§ 1. We have now to consider a quite new type of telepathic action. In the classes which have so far been passed in review, whether experimental or spontaneous, the parts of the agent and the percipient have been well defined, and the current of influence has set from the one to the other in an unmistakable fashion. But in several cases, it may be remembered (especially Nos. 35 and 94), we have had indications that the influence might be a reciprocal one - that each of the parties might receive a telepathic impulse from the other, and so each be at once agent and percipient. The cases referred to were doubtful, because the experience at one end of the line was a dream; and dreams having an almost limitless scope, it was conceivable enough that that of Mr. Newnham, for instance, though it curiously corresponded with his fiancee's actions and surroundings at the time, did so by accident; and that therefore his mental condition, while it affected her, was not affected by her. But had he had a waking vision of her, as she had of him, we should have considered it probable that the influence was mutual; since if two rare or unique events, which present so obvious a prima facie connection as A's vision of B and B's vision of A, fall at the same time, we cannot readily assume the coincidence to be accidental.

And if there are further and more distinct grounds for attributing B's vision to telepathy - say because A is dying at the time - it will be only reasonable to regard A's vision as part of the same complex phenomenon, rather than to suppose that A has an accidental vision at the same time as B has a telepathic one. But of course the proof of a reciprocal influence would be stronger still if, at the time of B's impression of A, A expressed in words some piece of knowledge as to B's condition which could not have been acquired in a normal manner. We thus see that a group of cases which have all the same claim to be considered telepathic, may have different claims, ranging from the very doubtful to the very conclusive, to be considered reciprocally telepathic.1

1 The numerous cases where two friends in different places prove to have been each exceptionally engrossed with the idea of the other at the same moment, must not be put forward as instances of telepathic, much less of reciprocal, action; for we may always suppose that the impressions only appeared to have been exceptionally vivid after the fact of the coincidence had given them a certain exceptional interest. The undue importance often attached to such incidents is to be regretted, since it confuses the subject, and to some extent excuses a similar confusion on the part of opponents - as, e.g., when an eminent man of science thinks telepathy sufficiently refuted by this very consideration, that by accident friends sometimes think of one another, and even write to one another, simultaneously (Deutsche Rundschau for Jan., 1886, p. 45). Nor will it suffice for the exceptional character of one of the impressions to be established beyond doubt.

I will begin with a couple of the more doubtful cases. The following account was received through the kindness of Mr. G. J. Romanes, F.R.S., who is well acquainted with the narrator.

"March 18th, 1883.

(303) " On the night of the 26th of October, 1872, I suddenly felt very unwell, and went to bed about half-past 9, an hour earlier than usual, and fell asleep almost immediately, when I had a very vivid dream, which impressed me greatly; so much so, that I remarked to my wife, on waking, that I feared we should shortly receive bad news. I imagined I was sitting in the drawing-room near a table, reading, when an old lady suddenly appeared seated on the opposite side, close to the table. She neither spoke nor moved much, but gazed very intently on me, and I on her, for at least 20 minutes. I was much struck by her appearance, she having white hair, very dark eyebrows, and penetrating eyes. I did not recognise her at all, but thought she was a stranger. My attention was then directed to the door, which opened, and my aunt entering and seeing me and the old lady staring at each other in this extraordinary way, with much surprise and in a tone of reproach exclaimed, ' John! don't you know who this is? ' and without giving me time to reply said, 'Why, this is your grandmother,' whereupon my ghostly visitor suddenly rose from her chair, embraced me, and vanished. At that moment I awoke.

Such was the impression it made on my mind, that I got my note-book and made a note of this strange dream, believing that it foreboded bad tidings. However, several days passed without bringing any dreaded intelligence, when one night I received a letter from my father, announcing the rather sudden death of my grandmother, which took place on the very night and hour of my dream, half-past 10.

