called, in a sort of way, a 'type'. The deviations from this type would then be produced by innumerable small influ- ences, partly physiological, partly physical and social, acting for the most part independently of one another, and result- ing in a Law of Error of the usual description. Under such restrictions and explanations as these, there seems to be no reasonable objection to speaking of a French or English type ar mean. But it must always be remembered that under the present circumstances of every political nation, these somewhat heterogeneous bodies might be subdivided into various smaller groups, each of which would frequently ex- hibit the characteristics of such a type in an even more marked degree.
§ 18. On this point the reports of the Anthropometrical Committee, already referred to, are most instructive. They illustrate the extent to which this subdivision could be carried out, and prove,—if any proof were necessary,—that the discovery of Quetelet's homme moyen would lead us a long chase. So far as their results go the mean 'English' stature (in inches) is 67.66. But this is composed of Scotch, Irish, English and Welsh constituents, the separate means of these being, respectively; 68.71, 67.90, 67.36, and 66.66. But these again may be subdivided; for careful observation shows that the mean English stature is distinctly greater in certain districts (e.g. the North-Eastern counties) than in others. Then again the mean of the professional classes is considerably greater than that of the labourers; and that of the honest and intelligent is very much greater than that of the criminal and lunatic constituents of the population. And, so far as the observations are extensive enough for the purpose, it appears that every characteristic in respect of the grouping about a mean which can be detected in the more extensive of these classes can be detected also in the nar-
