JANUARY TO MAY, 1906
ANNIE KENNEY SETS OFF TO ROUSE LONDON--THE SCENE IN THE LADIES GALLERY
AND THE DEPUTATION TO SIR HENRY CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN.
As soon as the General Election was over, we began to make preparations
for the opening of Parliament. It was decided that the work of our
Union must be carried to London, and that we must have an Organiser
there who would be able to devote the whole of her time to it. Annie
Kenney, who, after her imprisonment, had never gone back to the Mill,
was chosen for this post. The Election campaign had put a severe
strain upon the resources of the Union, and from the first the raising
of funds had been our greatest difficulty. Therefore, it was with
only £2 in her pocket and the uncertainty as to whether more would
be forthcoming that Annie Kenney set off "to rouse London." Perhaps
no one realised what a heavy task, and how many bitter rebuffs were
before this sensitive, fragile girl. I took a room for her in the house
where I was staying at 45, Park Walk, Chelsea, in order that we might
consult, and as far as possible, work together.
The Committee in Manchester had not formulated any definite plans
of campaign, but we came to the conclusion that we must organise a
procession of women and a demonstration in Trafalgar Square for the
day of the opening of Parliament. When Annie went to Scotland Yard to
inform the police of our intentions, however, she was told that no
meeting in Trafalgar Square could be allowed whilst Parliament was
sitting. This forced us to the conclusion that we must hire a Hall
somewhere near Westminster for our meeting place, but we knew not where
to find the money to pay for it. This and other difficulties, however,
were one by one smoothed away. Mr. Keir Hardie and Mr. Frank Smith
(afterwards elected to the London County Council as member for Lambeth)
were the first to help us, and they advised us to take the Caxton Hall,
Westminster, and put us in touch with a sympathiser who agreed to pay
the rent of it.
As soon as we had taken the Hall, we drafted a little handbill to
announce the Meeting, and then, armed with her bills and her wonderful
faith in the goodness of her fellow men and women, Annie Kenney
proceeded with her mission, calling day by day upon people of whom she
knew practically nothing, and to whom she herself was entirely unknown.
One of those who kindly helped us was Mr. W. T. Stead, who published in
the _Review of Reviews_ a character sketch of Annie Kenney, in which he
likened her to Josephine Butler. It was soon plain to us that it would
be easier to ask for help if we formed a London Branch of the W. S. P.
U., and with my aunt, Mrs. Clarke, and Mrs. Lucy Roe, our landlady, we
therefore formed a Preliminary Committee.
In about a fortnight's time my mother joined us. She was surprised to
learn that so many arrangements had been made and at first was almost
inclined to be appalled at the boldness of our plans. She was afraid
that we should never induce more than a handful of women to walk in
procession through the public streets, and that the Caxton Hall could
not be filled. But the die was cast, and she threw herself into the
work determined to do her very best to prevent failure.
A few days after this we heard that Mrs. Drummond was coming from
Manchester to help us. Her husband was earning little at the time, and
the Union had no money to provide her railway fare, but she had walked
miles through the snow in order to collect the necessary funds from
her friends. When she arrived, we were all of us growing very weary
and overwrought. It seemed almost impossible to stir this great city,
filled with its busy millions who appeared to have no time to think of
anything but their own affairs. The thoughtless apathy of those whom
we met with money and leisure at their disposal, the dull, hopeless
inertia of those who agreed that we were right, but would not stir
themselves to help, were to us in our anxiety, almost maddening. But
Mrs. Drummond, with her practical ways and her inexhaustible fund of
good humour, brought with her a spirit of renewed hope and energy. Her
first act was to go to the office of the Oliver Company and borrow
a typewriter from them. The secretarial duties were thus enormously
lightened, and after rattling off the correspondence she was always
ready to join us in delivering handbills, canvassing from house to
house, or writing announcements of the forthcoming meetings with white
chalk upon the city pavement.
At last the day of the opening of Parliament, February 19th, 1906,
arrived, and a crowd of some three or four hundred women, a large
proportion of whom were poor workers from the East End, met us at St.
James' Park District Railway Station. We formed in procession and put
up a few simple banners, some of which were red with white letters,
and had been made by working people in Canning Town, whilst the rest
I had made of white linen and lettered with India ink in the little
sitting-room at Park Walk. Our procession had gone but a few yards when
the police came up and insisted upon the furling of the banners, but
they did not prevent our marching to the Caxton Hall near by. Here we
found that a large audience had already assembled, and soon the hall
was crowded with women, most of whom were strangers to us. We were
told afterwards that amongst the rest were many ladies of wealth and
position, who, inspired with curiosity by the newspaper accounts of
the disturbances which we were said to have created, had disguised
themselves in their maids' clothes in order that they might attend the
meeting unrecognised.
Mrs. Pankhurst, Annie Kenney and others who spoke, were listened to
with much earnestness and presently the news came that the King's
speech, the Government's legislative programme for the session, had
been read, and that it had contained no reference to the question of
Women's Suffrage. My mother at once moved that the meeting should
form itself into a "Lobbying" Committee and should at once proceed to
the House of Commons in order to induce its members to ballot for a
Women's Suffrage Bill. This resolution was carried with acclamation,
and the whole meeting streamed out into the street and made its way
to the House. It was bitterly cold and pouring with rain, but when
we arrived at the Strangers' Entrance, we found that for the first
time that anyone could remember, the door of the House of Commons was
closed to women. Cards were sent in to several Private Members, some
of whom came out and urged that we should be allowed to enter, but the
Government had given its orders, and the police remained obdurate. All
the women refused to go away, and permission was finally given for
twenty women at a time to be admitted. Then hour after hour the women
stood outside in the rain waiting for their turn to enter. Some of them
never got into the House at all, and those who did so went away gloomy
and disappointed for there was not one of them who had received any
assurance that Parliament intended to give women the vote.
Now, after a chance meeting with Mrs. Pankhurst and a second long talk
with her and with Annie Kenney, a new recruit had entered our movement.
This was Mrs. Pethick Lawrence, the daughter of Mr. Henry Pethick, of
Weston-super-Mare, and a member of a Cornish family. As a child at
school she had read the story of Hetty Sorrell in George Eliot's "Adam
Bede," had seen "Faust," and Marguerite in her prison cell. Later
she had learnt from Sir Walter Besant's _Children of Gideon_ of the
cheerless struggle to eke out an existence upon starvation wages, which
falls to the lot of working-girls. Then and there she had resolved to
spend her life in striving to alter these conditions. She determined
that as soon as she left school she would go to "the East End," and
begin. When the time came she at once acted upon this decision. Without
seeking help or advice from anyone, she wrote to Mrs. Hugh Price
Hughes, of the West London Mission and asked that she might be received
into her sisterhood. When her request had been granted she told her
parents of what she had done, and they readily gave their full approval
and sympathy.
After four years of useful training and varied experiences in the West
London Mission, during which she had had at some times the charge of
a Working-Girls' Club and at others had been sent out at night on
to the London Streets in order to save and succour the homeless and
outcast women there, she and her friend, Miss Mary Neal, took rooms in
a block of artisans' dwellings and gathered round them a small colony
of social workers. Together they founded the Esperance Working-Girls'
Club, to which was attached a co-operative dressmaking establishment,
and a holiday hotel at Littlehampton called "The Green Lady." Later on,
after her marriage Mrs. Pethick Lawrence built a small cottage near her
house at Holmwood called "The Sundial," where the junior members of the
Esperance Club were invited during the summer.
Writing of these early years, and of her own decision to take part in
the Votes for Women Movement she says:
Out of that part of my life there stand out many memories.... I
remember a little girl belonging to the Children's Happy Evening Club,
who went mad with grief because her widowed mother lost her work,
and was in despair. The dread of being separated in the workhouse
was upon the whole family, and the child was taken to the asylum,
crying, "Poor, poor mother." I remember a girl about twenty, alone
in the world, earning a pittance as a waitress in a tea-shop. She
was a quiet, gentle creature, who made no complaint. All the greater
was the shock when the girl put an end to her life, leaving a little
note, with the words, "I am tired out." These two cries still ring
out at times in my memory with their terrible indictment against life
as men have made it.... We recognised the fact that we were only
making in a great wilderness a tiny garden, enclosed by the wall
of human fellowship. As we saw more and more of the evil plight of
women, we realised ever more clearly that nothing could really lift
them out of it until the power had been put into their hands to help
themselves.... Suddenly a light flashed out. News came of the arrest
and imprisonment of Christabel Pankhurst and Annie Kenney. Here at
last was action.
So it was that Mrs. Pethick Lawrence had prepared herself to take part
in the great Votes for Women Movement.
We had now decided to organise our London Committee on a more formal
basis. Mrs. Lawrence was asked to become one of its members and I well
remember her coming to my little room in Park Walk to take part in the
formation of the new Central Committee. It was the first time I had
seen her, and I can never forget how much I was attracted by her dark
expressive eyes, and the quiet business-like way in which she listened
to what was being said, only interposing in the debate when she had
something really valuable to suggest. It was later that I noticed the
untrammelled carriage and the fine free lift of the head.
That first meeting was towards the end of February and it was arranged
that Mrs. Lawrence, her friend, Miss Mary Neal, myself, Annie Kenney,
my aunt, Mrs. Clarke, Mrs. Roe, Miss Irene Fenwick Miller, daughter
of a well-known early suffragist, and Mrs. Martel, of Australia,
should form the London Committee with my mother and Mrs. Drummond,
who were returning to Manchester. It was decided that I was to become
the Honorary Secretary, and Mrs. Lawrence was asked to be Honorary
Treasurer.
We now felt that our next move must be to secure an interview with the
Prime Minister, and we therefore wrote to Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman
asking him to receive a deputation from our Union. He replied that he
could not spare the time to see us. Our answer was that, owing to the
urgency of the question, we could take no refusal, and that a number
of our members would call upon him at the Official Residence, No. 10
Downing Street, on the morning of March 2nd, 1906.
Downing Street is a short road opening out of Parliament Street and
ending in a flight of steps leading into St. James' Park. There are now
only three houses left in the Street, the others having been pulled
down to make way for Government Buildings. The Official Residence
itself was not built for its present purpose and consists of two
comfortable-looking Georgian houses knocked into one, each of which
is three stories high with attics above, and has three windows along
the front of the first and second floors and two windows and a door
below. The door is dark green, almost black, and has a black iron
knocker, a lion's head with a ring in its mouth. Above this knocker is
a small, circular, brass knob about half an inch in diameter and very
highly polished and under the knocker is a brass plate, equally well
polished, inscribed "First Lord of the Treasury." There is one shallow,
well whitened doorstep and on each side of it are black iron railings
that protect the house from the street. The next house, No. 11, is
a slightly more ornate building in the same style, which was then
occupied by Mr. Herbert Gladstone.
On presenting themselves at the door of the Official Residence, the
deputation from the Women's Social and Political Union were told that
Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman could receive no one, as he had been
ill and was still confined to his room. A request to see the Prime
Minister's secretary was also refused, and the door was shut. Then,
deciding to wait there until they were attended to, the deputation sat
down to rest on the doorstep and displayed a little white "Votes for
Women" banner.
We had notified the various newspapers[6] that we intended to call
on Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman and by this time a number of Press
photographers had collected. This greatly embarrassed the inhabitants
of No. 10, and presently the hall porter opened the door again, and
looking very uncomfortable, begged the women to go away. Annie Kenney
assured him that she and her companions would remain all day if need
be, and after arguing for some time, scratching his head and looking
very much puzzled, he finally asked two members of the deputation to go
inside, where they were received by Mr. Ponsonby, the secretary, who
promised to give their message to his chief.
The same evening we held another Committee meeting and drafted a
further letter to the Prime Minister asking for an early opportunity
of laying our case before him. In response to this letter, he returned
an evasive reply in which he stated that any representations that the
Union wished to make to him must be put in writing.
We therefore decided that another attempt must be made to interview
him and after waiting until he had made a complete recovery and was
again able to take his part in the House of Commons debates, a larger
deputation, consisting of several members of our Committee and some
thirty other women, made their way to Downing Street about 10 o'clock
on the morning of March 9th. They again asked to see the Prime Minister
and the door-keeper promised to give their message to the secretary.
After they had been waiting for three-quarters of an hour two men came
out and said to them, "You had better be off; you must not stand on
this doorstep any longer." The women explained that they were waiting
for a reply but were abruptly told that there was no answer and the
door was rudely shut in their faces.
Angered by this Miss Irene Miller immediately seized the knocker and
rapped sharply at the door. Then the two men appeared again and one of
them called to a policeman on the other side of the road, "Take this
woman in charge." The order was at once obeyed, and Miss Miller was
marched away to Canon Row Police Station. Spurred on by this event Mrs.
Drummond, exclaiming that nothing should prevent her from seeing the
Prime Minister, darted forward and pulled at the little brass knob in
the middle of the door. As she did so, she discovered that the little
knob, instead of being a bell, as she had imagined, was something very
different indeed, for suddenly the door opened wide. Without more ado
she rushed in and headed straight for the Cabinet Council Chamber, but
before she could get there she was caught, thrown out of the house and
then taken in custody to the police station. Meanwhile Annie Kenney
began to address the gathering crowd, but the man who had first called
the policeman again looked out and said, "Why don't you arrest that
woman? She is one of the ringleaders. Take her in charge." Then she was
dragged away to join her companions.
The three women were detained at Canon Row for about an hour. Then a
police inspector told them that a message to set them at liberty had
been sent by the Prime Minister, who wished them to be informed that he
would receive a deputation from the Women's Social and Political Union,
either individually or in conjunction with other women's societies. Of
course we published Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman's promise broadcast.
Shortly afterwards, two hundred Members of Parliament, drawn from every
party, petitioned Sir Henry to fix an early date for receiving some of
their number in order that they might urge upon him the necessity for
an immediate extension of the franchise to women. He then formally
announced that on May 19th he would receive a joint deputation both
from Members of Parliament representing the signatories to this
petition and all the organised bodies of women in the country who were
desirous of obtaining the Suffrage.
All the women's societies now began to make preparations for an
effective Demonstration on May 19th. The National Union of Women's
Suffrage Societies decided to hold a meeting in the Exeter Hall, but we
of the Women's Social and Political Union wished to do something very
much more ambitious than that, and we resolved to organise a procession
and a demonstration in Trafalgar Square. In view of the immense work
that this would entail, we felt the necessity of engaging another
organiser, and my mother now recommended that Miss Billington should be
asked to undertake the work.
Born in Blackburn in 1877, Theresa Billington, the daughter of a
shipping clerk, had been educated at a Roman Catholic convent school.
Owing to financial difficulties at home, she had been set to learn
millinery at thirteen years of age. At seventeen she had made up
her mind to be a teacher, and having obtained one of the Queen's
Scholarships, she eventually became a teacher under the Manchester
Education Committee. When she was first introduced to us she had come
into conflict with the authorities because of her refusal to give the
prescribed religious instruction to her pupils. My mother, who was
then a member of the Education Committee, intervened to secure that
she should be transferred to a Jewish school, where she would not be
expected to teach religion, and thus prevented her dismissal. In 1904,
at my mother's request, she had been appointed as an organiser for the
Independent Labour Party.
About the middle of April, a few weeks after the Prime Minister had
given his promise to receive the deputation, a Parliamentary vacancy
occurred in the Eye division of Suffolk, and Christabel wrote to our
London Committee, saying that she thought it advisable that we should
go down to the constituency and intimate to the Liberal candidate that,
unless he could obtain a pledge from his Government to give Votes to
women, we should oppose his return, and that we should take a similar
course in the case of every future Government nominee. Mrs. Pethick
Lawrence, Annie Kenney and Theresa Billington therefore went down to
Eye and interviewed Mr. Harold Pearson, the Liberal candidate, but he
treated the question of Votes for Women with contempt and ridiculed
the idea that women could do anything to hinder his return. Owing to
the size of that large county constituency and the pressure of work in
London these three members of our Committee then decided to return to
London. But at home in Manchester they were exceedingly anxious to see
the policy of opposition to the Government at by-elections put into
practice.
The funds of the Manchester branch of the Union were entirely
depleted, but five pounds was got together, an address to the Electors
of Eye from the Women's Social and Political Union was printed and
Mrs. Drummond set off to the constituency to fight the election
single-handed. Five pounds to fight an election campaign which seems an
absurdly small sum when one realises that the candidates spend many
hundreds. Nevertheless, though she was entirely friendless and unknown
in that part of the country, Mrs. Drummond succeeded in creating a
wonderful impression. She could not afford to hire a carriage, it is
true, but there was always a friendly farmer or tradesman who would
give the cheery little Scotchwoman a lift in his cart, and so active
was she that in a short time the impression was spread abroad that not
one solitary Suffragette had gone to Eye, but that several were working
from different centres. Before the end of the Election the Conservative
candidate and even scornful Mr. Harold Pearson, the Liberal, had
declared in favour of Votes for Women.
Meanwhile Mr. Keir Hardie had secured a place for a Women's Suffrage
Resolution which was to be discussed in the House of Commons on the
evening of April 25th. Though a resolution is only an expression
of opinion and can have no practical legislative effect, this was
considered important because it was realised that if the new Parliament
were to show a substantial majority in its support, the women's claim
that the Government should deal with the question would be greatly
strengthened. Unfortunately only a second place had been obtained
for the Resolution. Hence there was every reason to fear that, as so
often before, our talkative opponents would succeed in preventing its
being voted upon. The situation became more hopeful, however, when
the Anti-Vivisectionists, who had obtained the first place for the
evening, entered into a compromise by which they agreed to withdraw
their resolution early. The way was thus left clear for the Votes for
Women Resolution, but we ourselves still thought that the "talkers out"
would probably have their way. We were determined not to allow this to
happen without protest. Therefore, in order to be in readiness for any
emergency, a large number of us had obtained tickets for the Ladies'
Gallery.
