The Case for Women's Suffrage/The Present Position of the Women's Suffrage Movement
THE PRESENT POSITION OF THE WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE MOVEMENT
BY EMMELINE PANKHURST, OF THE WOMEN'S SOCIAL AND POLITICAL UNION
Women's Suffrage has now a place among the practical political questions of the day. It has not so much agitated the public mind since 1884. In that year the Representation of the People Act was introduced. The Act applied only to men, but an amendment to include women was moved. This amendment was strongly supported in the country, but was rejected by the House of Commons in consequence of the opposition of the Liberal Government.
At the ensuing General Election the Liberal Party barely escaped defeat. Had the Women Suffragists been well advised they would have offered strenuous opposition to Liberal candidates, in order to prevent the return to power of a Party which had so recently refused to enfranchise women. The Women's Suffrage Amendment to the County Franchise Bill had been supported by the Conservative leaders, and if the Women Suffragists had brought about the defeat of the Liberals, a Conservative Government would have found it difficult to avoid bringing in a Bill for Women's Suffrage.
Unfortunately, this great opportunity was allowed to pass, and for more than twenty years the movement has been under a cloud. Now, chiefly as the result of new methods of agitation—not only more dramatic but more political in their character than the old ones—Women's Suffrage stands in the direct line of political progress.
Because of our near approach to victory the strength of the opposition to be overcome is now more than ever apparent. I refer not to the action of certain misguided women who say that they object to the enfranchisement of their sex, but to that of male opponents who have hitherto regarded the Women's Suffrage movement as one which they could afford to ignore or even pretend to support. They now discover that this question is nearer settlement than they had thought possible. Hence, members of Parliament who object to Women's Suffrage are now sparing no pains to resist the reform.
Their opposition takes two forms. Some oppose Women's Suffrage avowedly because they object to the political equality of the sexes; others, less honest, argue against the immediate enfranchisement of women because they profess to believe that nothing short of complete womanhood suffrage ought to be granted. The Prime Minister adopts this attitude, without, however, giving the smallest indication of an intention to act upon his professed principles.
This, then, is the present position of affairs: Most members of the Cabinet are hostile to Women's Suffrage. The rest are apathetic as regards the question. Some women clung until lately to the belief that the Prime Minister was favourable, but his speech on March 8th has destroyed their illusion. Behind the Cabinet stands the largest majority of modern times. Most of the men who compose it are pledged supporters of Women's Suffrage, but they take no steps to force the Government to deal with the question. In fact, several of these pledged supporters now openly state that their pledges meant nothing, and some are actually found in the ranks of those who opposed Mr. Dickenson's Women's Enfranchisement Bill.
Looked at superficially, the position is discouraging, but it is in truth most encouraging. This is because two other factors have to be taken into consideration. One is the growing determination and strength of women, and the other the sympathy of the electors. The largest majority ceases to suffice for and protect a Government which has lost its hold on the country, and nothing is now more dangerous to the popularity of the Government than its treatment of the Women's Suffrage cause.
The Women's Social and Political Union has been driven to adopt the only sort of methods which politicians understand and will take notice of, the sort of methods too which have enabled men in this and other countries to win their political rights. The Chartist agitations, even the breaking down of Hyde Park railings, are referred to with the greatest respect by the very Liberals who loudly condemn similar tactics on the part of Women Suffragists. The assassination of an enemy of popular liberty in Russia seems to Liberal politicians much more innocent than what is termed a "raid" on the House of Commons, or the "heckling" of a British Cabinet Minister at a public meeting. Already 150 women have suffered imprisonment for the part they have taken in the movement.
Another way of bringing pressure to bear on the Government is by opposing and securing the defeat of their nominee at the by-elections. If it can be proved to the Government "that their refusal to grant Women's Suffrage is destroying their popularity in the country they will be obliged in self defence to deal with the question." Not even the strongest Government can afford to ignore the displeasure of the electors as evinced at by-elections. There is no more effective way of forcing the hands of the Government than that of working to defeat their candidates.
Members of the Liberal Party hotly resent this by-election policy, and that in itself is an excellent sign.
The Liberals know that already the work of the Women's Social and Political Union is injuring the Government, and they recognise that the new political force will in time become still more dangerous. Of course, the usual Liberal cries of "Tory gold," and "in league with the Tories" are heard. Liberals always make such insinuations against those who wish them to move faster than they are disposed to move.
