For the reported cases are relatively so few that, if they represented the whole number of cases which have occurred, we should almost be forced upon the hypothesis of an anti-telepathic inhibition, which is no more credible than the more popular theory. Will nothing satisfy the telepathists, short of complete absence of any coincidence? But that is in extreme contradiction to the laws of chance, and is totally incredible. The absence of coincidence would in itself be the most astounding and inexplicable of all coincidences.

An independent investigation has recently been carried out by Dr John E. Coover at the Leland Stanford Junior University of California, by means of funds placed at the disposal of the University for this purpose. In the first report, telepathy is dealt with. One set of experiments was as follows. The experimenter having selected a card from a pack of cards, depicted it sharply in his imagination and willed' for 15 or 20 seconds that it should come into the mind of another individual, who was present, and making efforts to receive the telepathic communication. The second individuals who were to receive the message were University students, favourably disposed; at the conclusion of the experiment, they were to name the cards, and were to indicate at the same time the degree of certainty with which they answered. In all, 10,000 experiments were made. The number of correct answers was precisely what it should be by the ordinary laws of chance, without any telepathic effort whatever. The percentage of correct answers was the same as when no 'willing' was attempted, and the same as when the experimenter did not himself know what the card was that he had selected. students professed to some certainty in their replies, it was found again that their accuracy was no greater than in other cases where they professed uncertainty, or where the experimenter did not himself know the card. A further set of 1000 experiments was then made on ten 'sensitives,' five of whom were 'spiritistic mediums,' and warm believers in telepathy. Their answers were found to be in no respect more accurate than those of the students, and in fact to be identical with what might be expected from the laws of pure chance.

By a similar method, it was proved that there is no

such thing as sensitiveness to being stared at. In one case, for instance, twelve experimenters all together agreed to think hard of the image of a black cat. But none of the other individuals ever thought of a black cat. Dr Coover, although under every incentive to find some truth in spiritualistic phenomena, observes that No trace of an objective thought-transference is found as a capacity enjoyed in perceptible measure by any of the individual normal reagents.'

6

It would appear, therefore, that not only is spiritualism opposed to every à priori probability; but that evidence of very definite character exists against it. We are thus thrown back upon the kind of evidence offered in Sir Oliver Lodge's 'Raymond.' The circumstances described in this book are in every instance capable of explanation by coincidence, illusion, trickery, or hysteria; and we are not offered any reasons showing why these alternative hypotheses should be excluded. To a normal observer, they will appear perhaps so far from improbable, as not even to leave much mystery about the matter. But Sir Oliver was not a normal observer. He started with a powerful bias in favour of supernatural activitya bias which on former occasions had led him to place confidence in a medium subsequently exposed. Moreover, the subject of the book in question was his own son; and his natural feelings as a father suffused the whole investigation with an atmosphere of sentiment and emotion. Deeply though we may sympathise with those feelings, we are bound to remark that this highly charged emotional atmosphere is in itself destructive of cool scientific judgment. Sir Oliver, both as parent and philosopher, had too much interest in the result. His mind was irresistibly weighted on one side. A doctor will not treat his own family in the event of severe illness, but seeks the advice of another doctor, whose professional judgment is not hampered or unnerved by domestic sentiments. It is a general rule that no man can judge clearly where his feelings are strongly enlisted; and this circumstance alone goes far to discount the whole of Sir Oliver's opinions upon the matter. Incidentally the view given of the other side-the abode of departed spirits-is so astonishingly anthropomorphic, so seemingly remote from verisimilitude, as in Vol. 233.-No. 462,

H

itself to generate extreme scepticism, and indeed we could almost add ridicule.

Another protagonist of spiritualism has lately stepped into the field in the person of Sir Conan Doyle. This gentleman has attended séances, in the course of which he has experienced peculiar sensations, as for instance that of being struck by a pair of braces belonging to the medium. Forthwith he has become convinced of the truth of spiritualism. Not being able to see how these things are done (perhaps because they are usually done in the dark), he dashes headlong into a spiritualistic explanation. Of these experiments, it is not worth while to say much; for no one who regards them as serious evidence is at all likely to be shaken by any process of logic.