Looking down through the brass grille, from behind which women are
alone permitted to listen to the debates in Parliament, we saw that
the House was crowded as is usual only at important crises, and that
both the Government and Opposition front benches were fully occupied.
The Resolution, "That in the opinion of this House it is desirable
that sex should cease to be a bar to the exercise of the Parliamentary
franchise" was moved and seconded in short speeches in order that
the opponents should have no least excuse for urging that there had
been no time for their own side to be fairly heard. Then Mr. Cremer
rose to speak in opposition. His speech was grossly insulting to
women and altogether unworthy of a Member of the People's House of
Representatives. Both by his words, his voice and gestures he plainly
showed his entire view of women to be degraded and indeed revolting.
Yet, though one was angry with him, he was an object for pity as he
stood there, undersized and poorly made, obviously in bad health and
with that narrow, grovelling and unimaginative point of view, flaunting
his masculine superiority. The women found it very difficult to sit
quietly listening to him, and, though my mother strove to check them,
some subdued exclamations caught the Speaker's ear. He immediately
gave orders for the police to be in readiness to clear the Ladies'
Gallery if any further sounds should issue from it. But, once Mr.
Cremer had finished speaking, absolute quiet was restored. Mr. Willie
Redmond, brother of John Redmond, the leader of the Irish Party, then
indignantly protested against the tone of Mr. Cremer's speech, crying
fervently that he himself had always believed in Women's Suffrage
because, all his life, he had been opposed to slavery in any form, and
declaring that "any of God's creatures who are denied a voice in the
Government of their country are more or less slaves," and that "men
have no right to assume that they are so superior to women, that they
alone have the right to govern."
All through the debate everyone was waiting for a declaration from the
Government. At last Mr. Herbert Gladstone, the Home Secretary, rose to
speak, but his words were vague and evasive, and whilst not absolutely
excluding the possibility of the Government's taking the matter up, he
certainly made no promise on their behalf.
At ten minutes to eleven Mr. Samuel Evans rose with the obvious
intention of talking the Resolution out and, as eleven o'clock, the
hour for closing the debate, drew nearer, whilst spinning out his
remarks by means of some very doubtful jokes, he kept turning round,
every now and then, to look at the clock. Our eyes were also eagerly
fixed upon the timepiece. Every moment one woman or another stretched
across and asked Mrs. Pankhurst whether the demonstration of protest
should begin, but her answer was always that there was "time yet," and
that we must wait.
At last someone looked round and saw that the police were already in
the gallery and we realised that we were to be taken away in order that
the Resolution might be "talked out" without our having an opportunity
to protest. Irene Miller could no longer be restrained. She called out
loudly, "Divide! Divide!" as they do in the House of Commons, and "We
refuse to have our Resolution talked out." Then we all followed suit,
and Theresa Billington thrust a little white flag bearing the words,
"Votes for Women" through the historic grille. It was a relief to thus
give vent to the feelings of indignation which we had been obliged to
stifle during the whole of the evening, and though we were dragged
roughly out of the gallery, it was with a feeling almost of triumph
that we cried shame upon the men who had wasted hours in useless talk
and pitiful and pointless jokes with which to insult our countrywomen.
But the rough usage of the police was not by any means the hardest part
of the experience. When we reached the Lobby, we learnt that our action
had been entirely misunderstood. A number of non-militant Suffragists
were present, and most of these believed, as the Members of Parliament
were telling them, that, but for our "injudicious" action, a vote would
have been taken upon the Resolution. They met us with bitter reproaches
and disdainful glances, and even those Members of Parliament who had
proved themselves to be absolutely careless of our question, now took
it upon themselves to come up and scold us. On all sides we were
abused, repudiated and contemptuously ridiculed, but, after a few days,
public opinion began to turn somewhat in our favour. It leaked out that
the Speaker had not intended to allow a Resolution calling for the
closure of the debate to be moved, and it therefore became known that
we had judged correctly in thinking that the Women's Suffrage motion
was to be talked out.
