Chapter VIII. Haunted Houses.
The following case of a haunted house is of special interest, as it was observed by Professor Lombroso, whom no one would suspect an excess of credulity, or of being a victim to suggestions resulting from his surroundings. This case, therefore, presents guarantees of authenticity.
The Turin newspaper La Stampa, in its issue of November 19, 1900, mentioned some extraordinary phenomena which were occurring in a wine and spirit shop at No. 6, Via Bava, Turin. For those unacquainted with the topography of Turin it may not be amiss to say that the Via Bava is in the suburb of Vanchiga, and commences at the Piazza Vittorio-Emmanuele I. On the day mentioned La Stampa was brought to my notice. Whilst I was casting a rapid glance over this paper I was struck by this pompous title, “The Spirit Devastators of the Via Bava.” Naturally, without taking up the time to read this lengthy account, and fearing that I should arrive too late (because in these cases one cannot arrive too quickly), I quickly got into everybody’s carriage – the tram-car – which took me in twenty minutes to the scene of action. Alas! too late! However, if the entertainment itself was over there were at least the spectators, who could themselves, in turn, serve as entertainers.
In the street a crowd of persons of all classes were struggling for entrance into the wine-shop; and in the shop itself a veritable swarm of drinkers were seated at the tables, and occupying themselves, between glasses, by composing epigrams about the spirits who today were dumb; others were trying to push their way through with their elbows, in order to make inquiries of everybody; to hear something related, to see, to touch, to examine, commencing with the bottles and the saucepans, even to the chairs, which, it is said, were broken, and several of which were transported from one place to another.
At the far end of the shop, at the counter, through a cloud of smoke and dust, we could distinguish a tall, corpulent, red-faced man (the landlord), who was turning and bending to right and left, holding in one hand a bottle of wine and receiving in the other his customers’ money, in the midst of a tempest of voices, cries, commands, and protestations from all directions. Sometimes the price of the wine drunk by one customer, who had taken advantage of the crowd to slip away unseen, would be demanded from another; the anger of the master fell upon the waiter, a boy of thirteen years of age, who would have needed a hundred eyes and a hundred arms to have met the wants of everybody, and – most important thing of all – to make them pay.
In a word, it was impossible in the midst of such a Noah’s Ark to take account of anything. It was with great difficulty that I succeeded in getting a few words with the master and mistress of the house. I interrogated one or two other persons and then went out. I returned the same evening, without obtaining any better result. A still denser crowd barred the way, and the wine-shop was that evening closed by order of the police to prevent disturbance. The report was spread at the same time that the phenomena had not been renewed. For some time I found it impossible to go into the matter, and when eventually I returned to the Via Bava all was completely restored to order and I was compelled to content myself with obtaining the evidence which I give here. If it was not possible to see anything I could, however, make some reflections, and this is the reason why I have prefaced my account with this long rambling statement.
Why had so many people been set in motion by the simple title of a newspaper article? Did they expect to discover the trick? I ought to state that I found in the place not only some idle and common people, and students, but also some people who are usually called serious-minded, and who had come there not to make a noise and laugh at credulous people, but with the simple desire to see, and impelled by the example of others. I hope that this may be a good sign – that is to say, that this denotes the slow but continuous infiltration among the masses of beliefs formerly regarded as erroneous.
I will now give the facts in the following order. First, I will state in an objective manner the simple outline of the facts: with the warning, however, that they come from the tales of witnesses of very diverse values, and that they should only be accepted for what they are worth. Then I will transcribe the written declarations which I have obtained from several witnesses, reserving to myself the criticism of the facts and testimony in accordance with my personal judgment.
The Facts. In order to make the phenomena more comprehensible it will perhaps be useful to describe the place where they occurred. I have stated that it was in a wine and spirit shop, No. 6, Via Bava, known as the Bottigheria Cinzano. I will here give the plan. A. The first room, for the use of customers. 1. Entrance door which opens on to the Via Bava. 2. Window. B. Second room, devoted to the same purpose as the former. 3. Door opening on to a corridor which communicates with the hall of the house. 4. Window looking on to the court. 5. Opening covered by a simple cloth curtain, through which one passes to a small room C, which serves as a kitchen and living room for the people of the house. This room is lighted by a window (6), and communicates with a garret (used as a bedroom) by means of a small staircase. The persons inhabiting this place were the landlord named Fumero, his wife, and a lad of thirteen years employed as a waiter.
