s , LIST OF REGISTERED MEDICAL WOMEN. AT the beginning of a new year, we think that a new list, brought down to date of the ladies who have passed the King's and Queen's College of Physicians in Ireland examinations, or those of any other English licensing body, will be of interest. To these are added the Hospitals and Dispensaries where poor women may have the benefit of consulting physicians of their own sex. 1. Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell, M.D. Geneva, U.S., 1849. Rock House, Hastings. 2. Mrs. Elizabeth Garrett-Anderson, L.S.A. London, 1865, M.D. Paris, 1870. 4, Upper Berkeley Street, Portman Square, London, W. 3. Mrs. Frances Elizabeth Hoggan, M.P. Zurich, 1870, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1877, M.K.Q.C.P.I., 1880. 7, Trevor Terrace, Rutland Gate, London, S.W. 4. Mrs. Louisa Atkins, M.D. Zurich, 1872, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1877. 112, Cambridge Gardens, Notting Hill, W. 5. Miss Eliza L. Walker Dunbar, M.D. Zurich, 1872, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1877, M.K.Q.C.P.I., 1880. 4, Buckingham Villas, Clifton, Bristol. 6. Dr. Sophia L. Jex-Blake, M.D. Bern, 1877, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1877, M.K.Q.C.P.I., 1880. 4, Manor Place, Edinburgh. 7. Miss Edith Pechey, M.D. Bern, 1877, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1877. 8, Park Square, Leeds. 8. Miss Annie Reay Barker, M.D. Paris, 1877, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1878. 7, Calthorpe Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham. 9. Miss Ann Clark, M.D. Bern, 1877, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1878. Street, Somerset. 10. Miss Agnes McLaren, M.D. France, 1878, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1878, M.K.Q.C.P.I., 1880. 3, Walker Street, Edinburgh. 11. Dr. Anna Dahms, M.D. Paris, 1878, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1878. 294, Oxford Road, Manchester. 12. Miss Alice Ker, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1879, M.D. Bern, 1880. 13. Madame Eliza Frikart (née McDonogh), M.D. Zurich, 1879, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1879.` Zofingar, Aargau, Switzerland. 14. Miss Jane E. Waterston, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1879. Medical Missionary, Lovedale, South Africa. 15. Mrs. Mary Marshall, M.D. Paris, 1880, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1880. 2, St. John's Gardens, Notting Hill, London, W. 16. Mrs. Matilda Chaplin-Ayrton, M.D. Paris, 1880, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1880. 68, Sloane Street, London, S.W. 17. Mrs. Isa. Foggo, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1880. Care of Messrs. Grindlay & Co. 55, Parliament Street, London, S.W. 18. Mrs. Jane E. Grant, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1880. 15, Comeragh Road, West Kensington, London, W. 19. Miss Alice Vickery, L.K.Q.C.P.L. and L.M., 1880. 333, Albany Road, London, S.E. Review 20. Miss Fanny Butler, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M, 1880. Medical Missionary, Jabalpur, India. 21. Mrs. Rushbrook, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1880. 145, Seven Sisters' Road, London, N. 22. Miss Edith Shove, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1881. Ladywell Park, Lewisham, S.E. 23. Mrs. Mears, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1881. 3, Hotspur Street, Tynemouth. 24. Miss Alice Marston, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1881. Medical Missionary, Lucknow, India. 25. Madame H. B. Adams Walther, M.D. Bern, 1881, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1881. Neue Mainzer Strasse, Frankfort-am-Main. 26. Mrs. de la Cherois, L.K.Q.C.P.I. and L.M., 1881. 28, Clifton Gardens, Maida Vale, London, W. Medical Institutions for Women and Children officered wholly or partially by registered medical women. The New Hospital for Women, 222, Marylebone Road, London, N.W. Visiting Physicians.-Mrs. Anderson, M.D.; Mrs. Atkins, M.D.; Mrs. Marshall, M.D. Out-patients seen daily. BRISTOL.—The Dispensary for Women and Children. Medical Officer.-Dr. Eliza Dunbar. EDINBURGH.-The Dispensary for Women and Children, Fountainbridge, Edinburgh. Medical Officer.-Dr. Sophia Jex-Blake. LEEDS.-The Mill Street Dispensary, Leeds. Medical Officer.-Miss M. E. Pechey, M.D. BIRMINGHAM.-The Midland Hospital for Women, The Crescent, Birmingham. Honorary Acting Physician.-Miss Annie Reay Barker, M.D. MANCHESTER.-The Dispensary for Women and Children, 74, Canal Street, Ancoats, Manchester. Medical Officer.