told oracularly that what is proposed is _contra bonos mores_, and are
warned with equal solemnity of the imminent downfall of any school
that dares to break loose from the bondage of Medical Trades-Unionism
and afford to women exactly the same advantages as to other students.
We do not wish to speak solely, or even chiefly, in the interests of
women; we wish to look at the question broadly and with a view to the
possible moral results to the public at large; and from this point of
view we cannot but feel that the more general association of the sexes
in earnest labour, and especially in scientific and medical study, may
be of the greatest importance to the community. Though the traditions
of the Bob Sawyer period are happily passing away, there yet seems to
linger an idea that medical students as a rule adopt a lower moral
standard and are of a more generally reckless character than those
studying for other professions. If this is so, may not the explanation
be found in the sort of half-expressed idea that seems prevalent in so
many people’s minds that there is in medical study something which, if
not actually improper and indelicate, certainly tends that way, and
had better be ignored as much as possible--something at least which
the average public would probably sum up as ‘rather nasty.’ We believe
that it is on this popular idea--which every true physician would
indignantly disclaim--that the opponents of women’s education trade
when they try to enlist public feeling against mixed classes. They
talk in a vague and very offensive way about certain studies which
form a necessary part of medical education, and not being themselves
capable of seeing the true dignity and profound purity of all science,
especially when pursued with the aim of succouring pain and combating
disease, they manage too often to impress the general public with the
idea that by sanctioning the joint study of medicine by men and women
the said public would commit itself to some shocking impropriety,
all the more awful for being quite indefinite--_omne ignotum pro
magnifico_. It is probable that this sort of vague terror is, in fact,
the best weapon yet forged against women students, but, like many
another terror, it is one that vanishes in the clear daylight. Let it
once be broadly understood that science has no hidden horrors, that
the study of God’s works can never be otherwise than healthful and
beautiful to every student who brings to their contemplation a clear
eye and a clean hand, and this weapon of darkness will be shivered for
ever. We believe, indeed, that nothing could be more desirable for the
average young medical student than to find himself associated in daily
study with women whom he cannot but respect; nothing more calculated
to give him an earnest sense alike of the dignity and of the purity
of his vocation than to labour in it side by side with ladies whose
character and whose motives are to him a daily reminder that he and
they alike are set apart both as the votaries of science and the
ministers of suffering humanity.”
_Daily Review_, October 11, 1870.
NOTE H, p. 78.
The following extracts will show the position and opportunities of
study enjoyed by lady probationers and nurses at London hospitals. The
first is taken from a letter written by a lady who was herself trained
as a surgical nurse in a hospital. She writes:--
“In the ordinary course of the day’s work, I went round the wards with
the visiting surgeons, and at the same time as the students, and, in
fact, I should think, enjoyed exactly the same opportunities that
people profess to be so much shocked at your desiring to obtain in
Edinburgh. Part of my time was spent in study in the female and part
in the male wards; and I never found either students or patients see
anything at all exceptional in my presence in the latter, though I
often had to perform services for the male patients which would never
be expected of you as students. When any patients from my wards went
into the theatre, for operation, I, as a matter of course, accompanied
them, and was present during the operation, standing often quite near
the surgeon, however many students might be there at the time. I was,
therefore, constantly associated with the students in the hospital
work, as were all the other ladies studying in the same capacity, and
I never saw any difficulty in this arrangement, nor had any reason to
suppose that the students did.”
Thinking that a lady’s evidence might be challenged on this matter, I
wrote to one of the principal surgeons of the Middlesex Hospital for
confirmation of her statement, and received the following reply:--
“Nurses and lady probationers are present in the wards, and attend the
surgeons in their visits, and are present at operations. The students
never, so far as I observed, took any notice of the question as to
whether the female attendants in the wards were ladies or ordinary
nurses--never, in short, troubled themselves about them.”
While on the subject, I will quote an extract from a letter received
from Dr Elizabeth Blackwell, the first Englishwoman who ever received a
medical degree. She says:--
“I walked St Bartholomew’s Hospital in the years 1850–51. I received
permission to do so from the Governors, and was received by the
medical faculty with a friendly courtesy for which I shall always be
grateful. I always went round with the class of students during the
physician’s visits. The medical class numbered about thirty students.
