Inventors

"”The obvious design of the sexual desire is the reproduction of the species. . . . The gratification of this passion, or indeed of any other, beyond its legitimate end, is an undoubted violation of natural law, as may be determined by the light of nature, and by the resulting moral and physical evils.” “Those creatures not gifted with erring reason, but with unerring instinct, and that have not the liberty of choice between good and evil, cohabit only at stated periods, when pleasure and reproduction are alike possible. It is so ordered among them that the means and the end are never separated ; and as it was the all-wise Being who endowed them with this instinct, without the responsibility resulting from the power to act otherwise, it follows that it is “HIS LAW”, and must, therefore, be the true copy for all beings to follow having the same functions to perform, and for the same end. The mere fact that men and women have the power and liberty of conforming or not conforming to this copy does not set them free from obedience to a right course, nor from the consequences of disobedience.” “The end of sexual pleasure being to reproduce the species, it follows, form the considerations just advanced, that when the sexual function is diverted from its end, reproduction, or if the means be used when the end is impossible, harm or injury should ensure.” “Perhaps the number is not small of those who think there is nothing wrong in an unlimited indulgence of the sexual propensity during married life. The marriage vow seems to be taken as equivalent to the freest license, about which there need be to restraint. Yet, if there is any truth in the law in reference to the enjoyment of the means only when the end is possible, the necessity of the limitation of this indulgence during married life is clearly as great as for that of any other sensual pleasure. “A great majority of those constituting the most highly civilized communities, act upon the belief that anything not forbidden by sacred or civil law is neither sinful nor wrong. They have not found cohabitation during pregnancy forbidden ; not have they ever had their attention drawn to the injury to health and organic development which such a practice inflicts. Hence, a habitual yielding to inclination in this matter has determined their life-long behavior. “The infringement of this law in the married state does not produce in the husband any very serious disorder. Debility, aches, cramps, and a tendency to epileptic seizures, are sometimes seen as the effects of great excess. An evil of no small account is the steady growth of the sexual passion by habitual unrestraint. It is in this way that what is known as libidinous blood is nursed as well among those who are strictly virtuous, in the ordinary meaning of the term, as among those who are promiscuous in their intercourse. “The wife and the offspring are the chief sufferers by the violation of this law among the married. Why this is so, may in part be accounted for by the following consideration: Among the animal kind it is the female which decides when the approaches of the male are allowable. When these are untimely, her instinctive prompting leads her to resist and protect herself with ferocious zeal. No one at all acquainted with the remarkable wisdom nature invariably displays in all her operations, will doubt that the prohibition of all sexual intercourse among animals during the period of pregnancy must be for a wise and good purpose. And, if it serves a wise and good purpose with them, why should an opposite course not serve an unwise and bad purpose with us? Our bodies are very much like theirs in structure and in function ; and in the mode and laws that govern reproduction there is absolutely no difference. The mere fact that we possess the power to acct otherwise than they do during that period, does not make it right. “Human beings having no instinctive prompting as to what is right and what is wrong, cohabitation, like many other points of the behavior, is left for reason or the will to determine ; or rather, as things now are, to unreason ; for reason is neither consulted nor enlightened to what is proper and allowable in the matter. Nature’s rule, by instinct, makes it devolve upon the female to determine when the approaches of the male are allowable. But some may say that she is helpless in the matter, No one dare to approach her without consent before marriage; and why should man not be educated up to the point of doing the same after marriage? She is neither his slave, nor his property; nor does the tie or marriage bind her to carry out any unnatural requirement.”"

"[F]or what moral right have men or women to do that which injure the integrity of the physical organism given them, and for which they are accountable to their Creator ? Surely none; for the man who destroys himself by degrees, is no less a murderer than he who cuts his throat or puts a bullet through his brain. The crime is the same-being the shortening of human life-whether the injury is done to one’s self or to another. In this matter, there are at least three sufferers; the husband, the wife, and the offspring, though’ in most cases, doubtless, the husband is the one to whom the sin almost exclusively belongs."

"Do not we owe much to those grand old pagans who laid the foundation for nearly all the modern sciences, and established better systems of political economy, and better schools for uniform culture of the whole individual, than any the world has seen since?"

"Mental Unchastity.-It is vain for a man to suppose himself chaste who allows his imagination to run riot amid scenes of amorous associations. The man whose lips delight in tales of licentiousness, whose eyes feast upon obscene pictures, who is every ready to pervert the meaning of a harmless word or act into uncleanliness, who finds delight in reading vivid portrayals of acts lewdness,-such a one is not a virtuous man. Though he may never have committed an overt act of unchastity, if he cannot pass a handsome female in the street without, in imagination, approaching the secrets of her person, he is but one grade above the open libertine, and is as truly unchaste as the veriest debauchee. Man may not see these mental adulteries, he may not perceive these filthy imaginings; but One sees and notes them. They leave their hideous scars upon the soul. They soil and amr the mind; and as the record of each day of life is photographed upon the books in Heaven, they each appear in bold relief, in all their innate hideousness."

"While it is true as a fact affirmed by constant observation that men have stronger passions than women, in general and that many men demand of their wives a degree of sexual indulgence which is the cause of serious injury to them, and even impossible for them to grant without doing themselves the greatest wrong, it is by no means proven either that these demands are imperative, that they are natural, or that they are not injurious to the man as well as the woman, much less beneficial to either. On the contrary, there is a great a weight of evidence as could be required that restraint, self-control, and moderation in the exercise of the sexual instinct is in the highest degree beneficial to man, as well as to woman, and necessary for his highest development."

"While it is true that there are a few more adult women than men, the difference is not sufficiently great to require the introduction of polygamy as a remedy for enforced celibacy At any rate this would be unnecessary until all bachelors ad been provided with wives, when there would be found no necessity for further provision, since there are large numbers of women who are utterly unfit to marry, who would be injured by so doing, and would only serve to degenerate the race, besides making themselves more wretched than they already are. Again, it is a well-known fact that more males than females are born, the preponderance of adult females being caused by a greater mortality among ale children, together with the losses from accidents and war. By a correct observance of the laws of health, together with the abolition of wars, the disparity in relative numbers of the sexes would disappear. Indeed, it might happen that men would be in the preponderance. Still again, it is only in a few very populous and long-settled communities that there are more women than men, as in the States of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and a few others of the Eastern States, and a few countries of Europe. In all newly settled countries the reverse is true. The inquiry naturally arises, What shall be done under these circumstances? Shall a woman be allowed more than one husband, as is actually the case in some countries? “Oh! no;” our polygamist replies “A woman is not capable of loving more than one man, and is not even able to satisfy the sexual demands of a single husband; so, of course, a plurality of husbands is out of the question. A man is capable of loving any number of women, being differently constituted from a woman ; and so the same rule does not apply.”"

"Perhaps we should add a word of two respecting this custom, which seems to be a still greater outrage against nature than that of polygamy, being the possession of a plurality of husbands by one woman. This practice is in vogue in several countries at the present time, being very common in Thibet, where it is not an unusual thing for a woman in marrying the eldest of a family of brothers to include in the contract all of the other brothers as well. Polyandry was also common among the ancient Medes. Indeed, the Medes practiced both polygamy and polyandry. A man was not considered respectable unless he had at least seven wives; neither were women considered worthy of general esteem unless they had as many as five husbands. In that country, the fact that a woman was already married was in no degree a barrier to subsequent marriages, even while the husband was living, and without the trouble of a divorce. Those who maintain the propriety o polygamy would do well to consider the historic facts respecting the opposite practice. There appear to be as good grounds for believing one to have a basis in the human constitution as the other."

"It has been authoritatively stated that there are, in our large cities, hundreds of young women who, being able to earn barely enough to buy food and fuel and pay the rent of a dismal attic, take the advice offered by their employers, “Get some gentleman friend to dress you for your company.” Others spend all their small earnings to keep themselves “respectably” dressed, and share the board and lodgings of some young “roué” as heartless as incontinent. Persons unaccustomed to city life, and thousands of people in the very heart of our great metropolis, have no conception of the frightful prevalence of this kind of prostitution. Young women go to our large cities as pure as snow. They find no lucrative employment. Daily contact with vice obtunds their first abhorrence of it. Gradually it becomes familiar. A fancies life of ease presents allurements to a hard-worked sewing girl. Fine clothes and comfortable lodgings increase the temptation. She yields, and barters her body for a home without the trouble of a marriage ceremony. Wealthy women could do more to cure the “social evil” by adopting plain attire than all the civil authorities by passing license laws or regulating ordinances. Have not Christian women a duty here? A few years ago, some Nashville ladies mad e slight move in the right direction, as indicated in the following paragraph; but we have not heard that their example has been followed:- “the lady member of the first Baptist Church, of Nashville, Tenn., have agreed that they will dispense with a ll finery on Sunday, wearing no jewels but consistency, and hereafter appear at church in plain calico dresses.” A more radical reform would have been an extension of the salutary measure to all other days of the week as well as Sunday; though we see no reason for restricting the material of clothing to calico, which might, indeed, be rather insufficient for some seasons of the year."

"The primary object of marriage was, undoubtedly, the preservation of the race, though there are other objects which, under special circumstances, may become paramount even to this."

"Time to Marry.-Physiology fixes with accuracy the earliest period at which marriage is admissible. This period is that at which the body attains complete development, which is not before twenty in the female, and twenty-four in the male. Even though the growth may be completed before these ages, ossification of the bones is not fully effected, so that development is incomplete. Among the most modern nations, the civil laws fixing the earliest date of marriage seem to have been made without any reference to physiology, or with the mistaken notion that puberty and nobility are identical. It is interesting to note the different ages established by different nations fot the entrance of the married state. The degenerating Romans fixed the ages of legal marriage at thirteen for females and fifteen for males. The Grecian legislator, Lycurgus, placed the ages at seventeen for the female, and thirty-seven for the male. Plato fixed the ages at twenty and thirty years. In Prussia, the respective ages are fifteen and nineteen; in Austria, sixteen and twenty; in France, sixteen and eighteen, respectively. Says Mayer, “In general, it may be established that the normal epoch for marriage is the twentieth year for women, and the twenty-fourth for men.”"

"Dr. Gardner quotes the Abbe Maury, as follows: “I hold as certain that after fifty years of age a man of sense ought to renounce the pleasures of love. Each time that he allows himself this gratification is “a pellet of earth thrown upon his coffin.” Dr. Gardner further says: “Alliance of this sort have taken place in every epoch of humanity, from the time of the patriarchs to the present day,-alliances repugnant to nature,-between men bordering on decrepitude and poor young girls who are sacrificed by their parents for position, or who sell themselves for gold. There is in those monstrous alliances something which we know not how to brand sufficiently energetically, in considering the reciprocal relations of the pair thus wrongfully united, and the lot of the children which may result from them. Let us admit, for an instant, that the marriage has been concluded with the full consent of the young girl, and that no external pressure has been exerted upon her will-as is generally the rule-it will none the less happen that reflection and experience will tardily bring regrets, and the sharper as the evil will be without remedy; but if compulsion, or what is often the same thing, “persuasion”, had been employed to obtain the consent with the law demands, the result would have been more prompt and vehement. From this moment the common life becomes odious to the unhappy victim, and “culpable hopes” will arise in her desolate heart, so heavy is the chain she carries. In fact, the love of the old man becomes ridiculous and horrid to her, and we cannot sufficiently sympathize with the unfortunate person whose duty [?] it is to submit to it. If we think of it an instant, we shall perceive a repulsion such as is only inspired by the idea of incest. . . . So what do we oftenest observe? Either the woman violently breaks the cursed bands, or she resigns herself to them ; and then she seeks to fill up the void in her soul by adulterous amours. Such is the somber perspective of the sacrilegious unions which set at defiance the most respectable instincts, the most noble desires, and the most legitimate hopes. Such, too, are the terrible chastisements reserved for the thoughtless or foolish pride of these dissolute gray-bears, who prodigalize the last breath of their life in search of depraved voluptuousness.”"

"Application of the Law of Heredity.-A moment’s consideration of the physiology of heredity will disclose a sufficient reason why marriage should be deferred until the development of the body is wholly complete. The matrimonial relation implies reproduction. Reproduction is effected through the union of the ovum with the zoosperm. These elements, as we have already seen, are complete representatives of the individuals producing them, being composed-as supposed-of minute gemmules which are destined to be developed into cell and organs in the new being, each preserving its resemblance to the cell within the parent which produced it. The perfection of the new being, then, must be largely dependent on the integrity and perfection of the sexual elements. If the body is still incomplete, the reproductive elements must also be incomplete; and, in consequence, the progeny must be equally immature."

"Senile Sexuality.-As with childhood, old age is a period I which the reproductive functions are quiescent unless unnaturally stimulated. Sexual life begins with puberty, and, in the female, ends at about the age of forty-five years, the period known as the “menopause”, or “turn of life”. At this period, according to the plainest indications of nature, all functional activity should cease. If this law is disregarded, disease, premature decay, possibly local degenerations, will be sure to result. Nature cannot be abused with impunity. The generative power of the male is retained somewhat longer than that of the female, and by stimulation may be indulged at quite an advanced age, but only at the expense of shortening life, and running the risk of sudden death. Says Parise, “One of the most important pieces of information which a man in years can attain is “to learn to become old betimes,’ if he wishes to attain old age. Cicero, we are told, was asked if he still indulged in the pleasures of love. ‘Heaven forbid,’ replied he, ‘I have forsworn it as I would a savage and a furious master.’” Some learned physicians place the proper limit of man’s functional activity at fifty years, if he would not render himself guilty of shortening his days by sensuality. Other reasons for this course will appear hereafter. When the passions have been indulged, and their diminishing vigor stimulated, a horrid disease, “satyriasis”, not infrequently seizes upon the imprudent individual, and drives him to the perpetration of the most loathsome crimes and excesses. Passions cultivated and encouraged by gratification through life will thus sometimes assert a total supremacy in old age."

