The Index to Professor Barrett's Reports enumerates between three and four hundred persons with whom experiments with the Divining Rod are described. A list of the names of "dowsers" is also given. This list includes the names of about seventy professional "dowsers," and of nearly as many amateur "dowsers." These figures show the extent to which the use of the rod prevails, and also the work which the preparation of the Reports involved. As a specimen of the kind of evidence presented by Professor Barrett from miscellaneous sources, the following may be quoted:--

"In the present Report numerous independent witnesses of unimpeachable integrity, and some with high scientific attainments, testify to the same cla.s.s of facts, viz.:--(1) The automatic and apparently irresistible motion of the twig in the hands often of a complete novice; and (2) that, when the forked twig does _not_ move in a person's hands, if the dowser takes one link of the twig, or even places his hand on the wrist of the insensitive person, the previously inert twig now turns vigorously and often breaks in two in the effort to resist its motion.

As regards (1), see the letter from the President of the Royal Geological Society of Cornwall on p. 219,[61] who states that the Clerk of his Parish Council, on finding the rod suddenly twist in his hands, called out--'It is alive, sir, it is alive!' Mr. Enys adds: 'This exactly describes the sensation when the rod moves.' ... Mr. Bennett, of Oxford, on p. 176, refers to the frantic motion and the ultimate breaking of the twig 'held firmly' in the dowser's hands.... As regards (2), see Mr. Morton's letter to _The Engineer_, given on p. 172; Mr.

Morton found the rod would not move in his hands, but when the late John Mullins, the dowser, 'laid his hands on my wrists and grasped them firmly, then the twig instantly began to turn, and continued turning till he removed his hands. He never touched the twig while it was in my hands.' Mr. Montague Price in his letter on p. 181 states: 'I held one side of the forked rod myself and the diviner the other, and when we came to water [alleged underground water] the strain was so great on my fingers I was obliged to ask him to stop. From the position of the rod it was almost impossible for him to produce the pressure, which increased with the strength of the stream.' ...

"The usual practice, after watching a dowser at work, is for some of the onlookers to try if the forked twig will move in their hands.

Generally speaking, one or more, out of perhaps ten or twelve persons, discover, to their astonishment, that the twig curls up in their hands--at the same places at which it did with the dowser. Here is such an experience. Mrs. Hollands writes to me as follows:--

"'DENE PARK, TONBRIDGE, _October_ 9, 1899.

"'In answer to your note of inquiry about the divining rod, the whole thing is rather a long story, but the practical result of the water dowser's visit was to find water which now supplies the house. One of my daughters found she had the strange power which moves the divining rod, and it works for her now quickly over any spring. It is most interesting, as you can feel the rod move if you take one side of it, and take one of her hands, she holding the other end of the rod--it struggles up, and would break off altogether if you did not allow it to move. My daughter has since found several springs on the estate, where we have sunk wells. They have stood us in very good stead these last dry seasons. MINNIE HOLLANDS.'

"A similar experience is given by Miss M. Craigie Halkett, who published some excellent photographs of a dowser at work in _Sketch_ for 23rd August 1899. Miss Halkett writes to me as follows:--

"LAURISTON, NEW ELTHAM, KENT, _September_ 8, 1899.

"The man depicted in the photographs is not a water-finder by profession. He is a tenant farmer residing at Catcolt, a village near Bridgwater, and merely exercises the art to oblige his neighbours. Several of the country people in this neighbourhood (Somerset) have the gift. It has never been known to fail. Personally I was rather sceptical on the subject, but was converted by the stick turning in my hands when standing over a spring. There were about six persons present at the time; all tried it, but it would turn for no one excepting the man in the picture and myself. I experienced a sort of tingling sensation in my arms and wrists, but otherwise was quite unaware when the forked stick began to turn, it seemed to go over so quickly. "'MAUDE CRAIGIE HALKETT.'

"Miss Halkett does not say how she knew she was 'standing over a spring' when the twig turned in her hands; this statement is very characteristic of many others that have reached me."[62]

Professor Barrett's views as to the source of the power which moves the rod are ent.i.tled to more attention than those of any one else. In a chapter on "Theoretical Conclusions" in the first of his two Reports, he says: "Few will dispute the proposition that the motion of the forked twig is due to unconscious muscular action." He then gives a summary of the causes which, he believes, determine that action. Among these he enumerates, impressions from without unconsciously made upon the dowser's mind from his own trained observation and practice, and from bystanders. He also believed that in some cases an impression appears to be gained through Thought-Transference. He did not, however, think this covered the whole ground. A peculiar pathological effect is produced on the dowser; but to what this is due can only be ascertained by persevering and unbia.s.sed investigation.

Professor Barrett's second Report contains a long and interesting discussion of this problem. His views had undergone some modification.

He adheres to his previous view that the "curious phenomena attending the _motion_ of the so-called divining rod are capable of explanation by causes known to science" (_e.g._ involuntary muscular action). But he has become more impressed with the view that the suggestion may arise "from some kind of transcendental discernment possessed by the dowser's subconscious self." And he further says: "For my own part, I am disposed to think that this cause, though less acceptable to science, will be found to be a truer explanation of the more striking successes of a good dowser." In conclusion Professor Barrett says still more definitely: "This subconscious perceptive power, commonly called 'clairvoyance,' may provisionally be taken as the explanation of those successes of the dowser which are inexplicable on any grounds at present known to science."[63]

FOOTNOTES:

[55] _Proceedings S.P.R._, vol. ii. pp. 79-107.

[56] Ibid., vol. xiii. (Part x.x.xII.), pp. 2-282, and vol. xv. (Part x.x.xVI.), pp. 130-383.

[57] _Proceedings S.P.R._, vol. xiii. pp. 145-148.

