ANIMAL MAGNETISM, ETC.

The following chapter aims at giving the reader an idea of some phenomena which are often mentioned in connection with hypnotism, although the connection is rather historical than essential. In my view they are the consequence of erroneously interpreted observations. But as they are often quoted, and it is necessary to know at least something about them, I will explain them in the following sections. I do not think that the conclusions drawn from them are just, but everything should be examined without prejudice. A scientific refutation helps truth more than a priori negation ; and some of these things are related by eminent observers. An investigation is as much in place here as it was when Virchow consented to examine the case of Louise Lateau when the necessary conditions were fulfilled. As Virchow remarks what we call the laws of nature must vary according to our frequent new experiences.

The phenomena are—(1) animal magnetism ; (2) super-normal thought-transference, telepathy {suggestion mentale) ; (3) certain super-normal acts in somnambulism ; (4) the effect of the magnet on hypnotic subjects; (5) the effect of drugs on approach or contact.

In animal magnetism the chief part is played by a personal influence, not resulting from suggestion, which A. exercises over B. The following examples will make this clear :—

A. tells B., " You cannot speak." B. hears, and cannot speak ; this is merely suggestion. If A. makes mesmeric passes down B.'s arm, and analgesia follows, this may be also suggestion. B. knows what A. is doing, and the result may be produced by B.'s imagination in a purely mental way. Let us suppose that C. comes on the scene, and makes passes over B.'s arm, and that analgesia does not follow ; suggestion explains this too. B. believes that A. can induce analgesia, and that C. cannot, and the results are in accord with his belief. But the case is different when B. does not know whether A. or C. is making the passes. According to the views of the adherents of animal magnetism—the so-called mesmerists—A. can produce analgesia by magnetizing and C. cannot. They therefore think that A. has some personal influence which suggestion does not explain. This influence is an inherent power in some people, and only such people can magnetize. This example shows what is at present understood by mesmerism or animal magnetism (vital magnetism, bio-magnetism, zoo-magnetism).

The mesmerists think that a man who has this power can cause local or general analgesia or contractures, or even cure diseases. He can even magnetize children under a year old, and influence them therapeutically. Liebeault, the founder of the Nancy school and of the method of suggestion, who disputed the magnetic influence in 1866, became a firm adherent of it later. In 1883 he published a book in J which he describes cures of children under three years ; these cures caused the change in his views. He thought that though nearly all might be explained by suggestion, something remained which needed another explanation, and this he called animal magnetism or zoo-magnetism—a name used by Bartels in the beginning of this century. Lately Liebeault appears to have abandoned his belief in animal magnetism again.

Besides the effects named—induction of analgesia and contractures, the healing of diseases, and its influence on young children—other effects of this supposed animal magnetism are mentioned as proving the existence of the force. Du Prel, one of its decided adherents, gives the following : Firstly, animals can be magnetized, in which case he thinks suggestion out of the question. On this point I refer the reader to the hypnotic experiments on animals which I have described. Such a force cannot be concluded from them. In the first place, it is by no means proved that animals are not susceptible to suggestion ; e.g., if an animal is held for some time, why should it not be able to conclude that it is unable to move, even after it has been released ? Many eminent experimenters hold this view. And further, certain stimuli applied to the nerves of the skin make movements impossible, though the stimuli are not caused by some unknown force ; and the fascination which the rattlesnake exercises on birds cannot be considered a proof, in Du Prel's sense of the word, any more than the fascinating gaze of a man can be considered to prove the possession of some force peculiar to himself. Secondly, Du Prel speaks of magnetic experiments on sleeping persons, i.e., on persons who did not know they were being magnetized. But it must be remarked that sleep does not involve an absolute loss of consciousness; consequently, that suggestion, in the psychological sense, is not impossible in sleep. Thirdly, the same author can magnetize people at a distance, as well as asleep, in which case suggestion is also supposed to be excluded. Fourthly, he says that plants can be magnetized and their growth thus influenced, as is said of the fakirs (cf. p. 216). Fifthly, the magnetic force can be passed on to inanimate objects, which then have the same effect as the magnetizer. Sixthly, Du Prel brings forward the super-normal thought-transference, which I shall shortly discuss, in proof of animal magnetism.

