ich
so often depend the honor of families, the rights of individuals, and
sometimes the interests of nationalities, has been in all times the
subject of careful research by physicians, philosophers, and
legislators. On the one side, have been those who contend that the laws
of nature are invariable, and that the term of pregnancy is fixed and
immutable. On the other side, have been those who assert that the epoch
of accouchement can be greatly advanced or retarded by various causes,
some of which are known, and others not yet appreciated. Abundant and
satisfactory testimony has proved that the prolongation of pregnancy
beyond the ordinary period of two hundred and eighty days, or forty
weeks, is possible. Nor is this contrary to what is observed in regard
to other functions of the human body. There is no process depending upon
the laws of life which is absolutely invariable either as to the period
of its appearance or duration. It is known, as we have already pointed
out, that puberty may be advanced or retarded; the time at which the
change of life occurs in women, as we shall have occasion hereafter to
show, is also subject to variation; and it is a matter of common
observation with mothers, that the period of teething is sometimes
strangely hurried or delayed. A certain degree of variability,
therefore, being frequently observed, and entirely compatible with
health, in the various other natural processes, why should that of
pregnancy form an exception, and be invariably fixed in its duration?
And observation upon the lower animals affords most convincing evidence
that nature is not controlled by any uniform law in reference to the
length of pregnancy. In the cow, the usual period of whose pregnancy is
the same as in the human female, instances of calving six weeks beyond
the ordinary term are not at all uncommon.

As an illustration of the great interest sometimes attaching to the
inquiry under discussion, we may cite the celebrated Gardner Peerage
Case, tried by the House of Lords in 1825. Allen Legge Gardner
petitioned to have his name inscribed as a peer on the Parliament Roll.
He was the son of Lord Gardner by his second wife. There was another
claimant for the peerage, however,--Henry Fenton Iadis,--on the ground,
as alleged, that he was the son of Lord Gardner by his first and
subsequently divorced wife. Medical and moral evidence was adduced to
establish that the latter was illegitimate. Lady Gardner, the moth