LUCIDITY OR CLAIRVOYANCE.
While there is doubtless a recognized standard of normal perception, yet
the acuteness with which sensations are perceived by different
individuals, even in ordinary health, passes through a wide scale of
variation, both above and below this standard. The difference in the
ability to see and recognize natural objects, signs, and indications,
between the ordinary city denizen and, for instance, the American Indian
or the white frontiersman, hunter, or scout, is something marvellous.
So, also, regarding the power to distinguish colors. One person may not be
able to distinguish even the simple or primary colors, as, for example,
red from blue or green, while the weavers of Central or Eastern Asia
distinguish with certainty two hundred or three hundred shades which are
entirely undistinguishable to ordinary Western eyes.
So of sound. One ear can hardly be said to make any distinction whatever
regarding pitch, while to another the slightest variation is perfectly
perceptible. Some even do not hear at all sounds above or below a certain
pitch; some persons of ordinary hearing within a certain range of pitch,
nevertheless, have never heard the song of the canary bird, and perhaps
have lived through a large portion of their lives without even knowing
that it was a song-bird at all. Its song was above the range of their
hearing. Some never hear the sound of the piccolo, or octave flute, while
others miss entirely the lowest notes of the organ.
There is the same great difference in perception by touch, taste, and
smell. In certain conditions of disease, accompanied by great depression
of the vital forces, this deviation from normal perception is greatly
increased. I have had a patient who presented the following
briefly-outlined phenomena:—
After a long illness, during which other interesting psychical phenomena
were manifested, as convalescence progressed, I had occasion to notice
instances of supernormal perception, and to test it I made use of the
following expedient: Taking an old-fashioned copper cent, I carefully
enveloped it in a piece of ordinary tissue paper. This was then covered
by another and then another, until the coin had acquired six complete
envelopes of the paper, and formed a little flat parcel, easily held in
the palm of my hand.
Taking this with me, I visited my patient. She was lying upon a sofa, and
as I entered the room I took a chair and sat leisurely down beside her,
having the little package close in the palm of my right hand. I took her
right hand in mine in such a manner that the little package was between
our hands in close contact with her palm as well as my own. I remarked
upon the weather and commenced the routine duty of feeling her pulse with
my left hand. A minute or two was then passed in banter and conversation,
designed to thoroughly engage her attention, when all at once she
commenced to wipe her mouth with her handkerchief and to spit and sputter
with her tongue and lips, as if to rid herself of some offensive taste or
substance. She then looked up suspiciously at me and said:
“I wonder what you are doing with me now.”
Then suddenly pulling her hand away from mine she exclaimed:
“I know what it is; you have put a nasty piece of copper in my hand.”
Through all these coverings the coppery emanation from the coin had
penetrated her system, reached her tongue, and was perceptible to her
supernormal taste.
This patient could distinguish with absolute certainty “mesmerized” water
from that which had not been so treated; my finger, also, pointed at her
even at a distance and when her back was turned to me caused convulsive
action, and the same result followed when the experiment was made through
a closed door, and when she did not suspect that I was in the
neighborhood.
It will be seen, then, how marvellously the action of certain senses may
be exalted by long and careful training on the one hand, and suddenly by
disease on the other. We have seen, moreover, how some persons known as
sensitives are able to receive impressions by thought-transference so as
to name cards, repeat words and fictitious names, both of persons and
places, merely thought of but not spoken by another person known as the
agent or operator, and to draw diagrams unmistakably like those formed in
the mind or intently looked upon by the agent.
We have also seen how the hypnotized or mesmerized subject is able to
detect objects which have only been touched or handled by the mesmerizer,
and even to feel pain inflicted upon him, and recognize by taste
substances put in the mesmerizer’s mouth.
It will be seen, then, that not only increased but entirely supernormal
perception on the part of some individuals is a well-established fact. But
all these conditions of increased power of perception, and especially
thought-transference, must be carefully distinguished from independent
clairvoyance. It is not the purpose of this paper to discuss the method or
philosophy of clairvoyance, but simply to call attention to
well-authenticated facts illustrating the exercise of this power, and to
briefly point to the current theories regarding it.
A belief in supernormal perception, and especially in the clairvoyant
vision, is apparent in the history, however meagre it may be, of every
ancient nation.
Hebrew history is full of instances of it. A striking example is recorded
as occurring during the long war between Syria and Israel. The King of
Syria had good reasons for suspecting that in some manner the King of
Israel was made acquainted with all his intended military operations,
since he was always prepared to thwart them at every point. Accordingly he
called together his chiefs and demanded to know who it was among them who
thus favored the King of Israel, to which one of the chiefs replied: “It
is none of thy servants, O King: but Elisha, a prophet that is in Israel,
telleth the King of Israel the words that thou speakest in thy chamber.”
Pythagoras, a century before the time of Socrates, found this faculty
believed in, and made use of in Egypt, Babylon, and India, and he himself,
as the founder of the early Greek philosophy and culture, practised and
taught the esoteric as well as the exoteric methods of acquiring
knowledge, and he is credited with having acquired by esoteric
methods—internal or mental perception and clairvoyant vision—a knowledge
of the true theory of the solar system as expounded and demonstrated in a
later day by Copernicus.
