322 



♦ KNOWLEDGE • 



[FEa 10, 1882. 



bof(aii liy lM<f,'i;iii^' tlio <|ni-ntioii, asRiiiniiif; (lin vrry puHition tliry 

 alioilld liuvc ti ieil I'l iii'iivr; jumped tu u C'liicluhiiiu lu^icully uii- 

 Ottiiinublt' ; pruixvil all wlio at^-ed nilli tliutii aa friendt, and 

 savnj^ly hcuIiUmI all uppoiiuiitB us cnemicis .' " Kumalo diBpulantH, 

 learned ur uiilcarticd, «cliluiii know liuw tu rcahun. Tlii-y axHtrt 

 and docloini, (^niplcy wit, ului|Uenct>, and sophigtry to confuU', (icr- 

 ■uudo, or nbaah ailvi-nuiricii ; but distinct rcoxonin); tlioy neither 

 oso nor coinpreliend " (Mias Eil^'i'wonh'ij "Loiters for I.iti-rary 

 Ladies"). Woman's \(iH, is cei tain ly not argument; as null ox- 

 |)0ct her to cliop nood as logic. (1 have seen American nouicu 

 chop wood!) In gencnilisatiou, orrungomont, and concrntratiouof 

 ideas, |shu cannot compete with man. "They never sec, whether 

 for good or bad, more than one side of any question, and always 

 the one which first presents itself " (" Oliver Twist "). 



Inability to argue is no murk of woman's absolute inferiority or 

 non-developnieut. .Sexual eciuality advocates admit woman's lack 

 of reasoning faculty compared with man. Hut (deceived by their 

 hypothesis) they dcclaro the power exists latent, and could be deve- 

 loped tu the same c^vtent as in man by a masculine education. They 

 miglit OS well argue that tho power to ci|ual man in size and 

 strength exists latent in woman. On their assumption, inability 

 to argue is a defect in woman. I maintain it is the result of natural 

 organisation ; therefore, no more a defect than woman's lack of 

 manly size, strength, sha|ie, beard, and complexion. Plato wished 

 to submit the sexes to tho same physical training, but even he 

 declared wcjman in every respect weaker than man. Her mind 

 corresponds with her body. Some men grow impatient with female 

 relatives for inability to ai-gue. Some despise the sex for this pecu- 

 liarity. The " strong-minded " libel the ." weak-minded" sister- 

 hood as poor, stunted, distorted, mentally-arrested creatures ! (I'tt- 

 loria Maijazine, May, 1870.) All are wrong who adduce absence of 

 reasoning power as a. defect in woman. The obvious error is to 

 gauge woman's mind by a masculine standard, and to expect the 

 astoundiug absurditj' that woman can, and should, possess all 

 man's mental qualities in addition to her owti ! Wiseacres blurt 

 out that woman is stupid, that her education has been neglected, 

 because she cannot write like Locke, Bacon, Newton, Shakespeare, 

 and Milton. Inability to argue — which would be a defect in man — 

 is a charactcnstic and valuable quality in woman ! 



It is a most irrational conclusion that woman is mentally un- 

 developed, and claims our pity, and masculine, mental, and physical 

 culture, to enable her to hold her own. Docs man's pre-eminence 

 in reasoning power give him an unfair advantage over woman ? It 

 would do so, if woman were — what sexual equality advocates mis- 

 represent her — man's disappointed rival, an undeveloped younger 

 brother, with a long lee-way to make up. " Woman is not undeve- 

 loped man, but diverse " (Tennyson). Two sexes constitute humanity. 

 To tell women to copy man is a gross insult. She was no more 

 intended to argue with, than to fight with, man. Very serious con- 

 sequences would result from the sexes having minds constituted 

 alike. Suppose that woman could generalise like man, could ascend 

 to principles, could think as profoundly, and reason as correctly ; 

 and that man had woman's intuitive powers, and capacity for 

 details. Woman would then become njan's rival, instead of his 

 help-meet. Each sex being able to dispense with the other's mental 

 qualities, man and woman would live in porijctual discord. But at 

 present, in spite of woman's alleged mental defects, harmony reigns 

 between the sexes. There is constant reciprocal need of the male 

 and female mind sui)plemeutiug one another. All tends to mutual 

 inter-dependence and happinees. Kacli sex, in turn, follows the 

 other's impulse, listens to the other's advice ; each influences in his 

 or her respective province ; each obeys, and both i-ule. 



J. McGkigok Alla.n. 



[273]— At the beginning of his letter of the 13th, Mr. McGrigor 

 Allan makes an assertion which, although true in the abstract, 

 cannot logically be advanced as an argument for the mental in- 

 feriority of women. It may be that in the past men have prac- 

 tically monopolised tho control of human thought and human 

 institutions ; but this cii'cumstance is no more a voucher for their 

 intellectual superiority than the defeat of the Komans was proof 

 of the mental supremacy of the Uuns. It lias been largely a ques- 

 tion of physical force, the assertion of which is proportionate in 

 despotism to the ignorance or degradation of the mule community. 



