Wise man as Mill was he did not foresee that his greatest object, the enfranchisement of women, would be carried at the antipodes long before there was victory either in England or America.  When I received, in 1869 from the publisher, Mr. Mill’s last book, “The Subjection of Women,” I wrote thanking him for the gift.  The reply was as follows:—­ “Avignon, November 28, 1869—­Dear Madam—­Your letter of August 16 has been sent to me here.  The copy of my little book was intended for you, and I had much pleasure in offering it.  The movement against women’s disabilities generally, and for the suffrage in particular, has made great progress in England since you were last there.  It is likely, I think, to be successful in the colonies later than in England, because the want of equality in social advantages between women and men is less felt in the colonies owing, perhaps, to women’s having less need of other occupations than those of married life—­I am, dear Madam, yours very truly, J. S. Mill.”  I have always held that, though the Pilgrim Fathers ignored the right of the Pilgrim Mothers to the credit of founding the American States—­although these women had to take their full share of the toils and hardships and perils of pioneer and frontier life, and had in addition to put up with the Pilgrim Fathers themselves—­Australian colonization was carried out by men who were conscious of the service of their helpmates, and grateful for it.  In New Zealand and South Australia, founded on the Wakefield system, where the sexes were almost equal in number, and the immigration was mainly that of families, the first great triumphs for the political enfranchisement of women were won, and through South Australia the women of the Commonwealth obtained the Federal vote for both Houses:  whereas even in the sparsely inhabited western states in the United States which have obtained the State vote the Federal vote is withheld from them.  But Mill died in 1873, 20 years before New Zealand or Colorado obtained woman’s suffrage.

In treating of my one interview with Mr. Mill I have carried the narrative down to 1869.  With regard to my single meeting with George Eliot, I have to begin in 1865, and conclude even later.  Before I left England Mr. Williams, of Smith, Elder, & Co., offered me an introduction to George Henry Lewes, and I expressed the hope that it might also include an introduction to George Eliot, whose works I so admired.  Mr. Lewes being away from home when I called, I requested that the introductory letter of Mr. Williams should be taken to George Eliot herself.  She received me in the big Priory drawing room, with the grand piano, where she held her receptions and musical evenings; but she asked me if I had any business relating to the article which Mr. Williams had mentioned, and I had to confess that I had none.  For once I felt myself at fault.  I did not get on with George Eliot.  She said she was not well, and she did not look well.  That strong pale face,