. I thought we were always most congenial to
each other. I do not remember any trouble, tell me what was
it about, you do not mean with me, do you ..."
Professor Hyslop explained that he meant his sickness,
and the communicator now made an attempt to state
what had been his sufferings immediately before his
death. There is a noteworthy difference between this
subjective mode of characterizing illness, and Phinuit's
medical diagnoses in former days. But Professor Hyslop
wanted the reply " catarrh," or " throat-trouble," and
continued his questioning until the communicator grew
tired and must leave. Rector now said : " Friend, they
have sent thy brother here for a few moments to wait
thy father's return." Both Charles, and afterwards the
sister, Annie, spoke. Then the father returned. After
an unsuccessful attempt to give the name of a medicine,
he replied to a remark by Professor Hyslop about Annie
as follows :
" Yes. She has been here longer than I have, James, and
is clearer in her thoughts when she is trying to speak, but do
not feel troubled about it. I will in time be able to tell you
all. I want you to know that I am at this moment trying to
think of anything but sickness "
236 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Afterwards he began to speak of the conversations they
had held about the work of the son, but was interrupted.
A httle later " Uncle Charles " (Carruthers) put in some
words, and when it was once more the turn of the father,
he began by an introduction of himself which seems to
contain a jesting allusion to the fact that not all com-
municators were so clear as he was. Here for the first
time his naYne was fully given. Prudens, as has been
seen, confined himself to the abbreviation " Mr. H : "
" Mr. H. Yes, Hyslop. I know who I am And long
before the Sun shall set for you I will give you a full and
complete account of your old father, James. Keep quiet,
do not worry about anything, as I used to say. It does not
pay. Remember this ?
" Prof. H. Yes, father, I remember that well.
" Mr. H. That, James, wa.^ my advice always You
are not the strongest man, you know Remember, it does
not pay, and life is too short there for you to spend it in
worrying. You will come out all safe and well, and will one
day be reunited with us, and we shall meet face to face, and
you will know me well. What you cannot have, be content
without. 1 am a little weary, James, but I will return
and recall if possible, my medicine. He is taking me away.
" Dr. H. Yes, you will have one day more now with your
son.
" Mr. H. Oh, let me refresh myself and return to him.
Seek and ye shall find.
" Prof. H. Father, good-bye until to-morrow and I will see
you then.
" Mr. H. Come in to-morrow and see how I am getting
along. Do you remember my saying this to you ? "
All that Mr. Hyslop here claimed to have said while
living, was correct. He used to say : " Do not worry,
it does not pay," " hfe is too short," etc. It is curious to
see that now he says : " Life is too short there " ; just so
it behoved one who had survived death to speak about
life on earth. " Come in to-morrow and see how I am
getting along," were the words which he used to say to
his son when he visited him during his last illness.
Before the third sitting concluded, Dr. Hodgson had
given Rector to understand that it would be useful to
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 237
get Mr. Hyslop to think over some incidents to tell his
son on the morrow. The consequences of this intimation
appeared at the sitting of that day, where the commvmi-
cator took great pains to recall triviahties instead of
speaking only of those things that interested himself :
" Mr. H. James, James I am here. My thoughts are
clearer now 1 can see and hear better than ever. Your
voice to me does not seem so far away. I will come nearer
day by day and all that transpired between us whilst in
the body I will refer to, that you may be sure it is I. I
remember very well indeed and what I said. I was most
emphatic in my desire to know the truth and make you know
it if possible. [To Dr. Hodgson :] Are you with James ?
" Dr. H. Yes
" Mr. H. Well, will you help me to return later if I wish
to return ? If so, I will try and free my mind now.
" Dr. H. I shall be very pleased to take messages to your
son.
" Mr. H. Well, I will not feel troubled then, because I
have no further talks with him now. James, do you remember
the things I took out West ? "
After this followed divers tests. " I remember Himi
[i.e., Hyomei]," said Mr. Hyslop. This was the reply to
a question that had been put to him about his medicine
at the preceding sitting. He added : "I will give him
all of them." " All of them ? " Dr. Hodgson asked,
greatly surprised. Mr. Hyslop had taken a variety of
patent medicines, and he succeeded at this and later
seances in giving the names of a number of them. With
regard to many of them it required a careful investigation
on the part of Professor Hyslop to ascertain that his
father had in fact used them. " Do you remember the
little knife — the little brown handle [d] one ? Ask
Willie [his son] about the knife," and so forth. But he
soon reverted to the things which he had most at heart :
" Mr. H. I wish I could step in and hear you at college
and see all that disturbs you. I would soon right things there
for you. I had a will of my own . . . perhaps you will
remember.
" Prof. H. -Yes, father, I remember, but it was not a bad
wiU.
238 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
" Mr. H. I am glad you think so. But if the rest had
been hke you, perhaps I should not have refused them any-
thing."
Professor Hyslop writes that all this is very pertinent.
Afterwards he read aloud a series of utterances explaining
to the communicator the aim of the sittings. He said
among other things that he had not asked many questions
nor reminded him of any important facts, because doing
so would be interpreted here on earth as suggesting the
answers themselves. " Ah, yes ; I remember the diffi-
culties," Mr. Hyslop put in, and the son continued :
" You know it is the work of Christ, and you will re-
member that I always said that I wished to live the life
of Christ, even if I was not a behever." " Perfectly.
Yes. That is surely James," exclaimed the father. He
had not until now heard many words that could convince
him that he was really speaking to his son.
It was the object of Professor Hyslop to impart to his
father, by means of this statement, a more complete
understanding of the importance of the work that was
performed through the sittings. He understood it
entirely. The conversation went on in the following
manner :
" Mr. H. I will push from this side whilst you call from
yours, and from my boyhood to now I will recall everything
for you. Go on I am waiting.
" Prof. H. Yes, father, I have read all that I wished to
read, and I shall be glad if you can recall and tell anything
about a railroad collision.
" Mr. H. Yes, I think I will, all about it, but do not ask
me just yet, James, . . just yet."
One cannot help sympathizing with the communicator,
if he was not at that moment disposed to think of an old
story about a railroad collision. Professor Hyslop him-
self acknowledges in his report that his remark " shows
as much incoherence and irrelevancy as could ever be
charged to a discarnate spirit."
His next question : " Do you remember much about
your religious life ? " fell into better ground, and resulted
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 239
for one thing in the communicator asking : " What do
you remember, James, of our talks about Swedenborg ? "
This was interesting also for the reason that Professor
Hyslop himself did not remember that he had talked with
his father about Swedenborg, and did not even believe
that he had known anything of him. But when he wrote
to his stepmother about it, he got the following reply :
" He did talk with me about Swedenborg after you had
been there 1 remember the conversation on the
Sabbath day you were at our house at Delphi about
psychical research, and your father was the first to speak
of Swedenborg, In answer to something you said he
replied : ' that was Swedenborg 's belief.' I cannot
remember much of the conversation."
A little later the father said :
" I am glad you have not given me any suggestions for your
sake, but it has perplexed me a little, and at times seemed
unlike yourself. I faintly recall the trouble on the subject of
spirit-return, and I see and understand now."
The conversation was broken off before he had a mind
to leave. " He longs to remain with him," said Rector,
" but Imperator is taking him away." Afterwards,
Rector said to Dr. Hodgson : " Friend, thou knowest not
the food which lieth in store for thee regarding this new
communicator. He is all that is good and true,"
• •••••
In February, 1899, Dr. Hodgson had five sittings with
Mrs. Piper on behalf of Professor Hyslop, who was in New
York. In the interval Rector had several times talked
of Mr. Hyslop and of the desirability of giving him an
opportunity of communicating, " Our friend Hyslop is
anxious to see you many more times if you think that is
desirable," he said on January i8th, and a week later :
" We have a great and good work to do with this dear
spirit Hyslop a very high and intelUgent spirit is he,
and no barrier between them, viz., himself and son."
When he at last got permission to come, he seemed, how-
ever, a little disappointed that it was not " James," It
240 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
happens sometimes that " the machine " does register
fragments of conversations which are held apparently
among the spirits themselves, and which would not seem
destined to be reported ; it belongs to the mysteries of
the trance drama, and has not found any explanation.
Thus, the following speech by Rector must be conceived
to be addressed to Mr. Hyslop :
" R. Nc^ he is not . . but it is his friend . . very well.
No, not James but Hodgson. Yes . . come.
" Mr. H. Yes, friend, I am pleased to meet you. I wish
to speak to James, but I understand he is not here, but sends
you in his place "
Professor Hyslop had in January communicated the
result of his inquiry about Swedenborg to Dr. Hodgson.
The latter had told it to Rector, by whom Mr. Hyslop
had apparently been informed of it. His first words to
Dr. Hodgson referred to this subject :
" Mr. H. I am thinking at the moment of what I referred
to concerning Emanuel Swedenborg. I am glad to know that
he understood my meaning.
" Dr. H. Yes.
" Mr. H. Yes, now I wish to tell him about another
subject "
Mr. Hyslop had thought of divers incidents, and a
great portion of the sittings was employed in speaking of
them. On the whole his recollections seemed correct, but
in several cases it at first looked otherwise ; sometimes he
was only after long investigations proved to be right.
In the midst of his attempts to recall railway accidents
and fires, he reverted to his dearest memories. " I
often think of the long talks we used to have during my
last years in earth life of the possibilities of communication
with each other ." It is curious to see that it was
Rector, and not Dr. Hodgson, who would not tolerate
this. During a momentary absence of the communicator
he enforced on Dr. Hodgson the necessity of making him
recall his experiences, whereupon the latter told Mr.
Hyslop that " James would be very pleased "if he would
i
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 241
do so. " Yes, well then I may as well tell you all I can
remember," answered the father, almost as with a sigh.
" I begin to see what James is wishing me to do," he
added a little later.
Afterwards, however. Dr. Hodgson explained about the
trance and the writing, and this interested him highly.
" Indeed," he says. "Then, well then what I say is written
out for you ? " " Yes," Dr. Hodgson answered, and told
about Rector. " Oh yes, I begin to see," he interrupted
him, " but I can see Rector and hear him speak to me."
Dr. Hodgson went on explaining, and said at last :
" Dr. H. Well now, if James had said to you when you
were in the body, ' come with me and see a lady in trance.
Her hand is controlled by a spirit,' you probably would not
have believed it.
" Mr. H. No probably not.
" Dr. H. And if James had passed out of the body and
you were left behind, and if I came to you and said, ' Your
son James wishes to see you and talk to you,' and if I prevailed
upon you to come here, we will suppose, and you were in the
body with me and James where you are, talking to Rector —
what do you think James would try to remind you of ?
" Mr. H. Why everything that we used to do together of
course, friend, or in other words all. I say all, about his
earthly experiences, because he would like me to make sure it
was he.
" Dr. H. Exactly. Now that is just what he wants. He
wants . . .
" Mr. H. Well, it is just what he will get, then, because I
know perfectly well who and what I am, and I know what
would please my son James, and I will do all in my power to
prove that I am his father "
That Dr. Hodgson's explanation impressed the com-
municator appears from an utterance of his four months
later at a sitting by Professor Hyslop :
" I had no idea at first what you really wished of me, but
it all came to me when you [hand indicating Dr. Hodgson]
said ' Well how would you have James know it was you.' "
He had on this occasion endeavoured to recall the life
in their little family circle in the distant period when his
eldest son was one of them. He had not yet fully com-
prehended that knowledge of their joint experiences was
CD. R
242 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
not considered a conclusive proof of his being the one he
purported to be, because they might be conceived to be
read from his son's own mind.
The following sittings by Dr. Hodgson were mostly
devoted to test questions, as before, under a faint protest
on the part of Mr. Hyslop. " I have so many things to
say of far greater importance in a way," he once replied
when Dr. Hodgson thanked him for having told him
about " the medicine and gown and reading the paper
and so on." Not until the last of the five sittings, on
February 22nd, 1899, where Dr. Hodgson read aloud a
letter which he had received from Professor Hyslop, but
which was directed to the father, did he become fully
interested. His eagerness was so great that he interrupted
the reading and replied to the contents as if the son had
himself been present and talked to him :
" Dr. H. [reading] I remember when you took me to the
station to start to college. Do you remember how you felt
then?
" Mr. H. Yes I do, well. At the parting. It was one of
the most hopeful of my life. And do you remember what I
said to you then ? Write, as I cannot see you often. Write
often as I shall be with you constantly in thought, James.
This is the starting point in your life. Take advantage of it,
improve your time, let me know how you are getting on daily
and keep up a stout heart. Want for nothing. Keep to the
right, be just in all things. I shall be lonely enough, but I
look forward to the future."
Professor Hyslop writes that this is a very good repro-
duction of what his father said when parting from him.
The statement "want for nothing" is literally what he
did say, though his pecuniary circumstances did not
justify him in saying so.
When Dr. Hodgson had finished reading, the com-
municator said :
" God bless you, my son. Do you remember this expres-
sion ? [To Dr. Hodgson] I wish you to know that to me James
was all I could ask for a son, and when I left him or he left me
I was heart-broken in one sense, but I felt that I had much
to look forward to "
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 243
This was the only occasion, Professor Hyslop adds, on
which he ever saw his father shed tears.
On May 29th, 1899, began the second series of Professor
Hyslop's personal sittings, of which there were eight.
They are of much the same character as the first series ;
only the test questions played a still larger part than they
had done in the beginning.
Dramatically correct it is that while in Dr. Hodgson's
sittings the father had been the sole communicator, now
when Professor Hyslop was himself present a large number
of his relatives appeared. " I have not seen so many
here around the light for a long time," Rector remarked
already at the first seance. Perhaps this was the reason
why George Pelham turned up as assistant at the second
sitting ; he had not been present at any Hyslop sitting
since the very first. " Look out, H[odgson], I am here.
G. P.," he announced himself ; " Imperator sent me
some moments ago." He began at once to make himself
useful by improving Rector's reproduction, viz.,
" McAllen," of the name of Professor Hyslop's cousin,
McClellan. " Sounds like McLellen, G. P.," he inserts
in the midst of the writing. He did good service on
several occasions.
For the rest the seances went on in the former manner ;
recollections were mixed with references to matters which
more naturally filled the thoughts of the communicator.
Professor Hyslop obtained much evidence for the identity
of his father ; not the least valuable were his many
remarks about the dead and living members of his family.
More, perhaps, than anything, the manner in which they
were put forth served to convince him ; the selection
from the standpoint of the father and of nobody else ;
the faculty to distinguish between what the son must
know from personal experience, and what he could only
have been told about by others, etc., etc. The same
applies to the other communicators ; each of them speaks
from his own point of view; the different facts — for
R2
244 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
instance, their mutual relationship, or the length of time
that had elapsed since their death, are made use of with
a never failing precision ; they deal with names in
accordance with their habit in life, etc. Professor
Hyslop's cousin, Robert McClellan, turns up and alludes
to " Uncle Hyslop," viz., the father of the professor ;
or inquires after " Robert," and replies to the question
which Robert it is : " Rob Hyslop of course, which other
could I mean ? " Professor Hyslop's brother Robert
was always called Rob. The long deceased brother
Charles talks about the " new sister Hettie," i.e., his
half-sister. The sister Annie says : "I want to help
father — because I came here^first and long ago." There
are examples ad libitum. Here is no confusion, no con-
founding of the numerous members of the large family.
What confusion there is, is of a different type, and most
often explicable by the existing conditions — Rector's not
always correct perception of names, etc., the indisposition
of the communicators in the earthly sphere — or as failing
memory. As good as always the statements contained a
core of truth that pointed to misrecollection and not
ignorance being the cause of the error. Very often, too,
the confusion wa.s due to the sitter's deficient memory, or
to his misapprehension of what was alluded to.
With regard to the theories which eventually ought to
explain away his own existence, Mr. Hyslop continued to
display a certain impatience. At the third sitting he said
to the son :
" Shut out the thought theory and do not let it trouble you.
I went on theorizing all my earthly life and what did I gain
by it ? My thoughts only became more subtle and
unsatisfactory "
And he continued, with an allusion to the topic which,
as seen above, had been discussed between Professor
Hyslop and his father during the visit in 1895, at which
time " the thought theory " had also been the subject of
their conversation :
" Now speaking of Swedenborg. What does it matter
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 245
whether his teachings were right or wrong so long as we are
individually and ourselves here ? "
George Pelham, too, is a little sarcastic on this point.
At the sixth sitting he made his appearance and got a
short conversation with Dr. Hodgson :
i<
G. P. H[odgson], how are you ? I have just been called
upon to lend a helping hand. You see I am not wholly
isolated from you.
" Dr. H. Good, George, were you here last time ?
" G. P. For a few moments. I helped a man named
Charles [i.e., Professor Hyslop's brother] but I did not get a
chance to say. How de do, H.
" Dr. H. All right, George.
" G. P. I am going after the elderly gentleman, look out
for me.
" Dr. H. We will.
" G. P. Got those theories all straightened out yet, H. ?
" Dr. H. Pretty fairly.
" G. P. I am going. Auf Wiedersehen. G.P."
At this sitting Professor Hyslop asked his father to
tell something that had occurred before his own birth,
but which his two aunts might possibly remember. That
Mr. Hyslop understood well that the object was to exclude
the interpretation of telepathy from the son, appears
from his instantaneous attempt to comply with the
request :
" Mr. H. Will you kindly ask Aunt Eliza if she remembers
a young man named Baker, and if she recall going to a prayer
meeting one evening with him, and if she remembers who
teased her about him. And ask them both if they remember
Jerry.
" Prof. H. [to Dr. Hodgson] That's right.
" Mr. H. Perhaps you may know of this. If you do, say
so, James, and I will think of something which you do not
know."
Professor Hyslop had heard about Jerry, and his remark
to Dr. Hodgson referred to the latter's reading of the name.
One cannot help acknowledging the intelligence and quick-
ness of reasoning of the communicator, first in devising
something which could hardly be known to the son, and
then in comprehending the intimation of his knowing it
246 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
which the remark "That's right" implied. The story
about the yoimg man Professor Hyslop had never heard,
and his Aimt Eliza was disposed to deny it, but finished
by admitting its correctness, perhaps with the exception
of the name Baker. Several statements from the following
sittings were likewise verified by the aunts.
From first to last Mr, Hyslop was interested in the
son's work as a psychical researcher. This interest had
at the first sitting of the new series led to a curious
remark :
" Mr. H. Do not go more to that place. I am not there.
I am not there and you cannot find me if you go.
" Prof. H. What place is that, father ?
" Mr. H. With the younger men trying to find me. They
are not light and I cannot reach you there."
Immediately after his first sittings, Professor Hyslop
had instituted a system of experiments with some young
men in New York to imitate the Piper phenomenon. The
object was only to demonstrate it ; there was no medium
present. It seems to be to these experiments that Mr.
Hyslop alluded. Now, at the sixth sitting, he reverted
to the subject of psychical research:
" Mr. H. Do you remember our conversation on this
subject ? Do you remember your last visit with me ?
" Prof. H. Yes.
" Mr. H. It was more particularly on this occasion than
before.
" Prof. H. Yes, that is right. Do you know what I was
doing just before I made the visit ?
" Mr. H. Yes, I believe you had been experimenting on
the subject and I remember of your telling me something
about Hypnotism.
" Prof. H. Yes, I remember that well.
" Mr. H. And what did you tell me about some kind of
manifestation which you were in doubt about ?
" Prof. H. It was about apparitions near the point of
death.
" Mr. H. Oh, yes, indeed, I recall it very well, and you told
me about a young woman who had had some experiments
[i.e., experiences] and dreams.
" Prof. H. Yes, that is right.
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 247
" Mr. H. Which interested me very much, but yet you
were doubtful about hfe after so-called death. Remember
the long talks we had together on this, James ? "
The last sitting but one contains an interesting attempt
to elucidate a former misunderstanding. Just as the
uncle Carruthers had all the time gone by the name of
Charles, or of Clarke, thus Professor Hyslop's stepmother
had always been spoken of by a wrong name, viz., Nannie,
instead of Maggie (Margaret), The error had not been dis-
covered at once, because there was an aunt Nannie who was
often mentioned. But gradually it dawned upon Professor
Hyslop that the latter was always called " Aunt Nannie,"
while all that was said about " Nannie " without prefix
did fit the stepmother. It was George Pelham to whom
it fell to clear up the matter, and his demeanour is
very characteristic. It was on this occasion that he
alluded, with some bitterness, to the treatment he had
himself formerly been subjected to by the experimenters.
His reproaches, however, were undeserved as regards
Professor Hyslop, who had purposely abstained from
asking for the name. But Dr. Hodgson did not under-
stand this, and of his own accord introduced the
question :
" Dr. H. The name of the mother in the body has never
yet been rightly given.
" R. Has it been asked for ?
" Dr. H. The stepmother has been referred to in various
ways, for example as Hettie's mother. She has also been
called Nannie, but her name is not Nannie.
" R. I cannot understand it.
" Dr. H. There have been several references to incidents
which were true about the stepmother, but in referring to
these things, the name Nannie . . .
" G. P. Well, why do you not come and say give me my
stepmother's name and not confuse him [Mr, Hyslop] about
anything except what you really want ?
" Dr. H. I think that it has been asked for directly but
cannot be sure.
" G. P. Has it ? Very well, if she has a name you shall
have it.
" Dr. H. I have drawn special attention to it because I
248 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
thought it might help you to know that there seems to be
some peculiar difficulty about getting her name.
" G. P. I do not think so, H. ; but I do think he would
refer to it in his own way if let alone. I know how you
confused me, by Jove, and I don't want any more of it. I am
going to help him and he is going to tell all he knows from
A to Z. No doubt about it, H., no one could be more desirous
of doing so than he is."
Towards the end of the sitting George Pelham re-
appeared :
" G. P. I will speak for a moment, and say I do not see
any reason for anxiety about Margaret. He said I suppose
I might just as well tell you first as last and have done with it,
as James may think I do not really know. Go tell him this
for me. You see I got it out of him for you, H., but you no
need to get nervous about it, old chap.
" Dr. H. All right, George, thanks.
" G. P. Well, I cannot hold him any longer, and you will
get more later. I am glad to meet your friend even though
you fail to say anything about him. [To Professor Hyslop] I
am George Pelham, and glad to see you. I will stand by you
at all costs.
" Prof. H. I am glad to meet you, especially as I know
your brother in Columbia University.
" G.P. Yes, Charles.
" Prof. H. That is right.
" G. P. Good, I'll see you again. Auf Wiedersehen."
As may be seen, George has still some difficulty in
reconciling himself to the distrust shown towards him,
but has withal preserved the same combination of
geniality and humour which was characteristic of him
from the very first.
At the next sitting it was Rector who took occasion
to reproach the experimenters for their not always
rational proceedings. He had asked them already two
days earlier to give the communicator time to grasp the
meaning of their questions fully, and if he failed to answer
that day let him think it over and reply at the next
sitting. It was after this that Professor Hyslop asked
for some memories from the time before his own birth,
and that the father told of his sister Eliza, and promised
THE HYSLOP SITTINGS 249
to recall other incidents. At the ensuing sitting there
had been some confusion which Rector now explained in
the following manner : " He came with his thoughts
full of thuigs concerning his last memories at the meeting
before, and could not be made to understand that he
should speak of other things." It can hardly be denied
that Rector is right in his criticism, and that the investi-
gators, in fact, made things difficult for the communi-
cators. Their silence and distrust were a necessity ; but
the same hardly applies to their tendency to mix too
many things together, and to pass too quickly from one
matter to another, which Dr. Hodgson admits to have
been a fault already at George Pelham's first manifesta-
tions. It is true, however, as Mr. Hyslop once said in
another connection, that " what was their loss is our
gain " ; if it made it more difficult for the communicators
to solve their task, it has in return increased the value of
its solution for the research.
The above sitting was the last which Professor Hyslop
held. But the interest of the trance personalities in
procuring evidence did not stop there. A month later,
on July 6th, 1899, Rector reminded Dr. Hodgson that
there was much for Mr. Hyslop's son to do and look up
yet. " There must not," he said, " be any neglect of
duty in regard to this, viz., the broken wheel, the visit of
the sister to church, the prayer meeting in the barn,
the sunstroke of one of the McLellan family." Mr.
