Nurse Pine’s Medal ‘For Duty’ sold at auction on 26 April 2024
Very nearly 8 years ago – on 26 May 2016 – I published a post titled The Mystery of Nurse Pine’s Medal. I knew that Nurse Catherine Pine, who had for many years attended Emmeline Pankhurst, had been given a medal by the Women’s Social and Political Union and I knew that she had bequeathed it to a now defunct nursing organisation but, as my post makes clear, I didn’t know what the medal looked like or what had happened to it.
Most satisfactorily, the mystery is now solved. The medal, resplendent with its bars, was given to Nurse Pine ‘For Duty’ (rather than ‘For Valour’, as denoted on the Hunger-Strike Medals). She did indeed leave it in her will to the ‘History Section’ of the British College of Nursing, who had it in their possession until the BCN, a charity, dissolved in chaos in 1956. It would seem that the contents of the ‘History Section’, along with the furniture and fittings of the BCN building, were sold off to any member interested – perhaps at a valuation set by Harrods, who had been appointed as valuers.
The medal resurfaced in 1990 when put up for sale at Sothebys, where it failed to sell, reappearing at a specialist medal sale in 2008 when it was bought by an American dealer. He sold it to an American collector of suffrage memorabilia, who has since died and whose collection was auctioned yesterday in Dallas, Texas, by Heritage Auctions.
I have known since the beginning of this year that the medal was coming up for sale and tried to interest various institutions in this country, but none had sufficient funds to consider acquiring it. However, for the last couple or so years I have been in touch with Hope Elizabeth May, a US professor, attorney and founder of the Cora di Brazzà Foundation, who has taken a legal, philosophical, and personal interest in the fate of Nurse Pine’s medal. She and I recorded a podcast about Nurse Pine and her medal a few days ago – on 21 April. You can listen to it here:
I am pleased to say that Hope Elizabeth May is now the ‘steward’, as she rather delightfully terms it, of Nurse Pine’s medal. The ‘Forward Into Light’ initiative of the Cora di Brazzà Foundation highlights connections between the suffrage and peace movements and Hope has interesting plans to use the medal for educational purposes, not only to promote interest in suffrage history but also to discuss philosophical questions about autonomy and its implications for estate law. I think we can be assured that the intention behind Nurse Pine’s bequest to the BCN will now be honoured.
Since being able to view the medal so clearly (thanks to the auctioneer’s image) I researched the dates on all the bars and established (thanks to the information contained in the entry on Emmeline Pankhurst in my The Women’s Suffrage Movement: A Reference Guide, in which I had carefully noted from the Home Office papers the precise dates on which she was released from prison) that all except the first represented a date in which Nurse Pine had taken over the care of Mrs Pankhurst. Hope Elizabeth May suggested, and I am sure she is correct, that the first bar – engraved ’25 March 1913′ – refers to care taken of Sylvia Pankhurst, who was released from Holloway on 21 March after being forcibly fed for several weeks while on hunger-and thirst-strike.
For an article about Nurse Pine, written in the centenary year of 2018, see the City University’s City Magazine Although the nature of the medal was still then unknown to the writer – and to me – it does tell something of the life of Nurse Catherine Pine.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Was it only as the author of the leading guidebook to Europe that redoubtable Mariana Starke (1762-1838) was known to those in high places?
Might her specialised knowledge not have been allied to courage, skill, and ingenuity?
Might she not, in 1828, have unmasked the infamy of a royal duke?
And by doing so determined the complicated fates of crowns and states?
Subscribers to this website will recognise my interest and affection for Mariana Starke, ‘the celebrated traveller’. She was the author of Information and Directions for Travellers on the Continent that went through a number of editions in the first three decades of the 19th century. I have researched her early life – and those of her ancestors – in detail and posted a number of articles on this website. I did consider attempting a biography, but reluctantly concluded that there was insufficient primary material covering her later years. I may well be mistaken but, instead, I have had a good deal of amusement in imagining a life for her.
The minutiae of the information she imparted inspired from me an adventure that begins when we encounter Mariana in Rome in January 1828. A malevolent figure, ‘the Demon Duke’, is orchestrating turbulence in Britain and in Hanover. But in Rome events transpire to convince Mariana that she has proof of his infamy. Can she succeed in delivering it? Can she outwit and outrun his proxies?
From Rome we accompany Mariana – and others – on journeys by land and sea, north through Italy and France to a London denouement. We live the roads on which they travel, the cities, towns, villages, and ports through which they pass, the barges, carts, ships, carriages in which they are conveyed, the inns in which they stay, and the food that they eat. Dangers lurk. Of course they do.
The whole is woven around real historical figures and real historical facts. You will know the genre.
My question is, if anyone is sufficiently motivated to venture an opinion,
Should I publish, that is, self-publish, Mariana Starke and the Demon Duke?
For the Pascal Theatre Company I am giving a talk on 8 March:
Gower Street’s ‘Enterprising Women’:transforming the home, the land, and politics, 1875-1928
The event is free and already fully booked – but, of course, people who have signed up for it may drop out – so, if you are interested, do add your name to the waiting list. To accompany my talk Senate House Library is amounting a small Garrett/Fawcett-related exhibition, to include sections from the ceiling from 2 Gower Street that was decorated by Rhoda and Agnes Garrett.
Millicent Fawcett standing on the doorstep of 2 Gower Street, Bloomsbury, on her way to receive her DBE, 12 February 1925
Rhoda and Agnes Garrett
Gower Street’s’ Enterprising Women’: transforming the home, the land, and politics, 1875-1928
RHODA GARRETT (1841-1882)
AGNES GARRETT (1845-1935)
FANNY WILKINSON (1855-1951)
MILLICENT FAWCETT (1847-1929)
A FULLY ILLUSTRATED TALK by Elizabeth Crawford
In the late-19th and early-20th centuries four pioneering women lived at 2 and 6 Gower Street, Bloomsbury. These houses were their homes as well as the sites of their commercial and campaigning enterprises.
The firm of ‘R & A Garrett House Decorators’ operated from number 2, which was first the home of the cousins Rhoda and Agnes Garrett. After Rhoda’s death, it housed Agnes and her sister Millicent Fawcett, leader of the constitutional women’s suffrage movement.
Fanny Wilkinson lived and worked next door but one, at number 6. She was the first professional woman landscape gardener, responsible for laying out over 75 of London’s public parks and gardens.
All four women were also involved, together with an intriguing assortment of friends and relations, in any number of other campaigns. All worked to improve the position of women.
This fully-illustrated talk will describe the life and work of Rhoda Garrett, (1841-1882), Agnes Garrett (1845-1935), Fanny Wilkinson (1855-1951), and Millicent Fawcett (1847-1929).
Elizabeth Crawford is the author of a number of books on aspects of women’s history. Of particular relevance to this talk is Enterprising Women: the Garretts and their circle.
Venue:Seng Tee Lee Seminar Room, Senate House Library, 4th floor, Senate House, Malet Street, WC1E 7HU
Timing: The talk 4pm-5.00pm will include a Q & A session.
You are also invited to join an introduction to the library at 5.15pm.
Registration (free) (access will be given at reception to those who have registered)
With a lengthy Suffrage section at the beginning of the catalogue, Women in the First World War at the end, and all manner of women in time and space in between.
Indexto Catalogue
Suffrage Non-fiction: Items 1-13
Suffrage Biography: Items 14-20
Suffrage Fiction: Items 21-22
Suffrage Ephemera: Items 23-100
Suffrage Postcards: Real Photographic: Items 101-140
1. ATKINSON, Diane Funny Girls: cartooning for equality Penguin 1997
With a foreword by Betty Boothroyd. Packed with illustrations, covering the 130 years before publication. Soft covers – very good
[15444] £6
2. BRISTOL BROADSIDES (CO-OP) Bristol’s Other History Bristol Broadsides 1984 (r/p)
Includes ‘Bristol Women in Action (1839-1919)’ by Ellen Malos and ‘People’s Housing in Bristol (1870-1939)’ by Madge Dresser. Soft covers – good/fair (one 4-pp section is present, but loose)
[15447] £4
3. CRAWFORD, Elizabeth Art and Suffrage: a biographical dictionary of suffrage artists Francis Boutle 2018
Discusses the lives and work of over 100 artists, each of whom made a positive contribution to the women’s suffrage campaign. Most, but not all, the artists were women, many belonging to the two suffrage artists’ societies – the Artists’ Suffrage League and the Suffrage Atelier. Working in a variety of media – producing cartoons, posters, banners, postcards, china, and jewellery – the artists promoted the suffrage message in such a way as to make the campaign the most visual of all those conducted by contemporary pressure groups. Mint – NEW
[15466] £20
4. KENT, Susan Sex and Suffrage in Britain, 1860-1914 Princeton University Press 1987
Fine in d/w (which has one slight nick)
[1361] £20
5. MACKENZIE, Midge Shoulder to Shoulder Alfred A. Knopf 1975
The book of the acclaimed TV series. Large format, many illustrations. Good
[15426] £10
6. NOTTINGHAM WOMEN’S HISTORY GROUP No Surrender! Women’s Suffrage in Nottingham Smallprint 2016
A local history of the women’s suffrage campaign, edited by Rowena Edlin-White. Card covers – 80pp – very good
[15465] £10
7. PHILLIPS, Dr Marion (ed) Women and the Labour Party by Various Women Writers Headley Bros, no date (1918)
Published immediately after women (some women) had won the right to the parliamentary vote. In the foreword Arthur Henderson writes ‘What practical use women will make of the political and industrial freedom they have gained this book is in part an attempt to show.’ Contributors include Mrs Sidney Webb, Margaret Llewellyn Davies, Mrs Bruce Glasier, Margaret Bondfield, Mary Macarthur, Margaret McMillan, Susan Lawrence and Rebecca West. With an introduction by Marion Phillips, Soft covers – good- with a few marginal pencil lines denoting a special interest in the paragraph
[15482] £75
8. RAMELSON, Marian The Petticoat Rebellion: a century of struggle for women’s rights Lawrence & Wishart 1972
An interesting history of the women’s movement, written from a left-wing angle. Paper covers – ex-university library
[1592] £3
9. REID, Marion A Plea for Woman Polygon 1988
First published in 1843. Paper covers – fine
[4001] £8
10. ROVER, Constance Love, Morals and the Feminists Routledge 1970
Good in d/w – though ex-library
[4552] £5
11. STRACHEY, Ray Women’s Suffrage and Women’s Service: the history of the London & National Society for Women’s Suffrage London & National Society for Women’s Suffrage 1927
A very useful history of the society that was at the core of the constitutional suffrage movement.With 10 interesting photographs – I particularly like the one of the Library at Women’s Service House. 38pp. Original pictorial cover -38pp – in fine condition
[15527] SOLD
12. SWANWICK, H.M. The Future of the Women’s Movement G. Bell 1913
Helena Swanwick (1864-1939) was educated at Girton and became a lecturer in psychology at Westfield College, University of London. After her marriage and move to Manchester she wrote for the ‘Manchester Guardian’ and eventually became editor of the newly-Lauched NUWSS paper, ‘The Common Cause’. With a foreword by Millicent Fawcett. Good – cover rubbed.. Scarce
[15505] £95
13. WATKINS, Cliff Votes for Women: the struggle for women’s suffrage nationally and in and around Beckenham 1867-1929 Beckenham Suffragette Centenary Group 2003
Soft covers – 28pp – many illustrations – fine – scarce
[15446] £10
Suffrage Biography
14. (BECKER) Audrey Kelly Lydia Becker and The Cause Centre for North-West Regional Studies, University of Lancaster 1992
A brief study of Lydia Becker, leading 19th-c Manchester suffragist. Soft covers – mint – scarce
[15443] £12
15. (BENETT) Iain Gordon Rebel With a Cause: The life and times of Sarah Benett (1850-1924), social reformer and suffragette Pen and Sword 2018
A biography drawing on Benett’s private papers and prison memoir to recount the life of a social reformer who, middle-aged, was a militant activist member of the WSPU. Mint in d/w
[15424] £12
16. (COOPER) Jill Liddington The Life and Times of a Respectable Rebel: Selina Cooper, 1864-1936 Virago 1984
Paper covers – very good
[1153] £10
17. (DUNIWAY) Ruth Barnes Moynihan Rebel for Rights: Abigail Scott Duniway Yale University Press 1983
Abigal Scott Duniway (1834-1915), American suffragist, journalist, and national leader. Fine in d/w
[1205] £5
18. (MILL) John Stuart Mill Autobiography Longmans, Green 1873
First edition in original green cloth. Internally very good – a little wear at top and bottom of spine
[14974] £75
19. (PANKHURST) David Mitchell Queen Christabel: biography of Christabel Pankhurst MacDonald and Jane’s 1977
Good in d/w – ex-library, free front end paper removed
[11623] £6
20. (WEBB) Richard Harrison Richard Davis Webb: Dublin Quaker Printer (805-72) Red Barn Publishing 1993
Webb was a committed anti-slavery campaigner, whose family were very involved in the Irish women’s suffrage campaign. A brief biography. Soft covers – very good condition
[15066] £8
Suffrage Fiction
21. GRAY, LESLEY The King’s Jockey Solis Press 2013
A novel centring on the life of the jockey who was riding the King’s Horse at the 1913 Derby, colliding with Emily Wilding Davison. Soft covers – fine condition
[15065] £5
22. LUCAS, E.V. Mr Ingleside Methuen, 15th ed, no date 1910/1912?)
A novel with suffrage scenes. Only a reading copy – cloth worn – backstrip loose
[14132] £4
Suffrage Ephemera
23. [1909 29 JUNE] WSPU A DEPUTATION OF WOMEN WILL GO TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ON TUESDAY, JUNE 29TH AT 8 O’CLOCK TO SEE THE PRIME MINISTER WSPU 1909
and lay before him their demand for the Vote. The right to do this is secured to them by the Bill of Rights….’ In the event many women were arrested, although most of them had their cases adjourned ‘sine die’. Some, charged with stone throwing, were imprisoned and were some of the first women to go on hunger strike in Holloway. The case of Mrs Pankhurst and Mrs Evelina Haverfield, judged to be the leaders of the protest and who pleaded their protest was within the terms of the Bill of Rights, was adjourned until the end of the year. Flyer, printed by St Clement’s Press, Portugal Street, in black on white paper. In fine condition – extremely scarce
[15494] £350
24. ARE WOMEN CITIZENS? NUWSS no date [1909/1910]
Double-sided leaflet published by the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies. The answer to the question ‘The law says Yes! when they are required to pay the taxes. The law says No! when they ask to vote.’ etc. Included in the leaflet was in invitation to join the NUWSS. As the society declared ‘Its weapon is public opinion.’ Good – a little browning around the edges -slight nick at edge where it was once folded – Scarce
[15540] £65
25. BAKER, Hatty Women in the Ministry C.W. Daniel 1911
She was hon sec of the Free Church League for Women’s Suffrage and here ‘examines the prejudice which excludes women from the ministry of the Nonconformist or Free Churches, and claims this sphere of labour as a legitimate extension of the already enlarged field of woman’s activity’. The Free Church League for Women’s Suffrage was founded in 1909 with the aim of securing both the female vote and the admittance of women into the clergy.Paper covers – 60pp of text plus 16 pp of publisher’s advertisements. In generally good condition – back cover fragile at spine – but still attached. Very scarce
[15532] £85
26. BALFOUR, THE RT HON A.J., M.P. Speech in the House of Commons on Women’s Suffrage 1892 London Society for Women’s Suffrage
The speech closed the debate of the Second Reading of Sir Albert Rollit’s private member’s franchise bill, which narrowly failed to pass. The speech was originally printed by the Central Society for Women’s Suffrage, so this is a later printing with the society now renamed the LSWS. As the address for the LSWS is given as 58 Victoria Street, this would indicate that it was issued in 1910 or after. Interesting that the speech still had resonance nearly 20 years after it was given. In fact, the pamphlet bears the stamp of the Women’s Freedom League – and, faintly in pencil, is marked ‘To be kept’. Paper covers – 8pp – – the leaves are separate, as the holding staple has failed.
[15526] £55
27. BRAILSFORD, H.N. The Conciliation Bill: and explanation and defence The Woman’s Press probably 1910
Brailsford, journalist and active suffrage supporter, explains the Conciliation Bill – and which women it would enfranchise. Paper covers are fragile, internally good – 15pp – scarce
[15535] £65
28. CAZALET, Thelma Mrs Pankhurst
An article about Mrs Pankhurst by Thelma Cazalet (MP for Islington East) in ‘The Listener’ (6 Nov 1935) in a series ironically titled ‘I Knew A Man’. See also item ??. A 4-pp article – including photographs. The late-lamented ‘The Listener’ was a substantial journal in those days – this issue is 55 pages – in goodish condition – the front page is present but detached.
[14454] £20
29. CAZALET-KEIR, Thelma I Knew Mrs Pankhurst Suffragette Fellowship c 1935
Pamphlet published by the Suffragette Fellowship, reproduced from an article the author had written for the ‘Listener’ (6 Nov 1935). 8-pp pamphlet – very good condition
[15496] £95
30. CLAYTON, Joseph Militant Methods in History The Woman’s Press no date [1911]
With an introduction by H.W. Nevinson. The British Library catalogue dates this WSPU pamphlet to 1913, but my research shows it was first published in March 1911, having first appeared as a series of articles in ‘Votes for Women’. Paper covers – 36pp -in very good condition internally, the front cover marked (a splash of tea?). The free front endpaper bears the handwritten message ‘To Mrs Rose with kind regards from Joseph Clayton’
[15486] £90
31. DESPARD, Charlotte Woman’s Franchise and Industry Women’s Freedom League no date [1910]
‘The Political Emancipation of WOmen as it will affect Industry – is of the most far-reaching importance.’ Paper covers, with photograph of Mrs Despard – 12pp – very good – scarce
[15542] £85
32. FAIRFIELD, Zoe The Woman’s Movement Student Christian Movement 1913
Zoe Fairfield (1878-1936), a cousin of Rebecca West, was for 20 years from 1909 assistant general secretary of the Student Christian Movement. She was a suffrage supporter and this item reprints four articles on the subject of the women’s movement, discussing women’s work (and wages), public morality, women and Christianity, and female missionary work that first appeared in ‘The Student Movement’ magazine in early 1913. Soft covers -36pp – good – scarce
[15546] £75
33. FEMINIST ART NEWS vol 2 number 1 Women in the Arts in Britain 1900-1910 FAN Business Collective 1988?
FAN was led by Jane Beckett and Deborah Cherry, who contribute an article on Art, Class and Gender 1900-1910 to this issue. Other articles are by Lisa Tickner on ‘images of femininity in the Edwardian women’s suffrage campaign’, Ziggi Alexander on ‘Black Entertainers 1900-1910’. Cheryl Buckly on ‘Women in the Edwardian Pottery Industry’, Sarah Harvey on Caroline Townshend and Magdalen Evans on Mariaanne Stokes. Soft covers – very good – withdrawn from London Guildhall University Library – scarce
[15463] £12
34. FLAPPERS: Casual Letters vol IV James Dunning & Co Ltd May 1928
Published in an idiosyncratic series of ‘Casual Letters’, these are the thoughts of a City gentleman, perhaps James Dunning himself. A ‘sometimes flippant’ look at the forthcoming change in the Franchise. It’s always worth investigating popular attitudes to ‘Women’. Good – paper covers – 26pp – decidedly uncommon
[15521] £10
35. HARDIE, J. Keir The Citizenship of Women: a plea for woman’s suffrage. With an appendix by Miss Clara Collet Women’s Freedom League [1908?]
Hardie’s essay was first published in 1905; this is a reissue by the Women’s Freedom League, the suffrage society most supportive of the Independent Labour Party. It is a little difficult to decide exactly when it was issued by the WFL but it bears the 1, Robert Street address suggesting it was no earlier than 1908. Paper covers marked- 12pp – good internally
[15537] £65
36. HARRISON, Ethel B. The Freedom of Women: an argument against the proposed extension of the suffrage to women Watts & Co 1908
Ethel Harrison (1851-1916) was the wife of Frederic Harrison, lawyer, political Radical, and supporter of trade unionism. She was a member of the Women’s National Anti-Suffrage League and this polemic is interesting, putting forward in an unhysterical way the arguments of those women who did not wish to be enfranchised. Paper covers – 60pp – good – scarce
[15533] £85
37. INTERNATIONAL WOMAN SUFFRAGE CONGRESS
Budapest June 15-20 1913. This is a small advertising paper label/stamp (it has a sticky back) for the Congress – showing two graceful women stretching their arms, to hold hands across the globe. The type-face is very 1913. A pretty and interesting memento of the last pre-war international women’s gathering. Fine -amazingly ephemeral – and unusual. With the background printed in blue
[14505] £85
38. JOHNSTON, Thomas The Case for Woman’s Suffrage and Objections Answered Forward Printing and Publishing Co (Glasgow) no date [1907]
Johnston founded ‘The Forward’, a socialist newspaper, in 1906 – and on the back page of his pamphlet claimed ‘Forward’ is the only paper in Scotland wholeheartedly supporting the Women’s Movement’. Johnston was a Fabian and a member of the Independent Labour Party. Paper covers – 16pp – marked in ink on the cover ‘For Review’. Very good – scarce
[15543] £85
39. L’UNION FRANCAISE POUR LE SUFFRAGE DES FEMMES La Charte de la Femme 1910
par Jean Finot suivie d’une Enquete sur le Vote Politique des Femmes en France. 60 pp – fair – paper covers present but detached
[13192] £8
40. LYTTON, Lady Constance ‘No Votes for Women’: A Reply to Some Recent Anti-Suffrage Publications A.C. Fifield March 1909 (reprint)
She uses wry humour to demolish the various tropes about women that were being propounded by the Anti-Suffrage League, founded in mid-1908. The pamphlet was first issued on 12 February 1909 and proved so popular that it was reprinted on 10 March 1909. Paper covers carry listings of other suffrage works available and note the societies and bookshops at which the pamphlet was sold. Front cover has pencilled references and other marks- and damage to lower edge -36pp – internally very good. Scarce
[15538] SOLD
41. MCLAREN, Lady ‘Better and Happier’: An Answer from the Ladies’ Gallery to the Speeches in Opposition to the Women’s Suffrage Bill, February 28th, 1908 T. Fisher Unwin 1908
I have always been rather an admirer of Laura McLaren and her straight-forward prose. 46-pp – paper covers a little marked – but good and tight. Scarce
[15492] £120
42. MAXSE, THE HON MRS IVOR ‘Votes for Women’ The ‘National Review’ Office 1908
[Suffrage activists] ‘have shown by their agitation that they do not understand the reason for which the vote has been given to men, or the true nature of that vote, or, lastly, the effect of this great extension of the franchise on the country and the Empire generally; She was Mary Maxse (1870-1944), niece of Lord Rosebery, wife of a general – and, as you can tell, an Anti. Paper covers – 16 pp – very good – scarce. This copy bears the stamp of the International Suffrage Shop, 15 Adam Street, Strand, W.C.’
[15530] £65
43. MEN’S LEAGUE FOR OPPOSING WOMAN SUFFRAGE Speeches by Lord James of Hereford and Lord Curzon of Kedleston at a Dinner of the Council on Tuesday, the 18th of May, 1909 MLOWS 1909
Interestingly, this copy bears the rubber stamp of ‘The International Suffrage Shop, 15 Adam Street, Strand, W.C.’ -showing that the shop did not only stock pro-suffrage material. James was a lawyer and politician who, incidentally, had in 1886 represented Dilke in the Crawford divorce case, giving, according to Roy Jenkins, ‘some of the worst professional advice that a man can ever have received’. Curzon, former viceroy of India, in 1912 became president of the National League for Opposing Women’s Suffrage (which had been formed in 1910 as a result of the amalgamation of MLOWS with the Women’s National Anti-Suffrage League). 12pp – good condition – scarce
[15528] £75
44. MINUTE BOOK OF THE PORTISHEAD SOCIETY OF THE NATIONAL UNION OF WOMEN’S SUFFRAGE SOCIETIES
This Somerset society was founded at a meeting held at Clarence House, home of Mrs Hall, the society’s president, on 16 December 1913. It was a member of the West of England Federation of the NUWSS. The society is particularly interesting as it continued in existence throughout the First World War, the Minute Book revealing not only local activities, but also the society’s reaction to the actions of Headquarters. For instance, we can follow the discussions that led to the society declining to support NUWSS representation at the Women’s Peace Conference held at The Hague and those that surrounded the machinations around the proposal to extend the franchise. Besides reports of meetings, the Minute Book lists the names of Portishead members, with their addresses. It also lists details of the parliamentary candidates, the halls that can be hired, printers that can be used (with their prices) – plus the political affiliations of numerous local residents, together with the names and addresses of other ‘People to Call On’. In May 1918 the members of the society appear to have created a Women’s Citizen Association, and then, in Jan 1919, after some debate, decided to stay in existence as an NUWSS society. The exact course of events at this rather febrile time might take some unravelling..
Presumably it was the secretary, Miss Butterworth, who selected a school exercise book to use as a Minute Book, strengthening one cover with board. Very few such Minute Books, so ephemeral in appearance, survive. And yet this Minute Book is an excellent primary source, containing a wealth of information, throwing light on the activities and opinions of a section of the female population in the years 1913-1919. As such it is of national as well as local importance. In good condition, with a number of cyclostyled letters and resolutions laid in. Unique
[15524] SOLD
45. MISS ALICE SCHOFIELD (Organiser) Women’s Freedom League WFL
An early WFL card – the address printed on the card is 18 Buckingham Street, Strand (ie before the move to 1 Robert St in 1908). Alice Schofield, influenced by Teresa Billington, had been a very early member of the WSPU, but with Teresa left the WSPU in 1907 and by 1908 was a paid WFL organizer. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson.. A scarce card – in fine unposted condition
[14554] £120
46. MISS EMILY FAITHFULL
studio photograph by W & D Downey, 57 & 61 Ebury Street, London, together with a printed brief biography.
[14029] £40
47. MISS MORGAN, OF BRECON The Duties of Citizenship Women’s Local Government Society c 1912
Extracts reprinted from a paper read at the Annual Conference of the National Union of Women Workers, Manchester, October 27th 1896. By the time this leafet was issued Miss Morgan had been Mayor of Brecon, 1911-12. 4-pp – good – withdrawn from the Women’s Library
[13833] £5
48. MRS DESPARD
portrait photograph by Lena Connell, 50 Grove End Road, NW – mounted on stiff brown card – published by The Suffrage Shop, the card embossed with the shop’s monogram. This once belonged to Joan Wickham. Fine
[15159] £120
Item # 49
49. MRS PANKHURST’S STATUE -CARTOON BY ‘CUMMINGS’ 1955
Artwork for an original ink cartoon by the cartoonist ‘Cummings’, showing Mrs Pankhurst’s statue, her face notably outraged, being manhandled by Nigel Birch, who in 1955 was the Minister of Works in the Conservative Government.
The cartoon alludes to the plan by the Ministry of Works to move Mrs Pankhurst’s statue in Victoria Tower Gardens (adjacent to Parliament) from its original site, where with great ceremony it had been unveiled on 6 March 1930. During a debate in the House of Commons on 28 June 1955 Nigel Birch, as Minister of Works, revealed that he had met with members of the Suffragette Fellowship, who objected fiercely to the proposed new site, demanding that if the statue were to be moved it should only be to a position even closer to Parliament. The Suffragette Fellowship kept up their campaign, lobbying and writing letters to the press (eg The Times,30 Aug 1955), until their wish was granted – and Mrs Pankhurst’s statue was moved to its current site and re-dedicated at a ceremony held on 14 July 1956. The Minister of Works was present on that occasion, but by then was no longer Nigel Birch, who in December 1955 had moved to the Ministry of Air, as Secretary of State. My belief is that the cartoon dates from the period June-December 1955 when Birch was still at the Ministry of Works.
‘Cummings’, the celebrated cartoonist, was Michael Cummings (1919-1997), who in the 1955 was working for the ‘Daily Express’ newspaper and for the ‘Essence of Parliament’ column in ‘Punch’. From the style of the ‘Statue’ cartoon I would think it might have been offered to ‘Punch’, rather than to the ‘Daily Express’. ‘Punch”s ‘Essence of Parliament’ column did indeed, in the autumn of 1955, refer to the controversy over the proposed moving of the statue in the autumn, but the short article was not illustrated with a cartoon. The explanation for the fact that the cartoon is available – ie not included in a newspaper/journal archive (such as that of ‘Punch’) – as it probably would be if it had been published- may be that it was not used by the journal to which it was offered. It is recorded that Cummings would later offer the ‘Sunday Express’ as many as five or six ideas for a -cartoon when only one was required.
The cartoon is a delightful comment on an event that those with an appreciation of suffrage history will relish – commemorating as it does the dedication of surviving friends and supporters of Mrs Pankhurst who, as Mrs Jean Mann, MP for Coatbridge stated in a further House of Commons debate. 15 Nov 1955, ‘do not like the idea of this noble lady being pushed around…’This cartoon is the only visual comment I have ever seen of the 1955 contretemps.
50. NATIONAL UNION OF WOMEN’S SUFFRAGE SOCIETIES Why We Are In A Hurry NUWSS no date [probably c 1912]
Sets out reasons why ‘votes for women’ is required asap. ‘Many of the workers in the suffrage movement are eager to work for other objects such as Temperance, Better Housing, The Reform of the Poor Law, The Abolition of Sweating, and the White Slave Trade etc etc, but they believe that until they get the vote they have not the necessary weapon with which to strike at the root of social evils.’ After describing more improvements that would follow the granting of the vote to women, the leaflet reminds the reader that ‘The Reputation of Great Britain is at Stake.’The leaflet was printed by The Templar Printing Works, Birmingham. A single sheet -in good condition. Scarce
[15495] £120
51. NATIONAL UNION OF WOMEN’S SUFFRAGE SOCIETIES CROYDON BRANCH
Small collection of leaflets issued by the Croydon NUWSS. 1) ‘Voters Sign the Petition’ – dramatic red, white and green leaflet asking (male) voters to ‘Come at once and Sign at 100, George Street’. The petition reads ‘That we the undersigned urgently beg that your Honourable House will without delay pass into law a measure for the enfranchisement of Women by granting to them the Parliamentary Vote on the same terms as it is or may be granted to men’. This dates from early 1910, in the aftermath of the general election, as a way of holding an unoffical referendum on women’s suffrage. Advertising leaflet mounted on card. 2) ‘An Appeal to Voters’. this leaflet, which gives the names of the Election Sub-Committee of the Croydon Branch, explains and amplifies the reasoning behind the Jan 1910 petition. Leaflet mounted on card 3) Prelimanary notice of NUWSS ‘Great Demonstration in support of the Conciliation Committee’s women’s Suffrage Bill, Trafalgar Square, July 9th [1910] – with a ‘Message from Mrs Fawcett’. Together with a special Croydon Branch leaflet advertising the 9 July demonstration ‘Come Yourself and Bring Two Friends’, noting charabancs will leave Pembroke Hall at 12.30pm. ‘If eeryone will do their best, this Demonstration will be a triumphant success’. Two leaflets mounted together on one board.
All 4 items are in very good condition – together
[15550] £250
52. NATIONAL UNION OF WOMEN’S SUFFRAGE SOCIETIES CROYDON BRANCH Annual Report 1910
A report on the year’s work of the Croydon branch, 1909-10. Includes the names of the committee members and a financial balance sheet (including 6 shillings raised by the sale of cakes at an ‘At Home’,) Very good – very scarce
[15475] £200
53. NATIONAL WOMEN’S SOCIAL AND POLITICAL UNION Australia’s Advice: The Debate in the Australian Senate on the Votes for Women Resolution, November 17th 1910, abridged from the official report The Woman’s Press no date [c1911]
At a time when the Conciliation Bill was before the Imperial Parliament Australia advised that ‘the extension of the suffrage to the women of Australia for States and Commonwealth Parliaments, on the same terms as to men, has had the most beneficial results’. Advice not heeded. Very good-tho’ the staples are missing – 24pp – in original paper wrappers with a little foxing- the inside front cover giving details of the WSPU and its personnel and the inside back cover a list of the Woman’s Press titles available. Scarce
[15487] £150
54. NEVINSON, Margaret Wynne Ancient Suffragettes Women’s Freedom League c 1909
Mrs Nevinson had been giving talks on this subject as early as 1908 and it must have been particularly galling to see that the WFL’s own paper, ‘The Vote’ (18 Nov 1909), credited this pamphlet, ‘containing delightful little sketches of Hebrew and Grecian rebels’ to her husband, ‘Mr H.W. Nevinson’. Just a typo, I suppose. Paper covers – 12pp – in good-ish condition – rubbed, frayed and marked. On the cover is written ‘To be kept. Only copy – and it is indeed very scarce. I don’t think I have ever had it for sale before.
[15541]£85
Inside page of #55
55. NEW VAGABOND CLUB 19 February 1910 Guest of the evening: Miss Christabel Pankhurst, LL.B
A guest list/seating plan for a dinner held by the New Vagabond Club at the Hotel Cecil on 19 February 1910. The New Vagabond was a dining club, run by men but to which women were admitted as guests. It was noteworthy that Christabel Pankhurst, as a woman, was invited as a guest speaker – and on the occasion did, of course, speak of the suffrage campaign. There were many known suffrage sympathisers in attendance that evening – including Carl Hentschel, the Club’s deputy chairman, and his wife and Cecil Chapman and his wife. In fact, Mrs Hentschel and Mrs Chapman had been founding members the previous month of the New Constitutional Society for Women’s suffrage. Among he many others present I note Yoshio Markino, the artist, who depicted life inside the WSPU office and two Mr Mappins (Sidney Mappin of the jewellery firm was an active supporter of the WSPU). The 4 folds of the accordion-type leaflet folds out to disclose the full seating plan for the dinner so that one can see who was sitting near to whom, while, on the reverse, two of the folds present an index of those in attendance. I love items such as this – ones that allow you to visualise the room, its setting, and likely conversations. In fine condition – very scarce
[15503] £600
56. PANKO
A suffragette card game, first mentioned in ‘Votes for Women’ in December 1909. The advertisement claimed ‘Not only is each picture in itself an interesting memento, but the game produces intense excitement without the slightest taint of bitterness’.The illustrations on the cards are by E.T. Reed, a ‘Punch’ cartoonist and the manufacturer was Messrs Peter Gurney Ltd. The cards in this set have clearly given hours of fun, being slightly worn – two are missing corners (a testament, perhaps, to the promised ‘intense excitement’). As is common with sets of Panko, the box is well worn although, unusually, the sheet of printed rules is present (it is often missing), although lavishly taped. So, here is a well-played card game that has survived c 114 years – an excellent example of the merchandise generated by the suffragette movement
[15412] SOLD
57. PETHICK-LAWRENCE, F.W. The Bye-Election Policy of the Women’s Social and Political Union The Woman’s Press 2nd ed [no date, 1909]
A crucial element in WSPU stragegy. ‘At every bye-election where a Liberal candidate is in the field members of the Women’s Social and Politial Union are present to urge the electors to vote against him. They take this course, not because they are opposed to Liberalism, but because the present Government are hostile to Woman Suffrage.’ Pethick-Lawrence elaborates on the policy and sets out details of the bye-elections at which it had been utilised, including many newspaper quotes. The last one considered was that at Chelmsford, where polling day was 1 Dec 1908. Paper covers – 20pp – very scarce
[15497] £200
58. PETHICK-LAWRENCE MEMORIAL COMMITTEE Memories of Fred and Emmeline Pethick-Lawrence Pethick-Lawrence Memorial Committee 1963
Reminiscences by those who knew them. – with a list of contributors to the Memorial Fund. 16-pp in card covers (which is decorated with a purple, white and green stripe). Fine
[15459] £35
59. PHOTOGRAPH OF ENID GOULDEN BACH AND HER BROTHER, EDWARD
taken at the 1931 London County Council election. The photograph (20cm x 16cm), mounted on a sheet of sugar paper, is very spotted. I know that it was once part of a collection of material that belonged to Stella Newsome of the Suffragette Fellowship and was likely to have been displayed at the original Suffragette Fellowship Museum in Kensington. I recognise Enid and assume, from another source, that the man is her brother Edward. They were the children of Mrs Pankhurst’s sister, Ada Goulden Bach; Enid was the last chairman of the Suffragette Fellowship. Fair
[15467]
£12
This is what a Suffragist looks like
#60
60. PORTRAIT SKETCH BY KATHLEEN TEMPLE BIRD OF MISS MARGARET BIDWELL
Mrs Kathleen Temple Bird (1879-1962) has an entry in my Art and Suffrage: a biographical dictionary of suffrage artists. Trained at the Slade and then in Florence, she was an active member of the Chelsea branch of the WSPU, speaking at meetings and putting her artistic skill to the service of the Cause by executing quick portrait sketches at the December 1911 WSPU Christmas Fair and at the 1913 WSPU Summer Fair. My belief is that this portrait sketch was made on one of these occasions – probably, from the style of Miss Bidwell’s hat, in 1913.
Margaret Evelyn Bidwell (1881-1985) was born in east Twickenham, the daughter of Edward Bidwell and Catherine (née Cotman). Her mother was the grand daughter of the artist John Sell Cotman. Margaret Bidwell trained as a teacher at Bedford College and was an assistant mistress at Edgehill School, Sydenham (1904-5), Highbury High School (1906-10), and Enfield County School from 1910 until at least 1939.
She was a member of the Kensington branch of the WSPU by February 1908 when ‘Votes for Women’ noted that she was intending to take part in ‘Self-Denial Week’ by organising a money collection, as a High School teacher, at a railway station, and took an active part in organising that branch’s contribution to the 21 June WSPU procession. Having moved to north London, she became a member of the Hornsey WSPU, making her first speech as the chairman of a meeting in March 1909 and in April travelled to East Edinburgh to assist at a bye-election. She was a banner captain for a group of women graduates in the 23 July 1910 procession and a regular speaker for the WSPU. Throughout the campaign she was a generous donor to WSPU funds.
Provenance: The portrait, signed by the artist, was acquired at a sale of the Cotman family’s picture collection, the sitter’s name identified on a slip attached to the reverse.
Framed and glazed. Charcoal and chalk. 27.5cm x 21cm. A very scarce survivor of ‘sketching for the Cause’
[15409] £1,200
#61
61. PROGRAMME FOR THE UNVEILING OF MRS PANKHURST’S STATUE, 1930
Programmes produced for the unveiling of Mrs Pankhurst’s statue in Victoria Tower Gardens on 6 March 1930. I do not remember seeing a copy of this programme before – and am intrigued by the choice of music. Not only did Ethel Smyth’s wonderfully dramatic overture to ‘The Wreckers’ accompany the moment of unveiling – but also included in the musical programme were the gently romantic ‘Indian Love Lyrics’. I wonder if these had been a favourite of Mrs Pankhurst’ The 4-pp programme is in good condition – surely owned by someone who was present on the day and who then kept it carefully.
[15473] £350
62. PUNCH CARTOON
21 January 1912 – full page – ‘The Suffrage Split’. Sir George Askwith (the charismatic industrial conciliator), as ‘Fairy Peacemaker’, has tamed the dragon of the Cotton Strike – and Asquith, wrestling to keep a seat on the Cabinet horse turns to him ‘Now that you’ve charmed yon dragon I shall need ye to stop the strike inside this fractious gee-gee.’
[14323] £12
63. PUNCH CARTOON
30 Nov 1910, scene is a suffragette demonstration, ‘Votes for Women’ flags flying. Two young street urchins observe and comment. Caption is ‘Man of the World (lighting up), “Well ‘ave to give it ’em, I expect, Chorlie”‘. Half-page illustration
[14324] £12
64. PUNCH CARTOON
18 April 1906. ‘A Temporary Entaglement’ – a scene from ‘Vanity Fair’. Sir Henry Campbell Bannerman as Josh Sedley holds the wool as The Suffragette (aka Becky Sharp) winds it into a ball. The allusion is to the news that ‘The Prime Minister has promised to receive a deputation on the subject of Female Suffrage after Easter’. Full-page cartoon by Bernard Partridge
[14333] £12
65. PUNCH CARTOON
5 October 1927. As a young woman takes her gun from the ghillie an elderly gentleman (the Conservative Party) looks concerned and remarks ‘I hope she’s got enough ‘intuition’ not to let it off in my direction’. The remark is explained: ‘The question of extended suffrage for women [ie for those between 21 and 30] [in whose ‘intuition’ Mr Baldwin reposes so much confidence will be raised in the approaching Conference of the Conservative Party]. Full page
[14334] £12
66. PUNCH CARTOON
23 May 1928. A gentleman identified as Lord Banbury kneels in a ring (it’s an allusion to the Royal Tournament which was doubtless on at the time) and opens his umbrella to defend himself against the horde of cloche-hatted women who are rushing towards him carrying their flag for the ‘Equal Franchise Bill’. In the debate on the Representation of the People Act on 21 May 1928 Lord Banbury had attempted to move its rejection. Full-page cartoon – good – one corner creased
[14335] £12
67. PUNCH CARTOON
26 March 1913. ‘Burglary Up-To-Date’. Burglar has taken his swag from a safe and now writes ‘Votes for Women’ across the jemmied door. Half-page cartoon – good condition
[14343] £10
68. PUNCH CARTOON
19 March 1913. At a railway wayside halt the stationmaster asks the signalman to keep an eye on ‘the ole gal on the platform’ while he has his dinner. The signalman doesn’t think she’ll come to any harm but the stationmaster explains ‘I’m not thinkin’ of ‘er ‘ealth. I’m thinkin’ about my station. She might want to burn it down.’ Half-page cartoon – very good
[14344] £10
69. PUNCH CARTOON
5 March 1913. ‘The child is daughter to the woman’ is the caption. Suffragette mother returns after a strenuous day and is expecting some important correspondence. Her daughter, however, reveals she has torn up the letters to provide a paperchase for her dolls. Mother expostulates: ‘..Haven’t I often told you that letters are sacred things?’ A comment on suffragette attacks on post-boxes. A half-page cartoon – very good
[14345] £10
70. PUNCH CARTOON
5 February 1913. ‘How Militant Suffragettes Are Made’. A cheeky caddie explains to a visiting golfer that the old green they are passsing gets flooded and ‘so they’ve give it up to the lydies.’ A half-page cartoon – very good
[14347] £10
71. PUNCH CARTOON
29 January 1913. ‘Rag-Time in the House’ is the caption. Members of the government are enjoying the ‘Suffrage Free & Easy Go As You Please’ dance. Asquith, with an ‘Anti’ label, is keeping an eye on Lloyd George (wearing a ‘Pro’ armband) jitterbugs with Sir Edward. The sub-text is ‘Sir Edward Grey’s Woman Suffrage Amendment produces some curious partnerships’. Full-page cartoon – very good
[14349] £12
72. PUNCH CARTOON
23 June 1912. ‘Votes for Men and Women’ is the caption. John Bull is sitting comfortably and turns round as Nurse Asquith enters carrying a baby labelled ‘Franchise Bill’. In answer to JB’s query ‘she’ replies: ‘Well, Sir, it’s certainly not a girl, and I very much doubt if it’s a boy’. The government’s Franchise and Registration bill was given its first Reading on 18 June 1912. Full-page cartoon – very good
[14350] £12
73. PUNCH CARTOON
27 March 1912. A young suffragette is standing on a table addressing a crowd: ‘I defy anyone to name a field of endeavour in which men do not receive more consideration than women!’ A Voice from the Crowd retorts: ‘What about the bally ballet!’ A half-page cartoon – very good
[14351] £10
74. PUNCH CARTOON
7 December 1910. ‘Voter’s Vertigo’ is the caption. It is the second general election of 1910 and the voter is all in a tizz..muddling up all the campaign slogans..(e’g. ‘don’t tax the poor man’s dreadnought’ and ‘home rule for suffragettes’). A quarter of a page cartoon – very good
[14352] £8
75. PUNCH CARTOON
24 December 1908. Two male Anti-suffragists, perhaps lounging at the Club, are talking about the suffrage campaign. One says ‘The idea of their wantin’ to be like us!’ while the other agrees ‘Yes, makin’ themselves utterly ridiculous’. Half-page cartoon – very good
[14354] £10
76. QUESTIONS TO LLOYD GEORGE ASKED BY THE WOMEN’S SOCIAL AND POLITICAL UNION
11 questions concerning his behaviour re introducing a Government measure for Manhood Suffrage in 1913…Among the many other pertinent questions ‘Why do you expect us to accept your personal and unofficial advocacy of Woman Suffrage as a substitute for united and offiicial action on the part of the Government as a whole? In good condition – some creasing. 2-sided leaflet, printed in purple
[15006] £100
77. RE-BARTLETT, Lucy The Woman of To-Morrow in Religion Aberdeen University Press 1918
Lucy Re-Bartlett (1876-1922) was a member of the WSPU before moving to Italy in 1910. She had been born in Edinburgh, was university-educated, and described by her obituarist in ‘The Common Cause’ as ‘a writer of notable intellectual power, a phlosopher whose restrained outlook on social questions gave value to all her judgments’. This is the published version of one of 4 speeches she gave in the summer of 1918, addressing ‘The Woman of To-Morrow’. They were sponsored by ‘The New Thought Alliance’. Paper covers -24pp – with an ink inscription on the cover ‘With Mrs Re-Bartlett’s compliments…’ Very scarce
[15529] £65
78. REPORT OF A MEETING OF THE BIRMINGHAM WOMEN’S SUFFRAGE SOCIETY 26 JAN 1883 Also copies of letters received from members of Parliament and other friends T.A. Larkin Printer Birmingham for the BWSS 1883
The meeting was held in Birmingham Town Hall. The lengthy verbatim report includes the speeches of, among others, Mrs Eliza Ashford (poor law guardian). Mr Mundella, Dr Crosskey, Charles McLaren, Mrs Osler, C. E. Matthews, Miss E.M. Sturge (the BWSS secretary), and Helena Downing-Shearer, who was an organiser/speaker for the National Society. The report also prints letters from luminaries, such as Millicent Fawcett, William Woodall, and Joseph Chamberlain, who had been invited to the meeting.
Disbound, with the stamps of both Bristol University Library and the National Liberal Club Library. In good condition – 25 pp – very scarce
[15477] £150
79. REPRODUCTION OF A PHOTOGRAPH OF A SCENE FROM THE ‘PRISON TO CITIZENSHIP’ PROCESSION, 18 JUNE 1910
The image shows Laurence Housman’s ‘Prison to Citizenship’ banner carried aloft by women in white, each holding a stave headed by a prisoner’s arrow. The single sheet is captioned ‘The Women’s Procession’ and may have been laid in as a supplement to a contemporary publication – ie it has not been disbound from a book. The image appears in ‘Votes for Women’, 24 June 1910, the photographer credited as ‘World’s Graphic Press’ and with thanks to the ‘Daily Telegraph’ for the loan of the block. So, the source is a bit of a mystery – but it is a good, large, clear image. It is accompanied by another sheet, captioned ‘The Women’s Franchise Demonstration’, which gives some details about the procession and was evidently written no earlier than 1911. 2 sheets – very good – with one nick to the blank surround to the photograph, not affecting the image.
[15336] £10
80. ROBINS, Elizabeth Why? Women Writers’ Suffrage League 1910
An actress, from 1908 Elizabeth Robins was also president of the Women Writers’ Suffrage League. In this little book she answers such questions as ‘Why are women of all classes in England banding themselves together to work for political Enfranchisement? Why have women subscribed in a little oer a year, to one society alone (the Women’s Social and Political Union) £50,000 to the cause?’ etc etc. The essay was later reprinted in ‘Way Stations’. Soft covers – 80pp – small format – printed by the Women’s Printing Society – reading copy – rubbed and worn and taped at spine. But very scarce
[15547] £75
81. SIMON, MRS E.M. Women’s Suffrage: Some Sociological Reasons for Opposing the Movement Cornish Bros Ltd (Birmingham) 1907
Emily Maud Simon (1861-1947) – later Lady Simons – was the wife of a Birmingham doctor and a dedicated anti-suffragist. – and a supporter of animal welfare This pamphlet contains not only the essay of the title but also another she wrote on ‘Women’s Suffrage’, reprinted from the ‘Monthly Review’. Paper covers – very good
[15525] £85
82. SOUVENIR WOMEN’S THEATRE INAUGURAL WEEK
The week ran from 8-13 December 1913 at the Coronet Theatre, Notting Hill Gate. See Naomi Paxton’s blog – http://www.naomipaxton.co.uk/blog/a-theatre-of-their-own-bbc-radio-3 to read/listen to more about this idea for a ‘Women’s Theatre’. The 32-pp Souvenir Brochure includes details of the General Committee for the Woman’s Theatre – and its aims, together with articles by Bernard Shaw, Cicely Hamilton, William Archer, and Flora Steele. Numerous, lovely advertisements for the various suffrage societies – and the businesses of their supporters – including The Children’s Theatre, directors Mrs Percy Dearmer and Miss Netta Syrett The Souvenir includes many photographs of actors and actresses and the back cover sports the device of the Actresses’ Franchise League. In very good condition – very scarce
[15531] £230
83. SPEECH OF MRS HELEN BRIGHT CLARK AT A WOMEN’S SUFFRAGE CONGRESS HELD IN BRISTOL, 23RD JANUARY 1879 1879
The meeting, held in the Victoria Rooms, was convened by the Bristol and West of England Branch of the National Society for Women’s Suffrage. Helen Clark was the main female speaker, supported by Lydia Becker (Manchster), Isabella Tod (Belfast), Lilias Ashworth Hallett (Bath) and Miss Sturge (Birmingham). The platform was packed with male supporters, MPs, clergymen etc. I am not sure whether this 4-pp speech was issued with covers; it is not obviously disbound but carries no imprint of printer or publisher so may well be. In good condition – scarce
[15545] £85
84. STOPES, Mrs Charlotte Carmichael The Sphere of ‘Man’ in relation to ‘Woman’ in the Constitution T. Fisher Unwin 1907
‘There lacks a word to distinguish between “man” in the general, and “man” with a sex-distinction. The lawyers of the 19th century have decided for us that the word “man” always includes “woman” when there is a penalty to be incurred, and never include “woman” when there is a privilege to be conferred. But it was not always thus.’ Covers the past status of women in social and trade gilds as well as in Scotland and in Ireland. That last section may have had a particular resonance for the original owner of the book, for written on the cover is ‘please return to H.S. Skeffington’ – that is Hanna Sheehy Skeffington, nationalist and suffragist. The year after the publication of this book Sheehy Skeffington was one of the group that founded the Irish Franchise League. Soft covers – 68pp – in good condition
[15488] £150
#85
85. SUFFRAGETTE CHINA – ‘ANGEL OF FREEDOM’ DESIGN
Saucer (12.25cm) made by Williamsons of Longton for the WSPU in 1909, initially for use in the refreshment room of the Prince’s Skating Rink Exhibition and then sold in aid of funds. The white china has strikingly clean, straight lines and is rimmed in dark green. Each piece carries the motif, designed by Sylvia Pankhurst, of the ‘angel of freedom’ blowing her trumpet and flying the banner of ‘Freedom. In the background are the intitials ‘WSPU’ set against dark prison bars, surrounded by the thistle, shamrock and rose, and dangling chains. For more information on the WSPU china see my website – http://tinyurl.com/o4whadq. This piece originally belonged to a well-known suffragette Mrs Rose Lamartine Yates. In fine condition, although without the maker’s mark
[15058] £450
86. TAX RESISTANCE LEAGUE SILVER BASKET ENGRAVED ‘SOLD FOR KING’S TAXES 1912 WOMAN SUFFRAGE L.E. RURQUAND 1913’
This silver basket was in its day the focus of much suffrage attention. It belonged to Miss Lizzie Emma Turquand (1857-1943), daughter of a nonconformist clergyman. In 1910 she was the founder of the Free Church League for Women’s Suffrage and was, first, the League’s press secretary and then editor of its newspaper, ‘The Coming Day’. For 6 years from 1907 she was a Croydon Poor Law Guardian, had served as secretary of her local Liberal Association, and was at one time the headmistress of a Croydon primary school. She was an early member of the WSPU and then of the WFL.
