These are harmless instances of this strange power. There are others the reverse of harmless in this significance. One or two of these we may quote: Prof. Liegeois, in his recently published pamphlet, "Of Hypnotism in its relations to Civil and Criminal Law," describes experiments with the subjects of M. Liebault, a well-known hypnotiser. In these experiments he took pains to induce the patients to commit crimes. As he relates, Mdlle. A. E. (a very amiable young lady) was made to fire at her own mother with a pistol, which she had no means of knowing was unloaded. The same lady was made to accuse herself before a judge of having assassinated an intimate friend with a knife. Yet in both these instances she was wide awake at the time and supposed that she was acting from her own impulse.
Many other instances might be given, but these will suffice for illustration. As to the length of time in which such a suggestion may remain operative, Prof. Beaunis relates a case in which he suggested to a hypnotised subject that he would call on her on the next New Year's day (172 days after the date of the experiment). On that date, being perfectly conscious, she seemed to see him walk into the room where she was, pay his compliments, and retire. She insisted that this had really happened, and could not be convinced to the contrary. A striking feature of this incident was that he seemed to be dressed in summer attire (as at the date of experiment), though it was now the dead of winter.
A natural conclusion from the facts above detailed is, that the strange power here indicated might prove a very dangerous weapon in the hands of an unscrupulous man. If a person can suggest to a subject in the hypnotic sleep that, at a certain future day, he or she shall kill a person obnoxious to the experimenter, or perform some other criminal act, and if the act be duly performed, the subject being in a seemingly normal state, and fully convinced that he acted solely through an impulse originating in his own mind, it might appear as if there was little safety left for honest people, and that a villain might carry out his murderous schemes with perfect impunity. In such a case as we have said, the mind of the patient would cease to be his own, but would partly belong to the person whose deadly thoughts it contained, and whose involuntary agent it had become. Will the jurisprudence of the future have to take account of such possibilities as this? Yet it must be remembered that the great majority of people are not susceptible to hypnotic influence, and that those whose will can be so completely subjected to that of another are comparatively few. Very few such have yet been found in France. In America, the realm of a less excitable people, still fewer could be found.