Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Portraits
- Acknowledgements
- Sources
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- I The Political Arena
- II An Uneasy Beginning
- III Degrees for Women
- IV The Parliamentary Seat to 1886
- V The University and Secondary Education
- VI Examining and Teaching – the Long and Crooked Road to Compromise
- Appendix
- Index
11 - Constitutional Complications: Parliament or Charter?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 March 2023
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Portraits
- Acknowledgements
- Sources
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- I The Political Arena
- II An Uneasy Beginning
- III Degrees for Women
- IV The Parliamentary Seat to 1886
- V The University and Secondary Education
- VI Examining and Teaching – the Long and Crooked Road to Compromise
- Appendix
- Index
Summary
The Senate did not have the question of degrees for women on its agenda at its meetings on 25 April and 9 May, 1877. But on 8 May the Annual Meeting of Convocation saw the whole debate over the entry of women to medical degrees widened by the raising of sophisticated issues of timing and by the introduction of constitutional controversy. Not at first, however, because Nesbitt and Bennett began by moving the resolution previously adopted by the rather grudgingly small vote in the Annual Committee, recommending Convocation to thank the Senate for deciding to admit women to degrees in Medicine. An amendment was immediately proposed by two doctors, quoting the memorial signed by 230 medical graduates which had been put before the Senate, and proposing that Convocation should recommend that no resolution in Senate to admit women to medical degrees should be adopted.
It must have become apparent, after a while, that neither of these formulations would be accepted. The house was, clearly, nicely balanced. Obviously enough, there were present representatives of both pro- and anti-women camps. But the pro camp included those who were unwilling to see medical degrees introduced for women before other degrees; and no doubt those opposed to the entry of women could see the possibility of exploiting that unwillingness to force abandonment of the whole venture.
The original motion and amendment were quickly found to be inappropriate, and were withdrawn. Nesbitt and Bennett, building on Convocation’s previous commitment, then came up with a new proposition:
. . . Convocation desiring that Women should be admitted to Degrees in all Faculties, thanks Senate for their resolution to admit Women to degrees in Medicine.
This, if passed, might well have been taken as giving Senate a green light to go ahead with the acceptance of women as candidates for medical degrees, leaving the question of entrance to other degree examinations to be pursued later.
But two medical men, William Scovell Savory and Robert Barnes, saw a splendid opportunity to combine the supporters of those who genuinely wanted to ensure an early entry for women to all degrees, with those who wanted, by any means, to delay and perhaps upset the decision to admit women to medicine.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The University of London, 1858-1900The Politics of Senate and Convocation, pp. 128 - 139Publisher: Boydell & BrewerPrint publication year: 2004