New-York tribune., 1905-07-30

--,ses which characserized either a narrativ,
- tss Use of names. When his father was srr-
-,s.s 70 be the "communicatcr.'' an aIlusion was
-..se 70 cane On which that person had carves
x,s initials Professor Hysiop says that a walk
- s,sck had been presented TO his father ana a.
- +. gold plate on which the initials were ~
-s,,Siv engraved. hut that his father never ry,+
80 letters on hat or any other cane Occa-
,,o,sI references were made IN the Piper mes
.oqes 20 Professor Hyslcp's stepmather. whose
-orve was Margaret. and who in life was a,U,avs
lied Maggie" Mrs Piper once sneIIea -
aAr-s-u-n-i-e" and thereafter invariably r,a5a q.
a-Iauuie' one communication recalled a rnn-
.wav In which a wagon was Injured ar,e--
ard being repaired with "a bit Of harness" 7,
vras asserted that the fright which led 70 the
accident was caused by a dog In the true YER
eion OF the case supplied by Professor Hyslop
ne vehicle was a buggy. # was mended with
rope and the horse was scared by goat hitched
% 4 small wagon and driven by a boy
When Professor Hyslop comes to consider the
method whereby all Of these revelatious-sucb
IS they were-were made. he finds himself linn
ted TO three possible explanations one is n re-
eort 70 s1-reptitious means Of various kinds.
which for convenience may be summed I'D under
have p-actsed trickery that il would be natural
. inaputs il 20 Mrs Piper. too. were it not that
some Of the tests were so devised as apparently
q make It impracticable. Again. Dr. Hocgson
Who has known her Tor many years and who IS
more 1euatrating than the average detective. is
convinced or her honesty. Professor William
lanes who GLIs The chair Of psychology at Har-
ard h1s also satisfied himself that she is "a
ubite b-1 55ird''-a rare exception 10 the aImost
-rirers1I ---e- The arguments for two other
5vpot1eses are then carefully reviewed. The
-ouon -hat the Information embodied in the
autouz-- writings Was evoked by telepathy
<-en the minds Of living persons does not appeal
strongly 20 the author. Hence he feels obliged
70 adopt The alternative proposition, which is
-bat -Le --rEe-satious were exactly what they
r7-Dor-ez % be-taIks with -'discarnate,' or dis
embodied spirits. Finding evidence here TO con-
vince him -f The reality OF the future life he
proceeds 20 deliver q lecture on the wholesome
influence which such q belief ought 10 exert on
popular morality
50 -a-zzd-a are Professor Hyslop's motives,
and 50 5-srasslo1ate and frank is he in the
presentation -f -eztlmony which apparently tells
against L-1- that K seems ungracious 10 dissent
from his COLA ---s-0Es Nevertheless some Of his
readers wlI DO so, regarding the teiepathic
hypothesis the more acceptable OF the two. The
nature and -l1litaticrs Of telepathy are still so
snlpertec--y Understood that Il would be ex-
t-ereIy 1-5ull-ious TO assert with emphasis that
il offers The only key 70 Che mysterious phe-
-c-a-a here discussed On the other hand. the
imperfect knowledge concerning it which IS at
present possessed hardly justifies summary re-
je---5u u IT, = choice is offered between two
widely different theories. To some minds the
a-st VIII oEe- The greatest appearance Of credi-
l---y, while 10 others the second viii seem the
more probable, and il IS not unlikely that among
,l-ze 10 whom the -elepathic theory is the more
-l-r-----g VIII be found as firm believers in The
Immortality of The soul as the ex-professor Of
logic e Columbia University Perhaps the
wisest course 70 pursue, therefore, relative to
The chief questions raised by his book, would be
10 refrain from q positive decision until psychol-
cg.sts have Investigated telepathy more thor
Cugh-y thar they have done hitherto.