nearer. Pleasant suggestions can be pro- | been cut out of a piece of red paper. If duced with equal ease and certainty by this red cross be placed upon a white gesticulations of a different nature. To ground, and the eyes be fixed on it for suggest by verbal affirmation is naturally some seconds and then removed, and a still more complete and effective method. again fixed upon a different part of the Verbal suggestions, indeed, can, as every white ground, the image of a pale-green one knows, be made to subsist and take cross becomes visible, to disappear after effect after the re-awakening of the patient. a few moments. This is called a "conIt is easy to gain some knowledge of secutive image." The same result may the mechanism of these phenomena by be obtained if, instead of an actual cross inquiring what effect the same means of cut out of red paper, the image of a red suggestion would have upon persons in a cross be fixedly contemplated in the mind; normal condition. At once it will become the pale-green cross will again become apparent that the same act which in a visible on subsequently casting the eye on hypnotized patient produces hallucinations a white surface. M. Wundt, the eminent would only occasion in a normal mind the physiologist of Leipzig, confirms this fact, very simple phenomenon of an "idea." that certain persons can so strongly figure Let us, for example, try to persuade a to themselves any given color that they friend who has a book in his hand that it can afterwards see its consecutive image. is not a book, but a knife. He will simply Such persons, however, are, in the normal smile. We have, consequently, not suc- state, very rare, so that Wundt's expericeeded in communicating any hallucina- ment is best verified by means of hypnotion to his mind. He knows he has a tism and suggestion. The hypnotized book in his hand, and does not take it for patient is caused to believe that he peranything else. Yet our attempt at sug-ceives a red image; he is then told to gestion has produced a certain effect upon him. He has understood what we were speaking of - we have spoken of a knife, and have, therefore, given him the idea of one. If only for one brief instant, he has conceived the idea, has seen the image, of a knife in somebody's hand. The sole difference between him and the hypnotized patient is that the image in one case has been very slight, and has not been accompanied by anything in the nature of conviction; whereas in the other it has taken full possession of the mind, has been projected, and has for the nonce appeared to constitute a material reality. Thus it may be said that our minds are always filled with the germs of hallucinations, as it were, and that these germs are what we call our ideas. Hypnotic experiments clearly demonstrate the close connection which exists between images, perceptions, and hallucinations. Here, then, is one important fact established by hypnotical researches and study. The second fact is much less frequent, and can only be observed in certain hysterical patients who have been carefully trained beforehand to give account of their impressions. The experiment consists in provoking visual sensations which, by their nature and the method of their production, serve to explain the processes of mental imagery. But, before entering into further details, it may be well to describe what physiologists term "consecutive imagery." Let us suppose that a small cross has look at a white surface, and immediately declares, of his own accord, that he sees the green consecutive image. This experiment might be considered to show that the seat of mental imagery in the brain is the same as that of sensation. There is, however, another possible conclusion, namely, that as a consequence of the infinite number of times of our having unconsciously perceived consecutive images (for whenever we have looked long at any red object, a green "consecutive" has afterwards arisen for a moment, though our conscious attention may not have dwelt upon the phenomenon) some obscure mental association may have been formed between the idea of red and that of green, which would suffice, under the hypnotic circumstances mentioned above, to call up one as the corollary of the other. v. We have seen that first introspection, then the analysis of mental maladies, then statistical observation, and finally hypnotism have been employed as means of studying the true nature of mental im. agery. Of late years still another method of investigation has been employed, consisting in the study of the aberrations of the faculty of speech, to which the generic name of "aphasia" is given. M. Ribot is one of the first writers who have regarded the phenomena of aphasia from the psychological standpoint. M. Charcot has followed in M. Ribot's footsteps, and his experiments in this connection have enabled him to construct the remarkable | as a substitute for the image, which is not theory of the different types of memory evoked at all, or is evoked very indistinctly. which has attracted so much attention in This fact it is which has led M. Charcot the scientific world. The chief result of these researches of M. Charcot's has been to demonstrate the number of different forms assumed by human thought. Roughly speaking, it might almost be said that no human being thinks in exactly the same way as any other, so that evidently the results of introspection as a method of psychological inquiry can have only an individual and not a general or typical value. A few examples will make our meaning clearer. In all our foregoing observations, only one style of thought has been considered, that of the visual image. We have taken it for granted that most persons see, as it were, the thing they think of. But the sense of sight is not the only one which affects the consciousness. The other senses may also serve as the basis of complex psychological operations. There is, for example, a memory connected with the sense of hearing, as appears in the case of musicians. Auditive imagery must exist, therefore, as well as visual, and there may also be a certain process of auditive reasoning, that is to say, a process of thought having sound for its object, as other mental processes have for their object things which come within the scope of vision. Having said thus much, let us suppose that the word "bell" is pronounced in some one's hearing. What will be the effect of this word upon this person's mind? If in the habit of using visual memory he or she will form a notion of the bell as a visible object, with its contour and its color. But if the nature of the memory be auditive the idea of a bell will connect itself with the remembrance of the sound a bell gives forth. The latter would naturally be the case with a blind person, and, indeed, it need not be said that memory in the blind must always be of the auditive type. And, finally, though this third case is undoubtedly much rarer than either of the other two, the word "bell" may provoke in the mind of the hearer a reminiscence of the sensations of contact and pression experienced in touching a bell with the hand. Thus it appears that there are at least three different ways of representing to oneself a material object. But this does not exhaust the number of different types of memory; among which the verbal type is the most important. It has been ascertained that some persons think entirely by means of words. They employ the word and his pupils, who have had so many cases of aphasia under their observation, to study the question of “interior speech." If we closely examine the operations of our mind while we are thinking we shall perceive that a sort of interior voice spoke within us whilst we thought. This voice does not accompany our thought simply, but is, in fact, our thought itself. Its action and nature have been carefully studied by the sagacious psychologist, M. Egger, and he has shown beyond a doubt that the interior voice is only the reflection, or repetition, of the real voice. With many persons interior speech is more than a simple phenomenon of mental audition; it is accompanied by a sensation in the mouth and lips, as though words were about to be spoken; and sometimes whispered words will accompany the act of meditation. Other persons, again, do not thus speak their thought when thinking, but as it were write it. Words appear to them un der the guise of written symbols. If they think of a hat, for example, they will see the word "hat" in written or printed letters. Altogether it may be said that there are two principal modes of thought: that which deals with material objects, and that which deals with words. Under either of these two general divisions various styles of memory may occur, and thus we obtain the four following types: (1) The visual, characterized by the use of visual images in all the operations of the mind and memory. This probably exists in the case of painters who can execute a person's portrait after having seen that person only once. (2) The auditive, which implies a special memory for sounds, as in the case of most musicians. (3) The motive, marked by the special use made of images derived from motion. (4) The indeterminate, which exists when the different varieties of imagery are employed alternately, according to occasion. It is practically a matter of some diffi culty to determine with anything like accuracy the particular type of memory in each individual. No very exact methods of inquiry exist at present in this respect. We have lately had in France the opportunity of observing a very peculiar case of auditive memory, in the person of a young mathematical prodigy, Jacques parishes into ecclesiastical districts which has taken place of late years, this sort of thing does not now often happen. It used to be a comical scene in those Inaudi, who was brought before the Academy of Sciences by M. Darboux, M. Charcot having been a member of the committee appointed to examine into the case. The conclusion was promptly ar-old days. The only vestry the church in rived at by M. Charcot that Inaudi's memory is not of the visual, but of the auditive type. Other mathematical prodigies, such as Mondeux, Colburn, and Bidder, saw the figures before them as they solved their problems. Inaudi hears his figures as though they were being whispered into his ear. It would always have been deemed impossible, prior to the observation of this particular case, that mental calculations of the most enormous extent could be carried out solely by means of auditive images. VI. UPON reaching the conclusion of this brief sketch or summary of a very complicated and interesting question, it will be seen at a glance what progress has been made in the study of mental imagery since the period when Hobbes described thought as being simply a state of inward vision. The whole present tendency of psychological research is to show, not that the mental operations of all persons are of a similar nature, but that immense psycho. logical differences exist between different individuals. In a word, the study of mind has entered of late years upon a new phase which may lead to singularly interesting and important results. ALFRED BINET. From The Cornhill Magazine. REMINISCENCES OF CLERICAL DUTY. question possessed was a very small and inconvenient one. So the wedding couples, attended by their admiring friends, used to wait in the church till their turn came to be registered. Then the old clerk would usher them into the vestry, and stand rubbing his back against the door, apparently an unconcerned spectator, while his daughter was filling up the registers in the opposite corner. He invariably went through the following laconic method of extracting the necessary information: "Now, you, sir, what's your name? How old are you? Where do you live? What do you do? Never been married afore? What's your father's name? Is he alive or dead? What does he do? What's her name? (with a nod towards the bride, intended to intimate that now it was her turn). How