-Dr. Anna Dahms. NOTTING HILL-The Portobello Road Provident Dispensary for Women and Children, 193, Portobello Road, Notting Hill, London, W. Medical Officer.-Mrs. Marshall, M.D. Of the twenty-six medical women whose names are given above, six were entirely educated at the London School of Medicine for Women and the Royal Free Hospital, and fourteen partially. The Executive Council of the London School of Medicine for Women will offer an Entrance Scholarship, value £30, for competition in September, 1882. For particulars apply to Mrs. THORNE at the School, 30, Henrietta Street, Brunswick Square, W.C. CORRESPONDENCE. SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING THE RETURN OF WOMEN 66 DEAR MADAM,-During the last few months this Society has been steadily working in various ways, striving to strengthen its hands for the coming elections in April. Drawing-room meetings have been held in different parts of London, and several others are to follow. These meetings materially help to enlighten people as to the duties of Poor Law Guardians, concerning which much ignorance prevails. When it is understood, however, that much of the Guardian's duty is matter of pure domestic economy, superintendence of the nursing arrangements, the education of young children, girls as well as boys, it must be confessed that work such as this can only be done well and effectively by Boards composed of persons of both sexes. Several gentlemen who are themselves Guardians strongly urge the necessity that exists for the co-operation of suitable women in this philanthropic work, and promise to exert their influence at the coming contests. Unfortunately, owing to the necessary qualification being a ratepaying one, the number of women both qualified for nomination and willing to give up so much of their time to this work is very small. To any women who are willing and able to become candidates, this Society will render all the assistance in its power, if they will kindly communicate with me or any member of the Executive Committee. This Society is about to publish a leaflet entitled, "Some Practical Suggestions on the steps to be taken by Women to qualify as Poor Law Guardians." I shall be glad to send this paper to any one interested in the question. I am, dear Madam, Yours faithfully, 44, Belsize Road, N.W. Jan. 5, 1882. LAURA BEAUMONT CHAMBERLAIN, THE OFFICIAL SAFE CUSTODY AND COMPULSORY REGISTRATION BY ACT OF PARLIAMENT OF ALL MARRIAGE SETTLEMENTS. 66 TO THE EDITOR OF THE ENGLISHWOMAN'S REVIEW. MADAM,-The peace, prosperity, and future welfare of millions of families in this country are entirely dependent upon the safety of this solemn and important deed, and millions of property upon the integrity of trustees. The great majority of cestui que trusts stand in the position of mere annuitants, and any redress afforded them where necessary by the Court of Chancery is a cruel mockery, because of its costliness. Marriage settlements should never be in the safe keeping and custody of trustees, but in that of an official, say, of the Trustee Court, wherein summary and cheap redress should be afforded in all disputes between trustee and cestui que trust. The writer knew of a case several years since where a trustee solicitor appropriated ninety thousand pounds of trust monies, brought the family to the workhouse, and absconded to Australia ; of another, a near connection of the writer's, where the trustee sold out the provision of the widow and children, drove them to menial positions for life, and absconded to Australia; and knows of other cases where Trustees, by their litigious conduct, intentional or otherwise, sometimes conspiring together, sometimes making a lucrative income out of the trusteeship, beggared, if not ruined, the helpless and innocent cestui que trusts, who are, for the most part, generally women. The insertion of this letter would greatly oblige, Madam, 6, Cromwell Terrace, Southtown, Great Yarmouth, 1881. AUGUSTUS J. HARVEY, F.R.G.S. THE AGAR-ELLIS CASE. This case was heard in the Court of Probate and Divorce Division, before the Right Hon. the President, on January 11th. Mr. INDERWICK, Q.C., with whom was Mr. Searle, stated that in this cause he had to bring before the Court a motion in respect of the mother's access to her children. The matter stood in this way:The petitioner, the Hon. Mrs. Agar-Ellis, had on the files of the Court a petition for a judicial separation from the respondent. Mr. and Mrs. Agar-Ellis were married some years ago. The lady, a daughter of the