745 C. In each of the two next cases the interval after death was considerable, and the percipient was an absolute stranger to the deceased. This condition must, of course, usually involve the disadvantage that the identification of the appearance with a particular person can be based only on the percipient's subsequent description of what he had seen. But in the case which I shall quote first, this sort of identification was reinforced by the percipient's recognition of a photograph of the deceased. The account, taken from Proceedings S.P.R., vol. v. p. 416, comes from Mr. John E. Husbands, of Melbourne House, Town Hall Square, Grimsby.

September 15th, 1886.

Dear Sir, - The facts are simply these. I was sleeping in a hotel in Madeira in January 1885. It was a bright moonlight night. The windows were open and the blinds up. I felt some one was in my room. On opening my eyes, I saw a young fellow about twenty-five, dressed in flannels, standing at the side of my bed and pointing with the first finger of his right hand to the place I was lying. I lay for some seconds to convince myself of some one being really there. I then sat up and looked at him. I saw his features so plainly that I recognised them in a photograph which was shown me some days after. I asked him what he wanted; he did not speak, but his eyes and hand seemed to tell me I was in his place. As he did not answer, I struck out at him with my fist as I sat up, but did not reach him, and as I was going to spring out of bed he slowly vanished through the door, which was shut, keeping his eyes upon me all the time.

Upon inquiry I found that the young fellow who appeared to me died in that room I was occupying. . . . John E. Husbands.

The following letters are from Miss Falkner, of Church Terrace, Wisbech, who was resident at the hotel when the above incident happened.

October 8th, 1886.

The figure that Mr. Husbands saw while in Madeira was that of a young fellow who died unexpectedly months previously, in the room which Mr. Husbands was occupying. Curiously enough, Mr. H. had never heard of him or his death. He told me the story the morning after he had seen the figure, and I recognised the young fellow from the description. It impressed me very much, but I did not mention it to him or any one. I loitered about until I heard Mr. Husbands tell the same tale to my brother; we left Mr. H. and said simultaneously, "He has seen Mr. D".

No more was said on the subject for days; then I abruptly showed the photograph. Mr. Husbands said at once, "That is the young fellow who appeared to me the other night, but he was dressed differently" - describing a dress he often wore - "cricket suit (or tennis) fastened at the neck with sailor knot." I must say that Mr. Husbands is a most practical man, and the very last one would expect "a spirit" to visit. K. Falkner.

October 20th, 1886.

I enclose you photograph and an extract from my sister-in-law's letter, which I received this morning, as it will verify my statement. Mr. Husbands saw the figure either the 3rd or 4th of February 1885.

The people who had occupied the rooms had never told us if they had seen anything, so we may conclude they had not. K.Falkner.

The following is Miss Falkner's copy of the passage in the letter:-

"You will see at back of Mr. du F--'s photo the date of his decease [January 29th, 1884]; and if you recollect 'the Motta Marques ' had his rooms from the February till the May or June of 1884, then Major Money at the commencement of 1885 season. Mr. Husbands had to take the room on February 2nd, 1885, as his was wanted. I am clear on all this, and remember his telling me the incident when he came to see my baby".

Gurney adds:-

I have received a full account of this case, viva voce, from both Mr. Husbands and Miss Falkner. They are both thoroughly practical, and as far removed as possible from a superstitious love of marvels; nor had they any previous interest in this or any other class of abnormal experiences. So far as I could judge, Mr. Husbands' view of himself is entirely correct - that he is the last person to give a spurious importance to anything that might befall him, or to allow facts to be distorted by imagination. As will be seen, his account of his vision preceded any knowledge on his part of the death which had occurred in the room. He has never had any other hallucination of the senses.

Another case much resembling this, but in which the evidence for identification of the figure is weaker, is that of Mrs. Lewin, in Proceedings S.P.R., vol. v. p. 462.