You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
16 January 1920
111 Harley Street, London
Dear Professor,
I was very glad to get your letters dated Dec. 23 (which crossed one of mine)1 and Jan. 6, which arrived yesterday.
You may rest quite assured, as you must be already from talking with Rank, that I have no trace of harsh feeling towards him or Abraham. Some momentary impatience on my part, of no importance, must have produced the impression on you. I am entirely devoted to every member of our committee (of Eitingon I cannot speak as yet, but I am greatly looking forward to knowing him).
I wonder how poor Von Freund is getting on. It has just been decided that my Father has a carcinoma in the sigmoid flexure (colotomy, and secondary growths), and probably has only a couple of months to live (which makes my visit to Vienna at Easter uncertain). I am very fond of him, so that it is extremely painful, and I am grateful that I have such a dear wife to help me bear it.
Two days ago I had a rather warm letter from Abraham, protesting against the Hague. I am writing to him on the following lines. One has to balance the necessity of enabling the committee members, and those near us, to attend with the great desirability of making it accessible (? passports) and attractive for the Westerners' (explaining the political and financial reasons). Of the two, the former is of course the more important, and would be a decisive reason against Holland if it made their coming impossible. But if it is possible for them, one can ask greater sacrifices from them deliberately than from the others, because of their greater good-will and devotion. I put the question to our society last night. They had no personal national feelings against Berlin, but pointed out (a matter that had escaped me) that it would harm the cause greatly in England by reinforcing the view of ψα as a German decadent science, and not an International movement which we want it to be; they also pointed out many technical objections of an obvious nature. My own opinio