EXPERIMENTAL
INCIDENTS
EXPERIMENT is
always the most important resource of science when it wants to obtain
assurance on any point. Spontaneous phenomena are exposed to unexpected
objections, often when we feel most sure about them, while the fear that
malobservation may have vitiated some conclusions keeps the judgment in
suspense, until experiment, in which we can determine conditions, has
supplied us with the evidential desideratum. The phenomena of psychic
research, which are sporadic even under the most favorable circumstances
and more so under test conditions, offer special difficulties in the way
of either their reproduction or discovery under evidential conditions.
Whatever the difficulties, however, science insists on experimental
production of the phenomena for better observation and security as to their genuineness and significance.
For
some years experimental results have been obtained by investigators
all over the world. There is to-day such a mass of well-authenticated
facts affording a selection of incidents having the desired evidential
value, as to make any other than the spiritistic hypothesis exceedingly
improbable. Facts intelligently selected with reference to proving the
personal identity of the
deceased are not of the kind exhibited in telepathy. They are usually
such as would most naturally
express the mind of the alleged communicator, and, with various other
characteristics of the phenomena themselves, they so commend themselves
to a spiritistic theory, that no other view of them can be rational.
In such a
summary of the facts as I give I cannot be expected to tell all the
circumstances which exclude normal knowledge as the source of the
messages. The detailed records do this quite fully. The reader will have
to he content with the general statement that no incident which has not
stood that test has been selected and that I have endeavored to
eliminate all bias in recording and selecting the facts here used. I am
primarily interested in their importance for establishing supernormal
knowledge and the personal identity of the communicator. In some cases
the very description of the facts will be a half-guarantee of
genuineness, and often very little will have to be said to protect them
against skepticism.
The
first incident that I select is strong and complicated. It involves what
is called a
"cross-correspondence." There is a technical distinction between "cross-correspondence" and "cross-reference." The former implies the
latter, but "cross-correspondence" involves the completion through a
second psychic of a message obtained through another, or an increment
that is relevant and not given at the first station. "Cross-reference"
need be no more than the delivery of the same message from two
independent sources. For our purposes there need be little difference
between them, though the "cross-correspondence" appears to many people
to be the more cogent.
The incident is
not fully reported in the paper by Mrs. Verrall in the "Proceedings" of
the English Society, and hence for the part which pertains to what Dr.
Hodgson did I shall have to depend on my memory. He told me that, at a sitting with
Mrs. Piper, in which Mr. Myers purported to communicate, Mr. Myers
referred to Miss Helen Verrall as the daughter of Mrs. Verrall and remarked that she
was "a better light than the mother," adding that he had got her to see
a vision of a hand and a book. Dr. Hodgson, seeing an opportunity to get
a cross-reference, and knowing nothing about the daughter, asked the
communicator to make her see a hand and a spear, varying the picture as
little as possible. Rector, the control, to whom the request was given,
did not understand the word
"spear" and interpreted it as "sphere." Dr. Hodgson corrected it and
spelled the word "spear" and
then Rector caught it, repeating the word "spear," and asking Dr.
Hodgson if he meant some flying weapon. Dr. Hodgson said that he did, and there the
matter stood, so far as events in Boston were concerned. This was on January 28,
1901. When he made inquiries later as to what had happened in
England, he ascertained that the daughter, Miss Helen Verrall, had
received no vision of either a hand and book or a hand and spear. But
Mrs. Verrall's record of automatic writing on January 31, 1902, three days after Dr. Hodgson had sent the message, contained the
following script in Latin and Greek, the first word being a mongrel of
neither language.
On February 4, the
communicator through Mrs. Piper said that he had succeeded in getting "Sphear"
through to the daughter Helen. This statement is not correct; but it is
apparent that Mrs. Verrall got the exact idea, except for the hand, in
the words "volatile ferrum—pro telo," with the word
 ,
which is the Greek for "sphere," representing the misunderstanding in
Boston of the word "spear," which Dr. Hodgson had given and which had
been mistaken for "sphere."
The significant
point here is, that what was started in English was translated into
Greek and Latin when delivered in England, with the same mistake there that had been made in Boston. Volatile ferrum is the
Latin for "flying iron," or arrow, and telum (ablative
telo)
is the Latin for javelin or spear.
The remainder of the message shows the filling that comes through
the transmitter or the subconscious of Mrs. Verrall. The chief points
lie in the coincidences between the words "spear" and "sphere" at one
end of the line and volatile ferrum—pro telo and
 at the other end. No serious
difficulty is met in the mistake about "sphear" in the sitting with Mrs.
Piper on February 4th. That is a natural error on the part of the
subconscious, which had started with the impression that Miss Verrall
was the subject of the experiment. In fact, this mistake and that of
transforming the word "spear" into "sphere" and putting it in Greek in
England is in favor of a spiritistic interpretation of the coincidences,
as it would be natural in the complicated circumstances under which such
a message has to be transmitted. But the reader can judge of all this
for himself.
A similar
mistake in regard to the personality through whom a message was intended to be delivered was
made in the St. Paul
cross-correspondence. Dr. Hodgson purported to be communicating through
Mrs. Piper in England when Sir Oliver J. Lodge was present as sitter. It
was the communicator, Dr. Hodgson, that proposed the name of
St. Paul
as an experiment, saying that he
would go to Mrs. Holland and deliver this message at once.
This was on
November 15, 1906. But no reference to St. Paul
appeared in the work of Mrs. Holland. By this time, however, Miss Helen
Verrall, like her mother, was doing automatic writing in foreign
languages. On January 12, Miss Verrall received the following in her
automatic writing. It began in
Latin and ended with the statement wholly unconnected with it: "The name
is not right, robbing Peter to pay Paul?
sanctus nomine quod efficit nil
continens petatur subveniet."
There
is the mention of the name St. Paul here to suggest the possibilities,
but it does not prove the intention. But, on February 26, the following
came, making rather evident the intention of the reference. Readers
should notice how it is buried in a mass of apparently irrelevant
matter. The first passage shows that a peculiar device had to be adopted
to get the name through, if it
refers to the cross-reference at all, and I have several times observed
in the work of Mrs. Chenoweth a similar circuitous method. Here is the
second passage.
"A tangle of
flowers with green grass between wall flowers, pansies, which such
hurry. Did you know that the second way was shorter. You have not
understood about Paul. Ask Lodge. Quibus eruditis advocatis rein
explicabis non nisi ad unam norman refers hoc satis alia vana. A tower of ancient masonry
with battlements."
The intention
here is unmistakable, especially since the reference has no logical
connection with its environment, save as this environment is
explanatory. In connection with the reference to St. Paul on January 12,
Mr. Piddington, who writes the article, translates the Latin to mean:
"Holy in name (i. e. with the
title of saint) what she (or he) is doing is of no use (i.e. by
itself). Let the point (continens) be looked for; it will help."
The Latin words of February 26
he translates to mean as follows: "By calling to your aid what learned
men will you explain the matter? (You will
not explain it) unless you refer to one standard. This is enough; more
is useless."
Mr. Piddington
adds that the names Peter and Paul do not occur elsewhere in the
automatic writing of Miss Verrall, so that it seems reasonable to suppose that the
cross-reference is intentional.
