PALLADINO
EUSAPIA PALLADINO, an Italian, has to her credit the successful deception of more philosophic and scientific men than any other known medium, being regarded by some as the most famous of them all, notwithstanding the fact that she seems to have made no pretence of producing the class of miracles claimed by D. D. Home and many others. Materialization was rarely resorted to by her and there is very little variety in her program from 1892 up to the time of her death in 1918, evidently being content to astonish investigating scientists with the levitation and gyrating of inanimate things.45
Palladino was born in the Neapolitan district of poor peasants who died when she was a mere child. Naturally bright, even shrewd, her perceptive instinct seems to have developed early in life and continued throughout her career though she had no education and to the end was scarcely able to read or write.
Her first contact with the mysterious arts appears to have been when she was a mere child of thirteen (1867) in the service of an acrobat or conjuror46 from whom she must have acquired some degree of skill and knowledge of the uncanny which she may have coupled up with the marvellous success achieved by Home, and her quick wit may have opened visions of a change from poverty to that affluence which she saw was the reward of the professional phenomena producer, for she began her Spiritualistic work just following his successful operations in Italy which served to spread Spiritualism in spite of Papal opposition. Her part must have been learned well and her plans carefully laid before she made her debut as a full fledged medium because she succeeded from the start in baffling brainy men of science, and while as the wife of a small shop-keeper she was very poor, she became wealthy within twenty years after taking up mediumistic work.
She did not attract the attention of the public until about 1880 when Professor Chiaia, who had been giving her a lot of attention without detecting her methods, challenged Professor Lombroso, at that time the most distinguished scientific man in Italy, to investigate her. Professor Lombroso did, but failed to detect any fraudulent work though his decision was delayed for so long a time that when it was finally given it was claimed that his mentality had weakened considerably.47
In 1892 Palladino had begun to attract the attention of scientific men in different Italian cities and had also been brought to the notice of some of the English Spiritualists but it was not until 1894 that she went to France. This trip was brought about through the influence of Professor Richet, and Sir Oliver Lodge, Professor Sidgwick, and Mr. Myers took part in the proceedings. On the return of Lodge and Myers to England they aroused interest in Palladino by reporting her phenomena to be genuine.
The first exposure of Palladino was made by Dr. Richard Hodgson in 1895. A committee from the English Society for Psychical Research, consisting of Hereward Carrington, Hon. Everard Feilding, and Wortly W. Baggally, which had held a series of test seances with Palladino in Italy, brought her to England for a fresh try-out and another series of sittings was held. Very early in the series suspicious movements on the part of the medium were observed. Later Dr. Hodgson joined the circle and was able to show conclusively that by clever manipulation—sheer trickery—she was getting one hand free and with it making the movements observed.
Her method48 was to begin by allowing one hand to be firmly held by the sitter at her side (say on the left) and let the fingers of her other hand (right) rest on that of the sitter on her right. In the course of some rapid spasmodic movements she would bring the sitters’ hands so close together that one of her own could do duty for two, being held by one sitter while its fingers rested on the hand of the other sitter,49 leaving her (Palladino’s) right hand free to produce the desired “phenomena” after which it was restored to its original position. Other devices equally dishonest were observed or inferred.
All of these men were experienced seance observers50 but the report of their conclusions shows how easily such experts were deceived by the very tricks which were later proved fraudulent by the New York branch of The Society for Psychical Research. Mr. Feilding’s reports were the least positive of the three and show that when the best phenomena were observed the control was not complete and that the stenographic notes were deficient, and when read over the day following the sitting they seemed weak in comparison with a recollection of the manifestations. That the final reports were based largely on these recollections is indicated by Mr. Feilding’s statement that:
“We were forced from our proposed colorless attitude to one of almost proselyting affirmation.”
When Palladino came to America in 1908 she was beginning to be world famous and her reputation was established; she was a shrewd woman with a large experience in the art of misdirection, and with a convenient subterfuge of unaccommodating Spirit guides whenever her own resources were exhausted because of some over-zealous observer. For twenty years or more she had avoided detection because she had fixed the conditions under which tests were made and consequently as scientific investigations they were simply farces. But in New York conditions were introduced which she did not approve for the simple reason that she did not know that they existed. Another difference was that in New York a number of rehearsals were held and each investigator was assigned to a special part of the work, thus guarding against the old trick of drawing the attention away from the place where a manifestation suddenly developed. The result was Palladino’s downfall.
On her arrival in New York a group of Columbia professors became interested in Palladino and arranged for a series of ten test seances at one hundred and twenty-five dollars a sitting. Eight of the ten seances had been held and though a majority of the professors were satisfied that she was cheating they were unable to prove it. Although the seances were being conducted secretly by the scientists one of them, Professor Dickinson S. Miller, discussed Palladino’s best trick, table levitation, with a friend of mine, Mr. W. S. Davis, himself an ex-medium whose seances were always given under test conditions. Davis not only explained to the Professor the probable method used by Palladino but demonstrated it as well with the result that the Professor declared that a full exposure of Palladino should be made even if it cost ten thousand dollars and invited Davis to aid at the next seance candidly admitting that he and his associates were incapable of proper investigation.
Davis replied that scientists were not the kind of men he could work with but if he would let him bring along a couple of “Flim-flam” men he would help. Professor Miller consented to this arrangement provided the men were palmed off as college professors as otherwise they would not be admitted. Davis then sent for John W. Sargent, a past-president of the Society of American Magicians, and for years my private secretary. He also sent for another magician, James L. Kellogg. Both agreed with Davis that his theory of Palladino’s method was correct. Professor Miller then suggested, that in order to make the discovery complete and to corroborate any and all observations, two other persons should be selected to watch the feet of the medium. Davis accordingly selected Joseph F. Rinn, another member of the magicians society, who had assisted in various exposures of pseudo-mediums and Professor Miller named Warner C. Pyne, a student at Columbia. It was agreed that these two should be clad in black even to a head covering and smuggled into the room under cover of darkness after the seance had convened and were to sprawl under the chairs and table in order that their heads might be near enough Palladino’s feet to detect any movement. I am indebted to my friend Davis for the following inside story of the sitting just as he gave it to me.
“After the arrival of Eusapia and Mr. Livingston and when both had entered the seance room, Rinn and Pyne came downstairs and hid in the hall where they waited for their signal. When we were introduced and after the usual conversation, Eusapia said that she would begin. Before she had time to pick her controllers, Professor Miller ushered Kellogg and myself into the positions next to her. She took a seat at the narrow end of the table and with her back close to the cabinet curtains. (The cabinet was formed by placing curtains from the ceiling to the floor, extending out from one corner of the room). Kellogg sat at her right and I sat at her left. Eusapia sat close to the table and her black dress touched the table legs. She placed her right foot on the instep of Kellogg’s left foot and her left foot on my right foot, which was her guarantee that her feet should play no part in the production of the phenomena. We did not reduce the light at the beginning of the seance.
“The rest of the party sitting around the table then placed their hands on its upper surface and formed the well known chain. Eusapia stamped Kellogg’s foot and mine and asked us if the control was satisfactory which of course it was. Eusapia then drew her own hands away from ours and soon light raps were heard. They were such as are easily and imperceptibly produced by sliding the finger tips upon the table top.
“We were next favored with responsive raps,—doubling up her hands she beat the air with her fists in a jerky, spasmodic way when we heard the light noises on the wood. The exhibition above board did not occupy our entire attention. Every one in the party was interested in the theory of using a foot as a lever to raise the table. As she beat the air with her clenched fist, she correspondingly slid her feet away until we felt the pressure on the toe end of our feet only, whereas there had previously been pressure on the insteps. Kellogg and I both suspected that she had succeeded in removing one foot and was making the other do duty for two. From then on we commenced to get heavier raps, as though she struck the table leg with her foot.
“In striking the table leg with the side of her shoe, thus producing raps, Eusapia also got the exact position in which her foot should be placed for levitation. When she rocked the table from side to side it was only necessary to switch her toe an inch when the left leg of the table would come down on it, then all she had to do was to elevate her toe while the heel remained on the floor and either partial or complete levitation followed.
