INDUCED TELEPATHIC HALLUCINATIONS. In the present chapter we revert once more to experimental evidence. The cases now to be discussed should, in the logical order, have been included in Chapter V., and for a proper appreciation of their theoretic bearings and evidential value they ought to be considered in connection with the instances of thought-transference at a distance there recorded. It seemed best, however, to separate these instances of the experimental production of hallucinations at a distance, and reserve them for subsequent treatment, with the view of anticipating as far as possible the misconceptions to which this class of evidence is peculiarly open. In brief, until some attempt had been made to elucidate the nature of sensory hallucination in general, it seemed unwise to introduce matter so controvertible as apparitions of the human figure. For we are here assailing the last fortress of superstition; in discussing such matters even educated persons find it difficult to free themselves from the fetters of traditional modes of thought and speech. Men who would be ashamed to think of earth, air, fire, and water as elements, because they were so held a century ago and are now so styled in the language of the market-place, will often see no middle course between rejecting altogether evidence of the kind here dealt with, and accepting the existence of "ghosts." But those who have followed the argument of the preceding chapters will see, if the possibility of thought-transference is granted, that the narratives now to be presented fall naturally into place as illustrating one of its modes of manifestation. That A. by taking thought should cause an image of himself to appear to B. need provoke no more surprise than that by the same means he should cause B. to see No. 27, or the Queen of Hearts. No one demands a spiritual entity corresponding to the Queen of Hearts, why then should any one believe in the other case that A.'s spirit had left its fleshly tabernacle to interview B.? The hallucinatory figure induced post-hypnotically in certain subjects presents an even closer parallel. It is recognised by all in such a case that the figure seen is a thought fashioned by the subject's mind, with no more substance than any other thought. It is only the influence of an unrecognised animism which leads us to demand such a substantial basis when the figure seen represents a dying man. The impulse which led to the projection of the hallucination was in the one case conveyed by word of mouth, in the other by some process as yet not understood. But the mystery lies in the process rather than in the result. The present chapter, then, will contain instances of the action of thought-transference in which the transmitted idea was translated in the percipient's mind, not, as in most of the cases described in previous chapters, into a simple feeling, or sensation, or dream, but into a hallucination representing the human figure. Readers of Phantasms of the Living will remember the accounts there given (vol. i. pp. 104-109) of some experiments made by a friend of ours, Mr. S. H. B. On several occasions Mr. B. succeeded by an effort of will in causing a phantom of himself to appear to acquaintances who were not aware of his intention to try the experiment. On one occasion the figure was seen by two persons simultaneously. As at that time results of the kind were almost unprecedented, we felt, notwithstanding our full confidence in Mr. B., some reluctance in publishing an account of his experiments, lest isolated marvels of the kind might prejudice our whole case. But fortunately, while Phantasms of the Living was actually passing through the press, we received from an independent source an account of successful experiments of the same kind (see below, case 63), and within a few weeks of its publication a friend of the present writer was induced by a perusal of Mr. B.'s narrative to make on his own account a similar trial, which completely succeeded. This gentleman wrote to me on 16th November 1886 as follows:— No. 61.—From the REV. CLARENCE GODFREY. "I was so impressed by the account on p. 105 that I determined to put the matter to an experiment. "Retiring at 10.45 [on the 15th November 1886] I determined to appear, if possible, to a friend, and accordingly I set myself to work with all the volitional and determinative energy which I possess, to stand at the foot of her bed. I need not say that I never dropped the slightest hint beforehand as to my intention, such as could mar the experiment, nor had I mentioned the subject to her. As the 'agent' I may describe my own experiences. "Undoubtedly the imaginative faculty was brought extensively into play, as well as the volitional, for I endeavoured to translate myself, spiritually, into her room, and to attract her attention, as it were, while standing there. My effort was sustained for perhaps eight minutes, after which I felt tired, and was soon asleep. "The next thing I was conscious of was meeting the lady next morning (i.e., in a dream, I suppose?) and asking her at once if she had seen me last night. The reply came, 'Yes.' 'How?' I inquired. Then in words strangely clear and low, like a well audible whisper, came the answer, 'I was sitting beside you.' These words, so clear, awoke me instantly, and I felt I must have been dreaming; but on reflection I remembered what I had been 'willing' before I fell asleep, and it struck me, 'This must be a reflex action from the percipient.' My watch showed 3.40 A.M. The following is what I wrote immediately in pencil, standing in my night-dress:—'As I reflected upon those clear words, they struck me as being quite intuitive, I mean subjective, and to have proceeded from within, as my own conviction, rather than a communication from any one else. And yet I can't remember her face at all, as one can after a vivid dream!' "But the words were uttered in a clear, quick tone, which was most remarkable, and awoke me at once. "My friend in the note with which she sent me the enclosed account of her own experience, says:—'I remember the man put all the lamps out soon after I came upstairs, and that is only done about a quarter to four.'"
Mr. Godfrey received from the percipient on the 16th November an account of her side of the experience, and at his request she wrote it down as follows:— "Yesterday—viz., the morning of November 16th, 1886—about half-past three o'clock, I woke up with a start and an idea that some one had come into the room. I heard a curious sound, but fancied it might be the birds in the ivy outside. Next I experienced a strange restless longing to leave the room and go downstairs. This feeling became so overpowering that at last I rose and lit a candle, and went down, thinking if I could get some soda water it might have a quieting effect. On returning to my room I saw Mr. Godfrey standing under the large window on the staircase. He was dressed in his usual style, and with an expression on his face that I have noticed when he has been looking very earnestly at anything. He stood there, and I held up the candle and gazed at him for three or four seconds in utter amazement, and then, as I passed up the staircase, he disappeared. The impression left on my mind was so vivid that I fully intended waking a friend who occupied the same room as myself, but remembering that I should only be laughed at as romantic and imaginative, refrained from doing so. "I was not frightened at the appearance of Mr. Godfrey, but felt much excited, and could not sleep afterwards."
On the 21st of the same month I heard a full account of the incident given above from Mr. Godfrey, and on the day following from Mrs. ——. Mrs. —— told me that the figure appeared quite distinct and life-like at first, though she could not remember to have noticed more than the upper part of the body. As she looked it grew more and more shadowy, and finally faded away. Mrs. ——, it should be added, told me that she had previously seen two phantasmal figures, representing a parent whom she had recently lost.[110] Mr. Godfrey at our request made two other trials, without, of course, letting Mrs. —— know his intention. The first of these attempts was without result, owing perhaps to the date chosen, as he was aware at the time, being unsuitable. But a trial made on the 7th December 1886 succeeded completely. Mrs. ——, writing on December 8th, states that she was awakened by hearing a voice cry, "Wake," and by feeling a hand rest on the left side of her head. She then saw stooping over her a figure which she recognised as Mr. Godfrey's. In this last case the dress of the figure does not seem to have been seen distinctly. But in the apparition of the 16th November, it will be observed that the dress was that ordinarily worn in the daytime by Mr. Godfrey, and that in which the percipient would be accustomed to see him, not the dress which he was actually wearing at the time. If the apparition is in truth nothing more than an expression of the percipient's thought this is what we should expect to find, and as a matter of fact in the majority of well evidenced narratives of telepathic hallucination this is what we actually do find. The dress and surroundings of the phantasm represent, not the dress and surroundings of the agent at the moment, but those with which the percipient is familiar. If other proof were wanting, this fact would in itself seem a sufficient argument that we have to deal, not with ghosts but with hallucinations. It is to be regretted, however, that most recent experimenters in this direction have succeeded only in producing apparitions of themselves. But a crucial experiment of the kind desired is to be found in an account published in 1822 by H. M. Wesermann, Government Assessor and Chief Inspector of Roads at DÜsseldorf. He records five successful trials with different percipients, of which the fifth seems worth quoting in full.[111] No. 62.—From H. M. WESERMANN. "A lady, who had been dead five years, was to appear to Lieutenant —n in a dream at 10.30 P.M. and incite him to good deeds. At half-past ten, contrary to expectation, Herr ——n had not gone to bed, but was discussing the French campaign with his friend Lieutenant S—— in the ante-room. Suddenly the door of the room opened, the lady entered dressed in white, with a black kerchief and uncovered head, greeted S—— with her hand three times in a friendly manner; then turned to ——n, nodded to him, and returned again through the doorway. "As this story, related to me by Lieutenant ——n, seemed to be too remarkable from a psychological point of view for the truth of it not to be duly established, I wrote to Lieutenant S——, who was living six[112] miles away, and asked him to give me his account of it. He sent me the following reply:— "'... On the 13th of March, 1817, Herr ——n came to pay me a visit at my lodgings about a league from A——. He stayed the night with me. After supper, and when we were both undressed, I was sitting on my bed and Herr ——n was standing by the door of the next room on the point also of going to bed. This was about half-past ten. We were speaking partly about indifferent subjects and partly about the events of the French campaign. Suddenly the door out of the kitchen opened without a sound, and a lady entered, very pale, taller than Herr ——n, about five feet four inches in height, strong and broad of figure, dressed in white, but with a large black kerchief which reached to below the waist. She entered with bare head, greeted me with the hand three times in complimentary fashion, turned round to the left towards Herr ——n, and waved her hand to him three times; after which the figure quietly, and again without any creaking of the door, went out. We followed at once in order to discover whether there were any deception, but found nothing. The strangest thing was this, that our night-watch of two men whom I had shortly before found on the watch were now asleep, though at my first call they were on the alert, and that the door of the room, which always opens with a good deal of noise, did not make the slightest sound when opened by the figure.
