CHAPTER VI.Clairvoyance.
Itis surprising with what avidity our forefathers, when they perceived some effect arising from an unknown cause, flew to the aid ofdiablerieand the supernatural for an elucidation of the mystery. Without seeking at once to work out a cause from the known laws of nature and natural phenomena, they stopped all pursuit in the paths of inquiry by at once bringing forward his Satanic Majesty as the cause of everything and every occurrence for the origin of which they could not give an immediate explanation.
We have happily reached an age which is distinguished for its matter of-fact treatment of all that appears mysterious and unusual. Thus we have, by our rigid inquiries into the truth, banished, or almost banished, those dread preventives of progress and civilization—superstition, and belief in the supernatural.
But even at the present day, with all its enlightenment and education, we find the weakness of our ancestors palpably predominating in the minds of the ignorant multitude, and spiritualism and magic looked upon by a certain number of persons as things existing and beyond the ken of men. Scientific inquiry—that broom that has swept away so many superstitions—has done its work well, and it cannot be long before the bigoted believers in the so-called “manifestation” of beings in another and unknown world will be looked upon, even by those whose belief in them is strongest, as the mechanical hanky-panky tricks of clever and astute conjurors, who feed upon the credulity and simplicity of their tools and followers.
Among the many subjects which were classed with the supernatural phenomena arising from the agency of unseen and spiritual powers,clairvoyance, or second sight, ranks conspicuous. It has been asserted, and by no mean authority, that second sight, or the belief in a secondary and unnatural sight, took its origin in the Scottish Highlands and Isles, where it was known by the name oftaisch—a spectral or shadowy appearance; but from the time when the Oracle at Delphi was sought by the populace, and when thousands were deluded by the mere mechanical tricks of a clever and crafty priesthood, even to this day, second sight has been looked upon as a spiritual visitation bestowed for some design upon persons who are made the instruments of Providence.
That at times men have had a prescience of what was to come cannot be denied, since murders and murderers have been undoubtedly discovered by means of visions which have been seen of the murderer, and the spot where the murder was committed.
Even Dr. Johnson, in his Journal in the Hebrides, where the belief in second sight prevailed to a great extent, hesitates whether to believe or deny; and he asserts that he “came away at last only willing to believe.” It is not my intention, nor have I the time or space, to enter fully into the subject of second sight of the past, but it is my intention to fully explain second sight, as it is understood now, and the reader will at once see how the old fabric of the superstitious ages melts into the most commonplace, and he will be perhaps vexed and annoyed to think that when witnessing a performance of second sight his mind misgave him, and he really was willing to believe.
The power, when blindfold, to discriminate things unseen, and promiscuously pick from a crowd of persons, and name miscellaneous and out-of-the-way articles, has been performed so cleverly that the greatest surprise and wonder has been created in the minds of even the most intelligent spectators. But like everything else to which the term magic has been and is applied, the wonderful and mysterious are only the simple and the commonplace, and the credulity of the audience leads to the merest trickery, to that marvel and wonder which surrounds a feat of legerdemain or clairvoyance; but, as my readers will have already seen, as soon as second sight is explained, it will cause wonder no more.
There are always two persons engaged in an exhibition of clairvoyance—the person who asks what the article is and the person whoanswers. The whole secret of second sight lies in the method of asking what the article is. A sort of dictionary has to be learned by both, and this lesson is certainly not more difficult than that of the tragedian in learning his part; but the audience are deceived by the simplicity of the questions asked. Although the words used by the questioner are nearly always the same, the position of the words is different. Hence, a different answer can be applied for every varying construction of the sentence.
When these different questions and their answers are thoroughly understood by the two accomplices, they can give an exhibition which to the uninitiated will appear marvellous and unaccountable. When the interrogator asks the question, “Is this picture colored or plain?” the answer is “Plain;” or if the question is, “Is this picture plain or colored?” the answer is “Colored.” This is the whole groundwork of second sight, and in order more fully to illustrate this matter I will give a series of answers and questions which have been adopted by a number of English and American professors. In asking the color of an article, the question can be so differently constructed that each construction can bear the answer for every ordinary color.
What color is this? Black.What is the color? Blue.Tell me the color? Green.Has it a color? White.Any color? Orange, yellow.Name the color? Brown.Please name the color? Red.
What color is this? Black.
What is the color? Blue.
Tell me the color? Green.
Has it a color? White.
Any color? Orange, yellow.
Name the color? Brown.
Please name the color? Red.
These have only to be learned by two persons in combination, when they will be able to tell the color of any article. Should the exhibitor have an article of a mixed color, say, mauve, he first asks the question having red for the answer; and then, before the reply can be given, again puts the query for blue. The clairvoyant thereby knowing it is a mixture of red and blue, he is able to know that mauve is the answer required. Again, in asking the nature of a stone set in a jewel the question may be thus arranged:
What is the stone? Topaz.What stone is it? Jet.Tell me the stone? Emerald.Name the stone? Diamond.Do you know the stone? Cornelian.Any stone? Amethyst.
What is the stone? Topaz.
What stone is it? Jet.
Tell me the stone? Emerald.
Name the stone? Diamond.
Do you know the stone? Cornelian.
Any stone? Amethyst.
And so onad infinitum. In ascertaining the nature of a piece of jewelry the questions may be put thus:
What is the metal? Gold.What metal is it? Brass.What metal? Silver.Tell me the metal? Copper.Name the metal? Iron; steel.Please name the metal? Bronze.Can you tell me the metal? Tin.
What is the metal? Gold.
What metal is it? Brass.
What metal? Silver.
Tell me the metal? Copper.
Name the metal? Iron; steel.
Please name the metal? Bronze.
Can you tell me the metal? Tin.
The following questions, having replies for the usual articles found upon persons assembled to witness a performance, may easily be learned by a person gifted with a good memory, or by a person with an ordinary memory by repeated application:
Name this? A pocket comb.What have I here? A purse.What is this? A toothpick.This will puzzle you? Court plaster.Speak loud? A letter.Answer quickly? A handkerchief.Has it a color? White.Is it perfumed? Yes.Tell me now? Keys.Is this of any use? An almanac.What is this for? To burn a cigar.Do ladies use this? Yes; a pincushion, needlecase.Do you know this? A walking-stick.Now, can you tell this? A pocket-book.Would you like this? Yes; a watch.Do you admire this? A brooch.Who gave me this? A lady—a bracelet.What is in my hand? A pin.Now, who gave me this? A gentleman—a chain.What have I now? Money.Now, what have I got? A sovereign.Can you tell me again? A shilling.Is this the same? Sixpence.You say I have money; but you don’t say the kind? A florin.You say I have money; but you don’t say its value? A half crown.You say I have money; but tell me its value? Ten shillings.What is the value of the money? A penny.I cannot hear you? A halfpenny.
Name this? A pocket comb.
What have I here? A purse.
What is this? A toothpick.
This will puzzle you? Court plaster.
Speak loud? A letter.
Answer quickly? A handkerchief.
Has it a color? White.
Is it perfumed? Yes.
Tell me now? Keys.
Is this of any use? An almanac.
What is this for? To burn a cigar.
Do ladies use this? Yes; a pincushion, needlecase.
Do you know this? A walking-stick.
Now, can you tell this? A pocket-book.
Would you like this? Yes; a watch.
Do you admire this? A brooch.
Who gave me this? A lady—a bracelet.
What is in my hand? A pin.
Now, who gave me this? A gentleman—a chain.
What have I now? Money.
Now, what have I got? A sovereign.
Can you tell me again? A shilling.
Is this the same? Sixpence.
You say I have money; but you don’t say the kind? A florin.
You say I have money; but you don’t say its value? A half crown.
You say I have money; but tell me its value? Ten shillings.
What is the value of the money? A penny.
I cannot hear you? A halfpenny.
I think I have given sufficient queries and answers to indicate the simplicity and the secret of second sight. When all the particulars of the articles are required, although the questions may seem perplexing to the spectator, yet they are extremely simple to the person who knows each question and its reply by heart.
Here is an illustration of a complicated series of questions, and the reader will see at once that the answering is very simple:
What is in my hand? A pin.What is the metal? Gold.Any stone? Amethyst.What have I now? Money.You say I have money; but you don’t say the kind? A florin.Can you tell me again? A shilling.
What is in my hand? A pin.
What is the metal? Gold.
Any stone? Amethyst.
What have I now? Money.
You say I have money; but you don’t say the kind? A florin.
Can you tell me again? A shilling.
From the illustrations I have given above, the reader will perceive that, provided a large and well-selected assortment of questions, corresponding with replies, be agreed upon, and well known by the two confederates, almost any question may be answered and any article known, together with its properties, color, contents, etc.
Another exhibition of clairvoyance—the reading of writing sealed up and unopened—adds greatly to the mystery of the performance; but how this is done can be easily explained. Previous to going on the stage, a sentence is selected, and written in blacklead on a piece of paper. During the performance similar pieces of paper are handed round to several of the audience, who are requested to write a sentence thereon. These papers are sealed similarly to the prepared one, and placed in a hat. The professor then pretends to select oneat random, after having shaken up the papers; but he really takes up the one he had already in his hand. The lady clairvoyant is then requested to read a sentence, which, of course, she can easily do. The paper is then handed to one of the audience and to their astonishment it is found to have been the actual sentence written. It will be understood that each writer of a sentence is ignorant of what another has written, and the given sentence is therefore thought to have been written by one of the audience. This suspicion may be heightened by the queer method of spelling, or the character of the caligraphy; it may be made still more astounding by writing the sentence in a foreign language with a slight mistake in spelling, or grammar, upon which the clairvoyant can comment in her reply, and thus acquire a reputation for scholarly and linguistic attainments.The same means are resorted to in the adding up of a sum.The figures are all prepared behind the stage, and thebona fidesums given by the audience are never the ones answered by the clairvoyant. I think I have given, or I hope I have, a clear and full explanation of clairvoyance or second sight, and the reader may, by a little practice, become as perfect in this special branch of magic as the mysterious lady—Heller—Miss Anderson, Dr. Lynn, and a host of others, who have mystified and bewildered thousands of wondering spectators.