As an example of responses by the Greek oracles, take the experience of
Crœsus, the rich King of Lydia. He sent messengers to ascertain if the
Pythoness could tell what he, the King of Lydia, was doing on a certain
specified day. The answer came:—
“I number the sands—I fathom the sea.
I hear the dumb—I know the thoughts of the silent.
There cometh to me the odor of lamb’s flesh.
It is seething, mixed with the flesh of a tortoise.
Brass is beneath it, and brass is also above it.”
The messenger returned and delivered the reply, when he found that
Crœsus, in order to do something most unlikely to be either guessed or
discovered, had cut in pieces a lamb and a tortoise, and seethed them
together in a brazen vessel having a brazen cover.
Apollonius Tyaneus, a Pythagorian philosopher and chief of a school of
philosophy which was the predecessor of the Alexandrian Neo-Platonists, is
credited with most remarkable clairvoyant powers. Many instances of this
faculty are recorded and believed upon the best of ancient authority.
One instance relates to the assassination of Domitian. Apollonius was in
the midst of a discourse at Ephesus, when suddenly he stopped as though
having lost his train of thought. After a moment’s hesitation, to the
astonishment of his auditors, he cried out: “Strike! strike the tyrant.”
Seeing the surprise of the people he explained that at the very moment at
which he had stopped in his discourse the tyrant was slain. Subsequent
information proved that Domitian, the reigning tyrant, was assassinated at
that very moment.
Ancient historians, philosophers and poets all unite in defending the
truth of the oracles and their power of perceiving events transpiring at
a distance, and also of foreseeing those in the future. Herodotus gives
more than seventy examples of oracular responses, dreams and portents
which he affirms were literally fulfilled. Livy gives more than fifty,
Cicero many striking cases; and Xenophon, Plato, Tacitus, Suetonius, and a
host of other writers all give evidence in the same direction. Now whether
these responses and visions were, as all these intelligent people
supposed, from a supernatural source, or as we shall endeavor to show, had
their origin in certain faculties naturally appertaining to the mind, and
which at certain times and under certain favorable circumstances came into
activity, it certainly shows that the most intelligent men amongst all the
most cultivated nations of the past have been firm believers in the
reality of clairvoyance.
Coming down to later times, Emanuel Swedenborg, and Frederica Hauffé, the
seeress of Proverst, were marked examples of the clairvoyant faculty. Some
have affected to discredit Swedenborg’s clairvoyant powers, but apart from
his revelations regarding a spiritual world, which, of course, it is at
present impossible to substantiate, whatever may be our belief regarding
them, if human testimony is to be regarded of any value whatever in
matters of this kind, the following oft-told incident should be counted
as established for a verity.
On a Saturday afternoon in September, 1756, Swedenborg arrived in
Gottenburg from England. Gottenburg is three hundred miles from Stockholm,
which was the home of Swedenborg. On the same evening he was the guest of
Mr. William Castel, with fifteen other persons, who were invited to meet
him, and who, on that account, may be supposed to have been of more than
ordinary consequence and intelligence.
About six o’clock Swedenborg seemed preoccupied and restless. He went out
into the street, but soon returned, anxious and disturbed. He said that at
that moment a great fire was raging at Stockholm. He declared that the
house of one of his friends was already destroyed, and that his own was in
danger. At eight o’clock he announced that the fire was arrested only
three doors from his own house.
The information, and the peculiar manner in which it was imparted, created
a great sensation, not only in the company assembled at Mr. Castel’s, but
throughout the city. On Sunday morning the governor sent for Swedenborg,
who gave him a detailed account of the conflagration and the course it had
pursued. On Monday, the third day, a courier arrived from Stockholm, who
also gave the governor a detailed account of the fire, which agreed in
every respect with that already given by Swedenborg.
Nearly a century after Swedenborg, lived Mme. Hauffé, known as the seeress
of Proverst. She died in 1829 at the age of twenty-eight years. As a child
she exhibited peculiar psychical tendencies, but it was only during the
last six years of her life, and after exhausting illnesses, that her
peculiar clairvoyant powers were conspicuously developed.
Justinus Kerner, an eminent physician and man of letters, was her
attending physician during the last three years of her life, and afterward
became her biographer. She first came under his care at Weinsberg in 1826.
At that time her debility was excessive, and nearly every day she fell
spontaneously into the somnambulic condition, became clairvoyant, and
related her visions. On the day of her arrival at Weinsberg, having gone
into this trance condition, she sent for Kerner but he refused to see her
until she awoke. He then told her that he would never see her nor listen
to her while she was in this abnormal state. I mention this simply to show
that her physician was not then at all in sympathy with her regarding her
peculiar psychological condition, though afterward he became thoroughly
convinced of its genuineness and of her honesty. He relates the following
incident, which, with many others, came under his own observation:—
Soon after her arrival at Weinsberg, and while still a perfect stranger to
her surroundings, while in her somnambulic condition, she said that a man
was near her and desired to speak with her, but that she could not
understand what he wanted to say. She said he squinted terribly, and that
his presence disturbed her, and she desired him to go away. On his second
appearance, some weeks later, she said he brought with him a sheet of
paper with figures upon it, and that he came up from a vault directly
underneath her room.