The beginning of the phenomena dates back to the early days of November. M. Raynero, the proprietor of the Annonciata Baths, situated at 51, Via del Po, was a friend of the Fumero family, and was informed at the commencement of November of the phenomena which had for some time past been occurring in that house. A cat seemed to be taken with strange mad attacks; it jumped as though possessed, and threw down the bottles. The food which had been placed in the kitchen cupboard in the evening disappeared during the night, and so on.
But, on November 16th, the phenomena commenced which caused a stir in the whole district. On the morning of that day only the woman and the boy were in the shop. They both stated that first of all a vessel containing some liquor, which was on the kitchen table, overturned of its own accord; then other vessels were thrown down and broken, and then began a mad dance, in which the furniture, saucepans, and all kinds of things took part. Some were dented, others broken, and others disappeared.
Fumero’s wife fainted away through fright, the neighbours ran in and telegraphed to her husband, who was away from Turin, and he returned that evening. All through the day, in the presence of several people, tables, chairs, and utensils danced. Some garments were thrown down from the upper to the lower chamber and damaged. They were taken back to their place, and they were again thrown down with still greater violence by an invisible hand which seemed to make sport of the general fright. The phenomena continued in the same way on the 17th and the following days with a few moments of respite.
In the meantime other things occurred in addition to those already mentioned, but outside the house. M. Fumero had several cellars in the basement, and one of these was under the room B, and was only used for storing bottles. It was ascertained that when any one went into this cellar, and even in the absence of persons the bottles, empty or full, were broken, always by the work of the same unknown agents.
It was stated that a priest, who had been asked to bless the place, immediately took flight, because he obtained results exactly the opposite to what he had expected. The police came in their turn, but they were powerless; many even maintained that the guards and their superior officers served as involuntary targets for the projectiles thrown by the unknown hand. Be that as it may, it appears that the police gave a hint to poor Fumero, that these things must cease, by love or by force. Fumero understood and complied, being greatly annoyed by the material and moral damage he had suffered. Thus when Cesar Lombroso went to the shop on November 21st, he was told (without knowledge as to who he was) that Professor Lombroso had been and that everything had ceased. Lombroso then revealed his identity, and, going down into the cellar, was able to verify the phenomena of which we shall speak later.
On November 22nd, Mme. Fumero, acting on advice, went to Nole Canavese, her native place. She remained there three days, during which time nothing unusual occurred, either at Via Bava or at Nole. On her return to Turin, the phenomena reappeared in an altered form, but substantially the same. On November 26th, Mme Fumero went away again, but this time the phenomena continued.
It was at this time that the migration of the shoes took place, as related in the attestation of M. Raynero. The wife returned to Turin and the phenomena ceased at the end of November – that is to say, only when, after it was seen that they were not due merely to the presence of Mme. Fumero, it was decided to discharge the waiter. He went to another shop in the same street, but nothing out of the ordinary happened, and so the matter ended.
Evidence Collected.
Negative Evidence – This was furnished by the police, by several Turin newspapers, by all those who had seen nothing; and, finally, by the cure of the parish of l’Annonciata (Via del Po), who remained for two hours in the place and not only saw nothing abnormal, but was convinced that there was nothing but joking and deception in the whole affair.
Positive Evidence – There were numerous positive testimonies; therefore I have only collected the most important ones, or those which seemed to me to be most worthy of confidence.
Attestation of the Proprietors of the Wine-shop and of two Customers.
“We declare that we were present several times at the Bottigheria Cinzano, 6 Via Bava, during the month of November 1900, when some strange occurrences occurred, such as the spontaneous movements of objects, breaking of bottles, &c., which we could not attribute to any practical joking or fraud whatever. In virtue of which we sign: Bartholomeo Fumero, Proprietor of the Bottigheria Cinzano. Antoinette Fumero, wife of the above. Carlo Degostini, Maker of Macaroni, 7, Via Pescator. Felice Hoppetti, Carpenter, 5, Via Bava. Turin, December 15, 1900.”
