If telepathy from the living breaks down when called upon to explain all the facts of clairvoyance, there exists another explanation which has received the enthusiastic support of those investigators who, while they reject transference between normal minds, point enthusiastically to the alleged efficiency of the “secondary” or “subliminal” self. Fascinating descriptions are given of this “mysterious Mr Hyde which lurks in each of us,” this subconscious mind working in the inner sanctum, as director and controller, while the normal work-a-day self transacts the conventional business of life in the open shop. The amazing performances of a “calculating boy,” the sudden conversion of a Bunyan or a Paul, the supreme genius of a Shakespeare or a Handel, are alike referred to that comprehensive source of all things supernormal, the secondary self! This subliminal self can, we are assured, furnish a sensitive with information which otherwise could not possibly be possessed by any other living person. It can not only explore the dim recesses of past experience but foretell with accuracy the events of the future. Driven from the outer trenches of telepathic defence, some modern protagonists of psychical research find, as they think, an impregnable stronghold in the limitless efficiency of the subliminal self. The _soi-disant_ George Pelham may convince his friends that he is what he claims to be, but he is only a manifestation of Mrs Piper’s subconscious self――in other words, George Pelham in Mrs Piper. If a medium announces in England the death in battle of an officer hours before the bad news has even reached his battalion’s base, this (if not a ‘happy shot’) is merely a striking instance of those abnormal powers of cognition possessed by the medium’s subliminal consciousness. Can this hypothesis bear the heavy strain put upon it? After all the phrase “subliminal self”, “unconscious mind”――call it what you will――embodies nothing at all beyond a hypothesis. Nobody has yet demonstrated the existence of such a division of the mind attached to each living personality, or defined its qualities or capacities. There are indubitably certain depths in the human mind which may be reached by the processes of psycho-analysis, but in these cases there appears to be no compelling reason for any bewildering thesis of two or more distinct minds attached to the same human organism. There may be diversities of mental operation, but the same mind: the θεός and θηρίον can form a composite mentality capable of moral excellence on the one hand, and on the other exposing to the Freudian probe the lower levels of a non-moral animal existence.