Writing in the _Sussex Daily News_ for May 2nd, Mr. Spencer Leigh
Hughes, well known under his pen name "Sub Rosa," recalled the
account given in Lady Mary Montague's "Memoirs" of the way in which
the Peeresses of the eighteenth century had frequently disturbed the
serenity of the House of Lords debates, and how they had triumphed over
the Lord Chancellor Philip Yorke, First Earl of Hardwicke, who had
attempted to exclude them from the House of Lords. Lady Mary describes
the "thumping," "rapping" and "running kicks" at the door of the House
of Lords, indulged in by the Duchess of Queensberry and her friends,
the strategy by which they finally obtained an entry, and the way in
which, during the subsequent debate, they "showed marks of dislike
not only by smiles and winks (which have always been allowed in these
cases), but by noisy laughs and apparent contempts." Mr. Hughes ended
by saying, "After this excellent and pertinent account of the action of
the Peeresses in the House of Lords, I suppose no one will be so silly
as to complain of what the women did the other day in the House of
Commons."
Mr. Stead in the _Review of Reviews_ published an article by a "Woman's
Righter," who said:
Patience has been tried long enough, and what has it brought? Less
than one ten minutes' expression of the divine impatience that the
Suffragists showed in the Ladies' Gallery that memorable night!...
"Surely it was unwomanly?" Pshaw! It was not anything like so
unwomanly as it was unmanly to allow a cause admittedly just to be
stifled without a single indignant protest.
Nevertheless, our supporters were still in the minority. Instead of
upholding what we had done to rebuke the anti-Suffragists for their
mean and cowardly policy of obstruction (a policy which had prevented
the enfranchisement of women for so many years), the National Union of
Women's Suffrage Societies and some of the members of the Parliamentary
Committee, which was at the time engaged in arranging the deputation
to the Prime Minister, now urged that the Women's Social and Political
Union had disgraced itself too deeply to form part of the deputation.
Efforts were made to induce us to withdraw from it, but this we refused
to do. At last, both because some Members of Parliament--and it is said
Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman himself--strongly supported our claim
to be represented, and because it was well known that if we were not
received we should simply agitate for another deputation, the attempt
to exclude us had to be abandoned.
On the morning of May 19th our procession started from the Boadicea
statue on Westminster Bridge. First came the members of the Deputation
to the Prime Minister, amongst whom were to be seen the veteran
Suffragist, fragile little Mrs. Wolstenholme Elmy, with her grey
curls, Mrs. Pankhurst, Mrs. Pethick Lawrence, Mr. Keir Hardie, and
Annie Kenney, wearing the clogs and shawl which she had worn in the
Lancashire cotton mill. Amongst the deputation marched a body of women
textile workers from Lancashire and Cheshire, who had joined us,
carrying the bright banners of their respective trades. Then came the
great red banner of the Women's Social and Political Union, inscribed
in white letters with the words, "We demand Votes for Women this
Session." The poles of the banner were lashed to a big forage lorry in
which rode a number of women, who were either too old or too feeble to
walk. After these came the members of the Women's Social and Political
Union and women members of various other societies and last of all, a
large contingent from the East End of London, a piteous band, some of
them sweated workers themselves, others the wives of unemployed working
men, and many of them carrying half-starved-looking babies in their
arms.
The deputation which assembled at the Foreign Office was introduced by
Sir Charles M'Laren, and it was arranged that there should be eight
women speakers. The first of these was the aged Miss Emily Davies,
LL.D., one of the two women who in 1866, more than forty years before,
had handed to John Stuart Mill the first petition for Women's Suffrage
ever presented to Parliament, and whose part in opening the University
examinations to women, and in founding Girton, the first of the women's
colleges, will be gratefully remembered by women of all ages. In
pleading for the removal of the sex disability Miss Davies said: "We do
not regard it as a survival which nobody minds. We look upon it as an
offence to those primarily concerned, and an injury to the community."
Then Mrs. Eva M'Laren, Miss Margaret Ashton and Mrs. Rolland Rainy,
representing respectively some 80,000, 99,000 and 14,000 women Liberals
in England and Scotland, urged, each in her own way, that the Party for
which these women had done so much should extend the franchise to them.
Miss Eva Gore Booth and Mrs. Sarah Dickinson, who had herself been
a factory worker for sixteen years and a Trade Union Organiser for a
further eleven years, then spoke on behalf of the fifty delegates from
the Lancashire and Cheshire Textile and other Workers' Representation
Committee. They dwelt on the low wages--often no more than six or
seven shillings a week, and the other heavy economic hardships under
which the women whom they represented were obliged to labour. They
pointed out that these women, millions of whom since leaving school had
never eaten a meal which they had not earned, were not only helping
to produce the great wealth of the country but were caring for their
homes and their children at the same time, and urged that they were
every day more gravely conscious of the heavy disadvantage under which
they suffered from their absolute lack of political power. Industrial
questions were now becoming political questions, they said, and the
vast numbers of women workers had their point of view and their
interests which ought to be taken into consideration, but which were
disregarded because they were without votes.