She was also a member of the Tax Resistance League and in May 1912 refused to pay House Duty Tax. As a result, the silver cake basket was seized (in a friendly fashion, we are assured) by a bailiff, in lieu of the 10s owed. It was reported that ‘the silver basket [was] a household treasure, with tender memories to Mis Turquand it being her mother’s.’ The TRL made much of the subsequent Sydenham auction, organising a poster and banner parade – with a pitch in Kirkdale at which lengthy speeches were delivered. All were reported, together with a photograph of Miss Turquand, in the Norwood News, 18 May 1912, p 5. The parade then continued to the Auction Rooms where Miss Turquand ‘amidst renewed cheering’ addressed the auctioneer and assembled company. The silver cake basket was sold to Mrs Beaumont Thomas, a Clapham member of the TRL.
I think it must have been returned to Miss Turquand because it was sold again in lieu of tax the following year, this time at Richardson’s Auction Rooms, Upper Norwood, an occasion on which she again gave a consciousness-raising speech (see Norwood News, 3 May 1913, p. 5). The basket was doubtless again returned to her, because a handwritten note, probably written by a later family member and affixed to its base, describes it as ‘Turquand Family. Henry Wilkinson. Sheffield 1852 Sterling Silver.’
It is uncommon now to discover such a well-documented item representing the efforts made by a member of the Tax Resistance League to publicise the mantra ‘No Taxation Without Representation’. In very good condition. For photograph see first page of this catalogue.
[15518] £1,500
# 87
87. THE ACTRESSES FRANCHISE LEAGUE AND THE WOMEN WRITERS’ SUFFRAGE LEAGUE Entertainment and Pageant of Famous Men and Women – B.C. 7000 – A.D. 2914
Arranged by the Joint Committee of the AFL and the WWSL – held on 29 June 1914 at The Hotel Cecil, London W.C. A spectacular ‘Costume Dinner’ held at the glorious Hotel Cecil, one of the very last grand occasions before the outbreak of war. The dinner was preceded by a Pageant, arranged by Ethel Craig. I remember writing in my biographical entry on Mrs Margaret Nevinson in my ‘Reference Guide’ that she attended this event in the guise of ‘The Mother of the Futurists’, which I thought very clever – as her son, C.R.W. Nevinson, was indeed a Futurist, But I now see that the final element of the Pageant, which began with figures from Ancient Egypt, was named ‘Futurist’, presumably representing the denizens of A.D. 2914, as mentioned in the title. The Programme lists all those taking part in the Pageant – for instance, Mrs Pethick Lawrence and Flora Annie Steel were in the Asia Section (and Mrs Archibald Little, who wrote about China, was there as a Chinese empress), in the Italy section, H.W. Nevinson was Garibaldi (and a tiny pencilled note beside his name reads ‘red shirt’ – so presumably he had acquired the correct costume. The list is fascinating – I counted 77 participants – most of them well-known to those interested in the suffrage campaign. It must have been a wonderful sight – and rather poignant when one thinks of the cataclysm that was about to occur. I have never seen this programme before – so deem it very scarce. In very good condition – 4pp
[15500] £600
88. THE CONCILIATION BILL EXPLAINED
Leaflet headed ‘Votes for Women’, probably dating from 1910. settng out the contents of the Conciliation Bill, which had passed its Second Reading in July 1910, and explaining details,such as which groups of women would be enfranchised under tis terms. Printed by Baines and Scarsbrook, 75 Fairfax Road, South Hampstead and with the rubber stamp of the WFL [Women’s Freedom League] 1 Robert St, Adelphi. In pristine condition, having been found laid betwen the pages of a book.
[15036] £120
89. THE FIGHTING SEX
This issue of the part-work ‘History of the 20th Century’ includes a section on the suffrage campaign – written by Trevor Lloyd (author of ‘Suffragettes International’). Paper covers – large format
[14074] £5
90. ‘THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN’
supplement to ‘The Graphic’, 1885, heralding the supplements to be issued in Nov and Dec 1885 on ‘Parliamentary Elections and Electioneering in the Old Days’. As its advertisement for the series The Graphic has chosen to use George Cruickshank’s ”The Rights of Women; or a view of the hustings with female suffrage, 1853.’ We see on the hustings the two candidates – ‘The Ladies’ Candidate’- Mr Darling’ and ‘The Gentleman’s Candidate – Mr Screwdriver – the great political economist’. Elegant Mr Darling is surrounded by ladies in bonnets and crinolines – Mr Screwdriver by ill-tempered-looking boors. The audience contains many women accompanied, presumably, by their husbands who are holding aloft a ‘Husband and Wife Voters’ banner. Another banner proclaims the existence of ‘Sweetheart Voters’ and riding in their midst is a knight in armour holding a ‘Vote for the Ladies’ Champion’ pennant. There do not appear to be many supporters of the opposition.
Single sheet 28 cm x 20.5 cm – a little foxed around the edges of the paper but barely afffecting the good, clear image of Crucikshank’s cartoon.
[13690] £160
91. THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS AND THE WOMEN’S MOVEMENT
A 4-page leaflet produced by the Friends’ Committee on Women Suffrage (Members of Essex and Suffolk Quarterly Meeting) setting out the Quakers’ stance on the suffrage movement. Scarce – but reading copy only – much underlining as a reader has taken its substance to heart.
[15534] £50
Inside # 92
92. THE VOTE Vol 1: the organ of The Women’s Freedom League Minerva Publishing 1909-1910
The first bound volume of the WFL’s weekly paper, 26 issues covering 30 October 1909 to 23 April 1910. In the WFL’s gold and green binding, very good internally – binding fraying at top and bottom of spine, with horizontal split to spine cloth, bumped and worn at corners. I think the volume may have had a Welsh provenance because laid in is a sheet of music (a Welsh song -not suffrage!), the reverse of which has been used to jot notes – ‘Mrs Murphy and Mrs Thomas to attend police courts to ask for 1 hours extension. Mrs Ross instructied to Management Committee.’ Also laid in is a lengthy newspaper cutting (26 Dec 1936) reporting the death of Mrs Emma Sproson, who had been a very active member of the WFL in the West Midlands.
Bound volumes of The Vote are very scarce
[15517] £950
93. THE WOMEN’S SOCIAL AND POLITICAL UNION – VOTES FOR WOMEN – ALL WOMEN ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PARLIAMENT OF WOMEN
to be held in the Caxton Hall, Westminster, on February 11, 12 and 13. Session each afternoon, 3-6. Evening meeting, 8-10. Chairman: Mrs Pankhurst.’ The year is 1908. The single-sheet leaflet, issued by the WSPU and printed by Geo. Barber, The Furnival Press, then sets out arrangements for other meetings to be given in the forthcoming weeks. In goodish condition – a little loss to paper on one side, with no loss of text
[15325] £350
# 93A
93A. US POLITICAL EQUALITY ASSOCIATION ‘VOTES FOR WOMEN’ CHINA
Mrs Alva Belmont, Newport socialite and mother of Consuelo Vanderbilt, sometime duchess of Marlborough, commissioned white china dinnerware, decorated with the legend ‘Votes for Women’ printed in blue, from the English pottery firm, John Maddox and Sons of Burslem. The china was probably made for the Council of Great Women Conference that took place in 1913 in conjunction with the opening of a new Chinese Tea House on Belmont’s estate at Marble House. This is a 16cm plate from the service – in fine condition.
[15513] £550
94. VERBATIM REPORT OF DEBATE ON DEC 3RD 1907 Sex Equality (Teresa Billington-Greig) Versus Adult Suffrage (Margaret Bondfield) printed in Manchester, probably for the Adult Suffrage Society 1908
Margaret Bondfield was chair of the Adult Suffrage Society, which had backed a 1906 Bill proposing adult suffrage. Teresa Billington-Greig was a founder of the Women’s Freedom League which had, in 1907, broken away from Mrs Pankhurst’s Women’s Social and Political Union. The debate was chaired by Isabella Ford. Women’s suffrage societies thought that their cause could only be harmed by any call for all men and women to be granted the vote, without any property qualifications. Margaret Bondfield was to be the first woman Labour cabinet minister. Paper covers, carrying photos of both Billington-Greig and Bondfield. The inside cover carries details of the Adult Suffrage Society, then based at 122 Gower Street. The British Library catalogue only lists a version published by the WFL, but there is no indication on this item that the WFL was the publisher. 34pp – very good, with a little spotting on the top right corner of the cover – scarce
[15539] £95
95. VOTES FOR WOMEN – A DEPUTATION OF WOMEN WILL PROCEED TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
to interview Mr Asquith and Mr Lloyd George, on Tuesday, Nov 21st at 8 o’clock, to protest against a Bill to give votes to all men being introduced by a Government that excludes all women from the vote’. The year is 1911. Set out in the leaflet is a invitation by Emmeline Pethick Lawrence, who was to lead the deputation, to members of the public to come along to Parliament Square ‘to see fair play’ and to ‘protect women from being brutally vitimized by police in uniform and in plain clothes as they were on Black Friday (November 18th 1910)’. The leaflet was issued by the WSPU and printed in green, on white paper, by Geo Barber, The Furnival Press. In very good condition
[15329] SOLD
96. VOTES FOR WOMEN – THE WOMEN’S SOCIAL AND POLITICAL UNION – A WOMEN’S DEMONSTRATION IN THE ROYAL ALBERT HALL, ON SATURDAY, JUNE 15TH, 1912 AT 8PM
Mabel Tuke is in the chair (in the enforced absences of Mrs Pankhurst and Mrs Pethick-Lawrence) and the speakers were T.M. Healy, the barrister and MP who had defended Mrs Pethick-Lawrence at her trial for conspiracy in March, Elizabeth Robins, Annie Kenney and Mrs Mansell-Moullin. Newspaper reports show that there was a febrile atmosphere at this demonstration, with messages read out from prisoners who were being held, on hunger strike. This 4-pp card contains a long list of the ‘Suffragist Prisoners Still Under Sentence’, with the date of their arrest, the length of their sentence and the prison in which they were held. The back cover consists of a form on which a promise of a donation to the WSPU could be made. Very good – most unusual. I don’t remember having seeing an item such as this previously.
[15330] £600
97. WOMEN’S SOCIAL AND POLITICAL UNION – VOTES FOR WOMEN – A DEPUTATION OF WOMEN WILL GO TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ON TUESDAY, JUNE 29TH AT 8 O’CLOCK TO SEE THE PRIME MINISTER
and lay before him their demand for the Vote. The right to do this is secured to them by the Bill of Rights….’ In the event many women were arrested, although most of them had their cases adjourned ‘sine die’. Some, charged with stone throwing, were imprisoned and were some of the first women to go on hunger strike in Holloway. The case of Mrs Pankhurst and Mrs Evelina Haverfield, judged to be the leaders of the protest and who pleaded their protest was within the terms of the Bill of Rights, was adjourned until the end of the year. Flyer, issued by the WSPU and printed in black on white paper by the St Clements Press, Portugal Street. In good condition – the year ‘1909’ has been added in pencil after ‘June 29th’ – extremely scarce
[15321] £400
98. WOMEN’S SOCIAL AND POLITICAL UNION ‘VOTES FOR WOMEN’ LEAFLET NO. 61
This double-sided leaflet is devoted to publishing Laurence Housman’s ditty ‘Woman This, and Woman That’, an ‘Echo of a ‘Barrack-room Ballad, with acknowledgments to Mr Rudyard Kipling’. It begins ‘We went up to Saint Stephens, with petitions year by year;/’Get out!’ the politicians cried, ‘we want no women here!’/ and was avery popular party-piece at WSPU gatherings. Perhaps its most famous rendition was by actress Decima Moore on the night of the 1911 census, when her audience comprised c 500 suffragettes evading the enumerator in the Aldwych Skating Rink. This leaflet is headed with full details of the WSPU office and leading personnel and was printed by the St Clement’s Press, Portugal Street (now the site of the LSE Library). Like many such ephemeral pieces, it has been folded – presumably in use at a WSPU gathering – with a slight split along a fold – but no loss of text. Although fragile, it is actually in quite good condition, considering its age and purpose
[15317] £150
99. ZANGWILL, Israel One And One Are Two NWSPU no date [early 1908?]
‘being a verbatim report of the speech delivered at Exeter Hall, on Feb 9th 1907, at the Demonstration of Women’s Suffrage Societies’. This ‘Demonstration’ is better known to us now as the ‘Mud March’, the first of the suffrage processions organised by the NUWSS. It is, therefore, interesting that the WSPU chose to publish it. From the print material that they list for sale on the inside front cover, I deduce that the pamphlet was published between Nov 1907 and April 1908. 8-pp pamphlet – foxed. Very scarce
[15491] £80
100. ZANGWILL, Israel The Hithertos The Woman’s Press 1912
The text of a speech delivered by Israel Zangwill at the WSPU demonstration in the Royal Albert Hall on 28 March 1912 (the meeting for which the card listed as # ? was issued). 24-pp, with paper covers which carry various advertisements for the WSPU. His speech begins ‘I have never valued the honour of addressing your Union so much as now, when it stands criminally indicted, despised, and rejected of men.’ In good condition – the cover is slightly marked and bears, in faded ink, the legend ‘Only copy, to be kept’. But, by whom, I cannot tell.
[15405] £90
Suffrage Real Photographic Postcards
101. ANNIE KENNEY
– an early postcard, I think, No photographer or publisher is credited. She is wearing a blouse with elaborate lace yoke and deep lace cuffs – and is standing behind a chair. She looks very youthful. It was probably the original owner, Miss Chapman, who wrote on the reverse ‘Miss Annie Kenney’. Very good – on good, thick card – unposted
[15109] £120
102. CHRISTABEL PANKHURST
photographed by Lambert Weston and Son, 27 New Bond St. I think the card dates from c 1907/8. Fine – unposted
[13616] £45
103. CHRISTABEL PANKHURST
black and white photograph of the portrait of Christabel by Ethel Wright, with Christabel’s printed signature along the bottom of the card. The card will date from c 1909, when the portrait was first exhibited. Having been owned by the family of Una Dugdale since that time, the portrait was bequeathed to the National Portrait Gallery in 2011 and is on permanent display. This postcard is in fair condition (it has a diagonal crease across the centre) and is unposted. It represents one of the WSPU’s ingenious methods of fund-raising.
[15111] £20
104. CHRISTABEL PANKHURST
photographed probably post-First World War – I have seen an image on Google images that may be from the same sitting and is dated to 1926.. She is shown in profile, wearing a blouse with a wide collar. The image is set in an oval, on stiff brown card – rather like that used by Lena Connell, but no photographer is noted. The card was once owned by Joan Wickham, Mrs Pankhurst’s secretary. An unusual image. Fine – unposted
[15153] £120
105. CHRISTABEL PANKHURST
Head and shoulders photographic portrait – wearing a square-necked dress and with her hair up in her characteristic knot. Captioned ‘Miss Christabel Pankhurst. The National Women’s Social and Political Union. 4 Clement’s Inn, WC’. Published by Sandle Bros. Fine – unposted
[15175] £25
106. DR THEKLA HULTIN
Portrait photograph, published by the Women’s Freedom League, 1 Robert St, Adelphi, and headed ‘Votes for Women’. The portrait is captioned ‘Dr Thekla Hultin, Member of the Finnish Diet’. Thekla Hultin was the first elected woman member of Parliament to speak at a suffrage meeting in Britain. Fine – unposted
[15123] £120
107. EMMELINE PETHICK LAWRENCE
Captioned ‘Mrs Pethick Lawrence. The National Women’s Social and Political Union, 4 Clements Inn, WC’ – she is wearing a coat with a heavy fur collar and lapels and is standing with her hands in her pockets. Published by Sandle Bros. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. In fine condition – unposted
[14571] £25
108. EMMELINE PETHICK LAWRENCE
The photo is captioned ‘Mrs Pethick Lawrence Joint Editor of ‘Votes for Women’, Honorary Treasurer, National Women’s Social and Political Union. 4 Clement’s Inn.’ The photographer, F. Kehrhahn, has an entry in my ‘Art and Suffrage: a biographical dictionary of suffrage artists’. Fine – unposted
[14574] £25
109. LADY CONSTANCE LYTTON
real photographic postcard- issued by the ‘Women’s Social and Political Union’. She is sitting at her desk looking at a book. Glossy photograph by Lafayette. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – unposted
[14603] SOLD
110. MISS CHRISTABEL PANKHURST, LLB
Captioned ‘National Union of Women’s Social and Political Union, 4 Clement’s Inn, WC’. She is wearing a brooch that may have been designed by C.R. Ashbee. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – unposted
[14599] £25
111. MISS CICELY HAMILTON
‘Member of the Executive Committee of the Women’s Freedom League, 1 Robert St, Adelphi, London WC’. The photograph is by Elliot and Fry – published by the London Council of the Women’s Freedom League. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – unposted
[14600] £65
112. MISS CICELY HAMILTON
member of the National Executive Committee, WFL. office 18 Buckingham Street, Strand, London. 30 Gordon Street, Glasgow.’ An early card – published by the Women’s Freedom League not long after their break with the WSPU and before they moved into their Robert Street office. Cicely Hamilton faces straight on to the camera. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson.. Fine – unposted – scarce
[14633] £45
113. MISS GLADICE KEEVIL
Portrait photograph of Gladys Keevil ‘National Women’s Social and Political Union, 4 Clement’s Inn, WC’. The photographer was Lena Connell, who, in an interview in the Women’s Freedom League paper, ‘The Vote’, dated her involvement with the suffrage movement to this commission – photographing Gladice Keevil soon after her release from prison in 1908. Gladice was considered one of the prettiest of the WSPU organisers. You can read about her in my ‘Reference Guide’. In fine conition – unposted. Unusual
[14918] £120
114. MISS MARGUERITE SIDLEY
Photograph by Foulsham and Banfield, headed ‘Votes for Women’ and captioned ‘Women’s Freedom League’ 1 Robert St, Adelphi, London W.C.,’ She wears, I think, the WFL ‘Holloway’ badge at ther throat and, certainly, a WFL flag brooch on her bosom. She had joined the WSPU in London in 1907, working for some time in the London office and then as a peripatetic organizer before leaving the WSPU to do the same kind of work for the Women’s Freedom League. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – scarce – unposted
[14643] £65
115. MISS SARAH BENETT
photographed by Lena Connell. In this studio photograph Sarah Benett is wearing her WFL Holloway brooch; she was for a time the WFL treasurer. She was also a member of the WSPU and of the Tax Resistance League. The card was published by the WFL and is from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson.
[14631] £65
116. MRS AMY SANDERSON
Women’s Freedom League, 1 Robert Street, Adelphi, London WC. She had been a member of the WSPU, and, as such had endured one term of :imprisonment, before helping to found the WFL in 1907. She is, I think, wearing her WFL Holloway brooch in the photograph. Card, published by WFL, is from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson..Fine – unusual – unposted
[14636] £65
117. MRS BORRMANN WELLS WFL
Headed ‘Votes for Women’ and captioned ‘Women’s Freedom League. Offices: 1 Robert Street, Adelphi, London WC’. Bettina Borrmann Wells was born in Bavaria c 1875 and in 1900 married an Englishman, Clement Wells. She joined the WSPU in 1906- but by 1908 had left to join the WFL. She was imprisoned for 3 weeks in Oct 1908 after demonstrating at Westminster. The Hodgson Collection contains a (different) postcard from Bettina Borrmann Wells to ‘Miss Hodgson’ asking for help with ‘special work’, which may be the picketing She later spent much of her life in the US. A striking photo- she’s rather magnificently dressed. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. In fine condition -unusual – unposted
[15004] £120
118. MRS BORRMANN WELLS WFL
Headed ‘Votes for Women’ and captioned ‘Women’s Freedom League. Offices: 1 Robert Street, Adelphi, London WC’. Bettina Borrmann Wells was born in Bavaria c 1875 and in 1900 married an Englishman, Clement Wells. She joined the WSPU in 1906- but by 1908 had left to join the WFL. She was imprisoned for 3 weeks in Oct 1908 after demonstrating at Westminster. The Hodgson Collection contains a (different) postcard from Bettina Borrmann Wells to ‘Miss Hodgson’ asking for help with ‘special work’, which may be the picketing She later spent much of her life in the US. A striking photo- she’s rather magnificently dressed. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. In fine condition -unusual – unposted
[15005] £120
119. MRS CHARLOTTE DESPARD
photographed in profile -seated. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by WFL members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – unposted
[14580] £25
120. MRS CHARLOTTE DESPARD
studio photograph. She is seated and facing the camera, looking wry. No photographer, publisher or suffrage affiliation given. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – unposted
[14591] £25
121. MRS COBDEN SANDERSON WFL
Mrs Cobden Sanderson is shown, head and shoulders, in profile on this most unusual card. The photo is by Max Parker and the caption is: ‘Mrs Cobden Sanderson. Women’s Freedom League’. I would imagine that this is quite an early card -c 1908. Fine – unposted
[14942] £120
122. MRS COBDEN SANDERSON WFL
Mrs Cobden Sanderson is shown, head and shoulders, in profile on this most unusual card. The photo is by Max Parker and the caption is: ‘Mrs Cobden Sanderson. Women’s Freedom League’. I would imagine that this is quite an early card -c 1908. Fine – unposted
[14965] £120
123. MRS DESPARD
Photograph of her in profile. The card is headed ‘Votes for Women’ and underneath her name is the caption ‘Hon. Treas. Women’s Freedom League Offices: 18 Buckingham St., Strand. 20 Gordon St, Glasgow’ The card dates from after 1910, when she took over the treasureship of the WFL. Very good – unposted
[14569] £25
124. MRS DESPARD
photographed by Alice Barker of Kentish Town Road and published by the Women’s Freedom League. A head and shoulders portrait in profile. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – unposted
[14592] £25
125. MRS DESPARD
photographed by M.P. Co (Merchant’s Portrait Co). ‘President, The Women’s Freedom League, 1 Robert Street, Adelphi, London W.C.). She is sitting in an armless chair – with her left arm leaning on a table. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – unposted
[14616] £25
126. MRS E. HOW-MARTYN
photographed by M.P.Co (Merchant’s Portrait Co) as ‘Hon. Sec Women’s Freedom League’. It seems to me that for this photograph she wearing the ‘Holloway’ badges issued to erstwhile prisoners by both the WSPU and the WFL. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – unposted
[14609] £65
127. MRS EDITH HOW-MARTYN
Hon Sec Women’s Freedom League, ARCS, BSc – photographic postcard headed ‘Votes for Women’. Photographed by Ridsdale Cleare of Lower Clapton Road. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – unposted
[14594] £65
128. MRS EMMELINE PANKHURST
photograph by F. Kehrhahn & Co, Bexleyheath. She is wearing one of the WSPU shield-shaped badges – and looks very beautiful. The sitter isn’t identified, but Mrs Pankhurst is unmistakable. The photograph had been taken at the same time – or had been cropped from and reproduced as a separate image – as a full length portrait (#14536). The card was published by Kehrhahn – about whom you can find out more here https://wp.me/p2AEiO-ge. Unusual – probably dates from c 1909. In fine condition
[14534] £100
129. MRS EMMELINE PANKHURST
no photographer or publisher given. She sites in a high-backed chair wearing a dress with heavily embroidered sleeves and bodice. Her right hand rests on her cheek. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson. Fine – unposted
[14640] £45
130. MRS EMMELINE PANKHURST
studio portrait photograph by F. Kehrhahn, Bexleyheath, possibly dating from c. 1912-1914. A head-and shoulders image – she is wearing an evening-style dress, a rather magnificent necklace, and a decorative band across her hair. It is an unusual image of her, taken by a photographer who often photographed WSPU occasions (or a post about Kehrhahn on my website see https://wp.me/p2AEiO-ge). Interestingly, although so recognisable, the card doesn’t carry her name – or any link to the WSPU. On the reverse of the card is written ‘Mrs Pankhurst’. It was once owned by Joan Wickham, Mrs Pankhurst’s secretary. Fine – unposted
[15152] £120
131. MRS HENRY FAWCETT, LL.D.
photographed by Elliott and Fry in c 1909. She is sitting, full length, seen in profile. Although the image is familiar I do not appear to have had a copy of this postcard in stock previously. The NUWSS issued far fewer postcards than did the WSPU so are relatively scarce – and this card doesn’t even mention her association with the NUWSS. Very good – unposted
[15127] £60
132. MRS LILIAN M. HICKS
– photographed by Lena Connell – an official Women’s Freedom League photographic postcard. Mrs Hicks had been an early member of the WSPU, but left to join the WFL in the 1907 split, returning in 1910 to the WSPU. Fine – unposted
[14533] £35
133. MRS MASSY
photographic portrait, taken by Rita Martin and captioned ‘Mrs Massy. National Women’s Social and Political Union, 4, Clements Inn, W.C.’. Mrs Rosamund Massy (1870-1947) probably joined the WSPU in 1908 and in Nov 1909 was imprisoned for the first time, In Nov 1910 she served a month in Holloway after breaking a window during the ‘Black Friday’ debacle. When, in 1928, Mrs Pankhurst stood for election in Whitechapel Mrs Massy, although not a Conservative, gave her every support and it was Mrs Massy’s hunger strike medal and Holloway badge that it was, it is believed, placed in a casket in the plinth of Mrs Pankhurst’s statue when it was first erected in Victoria Tower Gardens. Fine – unposted – unusual
[15189] £140
134. MRS PANKHURST
Full-lenth portrait by F. Kehrhahn of Bexleyheath.- captioned ‘Mrs Pankhurst’ She is wearing a WSPU badge and holds a dangling lorngnette in one hand while the other rests on an open book, is wearing a WSPU badge. Very good – unposted
[14536] £40
135. MRS PANKHURST
photographed sitting, turning towards the camera with an open book in her hand. A long, pale stole is draped over her shoulders. A studio portrait, though no photographer is noted. ‘Votes for Women’ is the heading and the caption is ‘Mrs Pankhurst, The Women’s Social and Political Union, 4 Clement’s Inn, Strand, WC’. This card dates from the early days of the WSPU in London, c 1907. Very good – unposted
[15138] £55
136. MRS PANKHURST
arrested in Victoria Street, 13 February 1908. She is on her way from the WSPU ‘Women’s Parliament’ in Caxton Hall – a policeman holds her left hand – she carries her ‘Parliament’s’ resolution in the other. Published by Photochrome Ltd. On the reverse, a rather complicated message to unravel. The card was posted from South Kensington to ‘Mrs Dixon, 66 Ceylon Place, Eastbourne’ in March 1908, I can’t make out the day on the postmark. I think it was a joint effort – the first sender, signing for ‘A & F (?), ‘writes this in the Hall – do so wish you here with us’, and a second (‘L’) continues ‘C. Pankhurst is speaking as I write. Mrs P. has been released today instead of tomorrow so will occupy the chair – I wish you were herre – must listen’. The meeting the writers of the postcard were attending was that held in the Albert Hall on 19 March 1908, at which Mrs Pankhurst, newly released from Holloway, did arrive to take the chair. Her sentence had followed her arrest, as pictured on the reverse.There is another layer, as it were, on the card. In what I think is another, firmer, hand (perhaps that of Mrs Dixon, the recipient), has been written ‘19.3.08 self denial £258 2. 11. 7!!’ This refers to the amount of the money raised in ‘Self Denial Week’ of £258 2s 11d. The figure 7 and the exclamation marks could be interpreted as referring to the £7000, the sum raised in cash, goods and promises by the end of the meeting. I have been unable to identify ‘Mrs Dixon’, who was no longer living at 66 Ceylon Place (a boarding house) in 1911, but perhaps someone with an interest in suffrage activity in Eastbourne will be able to. The card, with its interesting on-the-spot message, has been through the Edwardian post and has a crease across one corner, but is in generally good condition
[15346] £180
137. MRS T BILLINGTON-GREIG WFL
A lovely photographic head and shoulders portrait of her – captioned ‘Mrs T Billington-Greig Hon Organising Sec Women’s Freedom League 1 Robert St, London WC’. The photo is by Brinkley and Son, Glasgow. Fine – unposted – unusual
[14573] £65
138. MRS WOLSTENHOLME ELMY
real photographic postcard of one of the suffrage campaigns most earnest workers and one of the WSPU’s earliest supporters. The photograph was taken in May 1907 when the WSPU-nominated photographer called at her home. Fine – unposted – scarce
[14283] £100
139. REV R.J CAMPBELL
published in Rotary Photographic Series. A rather angelic-looking muscular Christian – and fervent supporter of women’s suffrage. He spoke out against the White Slave Trade. A postcard from the Postcard Album compiled by Women’s Freedom League members Edith, Florence and Grace Hodgson.. Fine – unposted
[14652] £65
140. WOMEN’S FREEDOM LEAGUE MRS DESPARD AND MRS COBDEN SANDERSON WAITING FOR MR ASQUITH WFL
‘Arrested August 19th, 1909’ They are shown wating outside 10 Downing Street as part of the campaign to picket the Prime Minister in a vain attempt to force him to accept a petition. Fine condition – scarce – unposted
[15354] £65
Suffrage Artist Postcard
141. ‘THE RIGHT DISHONOURABLE DOUBLE-FACE ASQUITH’ WSPU
The cartoon by ‘A Patriot’ appeared on the cover of the 19 Nov 1909 edition of ‘Votes for Women’. With one of his faces ‘Citizen Asquith’ is addressing a Peer of the Realm with ‘Down with privilege of birth – up with Democratic rule!’ and with the other he turns to a woman in prison clothes who is holding out her petition for Liberty and Equality and remonstrates ‘The rights of government belong to the aristocrats by birth – men. No liberty or equality for women!’ This image was also produced as a poster and resonated strongly among WSPU supporters. You can read about the artist – Alfred Pearse in my ‘Art and Suffrage: a biographical dictionary of suffrage artists’. The card was published by the WSPU. From Miss Chapman’s collection. In very good – unposted – condition
[15150] £150
Suffrage Postcard: Commercial Comic
142. THEM PESKY SUFFRAGETTES WANTS EVERYTHING FOR THEMSELVES
says old man confronted with a door labelled ‘For Ladies Only’. Rather topical, again. A US postcard. Fine – unposted
[14000] £20
General Non-Fiction
143. AARON, Jane And WALBY, Sylvia Out of the Margins: women’s studies in the Nineties Falmer Press 1991
Women’s Studies was then a rapidly expanding area in teaching and research. The collection of essays derive from a conference organized by the then new Women’s Studies Network held in July 1990 and provide a guide to the rapid institutional growth of Women’s Studies and feminist teaching practice and to intellectual developments on race and ethnicity, sexuality and lesbianism. Soft covers – very good
[8230] £8
144. ADELMAN, Jeanne And ENGUIDANOS, Gloria (eds) Racism in the Lives of Women: testimony, theory and guides to antiracist practice Harrington Park Press 1995
Paper covers – mint
[5226] £5
145. AHMED, Leila Women and Gender in Islam Yale University Press 1992
Fine in d/w
[10512] £15
146. ALBERMAN, Eva And DENNIS, K.J. Late Abortions in England and Wales Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists 1984
A report of a national confidential survey by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Soft covers – good – ex-library
[9010] £8
147. ALLEN, Jennifer (ed) Lesbian Philosophies and Cultures State University of New York Press 1990
Paper covers – very good
[5164] £5
148. ALLSOPP, Anne The Education and Employment of Girls in Luton, 1874-1924: widening opportunities and lost freedoms Boydell Press/Bedfordshire Historical Record Society 2005
Examines the education of Luton girls and its relationship with employment opportunities. Mint in d/w
[10963] £20
149. ASHTON-WARNER, Sylvia Teacher: the testament of an inspired teacher Virago 1980
With new introduction by Dora Russell. Soft covers – fine – signed by Carmen Callil on free front endpaper.
[9504] £9
150. BACK, Lee And SOLOMOS, John Theories of Race and Racism: a reader Routledge 2000
Soft covers – fine. Heavy
[9986] £12
151. BASCH, Françoise Relative Creatures: Victorian women in society and the novel Schocken Books 1974
Very good
[13467] £4
152. BEACHY, Robert Et Al (eds) Women, Business and Finance in 19th-century Europe: rethinking separate spheres Berg 2006
Fine
[9208] £12
153. BEARE, Geraldine and WHITE, Cynthia L. Moira House: portrait of a progressive school 1875-2000 Moira House Ltd 2000
A thorough history of this independent girls’ school, based for many years in Eastbourne. With over 90 illustrations. Fine in fine d/w – signed by Cynthia White
[15454] £12
154. BEER, Janet Kate Chopin, Edith Wharton and Charlotte Perkins Gilman: studies in short fiction Palgrave 1997 r/p
Focusses on a wide range of short fiction by these three women writers. Hardovers – fine
[11769] £12
155. BENJAMIN, Marina (ed) Science and Sensibility: gender and scientific enquiry 1780-1945 Basil Blackwell 1994
An interesting collection of essays, Soft covers – mint
[11668] £18
156. BERRY, Mrs Edward And MICHAELIS, Madame (eds) 135 Kindergarten Songs and Games Charles and Dible, no date [1881]
‘These songs are printed to supply a want in English Kindergartens’ – the music is, of course, included – as are movement instructions. Mme Michaelis ran the Croydon Kindergarten. Very good
[9035] £48
157. BLAIR, Karen The Clubwoman as Feminist: true womanhood redefined, 1868-1914 Holmes and Meier 1980
A study of the US women’s club movement – particularly the literary clubs – which offered an opportunity for domestic-oriented middle-class women to expand their intersts and activities beyond the home and into cultural and civic realms. Soft covers – fine
[15418] £8
158. BLAIR, Kirstie Form & Faith in Victorian Poetry & Religion OUP 2012
By assessing the discourses of church architecture and liturgy the author demonstrates that Victorian poets both reflected on and affected ecclesiastical practices – and then focuses on particular poems to show how High Anglican debates over formal worship were dealt with by Dissenting, Broad Church, and Roman Catholic poets and other writers. Features major poets such as the Browning, Tennyson, Hopkins, Rossetti and Hardy – as well as many minor writers. Mint in d/w (pub price £62)
[13693] £35
159. BLAKE, Trevor (ed) The Gospel of Power: ‘Egoist’ essays by Dora Marsden Union of Egoists (Baltimore) 2021
Essays by Dora Marsden (1882-1960), sometime member of the WSPU, published in ‘The Egoist’. Soft covers – mint
[15213] £8
160. BLAKELEY, Georgina and BRYSON, Valerie (eds) The Impact of Feminism on Political Concepts and Debates Manchester University Press 2007
Soft covers – mint
[11549] £10
161. BOASE, Tessa Mrs Pankhurst’s Purple Feather: fashion, fury and feminism – women’s fight for change Aurum Press 2018
In fact, Mrs Pankhurst is rather a red herring, as it were, for this is really the story of the founding of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds by Mrs Etta Lemon and her campaign to halt the plumage trade that, in decorating hats, destroyed birds. Very good in slightly torn d.w
[15423] £8
162. Boucé, Paul-Gabriel (ed) Sexuality in 18th-century Britain Manchester University Press 1982
Includes essays by Roy Porter, Ruth Perry and Pat Rogers – among others. Very good in d/w
[11034] £24
163. BOXER, Marilyn And QUATAERT, Jean H. Connecting Spheres: European women in a globalizing world, 1500 to the present OUP 2000
Soft covers – mint
[9353] £12
164. BOYD, Kenneth Scottish Church Attitudes to Sex, Marriage and the Family 1850-1914 John Donald 1980
Fine in d/w
[9679] £18
165. BURSTALL, Sara A. The Story of the Manchester High School for Girls 1871-1911 Manchester University Press 1911
Very good internally – slightly marked cover
[9606] £15
166. CADBURY, Edward, MATHESON, M. Cecile and SHANN, George Women’s Work and Wages: a phase of life in an industrial city University of Chicago Press 1907
US edition of this study of women’s work in Birmingham. Good – inner hinge a little loose
[8076] £50
167. CALLEN, Anthea Angel in the Studio: women in the arts and crafts movement 1870-1914 Astragal Books 1979
Widely researched and beautifully illustrated. Fine in d/w
[14420] £55
168. CAVENDISH, Ruth Women on the Line Routledge 1982
Explores the relationship between sex, class and imperialism as reflected in the lives of women working on the assembly line of a large factory. The author worked on an assembly line alongside women who had settled in England from Ireland, the Caribbean or the Indian subcontinent. Paper covers – fine
[10001] £10
169. CHARLES, Nickie And HUGHES-FREELAND, Felicia (eds) Practising Feminism: identity, difference, power Routledge 1996
Soft covers – mint
[8707] £8
170. CHECKLAND, Olive Philanthropy in Victorian Scotland: social welfare and the voluntary principle John Donald Ltd 1980
Fine in fine d/w
[9241] £20
171. CLARK, Margaret Homecraft: a guide to the modern home and family Routledge, 3rd ed 1978 (r/p)
The author was senior adviser for Home Economics for Derbyshire. The book was a textbook, suitable for school Home Economics courses. First published in 1966. Soft covers – very good
[10288] £6
172. CLARKE, Norma Dr Johnson’s Women Hambledon and London 2000
investigates lives of Elizabeth Carter, Charlotte Lennox, Elizabeth Montagu, Hester Thrale and Fanny Burney – exploring their relationship with Dr Johnson, with each other and with the world of letters. Excellent reading. Mint in d/w
[9736] £8
173. CLARKE, Patricia The Governesses: letters from the colonies 1862-1882 Hutchinson 1985
Fine in fine d/w
[12463] £7
174. COHEN, Monica Professional Domesticity in the Victorian Novel: women, work and home CUP 1998
Offers new readings of narratives by Jane Austen, Charlotte Bronte, Dickens, George Eliot, Emily Eden etc to show how domestic work, the most feminine of all activities, gained much of its social credibility by positioning itself in relation to the emergent professions. Soft cover – fine
[12419] £25
175. COLBY, Vineta The Singular Anomaly: women novelists of the 19th century New York University Press 1970
Soft covers – good internally – covers rubbed and bumped
[8311] £12
176. CRAWFORD, Elizabeth Enterprising Women: the Garretts and their circle Francis Boutle 2009 (r/p)
Pioneering access to education at all levels for women, including training for the professions, the women of the Garrett circle opened the way for women to gain employment in medicine, teaching, horticulture and interiior design – and were also deeply involved in the campaign for women’s suffrage. Includes studies of the work of Elizabeth Garrett Anderson, Emily Davies, Millicent Fawcett, Rhoda and Agnes Garrett, Fanny Wilkinson, Annie Swynnerton – and many women of their day. Soft covers, large format, over 70 illustrations. Mint
[15386] £25
177. CUNNINGTON, C. Willett Feminine Attitudes in the Nineteenth Century William Heinemann 1935
Good
[2558] £15
178. CURTHOYS, Jean Feminist Amnesia: the wake of women’s liberation Routledge 1997
Soft covers – fine
[8704] £8
179. DAVIS, Gwen and JOYCE, Beverly Poetry by Women to 1900: a bibliography of American and British Writers Mansell 1991
An exhaustive listing. Hard covers – 340, double-columned, pages -fine
[15440] £10
180. DEAN-JONES, Lesley Ann Women’s Bodies in Classical Greek Science OUP 1996
Soft covers – fine
[11865] £15
181. DEMOOR, Marysa Their Fair Share: women, power and criticism in the ‘Athenaeum’, from Millicent Garrett Fawcett to Katherine Mansfield, 1870-1920 Ashgate 2000
Mint
[11667] £25
182. DON VANN, J. and VANARSDEL, Rosemary T. (eds) Periodicals of Queen Victoria’s Empire: an exploration University of Toronto Press 1996
Fine in fine d/w
[9600] £18
183. DOODY, Margaret Anne The True Story of the Novel Fontana 1998
Aims to prove that the novel is an ancient form – with a continuous history of 2000 years. Soft covers – very good
[10562] £5
184. DURHAM, Edith High Albania Virago 1985
First published in 1909. Soft covers – very good
[10802] £8
185. DYHOUSE, Carol Girl Trouble: panic and progress in the history of young women Zed Books 2013
Paper covers – mint
[15209] £8
186. ELLIS, Mrs Sarah Stickney The Select Works Henry G. Langley (New York) 1844
Includes ‘The Poetry of Life’, ‘Pictures of Private Life’, ‘A Voice From the Vintage, on the force of example addressed to those who think and feel’
Good in original decorative cloth
[11234] £48
187. FADERMAN, Lillian Surpassing the Love of Men: romantic friendship and love between women from the Renaissance to the present The Women’s Press 1991 (r/p)
Paper covers – fine
[15049] £8
188. FINDLAY, J.J. (ed) The Young Wage-Earner and the Problem of His Education: essays and reports Sigwick and Jackson 1918
For ‘His Education’ read also ‘Hers’. The essays include: ‘From Home Life to Industrial Life: with special reference to adolescent girls, by James Shelley, prof of education, University College, Southampton; ‘The Young Factory Girl’ by Emily Matthias, superintendent of women employees, the Phoenix Dynamo Manufacturing Co, Bradford and the reports include: ‘Working Girls and Trade Schools (London)’ by Theodora Pugh and ‘The Sons and Daughters of Farming Folk’ by J.J. Findlay. Very good
[8026] £25
189. FRANCOME, Colin Abortion Freedom: a worldwide movement Allen & Unwin 1984
Very good in d/w
[9006] £5
190. FRYE, Susan And ROBERTSON, Karen (Eds) Maids and Mistresses, Cousins and Queens: women’s alliances in early modern England OUP 1999
A collection of essays exploring how early modern women associated with other women in a variety of roles, from alewives to midwives, prostitutes to pleasure seekers, slaves to queens, serving maids to ladies in waiting…’. Fine
[7435] £28
191. FULLER, Margaret ‘These Sad But Glorious Days’: dispatches from Europe, 1846-1850 Yale University Press 1991
Fine in d/w
[8887] £18
192. FURLONG, Monica Visions and Longings: medieval women mystics Mowbray 1996
Writings by and about eleven women Christian mystics who lived and worked between the 11th and 14th centuries. Fine in fine d/w
[9391] £12
193. GACEMI, Baya I, Nadia, Wife of a Terrorist University of Nebraska Press 2006
The ‘autobiography’ of a young Algerian woman. Translated by Paul Cote and Constantina Mitchell.
[9974] £6
194. (GARDINER), Sarah Gardiner (ed) Leaves from a Young Girl’s Diary: the journal of Margaret Gardiner 1840-41 Tuttle, Moorhouse & Taylor Co (NY) 1927
The journal kept by Margaret Gardiner who, with her father, a NY State Senator, her mother and her sister (who was to become the wife of a US President), sailed across the Atlantic to Europe. They landed at Liverpool and then proceeded to ‘do’ Europe. Delightful. Very good – scarce
[13478] £45
195. GARRETT, Stephanie Gender Tavistock 1987
In ‘Society Now’ series. Soft covers – very good
[8759] £3
196. GILBERT, V.E. And TATLA, D.S. Women’s Studies: a bibliography of dissertations 1870-1982 Blackwell 1985
496 double-columned pages. A few pencilled comments on the free front endpaper, otherwise fine in d/w
[2779] £10
197. GLUCK, Sherna Berger and PATAI, Daphne (eds) Women’s Words: the practice of oral history Routledge 1991
Explores the theoretical, methodological, and practical problems that arise when women utilize oral history as a tool of feminist scholarship. Hardback – fine in d/w
[11532] £15
198. GOOD HOUSEKEEPING’S HOME ENCYCLOPAEDIA Ebury Press 1968 (r/p)
Packed with information and illustrations. How very retro. Large format – very good in rubbed d/w – heavy
[10297] £10
199. GOODENOUGH, Simon Jam and Jerusalem: a pictorial history of the Women’s Institute Collins 1977
Very good in d/w
[15434] £5
200. GREGORY, Abigail And WINDEBANK, Jan Women’s Work in Britain and France: practice, theory and policy Macmillan 2000
Reveals profound structural changes in the British and French economies which will make it necessary to revalue caring and other unpaid work and to change men’s work patterns towards those conventionally associated with women, rather than calling on women to adapt to structures created for and by men. Soft covers – mint
[8709] £10
201. HARTLEY, Jenny (ed) Hearts Undefeated: women’s writing of the Second World War Virago 1994
Soft covers – very good
[9135] £10
202. HASTE, Cate Rules of Desire: sex in Britain: World War 1 to the present Pimlico 1992
Soft covers – very good
[10519] £8
203. HESSELGRAVE, Ruth Avaline Lady Miller and the Batheaston Literary Circle Yale University Press 1927
An 18th-century Bath literary salon. Lady Miller was the first English woman to describe her travels in Italy. Fine
[3020] £30
204. HOBMAN, D.L. Go Spin, You Jade: studies in the emancipation of woman Watts 1957
Traces women’s changing status from the Renaissance to the mid-20th century. Very good in slightly chipped d/w
[1311] £5
205. HOLT, Anne A Ministry To The Poor: being a history of the Liverpool Domestic Mission Society, 1836-1936 Henry Young (Liverpool) 1936
Very good – scarce
[9243] £45
206. HORSFIELD, Margaret Biting the Dust: the joys of housework Fourth Estate 1997
Mint in d/w
[10183] £5
207. HUFTON, Olwen The Prospect Before Her: a history of women in western Europe: vol 1 1500-1800 HarperCollins 1995
Considers the situation of all kinds of women in all aspects of their lives across the whole of western Europe. With 46 illustrations. Fine in fine d/w – 654 pp.
[15456] £8
208. HUGHES, Linda K. And LUND, Michal Victorian Publishing and Mrs Gaskell’s Work University Press of Virginia 1999
Fine in fine d/w
[9537] £15
209. (HUTCHINSON) Kathleen Coburn (ed) The Letters of Sara Hutchinson from 1800 to 1835 Routledge 1954
Friend of Mary and William Wordsworth – loved by Coleridge. Good
[9604] £18
210. JOHN, Angela (ed) Unequal Opportunities: women’s employment in England 1800-1918 Blackwell 1986
Essays, among others, on the Leicester hosiery industry, Leeds and London tailoring trade, the London bookbinding and printing trade, domestic service, clerical work, and on women and trade unionism. Soft covers – fine
[15455] £8
211. KEDDIE, Nikki And BARON, Beth (eds) Women in Middle Eastern History: shifting boundaries in sex and gender Yale University Press 1991
The first study of gender relations in the Middle East from the earliest Islamic period to the present. Fine in d/w
[10511] £15
212. KENEALY, Arabella Feminism and Sex-Extinction E.P. Dutton & Co (NY) 1920
Anti-feminist eugenicist polemic. US edition is scarce. Very good internally – cloth cover a little bumped and rubbed
[12107] £25
213. KERTZER, David and BARBAGLIO, Marzio (eds) Family Life in the Long Nineteenth Century 1789-1913 Yale University Press 2002
A collection of essays under the headings: Economy and Family Organization: State, Religion, Law and the Family; Demographic Forces; Family Relations. 420pp Heavy. Mint in d/w
[11037] £18
214. KIDD, Alan and NICHOLLS, David (eds) Gender, Civic Culture and Consumerism: middle-class identity in Britain 1800-1940 Manchester University Press 1999
Soft covers – very good
[11759] £12
215. KING, Brenda Silk and Empire Manchester University Press
A study of the Anglo-Indian silk trade, challenging the notion that Britain always exploited its empire. Mint in d/w (pub price £55)
[9845] £25
216. KIRBY, Joan (ed) The Plumpton Letters and Papers CUP for the Royal Historical Society 1996
Letters addressed mainly to Sir William Plumpton (1404-80) and his son, Sir Robert (1453-1525). Good in marked d/w- but has perhaps been exposed to damp at some point
[10954] £10
217. LEE, Julia Sun-Joo The American Slave Narrative and the Victorian Novel OUP 2010
Investigates the shaping influence of the American slave narrative on the Victorian novel in the years between the British Abolition Act and the American Emancipation Proclamation – and argues that Charlotte Bronte, Elizabeth Gaskell, Thackeray and Dickens integrated into their works generic elements of the slave narrative. Mint in d/w (pub price £40)
[13436] £15
218. LEGGET, Jane Local Heroines: a women’s history gazetteer to England, Scotland and Wales Pandora 1988
Tracking women from Aberdeen to Zennor. With maps and a biographical index. Such a good idea. Mint in d/w
[7441] £10
219. LEWIS, Jane Women in England 1870-1950: sexual divisions and social change Wheatsheaf Books 1986 (r/p)
An interpretive account of the role of women in English society. Soft covers – good – some marginal pencilled lines
[10872] £6
220. LITOFF, Judy Barrett And SMITH, David C. We’re In This War, Too: World War II Letters from American Women in Uniform OUP 1994
Fine in d/w
[8310] £16
221. LOANE, M. The Queen’s Poor: life as they find it in town and country Edward Arnold (new and cheaper edition0 1906
Martha Loane, a Queen’s Nurse in Portsmouth, wrote as a social investigator among the ‘respectable poor’. This was her first study. Good in decorative boards
[7995] £35
222. LYNN, Susan Progressive Women in Conservative Times: racial justice, peace, and feminism, 1945 to the 1960s Rutgers University Press 1992
Paper covers – mint
[5219] £10
223. MACKIE, Vera Creating Socialist Women in Japan: gender, labour and activism, 1900-1937 CUP 1997
Mint in d/w
[14429] £18
224. MCINTYRE, Neil How British Women Became Doctors: the story of the Royal Free Hospital and its Medical School Wenrowave Press 2014
A very thorough history of the Royal Free and the London School of Medicine for Women- written by an eminent doctor – a charming man. Soft covers – 580 pages – fine
[15450] £20
225. MALOS, Ellen (ed) The Politics of Housework Allison & Busby 1980
Fine in d/w
[1819] £4
226. MARKS, Lara Metropolitan Maternity maternity and infant welfare services in early 20th century London Rodopi 1996
Soft covers – fine
[11624] £22
227. MARTIN, Jane Women and the Politics of Schooling in Victorian and Edwardian England Leicester University Press 1999
Mint (pub price £65)
[10781] £15
228. MASON, Michael The Making of Victorian Sexuality OUP 1994
Fine in d/w
[10599] £14
229. METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF HACKNEY Catalogue of Books in the Public Libraries Public Libraries Committee, Hackney no date [1911?]