As stated
above, the writing of Mrs. Holland did not contain the name St. Paul,
but Sir Oliver Lodge notes that, on December 31, there is an approach to
the subject, which is thought to suggest an explanation of the words in
Miss Verrall's script. The statement in the writing of Mrs. Holland was:
"II Peter 1: 15. This witness is true. It is now time that the shadow should be lifted
from your spirit—'Let patience have her perfect work.' 'This is a
faithful saying."'
The
verse II Peter 1:15 is: "Moreover I wilt endeavor that ye may be able
after my decease to have these things always in remembrance." It is
quite apparent that this verse is not relevant to the name of St. Paul,
though the references and
quotations following it are more or less relevant. This fact was noted by Mr. Piddington and
the relevance of the remainder of the statements. But Rev. Dr. Walter F.
Prince, in a review of the whole crosscorrespondence
in connection with the name of St. Paul, calls attention to a possible
mistake in the reference to the Epistle of Peter by showing that, if it had been "II Peter III:15" the reference would
have been extraordinarily apt. He assumes that the mistake was "one" for
"three," or "first" for
"third," assuming an auditory transmission. The verse reads: "And
account that the long-suffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved
brother Paul, according to the wisdom given unto him, has written unto
you." Dr. Prince notes that this reference to St. Paul is not only direct, but
also that it is "the one
verse in the midst of 166 Petrine verses, and that it is likewise the only verse mentioning
him out of 734 which make up the body of the non-Pauline epistles." The
possible significance of this fact is apparent when we note that the
other several passages referred to have special relevance to St. Paul.
The expression, "This witness is true," Dr. Prince notes, is in St.
Paul's Epistle to Titus, 1:13, though similar expressions are found in St.
John. "This is a faithful saying" occurs at least three times in St.
Paul's Epistles, according to Dr.
Prince, and he adds a fourth instance. He also explains how the other
two statements are reminiscent of St. Paul, but we need not emphasize
the fact beyond recording Dr. Prince's opinion. As the main coincidence
is clear, we need not stress the more enigmatical coincidences. It is
only our knowledge that such circuitous methods are often employed that
allows or requires us to tolerate or admit the cogency of the
connection. The instance is the least cogent of the
crosscorrespondences.
Another
instance may be briefly cited. At a sitting on January 16, 1907, with
Mrs. Piper, Mr. Piddington asked the communicator, who happened to be Mr. Myers, to attach a sign to
any message he got through as a crosscorrespondence, and suggested that
this sign be something like a circle and a triangle. "A circle and a triangle
inside it appeared in the script of Mrs. Verrall at the foot of a remarkable
communication embodying a successful cross-correspondence" on January 28,
1907, just twelve days later than the date of Mr. Piddington's
suggestion. As he had mentioned Mrs. Verrall and Mrs. Holland as subjects for the
experiment, this coincidence has much value, especially as showing that
the circle and the triangle were signs of a cross-correspondence
message. The automatic writing of Mrs. Holland did not show any circle and triangle in
it; but on May 8, 1907, it did show geometrical figures, among which were a circle and a
triangle, though the triangle was not in the circle. Mrs. Piper was in
London, Mrs. Verrall in
Cambridge, and Mrs. Holland in India.
This instance,
however, as we have noted, is connected with the next, which is so complex that its meaning is unmistakable to all careful
readers. It is called the
"Hope, Star and Browning" incident. It will be apparent also that more than one personality is
probably concerned in it. On February 11, 1907, came the following at a
sitting with Mrs. Piper, Mr. Piddington being the sitter and Mr. Myers the
supposed communicator.
Did she [Mrs. Verrall] receive the word "evangelical"? (" Evangelical"?)
Yes.
(I don't
know, but I will inquire.)
I referred also to
Browning again.
(Do you remember
what your exact reference to Browning was?) I referred to Hope and Browning. I also said "star."
[Interruption.] (Now, Myers, I must say good-by, as the friend is here.)
Meanwhile
look out for "Hope," "Star," and "Browning."
On returning from the sitting, Mr.
Piddington examined the record of Mrs. Verrall and found there on an
earlier date, January 28, 1907, evidence
of allusion to this
cross-correspondence. On the next day, February 12, he asked Mr. Myers,
the communicator, about the word "evangelical," as it
had no meaning to
him. Mr. Myers explained, without any suggestion from Mr. Piddington,
that it was an attempt to give the name, Evelyn Hope.
He then quotes from the two records
of January 23 and 29, 1907, to show the reference to "Hope, Star and
Browning," though in an indirect
and enigmatical
form, showing evidence of the presence and influence of Dr. Hodgson. I quote first the record
of January 23, 1907.
"Justice
holds the scales. That gives the words, but an anagram would be better.
Tell him that—rats, star, tars and so on. Try this. It has been tried
before. RTATS, rearrange these
five letters, or again t e a r s, s t a r e: s e a m, s a m e, and so
on. Skeat,
takes, Kate's, Keats, stake, steak. But the letters you would give
to-night are not so many—only three—a s t."
The
explanation of these anagrams will follow the next quotation, as a
similar process is involved in that record. It is the sitting of January
28,
1907.
"A s t e r [star],
 [wonder or sign].
The world's wonder, and all a wonder and a wild desire—A WINGED DESIRE 
[winged love].
"Then there is Blake
and mocked my loss of liberty. But it is all the same thing—the winged
desire,  [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. 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."
[Then follows an arc
with the triangle in it, and then a full circle with the triangle in
it.]
Both
these passages are in the records of Mrs. Verrall. The indication
that Browning is meant lies in the allusion to Abt Vogler. Mrs. Verrall
recognized this allusion, but did not know what it meant, not knowing
that any cross-correspondence had been attempted. Note that this
occurred on January 23, nineteen days before the matter was alluded to
through Mrs. Piper on February II. The passage from Browning is not
correctly quoted in the
message. The word "hope" is in it, but instead the word "passion" is
in Browning. This idea is recognized in the Greek word for "love" or the
god of love. The line in Browning is:" The passion that left the ground
to lose itself in the sky." Mrs. Verrall queried if
 was an attempt at "bird," as it means
it "winged," and did not remark what Mr. Piddington notes, namely, that
'bird' is suggested by the line in Browning, which runs, "O lyric Love,
half angel and half bird." This line in Browning precedes the words in
Mrs. Verrall's record, namely, "And all a wonder and a wild desire." Thus the passage is packed
with Browning, and the word "hope" is found in one of the statements.
The anagrams
contain a remarkable intimation that Dr. Hodgson was behind a part of
the cross-correspondence. They had no meaning to Mr. Piddington, but
finally he remembered having seen something of the kind among the papers
of Dr. Hodgson when he was in America settling the affairs of the American Branch. He found on investigation that he had
kept a paper on which several
of these very anagrams were made by Dr. Hodgson himself while living.
Several papers containing them had been destroyed, but he had happened
to keep one of them. On it is the list of words: "Star, tars, rats,
arts, tras." Besides it contains "tears" and it stare," and the word
"aster," which is the English for a species of flower, and the Greek
word for "star," which comes out through Mrs. Verrall, is an anagram
play in the Greek on the word for wonder or sign, serving at the same time for a transition to
Browning. It throws much light on the process and the subliminal action of the
medium's mind.
But the
cross-correspondence did not stop here. Miss Verrall had not been told
what was happening. One day she got in her automatic writing the drawing
of a star with the following:
That was the sign she will understand when she sees it. diapason,
 [rhythm through it
all]. No arts avail. The heavenly harmony
[as Plato says]. The mystic three and a star above it all,
rats
everywhere in Hamelin town. Now do you understand. Henry."