The magnetic influence is used by means of mesmeric passes, by touch, by fixed gaze of operator and subject, by breathing on the subject (Barety), and some think by concentration of thought and will on the desired result (Puysegur, Nasse).

The mesmeric passes described on p. 22 are most generally used. Much information about the direction of the passes can be found in the books of the mesmerists. The effect is supposed to be different according as the passes are upwards or downwards, or made with the back or palm of the hand, apart from suggestion. The right and left sides have different effects. The mesmerists all speak much about the polarity of the magnet, and Fludd, Hell, and Mesmer supposed there was a similar polarity in men. The same thing has been asserted more recently by Chazarain, Decle, Durville, De Rochas, and Barety. But I find such opposed views among the different investigators about the distribution of the poles that for the present I ascribe the supposed polarity to unconscious habit.

The mesmerists have put forth many theories to explain this personal influence. I pass over most of them for brevity's sake. But I will mention those of Mesmer, because many false views are widespread about them. He says the whole universe is filled with a fluid which is more subtle than ether, just as ether is more subtle than air, and air than water. This fluid conducts vibrations just like ether, air, and water. As the vibrations of the light-ether cause light, and those of air cause sounds, so the vibrations of this universal fluid cause other phenomena. The mutual influence which the heavenly bodies undisputedly exercise on each other and the earth are caused by the vibrations of this fluid. One animal body influences another by means of the vibrations of this fluid. Mesmer called this animal magnetism.

This theory of Mesmer's is often confused with another theory of a fluid. Mesmer was thinking of a universally extended fluid. Another theory supposes a fluid in the nerves, which is called outwards by movement. This is the assertion of Albrecht von Haller, the famous physiologist of the last century, who established his priority to Mesmer, although their theories are by no means identical. These are not mere notions invented and defended by swindlers and fools. Many clever men—A. von Humboldt, for example—thought that a force in the nervous system could produce effects at a distance, if not at a great distance. The well-known physician and anatomist, Reil, held a like view. In any case the mesmerists had the support of eminent scientists, who supposed a nervous fluid surrounding men. Mesmerism has even quite lately found some adherents among eminent men of science. Ed. von Hartmann is a convinced adherent of it, and founds his belief on personal experience.

I shall pass over the other theories of animal magnetism, merely mentioning that many persons did not believe in the universal fluid.

The mesmerists maintain that sleep need not always be induced before a person can be magnetically influenced ; that the subjects may be thoroughly awake ; and that this is the distinction between mesmerism and hypnotism. But it should be said that there is by no means always a true sleep in hypnotism. It is evident that the old mesmerists knew the light hypnotic stages well; they called them magnetic states. The mesmerists also did not use the personal methods exclusively; they used inanimate objects for magnetizing, such as the baquet of Mesmer and Puysegur's favourite magnetized tree. They thought that the magnetic force passed into the object from the magnetizer. But when this was not the case they were not at a loss. When no magnetizer has touched the object, as is the case in the method. of Braid, then (as Moricourt thinks) the fluid of the subject is reflected from the object gazed at, and he is affected by his own fluid.

So-called animal magnetism has been made of practical importance by its use by healing magnetizers, who are supposed to be able to cure diseases. The utter lack of criticism among them, which makes scientific discussion impossible, obliges me to renounce the attempt to give details, though I am convinced that not one professional magnetizer has yet proved that he possesses any particular power unexplained by suggestion. On the other hand, many authors—e.g., Goler von Ravensburg—have pointed out great sources of error, so that childlike faith would be required to take their assertions seriously.

The phenomena of thought-transference, mental suggestion, telepathy, or, as Mayerhofer calls it, telaesthesia, are related to animal magnetism, and are often spoken of in connection with it. Telepathy means the transference of thoughts, feelings, sensations, &c, from a person A. to a person B. by some means other than the recognized sense perceptions of B. Consequently such thought-reading is altogether excluded, in which one person guesses the thought of another by means of the tremors in his muscles, i.e., by a recognized kind of perception. Telepathy has a certain relation to mesmerism (Ochorowicz).

