Now, there is nothing very remarkable in this affair, for all might have been done by the medium himself, by first pathetizing the persons present, as it might be done without their knowledge, and while in that state could be made to see and hear any thing imagined by the operator. We are assured, by one who knows, that it is impossible for those who are fit subjects to be present at a circle without being more or less under the mesmeric influence. And, in such cases, they can be _willed_ to remember or forget what they have seen or heard. We do not consider such persons as competent witnesses in such a case as they have testified to. It may all have been induced, or it may all have been real. And if real, there was no need to refer it to the agency of spirits, since such things have been done without spirits, as in the case of Joe Collins, or others which we shall refer to, in this part of our volume. But here we may be told, that a thousand dollars has been offered to any one who will prove that such things are produced by any other power than that of _spirits_. But the same sum has been offered to any one who will prove that _spirits_ move tables, chairs, and the like, or that _spirits_ produce the noises and other manifestations ascribed to them. We have heard the case of a person who went to a medium and wished to know if he could be put in communication with his father, who had died several years before. He was answered in the affirmative. But the inquirer desired, as proof that it would actually be the spirit of his father that would be introduced to him, that a pencil and paper should be laid upon a table, and that the spirit of the father should come and write his own name upon the paper, the son feeling assured that, if this were done, he should at once recognize both the name and the writing. Accordingly, the spirit in question came, and did as was desired, and the son declared it to be the real name and handwriting of his father. Now, the philosophy of the case is this: The inquirer was first pathetized, although ignorant of the fact at the time--a thing very common, though not generally understood. Thus the medium became acquainted with the name of the father as it existed in the mind of the son; but did the pencil actually write the name upon the paper? No. It was only made to _appear_ so to the mind of the inquirer. As to the handwriting, the inquirer's mind was directed to a piece of paper, and to look at the writing. Of course, he saw his father's name, and the handwriting, for he could see nothing else for the time being, his mind being impressed with that one idea or object, and closed to every thing else. It was in fact, to him, his father's name and chirography, and no one's else. It could not be otherwise while his mind was under the control of the operator.