H. Waitb 
431 
frequency of loops in the little fingers would make the results of comparatively 
little interest, while their insertion would greatly increase the size of the table." 
{Finger Prints, p. 119.) I have included them, however, for the sake of com- 
parison and completeness. 
My percentages are readily obtained from Tables LVI to C in the Appendix. 
TABLE Qd. 
Percentage of Oases in which the same Class of Pattern occurs in various Couplets of Digits. 
Galton* 
Waite 
Arches in 
Loops in 
Whorls in 
Arches in 
Loops in 
Whorls in 
Couplet 
Same 
Opposite 
Same 
Opposite 
Same 
Opposite 
Same 
Opposite 
Same 
Opposite 
Same 
Opposite 
hand 
hand 
hand 
hand 
hand 
hand 
hand 
hand 
hand 
hand 
hand 
hand 
Two thumbs 
2 
48 
24 
1-6 
47-4 
24-5 
„ fore-fingers 
9 
38 
20 
9-3 
36-2 
20-4 
„ middle fingers ... 
3 
65 
9 
5-8 
60-6 
10-5 
„ ring „ 
2 
46 
26 
1-9 
46-3 
27-9 
„ little ,, 
•9 
63-2 
6-3 
Thumb and fore-finger 
2 
2 
35 
33 
16 
15 
1-90 
1-85 
36-8 
35-7 
18-2 
17-5 
mid-finger 
1 
1 
48 
47 
9 
8 
1-4 
1-5 
47-0 
46-7 
10-9 
10-5 
„ ring finger 
1 
1 
40 
38 
20 
18 
•7 
•6 
41-0 
39-4 
20-8 
19-0 
Fore and mid-finger ... 
5 
5 
48 
46 
12 
11 
6-1 
5-5 
44-3 
43-5 
12-8 
12-3 
„ ring finger ... 
2 
2 
35 
35 
17 
17 
2-4 
2-3 
36-5 
35-7 
20-8 
20-2 
Middle and I'ing finger 
2 
2 
50 
50 
13 
12 
2-5 
2-4 
48-3 
47-1 
14-7 
13-7 
Thumb and little finger 
■52 
•45 
54-2 
53-6 
8-8 
8-1 
Fore and little finger . . . 
1-20 
1-15 
47-7 
47-2 
9-3 
8-1 
Middle and little finger 
ri 
ro 
63-9 
63-5 
6-5 
6-1 
Ring and little finger... 
•8 
•7 
56-1 
54-8 
12-9 
11-8 
In commenting on his results in Table Gd, Galton says: — "The agreement 
in the above entries is so curiously close as to have excited grave suspicion that 
it was due to some absurd blunder, by which the same figures were made in- 
advertently to do duty twice over, but subsequent checking disclosed no error. 
Though the unanimity of the results is wonderful, they are fairly arrived at, and 
leave no doubt that the relationship of any one particular digit, whether thumb, 
fore, middle, ring or little finger, to any other particular digit, is the same, whether 
the two digits are on the same or on opposite hands." 
It will be noticed, however, that while exactly half of Galton's eighteen pairs 
of percentages, which are worked to the nearest unit only, are in strict agreement, 
in all the other cases the result is one or two units less for two digits on opposite 
hands than for the corresponding digits on the same hand. In my figures the 
percentage for two digits on opposite hands is in every case the lower, and 
* Finger Prints, p. 120, Tables Via and Ylb. 
