OCTOBEE 5, 1906.] 



SCIENCE. 



435 



one thing and to give reasons for the judg- 

 ment another.' 



The graphologists who tried these same 

 documents only succeeded in 60 to 65.5 per 

 cent. (The * ignorants ' averaged 64.4 per 

 cent, of correct answers practically the same. 

 P. F.) 



In submitting to ' ignorants ' a group of 

 writings from distinguished and from medi- 

 ocre intelligences the answers were 78 right 

 and 79 wrong, i. e., pure chance. " In fact, 

 how," says Dr. Binet, " is one not endowed 

 with intelligence to discover it in the writing 

 of another" (!). 



Chapter XX. : Conclusions. 



The signs that indicate age and sex are not 

 constant. The ' ignorant ' can comprehend 

 these signs, but less well than the graphologists 

 (by about 0.05 per cent., P. F.). The same is 

 the case with intelligence. Dr. Binet's con- 

 clusion is : " It is possible for graphologists 

 (1) to read intelligence (2) in hand-writing. 

 (1) That is, some graphologists. Graphology 

 is not to be confounded with graphologists. 

 Had we not employed Crepieux-Jamin, Yie 

 and Humbert the conclusion as to graphology 

 would have been more severe. (2) Certain 

 intelligences are more revealed than others. 

 The degree of intelligence, genius and talent 

 is hard to determine." 



' In short there is some truth in graphology 

 but the graphologist's method is not infallible ' 

 (and is not sufficiently explained to give it a 

 place as a science, P. F.): 



Part IV. : Character in Handwriting. 

 , Chapter XXII. : Experiment with the wri- 

 ting of criminals. 



Fourteen honest people and eleven criminals 

 contributed the writing studied. The experts 

 were Crepieux-Jamin, Vie, Eloy, Paulhan, 

 Varinard and Mme. de Salberg. 



Chapter XXV. : A gallery of murderers and 

 their writing. 



Vidal. — Assassin of women. (His portrait 

 is excessively made and repulsive. P. F.) 



Eight lines of an autobiography written by 

 him in prison. From details of his life Binet 

 portrays him as cunning, cowardly, hypocrit- 

 ical, vindictive, boastful, lazy, violent, with 



low intelligence. The following diagnoses of 

 character in handwriting are given with full- 

 ness in the translated words of the writers 

 because it is the fairest test of the claims of 

 graphology. The words in parentheses refer 

 to the writing, the others to the writer. 



Crepieux-Jamin says : " Vivid imagination 

 without grace (inequalites in direction and 

 size, faulty capitals, backhand, large discord- 

 ant movements, letters too high) associated 

 with an activity of a low order in which agita- 

 tion (unevenness in size and direction, etc.), 

 discontinuity (bond of junction of words and 

 syllables retarding movement), mediocre (vul- 

 gar without relief) and superficial (hesitating, 

 rounded, without relief). He deceives and 

 procrastinates (uneven size, discordant spa- 

 cing), purpose behind his expansiveness (back 

 handed and sober with large discordant move- 

 ments). Lying, from too much imagination, 

 is habitual (very uneven size and direction, 

 sinuous and hesitating, too much raised). 

 Lacks reliability (very uneven size and direc- 

 tion, without relief). Not generous (back- 

 hand and studied soberness), not good (back- 

 hand, turning left, letters too high), but 

 selfish. Proud (too high), not incapable, ac- 

 cidentally, of heroism. Feeble energy (' t's ' 

 feebly crossed if at all, hesitating, slow and 

 uneven). Inconsistent. Gentle and violent 

 (curves with many discordances), sensual and 

 lazy (thick letters, heavy strokes). A nature 

 unbalanced." 



Dr. Binet praises the portrait but thinks it 

 does not go far enough. 



Vie says of this same specimen : " The 

 writing is of a young girl (?) of tem- 

 perate character (!). Principal characteristic 

 not sentimentality, though she is capable of 

 affection, and of altruism ( ?) but her emo- 

 tions are controlled. Has sang froid and is 

 mistress of herself. Principal desire is to 

 please, (?) natural to her elevated tastes (!). 

 She does not exaggerate modesty, but her 

 pride is subjective, for her simple manner 

 does not abandon her in her conduct of her 

 life. She is timid, her lack of impulse does 

 not permit her frankness to follow its natural 

 course but obliges it to recur to diplomacy. 



