matriculated with me at that date, have completed one-half of the
studies necessary for graduation in the University of Edinburgh.
Nearly five months ago, I ventured to point out to the Senatus
Academicus that, unless further arrangements were made, it would be
impossible for us to complete the studies which we have begun with
your express sanction. After pointing out the existing difficulties, I
ventured further to make two suggestions, either of which, if adopted,
might enable us to complete our education in the University. In reply,
however, I was informed that the Senatus, ‘having taken the opinion of
counsel with reference to the proposals contained in the memorial of
date 26th June 1871, find themselves unable to comply with either of
those proposals.’
“I understand, however, that since the date referred to, another legal
opinion has been obtained from the Lord Advocate and Sheriff Fraser,
and has been laid before the Senatus, and by them forwarded to your
honourable Court. As, however, the Senatus still appear unwilling to
initiate any measure by which we may be relieved from our present
difficulties, I feel constrained now to appeal to you, in my own name
and that of my fellow-students, to take such action as shall enable us
to complete our studies.
“I beg to represent to you that we have all paid matriculation fees
for the present year, and are by our tickets declared to be ‘Cives
Academiæ Edinensis,’ and that yet we, who commenced our studies in
1869, are unable during the present session to obtain any further
classes whatever towards completing our required course of study.
“We understand from those friends who have taken legal opinion on
the subject--and doubtless such opinion will be laid before you
simultaneously with this letter--that we are entitled to demand from
the University the means of completing our studies, and that, failing
any other alternative measures, we can claim the instruction of the
Medical Professors to the extent needed to complete our curriculum.
“We beg, therefore, most respectfully to request that, unless any
other mode of supplying our needs seems preferable to you, you will
vouchsafe to ordain that the Professors, whose courses we are bound
by the University regulations to attend, shall give us the requisite
instruction.--I beg to subscribe myself, Gentlemen, your obedient
servant,
“SOPHIA JEX-BLAKE.”
(2.) _Minute of University Court of January 8, 1872._
“The University Court have had under consideration the letters of Miss
Jex-Blake and Miss Louisa Stevenson, of 21st November, 1871, and other
relative documents laid before them on behalf of the women who have
been admitted by the regulations of the Court of November 10th, 1869,
to study medicine in the University.
“In these papers it is stated that certain Professors of the Faculty
of Medicine have declined to give separate classes of instruction to
women; and the Court are asked either (1) to extend, in the case of
female medical students, the privilege granted by ordinance by the
Universities’ Commissioners, to lecturers, not being Professors in
a university, of qualifying for graduation by their lectures, which
privilege is now restricted to four of the prescribed subjects of
study; or (2) To authorise the appointment of special lecturers to
give, in the University, qualifying courses of instruction in place
of those Professors who decline to do so; or (3.) To ordain that the
Professors referred to shall themselves give the necessary courses of
instruction to women.
“The second course suggested it is not in the power of the Court, or
other University authorities, singly or jointly to adopt.
“The third course is equally beyond the power of the Court. The Act of
1858 vests in the Court plenary powers to deal with any Professor who
shall fail to discharge his duties, but no Professor can be compelled
to give courses of instruction other than those which, by the use and
wont of the University, it has been the duty of the holders of his
chair to deliver.
“The first of the proposed measures would imply an alteration in one
of the ordinances for graduation in medicine (No. 8, clause vi.,
4). Such alteration could be made by the University Court only with
the consent, expressed in writing, of the Chancellor, and with the
approval of Her Majesty in Council.
“But to alter, in favour of female students, rules laid down for the
regulation of graduation in medicine would imply an assumption on the
part of the Court, that the University of Edinburgh has the power of
granting degrees to women. It seems to the Court impossible to them to
assume the existence of a power that is questioned in many quarters,
and which is both affirmed and denied by eminent counsel. So long
as these doubts remain, it would, in the opinion of the Court, be
premature to consider the expediency of taking steps to obtain, in
favour of female students, an alteration of an ordinance which may be
held not to apply to women.
“Though the Court are unable to comply with any of the specific
requests referred to, they are at the same time desirous to remove,
so far as possible, any present obstacle in the way of a complete
medical education being given to women,--provided always that medical
instruction to women be imparted in strictly separate classes.