As a matter of fact, the wine vaults of Mr. F., a wine merchant doing
business the next door, extended under Mme. Hauffé’s apartment, and
Kerner, who was an old resident of the place, recognized from the
seeress’s description of her visitor a man who formerly was in Mr. F.’s
employ as manager and bookkeeper. This man had died six years before, and
had left something wrong with his accounts—in fact, there was a deficit
of 1,000 florins, and the manager’s private book was missing. The widow
had been sued for the amount, and the matter was still unsettled. Again
and again did this apparition come to Mme. Hauffé, bringing his paper and
entreating her to interest herself in this affair. He declared that the
necessary paper to clear up the whole matter was in a building sixty paces
from her bed.
Mme. Hauffé said that in that building she saw a tall gentleman engaged in
writing in a small room, which opened into a large one where there was a
desk and chests; that one of the chests was open, and that on the desk was
a pile of papers, among which she recognized the missing document.
The wine merchant, being present, recognized the office of the chief
bailiff, who had the business in charge. Kerner went at once to the office
and found everything as described, but, not finding the missing paper,
concluded that her clairvoyance was at fault.
Mme. Hauffé, in her description of the paper said it had columns of
figures upon it, and at the bottom was the number 80. Kerner prepared a
paper corresponding to this description, and at the next séance presented
it to her as the missing document. But she at once rejected it, saying the
paper was still where she had before seen it.
On renewing the search the paper was found as described, and the bailiff
was to bring it on the following day. He came accordingly. In her sleep,
the seeress exclaimed:
“The paper is no longer in its place, but this is wonderful. The paper
which the man always has in his hand lies open. Now I can read more: ‘To
be carried to my private book,’ and that is what he always points to.”
The bailiff was astonished, for instead of bringing the paper with him as
Kerner had directed, he had left it lying open on his desk. All these
things are attested by the bailiff, the wine merchant, Kerner, and others
who witnessed them. Kerner himself visited the seeress more than a
thousand times, and although during the first part of his observations he
was skeptical, he was never able to detect her in the slightest attempt at
deception. She was in no way elated over her peculiar power, on the
contrary, she disliked to speak of it, and would gladly have been free
from it altogether. Her clairvoyant powers were tested by hundreds of
excellent observers during the last four years of her life.
The case of Alexis, the noted French somnambulist and clairvoyant, is
worthy of notice here. I remember very well the account of a séance at a
gathering of prominent Americans in Paris in 1853, of which the following
is an abstract:—
Thick masses of cotton were bound firmly over his eyes in such a manner as
to render it impossible for him to see in the ordinary way, and in this
condition he described pictures, read signatures of letters folded in
several envelopes, played games of cards with almost uniform success, and,
being asked to select the best pianist in the room from a number present,
who simply presented their hands for his inspection, he quickly selected a
young man not yet eighteen years old, who had won four first prizes at the
Conservatoire, and was really the best pianist of his age in Europe.
In playing cards he picked up the trick with a rapidity and certainty
which showed how clearly he knew the position of the cards upon the table.
Keeping those dealt to him in his left hand he held the card he intended
to play in his right, and never once changed the card upon the play of his
partner. He knew his adversary’s hand as well as his own. The writer adds:
“The cards used were bought by myself, half an hour before, so that any
suspicion of prepared cards would be idle and absurd.”
It remains to note some more recent instances reported by persons well
known and specially qualified to judge of their truthfulness and value.
The first case which I will present is embodied in a report “On the
Evidence of Clairvoyance,” by Mrs. Henry Sidgwick, wife of Prof. Sidgwick,
formerly president of the Society for Psychical Research. It was furnished
by Dr. Elliott Coues of Washington, D. C., where the incident occurred,
and was afterward investigated by Mr. F. W. H. Myers, secretary of the
society. Both the persons participating in the incident were well known to
Prof. Coues, and were both persons of prominence, one, Mrs. C., being well
known as a writer and lecturer, and the other, designated as Mrs. B., was
well known for her rare psychic faculties and her absolute integrity.
The incidents of the case are simple and unimportant, but they have a
special value on account of their clearness, freedom from the possibility
of external suggestion, and the well known ability and integrity of the
reporter. The following are the points in the case:—
In Washington, D. C., January 14, 1889, between 2 and 3 o’clock P. M.,
Mrs. C., having been engaged in writing in the Congressional Library, left
the building at 2:40 o’clock, and one or two minutes later was at her
residence, in Delaware Avenue, carrying her papers in her hand. In
ascending the steps leading from the street to the front yard she stumbled
and fell. She was not hurt, but “picked herself up” and went into the
house.
