place at the seance in question.  The facts are distorted.  Consequently, the person taking it upon himself to explain what took place at the seance is called upon to explain a number of things which, in reality, never took place at all.  We must remember, in this connection, that a number of conjuring tricks, as described, would be quite impossible to explain by any process of trickery.  The description of the trick was not correct.

Let me make this still clearer, and at the same time illustrate the difference between what apparently occurs, and what actually happens, by the following example:  A conjurer places a coin (say a quarter) in each hand, and closes his hands.  Another quarter is now placed upon the fingers of each hand, so that there is now one quarter in each hand and one-quarter on the fingers of each.  The magician announces that, by simply opening and closing his hands—­ which are held at some distance from each other—­he will thereby transfer one of the coins from one hand to the other, so that there will be three coins in one of the hands, and only one left in the other.

Now, if the sitter were writing out an account of what happened, it would most certainly read as follows: 

“The magician then tried the experiment—­of opening and closing his hands rapidly, and causing the coin to be transferred, as promised—­ but failed in the attempt, the coins from the back of each hand falling on to the table in rather a clumsy manner.  They were, however, again placed upon the backs of the magician’s hands; the movement was repeated, and this time successfully.  The coins disappeared from the backs of both hands, in one of which was now found three of the coins, while the other hand contained only one.”

Such is precisely the description of the trick, as it would be given by the average person, on seeing it, and it would represent his honest opinion of what occurred; as it stands, it is quite inexplicable by trickery.  Needless to say, the account is not a true statement of what actually occurred, as the following explanation will make clear: 

The first time the coins were dropped on to the table, the movement was not so “clumsy” as might have been supposed.  It was, in fact, intentional, being the principal factor in the accomplishment of the trick.  What actually transpired at that time was this:  The magician, by a quick movement, dropped both coins from one hand on to the table, at the same time dexterously opening the other hand a trifle, and allowing the second coin, on that hand, to fall into the interior of the hand itself.  Thus, while both hands are still seen to be closed, one is empty, and the other contains two coins.  It is obvious, therefore, that, when a coin is placed upon each of the hands again, the magician has only to repeat the opening and closing movement, and there will be three coins in one of the hands, and only one in the other.