merville, have attained greater celebrity than some men; but let us recollect that the instances are few, and look much more like exceptions than rules: they therefore should not be quoted. But I was saying that in woman the quantity of brain is smaller than in man. Now what is the logical inference? Why, that there is therefore a smaller amount of mental power. It has been proved beyond question, by recent experiment, that in woman the base of the brain is larger than the summit, whilst the opposite is the case in man; and it has been shown, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that power of mind, or will, or intellect, belongs to the upper part of the brain. Mental power, then, belongs more to man than to woman, whilst, on the other hand, mental emotion is more remarkable in woman than in man.

:

Now let us look to Natural History-what does that say upon the subject? Why, that the female is in every class of animals inferior to the male-made for a different purpose-made to be guided by the superior endowments of the male. I would instance the elephant, the monkey, and many kinds of birds in each of these tribes the female is invariably less intelligent than the male. Or look to the history of the world-of the race. Do the annals of the world show that the woman has done as much as the man? It is true that there are a few great instances of female superiority; but, let me ask, are there, in them all, bricks and mortar enough to build up a reputation for woman that shall compare with the fabric that man has reared?

It is said, or supposed, that by saying woman is intellectually inferior to man we degrade her, and render her less worthy of man's love. But this is not the case. Love does not depend upon the intellectuality of the object. We do not love the most intellectual persons best. We feel, therefore, that although woman may be inferior in intellect to ourselves, we should not love her less; and we feel, also, that we could love her more for the virtues of her character than for even the highest intellectual endowments. (Loud cheers.) After apologizing for the crudity of his remarks, and thanking the Class for the indulgence shown him, Dr. WILLIAMS resumed his seat amidst warm and general applause.

Mr. MARCH did not imagine he had anything particularly new to say upon the question, but still he felt it his duty to state that he could not agree with the opinions expressed by the last speaker. He could not see that Dr. WILLIAMS had proved the point on which he insisted so strongly, viz.—that woman was intended by nature to be inferior to man. What were the learned Doctor's arguments? They were founded upon woman's physical construction, upon history, and upon phrenology. Now as to woman's physical construction, that had nothing to do with the question; the subject was woman's' intellect, not her physical frame. He would ask, where were the proofs that if woman's mind had been cultivated it would not have been equal to man's? Then as to history: he thought that, if rightly studied, history would show that woman was equal to man. It was true there were no Shaksperes amongst them, nor had they produced any Bacons. (Much laughter.) Really he could not see what gentlemen were laughing at. (Renewed laughter.) He thought it a very stupid thing for the Class to laugh at a man's name; they had better attend to what he was talking about. (Increased laughter, "Oh, oh!" and cheers.) Well, he was saying that though amongst women there were no names equal to the names among men, still there were many illustrious instances of woman's power of mind. (Cheers.) The learned Doctor had said that woman's inferiority would not cause him to love her less, but he (Mr. M) begged to say that it must. (Hear, hear.) Was it possible, he would ask, for a man to love a being who was so far below him in intellect

Dr. WILLIAMS begged his friend's pardon-he had not said that woman was an idiot.

Mr. MARCH-What did the learned Doctor say?

Dr. WILLIAMS begged to inform the honourable gentleman that he had not said he could bestow his love upon an idiot.

Mr. MARCH did not suppose his friend had; he gave him credit for better sense. But now to glance again at history: there was Catherine-was not her's a masculine spirit?-and there were many others, but he would not stay to name them. It was his opinion that there were more men ruled by women than women ruled by men-yes, and in a mental point of view, too. Every day's experience proved that woman can overcome the higher feelings of man's mind, and completely govern and rule him. Dr. WILLIAMS had spoken of the inferior animals, and had told them all about the she-elephant and the she-monkey. Now he (Mr. M.) was free to confess that he hadn't studied the natural history of elephants and monkeys-(laughter)—but for his (Mr. M.'s) part, he had always been accustomed to think that animals had no intellect at all; the light they had was instinct, and in that he (Mr. M) thought that the female was superior to the male. Now as to woman-couldn't they perceive danger better, and offer advice? And he would like to know who it was that supported man in his desponding moment-who it was that comforted him on his sick bed-soothed him in his hour of need? He thought that this was enough to prove that her intellect was equal to man's. He would not say more; he thought that the asserters of woman's inferiority ought to bear the onus of proof, and not leave it to the other side. He would merely say, therefore, that in his opinion woman's apparent inferiority was entirely owing to the circumstances in which she had been placed.