The following declaration was written by myself in the presence of the witness, in accordance with his own narrative. Attestation of Raynero. “I, the undersigned, proprietor of the Baths of the l’Annonciata, at 51, Via del Po, attest upon my honour that what is here said is in conformity with the truth and the absolute conviction I have formed as to the real existence of the inexplicable facts which happened during the month of November in the Bottigheria Cinzano at 6, Via Bava. The following are two facts to which I can best testify –
- “On November 27th, I was in the front room (A) of the wine-shop in company with M. Fumero, whose wife had gone to Nole. I was seated at a table (a) with another person. The waiter was in the back room (B) engaged in washing bottles, in a corner where I could clearly see him all the time. Suddenly two shoes, which came from the kitchen, fell at my feet. I instantly hastened to the kitchen, followed by M. Fumero, to catch the joker – if there was one – in the act. I mounted the staircase which led to the garret, but could find no one there; I was then convinced that the shoes came of themselves to my feet. Previously the shoes must have been in their usual place. I saw them while they were still in the air. The waiter, during the phenomenon, had not moved from the spot where he had previously been.
- “I was in the cellar with M. Merini, Accountant, and while I held a lighted candle in my hand, I saw some full bottles thrown over and broken. Immediately after M. Merini had remarked that the fermentation of the wine might be the cause of the disturbance, some empty bottles began to break. Certainly no one had anything to do with the breaking of these articles.
“These two facts, more than anything else, led me to the belief that the phenomena which occurred in the refreshment room could not be due to any fraud, either on the part of Fumero’s wife or of the waiter, or, indeed, of anybody else. I must therefore recede from the opinion that I first expressed when Mme. Fumero told me of the made antics of the cat, the disappearance of food, &c., that she and the waiter were doubtless subject to some malady which induced them to commit these acts in secrecy. Christofle Raynero. Turin, December 22, 1900.”
I also drew up the following declaration of M. Merini, the Accountant, who was not able himself to find time for that purpose. It may, however, be considered as exactly agreeing with his opinions, and as giving each of his statements its proper value. Attestation of the Accountant, M. Merini. “I learnt about the phenomena of Via Bava through the newspapers of other towns some days after they first happened. I went immediately to the Bottigheria Cinzano, 6, Via Bava. It was an afternoon between November 19th and 25th. I was unwilling to believe the facts which were reported, but I was nevertheless inclined to accept them if I could be present at some absolutely clear manifestation. I arrived at the spot at a time when according to the persons present, the manifestations were in full swing. Those whom I questioned related many marvellous things, among which I noted evident exaggeration of details, and some contradictions; then, learning that manifestations had taken place in the cellar, before any one was there, I expressed a desire to go there myself.
“There (in the cellar), in company with several other persons, I saw bottles break without apparent and reasonable cause. I wished to remain alone, the better to verify the phenomenon. The other persons having assented to this proposal, I shut myself up in the cellar, while all the rest withdrew to the end of the passage, from which the staircase leads to the upper floor. I began by assuring myself, with the aid of a candle, that I was really alone. This examination was easy, thanks to the smallness of the cellar, and the difficulty that there would have been in hiding behind the few utensils which were in it. Along the walls, lengthwise of the cellar, there were a series of strong beams supported at each end by posts. The planks resting on these beams were completely covered with bottles, empty and full. I also observed that the window looking out on the courtyard, which formerly served to light the cellar, was at that time obstructed by a plank.
“I then saw several empty and full bottles break of themselves before my eyes. I placed a ladder near the spot where they broke most frequently, and mounted to the top rung. I took an empty bottle which had been broken shortly before, and of which only the lower half remained; I separated it from the others, placing it at some distance from where it had previously been, namely, on the top of one of the posts which supported the shelves. After a few minutes the bottle broke again and flew into splinters. This is one of the facts which I can certify most precisely.
