e a material basis
of veils, false moustaches, wigs and the _corpus vile_ of the medium. It
is also possible that mere expectancy and suggestion induce
hallucinatory perceptions among the members of the circle. That
apparitions of a sort can be induced by hypnotic and posthypnotic
suggestion is certain enough (see HYPNOTISM). Savages produce
apparitions in similar ways by suggestion, accompanied by dances,
fumigations, darkness, fasting, drugs, and whatever can affect the
imaginations of the onlookers (see MAGIC). Both in savage and civilized
life, some persons can provoke themselves into beholding apparitions
usually fantastic, but occasionally coincidental, by sedulously staring
into any clear deep water, a fragment of rock crystal, a piece of
polished basalt or obsidian, a mirror, a ring, a sword blade, or a glass
of sherry (see CRYSTAL GAZING). Indeed any object, a wall, the palm of
the hand, the shoulder-blade-bone of a sheep, may be, and has been used
to this end (see DIVINATION).

Almost all known apparitions may accommodate themselves to one or other
of the categories given, whether they be pathological, coincidental or
spontaneous, induced, permanently localized, or sporadic.

See generally, SPIRITUALISM and PSYCHICAL RESEARCH. (A. L.)

APPARITOR, or APPARATOR (Latin for a servant of a public official, from
_apparere_, to attend in public), an attendant who executed the orders
of a Roman magistrate; hence a beadle in a university, a pursuivant or
herald; particularly, in English ecclesiastical courts, the official who
serves the processes of the court and causes defendants to appear by
summons.

APPEAL, in law. In the old English common law the term "appeal" was used
to describe a process peculiar to English criminal procedure. It was a
right of prosecution possessed as a personal privilege by a party
individually aggrieved by a felony, a privilege of which the crown could
not directly or indirectly deprive him, since he could use it alike when
the prisoner was tried and acquitted, and when he was convicted and
pardoned. It was chiefly known in practice as the privilege of the
nearest relation of a murdered person. When in 1729 (after Colonel
Oglethorpe's inquiry and report on the London prisons) Banbridge and
other gaolers were indicted for their treatment of prisoners, but were
acquitted for deficiency of evidence, appeals for murder were freely
brought by relatives of deceased prisoners