However, he went on to say that Moses, the Trinity and God were all a dream; Israel and the High Grade are real--the High Grade is the Lord. G. stands for God and he belongs to the G Lodge, therefore he belongs to God's Lodge. But he has a uniform of the High Grade at home, so he must be the High Grade himself. By using the symbols of his order in this way he disposes of his wife who has not treated him well, identifies himself with God (while he abolishes the regular God) and endows himself with the supremest power in a Lodge which he regards as omnipotent in the world. Another group of his ideas refer to his race. He has been put on Ward's Island as a result of the great struggle between Christians and Israel. But Israelites are the head of the Fellowship Lodge, so all Christians must follow him, the patient. This is the explanation of "Da liegt der schwarze Hund begraben!" He is like a dog in the house and he is considered to be nobody, a corpse on the floor. But he really lies here buried--the missing man of the tribe. Once off Ward's Island, therefore, he will come to life as head of Israel, and head of the omnipotent Lodge. Patiently, hopefully, he awaits rebirth. The egoism of these ideas is obvious. Wherein do the constructive factors lie? Simply in this: this expansiveness could easily be formulated directly. But he does not do so. His ideas include two objective and potentially altruistic interests his lodge and his race. He is interested in them; in fact one can probably say that it is just in so far as he is insane that the selfish determination for these interests become manifest. We have also studied two cases of recurring excitements in patients one of whom was an evident praecox, the other of doubtful classification. Both showed queer behavior during their intervals with mild indications of their ideas which gained freer expression in their attacks. These episodes showed, of course, markedly a typical feature in a tremendous amount of queer behavior and more excitement than true elation. As there was nothing in their ideas essentially different in principle from the cases already quoted, they need not be further detailed.