What Women Should Know/Chapter 7

Protection of the Family.—The one institution most sacred in all the world is the family; and the abiding-place, the retreat, the altar of the family is the home. To protect the family and to preserve the inviolability of the home, all governments, from the earliest ages, have been instituted.

The Destruction of the Family.—Whoever destroys the family and desecrates the hearth-stone uproots government and upheaves society from its very foundations, tearing down so effectually that there is no hope of rebuilding.

Free Love.—Of the practical workings of the system of "free love" we may see illustrations every day in the police and criminal records. We find special illustrations in a recent notorious murder case on the Pacific shore, and in a still more recent and more notorious one in New York City.

The Home.—The first object, not only of government, but of each individual, should be to hedge about the home with every means of protection, and to make it the centre of all contentment and peace. Society should be the outgrowth of the home, which ​latter should contribute to it from its overflow of happiness.

Deserters from the Home.—In those families where society and the public are put first, by either husband or wife, the natural order of things is subverted. As long as there are pressing home duties for either the one or the other, their call should be loud enough to drown all voices from the outer world. A man's duties to his family are as obligatory as those of a woman. A husband and father who, to enter into public life, deserts his home and compels the wife and mother to bear his burdens in addition to her own, is just as culpable as the woman who leaves her baby unrocked and her husband's stockings un mended. He is a shirker, and his wife must stagger under double responsibilities.

Time of Release from Domestic Duties.—There comes a time in the life of both husband and wife, when their minds have matured and their experiences have fitted them for more extended labor. And this time is when, in the natural order of things, home cares have relaxed, and both are equally ready for the work of the world. Then whatever their hands find to do let them do with all their might, and let them, as far as possible, work in unison, remembering that those whom God hath joined together no man should put asunder.

Significance of the Word Home.—I do not accept the common definition of the word home, which, if put into plain, brief language, would read, ​A prison-house for women. It has to me a broader, sweeter, grander significance. The true home is a world within a world. It is the central point of the universe around which all things revolve. It is the treasure-house of the affections, the one serenely bright spot in all the world, toward which its absent members always look with hope and anticipation. It is the shrine to which all the trophies of victories won in the world are brought with pride and triumph, and where the victor receives the sympathy and congratulation of the circle dearest to him, and is recrowned with laurels which retain perennial freshness when the wreath accorded by the public has faded and is forgotten. A prophet may be little honored in his own country; but a man and woman are never so great a hero and heroine as in their domestic circle. If they are worthy of respect and reverence, they are never anywhere else so much respected and revered; and they are never anywhere else so much loved, whether, alas! they are worthy of it or not.

Treasures of the Home.—It is as they may be beautiful or useful in our homes, that all earthly things are valuable or valueless. Here are garnered up whatever treasures the world offers to the industrious seeker. Here are tenderest heart-memories; here rich experiences; here sometimes sorrows too sacred for the common eye to see.

The Homeless.—All homes are not true homes. Few are as perfect as they might be. Many are not homes at all. They are only places where food and ​shelter may be obtained, and where the individual members feel privileged to be themselves at their worst. The occupants of such homes are more to be pitied than the poor wanderer upon whose tombstone is recorded: "The author of 'Home, Sweet Home.' He never had a home." The latter had a conception of what home ought to be. They, pitiful beggars upon the cold charity of the outer world! have neither the home itself, nor its ideal within their hearts. God pity the homeless!

Construction of the Home.—Marriage lays the foundations of the home; the children build the walls; and the structure is strengthened and stayed by conjugal, parental and filial love, and roofed over by mutual forbearance and self-sacrifice.

Marriage.—"A pure life from the day we become responsible to the moment we are revealed to each other; a frank and open communion from that day to the wedding; a loyalty, purity and patience mingling with our love from that day onward, and this true expression of our perfect trust from beyond the grave,—these are the things that go to a true wedding, a true home and a blessed home life." These are the concluding words of Robert Collyer's sermon on "Marriage"—a sermon so true, so beautiful, so admirable in every respect, that I wish I might give the whole of it here.

Physical Relations of Marriage.—Marriage brings a man and woman into the closest physical relations. These relations, if rightly regarded and ​properly sustained, are conducive to happiness, health and longevity. When they are perverted and abused, and their true aims overlooked, they are the cause of physical and mental wretchedness and moral deterioration.