"'S.
"'D——n, January 11th, 1818.' "From this story (Wesermann continues) the following conclusions may be drawn:— "(1) That waking persons, as well as sleeping, are capable of perceiving the ideas [Gedankenbilder] of distant friends through the inner sense as dream images. For not only the opening and shutting of the door, but the figure itself—which, moreover, exactly resembled that of the dead lady—was incontestably only a dream in the waking state, since the door would have creaked as usual had the figure really opened and shut it. "(2) That many apparitions and supposed effects of witchcraft were very probably produced in the same way. "(3) That clairvoyants are not mistaken when they state that a stream of light proceeds from the magnetiser to the distant friend, which visibly presents the scene thought of, if the magnetiser thinks of it strongly and without distraction."
More philosophic or more successful than recent investigators, Wesermann, it will be seen, varied the form of his experiment. In the first he caused his own figure to appear, but in each of the subsequent trials he chose a fresh image, meeting on each occasion with equal success. It should be observed, however, that though Wesermann seems to have been a careful as well as a philosophic investigator, he has omitted to record how often he made trials of this kind without producing any result, and it cannot fairly be assumed that there were no failures. But in comparing such cases as those here recorded with the experiments at close quarters described in Chapters II., III., and IV., it should be remembered that a failure which consists merely, as in Mr. Godfrey's second trial, in the absence of any unusual impression on the part of the percipient, detracts far less from the value of occasional success than failures attested by the production of wrong impressions; and further, that a sensory hallucination being a much rarer phenomenon than an idea, the improbability of chance-coincidence between a hallucination and the attempt (unknown to the percipient) to produce it is greater in the same proportion. Later experience has not confirmed Wesermann's third inference, as to the stream of light proceeding from the agent; there are no grounds for regarding such an appearance as other than subjective, due to the percipient's preconceived ideas of what he ought to see. But another feature in the narrative is more significant. One is led to infer both from Herr S.'s description and from Wesermann's remarks in (1) that the figure seen resembled a deceased lady who was not known to either of the percipients. If this interpretation is correct, the figure seen cannot have been subjective in the same sense as the hallucinations described in Chapter IX. and Mr. Godfrey's apparition may be supposed to have been. The latter were, ex hypothesi, autoplastic—i.e., they were hallucinations built up in the percipient's own mind on a nucleus supplied from without. But what Herren S. and ——n saw was a heteroplastic image, a picture like that of a diagram or a card transferred ready-made from the agent's mind. We should not of course be justified, on the evidence of a single narrative of somewhat doubtful import, in concluding that such an origin for a hallucination is possible. But there are a few narratives to be cited later (Chapter XIII.) which also suggest such an interpretation. In Mr. Godfrey's trials, as also in those made by Mr. S. H. B., the agent was asleep at the time of the experiment.[113] In the two cases which follow the agent was in a hypnotic trance. In the first instance, it will be seen, there appears to have been a reciprocal effect, the agent himself becoming aware at the time of the percipient's surroundings, and of the effect produced on her by his influence. The account was sent to us in January 1886. No. 63.—From MR. H. P. SPARKS. After describing various hypnotic experiments on a fellow-student, Mr. A. H. W. Cleave, Mr. Sparks continues:— "Last Friday evening (January 15th, 1886) he expressed his wish to see a young lady living in Wandsworth, and he also said he would try to make himself seen by her. I accordingly mesmerised him, and continued the long passes for about 20 minutes, concentrating my will on his idea. When he came round (I brought him round by just touching his hand and willing him, after 1 hour and 20 minutes' trance) he said he had seen her in the dining-room, and that after a time she grew restless, and then suddenly looked straight at him and then covered her eyes with her hands. Just after this he came round. Last Monday evening (January 18th, 1886) we did the same thing, and this time he said he thought he had frightened her, as after she had looked at him for a few minutes she fell back in her chair in a sort of faint. Her little brother was in the room at the time. Of course, after this we expected a letter if the vision was real; and on Wednesday morning he received a letter from this young lady asking whether anything had happened to him, as on Friday evening she was startled by seeing him standing at the door of the room. After a minute he disappeared, and she thought that it might have been fancy; but on the Monday evening she was still more startled by seeing him again, and this time much clearer, and it so frightened her that she nearly fainted. "This account I send you is perfectly true, I will vouch, for I have two independent witnesses who were in the dormitory at the time when he was mesmerised, and when he came round. My patient's name is Arthur H. W. Cleave, and his age is 18 years. A. C. Darley and A. S. Thurgood, fellow-students, are the two witnesses I mentioned. "H. PERCY SPARKS."
