Mr. Smith had no idea that the original was not a geometrical diagram.

He added line _b_ some time after he had drawn line _a_, "seeing a line parallel to another somewhere."]

[Ill.u.s.tration:

No. 2.

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION

Mr. Guthrie and Miss E. no contact.]

An entirely different group of experimenters set to work in Liverpool.

Mr. Malcolm Guthrie, J.P., was a partner in one of the large drapery establishments, and Mr. James Birchall was the Hon. Secretary of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Liverpool. Their interest was aroused in the subject of Thought-Transference, and they carried out a very large number of experiments with some of the young ladies employed in Mr. Guthrie's establishment, who, "amusing themselves after business hours, found that certain of their number, when blindfolded, were able to name very correctly figures selected from an almanack suspended on the wall of the room, when their companions having hold of their hands, fixed their attention on some particular day of the month." This led to serious experiments, including about one hundred and fifty Thought-Transference Drawings. The conditions were carefully guarded, and in the majority of cases no contact was permitted. There were many failures, but a large number of successes. a.s.sistance as "transmitter"

was also given by Mr. F. S. Hughes, a member of the Society for Psychical Research. In a report by Mr. Guthrie, published in the _Proceedings_ of the Society, sixteen of these drawings are given. NOS.

2 and 15 are selected. In neither of these was any contact between "transmitter" and "receiver" permitted. In NO. 2, Mr. Guthrie was "transmitter" and Miss Edwards "receiver." In NO. 15, Mr. F. S. Hughes was "transmitter" and Miss Edwards "receiver." With regard to the second, Miss Edwards said, "It is like a mask at a pantomime," and immediately drew the reproduction.

[Ill.u.s.tration:

No. 15.

ORIGINAL Mr. Hughes and Miss E. no contact.

REPRODUCTION Miss E. said, "It is like a mask at a pantomime,"

and immediately drew as above.]

Mr. Malcolm remarks in his Report: "The drawings must speak for themselves. The princ.i.p.al facts to be borne in mind are that they have been executed through the instrumentality as agents [transmitters] of persons of unquestioned probity, and that the responsibility for them is spread over a considerable group of such persons, while the conditions to be observed were so simple--for they amounted really to nothing more than taking care that the original should not be seen by the subject [receiver]--that it is extremely difficult to suppose them to have been eluded."

Mr. Guthrie, having satisfied himself as to the reality of the phenomena of Thought-Transference, as manifested by the drawings, and in other ways, endeavoured to interest the scientific men of Liverpool. He naturally appealed among others to Sir Oliver Lodge, who was then Professor of Physics in University College, Liverpool. He accepted the invitation, and subsequently gave "An Account of Some Experiments in Thought-Transference" to the Society for Psychical Research, of which he was already an unofficial member, and which account is published in the Society's _Proceedings_.

The Report commences with a tribute, "since it bears on the questions of responsibility and genuineness," to the important position Mr. Guthrie held in Liverpool, as an active member of the governing bodies of several public inst.i.tutions, including the University College. Sir Oliver Lodge then says:--

"After Mr. Guthrie had laboriously carried out a long series of experiments ... he set about endeavouring to convince such students of science as he could lay his hands upon in Liverpool; and with this object he appealed to me, among others, to come and witness, and within limits modify, the experiments in such a way as would satisfy me of their genuineness and perfect good faith. Yielding to his entreaty, I consented, and have been, I suppose, at some dozen sittings, at first simply looking on so as to grasp the phenomena, but afterwards taking charge of the experiments.... In this way I had every opportunity of examining and varying the minute conditions of the phenomena, so as to satisfy myself of their genuine and objective character, in the same way as one is accustomed to satisfy oneself as to the truth and genuineness of any ordinary physical fact.

"I did not feel at liberty to modify the experiments very largely, in other words to try essentially new ones.... I only regarded it as my business to satisfy myself as to the genuineness and authenticity of the phenomena already described by Mr. Guthrie. If I had merely witnessed facts as a pa.s.sive spectator I should most certainly not publicly report upon them. So long as one is bound to accept imposed conditions and merely witness what goes on, I have no confidence in my own penetration, and am perfectly sure that a conjurer could impose upon me, possibly even to the extent of making me think that he was not imposing on me; but when one has the control of the circ.u.mstances, can change them at will, and arrange one's own experiments, one gradually acquires a belief in the phenomena observed quite comparable to that induced by the repet.i.tion of ordinary physical experiments."

Sir Oliver Lodge then describes in detail the method of procedure, in the course of which he says:--

"We have many times succeeded with agents ['transmitters'] quite disconnected with the percipient ['receiver'] in ordinary life and sometimes complete strangers to them. Mr. Birchall, the headmaster of the Birkdale Industrial School, frequently acted; and the house physician at the Eye and Ear Hospital, Dr. Shears, had a successful experiment, acting alone, on his first and only visit. All suspicion of a pre-arranged code is thus rendered impossible even to outsiders who are unable to witness the obvious fairness of all the experiments."

Sir Oliver Lodge then gives the details of twenty-seven experiments.

From these four are selected. Descriptions, in Sir O. Lodge's own words, are condensed.

(1) "Mr. Birchall, agent--Miss R, percipient, holding hands. No one else present except myself. A drawing of a Union Jack pattern. As usual in drawing experiments, Miss R. remained silent for perhaps a minute; then she said, 'Now I am ready.' I hid the object; she took off the handkerchief and proceeded to draw on paper placed ready in front of her. She this time drew all the lines of the figure except the horizontal middle one. She was obviously much tempted to draw this, and indeed began it two or three times faintly, but ultimately said, 'No, I'm not sure,' and stopped."