Marriage a Sacrament.—A pure marriage, in which affection is the ruling power and passion is curbed and held in control-in which the thought of self is kept secondary-is a true sacrament, blessing the participants. A marriage in which passion, unguided by reason, degenerates into lust, is a sacrament desecrated, a blessing turned to a curse.

Bridal Tours.—Every newly-married couple, no matter how limited their means, feel obliged, if they would maintain their position in society, to take a bridal tour. As bridal tours were first instituted—for the purpose of taking the young couple away, at the commencement of the new physical and moral experiences which they must undergo, from prying eyes, unpleasant and impertinent remarks and unwise interference, and allowing them time to adjust themselves in their new relations—they were certainly not objectionable. To accomplish these desirable ends, quiet and retirement in semi-solitude seem most necessary, where they shall be thrown exclusively into each other's society, and have opportunity to become better acquainted with each other's characters. Such a plan as this may not be wise in all respects, but it has at least a show of reasonableness which is utterly lacking in a fashionable bridal tour. In the conven​tional tour, instead of retiring from the public gaze, they set out for the most crowded places; instead of seeking to avoid observation, they court it by a dis play of unmistakable bridal trappings; instead of seeking to learn each other's characters more fully by indulging in each other's society under the most favorable auspices, the exigencies of travel and sight-seeing, with the weariness which these entail, and the nervous and physical excitement incident to the event which they are celebrating, frequently call out only their most unfavorable traits, and leave them at the conclusion of their journey less pleased with each other than when they set out. Then the expense involved in a fashionable bridal trip would go far toward furnishing a house and providing a home for those who, from a fancied want of means, are obliged to take refuge, for a more or less extended period, in the artificial life of a boarding-house.

I think the prettiest description of a bridal tour I ever read is in Miss Alcott's "Little Women," where Margaret and John, after the wedding day is over, walk in the gloaming side by side along the narrow path which leads from the home of the bride's parents to the little house which is to be their own home in future. That is the best, the most sensible bridal tour which takes the young people, in whatever fashion, directly to the spot which is to be their home, and consecrates that spot from the very marriage day with all the sweet memories which belong to and bless a happy marriage.

​Evils of Boarding-house Life.—Speaking of bridal tours brings us naturally to the consideration of the future home of the young couple. It is the great evil of the present state of society that young married people shirk housekeeping. The wife is ignorant of domestic duties, and perhaps does not care to correct that ignorance. The husband, used to all the orderliness and luxuries of a long-established household, shrinks from meeting the failure and possible discomfort which may await him in a house of his own. Both perhaps wish to live in a style unsuited to their means, and find they can do this better and with less care in a boarding-house than in a private establishment. But this will be found a great mistake when considered from the proper point of view.

Boarding-house life is at best a poor substitute for the quiet and retirement of home. It is leading this life that we find idle, frivolous women—women who "want no more rights" lest they should bring with them new duties—women who sneer at temperance and all the earnest questions of the day—women who have no higher aim than to dress fashionably and extravagantly and to be admired. It is in boardinghouses that our scandal and divorce cases are matured—where husbands learn to be neglectful and wives unloving and unfaithful. There is one common parlor for dress and show and flirtation, for gossip and mis. chief-making, but no chance for any of that quiet home-life which develops the affections and brings ​out into strong relief all the manly and womanly traits of the character.

Everybody needs a home, and a boarding-house is not in any sense a home. Let the young couple be content to begin humbly if they must, but let them by all means isolate themselves from the outside world, so that the home shall be something distinct and apart from it—an altar dearer and more sacred than it is possible to erect within the precincts of the hotel or the boarding-house. Those families will be found happiest who have thus secluded themselves.

Test of Virginity.—It is popularly believed that the husband receives proof upon the consummation of his marriage of the previous chastity of his wife. If he obtains this evidence it is safe to accept it as conclusive, though rare exceptional cases are to be met with in which the evidence counts for nothing. If, on the other hand, the proof is wanting, it is most unjust and cruel, on the strength of this alone, to charge a wife with want of chastity previous to marriage. It is not uncommon for accidents, which may occur at any time, and which may even date back to birth itself, to destroy this evidence; or it may never have existed.