"Early Marriage.-The preceding paragraph contains a sufficient reason for condemning early marriage; that is, marriage before the ages mentioned. It is probable that even the ages of twenty and twenty-four are too early for those persons whose development is uncommonly slow. But there are other cogent reasons for discountenancing early marriages, also drawn from the physiology of reproduction, to say nothing of the many reasons which might be urged on other grounds. 1. During the development of the body, all its energies are required in perfecting the various tissues and organs. There is no material to be spared for any foreign purpose. 2. The reproductive act is the most exhaustive of all vital acts. Its effect upon an undeveloped person is to retard growth, weaken the constitution, and dwarf the intellect. 3. The effects upon the female are even worse than those upon the male; for, in addition to the exhaustion of nervous energy, she is compelled to endure the burdens and pains of child-bearing when utterly unprepared for such a task, to say nothing of her unfitness for the other duties of a mother. With so many girl-mothers in the land, it is any wonder that there are so many thousands of unfortunate individuals who never seem to get beyond childhood in their development? Many a man at forty years is as childish in mind and as immature in judgment, as a well-developed lad of eighteen would be. They are like withered fruit plucked before it was ripe; they can never become like the mellow and luscious fruit allowed to mature properly. They are unalterably molded; and the saddest fact f all is that they will give to their children the same imperfections; and the children will transmit them to another generation, and so the evil will go on increasing, unless checked by extinction."

"Marriage.-The scope and plan of this work will allow of but the briefest possible consideration of this subject upon which volumes have been written, much to no purpose other than the multiplication of books."

"Let Dr. Gardner speak again :- “Children, the issue of old men, are habitually marked by a serious and sad air spread over their countenances, which is manifestly very opposite to the infantile expression which so delights one in the little children of the same age engendered under other conditions. As they grow up, their features take on more and more the senile character ; so much so that every one remarks it, and the world regard it as a natural thing. The old mothers pretend that it is an old head on young shoulders. They predict an early death to these children, and the event frequently justifies the horoscope. Our attention has for many years been fixed upon this point, and we can affirm that the greater part of the offspring of these connections are weak, torpid, lymphatic, if not scrofulous, and do not promise a long career.”"

"Often the manifestation of sexual precocity is less gross, but almost equally fraught with danger, nevertheless. Dr. Acton, a distinguished English surgeon whom we shall frequently quote, makes the following excellent remarks upon this subject:- “Slight signs are sufficient to indicate when a boy has this unfortunate tendency. He shows marked preferences. You will see him single out one girl, and evidently derive and unusual pleasure (for a boy) in her society. His “penchant” does not take the ordinary form of a boy’s good nature, but little attentions that are generally reserved for a later period prove that his feeling is different, and sadly premature. He may be apparently healthy, and fond of playing with other boys; still there are slight, but ominous, indications of propensities fraught with danger to himself. His play with the girl is different from his play with his brothers. His kindness to her is a little too ardent. He follows her, he does not know why. He fondles her with a tenderness painfully suggestive of a vague dawning of passion. No one can find fault with him. He does nothing wrong. Parents and friends are delighted at his gentleness and politeness, and not a little amused at the early flirtation. If they were wise, they would rather feel profound anxiety; and he would be an unfaithful or unwise medical friend who did not if an opportunity occurred, warn them that such a boy, unsuspicious and innocent as he is, ought to be carefully watched and removed from every influence calculated to foster his abnormal propensities."

"The premature development of the sexual inclination is not alone repugnant to all we associate with the term childhood, but is also fraught with danger to dawning manhood. On the judicious treatment of a case such as has been sketched, it probably depends whether the dangerous propensity shall be so kept in check as to preserve the boy’s health and innocence, or whether one more shattered constitution and wounded conscience shall be added to the victims of sexual precocity and careless training. It ought not to be forgotten that in such a cases a quasi-sexual power often accompanies these premature sexual inclinations. Few, perhaps, except medical men, know how early in life a mere infant may experience erections. Frequently it may be noticed that a little child, on being taken out of bed in the morning, cannot make water at once. It would be well if it were recognized by parents and nurses that this often depends upon a more or less complete erection."

"We again quote from Dr. Acton some observations on the causes of this disorder,-for a grave disorder it is,-as follows:- ”I should specify “hereditary” predisposition as by no means the least common. . . . I believe that, as in body and mind, so also in the passions, the sins of the father are frequently visited on the children. No man or woman, I am sure, can have habitually indulged the sexual passions . . . without , at least, running the risk of finding that a disposition to follow a similar career has been inherited by the offspring. It is in this way only that we can explain the early and apparently almost irresistible propensity in generation after generation indulging similar habits and feelings.”"

