Do not let us for a moment imagine that because man is ceasing to remove his hat at her entrance into crowded elevators, or because he hustles her or allows her to hang by the straps in crowded cars, that he is tending to forget this supernaturalism of woman.  Such change in his manners merely means his respect for her disguise, her disguise as a business woman.  By day she desires to be regarded as just that, and she resents as untimely the recognition of her sex, her mystery, and her marvel during business hours.  Man’s apparent impoliteness, therefore, is actually a delicate modern form of chivalry.  But of course his real feelings are only respectfully masked, and, let her be in any danger or real discomfort, or let any language be uttered unseemly for her ears, and we know what promptly happens.  Barring such accidents, man tacitly understands that her incognito is to be respected—­till the charming moment comes when she chooses to put it aside and take at his hands her immemorial tribute.

So, you see, she is able to go about the rough ways, taking part even in the rough work of the world, literally bearing what the fairy tales call a charmed life.  And this, of course, gives her no small advantage in the human conflict.  So protected, she is enabled, when need arises, to take the offensive, with a minimum of danger.  Consider her recent campaign for suffrage, for example.  Does any one suppose that, had she been anything but woman, a sacrosanct being, immune from clubs and bullets, that she would have been allowed to carry matters with such high victorious hand as in England—­and more power to her!—­she has of late been doing.  Let men attempt such tactics, and their shrift is uncomplimentarily short.  It may be said that woman enjoys this immunity with children and curates, but, even so, it may be held that these latter participate in a less degree in that divine nature with which woman is so completely armoured.

          How with this rage shall beauty hold a plea,
          Whose action is no stronger than a flower?

exclaims Shakespeare.

But there is indeed the mystery, for, though its “action is no stronger than a flower,” the power wielded by beauty in this world, and therefore by woman as its most dynamic embodiment, is as undeniable as it is irresistible.  “Terrible as an army with banners” was no mere figure of lovesick speech.  It is as plain a truth as the properties of radium, and belongs to the same order of marvel.  Such scientific discoveries are particularly welcome as demonstrating the power of the finer, as contrasted with the more brutally obvious, manifestations of force; for they thus illustrate the probable nature of those spiritual forces whose operations we can plainly see, without being able to account for them.  A foolish phrase has it that “a woman’s strength is in her helplessness.”  “Helplessness” is a curious term to use for a mysteriously concentrated or super-refined form of strength.  “Whose action is no stronger than a flower.”  But is the action of a flower any less strong because it is not the action of a fist?  As a motive force a flower may be, and indeed has time and again been, stronger than a thousand fists.  And what then shall we say of the action of that flower of flowers that is woman—­that flower that not only once or twice in history has