In a brief resume like this it would be impossible to name even the chief experimenters in the different countries who contributed to this period, but some names stand out so prominently that they should be emphasized, for they must be reckoned in importance with Braid's. Liebeault, whose book, _Du Sommeil_, _etc._, was published in 1866, has been called the founder of the therapeutics of suggestion. While suggestion in both waking and hypnotic states had been applied long before Liebeault's day, it was he who first fully and methodically recognized its value. We are also indebted to him for stimulating in the study of hypnosis Bernheim and other prominent investigators. Liebeault at the head of the School of Nancy was not less known than Charcot at the Salpetriere. Charcot was indefatigable in his researches, but was led away in his conclusions by artifacts. For example: three states were produced in the hypnotic subject which Charcot considered to be symptomatic and characteristic. They were catalepsy, lethargy, and somnambulism. Certain physical excitations, such as rubbing the scalp or exposing the eyes to a bright light, were thought to be all that was necessary to change the subject from one stage to another. It has since been shown that not only were the states of catalepsy, lethargy, and somnambulism produced by suggestion, but the physical stimuli were simply suggestions and signs by which the subject knew that a particular change was expected, and, in harmony with hypnotic action, the expected change came about. Not only did Charcot make this mistake, but some of his followers of the Salpetriere School continued to be deceived for years afterward. Hardly a conclusion of Charcot's remains to-day, and yet so earnest was he in his investigations and so untiring in his experiments, that many of his facts contributed much to our knowledge of the subject even if his theories have been rejected. Binet, Fere, and other followers of his have contributed much to the science and literature of the subject. The latter half of this period is not unknown to us to-day, and as the names connected with it are familiar, it remains for me to mention but one more name, that of the one who ushered in the fourth period, F. W. H. Myers.