In making the experiments, the person B., who is to guess the thoughts of A., is often mesmerized by A., as this is supposed to make the transference easier. Some English experimenters, Guthrie in particular, have made experiments when both persons were quite awake. The transference is supposed to be caused merely by a strong concentration of thought on the part of the agent. In the same way the subject feels the agent's sense perceptions. If A. is pricked, B. feels it ; if A. tastes salt, B. tastes it, &c. It is also said that A. can make B. act, merely by concentrating his thoughts on what B. is to do. Others think that it is the concentration of A's. will on B. which causes the action. Perronnet even maintains that it is possible to influence the pulse and cause vasomotor changes telepathically, by an effort of will. The nearer A. is to B. the better, but the phenomena are said to have been observed when subject and agent were separated by several kilometres. It is said to be even possible to hypnotize certain people at long distances by concentration of thought ; such experiments are said to have succeeded at Havre. Among authors who vouch for the reality of telepathy, and whose experiments deserve consideration, I mention Charles Richet, Ochorowicz, Pierre Janet, Gibert, F.

Myers, A. Myers, Gurney, Birchall, Guthrie, and Max Dessoir. However, these experiments raise some doubts. Those published by Du Prel, Schrenck-Notzing, Mensi, and Welsch, contain so little information about the conditions of the experiments that it is difficult to weigh the question.

Clairvoyance is the perception of things distant either in time or in space. Belief in it is as old as history ; Du Prel reminds us of the Oracles. The prophecies of the Pythia at Delphi show that it was even then believed in. From what has come down to us in history it seems that the state of the Pythia was like deep hypnosis, although they probably used toxic methods also; Kluge and Ed. von Hartmann think that the state was somnambulism. It was the same thing with the Sibyl of Cumae.

The mesmerists think clairvoyance and the transposition of the senses of which I shall shortly speak are phenomena to be found in magnetized subjects. It is not certain whether Mesmer himselfknew of the phenomena; but it appears from one of his letters (published by Du Potet) that he was acquainted with them, but did not enter into them, because they appeared to him inexplicable. Most of the commissions which have investigated clairvoyance have failed ; but some great minds—Schopenhauer, for example-have believed in it. Even Braid, about whose views there are so many mistaken opinions, believed in clairvoyance. This must be mentioned, because from Preyer's representation of Braid's teaching we should be obliged to conclude that he denied clairvoyance. I should explain the passage in Braid's Neurypnology, p. 21, in quite the opposite sense. Braid thought clairvoyance proved, though he had never seen it and could not induce it himself; but he thought that a number of those who vouched for its reality were scientific and truth-loving enough to be believed ; he expressly says so, and there can be no doubt about it. The magnetic state in which such phenomena as clairvoyance, thought-transference, &c, are found, is sometimes called somnambulism (*) by the mesmerists. In previsional clairvoyance forthcoming events are foretold ; in spatial clairvoyance things are seen which are so placed in space that normally they would be invisible ; they are either separated from the seer by some non-transparent substance, or they are too far off to be seen. In Paris, somnambulists are often made use of in diagnosing disease ; this is a kind of spatial clairvoyance. One common experiment is to make the somnambulist diagnose his own disease, foretell its course, and mention the drugs to be used.

(*) Consequently the word somnambulism is used in several senses : 1. One of Charcot's stages is often called somnambulism. 2. The school of Nancy calls that hypnotic state somnambulism in which there is loss of memory after waking. 3. Some identify hypnotism with somnambulism. 4. Somnambulism is a natural sleep in which there are actions and movements. 5. The mesmeric state described above is called somnambulism.

In transposition of the senses, stimuli, which normally would only affect a particular organ of sense, affect some other part of the body. For example, letters are said to be read by means of the skin, instead of the eyes, without a heightening of the sense of touch, such as is found in the blind. On the contrary, the part of the skin concerned is supposed to be stimulated by the light rays, even without direct contact, andwhen there is no hyperaesthesia of feeling. The supposed transposition of the senses is thus distinguished from hyperaesthesia of the sense of touch.

One of the most commonly mentioned phenomena is reading or hearing with the pit of the stomach. I have seen a person who was supposed to read with his nose, even at a distance of several feet. When his nose was covered with wadding he failed. It is tolerably certain that he saw with his eyes ; for though they appeared to be covered with wadding and bandaged, Braid has pointed out that such bandaging is of very doubtful use.