old is she? Where does she live? She ever been married afore? What's her father's name? Is he alive or dead? What does he do? Go into the church. Next couple." Somehow or another, as I have myself found out from later experience, when attempting in my prosy, if more courteous, fashion to get hold of the same information, the old man had exactly gauged the capacity of a large number of those with whom he had to do, and he usually got hold of the necessary facts much more quickly and correctly by the drastic method above mentioned than if he had wasted more words upon his task. One day I was marrying a couple, and this old fellow was standing just behind them in the church. As soon as I had uttered the words "I pronounce them man and wife together," the gentleman thought it was a convenient opportunity to give his wife a resounding kiss. The old clerk did not approve of such goings on, and grumbled out in a very audible voice, I HAVE been a working parson in large town parishes for more than a score of years, and during that period I have come across many strange specimens of human nature. Probably the most comical incidents happen on the occasion of weddings. It has been my lot to unite in the bonds" Now, then, behave yourselves." My of holy matrimony many hundred couples, and the somewhat monotonous task of reading the service so often has been at times varied by amusing incidents. When I was first in orders it used sometimes to fall to my lot as junior curate to marry couples by wholesale. One Christmas day I married (I think) twenty-three couples before breakfast, and then went away, leaving one of the other curates to complete the task. Owing to the great subdivision of the ancient risible faculties were proof against the kiss, but this remark was too much for me, and I fear that I smiled. I remember on another occasion when I was performing the marriage ceremony over a somewhat elderly gentleman of very dull and stupid exterior, I could hardly get him married at all. When I told him to give me his right hand, he gave me his left, when I said, "Say this after me," he immediately remarked "Say this after me." But when I came to the words I wanted said, he was stolidly my way. I promptly told them that I silent. At last he saw that I was some- would have nothing to do with any of what bothered by his extreme stupidity, them, and shut up the books and left the so in the middle of the service he upset my gravity by volunteering the following apology: "You see, sir, it's so long since I was married afore, that you must excuse my forgetting of these things." It was once my lot to have two young ladies in the church at the same time, both wanting to be married to the same man. One of these would-be brides I found waiting for me in the vestry on my arrival at the church a few minutes before the time appointed for the ceremony to commence. She proceeded to explain to me how she was engaged to the faithless swain who was about to appear with another fair one, and how their banns had been put up in the East End parish where they lived, and all arrangements made for the wedding to take place in due course. Meantime she had discovered that her young man had been carrying on with another young woman, and had put up the banns in our West End church, where he hoped that no one would know anything about him. She had hardly finished this explanation when the young man in question walked in with that almost idiotic grin upon his face, so often assumed by "'Arries" on such occasions, and with a most bouncing and gaily apparelled female on his arm. The start of horror which came over his intelligent countenance when he saw who the parson had got with him in the vestry may be more easily imagined than described. But I found myself in a very difficult position. Neither lady would gracefully retire, and I was a young and Bashful curate with no judgment in such matters. We all sat down round the ves try table, and proceeded to discuss the situation at considerable length, both the would-be brides (as it is perhaps hardly necessary to mention) continuing the conversation in a high-pitched key at the same time. But we got no nearer to an amicable settlement of the knotty point. Though I need hardly say that my sympathies went strongly with the lady who was first in the field, yet, unfortunately, "it is a free country we live in," and I was very much afraid that I should be obliged to marry the man to the only bride whom he was willing to accept. But while I cogitated the matter, it most fortunately came out in the course of the conversation that neither the man nor woman had ever really "kept residence" by sleeping a single night in our parish. As soon as I discovered this important fact, I at once saw church. The man was furious, and threatened me with a prosecution, and all sorts of terrible pains and penalties. But I never heard another word about him or his amours from that day to this. On another occasion a very grand wedding came to the church duly armed with a marriage license. But the clerk on entering the particulars in the registers unfortunately discovered that the pet name of the bride had been put into that docu. ment instead of the legal Christian name which her godfather and godmothers had given her at her baptism. We were in a fearful fix. The license was practically no license at all, as the pet name and the real name did not bear the remotest resemblance to one another. Again every one began to talk at once, and we spent so much time in this interesting but entirely useless occupation that the fatal hour of noon got perilously near. It was proposed that the wedding should be postponed for a day, while the mistake was rectified, but this course was stoutly opposed by the bridegroom, who oddly enough adduced as his principal reason, "We shall look such fools before the waiters if we go back unmarried." At last it was proposed that we should go down to the police court, where the magistrates were sitting, and get an affidavit sworn