It was Browning
who wrote the "Pied Piper of Hamelin," and in the Passage quoted there
is not only a definite allusion to "star," but there is also the allusion to "rats" and
"arts," two words in the anagrams mentioned through Mrs. Verrall. For brevity's
sake I omitted one statement in the quotation which, in Greek as it was
given, means "' a foreign physician "; the "Pied Piper" cured Hamelin of
its plague of rats. The same circuitous reference to Browning, apparent
in the automatic writing of Mrs. Verrall, appears here. We have then
three psychics alluding to the same complex group of ideas; the circumstances not
only prove the cross-correspondence, but also show very clearly the
difficulties in communicating.
The evidence
for cross-correspondence is not the best. If it were as direct and
meaningful as desired, there could be no skepticism based on the ground
that the connections are fantastic and circuitous, or dependent on the
interpretation of the reader. But, while some concession must be made to
critical readers, the difficulty is not very apparent in the next
instance, which is called that of "Crossing the Bar." It requires some
preliminary explanation.
Mrs. Verrall
had been struck with some indication of the personality communicating in
the messages of Mrs. Piper; and, knowing that her personal acquaintance
with Mr. Myers before his death precluded trusting her own messages reflecting his personal characteristics, she resolved
on a test which would
eliminate the subconscious knowledge of Mrs. Piper and perhaps strengthen the evidence for the presence of Mr. Myers. She looked
about for something to use at
a sitting with Mrs. Piper, that might provoke a significant reaction
from the alleged Myers as communicator. She required a sentence or words
which Mr. Myers would naturally recognize and which Mrs. Piper would not
understand. Finally she hit upon a few words from a passage in Plotinus,
used as a motto to a poem by Mr. Myers himself. The words were
 
or, spelled in English,
kai autos ouranos
akumon, meaning "the very
heavens calm." Mrs. Piper did not know Greek, and so she would not be
able even subconsciously to know the meaning of the terms when uttered to
her control in the trance. Armed with these Greek words, Mrs. Verrall
went to Mrs. Piper on January 29, 1907, and gave three of the words to
the supposed Myers, omitting the first of the four,
kai.
She expected some reference to the
following:
1.
A translation into English of the three words.
2. A reference to Myers's poem on
Tennyson.
3. A reference to Plotinus and the
latter part of "'Human Personality," the title of Myers's great work.
On January 30,
at the sitting with Mrs. Piper, Mrs. Verrall received an allusion to a
"haven of rest," purporting to come from Mr.' Myers; and it was thought
that it contained a remote reference to what was wanted. But this is
only conjectural, as it may be a plainer English version of the
expression "celestial halcyon days," another cross-reference having some
associations with the present subject. Not until March 6, were distinct
traces of the translation noticeable. In the meantime, Mrs. Verrall's
automatic writing had taken up the subject and discoursed about it in a
remarkable manner with results that seem evidential in some instances,
though much of the matter is exposed to the suspicion of being
subconscious production. The details would make too long a story here.
But the messages purporting to come from Mr. Myers through her script
refer to Tennyson's "In Memoriam" and his poem on Lucretius, both of
which in some passages have affinities to thoughts in Plotinus. Though
Mrs. Verrall had read Tennyson's "In Memoriam" in her college days, she
had no suspicion that there were passages in it referring to Plotinus,
until she re-read the poem in order to discover them. Passages from
Tennyson's "Lucretius" were introduced very directly into the automatic
script; they were almost a literal translation of the ideas in the three
Greek words she had given Mr. Myers at the sitting with Mrs. Piper. This
circumstance, of course, is not evidential; but these very ideas came
back through Mrs. Piper, who knew nothing about either the Greek words
or the relation of "In Memoriam" and "Lucretius" to their meaning. These
records extend from February 12 to March 11, while the communicator was silent on the matter all this
time, in so far as Mrs.
Piper's communications were concerned, except that on March 6 Mrs.
Piper's trance personalities began the translation and the system of
pertinent cross-correspondences. I quote Mr. Piddington. He alone was at
the sitting.
"On
March 6, Myers, in the course of announcing various
crosscorrespondences which he claimed to have transmitted to Mrs.
Verrall, gave without explanation three words, 'Cloudless, Sky,
Horizon,' followed by the phrase: 'a cloudless sky beyond the horizon.'
In the waking stage Mrs. Piper uttered the words: 'moaning at the bar
when I put out to sea.' A little later she pronounced the name 'Arthur
Hallam'; then almost directly said it again: 'Arthur Hallam. Good-by. Margaret,'
Margaret being Mrs. Verrall's Christian name."
The mention of Arthur Hallam, the
subject of "In Memoriam," was very pertinent here. Mr. Piddington adds
in his remarks:
"Though no claim was made to have
given a translation of the words of the test question in the phrase 'cloudless
sky beyond the horizon' it would be difficult to suppose that chance had
furnished so satisfactory a paraphrase I this of
 (kai autos akumon); but Vpavo
preceded as the phrase was by references to Mrs. Verrall and followed by
the quotation from 'Crossing the Bar' and the name 'Arthur Hallam,' it
is practically impossible to attribute its appropriateness to chance.
Moreover, this paraphrase seems to indicate knowledge not only of the
meaning of the three words of the test question but also of their
original context."
Mr.
Piddington then quotes the whole of the original passage from which the
three words were taken and shows that the Greek word for "air" preceded
that for "heaven" and that the latter meant what was beyond the air; as we in English often use "sky"
for the region occupied by the air, the phrase "beyond the sky" points
to a knowledge of the whole passage.
At this time Mrs. Verrall had not
consciously grasped the meaning of her own automatic writing in
connection with the references to "Arthur Hallam" and "Crossing the
Bar." It was March 12 before she saw the connection. On March 13, at a
sitting with Mrs. Piper by Mr. Piddington, Myers communicating drew
lines which were said to represent a bar, evidently referring to
Tennyson's poem or indicating an attempt to make a sign at the end of a
crosscorrespondence. But
nothing more of importance seems to have come until April 29, when Mrs.
Verrall herself was present. At this sitting the only item of interest
in this connection was a reference to "azure" and "blue sea," perhaps
not as cogent as may be desired, but apparent to careful students of the
record. No allusion was made to Plotinus or to "Human Personality." On
April 30, however, when Miss Johnson was present at a sitting with Mrs.
Piper, Rector, the control, said:
"I have seen Mr.
Myers and he gave me his reply to your Greek words and I gave them to
the other lady before you appeared. Tell her to speak them. All right.
Homer's 'Iliad."'
Later in the sitting Mrs. Verrall
came in; she was given the name Socrates and was told that it reminded
the communicator of Homer. At first Mrs. Verrall thought the allusion to
Socrates and Homer's "Iliad" was nonsense. "But later in the day," says
Mr. Piddington, "a dim impression came to Mrs. Verrall, after thinking
it over, that in the second volume of "Human personality," close to the
passage about the vision of Plotinus in which occurs the translation of
the words
kai autos ouranos akumon
(Greek letters given in original) was
an allusion to the famous vision of Socrates, in which the woman of
Phthia addressed him in a line from the 'Iliad."' An unmistakable
allusion in Mrs. Verrall's own script of the next day, May 1, to the
"eagle soaring above the tomb of Plato"—a phrase descriptive of Plotinus,
quoted in the ninth chapter, of "Human Personality"—led her to
investigate further with the following results.
