The Evening critic., 1882-06-08
WOMEN MEDICAL STUDENTS
Appeal for Admission TO clinics i'm
Columbia Hospital for women
why Does Not the District Conn


mfttcc Act?
Some time ago Mr.. stockslager, OF Indiana,
introduced the following bill In the House Of
representatives.,
BE 1t enacted, etc, That from and after tho
passage OF this act women shall be admitted
TO clinics, as resident students in Columbia
Hospital for Women, situated In tho District
OF Columbia, under such rules and regula-
tions as men are now admitted, and with all
the privileges that are now being granted the
male students In other hospitals.
The bill was backed up by tho following
petition.
To he Honorable Committee Of he House Of Rop-
f6sentdttres for Tie District of Columbia.
Your petitioners, women medical students
OF the District of Columbia, would respectfully
state In reference TO House bill No. 2S7o, that
the Columbia Hospital and Lying.in Asylum
is established exclusively for tho treatment
of women and Its support is from the annual
appropriation of Congress.
Tho very valuable advantages In tho matter
Of medical instruction derivable from attend.
the medical stan, which consists wholly Of
men, TO men physicians who may be occasion
ally invitcd TO attend and 10 the two or three
men students who arc appointed to reside in
We desire TO present to your consideration
the fact that, as women physicians, our future
sional attendance upon members OF our own
sex; mat, SO lar as We know, both women
students and women practitioners are practi-
cally debarred from any Of tho advantages
Afforded by the hospital.
You Will readily perceive how necessary to
us, In our future profession, Is the permission
10 attend clinics at this hospital and our ap-
Iointment as resident students.
The civilization Of TO day presents a strange
anamoly in the fact OF public hospital de-
voted exclusively to the medical treatment OF
women, debarring women medical students
from It's advantages, which are exended to a
certain number OF men.
Reasons which might be held to exclude
men from attendance would rather be reasons
for our admission.
We have made application for these priv
ileges TO the board of directors, and are in
formed that the matter was referred by them
TO a special committee, which is expected to
We have reason to expect an unfavorable
report, and in view of that we present this
petition to your honorable body, to which we
subscribe ourselves
Respectfully, your petitioners,
Anna w. Mccormick, Ellen Ii. Sheldon, Juliet
q. Shearer, NJ. D.; Nanctte r. Draper, Mary @.
WhelaR, Kate J. Rorer, Mary II. Hartwell, Kate
D. Barstow, NJ Frances Smith, Lily NJ. Dent,
Katie F. Beatty, Mary L. Wooster, Caroline A.
Burghardt, NJ. d.
The bill went to the Committee on the Dis.
trict Of Columbia, and was by that body re-
ferred to q subcommittee composed of Messrs.
Smith, of New York; Urner CT Maryland, and
Cassidy, of Nevada, and an early report was
promised, but for some reason 1t has been de-
lnyed. The petitioners are certainly entitled
to have some action. II tho committee will
recommend the bill let them do it. If not, let
House chance to vote upon the measure. 1t
certainly would seem that a hospital intended
wholly for women is0 the proper place for
women students to be educated,