Telepathy and the Subliminal Self Part 20

"At the breakfast table I said to the friend who shared the apartment with me, 'Rosa is dead.' 'What do you mean by that?' she inquired; 'you told me she seemed better yesterday.' I related the occurrence of the morning and told her I had a strong impression Rosa was dead. She laughed and said I had dreamed it all. I a.s.sured her I was thoroughly awake. She continued to jest on the subject and slightly annoyed me by her persistence in believing it a dream when I was perfectly sure of having been wide awake.

To settle the question I summoned a messenger, and sent him to inquire how Rosa did. He returned with the answer that she died that morning at five o'clock.

"H. G. HOSMER."

I will also introduce here as a "Borderland case" an extract from _The Life and Times of Lord Brougham, written by himself_ (1871), the extract being an entry in his journal during a journey in Sweden in December, 1799. It is as follows:--

"We set out for Gothenburg [apparently on December 18th], determined to make for Norway. About one in the morning, arriving at a decent inn, we decided to stop over night. Tired with the cold of yesterday, I was glad to take advantage of a hot bath before I turned in, and here a most remarkable thing happened to me--so remarkable that I must tell the story from the beginning.

"After I left the High School, I went with G., my most intimate friend, to attend the cla.s.ses at the University. There was no divinity cla.s.s, but we frequently in our walks discussed and speculated upon many grave subjects--among others, on the immortality of the soul, and a future state. This question, and the possibility, I will not say of ghosts walking, but of the dead appearing to the living, were subjects of much speculation; and we actually committed the folly of drawing up an agreement written with our blood, to the effect that which ever of us died first should appear to the other, and thus solve any doubts we had entertained of the 'life after death.' After we had finished our cla.s.ses at college, G. went to India, having got an appointment there in the Civil Service.

"He seldom wrote to me, and after the lapse of a few years I had almost forgotten him; moreover, his family having little connection with Edinburgh, I seldom saw or heard anything of them, or of him through them, so that all his school-boy intimacy had died out, and I had nearly forgotten his existence. I had taken, as I have said, a warm bath, and while lying in it and enjoying the comfort of the heat after the late freezing I had undergone, I turned my head round, looking towards the chair on which I had deposited my clothes, as I was about to get out of the bath. On the chair sat G., looking calmly at me.

"How I got out of the bath I know not, but on recovering my senses I found myself sprawling on the floor. The apparition, or whatever it was that had taken the likeness of G., had disappeared.

"This vision produced such a shock that I had no inclination to talk about it even to Stewart; but the impression it made upon me was too vivid to be easily forgotten; and so strongly was I affected by it that I have here written down the whole history, with the date, 19th December, and all the particulars, as they are now fresh before me.

"No doubt I had fallen asleep; and that the appearance presented so distinctly to my eyes was a dream, I cannot for a moment doubt; yet for years I had had no communication with G., nor had there been anything to recall him to my recollection; nothing had taken place during our Swedish travels either connected with G. or with India, or with anything relating to him, or to any member of his family. I could not discharge from my mind the impression that G. must have died, and that his appearance to me was to be received as a proof of a future state; yet all the while I felt convinced that the whole was a dream; and so painfully vivid, so unfading the impression, that I could not bring myself to talk of it or make the slightest allusion to it."

In October, 1862, Lord Brougham added as a postscript:--

"I have just been copying out from my journal the account of this strange dream: _Certissima mortis imago!_ And now to finish the story, begun about sixty years ago. Soon after my return to Edinburgh, there arrived a letter from India, announcing G.'s death, and stating that he had died on the 19th of December!

"Singular coincidence! Yet, when one reflects on the vast number of dreams which night after night pa.s.s through our brains, the number of coincidences between the vision and the event are perhaps fewer and less remarkable than a fair calculation of chances would warrant us to expect.

Nor is it surprising, considering the variety of thoughts in sleep, and that they all bear some a.n.a.logy to the affairs of life, that a dream should sometimes coincide with a contemporaneous, or even with a future, event. This is not much more wonderful than that a person whom we have had no reason to expect should appear to us at the very moment we have been thinking or speaking of him. So common is this, that it has for ages grown into the proverb, 'Speak of the devil.' I believe every such seeming miracle is, like every ghost story, capable of explanation."

I have introduced in full Lord Brougham's statement of the case and his method of reasoning upon it; let us for a moment a.n.a.lyze each.

I have also introduced Harriet Hosmer's experience along with that of Lord Brougham, because they are both notable persons whose evidence regarding matters of fact could not be impugned, and whose strength of character, honesty of purpose, and knowledge of affairs enables us to throw out of account any idea of imposture or self-deception in either case. These cases, then, must be received as having actually occurred as related; and being so received they render all the more credible other cases reported by persons less well known.

What was the character of the apparitions or appearances which were presented; were they, properly speaking, dreams? In Miss Hosmer's statement she stoutly affirms that she was awake, and she gives good reasons for so believing, namely, before she _saw_ anything, but only _felt_ that some one was in the room, she _awoke_ from a sound sleep; she reasoned with herself regarding the possibility of any one getting into the room; she called out: "Who's there?" She saw the furniture, heard the clock strike, and counted five; and in another account which I also have, she heard the familiar noises about the house of servants at their usual work, and she resolved to get up. All this before she saw anything unusual; then turning her head she saw Rosa. Clearly this was not a dream but a vision occurring possibly in a condition of reverie.

Taking up Lord Brougham's case: in simply recording the facts in his diary he speaks of his experience as a _vision_ and the idea that it was a _dream_ was evidently an after-thought. He was _enjoying_ the heat; he was _about to get out of the bath_; he _turned_ his head. He describes the sensations and actions of a man who is awake, or certainly not in a condition to have dreams disconnected with his actual surroundings. After all this, looking toward the chair upon which he had deposited his clothes--still a part of his surroundings, of which he was perfectly conscious--he saw G. on the chair _looking calmly at him_.

Now to have _dreamt_ of G., his old school-fellow and friend, looking calmly at him, would not have been anything shocking nor even surprising; it would not have been even _uncommon_ among dreams--it would have been nothing out of the ordinary course of nature. Dreams seldom shock or even surprise us--surely not unless there is something intrinsically shocking represented by them; but when we see the phantasm of a person whom we know cannot be there--that is unusual, that is not in the ordinary course of nature, as we are accustomed to observe nature, and it surprises us, shocks us, perhaps frightens us; but it does so because we are awake and can reason about it and compare its strangeness with the usual order of things.

Lord Brougham was awake, he did so reason, and was accordingly shocked.

So vivid was the apparition that he tumbled out of the bath and fainted.

It is only some time after this, when writing up his diary, that he has no doubt that he had fallen asleep. Preconceived theories about apparitions now come up in his mind and get him into trouble; he must _explain_ his vision.

Now for the explanation. Lord Brougham finds, on returning to Scotland, that his former friend is dead, and that the time of his death corresponded with the time at which he had seen his apparition in Sweden, December 19th.

"Singular coincidence!" That is Lord Brougham's explanation; and that is the usual explanation; but it is ill-considered--it is weak--it does not cover the ground.

Lord Brougham had but two theories from which to choose: namely, Chance and Supernaturalism; and of the two horns of the dilemma he chose the easier one.

Let us, however, place ourselves, for the moment, on his ground, namely, that (1) It was a dream; and (2) dreams are so numerous that it is not surprising that some of them coincide with contemporaneous events.

Evidently the more numerous the coincidences, or the dreams which correspond to contemporaneous events, the weaker becomes the theory of _chance_ coincidences. Supposing, then, Lord Brougham's case to have been unique, that not another similar case was known to have occurred, then we should have no particular hesitation in a.s.signing it to the category of chance coincidences; but even then it would be out of the order of _usual_ coincidences both in interest and the number of separate points involved; it would excite special interest, but the reference of it to chance would not be considered unreasonable: if, however, three or four such cases had been reported and discussed in a generation, thoughtful people would begin to inquire if there might not be some relation of sequence, or possibly of cause and effect; but when hundreds of cases have been reported, because they have been systematically sought for--veridical dreams connected with the moment of the death of the agent, with fainting, with trance, with moments of supreme excitement, or of extreme danger, so many different conditions in which by careful observation it is found that such hallucinations and symbols relating to actual contemporaneous occurrences originate and are telepathically transmitted--the matter is then quite removed from the category of chance coincidences, and any attempt to force these cases there to-day denotes either ignorance of established facts or inability to appreciate logical reasoning or even mathematical demonstration. This is all upon the supposition that the case in question was a dream. On the other hand, now place the case where it really belongs as a _waking_ or Borderland _vision_--an event in a cla.s.s a hundred-fold less numerous than dreams--and in which cla.s.s corresponding events are at least tenfold _more numerous_, and we see how conspicuously weak is the coincidence theory.

Neither need the other horn of the dilemma, namely, Supernaturalism, any longer be taken. A newly recognized method of mental interaction is gradually coming into view; a new principle and law in psychology is being established; and under this law the erratic and discredited facts of history as well as the facts of present observation and experiment are falling into line and becoming intelligible.

The new principle or law, as we have seen, is this: Perceptions, of the cla.s.s which have usually been known as hallucinations, may be originated and transferred _telepathically_; in other words, there is a subliminal self, which, under various conditions on the part of either agent or percipient, or both, may come to the surface and act, impressing the sensitive percipient through the senses, by dreams, visions, and apparitions, as well as through hallucinations of hearing and touch.

Returning to our well considered cases ill.u.s.trating some of these various conditions: having presented examples of veridical or truth-telling dreams, and of waking or borderland visions also corresponding to actual events taking place at the same time, I will next present cases where the percipient was _undoubtedly awake_ and in a normal condition. The following case is reported on the authority of Surgeon Harris of the Royal Artillery, who, with his two daughters, was a witness of the occurrence:

"A party of children, sons and daughters of the officers of artillery stationed at Woolwich, were playing in the garden. Suddenly a little girl screamed, and stood staring with an aspect of terror at a willow tree standing in the grounds. Her companions gathered round, asking what ailed her. 'Oh!' said she, 'there--there. Don't you see? There's papa lying on the ground, and the blood running from a big wound.' All a.s.sured her that they could see nothing of the kind. But she persisted, describing the wound and the position of the body, still expressing surprise that they did not see what she so plainly saw. Two of her companions were daughters of one of the surgeons of the regiment, whose house adjoined the garden.

