The Project Gutenberg EBook of Education of Women, by M. Carey Thomas

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org.  If you are not located in the United States, you'll
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using
this ebook.



Title: Education of Women

Author: M. Carey Thomas

Editor: Nicholas Murray Butler

Release Date: June 25, 2018 [EBook #57398]

Language: English

Character set encoding: UTF-8

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EDUCATION OF WOMEN ***




Produced by Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)

Attitude of different sections of the United States toward coeducation and separate education of men and women

The higher education of women in America is taking place before our eyes on a vast scale and in a variety of ways. Every phase of this great experiment, if experiment we choose to call it, may be studied almost simultaneously. Women are taking advantage of all the various kinds of education offered them in great and ever-increasing numbers, and the period of thirty years, or thereabouts, that has elapsed since the beginning of the movement is sufficient to authorize us in drawing certain definite conclusions. The higher education of women naturally divides itself into college education designed primarily to train the mental faculties by means of a liberal education, and only secondarily, to equip the student for self-support, and professional or special education, directed primarily toward one of the money-making occupations.

COLLEGE EDUCATION

Women’s college education is carried on in three different classes of institutions: coeducational colleges, independent women’s colleges and women’s colleges connected more or less closely with some one of the colleges for men.

1. Coeducation—Coeducation is the prevailing system of college education in the United States for both men and women. In the western states and territories it is almost the only system of education, and it is rapidly becoming the prevailing system in the south, where the influence of the state universities is predominant. On the other hand, in the New England and middle states the great majority of the youth of both sexes are still receiving a separate college education. Coeducation was introduced into colleges in the west as a logical consequence of the so-called American system of free elementary and secondary schools. During the great school revival of 1830–45 and the ensuing years until the outbreak of the civil war in 1861, free 4elementary and secondary schools were established throughout New England and the middle states and such western states as existed in those days. It was a fortunate circumstance for girls that the country was at that time sparsely settled; in most neighborhoods it was so difficult to establish and secure pupils for even one grammar school and one high school that girls were admitted from the first to both^[1]. In the reorganization of lower and higher education that took place between 1865 and 1870 this same system, bringing with it the complete coeducation of the sexes, was introduced throughout the south both for whites and negroes, and was extended to every part of the west. In no part of the country, except in a few large eastern cities, was any distinction made in elementary or secondary education between boys and girls^[2]. The second fortunate and in like manner almost accidental factor in the education of American 5women was the occurrence of the civil war at the formative period of the public schools, with the result of placing the elementary and secondary education of both boys and girls overwhelmingly in the hands of women teachers. In no other country of the world has this ever been the case, and its influence upon women’s education has been very great. The five years of the civil war, which drained all the northern and western states of men, caused women teachers to be employed in the public and private schools in large numbers, and in the first reports of the national bureau of education, organized after the war, we see that there were already fewer men than women teaching in the public schools of the United States. This result proved not to be temporary, but permanent, and from 1865 until the present time not only the elementary teaching of boys and girls but the secondary education of both has been increasingly in the hands of women^[3]. When most of the state universities of the west were founded they were in reality scarcely more than secondary schools supplemented, in most cases, by large preparatory departments. Girls were already being educated with boys in all the high schools of the west, and not to admit them to the state universities would have been to break with 6tradition. Women were also firmly established as teachers in the secondary schools and it was patent to all thoughtful men that they must be given opportunities for higher education, if only for the sake of the secondary education of the boys of the country.^[4] The development of women’s education in the east has followed a different course because there were in the east no state universities, and the private colleges for men had been founded before women were suffered to become either pupils or teachers in schools. The admission of women to the existing eastern colleges was, therefore, as much an innovation as it would have been in Europe. The coeducation of men and women in colleges, and at the same time the college education of women, began in Ohio, the earliest settled of the western states. In 1833 Oberlin collegiate institute (not chartered as a college until 1850) was opened, admitting from the first both men and women. Oberlin was at that time, and is now, hampered by maintaining a secondary school as large as its college department, but it was the first institution for collegiate instruction in the United States where large numbers of men and women were educated together, and the uniformly favorable testimony of its faculty had great influence on the side of coeducation. In 1853 Antioch college, also in Ohio, was opened, and admitted from the beginning men and women on equal terms. Its first president, Horace Mann, was one of the most brilliant and energetic educational leaders in the United States, and his ardent advocacy of coeducation, based on his own practical experience, had great weight with the public.^[5] From this time on it became a custom, as state universities were opened in the far west, to admit women. Utah, opened in 1850, Iowa, opened in 1856, Washington, opened in 1862, Kansas, opened in 1866, 7Minnesota, opened in 1868, and Nebraska, opened in 1871, were coeducational from the outset. Indiana, opened as early as 1820, admitted women in 1868. The state University of Michigan was, at this time, the most important western university, and the only western university well known in the east before the war. When, in 1870, it opened its doors to women, they were for the first time in America admitted to instruction of true college grade. The step was taken in response to public sentiment, as shown by two requests of the state legislature, against the will of the faculty as a whole. The example of the University of Michigan was quickly followed by all the other state universities of the west. In the same year women were allowed to enter the state universities of Illinois and California; in 1873 the only remaining state university closed to women, that of Ohio, admitted them. Wisconsin which, since 1860, had given some instruction to women, became in 1874 unreservedly coeducational. All the state universities of the west, organized since 1871, have admitted women from the first. In the twenty states which, for convenience, I shall classify as western, there are now twenty state universities open to women, and, in four territories, Arizona, Oklahoma, Indiana and New Mexico, the one university of each territory is open to women. Of the eleven state universities of the southern states the two most western admitted women first, as was to be expected. Missouri became coeducational as early as 1870, and the University of Texas was opened in 1883 as a coeducational institution. Mississippi admitted women in 1882, Kentucky in 1889, Alabama in 1893, South Carolina in 1894, North Carolina in 1897, but only to women prepared to enter the junior and senior years, West Virginia in 1897.^[6] The state universities of Virginia, Georgia and Louisiana are still closed. The one state university existing outside the west and south, that of Maine, admitted women in 1872.

