15
"I knew it—it's all Mr Love's fault—I told him what it would be——" "It's a mercy it's not on the face," said the midwife.
I have been the more particular on this matter as it accounts for a certain physiological pecularity in the Love family. Besides it may throw some light on a hitherto dark, or, to use a more scientific word, occult point in physiology—cause and effect. Was my Grandmother—honest woman—right in her assumption? Was the effect the result of a culpa, as she stated, and, if so was it a positive or a negative? It is admitted by all Philosophers, that a pudding is an exception to a general rule, because it has two ends—may this phenomenon not have had two causes? Could it not be explained by the laws of Photography. I merely throw out this hint, and will now leave the matter in the hands of the scientific for discussion. But, methinks I hear a knowing member of the Paisley Philosophical Society say, was there really a mark after all? Was it not mere occular hallucination? Well, perhaps it was. I know the question, like all other scientific matters, is hedged round with difficulties.
