66 



I 



magicians use tlieir wiuids^ — to ilivort tho attention and "cover the experi 

 ment." As evidence I cannot consider it any more seriously than tlie re 

 niarl<al)le feat of Joshua uiiglit be taken as proof conclusive of the futility 

 in the study of celestial mechanics. 



Tlie ubiquity of the doctrine may also be satisfactorily explained. 

 Like "Little Orphant Ainiie," every race lias its own peculiar story (»f how 

 "the goblins will get you," and it would be more than strange if supersti- 

 tions of like character did not arise even in remote peoples over the birth 

 of a child — j)articu!arly an abnormal one. I am not prepared to deny 

 that folklore has some truth in it; but then folklore never loses in the 

 telling and does not necessarily imply close analytical study. 



Tlie ini(juity of the doctrine is notorious and consists in an attempt 

 to convict Mrs. X. of giving Itirth to a mentally, morally or physically 

 misshapen child or to a matlieiiiatico-nnisico-poetic prodigy by reason of 

 certain inliiience she lias exertid, and without giving her a chance to de- 

 fend herself. If the law liolds that a person must be proved guilty be- 

 yond reasonable doubt, let us first loolv into the evidence; for without the 

 facts, there is nothing to disprove ; without the facts, the argument may 

 be entertaining but- not productive. 



Inasmuch as everyone has liis own cases which illustrate the work- 

 ings of maternal influence and wliich he looks upon anywhere ranging 

 from a grave suspicion to conviction, I will arrange the evidence presented 

 into several classes and illustrate each witli a case. 



I. Alleged bona-fide maternal impression — conscious type. 



"Dr. Naplieys tells of a woman, the wife of a baker, who during the 

 earlier months of her pregnancy, sold bread over the counter. Nearly jl 

 every day a child with a double thumb came in for a penny roll, present- 

 ing the money between the thumb and finger. After the third month, tlif 

 mother left the bakery but the malformation was so impressefl on hor 

 mind, that she was not suri»rised to see it reproduced in her own child." 

 Neither was Dr. Napheys, for that matter, for had he been skeptical, he || 

 would liave inquired into what the mother of the first child saw to create 

 the deformity, and would have commented on tlie frequency of this i)ar 

 tlcular deformity at this time. Otherwise the evidence is excellent. 



II. Alleged bona-fide maternal impression — subconscious type. I 

 "We hav(> heard of a mother (evidence?) who gave birth to a child 



that had lint (Uic hand, 'riic other arm was handles.s ns if Miiiputated bo 



