(Dreams and Myths) a translation of which is now running in the Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, draws a close parallel between the two. According to him the myth is a relic out of the infantile mental life of the race and the dream is the myth of the individual. In the cases described we see the symbolisms assuming the infantile, archaic form which is characteristic of both myth and childish phantasy. We often find in the male neurotic, a form of sexual repression which we do not uncover except by questioning. It is either a psychic impotency or an exaggerated nicety, or sensitiveness of feeling which prevents a normal adjustment to the sexual life. These pa tients openly complain of an inability to accomplish tasks, to stick at one piece of work till it is finished, of inability to follow through, and in aggravated cases, of a true agoraphobia. These symptoms may be taken as symbolic of the patient's attitude towards his own sexuality and the essential treatment of these cases is to free the patient from his sexual inhibitions. Phantasies of death play a large part in the mental life of the neurotic. They do so because of the masochistic impulse of self-punishment, that is so typical of the neurotic. Every neurotic has a strong guilt complex or sense of sin. Stekel says that masochism always spells remorse. Death symbols play a large part among the hysterical and psychasthenic symbolisms. One of the determinants of the phobia of a psychasthenic of going to a distance was the symbol of life as a journey. To journey was to live and to reach the end of a journey was to die, hence the fear of a journey, and the confinement to his home for eight years. The hand washing impulsion in many cases is a symbolical cleansing the hands of moral dirt. The case of hysterical astasia abasia cannot walk because of unconscious fancies of falling morally. K The symbolism of right and left is often met with, as indicating right and wrong. Various sensations or disturbances in the neurotic patient affecting the left side may be found to be connected with guilt complexes. A neurotic patient, who had strong but repressed homosexual tendencies was greatly troubled by the feeling of a high wall that crowded him on his left side and caused a sense of fear. The left side symbolized his homosexual tendencies that were pressing forward into consciousness. The house is a common symbol of a person. A number of risque stories are based on this symbol. An anxiety neurotic conceived a violent antipathy for a house her husband had just bought and which was far superior to the one they had left. The feelings so aroused caused intense depression, fears of insanity and thoughts of suicide. The depression and aversion did not disappear until it became apparent that the house symbolized both her hubsand and herself. The apparently unreasonable aversion then became reasonable and the patient was able to adjust herself to feelings and thoughts that had never before been openly conscious. There was here a very pretty example of displacement of the emotions from the real object to a symbolical substitute. Time has not allowed of more than an allusion to the subject of symbolism, but I hope that what I have brought out may serve to give an idea of what today is a very live subject in psychopathology. The essential points may be summarized as follows: The symbol in the symptomatology of the neurosis is the expression in conscious manifestation or action of a concealed or unconscious thought. This symbol may correspond to the fulfillment of an unconscious wish that is associated with the unconscious phantasies that constitute the nucleus of the neurosis. ANSAS CITY was selected as the next meeting-place of the Medical Society of the Missouri Valley, March 20 and 21, 1913. Dr. Herman E. Pearse was elected chairman of the Arrangement Committee. It is proposed to devote one day to clinics at the General Hospital. The profession of nearby states cordially invited to attend. The Medical Herald is the official journal of the society. THE "ALLOPATH." George L. Servoss, M. D., Gardnerville, Nevada. HAT is an "allopath" anyway? The Century dictionary says that he is one who practices "allopathy," and further defines the latter term as the name of a system of medicine in which drugs, or other agents, producing other than the symptoms present, are employed. The term was brought forward by Hahnemann, in that the "old" or "regular" school of medicine might have a name which would distinguish it from that of his "homeopaths." In reality, there is no such thing as a true "allopath" in the practice of medicine, more than there is an absolutely true "Homeopath" or "Eclectic." The doctor of the "regular" or "old" school is simply a doctor, nothing more nor less. There is nothing narrow about his practice, or at least there should not be. He is ready and willing, at all times, to accept that which is best for his patient, no matter whether it may originate within the ranks of the "homeopaths," the "Eclectics" the "Osteopaths," or even the "Christian Scientists." realizes that there is good in all things, and it is aim and endeavor to obtain the best, regardless of from where it may come. He likewise realizes that any school of medicine, which follows a single beaten path, is liable to become narrow, and that the doctors of such school are very liable to become so narrow minded as not to give their patients the best there is to obtain. Only within the past few days we have seen the doctor of the "regular" school scorned within the walls of the United States Senate by a member of a certain non-medicinal sect. He has accused the "allopaths," as he calls the member of the "old" school of numerous faults. Primarily, simply because of the fact that the doctor is endeavoring to bring about better conditions of health, and incidentally endeavoring to prevent the occurrence of disease, and this through national organization, he is accused of being a member of a noxious "trust." Then again, this same doctor, in his treat He ment of existing diseases gives medicines which, at times, and under certain conditions, produce some nausea, despite the fact that these self-same remedies produce more real satisfactory terminations than do all others. But is this latter accusation absolutely truthful? Does it show a perfect knowledge of things as they are today? I think not. The so-called "allopath" of today is not as narrow as were his forefathers of the earlier days. This is evidenced by the fact that within the membership of the American Medical Association, as well as in State and county societies we