Abuse of Marital Privileges.—One is often led to wonder if a large class of men are not simply brutes, in all that concerns the physical relations of marriage. Women do not readily make confidential complaints to other women against their husbands, ​So that when a word—an incompleted sentence smothered before it is fully uttered—is spoken, it must be wrung from the lips by extreme marital brutality. That women, many women, so suffer at the hands of husbands, brutal in this respect, though kind in all others, does not admit of doubt. Disinclination, weariness, ill-health, none of these things will excuse a woman from a participation in the marital act, when her husband's inclinations lead him to require it of her. Strange that, while the law recognizes rape as a crime punishable by severe penalties, there is no recognition whatever of a married woman's right to control over her own person. I do not know that the most brutal conduct in this respect, if there was no other reason for complaint, would be considered by the courts as a sufficient cause for divorce. Yet any one can readily imagine that it is possible for a man of a strong sensual nature, who places no curb upon his appetites, to render the life of a delicate, pure-minded woman intolerable to the last degree. As mutual affection is the heavenly bond of marriage, so mutual pleasure should alone sanction its earthly bond. Love should be prepared to give as well as to receive—to be self-denying when self-denial is required of it. I cannot believe that a wife who sees her husband thus considerate will be unreasonable in her refusals.

Just Causes for Refusal of a Husband's Demands.—There are certain times and circumstances when a woman is perfectly justified in refusing her ​husband's demands. These are, during her monthly periods; for ore month after confinement; for three months after miscarriage; during convalescence from any ordinary sickness, while the woman is still weak and debilitated; in case of any uterine difficulty which renders cohabitation painful and of course injurious; if there is any sufficient reason for limiting the number of offspring, for a certain period of days both before and after menstruation; when the husband is in a state of intoxication or under the partial influence of stimulants or opiates; and when there is knowledge of unfaithfulness on his part. In the latter case, if the woman have true respect for herself, she will make her refusal absolute and final.

Excessive Sexual Gratification.—The gratification of sexual passion, though beneficial if indulged in moderately, will, if carried to excess, prove highly injurious, and may possibly result in lost energies and prostrated health. If the husband has not sufficient self-control, the wife is justified in limiting him to the bounds of temperance and prudence, not only for her own comfort and convenience, but for her husband's good.

Shall Husband and Wife Sleep together?—Certainly, if they both wish it. If either or both parties do not desire it, or if they have reason to suppose that the health of either suffers in consequence (and I have known such cases), or if the husband cannot properly control his amorous propensities, they (illegible text) better by all means occupy separate beds. If the ​last reason is the one causing this separation, they had better occupy different apartments, with a lock on the communicating door, the key in the wife's possession.

Conception.—The manner in which conception takes place has long been a matter of dispute among physiologists, and many theories, some tolerably plausible, others absurd, have been advanced in different ages of the world. It is probably something which can never be entirely understood; but certain facts have already been elicited by the experiments of modern science, and still others may yet be discovered. It is established that from the ovaries of a woman capable of bearing children a minute ovum or egg escapes at regular intervals—usually once in four weeks—during the period of the menstrual flow. This ovum passes slowly down into the womb through the Fallopian tube, which connects the ovary with the womb, and thence out. It is believed that if before its expulsion from the womb it comes in contact with. the male element it becomes impregnated, remains in the womb and develops into a living embryo.

Scars left by the Ova.—Each ovum as it bursts from the ovary leaves a scar behind it, which, however, if the ovum is not impregnated soon disappears. If conception takes place, the scar remains; so that the lasting scars upon the ovaries correspond with the number of times a woman has conceived. This latter fact is something that puzzles physiologists, and has led them to think it possible that impregnation of the ovum takes place before it leaves the ovary. Demon​strable facts, however, testify against this belief. I know comparatively little of either physiology or anatomy, so I offer my theory regarding these scars with due hesitation and modesty; but may it not be possible that, when the regularity of the ejection of the ova from the ovary is uninterrupted, each succeeding ovum obliterates the scar left by the last; and that in case of conception and the consequent rest of the ovaries for a greater or less period—usually through pregnancy and suckling—the last scar, remaining undisturbed, has time to assume a permanent form?

