He stated at his hearing that no one had the right to send him back. At that time even he conveyed the impression of being not quite normal and was let off with his arrest only. Later he refused again to go on guard duty, saying, “You have nothing to say at all. Perhaps you will find out that we shall meet each other again in hell tomorrow morning.” He was taken before the physician, who considered him mentally inferior and not entirely appreciative of the nature of his acts. He was told that the death penalty would meet such behavior, whereupon he remarked, “I am not afraid of the death penalty,” staring excitedly at the officer and trembling throughout his body. It seems that he had already made an impression of mental inferiority in the troop, and had once before said to an officer who wanted to send him to the front, that he would not go; this had been regarded as almost a breach of discipline. He had been in the habit of not reacting to the calls of his superiors, and had smiled at their reproaches. He seemed to hold the opinion that not even a company commander had power to order him to go back. Examined in the clinic he held to the same opinion, that there was no need of his going back; that they took volunteers; and that he wanted to remain at the front. On the day of the deed, he had drunk a rye whiskey. He had shaken off the non-commissioned officer because the leader had seized him by the throat. In the clinic he often smiled and wrinkled his forehead. He gave evasive and inadequate answers. Asked about oaths and perjury, he remarked, “I prefer to remain silent.” He said that one of his sisters was a little stupid. Study of his previous history indicates that Friedrich L. had formerly been a quiet and steady man, although he often had attacks of rage, breaking out upon sudden excitements. As to his capacity in school, nothing could be learned, since the Russians had taken the school registers away. The analysis of this case seems to reduce to the question of feeblemindedness and schizophrenia, unless some form of inborn qualitative inferiority of mind be preferred as the diagnosis. On the whole, possibly, the diagnosis of feeblemindedness seems preferable. The entire symptom picture seems to relate to the patient’s one mental attitude about sticking at the front, _ruat coelum_. A French soldier who admired Germans. =Case 48.= (LAUTIER, 1915.) A man with the extraordinary first name of _Agapithe_ (Laurent insists on the frequency of strange first names in degenerate families) came from Val-de-Grâce to Villejuif June 5, 1916, with the diagnosis of mental weakness, interpretative ideas of persecution, mental excitement, recrimination, logorrhoea, and a tendency to revengeful reactions. On arrival the patient said he must be in an insane asylum because he heard _spiritiques_ talking together. He, however, was “not insane” and began expounding his plans for revenge with the words “Kill,” “Cut-throat.”