Part 7

About the same time a petition, signed by twenty-three male students,[94] was presented to the Infirmary managers, praying that the lady students should no longer be excluded, but no attention was paid to the request; and when subsequently a similar application was made to the Managers by a deputation of very influential citizens,[95] they again refused, by a majority, to do anything in our behalf. Professor Balfour moved the appointment of a Committee to enquire into a scheme for the instruction of ladies proposed by certain of the medical officers of the Infirmary, but Professor Christison carried an amendment negativing even this measure; and thus another year of Hospital instruction was lost.

With each succeeding Session new students joined our small class, partly in consequence of the very kind encouragement held out by Lady Amberley, Dr Garrett Anderson, and other friends, in the way of Scholarships; for, since public indignation was excited by the refusal of the Hope Scholarship to Miss Pechey, hardly a term has passed without some generous offer of valuable prizes for those ladies who needed such assistance to pursue their studies, and who, by their success in competitive examinations, showed themselves worthy of them. Such kindness is the more valuable at a time when, by incessant delays and constantly-recurring difficulties, every effort is evidently being made to exhaust alike the patience and the purses of the troublesome women who desire to complete the work they have begun.

It is not necessary for me to enter into details respecting the ladies’ progress in their studies, further than to state that in every course in which they have competed for prizes, more than half of the whole class have been in the honours list, and in some cases every lady student has so appeared;[96] so that any refusal to grant them further instruction can hardly be based on the plea that they have not done their best to avail themselves of what was already afforded.

During the two years, 1869–70 and 1870–71, the five original students who entered in 1869 had completed the first half of their University course, partly by attendance on separate classes in the University, and partly by means of extra-mural lectures. But at the end of these two years a dead-lock appeared imminent. The rules of the University forbid any student to take more than four classes outside the walls, and those four classes we had already taken. Professor Christison and others, whose classes came next in term, gave a curt refusal to our request for instruction, although we again offered to guarantee any fee that might be required. In this dilemma we applied for help to the Senatus, and suggested that, if no other means could be devised, the difficulty might be solved in either of two ways--(1) by appointment of special University lecturers, whose payment we would guarantee; or (2) by the relaxation in our case of the ordinary regulations, so that we might take an increased number of extra-mural classes. When these proposals came before the Senatus, it was decided to take a legal opinion as to the rights and powers of the University; and an opinion adverse to our interests having been given, the Senatus decided, on July 28, 1871, by a majority of one, that they would take no action in the matter.

In these circumstances, a Committee[97] of friends which had been formed for our assistance, caused a statement of the facts to be drawn up and submitted to other Counsel, and obtained from the Lord Advocate and Sheriff Fraser an Opinion to the following effect:[98]--That it was quite competent to the University authorities to make any necessary provision for the completion of the ladies’ education; and that the Medical Faculty were bound to admit the ladies to professional examination on the subjects in which they were already qualified to pass.

I must explain that the advice of counsel had been asked on this last point in consequence of a rumour that difficulties might be made respecting the examination that was now due at the end of two years of professional study. The first official notice on this subject was, however, received by us on Saturday, October 14, after the fees for such examination had been paid, and tickets of admission obtained; the examination itself being due on the 24th of the same month, and the ladies concerned having studied for two years with the view of passing this examination, for which they had more especially been preparing assiduously for the last six months.

On the following Monday, October 16, I, moreover, received an official notice that the Dean of the Medical Faculty had been interdicted by the Faculty from giving to ladies any papers for the Preliminary Examination in Arts, which was to take place _on the following day_, October 17! Three ladies had come up to Edinburgh from different parts of the country with the express object of passing these examinations, and, if prevented from doing so, they would be retarded in their studies to the extent of one year. The excessive shortness of the notice given made it impossible even to appeal to the Senatus, and the only course open to me was to submit the facts for the opinion of counsel. This was done, and we were informed that the course taken by the Medical Faculty was quite illegal,[99] while an express invitation to lady students formed part of the official calendar of the University. This opinion was forwarded to the Dean, whose kindness to us had been invariable; and, I am sure that he was glad by it to be released from the painful necessity of obeying the Medical Faculty in this matter. The ladies were accordingly examined in the ordinary course.