[58] _Proceedings S.P.R._, vol. xiii. pp. 88-89.

[59] _Proceedings S.P.R._, vol. xiii. pp. 89-90.

[60] _Proceedings S.P.R._, vol. xiii. p. 182.

[61] The pages in _this_ paragraph refer to the present Report (_i.e._ _Proceedings S.P.R._, vol. xv. pp. 130-383).

[62] _Proceedings S.P.R._, vol. xv. pp. 279-281.

[63] _Proceedings S.P.R._, vol. xv. p. 314. See also the whole discussion of which this page is the conclusion.

CHAPTER VIII

THOUGHT-TRANSFERENCE DRAWINGS

There is one, and perhaps only one phase of the great subject of Thought-Transference or Telepathy the manifestations of which can legitimately be included among physical phenomena. Involuntary drawing or scribbling is a phenomenon of very common occurrence. But when such an involuntary drawing turns out to be a more or less exact copy of a drawing which the involuntary draughtsman has never seen; and still further when it turns out that the original drawing has been drawn by another person with the deliberate purpose of impressing it on the mind of the involuntary draughtsman, the subject a.s.sumes an entirely new interest. This, however, is the history of those series of "Thought-Transference Drawings" which have been published by the Society for Psychical Research. They are scattered through several volumes of its publications. Through the kindness of the Council of that Society I am able to put before the reader the largest selection of these drawings which has appeared. The drawings are the results of several different groups of experimenters in different parts of the country; and the selection has been made from as many groups as possible. In all cases facsimiles of the original drawing and of the reproduction are given. The earlier series done under the auspices of a Committee of the Society do not represent successes picked out of a large number of failures, but include all the attempts made at the time. The number that can be considered total failures in any of the trials is exceedingly small. Any conceivable chance or coincidence is entirely inadequate to account for the similarity in the great majority of cases.

The "First Report on Thought-Reading" was written by Professor W. F.

Barrett, Mr. Gurney, and Mr. Myers, and was read at the first General Meeting of the Society on 17th July 1882. In order to ill.u.s.trate the then state of scientific opinion, the writers say: "The present state of scientific opinion throughout the world is not only hostile to any belief in the possibility of transmitting a single mental concept except through the ordinary channels of sensations, but, generally speaking, it is hostile even to any inquiry upon the matter. Every leading physiologist and psychologist down to the present time has relegated what, for want of a better term, has been called "Thought-Reading" to the limbo of explored fallacies."[64] A second Report by the same writers was read at a meeting of the Society in the same year. In this Report the first series of "Thought-Transference Drawings" was described.

The method of proceeding was as follows:--A. makes an outline sketch of a geometrical figure, or of something a little more elaborate. B. sees this sketch, and carrying it in his mind goes and stands behind C., who sits with a pencil and paper before him and draws the impression which arises in his mind. Precautions are taken against the conveyance of information by any ordinary means. Except in a few of the earliest trials no contact between any of the parties was permitted. B. and C.

are called respectively "transmitter" and "receiver."

In December 1882, Mr. Myers and Mr. Gurney paid a visit to Brighton to personally investigate some joint experiments of Mr. Douglas Blackburn and Mr. G. Albert Smith. Both Mr. Blackburn and Mr. Smith were then, or soon after became, members of the Society for Psychical Research. The experiments were made in Mr. Myers' and Mr. Gurney's own lodgings. The following plan, arranged in regard to some experiments made on 4th December, is thus described by Mr. Myers: "One of us completely out of sight of S. [Mr. Smith] drew some figure at random, the figure being of such a character that its shape could not be easily conveyed in words.... The figure, drawn by us, was then shown to B. [Mr. Blackburn]

for a few moments, S. being seated all the time with his back to us, and blindfolded, in a distant part of the same room, and subsequently in an adjoining room. B. looked at the figure drawn; then held S.'s hand for a while; then released it. After being released, S. (who remained blindfolded) drew the impression of a figure which he had received....

In no case was there the smallest possibility that S. could have seen the original figure; and in no case did B. touch S., even in the slightest manner, while the figure was being drawn."

The whole series of drawings done in this way, on that occasion, is given in the Report in the _S.P.R. Proceedings_. They were nine in number. We have selected two, Nos. 5 and 9.

No. 5 calls for no special remark.

[Ill.u.s.tration: NO. 5.

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION]

[Ill.u.s.tration: NO. 9.

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION]

When the reproduction of No. 9 was drawn, Mr. S. touched the spot to which the arrow points, and said: "There is something more there, but I cannot tell what it is."

In the experiments made subsequently to these, the conditions were still more stringent, and no contact whatever was allowed between Mr.

Blackburn and Mr. Smith; and it will be seen that striking and successful results were obtained.

A few weeks later, in January 1883, at the invitation of the Committee of the Society for Psychical Research, Mr. Blackburn and Mr. Smith came from Brighton, and a series of experiments was conducted at the Rooms the Society then occupied in Dean's Yard, Westminster. For the Report embodying the results of these experiments, Mr. Myers, Mr. Gurney, and Professor Barrett are specially responsible. Two drawings, Nos. 10 and 11, are selected from a series of twenty-two made on this occasion.

As to No. 10, Mr. S. had no idea that the original was not a geometrical diagram. Nor had he any clue given him as to the character of No. 11. He added the line marked _b_ some time after he had drawn the line marked _a_, saying that he saw "a line parallel to another somewhere."

The authors of this Report say: "It is almost needless to point out that in these observations so foreign to our common experience, it is indispensable to be minutely careful and conscientious in recording the exact conditions of each experiment." The reader is referred to the Report itself to show how this was carried out; and also to show how exhaustively every possibility was considered by means of which information could be conceived to be conveyed through any recognised channel.

[Ill.u.s.tration:

No. 10.

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION

No. 11.

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION