“To sum up the whole matter in one word,” she wrote, “I will venture
to say, that, instead of the daily trials of the past two years and
the apparent deadlock at which we have now arrived, we should have
found nothing but smooth paths for our feet, and no difficulties from
either students or professors, had Dr. Christison but kept to the
promise he voluntarily made to me at the close of my single interview—
of two minutes—with him 2 years ago—‘I shall vote against you, but I
shall take no measures to oppose you.’”
Once more the _Lancet_ made dignified protest:
“The Edinburgh school has come badly out of its imbroglio with the
lady students. The motion of Dr. Alexander Wood, to which we made
reference last week, was negatived by a majority of ten. As we then
pointed out, the issue before the General Council was neither more nor
less than this,—to keep faith with the female students whom the
University had allowed to proceed two years in their medical
curriculum. The Council was not asked to commit itself in the
slightest degree to any opinion, favourable or unfavourable, to the
admission of ladies to a medical career. It had only to concede, in
common courtesy, not to say common fairness, the right to which the
best legal advice had clearly shown the female students to be
entitled,—the right to carry on the studies they had been allowed to
prosecute half way towards graduation. Will it be believed? An
amendment postponing the settlement of the difficulty till it had been
duly considered by the authorities of the University, was put and
carried; as if there was any more room for ‘consideration’ in the
matter! Thus Edinburgh stands convicted of having acted unfairly
towards seven ladies, whom she first accepted as pupils, and then
stopped half-way in their career.”[91]
Footnote 91:
_Lancet_, November 4, 1871.
Move and countermove follow with bewildering rapidity at this time.
Within a fortnight Professor Muirhead is urging the Senatus to rescind
the regulations for the admission of women to the University, reserving
the rights of those already entered; and this is passed by a majority of
one,—14 to 13.
Eighteen Professors, however, rose up in wrath to protest against this
decision, and—as only fifteen, out of a total of thirty-five, could be
got to support it,—the regulations of Nov. 1869, were confirmed by the
University Court, and everything was left _in statu quo_![92]
Footnote 92:
“The Court find it inexpedient at present to rescind the said
resolutions and regulations, and therefore decline to give effect to
the decision of the Senatus. The Court must not be understood as
indicating by this deliverance any opinion as to the claims of women
to proceed to graduation, or as to the power of the University to
confer on women degrees in the Faculty of Medicine.” Commd. by
direction of the University Court. J. Christison, W.S., Sec.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account