Phenomena of materialisation : a contribution to the investigation of mediumistic teleplastics (1923)

BOSTONPUBLICtlBRARY

PHENOMENA OF MATERIALISATION

PHENOMENA OFMATERIALISATION

A CONTRIBUTION TOTHE INVESTIGATION OF MEDIUMISTIC TELEPLASTICS

o BY

BARON VON SCHRENCK NOTZINGPRACTISING PHYSICIAN IN MUNICH

TRANSLATED BY

E. E. FOURNIER d'ALBE, D.Sc. (Lond. and Birm.)Author of ''The Electron Theory," "Two New Worlds,"

"New Light on Immortality," etc.

Reissue of the First English Edition

WITH 225 ILLUSTRATIONS

LONDONKEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO. Ltd.

NEW YORK: E. P. DUTTON & CO.1923

'"/ ""y^'

PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BYTHE EDINBURGH PRESS, 9 AND II YOUNG STREET, EDINBURGH

Preface to the First German Edition" Nothing is too wonderful to be true."

Faraday.

It is not without some misgiving that I publish in the present workthe results of four years' observations of the medium Eva C. For theobservations of mediumistic phenomena hitherto made, do not, up tonow, in spite of their continuity and their independent agreement, andin spite of the high reputation of the authors whose names vouch forthe facts stated, fulfil the requirements of an exact scientific method.This may, however, be due to the character of the occurrencesthemselves.

Any dealings with the discredited so-called ** spiritistic" phenomenaare attended, even now, by certain disadvantages to the investigator.Not only are his powers of observation, his critical judgment and hiscredibility brought into question, not only is he exposed to ridiculeby the reproach of charlatanismas, for example, was the famouscriminal anthropologist, Lombrosobut he even incurs the danger ofbeing regarded as mentally deficient, or even as insane, as was thecase with the astronomer, Zollner, and the English chemist, Crookes.

The open or secret opponents of scientific men thus discreditedare in the habit of deriving some advantage from the destruction oftheir scientific authority. Recognising this fact, the well-known Frenchpsychologist, Charles Richet, has for the present entirely withdrawnfrom any dealings with the forbidden subject.

As to the means sometimes adopted by those who wish to provethe supposed fraud underlying mediumistic phenomena, the experienceof the author furnishes an instructive contribution. Convinced thatthe author was the victim of expert deceptions practised by twowomen, i.e.^ the medium Eva C. and her protectress Mme. Bisson,somebody secretly and without the author's knowledge instructed awell-known Parisian detective office to watch these two ladies. Theemployees of this firm, besides gathering the necessary informationabout the medium herself, also gained illegal possession of a numberof photographic copies of the negatives obtained during the experi-ments, though these were the exclusive property of the author andhis collaborator.

In spite of the unwelcome annoyances to which these two ladiesV

vi PREFACE TO THE FIRST GERMAN EDITION

were exposed by the tools of this anonymous agency, not only in thestreet but in their domestic and family life for eight months, theagency did not succeed in furnishing any proof of fraud or in findingthe firm which supplied what they supposed to be the material requiredfor the sittings, in the way of hand-shapes of all kinds, of veils,muslins, plaster casts of faces, or portrait drawings of four entirephantom images. One can hardly imagine a more miserable fiascoof this well-meant, but incorrect, method of serving the truth, if thealleged fraud had actually taken place. One remembers that in thecase of the German flower medium, Anna Rothe, and the Australian,Charles Bailey, the purveyors of the objects required as " apports "

during the sittings were easily found, even without spies. Cleverdetectives are in the habit of solving more difficult problems in ashorter time than was available in this case.

Though we may condemn the method here described, we mustacknowledge that a healthy scepticism and an open, benevolent andreasoned opposition may contribute to the elucidation of mediumisticproblems. For they lead to the subsequent testing of the objectionsbrought forward, and thus often to an improvement in the methodsof investigation.

The great astronomer, Johann Kepler, was right when he said*'Only resistance awakens slumbering forces. The works of foolish-ness perish. They must further what they seem to hinder. But thatwhich comes from the fountain-head is eternal." Since all honestinvestigation means a step forward in knowledge, the author has, inspite of all these hesitations, made up his mind, after a twenty-fiveyears' experience on the subject of mediumship, that he will nolonger withhold from the public the four years' observations withEva C. For, possibly, we may succeed in again directing attentionto a dark and unexplored side of human Soul Life, and in particularto certain problematical psycho-physical effects, and, furthermore,furnish an incitement towards further tests.

Whatever view we may take of this question, we cannot deny thatthe method of experiment employed in the observations with Eva C.and Stanislava P. marks a distinct step in advance in comparisonwith former similar investigations, so that further progress along thesame road may yield even better results.

The present work records in as impartial a manner as possible,and with the avoidance of attempts at explanations which would, atpresent, be premature, observations and occurrences in the case of themedium Eva C, which were objectively recorded by free photography.The majority of the experiments took place in Paris, and the authorhas stayed there as often as possible in order to continue these studies.

PREFACE TO THE FIRST GERMAN EDITION vii

During his absences the sittings were regularly continued under theaccepted conditions, and in this case his collaborator, Mme. Bisson,made considerable use of the author's photographic apparatus.

In order to give a continuous view of the development of themediumistic phenomena during that time, nearly all the photographstaken by Mme. Bisson herself, dating from May 1909, are alsopublished, as well as numerous personal observations made by her{e.g. on the spontaneous occurrences of the phenomena), which werefacilitated by several years of her joint residence with the medium.These communications furnish a valuable and necessary supplement tothe author's own experimental material. Besides, the reports couldoften be confirmed by a subsequent repetition in the author's presenceof such occurrences as were, in the first instance, observed byMme. Bisson alone, so that there is no occasion to doubt the correct-ness of these supplementary reports. The photographic plates werealways inserted by the author himself during his experiments. Theywere developed also in his presence either by Barenne & Co. (RueDuret 27 bis), or in Munich by the Photo-Chemical Institute ofDr Hauberrisser (Dienerstrasse 19).

The majority of the materialisation phenomena photographed werealso taken as stereoscopic photographs, but these could not, fromconsiderations of clearness and brevity, be reproduced in the presentwork.

Since in the first year, on account of the imperfect working of theflash-light apparatus, the photographs were often failures, certainsituations of some apparent importance were reconstructed, accordingto the records, by the welcome assistance of the painter, KarlGampenrieder. Such pictorial representations cannot, of course, beregarded as substitutes for photographs, and they only claim arelative value as graphic renderings of certain interesting moments.

In the present year (1913J the author had the unexpected opportunityof observing materialisation phenomena in the case of a young Pole,Stanislava P., whose mediumistic powers are not yet sufficientlydeveloped. These observations took place at Munich under similarconditions as with Eva C, but in a less rigid and convincing form.The independent agreement of certain performances of the Polishmedium with those of Eva C. is so striking, that certain selectedphotographs from these sittings, together with explanatory notes, areadded to this work in a special chapter.

As regards the criticism of the occurrences related in the case ofthe medium Eva C, such men of science must be acknowledgedas qualified in the first instance who command adequate knowledgeand a special study of the subject of Physical Mediumship. He

viii PREFACE TO THE FIRST GERMAN EDITION

who has not read the works of Lombroso and Zollner, nor is acquaintedwith the several years' investigations of Sir W. Crookes, will possiblyarrive at an erroneous conception or even a denial of the resultscommunicated. But new acquisitions of knowledge must not bejudged according to their probability or improbability ; they need notbe swayed by temporarily dominant scientific dogmas or by popularopinion.

Even though, at the present moment, we cannot comprehend thestrange capacities of mediums, we have not to deal with "miracles"in the religious sense, but with occurrences happening fairly regularlyunder certain conditions, though their causes and laws are at presentunknown. As Richet justly observes : '' Nothing is touched thatbelongs to the classical treasury of science."

Let the reader then approach without prejudice and with an openmind the study of the present work, and let him not be shaken in hisjudgment by prevalent opinion, nor by the numerous failures anddisappointments hitherto encountered in the history of "Occultism."

As the author was guided in his experiments, so may also thereader be guided by the words of Frederick the Great: "I seek thetruth everywhere, and respect it wherever I find it, and 1 submit toit whenever it is shown to me."

ALBERT VON SCHRENCK NOTZING.

Munich, iz^th October 19 13.

TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE

This first English version of Dr von Schrenck Notzing's Materialisa-tions-Phcenomene embodies not only the original volume but also themore important parts of the supplementary work entitled Der Kampfum die Materialisations Phcenoviene^ published early in 19 14, as wellas certain subsidiary material accumulated since these researcheswere first made public. The English version has been prepared inconsultation with the author and with Mme. Bisson, and it maybe taken to represent their results and views as finally arrived atin 1920 and embodied in the forthcoming Second German Edition.

