444 
Occultism R econsideved -. 
[August, 
party were sitting. “ Then she marked a spot on the 
ground, and called to one of the gentlemen to bring a knife 
to dig with. The place chosen was the edge of a little 
slope, covered with thick weeds and grass and shrubby 
undergrowth. He — let us call him X— tore up these in the 
first place with some difficulty, as the roots were tough and 
closely interlaced. Cutting into the matted roots and earth 
with the knife, and pulling away the debris with his hands, 
he came at last on the edge of something white, which 
turned out, as it was completely excavated, to be the required 
cup. A corresponding saucer was also found after a little 
more digging. Both objects were in among the roots which 
spread everywhere through the ground, so that it seemed as 
if the roots were growing round them. The cup and saucer 
both corresponded exactly, as regards their pattern, with 
those that had been brought for the picnic. I may as well 
add that afterwards, when we got home, my wife questioned 
our principal khitmutgar as to how many cups and saucers 
of that particular kind we possessed. In the progress of 
years, as the set was old, some had been broken, but the 
man at once said that nine tea-cups were left. When col- 
lected and counted that number was found to be right, 
without reckoning the excavated cup. As regards the pattern 
it was one of a somewhat peculiar kind, bought a good many 
years previously in London, and which assuredly could never 
have been matched in Simla.” 
There are, we submit, only three conceivable ways of 
accounting for this occurrence. Either— 
1. Mr. Sinnett is guilty of deliberate deception, or— - 
2. He and others present were themselves deceived by an 
elaborate fraud, or lastly — 
3. The cup and saucer were produced in the earth where 
found by some agency to us inconceivable. 
As regards the first alternative, though we have not the 
pleasure of knowing Mr. Sinnett personally, yet a friend of 
high scientific standing vouches both for his integrity and 
for his general acuteness and freedom from gullibility. 
The second supposition literally bristles with difficulties. 
The ground where the cup was found is described as undis- 
turbed. If a tunnel had been dug, through which the cup 
might have been thrust to the spot where it lay, some traces 
of such an excavation would have been found when a special 
search was made shortly after. What is equally important, 
the need for a cup and saucer could not have been foreseen, 
since it arose from an unexpected person joining the party 
at the last moment. Again, the servants, without the 
