Corrtntpoiidtnct with Emily Shirrtff 



133 



Tub Collkob, Hitchih. March 16tb 70 



Dkar SiK, I hiivp l>een thinking very much aliout (Ik; opinion I r lU ooa- 



iin){ tlio (liHinclinalion to mnrriago nriiong woiiicn of a i'«>rt«iii stjn ;i(l and 



AiniM-ica, imd wishing vory much that I could K've you evidence of whut to me ih eertninly a 

 fact, hut which hiw gi-own into that through a multitude of channulH, minute olwcrvation, 

 Bcatterud opinion in IkmiIch and xome axpects of opinion upon nocial queationii. Aa regKrda 

 America I know I gatliered much from Mr H. Dixon'H two worki*, alao I remeinlwr Bome 

 papers of Mr F. Newman which left mo the same impression. Oenerally, the tone of what 

 Komo call the most advanced (and which appear t'l me the most exagi{erate<l) views of the 

 'wonum question' tnmts marriage and the hoiix" fKwition of the wife and mother with a sort of 

 half contempt which indicates the feeling I speak of. Mr Mill has expn»<s<Nl what women have 

 been feeling more and more for years past concerning the injustice of the irresponsihle despotiam 

 under which they live; it may be and often is a In^nevolent deafK)tism, liut absolute; govern- 

 mnnts are not in fashion and the reaction of lilMjral politics has di)ul)tless a(rect<'<l the views of 

 home life. Women have little hop«> of any change that law can make in their destiny, — lietter 

 therefore they say to Ije independent of men. All that foolish talk alx)ut njuaJily (foolish 

 because it never can be proved one way or the other and has very little bearing upon the 

 practical question) has stirred up feelings of antagonism and these are most unfavourable to 

 marriage. I believe men do not realist" to what a miserable extent women h»ve married for 

 position or independence, and degrading as the system has t)een it must lie owned tluit to the 

 larger nund>er there was no other resource, — they hatl no openings for employment and their 

 families did not provide for them. Now therefore that there is so much stir alx)ut occupation 

 for women and that they see for tlie first time a vision of independence to be earned by their 

 own work, it is, jwrliaps, a necessary — at any rate a natural — result that they should look with 

 some dislike to what se<>ms the refuge for weaker minds. I believe that the feeble intluence of 

 piission over women — educatefl women at any rate — as compai-e<l with affection aids this state 

 of things. If they do not meet with the individual who calls forth the strong affection, and for 

 whom any sacrifice is light, a single life has nothing from which they shrink. If they can live 

 without hardship they fit-l that they have much in the sense of freedom to comjien.sate for any 

 advantages marriage might have given. In France they will not bear the social discredit of 

 old maidism, but the same struggle for independence is going on and is more ea.sy to carry on 

 within the limits of married life than in England. I think that the frequency with which we 

 see women of |)ro|)erty remain single is a corroboration of what I have said. But I feel tliat 

 all I have written is most vague and can only show you the nature and dirt'ction of the evidence 

 that has produced this conviction on my mind — one to which I give no welcome — for with all 

 its ignorant shortcomings in practice, I am sure the old theory of life is that which is true to 

 Nature, and that the existence of nmn or woman is abortive without the other. I say this 

 only to let you know that my belief is not born of my own prepossession. iShould I oome acroas 

 any facts or views I thiuk luight be interesting to you on this point, T shall have great pleasure 

 in sending them to you. Yours truly, Emily Siiikrekf. 



I do not think Galton fully heard this knocking of the younger g^ene- 

 ration on the door. He had assumed that the ahler men could nave the 

 abler women for the asking, l)ut what if the social evolution were to be such 

 that the latter tended to stand idoof from marriage altogether? The writer 

 of these letters may have put the matter vaguely in 1870 — she was only at 

 the beginning of the great movement of tiie last fifty years, and must fail 

 to foresee all its phases. Yet she grasped a danger to the race, that the 

 author of Hereditaiy Genitis had not hinted at — the danger that the abler 

 woman, when she has once realised her powers, may prefer to remain un- 

 married'. You may press upon her the religious duty of race-betterment, 



' I think this 'fear' of the 'seventies has largely materialised into a statistically demonstrable 

 fact in the last thirty years. The abler men, either by choice or necessity, do not mate with 

 the abler women, and the latter either by choice or necessity remain to a very lar^ge extent 

 unmarried. 



