very unusual contents of a store-room at the top of the house, she was entirely at fault, until I purposely prompted her by leading questions. The next day I found out that she had enjoyed ample previous opportunities of information as to the points which she had described correctly; whilst it soon came to my knowledge that a most circumstantial narrative was current in Bristol (where I then resided) of her extraordinary success in discerning in the store-room the very objects which she had entirely failed to see. Here, then, was a marked instance of two sources of fallacy in narratives of this description: first, the disposition to attribute to occult' agencies what may be readily explained by natural causes; and second, the 'myth-making' tendency-far more general than is commonly supposed—which, as I have already shown you, builds up the most elaborate constructions of fiction upon the slenderest foundation of fact.

In my interviews with Alexis and Adolphe, also, both of whom were reputed to possess a very high degree of this power, I tested them as to the contents of my house, which they described in a vague and general way that would apply to almost any ordinary domicile. But both of them spoke of my drawingroom as having pictures on its walls, which was not then the fact; and neither of them, though pressed as to something very conspicuous which they could not help seeing, gave the least hint of the presence of an organ with gilt pipes. Their failure with me does not, of course, invalidate any real successes they may

have gained with others; but my previous experience had led me to entertain grave doubts as to the reality of the reputed successes; and these doubts were subsequently strengthened by the complete breakdown, under the persevering and sagacious enquiries prosecuted by Dr. Forbes, of a most notable case which excited great public interest at that time.

The wonderful performances of Miss Martineau's servant J., which she announced to the public in 1844, through the medium of the Athenæum, culminated in a detailed description-given by J. in the mesmeric sleep-of the particulars of the wreck of a vessel of which her cousin was one of the crew, as also of the previous loss of a boy overboard; with which particulars it was positively affirmed by Miss Martineau, and believed by many on her authority, that the girl could not possibly have been previously informed, as her aunt had only brought the account to the house. when the séance was nearly terminated. On being asked, says Miss M., two evenings afterwards, when again in the sleep, "whether she knew what she "related by seeing her aunt telling the people "below," J. replied "No; I saw the place and the "people themselves-like a vision." And Miss Martineau believed her.

46

My sceptical friend, Dr. Forbes, however, would not pin his faith to hers; and determined to institute, through a Medical friend on the spot, a more searching investigation than Miss Martineau had thought necessary. The result of this enquiry was to prove, unequivocally, that J.'s aunt had told the whole story

to her sister, in whose house Miss M. was residing, about three hours before the séance; and that, though J. was not then in the room, the circumstances were fully discussed in her presence before she was summoned to the mesmeric performance.--Thus not only was J. completely discredited as a seer; but the value of all testimony to such marvels was seriously lowered, when so honest and intelligent a witness as Harriet Martineau could be so completely led astray by her 'prepossession,' as to put forth statements as facts, which were at once upset by the careful enquiry which she ought to have made before committing herself to them.

It is the wise rule of our law, that no Evidence (save that of dying declarations) is admissible in Court, that is not capable of being tested by crossexamination; and no well-trained investigator will put forth a new discovery in Science, until he has verified it by 'putting it to the question' in every mode he can think of.

If, in the case I have just cited, the 'common sense' view had been taken from the beginning, the correspondence of J.'s circumstantial narrative with the actual facts of the case, would have been accepted as proving-not that she had received them in Mesmeric vision-but that she had learned them through some ordinary channel; and the truth of this conclusion would have at once become apparent, when the proper means were taken to verify it. The same

■ Illustrations of Modern Mesmerism, pp. 91–101.

ground should (I contend) be taken in regard to all the marvels of this class which rest on the testimony of believers only. For no one of them is better attested than that which I have just cited; and until the evidence in support of any case of clairvoyance can be shown to have been sifted in the same thorough manner, I maintain that it has no more claim on our acceptance, than has the specious 'opening' of a case in a Court of Law, before it has been subjected to the hostile scrutiny of the counsel on the other side.

TABLE-TURNING AND TABLE-TALKING.

I need not detain you long with the scientific discussion of the phenomena of Table-turning and Tabletalking; since no facts have been established in regard to them, which are not susceptible of a very simple explanation. A number of persons seat themselves round a table, and place their hands upon it, with a preconceived idea that the table will turn ; and after some time, it may be, during which the movement has been attentively waited for, the rotation. begins. If the parties retain their seats, the turning only takes place as far as the length of their arms allows, but not unfrequently they all rise, feeling themselves obliged (as they assert) to follow the table; and, from a walk, their pace may be accelerated to a run, until the table actually spins round so fast that they can no longer keep up with it. And since this happens, not merely without consciousness on the part of the performers that they are exercising any

H

force of their own, but for the most part under the full conviction that they do not ;-and, moreover, as tables thus move, which the performers declare themselves unable to move to the same extent by any voluntary effort;—it is not unnatural that they should conclude that some other force than their own Muscular action must have put it in motion.

But the man of science, whether Physicist or Physiologist, cannot rest content without adequate proof of this conclusion; and a test is very easily applied. You see here a little apparatus consisting of two pieces of board, two cedar pencils, two india-rubber bands, two pins, and a slender index-rod, which was devised by Faraday to ascertain whether the table ever moves round without a lateral pressure from the hands of the operators. For this 'indicator' is so constructed, that when the hands are placed upon it, instead of resting immediately on the table, any lateral pressure exerted by them makes the upper board roll upon the lower; and the slightest movement of this kind is so magnified by the leverage of the index, as to show itself by a very decided motion of its point in the opposite direction. By this simple test, anyone may experimentally satisfy himself that the table never goes round unless the index of the 'indicator' shows that lateral muscular pressure is being exerted in the direction of its movement; and, conversely, that when such lateral pressure, as shown by the indicator,' is being adequately exerted, the table moves round. The Physicist, therefore, has a right to assert, that, until a table shall be found to turn without lateral pressure of the hands laid upon