Finally he argues that even if collective hallucinations are also "with comparative frequency" coincidental, that is to be explained thus: "The rarity and the degree of interest compelled by it" (by such an hallucination) "will naturally tend to connect itself with some other prominent event; and, conversely, the occurrence of such an event as the death or mortal danger of a friend is most calculated to produce memory illusions of this kind."
In the second case, the excitement caused by the death of a friend is likely, it seems, to make two or more sane people say, and _believe,_ that they saw him somewhere else, when he was really dying. The only evidence for this fact is that such illusions occasionally occur, _not_ collectively, in some lunatic asylums. "It is not, however, a form of mnemonic error often observed among the insane." "Kraepelin gives two cases." "The process occurs sporadically in certain sane people, under certain exciting conditions." No examples are given! What is rare as an _individual_ folly among lunatics, is supposed by Herr Parish to explain the theoretically "false memory" whereby sane people persuade themselves that they had an hallucination, and persuade others that they were told of it, when no such thing occurred.
To return to our old example. Jones tells me that he has just seen his aunt, whom he knows to be in Timbuctoo. News comes that the lady died when Jones beheld her in his smoking-room. "Oh, nonsense," Herr Parish would argue, "you, Jones, saw nothing of the kind, nor did you tell Mr. Lang, who, I am sorry to find, agrees with you. What happened was _this_: When the awful news came to-day of your aunt"s death, you were naturally, and even creditably, excited, especially as the poor lady was killed by being pegged down on an ant-heap. This excitement, rather praiseworthy than otherwise, made you _believe_ you had seen your aunt, and _believe_ you had told Mr. Lang. He also is a most excitable person, though I admit he never saw your dear aunt in his life. He, therefore (by virtue of his excitement), now _believes_ you told him about seeing your unhappy kinswoman. This kind of false memory is very common. Two cases are recorded by Kraepelin, among the insane. Surely you quite understand my reasoning?"
I quite understand it, but I don"t see how it comes to seem good logic to Herr Parish.
The other theory is funnier still. Jones never had an hallucination before. "The rarity and the degree of interest compelled by it" made Jones "connect it with some other prominent event," say, the death of his aunt, which, really, occurred, say, nine months afterwards. But this is a mere case of _evidence_, which it is the affair of the S.P.R. to criticise.
Herr Parish is in the happy position called in American speculative circles "a straddle." If a man has an hallucination when alone, he was in circ.u.mstances conducive to the sleeping state. So the hallucination is probably a dream. But, if the seer was in company, who all had the same hallucination, then they all had the same _points de repere_, and the same adaptive memories. So Herr Parish kills with both barrels.
If anything extraneous could encourage a belief in coincidental and veridical hallucinations, it would be these "Oppositions of Science." If a learned and fair opponent can find no better proofs than logic and (unconscious) perversions of facts like the logic and the statements of Herr Parish, the case for telepathic hallucinations may seem strong indeed. But we must grant him the existence of the adaptive and mythopoeic powers of memory, which he a.s.serts, and also ill.u.s.trates. I grant, too, that a census of 17,000 inquiries may only have "skimmed the cream off"
(p. 87). Another dip of the net, bringing up 17,000 fresh answers, might alter the whole aspect of the case, one way or the other. Moreover, we cannot get scientific evidence in this way of inquiry. If the public were interested in the question, and understood its nature, and if everybody who had an hallucination at once recorded it in black and white, duly attested on oath before a magistrate, by persons to whom he reported, before the coincidence was known, and if all such records, coincidental or not, were kept in the British Museum for fifty years, then an examination of them might teach us something. But all this is quite impossible.
We may form a belief, on this point of veridical hallucinations, for ourselves, but beyond that it is impossible to advance. Still, Science might read her brief!
[Footnote 1: Walter Scott.]
[Footnote 2: Parish, p. 278.]
[Footnote 3: Ibid. pp. 282, 283.]
[Footnote 4: P. 287, Mr. Sims, _Proceedings_, x. 230.]
[Footnote 5: Parish pp. 288, 289.]
[Footnote 6: _Report_, p. 68.]