Mr. Cleave writes, on March 15th, 1886:— "H.M.S. Marlborough, PORTSMOUTH. "Sparks and myself have, for the past eighteen months, been in the habit of holding mesmeric sÉances in our dormitories. For the first month or two we got no very satisfactory results, but after that we succeeded in sending one another to sleep. I could never get Sparks further than the sleeping state, but he could make me do anything he liked whilst I was under the influence; so I gave up trying to send him off, and all our efforts were made towards my being mesmerised. After a short time we got on so well that Sparks had three or four other fellows in the dormitory to witness what I did. I was quite insensible to all pain, as the fellows have repeatedly pinched my hands and legs without my feeling it. About six months ago I tried my power of will, in order, while under the influence, to see persons to whom I was strongly attached. For some time I was entirely unsuccessful, although I once thought that I saw my brother (who is in Australia), but had no opportunity of verifying the vision. "A short time ago I tried to see a young lady whom I know very well, and was perfectly surprised at my success. I could see her as plainly as I can see now, but I could not make myself seen by her, although I had often tried to. After I had done this several times I determined to try and make myself seen by her, and told Sparks of my idea, which he approved. Well, we tried this for five nights running without any more success. We then suspended our endeavours for a night or two, as I was rather over-exerted by the continued efforts and got severe headaches. We then tried again (on, I think it was, a Friday, but am not certain), and were, I thought, successful; but as the young lady did not write to me about it, I thought I must have been mistaken, so I told Sparks that we had better give up trying. But he begged me to try once more, which we did on the following Monday, when we were successful to such an extent that I felt rather alarmed. (I must tell you that I am in the habit of writing to the young lady every Sunday, but I did not write that week, in order to make her think about me.) This took place between 9.30 P.M. and 10 P.M. Monday night, and on the following Wednesday morning I got the letter which I have enclosed. I, of course, then knew I had been successful. I went home about a fortnight after this, when I saw the young lady, who seemed very frightened in spite of my explanations, and begged me never to try it again, and I promised her that I would not."
The two witnesses of the experiment last described write as follows:— "I have seen Mr. Cleave's account of his mesmeric experiment, and can fully vouch for the truth thereof. "A. C. DARLEY."
"I have read Mr. Cleave's statement, and can vouch for the truth of it, as I was present when he was mesmerised and heard his statement after he revived. "A. E. S. THURGOOD."
The following is a copy, made by Mr. Gurney, of the letter in which the young lady, Miss A——, described her side of the affair. The envelope bore the postmarks, "Wandsworth, Jan. 19, 1886," "Portsmouth, Jan. 20, 1886," and the address, "Mr. A. H. W. Cleave, H.M.S. Marlborough, Portsmouth." "WANDSWORTH, Tuesday morning. "Dear Arthur,—Has anything happened to you? Please write and let me know at once, for I have been so frightened. "Last Tuesday evening I was sitting in the dining [room] reading, when I happened to look up, and could have declared I saw you standing at the door looking at me. I put my handkerchief to my eyes, and when I looked again you were gone. I thought it must have been only my fancy, but last night (Monday), while I was at supper, I saw you again, just as before, and was so frightened that I nearly fainted. Luckily only my brother was there, or it would have attracted attention. Now do write at once and tell me how you are. I really cannot write any more now."