A listing of all the books held in Hackney Public Libraries c 1910. Each book’s listing gives the name of author, title and date of publication. Very interesting
[13479] £25
230. MEWS, Hazel Frail Vessels: woman’s role in women’s novels from Fanny Burney to George Eliot Athlone Press 1969
Very good in d/w
[3801] £12
231. MILLER, Lucasta The Bronte Myth Cape 2001
Hardcover – fine – in very good d/w
[15216] £8
232. MINKIN, Mary Jane And WRIGHT, Carol What Every Woman Needs to Know About Menopause: the years before, during, and after Yale University Press 1996
Mint in d/w – heavy
[9987] £12
233. MUMM, Susan (ed) All Saints Sisters of the Poor: an Anglican Sisterhood in the 19th century Boydel Press/Church of England Record Society 2001
A history of the Sisterhood that was founded by Harriet Brownlow Byron in 1850 to work in the slums of Marylebone – but then spread its net much wider. This volume comprises material drawn from the Sisterhood’s archives. V. interesting. Mint
[10964] £15
234. NASH, David Secularism, Art and Freedom Leicester Unviersity Press 1992
A study of the Secular movement in Victorian England. Fine
[7447] £18
235. NATIONAL LESBIAN AND GAY SURVEY What a Lesbian Looks Like: writings by lesbians on their lives and lifestyles Rooutledge 1992
Paper covers – mint
[5281] £10
236. NORWICH HIGH SCHOOL 1875-1950 privately printed, no date [1950]
A GPDST school. Very good internally – green cloth covers sunned – ex-university library
[9612] £15
237. ORAM, Alison And TURNBULL, Annmarie The Lesbian History Sourcebook: love and sex between women in Britain from 1780 to 1970 Routledge 2001
Soft covers – fine
[9092] £12
238. OTTER, Samuel Philadelphia Stories: America’s literature of race and freedom OUP 2010
An account of Philadelphia’s literary history. Hardback – mint in d/w
[13423] £12
239. PALMER, Beth Women’s Authorship and Editorship in Victorian Culture OUP 2011
Draws on extensive periodical and archival material to bring new perspectives to the study of sensation fiction in the Victorian period. Mint in d/w (pub price £60)
[13432] £20
240. PEACH, Linden Contemporary Irish and Welsh Women’s Fiction: gender, desire and power University of Wales Press 2008
The first comparative study of fiction by late 20th and 21st-century women writers from England, Southern Ireland and Wales. Soft covers – mint
[11572] £15
241. PEEL, John And POTTS, Malcolm Textbook of Contraceptive Practice CUP 1969
Soft covers – very good
[9021] £6
242. PERKIN, Joan Victorian Women John Murray
Women discussing their lives in their own words – through letters, memoirs etc – during the long 19thc. Fine in fine d/w – illustrated
[4254] £8
243. PHILLIPS, Margaret Mann Willingly to School: memories of York College for Girls 1919-1924 Highgate Publications 1989
Good in card covers – though ex-library
[13124] £10
244. PICHLER, Pia Talking Young Femininities Palgrave 2009
Explores the spontaneous talk of adolescent British girls from different socio-cultural backgrounds. Hardovers – mint ( pub price £50)
[11525] £10
245. PINES, Davida The Marriage Paradox: modernist novels and the cultural imperative to marry University Press of Florida 2006
Mint
[10188] £18
246. PORTER, Elisabeth Peacebuilding: women in international perspective Routledge 2007
Hardcovers – mint
[15176] £20
247. POTTS, Malcolm, DIGGORY, Peter And PEEL, John Abortion CUP 1977
Soft covers – very good – 575pp
[9007] £8
248. PURKISS, Diane The Witch in History: early modern and 20th century representations Routledge 1996
Soft covers – mint
[9395] £12
249. RAPPOPORT, Jill Giving Women: alliance and exchange in Victorian culture OUP 2012
examines the literary expression and cultural consequences of English women’s giving from the 1820s to the First World War – in the work of Charlotte Bronte, Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Elizabeth Gaskell and Christina Rossetti – as well as in literary annuals and political pamphlets. Through giving, women redefined the primary allegiances of teh everyday lives, forged public coalitions, and advanced campaigns for abolition, slum reform, eugenics, and suffrage. Mint in d/w (pub price £45.99)
[13413] £32
250. RICHARDSON, Anna Steese A Manual for Club Women L.C. Smith & Corona Typewriters Inc (New York) 1919
A handbook telling women ‘How to run a club’ – with all the attendant considerations. Such as, ‘How to conduct a meeting’, ‘Minutes and how to keep them’, ‘Club finances and how to handle them’, ‘Publicity and how to get it’ etc. The author was ‘Director, Good Citizenship Bureau of the Women’s Home Companion’. The title page bears the rubber stamp of ‘Springfield Typewriter Exchange, 353 Bridge street, Springfield, Mass’ and laid in is the 8-page ‘Constitution and By-Laws of the Somers Women’s Club’. Good
[15419] £12
251. RIOJA, Isabel Ramos The Day Kadi Lost Part of Her Life Spinifex 1998
A photographic study of female circumcision. Soft covers – large format – mint
[7577] £8
252. ROBERTS, Alison Hathor Rising: the serpent power in ancient Egypt Northgate 1995
Soft covers – fine
[11866] £8
253. ROBERTS, Robert The Classic Slum: Salford life in the first quarter of the century Penguin 1980 (r/p)
The ‘century’ is, of course, the 20th – an interesting study of life in the area of Manchester in which the Pankhursts had lived – and in which the WSPU was founded. Paper covers – good
[15451] £3
254. ROBINSON, Annabel, PURKIS, John, MASSING, Ann A Florentine Procession: a painting by Jane Benham Hay at Homerton College, Cambridge Homestead Press (Cambridge) 1997
A study of the Pre-raphaelite style painting and its artist – who was a friend of Bessie Rayner Parkes. With colour reproduction of the large painting. Paper covers – mint
[2465] £8
255. ROWBOTHAM, Sheila Women, Resistance and Revolution Allen Lane 1972
Very good in chipped d/w
[1834] £10
256. ROYLE, Edward Victorian Infidels: the origins of the British secularist movement, 1791-1866 Manchester University Press 1974
Very good in d/w
[15431] £12
257. SANCHEZ, Regina Morantz- Conduct Unbecoming a Woman: medicine on trial in turn-of-the-century Brooklyn OUP 2000
Soft covers – very good
[15212] £4
258. SEAGER, Joni Earth Follies: feminism, politics and the environment Earthscan 1993
Soft covers – fine
[8708] £8
259. SEARLE, Arthur (ed) Barrington Family Letters 1628-1632 Royal Historical Society 1983
In the main letters to Lady Joan Barrington, the focal point of the extended family, the dowager and respected matriarch on a recognisable early 17th-century pattern. Very good
[10955] £12
260. SEIDLER, Victor The Achilles Heel Reader: men, sexual politics and socialism Routledge 1991
Paper covers – mint
[5302] £5
261. SHATTOCK, Joanne And WOLFF, Michael (eds) The Victorian Periodical Press: samplings and soundings Leicester University Press 1992
A collection of essays. Fine in d/w
[3501] £28
262. (SHELLEY) Miranda Seymour Mary Shelley John Murray 2000
A 655-pp well-written biography. Mint in dustwrapper
[8588] £18
263. SHUTTLE, Penelope And REDGROVE, Peter Alchemy for Women: personal transformation through dreams and the female cycle Rider 1995
Soft covers – very good
[9430] £5
264. SIMETI, Mary Taylor Travels with a Medieval Queen Weidenfeld & Nicolson 2002
Retracing the footsteps of a 12th-century princess, Constance of Hauteville, through Germany and Italy. Mint in d/w
[9327] £12
265. SIRAJ-BLATCHFORD, Iram (ed) ‘Race’, Gender and the Education of Teachers Open University Press 1993
Soft covers – mint
[8711] £4
266. SLATER, Michael The Great Dickens Scandal Yale University Press 2012
How Dickens sought to cover up his relationship with Ellen Ternan. Mint in d/w (pub price £20)
[13420] £8
267. SMITH, Joan Misogynies Faber 1990
Reprint, paper covers – mint
[15064] £4
268. SONBOL, Amira El Azhary (ed) Women, the Family, and Divorce Laws in Islamic History Syracuse University Press 1996
18 essays covering a wide range of material. Soft covers – fine
[10484] £12
269. SOUHAMI, Diana No Modernism Without Lesbians Head of Zeus 2021
Pioneering research on sexism in education. Paper covers – mint
[1667] £2
271. STONE, Dorothy The National: the story of a pioneer college Robert Hale 1976
History of the pioneering domestic economy training college – The National Training College of Domestic Subjects. Fine in d/w
[8231] £12
272. STOPES, Marie Birth Control Today Hogarth Press, 12th ed 1957
Very good in d/w
[9003] £5
273. SUTHERLAND, J.A. Victorian Novelists and Publishers University of Chicago Press 1978
A study of the relationship in the mid 19thc between publishers and authors such as Dickens, George Eliot, Thomas Hardy, Thackeray, Charlotte Bronte, Charles Reade, and Bulwer-Lytton. Soft covers – fine
[15432] £5
274. TAYLOR, Jane Contributions of Q.Q. Jackson & Walford 5th ed, 1855
The majority of these essays were first published in the ‘Youth’s Magazine’, between 1816 and 1822. Good in original cloth
[1699] £15
275. THE LONDON JOURNAL: a review of Metropolitan Society Past and Present Summer 1985
Vol 11, no 1 – contains, among other articles, Elizabeth Williams on ‘The Foundation of Royal Holloway College, Egham, 1874-1887
[15457] £3
276. THOMPSON, Dorothy Outsiders: Class, Gender and Nation Verso 1993
Includes the essay ‘Women and 19th-century Radical Politics: a lost dimension’. Soft covers – mint
[8090] £11
277. TINDALL, Gillian Three Houses, Many Lives: the story of a Cotswold vicarage, a Surrey boarding school and a London home Vintage 2013
Once again Gillian Tindall works her magic. I loved it (I bought my own copy!)
[13417] £5
278. VANITA, Ruth Sappho and the Virgin Mary: same-sex love and the English literary imagination Columbia University Press 1996
Soft covers – very good
[11223] £8
279. VICINUS, Martha (ed) Suffer and Be Still: women in the Victorian age Methuen 1972
An excellent collection of essays. Paper covers – fine – scarce
[2388] £25
280. WANDOR, Michelene Post-War British Drama: looking back in gender Routledge, revised edition 2001
Soft covers – mint
[5897] £12
281. WILSON, Philip K (ed) Childbirth: Vol 3: Methods and Folklore Garland Publishing 1996
An anthology of key primary sources centring on methods of childbirth -covering ‘Painless Childbirth’ from the 18th century onwards; ”Caesarian Sections’ and ’20th Century Natural Childbirth’ and ‘Oral Traditions and Folklore of Pregnancy and Childbirth’ A single volume from a 5-voume series. Fine – 433pp
[11065] £25
282. WOLFE, Susan J. And PENELOPE, Julia (eds) Sexual Practice/Textual Theory: lesbian cultural criticism Blackwell 1993
Paper covers – mint
[5276] £5
283. WOOD, Ethel M. The Pilgrimage of Perseverance National Council of Social Service 1949
A rather negelected but I think rather good short history of feminist campaigns. Good – though ex-library
[2312] £0
284. ZIMMERMAN, Jan Once Upon the Future: a woman’s guide to tomorrow’s technology Pandora 1986
Paper covers – very good
[14940] £4
General Biography
285. (ALDRICH-BLAKE) Lord Riddell Dame Louisa Aldrich-Blake Hodder & Stoughton, no date (1920s)
Biography of Louisa Aldrich-Blake, surgeon at Elizabeth Garrett Anderson’s New Hospital for Women. You can see her portrait bust in Tavistock Square, Bloomsbury. Presentation copy from the author, Lord Riddell.
[15283] £15
286. (ALLEN) John C. Hirsh Hope Emily Allen: medieval scholarship and feminism Pilgrim Books (Oklahoma) 1988
Biography of an American medieval scholar, born in 1883 – who spent time at Newnham. Fine
[11995] £15
287. (AMBERLEY) Bertrand and Patricia Russell (eds) The Amberley Papers: the letters and diaries of Lord and Lady Amberley Hogarth Press 1937
The epitome of radical liberalism in the mid-19th-century. Both died tragically young. Good
[11044] £45
288. ANON WOMEN’S WHO’S WHO, 1934-5 Shaw Publishing Co 1935
‘An Annual Record of the Careers and Activities of the Leading Women of the Day.’ A mine of information. Very good
[15290] £38
289. ANON (Agnes Maud Davies) A Book with Seven Seals Cayme Press 1928
First edition of a classic of Victorian childhood – I think perhaps it is a ‘faction’ – am not sure that it is actually a memoir. If I said that it strikes me as having a hint of Rachel Ferguson about it, those that are familiar with her work will know what I mean. The author’s name was withheld for this first edition. An elegant book – cover a little blotched
She was the niece and adopted daughter of W.E. Foster. The journals covers the years 1880-1882 when he was chief secretary for Ireland. Fine in slightly rubbed d/w
[1043] £10
291. (ASHBURTON) Virginia Surtees The Ludovisi Goddess: the life of Louisa Lady Ashburton Michael Russell 1984
She was possibly proposed to by Browning – and was the patroness (and perhaps lover) of Harriet Hosmer. Fine in d/w
[8886] £18
292. (BAIRD) Elizabeth Nussbaum Dear Miss Baird: a portrait of a 19th-century family Longstone Books 2008
Traces the fortunes of a 19th-century family over 60 years, shedding light on issues such as the status of women, education and changing attitudes to religion, love and death. Some pencil lines in margins. Young Gertrude Baird was a talented artist, who died too young. Soft covers -some pencil lines in margins – otherwise fine
[15068] £3
293. (BEALE) Elizabeth Raikes Dorothea Beale of Cheltenham Constable 1908
Good
[11045] £15
294. (BEETON) Kathryn Hughes The Short Life and Long Times of Mrs Beeton Harper 2006
Excellent biography. Soft covers – fine
[10918] £6
295. BELL, Alan (ed and with an introduction by) Sir Leslie Stephen’s ‘Mausoleum Book’ OUP 1977
Intimate autobiography written for Stephen’s immediate family after the death of his wife, Julia, the mother of Vanessa and Virginia. Very good in d/w
[13199] £12
296. (BOTTLE) Dorothy Bottle Reminiscences of a Queen’s Army Schoolmistress Arthur Stockwell no date [1936]
Dorothy Bottle (c.1886-1973) taught at schools for the children of the military – in Ireland, Jamaica, Egypt and Britain and relates her experiences from c 1904-1935. She was an astute and sympathetic observer. Very good – with photographs – very scarce
Follows her career from her romantic marriage to the impoverished French émigré General d’Arblay to her death 46 years later. Fine in fine d/w
[12030] £12
298. (CAMERON) Victoria Olsen From Life: Julia Margaret Cameron and Victorian photography Aurum Press 2003
Fine in d/w
[9345] £15
299. CLAYTON, Ellen English Female Artists Tinsley Brothers 1876
Biographical essays on English women artists – from the 16th century until 1876. Particularly interesting for the information on 19th-century artists. Two volumes – bumped, rubbed and back board of vol 2 detached, but present. Scarce
[15078] £50
300. (CLEARY) Susanne George Kate M. Cleary: a literary biography with selected works University of Nebraska Press 1997
Study of woman who wrote stories, poems and articles about life in the American west. Mint in d/w
[5413] £5
301. CRAWFORD, Anne et al (eds) Europa Biographical Dictionary of British Women: over 1000 notable women from Britain’s Past Europa 1983
Soft covers – 536pp – fine
[12408] £10
302. (DE STAEL/CONSTANT) Renee Winegarten Germaine de Stael and Benjamin Constant: a dual biography Yale University Press 2008
Hardcovers – fine in fine d/w
[11963] £12
303. (DICKINSON) Lyndall Gordon Lives Like Loaded Guns: Emily Dickinson and her family’s feuds Virago 2010
Biography of Emily Dickinson. Hardcover in fine condition – in fine d/w
[15207] £8
304. (EDEN) Violet Dickinson (Ed) Miss Eden’s Letters Macmillan 1919
Born, a Whig, in 1797. Her letters are full of social detail. In 1835 she went to India with her brother when he became governor-general. Very good
[9339] £28
305. (ELIZABETH) Philip Yorke (ed) Letters of Princess Elizabeth of England, daughter of King George III, and Landgravine of Hesse-Homburg written for the most part to Miss Louisa Swinburne T. Fisher Unwin 1898
Full of social details – letters written both from England and Germany. Good
[8520] £38
306. EWAN, Elizabeth, PIPES, Rosie etc (eds ) The New Biographical Dictionary of Scottish Women Edinburgh University Press 2018
Soft covers – 496pp – mint
[15072] £16
307. (GAUTIER) Joanna Richardson Judith Gautier: a biography Quartet 1986
Biography of French woman of letters – and muse. Soft covers – fine
[12432] £6
308. (GLADSTONE) Lucy Masterman (ed) Mary Gladstone (Mrs Drew): her diaries and letters Methuen 1930
Daughter of Gladstone, born in 1847, excellent diary and letters, 1858-to her death (1927). Very good in d/w
[8409] £18
309. (GOODINGS) Lennie Goodings A Bite of the Apple: a life with books, writers and Virago OUP 2020
Autobiography of Lennie Goodings, one of the founders of Virago. Mint in mint d/w
[15091] £6
310. (HALDANE) Elizabeth Haldane From One Century to Another Alexander Maclehose 1937
She was born in 1862, into an eminent Scottish Liberal family – an interesting autobiography by one who was at the heart of things. Good – cover marked – remains of Boots Library label
[15266] £12
311. (HAMMOND) Mrs John Hays Hammond A Woman’s Part in a Revolution Longmans, Green 1987
The ‘Revolution’ was the Boer War – her husband was imprisoned by the Boers. Good
[6083] £30
312. (HARRISON) Amy Greener A Lover of Books: the life and literary papers of Lucy Harrison J.M. Dent 1916
Lucy Harrison (a niece of Mary Howitt) studied at Bedford College, then taught for 20 years at a school in Gower St (Charlotte Mew was a pupil at the school and v. attached to Miss Harrison) and then became headmistress of the Mount School, York. Good – pasted onto the free front end paper is a presentation slip from the editor, Amy Greener, to Mary Cotterell
[11054] £18
313. HAYS, Frances Women of the Day: a biographical dictionary of notable contemporaries J.B. Lipincott (Philadelphia) 1885
A superb biographical source on interesting British women. Good in original binding – with library shelf mark in ink on spine- scarce
[12594] £75
314. (HOLTBY) Alice Holtby and Jean McWilliam (eds) Winifred Holtby: Letters to a Friend Collins 1937
Excellent, chatty, letters, dating from 1920-1935, written to her friend, Jean McWilliam, whom she had first met in 1918 while serving with the WAAC in France. First edition, hard covers, in very good condition
[15253] £20
315. (HOLTBY) Evelyne White Winifred Holtby as I Knew Her: a study of the author and her works Collins 1938
Very good in d/w
[15252] £15
316. (HOWE) Valarie Ziegler Diva Julia: the public romance and private agony of Julia Ward Howe Trinity Press International 2003
Hardcover – fine in fine d/w
[11892] £10
317. (JAMESON) Clara Thomas Love and Work Enough: the life of Anna Jameson Macdonald 1967
Good
[12070] £10
318. (JAMESON) G.H. Needler (ed) Letters of Anna Jameson to Ottilie von Goethe OUP 1939
Very good internally – cover marked
[12451] £20
319. (JEBB) Alice Salomon Eglantyne Jebb Union Internationale de Secours Aux Enfants 1936
Short study in French. Paper covers – 53pp – very good
[13170] £5
320. (LEIGH) Michael and Melissa Bakewell Augusta Leigh: Byron’s half-sister – a biography Chatto & Windus 2000
Hardcovers – fine in fine d/w
[12012] £8
321. (LEVY) Christine Pullen The Woman Who Dared: a biography of Amy Levy Kingston University Press 2010
An excellent study of a bold spirit. Soft covers -signed by the author – fine – and scarce
[15452] £30
322. (LIDDELL) Simon Winchester The Alice Behind Wonderland OUP 2011
‘Using Charles Dodgson’s published writings, private diaries, and of course his photographic portraits, Winchester gently exposes the development of Lewis Carroll and the making of his Alice.’ Mint in d/w
[15413] £6
323. MARTINDALE, Hilda Some Victorian Portraits and Others Allen & Unwin 1948
Biographical essays of members of her circle – including Adelaide Anderson, factory inspector. Very good in d/w
[6071] £18
324. (MARTYN) Christopher Hodgson (compiler) Carrie: Lincoln’s Lost Heroine privately published 2010
A biographical anthology of works relating to Caroline Eliza Derecourt Martyn, socialist. Soft covers – fine
[14222] £10
325. (MAYNARD) Catherine B. Firth Constance Louisa Maynard: mistress of Westfield College Allen & Unwin 1949
Very good – scarce
[11033] £15
326. (MONTAGU) Iris Barry Portrait of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu Ernest Benn 1928
Biography of the intrepid Lady Mary. Good
[8548] £9
327. (MONTGOMERY) Mary Rubio and Elizbeth Waterston (eds) The Selected Journals of L.M. Montgomery: vol 1 1889-1910 OUP 1985
Fine in very good d/w -424pp – heavy
[12426] £15
328. (MORGAN) Sydney Lady Morgan Passage From My Autobiography Richard Bentley 1859
‘The following pages are the simple records of a transition existence, socially enjoyed, and pelasantly and profitably occupied, during a journey of a few months from Ireland to Italy.’ Good – in original decorative mauve cloth
Her correspondence, and a few short published articles, from her youthful European travels. She is an excellent observer and reporter. Fine in d/w – 802pp
[11112] £45
330. (NORTON) Jane Gray Perkins The Life of Mrs Norton John Murray 1910
332. PARRY, Melanie (ed) Chambers Biographical Dictionary of Women Chambers 1996
Soft covers – fine – 741pp – heavy
[12421] £10
333. (PASTON) Helen Castor Blood and Roses Faber 2004
A family biography tracing the Pastons’ story across three generations. Mint in mint d/w
[11981] £8
334. (PINZER) Ruth Rosen & Sue Davidson The Maimie Papers Virago 1979
Correspondence, beginning in 1910, between Fanny Quincy Howe, a distinguished Bostonian, and Mainie Pinzer, a Jewish prostitute. Fascinating. Paper covers – very good
[5444] £5
335. (PLATH/HUGHES) Diane Middlebrook Her Husband: Hughes and Plath: a marriage Little,Brown 2004
Fine in fine d/w
[12020] £8
336. (PUREFOY) G. Eland (ed) Purefoy Letters 1735-1753 Sidgwick & Jackson 1931
The letters of Elizabeth Purefoy (1672-1765), whose husband died in 1704, and her son, Henry Purefoy. Elizabeth Purefoy was, as her epitaph recorded, ‘a woman of excellent understanding, prudent and frugal’ and her letters are full of domestic detail. Very good – two volumes
[9338] £40
337. ROSE, Phyllis Parallel Lives: five Victorian marriages Vintage 1984
Studies of the marriages of the Carlyles, Effie Gray & John Ruskin, Harriet Taylor and John Stuart Mill, Catherine Hogarth and Dickens, and George Eliot and George Lewes. Soft covers – good
[15433] £5
338. (RUSKIN) Mary Lutyens (ed) Young Mrs Ruskin in Venice: the picture of society and life with John Ruskin 1849-1852 Vanguard Press (NY) 1965
Very good in d/w
[13200] £12
339. (SEEBOHM) Victoria Glendinning A Suppressed Cry: life and death of a Quaker daughter Routledge 1969
The short, sad life of Winnie Seebohm, smothered by her loving family. She enjoyed a month at Newnham in 1885, before returning home and dying. Good in d/w – though ex-library
[4276] £4
340. (SEWELL) Mrs Bayly The Life and Letters of Mrs Sewell James Nisbet, 3rd ed 1889
Memoir of the Quaker writer of moral didactics for children; she was mother of Anna Sewell. Good
[2667] £12
341. (SMITH) Dodie Smith Look Back With Astonishment W.H. Allen 1979
A volume of autobiography – from the early 1930s and the beginning of her success as a playwright. Good reading copy – ex-public library
[10642] £3
342. (SMITH) Dodie Smith Look Back With Gratitude Muller, Blond & White 1985
Follows on from ‘Look Back With Atonishment’. Reading copy – ex-public library
[10643] £3
343. (SOYER) Ruth Cowen Relish: the extraordinary life of Alexis Soyer, Victorian celebrity chef Weidenfeld 2006
Chef and kitchen designer to the Reform Club and reformer of army catering. Mint in d/w
[9824] £8
344. (SPENCE) Susan Magarey etc (eds) Every Yours, C.H. Spence Wakefield Press 2005
Catherine Helen Spence was an Australian novelist, journalist and campaigner. This is her Autobiography (1825-1910), Diary (1894) and some correspondence (1894-1910). Fine in fine d/w
[15071] £12
345. (SPRING RICE) Lucy Pollard Margery Spring Rice: pioneer of women’s health in the early 20th century Open Book 2020
Excellent biography of yet another enterprising member of the Garrett family, author of ‘Working Class Wives’. Soft covers – mint
[15074] £12
346. (ST TERESA OF AVILA) St Teresa of Avila by Herself Penguin Classics 1957 (r/p)
Soft covers – fine
[11950] £6
347. (STEAD) Chris Williams Christina Stead: a life of letters Virago 1989
Soft covers – fine
[11891] £8
348. (STOWE) Joan Hedrick Harriet Beecher Stowe OUP 1994
Soft covers – fine
[11991] £9
349. (STUART) Hon. James A. Home (ed) Letters of Lady Louisa Stuart to Miss Louisa Clinton David Douglas (Edinburgh) 1901 & 1903
Two volumes – complete set. The first volume covers the period 1817 to 1825 and the second volume (called ‘Second Series’) that from1826 to 1834. Society observed. Very good – two volumes together
[13335] £38
350. (TAYLOR) Nicola Beauman The Other Elizabeth Taylor Persephone 2009
Biography of the novelist. Soft covers – mint
[15089] £8
351. (TENNYSON) James O. Hoge Lady Tennyson’s Journal University Press of Virginia 1981
Fine in d/w
[9675] £18
352. (TERNAN) Claire Tomalin The Invisible Woman: the story of Nelly Ternan and Charles Dickens Viking 1990
Actress and Dickens’ ‘intimate companion’. Hardcovers – very good in rubbed d/w
[15414] £5
353. (TREMAIN) Rose Tremain Rosie: scenes from a vanished life Vintage 2018
Autobiography of the novelist. Soft covers – mint
[15093] £4
354. (TROUBRIDGE) Jaqueline Hope-Nicholson (ed) Life Amongst the Troubridges: journals of a young Victorian 1873-1884 by Laura Troubridge John Murray 1966
Very good in rubbed d/w
[9324] £10
355. (TUCKER) Agnes Giberne A Lady of England: the life and letters of Charlotte Maria Tucker Hodder & Stoughton 1895
The standard biography of a popular children’s and religious writer – who spent the later years of her life as a missionary in India. Good – though ex-university library
[9599] £28
356. (TUDOR) Maria Perry Sisters to the King deutsch 2002
Lives of the sisters of Henry VIII – Queen Margaret of Scotland and Queen Mary of France. Soft covers – fine
[12024] £4
357. (VICTORIA) Agatha Ramm (ed) Beloved and Darling Child: last letters between Queen Victoria and her eldest daughter 1886-1901 Alan Sutton 1990
Mint in d/w
[6509] £10
358. (VICTORIA) Dorothy Marshall The Life and Times of Victoria Weidenfeld & Nicolson 1992 (r/p)
Lavishly illustrated. Mint in d/w
[6510] £10
359. (WARWICK) Charlotte Fell-Smith Mary Rich, Countess of Warwick (1625-1678), her family and friends Longmans, Green 1901
Very good
[1754] £15
360. (WORTH) Edith Saunders The Age of Worth: courtier to the Empress Eugenie Longmans 1954
Interesting social history. Good – though ex-Boots library, with label pasted on to front cover.
[4013] £5
361. (WRIGHT) Margaret Lane Frances Wright and the ‘Great Experiment’ Manchester University Press 1972
An Owenite – the ‘Great Experiment’ was Nashoba, a utopian community in America. Very good
[6081] £18
362. (WYNNE) Anne Fremantle (ed) The Wynne Diaries Vol II (1794-1798) OUP 1937
I’ve loved Betsey and Eugenia Wynne ever since I encountered them about 50 years ago in the condensed, one volume, Oxford Classics edition of the Wynne diaries – and then followed them through the three full published volumes. They are rattling around Europe, on land and sea, during the war with France. Very good in very good d/w
[9609] £35
363. (WYNNE) Anne Fremantle (ed) The Wynne Diaries Vol III (1798-1820) OUP 1940
I’ve loved Betsey and Eugenia Wynne ever since I encountered them about 50 years ago in the condensed, one volume, Oxford Classics edition of the Wynne diaries – and then followed them through the three full published volumes. In this vol Betsey is married to Capt Fremantle, who becomes an admiral in the course of fighting Napoleon at sea. Betsey is at home in England and the letters and diary give a wonderful picture of civilian life at all levels of society. Very good in very good d/w
[15077] £35
General Ephemera
364. The Home Friend (New Series) SPCK 1854
4 vols of miscellany of fact and fiction. Very good in embossed decorative original cloth – together
[8313] £45
365. VICTORIA LEAGUE – BATH BRANCH – AWARD OF MERIT
The Victoria League was founded by women in 1901 to promote greater understanding between all parts of the British Empire – concentrating on hospitality and education. This certificate – Award of Merit – was awarded to Francis A. Bodger – for ‘Australia’, presumably an essay. Francis Ainsworth Bodger was born in 1877, in 1911 was a sergeant in the Royal Artillery, and died in Bath in 1940. The certificate gives the name of the Branch President as Leila Cubitt, and she died in Bath in 1951. The decorative certificate has at its centre a black & white illustration by Robert Anning Bell ‘What is the Flag of England Winds of the World Declare’. Good
[13771] £12
366. ASSOCIATION OF ASSISTANT MISTRESSES Education Policy; with special reference to Secondary Education no date (early 20th c)
4-pp leaflet – good – ex-Board of Education library
[14163] £5
367. AUTOGRAPHS – THE GUILDHOUSE
The Guildhouse was an ecumenical place of worship and cultural centre founded in 1921 by Maude Royden. On 4 sheets of paper are fixed 25 cut-out signatures, including those of Maude Royden, Hudson Shaw, Daisy Dobson (Maude Royden’s secretary), Zoe Procter (former WSPU activist), and Katherine Courtney (of the NUWSS). Together
[13061] £45
368. BINFIELD, Clyde Belmont’s Portias: Victorian nonconformists and middle-class education for girls Dr Williams’ Trust 1981
The 35th Friends of Dr Williams’s Library Lecture. Paper covers – 35pp – good – scarce
[9158] £18
369. BRITISH MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
Memorandum of the Articles of Association, and by-laws of the British Medical Association, together with a few other items sent with a letter, dated 17 July 1922, welcoming Dr Gladys Stableforth, Moorfields, Fenham, Northumberland as a member of the BMA.
[8762] £3
370. BURTON, Elaine Domestic Work: Britain’s largest industry Muller 1944
A discusssion of whether housewives should be paid for their house work. Elaine Burton (1904-1991), later Baroness Burton of Coventry, was a Labour MP, 1950-1959. Paper covers – 20pp very good
[15519] £5
371. CHARITY ORGANISATION REVIEW Vol X (New Series) July To Dec 1901 Longmans, Green 1902
half-yearly bound volume of the COS’s own magazine. Very good
[9244] £28
372. CHARITY ORGANISATION SOCIETY H. Holman A Restatement of the First Principles of Charity Organisation Work COS 1912
Paper read on 21 May 1912 at the 21st Annual National Conference of Charity Organisation Societies, Manchester. Paper covers – 24pp – good – unusual
[14100] £14
373. CHARITY ORGANISATION SOCIETY J.W. Pennyman The Cost of Good Work COS 1895
A Paper read at the Cheltenham Charity Organisation Conference. ‘How shall we estimate the cost of good work? To do this we shall have to realise what is meant by good work, and to consider the special needs of our locality.’ A discussion of the financial costs of local charity. COS Occasional Paper No 57. 6-pp – unusual
[14099] £12
374. CHATTERJEE, GLADYS Subjects Relating to the Royal Commission on Marriage and Divorce Moore and Tomlinson Ltd 1953
A bibliography of works consulted by the Royal Commission – with an introduction by Gladys Chatterjee of Lincoln’s Inn
[14993] £4
375. CITIZEN HOUSE, CHANDOS BUILDINGS, BATH
First Report on the running of Citizen House, which opened in Sept 1913 as an educational and social centre. The Report, dated March 1915, gives details of the societies, such as the National Union of Women Workers, the Workers Educational Association, Girl Guides – and, since the beginning of the war, the Committee of Women Patrols and the Aid Coordination Committee. The Wardens were Helen Hope and Mary de Reyes. Packed full of information about the good works being done in Bath. In very good condition – 16pp – card covers
[14978] £18
376. DAVIES, Dilys The Problem of Girls’ Education in Wales Association for Promoting the Education of Girls in Wales 1887
‘An Address delivered before the Welsh National Society of Liverpool, on January 13th 1887’. ‘The need of education is never felt more keenly than by the woman whose faculiteis have been undeveloped by wise guidance in childhood, and who is thrown unexpectedly on her own resources to fend for herself, and earn an honest living’. Very sensible. 14-pp pamphlet – very good – but with foxing
[14524] £18
377. DEMONSTRATION IN CAMBRIDGE AGAINST THE PROPOSAL TO AWARD WOMEN DEGREES – 20 OCTOBER 1921 1921
Photograph showing the demonstration passing along Sidney Street (identified by the presence of Rexall Pharmacy’) Members of the University were voting in Senate House when, in the middle of the day, as the ‘Daily News’ reported (21 )ct 1921) ‘groups of undergraduates began to assemble in the vicinity, and the rumour gained ground that there was to be a big demonstration. At 12.30 the sound of bag-pipes was heard in the distance, and the vanguard of a long procession, two undergraduates made up as Scotch pipers, with red beards and kilts came marching along the King’s Parage. They were followed by a motley crowd of men dressed as girl graduates, in short skirts and football jerseys, caps, gowns, and silk hats…The centre-piece of the procession was an imitation funeral hearse with a small black-draped coffin of the ‘Last Cambridge undergraduate.’ These are the characters that can be seen in the photograph – the pipers leading the procession, followed by an exceptionally tall chap in a skirt and mortar board and others in top hats…participants pack the entire length of the narrow street, accompanied, of course, by the usual contingent of interested youngsters. The ‘funeral hearse’ is, I think, in the foreground. The result of the main vote was that women were once again denied (limited) membership of the University, by a resounding majority of 214. After the result was announced ‘a swarm of men in caps and gowns marched off along King’s Parade, towards Newnham College. When I reached the spot half-a-dozen undergraduates were battering down the gates with a hand truck in which was a weight’. The lovely bronze gates, a memorial to Annie Clough, Newnham’s first principal, were badly damaged, for which act of vandalism six of the ringleaders of the ‘Rag’, as it was described, were ‘sent down’.
Photograph – in very good condition
[15523] SOLD
378. EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE OF THE INCORPORATED ASSOCIATION OF HEAD MISTRESSES OF PUBLIC SECONDARY SCHOOLS Annual Report for 1930 HMSO 1931
Withdrawn from the Women’s Library – 16pp – good
[14995] £4
379. EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK Equal Pay Campaign Committee 1944
‘The question of Equal Pay for Equal Work will shortly come up for discussion in Parliament…’Small 4pp leaflet
[14999] £2
380. EVERYWOMAN
founded in 1985, a news and current affairs magazine aimed at ‘real women’. Issues:
1991 July/Aug
1992 Oct, Nov, Dec/Jan 1993;1993, Feb, April, March, May, June, July, Aug, Sept, Oct, Nov Dec/Jan 1994; 1994, Feb, March, April, May, June, July, Aug, Sept, Oct, Nov, Dec/Jan 1995;1995 Feb, March, April, May, June, Aug, Sept, Oct, Nov, Dec/Jan 1996;1996 May
In good condition. Each
[14923] £8
381. FAREWELL FROM THE WOMEN’S BRANCH OF THE BOMBAY PRESIDENCY WAR AND RELIEF FUND 1914 1918
Small metal Vesta case with a map of India shown in relief..to hold a small box of matches. During World War I, Lord Willingdon, the governor of Bombay, created the India War & Relief Fund (Bombay Branch) two which all the native and princely states neighbouring the Bombay Presidency contributed, along with the people of the Bombay Presidency. Lady Willingdon was president of the Women’s Branch. it is thought these little vesta cases were given to soldiers leaving India on their way back to Britain. In good condition – unusual
[14979] £25
382. GIRLS’ FRIENDLY SOCIETY KALENDAR 1908
To be – and has been – hung on the wall. Each page covers a month – with a scriptural message for each day – brief homilies – and an illustration. An interesting survival. Goodish ccondition.
[15520] £5
383. HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIRLS BOLTON
Page from ‘The Buiilding News’ (18 March 1892) showing the new building for the school, at Park Road, Bolton, opened by Millicent Fawcett on 8 May 1891. The building, now, I think, demolished was in an ‘olde Englishe’ style, with half-timbering and an oriel window to the assembly hall. The page includes plans for the Ground and First floors, showing the disposition of classrooms, wcs etc. Very good
[14898] £25
384. KLEIN, Viola Employing Married Women Institute of Personnel Management 1961
Paper covers – 52pp – good – withdrawn from the Women’s Library
[14996] £5
385. MATERNAL MORTALITY Report of Meeting held at Central Hall, Westminster, on October 30, 1928 Maternal Mortality Committee 1928
Held at a time when there was still one maternal death per 250 births. Withdrawn from the Women’s Library. 30 pp – good, though front cover detached and torn
[14987] £8
386. MELLORS, Robert Evening School in the Villages of Nottinghamshire 1910
‘An appeal to the ladies and gentlemen of every class in the county to aid in the formation and management of evening schools adapted to local industrial conditions.’ Mr Mellors was an alderman on Nottinghamshire County Council. 20-pp pamphlet – good – ex-Board of Education library
[13024] £4
387. MINISTRY OF RECONSTRUCTION Report of the Women’s Advisory Committee on the Domestic Service Problem together with reports by sub-committees on training, Machinery of distribution, organisation and conditions HMSO 1919
Among those involved in the committee were Margaret Tuke, Winifred Mercier, Clementina Black, Katherine Furse, Mrs C.S. Peel, and the Marchioness of Londonderry. The recommendations cover training, contract of service, scale of wages, employment exchanges and registry offices. Probably missing blue paper covers, otherwise very good -36pp
[14994] £20
388. NATIONAL BOARD FOR PRICES AND INCOMES The Pay and Conditions of Service of Workers in the Laundry and Dry Cleaning Industry HMSO 1971
A 100-page report. Good – ex-library
[14424] £2
389. PAOLO AND FRANCESCA
programme for the production of ‘Paola and Francesca’ by Stephen Phillips staged by George Alexander at the St James’s Theatre in March 1902. The cast included Elizabeth Robins, Henry Ainley, Lilian Braithwaite and Evelyn Millard. The programme conmprises, as well as the cast list, a long history of the story of Paola and Francesca, notes on the costumes, the scenery, and the music. Good condition
[14423] £5
390. PICTURE POST
Issue for 13 May 1939 -includes 5pp on ‘The Call for Women’ -‘If war should come, the women who live in big cities or in vulnerable districts will be in the first line of defence.’ – full of photographs. Very good
[2325] £5
391. RECHABITES TEMPERANCE FRIENDLY SOCIETY A JUVENILE TEMPERANCE MEETING
Handbill for ‘A Juvenile Temperance Meeting’ to be held in the Congregational Schoolroom at Little Waltham, Essex, at which ‘Miss Hitch, D.S.J.R. will speak on The Bantam Battalion of the Temperance Army’. The current website for Little Waltham United Reformed Church mentions that there had apparently been a problem with ‘Drink’ in the village in the mid-19th century, which had led to a keen concentration on ‘Temperance’. Miss Hitch was probably Annie Emily Hitch (1881-1957), the elder daughter of George Hicks, a Writtle farmer. Her uncle had, for a time, been a Congregational missionary in Madagascar. Newspaper reports show that she was for many years involved with the youth section of the Rechabites in Essex.and in the 1939 Register was described as ‘Clerk to a Friendly Society’ – presumably the Rechabites. In very good condition – the portal to a vanished world
[15522] £20
392. REFORMATORIES AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS (COMMITTALS) Returns showing the comparative number of committals of boys and girls to reformatories and industrial schools April 1872
‘Shows comparative number of committals of boys and girls to reformatories and industrial schools in 1870, with the number of cases in which the parents have been charged with such payment towards their children’s cost at such schools as may be considered equal to the expense they are saved by so throwing their children on public support, together with a comparative statement of the number of cases in which such charge has been adjudged, with that of the charges actually recovered and regularly paid.’ Raw facts. 4 foolscap pp – disbound
[9150] £28
393. REPORT OF THE STREET OFFENCES COMMITTEE HMSO 1928
The Committee included Margery Fry. Good – 50pp – withdrawn from the Women’s Library
[14380] £5
394. ROSS, Alan The London Magazine, March 1970
Special Short Story Issue. Contains essays on short-story writing by Brian Glanville, Elizabeth Taylor and William Trevor. Soft covers – good
[7308] £5
395. SENIOR, Mrs Nassau Pauper Schools HMSO 1875
‘Copy ”of a Letter addressed to the President of the Local Government Board by Mrs Nassau Senior, lately an Inspector of the Board, being a reply to the observation of Mr Tufnell, also a former inspector upon her report on pauper schools’. This was a follow-up to Mrs Senior’s 1874 report.
24pp – large format – disbound.
[10457] £28
396. SOCIAL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT LSE Woman, Wife and Worker HMSO 1960
In the ‘Problems in Industry’ series, no 10, published by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. ‘In recent years the subject of married women’s employment has been the theme of many heated arguments.’ Paper covers – fine
[14425] £5
397. THE SPECTATOR AUGUST 6 1836
Includes a report of a wife offered for sale at ‘the new Islington cattle market’. She fetched 26s.
[14067] £20
398. THE UPLANDS ASSOCIATION The Uplands Circular
The Uplands Association was an organisation pledged to reform school life and teaching. Its first principle was ‘All types of schooling to be pursued as far as climatic conditions will permit in the open air’. They ran a Summer School each year at Glastonbury and issued a newsletter ‘The Uplands Circular’. Issue for Feb 1922. Good – 8pp – ex-Board of Education Library
[13475] £3
399. WARWICK, The Countess Of Unemployment: its causes and consequences Twentieth Century Press, no date (c 1906)
Pamphlet – 16pp – first published as two articles in the ‘Daily Mail’ in Feb 1906. Good internally. The rather grubby pink paper covers – with a v glamourous photograph of the author – are present – heavily chipped – but detached. Scarce
[14117] £45
400. A WOMAN’S RIGHT TO CHOOSE Abortion Law Reform Association Why we must fight the Abortion (Amendment) Bill and how to go about it
20-pp pamphlet giving ‘Some Information about the Abortion (Amendment) Bill’ – and including a ‘List of Members of Parliament who voted AGAINST the Bill’s Second Reading, 7 Feb 1975)
[13197] £8
401. WOMEN: A CULTURAL REVIEW OUP
1994 Spring, vol 5, no 1; Autumn vol 5, no 2; Winter vol 5, no 3
1995 Summer vol 6, no1; Autumn vol 6, no 2; Winter, vol 6, no 3
1996 Spring vol 7, issue 1; Autumn vol 7, no 2; Winter vol 7, no 3
1997 Sprng vol 8, no 1; Autumn vol 8. no 3
In very good condition – each
[14929] £8
General Postcards
402. ‘BILLIE BURKE’
American actress (1884-1970).Once held in a suffragette’s collection. In very good condition, with traces of adhesive on the reverse
[14744] £4
403. CLARK’S COLLEGE, CIVIL SERVICE Preparing for the Lady Clerk’s G.P.O. Exam
Photographic postcard of the young women preparing for this exam which, if they passed, offered a chance of bettering themselves. Very good – unposted
[9233] £12
404. MAUDE FEALY
American actress (1883-1971). Once held in a suffragette’s collection. In very good condition, with traces of adhesive on the reverse.
[14746] £4
405. MISS DOROTHEA BAIRD
English actress (1875-1933). In very good condition – with traces of adhesive on the reverse – once held in a suffragette’s collection.
[14741] £4
406. MISS LILY BRAYTON
photograph of the actress and singer (1876-1953). Once held in a suffragette’s collection. On the reverse is written in pencil ‘Ophelia’ suggesting the image shows her in ‘Hamlet’ in which she played Ophelia in 1905. In very good condition – with traces of adhesive on the reverse.
[14743] £4
407. MISS MAXINE ELLIOTT
American actress (1868-1940).Once held in a suffragette’s collection. In very good condition, with traces of adhesive on the reverse.
[14745] £4
408. MYSTERY ‘WOMEN’S DEMONSTRATION’ POSTCARD
I bought this card in 2004, but it was only as a result of Lockdown research that I was available to work out why a large group of women were arrayed in front of a camera in Hull. For details see the piece about it on my website – https://wp.me/p2AEiO-1Br
[8145] £20
409. RUTH VINCENT
English actress and opera singer (1877-1955) – photograph by Ralph Dunn of 63 Barbican, London EC. Because the word ‘Amasis’ is written in pencil on the reverse of the card, I think it dates from around 1906/7 when Ruth Vincent was appearing in the lead role. In very good condition, with traces of adhesive on the reverse. In very good condition -once held in a suffragette’s collection.
[14742] £4
General (Cross=Dressing) Vaudeville Sheet Music
410. MISS ELLA SHIELDS B. Feldman 1914
sings ‘Just One Kiss – Just Another One’ and is photographed in top hat and tails on the cover of the sheet music. The song was written by William Hargreaves and Dan Lipton. Very god
[10675] £7
411. MISS ELLA SHIELDS Campbell, Connelly & Co 1925
sings ‘Show Me the Way to Go Home’, written by Irving King, and is photographed as an awkward young man on the cover of the sheet music. Good
[10678] £6
412. MISS ELLA SHIELDS Lawrence Wright 1925
sings ‘When the Bloom is On the Heather’ and is photographed in top hat and tails on the cover of the sheet music. Very good
[10681] £6
413. MISS ELLA SHIELDS Lawrence Wright 1929
sings ‘Home in Maine’ and is photographed in sailor attire on cover of sheet music. Good
[10688] £6
414. MISS HETTY KING Francis, Day & Hunter 1908
sings ‘I’m Afraid to Come Home in the Dark’ and is photographed on the cover of the sheet music in extravagantly elegant top hat and tails. Very good
[10684] £7
415. MISS NORA DELANEY Lawrence Wright 1929
sings ‘Glad Rag Doll’ and is photographed in male evening dress on the cover of the sheet music. Good
[10687] £5
416. VESTA TILLEY Francis, Day & Hunter 1905
sings ‘Who Said, “Girls”?’. Sheet music featuring photograph on cover of Vesta Tilley in smart male attire. The ditty begins: ‘One day on a Western claim/Miners vow’d their lives were tame, For in that lonel spot there seldom girls had been.’ Good
[10670] £7
417. VESTA TILLEY Francis, Day & Hunter 1896
sings ‘He’s Going In For this Dancing Now’, sheet music, written by E.W. Rogers. Very good – except that the front cover is semi-detached
[10672] £5
General Fiction
418. Anna Wickham Richards 1936
‘Richards’ Shilling Selections from Edwardian Poets’. Soft covers – fine
[8134] £12
419. AITKEN, David Sleeping with Jane Austen No Exit Press 2000
Facetious crime novel. Soft covers – very good
[12417] £4
420. ANON ( W.R.H. Trowbridge) The Grandmother’s Advice to Elizabeth T. Fisher Unwin 1902
‘Suggested by the ‘Visits of Elizabeth’ by Elinor Glyn.’ Paper covers – good
[3078] £6
421. ATWOOD, Margaret Dancing Girls and Other Stories Virago 1987 (r/p)
Soft covers – very good
[15167] £4
422. ATWOOD, Margaret Life Before Man Virago 1983 (r/p)
424. CLIFT, Charmian Walk to the Paradise Gardens Harper & Bros (NY) 1960
First US edition of this Australian novel. Very good in very good d/w, which is slightly chipped at top and bottom of spine
[12458] £25
425. DUNANT, Sarah Birth Marks Michael Joseph 1991
A thriller – ‘as much a study in psychology as a traditional whodunnit’. Very good in very good, unclipped, d.w
[15436] £5
426. EL SAADAWI, Nawal The Circling Song Zed Books 1989
A novel. Soft covers – fine
[9897] £5
427. FREELY, Maureen Mother’s Helper Jonathan Cape 1979
Her first novel. First edition, very good in d.w – with the bookshop stamp of ‘Shakespeare & Co, Paris’ on free front end paper
[15430] £15
428. HAWTHORNE, SUSAN (indtroduces) Differences: writing by women Waterloo Press 1985
An anthology reflecting the diversity of women’s experience – published to mark the Women 150 Writers’ Week in Melbourne, September 1985. Writers include ‘Aboriginal women [that is the term then used in the backjacket text], migrant women from Europe and Asia, those whose works represent class strugges, and lesbian women.’ Audre Lorde and Keri Hulme were among the contributers. Soft covers – very good
[15169] £8
429. HOLTBY, Winifred The Crowded Street The Bodley Head 1924
Very good in original decorative cloth. The novel is dedicated to Winifred’s friend, Jean McWilliam, to whom she wrote the letters published as ‘Letters to a Friend’ (see item # ?]
