2 May 1919  69 Portland Court  London W

Dear Professor:

«IP4,0»It was a pleasure to get a letter from you direct, a sign of the moving times.  I shall be very glad to know what your personal plans are likely to be for the summer, whether you stop work as usual in July, if you go to Switzerland, etc.  As to the Congress, it is highly important that it should take place, even if small, and say at Interlaken if Holland is impossible for the Viennese.  Otherwise we shall not have the much‑needed and essential authority to start the English journal and series; for I rely on the prestige of the Congress in dealing with any difficult Americans.  And it is about that that I am now chiefly writing, to ask your advice and decision on the following matter.

Last year Tannenbaum, who is a practitioner of no good standing in N. Y., asked my support for a journal of ps‑a which he was quite ready to bring out, saying he even had all the necessary subscribers etc.  My first question was whether it was to be strictly Viennese, to which he answered satisfactorily and sent me articles he had written against Jung.  I then begged him to postpone his plans till after the war, saying that there was already Jelliffe's «MDUL»Ps‑A Review«MDNM», that there was no more room for a private one, that in any case I hoped as soon as possible to start an official organ, for which we should unite all our forces, and promised him (perhaps rather rashly) that if he joined us his sacrifice would be taken into account; he now claims the fulfilment of this promise.

As I think I told you already, my idea was that I should be assisted by an editorial board consisting of two English and three Americans, the latter being Brill, MacCurdy, and Tannenbaum.«FN1.××Samuel Tannenbaum (b. 1874), M. D. 1898 Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, N. Y., charter member of the New York Psychoanalytic Society (12 February 1911).

»  On sending this suggestion to Brill he wrote as follows (march 7th): "I am extremely pleased with what you tell me about the journal and I assure you that I'll assist you in everything possible.  I spoke to Frink and others who are quite pleased with the idea.........As to Tannenbaum I would advise you to leave him out.  I am sure the Journal will be harmed through his collaboration.  It will certainly keep others away.  Tannenbaum is not affiliated with any neurological or psychiatric society.  He is associating with a rather questionable crowd, as W. J. Robinson,«FN1.××William J. Robinson (1867‑1936), born in Russia, M. D. 1893 New York University Medical College, founder and editor of «MDUL»Medical Critic and Guide«MDNM».» a Russian Jew of the Bolshevik type who is editing the "Critic and Guide" and similar stuff, a most unscrupulous person, and G. S. Viereck,«FN1.××George Sylvester Viereck (b. 1884 Munich), American editor and writer.» the German‑American writer who has been very notorious during the war.  He is undoubtedly a bright fellow and a good writer, but no one has any confidence in him here, and he has hardly ‑‑ if any ‑‑ recognition among the better class of physician........ I would suggest that there should be a sort of reorganisation of the International V., with an English‑American branch located in London and sub‑branches in all English‑speaking countries.  It would be very good to keep the Headquarters at Vienna".

(There is of course no need for a London depot of this kind, and my own opinion is that the headquarters should be in Geneva).  I then asked him if we could drown Tannenbaum's bad name by having a large list of about twenty.  Naturally Brill's opinion on this matter is «MDUL»massgebend«MDNM» [authoritative], as he knows the American feeling so well.  He replies (April 16th): "I have no doubt at all that we can make the journal a success.  I would prefer to have no committee at all, only "Edited for the International Psychoanalytical Association by Ernest Jones".  I have no doubt at all that if you should put Tannenbaum's name in it at all it would do harm.  Since I wrote to you last I have sounded a number of the men about him by making some remarks as "Well, he understands his work", etc., and they all jumped on me (slang for strong criticism).  So I feel that the best solution would be, as long as you have to put him in, to mention no names at all."

Now what do you think should be done.  I do not want if possible to make an enemy of Tannenbaum as regards the «MDUL»Journal«MDNM», but I think that Brill's solution (of which I had thought myself) is the only feasible one.

Next week I am lecturing at the University of London on «MDUL»Alltagsleben«MDNM» and before a society of shell‑shock doctors on how to use dreams in the analysis.  Things are very alive here in psychopathology.  At present I am acting as chairman, and Flügel as secretary, of the committee of the British Psychological Society, which is being re‑organised.  A group has been formed for medical psychology, with over a hundred members, who are shewing great interest.  Naturally psycho‑analysis is well represented in the discussions, as you may imagine, and it is taking good root.

Yours always affectionately  Ernest Jones.

«PG»