"In
the last two chapters of 'Human Personality,' twice and twice only, is
the word 'vision' used; the first time, of the vision which came to
Socrates in the prison house, when the 'fair and white-robed woman' had
'given to Achilles's words'—'On the third day hence thou comest to
Phthia's fertile shore'—'a more sacred meaning'; and the second time of the vision
of Plotinus."
It should be added that the
passage is translated in "Human Personality," but the words of it were not
mentioned in the book, so that any supposed reading of the book by Mrs.
Piper is not a valid criticism. But one more message was required to
complete the reference desired by Mrs. Verrall, and that was the name of
Plotinus. She told Mrs. Sidgwick and Miss Johnson of this defect; and,
just when Mrs. Sidgwick intended to tell the trance personality at her
sitting of May 6 that the name of the author was wanted, Mr. Myers,
purporting to communicate, said.
"Will you say to Mrs. Verrall—Plotinus." The last word was not deciphered
by Mrs.
Sidgwick, and was thereupon repeated in large letters, PLOTINUS. Mrs.
Sidgwick then asked: "What is that?" and Myers replied:
"My answer to autos
ouranos akumen."
[akumon].
This completes the data necessary to
clinch the cross-correspondence, and, whatever readers may think of its
evidentiality, it bears unmistakable indications in its complications
and indirections of being what it claims to be, though I can quite
understand that the incident may seem inconclusive to those who assume
that communication with the dead should be more direct and obvious, if
it is to be convincing.
The
next instance of cross-correspondence is especially interesting because
it involves the giving of the contents of a posthumous letter before
the person who wrote it had died. By a posthumous letter we mean one
written by a living person and sealed, so that no living person normally
knows the contents; the
intention is, if possible, to reveal the contents after death. The contents in this case
purported to be given by Mr. Myers while he made an experiment in
cross-correspondence with the contents. To understand the significance
of the case, we should know some preliminary facts.
Mr.
Myers, when he read the work of Stainton Moses, was impressed by one incident, very important if
genuine. Mr. Moses, when doing some automatic writing, asked Rector, the
control, if he could read the contents of a book; on his answering in
the affirmative, Mr. Moses put him to the test, and, if we accept the
account of Mr. Moses, he succeeded in a remarkable manner. Mr. Moses
named the book, the shelf on which it stood, the number of the book and
the page from which be wanted some passage read. Mr. Moses did not
himself know what was on the page. When Mr. Myers heard of this
phenomenon, he at once thought that, if such a thing were possible, it would be very difficult to prove the
identity of any discarnate
spirit who gave the contents of any document as evidence. He at once saw
the relation of the possibility to posthumous letters, and came to the conclusion
that the proof of survival would depend upon the concordant results of a
large number of insignificant facts from different sources. He,
therefore, based his method of deciding the question upon a system of
cross-correspondences which should rightly articulate in illustrating
the personal identity of a given person. After this' discovery he did not attach so much value to
posthumous letters as he had done before.
After his
death, evidently with some sense of humor, he proceeded to prove his
theory by giving messages which illustrate cross-correspondence and the
obtaining of the contents of a posthumous letter. I summarize the facts
in tabular form. On July 13, 1904, Mr. Piddington sat down in the office
of the Society and wrote out his posthumous letter, which contained
references to the number seven, and expressions including it., He said
that he would try, after death, to communicate a written number seven,
adding: "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." He went on to say that he seemed to have an organic interest in the number seven,
and that it might have made such an impression on his mind that he would
be able to recall it as a spirit, if he survived. With this explanation
and the date of the letter, the following table will explain itself. It
represents the dates and contents of automatic writing through the
several psychics named.
The force of
the coincidences referring to Mr. Piddington's letter will be more
apparent if we quote the whole of the passage that came through Mrs.
Verrall on July 13th, 1904. The whole passage runs: "It is something
contemporary that you are to record—note the hour—in London; in London
half the message has come." Then after referring to the posthumous letters of Mr. Myers and
Professor Sidgwick, the passage ends with a reference to Mr. Piddington as
follows: "Surely Piddington will see that this is enough and should be
acted upon."
(1)
THE POSTHUMOUS LETTER.
|
DATE. |
WRITER. |
INCIDENTS. |
POSSIBLE ALLUSIONS
TO
LETTER. |
|
July 13, 1904. |
Mr. Piddington |
Mr. Piddington
writes
Letter |
In London half
the message has
come. |
|
July 13, 1904. |
Mrs. Verrall. |
|
Contrast between
potency of
dead and living. |
|
July 15, 1904. |
Miss
Verrall. |
|
|
(2) REFERENCES OF
AUTOMATISTS.
|
DATE. |
WRITER. |
INCIDENTS. |
|
May 8, 1908. |
Mrs. Piper. |
We are seven. Seven of us in the distance. |
|
May 12, 1908. |
Mrs. Piper. |
|
|
July 23, 1908. |
Miss Holland. |
There should be seven in accord. |
(3) DANTEAN
ALLUSIONS.
|
DATE |
WRITER |
INCIDENTS |
Possible
Allusions
to Letter |
|
Aug. 6, 1907. |
Miss Verrall. |
A rainbow: the seven-fold radiance. |
He himself will
seem to have
transferred this. |
|
May 11, 1908. |
Miss Verrall. |
We are seven.
Many mystic sevens.
Jacob's ladder.
Seven candies and
seven colors in
the rainbow. |
|
|
June 11, 1908. |
Mrs. Frith. |
The mystic seven
and the golden
candlestick. |
|
|
July 23, 1908. |
Mrs. Holland. |
Green beyond
belief—Green Ray. |
|
|
July 24, 1908. |
Mrs. Home. |
Seven times seven
and seventy seven. |
|
(4) ASSOCIATION AND
OTHER EXPERIMENTS.
|
DATE. |
WRITER. |
INCIDENTS. |
|
Aug. 28, 1907. |
Mrs. Verrall. |
Let Piddington choose a sentence and send a
part to each. |
|
Jan. 27, 1909. |
Miss Verrall. |
Has Piddington
found the bits of his sentence
scattered among
you all? |
There are certain marked weaknesses
in this instance of cross correspondence. The dates of
the incidents create a doubt about the intention; and the Dantean
allusions, though they contain frequent mention of "sevens," do not
assure us by anything said about their reference that they were meant to
indicate Mr. Piddington. We have only the contents of the messages to
suggest him, and the skeptic probably would not be satisfied that they
have this import. But the allusion to Mr. Piddington in London and to
the hour, with other references to sevens make it fairly probable that
his posthumous letter, written at the time of the first reference, was meant. The allusion,
if accepted, shows that Mr. Myers was trying to prove that deceased persons might read the contents of posthumous letters before their
writers had died, and so might impersonate the writer. In this way, while the
securing of the contents of posthumous letters of the living or the dead
might disprove telepathy between the living, it would not prove personal
identity and might be explained by telaesthesia or clairvoyance by
either the living or the dead. Apparently to emphasize this theory, Mr.
Myers, on January 27, 1909, remarked in his message:
"But even if the source is human, who carries the thoughts to the receivers? Ask him that." He had
mentioned Mr. Piddington in the message, which shows exactly the same
conception of telepathy as that mentioned in a message through Mrs.
