There are similarities between the language used in both sources. Source B uses the word shrill, which is generally negative. It was used in context about the loud protesting of the suffragette movement. Source C uses the word shrieking which is synonymic of the word shrill. It implies that the shrieking is uncontrolled and unmonitored – that not much thought is going into the argument so shouting is the best means the suffragettes have to drive their message home.
There are differences between the sources also. Source B is definitely outright against the vote for women – Corelli is of the opinion that “women were and are meant to make voters rather than be voters”. They are supposed to create the voters but not vote themselves. Source C has a different viewpoint. Partridge conveys the idea that suffragettes shouldn’t get the vote, but if campaign methods were changed, if they took a more suffragist slant, then the overall objective could be achievable.
Q3. Study Sources D & E and use your own knowledge. Why despite the suffragette activity, had women not gained the vote by the outbreak of the first world war?
A3. Prior to 1914, a series of Private Members bills had been introduced by individual MPs, and the cause of the suffragists had been receiving sympathy. However, on each Private Member’s Bill, time was not given for extended discussion or voting. Votes for Women wasn’t on the schedule for any of the three main government parties (Labour, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats). Support was evidently decreasing for the cause, and yet there was still obvious individual support in each party, but the leaders of each group recognised that votes for women wasn’t the best platform for gaining votes. Specifically, Labour and the Liberals were particularly opposed as they believed the conservatives would gain the most – they thought they’d receive the majority of the female vote.
In 1910, a team of MPs from the three major political parties (known as a conciliation committee) proposed a bill which would grant a limited licence to women. Again, time was withheld for the bill to proceed. Then, in the midst of the violence being spewed by the suffragettes, the Liberal Government leader, Herbert Asquith, submitted a franchise bill containing a women’s section. The reason for this was probably appeasement, but he needn’t have bothered – the Speaker of the House ordered him to withdraw that section from the bill.
Source D is an extract from a book by one of the leading suffragettes, Emmeline Pankhurst. She points out that because of their activities, the news was full of their activities, so at least people knew about the women’s voting movement. The government had proved unwilling to budge in 1906, when public opinion was favourable to the suffragists, and as the vote wasn’t given then, they had to fight now. And it was this fighting that was their undoing.
In 1913, the suffragettes were fighting and this was rapidly changing people’s opinions. This was the year that the suffragettes got a martyr and when, in Source E, a MP gives a speech showing his disregard of the idea for women votes. So, this infers that opinion hadn’t improved, even with Emily Davison’s sacrifice. If anything, it had further harmed the movement for women’s suffrage, as a lot of people considered them mentally unstable and to be lunatics.
Another important factor for the women’s failure in the battle for the vote was the fact that the government faced serious problems which tended to eclipse the issue of women’s suffrage. For example, in 1906, there was a succession of social reformations. In order to proceed with these, the government needed to win the election of 1910 and so therefore cast aside the shrill cries of votes for women, as they thought it would repel potential voters.
There was almost a civil war in Ireland over the topic of Home Rule and this overshadowed the suffrage arguments. Also feuding, were the House of Commons and the House of Lords. This threatened to bring down the government and therefore was of greater concern than a noisy group of women who wanted something they shouldn’t have.
As 1914 crept closer, war was looking imminent and this was a top priority for the government. They didn’t want an outbreak of conflict which would be both physically and economically draining on the country and it’s resources.
However with the outbreak of war in 1914, the argument of female suffrage wasn’t abandoned, merely put aside for the time being. The big suffragette voice, Mrs Pankhurst, declared her full support towards the war effort of Great Britain. The men were being drafted to the frontline in increasing quantities, so the women stepped in to replace the loss of manpower – this was their chance to prove themselves as worthy as men.
Q4. Study Sources F & G How useful are these two sources as evidence for the contribution of women to the war effort in the years 1914-1918?
A4. Source F is a poster produced by the government in the middle of the war, specifically 1916. It shows a woman in official uniform – ready and working. This picture tells us that women were being utilised in the workforce. They were actively contributing to wartime by manufacturing and supplying the military with munitions. The caption of the poster is ‘Enrol at once’. This shows that women were needed and that the employers were quickly realising the necessity of their efforts. They were being valued more as workers, rather than in the typical woman’s household placement.
