I here embrace the opportunity to make a correction of a statement in “The Unmasking of Robert Houdin” (page 287). The record and source of information at that time was published in Berlin, Germany. It gave the impression that the “letters” cited above referred to Spiritualistic phenomena, but now, having come into possession of a true translation of these documents complete, as published by the Society for Psychical Research,[128] I am of the opinion that Houdin did treat the subject of Spiritualism with conservative prudence and impartiality, as recorded by Professor Hoffmann. But I wish to say that in my estimation of Robert Houdin, despite his wonderful reputation and record as mentioned in Larousse’s Encyclopedia, I cannot agree with his statements, because he misrepresented so much in his “Memoirs of a Magician.” In “The Unmasking of Robert Houdin” I devoted a whole chapter to his ignorance of magic and by investigating I have found that he was not competent as an investigator of the claims of Spiritualists. It came quite as a shocking surprise to me to find that the letters which were supposed to refer to Spiritualistic seances, and which have been quoted so often as being such, refer only to his experience with Alexis the clairvoyant. It must be apparent, even to the casual observer, that they have no bearings whatsoever on Spiritualism, but refer only to sittings with a clairvoyant in a game of sharp card practice. Knowing, as I do now, what it all meant, the fact that he wrote the letters does not surprise me in the least. I believe a lot of things transpired in that room which he could not see, or know whether there was confederacy, for clairvoyants as well as mediums often get information from the most unexpected sources. Clairvoyance, like Spiritualism, was not in the direct line of professional observation to Robert Houdin. What would he or any of his confreres, who were supposed to be adepts at that time, say if they could visit a seance of some of our present day clairvoyants who are appearing before the public and making use of radio, wireless, induction coils, etc.? What a wonderful bunch of letters they might write because of the simple fact that they could not tell how the effects were produced. It is ridiculous for any magician to say that the work he witnesses is not accomplished by conjuring or legerdemain simply because he cannot solve the problem. As to his qualifications for adjudging the work of a clairvoyant, we have but to revert to his own narration of the origin and development of second-sight as used by himself. This account can be found in the English edition of his Memoirs: