he defeated his own ends. Thus, after seeing a girl of 17 years. of age, it was stated: "Test work with this girl was very unsatisfactory not because the girl would not co-operate, but because during the work she became a good deal confused." This was due to the very effort she made to do well. One would hesitate to judge of her capacity by the results of this interview; for it was evident that the girl was not doing herself justice. Indeed, this was so apparent, that it was hardly worth while to do more with her.

Fortunately, we were able to study this case further about two weeks after our first interview. This time she was quieter and more controlled. A comparison of the results of the two occasions shows significantly the truth of our earlier impressions. Though a grammar school graduate, on the first examination she succeeded. on the crossline test with great difficulty; on the code test she made seven errors besides omitting all the dots; she made a very poor record on the Kraepelin continuous subtraction test and three errors on the antonyms test. At the second interview the crossline, with changed lettering, was done promptly on first trial; the code with two errors but no dot omitted; the antonym test still had three errors, but the average time was somewhat better.

V. Combination of Causes: In some cases the explanation is not so simple; the problem may not be an easy one to analyze. Sometimes it is evident that there are disturbing conditions; that the mental attitude is unsatisfactory, but one does no feel sure just wherein the trouble lies. Two or more conditions may seem to be factors, and this makes it, at times, exceedingly difficult to reach any definite diagnosis.

Obvious recalcitrancy may be upon the basis of some conflict or grudge; in this respect unlike the case cited above, where no motive was ever discovered. This is well illustrated in the case of a boy, twelve years old when first seen. Everyone who came in contact with this boy felt that there was something unusual in his mental attitude; school teachers, attendants in the Home where he was being held, even his mother, commented upon this fact. He was seen in the laboratory a number of times. There, too, it was felt that the boy displayed extreme obstinacy and recalcitrancy. He would work well on a few tests, then would sham disability,

and at times refuse absolutely to co-operate. At the beginning of testing, he was decidedly surly, saying he did not like any games. He never smiled, nor, in discussing his own delinquencies, did he show any remorse or approach tears. One was sure that he was not making his best efforts. As noted in an earlier case, this boy did better on performance tests. He solved the simpler construction test in 2 minutes 5 seconds, making in all, fifteen unnecessary moves. At the expiration of 2 minutes, he himself said, "I can't do it," although, with 5 seconds more effort, he succeeded. He failed on the simpler crossline after four trials, but succeeded on the more difficult one on the first trial. In the code test, which, though difficult, usually arouses considerable interest, he refused absolutely to make any attempt.

Seen a month later, the boy not only did the simpler construction test in 30 seconds (not a very significant performance, since he may have remembered the solution), but the more difficult construction test was done in 35 seconds with not a single unnecessary move. The simpler crossline test was correct on the first trial, but the code was still a failure. This boy has been seen on numerous other occasions, at varying intervals, and we have come to the conclusion that he is quite capable and that his earlier failure was not due to lack of ability.

It was felt from the start, that in this case the mental attitude was not that of defiance, nor did the boy display a grudge-like attitude. It was simply a matter of stubbornness and recalcitrancy. After repeated interviews, it was definitely proven that this attitude was based upon a conflict regarding sex affairs, which colored this boy's reactions toward everyone. Of course, in a case of this sort, the appreciation, not only of the attitude itself, but of what causes it, is of great importance in relation to social behavior, as well as to the interpretation of test results.

Still more difficult, from the standpoint of diagnosis, is the next case presented: A little girl ten years and three months of age, was studied after she had already been very delinquent. When first seen, she was exceedingly downcast; she wept copiously and frequently. In the schoolroom she was said to be naughty and stubborn. It was known, too, that she was engaging in bad sex habits.

The most striking feature of early work with this girl was the excessive inhibitions shown both in conversation and in the schoolroom. After a few tests were done, she would put her hands over her face, avert her eyes, refuse to speak, and begin to weep bitterly. Although seen on three different occasions, on all of which the greatest kindness was shown her, the diagnosis of her mentality had to be merely a tentative one. At the first interview, she made a fairly good record on the simple picture puzzle and on the simpler construction test. She failed to solve the more difficult one, refusing to work at the end of seven minutes. Seen the next day, she failed on the simpler crossline test after four trials, refused to attempt the more difficult crossline test, would not answer any tests where the solution required the use of language, refused to do any school work.

