There is no doubt, however, that all these safeguards of hypnotism are almost completely lost for certain "better somnambulists," especially for certain hysterical persons, who are so completely and deeply affected by suggestion that one could misuse them in any way with comparative safety. It is very difficult to say what percentage of people belong to this category, for one cannot judge a number of persons whom one only hypnotizes once or twice. As we have seen, a person, who for a time does not appear to be hypnotizable, or only appears to be slightly hypnotizable, can suddenly become a perfect somnambulist if one ascertains the proper access to his individual suggestibility. The figures which have been accepted up to the present by the Nancy school of fifteen to twenty somnambulists per one hundred persons, and about fifty per one hundred children, will probably be found to be capable of considerable increase if sufficient practice and a deeper study into the nature of suggestion be employed (see O. Vogt's results). However, there are many grades of somnambulism, and one must not deduce from these figures that it would be easy to commit a crime undetected on every somnambulist. Liegeois has an erroneous conception of suggestion when he states that somnambulists are necessarily automatons, and I wish to point out here that Bernheim has never agreed with him in these exaggerations.

Von Lilienthal considers that one can draw a distinction between the lethargic and the somnambulic condition in law. The lethargic person alone is regarded as unconscious legally, probably in response to Charcot's statements. The somnambulist, with his power of speech and open eyes, is, as a matter of fact, just as incapable of resistance as is the lethargical person who is only apparently unconscious. I refer to what I have already said on this subject. I must, of course, except deep pathological lethargy, which does not belong to hypnotism, but rather to the category of hystero-epileptic and epileptic attacks, and which cannot be transformed into somnambulism at will, like Charcot's form of lethargy.

The most common crime is that of a sexual nature, and up to the present this is the only one which has been dealt with in the literature. This consists simply in the abuse of a deep hypnosis, for the purpose of the performance of sexual intercourse by the hypnotist, who is satisfied that his victim will not awake, and that she will remain amnesic. There is no doubt that this is possible with certain very good somnambulists - i.e., with those hypnotized persons in a condition of deep sleep who can be rendered anaesthetic, and who remain amnesic. If one considers that I was able to put nineteen out of twenty-three female attendants to sleep with amnesia and anesthesia, one will realize the danger easily. But one must not forget the danger of being found out later on. However, the danger is very great when one thinks that the two chains (superconceived and hypoconceived) act in the same brain, and that the tempter will achieve his aims more surely and more cleverly during waking suggestion. This cannot be so easily followed up by criminal law (cf. the Czynski trial). It is self-evident that murder, theft, and the like could easily be committed on such defenseless persons. They are, for all intents and purposes, in the same condition for the moment as if they were drugged, or deeply idiotic, or even apparently dead. For this purpose, however, it is necessary that the criminal has not previously awakened the mistrust of his victim for a single instant, for otherwise this alone would be sufficient to desuggest him. But after all is said and done, the advantage for the criminal is not very great over the more usual attacking an unsuspecting and defenseless person.

The abuse of posthypnotic actions of suggestion appears to be more complicated. One might wait until such a case is subjected to legal judgment. However, I am of opinion that it would be wiser to form a clear idea on the subject at once.

I have shown that these phenomena vary considerably, according to the personality. The varying individual ethical or aesthetic reaction of a normal person to unethical or unaesthetic posthypnotic suggestions is very interesting.