388 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



Belgium, Switzerland, the United States and the majority of the 

 South American republics, but in at least some of these cases the gov- 

 ernmental acceptance of the system does not mean an extensive prac- 

 tical use, a condition of affairs especially true in the United States, 

 where the governmental acceptance means merely an official sanction 

 and where each state, or even each municipality, may employ its own 

 methods of recording and registering criminals, quite independently 

 of its neighbors. In this country the main reliance is placed upon 

 photographs and descriptions, sent to various police headquarters in 

 the form of little handbills, and although one sees occasionally among 

 the descriptive part of these a set of Bertillon measurements (without 

 further designations), it is very doubtful if in cities of moderate size the 

 police authorities have any definite idea of their significance, or possess 

 the necessary instruments for obtaining these measurements and thus 

 verifying the data furnished. In England the Bertillon system is ex- 

 tensively employed, although in a somewhat modified form, to which is 

 appended, at present as a supplementary system, that of Galton, to be 

 described below. On October 21, 1893, a departmental committee was 

 appointed by the home secretary, the Hon. H. H. Asquith, to inquire 

 into the various methods of identification of criminals, and an official 

 report was presented by them on February 12, 1894, and published as 

 a Bluebook (C. 7263). The recommendations embodied in this report, 

 and adopted in full by the English government, were as follows (para- 

 phrased) : 



I. To photograph criminals as at present, the photographs to consist of 



both a front and profile view, taken on separate negatives, and not 

 by means of a mirror, as heretofore. 



II. To employ the first five of the Bertillon measurements, as follows, ex- 



pressed in millimeters: 



1. Length of head. 



2. Breadth of head. 



3. Length of left middle finger. 



4. Length of left forearm. 



5. Length of left foot. 



III. To take the finger prints by Mr. Galton's method. 



IV. To add a brief description including the height in feet and inches, color 



of hair, eyes and complexion and distinctive marks, the latter in a 

 fixed order, beginning with the head, then the hands and arms, then 

 the body, and lastly the legs and feet. 



With regard to that portion of the recommendation which concerns 



the Bertillon system the committee gave its unqualified approval to 



the use of the first five categories as given above, but felt that the 



further subdivisions (height, length of little finger and color of eyes) 



were rather unsatisfactory. As stated in the report : 



The length of the little finger is closely correlated with the length of the 

 middle finger; in most cases where the one is long, the other is long also. 

 The heiglit again is a very unsatisfactory measurement; it is subject to varia- 



