The ragpicker of Rue des Noyers.

— Under the title Scenes of witchcraft in the nineteenth century, the Droit relates the following:

“A very strange fact is currently occurring on Rue des Noyers. Mr. Lesage, steward of the Palace of Justice, occupies an apartment on that street. For some time now, projectiles coming from no one knows where have been breaking the windowpanes, penetrating the interior of the house, and striking those who are there, so as to wound them more or less seriously. They are rather considerable fragments of half-charred firewood, very heavy pieces of pit coal, and even what are called Paris coals. Mr. Lesage's servant received several on the chest, resulting in severe contusions. “The victim of these sorceries ended by requesting the assistance of the police. Agents were placed on watch; but they themselves were soon struck by the same invisible artillery, it being impossible for them to know where the blows came from.

“Existence having become unbearable in a house in which disagreeable surprises could occur at any moment, Mr. Lesage requested of the proprietor the rescission of the contract. The request being accepted, and in order to draw up the deed of rescission, they sent for Mr. Vaillant, an officer of justice, whose name suited perfectly in a circumstance in which the summonses could not be made without danger. “Indeed, as soon as the ministerial officer began to draw up the act, an enormous piece of coal, thrown with extreme violence, came through the window and struck against the wall, reducing itself to dust. Without being disturbed, Mr. Vaillant made use of the dust to spread it over the page he had just written, in the same way that, in former times, Junot had made use of the earth raised by the bomb.

[Spontaneous physical manifestations on Rue des Grès.]

“In 1847 an analogous fact occurred on Rue des Grès, the account of which we then gave. A certain L…, a coal merchant, also served as a target for fantastic archers, and these incomprehensible emissions of stones threw the whole quarter into an uproar. Parallel to the house inhabited by the coal merchant there was a vacant lot, in the midst of which stood the former church of Rue des Grès, today the School of the Brothers of Christian Doctrine. At first they imagined that the projectiles came from there, but this illusion was soon dispelled. When they watched on one side, the stones arrived from the other. Nevertheless, they ended by catching the magician in the act, who was none other than Mr. L… himself. He had resorted to that phantasmagoria because he was discontented in the house and wished to rescind the contract. [see Judicial summons.] “This was not what happened with Mr. Lesage, whose honorability excluded any idea of trickery and who, moreover, was very content with his apartment and left it with regret.

“It is hoped that the inquiry, conducted by Mr. Hubaut, commissioner of the Sorbonne district, will clear up the mystery, which perhaps is nothing but a joke in poor taste, excessively prolonged.”

[Clarifications from St. Louis.]

(To St. Louis.) Would you have the kindness to tell us whether the facts related above are real? As to their possibility, we do not doubt it.

Answer. – Yes. The facts are true; only men's imagination has amplified them, whether out of fear or out of irony. But, I repeat, they are true. Such manifestations are provoked by a Spirit who amuses himself at the expense of the inhabitants of the place. Observation. – Since then we have had the opportunity to see Mr. Lesage himself, who honored us with his visit and not only confirmed the facts but completed and rectified them on several points. St. Louis was right in saying that they had been amplified by fear or by irony. Indeed, the story of the dust stoically gathered by the courageous officer of justice, in the manner of Junot, was an invention of the amusing journalist. In the next issue we shall give a perfectly exact account of the facts, with the new observations they will have occasioned.

Is there in the house a person who is the cause of these manifestations?

Answer. – These are always caused by the presence of the person attacked; it is that the disturbing Spirit attaches himself to the inhabitant of the place where he is, wishes to commit mischief, and even to make him move away.

We ask whether, among the inhabitants of the house, there exists someone who is the cause of these phenomena by a mediumistic and involuntary influence?

Answer. – It is indeed necessary; without that the fact could not occur. A Spirit inhabits a place of his predilection; he remains in inaction until someone whose nature is suitable to him presents himself there. When that person arrives, he amuses himself as much as he can.

These Spirits are always of a very inferior order. Is the aptitude for serving them as an instrument an unfavorable presumption against the person? Does this not denote a sympathy with beings of that nature?

Answer. – Not exactly, since such aptitude depends on a physical disposition. Nevertheless, it often betrays a material tendency that it would be preferable not to have, for the more elevated one is morally, the more one attracts the good Spirits, who necessarily drive away the bad ones.

Where does the Spirit obtain the projectiles he makes use of?

Answer. – Most often these objects are gathered in the very places. A force proceeding from a Spirit launches them into space, falling in the location designated by the Spirit. When there are not, in these places, stones, coals, etc., they can be fabricated by them very easily. Observation. – In the Review of the month of April 1859 we published the complete theory of these kinds of phenomena, in the articles: Furniture from beyond the tomb and Pneumatography or direct writing.