I will here mention some experiments of Heidenhain's which are generally misunderstood, and which at any rate may be easily misunderstood. He maintained that his subjects repeated whatever he said to them when a stimulus was applied to their stomachs ; it was necessary to speak close to the stomach to stimulate it. He even said that the part could be exactly defined, and that it was the region of the stomach. According to him the vagus nerve was set vibrating and the sound centres were stimulated, and thus a sound was made which exactly corresponded to the one heard ; but he thought the sound was heard by the ear and not by the stomach, the nerves of which merely stimulated the sound centres and thus induced imitation of what was heard by the ear. It might be concluded from many accounts of Heidenhain's experiments that he thought his subjects heard with their stomachs, but nothing was further from his thoughts. I have said on p. 81 that Heidenhain was probably wrong in his conclusions.

The law of the individual capacity of the sense organs (*) would be violated by transposition of the senses. But I do not think the thing is proved.

(*) According to this law each organ of sense has its own appropriate stimulus, which has no effect on any other organ, e.g., the eye is stimulated by light, but not the sense of touch or thestomach.

The belief in the action of the magnet on human beings is very old. The Magi of the East used it for curing diseases, and the Chinese and Hindoos used it long ago. Albertus Magnus in the thirteenth century, and later Paracelsus, Van Helmont, and Kircher also used it, as well as the astronomer and ex-Jesuit Hell of Vienna at the end of the eighteenth century. Mesmer is said to have heard from him of its effect upon men, and he also used it at first (p. 5). Even then many doctors—e.g., Deimann, of Amsterdam— denied the therapeutic action of the magnet, and asserted, as others do at present, that brass plates did as well. Reil, the well-known physician, used the magnet therapeutically ; in 1845 Reichenbach asserted that some sensitive persons had peculiar sensations when they were touched by a magnet. He also said that they saw light—the so-called Od light—at the poles of the magnet: an assertion that was supposed to be disproved, but which has lately been again made by Barrett, in London. Maggiorani, in Italy, has lately contended for the therapeutic use of the magnet (Belfiore), and quite recently the school of Charcot has asserted the influence of the magnet on certain individuals.

I have already spoken of the application of the magnet for inducing hypnosis, as well as of the action of the hypnoscope.

With regard to the action of the magnet during hypnosis, the phenomena of transference must first be mentioned. According to the school of Charcot, transference means that certain phenomena, influenced by some sesthesio-genetic expedient, particularly the magnet, change the place of their appearance. Charcot says that such phenomena are seen in hysterical patients. Thus, contractures on the right side can be transferred to the left by the magnet. Charcot, as well as a number of other experimenters, among them Preyer, thinks these phenomena quite proved, while in Germany a mental factor has been called in to account for them. It was supposed that the subject's expectation produced the effect and not the magnet ; and that (according to Westphal) sealing-wax, bones, &c, produced the same result, provided only that the subject expected it. The school of Charcot say that this transference takes place in hypnosis as well as in the waking state. The laws which Binet and Fere have laid down about it are as follows : When lethargy on one side of the body and catalepsy on the other have been induced by closing the subject's eyes, the approach of a magnet causes lethargy on the cataleptic side, and on the lethargic side catalepsy. In the same way, when the state is somnambulistic on one side and cataleptic or lethargic on the other, the magnet causes transference. But also, in each particular hypnotic state, symptoms can be transferred by the magnet from one side to the other, e.g., the individual contractures in lethargy, and particular postures of the limbs in catalepsy. In somnambulism, contractures as well as hallucinations of one side, and hemiansesthesise, can be transferred in the same way. Binet and Fere say that when hypnotic subjects write with the right hand, they reverse the direction of the writing under the influence of the magnet and write at the same time with the left hand.

Another method of influencing with the magnet is called polarization. It is a reversal of a functional state (Belfiore). For example, the magnet is supposed to resolve a contracture induced by suggestion (motor polarization). It can banish a suggested hallucination and can change the mental pictures of colours into their complementaries. If a subject believes he sees blue, he thinks he sees yellow when the magnet is brought close to him (sensory polarization). The magnet is said to change happiness into sadness (mental polarization). When a reversal of the state takes place, e.g., when " blue " is turned into " yellow," i.e., into its complementary colour, then this is called polarization in a narrower sense, and an arbitrary change of state, i.e., the changing of " yellow" into " red" is called " dispolarization " (Lombroso, Ottolenghi). Binet and Fere are the authors of these experiments, which are confirmed by Bianchi and Sommer, whose experiments, however, offer no guarantee that sufficient precautions were taken ; at least I have found nothing concerning this point in their publications. Lombroso and Ottolenghi also affirm the phenomena of polarization.

