CORN-CUTTER is indeed a homely plain English term, but if the teeth give from the Latin the appellation of dentist, as the eye that of oculist, what name, taking it from the _part_ in question, will remain for that language, to give the men-practitioners of midwifery, in substitution to that hermaphrodite appellation, that absurd contradictory one in terms, of _man_-mid_wife_, or to that new-fangled word _accoucheur_, which is so rank and barefaced a gallicism? But let what name soever be given them, it can hardly be too burlesque an one, considering the gross revolting impropriety of men, addicting themselves to a profession naturally so little made for them. PAINT to yourself one of these sage deep-learned _Cotts_, dressed for proceeding to officiate[5], and presenting himself with his pocket-nightgown, or loose washing wrapper, a waistcoat without sleeves, and those of his shirt pinned up to the breasts of his waistcoat; add to this,[6]fingers, if which not the nicest paring the nails will ever cure the stiffness and clumsiness; and you will hardly deny its being somewhat puzzling, the giving a name to such an heteroclite figure? Or rather can a too ludicrous one be assigned _it_? THOSE however who will consider this grave Doctor in his margery field-uniform, this ridiculous piece of mummery, in a light of seriousness, such as the matter perhaps more justly deserves, especially combining with all the rest, the idea of his crotchets, forceps, and the rest of his bag of instruments, may think he less resembles a priestess of Lucina, than the sacrificer, in a surplice, with his slaughtering-knife, to one of those heathen deities whose horrid worship required human victims, which the poor lying-in women but too nearly resemble. BUT whether or not, in imitation of the dentist, or oculist, he receives his title from the particular part he has taken under his protection, so much is certain, that the same arguments, which militate for those partial artists claiming their respective departments of the human body, will not avail the man-midwife. An oculist, a dentist, a corn-cutter, have no operations to perform but those of which disorders equally incident to both sexes are the object. There is nothing in their practice repugnant to the nature of the male-sex, nor to that reasonable decency, which only requires that no sacrifices of it should be made in vain, or at least not made to no better a purpose than to increase at once the danger and the pain of both mother and child, in whose favor it is sacrificed, as it may be clearly proved to be oftenest the case. But of the chirurgical part of the man-midwife’s pretention, I reserve to treat after considering him in the capacity of a physician; in which a man may indeed be wanted, but in that of surgeon never, or at least so very rarely, as not to atone for the dangers which attend the men forming themselves into a set under the name of men-midwives.