when alleged
transcendental phenomena do violence to all probability, that is the
unfailing test of hallucination or untruth on the part of those who
depose to them. These things could not have occurred as they are
narrated, and Dr Bataille is exploiting the ignorance of that class of
readers to whom his mode of publication appealed. As products of
imagination his marvels are crude and illiterate; in other words, they
belong to precisely that type which is characteristic of romances
published in penny numbers, and when he pledges his rectitude regarding
them he does not enlist our confidence but indicates the slight value
which he sets on his stake.

At the same time, two reasons debar me from laying further stress upon
this line of argument. In the first place we must remember that his
unlettered readers have been taught by their religious instructors to
believe in the unlimited power of the devil, and they have probably
found in the outrageous nature of the narratives a real incentive to
accept them. In the second place my own position as a transcendentalist
connects me less or more with the acknowledgment of transcendental
phenomena, and to distinguish the limits of possibility in these matters
would involve a technical discussion for which there is no opportunity
here. It is understood, however, that in the interests of
transcendental science I reject the miraculous element in Dr Bataille's
memoirs.

Another line of criticism also open and leading to convincing results
would dwell upon the glaring improbability of the entire story outside
that miraculous element. There is no colourable pretence of likelihood,
for example, in the connection instituted between fakirs and Freemasons,
or between secret societies in China and a sect of Luciferians in
Charleston. But the partisans of Dr Bataille are prepared to believe
anything of Masonry, and to dismiss likelihood as they would dismiss
impossibility. Some arguments are unassailable on account of their
stupidity, and of such shelter I intend to deprive my witness. I shall
therefore merely register my recognition that this criticism does obtain
completely. For much the same reason I shall only refer in passing to
another matter which in itself is sufficient to remove these memoirs
from the region of actuality; they bristle with the kind of coincidences
which are the common convenience of bad novelists to create or escape
situations, and are rejected even by legitimate fi