The recent work of Török (Zeits. f. Psych., xlvi) made it appear fairly certain that superficial tickle is to be referred to the pressure organs, and itch to the organs of cutaneous pain. The probability of this ascription was strengthened by Murray's failure (this Journal, xix) to confirm Alrutz' observation, of which more was made by Thunberg than by Alrutz himself, that sensations of tickle may be aroused in the regions of the skin lying between the pressure-spots and consequently insensitive to pressure. In his present paper, however, Alrutz continues to identify tickle and itch. It is impossible, he says, to draw a sharp introspective distinction between the two; there are times and places when you cannot decide which you are experiencing; there are, that is, transitions between the extreme forms. There is no introspective resemblance between either tickle or itch and light pressure (contact). Nor is there any observable likeness between tickle and prick. Itch, on the other hand, is like prick and may pass over into prick by intermediate stages.
After a review of previous work, normal, pathological and clinical, and after reporting further experiments of his own, Alrutz decides positively that itch has nothing to do with pressure. He decides, also, that it is as good as proved that tickle is altogether independent of the pressure sense. Tickle and itch thus appear as one and the same quality, differently named according to the mode of stimulation (external or internal) of the organ, of a distinct sense. The organ itself is probably a less differentiated form of the pain organ. He adds that puuctiform pain or prick, and diffuse cutaneous pain or smart, come from the same terminal organ, namely the cutaneous organ of pain.
It is difficult to see how these conclusions are to be reconciled with the results of Murray's work upon tickle. In the reviewer's opinion, Alrutz is not justified in identifying the qualities of tickle and of itch.
This is a very chatty series of very informal talks, especially on various obsessions and physical habits and their control. The object of the book is to promote such habits of mind as may make for health as well as happiness. It is preventive.
Note
The life and work of Lie"geois, professor of law, for many years in the University of Nancy and one of the founders, with Llebault and Bernheim, of the " Nancy School" of hypnotism, has been fittingly commemorated by the erection of a monument by international subscription, in his native city of Damvillers. The monument takes the form of a bust upon a pedestal of granite and stands in the square before the city hall. The formal exercises of commemoration took place on Oct. 24, 1909, in the presence of official delegates from the University of Nancy, the Institute of France, the Society of Hypnology, and men of science of France and other countries. Addresses were delivered by MM. Charles Humbert, Van Reuterghem B6rillon, Bonjeau, I/yon, Caen the mayor of Damvillers and others. lyiegeois besides doing successful work in economics, has put both psychologists and jurists in his debt by his pioneer studies of hypnotism and suggestion in their medico-legal aspects.
