The Apothecaries' Hall have withdrawn,—we do not know how •
they make out their legal power to withdraw,—from examining women for their diploma. Mrs. Thome wrote recently to the Church Daily News to state that she had applied in vain for permission to be admitted to the examinations. We must say we hold this to be a most unfortunate thing for the public, and a very dis- creditable one for the Apothecaries' Hall. That women with a thorough knowledge of medical science are specially fitted to do a great deal of good which it will never fall in men's way to do, is matter of fact. If it were only for the sake of highly skilled nurses, the study of medicine, and good testa of medical knowledge, should be opeu to women. But there are much higher branches of the profession than this open to women, for which they have almost exclusive advantages. Miss Garrett, for instance, is, we have heard, doing enormous good by advising poor women—who would never have asked advice of a man at all—on their own and their children's complaints. It is monstrous to shut up such a field against women. And if neither the younger nor the older Universities will open it to them, the Female Medical Society should themselves obtain a charter em- powering them to grant diplomas to female practitioners. We do not believe that Parliament would refuse so obviously just a demand. The Queen could grant the charter, of course, without asking the authority of Parliament, but we doubt whether any Home Secretary would take the responsibility in this case of advising her to do so.
Previous page