find members who are other than from the "regular" or "allopathic" school, and farther by the fact that we of the "allopathic" school have adopted and are using many of the remedies brought out by the other schools. The senator who made such accusations seemingly did not know that the "allopaths," to a very considerable extent had adopted some of the tried and true products of the "homeopathic," the "eclectic" and other schools. He did not know that not less than one-third of the "allopaths" were employing their own particular drugs in such form as not to be unpleasant in any possible way. In fact his accusations were based upon a lack of knowledge of medicine in general, and particularly that of the "allopaths" of today. Had this man picked up the average medical jorunal of the time, he would have seen within its pages, mention made of the remedies of every school under the sun, both drugs and other agents of known and accepted value. He would have seen that many of the methods of the non-medical schools and sects accepted, and used by the "allopaths." He would even have seen that much good was noted by the disdained "allopath," even in the sect represented by him. In fact he would have found that the "allopaths" were really very broad in their ideas. This gentleman objected to the use of the "nasty" serums and vaccines, and insisted that they should not be used. This again displayed his ignorance, not only of the agents themselves, but the statistics as relative to their use. He did not admit that diphtheria antitoxin had reduced the mortality of that disease to almost absolutely nothing, or that it had interfered with the immense number of cases in epidemics, through the giv ing of immunizing doses to those who had been exposed to the infection, thereby keeping them in good health, He did not admit that the giving of typhoid vaccine to the soldiers of the army of the United States had practically done away with the occurrence of the disease within the ranks. He did not call attention to the fact that typhoid, during the Spanish-American War, and before the introduction of the vaccine, carried off more young men than did the bullets of the enemy. He did not admit that vaccination against smallpox had practically done away with that horrible disease. He did not admit that the "allopath" was making an endeavor to foster the health of the Nation, through the betterment of hygiene and sanitation. Of course not. No narrow-minded sectarian ever could find anything good in the broaded-minded "allopath," no matter what results the latter might obtain. The member of the "regular" school should no longer be termed an "allopath," as he does not confine himself strictly to such drugs as produce effects contrary to those of the disease under observation. This is evidenced in the use of vaccines, bacterins and antitoxins, as it frequently occurs that the agents of this sort do produce exactly the same conditions as are those under observation. The fact that many of this school have adopted some of the agents of the "homeopath" is another reason why he should not be termed an "allopath. The regular physician indicates his broad-mindedness, through his every endeavor to decrease the illness of the Nation, by every means possible, and every advance in medical science is to be traced to this particular school of medicine. It is this school which fos tered the germ theory and placed it in operation, thus reducing the mortality in surgical, and infective cases to the minimum. It was this school which recognized the efficacy of the antitoxins and vaccines and insisted upon their introduction and use, with the incident lessening of both epidemics and the mortality thereform. It is this school which has made the greatest strides in the use of certain chemicals for the treatment of certain specific conditions. In fact every improvement in the practice of medicine is traceable to the "regular" school. This school recognized the importance of hygiene and sanitation in the prevention of disease, and it has made every effort to see that proper measures of this sort have been taken. It would seem folly on the part of the doctor to do anything which would take work out of his hands, as do most certainly the preventive measures, but he has recognized the fact that, through prevention of disease, the health of the Nation has been conserved and the population and prosperity thereof increased. In furthering sanitation and hygiene there is sufficient for the doctor to do, even though the demand for his services in the treatment of diseases is decreased To say the least, the "allopath" has always been honest in that he has not claimed to practice something which he did not. He has not claimed to follow the narrow limits, as regards the drugs employed by him, and subsequently gone without those lines, as has been the case with some other schools. He has said that he would employ anything which it was deemed would benefit his patient, regardless of the derivation thereof. The allopath" has always been the progressive doctor. He may have objected to the acceptance of certain methods in their infancy, still practically untried, but if shown that they were efficient, any objection has been withdrawn. He has been combatted by the various sects and schools, and still has adopted many of their methods, despite the abuse which has been heaped upon him. He is, and always has been, and always will be of the dominant school of medicine, as he is of the most progressive school. SOME CHILDLESS WIVES. G. Henri Bogart, M. D., Paris, Ill. N the course of the past five years since I commenced active writing for the cause of cleaner, purer living, there has come through private correspondence, a large number of consultations from childless women, who nearing the menopause, are anxious-wildly so in many instances for relief in maternity and who have come for opinions as to the removal of this curse of Jephthah's daughter. From these cases I have selected a number of types which will illustrate various phases of this all too prevalent and regrettable feature of our higher civilization. No practitioner who has the element of human sympathy that will be spontaneously recognized by those near him, but is made the recipient of many secrets which he as father confessor must carry. At the same time, if he lack this innate power of standing as the intermediary cross-bearer, he is not fitted for the higher place in the healing art. The first case which I shall present involves more of the deeper questions of the ethical and equity rights of the individual, as well of the social whole, as related to communal