Her Oxford

4. A Turning Point . . . and a Third Sister

46 4 A Turning Point . . . and a Third Sister T o those who had worked so hard to organize the Lectures for Ladies, it seemed a wonderful concession when Oxford instituted the special women’s examinations in 1875. There were problems, however. As Edith Pearson (LMH 1879) later explained: “Nobody very clearly understood what was their scope or the standard expected. Consequently it was not easy to bear them very steadily in mind in working.”1 The women’s examinations became more of a known quantity over time, but less than ten years later, many people believed that higher education for women at Oxford was doomed unless women were permitted to take the same examinations as men and under the same conditions. Just as ­ Emily Davies had preached for so long, many outside the university, particularly prospective employers, believed that the women’s examinations were not equal in breadth or rigor to the men’s. In 1881, women had been formally admitted to the tripos examinations at Cambridge, and a movement began at Oxford to allow women to take some of the men’s examinations. Examination Debate In 1883, the AEW Committee passed a resolution requesting the Delegacy of Local Examinations to open men’s honour exams to women, leaving it to the delegates’ discretion to determine which exams to open and under what conditions. When the delegates passed along the AEW proposal to the Hebdomadal Council, it was refused.2 Undaunted, the AEW regrouped and presented the following petition to Council, signed by 122 members of Congregation, Oxford’s legislative body: We, the undersigned Masters of Arts of the University of Oxford, being likewise Members of Congregation, considering the great advantage to women of having their acquirements tested by a known and recognized standard, respectfully petition Council to lay before the university some scheme by which women may be admitted to some, at least, of men’s Honour Examinations.3 A Turning Point . . . and a Third Sister 47 The Hebdomadal Council accepted this request and, on February 13, 1884, gave notice of a statute to be promulgated on February 26.4 This statute would allow the delegacy to open to women honour moderations in classics (the first of two examinations in literae humaniores) and in mathematics , and the final honour schools in mathematics, natural science, and modern history.5 No terms of residence were mentioned, nor did the statute prescribe responsions or any intermediate examinations. The delegacy would simply be empowered to substitute some of the men’s examinations for the special women’s exams. Congregation met to vote on the preamble to the statute on February 26, 1884, and conservative opponents at the meeting quickly voiced their objections. Canon Liddon of Christ Church, who had never favored higher education for women, argued that women were happier when they had indirect power and that this proposal would give them direct power. He also maintained that women were men’s helpmates and should never seek to become their rivals. The senior proctor, still adhering to the notion of woman’s physical and mental inferiority, expressed doubts that women could bear up under the strain of taking the men’s examinations. On the other side, however, the warden of Merton couldn’t understand why all the men’s examinations shouldn’t be open to women, and Professor Dicey of Trinity defended the proposal by saying that it was “both generous and just” to allow women a “small share of what men were entitled to.”6 Congregation passed the preamble by a vote of 100 to 46 and on March 11 approved the statute by 107 to 72. Nevertheless, the battle lines had been drawn. Convocation was scheduled to vote on the statute on April 29, and in the interim, both sides circulated letters and fly sheets, many of which appeared in the Times and the Guardian.7 On April 16, the Times printed a long anonymous article in which the author, presumably male, outlined a number of objections to the statute. First, because residence was not required for women, the author feared that undergraduates would eventually have no residence requirements and that the university would become merely an examining body. He then questioned whether the intellectual sphere was suitable for “the more refined, delicate and domestic nature of women” and worried that competition would “involve danger to their health, and so to their fitness to discharge the duties of family life.” In the same vein, he expressed concerned that, if all...