Mr. THOMAS TAGG thought that great praise was due to Dr. WILLIAMS for his very beautiful and talented speech-the manner in which he treated the question was most excellent. At the same time he regretted extremely that the last speaker (Mr. MARCH) should not only have proved that he did not understand the speech, but that he should have shown that the subject was altogether beyond his comprehension. (Laughter.) Now he (Mr. T.) thought it a very remarkable thing that all the advocates of female equality admit-readily and invariably admit-that there is an inferiority. It was true that they pretended to account for it on the ground of difference in education, but he thought that the very admission was fatal to thein. How was it, he would ask, that of men, the most remarkable have been the least educated, whilst the reverse is the case with women? He thought this was sufficient to prove woman's inferiority. Now he could not but think that if women were educated at Colleges or Universities, harm, rather than good, would be done. Was it natural for the female to rule? Was it proper for generals, senators, and rulers, to be women, and men to be what women are now-dependants and inferiors? He thought not, and he thought the Class would think so too. Mr. MARCH had spoken of the advantages conferred on society by women; he (Mr. T.) would cheerfully acknowledge those advantages, but he could not agree with Mr. MARCH that, therefore, woman must be man's equal. The power to soothe is not the power to think; and she may console him and comfort him, without necessarily being his equal in intellect. thought that Mr. MARCH, not having the mental power to perceive this distinction, had been led to make the strange statements that characterized his extraordinary speech. Metaphysics had been once defined to be "that which a man says when he does not know what he is talking about." Now if that definition were correct, he was quite certain that Mr. MARCH had been talking pure metaphysics all through bis speech. (Much laughter and cheering.) He (Mr. T.) did not wish to be too hard upon his friend(laughter)-but still he thought that what he (Mr. T.) said was quite correct. He would say but one word more. He thought that Mr. PORTER was very successful in his opening address; it was an honest, off-hand sort of speech, and one that did him much credit. He liked the straightforwardness with which he said that consistency was all humbug: and he only wished that every one who, like Mr. PORTER, changed his coat, was, like Mr. PORTER, honest enough to confess his conversion. (Cheers.)

Mr. SHAW would take the liberty to offer a few words upon the question, and to express the great pleasure he felt as a new member (this being only the first time he had attended the Class), in finding that it possessed so many good speakers. He agreed in the main with the conclusion come to by the last speaker, but not for the same reasons; and he would briefly state his views. Before doing so, however, he could not but notice a glaring contradiction in the speech delivered by Mr. MARCH. That gentleman had admitted woman's inferiority-indeed, he had attempted to account for it; and yet he had subsequently asserted that the majority of women rule the majority of men, and that by means of intelligence. Now this was certainly a contradiction. If her intelligence were greater, how could she be inferior to him? How was it that when the world commenced, if men and women were equal in intelligence, that woman did not assert and maintain an equality of power to man? How was it that they were still, and always had been, inferior in position? Mr. MARCH had said that history contradicted the assertion that woman had always been inferior; he (Mr. S.) thought otherwise. Mr. M. had said that woman was shown by history to have more firmness than man; he (Mr. S.) could not agree with him. He would instance the case of Zenobia, who sacrificed her minister to save herself. A more lamentable instance of want of firmness in a ruler was, perhaps, never seen than her history afforded. It had been said that inferiority necessarily implied degradation; he (Mr. S.) could not conceive that such was the case. (Hear, hear.) It did not follow that because woman could not understand mathematics, philosophy, and the government of nations, that she should not be in every sense a help-meet for man, and be esteemed and loved by him. (Cheers.) She was meant for a different sphere. It was not necessary for him to say how nobly she filled that sphere, nor to enlarge upon the benefits she conferred, and had conferred, upon the world; it was enough for him to say that she more than recompensed the world for the want of intellectual power, and was more to he loved for that than for any intellect she could possess. (Loud cheers.) And here he felt it his duty to bid those who spoke of woman's degradation remember what they did. God had placed woman in her present sphere; so, therefore, they affirmed, when they called her degraded, that the degradation was not her's, but God's. (Cheers.) He (Mr. S.) begged to appeal for a moment to the best authority he could adduce-he meant the Bible. That holy book said, "Let no woman speak in your churches." Did not that show that she was meant to be intellectually inferior? (Hear, hear.) It said also, "Let a woman be obedient to her husband.".

