THE PSYCHOPHONE IN
SCOTLAND
By James Coates
(Author of
Self-Reliance
and other works).
Rothesay, September 8, 1913.
Dear Admiral Moore,
In sending you the following notes on
psychophone and allied psycho-physical phenomena, in which Mrs. Wriedt was
the centre round whom they
took place, I wish to say that either the notes are written by persons
the accuracy of whose statements are verified by my shorthand notes, or
they have been taken down during interviews by myself. As desired, they are
specially contributed to your book.
Concerning the
medium Mrs. Wriedt I have nothing to say, as neither her personality nor
her mediumship depends on my opinions, being adequately testified to by
your works and others which have been given to the public. Personally, I
think she is the finest medium of her kind, and in her the late Mr.
Stead found the most valuable and reliable instrument for psychophone
communication with his family and the world. A brief account of some of
these communications are given in
Has W. T. Stead returned ?
and to the press. Remarkable as
this has been, it falls far short of the evidences presented—in her
presence—of the knowledge possessed by departed friends to those on
earth, whom they were able, over the psychophone, to address. If it be
impossible to multiply the evidences by giving demonstrations in all centres of the movement, we
must rejoice in having such a rare instrument as Mrs. Wriedt with whom
to experiment. The manifestations in Mrs. Wriedt’s presence are
analogous to telephonic messages—hence my use of the name psychophone.
While many of the voices heard were characterless in expression, muffled
in sound, as if inadequately transmitted by telephone, the majority
became definitely clear, individualised characteristic of the voice of
the departed in life, towards the end, when the “distant” speaker and
the person receiving the message got into freer communication. The voice
identification was—in addition to the humanly identifiable nature of the
communications—most evidential. If it be objected that the messages were
in some instances short, although the names and incidents were correct,
or the voice of the supposed speaker was not recognised, my answer is
“These are not sound objections, and would not be advanced by an
experienced psychic investigator. The latter would esteem the shortest
voice communication of value. It is neither the length or brevity of the
message which matters, but
the contents.” The voice
being transmitted in this way may be feeble, muffled, or clear; yet,
however valuable the clear voice, that in itself is not so important as
the import and aptness of that which is said. As a Naval officer you
will appreciate as an illustration the hailing of ships at sea: a few
flags hoisted and pulled down during the day; some lights flashed at
night, or if near enough—in the old days—a hail or two from the
quarterdeck, and you obtain all the information you
wanted, the name of the vessel,
destination, number of passengers, cargo, and
bon voyage.
It was not much, but was sufficient. So
has it been in the séance room. If the messages were in some instances
brief, they were sufficient; identification was complete, and kindly
greetings were exchanged. In these days of scientific discovery great
advances have been made, and the intelligences in the invisible are
evidently keeping up to date. In
advance, indeed, for long before telephonic communication was deemed possible on earth, voice
phenomenon was reported in séance-rooms. As a rule, a telephone message is
only heard by the user; but not so with the psychophonic messages. They
are not only heard by the person most interested, but are heard by all
privileged to be present.
In the Rothesay circle it is the rule
not to admit any person for the first time, unless introduced by one whose
bonâ-fides are acceptable to me. When we have a professional medium like Mrs. Wriedt,
the same rule holds good. Although there are expenses, no one is admitted
either because of demand or ability to pay. A wellmeaning friend, being
thoroughly convinced himself and anxious to make the facts known, wanted
to invite some persons—clergymen, magistrates, and so on—thinking, if they
were convinced, great good would be accomplished; he was willing to pay
all expenses. I objected; but, to save his feelings, consulted “Dr.
Sharp.” Who stoutly refused, saying, “When people are ready and have a
longing in their hearts for communication with their loved ones, the way
will be found for them, but not for these outsiders. Bring a minister in,
and ten to one, if he is convinced, he will not have the courage or honesty to speak the
truth; if he is not, he will be the first to proclaim from the pulpit what
he is pleased to call ‘a fake.’ Magistrates—rubbish; invite no one because
of their position and influence. Yes; there is room for sincere men and
women; but we have no time for these persons, the bulk of whom would never
put to good use what they got. Christ warned his disciples not to throw
pearls before swine, but some people wanted to throw pearls
into them. No ! no ! tell
your friend we will have none of these folk.”
Dr. Sharp has
experience, and he is right. Honest scepticism in the open-minded has
never hindered phenomena, but it is a fatuous proceeding to introduce the
unfit and the unready into the séance-rooms in order to convince them
Another good friend who received
valuable evidence last year here was anxious to give a few friends a sitting, and so
arranged for a private séance. What came was very good, but his friends were neither
ready nor anxious for these messages, and one o0f them afterwards attributed “the
voices” to ventriloquism—a double error, arising from ignorance of the range and scope of ventriloquism and the possibilities
of psychophysics.
To those who admit
phenomena, but object to them on the ground that they proceed from evil
spirits personating our departed friends. I have nothing to say,
contenting myself with stating the objections. Having said so much, I will
present a few cases and let them tell their own tale. |