[Ill.u.s.tration:

No. 1.

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION]

(2) "Double object. I arranged the double object between Miss R----d and Miss E., who happened to be sitting nearly facing one another. Miss R----d and Miss E. both acting as agents. The drawing was a square on one side of the paper, and a cross on the other. Miss R----d looked at the side with the square on it, Miss E. looked at the side with the cross. Neither knew what the other was looking at--nor did the percipient know that anything unusual was being tried. There was no contact. Very soon, Miss R. (percipient) said, 'I see things moving about.... I seem to see two things.... I see first one up there and then one down there.... I can't see either distinctly.' 'Well, anyhow, draw what you have seen.' She took off the bandage and drew first a square, and then said, 'Then there was the other thing as well, ... afterwards they seemed to go into one,' and she drew a cross inside the square from corner to corner, adding afterwards, 'I don't know what made me put it inside.'"

[Ill.u.s.tration:

No. 2.

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION]

[Ill.u.s.tration:

No. 3.

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION]

(3) "Object--a drawing of the outline of a flag. Miss R. as percipient, in contact with Miss E. as agent. Very quickly Miss R. said, 'It's a little flag.' And when asked to draw, she drew it fairly well but perverted. I showed her the flag (as usual after a success), and then took it away to the drawing place to fetch something else. I made another drawing, but instead of bringing it I brought the flag back again and set it up in the same place as before, but inverted. There was no contact this time. Miss R----d and Miss E. were acting as agents.

After some time Miss R. said, 'No, I cant see anything this time. I still see that flag.... The flag keeps bothering me.... I shan't do it this time.' Presently I said, 'Well, draw what you saw anyway.' She said, 'I only saw the same flag, but perhaps it had a cross on it.' So she drew a flag in the same position as before, but added a cross to it."

(4) "Object--a teapot cut out of silver paper. Present--Dr. Herdman, Miss R----d, and Miss R. Miss E. percipient. Miss R. holding percipient's hands, but all thinking of the object. Told nothing. She said, 'Something light.... No colour.... Looks like a duck.... Like a silver duck.... Something oval.... Head at one end and tail at the other.' ... The object being rather large, was then moved further back, so that it might be more easily grasped by the agents as a whole, but percipient persisted that it was like a duck. On being told to unbandage and draw, she drew a rude and perverted copy of the teapot, but didn't know what it was unless it was a duck. Dr. Herdman then explained that he had been thinking all the time how like a duck the original teapot was, and in fact had been thinking more of ducks than teapots."

[Ill.u.s.tration: No. 4.

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION]

In the autumn of 1891 Sir Oliver Lodge was staying for a fortnight in the house of Herr von Lyro at Portschach am See, Carinthia. While there he found that the two adult daughters of his host were adepts in the so-called "willing game." The speed and accuracy with which the willed action was performed left little doubt in his mind that there was some genuine thought-transference power. He obtained permission to make a series of test experiments, the two sisters acting as agent and percipient alternately. He hoped gradually to secure the phenomena without contact of any kind. But unfortunately contact seemed essential, though of the slightest description, for instance through the backs of the knuckles. Sir Oliver Lodge says: "It was interesting and new to me to see how clearly the effect seemed to depend on contact, and how abruptly it ceased when contact was broken. While guessing through a pack of cards, for instance, rapidly and continuously, I sometimes allowed contact, and sometimes stopped it; and the guesses changed, from frequently correct to quite wild, directly the knuckles or finger tips, or any part of the skin of the two hands ceased to touch. It was almost like breaking an electric circuit."

As Sir Oliver Lodge remarks, it is obvious how strongly this suggests the idea of a code, and that therefore this flaw prevents these experiments from having any value as tests, or as establishing _de novo_ the existence of the genuine power. But apart from the moral conviction that unfair practices were extremely unlikely, Sir Oliver Lodge says that there was a sufficient amount of internal evidence derived from the facts themselves to satisfy him that no code was used. As examples, two from a series of twelve drawings are given.

[Ill.u.s.tration:

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION]

[Ill.u.s.tration:

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTIONS]

In 1894, Mr. Henry G. Rawson, barrister-at-law, made a long and interesting series of experiments in Thought-Transference, a Report of which was published in vol. xi. of the _Proceedings_ of the Society for Psychical Research. The Report includes fifteen originals and reproductions of drawings. Two sisters, Mrs. L. and Mrs. B., were the operators; and on the two evenings when the two series of drawings were executed, from which the accompanying selections are made, Mr. Rawson was the only other person present. On both occasions, Mrs. L. sat on a chair near the fire, Mrs. R. sat at a table many feet off, with her back to Mrs. L., and Mr. Rawson stood or sat where he could see both ladies.

[Ill.u.s.tration: 5

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION]

[Ill.u.s.tration: 6

ORIGINAL REPRODUCTION]

Nos. 5 and 6 of the first series are here reproduced.

The following selection is from the second series. Mr. Rawson says respecting it: "Mrs. L. began drawing within ten to fifteen seconds, and presently said, 'I am drawing something I can see.' The clock was in front of her on the mantelpiece." It would seem as though the idea of a clock was thought-transferred at once; but that the working out of the idea in the mind was modified by what the percipient happened to see before her.