The English-speaking public has, therefore, now an opportunityof studying these remarkable results at first hand. The present workis unique, in that it gives a full scientific account of a set of strangeoccurrences observed under the strictest conditions of control, andas yet quite unexplained. With admirable candour the author takesus into his confidence, and publishes his results in full, regardless ofthe dangers of misinterpretation by superficial and prejudiced critics.It cannot be expected that the facts here stated will be readily acceptedas presented. Nobody believes facts merely because they are true.They must also link up with other facts, they must fit into ourprevailing habits of thought, they must be "useful" in the senseof leading to workable practical conclusions. But any intelligent manmay safely be challenged to read through this work with an openmind, and then deny that the case for the reality of the phenomena,and for the novelty and abnormality of their mode of production,has been completely established ; and once that point of view isattained, the new branch of knowledge will soon find its place in theintellectual inheritance of our race.

The translator is convinced of the authenticity of the phenomena,not only from the perusal of this work but from the opportunities hehad, through the kindness of the Society for Psychical Research, ofwitnessing some of the phenomena presented by the medium Eva C.in London. He does not venture an explanation, but agrees in themain with the author in regarding them as a new, or rather a hithertounexplored, function of certain human organisms. He also takes the

ix

X TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE

author's view that a spiritistic interpretation has not, so far, becomeunavoidable.

In reading the reports of some of the Sittings one cannot helpregretting that certain excessively severe precautions to eliminate thehypothesis of fraud should have been considered necessary, and hopingthat the physical and emotional martyrdom undergone by the Frenchmedium should suffice to silence the most ruthless and exacting critic,and so pave the way for more humane methods of investigation. Thatthe medium has retained her mental and moral equilibrium throughso many years of experimentation is entirely due to the wisdom,patience and devotion of Mme. Bisson.

The world is now for the first time in possession of a Monographon these mysterious and much-controverted phenomena, investigatedby a trained observer, and recorded by him with the aid of greatscientific resources. The work demands, and is entitled to, anunprejudiced and respectful hearing. The verdict as to its valuein the advancement of knowledge can be safely left to an enlightenedpublic opinion.

E. E. FOURNIER d'ALBE.

London, Aug^ust 1920.

CONTENTS

PART I.1909-1913.

INTRODUCTION.

General and HistoricalOn Method in Mediumistic InvestigationsFacts and Hypotheses

PAGE

I

14

28

PHENOMENA WITH EVA C.Sittings in May and June 1909 (Paris) ...... 37Sittings in November 1909 (Paris) ...... 44Sittings in May and June 1910 (Paris) ...... 50Observations in Biarritz ........ 57Sittings in October and November 1910 (Paris)..... 59Sittings in December 1910 and January 191 1 (Paris) . . . .80Sittings in March and April 191 1 (Paris) . ..... 86Sittings in May and June 191 1 (Paris) ...... 91Further Observations in June and July 191 1 (Paris) . . . .97Sittings in July and August 191 1 (St Jean de Luz) . . . .99Further Observations in September 191 1 (St Jean de Luz) . . . 115Sittings in October and November 191 1 (Paris) .... 117Observations in December 191 1 (Paris)...... 134Sittings in December 191 1 and January 1912 (Paris) .... 137Observations in March and April 191 2 (Paris) ..... 145Sittings in April 1912 (Paris) ....., 147Psychical Phenomena ..... 149Sittings in May and June 1912 (Paris) ...... 156Observations in June and July 1912 (Paris) ..... 169Sittings in July, August and September 1912 (Munich) . . .

. 171

Sittings in October and November 19 12 (Paris)..... 207Observations in December 1912 and January and February 1913 (Paris) . 216Sittings in February and March 191 3 (Paris) . . . . .222Observations in March, April and May 1913 (Paris) .... 228Sittings in May and June 1913 (Paris) ...... 231Observations in June and July 19 1 3 (Paris and La Baule) . . . 243Result of the Microscopic Examinations . ..... 246

xi

xii CONTENTS

PHENOMENA WITH STANISLAVA P.Introduction .....

Sittings in January and February 1913 (Munich)Sittings in June and July 1913 (Munich)Results of the Observations

251

252

257

259

RETROSPECT.

Negative Points and the Hypothesis of Fraud .

Artistic and Technical Opinions .....

Method of Observation and Development of Teleplastic Structures

Head Fragments, Faces and Phantoms ....Conclusion........

260

271

274

279

283

PART II.1913-1919.

Introduction ......

The Rumination Hypothesis ....

Front Page Illustrations from the Journal Le Miroir .

Sittings with Eva C. in November and December 1913 and January1914 (Paris) ......

Sittings with Eva C. in May and June 1914 (Paris)Result of the Observations ....

Reports of French Investigators 1916 (Paris)

Dr V. Gustave Geley (Paris) on his Observations with Eva C. in 1918 (Paris)

Conclusion..........

28s

286

292

306

311

320

324

327

336

PHENOMENA OF MATERIALISATION.

INTRODUCTION.

GENERAL AND HISTORICAL.

The history of Science in the last few decades confirms, more perhapsthan in any previous age, the justice of the words of the great mathe-matician Arago, that the word " impossible " should be very sparinglyused outside mathematics. Among the " impossibilities " of formeropinion we may enumerate the following :free motor traction onordinary roads ; flying ; the arbitrary production of psychic dependenceof a human being (hypnotic suggestion) ; vision into closed spaces(Rontgen rays) ; colour photography ; wireless telegraphy ; and radio-activity ; not to mention other facts of recent research.

Hypnotism, which encountered more opposition than anythingelse, is now the common property of psychology, and the cure of nervousdisease. At all times new discoveries have encountered violent opposi-tion. Facts were denied because they did not fit into the theoriesprevailing at the time, or because fantastic people drew unwarrantableconclusions from them.

A particularly instructive example of this kind is furnished bymeteoric stones, whose actuality struggled long for recognition. ThusChladni^ complains in his work on " Fiery Meteors " of the treatmentaccorded to him by his colleagues : " When my work appeared, themajority of them declared the whole contents to be foolishness, asindeed I had expected. It was said in the General German Librarythat my assertions were unworthy of refutation." J. A. du Lucexpressed himself in this sense, that if he had seen such a stone fall athis feet he would have said, " I have seen it, and yet I do not believe it."

But, as a rule, people make the matter easy for themselves bydistorting the facts newly announced, or by simply denying them,instead of taking the trouble to make further investigations. Dis-belief went so far that most of the meteorites which had been keptin public collections were simply thrown away by the Keepers, for fearof being made ridiculous and being regarded as uneducated if theyadmitted the possibility of the thing. This a priori resistance tonew phenomena, an old inherited scientific sin, is seen more particularlyin medicine, which owed originally to laymen so many of its presentsecure possessions. Let us remember the violent resistance opposed to

^ Chladni, Tiber Feuermeteore, Vienna, 1819.

2 PHENOMENA OF MATERIALISATION

Harvey's discovery of the circulation of the blood (this excellentinvestigator was even declared to be insane), also the opposition of theFrench Academy to vaccination for smallpox, as proposed by Jenner.

The history of Science offers numerous examples of this kind, whichmay be found enumerated in the writings of Flammarion, Zollner,and Kemmerich.i

Our investigation of Nature is subject to change. We have nojustification for condemning a priori, though a healthy scepticismcan only contribute to the furtherance of truth. A recollection of therevolutionary results of investigation obtained in the last few decadesmay, however, have cleared the judgment of the present world ofscience. Thus our present time appears to be better disposed towardsthe reception and sober examination of new facts, however strangeand absurd they may appear to be.

Another important advance is the abandonment of the materialisticconception of the universe which, even thirty years ago, was in solepossession. Modern physics regards matter as a form of motion, and isdominated by the idea of energy. Psychology also is gradually emanci-pating itself from the purely physiological conception of mental life ;and under the leadership of the philosopher Bergson, it tends toacknowledge the superiority of the psychical over the physical. Thusthe circumstances are much more favourable to the investigation ofgreat new problems and facts than they were some decades ago.

Among the more important problems we may place the scientificinvestigation of the physical phenomena of mediumship which, up tonow, has been entirely in the hands of superstitious spiritists.

In view of the improvement of our natural knowledge there is noa priori reason against the possibility of abnormal phenomena andeffects which may have their origin in the wonderful human organism.Our knowledge of that which we call life is limited. The riddles ofpropagation, of growth, of the transmission of racial qualities, areentirely unsolved, although they take place daily before our eyes.Perhaps, as Kayserling ^ supposes, the individual is only a stage in theprocess of life. If that is so, the real in Nature is based upon some-thing ideal. The principle of life is not exhaustively represented byits temporary appearance. According to this view we overestimatethe importance of consciousness, which does not imply anything essentialto life, and so we exaggerate the sense of personal existence.

Now we find abnormal phenomena of human nature, as presentedby mediumistic processes, at all times in the history of civilisation,so that, for this reason alone, an examination of them is justified quiteapart from any subsequent explanation. Is it only a matter of fraud,superstition and self-deception ? Even if that were so, an investigationof the subject, and a re-education of the persons thus misled anddeceived, would appear to be necessary.

But if, as has been asserted, we have to deal with genuine phenomenaof an unknown, transcendental origin, then the study of these factsis one of the most important tasks ever imposed upon science. For

1 Flammarion, Les Forces Inconnues de la Nature; Zollner, Wissemchaftliche Abhand-lungen, 1878, Leipzig ; Kemmerich, Kultur-Kuriosa, Vol. II. (Langen, Munich, 1910).

2 Kayserling, TJnsterblichkeit , Munich, 1907.

INTRODUCTION 8

it must bring about an unexpected widening of the knowledge of theprocesses of human life.

The unprejudiced and sober examination of the records contributedto literature by well-known investigators familiar with the methodsof scientific observation, shows that it is absolutely necessary to makefurther tests of their results if there is a suitable opportunity of doing so.The best known of such records are those made 1870 to 1874 by thelate Sir William Crookes, the great English chemist and physicist,which were undertaken with the medium, Florence Cook, then fifteenyears of age, and with Daniel Dunglas Home. The investigationsof this savant were conducted with such care that it is difficult to denyhim any credibility simply on account of his cursory and sometimesrather startling form of publication, as was done by Alfred Lehmann.^Crookes employed self-registering measuring apparatus and treatedthe medium as a sort of power-engine. He published the first recordof certain phenomena in the case of Home in 1871, and eighteen yearslater further notes on the same sittings. In these we get a pictureof some occurrences rather different from that presented in the originalpublication. Thus Lehmann, who exposes a few contradictions in thetwo publications, finds fault with the dependence of the experimenteron the wish of the medium, the defective illumination, the free movementof the medium during the experiments, and many inaccuracies in therecords. According to him a conscientious investigator should onlypublish such results as he has repeatedly obtained under definite con-ditions, and the records should be published in full, together with adescription of all accompanying circumstances.

Even if we admit certain faults in Crookes's records of his experi-ments, these do not impair the value of any single definite experiment,or of a self-contained single observation. Must these results, therefore,have been observed inaccurately and falsely, because they are notrecorded as Lehmann justly desires it ?

As regards the good-will of the medium, we may take it that allexperiments are dependent on that, and the education of the mediums(who have a very imperfect understanding of the requirements ofscientific method), so as to make them into useful subjects for research,is one of the most difficult problems which investigators, in this subject,have to solve.

As regards the famous materialisations of " Katie King," Podmore ^showed that the decisive proofs were not obtained in Crookes's ownhouse, but at the house of the Cook family in Hackney, where the bed-room of the medium was used as the cabinet.

The electric control of the medium proposed by Varley did not,according to Lehmann, exclude fraud. Yet this critic admits thatKatie King was a living being ! Must we take it that the circum-stances of the medium's bedroom being used in some cases as a darkcabinet has anything to do with the value of the results obtained byCrookes, who, in the course of four years, made hundreds of experimentsin his own laboratory ? Decision can only rest with the conditionsof the single experiment performed. The genuineness of the medium-

' Lehraanrij Ahergluube und Zaufierei, Enke, Stuttgart, 1908." Podmore, Modern Spiritualism, Vol. II., p. 155.


istic phenomenon should be considered as completely established bythe generation and disappearance of a figure without any artificialmeans before the eyes of the experimenter, as was so often describedby Crookes. That this phenomenon accompanied the medium, and waseffected even better in the rooms in which she lived, is quite natural.

Lehmann says nothing about the photographs taken by Crookes,which proved that Katie King and Florence Cook weve two differentliving beings. When, several years after the medium's marriage withMr Corner, during a sitting of the 9th January 1880, the spirit " Mary

"

was seized and found to be the medium in a flannel dress andcorsets, and when, later, six unsatisfactory sittings were heldby Polish men of science, it was said everywhere that the celebratedmedium of Professor Crookes was a fraud, and that she had deceivedhim during several years. Whether this exposure was really a case of" transfiguration," " transmutation," or pseudo-materialisation, suchas often occurs, and has also been observed by the author, may be leftaside for the moment. But the readers of Crookes's reports may remem-ber the farewell sitting of Katie King, in which she declared that shewould depart and would never return.

Possibly this termination was a hint of the close of Miss Cook'smediumship. We may find it humanly comprehensible that she madefurther attempts, and that, in spite of the failure of her mediumisticpowers, she consented to sittings which came to a lamentable end.

But even this circumstance cannot diminish the importance of thefacts which Crookes obtained with the medium at the height of hercreative power. Of the whole of Lehmann's criticism of the Englishinvestigator only one justifiable objection remains, viz., that therecord of these interesting phenomena might have been more completeand accurate.

Besides, the late Sir William Crookes, who was regarded as one ofEngland's greatest chemists and physicists, never recanted a singleone of his statements on this matter. In this connection he has made thefollowing pronouncement : ^

" Thirty years have passed since I published a report concerningexperiments purporting to show that behind our scientific knowledgea power exists which differs from that common to all mortals. ... Tostop in an investigation which promises to open wide the gates ofknowledge, to hesitate for fear of difficulties and hostile criticism,would mean exposmg science to censure. The investigator has nothingto do but to go straight ahead, to gather information everywhere, tofollow the light inch by inch with the aid of his reason, wherever thelight may lead, even should it resemble a will-o'-the-wisp !

"

Among other mediums referred to in the literature of the latterpart of the nineteenth century and the first years of the twentieth, afew may be mentioned here, whose performances furnish links andparallels with the statements contained in the present work.

The private medium, Mrs d'Esperance, born in London in 1852,is described by all who came in contact with her as an honest andcredible person. In spite of her truthful character she was not spared

1 Hyslop, Enigmas- of Psychical Research (passage retranslated fiom the Germau).

INTRODUCTION 5

an " exposure." While she was believed to be sleeping in the cabinet,her shadow friend " Yolande " was seized. On this she says : " Theman who had seized her said it was I. This assertion appeared to meso extraordinary and incomprehensible that I could have laughed, if myutter helplessness and weakness had not rendered me incapable ofthinking or even of moving." In consequence of this shock, this lady ofunimpeachable character broke down completely, became seriously ill,retired from the world, and ceased to give any sittings for a long time.She had devoted herself to mediumistic studies solely from a love ofthe subject and from a thirst for knowledge. From these and otherremarks Lehmann arrives at the reasonable conclusion that Mrs d'Esper-ance, during the exposure, played the part of Yolande automaticallyin a dream. In general, he adopts the view that the spirit forms areunconscious figments dramatically^ enacted by the materialising mediums.

Mrs d'Esperance was a dreamer even as a child. She had a livelyimagination. At fourteen she believed herself to be insane, on accountof numerous visual and auditory hallucinations. Under the influenceof spiritists she commenced with table-tilting, psychography, andautomatic drawing and writing, (She had been taught drawing andpainting.) The genesis of her own materialisation phenomena shedescribes just as they are observed in other mediums : a white heap ofmuslin lying on the floor becomes animated and ascends in the form ofwhite clouds, until, under the folds of the drapery, a living being in humanshape appears. On p. 254 of her book ^ the same process is described asfollows :

" First a filmy, cloudy patch of something white is observed on thefloor in front of the cabinet. It then gradually expands, visibly extend-ing itself as if it were an animated patch of muslin, lying fold upon fold,on the floor, until extending about two and a half by three feet, andhaving a depth of a few inches

perhaps six or more. Presently it

begins to rise slowly in or near the centre, as if a human head wereunderneath it, while the cloud}^ film on the floor begins to look morelike muslin falling into folds about the portion so mysteriously rising.By the time it has attained two or more feet in height, it looks as ifa child were under it and moving its arms about in all directions as ifmanipulating something underneath. It continues rising, oftentimessinking somewhat to rise again higher than before, until it attains theheight of about five feet, when its form can be seen as if arranging thefolds of drapery about its figure. Presently the arms rise considerablyabove the head and open outwards through a mass of cloud-like spiritdrapery, and Yolande stands before us unveiled, graceful and beautiful,nearly five feet in height, having a turban-like head-dress, from beneathwhich her long black hair hangs over her shoulders and do\vn her back..... The dematerialising of Yolande's body occupies from two tofive minutes, while the disappearance of the drapery occupies from ahalf to two minutes."

In one of the illustrations published in her book she is photographedwith her " spirit " Yolande. Later, she took hundreds of photographs,to test whether she could exert some mediumistic influence upon the

^ Shadow Land, by E. d'Esperanee. London. George Redway^ 1898.


plate. On some plates, heads and nebulous human shapes were foundbeside the person photographed. Professors Butlerow and Aksakoffsucceeded in obtaining materialisation photographs with Mrs d'Esperance.Oxley made the interesting experiment, unknown to the medium upto the time of the experiment, of mixing the seed of an Indian plant,Ixora crocata, with sand and water in a decanter, and requesting themedium to accelerate its growth. It is said that, under the eyes oftwenty persons, the plant developed to a height of twenty-two inches,with a flower composed of some 150 four-star corollas and twenty-nineleaves.

Mrs d'Esperance lives in retirement in the country, or travels, andhas quite ceased her mediumistic activity. (She died in 1919

Tr.)The incompleteness and imperfection of the materialisations was

already evident to the observers of the phantom " Yolande," whichappeared with Mrs d'Esperance on 13th March 1896.^ The headssometimes gave the impression of masks, and this was also found byComte Bullet during the photography of a phantom with anothermedium. According to his view, a flat surface is materialised first,and this is modelled subsequently. This view receives some supportfrom the author's observations as recorded in this work.

As in Mrs d'Esperance' s book Professor Mangin - describes materiali-sation as a fugitive structure suddenly generated, which assumes ahuman or animal shape. Its material is not permanent, but phantom-like. It contains the minimum of substance necessary to produce in thewitnesses the illusion that they have a living body before them. Mostlyit consists of outlines or sketches of hands or heads, and in order to savework in the formation of heads, the mysterious artist employs drapery.In a harmonious concatenation of all the best conditions a " KatieKing " can be born and equipped up to the limit of illusion. She mustvanish like the dream she is. The substance borrowed from the mediumnmst return whence it came ; the child disappears into the lap of itsmother. In connection with the dress of the phantom Mangin askswhether it consists of " apports " or materialisations, and recalls thewell-known scene in which Katie King cut off portions of her garmentand distributed them among those present. She then filled up thegaps by simply covering them with the intact portion of her drapery.They were immediately filled up, and, in spite of the closest inspection,Crookes was unable to find a seam.

Similar to the above is the description given by the French physiolo-gist, Professor Charles Richet,^ of the process as observed in his Algierssittings. " I see something like a white luminous ball of undeterminedoutline suspended above the floor. Then suddenly there appears,emerging from this white orb of light as from a trap-door, the phantom' Bien Boa.' It is of moderate height. He is draped in a flowinggarment with a belt round his waist. ' Bien Boa ' is halting andlame in his walk. One cannot say whether he walks or glides. . . .Without opening the curtain he suddenly collapses and vanishes onthe floor. At the same time one hears the noise of a body falling onthe floor. Three or four minutes afterwards the same white orb appears

1 Psychische Studien, 1907, p. 119. ^ Annales des Sciences Psychiques, Dec. 1907.3 Psychische Studieri, 1906, p. 82.

INTRODUCTION 7

in the opening of the curtain above the floor, then a body is seen quicklyrising straight up and attaining the height of an adult, and then it againcollapses on the floor."

Richet regards this as decisive, and says : " Before my eyes outsidethe curtain, a living body has been formed, which emerged from thefloor and vanished into the floor." (There was no trap-door.) Thephotograph of the phantom taken by Richet on this occasion coversthe upper body and the head of the medium. One might l)e justifiedin raising the objection that, viewed merely as a photograph, withoutregard to the conditions of the experiment, it does not prove the exist-ence of any living being besides the medium, but that it gives theimpression of a transfiguration, as already pointed out by ProfessorGabriel Max.

Within the last forty years hardly any medium has stimulatedthe study of spiritistic phenomena to such an extent, nor earned asmany convinced adherents among men of science, as Eusapia Paladino.The author followed her development for about sixteen years.

The first series of sittings took place in 1894, in the presence ofRichet, Lombroso (Turin), Danilewski (Petrograd), and others.

In 1898 (May-June), 1903 (February-March), there were investiga-tions in Munich in conjunction with German savants, and ProfessorFlournoy (Geneva). The author also took part in the tests of themedium arranged by Richet in August 1894 in the South of France,attended by the physicist Sir Oliver Lodge, Professor and Mrs Sidgwick,Frederick Myers and some French physicians. Lacking confidencein the accuracy of his own results, the author felt the need of repeatedsupplementary tests, and these took place at Rome (May 1896), Naples(May 1898), Rome and Naples (April 1902), Rome (March 1903), andlastly in Genoa and Nice (April 1909).

This lack of confidence was also the reason why no details havebeen hitherto published with regard to the results of these fifty-fivesittings.

Meanwhile Eusapia submitted herself to further numerous andlengthy examinations by scientific commissions in Genoa, Turin, Naples,Paris, and other places. The careful experimental investigations ofthe General Psychological Institute ^ in Paris extended, with inter-ruptions, over several years. As in the case of the author and otherswho have repeatedly and thoroughly examined the medium, theinvestigators reached, in general, positive conclusions in regard tothe reality of certain mediumistic phenomena of a special kind. Icannot, however, deal with these in this Introduction. The pheno-mena observed were the motion of objects at a distance without

^ " Rapport sur les seances d'Eusapia Paladino a I'Institut General Psychologique eu190.5, 1906, 1907, 1908," par Jules Courtier (Bulletin de I'Institut General Psychologique,1908, p. 415). Presi'ut.M. and Mme. Curie, Branly, Richet, d'Arsonval, Bergson,Langevin, Yourjewich, Miquel, etc. The Report confirms the motion, registered byautomatic apparatus, of inanimate objects without contact with the medium, luminousphenomena, appearance of human shapes, contact and other telekinetic phenomena, and acertain proportion of fraud. For the majority of Eusapia's performances fraud could notbe assumed. The conditions of control give a great probability against it ; but the doubtsoccasioned by the frauds discovered, prevented the observers from speaking of a scientifically" impregnable " certainty of proof, and only admit of subjective judgments.


contact, table-tiltings, raps, the production of tactile sensations andsimUar performances.

Like Home, Slade, and Eglinton, Eusapia is chiefly a physicalmedium. The sittings mostly took place in a feeble red light, partlyalso in total darkness, but nearly all observers record some phenomenain a bright electric light.

By her long years of intercourse with sceptical savants she is accus-tomed to experimental conditions of the most varied kinds, and is herselfanxious to maintain a good illumination and an accurate control.

Nevertheless, there is complete agreement among all these investi-gators, both those who have vouched for the genuineness of her pheno-mena, and those who are not convinced on this point, that Eusapiaoften deceives by well-known manipulations, that she knows how tofree a hand or a foot, or even both hands, and thus brings about someof these phenomena mechanically with the aid of her own limbs.

Thus the author had alread3% in April 1894 in Rome, discoveredthe change of the hands and the use of a stretched hair for movinga letter balance. During a similar experiment in February 1903, inMunich, the author captured the hair which she used.

In the case of a sitting at Munich, in May 1898, Professor Lippsnoticed that, instead of Eusapia's hand, he held the hand of the sittercontrolling the left side of the medium. In this way she had freedboth hands by a trick. Also the savants, Dr Eugen Albrecht, DrMinde and Dr Loeb, who conducted the sittings in 1903, at Munich,found a regular freeing of arm or leg.

On the 22nd of February 1903 Professor Flournoy of Geneva con-trolled her left side during a sitting at Munich. The author stoodbehind the chair of the medium and saw, at the moment when ProfessorFlournoy felt himself touched on the right side, the sole of a foot andthe heel quite clearly. It cannot, therefore, be doubted that the cleverNeapolitan used her foot in order to touch the Professor while thelatter believed he was controlling the foot.

On the 20th of February 1903 she produced a " direct writing "on my cuff. But I had remarked beforehand that she was playingwith a pencil, and the point of this pencil was afterwards found to bebroken off, and was probably used by her.

On the 11th of April 1894 she pretended to bring about a suspensionof her body, a so-called levitation, in the dark, during a sitting at Rome,but I found that her foot was firmly planted on the table. She hadtherefore simply got on to the table. In fact, she utilised in a cleverway, besides her usual and well-known tricks, the weakness of theobservers. Thus she diverts the attention to the unoccupied side, andcomplains of too great pressure by those holding her hand. She isable to displace her chair by small and imperceptible jerks, so that shemay, for instance, upset a small table standing behind her by a violentjerk of the back of her chair backwards (Munich, May 1898). Or sheuses the train of her dress to pull objects towards her. Whole sittingswere often filled with such manoeuvres, which always aimed at out-witting the controlling sitters. And so it often happens that highlycritical sitters see their expectations entirely repJised, and believe theycan explain all the phenomena by means of these frauds.

INTRODUCTION 9

During a sitting at Munich, which took place in a gathering offriends on the 4th of March 1903, there was a sudden appearance ofa branch with red flowers. As we found afterwards, the branch fittedexactly on to the broken stem of an azalea bush which Eusapia hadplaced in her room. It is, therefore, quite probable that she broughtthe branch with her into the sitting room. If that was done intention-ally, then this would, m my experience, be the only one during a longnumber of years in which she had prepared a phenomenon before thesitting. For, as a rule, she improvised her deceptions by a clever adapta-tion to the situation of the moment and by the simplest means, whichwere sometimes extremely naive, barefaced and clumsy. For instance,when, during her farewell sitting at Munich in June 1898 the tablewould not tilt, she simply put her whole arm under the table and raisedit up. Even in the case of those phenomena, which must be regardedas genuine, she often helps. Thus she uses the support of her shinto raise the table into the air, or employs curtains in order to manipulatemore freely.

Although this mechanical production of mediumistic occurrenceshas often been observed by me, I have not been able to agree with theassertions of the English investigators (Sidgwick, Hodgson, and theconjuror, Maskelyne of London, 1895-6) that she worked with smallapparatus brought into the sitting. I not only examined her dresswith a ruler before every sitting, or had a special dress made for her, butI also had occasion to examine her whole luggage down to the lastneedle. Not the slightest suspicious objects, such as are required byevery conjuror, could be discovered.

In Eusapia's case we may regard the following as the causes of herfraudulent performances : lack of productivity, incorrect control onthe part of inexperienced and other sceptical observers, the suggestiveinfluence of mental surroundings unfavourable to the proper psychictone, the desire to fulfil the wishes of the participators, a> well as bodilyailments or psj^chic discord. But, however frequent deceptions mayhave been in the case of Eusapia, they do not furnish any explanations ofthe genuine mediumistic phenomena observed under the most rigidcontrol of the medium, as the author was able in numerous cases toverify.

Since she often fell into a deep trance, we must not judge her fraudu-lent practices without determining in every case how far she actedintentionally or unconsciously. The somnambulic activity of a mediummust not be mistaken for deliberate fraud. Eusapia Paladino's perform-ances have been examined several times by em.inent conjurors (such asRybka of Warsaw on the 13th of December 1893), and have beenacknowledged in their written testimony. Thus the American conjuror,M. Howard, said the following on the occasion of Eusapia's sittings inAmerica :

" I have been a conjuror all my life, and have up to now exposednumerous mediums who produced physical phenomena, but I amconvinced that this medium (Eusapia) actually produced elevationsof the table, and I undertake to contribute a thousand dollars to acharity if any one can prove to me that Eusapia is unable to raise a


table into the air without trick, without fraud and without help, exclud-ing the use of fraudulent manipulations of knees or feet or any otherpart of her body or utensils."

Carrington, who, in conjunction with other conjurors, examinedthe Neapolitan, at the instance of the Society for Psychical Research,for several months at her home, and who also arrived at a result favour-able to the ijiediumship of Eusapia, wrote in a letter addressed toLight :

" Several times I saw a third arm appearing, which closely resembledthat of Eusapia. It proceeded from her shoulder and touched theexperimenter sitting on the right. Both Eusapia's hands were visibleon the table. During the sittings in the Columbia University a hole'was made in the roof of the cabinet and one of the experimenters con-stantly observed the behaviour of the subject through this small openingwhile the phenomena took place. On three different occasions I sawstrange projections emerging from Eusapia's bodyonce from the middleof her backand then receding into her body. These pseudopods werewrapped in the material of the curtain, so that their consistency cannotbe determined. The clearest observation was made of a pointed shape,about a foot long, which developed from her foot. It approached thesmall table, touched the top and threw objects standing upon it to thefloor. All this was clearly observed."

With reference to Muensterberg's exposure of this medium, thewell-known American psychologist. Professor Hyslop, says this :" The report of Professor Muensterberg is not to be taken seriously,for it does not prove any actual fact, but only attempts an explana-tion."

Eusapia during the sittings fell into a deep hysterical somnambulism,and was often in a slightly dazed condition after the close. When thetrance set in, she turned pale, her head swerved to and fro, and the eyeswere turned upwards and inwards. She was hypersensitive, especiallyto the touch, and also to light ; she had hallucinations, delirium, fits oflaughter, weeping, or deep sleep, and showed other typical hystericalconvulsions. Digestive troubles also sometimes set in, especially whenshe had eaten before the sitting. In a sudden light or at a sudden roughtouch, she cried out and shuddered, as she would under unexpectedviolent pain. Her comprehension was extremely rapid during herecstasy ; she guessed the thoughts of those present very easily, especiallyif one of them suspected fraud.

As may be seen from the symptoms of the deep trance, great careand reserve are necessary during such experiments. Records made byauthors familiar with the sources of error, and having great experiencein the observation of people, should be accorded more weight. Forthis reason those materials seem to be the most valuable which arecollected by experts, psychologists, physicians, nerve specialists,physicists, chemical anthropologists and official representatives ofscience. It is true that even such men may be victims of refined fraud,but they employ scientific methods of investigation, and in the publica-tion of their reports they risk their scientific reputations. Their

INTRODUCTION 11

responsibility, is therefore, considerably greater than that of any privatereporter.

If, for instance, a savant like Morselli, Professor of Psychiatry inGenoa, who for many years conducted a literary war against spiritism,first took part as a novice and an unbeliever in the sittings with themedium, Eusapia Paladino, then convinced himself of the reality ofmediumistic processes, and finally studied this subject with a scientificexactness and thoroughness, the judgment of such an eminent psycholo-gist must be of great weight.

In reality he extended his investigation over several years, hasstudied the whole literature of the subject, and has finally published,in 1908, a vvork of 1000 pages in two volumes, which in exactness, scientificacumen, rigid self-control, and thorough information, can be comparedto the best works of scientific literature.

He again and again emphasises that there cannot be the slightestdoubt of the reality of the Eusapian phenomena, and in this the authorentirely agrees with him, in spite of the fraudulent instances abovespecified. Besides, a large number of scientific authorities, both inItaly and elsewhere, have confirmed the authenticity of the phenomenawith Eusapia under the most rigid control. According to Morselli,the explanation of Eusapia's performances by the fraudulent changeof hands and feet is a thing of the past. " The time has come to breakwith this exaggerated negative attitude, this constant casting of theshadow of doubt with its smile of sarcasm."

Spiritism, according to Morselli's view, is a religion, and as suchhas its apostles, its priests, its dogmas, its ritual, and its sermons.He regards Eusapia's controlling spirit, " John King," as a suggestivecreation from the medium's subconsciousness, as a fantastic dreamimage, as already shown by Professor Ochorowicz in Warsaw. Manyphenomena are also in direct contradiction to the spiritistic teaching.

The physical phenomenonology of the mediums, whatever theirnames (Politi, Miller, d'Esperance, etc.), is to-day a matter of spirit-istic tradition. Therefore, the savants are obliged to use the smalltable, magnetic chains, the control of hands and feet, the cabinet,darkness, the red light, plasticine and other limitations of the presentinvestigation.

It is true that Morselli corrected this view by admitting that thephenomena themselves required certain conditions. Do not certainchemical combinations require to be formed in darkness in the labora-tory ? Do not photographic plates require a ruby light ? And doesnot the night produce changes in the functions of animal and vegetableorganisms ?

It is, therefore, quite possible that the metapsychical or biodynamicalperformances of the medium are neutralised or impeded by light,which thus prevents him from producing the main phenomena of material-isation.

Control also paralyses the medium and influences him unfavourably ;it often stops the occurrence of the phenomena. Morselli admits thatmediumship is not a purely mechanical function like that of physicalapparatus, but depends upon the psychic constitution of the person inquestion.


For this reason alone it is not right to demand objective resultsfrom the mediums in the sense of physics and chemistry, howeverdesirable it may be to replace the record of the senses by registeringapparatus.

Mediumship has its own essential conditions, which must be respectedand studied by the observer. So long as spiritism develops outsidescientific laboratories, the traditional usages of the sittings must beput up with. It is only when science has seriously tackled the subjectthat one can attempt to reduce the phenomena to a system. Modernspiritism has the same relation to the future science of mediumisticprocesses as astrology had to astronomy, and alchemy to chemistry.We must, therefore, endeavour to get beyond the state of raw empiricismin which we stand at present, to increase the confidence of the mediumsin science and in its representatives, and use physical instruments andapparatus. Better even than dynamometers, balances and metro-nomes, in Morselli's opinion, is the photographic camera, since itgives positive proofs in the real sense of the word. In this con-nection, a large use has been made in the following investigations ofphotography, larger than has ever been done hitherto in the study ofmaterialisation phenomena.

Although the nature of the various physical phenomena of medium-ship is not yet entirely known, although in certain groups there is notyet any clear view of their subjective or objective character, variousauthors, like Aksakoff, Geley, Anastay and Morselli, have attempted theclassification of mediumistic occurrences.

Thus Morselli describes as the parakinetic phenomena of medium-ship the mechanical changes in or about inanimate objects touchedby the medium, such as the oscillations, motions and liftings of a table,and the touching and motions of objects when touched by the hand ofthe medium. It is an open question whether the play of involuntarymuscular action is able to give a sufficient explanation for all processesof this kind. One might have some hesitation in classifying such per-formances in any sense as physical mediumship.

Morselli has attempted to classify the Eusapian phenomena underthe head of subjective and objective phenomena. Among the subjectivephenomena he enumerates ten subdivisions ; in the objective ones,eight classes with numerous subdivisions. To me this elaborateclassification seems much too complicated, as well as unnecessary,in the presence of a subject in which the question of fact is not, as yet,sufficiently clear.

Since the present work only concerns itself with subjective occur-rences and mental mediumship (modifications of consciousness, intellec-tual performances, dramatisation of personalities, automatism andpsychography) in so far as they are necessary to understand thephysical performances of Eva C., I refer those readers who wishto inform themselves in detail to the special literature, and particu-larly to the extremely careful investigations of Professor Flourno}^in his work Esprits et Mediums (Geneva and Paris, 1911), as alsoto the observations of Mrs Piper by the British and AmericanSocieties for Psychical Research (communicated in their respectiveProceedings).