“On examining attentively the manner in which the bottles broke, I was able to make out that the fracture was preceded by the special cracking noise peculiar to breaking glass. I had already observed that the empty bottles broke in this way, from which it was evident that the explosion could not be due to the pressure of gas produced by fermentation, which besides was very improbable. To give an idea of the noise made by the bottles in breaking, and of the way in which they crumbled to pieces, I will add that it might be compared to the breaking of those drops of glass which fly into powder when they are scratched, and which are known as Prince Rupert’s Drops.
“As to the mysterious cause of these phenomena, I confess that, although I had no reason to be afraid, I always experienced in their presence a certain feeling of astonishment and fear, for which I can give no reason; except that I recognised that the cause of these phenomena was an intelligent one and uncontrollable by any person’s will. In other words, if I were convinced that spirits existed, I should truly have to say that they were the invisible authors of this uproar. I state this explicitly, because I confess that before seeing such things I was far from believing that they could produce such an effect on me. I declare on my word of honour that the foregoing is the truth, and that I am sure that I was not the victim of illusion or fraud. Pietro Merini, Accountant. Turin, 9, Via Pietro Micca, January 9, 1901.”
Phenomena observed by Professor Lombroso. “I went into the cellar, at first in complete darkness, and heard a noise of broken glasses, and bottles rolled at my feet. the bottles were ranged in six compartments one above another. In the middle was a rough table on which I had six lighted candles placed, supposing that the spirit phenomena would cease in the bright light. But, on the contrary, I saw three empty bottles, standing on the ground, roll as though pushed by a finger, and break near the table. To obviate any possible trick, I felt and carefully examined by the light of a candle all the full bottles which were on the racks, and assured myself that there was no cord or string which could explain their movements.
“After a few minutes first two, then four, then two other bottles on the second and third racks detached themselves and fell to the ground, not suddenly, but as though carried by some one; and after their descent, rather than fall, six of them broke on the wet floor, already soaked with wine; only two remained whole. Then at the moment of leaving the cellar, just as I was going out, I heard another bottle break.”
Criticism of Evidence.
In case any reader should find the following pages scarcely in harmony with the title of this section, I would ask him to reflect on the difficulty experienced, in this case, in collecting the facts and recording them in such a way as to leave no doubt as to their authenticity, so that some conclusion can be drawn from them. If you go to the shop in the Via Bava, you will hear related by one, and then another, a thousand different incidents, and it will seem to you that there can be no doubt as to their authenticity. But take the pains to question them, insisting on such and such a point, and you will immediately perceive that nearly all your interlocutors contradict themselves on points they had previously affirmed, or do not agree with some one who was present at the same events, and you will be persuaded that all was merely a trick or a hallucination.
If that astonishes you, I may tell you that nothing on the contrary is more natural. In fact, it is sufficient to reflect that if we cannot regard as always exempt from error even those who are endowed with the scientific training which is indispensable in such cases, and who are well acquainted with the difficulties (which cannot always be foreseen) presented by the verification of mediumistic phenomena, it will be much worse still for those who, while possessing scientific aptitudes, do not possess the experience which is gained by studying various mediums. From that it follows that many studious and learned persons have fallen into gross errors.
To mention only one of these, I will refer to the supposed imposture of all the mediums from 1848 up till today. Thus any amateur investigator of spiritism, who possesses perhaps a name honourably known in other branches, can allow himself to joke about experiments of Crookes – to quote the name of a known experimenter – because on reading his account he found he could make such or such an objection; or because, having decided to hold a seance, he observed that the materialised form of Katie King resembled that of the medium, a thing which could not happen if Katie King was a person having a separate existence, &c. &c. This is the sort of confusion of ideas which is produced by incompetent men. It seems to me like a surgeon performing a delicate operation on a sick person after having studied human anatomy only in the text-books.
But a truce to digressions. Therefore, if those who ought to show themselves competent, permit themselves to form certain judgments, what can a poor joiner or wine-seller, both almost without education, tell you that is serious or worthy of belief? There is, however, one thing which has some value if regarded with a certain breadth of view. If, for example, the four witnesses whose name appear at the foot of the first attestation find it difficult to agree among themselves, in describing such or such a fact, in such a way as to leave no doubt as to its truth, they are not therefore fools; far from that. If they have had little education, they have had experience as men who have seen life, and we cannot refuse to place a certain amount of confidence in them when they tell us decisively and with an enthusiastic conviction: “I have seen.” And the same may be said of many other persons who repeat the same refrain: “I have seen.”
