The Salem witchcraft, The planchette mystery, and Modern spiritualism Part 6

And again, what of that spicy colloquy in which Planchette writes the words "devil," "devil's brother," "stir fires," "broil you," etc.? Oh, Mr. H. tells us, "That was owing to the irritation of the mediums, their horror and fright, their superst.i.tion, and their repugnance to the questions that were being asked." Curious, is it not? to see "electricity" seizing hold of this irritation, that horror, the other fright, and such and such a superst.i.tion, repugnance, and disgust, and, carefully arranging these mental emotions, building them up by a mysterious mason-work into a distinctly defined and sharply p.r.o.nounced individuality, with a peculiar moral and intellectual character of its own, differing more from each and all of the parties present in the flesh than any one of the latter differed from another! And this individuality, too, putting forth a volition which was not _their_ volition, moving the Planchette which _they_ did not move, making and arranging letters which _they_ did not make and arrange, writing intelligent words and sentences which _they_ did not write, and then causing this creation to a.s.sume the name and character of a regularly built "devil"--a character which appears to have been so far from these young persons' minds that they were unwilling to look it in the face, and were sorely afraid of it! Surely, if "electricity" can do all this, then "electricity" itself is the "devil," and the less mankind have to do with it the better.

But more wonderful still. It appears that "electricity" can give answers, of which not even the slightest elements previously existed in the mind of the questioner or any of the company, and which were even diametrically _contrary_ to his mind; as in the answers of cla.s.s No. 3.

Here "electricity" swings loose, and, becoming completely independent, commences business on its "own hook." Not only so, but it even goes so far beyond the sphere of Mr. H.'s mind as to _fib_ a little, giving at least two answers which this writer p.r.o.nounced "false," as noted in cla.s.s No. 4--thus giving a still more signal display of its independent powers of invention--naughty invention though it was.

Seriously, had not friend Headley better employ his fine talents in giving us another clever book or two about "Was.h.i.+ngton and his Generals," and leave Mr. Planchette, and that more wonderful personage, Mr. Electricity, to take care of themselves? We are obliged here to part company with Mr. H., and pa.s.s on for the purpose of having a few words under this same head with the reverend author of "Planchette, or Spirit-Rapping Made Easy," in the _Ladies' Repository_.

I find it difficult to get at the idea of this writer, if indeed he himself has any definite idea on the subject. By the t.i.tle of his article, however, and several expressions that occur in the body of it, he seems to a.s.sociate the performances of the Planchette with a somewhat extensive cla.s.s of phenomena, in which spirit-rappings, table-tippings, etc., are included. He says:

"Twelve years ago I took pains to study the matter, and at that time I came to conclusions that are every day being proved to be true. I was soon satisfied that as regarded 'trance mediums,' the cause was due to one-third trickery, one-third partial insanity or monomania, and the remainder animal magnetism. I have since learned that opium and has.h.i.+sh (Indian hemp) played an important part. It was proved that young ladies purchased written speeches which they delivered under the influence of has.h.i.+sh."

He then goes on to speak of galvanism, magnetism, electricity, animal magnetism, and the odylic force; but, so far as we can see, without proving any necessary connection between these forces or either of them, and the subject which he aims to elucidate. Quoting a former article of his, he continues:

"The magnetizer of whom I spoke [an exposer of rappings] threw himself into magnetic connection with the table, and _willed_ it to move hither and thither. The will in this case seemed to be a powerful battery, putting its subject into life. Now I suggest that this power be applied to machinery. We will get us a large propelling wheel, to which we will connect our machinery. We will then engage a company of mediums who shall get into _rapport_ with one wheel, and stand willing the wheel on in its evolutions.... If a table may be made to spin around the room, why may not a wheel be made to turn as well?"

