This table indicates that Colorado, Wyoming and Arizona, having a population of 260,000 in 1880, produced no women who have been included in this issue of "Who's Who in America. Furthermore, Idaho, South Dakota, New Mexico and Oklahoma, having a total population of 451,000 in 1880, have each produced only one. Thus these seven states with a population in 1880 of 712,000 are represented in "Who's Who" by only four women. On the other hand, New England, which had a scarcely larger population in 1880, contributed 333 eminent women. Similarly, the Southern States, with an 1880 population somewhat greater than that of New England and the Middle Atlantic States combined, produced only 99 famous women in contrast with 844 from these northern states. Not only were few eminent women born in the South about 1880, but still fewer now reside there, 63 vs. 99. The North Atlantic and New England States have attracted many notable women with the result that 1,148 of the 1,687 women listed now live there. In other words, these states produced 54.5 per cent. of the eminent women, but now have 68 per cent. of the nation's total.

This great centralization of production of famous women and of their present distribution may be due to the following in

fluences: The presence of more educational institutions in the northeast, and the greater emphasis placed on education there.

Unquestionably there are sectional differences in ideals. parts of the South, for example, an intellectually ambitious woman is not in favor.

The fact that men outnumber women in the West tends to encourage early marriage in the West. Relatively sparse population and more recent occupation also tend to cause life to be on a somewhat more primitive plane, with less opportunity or incentive for the type of achievement recognized by inclusion in "Who's Who." Western women who do not marry early are more likely than eastern women to have opportunity to become school teachers, clerks or business women.

Selective emigation certainly helps explain the distribution of the birthplaces of the eminent. As a rule, the highly intellectual type do not become frontiersmen. Pioneering calls for physical vigor and daring rather than high education or unusual intelligence. Furthermore, the highly intelligent type generally are in fair circumstances, and it usually is the poor who emigrate, not the well-to-do. Hence, for a number of reasons, there is a tendency for the intellectual type of people not to emigrate, unless it be as missionaries, but to remain where they can make the most use of their ability and education. Thus many have remained in the older states, or have moved into the older communities in the Middle West, rather than going to the Newer West. Consequently, few infants possessing unusual intellectual endowment are born on the frontier or in the Newer West.

The presence of nearly ten million negroes in the South reduces the South's contribution of eminent women in proportion to its total population, for no negress is included in this volume of "Who's Who.”

The climate of the North is more favorable for mental activity than is the often rather enervating climate of the South. It likewise favors physical vigor and thus increases accomplishment. Climate also doubtless has played a part in reducing the production of eminent women in parts of the West. While the climate of the arid and semi-arid west may possibly favor intellectual activity and physical vigor, it can not be disputed that the frequent droughts, unseasonable frosts, etc., have tended powerfully to encourage the emigrating of the exceptionally alert and resourceful people. Such people tend to go into regions where the opportunities are less uncertain.

In addition to place of birth and residence, note was taken of occupation, education and state of marriage. It was found that

53 per cent. of the last 950 women in "Who's Who" are married. Many occupations are followed. Eighteen chief types were listed. The most important eight, with the number engaged in each, and the per cent. of the total are shown in Table 4.

TABLE 4

OCCUPATIONS OF WOMEN IN "WHO'S WHO IN AMERICA'

Number of women Per cent. of women

Occupations

In addition to these eight, there are lawyers, politicians, religious workers, librarians, scientists, lecturers, explorers, musicians, business women and those interested in home economics. Thus there is a very wide range of activities.

From Table 4 and other data a few conclusions appear warranted. One is that women receive recognition for writing more readily than in most activities. Nearly one half of the 1,582 women whose biographies are given are writers. On the other hand, comparatively few teachers have attained the fame of the type indicated by inclusion in "Who's Who," most of the "educators" included being administrators such as deans and presidents. Indeed, a considerable number of women are holding administrative positions.

The higher education of women was also noted, and it was found that 88 per cent. report training above the secondary school. Of the two groups attending college or college and university, exactly one half of the women report training in women's colleges.

This table indicates that few women who do not take advantage of existing opportunities for higher education (beyond the secondary or high school) now attain national fame.