But the excitements of the month were not yet at an end. On applying for matriculation tickets the ladies were informed by the Clerk that the Principal, Sir Alexander Grant, had written him word that, in consequence of representations made to him by Professor Christison, he desired that no ladies should at present be allowed to matriculate. On this point, and that regarding the Professional Examination, we, of course, appealed at once to the Senatus. At the meeting at which our appeal was considered, “the Committee for securing complete Medical Education for Women in Edinburgh” also presented the opinion obtained by them from counsel, together with a letter urging that complete provision should be made for our instruction. At their meeting on October 21, the Senatus at once decided both points of appeal in our favour. The Principal’s prohibition, which had never had any legal weight, was overruled, and the permission to women to matriculate and pass the Arts Examinations was renewed, and declared to be in force so long as the present regulations stood in the calendar. The Medical Faculty also were instructed at once to admit the ladies who were prepared for it to the Professional Examination on the following day; and I am happy to say that, in spite of the incessant worry to which they had been subjected for the past ten days, they all passed successfully. I am sure that all those who have had to prepare for severe University examinations will appreciate the difficulties under which they did so.[100]

A few days later came a meeting of the University Council, when Dr Alexander Wood made a gallant attempt to get a vote passed to the effect that “the University is bound, in honour and justice, to render it possible for those women who have already commenced their studies, to complete them.”[101] The _Lancet_ remarked, respecting this motion:--“This is precisely the ground we have always taken up about the matter; and we hope that the General Council of the University will, by the adoption of Dr Alexander Wood’s motion, put an end to the controversy which had redounded so little to the credit of that school.”[102] A memorial in favour of the resolution was also presented, signed by more than nine thousand women, residing in all parts of the country, and representing almost every rank in society.[103] Very vigorous opposition to it was, however, made by Professors Turner, Thomson, and Christison, all of whom were members of the Medical Faculty, and ultimately an amendment, which proposed to leave the question to be settled by the Senatus and University Court, was carried by 107 votes to 97.[104]

At a meeting of the Senatus held on Oct. 30th, the question of making further provision for the instruction of women was brought forward, and a letter was received from the Committee of our friends stating that, “in the event of special lecturers being appointed by the University to give qualifying instruction to women, the Committee are willing to guarantee the payment to them of any sum that may be fixed by the Senatus for their remuneration, in case the fees of the ladies are insufficient for that purpose; and that, if necessary, they are willing further to undertake to provide such rooms and accommodation as may be required for the delivery of the said lectures, if it should be found absolutely impossible for the University to provide space for that purpose.” After a long debate the Senatus decided, by a majority, that they would not take any steps to enable us to complete our education. At a meeting a few days later the Senatus further decided, by fourteen votes to thirteen, to recommend to the University Court that the existing regulations in favour of female students be rescinded, without prejudice, however, to the rights of those already studying. This resolution was, as I said, passed by fourteen votes to thirteen, and it may be worth while to mention that two of the fourteen votes were those of Dr Christison and Sir Alexander Grant, who were themselves members of the University Court to which the recommendation was to be made. That the proposed measure was not the wish of a real majority of the Professors was soon made abundantly clear, for a protest against it was sent up to the Court, signed by eighteen out of the thirty-five Professors of the University, while two out of the remaining seventeen were persistently neutral, never indeed having voted on the question from first to last. In the teeth of this protest it was, of course, almost impossible that the Regulations could be rescinded, and so they were once more confirmed by the University Court on January 3, 1872.