“The Court are of opinion that the question under reference has been
complicated by the introduction of the subject of graduation, which is
not essential to the completion of a medical or other education. The
University of London, which has a special charter for the examination
of women, does not confer degrees upon women, but only grants them
‘certificates of proficiency.’ If the applicants in the present case
would be content to seek the examination of women by the University
for certificates of proficiency in medicine, instead of University
degrees, the Court believe that arrangements for accomplishing this
object would fall within the scope of the powers given to them by
section 12 of the Universities’ (Scotland) Act. The Court would be
willing to consider any such arrangements which might be submitted to
them.”
(3.) _To the University Court._
“15 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh, January 18, 1872.
“GENTLEMEN,--I have received from your Secretary a copy
of your minute of the 8th instant, and I beg you to allow me most
respectfully, but at the same time most emphatically, to protest
against the decision therein contained, on the following grounds:--
“1. That when women were admitted to study ‘for the profession of
medicine’ in the University of Edinburgh, and were required to pay the
ordinary matriculation fees as _Cives Academiæ Edinensis_, in addition
to those for instruction, it was believed to be involved that, subject
only to the restrictions laid down in the regulations of November 12,
1869, we should be allowed to complete our education, and should,
as a matter of course, proceed to the degree of M.D., no official
intimation to the contrary being given to us at the time, nor indeed
until now, when we have half completed our University curriculum. You
will allow me to remind you further, that we have very high legal
authority for believing that these expectations were well founded,
and that matriculation does involve necessarily all the privileges of
studentship, including graduation, as was indeed recently admitted
by a legal Professor, who has always been one of our most determined
opponents, when addressing your honourable Court in favour of
rescinding the present regulations.
“2. That, except with a view to ultimate graduation, it was quite
meaningless to require us to pass, as we did, the preliminary
examination in Arts, which has not any necessary connection with the
study of medicine itself, but is expressly stated to be ‘the first
examination _for the medical degree_.’
“3. That we have all along pursued our studies with a view to the
further professional examinations; that, in the resolutions passed
by the Medical Faculty on July 1, 1869, it was distinctly stated
that ‘ladies be allowed to attend medical classes and to receive
certificates of attendance qualifying for examination;’ that,
further, on April 9, 1870, the Senatus Academicus expressly ordained
that exactly the same University certificates of attendance should
be issued to students of both sexes, for the special purpose of
qualifying for professional examination.
“4. That no kind of official notice was ever given to us that a
doubt existed respecting our admission to the ordinary professional
examinations, until certain of our number had completed their
preparations for the first professional examination, and had paid
their fees for, and received tickets of admission to, the same; and
that, when the matter was brought before the Senatus, it was by
them decided that ladies should be admitted to the examination, and
accordingly the ladies in question were examined in the ordinary
course and passed the examination successfully.
“5. That under the existing Act of Parliament it is impossible for any
person to practise medicine under legal sanction, without a distinct
‘qualification’ as defined by the said Act of Parliament.
“6. That the only ‘qualification’ which it is in the power of the
University of Edinburgh to grant, is the ordinary medical degree, and
that no ‘certificates of proficiency’ would possess the slightest
legal value unless a special Act of Parliament was passed making such
certificates registrable qualifications.
“7. That the difficulty and expense of procuring such a special Act
of Parliament would be very much greater than that of obtaining the
sanction of the Queen in Council to such minor alterations in the
University Ordinances as are alone necessary to enable us to complete
our education by means of additional extra-mural classes; even if your
honourable Court declines to make the necessary arrangements _within_
the University.
