Why did a campaign for women's suffrage develop in the years after 1870?

Natalya Frederick 11JT

History Coursework

Votes for Women

Q1. Why did a campaign for women’s suffrage develop in the years after 1870?

The late 19th Century, as a period where social unrest was prevalent, became the major starting point of social, political and economic reform in Britain. Social groups were beginning to demand that their voices be heard by government in order to improve standard of living, working conditions and education opportunities.

This period of reform was echoed by the height of the campaign for female emancipation. As the first trade unions and strikes were being organised by miners, labourers and other male workers, female workers and women in general were beginning to demand improvements in their legal, social and financial positions. New acts and reform bills were steadily introduced from around the mid 19th Century, improving women’s rights.

E.g. The 1839 Custody of Infants Act gave more rights to divorced women to see their children (although the father still had almost complete control of the children), and the factory Acts of 1842 and 1847 reduced maximum working hours for women in textile factories.

At this time, many of Britain’s poorest and most exploited people were women. By 1900 there were over 5 million wage-earning women in Britain, most of them grossly underpaid, working in awful conditions. These issues of poverty and inequality formed the background of the demand for votes for women.

Despite many new laws attempting to redress some of the inequalities women faced daily, national female suffrage was largely ignored or flatly denied by parliament. Much progress was made at local level – women could vote in council, school board and health board elections by 1899, however they were still specifically excluded from voting in general elections.

Although countless reform acts enabled increasing numbers of men to vote, there were no such advances for female suffrage. The major arguments against female suffrage felt by many politicians, authorities, men and even women were the opinions against which pro-female suffrage and feminist organisations fought. This opposition had many voices, however the arguments were limited to a simple few.

It was felt that women would be sacrificing their ‘womanhood’ in order to take part in the masculine world of politics and that they were needed and valued at home and so should leave politics to men. Many thought that political power would be in the hands of irresponsible women who could ‘swamp’ the male electorate if they chose to. It was true that not all women were in favour of female suffrage, therefore many thought that it was unjustified. In addition, many felt that women would be intimidated into voting for their husbands’ choice of political party.

Although the anti-female suffrage campaign may have had some valid points, the truly compelling argument is that advocating the case for female suffrage. Essentially, a campaign for women’s suffrage developed in the late 19th Century because women saw the vote as a ‘means to an end’. The vote had been a key factor in safe-guarding the interests of men, and now women were demanding the same. Little progress could be made to improve women’s issues until MPs were made accountable to female voters. Emmeline Pankhurst, a leading female suffrage campaigner said of the vote, “first of all it is a symbol, secondly a safe-guard, and thirdly an instrument.” Votes for women organisations, such as the NUWSS and WSPU argued that many social and female issues (e.g. Child death rate, married women employment, etc) cannot be settled without a female viewpoint. Also, as long as the vote was denied, important and lucrative positions would also be denied, and as politics and economics go hand in hand, without political status, women would always have a limited economic voice. In answer to the argument that women do not belong in politics and should stay at home, it was argued that politics had invaded the home, and so women should be compelled to enter politics.

In conclusion, the campaign for women’s suffrage developed in reaction to women being the victims of an unfair social system, where they were poorly politically represented and so disregarded – often leaving them to lives of poverty, inequality and ignorance.

History Coursework

Votes For Women

Q2. Describe the ways in which the methods of the suffragists and suffragettes were different

...

This is a preview of the whole essay

History Coursework

Votes For Women

Q2. Describe the ways in which the methods of the suffragists and suffragettes were different

The 19th Century campaign for female suffrage was led by two main organisations, which although both had a similar aim of votes for women, used very different tactics and methods in order to publicise their campaigns, gain support, and ensure success.

Founded in 1897, the NUWSS, National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies (also known as the Suffragists), used peaceful, moderate and law-abiding methods, to achieve their simple aim ‘to promote the claim of women to the parliamentary vote on the same terms as it is or my be granted to men’. They did not want the vote for all women; they just wanted women to be on an equal footing as the voting men, and the men who would get it in the future.

Mrs Millicent Garrett Fawcett was the President of the NUWSS – elected by the members (over 600 societies and more than 100, 000 individuals) who also decided the policies. As the oldest and largest national organisation campaigning for votes for women, the NUWSS gained a lot of support, particularly from working class women who worked in cotton mills and textile factories. These working women wanted the vote in the hope that their low wages would be raised and dreadful living and working conditions improved.

The Suffragists used door to door canvassing, speeches at local trades union meetings by members in order to publicise their campaign, which was although often tiresome and time-consuming was highly effective – working class women joined the NUWSS in their droves. Other peaceful methods adopted by the NUWSS included petitions, propaganda campaigns (posters, banners, postcards, newsletters, plays and theatre productions produced by women nation-wide) and peaceful public demonstrations

Although effective, the suffragist’s methods were slow, and often still ignored by major politicians and authorities. This caused some factions of the movement to become dissatisfied with peaceful methods and to believe that the only way to gain the vote for women was by using more aggressive campaign methods. These women formed the Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU), also known as the Suffragettes who adopted a more militant approach to the campaign in the hope of gaining more publicity.

Founded in 1903 by Emmeline Pankhurst and her daughters Christabel and Sylvia, the WSPU were not opposed by the NUWSS, the NUWSS just did not believe that the WSPU’s aggressive methods would work. Although originating from a similar viewpoint, the WSPU and NUWSS were vastly different organisations.

Whereas the Suffragists (NUWSS) were largely non-political, the Suffragettes were closely linked with the Labour party, whose party meetings were often attended by the Pankhursts as speakers. In addition, the Suffragists had a vast grass-root support system among working class women, whereas the Suffragettes had very few working class members (Annie Kenney being a high profile example).

