M. Babinet began by accepting _a priori_, the rotation and movements of the furniture, which fact he declared to be ”_hors de doute_.” “This rotation,” he said, “being able to manifest itself with a considerable energy, either by a very great speed, or by a strong resistance when it is desired that it should stop.”[195] Now comes the explanation of the eminent scientist. “Gently pushed by little concordant impulsions of the hands laid upon it, the table begins to oscillate from right to left.... At the moment when, after more or less delay, a nervous trepidation is established in the hands and the little individual impulsions of all the experimenters have become harmonized, the table is set in motion.”[196] He finds it very simple, for “all muscular movements are determined over bodies by levers of the third order, in which the fulcrum is very near to the point where the force acts. This, consequently, {105} communicates a great speed to the mobile parts for the very little distance which the motor force has to run.... Some persons are astonished to see a table subjected to the action of several well-disposed individuals in a fair way to _conquer powerful obstacles_, even break its legs, when suddenly stopped; but that is _very simple_ if we consider the power of the _little concordant actions_.... Once more, the physical explanation offers no difficulty.”[197] In this dissertation, two results are clearly shown: the reality of the phenomena proved, and the scientific explanation made ridiculous. But M. Babinet can well afford to be laughed at a little; he knows, as an astronomer, that dark spots are to be found even in the sun. There is one thing, though, that Babinet has always stoutly denied, viz.: the levitation of furniture without contact. De Mirville catches him proclaiming that such levitation is impossible: “simply _impossible_,” he says, “as impossible as perpetual motion.”[198] Who can take upon himself, after such a declaration, to maintain that the word _impossible_ pronounced by science is infallible? But the tables, after having waltzed, oscillated and turned, began tipping and rapping. The raps were sometimes as powerful as pistol-detonations. What of this? Listen: “The witnesses and investigators are _ventriloquists_!” De Mirville refers us to the _Revue des Deux Mondes_, in which is published a very interesting dialogue, invented by M. Babinet speaking of himself to himself, like the Chaldean En-Soph of the Kabalists: “What can we finally say of all these facts brought under our observation? Are there such raps produced? Yes. Do such raps answer questions? Yes. Who produces these sounds? The mediums. By what means? _By the ordinary acoustic method of the ventriloquists._ But we were given to suppose that these sounds might result from the _cracking of the toes and fingers_? No; for then they would always proceed from the same point, and such is not the fact.”[199]