the smallest mark or indentation; others can also vouch for this fact.
The H----s had all left B---- for good at that time, except the
eldest son, and Miss Freer agreed with me that whatever damage was
done to the doors, must therefore have been done after the H----s
left, and before her party came in.... The hot-water pipe theory
revived by the writer of the article in _The Times_ is disproved by
Miss Freer, who told me that the hot-water apparatus was not used for
some time, and that the disturbances continued just the same.... The
stories told in connection with B---- were not circulated or started
by the H---- family. They were told _to_ them by persons living around
B----."

In a letter to Miss Freer, dated June 12th, Mrs. "G." writes, in
reference to the charge of practical joking:--

"They are the most unlikely family to do such a thing; and besides, if
further proof were wanted, the young men of the family were away from
B---- when we stayed there ten days, and there was only one night when
we did not hear the noises."

Miss Freer of course entirely accepts Mrs. "G.'s" statement, and that
of Mr. H---- as published in _The Times_. She had been led to her
earlier conclusions as to the marks of a boot-heel on the upper panels
of the doors by the statements of interested persons.

A suggestive point in this connection is the fact, to which Miss "G."
has herself testified, that while Mr. and Mrs. "G." were disturbed to
the utmost degree, their daughter, who slept in a room communicating
with that of her mother, heard nothing whatever; from which it would
appear that the noises heard by them were subjective, and that the