“We looked pleased and Eusapia began to feel at home. With a little rest, the rocking was resumed and she considered it safe to risk the entire levitation. Holding Kellogg’s left hand up in the air with her right she put my right hand, palm down, on the top of the table, directly over the left table leg; then put her left hand over mine, the tips of the fingers extending rather over my hand and touching the table. No other hands were upon it. Then, after a few partial levitations, the table went up into the air with every leg off the floor. It was our first complete levitation. As beautiful as any on record and given under bright lights.”
I asked Davis how he knew the levitation was fraudulent and he answered:
“(1) During the partial levitations I casually lifted my left foot, passed it over the right foot in the direction of Eusapia and was unable to touch her left leg in the place where it should have been. (2) Her black dress touched the table leg and as she took her toe suddenly out from under it, her dress moved accordingly. (3) By the thud which the table made when it was deprived of its very material perch. (4) By the fact that any juggler can perform the feat when the ‘modus operandi’ is fully understood, though perhaps not with the same skill. (5) Every one present knew that the table was steadied at the top by Eusapia’s hand, which rested upon mine, in turn bore down over the table leg, held up presumably by Eusapia’s toe which formed a perfect human clamp.51(6) What Rinn and Pyne told us after the seance. They said that from their position under the chairs they saw Eusapia place her right foot upon Kellogg’s left and her left foot upon my right, later they saw her tapping upon our feet with hers while she made some changes in the position of her feet. They also saw her slide her left foot away by a few hitches as her right was twisted around to cover my right foot which had previously been under her left foot. They distinctly saw Eusapia strike the table leg with the side of her foot to produce the raps and they also saw her slide her toe under the table leg and force the table up by toe leverage.”52
During his narration I asked Davis to tell me if this astute Italian who had fooled the scientists of the world was not suspicious or did not sense that she was being checked up in her movements.
“No,” he replied dryly, “once during the seance she asked every one to stand up. Two of the ladies in their inexperience proceeded to obey the command. We had two spies under our chairs and as we did not want her to see them something had to be done immediately, so I pretended to have severe cramps in my legs and while the interpreter told Eusapia of it Sargent and Kellogg nudged the ladies to sit down and the medium then resumed her seat.”
I will not bore the reader with a detailed account of the cabinet phenomena at this seance under a subdued light but suffice to say that Davis and Kellogg tricked her as before and were able to explain every manifestation. The whole Miller seance was carried out as planned so carefully that Palladino on the way to her hotel afterwards told the Columbia student who had acted as interpreter53 for her that she was well pleased with the evening and that the seance had been one of the most successful of the series.54
I quote by permission from a letter written me by Mr. Davis under date of June 22, 1923:
“Rupert Hughes, in an attack upon Spiritism some time ago, said that favorable reports on Palladino constituted a vast literature, and he was right. The public libraries both in this country and Europe contain many books in which it is claimed that it has been ‘scientifically demonstrated’ that Eusapia possesses some occult power.
“Generations for centuries will probably be influenced by these books. They are only calculated to create superstition and ignorance and it is a shame that they are permitted to circulate. Eusapia was one of the world’s greatest mountebanks. Her dupes were our foremost men of learning—they were not of the rabble. She was the greatest mountebank produced by modern Spiritism, and she duped more scientists than any other medium. In that respect D. D. Home does not compare with her. The important lesson in the case is that so-called ‘scientific’ testimony is just about worthless. That is an important educational fact and a valuable lesson to the general public.”
Mr. Davis is quite right in his view of the seriousness of the possible danger and damage to the reading public from the effects of the grossly misapplied energy of the prominent scientists who have so unqualifiedly endorsed Eusapia Palladino as a genuine miracle worker, and the hosts of Spiritualistic enthusiasts who have repeated their published statements. Even Sir Arthur Conan Doyle unqualifiedly lauds Home and Palladino as patron saints of his psychic religion (?). He accepts as proof the fact that these learned scientists met their Waterloo in an attempt to fathom the simple tricks of impostors, and like all other Spiritualists refuses to accept the positive proof of the deception secured by men schooled in the science of magic which at times is as seemingly unexplainable as the more profound subjects of natural science.
The reader should bear in mind that Mr. Davis’ sincerity is just as great as is Sir Arthur’s. Sincerity is Sir Arthur’s strong magnet and the reader should attach as much importance to sincerity on the part of an opponent. We must also take into consideration the fact that Mr. Davis was at one time a medium himself and he has had much opportunity for observing the qualifications of scientists as occult investigators. We must notice too the methods of conducting the seances in which such diverse results were obtained. Those held with only scientists as observers were under the full control of the medium and all her conditions were conformed to, but in New York it was practically a case of fighting fire with fire. It is proverbial that “it takes a rogue to catch a rogue”—just so a trickster is more capable of setting traps to detect trickery than the grave scientist in his endeavor to solve the problem by mathematics or logic. In the successful instance the plan of operation had been carefully worked out in every detail, each participant was assigned a specific work to do and did it. A number of rehearsals were held so that each person was familiar with their part. All the conditions so strenuously adhered to in previous seances, were safeguarded and the result was a successful exposure.
EUSAPIA PALLADINO AND HER SEANCE TABLE
When Carrington brought Palladino to this country he announced that he did so in the interest of “science.” Publicity was not to be ignored though and consequently the first seance was given before newspaper men. William A. Brady (the theatrical man) occupied the seat of honor which made it look as though Carrington hoped for some theatrical business as a side issue to the seances with scientists at a hundred and twenty-five dollars a sitting. It is also known that Carrington made a contract with a popular magazine which gave it an exclusive right to publish reports of the seances and naturally Carrington was to have received a liberal fee. But Mr. Davis in 1909 furnished the New York Times with two articles making a sensational attack on Palladino whereupon the magazine people cancelled their contract with Carrington on the ground that Davis had put a “frost” on their plans. As a result Carrington threatened the Times with a suit for a hundred thousand dollars damage. The threat was dropped after Palladino’s complete exposure and her refusal to go to the Times Building and win the two thousand dollar prize offered by Rinn. In all the seances conducted by Carrington the program was the same and the phenomena of precisely the same character as in the one which resulted in Palladino’s complete exposure. The value of Mr. Carrington’s opinion as evidence may be judged from excerpts from an article in McClure’s Magazine for October, 1909. In this article he answers his own question “Does Eusapia Deceive Her Investigators?” by saying:
“Well do I know the condition of mind induced by one or two seances with Eusapia. All one’s previous experience is refuted, and the mind fails to grasp the facts or to accept them as real. It is incapable of absorbing them. It requires several seances before one is convinced of the reality of the phenomena, and of the fact that one’s observation is not mistaken. Personally, I had to witness six seances before I was irrevocably and finally convinced of the reality of the fact. Before that, although I was quite unable to explain what I saw by any theory of fraud or trickery, and although I was quite certain the facts were not due to hallucination, still I could not believe them. I felt that there must be a loophole somewhere; and I know that my colleagues felt exactly as I did. But at the sixth seance when I was controlling the medium myself, in such a manner that I was quite sure as to the whereabouts of her whole body, and when it was, moreover, light enough to see the whole outline of her body clearly,—when, in spite of this, phenomena continued to take place all around us in the most bewildering manner and under the most perfect test conditions, I felt that there was no more to be said; certainty had been achieved; and from the sixth seance onward, and forever after, I shall remain as certain that these phenomena are facts, and form a part—however sporadic—of nature, as I am that I write this article.”
