The Sun.
London, England, 1858-09-10 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—Sept. 9.

as a religious body, thi cy must be protected from
annoyance in the exercise of their religion.
Mr. Payne said, the law protected all religious
bodies peaceably assembled for the purpose of wor-
ship, and it must be etjually and impartially admin-
istered to all denominations. The defendants must
each enter into his own recognizance in the sum of
£5O to come up when called upon, and if they
repeated the disturbance they would be brought up
and dealt with as the Court might think fit, and if
they did not appear. when called upon they would
be liable to be imprironed until the amount of the
recognizance was aid in each case. Those who
professed Mormonism 1, or any other " ism," when
peaceably assembled. for the purpose of worship in
an authorised place, must not be disturbed ; they
were entitled to the protection of the law, which
the Court was bound to enforce.
The defendants promised not to offend again,
and, having entered into recognizances, were dis-

charged. -
Caroline Dunn, 32, was indicted for stealing the
sum of £5 10s., the money of Joseph Petford, from
his person.
Mr. Ribton was counsel for the prosecutor, Mr.
Metcalfe for the prisoner.
The prosecutor stated that he lived at No. 5,
Ferdinand-place, St. Pancras, and on the night of
the 31st of August he met the prisoner in Ferdi-
nand-street, and they had some ale together. It
was between 10 and 11 o'clock, and he went with
her to 11, Weedington-street, where she lodged,
and he fell asleep on the bed. When he went there
he had £5 10s. in his pocket ; when he woke up it
was gone, and the prisoner too. From other evi-
dence it appeared that the prisoner soon after the
robbery was seen at publichouses showing money,
and with the landlady of one of them she left £2
15s. for safety, which sum was produced in court.
The jury found her guilty, and she was sentenced
to four months' hard labour.

Sarah Winfield was indicted for stealing from
Jessie Proctor, a child four years of age, three
penny pieces, the property of George Proctor.
Mr. Abram was for the prosecution ; Mr. Ribton
for the prisoner.
A police-constable, 41 B, stated that he was on
duty in Victoria-road, Pimlico, on the 26th of
August, when helnoticed the prisoner with a little
girl, and he watched them. He saw the prisoner
take something from the child's hand, and then
leave her. He asked the child. a question, when
she began to cry, and in consequence of what she
told him he went after the prisoner, whom he took
to the child's mother, and charged her, upon the
child's statement, with having robbed her of 3d.
The prisoner took out a shilling, five penny pieces
and a farthing, which she said was all her own ;
but the mother, the wife of a farrier in the Royal
Mews, identified one of the pieces by the letters
G. stamped upon it. She had shortly before
given it with two others to the child.
The prisoner, who is the wife of a builder, re-
ceived a very excellent character, and her counsel
put it to the jury whether they would ruin that
good character on the identity of a penny piece,
about which there was every probability of a mis-
take.

The jury found her not guilty.
A boy named William Johnson was brought up
on Wednesday for judgment, having been convicted
on Monday of going up to a lady in Barnsbury-
road, Islington, and snatching a purse -from her
hand. He was remanded in order that inquiries
might be made about him.
The officet said that he had ascertained that a
statement made by the prisoner that he had been
an errand boy to a jeweller was correct, but he had
been there only three weeks, and it was suspected
that he obtained.the situation, only for the purpose
of robbing the place in concert with others older
than himself. His father lived in Gray's-inn-lane,
and had five children. The prisoner had been
taught to dance on a spade and in clogs, and had
performed as a little wonder at public-house con-
cert rooms, not for his own benefit, but for that of
those who took him about.
Mr. Creasy said, the best thing that could be
done with him would be to pass such a sentence as
might lead to his being sent to a reformatory for
such a period as would afford a full opportunity for
his becoming a good young man. It was quite
clear that if after a short imprisonment he went
back to those from whose clutches he was now free
he would be ruined for ever. He should, there-
fore, sentence him to four months' imprisonment,
and to four years' detention in a reformatory. He
was sorry to say that the claims upon the resources
of these vahiable institutions were so numerous
that many cases could not be brought under their
operation.
William Smith, 38, was indicted for having
stolen six gas-burners, the property of her Majesty's
Commissioners of Works and Buildings, from the
new bridge from Chelsea to Battersea.
Mr. Abram prosecuted ; Mr. M'Donnell was
counsel for the prisoner.
The indictment charged that the qffenee was
committed in the parish of Battersea, in the county
of Middlesex, and, upon the application of Mr.
Abram, " Surrey" was substituted for " Middlesex."
It was then contended, by Mr. M'Donnell, that the
Court had no jurisdiction to try the case, as it had
no jurisdiction in Surrey, but Mr. Abram cited a
case to show that the Court had jurisdiction to try
for an offence committed within 500 yards of the
boundary of the county, and proved by a witness
that the spot where the burners were taken from
was less than that distance from the Middlesex side
of the bridge. The case then proceeded, and the
prisoner (who had been employed on the works)
was convicted. He had borne a very good charac-
ter, and was intoxicated when he committed the
offence.
Mr. Creasy sentenced him to three months' hard
labour.
Mr. Abram said, he was only instructed on the
part of the Court, and was not aware of the error
in the indictment. It was a case in which the
commissioners ought to have instructed their own
solicitor to prosecute.
Benjamin Smith, 62, dock labourer, and Charles
Gue, 30, carman, were indicted for stealing a bag
of coffee, value £2, the property of the St. Katharine
Dock Company, in their dock.
It appeared that Gue had been in the habit of
going to the dock for his master, and he was
charged with having stolen a bag of coffee, which
he did not, however, get clear off the premises, and
it was alleged that Smith was an accomplice in the
transaction.
The jury acquitted Smith, and found Gue guilty.
He was sentenced to four months' hard labour.
Isabella Reid, 52, charwoman, was charged in
four counts of an indictment with having obtained
linen from houses under the false pretence that she
had been sent for it by the laundress. She pleaded
guilty, and was sentenced to 18 months' hard
labour.

(Before Mr. Payne, at Clerkenwell.)
Henry Ripley and William Barr, drovers, were
indicted for " unlawfully, wilfully, and con-
temptuously disturbing a certain congregation of
persons called Latter-day Saints, assembled for the
purpose of religious worship."
Mr. F. H. Lewis appeared for the prosecution ;
Mr. Metcalfe for the defendants.

The defendants pleaded guilty.
Mr. Lewis said, .this prosecution had been insti-
tuted by the elders of a congregation of persons
belonging to the Mormon church, for the purpose
of being protected from a system of annoyance and
interruption to which they had been for some time
subjected while in the performance of their reli-
gious worship. These defendants had taken part
in such annoyance, but there was every reason to
believe they were the dupes of another person
whose name need not then be mentioned ; and Mr.
Metcalfe, their counsel, had with his usual judg-
ment and discretion, advised them to take the
course they had adopted in pleading guilty, and, as
the only object of the elders was to obtain the pro-
tection of the law, they believed that the defend-
ants, having seen the folly and impropriety of their
conduct in interfering with the proceedings of the
congregation in question, that object would be
attained by their being bound in their own recog-
nisances to come up for judgment when. called upon.
If they repeated their misconduct they would most
certainly be called upon to receive sentence ; if they
did not, of course they would hear no more of the
matter.

Mr. .Nretealfe-
said, the defendants were willing
reeoto
any
lsaneeesxeroise
of
dis-
cretion to appear if
rteocieLt.eerdanntod,thweiitr respectwhon
for which Mr. Lewis had
defendants, him credit,
he had only to say that the
drunken men in a disorderly crowd, hadt Lne as
tai
that
which they were not legally justified in, doing and
which they, would not repeat.
Mr. Lewis said, although the doctrines of the
Mormons were not what everybody approved, still,

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 10, 1858.

her husband, said she lived in Bell-lane, Spital-
fields, and that morning early her husband came
home intoxicated while she was asleep in bed, and
beat her very badly about the face and head. Pri-
soner was a " translator" of boots and shoes, and
earned high wages. For more than two years she
had been an inmate of a lunatic asylum, which she
attributed to his ill-usage ; and on one occasion the
Lord Mayor had sentenced him to six months' im-
prisonment for assaulting her.
Mr. Hammill sent the husband to prison for
three months, and directed that 10s. should be
given to the wife from the poor-box.