Hyslop himself put in : "I would say one word more
only. Some of the things date back many years.
Adieu."
It was mostly the incidents from the time before his
son's birth he alluded to. The event of the sunstroke
was not quite as old as that. But Professor Hyslop had
known nothing about the existence of the uncle of James
McClellan, David Elder by name, who had been afflicted
in that manner more than thirty years ago, and he had
great difficulty in finding the persons to confirm the fact.
The communicators seemed at last to have fully com-
250 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
prehended what kind of evidence was best suited to
refute " the thought theory."
The EngUsh Proceedings contain nothing more about
Robert Hyslop. But his ardour to assist in the work
of his son did not cool, and it is possible to renew the
acquaintance with his sympathetic personality else-
where.^
1 See below, p. 341.
CHAPTER XV
THE TUNOT SITTINGS ^
Immediately after the Hyslop sittings a new series
began, which covers a period of more than six years,
and in several respects makes a singular contrast to the
former. Mr, Hyslop was at his death an old man who
had suffered maich ; who had lived his life to its end and
gained its wisdom. Bennie Junot, the happy child of
rich and loving parents, at the age of seventeen finished
his earthly existence, to their deep grief, just at the
moment when he was leaving his boyhood behind him.
His father, Mr. Junot (pseudonym), who was a lawyer
and lived a thousand miles west of Boston, had heard of
Mrs. Piper, and applied to Dr. Hodgson, by whose inter-
vention he obtained about a year after his son's death
his first sittings with the famous medium. From thence
and until the death of Dr. Hodgson he came to Boston
once a year to find Bennie, most often accompanied by
his wife ; sometimes Bennie's brother Roble or sister
Helen were also present. In the intervals there were
sittings where Bennie came to Dr. Hodgson alone.
A great number of evidential statements are given in
this series, which contains altogether sixty-five sittings,^
and where several deceased relations of the Junots
appeared. With a few exceptions, however, no informa-
tion was given that had not been known at some time to
some members of the family. But many of the clearest
and most correct statements were made when Dr. Hodgson
was alone, so that they, at any rate, cannot be explained
1 Report on the Junot Sittings, by Helen de G. Verrall, Proceedings
S.P.R., Vol. XXIV., pp. 351—664.
"^ The Junots had seances also after Dr. Hodgson's death, but these
are not included in the report in the Proceedings.
253 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
as reading off the mind of a present person. The sittings
were commented on at the time by Mr. Junot with a
care that makes it easy to judge of the value of the
statements.
Mr. Junot was introduced to Mrs. Piper anonymously,
according to Dr. Hodgson's usual practice. A certain
amount of information was, however, deliberately given
to the communicator by the sitters. Bennie was not for
the sake of evidence worried by far so much as George
Pelham and Mr. Hyslop had been, although at a later
point he learned to comprehend the importance of giving
tests. Still less was he tormented through an unnatural
attitude of the sitters hke that which had in the beginning
troubled Professor Hyslop's father. The outcome of
this was a greater naturalness of the dialogue, and a
greater joy in the conversations on the part of the com-
municator. This no doubt contributes to impart to
the reader of the report a picture of a happy boy who
exults in being able to communicate with his dear ones ;
this is, perhaps, the strongest impression left from this
series of sittings — a boy, though, who seems to grow
before the eyes of the reader during the six years of the
acquaintance.
With regard to the question of " articles," the situation
seems to be the same as at the Hyslop sittings. They
were considered to be of a certain usefulness, but were
not indispensable. Mr. Junot had for his first sitting
brought some objects that had belonged to his son, but
they were wrapped in thick paper and lay until far into
the seance on a table on the other side of the room.
Later they were unwrapped and handed to the medium.
Several times in the course of the sittings Bennie alludes
to the import of such objects ; for instance : "I would
like something at this moment, dear, and it will help me
to keep clear"; "I only wish to get help so I can
remain " ; " my things help me very much."
The proceedings at the seances were the same as at the
Hyslop sittings ; Rector was acting as amanuensis at
THE JUNOT SITTINGS 253
the writing, while George Pelham now and again assisted
in other ways. In the deep trance the communication
took place exclusively by means of the hand, but in the
so-called waking-stage Mrs. Piper might, among her own
utterances, sometimes put forth something that seemed
to be a rendering of the words of a communicator.
Mr. Junot's first sitting took place on June i6th, 1899,
and commenced in the following manner :
" R. We see among our friends here a young man who
seems dazed and puzzled. He is not near enough to us for
us to give him much help at the moment but will be presently.
George is here with him and trying to urge him to come
closer
" B. I hear . . . I hear something. Where is my mother.
I want very much to see her. I can breathe easier now. I
want to go home now . . . And take up my studies and go
on. I see some one who is very hke my father. I want to
see him very much.
" Mr. J. Speak, Bennie
" B. I . . I want to see you awfully . . I Father
papa papa Pa Pa father I hear something strange . . can it
be your voice
" Mr. J. Yes, Bennie.
" B. I . . You hear me . . do you hear me I . .
wonder how I can reach you as I long to do. I heard all you
said . . . And I want to tell you where I am. [To Dr.
Hodgson] You are not my father ? "
Dr. Hodgson now explained that he had brought his
father for him that he could free his mind to him :
" B. And can I do so now ?
" Dr. H. Yes.
" B. Do you [know ?] the boys (?) and if they will be glad
to see me. I want to see father more than any one except
mama."
This was the introduction which was followed by
inquiries on the part of both. It appeared that Bennie
knew a great deal about things that had happened after
his death. He had apparently, as he continued to do,
watched the doings of those he loved on earth. Alluding
to a cow-boy named Harry, who had been his friend
254 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
on the farm where the family passed the summer, he
said :
" B. I want to know about Harry.
" Mr. J. He wrote your mother lately.
" B. I thought he sent the photograph to her,
;; Mr. J. He did, yes.
" B. I heard her say it looked like him Did Harry say
he would send me any message ?
" Mr. J . ^ Mamma wrote and told Harry that you had gone
away and left us.
" B. I wonder what he thought when he heard that. Give
him my love and tell him I will never forget the good
times we had together."
It is funny that Bennie thinks it likely that Harry
would send him a message, and very boyish that he
wonders what the cow-boy thought when he heard of his
death. Evidently he feels himself to be an interesting
person on account of that circumstance.
The next sitting took place on the morrow, and was
full of eager inquiries from Bennie, both about people
and about the things he had left. There were, however,
also put questions to him ; for quite exempt from the
desire of tests the father was not. But Bennie's way of
replying differs in a characteristic manner from that of
other communicators. For instance, Mr. Junot asked
him about a gold scarf-pin with which he had formerly
presented his son, and which he had now brought to the
sitting :
" Mr. J. What did I tell you about the pin ? Where did
I say the gold came from ?
" B. This came from . . Oh I never can say it. Co . .
Who was the man who went out there with you and . . I
had so many pieces of it.
" Mr. J. Do you mean the miner man ?
" B. Yes I do, but his name has gone from me completely."
The scarf-pin was made of a Colorado nugget presented
to Mr. Junot with a number of other nuggets from a
miner friend.
One of the matters that Bennie had most at heart was
his horse, which he wanted his sister to have.
THE JUNOT SITTINGS 255
" B. I want her to have my horse, want her to have my
horse . . I do very much.
" Mr. J. She's got a nice new horse of her own.
" B. I know it. I know it, and . .
" Mr. J. And your horse has been sent to be sold. I think
it has been sold.
" B. Has it . . I don't think so. I wanted her to have
it."
The horse had been sold but not delivered, and was
recovered by telegram. Mr. Junot had no more sittings
that time, but on July 6th, 1899, Dr. Hodgson asked
George Pelham whether there was any message from
Bennie. The latter now appeared himself, saying :
" B. Oh give my love, my dearest love to papa, mama
Roble and Helen.
" Dr. H. I will.
" B. Oh tell them I love them oh so much and I will do all
I can to help them know I live. I am so glad about the
horse. I do not know what to say."
It was only in a letter of July 12th that Dr. Hodgson
learned that Mr. Junot had stopped the sale of Bennie's
horse.
In the month of March in the following year Mr. Junot
returned, this time accompanied by Bennie's mother.
Bennie's joy was excessive :
" B. Dad Dad Dad yes I am coming dear It is I,
Bennie don't you know me.
" Mr. J. Yes Bennie, we hear you.
" B. I see mamma I am so glad so glad . . Oh do you
know all I feel for you
" Mrs. J. Bennie, I often think you come to me. Do
you?
" B. Come to you . . Yes indeed I do and mama there
is no doubt about it. I do see and know a great deal about
you and the things you do. I see all the pictures of myself
and all my own work."
Mr. Junot writes that they had a great many pictures
of Bennie lately placed in their rooms, also various
pieces of his handiwork. As to Bennie's mode of address
to himself, he states that he used to call him both " Dad "
and "Pa" and " Papa."
256 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Later Bennie asked to be left alone with his mother for
a little time. " I want to see you. Mamma, as I did
before I came here, and he [Dr. Hodgson] confuses me,"
he said to the mother, and a long conversation ensued.
Then the father returned, asking : " Do you want me,
Bennie?" and Bennie answered: "Yes I do. Oh I am
so glad. There never was a boy so glad."
And thus he goes on chattering, about " Grandpa
Junot," and the farm, his much beloved summer home,
and concludes with a gracious permission for Dr. Hodgson
to return : " Call him back once more and let him help
me." Bennie seems somewhat prone to regard this
stranger as a subordinate person. " Hello, dear dad, is
that you dear," he says a few days later ; " just you talk
to me and don't mind that man. Rector knows him."
In a short time, however, they became the best of friends.
Towards his parents Bennie was unceasingly grateful
and loving. At the next sitting he said, among other
things :
" I almost never see you but that you do not speak of me
and it makes me very happy But the one thing that has
troubled me more than anything since I came to this life is
the thought of dear mamma's feeling that she could do more
for me. I tell you now that she did all she could and nothing
could have kept me in the body. Do you hear me dear ..."
Before the parents left Boston, Bennie had got informed
of the import of the evidence he might be able to furnish.
He commenced their last sitting by clearing up something
that had become confused in the preceding one, and
afterwards turned to new statements, interposing : "I
know perfectly well what you want of me now, because
Rector told me." And he displayed certainly in the
subsequent part of the seance a remarkable energy to
satisfy their demands.
In the midst of the sitting the communication was,
however, on the point of being cut off too early. Bennie
ceased to speak, and Rector said to Dr. Hodgson :
" Friend, I think — if we could ask thee to go a little way
off for a time it might help us to keep him."
THE JUNOT SITTINGS 257
Dr. Hodgson now left the room, and Bennie returned :
" B. Yes dad here I am again I begin to think again.
And my head is getting clear since that man called George
went away with his father.
" R. [to Dr. Hodgson who had returned] That is thy father,
friend."
The little episode shows how George Pelham helped to
keep other communicators away. Apparently, Dr. Hodg-
son's father had come to speak to his son, and G. P. took
him away because his presence confused Bennie, who at
the time was the principal person. " What is it, H. ?
Want my help } " G. P. interposed on another occasion;
" I am here on Deck."
A few weeks after the Junots had left, Bennie had some
conversations with Dr. Hodgson. He learned to under-
stand what part the latter played as intermediary between
his parents and himself, and displayed now towards him
also the geniality of his nature. They talked together
about all sorts of things, memories of the past and the
actual situation. Bennie told about Rector and the band,
saying :
" You should see the kindly men who are teaching me how
to find the way to speak clearly. You would be as glad as I
am to do just what I am doing."
The friendship developed through the natural talk of
Dr. Hodgson to such a degree that Bennie even forgot
that they were not " on the same side : "
" B. Such fun as Roble and I used to have you never saw.
" Dr. H. Yes, I used to have jolly times myself, Bennie,
when I was a young fellow.
" B. Did you, did you have a brother like mine ?
" Dr. H. I have a brother about seven years younger than
myself. One of my chums when I was your age was my
cousin Fred. Ask Rector to introduce him to you, and he
can tell you about some of the fun we used to have.
" B. Well I will, that will be fine for me. He perhaps can
help me. Well I am awfully glad I know you. I love music
dearly, do you ?
CD. S
258 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
" Dr. H. Yes, I used to play the violin.
" B. Oh yes jolly. King of instruments.
" Dr. H. Yes.
" B. Well, we have great music here I tell you, can you
hear it at all ?
" Dr. H. No, my senses are too shut in,
" B. Well, that is too bad, can I do anything for you ?
" Dr. H. I fear not, thank you. I must wait till I get to
your side.
" B. Oh yes well that will be all right then won't it. Yes.
Well, I begin to understand better, I think. You are in the
body. That is it. All right. Now let me tell you all I can
before I get too weak."
At the close of the sitting Bennie asked : " What is
your real name if you do not inind telling me before I get
too far away." It appeared a little difficult for him to
catch it, but at last he succeeded. " H O D G S O N,"
he spelt out. " Good, I won't forget it," he finished the
sitting.
At a later seance Dr. Hodgson read aloud to Bennie
letters from Mr. and Mrs. Junot. His excitement was
touching. " Do you wonder I am happy ? " he asked
when Dr. Hodgson finished reading the letter from the
father. " A most worthy lad," Rector said about him a
little afterwards when he had gone away. Later he
returned and explained some matter to Dr. Hodgson, to
which the latter replied : " Yes, I understand." This
gained him the most unfeigned appreciation on the part
of Bennie :
" B. Well that is good. You must be pretty bright, I
think. Did you ever teach school ?
" Dr. H. Yes, I have taught.
" B. I thought so. Did you hke Algebra ?
" Dr. H. Yes, I did.
" B. I am glad to know it. I didn't."
It is really as if it were a boy fresh from college
speaking.
Neither did Bennie forget Dr. Hodgson's recommenda-
tion of the cousin Fred with whom he used to have so
much fun. At a seance by another sitter a fortnight
THE JUNOT SITTINGS 259
later he appeared for a moment, George Pelham acting
as secretary, and said among other things :
" B. I saw Mr. Hyde and I Uke him mighty well . . he
is a very bright fellow and has been helping me in many ways.
" Dr. H. Oh, you mean my cousin Fred.
" B. Yes he is your cousin Fred and the gentleman who is
speaking for me [G. P.] helped me to find him."
Noteworthy is Bennie's correct mention of Dr. Hodg-
son's cousin as " Mr. Hyde " ; he does not call strangers
by their Christian names. George Pelham's name, how-
ever, appears to confuse him a little ; he says " Mr.
George," and once " George somebody " (" George some-
body is very good to us here"). One might conceive
that it was the circumstance of his having the pseudonym
Pelham besides his real name which embarrassed him.
About Rector he once says : " the man they call Rector,
but he isn't Rector at all, he is somebody else." On
asking for Dr. Hodgson's name he said : " What is your
real name if you do not mind telling me," as if he were
accustomed to people being called by pseudonyms.
There is an inner unity in all this which is very realistic.
• ••••*
At the parents' sittings in the third year, 1901, it is as
if it were a somewhat more serious and grown-up Bennie
speaking. He is very anxious to reply to their questions
in a satisfactory manner, and altogether thinks more
about others than about himself. When the father on
being asked had admitted that they felt it was difficult
for him to remember names, he answered very earnestly :
" Well that is so. But I have hunted for you ever since I
left the body and I said if I could reach you in any way I
would do so, and here I am if I am imperfect."
And on the morrow he said to his mother :
" B. Several times I was too weak to answer for you
before.
" Mrs. J. Yes.
" B. Will you forgive my blunders and see me as I am
when I am not trying to whisper to you dear.
s 2
26o COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
" Mrs. J. Yes, Bennie, I think you do very well.
" B. But I try and that is all I can do dear "
As Mrs. Junot had asked why his grandmother never
came to them at the sittings, he answered penitently :
" But she has dear, only I fear I am a little greedy and take
up all the hght dear mother, but I do not mean to."
At a later point, in 1902, Bennie had conquered this
selfishness, ^is uncle Frank Clarke had during an
absence of his spoken with Mr. Junot, and when Bennie
returned, he said :
" Father, you realize I know the desire on the part of
Uncle F to meet you again. That is why I left so suddenly."
Immediately afterwards he gave his place up to another
communicator.
A kind of test that played a great part at the sittings
consisted in Bennie displaying his knowledge of the
doings of his family. Among other things he had several
times given veridical statements respecting their visits to
his grave — " the place where they laid my body," he
once called it. At a sitting in 1902 he said that he had
seen his father there, and Mr. Junot asked if he also
heard what he said. Bennie replied :
" Bennie, these are for you dear, and something else I
heard it quite clearly, tell Mr. H[odgson] you said, something
about Doctor, I think tell Doctor this."
The father had, standing by the grave, said aloud :
" Dear Bennie, these flowers are for you. We have not
forgotten you. Go and tell Dr. Hodgson this." Bennie
did not seem to realize that Hodgson and " Doctor "
was the same person. He mentions him also later as
Mr. Hodgson.
At the same sitting, in February, 1902, Mr. Junot asked
a question that led to a most interesting result. He had
had a negro coachman named Hugh Irving, who lived with
the family through the whole of Bennie's life. He was
discharged on account of drinking in August, 1901, and
died two months later of an unsuspected cancer, which
THE JUNOT SITTINGS 261
appears to have been the cause of his taking to drink.
When he left the Junots he took with him a dog named
Rounder, the loss of which worried Mr, Junot very much.
So, when he came to Boston next time, he asked Bennie
about him :
" Mr. J. Bennie, do you know where Hugh is now ?
" B. Oh yes I have seen him several times. What did he
go for ?
" Mr. J. Bennie, tell Hugh that we want the dog Rounder
back.
" B. 1 will sure and if you will wait for me a moment I will
attend to it now and you shall have him sure.
" Mr. J. Good
" B. See if I don't. Wait a moment and in a few days
you shall have him. I'll prove it dad."
Later Rector said that Bennie had gone away for a
moment. When he returned, he said :
" B. Yes, father are you still here ?
" Mr. J. Yes.
" B. You shall have him right away They will give
him back to you, he told me so and when I go out again I'll
ask him all about where he is You will have him sure.
This is my test to you dear father."
Afterwards Hugh himself appeared. He told that he
had lost Rounder, but promised to find him and send him
back. The next day the Junots had their last sitting for
that time, and then returned to their home. But on
April 2nd, 1902, Dr. Hodgson being alone, the following
scene occurred while Mrs. Piper was in the waking-
stage :
"Mrs. P. John Welsh has Rounder.
" Dr. H. John Welsh was round her ?
"Mrs. P. John Welsh has Rounder Tell this . . tell
. . tell . . tell . . John Welsh has Rounder.
" Dr. H. John Welsh is round her ?
" Mrs. P. has . . has . . It's I, Bennie, don't you see
me ? I, Bennie.
" Dr. H. John Welsh has Rounder. Yes, I understand.
" B. Tell Dad."
When Mr. Junot got this message, he set about finding
John Welsh, but without success. In the process, how-
262 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
ever, he found the dog in the hands of another man and
recovered him. John Welsh he could not trace, but at
last, in June, 1902, it occurred to him to ask the deputy
sheriff, and from him he learned that a neighbouring
working man, a great friend of Hugh Irving's and com-
monly known as " Old Happy," was registered to vote as
John Walsh. At Mr. Junot's request the sheriff visited
this man and asked him about the dog. He quickly
became suspicious and would not answer, saying : " What
are you asking about the dog for ? They have got him
back." Thus, it is very probable that he had really had
something to do with Rounder. The mention of him in
Mrs. Piper's trance by a nama which was almost known
to nobody, in connection with the dog that had been
taken away by his friend, is one of the circumstances that
it is most difficult to account for, either by mind-reading
or by clairvoyance.
The remaining sittings occupy as much space in the
report as the preceding ones, but it must suffice to quote
a fragment here and there in order to follow Bennie as
far as the editor has made it possible.
November, 1902.
Bennie arrives to beg Dr. Hodgson to take a message to
his father, and says afterwards :
" B. You have been so kind to me always I feel as though
I had always known you,
" Dr. H. I feel as if you were an old friend.
B. Well, I think I am."
<(
February, 1903.
Bennie had talked to his father about his friend Dwight,
and asks : " Does he know I am alive, or any [of] the
rest of the boys ? " It was not the first time that he
showed his anxiety to make his friends know that he was
not really dead. Above all, however, he thought of his
brother and sister, in whose progress and welfare he took
a deep interest :
THE JUNOT SITTINGS 263
" B. Dad Roble is doing finely again he takes to his
work hke a soldier and is looking forward to getting through.
Father he appreciates all only you give him time dear he is all
right.
" Mr. J. Bennie, tell me about yourself.
" B. About myself dear. Well dad I am progressing all
the time. I am very happy helping others, learning all I can
about this life and the philosophy of life in the body before we
enter this. I look over my life in the body and wonder what
I could have done more for you and mother dear. I wonder
if you understand all I feel for you both.
" Dad do you want me to give you some more tests ?
" Mr. J. Surely, if you can.
" B. I'll think up some things and tell you next
time. Now let me tell you one thing. Don't question the
right and wrong of my returning because there are no wrongs
in it.
" Mrs. J. Yes Bennie, it gave us a little anxiety as to
whether we were doing right in calhng you to us.
" B. I heard it all and it made me uneasy dear so thought
I would settle it for you."
His parents had on the evening before held a long
conversation on this subject.
In the following winter Bennie told Dr. Hodgson
several things about the doings of his brother and sister.
He had seen Roble try on a new suit, and to his great
amusement seen him paint his straw-hat green. Helen
photographed the pony, and she had got a red coat
which did not quite please Bennie. All this turned out
to be correct, except that Helen's coat was not red, but
blue with red lining. Bennie, however, knew well that
he was not infallible. " I may make some few mistakes,
I do not claim to do otherwise when I see so much."
On an earlier occasion he had said : " Objects sometimes
seem quite clear, then again they seem to lose their
shape completely."
February, 1904,
II
Roble. Bennie, do you remember now how your old
runabout was broken ?
" B. Surely I do & told you I would come here some day
and tell him [hand points to Dr. Hodgson] just how it happened.
Then you can't say I got it out of your mind see . . .
264 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
" R. Yes, I understand.
" B. George is always talking about this to me."
That George Pelham is very kind to the boy Bennie
appears from a little conversation with Dr. Hodgson at
a time when the latter was alone :
" B. Here is George perhaps you would better greet him
too.
" Dr. H. Yes, George, very grateful for all your help.
" G. P. Ju^t say good morning, that will do. You know
I understand. It is only to please the boy."
June, 1904.
On this occasion both Helen and Roble had come to
Boston with their mother. B^ennie talked to his sister
about his old horse that had " kicked up a good deal " :
" H. Yes he was very mean last summer.
" B. Very what Helen ?
" H. Mean.
" B. Do you mean that . . .
" H. He was ugly, and my driving worried him.
" B. Oh yes. I understand what you mean. But he is
getting old When I saw Helen it brought it all back to my
mind because I wanted her to have my horse."
The few sentences convey a vivid impression of Bennie's
affectionate mind, which even embraces his old horse
that five years previously he had been so anxious to leave
with his sister and not with strangers.
October, 1904.
" B. Dear Mr. Hodgson. I am glad to greet you. Please
tell my dear ones in the earthly world that I am still with and
watching over them. When I can conveniently do so I shall
tell about some of their doings since we last met. Do you
hear me ?
" Dr. H. Yes, Bennie. I have a letter from your father
[reads it aloud].
" B. 1 am delighted. Thank you. Now cannot you
help me by corroborating all that I have previously mentioned
that was clear ? it will enable me to avoid repetition."
Bennie speaks in a very grown-up manner on this
occasion. Likewise, he talked most seriously with his
parents when he met them the next time.
THE JUNOT SITTINGS 265
February, 1905.
" B. I heard you talking about my going a long way from
you, not so dad, I am growing all the time in knowledge of this
new life, but not that I shall leave you . . .
" Mrs. J. No, but, Bennie, in your thought to care for us,
you must not do anything to prevent your own progress.
" B. No, how could I, dear mother ? there are laws
connected with this life and its conditions which enable me to
progress constantly, yet while progressing I am better able to,
if possible, to help you than otherwise."
But he can also speak of things that amuse him. The
following episode is rather curious :
" B. Tell me who the fellow was in Roble's room last
night.
" Mrs. J. I shall ask.
" B. Such fun I never heard. He was playing on a banjo.
He and another fellow were there together playing and one
sang something like Dellia.
" Dr. H. Deha ? Deha ?
" Mrs. J. Bennie, perhaps you mean Burdelia, Budelia ?
It is a song that the boys sing.
" B. Yes I think so. Say it again it sounded so queer to
me.
" Mr. J. It's Obedeha.
" B. I heard O I heard steel ing I heard Delia I heard
Roble laughing merrily. He and . . do you know Bert ? "
A few months afterwards Bennie was alone with Dr.
Hodgson and reverted to the funny song.
May, 1905.
" B. Good morning Mr. Hodgson will you give my love to
all at my home and ask about the evening I heard that
song.
" Dr. H. The boy or young fellow with Roble did sing that
song about Bedelia, and so on. I forget just how it goes.
" B. Well I heard him and I heard him say something
about stealing her . . .
" Dr. H. Yes, I think that's right.
" B. Well it was so queer to me I laughed and laughed to
hear him say it "
Roble Junot states that he and his friend Bert had
very often sung the song " O, Bedelia, I've made up my
mind to steal you," together, but not on the evening
266 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
mentioned by Bennie. On that night he was with a
party of young people, and they played the piano and
sang, but did not sing Bedelia. Bennie thus appears to
have confounded different recollections, or rather to
have been mistaken with regard to the time when he said
" last night."
In November, 1905, the Junots for the last time met
Bennie in the presence of Dr. Hodgson. One of the last
things he said to them was the following : " When you
are called to this beautiful world I shall be the first to
greet and help you — I can only give you glimpses of
what it really is, but I am glad to do even this." Bennie
is right when he says that it is only glimpses he has been
able to give of the world in which he appears to live ;
it does not seem possible to make it conceivable to earthly
people. When once Mr. Junot replied to a statement by
the son about something referring to the latter's own life :
" All right, I understand," Bennie answered, no doubt
with good reason : " Well, I am not sure that you do."
As, moreover, everything of that kind is unverifiable, I
have left it out as far as possible. In one respect only it
is possible to test the value of statements about " the
beyond," namely, when Bennie speaks of the departed
whom he meets, either those who have preceded him, or
those who have died after his own demise. Of this may
the same be said as of his statements about his own
earthly existence, or about the things he pretends to see
occurring on earth after his death. On the whole, they
agree with facts, and the occasional mistakes are easily
accounted for through the circumstances attending the
communications.
To Bennie himself the words seem to fit which Dr.
Hodgson wrote about George Pelham ; what there was of
change was not a change of disintegration, but of evolu-
tion and growth.
CHAPTER XVI
THE HODGSON-CONTROL
As fate would have it, the next communicator of con-
sequence who purported to communicate in the Piper-
trance was Dr. Hodgson himself,^ As previously men-
tioned, he died suddenly in Boston on December 20th,
1905. On December 28th a Hodgson-control already
manifested through Mrs. Piper, and in the next time
hardly any sitting passed entirely without him. In the
beginning he spoke only a few words every time, but
by degrees he seemed to grow stronger, and made, as
formerly George Pelham, a convincing impression upon
most of his surviving friends.
But among these were also some of the most sceptical
psychic researchers, as Professor James and Professor
Newbold. And there was with regard to the Hodgson-
control the special ground for scepticism that the medium
had known the living Hodgson, and during a long series
of years seen him constantly. It would therefore seem
that she had special qualifications for personifying him ;
one could never with regard to the evidential information
produced by him feel entirely secured against the possi-
bility that he might have told it to her during their inter-
course. It is true that the latter thing was thought very
improbable ; the medium and the experimenter had only
used to pass a few moments together before the trance
began, and Dr. Hodgson had not at all been on terms of
intimacy with Mrs. Piper ; on the contrary, he seems to
have adopted a purely business tone with her. More to
the point, perhaps, was the contention that she might
• Report on Mrs. Piper's Hodgson-control, by Professor William
James, Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XXIII., pp. 2 — 121.
268 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
know him subconsciously from his demeanour during the
trance and from his numerous conversations with the
communicators. The possibiUties of this were wide-
ranging. To quote Professor Hyslop^:"The scientific
man will attach less value to what purports to come from
Dr. Hodgson through Mrs. Piper than if it came from
some one else."
But how; right this may be in the abstract, it will hardly
in the individual cases be difficult to decide whether there
is any probability of the normal Mrs. Piper having been
told about the matter in question by Dr. Hodgson. The
same, of course, applies to his utterances to the trance-
personalities. A few things, he is known to have talked
about to Rector, etc., but with regard to the greater part
of the statements given after his death this must be con-
sidered quite out of the question. Besides, such an
application of casual knowledge would not at all agree
with the usual proceedings in the Piper-trance, where
there is rarely made use of anything but what the drama
requires. Nay, matters which are well known to Mrs.
Piper, the trance-personalities may seem ignorant of.
For instance, the Hodgson-control made a mistake with
regard to the name of the lady who assisted Dr. Hodgson
in his office, and did not, when some time had elapsed,
remember that of the street where he had lived, though
Mrs. Piper knew both things very well.
As to the characterization given of Dr. Hodgson through
the trance-communications, the medium's knowledge of
his personality might sooner be considered a ground for
scepticism. At the same time, it must be questioned
whether a knowledge of him as manager of the sittings
could be of much use when he ought to be presented in
his relations with his friends. Towards these he had been
both gay and full of feeling, and had in return been much
valued and loved by them. That his relations with Mrs.
Piper were not very cordial appears from the circumstance
that she was at one time disposed to break off the connec-
1 Journal Am. S.P.R., Vol. I., p. io6.
THE HODGSON-CONTROL 269
tion altogether. After all, the art of transforming
Dr. Hodgson as she knew him was perhaps — if it were art
— not smaller than to create Bennie and Mr. Hyslop and
George Pelham on the basis not of her own but of other
people's knowledge about them.
The first persons who had sittings with Mrs. Piper in
the hope of finding Dr. Hodgson were some of his women
friends. One of them was so overcome by the first
meeting with him that she fainted after the sitting had
finished. Professor James says about his first appear-
ances that they were " characteristic enough in manner,
however incomplete." Hodgson was very lively, though
somewhat worried by the difficulties of communication,
which were greater than he had expected. Respecting
this he says in January, 1906 :
"I am Hodgson ... I heard you call — I know you —
you are Miss Pope. Piper instrument. I am happ}^ exceed-
ingly difficult to come, very. I understand why Myers came
seldom. I must leave "
And on another occasion :
" Remember, every communication must have the human
element. I understand better now why I had so little from
Myers."
As an instance of his conversation may be quoted the
following from a sitting on January 30th. The sitter,
Mrs. M., said :
" Mrs. M. Do you remember our last talk together, at N.,
and how in coming home we talked about the work ?
" R. H. Yes, yes.
" Mrs. M. And I said if we had a hundred thousand
dollars —
" R.H. Buying Billy ! !
" Mrs. M. Yes, Dick, that was it — ' buying Billy.'
" R. H. Buying only Billy ?
" Mrs. M. Oh no — I wanted Schiller too. How well you
remember."
Mrs. M., before Dr. Hodgson's death, had had dreams
of extending the operations of the American branch of
the Society for Psychical Research by getting an endow-
270 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
ment and possibly inducing Professor Newbold (Billy)
and Dr. Schiller to co-operate.
A few months later Professor Hyslop had sittings, where
Hodgson manifested and at great length discussed their
common work and the plans that were cut short by his
death. As an instance, the following conversation on
April 25th^ may serve ; it has a special interest because
Professor X Hyslop knew nothing about the matter which
the communicator alluded to :
" R. H. Do you remember a man we heard of in — No, in
Washington, and what I said about trying to see him ?
" Prof. H. What man was that ?
" R. H. A light.
" Prof. H. A real light ? "
" R. H. Yes, I heard of him just before I came over.
Perhaps I did not write you about this."
Dr. Hodgson had not written about any such discovery.
But in June, 1906, Professor Hyslop was in Washington,
and accidentally met a gentleman who mentioned that
he had written to Dr. Hodgson a short time before his
death about a man there who showed signs of mediumistic
powers.
From a sitting that Professor James held on May 21st,
1906, may be chosen the following small episode which
at the time impressed the sitter much, though he adds
that Mrs. Piper Jtiight have heard the anecdote :
" R. H. Do you remember — what is that name, Eliza-
beth Putnam ? She came and put her hands over my
eyes and said ' who is it ? ' I said ' well it feels like El. Putnam,
but it sounds like — '
" Prof. J. I know who you mean.
" R. H. Do you realize how difficult it is ?
" Prof. J. Yet you were just at the point of saying it.
' R. H. Dr. — not Putnam — Dr. Bowditch !
" Prof J. That is it.
" R. H. Sounds like Dr. Bowditch."
Dr. Hodgson, though, had of course said the reverse
of what is told here, namely " it feels like Dr. Bowditch,"
a gentleman who weighed nearly 20olbs. Besides, the
1 Reported in Journal Am. S.P.R., Vol. I., p. 106.
THE HODGSON-CONTROL 271
little girl's name was not Elizabeth, but Martha Putnam ;
when Professor James objected that the first name was
wrong, Hodgson attempted " Annie — Mary — Mamie,"
and finished by saying : " Well, it has gone from me at
the moment. That is less important than the thing
itself," a remark which it is not difficult to subscribe to.
In a series of sittings by Mr. George B. Dorr, Hodgson
gave a detailed and in every respect characteristic de-
scription of his visits at the sitter's place, " Oldfarm."
Here Mrs. Piper's possible knowledge of Dr. Hodgson's
experiences seemed a too extravagant assumption, and
the reporter can as alternative to the spirit theory only
suggest that of reading of Mr. Dorr's mind.
But the most interesting sittings from Professor
James's report are probably those by Professor Newbold.
Here Hodgson, among other things, reverts to his favourite
subject, psychical research, and his former discussions on
it with the sitter. For instance, on July 7th, 1906 :
" R. H. You said you could not understand why so many
mistakes were made, and I talked you blind, trying to explain
my ideas of it You laughed about the ungrammatical
expressions and said, why in the world do they use bad
grammar ?
" Prof. N. Yes Dick, I said that.
" R. H. I went into a long explanation and attributed it
to the registering of the machine. You were rather amused
1 find now difficulties such as a blind man would
experience in trying to find his hat. And I am not wholly
conscious of my own utterances because they come out
automatically, impressed upon the machine I impress my
thoughts on the machine which registers them at random
I understand so much better the modus operandi than I did
when I was in your world."
Later in the same sitting Hodgson reminded Professor
Newbold of some experiences which the latter, however,
did not recollect. Which of them was right can hardly
be decided. The characteristic point is that Hodgson,
in spite of all denials on the part of the other, clung to his
opinion. At last he said :
" I find my memory no worse than yours in spite of the
fact that I have passed through the transition stage — state.
272 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
You would be a pretty poor philosopher if you were to forget
your subject as you seem to forget some of those little memories
which I recall, Billy ! "
It cannot be denied that the deportment of this com-
municator is somewhat more superior when the sitter
will not bow to his opinion than that of poor Phinuit
when he was unable to satisfy the inquirers. In a cor-
responding tone of language he spoke later, after Mrs.
Piper's sojurn in England, about the English investi-
gators, Sir Oliver Lodge and Mr. Piddington. A friend
of Dr. Hodgson's, Miss Bergman, had a sitting on
January ist, 1908, at which, among other things, she
asked Hodgson whether he knew that she had been at his
lodgings. It was after the death of Dr. Hodgson that
she had been there, but the communicator naturally
believed that she referred to a visit during his life-time.
So he asked whether they had had tea together or whether
she had visited him to read something ? When he at
last was informed of the real facts, he exclaimed : " Capital,
that is good. Lodge and Piddington consider it good
when I don't remember what did not happen ! " The
irony of this is not bad.
That Hodgson, like Bennie and other communicators,
is represented with the faculty of peering down to the
living appears, for instance, from a passage from the
conversation with Professor Newbold :
" R. H. I heard you and William discussing me, and I
stood not one inch behind you.
" Prof. N. William who ?
" R. H. James. He said he was baffled but he felt it was
I talking — at one moment — then at another he did
not know what to think. He said I was very secretive and
careful.
" Prof. N. I don't remember his saying so."
Professor James writes, " I remember it," and states
that the above is a perfectly true description of his con-
versation with Professor Newbold after his sitting with
Mrs. Piper on June 27th, 1906.
THE HODGSON-CONTROL 273
It is hardly necessary to quote more from the com-
munications from Hodgson to obtain an impression of
Mrs. Piper's reproduction of him. There were things
that disappointed the experimenters ; the communicator
did not try to give them the key of a cypher employed by
Dr. Hodgson, and he did not seem to recognize some
English friends who were introduced at sittings while
Mrs. Piper was in London. But these and similar defi-
ciencies can hardly alter the value of the positive results
that were obtained. The latter are in his case, as in that
of the other communicators, a phenomenon which,
explicable or inexplicable, does not cease to exist because
other things call for criticism. Hence, I have in the
preceding review dwelt especially on the positive matter.
Only if it be possible to make the whole fall into unity by
elucidating the good results through the bad ones, it
becomes a necessity to omit nothing. Such was the case
with regard to the automatic writings of Mrs. Verrall
and Mrs. Holland, which when they were looked at as a
whole proved to be wholly due to the automatists them-
selves, or to their supernormal impressions about living
people. A similar unity of conception is unattainable in
the Piper case. In whatever way the deficiencies and
the improbabilities of the communications be conceived,
there will always remain large quantities which cannot
be explained away by referring to them. To present an
idea of the nature of those quantities has been the object
of the preceding extracts.
CD.
SECTION VI
Mrs. Piper's Mediumism. III. Experiments
CHAPTER XVII
cross-correspondences
In the autumn of 1906 Mrs. Piper, by arrangement
with the Society for Psychical Research, for the second
time set out for England. In November and in the
beginning of December a series of sittings were held at
the house of Sir Oliver Lodge at Edgbaston, near
Birmingham, under his own direction. Afterwards the
medium came to London, where the experiments were
directed by Mr. Piddington during three months, and
afterwards by Mrs. Sidgwick until May 8th, 1907. A
few sittings by Sir Oliver Lodge ended the medium's
sojourn in England.
The sittings which will be mentioned below were
devoted to experiments, and are for the greater part
reported by Mr. Piddington in his paper, " A Series of
Concordant Automatisms."^ They are, apart from the
results of the experiments, of a special interest because a
principal part in them was played by Myers, who had
otherwise very seldom manifested through Mrs. Piper.
According to Hodgson's statements in January, 1906, it
seems to have been the difficulties of communication that
kept him back. It has, at any rate, a dramatic fitness
that it was the death of Dr. Hodgson which apparently
caused a change, so that he was henceforth eager enough
to assist in the work. Hodgson's own anxiety to secure
his co-operation appears from the following utterance to
1 Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XXII., pp. 19 — 416.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 275
Sir Oliver Lodge at the latter's last sitting before Mrs.
Piper went up to London ^ :
" Myers has had very little opportunity or encouragement
to prove his identity it should be given him in any case,
as he is intelligent, clear, and understands the necessity of so
doing."
Sir Oliver Lodge had been much taken up with other
communicators, especially his late friend and neighbour,
Isaac Thompson, whose family was anxious to communi-
cate with him. He himself admits that he had neglected
Myers. Any great respect for the alleged discarnate the
experimenters cannot be said to display. At a later
sitting Mr. Piddington interrupted Myers in an important
matter to inform him that a sitter — who had nothing to
do with their experiment — had arrived. " Do I under-
stand that I am to go ? " Myers asked, with evident sur-
prise, though with his usual gentleness. In a very
different tone had George Pelham on a similar occasion
exclaimed : " Sorry to be put out in that way, Vance,
but I suppose I shall have to swallow it." The informal
way in which the communicators were treated affords
us at any rate an opportunity to admire the manner in
which their reaction by the treatment is characterized.
In London, however, Myers got plenty to do ; the
experimenters here were, if anything, prone to overwork
him. The main object they had proposed to themselves
was to obtain cross-correspondences, or mutually corre-
sponding things, through the different psychics. They
were, as we know, inclined to believe that Frederic Myers
had for a long time produced such correspondences in the
automatic writings of Mrs. Verrall and Mrs. Holland.
They intended now to make the Piper-Myers undertake
definite tasks in the same direction, and then to watch
the eventual results in the different scripts.
Both Myers and Hodgson were very willing to try such
experiments. But nothing indicates that Myers had
1 " Report on Some Trance Communications," by Sir Oliver Lodge,
Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XXIII.. pp. 246 seq.
T 2
276 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
tried them before. On a certain occasion, on the contrary,
he expressed some distrust with respect to their evidential
value. Mr. Piddington had spoken of the importance
the investigators attached to them. Myers could not
understand why they did so; for, said he, "if you estab-
lish telepathic messages, you will doubtless attribute all
such [i.e., cross-correspondences] to thoughts from those
living in the mortal body." Mr. Piddington, however,
had a special reason for praising the cross-correspon-
dences ; he had in a " message," composed in Latin,
asked Myers to produce a kind of complementary corre-
spondence, and intended by his utterances in favour of
the simple ones to protect t-he contents of this message
which Myers had not yet shown symptoms of under-
standing. Myers seems to have accepted his opinion ;
at any rate, he displayed immediately afterwards an
increased eagerness to produce cross-correspondences.
" Myers is specially interested in taking messages," said
Rector a few days after his above conversation with
Mr. Piddington. But his very rational remark during
that conversation proves both that the cross-correspon-
dences were no invention of his, and that he had no
notion of the complementary ones. Rightly it has been
argued that the Myers who spoke in such a way could
not be identical with the personality that had inspired
Mrs. Verrall's and Mrs. Holland's writings during the
preceding years.
This, however, cannot influence our conception of the
Piper-Myers, as we found no cause to assume that the
so-called cross-correspondences in Mrs. Verrall's and Mrs.
Holland's scripts were other than impressions which one
of them obtained about the other. Apart from Dr. Hodg-
son's attempt with the "pass-word" stahdelta which, at
any rate, left traces in Mrs. Verrall's script, the pheno-
menon in fact did not begin until Mrs. Piper's sojourn in
England in 1906 — 7. It is on the performances from
that time that the judgment of its signification must be
based.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 277
The first attempt at these experiments was made
at one of Sir Oliver Lodge's earliest sittings, on
November 15th, 1906.^ Mr. Piddington had, as said
before, been in Boston in the spring of that year in con-
sequence of Dr. Hodgson's death. He had then had
sittings with Mrs. Piper, and among other things to the
Hodgson-control mentioned Mrs. Holland, about whom
Dr. Hodgson, living, never knew anything. Thus it is
natural that Hodgson immediately thought of this lady
as the recipient of a cross-correspondence, while Myers
chose Mrs. Verrall.
I quote the dialogue with only a few omissions. After
an introduction by Rector first Myers and afterwards
Hodgson appeared :
" M. Well well Lodge. I am Myers.
" Sir 0. Glad to see you
" M. I wish you to remind me of something.
" Sir 0. What we are anxious to get is correspondence
messages between this medium and others.
" M. Good. I understand.
" Sir 0. Well, will you now give one to some one.
" M. Very well, give me a message.
" Sir 0. Suppose you say ' Julius Caesar.' Can you send
that?
" M. Yes spell it [Sir Oliver spells.] I will give
it her within five minutes.
" Rector. He has gone.
" M. Here I am I have given your message to Mrs. Verrall,
and she will record it in black and white within a few hours.
" R. H. Hello Lodge. I am not dead as some might
suppose. I am very much alive. Speak to me.
" Sir 0. Are you interested in the cross-correspondences ?
Could you send something to other communicators [i.e.,
automatists] ?
" R. H. I am very, and think it the very best thing.
" Sir 0. Could you send one now to one of the mediums ?
" R. H. I will go to Mrs. Holland.
" Sir 0. What will you send ?
" R. H. St. Paul I will give it to her at once."
Afterwards he said : " Give my love to Piddington and
1 Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XXIII., p. 227 seq.
278 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
tell him I shall try cross messages." On the morrow he
announced that "St. Paul " had been given.
Such was the commencement ; the result was not very
satisfactory. " Julius Caesar " did not appear in any
automatic script. As to " St. Paul," Mrs. Holland
wrote :
December '^ist, 1906.
"II Peter^I 15 [Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be
able after my decease to have these things always in
remembrance]."
This was followed by quotations from St. John and
St. James, without references, and finally the words :
" This is a faithful saying," a^phrase which occurs several
times in St. Paul's epistles.
Miss Helen Verrall wrote :
January 12th, 1907.
" The name is not right robbing Peter to pay — Paul ? "
February 26th, 1907.
" You have not understood about Paul ask Lodge."
If all this be due to anything but chance, it seems to
mean that Mrs. Holland had written Peter instead of
Paul, and that an attempt to correct the mistake was
given through Miss Verrall's script.
The fate of these first two cross-correspondences was
shared by many in the following period. The Julius
Ccesar experiment is an instance of the numerous cases
where a cross-correspondence was agreed upon, nay in
the opinion of the communicators accomplished, but
where no result appeared in the automatic writings.
St. Paul is a case where it is impossible to feel sure that
the productions are really connected with the announced
message. The difficulty of decision is in this and similar
cases increased through the long space of time that may
elapse between the announcement and the production of
the cross-correspondence. That a certain time must pass
before a delivered message could be written down, the
communicators no doubt seemed to expect. For instance.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 279
Myers said above that he had given " Julius Caesar " to
Mrs. Verrall, and that she would record it within a few
hours. This, however, was his first sanguine conception
of the matter. On the next day he added : " I have not
succeeded in getting it through to Mrs. Verrall, but I will
persist." On a later occasion, on June 2nd, 1907, he
said, also to Sir Oliver Lodge, about some cross-corre-
spondences : " These I propose to work on until they
appear through Mrs. V." It is a mode of expression
that recalls Dr. Verrall's experiment, where it had
certainly been necessary to work assiduously before any-
thing akin to a result appeared in the script of his wife.
The faculty of the communicators to impress the auto-
matists does not seem to differ much from that of the
living.
Besides the unsuccessful and the doubtful cross-corre-
spondences there are, however, a number of cases which
may be characterized as successful, great enough to make
it impossible to ascribe the whole phenomenon to chance.
From these I propose to reproduce the clearest and most
instructive. The extracts will be made as short as possible,
but accessories of special interest must sometimes be
cited at length. The cases are given in the chronological
order of the first appearance of the cross-word at the
Piper-sittings.
Laurel Wreath.
On January 2nd, 1907, Myers said through Mrs. Piper :
" I said wreath to Mrs. Verrall. Wreaths."
Rector added that he felt that the word wreath had
been received by Mrs. Verrall. On January 21st this
lady was herself present at the sitting with Mrs. Piper,
and Rector asked her : " Did you understand about the
wreath ? " She answered in the negative, and Rector
perceived his indiscretion and said two days later to
Mr. Piddington : " We are rather sorry we mentioned
wreath before her, but we did so inadvertently."
28o COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
On February 6th Mrs. Verrall wrote automatically as
follows :
" Laura
" Apollo's laurel hough
" Laureatus a laurel wreath
" perhaps no more than that [drawing of laurel wreath]
" Corona laureata has some meaning here
" with laureate wreath his brow serene was crowned—
On Febriiary 27th Myers said through Mrs. Piper :
" I gave Mrs. Verrall Laurel wreath."