In his famous creation of Sherlock Holmes, Sir Conan has given the world a series of detective stories, which are the delight of every schoolboy. To the schoolboy it matters little that they abound in every kind of logical fallacy, more particularly due to a wholesale misapplication of the deductive method. The adult knows, however, that, in real life, chains of deductive inference do not work. The factors are too numerous, and, though in a novel they may be left out of account, they soon intrude themselves in any practical problem. It would almost seem that Sir Conan has been so carried away by the creation of his own imagination, as to suppose that this kind of reasoning is a safe guide in real life.

Spiritualism has been defended on the ground that it gives consolation to those who have lost near relatives or friends. But it is difficult seriously to argue that a great superstition should be left untouched, merely because the truth is unpleasant to a few individuals. For the higher type of mind, truth itself is an ideal at which we must always aim, whether its implications are or are not agreeable to us. It is perhaps not yet certain that the knowledge of truth is necessarily good for humanity. Yet there can be no denying that, in the past, humanity has abundantly profited by the increase of real knowledge. And in any case truth itself is a high moral ideal, in no way inferior to the ideal of human comfort. If life is easier when lying on a soft bed of superstition, it is higher and more admirable

when based upon the harder rock of truth. Superstition may be a luxury; but truth is a bracing tonic which makes luxury unnecessary.

There is, however, a more definite danger in connexion with spiritualistic doctrines. Several experts in lunacy have recently expressed the opinion that, with delicate persons (who are those most apt to be attracted by spiritualism), some mental risk attends absorption in these studies. The first of these authorities whom we

shall cite is Dr Charles Mercier, who writes:

'I know from my own medical experience, that the pursuit of the occult, and especially of that form of it that used to go by the name of spiritualism, but is now called telepathy,. leads to a morbid frame of mind, and tends to render those who are at all predisposed to insanity an easy prey to the disease. . . . An experienced physician cannot shut his eyes to the pernicious effects it [spiritualism] sometimes produces.'

Similarly Dr G. M. Robertson, Superintendent of the Royal Asylum of Morningside, Edinburgh, writes:

'I desire to warn those who may possibly inherit a latent tendency to nervous disorders to have nothing to do with practical inquiries of a spiritualistic nature. . . . Inquiries into spiritualism sometimes lead to insanity in the predisposed.'

The form of insanity which is related to spiritualism is that of which hallucinations are the chief characteristic ; the deep significance of the fact is obvious.

It remains only to sum up the conclusions arrived at in this article. They are not of a controversial character; or at least, if by the impetuosity of partisanship any one is led to deny them, they can be defended and substantiated without any trouble or uncertainty. We find that spiritualism as a vera causa conflicts with universal human experience of the orderly sequence of events in Nature; and hence that the kind of evidence required to establish it must be commensurate with the sum-total of human experience testifying in the opposite sense. We find, moreover, that the phenomena actually cited as evidence of spiritualism may be interpreted by many other more commonplace methods-by coincidence, fraud, hysteria, or hallucination. There is none that cannot be

imitated by a conjurer, and few that could not be greatly improved upon. Since all these possible explanations are within the orbit of common experience, they are, any one of them, more probable than that of spiritualism. Taken all together, they provide so extensive an organon of explanation as scarcely to leave any mystery at all. Yet we find no adequate precaution taken to show the impossibility of these rival methods. We know that, in the past history of spiritualism, the percentage of discovered fraud is immense. We are bound to infer that there remains much fraud not yet discovered.

While on the purely objective side, we see overwhelming reasons against accepting spiritualism, we find on the subjective side a strong human tendency towards that class of explanation, in the absence of evidence—a tendency which has been shown to be a fertile cause of error throughout history. We noted that this tendency is most marked among women, delicate persons generally, and those unnerved by misfortune-the very same class that is most attracted by spiritualism. We inferred that in the present state of human nature, there is bound to exist a large body of belief in spiritual manifestations. The mind of man is now and always has been weighted in that direction, contrary to the dictates of a sober judgment. These false beliefs are certain à priori to exist. The existence of a belief in spiritualism is bound psychologically to occur, quite independently of any genuineness in the facts alleged. The total exposure of these facts would merely shift the belief to some other sphere. Nevertheless, the ideal of truth demands that error shall be fought, whenever, however, and wherever it may make its appearance.

HUGH ELLIOT.