SOUTHWARK.--Wm. Kelly, a horse dealer,
who falsely described himself as a corn merchant
and a contractor for watering the streets, was
brought before Mr. Combe for final examination,
charged with being, concerned, with another not in
custody, in administering a narcotic to Jonathan
Fisher, a greengrocer, residing at Lewisham, and
stealing from him a horse worth £l5.
Mr. Downey appeared for the prosecution, and
Mr. Edwin for the prisoner.

It appeared from the evidence of the prosecutor
that on Friday morning, the 27th, while going to the
New Cattle-market to dispose of a horse, he fell in
with a man named Fielder, who accompanied him.
There Fisher changed his horse for a dun cob, and
on returning (still with Fielder in the cart) he
came up with the prisoner, who was standing near
the road. Fielder pointed out the prisoner as a
man who was likely to buy the cob. He said he
did not want to sell it—that at all events he should
want £l5 for it. Hereupon they all went to the
" World Turned Upside Down" public-house, in the
Old Kent-road. Prisoner offered him £l3, which
he refused. Afterwards they had some stout, and
after taking a glass of it prosecutor almost immedi-
ately lost his senses, and had no recollection of any-
thing that happened until midnight, when he found
himself lying on a sofa at home. He was positive he
never sold the horse while in his senses, but in his
pocket was found a sovereign and a piece of paper,
which purported to be an I 0 V for £l2, signed
" William Kelly." He had no recollection of ever
seeing that before, neither had he any recollection
of seeing the paper produced by the prisoner's soli-
citor as follows :—" Aug. 27, 1858. Sold a dun cob
for £l3, and received as cart payment £l. Jona-
than Fisher." It was his signature, and had a penny
stamp attached to it.
William Palmer, 125 L, said he took the prisoner
into custody, and when told what he was charged
with, he said that he had bought the horse in the
usual way, for £l2, but he had not the opportunity
of paying all the money at the time. He also told
witness that the horse was at grass at Mr. Chand-
ler's, at Guildford. Witness went there, and the
horse was given up to him.
Mr. Combe asked whether the man Fielder had
been found ?

The constable replied in the negative ; but the
prisoner and that man were no doubt connected
with a well organised gang of sharpers who infested
all the high roads•leading to the metropolis, on the
look out for victims. There were other distinct
charges against them. A limeburner named Crow-
ther, residing in Kent, had just come into' court,
who, on the 29th ult., was robbed of a horse by the
prisoner under similar circumstances.
Mr. Combe said that he should commit the pri-
soner for trial for hocussing and robbing Mr. Fisher,
but to enable the other persons to prefer their
charges he should remand him for a week.
The prisoner was formally committed for trial.

LAMBETH..—Yesterday Henry Arlett, a man
about 30 years of age, wearing large jet-black whis-
kers and moustaches, and in the uniform of an artil-
leryman, was placed at the bar before the Hon. G.
C. Norton on a charge of vagrancy.
William Hewett, a mendicity officer, deposed that
on the evening before, standing near the railway
arch in the Westminster-road, the prisoner was beg-
ging, and his appearance having attracted a num-
ber of persons, and more than ordinary sympathy,
he in a short time. got as much as half-a-crown m
coppers. The officer added that the prisoner was
dressed as smartly as if he was going to parade.
In reply to the charge the prisoner said he had
been 'in the Royal' Artillery about a year and a
half, that he had been sent home invalided from
Malta, had been some time at the hospital at Wool-
wich, and was ultimately discharged at Christmas
last, with merely a sovereign as a gratuity. Since
then he had been living by the exertions of his wife
as a laundress, but her work getting slack he was
compelled to beg.
Mr. Norton—What is the reason you cannot
work for your living ?
Prisoner—Because I am unable from an affection
in the back.
Mr. Norton—Then your proper course is to go
to your parish ; you cannot be permitted. to beg in
this way. 'Where is your parish ?
Prisoner—ln the City of London.
, • Mr. Norton—Then you must go there. You
must be a mean-spirited person to disgrace the
uniform of the finest corps in her Majesty's service
by begging in it. I shall give you alight sentence
of seven days, and on the expiry of your imprison-
ment you must go to your parish.
The Prisoner (insolently)—This uniform suit is
mine, and while there is a single shred of it together
I shall not cease to beg.
Mr. Norton—You seem a worthless fellow, and
deserve a much more severe punishment than I have
given you.
Prisoner—l say what I mean. I'll keep my
word, and beg.
The prisoner was then removed from the bar.

