She did not attract the attention of the public until about 1880 when Professor Chiaia, who had been giving her a lot of attention without detecting her methods, challenged Professor Lombroso, at that time the most distinguished scientific man in Italy, to investigate her. Professor Lombroso did, but failed to detect any fraudulent work though his decision was delayed for so long a time that when it was finally given it was claimed that his mentality had weakened considerably.[47] In 1892 Palladino had begun to attract the attention of scientific men in different Italian cities and had also been brought to the notice of some of the English Spiritualists but it was not until 1894 that she went to France. This trip was brought about through the influence of Professor Richet, and Sir Oliver Lodge, Professor Sidgwick, and Mr. Myers took part in the proceedings. On the return of Lodge and Myers to England they aroused interest in Palladino by reporting her phenomena to be genuine. The first exposure of Palladino was made by Dr. Richard Hodgson in 1895. A committee from the English Society for Psychical Research, consisting of Hereward Carrington, Hon. Everard Feilding, and Wortly W. Baggally, which had held a series of test seances with Palladino in Italy, brought her to England for a fresh try-out and another series of sittings was held. Very early in the series suspicious movements on the part of the medium were observed. Later Dr. Hodgson joined the circle and was able to show conclusively that by clever manipulation--sheer trickery--she was getting one hand free and with it making the movements observed. Her method[48] was to begin by allowing one hand to be firmly held by the sitter at her side (say on the left) and let the fingers of her other hand (right) rest on that of the sitter on her right. In the course of some rapid spasmodic movements she would bring the sitters’ hands so close together that one of her own could do duty for two, being held by one sitter while its fingers rested on the hand of the other sitter,[49] leaving her (Palladino’s) right hand free to produce the desired “phenomena” after which it was restored to its original position. Other devices equally dishonest were observed or inferred. All of these men were experienced seance observers[50] but the report of their conclusions shows how easily such experts were deceived by the very tricks which were later proved fraudulent by the New York branch of The Society for Psychical Research. Mr. Feilding’s reports were the least positive of the three and show that when the best phenomena were observed the control was not complete and that the stenographic notes were deficient, and when read over the day following the sitting they seemed weak in comparison with a recollection of the manifestations. That the final reports were based largely on these recollections is indicated by Mr. Feilding’s statement that: