Therefore, while I have cited illustration and example as affording unproved or hearsay evidence, I, in fact, decidedly reject not only all tradition, as proof on occult subjects, but all assertion from any quarter, however trustworthy, asking the reader to believe in nothing which he cannot execute and make sure unto himself.  Tradition and testimony are very useful to supply ideas or theories, but to actually believe in anything beyond his experience a man should take sufficient interest in it to prove it by personal experiment.  And, therefore, as I have already declared, I not only ask, but hope that no reader will put faith in anything which I have alleged or declared, until he has fully and fairly proved it to be true in his own person.

The history of true culture, truth, or progress has been that of doubt or disbelief in all which cannot be scientifically proved or made manifest to sensation and reflection, and even in this the most scrupulous care must be exercised, since our senses often deceive us.  Therefore, in dealing with subjects which have undeniably been made the means of deceit and delusion thousands of times to one authentic instance, it is not well to accept testimony, or any kind of evidence, or proof, save that which we can establish for ourself.  The day is not yet, but it is coming, when self-evidence will be claimed, and granted, as to all human knowledge, and the sooner it comes the better will it be for the world.

But I would be clearly understood as declaring that it is only as regards making up our minds to absolute faith in what involves what may be called our mental welfare, which includes the most serious conduct of life, that I would limit belief to scientific proof.  As an example, I will cite the very interesting case of the hypnotic treatment of a patient by DR. VOISIN, and as given by MASON.

“In the summer of 1884, there was at the Salpetriere a young woman of a deplorable type, Jeanne S——­, who was a criminal lunatic, filthy, violent, and with a life history of impurity and crime.  M. Auguste Voisin, one of the physicians of the staff, undertook to hypnotize her, May 31.  At that time she was so violent that she could only be kept quiet by a straight-jacket and the constant cold douche to her head.  She would not look at M. Voisin, but raved and spat at him.  He persisted, kept his face near and opposite to hers, and his eyes following hers constantly.  In ten minutes she was in a sound sleep, and soon passed into a somnambulistic condition.  The process was repeated many days, and she gradually became sane while in the hypnotic condition, but still raved when she woke.

“Gradually then she began to accept hypnotic suggestion, and would obey trivial orders given her while asleep, such as to sweep her room, then suggestions regarding her general behavior; then, in her hypnotic condition, she began to express regret for her past life, and form resolutions of amendment to which she finally adhered when she awoke.  Two years later she was a nurse in one of the Paris hospitals, and her conduct was irreproachable.  M. Voisin has followed up this case by others equally striking.”