Early in the month the news agencies carried the story from New York of the small Chicago baby, Helaine Colan, doomed apparently either to blindness or death, and the decision of the parents to leave the matter to the judgment of a jury. Five weeks of age, little Helaine was discovered to be suffering from a cancerous growth which had already afflicted both eyes and was steadily drawing closer to the brain. The question was posed as to whether the child's eyes should be removed in an effort to prevent further progress of the trouble, or should she be allowed to die by the unfortunate processes of nature. The agonized parents could not make up their wu minds, and left the decision to twelve persons, doctors, scientists and clergymen. They agreed upon the desirability of an immediate operation condemning the child to a life of blindness. While that decision was pending public opinion in the United States was sharply divided. There were those who maintained that it was better that Helaine should die rather than live in perpetual darkness.—There were, on the other hand those who argued that if the life could be aved it should be, and that it was the duty of ever concerned that this young sou should be allowed to progress towards whatever spiritual development destiny had in store for her. The latter opinion gained the day. Whether it is the correct de time will show, but now that the m brought fuller details of the lo to s the right thing to do. for thinking so, not the least important of which is that should this baby grow to maturity she will never have realized what sight meant, and consequently have no real criterion by which to estimate the grievous. ness of her misfortune. Blindness under such 2 condition is not nea catastrophic as that which comes after a period of the enjoyment of sight which can be remembered, for then the loss is rendered all the more tragic by reason of the effect of memory. A los which is not realized is not so serious as one which i:
But the decision of the jury seems to be based upon firmer grounds than mere specula tions such as the foregoing. From the lat mails it clear that there ample testimony available as to what similar sufferers felt on the subject, people of mature age who lived under the same afflict judgment was that the child should live.
Notably among those who pleaded for ssu ery was the famous blind and deaf Helen Keller, whose achievements in speech and literature have made her one of the world's mest famous women of today. To the grief-stricken parents she sent mess age The child has every right to a fighting chance. I understand that X-ray treatment has proved successful. An operation is ma ndatory if it brings Helaine health. Blindness is not the gr only a physical atest evi handicap which Helaine's mind can overcome.
Everett Eddie, the pianist, whose ud is also blind, wrote that the little child would find a lot to live for when she grew up, while Mrs. Rose Scorzo, whose eyes were removed at the age of eighteen month. for exactly the same reason declared "Operate.
Life offers so many things that make up for the loss of sight. I am glad I am alive." If that were not sufficient, even Milton can be quoted to show that a man stricken bli the age of forty-four out of the bravery his spirit could view his affection with philosophy and courage which made man he was These eyes, the' clear To outward view of blemish or of spot Bereft of their light, their seeing have forgot Nor to their idle orbs doth sight appear Of sun, or moon, or sta:
Or man or woman. Yet I
Against Heaven's hand or will, nor bate a jot Of heart or hope: but still bear up and steer Right onward.
He knew what he had lost. An active man in the prime of his life had been reduced to comparative inactivity, but his loss was not efficient to daunt the greatness of his soul.
Helen Keller, Milton, Mrs. Scorzo, agree that blindness is not the great: that life can still be bearable even in lasting darkness and those who would have allowed nature to take its errant course are confounded.
This is no discussion of the merits or demerits of outban that merely deals with the que: terminating suffering there is no of eu of this baby he may live human being. d what is a life usefulness to herself and the world in general.
"Blindness is not the greatest ey tes the woman who knows. Neither is death, there is an inutility about death which is not to be found in life no matter how it ion suc been coz Even if all that is to be done for the child save her life, there will always be the ation available for her parents that has been done for her that could y will be freed from the reproach g had been done, for that could that it was better that the child should die than live in blindness had been adopted. Tha:
ould have been an example of spiritual blindness of which there is far too much i the ture has so many compen: tions. who have witnessed the work stitute for the Chinese Blind in i, will have noticed the happiness of dren for whom Mr. Geo. B. Fryer so assiduously and a There was brightness aiety in their demeanour which se correct Keller's statement, for once thei had been directed along lines congenial to them, and they proved to themselves their Mess in the world, the sense of help-disappeared, and self-reliance too! ts place. That jury of doctors, scientists and clergymen made the right decision, There could not, in reality, ye been any other, for who knows? Helaine may yet prove to be another Helen Keller and if she does only then will it be possible to understand how at a disservice might have been done to the world if science had not interfered with Nature and obstructed her disorderly tendency.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.