8The greater part of the college education of the United States, however, is carried on in private, not in state universities. In 1897 over 70 per cent of all the college students in the United States were studying in private colleges, so that for women’s higher education their admission to private colleges is really a matter of much greater importance. The part taken by Cornell university in New York state in opening private colleges to women was as significant as the part taken by Michigan in opening state universities. Cornell is in a restricted sense a state university, inasmuch as part of its endowment, like that of the state universities, is derived from state and national funds. Nevertheless, there is little reason to suppose that Cornell would have admitted women had it not been for the generosity of Henry W. Sage, who offered to build and endow a large hall of residence for women at Cornell university. After carefully investigating coeducation in all the institutions where it then existed, and especially in Michigan, the trustees of the university admitted women in 1872. The example set by Cornell was followed very slowly by the other private colleges of the New England and middle states. For the next twenty years the colleges in this section of the United States admitting women might be counted on the fingers of one hand. In Massachusetts Boston university opened its department of arts in 1873, and admitted women to it from the first; but no college for men followed the example of Boston until 1883, when the Massachusetts institute of technology, the most important technical and scientific school in the state, and one of the most important in the United States, admitted women. This school, like Cornell, is supported in part from state and national funds. Very recently, in 1892, Tufts college was opened to women. In the west and south the case is different, and the list of private colleges that one after another have become coeducational is too long to be inserted here. Among new coeducational foundations the most important are, on the Pacific coast, the Leland Stanford junior university, opened in 1891, and, in the middle west, Chicago university, opened in 1892. To show the differing attitude toward coeducation of the different sections of the United States, I have arranged the 480 coeducational colleges and separate colleges for men given in the U.S. education report for 1897–98 in a table on the opposite page. In matters like women’s education, which are powerfully affected by prejudice and conservative opinion, we find not only a sharp cleavage in opinion and practice between the west and the east of the United States, but also distinct phases of differing opinion, corresponding in the main to the old geographical division of the states into New England, middle, southern and western.^[7]

9In the western states it will be observed there are, excluding Roman Catholic colleges and seminaries, out of 195 colleges 182 coeducational and only 13 colleges for men only. All of these except 3 are denominational; 6 belong to the Lutheran, 1 to the Dutch Reformed, 1 to the German Evangelical, 1 to the Episcopalian, and 1 to the Congregationalist. The other 3 are, as we might expect, in the most eastern and the earliest settled of the western states; one in Ohio, Western reserve, which teaches women in a separate women’s college; one in Indiana, Wabash college, one of the three most important colleges in Indiana; and one in Illinois, Illinois college. Roman Catholic institutions apart, in 14 states and all 3 territories every college for men is open to women (the one university of the territory of New Mexico, not included in the U. S. education report, is open to women). In the southern states and southern middle states there are, excluding Roman Catholic colleges and seminaries, out of 161, 125 coeducational and only 36 colleges for men only. Among these 36, however, are the most important educational institution in Maryland, the Johns Hopkins university; the most important in Georgia, the University 10of Georgia; in Louisiana the two most important, the Louisiana state university and Tulane university, and in Virginia the very important University of Virginia.^[8] Roman Catholic institutions apart, all the colleges in the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida and West Virginia are coeducational. In New England and the northern middle states out of 64 colleges, excluding Roman Catholic colleges and seminaries, only 29, or less than half, are coeducational. The colleges for men only include (with the exception of Cornell) all the largest undergraduate colleges in this section—Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Princeton, Pennsylvania. Maine and Vermont are liberal to women, 2 colleges (3 if we count the limited coeducational college of Colby) in Maine and 3 in Vermont being coeducational, but the total number of students in college in these states is very small (in Maine only 843 men and 189 women; in Vermont only 301 men and 99 women). The leading colleges of New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey and Pennsylvania are closed, and in Massachusetts only 2 are open and 7 closed.^[9]

Of the four hundred and eighty colleges for men enumerated by the commissioner of education 336, or 70 per cent (or, excluding Catholic colleges, 80 per cent), admit women. It would be misleading, however, to count among American institutions for higher education, properly so-called, most of the coeducational colleges and separate colleges for men included in this list, and it would be equally misleading to compare the number of women studying in such colleges in the United States with the number of women engaged in higher studies in England, France and Germany.^[10] In order to obtain a better idea of opportunities 11for true collegiate work open to women at the present time in the United States I have selected from these four hundred and eighty colleges and from the numerous colleges for women classified elsewhere, a list of fifty-eight colleges properly so-called, employing for the purpose the four means of classification most likely to commend themselves to the impartial student of such things.^[11] Of these 12fifty-eight colleges four are independent colleges for women and three women’s colleges affiliated to colleges for men; of the remaining 51, 30, or 58.8 per cent, are coeducational, and a nearer examination makes a much more favorable showing for coeducation. Of the 21 colleges closed to women in their undergraduate departments five have affiliated to them a women’s college through which women obtain some share in the undergraduate instruction given, the affiliated colleges in three cases being of enough importance to appear in the same list. Of these five, four (all but Harvard) admit women without restriction to their graduate instruction, and in addition Yale, the University of Pennsylvania and New York university make no distinction between men and women in graduate instruction. The Johns Hopkins university maintains a coeducational medical school. In this list then of fifty-eight, which includes all the most important colleges in the United States, there are, apart from the two Catholic colleges, only ten (Dartmouth, Amherst, Williams, Clark, Princeton, Lehigh, Lafayette, Hamilton, Colgate, Virginia, all situated on the Atlantic seaboard) to which women are not admitted in some departments. Princeton is the only one of the large university foundations that excludes women from any share whatsoever in its advantages. The diagram on the opposite page shows the steady progress of coeducation from 1870 to 1898.^[12]

I have prepared the diagram for 1870 from the U. S. ed. rep. for 1870, pp. 506–516, and the diagram for 1897–98 from the U. S. ed. rep., pp. 1848–1867, and from the table, opposite page 9 of this monograph. The diagrams for 1880 and 1890 are copied from the report for 1889–90, p. 764. For assistance in the preparation of this and other diagrams, and in working out the percentages given here, and elsewhere, in this monograph I am much indebted to Dr. Isabel Maddison.

If Catholic colleges are excluded, as in the map opposite page 10, coeducational colleges formed, in 1898, 80 per cent, and colleges for men only 20 per cent of the whole number—a still more favorable result for coeducation.

