un-physiological work. She was unable to make a good brain, that could
stand the wear and tear of life, and a good reproductive system that
should serve the race, at the same time that she was continuously
spending her force in intellectual labor. Nature asked for a
periodical remission, and did not get it. And so Miss G---- died, not
because she had mastered the wasps of Aristophanes and the Mécanique
Céleste, not because she had made the acquaintance of Kant and
Kölliker, and ventured to explore the anatomy of flowers and the
secrets of chemistry, but because, while pursuing these studies, while
doing all this work, she steadily ignored her woman's make. Believing
that woman can do what man can, for she held that faith, she strove
with noble but ignorant bravery to compass man's intellectual
attainment in a man's way, and died in the effort. If she had aimed at
the same goal, disregarding masculine and following feminine methods,
she would be alive now, a grand example of female culture, attainment,
and power.

These seven clinical observations are sufficient to illustrate the
fact that our modern methods of education do not give the female
organization a fair chance, but that they check development, and
invite weakness. It would be easy to multiply such observations, from
the writer's own notes alone, and, by doing so, to swell this essay
into a portly volume; but the reader is spared the needless
infliction. Other observers have noticed similar facts, and have
urgently called attention to them.

Dr. Fisher, in a recent excellent monograph on insanity, says, "A few
examples of injury from _continued_ study will show how mental strain
affects the health of young girls particularly. Every physician could,
no doubt, furnish many similar ones."