[15254] £35
430. KOPPLEMAN, Susan (ed) Old Maids: short stories by 19th-century US women writers Pandora 1984
Soft covers – very good
[8122] £7
431. LEVERSON, Ada Love’s Shadow Chapman & Hall 1950
Reprint of the 1908 edition. Good
[3086] £4
432. MARTIN, Valerie The Unfinished Novel and Other Stories Weidenfeld & Nicolson 2006
434. SHEPHERD-ROBINSON, Laura Blood and Sugar Pan 2019
Crime thriller set in late-18thc Deptford – involving the grim slavery trade. Atmospheric. Soft covers – mint
[15088] £3
435. SIGOURNEY, Mrs (ed. F.W.N. Bailey) The Poetical Works of Mrs L.H. Sigourney G. Routledge 1857
Neatly rebound in cloth
[2428] £10
436. SOUEIF, Ahdaf In the Eye of the Sun Bloomsbury 1992
‘The Great English Novel about Egypt’/’The Great Egyptian Novel About England’. Very good in d/w. 791pp – heavy
[9927] £8
437. SPENDER, Dale The Diary of Elizabeth Pepys Grafton 1991
Elizabeth gives her account of life with Samuel. Soft covers – very good
[11232] £8
438. SWAN, Annie S. The Strait Gate S.W. Partridge, no date (1890s?)
Good in decorative binding
[9706] £8
439. TAYLOR, Kate Madame Proust and the Kosher Kitchen Vintage 2004
Enjoyable novel, Canadian literary researcher in Paris – parallel portraits of old and new worlds. Soft covers – fine
[10470] £4
Women and the First World War: Non-fiction
440. ALDRICH, Mildred On the Edge of the War Zone: from the Battle of the Marne to the entrance of the Stars and Stripes Constable 1918
Mildred Aldrich had left the USA for France in 1898 and in 1914, when war broke out, was living in La Creste, a country house overlooking the Marne Valley. In this volume she recounts, in letter form, day-to-day life after the Battle of the Marne. The account was intended to influence public opinion, to back the entrance of the US into the war. In 1922 she was duly awarded the Legion d’Honneur. Very good
[15297] £45
441. ANDERSON, Adelaide Women in the Factory: an administrative adventure, 1893 to 1921 John Murray 1922
‘Tells the story of the Woman Inspectorate of Factories and Workshops from its beginning in 1893, until 1921, when 30 Women Inspectors saw the fruits of the work of their branch, not only in greatly developed protection for the woman worker, but also in her own increased capacity to help herself’. Written by one of the leaders of the woman inspectorate movement, who was, incidentally, a niece of Elizabeth Garrett Anderson. Good, with the bookplate of the Lyceum Club, Melbourne on the free front endpaper – and a few spots on the front cover and spine, whch shows slight cracking. Scarce.
[15225] £58
442. BILLINGTON, Mary Frances The Red Cross in War: woman’s part in the relief of suffering Hodder & Stoughton 1914
Good
[15273] £20
443. BOWSER, Thekla Britain’s Civilian Volunteers: authorized story of British Voluntary Aid Detachment Work in the Great War McClelland, Goodchild & Steward (Toronto) 1917
This is the US/Canadian title of ‘The Story of British V.A.D. Work in the Great War’ – the text of both editions is the same. With 18 photographs. Very good – in d.w.
[15269] £45
444. CABLE, Boyd Doing Their Bit: war work at home Hodder and Stoughton, 2nd imp 1916
Includes a chapter on ‘The Women’. Good
[15232] £28
445. GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, Dame Helen Service With the Army Hutchinson, no date (1940s)
A history of women’s involvement with the British army in the First and Second world wars – by one who played a key role in both. Good – scarce
[15260] £45
446. HAMILTON, Cicely Senlis Collins 1917
Her experience in France during the First World War. Good – with 11 photographs – and scarce
[15275] £75
447. LUARD, K.E. Unknown Warriors: extracts from the letters of K.E. Luard, R.R.C., nursing sister in France 1914-1918 Chatto & Windus 1930
With a preface by Viscount Allenby. For four years Kate Luard ran advanced Casualty Clearing Stations within a few miles of the front line. In the form of letters she gives in this account a detailed picture of nursing through the battles of Arras, Passchendale, and others. Fine – scarce
[15299] £95
448. MARKHAM, Violet R. Watching on the Rhine George H. Doran (NY) 1921
Violet Markham was a member of the Army of Occupation in Germany immediately after the First World War. Very good. (The English edition was entitled ‘The Watcher on the Rhine’).
[15256] £25
449. THE TIMES HISTORY OF THE WAR VOL XVII The Times 1918
This large, heavy volume includes a section on ‘Women’s Work: War Service’ that includes numerous photographs. Other sections on, for instance, ‘Medical Science and the Pests of War’, ‘The Conquest of Rumania’, ‘The Arab Uprising’, ‘The Boy Scouts’ etc. Very good – scarce
[15306] £65
Women and the First World War: Biography & Autobiography
450. ANON The Letters of Thomasina Atkins: Private (WAAC) on Active Service Hodder & Stoughton no date (1918)
With a foreword by Mildred Aldrich. This is one of those books about which it is difficult to be entirely sure – are the letters genuine – or is it fiction? The general consensus – of reviewers in 1918 and of academics in the 21st century – is that they are real letters, written by a member of the Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps to a woman friend (‘Peachie’). The only clues as to the author’s identity are that she had previously been an actress and that she was considerably younger than Mildred Aldrich (author of ‘Hilltop on the Marne’ and other accounts of the War), who had known her since she was a child. Good – with a damp stain along bottom of free front endpapers – ownership inscription (1918) and stamp of the ‘Royal Midland Counties Home for Incurables Castel Froma Lillington Road Leamington Spa’. Very scarce
[15261] £45
451. (ASHWELL) Lena Ashwell Myself a Player
Autobiography of the actress and manager, in the years before the First World War, of the Kingsway Theatre – where she staged and starred in Cicely Hamilton’s ‘Diana of Dobson’s’. During the First World War she was a member of the Women’s Corps – and entertained the troops. Very good
[15219] £48
452. (BAGNOLD) Enid Bagnold A Diary Without Dates Heinemann new impression, March 1918
Diary of her life as a VAD in the First World War. Good internally – split to spine cloth – very scarce
[15300] £65
453. CORBETT, Elsie Red Cross in Serbia: a personal diary of experiences, 1915-1919 Cheney & Sons 1964
Eyewitness account of nursing in the Balkans during the First World War. Very good,although free front end paper removed and cover cloth a little mottled – a presentation copy to the author
[15244] £65
454. DOUGLAS-PENNANT, Violet Under the Search-Light: the record of a great scandal Allen & Unwin 1922
In June 1918 Violet Douglas-Pennant was appointed Commandant, Women’s Royal Air Force – only to be dismissed two months later ‘by direction of Lord Weir and Sir Auckland Geddes on the advice of Lady Rhondda, who acted without enquiry on secret information supplied to her, as well as to Mr Tyson Wilson MP, and Miss P. Strachey, by Mrs Beatty and others’. How intriguing. The book takes 463 pp to cover the ‘scandal’. Douglas-Pennant wrote it as her self-justificatory account of events “so that my name & honour may at last be vindicated.” Includes recollections of her ten weeks’ in charge, a Who’s Who of the personalities involved & full details of the House of Lords Inquiry into her dismissal. Good
[14129] £85
455. (FORBES) Lady Angela Forbes Memories and Base Details George H. Doran (NY) 1922
Born in 1876, she was the half-sister of Daisy, Countess of Warwick, and full sister to Millicent, Duchess of Sutherland. Much about her aristocratic up-bringing but the other half of the book (well over 100 pages) is devoted to her work during the First World War – organising hospitals in France. Very good -scarce
[15221] £48
456. (HUTTON) Isabel Hutton Memories of a Doctor in War and Peace Heinemann 1960
Studied medicine at the Women’s Medical School in Edinburgh (not Sophia Jex-Blake’s one) – much about her medical education – then with the Scottish Women’s Hospitals in the First World War – and a lifetime’s work after. Very good in d/w
[15245] £55
457. (INGLIS) Lady Frances Balfour Dr Elsie Inglis Hodder & Stoughton no date (c 1919)
Biography of Dr Elsie Inglis (1864-1917), Scottish doctor – and suffragist. Founder of the Scottish Women’s Hospitals. In good condition
[15286] £35
458. (JOHNSTON) Agnes Anderson ‘Johnnie’ of Queen Mary’s Army Auxiliary Corps Heath Cranton no date (c. 1919)
Elizabeth Johnston joined the WAAC in Dec 1917 and died, bizarrely, on Christmas Day 1918, having fallen from the tower of the church of St Ouen in Rouen. Her year’s work in France is detailed from the letters she sent home to Fife. Very good -very scarce
[15259] £65
459. (KENNARD) Lady Kennard A Roumanian Diary, 1915, 1916, 1917 William Heinemann 1917
Joins a Red Cross Hospital in Roumania in 1916. With photographs. Good condition -very scarce –
[15238] £65
460. (MCARTHUR) Josephine Kellett That Friend of Mine: a memoir of Marguerite McArthur The Swarthmore Press 1920
Memoir of a young woman, educated at Newnham, who in 1914 worked for the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Society and then, after the outbreak of war, first in the War Office and then in France, in Etaples, with the YMCA. She was still working there when she died, of influenza, aged 26 in February 1919. Fine – presentation copy from her sister
[15277] £35
461. SINCLAIR, May Journal of Impressions in Belgium Macmillan (NY) 1915
Her description of her journey to the front line with the Motor Ambulance Corps. Very good – extremely scarce
[15248] £75
462. (SQUIRE) Rose Squire Thirty Years in the Public Service: an industrial retrospect Nisbet 1927
She was one of the first women inspectors of factories – appointed in 1896. Section on work in factories during the First World War. Good -but free frontpaper removed – scarce
[15231] £48
463. (STIMSON) Julia C. Stimson Finding Themselves: the letters of an American Army Chief Nurse in a British Hospital in France Macmillan (NY) 1927
She arrived in Liverpool in May 1917, moved on to London where she met society women now devoting themselves to running hospitals etc. She was in France, working alongside British nurses, by 11 June and was still there when the book ends, in April 1918. Good condition – very scarce
[15291] £120
464. SUTHERLAND, Millicent, Duchess Of Six Weeks At The War The Times 1914
She left England on 8 August 1914 to join a branch of the French Red Cross – and then went on to form her own ambulance unit and took it into Belgium.With photographs. Soft covers – good – spine a little nicked
[15239] £55
465. (VIDAL) Lois Vidal Magpie: the autobiography of a nymph errant Little, Brown 1934
Daughter of the vicarage, she was all for adventure. She worked in the War Office, and then went to France as a war worker in France during the First World War, then was a governess in Corsica, then to Canada – and then back to England. Packed with interesting social comment. Good
[15229] £28
Women and the First World War: Fiction
466. FORBES, R.E.(pseudonym of Ralph Straus) Mrs Holmes, Commandant Edward Arnold 1918
The printed dedication is: ‘Dedicated with feelings of the profoundest respect to the Detachment’. By which is meant the ‘Voluntary Aid Detachment’, for this is a novel (humourous) about the setting up of a VAD hospital in a small English town. First edition in good condition – and very scarce
[15258] £45
467. MARCHANT, Bessie A Transport Girl in France: a story of the adventures of a W.A.A.C. Blackie no date [reprint c earl 1930s]
With pictorial cloth cover: the original design was still in use c 15 years after first publication. Free front endpaper bears a presentation label from Gosport Education Committee showing that the book was awarded to ‘Netta Gladys Smith of St John’s Girls’ School for Good Conduct, Industry and Progress in Standard VIII. Position in Class: 1. 1934.’ The label is annotated in ink: ‘Mayor’s Special Prize’ and signed by the Mayor. Good – with illustrations by Wal Paget. Very scarce.
[15262] £75
468. MARCHANT, Bessie A V.A.D. in Salonika Blackie, no date c 1917/18
Good – with pictorial cover (she is in uniform, pushing a motor bike, with minarets and domes in the background.) Has an birthday gift inscription on free front endpaper – 15 February 1918
[15242] £45
Women and the First World War: Ephemera
469. ALEC-TWEEDIE, Mrs A Woman on Four Battle-Fronts 1919
‘written May 1919, reprinted August, 1919, by kind permission of the Editor ‘Marshall Syndicate’, USA and the ‘Yorkshire Post’. This records her journey of 991 miles across France and Belgium in the immediate aftermath of the First World War. She had been a very successful fund-raiser for the YMCA during the war, in the course of which one of her sons had been killed. This booklet is double-columned and print is small, so packs a lot in. She reports conversations with the inhabitants of towns and villages and gives her own account of the state of the country over which she is, with some difficulty, travelling. With 2 maps and 7 photographs. Soft covers – 30pp – very good
[15548] £55
470. BIBESCO, Princesse La Revue de Paris extrait du numero du 15 mai 1934: Lettres de Combattants Anglais Paris 1934
A lengthy review, in French, of ‘War Letters of Fallen Englishmen (Lettres de guerre d’hommes anglais qui sont tombès) compiled by Laurence Housman. She reviews it at length (24pp), quoting from letters of both the well -known (Julian Grenfell, Edward Tennant) and the unknown. The intriguing Princess Bibescco (nèe Elizabeth Asquith, daugher of H.A. Asquith) was a novelist of some repute,Very good – paper covers – offprint of the journalpaign
[15029] £10
471. A MESSAGE FROM THE NATIONAL FILLING FACTORY, HAYES, MIDDLESEX TO THE WOMEN OF ENGLAND HMSO no date [c 1915]
Come and Enlist in the Munition Army and Help to Win the War.’ A pamphlet, with photographs, encouraging women to come and fill shells – ‘The shell you fill may sink the submarine that sank the “Lusitania”‘. ‘If you cannot fight for your country, work for it.’ Has been folded and is somewhat rubbed – well-studied, perhaps. Scarce
[15507] £85
****
You can pay me by bank transfer (preferred method), cheque or (if from overseas) at www.Paypal.com, using my email address as the payee account.
****
In case you may be interested in books I have published they are ~
NEW-ish
Millicent Garrett Fawcett: Selected Writings
ed. Melissa Terras & Elizabeth Crawford
Reproduces Fawcett’s essential speeches, pamphlets and newspaper columns to tell the story of her dynamic contribution to public life. Thirty-five texts and 22 images are contextualised and linked to contemporary news coverage as well as to historical and literary references. These speeches, articles, artworks and photographs cover both the advances and the defeats in the campaign for women’s votes. They also demonstrate a variety of the topics and causes Fawcett pursued: the provision of education for women; feminist history; a love of literature (and Fawcett’s own attempt at fiction); purity and temperance; the campaign against employment of children; the British Army’s approach to the South African War; the Unionist cause against Home Rule for Ireland; and the role of suffrage organisations during World War I. Here is a rich, intertextual web of literary works, preferred reading material, organisations, contacts, friends, and sometimes enemies, that reveals Fawcett the individual throughout 61 years of campaigning. The first scholarly appraisal of Fawcett in over 30 years, this is essential reading for those wishing to understand the varied political, social and cultural contributions of Dame Millicent Garrett Fawcett.
Art and Suffrage: a biographical dictionary of suffrage artists discusses the lives and work of over 100 artists, each of whom made a positive contribution to the women’s suffrage campaign. Most, but not all, the artists were women, many belonging to the two suffrage artists’ societies – the Artists’ Suffrage League and the Suffrage Atelier. Working in a variety of media –producing cartoons, posters, banners, postcards, china, and jewellery – the artists promoted the suffrage message in such a way as to make the campaign the most visual of all those conducted by contemporary pressure groups.
In the hundred plus years since it was created, the artwork of the suffrage movement has never been so widely disseminated and accessible as it is today, the designs as appealing as they were during the years before the First World War when the suffrage campaign was at its height. Yet hitherto little has been known about most of the artists who produced such popular images. Art and Suffrage remedies this lack and sets their artistic contribution to the suffrage cause within the context of their reanimated lives, giving biographical details, including addresses, together with information on where their work may be seen.
With over 100 illustrations, in black-and-white and in colour.
Kate Parry Frye: the long life of an Edwardian actress and suffragette
Published by ITV Ventures as a tie-in with the series: ‘The Great War: The People’s Story’ this e-book tells Kate’s life story from her Victorian childhood to her brave engagement with the Elizabethan New Age. For details see here (and many more posts on my website).
Available to download from iTunes or Amazon
***
The Women’s Suffrage Movement 1866-1928: A reference guide
Elizabeth Crawford
‘It is no exaggeration to describe Elizabeth Crawford’s Guide as a landmark in the history of the women’s movement…’ History Today
11 The Beacon, Exmouth, onetime home of Mariana Starke
(Photo courtesy of Sylvia Morris and Historic England)
As I mentioned in my last ‘Mariana Starke’ post (The De-Ciphering of Mrs Crespigny’s Diary), I don’t know if, or for how long, the friendship continued between Mariana Starke and Mary Crespigny after Mariana set out for the Continent on 25 October 1791. The last evidence I have found of contact between the two women is the entry Mrs Crespigny records in her 1791 diary, noting she had received letters from Lyons on 3 December – presumably from Mariana and her party. I am sure the correspondence would have continued, at least for a while, but, with no surviving letters or other evidence, I have no proof.
I did wonder if relations between the two women had at some point faltered only because there is no mention, as far as I remember, of Mary Crespigny in any of Mariana’s surviving letters or of Mariana Starke – either in the flesh, as a direct correspondent, or even as an off-stage character – in Mary Crespigny’s one other surviving diary – that for 1809/1810. At this time Mariana was back in England, living in Exmouth, and Lady de Crespigny (as she now was) was meeting regularly, in London and in Bath, friends they once held in common. But, again, the absence of a mention is no proof of any discord.
In fact, the name ‘Starke’ is not entirely absent from Mary de Crespigny’s 1809/10 diary, for on 25 August 1809, while enjoying a protracted stay in Brighton, Lady de Crespigny mentions that she ‘had a present of a turtle from Mr Starke’. There is no suggestion that Mr Starke – this must surely be Richard, her erstwhile lover – was in Brighton at the time – so presumably he had arranged for her to be sent this prime delicacy, Lady de Crespigny doesn’t describe how Mr Starke’s turtle was served, but later in the diary, back in her London house, she does detail a dinner she hosted at which another turtle was the centrepiece of the meal. As turtle was the most expensive and desirable food of the period, a gift such as this would appear to indicate that there had been no lasting rift between Richard Starke and the de Crespignys.
And, from another, rather remarkable source, I think we can infer that, whatever the relations between the two women, Lady Mary de Crespigny was still very much present in Mariana Starke’s thoughts – and speech.
For, in 1840 there appeared in Bentley’s Miscellany, a short story, ‘Are There Those Who Read The Future?’: A Tissue of Strange Coincidences’ in which ‘Mrs Mariana Starke – the celebrated tourist’ features, alongside a mysterious foreigner to whom the author gave the name ‘Hortense de Crespigny’. I could not believe that the conjunction of the names was purely coincidental, so undertook a spot of sleuthing.
The story’s seaside setting of ‘Sunny Bay’ was known to be based on Exmouth, and was, for that reason, reprinted in Memorials of Exmouth (1872) The author of the story was anonymous, merely described as ‘Author of “Recollections of a Prison Chaplain”’. But it did not require much research to reveal him to be the Rev. Erskine Neale [1804-83], the son of Adam Neale (d.1832), onetime physician to the forces. In 1812 one of Erskine Neale’s younger brothers was born in Exmouth and I conclude that the family – at the least the mother and children – spent some time there – at the seaside – before settling in Exeter when Adam Neale returned from the Peninsular War.
Lady Nelson’s House, 6 The Beacon, Exmouth
(Photo courtesy of Exmouth Journal)
In the story another of the real-life characters involved with Hortense de Crespigny is Lady Nelson, the unfortunate widow of Horatio. Erskine Neale appears very au fait with Nelson family affairs, as well he might; his younger brother was married to Frances Nisbet, Lady Nelson’s granddaughter. When Erskine Neale was young, Lady Nelson was living a few doors away from Mariana Starke on The Beacon and I am imagining – yes, imagining – that Mrs Neale was present at ‘Afternoons’ in one or either of the houses and her son was either told – or overheard – scraps of conversation by or about the older women. He must also have encountered Mariana Starke in person, for his depiction of her attire and style of speech accords with the memories of other of her contemporaries.
My thinking is that, as a boy, Neale noted that ‘Lady de Crespigny’ featured frequently in Mariana’s conversation and, many years later, when searching for a suitably foreign name for his mysterious character, ‘de Crespigny’ sprang to mind. Erskine Neale accorded Hortense de Crespigny with the ability to foretell the future and, at the end of the tale, suggests she may have acted for the British government in some ‘cloak and dagger’ capacity. I doubt that it was in those terms that Mariana Starke discussed Lady de Crespigny but, let me just say that the tale is a ‘Tissue of Strange Coincidences’ on more than one level. A mysterious remark on which I may elaborate before too long.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
On 19 September 2023, together with members of the Feminist Society of Ibstock Place School, I unveiled the 1000th English Heritage Blue Plaque. It commemorates the Women’s Freedom League and is mounted on the wall of their sometime headquarters, 1 Robert Street, Strand.
This was 116 years and 5 days after the Women’s Freedom League (WFL) was formed at a meeting held close by – in the very popular Eustace Miles vegetarian restaurant. Vegetarianism was very much a WFL ‘thing’.
The meeting had been called by some women, erstwhile members of the Women’s Social and Political Union, who had protested Mrs Pankhurst’s unilateral action in abolishing the WSPU constitution and cancelling their annual conference. They did not care for the fact that the Pankhursts intended, in effect, to rule the WSPU by dictat.
Mrs Charlotte Despard was voted into the chair and among others present at that first meeting were Teresa Billington (later Billington-Greig) and Edith How-Martyn – all strong individuals –with strong views – believing particularly in democracy and socialism.
Charlotte Despard, born into an Anglo-Irish family and long a widow, had since the 1890s devoted herself to social work with women and children in an impoverished area of Battersea, hemmed in by the Thames and railways. Most unusually, she chose to live there – at least during the week – only returning to her country home at Esher at the weekend. Teresa Billington-Greig – the WFL’s political theorist – had been a teacher before devoting herself to the WSPU suffrage campaign – while Mrs Edith How-Martyn, a young science graduate – was an effective and practical campaign organiser.
The three leaders were all supporters of the Independent Labour party and had been particularly troubled by the Pankhursts’ decision, announced earlier in 1907, not to support Labour candidates at elections. They were not women who took kindly to autocracy and were all to give a lifetime commitment to the WFL – and to its campaigns for social justice for women.
It took a little time for matters to resolve themselves, but in November 1907 the new society was given a new name –the Women’s Freedom League – chosen democratically by a referendum to members. The other suggested names were all associated with emancipation and rights – but Women’s Freedom League was good choice. It was not a name tied only to suffrage, but encompassed all kinds of freedom – appropriate to an agenda that changed over time to meet changing conditions. The thread running through the WFL’s long active life was – Equal citizenship, equal pay, equal opportunity, and equality under the law.
After a year in a temporary office, the WFL moved to 1 Robert Street in September 1908 – into 4 rooms on the first floor – staying until 1915, when they moved to High Holborn. Their presence there is marked by a plaque, although not the esteemed ‘Blue’ one.
Although considered a militant society, unlike the WSPU the WFL didn’t carry out acts of physical protest. Its members were not arsonists or bombers but, influenced by the teachings of Gandhi, they conducted campaigns of passive resistance, such as protesting in Police Courts that women were tried by laws made only by men, and in 1909 conducting a 5-month continuous picket of the House of Commons, ‘The Great Watch’.
One WFL tactic was to attempt to present petitions to the King.
It was WFL members, Helen Fox and Australian Muriel Matters, who attracted publicity in 1908 by chaining themselves to the grille in the Ladies’ Gallery in the House of Commons – and Muriel Matters, again, who hired an airship from which to drop leaflets over London. It was the WFL who first had the idea of boycotting the 1911 census, and whose members set up the Tax Resistance League, refusing to pay taxes and then creating publicity when their goods were seized and auctioned.
Local branches were set up throughout the country – the WFL was notably strong in Wales and in Scotland – but at both a local and a national level the WFL always struggled financially. To support their work the WFL relied on generous donors and on their own, time-consuming, fund-raising activities. Seen as of particular importance was raising enough money to ensure the publication of their weekly paper, The Vote, in which they were very successful as it ran from 1909 until 1933 and is an invaluable source of information on the changing nature of feminism in the first three decades of the 20th century. As well as its newspaper, the WFL’s main archive is held just across the Strand from Robert Street in the Women’s Library @LSE.
Women Police Volunteers, December 1914
Although they called a halt to militant protests during the First World War, the WFL continued to campaign for women’s rights – for instance, its members were associated with the founding of the first women’s police force.
In the early years of the war the WFL ran a toy factory in Hackney, providing work for women, particularly those who had hitherto been employed in the garment trade.
Although most members of the WFL were pacifists the organisation managed to avoid a schism on the subject, such as beset the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies. Indeed, WFL members were generally adept at putting aside differences –including party differences – and instead concentrating on working for their shared causes.
Mrs Edith How-Martyn
Several members of the WFL were candidates in the November 1918 general election, the first in which women over 30 could vote and at which women could stand for Parliament Charlotte Despard, who stood for Labour in Battersea, was one and Edith How-Martyn, who stood as an Independent in Hendon, was another – but all were unsuccessful. In one way the fact that not all women were granted the vote in 1918 had a positive effect in that it gave a society such as the WFL the impetus to continue the campaign – for an equal franchise was an obvious goal– while also working for gender equality across all aspects of political, educational, work, and social life.
During the interwar years new WFL branches were formed, while old ones maintained a loyal following – many members who had held posts in the pre-war years continuing to do so right through the 1920s. One such was Mrs Sarah Whetton , honorary secretary of the Portsmouth branch, where the WFL was particularly active as a pressure group, influencing local government on housing, education and health – all areas of special concern to women.
The WFL spanned the lifetime of its early members, only dissolving itself in 1961 after the death of its president, Marian Reeves, who had joined the organisation as a young woman in 1909. The WFL had run its course. Back in 1907 the founders had announced ‘we hope to fight to the finish as members of the Women’s Freedom League’ – and we were there in 2023 to vindicate their hope.
With many thanks to English Heritage for arranging such an engaging event – and commiserations to Dr Claire Eustace, who would have been my fellow speaker but who was prevented by illness from attending.
If you have a BBC account already, or sign up to one, you can listen to me speaking, very briefly, about the WFL on the Radio 4 Today programme (at 50 mins in). There was also a well-researched piece on the BBC 1 Local News.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Mrs Mary Crespigny (later Lady Mary de Crespigny), courtesy of Kelmarsh Hall and Art.UK
In 2011 I made an enjoyable flying visit to Oxford to spend a few hours in the Bodleian Library reading quickly through a diary that the Library had lately acquired, a 1791 ‘Ladies Pocket Journal’, catalogued as having been written by a ‘Mrs Starke’.
As a result, I was able to identify the writer of the diary not as ‘Mrs Starke’ but as Mrs Mary Crespigny (1750-1812), patron and friend of Mariana Starke (see The Mystery of the Bodleian Diary). But I was unable to explain why, throughout the year, the male figure dominating the entries, whom in my innocence I assumed to be her husband, was referred to as ‘Starke’.
When I mention that many of the entries were written in a form of cipher, that in my original post I remarked that ‘It only now requires a cryptographer to set to work to decode the sections that she wished to keep safe from prying eyes’, and that, twelve years later, my wish has been granted, you may well see where this is going.
For I am now in possession of both a key to the cipher and a rough translation of the coded entries, which reveals beyond a peradventure that Mary Crespigny had formed ‘an attachment’ to Richard Starke, Mariana’s younger brother. Writing his name – ‘Starke’ – in plain text, Mrs Crespigny notes his presence almost every day – and evening – at Champion Lodge, the Camberwell home she shared with her husband, Claude Crespigny. Even if absent, Starke’s whereabouts are noted. In the coded passages his name is never spelled out, but it is clear that it is ‘Starke’ who is at the centre of Mrs Crespigny’s world. ‘Mr C.’ is occasionally mentioned, invariably favourably, but it is not on him whom her thoughts are concentrated.
Richard Isaac Starke was baptized at Epsom on 4 January 1768 and so in 1791 was 23 years old, eighteen years younger than Mary Crespigny, and three years younger than her only son, William. A member of the 2nd Regiment of Life Guards, Starke was promoted lieutenant in May 1791, his responsibilities not, apparently, particularly arduous. At intervals he undertook unspecified guard duties, which, on one occasion in February 1791, involved accompanying the King to the Opera.
The first mention I can uncover linking Richard Starke and Mary Crespigny is a notice in the 7 April 1789 issue of The Times, reporting that ‘At Mrs Crespigny’s temporary theatre at her house at Camberwell Miss Starke and Mr Starke took part in The Tragedy of Douglas’. The other actors, all amateurs, included William Crespigny as ‘Douglas’, the lost son of the heroine ‘Lady Randolph’, who was played by Mrs Crespigny to Richard Starke’s ‘Lord Randolph’. It is likely, however, that Richard Starke and Mary Crespigny were already well acquainted. Although I assume that it was through his sister that Richard Starke entered Mrs Crespigny’s orbit, I do not know when exactly the two women first met. Mrs Crespigny was certainly the inspiration for Mariana’s long poem, The Poor Soldier, published in March 1789, a month before the theatricals, and that work must have been a good while in the gestation. In fact, in her dedication, Mariana describes Mrs Crespigny as having ‘long honoured’ her with ‘flattering, though undeserved partiality’. Anyway, even if they had not done so previously, while playing husband and (unhappy) wife in Douglas, Richard Starke and Mary Crespigny had every opportunity to bond.
The following year, in April 1790, Richard and Mariana Starke again took part in Mrs Crespigny’s private theatricals. This time Mariana was the author, the play The British Orphan, never published, is now known only through a lengthy description in The Town and Country Magazine (vol 22, 1790). Mrs Crespigny was again the heroine and was particularly noted by the European Magazine and Theatrical Journal (April 1790) as appearing in three different dresses. Richard Starke played one of two friars, the other being R.J. S. Stevens, a composer who for the production set to music a poem written by Mariana. In his Recollections of a Musical Life (p.70) Stevens observed that Mrs Crespigny had wanted Caroline, a daughter of Lord Thurlow, to sing in this piece but, when consulted by Lord Thurlow, he (Stevens) disapproved ‘and I was inflexible. Private Theatricals I have ever considered as a species of entertainment very injurious to young minds; destructive of their innocence and modesty; and equally endangering their peace and happiness.’ When quoting this in my previous post about The British Orphan I did not know what I now know. Perhaps the Camberwell frolics had helped shape Stevens’ attitude.
Despite his Life Guard duties, Richard Starke not only had the time and inclination to take part in theatricals but had also put his pen to work, writing the epilogue to Mariana’s next play, The Widow of Malabar, which was given its first public performance, at the Theatre Royal, Haymarket, a month after the staging of The British Orphan. The printed edition of The Widow of Malabar carries a dedication by Mariana to Mrs Crespigny, dated 24 January 1791. The first full entry in Mrs Crespigny’s 1791 diary would appear to indicate that she attended a production of The Widow of Malabar on 12 January – and may have gone again on the 19th. Even if she did not attend in person, she made sure that ‘Miss Starke had a very full house. I sent vast numbers – filled 10 rows of pit & nearly all the Boxes…’ On 16 February she wrote in her diary: ‘My wedding day – been married 27 years – We dined without company – Starke and I went to the Widow of Malabar in the eve.’ How conventional I was to think that on her wedding anniversary it was with her husband that she attended the play.
However, the cipher entries make clear that the ‘attachment’ (as she often refers to it) was tempestuous. She records frequent quarrels and tiffs. For instance, in March,
‘[Starke] and I were very happy till sometime after supper when he grew peevish and we tiff’d. He certainly rather cut and he is then generally out of humour. He said I was the wretchedest creature upon Earth – that he lived a wrong life….We made it up and the next morn were as good friends as ever.’
That is the pattern; it must have been very wearing. Doubtless it was the ‘making up’ that fuelled the affair. I suspect that a not-infrequent marginal mark records the instances of ‘making up’.
However, throughout the year Starke’s ‘propensity for drinking’ and womanising – with at least one prostitute (‘he told me that he had been naughty and taken a dolly out of the street to his own room…he told me he wd not go to any of the houses…what signifies it to me for this proves that his forbearance is at all end as we had not had the least quarrel nor was the least in liquor’) – caused Mary Crespigny great distress. While, as I’ve mentioned, she had no qualms about recording Starke’s constant presence in her plain text diary entries, Mary Crespigny confines her anguish to cipher. After one incident she wrote in code that ‘I complained to his sister tho very sorry to do so – she behaved vastly well and determin’d if he gave me further uneasiness that his mother [should] speak to him.’ The next words translate as ‘Mrs Stake’ – but can only mean ‘Mrs Starke’. So, here is the clearest evidence that not only was the ‘attachment’ known to Mariana, but that she knew that her brother used her patron ill.
The ’attachment’ was still in place at the end of December 1791 and we do not (for the moment, at least) know how it ended. But end it did. Richard Starke married in 1798 – not that that would necessarily prove anything – and Mary Crespigny’s only other surviving journal – covering April 1809-December 1810 – makes no mention of any Starke, either brother or sister. It does, however, frequently allude to her husband, now Sir Claude de Crespigny, and her son, William, who, with his family, received only a couple of mentions in 1791. And, interestingly, it contains no cipher entries. Presumably Mary Crespigny now had nothing to hide.
Sir Claude Champion de Crespigny (1734-1818), 1st Bt; Courtesy of Kelmarsh Hall and Art.UK. A ‘complaisant husband’?
That this lens through which to peer into late-18th-century life as actually lived should have been offered by Mary Crespigny is particularly pleasing, as it is as the author of a guide to a young man’s conduct that her literary fame rests.
Letters of Advice from a Mother to her Son was published in 1803, although Mary Crespigny’s dedication, to the Archbishop of Canterbury, claims the letters were originally written for ‘partial instruction to a beloved Son’ and, before publication, ‘remained by me many years unthought of…’ If that were so we could conclude, from the content, that they had been written when William was around 16 or 17 years old – perhaps circa 1782. The surprisingly frank essays treat matters religious, sexual, and socially practical. Of these one, Letter XXVII, headed ‘Attachment’, appears particularly relevant to Mrs Crespigny’s situation as revealed in her 1791 diary.
She states:
‘the uneasiness we are entangled in, for which accuse fortune or abuse others, is generally the offspring of our crimes or imprudence; by giving way impetuously to improper passion, we ourselves inflict the wound that is afterwards our torment: -no crime or folly is more likely in the end to produce this torment, than a forbidden attachment, which too often pursues its fatal course, at first, possibly, under the appearance of friendship; – and, by degrees almost imperceptible, it is then suffered to become that forbidden attachment, which, if its insinuating poison is not well guarded against, will certainly destroy the feelings of honour, truth, and virtue, and render the self-devoted victim a wretched slave to duplicity, falsehood, and criminality….Too often the person committing it is one in whom the greatest confidence is placed – the apparent friend of the family, daily partaking of its hospitality, and, with a seared conscience, receiving its favours….To be received into a house, to be treated there by the master of it with hospitality, kindness, and friendship, possibly to receive favours from him…to return all this with duplicity….is such a breach not only of hospitality, but every tie moral and divine…’
Whether this ‘Letter’ was written in the 1780s, well before the Starke adventure (although who is to say she had not had previous such ‘attachments’?), or whether written nearer the date of publication, in which case we know she was able to speak of ‘torment’ from experience, one might feel that Mary de Crespigny was taking something of a risk in moralising so sternly on the subject. For, eighteen years or so earlier, her ‘set’ could have had few doubts as to the nature of her relationship with the young man who lived in her house and accompanied her around town. In fact, the reviewers gave far more consideration to her views on religion or duelling or idleness than on ‘Female Connexion’, of which ‘Attachment’ was an element. However, The Critical Review (vol 1, 1804) did praise her for taking ‘off the mask which disguises some of her sex; we wish she had done it more generally; but she probably knows nothing of the worst part.’
Contrast that pious sentiment with this October 1791 entry, in cipher, in Mary Crespigny’s diary:
‘ He took me into another room and told me that he had been very foolish that a woman at a window had nodded to him and he went to her – how changed must be he feel towards me and how little attention he pays to my happiness any way – when assaild by strong temptation or when absent and when he has drunk too much he may have some excuse but after what has pass’d between us and while he chuses to continue to live with me he ought to pay some attention to my feel[ings] – shew some forbearance. It wd at any rate be mean[?] in to continue attach’d to him as I have been for he is clearly tired of me and he now gives way to what dear Mr C says is Libertism. I will suppress my feel[ings] – so far as not to make him an outcast from the house that wd be ruin to him but I am resolved to conquer my ill placed attachment to him and be only upon common terms with him.’
Knowing that Mary Crespigny was indeed well aware of ‘the worst part’, I wonder if this makes her observations as to the conduct to be expected of a young gentleman more or less persuasive?
In fact, a reading of the plain and cipher text of Mrs Crespigny’s 1791 ‘Pocket Journal’ provokes any number of questions around attitudes to morality held by her contemporaries. As such it will surely prove an interesting new resource for historians of late18th-century ‘upper-middling’ society.
Bodleian Reference for Mrs Crespigny’s 1791 diary.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
With thanks to the anonymous cryptographer who cracked Mrs Crespigny’s cipher and to Nigel à Brassard for generously sharing the resulting key and text.
Here we see Emily Wilding Davison, one of the most famous suffragettes, wearing her Hunger Strike Medal c. 1912. Now, well over a century later, these medals are a familiar sight, appearing surprisingly often at auction, as the price they attract tempts descendants to sell. But the history of the WSPU Hunger-Strike Medal is not uncomplicated.
My research would indicate that the first WSPU members to be awarded medals as a reward for hunger striking stood in the dock at Bow Street Police Court on 30 June 1909, 114 years ago today. The previous evening they had been arrested when taking part in a deputation to the Houses of Parliament, led by Mrs Pankhurst, who was carrying a petition from a large WSPU meeting in Caxton Hall.
WSPU flyer advertising the 29 June deputation (from my collection)
The case was adjourned and on 12 July thirteen women were found guilty of stone-throwing – breaking windows in Whitehall. They duly served their sentence in Holloway and, following the example of Marion Wallace-Dunlop, who had recently been imprisoned for a a different offence, went on hunger strike. Like Wallace-Dunlop, the 13 hunger strikers were released without being forcibly fed. The authorities had not yet arrived at the solution to that particular problem.
I will now take you back to an event that took place a few weeks earlier, on 16 June 1909, when WSPU member Patricia Woodlock, who had been imprisoned for three months in Holloway – but had not been on hunger strike – was presented with a ‘For Valour’ medal at a ceremony described in Votes for Women (18 June 1909, p. 810). I think that this was the very first medal presented to a WSPU ‘foot soldier’ and, although there is now no trace of it, I assume that it took its name from ‘For Valour’ engraved on the medal’s top bar.
Although I can find no contemporary reference to the sequence of events, my thinking is that when the women who had taken part in the 29 June 1909 deputation were eventually released, after their hunger strike, the WSPU chose to honour them with medals identical to that designed for Patricia Woodlock.
Ada Wright’s ‘Holloway’ medal (Image courtesy of Bonhams)
These medals were presented by Mrs Pankhurst at a ceremony at St James’ Hall, Great Portland Street, as reported in Votes for Women, 6 August 1909. Two of the medals have resurfaced. That awarded to Theresa Garnett is held by the Museum of London and that to Ada Wright was recently sold at auction. This batch of medals makes no mention of the hunger-strike (unlike the later, more common, more famous version); instead, the roundel depending from the bottom bar is engraved with the word ‘Holloway’. The fact that the recipients had been on hunger strike was not yet commemorated in the medal wording.
However, in early November 1909 another medal presentation ceremony took place, held in Birmingham Town Hall (see Votes for Women 5 Nov 1909, p 84) . As far as I can discover this was only the second such medal presentation. The recipients were WSPU members who had protested at the meeting held by Asquith in Bingley Hall in September, had been arrested, sentenced and had gone on hunger strike and been forcibly fed in Winson Green Prison.
Mabel Capper’s medal, commemorating her hunger strike, presented to her in Birmingham in November 1909
Although the medal is described in Votes for Women as the ‘For Valour’ medal, I am sure this was the first occasion on which the medal with the ‘Hunger Strike’ roundel was presented – for research reveals a photo of the medal presented on this occasion to Mabel Capper, with the ‘Hunger Strike’ inscription on the roundel.
By the way, if you wonder what happened to Emily Wilding Davison’s hunger-strike medal, you might like to read a piece I wrote about it a while ago
And be very careful to research for authenticity any hunger-strike medal offered for sale.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement
Led by Miss Kerr, who is carrying a WSPU flag, suffragettes parade outside the WSPU offices in Clement’s Inn(image courtesy of Women’s Library@LSE)
When I started in business nearly 40 years ago as a dealer in books and ephemera, specialising in the lives of women, there was little need to think twice about the authenticity of any appealing object. I do remember being very careful to check that a signature on, say, a photograph of Mrs Pankhurst was penned rather than printed but, in those days, ‘women’ as a class had not attracted the attention of scammers. How times have changed. And that change is particularly manifest in objects associated with the suffragette movement.
Nowadays I take extreme care, perhaps bordering on paranoia, to check the authenticity and provenance of any object before I add it to stock. For unscrupulous dealers are now ridiculing the suffragette movement by creating and selling objects that claim to be associated with the WSPU. Perhaps, unsurprisingly, the NUWSS has not attracted this attention, scammers knowing where lies the popular appeal.
This trade disturbs me on several levels. I am upset to see those with no knowledge or interest in the suffrage movement traducing the historical record, I am upset to see buyers disappointed when, thinking they have acquired an original object, they discover they have not, and I am particularly worried when, as has happened, a public collection acquires a spurious suffrage artefact.
It may be useful to present the history of one element of suffragette material culture that currently concerns me: the phenomenon of the WSPU flag currently flooding the market.
It was probably three or four years ago that a purple, white, and green flag first appeared on an eBay site. Along the white side selvedge strip was printed the legend ‘WPSU 3 & 4 Clement’s Inn, Strand W.C.’. I have not kept a record of the price this object fetched, but it was, if memory serves, several hundred pounds. Another book dealer contacted the seller to point out that this flag was unlikely to be original, as the initials were incorrect – ie ‘WPSU’ rather than ‘WSPU’. He did not receive a reply, but answer was made in kind as another flag then appeared – with the middle two letters cut out – leaving only the ‘W’ and the ‘U’ – and the (correct) address. Laughable, really. In fact, at the moment (June 2023) one of these flags is available for sale on eBay – for £260 – although now the whole of ‘WPSU’ has been raggedly removed, leaving only the address.
Most of the flags now boast a ‘Votes for Women’ slogan across the central white stripe and have a variety of marks on the white webbing at the side. Currently (June 2023) there are 7 WSPU flags for sale on eBay: one is marked with ‘1912’, two with ‘London 1908’, one with ‘London 1910’, and two with ‘1910 WSPU’ (both of these listed by the same dealer). The flags are priced at between £149 and £895.
Between March and June 2023 27 ‘original’ WSPU flags were sold on eBay– their prices ranging from £58 to £310. Again, they are printed on the selvedge with dates and places – such as ‘Bath 1912’, ‘London 1914’ etc. They variously claim to have been found in ‘a box at an antiques fair’ or from ‘a deceased estate’.
A number of these flags have moved from eBay to terrestrial auctions and, on the whole, auctioneers do remove them from a sale once doubts are expressed as to their originality. I note that one auctioneer who initially refused to withdraw one of the flags from sale – and has since sold several more – does at least now note that their authenticity cannot be guaranteed. The flags have, of course, moved out of salerooms and are now to be found at antiques markets and fairs and I accept that, as they move further from their source, vendors may well not realise that they are selling fakes.
I have not inspected any of these flags in person – my reasons for knowing that they are not ‘right’ is based on my many years of archival research and on my hard-acquired knowledge of the trade in suffrage ephemera. At the most basic level, if you study the Flickr account of the Women’s Library@LSE, perhaps the most extensive photographic record of the suffrage movement available to view on the internet, you will note that there is no evidence of the WSPU flag as is currently being traded. At the head of this post is one of the few photographs to show a WSPU flag (we presume it is purple, white, and green but, of course, the photograph is in black and white). However, you will note that the orientation of the stripes is such that one of the colours (purple or green?) lies against the carrying pole, whereas on that of the fake flag all the colours meet the pole. That is to say, the stripes on the flags currently being sold are lying horizontally, whereas they should be positioned vertically. In addition, I do not remember seeing a ‘Votes for Women’ slogan imposed on a purple, white and green flag; they are invariably plain. I suspect that any analysis of the material and method of manufacture would indicate a 21st rather than early-20th century provenance.
The Women’s Library photographs do, of course, contain innumerable images of all manner of other banners and it was exactly because I am always so worried about fakery that when, in 2017, I spotted an amazing Manchester banner coming up for sale at a little-known auction house, I alerted first the Working Class Library and, through their archivist, the People’s History Museum because I thought it essential for a textile expert to inspect it in person in case somebody had taken it upon themselves to fake it. Fortunately, it was ‘right’ and now hangs in pride of place in the PHM.
The Manchester WSPU banner (image courtesy of the People’s History Museum)
And that is why I hope that no well-meaning donor will think of presenting their local museum with one of the spurious ‘Votes for Women’ flags for, by allowing the scammers to muscle in on our history, we are demeaning everything that is ‘right’.
Cynic that I am in such matters, I only hope this post does not encourage scammers to create more accurate reproductions.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement
Excellent News: Millicent Garrett Fawcett has now entered Parliament. A portrait of Millicent Garrett Fawcett by Annie Swynnerton, acquired by The Speaker’s Advisory Committee on Works of Art, was ‘unveiled’ on 27 March 2023. The event, chaired (vivaciously) by Jess Phillips MP, was notable for talks on the sitter and the artist by Prof. Melissa Terras and Dr Emma Merkling.
UPDATE
I wrote a long post earlier this month – revealing the existence of previously unknown collection of Swynnerton portraits, the existence of which enhances our knowledge of the artist. Since then I have tracked down one further associated portrait. Rather than merely issuing a short post with the new information, I thought it best, for completeness, to update the existing post. The ‘new’ portrait is discussed towards the end of this article, the main body of which has been amended where necessary.
Millicent Garrett Fawcett by Annie Swynnerton (Courtesy of The Speaker’s Advisory Committee on Works of Art)
It was in July 2022 that I noticed the portrait had appeared in an art dealer’s listing and immediately alerted Melanie Unwin, who until recently was Deputy Collector of the Palace of Westminster Collection – exclaiming, ‘Now, wouldn’t this be an excellent addition to the Parliamentary Collection?’ And – it has come to pass. Public recognition of Millicent Fawcett is something in which I have taken a personal interest – for ten years ago I posted on this website a plea – ‘Make Millicent Fawcett Visible’. And now, lo – the veil has been lifted – she now has a statue in Westminster Square, her portrait, by Annie Swynnerton, is on show in the Tate,[i] and this other version will now hang in Parliament.
This version, which presumably was painted around the same time (1910) as that bought for the Tate by the Chantrey Bequest in 1930 (the year after Fawcett’s death), remained, for whatever reason, in Annie Swynnerton’s studio and was sold in the February 1934 posthumous sale of her ‘Artistic Effects’. After that it passed through the auction rooms on several occasions but since the early 1970s has remained out of sight. However, thanks to the fact that the National Portrait Gallery archive holds a black-and-white photograph, Melissa Terras and I were able to include this image in Millicent Fawcett: selected writings.[ii]
In Enterprising Women: the Garretts and their circle I hazarded a guess that the Tate’s portrait might have been painted in a first-floor back room at Fawcett’s home, 2 Gower Street, Bloomsbury. However, I’ve now discovered, in a recently-digitised newspaper (the wonder of our age), that ‘Mrs Swynnerton told a Daily Herald representative that half of the portrait was painted in the garden of Dame Millicent’s house in Gower Street and the other half at her own home’.[iii]
Which leads me neatly to the bland, but intriguing, observation that a narrative is shaped by the available information. Thus, in biography, an author takes ‘facts’ about a subject and turns them into a ‘life’. If the ‘facts’ comprise primary sources, such as letters, diaries, newspaper articles, society minutes, oral interviews etc, so much the better – or, at least, easier. But if the subject has left no written trace, information must be wrung from whatever material comes to hand.
And, thus, I leap to the particular. For, in the case of the artist Annie Swynnerton (née Robinson), although there is very little documented information about her early life, serendipity – in the shape of a previously unrecorded collection of family portraits – has recently allowed me to focus the biographical lens on one connection made at the start of her career, that ran as a thread through its entirety, ensured her a place in the canon, and effected the link between the artist and the sitter of Parliament’s latest acquisition.
We know Annie Louisa Robinson was born in Manchester in 1844, the eldest of seven daughters. Her father, Francis Robinson (1814-89), the son of a Yorkshire carpenter,[iv] had risen from what one assumes were relatively humble beginnings, to become a solicitor, with a practice in central Manchester. By the mid-1850s he was sufficiently successful to be able to move his growing family from inner Manchester to a newly-built, detached house in leafy Prestwich Park, 5 km north of the city.[v] In fact Robinson was one of the first house-owners in this development which, guarded by two entrance lodges and with fine views, was intended to appeal to the burgeoning Manchester middle-class.[vi] For some years Robinson involved himself in Manchester affairs; in 1863 he was vice-president of the Manchester Law Association and from at least 1861 was a councillor for St Ann’s Ward and by 1868 its chairman. However, in 1869 disaster struck; he was declared bankrupt. The effect on the family was momentous. In March the entire contents of the home – from a ‘Splendid Walnutwood Drawing-Room Suite, ‘’a sweet-toned cottage pianoforte’, ‘stuffed Australian birds under glass shade’ to a ‘patent coffee percolator’, ‘large brass preserving pans’, and ‘300 choice greenhouse and other plants’ – were all sold at auction.[vii] Stripped from the walls were oil paintings by, among others, Sam Bough, John Brandon Smith, and David Cox, and, from the bookshelves, about 500 volumes, among which were Bryan’s Dictionary of Painters and Engravers.
In June the house itself, with its drawing-room, two dining rooms, breakfast room, library, nine bedrooms, bathrooms, pantries, sculleries, and about half an acre of land, was sold.[viii] The family was then split up. The 1871 census shows Annie (27, Artist), living with her sisters Emily (26, Artist), Julia (24, Artist), Mary (Scholar 16) and Frances (Scholar, 14) in lodgings at 28 Upper Brook Street, back in central Manchester, while Sarah (22) and Adela (19) were visiting with Mrs Sarah Robinson, an elderly widowed relation, and their aunt Mary on the other side of the same street, at number 13.[ix] There is no trace of the Robinson parents in the census but, wherever they were, on census night at least, they were not living with any of their daughters. We must assume that the older sisters now had responsibility for the younger two, who were still at school.
