In the end of January, 1907, an Austrian Association for the Protection of Mothers was founded in Vienna, under the presidency of Dr. Hugo Klein. To the committee of this Society there belong, Siegmund Freud, Rosa Mayreder, Marie Eugenie delle Grazie, Professor Schauta, and about forty other well-known persons, physicians, lawyers, schoolmasters, and many women. In the meeting at which the Association was founded, Dr. Ofner spoke regarding the legal rights of illegitimate mothers and children, and Dr. Friedjung regarding the protection of nursing infants. In the United States also an Association for sexual reform has been founded, the so-called “Umwertungsgesellschaft” (Revaluation Society), the principal aim of which is the complete re-estimation of all values in the amatory life, and the introduction of a more ideal view of love. The President of this American Association is Emil F. Ruedebusch; the secretary, Mrs. Lina Janssen; the meeting-place of the society is Mayville, in the State of Wisconsin. Regular evenings of discussion are fixed, on which questions of especial interest are debated. [In Holland also an Association for the Protection of Mothers has been founded; its name is “Vereeniging Onderlinge Vrouwenbescherming.”] In the newspaper _Mutterschutz_ (1905, No. 9, pp. 375, 376), we find a report of the meeting of the American Association held on October 8, 1905, when the topic of discussion was: =What is the true nature of marriage?= The answer ran as follows: Is it the family (parental) relationship?--No; for a married couple may have no children, may not desire to have children, and can, none the less, be thoroughly married. Is it the common home, domestic life?--No; for husband and wife may live their whole life in a hotel, and, none the less, be thoroughly married. Is it the lifelong community of material interests?--No; for man and wife can keep their property separate, if they wish to do so. Is it mutual assistance and a state of comradeship throughout life?--No. When a conjugal union is the exact opposite to this, we speak of a bad husband and a bad wife; they are, none the less, man and wife. Does it signify a contract for a lifelong exclusive love?--Certainly not; if marriage signified that, all Christians would be opposed to this institution. And yet these are the things which, according to the common estimation, make up the nature of marriage, whenever the question is discussed in a manner which is regarded as “respectable” and “decent.”--As a matter of fact, there is nothing respectable or decent in this mystification. What is it, then, in which the true nature of marriage is to be found?--It is the possession of a human being for lifelong exclusive sexual service.