I would refer this case to the anonymous writers of the Magic Circle, who has done all they could to worry this poor woman and to destroy her powers, and I would ask them how that little bag of tricks which exists only in their own imagination could have affected such a result as that. It will be noted in the already quoted opinion of Dr. Cushman that since this scandal Mrs. Deane has been severely tested by him and others, and that they have been able under the Doctor’s own conditions to get psychic results.
Another excellent case of Mrs. Deane’s power is that which forms the subject of [Figure 30]. The extra in the ectoplasmic cloud is Mr. Barlow, senior, the father of the Secretary of the S.S.S.P. Beside him is a picture of how he looked twelve years before his death. No one can deny that it is the same man with the years added on. Mrs. Deane never knew Mr. Barlow’s father in life. How, then, was this result obtained? These are the cases which the Magic Circle report avoids, while it talks much of any negative results which it can collect or imagine. I hope that this short account may do something towards helping a woman whom I believe to be a true psychic, and who has suffered severely for the faith that is in her, having actually, I understand, endured the excommunication of her church because she has used the powers which God has given her. I have a recollection that Joan of Arc endured the same fate for the reason “le plus il change, le plus il reste le même.”
It only remains for me now, before giving place to others, to say a word about Mr. Vearncombe, the psychic photographer of Bridgwater. Mr. Vearncombe was a normal, professional photographer, but he found, as Mumler did, that inexplicable extras intruded upon and spoilt both his plates and his business. He then began to study this new power, which he seemed to possess, and to develop it for commercial use. Mrs. Humphreys, a member of the S.S.S.P. and a student of psychic affairs, lived in the same town and submitted him to certain tests which convinced her and others of his bona fides, though I cannot repeat too often that no blank cheque of honesty can ever be given to any man.
My own experience of Mr. Vearncombe and my knowledge of his work are far less than in the cases of Mr. Hope and Mrs. Deane, so that I can only say that I believe he produces genuine results, whereas in the other two cases I can say that I know they produce genuine results.
I have had two experiments with Vearncombe, but did not impose any test conditions in either case. I simply sent a closed envelope containing a letter and asked him to photograph it in the hope that some extra might appear which I could associate with the sender of the letter. In both cases a large number, six or seven, well-marked faces developed round the letter, but none which bore any message to me. Others, however, have been more fortunate in their experience and have assured me that they have received true pictures of the dead in that fashion. There is no ectoplasmic cloud or psychic arch, but the faces are as clear-cut as if they were stamped with a die.
I am in some degree responsible for Vearncombe’s troubles, as I mentioned his name as being one who might repay investigation upon the occasion when I gave evidence before a committee of these conjuring gentlemen. They seem to have made up a sealed packet to Mr. Vearncombe with instructions to get what he could. Upon its return they declared that the packet, which had furnished a psychic result, had been tampered with. No independent proof whatever was offered in support of this assertion, and Mr. Fred Barlow, who had obtained results from Mr. Vearncombe, where he was sure that the packets had not been tampered with, was sufficiently interested to hunt up the name of the sender and some details of the case from the Vearncombe end, rather than from that of the “exposers.” Fortunately Vearncombe had preserved the letters, and it was then found that the sender, when the packet and the psychic result had been returned, had at once written to Vearncombe to acknowledge receipt, adding the two statements:
(1) That one of the faces strongly recalled “an old true friend who had not been heard of for many years,” and
(2) That the packet had been returned intact.
Thus the Magic Circle had clearly fallen into the pit that it had digged, and its agent is convicted either of being a senseless liar without any cause, or else of having completely endorsed the result which the Circle afterwards pretended was a failure. It was one of those numerous instances when it is not the medium but the investigators who should really be exposed. My experience is that this is the case far more frequently than the public can realise, and that it is amazing how men of honour can turn and twist the facts when they deal with this subject. A well-known “exposer” assured a friend of mine that he would think nothing of putting muslin in a medium’s pocket at a séance, if he was sure that he could thereby secure a conviction.
I have seen a letter from Mr. Marriott, who is also busy in showing up “frauds,” in which, writing to Mr. Hope, he offered to teach him to make more artistic spirit-photographs, charging thirty guineas if the lessons were in London and forty if at Crewe. I am quite prepared to anticipate Mr. Marriott’s explanation that this was a trap, but it is an example of the tortuous, deceptive methods against which our mediums have to contend.