I spent between five and six hours daily in recording and studying
cases. During the visits, I never received anything but courtesy
from the students. When studying in the wards, I received much kind
assistance from the clinical clerks and dressers. While leaving the
hospital the treasurer said to me--‘When we gave you permission to
enter, we thought we were doing something so unusual that we were
rather anxious about the result, but, really, everything has gone on
so quietly, so exactly as usual, that we had almost forgotten you
were here.’ ... My observation of mixed study is, that a small select
number of women may join an ordinary school with little difficulty,
and that there is even less trouble in arranging hospital visiting
than class-room instruction.”
The last case that I will cite with reference to hospital instruction
is that of Mrs Leggett, who is now attending as a regular student in
Steevens’ Hospital, Dublin, and who writes:--
“I had the unanimous consent of the Board to pursue my medical
studies in Steevens’ Hospital. As to the medical students, they are
always civil. Dr Macnamara, President of the College of Physicians of
Ireland, said it was his opinion that the presence of ladies would
refine the classes.”
With reference to the attendance of this lady, Dr Hamilton, Medical
Secretary of Steevens’ Hospital, writes--
“So far as we have gone, we find the education of mixed classes in one
hospital to work very well.”
NOTE I, p. 93.
The following are a few only out of very many expressions of public
indignation at this episode:--
“One of the most singular of University ‘scandals’ comes to us from
decorous Edinburgh. True, it is the very antithesis of cases--such as
are only too familiar on this side the Border--of debauchery at night,
and a scene in court next morning, but it is not a whit the less
discreditable. The transgressor, however, is not a college student,
but a college professor. The case admits of, we might say demands,
historic treatment. Some years ago, Dr Hope, then Professor of
Chemistry in the University, gave a course of lectures to ladies--at
that time quite an experiment--and was so much gratified, we are
told, at their popularity, that he devoted the proceeds, amounting
to about a thousand pounds, to found what have since been termed
Hope Scholarships. We now get to a very modern period indeed. The
Chemistry class during last winter numbered no less than 236 students,
of whom six were ladies, who had been admitted to study in the
medical classes, ‘in accordance with the decision of the University
authorities at the beginning of the session.’ A few days ago the
results of the examination were made known, when it appeared that one
lady, Miss Mary Edith Pechey, was in the proud position of third in
the list of honours, and another lady, Miss Sophia Jex-Blake, tenth.
Miss Pechey’s success is the more gratifying, inasmuch as she is a
fresh student, while the two gentlemen who stood above her on the
list have attended a previous course of lectures. Dr Crum Brown, the
Professor of Chemistry, in announcing the results, took upon himself
to say that he should pass over Miss Pechey and award one of the Hope
Scholarships to the next male on the list. This is directly in the
teeth of the regulations made and provided for his guidance; according
to which these scholarships are to be awarded to ‘the four students
whose names stand highest in the chemistry class for the session.’
We understand that Professor Crum Brown justifies his action on the
ignoble plea ‘that the women now studying in the University class do
not form part of the University class, on account of their meeting at
a different hour.’ Great indignation has very naturally been excited
in Edinburgh by this incident, and the question has been referred to
the Senate of the University, who, though a corporate body, will, we
hope, act as honourable men.”
_Manchester Examiner and Times_, April 6, 1870.
