It is held that the paralysis in the reflex cases is more limited, more persistent, and assumes special forms not observable in hysteria. The attitudes in hysterical palsies conform more to the natural positions of the limbs than do those observed in reflex paralysis. Probably the presence of marked amyotrophies in the reflex nervous disorders is the most convincing factor in separating these from pithiatic affections. These atrophies correspond to the arthritic muscular atrophies of Vulpian, Charcot, Gowers, and others, and cannot for a moment be regarded as caused by suggestion or as removable by counter-suggestion or persuasion. They are influenced, discounting the effect of time and natural recuperation, only by methods of treatment designed to improve the peripheral and central nutrition of the patient. Pithiatic atrophies are slight and probably always to be accounted for by disuse or the association of some peripheral neural disorder with the hysteria. Affections of the sudatory and pilatory systems are more definitely pronounced in reflex cases than in those of a strictly hysterical character. Some of the facts brought forward by Babinski and Froment to demonstrate the differentiation of reflex paralyses from pithiatic disorders of motion are challenged in the records of this volume by others, as for instance, by Dejerine, Roussy, Marie, and Guillain. Babinski tells us that in pithiatism, properly so designated, the tendon reflexes are not affected. He believes that even in pronounced anesthesia of the lower extremities the plantar reflexes can always be elicited and are not abnormal in exhibition. Dejerine, however, produces cases to illustrate the fact that in marked hysterical anesthesia of the feet plantar responses cannot be produced. I have personally studied cases which lend some strength to either contention. In some of these I was not able to conclude that either the use of the will or the presence of contractions in extension was sufficient to exclude the normal responses. Differences in muscle tonicity, in mechanical irritability of the muscles, and the presence or absence of fibrotendinous contractions are indications of a separation between the reflex and purely functional cases, as apparently demonstrated in some of the case records. True trophic disorders of the skin, hair, and bones observed in the reflex cases are also said to have no place in the illustrations of pithiatism.