What authorities can Mr. Allan cite for his stalen.ent that savage 

 life shows the nearest approach to physical equality of the sexes 'i 

 Tho hardships to which savage womeu arc accustomed from their 

 infancy ore certainly such as could not safely bo imposed upon 

 civilised females. But are we to suppose that savage life has not 

 increased male robustness in an etiual proportion 't 



Mr. Allan incidentally remarks that 'among savages woman is a 

 slave." This is a fatal admission ; for savages do but give physical 

 scope to tho spirit of overbearing which animates scoffers at women. 



Name u nation wliore women ore debarred from social influence, and 

 you have named ono which is proi>ortionutely back ward in liberty 

 and knowledge. But, tu bu consistent, Mr. Allan should ag\laUi 

 against the |i<irl which women already take in state affairs. Ue 

 cannot surely resign a large shore in such un ini{ orlant function aa 

 the eilucation of future generations into the hands of tlioac who, 

 he declares, do not possess "auilicicnt development of the abstract 

 principles of justice, morality, truth, &.C., to hold society together 

 for ono week I " 



It is a remarkable fact that Mr. Allan's school, although it has 

 ever impeded and o|iposed, as it still does impede and op|>osc, the 

 higher education of women, always seeks to make an argument of 

 their small achievements in invention and philosophy. 



Mr. Allan hath it that " the eternal subordination of woman is 

 conclusively oxemplilied in her exaggerated admiration for the male 

 prerogatives — strength and intellect." Vour readers must judge 

 as to tho soundness of the proposition that admiration — whether 

 exaggerated or not — for strength and intellect is evidence of in- 

 feriority ; but 1 have always heard that a profound appreciation of 

 talent was the special characteristic of the world's greatest men. 



For the rest, Mr. Allan's letter makes a series of pompous and 

 sweeping assertions, sup|>urtcd by an extract from a novel, and so 

 spiced with illiberal flipjmney as to contrast strangely with his 

 complaint of female injustice. K. Bl'BKk. 



[274] — As " Only a Woman " considers the philosophy of Sl.iif.i ■ 

 speare conclusive on the subject of "womeu possessing justii.' . 

 may I call her attention to a few things that tho subtle under- 

 standing of the immortal bard has given forth to tho world. lie 

 says, " Frailty, thy name is woman!" "Be it lying, note it, the 

 woman's i flattering hers, deceiving hers ; " "Women are frail as 

 tho glasses where they view themselves ; " " Even to vice they are 

 not constant." About their logic, he says, " 1 have no other but a 

 woman's reason." Satirical view of their constancy: "Constant 

 you are, but yet a woman ; and for secresy, no lady closer j " " Hon 

 hard it is for women to keep counsel." 



So it will ajipear that Shakespeare does not represent woman as 

 " infallibly faithful ; " and I think it is only just to bring forward 

 his opinions, since they have been courted. Some of his female 

 characters are actuated by the most selfish and vicious motives 

 that can pos.'iibly be conceived. B. C. Fkaseb. 



[To say that Shakespeare makes certain of his characters express 

 these views, would be nearer the mark. What Shakespeare him> 

 self thought cannot be judged in this way. — Ed.] 



ASBESTOS PAINT AXD THE SAFETY-LAMP. 

 [275] — Upon reading tho very interesting description in K.NOW- 

 LEDGE of the successful experiments recently carried out at the 

 Crystal Palace with the asbestos paint, I was ltd to infer that 

 another important ai>plication of it — namely, to the wire-gause of 

 the ordinary safety-lamp— might be adopted. For, if this gau/e 

 were so protected, it would not, I conceive, even under the most 

 unfavourable circumstances, be raised ahova incandescence, and, 

 therefore, could never, while entire, give rise to an explosion. Sir 

 Uumplirey Davy, in his treatise on the safety-lamp, having declai > I 

 "that even red-hot gauze of the proper degree of fineness wii 

 abstract sufficient heat from the flame of carburetted hydrogen ;■> 

 extinguish it." In fact, on account of the very low conducting.' 

 property of asbestos, and the consequent ditEculty of ra'sing it .<• 

 a high tempcratiu-e, I ventured to propose, somo years since, the 

 substitution of an asbestos gauze or netting for the iron-g.iu.:e 

 cylinder of the "Davy," but do not know whether the suggisti.n 

 was ever experimental!}' realised. 



.Should you deem this brief commuiucation worthy a place u 

 your valuable pages, I shall feel gratified. — Yours, SiC, 



W. H. (.1. 



VEGETARIANISM. 



[27G] — Permit me a few lines of comment on part of a letter 

 relating to the above subject, published in your last number, and 

 signed " A Fellow of tho Royal Astronomical Society." 



If stories bo really valuable in controversy, I can produce scores, 

 the moral of which is exactly contrary to that cited by your oorre- 

 spondcut. But my experience of " stories " is this, that they are 

 seldom related with scientific exactness, and that minute investiga- 

 tion generally reveals some detail which has been cither wilfully or 

 ignorantly suppressed in narration, and which invalidates the whole 

 point it is sought to establish. Personal observation of facts in 

 one's own immediate sphere, constitute, in my opinion, the most 

 valuable kind of statistics. Some five years ago I had very eeverei 

 symptoms of tubercular phthisis, a disease hereditary in my familyJ 

 The physicians whom I consulted recommended mo cod-liver oilj 