13All the arguments against the coeducation of the sexes in colleges have been met and answered by experience. It was feared at first that coeducation would lower the standard of scholarship on account of the supposed inferior quality of women’s minds. The unanimous experience in coeducational colleges goes to show that the average standing of women is slightly higher than the average standing of men.^[13] Many 14reasons for the greater success of women are given, such as absence of the distraction of athletic sports, greater diligence, higher moral standards, but the fact, however it may be explained, remains and is as gratifying as astonishing to those interested in women’s education. The question of health has also been finally disposed of; thousands of women have been working side by side with men in coeducational institutions for the past twenty-five years and undergoing exactly the same tests without a larger percentage of withdrawals on account of illness than men. The question of conduct has also been disposed of. None of the difficulties have arisen that were feared from the association of men and women of marriageable age. Looking at coeducation as a whole it is most surprising that it has worked so well.^[14] Perhaps the only objection that may be made from men’s point of view to coeducation in America is that it has succeeded only too well and that the proportion of women students is increasing too steadily. Not only is the number of coeducational colleges increasing but the number of women relatively to the number of men is increasing also. In 1890 there were studying in coeducational colleges 16,959 men and 7,929 women; or women, in other words, formed 31.9 per cent of the whole body of students. In 1898 there were 28,823 men and 16,284 women studying in coeducational colleges, women forming 36.1 per cent of the whole body of students. Between 1890 and 1898 men in coeducational colleges have increased 70.0 per cent, but women in coeducational colleges have increased 105.4 per cent.^[15]

15There is every reason to suppose that this increase of women will continue. Already girls form 56.5 per cent of the pupils in all secondary schools and 13 per cent of the girls enrolled and only 10 per cent of the boys enrolled graduate from the public high schools. It is sometimes said that men students, as a rule, dislike the presence of women, and in especial that they are unwilling to compete for prizes against women for the very reason that the average standing of women is higher than their own. If there is any force in this statement, however, it would seem that men should increase less rapidly in coeducational colleges than in separate colleges for men. The reverse, however, is the case. During the eight years from 1890 to 1898 men have increased in coeducational colleges 70.0 per cent, but in separate colleges for men only 34.7 per cent.^[16] This is all the more remarkable, because in the separate colleges for men are included the large undergraduate departments of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia and the University of Pennsylvania. It is women who have shown a preference for separate education; women have increased more rapidly in separate colleges for women than in coeducational colleges. It will be observed, however, that the separate colleges for women, like the separate colleges for men included in my list of fifty-eight, are in the east; it is in the east only that any preference for separate education is shown by either sex.^[17]

16Independent colleges for women—Since independent colleges for women of the same grade as those for men are peculiar to the United States, I shall treat them somewhat more fully.^[18] The independent colleges here taken into account are the eleven colleges included in division A^[19] of the U. S. education reports.^[20] The independent 17colleges for women fall readily into three groups: I. The so-called “four great colleges for women,” Vassar, Smith, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr. It will be seen by referring to the classification on page 12 that these four colleges are included among the fifty-eight leading colleges of the United States; they are all included in the twenty-two colleges admitted to the Association of collegiate alumnæ; two of them, Bryn Mawr and Wellesley, are included in the twenty-three colleges belonging to the Federation of graduate clubs; they are all included in the list of fifty-two leading colleges of the United States given in the handbook of Minerva; they are all, except Bryn Mawr, included in the list given by the U. S. education report for 1897–98^[21] of forty-six colleges in the United States having three hundred students and upward; three of them, Bryn Mawr, Smith and Vassar, are included among the fifty-two colleges of the United States possessing invested funds of $500,000 and upward, and two of them, Vassar and Bryn Mawr, are included among the twenty-nine colleges of the United States possessing funds of $1,000,000 and upward; three of them, Smith, Wellesley and Vassar, rank among the twenty-three largest undergraduate colleges in the United States; one of them, Smith, ranks as the tenth undergraduate college in the United States.

18Vassar college, Poughkeepsie, New York^[22]—Founder, Matthew Vassar; intention, “to found and equip an institution which should accomplish for young women what our colleges are accomplishing for young men;” opened, 1865; preparatory department dropped, 1888; presidents, three (men); 45 instructors (16 Ph. D.s.)—35 women, 2 without first degree; 10 men; 584 undergrad. s., 11 grad. s., 24 special s.; productive funds, $1,050,000; a main building with lecture rooms, library and accommodation for 345 students, and two other residence halls accommodating 189 students; a science building; a lecture building; a museum with art, music and laboratory rooms; an observatory; a gymnasium; a plant house; a president’s house; five professors’ houses; total cost of buildings, $1,044,365; vols. in library, 30,000; laboratory equipment, $33,382; acres, 200; music and art depts., but technical work in neither counted toward bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $100; lowest charge, tuition, board and residence, including washing, $400.

Wellesley college, Wellesley, Massachusetts—Founder, Henry F. Durant; intention, “to found a college for the glory of God by the education and culture of women,” opened 1875; preparatory department dropped, 1880; requirement from students of one hour daily domestic or clerical work dropped, 1896; presidents, five (all women); 69 instructors (13 Ph. D.s.)—64 women, 16, apart from laboratory assistants without first degree; 5 men; 611 undergrad. s., 25 grad. s., 21 special s.; productive 19funds, $7,000;^[23] a main building with library lecture rooms and accommodation for 250 students; a chemical laboratory; an observatory; a chapel; an art building; a music building; 8 halls of residence, accommodating 348 students (new hall being built); total cost of buildings, $1,106,500; vols, in library, 49,970; laboratory equipment, $50,000; acres, 410; music and art depts., but technical work in neither counted toward bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $175; lowest charge, tuition, board and residence (beds made, rooms dusted by students), $400.

