True Ghost Stories Read online

  “For hours I lay awake, not daring to move. After what seemed a century, the first faint shafts of light fell across the room, betokening the welcome morn. Finally glorious day broke. Glorious light! Hateful darkness! Cannot you see why I hate it so?”

  But, fortunately, this evil and horrible side of ghost-land is not universal.

  Ghosts do not always present themselves as so formidable and gruesome! Some of them prove helpful; others seem to wish to right a wrong; some even seem to have a sense of humor! So there are all sorts of ghosts, just as there are all sorts of people; and the variety is just as great in the one case as in the other.

  What Is a Ghost?

  But, after all, what is a ghost? What do we mean by this? Where do ghosts live, and how? What do they do with themselves? How do they manifest? Why do they return? These are some of the questions which the average man asks himself—unless he totally disbelieves in them.

  Most men, it is true, disbelieve in ghosts—unless they have had some experience to convince them to the contrary. Yet, after all, why should they? As Mr. W. T. Stead once remarked:

  “Real Ghost Stories! How can there be real ghost stories when there are no real ghosts?

  “But are there no real ghosts? You may not have seen one, but it does not follow that therefore they do not exist. How many of us have seen the microbe that kills? There are at least as many persons who testify that they have seen apparitions as there are men of science who have examined the microbe. You and I, who have seen neither, must perforce take the testimony of others. The evidence for the microbe may be conclusive, the evidence as to apparitions may be worthless; but in both cases it is a case of testimony, not of personal experience.”

  The average conception of a Ghost is probably somewhat as follows: That it is a thin, tall figure, wrapped in a sheet, walking about the house, clanking chains behind it, and scaring out of his wits anyone who sees it. According to this view, a ghost would be as material and substantial a thing as a buzz-saw or a lap-dog, and exists just as fully “in space.” Such, however, is not the conception of the ghost which modern science entertains. Many investigators who have examined this question closely have come to the conclusion that ghosts do actually exist; but when we come to the more troublesome question: What are they? we are met at once with difficulties and disagreements. The recent scientific theories and explanations of the subject are complex and subtle; and necessitate a certain preliminary knowledge on the part of the student in order for him to understand them. I shall explain as briefly and clearly as possible exactly what these theories are. For the moment, I wish to speak, first of all, of the history of psychic investigation; and particularly that portion of it which deals with apparitions or “ghost hunting.”

  Historic Investigations

  Here and there, serious investigators have always existed. In the sixteenth century Dr. Glanvil pursued this study with great genius and patience; Dr. Johnson also was a firm believer in the reality of “ghosts”; Sir Walter Scott and others of his time were investigators, the famous Dr. Perrier wrote a treatise on apparitions, and similar investigations have been continued up to the present day. The first organized and systematic attempt to solve the problem, and to find out exactly what ghosts are, however, was made by the Society for Psychical Research (S. P. R.) in 1882. Practically all the investigations which have been carried on since then have led to important results.

  Soon after the above mentioned Society was founded, and material began to be collected, it was found that many cases had to do with haunted houses, many with apparitions, but the greater number of them hinged around the one point—the coincidence of apparitions with the death of the persons represented. An apparition of a certain person would be seen in London, let us say; and some hours later a telegram would arrive, conveying the news that this person had just been killed. When the time was compared, it was found to agree exactly; the hour of the death and that of the apparition tallying to the minute.

  Chance, you say? Perhaps so. One case of this character might be explained in such manner; but could fifty? Could a hundred? It became a question of statistics—of figures; these alone can answer our question.

  Before considering these, however, let us give a few examples of cases of “death-coincidences,” so that the reader may see the character of the evidence presented. He may then appreciate the value of a great mass of such evidence, when published in extenso.

  Death Coincidences

  The first case we take is from M. Flammarion’s book, The Unknown (p. 108), and is as follows:

  “My mother ... who lived in Burgundy, heard one Tuesday, between nine and ten o’clock, the door of the bedroom open and close violently. At the same time, she heard herself called twice—‘Lucie, Lucie!’ The following Tuesday, she heard that her uncle Clementin, who had always had a great affection for her, had died that Tuesday morning, precisely between nine and ten o’clock....”

  In the following instance, the notification is in visual, instead of auditory form, and is taken from the Proceedings, S. P. R., Vol. X., pp. 213-14:

  “About the 14th of September, 1882, my sister and I felt worried and distressed by hearing the ‘death watch’; it lasted a whole day and night. We got up earlier than usual the next morning, about six o’clock, to finish some birthday presents for our mother. As my sister and I were working and talking together, I looked up, and saw our young acquaintance standing in front of me and looking at us. I turned to my sister; she saw nothing. I looked again to where he stood; he had vanished. We agreed not to tell any one....

  “Some time afterwards we heard that our young acquaintance had either committed suicide or had been killed; he was found dead in the woods, twenty-four hours after landing. On looking back to my diary, I found that the marks I made in it corresponded to the date of his death.”