The foregoing shows how vacillating the mind of Mr. Carrington was at the time he was conducting the Palladino seances, and when after a personal contest with the medium he stated his conviction he should have known he was talking the impossible; that no one man could control Palladino beyond the possibility of fraud and at the same time detect her false moves. In the same article he writes:
“I may remark just here that this medium has been caught in trickery from time to time, and will almost invariably resort to it unless she is prevented from doing so by the rigidity of the control (that is, the degree of certainty obtained in holding her hands and feet). The reason for this is that Eusapia, knowing that the production of genuine phenomena will exhaust her nervous forces, resorts to this simpler method, if her sitters are sufficiently credulous to allow it, in order to save herself from the painful after effects of a genuine seance. Nearly every investigator has at one time or another discovered this fraud, which is petty, and more or less obvious to any careful investigator, and consists in the substitution of one hand for two, and in the production of phenomena with the remaining free hand. If, however, sufficient precautions are taken, it is a comparatively easy matter to frustrate her attempts at fraud; and when this is done so-called genuine phenomena are produced. Many of the phenomena are so incredible that by far the simplest explanation is that fraud has been operative in their production; but I can say positively (and I believe the records will show this) that fraud was quite impossible throughout our seances, not only because of the nature of our control of the medium, which was rigidly exacting, but because of the abundance of light. Any theory based upon the supposition that confederates were employed is absolutely discounted: first, because the seances were held in our own locked rooms in the hotel; and secondly, because throughout the seances it was light enough for us to see the whole room and its occupants. It is hardly necessary to add that we examined the cabinet, the table, instruments, and all articles of furniture, both before and after each seance.”
This last seems just as a manager might be expected to talk of the merit of his own show. A salesman should not decry his wares.
There is no question but what Palladino was given to fraud.55 In personal conversations with Hon. Everard Feilding, W. W. Baggally, E. J. Dingwall and Hereward Carrington, each stated positively that they had caught her cheating and that they knew her to be a fraud. They claimed that toward the end of her career she lost her occult power and at such times as the Spirits failed her she would resort to trickery rather than confess failure. They believed her a genuine medium because of the things which she did under test conditions which they could not explain, their knowledge of fraud being overpowered, apparently, by a willingness to believe in the impossible simply because they were not able to solve the problem.
If you go to a department store and ask for a well advertised bit of merchandise and when you get home you find the clerk has substituted “something just as good” you either report the clerk to the management or else you do not patronize the store again; if you go to a tailor and he sells you an “all-wool” suit and you find that most of the “wool” grew on cotton plants you pass that store by when you are ready to buy another suit; if you catch your best friend cheating at cards you refuse to play with him again ever and a life-time friendship is broken up. But Palladino cheated at Cambridge, she cheated in l’Aguélas, and she cheated in New York and yet each time that she was caught cheating the Spiritualists upheld her, excused her, and forgave her. Truly their logic sometimes borders on the humorous.
F. W. H. Myers wrote in “Borderland” in 1896:
“These frauds were practiced in and out of the real, or alleged, trance and were so skillfully executed that the poor woman must have practiced them long and carefully.”
Palladino is summed up in these few lines.
My opinion is that Palladino in her crafty prime may have possessed the agility and abundant skill in misdirection together with sufficient energy and nerve to bamboozle56 her scientific and otherwise astute committeemen, but as time demanded its toll she probably lost her vim and nerve and became unable to present her “performances” with the success that attended her earlier demonstrations.
My old friend, John William Sargent, who died on September 24, 1920, was one of the committee which finally dethroned Palladino, and I believe it no more than just that the last word of this chapter should be said by him.
“Eusapia Palladino is dead and I have little doubt that she departed hence without forgiving me for the part I took in spoiling her business in America by assisting in the exposure of her little bag of tricks. It is an open question, however, whether the exposure of her trickery, or in fact of any of the class of sensation mongers to which she belonged, ever turned a soul from belief in Spiritism; some of the leading newspapers, in commenting on her death, show that in spite of the complete exposure of her methods, there still remains in the minds of many intelligent people the conviction that she was far from an impostor. I cannot understand how any reasonable person could see in this woman anything more than a fairly clever charlatan, whose success was due more to the credulity of her audiences than the skill of her performances. What did all her exposures amount to? Those who believed have continued to believe, and in spite of the old saw, ‘Truth is mighty and must prevail,’ the name of Eusapia Palladino will be on the lips of men long, long after her exposers are forgotten dust.”