It can readily be seen that, at this time, one could not possibly state whether this girl was unable to do the tests, whether she merely refused on a basis of recalcitrancy, whether she was dull from her bad sex habits, whether she was developing a psychosis, or whether her peculiar inhibitions were due to some mental conflict.

Seen a year later, in general her reactions were much the same. She still showed interest in performance tests where she could handle concrete material, but the tests previously failures, were still done as poorly. The girl refused to attempt Binet tests involving language, and in more difficult tests where continued effort was required, she refused to co-operate any length of time.

Just recently, more than four years after first knowing this girl, we have once more studied this peculiar problem. We find her attitude much changed. She has been for a long time in an institution, where a great deal has been done for her. At our last interview, she co-operated, apparently, as far as she was able, was friendly, and showed none of the extreme inhibitions previously so characteristic. We feel now that the results of tests are trustworthy and give us a basis for diagnosing her mentality. We find that she still does performance tests extremely well. She succeeds with the simpler crossline test, but is still unable to cope with the more difficult one. By Binet tests she grades through all

of the 10-year series and does well three of the 12-year series. She has had good school opportunities but is quite retarded in this respect. In number work she can only do problems in addition, while her reading for a girl of her age is distinctly poor. From these results we must conclude that the girl is, no doubt, subnormal.

The point of this illustration is that because of the numerous factors which entered into the situation previously, one could not fairly reach any definite conclusion nor explain satisfactorily the mental attitude of the examinee.

AN ANALYSIS OF A CASE OF KLEPTOMANIA.

BERNARD GLUECK, SENIOR ASSISTANT PHYSICIAN GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL FOR THE INSANE, INSTRUCTOR IN PSYCHIATRY, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, D. C.

INTRODUCTION.-The past two years have been very profitable ones for the science of criminology as they have brought to light two books on the subject which concretely reflect, on the one hand, the dying out of the old statistical method of studying the criminal, a method which will never tell the whole story, and on the other hand, the birth of a new kind of approach to the study of the criminal, namely the characterological approach. The study of crime or anti-social human behavior from this newer standpoint at once becomes a study of character, and demands a scientific consideration of the motives and driving forces of human conduct, and since conduct is the resultant of mental life, mental factors at once become for us the most important phase of our study. Both of these books represent epoch-making culminations of years of hard labor and scientific devotion to criminology by two eminent students Drs. Goring1 and Healy.2

Dr. Goring's book, "The English Convict, a Statistical Study," appeared in 1913, and is the result of an intense statistical study of 4,000 English male convicts, to which the author devoted about twelve years of his life. Dr. Healy's book, "The Individual Delinquent", which appeared in the early part of this year, reflects the results of thoroughgoing scientific studies of about 1,000 repeated offenders, during the author's five years' experience as

Director of the Juvenile Psychopathic Institute in connection with the Juvenile Court of Chicago. Numerous reviews of these two books have appeared in medical and criminologic literature, and we shall only touch very minutely upon the difference in the methods of approach to the subject of these two authors as they concern the subject under consideration in this paper. I can do this no better than by quoting from a critical review of Goring's book by White, as it happily touches upon our very subject-namely, stealing. "Take the more limited concept of 'thief', for example. One man may steal under the influence of the prodromal stage of paresis who has been previously of high moral character. Another man may steal under the excitement of a hypodermic attack; another may steal as result of moral delinquency; another as a result of high grade mental defect; another under the influence of alcoholic intoxication, and so forth and so on, and how by any possibility a grouping of these men together can give us any light upon the general concept of 'thief' is beyond my power to comprehend."

When one remembers that the 4,000 units with which this really marvelous statistical machinery has worked for twelve long years had nothing more in common than the fact that they were English male convicts the force of White's argument becomes quite apparent. I need not state that this view of Goring's work is not intended to detract one iota from the full measure of credit which this author deserves. His work will stand forever as one of the monumental accomplishments of the twentieth century.

Our views concerning Healy's contribution to the science of criminology will be reflected in the course of our paper, which will indicate, I trust, in a way his mode of approach to the problem, though he may not agree with me concerning the details of my interpretation of the case which I am about to report.

Definition: Like many another I dislike the term "kleptomania" and would much prefer the term "pathological stealing" to denote the condition under consideration. Pathological stealing is not synonymous with excessive stealing as one would gather from the sensational use of the term in the lay press. Neither is Kraepelin's dictum that kleptomania is a form of impulsive insanity, necessarily correct. It is obviously, however, a form of abnor