It is pitiful to see the lack of manliness exhibited by men in conceding to women educational privileges in common with themselves. One of our denominational universities, which had previously granted certain educational advantages to women, curtailed these advantages at the behest of the male students who did not care to have their sisters take rank as high as themselves. No fault was found, or could be found, with the standard of scholarship. In fact, when both sexes come together and equal chances are given to both, women acquire and assimilate knowledge quite as readily as do men. That the faculty of a great college should give way to the prejudices of a lot of undeveloped, conceited young men shows both mental and moral weakness; but how can one expect better results when boys see their fathers dictate to their mothers as to what they shall and shall not do? Yes, the world is more civilized than it was when a man could give a woman a bill of divorcement if she cooked him a poor dinner, but it has advanced little, if any, beyond the "goods and chattels" stage, when a man owned his wife and it was her bounden duty to obey him, right or wrong. The world needs more truth and with it more freedom for women.

In the higher freedom of life there will be no dictation either on the part of men or women, there will be that perfect cooperation which will make for the harmony of the whole life. There is but one law for male and female, and both must be judged by that law. A woman, spiritually, mentally, and physically, in the common order of things, will be the equal of the man. She is not the equal of man now, because she is surrounded by many and grievous limitations which make equality impossible. Many of these limitations have been set by man; some are of her own making. But she is beginning to realize that independence of thought and independence of action are indispensable to her happiness and well-being. She is also showing in many and varied ways her ability to compete successfully with man in spite of the injustice done her by the refusal on the part of her employers to pay her equal wages for equal work.

In a study of the history of the nations we find that those who have become the most highly civilized have had the greatest personal liberty.

To the people who think that women need no greater rights than they have, and who prate about man as being the natural protector of woman, one might say, Why does he not protect her by paying her equal wages with man in positions where she is equally competent? No, the natural-protection argument is not sufficient in a world where selfishness is still the mode of power. When throughout our whole country laws are made that are as just to women as they are to men, it will be because women have helped to make such laws, only a woman best understands the needs of a woman, and should have a say in the making of laws.

That woman is gradually coming into her own and taking her rightful place is evidenced in many ways.

Recently Japan threw open its doors of higher education to women, claiming that the nations which hold their women in subjection and deny them the educational advantages granted their men become weak and powerless, citing Turkey and other Eastern countries as proof of the truth of this statement.

The well-being of the race can only become an accomplished fact when men and women are able to enter into and appreciate one another's thoughts and feelings. The readjustments which have taken place are bringing to man the truer development of his inmost feelings, and to woman is coming that which has been denied her so long: the capacity to think as clearly and reason as logically as her brother man.

These two conditions are always the essentials of perfect equality.

Many people are asking whether the new order of things is not going to play havoc with the domestic relations and home life; whether the rearing and caring for children will not be seriously endangered. It is also contended by some that the mingling of men and women on an equal footing, as students and bread-winners, takes away from womanly refinement and delicacy of feeling, and blunts her intuition and finer sensibilities. Another question might be asked which would offset this: How much more will man profit through such contact? Would not the gain to humanity as a whole be greater than the loss?

With equality, too, will come the true comradeship, the real, mutual, helpfulness that must bring good to both. A woman under such circumstances could never become the mere plaything of a man. She would take her rightful place for the first time in history, and from then on change would follow change; each one bringing something better to the world. The home life must of necessity be benefited, for woman, far from losing her love-nature, through being free, should become more independent and self-reliant, better equipped for living a truer, fuller life. There would be less probability of her marrying solely that she might have a home.

Men have often wondered why women have been so harsh in their judgment and condemnation of one of their own sex who leaves the path of virtue, and also why they so easily forgive men who have violated every code of morality. Without going into an exhaustive analysis of the different causes of this attitude, two seem to stand preeminent: First, because of her higher intuitive development, woman realizes to a fuller degree than does man the innate purity of the inner life, and the ideal relationship which should exist between man and woman. Anything which does violence to that ideal shocks her finer sensibilities. In the second instance, man's thought of possession - and this attitude held to through the ages - and that woman should keep her life pure and spotless, has acted on the mind of woman in the nature of a suggestion.

If this suggestion had been an unselfish one, doubtless it would have been of untold benefit to her, but because it was rooted and grounded in selfishness it resulted in a standard of judgment wherein the good became perverted by a lack of charity and an unforgiving spirit. The standard of judgment she formed for her own sex is not applied impartially to the other sex. Again, suggestion is responsible for this other standard. Man's belief in his own superiority, and his independence and selfishness in consulting his own pleasures and personal desires, tended to establish a condition of mind that might be summed up by the saying, "The king can do no wrong." This condition of mind would change of necessity when woman brought reason and logic to bear on the subject. She would certainly deal as impartially with one sex as the other. She would recognize the one law as applying to both. The law of God is alike for all people; He is no respecter of persons. The sun shines on the just and the unjust; He sendeth His rain on the good and on the evil. Why, then, should not a woman be equal with man under the law of man? Why should she be tried by any law, in the making of which she has had no part? Is man so much wiser, that he can not err? Is his judgment infallible? No. There should be one law for rich and poor and one law for men and women, and all should have some say in the making of law, so that all may be equally protected under it.