Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:The History of Spiritualism
.pdf
THE HISTORY OF SPIRITUALISM
vestigation. Describing an interview he had with Mr. Seybert a few
days before the latter’s death, when he agreed to act as his representative, Mr. Hazard says he did so only “with the full and distinct
understanding that I should be permitted to prescribe the methods
to be pursued in the investigation, designate the mediums to be consulted, and reject the attendance of any person or persons whose
presence I deemed might confl ict with the harmony and good order
of the spirit circles.” But this representative of Mr. Seybert seems
to have been quietly ignored by the University. After the Commission had been sitting for some time, Mr. Hazard was dissatisfi ed with
some of its members and their methods. We fi nd him writing as fol-
[58]
lows in the Philadelphia North American,
approaching the University authorities :
Without aiming to detract in the slightest degree from the unblemished moral character that attaches to each and every individual of the Faculty, including the Commission, in public esteem, nor to
the high social and literary standing they occupy in society, I must
say that through some strange infatuation, obliquity of judgment,
or perversity of intellect, the Trustees of the University have placed
on the Commission for the investigation of modern Spiritualism,
a majority of its members whose education, habit of thought, and
prejudices so singularly disqualify them from making a thorough
and impartial investigation of the subject which the Trustees of the
University are obligated both by contract and in honour to do, that
had the object in view been to belittle and bring into discredit, hatred and general contempt the cause that I know the late Henry
Seybert held nearest his heart and loved more than all else in the
world beside, the Trustees could scarcely have selected more suitable instruments for the object intended from all the denizens of
Philadelphia than are the gentlemen who constitute a majority of
the Seybert Commission. And this I repeat, not from any causes that
presumably after vainly
281
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
affect their moral, social or literary standing in society, but simply
because of their prejudices against the cause of Spiritualism.
He further advised the Trustees to remove from the Commission Messrs. Fullerton, Thompson, and Koenig.
Mr. Hazard quoted Professor Fullerton as saying in a lecture before the Harvard University Club on March 3, 1885:
It is possible that the way mediums tell a person’s history is by
the process of thought-transference, for every person who is thus
told of these things goes to a medium thinking of the same points
about which the medium talks... When a man has a cold he hears
a buzzing noise in his ears, and an insane person constantly hears
sounds which never occur. Perhaps, then, disease of mind or ear, or
some strong emotion, may be the cause of a large number of spiritual phenomena.
These words were spoken after the professor had served on the
Commission for more than twelve months.
Mr. Hazard also quotes Dr. George A. Koenig’s views, published
in the Philadelphia Press, about a year after his appointment on the
Commission:
I must frankly admit that I am prepared to deny the truth of
Spiritualism as it is now popularly understood. It is my belief that
all of the so-called mediums are humbugs without exception. I have
never seen Slade perform any of his tricks, but, from the published
descriptions, I have set him down as an impostor, the cleverest one
of the lot. I do not think the Commission view with much favour the
examination of so-called spirit mediums. The wisest men are apt to
be deceived. One man in an hour can invent more tricks than a wise
man can solve in a year.
Mr. Hazard learned from what he considered to be a reliable
source, that Professor Robert E. Thompson was responsible for this
view which appeared in Penn’s Monthly of February, 1880.
282
THE HISTORY OF SPIRITUALISM
Even if Spiritualism be all that its champions claim for it, it has
no importance for anyone who holds a Christian faith... The consideration and discussion of the subject is tampering with notions and
condescending to discussions with which no Christian believer has
any business.
We have in these expressions of opinion a means of judging how
unsuited these members of the Commission were for making what
Mr. Seybert asked for – “a thorough and impartial” investigation of
the subject.
An American Spiritualist periodical, the Banner of Light, com-
menting on Mr. Hazard’s communication, wrote :
So far as we have information, no notice was taken of Mr. Hazard’s appeal – certainly no action was had, for the members above
quoted remain on the Commission to this day, and their names are
appended to this preliminary report. Professor Fullerton, in fact, was
and now is the secretary ; one hundred and twenty of the one hundred and fi fty pages of the volume before us are written by him, and
exhibit that excessive lack of spiritual perception and knowledge of
occult, and we might also say natural laws, which led him to inform
an audience of Harvard students that “when a man has a cold he
hears a buzzing noise in his ears” ; that “an insane person constantly
hears sounds which never occur,” and suggest to them that spiritual
phenomena may proceed from such causes.
