Like the Btudy of sexual psychology, that of criminal anthropology is a new science. Its first international congress was held at Rome only in 1885. While at first its teachings were regarded with considerable doubt and suspicion, as with every school of thought in its polemical stage, at present scientific interest in its work is undoubtedly increasing. Italians—Lombroso, Laschi, Innacoriti, Fioretti—and others, were the innovators; France, following rapidly with such names as those of Charcot, Magnan, Lallemand, Tarde and Letoumeau. At present the school is divided into two parties; one emphasizing the pathological, or atavistic, the other the psychological, and sociological, origin of crime. The truth is, particularly of sexual crime, that both these cliques—as with rival schools of medicine and theology—will probably very shortly meet on a common ground, whence we may more hopefully look for the true cause and treatment of social crime to be evolved. But when we examine the world about us, and find it to be a vast organic mechanism of absolute relativity, one part touching another, the abnormal overlapping the normal, virtue trenching upon vice, and insane traits appearing in the nominally sane, we realize, very clearly, the difficulty, not only of distinguishing between health and disease, sanity and insanity, normality and abnormality, but, of projecting arbitrary lines of ethical distinction between what may be entirely proper and good for the individual microcosm, and that which is wrong and hurtful for the social macrocosm.