SPIRITUALISM.

Grey River Argus, 21 July 1922, Page 6

SPIRITUALISM.

FRENCH SCIENTIST’S INVESTIGATIONS. DO MEDIUMS MATERIALISE OBJECTS? A. cable from London on July 8 stated: —French scientists, after exhaustive investigations to ascertain whether ectoplasmic emanations appeared from a medium reported in the negative. A well known spiritualist, previously insisted that he had seen a living moving substance emanate from the body of the medium, and assume a human form, and then vanish. A noted French scientist, Professor Richet, the first authority on psychology (empirical) in Europe, had recently something interesting on this subject to say, following on articles by Sir O. Lodge and Lord Riddell. Richet’s book “Traite de Aletapsychique,” is creating a sensation in scientific circles, and furnished us with some further evidence concerning his startling experiments. Professor Richet occupies the Chair of Physiology in the University of Paris, and is a member of the Institute of France. He is a tall, slender man. with steady hazel eyes and exceptional charm of manner. By temperament ami training a rationalist, he belongs also to the world; at one moment he quotes La Rochefoucauld and tho next he refers to the researches of Sir William Crookes. As reg: rds his investigations of the occult, he says that he refuses to accept any manifestation which is supported by less convincing evidence than that required by a Judge before pronouncing the death sentence.

Professor Richet says: The psychic phenomena with which I am concerned may be divided into subjective and objective. Subjective phenomena belong to the realm of lucidity. They r.re phenomena of the human mind, and are exclusively intellectual. Telepathy and clairvoyance are examples. Objective phenomena, on the other hand, are manifestations which anyone can see, hear, or feel. That is to say, if the same thing is visible to all eyes, or is audible to everyone, or can be felt, it is objective, whether it happens to be a light, a sound, or a movement, or the production of a substance. If 1 can see a thing and someone else cannot see it, then it is a subjective phenomenon. Faith does not enter into my consideration: I am a rationalist. My work is confined to the phenomena of observ: tion nr MATTER AND MIND. Metaphysical happenings seem the product of unknown but intelligent forces. Those phenomena include the astonishing vagaries of the sub-consci-ous mind. Hitherto science has been devoted to the study and analysis of forces which are blind. Scientists have devoted their attention to the observation of cause and effect in things which in themselves are without consciousness —without personality or will. Mercury is dilated by heat without its possess ing the power of understanding. TELEPATHY. On the other hand, tho motapsychieal forces which produce telepathy, the movement of an object without contact, apparitions, and certain modi: nical ami luminous phenomena seem not to be so lind ami unconscious. On the contrary, they appear to possess an intelligent element In subjective metapsychics one notes occurrences which seem tn indicate a mysterious faculty of understanding, a form of lucidity which is outside our physiology of sensations. This un known faculty I call cryptesthesia, because it is a form of sensibility the explanation for which escapes us. As 1 I have said, it is purely mental, non ■ material; it is within us. Objective met- psychics are material and external. 1 will give you examples. MURDER KNOWN TO MEDIUM. The assassination of Queen Draga of Serbia was formally alluded to at the very instant of its occurrence by a medium in Paris. The medium in question was without any ration: 1 knoAvledge of the crime. That was a ease of subjective metapsychics. But if a medium, pinioned at every point holds her hands 18 inches below a heavy table and the table rises three or four feet in the air, without contact of any sort, we have an objective phenomenon. While there is not one person, rough ly speaking, in 20/100 with subjective lucidity, there is certainly not one in 20,000,000 capable of objective niaui legations. There have been few indeed of the latter variety to my knowledge: Home, Florence Cook, Mme. d’Esper anee, Miss Golligher, and Kluski. The United States, though their people are of tho positive type, are, curiously enough infested with charlatans. There is in America an industry, almost, a school, of fraud in connection with spiritism. Nevertheless, the best subjective medium of the day, and perhaps of all time, is an American. Mrs. Piper. The powers of a medium are a gift of nature. They can never be acquired, :nd rarely developed. Sometimes they increase or diminish slightly it is true; but they are more often stationary. The temperament of a medium is not merely tormented; it is tormenting. Such persons are not, however, abnormal in their manner, appearance, or conversation. But a great medium contains what can be described as a person within a person. REM ARK A 81. E EXPERIENCES. A remarkable experience I once had took place in the presence of Sir Oliver Lodge, Frederic Mvers, and Ochorowicz. In a half-light I firmly held the hands of the medium, Paladino, her left hand in my right and her right hand in my left. While 1 ' was in that position a third hand touched my face, pulled my hair, and struck me on the shoulder. Aly three colleagues t heard the blow I received. It was a ■

manifestation of what I have called ectoplasm. When I hold the hands of a medium, and an object—say a melon weighing Gib—is moved from the sideboard to the table, a distance of more than a y: rd, it is called telekinesia. Cryptosthesia occurs when, for instance, a medium tells a man she has never met or heard of before the names of members of his family, living or dead. Was it a case of cryptesthesia xvhen a cobbler in America completed Dickens’s unfinished novel, “Edwin Drood,” in | the manner and style of the author? The human brain is like a town in which all sorts of activities are going on in the first hours of the night. A man walking down the street of such a town sees only a few lights or objects at a time. So with the conscious mind, which takes cognisance of only a very limited number of things, although in: ny other things are occupying the subconscious mind. We have an example of the subconscious and conscious minds when a medium actively carries on a conversation while writing about something else. A medium is not always, I may explain, in a hypnotised, nor even in a partly-hypnotised, st: to during a seance. Quite the contrary very often; though for the medium to attach his (or her) subconsciousness to the personality of someone else involves his being in an abnormal condition while the experience is in progress. METAPSYCHICAL PHENOMENA. It is an entire fallacy to imagine hat the occultists of bygone times excelled those of to-day in any way. We know more of such things th: n ‘hey knew—infinitely more. Moreover n my view, wi' know that our dis’overies refer to natural phenomena. There is no magic or anything of that ort. There is no mysticism in it. There are no spirits. One might as well believe with the early inhabiants of the world that when there is an eclipse of the moon a dragon is ■•ating it! Life is, of course, nude up if things which we do not understand, riiere are habitual and “unhabitual ” things. For one material thing to attract another material thing to it is ‘unhabitual.” It would surprise us to see a pear attract a piece of cardboard. Vet a magnet attracts a piece of steel. The average man has no idea why this .s so, but he is accustomed to the phelomenon, and therefore it is “habitual.” Again, an apple fills from a tree. Why it should fall few can explain. But it is a commonplace thing for the apple to do; it is therefore habitual. We are accustomed to it. Aletapsychical phenomena are “unhabitual” for the most part, and for this reason they are amazing. Never * theless they are a manifestation of nature, like the apple f: Hing from the tree, or the nmgnet attracting a needle. La Rochefoucauld said: “Whatever discoveries we make in the domain of amour propre, we always find unknown lands.” It is the same with science. For my part, I am as severe in accepting evidence as a judge who is trying a man for his life. I cannot accept as proved that we have a life hereafter; nor do I attach credit to the conversations of mediums with the spirits of the dead. There is no evidence whatever to support either conclusion. But I consider as certain the existence of (1) cryptesthesia or lucidity, or telepathy, and of (2) certain materialisations — very rare —notable of the medium Ensapia Paladino, who produced a hand which I held for 29 seconds. Mme Curie and two others persons of great selenitic importance were present at tho time,