868 REPORT—1899. 
The following Reports and Papers were read :— 
1, Report on the New Edition of ‘ Anthropological Notes and Queries.’ ! 
2, Report on Photographs of Anthropological Interest. 
See Reports, p. 592. 
3. The Presidential Address was delivered. See p. 861. 
4, The Personal Equation in Anthropometry. By Dr. J. G. Garson. 
5. Finger Prints of Young Children. By Francis Gatton, D.C.L., FBS. 
At the times when I published my book on ‘ Finger Prints,’ and subsequent 
works on the same subject, no material existed for determining the age at which the 
patterns of the ridges on the fingers and their numerous details became first 
established. The ridges were known to be traceable in some degree long before 
birth, but it was not known whether they had acquired, even in early childhood, 
that strange complexity of distribution which I showed to be permanent from 
youth upwards. The wish to complete my work by investigating this interesting 
physiological point was sharpened by a request for an opinion on the following 
case. The police authorities in (I will not say what country) received informa- 
tion that a baby who was heir to a great title and estate might be kidnapped for the 
sake of extorting ransom. Such cases have occurred in history, and it is needless 
to ipsist on the miserable doubts and legal difficulties that would arise if a stolen 
infant should be restored after the lapse of some time without satisfactory identi- 
fication. I was asked whether prints of the fingers of a baby would serve for 
ever afterwards to identify him, and to prove that he was not a changeling. 
An American lady —Mrs. John Gardiner, of Boulder, Colorado—kindly volun- 
teered to collect finger prints of infants for me. The following remarks are 
confined to those of her own child Dorothy, whose fingers she printed every day 
after that of her birth for a short time, then less frequently, and afterwards yearly, the 
child being now 44 years old. By selecting the best of the numerous specimens of the 
earlier dates, I compiled three sets of all the ten fingers. In the first set the age 
of the child lay between 9 days and a month. In the second, between ] month 
and 6 weeks; in the third, between 5 and 7 months. In addition, I have a fcurth 
set taken at 17 months, a fifth at 24 years, and a sixth at 44 years. 
It is easy to those who have learnt the art, and who have the necessary 
materials, to print with sharpness the fingers of children who have attained six years 
of age or upwards; but it is exceedingly difficult to print the tingers of babies. 
Far more delicate printing is needed on account of the low relief of the ridges and 
the minuteness of the pattern. At the same time, babies are most difficult to deal 
with, the persistent closing of their fists being not the least of the difficulties. 
The result is that many undecipherable blurs are made before one moderate success 
is attained, and, at the best, the print is made by a mere dab of the finger, rolled 
impressions being practically impossible. Consequently the first four sets are all 
more or less blotted, and none show more than a small part of that surface which 
it is desirable to print. 
The fifth and sixth sets are clear though pale, for it was necessary to spread 
the ink very thinly to avoid blots; otherwise they are perfectly suited for com- 
parisons. The two sets agree in every detail, and show the same order of 
complexity that is found in the ridges of adult persons; so, subject to the possi- 
bility of some minute after change, I should infer that the print of a child’s fingers 
at the age of 2} years would serve to identify him ever after. It will be interesting 
1 The book was published in November. 
