If the claim of the spiritualists to having achieved the materialisation of the spirits of deceased persons were restricted to the mere ocular, oral, and tactile evidence of the dark sÉance, the theory of hallucination would account for much that is perplexing. But the problem becomes complicated when the spiritualists come forward with proof that their senses have not misled them. It is only a few months since that a young man in the north of England, on photographing his mother and sisters, was greatly startled to find his late father's face also on the plate. He had not made use of the camera, we are told, for eighteen months. Recently, too, a professional photographer in London was commissioned to photograph a grave which was surmounted by a beautiful basket of flowers. To his consternation, within the handle appeared the facial lineaments of the deceased.

The earliest spirit photograph, as far as can be ascertained, dates from 1862, when an American photographer named Mumler, on developing a photograph of himself, discovered the likeness of a cousin who had been dead some dozen years previously. The case was investigated by Dr Mumler of Boston, who considered that many of the "spirit photographs" afterwards taken by Mumler were genuine, but that others were, in our modern phrase, indubitably faked. This was put down to Mumler's desire to cope with the unusual demand and satisfy his host of sitters.

Mumler, after twelve years' experience, writing to Mr James Burns, says:

"I have been investigated by the best photographers in America, and have their testimony in my favour, given under oath; I have been tried in a court of justice, and been honourably acquitted; and, lastly, I have the evidence of thousands of people who have had pictures taken, and recognised the likenesses of their spirit friends, many of whom never had a picture taken during life. I have been a humble instrument in the hands of the Almighty, to place a link in the great chain of evidence that binds the two worlds together. Flowers, birds, and animals have frequently appeared upon the plates and one lady was delighted to recognise by her side her faithful old black retriever."

Not till ten years later did a photographer named Hudson succeed, with the aid of a medium, in producing spirit pictures. The modus operandi appeared simple. The sitter was posed before the camera, and the picture was subsequently developed, when besides the sitter's own image there appeared another figure or figures usually draped, with the features blurred or only partly distinguishable. Usually these figures were recognised unhesitatingly by the sitters as portraits of deceased relatives or friends. Afterwards the practice of spirit photography received a rude shock. They were examined carefully by professional photographers, and some of them were found to bear clear marks of double exposure, the background in each case being visible through the dress of the sitter—a fatal defect in spirit photography. Moreover it was found that in some cases the medium had dressed up to play the rÔle of spirit. Whereupon several of those who had professed to recognise the "ghosts" now hastened to repudiate their recognition. But spirit photography was not to be quashed so easily. The experiments went on, and faces and figures appeared on the developed plate which seem to have considerably baffled the experts. Sir William Crookes now resolved to put the matter to a test by attempting to obtain a photograph of "Katie," the famous "control" of Miss Cook, the medium. The young lady gave a series of sittings in May 1874 at Sir William's house for the purpose. These sittings took place by electric light, no fewer than five cameras being simultaneously at work. The medium lay down on the floor behind a curtain, her face muffled in a shawl. When the materialisation was complete "Katie" would appear in the full light in front of the curtain:

"I frequently," writes Sir William Crookes, "drew the curtain on one side when Katie was standing near; and it was a common thing for the seven or eight of us in the laboratory to see Miss Cook and Katie at the same time, under the full blaze of the electric light. We did not on these occasions actually see the face of the medium, because of the shawl, but we saw her hands and feet; we saw her move uneasily under the influence of the intense light, and we heard her moan occasionally. I have one photograph of the two together, but Katie is seated in front of Miss Cook's head."

I have not seen these photographs of "Katie," but Mr Podmore has, and when comparing them with contemporary portraits of Miss Cook herself he is inclined to consider the likeness between the two sets unmistakable. "The apparently greater breadth of 'spirit' face," he writes, "may well be due to the fact that, whereas Miss Cook wore hanging ringlets, 'Katie's' hair is effectually concealed by the drapery, which in most cases comes down over the forehead, and falls in two thick folds on either side of the head, something like the headgear of a sphinx. Again, as Miss Cook, when photographed, wore her ordinary dress, which concealed her feet, the apparent difference in height on some occasions between herself and the spirit figure cannot be relied upon. One piece of evidence would, indeed, have been conclusive—that the ears of the spirit form should have appeared intact, for Miss Cook's ears were pierced for earrings. But the encircling drapery effectually concealed both the ears and the hair of the spirit 'Katie.'"

