Page:Psychopathia Sexualis (tr. Chaddock, 1892).djvu/425

 dogs, cats, and rabbits in this vile manner. Much more frequently, however, he committed sodomy on female rabbits,—the only animal that had a charm for him. At dusk he was accustomed to repair to his master's rabbit-pen, in order to gratify his vile desire. Rabbits with torn rectums were repeatedly found. The act of bestiality was always done in the same manner. There were actual attacks which came on every eight weeks, always in the evening, and always in the same way. A. would become very uncomfortable, and have a feeling as if some one were pounding his head. He felt as if losing his reason. He struggled against the imperative idea of committing sodomy with the rabbits, and thus had an increasing feeling of fear and intensification of headache, until it became unbearable. At the height of the attack there was sound of bells, cold perspiration, trembling of the knees, and, finally, loss of resistive power, and impulsive performance of the perverse act. As soon as this was done, he lost all anxiety; the nervous cycle was completed, and he was again master of himself, deeply ashamed of the deed, and fearful of the return of an attack. A. states that, in such a condition, if called upon to choose between a woman and a female rabbit, he could make choice only of the latter. In the intervals, of all domestic animals, he is partial only to rabbits. In his exceptional states simple caressing or kissing, etc., of the rabbit suffices, as a rule, to afford him sexual satisfaction; but sometimes he has, when doing this, such furor sexualis that he is forced to wildly perform sodomy on the animal.

The acts of bestiality mentioned are the only acts which afford him sexual satisfaction, and they constitute the only manner in which he is capable of sexual indulgence. A. states that, in the act, he never had a lustful feeling, but satisfaction, inasmuch as he was thus freed from the painful condition into which he was brought by the imperative impulse.

The medical evidence easily proved that this human monster was a psychically degenerate, irresponsible invalid, and not a criminal. (Boeteau, La France médicale, 38th year, No. 38.)

The following case seems to be devoid of a psychopathic basis :—