Erroneous Belief concerning Conception.—It is a belief entertained by a majority of people even yet, and one upon which our laws are based and judicial decisions rendered, that conception cannot take place unless both be willing parties to the conjugal act, and participate in its pleasure. Modern science has proved the fallacy of this. French physicians have, by a series of audacious experiments, the nature of which it is not necessary to describe here, demonstrated beyond a shadow of doubt that not only is mutual pleasure in cohabitation unnecessary, but that conception may actually take place while the woman is under the influence of anæsthetics and totally unconscious. They have proved even more than this, but this is sufficient. Thus the decision which declares an alleged rape to be nothing more than seduction, because the union proved fruitful, may be cruelly unjust.

​Grave Importance of the Act of Generation.—Of the exact manner of conception there is little known, nor probably will there ever be any greater knowledge. It is known, or at least believed, however, that the moment of generation is one of unparalleled importance to the welfare of the future being. Dr. Hufeland, an eminent German writer, says: "In my opinion, it is of the utmost importance that this moment (the moment of sexual union) should be confined to a period when the sensation of collected powers, ardent passion, and a mind cheerful and free from care, invite to it on both sides." Yet how almost invariably is this, the most important act of life, so considered from its possible consequences, participated in thoughtlessly, and in improper and unworthy physical and mental states!

Sterility.—When married women do not become mothers, they are said to be sterile or barren. This condition is not uncommon among women, and is frequently the cause of much unhappiness; for while many women regret their ability to bear children, those who have no children exhibit almost a morbid longing for them.

Desirability of Children.—It is certainly far better that a married pair should become parents than that they should live childless. A life unblessed with children is a selfish life. However pleasant and convenient it may be in youth and middle age, it is unsatisfactory at the end. The desire for and love of offspring are instincts implanted by nature, and men ​and women are all the more easily reconciled to old age, with its declining powers, and at last to death, in the consciousness that they are represented in their children who will live after them, and who may accomplish, perhaps, what they have failed to do.

A life into which no child-love has ever entered is apt to become contracted, selfish and hard. The little ones teach us charity, patience and kindness. In the care of them we receive our own best education. Therefore, those wives who fail to become mothers may well consider themselves unfortunate, and are justified in asking anxiously if there is any means to remedy this misfortune.

Causes of Sterility.—The causes of sterility are numerous. It is well known that the families of the rich are, on an average, much smaller than those of the poor. The reason of this is that idleness and luxurious living act as a check upon child-bearing. A woman leading such a life is not so apt to conceive as, or if she does conceive she is more apt to miscarry than, those who live in accordance with the laws of nature.

On the other hand, an active life and a plain, spare diet are conducive to fecundity. And thus children become the poor man's only riches.

Displacement of the womb is also a frequent cause of childlessness. When barrenness results from this or from similar causes, it may almost always be known by the pain and prostration which attend the monthly period. This is, of course, remediable, and the ad​vice and assistance of a physician should be sought at once.

Debility may prevent conception or cause miscarriage. So also will too frequent sexual intercourse or too intense passion at such times. Again, a woman may be capable of conception, but so liable to miscarry that she will never go her full time.

Miscarriage may take place so constantly and at so early a period in pregnancy that the woman may never suspect the true state of the case, and imagine herself sterile. When a liability to miscarry is known, or even suspected, a physician should be consulted who may be able to devise means to prevent it, or at least render it less likely in future. The husband should absent himself from his wife's bed for three months after a miscarriage if he would diminish the chances of its repetition. These are some of the remediable causes of sterility. There are other causes known to physicians, a repetition of which here is unnecessary.

Cure of Sterility.—A childless wife who desires to become a mother should, therefore, live sparingly, indulge in abundant exercise (unless her childlessness is the result of miscarriages, when, in certain cases, she had best preserve quiet), subject herself to no undue excitements nor partake of stimulants. If there are local diseases, they should be attended to, and her general health should be brought to its highest standard. Sexual pleasures should be but moderately indulged in. An entire change of air and ​scene, with a temporary absence, more or less prolonged, from her husband, will often prove beneficial.

