§ 10. As regards the interval of time which may separate the two events or experiences on the agent's and the percipient's side respectively, an arbitrary limit of 12 hours has been adopted - the coincidence in most cases being very much closer than this; but no case will be presented as telepathic where the percipient's experience preceded, by however short a time, some grave event occurring to the agent, if at the time of the percipient's experience the state of the agent was normal ......... 112-113

§ 11. It is in the matter of the dates that the risk of misstatement is greatest. The instinct towards simplification and dramatic completeness naturally tends to make the coincidence more exact than the facts warrant . . 114-115

§ 12. The date of the event that has befallen the agent is often included in the news of that event; which news, in these days of posts and telegraphs, often follows close enough on the percipient's experience for the date of that experience to be then safely recalled ..... ... 115-116

§ 13. But if a longer interval elapse, the percipient may assume too readily that his own experience fell on the critical day; and as time goes on, his certainty is likely to increase rather than diminish. Still, if the coincidence was then and there noted, and if the attention of others was called to it, it may be possible to present a tolerably strong case for its reality, even after the lapse of a considerable time . . . . . . . . . . 116-117

§ 14. These various evidential conditions may be arranged in a graduated scheme ........... 117-119

§ 15. Second-hand evidence (except of one special type) is excluded from the body of the work; but the Supplement [omitted in this edition. - Ed.] contains a certain number of second-hand cases, received from persons who were well acquainted with the original witnesses, and who had had the opportunity of becoming thoroughly acquainted with their statement of the facts . 119-120

§ 16. A certain separation of cases according to their evidential value has been attempted, the body of the work being reserved for those where the prima facie probability that the essential facts are correctly stated is tolerably strong. But even where the facts are correctly reported, their force in the argument for telepathy will differ according to the class to which they belong; purely emotional impressions, for instance, and dreams, are very weak classes . . 120-121

The value of the several items of evidence is also largely affected by the mental qualities and training of the witnesses. Every case must be judged on its own merits, by reference to a variety of points; and those who study the records will have an equal opportunity of forming a judgment with those who have collected them - except in the matter of personal acquaintance with the witnesses, the effect of which it is impossible to communicate , . 121-123

§ 17. An all-important point is the number of the coincidences adduced. A few might be accounted accidental; but it will be impossible to apply that hypothesis throughout. Nor can the evidence be swept out of court by a mere general appeal to the untrustworthiness of human testimony. If it is to be explained away, it must be met (as we have ourselves endeavoured to meet it) in detail; and this necessitates the confronting of the single cause, telepathy (whose a priori improbability is fully admitted), with a multitude of causes, more or less improbable, and in cumulation incredible .... 123-124

18. With all their differences, the cases recorded bear strong signs of belonging to a true natural group; and their harmony, alike in what they do and in what they do not present, is very unlikely to be the accidental result of a multitude of disconnected mistakes. And it is noteworthy that certain sensational and suspicious details, here conspicuous by their absence, which often make their way into remote or badly-evidenced cases, are precisely those which the telepathic hypothesis would not cover ..... 124-126

§ 19. But though some may regard the cumulative argument here put forward for spontaneous telepathy as amounting to a proof, the proof is not by any means of an eclatant sort: much of the evidence falls far short of the ideal standard. Still, enough has perhaps been done to justify our undertaking, and to broaden the basis of future inquiry ...... 126-128

§ 20. The various items of evidence are, of course, not the links in a chain, but the sticks in a faggot. It is impossible to lay down the precise number of sticks necessary to a perfectly solid faggot; but the present collection is at least an instalment of what is required ....... 128-129

§ 21. The instinct as to the amount of evidence needed may differ greatly in a mind which has, and a mind which has not, realised the facts of experimental telepathy (Chap. ii.), and the intimate relation of that branch to the spontaneous branch. Between the two branches, in spite of their difference - a difference as great in appearance as that between lightning and the electrical attraction of rubbed amber for bits of straw - the great psychological fact of a supersensuous influence of mind on mind constitutes a true generic bond . . .129-130

[The following is Gurney's Synopsis of his important Note on Witchcraft Omitted in the present Edition. - Ed].

The statement made in Chapter iv (General Criticism Of The Evidence For Spontaneous Telepathy). as to the lack of first-hand evidence for the phenomena of magic and witchcraft (except so far as they can be completely accounted for by modern psychological knowledge) may seem a sweeping one. But extensive as is the literature of the subject, the actual records are extraordinarily meagre; and the staple prodigies, which were really nothing more than popular legends, are quoted and re-quoted ad nauseam. Examples of the so-called evidence which supported the belief in lycanthropy, and in the nocturnal rides and orgies.

The case of witchcraft, so far from proving (as is sometimes represented) that a more or less imposing array of evidence will be forthcoming for any belief that does not distinctly fly in the face of average public opinion, goes, in fact, rather surprisingly far towards proving the contrary .....

This view of the subject is completely opposed to that of Mr. Lecky, whose treatment seems to suffer from the neglect of two important distinctions. He does not distinguish between evidence - of which, in respect of the more bizarre marvels, there was next to none; and authority - of which there was abundance, from Homer downwards. Nor does he discriminate the wholly incredible allegations (e.g., as to transportations through the air and transformations into animal forms) from the pathological phenomena, which in the eyes of contemporaries were equally supernatural, and for which, as might be expected, the direct evidence was abundant.

A most important class of these pathological phenomena were subjective hallucinations of the senses, often due to terror or excitement, and sometimes probably to hypnotic suggestion, but almost invariably attributed to the direct operation of the devil. Other phenomena - of insensibility, inhibition of utterance, abnormal rapport, and the influence of reputed witches on health - were almost certainly hypnotic in character; "possession" is often simply hystero-epilepsy; while much may be accounted for by mere hysteria, or by the same sort of faith as produces the modern " mind-cures".

Learned opinion on the subject of witchcraft went through curious vicissitudes; the recession to a rational standpoint, which in many ways was of course a sceptical movement, being complicated by the fact that many of the phenomena were too genuine to be doubted. Now that the separation is complete, we see that the exploded part of witchcraft never had any real evidential foundation; while the part which had a real evidential foundation has been taken up into orthodox physiological and psychological science. With the former part we might contrast, and with the latter compare, the evidential case for telepathy.