398 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



culture," presented to Parliament in 1868. In it Mr. Henley states 

 that the women who work in the fields of Northumberland are " phys- 

 ically a splendid race." The same witness says : " There are many who 

 consider field-work degrading ; I should be glad if they would visit 

 these women in their own homes, after they have become wives and 

 mothers. They would be received with a natural courtesy and good 

 manners that would astonish them. . . . The visitor will leave the cot- 

 tage with the conviction that field-work has no degrading effect, but 

 that he has been in the presence of a thoughtful, contented, unselfish 

 woman. . . . The very appearance of the habitual workers is sufficient 

 to prove the healthiness of their mode of life ; and the medical testi- 

 mony is overwhelming as to the absence of disease and the usual com- 

 plaints attendant on debility." 



Mr. John Grey testifies of the same women : " The healthful and 

 cheerful appearance of the girls in the hay or turnip fields of the north, 

 and their substantial dress, would compare favorably with those of 

 any class of female operatives in the kingdom," etc. Here we have 

 the same kind of work, destructive in one case, beneficial in the other. 

 And this is due to the different conditions under which it is done. So 

 in other work, it is not necessary that women should do every part of 

 it precisely as men do it. The question is, Is there not in most kinds 

 of work a place which women can fill to advantage under suitable con- 

 ditions ? 



Women are much more fettered than men by conventional require- 

 ments and prohibitions. They come to any new occupation hampered 

 by the restraints and burdens so imposed. Their dress is modeled 

 upon fashions adopted by women in society, to whom dress is a pro- 

 fession, occupying a great part of their time, strength, and intelligence; 

 yet custom forbids any material modification of it to suit the require- 

 ments of work. Equally liable to misrepresentation is any assump- 

 tion of unconventional freedom in going about, ways of living, etc. 

 Women are hindered at every turn by endless restraint in endless mi- 

 nor details of habit, custom, etc., which, often trivial in themselves, by 

 their number and perpetual action often trammel them as effectually 

 as the threads of his Lilliputian adversaries did Gulliver. In these 

 respects we might apply to men and women the common French say- 

 ing in respect to English and French law, viz., that " to one everything 

 is permitted that is not expressly forbidden, to the other everything is 

 forbidden which is not expressly allowed." Most women who have 

 been engaged in any new departure would testify that the diffi- 

 culties of the undertaking lay far more in these artificial hindrances 

 and burdens than in their own health, or in the nature of the work 

 itself. 



Finally, is not much of the objection that work is destructive to 

 the workers applicable to all work and all workers to men as well 

 as to women to domestic as well as non-domestic work? Do we 



