of great devotion to them and sacrifice for them, and I would certainly rather have died than have injured them. The boys got on well with me. I was never weak with them, and I was able to allow all kinds of familiarities without any loss of respect. The older boys usually, out of class, called me by my Christian name, and I remember one writing to ask me whether he might do so, as it made him feel 'nearer' to me. A few of the lads I of course loved with special devotion. They kissed me and loved to have me embrace them. One of these was, I now know, pure uranian, and there was in his case certainly some sexual response, but though I often slept with him, when he was a lad of 17 and 18, there was never any idea in our minds of any sexual act. We are still warm friends, and always kiss when we meet. Looking back upon those days, I feel that I was a little inclined to pass on from one love to another, but each was a genuine devotion, and involved real hard work on the lad's behalf. And I know that where the lad stuck to me into manhood a real tenderness and love remain still.
"While teaching I made the acquaintance of a non-conformist minister, who, though happily married, had certainly some homogenic tendencies. He was most devoted to boys and helped me with regard to some difficult cases. It was the difficult cases that always attracted me. I had to punish these lads and my friend recommended spanking with the hand on the bare buttocks. I mention that I adopted this method, because it might have been thought specially dangerous to me. It certainly never produced in me the remotest suggestion of any sexual act, though it did sometimes produce a slight amount of sexual excitement. I disregarded this, or put it out of my mind, as I found the method most efficacious. It was capable of great variation of intensity, and the boys were always ready to joke about it. I never came across a case where any sexual excitement was produced by it. The boys whom I had to be most 'down' on almost always, however, grew fonder of me. There may be a slight and normal masochistic tendency in most boys, and perhaps the erogenic character of the buttocks has something to do with the development of affection. If so, I am inclined to regard it as normal and useful rather than otherwise, for in my experience no undesirable result was ever produced. But then, of course, there was no playing with the business; that might, I am sure, in some cases be decidedly injurious.
"One experience of my schoolmastering days is, I think, important in its bearing upon general sexual psychology. I always noticed that during the term I was specially free from 'wet dreams.' What is noteworthy is this: During term there was never anything more than a very partial sexual expression of any feeling of mine, such expression indeed as was wholly inevitable. There was therefore no actual loss of semen, and it seems clear that the 'wet dreams' were not due to mere physical pressure. The psychic satisfaction of love in this case made the complete physical expression less urgent. But it was a love of a distinctly tender kind that was needed to keep the physical from obtruding. Of that further experience has made me sure. I am, moreover, now convinced that a mutual uranian love will reach its best results, both spiritual and physical, where there is complete sexual expression.
"Of the character of the sexual dreams I have had, there is not much to be said. During the period of masochistic tendency, they were masochistic in character; otherwise they have been dreams simply of the naked embrace. Usually there has been a considerable element of ideal love in the dream. I have not more than three times at most dreamed of intercourse with one of the opposite sex. There was only in one case anything that I could call actual emotion in such a dream. The other dreams have often (not always) been dreams of real yearning, and not at all what I should call merely sensual.
"In the course of time I wanted more freedom to do things in my own way than could be obtained in a public school. I started a school of my own. The work was for a good many years very happy. I loved the boys, and they loved me. I was active, ardent, and they made a chum of me. But people got into the way of sending me awkward customers. I poured out my love on these, I used myself up for them. Unfortunately (though I was never 'orthodox') my Puritanical morality was still strong within me, my views of human psychology were too limited, and I imposed them on the boys. Some were very devoted; but, as years went by and the proportion of mauvais sujets increased, there tended to be a split in the small camp and one or two boys whom I loved deceived me terribly. To a man of my temperament this was heart-rending and from then the work was doomed. Troubles at school went along with troubles at home, and these things contributed to center my affection upon a lad who was with me, and who had given me much trouble. For some reason or other I went on believing that he would get right. Deceit was his great difficulty. He was certainly partly homosexual himself. Looking back I can see that with a wider and more charitable knowledge I could have dealt more wisely and helpfully with certain homosexual episodes of his. I am convinced now that mere sweeping condemnation of the physical is not the wholesome way of help. However, to cut the story short, all seemed at last to go well, and the lad was growing into a young man. Our love deepened, and we always slept together, but quite ascetically. Later, when quite in his young manhood he had left school, there was, unfortunately, misunderstandings with his parents, who forbad him to sleep with me. What followed is of some importance. Up till then, though certainly his affection seemed ardent, I had observed no sexual signs on his part. I had been quite frank with him as to mine. He was then 19, and I thought old enough to have things explained to him. Sleeping with him I had found peaceful and helpful, and more than once he told me that it greatly helped him. But after we were forbidden to sleep together, I found the passion in me more difficult to control, and it suddenly leaped out in him. We were still, however, rather ascetic, though we used to kiss each other, and we used to embrace naked. This produced emission not infrequently with me, but only once with him, though always powerful erection. I would not allow any friction. Perhaps this was a mistake. A more complete expression might have helped him.
"All my life I had been hungry for a complete response, and at one time the lad thought he could give it. He was then nearing 20. 'I have never been so happy in my life,' he said. It was a blow to me when I found he had mistaken his own feelings, but I was quite ready to accept what love he could give. I also never dreamed of any sort of insistence on sexual expression. With such love as he could give I was quite ready to make myself content. 'The true measure of love,' wrote a uranian schoolmaster to me once, 'is self-sacrifice'; not 'What will you give?' but 'What will you give up?' Not 'What will you do for him?' but 'What will you forego for his sake?' I quote this gladly, for the conventional English moralists regard an invert as a kind of deformed beast. I can only say that I tried to realize the ideal which these words express. No 'moralist' would have helped me one whit. The parents, also, separated us. They have done much harm by their mistake. How difficult it is for parents to allow freedom to their children! Their ideal is successful constraint, not free self-discovery. But in spite of them, and in spite of the separation, I know that my friend and I have helped each other.
"There is one fear parents have which I believe is unwarranted. As far as I have seen, I do not conclude that the early expression of homosexual love prevents heterosexual love from developing later. Where this love is a part of the individual's inborn nature, it will show itself. I do, however, believe that a noble homogenic love in early life will sometimes help a lad to avoid a low standard of heterogenic attachment. The Greeks did well, at their best time, in cultivating and ennobling the homogenic love. Amongst us, as can be understood by all who know the working of society taboos, it is the baser forms that are unhindered, the noblest forms that are debased.
"We urnings are, I think, dependent upon individual love. Many of us, I know, need to work for an individual to do our best. Is this the outcome of the woman in the uranian temperament? And the tragedy of our fate is that we whose souls vibrate only to the touch of the hand of Eros are faced with the fiercest taboo of all that can give our lives meaning. The other taboos have been given up one by one. Will not this, the last of the taboos, soon vanish? I have known lives darkened by it, weakened by it, crushed out by it. How long are the western moralists to maim and brand and persecute where they do not understand?"
The next case belongs to a totally different class from all the preceding histories. These—all British or American—were obtained privately; they are not the inmates of prisons or of asylums, and in most cases they have never consulted a physician concerning their abnormal instincts. They pass through life as ordinary, sometimes as honored, members of society. The following case, which happens to be that of an American, is acquainted with both the prison and the lunatic asylum. There are several points of interest