On March 4th he added :
" When I gave Mrs, V. the message about Laurel wreath I
purposely said Laurel so as to make the message clear. After
having mentioned wreath here, i thought it wiser to add more
to it."
A script by Miss Helen Verrall of March 17th is possibly
a reflex from that of her mother which she had not seen :
". . laurel leaves are emblem laurel for the victor's brow."
Arrows.
On February 12th, 1907, the following occurred at the
Piper sitting :
" R. H. Arrow
HODGSON
" Mr. P. Will you explain that ?
" R. H. I said to Mrs. V "
On February i8th Rector said : " Hodgson says do not
forget arrow. Watch for it if it comes out."
Mrs. Verrall's script of February nth had contained
the following :
tria convergentia in unum [three converging to one].
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 281
Perhaps the arrows are a first outcome of Hodgson's
attempt, but their number and position as well as the
Latin phrase are probably a result of Mrs. Verrall's
thoughts being in this period occupied by another experi-
ment, aiming at the co-operation of three mediums.^
But, at any rate, the following script, of February i8th,
seems connected with Hodgson's exertions :
" Do ew. No nor any other
" Can't you take the message ?
" [drawing] it seems to be carvings in stone
" Church architecture or some such thing
" Architectonic Architrave
" [drawing] a pointed arch
" I can't get rid of the idea A R C H it obsesses me
" There has been great confusion here and I do not think
anything has been accurately said
" accurate dicta adcuranda sunt [things said accurately
should be attended to]
" But the white arch should give a clue."
On February 19th the following conversation was held
at the Piper-sitting between Mr. Piddington and Hodgson :
" Mr. P. You said you were going to give arrow to Mrs.
Verrall.
" R. H. I did certainly say so and I have been there three
days trying to impress it upon her, hard. She did get ar I
think and stopped there ; after that I saw w written I know.
" Mr. P. It did seem to me that she was getting near the
idea of arrow. Do you know what she did get ?
" R. H. Not exactly, but Piercing, swift and Piercing
came into my own mind while impressing her, and I tried in
several ways to make her understand my real meaning. She
is the very best subject we have to work with and I believe
she can become much more important to us."
The conversation was continued on the morrow in this
manner :
" R. H. I should Hke to know if Mrs. V understood
my message ?
" Mr. P. I find she did write ' ar.' I can't say anything
about the ' w ' ; it isn't certain.
" R. H. I am not absolutely sure myself about this, but
she wrote what appeared an M or a W.
- See below, p. 315.
282 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
'' Mr. P. Is the first letter an M ?
" R. H. Yes but my point was to bring out the W. I
beheve she made it distinct enough to be recognized as a W.
" Mr. P. I am going to ask you a question, Hodgson.
When Mrs, Verrall got the letters ' ar ' she wrote several words
beginning with the letters ar.
" R. H. That makes no special difference to me. My
special word to her was arrow A R.
" Mr. P. I quite understand, but what I want to know is
this : In yoijr attempt to impress ' arrow ' did you try to
get at it by impressing the actual words which she wrote
beginning with ar ; or are these words the result of Mrs.
Verrall's own mind ?
" R. H. That is what it is. The actual word or point was
to make her write arrow.
" Mr. P. I'll tell you^ the words in ' ar ' which
Mrs. Verrall wrote. They were ' arch,' ' architecture,'
' architrave ' and ' pointed arch.'
" R. H. Pointed was my own word to suggest arrow
Well suppose I go to her again as soon as' I finish here and give
her the suggestion again."
On February 25th the subject was once more discussed
at the Piper-sitting :
" R. H. Got arrow yet ?
" Mr. P. Well, Hodgson, I don't think the word ' arrow '
has been written, but it has certainly been drawn.
" R. H. Amen. I spent hours of earthly time trying to
make her understand."
The drawing which Mr. Piddington alluded to was
that of the three arrows in Mrs. Verrall's script of
February nth. On March i8th, however, her script
contained four drawings, of which the last three repre-
sent a bow and arrow, an arrow, and a target. They
seem to have no connection with the rest of the script,
and may then, perhaps, be considered a late result of
Hodgson's renewed exertions. Mrs. Verrall knew nothing
about his utterances respecting " arrow " in the Piper-
trance.
Miss Verrall's script of February 17th had contained
the following : #1
" \ many together."
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 283
As she, like her mother, on February nth, speaks of
many arrows, the script in all probabihty is a reflex of
that of Mrs. Verrall.
Violets.
On March nth, 1907, at one o'clock, Mrs. Piper said
in the waking stage :
" Violets. Dr. Hodgson [said] violets."
According to the experience of Mr. Piddington such an
utterance alludes to a cross-correspondence. On the
same day at eleven a.m. Mrs. Verrall had automatically
written as follows :
" With violet buds their heads were crowned
" violaceae odores [scents of violet]
" Violet and olive leaf purple and hoary
" The city of the violet "
Diana.
After Mrs. Sidgwick had undertaken the charge of the
Piper-sittings, the following conversation took place on
March 19th, 1907 :
"Rector. Mr. Hodgson wishes to ask if you under-
stand that Mrs. V — has written Dianna.
" R. H. Good morning Mrs. Sidgwick I said DIANNA
I tried to impress it on her mind.
" Mrs. S. Yes, I will inquire.
" R. H. ... Why don't you get her to send you what
she does get each day so you can compare it with what I tell
you here ? Would not that be wise ?
" Mrs. S. She sends it every day to Mr. Piddington, and I
tell Mr. Piddington what you say.
" R. H. Oh yes, very good."
On April 4th it was Myers who spoke to Mrs. Sidgwick
about the cross-correspondence :
" M. I should be glad if you could tell me if she wrote
about Diana.
" Mrs. S. I will inquire. I think she wrote something Uke
it, but not quite Diana.
" M. It was that that I was impressing upon her mind."
Mrs. Sidgwick had in mind a script of Mrs. Verrall's of
March 13th which spoke about Bacchic revellers and
284 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
" Diva the goddess," and, probably as an attempt at the
latter, contained the meaningless " Dina." But Mrs.
Verrall had in fact produced a script about Diana already
on February 27th where she, utilizing reminiscences
from Horace, wrote among other things :
" Nemorum custos [guardian of the woods]
" Montium custos [guardian of the mountains]
" Dianam tenerae dicite virgines [sing Diana youthful
maids]
" I cannot get the meaning clear. I will try again."
Besides, she had on January ist written the name
Diana, but in a connection which made it evident that
it was the Christian name of Mrs. Forbes that was meant.
On April 29th Mrs. Verrall had herself a sitting with Mrs.
Piper, where she referred both to the latter script and to
that of February 27th, but not to that about " Diva,"
which Mrs. Sidgwick had mentioned. Mrs. Sidgwick was
not present on this occasion :
" M. I referred to the word Dianna I thought
you wrote it. Look that up also.
" Mrs. V. I've written the word Diana, I am quite sure.
"M. Recently?
" Mrs. V. Some time ago.
" M. Yes, I told her [Mrs. Sidgwick] so, but she said no.
" Mrs. V. Then she was wrong ; twice I had a reference to
her — once a longish time ago to her name and another time to
a Latin poem of Diana.
" M. Yes I was sure you had understood me and that you
had registered it. We must try to do better and she must be
sure of what you do write. It is so much easier for me when
I say I know that you did get a word for her to understand.
Otherwise I keep on trying at the same word again. Therefore
you must make it clear to her and vice versa."
It is curious to see the communicator instruct the
experimenters as to the best manner of proceeding.
Rector, too, had endeavoured to teach Mrs. Sidgwick. At
the sitting on April 4th he said to her :
" Will you note friend our messages to and about Mrs. V.
and reply to us when we think we have succeeded in getting
messages through ? We do not wish to make the same
things when once they have been received."
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 285
The trance-personalities do not seem quite unjustified
in their criticism. If the unpractical proceedings were
due to the desire of excluding the explanation " telepathy
from the sitters," they, at any rate, were not carried
through. Mrs. Sidgwick knew Mrs. Verrall's script
about " Diva," and Mr. Piddington had, as the experi-
menter in charge, constantly made himself acquainted
with the productions.
Euripides. Spirit and Angel.
On April 8th, 1907, Myers said to Mrs. Sidgwick
through Mrs. Piper :
" Do you remember Euripides ? Do you remember
Spirit and Angel ? I gave both Nearly all the words I
have written to-day are with reference to messages I am trying
to give through Mrs. V."
Mrs. Verrall had on March 7th produced a long script,
containing among other things the words " Hercules
Furens " and " Euripides." On March 25th she wrote :
" The Hercules play comes in there and the clue is in the
Euripides play, if you could only see it "
Furthermore, she wrote on the same day a piece
wherein words like shadow were constantly repeated :
" Let Piddington know when you get a message about
shadow.
" The shadow of a shade. That is better umbrarum
umbras [shadows of shadows] o-kiSs ItSwXoi/ [shadow of a shade]
was what I wanted to get written."
The word " Spirit," however, did not appear. On
April 3rd she obviously strove for a definite goal, but
without obtaining the word " Angel":
" Flaming swords wings or feathered wings come in
somewhere Try pinions of desire The wings of Icarus
Lost Paradise regained his flame clad messengers
[drawing of angel with wings]
that is better F W H M has sent the message through — at
last ! "
286 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
On April i6th Mrs. Holland produced a piece that
seems to reflect Mrs. Verrall's Euripides script, what is
moreover indicated by the mention of her name Margaret :
" Lucus Margaret To fly to find Euripides Philemon."
The names Lucus and Philemon come from Browning's
version of Euripides' Hercules Furens. On inquiry
Mrs. Holland answered that she had not read this play ;
but she oWned the book, and Mr. Piddington points out
that she may easily have seen the names by turning over
the leaves.
Mrs. Holland's script on March 27th, which was
written on the day of the week chosen for experimenting
with Mrs. Verrall, is perhap§ in a similar way related to
the script about Shadow :
tenebrae [darkness] obscura [dark] Sorrow
and love — as inevitably as Light and Shadow — Shadow
and light "
Shadow, at any rate, does not here mean Spirit but,
like tenebrae, darkness, and so cannot have anything to do
with the Piper cross-correspondence.
What must above all strike the student on contemplat-
ing these cross-correspondences, and provisionally grant-
ing that they are what they pretend to be, viz., attempts
on the part of the Piper-personalities to produce certain
words in the script of Mrs. Verrall, is the extreme difficulty
which the task presents. As pointed out before, it is a
difficulty comparable with that which Dr. Verrall ex-
perienced when he tried to impress his Greek phrase.
That the success of the trance-personalities is greater
than Dr. Verrall's can at any rate only be said of a
number which is small in comparison with that of the
attempts ; many more " messages " were planned with
apparently no result at all. Besides, the tasks which
they proposed to themselves were far easier than Dr.
Verrall's. They were aiming at simple words like
" Diana " or " Arrow," and generally at one word at a
time; even Laurel wreath was only chosen because
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 287
" wreath " alone had been spoiled by Rector's thoughtless
mention of it to Mrs. Verrall. In return, it was the
identical word they wanted to produce, not a similar one.
Hodgson's remarks on the attempts at Arrow are in this
respect very instructive. " That makes no special
difference to me. My special word to her was arrow,"
he said to Mr. Piddington when the latter alluded to the
other words which Mrs. Verrall had written. There was
no question here of anything but " hitting the bull."
This, however, was not always achieved even in the
cases where a correspondence is undeniable. In the case
of " Spirit " the word was not obtained, in those of
" Angel " and " Arrow " it was only the drawings that
really expressed the idea. And almost always the word
in question was wrapped up in the automatist's own
productions in the same manner as Dr. Verrall's Greek
words had been. It is interesting to see how a foreign
impulse appears to struggle with the matter in the writer's
own mind, and how now one and now the other part
predominates. " I can't get rid of the idea arch, it
obsesses me," Mrs. Verrall writes during her exertions to
produce arrow. Often it is possible to trace the auto-
matist's subconscious thoughts, which form a chain of
more or less evident associations of ideas, and to see how
the foreign element intrudes between them. The latter
is not linked to the contents of the writer's mind by any
association, but may of course become the starting-point
for new ideas. At times it is as if the automatist had a
feeling of having reached her goal. " Perhaps no more
than that," Mrs. Verrall writes after having put down the
words Laurel wreath; and after the angel has been drawn,
the script exclaims triumphantly : " F W H M has sent
the message through — at last ! "
On the other hand, it is clear from what has just been
said that most of the automatic script is at any rate due
to the writers themselves. To this obviously belong the
divers remarks about " the clue " (" the clue is in the
Euripides play," " the white arch should give a clue "),
288 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
which we know from Mrs. Verrall's earlier productions ;
and the conversations which she frequently holds with
herself : "I cannot get the meaning clear"; "Can't you
take the message " ; " There has been great confusion
here and I do not think anything has been accurately
said." All this confirms with regard to the greater
portion of the script that conception of its character
which we ^ had previously attained to. The question
that remains is, whether we ought to add the contention
that the isolated words which constitute the cross-
correspondences originate from an external source that
may in a degree be compared to Dr. Verrall in his oft-
mentioned experiment.
• •••■•
Before entering into the discussion of this problem
there are, however, a few more cross-correspondences to
take into account. The experiments were continued
after Mrs. Piper's return to Boston by Mr. George B. Dorr,
who, in March — May, 1908, held a large number of sittings
with her,^ and devoted a portion of them to cross-cor-
respondences. The English investigators knew nothing
of this while it took place ; afterwards the records were
sent to England, where Mrs, Verrall read them in October,
1908. Mr. Dorr, on the other hand, did not know the
details of the English experiments ; he only knew that
such had been undertaken. Having, therefore, no
model to guide him, he often set the communicators
more difficult tasks than they had performed in England.
He himself most often proposed the subjects.
The cases are, as before, quoted in the chronological
order of the Piper-sittings.
Troy, Joy, and Wreath.
The following conversations took place in March, 1908,
between Mr. Dorr and the Piper-personalities :
1 " Further Experiments with Mrs. Piper in 1908," Proceedings
S.P.R., Vol. XXIV., pp. 31—200.
((
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 289
March gth, 1908.
R. H. He [Myers] says Say to our good friend, Troy.
Troy, I'll go give that to Mrs. Verrall.
" My. D. Will you give her the words Exile and Troy ?
Take as synonym for Troy ' the city in flames ' "
March 1.6th, 1908.
" M. I have given Mrs. V. Troy, Joy.
" Mr. D. Why did you write ' joy ' ?
" M. In making her understand TROY she misunder-
stood and wrote Joy.
" Mr. D. Did you get ' Troy ' through too ?
" M. Yes she finally got it right, and wrote Troy. She
understood flames ... I gave her my first initials F.M. so
she would understand who was writing."
March 2;^rd, 1908.
" R. H. We wrote wreath and Joy, also Joy of the Gods.
" Mr. D. Did you do this in any allusive fashion, so far as
you can tell ?
" R. H. No. That is good and by itself, as we wrote
archway for P [iddington] in England. Joy was written in
the same way We wrote it straight out as we did archway
long ago."
" Archway " is evidently a mistake for Arrow, which
cross-correspondence was more than a year old now.
Myers had on March 9th said to Mr. Dorr : " I can't
take more to Mrs. Verrall, but I will take a message to
Helen Verrall." Later in the same sitting he said :
" I shall go and give my messages to Mrs. V. and Helen."
Mrs. Verrall's script contained no trace of the above
cross-correspondence, but Miss Verrall wrote on April ist,
1908, the following :
" The pillars of converging fire
The ministers of joy divine "
and on April 20th, 1908 :
" A holly leave or something like that green and
prickly a hoUy wreath Troy Laodamia ^ "
* Cf. Wordsworth, Laodamia: " The Beach of Troy," etc.
CD. U
290 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Exile.
On March 23rd, 1908, Mr. Dorr spoke to Hodgson
about the other messages that had been proposed on
March 9th.
" Mr. D. Did you write ' Exile ' ?
" R. H. Yes, long ago. It came out with Moore.
MOORE."
More than a month later, on April 27th, Miss Verrall's
script contained the following quotation from Moore :
" A golden harp — the harp that once through Tara's
halls "
•s
and on May i6th she wrote
" By the waters of Babylon. The song of exile in a strange
land The harp that once through Tara's halls "
On February loth, 1909, Mrs. Holland wrote in India
a script where allusions to Ireland and to exile appeared
together, among several other things ^ :
" St. Bridget's Day— St. Bride Oh Bay of Dublin my
heart you're troubling — Leave your home behind lad "
Prometheus.
On March 31st, 1908, Mr. Dorr suggested " Prome-
theus " as a message to be taken to the other automatists.
On April 7th in the waking stage came the words :
" Fire — from careless man — he taught them all his wiles and
wisdom.
" Shelley ! he taught them all he knew. And they were
envious of him —
" Poor Prometheus ! What would we have known but for
him."
Promeiheus was afterwards referred to as a message to
be taken with Fire and Art in several sittings in April
and May.
On September 23rd, 1908, Mrs. Verrall, who at that
1 " Third Report on Mrs. Holland's Script," Proceedings S.P.R.,
Vol. XXV., pp. 218—303.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 291
time had not seen the records of Mr. Dorr's sittings,
wrote in Greek as follows :
" In a narthex was hidden the fire by which Prometheus
made men like unto gods."
This was followed by English verse containing remi-
niscences from iEschylus' Prometheus. This, the editor
adds, is the only mention of Prometheus in 282 scripts
by Mrs. Verrall, covering a period of nearly four years.
On December 30th, 1908, Mrs. Holland quoted, with
a few alterations, a verse from Shelley's Prometheus
Unbound :
" Here oh here
We bear the bier
Of the Spectres of many a vanished year
Spectres we
Of the dead time be
We bear Time to his tomb in Eternity."
Meanwhile, Miss Helen Verrall had on November 19th,
1908, written as follows :
" Time's hour glass whose sands never run out — Time and
Eternity "
Possibly Mrs, Holland's script, which began, " The
solemn beat of time swinging through the spheres to
Eternity," is a reflex of Miss Verrall's— if it be more than
a result of her new-year's sentiments.
Turkey?.
On April 6th, 1908, the following conversation occurred
between Mr. Dorr and Hodgson :
" Mr. D. Now shall I give you a new message ? It refers
to the landing of the Pilgrim Fathers —
' The breaking waves dashed high
On a stern and rock-bound coast.'
Do you understand what ' Pilgrim Fathers ' means ?
" R. H. Something about birds or turkeys."
Mr. Dorr did not at once understand this association
of ideas. Not until after the sitting it dawned upon him
that Hodgson had thought of Thanksgiving Day, which
u 2
292 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
commemorates the Pilgrim Fathers' first harvest in
America, and is always celebrated with turkeys for dinner.
He explained, however, what he had in mind, and finished
by saying :
" Mr. D. Now you understand about the ' breaking
waves ' and the ' rock-bound coast ' ?
" R. H. Good. I understand well. Breaking waves ? "
On April 22nd Mr. Dorr told Hodgson that he had
discovered the association between turkeys and pilgrims :
" R. H. I could not think of the word [Thanksgiving].
" Air. D. You might add it and turkeys to the message."
On May 4th, Hodgson, on " Thanksgiving " being
mentioned, said :
" I said Turkeys and Birds to Mrs. Holland, and Mrs. V.
also."
On December 9th, 1908, Mrs. Holland's script contained
the following words and drawing :
" Mallard
and a path between — "
Mrs. Holland took this to be a reminiscence from a
drinking song which is sung at the celebration of All
Souls' Day in All Souls' College in Oxford. Its first
verse runs as follows :
" Griffin, Turkey, Bustard, Capon,
Let other hungry mortals gape on,
And on their bones with stomachs fall hard,
But let All Souls men have the mallard."
A connection there must needs be between the script
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 293
and Mr. Dorr's experiment ; to that the fullness of the
impression testifies. In whatever way Mrs. Holland had
obtained it, it had called forth not only the " birds and
turkeys," but withal the notion of a feast where such
creatures were eaten, nay even the picture of the voyage
across the waves which Mr. Dorr had associated with the
Pilgrim Fathers.
Medusa's Head.
There had at the sitting with Mrs. Piper on April 13th,
1908, been talked about Medusa, and Perseus who cut off
her head, and Mr. Dorr had suggested that " Medusa's
head " would be a good message to take to the other
lights, adding : " Describe it if you can as you have to
me, carried through the air and dropping blood." On
May 12th the trance-personality wrote that the message
had been received by Mrs. Holland, who had written
" Blood — Horse — Head, etc." However, it was not until
a year later, on May 19th, 1909, that Mrs. Holland wrote
the following :
" Pershore — pericarp — Persia — Persens — The Fateful Head
— Medusa — The mirrored shield and the winged sandals of
swiftness "
Shelley's Skylark.
On May 4th, 1908, Mr. Dorr spoke with Myers as
follows :
" Mr. D. You spoke of Shelley's poem the Skylark the
other day ; perhaps you could get one of them to quote for
you some lines from it.
" M. We will impress her [sic] to write it."
On May 8th, Mr. Dorr reverted to the question, saying :
" We agreed the other day upon Shelley's poem the Skylark
as a message. And you were going to try and make one of
the other Lights write some lines from that "
In the waking stage on the same day Mrs. Piper said :
" We said Ode, and we said Skylark, and we wrote them.
And she drew a bird."
At Mr. Dorr's sittings no more was said about this
294 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
experiment. But on December 9th, 1908, Miss Pope had
a seance with Mrs. Piper, and asked the communicators
to give " a message for England."
Hodgson wrote :
" G.P. has one which I think good. The nightingale has
a lyre of gold. Myers and Hodgson with the help and encour-
agement of\ G.P. The lark is on the wing. No more, too
many may lead to confusion We shall get on famously
after a while. I saw and helped Mrs. Holland."
Hodgson's humorous announcement of " the lark "
seemed to be verified on February loth, 1909, when Mrs.
Holland wrote the lines of Shelley's Ode to a Skylark :
" Hail to thee blythe Spirit
Bird thou never wert."
COMUS.
On May 12th, 1908, Mr. Dorr said to Myers, referring
to something he had read to him on May 4th, from
Milton's Comus :
" I read you ' Sabrina fair, listen where thou art sitting,
Under the glassy cool translucent wave.' Perhaps this, as a
quotation, may help you to give it to the other Lights."
On December i6th, 1908, Mrs. Holland wrote :
" The glassy cool translucent wave — . . .
I want her to draw a recumbent figure [Sabrina ?] "
Lux, Clouds, Arrow.
This case and the following are from the beginning of
1909, when now Miss Pope, and now Mr. Dorr, held sittings
with Mrs. Piper. On January 13th Myers, among other
things, said to Miss Pope :
" Helen wrote gathering clouds, clouds are gathering in the
west and she also wrote Lux [light] Then another thing
was written. Arrow, light and swift as an arrow Then
Mrs. Verrall wrote as did Mrs. Holland also clouds before
dawn."
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 295
Miss Helen Verrall had on November 5th, 1908,
written :
" Mist on the high peaks of the mountains at sunrise when
the clouds in the valley grow rosy in the growing hght.
Lucifero radio Phoebus iam diffugat umbras et sub luce nova
nova lucent omnia [now Phcebus with Hght-bearing ray puts
to flight the shadows, and beneath the new light all things
shine anew]."
And on November loth :
" The two horns of the moon and between them a cord —
thus Diana's shafts speed swiftly — the arrow by day."
Trailing, Rolling Waves. The Voyage.
On March ist, 1909, the following conversation was
held at the Piper-sitting :
" R. H. Helen. Trailing Trail TrelHs
" Mr. D. Is that word traihng ?
" R. H. Yes, very good Sea Season Rolling Roll
Waves. I got these through Helen V."
Later in the sitting Mr. Dorr read to Myers the verse
from Tennyson's The Voyage, beginning, " For one fair
vision," when the hand wrote :
" Wait for this. I have already referred to this particular
verse with Helen V."
Miss Verrall had in her script from the preceding
months the following :
November 24th, 1908.