It will be seen that Miss A—— fixes the date of her first hallucination on Tuesday, whereas Mr. Sparks and Mr. Cleave speak of it as Friday. Mr. Gurney, in conversation with the experimenters, was unable to fix the actual date with any certainty, but there can be little doubt that if Tuesday was the day, it fell within the five days on which Mr. Cleave attempted to see Miss A——. Of the second coincidence there can be no doubt. The next case is recorded by Mr. F. W. H. Myers (Journal S.P.R., March 1891), who writes:— No. 64. "In 1888 a gentleman, whom I will call Mr. A., who has occupied a high public position in India, and whom I have known a long time, informed me verbally that he had had a remarkable experience. He awoke one morning, in India, very early, and in the dawning light saw a lady, whom I will call Mrs. B., standing at the foot of his bed. At the same time he received an impression that she needed him. This was his sole experience of a hallucination; and it so much impressed him that he wrote to the lady, who was in England at the time, and mentioned the circumstance. He afterwards heard from her that she had been in a trance-condition at the time, and had endeavoured to appear to him by way of an experiment. "Mr. A. did not give me the lady's name, supposing that she did not desire the incident to be spoken of; nor did he find an opportunity of himself inquiring as to her willingness to mention the matter."
Subsequently, on July 13th, 1890, the agent, Mrs. B., wrote of her own accord to Mr. Myers. Mrs. B. began by stating that she had submitted herself to be experimented upon by a lady friend, with the view of acquiring clairvoyant faculties. She then described how in the course of one experiment in 1886 she lost consciousness of outward things, and saw the figure of a tall woman, whom she recognised as a friend of her mother's, standing by her. Then she goes on:— "I find myself seriously debating within myself what I should do to prove to myself, and for my own satisfaction, if I am indeed the victim of hallucination or not. I decided in a flash on a man whom I knew to be possessed of the most work-a-day world common-sense; his views and mine regarding most things were at the antipodes, very unreceptive, who would be entirely out of sympathy with me in my present experiment and experiences, at which I knew he would only laugh, while regarding me as a simple tool in tricky hands. Such a man was, I decided, the most satisfactory for my trial. The grey lady here impressed me with a desire to will; in her anxiety she appeared to move towards me. I felt her will one with mine, and I willed with a concentrated strength of mind and body, which finally prostrated me, thus: I will that [Mr. A.] may feel I am near him and want his help; and that, without any suggestion from me, he write to tell me I have influenced him to-night. "The grey lady disappeared. I was seated in the chair, weary, but feeling naturally, and back in common-place life. We put down the date and the appearance of the grey lady, and I spoke to none of what had happened. Some weeks passed, when I received a letter from [Mr. A.], asking how had I been employed on a certain July evening at such and such an hour, mentioning to what hour it would answer in London—day, date, and hour were those on which I had made my proof trial—saying that he was asleep, and had dreamed something he would tell me, but that he awoke from the dream feeling I wanted something of him, and asking me to let him know if at the time he so carefully mentioned I had been doing anything which had any reference to him. I then, and then only, told him what I have here related."
Unfortunately Mr. A., on being again appealed to, refused to write an account of his own experience, on the ground that his memory for details might by lapse of time have become untrustworthy. The case is therefore defective, not merely by the length of time which passed between the incident and the agent's record of it, but by the absence of any direct testimony from the percipient. It will be seen that Mrs. B. writes of Mr. A.'s impression as a dream. It seems clear, however, that Mr. A. did not himself regard his experience as a dream. An interesting account is given by Miss Edith Maughan (Journal S.P.R.) of a similar experiment made by her in the summer of 1888. She was reading in bed when the idea occurred to her of "willing" to appear to her friend, Miss Ethel Thompson, who occupied the adjoining room. After concentrating her attention strongly for a few minutes she "felt dizzy and only half-conscious." On recovering full consciousness she heard Miss Thompson's voice speaking in the next room. The time was about 2 A.M. As a matter of fact, Miss Thompson, who was fully awake, was disturbed between 2 and 3 A.M. by seeing at the bedside the figure of Miss Maughan, which disappeared instantly on a light being struck. It is not perhaps possible under the circumstances, in view of Miss Maughan's own statement that she was only semi-conscious during part of the experiment, absolutely to exclude the hypothesis that the figure seen was that of Miss Maughan in some state analogous to somnambulism, and the case is not therefore given in full; but it is important to note that both ladies—and we have reason to know that they are good observers—are convinced that the figure seen was not that of Miss Maughan in the flesh, and the rapidity of the disappearance is a further argument against such a supposition. In the cases so far dealt with the agent, when his state is recorded, was asleep or entranced at the time of the experiment, whilst the percipient appears as a rule to have been awake. In the cases which follow the agent was awake, but the percipient, in two of the cases—if not also in the third—seems to have seen the hallucinatory figure in the borderland state on awaking from sleep. In two of the cases the agent, no doubt intentionally, chose a time when he had reason to believe that the percipient would be asleep; in the third case, whilst the experiments at night failed, success was obtained when the percipient had fallen asleep unexpectedly in the daytime. In view of the absence of any well-attested cases in which both agent and percipient are shown to have been fully awake immediately before and at the time of the experiment,—in case 62 (Wesermann) the state of the agent, and in case 66 (Wiltse) that of the percipient, is not clearly shown,—it is difficult to resist the conclusion that the condition of sleep or trance in one or both parties to the experiment is favourable to transference of this kind. That sleep, or rather the borderland which lies on either side of sleep, is peculiarly favourable to the production in the percipient, not only of hallucinations in general, but of telepathic hallucinations in particular, has already been shown. But the instances cited in the present chapter would seem to indicate that in the agent also sleep and trance (or possibly a trance self-induced in sleep or in waking) may facilitate such transmissions. No. 65.—From DR. VON SCHRENCK-NOTZING. We received the following case from Baron von Schrenck-Notzing, some of whose experiments have been already quoted (No. 9, p. 54). Dr. von Schrenck-Notzing first gave an account of the incident verbally to Professor Sidgwick at Munich, and subsequently, at his request, sent in June 1888 the following written narrative:— "In the winter of 1886-87, I think it was in the month of February, as I was going along the Barerstrasse one evening at half-past 11, it occurred to me to make an attempt at influencing at a distance, through mental concentration. As I had had, for some time, the honour of being acquainted with the family of Herr ——, and thus had had the opportunity of learning that his daughter, FrÄulein ——, was sensitive to psychical influences, I decided to try to influence her, especially as the family lived at the corner of the Barerstrasse and Karlstrasse. The windows of the dwelling were dark as I passed by, from which I concluded that the ladies had already gone to rest. I then stationed myself by the wall of the houses on the opposite side of the road, and for about five minutes firmly concentrated my thoughts on the following desire:—FrÄulein —— shall wake and think of me. Then I went home. The next day when I met FrÄulein ——'s friend on the ice, I learned from her (they shared a bedroom between them) that something strange had happened to the ladies during the preceding night. I remarked thereupon to FrÄulein Prieger (such was the friend's name) that the time when the occurrence took place was between half-past 11 and 12; whereat she was greatly astonished. Then I obtained from the lady an account of the circumstance, as she herself has written it out on the accompanying sheet of paper. For me the success of this experiment was a proof that under certain circumstances one person can influence another at a distance. "ALBERT FREIHERR VON SCHRENCK-NOTZING."
The percipient, Miss ——, writes on May 11th, 1888:— "There is not much to tell concerning the incident of which you ask me to give an account. It happened thus:—Baron Schrenck was returning home one night in March 1887 (or April, I am not sure as to the date), about 11.30, and stood for some time outside my bedroom window, which looked onto the street. I was in bed at the time, lying with closed eyes, nearly asleep. It seemed to me as if the part of the room where my bed was had become suddenly light, and I felt compelled to open my eyes, seeing at the same time, as it appeared to me, the face of Baron Schrenck. It was gone again as quick as lightning. The next day I told my friend FrÄulein Prieger of this occurrence; she went skating that same day, and met Baron Schrenck on the ice. They had scarcely conversed together five minutes before he asked FrÄulein Prieger if I had seen anything last night. FrÄulein Prieger repeated what I had told her, whereupon Baron Schrenck said that, at the time of my seeing him, he was standing outside my window, trying hard to impress his presence upon me. This never occurred again, and I believe Baron Schrenck did not have occasion to repeat the experiment."
