ions of analysis. . . . In its insistence upon the evidential or observational element in empirical science it has ignored that other indispensable component, theory and analysis" (pp. 69-70). In order to have a rational criminal code and a rational administration of the criminal law, it is necessary to have empirical knowledge of the causes of criminal behavior and of the effects of the various forms of corrective treatment. Present day psychology and sociology do not supply this information and it therefore becomes necessary to construct a science of criminal law as well as a science of criminology. An Institute of Criminology is needed, and should be established, with the definite purpose of accomplishing this two-fold objective. The personnel of such an institute, in the criminological division, should consist, ideally, it is said, of psychologists and sociologists who would combine the knowledge and experience possessed by: (a) a logician skilled in theory and formal analysis and interested in the methodology of empirical science; (b) a mathematician whose major interest is applied mathematics; (c) a statistician who has worked with psychological and sociological data and who is competent to devise new statistical techniques; (d) a theoretical physicist with knowledge of empirical physics who has an understanding of what is involved in the construction and use of theory in an empirical science; (e) an experimental physicist who is acquainted with the problems of experimental research and who is competent to invent observational techinques (pp. 404-408). Since there are no psychologists or sociologists who possess this combined knowledge and experience, it is suggested that the staff consist of at least one able scholar from each of these fields plus a mathematical economist, a man from the field of psychometrics, and, as an after-thought, a criminologist "who has wide acquaintance with the literature of criminology, preferably one who has not himself