“The inferior sex has always been a nuisance and a bore. A wise old
Sultan of Turkey used to ask, whenever anything went wrong, ‘Who was
she?’ One day while the Sultan was making an addition to his palace
(as is the habit of Sultans), a labourer fell from the scaffold and
was killed. ‘Who was she?’ said the Sultan at once. The inferior sex
is always plaguing the superior sex in one way or another, and now
it seems that the inferior sex are winning _our_ scholarships over
our most sacred heads. This is a matter which must be looked to. We
will stand a great deal, but this is going a little too far; we must
agitate; members must pledge themselves on the hustings to a bill
providing that any one of the inferior sex who gains a scholarship
must not have it at any price whatever, or we shall all be undone. We
must have an Act for the repression of women; we are very sorry to
say such terrible words, but the thing must be done: it had better be
done at once while the nation is in a mood for repression. Particular
cases thrust themselves prominently on the national mind, and cause
legislation: the Coercion Bill for Ireland was thrust on to an
unwilling Government by a very few of the later agrarian outrages: the
last ounce breaks the camel’s back. If Miss Edith Pechey chooses to
come in _facile princeps_ at the head of the Chemistry Class of her
year, we of the superior sex must really look to ourselves. We have
the power of legislation still left in our hands, and we warn such
ladies as Miss Edith Pechey and Miss Jex-Blake that we shall use it.
We must have a bill for the protection of the superior sex.
“We feel sure that the ladies will forgive joking about a very absurd
matter. Ladies should surely understand the power of ridicule.
We think that the ‘_reductio ad absurdum_’ in this matter is the
proper line of argument. The facts of the case seem to be simply
these:--After protracted delays and much discussion, the University
authorities last autumn vouchsafed to ladies the permission to
enter the College as matriculated medical students, with the single
restriction that their instruction should be conducted in separate
classes. On referring to the minutes of the University Court, we
find the following definition of the position to be taken by the new
students:--‘All women attending such classes shall be subject to all
the regulations now, or at any future time, in force in the University
as to the matriculation of students, their attendance on classes,
examination, or otherwise.’ We turn to the Calendar to see what are
the ‘regulations in force in the University’ as to examination in
chemistry, and we find at page 84 the following:--‘The class honours
are determined by means of written examinations held during the
session. The four students who have received the highest marks _are
entitled to have the Hope Scholarships_ to the laboratory of the
University.’ The ladies accepted in good faith the regulations of the
University, and, fired by a laudable ambition to prove themselves
worthy of the privileges now accorded for the first time to women,
worked with an assiduity that may be guessed when it is found that
one of them, Miss Pechey, actually gained the highest number of
marks awarded during the session to any student attending chemistry
for the first time, though she was excelled (by one and two marks
respectively) by two gentlemen who had gone through a previous
course of lectures. But when the day arrived which was to reward all
this work, the Professor announced, without, as it seemed to us, a
shadow of justification, that the four scholarships would be given,
_not_ according to the University regulations to the four students
‘_entitled to them_,’ but to the three gentlemen who had won the
first, second, and fourth places, and to the one who stood fifth on
the list, this last having earned a most honourable place by his
talents and industry, but _not_ the Hope Scholarship, though now he
has, of course, the right to claim free admission to the laboratory
as it has been promised to him. This, then, is a University episode.
Six students are admitted on the distinct understanding that, with one
exception (dictated, as we think, by a whimsical propriety), they are
to be ‘subject to the regulations of the University;’ no hint is given
to them that this statement is analogous to the one which pithily
describes women’s political condition in England--‘_He_ means _she_
when it’s a question of hanging; _he_ doesn’t mean _she_ when it’s a
question of voting.’ The ladies are encouraged to exert their utmost
power for work; when the rewards are to come, and it is found that one
of them has earned one of the highest honours attainable by the class,
she is calmly informed that that honour has been given to somebody
else! A neater instance of generosity with other people’s property it
has never been our lot to witness, and we don’t care how long it is
before we repeat the experience.
“The only excuse that we can with the utmost stretch of charity
imagine in this case would be that Dr Crum Brown thought some
difficulty might arise respecting Miss Pechey’s use of the
scholarship (which gives free admittance to the laboratory), under
the restrictions now imposed on women by the University Court--for
we will not suppose for a moment that the Professor could himself
wish to impede the further progress of a student of such merit. But
if such difficulty occurred it might be an excellent reason for
relaxing those restrictions, when they are seen to deprive a student
of the full reward of her past work, and at the same time to prevent
her prosecuting further the study in which she has so distinguished
herself; but we are quite at a loss to see how any legitimate argument
can be drawn thence to justify Dr Brown in laying violent hands on a
scholarship which has been fairly earned by one person for the purpose
of presenting it to another. It is possible that A’s circumstances
may prevent his deriving full benefit from some of his possessions,
but the law would hardly consider this fact a valid reason for B’s
‘annexing’ the said possession for the benefit of C. If Dr Brown
chooses to admit a fifth student to the laboratory he can of course do
so, but unless we are greatly mistaken he will probably be informed
by the Law Faculty (whom he might previously have consulted with
advantage) that neither he nor any other person can alter the fact
that Miss Pechey and no one else _is_ third Hope Scholar.”