" a sloping hillside with trailing vines.
December 12th, 1908.
"From the deep the wailing of the waters thalassa,
thalassa [the sea, the sea].
December i^th, 1908.
" [In Greek ."] Of the sounding sea.
January 22nd, 1909,
" On the face of the waters — when the deeps are stirred
February 1st, 1909.
" The sound of great waters when the bed of ocean
rocks
" We know the merry world is round
" And we may sail for evermore."
296 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
The two last lines are a quotation from Tennyson's
The Voyage.
A retrospective glance at the above cross-correspon-
dences in their entirety will show that they may be divided
into two groups — those that had appeared in the script
of other automatists before they were mentioned by the
Piper-personalities, and those that did not appear in the
automatic scripts until a shorter or longer time after they
had been mentioned at Mrs. Piper's. To the former
group belong almost all experiments performed in England,
besides the two last-described correspondences referred to
at the sittings in Boston in 1909 ; Myers or Hodgson
asked whether some word had been written, or declared
that it had been so, and it turned out that it had in fact
appeared in some script. Mr. Dorr's experiments in
1908, on the contrary, fall under the other category.
Generally it was himself who proposed the messages ;
thus, as far as they did appear at all, it must needs be
after the mention of them in the Piper-trance.
In judging of the value of the cross-correspondences, it is
not, however, without import whether they belong to the
former or the latter of these categories. The possibility
that the correspondence between a subject talked of at the
Piper-sittings, and the script of one of the non-entranced
automatists, might be due to supernormal perception on
the part of the mediums, is no doubt greater when the
mention at the Piper-sittings precedes the script than
when it is the reverse. It is especially great in the four
cases where it is in Mrs. Holland's script that the corre-
spondence appears. This lady returned to England in
the autumn of 1908 ; in the period of Mr. Dorr's experi-
menting with Mrs. Piper she had not produced any auto-
matic writing, and during the summer only a single piece.
But after a conversation with Miss Johnson on Novem-
ber 24th, 1908, she began once more to write. The result
was among other things the four cross-correspondences
mentioned above, the two of which were produced in
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 297
December, while the next appeared in February and the
last one as late as in May, 1909. To all of them it applies
that they did not appear until Miss Johnson and Mrs.
Verrall had seen the records of Mr. Dorr's experiments.
Under these circumstances, much speaks in favour of
conceiving Mrs. Holland's script as a reflex only of the
knowledge of the other ladies.
Nevertheless, it is difficult to acquiesce in this concep-
tion. The four cases are very different from the so-called
cross-correspondences between Mrs. Verrall and Mrs.
Holland in former years. There is here nothing of the
vague similarity which formerly made the researchers
believe that it was not the same thing which was impressed
on the two automatists, but complementary ones. We
have seen how jeast, birds and " breaking waves "
were transmitted in the Pilgrim Fathers experiment ;
the message Medusas Head was likewise reproduced
with great completeness. From Shelley's Skylark,
Mr. Dorr had wanted some lines to be quoted, without
specifying which ones ; Mrs. Holland quoted two. As
regards Comus, Mr. Dorr had himself chosen the lines ;
one of these " Sabrina fair, listen where thou art sitting,"
was indicated through the words " a recumbent figure,"
while the other, " Under the glassy cool translucent wave,"
appeared with the exception of the first word. Neither
ought it to be overlooked that it had in three of the said
cases — Turkeys, Medusa, and Skylark — been expressly
told in the Piper-trance that it was to Mrs. Holland that
the message was sent.
The two cases from 1908, in which the correspondence
appears in Miss Helen Verrall's script, present difficulties
of another kind. In the former, at any rate, the plan seems
to have been that it should appear through Mrs. Verrall,
which it did not. More perplexing, however, is the
circumstance that the Piper-personalities in both cases
seemed to know in what form the message would appear,
long before it was produced in any script. " In making
her understand Troy she [Mrs. Verrall] misunderstood
298 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
and wrote Joy — she finally got it right and wrote Troy,"
Myers says on March i6th, 1908 ; both Joy and Troy
appeared through Miss Verrall not long afterwards.
About Exile, Hodgson says : " It came out with Moore,"
two months before Miss Verrall wrote : " The song of
exile," at the same time quoting Moore's line : " The
harp that ^once through Tara's halls." Here again one
would be justified in contending that it is on a supernormal
perception of what has occurred at the Piper-sitting that
Miss Verrall's script is based. But, on the other hand, the
correspondence is in this case, as in that of Mrs. Holland,
much greater than is usual wjien it is due to such impres-
sions. If it be in itself difficult to " hit the bull," it is of
course more improbable still that it will happen with two
shots at a time, as is here the case both with Joy -Troy and
with Exile-Moore. One feels tempted to appeal to the
" explanation " prevision.
With regard to the category of cross-correspondences
where the Piper-personalities refer to a message that
turns out to have already appeared, the matter stands
somewhat differently. Theoretically, it is no doubt
possible to urge that Mrs. Piper might as well obtain
impressions about the other automatists as vice-versa,
and in very simple cases like Violets and Euripides this
possibility could hardly be dismissed. But there are
cross-correspondences within this category where the
case is too complicate to make the explanation satis-
factory. Such a one is, for instance, the Arrow corre-
spondence. Hodgson contends that he has said " arrow "
to Mrs. Verrall, and that at least " ar " has appeared.
In reality, Mrs. Verrall has drawn three arrows and,
moreover, groped for a word beginning with ar. About
this Mrs. Piper ought to have obtained not a vague im-
pression, but as clear a knowledge as that which the
reader of the records obtains, to be able to utilize it for
the fiction that it is Hodgson who has produced it. The
Laurel Wreath case is no less remarkable. The Piper-
personalities tell that they have endeavoured to make
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 299
Mrs. Verrall write " wreath " ; at that time she has not
yet done so, but later she writes " laurel wreath," and
they pretend now to have added laurel, because they
had inadvertently mentioned wreath. It can hardly
be denied that Mrs. Piper, if it be she, understands
how to produce exactly the right impression of Mrs.
Verrall's script being influenced by the alleged com-
municators.
But even if the cross-correspondences do not furnish
conclusive evidence for the reality of the trance-personali-
ties, but must rank with the other mysteries of Mrs.
Piper's trance, they have at least proved very different
from those we got to know earlier by the same name.
There we found only a reflex from one automatist to
the other ; apart, perhaps, from stahdelta, Dr. Verrall's
sentence was the only thing that looked like a result of
intentional transmission. But that there had not pre-
viously been made any attempt at influencing the auto-
matists from outside does not, of course, preclude the
possibility of such attempts being made now. Hodgson
says at one of the Piper-sittings in London in 1907 about
Mrs. Verrall : " She is the very best subject we have to
work with, and I believe she can become much more
important to us." The Piper-personalities thus seem to
conceive the present experiments as a beginning, and in
that at any rate they are right. Whatever they are,
they must be judged by themselves, without regard to
that which had preceded them in the writings of the
English automatists.
Before leaving the cross-correspondences, it is necessary
to mention one which has gained a special reputation,
and which perhaps, if it were all that the English re-
searchers have assumed, would be of no small value for
the conception of the whole problem. For in that case
six different mediums would have been co-operating in
one and the same cross-correspondence, aiming at the
production of the number seven. The assumption, how-
\
300 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
ever, has been sharply attacked by the critics, and no
doubt they are right.
The incident is long when all that belongs to it in the
opinion of the investigators is included, and without
doing this the argument can hardly become satisfactory.
The real cross-correspondence occurred in the year 1908,
but in 1904 an event had already taken place which is
thought to constitute the introduction. I shall begin
by this event, and relate the whole case in chronological
order.
On July 13th, 1904, Mr. Piddington wrote in the rooms
of the Society for Psychical Research in London a letter
which he sealed and gave into the custody of Miss Johnson,
who without knowing its contents placed it in one of the
drawers of the office. The plan was that it should
remain unopened till after his death ; circumstances,
however, led to its being opened in the autumn of 1908.
The contents of it were, slightly abridged, the following :
" If I ever am a spirit, and if I can communicate, I shall
endeavour to remember to transmit in some form or other the
number SEVEN. I should try to communicate such
things as : ' The seven lamps of architecture,' ' The seven
sleepers of Ephesus,' ' unto seventy times seven,' ' we are
seven,' and so forth. The reason why I select the word seven
is because seven has been a kind of tic with me ever since my
early boyhood. I would walk along the street to a rhytm
formed by counting i, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 I have purposely
cultivated this tic as I think it likely that the
memory of it having by practice been frequently revived in
my lifetime, may survive the shock of death."
On the same day when Mr. Piddington composed this
" posthumous letter " in London, Mrs. Verrall produced
in Cambridge a script that among other things contained
the following lines :
"It is something contemporary that you are to record —
note the hour — in London half the message has come."
This was followed by remarks about the contents of
Myers's sealed envelope left with Sir Oliver Lodge, and a
statement about a sealed envelope left by Professor
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 301
Sidgwick, We have previously seen to what extent
Mrs. Verrall's mind was at this period occupied with the
thought of Myers's letter, and how this preoccupation
led to statements in her script which turned out to dis-
agree with the facts. That under these circumstances
she may have got a clairvoyant impression about Mr.
Piddington's performance on the same day is not im-
probable ; this kind of supernormal faculty she was
often proved to possess. The phrase " half the message "
is no doubt due to her usual tendency to expect a com-
plement to her own writing.^
Three years after this prelude another episode followed,
which the editor includes in the report about the Sevens.
It seems, however, to get its natural explanation from
the circumstance that the automatists, who in this case
were Mrs. Verrall and her daughter, had been much
occupied with the before-mentioned " Latin message "
experiment that was completed in May, 1907, and that
aimed at making the Piper-Myers establish a cross-
correspondence between three mediums. It was in a
special degree Mr. Piddington's experiment, and it is
probably to him Miss Verrall alludes in the following
script of August 6th, 1907 :
" A rainbow in the sky
" fit emblem of our thought
" the sevenfold radiance from a single light
" many in one and one in many
" [In Latin .*] Doubtless he himself will seem to have
transferred this to his own rule. Wlierefore whatever is set
forth must be co-ordinated, lest, being scattered, it should
escape notice "
At any rate, it seems certain that the script alludes
to cross-correspondences between several mediums. The
rainbow is such a familiar symbol of fusion that its choice
1 Miss Johnson {" Second Report on Mrs. Holland's Script," Proceed-
ings S.P.R., Vol. XXIV.) assigns a deeper meaning to the said phrase.
The real cross-correspondence which took place in 1908 embraced, in
her opinion, besides the sevens also allusions to Dante ; Mr. Piddington's
sealed letter, therefore, was only " half the message." According to
this conception, the cross-correspondence must have been planned four
years before its execution !
302 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
hardly requires to be explained as an impression from
Mr. Piddington, even if his constant occupation with
sevens might be considered to influence the ladies of his
acquaintance who wrote automatically.
Mrs. Verrall read her daughter's script on August 28th,
1907, and on the same day wrote as follows :
" Significatio patet ; symbolum tetigisti [the meaning is
obvious; yoh have touched the symbol]. Test the weakest
link [drawing of three hnks of a chain] the chain still holds.
Not ours to teach. You learn alone Place the question in the
midst and let each have his test. The same should be said to
each — Try this new experiment — Say the same sentence to
each of them and see what completion each gives to it. Let
Piddington choose a sentence -that they do not know and
send part to each Then see whether they can complete Or
he might give different parts of the same sentence to each of
them if the sentence is long enough "
It is evident that Mrs, Verrall, at least subconsciously,
has taken her daughter's script to refer to Mr. Piddington's
experiment ; the drawing of three links further indicates
that she has the Latin message in mind. The memory
of it has set her imagination in motion, and made it in a
somewhat confused manner devise plans for similar
experiments. To his sealed envelope or the sevens
nothing is pointing.
In the spring of 1908, however, began what the inves-
tigators consider the real cross-correspondence. Mrs.
Verrall's script of April 20th referred to " the seven hills "
of Rome ; according to an entry in her diary she herself
thought that the reference was due to the circumstance
that April 21st is the date of the founding of Rome, a date
which had been very familiar to her from her girlhood.
On April 27th her script referred to numbers, though
more to threes than to sevens. She wrote as follows :
" [Scrawl] and later too — Do not try to attend
37603
7
6
72
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 303
Try again
3
7
6 41
17
13 + 3 361
16 495
" I can't do anything but these figures. They seem to be
wanted but I can't tell why."
Miss Helen Verrall's script of April 29th appears to
reflect that of her mother :
" The figure 3 that seems wanted "
On May 4th she wrote :
" 8 eight ....
A a triangle "
On May 8th occurred what is considered to be Mrs,
Piper's contribution to the cross-correspondence. At a
sitting by Mr. Dorr in Boston she said in the waking stage
the following :
" We are seven
" I said Clock ! Tick, tick, tick ! Stairs, "
Some days afterwards Mr. Dorr asked the communicator
about the meaning of this :
" Mr. D. The first thing she said was ' We are seven.'
" C. That is Wordsworth, but we were seven in the distance
as a matter of fact."
Miss Johnson writes that this " rather enigmatic
phrase " she takes to mean that seven persons were
concerned in the cross-correspondence. I cannot see
that it says anything more than that the group of commu-
nicators were seven at the particular moment. Together
with the remark that the quotation " we are seven "
comes from Wordsworth, this statement destroys every
foundation for believing that seven referred to a cross-
correspondence, let alone that it alluded to its being
performed by seven persons.
Further, Miss Johnson laid great stress on Mrs. Piper
304 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
having said " Tick, tick, tick ! " In Mr. Piddington's
sealed letter the word tic occurred in the sense of habit.
But, as Professor Hyslop^ has afterwards made clear,
Mrs. Piper's tick, followed by stairs, refers to a clock on
the stairs of Dr. Hodgson's " taverna," which had been
the subject of the preceding conversation between the
communica|:or and Mr. Dorr.
Meanwhile, Mrs. Verrall had in the days from May 5th
— 8th, been occupied in reading the last cantos of Dante's
Piirgatorio : on May 8th she composed automatically a
poem that was evidently prompted by this reading. On
May loth she wrote the following script, which was after-
wards thought to refer to the Sevens cross-correspondence :
" I have wanted for some time to tell you of something that
will interest you greatly, but it is very important that Helen
should know nothing of it. It concerns her more closely than
it does you but you will have to wait some time to hear of it.
She has got quite a new type of thing in her writing — it is she
who will lead this time not you — you only fill in her gaps "
But there is in fact nothing in it that points beyond
subconscious fabrication. Miss Verrall believed that the
" new type of thing " referred to the figures that had
appeared in her script ; but Mrs. Verrall had herself
written figures, even more than her daughter. If the
allusion were to the sevens, it was neither correct that
Mrs. Verrall would " fill in her gaps," nor that Miss
Verrall's script would tarry in appearing. Mrs. Verrall
has no share whatever in the following part of the cross-
correspondence, and Miss Verrall's script about the
sevens appeared already on the day after that of her
mother.
The facts of the case seem to be that Mrs. Verrall's
reading of Pur gator io, especially of Canto XXIX., where
the number seven is constantly repeated, has been reflected
in the automatic script of her daughter. Miss Verrall, on
May nth, wrote :
" A branching tree not a real tree but emblematical.
Scrolls in place of leaves.
» Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XXV., p. 298.
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 305
" Jacob's ladder and the angels upon it. What does that
mean —
" A spinning top many colours but as it spins they are
blended into one —
" Mark the simile
" [drawing of branch with seven leaves] a leaf that hangs
down like that and a flower small and white I think and a sweet
scent, it is a scrub — foreign — not English — Sciola a name like
that.
" The seven branched candlestick it is an image — the seven
churches but these not churches
" seven candles united in one light
" and seven colours in the rainbow too.
" Many mystic sevens
" all will serve
" we are seven
" Who (?) F. W. H. Myers."
Jacob's ladder is mentioned in the part of Purgatorio
read by Mrs. Verrall, and appears in her automatic verses
of May 8th. But there is also a flower called " Jacob's
ladder " which is described in Bentham's British Flora, a
book familiar to Miss Verrall ; in the illustration of it the
number of leaflets shown hanging down is seven. The
allusion to it, then, evidently originates from Miss Verrall's
own subconscious mind ; neither does the script contain
any other thing which she did not know ; the angels upon
the ladder, the seven-branched candlestick, and the seven
colours in the rainbow, are everyday knowledge. Besides,
there is an echo of the preceding year's script about the
sevenfold radiance and the rainbow.
Miss Johnson herself leans towards the above opinion,
viz., that Miss Verrall's script is due to her mother's pre-
occupation with Dante. The same explanation, however,
may doubtless be extended to the next link of the cross-
correspondence. Mrs. Verrall had a friend, Mrs. Frith,
who wrote automatically, and who believed herself to
receive communications from Hodgson ; there had been
a few indications of supernormal connection between her
script and Mrs. Verrall's. Immediately before his death
in 1905, Dr. Hodgson had mailed a Christmas card to
Mrs. Verrall, containing a quotation from Tennyson's
CD. X
3o6 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Ancient Sage, " Climb the Mount of Blessing." In
February, 1908, Mrs. Verrall addressed the following
question to Mrs. Frith in the hope of getting an answer
through her script : " Can R. H. say what are his associa-
tions with the words * Climb the Mount of Blessing ' ? "
No reply was obtained, but on June nth, a few days
after Mrs. yerrall had read her daughter's script about
the sevens, and the day after she had told Mr. Piddington
about it in a letter, Mrs. Frith automatically wrote a
poem, the first and last lines of which run as follows :
" Then you are drawing nearer to the plane
The plane of blessing and the promised land
Pisgah is scaled the fair and dewy lawn
Invites my footsteps till the mystic seven
Lights up the golden candlestick of dawn."
The first lines are evidently prompted by Mrs. Verrall's
question, which was normally known to Mrs. Frith, while
she did not know the answer. As she both through this
question, and otherwise, was in rapport with Mrs. Verrall,
it is quite likely that she may have obtained an impression
about the sevens which just at that moment filled Mrs.
Verrall's thoughts. That her verse contains allusions to
Dante, as Miss Johnson contends, I am unable to see.
Both Pisgah — the mountain from whose top Moses saw
the Promised Land — and the seven-branched candlestick
are well-known Biblical references.
The next contributor to the cross-correspondence was
Mrs. Holland. Anterior, however, to her real contribu-
tion to it, the following occurred. She was on her way
home to England from India, when she, in the night
between the 14th and 15th of July, 1908, had a dream,
which in a letter to Miss Johnson she described as follows :
" Last night I dreamt that I was in a large bare room —
rather like a studio. . . .
" Some one showed me an old note book — or diary — in
which was written in a small neat hand :
" * Since in 1872 a dear friend chose as a sign by wliich to
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 307
communicate with me the figure 6, I, in my turn, will try,
in the time to come, to send the figure 6, — simply the sign
of 6.' "
There is a very curious resemblance between the note-
book and its contents in the room like a studio and
Mr. Piddington's sealed envelope in the office of the
Society, distorted just in the manner in which dreams
use to distort things. Possibly the dream was really due
to an impression from Mr. Piddington, who on account of
Mrs. Verrall's communication about her daughter's
sevens, must needs have been led to think more than
usually of his " posthumous letter."
On July 23rd Mrs. Holland, who was still at sea,
automatically wrote the following script :
" There should be three at least in accord and if possible
Seven — The lady and the learned lady and the maiden of
the crystal and the scribe and the professed scribe — and the
two new comers — what could be better than that ? Take this
for token ' Green beyond belief.' Not only on the ocean
may the Green Ray appear "
A few days previously, on July i8th, Mrs. Verrall had
read Mrs. Frith's script of June nth, and had been
impressed by the similitude between it and her daughter's
sevens. Thus it is also in this case probable that the
automatist has received a supernormal impression from
her ; Mrs. Holland, as we know, had on numerous
occasions demonstrated her sensitiveness with regard to
such. The plan of an experiment with seven contributors
had been intimated already in Miss Verrall's script of
1907, and must, at any rate subconsciously, have existed
in her mother's mind. Mrs. Holland took the five of the
mediums mentioned by her to be Mrs. Forbes, Mrs.
Verrall, Miss Verrall, herself and Mrs. Piper. In the
opinion of the investigators, however, there were only
six mediums. The seventh contributor to the cross-
correspondence was Mr. Piddington.
" Green beyond belief " was, in Mrs. Holland's opinion,
due to a phenomenon on the sea which she had been told
X 2
3o8 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
of. Miss Johnson interpreted it as an allusion to Dante —
the eyes of Beatrice are in Purgatorio compared to
emeralds.
The last contribution to the Sevens cross-correspondence
was due to a non-professional trance-medium, Mrs. Home,
through whom a " Myers-control " had often purported
to speak. Through her the following conversation was on
July 24th, 1 90S, held with Colonel Taylor and one Miss H. :
" M. Seven times seven and seventy-seven. Send the
burden of my words to others.
" Miss H. To whom shall we send ?
" M. Souls that labour for your earthly wisdom send no
names.
" Miss H. May we say the message is from a teacher ?
" M. No . . Several wait to hear. Some say they do
not mind the name ; others seek only. Omnia vincit.
" Col. T. Shall I send this to ^liss Johnson, or to Mrs.
Verrall ?
" M. Miss Johnson likes it better ; you can help better
through her."
The puerility of all this no doubt suffices to characterize
it as subconscious fabrication. But the phrase " seven
times seven and seventy-seven " just at this point can
hardly be dismissed as a casualty. Miss Johnson states
that there had been a slight coincidence between an earlier
trance-utterance of Mrs. Home's and one of Mrs. VerraU's
scripts. Thus it is not improbable that this medium too
has received a supernormal impression from the latter,
who was at that time so engrossed by the sevens.
From the above representation it appears, among
other things, that the contributors to this curious cross-
correspondence really were but four. Mrs. Piper has
nothing at all to do with the case ; but neither does
Mrs. Verrall, strictly speaking, belong to it ; her script
about the seven hills of Rome has no relation to the rest.
On the other hand, she is at the bottom of the whole
affair as the involuntary cause of the productions of the
other ladies. Her reading of Purgatorio is reflected in her
daughter's script of May nth, and as soon as she has
seen this and told Mr. Piddington of it, Mrs. Frith too
CROSS-CORRESPONDENCES 309
receives an impression about the sevens that emerges in
her script of June nth. This script is read by Mrs.
Verrall on July i8th, and on July 23rd and 24th the
impression is transmitted to Mrs. Holland and Mrs. Home.
Thus, at any rate, it may have happened. Mr. Podmore,
who has criticized the Sevens case from a similar point of
view,^ assigns a share in the result to Mr, Piddington ;
on my part I inclmc to confine his influence to the dream
of Mrs. Holland.
The chief reason why the researchers, in spite of
numerous improbabilities, ascribed the Sevens cross-
correspondence to extra-terrestrial influences, was that
it seemed too preposterous to assign to a sub-personality,
for instance, that of Mrs. Verrall, a plan like that which
apparently was at the bottom of it. We have seen, how-
ever, that there is no reason whatever to speak about a
plan or a design on the part of her nor any other. The
marvel of this cross-correspondence is reduced to four
separate sensitives having obtained an impression from
her in the same supernormal manner in which a single
one — Mrs. Forbes, Mrs. Holland, Miss Verrall — had so
often done it. With regard to the percipients, the case
was of exactly the same nature as otherwise ; and as
regards " the agent," she was no more a party to it than,
for instance, in a former case the friend in Copenhagen
from whom Miss Ramsden received an impression.
Probably that kind of thing often takes place when
people experiment with automatic script and the like,
and the special point here is only the circumstances
that brought to light the different elements of the incident.
The Sevens cross-correspondence had yet an after-play
which the recorder interprets in favour of her own con-
ception, but which, if anything, speaks against it. In the
middle of January, 1909, Mr. Piddington said half in jest
to Mrs. Verrall that " a recent case told rather against
spirits." He had in mind his " posthumous letter " and
• The Newer Spiritualism, pp. 268 — 76.
