CHAP. I. Wherein the Case is briefly stated, and all those Texts of Scripture alledged which relate to it: Toge­ther with the Arguments and In­ferences which result from them.

§ 1. IT will not be necessary to spend much time in any elaborate stating of the Case, which I have undertaken. For it is agreed on all hands, that where there is a natural Inability or any bodily Infirmities in the Mother (real and not meerly pretended) that might have a pernicious Influ­ence on her Nursery, God who by his Providence hath caused those Impediments, doth in such cases dispense with this Duty.

§ 2. So that this is the Case, Whether all Mothers, be their Qua­lity what it will, who are neither dis­enabled by any natural Defect, nor contracted Infirmity, are bound in [Page 16]Duty to give Suck themselves to their own Children.

This I affirm, and shall endea­vour to evince both from the Holy Scriptures recommending it as a Duty, the mischievous Consequences of neglecting it, and the Insuffici­ency of all the usual Plea's, which are made for such neglect. Which three general Heads shall limit my ensuing Discourse.

§ 3. I begin with the Holy Scriptures. And because I intend all possible plainness, without the Affectation of any artificial Me­thod, I shall offer some Passages to Consideration in the same or­der as they lye in our Bibles, and make some obvious Remarks up­on them, and such Inferences as they will fairly bear, as I proceed.

§ 4. And to begin with the Old Testament, the first passage we meet with to this purpose is in Gen. 21.7. where Sarah saith,Gen. 21.7. Who would have said unto Abraham, that Sarah should have given Children [Page 17]Suck? For I have borne him a Son in his Old Age. We have Sarah a Nurse as well as a Mother, though she were the Wise not of a mean Peasant, but of a mighty Prince; a Prince so Potent, that the neigh­bouring Kings courted his Alli­ance. A Prince abounding in Wealth and Power, the Master of a numerous Family, out of which he could number 318 Men fit to bear Arms, and all born in his House. Now the Wise of such an one could not want Conveniencies among so many Child-bearing Women that were in her Family, for the Nursing of her Son by another; she might have pleaded either State or Business to have ex­cused her self from the Employ­ment; especially being grown in­to years, which made her less able to undergo the Fatigue of such an Office; and having Beauty beyond what was ordinary at her Years, the decay of which, by the Toil and Watchings incident to a [Page 18]Nurse, she might have fairly pleaded. But waving all these Plea's, she includes it her Duty to Nurse the Fruit of her own Womb. For her words imply so much, Who would have said to A­braham, that Sarah should have given Suck? For I have borne him a Son, q. d. It is, I doubt nor, the Mothers Office, who bears the Child, to give it Suck; since then I have borne Abraham a Son, I must give it Suck and Nurse it for him. Had it been usual in those times for vertuous Mothers to decline this Office, she would not have in­ferred her Nursing a Son for Abra­ham from her bearing of one; whereas the one implying the other intimates a necessary Con­sequence of the one from the other. And I do with the greater Confidence urge this Argument, because it is St. Ambrose's Note on this Verse,De Abrah. l. 1. c. 7. The Moral use of this is, that Women are provoked to remem­ber their Dignity, and to give Suck [Page 19]to their Children. This is the pro­per Grace, the Honour of a Mother, whereby she may recommend her self to her own Husband. However this is certain, that this Pious Mother whom the Apostle proposes as a Pattern to her Sex, and exhorts all Wives to imitate, that will do well, 1 Pet. 3.6. and discharge Faithfully the Du­ties of their Relations, she not only Nurses her Son her self, but plain­ly intimates, that she thought it her Duty to do so; though she might have pleaded as many Ex­cuses as most of them can who decline this Office. They then that neglect the Duty, and have no better Pretences for such their neglect, than those which she waved as insufficient, are faulty at least on this account, that they refuse to imitate Sarah, whom the Apostle tells Wives they must fol­low, if they will do well.

§ 5. The next Text is in Gen. Gen 49.25 49.25. where the Patriarch Jacob having foretold the numerous in­crease [Page 20]of the Tribe of Joseph, that like a Fruitful Vine, Gen. 49.22 whose Branches spread over the wall, it should mul­tiply into two Tribes; he assures him that the God who had pre­served and prospered him, not­withstanding his many Afflictions from his Brethren at first, and the Egyptians afterward,V. 25. should Bless his Posterity with Blessings of Hea­ven above, Blessings of the Deep, that lieth beneath, Blessings of the Breast and of the Womb, i.e. He would pro­vide for him an Inheritance, fer­tile and well watered with Foun­tains and Rivers, and a numerous Posterity to enjoy it. Where it is to be observed, that the Blessings of the Breast and of the Womb are conjoyned, and a Promise made to this Tribe, that in order to its Increase, the Wives should be Fruitful to bear, and Careful to Nurse their own; that God would bless it with such Women, as both would bear a numerous Off-spring and nourish their own Off-pring [Page 21]with their own Breads. Whence the Inference is obvious, that as a Fruitful Wife is a Blessing, so when she Nurses her Children she is a double Blessing to a Family. And as it is the Duty of every one to be as great a Blessing as she can be to her Family, so such Women must need be faulty, who after God hath given the Blessings of the Womb, re­fuse to compleat the Felicity by the Blessings of the Breast. The ten thousands of Ephraim,Deut. 33.17. and the thou­sands of Manasseh, are the effects of these Blessings of the Breast and of the Womb; and intimates to us, that it is a likely way to obtain a numerous Posterity, such as Jo­seph's was, for Fruitful Mothers to become themselves Careful Nurses.

§ 6. In Exod. 2.7, 8. when Pha­raoh's Daughter sends to seek out for a Nurse for Moses, Exod. 2.7, 8. whom she found exposed, her Maid called the Childs Mother, and to her she committed the little Nursery. Now this may be considered, [Page 22]either as the Act of the Royal Princess, the Contrivance of the Mother, or a Dispensation of Di­vine Providence. If we suppose that Pharaoh's Daughter sent on purpose to enquire out the Mo­ther of the exposed Infant, we may conclude, she thought her the fittest to Nurse it. If it be rather thought, that the Mother laid her Daughter to watch and be ready if any such occasion should hap­pen, to call her rather than ano­ther, we have a commendable In­stance of her Pious and Tender Concern for her Son, and carnest desire to Nurse it her self, rather than any other should ease her of that Burden, and do that work for her. But if besides either the Princess or the Mothers Intention God by his wise Providence deter­mined the Messenger to apply her self to the Mother rather than any other Woman; we have the plain Determination of God him­self, that the Mother is fittest to [Page 23]Nurse her own Child, and that it was best for this Infant, whom he intended for extraordinary Service, to have the advantage of the most suitable Nurse. And it is further observable, that tho God would have Moses trained up in Learn­ing by the Egyptian Doctors, that he might be better qualified for the great Charge he was here­after to undertake, yet he would not have him Suck Milk from an Egyptian Nurse, which might have some bad Influence upon his Constitution and his Man­ners.

§ 7. Numb. 11.12. Moses thus expostulates with God, Have I conceived all this People? Have I begot them? ^* or brought them forth) That thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy Bosom, as a [Page 24]Nursing Father (orThere is no word in the Original for Father, only the Participle [...] is Masculine; which yet the 72 render by [...] which for most part is Feminine, and signifies a Nurse. And considering that Frequently in Hebrew one Gender is put for another, It may well be rendred a Nurse here, as more suit­able to Conception and b­ring forth in the clause fore­going. as a Nurse) beareth the Sucking Child to the Land, which thou swarest unto their Fa­thers. Where Mosess Argument stands upon this Foundati­on that whosoever hath conceived and brought forth, ought to become Nurse to the Sucking Child, and carry it in her Bosom. Unless this be granted; his Argument is invalid and nothing to the pur­pose, the whole force of which seems to depend on that Supposi­tion. Judge then whether is more reasonable to charge Moses with an Absurdity, or those Women with an Immorality who neglect the Duty, which he takes for granted. He thought himself not obliged like a Nurse to bear that froward People in his Bosom, be­cause he had not conceived them [Page 25]nor brought them forth. Thereby evidently implying, that the Mo­ther who hath conceived and brought forth the Infant, ought (however froward it may be) to become its Nurse, and Suckle it in her Bosom.