HAMMERSMITH.---Mr. Francis Thompson, a
pawnbroker, of No. 38; Norland-road, Shepherd's-
bush-market, appeared before Mr. Ingham to
answer an adjourned summons, at the instance of
Mrs. Martha Nasmyth, a lady residing in Norland-
square, for knowingly taking a quantity of clothes
sent to wash as a pledge from a laundress named
Caroline Burton.
Caroline Burton stated that she lived in James-
street, Kensington, and formerly took in washing.
She was Mrs. Nasmyth's laundress in the month of
June last, and she pledged the washing at the
defendant's shop to procure her children bread, as
her husband was out of employment. The defen-
dant had known her for three or four years, and
she had repeatedly pledged at his shop. He knew
that she was a laundress, because she had pledged
£1 worth of shirts at a time. She had pledged her
customer's clothes a great many times, and when
she got money she redeemed them. She had taken
a clothes-basket full at a time and pledged some-
times 20 sheets in a bundle. The defendant had
several times said he hoped she would not get into
trouble when the bundles had been large, and she
had told him that it was in consequence of her hus-
band being out of work.

Mr. Ingham said he had a duplicate before him
relative to a quantity of clothes and other articles
pledged in July for £1 ss.
The witness said, at that time three tickets were
made into one for £1 ss. She told the defendant
that the lady wanted her things home, and that she
could not get them out. She then asked for, the
three tickets to be made into one for her to take to
the lady. The articles in the ticket consisted of
two large tablecloths, five sheets, a pair of drawers,
36 towels and pillowcases. ,

The defendant said he had no knowledge of the
things being " washing" at the time they were
in. The things were pledged separately, and for
small sums.

Mr. Ingham said the defendant must have been
aware that the witness was a laundress from her
pledging
hindtginggs2boeisngheets at a time. Besides, he must
have known that a painter's wife was not likely to
possess 36 chamber towels.
The defendant then called his assistant, William
GO-di
, who stated that he was not cognizant of
" washing" at the time they were
taken in.
The witness asserted that she told him that the
articles were " washing."
Mr. Ingham said it was not material to inquire
as to whether the defendant knew the things were
" washing" when they were first pledged. In July
the duplicates were consolidated and made into
one. That act was substantially a pledging, and
then the question was whether at that time the
defendant knew that the woman was a laundress,
and that the things were "washing." He thought
that the case was quite clear, and that the defen-
dant knew perfectly well when he made out the
ttiheekeatrticl
thaest,
wthieth m4-osm.
caon
st:-.as a laundress and that
the things were " washing." He ordered the
defendant to forfeit £2 10s., and to deliver up all

MR. DOAING OF 'Et.som.—The Mr. Dorling
whose death ,was yesterday recorded in several of the me-
tropolitan newspapers was the father of Mr. Henry Dor-
ling, the well-known clerk of the course at Epsom. He
had nothing whatever to do with the " Grand Stand" and
" correct cards." Mr. Henry Dorling, whose name is so
familiar to the public, is, we are glad to state, likely to
dischirge his duties in connection with Epsom races for
many years to come. • •
[AnvEirrisEmExii.—Holloway's Pills and Ointment.—
These medicines have obtained a celebrity and an amount
of sale in all parts of the world, which must be taken as a
sufficient proof that their virtues are not exaggerated.
They have stood the test of nearly a quarter of a century,
and during all that period there has not been a single
charge brought publicly against them. No one has com-
plained that they have done harm instead of good. No
invalid, after a fair trial, has found them fail to relieve his
pain or cure his disease. In all cutaneous disorders espe-
cially,-the combined action of the Ointment and the Pills
is absolutely irresistible. The cure is not temporary or
superficial, but complete and permanent.

SO Ult

VITY.