Mr. GANDAR rose to order. He begged to ask the Chairman whether the speaker was not transgressing a rule of the Class in introducing theology? The CHAIRMAN decided that such was the case.

Mr. SHAW would apologize most sincerely for his error, but having joined the Class for the first time that evening, he was not aware of the rule. He would therefore omit all reference to the Bible, but he would ask instead, what was the common sense of mankind upon the subject? Why there existed a general impression-amongst women as well as men-that woman was inferior; and was not this, he would ask, the best possible argument he could use? It was impossible that there could be a safer appeal.

He had now stated his reasons for agreeing with the conclusions of several of the preceding speakers, but he felt bound to say that he could not coincide in all their arguments. For instance, he attached no weight to the fact that woman was born after man. Man was born after the beasts of the field, but he was not therefore inferior. Neither could he think that her being made out of Adam's rib had anything to do with the question. If the fact were to be admitted at all, it must weigh on the other side; for certainly it was more honourable to be made out of a rib-a living part of man's body-than to be made, as Adam was, out of the mere lifeless dust of the earth. (Cheers.) He would say but very little more. He had observed

with much regret the want of courtesy that prevailed amongst some of the members of the Class; and he must say that he thought such words as "stupid" and "absurd," as applied by one member to another, were very unbecoming, and calculated to do a great deal of harm. (Loud cheers.)

Mr. GANDAR-Sir, although I must confess the great pleasure I have felt in listening to the observations of the last speaker, I cannot altogether agree with his arguments or his conclusion. Now, I will at once admit that if phrenology be an admissible witness, we must come to the conclusion that woman is intellectually inferior to man; but I think that the science is not sufficiently grounded or received to warrant our relying on its testimony. It has been said that the volume of woman's brain is not so large as man's, but I think that the difference of temperament should be considered at the same time; and in that case I think we should possibly come to other conclusions. As to the evidence of history, it is true woman has done little; but as the world has progressed woman has done more. (Cheers.) It seems to me that the difference in physical strength will account for the difference in position, and will especially account for why woman did not take the lead at first. And here I must reiterate the remark about her defective education; and by the term education I do not mean merely the learning taught at school-I mean the learning of the life. Now, to say nothing of the years lost at school, what is the education of the girl's afterlife? She is taught to rely upon others for thought and for labour, and never to think or to do for herself. The reverse is the case with the boy— he is early taught to mix with and to know the world; and, more than all, to think and decide for himself. This I think of itself sufficiently accounts for such a man's superiority over such a woman. (Hear.) In looking into history, I cannot help being struck with the fact that the alleged difference between man and woman is by no means greater than the difference between different communities of men-nay, between men of the same nation in different eras. I instance the Greeks, the Romans, the Eastern Empire; and when you tell me that circumstances have produced the results unfavourable to man's mental dignity which we there behold, I ask, may not circumstances have kept woman back likewise? (Cheers.) Her school education, her after-life education, public opinion-all these are against her; and till these circumstances are changed we must not look for much improvement in her mental condition. Still there are some splendid names in woman's history-Madame de Stael, Mrs. Somerville, Joanna Baillie, Mrs. Norton, and many others. Sir, I would say, that although woman is not required to rule the world, that her duties require as much intellect. She has to educate her children-to form the future mind-to inculcate virtues and principles-and therefore she requires as large an intellect as it is possible for any human being to have. To conclude, Sir, I am of opinion that, suffering as we do under the evil effects of woman's long-imposed inferiority, we cannot arrive at a right decision on the subject; but when circumstances shall have altered her position, and have given fair scope to her powers, a true, and, probably, a different judgment from that expected, may be pronounced. (Loud cheering.)

On the motion of Mr. F. EVANS, seconded by Mr. CHARLES WARWICK, the debate was adjourned till Thursday evening, the 29th December.

