176 LOLA 



another case of a combined psychical (partial) opera- 

 tion of a " mediumistic " kind ; and this hypothesis 

 makes very plausible the other no less impressive 

 hypothesis of the observer that his mind was reading 

 (in a subconscious way) the mind of the horse. I call 

 this hypothesis of Ferrari impressive, because in this 

 case it was due to a person who is certainly not to be 

 suspected of dilettantism, and still less of any pseudo- 

 scientific mysticism. 



For the rest I repeat that " telepathy " also may 

 co-exist along with " mediumistic " action. In a 

 general way, telepathy would seem to assume in the 

 animal a greater amount of " human " psychic affinity, 

 whilst in mediumistic action I look upon the animal 

 as reacting to the intervention of the other mind in a 

 much more " automatic " way : almost like a " speak- 

 ing table," but a table provided with live feet rather 

 than inert legs, and above all provided with a nervous 

 system forming part of it, so that very little action 

 on the part of the medium is required, but the sub- 

 liminal action of the investigator is enough by itself 

 to work it. (Of course, this does not exclude altogether 

 action by others or by the horse itself). 



Krall admits the possibility of telepathy (but in a very 

 limited measure) : and then, if I remember right, he was 

 looking finally for an explanation which to-day I should 

 perhaps call of the mediumistic type, if I had been better 

 acquainted with it ; but in fact I had of him, in his lifetime, 

 only some vague hint on the point. 



As to Miss Kindermann, she recognises the possibility of 

 transmission of thought in certain cases (e.g. when Lola 

 is tired or is unwilling to " work " any more). According 

 to her it would be a question of a line of least resistance, 

 along which the " work " of the animal becomes more 

 easy. Hence arises the necessity, as she maintains, for the 

 investigator to be very careful of the danger of falsified 