Chenoweth on November 28, 1911, when he actually used the
word "carry" for the process and said that it was the "guide" or "familiar" that
"carried" or transmitted telepathic messages. This aside, however, the
main point is that in this real or apparent crosscorrespondence he is
demonstrating that not the posthumous letter, but the articulation of
bits of evidence through a large number of psychics, is the crucial
evidence for survival. The whole episode is remarkable on any theory;
and, quite apart from the question of cross-correspondences, it gives good evidence of the personal identity of Mr. Myers.
I think I can
give some instances of cross-reference in which the bare statement of
the facts will carry the weight of evidence. Those already quoted
require so many explanations that many people will not fully appreciate
their value. The main point is the accuracy with which they point to the
literary and classical tastes of Mr. Myers as he was known to his
colleagues.
A lady whom I have called Mrs.
Quentin, who was a person of good social standing in New York, was able
to use the ouija board. At a sitting with her on October 4, 1906, four other persons being present and only three of us at the table, the
following was spelled out. George Pelham purported to be present and
controlling the messages.
(Well, George, have you seen any of my friends recently?)
"No, only Richard H." [Richard Hodgson, then deceased.]
(How is H.?)
"Progressive as
ever." (Is he clear?) "Not very."
(Do you mean when he communicates or in his normal
state?)
"Oh, all right normally. Only when he comes into that
wretched atmosphere he
goes to pieces. Wonder how long it will take him to
overcome this."
(Do you see Hodgson
often?) "Yes, our lives run in parallels." Mrs.
Quentin knew about both George Pelham and Dr. Hodgson, so that this message is not evidential. The
allusion to his going to pieces in our wretched atmosphere is pertinent,
as it was quite true of him up to that time, in all the messages I had heard
from him. But the passage has interest in the light of what follows.
On the tenth of October, six days
later, without revealing a word of my experience with Mrs. Quentin, I had a
sitting with Mrs. Piper. Dr. Hodgson purported to communicate soon after
the preliminaries.
"I am Hodgson."
(Good, Hodgson, how are you?)
"Capital. How are you, Hyslop, old chap?"
(Fine.)
"Good, glad to hear
it. Did you receive my last message?" (When and where?)
"I told George to give it to you."
(Was that recently?)
"Yes, very."
[After some further
statements irrelevant to the present issue I put another question.]
(What
light was it that George spoke about?)
[I thought of the
Smead case, expecting something would be said about it.]
"He spoke about this [Mrs. Piper] and the woman you
experimented with."
[G. P. did speak
spontaneously of the Piper case at the sitting with Mrs. Quentin and
also made some pertinent and true statements about the Smead case,
agreeing with what he had said about it through Mrs.
Piper some years before; the facts had not been published and hence were not known to Mrs. Quentin.
After a
further interruption the communication continued.]
"Did you hear me say George?"
(When?)
"At the lady's."
(No.)
"I said it when I heard you say Van."
(Was that the last time I had an experiment?)
"Yes, we do not
want to make any mistake or confusion in this Hyslop." (Did G. P.
communicate with me there?)
"He certainly did.
Wasn't that Funk?"
(No, Funk was not there.)
"Was it his son?"
(No, it was not his son.)
"It resembled him, I
thought. I may be mistaken, as I have seen him with a light recently."
(Do you know anything that George said to me?)
"I cannot speak his
exact words, but the idea was that we were trying to reach you and
communicate there."
(Do you know the
method by which the messages came to us?) "We saw ——"
[Mrs. Piper's hand
ceased writing and began to move about the sheet of paper exactly as did
the hand of Mrs. Quentin when she spelled out the words by the ouija
board. The most striking feature of this resemblance was the tendency of
Mrs. Piper's hand to move back to the center of the sheet, as Mrs.
Quentin's always did after indicating a letter.]
(That's right.)
"You asked the
board questions and they came out in letters." (That's right.)
I saw the modus operandi
well. I was pleased
that George spelled his name. It gave me great delight. I heard you ask who was with
him and he answered R. H." (I asked him how you were.)
"He said first rate or very well. I am not sure of the exact words. Do
you mind
telling me just how the words were understood. Was it very well or all
right?" (The
words were 'progressive as ever.')
"Oh yes! I do not
exactly recall those words, but I heard your question distinctly, Hyslop.
I leave no stone unturned to reach you and prove my identity. Was it not
near water?"
(Yes.)
"And in a light
room? (Yes; that's correct.).
I saw you sitting at a table or near it."
(Yes, right.)
"Another man present and the light was near you."
(Yes.)
"I saw the surroundings very clearly when George was
speaking. I was taking it
all in, so to speak."
The reader can see for himself
without any explanation the connection between the two sittings. I have
only to say that I do not know any one by the name of Van and nothing
was said about such a person at the sitting with Mrs. Quentin. Nor was
Dr. Funk present. He might have been experimenting about that time, as
he was doing much work on the subject. Dr. Hodgson knew something of the
man, Mrs. Piper little or nothing. The record indicates the correct
incidents and all that we need to know is that Mrs. Piper could not have
known the facts.
At
the end of the message I saw my chance to have another crossreference;
and, as I had previously made arrangements to have a sitting with Mrs.
Chenoweth, my first and made for me by another person, who did not give
my name, I at once took up the matter as follows:
(Now, Hodgson, I expect to try another case this
afternoon.)
"Chenoweth." [Real name written.]
(Yes, that's right.)
"I shall be there,
and I will refer to books and give my initials R. H. only as a test."
(Good.)
"And I will say 'books."'
I was alone at
the Piper sitting. Mrs. Piper was in a trance, from which she recovered
without any memory of what had happened or has been said during it.
Three hours afterward I went to Mrs. Chenoweth, who did not know that I
had been experimenting that day with Mrs. Piper and who did not know who I was. The communication
through Mrs. Chenoweth was by
speech in a light trance, not by automatic writing. It must be
remembered in reading the
record that the process was pictographic and that the control or the
subconscious must interpret the mental pictures which come to his or her mind. After a few
preliminaries in which I said nothing about my work, the following came,
just after the mention of an unrecognizable name.
"Beside
him is Dr. Hodgson. It is part of a promise to come to you to-day, as he
had just
been to say to you he was trying not to be intense, but he is intense. I
said I would
come here. I am. I thought I might be able to tell different things I
already told. Perhaps I can call up some past interviews and make things
more clear. Several things were scattered around at different places.
[Correct.] He says he is glad you came
and to make the trial soon after the other."
[I put a pair of Dr.
Hodgson's gloves which I had with me in Mrs. Chenoweth's hands.]
"You know I don't
think he wanted them to help him so much as he wanted to know that you had them. You have got something of
his. It looks like a book, like a note book, with a little writing in it. That is only to
let you know it."
[At this point the
subject was spontaneously changed and I permitted things to take their own
course, and a little later the previous subject was resumed.]
"There is something
he said he would do. He said: 'I would say like a word., I said I would
say—I know it is a word. Your name isn't it? [Apparently said by psychic
to the communicator.] I said I would say each time the word slips.
[Pause.] I
am afraid I can't get it. It sounds—looks as if it had about seven or
eight letters. It is all shaky and wriggly, so that I can't see it yet.
"Can't you write it
down for him so I can see? [Apparently said to the communicator.] C
[Psychic then shakes her head. Pause. Psychic's fingers then write on the table.] Would it mean anything like 'Comrade
'?"
(No.)
"He goes away again."
(All right. Don't worry.)
"Let me take your hand."
[Said to me: I placed my left hand in the psychic's.]
