.R. Greg, p. 142.

[28] It is a fact not to be lost sight of, says Dr. J.C. Toner of
Washington, that the proportion between the number of American
children under fifteen years of age, and the number of American women
between the child-bearing ages of fifteen and fifty, is declining
steadily. In 1830, there were to every 1,000 marriageable women, 1,952
children under fifteen years of age. Ten years later, there were
1,863, or 89 less children to every thousand women than in 1830. In
1850, this number had declined to 1,720; in 1860, to 1,666; and in
1870, to 1,568. The total decline in the forty years was 384, or about
20 per cent of the whole proportional number in 1830, a generation
ago. The United-States census of 1870 shows that there is, in the city
of New York, but one child under fifteen years of age, to each
thousand nubile women, when there ought to be three; and the same is
true of our other large cities.--_The Nation_, Aug. 28, 1873, p. 145.

[29] Vid. a pamphlet by the Rev. Dr. Todd.

[30] The New Englander, July, 1873. Art., Iowa College.

[31] Body and Mind. Op. cit., p. 85.

[32] Use of the Ophthalmoscope. By T.C. Allbutt. London. P. 5.

[33] Some physiologists consider that the period of growth extends to
a later age than this. Dr. Anstie fixes the limit at twenty five. He
says, "The central nervous system is more slow in reaching its fullest
development; and the brain, especially, is many years later in
acquiring its maximum of organic consistency and functional
power."--_Neuralgia, Op. cit._, by F.E. ANSTIE, p. 20.

[34] Wear and Tear. Op. cit., p. 33-4.

[35] It is a curious commentary on the present aspect of the "woman
question" to see many who honestly advocate the elevation and
enfranchisement of woman, oppose any movement or law that recognizes
Nature's fundamental distinction of sex. There are those who insist
upon the traditional fallacy that man and woman are identical, and
that the identity is confined to the man, with the energy of
infatuation. It appears from the Spectator, that Mr. and Mrs. Fawcett
strongly object to the Ten-hour Act, on the ground that it
discriminates unfairly against women as compared with men. Upon this
the Spectator justly remarks, that the true question for an objector
to the bill to consider is not one of abstract principle, but this:
"Is the restraint proposed so great as really to diminish the average
productiveness of woman's labor, or, by _increasing its