[Footnote 7: P. 274, note 1.]
[Footnote 8: Parish, p. 290.]
[Footnote 9: _Report_, p. 297.]
[Footnote 10: Parish, p. 290.]
[Footnote 11: Pp. 291, 292.]
[Footnote 12: Moll, _Hypnotism_, p. 1.]
[Footnote 13 _Proceedings_, vol. vi. p. 433.]
[Footnote 14: Parish, p. 313.]
[Footnote 15: Compare _Report_, pp. 181-83, with Parish, pp. 190 and 313, 314.]
APPENDIX B
THE POLTERGEIST AND HIS EXPLAINERS.
In the chapter on "Fetishism and Spiritualism" it was suggested that the movements of inanimate objects, apparently without contact, may have been one of the causes leading to fetishism, to the opinion that a spirit may inhabit a stick, stone, or what not. We added that, whether such movements were caused by trickery or not, was inessential as long as the savage did not discover the imposture.
The evidence for the genuine supernormal character of such phenomena was not discussed, that we might preserve the continuity of the general argument. The history of such phenomena is too long for statement here.
The same reports are found "from China to Peru," from Eskimo to the Cape, from Egyptian magical papyri to yesterday"s provincial newspaper.[1]
About 1850-1870 phenomena, which had previously been reported as of sporadic and spontaneous occurrence, were domesticated and organised by Mediums, generally American. These were imitators of the enigmatic David Dunglas Home, who was certainly a most oddly gifted man, or a most successful impostor. A good deal of scientific attention was given to the occurrences; Mr. Darwin, Mr. Tyndall, Dr. Carpenter, Mr. Huxley, had all glanced at the phenomena, and been present at _seances_. In most cases the exhibitions, in the dark, or in a very bad light, were impudent impostures, and were so regarded by the _savants_ who looked into them. A series of exposures culminated in the recent detection of Eusapia Paladino by Dr. Hodgson and other members of the S.P.R. at Cambridge.
There was, however, an apparent exception. The arch mystagogue, Home, though by no means a clever man, was never detected in fraudulent productions of fetishistic phenomena. This is a.s.serted here because several third-hand stories of detected frauds by Home are in circulation, and it is hoped that a well-attested first-hand case of detection may be elicited.
Of Home"s successes with Sir William Crookes, Lord Crawford, and others, something remains to be said; but first we shall look into attempted explanations of alleged physical phenomena occurring _not_ in the presence of a paid or even of a recognised "Medium." It will appear, we think, that the explanations of evidence so widely diffused, so uniform, so old, and so new, are far from satisfactory. Our inference would be no more than that our eyes should be kept on such phenomena, if they are reported to recur.
Mr. Tylor says, "I am well aware that the problem [of these phenomena] is one to be discussed on its merits, in order to arrive at a distinct opinion how far it may be connected with facts insufficiently appreciated and explained by science, and how far with superst.i.tion, delusion, and sheer knavery. Such investigation, pursued by careful observation in a scientific spirit, would seem apt to throw light on some interesting psychological questions."
Acting on Mr. Tylor"s hint, Mr. Podmore puts forward as explanations (1) fraud; (2) hallucinations caused by excited expectation, and by the _Schwarmerei_ consequent on sitting in hushed hope of marvels.
To take fraud first: Mr. Podmore has collected, and a.n.a.lyses, eleven recent sporadic cases of volatile objects.[2] His first instance (Worksop, 1883) yields no proof of fraud, and can only be dismissed by reason of the bad character of the other cases, and because Mr. Podmore took the evidence five weeks after the events. To this example we confine ourselves. This case appears to have been first reported in the "Retford and Gainsborough Times" "early in March," 1883 (really March 9). It does not seem to have struck Mr. Podmore that he should publish these contemporary reports, to show us how far they agree with evidence collected by him on the spot five weeks later. To do this was the more necessary, as he lays so much stress on failure of memory. I have therefore secured the original newspaper report, by the courtesy of the editor. To be brief, the phenomena began on February 20 or 21, by the table voluntarily tipping up, and upsetting a candle, while Mrs. White only saved the wash tub by alacrity and address. "The whole incident struck her as very extraordinary." It is not in the newspaper report. On February 26, Mr. White left his home, and a girl, Eliza Rose, "child of a half-imbecile mother," was admitted by the kindness of Mrs. White to share her bed. The girl was eighteen years of age, was looking for a place as servant, and nothing is said in the newspaper about her mother. Mr. White returned on Wednesday night, but left on Thursday morning, returning on Friday afternoon. On Thursday, in Mr. White"s absence, phenomena set in.