They called their father, who at once came to the spot. He found the child in a state of extreme terror and agony, took her into his house, a.s.sured her it was only a fancy, and having given her restoratives sent her home.

The incident was treated by all as what the doctor had called it, a fancy, and no more was thought of it. News from India, where the child's father was stationed, was in those days slow in coming, but the arrival of the mail in due course brought the information that the father of the child had been killed by a shot, and died under a tree. Making allowances for difference in time, it was found to have been about the moment when the daughter had the vision at Woolwich."

The next case is from Mr. Francis Dart Fenton, formerly in the native department of the Government, Auckland, New Zealand. In 1852, when the incident occurred, Mr. Fenton was engaged in forming a settlement on the banks of the Waikato.

He writes:--

"March 25th, 1860.

"Two sawyers, Frank Philps and Jack Mulholland, were engaged cutting timber for the Rev. R. Maunsell, at the mouth of the Awaroa Creek, a very lonely place, a vast swamp, no people within miles of them. As usual, they had a Maori with them to a.s.sist in felling trees. He came from Tih.o.r.ewam, a village on the other side of the river, about six miles off. As Frank and the native were cross-cutting a tree, the native stopped suddenly and said, 'What are you come for?' looking in the direction of Frank. Frank replied, 'What do you mean?' He said, 'I am not speaking to you; I am speaking to my brother.' Frank said, 'Where is he?' The native replied, 'Behind you. What do you want?'

(to the other Maori). Frank looked round and saw n.o.body; the native no longer saw any one, but laid down the saw and said, 'I shall go across the river; my brother is dead.' Frank laughed at him, and reminded him that he had left him quite well on Sunday (five days before), and there had been no communication since. The Maori spoke no more, but got into his canoe and pulled across. When he arrived at the landing-place, he met people coming to fetch him. His brother had just died. I knew him well."

In answer to inquiries as to his authority for this narrative, Mr. Fenton writes the editors of _Phantasms of the Living_:--

"December 18th, 1883.

"I knew all the parties well, and it is quite true. Incidents of this sort are not infrequent among the Maoris.

"F. D. FENTON,

"Late Chief Judge, Native Law Court of New Zealand."

The following case was first published in the _Spiritual Magazine_ in 1861, by Robert H. Collyer, M. D., F. C. S.

Although published in a spiritual publication, Dr. Collyer states that he himself is not a believer in spiritualism, but, on the contrary, is a materialist and has been for forty years.

He writes from Beta House, 8 Alpha Road, St. John's Wood, N. W.:--

"April 15th, 1861.

"On January 3d, 1856, my brother Joseph being in command of the steamer _Alice_, on the Mississippi, just above New Orleans, she came in collision with another steamer. The concussion caused the flagstaff or pole to fall with great violence, which coming in contact with my brother's head, actually divided the skull, causing of necessity instant death. In October, 1857, I visited the United States. When at my father's residence, Camden, New Jersey, the melancholy death of my brother became the subject of conversation, and my mother narrated to me that at the very time of the accident the apparition of my brother Joseph was presented to her. This fact was corroborated by my father and four sisters. Camden, N. J., is distant from the scene of the accident, in a direct line, over one thousand miles. My mother mentioned the fact of the apparition on the morning of the 4th of January to my father and sisters; nor was it until the 16th, or thirteen days after, that a letter was received confirming in every particular the extraordinary visitation. It will be important to mention that my brother William and his wife lived near the locality of the dreadful accident, and are now living in Philadelphia; they have also corroborated to me the details of the impression produced upon my mother."

Dr. Collyer then quotes a letter from his mother which contains the following sentences:--

"CAMDEN, N. J., UNITED STATES, "March 27th, 1861.

"MY BELOVED SON,--On the 3d of January, 1856, I did not feel well and retired early to bed. Some time after I felt uneasy and sat up in bed; I looked around the room, and to my utter amazement, saw Joseph standing at the door looking at me with great earnestness; his head was bandaged up, a dirty night-cap on, and a dirty white garment, something like a surplice. He was much disfigured about the eyes and face. It made me quite uncomfortable the rest of the night. The next morning Mary came into my room early. I told her I was sure I was going to have bad news from Joseph. I told all the family at the breakfast table. They replied, 'It was only a dream and nonsense;' but that did not change my opinion. It preyed on my mind, and on the 16th of January I received the news of his death; and singular to say both William and his wife, who were there, say that he was exactly attired as I saw him.

"Your ever affectionate mother, "ANNE E. COLLYER."

In reply to questions, Dr. Collyer wrote: "My father, who was a scientific man, calculated the difference of longitude between Camden and New Orleans and found that the mental impression was at the exact time of my brother's death....