§ 8. If we turn over to 1 Sam. 1.22, 23. we find,1 Sam. 1.22, 23. that after Han­nah by her Prayers had obtained a Son, she resolves to lay aside all other business, that she might at­tend this important one, the Nur­sing of her Samuel. She was a Wo­man of great Piety, who constant­ly went with her Hushand to the Sanctuary at the Feasts. Yet know­ing how much God prefers Mercy before Sacrifice, she resolves to do so too; staying at home to Nurse her Son, as what she apprehended more acceptable to God, than to appear at his Tabernacle with an Offering, and leave her Child at home to some Mercenary's Care. Whence we may conclude, that even the Pretences of Piety, which [Page 26]of all others are the most plausi­ble, are not sufficient to excuse Mothers from this piece of Cha­rity; and that if their Nursery should detain them for that time from a constant Attendance on God's publick Worship, he will in such a case dispence with their absence, and accept their Charity toward their Infants instead of Devotion to himself. Persons of Quality indeed may have such assistance, that there can be no necessity of their confinement from Gods House, especially since none of them but are much nearer to a Church than Ramah was to Shiloh, Bunting's Travel of Patriarchs which is computed to be twelve Miles, so that ordinarily they cannot have that Plea to make. Yet if any be in such Cir­cumstances, that either the pu­blick Worship of God or the Nur­sing her Child must be neglected, she hath here a president to deter­mine the case in favour of Cha­rity against the specious Obje­ctions [Page 27]of Devotion. And it is fur­ther observable, that Hannah's Nursing of her first Son, was so far from hindring Fertility, that it rather procured a Divine Bene­diction, which multiplied her Po­sterity to three Sons and two Daugh­ters, 1 Sam. 2.21 sufficient to rescue her from her Rivals Taunts, and rank her in the Catalogue of fruitful Mo­thers. So vain is that popular Pre­tence, that Nursing is an Impedi­ment to Fruitfulness, and to be declin'd by great Persons for the better securing of Succession by a numerous Posterity; for if those bear faster who dry up their Breasts, they that Nurse their Children commonly bear longer, and bring more up to an Health­ful Maturity; which comes to pass, partly through their greater Care, and partly through Gods Blessing on their exemplary Piety.

§ 9. There is a Story in 1 Kings 3.21. of two Women of an in­famous Character,1. Kings 3.21. being stiled [Page 28] Harlots; nor will I take the ad­vantage some Interpreters give me, to soften that Denomination into Victuallers; but will suppose them to have been bad Women, yet observing something remark­ably good in one of them, it is the more to be took notice of. Now it is evident that the one of these Harlots was a tender Mo­ther, though she had been an un­chast Woman, and loved her Child very well, however she came by it; and it is recorded of her, that she her self gave it Suck. Which is an Argument, that though she had not Vertue sufficient to se­cure her Chastity, yet she was not so overgrown with Vice, as to have obliterated Natural Affecti­on. The better of these two Har­lots hath the Character of a Fond Mother, and her pleading before King Solomon, that she rose to give her Child Suck, is an Intimation that this was a Duty of good E­steem in those days, and that it [Page 29]would make something for her that she had done so. And how can those Mothers pretend Affe­ction to their Children, who at­tain not to the Tenderness of this good-natur'd Harlot?

sect; 10. In the Book of Job, Job 39.16 c. 39.16. there is an elegant Description of the Ostriches stupid neglect of her young ones, wherein this is especially took notice of, That she hardened her self against her young ones, as though they were not hers. Whereby the Spirit of God inti­mates it to be an Aggravation of Hard-heartedness to deal hardly with those that are young, especi­ally where natural Relation ob­liges to a tender Regard: And that the nearer any come to re­semble the Ostriches Obduracy, in neglecting to take care of their Off spring, the more unnatural and cruel they may be justly deemed. And if it be a piece of Hardship to turn off a tender In­fant to a Mercenary Nurse (as I [Page 30]doubt not but in the sequel of this Discourse will be manifest) those Mothers must be accounted more Ʋnnatural than the Ostrich, be­cause they have not so much Stu­pidity.

§ 11. In Psal. 29.9. the Psal­mist says,Psal. 22.9 Thou didst make me hope, when I was upon my Mothers Breasts. Now hope is an act of Reason, not to be exerted by an Infant not yet arrived to the Exercise of Rea­son, yet here in a Poetical stile at­tributed to such an one; to inti­mate, that the Care God takes of Infants, and the early Provision he hath made for them, by filling their Mothers Breasts as soon as they have left her Womb, is an Ar­gument that Mankind is under the Care of God's Providence, and of sufficient force to engage even Infants to hope in God, if they were capable. And hence it is evi­dent, that it is the Intention of the God of Nature, in furnishing the Mother with full Breasts, to [Page 31]oblige her to minister thereby to his Providence for the Preserva­tion of her Child. Moreover the Psalmist's using such a Phrase as this, doth not only imply that he was nursed by his own Mother, but also that it was usual in those days, for Mothers themselves to perform that Office. The Practise of our Age would scarce allow us to express the time of Infancy by hanging on the Mothers Breasts, wherein so few enjoy that Privi­ledge. And if we grant that such Idioms of Language are founded on the prevailing Customs of Na­tions, we may conclude from this Phrase (and that of Solomon's, who expresses a Brother Periphrasti­cally, by one that sucked the Breasts of his Mother) that it was in those days very common,Cant. 8.1. and accounted most reasonable, that the Mother should Nurse at her Breasts all the Children she had born in her Womb.

§ 12. The Prophet Jeremiah exaggerates the Extremity of Fa­mine in Jerusalem by this Cir­cumstance, that it had made Mo­thers Cruel to their Infants, and uncapable of giving them Suck, Lam. 4.23. Even the Sea-monsters draw out the Breasts, Lam. 4.23. they give Suck to their young ones; but the Daugh­ters of my People is become Cruel, like the Ostriches in the Wilderness. It's true, it seems to be not so much from the Hardness of their Hearts, as of the Times, that the Daughters of Jerusalem do not that for their Off-spring, which the very Sea­monsters do for theirs, and which no Creature on the Land is so much a Brute as to neglect, ex­cept the Ostrich, whose stupidity is such, that she leaves her Eggs in the Sand and takes no further care of them, no nor of her young ones neither, after the heat of the Sun and of the Sand hath hatched them. And nothing certainly, but the Extremity of Famine, could [Page 33]make the Daughters of Jerusalem so Cruel, that no Monster at Sea, no Brute on Land, can parallel them, except the Ostrich. How then can they excuse themselves, who neglect their Children as much out of Luxury, and in the midst of Plenty, as those Israelites did through Famine? The Pro­phet thought this an Instance fit to exaggerate the great Misery of a Famine, that it constrained Mothers to that which Nature most abhors. We may then rea­sonably conclude, That he would have passed a very severe Cen­sure on those Mothers that be­come Cruel in the midst of Plen­ty; and for that very reason too, because they abound with Plenty. They are more unnatural than Sea-Monsters, that draw out their Breasts to their young ones, whilst these turn theirs off to some mean and Mercenary Neighbour.

§ 13. I shall conclude my Ob­servations out of the Old Testa­ment, Hos. 9.14. with that passage of the Prophet Hos. 9.14. Give them, O Lord, What wilt thou give them? Give them a miscarrying Womb and dry Breasts. For whether he pray for this as a Blessing for Israel, that they may not be more mi­serable (in the common Slaughter of their Country) for their Ferti­lity, as our Lord Christ pro­nounces such comparatively Hap­py in the Destruction of Jerusa­lem, that were barren and had ne­ver born, Luke 23.29. and whose Paps had ne­ver given, Suck. Or whether he denounce it as a Curse, that their Women should be Barren and pu­nished with a miscarrying Womb and dry Breasts; which way soe­ver we understand it, it affords us this Conclusion, that the Spi­rit of God in the Scriptures makes dry Breasts as well as a miscarrying Womb, the Periphrasis of Bar­renness; thereby declaring it e­qually [Page 35]unnatural for a Mother by artificial Applications to dry her Breasts, as to force Abortion; and that where God gives a fruitful Womb, he expects ordinarily that the Breasts should give Suck. God gives dry Breasts as a Curse to some, as an Affliction to o­thers; but they that invite that, whether Curse or Affliction, to themselves by voluntary Appli­cations, love not Blessing, there­fore it shall be far from them.

