But I have often been told, when remonstrating with mothers for exposing their children, "O, I don't believe in coddling; this sort of thing hardens them and makes them strong." This theory of hardening is a fallacy from beginning to end. From one point of view only can anything be said in its favour, and that is, that, allowing there are already too many people in the world, it will be an advantage to get rid of as many of the weakest of newcomers as possible. By adopting the "hardening" plan, the weak ones certainly go to the wall, though I think mothers, even while defending the theory, will hardly appreciate the advantage of this result; but then the survivors are just as certainly injured in health or in development.
Here I would mention also that there are two facts which the advocates of the "hardening" theory entirely ignore. Firstly, when they say, "Well, look at these children; their arms and legs and necks are bare, but they do not feel the cold a bit," or, "I never wrap up, but I do not feel the cold," they forget the principle which I shall presently2[1] take some pains to explain, that the senses, when their warnings are constantly neglected, cease, after a time, to give any. Nature has adapted itself to the objectionable circumstances, but this is no guarantee that no harm has been and is being done by them. Secondly, when these theorists point to A, B, or C, and say, "See what a fine fellow he is, yet he was
- ↑ 2 See Chapter x.