No good. I'm trying
to do it. I know that he has just come from the other place, and kept his promise
to say a word." This passage
also explains itself as an apparent, but unsuccessful, attempt to get
his name. He was able to indicate that he had promised "at the other
place" to come here. The talk about a book requires no explanation. But in the course of the
communications I got also a reference to "a pen which he carried in his
pocket." He had referred at the sitting with Mrs. Piper to a "stylographic
pen" which he had always carried in his pocket, while his pencils were
carried in his bag. The "stylographic pen" was specially kept for the
Imperator personality to use in the automatic writing through Mrs. Piper. It was,
therefore, pertinent to mention it in both cases.
I went again that
evening to see a young girl who was just developing psychic power. She
did not know that I had had any sittings on that day. I had carefully
concealed the fact from her and from her mother, purposely conducting
the experiment in a manner to make them think I had just arrived in
Boston. I put Dr. Hodgson's gloves into the girl's hands and she began
immediately to talk about books. The coincidence with the other two
sittings is apparent, but I did not secure further evidence of the
connection.
I should
perhaps add one more cross-reference, to which I have referred before,
but which is so good that it should perhaps be repeated in detail and
with its complications:
On February 7,
1900, at a sitting with Mrs. Piper, soon after I had had a sitting with
a psychic whom I thought to be a fraud, my father, evidently alluding to
the experiment, gave me a pass sentence in a language which Mrs. Piper
did not know, and suggested that, unless I received it at first in
any such experiments, I need
not try for it. On March 7, 1901, I conducted an experiment
with Mrs. Smead. She was the wife of an orthodox clergyman, exempt from
all suspicion of trickery, and in no respect a professional psychic. In
her trance, when my father purported to communicate, I asked for the
pass sentence. After some struggle I got the first word of it very
clearly, probably the second word, and a letter or two of the third, but
certainly not the whole word. Mrs. Smead also did not know the language in which it was to
be written. On May 31, 1902, I had a sitting with a lady
whom I shall call Miss W——, an assistant to a physician. In the course
of the sitting the communicator came to the sentence spontaneously and
without a hint from me. The following is the passage.
"I doubt if I can
give you the one thing you most desire this moment.
(What do I desire
this moment?) [I was not conscious of any particular
desire.] "The sign, web not exactly password, but the test. If you will
keep
motionless, I can be able to give even that. I shall not be able to give
that and much else without the full cooperation of the
messenger. Let us not ask too much, James."
It was called both a "password" and a
"test" in the records of Mrs. Piper, which had not been published at that
time. It is clearly referred to here, though not given, and the allusion
is evident in the expression, "cooperation of the messenger." Imperator
always called himself a
"Messenger" in the work of Stainton Moses and Mrs. Piper, and Miss W—
— had seen none of the work of
either of them. Besides, Imperator always claims to help the
communicator when he is present and his aid is needed. Miss W—— knew
nothing of these circumstances.
Later still,
the date is not important, I had an experiment with another person who
knew nothing about the facts, as they had not yet been published; and,
on my asking for the pass sentence, she also not knowing the language in which it was to be
written, I got the English of it.
In quoting
incidents which establish personal identity, I shall give first an
illustration of the difficulties attending the application of the
telepathic hypothesis to the facts. It involves events which happened in
various parts of the world and yet purport to come from the only person
who ever had the knowledge of them all in his mind.
A lady of whom
I had never heard in my life wrote me from Germany asking if I could
recommend to her a psychic, saying she had lost her husband and in her distress of mind
wished to be convinced of a future life, hoping that communications from her
deceased husband would convince her of it, if he actually survived and
could communicate. I replied to her inquiry that I did not know of any
psychic in Germany, but that I could give her sittings when she returned
to America. She replied that she could not come to America, but that she had a sister
living in Boston who might take the sittings in her place. I then wrote
her for name and address of this sister and asked her to send me an
article wrapped in a special covering and said I would arrange for the
sister's presence in due time. I had never heard of her husband, who had
been a teacher of philosophy in a small western university
"I will try to write for her, for it
is good to have the chance to do so. We are
four over here in a loving group this
morning. One woman, three of which also I had never heard. This
institution was on the Pacific coast. He fell ill there and went to Germany,
his native place, where he died.
As soon as I could
fix dates for sittings I did so and arranged for the lady's sister to
see me at my hotel at a certain hour on the date of the first sitting. I
did not tell her whom we were to see or where we were going. I never
give sitters any information of the name or address of the psychic. I
also put her into a trance
before admitting the sitter. These conditions were observed on the occasions of the
present sittings. The following facts summarize the results.
As soon as the
automatic writing began, the letter "O" was written, or the circle which
had been used for the sign Omega by Professor James in his
communications three years before. After the circle had occurred several times the sign of the cross was made inside or over it. I
recognized its import but said
nothing in recognition, though I saw no reason for its appearance on
this occasion. I had never known nor heard of the communicator I was
seeking and knew not whether he had any connections with Professor
James. 'The sequel showed that they had been personal friends, and the
significance of the circle and the cross was indicated in response to my query a
little later, when I wanted the record to explain its significance. When the
desired communicator broke down, Jennie P. came in to write; in the
course of her automatic writing I asked her what the circle and cross
meant, though knowing well enough. Her reply was, "W. J.", and I was
satisfied that these were the initials of Professor James, as they have nearly
always been used to denote him.
The giving of
the circle and the cross was followed by a short communication from
Imperator intimating that he soon expected to fulfill a desire of mine
with reference to another case which I had brought to Mrs. Chenoweth,
wanting the judgment of Imperator on it. Immediately following Imperator
came another communicator. It took some time to make clear that I was on the right
track. I simply let the communicator take his own course. The very first
sentence took the right direction. men, all so anxious to tell her about the life we
remember and the life we live now. There are others who wish to come, but they will wait.
"I am not entirely
new to this belief and neither is she and her own experiences ought to help at
this time."
(Yes.)
"I know the
questionings of her intellect and also her belief in the power, and I
would not scoff nor laugh now, but rejoice that the time is given me to
try my own power."
(Good.)
"I did not want too
much of this talk before, but I cannot get enough of it now. I did not
want to die. I don't know as any one does, but any way I wanted to live
and accomplish things and finish my work, but it was no use, I could not
weather the gale."
The
first sentence implies that it was a lady who wished to hear from the
communicator. Of course a lady was present, and the critic will say that
the psychic knew this and that the reference on that account has no
significance. But we must remember that the psychic had not seen the
sitter, neither in her normal state nor in her trance, and had no means
of knowing whether it was a man or a woman who was present, unless she
guessed from hyperaesthetic perception of her walking upstairs and into
the room, or the slight noise
from the movement of her dress when coming into the room. But Mrs. Chenoweth
never shows this power in other instances. In fact she is very often
normally mistaken about the situation, sometimes thinking a person is
present when he is not, or thinking none there when a sitter is present,
and sometimes, I might say always, ignorant of the sex, unless told.
Besides, a little later, after a few sentences, the communicator
referred to the lady who wished to hear from him as "belonging to me,"
an expression constantly used in this work to denote husband or wife,
and hence not applying to the sitter, though a guessing medium might try
the phrase for leverage. But he soon remarked that his "father was over
here," which was true of the communicator. Soon after this statement and
some general and non-evidential messages the communicator gave up and was
followed by Jennie P.
As soon as I
could ask Jennie P. what the circle and cross meant, she replied by the
initials "W. J.," which were correct. She then made some flings, in her
humorous way, at cross-references, and then proceeded with the following
statements:
"Did you know that
the lady is psychic?
