Both，however，wereinsensibleofitsinfluence；andmostcertainlyitisimpossibleineithercasetoattributethissensibilitytotheimagination。“Thefirstcasehasbeenalreadydisposedof。Withregardtothesecond，itisverypossibletoattributealltheresultstoimagination。Itcannotbecontended，thatbecausetheladwasdeafanddumbhehadnounderstanding，thathecouldnotseethestrangemanipulationsofthemagnetiser，andthathewasunawarethathiscurewastheobjectoftheexperimentsthatwerethusmadeuponhim。Hadhenofancymerelybecausehewasdumb？andcouldhe，forthesamereason，avoidfeelingaheavinessinhiseyelids，anumbness，andasleepiness，whenhewasforcedtositfortwoorthreehourswhileM。
Foissacpointedhisfingersathim？Asfortheameliorationinhishealth，noargumentcanbeadducedtoprovethathewasdevoidoffaithintheremedy；andthat，havingfaith，heshouldnotfeelthebenefitofitaswellasthousandsofotherswhohavebeencuredbymeanswhollyasimaginary。
Thethirdcaseisbroughtforwardwithastillgreatershowofauthority。Havingmagnetisedthechildandthedumbyouthwithresultssoextraordinary，M。FoissacnexttriedhishanduponaCommissioner。
M。Itardwassubjectedtoacourseofmanipulations；theconsequenceswereaflowofsaliva，ametallicsavourinthemouth，andasevereheadach。Thesesymptoms，saythereporters，cannotbeaccountedforbytheinfluenceofimagination。M。Itard，itshouldberemarked，wasaconfirmedvaletudinarian；andabeliever，beforetheinvestigationcommenced，inthetruthofmagnetism。Hewasaman，therefore，whosetestimonycannotbereceivedwithimplicitcredenceuponthissubject。
Hemayhaverepeated，andsomayhisbrotherCommissioners，thattheresultsabovestatedwerenotproducedbythepoweroftheimagination。ThepatientsofPerkins，ofValentineGreatraks，ofSirKenelmDigby，ofFatherGassner，wereallequallypositive:butwhatavailedtheirassertions？Experiencesoonmadeitmanifest，thatnootherpowerthanthatofimaginationworkedthewondersintheircase。