_Daily Review_, April 1, 1870.
“A very odd and very gross injustice appears to have been attempted
in the University of Edinburgh. In that University the lady medical
students are taught in a separate class,--not from any wish of their
own, but through the delicacy of the professors. In the chemical
class, Miss Edith Pechey gained the third place, and was first of
the first year’s students, the two men who surpassed her having
attended the class before. The four students who get the highest marks
receive four Hope Scholarships,--scholarships founded by Dr Hope some
years ago out of the proceeds of a very popular _ladies’ class_ of
chemistry, with the success of which he had been much gratified. Yet
Miss Edith Pechey was held by the professor not to be entitled to the
third scholarship, and omitting her name, he included two men whom
she had beaten, and who stood fourth and fifth in the examination,
his excuse being that the women are not part of the University class,
because they are separately taught. Yet Dr Crum Brown awards Miss
Pechey a bronze medal, to which only members of the University class
are said to be entitled! It is quite clear that such a decision cannot
stand. To make women attend a separate class, for which they have to
pay, we believe, much higher fees than usual, and then argue that they
are out of the pale of competition because they do so, is, indeed, too
like the captious schoolmaster who first sent a boy into the corner
and then whipped him for not being in his seat.”
_Spectator_, April 9, 1870.
“The letter Miss Pechey addressed to us the other day was written in
an admirable spirit, and must insure her the hearty sympathy of all,
whatever their opinions upon the points in question. She has done her
sex a service, not only by vindicating their intellectual ability
in an open competition with men, but still more by the temper and
courtesy with which she meets her disappointments. Under any view
of the main question, her case is a hard one, for it is clear both
she and the other lady students were led to attend the classes under
the misapprehension of the privileges to which they were admissable.
If the University intended to exclude ladies from the pecuniary
advantages usually attached to successful study, the intention should
have been clearly announced. Miss Pechey, in the spirit of a true
student, says she is abundantly repaid for her exertions by the
knowledge she has acquired; but it is none the less hard that, having
been encouraged to labour for a coveted reward, and having fairly won
it, she should be disqualified by a restriction of which no warning
had been given her.”
_Times_, April 25, 1870.
“There are probably few persons who did not learn with regret the
decision of the Edinburgh Senatus in respect of the Hope Scholarships.
It is not pleasant that such a story of, at least, seeming injustice
should circulate through foreign universities, to the discredit of
our own, for there cannot be much doubt as to the view that will
be taken of the case by those nations--now forming the majority in
Europe--who have admitted women to their medical colleges on terms of
exact fairness and equality with their other students.... A medical
contemporary argues that this affair proves how unwise it was to
admit women to the University of Edinburgh--such admission being, as
is asserted, the natural source of ‘constant squabbles.’ But most
unprejudiced people, judging the case at first sight, would surely
rather see here the evil of a partial, restricted, and permissive
legislation. If women have a claim to medical education at all, they
have exactly the same claim as men; if they are to be received as
students at all, they must certainly be treated with even-handed
justice, and not as social or rather academical _pariahs_, to whom
the bare crumbs of instruction are vouchsafed as a grace and bounty;
while all the honours and rewards are to be reserved to their male
competitors. Looking at the thing for a moment, merely in the
interests of the young men, and as a question of expediency, we cannot
imagine anything much worse for their moral guidance than to find that
women are indeed to compete with them, but so shackled that they can
never win; or rather that, if they do win, the prizes will be snatched
from their grasp and given to men whom they have beaten. We have heard
that, in both classes where the ladies have this year studied, a very
unusual access of zeal and energy has been noticed among the gentlemen
in the other section of the class--a happy effect of such competition,
which has often been observed in the mixed colleges of America, and
which surely need not be neutralised here by the providence of the
Senatus.”
