SCIENCE AND TEE SPIRITS." 341 



rnenced repeating the alphabet, and when he reached the 

 letter " P " a knock was heard. He began agaih, and the 

 spirits knocked at the letter " 0." 1 was puzzled, but 

 waited for the end. The next letter knocked down was 

 " E." I laughed, and remarked that the spirits were going 

 to make a poet of me. Admonished for my levity, I was 

 informed that the frame of mind proper for the occasion 

 ought to have been superinduced by a perusal of the Bible 

 immediately before the seance. The spelling, however, 

 went on, and sure enough I came out a poet. But matters 

 did not end here. Oar host continued his repetition of the 

 alphabet, and the next letter of the name proved to be 

 " 0." Here was manifestly an unfinished word, and the 

 spirits were apparently in their most communicative mood. 

 The knocks came from under the table, but no person 

 present evinced the slightest desire to look under it. I 

 asked whether I might go underneath; the permission was 

 granted; so I crept under the table. Some tittered; but the 

 candid old A. exclaimed, " He has a right to look into 

 the very dregs of it, to convince himself." Having pretty 

 well assured myself that no sound could be produced under 

 the table without its origin being revealed, I requested 

 our host to continue his questions. He did so, but in vain. 

 He adopted a tone of tender entreaty; but the *' dear spirits " 

 had become dumb dogs, and refused to be entreated. I 

 continued under that table for at least a quarter of an hour, 

 after which, with a feeling of despair as regards the prospects 

 of humanity never before experienced, I regained my chair. 

 Once there, the spirits resumed their loquacity, and dubbed 

 rue ie Poet of Science." 



This, then, is the result of an attempt made by a scien- 

 tific man to look into these spiritual phenomena. It is 

 not encouraging; and for this reason. The present pro- 

 moters of spiritual phenomena divide themselves into two 

 classes, one of which needs no demonstration, while the 

 other is beyond the reach of proof. The victims like to 

 believe, and they do not like to be undeceived. Science 

 is perfectly powerless in the presence of this frame of mind. 

 It is, moreover, a state perfectly compatible with extreme 

 intellectual subtlety and a capacity for devising hypotheses 

 which only require the hardihood engendered by strong 

 conviction, or by callous mendacity, to render them 

 impregnable. The logical feebleness of science is not suffi- ^ 



