Hypnotism has, moreover, been frequently made the study of medical students; from 1888 to 1890 lectures were delivered about it in Berlin by the late Professor Preyer, and in Freiburg-in-Baden by Miinsterberg. It was more frequently mentioned in lectures on other subjects, as, for example, by Jolly in his clinical discourses on psychiatrics. But as a rule hypnotism did not maintain a prominent position in university lectures, any more than psychology, psycho-therapeutics, and medical psychology in general. Hypnotism and suggestion were for the most part taught in classes held independently of the universities. Among lecturers on the subject in Berlin I may mention Hirschlaff, Vogt, Georg Flatau, and J. Grossmann.

In the winter of 1904-05 I myself gave a series of lectures on psycho-therapeutics in connection with the course promoted by the central committee for post-graduate students; in those lectures I dealt with the methods of treatment by hypnosis and suggestion.

In other countries also lectures on hypnotism have been given at universities, as at Zurich by Forel. In Paris, Berillon has delivered lectures on hypnotism in conjunction with Jennings and Farez. Lehmann, a distinguished psychologist at Copenhagen, has, in his lectures there, dealt with the psychological significance of hypnotism. Joire has lectured on hypnology in Lille, and Tokarski in Moscow. In short, we find universal and strenuous endeavours to throw the light of science on hypnotism, and attract fresh investigators to this field of inquiry.

Much documentary evidence in favour of hypnotism has been collected in Germany. The propriety of utilizing hypnosis in the production of a literary work has been discussed by Franzos, who collected and published a number of opinions on the subject. Unfortunately, Franzos, to further his object, made use of many highly-esteemed names in the German professional world, among others that of Helmholtz, who openly admitted that he had never troubled his head about the matter. At the same time we must not lose sight of the instructive and detailed work which we owe to Forel, Eulen-burg, Krafft-Ebing, and Preyer. Another collection of documents, dealing more especially with the therapeutic side of the question, was published by J. Grossmann. This, I am sorry to say, omits some names - for example, Preyer's - but several of the papers contained in it are of great value. In 1902 the Prussian Minister of Education invited the Council of Prussian Physicians to institute an inquiry into the therapeutic value of hypnosis.

At the same time the presidents of the various governmental districts were requested to report on the extent to which hypnosis was carried on by unqualified persons.

It cannot be denied that hypnosis is frequently practised by laymen, and that, too, in a very unscientific manner. I need only point to the public exhibitions of hypnotism which take place from time to time in spite of all prohibitive measures. Advertisements announcing instruction in hypnotism constantly appear in the daily press, both at home (Germany) and abroad. There is an American institute which has, undoubtedly, been the greatest offender in this respect; for years past its widespread advertisements have held out to prospective pupils a means of learning the art of hypnotizing, whereby they should be able to influence their fellow-men in wondrous wise. This institute offers its instruction in written and in printed form. But putting on one side this unscientific treatment of hypnotism, we must not forget that numerous popular, and at the same time excellent, treatises have appeared on the subject, and popular exposition must not be confused with unscientific exploitation. Many of the authors of these popular works are scientists of some repute, as, for instance, Eisler, the author of Zur Psychologie der Hypnose, an essay which appeared in a South-German paper; there are many other popularizers of hypnosis who could be mentioned, but I need only name such men as Max Hirsch, Sjostrom, and Newbold of Philadelphia.

Hypnotism has not been without its votaries in literature. In former days animal magnetism formed material for romances. I need only call to mind a short play by Iffland, called Der Magnetismus; or to the writings of Alexandre Dumas and Balzac, the latter an enthusiastic upholder of animal magnetism, as evinced in his story of Ursule Mirouet. According to Witkowski, Ben Jonson's comedy, The Magnetic Lady, was produced one hundred years before Mesmer was thought of, and in it a somnambulistic clairvoyante played a prominent part. Novelists of a later date have also brought hypnotism into play. This we see in Claretie's Jean Mornas, Belot's Alphonsine, and Achille's Un Raffini. Others to be mentioned are Epheyre and Valdes, the latter for his La Prise du Regard. But without doubt, George du Maurier's Triiby caused most stir. Of German productions of a similar nature I may mention Meding's Unter fremden Willen and Proll's Moderner Totentanz. Haas tells us that Catholic literature has been influenced by hypnotism, but according to our authority the modus operandi seems to have been somewhat incomprehensible. Hypnotism has often been utilized by playwrights; for example, in Sardou's Sorciere, a piece in which Sarah Bernhardt appeared.

Other plays to be mentioned in this respect are Kurt Abel's Der Hypnotiseur and Dr. FeodorofFs comedy, Die Hypnotische Suggestion, a play produced in 1896 for a Russian charity, and in which all the doctors connected with the fund appeared. It stands to reason that caricaturists and satirists have not failed to make use of the humorous side, and certainly it would be difficult to find a subject lending itself more readily to caricature. This fact has kept many a person from studying hypnosis. A number of pretty songs depicting hypnotism from a humorous point of view is to be found in Korb's well-known Song-book for German Physicians and Scientists.