In a further letter Miss —— adds (1) that the blinds of her room were drawn down, (2) that she has experienced no other hallucination of any kind. FrÄulein Prieger, whose account was enclosed in Dr. von Schrenck-Notzing's letter of June 1888, writes:— "The winter before last, shortly after Christmas, I was suddenly awakened in the night, between 11 and 12 o'clock, by my friend —, who asked me in an excited manner if I also saw Baron von Schrenck, who was close by her bed. On my objecting that she had been dreaming, and should now quietly go to sleep again, she repeated that she had been completely awake, and had seen Baron von Schrenck so close to her that she could have caught hold of his beard. By degrees she quieted herself, and we both went to sleep. "The following day, on my way home from the ice, I told Baron von Schrenck of this exciting nocturnal scene, and noticed to my not slight astonishment that he seemed greatly rejoiced, as though over a successful experiment which had received its completion in what I communicated to him. "LINA PRIEGER. "Gubelsbergerstrasse, 15 I."
It is much to be regretted that none of the persons concerned thought it worth while to write down an account of the incident at the time. It will be observed that even in the comparatively short interval—little more than a year—which elapsed before this was done, one slight discrepancy, as to the time at which FrÄulein Prieger was told of the impression, has crept into the narrative. But it seems clear that Miss —— told her experience before FrÄulein Prieger met Baron von Schrenck-Notzing. In the next two cases also the result here recorded is one of many successful experiments in thought-transference made by the agent (see Chapter XV.). No. 66.—From DR. WILTSE, Skiddy, Kansas, U.S.A. "March 16th, 1891. "Some weeks ago several persons were passing the evening at my house, and two children, a little girl of eight years and a boy of six years, whose mother is stopping with us, had been put to bed in an adjoining room, the door between the rooms being closed. The company were engaged in games that did not interest me, and I took a seat some five feet from the bedroom door and began trying to make the boy see my form in the room at his bedside, he being on the front side of the bed. I knew the children were awake, as I could hear them laughing. After some ten or fifteen minutes, the boy suddenly screamed as if frightened, and, hurrying in there, I found the little fellow buried up in the bedclothes and badly frightened, but he seemed ashamed of his fright and would not tell me what was the matter. "I kept the matter of my having tried an experiment a thorough secret, and after some two weeks it came out through the little girl that Charlie thought he saw a "great big tiger standing by his bed looking at him, and he could see Uncle Hime (myself) in the tiger's eyes." What was the tiger? I had not thought of any form but my own. The child lives in Cleveland, Ohio, and has seen the collections in Zoological Gardens, but has not been taught the different colours. I have just now shown him the plates in Wood's Natural History, and he pointed out a lion as the animal he saw, but as the plates are not coloured, they are little good for the purpose; but as I began at the back of the book and took through all sorts first, and the lion was the first and only animal designated by him as the one he had seen in the room, I conclude he was near enough to the classification for our purpose. No one but myself knew of my experiment until the children had told their story. "A. S. WILTSE."
Dr. Wiltse writes later:— "SKIDDY, MORRIS CO., KANSAS,
March 29th, 1891. "I tried one more experiment of the same kind with the little boy, but failed, but I was conscious of wavering in mind during the whole course of the experiment, and besides this there were other unfavourable conditions. The child's mother was absent for the evening and the children with my own boy (aged fifteen) were making Rome howl in the way of untrammelled fun."
Mrs. Wiltse and Dr. Wiltse's son write as follows:— "SKIDDY, KANSAS,
March 28th, 1891. "I was present when Josie Skene told papa what her brother Charlie was scared about. "She said that Charlie throwed the cover over his head and told her that he saw a tiger, and Uncle Hime, as he called papa, was in the tiger's eyes.
"JASON WILTSE."
"I certify that the above statement is substantially correct, as I also heard the little girl relate it.
"MRS. HAIDEE WILTSE."
Mrs. Charles Skene, the mother of the little boy, writes:— "153 PLATT STREET [CLEVELAND, OHIO],
April 9th, 1891. "Your letter dated the 6th came to hand to-day. I was on a visit to the Dr. and his family, and one evening he said he would try an experiment on my little boy; it was about seven o'clock and they had just been put to bed. The Dr. wanted to make him see him by his bedside, and him in the other room, and he did; he saw him in the form of a tiger and he also had tigers in his eyes. He commenced to shout, and said he was frightened, but did not say any more, he was so frightened. This is my daughter's statement as far as she can recollect. "If there are any more questions you would like me to answer I will gladly do so. I was not at home the night this happened.
"MRS. CHAS. SKENE."
Later she adds:— "April 27th, 1891. "Your letter of the 17th came to hand. I do not know the date, but it was about the middle of February, on a Wednesday evening. My little boy is six years old; he remembers it well, and often talks of it."