We have no information as to where or how Annie and her sisters were educated. The 1861 Robinson household census does not include a governess, so we can probably conclude that the girls attended a school.[x] Published 30 years later, a brief biographical article in The Queen gives us a rare insight into the Robinson sisters’ early life.[xi]
‘Curiously enough, whilst neither parent had any taste in that direction, Mrs Swynnerton’s two sisters Emily and Julia, were, like herself, born artists, and are both practising their profession in Manchester. When of the tender age of from eleven to thirteen years, Miss Annie used to delight her playfellows, visitors to the house, and the servants with exhibitions of specimens of her very juvenile skill in the shape of water-colour drawings. These primitive works were produced without the advantage of any instruction, and were simply the spontaneous efforts of an inborn, absorbing love of art.’
The Queen commends Francis Robinson for recognising his eldest daughter’s talent and states that ‘she was early placed in the art school at her native city, Manchester’, making no mention of the family’s financial disaster that probably necessitated, or, at least, precipitated, this development. Bankruptcy was unlikely to have struck suddenly and Annie and her sisters may well have been aware of impending disaster. That may be why, from sometime from 1868, Emily, Annie and Julia enrolled as students at the Manchester School of Art. Sensible young women knew a training was necessary if a living was to be earned. Certainly by 1870/1871, with the security they had once enjoyed swept away, the three oldest Robinson sisters were all attending classes at Manchester School of Art.[xii] Here Annie excelled and in 1873 was awarded one of the 10 national gold medals and a Princess of Wales scholarship worth £11 for ‘Group in oils’.[xiii] Julia was presented with a bronze medal and Emily a book prize.[xiv]
In tracing Annie’s developing career I will continue with the known facts and return later to suppositions. Thus, the narrative runs that in 1874 Annie Robinson travelled to Rome with her friend Isabel Dacre to study and paint, returning to Manchester in 1876. We do not know exactly when in 1874 they left Manchester, nor exactly when in 1876 they returned. But we do know that Annie exhibited a painting at the Manchester exhibition in March 1877.[xv]
Mrs Louisa Wilkinson by Annie Swynnerton (credit Kenneth Northover)
Annie was again successful the following March (1878) in having another painting selected to hang in the Manchester exhibition. Most importantly, this was the first of her works to which the name of the subject was attached, a name that was then included in the press reports. [xvi] The painting was a full-length portrait of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson and is the first, dated, evidence of Annie’s lifelong friendship with the Wilkinson family, about which I write in Enterprising Women. When researching and writing that book, I guessed that the Wilkinsons, a leading Manchester family, were likely to have been the conduit through whom Annie entered the Garrett Circle, but until recently I had no material proof of when the connection might first have been made.
Revelation struck in June 2022 on a particularly serendipitous occasion, held to mark the installation, on her one-time Bloomsbury apartment, of an English Heritage Blue Plaque to Fanny Wilkinson (1855-1951), Britain’s first professional woman landscape gardener. It was my research on Fanny, published in Enterprising Women, that directed attention to her work, and I was delighted to listen as a descendant of her youngest sister gave a talk about the Wilkinson family – and was astounded when a portrait of Fanny, by none other than Annie Swynnerton, appeared on the accompanying Powerpoint. During the reception that followed I was thrilled to discover that a South African branch of the family held other portraits of family members painted by Annie, both before and after her marriage. This cache of paintings, previously unknown to the art world, presents us with a key to unlock more information about Annie’s career.
For among these family portraits is the painting of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson (1823-89) that was exhibited in Manchester in 1878. Here she is, fashionably attired in satin, lace, and jewels, her dress, with its swagging, rosettes, ruches, and train, affording Annie every opportunity of displaying a bravura technique. The Wilkinsons were wealthy and philanthropic; there is no doubt that Annie would have been well paid for the portrait. In addition, by permitting her portrait to be exhibited and allowing herself to be named, Mrs Wilkinson was furthering Annie’s cause by advertising her skill. To attract clients from Manchester’s prosperous middle-class an artist had to be able to display their work. Were the Wilkinsons Annie Robinson’s first significant clients?
It may be that Annie received similar portrait commissions at this time but because they were not exhibited by name (or, indeed, have subsequently passed through the auction rooms with no name attached) they are now unknown. The one portrait by Annie that did receive attention in the late 1870s was that of the Rev. W. Gaskell, widower of the novelist Elizabeth Gaskell, which was commissioned by the Portico Library. It was the Rev. Gaskell himself who in 1879 chose to be painted by Annie, remarking ‘My daughters tell me that she has painted a portrait which they like very much.’[xvii]Could it have been the portrait of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson to which they were referring?[xviii]
For the Gaskells and Wilkinsons must surely have known each other. Dr Matthew Eason Wilkinson (1813-78) was Manchester’s leading doctor and his wife, although born in the US, was descended from a radical Manchester family. The Wilkinsons took an interest in art; Fanny, the eldest, put an artistic ‘eye’ and practical ability to good use in forging a novel career, while both Louisa (1859-1936) and Gladys (1864-1957) studied art in London and had works exhibited.
But, to return to the portrait of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson. To have been exhibited in March 1878, this portrait must have been painted sometime earlier, which places Annie firmly in Manchester for at least some of 1877 and, probably, part of 1876. It so happens that the ‘manly, intellectual head’ of Mrs Wilkinson’s husband, Dr Matthew Eason Wilkinson, was, in the autumn of 1877, on display in the studio exhibition of a sculptor, Joseph Swynnerton.[xix] I think, therefore, we can be certain that, whether or not they had known each other previously (and surely they had), the artist and the sculptor must have encountered each other at this time, as they each immortalised Wilkinson père and mère, a pattern repeated the following year when they both produced portraits of the Rev. Gaskell, one in oils and one in marble.
Louisa Wilkinson – second daughter of the Wilkinson family (credit Kenneth Northover)
It was another eleven years before another Annie Swynnerton portrait of a fully-named member of the Wilkinson family was exhibited – and that is this full-length portrait of Louisa Mary Wilkinson, shown at the New Gallery in April/May 1889 . The change of style is remarkable. Louisa was described in the Pall Mall Gazette as ‘a slim figure with an old-fashioned face out of a Dutch picture standing among bluebells and clasping an illuminated missal,[xx] while the Birmingham Daily Post considered it a ‘very original and unconventional portrait, which we found a great deal more human and interesting than the silk and satin gowns with long trains, the feather-fans ad bric-a-brac, with figure-heads attached’.[xxi]
It is now possible to insert a biographical ‘fact’ that may give a slight narrative depth to this picture. For when it was painted, 1888/9, although renting a studio at 6 The Avenue (76 Fulham Road), Annie and Joseph were actually living in Bedford Park, the ‘Queen Anne’, ‘Sweetness and Light’, suburb so popular with artists, their house, 18 St Anne’s Grove, having a purpose-built studio on the top floor.[xxii] At the same time, Mrs Louisa Wilkinson was also a resident of Bedford Park. Although Fanny was living in Bloomsbury, it’s likely that Louisa and her younger sisters lived, at least some of the time, with their mother.[xxiii] I don’t think it too fanciful to suggest that the younger Louisa Wilkinson may have been painted in Bedford Park – standing amongst bluebells (the image I reproduce is, perforce, cropped) either in the garden of Annie’s house or that of her mother.
A few years earlier Louisa had been recorded in the 1881 census as an art student, exhibited that year in the Dudley Gallery and in 1882 at the Walker Gallery, and later turned her hand to book binding. Thus, it’s fitting she’s depicted wearing Artistic Dress, her loose linen garment, with tucks, shoulder embroidery and bodice smocking, cinched by an embroidered belt, hinting at an artist’s smock. She wears no necklace or earrings, the illuminated missal offering sufficient jewelled colours. Perhaps she had bound the missal herself.
In 1894 Annie exhibited the portrait again, including it in a Society of Lady Artists exhibition. Fortunately, the review in The Queen allows us to identify this as the same portrait, by including a description of ‘Portrait of Miss Louisa Wilkinson’: ‘a finely executed picture of a lady facing the spectator, holding, apparently, an illuminated missal in her hands. There is a strong sense of harmony in the scheme of colour, in which a reddish-brown costume plays a not inconspicuous part’.[xxiv] The Manchester Evening News described the portrait as a ‘very “new English” full-length study’.[xxv] Although Annie was not elected a member of the New English Art Club until 1909, she had long been responsive to works by such earlier members as George Clausen.
The two paintings, so different in style – that of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson exhibited in 1878 and her daughter, Louisa, in 1889 – are the only two of Annie’s Wilkinson portraits that were exhibited by name. But they are not the only family portraits by her still held by Wilkinson descendants. As I’m keen to keep supposition separate from known facts, I’m now discussing these separately, rather than inserting them into the known Annie Robinson/Swynnerton chronology.
Jean (on the left) and Gladys Wilkinson (credit Kenneth Northover)
It is possible that the above portrait could have been the first that the Wilkinson family commissioned from Annie. The biographical article published in The Queen mentions that Annie’s ‘.. first picture was a profile picture of a girl’s head, and this she followed with a group, two half-length portraits, called “Gladys and Jean”, which was in the Manchester exhibition.’
Gladys and Jean were the youngest members of the Wilkinson family, born in 1863 and 1876. How old do you think they look in this painting? To me it doesn’t seem possible they could be older than 11 and 7 respectively and that, if so, the double portrait must have been painted no later than 1873/1874, before Annie’s departure abroad.[xxvi] Even in this imperfect photo, we can see that the girls’ satin and lace dresses – and the fashionable Japanese fan held by Gladys – have been lovingly detailed by Annie. It seems plausible that the Wilkinson parents would have commissioned a smaller portrait of their youngest daughters, as a test run, before incurring the expense of a full-length painting of their mother. If TheQueen journalist was correctly informed and the painting was indeed exhibited in Manchester, it could have been included in the 1875 Royal Manchester exhibition, the first for which ‘lady exhibitors’, of whom Annie was one, were eligible.[xxvii] Or could it even have been the ‘group in oils’ (which is an echo of the term used of ‘Gladys and Jean’ in The Queen)for which Annie won her Princess of Wales scholarship in 1873? But that is probably too fanciful – and an illustration of how dangerous it is to view a ‘biography’ through a single lens.
Fanny Wilkinson by Annie Swynnerton (credit Kenneth Northover)
Here, now, is the portrait of a demure Fanny Wilkinson that put me on the trail of the cache of ‘Wilkinson’ paintings. Although it probably does carry a date, that cannot be seen at the moment, and, although it’s possible to gauge the age of young children such as Gladys and Jean, it’s more difficult to do so for a young woman. Although I cannot decide whether it was painted before or after Annie’s stay in Rome (1874-6), I think we can be certain that the portrait was painted before the death of Dr Wilkinson in Autumn 1878 and the family’s consequent move from Manchester to Middlethorpe Hall in Yorkshire.
Fanny is depicted as decidedly ‘Artistic’, the sleeves of her dress bound in a quasi-medieval style, a lace fichu flowing over the bodice, complementing the frothing cuffs. Although we cannot see the whole shape of her dress, it certainly appears more relaxed than her mother’s ruched and flounced costume. The peacock feathers were, of course, the height of Aesthetic accessorizing. The accomplished painting of the yellow satin and the lace once again advertised the artist’s skill. I wonder if the portrait was ever exhibited? I don’t think it can be the ‘profile picture of a girl’s head’ mentioned in the 1890 Queen article – as it’s so much more than ‘a head’.
Louisa Wilkinson by Annie Swynnerton (credit Kenneth Northover)
This is the last of this particular collection of Wilkinson portraits – a sketch of Louisa in a sun bonnet. It is signed ‘A.L. Swynnerton’ and so can be dated to no earlier than 1883 – and her marriage to Joseph – but could perhaps be any time after 1887 (for in that year she was still signing paintings as ‘Robinson’) but before Louisa’s marriage to George Garrett in 1900 (because the title on the frame refers to her as ‘Wilkinson’).[xxviii]
This marriage merely formalised the link between the Garrett and Wilkinson families, the women having already been bound for over two decades in friendship and shared enterprises, with Annie as their preferred portraitist. However, besides the portraits noted above, I knew that Annie Swynnerton had painted another portrait of Louisa Garrett/Wilkinson because I had, very much in passing, seen it when researching Enterprising Women, well over 20 years ago. It was then hanging in a house in Aldeburgh, the home of the widow of a descendant of the wider Garrett family who had inherited ‘Greenheys’ (the Snape home of George and Louisa Garrett). I was there attempting to track down information on the work of Rhoda and Agnes Garret and, although noting the portrait with interest, did not, at the time, record it in any way. But, its existence, if not its form, remained in my memory and in very early 2020, shortly before Covid descended, I set out to try and track it down – and yesterday succeeded.
Louisa Wilkinson (later Mrs George Garrett) by Annie Swynnerton (credit Peter Wood)
The portrait of Louisa Wilkinson is particularly interesting for having Annie Robinson’s monogram prominently displayed in the top left corner. Moreover, I believe it is the painting, catalogued as ‘Louise’, that Swynnerton exhibited at the Walker Gallery, Liverpool, in September 1878. The critic in the Liverpool Mercury (23 September 1878) praised it as ‘A very pleasing and clever picture, unassuming in character of both work and individual; no ostentation, no gilding of nothingness, but a really fine painting. A young and thoughtful face, neat costume, chaste subdued colouring, and good workmanship, make it a work of beauty and promise much to be admired.’
I think, too, that this is ‘Portrait of a Lady’ that Swynnerton exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1879. I make this deduction from an intriguing comment made in the course of an article about Swynnertonthat appeared in the 1890 Queen article. In it the writer remarks of her work that ‘An excellent picture, “Louise”, was placed on the line at the RA, this being succeeded by “The Tryst”.’
It is difficult to interpret this remark. Although ‘The Factory Girl’s Tryst’ was shown at the RA in 1881, preceded in 1879 by ‘Portrait of a Lady’ and in 1880 by ‘Portrait of Miss S. Isabel Dacre’, Annie doesn’t appear ever to have exhibited any ‘Louise’ (or ‘Louisa’) at the RA. Unless, of course, the Queen journalist was told that the 1879 ‘Portrait of a Lady’ was that of a particular ‘Louise’ (or ‘Louisa’), in which case it must surely be the portrait exhibited in Liverpool the previous year.
In 1879 The Athenaeum’s reviewer described the RA portrait as of a ‘lady in a grey citron dress, standing against a grey background [which] shows profitable studies of old Italian portraiture with Dutch vraisemblance, and is the first-rate example of the harmonious treatment of low tints and tones in a manner that is not decorative ‘[xxix] What do you think? Could this accord with what you see in the portrait of Louisa Wilkinson? After Liverpool in 1878, was she re-shown at the RA in 1879? As we can see, from the three known portraits, Louisa Wilkinson/Garrett was one of Swynnerton’s favourite subjects. If this was the first, Louisa would have been c 19 in 1878, an age consonant with the sitter of ‘Louise’, Knowing that Swynnerton had also recently painted her mother and three of her sisters, it seems entirely credible that this portrait of Louisa would have been painted in 1878 and, hence, that it is the portrait exhibited at the Walker Gallery and the Royal Academy.
I also know that, over the years, Swynnerton painted Louisa Garrett Anderson (daughter of Elizabeth Garrett Anderson and niece of Millicent Fawcett) and Rhoda Garrett (cousin and partner of Agnes Garrett), although their whereabouts is not now known. However, in the course of researching this article I think I have made one discovery.
Agnes Garrett by Annie Swynnerton (courtesy of Lacy Scott and Knight)
For, on Jonathan Russell’s excellent website, under details of the paintings shown at the 1923 exhibition of Annie’s works, I came across this – described as ‘Portrait of a lady standing by flowering ivy’. It was sold, unframed, at auction twice, in quick succession, in 2014.[xxx] I am certain that this is the portrait that Annie painted of Agnes Garrett – at Agnes’ holiday home in Rustington, in the summer of 1885. The subject not only looks like Agnes, but I can see Sussex knapped flints in the wall behind her. This painting was included in the 1923 Manchester exhibition of Annie’s works – and I know that Agnes’ portrait was also there, in Room 7, lent by her sister-in-law, Louisa Garrett. This must surely be it.
In Enterprising Women I describe in detail how the Wilkinsons, the Garretts, and other members of their circle did so much – through their ‘matronage’ – to ensure Annie Swynnerton’s presence on art gallery walls. And she, in turn, has ensured that her friends and associates, as they hang on the walls of family homes, are still known to their descendants.
You can find other posts about Annie Swynnerton on this website by putting ‘The Garretts and their Circle’ into the Searchbox.
For International Women’s Day 2023 the Pre-Raphaelite Society invited me to talk about Annie Swynnerton. You can find the resulting 2 podcasts here.
[i] When, c. 2000, I was researching Enterprising Women:the Garretts and their circle (Francis Boutle, 2002) the I had to visit the Tate storage facility in order to view the Swynnerton portrait of Millicent Fawcett. It was subsequently shown in Wales, at Bodelwydden Castle, but returned to London for the suffrage centenary in 2018.
[iii]Daily Herald, 7 May 1930, 1. Swynnerton’s home and studio in 1910 was 1a The Avenue, 76 Fulham Road, London W.
[iv] Information from Francis Robinson’s Articles of Clerkship, 1836 via Ancestry.
[v] I note that the two youngest Robinson daughters were both born in Prestwich. The elder, Mary, was baptised at St Mary’s, Prestwich, on 3 March 1856.
[vi] For something on the history of Prestwich Park see https://www.bury.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5382&p=0. In the advertisement for the sale of the Robinsons’ household goods in the Manchester Courier, 6 March 1869, the house was described as ‘the second house from the Bottom Lodge, Prestwich Park.
[ix] C. Allen and P. Morris, Annie Swynnerton: painter and pioneer, Sarsen Press, 2018, identifies the widowed relation as Francis Robinson’s stepmother
[x] In 1861 Miss Hannah Dickinson’s Ladies’ College opened at Hill-side House, in Prestwich Park, close to the Robinsons’ home. Although Annie would have been then too old, it’s unlikely that even her younger sisters were pupils, as Its fees, even for day girls, were high, 16-20 guineas per annum. Miss Dickinson stressed that she had chosen Prestwich Park for its ‘beautiful scenery, its rural glens, its retired walks, and salubrious breezes – as well as ‘its kind-hearted inhabitants’. Miss Dickinson, Thoughts on Woman and Her Education, Longman Green, 1861, p2
[xii] No firm, primary, evidence has come to light as to when exactly the sisters – either individually or together – enrolled at the School of Art. However, Allen and Morris (p. 19) have established very persuasively that Emily ‘was certainly there from at least autumn 1868’ and that Annie, too, had probably been enrolled in 1868, and Julia certainly by 1869-70.
[xv] It was only in 1875 that 9 ‘Lady exhibitors’ were elected for the first time – among whom were Annie Robinson and Isabel Dacre.
[xvi]‘Miss Annie L. Robinsonhas a large full-length portrait of Mrs. Eason Wilkinson … and although defective in some respects, gives promise of better work in the future.’ (The Manchester Courier, and Lancashire General Advertiser, 8 March 1878.)
[xvii] Rev. Gaskell quoted in B. Brill, William Gaskell, 1805-84: a portrait, Manchester Literary and Philosophical Publications, 110-11.
[xix]Manchester Times, 6 October 1877. Dr Wilkinson was that year president of the British Medical Association, whose meeting had been held that summer in Manchester. The portrait bust may have been intended to mark this achievement. I have no knowledge of what has become of it. Swynnerton’s studio was at 35 Barton Arcade. In 1880 the address of the Manchester Society for Women Painters was 10 Barton House, Deansgate, which must have been close to the Arcade.
[xx]Pall Mall Gazette, 1 May 1889. At this time both artist and sitter had moved from Manchester; Annie had a London base at the Avenue Studios, 76 Fulham Road, W. and Louisa Wilkinson was living, with her sister Fanny, at 15 Bloomsbury St, WC.
[xxii] Annie gave th e St Anne’s Grove address when she submitted work in 1888 to the Society of Women Artists and the Swynnertons were still living there in 1891. However, it is only Annie’s name – and that of her Aunt Mary and their one servant – that appears on the census because the previous page, which must include Joseph as the last entry, is missing – or has been missed when scanning. The page reference that shows Annie’s presence at 18 Queen Anne’s Grove is RG12/1038 folio 8 page 33 schedule 193. Information on the Swynnertons’ occupation of these addresses can be found in the London Electoral Register via Ancestry.
[xxiii] Mrs Wilkinson was living in Bedford Park from at least 1886 and died there in 1889. Her house is only referred to as ‘The Chestnuts’ and I have been unable to discover the exact address.
[xxvi] The double portrait of ‘Gladys and Jean’ may be dated, but at the moment that information is not accessible.
[xxvii] Alas, I have not yet been able to consult the catalogue for this exhibition. If anyone does know if a portrait by Miss Robinson of two young girls was included do, please, let me know.
[xxix] Thanks to Julie Foster for pinpointing the Liverpool Mercury reference. The Atheneum, 5th and concluding notice of RA Summer Exhibition, 7 June 1879,734.
[xxx] . Unfortunately, neither of the East Anglian auction houses who sold the painting holds records as far back as 2014 and I’ve been unable to discover any more information about the painting, or its current whereabouts.
Following on from my previous post on Annie Swynnerton – ‘New Revelations’ – the Pre-Raphaelite Society have released, for International Women’s Day, my podcast talk on Annie – and Isabel Dacre.
The podcast is in two parts and you can listen here:
A few rousing items for saleto mark International Women’s Day 2023
MEMENTO OF WOMEN’S CORONATION PROCESSION TO DEMAND VOTES FOR WOMEN: Order of March and Descriptive Programme The Women’s Press 1911
This is the official programme for the spectacular march that was held in London on Saturday June 17 1911. ‘From the Introduction: ‘The March through London of 40,000 women has been arranged to show the strength of the deman to win Votes for Women in Coronaton year. The Procession will form up on Westminster Embankment, starting at 5.30pm and marching seven abreast in a line some five miles long, through Trafalgar Square, Pall Mall, Piccadilly, Knightsbridge, to Kensington. At the close of the march a great meeting will be held by the Women’s Social and Political Union in the Albert Hall…’ The programme lists all the suffrage societies taking part and describes in detail the different sections – such as the Prisoners’ Pageant and the Historical Pageant. The ‘Order of March’ is inset. The decorative cover is printed in greeen on good quality thick paper, In good condition – with a little rusting at the staples- a very scarce item.
[15320] £700
2. THAT RAGTIME SUFFRAGETTE SHEET MUSIC B. Feldman & Co c 1913
written by Harry Williams and Nat D. Ayer and originally heard in the 1913 Ziegfeld Follies. It was recorded c 1913/14 by Warwick Green – a British comic singer – to very great effect, although I think he omits the second verse, which is printed in this sheet music. You can hear Warwick Green singing ‘That Ragtime Suffragette’ on youtube. I think it’s wonderful – so evocative- ‘Ragging with bombshells and ragging with bricks/ Hagging and nagging in politics’. The 4-pp of sheet music is printed ‘Professional Copy’ – in good condition, a little rubbed and scuffed; I’m sure it has been well played. Very scarce.
[15319] £120
3. THE MARCH OF THE WOMEN
‘Dedicated to the Women’s Social and Political Union’ by its composer, Ethel Smyth. This is an example of the ‘Popular Edition in F. (For meetings and processions, to be sung in unison)’. The 4-page song sheet, containing both music and the words, the latter written by Cicely Hamilton, was published by Breitkopf & Hartel of 54 Great Marlborough Stree, London W and was ‘To be had of The Woman’s Press, 156 Charing Cross Road, London, W.C.’ Price Threepence. ‘The March of the Women’ was premiered at a WSPU meeting, held on 21 Jan 1911 to celebrate the release from prison of WSPU militants. The back cover lists ‘Works by Ethel Smyth, Mus. Doc.’. The song-sheet has been folded and is a little rubbed and marked, having presumably been put to its intended use at some WSPU rally, but is in generally good condition. Very scarce £250
4. ‘THE WOMEN’S MARSEILLAISE’
Written by Florence Macaulay (1862-1945), one-time student at Somerville College, Oxford, and an organiser for the WSPU. ‘The Women’s Marseillaise’, a marching song, was written in 1909 and begins ‘Arise, ye daughters of a land/That vaunts its liberty’. This single sheet is headed ‘The National Women’s Social & Political Union 4 Clement’s Inn, Strand, W.C.’ and was printed by ‘Geo. Barber,The Furnival Press, E.C.’ The sheet was clearly used for the purpose intended, has been folded, with a slight split at the edges of the fold. In good condition – very scarce
[15314] £120
5.‘VOTES FOR WOMEN’ to be sung to the tune of ‘Bonnie Dundee’
Songsheet, – the words of a song adapted from a poem by Sir Walter Scott, to be sung to the tune of ‘Bonnie Dundee’. It begins ‘To the Lords of Westminster ’twas the suffragette spoke:-/Put us in the King’s Speech, and give us the Vote,/Let each mother’s son who loves freedom to see,/Cry ‘Votes for the Women’ let Britons be free!’. No publisher or society is credited as issuing of the songsheet, which was in circulation by April 1908.(because Campbell-Bannerman is cited, still prime minister). So quite an early example of a suffrage songsheet. Good -single sheet – some foxing
[15309] £120
6. WOMEN’S SOCIAL AND POLITICAL UNION ‘VOTES FOR WOMEN’ LEAFLET NO. 61
This double-sided leaflet is devoted to publishing Laurence Housman’s ditty ‘Woman This, and Woman That’, an ‘Echo of a ‘Barrack-room Ballad, with acknowledgments to Mr Rudyard Kipling’. It begins ‘We went up to Saint Stephens, with petitions year by year;/’Get out!’ the politicians cried, ‘we want no women here!’/ and was avery popular party-piece at WSPU gatherings. Perhaps its most famous rendition was by actress Decima Moore on the night of the 1911 census, when her audience comprised c 500 suffragettes evading the enumerator in the Aldwych Skating Rink. This leaflet is headed with full details of the WSPU office and leading personnel and was printed by the St Clement’s Press, Portugal Street (now the site of the LSE Library). Like many such ephemeral pieces, it has been folded – presumably in use at a WSPU gathering – with a slight split along a fold – but no loss of text. Although fragile, it is actually in quite good condition, considering its age and purpose
[15317] £150
**
If interested in buying any of these ephemeral items – do email me – elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com . You can pay me by bank transfer (preferred method), cheque or (if from overseas) at www.Paypal.com, using my email address as the payee account.
Millicent Garrett Fawcett by Annie Swynnerton. (Courtesy of The Speaker’s Advisory Committee on Works of Art)
Excellent News: Millicent Fawcett is entering Parliament.A portrait of Millicent Garrett Fawcett by Annie Swynnerton has been acquired by The Speaker’s Advisory Committee on Works of Art .
Last summer I noticed that this painting had appeared in an art dealer’s listing and immediately alerted Melanie Unwin, who until recently was Deputy Collector of the Palace of Westminster Collection – exclaiming, ‘Now, wouldn’t this be an excellent addition to the Parliamentary Collection?’ And – it has come to pass. The portrait is due to be ‘unveiled’ at the end of this month (March 2023). Public recognition of Millicent Fawcett is something in which I have taken a personal interest – for ten years ago I posted on this website a plea – ‘Make Millicent Fawcett Visible’. And – the veil has been lifted – she now has a statue in Westminster Square, her portrait, by Annie Swynnerton, is on show in the Tate,[i] and this other version will now hang in Parliament.
This version, which presumably was painted around the same time (1910) as that bought for the Tate by the Chantrey Bequest in 1930 (the year after Fawcett’s death), remained, for whatever reason, in Annie Swynnerton’s studio and was sold in the February 1934 posthumous sale of her ‘Artistic Effects’. After that it passed through the auction rooms on several occasions but since the early 1970s has remained out of sight. However, thanks to the fact that the National Portrait Gallery archive holds a black-and-white photograph, Melissa Terras and I were able to include this image in Millicent Fawcett: selected writings.[ii]
In Enterprising Women: the Garretts and their circle I hazarded a guess that the Tate’s portrait might have been painted in a first-floor back room at Fawcett’s home, 2 Gower Street, Bloomsbury. However, I’ve now discovered, in a recently-digitised newspaper (the wonder of our age), that ‘Mrs Swynnerton told a Daily Herald representative that half of the portrait was painted in the garden of Dame Millicent’s house in Gower Street and the other half at her own home’.[iii]
Which leads me neatly to the bland, but intriguing, observation that a narrative is shaped by the available information. Thus, in biography, an author takes ‘facts’ about a subject and turns them into a ‘life’. If the ‘facts’ comprise primary sources, such as letters, diaries, newspaper articles, society minutes, oral interviews etc, so much the better – or, at least, easier. But if the subject has left no written trace, information must be wrung from whatever material comes to hand.
And, thus, I leap to the particular. For, in the case of the artist Annie Swynnerton (née Robinson), although there is very little documented information about her early life, serendipity – in the shape of a previously unrecorded collection of family portraits – has recently allowed me to focus the biographical lens on one connection made at the start of her career, that ran as a thread through its entirety, ensured her a place in the canon, and effected the link between the artist and the sitter of Parliament’s latest acquisition.
We know Annie Louisa Robinson was born in Manchester in 1844, the eldest of seven daughters. Her father, Francis Robinson (1814-89), the son of a Yorkshire carpenter,[iv] had risen from what one assumes were relatively humble beginnings, to become a solicitor, with a practice in central Manchester. By the mid-1850s he was sufficiently successful to be able to move his growing family from inner Manchester to a newly-built, detached house in leafy Prestwich Park, 5 km north of the city.[v] In fact Robinson was one of the first house-owners in this development which, guarded by two entrance lodges and with fine views, was intended to appeal to the burgeoning Manchester middle-class.[vi] For some years Robinson involved himself in Manchester affairs; in 1863 he was vice-president of the Manchester Law Association and from at least 1861 was a councillor for St Ann’s Ward and by 1868 its chairman. However, in 1869 disaster struck; he was declared bankrupt. The effect on the family was momentous. In March the entire contents of the home – from a ‘Splendid Walnutwood Drawing-Room Suite, ‘’a sweet-toned cottage pianoforte’, ‘stuffed Australian birds under glass shade’ to a ‘patent coffee percolator’, ‘large brass preserving pans’, and ‘300 choice greenhouse and other plants’ – were all sold at auction.[vii] Stripped from the walls were oil paintings by, among others, Sam Bough, John Brandon Smith, and David Cox, and, from the bookshelves, about 500 volumes, among which were Bryan’s Dictionary of Painters and Engravers.
In June 1869 the Robinsons’ house , with its drawing-room, two dining rooms, breakfast room, library, nine bedrooms, bathrooms, pantries, sculleries, and about half an acre of land, was sold.[viii] The family was then split up. The 1871 census shows Annie (27, Artist), living with her sisters Emily (26, Artist), Julia (24, Artist), Mary (Scholar 16) and Frances (Scholar, 14) in lodgings at 28 Upper Brook Street, back in central Manchester, while Sarah (22) and Adela (19) were visiting with Mrs Sarah Robinson, an elderly widowed relation, and their aunt Mary on the other side of the same street, at number 13.[ix] There is no trace of the Robinson parents in the census but, wherever they were, on census night at least, they were not living with any of their daughters. We must assume that the older sisters now had responsibility for the younger two, who were still at school.
We have no information as to where or how Annie and her sisters were educated. The 1861 Robinson household census does not include a governess, so we can probably conclude that the girls attended a school.[x] Published 30 years later, a brief biographical article in The Queen gives us a rare insight into the Robinson sisters’ early life.[xi]
‘Curiously enough, whilst neither parent had any taste in that direction, Mrs Swynnerton’s two sisters Emily and Julia, were, like herself, born artists, and are both practising their profession in Manchester. When of the tender age of from eleven to thirteen years, Miss Annie used to delight her playfellows, visitors to the house, and the servants with exhibitions of specimens of her very juvenile skill in the shape of water-colour drawings. These primitive works were produced without the advantage of any instruction, and were simply the spontaneous efforts of an inborn, absorbing love of art.’
The Queen commends Francis Robinson for recognising his eldest daughter’s talent and states that ‘she was early placed in the art school at her native city, Manchester’, making no mention of the family’s financial disaster that probably necessitated, or, at least, precipitated, this development. Bankruptcy was unlikely to have struck suddenly and Annie and her sisters may well have been aware of impending disaster. That may be why, from sometime from 1868, Emily, Annie and Julia enrolled as students at the Manchester School of Art. Sensible young women knew a training was necessary if a living was to be earned. Certainly by 1870/1871, with the security they had once enjoyed swept away, the three oldest Robinson sisters were all attending classes at Manchester School of Art.[xii] Here Annie excelled and in 1873 was awarded one of the 10 national gold medals and a Princess of Wales scholarship worth £11 for ‘Group in oils’.[xiii] Julia was presented with a bronze medal and Emily a book prize.[xiv]
In tracing Annie’s developing career I will continue with the known facts and return later to suppositions. Thus, the narrative runs that in 1874 Annie Robinson travelled to Rome with her friend Isabel Dacre to study and paint, returning to Manchester in 1876. We do not know exactly when in 1874 they left Manchester, nor exactly when in 1876 they returned. But we do know that Annie exhibited a painting at the Manchester exhibition in March 1877.[xv]
Mrs Louisa Wilkinson by Annie Swynnerton (credit Kenneth Northover)
Annie was again successful the following March (1878) in having another painting selected to hang in the Manchester exhibition. Most importantly, this was the first of her works to which the name of the subject was attached, a name that was then included in the press reports. [xvi] The painting was a full-length portrait of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson and is the first, dated, evidence of Annie’s lifelong friendship with the Wilkinson family, about which I write in Enterprising Women. When researching and writing that book, I guessed that the Wilkinsons, a leading Manchester family, were likely to have been the conduit through whom Annie entered the Garrett Circle, but until recently I had no material proof of when the connection might first have been made.
Revelation struck in June 2022 on a particularly serendipitous occasion, held to mark the installation, on her one-time Bloomsbury apartment, of an English Heritage Blue Plaque to Fanny Wilkinson (1855-1951), Britain’s first professional woman landscape gardener. It was my research on Fanny, published in Enterprising Women, that directed attention to her work, and I was delighted to listen as a descendant of her youngest sister gave a talk about the Wilkinson family – and was astounded when a portrait of Fanny, by none other than Annie Swynnerton, appeared on the accompanying Powerpoint. During the reception that followed I was thrilled to discover that a South African branch of the family held other portraits of family members painted by Annie, both before and after her marriage. This cache of paintings, previously unknown to the art world, presents us with a key to unlock more information about Annie’s career.
For among these family portraits is the painting of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson (1823-89) that was exhibited in Manchester in 1878. Here she is, fashionably attired in satin, lace, and jewels, her dress, with its swagging, rosettes, ruches, and train, affording Annie every opportunity of displaying a bravura technique. The Wilkinsons were wealthy and philanthropic; there is no doubt that Annie would have been well paid for the portrait. In addition, by permitting her portrait to be exhibited and allowing herself to be named, Mrs Wilkinson was furthering Annie’s cause by advertising her skill. To attract clients from Manchester’s prosperous middle-class an artist had to be able to display their work. Were the Wilkinsons Annie Robinson’s first significant clients?
It may be that Annie received similar portrait commissions at this time but, because they were not exhibited by name (or, indeed, have subsequently passed through the auction rooms with a name attached), they are now unknown. The one portrait by Annie that did receive attention in the late 1870s was that of the Rev. W. Gaskell, widower of the novelist Elizabeth Gaskell, which was commissioned by the Portico Library. It was the Rev. Gaskell himself who in 1879 chose to be painted by Annie, remarking ‘My daughters tell me that she has painted a portrait which they like very much.’[xvii]Could it have been the portrait of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson to which they were referring?[xviii]
For the Gaskells and Wilkinsons must surely have known each other. Dr Matthew Eason Wilkinson (1813-78) was Manchester’s leading doctor and his wife, although born in the US, was descended from a radical Manchester family. The Wilkinsons took an interest in art; Fanny, the eldest, put an artistic ‘eye’ and practical ability to good use in forging a novel career, while both Louisa (1859-1936) and Gladys (1864-1957) studied art in London and had works exhibited.
But, to return to the portrait of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson. To have been exhibited in March 1878, this portrait must have been painted sometime earlier, which places Annie firmly in Manchester for at least some of 1877 and, probably, part of 1876. It so happens that the ‘manly, intellectual head’ of Mrs Wilkinson’s husband, Dr Matthew Eason Wilkinson, was, in the autumn of 1877, on display in the studio exhibition of a sculptor, Joseph Swynnerton.[xix] I think, therefore, we can be certain that, whether or not they had known each other previously (and surely they had), the artist and the sculptor must have encountered each other at this time, as they each immortalised Wilkinson père and mère, a pattern repeated the following year when they both produced portraits of the Rev. Gaskell, one in oils and one in marble.
As an addendum to the discussion of the portrait of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson, I will just mention here a rather intriguing comment made in the 1890 article about Annie that appeared in TheQueen. In it the writer remarks that ‘An excellent picture, “Louise”, was placed on the line at the RA, this being succeeded by ”The Tryst”.’ It is difficult to interpret this remark. Although ‘The Factory Girl’s Tryst’ was shown at the RA in 1881, preceded in 1879 by ‘Portrait of a Lady’ and in 1880 by ‘Portrait of Miss S. Isabel Dacre’, Annie doesn’t appear ever to have exhibited any ‘Louise’ (or ‘Louisa’) at the RA. Unless, of course, the Queen journalist was told that the 1879 ‘Portrait of a Lady’ was that of a particular ‘Louise’ (or ‘Louisa’). In 1879 The Athenaeum’s reviewer described the portrait as of a ‘lady in a grey citron dress, standing against a grey background [which] shows profitable studies of old Italian portraiture with Dutch vraisemblance, and is the first-rate example of the harmonious treatment of low tints and tones in a manner that is not decorative ‘[xx] What do you think? Could this accord with what you see in Mrs Louisa Wilkinson portrait? After Manchester in 1878, was she re-shown at the RA in 1879? Or was the portrait of another ‘Louise’ entirely?
Louisa Wilkinson – second daughter of the Wilkinson family (credit Kenneth Northover)
It was another eleven years before we can be certain that another portrait by Annie Swynnerton of a member of the Wilkinson family was exhibited – and that is this full-length portrait of Louisa Mary Wilkinson, shown at the New Gallery in April/May 1889. The change of style is remarkable. Louisa was described in the Pall Mall Gazette as ‘a slim figure with an old-fashioned face out of a Dutch picture standing among bluebells and clasping an illuminated missal,[xxi] while the Birmingham Daily Post considered it a ‘very original and unconventional portrait, which we found a great deal more human and interesting than the silk and satin gowns with long trains, the feather-fans ad bric-a-brac, with figure-heads attached’.[xxii]
It is now possible to insert a biographical ‘fact’ that may give a slight narrative depth to this picture. For when it was painted, 1888/9, although renting a studio at 6 The Avenue (76 Fulham Road), Annie and Joseph were actually living in Bedford Park, the ‘Queen Anne’, ‘Sweetness and Light’, suburb so popular with artists, their house, 18 St Anne’s Grove, having a purpose-built studio on the top floor.[xxiii] At the same time, Mrs Louisa Wilkinson was also a resident of Bedford Park. Although Fanny was living in Bloomsbury, it’s likely and Louisa and her younger sisters lived, at least some of the time, with their mother.[xxiv] I don’t think it too fanciful to suggest that the younger Louisa Wilkinson may have been painted in Bedford Park – standing amongst bluebells (the image I reproduce is, perforce, cropped) either in the garden of Annie’s house or that of her mother.
A few years earlier Louisa had been recorded in the 1881 census as an art student, exhibited that year in the Dudley Gallery and in 1882 at the Walker Gallery, and later turned her hand to book binding. Thus, it’s fitting she’s depicted wearing Artistic Dress, her loose linen garment, with tucks, shoulder embroidery and bodice smocking, cinched by an embroidered belt, hinting at an artist’s smock. She wears no necklace or earrings, the illuminated missal offering sufficient jewelled colours. Perhaps she had bound the missal herself.
In 1894 Annie exhibited the portrait again, including it in a Society of Lady Artists exhibition. Fortunately, the review in The Queen allows us to identify this as the same portrait, by including a description of ‘Portrait of Miss Louisa Wilkinson’: ‘a finely executed picture of a lady facing the spectator, holding, apparently, an illuminated missal in her hands. There is a strong sense of harmony in the scheme of colour, in which a reddish-brown costume plays a not inconspicuous part’. [xxv] The Manchester Evening News described the portrait as a ‘very “new English” full-length study’.[xxvi] Although Annie was not elected a member of the New English Art Club until 1909, she had long been responsive to works by such earlier members as George Clausen.
The two paintings, so different in style – that of Mrs Louisa Wilkinson exhibited in 1878 and her daughter, Louisa, in 1889 – are the only two of Annie’s Wilkinson portraits that were exhibited by name. But they are not the only family portraits by her still held by Wilkinson descendants. As I’m keen to keep supposition separate from known facts, I’m now discussing these separately, rather than inserting them into the known Annie Robinson/Swynnerton chronology.
Jean (on the left) and Gladys Wilkinson (credit Kenneth Northover)
It is possible that the above portrait could have been the first that the Wilkinson family commissioned from Annie. The biographical article published in The Queen mentions that Annie’s ‘.. first picture was a profile picture of a girl’s head, and this she followed with a group, two half-length portraits, called “Gladys and Jean”,which was in the Manchester exhibition.’
Gladys and Jean were the youngest members of the Wilkinson family, born in 1863 and 1876. How old do you think they look in this painting? To me it doesn’t seem possible they could be older than 11 and 7 respectively and that, if so, the double portrait must have been painted no later than 1873/1874, before Annie’s departure abroad.[xxvii] Even in this imperfect photo, we can see that the girls’ satin and lace dresses – and the fashionable Japanese fan held by Gladys – have been lovingly detailed by Annie. It seems plausible that the Wilkinson parents would have commissioned a smaller portrait of their youngest daughters, as a test run, before incurring the expense of a full-length painting of their mother. If TheQueen journalist was correctly informed and the painting was indeed exhibited in Manchester, it could have been included in the 1875 Royal Manchester exhibition, the first for which ‘lady exhibitors’, of whom Annie was one, were eligible.[xxviii] Or could it even have been the ‘group in oils’ (which is an echo of the term used of ‘Gladys and Jean’ in The Queen)for which Annie won her Princess of Wales scholarship in 1873? But that is probably too fanciful – and an illustration of how dangerous it is to view a ‘biography’ through a single lens.
Fanny Wilkinson by Annie Swynnerton (credit Kenneth Northover)
Here, now, is the portrait of a demure Fanny Wilkinson that put me on the trail of the cache of ‘Wilkinson’ paintings. Although it probably does carry a date, that cannot be seen at the moment, and, although it’s possible to gauge the age of young children such as Gladys and Jean, it’s more difficult to do so for a young woman. Although I cannot decide whether it was painted before or after Annie’s stay in Rome (1874-6), I think we can be certain that the portrait was painted before the death of Dr Wilkinson in Autumn 1878 and the family’s consequent move from Manchester to Middlethorpe Hall in Yorkshire.
Fanny is depicted as decidedly ‘Artistic’, the sleeves of her dress bound in a quasi-medieval style, a lace fichu flowing over the bodice, complementing the frothing cuffs. Although we cannot see the whole shape of her dress, it certainly appears more relaxed than her mother’s ruched and flounced costume. The peacock feathers were, of course, the height of Aesthetic accessorizing. The accomplished painting of the yellow satin and the lace once again advertised the artist’s skill. I wonder if the portrait was ever exhibited? I don’t think it can be the ‘profile picture of a girl’s head’ mentioned in the 1890 Queen article – as it’s so much more than ‘a head’.
Louisa Wilkinson by Annie Swynnerton (credit Kenneth Northover)
This is the last of this batch of Wilkinson portraits – a sketch of Louisa in a sun bonnet. It is signed ‘A.L. Swynnerton’ and so can be dated to no earlier than 1883 – and her marriage to Joseph – but could perhaps be any time after 1887 (for in that year she was still signing paintings as ‘Robinson’) but before Louisa’s marriage to George Garrett in 1900 (because the title on the frame refers to her as ‘Wilkinson’).[xxix]
This marriage merely formalised the link between the Garrett and Wilkinson families, the women having already been bound for over two decades in friendship and shared enterprises, with Annie as their preferred portraitist. Besides the portraits noted above, I know she painted an earlier portrait of Louisa Wilkinson (the younger), probably dating from the late 1870s, but at the moment am unable to contact the owner in order to ask permission to reproduce the image of it that I have.It has even crossed my mind to wonder if this could be the portrait of ‘Louise’ that The Queen journalist was so sure had been exhibited at the RA. I also know Annie painted Louisa Garrett Anderson (daughter of Elizabeth Garrett Anderson and niece of Millicent Fawcett) and Rhoda Garrett (cousin and partner of Agnes Garrett), although the whereabouts of these portraits is not now known. However, in the course of researching this article I think I have made one discovery.
Agnes Garrett? by Annie Swynnerton (courtesy of Lacy Scott and Knight)
For, on Jonathan Russell’s excellent ‘Annie Swynnerton’ website, under details of the paintings shown at the 1923 exhibition of Annie’s works, I came across this painting– described as ‘Portrait of a lady standing by flowering ivy’, which, as I then saw from Saleroom.com, had been sold twice, in quick succession, in 2014. I am certain that this is the portrait that Annie painted of Agnes Garrett – at Agnes’ holiday home in Rustington, in the summer of 1885. The subject not only looks like Agnes (wearing a dress with an apron front fashionable at that date) but I can see Sussex knapped flints in the wall behind her. This painting was included in the 1923 Manchester exhibition of Annie’s works – and I know that Agnes’ portrait was also there, although without her name attached. This must surely be it.
The Wilkinsons’ connection to Annie Swynnerton continued until her death. Louisa Garrett sent a wreath – and her sister, Fanny Wilkinson, was one of the few mourners named as attending her burial.
In Enterprising Women I describe in detail how the Wilkinsons, the Garretts, and other members of their circle did so much – through their ‘matronage’ – to ensure Annie Swynnerton’s presence on art gallery walls. And she, in turn, has ensured that her friends and associates, as they hang on the walls of family homes, are still known to their descendants.
You can find other posts about Annie Swynnerton on this website by putting ‘The Garretts and their Circle’ into the Searchbox.
For International Women’s Day 2023 the Pre-Raphaelite Society invited me to talk about Annie Swynnerton. You can find the resulting 2 podcasts here
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement
[i] When, c. 2000, I was researching Enterprising Women:the Garretts and their circle (Francis Boutle, 2002) I had to visit the Tate storage facility in order to view the Swynnerton portrait of Millicent Fawcett. It was subsequently shown in Wales, at Bodelwydden Castle, but returned to London for the suffrage centenary in 2018.
[iii]Daily Herald, 7 May 1930, 1. Swynnerton’s home and studio in 1910 was 1a The Avenue, 76 Fulham Road, London W.
[iv] Information from Francis Robinson’s Articles of Clerkship, 1836 via Ancestry.
[v] I note that the two youngest Robinson daughters were both born in Prestwich. The elder, Mary, was baptised at St Mary’s, Prestwich, on 3 March 1856.
[vi] For something on the history of Prestwich Park see https://www.bury.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=5382&p=0. In the advertisement for the sale of the Robinsons’ household goods in the Manchester Courier, 6 March 1869, the house was described as ‘the second house from the Bottom Lodge, Prestwich Park.
[ix] C. Allen and P. Morris, Annie Swynnerton: painter and pioneer, Sarsen Press, 2018, identifies the widowed relation as Francis Robinson’s stepmother
[x] In 1861 Miss Hannah Dickinson’s Ladies’ College opened at Hill-side House, in Prestwich Park, close to the Robinsons’ home. Although Annie would have been then too old, it’s unlikely that even her younger sisters were pupils, as Its fees, even for day girls, were high, 16-20 guineas per annum. Miss Dickinson stressed that she had chosen Prestwich Park for its ‘beautiful scenery, its rural glens, its retired walks, and salubrious breezes – as well as ‘its kind-hearted inhabitants’. Miss Dickinson, Thoughts on Woman and Her Education, Longman Green, 1861, p2
[xii] No firm, primary, evidence has come to light as to when exactly the sisters – either individually or together – enrolled at the School of Art. However, Allen and Morris (p. 19) have established very persuasively that Emily ‘was certainly there from at least autumn 1868’ and that Annie, too, had probably been enrolled in 1868, and Julia certainly by 1869-70.
[xv] It was only in 1875 that 9 ‘Lady exhibitors’ were elected for the first time – among whom were Annie Robinson and Isabel Dacre.
[xvi] ‘Miss Annie L. Robinsonhas a large full-length portrait of Mrs. Eason Wilkinson … and although defective in some respects, gives promise of better work in the future.’ (The Manchester Courier, and Lancashire General Advertiser, 8 March 1878.)
[xvii] Rev. Gaskell quoted in B. Brill, William Gaskell, 1805-84: a portrait, Manchester Literary and Philosophical Publications, 110-11.
[xix]Manchester Times, 6 October 1877. Dr Wilkinson was that year president of the British Medical Association, whose meeting had been held that summer in Manchester. The portrait bust may have been intended to mark this achievement. I have no knowledge of what has become of it. Swynnerton’s studio was at 35 Barton Arcade. In 1880 the address of the Manchester Society for Women Painters was 10 Barton House, Deansgate, which must have been close to the Arcade.
[xx]The Atheneum, 5th and concluding notice of RA Summer Exhibition, 7 June 1879,734.
[xxi]Pall Mall Gazette, 1 May 1889. At this time both artist and sitter had moved from Manchester; Annie had a London base at the Avenue Studios, 76 Fulham Road, W. and Louisa Wilkinson was living, with her sister Fanny, at 15 Bloomsbury St, WC.
[xxiii] Annie gave the St Anne’s Grove address when she submitted work in 1888 to the Society of Women Artists and the Swynnertons were still living there in 1891. However, it is only Annie’s name – and that of her Aunt Mary and their one servant – that appears on the census (as shown on Ancestry and Findmypast) because the previous page, which must include Joseph as the last entry, is missing – or has been missed when scanning. The page reference that shows Annie’s presence at 18 Queen Anne’s Grove is RG12/1038 folio 8 page 33 schedule 193. Information on the Swynnertons’ occupation of these addresses can be found in the London Electoral Register via Ancestry.
[xxiv] Mrs Wilkinson was living in Bedford Park from at least 1886 and died there in 1889. Her house is only referred to as ‘The Chestnuts’ and I have been unable to discover the exact address.
[xxvii] The double portrait of ‘Gladys and Jean’ may be dated, but at the moment that information is not accessible.
[xxviii] Alas, I have not yet been able to consult the catalogue for this exhibition. If anyone does know if a portrait by Miss Robinson of two young girls was included do, please, let me know.
[xxx] . Unfortunately, neither of the East Anglian auction houses which sold the painting holds records as far back as 2014 and I’ve been unable to discover any more information about the portrait, or its current whereabouts.
Still Life by M.C. Lloyd (Constance Lloyd). (Private collection, courtesy of Napier Collyns)
Reading Rebecca Birrell’s This Dark Country: women artists, still life and intimacy in the early 20th c,I had sped through the Introduction and the first three chapters – on [Dora] Carrington, Edna [Waugh], and Ethel [Sands] – when I came to the fourth, titled ‘Mary’. The opening paragraph was intriguing, for it revealed that this artist – ‘Mary’ -was something of a mystery to the author. Birrell writes that:
‘at first she was a confusion of names, an inconsistency that asked to be resolved: she was Constance, and she was Miss Lloyd, and she was Mary, and she was Katherine – shadows with a similar shape, an address in common, a hand worn by the same work. Then she was those four strands of herself combined, she was Mary Katherine Constance Lloyd, a figure with a question hanging over her…Mary became all the small details I gathered from what she allowed me to see.’
This elusive ‘Mary’ attracted my attention. For, while Birrell employs what is known to academics as the ‘emotional’ or ‘affective’ turn to the study of these women artists, I am very much attached to the ‘biographical’ turn.Who was ‘Mary’? Why was there a confusion of names?
Googling ‘Mary Katherine Constance Lloyd’ led me to the ArtUK page for ‘Mary Katharine [sic] Constance Lloyd’, which included birth and death dates and a short biography[i]. It was then only the work of a moment to discover on Ancestry that the woman with the given dates was not a Mary Katherine Constance Lloyd but a Katharine Constance Lloyd. How peculiar, I thought, and looked again at the ArtUK page. It then seemed obvious that the paintings displayed were unlikely to all be by the same hand. Four, including the one described by Birrell in the chapter on ‘Mary’, might be classed as ‘impressionist’, while the others were formal portraits of worthy 20th-century gentlemen, attired in various robes of office.
A little more online research established that there was, indeed, another artist with a similar name, Mary Constance Lloyd, and that a succession of art reference works had carelessly blended their two lives together – to create ’Mary Katharine Constance Lloyd’. I suppose it is a measure of how little importance is attached to the lives of such women artists that in 50 years no author had bothered to research either subject ab initio – but, when compiling a new biographical dictionary or making a footnote reference, had merely copied the – incorrect – information.
Anyway, suffice to say, having now resurrected as best I can the long, professionally active lives of both women, the resulting biographies can be found below. The artist to whom Birrell devotes the ‘Mary’ chapter is Mary Constance Lloyd who, while signing her paintings ‘M.C. Lloyd’, was always known as ‘Constance’ rather than ‘Mary’. Katharine Constance Lloyd has yet, I think, to attract any authorial attention.
I must confess that I find myself rushing to Constance Lloyd’s defence, for Birrell, while establishing no firm facts about her life, yet ‘reads’ one still life to suggest that ‘Mary’s preferences tended towards invisibility, ignored proposals, anonymous works, little self promotion’.[ii]
My research into the life actually led by Constance Lloyd indicates that this was definitely not the case. I do not know what Birrell means by ‘ignored proposals’ (the phrase is not referenced), but Constance Lloyd’s work was not anonymous and the evidence is that she was not at all averse to self-promotion, taking part in numerous exhibitions, her work cited in reviews, happy to accept the help offered by her old friend Duncan Grant in getting her work shown and, even in old age, keen to engage in interviews with the press.
On one specific point Birrell is incorrect in stating that ‘she lived in Paris from the turn of the century to the twenties, after that she returned to England, and life was different, quieter. Long walks, rooms lit weakly by the fire, an ache in the hands once her letters were finished, slipping under heavy bedding before it grew dark’. Birrell gives no reference for the described scenario, but Constance did not, in the 1920s, return to live in England. Indeed, in her will, drawn up in 1958, she specifically states that she had lived in France since 1908. She died in Paris 10 years later.
Finally, Birrell states, ‘What happened to her practice is unclear.’ My short biographical study answers that question. Constance Lloyd was exhibiting in London when she was 79 years old – and continued painting for the rest of her life. Family members fondly remember her as engaging and spiritedly independent, recalling visits to her crowded Parisian flat and to her house at Genainville, their memories ranging from her love of Siamese cats and Black Magic chocolates to her fluent French, spoken with a ‘Churchillian accent.’
Although I do understand that in This Dark Country Birrell is applying ‘a loose and interpretive method’ to her study of her chosen artists, she does not rely solely on the ‘emotional turn’ when discussing artists such as Carrington and Vanessa Bell, but also draws from the wide range of available biographical detail. It does seem a pity, therefore, that, by resisting any attempt to discover who ‘Mary’ really was, Birrell allowed her ‘to slip away unnoticed’, suggesting that ‘There was a freedom in existing as she did, as a series of charged impressions, connected only to a handful of letters, sometimes as Mary and sometimes as Constance, no husband or acquired surname to place her firmly within an established familial structure.’ I am not sure that ignorance should be equated with freedom. Great-Aunt Con is still very much a reality to the Lloyd family (a familial structure in which she was firmly established) who would, I am sure, have been as happy to share their knowledge of her life and work with Birrell as they have been with me.
Mary Constance Lloyd
The Lloyd family photographed outside ‘Farm’, c. 1900. Constance is standing 4th from left. (Courtesy of Sampson Lloyd)
Lloyd, Mary Constance (7 October 1873-1 August 1968) was born at the Lloyd family home, ‘Farm’, Sampson Road, Sparkbrook, Warwickshire, the youngest of the twelve children (ten daughters and two sons) of Samuel (1827-1918) and Jane Lloyd (1839-95). While ‘Mary’ was her first given name – and she signed her paintings as ‘M.C. Lloyd’ – she was always known as ‘Constance’ and, within the family, as ‘Con’.
Constance’s family was wealthy. Her great- great-grandfather had been the founder of Lloyds Bank; her father was a steel maker, an ‘iron master’.Neither she nor her sisters were compelled to earn their own living, although several of them carved out distinctive careers. Adelaide (1861-1937) trained as a nurse, became matron of Stratford-on-Avon Hospital and then, from 1895 for ten years, matron of Birmingham Children’s Hospital. In 1914 she was elected, by an overwhelming majority, a member of Sparkbrook board of guardians.[iii] [Margaret] Jessie (1865-1952) was in 1911 secretary of Birmingham Infants’ Health Society and treasurer of the Adult School Union.[iv] Julia (1867-1955) trained as a teacher at the Froebel institutes in Edgbaston and Berlin and was for some time an instructor in a St John’s Wood, London, training school for kindergarten teachers. She then returned to Birmingham, where she set up kindergartens in poor districts and was secretary of the Birmingham People’s Kindergarten Association, which became, in 1917, the Birmingham Nursery Schools Association.[v] Another sister, Edyth (1860-1936), was also involved in welfare work, in 1915 working for the Ladies’ Association for the Care of Friendless Girls and, alongside Julia in Birmingham Women’s Settlement.[vi] Being independently wealthy the sisters had no need to find financial support through marriage and only one, Caroline (1863-1921), chose to marry. Gwen John exaggerated only slightly when she reported to Rodin that Constance Lloyd had nine sisters, all above the age of 23, none of whom had ever had a lover.[vii]
Little is known of the sisters’ education, although in 1881 two of Constance’s older sisters, Caroline and Jessie, were pupils at St John’s Ladies’ School in Patcham, Sussex, while in that year Julia began attending Edgbaston High School. It is likely that Constance, who, living at home aged 17, is described as a ‘scholar’ in the 1891 census, was also a pupil at Edgbaston High. In that census two other of her sisters, Edyth and Marian, were noted as being science students and staying with the family on census night was Mildred Pope, later an eminent scholar of Anglo-Norman England, then a student at Somerville College, Oxford.[viii] Alas, when encountered in the next census, in 1901, Marian had entered Barnwood House, a private Gloucestershire mental hospital, where she was to remain for the rest of her life.[ix]
From October 1896 until July 1897 Constance was a student at the Slade School of Fine Art in London, studying under sardonic and sarcastic Henry Tonks. Her mother had died in March 1895, which might have been a signal for release from home, or may, of course, have been entirely coincidental. There certainly was no shortage of daughters to fulfil the role of ‘daughter-at-home’. Constance was an assiduous attender at the Slade, signing in most days, alongside such fellow students as Gwen John, Maude [Grilda] Leigh-Boughton, and Edna Waugh. However, she only spent one year at the Slade, apparently disappointed by the experience; Tonks ‘had no conception of her abilities.’[x]
It is not known whether she continued her studies elsewhere during the following three years before, in 1901, we find her taking lessons from Simon Bussy, who had come from France and rented a Kensington studio.[xi] Among her fellow pupils was Dorothy Strachey, who married Bussy in 1903. Constance became a ‘lasting friend of the Bussy family’.[xii] In 1903 she was painting in Venice[xiii] and by 1904, ‘under the weight of parental disapproval’,[xiv] was living in Paris, studying at the Académie Colarossi and sharing an apartment at 118 rue d’Assas, a tall building close to the Luxembourg Gardens, with Aline Baylay.[xv]
Gwen John, with whom Constance had maintained a close friendship since her Slade days,[xvi] was a fellow-student at the Colarossi – and also living in Paris with his family was her brother, Augustus. We catch a glimpse of Constance – described as ‘nice and awkward and ugly’ – in a letter written to him by his wife, Ida.[xvii] Family information reveals that Constance was born with a deformity of the foot, which may account for the description of her as awkward. Constance Lloyd may have used Gwen John as a model on a number of occasions. One nude study, now in held by the National Library of Wales, is thought to date from 1905 and it is possible she also painted her in the summer of 1907.[xviii]
By now Constance was also friendly with Duncan Grant, whose address she had been given by his cousin, Pippa Strachey (sister of Dorothy Bussy), and spent time with him copying in the Louvre.[xix] Her circle of friendship also included Eileen Gray, Paul Henry, and Stephen Haweis. In the summer of 1908 five of her paintings were included in the Allied Artists’ Association exhibition[xx] at the Albert Hall in London and in February 1912 her work was shown by the Friday Club at London’s Alpine Club, alongside that of Roger Fry, Duncan Grant, Vanessa Bell, and Gwen Raverat.[xxi] Of her painting the Times reported, ‘The little landscape and still lives of Miss Constance Lloyd show professional skill, but they have an amateur simplicity and would be charming ornaments to a small room. The same artist shows some cretonnes which carry on the Morris tradition with feminine originality’.[xxii]
For Constance Lloyd did not confine herself to fine art, but c. 1910 was among the artists commissioned to produce designs for a Parisian company run by Andre Groult. Her designs do not survive, but Groult’s patterns were said to be ‘Modern in spirit, although moderate in tone’, ranging from stencil-like, flat stylised flower and fruit patterns to Dufyesque narrative toiles.’[xxiii] In 1914 Constance designed a night nursery, her furniture design executed by Damon & Bertaux, a very reputable firm of cabinet makers.
After returning to England on the outbreak of the First World War, Constance later went back to France, moving between Paris and the countryside and, in 1918, in a letter home, described the shelling of Paris. By 1919 she was living in a flat in the 4tharrondissement with a view of the Seine, high above the Boulevard Henri IV.[xxv] This view was remarked upon by Gwen John who also had returned and who, in 1921 gave Constance, to give to her sisters for Christmas, some sketches she had made of women in the congregation of the church in Meudon.[xxvi]
Constance Lloyd in her Parisian flat, 1924.(Courtesy Collyns family)
Constance and Gwen continued to live in Paris, in 1930 attending classes given by the influential artist and teacher, André Lhote.,[xxvii] and remained friends until Gwen’s death in 1939.[xxviii] In the mid-1920s Constance Lloyd was a supporter of Shakespeare & Co, Sylvia Beach’s renowned bookshop, but, alas, no record survives of any book borrowing.[xxix]
Constance Lloyd at her cottage in Genainville, 1924. (Courtesy Collyns Family)
In the early 1920s she bought a cottage at Genainville, a village 50 km north of Paris, owning it for the rest of her life, beloved by her neighbours and often visited there by members of her family. In 1931 Duncan Grant recommended the cottage to David Garnett who, with his wife Ray and young sons, was proposing to winter in France. In fact, it was almost by accident that the Garnetts did, indeed, end up renting Constance’s house for three months and, in the event, were less than enamoured with the village – ‘It is very cold and damp – and the sun never shines – and it is much more difficult to get into Paris than I had expected’.[xxx]
During this period Constance moved to an apartment in 8 avenue de Breteuil[xxxi] in the 7tharrondissement, close to Les Invalides and the Eiffel Tower, and was in Paris in 1940 when the Germans invaded, writing home a detailed description of life in the city and surrounding countryside.
‘..a large car full of German officers, and a loud speaker, have gone slowly by telling us not to stir out of doors again till seven o’clock tomorrow morning….My studio is lovely in the summer sunshine, and the trees opposite so green and full of shadow – the avenue empty most of the time, such peace and quiet.. ..5 July. I took the metro which is working (there are no buses and no taxis) to the Madeleine, and then sat at a cafe nearly opposite Lloyds Bank, and had some very good strong coffee with 3 lumps of sugar, and a sympathetic waiter. Lloyds Bank, as I could see from where I sat, is open, but has become a German Bank…I saw nothing was possible at the Bank...’[xxxii] This letter was posted for her in Lisbon by an American friend, Virginia Hall, who had been an army ambulance driver in France but, after the German invasion, made her way to Spain. She was soon to be recruited by SOE, returning to France as an agent in 1941.
Towards the end of the war Constance was able to return to England for a visit and, interviewed by The Birmingham Mail, recounted how she was arrested by Germans in her Parisian flat on 5 December 1940 and taken to Vauban Barracks, Besancon, where 5000 other women with British passports were housed.
‘They came for me at 7.15 in the morning, and unfortunately did not tell me that I was being taken to an internment camp. Consequently, I had only a rug, a piece of chocolate, and two pairs of spectacles.[We] were quartered in barracks quite suitable for young soldiers, but quite unsuitable for elderly ladies….At first we slept on dirty mattresses on the barrack floor and we had to forage for broken plates and utensils from a scrap heap to use. Many of the internees became ill because of the severe conditions and the bad and meagre food, and between 400 and 500 of them died in a period of six months’.[xxxiii] Constance was released early in 1941, and allowed to return to her flat in Paris, although relieved of her wireless set and telephone.
In the immediate post-war period Constance’s long-time friendships bore fruit; apparently it was Duncan Grant who was instrumental in organising for her a joint exhibition with Janie Bussy (daughter of Simon and Dorothy Bussy) in 1947 at the Adams Gallery in London.[xxxiv] Of Constance’s paintings the Times critic wrote, ‘Her subjects one feels have been chosen with the greatest care and forethought, not only to suit a natural refinement of taste – the taste perhaps of a fastidious Englishwoman who likes everything to look French – but also because they are precisely adapted to the decorous originality of her colour and the sagacious simplicity of her design. …the work of an experienced artist with a real feeling for quality of paint who has understood and quietly developed her individual sensibility’[xxxv]
Still life by M.C. Lloyd(Constance Lloyd). (Courtesy Freston Family)
Five years later, in October 1952, now nearly 80 years old, she once again exhibited at the Adams Gallery. The Bloomsbury Group again rallied round; Quentin Bell reviewed the exhibition in The Listener, remarking ‘her only claim to fame rests upon the fact that she paints exceedingly good pictures. Her great talent lies in finding perfect juxtapositions of colour, of building – with beautiful economy and consummate art – a pattern of closely related tones, so finely balanced that, although her drawing is not remarkable, she creates a completely convincing world of light and space.‘[xxxvi] Another critic suggested that she ‘belongs, it seems, to the school of painting of Vuillard and Bonnard,’[xxxvii] while another remarked that the exhibition was ‘notable for paintings done in Paris and Venice, most of them still-life. They are of exceptional merit.’ She told the journalist that she would be leaving London for the sunshine of the West Indies – ‘That’s necessary for me because of my age and my desire to go on painting.’[xxxviii] In fact she set sail on 29 November to stay in Dominica with Stephen Haweis, another friend from her earliest days in Paris.[xxxix]
Constance Lloyd photographed with a nephew in her Parisian flat, 1968. (Courtesy of Sampson Lloyd)
Constance Lloyd lived another 16 years, dying in her apartment in Paris. In her will she had instructed that, in this eventuality, she should be cremated, and her ashes deposited at the cemetery at Genainville.
Of her paintings in public collections, one is the nude study of Gwen John mentioned above, one, the still life critiqued by Rebecca Birrell, is held at Charleston House, home of Duncan Grant and Vanessa Bell, apparently given to the Charleston Trust, though I’ve been unable to find out by whom.[xl] The other two, one a landscape and one a still life, both rather indistinct, are held in Chastleton House, now owned by the National Trust but once the home of Alec Clutton-Brock, an art critic. It is likely that the paintings are in the house because Constance knew either him or his father, who had been art critic of the Times and who, in 1909, had given ‘books’ as a wedding present to Aline Baylay and Albert Lloyd. Other of Constance Lloyd’s paintings are held by members of her family.
Katharine Constance Lloyd
Lloyd, Katharine Constance (10 November 1884-18 October 1974) was born at Hartley Wintney, Hampshire, the third child, and eldest daughter, of the eight children (five sons and three daughters) of Edward Wynell Mayhow Lloyd and his wife Eleanor (née Hastings). Her father, a renowned cricketer, educated at Rugby School and Cambridge University, was, from 1876 until 1910, the owner and headmaster of Hartford House, a boys’ preparatory school in Hartley Wintney. Four of Katharine’s brothers were educated at Rugby, where her uncle (Charles Hastings, her mother’s brother) was a master, but there is no information as to where she and her sisters went to school. Nor is it known if – and, if so, where – she attended an art school, although it is very likely that she did.
After her birth, the first public record found for Katharine Lloyd dates from 1906 when, on 18 August, she set sail for Cape Town, South Africa. She was doubtless journeying to stay with her brother Arthur (1883-1967) who, after graduating from Oxford, had, in 1905, left for South Africa, remaining there for five years while working as a cartoonist for the Rand Mail and Johannesburg Star. In the 1911 census Katharine is living at home in Hartley Wintney with her two younger sister – and five servants – head of the household in her parents’ absence.
Katharine Lloyd next appears in the public records, described as ‘Artist (Painter)’, in the 1921 census, living at 20 St Thomas Mansions, Stangate, Southwark. Her brother Arthur, who had been injured while serving in South Africa during the First World War, was on the census night at the family home in Hartley Wintney but gave his permanent address as that of the Southwark flat. Arthur is described as a ‘Black & White Artist’, working for Bradbury, Agnew & Co, proprietors of Punch. For many years Katharine Lloyd lived at addresses in Redcliffe Road, Fulham.
We first find evidence of Katharine Lloyd’s work as an artist in 1921 when a portrait, after Hoppner, of Lieutenant-General Sir Ralph Abercromby, an 18th-c Old Rugbeian, was commissioned from her by Rugby School.[xli] In fact, her connection to Rugby resulted in a number of similar commissions, including a portrait of other former pupils; one of Lewis Carroll, copied from the original by Herkomer that hangs in Christ Church, Oxford, [xlii] one of William Temple, Archbishop of Canterbury,[xliii] one of Hugh Lyon, headmaster of Rugby, 1931-48, and one of Sir Pelham Warner, president of the MCC.[xliv] The Warner portrait was a copy of one commissioned from Katharine Lloyd in 1949 by the MCC to hang in the pavilion at Lord’s Cricket Ground. For the pavilion she was also asked to copy the 1768 painting by Francis Cotes of ‘The Young Cricketer: Portrait of Lewis Cage’. This remained at Lord’s until 2008, but, after the MCC was able to purchase the original, in 2020 Katharine Lloyd’s copy was sold at auction, realising £13,000.
It is obvious that Katharine Lloyd’s association with Rugby School was important in effecting commissions, but other family connections also helped to raise her artistic profile. In 1936 the Royal Academy exhibition included her portrait of the ‘Rt Hon and Rt Rev the Lord Bishop of London’ who, as Arthur Winnington-Ingram, had been a pupil at Hartford House School when Katharine’s father was headmaster. The following year, 1937, Katharine Lloyd had another portrait selected for the RA exhibition, that of ‘Anne, daughter of late Major C.L. Compton Smith’. Anne[xlv] was Katharine Lloyd’s niece and in the 1930s had lived with her at 64 Redcliffe Road, Kensington. Katharine’s posthumous portrait of Anne’s father, Major Geoffrey Compton-Smith, who was murdered by the IRA in 1921, while serving in Ireland, is held by the Royal Welch Fusiliers Museum. The 1943 RA exhibition included another of Katharine’s portraits of a family member – ‘His Hon Lord Gamon’, her brother-in-law, Hugh R.P. Gamon.[xlvi]
In 1948 Katharine Lloyd was commissioned to paint the portrait of Dr J.W. Skinner, retiring headmaster of Culford School, Bury St Edmunds. The fact that he was depicted holding a copy of Punch caused much local merriment. The press report described the artist as ‘a Royal Academy exhibitor’,[xlvii] which may account for the commission she promptly received from Bury Town Council, who paid her a substantial sum to paint a portrait from photographs of the late Alderman Lake.[xlviii]
Katharine Lloyd made something of a speciality of posthumous portraits, commissioned as memorials to the recently departed. ArtUk references portraits of Sir William Carey, Bailiff of Guernsey[xlix] and Jan Hofmeyr, eminent South African politician,[l] both of which are likely to have been posthumous. Her posthumous portrait of Bishop Mosley, the late bishop of Southwell, was unveiled in 1949, one press report mentioning that, although a local artist would have been preferred, Miss Lloyd had been selected because she lived near to the home in the south of England to which the Bishop had retired. In the event, he died before work could start and she painted the portrait from photographs.[li]
Two other portraits by Katharine Lloyd listed on the confused ‘Mary Katherine Constance Lloyd’ ArtUK page are of Archibald Harrison and James Ross, both one-time principals of Westminster College. Harrison’s portrait was actually painted posthumously, in 1947, while Ross’s marked his retirement in 1953. In 1956 she painted what may have been her final commission, a portrait of G.H. Ash, headmaster of the Queen Elizabeth Grammar School, Hartlebury, near Worcester. [lii]
Although portraits of (male) worthies probably provided Katharine Lloyd with a bread-and-butter income and she did exhibit with the Royal Society of Portrait Painters, she also painted landscapes and still lives. In 1923 she exhibited a view of Niton, Isle of Wight[liii] with the NEAC and in 1929 a view of Ventnor at the Society of Women Artists .Her RA exhibits included flower paintings, shown in 1944 and 1946.
In 1934 Katharine Lloyd held a joint exhibition with her brother Albert at the Coolings Gallery. A review in the Times (23 October 1934) mentions that she displayed a ‘wide range of subjects, from crayon portraits to landscapes in water-colours, and throughout her work there is evident a good sense of design. It is most apparent in the water-colours, in which the ‘pattern’ of the landscape is emphasized and supported by well-related tones of colour.’ Among the landscapes were, again, scenes at Niton and at Hartley Wintney.
At this exhibition Katharine Lloyd also showed oil paintings of ‘Carting Turf in West Ireland’ and ‘Keel, Achill Island’. These last two may relate to a commission to illustrate Patricia Lynch’s The King of the Tinkers, published by J.M. Dent in 1938, for which she provided eight full-page colour and numerous smaller black-and-white illustrations. As far as I know she only illustrated one other book, Eleanor Doorly’s Ragamuffin King, Henry IV, King of France, published by Jonathan Cape in 1948.
Katharine Lloyd’s frontispiece for King of the Tinkers
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement
[i] The ArtUK page notes that the biographical information is sourced from D. Buckman, Artists in Britain since 1945, Sansom & Co, 2006.
[ii] The ‘Mary’ chapter is the only one in This Dark Country that is not illustrated, but the painting referred to is ‘Still Life with Fan’, held by the Charleston Trust.
[iii] Adelaide. a member of the Church League for Women’s Suffrage, was backed in the 1914 election by the Association for the election of women on governing bodies and in 1919 her re-election to the board of guardians was backed by the National Union for Equal Citizenship.
[iv] I think Jessie was a nurse at Westminster Hospital in 1891 and during the First World War, as a trained masseuse, was working with the French Red Cross. However, I have not been able to prove beyond dispute that this Margaret Jessie Lloyd is ‘our’ JML.
[v] For more about Julia Lloyd see R. Watts, ‘Julia Lloyd’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.
[vi] See Birmingham Post, 27 February 1915, 4 and Birmingham Evening Mail, 23 June 1980, 7.
[vii] The story is reported in Roe, Gwen John: a life, Chatto & Windus, 2001, 63
[viii] I do not know where Edyth and Marian were studying, but it was not at Somerville.
[ix] It is to be remarked that Marian’s father, Samuel Lloyd, when completing the 1901 census form, wrote in the column intended for remarks as to whether any of the household were ‘Deaf and Dumb; Blind; Lunatic; Imbecile, feeble-minded’ wrote ‘None of this character in this house. S.L.’
[xiii] For instance, her paintings Riva degli Schiavoni and Santa Maria dellaSalute have sold in recent years. In 1904 she exhibited a painting, ‘Venice’, at the Women’s International Art Club exhibition at the Grafton Galleries. The critic from the Daily Mirror singled it out – ‘It is full of light, air, and breeze, and Miss Lloyd has had the courage to remind us that Venice has factories and chimneys, without detracting from the fresh beauty of her little picture.’ Daily Mirror, 27 Jan 1904, 2.
[xiv] Spalding, Duncan Grant, 47. Presumably if there was any disapproval it came from her father, her mother having, as we have noted, died some years earlier. It is unlikely the mere fact of living abroad caused consternation; her sister, Julia, had studied in Berlin. Perhaps it was the artistic milieu that was suspect.
[xv] In 1909 Caroline Emma Baylay (1878-1962) married Constance Lloyd’s brother, Albert. In the 1901 census Caroline’s occupation was ‘art student’.
[xvii] Letter from Ida to Augustus John, 10 November 1906, see Roe, 80. Interestingly, Augustus had been a pupil at the Slade at the same time as Constance so presumably knew her by sight.
[xviii] The NLW painting is signed ‘M.C.Lloyd’. The donor, a family member, indicated it was painted in 1905. Roe, 91-2, mentions that Gwen modelled for Constance in 1907.
[xix] In 1909 Col and Mrs Grant gave a wedding present to Aline (Bayley) and Albert Lloyd, suggesting that there may have already been an established family connection to one or the other. Would they have given a present to a couple, one of whom was merely a friend of their son? Both Col Grant and Charles Bayley, Aline Bayley’s father, had seen service in the army in India; perhaps their paths had crossed there.
[xx] Constance Lloyd’s address is given in the catalogue as 38 rue du Montparnasse.
[xxi] See the Times, 13 February 1912, 11. The Friday Club had been founded by Vanessa Bell in 1905 but in 1913 she, with Roger Fry and Duncan Grant, broke away and established the rival Grafton Group. The first Grafton Group exhibition was held in March 1913, but, as the Times reported (20 March 1913, 4) the works were displayed anonymously, so it is impossible to know if Constance Lloyd was among their number.
[xxxvi]The Listener, 16 October, 1952, 644. One of Constance’s still lives, bearing an Adams Gallery label, passed through Holloway Auctions in 2019, selling for £10.
[xxxix] Mentioned in Goff, Eileen Gray: her work and her world.
[xl] The Charleston Trust is unable to disclose acquisition information.
[xli] See report of Speech Day in Rugby School’s magazine, The Meteor, vol 55, issue 663, 1921.
[xlii] Mention is made of the Lewis Carroll portrait in the report of Speech Day, The Meteor, vol. 69, issue 812, 1935, although it is not clear when the painting was made.
[xliii] Painted posthumously; Temple died in 1944. I think the portrait was presented in 1946; its existence was certainly mentioned in Rugby Advertiser, 16 June 1950.
[xliv] The two last portraits were painted in 1950. See Rugby Advertiser, 20 June 1950, 3.
[xlv] Anne (later Mrs Anne Peploe) was an amateur artist – see Sevenoaks Chronicle, 4 December 1976, 4.
[xlvi] Married Katharine’s sister, Margaret Eleanor Lloyd, in 1914.
[xlvii]Bury Free Press, 9 July 1948, 6. It was intended that the presentation of Skinner’s portrait should have been made by Dr H.B. Workman, who had been the principal of Westminster College before Archibald Harrison. This suggests that Katharine Lloyd may have benefited from some Westminster College networking.
[xlviii] This portrait appears on ArtUK, held by West Suffolk Heritage Service, and dated to 1946. I think this date is incorrect and should be amended to 1950 – the portrait was unveiled in April 1950 – see Bury Free Press, 7 April 1950, 3. In the Bury Free Press (13 August 1948, 1) Katharine Lloyd’s fee is given as 200 guineas, but in a report in the same paper (12 November 1948, 16) it is cited as 100 guineas.
[xlix] He died in 1915. This is the earliest of Katharine Lloyd’s works so far found.
[l] Hofmeyr died in 1948, This commission may well have come through Arthur Lloyd.
[li]Newark Advertiser, 13 April, 1949, 1; Nottingham Evening Post, 8 January 1949, 3.
Here is a link to the recording of the Zoom Book Launch of Millicent Garrett Fawcett: Selected Writings.
My co-editor, Prof Melissa Terras, and I discuss, in some detail, Millicent Fawcett’s life, work, and writings – and the importance of the digital to the archival as a means of undertaking this act of feminist interpretation and exposition. There are pictures!
We are in conversation with Prof Fiona Mackay (University of Edinburgh School of Political Science), the event hosted by the University of Edinburgh Centre for Data, Culture and Society.
Millicent Garrett Fawcett: Selected Writings is published by UCL Press and is available to download, with free open access, or to buy in hard copy – for details see here.
To get in a holiday mood you could do no better than play this Dean Street Press trailer for The Marble Staircase. Unlike most ‘Furrowed Middlebrow’ titles this is not a reissue, but a novel written by Elizabeth Fair c 1960, the typescript of which languished for 60 years in a black tin trunk until her literary heirs, inspired by the success of Dean Street Press’s reissues of her published novels, thought to mention its existence. Once read, there was no hesitation in adding it to the Furrowed Middlebrow list and I was delighted to be asked to contribute a foreword, building on those I have written for all Miss Fair’s other novels.
Elizabeth Fair, photographed by Angus McBean
The research was absorbing, allowing me to pick up clues from Elizabeth Fair’s diary, study in detail the topography of a Lancashire seaside town, linking that to the lives of her antecedents, while relishing the effect visits to Lake Como and Florence had on the life of the novel’s heroine. ‘Liberation of the mind’ is the theme, Italy the catalyst, a combination familiar to readers of E.M. Forster and Elizabeth von Arnim, but given an entirely individual rendition by Elizabeth Fair.
And here is the trailer for more Dean Street Press August largesse – 12 novels by ‘Susan Scarlett’, aka Noel Streatfeild. Again, I was delighted to be commissioned to write the foreword to these reissues, detailing how the author, now mainly remembered for her books for children, came to write these light novels that did so much to brighten the lives of her readers during the Second World War. The first, Clothes-Pegs, was published in 1939 and the last, Love in a Mist, in 1951, and, between them, allow us to enter worlds all well known to the author – those of fashion, concert parties, ballet, munitions (this novel has perhaps the best title, at least to those of a certain age – Murder While You Work), and even that of the film studio, all set against the background of ordinary lives in wartime and post-war England.
In the course of my research, I reread Angela Bull’s biography of Noel Streatfeild, as well as the author’s various autobiographies, and very much enjoyed mining digitized newspapers for obscure details of her early years, all grist to the mill. But a particular source of information was one that, as a sometime publishing house employee, I particularly value – the ledgers of ‘Susan Scarlett’s publisher, Hodder. These very heavy and unwieldy objects are held, most conveniently for me, in the London Metropolitan Archives and I would make a bold guess that it is many decades since anyone else has looked at the sales and profit and loss accounts for the novels of Susan Scarlett. It always gives me great pleasure to investigate prime records such as these that bring to life the facts behind the books.
‘Susan Scarlett’ during the Second World War
Dean Street Press have served a veritable ‘Furrowed Middlebrow’ feast this summer. Enjoy.
This International Women’s Day I would like to celebrate, once again, the work of the women of the Garrett family.
In a couple of months’ time UCL Press will be publishingMillicent Garrett Fawcett: Selected Writings on which I have had the pleasure of working, alongside the lead editor, Prof Melissa Terras. In the volume, which will be open access as one of the publishing options, 35 texts and 22 images are contextualised and linked to contemporary news coverage, as well as to historical and literary references. This is the first opportunity to study in one volume Millicent Fawcett’s thinking on a range of topics concerning the advancement of women, of which the women’s suffrage campaign is only one.
In the photograph we chose as the cover for the book you see Millicent Fawcett seated at her desk in a corner of the first-floor front drawing-room of her home at 2 Gower Street, Bloomsbury. It may be the very same desk as that of which we catch a glimpse, to the right of the fireplace in the illustration below, taken from Suggestions for House Decoration (1876) by Rhoda and Agnes Garrett. Many years ago, after visiting 2 Gower Street when researching Enterprising Women: the Garretts and their circle, I came to the conclusion that the illustrations in House Decoration were taken directly from real life, that is they were pictures of the rooms in 2 Gower Street, as arranged by Rhoda and Agnes. Recently I have been delighted to have my educated guess vindicated by discovering that Lady Maude Parry, a friend of the Garretts, stated in an obituary article on Rhoda, published in Every Girls’ Annual 1884, that in Suggestions for House Decoration ‘are illustrations of their house in Gower Street’.
Rhoda died in 1882, but Agnes carried on the business of ‘R & A Garrett’, house decorators, until 1905, although in 1899 the lease on the firm’s warehouse in Morwell Street came to an end, necessitating the sale of its contents and, presumably, a reduction in the work undertaken. Incidentally the Morwell Street building and its neighbours has recently, 2022, been approved for demolition, to be replaced by a 6-storey building. When I first noted it c 2000, the Garrett’s ‘warehouse’ retained its original façade (illustrated in Enterprising Women), which has subsequently been altered – now another Garrett link will be utterly obliterated. However, that furniture sale, held at Phillips, Son and Neale on 27 July 1899, has provided me with considerable scope for research – allowing me to identify a number of individuals keen to buy furniture and house accoutrements that had the Garrett seal of approval – in that they had passed through Agnes’ hands – and to muse a little on the state of the ‘house furnishing’ market at the end of the 19th century. That research will appear in a subsequent post on this website.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement
Over the years I have expressed concern about the practice of dealers and auctioneers in labelling as ‘suffragette’ any piece of jewellery that combines stones approximating to suffragette colours of purple, white and green. I explained in another post [see https://wp.me/p2AEiO-nd] that such jewellery would have had no association with the suffragette movement, the colours were merely harmonious and fashionable, which was why they had been chosen by the Women’s Social and Political Union as their ‘brand’. This practice is, I am afraid, still rife, but at least I have tried to warn the trade and the public.
However, I am now increasingly worried by the number of deliberately faked suffragette objects that are being sold both on eBay and by British auction houses, often for high prices. Fake ‘suffragette’ flags, watches, cigarette cases, car badges, defaced coins, and woven cloth badges are the latest items to appear in auction house sales. Having specialised in suffrage ephemera – as an historian and a dealer – for over 35 years I can assure my readers that most of these objects either never existed in the ‘suffrage’ years and are being dreamed up – and manufactured – by unscrupulous sellers, or are modern copies. I do occasionally protest to terrestrial auction houses about individual items and they then invariably withdraw them from sale – but I cannot hope to stem the tide alone.
While I hate the idea of private buyers being duped, not only by spending large sums but also by thinking, erroneously, that they own an artefact with a real connection to the suffrage movement, my principal fear is that such objects will end up in public collections; indeed, I know this to have happened. If the institution is made aware of its mistake and removes the object from display, it has lost money; if the object passes into the collection unchallenged, it is legitimising a fiction. I would ask potential buyers to think carefully – and even consult an expert – before spending money on artefacts labelled as ‘suffragette’. Better still, research the movement carefully so that you can exercise your own judgment. There are still plenty of ‘right’ objects to be found but, as ever, this maxim holds: ‘If an item looks too good to be true, it probably is’.
Caveat Emptor
To see something of the marvellous range of suffrage artefacts that were actually produced by suffrage societies do consult Ken Florey’s site. Although treating, in the main, items produced to publicise the US suffrage movement, he also includes a wide range of British items.
My website also includes a number of articles that may prove useful – under the ‘Collecting Suffrage’ heading. And, if you would like advice about an item you are thinking of buying, you can always ask for my opinion.
Mrs Pankhurst on the Majestic as she sailed into Plymouth on 4 December 1913 – just before the police arrived to arrest her. With her are the American journalist, her ghostwriter, Rheta Childe Dorr, and Joan Wickham, her secretary.
Here is a link to the Zoom talk on the women’s suffrage campaign in South Devon that I gave on 25 September as part of Torbay’s Heritage Lecture Day. The fully-illustrated talk traces suffrage activity in the area from its beginnings in 1866 – through the 19th and 20th centuries.
‘Plymouth is so very backward that what we have gained represents a very real advance’: the ‘Votes for Women’ campaign in South Devon in the 19th and 20th centuries is the title of a Zoom talk I am giving on Saturday 25 September at 1.30pm. The fully-illustrated talk covers the women’s suffrage campaign in the 19th and 20th centuries.
The talk forms part of Torbay’s Heritage Lecture Day – for full details of which see here. N.B. click on the ’10 am’ option to buy a ticket for the Virtual Talk. You can watch the talk from anywhere in the world!
The talk will make clear the meaning of this photograph
If you are interested in discovering something about the wide range of objects produced during the course of the women’s suffrage campaign in the 19th and early 20th centuries, you may like to view a talk I gave recently, hosted by the Antiquarian Booksellers Association and the Institute of English Studies, University of London. Click here to watch.
On Tuesday 22 June at 6pm London Time I shall be giving a free online (Zoom) talk on ‘Collecting Suffragettes’,, under the auspices of the Antiquarian Booksellers Association and the Institute of English Studies (University of London.
The very fully illustrated talk will discuss suffrage memorabilia – of all types – created in the course of the women’s suffrage campaign that ran from 1866 until all women in Britain were granted the parliamentary vote in 1928.
Laura Jesson in Boots Booklovers’ Library – still from Brief Encounter
A recording of my talk on The ‘Furrowed Middlebrow’ Fiction: novels by and for women, 1920s to 1950s is now available here It was hosted by LSE Library and delivered via Zoom on 20 May.
I discussed some of the ‘middlebrow’ novels written by women that were available to borrow from public and circulating libraries in the 1920s to the 1950s, making special reference to those by novelists such as Margery Sharp, Celia Buckmaster, Stella Gibbons and Elizabeth Fair that have recently been republished by Dean Street Press under their ‘Furrowed Middlebrow’ imprint. I have written introductions to about 35 of the reissues.
The talk ties in with the current LSE Library online exhibition Making Modern Women: Women’s Magazines in Interwar Britain – which you can view here
Hosted by LSE Library, I’ll be giving a free online – Zoom – talk – The ‘Furrowed Middlebrow’ Fiction: novels by and for women, 1920s to 1950s – on Thursday 20 May, from 1-2pm.
I’ll be discussing some of the ‘middlebrow’ novels written by women that were available to borrow from public and circulating libraries in the 1920s to the 1950s. I’ll be making special reference to those by novelists such as Margery Sharp, Celia Buckmaster, Stella Gibbons and Elizabeth Fair that have recently been republished by Dean Street Press under their ‘Furrowed Middlebrow’ imprint. I have written introductions to about 35 of the reissues.
For full details of my talk – and how to register – see here.
The talk ties in with the current LSE Library online exhibition Making Modern Women: Women’s Magazines in Interwar Britain – which you can view here
The term ‘suffragette’ was invented in 1906 by the Daily Mail, as a belittling epithet, and was then adopted as a badge of honour by the women it sought to demean. These women – the suffragettes –campaigning for the parliamentary vote – were members of what are termed the ‘militant’ suffrage society – the Women’s Social and Political Union, led by Mrs Pankhurst and her daughters.
It would be possible to approach the subject of suffragettes and their dress chronologically because during what we think of as the Edwardian years, that is from 1901 to 1914, women’s dress did alter decisively, from the curvy, rather fussy outline, topped by a large hat, of the early years to the more tailored look in the year or so before the outbreak of war. It could be argued that this was not unconnected to the growing importance and popularity of the campaign for ‘votes for women’. However, I thought it would be interesting to approach the topic from a different angle – to see whether the suffragettes used dress as a weapon in their campaign and, if so, why and how.
The suffragettes were by no means the first women in Britain to campaign for the right to vote in parliamentary elections. That campaign had begun 40 years earlier, in 1866, when John Stuart Mill, then MP for Westminster, presented a petition to the House of Commons asking for the vote for women on the same terms as it was granted to men. Why were women barred from voting? The one reason – unarguable in its unreasonableness – was simply that in the mid 19th c the act of voting was gendered male – just as the army, the navy and the church were male. The ballot was not secret, votes were bought with beer, and the hustings were notorious for scenes of drunken brawling. Women who claimed a right to enter this world were transgressing the gender divide. In consequence, such women were either regarded, negatively, as insufficiently womanly – the jibe was that they must want the vote to make up for their lack of charms – or as positively masculine – as women aping men. Either way the popular verdict was that these ‘women’s righters’ were embarrassments – figures of fun.
As dress may be taken as the outer signifier of inner thought, the appearance of women who campaigned for the vote was always a matter to be given serious consideration.– both during the 19th century and then during the Edwardian campaign.
This is Punch’s view of the presentation of that first petition. The representation of the women – the ‘persons’ – whom Mill is leading – does reflect something in demeanour and dress of the women who organised the petition. They were, on the whole, self-confident, young middle-class women – the wearers of muffs and fashionable bonnets. The more elderly woman with glasses represented the earnestness of the movement – while the image of the old woman with the umbrella – as depicted, a member of a class of women who would have no hope of gaining the vote, which was based on property holding – was the caricature that was to feature in both 19th and 20th c popular representations of the suffrage movement, particularly on comic postcards in the Edwardian period.
Agnes and Millicent Garrett
The petition had been put together very quickly – women went round their friends, relations and neighbours asking for signatures.Here are two young women who did just that – in Aldeburgh in Suffolk. They are Millicent Garrett, sitting down, and her sister, Agnes. As you will note they are entirely conventionally attired as young women of the 1860s. Both were to be involved in the suffrage campaign all their long lives – Millicent Garrett, as Mrs Millicent Fawcett, was to negotiate women to the ballot box in 1918.
Elizabeth Garrett Anderson, 1889 – doctor, founder of the New Hospital for Women, dean of the London School of Medicine for Women, wife and mother
Millicent and Agnes very much looked up to their elder sister, Elizabeth, who, in spite of many difficulties put in her way, had in 1866 managed to become the first woman to qualify in Britain as a doctor. She was one of those in London who were organizing the suffrage petition. Again, all her life she made no particular statement about her looks – but dressed in such a way that, within the bounds of conventional fashion, she could carry out her work as a doctor in the hospital she founded and as lecturer and eventually dean of the London School of Medicine for Women. Like Millicent, she was, at this time, very much of the view that women would get the vote by proving themselves worthy – not by upsetting the establishment. One aspect of this was that from the very beginning of the campaign it was recognised that women were more likely to be taken seriously – or at least, not dismissed out of hand – if in outward appearance – in dress and demeanour – they conformed to the general ‘look’ expected of women – that is, if they placed themselves firmly on the female side of the gender divide and avoided looking either unwomanly or mannish. For instance, when in 1870 public suffrage meetings was being planned in London, Elizabeth Garrett, who was something of a cynic, suggested that it would be a good idea to make sure that only pretty, well-dressed women filled the front row.
At a time when it was still exceptional for a well-brought up woman to speak on a public platform, suffrage speakers quickly made their mark and by 1874 Punch had already made up its mind on the subject of the dress of a typical suffrage campaigner. Here the cartoonist has elected to depict her as positively masculine. Now, just such a woman as Punch was referring to – a famous champion of women’s rights, although by all accounts very much more attractive in the flesh – was Rhoda Garrett – who was not only the cousin of Agnes, Elizabeth and Millicent, but also the partner, both in an interior design business and in life, of Agnes.
An engraving of Rhoda speaking at a London public meeting in 1872, shows her wearing an outfit such as that in the Punch cartoon – a loose jacket and skirt. She is hatless and her hair is loose and she certainly doesn’t look to be corseted. Rhoda was on the radical wing of the suffrage movement – her attire reflecting her freer approach She was prepared, for instance, openly to support the campaign to repeal the Contagious Diseases Acts. Millicent Fawcett, on the other hand, believed that it was dangerous to the suffrage cause to mix it in the public mind with any mention of prostitution. You can see Millicent here on the left, with hair braided, shawl draped.
Rhoda Garrett died in 1882 – when barely 40 – and is now little remembered. If she had lived she might well have made a very interesting figurehead for the suffrage movement – both in terms of the substance of her speeches and in her idiosyncratic style of dress.
But by the beginning of the 20th century, despite the hundreds and hundreds of meetings, petitions presented and bills debated, women were still denied the vote – even though by then the act of voting only meant, as it does now, putting a piece of paper into a box, the electoral hustings no longer involved hard drinking and unseemly brawls and women had already won the right to vote for many local government bodies.
Mrs Emmeline Pankhurst
In October 1903 Emmeline Pankhurst decided to form her own pressure group – the Women’s Social and Political Union – to make a determined effort to move the campaign forward. She had been involved with the suffrage movement since the 1880s when living with her husband and children in Manchester. Despite spending some years moving in London Arts and Crafts circles, Emmeline always remained more a figure rendered by Tissot than Burne-Jones. She preferred Parisian modes to Pre-Raphaelite drapery. By the time she founded the WSPU she was a widow, back living in Manchester. It took a couple of years to gather steam and it was when the WSPU began to make itself seen and heard in London that the term ‘suffragette’ was coined. By 1906 the difference between the suffragettes and the original campaigners – the ‘suffragists’ – had become clear.
Emmeline Pankhurst arrested, 1908
The WSPU were prepared to demonstrate in an increasingly militant fashion, while the suffragists, members of the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies – known as the NUWSS – led by Millicent Fawcett, remained ‘constitutional’ – that is they would not contemplate breaking any aspect of the law. Even when under arrest Mrs Pankhurst contrived to look elegant and womanly.
Christabel Pankhurst
Emmeline Pankhurst was soon joined in the WSPU by her eldest daughter, Christabel. The photograph above dates from c 1908 – her dress is rather more ‘artistic’ than her mother’s – the brooch may have been designed by C.R. Ashbee.
Christabel Pankhurst, by ‘Spy’
In the Vanity Fair ‘Spy’ cartoon from a couple of years later she appears to be wearing the same gown – which we can now see is green, a favourite colour. Grace Roe, who was to become a life-long friend, has left a description of the first time she saw Emmeline and Christabel speaking – at a WSPU rally in Hyde Park in 1908. Although she was interested in the women’s suffrage movement she had been put off by the press reports and was afraid that Emmeline and Christabel might be ‘unwomanly women’. However, she was delighted to discover that, on the contrary, ‘There was Mrs Pankhurst, this magnificent figure, like a queen’ and Christabel who ‘had taken off her bonnet and cloak, and was wearing a green tussore silk dress. She was very graceful, had lovely hands and a wonderful way of using them.’
Christabel Pankhurst, 1909
And here is Christabel again, photographed at the Women’s Exhibition – a WSPU bazaar that was both fund and image-raising – held in Knightsbridge in 1909. And that is a hat that is intended to disarm – to secure her as a ‘womanly woman ‘ and disprove any association with the Shrieking Sisterhood. The photographs of Emmeline and Christabel– as were many others of the leaders – were reproduced on postcards, which were sold by the WSPU. By doing so they not only advertised that they conformed to accepted views of womanhood, but raised money in the process.
Sylvia Pankhurst
Emmeline Pankhurst’s second daughter, Sylvia, was an artist, and had trained at Royal College of Art. She eventually broke away from Emmeline and Christabel to pursue the campaign for the vote from a base among the working women of the East End. She always appears conventionally, if carelessly, dressed and in 1911 the WSPU newspaper, Votes for Women, characterised her as too busy to be ‘bothered about her hair, or the hang of her skirt.’ Another suffragette described her as dressing ‘like a Quakeress in sober browns and greys’. But when the occasion demanded even she, radical that she was, was prepared to make an effort. During an American tour in 1911 a reporter in Des Moines described her arriving at a suffrage meeting, a ‘pink-cheeked slender girl clad in a trailing gown of creamy silk, [who] dropped modestly into a seat on the platform and raised her blue eyes to meet the hundreds in the audience.’
Emmeline Pethick Lawrence
Emmeline Pethick Lawrence and her husband, Frederick, were wealthy philanthropists – working philanthropists- who brought both money and organisational skill to the WSPU, joining the Pankhursts as its leaders. Mrs Pethick Lawrence was particularly disturbed by the exploitation of girls working in the London dress trade and in the early years of the 20th century founded a club for them. In fact, in the mid-19th century, right at the very beginning of the suffrage campaign, it had been concern for what were then termed ‘needlewomen’ that had dominated much of the discourse. Although, of course, such women would not be emancipated under the terms for which the vote was being demanded, middle-class women thought that if they had the vote they would be able to improve the lives of their working-class sisters. The irony of women slaving to provide new fashions for other women was not lost on the campaigners. Emmeline Pethick Lawrence set up not only a club, but also a tailoring co-operative – ‘Maison Esperance’ – to free at least a few girls from exploitation. It was based first in Great Portland Street and then in Wigmore Street. As you see, Emmeline Pethick Lawrence favoured rather loose, flowing garments – richly embroidered, tasselled – floating scarves. I think they qualify as artistic; she was certainly rather fey and spiritual.
Annie Kenney with Elizabeth Wolstenholme Elmy
These women were, of course, all middle-class, but the WSPU also had its working-class icons – the most important of whom was Annie Kenney. Until swept up by the Pankhursts, she had been a mill girl in Lancashire – and for many of her early public appearances she was dressed in shawl and clogs – for effect, I may say. That is not how she would have chosen to dress. In the photograph on the left she appears in the mill girl guise, alongside Mrs Elizabeth Wolstenholme Elmy, who had been one of the earliest of the suffrage campaigners. Mrs Elmy was impoverished – what money she had was spent on campaigning – and totally unworldly – her ringletted hair was styled as it had been in her youth – but was well aware that it would never do, as she said, to ‘look a scarecrow’ when appearing in public. So friends united in providing her with a new gown when necessary, ensuring that her appearance was commensurate with her importance in the movement.