(No, I did not.)
"She has had some
experiences of her own. I do not mean with other lights, but alone, and she
really has clairvoyant power, if it were only unfolded; but she is
one of those
cautious kind and does not want to let her imagination ran away with
her. Do you know anything about a mother in the
spirit?"
(Yes, his mother is dead.) [Sitter nodded head.]
"And there is such a
desire on her part to come here to-day. She has been gone some time and
she has not much acquaintance with this sort of business. Is that true?"
(That is correct.) [Sitter nodded head.]
The communicator's wife, not present
but in Europe, is quite psychic, a fact that I did not know at the time. I learned it
from inquiries after the sitting. She had had a number of experiences of
her own and it was probably these that induced her to apply to me. She
distrusted her own experiences, fearing that they were imagination or
subconscious action. Her
mother was dead, a fact not known to me, but known to the sitter. Her
mother was of a very religious nature and had known nothing of these
phenomena. The communications went on with some correct, though not
striking, statements about this mother, among them that the communicator
had "a deep reverence for his
mother." This was followed by a reference to the sitter implying, though not
asserting, that she was his wife. Jennie P., acting as an intermediary,
made the statement with this implication and I did not correct it. I
then asked what the nature of his work was and the answer by Jennie P.
was that it was "philosophical" and that "he philosophized about
everything." This was true. He was a teacher of the subject. General
messages of a non-evidential character followed, until I was asked
whether I knew any one named William with whom the communicator was
associated. I replied by the query whether it was "W. J." and Jennie P.
at once answered that she did not know it was he and proceeded to say that she would
leave, but finished with the statement:
"Just as I said I go, he put his hand to his mouth and I saw a cavity as
if one or
two teeth had been extracted and the funny part of it was that I saw him
take them out
himself. It looks as if he had something happen to his teeth. Did he
have a tooth which he lost and had replaced by a new one?
(I don't know.)
"It seems to be a
space about big enough for one, perhaps two, but not more than that and here
is something about some dentistry which involved that space."
This incident came suddenly and
apparently irrelevantly. Of it the widow writes: "He lacked just one
tooth, but the cavity was not visible. He had, however, a tooth filled in
Portland, Oregon, about a
year ago, and was very much
dissatisfied with the dentist and refused to pay the exorbitant price he
asked."
Nothing more
came in the automatic writing, but the first thing that appeared in the
subliminal stage of the recovery was the capital letter T., which was
the initial of his name. The subliminal, however, suspected the name
Theodore, which was the name of the communicator of the week before. I
denied that this was correct when asked by the subliminal if it was, but
I said no more.
The automatic
writing of the next day began with general observations on the
communicator's new life and experiences, as if he were merely practising until he could get
control; he then made an allusion to my desire for evidence and at once began the
effort to give it.
"There was a great
deal of pain in my head. I could not seem to think clearly, so much
confusion, you know what I mean."
(Yes perfectly.)
"And the confusion
of ideas made everything seem unreal and some of the things I said were meaningless, like one talking in his
sleep. Still I was not asleep nor yet irresponsible entirely. It seemed as if there were more people
about than there really were, but just at the last moment there was
peace and hush and no more hurrying to and fro. I longed for home."
Mrs. Tausch writes in regard to this
statement that he did suffer a great deal of pain in the head and that a
short time before his death he was delirious and talked incoherently at
the last. When she arrived at his side she was not sure that he
recognized her. There were only two at his side when he died, Mrs. Tausch and her
sister-in-law.
The messages
continued immediately with reminiscences of the last illness, one or two
of much interest. The allusion to his longing for home implied that he died away from it, a
fact which I did not know. But to help make the allusion clear I began with
a question.
(Did you not pass away at home?)
"No, I did not mean
that I was away from home, so much as that it was not like home at all and the
noise of the feet on the floor troubled me. You know what I mean, the footsteps, first on the carpet, then on
something bare.
"I wish to recall
something gray which was thrown about me as I was lifted up to take
something from a cup. It was only a partial lifting but this gray
garment was
over my shoulders. So weak I could not do it myself." He then evidently attempted to refer
to his mother, who was dead, and then referred to his children as
living. He left two children
when he died. He died, not at his home in America, but at his old home in Germany. Mrs. Tausch thinks that walking on the floor disturbed him, but she was not
a personal witness of the fact. He was constantly getting up and sitting
wrapped in his mother's gray dressing gown. It is probable that he
drank medicine or nutriment from a cup. Outside of his sick room was a
pretty scene. It was a picturesque village with an old convent in view. Of the
children he said they needed him more as an advisor than as provider. The
reverse was true. They needed his provision more than his advice
at their young age. But he went on with his message.
"I wish to prove to them all that I was not a fool to be interested in
this belief of
spirit. You know
what I mean."
(Yes.)
"It is not so easy
to prove as it is to believe." (Yes, that is right.)
"I also had some records I had been much interested in."
(Yes, do you mean
they were your own?) "No."
(Whose?)
"Others. My personal
experience was limited." (Yes, do you know whose records they were?)
"Yes, J. had some."
(Let me be sure what
the J. is for?) "My friend James."
Now Professor
James was a friend of the communicator, and Mrs. Tausch wrote in
response to my inquiries that Professor James had given them records to
read and that they had done so. Of course I knew nothing of this fact, and indeed nothing of
the wan and his life.
This message was followed by a
reference to a long country road with birch trees on its sides, a stone
wall, and the road winding round a hill. He intimated also that he had
suffered from shortness of breath, apparently caused by climbing the
hill referred to. Mrs. Tausch says he did walk over such a road the last year
of his life, but there were no birches on it. He suffered from shortness of
breath, caused by asthma, not by climbing the hill, though the latter would
probably produce the same effect. He then referred to his wife with an initial
B., which is a letter in her name, but not significant here. He referred to
himself as a philosopher, which was correct, and then to "some things
near an old furnace," which could not be verified. He referred to Harvard and
Columbia Universities, claiming to
be a graduate of Harvard, which he was not. But he had visited both
universities and knew the head of the philosophy department at Columbia. He referred to the name
Fiske and connected it with a place which be said his wife would know, saying that the
man was dead. He had patronized the Fiske Teachers' Agency. I have not
been able to verify the death of the man. But he went on with other
incidents.
"Does she remember
how I used to fuss about clocks? I wanted them to be right. Does she not
know what I mean?"
(She does not know.)
[Sitter, sister-in-law, shook her head, knowing nothing about his
private and domestic life.]
"I was always fixing
things. [Hand then seized the article on the table which was a purse
enclosed in oiled silk.] My purse."
(Yes.) [Might have detected it by touch.]
"Well, well, that
ought to bring a man to his senses. I am getting hold a little now, but
is it not hard work?
(Yes.)
"My books, does she
not know about my books and library, so many of them which have been
annotated for use. T h T." [Pencil fell and control lost.]
Mrs. Tausch
says that he did fuss about the clocks a great deal, especially a cuckoo clock which he
always wound up. As to annotating his books Mrs. Tausch says: "Well, he was
the greatest man for that. He always read with
pencil in hand."
The letter is
the initial of his name and "h" the last letter in it. As he came to the end of his message he evidently tried to sign down, and the automatic writing came to a close.
In the subliminal recovery, reference
was made to "Rome in New York." The sitter knew no reason for
referring to it, but Mrs. Tausch, though she could give no special
meaning to it, said that he had travelled about New York State lecturing in
various places, and Rome may have been one of them. A further reference
was made to Niagara Falls and Mt. Tom with a house on it. Also a yellow building was described, with the
intimation that it was on Mt.
