[11]

PAGE DES REVENANTS

(Round Robin, in keeping with its character as a bulletin of psychic studies, will continue to print from time to time memoranda of private seance work. These may seldom or never contain anything of a startling nature, but will always include certain points which seem to us to be worth recording.

(These phenomena may be regarded, in all instances except where otherwise specified, as taking place under "test conditions." But this expression will usually mean that all persons concerned are well and favorably known to this writer, that the sittings are non-commercial and private, not involving professional mediums, that conditions of observation were good, and that the writer sees no cause whatever to question the substantial accuracy of his report. To attempt anything more than this, for our Round Robin purposes, would be both impractical and superfluous. We are not arguing a case for spiritualism; we are simply reporting certain happenings observed, and addressing for the most part persons already well informed on these matters, and whose confidence we possess.)

(Sitting of April 27, 1946, at San Diego. Present: Mark Probert, 39, (artist, bank employee); his wife; George B...., 19, artist and student; Meade Layne. 8:30 p.m.)

(Mark Probert is by nature strongly mediumistic or psychic, has read considerably in the literature of the subject but has had no systematic instruction or 'development,' and has never practised any form of mediumship for gain. Probert is also a 'sensitive' tho in lesser degree, and often receives verifiable information by use of the ouija board. George B. is active intellectually and considerably above average mentality; he is new to the subject of spiritism and is deeply sceptical.)

These sittings originate in the following circumstances: (a) The belief that the remarkable natural powers of Mark P. can can perhaps be developed into either trumpet voice or materialization phenomena (since there are many signs of both); (b) The remarkable predominance of Xenoglossy. Speaking with tongues is a fairly common phenomenon, but in the case of Mark P. it is difficult to get him, or the communicators, to use English, his native tongue. He has been heard to speak fluently in German, Swedish, Spanish, French, Latin, Arabic, Japanese, sings in Spanish and other languages, and has recited the Dies Irae in Latin. All this while under 'control.' At such times he is aware of the sound of his own voice, but cannot stop, or control his utterance, or understand the meaning of what he is saying. He does not read or speak any other language than English, and has not lived among foreign peoples or been especially in contact with other languages. He is of excellent natural abilities but has only an average schooling.

Immediately upon the lights being dimmed, Mark P. passes under control, begins to talk with great violence, almost shouting, in Swedish. His actions are convulsive and he soon begins to weep. No one present understands Swedish, and ML remonstrates with the controlling personality, explaining that he is out of the dense body, that he is much too violent in his use of the instrument, and that he should [12] speak English if possible.

After a little time a few sentences of badly broken English come through, and it is made out that the communicator was killed by machine gun fire during the war. "I was young - I was a boy - I did not want to die." The voice was frantic, the medium clutched his throat and started to fall over backward, and it was necessary to suspend the sitting for a short time. On resuming, a second control appeared, also speaking violently in Swedish, which could not be understood.

After a quiet interval of about a half hour, table movements began. Mark P., in normal consciousness, asked ML if he had a "uncle Arthur"; he said that some one was saying "Meade, do you remember 'Uncle Arthur?'" The communicator was then asked to reply to questions by moving the table, if no better way was possible, giving one short jerk for NO and three or more for YES. This of course confined the interrogation to yes-and-no questions. ML recurred to the 'uncle Arthur' matter, and asked:

The medium at this point asserted that he was impressed to say, that this relative, believed to be the 'uncle Arthur' had been killed by horses, or by horse and wagon. But there was considerable uncertainty as to whether the first name, Arthur, had been correctly understood. The relevant facts are these: The querent, ML, has a brother in law named Arthur H., who is spoken of as 'uncle Arthur' in ML's family, and who is now living, in Ohio. There was also an uncle of ML's wife, one John Wesley H., who formerly lived in Ohio, and who was killed there by the kick of a horse, some 45 years ago. It is almost certain that the living Arthur H. knows of this long past accident. Arthur H. is a dealer in grain, which in past years was hauled to the elevator by horse and wagon.

This is a good tho comparatively trite example of the confusions which arise in such matters. For a time there seemed to be a clear cut 'message' to the effect that Arthur H. had been killed, and if the matter had rested there, one more 'lying communication' would have been alleged. But in some way the John and Arthur identities became entangled. It is difficult to account for the question to ML, "Do you remember," etc. But ML himself, at time of the sitting, had never heard of John Wesley H., tho well acquainted with Arthur H. The veridical elements simmer down to (a) the death of a relative (b) named H. (c) in Ohio (d) caused by a horse.

At the close of the sitting the following question and answer occurred: