The difference between the effects of mesmerism on man and animals is one of degree only; and the difference of degree is determined only by their difference in intelligence. The laws are the same. When a man is mesmerized, his subjective mind may be stimulated to activity, whether his objective mind is completely in abeyance or not. If it is completely in abeyance, the subjective phenomena will be all the more pronounced and complete. But when an animal is put to sleep, little or no subjective phenomena can be exhibited, for the simple reason that he has not the power of speech, and his intelligence is otherwise limited. The same law also governs the production of hypnotic phenomena in men and animals alike. An animal can be put to sleep by hypnotic processes; but he cannot be made to exhibit subjective phenomena during that sleep, owing solely to the limitations of his intelligence. He is not capable of receiving and understanding a suggestion. Besides, in hypnotism, as has been shown, there is no telepathic rapport existing between the operator and the subject.

Consequently the phenomena which may be exhibited through or by means of mesmeric processes, which grow out of telepathic rapport, cannot be exhibited in hypnotism.

It may be thought that the laws governing the production of mesmeric phenomena show that the law of suggestion is, after all, limited in its scope and application. This is not true, except in the sense that suggestion, as has already been shown, is not a necessary element in the induction of the hypnotic state. The proposition that the subjective mind is constantly amenable to control by suggestion is not affected in the slightest degree by mesmeric phenomena. On the contrary, they distinctly prove the universality of that law. Suggestion is not necessarily limited to oral communication. Nor is it necessarily a communication which can be taken cognizance of by means of any of the objective senses. Telepathic communication is just as much a suggestion to the subjective mind as is oral speech. Indeed, telepathic suggestion is often far more effective than objective language, as will be clearly shown in a future chapter on the subject of psycho-therapeutics.

Hence the power to mesmerize at a distance. In such cases, however, it seems to be necessary that the operator and subject should be by some means brought into telepathic rapport. When that has been done, especially when the rapport has been established by the subject having been previously mesmerized by the same operator, it is perfectly easy to mesmerize at a distance. In such a case no previous arrangement is necessary. The suggestion is then purely mental. But it is suggestion, nevertheless, and demonstrates the universality of the law. Numerous instances of the exercise of this power by purely telepathic methods are cited in the able work on Hypnotism by Professor Bjornstrom, to which the reader is referred for particulars.

One further remark should be made regarding the power to mesmerize at a distance, and that is, that it. depends solely upon the faith and confidence of the operator. Distance, or space, as it is cognized by our objective senses, does not appear to exist for the subjective mind. There is, therefore, nothing in distance, per se, to prevent the full effects of mesmeric power from being felt at the antipodes just as plainly and effectively as it is in the same room. We are, however, so in the habit of regarding distance as an adverse element that it is difficult to overcome the adverse suggestion that it conveys. When this principle is once understood and fully realized, there will be nothing to prevent an operator from exercising his power at any distance he may desire.