About the same time in the afternoon of the 30th December, the lady came into the drawing-room, and to her great astonishment she perceived her husband standing with his back to the fireplace. She had seen him go out walking a short time previously, and was naturally surprised to find he had returned so soon. He looked at her very thoughtfully, and made no answer. She sat down close beside him at the fire, and as he still gazed upon her she said, “Why don’t you say something!” The figure immediately moved away towards the window at the farther end of the room, still gazing at her, “and it passed so close that she was struck by the circumstance of hearing no step nor sound, nor feeling her dress brushed against, nor even any agitation of the air.” Although convinced this was not her husband, the lady never fancied there was anything supernatural in the appearance of the figure. Subsequently she was convinced that it was a spectral illusion, although she could not see through the figure which appeared as substantial as the reality. Were it advisable, we could multiply instances. In the _Edinburgh Journal of Science_ these, and many more instances of spectral illusions were narrated by the husband of the lady. She frequently beheld deceased relatives or absent friends, and described their dress and general appearance very minutely. On one occasion she perceived a coach full of skeletons drive up to the door, and noticed spectral dogs and cats (her own pets’ likenesses) in the room. There can be no doubt upon these points; the appearances were manifest and distinct. They were seen in the presence of other people, in solitude, and in the society of her husband. The lady was in delicate health, and very sensitive. The spectres appeared in daylight as well as in the dark, or by candle-light. Let us now, guided by what we have already written, and by Sir David Brewster’s experience, endeavour to give a rational explanation of these illusions. “The mind’s eye is really the body’s eye, and the retina is the common tablet upon which both classes of impressions are painted, and by means of which they receive their visual existence according to the same optical laws.” “In the healthy state of mind and body the relative intensity of the two classes of impressions on the retina are nicely adjusted—the bodily and mental are balanced. The latter are feeble and transient, and in ordinary temperaments are never capable of disturbing or effacing the direct images of visible objects.... The mind cannot perform two different functions at the same instant, and the direction of its attention to one of the two classes of impressions necessarily produces the extinction of the other; but so rapid is the exercise of mental power, that the alternate appearance and disappearance of the two contending impressions is no more recognized than the successive observations of external objects during the twinkling of the eyelids.”