INTRODUCTION 13

The most important objective performances of mediumship may bedivided into two main groups :

1. Telekinetic Phenomena.

This class comprises every sort of action upor> inanimate objectswithout contact, such as oscillations, the moving of tables (attractionand repulsion), the levitation of objects (raising and suspension), infla-tions and motions of a curtain, the mechanics of motion connected withthe so-called " apports," and finally the generation of musical notesand noises at a distance (including raps and other auditory impressions).Also effects upon musical instruments, direct writingin a word, allforms of action at a distance, no matter whether in their case the mannerof production by the mediumistic force was the same.

2. Teleplastic Phenomena.

This group includes the so-called materialisation phenomena of thespiritists, i.e., the production of forms and materials of organic or eveninorganic matter, in accordance with definite conceptions and thoughtimages of the medium, which may have their origin in the memory,or in the psychic under-currents of the medium, in the mentality ofone of the witnesses, or (in the spiritistic sense) in forces and intelli-gences outside the medium.

On account of their psychogenic origin they may also be called" ideoplastic " occurrences. To these belong the alleged vital efflores-cences observed in the case of Eusapia Paladino by Lodge, Richet andthe author ; the production of whitish threads (" Rigid Rays ") ; cloudsand mists ; materials resembling muslin used for the clothing of theapparitions or of the medium (during transfiguration) ; the appearanceof forms of an undefined character ; vague half-shadows ; visible andtangible hands, fingers, and heads of structures resembling humanlimbs ; impressions of these on lamp-blacked paper, or in clay ; photo-graphic reproductions of ideoplastic forms in various stages of develop-ment, including those invisible to the normal human eye ; sketches ofartistic reproductions of faces, or fragments of animal and human limbs

;

and finally, fully formed phantoms of distinct character and definitefeatures and forms.

In the wider sense we may reckon among the teleplastic occurrencescertain temporary changes in the state of aggregation of matter, aswell as the dissolution and restoration of forms of distinct inanimateobjects, e.g., the celebrated " knot experiment," the interpenetrationof matter, the introduction of objects not contained in the experimentalroom (" apports ") and the production of luminous objects.

Beside the phenomena enumerated here, there are a number of phen-omena the existence of which is doubted by an investigator as thoroughand free from prejudice as Morselli, e.g., change of weight of the medium,or of objects touched by the medium, and levitation of the medium(a telekinetic occurrence in the sense that the body of the medium itselfis acted upon by the force in question).


During 1915 and 1916 Dr W. J. Crawford, Lecturer in MechanicalEngineering, Queen's University, Belfast, published some new anddetailed investigations on levitation and raps. The medium is seatedon a weighing-machine, and, when the table is levitated without anycontact in a bright red light, her weight increases by approximatelythe weight of the table. Any vertical oscillation of the table is accom-panied by an oscillation of the balance. The connection betweenmedium and object is maintained by a " psychical structure," of unknowncomposition, derived from the body of the medium. This structureis of the " cantilever " kind, being fixed in the medium's bod}' withoutother support, unless the objects levitated are heavy, when a supportis found on the floor. The object is gripped by this structure in a mannerresembling suction. Raps are produced by the impact of the hardend of such a " psychic rod " on a hard surface. See W. J. Crawford,D.Sc, The Reality of Psychic Phenomena and Experiments in PsychicalScience (Watkins, London).

The sensations of cold, heat, and other radiations, which are oftendescribed, and which Morselli terms " thermoradiant " phenomena,are, when registered by sensitive apparatus, to be regarded merelyas preparatory and concomitant phenomena of one of the real mani-festations.

The physical phenomenaassuming them to be genuinetake thesame course with all mediums. There are always the telekinetic andteleplastic processes classified above.

ON METHOD IN MEDIUMISTIC INVESTIGATIONS.

Even though the psychic and moral conditions of mediuniship are notas yet sufficiently known, we may confidently say already that they lieapart from the normal course of psychic events. As in the case ofmediums for mental manifestations, the hystero-hypnotic complex ofsymptoms plays a great part in the genesis of physical manifestations,for the stronger phenomena require, as a rule, the presence of a conditionof deep trance.

Assuming that mediuniship comprises genuine telekinetic andteleplastic performances, the possibility of such action is no doubtconfined within definite limits. Its production corresponds to a certaindegree of exhaustion of the medium's organism, and this conversionmust be accompanied by a strong bodily reaction of the medium. Thenatural principle of conservation of energy is here also brought intoaction, and the forces seem to decrease with increasing distance. Inan impartial examination of the subject we must, therefore, reckonwith the possibility that the transformation process does not alwaysfollow a regular course, that it is accompanied by a strong reaction ofthe medium, and that it depends upon the momentary psychic con-stellation, and principally on the mood and bodily condition of theperson under examination. In this sense we must regard the simultan-eous sympathetic inuscular contractions, which, especially in the caseof Eusapia Paladino, were definitely established, as regular physiologicalaccompaniments of telekinetic occurrences. To bring about the genesis

METHOD IN MEDIUMISTIC INVESTIGATIONS 15

of any desired effect, a strong psycho-physical effort, a vivid act ofvolition of the medium is required.^ The person under test may, if theeffort does not succeed at once, or if the forces available do not suffice,easily be led to assist, to some extent unconsciously, with the muscles,e.g., to further the development of the phenomenon with a coup de pouce.Thus we get transition products of a mixed character, e.g., help in table-tiltings, which the radical sceptic would inevitably attribute to fraud onaccount of the motor assistance observed.

During actions at a distance upon inanimate objects, many mediumsmove parts of their body in the desired direction in order to facilitatethe transfer of force ; for all experience points towards these medium-istic forces being limited in their effect, as already mentioned.

In the case of Eva C. also, the participation of the voluntary musclescould be regularly verified during the genesis of the materialisations.In both Eusapia Paladino and in Eva C. the violent muscular action,combined with pain, groans, and gasps, reminds one of the labour ofchildbirth. The expression " mediumistic labour " denotes, perhaps,quite definite and frequently observed physiological concomitantsof telekinetic and teleplastic performances.

These motor concomitants of mediumship are a factor not to beneglected in observations. In combination with a vivid desire for successthey easily lead to an unconscious mechanical execution of the task bythe limbs.

Ver\^ frequently somnambulists play, or represent, the " spirit "

themselves. As soon as a dream-like condition sets in, all consciousnessof deception may be absent. In the case of the still more frequentrepresentation of " spirits " by conjuring tricks, one always finds textilefabrics, clothes, beards, and other " properties " for the masquerade.Apart, therefore, from coarse prestidigitation, we have to consider threeclasses in the production of mediumistic occurrences :

1. The unconsciously fraudulent representation of mediumisticperformances in the waking and somnambulic states.

2. Mixed phenomena, combined with automatic reflex motions.3. Pure unfalsified mediumistic phenomena.

Professor Ochorowicz ^ is probably right in distinguishing consciousdeception, i.e., the conjuror's dramatisation of mediumistic performances,from the frauds of mediumship. In the case of disguised, or open,somnambulism we should liave unconscious deception without respon-sibility, since there is no consciousness of fraud. To the layman themedium may in that case appear to be awake, but the alteration in theeye, and in the whole psychic demeanour of the person under test, willnot escape the trained medical observer.

The question of the substitution of illusory facts for genuine onesis not always easily answered. A reasonably reliable opinion on thecharacter of the occurrence in question presupposes a rigid impartiality.

1 The author has known cases in which the medium in a deep trance appeared quitepassive, without participation or volition. But the psycho-physical exhaustion was alwaysproportional to the performance.

- Ochorowicz. " La question de la fraude dans les experiences avec Eusapia Paladino "(Ann. des sciences psychiques, 2nd Sept. 189(5).


There must be a combination of an extreme degree of scientific scepticismwith a personal benevolence towards the medium. The accountsfurnished by credible and reliable observers and found in the literatureof the subject must be examined sine ira et studio. Many so-calledexposures have exposed nothing but the ignorance of the exposers.But, on the other hand, we must bear in mind the important partplayed by subjective colouring, imagination, unavoidable errors ofobservation, lapse of memory, and strain effects, in such observationsand reports.

We know that psychologists like Davey, Hodgson, and Lehmanncould, after acquiring the necessary conjuring proficiency, deceivea number of calmly thinking persons, and impart to them a belief intheir own mediumistic powers. And it cannot be denied that in thecase of nearly all professional, and many private, mediums, the mechani-cal performance of some of their effects has been established. Thus inthe case of Eusapia Paladino 10 per cent, of the phenomena are false,15 per cent, doubtful, and 75 per cent, genuine, according toMorselli.

Conjuring tricks, which usually imply study and practice, must,therefore, not be put in the same category with mediumistic deceptions,at least, so far as mediums of the class of Eusapia Paladino and Eva C.are concerned. As a rule, mediums like these are placed at the mercy oftheir hosts or their investigators, who have every opportunity of exam-ining their usually sparse luggage.

Besides, the conjuror is not dependent upon the malicious, hostile,or frivolous mentality of his audience. But the disturbing influenceson the medium increase with the number of people present. The con-juror usually provides the necessary apparatus himself, changes theprogramme, and permits no interference with his experiments. Inthe case of the medium all this is reversed.