Not very long ago the Labour Party was charged with being financed and engineered by the Tories. Now that the Labour Party has grown strong Liberals dare not utter such slanders concerning Labour men, but they think they can afford to traduce the women's movement in their accustomed way. Quite undeterred, encouraged rather, by their attacks the Women's Social and Political Union holds firmly to its by-election policy.
The elections are fought on strictly independent lines. Naturally if the Liberal candidate has only one opponent he, whether he be Labour man or Unionist, reaps the whole benefit of the votes detached from the Liberal. If three or more candidates are in the field the Liberal is opposed, and the Union observes a neutral attitude towards the remaining candidates.
Many Liberal candidates are prepared to declare in favour of Women's Suffrage, but we nevertheless oppose such candidates. Already the House of Commons contains 420 members who before their election promised to support Women's Suffrage. Several of these gentlemen explain that they made the pledges without any intention of fulfilling them. Those who profess to be in earnest are quite inactive. Liberal members refuse to embarrass the Government, and if they were to show signs of doing so, would be restrained by the Liberal executives in their constituencies. Let those who plead for mercy to be shown to the Liberal candidates who are "in favour" of Women's Suffrage reflect that no man who really believes in that reform would consent to stand as a candidate under Liberal auspices while the policy of the Government remains what it is to-day. If Liberal candidates and others want the women's opposition to cease, they have only to persuade the Prime Minister and his Cabinet to grant the franchise to women.
Some people, overwhelmed perhaps by the magnitude of the idea of fighting the Government, talk of basing their action at the elections entirely upon the character of the pledges given by individuals. If one candidate is in favour of Women's Suffrage and the other is opposed, they propose to work for the man who is in favour. If both individuals are in favour, they think it advisable to take no part in the contest at all. Thus, if both candidates choose to say they are in favour the Suffragists would be driven off the field. Such a policy is obviously very weak in comparison to that which seeks to bring pressure to bear upon the Government by robbing it of adherents.
The few occasions upon which this anti-Government by-election policy has been tried have brought much encouragement.
The electors begin to understand our appeal to vote against the Government, and to respond to it. As the campaign becomes more dangerous, those whom we are attacking attempt to undermine our position by means of misrepresentation as to our methods. They also make every effort to confuse the public mind by talking of their belief in womanhood suffrage, well knowing that the Government which they support has not the slightest intention of granting votes to all women.
The presence of the Women's Social and Political Union at by-elections has caused the services of Liberal women election workers to be at a premium. The Liberal Party has evidently come to the conclusion that only women can offer effectual resistance to a women's campaign. Hence the help of Liberal women is in greater demand than ever before.
This fact alone should prove to Liberal women what is their duty at the present time. If they will cease to work for the Liberal Party and begin instead to work against it until the vote is granted to women, the Government will be obliged to yield.
At first sight such course of action seems unthinkable to many Liberal women. Loyalty to Party they think forbids it. One would remind them that fidelity to principle must come before fidelity to Party. The Liberal women by their work at the last General Election have a strong claim upon the Party leaders. Moreover, they constitute a force which those leaders cannot afford to disregard. Having, therefore, the power to claim and win the enfranchisement of their sex they stand in the position of trustees for the women of the nation, and they betray their trust when they prefer Party interests to the interests of the Women's cause.
Liberal women shrink from the idea of taking part in the overthrow of the Government. They need not fear. Long before matters reach such a pass the Government will yield.
The loss of half a dozen seats owing to the opposition of women, while not destroying the power of the Government to carry the reforms to which they are pledged, will force the Liberal leaders to grant the Suffrage. The opposition of the Women's Social and Political Union to the Government will continue until such time as Women's Suffrage is granted, whether the Liberal women join us or not, but their co-operation would hasten the day of success.
Some Liberal women are heard to say that they will work for the Suffrage from inside the Liberal Party. How they intend to enforce their demand supposing persuasion to fail they do not explain. To leave the Liberal Party and thenceforward to fight against it seems to an onlooker the only possible way. Other Liberal women claim to regard it as the height of unwisdom to harass the Government. Have they not learnt that a Government pressed by conflicting claims deals with those that are the source of most inconvenience?
Not to Liberal women only, but to the women of all parties one appeals that they will, until they have won the vote, forget Party politics and unite in an independent campaign, having for its object the removal of the political disability of sex.