OF INFANCY. 381 



denied the liberty of turning its head to facilitate 

 this neceflary dilbharge. Is it not an inftance 

 of fuperior wifdom in thofe nations, who fim- 

 ply clothe their infants, without tormenting 

 them with fwaddling-bands ? The Siamefe, the 

 Indians, the Japanefe, the Negroes, the favages 

 of Canada, of Virginia, of Brafil, and almoft 

 all the inhabitants of South America, lay their 

 infants naked into hanging beds of cotton, or 

 put them into cradles lined with fur. Thefe 

 practices are both fenfible and humane : The 

 leftraint of fwaddling-bands muft be painful. 

 The efforts made by infants to difentangle them- 

 ielves have a moie direct tendency to diftort 

 their members, than any pofitions they could af- 

 fume, if left in the full poffefTion of liberty. 

 Swaddling-bands may be compared to the ilays 

 "worn by young girls, which occafion many 

 more deformities and difeafes than they are in- 

 tended to prevent. 



If the efforts for liberty made by infants thus 

 fettered be hurtful, the inadivity to which they 

 are condemned is, perhaps, ftill more noxious. 

 The want of exercrfe retards the growth of their 

 members, and diminifhes the ftrength of their 

 bodies ; and, of courfe, thofe children who are 

 allowed full freedom of motion will be the moft 

 vigorous and healthy. It was this motive that 

 induced the Peruvians to leave the arms of their 

 infants perfed:ly loofe, in a wide fwathing-bag : 

 Afterwards, when their children grew older, 



they 



