These practical and efficient measures would be taken in the case of lesser criminals.  For the graver crimes committed by atavistic or congenital criminals, of by persons inclining toward crime from acquired habit or mental alienation, the positive school of criminology reserves segregation for an indefinite time, for it is absurd to fix the time beforehand in the case of a dangerous degenerate who has committed a grave crime.

The question of indeterminate sentences has been recently discussed also by Pessina, who combats it, of course, because the essence of the classic school of criminology is retribution for a fault by means of corresponding punishment.  We might reply that no human judge can use any other but the grossest scale by which to determine whether you are responsible to the extent of the whole, one half, or one third.  And since there is no absolute or objective criterion by which the ratio of crime to punishment can be determined, penal justice becomes a game of chance.  But we content ourselves by pointing out that segregation for an indefinite time has so much truth in it, that even the most orthodox of the classic school admit it, for instance in the case of criminals under age.  Now, if an indeterminate sentence is a violation of the principles of the classic school, I cannot understand why it can be admitted in the case of minors, but not in the case of adults.  This is evidently an expedient imposed by the exigencies of practical life, and only the positive school of criminology can meet them by a logical systematization.  For the rest, indefinite segregation, such as we propose for the most dangerous atavistic criminals, is a measure which is already in use for ordinary lunatics as well us for criminal lunatics.  But it may be said that this is an administrative measure, not a court sentence.  Well, if any one is so fond of formulas as to make this objection, he may get all the fun out of them that he likes.  But it is a fact that an insane person who has committed a crime is sent to a building with iron bars on its gates such as a prison has.  You may call it an administrative building or a penal institute, the name is unessential, for the substance alone counts.  We maintain that congenital or pathological criminals cannot be locked up for a definite term in any institution, but should remain there until they are adapted for the normal life of society.

This radical reform of principles carries with it a radical transformation of details.  Given an indeterminate segregation, there should be organs of guardianship for persons so secluded, for instance permanent committees for the periodical revision of sentences.  In the future, the criminal judge will always secure ample evidence to prove whether a defendant is really guilty, for this is the fundamental point.  If it is certain that he has committed the crime, he should either be excluded from social intercourse or sentenced to mate good the damage,