32 MAL-NUTRITION AND THE TEACHER'S 



are said to have been ' normal '. This, I am convinced, is 

 the only satisfactory explanation of Dr. Warner's results. 



There are many other points in Dr. Warner's data which 

 are open to serious criticism, but I shall content myself with 

 drawing attention to the want of agreement between the 

 results of the 1888 and 1892 parts of the survey and with 

 agreeing with Mr. Yule in protesting against the extra- 

 ordinary number of slips in the numbers given. 



The Galton Memoir on the influence of environment on 

 the intelligence of school children was condemned by 

 Mr. Yule on the grounds that (a) the teachers' estimates of 

 the intelligence of the children were worthless, and (d) that 

 the results were altogether at variance with those Dr. Warner 

 and Mr. Yule obtained from the survey of the former, in 

 which also the teachers were responsible for the estimates of 

 intelligence. 



I have shown that the judgement of teachers in elementary 

 schools on the intelligence of the school children, when tested 

 against place in class (of which Mr. Yule approves), turns 

 out in three lengthy investigations to be of decided value. 



Mr. Yule's citation of Dr. Warner's results has rendered 

 necessary a detailed criticism of that survey, and it has 

 been shown that the methods of examination were such 

 that the results cannot be accepted as of any value. 



I should have wished to be spared this criticism of 

 work, which, however inadequate in method and erroneous in 

 conclusion, served the useful purpose of drawing attention 

 to mentally defective children. I would willingly have 

 allowed Mr. Yule's own treatment of these papers to pass 

 unnoticed. Mr. Yule says that I have not referred to these 

 ' much more extensive surveys '. The want of reference 

 explains itself^ for these surveys were not only conducted in 

 an unscientific manner, but had been treated statistically by 