Sterile Husbands.—It is, however, a mistake to place the blame of unfruitfulness in marriage invariably upon the wife. Some men are sterile as well as some women, although their general health may be good and their powers unimpaired by excesses. Then, again, "reformed rakes" have not infrequently lost their virility through antenuptial excesses. In this case it is the husband who requires medical and hygienic treatment. Such a state of affairs is plainly though somewhat coarsely illustrated in Charles Reade's recent novel, "A Terrible Temptation."

Criminal Abortion.—A few years since I read an excellent little pamphlet by a well-known physician, entitled "The Serpent in the Dove's Nest," and treating of criminal abortion. (The same gentleman published shortly after a companion pamphlet for men, entitled "Is it I?" equally excellent and equally deserving of attention.) This pamphlet treated of the prevalence of criminal abortion in America; and the author's earnest protests against it ought to have been productive of the best results.

Circumstances which may Extenuate Criminal Abortion.—Yet there are sometimes, I think, extenuating circumstances in the commission of this crime; though I would not by any means justify the deed. The first to be considered of these circumstances is the ignorance of women on all points concerning it. The almost universal belief among wo​men—even intelligent women—is that the life of a child does not begin until quickening is felt, and that to produce abortion before that time is not to destroy life, but simply to remove a physical obstruction. No one having sufficient authority has ever taught them any better; and the assertion of a mere woman like themselves they are not likely to regard.

Again, very few are aware of the grave dangers threatening health, and even life, attending abortion. They believe that it occasions only temporary inconvenience, from which they recover far sooner than from an ordinary confinement. Thus, after an abortion is accomplished, they are almost certain, by a hasty and imprudent convalescence, to bring on certain diseases which by a more careful course they might possibly escape.

Responsibility of Publishers.—Women should not be considered alone to blame in the matter of criminal abortions. Editors may enter their protests against this crime in whole columns of moral indignation, but so long as they are ready, for pay, to publish advertisements of remedies for "female irregularities," "warranted to remove obstructions of whatever nature with perfect safety," editors will talk in vain. Nor can they shirk the responsibility that rests upon them. The publisher who inserts in his sheet any advertisement whatever, of such a character, is responsible in a degree for all the misfortune and criminality which the publication of such an advertisement occasions.

​Danger of Quack Medicines.—There are no female irregularities which can safely be medically treated by any one but a regular physician. These patent medicines are invariably harmful. Even in the class of diseases for which they are nominally intended, the chances are very great that they will produce confirmed invalidism instead of health.

Culpability of Law-Makers.—Nor are our law-makers less culpable, when they punish only the man or woman found guilty of producing criminal abortion, and permit these advertisements to circulate through the land without any legal responsibility upon either advertiser, publisher or seller.

How to Check the Crime of Willful Abortion.—In only one way can this crime be checked, so far as women themselves are concerned. It is by the diffusion of knowledge. Let women be made thoroughly conversant with the physiological bearings of pregnancy. Impress upon them beyond the possibility of a doubt that life exists in the embryo from the moment of conception, and that this life is almost as distinct from that of the mother as when the babe has entered the world and draws sustenance from her breasts. Her pelvis is only the primary cradle which holds it, and her womb the covering which enwraps and protects it until it has reached a period of development which qualifies it to lead a more exposed life. It is her child from the very first, and she is a mother in reality from the earliest period of its existence.

​Women not without Consciences.—Women may be frivolous and thoughtless, even unreasoning and unreasonable sometimes; but they have consciences. When they realize that willful abortion is nothing less than murder, as surely as though they murdered the babe that lies in their arms, they will shrink with horror from its commission.

Accessory to the Crime of Fœticide.—There is almost always an accessory to this crime, which the world usually does not remember. I mean the husband or the seducer of the woman who commits it. When the woman is unmarried, and she resorts to the act to hide her shame, she ought to be regarded with pity as well as with blame. She is driven to a state of desperation and distraction which man can never realize, and which so nearly approaches insanity, that a broad charity might readily pronounce it such, with far more justice, in fact, than in many murder cases where such a verdict has been returned. A remedy has never been devised to check this crime under these circumstances, and never will be, until one which I will presently recommend shall be tried. I am a woman, and, no doubt, see things in a different light from men; but I am none the less convinced not only of the efficacy, but of the justice, of my plan.

