The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1910-02-08
POPULAR FALLAC|ES.
Some Old Fashioned Notions
That Still Obtain Credence.
THE CYCLE OF THREE IDEA.
a Drowning Man May Sink Not Only
Thrice, hu. q Dozen Times. and Still
ss Reseued-consessiss ch,iis and

% nsScSeG-\ohSeSSiSe SNilS auo
the Merging Of Disesses-Law Points.
Three physicians We're standing in
a downtown drug store the other day
when one. who had been looking at
an evening paper. exclaimed: Great
Caesar. here it is again, l see il in
the papers At ieast twice month"
What's thar asked one OF the 9TH
ers.
It's that popular fallacy about
drowning man sinking for the third
time. Here il says. Just as he was
sinking for the third time he was saved
by the timely arrival etc. The next
time see this third time business it
probably will read. He sank FOR the
third time before aid could be had and
WAS drowned
Why will people get that fool idea
that sinking for the third time must
needs be fatal to a drowning man?
Why. bless you. l saw a man sink a
half dozen times before he was res.
cued alive. An uncle OF mine. wit
nesses said. never sank but once. and
he was drowned. The number OF times
Il man sinks has nothing to do with
and he may go beneath the water any
number of times. Ii ali depends upon
the person who is drowning. his phys
zeal condition and how quickly the
lungs nil with water
That cycle OF three" suggested an
other OF the doctors. lis carried along
by those who insist that Il person dies
in his third suggestive chill. but this
is not true. The same rule holds good
in congestive chills as in the case Of
the drowning man \ person may die
in the first or he may have dozen
and still live. The rule of three does
not obtain there either"
The first physician. with great dis
dain. then told how many ignorant
persons would swear that If We git
TIL malary an it runs into typhoid
fever an it runs into newmony it's
shore death
There's that same old rule Of three
| again." he continued almost ansrily.
First and foremost, one disease docs
not run into another. There's no such
thing as a collision between diseases,
as many believe. II one has malaria
he has that and that alone. The same
| thing is true Of typhoid fever and
| pneumonia. Each one is a separate
and distinct trouble. and doctor with
any sense should be able TO diagnose
his malady from symptoms which are
| always present in each and entirely
different"
From popular fallacies in regard to
medicine the conversation drifted to
fallacies regarding the law. A lawyer
present was called upon to explain
first one thing and another. when one
| of the bystanders said:
Il made n bet the other day that n
person had no right to touch a dead
wOn.'
who decided the question for you:"
asked the lawyer smilingly.
Well" said the man sheepishly, 1T
was a bartender. but he's an educated
fellow and is a good judge Of the law"
You speak of the law as II it were
something to be judged like cattle at
a fat stock show" replied the attorney.
There is no law on any statute book
In any state in the United States which
says one may not touch body before
the arrival Of the coroner.
I'm case Of murder the old English
common law used to require that the
body of the murdered one be left just
! as it lay until viewed by one In author
ity.
THAT was done, it can plainly be
! seen, for the purpose OF preserving the
surroundings intact SO that whatever
evidence might be there would not be
= ~ 4oP TO-DAY
especially II any mystery were con-
nected with IT, common sense would
teach a person to leave everything In.
tact, not alone for the coroner, but fol
/ the police officials as well. But should
the body Of a murdered man be moved
there is no law covering 1t unless II
could be proved that the person who
moved the body did 1t with the inten
ton to destroy evidence. In cases OF
suicide or death by accident there
could be ne objection to moving thu
BODY anywhere In the city II done witt
humane or some other proper motive
IN tell you what is the law" sait
q stoop shouldered. long armed maj
who had been listening long enough
TO get the gist Of the discussion III {
Yellow sees IluTueE tbEousu Al p1"'
of glass he can't be witness in TIT
case"
~Oh. pifne-' exclaimed the attorney
sI'm going to lunch. That's the limit
was waiting for some zap to sprinl
> that. II that was the case and a rrul
der should be committed in this roon
/. half a dozen Of US could not be con-
peteut witnesses, il your statement
true, because we are wearing glasses
Glass is glass whether in q window
on the nose There Is no such law
that. That's foolish"
Il heard my grandfather say that.
insisted the long armed man, and
know'd law too"
YES" retorted the exaspernted a
torney. and he no doubt gave 1t on
as law that a man could stand with b
- back against his own house and ki
any one who came within q certai
distance Of him. But he would han
for il unless he had mighty good q
a fecae. All Of those things are whs
a we call chimney corner law but the
= wont hold in court-"-Kansas CT