“8. That we are informed on high authority that it is at present
within the power of your honourable Court, in conjunction with the
Senatus, to make the necessary arrangements within the University,
without any external sanction; either by ordaining that the present
Professors shall instruct women in separate classes, or by appointing
special lecturers for that purpose. As regards the former course,
I venture to remark that several Professors in the Faculty of Arts
are already delivering two or more lectures daily, and that, as I
presume it was always contemplated that each Professor should instruct
all matriculated students desiring to study his subject, it is
quite conceivable that it might become necessary from the number of
students, or otherwise, for the medical Professors also to be required
to deliver two courses; and that, therefore, it could hardly be
considered a hardship if they should be required to deliver a second
course, with proper remuneration for the same, to those matriculated
students who are forbidden by the University to attend in the ordinary
classes. As regards the second alternative, I believe that it has
never been doubted that the Senatus and University Court, conjointly,
have the power of appointing any number of assistants or special
lecturers in any faculty, if they are required for the efficient
performance of the teaching of the University.
“9. That as the main difficulty before your honourable Court seems
to be that regarding graduation, with which we are not immediately
concerned at this moment, we are quite willing to rest our claims
to ultimate graduation on the facts as they stand up to the present
date, and in case your honourable Court will now make arrangements
whereby we can continue our education, we will undertake not to draw
any arguments in favour of our right to graduation from such future
arrangements, so that they may at least be made without prejudice to
the present legal position of the University.
“10. That we are informed by high legal authorities that we are
entitled, as matriculated students, to demand from the University
complete arrangements for our instruction, and that we are further
entitled to bring an action of declarator to obtain the same from the
several Professors if no alternative measures are devised, and that
we shall inevitably be driven to pursue this course, with whatever
reluctance, if your honourable Court persistently refuses to make, in
any form whatever, such arrangements as may enable us to complete our
education, and to obtain a legal qualification to practise.
“Earnestly commending the above considerations to your most favourable
notice, I have the honour, &c.,
“SOPHIA JEX-BLAKE.”
(4.) _From the Secretary of the University Court._
“University of Edinburgh, 5th February 1872.
“MADAM,--I am desired by the University Court to inform you
that your letter, dated the 18th ultimo, has been laid before them and
considered.
“In reply, I am to say that in several points of your view of the past
history and present position of the question relative to the medical
education of women in Edinburgh the Court are unable to concur.
“Without going into the discussions which might be raised on these
points, it appears to the Court that it is only necessary for them to
enter upon the subject of your ninth paragraph, in which you say:--
“‘That as the main difficulty before your honourable Court seems to be
that regarding graduation, with which we are not immediately concerned
at this moment, we are quite willing to rest our claims to ultimate
graduation on the facts as they stand up to the present date; and in
case your honourable Court will now make arrangements whereby we can
continue our education, we will undertake not to draw any arguments in
favour of our right to graduation from such future arrangements, so
that they may at least be made without prejudice to the present legal
position of the University.’
“On this I am desired to inform you that you appear to ask no more
than was offered by the Court in their resolution of the 8th ultimo,
in which it was stated that while the Court were restrained by legal
doubts as to the power of the University to grant degrees to women,
from considering ‘the expediency of taking steps to obtain, in favour
of female students, an alteration of an ordinance which might be
held not to apply to women,’ they were, ‘at the same time, desirous
to remove, so far as possible, any present obstacle in the way of a
complete medical education being given to women: provided always that
medical instruction to women be imparted in strictly separate classes.’
“On the assumption, therefore, that while you at present decline the
offer made by the Court with reference to certificates of proficiency,
you now ask merely that arrangements should be made for completing the
medical education of yourself and the other ladies on behalf of whom
you write, I am to state that the Court are quite ready to meet your
views. If, therefore, the names of extra-academical teachers of the
required medical subjects be submitted by yourself, or by the Senatus,
the Court will be prepared to consider the respective fitness of the
persons so named to be authorised to hold medical classes for women
who have in this or former sessions been matriculated students of the
University, and also the conditions and regulations under which such
classes should be held.
“It is, however, to be distinctly understood that such arrangements
are not to be founded on as implying any right in women to obtain
medical degrees, or as conferring any such right upon the students
referred to.
“I have, &c.,
J. CHRISTISON, Secretary.”
(5.) _To the University Court._
“15 Buccleuch Place, February 9, 1872.
“GENTLEMEN,--I beg to thank you sincerely for the resolution
to which you came on Monday the 5th inst., and which, if I understand
it rightly, will, I trust, prove a satisfactory solution of our
present difficulties.
