EXPLAIN WHY WOMEN FAILED TO GAIN THE RIGHT TO VOTE BETWEEN 1900 AND 1914.

JACOB HARTLEY

There are many reasons why women failed to get the vote during this period, a key one being attitudes to women. By 1900 the Victorian belief still prevailed that women were the weaker sex and needed protection from the harsh political world. Source C states:-

“Ever since the world was created, most women have been of weaker mental power than men”. (1)

Women were seen as intellectually incapable to vote, too emotional and impulsive to make rational decisions. Men dealt with subjects such as war and peace and managing the Empire, things that were outside women’s knowledge. Many felt that as women did not do military service they shouldn’t vote. Traditionally women were seen as homemakers. Source B states:-

“A woman should make a man’s home delightful”. (2)

However many working class women did work hard usually in low status, poorly paid jobs. All women shared a lack of rights. They and their belongings were seen as their husband’s possessions, they were barred from most professions and universities. Source A is a woman asking how she is to pay the bills and feed the children. Her husband answers:-

“What I do with my money is no business of yours”,

It was attitudes like these that saw women as second class citizens that kept women disenfranchised.

The right to vote was seen as key to changing the status of women. Women needed to fight for this because Parliament was all male, elected by men and most opposed women’s suffrage. Women had been campaigning for the vote since the 1850’s. Women’s groups joined to form the NUWSS. They wanted equal voting rights with men, only male householders had the vote. The leaders were generally middle class women who campaigned within the law. However they failed to reach all women as they only wanted the vote for women like themselves.

During 1903 the WSPU led by Emeline Pankhurst was set up. These women had grown impatient with the NUWSS because their methods were not getting them the vote. They wanted to include all women, not just middle class. Until 1905 their methods were peaceful, however as interest in them grew less they decided to use more militant methods such as, disturbing meetings, attacking property and holding demonstrations. During 1912–1914 their methods became more violent with arson attacks. In 1913 Emily Davison ran in front of the King’s horse and was killed. This created much publicity. The public were sympathetic when they were force fed in prison. However they were deprived of this sympathy when the Government passed the Cat and Mouse Act in 1913 which allowed ill hunger strikers to leave prison, recover and then return.

They used violence to gain publicity but as the newspaper owners were men they portrayed them as lunatics. Actions such as arson attacks and smashing shop windows lost them shocked the public and lost them sympathy. Women were expected to have manners. Source E states:-

“’Manners make the lady’, we were taught”.

MP’s lost sympathy with them and this violence provided the Government with a reason not to give them the vote. Also the Government refused to give in to violence as this may set a precedence.

Most women didn’t ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

“’Manners make the lady’, we were taught”.

MP’s lost sympathy with them and this violence provided the Government with a reason not to give them the vote. Also the Government refused to give in to violence as this may set a precedence.

Most women didn’t belong to suffrage groups. Influential women such as Queen Victoria were opposed to women’s suffrage. Anti suffrage organisations supported the view that women’s enfranchisement was not necessary as most didn’t want it. Source D states:-

“I have no need of a vote and should not use it”. (3)

Also women were split about which group to support. Many women would have supported the WSPU as they were campaigning for all women, but they did not like their violence. Working class women may have preferred the NUWSS methods but didn’t identify with them and they were not fighting for votes for them. Rivalry between the groups also harmed their case. It was felt that they shouldn’t get the vote if they couldn’t even organise themselves. So the fact that there was no united front campaigning for women contributed to them not getting the vote during this period.

Another reason for women not getting the vote was that no party was willing to adopt their cause. Some MP’s were sympathetic however it was the leaders who had the power and they refused to use it. Prime Minister Asquith was a key figure in keeping women disenfranchised. The Conciliation Bills failed, they were opposed because some MP’s didn’t want women’s enfranchisement, others wanted all women enfranchised, many Liberals were against them as the vote would go to mainly middle class women who were likely to vote Conservative and many Irish voted against them as they wanted more time to discuss the Irish question. During this period also the Government were dealing with other problems such as the IRA fighting for home rule and the major industries going on strike. If the Government had given into the violence of the Suffragettes then other groups may have used it also to get what they wanted.

There were many reasons that women failed to get the vote the main one being attitudes towards them.

Source C (1) The Times in 1867 in reply to the suggestion that women should be allowed to vote

Source B (2) Mrs John Sandford, Women in her Social and Domestic Character (1837)

Source D (3) Edith Milner writing in the Times October 1906

“WITHOUT THE FIRST WORLD WAR BRITISH WOMEN WOULD NOT HAVE GAINED THE RIGHT TO VOTE IN 1918”.

DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THIS INTERPRETATION?

The First World War was a factor in gaining women the vote but it was not the only factor.

It was not until the war that women could prove they were capable of working just as hard as men in what were men’s jobs. Women kept the country going while the men were away at war. 3,224,600 women were employed in July 1914 and 4814,600 in January 1918. Over 700,000 worked in dangerous, crucial, munitions factories. They did manual jobs such as unloading coal and joined the Forces as nurses, cooks and drivers. Source C is a typical stereotyped pre-war view of women by the Conservative leader Lord Curzon. He argued against women’s enfranchisement saying, they lacked strength, their “duties” would suffer and they could not cope with war. The war proved this stereotype wrong and could not be used to deny women the vote.

Rover (1) argues that because of women’s role in the war attitudes changed as their public image improved. Source A is a front cover of ‘The War Worker’ showing a man and woman both given equal importance as they are united in the war cause. Used as propaganda to encourage people to become involved in the war effort, it is therefore not very reliable. However it does show a marked change with women being shown as equals. Source E is from a modern text book written by a historian so is a more reliable source. He states that men’s attitudes to women workers had not really changed, some working women were victims of hostility or even sabotage. So it is too simplified to see women’s enfranchisement as being only due to their work in the war.

Source B, a suffragette postcard shows how irrational it was for unfit lunatics or drunkards to vote but not to allow respectable females such as nurses and mayors to vote. Although the comparison between the sexes is extreme it does forcibly put across the message that not giving women the vote was irrational. Source A is from a speech by Emmeline Pankhurst. She rationally points out that the vote is important so that “the woman’s point of view can be put forward”, in government. She comments on how newspapers and conferences were all talking about change in society. This was spoken at the time when the WSPU were using violence to try and force changes. The Women’s Movement had kept the campaign of women’s votes in the public eye which was a factor in gaining women the vote. It can be argued that attitudes to women had been changing and given time women would have got the vote even if the war hadn’t happened. This can be seen in the slow improvement of women’s education, career opportunities and matrimonial rights.

When war started The Women’s Movement changed their tactics from confrontation to cooperation, Emmeline Pankhurst encouraged recruitment for example. This shows that the women who were labelled “lunatics” by the press were capable of making rational decisions. Public opinion became more favourable towards them. The war gave them a chance to prove they were not just fanatics. Rover (1) argues that after the war ended the campaign for women’s votes would have begun again and this time support for women would have been even stronger. There would have been more pressure put on the Government who would have found it difficult to imprison women who had contributed so much.

During 1917 the Government had to cope with many crises. Poorer men who were fighting but did not have the vote were questioning what the war was doing for them. Therefore Government needed a new war aim. To maintain moral they began to speak of making “A land fit for heroes”, when the war finished. It was about this time that the Government started to talk about giving women the vote. As it was a coalition Government concerns that one party may benefit from women’s suffrage had disappeared.

Bartley (2) states that:-

“It would be naïve to believe that women received the vote solely for services rendered in the 1st World War”.

She argues that it was only women over 30 who got the vote. They were not given the vote on the same terms as men. In source C Lord Curzon argued against the vote for women saying that if women got the vote then most voters would be women. This could have been a factor in disenfranchising some women. Not giving the vote to women under 30 shows that the argument that the vote was given as a reward is wrong as it was these women who did many of the most dangerous jobs.

The post war period was a good time for women’s votes. Franchise reform was needed as many men had been killed during the war or had been away for so long that they lost their right to vote. Many of the men opposed to the vote for women were away at war so there was less opposition in general against women’s votes and Asquith was replaced by David Lloyd George who was more sympathetic to women’s votes. Also full Democracy was part of a global trend and Britain didn’t want to lag behind.

Although the war was not the only reason for women getting the vote I agree that without the war women couldn’t have got the vote in 1918, it would have taken longer.

(1) Constance Rover Women’s Suffrage and Party Politics in Britain 1866-1914 (1967)

(2) Paula Bartley Votes for Women 1860 – 1928 (1998)