John McHenry, for many years Judge of the First District Court of New Orleans, and a noted man both in Louisiana and California. She graduated in 1882, as one of the class speakers, was immediately admitted to the bar, and practised for seven or eight months with marked success, when she married Mr. William Keith, a well-known artist, removed to Berkeley, Cal., and retired from the law. She writes me that she hopes to resume practice before long, but that her husband laughingly says, " Not much you will." Miss Emily Buckhout, of Oakland, Cal., now Mrs. Baker, graduated and was ad mitted to the bar in 1883, but has never practised, owing, she writes me, to " two reasons, — ill-health and disinclination. The more I see of life the stronger is my belief that public life for women is not desirable, individually or for society. I began life a woman-suffragist, but my own experience and observation have worked a radical change in my opinions." I quote this from Mrs. Baker's letter, which was very promptly and courteously sent in re sponse to my inquiries, because out of all the hundred and odd letters which I have received from women lawyers and law stu dents of the present and of the past, it is the only one which has been expressed in discouraging terms, and I cannot help but wonder whether the misfortune of ill-health has not had at least some part in forming the disinclination. From Miss Josephine L. Todman, of Stockton, Cal., I hear nothing, but under stand she is doing a good office business. Three other ladies have been enrolled as students at this school, — Mrs. Ida Hatch, of Los Angeles; Mrs. Clara S. Foltz, who was for several years in practice at San Francisco, and is now, I understand, prac tising in San Diego, but from whom I have not heard; and Mrs. Laura De Force Gor don, of Stockton, Cal. Mrs. Gordon writes me that in 1877, while attending the session of the California Legislature to report its proceedings for her own paper, the " Oak
land Daily Democrat," she assisted in pro curing the passage of an act permitting women to practise law. At the same ses sion the Legislature accepted or founded the Hastings College of Law; but when open for the admission of students, the applications for admission made by Mrs. Foltz and herself were rejected. They brought a writ of mandamus, which was successful; and a year later these ladies were admitted. In the mean time Mrs. Gordon had studied diligently, and was ad mitted to the bar in 1879. She immedi ately began practice in San Francisco, and continued there for five years with very gratifying success. She sought no specialty, but seemed to drift into criminal practice, as the result of successfully defending a Spaniard charged with murder, within two months after her admission to the bar. Mrs. Gordon is now located at Stockton, where she is in steady active practice of a general nature. Among her most noted criminal cases was that of The People v. Sproule, which was indeed in some respects the most remarkable trial in the whole range of criminal jurisprudence in California. The defendant had shot and killed a young man named Andrews, by mistake for one Espey, the seducer of Sproule's wife. It was a fearful tragedy, and the excitement was so great that the jail had to be guarded for a week to prevent the lynching of the prisoner. Mrs. Gordon undertook his de fence, against the advice of the most distin guished lawyers in the State, and obtained a verdict of " Not guilty " amidst the most deafening cheers of men and hysterical cries of women, half-weeping jurymen joining in the general clamor of rejoicing. Mrs. Josephine Young was admitted to the bar at Sacramento about 1882, and has prac tised with her husband at San Francisco. Mrs. Marion Todd, now located at Albion, Mich., but formerly of San Francisco, writes me that she studied two years in the Hast ings College, graduated and was admitted to the bar in 1881. Probably by some mistake
