inclined to support his colleague in her opinions, which made his task of convincing the audience of the soundness of his own view hard and arduous. But he did not despair; despite the awkwardness of his position, he proceeded to divide his talk into two points.

The first: a discussion of the idea from the standpoint of its appli-cation. And the second: whether the idea of coeducation has any foundation to rest upon. He said:

Scholars are agreed that the girl, between the age of four and fifteen, surpasses the boy in her bodily and mental growth; the boy, in this stage of his life, passes through an unruly childhood and false preten-sions that run through the course of his growth, until he settles and his gifts begin to overflow; and then it appears to onlookers that the girl's lead halts relatively, and the man's turn comes to devour the distances the girl traversed in his bygone days of heedlessness.

It is a mistake to bring the boy and the girl together before the age of adolescence, because of the difference in temperaments and in physiological transforma-tion, which widen the gulf of understanding between the two.

The Frenchman Buffon explained the slowness of men by saying: "Since men are larger and stronger than women, it was necessary that the time of their growth be longer than the time of women's growth."

And Cabanis said: "Woman is quicker than man both in growth and in decline; no sooner does she come to youth than she begins to crumble; and between her passage

from the age of youth to the age of senility there is no interval worth mentioning."

Hence we see that from this side there results a vast distance between the nature of boys and that of girls, which leads to the creation of a different field for each of them to grow up in.

Now perhaps it will be said to me that this experiment has succeeded in the West — so why should we not try to apply it in our society?

I answer: what has proved true among others may not be taken as a rule for us to walk by, because the difference in nature and in environmental and social upbringing creates a total disparity which makes of the idea of coeducation a voice that can never produce harmony; and, as has been said: what is wanted of the cloud is not the rains — the fruits are what is hoped for from it.

The girl has her mission in society; and it is a mission that differs from the young man's; and the difference of mission requires the creation of a different learning, one that pre-pares the girl to perform her task and the young man his; and the dif-ference of learning leads inevitably to a difference in the methods of imparting this learning. Hence:

The girl has her school; and the boy has his.

For the girl's mission in society is the mission of a mother and mistress of the house.

Fénelon said in his book "The Education of Girls" that woman's learning, like man's learning, must stop at the acquisition of those branches of knowledge that bear upon her function in society.

And I add to that: the difference in kinds of learning leads also to a difference in the method of imparting this learning; and thus the girl must have her school and the boy his.

The lecturer ended by refuting his colleague's citation of America, where the schools follow coeduca-tion; he pointed out that a single law is applied in different ways as countries and mentalities differ — and this is what the Americans did in our country when they divided education into several stages.