The Banner of Light continues :
We consider that the Seybert Commission’s failure to follow
the counsel of Mr. Hazard, as it was plainly their duty to do, is the
key to the entire failure of all their subsequent efforts. The paucity
of phenomenal results, in any degree approaching what might be
looked for, even by a sceptic, which this book records, is certainly
remarkable. It is a report of what was not done, rather than that of
what was. In the memoranda of proceedings at each session, as given
283
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
by Professor Fullerton, there is plainly seen a studied effort to give
prominence to everything that a superfi cial mind might deem proof
of trickery on the part of the medium, and to conceal all that might
be evidence of the truth of his claims... It is mentioned that when
certain members of the Commission were present all phenomena ceased. This substantiates the correctness of Mr. Hazard’s position ; and there is no one who has had an experience with mediums,
suffi cient to render his opinion of any value, who will not endorse it.
The spirits knew what elements they had to deal with ; they endeavoured to eliminate those that rendered their experiments nugatory ;
they failed to do this through the ignorance, willfulness or prejudice
of the Commission, and the experiments failed ; so the Commission,
very “wise in its own conceit,” decided that all was fraud.
[59]
Light,
much now as in 1887 :
We notice with some pleasure, though without any marked expectation of what may result from the pursuance of bad methods of
investigation, that the Commission proposes to continue its quest
“with minds as sincerely and honestly open as heretofore to conviction.” Since this is so, we presume to offer a few words of advice
founded upon large experience. The investigation of these obscure
phenomena is beset with diffi culty, and any instructions that can
be given are derived from a knowledge which is to a great extent
empirical. But we know that prolonged and patient experiment with
a properly constituted circle is a sine qua non. We know that all
does not depend on the medium, but that a circle must be formed
and varied from time to time experimentally, until the proper constituent elements are secured. What these elements may be we
cannot tell the Seybert Commission. They must discover that for
themselves. Let them make a study in the literature of Spiritualism
of the varied characteristics of mediumship before they proceed to
in its notice of the report, says what needs saying as
284
THE HISTORY OF SPIRITUALISM
personal experiment. And when they have done this, and perhaps
when they have realized how easy it is so to conduct an examination
of this nature as to arrive at negative results, they will be in a better
position to devote intelligent and patient care to a study which can
be profi tably conducted in no other way.
There is no doubt that the report of the Seybert Commission set
back for the time the cause of psychic truth. Yet the real harm fell
upon the learned institution which these gentlemen represented.
In these days when ectoplasm, the physical basis of psychic phenomena, has been established beyond a shadow of doubt to all who
examine the evidence, it is too late to pretend that there is nothing
to be examined. There is now hardly a capital which has not its Psychic Research Society – a fi nal comment upon the inference of the
Commission that there was no fi eld for research. If the Seybert Commission had had the effect of Pennsylvania University heading this
movement, and living up to the great tradition of Professor Hare,
how proud would her fi nal position have been I As Newton associated Cambridge with the law of gravitation, so Pennsylvania might
have been linked to a far more important advance of human knowledge. It was left to several European centres of learning to share the
honour among them.
The remaining collective investigation is of less importance,
since it deals only with a particular medium. This was conducted by
the Institut Général Psychologique in Paris. It consisted of three series of sittings with the famous Eusapia Palladino in the years 1905,
1906, and 1907, the total number of séances being forty-three. No
complete list of the sitters is available, nor was there any proper
collective report, the only record being a very imperfect and inconclusive one from the secretary, M. Courtier. The investigators included some very distinguished persons, including Charles Richet,
Monsieur and Madame Curie, Messrs. Bergson, Perrin, Professor
285
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
d’Arsonal of the College de France, who was president of the society,
Count de Gramont, Professor Charpentier, and Principal Debierne
of the Sorbonne. The actual result could not have been disastrous to
the medium, since Professor Richet has recorded his endorsement of
the reality of her psychic powers, but the strange superfi cial tricks
of Eusapia are recorded in the subsequent account of her career, and
we can well imagine the disconcerting effect which they would have
upon those to whom such things were new.