"A writer of some note, whose work on this and kindred subjects has had quite an extensive circulation, advocates with great emphasis the theory that parties contemplating marriage should in all cases select for partners individuals as nearly like themselves as possible. Exact duplicates would, in his opinion, make the most perfect union attainable. To make this theory practicable, he is obliged to fall back upon phrenology; and directs that a man seeking wife, or a woman seeking a husband, should obtain a phrenological chart of his head and then send it around until a counterpart is found. If the circle of one’s acquaintance is so fortunate as to contain no one cursed with the same propensities or idiosyncrasies as himself, the newspapers are to be brought into requisition as a medium of advertising."

"The juvenile parties so common now-a-days, at which little ones of both sexes, of ages varying from four or five years to ten or twelve, with wonderful precocity and truthfulness imitate the conduct of their elders at fashionable dinners, cannot be too much deprecated. Such associations of the sexes have a strong tendency to develop prematurely the distinctive peculiarities of the sexes. This is well evidenced by the fact that on such occasions one of the most common and popular entertainments is sham marriages. Parents greatly err in encouraging or allowing their children to engage in amusements of so dangerous a character. They are productive of no good, and are almost without exception productive of positive and serious injury. Modern modes of life, improper clothing, the forcing system of cramming in schools, the immodest example of older persons, and especially the irritating, stimulating articles of diet which are daily set before children, as well as older people, undoubtedly have a powerful influence in stimulating the development of the sexual passions. This subject is again referred to under the heading, “Chastity.” Obscene books and papers, lewd pictures, and evil communications are telling causes which will be further noticed elsewhere."

"In old age the seminal fluid becomes greatly deteriorated. Even at the best, its component elements could only represent decrepitude and infirmity, degeneration and senility. In view of such facts, say Dr. Acton,- “We are, therefore, forced to the conclusion that the children of old men have an inferior chance of life; and fact daily observed confirm our deductions. Look but at the progeny of such marriages; what is its value? As far as I have seen, it is the worst kind-spoilt childhood, feeble and precocious youth, extravagant manhood, early and premature death.” Unions of an opposite character to those just considered, wherein a young man married a woman much older than himself, are more rare than those of the other class. They are, perhaps, less deplorable in their physical effects, but still highly reprehensible they are seldom prompted by pure motives, and can e productive of no good. Children resulting from such unions are noticeably weak, unbalanced, and sorry specimens of humanity. We have scarcely referred to the domestic misery which may result from these disgraceful unions. If a young girl is brought home by a widower to preside over his grown-up daughters, perhaps old enough to be her mother, all the elements are provided for such a domestic hell as could only be equaled by circumstances precisely similar. If children are born, neither father nor mother is fit to act the part of a parent to them. The father, by reason of his age, is fitful, uncertain, and childish; to-day too lenient, to-morrow too exacting. The mother is pettish, childish, indulgent, impatient ,and as unskilled in government as unfit for motherhood. In the midst of all this misrule, the child grows up undisciplined, uncultivated, unsubdued; a misery to his parents, a disgrace to his friends, a dishonor to himself. “What shall I do with him? And what will he do with me?” was the question asked by a girl of eighteen whose parents were urging her to marry an old man; and every young woman would do well to propound it under similar circumstances."

"According to this rule, a man or woman or large combativeness should select a partner equally inclined to antagonism; then we should have what? The elements of a happy contented, harmonious life? No, instead, either a speedy lawsuit for divorce, or a continual domestic broil, the nearest approach to mundane purgatory possible. The selfish, close-fisted, miserly money-catcher must marry a woman equally sordid and stingy. Then together they could hoard up, for moths and rust to destroy, or for interested relatives to quarrel over, the pictorial greenback and the glittering dollar, each scrimping the other down to the finest point above starvation and freezing, and finally dying, to be forgotten as soon as dead by their fellow-men, and sent among the goats at the great assizes. A shiftless sprendthrift must choose for a helpmeet (?) an equally slovenly, thriftless wife. A man with a crotchet should select a partner with the same morbid fancy. A man whose whole mental composition gravitates behind his ears, must mind a mate with the same animal disposition. An individual whose mental organization is sadly unbalance, is advised to seek for a wife a woman with the same deficiencies and abnormalities. Any one can see at a glance the domestic disasters which such a plan of proceeding would entail. Men and women of unbalanced temperaments would become more unbalanced. An individual of erroneous tendencies, instead of having the constant check of the example and admonitions of a mate of opposite tendencies, would be, by constant example, hastened onward in his sinful ways. Thus, to all but a very small proportion of humanity, the married state would be one of infelicity and degeneration. And what would be the progeny of such unions? The peculiarities and propensities of the parents, instead of being modified and perhaps obliterated in the children by corresponding difference sin character, would be doubly exaggerated. The children of selfish parents would be thieves; those of spendthrifts, beggars; those of crotchety parents, monomaniacs; those born of sensual parents, beastly debauchees. A few generations of such a degenerating process would either exterminate the race of drive it back to Darwin’s ancestral ape. It must not be inferred, from our strictures upon the theory mentioned, that we would advocate the opposite course, that is, the contraction of marriage by individuals of wholly dissimilar tastes, aims, and temperaments. Such alliances would doubtless be quite as wretched in their results as those of an opposite character. It is with this as with nearly all other subjects; the true course lies between the two extremes. Parties who are negotiating a life partnership should be careful to assure themselves that there exists a sufficient degree of congeniality of temperament to make such close and continued association agreeable."

