Part 35 (2/2)

Mr. Podmore explains that only two candles and the fire gave light on one occasion, and that 'possibly' Home's hands were protected by some 'non-conducting substance.' He does not explain how this substance was put on Lord Crawford's hands, nor tell us what this valuable substance may be.

None is known to science, though it seems to be known to Fijians, Tongans, Klings, and Bulgarians, who walk through fire unhurt.

It is not necessary to believe Sir W. Crookes's a.s.sertions that he saw Home perform the fire-tricks, for we can fall back on the lack of light (only two candles and the fire-light), as also on the law of hallucination caused by excitement. But it _is_ necessary to believe this distinguished authority's statement about his ignorance of 'some non-conducting substance:'

'Schoolboys' books and mediaeval tales describe how this can be done with alum and other ingredients. It is possible that the skin may be so hardened and thickened by such preparations that superficial charring might take place without the pain becoming great; but the surface of the skin would certainly suffer severely. After Home had recovered from the trance, I examined his hand with care to see if there were any signs of burning or of previous preparation. I could detect no trace or injury to the skin, which was soft and delicate, like a woman's. Neither were there signs of any preparation having been previously applied. I have often seen conjurers and others handle red-hot coals and iron, but there were always palpable signs of burning.'[11]

In September 1897 a crew of pa.s.sengers went from New Zealand to see the Fijian rites, which, as reported in the 'Fiji Times,' corresponded exactly with the description published by Mr. Basil Thomson, himself a witness.

The interesting point, historically, is the combination in Home of all the _repertoire_ of the possessed men in Iamblichus. We certainly cannot get rid of the fire-trick by aid of a hypothetical 'non-conducting substance.'

Till the 'substance' is tested experimentally it is not a _vera causa_. We might as well say 'spirits' at once. Both that 'substance' and those 'spirits' are equally 'in the air.' Yet Mr. Podmore's 'explanations' (not satisfactory to himself) are conceived so thoroughly in the spirit of popular science--one of them casually discovering a new psychological law, a second contradicting the facts it seeks to account for, a third generously inventing an unknown substance--that they ought to be welcomed by reviewers and lecturers.

It seems wiser to admit our ignorance and suspend our belief.

Here closes the futile chapter of explanations. Fraud is a _vera causa_, but an hypothesis difficult of application when it is admitted that the effects could not be caused by ordinary mechanical means. Hallucination, through excitement, is a _vera causa_, but its remarkable uniformity, as described by witnesses from different lands and ages, knowing nothing of each other, makes us hesitate to accept a sweeping hypothesis of hallucination. The case for it is not confirmed, when we have the same reports from witnesses certainly not excited.

This extraordinary bundle, then, of reports, practically identical, of facts paralysing to belief, this bundle made up of statements from so many ages and countries, can only be 'filed for reference.' But it is manifest that any savage who shared the experiences of Sir W. Crookes, Lord Crawford, Mr. Hamilton Ade, M. Robert de St. Victor at Cideville, and Policeman Higgs at Worksop, would believe that a spirit might tenant a stick or stone--so believing he would be a Fetis.h.i.+st. Thus even of Fetis.h.i.+sm the probable origin is in a region of which we know nothing--the _X_ region.

[Footnote 1: A sketch of the history will be found in the author's _c.o.c.k Lane and Common Sense_.]

[Footnote 2: The best source is his article on 'Poltergeists.'

_Proceedings_ xi. 45-116. See, too, his 'Poltergeists' in _Studies in Psychical Research_.]

[Footnote 3: _Studies in Psychical Research_, p. 140.]

[Footnote 4: See Preface to this edition for correction.]

[Footnote 5: _Proceedings_, S.P.R. vii. 383-394.]

[Footnote 6: See Sir W. Crookes's _Researches in Spiritualism_.]

[Footnote 7: Mr. Ade has given me this information. He recorded the circ.u.mstances in his Diary at the time.]

[Footnote 8: _Report of Dialectical Society_, p. 209.]

[Footnote 9: See Porphyry, in Parthey's edition (Berlin, 1857), iii. 4.]

[Footnote 10: _Bulletin de la Societe de Biologie_, 1880, p. 399.]

[Footnote 11: Crookes, _Proceedings_, ix. 308.]

APPENDIX C

_CRYSTAL-GAZING_

Since the chapter on crystal-gazing was in type, a work by Dr. Pierre Janet has appeared, styled 'Les Nevroses et les Idees Fixes.'[1] It contains a chapter on crystal-gazing. The opinion of Dr. Janet, as that of a savant familiar, at the Salpetriere, with 'neurotic' visionaries, cannot but be interesting. Unluckily, the essay must be regarded as seriously impaired in value by Dr. Janet's singular treatment of his subject. Nothing is more necessary in these researches than accuracy of statement. Now, Dr. Janet has taken a set of experiences, or experiments, of Miss X.'s from that lady's interesting essay, already cited; has attributed them, not to Miss X., but to various people--for example, to _une jeune fille, une pauvre voyante, une personne un peu mystique_; has altered the facts in the spirit of romance; and has triumphantly given that explanation, revival of memory, which was a.s.signed by Miss X.

herself.

Throughout his paper Dr. Janet appears as the calm man of science p.r.o.nouncing judgment on the visionary vagaries of 'haunted' young girls and disappointed seeresses. No such persons were concerned; no such hauntings, supposed premonitions, or 'disillusions' occurred; the romantic and 'marvellous' circ.u.mstances are mythopoeic accretions due to Dr.

<script>