KW HOOKS. ;, |'| Tuniing to other forma of 1 medhunsldp 1 Prof. Hounmv 11,1,1* that tlm e idcncc for ' physical phenoni. .,mrioii with M,|||r. Sniitli ' i*
and not convincing: that for telepathy is better, but not striking-
while of the clairvoyance or 'lucidity' said to have been observed it proved impossible to get satisfactory records. On thr other lumd, ob- she had lost were often recovered by ' Mdlle. Sniitli ' in u striking manner (a fact, however, which could easily be explained by subcon- memory), while some of the cases of apparent spirit-identity' are very curious. In fact, if cases as extraordinary as that of the Syndic Chau- niontet and the Cure Burnier (pp. 406-411), or as that of Mdllc. V: were recorded by the dozen instead of singly, it would be difficult for those who have an open mind on the subject at all to resist the con- viction that the spiritistic interpretation was less improbable than the theory of latent memories and curious coincidences would become under tin' cumulative strain of a stream of such instances. As it is. Prof. Flournoy's explanation just preserves its credit. Altogether it is I trust evident even from the above summary that Prof. Flournoy's medium well deserved the study he has bestowed upon her. and that her case has greatly extended our knowledge of the nature and capacities of the subliminal consciousness. Of course it must lx> taken for granted that the medium acted in good faith, and was not en- gaged in a conscious, elaborate and systematic imposture, aided and abetted by confederates either in her family or among her spiritist friends, who helped her to 'get up' her most remarkable effects. That this possibility is wholly excluded Prof. Flournoy appears to be quite confident, but such confidence can never be transferred in its integrity to a reader who has not observed the case himself. And it does not appear that detectives were ever used to watch the medium, as in Mrs. Piper's case. Nevertheless ' Mdlle. Smith's ' case also produces a strong impression of genuineness, at least upon the present reviewer, who is per- haps unduly influenced by the close analogy between her 'automatisms' and those of a case in his own family which he observed many years ago (cp. S.P.R. Proceedings, No. 11, p. 216 f.). In both cases considerable success was attained in tracing the sources of the supranonnal informa- tion automatically conveyed, though as Prof. Flournoy's case is in every respect more remarkable, it is no wonder that his explanations only attain a lesser degree of completeness. On the other hand it is no use blinking the fact that the ' scientific ' explanations also are not wholly satisfactory. They neither account for the persistence with which such cases assume a spiritistic form, nor do they supply a principle to account for the 'ion of recondite and pseudo-evidential memories in lieu of those which ordinary paths of association would naturally reproduce. We may freely grant that the spiritist interpretation, in all cases so far recorded, falls short of complete cogency ; but <o does the subliminal memory theory. And an uncomfortable feeling remains that the dif- ferences between them are fast becoming quantitative only : if certain types of incident, of which there have now been recorded a considerable number, occur with more than a certain frequency the spiritist (or some equivalent) interpretation might easily become inevitable; if not. we can continue to explain them away with Prof, r'lournoy. The final decision, of course, must rest with more investigation : beyond this it is points out however that neither at the period alleged nor at am would iromrn know Sanscrit, and considers that the general i ' Simandini's ' utterances is suggestive of memories of examples out of a Sanscrit grammar.
