849 A. I quote below part of Mr. Newnham's account of his experiments in thought-transference through automatic writing, the whole of which is given in the Proceedings S.P.R., vol. iii. pp. 8-23. Extracts from Mr. Newnham's Diary.

It was in January 1871 that I was first led to think of making an attempt to investigate the alleged phenomena of planchette-writing. Having procured an instrument, I consulted carefully with my wife, as to forming a code of conditions which we would agree to bind ourselves rigidly to observe, in case she was found capable of writing.

I copy from my note-book the following preliminary statement and conditions agreed upon, which were put down in writing before any experiment had been made:-

"Being desirous of investigating accurately the phenomena of planchette, myself and my wife have agreed to carry out a series of systematic experiments in order to ascertain the conditions under which the instrument is able to work. To this end the following rules are strictly observed:-

1. The question to be asked is written down before the planchette is set in motion. This question, as a rule, is never known to the operator.

2. Whenever an evasive or other answer is returned, necessitating one or more new questions to be put before a clear answer can be obtained, the operator is not to be made aware of any of these questions, or even of the general subject to which they allude, until the final answer has been obtained.

3. In all cases where the operator has asked the question, or is aware of its terms or general tenor, the question will be distinguished by prefixing an asterisk, and leaving a space between it and the marginal line. [None of these questions are quoted here].

4. Where no operator is mentioned, my wife is always meant.

5. Where no questioner is mentioned, myself is always meant." Although not provided for in writing (as our mutual bona fides was, of course, taken for granted), I may add that my wife always sat at a small low table, in a low chair, leaning backwards. I sat about eight feet distant, at a rather high table, and with my back towards her while writing down the questions. It was absolutely impossible that any gesture, or play of features, on my part, could have been visible or intelligible to her. As a rule, she kept her eyes shut; but never became in the slightest degree hypnotic, or even naturally drowsy.

Under these conditions we carried on experiments for about eight months, and I have 309 questions and answers recorded in my note-book, spread over this time.1 But the experiments were found very exhaustive of nerve-power, and as my wife's health was delicate, and the fact of thought-transmission had been abundantly proved, we thought it best to abandon the pursuit.

I now proceed to give a sample of some of these questions and answers. The numbers prefixed are those in my note-book.

I may mention that the planchette began to move instantly with my wife. The answer was often half written before I had completed the question.

On first finding that it would write easily, I asked three simple questions which were known to the operator; then three others, unknown to her, relating to my own private concerns. All six having been instantly answered in a manner to show complete intelligence, I proceeded to ask -

7. Write down the lowest temperature here this winter. A. 8.

Now, this reply at once arrested my interest. The actual lowest temperature had been 7.6° so that 8 was the nearest whole degree; but my wife said at once that, if she had been asked the question, she would have written 7, and not 8; as she had forgotten the decimal, but remembered my having said that the temperature had been down to 7 something.

I simply quote this, as a good instance, at the very outset, of perfect transmission of thought, coupled with a perfectly independent reply; the answer being correct in itself, but different from the impression on the conscious intelligence of both parties.

1 The remainder of the 385 questions and answers in this book belong to a different series, where the question was known to the operator.

Naturally our first desire was to see if we could obtain any information concerning the nature of the intelligence which was operating through the planchette, and of the method by which it produced the written results. We repeated questions on this subject again and again; and I will copy down the principal questions and answers in the connection.

January 29th. 13. Is it the operator's brain, or some external force, that moves the planchette? Answer "brain" or "force." A. Will.

14. Is it the will of a living person, or of an immaterial spirit, distinct from that person? Answer "person" or "spirit." A. Wife.

15. Give first the wife's Christian name; then my favourite name for her. (This was accurately done).

27. What is your own name? A. Only you.

28. We are not quite sure of the meaning of the answer. Explain. A. Wife.

Failing to get more than this, at the outset, we returned to the same thought after question 114; when, having been closely pressed on another subject, we received the curt reply - "Told all I know".

February 18th. 117. Who are you that writes, and has told all you know? A. Wife.

118. But does no one tell wife what to write? If so, who? A. Spirit.

119. Whose spirit? A. Wife's brain.

120. But how does wife's brain know [Masonic] secrets? A. Wife's spirit unconsciously guides.

121. But how does wife's spirit know things it has never been told? A. No external influence.

122. But by what internal influence does it know [Masonic] secrets? A. You cannot know.

March 15th. 132. Who, then, makes the impressions upon her? A. Many strange things.

133. What sort of strange things? A. Things beyond your knowledge.

134. Do, then, things beyond our knowledge make impressions upon wife? A. Influences which no man understands or knows.

136. Are these influences which we cannot understand external to wife? A. External - invisible.

137. Does a spirit, or do spirits, exercise those influences? A. No, never (written very large and emphatically).

138. Then from whom, or from whence, do the external influences come? A. Yes; you will never know.

139. What do you mean by writing "yes" in the last answer? A. That I really meant never.

March 19th. 142. By what means are [Masonic] secrets conveyed to wife's brain? A. What you call mesmeric influence.

144. What do you mean by "what you call"? What do you call it? A. Electro-biology.

145. By whom, or by what, is the electro-biologic force set in motion? A. I told you you could not know more than you did.

146. Can wife answer a question the reply to which I do not know? A. Why do you try to make me say what I won't?

147. Simply because I desire knowledge. Why will not you tell? A. Wife could tell if some one else, with a very strong will, in the room knew.

March 26th. 179. Can you foresee the future? A. No.

April 10th. 190. Why are you not always .... influenced by what I think? A. Wife knows sometimes what you think.

191. How does wife know it? A. When her brain is excited and has not been much tried before.

192. But by what means are my thoughts conveyed to her brain? A. Electro-biology.

193. What is electro-biology? A. No one knows.

194. But do not you know? A. No. Wife does not know.

195. What makes you always call her "wife"? A. You always think of wife.

196. But I never call her "wife." Why do you? A. I am nothing without wife.

200. That is no answer. Why do you call her so? A. Because she is all a wife.

My object in quoting this large number of questions and replies has not been merely to show the instantaneous and unfailing transmission of thought from questioner to operator; but, more especially, to call attention to a remarkable characteristic of the answers given. These answers, consistent and invariable in their tenor from first to last, did not correspond with the opinions or expectations of either myself or my wife. . . . For such answers as those numbered 14, 27, 137, 144, 192, and 194, we were both of us totally unprepared; and I may add that, so far as we were prepossessed by any opinions whatever, these replies were distinctly opposed to such opinions. In a word, it is simply impossible that these replies should have been either suggested or composed by the conscious intelligence of either of us.