About the same hour, certainly between 2 and 3 o’clock, Mrs. B., sitting
sewing in her room a mile and a half away, sees the occurrence in all its
details. The ladies are friends. They had met the day previous, but not
since. The vision is wholly a surprise to Mrs. B. Nevertheless, it is so
vivid that she at once sits down and writes to Mrs. C., describing
minutely the occurrence, which letter Mrs. C. receives the next morning
with much surprise. The following is an extract from the letter:—
“I was sitting in my room sewing this afternoon about 2 o’clock, when what
should I see but your own dear self—but heavens! in what a position! You
were falling up the front steps in the yard.
“You had on your black skirt and velvet waist, your little straw bonnet,
and in your hand were some papers. When you fell, your hat went in one
direction and your papers in another. You very quickly put on your bonnet,
picked up your papers, and lost no time in getting into the house. You did
not appear to be hurt, but looked somewhat mortified. It was all so plain
to me that I had ten notions to one to dress myself and come over and see
if it were true, but finally concluded that a sober, industrious woman
like yourself would not be stumbling around at that rate, and thought I’d
best not go on a wild-goose chase.
“Now, what do you think of such a vision as that? Is there any possible
truth in it? I feel almost ready to scream with laughter whenever I think
of it; you did look too funny spreading yourself out in the front yard.
‘Great was the fall thereof.’ I can distinctly call to mind the house in
which you live, but for the life of me I cannot tell whether there are any
steps from the sidewalk into the yard, as I saw them, or not.”
In answer to Mr. Myers’ letter of inquiry to Mrs. C., she says that the
incident was described exactly—the dress as correctly as she could have
described it herself. There were two steps from the sidewalk to the yard,
and it was on the top one of these two steps that Mrs. C. stumbled. The
manner of the fall, the behavior of the bonnet and papers, and her own
sensations were all correctly described.
The next case—also embodied in the same report and examined in the same
careful manner by Mr. Myers—was the exhibition of clairvoyant powers by
a woman called Jane, the wife of a pitman in the County of Durham, in
England. She received no fees and was averse to being experimented with
for fear of being ridiculed or called a witch by her associates.
She was a particularly refined woman for one of her class, sweet, gentle,
with delicately cut features, religious and conscientious to a remarkable
degree. She was a marked example of those who, in the trance condition,
could not be induced by suggestion to do a wrong or a mean act, or one
which she would consider wrong in her normal state. In her sleep she was
anæsthetic, felt herself quite on an equality with the operator, always
spoke of herself as “we,” and of her normal self as “that girl.” The
following instance of her clairvoyance was furnished by Dr. F., who knew
her well for many years, and is from notes taken at the time:—
On the morning of the day fixed for the experiment the doctor arranged
with a patient in a neighboring village that he should be in a particular
room between the hours of 8 and 10 in the evening. The patient was just
recovering from a severe illness and was weak and very thin and emaciated.
This gentleman and the doctor were the only persons who knew anything of
the arrangement or the proposed experiment.
After having secured the proper somnambulic condition in the subject, Dr.
F. directed her attention to the house where his patient was supposed to
be awaiting the experiment, as arranged. She entered the house, described
correctly the rooms passed through, in one of which she mentioned a lady
with black hair lying on a sofa, but no gentleman. The doctor’s report
then goes on as follows:—
“After a little she described the door opening and asked with a tone of
great surprise:
“‘Is that a man?’
“I replied, ‘Yes; is he thin or fat?’
“‘Very fat,’ she answered; ‘but has the gentleman a cork leg?’
“I assured her that he had not, and tried to puzzle her still more about
him. She, however, persisted in her statement that he was very fat, and
said that he had a great ‘corporation,’ and asked me whether I did not
think such a fat man must eat and drink a great deal to get such a
corporation as that. She also described him as sitting by the table with
papers beside him, and a glass of brandy and water.
“‘Is it not wine?’ I asked.
“‘No,’ she said, ‘It’s brandy.’
“‘Is it not whisky or rum?’
“‘No, it is brandy,’ was the answer; ‘and now,’ she continued,‘the lady is
going to get her supper, but the fat gentleman does not take any.’
“I requested her to tell me the color of his hair, but she only replied
that the lady’s hair was dark. I then inquired if he had any brains in his
head, but she seemed altogether puzzled about him, and only said she could
not see any. I then asked her if she could see his name upon any of the
papers lying about. She replied, ‘Yes;’ and upon my saying that the name
began with E, she spelled each letter of the name, “Eglinton.”
“I was so convinced that I had at last detected her in a complete mistake
that I arose and declined proceeding further in the experiment, stating
that, although her description of the house and the name of the person was
correct, in everything connected with the gentleman himself she had told
the exact opposite of the truth.
“On the following morning Mr. E., my patient, asked me the result of the
experiment. He had found himself unable to sit up so late, he said, but
wishful fairly to test the powers of the clairvoyante, he had ordered his
clothes to be stuffed into the form of a human figure, and, to make the
contrast more striking, he had an extra pillow pushed into the clothes, so
as to form a ‘corporation.’ This figure had been placed by the table in a
sitting position and a glass of brandy and water and the newspapers placed
beside it. The name, he said, was spelled correctly, though up to that
time I had been in the habit of writing it ‘Eglington’ instead of
‘Eglinton.’”
