642 B. Contemporary Documentary Evidence

Some attacks were made on the ground of the scarcity of contemporary documentary evidence; for instance, one by Mr. A. Taylor Innes, in a paper entitled "The Psychical Society's Ghosts," in the Nineteenth Century for November 1891. He alleged that the natural thing to do after witnessing a "wraith or other intimation " would be at once to post a letter informing some one of it, and observed, " In all the most important of the Psychical Society stories of 1886 we have one such letter alleged sometimes even two." The production of these letters would prove the stories, and with regard to some of them, "if such a letter exists, with contents and postmark undisputed, it is worth a thousand guineas in the market." But, he stated, there was not one case in which the editors of Phantasms had "seen or ascertained a letter or document issued at the time by the narrator, so as to prove his story to be true." Since, then, in a large proportion of the cases, contemporary documents had been alleged to have been written, the fact that none of them had been forthcoming showed, he maintained, that the evidence was worthless.

Mr. Innes's statements were misleading in two respects: - (1) they gave a very exaggerated impression of the proportion of cases in which documentary evidence was alleged to have existed; and (2) it was incorrect to say that such evidence was not forthcoming in any of them.

The following is a list of some of the cases authenticated by such evidence: -

(a) In Phantasms of the Living, vol. i. p. 93, Mr. S. H. B.; p. 108, Mr. S. H. B. (quoted in 668); p. 197, Mr. Keulemans (quoted in 662 A); p. 199, Mr. Wingfield (quoted in 429 C); p. 221, a lady, name not given; p. 324, Mr. Sladen; p. 407, Mr. Jukes; p. 425, Mrs. T. (quoted in 428); p. 527, Miss R. (quoted in 667 A).

Ibid. vol. ii. p. 31, Mr. Gottschalk (quoted in 662 B); p. 154, Mr. W. (quoted in 428 D); p. 693, Mr. Teale.

In all these cases, the written note of the percipient's experience, made before ascertaining whether it was veridical or not, was seen by one of the authors of Phantasms.

(i) In the Proceedings S.P.R., vol. vi. p. 31, Mr. Cameron Grant (also referred to in vol. viii. p. 212, and in Phantasms of the Living, vol. ii. p. 688); vol. xi. p. 431, Mr. Glardon; p. 438, Mrs. Chase; vol. xii pp. 268 and 270, Mrs. D.

(c) In Wit Journal S.P.R., vol. iii. p. 265, Mr. Boyle (quoted in 423); p. 267, Mr. Hamilton (quoted in 424); vol. vii. p. 239, Mr. Nascimento (quoted in 421 J); vol. ix. p. 134, Mrs. Verrall.

(d) In the Proceedings of the American S.P.P., vol. i. p. 226, a lady, name not given; p. 227, Mrs. T.; p. 395, Mr. J. T.

In reply to Mr. Innes's suggestion of he commercial value of documentary evidence, Mr. Podmore (in he National Review for April 1892) observed that, "although a well-attested ghost story may be, to its possessor, of more value than gold, it is very doubtful whether an investigator can afford to give sixpence for it. The Society for Psychical Research, at any rate, early decided that it could offer no remuneration whatever to informants, holding it essential to avoid any inducement to the production of false or doctored evidence." (It is obvious, of course, that documentary evidence could easily be forged, and rests therefore, generally speaking, on the bona fides of the witness. But supposing that the witness is not accused of practising deliberate fraud, but merely of remembering events inaccurately, the value of the documentary evidence simply lies in its independence of his memory).

Mr. Podmore discusses various reasons why letters or other notes of the occurrences should seldom be made, and why only a small proportion of those made should be preserved, and goes on to give six cases received during the few years since the publication of Phantasms, in which the original documents had been preserved and seen.

The question is discussed more fully in the Proceedings S.P.R., vol. x. ("Report on the Census of Hallucinations," pp. 220-223), from which I quote a short extract, as follows: -

"The importance and value of contemporary documentary evidence for telepathy was first pointed out in Phantasms of the Living (vol. i. pp. 134-147), and has been constantly and emphatically reiterated by those who are working at psychical research, with the result that, in addition to what existed at the time Phantasms of the Living was written, the amount of it has since been steadily, though slowly accumulating. Some of the critics of the Society's work have assumed that in a large proportion, probably about one in seven, of the cases where a sensory hallucination is experienced, the percipient would at once write a letter on the subject to some friend, and that letters containing such accounts would, in general, be carefully preserved. They have accordingly maintained that the absence of documentary evidence in the great majority of cases constitutes a positive argument against the telepathic explanation. The force of this argument depends, of course, primarily on the frequency with which contemporary notes of possibly telepathic incidents are made. We have therefore endeavoured to obtain information as to the cases in which any notes were taken at the time of the hallucinatory experience.

From the information received, it appears that in 49 out of the 1942 cases recorded - that is, in 2.5 per cent. - some note was made, or some letter mentioning the hallucination written, within 24 hours of the occurrence, and before knowing whether it was coincidental or not, either by the percipient himself, or by some person who was told of it at the time. We have included in the 49 some cases in which it is not quite certain from the expressions used whether our informant meant that he had made a written or a mental note of his experience, in order to obtain an outside estimate of the number of cases in which contemporary documentary evidence of any kind ever existed".

[Of these 49 cases, 8 were hallucinations coinciding with deaths (of which 6 were recognised apparitions), 9 were coincidental with other events, and 32 were non-coincidental. With regard to the kinds of hallucinations, 24 out of the 49 were recognised apparitions of living persons, 4 of dead persons, and 9 other visual hallucinations; jo were auditory hallucinations and 2 tactile. The writers proceed to give reasons why the amount of documentary evidence should be so small, and continue: - ]

"Of the 17 coincidental cases which were noted at the time, the note has been seen by us in two cases;1 in the third case a letter which was written in answer to one from the percipient describing her experience, and which establishes the coincidence, has been seen by us; in a fourth case we have received a copy of a similar letter; and in five other cases we have evidence - either from the persons who received the letters, or from those who witnessed the making of the notes - confirmatory of the percipient's statement that the letters or notes were written at the time".