Now there are people who have the greatest respect for conjuring,and believe that art to be all-powerful. But this overestimate is solelydue to ignorance.^ If we consider it a priori impossible to protectourselves against prestidigitation and other fraud practised by themediums, we thereby declare the human senses to be incapable ofscientific determinations of any kind. We should have to renounce allinvestigation, and particularly the psychological analysis of the insane,of criminals, and of simulators. Such an indefensible point of viewclearly leads ad absurdum. A serious interest in this subject means,indeed, in the larger circle of savants and educated people, even now,a martyrdom for the investigator and the risk of being regarded asmentally inferior. Yet it is just the neglected subject of physicalphenomena, constituting mediumship in the truest and narrowestsense, which deserves the attention and devotion of savants free fromprejudice.

On the other hand, every serious investigator who undertakes thisresearch must guard himself against the exploitation of his observationsby visionaries to satisfy some need of religious belief. For the spiritistichypothesis rests essentially on the metaphysical tendency implanted

^ It is conceivable that a medium might combine genuine forces with conjuring tricks,just as professional soothsayers may have some real clairvoyance.


in mankind (experimental religion). As Richet very truly remarks ^" We must make sure of the facts before we formulate general laws."

It appears to be extraordinarily difficult to place a fact upon so firma basis as to be unshakable. This requires absolute accuracy. " Itis a great drawback to scientific progress that spiritists, theosophists,mesmerists and mystics have erected such fanciful structures on sucha tiny and insecure basis. Let us be satisfied with faultless experiments.Theory will follow in the natural course."

In another place Richet ^ writes similarly :

" At the same time I do not consider myself justified in despisingthe ' metapsychic ' facts, which must be methodically studied withoutprejudice. . . . We must not be appalled by what is strange

. . .

that which marks a discovery, the unforeseen, the unexpected, the new.It may clash with popular opinion, it may contradict the classic officialteaching. Otherwise it would not be a discovery. And after it hascome forward, it encounters a thousand denials. Even if it is as clearas the sun, it is not accepted. ... It is only with difficulty that weform the conviction of having lived in error, of having made wrongassertions.

. . .Only unusual phenomena astonish us. A thing

appears true because we have often seen it, but not at all because wehave understood it, for all natural phenomena are incomprehensible."

It is difficult, more especially for savants who have acquired a wideknowledge by hard work, to free themselves entirely from preconceivedopinions and old habits of thought.

Many an investigator is not convinced by reason. Convictiononly sets in when he has himself observed certain facts so often thattheir existence has become to him a mental habit, a familiar thino-.Zollner^ already found this psychic law of inertia, and added : " This isa curious phase of the human spirit, and is particularly strong in savants,indeed stronger, in them, I believe, than in others. For this reasonwe must not always regard a man as dishonest because for a long timehe keeps beyond the reach of proof. The ancient wall of belief requiresmuch siege artillery for its demolition."

Careful researches by English investigators have shown that humanpowers of observation are very imperfect. In his excellent work(already referred to) on Superstition and Sorcery, the well - knownpsychologist Lehmann of Copenhagen has fully dealt with the sourcesof errors of observation, especially in mediumistic investigations. Theseshould be minutely studied by any one who approaches these experi-ments, so as to avoid self-deception as much as possible. Reports bypersons lacking the necessary practice in observation should be receivedwith caution. As a rule, there is hardly time during mediumistic tests,in presence of the often surprising and varying occurrences, to directthe attention to the most essential points. In this connection we mustremember the conjuror's well-known stratagem of directing the attentionto quite secondary matters. And, further, the employment of the

^ Richet, Experimental Studies in Thought Transference, with a Preface by v. Schrenck-Notzing (Enke, Stuttgart, 1891).

2 Richet, "The Future of Psychology" (Ubersinnliche Welt, Feb. 1907).2 ZoUner, Abhandlungen, Vol. II.


sense organs, especially in dark sittings, is not possible to the usualextent, the sense of sight, being in abeyance. There are well-knownerrors in the mere estimation of distances, weights, etc., and thereforeaccurate measures in figures, etc., appear to be necessary. One is alsoeasily deceived as to the direction and source of sound. Similar con-siderations apply to time. Sense impressions are often falsely inter-preted (" illusion ").

As a matter of fact we find cases in the experiments with Eva C.,in which a materialised structure in the shape of a hand, which inthe red light was not easily distinguished from a real hand, simu-lated the presence of the latter, while the real hand executed theexpected mediumistic performance. Similar observations were made byProfessor Ochorowicz with Eusapia Paladino. The author succeededindeed, in photographically recording this interesting process. In thecase of the Polish medium, St. P., also, it was sometimes difficultto decide whether the red patches visible in her lap were really herhands.

But the most frequent sources of error in the observation of medium-istic phenomena are gaps in the recollection. Unless a careful recordis kept during each observation ^ a retroactive falsification of memoryduring the preparation of a subsequent record may reduce itsvalue.

Facts and events are unintentionally mixed up, their order of succes-sion is inaccurately recollected, apparently unessential points are omitted,and the report is unintentionally supplemented according to sub-jective interpretation. Thus the spiritist will, in accordance with hisreligious habit of thought, only retain that which he regards as essential,and his fancy will travel the old road in supplementing it. But, in thesame way, the rooted associations of a determmed opponent will rendervalueless an experiment which is successful in the wider sense, i.e.,which contradicts his negative conviction, so soon as the above-mentionedfailure of memory sets in. Without hesitation he will unconsciouslyfill up the gaps of memory in his own way. He will see fraud wherenone exists, just as the believing spiritist will see manifestations ofspirits where there are nothing but conjuring tricks. And since mostpeople are already committed to some decided point of view, favourableor unfavourable, of these phenomena, it is exceedingly difficult to obtainquite unprejudiced and purely objective determinations.

In this way the author found, not only in the Munich sittings withEusapia Paladino, but also in the experiments with Eva C, that thefacts of the phenomena were afterwards distorted by learned witnessesunder the compelling, though unconscious, influence of their anti-spirit-istic habit of thought. Thus an eminent psychologist, who had observedEusapia Paladino in the author's presence, asserts that during the well-known phenomenon of the inflation of her dress, he had seen a blackrod manipulated by her feet, in order to pull forward some objectswith the help of a hook attached to the rod. The author can guaranteethe inaccuracy of this assertion, as he not only took part in observing

J For this purpose the Roueograph, brought out by Pathe Freres in Paris, is especiallyto be recommended. It is a sort of phonograph, whose wax plates receive the dictatedrecord during the sitting and reproduce it afterwards.


the phenomenon, but minutely controlled the medium before andafter the sitting.

Another observer is at present entirely convinced that Eusapiawears on her left shoe an iron sole, so that she can without detectionwithdraw the left foot and use it fraudulently, while the weight of theshoe standing on the foot of the controller on the left, is to produce theimpression of a strong pressure with the foot. The numerous anddetailed observations of the medium have not substantiated this hypo-thesis.

Another example : An observer of the sittings with Eva C. assertedin a supplementary record, written six months after the sitting, that themedium had only been examined over her dress, whereas the writtenrecord prepared by another savant immediately after the sitting givesan accurate account of the examination over the bare body, in con-formity with the statements of the other witnesses.

These examples can easily be paralleled by similar experiences.Single determinations may often be of paramount importance for adecision as to the genuineness or falsity of a phenomenon.

We must add that m many mediumistic performances it is hardlypossible for one person to execute the control and observation of 1)hemedium single-handed with sufficient accuracy. The help of a secondobserver must bo secured. Now, however careful has been the controlby these two trained and credible observers, however much both ofthem may asseverate that they had held the medium during the criticalmoment, yet it is natural that, in these extraordinary manifestations,most savants would rather assume an error of attention, or observation,in the case of the other controller, than acknowledge the genuinenessof the phenomenon in question. That, at least, is the author's experi-ence. And if, in spite of this, all objections can be met, the imaginationwill finally make soine arbitrary addition or invention. The convenienceof thought, the tough adherence to old preconcejjtions, is in most peopletoo powerful to be put out of gear by any single observation.

If, therefore, we are to obtain reliable results, we must have a frequentrepetition of the same occurrence, the same experiment, so that, afterevery experiment the objections and doubts suggested by maturereflection inay be examined as to their justification during the repetitionof the experiment. One should, therefore, always have a large numberof sittings with the same mediumsix at leastand arrange the wholemethod, so that the same experiment may be repeated as often as possiblein the various sittings. The conditions may be changed, at discretion,at every sitting, so long as the externalisation of the mediumistic forceis not thereby impeded.

How much emotional agitation, tension, expectation, fear, terror,and nervousness may hinder the power of observation and attention,inflame the imagination, and so produce errors of sense perception,amounting even to hallucination, is sufficiently known. Now, since asa ruleas Lehmann justly remarkstwo people never commit the sameerrors of observation, their independent reports of the same event donot generally agree.