Dr. Alfred Backman of Kolmar, Sweden, a corresponding member of the
Society for Psychical Research and a good practical hypnotist has had
unusually good fortune in finding clairvoyants among his own patients in
that northern country. Two in particular, Anna Samuelson and Alma Redberg,
gave most excellent examples of clairvoyant vision, describing rooms,
surroundings, persons, and also events which were at the moment
transpiring, though quite unknown and unsuspected by any one present at
the experiment. Several of these cases are included in Mrs. Sidgwick’s
report. Instead of these cases, however, I prefer to adduce an instance or
two reported by Dr. Dufay, a reputable physician of Blois and subsequently
a senator of France. The cases were first reported to the French Société
de Psychologie Physiologique, which was presided over by Charcot, and
published in the Revue Philosophique for September, 1888.
Dr. Gerault, a friend of Dr. Dufay, had a maid-servant named Marie, who
was a natural somnambule, but who was also frequently hypnotized by Dr.
Gerault. Dr. Dufay witnessed the following experiments:—
Being hypnotized, Marie was describing to a young lady soon to be married,
some characteristics of her lover, much to the amusement of the lady, who
was clapping her hands and laughing merrily. Suddenly, almost with the
rapidity of lightning, the scene changed from gay to grave. The
somnambulist panted for breath, tears flowed down her face, and
perspiration bathed her brow. She seemed ready to fall, and called on Dr.
Gerault for assistance.
“What is the matter, Marie?” said the doctor; “from what are you
suffering?”
“Ah, sir!” said she; “ah, sir! how terrible! he is dead!”
“Who is dead? Is it one of my patients?”
“Limoges, the ropemaker—you know, in the Crimea—he has just died. Poor
folks—poor folks!”
“Come, come, my child,” said the doctor, “you are dreaming—it is only a
bad dream.”
“A dream,” replied the somnambulist. “But I am not asleep. I see him—he
has just drawn his last breath. Poor boy! Look at him.”
And she pointed with her hand, as if to direct attention to the scene
which was so vivid before her. At the same time she would have run away,
but hardly had she risen to go when she fell back, unable to move. It was
a long time before she became calm, but, on coming to herself, she had no
recollection of anything which had occurred. Some time after, Limoges
senior received news of the death of his son. It occurred near
Constantinople on the same day that Marie had witnessed it in her
clairvoyant vision.
On another occasion there was a séance at which ten or twelve persons were
present. Marie was put to sleep and had told the contents of several
pockets and sealed packages prepared for the purpose. Dr. Dufay came in
late purposely, so as to be as much out of rapport with her as possible.
He had just received a letter from an officer in Algiers, stating that he
had been very ill with dysentery from sleeping under canvas during the
rainy season. This letter he had placed in a thick envelope, without
address or postmark, and carefully stuck down the edges. This again was
placed in another dark envelope and closed in like manner. No one but
himself knew of the existence of this letter.
Unobserved, he passed the letter to a lady present, indicating that it was
to be given to Dr. Gerault, who received it without knowing from whom it
came, and placed it in Marie’s hand.
“What have you in your hand?” asked the doctor.
“A letter.”
“To whom is it directed?”
“To M. Dufay.”
“By whom?”
“A military gentleman whom I do not know.”
“Of what does he write?”
“He is ill—he writes of his illness.”
“Can you name his illness?”
“Oh, yes; very well. It is like the old woodcutter’s of Mesland, who is
not yet well.”
“I understand; it is dysentery. Now listen, Marie. It would give M. Dufay
much pleasure if you would go and see his friend, the military gentleman,
and find out how he is at present.”
“Oh, it is too far; it would be a long journey.”
“But we are waiting for you. Please go without losing time.”
(A long pause.) “I cannot go on; there is water, a lot of water.”
“And you do not see any bridge?”
“Of course there is no bridge.”
“Perhaps there is a boat to cross in, as there is to cross the Loire at
Chaumont.”
“Boats—yes—but this Loire is a regular flood; it frightens me.”
“Come, come; take courage—embark.”
(A long silence, agitation, pallor, nausea.) “Have you arrived?”
“Nearly; but I am much fatigued, and I do not see any people on shore.”
“Land and go on; you will soon find some one.”
“There, now I see some people—they are all women, dressed in white. But
that is queer—they all have beards.”
“Go to them and ask where you will find the military gentleman.”
(After a pause.) “They do not speak as we do—and I have been obliged to
wait while they called a little boy with a red cap, who understands me. He
leads me on, slowly, because we are walking in sand. Ah! there is the
military gentleman. He has red trousers and an officer’s cap. But he is so
very thin and ill. What a pity he has not some of your medicine!”
“What does he say caused his illness?”
“He shows me his bed—three planks on pickets—over wet sand.”
“Thanks. Advise him to go to the hospital, and now return to Blois.”
The letter was then opened and read to the company and caused no little
astonishment.
Remarkable instances of clairvoyance have not been frequently reported in
America. Nevertheless, well-authenticated cases are by no means wanting.