The following remarks on the sources whence
insanity springs, or appears to spring, taken from
the report of the Medical Superintendent of James
Murray's Royal Asylum for Lunatics, near Perth,
will repay the trouble of perusal :
No year passes without abundant proof of the
hereditary, or hereditary transmissibility, of insa-
nity. Of 69 admissions, horeditary predisposition
was proved in 17, 13 females and 4 males—the
female sex, therefore, largely predominating in the
proportion of more than 3to 1. In one of these
cases the mother was insane ; in 2, the father ; in
1, the father and brother ; in 2, a brother ; in 6,
sisters ; in 1, the maternal uncle ; in 1, the paternal
uncle ; in 1, a half-uncle and aunt ; in 1, a grand-
father's cousin ; and in 1, the family generally
were eccentric or insane, according to the views
taken as to what constitutes insanity and eccen-
tricity respectively. With a view to illustrate the
subject of hereditary predisposition more fully and
trustworthily, we have examined our statistics for
the last 31 years—from the opening of the institu-
tion in 1827 to the present date—and we find, as
the result, that of a total of 1,130 cases admitted,
it existed in 26.54 per cent., or rather more than
one-fourth ; or, if we deduct the cases in which
no cause is stated—which gives us a total of 733
in 40.92 per cent. Of 300 cases, in which
hereditary tendency is thus noted, 165 were
females and 135 males—the former sex, therefore,
greatly predominating. Esquirol estimates here-
ditary predisposition to occur in nearly, one
fourth of the admissions, or 21 per cent. ; Guislain
at one-fourth, or even 30 per cent. ; Dr. Webster,
from the statistics of Bethlem, at 32 per cent.; the
statistics of the York Retreat show nearly one-third
of the admissions •, and Professor Holst of Chris-
tiana states it as high as 69 per cent. in Norway.
It may be necessary to explain that our statistics
make no distinction between collateral and direct
relationships. And it may further be advisable to
remind the reader that it does not necessarily fol-
low, because progenitors have been insane or eccen-
tric, that the immediate affspring should be equally
so. There are well-establishetflaws of transmissi-
bility which we cannot here stop to explain or
enumerate. The form of insanity chiefiytransmitted
appears to have been Dementia. The mother was
noted to havebeen insane in 20 cases, andthe father
in 29. The mother's insanity was transmitted in 13
instances to daughters, and in 7to sons ; while the
father's was transmitted in 16 cases to sons, and in
13 to daughters. This bears out the conclusions ar-
rived at by the majority of British and foreign
statists—that the mother's insanity is chiefly trans-
mitted to daughters, and that of the father to sons.
The father, however, according to our tables, was
more frequently insane than the mother, in the pro-
portion of 29 to 20 times. This does not quite accord
with the generality of statistics, which show that
the mother is more likely to transmit insanity than
the father.
Intimately connected with this subject is the deli-
cate and painful one of the inter-marriage of
tainted persons, especially of tainted females—of
women labouring under, or predisposed to insanity,
and whose offspring are more than likely to mani-
fest insanity, or at least to bear about with them a
strong predisposition. We cannot too strongly
reprehend the practice in parents of wilfully con-
cealing from an intending husband or wife the fact
of existing or prior insanity in the opposite con-
tracting party. Such practice is not only cruel,
but criminal it is perpetuating and propagating
insanity broad-cast ;it is burdening the country
with the helpless and diseased ;it is—to use a
phrase which, if plain and homely, nevertheless
embodies a great and wholesome truth,—" deteriorat-
ing the stock" of society. One lamentable instance
came under our notice during the. year. A woman
was brought here for the second time, whose house,
on the evening preceding her admission, had pre-
sented the following scene :—ln one apartment lay
a dying husband cursing, with his last breath, the
day he had been married, and lamenting bitterly
that he had not been made aware that he was ally-
ing himself with a tainted woman. His simple and
pathetic story was this : In his youth he had had
an attachment for her as a girl ; he spent some
years abroad as a soldier ; on his return, finding
her still unmarried, he renewed his former attach-
ment, and was permitted to propose marriage with-
out being made aware, either by her or her friends,
that durmg his absence she had had one or more
attacks of insanity. They were married, and sub-,
sequent attacks soon opened his eyes to his wife's
morbid tendency ; from that day to the period of his
death he never ceased to allude to his alliance as
the curse of his life. In an adjoining apartment, a
son—an indolent " ne'er-do-weel," who had never
exerted himself either for his own support or that
of his parents—had just committed suicide, on being
told that, in consequence of his father's approach-
ing death, he would be compelled to work. . A
daughter had just come home to this scene of misery
to be confined of an illegitimate child, while the
