Comparing the above with the findings by previous writers we see little chance to draw safe deductions. So many of the foreign cases have been insane; they can be more nearly compared with our 7 border-line types where all sorts of physical conditions may be found. It is notable that a large percentage of our mentally normal cases are in good general condition. Defective vision in 6 cases may be only a coincidence, but perhaps resulting nervous irritation was sometimes a factor in producing misconduct. Headaches, which Stemmermann makes so much of, appear as an incident in only a small number of our cases; her emphasis on periodicity also we cannot corroborate, there are hints of it in only one or two instances, but then her cases for the most part are not comparable to ours. That 6 out of 18 females should have had severe gynecological ailments is not to be wondered at, considering the trend of their lives, but, in turn, there can be little doubt that, as in Cases 16, 18, and 21, the local irritation tended to bring about moral disabilities. MENTAL FINDINGS Considering first the question of mental capabilities we can classify our 19 normal cases as follows: Supernormal in ability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Precocious; later, still considered bright. . . . . . . . 1 Good ability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Fair ability, perhaps not quite up to the former classes. 6 Poor ability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Poor ability, hysterical type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Poor in general, but with artistic and literary ability . 1 Dull from physical causes, but later normal . . . . . . . 1