IO Psychic Force and Modern Spiritualisin, 
On p. 346, referring to the results obtained with the board and balance, my re- 
viewer urges that it never seems to have occurred to me “to test whether the same 
results could not be produced by throwing the board into rhythmical vibration by 
anintentional exertion of muscular action!’ Yet will it be believed that at p.344 
he gives in my own words an account of my trying this identical experiment ; 
and if he had taken the trouble to refer to my other paper on p. 486 of the Quar- 
terly fournal of Science, he would have seen that I had tested in like manner the 
special apparatus to which he alludes. Has the reviewer learnt to blow both 
hot and cold? has his memory faded? or has chagrin at missing the truth in his 
long investigations spoilt his temper ? 
The ‘“fac&t” spoken of on p. 347, that myself and friends attributed to 
psychic force the rippling of the surface of water in a basin, when it was really 
produced by the tremor of a passing railway train, is, like many other of the 
reviewer's “facts,” utterly baseless; but as he is careful to tell us that in this 
particular case the “ fact” is not one of his own invention, what is to be said 
of his discretion in believing his ‘‘ highly intelligent witness?” No such 
occurrence took place; nor will a passing railway train produce a ripple on 
the surface of water in the basin in my room. I invite the “ highly intelli- 
gent witness” to verify the fact. 
On p. 348, in speaking of Mr. Varley, the reviewer says that ‘his scientific 
attainments are so cheaply estimated by those who are best qualified to judge 
of them, that he has never been admitted to the Royal Society.” It seems 
natural it should follow that Mr. Varley is a Fellow of the Royal Society; he 
was elected in June last. I seem to be safe in saying exactly the opposite of 
the reviewer. 
Not to weary the reader, I will deal only with three more mis-state- 
ments, selecting instances where the reviewer conceives that he is perfectly 
sure of his facts. In these three instances the reviewer commences his attack 
upon me with the ominous words ‘we speak advisedly.” If this expression 
has any meaning, it implies that the writer is more than ordinarily certain of 
the statement it prefaces—that he speaks with deliberate and careful con- 
sideration. Now I also speak ‘‘advisedly”’ when I affirm, with the proof in my 
hand, that two if not all of these three charges fulminated against me are either 
heedless or wilful misrepresentations. 
The first charge is as follows :— 
** Now we speak advisedly when we say that Mr. Crookes knew nothing 
whatever of the perseverance with which scientific men with whom 
he has never had the privilege of associating, qualified by long 
previous experience in inquiries of the like kind, had investigated 
these phenomena.” 
This spiteful statement is utterly false. I should think there are few 
persons in this country who have examined more carefully into the litera- 
ture of the subject, or have read a greater number of books on spiritualism, 
demonology, witchcraft, animal magnetism, spiritual theology, magic, and medi- 
cal psychology, in English, French, and Latin. In this list I have even included 
Dr. Carpenter’s article on Electro-Biology and Mesmerism in the Quarterly 
Review for October, 1853. 
The second well-considered charge runs as follows :— 