And that is why those who, from the circumstances in which they were placed, ought to have been better able than the others to state the facts precisely as they happened, are those who, on the contrary, have given the least precise account, and hence the vagueness of the first attestation.
The second, signed by Raynero, is more extended, and states precisely two important facts – the throwing of shoes by an unknown hand, and the spontaneous breaking of the bottles in the cellar; moreover, his manner of telling the story inspires more confidence, because he allows himself to be less carried away than the others into exaggeration of the facts, while relating them with earnest conviction. I do not, however, consider that we can blindly accept his evidence on one point – that which deals with the conclusions which he draws from the facts; that is to say, the non-participation of the wife and waiter in the phenomena, these two persons being the only ones on whom suspicion rested. My suggestion is, however, that if this participation did occur, it was entirely sub-conscious. Further on I shall give some other reasons in support of this view. For the present, it is sufficient to say that, although there are indications which cause us to suspect that the phenomena are not really supernormal, we must logically exclude all thoughts of ordinary trickery.
Having expressed these doubts on Raynero’s conclusions, I will now discuss the facts which led Raynero to such a conclusion.
Any one who carefully reads the description of the telekinetic phenomena, which consisted in the throwing of the shoes, with the plan of the place before him, cannot fail to observe that the explanation given by Raynero is insufficient to prove that there was not fraud on the part of the waiter. Urged by a doubt of this character after Raynero had signed his declaration, I proposed to go with him to the place in order to thoroughly clear up certain points. This was done immediately. We shall now see with what caution such evidence ought to be received. I therefore ascertained – and Raynero also agreed – that in the place where he was seated (A) at the moment when the shoes fell, it would have been difficult for him to see if the waiter, engaged in his work in the other room (B), had disappeared for a moment to throw the articles, which, with unconscious premeditation, he must previously have taken from their usual place. Even from the point in question Raynero could not completely see the waiter and no one thought of putting him under surveillance; moreover, after the event took place there was no suggestion that it might be due to fraud, so that it could not even be ascertained if, immediately after the phenomenon occurred, the waiter was calmly engaged in his work or not.
In these circumstances my opinion is that we can no longer speak of certifying such a phenomenon.
When I had put these observations to him, Raynero began to hesitate, then to doubt if the phenomenon had really occurred, as I had done myself. But, after having considered a little, he reverted to his first opinion, and observed that he had seen the shoes when they were still in the air, and that, according to the course they took, it could be inferred that they had been thrown from a point near the top of the staircase. It consequently seemed to him that the waiter could not have accomplished this feat without being seen and without making some noise, because, owing to his small stature, he would have had to go nearly up to the middle of the staircase. I am willing to accept this correction by Raynero, although it is difficult, even admitting that such details remained impressed on the memory, to get rid of doubts as to the accuracy of the observation, seeing that at the time no one expected any such phenomenon.
I think I should also add, as a scrupulous narrator, a detail as to the circumstances in which the phenomenon was produced. At my request Raynero told me again that the window of the garret (above the kitchen, C) was then open. It seemed to me hardly probably, if not impossible, that some one could hide in the garret and then get away through the window. I found it to be equally unthinkable that the shoes were thrown from the court through the window in such a way as to pass through the garret and fall at Raynero’s feet. We can therefore, without much fear of being mistaken, set aside these hypotheses.
Having examined the circumstances, we have to pronounce and decide whether the phenomenon in question is to be attributed to fraud on the part of the waiter, or if it must be considered as a true supernormal phenomenon. I consider that, owing to the conditions of the phenomenon being imperfectly verified, although there exists a certain probability that they were produced by super-normal means, it is best to abstain from a definite judgment.
After all this discussion, and after so prolonged an examination, some may ask themselves why, if the phenomenon appears to be doubtful and due to fraud, I have made so specious an argument, based on a sub-consious fraud of the waiter, instead of on a real and conscious deception. These questions demand a few words in reply. In the first place, I have tried to show why one could not accept entirely the evidence of an individual who, among several whom I questioned, might, it seemed to me, inspire confidence by the exact manner in which he reported the facts; then to make the readers understand that these facts ought to be rigorously attested in order to be taken into consideration.