Next followed Mrs. Gasson, the speaker for 425 branches and 22,000
members of the Women's Co-operative Guild. She said that the
Co-operative movement, with its 62,000,000 members and annual trade
of £60,000,000, had often been called a "State within a State." In
that State women had votes, they attended quarterly business meetings
and voted side by side with men on questions of trade, employment and
education. Women were elected as directors of Co-operative societies
and also on Educational Committees connected with the Co-operative
movement. And yet the prosperity of the co-operative "State" continued
to increase, although in many places the women members outnumbered the
men. The Co-operative Guild Women saw that when questions affecting the
Co-operative movement came before Parliament the movement lost much of
its power because the women had no vote. Unwise or unjust taxation was
injurious to the Co-operative trade, and women were the chief sufferers
by unjust taxation. Whatever taxes were put upon necessaries men did
not receive larger incomes, and so women had less to spend. That very
month Mr. Birrell had received Resolutions from large conferences of
the Co-operative Guild members, urging that medical examination should
be made compulsory under the New Education Bill, but the Resolutions
were worth nothing without a vote behind them. The women who had sent
up these Resolutions felt "like a crying child outside the door of
a locked room, demanding entrance with no one to open it." Most of
the Co-operators were married working-women. Their houses were both
their workshops and their homes, and therefore Housing and public
Health questions were especially important to them. Their incomes
were affected by laws relating to trades, accidents, pensions and all
industrial legislation that went to secure the good health of the
workers. Therefore they appealed that this common right, the right of a
citizen, should be granted to them and to other women.
Mrs. Watson spoke on behalf of the Scottish Christian Union of the
British Women's Temperance Association, with a membership of 52,000
women. Then Mrs. Mary Bateson presented a petition for the franchise
from 1,530 women graduates, amongst whom were Doctors of Letters,
Science and Law in the Universities of the United Kingdom, the British
Colonies and the United States.
Mrs. Pankhurst spoke for the Women's Social and Political Union, the
militant organisation of which most of the others were half afraid.
She urged on its behalf that the women of the country should be
enfranchised during that very year, either by a clause in the Plural
Voting Bill then before Parliament, or by a separate measure. Assuring
the Prime Minister that the members of the Union believed that no
business could be more pressing than this, she stated calmly and firmly
that a growing number of them felt the question of Votes for Women so
deeply that they were prepared, if necessary, to sacrifice for it life
itself, or what was perhaps even harder, the means by which they lived.
She appealed to the Government to make such sacrifices needless by
doing this long-delayed act of justice to women without delay.
Now that the women had all clearly and carefully laid their case before
him, Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman rose to reply. He began as though he
had been an earnest and convinced supporter of the Women's cause and
dwelt at length not only upon the benefits which the franchise would
confer upon them, but also on the enthusiasm which they had shown in
working for it, their fitness to exercise it and the good work which
they had already done in public affairs. Then, after a long pause, he
said: "That is where you and I are all agreed. It has been very nice
and pleasant hitherto, but now we come to the question of what I can
say to you, not as expressing my own individual convictions, but as
speaking for others, and I have only one thing to preach to you and
that is the virtue of patience." With hurried hesitating accents he
explained that there were members of his Cabinet who were opposed to
the principle of giving votes to women, and that, therefore, he must
conclude by saying, "It would never do for me to make any statement
or pledge under these circumstances." Poor blundering old man, if he
really spoke truthfully to the deputation, one may well pity him in
that invidious and humiliating position.
During Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman's last words there had been a
strange silence amongst the women, and as he resumed his seat a low
murmur of disappointment ran through the room. Mr. Keir Hardie had
been asked by those in charge of the arrangements to move the vote of
thanks to the Prime Minister for having received the Deputation, and,
though he now performed this duty with characteristic graciousness
of manner, he plainly said that all present must have suffered great
disappointment on hearing the Prime Minister's concluding statement.
Nevertheless, they were glad to learn that the leaders of the two
great political parties in the House of Commons were now personally
committed to the question, by Mr. Balfour, a statement he had made in
the House a few evenings before and the Prime Minister by what he had
said that afternoon. "With agreement between the leaders of the two
great historic parties," Mr. Hardie said gravely, "and with the support
of the other sections of the House, it surely does not pass the wit of
statesmanship to find ways and means for the enfranchisement of the
women of England before this Parliament comes to a close." At this
point Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman turned and looked at Mr. Keir Hardie
and solemnly shook his head.