The next event of importance was the annual re-election of Infirmary managers, six of whom were to be chosen at the contributors’ meeting at the beginning of January 1872. As on a former occasion, the election evidently turned wholly on our admission to, or exclusion from, the Infirmary wards. The medical party moved the re-election of the former managers, and they were sure of the support of everybody who did not consider our admission a vital question. Our friends, on the contrary, brought forward a list of gentlemen, all of whom were known to be friendly to our cause. After a very warm debate the list of our friends proved to be successful, being supported by 177 votes, while 168 were recorded on the other side. Professor Masson then moved that a Statute be enacted by the Court of Contributors, giving the same educational advantages in the Infirmary to female as well as to male students. The hostile party, finding themselves in a minority, endeavoured to prevent this being put to the vote on technical grounds which were subsequently found to be of no legal importance. Failing in this, they then adopted the remarkably dignified course of decamping in a body, accompanied, I must confess, by some ironical cheers from those left behind. In the lull that succeeded Professor Masson brought forward his motion, which was seconded by the Rev. Dr Guthrie, and passed without a dissentient voice. This Statute is, therefore, now actually law in the Infirmary, and considering that managers friendly to us had also been elected, it might have been thought that our difficulties there were at end. But now comes the most extraordinary part of the whole story. On a scrutiny of the votes it was found that with the majority had voted twenty-eight firms, thirty-one ladies, and seven doctors. On the other side were fourteen firms, two ladies, thirty-seven doctors, and three druggists. These figures may seem, indeed, to have a tolerable moral significance, but it is not with that that I am at this moment concerned. It occurred to the defeated party that here might be found a straw for them, drowning, to catch at,--that possibly a legal objection might be sustained against the votes of firms which were so largely in our favour, and that, if so, the victory might yet be secured![105] The result was, that, when the Contributors assembled at the adjourned meeting,[106] for the purpose of hearing the result of the scrutiny and the final declaration of the election, the Lord Provost found himself served with an Interdict forbidding him to declare the new managers duly elected, on the ground that the votes of firms were incompetent, and that by means of these the majority had been obtained!

Instances have occurred before now where personal feelings have triumphed over public interests, but I do not think that I ever heard of quite so reckless a course as this, by which the medical clique has plunged the great Edinburgh Hospital into litigation, and that with some of its own most generous supporters, rather than allow a dozen women to obtain in its wards the instruction that the Contributors had decreed they should receive![107]

The litigation thus begun is still pending, and the incomplete Board of Managers have for all these months carried on the business of the Infirmary without any representatives at all from the Court of Contributors; and it is probable that they make the very fact of their deficient numbers the excuse for having up to this moment given no effect whatever to the Statute unanimously passed in our favour last January by the Court of Contributors. We applied immediately after the meeting for tickets of admission, but were told that the managers must first be consulted, and from that day to this no tickets have been issued to us, though the statute referred to legally secured that “henceforth all registered students of medicine shall be admitted to the educational advantages of the Infirmary, without distinction of sex.” The matter, however, can now be only one of time; and, since the law of the Infirmary is at length on our side, our opponents may, I think, rest assured that our patience in awaiting the end will be at least equal to theirs. In all such struggles a present triumph may be snatched by those in brief authority, but the future belongs inalienably to the cause of justice and liberality.

In the meantime, I had, on behalf of my fellow-students and myself, appealed to the University Court to provide us with the means of completing our education, and our friends of the Committee also forwarded to the Court a further legal Opinion from the Lord Advocate and Sheriff Fraser, to the effect,--that the University authorities had full powers to permit the matriculation of women in 1869; that the Resolutions then passed amounted to a permission to women to “_study medicine_” in the University, and that therefore the women concerned were entitled to demand the means of doing so; and finally, that if such means were persistently refused, the legal mode of redress lay in an Action of Declarator.[108]

On January 8th, 1872, the University Court declared that they could not make any arrangements to enable us to pursue our studies with a view to a degree, but that, _if we would altogether give up the question of graduation_,[109] and be content with Certificates of Proficiency, they would try to meet our views!

In reply, I represented to the Court that no “Certificates” were recognised by the Medical Act, and that any such documents would therefore be perfectly useless to us. I further urged that as matriculation fees had been exacted from us, in addition to the fees for tuition, and as we had been required to pass the Preliminary Examination “_for the medical degree_,” and as some of our own number had moreover passed the first Professional Examination, I could not but believe that we were entitled to demand the means of completing the ordinary University education, with a view to obtaining the ordinary degree; such belief being moreover confirmed by the emphatic opinion of very distinguished counsel. On these grounds I entreated the Court to reconsider their decision, and made the following suggestion:--

“That, as the main difficulty before your honourable Court seems to be that regarding graduation, with which we are not immediately concerned at this moment, we are quite willing to rest our claims to ultimate graduation on the facts as they stand up to the present date; and, in case your honourable Court will now make arrangements whereby we can continue our education, we will undertake not to draw any arguments in favour of our right to graduation from such future arrangements, so that they may at least be made without prejudice to the present legal position of the University.”

