LETTER II.
The favourable reception my last letter met with from the public, leads me to hope our married men will seriously reflect on the dangers which attend the employing Men-midwives to attend their wives, except in cases where there is the most urgent necessity for the interference of art. I flatter myself it will not be difficult to convincesensible,modestwomen of two undeniable truths, which nothing but prejudice, or vice, can render them blind to the force of:—First, that Men-midwives are not so safe as women;—and secondly, that it is absolutely impossible to permit men to take the unbounded freedoms which Men-midwivesfalsely pretend are necessary, without throwing themselves entirely at their mercy, and, at all events, being polluted by their needless invasion.
The Men-midwives and their friends, have wisely chose to be silent. They are conscious my assertions cannot be denied with anyshadow of truth, they therefore prudently have declined the combat. If they had attempted controverting my arguments, they must have discovered the sandy foundations on which they have established the idea oftheir being the properattendants on the labours of women. Objections which they cannot remove,—dangers which they cannot dissipate,—and impurities which no varnish can conceal, they wish to avoid mentioning; fearful lest an attempt to answer my letter, should display to the world the weakness and insufficiency of their defence, and stimulate abler pens than mine to continue the subject too long for their interest. They vainly imagine my letter will soon be forgotten, and be consigned to oblivion amongst waste paper. But they are mistaken,—this letter shall accompany it annually to the press, to remind my fair countrywomen of the inestimable value of chastity,—and to warn them from those practices which pave the way to the most flagrant breach of it;—and I am not without hope that I shall bejoined by the friends of virtue, and assisted in the arduous talk I have undertaken. What undertaking can be more difficult to succeed in, than an endeavour to reform the manners of a vicious age? Yet, encouraged by the consciousness of the rectitude of my intentions, and of the sincerity of my wishes to repair the foundations of matrimonial happiness, I freely offer my sentiments to the world,—let the candid weigh them in the scale of common-sense,—and either adopt, or disregard them, as they appear to tend to the benefit, or prejudice of mankind. The consequence of their decision will principally affect themselves,—it will not reach to me.
The Men-midwives are sensible, that, when they urge their knowledge in anatomy as a reason for their being safer than women, they mean to take advantage ofthe ignoranceof mankind. Wherevery rare,particularcircumstances occur, undoubtedly the knowledge of anatomy becomes then absolutely necessary to directthe operator in the means requisite to save the woman’s life. In that distressed, unhappy, deplorable situation, no modesty can possibly be violated. The poor afflicted woman, is,if sensible, so taken up with anxious thoughts, and torturing pains, that she isnot consciousof the transaction—and the Royal Exchange, when crouded, might be spectators, without attracting her attention, or interrupting her fears. It is quite different ina very large majorityof labours. The woman has many intervals of ease,—she does not apprehend there is any peculiar danger in her case:—her mind, while free from pain, is at liberty calmly to attend to whatever is done. There is not above one labour in a thousand where there is any occasion for the knowledge of anatomy. I insist thatexcept in those very extraordinary cases, a knowledge of anatomy leads Men-midwives frequently to do great mischief.It makes them impatient.Theyknow howto bring on the labour pains,—theyknow how to force the birth. Fromthisdestructiveknowledge, numbers of children are demolished,—numbers of women are thrown into fevers bylacerationsandinflammations, which might have the worst consequences, and which never would have happenedif the knowledge of anatomyhad nottempted mento have recoursetoartwithin the proper boundaries ofnature’sempire. For this reason, if I was a married man, I would not employeven a womanwho had been bred under a Man-midwife. Herknowing the partsanatomically, andunderstanding theuseofinstruments, and pursuing theteizing,fiddlingcustoms of the men who had instructed her, instead of recommending her to me, would be a sufficient cause to prevent my employing her.
The only safe knowledgefor a midwife to possess, is,that which is taught byexperience. Whenever itceasesbeing possible for nature, with such assistance, to do her work,then, andthen only, art ought to be called in with instruments toaid.—Yet our young women are not ashamedpremeditately to resolveon employing men, though there are such a multitude of chancesagainstthe supposition of a dead child—or that there will be occasion for the destruction of her infant to save her own life. It is for this wanton use of men, that I wish I had abilities to expose their want of modesty in colours striking enough to hold out our women to the universal ridicule of the world, and draw down on them the contempt and indignation of the virtuous.
Is it not laughable to hear of amodestwoman sending fora manto inform herwhether or not she is with child, andhow far gone?—Heavens!a little patiencewould soon have cleared up that matter, and the most skilful man may be mistaken,even allowing the supposition(which isnotprobable)that he may be quite cool, andexperienceno flutteringsensations to confuse his mind duringthe seriousinvestigation. Why cannot the ladyallow afew monthsto elapse? Her doubts would then have been removed, without anymaleintrusions,withoutscandalous violationsofmodesty—without, what I term,shameful pollutions of her person.