Dr. S. B. Brittan, in his book entitled “Man and His Relations,” relates
several such cases. The following came under his own observation:—
In the autumn of 1855 he saw Mr. Charles Baker of Michigan, who, while out
on a hunting excursion, had been accidentally shot by his companion. The
charge passed through his pocket, demolishing several articles and
carrying portions of the contents of the pocket deep into the fleshy part
of his thigh. The accident was of a serious character, causing extreme
suffering, great debility, and emaciation, lasting several months, as well
as much anxiety regarding his ultimate recovery.
He was in this low condition when seen by Dr. Brittan. The doctor soon
after returned East, and called on Mrs. Metler of Hartford, with whose
clairvoyant power he was familiar, and requested her to examine into the
condition of a young man who had been shot. No information was given as to
his residence, condition, or the circumstances attending the accident.
She directly found the patient, described the wound, and declared that
there was a piece of copper still in the wound, and that he would not
recover until it was removed.
Young Baker, however, was sure he had no copper in his pocket at the time
of the accident; the medical attendant found no indications of it, so it
was concluded that the clairvoyant had made a mistake.
Later, however, a foreign substance made its appearance in the wound, and
was removed by the mother of the patient with a pair of embroidery
scissors; it proved to be a copper cent. The removal of the foreign
substance was followed by rapid recovery. The discovery of the copper coin
was made by the clairvoyant while at a distance of nearly one thousand
miles from the patient.
Mrs. H. Porter, while at her home in Bridgeport, Conn., in the presence of
the same writer, declared that a large steamer was on fire on the Hudson
River; that among other objects in the vicinity she could clearly
distinguish the village of Yonkers, and that the name of the steamer was
the Henry Clay. The whole sad catastrophe was described by her with
minuteness, as if occurring in her immediate presence.
The next morning the New York papers gave a full account of the burning of
the Henry Clay off the village of Yonkers—an occurrence which, doubtless,
some of my readers may still remember—corresponding in every important
particular with that given by the clairvoyant.
Mr. John Fitzgerald of Brunswick, Me., once a somewhat noted temperance
lecturer, but at the time now referred to a bedridden invalid, saw,
clairvoyantly, and fully described the great fire in Fall River, Mass., in
1874, by which a large factory was destroyed. He described the
commencement and progress of the fire, the means employed to rescue the
operatives, criticised the work of the firemen, shouted directions, as if
he were present, and at last as the roof fell in, he fell back upon the
pillow and said:
“It is all over—the roof has fallen, and those poor people are burned.”
It was not until three days later that Mrs. Fitzgerald obtained a paper
containing an account of the fire. This she read to her husband, who
frequently interrupted her to tell her what would come next as “he had
seen it all.” The account corresponded almost exactly with the description
given by Mr. Fitzgerald while the fire was in progress.
I have, myself, recently found a very excellent subject whom I will call
A. B., whom I first hypnotized on account of illness, but who afterward
proved to have psychic perception and clairvoyant powers of a remarkable
character. Once, while in the hypnotic condition, I asked her if she could
go away and see what was transpiring in other places, as for instance, at
her own home. She replied that she would try. I then told her to go to her
home, in a small town three hundred miles away and quite unknown to me,
and see who was in the house and what they were doing. After a minute of
perfect silence she said: “I am there.” “Go in,” I said, “and tell me what
you find.” She said: “There is no one at home but my mother. She is
sitting in the dining-room by a window; there is a screen in the window
which was not there when I left home. My mother is sewing.” “What sort of
sewing is it?” I asked. “It is a waist for D.” (her little brother). I
wrote down every detail of her description, and then awoke her. She had no
recollection of anything which had transpired, but said she had had a
restful sleep. I then desired her to write at once to her mother and ask
who was in the house at four o’clock this same afternoon, where she was,
and what she was doing.
The answer came, describing everything exactly as set down in my notes.
On another occasion when I made my visit, it happened to be the day of the
races occurring at a well known track some ten miles away, and members of
the household where she was residing had gone to witness them. Neither she
nor I had ever attended these races—we knew nothing of the appearance of
the place, of the events that were expected, nor even of the ordinary
routine of the sport. She was put into the deep hypnotic sleep, and
thinking it a good opportunity to test her clairvoyance, I requested her
to go to the grounds and I carefully directed her on her journey. Once
within the inclosure she described the bright and cheerful appearance—the
pavilion, the judge’s stand, and the position of persons whom she knew.
She said there was no race at the time; but that boys were going around
among the spectators and getting money; that the people seemed excited;
that they stood up and held out money, and beckoned to the boys to
come—but she did not know what it meant. I suggested that perhaps they
were betting. She seemed to look carefully and then said: “That is just
what they are doing.” She then described the race which followed, was much
excited, and told who of the persons she knew were winners. I then said:
“You will remember all this and be able to tell M. when she comes home.”
It was found that everything had transpired as she had described. One of
the races had been a failure, the horses coming in neck and neck; all bets
were cancelled and new bets were made, which caused the excitement which
she had witnessed. She surprised those who were present by the accuracy of
her description, both of the place and the events, especially of the
excitement caused by making the new bets.
On the same occasion, before awakening her, I said to her: “Now, I have
something very particular to say to you and I want you to pay close
attention.
