“Smell had to be guarded against with still greater care. When the substance was odoriferous the packet or bottle was opened outside the room, or at such a distance, and so cautiously as to prevent any sensible smell from escaping. The experiments, moreover, were conducted in the close vicinity of a very large kitchen, from whence a strong odour of beefsteak and onions proceeded during almost all the time occupied. The tasters took pains to keep their heads high above the ‘subjects,’ and to avoid breathing with open mouth. One substance (coffee) tried was found to give off a slight smell, in spite of all precautions, and an experiment made with this has been omitted.
“The tasters were Mr. Guthrie (M.G.), Mr. Gurney (E.G.), and Mr. Myers (M.). The percipients may be called R. and E. The tasters lightly placed a hand on one of the shoulders or hands of the percipients—there not being the same objection to contact in trials of this type as where lines and figures are concerned, and the ‘subjects’ themselves seeming to have some faith in it. During the first experiments (September 3rd and 4th) there were one or two other persons in the room, who, however, were kept entirely ignorant of the substance tasted. During the experiments silence was preserved. The last fifteen of them (September 5th) were made when only M. G., E. G., and M., with the two percipients, were present. On this evening E. was, unfortunately, suffering from sore throat, which seemed to blunt her susceptibility. On this occasion none of the substances were allowed even to enter the room where the percipients were. They were kept in a dark lobby outside, and taken by the investigators at random, so that often one investigator did not even know what the other took. Still less could any spy have discerned what was chosen, had such spy been there, which he certainly was not.
“A very small portion of each substance used was found to be enough. The difficulty lies in keeping the mean between the massive impression of a large quantity of a salt, spice, bitter, or acid, which confounds the specific differences under each general head, and the fading impression which is apt to give merely a residual pungency, from which the characteristic flavour has escaped. It is necessary to allow some minutes to elapse between each experiment, as the imaginary taste seems to be fully as persistent as the real one.
“We should have preferred in these experiments to use only substances which were wholly inodorous. But in order to get any description of tastes from the percipients, it was necessary that the tastes should be either very decided or very familiar. It would be desirable, before entering on a series of experiments of this kind, to educate the palates of the percipients by accustoming them to a variety of chemical substances, and also by training them to distinguish, with shut eyes, between the more ordinary flavours. It is well known how much taste is helped by sight and determined by expectation; and when it is considered that the percipients in these cases were judging blindfold of the mere shadow of a savour, it will perhaps be thought that even some of their mistakes are not much wider of the mark than they might have been had a trace of the substance been actually placed upon their tongues.”
In later experiments, Mr. Guthrie endeavoured to meet the difficulty caused by odorous substances, and even succeeded in obtaining what appeared to be transferences of smell-impressions. The “subjects” and the agents were placed in different rooms. An opening, 101 inches square, had been made in the wooden partition between the two rooms; and this had been filled in with a frame, covered with india-rubber and fitting tightly. Through a slit in this frame the agent (Mr. Guthrie or his relative, Miss Redmond) passed a hand, which both the “subjects” could then touch. Under these conditions, as far as could be judged, it was impossible for any scent to pass; and, certainly, if any did pass, it would have needed extreme hyperæsthesia to detect it. The following results were obtained on December 5th, 1883:—
1.—Miss Redmond tasted powdered nutmeg.
E. said “Ginger.”
R. said “Nutmeg.”
2.—Mr. G. tasted powder of dry celery.
E.: “A bitter herb.”
R.: “Something like camomile.”
3.—Miss Redmond tasted coffee.
At the same time, without any previous intimation, Mr. G., with two pins, pricked the front of the right wrist of Miss Redmond.
E. said: “Is it a taste at all?” Mr. G.: “Why do you ask?” “Because I feel a sort of pricking in the left wrist.” She was told it was the right wrist, but said she felt it in the left.
R.: “Is it cocoa or chocolate?” Answer given in the negative.
E.: “Is it coffee?”
4.—Mr. G. tasted Worcestershire sauce.
R.: “Something sweet . . also acid . . a curious taste.”
E.: “Is it vinegar?”
5.—Miss Redmond smelt eau do Cologne.
R.: “Is it eau de Cologne?”
6.—Miss Redmond smelt camphor.
E.: “Don’t taste anything.”
R.: Nothing perceived.
7.—Mr. G. smelt carbolic acid.
R.: “What you use for toothache . . . creosote.”
E. afterwards said she thought of pitch.
8.—Mr. G. Right instep pricked with pins.
E. guessed first the face, then the left shoulder; then R. localised the pain on the right foot.
The pain was then silently transferred to the left foot. E. localised it on the left foot. Both maintained their opinions.
I will quote one more taste-series, for the sake of illustrating a special point—namely, the deferment of the percipient’s consciousness of the sensation until a time when the agent had himself ceased to feel it. This fact is of great interest, on account of the marked analogy to it which we shall encounter in many of the spontaneous telepathic cases. The instances below are too few to be conclusive; but we used to notice the same thing in our experiments with the Creery family—the object on which the attention of the agents had been concentrated being sometimes correctly named after the experiment had been completely abandoned as a failure. (Cf., Vol. II., p. 327.)
June 11th, 1885.
Dr. Hyla Greves was in contact with Miss Relph, having tasted salad oil.
Miss Relph said: “I feel a cool sensation in my mouth, something like that produced by sal prunelle.”
Mr. R. C. Johnson in contact, having tasted Worcestershire sauce in another room.
“I taste something oily; it is very like salad oil.” Then, a few minutes after contact with Mr. Johnson had ceased, “My mouth seems getting hot after the oil.” (N.B.—Nothing at all had been said about the substances tasted either by Dr. Greves or Mr. Johnson.)
Dr. Greves in contact, having tasted bitter aloes.
“I taste something frightfully hot . . . something like vinegar and pepper . . . Is it Worcestershire sauce?”
Mr. Guthrie in contact, also having tasted bitter aloes.
“I taste something extremely bitter, but don’t know what it is, and do not remember tasting it before . . . It is a very horrid taste.”
The possibility of the transference of