The evidence for photographs of invisible people which we sometimes hear abduced as adequate is surprisingly feeble. For instance, in a recent anonymous and weak book, said to be written by a member of the Society for Psychical Research, two photographs are reproduced which are said to have been obtained under what are considered crucial conditions; but the narrative itself at once suggests a simple trick on the part of the photographer—viz. the provision of backgrounds for sitters with vague human forms all ready depicted on them in sulphate of quinine.

Sir Oliver Lodge is of opinion that it is by no means physically impossible that some of these temporary semi-material accretions might be inadequate to appeal to our eyes, and yet be of a kind able to impress a photographic plate; but here he confesses that the evidence, to his mind, wholly breaks down, and he admits that he has never yet seen a satisfying instance of what is termed a spirit photograph; nor is it easy to imagine the kind of record apart from testimony which in such a case would be convincing, unless such photographs could be produced at will.

A conviction of fraud having entered the minds of the sceptically inclined, the exposure of a certain Parisian photographer, Buguet, shook the faith of the credulous. Buguet enjoyed in London an extraordinary success. Many leading people sat to him and obtained "spirit photographs," by them clearly recognisable, of their deceased relations. No less than forty out of one hundred and twenty photographs examined by Stainton Moses were pronounced by the sitters to be genuine likenesses of spirits, and baffled the scrutiny of the sceptics. Nevertheless Buguet was arrested and charged by the French Government for fraudulent production of spirit photographs. At his trial Buguet disconcerted the whole spiritualistic world by confessing, he said that the whole of his spirit photographs were obtained by means of double exposure. To begin with, he employed three or four assistants to play the part of ghost. Nevertheless, in spite of his confession, in spite of the trick apparatus confiscated by the police, at Buguet's trial witness after witness, people high in the social and professional world, came forward to testify that they had not been deceived, that the spirit photographs were genuine. They refused to doubt the evidence of their own eyesight. One M. Dessenon, a picture dealer, had obtained a spirit portrait of his wife; he had been instantly struck with the likeness, and had shown it to the lady's relatives, who exclaimed at once on its exactness. The judge asked Buguet for an explanation. The prisoner replied that it was pure chance. "I had," he said, "no photograph of Madame Dessenon." "But," cried the witness, "my children, like myself, thought the likeness perfect. When I showed them the picture, they cried, 'It is mamma!' I have seen all M. Buguet's properties and pictures, and there is nothing in the least like the picture I have obtained. I am convinced it is my wife." As a result, many spiritualists, including Stainton Moses and William Howitt, refused to consider the case one of fraud. They regarded Buguet as a genuine medium who had been bound to confess to imaginary trickery. Yet after this spirit photography as a profession has not flourished in this country. There is one professional who is responsible for many ghost pictures. But in his productions appear unmistakable signs of double exposures. You see the pattern of the carpet and the curtain of the study visible through the sitter's body and clothes. In one instance at all events, where the ghost represents a well-known statesman, the head has obviously been cut from the photograph and the contour draped to hide the cut edges. But the phenomena of spirit photography are abundant enough in private circles.

I have before me as I write a number of reputed spirit photographs obtained by private persons both with and without the aid of a professional medium. In one sent me by a gentleman resident at Finsbury Park, which is a very impressive specimen of its kind, the fact of a double exposure is obvious to the least experienced in dark-room matters. Notwithstanding, the photographer has apparently made a speciality of this kind of work.

"In my collection [he writes] of over two thousand specimens are portraits of Atlantean priests, who flourished about 12,000 years ago, Biblical patriarchs, poets, Royalties, clerics, scientists, literary men, etc., pioneer spiritualists, like Emma H. Britten, Luther Marsh, Wallace, and John Lamont. The latest additions are, I am happy to say, my kind old friend Mrs Glendinning, and a worthy quartette of earnest workers in Dr Younger, Mr Thomas Everitt, Mr C. Lacey, and David Duguid."

One of the most curious instances of a ghost photograph occurred in the summer of 1892. Six months previously a lady had taken a photograph of the library at D—— Hall. She kept the plate a long time before developing it, and when developed it showed the faint but clearly recognisable figure of a man sitting in a large arm-chair. A print from the photograph was obtained and shown, when the image was immediately recognised as the likeness of the late Lord D——, the owner of D—— Hall. What was more, it was ascertained that Lord D—— had actually been buried on the day the photograph was taken. A copy of the photograph was sent to Professor Barrett, who examined it and reported (1) that the image is too faint and blurred for any likeness to be substantiated; (2) that the plate had been exposed in the camera for an hour and the room left unguarded; (3) that actual experiments show that an appearance such as that on the plate could have been produced if a man—there were four men in the house—had sat in the chair for a few seconds during the exposure, moving his head and limbs the while.

Another ghost picture described by Mr Podmore was probably caused in a similar way. A chapel was photographed, and when the plate was developed a face was faintly seen in a panel of the woodwork, which the photographer recognised as a young acquaintance who had not long since met with a tragic death. "In fact," writes Mr Podmore, "when he told me the story and showed me the picture, I could easily see the faint but well-marked features of a handsome melancholy lad of eighteen. A colleague, however, to whom I showed the photograph without relating the story, at once identified the face as that of a woman of thirty. The outlines are in reality so indistinct as to leave ample room for the imagination to work on; and there is no reason to doubt that, as in the ghost of the library, the camera had merely preserved faint traces of some intruder who, during prolonged exposure, stood for a few seconds in front of it."

In spite of all the damaging exposÉs and these discouraging explanations many intelligent persons the world over will still go on believing in the genuineness of spirit photography. Let me give a few examples of their testimony. M. Reichel, to whom allusion has already been made, states that at one of Miller's sÉances in America, held on 29th October 1905, those present suddenly heard a great number of voices behind the curtain:

"Betsy told us that sometimes there are Egyptian women and sometimes Indians who come in a crowd to produce their phenomena. On October 29th and again on November 2nd I sent for a San Francisco photographer, Mr Edward Wyllie, to see what impression would be made on a photographic plate by the beings who appeared. Some remarkable pictures were taken by flashlight. Besides the fully materialised forms, there were shown on the photographs several spirits who could not be seen by the physical eyes.

"In one of the latter figures I instantly recognised an uncle of mine, whom I had made acquainted with spiritualism about twelve years previously, through the assistance of another medium."

A correspondent sends me an interesting account of investigating materialised spirits in daylight:

"Miss Fairlamb (afterwards Mrs Mellon) was the medium, and the photographs of 'Geordie' and others taken in the garden in broad daylight were quite successful. The conditions must have been most harmonious, as 'Geordie' afterwards, when twilight came on, walked about the lawn, and even ventured into the house, returning to the tent, which served as a cabinet, with an umbrella and hassock in his hands."

Dr Theodore Hausmann, one of the oldest physicians in Washington, U.S.A., has devoted many years to this particular phase of mediumship. He places himself before his camera in the study and photographs his spirit visitors, who have included his father, son, and President Lincoln. The opening paragraph in an article he wrote is as follows:—

"Grieving parents, the bereaved widow and mother, will only be too happy if they can see the pictures of those again who were so dear to their hearts, and whose image gradually will vanish if nothing is left to renew their memories."

There have been many touching letters from relatives of grateful thanks, who imagine themselves in this way to have received portraits of their dear ones who have passed away.

In a work which I have come across in which spiritualism is by no means supported Mr J. G. Raupert acknowledges:

"That as regards spirit photographs, he 'obtained many striking pictures of this character, under good test conditions, and attended by circumstances yielding unique and exceptionally valuable evidence.... The evidence in favour of some of these psychic pictures is as good as it is ever likely to be, and, respecting some of these obtained by the present writer, expert photographic authorities have expressed their verdict. Sir William Crookes has obtained them in his own house under personally imposed conditions, and many private experimenters in different parts of the world have been equally successful."

This from an avowed opponent is striking testimony to some kind of manifestation which is not, in intent, at least, fraudulent.