represented by their numerical proportion among offenders.

We have purposely limited our own material for presentation.
Here, as elsewhere, we insist on the value of genetics and
consequently have busied ourselves at length with those cases
where we could gain something like an adequate conception of the
antecedents in family and developmental histories and where some
measure of the psychogenetic features could be taken. Cases of
older individuals with their prolonged and often picturesque
careers, equivalent to those recounted in European literature, we
have left strictly alone. One ever finds that the older the
individual the less one can learn satisfactorily of beginnings of
tendencies, just on account of the unreliability of the principal
actor in the drama. The cases of older swindlers at first sight
seem to offer much for the student of criminalistics, if only for
purely descriptive purposes, but in the literature we have failed
to find any satisfactory studies of the formative years of such
careers. By taking instances of younger pathological liars, such
as we have studied, the natural progress into swindling can be
readily seen.

In court work we have been brought face to face with many cases
of false accusation and, of course, with plenty of the usual kind
of lying. Where either of these has been entered into by way of
revenge or in belief that it would aid in getting out of trouble,
no further attention has been paid to it from the standpoint of
pathological lying. Our acquaintance with some professional
criminals, particularly of the sneak-thief or pick-pocket class,
has taught us that living conditions for the individual may be
founded on whole careers of misrepresentation and lies--for very