It has been supposed by some authors, and we think correctly that the majority (if not all) of face presentations are originally cranial presentations: if this be the case, we can easily understand why the right side of the face presents more frequently than the left, for if the head in the first cranial position moves round upon its transverse diameter, and thus allows the face to turn downwards, we shall immediately have a first position of the face. We are the more inclined to adopt this opinion, not only from the greater number of cases where the right side of the face presents, but also from our having more than once met with cases where so long as the head of the child was moveable above the brim, the presentation was midway between one of the cranium, and of the face. On one side of the pelvis we could feel the anterior fontanelle; on the other we could, with some difficulty, reach the orbital process of the frontal bone: as the pains increased, and the head advanced lower, the side of the face came more within reach; so that by the time it had fairly entered the cavity of the pelvis, it had become a complete presentation of the face.[79] We distinguish the face by the bridge of the nose, which from its crossing the os uteri may be detected at a very early period of labour: it is far better than the eye, for not only is this liable to mislead us in our examination, but it may also receive injury from the finger. Nor is the malar bone a guide, for this might easily be mistaken for the tuberosity of the ischium, or even for the shoulder. The nose not only tells us that the face is presenting but also in which position, for at one end we shall feel the soft cushiony extremity of it, at the other we shall reach the broad hard expanse of the forehead. It was not until nearly the end of the last century that presentations of the face ceased to be accounted unnatural, and impossible to be terminated by natural means. Although the fact had been pointed out by Portal so early as 1685, that these presentations were very little removed from the usual one, it seems to have excited but little attention until the time of Deleurye in 1770. "I have," says Portal, "delivered several women whose children came with the face foremost, and always without any great difficulty, it being only observed, _that in such cases no violence must be used, but nature be left to its own course; which done, there is no danger either of mother or child_." (Portal's _Midwifery_, transl. obs. 66:) La Motte in 1721, although so accurate an observer, could not divest himself of the general opinion that these were unfavourable positions, even although the face was usually expelled by the natural efforts, after he had fruitlessly endeavoured to rectify it, and although he himself confesses never to have "seen any that had not done well."