Psychic Photography.—At a recent London and Provincial meeting, Mr. J. Traill Taylor showed some negatives of what are commonly called “spirit photographs,” which he had taken under test conditions. He had bought ordinary commercial plates from a well-known commercial dealer, and exposed them at a recent séance held in the north of London. He took his own stereoscopic camera, opened the original packets of plates and filled the slides himself in the presence of two gentlemen. He exposed them by magnesium light upon two sitters, one of whom was alleged to be a “medium,” and immediately developed them himself. On development some of them showed other figures (in addition to those of the sitters) which had not been visibly present when the exposure was made. The exposures were made in the afternoon in an ordinary drawing-room, when it was far from dark, and the magnesium light was supplementary to the daylight. Prints from the resulting negatives, viewed in the stereoscope, showed the sitters in relief, but the “ghosts” with the appearance of flatness. We are almost surprised at Mr. Taylor’s temerity in bringing forward such a subject before such an audience, when he knows full well the unreasoning prejudice with which the subject is met. Like the brothers of Dives, “they would not be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.” We do not imagine that Mr. Taylor wished to convince his hearers of anything, but surely he was over-sanguine if he even expected fair investigation or criticism. Before he came forward in this matter, he would have been taken as a competent investigator—in fact, the meeting in question passed a resolution to the effect that he was a “reliable person, and a gentleman well qualified to conduct such an experiment as had been described.” Yet, when he states that fraud was impossible, he is at once condemned as either an incompetent or an impostor—preferably the former. A committee was appointed to investigate the matter. Will they be believed if they give a report similar to that of Mr. Taylor’s? Or will they only be believed if they give the report that is expected? Referring to the unsuccessful attempt made in another photographic journal to throw doubt upon Mr. Taylor’s experiments by raising a cry of trickery, the _Practical Photographer_ makes this sensible observation:— “Surely this is a miserable evasion of the main point at issue, which is not whether the medium was capable of fraud if he got the chance, but whether Mr. Taylor is believable when he asserts that the chance for fraud was not given.” In the May issue of the same journal there is the following:—