Under such circumstances it is necessary to be cautious, seeing that, in this matter, we are still generally too ignorant to be able to pass over in silence certain details which seem a priori to be useless. It is necessary above all to show discretion in the question of “sub-conscious” or “automatic” fraud, to which I must return, because it is denied or ignored by a very large number of people, but on this I shall only enlarge as far as is necessary to justify what I have said above.
May I then be permitted to call to mind that at the time of the experiments, now historical, made at Milan, through Eusapia Paladino – experiments in which a number of persons, well known throughout the whole of Europe, took part, and which marked a milestone in the progress of these ideas in the orthodox camp – an individual (now dead) claimed to reveal how Eusapia Paladino produced these phenomena. The publicity given to this discovery caused many persons to confuse together the phenomena which could not in any way be attributed to fraud, with others, with regard to which this accusation could be brought, and to go so far as to charge with the greatest stupidity ten or twelve persons who, fortunately, were not mere nobodies.
Later on, in fact, it was discovered what constituted Eusapia Paladino’s frauds and their “automatic” or “subconscious” nature. Up to the present time, it should be said that such “sub-conscious” frauds have been but little studied in mediums, because those who have been interested in these mediumistic phenomena either accept everything, or attribute everything to common fraud, whereas this latter is much rarer than we suppose in our excessive pride, which causes a person of ordinary cunning to fancy himself shrewder than every one else. For my part I declare, from my own experience, that I consider that “sub-conscious simulation,” both in physical phenomena and in the so-called communications from beyond the tomb, is very frequently, if not always, bound up with authentic phenomena.
I should then have considered it quite natural, and in the order of things, if along with the authentic phenomena of the Via Bava there had been observed “unconscious automatisms” of which I speak; and, for more than one reason, I even incline to the belief that such was the case.
As to the evidence of the Accountant, M. Merini, I state at once that there is little to say: the fact which he relates is expressed with such precision of detail that there is almost nothing to object to it. Further, in conversing with him, I am convinced that his mind is well balanced, his judgment calm and sure, his conviction firm and complete. Not only has he never manifested any repugnance to the publication of his name; but he even wishes that I should say here that he is ready to repeat to any one who desires to hear it what he has related to me. This last feature sufficiently characterises the individual.
Finally, I have no need to comment on the declaration of Professor Lombroso, because no one would refuse to credit his statements.
Notes and Conclusions.
I hope it has been made clear to the reader who has impartially followed us up to this point that supernormal phenomena really took place in the Via Bava. Some one, however, will say: “Who was the medium that produced all these extraordinary things?” And, in fact, it is admitted that these phenomena are always due to the presence of certain persons gifted with special aptitudes. But I do not know how to reply to such an apparently simple question. Was it the waiter that was the medium? Or the wife? Or both? Several seances have, however, been held in the same cellar in the Via Bava, with the same persons, without obtaining any result to be compared with the other phenomena.
I should be inclined to believe that there was a mediumistic contagion. I could not, however, affirm this. Be that as it may, why did these phenomena break out suddenly, and why did they disappear in the same manner? We have not been able to find out the real reason. I believe, however, that it is not surprising that the wife and the waiter, although both mediums, did not produce anything outside of a determined sphere. Perhaps they were special mediums, “occasional mediums,” so to speak, of whom we find numerous examples. And thus it was that at the end of November the phenomena ceased altogether, and were no longer produced, even in the new place to which the waiter went after leaving the Bottigheria Cinzano.
It will not be unacceptable to the reader, I hope, if I add a few words about the Fumeros and their waiter. Bartolomeo Fumero is a man of about fifty years of age. He is square-shouldered, and has the red face usually found in drinkers. He is of an impulsive nature, falling easily into exaggeration when talking. (Thus, doubtless, he exaggerated the damage he had suffered.) In other respects his neighbours regarded him as a very honest man, incapable of injuring any one. His wife, when I saw her for the first time (on the occasion of the phenomena), seemed to be ill. Now she is well, but she is still pale and delicate. She was not willing to admit to me that she had ever been subject to any hallucinations whatever. Professor Lombroso, on the contrary, in his statement, makes an allusion to these hallucinations. She is clever, knows how to write and keep accounts. She underwent an operation for hystero-ovariotomy a year ago.