"Were we disposed to define more specifically the conditions necessary to secure the most harmonious matrimonial unions, it would be useless to do so; for unions of this sort never have been, and never will be-with rare exceptions-formed in accordance with a prescribed method independent of any emotional bias. Nor is it probable that such a plan would result in remedying, in any appreciable degree, existing evils. It is a fact too patent to be ignored that a very large share of the unhappiness in the world arises from ill-mated marriages; but it is also true that nearly the whole of this unhappiness might be averted if the parties themselves would endeavor to lessen the differences between them by mutual approximation."

"If it was so important that man should have more than one woman to supply his sexual demands, why was the Creator so short-sighted as to make but one Eve? It would have been as easy to remove two or three or half a dozen ribs from Adam’s side as one; and as the whole world had yet to be populated, a plurality of wives would certainly have accelerated the process. Surely, if polygamy was ever required or excusable, it ought to have been allowed at the start. Again, when Noah went into the ark taking with him an assortment of all species of animals, he took some kinds of pairs and some by sevens, from which we might suspect, at least, that he observed the laws of nature respecting polygamous and monogamous animals. But he took only one wife for himself, and only one for each of his sons. Why not two or half a dozen instead? Polygamy would certainly have accelerated the repopulation of the earth most wonderfully; but Noah was monogamous. To say, in view of such facts, that monogamy originated with the paganism of ancient Greece and Rome, is blasphemy."

"Not a Modern Crime.—Although this crime has attained remarkable proportions in modern times, it is not a new one by any means, as the following paragraph will suffice to show:— "Infanticide and exposure were also the custom among the Romans, Medes, Canaanites, Babylonians, and other Eastern nations, with the exception of the Israelites and Egyptians. The Scandinavians killed their offspring from pure fantasy. The Norwegians, after having carefully swaddled their children, put some food into their mouths, placed them under the roots of trees or under the rocks to preserve them from ferocious beasts. Infanticide was also permitted among the Chinese, and we saw, during the last century, vehicles going round the streets of Pekin daily to collect the bodies of the dead infants. To-day there exist foundling hospitals to receive children abandoned by their parents. The same custom is also observed in Japan, in the isles of the Southern Ocean, at Otaheite, and among several savage nations of North America. It is related to the Jaggers of Guinea that they devour their own children.” The Greeks practiced infanticide systematically, their laws at one time requiring the destruction of crippled or weakly children. Among all the various nations, the general object of the crime seems to have been to avoid the trouble of rearing the children, or to avoid a surplus, objects not far different from those had in view by those who practice the same crimes at the present time. The destruction of the child after the mother has felt its movements is termed infanticide; before that time it is commonly known as abortion. It is a modern notion that the child possesses no soul or individual life until the period of quickening, an error which we have already sufficiently exposed. The ancients, with just as much reason, contended that no distinct life was present until after birth. Hence it was that they could practice without scruple the crime of infanticide to prevent too great increase of population. "Plato and Aristotle were advocates of this practice, and these Stoics justified this monstrous practice by alleging that the child only acquired a soul at the moment when it ceased to have uterine life and commenced to respire. From hence it resulted that, the child not being animated, its destruction was no murder.""

