512 C. The following is a somewhat similar case of self-suggestion where the suggestibility was apparently heightened under the influence of opium, which at the same time developed a monitory hallucination. The narrator is Dr. D. J. Parsons, and the account is taken from the Proceedings S.P.R., vol. xi. p. 427.

Sixteen years ago I was a little sick; took half a grain of opium, and lay down upon the bed. Soon as I began to feel the tranquillising effect of the opium, I saw three men approaching me; the one in front said: "You smoke too much tobacco." I replied: "I know I do." He then said: "Why don't you quit it? " I answered by saying: " I have been thinking about it, but I am afraid I can't." He extended his right arm, and, placing his forefinger very near my face, gave it a few very significant shakes, said, in a very impressive and emphatic manner: " You will never want to use tobacco any more as long as you live." He continued, by saying: "-You swear sometimes." I answered: 'Yes." He said: " Will you promise to quit ? " I intended to say yes, but just as 1 was about to utter the word yes, instantly a change came over me, and I felt like I had been held under some unknown influence, which was suddenly withdrawn or exhausted. I had been a constant smoker for more than twenty years.

Since the occurrence of the above incident, I have not touched tobacco; have felt ever since like it would poison me, and I now feel like one draw at the pipe would kill me instantly. My desire for tobacco was suddenly and effectually torn out by the roots, but perhaps I shall never know just how it was done. D. J. Parsons, M.D.

Sweet Springs, Mo.

513 A. Dr. Bramwell describes the differences between the so-called hypnosis in animals and true hypnosis in human beings in his article "What is Hypnotism?" in the Proceedings S.P.R., vol. xii. p. 213, as follows: -

Mr. [Ernest] Hart believes that animals, such as guinea-pigs, rabbits, frogs, birds, crayfish, and even young alligators can be hypnotised by methods similar to those employed with the human subject, and that they present like phenomena. The only argument in favor of this is drawn from the fact that these animals, after certain physical stimuli have been applied to them, present the phenomenon of catalepsy. Is this catalepsy invariably a genuine one ? I am inclined to think that in many instances it is a conscious simulation of death, adopted by the animal from the instinctive knowledge of the fact that certain birds and beasts of prey, except under pressure of extreme hunger, will not attack what is dead. If, for example, you turn a beetle over on its back it will remain motionless and apparently cataleptic, with its legs sticking rigidly in the air. The moment you turn away, however, it scrambles to its feet and resumes its journey. Here death or catalepsy was in all probability only shammed, and doubtless the insect was keenly watching your every movement and anxiously waiting for your departure. Again, catalepsy is only one, and a comparatively unimportant, phenomenon of hypnosis.

One of the main characteristics of the hypnotic state is the rapidity with which one phenomenon can be changed into its opposite. Have we any evidence of this in the so-called hypnosis of animals? I think not. Again, is it logical to conclude similarity of cause from identity of effect? In order to induce hypnotic catalepsy in the human subject, a clear idea of the suggested act is necessary. What evidence have we for concluding that a crayfish becomes cataleptic from a clear idea that the operator has suggested this condition ? It is possible that in some instances the phenomenon is genuine, and then, according to Preyer, the condition is one of paralysis resulting from fright. Now fear is not necessary for the induction of hypnosis; and, before concluding that the condition is a hypnotic one, it would be wise to exclude this factor from the equation. To do this experimentally would not be difficult; it would only be necessary to get rid of the disproportion between the size and strength of the operator and the animal, a disproportion which, in the experiments referred to, has always existed in favour of the hypnotiser. Instead of a young alligator, let one of greater age and larger growth be chosen and the experiment repeated.

I am inclined to think that in such a case the roles would be reversed, the operator would become cataleptic, and the subject uncommonly and disagreeably mobile.

See also W. Preyer, Die Cataplexie und der thierische Hypnotismus.

Also a paper by Dr. J. N. Langley "On the Physiological Aspect of Mesmerism," read before the Royal Institution, March 14, 1884; and Verworn's Die sogenannte Hypnose der Tiere.

513 B. It used to be claimed by the mesmerists that the possibility of affecting animals mesmerically afforded a crucial test of the reality of the mesmeric effluence, since effects on animals could not be put down to the power of their imagination. The various phenomena obtained, however, do not seem really all to belong to the same category. Thus the comatose condition produced in sparrows, in savage dogs, in a young bear, in a furious bull (Zoist, vol. viii. pp. 156, 297-99), by the fixed gaze of the mesmerist or by his passes, was no doubt analogous to the "fascination " exercised by snakes on their prey, or by tigers on human beings (Zoist, vol. ix. pp. 7-9), and is equivalent to the catalepsy described by Dr. Bramwell.

On the other hand, the so-called " mesmeric cures" of animals reported in the Zoist seem to have been generally effected by something like massage. Thus in the once celebrated case of Harriet Martineau's cow (Zoist, vol. viii. p. 301), which had been given up as incurable by the cow doctor, relief was obtained by passes along the spine and across the chest. Two cures of lock-jaw in horses by similar means are reported - one by Mr. H. S. Thompson - in the Zoist, vol. ix. pp. 49-51, the passes being made daily for some hours, and the recovery being gradual.

Two other cases of the cure of inflammation in horses, reported by Mr. Thompson (op. cit., vol. viii. p. 300), were much more striking, in that the passes were made without contact, and the effect was produced very rapidly. In the first case passes were made for half-an-hour over the injured organ the eye - at a distance of a few inches, and "the inflammation was considerably abated." In the second case the injury was in the leg, and passes made for half-an-hour at the distance of about an inch from it reduced the inflammation considerably.

See also some curious recent accounts of the cure of warts in horses and cows by "charming," printed in the Journal S.P.R., vol. ix. p. 100.