The writer certainly deserves credit for this sage suggestion, and a patent for his machine; but whether he will succeed in making it operate satisfactorily without calling into requisition the "monomania," the "has.h.i.+sh," and the "opium," remains to be seen. He then goes on to describe Planchette, and afterward continues:

"The mysterious little creature is called Planchette, and is no humbug. And it conforms to all the customs of the old-time tipping-tables. The operator magnetizes Planchette, and by a mysterious will-power causes it to answer questions. Before giving ill.u.s.trations, we may as well state the laws that seem to govern it.

_First._ It will always answer correctly, _if the operator knows the answer_. _Second._ While it will answer other questions, in all the experiments I have ever engaged in, it has never answered correctly.

_Third._ If a person standing by, who has strong magnetic powers, asks a question, Planchette will answer. But _in all cases_, in our experiments, some ruling mind must have knowledge of what the answer should be, if a correct answer is returned."

In reply to the above, we a.s.sert, _First_. That the "operator" does not "magnetize" the board at all, nor does he exercise any "will power"

over it, causing it to answer questions; and if he did thus cause it to answer only those questions whose answers are already in his mind, what marvel is there in it, more than there is in my pen being caused by my will-power to trace these words and sentences? _Secondly._ If by his _second_ and _third_ specifications of the supposed "laws" which govern Planchette, he means to imply that it will not tell, _often_ tell, and tell with remarkable correctness, things that were never known or dreamed of by the operator, the questioner, or any one present in visible form, then he simply mistakes, as can be testified by thousands, in the most positive manner. But the great essential question is, not so much whether answers given under such and such circ.u.mstances can be _correct_, as whether answers and communications _can be given at all_, which have no origin in the minds of the persons engaged in the experiment, and which must hence be referred to some outside intelligence?

The writer under review, after all, acknowledges his incompetency to unravel this subject, by saying:

"There are mysteries in Planchette. No one is ready to explain the mysterious connection between the mind and the little machine, but there can no longer be any doubt that these curious phenomena, table-tipping and all, are produced by magnetism and electricity....

It is useless to ignore these things, or to laugh at them. It were better to account for them, and subject the influence to the power of man.... When some scientific man will condescend to toy with Planchette, we shall have the curtain drawn aside behind which the spirits have operated these years, and this calamitous spirit-rapping mania will destroy no longer."

One might almost regret that this latter thought did not occur to the writer before he commenced his article, in which case, by a little patient waiting for this ideal and very condescending "scientific man," we might have been spared this diatribe of jumbled electricity, magnetism, will-power, opium, has.h.i.+sh, monomania, and driving wheels.

ELECTRICITY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

From much and varied observation and experiment in reference to the performances of Planchette, and of kindred phenomena, now extending over a period of about twenty years, I here record my denial, in the most emphatic manner, that electricity or magnetism, properly so called, has anything to do with the mystery at all, and call for the proof that it has. That a certain psycho-dynamic agency closely allied to, and in some of its modifications perhaps identical with, Reichenbach's "Od," or odylic force, may have some mediatorial part to play in the affair, I do not dispute, nor yet, for the present, do I affirm. But though this agency has sometimes been identified with what, for the want of a better term, has been called "animal magnetism," it has yet to be proved, I believe, that there are any of the properties of the magnet, or of magnetism, about it, even so much as would suffice to attract the most comminuted iron filings. It is remarkable that the a.s.sertion or hypothesis that electricity or magnetism is concerned in the production of the phenomena in question, has never yet had an origin in any high scientific authority. This is accounted for by the fact that those who are properly acquainted with this agency, and who have the proper apparatus at their command, can demonstrate the truth or falsity of such a hypothesis with the greatest ease. For an experiment, place your Planchette upon a plate of gla.s.s, or some other non-conducting substance. Attach to it a common pith-ball electrometer, and then let your medium place his hands upon the board. If electricity equal to the force even of a small fraction of a grain pa.s.ses from the medium to the board, the pith ball, to that extent, will be deflected from its position. By means of the _Torsion Balance_ electrometer, invented by Coulomb, the presence of almost the smallest conceivable fraction of a grain of electrical force in your Planchette or your table might be detected; and with these delicate tests within reach, tell us not that the movements in question are caused by electricity till you have _proved_ it positively and beyond all dispute.