310 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
its possible influence on the Sevens scripts, but did not
tell Mrs. Verrall anything about it. He had in the
autumn opened the letter and shown its contents to
Miss Johnson, but Mrs. Verrall had not been made
acquainted with its existence. About a week after her
conversation with Mr. Piddington, on January 27th, she
automatically wrote as follows :
" Nothing is swifter that Thought, nothing more
sure — swifter than arrow or than bullet thought flies from
mind to mind, instantaneous. It is a now and a now, at
once, no pause, no then. Don't you understand ?
" And ask what has been the success of Piddington's last
experiment ? Has he found the bits of his famous sentence
scattered among you all and does he think that is accident,
or started by one of you ? Tell him to look carefully and he
will see a great difference between the scripts in this experi-
ment and in the others. That ought to help the theory. One
language only has been used this time. But even if the
source is human, who carries the thoughts to the receivers ?
Ask him that.
" F. W. H. M."
It is evident that Mrs. Verrall, who knew nothing about
Mr. Piddington's sevens, had through the conversation
with him been led into a wrong track. His remark about
the case that " told rather against spirits " had set her
mind in motion, and it was now by her automatic self
interwoven with the idea in her former script of his
dividing a sentence among different mediums. To be
sure, the whole is rather meaningless. Formerly it was
he who ought to distribute the sentence, now it is asked
whether he has found it scattered among them. But this
is only one of many instances of the looseness of the sub-
conscious fabrication, which so much resembles that of
dreams, and so little satisfies the logical exigencies of the
waking reason. With the sevens the script has no con-
nection whatever. The one thing that might apply to
that cross-correspondence is the remark that only one
language had been used ; but of course it would no less
apply to an experiment, like that mentioned in the script,
where a single sentence had been parcelled out in bits.
CHAPTER XVIII
OTHER EXPERIMENTS
During Mrs. Piper's sojourn in England in 1906 — 7
the English researchers had, besides the cross-correspon-
dences, performed a number of other experiments. On
the whole, it must be said that they demanded a great
deal of the trance-personalities. Perhaps more had been
attained through less exacting proceedings ; but in return
that which was attained is no doubt the more valuable as
regards the solution of the question of its origin.
In one respect, however, the proceedings seem due to
an erroneous conception on the part of the experimenters.
As formerly in the case of George Pelham, they appeared
to think that people after death could remember all that
they had ever experienced. Perhaps it was the, if not
unlimited, yet considerable subliminal faculty of remem-
brance that was transferred to the discarnate ; but
nothing, in fact, justified the conception. Supposing
that the Piper-communicators were what they claimed to
be, their memory was on an average like that of the living.
George Pelham could not remember with whom Mr.
Howard and himself had once dined in New York, still
less how many pages his manuscript contained, but he
recollected other and more important things ; the same
was the case with Hodgson and others. In England
Myers was worried with divers inquiries which while
living he would hardly have been expected to answer
after the lapse of many years. Thus, Mrs. Verrall had
come across a letter from Frederic Myers to Dr. Verrall,
in which, on account of the latter having called the
" Archytas " ode by Horace^ "positively bad," he
1 Carminum, I,, 28.
312 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
exclaims : " The first six lines of Archytas have entered
as deeply as almost any Horatian passage into my own
inner history." This caused Mrs. Verrall to ask the Piper-
Myers the following question through Mr. Piddington :
" Which ode of Horace entered deeply into your inner
life ? " The letter was written in 1884. Is it to be
wondered at that Myers, if it were he, found it difficult
to answer the question twenty-three years later ?
Another incident where much was exacted of his
memory is of a special import because it shows that the
Piper-Myers in 1907 pretended to influence Mrs. Verrall's
script also in a case where there was no question of a
cross-correspondence. Mrs. Sidgwick ^ had through Mrs.
Verrall put the question to him whether he could
remember what the last conversation she had had with
him before the death of her husband referred to. Pro-
fessor Sidgwick died in the summer of 1900, Frederic
Myers half a year later. The conversation had had
reference to matters of great interest for the widow, but
hardly of so much importance for Myers, who was then
drawing near to the end of his own life. Besides, they
had had more than one conversation, and there was no
reason for his remembering, after the lapse of six years,
what they had spoken of in this particular case. At any
rate, the Piper-Myers committed several mistakes, though
by-and-bye he recollected many things. At one time he
thought it possible that they had discussed a library
matter, probably the library of Edmund Gurney. It
was at this point that he alluded to Mrs. Verrall's script
in a manner that is more interesting than the question
whether or no he had in 1900 talked with Mrs. Sidgwick
about a library. On February nth, 1907, the following
conversation took place between him and Mr. Piddington :
" Mr. P. You will remember that at our last meeting you
said that one of the subjects of the conversation between you
and Mrs. Sidgwick was connected with a library.
' See her paper, " An Incident in Mrs. Piper's Trance," Proceedings
S.P.R., Vol. XXII., pp. 417 — 40; and ibidem, pp. 46 — 59.
OTHER EXPERIMENTS 313
" M. Yes as I recall.
" Mr. P. Well, the day after our last meeting here Mrs,
Verrall wrote a message and in it there was a reference to a
library. There was no obvious connection between what
Mrs. Verrall wrote and what you said except for the bare
mention of a library. Still it seems possible to me that you
tried to repeat through Mrs. Verrall what you had already
said here.
" M. This is quite true. Did I not tell you that I would go
to Mrs. Verrall ?
" Mr. P. Yes. I want you to tell me if you can how
your message came out.
" M. Just how much she understood I am not sure, but
what I do wish her to understand is that during my conversa-
tion with Mrs. S. the library was referred to as an important
transaction What I said to her was, write for Mrs. Sidg-
wick that we talked about library.
" Mr. P. That is exactly what I wanted to get at. But
as a matter of fact there is no reference to Mrs. Sidgwick in
what Mrs. Verrall wrote ; only a quite disconnected reference
to a library.
" M. What a pity I persistently repeated the word
to her, also my own name and Mrs. Sidgwick's."
The interesting point is this that the script which
Mr. Piddington had in mind was not at all the one which
Myers spoke about. Mrs. Verrall had on February 6th
produced a script mentioned above and containing the
cross-correspondence Laurel Wreaih.'^ It began with
Laura, but afterwards passed on to other things, among
them " The great Library has already gone before.
Hugh Le Despenser," after which it went on wdth
" Apollo's laurel bough," etc. It was this script with its
" quite disconnected reference to a Hbrary " which
Mr. Piddington referred to ; and he himself points out
that the above passage is no doubt partly due to the
circumstance that Mrs. Verrall had recently heard that
Lord Spencer v^ould retire as Chancellor of the University
in Manchester ; " the great library " alludes to the
Althorp Library in Manchester, and " Hugh Le Des-
penser " to Lord Spencer. So there would have been
ahnost nothing evidential about the case if it were this
' See above, p. 280.
314 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
script that represented Myers's attempt to produce
" library " ; moreover, it was Mr. Piddington who
mentioned it to him, and not the reverse. But, on
February 4th, Mrs. Verrall had written another script
which Mr. Piddington had wholly forgotten, though he
had seen i^ immediately after its production. With this
script the description by Myers corresponds. It ran as
follows :
" On the Council I asked and she said Yes. Tell Mrs. Sidg-
wick that. And something about the Gurney library which
I think she will remember or a Gurney memorial which she
was to take over The signature might help. H. Sidgwick.
We have tried for that to day, wait for their answer.
F. W. H. M."
Though evidently interspersed with subconscious fabri-
cation, it contains all that Myers had assured at the sitting
on February nth. After this sitting Mr. Piddington,
who had been much struck with the way in which the
communicator " stuck to his point," looked again at the
recent pieces of script sent him by Mrs. VerraU. At the
next meeting he was able to tell Myers that he had been
right in every point. " You did mention Mrs. Sidgwick's
name, you did mention a library, and you did sign the
message with your name," he said, and Myers replied :
" I did certainly, and am very pleased to hear that she
fully registered the thoughts which I indubitably gave
her."
Of course it may here, as elsewhere, be urged that
the entranced medium has had a supernormal knowledge
of Mrs. Verrall's script, which she utilized in her usual
dramatic manner.
• •••••
The longest and most remarkable among the experi-
ments with Mrs. Piper is the one called The Latin message,
which has been alluded to above. ^ It became remarkable
for quite a special reason, namely in consequence of the
misunderstandings it occasioned between the experi-
1 See p. 276 and p. 301.
OTHER EXPERIMENTS 315
menters and the communicator, and there is doubtless
much to learn from the manner in which the latter bore
himself under these circumstances.
The researchers were, as we know, inclined to think that
it was Myers who had invented the cross-correspondences,
nay, that he had devised the plan of making them comple-
mentary in order to exclude the explanation telepathy
between the living. To test this theory it was determined
to ask the Piper-Myers to arrange a cross-correspondence
of the following type : to two automatists should be given
two different messages, between which no connection
was discernible, and then as soon as possible to a third
automatist a third message, which would reveal the
hidden connection. To obtain the more security for the
success being eventually due to Myers and not to Mrs.
Piper, the request was translated into Latin, and more-
over into an intricate and difficult language. The message,
as it was called, was dictated to the Piper-personalities
in small portions in several sittings, and it appeared to
be a laborious task for them to get hold of it through an
intermediary like Rector, whose ignorance of Latin was
often accentuated. On January 2nd, 1907, the whole of
it had been transmitted, but in February they still had
only attained to a vague conception of the meaning of the
first lines.
How hard it was for them to grasp the Latin words is
illustrated by the following episode. Mr. Piddington
had at a sitting read aloud a piece of the message to
Hodgson, who acted as Myers's helper. Hodgson asked
for a repetition of " the next to the last word," which was
jamdudum. Mr. Piddington now told him that the first
syllable was " spelt like the English word jmn — preserves."
" Oh yes, I understand. Marmalade," Hodgson exclaimed ;
" that has been the most difficult word for him to under-
stand." More was not said about it ; but jamdudum
was rightly translated " long since " when Myers shortly
afterwards tried to give a version of the beginning of the
message. Thus one cannot deny the possibility of the
3i6 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
request being understood if all of its words had been
caught clearly.
Mr. Piddington's ardour, however, did not allow him
to await this possible result. Something had occurred
which had impressed him strongly, and made him suspect
that Myers had already comprehended the message.
On February nth the following conversation had
taken place at the Piper-sitting :
" M. Did she [Mrs. Verrall] receive the word Evangelical ?
" Mr. P. 1 don't know, but I will inquire.
" M. I refeiTed also to Browning again.
" Mr. P. Do you remember-what your exact reference to
Browning was ?
" M. Yes. I referred to Hope and Browning. I also said
Star."
It turned out later that Rector, who evidently had no
knowledge of Browning, must have been very unfortunate
in transmitting the principal words on this occasion.
" Evangelical " proved to be a mistake for Evelyn ; it
was Browning's poems Evelyn Hope and My Star which
Myers claimed to have given to Mrs. Verrall. But of course
it was impossible for Mr. Piddington to guess this. On
looking through Mrs. VerraU's recent scripts, he found one
from January 28th that contained the words Aster [star]
and hope, besides divers quotations from Browning ; so he
assured Myers that " the message he said he gave to Mrs.
Verrall about Browning, Star and Hope " had come out
clearly. Myers thus had every reason to believe that this
attempt at a cross-correspondence was a decisive success.
But Mr. Piddington had, on reading Mrs. VerraU's
script of January 28th, been struck by an idea which
made him consider Myers's "Hope Star Browning"
much more than an ordinary cross-correspondence.
Mrs. VerraU's script in extenso runs as follows :
" Aster [star]
" Tepa<; [wonder or sign]
" The world's wonder
" And all a wonder and a wild desire —
" The very wings of her
"A WINGED DESIRE
OTHER EXPERIMENTS 317
" {rTTOTTTCpOS tpWS [wingCCl lOVC]
" Then there is Blake
" and mocked my loss of liberty.
" But it is all the same thing— the winged desire
" tpws TTo^eivds [passion] the hope that leaves
" the earth for the sky — Abt Vogler for earth
" too hard that found itself or lost itself— in the sky.
" That is what I want
" On the earth the broken sounds
threads
" In the sky the perfect arc
" The C major of this life
" But your recollection is at fault."
" A D B is the part that unseen completes the arc."
The first quotation, " And all a wonder and a wild
desire," comes from Browning's The Ring and the Book ;
the later quotations are from his poem Aht Vogler.
Correctly it ought to be : " The passion that left the
ground "to lose itself in the sky," and " On the earth
the broken arcs ; in the heaven a perfect round."
But it was some other lines from Abt Vogler that gave
birth to Mr. Piddington's idea. In Stanza VII. is the
passage :
" I know not if save in this [i.e., music] such gift be allowed
to man,
That out of three sounds he frame not a fourth sound, but
a star."
3i8 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
The three sounds that form a star he conceived to be
an ingenious symbol of the co-operation of three mediums
which in the Latin message he had asked Myers to bring
about. The mention of " Hope Star Browning," then,
through Mrs. Piper, he took to refer to Abt Vogler, and
the quotation from this poem, through Mrs. Verrall, to
indicate his^ comprehension of the message. To be sure,
it was not the actual verse that Mrs. Verrall had quoted.
Neither did the utterances in the Piper-trance suggest
that Myers had at that time grasped the Latin. But
Mr. Piddington was, to use his own expression, too
" obsessed " by his idea to catch sight of its deficiencies.
It was under these circumstances that Myers should
deliver his reply to the message. The first sentence of
this was the following :
" Diversis internuntiis quod invicem inter se respondentia
jamdudum committis, id nee fallit nos consilium, et vehementer
probamus [As to the fact that you have for a long time been
entrusting to different intermediaries things which correspond
mutually between themselves, we have not failed to notice
it, and cordially approve it]."
On February 20th Myers said to Mr. Piddington :
" The idea I got was that I should be a messenger and
hand through coherent messages to you." At the next
sitting a week later, he said :
" I felt a little perturbed over your message to me when you
said I [failed ?] in replying sufficiently to convince you
What you said [was this] Although you as intermediary have
long since united mutually ideas, you have or do not reply
or respond sufficiently to our questions as to convince us of
your existence etc,"
It will be seen that Myers endeavoured to translate the
Latin ; he knew only the beginning of the message, and
was therefore ignorant of what was really demanded of
him. But he had misheard the word internuntiis as inter-
nuntius, and so made it the subject of the sentence. He
believed it was himself it applied to — that he himself
was called an intermediary, as the one who had given
" things which correspond mutually between themselves."
OTHER EXPERIMENTS 319
He appears to have been glad to be characterized as a
messenger ; at least Rector, on December 31st, 1906, said
that he had been delighted with the message, as far as he
had been able to receive it. As for the rest of the Latin,
he at any rate displayed more knowledge than it seems
possible to ascribe to Mrs. Piper. Only the conception
that the message contained a criticism on himself must
be due to a strange misunderstanding {oi fallitP), if it
were not a conclusion drawn from the word " although,"
by which he translated quod. Something, he may have
argued, must be wrong with his exertions, as Mr. Pidding-
ton said : " Although you have long since," etc. Later
he expressed the same thought in a somewhat altered
manner : " you have long since been trying to assimilate
ideas," he says, when after the close of the experiment he
attempted to reproduce the message for Sir Oliver Lodge.
The mistake that the message contained a censure
was, however, destined to influence the experiment
greatly. It led Myers to mention a few of his perform-
ances, and among them Browning's poems Evelyn Hope
and My Star. The import of this will appear from an
extract of the conversation held on February 27th :
" M. Now I believe that since you sent this message to
me I have sufficiently replied to your various questions to
convince the ordinary scientific mind that I am at least a
fragment of the once incarnate individual whom you called
Myers.
" Mr. P. You say you have repHed. Tell me in what
messages your reply is given.
" M. In my messages reported here and through Mrs.
Verrall. The poems, the Halcyon days. Evangelic
" Mr. P. Tell me what poems.
" M. Chiefly Browning's lines given through Mrs. VerraU,
" Mr. P. Thank you very much. I think you are making
it clear ; but I want you to make it completely clear. I think
if you can get through a clear and complete answer to my
Latin message you will have forged a new and strong link in
the claim of evidence for survival of bodily death.
" M. I understood that you asked me to reply referring to
my utterances through Mrs. Verrall.
" Mr. P. Now I think you have done enough for to-day
in the matter of replying to the Latin message."
320 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Myers then asked for the last sentence of the Latin to
be repeated, which was done. Afterwards the conversa-
tion went on as follows :
" Mr. P. I want to say that you have, I believe, given an
answer worthy of your intelligence — not to-day, I mean, but
some time ^back — but the interpretation must not be mine.
You must explain your answer at this light.
" M. Yes.
" Mr. P. You could do it in two words.
" M. Yes, I understand.
" Mr. P. Well ?
" M. Hope Star.
" Mr. P. Well ? Yes ?
" M. Browning.
" Mr. P. Exactly. It couldn't be better.
" M. That is my answer.
" Mr. P. I can't thank you enough. That is what I have
been waiting for.
" M. Well what I wished was to translate the whole
message for you into EngHsh
" Mr. P. Translate into English certainly, if you like.
In telling me that ' Browning, Hope and a Star ' contains
your answer to the Latin message you have given an answer
which to me is both intelligible and clear ; but still I should
like you to bring out one more point still, so as to leave no
doubt in any one's mind of your meaning.
" M. My Star. Evely ... I am too [weak] to tell it
to-day. My thoughts wander ..."
It is clear that Myers and Mr. Piddington had talked
about quite different things. Myers did not intend to say
that he had answered the Latin message, but mentioned
his rephes to Mr. Piddington's various questions, and the
cross-correspondences between Mrs. Piper and Mrs.
Verrall, as performances that were not quite despicable.
When in the midst of this Mr. Piddington reverted to the
Latin message, he did not comprehend why the conversa-
tion had been turned that way, but said with some
astonishment : "I understood that you asked me to
reply, referring to my utterances through Mrs. Verrall,"
i.e., to the cross-correspondences. And beginning now to
suspect that Mr. Piddington had spoken of something
other than he had himself done, he asked for a repetition
OTHER EXPERIMENTS 321
of the last sentence of the message. Afterwards Mr.
Piddington praised him for the reply already given, but
begged him to explain it through Mrs. Piper. Unable to
comprehend him, Myers tried to escape with a vague
" Yes," but Mr. Piddington continued : " You could do it
in two words." It was fatal, but hardly to be wondered
at, that Myers believed that Mr. Piddington had in mind
the two words of the cross-correspondence which had
recently been spoken of as a great success — Hope and
Star. Evidently he did not understand his enthusiasm
on receiving them, and was quite at a loss when asked to
" bring out one more point." He made a feeble attempt
to explain, faltering out at last the real titles of the two
poems, and left the matter there for the time being.
Very dramatic is the next sitting, on March 6th, where
George Pelham, who had together with Hodgson acted
all the time as Myers's assistant, but mostly behind the
scenes, appeared and tried to unravel the misunder-
standings. He did not succeed with regard to Mr.
Piddington, but for the reader the following conversation
is instructive :
" G.P. Did he [Myers] tell you about My Star ?
" Mr. P. He did. Can you explain about My Star ?
"G.P. Yes it was a poem he had on his mind of Browning's.
" Mr. P. And why had he this poem on his mind ?
" G. P. He said because it was one of his test experi-
ments with a lady in the body to whom he refers as V. He
also had another : Evelyn — Evelyn Hope.
" Mr. P. Is that the explanation of the word which came
out as ' Evangehcal ' ?
" G. P. Yes. It was very stupid of Rector I must say as
Hodgson and Myers both kept repeating it over and over
again to him. I understand your Latin message very well.
" Mr. P. Well, will you show me that you understand it ?
" G. P. Yes certainly. You said in order to convince you
he should repeat a message not only through this lady Mrs. V.
but it should be reproduced here "
George Pelham's utterings are just as clear in them-
selves as they are erroneous with regard to the contents
of the Latin message ; but he was considerably less sure
CD. Y
322 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
when after some explanations on the part of Mr.
Piddington he left the scene. His remarks, however,
teach us how the Piper-personalities at this time appre-
hended the message. In reality, the opinion expressed
by G. P. was the only natural one after the sitting on
February 27th, where Mr, Piddington had incessantly
asked Myers to repeat something that had appeared in
Mrs. Verrall's script. How was it, after this, possible
to doubt that the Latin did refer to some new cross-
correspondence ? The more because the communicators
had conceived the idea that their former achievements
were thought to be unsatisfactory.
From this point there was not any question of the real
contents of the Latin message, but only of the title of
the Browning poem which Mrs. Verrall had quoted in her
script of January 28th. Myers had comprehended that
this was what Mr. Piddington demanded, and the latter
formulated his demand very clearly in a note which was
read to Myers on April 2nd by the new experimenter in
charge, Mrs. Sidgwick : " You promised to try to tell us
what particular poem of Browning's you meant to refer
to by the words Browning, Hope and Star."
There are several things that indicate that Myers had a
certain knowledge of Mrs. Verrall's Abt Vogler script.
For instance, he referred in a connection as if he endea-
voured to recall it, at the first sitting after February 27th,
to the circle and the triangle which are found there.
And from the very first he appeared to know that its
subject was survival — that " Hope " meant hope of a life
after death. This was quite another conception than
that which had suggested itself to Mr. Piddington after
he had read the script. But it was in fact the right one.
If an external agent had a share in it, his object must
have been to impress the idea of another world on the
automatist. It is already this thought that underlies
the " winged desire " ; but it appears to have fought
with other thoughts in Mrs. Verrall's mind. " Winged "
has led her to write " winged Eros," and Eros again
OTHER EXPERIMENTS 323
leads, as Mr. Piddington points out, to the meaningless
interpolation : " Then there is Blake and mocked my loss
of liberty " ; the quotation comes from Blake's Prince of
Love, who " mocks at the lover's loss of liberty." But
she reverts to that which is " all the same thing " : the
hope that leaves the earth for the sky, the unseen arc.
It is for the sake of these thoughts that Browning is
quoted.
Furthermore, it would by no means be unnatural if
the Latin message had filled Myers's mind with recollec-
tions of words and lines from Browning that speak of
earth and heaven and the intercourse between them,
seeing that it had made him realize his own position as an
intermediary between two worlds. But even if he had
attempted to impress them upon Mrs. Verrall, this, of
course, is quite another thing than if he had intended to
answer the message by means of them, and there was no
reason why they should have remained in his memory,
as they must have done in the latter case. On the other
hand, he could not know how far Mrs. Verrall caught his
thoughts ; " just how much she understood I am not
sure," he says in the Library case, and later : "I am glad
she registered the thoughts I indubitably gave her." For
one reason and another his conception of her script
must be vague. Besides, the incident was many weeks
old now, and the interval had been filled with cross-
correspondences and experiments in great abundance.
Such being the case, it would agree with the situation
if Myers must ponder somewhat over the matter before
he named a poem — and if he were mistaken. And this
was just what happened. On April 8th he reluctantly
told Mrs. Sidgwick that the poem he had " specially
thought of " was La Saisiaz. But this mistake is very
important. This long poem by Browning has for its sole
subject the possibility of a future life, ending with a
vision of Hope, whose arrow pierces the cloud of doubt.
If the trance-personality had not so much remembered it,
as devised that it might be this poem that had appeared
y 2
324 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
in Mrs. Verrall's script, he must not only have known the
tendency of her Browning quotations, but must withal be
very familiar with that poet. He could obtain it by
mind-reading as little as by clairvoyance, as it was
neither found in the thoughts of the experimenters nor in
the script^of Mrs. Verrall.
Myers, however, was far from being sure of having
found the right poem, and of course Mrs. Sidgwick's
surprise at the mention of it must add to his doubts. At
the following sitting it became evident that he had
abandoned La Saisiaz, and the next time he named the
right one — Aht Vogler.