After the resolution had been seconded Mrs. Elmy, whose name had not
been placed upon the authorised list of speakers, interposed, saying
that she had worked in the cause of Women's Suffrage since October,
1865, and that during that period she had seen the men voters of the
country increased from less than 700,000 to more than 7,000,000. When
the Reform Act of 1884 had been under consideration, women Suffragists
had been full of hope, but Mr. Gladstone had refused point blank to
give them the franchise. No Parliament had ever offered a greater
insult to womanhood than the Parliament of that year, for it had
actually taken six or seven divisions on the point as to whether a
criminal should continue to be disfranchised for more than a year
after his release from prison, but only one division had been taken
to decide that English women should not exercise the vote. Every year
it had become more and more difficult to remedy the injustices under
which women suffered. "If I were to tell you of the work of the last
twenty years of my life," she said, "it would be one long story of the
necessity for the immediate enfranchisement of women."
The vote of thanks to Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman was then carried
with feeble spiritless clapping and some hisses. Then the Prime
Minister made his reply, but he did not in any way strengthen his
previous declaration and ended by saying that what women had to do
was "to go on converting the country." As he concluded Annie Kenney
suddenly rose up and cried, "Sir, we are not satisfied, and the
agitation will go on."
Then we dispersed to meet again at three o'clock in Trafalgar Square.
No better meeting place could have been chosen, for it was here in
Trafalgar Square, that Edmund Beales and the other leaders of the
Reform movement had spoken when the Hyde Park gates had been closed
against them by the authorities on that historic 23rd of July, 1866,
on which the Park railings were pulled down and the blow struck which
won the Parliamentary vote for the working men in the towns. It was
here, too, that in February, 1886, John Burns had made that speech to
the starving unemployed men of his own class which caused him to suffer
a month's imprisonment and made him a famous man, and it was here in
Trafalgar Square on the 5th of November, 1887, that, in taking part in
the Demonstration against the imprisonment of O'Brien and the other
Irish leaders, poor Alfred Linnell had been trampled to death by the
horses of the police.
On this ground, consecrate to the discontented and the oppressed, under
that tall column topped by the statue of the fighting Nelson and on
that wide plinth, flanked by the four crouching lions, the first big
open-air Women's Suffrage meeting in London was held. By three o'clock
more than 7,000 people had assembled. I well remember every detail of
the scene. In my mind's eye I can clearly see the Chairman, my mother,
with her pale face, her quiet dark clothes, her manner, calm as it
always is on great occasions, and her quiet-sounding but far-reaching
voice with its plaintive minor chords. I can see beside her the
strangely diverse group of speakers: Theresa Billington in her bright
blue dress, strongly built and up-standing, her bare head crowned with
those brown coils of wonderfully abundant hair. I see Keir Hardie, in
his rough brown homespun jacket, with his deep-set, honest eyes, and
his face full of human kindness, framed by the halo of his silver hair.
Then Mrs. Elmy, fragile, delicate, and wonderfully sweet, with her face
looking like a tiny bit of finely modelled, finely tinted porcelain,
her shining dark-brown eyes and her long grey curls. Standing very
close to her is Annie Kenney, whose soft bright hair falls loosely from
her vivid sensitive face, and hangs down her back in a long plait,
just as she wore it in the cotton mill. Over her head she wears a grey
shawl as she did in Lancashire, and pinned to her white blouse is a
brilliant red rosette, showing her to be one of the marshals of the
procession, whilst her dark-blue serge skirt just shows the steel tips
of her clogs. How beautiful they are, these two women, as hand clasped
in hand they stand before us!--one rich in the mellow sweetness of a
ripe old age which crowns a life of long toil for the common good; the
other filled with the ardour of a chivalrous youth; both dedicated to a
great reform. But now, Annie Kenney speaks. She stands out, a striking,
almost startling, figure, against the blackened stone-work of the
plinth and speaks with a voice that cries out for the lost childhood,
blighted hopes and weary, overburdened lives of the women workers whom
she knows so well.
[Illustration: First Women's Suffrage Demonstration ever held in
Trafalgar Square, May 19th, 1906. Mr. Keir Hardie speaking: Mrs.
Pankhurst and Mrs. Wolstenholme Elmy in centre of the platform]
FOOTNOTES:
[6] From the first, the London papers and especially the newly
inaugurated _Daily Mirror_, had been somewhat interested in our unusual
methods of propaganda. It was just at this time that the _Daily Mail_
began to call us "Suffragettes" in order to distinguish between us and
the members of the older Suffrage Society who had always been called
"Suffragists," and who strongly objected to our tactics.