Such a case is called a "telepathically induced hallucination" or an "experimental apparition," for the reason that the figure seen is doubtless hallucinatory in character and was induced by means of telepathy. Such cases (and there are plenty of them) are very striking proof of the direct action of mind on mind; and at the same time form a sort of bridge across the gulf which otherwise seems to exist between the experimental cases we have just quoted and the spontaneous cases to which we must now refer. Soon after the Society began its work it was noticed that numbers of cases were sent in, in which apparitions were seen at the very moment of the death of the person symbolized by the apparition. In many such cases, no other experience such as this has happened to the percipient throughout his or her life; but on the very occasion when such a figure _was_ seen, the individual was found to have died at that particular time! Can so many cases of so remarkable a character be attributed to chance? The answer at first sight is: No. But here we must be cautious. In scientific research such as this, we must not be guided by impressions, but by facts and figures. Accordingly it was decided to put this matter to the test, and an "International Census of Hallucinations" was inaugurated, which extended throughout several countries (America being represented by Professor William James), and the taking of which lasted several years. As the result of this laborious undertaking, 30,000 answers were received--the percentage of coincidental apparitions being calculated. After making allowances for all possible sources of error, it was ascertained that the number of coincidences received were several hundred times too numerous to be attributed to chance; and the following statement was signed by Professor Sidgwick's Committee[41]: "_Between deaths and apparitions of the dying person a connection exists which is not due to chance alone. This we hold as a proved fact._" These are important words in many senses; and _donne a penser_. It shows us that, after all is said and done, this old theory of "ghosts" is not so far wrong, and that they, in a certain sense, _do_ exist; it is only a matter of their interpretation: the "mystics" have as usual been right as to the existence of the facts, but the "scientists" may be right in their interpretation of them.