Chapter 7 – The Women’s Social and Political Union, 1903-14 Flashcards
What were the methods used by the NUWSS?
- 1867 united various suffrage organisations; strong and united, branches across Britain (400 in 1914)
- Focused much of their campaigning on persuading individual MPs to support suffrage; petitioned Parliament to show demand and lobbied MPs
- During election campaigns, they worked for those who were in favour of votes for women (eg. leaflets)
- Private member bills every year as parties didn’t support, failed
How was the WSPU led and organised?
- Founded by Emmeline Pankhurst & daughters (Christabel, Sylvia), steeped in radical politics of Manchester (ILP)
- Independent of any male political party; all female membership; more CONFRONTATIONAL
LED - Leaders mostly from affluent, middle-class families (had to be economically independent to campaign)– Lady Constance Lytton was aristocratic BUT recruited many w.c. (propaganda work in textile towns, Sylvia establised branch in w.c. East End of London)
ORGANISED
-Highly AUTHORITARIAN: top-down, from 1906 policies decided by unelected Central Committee (Pankhursts), advised by Pankhurst family friends; controlled all publications & finances - Little debate and discussion among members: although Pankhurt ‘wishes women to have votes she will not allow them to have opinions’
?- no official membership list, anyone could attend; many showed unquestioning loyalty, enjoyed learning
?- local branches enjoyed considerable autonomy
?- needed to have quick responses, strong fighting force: ‘as soldiers ready to march onwards into battle’
How successful was the WSPU in its early years
A) First 2 years: 1) conventional, peaceful (meetings- eg. London-, petitions, leaflets, letters)
2) ‘The Women’s Parliament’; Caxton Hall
B) 1905: more militant– 1908: law-breaking, violence
May 1905: Bill about compelling carts on road to carry rear lights debated to talk out suffrage– FORCE needed
1) October: Christabel Pankhurst and Annie Kenney interrupted speeches of 2 leading Liberal politicians at election rally in Manchester: - ejected, addressed crowd outside, Christabel courted arrest and spat on policeman- chose prison>fines: PUBLICITY; front page, bigger audience & membership
2) Heckling of leading politician’s (Churchill- lost parliamentary seat in Manchester by election) speeches; each heckler chose imprisonment.
* Churchill- Dundee- they hid in nearby building to throw stones at windows in roofs skylight
* lowered into political meetings on ropes
Why did the WSPU adopt more militant tactics after 1905?
reflected unstable nature of women; hysterical
‘We have tried every way.’ 1908
1) Reaction to repressive measures taken by Liberal government from 1906 (excluding women from public meetings, refusing to meet suffrage deputations) which denied suffragettes the main form of peaceful demonstrations
2) Only realistic option left now that peaceful protest was curbed
3) Retaliation against a government which encouraged police brutality, imprisoned, force-fed those who engaged in direct action; in response to use of force by authorities
4) Believed they were following a long and respected tradition of protest: physical force used before 32 and 67, plus Chartists
Believed gov would only give vote if forced to do so; 1911 miners called for violence and were successful
* Sandra Holton shown violence often began at local level, only adopted by leadership when member’s widespread support
* Resorted to violence when E. Pankhurst was imprisoned (most widespread 4/1913; several houses burned, bomb at railway station, telephone wires, Manchester Art Gallery)
What was the Conciliation Committee?
1) 1910- both Suffragettes and Suffragists cooperated with Conciliation Committee in Parliament
2) Small number of MPs, gather support across party lines for votes for women
3) drafted a private members bill to extent franchise to women; similar Conciliation Bill introduced in Parliament in 1911- the suffrage societies lobbied MPs and held meetings to pressure them to vote for; WSPU called a truce during negotiation
4) Both bills failed to become law; Gov announced own Franchise Bill to extend male franchise; PM Asquith indicated it might be possible to add amendment to extend vote to women BUT early 1913 speaker said it couldn’t be added– Asquith: ‘a great relief’
How did the Liberal government respond to the suffragettes’ more militant actions?