Thus have I lead you through the Old Testament, and shewed you the laudable. Examples it gives Mothers for Nursing their Children, and the plain Intima­tions (at least) of the Divine Pleasure, that they should do like­wise.

§ 14. I proceed to set before you such passages of the New Te­stament as are of the same Impor­tance, and furnish us with some Proofs of the case proposed.

In the Gospel we read of a Woman, who in a Rapture of Admiration at Christ's Discourses, cries out,Luke 11.27. Blessed is the Womb that bare thee, and the Paps which thou hast Sucked. Which shews that she took it for granted, that the Mother of our Lord gave him Suck. And upon this evidence, and because we find that Joseph in his Flight with his Holy In­fant into Egypt, took none other with him but the Blessed Virgin, it hath been unanimously agreed, that she was the Nurse as well as the Mother of Christ. And since this Virgin, not only for the Nobility of her Extraction (tho now sunk into a meaner For­tune) but especially for the Pu­rity of her Manners, hath justly been reputed the Glory of her Sex, none can have an Example more worthy of her Imitation. God chose not (saith one of the Ancients) any ordinary Woman to be the Mother of Christ, Apud Just. Mart quaest. & resp. ad Orthod. q. 136. p. 375 but one that [Page 37]excelled all other Women in Vertue; whom he therefore pronounces Blessed for her Vertues, for which he vouch­safed her to be his Mother. And such eminent Vertues in this Roy­al Virgin recommend her as a fit Example for the best and the greatest of her Sex to imitate.

§ 15. In the next place it may be observed, That the Christian Religion hath adopted into Law and Duty, all those things which generally approve themselves to the unprejudiced Reason of Man­kind,Phil. 4.8. to be things Honest, Lovely, and of good Report. Things honest ( [...]) Grave, 1 Tim. 3.11. or becoming Chast and Vertuous Matrons. Things Lovely ( [...]) which are gene­rally Grateful to all wise and ver­tuous Persons, and apt to procure Love. Things of good Report, which are apt to procure to the Persons that do them, and to the Religion which they profess, good Esteem and Commendation. Now I dare appeal to all the World, [Page 38]whether those few Persons of Quality and Honour are not ge­nerally looked upon with a Ve­neration and Esteem, who having broke through an unreasonable Custom, and preferred the good of their Children before a Fan­tastick Privilege of Greatness, be­come Nurses to their own Off-spring. Who doth not approve of this as an Action becoming the Gravity of a Chast Lady? In whose Eyes is it not a Spectacle most Lovely? What vertuous and sober Persons but think it very Praise-worthy? From this general Precept of Christianity therefore we must conclude this generally to be the Duty of Chri­stian Matrons.

§ 16. That of the Apostles 1 Thess. 2.7. is not here to be omitted.1 Thess. 2.7. We were gentle among you, even as a Nurse cherisheth her Children. [...]. Where two things are observable: First, That the Mo­ther is here stiled a Nurse; for it [Page 39]is her own Children, not anothers, whom the Nurse is said to Che­rish. Whence it seems, that the Apostle taking it for granted, that the Mother is her self the Nurse, implies it the Duty of all Mothers to undertake that Office. Secondly, That St. Paul chooses to express his own mild and gen­tle Behaviour toward the Church, by a Mother Nursing her own. Which implies, that the Mothers Care is the greatest, and her Car­riage the most Tender toward her Nursery, who is influenced by Natural Affection, and not meerly by hopes of Reward. It would have been a Disparage­ment to the Apostles mild and tender Behaviour towards them, to have compared him with a Mercenary Nurse, that looks to anothers Child for hire, and is rarely so careful of it as its own Mother, to whom Nature di­ctates the most compassionate Concern for its welfare.

§ 17. Hitherto in the next place belongs the Character which the Apostle gives of a Wi­dow indeed, 1 Tim. 5.10. who is to be main­tained by the Churches Charity. He requires, among other Virtues, that she be well reported for good Works, and that she have brought up Children. [...]. The Greek word denotes Nursing Children. Our Lexicons cite Aristotle for the use of it, and it is obserable, that he uses the Verb, from which this is compounded to denote this pecu­liar Office of the Mother in his Oeconomicks, which because it gives us the Judgment of that great Philosopher,Arist. Oeco. l. 1. c. 3. [...]. And [...], Acts 13.18. is in the Margent of our Bibles rendred, Suffered them, as a Nurse beareth the Child. And by Dr. Hammond, Carried them as a Nurse; who concludes the right reading to be [...] from [...], to do the Office of a Nurse; who not only bears the Child in her Arms, but feeds and sustains it too, as God did the Israelites in the Wilderness. [...] is also rendred a Nurse in the Text aforecited, 1 Thess. 2.7. I will here transcribe. As to their Children, saith he, both Parents equally con­tribute [Page 41]to their Generation; but their Offices are peculiar as to their future Improvement. The Mothers Office is to Nurse, and the Fathers to Educate or Correct. In the Judg­ment then of St. Paul, those Wi­dows who had nursed their own Children, were reputed to have done a good Work; and they that had not done so, were judged for that very reason unworthy of the Churches Charity. And as we may very well presume, the Apo­stle would not have exempted any indigent Widow from that Privilege for no Fault; but that it was a thing Scandalous and of very ill report, for any Christian Matron not to have nursed her own Children.

§ 18. I shall only add, That among the Duties of the younger Women, such as are not yet past Child bearing, they are to be taught, That they love their Chil­dren, Tit. 2.4. For if it be con­sidered, that Nursing their own [Page 42]Children is a very proper and natural Testimony to maternal Love, and the most likely means not only to express but increase their natural Affection toward them; I see not how they can evade the Obligation of this Pre­cept. For the Law of Love obliges a Mother to all proper Means and Ways of testifying and maintaining her Love, and consequently to this. The greatest Ladies are bound to love their Children as well as the meanest Beggar, and consequently to neg­lect no proper means of shewing and cherishing it: So that unless they deny Nursing of them to be such, they must hence conclude it to be their Duty.

§ 19. But before I put an end to this Chapter, it is requisite that I take notice of some passages which seem to discountenance the Cause I have been pleading for; least my pretermitting of them should make any to fancy [Page 43]it was not for the Weakness but Cogency and Weight of the Ob­jection that is raised from them. I mean those Texts which men­tion some Nurses who were not the Mothers of the Children whom they Nursed. Such was Deborah, Gen. 35.8. Ruth 4.10. Rebecca's Nurse; Naomi, who be­came Nurse to her Grandson by Ruth; Mephibosheth's Nurse,2 Sam. 4.4. 2 Kings 11.2. who let him fall as she sled; and Jo­ash's Nurse that was hid with him.

§ 20. Now in answer to these Instances, I shall only offer these things. 1. That in some cases it is so far from being a necessary Duty, that it is not possible for the Child to be nursed by its own Mother: As if she die in Child­bed, or lye under some natural Inability from the want of Nip­ples or Suck. And in such cases recourse must be had to some other means for the Infants Pre­servation. And for what appears to the contrary, this may be the [Page 44]occasion of the Substitution of some of the Nurses abovenamed. Joash's Nurse it's probable sup­plied the Office of his deceased Mother; for his Aunts Care about his Preservation makes it likely, that his Mother was ei­ther dead before, or was Mur­dered in the universal Butchery of the Royal Family by Athaliah. 2. Some of those before named were dry Nurses, Assistants only not Substitutes to the Mother: Such doubtless was Naomi, whose Age and long Widowhood makes it very unlikely, that she should be able to give her Grandchild Suck. And Pareus from Jacob's solemn Mourning at the Death of Deborah, concludes her to have been called Rebecca's Nurse, be­cause she had assisted her in the Nursing of her Children, and not as if she had given her Suck; and that for this reason Jacob after his Mothers Death, had taken her into his own Family. 3. If it be [Page 45]granted most probable (as to me it seems to be) that Mephibo­sheth's Nurse gave him Suck, and was substituted in the room of his Mother; this will be no dis­advantage to our Cause. For as it was his great Unhappiness to lose his Mother betimes, so it was a greater, to be committed to such a Nurse, as by her Carelesness (perhaps) made him a Cripple to his Death. Lastly, I cannot upon the whole, remember one Instance out of the Holy Scriptures, of any either good or bad Mother, who did her self deliver her Child to another to Nurse, nor is it pro­bable that any of the Nurses in­stanced above, were made such by the Mothers of the Children themselves whilst they were liv­ing, and therefore they reach not to Patronize their Case, who or­dinarily do so.

