“It appears to me that you constantly avoid making any direct statement in regard to the problem of lay-analyses. Apparently, what you wish me to surmise now is that it would be your suggestion to withhold, as a means of revenge, as an act of punishment, so to speak, the monopoly of practising psychoanalysis from physicians, because such physicians as employ analysis, are beyond control. You would, however, permit the application of such medical activity to laymen.” I am not so sure that you surmised my motives correctly. Perhaps, I may later on be in a position to prove to you that my point of view is not as partial as all that. But be that as it may, _I strongly emphasize my demand that nobody should be permitted to practise psychoanalysis, unless he has obtained this privilege on the basis of thorough training_. Whether such a person is a qualified physician or not does not seem important to me. “What, then, are your practical suggestions?” I am not as far as that yet. I don’t even know whether I shall ever get that far. There is some other question which I wish to take up with you, and by way of introduction, touch upon a certain point. It is reported that the authorities, on the strength of suggestions made by medical bodies, may put a sweeping prohibition for the practise of psychoanalysis by laymen on the statute books. Such prohibition would naturally also hit the non-medical members of psychoanalytical societies—men and women who have undergone a very thorough training and improved themselves greatly by practice. Should such a sweeping prohibition become an actual fact, the incongruous condition would then present itself whereby people really capable of applying psychoanalysis properly, would be excluded from this practice, while on the other hand, this privilege would be extended to individuals insufficiently informed, and not specially trained for such work. Of course, no legislature aims at so absurd an effect. But the dilemma that presents itself with this piece of legislature, is neither important nor difficult. It would concern only a handful of people who would not even suffer appreciably. Analogous to measures enacted by monarchical Austria, republican Austria could also resort to exception laws. Under the Hapsburg régime, it happened that certain “quacks” whose ability in the treatment of certain diseases was convincing, were privileged _ad personam_ to treat sick people. These were mostly cases of rustic healers, who enjoyed the recommendation of one of those exalted, once so plentiful, archduchesses. However, it should be possible to assume that the benefit of such exception laws should also pertain to city inhabitants, who are recommended by mere experts.