window; he first went into a trance, and walked about uneasily; he then
went into the hall; while he was away, I heard a voice whisper in my
ear, 'He will go out of one window and in at another.' I was alarmed and
shocked at the idea of so dangerous an experiment. I told the company
what I had heard, and we then waited for Home's return. Shortly after he
entered the room, I heard the window go up, but I could not see it, for
I sat with my back to it. I, however, saw his shadow on the opposite
wall; he went out of the window in a horizontal position, and I saw him
outside the other window (that in the next room) floating in the air. It
was eighty-five feet from the ground. There was no balcony along the
windows, merely a strong course an inch and a half wide; each window had
a small plant stand, but there was no connection between them. I have no
theory to explain these things. I have tried to find out how they are
done, but the more I studied them, the more satisfied was I that they
could not be explained by mere mechanical trick."[36]

There is one episode in the career of D. D. Home which, although it does
not affect the reality of the phenomena alleged to have taken place in
his presence, claims a brief mention. The gift to Home by Mrs. Lyon of a
large sum of money, the subsequent lawsuit, and the judgment in
accordance with which the money was returned to its original owner,
excited much attention at the time. Public opinion frequently takes up
sensational occurrences in a most illogical and unscientific manner. But
a permanent effect may thus be produced, which is extremely difficult to
eradicate, even if shown to be unjustifiable. This episode with Mrs.
Lyon has probably had more effect than any other circumstance in causing
the feeling of aversion with which large numbers of people regard Home
and all his doings. He is looked upon, and spoken of, as if he were an
unprincipled adventurer, convicted of fraud, and of obtaining money
under false pretences.

The remarks at the end of this chapter are based mainly upon Appendix
III. to the Report by Professor Barrett and Mr. Myers, and which deals
with the case of Lyon _v._ Home.[37] The Appendix commences thus: "Our
colleague, Mr. H. Arthur Smith [barrister-at-law], author of 'Principles
of Equity,' has kindly furnished us with the following review of the
case of Lyon _v._ Home." The following are a few extracts from this
review:--

"I have looked carefully into