_Rinlaender_;[292] their absence from the scrotum does not necessarily imply impotence; they are formed in the cavity of the abdomen, and until the sixth month, lie immediately below the kidneys on the fore part of the Psoæ muscles, after which period they gradually descend towards the abdominal ring, through which they generally pass into the scrotum before birth; but it occasionally happens that this descent, in regard to one or both testicles, does not take place until a late period, and in some instances they remain within the cavity of the abdomen during life;[293] in such a case, a question has arisen as to the virility or impotence of the individual so situated, and upon which medical opinion would seem to be still unsettled. _Foderé_ states that such persons have even been remarkable for their vigour; for these organs, says he, appear to derive greater power of secretion from the warm bath in which they lie, than when they have descended into their natural situation. Mr. _John Hunter_ has given a very different opinion, and one which appears to be more compatible with the sound doctrines of physiology; he believes that when both testicles remain through life in the belly, they are exceedingly imperfect, and incapable of performing the natural functions of these organs; and that it is such imperfection in structure which prevents the disposition for their descent taking place; an opinion in which _Zacchias_ and _Riolan_ entirely concur. Mr. _Wilson_[294] observes that he is acquainted with one case that confirms, and another that would to a certain degree refute this opinion; and this is probably the true state of the question; each case must rest upon its individual merits, and the practitioner, whose opinion is desired upon such an occasion, must carefully inquire into every moral and physical circumstance that can, collaterally, assist his judgment; such as the general appearance, _soprano_ voice, and effeminate physiognomy, of the individual, “_frustra enim ætas advenit, si testes defuerint; manebit enim etiam virili ætate fæminæ similis_.”[295] But the absence of the testicles in the scrotum may depend upon other and less equivocal circumstances, they may have been removed by excision (_Eunuchs_), in which case there will be no difficulty in ascertaining the fact by the appearance of the cicatrix: or they may have been actually absorbed by an operation of Nature, after considerable inflammatory action. Mr. John _Hunter_[296] has given an account of three cases in which such a result occurred. It does not appear that _two_ testicles are essential to virility, although the Parliament of Paris in 1665 decreed that the matrimonial contract should not be deemed valid unless _two_ testicles were evident; it is now generally admitted that persons with only one (_Monorchides_) are fully capable of procreation.