The early examples of the Suffragette’s disruptive campaign included members attending political party meetings and heckling politicians/speakers with questions on how they intended to work for female suffrage, resulting in their removal and often, arrest. Rather than pay fines, many members opted to be jailed in order to further publicise the campaign.

This publicity attracted new recruits and encouraged the WSPU’s militant approach. The WSPU declared ‘war’ on the Liberal government for failing o do anything for votes for women. Leading liberal politicians were heckled during speeches, their houses picketed and demonstrations were held and disturbances caused outside the Houses of Parliament. More arrests and refusals to pay resulted in longer prison stays where women were forced to wear prison uniforms, denied visits or letters. This was another victory for the WSPU propaganda machine. They were able to show that their members were being treated more harshly than some hardened criminals, forcing the government to back down. Realising how it could torment the government and Liberal leaders, the WSPU became increasingly militant.

In 1911, began one of the Suffragettes most violent campaigns in order to destroy commercial properties, to promote awareness for their cause. They smashed windows of both government and private offices. Lots of damage was caused in London, leading to over 200 women being arrested. By 1912, window smashing had become an official WSPU policy, extending to Churches (the Church of England was anti-female suffrage), art galleries and the use of bombs on private houses and public places. By 1913-14, few suffragette bombers were caught, increasing political & public anger and opposition towards the WSPU.

Those who were imprisoned often went on hunger strike, and many were brutally force-fed. This was publicly condemned, resulting in the end of this cruel practice. Instead, women were allowed to go on hunger strike but they were released as soon as they became ill. Once recovered, they would be re-arrested and re-imprisoned until their sentence was completed. This successful means of dealing with hunger strikes, was the governments only real weapon against the WSPU, and was known as the ‘Cat and Mouse’ Act.

Essentially, the suffragist methods were intended to work to show the merits of the campaign and were more prepared to compromise with the government in order to allow at least some women vote (the new Reform Bill, 1911). However the militant and aggressive WSPU were far less prepared to co-operate and instead, intended to mock and torment the government and their opposition until they conceded ‘defeat’, and agreed to meet the WSPU’s demands. It is in this way that many historians have drawn parallels between the Suffragettes and terrorism.

History Coursework

Votes for Women

Q3. Women over 30 gained the vote in 1918 mainly because of women’s contribution to the war effort. Do you agree? Explain your answer.

By the early 1910s, the campaign for female suffrage led by the NUWSS and WSPU had reached its height. The Suffragists led the ‘Women’s Pilgrimage’ of 1913, a march organised in order to increase public awareness and support for the campaign, and between 1912 and 1914, the Suffragettes campaign methods were more militant than ever. However, these campaigns were to be the final phase of Suffragette activity, as with the outbreak of WW1 in 1914, campaigns for votes for women were put on hold in order to concentrate on the war effort.

Women played a vital role in the war, both in the armed forces and on the home front. By 1915, the British army was almost 2.5 million strong, and an army of this size needed a vast supply of munitions. This meant that more and more women were needed to help supply them by taking the jobs of the men who had joined the army, in munitions factories.

Women were also recruited into the armed services for the first time. Women with experience in first aid, were used as nurses, those with farming experience in the countryside joined the Land Army, taking the places of farm workers, and the Women’s Auxiliary Army Corps, Royal Naval Service and Royal Air Force were set up.

The motor car, mechanics, aeroplane and banking industries also gained female recruits during the war, however despite their pivotal roles in the war effort, women were not readily accepted or valued by their male counterparts who would almost always earn more and be more likely candidates for promotion. There were many strikes against the use of female workers, and the government was forced to sign agreements with the trade unions stating that women would not keep their jobs at the end of the war.

The Representation of the People Act, in 1918 gave the vote to all men over 21 and women over 30 who were married to, or themselves householders. It is widely thought by historians that this victory for the campaign for female suffrage was one largely because of a government attempt to produce an electoral register in 1916, rather than being due to the work of women in the war effort. This is thought because it was soon becoming obvious that many of the men who were entitled to the vote in 1914, were no longer because they were in the army and no longer qualified under the household franchise. The government therefore decided it would be easier to give the vote to all men over 21, which was done in the Representation of the People Act of 1918. The government also took the opportunity to give the vote to women at the same time, as much of the stigma that was attached to giving women any kind of political and social power had been eradicated with the advances made during the war.

Although it is likely that the historians view that the government’s attempt to produce a new electoral register was a major factor in aiding women to win the vote is likely, the vital work of women throughout the war effort cannot be disregarded.

It was the entrance of women into the world of work along side men of often doing the dirtier, more dangerous jobs which really triggered the major changes which made the government’s decision to give women the vote generally more acceptable to the public and therefore more likely to be introduced. While the men were fighting on the front line during WW1, the women were taking on the traditionally ‘men-only’ jobs on the home front. Women were becoming postal workers, bus conductors and mechanics out of necessity in order to aid the war effort and it was in these professions where many women proved themselves to be capable of much more than was traditionally expected of them, and earned the grudging respect and support of politicians who have previously been opposed to the female suffrage campaign.

The fact that women had really earned acknowledgement for their efforts during the war was a great influence on the decision of politicians and the government to give some women the vote. Another influence might have been that the government were unwilling to come up against Emmeline Pankhurst and the Suffragettes and their temporarily called-off violent campaign now that the war was over.

In conclusion, I agree with the original statement because I feel that the government would have been reluctant to introduce the radical and traditionally opposed idea of votes for women without the major social change and subsequent change in public opinion which was due to the changing face of industry and economical & social power which now included rather than disregarded women.