DR. TOM A. WILLIAMS, Washington, D. C.: I don't know that we can say that the fundamental differentiation of epilepsy is the unconsciousness. That is a psychological division. The paper did not give any differential why they were regarded as epileptics at all. There was no description of the convulsion, except in so far as this formed the hysteric form of convulsion, so I don't think we are in a position to discuss the paper without more clear data of these instances. DR. WALTER B. SWIFT, Boston: I was interested in hearing about the case of stammering. That will be explained in my own paper and I have also run up against several who have done the same. I should like to ask Dr. Emerson if he considers stammering as an expression of an orgasm. DR. L. E. EMERSON, Boston: Dr. MacCurdy well remarked that this adds nothing to the understanding of epilepsy. In a certain sense this is true. I do not feel that I could add anything to a deeper understanding of epilepsy. The whole development of psycho-analytic theory, up to a certain point, has been based on the actual recovery of patients, if you do not like the use of the word cure, from particular symptoms. Then this has been generalized. Now that has opened an enormous field for ratiocination. Therefore, I am not at all sure that these conceptions will really apply to essential epilepsies or to the real epilepsies. I do not know how far our conceptions which originate in the therapeutic situation will apply to the situation which appears to be absolutely beyond therapeutics. In regard to what Dr. White said of starting from the known and going through transitional stages to the unknown, you do get insight and it may be that the condition as described in this broad way by Clark and by Stekel and others may be true, but I am not perfectly sure. I am very grateful for Dr. Allen's approval of this way of putting things because perhaps it is a defence reaction on my own part that occasionally I feel it necessary to report things I have seen with my own eyes and really experienced, instead of following my natural tendency to go off into vague philosophizing. REVIEWS PSYCHOLOGY IN DAILY LIFE. By Carl Emil Seashore. 1914, XVIII plus 226 pp., N. Y., D. Appleton & Co. This is the first volume of the "Conduct of Mind" series, the purpose of which, as stated by its editor, Professor Joseph Jastrow, in his introduction to the series, is "to provide readily intelligible surveys of selected aspects of the study of mind and its applications." The present work contains seven chapters, which were originally prepared as "semi-popular addresses." As a consequence, the book lacks somewhat in coherence, but, except in a few places, the emphasis is practical throughout. It is perhaps not surprising that the most subtle and modern part of the discussion, viz. the chapter on "Mental Law" should be the least practical in its bearing.