Mr. Davey's performances, _as described_ by many of his sitters,
like the descriptions of the performances of many a medium, are
marvelous enough to demand the hypothesis of occult agency: "Writing
between a conjurer's own slates in a way quite inexplicable to
the conjurer; writing upon slates locked and carefully guarded by
witnesses; writing upon slates held by the witnesses firmly against
the under-surface of the table; writing upon slates held by the
witnesses above the table; answers to questions written secretly in
locked slates; correct quotations appearing on guarded slates from
books chosen by the witnesses at random, and sometimes mentally,
the books not touched by the 'medium'; writing in different colors
mentally chosen by the witnesses, covering the whole side of one
of their own slates; messages in languages unknown to the medium,
including a message in German, for which only a mental request had
been made, and a letter in Japanese in a double slate locked and
sealed by the witness; the date of a coin placed by the witness in a
sealed envelope correctly written in a locked slate upon the table,
the envelope remaining intact; a word written between slates screwed
together and also corded and sealed together, the word being chosen
by the witness after the slates were fastened by himself, etc.,
etc. And yet, though 'autographic' fragments of pencil were 'heard'
weaving mysterious messages between and under and over slates, and
fragments of chalk were seen moving about under a tumbler placed
above the table in full view, none of the sitters witnessed that best
phenomenon, _Mr. Davey writing_."
It must not be supposed that the errors of mal-description and
lapse of memory thus committed are at all serious in themselves; on
the contrary, they are mostly such as would be entirely pardonable
in ordinary matters. Mr. Hodgson places them in four classes. In
the first, the observer _interpolates_ a fact which really did not
happen, but which he was led to believe had occurred; he records that
he examined the slate, when he really did not. Secondly, for similar
causes, he _substitutes_ one statement for another closely like it;
he says he examined the slate minutely, when he really only did so
hastily. Thirdly, he _transposes_ the order in which the events
happened, making the examination of the slate occur at a later period
than when it really took place. Lastly, he _omits_ certain details
which he was carefully led to consider trivial, but which really
were most important. Such slight lapses as these are sufficient
to make a marvel of a clever piece of conjuring; add to this the
increased temptations for mal-observation afforded by the dim light
and mysterious surroundings of the medium, as well as by the
sympathetic attitude of the sitters, and the wide divergence between
the miraculous narratives of spiritualists and the homely deceptions
which they are intended to describe, is no longer a mystery.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account