Smith college, Northampton, Massachusetts—Founder, Sophia Smith; intention, to provide “means and facilities for education equal to those which are afforded in our colleges for young men;” opened, 1875; no preparatory department ever connected with the college; president, one (man); 49 instructors (13 Ph. D.s.)—27 women, 9 without first degree; 12 men; 1,070 undergrad. s., 4 grad. s.; since 1891 no special s. admitted; productive funds, $900,000; two lecture buildings; a lecture and gymnastic building; a science building; a chemical laboratory; an observatory; a gymnasium; a plant house; a music building; an art building; 13 halls of residence accommodating 520 students; a president’s house; total cost of buildings $786,000; vols, in library, 8,000 (70,000 vols. in library in Northampton also used by the students); laboratory equipment, $22,500; acres, 40; music and art depts., technical work in both, amounting to between one-sixth and one-seventh of the hours required for a degree, may be counted toward bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $100; lowest charge, tuition, board and residence (beds made, rooms dusted by students), $400.

Bryn Mawr college, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania—Founder, Joseph W. Taylor; intention, to provide “an institution of learning for the advanced education of women which should afford them all the advantages of a college education which are so freely offered to young men;” opened, 1885; no preparatory department ever connected with the college; presidents, two (one man, one woman); 38 instructors (29 Ph. D.s. 1 D. Sc.)—15 women, 23 men; 269 undergrad, s., 61 grad. s., 9 hearers; productive funds, $1,000,000; a lecture and library building; a science building; a gymnasium; an infirmary; five halls of residence and two cottages, accommodating 323 students; a president’s house; 6 professors’ houses; total 20cost, $718,810; vols. in library, 32,000; laboratory equipment, $47,998; acres, 50; no music department; no technical instruction in art; tuition fee, $125; lowest charge, tuition, board and residence, $400.

II. The women’s colleges not included in the list of the fifty-eight most important colleges in the United States given on page 12, but of exceedingly good academic standing as compared with the greater number of the separate colleges for men and the coeducational colleges included in the four hundred and eighty enumerated by the commissioner of education.

Mt. Holyoke college, South Hadley, Massachusetts—Founder, Mary Lyon; seminary opened, 1837; chartered as seminary and college, 1888; seminary department dropped and true college organized, 1893; presidents, two (both women); 37 instructors (7 Ph. D.s.)—all women; 5, apart from laboratory assistants, without first degree; 426 undergrad, s., 3 grad. s., 9 special s., 3 music s.; productive funds, $300,000; a lecture building; a science building; a museum and art gallery; a library; a gymnasium; a rink; an observatory; an infirmary; a plant house; 9 residence halls accommodating 478 students; total cost of buildings, $625,000; vols. in library, 17,700; laboratory equipment, $33,000; acres, 160; music and art depts., technical work in both, amount limited by faculty, may be counted towards bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $100; lowest charge, tuition, board and residence (beds made, rooms dusted, by students, and in addition one-half hour of domestic work required), $250.

Woman’s college of Baltimore, city of Baltimore, Maryland—Founded and controlled by Methodist Episcopal church; opened, 1888; preparatory department dropped, 1893; presidents, two (men); 21 instructors (10 Ph. D.s.)—11 women, 1 without first degree; 10 men, 1 without first degree; 259 undergrad. s.; 0 grad. s.; 15 special s.; productive funds, $334,994; a lecture building and three houses adapted for lecture purposes; a gymnasium; a biological laboratory; 3 residence halls holding 230; total cost of buildings, $505,703; vols. in library, 7,800; laboratory equipment, $47,000; acres (in city), 7; music and art depts., but technical work in neither counted towards bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $125; lowest charge, tuition, board and residence (beds made, rooms dusted by students), $375.

21Wells college, Aurora, New York—Founders, Henry Wells and Edwin B. Morgan; seminary opened, 1868; chartered as college, 1870; preparatory dept. dropped, 1896; presidents, two (men); 13 instructors (4 Ph. D.s.)—10 women, 3 without first degree; 3 men; 59 undergrad. s.; 0 grad. s.; 27 special s.; 4 music s.; productive funds, $200,000; a main building with lecture rooms and accommodations for 100 students; a science and music building; a president’s house; total cost of buildings, $195,000; vols. in library, 7,300; laboratory equipment, $20,200; acres, 200; music and art depts., technical work in neither counted towards bachelor’s degree; tuition fee, $100; lowest charge, tuition, board and residence (beds made by students), $400.

III. Elmira college, the Randolph-Macon Woman’s college, Rockford college and Mills college are here relegated to a third group because of certain common characteristics. Their endowment is wholly inadequate, averaging considerably less than $50,000 apiece, reaching $100,000 only in the case of the Randolph-Macon Woman’s college. In each of them a disproportionate number of students is studying in the music or art department; special students form too large a proportion of the whole number of students; the number of professors is too small to permit college classes to be conducted by specialists; the college classes are too small; true college training cannot be obtained in very small classes, and moreover, in view of the increasing number of women now going to college, when a college for women does not grow steadily it is reasonable to assume that there must be some good reason for its lack of growth.

Elmira college, situated at Elmira, New York, has, apart from the president, 10 academic instructors (7 women, 2 without first degree; 3 men); 5 teachers of music, 2 of art. There are studying in the college 70 regular college students, 17 specials and 61 special students in music.

The Randolph-Macon Woman’s college, situated at Lynchburg, Virginia, has, apart from the president, 12 academic instructors (2 Ph. D.s.)—7 women, 2 without first degree; 5 men; 9 instructors in music. Of the 226 students,^[24] 55 are regular college students; 44 registered for degree but spending one-fifth of time in 22music or preparatory work; 16 special students; 6 students of art; 49 preparatory students; 46 students of music.

Rockford college, Rockford, Illinois—Opened as seminary, 1849; chartered as college, 1892; 13 academic instructors (2 Ph. D.s.)—all women, 3 without first degree; 4 teachers of music, 1 of art; 35 college s.; 7 special s.; 70 s. in music only.

Mills college, California—Opened as seminary, 1871; chartered as college, 1885; 11 instructors (9 women, 3 without first degree; 2 men); 8 teachers of music; 22 college s.; 135 pupils in preparatory department.

In addition to the existing colleges belonging to these groups, a separate college for women, Trinity, meant to be of true college grade, will soon be opened in Washington under the control of the Roman Catholic church.

It is often assumed by the adversaries of coeducation that independent colleges for women may be trusted to introduce a course of study modified especially for women, but the experience, both of coeducational colleges that have devised women’s courses and of women’s colleges, demonstrates conclusively that women themselves refuse to regard as satisfactory any modification whatsoever of the usual academic course. At the opening of Vassar college itself it is clear that the trustees and faculty made an honest attempt to discover and introduce certain modifications in the system of intellectual training then in operation in the best colleges for men. They planned from the start to give much more time to accomplishments—music, drawing and painting—than was given in men’s colleges, and the example of Vassar in this respect was followed ten years later by Wellesley and Smith. These accomplishments have gradually fallen out of the course of women’s colleges; neither Vassar nor Wellesley allows time spent in them to be counted toward the bachelor’s degree. Smith alone of the colleges of group I still permits nearly one-sixth of the whole college course to be devoted to them. Bryn Mawr, which opened ten years later than Smith or Wellesley, from the beginning found it possible to exclude them from its course.

23In like manner Vassar, Smith and Wellesley in the beginning found it necessary to admit special students—students, that is to say, interested in special subjects, but without sufficient general training to be able to matriculate as college students; but their admission has been recognized as disadvantageous, and has gradually been restricted. In 1870 special students, as distinguished from preparatory students, formed 19.6 per cent of the whole number of the students of Vassar; in 1899 they formed only 3.9 per cent, and only 3.3 per cent of the whole number of Wellesley students. Smith since 1891 has declined to admit them at all, and Bryn Mawr never admitted them.^[25]

Again, Wellesley and Vassar in the beginning organized preparatory departments with pupils living in the same halls as the college students and taught in great part by the same teachers. The presence of these pupils tended to turn the colleges into boarding schools, and the steady and rapid development of Vassar as a true college began only after the closing of its preparatory department in 1888; until this time the number of students in the college proper had been almost stationary; Wellesley closed its preparatory department in 1880; Smith never organized one; Bryn Mawr never organized one; Mt. Holyoke, the Woman’s college of Baltimore, and Wells college have all closed their preparatory departments within the last seven years.^[26]

24It seems to have been at first supposed that the same standards of scholarship need not be applied in the choice of instructors to teach women as in that of instructors to teach men, that women were fittest to teach women, and that the personal character and influence of the woman instructor in some mysterious way supplied the deficiency on her part of academic training. For a long time not even an ordinary undergraduate education was required of her, and there are still teaching in women’s colleges too many women without even a first degree. But it has been found on the whole that systematic mental training is best imparted by those who have themselves received it; the numbers of well-trained women are increasing; and the prejudice against the appointment of men where men are better qualified has almost disappeared.^[27]

25It has been recognized that the work done in women’s colleges is most satisfactory to women when it is the same in quality and quantity as the work done in colleges for men, and it has been recognized also that they need the same time for its performance. Domestic work, therefore, which by the founder of Wellesley was regarded as a necessary part of women’s education, is at present, I believe, required nowhere except on the perfectly plain ground of economy. The hour of domestic service originally required of every student in Wellesley was abandoned in 1896; a half-hour is still required at Mt. Holyoke, but tuition, board and residence are less expensive there. The time given to domestic work is obviously so much time taken from academic work.

In the matter of discipline the tendency has been toward ever-diminishing supervision by the college authorities. Vassar and Wellesley began with the strict regulations of a boarding school; it was regarded as impossible that young women living away from home should be in any measure trusted with the control of their own actions. Smith from the first allowed more liberty, in part because many of her students lived in boarding houses outside the college. In all three colleges the restrictions laid upon the students have been gradually lessened, and at Vassar there is at present a well-developed system of what is known as “limited self-government,” according to which many matters of discipline are intrusted to the whole body of students. Bryn Mawr was organized with a system of self-government by the students perhaps more far-reaching than was then in operation in any of the colleges for men; the necessary rules are made by the Students’ association, which includes all undergraduate and graduate students, and enforced by an executive committee of students who in the case of a serious offense may recommend the suspension or expulsion 26of the offender, and whose recommendation, when sustained by the whole association, is always accepted by the college. The perfect success of the system has shown that there is no risk in relying to the fullest extent on the discretion of a body of women students.

Affiliated colleges^[28]—There are five^[29] affiliated colleges in the United States—Radcliffe college, Barnard college, the Women’s college of Brown university, the College for Women of Western reserve university, and the H. Sophie Newcomb memorial college for women of Tulane university.^[30] The affiliated college in America is modeled on the English women’s colleges of Oxford and Cambridge, with such modifications as are made necessary by the wholly different constitution of English and American universities. These modifications, however, it must in fairness be explained, are so essential as to make of it a wholly different institution.^[31]

27Radcliffe college, Cambridge, Massachusetts^[32]—Affiliated to Harvard university, union dissoluble after due notice; opened by the Society for the collegiate instruction of women in 1879; incorporated as Radcliffe college with power to confer degrees in 1894; board of trustees and financial management separate from Harvard; B. A. and M. A. degrees conferred by Radcliffe; Ph. D. degree as yet conferred neither by Radcliffe nor Harvard; degrees, instructors, and academic board of control, subject to approval of Harvard; no instructors not instructors at Harvard also; undergraduate instruction at Harvard repeated at Radcliffe at discretion 28of instructors; since 1893 women admitted to graduate and semi-graduate courses given in Harvard, at discretion of instructor, subject to approval of the Harvard faculty; in 1899, 64 such courses open to Radcliffe students; 238 undergrad. s.; 54 grad. s.; 129 special s.; productive funds about $430,000; a lecture and library building; a gymnasium; 4 temporary buildings used for lectures and laboratories; a students’ club house; no residence hall, but one about to be built; total cost of buildings about $110,000; vols. in library, 14,138; access to Harvard library and collections; scientific laboratories of Harvard not available; cost of laboratory equipment not ascertainable, inadequate; acres (in city) about 3; tuition fee, $200.

Barnard college, New York city—Affiliated to Columbia university, union dissoluble by either party after year’s notice; opened in 1889; status very much that of Radcliffe until January, 1900, when women graduates were admitted without restriction to the graduate school of Columbia, registering in Columbia, not as heretofore in Barnard, and Barnard was incorporated as an undergraduate women’s college of the university, its dean voting in the university council, and the president of Columbia becoming its president and a member of its board of trustees; Barnard’s faculty consists of the president of the university, the dean of Barnard, and instructors, either men or women, nominated by the dean, approved by Barnard trustees and president of Columbia and appointed by Columbia; courses for A. B. degree and all examinations determined and conducted by Barnard faculty, subject to provisions of university council for maintaining integrity of degree; all degrees conferred by Columbia; after July 1, 1904, no undergraduate courses in Columbia, except in the Teachers’ college, will be open to Barnard seniors as heretofore, complete undergraduate work will be given separately at Barnard, not necessarily by same instructors; 131 undergrad. s.; 76 grad. s.; 73 special s.; productive funds, $150,000; one large building containing lecture rooms, laboratories and accommodation for 65 students, cost, $525,000; vols. in reading room, 1,000; access to Columbia, library; scientific laboratories of Columbia not available; cost of laboratory equipment $9,250; land (in city), 200 × 160 feet; tuition fee, $150.

Women’s college of Brown university, Providence, Rhode Island—Affiliated to Brown university; university degrees and examinations opened to women, and their undergraduate instruction informally begun in 1892; women’s college established by 29Brown university as a regular department of the university in 1897 under control of the university trustees; advisory council of five women appointed by trustees to advise with president of university and dean of women’s college; funds of the women’s college held and administered separately by trustees; all degrees conferred by Brown; women and men examined together; required courses given in Brown repeated to women by same instructors; all instruction given by Brown instructors; all graduate work in Brown open to graduate women without restriction since 1892; women recite with men in many of the smaller elective undergraduate courses; 140 undergrad. s.; 38 grad. s.; 25 special s.; a lecture hall costing $38,000; no residence hall; access to Brown library; scientific laboratories of Brown not available; very inadequate laboratory equipment; no productive funds; tuition fee, $105.

College for women of Western reserve university, Cleveland, Ohio—Affiliated to Western reserve university; established by Western reserve in 1888; degrees conferred by Western reserve; graduate department of Western reserve open to graduate women without restriction; separate financial management; separate faculty 21 (9 Ph. D.s.)—14 men, 7 women; 165 undergrad. s.; 18 special s.; productive funds, about $250,000; a lecture hall, a residence hall accommodating 40 students; total cost of buildings, including land, about $200,000; 3 laboratories of men’s college available at certain times; access to Western reserve library; tuition, $85; lowest charge, board, room rent and tuition (beds made by students), $335.

H. Sophie Newcomb memorial college for women, New Orleans, Louisiana—Affiliated with Tulane university, but situated in another part of the city; founder, Mrs. Josephine Louise Newcomb; opened 1886; under control of board of trustees of Tulane; graduate department of Tulane university open to graduate women without restriction since 1890; separate financial management; separate president and faculty; 8 instructors (1 Ph. D.)—5 women, 2 without first degrees; 3 men, 1 without first degree; 51 undergrad. s.; 34 special s. (10 in gymnastics); 54 s. of art; 80 pupils in preparatory dept.; art dept.; productive funds, $400,000; a lecture building, a chapel, an art building, a pottery building, two residence halls accommodating 75 students, a high school building; total cost of buildings about $225,000; vols. in library about 6,000; tuition, $100; lowest charge, board, room rent (two in one room, beds made by students) and tuition, $280.

30In the smaller group, which includes the College for women of Western reserve university and the H. Sophie Newcomb memorial college, the affiliated college tends to become an entirely separate institution; in its instructors and instruction it differs widely from the institution to which it is affiliated; it is, in fact, a different college called into existence by the same authorities. In the larger group, which includes the Women’s college of Brown, Barnard and Radcliffe, the affiliated college tends to blend itself with the institution to which it is affiliated in a new coeducational institution. The ideal in view is a complete identity of instructors and instruction and the law of economy of force forbids attaining this ideal by the duplication of the whole instruction given. It is less wasteful to double the number of hearers in any lecture room than to repeat the lecture. It is in the Women’s college of Brown that we find the closest affiliation and, accordingly, the nearest approach to coeducation. The corporation of Brown furnished the land on which Pembroke hall, the academic building of the Women’s college, was erected, and accepted the gift of the building when it was completed; Brown has from first to last openly assumed responsibility for its affiliated college in fact as well as name. In the graduate department of Brown there is, as has been said, unrestricted coeducation; and in many of the smaller undergraduate elective courses women are reciting with men. In the graduate department of Columbia there is now unrestricted coeducation. It is in the case of Radcliffe that there is least approach to coeducation. What has made possible the policy pursued at Radcliffe has been the self-sacrificing zeal of many eminent Harvard professors, willing at any cost of inconvenience to give to women what could seemingly on no other terms be given; but the sacrifice is too great, and in the modern world too unnecessary; it is at present almost everywhere possible for the professor interested in educating women to lighten his own labors by admitting them to the same classes with men. Only the affiliated colleges of the second group present in their internal 31organization a type essentially different from that of the independent college—a type intermediate between the independent and the coeducational.

PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

Graduate instruction in the faculty of philosophy—True university instruction begins after the completion of the college course, and very little such instruction is given by any American university^[33] except in the so-called graduate schools belonging to the twenty-three colleges in the United States included in the Federation of graduate clubs.^[34] In the following 16 of these 23 graduate schools women are admitted without restriction and compete with men for many of the scholarships and honors: Yale, Brown, Cornell, Columbia, New York university, Pennsylvania, Columbian, Vanderbilt, Missouri, Western reserve, Chicago, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, California, Leland Stanford Junior; Bryn Mawr and Wellesley admit women only; Harvard admits them to certain courses through the mediation of Radcliffe. There remain, apart from the Catholic university, only 3 graduate schools excluding women: Clark, Princeton and the Johns Hopkins university; and in the Johns Hopkins they are admitted to at least one university department—that of the medical school.^[35]

32In 1898–99 there were studying in these 23 graduate schools 1,021 women, forming 26.8 per cent of the whole number of graduate students.^[36] In 1889–90 the U. S. education report estimates that there were 271 women graduate students out of a total of 2,041 graduate students, or women formed 13.27 per cent of all graduate students; in 1897–98 the report for that year estimates that there were 1,398 women out of a total of 5,816 graduate students, or women formed 24.04 per cent of all students—a remarkable increase as compared to the increase of men graduate students in 8 years.

Graduate fellowships and scholarships—In 1899 there were open to women 319 scholarships varying in value from $100 to $400 (50 of these exclusively for women) and 2 foreign scholarships (1 exclusively for women); 81 residence fellowships of the value of $400 or over (18 of these exclusively for women); 24 foreign fellowships of the value of $500 and upwards (12 of these exclusively for women).^[37]

33Theology, law, medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, veterinary science, schools of technology and agriculture—Ten years ago there were very few women studying in any of these schools. The wonderful increase both in facilities for professional study and in the number of women students during the last eight years may be seen by referring to the comparative table on the opposite page.

It is evident to the impartial observer that coeducation is to be the method in professional schools. Except in medicine, where women were at first excluded from coeducational study by the strongest prejudice that has ever been conquered in any movement, no important separate professional schools, indeed none whatever, except one unimportant school of pharmacy have been founded for women only.^[43] It is evident also that the number of women entering upon professional study is increasing rapidly. If we compare the relative increase of men and of women from 1890 to 1898 we obtain the following percentages: increase of students in medicine, men, 51.1 per cent, women, 64.2 per cent; in dentistry, men, 150.2 per cent, women, 205.7 per cent; in pharmacy, men, 25.9 per cent, women, 190 per cent; in technology and agriculture, men, 119.3 per cent, women, 194.7 per cent.

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

There are many questions connected with the college education of American women which possess great interest for the student of social science.

Number of college women—In the year 1897–98^[44] there were studying in the undergraduate and graduate departments of coeducational colleges and universities 17,338 women, and in the undergraduate and graduate departments of independent and affiliated women’s colleges, division A, 4,959 women, women forming thus 27.4 per cent of 34the total number of graduate and undergraduate students. The 22 colleges belonging to the Association of collegiate alumnæ, which are, on the whole, the most important colleges in the United States admitting women, have conferred the bachelor’s degree on 12,804 women. If we add to these the graduates of the Women’s college of Brown university, 102 in number, and the graduates of the 14 additional coeducational colleges included in my list of the 58 most important colleges in the United States, we obtain, including those graduating in June, 1899, a total of 14,824 women holding the bachelor’s degree.^[45] There is thus formed, even leaving out of account the graduates of the minor colleges, a larger body of educated women than is to be found in any other country in the world. These graduates have received the most strenuous college training obtainable by women in the United States, which does not differ materially from the best college training obtainable by American men (indeed, women graduates of coeducational colleges have received precisely the same training as men), and may fairly be compared with the women who have received college and university training abroad. In other countries women university graduates, or even women who have studied at universities, are very few;^[46] in America, on the other hand, 35the higher education of women has assumed the proportions of a national movement still in progress. We may perhaps be able to guide in some degree its future development, but it has passed the experimental stage and can no longer be opposed with any hope of success. Its results are to be reckoned with as facts.

Health of college women^[47]—Those who have come into contact with some of the many thousands of healthy normal 36women studying in college at the present time, or who have had an opportunity to know something of the after-lives of even a small number of college women, believe that experience has proved them to be, both in college, and after leaving college, on the whole, in better physical condition than other women of the same age and social condition. Since, however, people who have not the opportunity of knowledge at first hand continue to regard the health of college women as a subject open for discussion, a new health investigation, based on questions sent to the 12,804 graduates of the 22 colleges belonging to the Association of collegiate alumnæ, is now in progress. The statistical tables will be collated a second time by the Massachusetts bureau of statistics of labor and sent to the Paris exposition as part of the educational exhibit of the Association of collegiate alumnæ.^[48]

Marriage rate of college women—Here again no positive conclusions can be reached until we know what is the usual marriage rate of women belonging to the social class of women graduates. Everything indicates that the time of marriage is becoming later in the professional classes and that the marriage rate as a whole is decreasing. An investigation undertaken simultaneously with the new health investigation by the Association of collegiate alumnæ will enable us to speak with certainty in regard to the marriage rate of a large number of college women and their sisters.^[49] It must be borne in mind that the element of time is very important, and in the case of women the later and therefore younger classes are all larger than the earlier ones, see table on opposite page.

It will be seen that independent, affiliated and coeducational colleges fall into their proper place in the series, thus showing conclusively that the method of obtaining a college education exercises scarcely any appreciable influence on the marriage rate.

The marriage rate of Bryn Mawr college, calculated in January, 1900, will also serve as an illustration of the importance of time in every consideration of the marriage rate: graduates of the class of 1889, married, 40.7 per cent; graduates of the first two classes, 1889–1890, married, 40.0 per cent; graduates of the first three classes, 1889–1891, married, 33.3 per cent; graduates of the first four classes, 1889–1892, married, 32.9 per cent; graduates of the first five classes, 1889–1893, married, 31.0 per cent; graduates of the first six classes, 1889–1894, married, 30.0 per cent; graduates of the first seven classes, 1889–1895, married, 25.2 per cent; graduates of the first eight classes, 1889–1896, married, 22.8 per cent; graduates of the first nine classes, 1889–1897, married, 20.9 per cent; graduates of the first ten classes, 1889–1898, married, 17.2 per cent; graduates of the first eleven classes, 1889–1899, married, 15.2 per cent.