What must Men-midwives think of those ladies, who send for them to be inspected on such trifling occasions?What can they avoid thinking?Must they not conclude, that those ladies are restrained from adulterynotby any principleof virtue, but by a dread of the consequences; and, since they can admit no man to familiarities but their Man-midwife (who is thepriviledged father confessor of England) without losing their reputations, they are resolved to beas immodest, without losing their characters, as the depraved, profligate custom of the world can authorize them? Men-midwives entertain each other with curious recitals of their adventures among the fair:—Surely those women cannot justly be pitied, who thus by their folly, or vice, furnish subjectsfirstfor their sensualideas, andafterwardsfor their mirth.
I have been a good deal amused by hearing my letter commented on in different companies, where the author was far from being suspected to be present. The Men-midwives, and the ladies who receive pleasure from employing them, never can forgive me for having exposed their conduct. All they can however say against me, is, that I am “very indelicate;”—that “it is a shame such papers should appear.”—Let them be informed, Mr. Printer, thatif I am “indelicate,”it isbecausethey are immodest. Wherethe boneiscorrupted, the flesh must be removed, andthe foul parts laid bare, in order to bescraped, andpurified—desperate disorders require desperate remedies.The “shame” does not consistin what I writebutin what they do.—Let themquit their practice, I will most readily throw aside my pen.
I should be sorry to entertain so bad an opinion of the generality of my fair countrywomen, as to suppose them hardened by the depraved custom of the times, beyond a possibility of being roused to a sense of danger for themselves and infants, and to a sense of virtue. Doctor Hunter is, beyond dispute,the best Man-midwife in the world—yet, let the advocates for theindiscriminateuse of men lay their hands on their hearts, and answer me ingenuously this question—Suppose anythreeof thebestMidwives in London had lostin their lives, the same numberof women of fashionDoctor Hunterhas lostwithin these two or three years,[3]would they not have exclaimedloudly, andtaken advantageof those deathsto prove the danger of employing women? All England would have rung of their mismanagement—and the women would have been ruined!—There are women in London who have laid several thousands, and yet never lost either a mother or an infant.
Though the abandoned custom exculpates ladies in the estimation of a dissipated world, yet I recommend to their confederationhow their thoughts, during the visitsof Men-midwives, will stand the test of the penetrating eye of their Creator.
I hope to live to see the day, when innate modesty will be the characteristic of English women; andof course, when a lady will not be more publickly branded with infamy for the most barefaced prostitution, than for the effrontery whichwill thenbe necessary to enable a woman wantonly to employ
A MAN-MIDWIFE.
[3]I would by no means be understood to insinuate the most distant reflection on Dr. Hunter’s management. I have not the smallest idea that any of those deaths were in consequence of the least fault in his execution of his business. I only mentioned them to shew that misfortunesmay happenwith the most able Man-midwife; and therefore that it is cruel to name one or two accidents as proof of a woman’s being unsafe, since they will happen to the first man in the whole world. I look on Dr. Hunter as a most skilful anatomist; able physician; experienced, tender, patient Man-midwife. If it was left to me to call any man to the labour of a woman in imminent danger, and whose life was linked in mine, Dr. Hunter is the man I would send for without a moment’s hesitation, his skill, but, above all, his experience,age, andinfirmities, render him theonlyman proper to be allowedto take libertieswith married women. Yetany woman of experience, in my opinion, isinfinitely saferthan even Dr. Hunter,except in very extraordinary cases.
[3]I would by no means be understood to insinuate the most distant reflection on Dr. Hunter’s management. I have not the smallest idea that any of those deaths were in consequence of the least fault in his execution of his business. I only mentioned them to shew that misfortunesmay happenwith the most able Man-midwife; and therefore that it is cruel to name one or two accidents as proof of a woman’s being unsafe, since they will happen to the first man in the whole world. I look on Dr. Hunter as a most skilful anatomist; able physician; experienced, tender, patient Man-midwife. If it was left to me to call any man to the labour of a woman in imminent danger, and whose life was linked in mine, Dr. Hunter is the man I would send for without a moment’s hesitation, his skill, but, above all, his experience,age, andinfirmities, render him theonlyman proper to be allowedto take libertieswith married women. Yetany woman of experience, in my opinion, isinfinitely saferthan even Dr. Hunter,except in very extraordinary cases.
[3]I would by no means be understood to insinuate the most distant reflection on Dr. Hunter’s management. I have not the smallest idea that any of those deaths were in consequence of the least fault in his execution of his business. I only mentioned them to shew that misfortunesmay happenwith the most able Man-midwife; and therefore that it is cruel to name one or two accidents as proof of a woman’s being unsafe, since they will happen to the first man in the whole world. I look on Dr. Hunter as a most skilful anatomist; able physician; experienced, tender, patient Man-midwife. If it was left to me to call any man to the labour of a woman in imminent danger, and whose life was linked in mine, Dr. Hunter is the man I would send for without a moment’s hesitation, his skill, but, above all, his experience,age, andinfirmities, render him theonlyman proper to be allowedto take libertieswith married women. Yetany woman of experience, in my opinion, isinfinitely saferthan even Dr. Hunter,except in very extraordinary cases.