472 The u Woman’s Rights' ” Question [October, 
and in every way excel the second lot in athletic perform- 
ances. 
Again, it is found that the size of the chest, and conse- 
quent volume of the lungs, affords a very good standard by 
which the general vigour, the vital energy of either man or 
beast may be gauged. The more a man, free from corpu- 
lence, measures round the chest, the better are his stamina, 
and the greater his power to support fatigue and hardships. 
Of this faCt the military and the sporting world are perfectly 
aware, and never fail to take it into account in estimating 
the eligibility of a recruit or the probable performances of 
an athlete. 
Having seen, then, that male animals are not merely 
adually larger than their respective females, but surpass 
them proportionally in the size of the thorax, we naturally 
expeCt the former to be decidedly the stronger, gifted with 
a more intense and exuberant vitality. Nor are our ex- 
pectations disappointed. The bodily strength of a cow is 
trifling indeed compared with that of a bull of the same 
breed. In races a filly is very frequently — merely as such — - 
allowed to carry less weight than a horse. A lady gorilla 
would be in evil case indeed if her husband did not treat 
her with a gentleness and kindness which many of our own 
species would do well to imitate. And as to mankind — Is 
not, perhaps, the most legitimate source of the very movement 
we are criticising an attempt to secure women against the 
superior strength of men ? Yet at a meeting at Manchester 
a male agitator actually sought to deny the superior physical 
power of man, because it would be easy to find a fish-wife 
stronger than a cotton-weaver. The argument being in- 
tensely illogical was frantically applauded. 
Persons are not, however, wanting, who— whilst admitting 
the general inferiority of women to men in physical strength 
• — contend that this weakness is the result of continued and 
systematic repression. Woman, they say, has been forcibly 
debarred from invigorating pursuits, and comparative feeble- 
ness is the natural result. We would ask such advocates 
whether this systematic repression has been also carried out 
among the lower mammals, and, if not, what is the origin 
of the weakness of the female sex in their case, which is at 
least as well marked as among mankind ? Has the “ subju- 
gation ” of woman had its parallel in the “ subjugation ” of 
the cow, the mare, the ewe, the lioness ? 
That the women of the middle class in all civilised coun- 
tries, and of the higher in some, would be much healthier 
and stronger if they took more exercise in the open air and 