GO TO THE BEE

A CONTRIBUTION TO THE PERMANENCE OF ARISTOCRACY

66 THE

By Dr. DAVID STARR JORDAN

STANFORD UNIVERSITY

HE Leisure Classes, the Chief Support of the Nation they adorn"-such was the topic of a remarkable sermon delivered not long ago to an audience of superior people, by the Reverend Vicar of Girlington, England, whose actual name I do not give lest my feeble words fail to interpret his lofty ideals. From the press notices that came under my eye, it appears that the admized and admirable vicar finds his mission in the salvation of British aristocracy through its complete restoration to the ranks of leisure. In his judgment the aristocrats or superior persons serve society best by standing as examples of human perfectibility. This is the end they should seek, through utter surcease from all worry, all effort and all personal hopes and desires.

The vicar would indeed make of the upper classes a group, not of hereditary rulers, but of elect examplars of what humanity may become, a condition to be open to a chosen few to whom is granted release from the sordid side of life. From such relief the great body of the British people are of course excluded-not from any fault or deficiency of their own, but simply because there is not leisure enough to go around. Thus for the chosen the mass must live; the many gather honey for the few to enjoy. But in fairness and this I take it is the vital part of the vicar's contentionall should have an equal chance in the beginning.

A rationally organized society would then consist of two classes which for convenience the vicar might call the laborers and the leisurers. To the former belongs the capitalist as well as the workman ; all indeed who work with hand or tongue or pen or brain labor alike. The leisurer alone enjoys that perfect serenity which comes from fearing nothing, wanting nothing, hoping for nothing. True happiness rests on a division of duty. A natural cleavage lies between those who create and those who enjoy, each condition having its own peculiar delight. Between the two yawns a great gulf which society crosses only at its peril.

The vicar's discourse harks back to the words of Solomon, "Go to the ant; consider her ways and be wise," an injunction inciting alike to modesty and to thrift, two virtues of which the ant is a

model. She knows her place and keeps it. Aspiration goes with aviation; having no wings, she never tries to fly.

But in addressing the leisurer the vicar would modify his text: "Go rather to the bee; consider his ways and be wise." Physically the bee resembles the ant, but his social system is organized on a more exalted basis. With him, the leisure class is unquestionably the chief support of the society it adorns. And now to make clear the vicar's appeal, I find it necessary to amplify the too meager report given in the Girlington Guardian, and without holding the speaker closely responsible, I may draw for the moment from the fascinating observations of the noted apiarist of Brussels, Maurice Maeterlinck.

Two salient facts at once appear: first, bee society maintains its own aristocracy; second, its leisurers, having no hereditary claim for distinction, are chosen by lot and by no effort of their own. As the young bees are about to hatch, their faithful nurses construct a few cells of extra size and feed the occupants on a special food, the "royal jelly" of the apiarist. These selected individuals, the "queens," then grow up in an atmosphere of leisure. To produce the harmonious and perfect bee for which the toiling workers exist is the culmination of the apiarian system.

In carrying the analogy into human society, the essential point (as I think the vicar would agree) is that among men as among bees, no injustice shall be done. Leisurer and laborer must both exist, but as both are of one lineage, each should have an equal chance for the great prize of existence. That "the rank is but the guinea's stamp, the man's the gold" is literally true. Royal jelly and a royal cell make the bee-aristocrat. The difference between queen and worker is purely one of bringing up; the two are of the same blood, the queen becomes regal without effort of her own.

By like means human society may breed its aristocrats-so reads the lesson to be learned from the bee. The queen exists not for her own sake, nor by inherited right. Neither should a lord among men, his only true function being to round out the humanity of his fellows, show what man has it in him to be if brought up without work or worry, marred by no trace of struggle, no fear of defeat, by nothing which wrinkles the brow, makes callous the hands, nor hardens the heart! Lacking this perfect ideal, end and aim, humanity can never realize itself.

Perfection, by the very nature of things, is denied the laborer. Yet how vital it is that perfection should exist! Plainly, however, only a few can be leisurers, though in life's grand lottery all may start alike. The needs of the hour call for the "man with the hoe, the woman at the washtub. Some must toil and spin that the human lily may be properly arrayed. Mark, too, the perfect rose,

Vol. XV.-29.