Dupuytren and Delpech state that the tissue formed in a cicatrix is never converted into true skin--the _rete mucosum_ when once destroyed never being re-formed. It contains no sebaceous glands, sweat glands, or hair follicles, and is but slightly vascular. This may account for the white colour of ordinary cicatrices, but even to this rule exceptions may be taken, and dark brown patches of pigment have been known to mark the situation of old lacerated wounds. It must be remembered also that in irregular wounds and in incised wounds which may heal with an uneven joint, that portions of skin may become embedded or grow into the scar tissue and give rise to difficulty in forming an opinion. I have seen a well-defined dark coloration of the skin continue for three months after the application of a mustard plaster, followed at the time by desquamation. Tattoo Marks.--With regard to tattoo marks, the question of their disappearance gave rise to considerable discussion in the celebrated Tichborne case. On this subject the experiments of Hutin, Tardieu, and Casper appear to point to the fact “_that tattoo marks may become perfectly effaced during life_,” but that after death the colouring matter with which the marks were made may be found in the lymphatic glands. This is especially the case when vermilion is used. The most permanent marks are made with Indian ink, powdered charcoal, gunpowder, washing blue or ink, and vermilion. These are given in the order of their permanency. Hutin found that in 506 men who had been formerly tattooed, the marks had disappeared from 47 of the number. Not only does permanency depend upon the colouring matter used, but also upon the depth to which it has penetrated. If superficial, it may gradually become effaced. If the material be carried down to the papillæ, it will remain permanent, and can only be removed in such a way as to leave a scar. But besides the spontaneous disappearance of tattoo marks from the lapse of time, these marks may be artificially removed, and in such a manner as to prevent the possibility of a definite opinion being given as to their primary character. The presence of a scar in the situation of a well-known tattoo mark is suspicious. Thus, the Claimant had a scar on a part where it was sworn that Arthur Orton had been tattooed. The application of strong acetic acid, potash, hydrochloric acid and glycerole of papain appears to be the means adopted for the removal of tattoo marks. Efforts are made to remove superficial tattoo marks by removing the particles with needles. Tattoo marks according to their position and design are useful evidence of identification.