“This evening when your dinner is brought up to you—you, A. B.’s second
self, will make A. B. see me come in and stand here at the foot of the
bed. I shall say to you: ‘Hello! you are at dinner. Well, I won’t disturb
you,’ and immediately I shall go. And you will write me about my visit.” I
then awoke her in the usual manner. This was Tuesday, July 3, 1894. On
Thursday following I received this note, which I have in my possession.
“Dear Dr. Mason:—
“As I was eating my dinner on Tuesday I heard some one say
‘Good-evening.’ I turned around surprised, as I had heard no one enter
the room, and there at the foot of the bed I saw you.
“I said ‘Halloo! won’t you sit down?’ you said: ‘Are you taking your
dinner? Then I won’t detain you,’ and before I could detain you, you
disappeared as mysteriously as you had come. Why did you leave so
suddenly? Were you angry? Mary, the nurse, says you were not here at
all at dinner-time. I say you were. Which of us is right?
“Sincerely,
“A. B.”
(Full name signed.)
The clairvoyant faculty is sometimes exercised in sleep, and hence the
importance so often attached to dreams. I have a patient, Miss M. L.,
thirty-five years of age, who has been under my observation for the past
fifteen years, and for whose truthfulness and good sense I can fully
vouch. From childhood she has been a constant and most troublesome
somnambulist, walking almost every night, until two years ago when I first
hypnotized her and suggested that she should not again leave her bed while
asleep, and she has not done so.
This person’s dreams are marvellously vivid, but her most vivid ones she
does not call dreams. She says, “When I dream I dream, but when I see I
see.”
Nine years ago, M. L., had a friend in New Mexico whom I will call G.,
from whom she had not heard for months, and of whose surroundings she knew
absolutely nothing.
One night she dreamed, or, as she expresses it, saw this friend in
Albuquerque. She was, as it seemed to her, present in the room where he
was, and saw everything in it with the same degree of distinctness as
though she were actually present. She noticed the matting on the floor,
the willowware furniture, bed, rocking-chair, footstool, and other
articles. He was talking with a companion, a person of very striking
appearance, whom she also minutely observed as regarded personal
appearance, dress, and position in the room.
He was saying to this companion that he was about to start for New York
for the purpose of interesting capitalists in a system of irrigation which
he had proposed. His companion was laughing sarcastically and ridiculing
the whole scheme. He persisted, and the conversation was animated—almost
bitter.
Three weeks later, early one morning, she dreamed that this man was in New
York. She saw him coming up the street leading to her house, and saw her
father go forward to meet him. At breakfast she told her father her dream,
and they also talked freely about her former dream or vision of three
weeks before.
After breakfast her father sat upon the front stoop reading the morning
paper, and M. L. went about some work. Suddenly she heard her father call
out in a startled sort of way: “Mary, sure enough, here comes G.!” She
stepped to the window and there was G. coming up the street and her father
going forward to meet him exactly as she had seen him in her dream. He had
just arrived from the West, and had come for the very purpose indicated by
his conversation in M. L.’s vision. After some general conversation M. L.
said to G.; “By the way, who was that remarkable person you were talking
with about this journey, three weeks ago?” mentioning the night of her
dream. With evident surprise he said:
“What do you mean?”
She then related the whole dream just as she had experienced it, even to
the minutest details. His astonishment was profound. He declared that the
details which she gave could never have been so exactly described except
by some one actually present; and with some annoyance he accused her of
playing the spy.
There are many other instances of remarkable clairvoyant vision on her
part, and especially two which have occurred within the year—the visions
having been fully described before the events were known.
Such are a few among hundreds of cases which might be adduced as examples
of the clairvoyant power. They are from every period of history, from the
earliest down to our own times. Looked at broadly, they at least show that
a belief in the clairvoyant power of some specially endowed persons has
existed throughout the historic period; they also exhibit a great
similarity in their character and the circumstances under which they are
observed.
Apollonius stops short in his discourse, apparently in his natural state,
sees the assassination of Domitian, and shouts, “Strike the tyrant!”
Fitzgerald at Brunswick suddenly beholds the burning factories at Fall
River, and shouts his orders to the firemen. Others spontaneously go into
the somnambulic condition and only then become clairvoyant; while still
others need the assistance of a second person to produce somnambulism and
independent vision.
What is the nature and what the method of this peculiar vision which has
been named clairvoyance?
Is it a quickening and extension of ordinary vision, or is it a visual
perception obtained in some other manner, independent of the natural organ
of sight?
It has been noted how vastly the action of the senses may be augmented by
cultivation, but never has cultivation increased vision to such an extent
as to discover a penny a thousand miles away and through opaque coverings.
Besides, the clairvoyant vision is exercised quite independent of the
bodily eye. The eyes may be closed, they may be turned upward or inward so
that no portion of the pupil is exposed to the action of light, or they
may be covered with thick pads of cotton or closed with plasters or
bandages, yet the clairvoyant vision in proper subjects is obtained in
just the same degree and with just the same certainty as when the eyes are
fully exposed to the light.
