H. Waitb 
445 
any other class found from any of the Tables, while the correlation coefficients have 
five exceptions to this general rule. 
(d) The contingency coefficients given in Table 8, where the two hands are 
taken together, are, with two exceptions, greater than the corresponding coefficients 
in other parts of Tables 8 and 9. The exceptions are (1) the contingency co- 
efficient -234 for small loops with large loops of Table 8 is slightly less than those 
in Table 9 ; and (2) the coefficient -503 for small loops with whorls in Table 8 is 
rather less than that for whorls (right) with small loops (left) of Table 9. 
A further study of the above Tables shows that : — 
Large loops are closest to arches. 
Arches „ „ whorls. 
Whorls „ „ small loops. 
Small loops ,, „ whorls and then to arches. 
Composites „ „ small loops and then to arches. 
The suggestion thus arises that arches and whorls have the closest natural 
resemblance to intermediate sized loops, and also that the " natural order " of the 
classes of finger-prints is : — 
(1) Large Loops, (2) Arches, (3) Whorls, (4) Small Loops, (.5) Composites. 
This is more clearly seen from the following arrangement of the contingency 
coefficients. 
TABLE 10. 
Contingency Coefficients of Right Hand. 
Large 
Loops 
Arches 
Whorls 
Small 
Loops 
Composites 
Large Loops 
1 
•246 
•162 
•166* 
•128 
Arches ... 
•246 
1 
•335 
•,305 
•154* 
Whorls 
■162 
•335 
1 
•408 
•137 
Small Loops 
•166 
•305 
•408 
1 
•228 
Composites 
•128 
•154 
•137 
•228 
1 
TABLE n. 
Contingency Coefficients of Left Hand. 
Large 
Loops 
Arches 
Whorls 
Small 
Loops 
Composites 
Large Loops 
1 
•309 
•236 
•120 
•103 
Arches ... 
•309 
1 
•274 
•3.35* 
•162 
Whorls 
■236 
•274 
1 
•419 
•244 
Small Loops 
•120 
•335 
•419 
1 
•311 
Composites 
•103 
•162 
•244 
•311 
1 
Coefficients which do not agree with the proposed " natural order. 
57—2 