§ 21. Thus I have given a just and impartial account of the Testimonies of the Holy Scripture [Page 46]both of the Old and New Testa­ment, which respect our present subject; and if they have been impartially considered, they must needs have satisfied you, that those Mothers are most conform­able to the Dictates of God's Spi­rit in his Word, who themselves Nurse their own Children. And all the Favour I desire of any Mother upon the Survey of the forementioned particulars, is to allow her own Conscience to de­termine, whether God hath not in his Word plainly enough de­clared this to be her Duty. And then, I hope, none will be so Vain or Impious, as to oppose Cu­stom or the Privilege of her Rank, to such indisputable Authority and plain Convictions of her Duty.

CHAP. II. Wherein are manifested the great Mischiefs which Mothers by trans­ferring the Nursing of their Chil­dren to other Women, threaten their Families with; both in point of Succession, and that Mutual Affection which ought to be a­mong the several Branches of it.

§ 1. MY proposed Method leads me how to the second part of my undertaking, viz. To consider and represent the Mischievous Consequences which fre­quently result from Mothers expo­sing their Children to be nursed by other Women, and cannot other­wise be so surely prevented, as by discharging this Office themselves. And they either respect the Fa­mily or the Child.

First, The whole Family may suffer great prejudice by this unrea­sonable Custom: And that both in [Page 48]point of Succession, and that mu­tual Affection which ought to be among the several Branches of it, and is necessary to its flourishing Prosperity.

§ 2. 1. The Families of the Great and the Rich especially are in danger to be injured hereby in the Succession. None are so much concerned, as Persons of Honour and Estates, to preserve the Succession of both to their own Off-spring, nor are any in so much danger as they to be injured that way. The poor Man needs not fear a Sup­posititious Brood; for who will be desirous to obtrude a Child on him to inherit Beggary? But if a poor Tenant have a fair Oppor­tunity to thrust her own or Friends Child into the room of her Landlords Heir, or can con­trive to make him pass for the Son of a Wealthy Tradesman, it requires a deal of Honesty to with­stand the Temptation. Now if it be considered how mutable the [Page 49]Countenance of an Infant is; what Alterations a few days make in the Lineaments of its Face, it may be judged no hard thing to deceive the most Criti­cal Mother after a Months ab­sence. So that either if the Nurse have a mind to make her own Child, or be hired to make some others a Fortune; or if she have Overlaid her Nursery, and to conceal the Crime, cloath some other about the same Age in its Spoils, perhaps the most curious Inspection may not be able to discern the Cheat. I am sure the boorish and degenerate Rudeness of some, who pass for the Chil­dren of very Polite, Ingenious and good humoured Parents, give too much cause to suspect them Changlings. Nor is this a bare Supposition without any In­stances, for Valerius Maximus tells us,Val. Max. l. 9. c. 15.3. That in the Reign of Augustus, one pretended to be the Son of his Sister Octavia, affirming, [Page 50]That by reason of his great Weak­ness he had been changed for the Nurses own Son. It's true the Cheat succeeded not, yet Octa­via's putting of her Son off to be Nursed by a Stranger, gave an opportunity to attempt it: And perhaps the reason that so few Nurses art detected in such like Attempts, is because they fre­quently succeed better, being de­tected only where they fail. Yet one remarkable Instance more there is, How Arthebar, or (as others call him) Artabanus King of Epirus was more successfully imposed on, having his Child changed at Nurse, and the Son of a mean Knight introduced into his Family. Which Treason the Nurse at length, though too late discovering, occasioned a Bloody War, wherein both Pretenders were slain, and the Kingdom it self Usurped by Alexander the Brother of that Olympias, who was Alexander the Great's Mo­ther, [Page 51]And to prevent such Sup­posititious Bastardies, Lycurgus the Famous Spartan Law-giver enacted, That the noblest Spartan Women▪ even their Kings Wives, should at the least Nurse their eldest Son. And Plutarch reports, That the second Son of Themistes the seventh King of the Lacede­monians, succeeded his Father, only because he had been nursed by his own. Mother, whereas the eldest had sucked the Breasts of a Stranger. Now as the Mothers Nursing her self is a sure way to prevent any such Cheat of the Nurse; so it is a Security to the Husband, that she hath not her self, to escape the Infamy of Bar­renness., Consented to the intro­ducing of anothers Child into his Family. And it is the Note of St. Chrysostom upon Gen. 21.7. ‘That therefore Sarah give Suck, to make it more credible, that she was truly a Mother, least any by reason of her Age should [Page 52]have suspected the Child to have been Supposititious. For the Milk in her Breasts might satisfie the most Distrustful, that Isaac was her genuine Off­spring, and that beyond all Ex­pectation she was become a Mother.’ Hence I conclude, that the Quality of any Woman is so far from being a reasonable Excuse from undertaking this part in the Education of her Child, that it rather increases her Obli­gation. For the greatest Care ought to be taken in preventing the Obtrusion of a Spurious Issue on the Families and Successions, where there is the most Danger.

§ 3. 2. I come to shew Second­ly, That as it is necessary to the Happiness of every Family, that there be mutual Indearments be­tween the several Branches of it: So the putting of Children out to be nursed by others, is a very likely way to hinder them, and the contrary to promote them; [Page 53]which I shall manifest in these three Particulars, viz. In respect of the Mothers Affection towards the Child, The Childs towards its Mother, and The Children of the same Parents towards one another.

§ 4. First, It is very unlikely that those Mothers, who transfer the Nursing of their Children to others, should ordinarily love them as tenderly as those that make them their own Care. A Gell. l. 12. c. 1. ad fin. When the Infant is exil'd from its Mothers sight, that warmth of Love, which re­ceives new Vigor from the fre­quent view of its Object, cools by degrees and languishes; whilst the Interposition of other Objects soon weans her from that poor Exile, who becomes abroad al­most as much forgotten, as if it had been laid in the Grave. It is not rare to observe, That Fo­ster-Children are more dear to their Nurses than their Mothers; and Mothers for the most part are fondest of those whom they [Page 54]have nursed themselves. And it is too common an Observation, That some Ladies shew a greater Fondness toward their Dogs than their Children,Ladies Calling, Part 2. Sect. 2. § 26. Shewing those to all Comers, when in many days Converse one shall hear nothing, whence it may be known that they have any Children. Concerning which we have a remarkable Story in Plutarch, Plut. In Pencl▪ How that Cesar once seeing some Strangers at Rome, who were People of Quality, car­rying up and down with them in their Arms and Bosoms young Puppy-dogs and Munkies, and hugging and making much of them, took occasion to ask, Whe­ther the Women in their Coun­try were not used to bear Chil­dren. By that Princely Reprimand gravely reflecting upon such Per­sons as spend and lavish that Af­fection and Kindness (which Na­ture hath impleated in us) on Brute Creatures, though it be due [Page 55]and owing only to humane Na­ture, those of our own Kind. Now there can no account so likely be given of any Womans greater Fondness, of Brutes, than of their own Children, but that these being nursed abroad, their Dogs are more conversant with them than they. I must confess (what a. Learned Man objects) that many Ladies,Towerson on the Com­mandm. p. 237. who place their Children abroad, are very tender of them, and sometimes more Fond than Women of meaner Birth and Fortunes, who for the most part Nurse them­selves: Nor would I therefore be understood to intend the fore­going Censure for all Mothers that decline this Office. In some, nay in many, I hope, Duty and natural Affection triumph over this Temptation. However it is a Temptation that prevails on too many, and they that are Wise, will for that reason con­clude it best and safest to avoid it. [Page 56]St. Ambrose made this Observa­tion,Amb. de Abr. l. 1. c. 7. That Mothers generally love those best whom they have Suckled at their own Breasts.Plut. [...], p. 3. Id. [...], p. 496. And Plutarch concludes this the principal Intention of Nature, in giving the Mother a Capacity of being a Nurse, and in placing her Breasts so conveniently for the embracing of her little Nurse­ry, that she may receive fresh Endearments every Moment from those intimate Embraces.Nay, God himself supposes this apt to create a great Ten­derness in the Mo­ther, when he says, Isa 49.15. Can a Woman forget her Sucking Child, that she should not have Compassion on the Son of her Womb? When the Woman makes the Son of her Womb her Suck­ing Child, or her own Nursery, it is a thing next to im­possible, that she should fail in the Affection and Care of a Mother toward it. And if this be granted as a most likely means to increase the Mo­thers Love to her Child, she that exiles her little ones, takes the way hugely to cool, if not quite extinguish it.