Do you judge that it would be useful to evoke this Spirit to ask him for some explanations?

Answer. – Evoke him, if you wish; but he is an inferior Spirit who will give only very insignificant answers.

[Evocation of the disturbing Spirit.]

(Society, June 29, 1860.)

Evocation of the disturbing Spirit of Rue des Noyers.

Answer. – Why do you call me? Do you want stones thrown? It would then be every man for himself, notwithstanding your air of bravery.

Even if you threw stones at us, we would not be afraid. I ask whether you can in fact throw them.

Answer. – Here perhaps I could not; you have a guard who watches well over you.

On Rue des Noyers was there someone who served you as an auxiliary to facilitate the jokes in poor taste with the inhabitants of the house?

Answer. – Certainly; I found a good instrument and no learned, wise, and virtuous Spirit to prevent me. Because I am merry, I sometimes like to amuse myself.

Who was the person who served you as an instrument?

Answer. – A maidservant.

Did she serve you as an auxiliary without knowing it?

Answer. – Oh, yes! Poor girl! She was the most terrified.

Among the persons who are here, is there any capable of helping you to produce similar effects?

Answer. – I could indeed find one, if she were willing to lend herself to it; but not to operate here.

Can you point her out?

Answer. – Yes. There, to the right of the one who is speaking; he wears glasses.

Observation. – Indeed, the Spirit points out a member of the Society, who is somewhat a writing medium, but who has never produced any physical manifestation. It is probable that this is a new joke of the Spirit.

— Do you act with a hostile aim?

Answer. – I have no hostile aim; but men, who seize upon everything, will draw their advantage from it.

What do you mean by this? We do not understand you.

Answer. – I sought to amuse myself, but you study the thing and have one more fact to show that we exist.

Where did you obtain the objects you threw?

Answer. – They are very common; I found them in the courtyard and in the neighboring gardens.

Did you find them all or did you fabricate some?

Answer. – I created nothing, I composed nothing.

If you had not found them, could you have fabricated them?

Answer. – It would have been more difficult; but, at a pinch, one mixes materials and this makes some sort of whole.

Tell us, now, how you threw them?

Answer. – Ah! This is more difficult to tell; I made use of the electric nature of that girl, together with my own, which is less material. Thus, we were both able to transport those various materials. (See the note that follows the evocation.)

I imagine you would like to give some information about yourself. In the first place, tell us whether you died a long time ago?

Answer. – A long time ago; quite some fifty years.

What were you in life?

Answer. – I was not much; I sewed rags in this quarter. Sometimes they said foolish things to me, because I was very fond of the red liquor of the ingenuous Noah. Thus, I wanted everyone to disappear from here.

Was it by yourself and of your own good will that you answered our questions?

Answer. – I had a guide.

Who is this guide?

Answer. – Your good king Louis.

Observation. – This question was motivated by the nature of certain answers, which seem to surpass the scope of the Spirit, by the substance of the ideas and even by the form of the language. There is nothing surprising in his having been aided by a more enlightened Spirit, who wished to take advantage of the occasion to instruct us. This is a very common fact. But – a remarkable particularity in this circumstance – the influence of the other Spirit made itself felt upon the very handwriting: that of the answers in which he intervened is more regular and flowing; that of the others is angular, coarse, irregular, generally barely legible, and shows a different character.

What are you doing now? Do you occupy yourself with your future?

Answer. – Not yet; I wander. They think so little of me there on Earth that no one prays for me. Thus, I am not helped and I do not work.

What was your name when you were living?

Answer. – Jeannet.

Very well! We shall pray for you. Tell us whether our evocation gave you pleasure or vexed you?

Answer. – Rather pleasure, since you are good, merry creatures, although a little austere. No matter: you have listened to me and I am content.

Jeannet.

Observation. – The explanation given by the Spirit to question 13 is perfectly in conformity with that which was given to us, some time ago, by other Spirits, as to the manner in which they act to operate the movement and the translation of tables and of other inert objects. When we account for this theory, the phenomenon appears very simple. It is understood that it concerns a law of Nature, and it is no more marvelous than the other effects whose causes we are ignorant of. This theory is found completely developed in the issues of the Review of May and June 1858. Daily, experience confirms to us the usefulness of the theories we have given of the spiritist phenomena. A rational explanation of these phenomena ought to result in a better understanding of their possibility and, for that very reason, to give conviction. This is why many persons who had not been convinced by the most extraordinary facts became convinced as soon as they were able to understand the why and the how. We add that, for many, these explanations make the marvelous disappear, replacing the facts, however unusual they may be, in the order of natural things, that is to say, their not being derogations of the laws of Nature, nor the devil having anything to do with it. When they occur spontaneously, as on Rue des Noyers, we almost always find an opportunity to do some good or to relieve some soul.