An Efficient Temperance Law.—Three years ago, writing incidentally in a magazine article of the evils of intemperance, I declared it as my conviction that the only effectual bar to drunkenness would be to make the liquor-seller pecuniarily responsible for ​any evils resulting from his business. I thought myself radical and singular in such an assertion; but to-day the most effective temperance law ever known is based upon this very principle. This law is now in active operation in several of our States. It derives its singular efficiency from the fact that it places the weapons of defence against liquor-selling in the hands of the greatest sufferers from it—the injured wives of drunken husbands. Thus the absolute truth of my impressions has been verified.

Guilt of the Seducer.—I would see this same principle applied in the case of criminal abortion, especially when it follows seduction. We may not be able to mould public opinion, but we can make laws. In an unmarried woman there is but one cause which operates to the commission of this crime, and that is the fear of disgrace. Thus, when she has been found guilty of fœticide or infanticide, her seducer should be held equally guilty and suffer an equal punishment with her. The crime may have been committed without his knowledge or in spite of his urgent protest; nevertheless, his guilt should be unquestioned, as it was possible for him in two ways to prevent its commission: first, by abstaining from the act of seduction; secondly, having been guilty of that act, by subsequent marriage averting that shame which drives the woman to such an extremity. If there is any difference between them, he is the greater culprit of the two; in addition to his participation in the guilt of the murder, he deliberately dooms a human being, ​whose greatest fault was a misplaced confidence in him, to the depths of suffering, shame and despair, and frequently to moral ruin.

Responsibility of Husbands.—A husband may be guiltless of either knowledge of or consent to such a crime. Nevertheless, he should not be held entirely irresponsible. I have already referred parenthetically to a little pamphlet addressed to husbands, entitled "Is it I?" This pamphlet treats of the degree of guilt incurred by husbands, by a display of selfishness and sensuality in their marital relations.

"Marital Rights."—I have been surprised and astonished to find, not only among men, but among women too, that there seems to be no standard of prudence and consideration deemed necessary in a husband. His "marital rights" are taken for granted, and the woman who would question them or attempt to limit them is considered exceedingly blamable. Thus I have seen innocent and suffering wives made morally responsible for the unfaithfulness of their husbands, when that unfaithfulness ought to have been set down as gross selfishness tending to beastly sensuality. Neither his own sex nor the other seems to regard a man as bound by any law of morality or self-restraint. In his capacity of husband he considers himself entitled to gratify his passions at whatever cost to a suffering wife. If this gratification threatens and actually results in the death of his victim, it is regarded as unfortunate, but something for which he should not be blamed.

​Was it not Murder?—A case in point: There was a woman who had to undergo a terrible surgical operation for the removal of an uterine tumor. The operating surgeons assured the husband, himself a physician, that a subsequent pregnancy would be exceedingly dangerous and probably fatal. But this man, in all other respects a model husband, felt himself under no obligation to self-restraint. In course of time the woman became pregnant, and the surgeons' predictions were verified. To-day that husband is living with his second wife, as honored and as respected a member of society as though his first wife's death did not lie at his door.

Enforced Child-Bearing.—Again, how often do we see men, whose wives can meet the perils of confinement only at the greatest risk to life and health, compel them to bear children until their health succumbs, and they either sink into helpless, hopeless invalidism, or escape into the grave as the only place where there is certain rest from child-bearing! I was once told of such a woman—a woman still young in years—who had already borne ten children, only to endure the additional suffering of having them taken away from her by death, one after another, while they were yet infants. Every successive confinement her physician warned her must be the last, as there was imminent danger that, her health already broken, life itself would give way. But she is still dragging a feeble existence. Surrounded by the evidences of immense wealth—being denied nothing that ​money can buy—she yet knows nothing of physical comfort. Her husband prides himself on his marital fidelity to his wife.

"How much better," said my informer, who, by the way, was a woman of the world, with exceedingly lax notions as to the moral obligations of men—"how much better it would be if her husband would get a mistress, and so allow his wife a chance to recover her health, and know something of enjoyment in life!"