The waiter is not of full height, and is of moderate intelligence. There is apparently nothing else to remark concerning him. With regard to fraud, I recall an observation made by a workman who was one day present at a spontaneous breaking of bottles. He saw, or thought he saw, that this breaking of bottles was always preceded by a sudden movement of the waiter. The workman explained that by saying that the waiter threw out the force. We record the observation; even such a phenomenon is not new, since it has already been observed with other mediums – for instance, with the very well-known Neapolitan medium, of whom we have already spoken with regard to sub-conscious fraud. I shall return to this question of apparent fraud in connection with the observations made with other mediums.
Let us, then, sum up. Via Bava was the scen of perfectly authentic phenomena of a supernormal character; also of less well-defined phenomena, obscurely connected with the first.
We have, in fact, spoken of hallucinations, of subconscious frauds, and even – as if this were not sufficient to complicate all verification of the facts – of a case of undoubted appearance of fraud in the automatic movements of the waiter preceding some of the phenomena. We can easily understand why such uncertainty is prejudicial to the effect which these phenomena ought to produce on public opinion. Only, if the question is so far from clear, this is due mainly to the indifference with which the majority of scientific men regard this class of studies. As to the majority of the public, they take advantage of these uncertainties to create confusion and to throw doubt even upon what is now absolutely proved; that is to say, that in Spiritism, Mediumship, Occultism – call it what you will – there exist facts opposed to the general idea which we have formed as to the laws governing the physical world.
Psychical and supernormal phenomena, their observation and experimentation. By P.M.J. Joire (1916).
In other cases the influence of the medium is less certain. The following are instances:
On the 16th of November, in Turin, Via Bava, No. 6, in a little inn kept by a man named Fumero, there began to be heard in the daytime, but to a greater extent at night, a series of strange noises. In seeking out the cause, it was found that full or empty wine-bottles had been broken in the wine cellar. More frequently they would descend from their places and roll along the floor, heaping themselves against the closed door in such a way as to obstruct the entrance when it was opened.
In the sleeping-chamber on the upper floor (which communicated by a staircase with the servants’ room near the small public room of the inn) garments were twisted up and some of them transferred themselves downstairs into the room beneath. Two chairs in coming down were broken. Copper utensils which had been hung upon the walls of the servants’ dining-room fell to the floor and slid over long reaches of the room, sometimes getting broken. A spectator put his hat on the bed of the upper chamber; it disappeared and was later found in the filth-heap of the courtyard below.
Careful examination failed to disclose any normal cause for these performances. No help could be got either from the police or the priest. Nay, when the latter was performing his office, a huge bottle full of wine was broken at his very feet. A vase of flowers that had been brought into the inn descended safely onto a table from the moulding above the door, where it had been placed. Two large bottles of rosolio, which they were distilling, were broken in broad daylight. Five or six times, even in the presence of the police, a little staircase-ladder, which leaned against the wall at one side of the main room of the inn, was slowly lowered to the floor, yet without hurting any one. A gun went across the room and was found on the floor in the opposite corner. Two bottles came down from a high shelf with some force. They were not broken, but they bruised the elbow of a porter, giving him a slight “black-and-blue spot.”
The people kept crowding in to see, and the police during their investigations gave the Fumero family to understand that they suspected them of simulating, so that the poor creatures decided to suffer the annoyance in silence. They even gave out that it had ceased (after an imaginary visit from me), so as to escape at least the guying, if not the damage. I began attentively to study the case.
