It is but fair to observe, that M. De la Motte, (Obs. 248) instances, from Peu, two patients perishing by the midwife’s trusting to the pure actings of Nature in this very case. Footnote 33: Dyonis in his Treatise, book III. ch. 12. Mauriceau, book II. chap. 14. Footnote 34: This instrument was once as much in vogue, as can be supposed of a time, when instruments were not so common as they are now. But how much torture in vain must it have given before it was discovered, that “so far from answering the _supposed_ intention of it, namely, to extend the bones of the Pelvis; it can serve no other purpose than that of _bruising_ or _inflaming_ the parts of the woman.” SMELLIE, p. 296. Possibly the more modern instruments, which have supplanted this now exploded one, under the notion of improvement, will, in time be found to be liable to as just objection. But in the mean while what lives must be lost, what tortures endured, in the experiment! How many will have been the victims, women and children! Footnote 35: Even this very Mauriceau allowed, by his brother practitioner M. De la Motte, to have been an excellent man-midwife, is however very justly animadverted upon by him for his weakness in giving into such nonsense, as prescribing histeric medicines by way of hastening the delivery. His capital receipt was the juice of a Seville orange in an infusion of Sena. Let any one imagine, what an effect such a laxative potion must have on a woman, commonly rather wanting to have her strength recruited by proper restoratives, than diminished by purges, on so senseless a view. But how many other instances might be brought of these same most learned men-midwives, making almost as pitiful a figure in the character of physicians, as they must for ever do in that of manual practitioners of our art! Even the works of Daventer, who has such glimpses of true theory, prove him not uninfected with a spice of quackery. This is generally speaking so true of the men-dabblers in practical midwifery, that one would imagine the extension of that meanness of theirs, in putting their nose into such a function, even to their collateral profession, whatever it be, of physician, surgeon, chemist or apothecary, was the revenge of Nature, for the outrages of their pretended art upon her. Footnote 36: Page 249, of his treatise of midwifery. Footnote 37: That is to say, if he touched the woman at all with it, and did not sometimes, at least, _make believe_ that he delivered her with it though Nature alone should have done the work. Sure I am that that piece of quackery in him of pretending to hide the instrument, might justify such a suspicion, of a less guilt however than that of really applying an instrument insignificant to any purpose but that of torture in vain. Footnote 38: