Otto S., at present courier, otherwise, land-owner.”
As for this Commercial-Counsellor P., P.’s son stated that his father had been dead for three years and a half.
S. gave himself out in T—— as a land-owner, falsifying his name, asking for beer to the amount of a mark a day, borrowing from his landlady ten marks, paying nothing, but remaining on friendly terms with the landlady and her women lodgers, making a contract with a superintendent ostensibly for his estate, and borrowing money from him.
Observed in the clinic, he said he was a bank representative and had been very nervous since being divorced in 1911. The divorce was due to his wife’s adultery. Sometimes he would not know really what he was doing, once even tried to shoot himself, and again once threw a burning lamp into his wife’s face without knowing it.
He had gone to the City of T—— without furlough in October because others used to, too. Only five days later had he noticed that his troop was no longer there; and upon inquiring about the troop he could find nothing as to its whereabouts.
He had been a heavy drinker and was always somewhat intoxicated, which, according to the patient, made him forget everything. He had drunk 20 glasses of beer and liquor daily. He wrote to P. because he knew his father.
As for the frauds, he said he knew nothing about them. He did not know even the baker from whom he had gotten the cakes. In fact, he had been drunk the whole day long.
He said that he had learned badly in school and had not passed any examinations. In active service he had already been convicted of drunkenness once. Referring to his treatment by injections, he said he would rather be dead. He had only sought diversion in looking over estates. Both his ability to reckon and his memory had suffered greatly. He and another patient eloped from the clinic one day but were captured a few hours later.
Remarks: Details are lacking as to the physical and laboratory side of this case. On the whole, there appeared to be no convincing features of paresis or cerebrospinal syphilis. The phenomena are very possibly in part alcoholic. There appeared to be no sensory disorders, and in particular no hallucinations. The intellectual disorder is chiefly amnestic. There is little or no evidence of emotional abnormality. The curious conduct seems hardly to indicate a primary disorder of will. The main feature psychologically appears to be amnesia coupled with an inability to reckon. To be sure, the letters are written externally in sufficiently good form; the amnesia does not appear to extend to details. It is a question of whether the disorientation which one suspects is not merely amnestic. On the whole, however, it would appear that there must have been at various times disorder of consciousness, as indeed is indicated by the patient’s own account of his ignorance of the cake-roebuck episode.