It is true there has been much doubt and discussion on this vital point,
the objectors maintaining that sight was possible and practicable by
experts, notwithstanding the precautions used in blindfolding; in short,
that the whole thing might safely be set down as deception and fraud.
In the face of facts such as are here cited, and the thousand others that
might be adduced, it is hardly possible to treat this charge seriously.
To such objectors, cumulative evidence regarding facts out of their own
mental horizon is useless. Their motto is: “No amount of evidence can
establish a miracle;” and their definition of a miracle is something done,
or alleged to have been done, contrary to the laws of nature. But the
objector who refuses credence to well-attested facts on that ground alone,
simply assumes that he is acquainted with all the laws of nature.
A miracle, really, is only something alleged to have been done, and we are
not able to explain how; nevertheless, it may be perfectly in accordance
with natural laws which we did not understand or even know existed. To the
West Indian, whom Columbus found in the New World, an eclipse of the sun
was a miracle of the most terrible character; to the astronomer it was a
simple fact in nature. To the ignorant boor, “talking with Chicago” or
cabling between New York and London is a miracle; to the electrician it is
an everyday, well-understood affair. For a long time scientific men did
not believe in the existence of globular, slowly-moving electricity; if
such a thing had existed, it certainly should have put in an appearance
before members of the “Academy,” or “Royal Society” some time in the
course of all these years; but it never had done so; only a few cooks,
blacksmiths, or back-woodsmen had ever seen it, and they certainly were
not the sort of people to report scientific matter; they did not know how
to observe, and undoubtedly “they did not see what they thought they saw.”
But for all that, globular, slowly-moving electricity is now a well known
fact in nature.
Neither the West Indian, the ignorant boor, nor the man of science had, at
the time these several facts were presented to him, “any place in the
existing fabric of his thought into which such facts could be fitted.” The
fabric of thought in each case must be changed, enlarged, modified, before
the alleged facts could be received or assimilated.
The objector to the fact of clairvoyance and other facts in the new
psychology is often simply deficient in the knowledge which would enable
him properly to judge of these facts; he may be an excellent
mathematician, physicist, editor, or even physician, but he has been
educated to deal with a certain class of facts, and only by certain
methods, and he is wholly unfitted to deal with another class of facts,
perhaps requiring quite different treatment.
An excellent chemist might not be just the man to analyze questions of
finance or to testify as an expert on the tariff, or a suspension bridge;
the “texture of his thought” would need some modifying to fit him for
these duties; indeed, he is fortunate if he can even be quite sure of
morphia when he sees it; it might be a ptomaine.
If, then, the objector to well authenticated facts in any department of
research expects his objections to be seriously considered, he must, at
least, exhibit some intelligence in that department of research to which
his objection relates.
I shall then simply reiterate the statement that there is abundant
evidence of visual perception by some specially constituted persons,
independent of any use of the physical organ of sight.
What the exact nature or method of this supranormal vision is, may not yet
be absolutely settled, any more than the exact nature of light or of life
or even of electricity is settled, and each of their various methods of
action known, though of the fact itself in any of these cases there is no
doubt.
From a careful consideration of the best authenticated facts and examples,
we are led to believe that the faculty of clairvoyance is no supernatural
gift, but may be possessed, to some degree, by many, perhaps by all,
people; that it is a natural condition, developed and brought into
exercise by a few, but undeveloped and dormant in most; that the faculty
may include not only the power of obtaining visual perceptions at a
distance and under circumstances which render ordinary vision impossible,
but also the perception of general truth and the relation of things in
nature to such a degree as to render the person who possesses it a teacher
and prophet of seemingly supernatural endowments. Carefully excluding
cases of unusual extension, or skill in using normal perceptive faculties,
and also thought-transference, which, although bearing a certain relation
to clairvoyance, should not be confounded with it, the phenomena of
independent clairvoyance appear in certain persons under the following
conditions:—
In certain states, brought about by disease, and at the near approach of
death, in the hypnotic condition, whether self-induced or produced by the
influence of a second person, and especially in the condition known as
trance; it may also appear in sleep of the ordinary kind—in dreams, and
especially in the condition of reverie or the state between sleeping and
waking; a few persons also possess the clairvoyant faculty while in their
natural condition, without losing their normal consciousness. In general
it may be said that the faculty is most likely to appear when there exists
a condition of abstraction, and the mind is acting without the restraint
and guidance of the usual consciousness—and it reaches its most perfect
exercise when this usual guidance ceases entirely—the body becoming
inactive and anæsthetic and the mind acting independent of its usual
manifesting organs. Such is the condition in trance.
This view is, of course, in direct opposition to the materialistic
philosophy which makes the mind simply a “group of phenomena,” the result
of organization, and absolutely dependent upon that organization for its
action, and even for its existence. To discuss this question here would
occupy too much space; besides, one of the objects of these papers is to
show this mind, spirit, psychos, mentality, “group of phenomena,”
whatever it may be, and whatever name may be applied to it, acting under
circumstances which will enable us to consider with greater intelligence
this very question, viz.: Whether the mind, under some circumstances, is
not capable of intelligent action independent of the brain and the whole
material organization through which it ordinarily manifests itself.