As an instance that the presence of the menses is no proof that pregnancy has _not_ occurred, I give the following case:--Not long since I was requested to see a lady who was supposed to labor under a polypus in the womb. She had been married six years, but had no offspring. On seeing her I suggested, from certain peculiarities in her appearance and manner, that _possibly_ she might be pregnant. The suggestion was met with a smile, particularly by the medical attendant who was present, and I was told that there was no sign of such a thing, and moreover it _could not be_, for she had never stopped menstruating, nor was there the slightest change in the breasts, nor any disturbance in the stomach, mind, or feelings. On making the usual examination however, I felt fully _convinced_ I was right, and told them so, but my opinion had no other effect than to induce them not to interfere for a time. They had been talking of an _operation_ immediately. She still continued to menstruate for three months after, but in six weeks from her last period was safely delivered, without assistance, of a very fine living child. No part of the body had undergone any material change, except the abdomen, though many of the usual changes occurred after delivery. In this case the delay probably saved the lives of both mother and child, and deeply grateful they all were for the escape. In my work on the Diseases of Woman many fatal cases will be found of pregnant females who have been killed from mistakes of this kind, owing to a blind reliance on such uncertain signs.