60 
On the Inheritance of the Finger- Print 
I have therefore had at my disposal two series of data (1) the earlier one, in 
which finger-prints of every finger wei-e taken, consisting of about 370 pairs of 
brothers and sisters where only the fraternal relationship can be discussed, 
(2) the later series in which only the first finger was considered but from which 
we can find, not only the fraternal relationships but also the paternal and maternal 
and to a certain extent the relationship between cousins and the relationships 
between uncles and aunts and their nephews and nieces. 
(2) Classification of Finger-Prints. 
Nearly 800 of his later collection were classified by Galton and he attempted 
new methods of counting the ridges in an effort to obtain a numerical scale for all 
types of finger-prints, not only for loops. He failed, however, to find a quanti- 
tative scale that satisfied him and he put the material completely aside some 
years before his death. In the classification of types Galton used great detail 
and an examination of the detail is most suggestive. One of the questions that 
arises in a study of finger-prints is, as we have -already indicated, whether the 
types of finger-print show a continuous variation ; we are accustomed to think in 
the first place of three distinct patterns, arch, loop and whorl ; but a minute 
examination of finger-prints at once reveals many intermediate steps and Galton 
in a very early stage of his work recognized many more gro^^ps than these and 
laid great stress on what he called " transitional cases." In 1892 he sub-divided 
patterns under .53 heads and the reproduction of these patterns forms a most 
interesting series. Of these transitional cases the most common occur among 
loops and all stages between loops and whorls can be found. Galton in his later 
work uses four types of loops (a) plain loops, (h) eyed loops " y," (c) invaded 
loops " v " and {d) hooked loops " k." Of these " y " and " v " are the more 
common and " y " is obviously the first stage in a whorl. Central pocket loops as 
Henry calls them seem to be another stage, but it is quite easy to find several 
finger-prints that might be considered either " y " loops or central pocket loops. 
Francis Galton wrote in his Finger-Print Directories, 1895, p. 100 : " The tran- 
sitional cases between loops and whorls are largely due to the presence in loops of 
a strongly marked ' y,' doubt arising whether its outline does or does not make 
a complete circuit." Galton used the word " compound " to cover these tran- 
sitional cases, but the word has been superseded by " composite " which includes 
those cases compounded of loop and whorl but where I think whorl is uppermost, 
for composites do not include what I might describe as " not plain " loops. 
By a study of the reproductions between pp. 74 and 75 in Galton's Finger- 
prints we can see how arches pass into loops through " forked " and " tented " 
arches and how " eyed " loops (Galton used the term " eyeletted " in 1892) become 
central pocket loops and central pocket loops become whorls. There is no difficulty 
in making 53 or more groups of finger-prints ; the difficulty arises when we have 
to agree where arches end and loops begin and where loops end and v,rhorls begin. 
Galton found this a difficulty when Mr Howard Collins and he were working 
together. He writes : " living at a distance apart, it was not easy at the time 