My wifely instincts were aroused at this. "Anything but that!" I replied. "But how much better if he would cease being a brute, and learn that to be a true and affectionate husband involves sometimes self-denial in the place of unreasoning gratification of the passions!"

Some women are so physically constituted, or so suffer from confirmed ill-health, that the whole period of gestation is one of intense discomfort, and childbearing an almost insupportable misery. Such women, if no means of prevention are resorted to, must live at least one-third of their lives in a state of hopeless suffering. When we regard such a woman, and consider how these sufferings are forced upon her, we need not greatly wonder that she sometimes, in her ignorance of the guilt incurred, and the risks to health and life run, seeks to avoid these miseries by a short cut through the door of abortion. There is no use in saying to such a woman that if she were not willing to endure the penalties of matrimony she ought never to have entered within its bonds. Few unmarried ​women know the full extent of these penalties; none of them know what will be their degree in their own individual cases. There is no man who would be willing that his future wife should make a trial of that state, before entering into it permanently.

"For Better, for Worse."—Marriage is something irrevocable, in which husband and wife are bound together for better or for worse. It is hardly fair that the "better" should always be on the one side, the "worse" on the other. Husbands should feel themselves called upon to bear the incidental disadvantages of marriage equally with their wives; and if these disadvantages include restraint of the passions, the obligation is in no way relaxed, and infidelity no less a sin.

Limitation of Offspring.—Let physicians and moralists say what they will, and let us all admit that large families of children are even desirable when the circumstances are favorable, there are still circumstances which justify—not only that, but actually demand—a limitation of the number of offspring. A woman's health should be an important consideration in this matter. Surely, if there is any personal question which an individual has a right to decide, the woman should have a voice in the matter of childbearing. She has to endure the pains, penalties and responsibilities, both before and afterward, and she can best judge of her fitness and her powers of endurance. Yet she should not decide in the negative without grave reasons for such a decision; but when ​she has made this decision, it is the extreme of cruelty for her husband to force child-bearing upon her.

Quality of Population, not Quantity.—Our population is not in such a state of depletion that mere numbers are an object. We have plenty of people now, such as they are. We could do with fewer births if the children born promised better physical development, and were better educated and better trained morally. A woman overburdened and broken down by excessive child-bearing can never give birth to as healthy children, nor can she devote as much time to their mental and moral training, as she ought to do.

In what Manner shall the Number of Children be Limited?—But how this evil of too large families is to be avoided is a question asked by many, especially suffering wives. They ask their physician during the pains and terrors of delivery, and they are answered flippantly, if not indelicately.

Wrong Methods of Limitation.—Those who are careful newspaper readers know that means for accomplishing this end are widely advertised. But these advertised means may be one and all set down as highly deleterious to health and morals. Clearly, abortion is not the proper method.

Incompleted sexual intercourse, so frequently resorted to for this purpose, is considered a perfectly harmless method. But there never was a more erroneous idea. Its effects upon the husband are precisely the same as self-abuse. To the wife, if she be in any ​degree an active participant of the passion of the moment, the results may be even more serious, including among them inflammation and grave affections of the uterine system, such as tumors, ulcers and the like. It is unnecessary to explain in these pages why this is so, though it is easily explicable. Scarcely less injurious in its results, and at the same time not by any means certain, is the use of cold-water injections to prevent conception.

A Safe Preventive to Conception.—There is one means perfectly harmless and perfectly safe as far as any evil results may follow—a means which will not only secure the end, but the employment of which will in all probability prove beneficial to both husband and wife. It is a means which neither violates physical laws nor involves moral degradation. It is, in brief, moderation in the indulgence of sexual desire. In each month there is a period varying from four to eight days in duration, during which most women are incapable of conception. This period begins about the tenth or twelfth day after the cessation of the menses, and ends the fourth or sixth day before their next appearance. Previous to this tenth or twelfth day, the ovum, which is discharged from the ovary at each monthly period, may still be in the passages or the womb, and become impregnated upon sexual intercourse. If intercourse be indulged in shortly before the monthly flow, it is possible for the male element to retain life until it meets with and impregnates the ovary. This I believe to be a toler​ably general though not universal rule. Women who are exceptions to this general rule must accept the inevitable, if their health is equal to continued childbearing. When their health will not allow of increased family cares, then, I repeat, forbearance and self-denial become the duty of their husbands. Thus it will be seen that temperance and self-denial are the only means by which this oftentimes most desirable end can be attained in an honorable and unobjectionable manner. If there are any other proper means, I am ignorant of them.