"Disparity of Age.-Both nature and custom seem to indicate that the husband should be a little older than the wife. Several reasons might be given for this; but we need not mention them. When, however, the difference of ages reaches such an extreme as thirty, forty, even fifty or more years, nature is abused, good taste is offended, and even morality is shocked Such ill-sorted alliances are disastrous to both parties, and scarcely more to one than the other. An old man who forms a union with a young girl scarce out of her teens-or even younger-can scarcely have any very elevated motive for his action, and he certainly exposes himself to the greatest risk of sudden death, while insuring his premature decay. A king once characterized such a course as “the pleasantest form of suicide.” It is doubtless suicidal, but we suspect there are some phases of such an unnatural union which are not very enjoyable. One reason of the great danger of such marriages to the old is the exhaustive effects of the sexual act. As previously noted, in some animals it causes immediate death. Dr. Acton makes the following pertinent remarks:- “So serious, indeed, is the paroxysm of the nervous system produced by the sexual spasm, that its immediate effect is not always unattended with danger, and men with weak hearts have died in the act. Every now and then we learn that men are found dead on the night of their wedding.” “However exceptional these cases are, they are warnings, and should serve to show that an act which “may” destroy the weak should not be tampered with, even by the strong.” “There are old men who marry young wives, who pay the penalty by becoming martyrs to paralysis, softening of the brain, and driveling idiocy.”"

"Causes of the Crime.—Many influences may combine to cause the mother ruthlessly to destroy her helpless child: as, to conceal the results of sin; to avoid the burdens of maternity; to secure ease and freedom to travel, etc., or even from a false idea that maternity is vulgar; but it is true, beyond all question, that the primary cause of the sin is far back of all these influences. The most unstinted and scathing incectives are used in characterizing the criminality of a mother who takes the life of her unborn babe; but a word is seldom said of the one who forced upon her the circumstances which gave the unfortunate one existence. Though doctors, ministers, and moralists have said much on this subject, and written more, it is reasonable to suppose that they will never accomplish much of anything in the direction of reform until they recognize the part the man acts in all of these sad cases, and begin to demand reform where it is most needed, and where its achievement will effect the most good. As was observed in the remarks upon the subject of "Prevention of Conception," this evil has its origin in "marital excesses," and in a disregard of the natural law which makes the female the sole proprietor of her own body, and gives to her the right to refuse the approaches of the male when unprepared to receive them without doing violence to the laws of her being."

"Courting, in the sense in which we use the word, is distinctly an American custom. The social laws of other civilized countries are such as to preclude the possibility of the almost unrestrained association of the sexes in youth which we see in this country. We do not offer this fact as an argument in favor of foreign social customs, by any means, although in this one particular they often present great advantages, since in the majority of instances other evils as great or even greater are encouraged. We mention the fact simply for the purpose of bringing into bold relief the evils of the characteristic American looseness in this particular. A French matron would be horrified at the idea of a young man asking her daughter to accompany him alone on an evening ride to a lecture, concert, or other place of amusement, and much more should he ask the privilege of sitting up all night in the parlor with the light turned down, after the rest of the family had retired. Among respectable people in France such liberties are not tolerated; and a young man who should propose such things would be dismissed from the house instantly, and would be regarded as unfit for association with virtuous people. If a young man calls upon a young lady for the purpose of making her acquaintance, he sees both her and her mother, or an aunt or older sister. He never sees her alone. If he invited her to ride, or to accompany him to an entertainment of any sort, he must always invite her lady friend also; she goes along at any rate. There is afforded no chance for solitary moonlight strolls or rides, nor any other of the similar opportunities made so common by American courting customs. We are no advocates of the formal modes of contracting matrimonial alliances common among many nations, and illustrations of which we find at all ages of the world. For example, among the ancient Assyrians it was a custom to sell wives to the highest bidder, at auction, the sums received for the handsomer one being given to the less favored ones as a dowry, to secure a husband for every woman. The same custom prevailed in Babylon in ancient times, and has been practiced in modern times in Russia. At St. Petersburg, not many years ago, an annual sale of wives was held on Whit Sunday, after the same plan followed by the Assyrians. Among the early Jews it seems to have been the custom for parents to select wives for their sons. In the case of Isaac, this important matter was intrusted to an old and experienced servant, who was undoubtedly considered much more competent to select a wife for the young man than he was himself. The same custom has been handed down even to the present time among some oriental nations. In many cases the parties are not allowed to see each other until after the wedding ceremony is completed. The Hungarians often betroth their children while they are yet in their cradles, as did the Mexicans and Brazilians of the last century. In some countries it has even been customary to betroth girls conditionally before they were born. The primitive Moravians seem to have adhered to the ancient Jewish custom in some degree, though making the selection of a wife a matter of chance. The old people did all the courting there was done, which was not much. When a young man desired a wife, a helpmeet was selected for him by casting lots among the marriageable young ladies of the community, and the young man was obliged to abide by the decision, it being supposed that Providence controlled the selection. We are not prepared to say that the young man ran any greater risk of getting an uncongenial or undesirable life companion by this mode of selection than by the more modern modes in vogue among us. As before remarked, we do not represent these customs as illustrations of what might be considered a proper mode of conducting the preliminary steps of matrimonial alliances. On the contrary, we unhesitatingly pronounce them decidedly objectionable on moral grounds if not on others, and we can readily see that such inions must have been in many cases exceedingly unsatisfactory."