§ 5. Secondly, This is the way to alienate the Childs Affections [Page 57]from its Mother. Some Gramma­rians derive the Latin word Lac (Milk) from lacio (to allure) as concluding no way so likely to allure the Child to love its Mo­ther, as Nursing it with her Milk. She performs indeed but half the Office, and consequently earns but half of that Love which otherwise is due to a Mother who only bears her Child and then turns it off. And I never yet met with any one Instance to contradict the Observation of a Learned Prelate to this pur­pose, viz. That many cruel Ty­rants have killed their Mothers, Bishop Taylor's Grand Ex­ample. p. 21. § 10. yet none ever offered Violence to his Nurse. And this shews that bear­ing in the Womb is not so invi­olable an Obligation to Love, as Nursing at the Breast. We read of one of the Gracchi returning to Rome from his Victories in Asia, that he presented his Mo­ther with a Jewel of Silver, and his Nurse with a Girdle of Gold; [Page 58]giving this reason for the prefe­rence of the latter,Roderic. de Castro de Mulier. morbis. That when his Mother, after his Birth, cast him off, his Nurse took him for­saken as he was to her Breasts, and cherished him in her kind Embraces. This is manifest, that Love desconds more strongly than it ascends, so that it is not likely that the Childs Affections to­wards its Parents should exceed theirs towards it. And therefore such a Mother hath reason to ex­pect the least Love from her Children, who hath shewed the least toward them Perhaps whilst she is in Prosperity, and stands in no need of their Love, Interest may oblige them to carry civilly toward her: Yet it is to be su­spected that they have no such grounds in Nature, as will main­tain a constant Fervour of Affe­ction against the Frowardness or Misfortunes of an Unnatural Mo­ther. I do not affirm this to be a constant Effect of that Cause, [Page 59]for sometimes perhaps the Mo­thers After-care may make a­mends for the first Unkindness: Sometimes extraordinary good Nature in the Child may conquer the Resentments of this early Neglect, or the Influences of Di­vine Grace may triumph over this Temptation. It is enough for my purpose that it is a Tempta­tion, a Temptation which oft prevails on a Graceless Child, to requite hits Mothers Rejection of him with the like Unkindness: And this is reason enough to oblige all Mothers to prevent it by their early Care and Tender­ness in Nursing.

§ 6. Thirdly, As the Happi­ness of Families very much de­pends upon the mutual Love of the several Branches of it among themselves; so the Mothers re­fusing them that common Nourish­ment which were likely to pro­mote it, is too justly chargeable with the Mischiefs which result [Page 60]from their mutual Unkindnesses. We read of Scipio Asiaticus, that though he rejected the Importu­nity of his Brother Africanus, in behalf of ten Soldiers who were condemned for offering Violence to the Vestals; yet he pardoned them at the request of his Foster-Sister: And being asked the rea­son why he did more for his Nurses Daughter than for his own Mothers Son, he returned this answer, I esteem her rather to be my Mother who brought me up, than her that brought me forth and then forsook me. Which shews both that his Nurse had more of his Love than his Mother, and also her who sucked the same Milk, than he who had lain in the same Womb.Plut. In Catone. I remember Plutarch reports of Cato, that wise Roman, that as he obliged his Wife to give her Children Suck with her own Breasts, so also to let the Children of his Slaves Suck her too, that by partaking of the [Page 61]same Nourishment, a Natural Affection might be instilled into them toward his Son. And the frequent Instances of many great Persons Kindness and Liberality toward their Foster-Brothers, is an Argument how prevalent this Method is, of propagating the Streams of Love from the com­mon Fountain of the Breast a­mong all the partakers of it. And the too common Observation of Fraternal Discords, as it is matter of Melancholly Consideration, so it ought to oblige Mothers to neglect no means any way likely to prevent them; especially to joyn them all at her Breasts, that they may be more united in their Lives.

§ 7. Thus have I demonstrated how much the good of Families obliges all Mothers, especially Persons of Quality, to Nurse their own Children, that they may more surely prevent all Oppor­tunities of wronging their own Heir, [Page 62]of alienating themselves from their Children, or their Children from them, or from one another.

CHAP. III. In which is contained an account of the Inconveniencies resulting to the Children themselves that are Nursed by Strangers, in re­spect of their Bodies, either through the Nurses want of Care, the unsuitable Nourishment, or Contagious Diseases that may be transmitted in her Milk.

§ 1. I Come now Secondly to represent the Mischiefs that threaten the Children them­elves, which are deserted by their own Mothers to be Nursed by Strangers.

It is a pretty Observation which St. Ambrose makes on Gen. 9.25. where Cham's Curse is ex­pressed in his Sons name, Cursed [Page 63]be Canaan, viz. That it is a greater Punishment to wicked Cham to be Cursed in his Race, than in his own Person. The Wounds which tender Parents receive in the Miseries of their Children, are much more sensi­ble than their own personal Ca­lamities. This Consideration then in all reason should touch all Mo­thers in the most sensible part, and be of the greatest force with them, viz. That others Nursing of them is likely to be extreamly prejudicial to their Children, both in respett of their Bodies and their Minds.

§ 2. I shall in this Chapter shew how the Health of the Childs Body is endangered by putting it to a Stranger to be nursed, and that these several ways, Either by her want of Care intending it, by yielding it unsuitable Nourish­ment, or by transmitting Diseases to it.

§ 3. A Mercenary Nurse is not likely to take so much Care of the Child as its own Mother. In our Bibles we read of Mephiboshesth's Mishap received from his Nurse, who letting him fall out of her Arms as she fled, made him ever after unable to go. And who sees not how many carry about them to their death, the Marks of their Nurses Carelesness? And no won­der, for Natural Affection will make the Mother more watch­ful over and patient with the Frowardness of her own Babe, than she can expect an Hireling to be.De Educ. lib. P. 3. The Mother is fittest to Nurse, saith Plutarch, because she will treat the Child with more Com­passion and Care, as being influenced by an inward Tenderness, which bears date from its first being: Where­as the Love of a Nurse is only Sub­dititious, the result not of Nature but of Wages. It is reasonable to expect the Mistress of the Fa­mily more careful of her own [Page 65]Domestick Affairs, than any of her Mercenary Servants, since the first is obliged by a greater In­terest than the latter; so that where the Mistress is Negligent, we do not ordinarily expect the Maid should be more Industri­ous. And where the Mothers Love can suffer a Child to be exposed, whom Nature hath interested in its Welfare, none can wonder if a Stranger neglect it. For indeed how can it be expected, that an Hireling should endure all the Tediousnesses and Inconvenien­cies attending the Nursing of a little, helpless, perhaps Froward Infant; when the Mother, to whom Natural Affection should have endeared the Employment, out of Softness and Luxury de­clines it as a Burden? Or why hath God generally inspired the Mother with a greater Tender­ness toward the Child, but for this very end, That thereby she may be enabled to digest more [Page 66]easily the little Ʋnhandsomnesses (as one phrases it) which others Will nauseate,Bishop Taylour's Grand Ex­ample. and submit to those Fatigues that none else will for its Preservation, whilst her Care and Patience are doubled by her Affection? There are frequent Tragical Instances of Infants O­verlaid by Sleepy and Careless Nurses, which much more rarely happen, where the Mother un­dertakes this Province her self. Methinks then it is very reason­able thus to argue, She is fittest to Nurse the Child who loves it best; and if the Mother is not ashamed to have it said, That any Woman should love her Child better than her self, she must be concluded fittest to Nurse it; and she ought to undertake that Office which requires so much Vigi­lance and Patience, Care and Ten­derness, as can be expected only from the greatest Love. Nothing is more common, than for Mer­cenaries to let the poor Babe Cry [Page 67]it self weary without regarding it, whilst the Mothers Ears would have so affected her Heart, as to send her in all haste to quiet it. The Mother ordinarily will spare no Pains to keep it Neat and Clean, whilst Nurses generally are so Negligent, that Nastiness oft breeds Diseases, and the keep­ing of the Child Dirty, is a sure Preludium of its Funeral, When Dust is laid to Dust, and Ashes to Ashes.

