1691. The ‘wicked ones,’ in this case, seemed to come nearer the truth than the ‘good ones;’ for, on the afternoon of the eighth of April, the breaking of glass commenced for the first time, by the breaking of a pane in a mysterious manner. In the evening of the same day another was broken during family prayers, some of the pieces falling inside and some outside. There were no indications of any thing being thrown against it.
1692. From this time forward for several weeks glass was broken almost daily, until the whole number of panes broken amounted to seventy-one in the house and out-buildings. Most of them were broken by something being thrown against them; among the articles were a brush, a shoe, a poker, a fire-shovel, a candlestick, a pair of snuffers, books, and numerous other things; occasionally a stone or piece of brick, thrown from the outside.
1693. Dr. P. thinks it would have been possible, but not probable, that, in some of these cases, they might have been broken by human agency; but he was an eye-witness in some twenty or thirty cases, and knows that they could not have been so done. He saw a brush, which he knew to have been on a certain shelf but a moment before, and no person near the shelf, fly to the window, break out a glass, and fall down between the shutter and sash, where he knew from the position that no one could have thrown it. He saw a tumbler, which was standing on a bureau, rise from its place, fly to the window, and dash out the only pane remaining whole in the window, when no person was within twenty feet of it, and the only persons in the room were himself and Harry, the latter standing by the doctor’s side in the doorway of the room—a position in which it was utterly impossible for him to have done it without detection.
1694. The mysterious visitors, whoever they were, seemed at times to be actuated by a spirit of sheer mischief in the destruction of property, particularly glass and crockery. Even the glass in the carriage-top was broken out. Pitchers of water were, on two or three occasions, poured into the beds, and the pitchers and other vessels thrown about the room and broken. The damage to furniture during the whole time was nearly two hundred dollars. Sometimes there was a cessation of ‘hostilities’ for two or three days; but they would then return with additional violence; in fact, they increased gradually in violence from the beginning to the middle of April. On the evening of that day, and during the night, they were more violent and destructive than ever before. On the night of the 13th of April, loud pounding and beating, as with some hard substance, were frequent in the room adjoining that in which Dr. P. slept; so loud and continued were they, that at one o’clock no person in the house had been able to sleep. Soon after, a small drawer was taken from a dressing-table, and beaten so violently against the bedstead as to break it into fragments, some of which were thrown against the windows, breaking two panes of glass. The knockings were now transferred to Mrs. P.‘s room. She was pinched, pricked with pins, and otherwise annoyed in a manner beyond explanation ‘on any known laws of matter or mind.’ Mr. W. C. was staying in the house that night. He went to the room by request, and proposed to interrogate them, as they were then doing at Rochester and other places in Western New York. Being left to act his pleasure, he queried, and was replied to as follows: ‘Who are you? If a spirit, knock.’ Immediately there were heard on the head of the bed distinct knocks. Q.—‘Are you a good or bad spirit? If good, knock.’ To this there was no answering sound. ‘If a bad spirit, knock.’ At once the same sounds as before were heard. Q.—‘Will you spell your name if the alphabet is called?’ A.—Knock. It was done; and a name was spelled out, and a communication made of a most extraordinary character, detailing the particulars of a transaction in which a portion of the family were said to have been defrauded out of a large property. As this whole communication relates to a matter which may yet come before the tribunals of our country for adjudication, I am expressly prohibited from making any extracts from this part of the journal. I regret this more, as the facts in this case form one of the most wonderful and unaccountable cases on record.
1695. The family concluded that, after these important disclosures were made, the disturbances would cease; but they were doomed to be disappointed. The following night no communications were made, but the throwing of articles and breaking of windows, crockery, etc., were renewed with greater violence than before. Four or five panes of glass were broken in one room in the space of half an hour. While the family were together in the east chamber, a small sauce-dish, with an iron handle, rose from the floor, under the washstand, and beat against the bedstead with such violence as to break the handle off, and was then thrown back from whence it started. It beat seven or eight times against the bedstead, producing a noise that could easily be heard twenty rods. A round of a chair was beaten against the bedstead in the same manner, when there was no person within seven or eight feet of it. A lamp that was on the mantel leaped into the middle of the floor, and was extinguished. Being left thus suddenly in the dark produced no little agitation, and Mrs. Phelps proposed that they should take the children and go into the street, rather than stay in the house that night. In a few minutes two gentlemen, who had appointed to spend the night with them, arrived, and the more violent of the manifestations ceased.
1696. About this time, Dr. P.‘s attention was called to the fact that the demonstrations were much more violent in the presence of some persons than of others. While some were present they would cease entirely, and commence as soon as they left, with great vehemence.
1697. On the 17th the communications were renewed, and from that time they had frequent communications, mainly respecting the property affair. At one time they asked how they should know that this was really from the spirit it purported to be, and requested his signature; when in less than four minutes a small piece of paper, having on it an exact fac-simile of his handwriting, was seen sticking to the wall—the writing apparently done with a pencil. Dr. Phelps still preserves the original paper, with the name inked over. It was stuck to the wall by being made damp.
1698. It was now discovered that, in order to get the rapping, the presence of Henry was necessary. At one time a request was made by the rapping to send him to New York, and a threat that all the windows in the house would be broken, if they did not, was made; but in a few minutes after, a small piece of paper was seen to fall, apparently from the ceiling, and on it written, ‘Send him not to New York—evil will befall him.’ It was evident that there were two or more contending agencies engaged in the manifestations. It was not easy to define or imagine what their objects were. At times, when one was making a communication, the other would rap, seemingly to make confusion. At other times, when a communication was being made by alphabet, a paper would be dropped down, and on it written, ‘It is all a lie; don’t believe what he says.” Sometimes language the most profane, and occasionally, but rarely, obscene, would be written out in this way. Inquiry was made as to how these contradictory communications were to be accounted for, and the answer was that an opposing spirit was attempting to defeat the object of the first; that this spirit was now one of his tormentors; that both were in a state of misery, and his suffering would be mitigated if the object of the first could be accomplished, although he would never go to a state of happiness.
1699. “Among the spirits who communicated were two who professed to be in a state of happiness, and three in a state of misery. One of the good spirits claimed to be a sister of him who made the first communication; she communicated frequently, and constantly manifested herself in the morning and evening devotions of the family, and always gave two distinct knocks at the utterance of ‘Amen.’ Upon inquiry as to the meaning of these two knocks, the answer was given that it was a response, after the manner of the Episcopal service, signifying that she joined in the devotions.