  The following case is reported in Podmore’s Apparitions and Thought Transference, p. 265:

  “The first Thursday of April, 1881, while sitting at tea with my back to the window, and talking with my wife in the usual way, I plainly heard a rap at the window, and, looking round, I said to my wife, ‘Why, there’s my grandmother,’ and went to the door, but could not see anyone; and still feeling sure it was my grandmother, and, knowing that, though eighty-three years of age, she was very active and fond of a joke, I went round the house, but could not see anyone. My wife did not hear it. On the following Saturday, I had news that my grandmother died in Yorkshire about half an hour before the time I heard the rapping. The last time I saw her alive I promised, if well, I would attend her funeral; that was some two years before. I was in good health and had no trouble; age, twenty-six years. I did not know that my grandmother was ill.

  “Rev. Matthew Frost.”

  Mrs. Frost writes:

  “I beg to certify that I perfectly remember all the circumstances my husband has named, but I heard and saw nothing myself.”

  The following case is from Phantasms of the Living, Vol. II., p. 50:

  “On February 26th, 1850, I was awake, for I was to go to my sister-in-law, and visiting was then an event for me. About two o’clock in the morning my brother walked into our room (my sister’s) and stood beside my bed. I called to her, ‘Here is ——.’ He was at the time quartered at Paisley, and a mail-car from Belfast passed about that hour not more than a mile from our village.... He looked down on us most lovingly, and kindly, and waved his hand, and he was gone! I recollect it all as if it were only last night it occurred, and my feeling of astonishment, not at his coming into the room at all, but where he could have gone. At that very hour he died.”

  Mr. Gurney writes:

  “We have confirmed the date of death in the Army List, and find from a newspaper notice that the death took place in the early morning, and was extremely sudden.”

  Cases such as the above could be multiplied into the hundreds; but it is not necessary. For our present purposes, the above samples will at least serve to show the character of these “d
eath-coincidences,” and how accurate and how numerous they often are.

  Are They Due to Chance?

  The cases of “death-coincidences” came in so thick and so fast that, some time after its foundation, the Society for Psychical Research published an enormous book in two volumes, called “Phantasms of the Living,” which contained some 702 cases of this character. The possibility of “chance coincidence” was very carefully worked out; and it was ascertained that the number of collected cases was many thousand times more numerous than chance alone could be supposed to account for. A “connection” of some sort was thought to be proved.

  But objections at once began to be heard! “In order to prove your point you must collect a greater number of cases than this; you must get more facts before we can consider your point proved!”

  So the investigators again set to work, and carried on a far more extensive investigation, in several countries, covering a period of several years. The results were the same. After collecting some 30,000 cases, and calculating the number of death-coincidences contained in this number, it was again proved, and most conclusively, that the number of coincidences was far more numerous than could be accounted for by any theory of chance. Professor Sidgwick’s Committee, therefore, signed the following joint statement, at the conclusion of their lengthy Report:

  “Between deaths and apparitions of the dying person a connection exists which is not due to chance alone. This we hold as a proved fact....”

  These are weighty words. They represent an important forward step in our investigation of these involved and complex questions. Something takes place at death, which serves to unite, in some sort of spiritual bond, the dying and the still living relatives or friends. What is this connection? In what may it be supposed to consist?

  The Explanation

  For an explanation, we must begin by going back to experimental thought-transference. We know that it is possible, under certain conditions, for one person to affect another, otherwise than through the regular avenues of the five senses. This “telepathic” action between mind and mind is now pretty well known, and operates more or less throughout life. By means of this, it is occasionally possible for one person to impress a scene or a picture upon the mind of another, so that the other shall see before him, as it were, in space, a vivid mental picture of the scene in the other’s mind.

  This being so, it seems plausible to suppose that it might be possible to convey the impression or picture of one’s self to another—since this may be supposed to be the most precise and best-known picture we have. Would it not be possible to think of one’s own appearance so intensely as to cause a mental representation of it to appear before another person, distant some miles away?

  Apparently this has been done, many times. “Experimental apparitions” of this character have frequently been induced; accounts of a few of which will be found in this volume. The picture is mental, in such a case; it is an imaginative creation; it is a hallucination,—although it was caused or created by another, distant mind. It was, it is true, a hallucination; but as it was induced by telepathy, we have for such apparitions the name of “telepathic hallucinations.” It is this theory of “telepathic hallucinations” which is invoked to explain many of these cases of death-coincidences, or apparitions of the dying.

  Experimental Apparations

  The following types of “experimental apparitions” are good examples of the ability to induce a phantasmal form at a distance by “willing” to do so. As to the nature of this figure: there is as yet no unanimity of opinion—some authorities preferring to believe that such cases represent merely an extension of the power of thought-transference, known to us; others, on the contrary, contending that such cases prove the existence and travelling powers of the “astral” or “spiritual body.” Of this, however, more later.

  Here is a case of this nature, experienced by the English investigator, the Rev. William Stainton Moses, who corroborates the following account, which is furnished by the agent:—

  “One evening I resolved to appear to Z., at some miles’ distance. I did not inform him beforehand of the intended experiment, but retired to rest shortly before midnight, my thoughts intently fixed on Z., with whose rooms and surroundings I was quite unacquainted. I soon fell asleep, and woke next morning unconscious of anything having taken place. On seeing Z. a few days afterwards, I inquired: ‘Did anything happen at your rooms on Saturday night?’ ‘Yes,’ he replied, ‘a great deal happened. I had been sitting over the fire with M., smoking and chatting. About 12:30 he rose to leave, and I let him out myself. I returned to the fire to finish my pipe, when I saw you sitting in the chair just vacated by him. I looked intently at you, and then took up a newspaper to assure myself that I was not dreaming; but on laying it down I saw you still there. While I gazed, without speaking, you faded away.’”

  In the case which follows, the initials only are used; but the writer of the account was known to the officers of the S. P. R., who vouched for the general trustworthiness of the writer:

  “On a certain Sunday evening in November, 1881, having been reading of the great power which the human will is capable of exercising, I determined, with the whole force of my being, that I would be present in spirit in the front bedroom of the second floor of a house situated at 22 Hogarth Road, Kensington, in which room slept two young ladies of my acquaintance,—namely, Miss L. S. V. and Miss E. C. V., aged respectively twenty-five and eleven years. I was living at the time at 23 Kildare Gardens, at a distance of about three miles from Hogarth Road, and I had not mentioned in any way my intention of trying this experiment to either of the above ladies, for the simple reason that it was only on retiring to rest upon this Sunday night that I made up my mind to do so. The time at which I determined to be there was one o’clock in the morning; and I had a strong intention of making my presence perceptible. On the following Thursday I went to see the ladies in question, and, in the course of my conversation (without any allusion to the subject on my part), the elder one told me that on the previous Saturday night she had been much terrified by perceiving me standing by her bedside, and that she screamed when the apparition advanced towards her, and awoke her little sister, who also saw me.

  “I asked her if she was awake at the time, and she replied most decidedly in the affirmative; and, upon my inquiring the time of the occurrence, she replied, ‘About one o’clock in the morning.’

  “This lady at my request wrote down a statement of the event, and signed it....”

  Mr. Gurney (one of the authors of Phantasms of the Living) became deeply interested in these experiments, and requested Mr. B. to notify him in advance on the next occasion when he proposed to make his presence known in this strange manner. Accordingly, March 22d, 1884, he received the following letter:

  “Dear Mr. Gurney:—I am going to try the experiment to-night of making my presence perceptible at 44 Morland Square, at 12 P. M. I will let you know the result in a few days. Yours very sincerely, “S. H. B.”

  The next letter, which was written on April 3, contained the following statement, prepared by the recipient, Miss L. S. Verity:

  “On Saturday night, March 22, 1884, at about midnight, I had a distinct impression that Mr. S. H. B. was present in my room, and I distinctly saw him, being quite awake. He came toward me and stroked my hair. I voluntarily gave him this information when he called to see me on Wednesday, April 2, telling him the time and the circumstances of the apparition without any suggestion on his part. The appearance in my room was most vivid and quite unmistakable.”

  Miss A. S. Verity also furnishes this corroborative statement:

  “I remember my sister telling me that she had seen S. H. B. and that he touched her hair, before he came to see us on April 2.”

  The agent’s statement of the affair is as follows:

  “On Saturday, March 22, I determined to make my presence perceptible to Miss V. at 44 Morland Square, Notting Hill, at twelve midnight; and as I had previously arra
nged with Mr. Gurney that I should post him a letter of the evening on which I tried my next experiment (stating the time and other particulars) I sent him a note to acquaint him with the above facts. About ten days afterwards I called upon Miss V., and she voluntarily told me that on March 22, at twelve o’clock, midnight, she had seen me so vividly in her room (whilst wide awake) that her nerves had been much shaken, and she had been obliged to send for a doctor in the morning.”

  These cases will at least prove the possibility of such a thing as “experimental apparitions,” and, explain them as we may, they are, at all events, most interesting and significant. They prove the reality of “telepathic phantasms”—of apparitions produced in another by the power of mind. This is, at least, the modern conception of the facts.

  Telepathic Hallucinations

  How may the theory be said to work? How can a telepathic impulse from a distant mind cause a picture to appear in space, as it were, before the recipient? Here is the last word of modern science in this direction; here is the theory which has been advanced to explain puzzling cases of this character.

  When we look at and see an object, the sight-centers of the brain are roused into activity; unless they are so aroused, we see nothing, and whenever they are so aroused, no matter from what cause, we have the sensation of sight. We see.

  But we get no further than this; we do not reason about the thing seen, or analyze; or think to ourselves, “this is a red apple; I like red apples,” etc. No, we only see or perceive the object. All the reasoning about the object takes place in the higher thought-centres of the brain. A diagram will, perhaps, help to make all this clear.