mother was rushing from room to room raving mad,
and unable to comprehend the scene in which she
was So prominent an actor. But, strange to say,
similar marriages are sometimes deliberately solem-
nised among the educated and higher classes of so-
ciety, when both parties have their eyes open. Such
mesalliances are, however, much less seldom mar-
riages of love than of convenience ; there is probably
in general, money to be got on one or other side.
The parties entering into such compacts are inex-
cusable on the plea ofignbrance of the fearful results
of such mal-assorted and unnatural unions. It is a
delicate and difficult thing to interfere with civil
liberty ; but it adinits of a reasonable degree of
doubt whether there should not be some legal re-
striction in regard to such marriages. Their effects
are most disastrous to society at large ; and surely
society, which bears the burden and pays the pe-
nalty, has a right to enter some species of protest
against proceedings which are contrary to physio-
logical as well as to moral law. The propagation of
insanity by means of fatuous and facile female pau-
pers is now amenable to civil law. The subject we may
safely leave in the hands of the new Lunacy Board.
Such females are comparatively seldom married ;
their lives are too frequently of the most irregular
and dissolute character. More than one deplorable
instance has occurred to our notice during the year.
We are naturally led from the subject of marriage
among the insane to consider celibacy as a predis-
posing cause of insanity. Of 69 admissions during
the past year, 49 patients have been unmarried, 17
married, and 3 widowed ; or, in other words, the
single hare been considerably more than double the
number of the married. But as the statistics of a
single year may exhibit somewhat unusual or falla-
cious results, we have examined our statistics,bear-
ing on this subject, for the last 31 years ; and we
find, as the result, that of a total of 679 cases, in
which —the social condition has been specially
quoted, 445 have been single, 196 married, and 38
widowed ; that is, the single have constituted
65.64 per cent., and the married and widowed to-
ether 34.46 per cent. of the whole admissions ; or,
in other words, the former have been nearly twice
as numerous as the latter. It is but fair to state
that the statistics of a single asylum may be as fal-
lacious—in relation to society at large—as those of
a single year in any given as. ylum. The statistics
of other asylums do show different results. Those
who are sceptical as to the value of statistics go
the length of asserting that they may be made
to prove anything. We trust society has a
right to expect that this and similar • inquiries
and subjects will be elaborated by the new Lu-
nacy Board for Scotland, one of whose most useful
duties we take to be the drawing up of statistic s
from the returns which Government compels, the.
officers of asylums to furnish. Such is the public'
interest attachable to celibacy as a predisposing
cause of insanity that we venture to compare our
results with those arrived at by some of the first
authorities, British and foreign, on the statistics of
insanity, and to draw or deduce a few general con-
clusions therefrom. The statistics of Bethlem Hos-
pital for the Insane, London, according to Dr.
Hood, show that the married are more numerous
than the single patients, in the 'proportion of 1,364
to 1,194. This, however, is certainly an exceptional
state of matters. Opposite results are given in Buck-
nill and Tuke's " Manual of Psychological Medi-
cine," and in the statistics of the majority of British
and foreign asylums. In the Saltpetriere • and Bi-
cetre, during 20 years ending in 1822, according to
M. Desportes, of 2,490 patients, 1,472 were single,
and 956 married, widowed, or divorced. Jacobi's
statistics of insanity in Germany show that, of
2,015 patients, 1,573 were single, and 422 married
or widowed. Statistics then, on the whole, indubi-
tably prove that celibacy predisposes to insanity,
and also the converse—that matrimony is, to a cer-
tain extent, an antidote against insanity, or exer-
cises a preservative influence. These propositions
we commend to the attention of the Times and
other journals which have recently, with such
discussed the advantages of early marriages,
and the disadvantages of prolonged, unnatural, and
unhealthy celibacy. Parchappe remarks that celi-
bacy, as a predisposing cause of insanity, equally
affects both sexes ; but that matrimony is a greater
preservative against insanity in males than in
females. We do not here stop to inquire whether
insanity in celibates is producible by, or traceable
to, the restraints merely, or the vices of celibacy.
The subject is too delicate, difficult, and extensive
to dilate upon at present. But its connexion with
what has recently been paraded in the Times as the
" great social evil" is too evident to warrant us in
omitting a mere allusion. Let it not, however, be
supposed that we mean to infer or imply, in the 445
cases cited in our statistics, that the insanity was in
them necessarily due to the condition of celibaT
per se—let riot the reader confound the popt wit
the propter hoc. No doubt, in many cues, celibacy