Source G is a table with statistics from a school textbook. There is information from before the war started and before it ended. They show that there were few female workers before the start of the war. Notably, government employees got the biggest surge in numbers thanks to the woman contribution. There were 2,000 employees in July 1914 and in four years of warfare, the number had rocketed to 225,000. This proves again that more and more women were working and adding to the efforts of the country and were being employed in several areas of work.
A limitation of Source F is that it shows only one occupation. If we had only seen that one advertisement, we would be none the wiser as to whether women were being employed in other professions. This limits the usefulness as it is very narrow in the information it gives. There is no data as to how effective the women were in their new roles. It is useful however, as it effectively infers that women were needed for work, even in male-dominated workforces.
A limitation of Source G is that it shows only four jobs. Were women doing other jobs? We won’t find out from this source. It is limited as it shows figures months before the start of the war, and before the end. Also, other jobs like those in transportation are not shown.
The more useful source is Source G. It is more useful than Source F because it shows a greater width of jobs. Also, by providing statistics, comparisons can be drawn between two points in time.
Q5. Study Sources H, I and J and use your own knowledge. ‘It was the work that women did during the war that earned them the vote’. Explain whether you agree with this interpretation.
A5. With the inception of the Representation of the People Act, eight and a half million women were given the right to vote. It is presumed that the effort made by the women in the effort of wartime victory was the main reason. In doing this, Women had proven that many of the arguments put forwards by the opposition to be false. However this wasn’t the only contribution that changed the mind of the previously uncompromising government.
Source H disagrees with the above statement. It argues that the reason women over thirty got the vote in 1918, was not because of “loyal wartime service”, but down to the opinion of politicians that these women had brought up their sons successfully and had performed a service to the country – as a large percentage of these sons had fought in the war. It was because of this ‘service’ that the politicians thought these women were sensible enough to vote.
Source I is unsure about the cause of women receiving the vote. It considers that the period of 19-14-1918 was one of great change. After four years of conflict, the mood of people was favourable to a change in what they had lived with for the last four years (wartime Britain wasn’t the most pleasant of times). It does acknowledge women’s rights as one of the social and political changes that happened as a result of the war. Campaigns like ‘Homes made for Heroes’ and others aiming for reform, made the change in voting law easier to grant.
Source J somewhat agrees with the statement. It is a statement made by ex-prime minister Herbert Asquith in which he recalls his previous absolute objection to women’s suffrage. He goes on to point out that the suffragettes haven’t resumed their violent protests and they have instead directed their efforts into “every service during this war except that of fighting”. He says that because of this change in direction, and the work women did during the war, that he believes that some women ought to get the privilege of voting.
A point that opposes this statement is that men were gradually feeling more hostile and resentful towards the women who had filled into their job roles. The women were working effectively and for lower wages, so understandably fears of unemployment were growing amongst men, and they blamed the women. As the women got the vote, with this hostility floating around male heads, there is an indication that it was not the work done by women that got them suffrage.
Asquith himself highlighted that besides combat, women contributed to every service in the war. Well, those who worked in munitions were mainly young and working class and doing a hugely important job. Yet these women did not qualify for the vote which indicates that the vote wasn’t allocated exclusively because of hard work done by women.
Another likely reason for certain women being awarded the vote was down to fear of suffragette activity recommencing. They had suspended activity four years previously and this was likely to have been partly behind the change in opinion. As mentioned previously, these women went from violent protesting to hard wartime working, and this would have understandably earned the respect of the government. However, it was beneficial for the government to exaggerate women’s war work as they needed to increase recruitment figures into industry. It was also mutually advantageous for the women’s organisations as they were trying to enforce their case for enfranchisement.
It is arguable as to whether women would have obtained voting rights in 1918 had it not been for the men who had been fighting with the armed forces had lost their right to vote because of their none-residency during the war and this situation had to be overturned immediately. It was consequently fairly straightforward to add an amendment favourable to women, to the bill being pushed forward. So this fact is unsure as to the validity in the statement, as women only got the vote when an opportunity arose to slip in a policy change.
In consideration of all these points, I disagree with the statement as it says that it was the work that got women the vote. Well, it wasn’t just the work, there was Women worked exceptionally hard during the war and outstandingly quashed some of the opposition’s arguments. This undoubtedly had influence in the decision to give votes to certain women. It was a massive step forward and so had therefore had massive momentum behind it. Yes, the work provided some of this force, but there were many other factors that contributed.