their attire, and people of the lower classes, distinguished by
absolutely nothing in their exterior from other persons of the same
rank."

Medico-juristic science made a considerable step when Casper adopted
this distinction of two types of sexual inversion. But, as is always the
case in the analysis of hitherto neglected phenomena, his classification
falls far short of the necessities of the problem. While treating of
acquired sexual inversion, he only thinks of debauchees. He does not
seem to have considered a deeper question--deeper in its bearing upon
the way in which society will have to deal with the whole problem--the
question of how far these instincts are capable of being communicated by
contagion to persons in their fullest exercise of sexual vigour. Taste,
fashion, preference, as factors in the dissemination of anomalous
passions, he has left out of his account. It is also, but this is a
minor matter, singular that he should have restricted his observations
on the freemasonry among paederasts to those in whom the instinct is
acquired. That exists quite as much or even more among those in whom it
is congenital.

The upshot of the whole matter, however, is that the best book on
medical jurisprudence now extant repudiates the enormities of Tardieu's
method, and lays it down for proved that "the majority of persons who
are subject" to sexual inversion come into the world, or issue from the
cradle, with their inclination clearly marked.

V.

LITERATURE--MEDICINE.

Medical writers upon this subject are comparatively numerous in French
and German literature, and they have been multiplying rapidly of late
years. The phenomenon of sexual inversion is usually regarded in these
books from the point of view of psychopathic or neuropathic derangement,
inherited from morbid ancestors, and developed in the patient by early
habits of self-abuse.

What is the exact distinction between "psychopathic" and "neuropathic" I
do not know. The former term seems intelligible in the theologian's
mouth, the latter in a physician's. But I cannot understand both being
used together to indicate different kinds of pathological diathesis.
What is the soul, what are the nerves? We have probably to take the two
terms as indicating two ways of considering the same phenomenon; the one
subjective, the other objective; "psychopathic" pointing to the
derangement as observed in the mind emotions of its subject;
"neuropathic" to the