Most Liberal party members agreed with women’s suffrage.
1906 landslide victory: optimistic…
BUT time after time refused to support reform bills
1) Denied them democratic forms of protest
2) Home secretary Herbert Gladstone: to compromise would be ‘an exhibition of weakness in the face of these threats
3) Women forbidden to attend Liberal meetings without a signed ticket
4) Refused to meet deputations or accept petitions, banned meetings in public places and censored press to silence WSPU
(a- 1908, refused deputation with PM, assaulted by crowd then smashed windows @10
b- Asquith rejected second Conciliation Bill, Nov, 1911: WSPU members broke windows in LDN gov buildings)
5) Commissioner of police;
- refused to allow suffragettes to hold meetings in LDN parks
- persuaded Albert Hall not to let it out to them; WSPU hired a different venue, BUT owner threatened with license withdrawal
6) proscecuted printers of The Suffragette, raided offices and homes of members and forced Christabel to flee to Paris
(Churchill, Black Friday)
Why, and with what results, did the government resort to the forcible feeding of suffragette prisoners?
July 1909, Wallace DUNLOP went on hunger strike to secure rights as political prisoner, not treated like common criminal.
91 hours: released! Christabel claimed a suffragette victory. Gov on defensive.
Suffragettes die in prison? They become martyrs.
Hunger strikes became policy, esp as those who refused food were released when health deteriorated. (Happened to 37)
Then force-feeding. Suffragette propaganda portrayed it as oral rape. Doctors protested to PM: ‘unwise and inhumane practice’
Propaganda. Sympathy. Support. (1913- Emmeline propagated as nearing death in cell)
What were the effects of the ‘Cat and Mouse Act’?
The decline in public support and an increasingly hostile press enabled the gov to implement this, recapturing prisoners and withdrawing suffragettes from militant campaigns on the streets
April 1913: Prisoners’ Temporary Discharge for Ill-Health Act.
Prison authorise could release persistent hunger strikers, let them recover, then rearrest.
+ put an end to hunger striking
- ‘Cat and Mouse Act’: propaganda gift!
Why did the WSPU become less effective after 1912?
1) window breaking, attacks on pillar boxes, arson; Christabel advocated from Paris (enabled quick, police free getaway). Militants: ‘we target property, not one person killed because of buildings burning’ Yet: ‘some window breaking (eg. London’s west end shops) now fairly indiscriminate, endangered public > gov personnel/property’ 2) Cs support of escalating violence wrecking movement? Alienating public opinion. Elizabeth Wolstenholme-Elmy thought so: “madness...criminal actions would seem designed to wreck the whole movement” “appeal to or friends... in Parliament not to be deterred” 3) Frederick Pethwick-Lawrence (lawyer, helped finance) judged they had public on their side 1912 BUT advantage being thrown away by extreme militants. Both Expelled by Christabel: defiant to criticism, critical of men’s involvement 4) 1914 Sylvia expelled by mother and sis for taking too independent a line in support for specifically working-class issues. 5) The government stood firm, believing public opinion beginning to turn against suffragettes (mid-1912: many WSPU meetings met with hostile crowds throwing eggs, fruit, flour— driven off streets of London) More and more imprisoned + moves to close down The Suffragette = losing support / effectiveness 6) when Asquith agreed to meet deputation, it was from NUWSS (1913), and then (June 1914) a working-class delegation from Sylvia’s east London organisation. He had come round to the idea. Few weeks? WWI.
Why was the Liberal leadership opposed to giving votes to women?
MANY (IF NOT MAJORITY) OF MPS, ESPECH LIBERAL, WON OVER TO SUFFRAGE BY START OF 20THC. So why was Liberal leadership so obstructive?
* Asquith himself was unsympathetic
* Apprehensive about impact on electoral politics of enfranchising several million women– party political calculation: most bills would extend to every householder; giving vote to propertied women would enfranchise Conservative voters
^^^ Both Churchill and George opposed first Conciliation Bill 1910 on these grounds
Never used enough force to endanger Liberal government; threats of industrial action (esp. striking coal miners, use of force from Ulster Unionists in Ireland) were more pressing concerns.