Annie Kenney
Rather than shawl and clogs Annie Kenney much preferred the type of garments that those with whom she now associated wore – such as she wears in the above photo. Thus, in December 1906, for a dinner given at the Savoy by Mrs Fawcett and the NUWSS to celebrate the release of WSPU prisoners, Annie recorded that ‘Mrs Lawrence bought me a very pretty green silk Liberty dress for the occasion, and I wore a piece of real lace. I was so pleased with both.’
Flora Drummond, Emmeline Pankhurst and Christabel Pankhurst arrested 1908
For by the autumn of 1906 WSPU militancy now involved arrest and imprisonment. This photograph was taken a couple of years later – at the WSPU office in Clement’s Inn in the Strand and shows the leaders being arrested by Inspector Jarvis of the Yard. From this we can get a good indication of their normal daywear. From left to right they are Mrs Flora Drummond – Mrs Pankhurst – and Christabel. Annie Kenney looks down from the poster on wall
Pageantry
But alongside militancy that led to arrest was militancy that merely involved making a peaceful, public demonstration. Although the WSPU’s first London march in 1906 comprised women from the East End, many carrying their babies, the WSPU did not pursue its involvement with working-class women. Wealthier women were more able to contribute not only funds but a more glamorous presence on the streets. It was they who were mustered for the spectacles of pageantry that the WSPU in successive years mounted in London – and in provincial cities. These displays gave the photographers material to record. Both still and moving cameras were used – for newsreel of the occasions was shown in cinemas.
Emmeline Pethick Lawrence, June 1908
The WSPU staged the first of their major pageants in Hyde Park in June 1908. It was estimated that a quarter of a million people attended. In order to make as dramatic an effect as possible Mrs Pethick Lawrence suggested that women should wear white – and, of course, – as we see here – did so herself. .One suffragette, Jessie Stephenson, has left a description of how ‘my milliner and dressmaker took endless pains with my attire. A white lacy muslin dress, white shoes and stockings and gloves and, like an order, across the breast, the broad band in purple, white and green emblazoned “Votes for Women”, a white shady hat trimmed with white’. The mother of another WSPU member, Mary Blathwayt from Bath, recorded in her diary that Mary was dressed ‘in white muslin with the scarf crosswise over her shoulder’.– as the woman on the left wearing .
The scarf was a new piece of merchandise – a motoring scarf in the new WSPU colours of purple, white and green – a combination devised by Emmeline Pethick Lawrence to represent the WSPU brand – and with which the WSPU is still associated. The colours were used on programmes, rosettes, flags and banners and on the sashes the women draped across themselves.
Even Mrs Wolstenholme Elmy wore a sash, standing alongside Mrs Pankhurst. She has left us details of the bouquet she was given to carry –advertising the WSPU’s colours in a composition of ‘ferns, huge purple lilies and lily of the valley’.
Christabel, 1910 – in THAT coat
The colours were not only employed in the course of the pageants. In Nov 1910 Christabel Pankhurst was one of the leaders of a deputation of all the women’s suffrage societies to Asquith and Lloyd George and for the occasion dressed in a coat with wide satin lapels in purple, white and green. The journalist Henry Nevinson commented in his diary that it was ‘fine – but a little overdone for the morning.’
WSPU Shop – Putney
In order to sell the merchandise, the local WSPU societies opened shops – taking short leases on high street properties, just as charity shops do today. This is the one run by the Putney society. They produced a wide-range of tempting goods – from board and card games, to ‘Votes for Women’ tea and soap and ‘Emmeline’ and ‘Christabel’ bags. The Pankhursts were the Alexa Chungs of their day. But one of the most popular type of merchandise was what might be loosely termed ‘jewellery’. This ranged from mass-produced badges to hand-wrought items. One WSPU diarist recorded that the local society ‘had taken a shop in the central part of the town, and decorated it beautifully with purple, white and green flags. On a counter I saw piles of leaflets, pamphlets and Suffragette literature, also very pretty little brooches in the colours, one of which I bought and intend always to wear’
Jewish League for Women’s Suffrage – badge
The WSPU had very quickly developed the idea of creating such symbols to be worn to indicate support for their cause. Soon all the suffrage societies, ranging through the Women’s Freedom League, the Actresses’ Franchise League, the Church League for Women’s Suffrage, the NUWSS, the Men’s League and, as here, the Jewish League all had their own colours and badges.
Something of an irritating mythology has gathered around the concept of ‘suffragette jewellery’, fostered by dealers and auction houses who like to claim that any piece with stones approximating to the colours purple, white and green, must be of suffragette association. Although, at the height of the WSPU campaign, such pieces certainly were manufactured both by commercial and craft jewellers, it is now very difficult to identify them with any certainty as suffragette – amethysts, pearls and demantoid garnets or emeralds were very commonly used in Edwardian jewellery. We do know that some pieces were made with the WSPU in mind. For instance, in December 1909 Mappin and Webb issued a catalogue of ‘Suffragette jewellery’.
And this silver and enamel pendant using a design by Sylvia Pankhurst was certainly made and sold in WSPU shops. And in Votes for Women craft workers advertised jewellery made up in the colours and the numerous fund-raising bazaars provided ample opportunity for purchasing such items of jewellery associated with the movement.
Pendant made by Ernestine Mills
We also know that one-off pieces of suffragette jewellery were made.In 1909 Ernestine Mills, an enameller who was a WSPU supporter, was commissioned by the Chelsea WSPU to make a pendant for one of their members on her release from prison. In silver enamel, it depicted the winged figure of Hope singing outside the prison bars and was held by a chain made up of purple, white and green stones. Above is a pendant made by ernestine Mills for an Irish suffragette.
The symbolism of both jewellery and of military decoration is realized in a portrait of Flora Drummond, painted in 1936, that now hangs in the Scottish Portrait Gallery. She was a Scots woman living in Manchester who along with, or despite, her husband and young son, was swept into the WSPU in its very early days. As you can see, she took to it with a will –and was known as General Drummond. .For her portrait she wore a large pendant of purple, white and green stones alongside the WSPU equivalent of the Victoria Cross – the hunger-strike medal.
As you can see from this photo, held by the Museum of London, the WSPU by 1908 or so had, alongside its desire for its members to be seen as womanly women, begun to embrace a more military ethos. Uniform – or at least uniformity – were important elements when producing pageantry and processions – in creating a spectacle. Here we see a suffragette acting as a standard bearer You will note how like a uniform she has made her outfit – although all the individual pieces are, I imagine, conventional
l-r Emmeline Pethick Lawrence, Christabel Pankhurst, Sylvia Pankhurst, and Emily Wilding Davison, Hyde Park, 1910
For the major suffragette demonstration in Hyde Park in 1910 the WSPU paper,Votes for Women, asked those taking part to march eyes front, like a soldier and ‘to remember you are just a unit in a great whole’. Hints were also given on how to dress. ‘Don’t wear gowns that have to be held up. Don’t wear enormous hats that block the view. Do wear white if possible. Do in any case keep to the colours.’ .Emmeline Pethick Lawrence, who was probably responsible for this edict, took her own advice. She wore a lovely dress – with a hem that was perhaps weighted in someway, to bell out a little, clearing the ground. She wears a loose lacy long jacket over the dress – also white. Her hat may have been purple or green – although of course one cannot tell from the photograph – and is neat and close fitting. Her gloves are white and she carries a little bag – again probably in purple or green. Sylvia is holding one of the placards she had designed that were a feature of this procession –a convict’s arrow was superimposed on the House of Commons portcullis – symbolising the lengths that women were prepared to go to gain the vote. Christabel is in academic dress – she had graduated in 1906 with a first-class degree in law from Manchester University. In all the major processions graduates marched as a group – emphasising the fact that, although they had attained scholastic heights, they were still denied the vote.
Emily Wilding Davison
Emily Wilding Davison is the other figure in academic dress in the Hyde Park photoand on a separate occasion sat for a studio photographer in academic dress – she had gained her degree in the 1890’s. The photograph can be dated to some time after 1908 by the fact that she is wearing a particular brooch – the WSPU Holloway badge – given to women who had been imprisoned. This was the photograph that the WSPU chose to publish in the press and on postcards after her death at the Derby in 1913 – the image chosen to reinforce the idea of intellectual achievement – of noble womanhood sacrificed.
In 1911, Britain having badefarewell to King Edward the previous year, prepared to celebrate the coronation of the new king. The suffragettes, in a spirit of truce, held back on their militant campaign to stage perhaps their most spectacular procession – and demonstrate, in mass, their womanliness.
For this procession the WSPU organized separate contingents representing different groups –their dress making specific statements.
This is the Indian contingent.
Nurses – who always received a warm welcome from bystanders as they marched past
Members of Cymric Suffrage Society – the welsh suffrage society – dressed in their regional costume
Cicely Hamilton, seen here (3rd from left) carrying the Women Writers Suffrage League banner, was very much a lady who favoured the tailor rather than the dressmaker. In her autobiography she wrote: ‘A curious characteristic of the militant suffragette movement was the importance it attached to dress and appearance, and its insistence on the feminine note. In the WSPU all suggestion of the masculine was carefully avoided, and the outfit of a militant setting forth to smash windows would probably include a picture hat.’
But be that as it may, there were some women who were able within the WSPU to adopt a role that allowed them to wear clothing more masculine than was otherwise acceptable. Here we see Vera – also known as Jack – Holme, the WSPU’s chauffeur. Involvement with the WSPU allowed her very much more scope to lead the kind of life she wanted – previously she had been an actress in the D’Oyly Carte. As Mrs Pankhurst’s chauffeur she wore a striking uniform in the WSPU colours, with a smart peaked cap decorated with her RAC badge of efficiency – atop her decidedly short hair.
Advertisement from ‘Votes for Women’
She lived with the Hon Evelina Haverfield who appeared in the pages of Votes for Women in 1912 giving her imprimatur to the Omne Tempus raincoat – an ideal coat for town, county and campaigning.
As the suffrage battle grew more ever more physical, so the imagery became more military – if of a feminised kind. This poster was used after 1912 to advertise the Suffragette,the successor paper to Votes for Women. By now, Joan of Arc was often invoked as a role model
And, paradoxically, it was the womanly skills of WSPU members that were used to make many of the banners, flags and pennants that were carried by the marchers into the suffrage battle. And to raise funds for what was actually called ‘The War Chest’, the WSPU held grand bazaars. Of these the grandest was the one held in Knightsbridge in 1909. Here, in this photograph held by the Museum of London, we see Mrs Pankhurst manning the hat stall there – she had appealed for hats, veils, scarves, hair ornaments etc’. Hats clearly had their part to play in the woman’s struggle – although hat ornamentation could arouse strong feelings. Some suffragettes, many of whom combined interests in anti-vivisection and vegetarianism with their support for votes for women, were involved in a campaign to prohibit the wearing of feathers in hats.
But hat-wearing was de rigueur – even when setting out to commit arson. To have been hatless would have been to attract attention. When Emily Wilding Davison ran in front of the King’s horse in 1913– she was wearing a hat. Newsreel, that you can watch here, shows it bowling across the grass as she fell.
After Emily Wilding Davison’s death – the WSPU gave her a magnificent funeral. You can see the women dressed – very femininely -in white – guarding the coffin, holding their lilies like swords. One rank and file member, Alice Singer, recorded in her diary the day before the funeral that she had just bought a black armband to wear as she watched the procession from the pavement. And Kate Frye (who’s diary I have edited) bought a black hat specifically for the occasion.
This was the last big pageant –soon the WSPU was being harried by the police – it had to move out of its office, many of its leaders were in prison and Christabel had fled to France to avoid arrest. The society no longer had the resources to devote to pageantry
But whatever the suffragettes did to construct an image of co-ordinated determination, even if they might not always have achieved the ultimate goal of grace and nobility, the popular view of them had changed little. The Edwardian era saw the flourishing of the postcard trade and suffragettes were a boon to illustrators.
Their stereotypical attributes were glasses, big feet, tailored clothes, collar and tie, a billycock hat and an umbrella.
Lady Constance Lytton as ‘Jane Wharton’
The image was even accepted as ‘authentic’ by the suffragettes themselves. When Lady Constance Lytton wished to ensure that she would be arrested – which, on account of her family connections, would not have happened if she had been recognised – she disguised herself as a stereotypical ‘suffragette’ – and was duly imprisoned.
Daily Life as suffragette supporter
[pic] But life as a suffragette was not all processions, marching and pageantry. It’s clear from a wide range of photographs that rank- and- file suffragettes came in all shapes and sizes and in daily life favoured a variety of ‘looks’. As I have noted, depending on the taste of the wearer, these ranged from the feminine and fancy, through the artistic, to the tailored. This range in style is reflected in the advertisements that appear in Votes for Women.
For instance, regular advertisers included Maud Barham, Artistic and original dresses, hand embroideries, djibbahs, coats and hats;
Amy Kotze, Artistic dresses and coats – for women and children – and Miss Folkard, Artistic dress and mantle maker. One woman who did favour the artistic look was prepared to make a sacrifice for the cause. On 2 November 1911 Alice Singer wrote in her diary that ‘I sold my Liberty smock to Vera Wentworth [she was another WSPU member]– proceeds 5/- to WSPU’
As for the tailored look, Alfred Day, ladies’ tailor, of Regent’s Park, was a regular advertiser, while the more conventional dresser was addressed by Madame Rebecca Gordon, court milliner and dressmaker.
This shop appealed directly to suffragettes in London to take part in the 1911 WSPU Coronation Procession
Major stores such as Debenham and Freebody, Whiteleys and Pontings clearly thought it worth their while to advertise a variety of styles – tying in their advertising to current suffragette activities – whether electioneering or processing. Other advertisers included Regal Corset Parlor, whose slogan was – at least in Votes for Women – ‘Support the Women’.
However, whatever style was favoured, the wearing of the colours in everyday life was the sign of a committed suffragette. One writer mentions that in her experience a white costume, green straw hat and purple scarf was a very appropriate outfit for a WSPU member. In another, perhaps fictional, diary, when the suffragette heroine is persuading someone who is becoming interested in the WSPU, but does not want to fight with policemen, she tells her that ‘Derry and Toms have charming hats in the colours – they are really most becoming’ – thereby suggesting that she could participate in the fight for the vote by merely wearing the correct hat.
Other suffragettes were prepared to make a very much more public display of themselves. Many elderly suffragettes have recorded how, as gently-brought up girls, selling Votes for Women in the street took considerable courage. In the above photo we see that Vera Wentworth (to whom, as I mentioned, Alice Singer sold her Liberty smock) is the centre of attention as she advertises a WSPU procession.
Prison
But, increasingly, being a suffragette required more than social courage – it also involved the risk of being sent to prison. Before arrest, confrontations with the police could lead to physical manhandling and for one notorious scrum in Parliament square in November 1910 women altered their usual attire by stuffing cardboard down their fronts – armour indeed.
Mrs Pankhurst in a mocked-up prison cell, in prison dress
Many suffragettes have left memories of their time in gaol. The clothes are particularly remembered. One wrote ‘We wore a uniform – a green dress, thick serge, a little white cap on one’s head, an apron of blue and white check cotton and a round disc the colour of wash leather which had a number.’ Others remembered that in the early years underclothing was patched, stained and foul smelling – a particular horror.
But they put their prison dress to good use. Replica costumes were run up and were worn when campaigning at by elections, for parades, to show solidarity when meeting released prisoners at Holloway or, as in the photo of Mrs Pankhurst (above), at bazaars.
In November 1911 members of the WSPU adopted a new tactic and organised a mass breaking of windows in the West End and Knightsbridge. It was now thought that conventional methods of campaigning had achieved nothing and that violence – of a sort – was the answer. They called it the argument of the broken glass. Kate Frye, who did not actually wield a hammer, wrote in her diary on 21 November 1911, ‘I went in to Lyons and had coffee and a sandwich. Who should I happen to sit next but Miss Ada Moore [a popular actress and suffragette] and 2 ladies – ready for the fray. I wonder I wasn’t arrested as one – for I soon realized I was dressed for the part to the life. Long cloth ulster or coat, light hat and veil was the correct costume – no bag purse – umbrella or any extra.’ Muffs were a fashionable accessory at the time and were useful for concealing the hammer used to smash the windows. Three months later some members of the Chelsea WSPU adapted their dress by sewing special pockets to hang down inside their skirts in which to conceal stones to throw at windows. The attack on the very stores of which they were the main customers began shortly before closing time.
Alice Singer wrote in her diary on 24 February 1912 – ‘Wrote to offer myself as window breaking for 4th March, if Mrs Pankhurst thinks I shan’t disgrace the Cause’. And on the 27th February wrote’ Walked about the Suburb [that is Hampstead Garden Suburb] trying to find someone to make me a new frock to wear when I return from Holloway Gaol’. That certainly demonstrates a certain insouciance.
Holloway brooch – as awarded to Alice Singer for her imprisonment. She did not go on hunger strike
Hunger-strike medal in its presentation box
But it was not only imprisonment that women were prepared to face. Many also adopted the hungerstrike. Women who had undergone imprisonment and forcible feeding received recognition from the WSPU. The Holloway badge was given for imprisonment – and the medal – a metal disc inscribed with name and date suspended from a military style ribbon – for those that went on hunger-strike. These were awarded with some ceremony. For instance, on 15 June 1912, after the sentences incurred by the window breakers had been served, Alice Singer wrote in her diary, ‘rousing meeting at Albert Hall. All the 1st and 4 March prisoners released to date marched in two specially reserved places. I wore my prison-gate brooch for first time.’ These decorations were very much treasured. I’ve already mentioned that Flora Drummond is wearing her hunger-strike medal in her portrait – and many of the other leaders – Mrs Pankhurst, Lady Constance Lytton, and Mary Gawthorpe are ones that come immediately to mind – made sure that when they are photographed their Holloway badge and/or hunger-strike medal is prominently displayed.
Suffragettes photographed in prison
Interestingly, for all the significance given to prison uniform, many of the women who were imprisoned and on hunger-strike in 1912 and later – were able to wear their own clothes. This was after the government had passed a rule allowing them special treatment. These photographs were taken in the exercise yard at Holloway by a hidden photographer. They were wanted by Scotland Yard to send out to museums, galleries and other likely sites of suffragette attack. The photographs are interesting as in them we can see what women of the period looked like when not dressed up for the camera. I imagine that they may not have been very useful in identifying likely attackers – as presumably when approaching a gallery or some such place the women would be rather more carefully dressed – and have regained some of their lost weight. Some WSPU members would allow nothing – not even prison – to interfere with their standards of dress. .Janie Allan, a wealthy Scot imprisoned in Holloway, was remembered as ‘always correctly dressed for Exercise in hat and lemon kid gloves’
Grace Roe, Christabel’s deputy, was arrested in 1914 – wearing this rather becoming tailored suit.
Mrs Pankhurst arrested outside Buckingham Palace, May 1914
Whereas Mrs Pankhurst, arrested a couple of months later while leading a violent protest outside Buckingham Palace, still retains something of her Parisian style. She took size 3½ in shoes – they look so dainty dangling there – belying all the crude postcard caricatures. In 1910 she had lost one in a scuffle with police – and it is now held by the Museum of London.
Christabel Pankhurst – relaxing in Paris
And it was to Paris that Christabel had escaped in March 1912 – just after the window-breaking campaign – to avoid arrest on a charge of criminal damage. She spent the final 2 and a half years of the campaign there – clearly very relaxed – while those who followed her militant policy were imprisoned and on hunger strike.
The WSPU campaign ended with the outbreak of war. It was the NUWSS, led by Millicent Fawcett, that in 1918 negotiated women – or at least women over 30 – to the ballot box – and to the opportunity of sitting in parliament.
So, to summarise, we have seen that the suffragettes did use dress as a weapon in their campaign. They were encouraged to dress in such a way as to define themselves as womanly – but united. To this end the WSPU attempted to impose its brand on its members – encouraging them to wear its merchandise and colours, both as they went about their daily life and when they took part in the society’s spectacular processions. The WSPU never sought to be at the avant-garde of fashion but the tailored look that became increasingly popular in the couple of years before the outbreak of war coincided with the increasingly physically-militant tactics of the suffragette campaign. Women could still be fashionable – and therefore womanly – yet present themselves in a more streamlined – less curvaceous – way than in the past. This more tailored silhouette echoed the increasingly masculine – physical force – argument that the WSPU was now professing.
I will end with an image we saw earlier – of the suffragette as a feminine warrior – a rather dainty Joan of Arc – as first depicted on the WSPU poster and here, to the right in the photograph, in the shape of a dress made by Leonora Cohen, a Leeds suffragette, to wear in 1914 to the Leeds Arts Club Ball. The paper designs, presumably cut from the poster, are pasted on the dress which is made of turquoise rayon. The dress, now preserved in Leeds City Museum, recently conserved – and rather more sophisticatedly displayed – is testament to the willingness of at least one suffragette to clothe herself in her cause.
This blog is based on a talk that I gave to the Costume Society in 2010.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement
60 (on the right) and 62 Nelson Street, Manchester – The Pankhurst Centre
I hope those acquainted with my website will also be aware of the existence of the Pankhurst Centre in Manchester. If so, you will know that the Centre comprises two houses, 60 and 62 Nelson Street, the only buildings from the original early 19th-century street still standing, surrounded by the ever-expanding complex of Manchester Royal Infirmary. That the adjoining villas, built c 1840, are still there is due only to the fact that it was at number 62 in October 1903 that Mrs Emmeline Pankhurst founded the Women’s Social and Political Union. The buildings were listed Grade 2* in 1974 to save them from demolition.
Mrs Emmeline Pankhurst and her children, Christabel, Sylvia, Adela, and Harry moved into 62 Nelson Street, Chorlton-on-Medlock, Manchester, in the autumn of 1898. Her husband, Dr Richard Pankhurst, had died in the summer, on 5 July, leaving very little money, and his family was forced to economise by moving from their home, 4 Buckingham Crescent, Daisy Bank Road, Victoria Park, into a property cheaper to rent.
Mrs Pankhurst could have moved to any area of Manchester, so why was 62 Nelson Street chosen as the new family home?
In 1894 Mrs Pankhurst had been elected to the Chorlton Board of Guardians as a Poor Law Guardian, an unpaid position. Now, in the summer of 1898, she had to earn enough to support herself and her family and so on 30 August she resigned and, instead, accepted the offer made by the Board of Guardians of the post of salaried registrar of births, marriages, and deaths for Chorlton-on-Medlock.
Chorlton had been urbanized in the early 19th c, when streets of terraced houses were built to house the workers required to operate the large mills newly erected alongside the River Irwell. It was an area very much less salubrious than Victoria Park, but Nelson Street, off Oxford Road, was more refined than most surrounding streets. It was also a street that was well-known to the two eldest Pankhurst daughters.
I have never seen any mention in Pankhurst biographies and autobiographies of this apparent coincidence, but it was at number 60 that Christabel and, I think, Sylvia, had been regular visitors, students at the dancing school run by Mrs W. Webster and her brother. Although the name of the dance teachers does appear in Sylvia Pankhurst’s The Suffragette Movement, she makes no mention of the school’s address. Sylvia wrote:
‘We learned dancing from the Websters, an old dancing family in Manchester, and Christabel, who hitherto had never cared much or long for anything, roused herself to unexpected efforts to excel everyone in the class’. Sylvia suggests that Christabel, whom her mother intended should be a dancer, had taken lessons for several years before becoming ‘suddenly tired of the project’ around the time she was 16, that is in 1896.
In the years between 1890 and 1896 the dancing academy was run by Mrs W. Webster and her brother. Until his early death in 1890 the dancing master had been William Hilton Webster and the school had then been continued by his widow. She was Ellen Marianne Webster (née Goodman), who had been a cousin to her husband. For reasons that are unclear, her brother, Archie, changed his name from Goodman to Webster, perhaps to capitalize on the ‘Webster’ name, which, as Sylvia suggests, had long been synonymous in Manchester with ‘dance’, as William Hilton Webster’s father had been a dance teacher there from the 1870s. William Webster had moved to 60 Nelson Street in 1884, taking over the premises and goodwill of another dancing master, ‘Monsieur Paris’.
Christabel would have been taught by either or both Ellen and Archie Webster. The lessons offered were not for ballet dancing, but general classes for ballroom dancing and private classes for waltz, skirt,and serpentine dancing. Although I have no evidence, it strikes me that it must have been the latter types of semi-burlesque dance that, according to Sylvia, Mrs Pankhurst hoped Christabel would – as’ a professional devotee of Terpsichore’ – perform in the great cities of the world. A studio photograph of Christabel posed, with pointed foot, holding up with both hands material from her long, flowing dress, is exactly illustrative of a skirt dance. It was taken in Geneva in the summer of 1898 and is reproduced in June Purvis’ biography of Christabel.
Widowed Ellen Webster had four young children, two boys and two girls, and in 1893 remarried, her second husband being Charles Joseph Rourke, a cotton waste merchant. It was presumably during the next couple of years or so that Christabel and, perhaps, Sylvia were attending classes. They may still have been doing so when, in October 1895, 60 Nelson Street hit the headlines in newspapers around the country. Ellen Webster had committed suicide, murdering the elder of her sons at the same time. She had poisoned herself and both sons, but the younger recovered. Her daughters were at a boarding school in Sale, Cheshire, and although she had sent a servant to bring them home, apparently with the idea of killing them as well, their arrival was delayed, and they were saved. The inquest returned a verdict of murder and suicide, due to temporary insanity. The funeral of poor Ellen Webster and her son was held at St Aloysius Church, Ardwick, where she had been married a couple of years earlier.
Thus, in 1898, when Emmeline Pankhurst was looking for a house to rent, she would have been well acquainted with Nelson Street, not only as the address of the dancing school that her daughters had attended but as the site of a very recent Manchester tragedy.
Concert at Schiller Anstalt Institute, 1895 (courtesy of Manchester Central Library Collection)
Besides the dancing school Nelson Street contained another cultural centre at number 66 – the Schiller Anstalt Institute – a centre for the large Manchester German community. The Institute was housed in a building that had been converted from domestic use in 1886 and now offered a concert hall and gymnasium, holding a regular programme of lectures and musical activities [For more information about the Institute see here.] The Institute did not close until 1911 and it may well be that, as it was so close by, members of the Pankhurst family did occasionally attend an event there.
Between number 62 Nelson Street and the Schiller Anstalt Institute, number 64 was a large, detached house, once the home of a mayor of Manchester, but now, known as Nelson House, run as a private nursing home. This may explain why, when, previously, number 62 had been advertised for rent it was deemed ‘suitable for a medical man’.
Number 62 was described as offering ‘Three entertaining rooms, five bedrooms, dressing room, bath, w.c. and well-appointed domestic offices’, large enough for Emmeline to devote one room (presumably one of the ‘entertaining rooms’), as her registry office. The bedrooms were under pressure on the night of the 1901 census, for sleeping in the house were Emmeline and her four children, together with her two brothers, Walter and Herbert Goulden, the latter’s son, and the family’s two servants, the cook, Ellen Coyle (of whom Sylvia speaks very fondly) and Mary Leaver, the housemaid. I imagine that the Pankhurst children were made to share rooms, but presumably that was unusual and, now ranging in age from 20 to 11, they normally had a little more space to themselves. It’s difficult to imagine Christabel and Sylvia being happy to share, but doubtless on occasion they were forced to.
The situation only eased in the autumn 1904. Mrs Pankhurst placed an advertisement in the Daily News, ’Wanted, for art student. One or two Rooms, furnished or unfurnished. Near South Kensington Museum. Terms Moderate.’ The reply address was ‘Pankhurst, 62 Nelson Street, Manchester.’ Sylvia was off to London, to study at the Royal College of Art, freeing up a bed in the family home.
In October 1907 advertisements for 62 Nelson Street once more appeared in the press, in the Manchester Courier, indicating that the house was again to let. Emmeline Pankhurst, who had formed the Women’s Social and Political Union in the kitchen just four years earlier, had already left for London to join her daughters, Sylvia and Christabel, who had brought the fight for the vote to the capital.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement
Vera Holme, Mrs Pankhurst’s subsequent chauffeur, is behind the wheel in this photograph. But I think this is the car in which Aileen Preston drove Mrs Pankhurst in 1911
Aileen Chevallier Preston was born in 1889 in co. Armagh, one of the 6 children of John Preston, who had been a captain in 4th Royal Irish Rifles, and his wife Edith (nee Chevallier), whose family lived at Aspall Hall, Debenham, Suffolk. Of her 5 siblings, two of her brothers died in childhood and a sister in 1905. Her father was for some years the resident magistrate in Athlone, co. Westmeath, before his death in 1907. In 1903 Mrs Edith Preston, was the Irish Ladies Croquet Champion, in 1906 won the UK Ladies’ Croquet Championship, and as late as 1915 was the holder of the Ladies’Championship at her local club, Roehampton.
After the death of Capt. Preston his widow, Aileen and her brother and sister moved to England and by 1911 were living at 11 Kew Gardens Road, Richmond. As head of the household Mrs Preston did complete the 1911 census form but wrote ‘Unenfranchised’ in the ‘Infirmity’ column against the entry for each female member, including the three young servants. Although we do not know whether Aileen Preston and her mother were at this time active members of any suffrage society, this amendment to the census form makes their attitude to women’s right to the vote quite evident.
As noted, Aileen’s mother was most definitely ‘sporty’, a star of the ladies’ croquet world; Aileen’s game was golf. I suspect that Mrs Preston encouraged a practical bent in her children. In 1914 Aileen’s younger brother was training as a civil engineer while, as she later explained in an interview in Votes for Women, she, too, had always taken an interest in machinery. In a delightful BBC radio interview (listen here), recorded in 1962, she explained how, to much derision, she entered a motor works in order to learn all about the workings of the internal combustion engine and the maintenance of a vehicle. It was only after she had acquired this knowledge that she took driving lessons, becoming the first woman to gain a Royal Automobile Certificate.
Now fully qualified, she placed an advertisement in the Morning Post, offering her services as a ‘Lady Chaffeuse’. The most appealing response came from’Mrs Pankhurst’s secretary (probably Mrs Mabel Tuke) and, after an interview, Aileen was hired to drive Mrs Pankhurst around the British Isles on a five-month-long campaign.
Although her mother was, as we have seen, in favour of ‘Votes for Women’, Aileen later remembered that ‘My family were livid. They thought I was going straight into the dark arms of Hell – to be going to that dreadful woman, as her chauffeur. It was an awful blow, but I thought it was the most wonderful job. At a pound a week it was wealth’ [From Raeburn, The Militant Suffragettes]. In the radio interview Aileen mentioned that the pay was ‘all found’, so presumably she had her board-and-keep while on the road, as well as the £1 a week.
Her engagement began in April 1911, probably just after the Census. The WSPU had promised to put a hold on militant action in the run-up to discussion in Parliament of the Conciliation Bill; Mrs Pankhurst was using the time to spread the suffrage message throughout the country. in the radio interview Aileen gives a wonderful description of driving Mrs Pankhurst and her associates, together vast quantities of ‘literature’, over the un-tarmacked roads of Britain during that long, very hot summer. She tells just what it was like driving that car up and over the Kirkstall Pass.
For Aileen was driving a large, heavy Wolseley, given to the WSPU by Mary Dodge, an ardent suffrage supporter and heir to a US copper mining fortune. A ‘lady chauffeuse’ was every bit as responsible as a chauffeur for the very necessary running repairs and it was nothing to experience several punctures during the course of a day. There was always the danger that the low-slung petrol tank would rupture, caught by a stone on the rustic roads and, with the brakes working directly onto the tyres, there was always the danger of a blow-out while driving down a steep hill. Garages were few and far between; the ‘lady chauffeuse’ had to be resourceful, with nerves of steel.
Sometime after her engagement ended, Aileen Preston set up her own motor school. However, she maintained her link to the WSPU, and was the subject of an article in the 26 September 1913 issue of Votes for Women in which she mentioned that when setting out on her career she had had to overcome a good many difficulties and prejudices. It was for this reason that she thought other women would benefit from learning to drive and maintain a car at a school owned by a woman.
The school was based in St Mary Abbott’s Place, Kensington and, although giving lessons to what she termed ‘amateurs’ , Aileen was particularly keen to take pupils who wanted to take up motoring as a profession. As she told Votes for Women ‘The modern girl is admirable suited for the life, and as a chauffeur should receive a salary of 30s to £2 a week – the same, of course, as that paid to a man,’ She advertised regularly in Votes for Women and Common Cause through 1913 and 1914, until the outbreak of war. Business was so good that she took a partner, a Miss Carver.
Aileen joined the Voluntary Aid Detachment and served from 23 October 1914 until 23 April 1915. She married John Graham-Jones (1880-1946), an army doctor, in July 1915 and was again advertising her motor school around this time. However from 25 April 1916 to 19 September 1916, she rejoined the VAD, hired as a ‘Chauffeuse”. She was put in charge of the first autonomous women’s ambulance unit, based at a hospital in northern France, in charge of 13 women drivers, and was mentioned in despatches.
Aileen’s daughter was born in July 1917 and a son in 1920. By 1939 she and her husband, now retired, were living at Lower Bockhampton, Dorset, and she was a member of the Dorchester ARP. She must have maintained contact with other erstwhile suffragettes and was interviewed by Antonia Raeburn for her book, The Militant Suffragettes (1973)
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement
I recently noticed that the London Metropolitan Archives has launched a new database – Switching the Lens – Rediscovering Londoners of African, Caribbean, Asian and Indigenous Heritage, 1561 to 1840. This is an aspect of history that captured my imagination some time ago [see, for instance, Suffrage Stories: Black And Minority Ethnic Women: Is There A ‘Hidden History’?] and I was interested to see whether this new database would make the uncovering of individual histories any more possible. Through the centuries there have always been some men and women of BAME heritage living in Britain whose lives have, for one reason or another, been recorded in some degree of detail; the great majority, however, have hitherto remained untraceable.
The database has its inherent limitation in that the 2600 names listed are drawn, over a period of nearly three centuries, from Anglican parish registers. As such it deals only with those who were baptised, married or buried in a parish church in the London area. Nevertheless it contains a wealth of information.
Because I was particularly keen to see if information available on Switching the Lens could be amplified by that already held on genealogical sites such as Ancestry and Findmypast, I concentrating on reading entries in the later period covered by the database, running from 1801-1850. Would it be possible to follow up the lives of any of those people on the Switching the Lens database by, for instance, finding them on the census (from 1841) or identifying them on other national registers?
At a first glance the answer, briefly, is probably not. In general, names are too common or the information is too scanty for it to be possible to identify individuals with any certainty in later official registers. But that is only my finding after a cursory scan. It may well be that keen application will bear fruit. And I shall certainly take a closer look.
However, I have had some success and the following posts are based on entries found in the Switching the Lens database. It is such a pleasure to uncover the lives of these individuals, all, so far, of mixed African or Indian heritage, and try to see them in the context of their times.
Copyright All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
It has been my Lockdown pleasure to write more forewords to novels reissued by Dean Street Press under the Furrowed Middlebrow imprint. The following 11 novels (6 by Margery Sharp and 5 by Stella Gibbons) were all released in January 2021. It was blissful escapism to read them all, delve into the lives of the authors, and demonstrate how elements in the novels related to Real Life.
When I began selling books by women, it was just these titles that I searched for in bookshops around the country. Isn’t it odd how life works out?
Here are the delicious Dean Street Press covers. Full details of all Furrowed Middlebrow titles can be found here.
Original page containing the baptismal entry for William Antonio, 17 March 1833
I recently noticed that the London Metropolitan Archives has launched a new database – Switching the Lens – Rediscovering Londoners of African, Caribbean, Asian and Indigenous Heritage, 1561 to 1840. This is an aspect of history that captured my imagination some time ago [ see, for instance, Suffrage Stories: Black And Minority Ethnic Women: Is There A ‘Hidden History’?] and I was interested to see whether this new database would make the uncovering of individual histories any more possible. Through the centuries there have always been some men and women of BAME heritage living in Britain whose lives have, for one reason or another, been recorded in some degree of detail; the great majority, however, have hitherto remained untraceable. I gave details of the Switching the Lens website in my previous post and can now tell something of another life I encountered there, represented by a single entry in the database.
This image at the head of this post is, in fact, the first record of William Antonio’s baptismal entry in the register of St Peter’s Church, Regent Square, in the northern section of Bloomsbury, London. For whatever reason, the whole page was amended and in the process the entry for William Antonio was slightly altered.
Amended page containing the baptismal entry for William Antonio, 17 March 1833
As you’ll notice, the original entry described William Antonio as ‘a slave’. That epithet was removed when the entry was finalised, although I doubt that was the reason for the page being rewritten.
At the time of his baptism William, who was born of unknown parents in Africa, though where we do not know, was reckoned to be about 27 years old, indicating a birth c. 1806. His age and, of course, that date varied a little in the censuses taken over subsequent years and when he died in 1868 his birth date was estimated as 1808.
As you will see, at the time of his baptism William Antonio was living as a servant in a house in Wellington Square, now demolished but then very close to the church in Regent Square. Although we don’t know for which family he was then working, in 1841 he can be found on the census as the only live-in manservant in the home of James Fordati in Upper Bedford Place, Bloomsbury. In the years between his baptism and the 1841 census he had married ,the wedding having taken place in 1834 at St Giles in the Fields. The bride was a widow, Mary McDonald, and the marriage register reveals that neither party could write. However, by the time of the next census in 1851 William Antonio is now a widower, although I cannot find a record of the death of his wife.
It would seem that for at least some of his marriage William Antonio lived in the home of his master and, presumably, his wife lived elsewhere as she is not recorded in the 1841 census for the Fordati household, However, the 1841 census gives no indication of marital status and it could, of course, be that she was already dead. James Fordati was a general merchant living, with his young family, in a Bloomsbury town house, close to Russell Square.
By 1851 William Antonio had moved households. On census night, however, he was not in post but was a visitor in the home of Robert Whurl, a tailor, at 2 Colbridge Place, which appears to have been a section of Westbourne Park Road, Paddington. William Antonio is described as a widower, aged 34, born in Africa, and by occupation a butler. My supposition is that he may at this time been butler in the household of Anselmo de Arroyave, a merchant living at ‘7 Palace Gardens, Paddington’, now known as 7 Kensington Palace Gardens. For, although on census night a manservant and a page were present in that house, no butler is recorded. It was most definitely a household that would require the services of a butler and my deduction is that this merely happened to be William’s night off.
I am making the suggestion that William Antonio was by 1851 a member of de Arroyave’s household based on a reading of his will, dated 21 September 1868, four days before his death. By this document William Antonio left a number of items he prized to Anselmo de Arroyave, his ‘old master’, and other members of the family. This, I feel, indicates a very close association with this particular family over a considerable period of time.
So, to recap, we know that in 1841 William Antonio was a manservant in a merchant’s household in Upper Bedford Place and that by 1851 his position had been elevated to ‘butler’, probably to the de Arroyave family. I know that in 1843 the de Arroyaves were living in Tavistock Square, Bloomsbury, and my guess is that it was around this time that William Antonio changed masters. I feel it would have been unlikely that he would otherwise have looked for a new situation outside the area of London with which he had, for at least ten years, been familiar.
6/7 Kensington Palace Gardens
The de Arroyaves moved to 7 Palace Gardens in 1847, as the first occupiers of the grand, stuccoed house that is now part of the Russian Embassy. And then in 1852/4 de Arroyave built 9 Palace Garden, a similarly imposing pile, into which the family moved. A butler would have played a very important part in running a house such as this; William Antonio was clearly a man o’parts. It might have been fashionable for an owner of a grand London house to employ a black page or footman, considering them a decorative asset, but I’m sure a butler would only have been appointed on his merits.
But it is clear that, however well-positioned he was as a butler in a wealthy household, William Antonio had a dream of becoming independent. For by 1861 he had left a life ‘in service’ and set himself up. the census tells us, as a ‘bath chairman’. He had moved only a very short walk away from Palace Gardens and was now living at 10 Royal Hill, the name then of the southernmost stretch of Queensway, leading down to Bayswater Road. William Antonio was now a lodger in the home of Charles Pendal (sometimes spelled Pendall), a trunk maker, and his wife, Matilda. He had, presumably, saved sufficient money to purchase at least one bath chair, offering his services to those sufficiently incapacitated as to require some vehicular assistance.
A 19th-century bath chair
William Antonio had picked a good position from which to carry out his new business – situated as he was just across the road from Kensington Gardens. One can imagine that a bath chairman would be much in demand with invalids (so plentiful in the mid-19th century) wishing to take a breath of fresh Kensington air. In fact, his business did prosper, enabling him to purchase a second bath chair and, presumably, employ another man as a chair pusher.
Until a few days before his death we know no more of William Antonio, other than at some point after 1861 he moved to 85 Moscow Road, a few minutes walk away from Kensington Gardens. The house was multi-tenanted and it is doubtful that he occupied more than one room. He did, however, value his few possessions and took great care, on his deathbed, to apportion them to those he esteemed.
The first few lines of his will deal with items he is leaving to members of the de Arroyave family. Just to give a little background: Anselmo de Arroyave (1778-1869) was a merchant, born in Spain and naturalised in Britain in 1833. By his second marriage (his first wife had died young) he had four daughters who survived infancy. One incident in his long life is particularly apposite in connection to William Antonio’s circumstances for in 1843 de Arroyave was one of several character witnesses for the defendant in the trial at the Old Bailey of another Spanish-born British merchant, Pedro de Zulueta, who was charged with slave-trading. Zulueta was, in the event, acquitted, but there was a general feeling that this was only because of the difficulty of proving his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. And the doubt seems to have most certainly been there in the minds of anti-slavery campaigners, such as Thomas Clarkson, who cross-examined de Arroyave as to the extent and nature of his support for Zulueta.
But, whatever the rights or wrongs of that trial, there is no doubt that de Arroyave was held in considerable regard by his one-time butler, himself a former slave. For in his will William Antonio left de Arroyave ‘my watch and appendages’ and to Mrs de Arroyave ‘one of my Bath Chairs’. To the former Inez de Arroyave, now Mrs Travers, the youngest daughter of the family, he left ‘one gold pin’, to Major Puget, the husband of another daughter, Florence, he left ‘one gold pin and two scarves‘, and to another daughter, Georgiana, he left a ‘silk umbrella’. I do hope these bequests were received in the spirit in which they were given. William Antonio’s estate was valued at under £100; when Anselmo de Arroyave died the following year he left the equivalent of £2 million.
William Antonio itemised many other of his possessions, for instance leaving his ‘pictures, window blind and wash stand’ to ‘Mr Casey’, who I think must be Henry Casey, gas fitter, who in 1871 was living at 85 Moscow Road. The executor of the will was William Jackson, a watchmaker, who lived at 2 Queens Road (that is, Queensway), and to him was left £10 and a ‘frock coat and plaid scarf‘, and to his daughter, ‘the cane armchair’. Other names are mentioned, but they are either too common or else the legal hand has rendered them too illegible for me to be able to identify them with any certainty. After all the bequests, William Antonio asked one of the women mentioned ‘to dispose of [the residue] in charitable purposes’. By the tone of the will it would appear that William Antonio took a quiet satisfaction in remembering his friends and patrons. The will, signed only with his mark, as he obviously never did learn to write, is a testament to the life of a survivor, a man who emerged out of slavery and then out of ‘service’ to lead an independent life.
Copyright All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
In my previous post, ‘Discovering Elizabeth Purves’, I described something of the life of the Anglo-Indian daughter of Richardson Purves, who, c. 1806, having made his fortune in India, had brought her with him when he returned to England. While undertaking this research I was intrigued to discover that he had left behind at his indigo plantation in Tirhoot a man named John Purves, who had been listed in the New East India Kalendars for 1801 and 1804 as being in his employ. I thought it might be interesting to see what I could find about this branch of the Purves family, for it really would be too extraordinary if John Purves, who records show had arrived in India in 1797 specifically to assist Richardson Purves at Tirhoot, were not related to him in some way.
What I do know is that John Purves did remain in Tirhoot as an indigo planter, dying there in 1820. In the accounts drawn up after his death there is note of a payment to be made to ‘Bebee Razoo’, ‘bebee’ or ‘bibi’ being the term for an indigenous female companion/mistress. This is the only entry for a payment to an Indian woman. As I noted in my previous post, the name of Elizabeth Purves’ mother was rendered on the entry in the St Giles Cripplegate baptismal register as ‘Rajoo’. I did just wonder if that could have been a mis-transcription and perhaps the name should have been ‘Razoo’ (the name in John Purves’ accounts is written with a long tail to the ‘z’). That is, could the woman who appears as a payee in the 1820 accounts of John Purves be the mother of Elizabeth, the payment an indication of long-term maintenance ? Or, after Richardson’s departure, could she have then become the ‘bebee’ of John Purves? Or was she, perhaps, ‘bebee’ to John Purves, but an entirely different woman? Well, as usual with these attempts to peer behind the curtain that separates us from a different time and a different culture, who knows?
However, digging into the digitized India Office records I did find further evidence of the continuing existence of members of the Purves family in Bengal. For there is an entry for the baptism in 1825 of Mary, ‘daughter of John Purves, indigo planter, and a native mother’. There is no other mention at this time in the records of any John Purves other than the indigo planter at Tirhoot and I think it is safe to assume that the father of Mary is the man who was in the employ of Richardson Purves twenty years earlier.
John Purves died intestate so an inventory of his goods, as compiled for auction after his death, is the only surviving record of his life, providing a fascinating insight into the goods with which an indigo planter was surrounded. His extensive library, in particular, interested me. How did one amuse oneself in Tirhoot in the first decades of the 19th c? Why, by reading the Spectator, Edinburgh Review, Blackstone’s Commentaries, Smollett’s Works, Godwin’s Political Justice, Sporting Magazine, Debrett’s Peerage, Poems of Ossian, Smith’s Wealth of the Nations, Swift’s works, Farley’s Cookery etc etc – and numerous Voyages, Gazetteers and atlases. The household inventory does not, however, make any reference to Mary or any other child.
Seven years later the accounts drawn up, in a similar fashion, after the death of another Tirhoot indigo planter, Edward Egerton, do reveal something further about members of the Purves Indian diaspora. The first thing to note is that an 1829 announcement in the London Gazette discloses that one of the two men nominated as Egerton’s next-of-kin was his uncle ‘in England’, Richardson Purves. And, secondly, Edward Egerton’s accounts mention sums paid for the board and tuition of Miss Mary Purves, Mr William Purves, Mr James Egerton, and Miss Fanny Egerton. Extrapolation leads me to surmise that Edward Egerton was a relation of the late John Purves and, since his death, had been charged with care of his children.
I have explained that I’m pretty certain of the parentage of Mary Purves, who must have been born sometime before the death of John Purves in 1820, but what of William Purves? I can find no record of his birth or baptism but from the record of his death at Allahabad in 1870 I think we was born c 1812/1813 and, because he is recorded in Egerton’s accounts alongside Mary Purves, I cannot help thinking he must be her brother, another child of John Purves and ‘a native mother’. There is no record of John Purves having been married to a European woman.
Edward Egerton’s accounts reveal that in the early months of 1828 Mary Purves and Fanny Egerton received board and tuition from a Mrs M. Moore, but that, after November 1828, their care was transferred to Theophilus Reichardt. A little research showed that he was the Rev Reichardt, who had been born in Wurttemberg, trained in Basle, and had arrived in Calcutta in 1822 as a missionary under the aegis of the Church Missionary Society for India and the East. This was the society to which Richardson Purves and his family were generous donors. However, just at the time when he undertook the tuition of Mary and Fanny, Reichardt had left the Mission after a disagreement. He and his wife had then, as his obituary in the Calcutta Christian Observer (1836) reported, ‘entered upon the conduct of a seminary for young ladies in the city [Calcutta] where ‘he spared no toil, no pains, no watchfulness, to promote the improvement and comfort of his young charges’. I was pleased to note that the obituarist particularly mentions that ‘his was no stinted board at which his pupils fed sparingly’. Reichardt clearly remained close to Fanny Egerton for in the records of her marriage in Calcutta Cathedral in 1835 he stood as her ‘Next Friend’.
In 1840 Mary Purves married Richard Thaddeus Rutter and had two daughters – Mary, 1844, and Ellen, 1848. James Egerton was born in 1821, the son of James Egerton, an indigo planter. This information comes from his baptismal record, a ceremony he undertook late in life, in 1862. For this record he chose to give his father’s name, but not his mother’s. I think this indicates that he was certainly illegitimate and I am assuming that, therefore, his mother was Indian. I can find no trace of Fanny Egerton’s birth or baptism, but suspect she was sister to James. Her husband, Edmund Watterton Johnson, died in 1839. She had one son, born in 1837 and named for his father. She never remarried and died in 1872.
Edward Egerton’s accounts show that c.1828 young William Purves and James Egerton were receiving board and tuition from ‘Messrs Drummond and Wilson’. David Drummond was a Scotsman whose Calcutta school, Dhurmotollah Academy, offered the best English education, open to both European and mixed-race boys. Equipped with this excellent education William Purves entered government service, rising to become Registrar of the Board of Revenue in Allahabad. He married Harriette Ereth and had a numerous family, among whom the names ‘Richardson’ and ‘Egerton’ are threaded. One son, Robert Egerton Purves (1859-1943) became a renowned hydraulic engineer in the Punjab. I suspect that an effort was made to eliminate knowledge of an Indian ancestor; in his ‘Who’s Who’ entry Robert Egerton Purves merely described his parentage as ‘European’. He retired to England in the mid-1920s, bringing his family ‘home’ and ending an involvement with India that had lasted c 120 years. Although accompanied by children, unlike Richardson Purves he had made no fortune.
I daresay this post seems a little pointless, a good deal being, if not guesswork, then informed conjecture. But I have found the research instructive; on the way I’ve read something about the place of indigo in the 18th and 19thc Indian economy, the way in which the indigo factories were managed, and gleaned something of the position of those then known as ‘Eurasians’ and now as ‘Anglo-Indians’. Although I have absolute proof of the mixed parentage of Mary Purves, I cannot be sure of that of William Purves, or of Fanny and James Egerton. But it has been interesting attempting to unravel the truth. I wonder if Elizabeth Purves, an illegitimate Anglo-Indian living in England, knew anything of relations in India? There is a fascination about lives lived on the cusp of two civilisations.
Copyright All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
If you are interested in taking either a real or a virtual London ‘Suffragette Walk’, particularly around the Holborn/Strand area, you might find the following posts of interest.
Lincoln’s Inn House 2013, former headquarters of the WSPU
Baptism of Elizabeth Purves at St Giles, Cripplegate, on 28 August 1807.