good, than any other one that I have ever met. The woman is about 40 and has been married about half her life. She is a creature of the deepest sensibilities, finely educated, a splendid housekeeper, and an equal partner with her husband in business affairs, a strongly womanly woman and one best equipped by natural traits, by development of her powers and surroundings to mother that class of future citizens of which the world so much stands in need. The intensity of her maternal instincts may best be shown by a little incident which occurred some years ago, when first I met her. As we were seated on the verandah of her beautiful home a slatternly woman carrying a squalling sore-eyed baby, passed on the opposite side of the street. She forgot her speech in the middle of a sentence, her breath came in quick gasps, and her form grew almost rigid as she followed the pair with wild intensity, until they had passed around the corner. Then she sank back with a shudder and whispered: "Doctor, doctor, try and tell me something. I would gladly surrender my hopes of heaven to call that baby mine." I call her attention to its unlovely heredity, but she made reply that love. could work wonders, and that a shield of environments could be builded about it that would cover and smother its bad life-lines. I was unable to solve the matter of the removal of her sterility and with such platitudinous instructions as the woman and her husband-who shares her desires as far as is given to mere man to share-and dropped the matter with a few thoughts of the inequalities of the distribution of the world's gifts, then I lost sight of the couple who removed from the community. Then came a call for assistance from the husband. He had been from home on a business trip and returned with a well developed, obstinate case of gonorrhea, of so stubborn a character that he called for a consultation. He had been man enough to inform his wife of the true nature of his malady which he told her had been contracted while sleeping between dirty sheets." This was in all probability true so far as the condition of the sheets was concerned, but there had been something else with him between those sheets. It would seem that the gonococcus will survive but little exposure to open atmospheric conditions, and that infection from vessels, bedding and the like is almost impossible. It is to the quick death of this germ when exposed to the atmosphere that I ascribe the relative infrequency of gonorrheal ophthalmia as the germs on the fingers of the fellow who has handled infected sexual organs, die before he rubs his eyes. From the symptoms related in the letter, I at once inferred a new infection superimposed upon an old latent case and demanded full confidence from the patient. The result was a confession of an infection before his marriage, with a quick drying up "cure" (?) and no subsequent trouble save some little rheumatism, and heart trouble that had not been of sufficient severity to demand professional treatment. I recommended that the local treatment should be supplemented with the calcium and arsenic sulphides, pushed to the point of saturation, the arsenic to be dropped when the constitutional effects were shown, then renewed, the periods of medication to be continued until the disease was finally conquered with good results, as the microscope finally showed freedom from gonococci. Incidentally, another discovery was made from the examinations, i.e., that the husband was sterile, probably from occlusion of the vas deferens, though I had no opportunity for a personal examination of the patient. My original investigation of the woman's sterility had been directed to the wrong member of the family and at that period I did not know as much as I now do after several years of special investigation and study, and now in such cases it is to the man that I usually first turn for the answer to a question of sterility, at least I suspicion the male more than I do the female. Now, for the third step in this domestic tragedy.. The woman has written me and asked me pointedly, "Would I be likely to have a baby with another mate?" All the indications are that she would, though I have withheld an answer to that effect. Should I tell her the full truth, there would be three avenues open for her: She could suffer the deprivation of her absolute rights as a woman; she could separate from her husband and remarry, or she could find a congenial mate and win her desire. Neither alternate is pleasant to contemplate. Her marriage, so far as the real object of the union is concerned, has been a farce, and must continue to be a farce. The result of the infection has redoubled in the man in aggravated heat trouble, which have learned incidentally. She knows that the husband was not continent previous to marriage and though, with rare loyalty, she professes to believe the story of the dirty sheets, I am under the impression that she surmises the truth. I have withheld a direct answer, and am wondering as to the advisability of telling her the full truth; I am bearing her cross with her. On the other hand, there is to be considered her absolute right to bear a child, and the right of society to demand that she furnish a future citizen of the character that would be anticipated from her. Doctor, I am asking no advice in this case, I shall do what I eventually think to be right, but I am asking you to put yourself in my place and consider what you would do in the same condition of affairs. I recently read a paper in a prominent journal in which a noted writer says that he wishes that the journals would devote more space to reports of cases and treatment, and "less to fads, fancies and side issues, such as the sterilization of the degenerates, since such matters belong to the legal fraternity." He argues that we have no right to devote space to the consideration of prostitution and its effects, but should confine ourselves to the curing of such as get into difficulty from such sources. Fortunately for humanity, and for the profession as well, the best endeavor of medical science is devoted to the prophylactic side, and we now minister to the soul as well as to the tenement in which it dwells. Unless we give some thought to the spirit as well as to its corelated body, we shall not get very far. I think that this woman's marital tangle is as fully a matter for the sober thought of the medical man as any case of smallpox. Yet we vaccinate to prevent the lesser evil, and we quarantine the few cases which do arise, while the more terrible disease with its horrible train of woe, and wrecked homes and lives, must be suf |