§ 4. And here I cannot forbear to translate a passage out of a learned Physician, Dr. Walter Har­rys, in his Tract De acutis Morbis Infantum, viz. ‘That a worthy Divine, the Rector of Hayes, about twelve Miles from Lon­don, with great Grief told him, that his Parish (being large and populous, and scituate in a very wholsome Air) at his first com­ing thither was replenished with Infants sent abroad to be Nursed; yet in the compass of [Page 68]one Year he had buried them all except two: And that the same number of Nurseries being again twice supplied (through the Mercenary Diligence of those Women) out of London, he had again this same Year laid them all in their Graves before their time.’ A. D. 1689. So that by this ac­count, the Citizens seem to put out their Children, not so properly to be Nursed as to be Murdered. And I see not how they can be thought to have a due regard of their Childrens Lives, who after such fair warning given them by a Physician that Practises among them, and seems peculiarly con­cern'd for the good of Infants, re­solve still to run this Hazard, and prefer their own Ease before their Childrens Life.

§ 5. But if the Child nursed by a Stranger be not killed by her neglect, yet secondly it may be very much injured in its Health by the unsuitable Nourish­ment [Page 69]which it derives from her Breasts. Galen. de sanit. tu­end. l. 1. c. 7. Avicen l. 1. Fen. 3. Senner. de curat. inf. part 1. c. 1. It is agreed upon by an­cient and modern Physicians, that the Nourishment which Infants receive in the Womb, is of the same Nature with the Milk, which, soon after the Birth, Na­ture provides for it in the Breasts. And it is another approved Rule among them, that a sudden Alter­ation of Diet is oft Fatal, always dangerous, especially to the Infirm and such as are unable to resist any violent Impressions. If then we consider the waxen Tenderness of Infants (to use Galens Expressi­on on as well as Argument) and the Moisture of their Constitution,Galen. de temper. l. 2. c. 1. which makes them very suscepti­ble of new Impressions, we must conclude that a change of Diet immediately upon their Birth, is likely enough to have a dangerous Influence upon them. Now there is as great Variety in Constituti­ons as Faces, and consequently it will be as hard to find a Nurse of [Page 70]the same Temperament with the Mother, as endued with the same Features. So that the fatal Conse­quences of Strangers Nursing, may be imputed not always to their Negligence, but sometimes to the great difference in the Con­stitution of the Mother and the Nurse. For Galen peremptorily concludes, That the Child which draws its own Mothers Breasts, uses not only the most accustomed, but also the most proper aliment for it: Galen. de san. tuend. l. 1. c. 7. Avicen. l. 1. Fen. 3. c. 2. And Avicenna, That this it can best digest, and therefore it is most convenient for it; so that if any Indisposition seize on it, the Mo­thers Breast is most conducive to its Cure. And it is moreover to be ob­served, That for the most part those Mothers who decline this Office, are of a delicate and finer Mold, and Mercenary Nurses are generally robust and of a courser allay: And though the latter may be the more Healthful, yet her Milk may for that reason be the [Page 71]less suitable to the Constitution of an Infant conceived and nourish­ed hitherto in a Body more Fine and Tender. Brown Bread may be strong and wholsome Food, yet not fit to be prescribed on a sud­den to an infirm and delicate Sto­mach, which hath been long inured to Gruels and Pannado's. And if such unsuitable Diet oft prove Fatal to the Adult, there is more reason to fear, lest it never prove otherwise to Tender In­fants.

§ 6. But the Danger is much greater, Lest Mercenary Nurses transmit some desperate Contagion into their Nurseries. The Mothers Distemper is the most plausible Pretence for her declining of this Office: And all conclude it very reasonable, that in that case she forbear to Nurse, lest her Infant Suck Death from her Breasts whose Womb gave it Life, and she propagate her Diseases to it, toge­ther with her Milk, impregnated [Page 72]with the vicious Qualities of her Blood. But then the Argument is as strong to oblige an Healthful Mother to Nurse, least she should commit it to a Mercenary, in­fected with some latent Disease. The Right Reverend Dr. Burnet Bishop of Salisbury in his Letters assures us,Dr. Bur­net's Let. 4 p. 248. That one Mr. Gody Mi­nister of St. Gervais in Geneva, had a Daughter then sixteen Years old, who having a Nurse extraor­dinary thick of Hearing, spake all the little words that Children do at a Year old, but was Deaf at two years old. Which he concludes was caused by some Vapor the Nurses Milk was charged with, which was propagated to the Child, when she began to Suck more strongly, and to take greater quantities of that corrupted Nou­rishment. But this (though a very unhappy Infirmity) is very toler­able, in comparison of what other Infants have by this means been infected with. For there is a Story [Page 73]in Dr. Ambr. Parey, Par. de Lue Ven. c. 2. a Famous French Chyrurgion, to this pur­pose, so remarkable, that I cannot but judge it worthy to be tran­scribed.

§ 7. ‘A certain very good Citizen of this City of Paris, granted to his Wife, being a very Chast Woman, that condi­tionally she would Nurse her own Child (of which she was lately delivered) she should have a Nurse in the House to ease her of some part of the La­bour. By ill-hap the Nurse they took was troubled with the Ve­nereal Disease, wherewith she Presently infected the Child, the Child the Mother, the Mother her Husband, and he two of his Children, who frequently ac­companied him at Bed and Board, being ignorant of that Malignity wherewith he was inwardly tainted. In the mean while the Mother, when she ob­served that her Nurse-Child [Page 74]came not forward, but cried al­most perpetually, she asked my Counsel to tell her the cause of the Disease, which was not hard to be done, for the whole Body thereof was replenished with Venereal Scabs and Pustles, the hired Nurse and the Mothers Nipples were eaten in with vi­rulent Ulcers: Also the Fathers and the two other Childrens Bodies (whereof the one was three and the other four Years old) were troubled with the like Pustles and Scabs. I told them that they had all the Lues Venerea, which took its Original and first Off-spring by malign Contagion from the hired Nurse. I had them in Cure, and by Gods help healed them all except the Sucking Child, which died in the Cure. But the hired Nurse was soundly lashed in the Pri­son, and should have been whip­ped through all the Streets of the City, but that the Magistrate [Page 75]had a Care to preserve the Cre­dit of the Unfortunate Family.’

§ 8. Now if it be considered how common this Disease is in our Debauched Age, we may con­clued it is only to be imputed to the Secrecy of Physicians and Chy­rurgions, that we have not fresher Instances of this Nature. And this will be sufficient to caution all Mothers that are Healthful, ra­ther than run the hazard of such a Misfortune, to undergo the Fa­tigue of Nursing themselves. And thus you see how many ways a Mercenary Nurse endangers the Life and Health of your Children. And if it be an antedated Murder, by causing Abortion to hinder the Propagation of a Man, it cannot be a less Crime, after he is born and registred among Christians, to suffer him to die, and contri­bute any of these ways to his Murder.

CHAP. IV. Wherein are shewed the Mischiefs which may be propagated from Mercenary Nurses to the Minds of Children.

§ 1. HAving in the former Chapter shewed what Harm a Child may receive in its Body by an hired Nurse, I come in this to represent the Ill Influ­ences such an one may have on the Mind of her Nursery. And this (Ladies) will deserve your more Serious Consideration, by how much the Soul of your Child is better than its Body; especially since by the Improvements or Mis-improvements of the Mind, Persons of Quality become extra­ordinary Useful or Pernicious. Remernber it's not a Plow-man, but a Nobleman or a Gentleman, that may be spoiled, and that two ways, Either by the Diminution [Page 77]of the Childs Parts, or the Depra­vation of his Disposition or his Manners.