Producing the Sexes at Will.—It has always been greatly desired that there might be certain means discovered by which the sexes could be produced at will. Various theories have been devised, but none of them have yet fully borne the test of trial.

False Theories concerning the Production of the Sexes.—One of the most common beliefs among uninformed people is that a preponderance of either sex among the children of a family denotes superior vitality and stronger passion in the parent of that sex. It is scarcely necessary to say that this belief has not one single foundation in fact. Another theory which perhaps may have a single grain of truth in it, but scarcely more, is that superior vitality on the part of the father will be productive of drughters; on the part of the mother, of sons.

Latest Theory in Regard to the Production of the Sexes.—The latest theory, and the one most ​commonly accepted by enlightened medical and scientific men, is stated as follows in the Philadelphia Medical and Surgical Reporter of February 8, 1868: "Whenever intercourse has taken place in from two to six days after the cessation of the menses, girls have been produced; and whenever intercourse has taken place in from nine to twelve days after the cessation of the menses, boys have been produced." A writer in the London Lancet declares that "in the human female conception in the first half of the time between menstrual periods produces female offspring, and male in the latter. When a female has gone beyond the time she calculated upon, it will generally turn out to be a boy."

Evidence of Science in Regard to the Production of the Sexes.—This theory is founded on well-established facts in the vegetable and animal kingdoms. Botanists and gardeners know that in trees and plants which are bi-sexual the earliest and most vigorous shoots produce female blossoms; the latest, developed when the tree is declining in vigor, male blossoms. A similar fact concerning the propagation of the sexes has been discovered by cattle- and poultry-breeders. As a proof in support of this theory reference is made in particular to poultry, the earliest laid eggs of which, it is stated, produce hens, those toward the end of the laying season, cocks.

Personal Opinions concerning the Theory of Production of the Sexes.—I know it will appear like presumption in me to differ from the most ​advanced scientific and medical authorities of the day; nevertheless, I do differ somewhat, in so far that I believe they have grasped only half a truth, and do not yet comprehend it in its complete significance. First, my experience and observation as far as they go, in cases where there was sufficient temperance in the marital relations to ascertain the exact period of conception without possibility of doubt, seem to disprove this theory in almost every instance. Thus much for facts, as I am conversant with them.

My reasoning is as follows: One ovum, only, passes from the ovaries at each monthly period. If this ovum, impregnated at an early date, produces a female child, and, at a later date, a male child, then we must admit a change of sex in the same ovum, which seems scarcely likely. Again, referring to the facts which have been discovered in poultry breeding, we find that no egg changes its sex by a change in the time of its fecundation. Those first laid will hatch female chickens, those laid toward the last, when the hen's productive powers are on the wane, will hatch male chickens. Those eggs which would have produced hens display, when broken, a yolk of a deep rich orange in color. Those which would have produced cocks display the yolks deteriorated in color to a pale sulphur tint. Each egg retains its sex as long as it is capable of being hatched. The daily egg of the hen represents the monthly ovum of the woman.

Now, is it not safe to infer that, as nature requires the most vigorous and favorable conditions for the ​propagation of female plants and animals, she will pursue the same course in regard to the human race? As a result of this inference, may we not believe that the sexes result from special conditions rather than from special times? Not only does the female sex require superior vigor and vitality in order to sustain the heavier physical burdens which are laid upon it; but that it does possess this superior vigor and vitality is clearly proven by statistics which show that while there are more male children born (in the proportion of about one hundred and six male to one hundred female), so more of the male sex succumb to disease during infancy. Therefore, when age, health, moral habits and temperance in the marital relations combine—or when there are a sufficient number of these to make a favorable balance—the children of the parents possessing this combination will be predominantly daughters. Where, from any lack of these advantages, there is an adverse balance, sons may be expected. I offer my theory for what it is worth, believing that it is at least deserving of consideration.