[Judicial summons.]

It is known that in 1847 similar facts occurred on Rue des Grès, near the Sorbonne. Mr. Lerible, who was the victim, has just given a denial through the newspapers that accused him of fraud, summoning them before the tribunals. The whereas-clauses of his pleading deserve to be reported: In the year eighteen hundred and sixty, the ninth of July, at the requisition of Mr. Lerible, former dealer in coal and firewood, proprietor, residing in Paris, at Rue de Grenelle-Saint-Germain, 64, an elector, with domicile in his property;

I, Aubin Jules Demonchy, officer of justice of the Civil Tribunal of the Seine, seated in Paris, residing at Rue des Fossés Saint-Victor, 43, the undersigned, notify Mr. Garat, manager of the newspaper Patrie, at the offices of the said newspaper, situated in Paris, at Rue du Croissant, where, being there and speaking to a woman of confidence, I thus declared: To order the insertion, in response to the article published on June 27 last, in the Facts of the newspaper Patrie, of the following summons, made by the petitioner to the manager of the newspaper Droit, with the offer that the petitioner makes to cover the costs of the publication, in case his response exceeds the number of lines that the law authorizes to be published: “In the year eighteen hundred and sixty, on the fifth of July, at the requisition of Mr. Lerible, former dealer in coal and firewood, proprietor, residing in Paris, at Rue de Grenelle-Saint-Germain, 64, an elector, domiciled in his property;

“I, Aubin Jules Demonchy, officer of justice of the Civil Tribunal of the Seine, seated in Paris, residing at Rue des Fossés Saint-Victor, 43;

“I summoned Mr. François, in the name and as manager of the newspaper Droit, at the offices of the same newspaper, situated in Paris, at Place Dauphine, where, being there and speaking to…

“To appear on August 8, 1860 at the audience before the presiding judge and judges who compose the sixth chamber of the Tribunal of First Instance of the Seine, ruling in the matter of correctional police, at the Palace of Justice of Paris, at ten o'clock in the morning, in order to: “Whereas in its issue of June 26 last and on the occasion of the facts that are said to have taken place in a house on Rue des Noyers, the newspaper Droit reports that analogous facts are said to have occurred in 1847, in a house on Rue des Grès;

“Whereas the editor accompanies his observations with explanations that lead one to believe that the attacks of which the house on Rue des Grès was the target, in 1847, emanated from the tenant himself, who is said to have practiced them in bad faith, in order to obtain, by means of a dishonest speculation, the rescission of the rental contract; “Whereas the facts pointed out by the newspaper Droit really occurred, not in 1847, but in 1849, in the house that the petitioner occupied at that time at Rue des Grès;

“Whereas, although the petitioner's name is indicated in the article of the Droit only by an initial, the exact designation of his trade, that of the premises he inhabited and, finally, that the account of the facts under examination was gathered by the newspaper itself, sufficiently point to the petitioner as being the author of the maneuvers attributed to the person who occupied the house on Rue des Grès; “Whereas these imputations are capable of harming the honor and consideration of the petitioner;

“Whereas they are all the more reprehensible in that none of the verifications, with respect to the events in question, are said to have been carried out, and that, like those of which Rue des Noyers seems to have been the theater, they remained without explanation; “Whereas, moreover, the petitioner was proprietor, since 1847, of the house and the land that he occupied on Rue des Grès; that the supposition reached by the director of the Droit has no reason for being and was never formulated;

“Whereas the terms used by the newspaper Droit constitute a defamation and are subject to the application of the penalties provided by law;

“Whereas all the newspapers of Paris took advantage of the article of the Droit and that the honor of the petitioner has suffered, by reason of this publicity, an offense whose reparation is owed to him;

“For these reasons:

“It is resolved to apply to Mr. François the penalties established by law, condemning him, in person, to indemnify the petitioner for damages and losses that the latter reserves to claim at the audience, which he declares, for the moment, to employ for the benefit of the poor; that, in addition, the judgment to be rendered be inserted in all the newspapers of Paris, at the expense of the summoned party, who shall also pay the costs of the proceedings, under all reservations. “And, so that the aforesaid may not be ignorant of it, I left at his domicile a copy of identical tenor of the present act.

“Costs: 3 fr. 55 c.

“Signed: Demonchy “Registered in Paris, on July 6, 1860. Received 2 fr. and 20 c.

“Signed: Duperron “Declaring to the aforesaid that if he does not satisfy the present summons, the petitioner will appeal by the legal channels;

“I left at his domicile a copy of identical tenor of the present act.

“Costs: 9 fr. and 10 c.

“Demonchy.”

[1] Translator's note: We reproduce the whereas-clauses in the manner in which they are found in the original French, including the repetition of identical, or nearly identical, paragraphs.