ADJOURNED MEETING-DECEMBER 29, 1842.

MR. GANDAR IN THE CHAIR.

Mr. F. EVANS resumed the debate. He said on the face of this question we cannot but be struck with the evident mental difference existing between the sexes. Every one must have noticed that woman's manner of viewing anything is different from man's, whether in physical, mental, or religious knowledge. Hence the expression we so often hear, "a feminine view," or "a masculine view," of a subject.

That this should be so seems to me quite natural :-woman's sphere is different to man's to her is left the domestic arrangements-the in-door sphere: while to man is left, necessarily, the care of struggling with the world, and acquiring subsistence for himself and his family. The effects of this are just what might be expected; the pure, high feelings, with which man enters into life, are rubbed down by his contact with the world. His early love of virtue and honour are great; but he meets men of different sentiments, and his moral standard is lowered. Woman's moral sense is kept purer; her comparative seclusion enables her to preserve her moral feelings from contamination. The difference, then, in the minds of the sexes seems to be, that man has more intellectual, woman more moral power; and the question now arises, whether the difference is natural or accidental. In my opinion there is an original difference, quite unattributable to circumstances. It has been said that man's tyranny has kept woman down; but how did she fall at the first? Was it that man was more physically strong? Why, what is this but asserting that Nature has not been able to carry out her intentions that she meanf man and woman to be equal, but forgot to give woman physical strength enough to enable her to be so ? It is said that woman is the slave of man's strength: does her condition bear the aspect of slavery? Where nien have been enslaved, they have rebelled and risen, but woman has borne her slavery, not only quietly, but happilycontentedly.

Great names among women have been mentioned. I acknowledge their greatness: but I say it is not fair to pick the best, and argue as though all women were like these. We have to judge of the mass of men and women-not of the few. Either, then, give us bulk for bulk, or sample for sample. Your samples will not avail, for if we compare the greatest names amongst women with the greatest names amongst men, the victory is ours. Mrs. Somerville has been named as a great astronomer; can she compare with Newton, Kepler, or Gaileo? Is Joanna Baillie, as a dramatist, equal to Shakspere? Is Mrs. Hemans a poet like Milton? Is Queen Elizabeth to be named with Alfred, and our other great Rulers? (Cheers) It is unwise to set up this theory of equality. By supposing one to be weaker than the other, but, by that weakness, most protected, and by it acquiring a higher moral feeling than the other, and so being fitted to be man's best soother and companion, we have a pleasing and harmonious view of the world. By asserting them to be equal in intellect, we set up a continual battle between them, and a lasting evil is the result.

With regard to the assertion that woman's moral feeling is superior to man's, I hold the fact to be unquestionable; but it is the morality of emotion or instinct rather than of principle, and it by no means shows that therefore she must be man's equal in intellect. She has never developed a new system of morality-nor indeed of anything else. You cannot trace the effects of the female mind in the world's progression. But do we therefore degrade her? No: we honour her still! Her moral feelings cause her to be honoured-they make her our guardian angel and is not this better than to set her up as a rival with whom we are to wage continual war?

:

I said that woman has produced no effects in the world-do I say none? No; it would be an absurdity! She has done much, though working silently. She has inculcated on the world's mind lessons of grace and beauty that can never die. Hers is a noble sphere. It is to be the teacher—the guide the guardian of the young; the comforter and consoler of man. But is this all? No; she bas a higher mission; she is to be man's guide and better angel-not the mere minister, but the sharer of his joys; she is an end and not a means, and though she is not to be taught to cope with man for the mastery of the world, she is yet to be enlightened in mental and moral truth, and to be educated till her utmost intellect is developed.

After a few remarks on the frivolity of female education, Mr. Evans resumed his seat amidst loud and general cheering.

Mr. F. DE YRIGOYTI thought that sufficient importance had not been allowed to two great causes of the present inability of woman to contend with man in intellect-woman's deficient education, and her natural timidity of disposition. Where were the Colleges, or Universities, or Literary Institutions for woman? Echo would say-where? and he (Mr. Y.) thought, until the means had been tried, it was presumptuous to come to a conclusion. Mr. Y. instanced a case which had come under his own observation when in France, of a young lady who had attained the