2. That all that he saw done looked as if it might have been done by jugglery.
3. That the writing on slates was very suspicious—the German was bad, just such German as Slade spoke.
4. That Professor Weber, who was present at the sittings, was a very old man at the time, and presumably not an acute observer.
5. That Professor Fechner, another of those present, was afflicted with an incipient cataract, and could see very little.
6. That Professor Zoellner himself was at the time decidedly not in his right mind; his abnormal mental condition being clearly indicated in his letters and in his intercourse with his family.
7. That he (Professor Wundt) had not a high respect for the scientific judgment of Professor Ulrici, of Halle, who had been so much impressed by the report made by Professor Zoellner; Professor Ulrici he thought literary and poetical, but not scientific.
It will be seen that some of the points mentioned by Professor Wundt are suggestive; but I will postpone an examination of his statements, as of those of each of the others, until they have all been given and can be compared.
On the same day (June 19th) I called upon Professor Fechner, also at his home in Leipsic. Professor Fechner, who no longer lectures, being old and feeble, and suffering from cataract of the eyes, made the following statements, each of which I translated to him for his approval, after I had set it down:
1. That he himself was present at but two sittings, and that these were not very decisive.
2. That he did not look upon Slade as a juggler, but accepted the objective reality of the facts; that he did this, however, not on the strength of his own observations, for these were unsatisfactory, but because he had faith in Professor Zoellner's powers of observation.