The phenomena of mental polarization were carefully examined by a special committee of the Medical Congress at Padua. They were not confirmed; at least, they could not be referred to the action of the magnet. Tanzi especially opposes them, and thinks they are to be referred to unconscious and unintentionalsuggestion.

Venturini and Ventra made a therapeutical experiment in connection with these phenomena. They say they conquered a fixed idea, an auto-suggestion in the waking state, by means of the magnet. Some experiments of Raggi belong to this class ; he says that the approach of a magnet in hypnosis often causes subjective discomfort. In other cases the magnet is said to have put an end to the hypnosis.

A third possible way of influencing the hypnotic subject by the magnet is given by Tamburini and Seppilli. They think that when the magnet is brought close to the pit of the stomach it influences the respiratory movements. Later on, Tamburini and Righi found that other metallic bodies produced the same effect; the strength of the effect depended, however, on the size of the metal. The electro-magnet is said to have the same effect whether the stream is open or closed ; Tamburini supposes later that it is only the temperature of the magnet which has the effect, and that the magnetic force may have no influence.

In conclusion, there are Babinski's experiments, founded on a union of true magnetism and animal magnetism. If a hypnotized subject and a sick person are set back to back, a magnet put between them will cause the sick person's symptoms to pass over to the hypnotized subject. Hysterical dumbness and contractures have been thus transferred. But symptoms of organic disease, e.g., of disseminated sclerosis have also been transferred in this way. As a matter of course the phenomena must not be caused by suggestion. The hypnotic subject must not know what the sick person's symptoms are. Luys made such experiments with the same result.

All these actions of the magnet are very enigmatical, and my personal conviction is that the observations were erroneous. But it is certainly singular that the action of the magnet should have been asserted by so many authors at so many different times.

Little can be safely said in explanation of its effect. Obersteiner supposes that there may be a magnetic sense, which may come into activity during hypnosis, and which is, perhaps, localized in certain terminal organs of perception whose functions are still unknown.

moment supposed to be disproved, though some authors still assert it. This also is no new thing. The belief has often arisen that certain persons could find water or veins of metal with a divining-rod, through some influence of the water or minerals at a distance. Burq's metalloscopie and metallotherapie, in which, however, there was contact with the metals, was the same sort of thing.

Certain persons were supposed to be influenced by particular metals—copper, for example—which even caused symptoms of disease to disappear. The later investigations on the action of drugs at a distance apparently proved that certain drugs in hermetically closed tubes would, when brought close to human beings, act in the same way as if they were swallowed. Thus, strychnine was supposed to cause convulsions, ipecacuanha vomiting, opium sleep, alcohol drunkenness, &c. The experiments were first made by Grocco in Italy, and Bourru and Burot in Rochefort. They experimented with both waking and hypnotized people; Luys repeated the experiments with hypnotized subjects and confirmed them ; so did Duplouy and Alliot. Luys went further ; he even found distinctions, according as the ipecacuanha was applied to the right or left sides.

It is known that these experiments have been repeated in other quarters, e.g., by Jules Voisin, Forel, Seguin, and Laufenauer, without result; Luys brought the subject before the French Academy of Medicine, which appointed a commission (Brouardel, Dujardin-Beaumetz,and several others) to test the question in the presence of Luys ; they came to a conclusion opposed to his. Seeligmuller has confuted the experiments in a much better and more scientific way, which appears to me the only proper one for coming to a decision.

It consists of examining the conditions of the experiments ; the reports of commissions have no particular value. When we consider the history of animal magnetism we see that commissions always find what they wish to find ; the result is always what they expect. Commissions, in fact, are much influenced by auto-suggestion.

Although I have spoken of a number of enigmatical phenomena in this chapter, I have not done so because I wish to maintain their reality; I should expressly state that this is not the case. I thought it necessary to mention them briefly, on account of their connection with the history of hypnotism. It was further necessary to point out the many sources of error in such experiments.

One important condition in such experiments is that every word uttered should be taken down by some person present for the purpose. One apparently unimportant word may be enough to justify the chief objection made to such experiments—i.e., suggestion.

And there is an absence of criticism in most of them. When a subject reads in a closed book, and it is not proved that he was unacquainted with it previously, I think it is at least naive to speak of clairvoyance. When the magnet causes transference in subjects who know that the magnet is supposed to cause transference, it should be proved that the subjects could not know of the presence of the magnet through their organs of sense. When the approach of the magnet changes a subject's perception of "blue" into "yellow," let it be proved that he did not know the magnet was near, for a properly "trained" subject knows that the magnet is supposed to change his perception colour. When it is asserted that drugs in closed tubes have an effect, Bernheim's conditions should be observed, the chief of which is that no one in the room should know the contents of the tube. When it is asserted that some persons can magnetize others by means of a particular force, let suggestion be excluded. The impression that A. makes upon B. is often impossible to calculate, and when A. can influence B., but C. cannot, it should be shown that A. does not know whether B. or C. is magnetizing him. This is of course very important ; for there is no doubt that some people, by the manner in which they play their part and by a thorough knowledge of the technique of suggestion, can influence subjects who are refractory to others. It by no means follows that they possess a peculiar magnetic force ; suggestion will explain it. The chief sources of error in the experiments described in this chapter are as follows:—

1. Intentional simulation on the part of the subject in or out of hypnosis. A simulation of hypnosis is less to be feared, because if a person saw without using his eyes, it would not matter whether he was in hypnosis or not; the main point is the seeing. But even when there is hypnosis, the experimenter is not protected from simulation on the subject's part, because lying and fraud are possible even in deep hypnosis.

2. Unintentional simulation, if I may use an expression which is really contradictory. For example, the subject hears something, and is not conscious that the impression has been made on the usual organ of this sense ; as is the case when subjects themselves believe they hear with their stomachs. Or transference happens, when the subject has been induced by training to produce this phenomenon whenever a magnet is brought near him. The subject pays no attention to the approach of the magnet, and is not really conscious of it, and yet the effect appears. In the same way the subject in thought-transference learns to guess others' thoughts from many little signs, but is not conscious that he does so. The involuntary tremor of the muscles which every one has when he concentrates his thoughts strongly, and which betrays his thoughts to the subject, seems to me a great point in these cases ; Wernicke in particular has pointed out this source of error.

It should be especially guarded against in clairvoyance, because persons present, who can see the thing which the clairvoyant is to see without using his eyes, may give indications by involuntary muscular movements, &c. Even Goler v, Ravensburg, who is generally so practical, does not enough consider the importance of this point.

3. The probability of chance success. As many experiments fail, it should be considered whether the number of successful ones exceeds probability.

4. Coincidence. E.g., a command given in thought may be obeyed, because by chance, or for some reason, experimenter and subject think of the same thing. In telepathy the first order thought of is nearly always that the right arm should be raised. This source of error is both great and interesting. It has lately been carefully examined by a member of the American branch of the Society for Psychical Research, C. S. Minot. Thus it has been discovered that every one prefers certain figures, &c, which recur strikingly often, even when the choice is left open. Now, when in a telepathic experiment one person is to divine a number thought of by another, it would be necessary to discover if they prefer the same figures, if they have the same " number habit." This must also be weighed in experiments with cards, in which it appears to me the ace of hearts is very often chosen. It is evident that great care must be exercised in drawing conclusions, and that the study of " mysterious " phenomena leads to the recognition of important laws.

5. Hyperesthesia of the subject's organs of sense often allows him to perceive things imperceptible to others.

6. The increased power of drawing conclusions, which I have spoken of before, must be taken into consideration.

Munsterberg supposes that in thought-transference the agent's strong concentration of thought may throw him into a hypnotic state, and that in this state he may simply tell the subject what he is thinking of, without remembering it afterwards. I have myself made and watched numerous experiments, and cannot think the supposition just. Wernicke's supposition is just as doubtful; he thinks that different thoughts induce different effluvia from the skin, from which a properly trained subject can discover what the agent is thinking about.

When the published experiments are criticized by the rules given above, very few are left which are worthy of serious consideration. These are chiefly the experiments in thought-transference of Guthrie and Birchall, published by the Society for Psychical Research. I could discover no sources of error in them. As conscious deception is excluded, the supposition that the experiments did not really take place as published is out of the question. However, even here there was no regular registrar of the proceedings ; and besides, I am subjectively convinced that some sources of error were overlooked, and that suggestion was somehow or other called into play.