Tom. This house is not recognized by Mrs. Tausch, as having any meaning, nor
has the reference to Niagara Falls. But Professor Tausch visited
Little Falls, in New York, and, in a mental picture, which was the
method of communication employed here, this mistake might easily occur
and influence the subliminal. Mt. Tom Mrs. Chenoweth knew nothing about
save that such a place existed. It seems that the reference to Mt.
Tom has no relevance to Professor Tausch, but he had visited Mt. Chocorua, on which there is a conspicuous house. Mrs. Chenoweth knew the latter very well, having taught
in that locality.
At the beginning of the next sitting,
after a few general remarks while getting control, the communicator
gave the following incident:
"Do
you know about a man younger than I, still alive in your world, most
near to me
and my work, C—— yes C—— and I want to write about something which
was done by a group of men in connection with my death,
resolutions and something in the way of a tribute which was sent by my
associates to the family. You know about that."
[I asked the sitter
whether she knew about this, but she shook her head.] (I don't know. I
shall inquire elsewhere.)
"Yes, I knew about
it and it was a pretty thing to do and I wonder if she knows who M is,
alive. Ask her M."
(Yes.) [Sitter
nodded head and said: "My name is"... I waved my hand before she uttered
it and stopped her.]
"Dear to me and alive, that is what I mean."
(What relation to you is this M?)
"When you ask a
question, every spirit in the room begins to answer mentally and that
knocks the pins out from under me. You know I told you it seemed to be
a mental
process and every man here has his head on his shoulders and hears your
question. I
will do the best I can," Later
the relationship was stated, and the message went on with a new incident
to be given presently. The initial of the lady present was M. I did not
know it myself. But it is the incident given just prior to this initial
that is most interesting. The sitter knew nothing about it and Mrs.
Tausch writes me regarding it, "His death was published in Ohio papers
and I was asked by a former fellow-professor—not a close friend—whose
first name was Clement, to
send biographical notes of his life. Besides there came a great many
letters of condolence with
handsome tributes to him." The communicator's position as a teacher was,
as indicated, in Oregon, not Ohio, so that the incidents here mentioned refer to friends who knew him in another State.
Without
a break then the new incident was taken up:
I
want to speak about a glass and a small bag in which I carried papers,
manuscripts, and the glass was a magnifying, reading
glass. Ask her if she recalls either of those, the bag I used to put other things in, but the papers
went to the bottom always."
(I shall ask about it.)
"And I recall
trying to do some work just before I came here. That you probably know
already."
(I myself do not know it, and perhaps you had best tell
just what it was.)
"I had planned and
arranged to do some particular work and tried to complete it, but it was
beyond my strength."
Mrs.
Tausch writes regarding these incidents: "He carried a bag in which
he put his manuscripts. He did
not use a magnifying glass, but carried eye glasses in his bag and
always lost them. He had planned an essay on 'The Relation Between
Science and Religion.' But he died before he could do anything with it. An American
college offered a prize for such."
It is probable
that the eye glasses magnified somewhat, so that Mrs. Tausch, not
understanding the pictographic process of communicating, may not have noticed the approximate
truth of the communication.
There followed a long passage which had many characteristic hits in it,
though mainly expressed in isolated words. For instance, he referred to
ethics and his interest in the subject, which his wife says was one of
his passions. He also intimated his reason for staying in the church
though his own creed was too liberal for strict adherence, and he gave
as his reason for remaining in the church against his liberal creed that
it was better to be associated with the good than with those who
disregarded it. This was true of his career in life. The name Lizzie
came in the same connection; it was the name (Elizabeth) of his living wife; he said that she was
alive. The sitter, however, thought he was giving the name "Leslie," which she
recognized, and so spoiled the completion of the reference. He
described a brick church, but the wife does not recall it.
Then came the
effort to give his name. I got, without any help on my part, variously
Taussh, Tauch, and Taush, once "Tucah" and once "Tach." The reader will see that I got all
the letters and two or three times the name phonetically. I then began speaking
German to him and I got a few disjointed replies in German, among them
the relationship of the sitter to him: "Geschwister," and a few other
words. Mrs. Chenoweth does not know German, save four words:—"Federmesser,"
and "Wie viel Uhr," the latter of which she speaks incorrectly.
Then a
reference was made in the subliminal to the railway and a long trip, and the statement was made that after his death his body was taken
on a railway. This was not
correct. Perhaps the whole passage should be quoted.
"Do you know where there is a long stretch of railroad
track?" (No.)
"A long long track."
(Where?)
"Oh, I don’t know.
Wait a minute. Has there been a spirit here whose body was taken on a railroad
track after his death?
(No.) [Sitter shook her head to my inquiry.]
(That spirit who has
been here did not have his body on the train, but perhaps some friend of
his did.)
"No, it seems
connected with him, connected with him just near his death. I can't get
it very clearly. I seem to want to go to his grave. There are two or
three trees there that took like evergreens and are in some sort of a
conical shape right near his grave. They
don't grow that way, but are cut in conical shape."
Professor Tausch took a long railway
trip from Oregon via Quebec to Germany just before he died and was
physically exhausted by it. He
returned to Germany because of bad health in connection with asthma.
Probably this incident got confused with the reference to his grave, as
he was trying, pictographically, to give an account of these last
events. Mrs. Tausch knew nothing about the evergreens and so I asked her
to have photographs taken of his grave. This was in Silesia. She directed that my request be fulfilled and when I received the
photographs conical shaped
evergreens were visible not far from the man's grave.
There
were minor points of interest, but it would require the whole record and
much comment to bring out their significance. What I want to emphasize
is the fact that the incidents required confirmation by correspondence
with Mrs. Tausch, who was in Germany and who was the only person who
knew the facts, and even she did not know some of them, inquiry having
to be made in Silesia to verify them. The believer in telepathy will
have to stretch that theory inordinately to meet the situation, and that is the value of the facts;
namely, that they put that process to its wits' end to vindicate its
rationality.
Another case is
interesting because it involves something like a crosscorrespondence or
cross-reference, and also contains a complication of some interest because of the
connection between remote personalities.
A
man in the practice of international law had a lady, Miss De Camp, as
his secretary. She developed
automatic writing and was soon writing stories purporting to come from
the late Frank R. Stockton, who had died in 1902. Miss De Camp's work
began in 1909. The stories were sufficiently like those of Mr.
Stockton, despite subconscious influences, to enable Mr. Henry Alden, the editor of
"Harper's Monthly," to say that they were "very real." Mr. John R. Meader,
who had specially studied Stockton, said that the stories were
"very characteristic." There were occasional indications of personal
identity in the expression as well as the plot of the stories. But, as Miss De Camp had
read "The Lady or the Tiger" when she was a small child, though nothing
else of Stockton's, we had to allow for the possible influence of latent
subconscious knowledge. When I learned that the New York "World" was
going to publish some of the stories, I resolved to make some
cross-reference experiments before the stories were made public. I
therefore took Miss De Camp to Boston and had her registered in a hotel
under an assumed name. I then took her to Mrs. Chenoweth under the
conditions so often described. Miss De Camp entered the room after Mrs.
Chenoweth was in the trance, and left it before Mrs. Chenoweth recovered
normal consciousness.
At the first
sitting the name "Frank" came. This was referred to several |
