In the case of Helen Smith there are very strange peculiarities, which seem incapable of explanation except on the ground of fragments of personal recollections from previous lives, fragments that rise from the memory of the subject, put into a state of lucid somnambulism.

It is in this spirit that I wish to reconsider the work of M. Flournoy,1 whose study, well known to all psychologists, has been favorably received in scientific circles.

The author writes in a spirit contrary to our interpretations, which is a guarantee to us that we may accept the facts which he himself could not easily admit. Only, M. Flournoy presents his theory first, his facts afterwards, and then makes his facts fit his theory. He declares himself hostile to any interpretation which infers the intervention of a foreign influence. At the mere thought of this, he says, he feels a nervous amusement, which sets him laughing. As for table-tipping, he states with a certain cynicism, "Whether objects do or do not move is vastly indifferent to me." (p. 357.)

It is the salient characteristic of M. Flournoy that he attaches slight importance to the phenomenon itself, analyzing only its content: the faculty of creating instantly an imaginary language does not hold his attention. He demonstrates, and with reason, that this language is not authentic. Nevertheless, it remains to be explained how operations of great complexity can be produced without a conscious action. We know that we must beware of the names with which mediumistic personalities endow themselves to meet the demands of curious persons: generally they accept the first that is proposed to them. We do not know the personalities of the Beyond, and when we are concerned with a serious manifestant who is connected with important experiments, it must adopt a name.

1 From the Indies to the Planet Mars, by Th. Flournoy, Alcan, 1910.

Miss Smith's familiar spirit answered to the name of Leopold, and later accepted the personality of Cagliostro, who, we believe, was suggested to him.

In the case of Miss Beauchamp, Sally was a hostile and malevolent spirit. Leopold, on the contrary, is a guardian spirit: but the physical process of apparent possession is always the same - difficulty in adapting the foreign influence to the organs of the medium. When Leopold wished to write, there was a struggle of twenty minutes, during which Helen resisted with all her strength: but in vain. Leopold snatched the pen from her, twisted and hurt her arm, until Helen, vanquished, wept and obeyed. Miss Smith, accustomed to hold her pen with the middle finger, was obliged to write with the index finger. Moreover, she produced an orthography different from her own, not only as to penmanship, much larger and more regular, but also as to spelling, which was of the last century. Leopold did not fail once to write "j'aurois" for "j'aurais" and to use archaic terms. If, for instance, he named the streets of Geneva, it was under their old names.

The same struggle would begin for control of the vocal organs: it was not until a year after the first attempt that he succeeded in speaking freely. Here again there is a likeness with the case of Sally, who stammered terribly at the beginning. Helen suffered actually in her mouth and throat: then began to speak, with an Italian accent, in a deep and hollow voice, wholly unlike the usual sweet tone of her pretty feminine voice. And it was not the voice alone that changed: archaism appeared in speech as it had in writing: the vocabulary was studded with obsolete words - "phial" instead of "bottle," etc. Yet Leopold never forgot that he was Italian, and pronounced U like ou, and never used the new word, saying omnibus for tramway, etc., and all of this in a strong bass voice, very masculine and as Italian as possible. (From the Indies, p. 110.)

For D. Flournoy this is but a well-played role: the person is but a modification of Helen - a case of auto-hypnotism. Flournoy swallows the obstacle. Auto-hypnotism can be only the act of a self-cognizant will; it is the usual mode of action exerted upon oneself or upon the motor centers, if so be they are considered as distinct from the ego. Auto-hypnotism would in this case be a reverse action; the ego wishes to write in one manner, the hand in another, and the hand triumphs over the subject. It is the organic periphery attacking the brain and imposing its movements upon it, a way in which automatism does not function.