Some of these last century women were practical reformers, who realised the pernicious results of this false opinion about their sex. Among these was Hannah More, who entered a most earnest protest against the excessive accomplishment craze. The lower middle class were emulating the upper in their endeavour to make their daughters ‘accomplished young ladies,’ while they quite forgot that ‘the profession of ladies to which the best of their education should be turned is that of daughters, wives, mothers, and mistresses of families.’[8] She even ventured to fly in the face of public opinion by asserting that ‘a young lady may excel in speaking French and Italian, may repeat a few passages from a volume of extracts, play like a professor, and sing like a siren,’ and yet be very badly educated, if her mind remains untrained. ‘The kind of knowledge that they commonly do acquire is easily attained,’ they learn everything in a superficial question-and-answer way, or through abridgments, beauties, and compendiums, instead of reading books that require thought and attention. As we read her _Strictures on Female Education_ we rub our eyes and look at the date once more. Is this, indeed, Hannah More writing a hundred years ago, or have we stumbled upon a stray extract from Mr. Bryce’s report to the Schools’ Inquiry Commission in 1867? ‘She should pursue every kind of study which will teach her to elicit truth, which will lead her to be intent upon realities; will give precision to her ideas; will make an exact mind.’ She quotes Dr. Johnson’s opinion that ‘a woman cannot have too much arithmetic.’ Had the worthy doctor a prevision of a High School time-table?