late Lord Camoys, was a Roman Catholic, and Mr. Agar-Ellis was a Protestant; but the marriage was arranged on the footing that the children of the marriage should be brought up as Roman Catholics. Mr. Agar-Ellis having entered into that arrangement, the three children of the marriage were baptized in the Roman Catholic faith. However, after they had been instructed in that faith, Mr. Agar-Ellis changed his views, and would not allow them to be brought up Roman Catholics. That determination led to considerable litigation. Mrs. Agar-Ellis invoked the aid of the Court of Chancery; but an order was made by one of the Vice-Chancellors, and confirmed subsequently by the Lords Justices on appeal, in which the law was stated to be that the father, notwithstanding his ante-nuptial arrangement, had the right to control the education of his children, and was, therefore, at liberty to give effect to his change of mind on the subject. The ruling of the Lords Justices was made sometime in 1879. The children were taken out of the custody of the mother, but Vice-Chancellor Malins made an order giving her certain access to them. Afterwards Mrs. Agar-Ellis separated from her husband, and presented to this Court a petition in which she charged him with adultery. The cause was now on his Lordship's list, but could not be heard for some little time. In these circumstances, an application was made to his Lordship before the rising of the Court for the Long Vacation, that Mrs. Agar- Ellis might have access to the children during the then coming holidays. His Lordship made such an order, with the condition that in her interviews with them Mrs. Agar-Ellis should not interfere with their religion. When, on the last day of the Michaelmas Sittings, counsel for the lady applied for a renewal of this order so as to extend it to the Christmas holidays, counsel for Mr. Agar-Ellis opposed it on an affidavit from the solicitor of the respondent that there were grounds for believing that in August Mrs. Agar-Ellis violated the condition as to religion, and did interfere with the religious education of the children. As there was not time to answer this affidavit before the rising of the Court for the holidays, his Lordship directed that the matter should be brought before him at the sitting of the Court today. There were now on the files several affidavits for and against the application. As the eldest child was a young lady who had reached the age of sixteen since the order for access was made before the Long Vacation, it would not be necessary to consider the case of that young lady. The affidavits were then read. The PRESIDENT said, -I shall not trouble you, Mr. Solicitor. This belongs to a class of cases the most difficult and most unhappy that I have to deal with. I know nothing that seems to divide parties more thoroughly than these discussions as to religion. However, I have but one duty to perform, and that is to see that the law-even though it may be a hardship on particular personsis properly administered. Now it is undoubtedly the legal right of the father to determine in what religion his children should be brought up. Painful as in this case it must be to the mother, she being of a different religion from him, to submit to the law, submit she must. Without entering into the details set forth in the affidavits, it appears to me perfectly clear that, whether the mother was to blame for it or not, religious subjects were discussed between her and the children. She does not seem to have interposed as effectually as she might have done to prevent those conversations occurring. But it is not necessary for me to express my definite opinion, or give any direct definition as to the extent to which the mother's conversations with the children on the subject of religion may properly extend. I must deal with the question practically. The cause between the father and mother is at present sub judice, and various events must follow the decision in that cause, according as it may be in favour of the father or in that of the mother. The interval between the present time and the hearing of the suit will be but short. Probably it will only be about a month before the cause comes before me. Therefore, I have only now to deal with this practical question-What is to be done during this month? I am of opinion that things must remain as they are. That may not explain my meaning quite correctly. They must not remain exactly as they are; but the children must be left in the custody of the persons who now have charge of them until the de |