66 



magiciaus use their wands — to divert the attention and "cover the experi- 

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

 markable feat of Joshua might be taken as proof conclusive of the futility 

 iii the study of celestial mechanics. 



The ubiquity of the doctrine may also be satisfactorily explained. 

 Like "Little Orphant Annie," every race has its own peculiar story of 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 — jiarticularly an abnormal one. I am not pre]>ared 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. 



The iniquity of the doctrine is notorious and consists in an attempt 

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

 misshapen child or to a inathematic(>-musico-ix)etic prodigy by reason of 

 certain influence she has exerted, and without giving her a chance to de- 

 fend herself. If the law holds that a jierson must be proved guilty be- 

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

 facts, there is nothing to disi>rove; without tlie facts, the argument may 

 be entertaining but not productive. 



Inasniucii as everyone has his own cases wliicli illustrate the work- 

 ings of maternal influence and which he looks upon anywhere ranging 

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

 into several classes and illustrate each with a case. 



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



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

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

 e^ery day a child with a double thumb came in for a penny roll, present- 

 ing the moi>ey between the thumb and finger. After the ilrd month, the 

 mother left tlie bakery but the malformation was so ii ressed on her 

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

 Neither was Dr. Napheys, for that matter, for Ixad he been skeptical, ho 

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

 the deformity, and would have commented on the frequency of this par- 

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



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



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

 that had but one hand. The other arm was handless as if amputated be- 



