The source explains what happened when Pankhurst was arrested but the article has one main goal to make the suffragettes look bad. It makes the police officers look the innocent party in the drama. As shown in this quote
“There was no intention at that time to arrest the two suffragettes”
They report that there was no objective to apprehend the two women after spitting in the face of two police officers. This is highly doubtful as if they were causing a scene the police would have arrested them and on past protests suffragettes were left painfully bruised and hurt so how can we be sure this wasn’t another on of these?
The article goes onto say that the police gave a way numerous cautions to the women but they both ignored the policemen. It also makes the reader not agree with the work the suffragettes are doing. The press focussed on the suffragettes violent protests but didn’t focus on the suffragists who peacefully protested. So the article is making readers who might be sympathetic less compassionate as these women are assaulting well respected police officers.
The article in all is very biased but cleverly put together, so you read it as if it is the truth. The article is in the police’s point of view of what took place so he could make them look in better then they actually are.
Also where are Pankhurst and her daughter’s recollection of the protest? The article does not state anything said by Pankhurst. In fact, the Suffragettes started off relatively peacefully. It was only in 1905 that the organisation created a stir when Christabel Pankhurst and Annie Kenney interrupted a political meeting in Manchester to ask two Liberal politicians (Winston Churchill and Sir Edward Grey) if they believed women should have the right to vote.
But the article is stating what the evidence was for the trail, so it must be taken seriously.
Also a quote from the article says
“If the evidence was to be believed, their behaviour was such as one would expect of women from the slums”
So Pinehurst’s actions probably did more harm than good to the cause as she was a highly educated woman. Many men asked the simple question - if this is what an educated woman does, what might a lesser educated woman do? How can they possibly be given the right to vote?
All in all I think the story is very unreliable, only half of the whole picture is painted for the reader and it is basically a warning to people not to agree with suffragettes as they are violent people.
____________________________________________________________________
Andrew Corcoran.