“We will, if you wish it, very gladly prepare and submit to your
honourable Court a list of extra-academical lecturers and of gentlemen
prepared to qualify as such, who may, with your sanction, instruct us
in the various subjects which we have to study; but before doing so, I
venture to beg for official confirmation of my interpretation of your
late resolution in two essential particulars.
“I trust that I am correct in understanding--
“1. That though you at present give us no pledge respecting our
ultimate graduation, it is your intention to consider the proposed
extra-mural courses as ‘qualifying’ for graduation, and that you will
take such measures as may be necessary to secure that they will be
accepted if it is subsequently determined that the University has the
power of granting degrees to women.
“2. That we shall be admitted in due course to the ordinary
professional examinations on presentation of the proper certificates
of attendance on the said extra-mural classes.
“You will, I am sure, understand that, while we are quite willing
to accept present arrangements for instruction without any pledge
that they will confer a right to graduation, it would be useless for
us to attend any classes which would be incapable of qualifying for
graduation, and impossible for us to acquiesce in any agreement which
might prejudice the claim which we believe ourselves to possess to the
ultimate attainment of the medical degree.--I am, &c.,
“SOPHIA JEX-BLAKE.”
(6.) _From the Secretary of the University Court._
“University of Edinburgh, 24th February 1872.
“_Madam_,--Your letter dated 9th instant has been considered by the
University Court. In it you say:--
“‘I trust that I am correct in understanding---
“‘I. That though you at present give us no pledge respecting our
ultimate graduation, it is your intention to consider the proposed
extra-mural courses as ‘qualifying’ for graduation, and that you will
take such measures as may be necessary to secure that they will be so
accepted, if it is subsequently determined that the University has the
power of granting degrees to women.
“‘II. That we shall be admitted in due course to the ordinary
professional examinations on presentation of the proper certificates
of attendance on the said extra-mural classes.’
“In reply, I am desired to point out that no extra-mural courses,
beyond the number of four allowed by the Ordinance of the Universities
Commissioners, could either qualify for graduation, or for the ordinary
professional examinations, except under a change in the ordinance;
which change could be made only by a resolution of the Court sanctioned
by the Chancellor, and approved by the Queen in Council.
“The Court have already declared, in their resolution of the 8th of
January last, that they cannot even enter on the consideration of the
expediency of such a change in the ordinance until the legality of
female graduation has been determined.
“It would not only be premature for the Court to express at present
any views or intentions on the points to which you refer, but it would
be clearly contrary to their duty to do so. For, supposing the legal
question to be decided in a way favourable to your wishes, those points
would then doubtless be referred to the Court for their decision, when
various parties would probably desire to be heard with regard to them.
“I am to add that in your letter of the 18th January, you appeared
merely to ask that the Court ‘will now make arrangements whereby we
can continue our education,’ and that the Court offered, as stated in
my letter of the 5th inst., to meet your views in the only way which
appeared to lie within their competency. The Court are still of opinion
that it is quite impossible for them at present to add anything to that
offer.”--I have the honour, &c.,
J. CHRISTISON, Secretary.
NOTE U, p. 133.
I am anxious to guard myself from being supposed to attribute to
Scotch nationality the exceptionally bad conduct of certain students
in Edinburgh, during 1870–71. I cannot but hope that such behaviour
as I have described would have been impossible in any English Medical
School, but, in so saying, I do not by any means wish to imply that
Scotch students have less good feeling than others, when their
superiors set them an example of courtesy. In point of fact, moreover,
some of those who took most pains to make themselves obnoxious were
not Scotchmen at all, but Englishmen of an extremely low class. Some
Scotch lads no doubt behaved very badly, but, on the other hand, the
guard of honour (see page 104) was almost wholly composed of Scotch and
Irish students, who showed the utmost indignation at the conduct of the
rioters.
Transcriber’s Note
The “Notes” were originally printed in a very compressed format. Some
citations and signatures have been moved to new lines.
Other changes made by the transcriber are:
Page To From In
37 required re-required the required examinations
54 Il It Il est bien entendu
90 University Uni-sity the University authorities
138 at as regarded as a possibility
140 Times Tines Medical Times and Gazette