WHERE EDUCATED WOMEN CAN FIRST HELP 17 vorced in this country in twenty years, and those not the lastsuch is the deplorable record on which Catholic and Protestant clergy are already appealing for a union of all moral agencies to retard this downward rush of the multitude.* The same influence should help resist the yet more common weakening of family ties and destruction of family life. It should correct, at the origin of the evil, the extraordinary development of nervous excitability that accounts for so much of our fickleness of view and instability of belief; for the frequent outbursts of general turbulence and lawlessness through whole zones of population; for the varied and incredible character of the crimes, for the amazing publicity which attends them, and the ready imitation which the wide knowledge of every new crime often stimulates. Perhaps the same influence may even penetrate citadels far better entrenched,- those of evils that come from the ill-judged excesses of the best of people. It may possibly infuse moderation into our new and admirable devotion to athletics, and rescue us from those vagaries of Sport run mad that have made the football teacher more important in our universities than the Professor of Chemistry or of Philosophy, and the record of the cinder-track the essential thing rather than the baccalaureate degree. Harder task yet, it may restore sanity to our Charity run mad; may teach us the infinite harm that lurks in our lazy way of ridding ourselves of each casual beggar with a careless quarter instead of a careful inquiry; and may even, after a time, stop the premium we put upon crime and crankiness when we build palaces for our lunatics and our criminals, and sustain them in these establishments in a comfort and even luxury far beyond the average of what many taxpayers who meet the bills can afford for themselves. Under your guidance the moderate conclusion may, in fact, be reached that even for sweet Charity's sake the upright, industrious New York farmer or mechanic or shopkeeper is not *The corresponding secretary of the National League for the Protection of the Family, the Rev. Samuel W. Dike, of Auburndale, Mass., published a letter on June 16 referring to newspaper reports of this remark. He said: "This reference to the increase and extent of divorce in this country has attracted much attention. But some of the newspapers have erred in the statistics given. For it was not 'in the last twenty years' that there were 328,716 divorces granted in the United States, but in the twenty years 1867-1886. These are from 'The Report on Marriage and Divorce in the United States and Europe,' p. 1074, made by the Department of Labor in 1889. This report was secured chiefly through the efforts of the National League for the Protection of the Family. The league has been trying of late to have a further investigation ordered by Congress, to bring the report of 1889 down to date. That report passed through three or four editions, and is now out of print. "For the last twenty years, judging from the figures of the few States which supply them annually, the number of divorces must be much larger than for the period of 1867-1886. For example, Ohio granted 1809 in 1886, and 3217 in 1889. Michigan had 1339 in 1886 and 2418 in 1900. Indiana granted 1655 in 1886, and no less than 4699 in 1900, more than three times as many as there were in 1882, or in any earlier year." 18 THE THING TO DO bound to house and feed the crank and the criminal better than he can the children of his loins and the wife of his bosom. Are the burdens thus laid out for the conservative and moderating influence of the educated women of the land too weighty to be borne? I do not believe it. I am full of good hope for the future-more hopeful to-night than before I saw the late work of Vassar, more hopeful at every addition to the splendid array of its followers, Smith, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr, Barnard, Radcliffe, and the rest, with which our country now leads the world in the advanced education of women. But that you may not fall short of the full measure of your high capacities and still higher calling, let me ask your attention to a fact, and put to you a question about it. It is a fact, almost a commonplace,-at any rate, it is a fact which I venture to affirm, and believe to be beyond intelligent contradiction,—that the young ladies here at eighteen average higher than any corresponding body of boys at the same age in any corresponding institution. My question is, How will it be at twenty-eight? On your answer to that question depends our hope that the educated women of the country may furnish the conservative force for our land which the English philosopher led us to expect and the Frenchman to see that we needed. Is it not the frequent experience that from the moment of entering society the girl almost stands still,- is, at least, surely and generally passed by the boy,—and that in maturity and middle life the relative positions are apt to be reversed? The question is not raised with any thought of suggesting competition. Among all the disagreeable things brought forward by the new school, the most hateful is this thought of rivalry between the sexes, or of any necessary or natural antagonism of interests. My closing suggestion, then, with reference to the opportunities before you, and the country's need of you, is, not the duty of rivalry, but the duty of growth. For, never forget, it was merely of the body, not of the intellectual or spiritual man, the declaration was made that you cannot by taking thought add one cubit to your stature. When a tree ceases to grow, your science teaches you that it should be harvested. When the sun ceases to rise, its shadows fall mournfully eastward and the day is surely drawing to its close. When you cease to grow, you have already begun to decay. Grow, then, while you live,-grow to the full height of the duties we have seen. The land never needed you as it does to-day; you will never see a day in which it will not need you more and more. |