countries whose languages he is learning. If he takes an historical school he will find that the language side is ignored; if he knows languages he will get no help in perfecting his knowledge; if he does not know any he will have to do without them.

It is not my present purpose to talk about secondary schools, but I must point out that there is a similar defect in present-day school education in modern subjects. The modern languages are taught, but the literature, the history, the law, the manners of the countries, are not taught as they are taught on classical sides. Some day, perhaps, the teaching of modern languages in schools will be systematised on lines that improve upon the classical teaching; and a good sound all-round education will be provided based upon literature, history, and languages.

Then perhaps one of our modern Universities, or even perhaps one of our old Universities, will furnish for students of modern things a general education in modern subjects and languages as good as is provided by Literae Humaniores at Oxford, or the two parts of the Classical Tripos at Cambridge. It might even be better, in some ways.

STANLEY LEATHES.

STATE INSPECTION OF CONVENTS:
A REJOINDER

I HAVE to thank Mr. Kindersley for his courteous reply to my article advocating the inspection of convents which appeared in the October number of this Review. I am gratified to find (1) that he is in agreement with me on certain points, (2) that his contentions strengthen the position of those who advocate inspection, (3) that I can meet his charges of inaccuracy and misstatement.

First, let me say that my plea for inspection is not based on any anti-Catholic bias. Recognising and honouring the convictions and the spirituality of the majority of the members of this Church, realising that convent life has sometimes afforded a refuge for women, and knowing that a great deal of splendid work is done by nuns for the alleviation of the sufferings and sorrows of humanity, I yet maintain that convents, whether Roman Catholic, Church of England, or any other denomination, like all other institutions in Great Britain should be freely opened to inspection. And the demand for inspection should be seriously considered by Catholics as well as Protestants, if only on account of the immense importance of the hygienic aspects of this question.

Let us take these hygienic considerations first and deal with a few practical points. The mortality in convents is greatly above the average owing to the prevalence of tuberculosis. Mr. Kindersley acknowledges that it is undoubtedly a fact' that the death-rate from pulmonary affections has been high in convents. If any State campaign against tuberculosis is to be effective it is surely essential that statistics of the prevalence of this disease in every institution in the country be available. Consumption is an infectious disease which is at the same time preventible. The need of State inspection of convents is illustrated by the fact that the proportion of deaths due to tubercular disease was found on investigation to be nearly 63 per cent., whilst the ordinary death-rate from tuberculosis is 10 per cent. Cornet averred that the frequency of consumption in nunneries was due to bad ventilation and the sedentary, unhealthy life led by the nuns,

and declared that a girl entering a sisterhood at seventeen dies twenty-one years earlier than a girl equally healthy who remains in the world outside. In some cloisters more than three-fourths of the deaths are from this disease.' (Osler's Practice of Medicine, p. 266.)

Mr. Kindersley says that it is only within recent years that the remedy for consumption has been discovered, and that it is not surprising that the nuns shared ignorance of the nature of tubercular disease with the rest of the world. I reply, that in the last fifty years the general death-rate from consumption has been reduced 50 per cent. What are the statistics of decline of mortality in convents where, Mr. Kindersley declares, up-todate methods of dealing with this disease are utilised? Were these statistics available they would be sufficient in themselves to make the demand for inspection of conventual and monastic institutions irresistible.

Roman Catholic countries have recognised the dangers of the prevalence of tuberculosis in convents, and in reply to Mr. Kindersley's denial of my statement from the Daily Chronicle of the 12th of December 1906, that the Pope had decreed the abolition of conventual law of strict enclosure,' I refer him to the Italian paper La Tribuna of the 11th of December of that year, which states that 'Pope Pius the Tenth has ordained the abandonment (abbandono) of the enclosure law for those Sisterhoods who are engaged in the work of education in their own convents, ordering that they shall accompany the pupils for walks at least twice a week. This ordinance is motived by highly praiseworthy reasons of hygiene.'

Severe criticism had appeared in print about that time respecting the ravages of tubercular disease and the high rate of general mortality in convents of women. The Papal decision in question was widely commented upon in the Italian press as a most timely reform.