§ 2. First, The Nourishment re­ceived from the Breasts of a Merce­nary Nurse, may debase the Spirit, and diminish the Parts of a Child. The Faculties of the Humane Soul in their Operations, depend very much upon the Disposition of the Body in its united State. If then the Temper of the Body may be altered by Diet, the Ope­rations of the Mind may thereby be improved or impaired. Be the Hand never so Skillful, the Musick will not be equally Melodious, when it strikes on a bad, as on a good Instrument. David himself, saith one, could not have charmed Saul's Melancholly Spirit with the Strings of his Bow,Bishop Taylour's Grand Ex­ample. p. 22. or the Wood of his Spear, as he did with his Harp. If the Soul of a Night­ingal were in the Body of an Owl, its Harmonious Warbling would be changed into hideous Screak­ing; [Page 78]Or if the Humane Soul should, according to the Fancy of Apulei­us, be lodged in the Body of an Ass, it would not be able to speak or argue rationally, as it doth in the Body of a Philosopher, being condemned to an Instrument not tuned for such noble Harmony. Now whatever Temperament of Body a Child hath received from the Mother, if it be depraved by the Nurse, that Alteration may deprave its Parts, and hugely im­pair the Operations of its Mind. And when a Sucking Child draws its Nourishment longer from the Body of a stupid Nurse, than it did, whilst an Embrio, from the Substance of an ingenious Mo­ther, there is great reason to fear, least that have a greater Influence in forming its Constitution than this; especially happening whilst it is Young and Tender, and very susceptible of new Impressions.

§ 3.Caus. Holy Court. l. 1. § 8. p. 29. Causin tells us, That in the History of Germany there is a [Page 79]Story of a Child taken in a For­rest, and presented to the Landt­grave of Hesse, which having been bred among Wolves, learn'd to go on four feet, to Hunt, divide the Prey, and sleep with them, and was in every thing, but his shape, become a perfect Wolf. And may not Ferity and Stupidity be de­rived from the Breasts of Brutish Women, as well as from Wolves, which if any look upon the pre­ceding Relation as a Fable rather than an History, may pass for the Moral of it.

§ 4. I acknowledge the great Parts and brave Souls of many young Gentlemen, who have run an Hazard in drawing their first Nourishment from strange Nurses. But it may be these fell into the hands of some, whose Parts and Spirits were above their Fortune: Or perhaps though their Parts be great, yet they might have been more Considerable, had they en­joyed the same Advantages at the [Page 80]Breast as in the Womb. And any Diminution of their Parts, as well as the total loss of them, is to be deplored; and whatever hath any probable Tendency thereto a­voided. Besides there are some In­stances of Children in great Fa­milies falling infinitely short of their Parents Ingenuity, and every Mother may reasonably fear, least hers prove another of them, if she venture on this Method for their Education, which in frequent In­stances proves Pernicious. It is re­ported of Alcibiades, Plut. in Alcib. whose Parts were advanced so far above the ordinary pitch of his Country­men, that he drew his first Nou­rishment from the Breasts of a Spartan Woman.Id. in Lycur. And the brave Spirits of those Dames made other Grecians ambitious to purchase Nurses from Sparta for the Im­provement of their Childrens Spi­rit. I leave it therefore, Ladies, to your Consideration, whether it be safe to suffer your Children to Suck [Page 81]the Breasts of any Woman less In­genious than your selves, much less such stupid Women, as in re­spect of Parts and Spirits you would be very loath to have them resemble, least your generous Plants set in a barren and canker­ed Soil, degenerate and become Unfruitful.

§ 5. But Secondly, It ought further to be considered, Whether the Suck of a Mercenary Nurse may not corrupt the Disposition of the In­fants Soul, and depràve its Manners. For whosoever impartially consi­ders it, will find great reason to fear, least the Child imbibe the Nurses ill Conditions, together with her Milk. Though Vertue is a Supernatural Perfection, added to our Nature in this State of De­pravation by the Influences of Di­vine Grace, yet some Inclinations to it may be owing to the Temper of the Body, and propagated by a Communication of Spirits in the Nourishment. Much more may [Page 82]Vicious Dispositions, which are Natural, and depend more upon the Temper of the Blood and Spi­rits. The Peevishness, the Lust, the Pride, the Stubbornness or Base­ness of a Nurse, receive great En­couragement from the Constitu­tion of her Body, which being in some measure propagated to her Nursery, gives it also a great and Unhappy Propensity to the same Vices. This so far prevailed with the Mother of St. Bernard, Guil. Abb. in vit. Bern. l. 1. c. 1. that she would not let her Son draw any Breasts but her own, least he should draw from them some Contagion of Vice. And the common Pro­verb, which expresses an Invete­rate Habit of Vice, By drinking it in with the Mothers Milk, being grounded on universal Consent, gives great Authority to this No­tion.

§ 6. And Dion Cassius gives this account of the Prodigious Cruelty of Caligula, who was the Son of the Famous Germanicus and Agrippina [Page 83]the Daughter of M. Agrippa, two as Vertuous and Generous Per­sons as Heathen Rome could boast of. That to the end he might be of a Martial Disposition, they com­mitted him to a Masculine Nurse, one that was Hairy on the Face like a Man, drew the long Bow, run at the Ring, managed the great Horse, and was in all things most Cruelly and Mischievously in­clined. And from such a Nurse he became so in love with Blood, that he not only delighted to be pre­sent at the Execution of Crimi­nals, but would lick the very Blood of the Weapons wherewith they were executed. And Tiberius, who was such a Monster for Leachery, is said to have been Nursed by one no less famous for Unchastity than the other for Cruelty. And I knew a Gentleman, who had been very Sandalous in his Life for Whore­dom, and confessed in my presence, that his first Debauch was at Fourteen, with and through the [Page 84]Enticements of his Lustful Nurse. Who would not think his Parents to blame, for turning him off to such a Monster? Since from his Mother perhaps he might have Sucked a more Happy Constitu­tion, she being a very Chast and Vertuous Woman.

§ 7. Consider then, Ladies, what Assurance you have, that the Mercenary Nurse is not of a Vi­cious Disposition, and conclude it your Duty, not to put off your Child to any other, unless one from whom it may imbibe better Qualities than from your selves. And since few of those Nicer Dames, who decline this Office, think better of others than of themselves, I hope they will not be so unkind, as to venture their Children abroad, where they may be likely to draw in a Disposition to those Vices which they most abhor. I am much inclined to sub­scribe to the Opinion of Wise Cato, Plut. in Catone. That for the most part Noble Ma­trons [Page 85]are endued with more Vertuous Inclinations than the meaner sort. And methinks for that reason they ought not to place out their Children with any Women of baser Allay, and less Vertuous Dispositions.

§ 8. And thus I have given you an account of the probable Mischievous Consequences of Nursing Children abroad, which are sufficient to persuade all that truly love their Family, or their Children, to forego that unjusti­fiable Custom. Unjustifiable I say, for I am sure none can justifie themselves either in point of Pru­dence or Duty, if they still adhere to it. And this leads me to the last part of my undertaking, which shall be the subject of the next Chapter, The Insufficiency of the common Excuses alledged by those that decline the Nursing of their own Children.

CHAP. V. In which are mentioned the Com­mon Plea's for Nursing Children abroad: Together with the Insuf­ficiency of them, and the true Causes thereof are represented.

§ 1. I Come now in the last place to remonstrare, that the Causes for which the generality of those Mothers, that are capa­ble and able, refuse to Nurse, are so far from excusing, that they more evidently demonstrate and aggravate to their Fault in so do­ing. For whatever Plea's are fram­ed for them, they may be resolved into some of these three Sins, Luxury, Covetousness or Pride.

§ 2. First, Some of them pro­ceed from and convince them of Luxury. For hitherto it is reason­able to reduce the pretended Fears of diminishing their Beauty, and prejudicing their Health by the disturbance of their Rest, and [Page 87]other Toils incident to the Care of an helpless Infant. For I dare appeal to any one, who imparti­ally considers it, whether any thing but Luxury dictates this Pretence. For first, There is neither Reason nor Experience on their side, who pretend Nursing to be the Decay of a Womans Health or Beauty. The contrary is generally observed, That it helps the Appe­tite and Digestion, which is more likely to preserve both, than de­stroy either.Morton Phthisiol. l. 1. c. 7. I find it confirmed by the Experience of Learned Phy­sicians, that oft Consumptive Per­sons have been cured by Nursing their Children; and such as at o­ther times have looked Meagre and Pale, whilst they have Nursed have been Plump, Fleshy, and of a vivid Complexion. Whereas on the other hand, in drying their Breasts, Women very commonly run apparent Hazards of destroy­ing not their Health only but their Lives. The unnatural stopping up [Page 88]of these Fountains, occasions the corrupting of the Milk, and that corrupted Milk infecting the Blood, oft raises such a Ferment as produces a Fevor, or some other Fatal Distemper. And none can think it Prudence to throw them­selves into immature Death to avoid Wrinkles.

