nature may be eventually classified. It will be sufficient for me at
present to group the performances of the animals, if possible, with
something better known. And "mediumistic" facts, extrinsically at
least, are certainly better known. I refer therefore to them as I find
them described in the psychology called supernormal; because, from
force of circumstances I am compelled to recognize that it is within
this psychology that I must now continue the discussion.

IV. MEDIUMISTIC "RAPPORT" AND TELEPATHY

The hypothesis of a psychic automatism of a mediumistic type, as a
concomitant phenomenon, at least, in experiments of the "new
zoopsychology," offers us a point of support for a possible
interpretation of the strange uncertainty and irregularity of the
successes and failures of different observers and different animals.

With Krall two of his horses gave magnificent results; two others
negative results. In the same way, with the same dogs some
experimenters obtain wonders, others obtain nothing.... We may
therefore assume that in order to obtain favourable results there
must be a proper accord or reciprocal psychic concordance between
the animal and the person making the experiment, precisely as
happens with mediumistic phenomena.

Moreover, this hypothesis in the same way helps us to an
interpretation of the fact that the same animal, with the same
investigator, gives good results in some matters, poor or no result
in others. Taking, however, due account of the central mathematical
phenomena, on which, as it seems to me, the whole edifice is
superposed, there remains a great variety of marked psychical
idiosyncrasies in the various cases. One of the animals is
decidedly a calculator; another likes to read or to explain
figures; another detests reading but willingly taps out
"spontaneous communications."

Without possessing much intrinsic probative value of its own, it is
certain that all this fits in very badly with the supposition of a
purely mechanical automatism operated by the person making the
experiments. And on the other hand it bears a close analogy to the
mediumistic "specialities"; that is, to the well-known fact that
one "medium," for instance, is good for "physical effects" (i.e.
gives rise around it to dynamic phenomena), but is not good for
"psychography"; or produces "incarnations" but not "apports