I have heard persons in perfect good faith declare, that a man came to dine every day at the house where they lived, who had never dined there once; that a person had never taken the sacrament, by whose side they had twice at least knelt at Communion; that but one meal a day came out of a hospital kitchen, which for six weeks they had seen provide from three to five and six meals a day.  Such instances might be multiplied ad infinitum if necessary.

[2] This is important, because on this depends what the remedy will be.  If a patient sleeps two or three hours early in the night, and then does not sleep again at all, ten to one it is not a narcotic he wants, but food or stimulus, or perhaps only warmth.  If, on the other hand, he is restless and awake all night, and is drowsy in the morning, he probably wants sedatives, either quiet, coolness, or medicine, a lighter diet, or all four.  Now the doctor should be told this, or how can he judge what to give?

[3] [Sidenote:  More important to spare the patient thought than physical exertion.]

It is commonly supposed that the nurse is there to spare the patient from making physical exertion for himself—­I would rather say that she ought to be there to spare him from taking thought for himself.  And I am quite sure, that if the patient were spared all thought for himself, and not spared all physical exertion, he would be infinitely the gainer.  The reverse is generally the case in the private house.  In the hospital it is the relief from all anxiety, afforded by the rules of a well-regulated institution, which has often such a beneficial effect upon the patient.

[4] [Sidenote:  English women have great capacity of, but little practice in close observation.]

It may be too broad an assertion, and it certainly sounds like a paradox.  But I think that in no country are women to be found so deficient in ready and sound observation as in England, while peculiarly capable of being trained to it.  The French or Irish woman is too quick of perception to be so sound an observer—­the Teuton is too slow to be so ready an observer as the English woman might be.  Yet English women lay themselves open to the charge so often made against them by men, viz., that they are not to be trusted in handicrafts to which their strength is quite equal, for want of a practised and steady observation.  In countries where women (with average intelligence certainly not superior to that of English women) are employed, e.g., in dispensing, men responsible for what these women do (not theorizing about man’s and woman’s “missions,”) have stated that they preferred the service of women to that of men, as being more exact, more careful, and incurring fewer mistakes of inadvertence.

Now certainly English women are peculiarly capable of attaining to this.

I remember when a child, hearing the story of an accident, related by some one who sent two girls to fetch a “bottle of salvolatile from her room;” “Mary could not stir,” she said, “Fanny ran and fetched a bottle that was not salvolatile, and that was not in my room.”