"If you like an exercise, chances are you’re doing it wrong."

"A properly performed set of leg extensions immediately followed by a properly performed set of leg presses should leave you feeling like you just climbed a tall building with your car tied to your back."

"We learn, when we learn, only from experience, and then we only learn from our mistakes. Our successes only serve to reinforce our superstitions."

"Never be so arrogant that you fail to give people the benefit of being as stupid as they actually are."

"How old am I? Old enough to know it’s impossible to change the thinking of fools, but young and foolish enough to keep on trying."

"There must surely be a few bodybuilders who are not idiots. But if so, they are well camouflaged in some undiscovered cave."

"Thinking is a terrible disadvantage with which most people are not burdened. Being able to think merely makes you aware of the outrages around you."

"How would you feel if you lived on an island populated, apart from yourself, exclusively by retarded, malicious chimpanzees? Well, that’s how I feel. Don’t laugh, because you’re one of those retarded, malicious chimpanzees."

"If racehorses were trained as much as most bodybuilders train, you could safely bet your money on an out-of-condition turtle."

"Voting for politicians who tell you what you want to hear has all but destroyed civilization, giving in to outrage in the hope of avoiding trouble has all but destroyed freedom, and looking for the easy road to success in bodybuilding has all but destroyed the actually great potential value of weight training."

"Split routines make about as much sense as sleeping with one eye open. Best results will almost always occur from exercising both your upper body and your lower body in the same workout."

"I had trouble at first, in the early 1900s, in selling Mr. Leland our roller bearings. He then taught me the need for greater accuracy in our products to meet the exacting standards of interchangeable parts. Mr. Leland came to the industry with a mature experience in general engineering and in gasoline engines, which he had long made for boats. One of his specialties was precision metalwork, which went back to his experience in toolmaking for a federal arsenal during the Civil War, and which he afterward developed in the Brown and Sharpe Company, machine-tool makers of Providence, Rhode Island. It has been called to my attention It has been called to my attention that Eli Whitney, long before, had started the development of interchangeable parts, a fact which suggests a line of descent from Whitney to Leland to the automobile industry."

"Henry Leland had a profound influence not only on GM, but also on many later automakers. His nickname became “the Grand Old Man of Detroit.”"

"After getting to know the young Daytonians () Henry Leland told them about a friend of his who had stopped to help a woman whose car had stalled. As he cranked the starter, it kicked back and broke his jaw. The man later died from an infection as a result of that accident. This led Leland to ask Kettering and Deeds if they could use electricity to start a car. Of course, they accepted the challenge. A self-starter would not only prevent such accidents but would also open up the car market to women who were unable to crank a car. They returned to the Barn to try and make the first self-starter for automobiles..."

"On the train I was going over the problem of Sixes versus Fours and the disturbing periodic vibrations with which the 'six-cylinder manufacturers were contending. I realized the emphasis our competitors were placing on the fact that six smaller cylinders, producing the same maximum power as four larger ones, would result in smaller individual impulses, and consequent smoother action."

"At first we were of necessity slow in putting out those motors, but after we had gotten under way we delivered them so rapidly that Mr. Olds said we must have a motor incubator at our place."

"Our car was an Oldsmobile, delivered to our home by Mr. Olds himself. I recall how our family went out to the street curb to look at it. Mr. Olds worked quite a while cranking it, muttering something about each car having an individuality of its own. But after we began to make motors for him, father took the individuality out of them. After our own little Oldsmobile was properly equipped, it acted in quite an exemplary fashion."

"Henry M. Leland was the guiding genius of the Cadillac Motor Car Company. He was the company’s founder and became the Division's first general manager when it was purchased by Billy Durant and in 1909. Religiously devoted to accuracy of machining and quality construction, Leland recognized that in true interchangeability of parts lays the key to a great future automobile industry."

"If they had made that longer six-cylinder strong enough and had supported it well enough, they would have obtained the smoother action they talks about in their advertisements. But they could not do that, and those early sixes had a very undesirable period vibration at certain speeds. That vibration more than offset the gain that they would have realized, if they had treated the crankshaft properly."

"Mr. Sloan, are made to run, not just to sell."

"The teams at times could go but a short distance every day. In bad weather at night there would be as many as 150 horses at one of the small frame inns which were not more than five or eight miles apart. Each driver had to care for his eight horses, feed, clean, card, harness and unharness. For all this work my father received the wages of $15 per month."