The concept of what makes up a "beast" (as opposed to a "being") has been a point of contention among wizards for a long time. If you consider three creatures, you can better understand why. Werewolves are humans, but once a month transform into beasts, whose primary goal is to murder. Centaurs are as smart as wizards and Muggles, but do not behave as humans do. However, trolls have a humanoid appearance, and yet are some of the most dull creatures around. Now, if I posed the following question to you, how would you answer? Which of these creatures deserves the title of a "being" (a creature worthy of legal rights and a voice in the governance of the magical world)? This is precisely where the controversy exposes itself! Some argue that two legs = "being". Others argue that speaking the human tongue = "being". A solution was determined in 1811, by Grogan Stump, the newly appointed Minister of Magic. His definition was that a "being" was "any creature that has sufficient intelligence to understand the laws of the magical community and to bear part of the responsibility in shaping those laws". Of course, this definition has not been accepted by all. Werewolves do not necessarily fit into either category based on this definition. Centaurs do not want to be classified as beings. Some very intelligent creatures cannot overcome their natures to "bear part of the responsibility", and thus cannot be classified as beings. These beasts are all classified with a Ministry of Magic Classification of XXXXX.