study of history.

There is another class of difficulties. As anthropology becomes
popular, every inquirer knows what customs he _ought_ to find among
savages, so, of course, he finds them. In the same way, people may
now know what customs it is orthodox to find among ghosts, and may
pretend to find them, or may simulate them by imposture. The white
sheet and clanking chains are forsaken for a more realistic rendering
of the ghostly part. The desire of social notoriety may beget wanton
fabrications. In short, all studies have their perils, and these are
among the dangers which beset the path of the inquirer into things
ghostly. He must adopt the stoical maxim: "Be sober and do not
believe"--in a hurry.

If there be truth in even one case of "telepathy," it will follow that
the human soul is a thing endowed with attributes not yet recognised
by science. It cannot be denied that this is a serious consideration,
and that very startling consequences might be deduced from it; such
beliefs, indeed, as were generally entertained in the ages of
Christian darkness which preceded the present era of enlightenment.
But our business in studies of any kind is, of course, with truth, as
we are often told, not with the consequences, however ruinous to our
most settled convictions, or however pernicious to society.

The very opposite objection comes from the side of religion. These
things we learn, are spiritual mysteries into which men must not
inquire. This is only a relic of the ancient opinion that he was an
impious character who first launched a boat, God having made man a
terrestrial animal. Assuredly God put us into a world of phenomena,
and gave us inquiring minds. We have as much right to explore the