I made a minute examination of the premises. The rooms were small. Two of them served the purpose of a wine-shop; one was used for a servants’ eating-room, and was connected by a small stairway with a bed-chamber above. Lastly, there was a deep wine-cellar, access to which was obtained by means of a long stairway and a passageway. The people informed me that they noticed that whenever any one entered the cellar the bottles began to be broken. I entered at first in the dark, and, sure enough, I heard the breaking of glasses and the rolling of bottles under my feet. I thereupon lit up the place. The bottles were massed together upon five shelves, one over the other. In the middle of the room was a rude table. I had six lighted candles placed upon this, on the supposition that the spiritistic phenomena would cease in bright light. On the contrary, I saw three empty bottles, which stood upright on the floor, spin along as if twirled by a finger and break to pieces near my table. To avoid a possible trick I carefully examined, by the light of a large candle, and touched with my hand all the full bottles standing on the shelves and ascertained that there were no wires or strings that might explain the movements.
After a few minutes two bottles, then four, and later others on the second and third shelves separated themselves from the rest and fell to the floor without any violent motion, but rather as if they had been lifted down by some one; and after this descent rather than fall, six burst upon the wet floor (already drenched with wine), and two remained intact. A quarter of an hour afterwards three others from the last compartment fell and were broken upon the floor. Then I turned to leave the cellar. As I was on the point of going out, I heard the breaking of another bottle on the floor. When the door was shut, all again became quiet.
I came back on another day. They told me that the same phenomena occurred with decreasing frequency, adding that a little brass color-grinder had sprung from one place to another in the servants’ room, and, striking against the opposite wall, jammed itself out of shape – as indeed I observed. Two or three chairs had bounced around with such violence that they were broken, without, however, hurting any one standing by. A table was also broken.
I asked to see and examine all the people of the house. There was a tall waiter lad of thirteen, apparently normal; another, a head-waiter, also normal. The master of the house was a brave old soldier who from time to time threatened the spirits with his gun. Judging from his flushed face and forced hilarity, I judged him to be somewhat under the influence of alcohol. The mistress of the inn was a little woman of some fifty years, lean and very slender. From infancy up she had been subject to tremors, neuralgia, and nocturnal hallucinations, and had had an operation for hystero-ovariotomy. For all these reasons I counselled the husband to have her leave the premises for three days. She went to Nole, her native town, on the 25th of November, and there suffered from hallucinations, – voices heard at night, movements, persons that no one else saw or heard. But she did not cause any annoying movements of objects. During these three days nothing happened at the inn. But as soon as she got back the performances began again, at first furiously, but afterwards more mildly. The occurrences were always the same – utensils, chairs, bottles, broken or displaced. Seeing this, I again counselled that the wife absent herself anew, and she did so on November 26.
On the day the woman left (she was in a state of great excitement and had cursed the alleged spirits), all the dishes and bottles that had been placed on the table were broken and fell to the floor. If the family was going to dine, the table had to be prepared in another place and by another woman, because no dish touched by the mistress remained intact. Hence one naturally suspected that she had mediumistic powers, or would have done so had it not been that during her absence the phenomena were repeated in just the same way. That is to say (to be specific), a pair of shoes of hers that were in the bed-chamber, on the dressing-cloth, came downstairs in broad daylight (half-past eight in the morning), traversed the servants’ room through the air, passed into the common room of the inn, and there fell down at the feet of two customers who were seated at a table. (This was on November 27.) The shoes were replaced on the dressing-cloth and continually watched, but did not move until noon of the next day; and at that hour, when all were at dinner, they disappeared entirely! A week afterwards they were found, with heels to the floor, under the bed of the same chamber.
Another pair of ladies’ shoes, placed in the same chamber, on the dressing-cloth, and carefully watched, disappeared, and were found only after the lapse of twenty days (folded up as if they were to be packed in a trunk), between the mattresses of a bed in the same chamber that had been turned upside down in vain two days after the disappearance.
When it was seen that the phenomena continued just the same, the woman was recalled from Nole, and they were repeated with the same continuity as before. A bottle of effervescent liquor, for example, in the inn, in full daylight, in the sight of everybody, slowly, as if accompanied by a human hand, passed over a distance of twelve or fifteen feet, as far as the servants’ room, the door of which was open, and then fell to the floor and was broken.
After all this it occurred to the host to dismiss the younger of his two waiters. When he left (December 7), all the phenomena ceased. This of course makes one surmise that the motive force emanated from him. Yet he was not an hysteric, and was the cause of no spiritistic occurrences in his new home.
in ‘After Death – What?’ by Cesare Lombroso (1909).