The same accuracy of proof as is demanded for the genuinenessand objectivity of mediumistic phenomena must be furnished in an


even higher degree for the negative proof, i.e., for the presence of fraudu-lent manipulations when there is reason for suspicion. The latterproblem is much the easier, but it requires a juridical accuracy in theestablishment of guilt, i.e., it is essential to the formation of a judgmentthat all positive and negative evidence be weighed before a final con-clusion is drawn.

Any hasty generalisation, importing destructive criticism of therepresentatives of the opposite standpoint, nmst be regarded as unjust,illogical, and as the product of a very superficial acquaintance with theactual state of things. The fact that a medium has been detected infraud under certain circumstances, cannot, as Eduard von Hartmanncorrectly observes, lead to the conclusion that the same medium hasbeen nothing but fraudulent in every case and under the most varyingconditions. " We must examine the conditions of each case, and oneundoubtedly positive instance cannot be refuted even by a hundrednegative ones." Or will it be asserted, simply because simulation isoften indistinguishable from hysteria, that all symptoms of hysteriaare simulated ?

After all, the point is not whether errors and deceptions occur inthis subject, as in many other fields of scientific activity, but simplywhether, in this case, new and genuine facts of a special kind reallyexist. Even gold diggers must first separate the noble metal from itsore.

The author of this work, who has occupied himself more than twenty-five years with this subject, has had opportunities of observing mediumsof all shades, both professional and private. In conjunction with othersavants he has had occasion to reduce a whole spiritistic epidemic toits fraudulent causes (superstition and fanaticism) by means of carefuland detailed investigations. He has become acquainted with themanipulations of the medium Eglinton, the sources of experimentalerror with the mediums Lucia Sordi and Linda Gazerra, which he hasdealt with in special memoirs, and his own large experience has com-pletely convinced him that conscious and unconscious fraud play anenorrnous part in this matter, and that nearly all mediums will, whenthe conditions are unfavourable, when their mediumistic powers aredeclining, or simply from greed and ambition, take to fraudulent ormechanical production of the phenomena.

According to my experience, I can only agree with Richet andOchorowicz in regarding the psychic and moral conditions of medium-ship, and of the trance condition as hitherto unknown, and in consideringits aggregate of symptoms as different from the normal occurrencesof psychic action. ' Indeed, it almost seems as if the tendency towardsdeception and to the mechanical production of mediumistic occurrencesis a frequent quality of mediumship, just as simulation appears as asymptom of hysteria, or as pseudologia phantastica is inseparable fromcertain degenerative conditions of the brain.

We may be sure that absence of criticism, credulity, and the fana-ticism of spiritists, have greatly hindered the education of mediums forscientifically useful objects. Fanatical eagerness to experience some-thing a toutprix, to witness miracles, to receive signs from the " beyond,"has rendered the crowd quite blind to the distinction between facts


explicable according to the present conditions of psycho-pathology, andthose which are not so explicable. The whole method of the spiritisticeducation of mediums, with their ballast of unnecessary conceptions, givesindeed an encouragement to fraud. When the believing congregationends by seeing the work of a spirit hand in the falling of an umbrella,it is quite prepared to receive even the coarsest conjuring tricks ofmediums as spirit greetings.

It is true that the violent excitement of the medium during theperformance, especially in dark sittings, makes control very difficult,although on the other hand, it draws the attention of the observerbeforehand to the occurrence of phenomena, and this guards him againstsurprise. We have already pointed out that the methods usual in scienceoften here entirely fail the observer. It will, therefore, be a problemfor future investigators to devise a special method for the examinationof mediumistic processes.

We should, as Sir Oliver Lodge proposes, have a kind of psychiclaboratory furnished for all kinds of experimental psychology andpsycho-physics. Registration should, of course, be made independentof the sense organs, which are subject to deception, and should, as faras possible, be transferred to physical apparatus. A self-registeringbalance, the full use of photographic and electrical aids (such as photo-graphs with ultra-violet light), the use of various degrees of brightnessof light and of spectrum colours, thermometers, and other speciallyconstructed instruments, may find their place in such an institute.Other apparatus of a more physiological kind would be necessaryfor investigations of the medium's organism (weight, temperature,respiration, etc.).

But of more importance than all these instrumental aids towardsthe study of this new force (assuming such to exist), would be the correcttraining of mediums for scientific investigations.

Such a dream of the future can, of course, not be realised in thenarrow circle of a private residence, especially if the medium, as in thecase of Eva C, is regarded as one of the family, and only resigns herselfto these experiments voluntarily, and to a limited extent. Thus,in such a case, we have no complete independence in the arrangementof a laboratory, and the author found himself in the situation of anobserver anxious to determine the existence of a new class of naturalphenomena in the human organism.

In spite of this, it was possible, through the intelligent co-operationof the lady of the house, who conducted the mediumistic educationof Eva C. with great ability, to make the conditions during the fouryears of experiment gradually more and more rigid and exact. Thespiritistic group of ideas, which at first required the formation of chains,the singing and the addressing of the personifications appearing duringthe sittings, was afterwards put into the background, and during thelast year played hardly any part. We had gradually discarded thespiritistic tradition by a slow education of the medium. Besides, allthe sittings took place in a red light, so that during the four years therewas not a single dark seance. We began with a single lamp and endedwith a six-lamp chandelier of more than one hundred candle-power.The necessary dark room was furnished by the cabinet.


The experiments took place in two different Paris lodgings, in avilla at the seaside, and in the author's house in Munich, so that anypreparation, of the walls or floor of the cabinet, for the hiding of objects,was practically eliminated.

The objective registration was based upon photography, which hasbeen indicated by Lodge, Morselli, and other investigators as desirable.We began with a single camera, but at the end of the fourth year wesometimes had nine cameras, including several stereoscopic cameras,in action at the same time. From one to three cameras were thenmounted in the cabinet itself. They were focused for short distances,and have been admirably serviceable. This method has not hithertobeen mentioned in the literature of the subject, and was used for thefirst time with success. Unfortunately, a kinematograph, mounted bythe author, for which a special electrical connection was arranged, gaveno results m the case of Eva C.

That the control of the medium herself, both before and after everysitting, was executed with the necessary care is obvious.

The whole of the present work is really a monograph devoted tomaterialisation. For in the case of this medium, who is specially giftedfor the production of teleplastic phenomena, it seemed advisable todevelop this gift by suggestive education in every possible way, soas to form a firm empirical foundation for the study, by photographicmeans, of this teleplastic phenomenon so rarely found in mediumsat present. It is possible that telekinetic phenomena, also, are foundedupon a sort of materialisation, as indicated by the experiments of Pro-fessor Ochorowicz with Stanislawa Tomczyk. In this case also theprocess of materialisation might be regarded as the foundation of phy-sical mediumship and as the point of departure of physical performances.

According to our observations, it is clear that the general directionand subject matter of the thoughts of the persons taking part in theexperiments have an influence {either in a favourable or unfavourablesense), upon the psychic condition of the medium, and sometimesalso upon the character of the phenomena produced. The mediumisticorganism seems to be an exceedingly delicate reagent, very much opento the influence of suggestion. Strange as it may seem, active thoughtsabout exposures and trickery might, in the opinion of some investi-gators, suggestively influence the medium in this direction and lead tothe employment of such manual aids. During any careful investi-gation one must also pay attention to this source of error, and one shouldexclude so-called professional exposers entirely from such observations,if they are such as scent corruption everywhere, without any appreciationof the psychological delicacy and difficulty of the problem, and preferto assume collusion between the observer and the medium with adeceptive object, as the onh' reality in these occurrences.

Occasionally one finds savants with a compelling, but unconscious,idiosyncrasy as regards this field of mvestigation. They do indeedattempt to put themselves into a state of benevolence towards themedium, and to attune their mentality to the special conditions of theexperiment. They even declare that they will be satisfied if an experi-ment succeeds under certain precautions, but, afterwards, they succumbto the strong influence of their unconscious mental resistance ; they then


bring forward quite senseless objections, and make every effort to avoidhaving to admit the possibility of these phenomena. Their view isthat there is no other possibility than that of deception. Their wholeeffort, during the sittings, is not directed towards a determination freefrom objection, but simply towards detection of the fraudulent mech-anism. That such a condition of mind may suggestively influencethe instrument of research, and hinder its productivity, is shown bynumerous experiences. Since this mediophobia belongs to the realmof pathological inhibitions, it is advisable to exclude persons subjectto it from the sittings, as was done by Eusapia Paladino on account ofthe diminution of her powers, and so as not to be induced to practisefraud by such influence.

Nothing should be left undone to make the psychic conditionsfor the medium as favourable as possible. That is not always easy,especially if the medium, in consequence of his or her low state ofeducation, has only a slight understanding of the precautions necessaryfor a scientific investigation. Nevertheless, we should never forgetthat the success of the experiment is bound up with the mood, theconfidence, and the undisturbed comfort of the medium. By suspicion,even suppressed suspicion, by haughty or indifferent treatment, theinstrument can easily be put out of tune. I again agree entirely withEduard von Hartmann that it is no

Documents

Phenomena of materialisation : a contribution to the investigation of mediumistic teleplastics (1923)