The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1895-07-18

inns nature, we must necessarily resort
10 the hypothesis of 'hitherto undiscoy-
ered force in nature" and declare that a
new ana most promising field has been
opened up for scientific investigation.
Have we any certain proof that there
nave been phenomena of this nature?
Inc experiments of DR.. Luys at the hos.
pltal OF Nancy seemed to prove the GER
talnty of their existence till Ernest Hart
made the whole affair quite ludicrous by
proving that Luys himself had been
duped by. clever subjects who had been
making themselves Interesting"
Lombroso reported that he had made a
subject write music and speak German
though he knew neither. Yet, according
to Donate, this very subject has stated
that he was quite familiar with both.
Many like instances could be given of the
errors into which men of high scientific
attachments have been led. The Society
for Physical Research reports that in
stances of thought transference have been
witnessed by its members in which all
were agreed that there was no possibility
of fraud. The value of this opinion must
be determined in the light of the fact that
for two years this society was chiefly
occupied in studying thought transference
as practiced by a set of girls, and for two
years they We're successfully imposed
upon. When at last the fraud was de-
tected certain members were disposed to
regard this deceit as an afterthought that
had engrafted itself upon genuine phe-
nomenon." When two years are required
to detect one fraud, and its detection
shows the length to which some are will
ing to go to sustain a preconceived opin-
80, I,,t hat oil
there may be some mistake in the an
nouncement that other cases were genu-
inc.
1t is we'll known that the feats of the
professional mind reader" are usually
only clever tricks of muscle reading
that almost anyone may impose upon a
marvel-loving public. The celebrated
feats of Bishop and Cumberland l have
often repeated with friends, who could
not detect how they were done.
Not till there is at least one instance
of Thought transference' or mind read
ing" that is above all suspicion of fraud
on the part of the operators, and of err
rors and self-deception on the part of the
observers, is there to be found in these
practices any confirmation of the view
that the phenomena of hypnotism are to
be ascribed to the possession of unique
powers by the hypnotist.
The purpose of the present paper is to
describe certain phenomena of hypnotism
that arose under somewhat peculiar cir
cumstances, and to further relate how
they were reproduced under conditions,
such that, Judging by some of the theories
already noticed, we would deem them
impossible. This account is given in
hopes that it may throw some light upon
the problem as presented in Mr.. Cur
ncy's criticism.
In the September QS92) number of the
Review of Reviews Mr.. Stead described a
performance given by Phyllis Bently be-
fore number of European monarchs.
Ihls performance, we are told by the
editor, touches one phase of that vaguely
apprehcnded psychic force which begins
to manifest itself in so many suggestive
ways to the aroused spirit of inquiry" 1t
is quite evident that Mr.. Stead and Mr.
Shaw had no idea that they were eXtoll
ing the cleverness of an impOstOr. Such
was really the case. Yet, | am disposed
to think that their estimate of the value
OF this performance was correct: When
rightly understood it does throw light
upon some obscure mental processes.
My attention was first directed to this
subject by Witnessing a performance al
most identical with that described by
MIR. Stead. For some years one calling
herself Annie Abbott. the Georgia Mag
net has attracted considerable notice in
America, and has also gained some nOtO-
flety IN Europe as is shown by the fol-