Mrs. Skene added, in answer to a question, that the boy did not know that the experiment was being tried on him. It should be added that Mr. Rasero, who was present, wrote, on the 30th October 1891, to confirm Dr. Wiltse's statement that nothing was said beforehand about trying an experiment of any kind. The tiger in this experiment appears to have been a confused nightmare effect produced by the telepathic impression on the mind of the child percipient. In the next case, it will be seen, the percept appears to have been unusually clear and distinct. No. 67.—From JOSEPH KIRK.[114] Mr. Kirk has made several attempts to produce a hallucination of himself. Writing to us on the 7th July 1890, he stated that without the knowledge of his friend and neighbour, Miss G., he tried each night, from the 10th to the 20th of June, and once on the 11th in the afternoon, to induce her to see a hallucination of himself. From casual conversation, however, with Miss G. he gathered that no effect had been produced. But on June 23rd Mr. Kirk learned that the trial made on June 11th, the day and hour of which had been noted at the time, had completely succeeded. He thus describes the occasion:— "2 RIPON VILLAS, PLUMSTEAD. "... I had been rather closely engaged on some auditing work, which had tired me, and as near as I can remember the time was between 3.30 and 4 P.M. that I laid down my pencil, stretched myself, and in the act of doing the latter I was seized with the impulse to make a trial on Miss G. I did not, of course, know where she was at the moment, but, with a flash, as it were, I transferred myself to her bedroom. I cannot say why I thought of that spot, unless it was that I did so because my first experiment had been made there—i.e., on the previous night, the 10th June. As it happened, it was what I must call a 'lucky shot,' for I caught her at the moment she was lightly sleeping in her chair—a condition which seems to be peculiarly favourable to receiving and externalising telepathic messages. "The figure seen by Miss G. was clothed in a suit I was at the moment wearing, and was bareheaded, the latter as would be the case, of course, in an office. This suit is of a dark reddish-brown check stuff, and it was an unusual circumstance for me to have had on the coat at the time, as I wear, as a rule, an office coat of light material. But this office coat I had, a day or so before, sent to a tailor to be repaired, and I had, therefore, to keep on that belonging to the dark suit. "I tested the reality of the vision by this dark suit. I asked, 'How was I dressed?' (not at all a leading question). The reply of Miss G. was, touching the sleeve of the coat I was then wearing (of a light suit), 'Not this coat, but that dark suit you wear sometimes. I even saw clearly the small check pattern of it; and I saw your features as plainly as though you had been bodily present. I could not have seen you more distinctly.'"
Miss G.'s account is:— "June 28th, 1890. "A peculiar occurrence happened to me on the Wednesday of the week before last. In the afternoon (being tired by a morning walk), while sitting in an easy-chair near the window of my own room, I fell asleep. At any time I happen to sleep during the day (which is but seldom) I invariably awake with tired, uncomfortable sensations, which take some little time to pass off; but that afternoon, on the contrary, I was suddenly quite wide awake, seeing Mr. Kirk standing near my chair, dressed in a dark brown coat, which I had frequently seen him wear. His back was towards the window, his right hand towards me; he passed across the room towards the door, which is opposite the window, the space between being 15 feet, the furniture so arranged as to leave just that centre clear; but when he got about 4 feet from the door, which was closed, he disappeared.
"I feel sure I had not been dreaming of him, and cannot remember that anything had happened to cause me even to think of him that afternoon before falling asleep."
Mr. Kirk writes later:— "I have only succeeded once in making myself visible to Miss G. since the occasion I have already reported, and that had the singularity of being only my features—my face in miniature, that is, about three inches in diameter."
In a letter dated January 19th, 1891, Mr. Kirk says as to this last appearance:— "Miss G. did not record this at the time, as she attached no importance to it, but I noted the date (July 23rd) on my office blotting-pad, as it was at the office I was thinking of her. I say 'thinking,' because I was doing so in connection with another subject, and with no purpose of making an experiment. I had a headache, and was resting my head on my left hand. Suddenly it occurred to me that my thinking about her might probably influence her in some way, and I made the note I have mentioned."
Mr. Kirk enclosed in his statement to us the piece of blotting-paper on which the note of the second successful experiment had been made. The fact that the hallucination in the first case included a representation of the clothes actually worn by the agent at the time may have been a mere coincidence. But the case should be borne in mind in considering the possibility of heteroplastic hallucination.
|
  |