Perhaps somebody else may be able to discover these. In any case the members of the society are too scientific and too honourable not to recognize sources of error which are pointed out.

There is nothing to be said against the present examination of inexplicable things. Almost all great steps in natural science have been made by some one who had the courage to contest existing views, in spite of the danger of looking ridiculous. Harvey was obliged to struggle with the prejudices of his colleagues for years before the circulation of the blood was accepted. The fall of meteors was long denied. Modern anatomy was founded by Andreas Vesalius, who fought the prejudices of his time often by improper methods. The fact that a thing is contrary to known laws ought not to prevent its being examined. The contradiction is often merely apparent, and even the laws of nature change from day to day, as Virchow has said. Theories never precede facts; observation first, and then theory. The electric current does not contract muscles because the book says so ; the book says so because the current causes the contraction. As Herbert Spencer explains, experience comes first, and then theory.

Everybody may not care to approach this subject; but they should not blame others for their unprejudiced investigations. So long as science does not examine everything, practically and without prejudice, the great delusions of which animal magnetism, &c, makes use, will continue to exist. When careful examination has shown the sources of error, charlatanism will have lost its chief support. The indifference of science has always been the mainstay of charlatanism. The dread that many people have of investigating things of evil reputation is the chief support of imposture and error, and yet how much can be done to suppress them by a careful investigation of even what is improbable. The real enlightenment of the people can only be attained in this way.

It is incomprehensible to me that even scientific men should call those who interest themselves in hypnotism marvel-mongers. Any one who examines the question seriously will find, on the contrary, that the latest hypnotic experiments explain in a natural way much that has been called strange and supernatural. Stigmatization, for example, and automatic writing, which seems to be almost unknown in most scientific circles, and for this reason, and for want of scientific examination, is a powerful support to spiritualism and superstition. The spiritualists think that automatic writing proves some external force, because a work showing design, and independent of the consciousness of the writer, can only be produced by an external force or a spirit. But thanks to the investigations of Taine, F. Myers, Gurney, Pierre Janet, and Max Dessoir, automatic writing has now received another explanation, as table-turning did through Faraday. It is the same with many other phenomena which have been pressed into the service of superstition.

Whoever reads the writings of the magnetic healers and spiritualists will see how bitter they are against the investigators of hypnotism, and how angry the professional magnetizers become about suggestion, which takes the ground from under their feet (Forel). Truly great men try to avoid dogma and a priori conclusions, in spite of scientific doubts. If they cannot examine themselves, they yet consider a scientific examination, even of the improbable necessary. An example which Delboeuf brings forward may be mentioned. Darwin once wished, it is said, to examine the influence of music on the growth of plants, because such an influence had been talked of before him, and he therefore made some one play the bassoon for several days, close to some planted beans. If this anecdote is not true, it is well invented. Examination will conquer superstition sooner than an a priori philosophy. The non-recognition of dogma distinguishes science from blind faith, but to say a fact is impossible because it is opposed to the laws of nature is to dogmatize.

We should be careful, besides, not to make the mistake of claiming supernatural powers for ourselves and denying them to others. When—as happened to me—an otherwise scientific man, X., of Berlin, said that the subjects of Forel and Bernheim were impostors, without having seen them, and without offering proof, he made the mistake of claiming clairvoyance for himself, though he denied its existence. I have often seen such self-contradictions. Knowledge of the laws of nature is still in its infancy. Have the elementary mental processes yet been explained ? Has any one ever explained how an ovum, fertilized but soulless, develops into a being with a soul ? Has it been explained how the brain moves the muscles by means of the nerves ? Do we know why an apple falls to the ground ? The most elementary processes are inexplicable wherever we look, and most people only do not think them inexplicable because they see them every day. Some one has justly said that dreams, as well as hypnotism, might be called an extravagant fancy, if they did not happen every clay.

In spite of the progress which the exact sciences have made, we must not for a moment forget that the inner connection between the body and the mental processes is utterly unknown to us. Under these circumstances we should not refuse to examine the apparently inexplicable. Let us, however, impose severe conditions, and not accept any facts on authority without proof.