On Thursday night, in Mr. White"s presence, they increased in vigour. A doctor was called in, also a policeman. On Sat.u.r.day, at 8 A.M., the row recommenced. At 4 P.M. Mr. White sent Eliza Rose away, and peace returned.
We now offer the
STATEMENT OF POLICE CONSTABLE HIGGS. A man of good intelligence, and believed to be entirely honest....
"On the night of Friday, March 2nd, I heard of the disturbances at Joe White"s house from his young brother, Tom. I went round to the house at 11.55 P.M., as near as I can judge, and found Joe White in the kitchen of his house. There was one candle lighted in the room, and a good fire burning, so that one could see things pretty clearly. The cupboard doors were open, and White went and shut them, and then came and stood against the chest of drawers. I stood near the outer door. No one else was in the room at the time. White had hardly shut the cupboard doors when they flew open, and a large gla.s.s jar came out past me, and pitched in the yard outside, smashing itself. I didn"t see the jar leave the cupboard, or fly through the air; it went too quick. But I am quite sure that it wasn"t thrown by White or any one else. White couldn"t have done it without my seeing him. The jar couldn"t go in a straight line from the cupboard out of the door; but it certainly did go.
"Then White asked me to come and see the things which had been smashed in the inner room. He led the way and I followed. As I pa.s.sed the chest of drawers in the kitchen I noticed a tumbler standing on it. Just after I pa.s.sed I heard a crash, and looking round, I saw that the tumbler had fallen on the ground in the direction of the fireplace, and was broken. I don"t know how it happened. There was no one else in the room.
"I went into the inner room, and saw the bits of pots and things on the floor, and then I came back with White into the kitchen. The girl Rose had come into the kitchen during our absence. She was standing with her back against the bin near the fire. There was a cup standing on the bin, rather nearer the door. She said to me, "Cup"ll go soon; it has been down three times already." She then pushed it a little farther on the bin, and turned round and stood talking to me by the fire. She had hardly done so, when the cup jumped up suddenly about four or five feet into the air, and then fell on the floor and smashed itself. White was sitting on the other side of the fire.
"Then Mrs. White came in with Dr. Lloyd; also Tom White and Solomon Wa.s.s. After they had been in two or three minutes, something else happened. Tom White and Wa.s.s were standing with their backs to the fire, just in front of it. Eliza Rose and Dr. Lloyd were near them, with their backs turned towards the bin, the doctor nearer to the door. I stood by the drawers, and Mrs. White was by me near the inner door. Then suddenly a basin, which stood on the end of the bin near the door, got up into the air, _turning over and over as it went. It went up not very quickly, not as quickly as if it had been thrown_. When it reached the ceiling it fell plump and smashed. I called Dr. Lloyd"s attention to it, and we all saw it. No one was near it, and I don"t know how it happened.
I stayed about ten minutes more, but saw nothing else. I don"t know what to make of it all. I don"t think White or the girl could possibly have done the things which I saw."
This statement was made five weeks after date to Mr. Podmore. We compare it with the intelligent constable"s statement made between March 3 and March 8, that is, immediately after the events, and reported in the local paper of March 9.
STATEMENT BY POLICE CONSTABLE HIGGS.--During Friday night, Police Constable Higgs visited the house, and concerning the visit he makes the following statement.