that "Popsy" and "Lucy Victoria" were one and the same person. If this were done I professed myself ready to proceed with the ceremony. According ly, the bridegroom and I got into one of the wedding carriages, drove with all speed to the town hall, and presented ourselves before the astonished eyes of the magistrates there assembled. We explained our business, and one of the Great Unpaid who was assisting the stipendiary on the bench at once most good-naturedly undertook to do our little business for us. An affidavit was drawn up, and sworn to in all haste, and back we galloped to the church just in time to begin the ceremony before the clock struck twelve. By this performance I earned the everlasting gratitude of the bride and bridegroom, but I also brought down on my devoted head a considerable wigging from some official in London to whom the circumstances were in due course reported. He told me the marriage was perfectly valid, but he also ordered me with some asperity "not to do it again." The church of which I have been speaking was in former times used for little else on week days except weddings in the morning and funerals in the afternoon, and it is reported of the afore-mentioned clerk that on one occasion when a young lady and gentleman called at his house, and asked to go into the church for the purpose of seeing it, he made so certain that they could have come there but for one purpose, viz., to be joined together in holy matrimony, that when they followed him to the church they found to their considerable dismay that he had got out the marriage registers, and fetched one of the curates, so as to despatch their little business as expeditiously as possible. Report says they were brother and sister. But this is supposed to have happened long before my time, and I decline to vouch for the authenticity of the narrative. People are often wonderfully ignorant or careless on all subjects connected with these interesting occasions. I have known couples present themselves at the church without having made any preliminary arrangements, saying that they knew I was a surrogate, and they thought that I could "sell them a license" in the vestry before the service commenced. I was once sent for by a young lady, who asked me "whether it was legal to be married without bridesmaids," and on my assuring her that it was, she proceeded to ask me the further question "whether I would be so very kind as to marry her in her ordinary attire?" The common people have one peculiar habit of their own. When asked to say after the officiating clergyman" with all my worldly goods I thee endow," they frequently say "with all my worldly goods I thee and thou." But the stupidity is by no means always on the side of the people. I once had a curate who got greatly obfuscated by the number of the banns he was called upon to publish one Sunday morning. So, when at last he got through his task, he wound up by saying: "If any of you know any just cause or impediment why all these persons may not respectably be joined to gether in holy matrimony, ye are to declare it." Of course he meant respectively, but his mistake caused an audible titter from certain of the younger members of the congregation. It has twice happened to me that some one has risen up in the church for the purpose of forbidding the banns. I asked the objector to speak to me in the vestry after service, and the incident passed off and seemed to make little stir in the church at the time, but on both occasions the fact was widely reported in the London papers. I have heard again of a clergyman who was so awkward that on the first occasion of his officiating at a wedding he stood the whole time at the altar, and read the service exactly as he found it in the Prayer-book, without inserting the names of the interested parties. "I, M., take thee, N., to my wedded wife," etc. I believe this was declared to be a valid marriage, but I think the officiating clergyman deserved a wigging quite as much, if not more, than I did on the occasion of the mistake in the marriage license above referred to. It frequently happens that when people have been married before a registrar they afterwards develop qualms of conscience at this irregular method of entering into the wedded state, and come to the parson and want to be married again in church. The law specially provides in such cases that any clergyman may read the marriage service over such people, without the production of a license or the publication of banns, but of course he is not to enter such marriages in the registers, as the legal ceremony was complete before. It has happened to me to have to officiate in such cases several times. But on one occasion I was rather nonplussed by the answer I got to the question, "John, wilt thou have this woman to thy wedded wife?" "Why, sir, I told you we was married two years ago." I have several times married a deaf and dumb couple, but never to my knowledge a deaf and dumb person to one who could hear and speak. Sometimes I have used a slate, and written out the questions, while they have written out the replies. Sometimes I have had an interpreter, who followed me in the service with the deaf and dumb alphabet. But it is an awkward business at the best for an outsider, and now that there is a deaf and dumb clergyman (whom I have had the pleasure of meeting), I think that all such weddings ought to be his especial care in future. I once married a lady of title who was a spinster of seventy-one to a widower of seventy-three. On this occasion the parties procured a special license, with the view of being married in the afternoon, when they thought they would escape notice and be married "on the quiet." But somehow or other the affair got wind, and excited (as was, perhaps, but natural) extraordinary attention, and I have seldom seen a church fuller at a wedding than it was on that interesting occasion. The good old couple are both dead and gone now, but they lived to. gether for some years, and I always took |