Research source

We see here both psychic and physical powers-exercised, not generally recognised as possible

Date of account: Published 1893
Source: How to thought-read: A manual of instruction in the strange and mystic in daily life, psychic phenomena, including hypnotic, mesmeric, and psychic states, mind and muscle reading, thought transference, psychometry, clairvoyance, and phenomenal spiritualism
Reference: How to thought-read: A manual of instruction in the strange and mystic in daily life, psychic phenomena, including hypnotic, mesmeric, and psychic states, mind and muscle reading, thought transference, psychometry, clairvoyance, and phenomenal spiritualism · selected passage 104
Rights: public_domain
Language: English
Record updated: 2026-08-24

Record summary

Published source text

Read the available text below. Archive transcriptions may contain OCR errors; later context is labelled separately. A recorded claim is not a finding that it happened.

Source passage

Source text · mention only

We see here both psychic and physical powers-exercised, not generally recognised as possible. A massive table moved without physical leverage or exertion, and “thoughts read,” which formed the basis of the message. Trickery and collusion in this instance are absolutely out of the question. The only questions which remain to answer are: “Did this medium possess in himself the powers referred to? or did he possess them in consequence of being controlled by a disembodied spirit, as claimed by the message?” Although the message in itself did not contain evidence of any other source of information than that emanating from the lawyer’s own mind, we are forced to the conclusion that either the medium or the spirit controlling the medium had power to read his mind, and of exerting what Professor Crookes and Sergeant Cox would call Psychic Force to move the table, and indicate what pellets to select.

Historical context

Contextual commentary · mention only

This source supplies historical scientific, skeptical or conventional context. Its terminology and conclusions may not reflect current scholarship.

Modern context

Contextual commentary · mention only

Lattice uses this as an alternative-explanation source, not as an automatic dismissal of testimony. Claims still need to be compared with the actual evidence and current knowledge.

Investigate related details with Anomaly Graph’s account-based search, or read how matching and provenance work.