37Occupations of college women—It is probable that about 50 per cent of women graduates teach for at least a certain number of years. Of the 705 women graduates whose occupations were reported in the Association of collegiate alumnæ investigation of 1883 50.2 percent were then teaching. In 1895 of 1,082 graduates of Vassar 37.7 per cent were teaching; 2.0 per cent were engaged in graduate study and 3.0 per cent were physicians or studying medicine. In 1898 of 171 graduates (all living) of Radcliffe college, including the class of 1898, 49.7 per cent were teaching; 8.7 per cent were engaged in graduate study; .6 per cent were studying medicine; 17.5 per cent were unmarried and without professional occupation. In 1899 of 316 living graduates of Bryn Mawr college, including the class of 1899, 39.0 percent were teaching; 11.4 were engaged in graduate study; 6 per cent were engaged in executive work (including 4 deans of colleges, 3 mistresses of college halls of residence); 1.6 per cent were studying or practising medicine, and 26.6 per cent were unmarried and without professional occupation.^[50]

Coeducation vs. separate education—It is clear that coeducation is the prevailing method in the United States; it is the most economical method; indeed it is the only possible 38method in most parts of the country. Now that it has been determined in America to send girls as well as boys to college, it becomes impossible to duplicate colleges for women in every part of this vast country. If, as is shown by the statistics given in the successive reports of the commissioner of education, men students in college are increasing faster far than the ratio of the population, and women college students are increasing faster still than men,^[51] it will tax all our resources to make adequate provision for men and women in common. Only in thickly-settled parts of the country, where public sentiment is conservative enough to justify the initial outlay, have separate colleges for women been established, and these colleges, without exception, have been private foundations. Public opinion in the United States almost universally demands that universities supported by public taxation should provide for the college education of the women of the state in which they are situated. The separate colleges for women speaking generally are to be found almost exclusively in the narrow strip of colonial states lying along the Atlantic seaboard. The question is often asked, whether women prefer coeducation or separate education. It seems that in the east they as yet prefer separate education, and this preference is natural.^[52] College life as 39it is organized in a woman’s college seems to conservative parents less exposed, more in accordance with inherited traditions. Consequently, girls who in their own homes lead guarded lives, are to be found rather in women’s colleges than in coeducational colleges. From the point of view of conservative parents, there is undoubtedly serious objection to intimate association at the most impressionable period of a girl’s life with many young men from all parts of the country and of every possible social class. From every point of view it is undesirable to have the problems of love and marriage presented for decision to a young girl during the four years when she ought to devote her energies to profiting by the only systematic intellectual training she is likely to receive during her life. Then, too, for the present, much of the culture and many of the priceless associations of college life are to be obtained, whether for men or women, only by residence in college halls, and no coeducational, or even affiliated, colleges have as yet organized for their students such a complete college life as the independent woman’s college. So long as this preference, and the grounds for it, exist, we must see to it that separate colleges for women are no less good than colleges for men. In professional schools, including the graduate school of the faculty of philosophy, coeducation is even at present almost the only method. There are in the United States only 4 true graduate schools for men closed to women, and only 1 independent graduate school maintained for women offering three years’ consecutive work leading to the degree of Ph. D. There is every reason to believe that as soon as large numbers of women wish to enter upon the study of theology, law and medicine, all the professional schools now existing will become coeducational.

A modified vs. an unmodified curriculum—The progress of women’s education, as we have traced it briefly from its beginning in the coeducational college of Oberlin in 1833, and the independent woman’s college of Vassar in 1865, has been a progress in accordance with the best academic traditions of men’s education. In 1870 we could not have predicted 40the course to be taken by the higher education of women; the separate colleges for women might have developed into something wholly different from what we had been familiar with so long in the separate colleges for men. A female course in coeducational colleges in which music and art were substituted for mathematics and Greek might have met the needs of the women students. After thirty years of experience, however, we are prepared to say that whatever changes may be made in future in the college curriculum will be made for men and women alike. After all, women themselves must be permitted to be the judges of what kind of intellectual discipline they find most truly serviceable. They seem to have made up their minds, and hereafter may be trusted to see to it that an inferior education shall not be offered to them in women’s colleges, or elsewhere, under the name of a modified curriculum.

1 EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION—Andrew Sloan Draper, President of the University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois

2 KINDERGARTEN EDUCATION—Susan E. Blow, Cazenovia, New York

3 ELEMENTARY EDUCATION—William T. Harris, United States Commissioner of Education, Washington, D. C.

4 SECONDARY EDUCATION—Elmer Ellsworth Brown, Professor of Education in the University of California, Berkeley, California

5 THE AMERICAN COLLEGE—Andrew Fleming West, Professor of Latin in Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey

6 THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY—Edward Delavan Perry, Jay Professor of Greek in Columbia University, New York

7 EDUCATION OF WOMEN—M. Carey Thomas, President of Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania

8 TRAINING OF TEACHERS—B. A. Hinsdale, Professor of the Science and Art of Teaching in the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

9 SCHOOL ARCHITECTURE AND HYGIENE—Gilbert B. Morrison, Principal of the Manual Training High School, Kansas City, Missouri

10 PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION—James Russell Parsons, Director of the College and High School Departments, University of the State of New York, Albany, New York

11 SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND ENGINEERING EDUCATION—T. C. Mendenhall, President of the Technological Institute, Worcester, Massachusetts

12 AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION—Charles W. Dabney, President of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee

13 COMMERCIAL EDUCATION—Edmund J. James, Professor of Public Administration in the University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois

14 ART AND INDUSTRIAL EDUCATION—Isaac Edwards Clarke, Bureau of Education, Washington, D. C.

15 EDUCATION OF DEFECTIVES—Edward Ellis Allen, Principal of the Pennsylvania Institution for the Instruction of the Blind, Overbrook, Pennsylvania

16 SUMMER SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITY EXTENSION—Herbert B. Adams, Professor of American and Institutional History in the Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland

17 SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES AND ASSOCIATIONS—James McKeen Cattell, Professor of Psychology in Columbia University, New York

18 EDUCATION OF THE NEGRO—Booker T. Washington, Principal of the Tuskegee Institute, Tuskegee, Alabama

19 EDUCATION OF THE INDIAN—William N. Hailmann, Superintendent of Schools, Dayton, Ohio

End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Education of Women, by M. Carey Thomas

*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EDUCATION OF WOMEN ***

***** This file should be named 57398-h.htm or 57398-h.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
        http://www.gutenberg.org/5/7/3/9/57398/

Produced by Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)


Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
1.E.8.

1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country outside the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

  This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
  most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
  restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
  under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
  eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
  United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you
  are located before using this ebook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
provided that

* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
  the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
  you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
  to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
  agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
  within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
  legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
  payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
  Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
  Literary Archive Foundation."

* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
  does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
  License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
  copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
  all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
  works.

* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
  any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
  electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
  receipt of the work.

* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
  distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm

Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.

The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

For additional contact information:

    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
    Chief Executive and Director
    gbnewby@pglaf.org

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org

This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.