His joy and triumph after he had succeeded in getting
through the difficult and, to Rector, incomprehensible
German name seem in fact to indicate that he now felt
sure of having found the right poem. His assurance was
like that of a person who remembers, and not of one who
guesses. And with a deep emotion he explained what
just this poem meant to him, adding : " The thing which
impressed me most was the lines beyond the grave."
He would have said more, but, as impUed by Rector and
confirmed at a later sitting, some words were left out here
by mistake. It turned out afterwards that he had had
in mind the lines about the return of the dead from Abt
Vogler, Stanza V. :
" The wonderful Dead who have passed through the body
and gone
But were back once more to breathe in an old world worth
their new."
Thus it is evident that Abt Vogler' s significance to him
was the same as that of La Saisiaz. It was a poem that
touched on the problem of a future life. For this reason
had he — if it were he — mentioned it through Mrs. Verrall ;
for this reason he at any rate was now sure of its being
the poem that expressed what was for him the meaning
of the Latin message— that he should be a messenger to
the living from the dead. Afterwards, as Rector says,
he tried " to explain a little about the poem," speaking
OTHER EXPERIMENTS 325
of the resemblance between his own experience and Abt
Vogler's " doubts and fears, then his acceptance of God and
faith in Him." But Mrs. Sidgwick had expected a wholly
different explanation of his choice of Abt Vogler. To her
his speech was quite irrelevant as long as he did not
mention the line about the three sounds. But she must
wait a long time for that. That Myers considered his
answer satisfactory may be seen from the conversations
at the close of the sitting on April 24th and at the next
two :
" M. Now can I do more to help you than give other
messages ?
" Mrs. S. I should like you to say exactly why that poem
was so appropriate as an answer to the Latin message.
" M. Because of the appropriate conditions mentioned in
it which applied to my own life ; and nothing I could think
of so completely answered it to my mind as those special
words."
Mrs. Sidgwick got no other reply that time. But
Myers did not forget that at the end of the sitting she had
seemed less content than when he had first mentioned
Abt Vogler. So when he met her again, he himself intro-
duced the subject :
" M. I am anxious to-day to clear one or two things. Do
you remember my reference to the poem ? Did you wish to
ask anything more ? Do you remember when I said I had
passed through my body and returned ? I tried to give it
clearly, but was not sure you understood.
" Mrs. S. Do you mean you gave the name of the poem ?
" M. Oh ycb. I mean I tried to give another part also
which referred to completed happiness in this life and the
possibility of returning to the old world again to prove the
truth of survival of bodily death."
All that the message had meant to him is given in this
single sentence. But he felt the want of sympathy, and
said urgently :
" M. Mrs. Sidgwick, dear old friend, do you hear me at
all?
"Mrs. S. Yes I hear and I think that I shall
understand.
326 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
" M. I believe you will when I tell you I have returned to
breathe in the old world which is not however better than our
new."
This time he had succeeded in getting the important
lines through, and no lack of enthusiasm on the part of
the experimenters could make him doubt the sufficiency
of this response. At the next meeting it was not he who
reverted to the message. Nay, he had even ceased to
think of it, and was unprepared to return to it. He had
spoken about another question, and occasioned by a
passing remark Mrs. Sidgwick's mention of it :
" M. And the Latin [message] I have previously answered
through both lights sufficiently for you to understand that I
have really answered at last.
" Mrs. S. The Latin message, as you know, refers to
cross-correspondences, but also to something more, and there
is a line in Abt Vogler which we think you had in mind as
describing that something more.
" M. Did you say line ? [of the] poem ? I remember the
message as referring to my giving proofs of survival of bodily
death through cross correspondence messages 1 could
not help thinking of Browning "
Only after a time was he able to repeat his former reply
— that the point where the poem suggested itself to him
was this : " Those who passed beyond do return, those
beyond mortal vision," In return it is here confirmed
that this was what he wanted to add when he immediately
after his first mention of Abt Vogler said that the thing
which impressed him most was the lines " beyond the
grave." This time, however, Myers had understood that
he had not achieved all that was wanted of him. And
there was in fact one thing which in his eagerness to explain
his choice of A ht Vogler he had in the later sittings quite
lost sight of : the star. Of course it had been clear to him
that the Hope-Star poem must in some way be connected
with stars. At the first sittings by Mrs. Sidgwick he had
said that the poem referred to " life after death and stars."
La Saisiaz he had among other things described as a
" poem which Browning wrote to a friend about star and
OTHER EXPERIMENTS 327
hope," where " star " is wholly misplaced. Even into
Abt Vogler he had introduced the star, talking about " his
questioning and the answer through his seeing a star," a
mistake which is no doubt due to the idea of a star being
indispensable in " the poem." At the same time, how-
ever, the star had had another significance for him.
But to understand this it is necessary to go back some
months.
At a Piper-sitting on January i6th, 1907, Mr. Pidding-
ton had proposed that Myers should mark his cross-
correspondences with some sign, " say a triangle within
a circle." Myers's reply had shown that he understood
his meaning : " You wish me to make a sign when giving
a word at Mrs. Verrall's also at Mrs. Holland's, the same
sign." On January 28th, as seen above, a triangle within
a circle had been drawn beneath the script of Mrs. Verrall.
It is true that it was used to illustrate the quotation from
Aht Vogler about the perfect arc, but it may on the part
of Myers have been a result of Mr. Piddington's sugges-
tion, or may have served two ends ; at any rate Myers
when on March 6th he told the experimenter that he had
endeavoured to draw it, interposed the remark, " As you
suggested." There are, however, several tokens of his
having preferred to use another sign, viz., a star. And
though he first mentioned the circle in connection with
Mrs. Verrall's script of January 28th, he seems afterwards
to have thought that he had marked it with a star. When
on alluding to La Saisiaz he wanted to explain that he
spoke about the poem in Mrs. Verrall's script, he said
first : "I made a circle," but immediately added : "I
then drevv or tried to draw a star." In fact on that
occasion no star was drawn, but only the word aster
written ; but Mrs. Sidgwick confounded it with another
script and replied : " Yes, there was a star drawn."
From thence Myers unhesitatingly connects the star
with the script of " the poem " ; on April 24th, imme-
diately preceding his efforts to give the name Aht Vogler,
a star was drawn, and he exclaimed : "I remembered
328 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
Vol [Vogler] as it came to my memory." But it was as
the sign that the star made him recollect the poem.
When he quoted from it, it was other thoughts that filled
his mind.
Seen on this background, the sequel becomes clear.
From Aipn\ 24th till May 6th, Myers had repeatedly
vindicated his choice of Abt Vogler. But Mrs. Sidgwick
had not been satisfied with his quotations ; she had asked
for a line which was not among them. He then remem-
bered the star, which of course must not be absent from
the Hope-Star poem. And lie succeeded in recalling a
line about a star. It was not among those which had
impressed him specially ; indeed his recollection of it
was faint. But its significance, he believed, lay in its
referring to the sign. So at the very next sitting, on
May 7th, a star was drawn, and with some difficulty, and
alluding to another line of Abt Vogler, he wrote the
following :
" In my passion to reach you as clear as the sky I quote :
if instead of a fourth [sound] framed a star — came a star.
And to make it clearer I drew a star. This completes my
answer to the Latin message, if you have received all my
words clearly. In my passion to reach you clearly I have
made Rector try to draw a star for me so there can be no
mistake. When I quoted to Mrs. Verrall I drew the star so
as to make it clearer and I wished Rector to reproduce it in
connection with the words in the line."
Thus at last Myers had completed his answer. That
he conceived the meaning of the star as he did was only
natural ; it ought to be drawn by two mediums " so
there could be no mistake." That at the same time a
line about a star ought to be quoted was certainly a
strange device. But as the experimenters with great
urgency demanded a line, and Myers of course could not
suspect the real reason for this demand, it was very sen-
sible on his part to conjecture that it must refer to the
sign. When on a later occasion he wanted to explain the
experiment to Sir Oliver Lodge, he must no doubt have
felt that this was not done easily. But at this point he
OTHER EXPERIMENTS 329
had received so many assurances of his success that he
could not doubt that it was all right. Though with some
difficulty, he succeeded in fact in presenting a short
review of its last stages regarded from his own point of
view. What preceded the moment when he understood
that it was a question of reproducing som.ething which
had appeared in Mrs. Verrall's script, he must give up
explaining. What he said was the following :
" Remember when Piddington gave me his message the
special point in it was for me to give definite proof through
both lights. The first thought I had was to repeat a few
words or lines of Browning's poem, but in order to make it
still more definite I registered a star, and the lines I quoted
to you before [i.e., ' Instead of a fourth sound came a star ']
were the most appropriate I could find."
" To repeat or give more words of Browning's poem,"
he had in his last conversation with Mr. Piddington,
on March 13th, understood to be the task before him.
Ever since he had tried to do this. With the words
from Abt Vogler about the returning dead he had
believed himself to have performed his task. Per-
ceiving that more was wanted, he had drawn the star
and quoted " the line " — not knowing what it meant
to Mr. Piddington, and not having thought of it before.
As may be seen, his recollection of it was imperfect to
the last.
The experimenters looked upon the reference to Abt
Vogler and the quotation of the line about the three
sounds as a proof of Myers having comprehended the
Latin message and shown his comprehension through
Mrs, Verrall's script of January 28th. As regards the
critics, some explained the quotation by mind-reading,
while others were of opinion that the experimenters in
charge had given the Piper-Myers sufficient hints to
obtain Abt Vogler and the line in reply. I on my part
cannot subscribe to any of these contentions. I am
inclined to think that the Piper-personalities never dis-
played a greater independence or a clearer intelligence
330 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
than when they made their way out of the confusion
which Mr. Piddington's idea had wrought.^
Mr. Dorr's experiments were no more than those of
Mr. Piddington confined to cross-correspondences alone.
He had cqnceived the good plan of reading aloud to the
Piper-personalities, especially to Myers, divers classic
things in English translation, fragments from Myers's
autobiography, and the like, with the intention of observ-
ing how they would react upon it. This mode of pro-
ceeding produced many interesting results, though it
perhaps, as accentuated by Mrs. Verrall, who reports
some of the experiments, suffered from several faults —
too many topics being presented at a time, etc. As in
the case of Mr. Piddington, the trance-personalities must
often ask the experimenter not to overwork them. It is
fair to state this, as the performances of course required
the greater intelligence — whether that of Mrs. Piper or
of the alleged communicators — the more severe the
conditions were.
There cannot here be a question of reviewing many of
the experiments, and it is no easy matter to decide which
ones ought to be preferred. I choose a few of the most
simple where Myers is the communicator. Often both
he and Hodgson appeared to be present, at other times
only one of them. It is interesting to see that while
Mr. Dorr might forget which of them had been his inter-
locutor, the communicators themselves were never mis-
taken as to what they had taken part in. On May 8th,
Mr. Dorr had read some lines aloud to Hodgson, and men-
tioned them on May 12th to Myers. " Did you recite it
to me before, friend? " asked the latter. " If so, I did
not fuUy understand." The dramatic form is as usual
right at Mrs. Piper's.
One of the cases in which Myers displayed the greatest
' For further particulars about this incident see my paper, " The
Latin Message Experiment," Proceedings S.P.R., Vol. XXVI., pp. 147
— 170.
OTHER EXPERIMENTS 331
classical erudition is doubtless the following. At the
sitting on March 12th, 1908, Mr. Dorr read aloud the first
ten lines from Dry den's version of the Mneid. The last
of them run as follows :
" For what offence the queen of Heaven began
To prosecute so brave, so just a man ;
Involved his anxious life in endless cares,
Exposed to wants, and hurried into wars."
When Mr. Dorr had read these lines Myers interposed :
" Is there such anger in celestial minds ?
A hero for piety renowned — should suffer and toil."
The first sentence translates the line that was to come
(verse 11), tantcene animis ccBlestibus irce, which Dryden
renders, " Can heavenly minds such high resentment
show? " but which Mr. Dorr had not yet read aloud.
The ensuing sentence is a perfectly accurate rendering
of the immediately preceding lines {Mneid v. 9 — 10),
which are given a little more freely by Dryden. " It is
certain," Mrs. Verrall writes, " that a Virgilian scholar,
hearing a translation of insignem pietate virum tot adire
labores impulerit, would expect the words tantcBue animis
ccelestihus ircB ; and it is a remarkable proof of familiarity
with the opening lines of the first Mneid to combine
phrases which translate both what has, and what has not,
been read in Dryden's version." It can hardly be denied
that she is right in this.
A small, but interesting proof of a thoroughgoing
literary culture is the following. At the sitting on
April 22nd, 1908, Mr. Dorr read to Myers ten lines from
Shelley's translation of The Cyclops of Euripides, pur-
posely so chosen that they neither contained names nor
any other thing that might serve as a clue :
" Mr. D. ' One with eyes the fairest
Cometh from nis dwelhng,
Some one loves thee, rarest.
Bright beyond my telling.
In thy grace thou shinest
Like some nymph divinest
332 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
In her caverns dewy : —
All delights pursue thee, |
Soon pied flowers, sweet-breathing.
Shall thy head be wreathing.'
" M. You read well.
" Mr. D. Now see if you can tell me whose verses these
are. It's a translation from the Greek.
" M. Did he write Ode to the Skylark ?
" Mr. D. Yes, that is splendid, quite wonderful I think.
" M. Thank you. If I am not Myers, who am I ? "
To complete the characterization of the Piper-Myers
may finally be adduced an incident from one of Mr. Dorr's
first sittings. The latter was^reading aloud passages from
Frederic Myers's Fragments of Prose and Poetry, which is
partly an autobiography. Among other things he read :
" From ten to sixteen I lived much in the inward recital of
Homer, ^Fschylus, Lucretius, Horace, and Ovid. It was the
life of about the sixth century before Christ, on the isles of
the ^gean, which drew me most."
As these words were spoken, Myers wrote :
" A life incomplete. Oh ! it is all so clear, I recall so well
my feelings, my emotions, my joys, my pain and much pain.
Oh ! I am transported back to Greece. I recall it all. I am
transported — I remember before my marriage all my imagina-
tions, my pain, my longing, my unrest. I lived it all out as
few men did. I drank, as Omar K[hay]yam, life and all its
joys and griefs. And never was it complete. A disappointing
— long, dreary longing for a fulfilment of my dreamed of joys.
I found it here and only here. ' Men may come and men may
go, but I go on for ever.' ^ I shall be delighted to complete my
memories of Homer, Horace and Vergil until you are satisfied
that I am still one among you, not a fantasy but a reality."
There is perhaps nothing " evidential " in this. But
wonderfully well it fits the personality that has been
depicted at the Piper-sittings — the wise and gentle scholar,
the unpretending and untiring champion of the cause
which had filled the life of Frederic Myers.
1 Tennyson.
SECTION VII
Conclusion. New Mediums
CHAPTER XIX
CONCLUSION
In the preceding sections I have presented as much of
the materials gathered by the researchers as seemed
sufficient to yield a basis for the judgment of the question
which is the subject of this book. It has been my aim
to present " the evidence " in such fullness that it might
speak for itself. My own words can be few.
What, then, has this evidence told us ? It told us in
the first place that Professor Flournoy was right when he
pictured mediums whose statements originated from their
own dream-world, whose non-normal faculties at best
consisted in their being able to remember in a trance-
condition things that had long ago been obliterated from
their waking consciousness, or had perhaps scarcely
reached it. It told us in the second place that Hartmann
was right when he assigned to certain people a super-
normal power of perceiving things which were not only
distant with regard to space but might also be with regard
to time, and which in the latter case might belong not
only to the past but even to the future. We found
mediums, or automatists, who possessed this power, and
we saw that it was, like cryptomnesia, utilized for the
fabrication of romances in which their waking conscious-
ness had no share, but considered the products of foreign
beings. All this made us ask : Is there, then, no limit
to what may be perceived clairvoyantly and fabricated
unconsciously ? Is it possible that the whole difference
334 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
is, that in the case of those who are only a little medium-
istic, or a little entranced, we may trace the cause of their
performances, discover the sources of their knowledge,
the motives for their fabricating, while in a highly
mediumistic and deeply entranced individual like Mrs.
Piper we are unable to do this ? Is it only a difference
in degree ? Do all of them on a small scale achieve what
Mrs. Piper and similar mediums do on a large one ?
Let us remember what Professor Flournoy relates.
" There was hardly," he writes, " a prominent or well-
known man in Geneva who had departed this life who did
not soon afterwards manifest to me through some medium,
but invariably these manifestations corresponded to the
medium's idea of the deceased persons rather than to my
own relations with them." He adduces divers ridiculous
instances of the platitudes assigned to the departed.
Here, then, pure imagination sufficed to explain the
phenomenon ; clairvoyance did not play a part. In the
same way the great men of the past were re-constructed ;
Calvin recommended spiritualism in the tritest phrases,
and through a medium, too, who was the intelligent
authoress of philosophical and moral writings. Finally
we ought to recall the most famous among the Genevese
mediums, Helen Smith, who composed in trance romances
about the conditions on the planet Mars, and for one thing
invented for the use of the inhabitants a language that in
the most naive manner imitated her own mother-tongue.
With good reason. Professor Flournoy's experiments with
these mediums resulted in his talking of silliness, childish
joy in self-invented comedies, and relapse to a lower stage
of development than that occupied by the sensitives in
their waking condition.
It is a tremendous leap Professor Flournoy must make
when proceeding to speak about Mrs. Piper. The possi-
bility of mind-reading he had beforehand granted. " A
good medium," he says, " is able to mirror, or transmit,
the unconscious ideas of the sitters." Here already he
had by far exceeded the standpoint of his own mediums.
CONCLUSION 335
But as regards Mrs. Piper's performances, he saw that it
was necessary to go further and to admit " an active
and selective telepathy," by the aid of which the medium
could choose from the minds of many living — present or
absent — the elements from which the images of the dead
were reconstructed. Or else, he suggested, the incom-
plete image of the defunct which one of the sitters had
transmitted telepathically to Mrs. Piper might attract
to itself other fragmentary images possessed by other
persons, and thus give birth to a complete whole. In
extension, if not in principle, this does not much differ
from clairvoyance. And even so the cases where the
sitter does not know the communicator are not taken into
account. In fact, there is nothing for it but to grant her
clairvoyance, and that a wholly unlimited clairvoyance.
Well, clairvoyance is a fact, I shall not here dwell on
its limitations. Possibly the entranced medium possesses
it in a higher degree than the waking psychometrists or
the semi-waking automatists. That question cannot be
decided, as the problem at issue is just whence the
entranced medium obtains her knowledge— whether from
the discarnate or by means of clairvoyance. For the sake
of the argument it is necessary to grant Mrs. Piper this
supernormal faculty in the farthest possible dimension.
Mrs. Piper, then, is clairvoyant. There is nothing so
distant nor so forgotten that she cannot get hold of it.
She does not always get it, but this is not because it is a
question of a specially distant or wholly forgotten matter ;
it may be quite simple and obvious things she fails in,
while more difficult tasks are performed. But having
admitted all this, having admitted that her knowledge
may be due to clairvoyance, because clairvoyance exists,
we proceed to something else — namely to her utilization
of the material to which she, maybe through clairvoyance,
has access.
Her command of it is wonderful, her use of it that of a
master. What she makes of it we have seen ; here it
can only be hinted at. She creates a figure, Phinuit,
336 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
whom she endows with mediiimistic powers, with clair-
voyance and the faculty of psychometrizing, with medical
knowledge and prevision ; a medium, though an imperfect
one — as mediums mostly are. Beside him, she creates
figures in the likeness of deceased persons. These she
does not piake mediumistic — they know no more than
their human prototypes might be supposed to know. In
return, their knowledge is not dim and groping like that
of Phinuit, but certain enough within their limited
territory, apart from the slips of memory that are natural
for human beings, ^
And she goes further. She creates George Pelham, who
also represents an individual who has died, but who lives
on in new activity, the old George whom friends and rela-
tives recognize, and yet quite a new George. The same
applies to Professor Hyslop's father, Bennie Junot, Hodgson
and Myers — in short, to all the prominent portraits in
Mrs. Piper's gallery. It is not only a question of attract-
ing, as Professor Flournoy suggested, other people's
images of the persons represented ; when Mrs. Piper has
subliminally created her figures, they live, talk, and act,
not as they have talked and acted in the past, but as they
might be conceived to do if they still existed under new
conditions. It is no historical novel about bygone times
that Mrs. Piper composes on the basis of her mysterious
knowledge. The latter is the material of which she may
have fabricated her persons ; but her ability does not
end here ; she presents them in their relations with the
survivors, she shows us their reciprocal relations. Together
with the sitters and the researchers, she acts an extempora-
neous drama with a never-failing faculty of carrying
out the characterization of the countless personalities,
and making each of them play just the part claimed by
the situation. She even ventures to depict them con-
fused or momentarily incapable of replying to the proffered
questions, if the characterization demands it. For this
is not a way of covering her own possible lack of know-
ledge. It is part of the drama that the personalities
CONCLUSION 337
differ from each other with regard to clearness and faculty
of communicating. If the actual communicator cannot
answer what he is asked about, George Pelham may
perhaps learn it from him afterwards. Or, on the other
hand, what Phinuit could not obtain by psychome-
trizing, the spirit might tell when he himself appeared.
Mrs. Piper draws from an inexhaustible well, and distri-
butes her riches with the eye of a dramatic genius.
She does not flinch at any task. She has created
Myers, and she is so little afraid of the consequences
that she makes Hodgson ask the experimenters to give
him more opportunities to prove his identity ; she has
access to English literature and classic learning as to all
other knowledge, and need not fear to lack material for
his figure, the most exquisite she has produced. That
she can manage the cross-correspondences, and in a
highly intelligent manner make her way out of the mazes
of the Latin message experiment, is scarcely more remark-
able than the rest.
The question is then whether a person is subliminally
capable of all tliis. We have heard Professor Flournoy's
opinion. On reading about his Mile. X. one is reminded
of Mrs. Verrall and the other English automatists.
Intelligent, cultivated — nay, in the case of Mrs. Verrall
and her daughter, possessed of classical erudition — as they
were, their automatic productions might assume a form
which might deceive. But, in fact, it became for this
reason the more noticeable that their writings were so
incoherent and puerile as on a closer examination they
most often turned out to be. The automatists themselves
had an open eye for these qualities. It required many
exhortations to make Mrs. Holland continue her writing,
and Mrs. Verrall, who has herself reported her first pro-
ductions, mentions them in more than one place in a very
ironical manner. One faculty certainly seems to dis-
tinguish the subconsciousness in preference to the waking
man — memory. No doubt it is this phenomenon, cryp-
tomnesia, the faculty of drawing in trance or semi-trance
CD. Z
338 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
things from a hidden store which the conscious self ignores,
that has contributed the most to assign importance to
the automatic productions. It is the same faculty that
distinguishes the hypnotized person ; it may in this
connection be worth noting that a renowned physiologist ^
says that though such a person may remember many
details which the waking self has forgotten, the accumu-
lated store of learning is not made use of by him as it is
by the unmutilated consciousness of the waking man,
and, above all, " the accumulated knowledge of the past
is not at the command of the hypnotic self for deliberate
judgment, for the determination of conduct and the
expression of the will."
• •••••
This, then, is how matters stand with regard to the
evidence for communication with the dead. Everything
depends on the possibility of Mrs. Piper's automatic
productions being ingenious while those of other people
are infantile and foolish. To me it has appeared impos-
sible.
Of course, within the boundary of a single book it has
been infeasible to draw any but the roughest outlines of
the reply to the question. Above all, it must be accen-
tuated that there has not been any question of explaining
the phenomena, but only of their classification. It ought
however to be emphasized, that in spite of all disparity
they constitute a unity. Nature makes no bounds. It
is only apparently that there is a chasm even between the
silliest dream-fabrications and the manifestations through
Mrs. Piper. All of them grow in the same soil — the
mediumistic state of dissociation, that state where, to
use an expression which must only be taken as a symbol,
the spirit appears to have more or less completely left
the body. The effect of this state may be that there are
as in sleep born fancies for which the waking reason is
not responsible. But the same state, when the dis-
' Morton Prince, The Dissociation of a Personality, pp. 86 — 87.