I appeal to every intelligent man and woman to say whether these words, taken in connection with my previous argument, were in the slightest degree ambiguous, or whether any doubt could really exist that in them I was pleading for facilities for such an education as would ultimately enable us to become legal practitioners of medicine, although I was willing that the actual question of graduation should remain in abeyance for a few months, till decided by legal authority, or otherwise. The public evidently so understood my letter, which was published in the papers, for it was considered that I had substantially gained my end, when the following reply from the secretary of the Court was also published:--

“I am desired to inform you that you appear to ask no more than was offered by the Court in their resolution of the 8th ultimo, in which it was stated that, while the Court were restrained by legal doubts as to the power of the University to grant degrees to women from considering ‘the expediency of taking steps to obtain, in favour of female students, an alteration of an ordinance which might be held not to apply to women,’ they were ‘at the same time desirous to remove, so far as possible, any present obstacle in the way of a complete medical education being given to women; provided always that medical instruction to women be imparted in strictly separate classes.’ On the assumption, therefore, that while you at present decline the offer made by the Court with reference to certificates of proficiency, you now ask merely that arrangements should be made for completing the medical education of yourself and the other ladies on behalf of whom you write, I am to state that the Court are quite ready to meet your views. If, therefore, the names of extra-academical teachers of the required medical subjects be submitted by yourself, or by the Senatus, the Court will be prepared to consider the respective fitness of the persons so named to be authorised to hold medical classes for women who have, in this or former sessions, been matriculated students of the University, and also the conditions and regulations under which such classes should be held. It is, however, to be distinctly understood that such arrangements are not to be founded on as implying any right in women to obtain medical degrees, or as conferring any such right upon the students referred to.”

My friends, as I say, congratulated me on this apparently important concession; but to make assurance doubly sure, I resolved to have absolute official confirmation of the apparent meaning of the Resolution, and therefore addressed another letter to the Court, in which, after thanking them for their apparent good intentions, I enquired whether I was correct in understanding--

“1. That, though you at present give us no pledge respecting our ultimate graduation, it is your intention to consider the proposed extra-mural courses as ‘qualifying’ for graduation, and that you will take such measures as may be necessary to secure that they will be so accepted, if it is subsequently determined that the University has the power of granting degrees to women.

“2. That we shall be admitted in due course to the ordinary Professional Examinations, on presentation of the proper certificates of attendance on the said extra-mural classes.”

In reply, I was calmly informed that the Court meant nothing of the kind; that they would not agree to count any classes we might take as qualifying, and that in fact they would not stir a finger in any way whatever to enable us to become legally qualified doctors, though they might, if we spent a good many years of labour and a quite unlimited sum of money in obtaining our education, give us at the end these wonderful Certificates of Proficiency, which would be worth exactly--Nothing!

What had been the meaning of the previous letter of apparent concession I confess myself quite at a loss to conceive. What advantage could accrue to us from submitting the names of extramural teachers to the Court, in which Professor Christison was the only medical man, I have never been able to guess, since the Court did not intend to take any means to make their teaching qualify for graduation, and we hardly needed its sanction in order to make private arrangements for non-qualifying instruction! One is inclined to wonder whether the idea was that the University Court possessed some supernatural power, analogous to that supposed by certain churches to reside in episcopal laying on of hands, which would in a miraculous way benefit those lecturers whom they might “authorise” to teach us, though such teaching was to be given in place and manner wholly unconnected with that University with which I had supposed their functions to be exclusively connected. However, I am content to leave this among the unexplained mysteries, with very hearty thankfulness that, at least, by timely enquiries, we saved ourselves from a still more hopeless waste of time and money, which indeed we were on the point of incurring, in reliance on the good faith of the Court, and the apparent meaning of its mysterious Resolution.[110]

Having, however, at length arrived at a certainty that the Medical Faculty would rest with nothing short of our expulsion, if by any possibility they could attain that end; that the Senatus, though far more friendly, had not a sufficient majority of liberal votes to secure the permanent concession of our claims, however just, in the teeth of the strong medical opposition; and that the University Court would offer only such concessions as were quite valueless for our end, it became clear that it was useless to prolong the series of supplications which had, for nearly a year, been addressed in vain to one after another of the the ruling powers of the University.