In the discussion of this electrical theory we have occupied more s.p.a.ce than we originally intended, but we have thought it might be for the interest of true science to exhibit, once for all, this ridiculous and yet very popular fallacy, in its true light.

THIRD--THE DEVIL THEORY.

This theory, which appears to have many advocates, is well set forth in the following excerpts from an article published in the Philadelphia _Universe_, a Catholic organ:

"Neither the sight of the eye, nor the touch of the hand, can discover the spring by which Planchette moves. Therefore it is not, in its movements, a toy. It moves--undoubtedly it moves. And how?

Intelligently! It answers questions of any kind put to it in any language required. It does this. This can not be done but by intelligence. Well, by what description of intelligence? It can not be supposed that the Divine intelligence is the motive; for how can G.o.d be conceived to make such a manifestation of himself as Planchette exhibits?

"A corresponding reason cuts off the idea that it is presided over by an angelic intelligence; and it is evident to all that a human mind does not control it. There is but one more character of intelligence--that of evil spirits. Therefore Planchette is moved by the agents of h.e.l.l.... But why should the devil connect himself with Planchette?... We suppose that the experienced scoundrel is ready to do anything human wickedness may ask him when souls are the price of the condescension. But his reasons for particular manifestations are of small importance here. Facts are facts, and the point is, that Planchette is not a toy, that it is moved by an intelligence, and that the intelligence that moves it is necessarily evil. We would therefore advise all who have a Planchette to build for it a special fire of pitch and brimstone.... No one has a right to consult the enemy of G.o.d. They who do so are in danger of becoming wors.h.i.+pers of the devil, and of dwelling with him for ever."

This theory has at least the merit of being clear, definite, and easy to be understood, if it is not in all respects convincing. But here we have an exemplification of the old paradox of an irresistible force coming in contact with an immovable body. The Catholic priest tells us that Planchette is _not_ a toy; that it moves by an intelligence and volition that is not human; that its moving and directing power is of the devil.

The Rev. Dr. Patton, in his article in the _Advance_ (heretofore referred to), tells us that "It is a philanthropic toy, which may be used to bring to light hidden connections of mind and body, and to refute the a.s.sumptions of spiritism;" and the Rev. A. D. Field, in his article in the _Ladies' Repository_, backs up Dr. Patton by saying, that it is "a mere toy," "is no humbug," is of "some use;"--and, concerning the _devil_ theory of the general power which moves it and other physical bodies, he says: there is "too often the spirit of gentleness to make the theory acceptable." The "immovable body" here, is the authority of the Catholic priest; the "irresistible force" is the authority of our clerical brethren representing Protestantism; and after this fair impingement of the latter upon the former, we shall, perhaps, have to adopt a compromise solution of the problem, by saying that the "immovable body" has been moved _a little_, and that the "irresistible force" has been resisted _some_.

But this _devil_ theory, if what the Bible teaches us concerning that personage is true, is enc.u.mbered with other difficulties; and the first of these is, that the devil, however wicked, is not a _fool_. If he should set a trap for human souls, he would not be so stupid as to tell them there is a trap there. When approaching human beings, he a.s.sumes, as the good book tells us, the garb of an angel of light; but it is not likely that he would ever say he is the devil, as Planchette sometimes does--at least until he felt quite sure of his prey. And again, when, in a case slightly parallel with cases sometimes involved in the question in hand, the captious Pharisees accused the Saviour of men of casting out devils by Beelzebub the prince of devils, he reminded them that a house or a kingdom divided against itself can not stand. Now Planchette, I admit, is not always a saint--in fact, she sometimes talks and acts very naughtily as well as foolishly; yet at other times, when a better _spirit_ takes possession of her, she is gentle, loving, well disposed, and does certainly give most excellent advice,--advice which could not be heeded without detriment to the devil's kingdom, and which, if universally followed, would work its overthrow entirely. It is inconceivable that Satan would thus tear down with one hand what he builds up with another. But just at this point I wish to say, I think there is need of great caution in consulting Planchette on matters of a weighty or serious nature, lest one should extort from her mere _confirmations_ of his own errors, either in doctrine or practice; and that nothing should in any case be accepted from it that is repugnant to the established principles of the Christian religion. But we are after the _science_ of the thing now, and for the present that is our only question--a question, however, which the devil theory, as will appear from the foregoing, does not seem fully to answer.

THEORY OF A FLOATING, AMBIENT MENTALITY.

It is supposed by those who hold this theory, or rather hypothesis, that the a.s.sumed floating, ambient mentality is an aggregate emanation from the minds of those present in the circle; that this mentality is clothed, by some mysterious process, with a force a.n.a.logous to what it possesses in the living organism, by which force it is enabled, under certain conditions, to move physical bodies and write or otherwise express its thoughts; and that in its expression of the combined intelligence of the circle, it generally follows the strongest mind, or the mind that is otherwise best qualified or conditioned to give current to the thought. Although the writer of the interesting article, ent.i.tled "_Planchette in a New Character_," in _Putnam's Monthly_ for December, 1868, disclaims, at the commencement of his lucubration, all theories on the subject, yet, after collating his facts, he shows a decided leaning to the foregoing theory as the nearest approach to a satisfactory explanation. "Floating, combined intelligence brought to bear upon an inanimate object," "active intellectual principle afloat in the circ.u.mambient air," are the expressions he uses as probably affording some light on the subject. This is a thought on which, as concerns its main features, many others have rested, not only in this country but in Europe, especially in England, as I am told by a friend who recently visited several sections of Great Britain where forms of these mysterious phenomena prevail.

The first difficulty that stands in the way of this hypothesis is that it supposes a thing which, if true, is quite as mysterious and inexplicable as the mystery which it purports to explain. How is it that an "intellectual principle" can detach itself from an intellectual being, of whose personality it formed the chief ingredient, and become an outside, objective, "floating," and "circ.u.mambient" ent.i.ty, with a capability of thinking, willing, acting, and expressing thought, in which the original possessor of the emanated principle often has no conscious partic.i.p.ation? And after you have told us this, then tell us how the "intellectual principle," not only of _one_, but of _several_ persons can emanate from them, become "floating" and "ambient," and then, losing separate ident.i.ty, _conjoin_ and form _one_ active communicating agent with the powers aforesaid? And after you have removed from these _mere a.s.sumptions_ the aspect of physical and moral impossibility, you will have another task to perform, and that is to show us how this emanated, "combined," "floating," "circ.u.mambient"

intelligence can sometimes a.s.sume an individual and seemingly _personal_ character of its own, totally distinct from, and, in some features, even _antagonistic_ to, all the characters in the circle in which the "emanation" is supposed to have its origin?

It is not denied now that the answers and communications of Planchette (and of the influence acting through other channels) often do exhibit a controlling influence of the mind of the medium or of other persons in the circle. But no theory should ever be considered as explaining a mystery unless it covers the _whole ground_ of that mystery. Even, therefore, should we consider the theory of the "floating intelligence"

of the circle reproducing itself in expression, as explaining that part of the phenomenon which identifies itself with the minds of the circle (which it does not), what shall be said of those cases in which the phenomena exhibit characteristics which are _sui generis_, and can not possibly have been derived from the minds of the circle?

That phenomena of the latter cla.s.s are sometimes exhibited is not only proved by many other facts that might be cited, but is clearly exemplified by this same writer in _Putnam's Magazine_. The intelligence whose performances and communications he relates seems to stand out with a character and individuality as strongly marked and as distinct from any and all in the circle as any one of them was distinct from another.

