|
|
it, and Esquirol states that in 1813-16 he made use of it in eleven cases of
mental disorder, but without producing even the slightest improvement in the
condition of the patients. Nevertheless, in France mesmerism for the most part
fell into the hands of laymen. Here Deleuze may be mentioned as one of the earnest
investigators. But the whole doctrine received a great impetus through the Abbe
Faria, who came to Paris from India. In 1814-15 he showed by experiments, whose
results he published in part in 1819, that no unknown force was necessary for
the production of the phenomena: the cause of the sleep was in the person who
was to be sent to sleep—all was subjective. This is the main principle
of hypnotism and of suggestion, of which Faria made
I2 HYPNOTISM.
use in inducing sleep. General Noizet allowed the Abbe to experiment on him,
and even if he did not fall into a deep sleep, a condition which we nowadays
call the lighter degree of hypnosis was induced. The General relates that he
was unable to open his eyes until Faria allowed him to. Shortly afterwards the
Abbe was suspected of fraud, simply because he was tricked by an actor who had
been persuaded to feign sleep while pretending to submit honestly to the process
of hypnotizing. Thus Faria, a thoroughly honourable man, was set down a swindler,
in spite of the fact that for a long time he alone, almost, held the only true
view of mesmerism; while, as Ochorowicz reproachfully states, not a single scientist
gave himself up to a study of the question. Later on, in France, Noizet, whom
we have mentioned above, and a physician named Bertrand, paved the way for the
doctrine of suggestion, in spite of much inclination to animal magnetism. In
1820, experiments were begun in the Paris hospitals, chiefly under the direction
of Du Potet. At the proposal of Foissac, and at the recommendation of Husson,
the Paris Academy of Medicine in 1826 appointed a Commission to examine the
question of animal magnetism. The Commission worked for six years, and pronounced
a favourable opinion in 1831; but the Academy was evidently not convinced. In
spite of several further experiments—for example, those of Berna—no
other result was obtained. Particularly because the chief emphasis was laid
on the mystical side of the question, the struggle was made substantially easier
to the opponents of mesmerism, among whom Dubois was prominent. The candidates
for the celebrated Burdin prize for clairvoyance, Pigeaire, Hublier, and Teste,
failed to obtain it; and in 184o the Academy declined to discuss the question
further. Nevertheless, animal magnetism retained numerous adherents in France,
particularly in lay circles; and in the following years several works were published
on the question. I may mention those of Aubin Gautier, who made many valuable
contributions to the history of animal magnetism, and Ricard's exhaustive treatise
|
|