There are other health aspects of this question. Mr. Kindersley acknowledges that there may also be cases of insanity,' but every doctor knows that the mode of life in the closed Orders at least predisposes women to melancholia or depression, and to other manifestations of morbid psychology. Whilst a true and philosophical religion and a healthy physical life elevate the mind, and give stability and moral strength, an unhygienic mode of life, combined with exaggerations and emotionalism and the unnatural suppression of human instincts and affections, will tend to the development of religious insanity. Here again we have no statistics as to the effect of convent life on women. Every convent may have its medical man, but it must be remembered that the physician cannot enter the enclosure 4 M

VOL. LXXII-No. 430

of a convent without the permission of the Superior. Were convents, like other institutions, efficiently inspected, improved hygiene, better sanitation, and the early diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis, insanity, cancer, and other diseases would result.

State inspection is imperative, in the second place, because it is the duty of the State to ensure that all individuals living under its protection have freedom of action and of will. How are we to know that these women who have taken lifelong vows as girls, physically, mentally, and morally immature, are not suffering because they cannot free themselves from what has become death in life to them? The vows are taken before physiological adult life is attained, at an age when self-knowledge and experience are insufficient to form a proper estimate of the value of the liberty renounced. Mr. Kindersley maintains that if my plea for inspection means that adult women are not to be allowed to choose a mode of life which is neither seditious nor injurious to others without State interference' it would be 'a blow to personal freedom.' This is, of course, a misapprehension, almost an absurdity, my contention merely being that those nuns who wish to leave the life should have the opportunity of doing so, and that if the nuns were enabled to talk with a woman who is a representative of the State without espionage of any kind, English women would at least be assured that no woman could be confined against her will in any such institution in this country.

ness.

Mr. Kindersley says that if a nun wishes to withdraw from an Order there is a simple method' by which her desires can be effected. But he gives no information on this point; whereas St. Alphonse de Liguori, author of The True Spouse of Christ, writes (p. 551): 'Grant that what you state is true: now that you are professed in a convent and that it is impossible for you to leave it, tell me what you wish to do? If you have entered religion against your inclinations, you must now remain with cheerfulYou must then make a virtue of necessity.' How can relatives even know if a nun is detained against her will in these buildings, provided with every appearance and condition. of a prison-locked doors, barred windows, high walls. The whole thing is contrary to the principles of the British constitution, and indicates the need of State protection for these women such as is given to the inmates of asylums and factories. Abuses are made possible in any irresponsible and uninspected community not under the regulations of British law, and not inquired into by responsible British authority. Convents are inspected in Roman Catholic countries. In France the law requires that all authorised congregations shall supply the Government with a copy of their rules and regulations, particulars of their property,

and periodically an account of their income. Mr. Kindersley considers that it would puzzle anyone to say' what the legislation regarding religious houses in Italy amounts to. He has only to refer to the Encyclopædia Britannica (vol. xviii. p. 691, 1911 edition), which says were dissolved in Italy in 1866,' to find confirmation of my statement.

Mr. Kindersley says, again, that he is unable to verify what I say about Belgium, but he can do so by referring, not as he did to 'two Belgians' unacquainted with the law, but to the Parliamentary Report on Monastic Institutions presented to the House of Commons in 1875.

There are people who declare that convents are 'homes' and not institutions, but this can hardly be maintained in face of the commercial undertakings associated with many of them; and, on the other hand, it cannot be denied that inspection of ordinary households by the medical officer of health would make for improved household sanitation and health, for the better care and protection of children, and for the growth of parental responsibility.

Mr. Kindersley states that he has 'positive evidence for the belief that the Roman Catholic body would have been pleased if all institutions (schools and orphanages) had been placed under a Governmental department to be inspected by his Majesty's Inspectors in the same way as are the certified schools,' and I accept the admission as being in agreement with my assertion that, not only the certified schools,' but all schools and orphanages should be efficiently and regularly inspected. I cannot agree with Mr. Kindersley in his assertion that my plea for inspection of convent schools and orphanages has already been met by legislation. What of the schools and orphanages which, having no children of the State' attending them, do not come under the Government at all? Many of these places are satisfactorily managed, no doubt, but there are schools where the children are handicapped by the fact that the teaching is far from answering educational requirements, and where charges of cruelty and neglect could be brought against those in charge. State supervision and medical inspection of all convent schools would help to ensure good nurture and kindly treatment, medical care, and the opportunity for healthy development for children in all such institutions in England.

Mr. Kindersley, in saying that he has 'no knowledge of the case,' appears to include amongst my 'inaccurate statements' my reference to an inquiry into the conditions at a convent school in 1902. Reference to the daily Press of the 15th of August of that year will convince him of the truth of my statements, that the children were not only suffering from infectious