This individuality was first shown by giving its own pet names to the different persons composing the circle--"Flirt," "Clarkey," "Hon.

Clarke," "The Angel," and "Sa.s.siness." The young lady designated by the last _sobriquet_, after it had been several times repeated, pet.i.tioned to be indicated thereafter "only by the initial 'S,'" which the impertinent scribbler accorded only so far as omitting all the letters except the five S's, so that she was afterward recognized as "S.S.S.S.S."

The writer further says:

"It is always respectful to 'Hon. Clarke,' and when pressed to state what it thought of him, answered that he was 'a good skipper,' a reputation fairly earned by his capacity for managing a fleet of small boats. But we were not contented with so vague an answer, and our urgent demand for an a.n.a.lysis of his character produced the reply: 'A native crab apple, but spicy and sweet when ripe.' * * *

When asked to go on, it wrote: 'Ask me Hon. Clarke's character again, and I will flee to the realms of imperishable woe; or, as Tabitha is here, say I'll pull your nose;' and on being taunted with its incapacity to fulfill the threat, it wrote: 'Metaphorically speaking, of course.' Not satisfied with this rebuff, on another occasion the subject was again pursued, and the answer elicited as follows: 'Yes, but you can't fool me. I said nay once, and when I says nay I means nay.' [A mind of _its own_, then.] More than once it has lapsed into the same misuse of the verb, as: 'I not only believes it, but I knows it;' and again: 'You asks and I answers, because I am here.' * * *

"Again, on being remonstrated with for illiteracy, it defended itself by saying: 'I always was a bad speler' (_sic_); an orthographical blunder that no one in the room was capable of making. But on the whole, our Planchette is a scientific and cultivated intelligence, of more than average order, though it may be, at times, slightly inaccurate in orthography, and occasionally quote incorrectly; I must even confess that there are moments when its usual elegance of diction lapses into slang terms and abrupt contradictions. But, after all, though we flatter ourselves that as a family we contain rather more than ordinary intelligence, still it is more than a match for us."

Who can fail to perceive, from these quotations and admissions, the marked and distinctive _individuality_ of the intelligence that was here manifested, as being of itself totally fatal to the idea of derivation from the circle?

But not only was this intelligence _distinctive_, but in several instances even _antagonistic_ to that existing in the circle, as in the case reported as follows:

"Some one desiring to pose this ready writer, asked for its theory of the Gulf Stream; which it announced without hesitation to be 'Turmoil in the water produced by conglomeration of icebergs.'

Objection was made that the warmth of the waters of the natural phenomenon rather contradicted this original view of the subject; to which Planchette tritely responded: 'Friction produces heat.'

'But how does friction produce heat in this case?' pursued the questioner. 'Light a match,' was the inconsequent answer--Planchette evidently believing that the pupil was ignorant of first principles.

'But the Gulf Stream flows north; how, then, can the icebergs acc.u.mulate at its source?' was the next interrogation; which elicited the contemptuous reply: 'There is as much ice and snow at the south pole as at the north, ignorant Clarkey.' 'But it flows from the Gulf of Mexico?' pursued the undismayed. 'You've got me there, unless it flows underground,' was the cool and unexpected retort; and it wound up by declaring, sensibly, that, after all, 'it is a meeting of the north and south Atlantic currents, which collide, and the eddie (_sic_) runs northward.' [At another time,]

on being twice interrogated in regard to a subject, it replied tartly: 'I hate to be asked if I am sure of a fact.'"

Now, what could have been this intelligence which thus insisted upon preserving and a.s.serting its individuality so distinctly as to forbid all reasonable hypothesis of a compounded derivation from the minds of the circle, even were such a thing possible? A fairy, perhaps, snugly cuddled up under the board so as to elude observation. Friend "Clarkey,"

try again, for surely _this_ time you are a little befogged, or else the present writer is _more_ so.