CONCLUSION 339
sociation is more complete or the individual more fit for it,
may make it possible for other intelligences to make use
of the organism, A small quantity of mediumism pro-
duces the former result, a large one the latter. But it is
the same principle that underlies both phenomena.^
There are a quantity of minor questions which it has
been impossible to consider here. One of the most
important is the question of the interference of the
medium's subconsciousness in those cases where it is not
the sole factor. Even in the case of a medium of the
type of Mrs. Piper, and as deeply entranced as she is, it
seems to play a certain part. When Hodgson ^ once said
through her that " every communication must have the
human element," he no doubt spoke the truth.
Suggestibility and other subliminal qualities appear at
times to influence the communicators when they make use
of a medium's organism ; in the strangest way they are
now and again seen to protrude. Sometimes it is as if the
communicators must forcibly suppress a foreign tendency.
There might be quoted a number of cases where a com-
municator is on the point of accepting a suggestion, but
in due time succeeds in rejecting it. Thus, Professor
James had at a sitting on May 21st, 1906, proposed that
Hodgson should undertake Rector's part as intermediary.
" Yes," was the answer, " that is a very good suggestion,
very good." But immediately after he said : " But he
repeats for me very cleverly and he understands the
management of the light." And on a later occasion he
expressed in the strongest words the necessity of Rector's
intervention : " It is Rector who is speaking and he speaks
for me. I have no desire to take his place. He under-
stands the conditions better than any individual spirit.
When I finished with the conditions in the earthly life
I finished with my control over the light."
Another instance of suggestibility presents an incident
' Dissociation may withal produce pathological states ; but this does
not involve that mediumism is in itself pathological, which is not
indicated by anything else.
2 See above, p. 269.
Z 2
340 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
from the Horace Ode case.^ Myers had not answered
Mrs. Verrall's question : " Which ode of Horace entered
deeply into your inner hfe ? " But when during the Latin
message experiment he had cited the hnes from Abt
Vogler about the dead who return to breathe in the old
world, the experimenters, who did not recognize the
quotation, thought that it was possibly due to an attempt
to answer the former question ; the Archytas ode which
Mrs. Verrall had in mind alludes to the unsatisfactoriness
of our single and short earthly existence. In spite of
Myers having, as has been seen above, quoted the lines
about the returning dead for quite a different reason, he
accepted at the moment Mrs. Sidgwick's suggestion about
connecting them with the Horace question. On the next
day he tried to retract his answer, and acknowledged that
he only remembered the ode " in a sense."
Of the same kind it is when Myers, to Mrs. Sidgwick's
question about Abt Vogler, " Do you mean that you
gave the name of the poem ? " replies : " Oh yes. I
mean that I tried to give another part also," etc.^ The
communicators are obliging in a somewhat unnatural
manner that recalls the forced obedience of the hypno-
tized person. It is a task of no small import to elucidate
how far they are influenced by the subliminal qualities.
And in the sam.e way divers problems might be pointed
out whose solution must be the next step for those who
had attained to the conviction that the principal question
was answered.
1 Cf. above, pp. 311 — 12. J
2 See above, p. 325.
CHAPTER XX
NEW MEDIUMS
It is by means of the manifestations at the Piper-
sittings that I have attempted to prove the commmiica-
tion with the dead. Mrs. Piper was for a long time the
only medium with whom experiments were conducted
in a large number under scientific supervision, and the
material collected in this wise is of a copiousness that has
not yet been equalled. In later years, however, Professor
Hyslop has experimented with other mediums of a similar
type, and a series of reports on these experiments has been
published in the Proceedings of the American Society for
Psychical Research. ^
In itself there is no reason for discussing this material
here. But it is interesting to find again through these
new mediums " the group," as Myers-Hodgson-Pelham
call themselves ; with them also Professor Hyslop's
father, who has become one of the most ardent collabora-
tors in the work of enlightening humanity about the truth
of the survival of bodily death. When Mrs. Chenoweth
(pseudonym), who is one of Professor Hyslop's best
mediums, presents, for instance, George Pelham to us, it
is like meeting a good friend once more. It is precisely
the old G. P. who talks, for instance, in the autumn of
1910 with Professor Hyslop about the first attempts at
communicating made by Professor William James, who
had died in the preceding August and seems to have joined
the group immediately :
" G. P. James is very particular and anxious to have
everything just right. He is improving, we think. Do not
you ?
" Prof. H. Yes, I do.
* The extracts below are from Vol. VI.
342 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
ti
G. P. When he can push the pad around to suit himself
he will be getting pretty near into my class, but not yet. I
still hold the pennant and I don't intend to let any emigrant
from little Cambridge get in ahead of me. You see there are
some of us who still have a streak of human cussedness in
us "
On another occasion George Pelham reverts to the
period when we first became acquainted with him, the
time of his earliest manifestations through Mrs. Piper :
" G. P. I am always tempted to recall some of my own
past every time I return for I never can quite recover from
the awful grilling which Hodgson gave me after my most
respectable and sudden departure. You are not such a fiend
as he was or we would all be in the deep deep sea.
" Prof. H. Thank you.
" G. P. You get the evidence just the same and we are
not so distressed. The sittings with you are so much
pleasanter, so much more social. Hodgson says that will do,
he wants to hear no more of such soft compliments "
Professor Hyslop asserts that the medium had not read
the records of the Piper-sittings. But even if she had
done so, it would require no small amount of intelligence
to produce on the basis thereof the above pieces of charac-
terization.
A new communicator was, besides Professor James,
Mr. Frank Podmore. This well known critic of the
results of psychical research had, like James, died in
August, 1910 ; he appeared already in the following
October through Mrs. Chenoweth, who, being an American,
had never heard the name of the English author. Pod-
more had in his lifetime disputed, not exactly the possi-
bility of a future life, but the probability of getting into
communication with the departed. Above all, he had
contended that no proof had been produced of it. His
method had been that of attacking all weak points in
the communications without regard to the totality, and
without attempting any attack where the position was
strongest. No doubt he did good service by pointing
out the weaknesses, and by demanding that all possi-
bilities for a human explanation ought to be faced ; but
NEW MEDIUMS 343
he generally reckoned only with explanations like fraud,
self-deception, cryptomnesia, and at most telepathy.
Clairvoyance he was rather unwilling to admit, and to
psychometry he does not seem to have paid much atten-
tion. That he had not believed in it was affirmed by
Miss Johnson in reply to an inquiry by Professor Hyslop.
For those who know Mr. Podmore as an author it is
curious to read a conversation that took place in May,
1911, through Mrs. Smead (pseudonym), another medium
of Professor Hyslop's, between him and the latter. Pod-
more had, as stated afterwards by Hodgson, made the
acquaintance of a recently deceased lady who in Hodg-
son's lifetime had had sittings with Mrs. Piper, and who
had herself practised psychometry. He had thus been
converted into a belief in this phenomenon, a belief which
Professor Hyslop did not share. The unwillingness of
the latter to accept his opinion made the conversation
rather long but at the same time so instructive that I
propose to reproduce it with only a few omissions :
" P. Different objects do carry their influence, Hyslop,
more than you know.
" Prof. H. All right, I am glad to hear that.
" P. Yes and in some cases it is all from your side. Do
you know I wish to convey the meaning [of] Psychometry ? ^
" Prof. H. Yes.
" P. Yes. But only when objects are used continually ^
does it come like second nature to the ' Medium.'
" Prof. H. I understand.
" P. A case of Practice makes perfect. Yes that was how
I find it was with some of those I experimented with since I
have been here.
"Prof H. Good.
" P. All of the earth side. Do you know that ?
" Prof. H. No, I do not, but I am glad to hear it.
" P. Yes, these workers of whom I speak did much in this
way ; believed it was from here but only of the psy[chometry].
Yes, of earth life. Impressions of ours are left more
distinctly on those things we have kept about our person
continually. Yes do you not find it so ?
" Prof. H. I do not know, unless you mean , . .
" P. You get best results as you term it, H., from such.
^ Here and elsewhere the medium spells " Scicometry."
2 I.e., by the medium.
344 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
But sometimes the owner of it is not present and yet you get
information from them.
" Prof. H. Can you get little incidents of their lives, that
is, of the owners from the objects alone ?
" P. Not I, but some on your side, H., can. Can you
understand me ?
" Prof. H.^ Not quite fully because that must be long
investigated.
" P. Fact yes
" Prof H. All right.
" P. positively so too. Yes it does not of necessity need
be that we are with them to get the earth memories.
" Prof. H. Do you mean that the associations . . .
" P. remain with them.
" Prof. H. affect the mind of the . . .
" P. Yes yes yes, H., that is it exactly, H., that is why so
much is taken for Spirits that is not really so.
" Prof H. But . . . "
It was a mistake on the part of Podmore to conclude
from Professor Hyslop's utterances, which he himself cut
short, that he agreed with him. Professor Hyslop, how-
ever, in the sequel set forth his opinion so plainly that
the mistake was cleared up :
" P. Psychometry stops there. And if you keep the object
from their personal touch, H., you do not get much. Can you
understand my expression ?
" Prof. H. If you mean that many thoughts from the
spirit world are conveyed to the mind of the psychic and then
are recalled by association with the objects.
" P. No. No. I mean that those objects hold for a
while the impressions our Spirits left with them.
" Prof. H. Do you mean that thoughts are left on the
objects and can . . .
" P. Certainly, be picked up, if you please, by the ones
having the gift to do so. Not tel[epathy].
" Prof H. I understand that.
" P. They, H., could not get them if the objects were not
brought into contact with them.
" Prof H. I understand, but it is incredible to me.
" P. No, but if you keep the object from their touch and
your own, as it has been suggested, we can keep more in touch
with our earth friend, as it is then a case of our personality
and kept out of reach of the other's touch, the psychic touch,
if you like. You know I did not believe in Psy[chometry]
having any hold, when there, but when I came to try those
I had experimented with I found the new difficulty.
NEW MEDIUMS 345
" Prof. H. Then would it be better always not to have
objects near at hand when experimenting ?
" P. Not to let the psychic come in touch personally with
them. Do you now get my thought ?
'' Prof. H. Yes.
"P. If you desire a perfect set of facts and clear ones
never let them see or touch them, as they will always get
impressions if personal contact exists.
" Prof. H. I understand.
" P. Keep them as H[odgson] was told to do. I ridiculed
the idea when there, but it is true nevertheless.
" Prof. H. Then you simply read off the object your own
tt
P. life history, yes.
" Prof. H. Then it might be difficult to prove spirits
at all.
" P. If as I said, H., you let the psychic touch them. Can
you not understand yet ?
" Prof. H. Yes go on.
" P. It is only, H., when no other comes in contact with
our earth memories can they be proven as of Personal Identity.
Cannot you see that if another comes in contact it takes away
the proof ?
" Prof. H. That may be, but go on
"P. It was hard for me to believe it.
" Prof. H. Yes, and it is hard for me to believe it now, in
spite of your statement.
" P. Fact just the same.
;; Prof. H. All right.
" P. I never did give in.
" Prof. H. No, and I shall have to get much more evidence
to make me give in.
" P. Try it for yourself with my thoughts in view. See if
some of those you experiment with do not find it difficult to
get information without personal touch of objects, H."
As may be seen, Podmore's statement on the whole
agrees with the results we have previously attained to
with regard to " articles." But it is interesting to see
that it is he who advocates them, and advocates them
just in the way he does. Now he knows that communi-
cation is a fact, but he has also become convinced that
psychometry is so ; and he immediately discerns the
possibilities involved in this. He has made himself very
familiar with the subject. He knows that it can be
useful to bring objects, as it helps the communicators
346 COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEAD
to keep in touch with the sitters. That was just what
the utterances of Rector and others at the Piper-sittings
went to show. But the objects must be kept as Hodgson
was told to do — they must not come into contact with
the mediun^ ; the reverse may, even if the deceased owners
are present, occasion an interminghng of the psychic's
own impressions, and, what is the most important, it
takes away the proof. How characteristic that this sceptic
par excellence above all thinks about the proof !
And not only does he want to teach the experimenter
how to avert the objectionable influence of the articles ;
he points out, moreover, that the psychometric faculty
of certain mediums may become a means of deciding
whether the communications coming through them are
genuine or not. " Try yourself and see if some of those
you experiment with do not find it difficult to get infor-
mation without personal touch of objects." This is the
difference between those who can only psychometrize
and those who are really in communication with the dead ;
only the latter can procure information without touching
the objects.
Professor Flournoy in his book Spirits and Mediums
expresses half in jest the wish that " Myers or the other
spirits — if they really come into play at all — will reveal
to us a means of eliminating from mediumistic manifes-
tations the combined action of the subliminal imagination,
and of telepathy from the living." If the misleading
term telepathy be replaced by the more real notion
psychometry, Podmore has in a degree fulfilled this wish.
The danger of the sitters themselves being psychome-
trized no doubt remains, but it is of less consequence,
as in that way information may perhaps be obtained
about the living, but in a very small measure about the
dead. As for the action of imagination, Professor
Flournoy has himself indicated the means of discrimina-
tion by his accentuation of the inferiority of the subliminal
products.
So much for generalities. In the concrete, however,
NEW MEDIUMS 347
the difBculties are great. Between a medium like Mrs.
Piper and those described by Professor Flournoy there
are many grades ; nay, even among the apparently
genuine communications are interspersed things that do
not bear the stamp of genuineness. Beforehand only
one thing is certain — that an immense quantity of what
believing spiritualists accept as messages from beyond
must fall beneath a scientific criticism. On the other
hand, there may be danger of overlooking some golden
grain in the big heaps of chaff. But worse would it
be to call anything gold which was not gold. And
however hard it might be for many to see what they
believed in weighed and found wanting, the loss might
be made up by a more perfect assurance that not every-
thing was false — that through some mediums at least,
with regard to some of their performances, the reality
was proved of that communication with the dead which
tells us that they are living, and that we too shall pass
through the gate of death into a new life.
\
I
i'.
INDEX
Anne, " Aunt Anne," control, 189
Baltimore, Mrs., 79
Bergmann, Miss, 272
Calvin, control, 3, 12, 334
Carruthers, Eliza, 229, 231, 245-
246, 248. — , James, 229 ;
control, 231, 236, 247
Chenoweth (pseudonym), Mrs.,
341-342
Clarke, Mr. and Mrs., 197-198
Clarke, Frank, control, 260
Constable, Mr., 85-88
Coventry, Mrs., 25
Curtois, Miss, 93-94
Dandiran, Mme., 9-10
" Doctor," control, 223, 226
Dobeln, von, 36-37
Dorr, George B., 271, 288-297,
303-304, 330-332
Dupond, Mme., 4-6
Elder, David, 249
Fawcett, Henry, 155. — , Mrs.,
155
Feilding, Everard, 130-131, 142-
145
Flournoy, Professor, 1-17, 42, 46,
73, 171, 17/, 333-337. 346-347
Forbes (pseudonym), Mrs. Diana,
59-85, 89, 121-123, 129, 139-
145, 159, 163, 165, 170, 284,
307, 309- — , Mr., 142, 159.
— , Talbot, control, 59, 66, 79-
81, 83-84, 142-145
Frith, Mrs., 305-308
Conner, Mrs., 40
Gurney, Edmund, 32, 50, 195,
312, 314 ; control, 59, 61, 66,
80, 83-84, 104-105, 108, III-
112, 130, 149, 192-195, 221
Hart, John (pseudonym), 199-
202
Hartmann, Eduard von, 16-31.
41-46, 174, 333
Hodgson, Dr. Richard, 69-72, 95-
100, 132, 134-138, 174-175, 177.
179-180, 187-188, 199-200, 202
-216, 218-220, 223-234, 236-
237, 239-245, 247, 249, 251-
267, 270, 272, 276-277, 305,
311 ; control, 133-138, 175.
267-275, 277, 280-283, 287-
299, 304-306, 311, 315, 321,
330, 336-339, 341-346
Holland (pseudonym), Mrs., loi-
171, 173-174, 273, 275-278,
286, 290-298, 306-309, 327, 337
Home, Mrs., 308-309
Howard, James, 200-202, 205-
207, 210-211, 213-215, 218,
311. — , Miss Katharine, 200.
— , Mrs. Mary, 200, 207-209,
211-213, 2l8
Hyde, Fred, 259
Hyslop, family, 229. — , Anna
(Annie), 229 ; control, 235, 244.
— , Charles, 229 ; control, 230-
231, 235, 244-245. — , Pro-
fessor James, 43, 177, 235-250,
268, 270, 304, 341-345. — ,
Mrs. Margaret (Maggie), 229,
234, 239, 247-248. — , Mrs.
Martha Ann, 229. — , Robert,
229; control, 226-252,336, 341.
— , Robert (jr.), 244
" Imperator," control, 223-226,
243
Irving, Hugh, control, 260-262
James, Professor William, 137,
174, 184, 267, 269-272, 339;
control, 341
" Jessie," 134-137
Johnson, Miss Alice, 101-104,
106, 109-112, 114, 117-125,
127-132, 134-138, 141-144, 146.
152-154, 157, X60-161, 163-
350
INDEX
169, 296-297, 300-301, 303,
305-310, 343
Junot (pseudonym), family, 250-
266. — , Bennie, control, 250—
266, 272, 336
Lang, Andrew, 30, 32, 121-122
Leaf, Dr. Walter, 69-70, 173, 181,
184, 188, 197
Leblanc, Mme., 7-8
Lodge, Alfred, 190. — , Fred, Mr.
and Mrs., 29. — , Frank, 191..
— , Jerry, control, 190-191. — ,
Miss, 193. — , Sir Oliver, 29, 38,
41, 43, 45, 58, 68, 70-72, 95. 115.
117-119, 178-179, 181-183, 185
-186, 188-196, 221-222, 227,
272, 274-277, 279, 300, 319,
328 ; Lady L., 189, 193- — .
Robert, 190-191
Lund, Mr., 196-197. — , Maggie,
control, 196-197
Mackensie, Mrs., 40-41
Marsh, Mr., 92
Maxwell, Dr. Joseph, 96, 130, 136,
148
McClellan, James, control, 229.
— , Robert, control, 229, 243-
244
Miles, Miss Clarissa, 17-27, 31, 42-
44. 49, 57. 60, 78, 96, loi, 112,
121, 162, 186
Moses, Staynton, control, 112,
223-225
Miinsterberg, Professor Hugo, 135,
137
Myers, Dr. A. T., 50. — , Frederic,
38-39, 41, 48, 61-63, 67-68, 70-
72, 75-76. 85-88, 94, 97, 103-
104, 114-116, 119, 142, 223,
300-301, 312, 332 ; control, 48-
49. 56, 58-59. 64-72, 76-79,
104-120, 125, 130, 147-152, 171,
269, 274-280, 283-285, 287, 289,
293-296, 298, 301, 305, 308,
310-332, 336-337, 340-341. 346.
— , Mrs., 62-63
Newbold, Professor William, 177,
206, 208, 220-223, 267, 269-272
Noel, Roden, 152-154, 161, 166-
167
Oliphant, Laurence, 120
Paladino, Eusapia, 130
Peirce, Professor, 203, 207
Pelham (pseudonym), Mr. and
Mrs., 205-209, 211. — , Frank,
206. — , George, control, 198-
230,243,245,247-249, 252-253,
255. 257, 259-267, 275, 294,
311, 321-322, 336-337. 341-342
Peters, Vout, 33-38, 42, 45-46,
176, 178-179, 181, 185-186
Phinuit (Dr. Jean Ph. Scliville),
control, 134, 176-222, 225-227,
235, 272, 335-337
Piddington, Mr., 69-70, 95-96,
130, 134-137. 272, 274-277,
279, 281-283, 285-287, 300-
302, 304, 306-310, 312-324,
327-330
Pigou, Professor, 161-163
Piper, Mrs., 14, 95-99. 132, 134-
135, 172-177, 179, 185, 187-
188, 192, 196, 199-201, 203,
211, 216 — 221, 225, 228-229,
233. 239, 252-253, 261-262,
267-269, 271, 273-275, 283,
288, 293-294, 296, 298-299,
303-304, 308, 311, 314-315,
319, 330, 334-339. 341-343. 347
Podmore, Frank, 309 ; control,
342-346
Pope, Miss, 269, 294
Prince, Morton, 338
" Prudens," control, 226, 234, 236
Ramsden, Miss Hermione, 17-27,
31-32, 42-47. 49, 56-57, 60-61,
78, 96, loi, 112, 121, 162, 181,
185, 309
" Rector," control, 96, 222-228,
230, 232, 234-236, 239-241,
243-244, 247-249, 252-253, 256
-261, 268, 276-277, 279-280,
284, 287, 315-316, 319, 321,
324, 328, 339, 346
Rich, Dr., control, 195-196, 227-
228
Richet, Professor, 131
Sallie, " Aunt Sallie," 220-221,
228
Savage, Minot J., 199-201
Schiflf, Professor, 4
Schiller, Dr., 269-270
Schweizer, Mrs., 39
Scliville. See Phinuit.
Sidgwick, Professor Henry, 116,
153. 180, 301, 312-314 ; con-
trol, 71, 104, 108, 112, 152, 314.
— , Mrs., 39-42, 71. 77. "6-
INDEX
351
117, 152. 274, 283-285, 312-
314, 322-328, 340
Smead (pseudonym), Mrs., 343
Smith, Helen (pseudonym), 2-3,
9-13, 105, 334
Stella, Mrs., 32-3.3. 45, i95
Swedenborg, Emanuel, 239-240,
244
Taylor, Colonel, 308
Thompson, Mr. and Mrs., 193,
195-196, 227. — , Isaac, con-
trol, 228, 275
Trevelyan, Sir George, 152
Verrall, Dr., 21-22, 48, 50-58,
60-61, 63, 67, 73, 78, 89, 98,
109-112, 121, 137, 149-153,
161-162, 165, 279, 286-288,
299,311. — , Mrs., 21, 46-105,
109-130, 138-142, 145-171. 173
-174, 184, 273, 275-277, 279-
291, 294, 297-314, 316-324,
327-331. 337. 340- — . Miss
Helen, 95-96, 156-159, 166,
170, 278, 280, 282, 289-291,
294-295. 297-298, 301-309, 337
Vogt, Carl, 4
Walsh (Welsh), John, 261-262
ZoRA, Mme., 6-8
Zschokke, Heinrich, 28
BRADBURY, AGNEW, & CO. LD., PRINTERS, LONDON AND TONBRIDGE.
6.
<
/
i
v"sr
MftR 1 5 1384
/i\ MAY 07198^
= 001031988
g 50m-7,'69(N296s4) — C-120
-r
^RY<>
1
%!].
<^
^WEUNIVF"^
n 2^
' ^
#
)
C3
C-5
1i
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
LIBRARY
^_
Los Angeles
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.
> ■?^
^
V
DISCHARGE-URi
-
NOV 2 2198?
•N
V
Ff B t' '
FEB 1 iaa4
41/IIkWUV 1919
)B
5
(9
10.
-,VJ'JU'
1
<
>
REC'D ID "Rl-
/*
JWV
.^•
I /\ <:
3
%
111 J 1 «-
i
• ■
m
r-m
cr
«_3
<=
' 31
5
■2=
^i
5 1
0^
f\^-
■
■■'
^%
,^'
V ^
-
A "=>
1 ^
-
/ ^
cn
r-n
—
' ^
. 5^
#
^v •
!%
a> o
-n
V <^
^s
5 ■
Jo
(— >
■f
3 1158 00559 7967
->v\c.i'vii\/rDr/.
T* O
—I i-^
^^^-
^\V\tyNIV£Ry^
>
:^0 m
1 33
up SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
AA 000 505 373
<
■^0 P ^0
>^
^^
<~1
>
ju
''Cf
.^ME•ll^'l
^K
^j'l^iJDNvsov^"""' %a
^ 5
Ov
mv^
' VvJ V >| IJ 1
IJ J ' w J \J 1
^^f-
o
'J/4
^ ^ • _
3>