Medical Women: Two Essays — Inside the Classic

The Argument from Precedent and Principle

Jex-Blake does not rely solely on appeals to justice. She builds a case by questioning the stability of custom: “there is hardly any act, habit, or custom which has not been held meritorious and commendable in one state of society, and detestable and evil in some other.” This relativist move undercuts opponents who claim tradition as authority. She then invokes “eternal principles of right and wrong” that transcend public opinion, positioning her cause as a matter of fundamental equity rather than innovation. The excerpts show her weaving together philosophical argument with the practical language of contracts and obligations. She frames the University’s actions as a broken contract: “a University can, with formal solemnity, and with the concurrence of all its component parts, decree the admission of women to study for the profession of medicine, and then deny them access to those means by which alone they can enter that profession.” This legalistic framing is central to her strategy.

The Mechanics of Institutional Resistance

The excerpts reveal a detailed chronology of obstruction. Jex-Blake describes how the Senatus, “though far more friendly, had not a sufficient majority of liberal votes,” while the University Court offered “only such concessions as were quite valueless for our end.” She notes the “strong medical opposition” that influenced the Senatus. The turning point came when the women “brought an action of Declarator against the Senatus,” seeking a legal declaration that the University was bound to enable them to complete their education. Jex-Blake quotes a minute from dissenting Senatus members who “refused utterly to be parties to the defence of this action,” listing three reasons: they saw no just cause for opposing admission, they felt aid was due to enrolled women, and they doubted the University’s legal power to deny degrees. This internal dissent is a key piece of evidence that the opposition was not unanimous.

The Role of Public Sympathy and Legal Strategy

Jex-Blake emphasizes the “very widely spread and daily increasing sympathy of the community at large” and “constant offers of help from friends of every kind.” This public support contrasts with the “utterly relentless” opponents in high places. The legal action is presented as the only remaining option after a year of failed supplications. She quotes the Scotsman as “our great champion,” using its language to frame the core legal question: whether a University can exact fees and demand obedience without incurring responsibility. The excerpts show Jex-Blake carefully documenting the sequence of appeals to different bodies, creating a paper trail that supports her claim of good faith. The action of Declarator is not just a legal maneuver; it is a rhetorical device that forces the University to defend its position in a public forum.

Readers should attend to the interplay between Jex-Blake’s philosophical opening and the granular procedural narrative that follows. The essays are not a unified treatise but two distinct pieces, the first more polemical, the second more historical. The excerpts suggest that Jex-Blake’s strength lies in her ability to move between abstract principle and concrete institutional detail. The dedication to Dr. Lucy Sewall and the epigraph from Aurora Leigh signal a literary and professional lineage that deserves attention. The legal documents quoted are not mere evidence but part of the argument itself, making the case through the very language of the institutions she challenges.

Reading again about Sophia Jex-Blake’s tireless campaign in Edinburgh, I was struck by how much patient, methodical effort went into each small step forward. It brought to mind an old ophthalmology text I once leafed through, where every vapour and remedy was tried with similar earnest hope. That quiet persistence feels the same — Treatment of the diseases of the eye, by means of prussic acid vapour, and other medicinal agents — Reading Notes — a gentle reminder of how careful hands once mended what we now take for granted.