When this ‘division’ took place, the Suffragists continued with their peaceful methods. They participated in marches and demonstrations, printed leaflets, pinned up posters on walls, wrote letters to MP’s, anything that would get people’s attention without breaking the law. They used these methods because they believed that with time and persistence they would be able to persuade the government to agree with them. As most of the Suffragists were middle-class women with families they were rather reluctant to break the law or harm people. But these methods seemed to have little to no effect on the situation as many of the bills that were introduced into the House of Commons, due to their ongoing efforts, were either rejected or talked out.
The Suffragettes, after witnessing the Suffragists lack of progress decided to take things into their own hands. Unfortunately their methods did not limit themselves within the law. Suffragettes adopted almost terrorist-like mentalities and were prepared to act outside the law using violent and unlawful means. Along with participating in Suffragist-like means of protest, Suffragettes were known to have harassed MP’s, taken part in stone throwing, disturbed political meetings, destroyed property, heckled Cabinet Ministers and to the dismay of prisons around the country, adopted a firm stance on hunger striking as a weapon. During the summer of 1912 a prime example of such military type tactics was seen. The Suffragettes, using hammers which they had concealed in their clothing, marched up and down Oxford Street and the surrounding area, smashing every shop window in sight; this resulted in a planned assault on the WSPU headquarters by the police and the arrest of over 200 Suffragettes. These methods may seem extreme, but at the time they resulted in mass publicity and an opportunity for propaganda, especially in cases of forced feeding. As a result, people began to take notice and women’s suffrage became a major issue. This taught the Suffragettes, in their eyes, an invaluable lesson: militancy ‘paid off’.
Putting aside their differences, one thing that both Suffragettes and Suffragists had to deal with was ‘factionalism’. Throughout the campaigns both camps had divisions throughout their membership ranging from geographical location to social status. This meant that it was almost impossible for the leaders of the organizations to control the actions of each and every faction.
One thing that did aid the Suffragists cause was their affiliations to political parties and influential MP’s, something which the Suffragettes could not rely on. This was mainly down to the openness of the Suffragists to outside support and compromises along with the fact that Suffragettes antagonized parties and the public resulting in little to no support or sympathy.
