research even more than
on her teaching, work on committees and influence with the students.
Largely, too, it will depend on her tact and popularity with her
colleagues: to a very considerable extent it still rests also on
conditions over which she has no control, and which are part and
parcel of the slow recognition of a woman's right to compete on equal
terms with men.

It seems, as far as can be judged, that future opportunities are
likely to occur when the right candidates for posts are there in
sufficient numbers to make their exclusion on the ground of sex,
already seldom explicitly stated, impossible or inexpedient. Meanwhile
it is probable that individual women will continue, in some cases, to
suffer injustice, while in others, by virtue of their unquestionable
attainments and strength of personality, they may attain the positions
they desire. Slow progress is not altogether bad for the ultimate
cause of women at the Universities: nothing could injure that cause so
much as mistakes at the initial stage. An important appointment
given to the wrong woman, or to one in any respect inferior to her
colleagues, would be used as an argument against further experiment
for many years.

University women teachers can best help to secure equality of
opportunity by rendering themselves indispensable members of the body
corporate. In their case much is required of those to whom little is
given. Above all they must avoid the temptation to live entirely in
the absorbing interests of the present: they must remember that it is
the business of a University to make contributions to learning as well
as to teach. Secondly, they must insist on equality of payment and
status when there is any disposition, overt or acknowledged, to
differentiate on the score of sex. It is not right to yield on these
points, for an important principle is at stake. On the other hand the
time and place for insistence must be wisely selected, and any
claim made must be incontrovertible on the score of justice and
practicability. Lastly, women on committees and elsewhere are
not justified in keeping unduly in the background. When they have
something worth contributing to the discussion, it is not modesty but
lack of business capacity, which makes them silent. "Mauvaise honte"
is as much out of place as undue pertinacity. Women who are unwilling
or unable to assert themselves when necessary, are not in place at
a co-educational University. Most women, how