wifery in Europe. This is particularly the case with Dr. Haighton of London, and Hamilton of Edinburgh, certainly the two most distinguished teachers in Great Britain. They both reprobate in the strongest terms the introduction of females into the practice, and paint in the liveliest colours the dangers which arise from their inadequacy. The opinion of the profession at large has been expressed in the most unqualified manner. Among ourselves, it is scarcely more than half a century since females were almost the only accoucheurs. It was one of the first and happiest fruits of improved medical education in America, that they were excluded from the practice; and it was only by the united and persevering exertions of some of the most distinguished individuals our profession has been able to boast, that this was effected.
  The question really lies between the true and legitimate practitioners of the profession, and ignorant and assuming pretenders. It is a question whether the hopes of society shall be placed in the hands of those who have devoted their lives to the study, and rest their prospects on the success of an arduous and dignified profession, who have a character to acquire or to lose, who are able and willing to bear the responsibility of their office; or in the hands of those who, having neither education nor character, can assume no responsibility. It is of the utmost importance to separate the consideration of the general principle from that of a particular instance. There is in the profession no wish to persecute or oppress an individual; but the interest of an individual is not to be put in competition with the interest of the