mediumship, this seems to me to be the one which should
be tested most rigidly, as it lends itself very easily
not so much to deception as to self-deception, which is
a more subtle and dangerous thing. Is the lady herself
writing, or is there, as she avers, a power that
controls her, even as the chronicler of the Jews in the
Bible averred that he was controlled? In the case of
L. S. there is no denying that some messages proved to
be not true--especially in the matter of time they were
quite unreliable. But on the other hand, the numbers
which did come true were far beyond what any guessing
or coincidence could account for. Thus, when the
Lusitania was sunk and the morning papers here
announced that so far as known there was no loss of
life, the medium at once wrote: "It is terrible,
terrible--and will have a great influence on the war."
Since it was the first strong impulse which turned
America towards the war, the message was true in both
respects. Again, she foretold the arrival of an
important telegram upon a certain day, and even gave
the name of the deliverer of it--a most unlikely
person. Altogether, no one could doubt the reality of
her inspiration, though the lapses were notable. It
was like getting a good message through a very
imperfect telephone.

One other incident of the early war days stands out
in my memory. A lady in whom I was interested had died
in a provincial town. She was a chronic invalid and
morphia was found by her bedside. There was an inquest