15 March 1912  4O7 Brunswick Avenue  Toronto

Dear Professor Freud:

«IP4,0»I was so happy to get your letter this week.  It did my heart much good, and will be a source of fresh stimulus to me.  Thank you again and again.

First let me talk a little about my wife.  I am glad to say that she has been better in every way, except of course that the morphia is the same as before.  We have been happier this winter than ever before, and have been very, very near together.  She is also more hopeful about herself, and her attitude towards psycho‑analysis seems to have changed to some extent, though of course one cannot be sure that this latter is deep; the resistances must still be there.  Only recently she wistfully wondered whether a time would come when she might again be interested in my work and help me in it, as she used to in the days that I did only neurology.  One thing I am sure of, and that is that she has a more sincere desire to get well than ever before.  She has been for some time trying to overcome her inhi[bi]tions about writing, so that she might write a letter to you; I do not know what it will be about, but it will probably give you a better idea of her state of mind that [than] I can.  I cannot tell you how anxious I am to get her well again if possible; there is hardly any sacrifice I would not make to achieve this.  As you may imagine, her thoughts about yourself have been greatly influenced by my attitude towards you, and of late her wish has grown stronger and stronger that you should treat her, and no one else.  I do not know if this could be possible, but I am afraid that if not she will be very disappointed and disheartened.  I also have been doubting whether Maeder has enough skill and experience to deal with her resistances, and not to provoke them in a fatal way.  Perhaps I am influenced too much by her attitude in this, and also by the natural desire to get the best for one's wife.  I know it would be difficult for you to think of this, but we would make any financial arrangement in our power, including for instance the getting of a suitable suite of rooms in Vienna, with a nurse, and a doctor to attend her as often as would be necessary when the morphia is being reduced.  I feel one could safely trust her honesty about the morphia, and I have the best of reasons for saying this.  We are leaving here about the middle of May, and will get to Vienna by probably June the 14th, which I realise is your busiest and most fatiguing season.  She finds the future suspense and indecision hard to bear, and I wonder if it would be at all possible for you to say beforehand anything about the probabilities; I know you can say nothing definite until you see her.  Would it be practicable for her to go to a sanatorium until you start work in the 1st of October?  I have thought of this, but she asks why she need go to a sanatorium for this interval, and points out that if the morphia is to be reduced before psycho‑analysis it might just as well be done in England (the home of her heart), whereas any psycho‑analysis for a couple of months by someone who is not to carry it through might not be satisfactory in many ways.  It is a difficult situation.  I think I have told you that I have arranged to be in Europe until the beginning of next February.

I have been in correspondance with Rank about «MDUL»Imago«MDNM», and have arranged with him various ways in which I can help on its sale in America and England.  The prospectus looks most promising, and the journal is bound to be a great success.  It is certainly urgently needed, and even though it may not pay much at first, it will surely do so after a while.  There psycho‑analysis comes to its own, in demonstrating itself not a mere therapeutic measure that is to replace hypnotism, but as a key to the deepest problems of civilisation, and a task that will make all the sciences grateful to medicine as the sister who has taught them most.  I often wonder how soon you began to see the distant applications of pscyho‑analysis, at a time when your attention had to be concentrated on such problems as hysteria.  I expect it was pretty early, but you must have wondered whether you would ever see them put into existence. How you must rejoice to see those early dreams come true.

I am eagerly looking forward to your promised contributions, which I suppose are the first fruits of the work on religion.  The totemism one specially interests me, perhaps because it is such an essentially English subject, most of the work having been done by Englishmen.  How surprised poor Fraser will be, after announcing that "after twenty years of research on the subject my plummets have at last reached bottom", to hear how much they are still floating in mid‑sea.  The same would apply to Hartland's supposed demonstration that knowledge of the relation of sexual intercourse to conception is a relatively late idea in human development, whereas all the instance[s] he quotes are simply proof of that knowledge, being symbolic additions in the phantasy.  Still we must be thankful to such men for the wonderful material they provided us with, and at such labour.«FN1.××Hartland (1909‑10), and Frazer (1910, 1911‑15).

»

I heard about your contribution to the society for psychical research, for the secretary told me about it when asking me for one also.  I refused to send them one, for I think that you can afford to do things that someone in my junior position cannot without being misunderstood.

I have thought much over your reference to my need for concentration in writing, and suppose it partly refers to my occasional neurological articles.  They of course are written with a definite reason, which I believe to be a sound one, and have taken me hardly any time, as they all contain work done long ago, and which otherwise would be wasted.  But on looking back over the past three years I see that your reproach is also just as regards my psycho‑analytic writings.  My excuse there is that so much of my writings of late have had to be «MDUL»pièces d'occasion«MDNM», for society meetings, etc., and also that most of it has been of an elementary propagandism nature. My instincts rebel against this disordered and casual work, and I must confess to looking forward with a heavy heart to having to renew it when I go to England.  I had hoped that I had finished most of this, now that there are others to do it, and could devote myself to more serious investigations.  In England I shall try to get other men, more suited, to take up the more popular writing, but I shall probably have to do some myself at first.  Putnam has been invaluable in this way, for he has a special talent for it and has a great gift for explaining new ideas in pleasing and persuasive language.  The type of work I like doing is that of taking a small subject that can be covered completely, such as that of salt symbolism, and dealing with it fully. In saying this I am conscious that many of my articles do not support the truth of the statement, but it is so nevertheless.  I shall be very glad to have any criticism that you can spare time for on the subject of the nightmare article,«FN1.××Jones (1912j).» for I feel convinced that I should learn much from them.

I had two pieces of good luck yesterday that I must tell you about.  One was a letter from the President of the next International Congress of Medicine inviting me to serve as member of the Council of the Section of Neuropathology, «FN1.××The President of the Congress was Sir Thomas Barlow; the President of the Neuropathology Section was Sir David Ferrier; Jones is listed as a Council member representing Canada, see «MDSU»«MDUL»17th International Congress of Medicine (London, 1913): Daily Journal«MDNM» (London: John Bale, Sons and Danielsson, 1913, pp. 54, 123‑124).

» of all subjects in the world!  I don't understand why I should have received this honour, but I am very glad of it.  The other, perhaps more sincere, was a visit from a patient who had come all the way from Australia to consult me; he tells me he had read about my work in several of the Australian newspapers, which appear to be more up to date than I had thought.  I am to treat him here, his main complaint is timidity (father‑complex), and also in England, where he will follow me in June.  (I am expecting to spend two months in London this summer).  I have not done much work since Christmas, chiefly owing to the rabies anxiety. (I think I told you about my wife being treated), but am now getting on well with my monograph on the treatment of the neuroses, which is of course very easy to write.«FN1.××Jones (1913a).

»

I often think how the length of my letters must appall you; fortunately you will soon have a good respite from them.

Yours always affectionately  Jones.