SCIENCE. 



FRIDAY, APRIL 1, 1887. 



COMMENT AND CRITICISM. 



The resume of the evidence concerning though t- 

 transferrence which Dr. Morton Prince of the 

 Boston city hospital drew up for presentation to 

 a medical society, and which is now reprinted in 

 pamphlet form, seems to us eminently judicious. 

 It embodies such a judgment on this interesting 

 but exceedingly difiBcult subject as an intelHgent 

 man who has carefully studied the evidence, and 

 is competent to weigh it, may now fairly hold. 

 Dr. Prince begins by hastily narrating the salient 

 points in the history of the Society for psychical 

 research, and then summarizes the Creery experi- 

 ments, those with Messrs. Smith and Blackburn, 

 and those carried on by Mr. Malcolm Guthrie, all 

 of which are by this time familiar to American 

 readers, an article recounting them having ap- 

 peared in the Popular science monthly for August 

 last. The evidence adduced by the above-named 

 and similar experiments is, according to Dr. 

 Prince, as follows : First, we have as experi- 

 menters a number of gentlemen noted for their 

 integrity, and whose standing would exclude all 

 intention at deceit on their own part. Second, 

 the experimenters, after considerable previous ex- 

 perience, arrange the conditions of the experi- 

 ments so as to exclude by every possible device 

 all possibility of communication by the ordinary 

 channels, including collusion. They are allowed 

 to arrange the conditions according to their own 

 option in such a way as to test in the most strin- 

 gent manner the phenomena under investigation. 

 In this way the experiments differ essentially 

 from those made with ordinary professional 

 spiritualists and mind-readers. Under these strin- 

 gent conditions, results are obtained showing that 

 the thoughts of one mind have been communi- 

 cated in some way to another. Third, the experi- 

 menters conclude that the communication has 

 been made by direct thought-transferrence. 



that overlooked sources of fallacies may yet ap- 

 pear. The phenomena in question cannot be es- 

 tablished beyond the possibility of a doubt until 

 both observers and subjects have been very much 

 multiplied. The opinions held by Dr. Prince him- 

 self as to the evidence seem to us amply justified 

 by the facts. The opinions are these : 1°. All the 

 evidence that we possess, such as it is, goes to 

 prove that certain persons, under certain favorable 

 conditions, can become cognizant of the thoughts 

 of another without any communication by the 

 senses ; 2°. That the best working hypothesis that 

 we possess is in favor of direct thought-transfer- 

 rence as an explanation ; 3°. A priori, there is 

 nothing inherently impossible or improbable in the 

 hypothesis ; 4". The subject must be considered as 

 still sub judice, and needs further investigation to 

 settle the question beyond possibility of doubt. 

 Dr. Prince disposes very neatly of those critics 

 who would set aside the evidence gathered in 

 England because from time immemorial similar 

 claims have been made by spiritualists, clairvoy- 

 ants, and the like. He calls such objections il- 

 logical and unscientific, for there is not the slight- 

 est parallel between the two cases. " No physical 

 experiments in the laboratory have been more un- 

 der the control of the chemist and the physiologist 

 than have these. The subjects have given them- 

 selves up to the experimenters, not occasionally 

 and fitfully, but day after day. Any and every 

 sort of condition has been cheerfully acquiesced 

 in and imposed." Dr. Prince concludes his inter- 

 esting paper by cautioning aU persons against con- 

 founding the evidence for thought-transferrence 

 with the muscle- reading of the professional ' mind- 

 readers ' The more the intelligent public hears 

 about thought-transferrence, the more it is con- 

 vinced that a conclusion is going to be reached by 

 a study of the evidence solely, and not by abuse 

 and sarcasm aimed at the gentlemen who are 

 giving their time, their labor, and their money to 

 these investigations. 



Dr. Prince, in commenting on this summary of 

 the evidence, says that the opinions of the experi- 

 menters themselves are of undoubted value, but 



No. 217 — 1887. 



In 1883 A COMMISSION was appointed in Germany 

 to consider and report on the advantages and dis- 

 advantages of vaccination. In the commission 

 were three anti-vaccinationists. The following are 

 among the conclusions reached by the commis- 