_Scotsman_, April 15, 1870.
“The Senatus has, by a small majority, confirmed Professor Crum
Brown’s decision with regard to Miss Pechey and the Hope Scholarship,
on the grounds previously presumed by us. But these grounds, if so
they may be called, are in our opinion insufficient to deprive Miss
Pechey of the Scholarship. Whatever may be our views regarding the
advisability of ladies studying medicine, the University of Edinburgh
professed to open its gates to them on equal terms with the other
students; and unless some better excuse be forthcoming in explanation
of the decision of the Senatus, we cannot help thinking that the
University has done no less an injustice to itself than to one of its
most distinguished students.”
_British Medical Journal_, April 16, 1870.
NOTE J, p. 96.
For the credit of the profession, I append also the following indignant
protest from the chief medical paper:--
“There are very varying opinions abroad in the medical profession and
among the public, as to the advisability of allowing women to practise
medicine. There are still more serious and widely-spread doubts as
to the possibility of educating ladies in the same lecture rooms and
dissecting rooms with male students. But, until last week, we were not
aware that any one in the profession, or out of it, held that the mere
fact of ladies wishing to be educated in common with men, in order
that they might make sure of receiving the highest and most thorough
scientific training, justified those who held contrary opinions in
loading them with abuse and vulgar insult. It has been reserved for
Dr Laycock, professor in the famous University of Edinburgh, to set
an example which, we trust, even the least courteous and gentlemanly
of first-year’s students will hesitate to follow.... We shall only
remark that if the coarsest of those few students who still keep alive
the bad traditions of the Bob Sawyer period had given utterance to
the insinuations which were used by this distinguished Professor, we
should simply have shrugged our shoulders, and concluded that the
delinquent would be at once expelled with ignominy from his school.
Unfortunately there are no such punishments for highly-placed men like
Dr Laycock, but at the least we can express the deep indignation and
disgust which we are certain every gentleman in the profession must
feel at the outrage of which he has been guilty.”
_Lancet_, April 30, 1870.
NOTE K, p. 101.
The following are the papers referred to in the text:--
(1.)--_Letter from the Lady Students._
“MY LORD AND GENTLEMEN,--We, the undersigned registered
students of medicine, beg to lay before you the following facts, and
to request your kind attention to them:--
“On applying in the usual course for students’ tickets of admission to
attend the practice of the Royal Infirmary, we were informed by the
clerk that the Managers were not prepared to issue tickets to _female_
medical students. We earnestly request you to reconsider this decision
on the following grounds:--
“1. That the authorities of the University of Edinburgh and of the
School of the College of Physicians and Surgeons have admitted our
right to study medicine with a view to graduation.
“2. That an important and indispensable part of medical education
consists in attending the practice of a medical and surgical hospital,
and that the regulations of the Licensing Boards require, as part of
the curriculum of study, two years’ attendance at a ‘general hospital
which accommodates not fewer than eighty patients, and possesses a
distinct staff of physicians and surgeons.’
“3. That the only hospital in Edinburgh possessing the required
qualifications is the Royal Infirmary, and that exclusion from that
institution would therefore preclude the possibility of our continuing
our course of medical study in this city.
“4. That, in the present state of divided opinion on the subject, it
is possible that such a consummation may give satisfaction to some;
but we cannot suppose that your honourable Board would wish to put
yourselves in the attitude of rendering null and void the decisions
of the authorities of the University of which we are matriculated
students, and of the School of the College of Physicians and Surgeons,
where we are now attending the classes of anatomy and surgery.
“5. That it has been the invariable custom of the Managers to grant
tickets of admission to students of the University and of Surgeons’
Hall, and that, as far as we are aware, no statute of the Infirmary
limits such admission to students of one sex only.