There is included in the report a sort of conversation among
the sitters in which they talk the matter over, most of them being
in a very nebulous and non-committal frame of mind. It cannot be
claimed that any new light was shed upon the medium, or any new
argument provided either for the sceptic or for the believer. Dr. Geley, however, who has probably gone as deeply as anyone else into
psychic science, claims that “les expériences” – he does not say the
report – constitute a valuable contribution to the subject.
es this upon the fact that the results chronicled do often strikingly
confi rm those obtained in his own Institut Métapsychique working
with Kluski, Guzik, and other mediums. The differences, he says,
are in details and never in essentials. The control of the hands was
the same in either case, both the hands being always held. This was
easier in the case of the later mediums, especially with KluskI in
trance, while Eusapia was usually a very restless individual. There
seems to be a halfway condition which was characteristic of Eusapia, and which has been observed by the author in the case of Frau
Silbert, Evan Powell, and other mediums, where the person seems
normal, and yet is peculiarly susceptible to suggestion or other mental impressions. A suspicion of fraud may very easily be aroused in
this condition, for the general desire on the part of the audience
that something should occur reacts with great force upon the unreasoning mind of the medium. An amateur who had some psychic
[60]
He bas-
286
THE HISTORY OF SPIRITUALISM
power has assured the author that it needs considerable inhibition
to keep such impulses in check and to await the real power from
outside. In this report we read: “The two hands, feet, and knees of
Eusapia being controlled, the table is raised suddenly, all four feet
leaving the ground. Eusapia closes her fi sts and holds them towards
the table, which is then completely raised from the fl oor fi ve times
in succession, fi ve raps being also given. It is again completely raised
whilst each of Eusapia’s hands is on the head of a sitter. It is raised to
a height of one foot from the fl oor and suspended in the air for seven seconds, while Eusapia kept her hand on the table, and a lighted
candle was placed under the table,” and so on, with even more conclusive tests with table and other phenomena.
The timidity of the report was satirized by the great French Spiritualist, Gabriel Delanne. He says:
The reporter keeps saying “it seems” and “it appears,” like a man
who is not sure of what he is relating. Those who held forty-three
séances, with good eyes and apparatus for verifi cation, ought to have
a settled opinion – or, at least, to be able to say, if they regard a certain phenomenon as fraudulent, that at a given séance they had seen
the medium in the act of tricking. But there is nothing of the sort.
The reader is left in uncertainty – a vague suspicion hovers over
everything, though not supported on any serious grounds.
Commenting on this, Light says :
Delanne shows by extracts from the Report itself that some of
the experiments succeeded even when the fullest test precautions
were taken, such as using lamp-black to discover whether Eusapia really touched the objects moved. Yet the Report deliberately
discounts these direct and positive observations by instancing cases
occurring at other times and places in which Eusapia was said or be-
lieved to have unduly infl uenced the phenomena.
[61]
287
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
The Courtier Report will prove more and more plainly to be
what we have already called it, a “monument of ineptitude,” and
the reality of Eusapia’s phenomena cannot be seriously called in
question by the meaningless phrases with which it is liberally garnished.
What may be called a collective investigation of a medium,
Mrs. Crandon, the wife of a doctor in Boston, was undertaken in
the years 1923 to 5925 by a committee chosen by the Scientifi c
American and afterwards by a small committee of Harvard men
with Dr. Shapley, the astronomer, at their head. The controversy
over these inquiries is still raging, and the matter has been referred
to in the chapter which deals with great modern mediums. It may
briefl y be stated that of the Scientifi c American inquirers the secre-
tary, Mr. Malcolm Bird, and Dr. Hereward Carrington announced
their complete conversion. The others gave no clear decision which
involved the humiliating admission that after numerous sittings
under their own conditions and in the presence of constant phenomena, they could not tell whether they were being cheated or
not. The defect of the committee was that no experienced Spiritualist who was familiar with psychic conditions was upon it. Dr. Prince
was very deaf, while Dr. McDougall was in a position where his
whole academic career would obviously be endangered by the acceptance of an unpopular explanation. The same remark applies
to Dr. Shapley’s committee, which was all composed of budding
scientists. Without imputing conscious mental dishonesty, there
is a subconscious drag towards the course of safety. Reading the
report of these gentlemen with their signed acquiescence at each
sitting with the result, and their fi nal verdict of fraud, one cannot
discover any normal way in which they have reached their conclusions. On the other hand, the endorsements of the mediumship by
folk who had no personal reasons for extreme caution were fre-
288
THE HISTORY OF SPIRITUALISM
quent and enthusiastic. Dr. Mark Richardson of Boston reported
that he had sat more than 300 times, and had no doubt at all about
the results.
The author has seen numerous photographs of the ectoplasmic
fl ow from “Margery,” and has no hesitation, on comparing it with
similar photographs taken in Europe, in saying that it is unquestionably genuine, and that the future will justify the medium as against
her unreasonable critics.
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]