The Birmingham age-herald., 1915-05-09
The Psychological Explanation
of the Problem
By Professor James E. Lough
'fcssor of Experimental Psychology University

CnolOQy m New fOTk OnIVeTSlty.
 memory, power of reflection and power of inference they come, each one to be felt by him, after he has once yielded to them and experienced their results, in connection with a foresight of those results. It is obvious that every instinctive act in an animal with memory must cease to be blind after being once repeated An insect that lays her eggs in a place where she never sees them matched must always do so 'blindly,' but hen who has already matched brood can hardly be assumed to sit with perfect blindness on her second nest. Some expectation of. consequences must in every case like this be aroused, and this expectation according as it is desired or Is something disliked must necessarily either reinforce or inhibit the mere impulse. The hens idea of the chickens would probably encourage her to sit; rats memory, on the other hand, of former escape from a trap would neu- tralize his impulse to take bait from any thing that reminded him of that trap
 How oo we interpret these illustrations of the psychologist? How may they be applied to the instinct of man to guard and protect the woman of his clan? How does this instinct of man compare with the instinct of the bee to follow it's queen to protect her and to care for her so that the hive may not become extinct? And what Has IL all lO QC Wllu ile lSuu0QCy Ol HIGH juries to free women in this year of nne- teen hundred and fifteen?
 Instincts give us habits and habits wear deep grooves of impulse in the mind Somewhere back in the neolithic period nature whispered to man that the first law of his impulse must be to guard the female. Gradually, as man has come up through the stages of progress, that i'm pulse has grown into a habit of mind. When reason began to dawn it reinforced this impulse From that point on we have the two forces of instinct and reason digging out the channel of habit In rela- tion with his woman. man has the self preserving instincts of the silk worm, the defensive instinct of the rattlesnake the hunting instinct of the hawk, the self per petuating instinct of the bee. And in addi- tion he has bulwarked his instincts with an expediency furnished by the growing powers of reason. His instinct has been to guard the female at all costs. His reason has told him that this impulse was fundamental to his existence.
 In this connection it is interesting to note that mans mind has focused more and more upon the guardianship of the female as he has progressed through his historical epochs. His earliest school of thought centred in her. His will. his reasoning power, his perception of space, his emotions, his imagination were first
 
 female From the hunting animal he turned into an agriculturist because his woman demanded a greater assurance of life's necessities for her family. And so it has been through the successive steps toward civilization. Man has come walk ing up through the cons, fighting every inch of the way, so that his woman might have her rightful place in the sun to carry on the work for which nature endowed her. Even a Wicked Woman
 Still Excites Mans Sympathy.
 Is it surprising that with such an hab1tual focusing point his mind has developed 1nstinctive impulses for her pro- lection which at time dominate every dic- tate of the intellect? The situation is a very simple one. Intellect might tell a man that a criminal woman was a peril dangerous enemy to the well being of a sane and safe society. His intellect might prove to him that a criminal woman im- perilled the permanence of his family life the very thing his instinct has fought to preserve-and yet the old habit of blind, unreasoning protection for the female might well up tumultuously with uncontrol- lable power and manifest itself in a yer dict of not guilty.
 So have we come to the social premium on woman's life. With the instinct for blind. unreasoned protection has naturally grown another habit of mind-the attitude of guardianship. And with guardianship came naturally both an assumption of authority and an acceptance of irresponsi- bility for the woman. Roman law made constant effort to protect and to excuse the woman. A wife could not be held in a criminal action If she committed theft against her husband. The various state- ments of the Roman jurists make the mat ter clear. Sabinus and Proculus held that a wife could commit theft. but that there could be no criminal action. Juvenal tells us that husbands were so complacent toward erring wives that they could not be induced to prosecute them. Ulpian re-