To give into militancy of WSPU is to set a dangerous precedent.
What happened on Black Friday, 18 November 1910?
Gov acting harshly: as Home Secretary in charge of law and order, Churchill was held responsible for notorious police violence towards women here.
Approx 300 suffragettes marked to the House of Commons in protest at the failure of the first Conciliation Bill. They tried to enter parliament-
Police responded harshly. Been brought in from poorer east end, not used to dealing with suffragette demos.
Had been instructed not to arrest them, they forced them back, kicked them, twisted their breasts, punched their noses, thrust knees between their legs.
How were the suffragettes imprisoned?
Between 1906 and 1914, over 1000 suffragettes were imprisoned for breaking the law.
1) initially ‘First Division’: political prisoners, wear own clothes and receive food parcels
2) after 1908: ‘Second Division’, gov regarded them as criminals; lost privileges, ordinary prisoners
Remain silent, locked separately, wear ill-fitting, uncomfortable uniforms, referred to by number not name. Limited and censored contact with outside world;
JUNE PURVIS- regime designed to undermine suffragettes by eroding their sense of personal identity.
Elicited public sympathy.
YET March 1910: Churchill responded to public pressure: allowed visitors, letters, books, own clothes YET not political prisoners
Was the militancy of the WSPU the main reason why women were not enfranchised by 1914? ie. did it help or hinder the cause?
HINDER
“The government persisted with its highly illiberal methods in the confidence that opinions had turned against the WPSU’s campaign… In the process the organisation was driven steadily underground… by 1913 subscriptions had begun to fall”- Martin Pugh, 2000
First suffrage campaigners PM met were from NUWSS
1) Militancy of leaders ultimately made reform less>more likely (esp.1912-14)
2) Early heckling targeted politicians like Churchill & Lloyd George who were sympathetic… L.G.’s country house burned down (E.P.: “we have tried blowing him up to wake his conscience”- did not win support, opposite)
3) Public, Politicians, and loyal WSPU MEMBERS became resentful of extreme militancy:
-Emmeline and Frederick Pethwick-Lawrence argued leadership sacrificing sympathy suffragette prisoners elicited–>
Pankhursts increasingly fanatical, dismissive of opinions of public & loyal colleagues:
Annie Kenney- ‘what do we care whether we have public opinion with us or not?’
4) Played into hands of politicians > increasing pressure on them
5) by 1914, the women’s issue turned into a debate about law and order: in these circumstances, the government was unlikely to concede.
Was the militancy of the WSPU the main reason why women were not enfranchised by 1914? ie. did it help or hinder the cause?
HELP
BUT Martin Pugh: ‘by drawing criticism upon themselves, the suffragettes helped the constitutional suffragists to be better appreciated by the press and the politicians.’
1) emergence of WSPU initially gave a very favorable boost to women’s campaign (specifically its militant tactics from 1905) ENERGISING
2) Heckling of leaders like Churchill and George attracted huge publicity which boosted funds and membership: 1907, 58 branches
3) + intervening in by-elections: one of the most prominent political issues of the day
4) indirectly benefitted NUWSS: some, like Lady Knightley, acknowledged the militants were helping their cause by ‘pluck and determination’; the militant’s example & the higher profile emboldened the moderates in both WSPU and NUWSS, the last becoming more assertive and organising bigger demonstrations
5) years of militancy saw significant increase in donations and subscriptions for the WSPU, enabling them more staff, processions, merchandise (badges, banners, dolls)
6) Even @ height of militancy, far greater numbers of WSPU activists campaigning peacefully (and meetings/demos consistently attracted more than suffragists)
7) Property, not people // suspended during Conciliation Bills negotiations (truce for all but a week of Jan 1910- Nov 1911)… obduracy of government (+Asquith) which led them to conclude force necessary