"About ten minutes past [to?] twelve on Friday night, I was met in Bridge Street by Buck Ford, and Joe"s brother, Tom White and Dr. Lloyd. Tom said to me, "Will you go with us to Joe"s, and you will see something you have never seen before?" I went; and when I got into the house Joe went and shut the cupboard doors. No sooner had he done so than the doors flew open again, and an ordinary sized gla.s.s jar flew across the kitchen, out of the door into the yard. A sugar jar also flew out of the cupboard unseen. In fact, we saw nothing and heard nothing until we heard it smash.
The distance travelled by the articles was about seven yards. I stood a minute or two, and then the gla.s.s which I noticed on the drawers jumped off the drawers a yard away, and broke in about a hundred bits. The next thing was a cup, which stood on the flour-bin just beyond the yard door. It flew upwards, and then fell to the ground and broke. The girl said that this cup had been on the floor three times, and that she had picked it up just before it went off the bench. I said, "I suppose the cup will be the next." The cup fell a distance of two yards away from the flour-bin. Dr. Lloyd had been in the next house lancing the back of a little boy who had been removed there. He now came in, and we began talking, the doctor saying, "It is a most mysterious thing." He turned with his back to the flour-bin, on which stood a basin. The basin flew up into the air obliquely, went over the doctor"s head, and fell at his feet in pieces. The doctor then went out. I stood a short time longer, but saw nothing farther. There were six persons in the room while these things were going on, and so far as I could see, there was no human agency at work. I had not the slightest belief in anything appertaining to the super-natural. I left just before one o"clock, having been in the house thirty minutes."
As the policeman says, there was nothing "super-natural," but there was an appearance of something rather supernormal. On the afternoon of Sat.u.r.day White sent the girl Rose away, and a number of people watched in his house till after midnight. Though the sceptical reporter thought that objects were placed where they might easily be upset, none were upset. The ghost was laid. "Excited expectation" was so false to its function as to beget no phenomena.
The newspaper reports contain no theory that will account for White"s breaking his furniture and crockery, nor for Rose"s securing her own dismissal from a house where she was kindly received by wilfully destroying the property of her hostess. An amateur published a theory of silken threads attached to light articles, and thick cords to heavy articles, whereof no trace was found by witnesses who examined the volatile objects. An elaborate machinery of pulleys fixed in the ceiling, the presence of a trickster in a locked pantry, apparent errors in the account of the flight of the objects, and a number of accomplices, were all involved in this local explanation, the explainer admitting that he could not imagine _why_ the tricks were played. Six or eight pounds" worth of goods were destroyed, nor is it singular that poor Mrs. White wept over her shattered penates.
The destruction began, of course, in the _absence_ of White. The girl Rose gave to the newspaper the same account as the other witnesses, but, as White thought _she_ was the agent, so she suspected White, though she admitted that he was not at home when the trouble arose.
Mr. Podmore, reviewing the case, says, "The phenomena described are quite inexplicable by ordinary mechanical means.[3] Yet he elsewhere[4] suggests that Rose herself, "as the instrument of mysterious agencies, or simply as a half-witted girl, gifted with abnormal cunning and love of mischief, may have been directly responsible for all that took place." That is to say, a half-witted girl could do (barring "mysterious agencies") "what is quite inexplicable by ordinary mechanical means," while, according to the policeman, she was not even present on some occasions. But it is not easy to make out, in the evidence of White, the other witness, whether this girl Rose was present or not when the jar flew circuitously out of the cupboard, a thing easily worked by a half-witted girl. Such discrepancies are common in all evidence to the most ordinary events. In any case a half-witted girl, in Mr. Podmore"s theory, can do what "is quite inexplicable by ordinary mechanical means." There is not the shadow of evidence that the girl Rose had the inestimable advantage of being "half-witted;" she is described by Mr. Podmore as "the child of an imbecile mother." The phenomena began, in an isolated case (the tilted table), _before_ Rose entered the house. She was admitted in kindness, acted as a maid, and her interest was _not_ to break the crockery and upset furniture. The troubles, which began before the girl"s arrival, were apparently active when she was not present, and, if she _was_ present, she could not have caused them "by ordinary mechanical means,"
while of extraordinary mechanical means there was confessedly no trace.
The disturbances ceased after she was dismissed--nothing else connects her with them.