So sensible have mankind ever been of this, that, in all ages, incentives have been offered to the ingenious and distinguished, by titles, honors, and decorations distributed to excellence. To excellence in _men_; for _women_, however industrious their researches, however 'laborious' their 'days,' have little to expect but a limited fame, and the inward consciousness of high motives. Why should this be? Why might not woman have the satisfaction of feeling that her deservings may entitle her to the marks of approbation of the learned in her own sphere, and that her name may acquire a general respectability from honors worthily borne? In other words, why may not honorary degrees be granted by literary and scientific institutions to _all_ persons who merit them? And why may not women publicly bear such testimonials, by appending to their names the same titles borne by men under similar circumstances? I know that there is a large, worthy, and respectable class of men who, as some shrink in undefinable horror from the sight of a cat, feel nervous shudderings and morbid vexation at the word _strength of mind_ as applied to woman. To the _word_; for I have, in _essentials_, found many of these nervous gentlemen happy to avail themselves of the objectionable quality when it was taken by them in a disguised way. These might, at the first blush of the thing, begin to wince at a lady being styled A. M., F. R. S., _cum ceteris_. But, if they will, if they _can_ consider the subject coolly, they will see that there is nothing unfeminine, nothing the finest womanly delicacy need fear in the matter. Would the names of Maria Edgeworth or Hannah More have been published with less propriety, had they been supported by initials signifying that certain judges of literature approved their efforts and sanctioned their pretensions? For my part, I think it seems altogether more befitting a woman's weakness to be ushered into public by the stamp of masculine authority. I think even a _weak-minded_ woman could not disparage her charms by seeking in a signature the protection of her superiors. "Far be it from me, speaking in modern cant, to draw woman out of her sphere. I would have every one do her 'duty in that sphere of life in which it has pleased God to call her.' Let man rule in the court, the camp; let him make laws and enforce them; let him plough the main; let him defend his country; while woman soothes the bed of sickness and instructs her children. Let her studies and her efforts be to alleviate pain, to increase mental development, and, above all, by precept and example, to watch over morals and religion. These things she may do; these things she daily does; but, though more patient, and more spiritual than her brother _man_, she is not an angel. She needs encouragement, praise, and rewards to cheer her course. Why, then, deny her the harmless gratifications that are her due, that she has won and should wear?" * * * * *