§ 3. Again Secondly, Granting that the Nursing of half a dozen Children should decay the Glory of the Face a Year or two sooner, How could Beauty be better bestowed, than in such a Work of Piety toward her own Family and Posterity? Nor do I see how those Ladies can justifie themselves against the Charge of Vanity and Luxury, who prefer the colour of their own Face before the advancing of such important Interests. Did you ever see a vain Fop so enslaved to his neat Cloaths, that he declined Business most proper and necessa­ry, for fear of some little spot fall­ing on them, or any rude Motion [Page 89]to disorder his Garniture? There is as much Vanity in being a Slave to a fair Skin, as to a gawdy Suit. The miraculous Beauty of Sarah in her old Age, and of the Blessed Virgin in Youth, were neither so overvalued, as to deter them from being Nurses. So that those may be concluded to value too highly the Smoothness and Superficial Glory of their Skin, who prefer it before the greatest Good of their Posterity.

§ 4. And Thirdly, For such as decline Nursing, For fear of having their Rest disturbed, or being other ways overloaded, there needs no other Argument than their own Apology, to convince them of Soft­ness and Luxury. For what would any one judge of a Mother, whom he should hear wishing that some one could undergo the Sicknesses attending her Conception, the Toil of bearing her Child in the Womb, and the Throes of Travel in her stead? Would he not conclude, [Page 90]That such an one had deeply im­bibed the Counsel, which Epicurus is said somewhere by Arrian to have given his Scholars, to enjoy the Pleasures of Marriage, but by all means avoid the trouble of Chil­dren. Now if such a Wish argue too much Sensuality, How can they avoid that Imputation, who by throwing off as much of the Pains of a Mother as they can, make it apparent, that it is only from the Necessity of Nature that they de­cline no more? One that turns off her Child to be Nursed by a Stranger, for fear of taking Pains with it by Day, or being disturbed by it in the Night, evidences there­by, that she carried it in the Womb Forty Weeks, and underwent the Pangs of Child-birth, only be­cause Nature in those cases could not admit of a Substitute. There is no Vertue in enduring those Pains for your Child which you cannot avoid: And there are some Pains God hath so contrived, [Page 91]that they may be avoided (these I mean that attend the Nursing of it) that by a voluntary undertaking of them, you may make it appear how little you value your Ease, when it stands in Competition with your Duty. For doubtless she loves her Ease too well, who will not undergo those Labours for her own Child, which he expects another should take for Wages. Our Holy Religion, as it requires the great est Charity in all its Pro­fessors, so it prescribes Labours of Love; and consequently allows not of that over-great Tenderness to our selves, which is inconsistent with a Laborious Charity; especi­ally to the most natural and near­est Objects of a Mothers Charity, her own Children.

§ 5. Lastly, The Pretence of In­ability to Nurse, is oft reducible to this Head of Luxury. It is the com­mon Plea of those Mothers, who put their Children out to Nurse, that either they want Nipples or [Page 92]Milk: And though this may be re­ally the case of some few, yet I am persuaded, not of all that pretend it. Such dry Breasts, as one observes, are like the Gout, which is fre­quent among the Rich, but a stran­ger among the Poor. Few of those Women who are too Poor to hire a Nurse, but they are able to Nurse themselves; and I make no que­stion but many of our Rich and Honourable Dames, who pretend to want Suck or Nipples, would have had both if their Fortunes had been less. Now in all such, Luxury is the real Motive, though a Natural Inability be the Pre­tence.I might here add one Parti­cular more reducible to this Head, which though many are ashamed to plead, hath yet a great Influence on them in declining their Duty: I mean the Restraints that the Discharge of it would bring on them. They cannot Dress exactly according to the Mode, if to give Suck they must be called so oft to open their Breast: Nor will this be consistent with the Liberty they take to Revel and Game oft till after Midnight. But if the bare Proposal of this Plea do not convince and shame them that use it, I must despair of prevailing with them. But since I am sure there cannot be a better Argument to this Duty, than that it may be a means to restrain them from those Faults, I will not Despair.

§ 6. But that those Ladies, who have no better Plea's for the Neglect of this Duty, than these which so evidently convict them of Luxury, and too great a Fond­ness of their own Ease, will by a Serious Reflection upon this Con­sideration, persuade themselves ra­ther to discharge this Duty for the future toward their Children, than to expose themselves to just Cen­sure, by such Apologies for their Neglect. For (to conclude this first Cause) what is the true difference between a Modest Wife and an Adultress? But that the first de­sires to bring forth a Child to the World, to be a Servant of God, a Citizen to the Commonwealth, and an Object for her Charity and Diligence; whilst the latter aims at no more than the gratify­ing of her lend Inclinations and base Lusts. And I need not to say, how near those Mothers come to this latter Character, who after the Consummation of Marriage, [Page 94]and the Birth of a Child (as if Lust: were all they intended) de­cline the Labour and the Charity it gives them an opportunity to exercise towards it, and transfer them all upon another.

§ 7. Secondly, There is another Plea used for the declining of this Office which is the result of Avarice, as the former is of Luxuryr, and made use of by the Trading part of the Nation, as those by the Gen­try. The Nursing of a Child is looked on as too great a Confine­ment to the Wife, who by her In­spection over the Houshold Af­fairs, or Attendance in the Shop, may save her Husband much more than the Hire of a Nurse amounts to. But granting this, if (as hath been shewed) Nursing be the Mo­thers Duty, no prospect of gaining by the neglect can supersede her Obligation to it. And if I under­stand the Nature of Covetousness, it is such a Love of Gain as this, that draws one to the neglect of [Page 95]any Obligation, which is not con­sistent with his Profit. The Que­stion is not, Whether it may be as Conducive to your Temporal In­terest, but whether it be as Con­sistent with your Duty, to put out your Child to a Stranger, as to Nurse it your self. And if Avarice be excluded from the Consult, you must conclude, that other business ought to give place to this, which is so properly the Business of a Mother. For unless you love your Child too little, and your Gain too nmch, you will be sensible, that if your Infant be spoiled, or suffer any Prejudice in Body or Mind, you can be no Gainers, though your Domestick Business, or your Shop should be better attended.

§ 8. Lastly, I humbly recom­mend it to the Consideration of all Mothers, especially Persons of Quality, whether by adhering to this unnatural Custom, they do not shew themselves Guilty of a great deal of Pride. You think it [Page 96]below you to stoop to the Office of a meaner Mother, and there­fore, as a piece of State, and Pun­ctilio of Honour, turn off the Drudgery of Nursing to another. For if this were not a very pre­vailing Motive, the Great and Honourable would not be so uni­versally conformable to this un­reasonable Custom. But may they not as reasonably conclude it too great a Condescention to become a Mother as a Nurse? For there is the same equality between the most Honourable Lady and her Child, as between the meanest Beggar and hers; and there is no more reason why the best should think Scorn to Nurse her own at her Breast, than to bear it in her Womb. Let then those whom God hath advanced into a Superior Rank in the World, learn to have Modest Thoughts of themselves, and they will be ashamed to let such vain Punctilio's of Honour and Greatness influence them▪ [Page 97]Let such remember that the Laws of God and Nature equally oblige the Lady as the Beggar, the City as the Country Dame; and they will resolve not to plead the Fan­tastick Privilege of their Quality, against the Good of their Children and their own Duty. God expects that the greatest Lady, when she becomes a Mother, should do the Duties of a Mother; and she cer­tainly thinks of her self more highly than she ought to think, whoever is so Vain, as to fancy it below her to do her Duty. And if Luxury, Avarice and Pride, be the true Causes of this Customs universal Prevailence, whatever are the Pre­tences, it must needs be concluded inexcusably Sinful: Which was the last thing I undertook to prove.