"TO DAIMONION" (THE DEMON).

There was published, several years ago, by Gould & Lincoln, Boston, a little work ent.i.tled: "TO DAIMONION, OR THE SPIRITUAL MEDIUM.

_Its nature ill.u.s.trated by the history of its uniform mysterious manifestations when unduly excited._ By TRAVERSE OLDFIELD." This author deals largely in quotations from ancient writers in ill.u.s.tration of his subject; and as an attempt to explain the mysteries of clairvoyance, trance, second-sight, "spirit-knockings," intelligent movements of physical bodies without hands, etc., his work has claims to our attention which do not usually pertain to the cla.s.s of works to which it belongs. "_To Daimonion_" (the demon), or the "spiritual medium," he supposes to be the _spiritus mundi_, or the spirit of the universe, which formed so large an element in the cosmological theories of many ancient philosophers; and this, "when unduly excited" (whatever that may mean), he supposes to be the medium, not only of many psychic and apparently preternatural phenomena described in the writings of all previous ages, but also of the similar phenomena of modern times, of which it is now admitted that Planchettism is only one of the more recently developed phases. For some reason, which seemed satisfactory to him, but which we fear he has not made clear or convincing to the ma.s.s of his readers, this writer a.s.sumes it as more than probable that this _spiritus mundi_--a living essence which surrounds and pervades the world, and even the whole universe--is identical with the "nervous principle" which connects the soul with the body,--in all this unconsciously reaffirming nearly the exact theory first propounded by Mesmer, in explanation of the phenomena of "animal magnetism," so called. Quotations are given from Herodotus, Xenophon, Cicero, Pliny, Galen, and many others, referring to phenomena well known in the times in which these several writers lived, and which he supposes can be explained only on the general hypothesis here set forth; and in the same category of marvels, to be explained in the same way, he places the performances of the snake-charmers, clairvoyants, thought-readers, etc., of modern Egypt and India.

This _spiritus mundi_, or "nervous principle," to which he supposes the ancients referred when they spoke of "the demon," is, according to his theory, the medium, or menstruum, by which, under certain conditions of "excitement," the thoughts and potencies of one mind, with its affections, emotions, volitions, etc., flow into another, giving rise to reflex expressions, which, to persons ignorant of this principle, have seemed possible only as the utterances of outside and supermundane intelligences. And as this same _spiritus mundi_, or demon, pervades and connects the mind equally with all _physical_ bodies, in certain _other_ states of "excitement" it moves those physical bodies, or makes sounds upon them, expressing intelligence--that intelligence always being a reflex of the mind of the person who, consciously or unconsciously, served as the exciting agent.

Whatever elements of truth this theory, in a _different_ mode of application, might be found to possess, in the form in which it is here presented it is enc.u.mbered by two or three difficulties which altogether seem fatal. In the first place, it wears upon its face the appearance of a thing "fixed up" to meet an emergency, and which would never have been thought of except by a mind pressed almost to a state of desperation by the want of a theory to account for a cla.s.s of facts. Look at it: "The spirit of the world identical with the nervous principle"!--the same, "when unduly _excited_," the medium by which a mind may _unconsciously_ move other minds and organisms, or even dead matter, in the expression of its own thoughts! Where is the shadow of proof? Is it anything more than the sheerest a.s.sumption?

Then again: even if this mere a.s.sumption were admitted for truth, it would not account for that large cla.s.s of facts referred to in the course of our remarks on the "Electrical theory," unless this _spiritus mundi_, demon, nervous principle, or spiritual medium, is made at once not only the "medium," but the intelligent and designing _source_ of the communication; for, as we have said before, it would be perfectly useless to deny that thoughts are sometimes communicated through the Planchette and similar channels, which positively never had any existence in the minds of any of the persons visibly present.