"About four months after her death, I went to the Isle of Wight, where she lived, to get information from my relatives as to what my grandmother was really like. My aunt and cousin described her in every particular, and their descriptions of her coincided most marvellously with the figure and face that appeared to me, the white hair and dark eyebrows being a peculiarity in her. This I particularly observed in my dream. I learnt, too, that she was extremely fussy in the arrangement of her cap, always being anxious that no part, even the strings, should be out of place, and curious to relate, I noticed in my dream that she was nervously touching her cap strings, now and again, for fear they should be out of place. My cousin, who was with her when she died, told me that my grandmother had been delirious for some time previous to her departure; and for a moment, when in that state, she suddenly put her arms round my cousin's neck, and on opening her eyes and regaining consciousness, she said with a look of surprise, 'Oh, Polly, is it you? I thought it was somebody else.' This seems to me very curious, as it was just what she did before she vanished from me in the drawing-room. I must add that I had not seen my grandparent for at least 14 years, and the last time I saw her she had dark hair, but this had gradually changed to white, leaving her eyebrows dark, and I am positive that nobody ever mentioned this peculiarity to me."1 "J. H. W".

1 In respect of this last feature, the case may be classed with those of Chap. xii.' § 8. The nervous fidgeting with the cap-Strings may possibly be regarded as a die tinctive habit, sufficiently deeply organised to be a feature in the person's latent representation of her own physique. See the remarks at the end of the section referred to.

Mrs. W. says: -

"July 1st, 1885.

"I quite remember my husband telling me, on my going to my room on the evening of the 26th October, of a remarkable dream he had just had, and also his making an entry in the pocket-book on the following morning. "F. W".

We find from the Register of Deaths that Jane W. died at the age of 72, on Oct. 26, 1870 [see below], at Brixton, Isle of Wight.

Mr. Podmore says: -

"I called on Mr. J. H. W. to-day (July 4th, 1884), and heard the account from him viva voce. His cousin's corroboration, for a reason which he explained to me, cannot be obtained. But he explained to me that he went to see his cousin within three months of the death, and received full particulars of the death-scene from her then. I asked him if he stood by the phrase 'at least 20 minutes,' pointing out that it was difficult to attach any precise meaning to these words; if they were a correct description of his impressions, a grotesque incident must have been interpolated in the midst of an otherwise realistic dream. He maintains that the words are correct; it seemed to him that he and the old lady sat staring at each other across the table for a very long time. Mr. W. told me that he dreams very little; and that he has never had another dream which he thought worth noting. He has never dreamt of death".

After a second call, Mr. Podmore writes: -

"I received an account from Mrs. W. of her husband's dream, as she remembered to have heard it within an hour of its occurrence and subsequently, which tallied precisely with the account here given. I saw also the note made on the following morning. It occurs at the head of the first page of a small pocket sketch-book, the rest of the page being occupied with pen or pencil memoranda of accounts, etc. The entry is 'Odd dream, night of October 26th, 1870.' The last numeral, which is very indistinct, is apparently O. Mr. W., in writing his original account in March, 1883, had referred to this note and read the final numeral as 2. Hence the discrepancy. He has no other memorandum of the death.

"I pressed him as far as I could, but he still declines to give his name, fearing that he might acquire the reputation of being 'ghostly' and fanciful, and thus injure his professional prospects".

Clearly the dream here is far less likely to have been accidental than Mr. Newnham's. But the inference from the dying woman's words, that she may have been in some way affected with a sense of her grandson's presence, is, of course, not one that can be pressed. And the same remark applies to several cases where A, who is in the crisis of illness, professes actually to have seen, as though by some clairvoyant flash, an absent relative, B, who turns out to have had at the same time a telepathic impression of A; for unless special details of B's aspect or surroundings are described, A's alleged perception of him may always be supposed to have been a mere subjective dream or vision, and the percipience is not demonstrably reciprocal.

The next example - from Mr. J. T. Milward Pierce, of Bow Ranche, Knox County, Nebraska, U.S.A. - stands somewhat apart.

"Frettons, Danbury, Chelmsford.

"January 5th, 1885.