I recently noticed that the London Metropolitan Archives has launched a new database – Switching the Lens – Rediscovering Londoners of African, Caribbean, Asian and Indigenous Heritage, 1561 to 1840. This is an aspect of history that captured my imagination some time ago [ see, for instance, Suffrage Stories: Black And Minority Ethnic Women: Is There A ‘Hidden History’?] and I was interested to see whether this new database would make the uncovering of individual histories any more possible. Through the centuries there have always been some men and women of BAME heritage living in Britain whose lives have, for one reason or another, been recorded in some degree of detail; the great majority, however, have hitherto remained untraceable. I gave details of the Switching the Lens website in my previous post and can now tell something of another life I encountered there, represented by a single entry in the database.
This entry in the St Giles baptism register tells us that Elizabeth Purves, born on 19 October 1799, was the daughter of ‘Richardson Purves, Merchant, and Rajoo, a Native of Hindostan’. But what is her story?
Richardson Purves, born c1764, perhaps in Scotland, was by 1789 an employee of the East India Company working in Bengal. By 1797 he was overseeing the Company’s indigo works at Patnah (now Patna, capital of Bihar province). Indigo was a very lucrative product and by 1801 Purves had established himself as an indigo planter at Tirhoot (450km from Patna). He remained there until about 1806 but then ‘retired to England with a considerable fortune derived from the indigo manufacturies’ (as quoted in a footnote in Singh, History of Tirhoot, 1922).
A view from ‘Middleton’s Complete System of Geography’, 1779
So it was as a nabob that, after c 17 years in the East, Purves returned, accompanied not only by a fortune but also by a 7-year-old daughter, Elizabeth. We know nothing of her mother other than the one name ‘Rajoo’, which was probably her surname. As in the case of Africa-born Eliza Herbert, we don’t know for certain whether Elizabeth Purves’ mother had died, or whether, when the child’s father decided to return to England, she had felt compelled to part with her daughter. However, in such cases it is obvious that the contest was unequal; the wealthy European father held all the cards. In my next post I will attempt to shine a tiny glimmer of light on the situation, over two hundred years ago, at Tirhoot after the departure of Richardson Purves. But I think it is incontestable, and is as poignant now as then, that Elizabeth was old enough when she sailed from India to carry with her clear memories of her mother, whom she would never again see.
It would appear that Richardson Purves was a diligent father, wasting little time after his arrival in England in arranging the baptism of his daughter. She could, of course, have been baptised in India but, for whatever reason, he had waited until the ceremony could be conducted in London. Because I have been unable to uncover reliable details of his parentage I cannot guess why he chose ‘Elizabeth’ as her name. It would have been interesting to know if it was a family name, his mother’s perhaps.
Three years later, on 24 October 1808, Richardson Purves married Jane Hyde (1781-1853) in St Margaret Pattens, Eastcheap. At the time he was a resident in the parish of St James, Clerkenwell, and it is to be presumed that young Elizabeth had been living with him since their return from India. Richardson Purves proceeded to father two legitimate daughters, Jane in 1810 and Frances in 1813. The latter was born in the family’s town house in Bedford Place, Bloomsbury, they moved later to Harley Street. With his Indian fortune Richardson Purves had also purchased a large estate, Sunbury Place, at Sunbury-on-Thames. That house, now known as Sunbury Court, still stands, owned for the last 100 years by the Salvation Army.
Sunbury Place, shortly before it was bought by Richardson Purves (courtesy of Victoria and Albert Museum)
There were, of course, no censuses during the first third of the 19th century to give us proof that Elizabeth Purves was living with the rest of the family, but I believe she was. She certainly acted in concert with the other members, included, along with Mrs Jane Purves, Miss Jane Purves, and Miss Frances Purves, as a generous donor to a number of worthy causes, such as the Anti-Slavery Reporter (1831), to which she gave a two-year donation of four guineas, and to the Church Missionary Society to Africa and the East.
In 1841, when the first census was taken, Elizabeth Purves is listed at home with the rest of the family in their Harley Street house. However, when, in 1848, Richardson Purves died he made no mention of Elizabeth in his will, while going to considerable lengths to settle money on the unmarried daughters of another family, the Boldings. I have been unable to establish why this was but there must have been some underlying family or business connection that resists my attempts to tease it out. Provision must have been made for Elizabeth Purves in some arrangement that lay outside the terms of her father’s will because there is no suggestion whatsoever of anything other than that she was a completely integrated member of his family. When the 1851 census was taken Elizabeth is a ‘visitor’ at Sunbury Place, living there with the two Janes, her stepmother and half-sister. But yet again, when the senior Jane Purves died in 1853 there is no mention of Elizabeth in her will.
The mid-1850s saw the marriages of both Purves half-sisters. They were now in their mid-fifties and I had wondered if illegitimacy and her Indian heritage had hindered Elizabeth’s marriage prospects – but Jane, too, despite what I know to be her sizeable inheritance, had, for whatever reason, not married before now. Thus, on 4 July 1855 Jane Purves married a widower, Alexander Beattie, and on 31 July 1856 Elizabeth Purves married John Parker Bolding, widower of Mary* (nee Richardson). Mary’s brother, William Richardson, was the husband of Eleanor, John Bolding’s sister, at whose wedding Richardson Purves had been a witness. It is obvious that the Bolding, Richardson, and Purves families (very much including Elizabeth) had been closely entwined over a period of many years.
Elizabeth Purves was married in the parish church at Tunbridge Wells, the witnesses being Elizabeth Bolding (John’s sister) and Sidney Roper Curzon. Both Elizabeth Bolding and the Beatties lived in Tunbridge Wells, Elizabeth Bolding at Osborne House and the Beatties at Sunbury Place (presumably named in honour of Jane’s former home) and it was presumably with one or the other that Elizabeth Purves was staying at the time of her marriage. The Hon Sidney Roper Curzon, son of the 14th Baron Teynham, was the husband of the bride’s half-sister, Frances. I imagine that Richardson Purves, the nabob, was gratified that one of his daughters had married into the aristocracy, albeit into its lower echelons.
John Parker Bolding was a solicitor and the couple, with his three young children, lived for a time in Croydon, in a house named ‘Eversholt Lodge’. Eversholt in Bedfordshire was the parish in which John Bolding had been born and where his father had held an estate [see here for more about the Bolding family]. They later moved to 3 Bromfield Gardens, Richmond where, in 1888, John Parker Bolding died.
Sometime after Elizabeth moved to a house in Cambridge Road, Norbiton, a few minutes’ walk from the home, ‘Norbiton Place, London Road, of her widowed half-sister Frances. Elizabeth, supported by a cook and a parlour maid, lived alone, dying there in 1898. She left over £14,000, her executors being her stepson and the two stepsons of her half-sister Jane. Frances when she died shortly after, left only something over £200. Aristocratic connections had presumably proved expensive.
It was not, perhaps, unusual for a man in Richardson Purves’ position to choose to bring his child by an Indian woman back to England, but it would appear that the great majority of the offspring of such relationships did remain in India after the father’s departure. Moreover, a brief survey of the literature available to me (during a period when I cannot access a library) leads me to the conclusion that Elizabeth Purves was more fully integrated into her father’s subsequent family than many other mixed-race children. (See, for instance, here). This could have been a factor of wealth – Richardson Purves could certainly afford to support his illegitimate daughter – but it also must have been a matter of temperament.
Although Richardson Purves made his fortune in India and then returned ‘home’, there were certainly members of the East India Company connected to him wo continued to live and work in India in the second half of the 19th century and early years of the 20th. I wonder if Elizabeth Purves knew anything about them? I will do what I can in my next blog to follow the shadows they have cast, as revealed in documents created in India in the 19th century.
*UPDATE: Not that it’s particularly relevant to the life of Elizabeth Purves, but I’ve now worked out that Mary Richardson (her husband’s first wife) was a cousin of John Ruskin and from the age of 15, after her mother’s death, until her marriage to John Parker Bolding, lived with the Ruskin family in Herne Hill. Ruskin’s father, John James Ruskin, was brother to Jessie Richardson, Mary’s mother.
Copyright All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
A reader of this blog has asked me to confirm who was the ‘Mrs Rachel Scott’ who unfurled the ‘First in the Fight’ Manchester WSPU banner in 1908.
You will remember that I wrote here about the discovery of the banner and the subsequent appeal that resulted in it being acquired by the People’s History Museum in Manchester. In that piece I wrote that I suspected that the woman given the honour of unfurling the banner was the Mrs Rachel Scott who had been the WSPU’s first honorary secretary, rather than Rachel Scott, wife of C.P. Scott of the Manchester Guardian. And, of course, the merest further investigation showed that it was indeed Mrs ‘Secretary’ Scott who had unfurled the banner – not least because Mrs C.P. Scott had died three years earlier, in 1905.
But my enquirer was still interested in finding out something of Mrs Rachel Scott, the ‘unfurler’….so I have done a little delving. For, although her name has often been mentioned in studies of the early days of the WSPU, she has not, as far as I can see, hitherto been credited with a real life.
I can report that she was born Rachel Lovett in Chorlton, Lancashire, in 1863, one of the many (at least 9) children of Thomas Lovett and his wife, Elizabeth. Her father was a labourer in the oilcloth industry and in 1871 the family was living next to the Marsden oilcloth factory at Canal Side, Newton Heath. Rachel’s older sisters became weavers or winders as soon as, aged 14, they left school. However, the 1881 census shows that Rachel had escaped this fate and, aged 17, was working as a pupil teacher. She presumably continued teaching until her marriage in 1890 to Henry (Harry) Charles David Scott, the son of a schoolmaster. Harry was at this time described as a ‘cashier’ but by 1901, when the family, now with four children, was living at 5 Duncan Street, Broughton, he was ‘managing director of an engineering firm’. In fact, he worked for the Manchester firm of Royles for most of his life, becoming chairman of the board of directors. At the turn of the 20th century he was a strong supporter of The Clarion, the socialist newspaper, and was a member of the Independent Labour party, paying the rent of the Party’s Manchester meeting room.
For we know it was through the Manchester ILP that Mrs Emmeline Pankhurst encountered Rachel Scott, who was one of the women she invited to the meeting at her house in Nelson Street, Manchester, on 10 October 1903, at which the Women’s Social and Political Union was founded. Mrs Scott was appointed the WSPU’s first secretary and had a letter published in the 30 October 1903 issue of The Clarion alerting fellow Socialists to the existence of this new organisation and appealing ‘to all women Socialists to join in this movement to press upon party and community the urgent need of giving to women the vote, that they may take their share of the vote for social emancipation’.
Rachel Scott maintained her involvement with the Manchester WSPU for some years, noted as present at various meetings and demonstrations, for instance appearing on Platform 12 at the WSPU Hyde Park demonstration of Sunday 21 June 1908 (described in Votes for Women, 18 June 1908, as ‘well-known as a capable speaker and hard worker in the Manchester district’) and, of course, was singled out to present the banner to the Manchester WSPU on 20 June 1908, the day before the Hyde Park meeting. The banner hadn’t been ready in time to be unfurled with others in the Queen’s Hall in London.
Rachel Scott was on the platform at a meeting in Manchester’s Free Trade Hall on 19 January 1909 when Christabel Pankhurst received a rapturous welcome but I get the impression that after this she rather fades from view, perhaps less interested as it became clear that the WSPU was no longer a supporter of the socialist movement with which, in 1909, she was still actively involved. Certainly, she did not boycott the 1911 census and was at home (‘Arrandale’, Crofts Bank Road, Urmston) on census night with her husband and by now five children. Her eldest son was a ‘student of chemistry’, another was an ‘engineering apprentice’, and a third was a clerk. The other two children were still at school.
One of Rachel’s sisters was living with the family in 1911, as she appears to have done all their married life. Another of Rachel’s sisters died that year but had previously worked as a superintendent in the ‘Imbecile Wards’ of the Crumpsall (Manchester) Workhouse. Yet another sister had for a time been employed as a nurse in the same workhouse. Presumably both positions had been an improvement on the sisters’ earliest employment in the cotton industry. Doubtless both from her own experience and that of her sisters Rachel Scott was well apprised of the state of the poor and afflicted and had hoped that the WSPU would be a means of improving their lot. She may have become disillusioned.
Rachel Scott died in 1925. Of her sons, one was killed during the First World War, one became an analytical chemist, another an engineer designer, and the fourth emigrated to Australia. Her daughter married, but died in 1935. Harry, still a director of Royles, was appointed a magistrate in 1931 and died in 1937.
Copyright All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Tombstone of Stella Lavinia Spencer in the British Cemetery, Montevideo, Uruguay (photo courtesy David Rennie)
The epitaph reads:
In Loving Memory of my dear wife STELLA LAVINIA SPENCER born in England March 9th 1884 died April 14th 1930 age 46. Her nobility of soul was shown as an an ideal wife and in her endeavours for the welfare of others. A pioneer and tireless worker for the social and political emancipation of women. Poetess and artist whose devotion to the good and the beautifulwas the constant striving of her life. Even in adversity.
I recently had an enquiry, emanating from Uruguay, as to whether I knew of Stella Lavinia Spencer, who had died in Montevideo in 1930, was buried in the city’s British Cemetery, and had, perhaps, been a suffragette. Well, the short answer was ‘No’ – the name rang no bells – but a quick search showed that a Stella Lavinia Spencer was indeed listed in the Roll of Honour compiled by the Suffragette Fellowship. So the hare was ready to be chased.
Identifying her as a possible suffragette was the easy bit. The attempt to untangle the identity of Stella Lavinia Spencer has been a good deal more complicated. No-one of that name appears in the list of ‘Suffragettes Arrested’ compiled by the Home Office, nor does she appear on any census. It is obvious from the wording on the tombstone that ‘Spencer’ was her married name and the Probate Register revealed that her husband’s name was ‘Alberto John Spencer’. So the hunt was on to establish her maiden name.
One would have thought that, with the relatively unusual forenames of ‘Stella Lavinia’ and a firm birth date of 1884, this wouldn’t be difficult. But, in fact, no-one of those names appears to have been born in England (or anywhere else) in 1884. Was she perhaps a child registered before her parents had selected her name? It’s possible. Or could she have refashioned herself, selecting names more appealing than those with which she had been furnished by her parents? Again, a possibility. There’s probably a quite straightforward reason for her absence from the various registers, civil or ecclesiastical, but, if so, I haven’t found it.
However, thanks to a general Google search for ‘Stella Lavinia Spencer’ I encountered an article (‘You Are Not a White Woman’) by James Heartfield (The Journal of Pacific History, vol 38, no 1, 2003) which sketched something of my quarry’s biography – as well as telling a rather riveting story. The article concerns the trial in Fiji in 1915 of Stella Spencer, which makes clear that she was by now married. But it turns out that ‘Spencer’ was not her husband’s family name; ‘Alberto John Spencer’ was originally ‘Alberto John Sangorski’. This was a surname I knew very well, as Sangorski and Sutcliffe was the leading firm of ‘art’ bookbinders in England at the beginning of the 20th century. Research quickly revealed that Stella’s husband, Alberto Spencer, was the son of Alberto Sangorski, renowned as the firm’s illuminator and calligrapher.
Anyway, armed with this new knowledge, I was now able to search for the marriage of Alberto Sangorski and, sure enough, found that he had married in Kensington in the summer of 1910. But even now matters were complicated by a quirk in the listing on the register that didn’t make clear the name of his bride. I won’t bore you with the ramifications of my further searches but only say that I finally decided that a likely candidate was a ‘Stella L. Mahny’. Needless to say I could find no other record of a woman with that rather unlikely surname, but with this faint lead I returned to the ‘Suffragettes Arrested’ register and discovered that a ‘Stella O’Mahoney’ had been tried in Westminster on 1 July 1908. Without the tedious unravelling of the link to the Spencer surname I could not have been certain that I had the right ‘Stella’. But I am sure now that I have.
And what was it that she had done to merit arrest? Votes for Women (9 July 1908) reported that, on 30 June 1908, Miss Stella O’Mahoney had taken part in a demonstration organised by the Women’s Social and Political Union in the vicinity of the House of Commons and that, with 26 other WSPU members, had been arrested. She was ordered to give a surety of £20 not to take part in any other militant activity, but refused, and was instead sentenced to a month’s imprisonment in Holloway. At the trial she gave her address as that of the WSPU office, 4 Clement’s Inn, so, once again, I could get no closer to her.
There is no other record I can find of Stella O’Mahoney’s involvement with the WSPU but I would presume that she had been a member both before and after this incident. However, a couple of years later, soon after her marriage, she and Alberto set off for Australia, landing in Sydney on 17 November 1910.
The Heartfield article mentions that Stella Spencer had worked as a journalist, but I have been unable to find any articles written by her. The tombstone describes her as a poet and an artist, but, yet again, I can find no trace of her work in any medium.
So, Stella Spencer would remain something of an enigma were it not for the reasons behind her trial in Fiji in March 1915 that James Heartfield reveals in his article. She had arrived with her husband from Melbourne about seven months earlier because he had been employed in a new venture, the Fiji Produce Agency. This organisation had been set up as a means for Fijians to market their own produce, in competition with European traders. The background rivalry, both economic and political, was complicated, but the upshot was that Stella Spencer stood trial, accused of slapping a Fijian in the face. He was a henchman of the European faction and had accused her of being ‘a bad woman’, the implication being that she was sexually involved with a Fijian. The ensuing trial – of a white woman accused of assaulting a Fijian – was remarkable, motivated not from a desire to protect Fijians, but to punish those Europeans who failed to observe the policy of separation from the indigenous population.
Stella Spencer was found guilty but apparently, Heartfield reports, did not have sufficient funds to pay the fine levied and was, therefore, imprisoned. I have no evidence whatsoever for querying this, but did just wonder if, as in 1908, it was rather that she had refused to pay a fine. It seems very surprising that no funds could be mustered if she had been minded to pay. Stella then went on hunger strike, perhaps in emulation of the suffragette stratagem, adopted subsequent to her 1908 imprisonment. However, she abandoned the hunger strike after four days and wrote to the governor asking for passage to Melbourne for herself and her husband. This was granted at the end of April 1915. I don’t know when and why she and Alberto eventually made their home in Montevideo but he remained there for the rest of his life, dying in 1954, twenty years after Stella, and is buried in the same cemetery.
It is not difficult to detect a parallel between Stella Spencer’s interest in the emancipation of women and that of improving the lot of the native population of Fiji. Whatever her background, she was clearly imbued with a spirit of rebellion
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement
I recently noticed that the London Metropolitan Archives has launched a new database – Switching the Lens – Rediscovering Londoners of African, Caribbean, Asian and Indigenous Heritage, 1561 to 1840. This is an aspect of history that captured my imagination some time ago [ see, for instance, Suffrage Stories: Black And Minority Ethnic Women: Is There A ‘Hidden History’?] and I was interested to see whether this new database would make the uncovering of individual histories any more possible. Through the centuries there have always been some men and women of BAME heritage living in Britain whose lives have, for one reason or another, been recorded in some degree of detail; the great majority, however, have hitherto remained untraceable. I gave details of the Switching the Lens website in my previous post and can now tell something of another life I encountered there, represented by a single entry in the database.
Above we see the entry for the baptism of:
‘Eliza Catherine Herbert, illegitimate daughter of Henry Bennett Herbert, Secretary to the Committee of Merchants trading to Africa, by a Woman of Colour passing under the name of Nance, and born 29 May 1798 at Cape Coast Castle, Africa.’
This entry in the baptismal register of the church of St John, Wapping, made in, I think, August 1805, allows us a glimpse into the history of a London family involved in the African slave trade, a story that shuttles between Wapping and Cape Coast Castle, the ‘Grand Slave Emporium’ built on what was then known as the Gold Coast, now Ghana.
Let’s start with Henry Bennett Herbert, the father of the girl who is being baptised. His position as stated, ‘Secretary to the Committee of Merchants trading with Africa’, suggests a man of authority. However, the reality was rather different. In fact, Henry Bennett was only 22 years old and was already dead by the time he was appointed Secretary to the Committee of Merchants trading with Africa’. He had been born in 1777, baptized in St John’s, the Herberts’ family church, and had travelled out to Cape Coast Castle in 1795, aged 18.
Henry’s father, James Herbert (1735-1789) had been a cooper (a barrel maker) who ran his business from Brewhouse Lane, Wapping, and had been a freeman of the Committee of Merchants trading with Africa. Indeed, it is possible that the family connection may go back even further as various ‘Herberts’ are noted as serving with the Royal African Company in the early decades of the 18th century. Although, I haven’t found evidence that James Herbert had any direct investment in a slaving ship, the barrels his company made would most certainly have been the means by which goods were sent out to Africa on ships that, when they returned across the Atlantic, were carrying slaves. Brewhouse Lane, where the company remained until the 1830s, is very close to the Thames at Wapping, in an area then dominated by businesses supporting maritime trade.
After the death of James Herbert in 1789 the coopering business was inherited by Henry’s elder brother, another James (1764-1830). As the younger son, Henry had to seek his fortune elsewhere and doubtless felt himself fortunate to be able, through his family connection, to offer his services to the African trade. When approaching the Governing Committee in the Africa House he had no difficulty in finding the necessary guarantors; his brother James and another Wapping merchant put up £500, to which he himself added the same amount.
It was only after I had begun this research and was thinking about Henry Herbert’s situation that I remembered that somewhere on my bookshelves was a copy of William St Clair’s The Grand Slave Emporium: Cape Coast Castle and the British slave trade, bought when it was published in 2007. Fortunately I was actually able to find it (not an occurrence that I necessarily take for granted). Re-reading it illuminated both Henry Herbert’s short life and the near-miracle, as it seems to me, of his daughter’s appearance at the Wapping baptismal font.
When he arrived at Cape Coast Castle in, I think, October 1795, Henry Herbert’s first position was as a ‘Writer’, that is, a clerk, but within a year he had been promoted to ‘Deputy Secretary to the Committee’. Promotion was swift in Cape Coast Castle; the death rate was very high among the young men who arrived full of hope. In fact, Henry Herbert was appointed secretary to the Governor and Council on 5 April 1800 but the news of this appointment arrived only after his death. He had ‘Drown’d in Bathing at Cape Coast Castle’ on 23 March 1800. Henry Herbert had weathered the ‘seasoning’, the period during which new arrivals succumbed to the multitude of diseases infesting Cape Coast Castle, only to be felled by the surf. In fact, I found that William St Clair, too, had noticed the cause of Henry’s death and in his book mentioned that ‘there are few records of officers swimming for pleasure – Mr Herbert, who defied the dangers, was duly drowned.’
Cape Coast Castle (mid-19th c)
Henry Herbert’s time at Cape Coast Castle coincided with the peak of the British slave trade and, to understand a little of what he would have seen and done, I would urge you to read The Grand Slave Emporium in which St Clair describes in quotidian detail both life there and the economy, more complicated than one might imagine, on which it was based. It is perfectly clear that Henry Herbert knew exactly what was happening in the dungeons hewn into the rock several stories below his airy officers’ quarters and was complicit in sending men, women and children out through the Door of No Return to the slavers’ ships waiting in the roads. However, the notice of his appointments and death can only furnish a very general picture of his years at Cape Coast Castle. The entry in the Wapping baptismal register adds a more personal dimension.
William St Clair describes how ‘It was part of the welcome for a young officer arriving in the Castle to be supplied with a local sexual partner, one of the ways in which the British embraced local laws and customs without attempting to change them.’ He stresses that the arrangements made with ‘wenches’, as such women were known, while not regarded as marriages were certainly not informal casual sexual encounters. ‘Wenches’ were free women, not slaves. So, ‘Nance’, the woman named as Eliza Catherine’s mother in the baptismal register entry, was very likely Henry Herbert’s ‘wench’ and may have remained so for most of his time at the Castle. I noticed that St Clair, quoting from the will of a Castle officer who died in May 1795, mentions that in his will the man left a bequest to ‘my wench Nance’ and I did just wonder if she had found a new protector in Henry Herbert after his arrival a few months later. It may be a coincidence that two ‘wenches’ were named ‘Nance’, although most whom St Clair cites have African names. The Europeanised name may suggest that ‘Nance’ was of mixed race, as, naturally, there were by now numerous offspring of officers and ‘wenches’ living in and around the Castle.’
The news of Eliza’s birth in May 1798 must have been relayed to Wapping, a letter then taking about three months to travel between Africa and London. It is to be supposed that Henry’s mother, Elizabeth Herbert (for whom Eliza was obviously named), took a very real interest in the welfare of her grand-daughter and on hearing, in mid-1800. of the death of her son planned to bring young Eliza to England. My research leads me to think that this was probably not a very common occurrence. The Monk children, of whom I wrote here, were brought from India by their father, but in the case of Eliza Herbert it would seem that her family would have had to negotiate at a distance with ‘Nance’, if she were still alive, or, if not, with the officials of Cape Coast Castle, in order to take custody of the child and had then to arrange for her to be accompanied on the long sea journey to London. We do not know when exactly she did arrive for, although her baptism took place in 1805, she shared the occasion with a cousin, Susanna, daughter of her uncle James. It may merely have been convenient to baptise the two girls at the same time.
Detail of John Rocque’s Map of London (1746) showing Princes Square
But we can say with certainty that by 1805 Eliza Catherine Herbert was a most welcome member of the Herbert family and remained so for the rest of her long life. When, in 1817, her grandmother wrote her will it was to Eliza (‘the natural daughter of my son Henry Bennett Herbert) that she left all her personal and household possessions, in addition to setting up a financial trust in her favour. She also appointed guardians for her, because Eliza was at that time a minor. The will makes clear that Eliza was then living with her grandmother in her house in Princes Square (later renamed Swedenborg Square and now erased). As Land Tax Records show that at the time Eliza was baptised Elizabeth Herbert was living on the north-west side of Princes Square, in one of the early-18th-century houses built for prosperous merchants, we can assume that Eliza had been brought here when she first arrived in London
Wapping, 1896, showing, to the left of the image, Brewhouse Lane and area marked ‘Cooperage’ (Reproduced with permission from the National Library of Scotland)
The Herbert coopering business continued to be successful under the management of Eliza’s Uncle James, who in the early 19th century owned three ships involved in the British South Seas Whaling trade. The firm also, of course, produced the containers necessary for transporting the fishing products. His son, James Henry Herbert, inherited the business, moved out of insalubrious Wapping to Tottenham, and had retired by 1851, dying 20 years later by no means a wealthy man. Such is the fate of family businesses; they rise and then they fall. The unmarried women of such families have little agency in creating wealth, relying on the investments made for them. However, with the money inherited from her grandmother Eliza Herbert was able to lead what would appear to have been a reasonably comfortable life.
I cannot discover where Eliza lived after her grandmother’s death in 1827. She was now 29 years old and may have been able to continue living in the Princes Square house for a while but I next found her in the 1841 census living at 10 Holland Place, in north Brixton. The street has now vanished, but was in the area between Clapham Road and Brixton Road, south of the Oval. The 1841 census does not produce much information and we learn from this only that Eliza was of ‘Independent’ means’ and had not been born in Lambeth. At first I assumed she was living in this house as a lonely boarder but further investigation into the ramifications of the Herbert family revealed to me that Arthur French, the 70-year-old head of the household, had been a Wapping cooper, whose aunt was mentioned as a friend in the will of Eliza’s grandmother and that Anna Maria Pillar, the other woman of independent means listed as living in the house, was actually one of Eliza’s many cousins. So, although it’s ridiculously sentimental, I was pleased that she was living among friends and family.
Ten years later Eliza was still in the same house, although the head of household had changed. (In fact Arthur French had died barely a month after the 1851 census.) She is now described as ‘Fundholder’ and her place of birth is given as ‘Africa’. I have, however, been unable to find any link between Eliza and the other two women living as boarders in the house. Life may not have been quite so comfortable as it had been ten years earlier; there was now only one servant rather than the three who had previously waited on the household.
By 1861 Eliza Herbert had moved a short distance and was living at St Ives Cottage, St Anne’s Road, now obliterated, but it was just south of Holland Place. Once again she is a boarder, now described as ‘Lady’ and with her birthplace as ‘Africa’. Besides the householder (a commercial traveller), his wife and daughter there was only one other boarder, a teenage ‘shipbroker’, and one servant. Ten years later she had moved again, further west to 2 Grosvenor Place, a boarding house in a terrace on Camberwell Road (now demolished, but it was opposite Addington Square) Here she gave the 1871 census enumerator her exact place of birth, ‘Cape Coast Castle’.
Thus it would seem that for about 40 years (between the 1840s until the late-1870s) Eliza Herbert lived alone, as a boarder, occupying a room or two in the homes of strangers. This, doubtless, was the lot of hundreds of thousands of unmarried women, but I don’t think the actuality was as forlorn as it might appear because my researches show that during this time Eliza Herbert was always living close to ‘family’. For it is likely that the reason she remained in the Brixton area for so much of her life was because she was still very much in touch with the descendants of the French family, friends of her grandmother.
You will remember that in 1841 Eliza Herbert was living in the Brixton home of the former Wapping cooper, Arthur French. Also in the household was Arthur’s daughter, Grace, who by 1861 she was married to a successful building contractor, Benjamin Gammon, and living in Loughborough Park Road, in the northern part of Brixton. Interestingly, their house was named ‘Herbert Lodge’. Grace’s son, born c 1852, had been given ‘Herbert’ as a first name, suggesting to me there was a strong connection between Grace and Eliza.
The bond was made manifest by 1881 when the census finds Eliza Herbert, now 82 years old, living in the home of a young couple, Johanna and Robert Pearce, at 8 Church Road, Brixton. For Johanna Pearce was the daughter of Grace Gammon (nee French) and, with ‘Elizabeth’ as her second name, was Eliza Herbert’s god-daughter. Church Road is now St Matthews Road, running between Effra Road and Brixton Hill. No 8 was a charming early-19th century villa, long since demolished.
Josephine Avenue, Brixton, photographed c 40 years after Eliza’s death. It was noted on the Booth’s Poverty Map (c. 1898) as a ‘middle-class, well-to-do’ street
By 1886, when Eliza Herbert wrote her will, she had moved with Johanna and her husband to a new house, close by, in Josephine Avenue. It was here that, on 21 March 1890, she died. Her estate amounted to over £800 (roughly £100,000+ in 2020) – suggesting that the funds she had inherited had served her quite well during her extremely long life. She left her personal effects to be divided between Johanna Pearce and Herbert Gammon. Incidentally, I can’t help wondering what happened to all the household and personal possessions she inherited from her grandmother. Did she carry any Princes Square furniture and china with her from house to house or had everything been long since scattered?
And what, you might ask, is the point of all this? Well, I suppose it shows that a child, born in a far off country, out of wedlock, to an African mother, far from being repudiated by her British family, was welcomed and cherished. Knowledge of her unorthodox origin, which transgressed early 19th-century ideas of both morality and race, does not appear to have affected her family relationships. Her grandmother, referring to her as ‘the natural daughter of my son…’, was quite open about her status. Indeed, Elizabeth Herbert allocated far more care in her will to Eliza’s wellbeing than to those of her other grandchildren, the assumption being that they would be provided for by their fathers. And, as we have seen, care for Eliza continued down through the generations of the French/Gammon family.
And what of Eliza’s appearance? Was her genetic inheritance obvious? We don’t know. She lives now only in official documents and that is not the kind of thing of which they speak. Nor do we know anything about Eliza’s attitude to her origins, other than she was quite happy to admit to having been born not only in Africa, but specifically in Cape Coast Castle. I am assuming that she left the Castle when too young to retain any memories, but she could not have escaped thinking about her mother. Was ‘Nance’ a name that Eliza knew? Was she talked of when, as a child, Eliza lived with her grandmother in the house in Princes Square? Did Eliza subsequently take an interest in Africa, read books about it, or, perhaps, support missionary work?
As to her personality, we can only assume that Eliza was amiable, capable of maintaining family friendships throughout her long life. In her will she made bequests not only to Johanna Pearce and to Herbert Gammon, but to a number of cousins. Alas, it is the fate of single women that their memory disappears so entirely. If she had married and had children Eliza’s story might have been handed down, even surviving into the 21st century but, as it is, only an outline of her life can be resurrected, mapping a journey that brought her from Cape Coast Castle to Brixton, via Wapping.
And, of course, Brixton in the late 19th century being very different demographically, it is entirely a coincidence that this child of Africa, born above slave dungeons, should have spent her last years living a stone’s throw away from Windrush Square, now an implicit memorial to Britain’s involvement in the slave trade.
Apart from re-reading St Clair, The Grand Slave Emporium, research for this article has, of necessity, been drawn from online sources. I have, in particular, mined a plethora of records held by ancestry.co.uk and findmypast.co.uk. While doing so I realised that numerous family researchers have fatally muddled their Herbert family trees. The secret, I find, is to read all available wills.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
I recently noticed that the London Metropolitan Archives has launched a new database – Switching the Lens – Rediscovering Londoners of African, Caribbean, Asian and Indigenous Heritage, 1561 to 1840. This is an aspect of history that captured my imagination some time ago [ see, for instance, Suffrage Stories: Black And Minority Ethnic Women: Is There A ‘Hidden History’?] and I was interested to see whether this new database would make the uncovering of individual histories any more possible. Through the centuries there have always been some men and women of BAME heritage living in Britain whose lives have, for one reason or another, been recorded in some degree of detail; the great majority, however, have hitherto remained untraceable.
The database has its inherent limitation in that the 2600 names listed are drawn, over a period of nearly three centuries, from Anglican parish registers. As such it deals only with those who were baptised, married or buried in a parish church in the London area. Nevertheless it contains a wealth of information.
Because I was particularly keen to see if information available on Switching the Lens could be amplified by that already held on genealogical sites such as Ancestry and Findmypast, I concentrating on reading entries in the later period covered by the database, running from 1801-1850. Would it be possible to follow up the lives of any of those people on the Switching the Lens database by, for instance, finding them on the census (from 1841) or identifying them on other national registers?
At a first glance the answer, briefly, is probably not. In general, names are too common or the information is too scanty for it to be possible to identify individuals with any certainty in later official registers. But that is only my finding after a cursory scan. It may well be that keen application will bear fruit. And I shall certainly take a closer look.
As a result of my first venture into the database one entry did attract my attention and I have taken pleasure in unravelling a little of the lives thereby revealed.
The entry is a baptism that took place on 26 June 1828 at St Pancras Church in the Euston Road, of ‘Miya Jane, illegitimate daughter of William Garrow Monk and Coopoo, a native of the East Indies’. In fact I quickly realised that the girl’s name had been mis-transcribed and she was ‘Myra Jane Monk’, born in India on 3 August 1826. The baptismal register identifies William Garrow Monk (1785-1859) as a ‘Judge’, living in Enfield. Born in Hertfordshire, Monk had been an employee of the East India Company from the age of 20, rising to become a judge in the Madras Presidency. It would seem that he finally returned to England c 1828. If it had not been for the fact that the British Library is closed at the moment I would have enjoyed spending time in the East India Company archive finding our more about William Garrow Monk.
However, the online research that I could do revealed that Myra was not Monk’s only illegitimate child – because William Garrow Monk’s aunt, Elizabeth Monk (d 1832), in her will left money in trust ‘for the benefit of George Monk, Charles Monk and Myra Jane Monk, being the children brought from India by my nephew William Garrow Monk.‘
The inclusion, by name, in their great-aunt’s will, suggests that ‘the children brought from India’ were embraced by the wider family. It is not known whether or not all three children had the same mother, although I would think it right to assume that they did. But of her all that we know is that her surname was Coopoo. We do not know what position she held in Indian society, although it is likely that she was a bibi, living with William Garrow Monk in a marriage in all but name. Nor do we know if she was still alive when her three children sailed for England with their father, or, indeed, if she, perhaps, may have accompanied them to England. In his excellent book, The White Mughals, William Dalrymple relates the fascinating histories of some of the Indian wives and bibis whose lives were intertwined with those of employees of the East India Company.
The names ‘Myra’, ‘George’, and ‘Charles’ were Monk family names – in fact, all three were the names of William Garrow Monk’s siblings. Myra’s second name, ‘Jane’, was that of William Garrow Monk’s mother, born Jane Garrow. The Garrow family had a long association with India. It is notable that neither of the boys was named for their father. As we shall see, that name was reserved for his legitimate first-born son.
George and Charles were older than Myra, but I have not been able to trace entries for them on London baptismal registers. They may have been baptised in India or at an English church, the register of which has not been digitised. The 1891 census does reveal a Charles Monk, born in Madras in 1823, whom I am certain was Myra’s brother. In 1841 he was living in the Chelsea home of a surgeon, apprenticed as a medical assistant. When, now a ‘chemist’, in 1846 at St Paul’s, Deptford, he married, his father’s name is given on the marriage register as ‘William Monk, Gentleman’. However, as William Monk was not one of the witnesses it is impossible to know whether or not he attended the wedding. Charles and his wife had several children and he continued to live in Deptford until his death in 1899. In the 1891 census he is described as ‘retired medical assistant’.
Of George Monk I have been unable to find any convincing trace.
UPDATE: A descendant of Charles Monk has established that George Monk emigrated to Canada sometime before 1859.
In the year before the death of Great-Aunt Eliza, William Garrow Monk had married, on 26 April 1831, Eliza Ann Archer, 20 years old to his 46 She was the daughter of Thomas Archer, principal clerk to the Treasury. Barely three months later. Archer, a widower, married Myra Charlotte Monk, sister to William Garrow Monk.
William Garrow Monk and his wife were to have at least 6 children, the eldest being William, born in 1832. Some time after his birth the family moved to Hersham, Surrey,, to Hersham Lodge, on the south-east side of Hersham Green. It is not known whether Myra and her brothers spent any time living with their father’s new family. In the 1841 census Myra, aged 14, was boarding at a ladies’ school run by a Miss Chownes in Holly Road, Twickenham.
It is unsurprising to discover that, after her schooling ended, Myra earned her living as a governess. This was just the employment I had imagined would be her lot and was, therefore, satisfied to find her on the 1851 census with the occupation as ‘governess’, a visitor in a house in Camden Terrace, Peckham. She was still living in the area (in Camberwell New Road) in the following year (1 July 1852) when she married Arthur Turley in the church of St Giles, Camberwell, Arthur, living in nearby Champion Grove, was described as a ‘brewer’, although he later worked, perhaps not very successfully, as an architect and surveyor. Myra admits to no occupation. Interestingly the box on the marriage register for her father’s name has no writing – merely a line through it – although in the ‘Occupation’ column he is described as ‘Gentleman’ However her father was there in the church, signing himself ‘W.G. Monk’ as one of the witnesses. I was ridiculously pleased to know that this father appears in no way to have rejected his illegitimate, half-Indian, daughter.
Arthur Turley was originally from Yorkshire and after their marriage the couple moved north to Bradford where the aMyra was supplementing their income by running a school, presumably in their house. A year later the 1871 census shows that the family had moved to Halifax and the older three children were already in employment. Myra, the eldest (17), was a weaver, Evelyn (15) a boot stitcher, and Arthur (12) a telegraph messenger boy.
By this time Myra’s father, William Monk, had been dead for 12 years and I wondered how his legitimate family was faring without him. He had left under £1000 and by 1861, two years after his death, Eliza, his widow, and three of her now adult children had moved to a Brixton villa, The sons were all then described as ‘unemployed’ but by 1871 one was a stockbroker and his brother and sister were both ‘music professors’. The fact that the daughter, Mary, had an employment perhaps indicates a degree of financial necessity and makes her class position not much different from that of her illegitimate half-sister, who worked occasionally as a teacher. Nevertheless Mary’s life was made more comfortable for her by the cook and housemaid whom her mother was able to employ. Myra had no live-in help.
UPDATE: A descendant of Charles Monk has established, from a codicil to William Garrow Monk’s will, that the following bequests were made: £500 to Charles Monk and £50 each to Myra and George. The latter was, however, regarded as unreliable and the money was only to be given to him in small sums.The £500 bequest to Charles does seem very generous – amounting to half his estate. The remainder went to his wife, to be passed to his legitimate children after her death. What is clear is that William Garrow Monk was intent on caring for his illegitimate Indian children.
After Arthur Turley’s death, Myra, now living in Leeds, once more became a schoolmistress, the 1881 census showing that two of her daughters were also now teachers. It is probable that she had again resorted to setting up a school in her home, with two of her daughters, Evelyne and Agnes, to help her. In the next census, in 1891, still living in Leeds but with only Evelyne now at home, Myra is described as a ‘boarding-house keeper’. Her one boarder is, however, a professor at the Yorkshire College (later University of Leeds) so one imagines she ran a house that had a slight social cachet. Her eldest son, Arthur, followed in his father’s footsteps as a land surveyor, eventually achieving the position of surveyor to the city of Canterbury.
Three of Myra’s daughters, Myra, Evelyne and Laura, married and emigrated to the USA, although Evelyne and Laura returned eventually to live in north Wales. The US census in the early 20th century took note of race/colour and, interestingly, in all the censuses in which they feature the grand-daughters of Coopoo are classified as ‘white’.
I have found a photograph of Laura Garrow Cullmann (nee Turley), taken, with her husband, in 1920, nearly 100 years after the birth of her grandmother in India
My mother, Christmas 1914. On the reverse of this postcard is written ‘With Best Wishes for a Merry Xmas From Meg, Tom and the ‘Wee Un’.
On 4 August 1914 my mother, Margaret Wallace, was living with her parents in Edinburgh where her father, Thomas Wallace, was a cashier in a brewery. On 2 December 1915 he joined up, aged 27. He qualified as a signaller and telephonist (First class signalling certificate ) with the Royal Garrison Artillery, was mobilized on 17 August 1916, setting sail from Plymouth for France.
Thomas Livingston Wallace
He served in France until November 1917 when the 289th Siege Battery was redeployed to northern Italy. I have read 289 Siege Battery’s War Diary (held in the National Archives -WO 95/4205 289) which covers the period from Dec 1917 to May 1918 and gives a very interesting picture of army life up in the mountains above Vicenza. The officers seem to have enjoyed reasonably regular short breaks, allowing them visits to Rome.
Thomas Wallace’s army record seems uneventful. On 22 March 1918 he was admonished by the C.O. for turning up 85 minutes late to 9pm Roll Call, so I hope he had been having some fun. I doubt he ever got to Rome. On 19 April he was awarded First Class Proficiency Pay of ‘6d per diem’ and on 17 May was sent on a ‘Pigeon Course’ at General Headquarters, rejoining his Battery a week later. Three weeks later, on 15 June, during the first day of the battle of Asiago he was killed. Army records show that his effects – comprising photos, 21shillings, metal wrist watch (broken) and signaller’s certificate – were returned to his widow, my grandmother.
The story handed down in the family ran something along the lines that, as a signaller, Thomas Wallace had been alerted to the fact that the Austrians were about to make a surprise attack, that communications had been disrupted and that he was relaying this information by travelling down the Line in person when he was killed. One is naturally very wary of ‘family’ stories, knowing full well how they get corrupted in the telling but in records held in the National Archives, I did read, in a report of the battle of 15 June,
“289 Siege battery detached and section from them to engage suitable targets among the enemy’s advancing infantry
10.15 Runner and motor cyclists used because lines cut to brigade headquarters
Casualties in Brigade: 1 officer and 4 other ranks killed.’
The report of course doesn’t name the ‘other ranks’ but I wondered if Gunner Thomas Wallace was not one of those men.
He is buried at Magnaboschi Cemetery, a lovely tranquil spot, which when we visited some years ago we approached on foot through meadows. A fair proportion of the men buried in this small cemetery were also killed on 15 June 1918. The War Graves Commission information for Thomas Wallace is correct, whereas that created by the War Office is careless enough to have him killed in France. It just shows that one should never trust even the most official of records without corroborating evidence. Some years ago I did manage to get his entry corrected in the Roll of Honour of the Royal Garrison Artillery, contained in Scottish National War Memorial in Edinburgh Castle. Wasn’t it just typical, I thought, when you know something about anything ‘They’ would get it wrong.
That cemetery was a world away from the life my grandmother knew – the villages and small towns of Fife. I doubt she ever saw a photograph of his grave. She never seemed to recover from his death. Life on a war widow’s pension was a struggle. She kept all the letters he sent from the War – and when I was about 12 years old I was allowed to read one or two. I particularly remember one that described his crossing of the Lombardy Plain on the way to Italy. Alas, those letters disappeared around the time of her death in a nursing home in the early 1960s.
My widowed grandmother, with my mother and her brother, in the doorway of their Falkland cottage
Like so many other children of their generation my mother and her brother, who was born in December 1917, grew up without a father. That was all they had ever known.
My mother in her University of St Andrews graduation gown
What were that young couple, my grandparents, saying to each other as they discussed the news of War on 4 August 1914 in their Edinburgh tenement? Did they sense the cataclysm awaiting them? Probably not.
Copyright. All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Elizabeth Wolstenholme Elmy (1833-1918) is one of my heroes of the women’s suffrage movement. She began campaigning in the north of England in the mid-1860s and proved to be one of the movement’s most ‘earnest workers’, to use her terminology.
In 1904, putting aside a lifetime’s aversion to party politics, she joined the Manchester ILP. and it was the ILP that published this pamphlet. The content was originally published as an article in the Westminster Review, and in it she analyses in her concise style the events of the previous 40 years and demands that Liberal MPs who profess to support women’s suffrage honour their pledges.
The pamphlet was published by the Independent Labour Party, and on the back lists pamphlets, books, postcards, badges and leaflets issued by the Women’s Social and Political Union.
Very good – 2nd edition – no date, but, from the evidence of the publications listed on the back cover, this edition c 1908. With markings from the Women’s Library from which it has been withdrawn (duplicate) £35
I can also offer a real photographic postcard Mrs Elmy, taken in May 1907 when the WSPU-nominated photographer called at her Congleton home for that very purpose.
In fine condition – unposted – £100 +VAT in the UK and EU.
If you are interested in buying either – or both – of them items, email me
Metal badge worn by suffragettes who boycotted the April 1911 census. Around the outside of the badge is ‘No Vote – No Census – Census Resisted and in the centre ‘A census for Gt Britain shall be taken in the year 1911 & the census day shall be Sunday the 2nd day of April in that year’.
The census boycott was an important act of civil disobedience and you can find many posts on this website about the suffragette resisters. Just key ‘census’ into the Search Box.
The round black and grey badge still carries on its reverse the maker’s paper ‘Merchants Portrait Co.’. This badge is extremely scarce and is in fine condition £1100
If interested in buying, email elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
Portrait photograph of Miss Gladice Keevil, The ‘National Women’s Social and Political Union, 4 Clement’s Inn, WC’.
The photographer was Lena Connell, who, in an interview in the Women’s Freedom League paper, The Vote, dated her involvement with the suffrage movement to this commission. When she arrived at Lena Connell’s St John’s Wood studio in 1908 Gladice Keevil had not long been released from prison and was soon appointed National Organizer for the WSPU in the Midlands.
She was a speaker in the WSPU’s summer campaign in Ireland in 1910 and was described by a member of one of her open-air meetings in Belfast as ‘Clever speaker and knows her subject’. She was also one of the WSPU’s prettiest activists.
Postcard in fine condition – unposted £120 + VAT in UK and EU. Email me if interested in buying. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
Mrs Amy Sanderson, born in Bellshill, Lanarkshire, joined the Women’s Social and Political Union in 1906 and took part in the deputation in February 1907 from the first Women’s Parliament in Caxton Hall to the House of Commons, was arrested and served a Holloway prison term.
She actively campaigned in Scotland for the WSPU before, in October 1907, joining those who broke away to form the Women’s Freedom League. becoming for 3 years a member of the WFL executive committee. In 1908 she served another prison term.
She was a very popular speaker for the WFL and, in 1912, for the ‘Women’s March’ from Edinburgh to London.
In this photograph she is wearing her ‘Holloway brooch’, given by the WFL in recognition of her imprisonment.
The card, issued by the WFL no later than November 1909, after which date the Scottish Glasgow headquarters moved from Gordon Street to Sauchiehall Street, is in fine, unposted condition. £130 + VAT in UK and the EU.
Email me if interested in buying. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
Full-length portrait photograph of Anna Munro (1881-1962) Scottish organiser for the Women’s Freedom League. The address is that of the WFL Scottish headquarters.
Anna Munro had joined the WSPU in 1906, becoming its organizer in Dunfermline. The following year she followed Teresa Billington-Greig into the WFL, becoming her private secretary. She was imprisoned in Holloway in early 1908 before being appointed organizing secretary of the Scottish Council of the WFL.
After the First World War Anna Munro (now Mrs Ashman) became a magistrate in England and was later president of the WFL in which she remained active until its disbanding in 1961.
Photographic postcards of Scottish suffragettes are relatively uncommon. This one is in fine, unposted condition. £130 + VAT in UK and EU. Email me if interested in buying. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
Photograph of a luminous Cicely Hamilton, writer, actor and suffrage activist, taken by Lena Connell, the renowned photographer.
The close-up photograph is mounted on stiff card, which carries the logo of The Suffrage Shop, 15 Adam Street, Strand, London. Hamilton was closely associated with the Suffrage Shop, which in 1910 published her Pageant of Great Women.
The photograph was probably taken c 1910/1911. Hamilton’s name has been scratched on the emulsion, presumably by the photographer, and it is signed by Cicely Hamilton. SOLD
If interested in buying, do email me. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
A lovely photograph of Mrs Charlotte Despard, leader of the Women’s Freedom League. It was taken on a rooftop, possibly at the time of the WFL’s White, Gold and Green Fair in 1909.
The photographer and publisher of the resultant postcard was Mrs Albert Broom (Christina Broom), who photographed several groups of those participating in that WFL Fair.
In fine, unposted, condition. A scarce image. Sold
Email me if interested in buying. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
And this is the Minister weary and worn/Who treated the Suffragette with scorn,/Who wanted a Vote, and (a saying to quote),/ Dared him to tread on the tail of the coat/Of the bold Suffragette determined to get,/Into ‘THE HOUSE’ that man built.’
The Minister is surrounded by elegant suffragettes – with the House of Commons in the background.
One in the BB Series of 6 postcards showing suffragettes in a dignified light.
Fine – unposted £30 + VAT in UK and EU
Email me if interested in buying. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
Head and shoulders photographic portrait of Christabel Pankhurst, probably dating from c. 1908.
She is wearing a rather attractive loose, square-necked dress, with her hair up in her characteristic knot. When Kate Frye attended a meeting of the Actresses’ Franchise League addressed by Christabel in February 1910 she commented, ‘Her hair was very untidy and I think would suit her so much better done low than on top in an ugly little knob.’ But I always think the hint of dishevelment is rather endearing.
The postcard is captioned ‘Miss Christabel Pankhurst. The National Women’s Social and Political Union. 4 Clement’s Inn, WC’, indicating that it was issued after some members, led by Mrs Charlotte Despard, broke away to form the Women’s Freedom League in the autumn of 1907. For a time they hoped to keep the ‘WSPU’ name, which led the Pankhursts to rename their faction ‘The National WSPU’.
The card was published by Sandle Bros. and would have been for sale in WSPU shops. This copy came from a collection put together by three suffragette sisters. Fine – unposted – £40 + VAT in UK and EU. Email me if interested in purchasing. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
Elena Shayne in her dancing years, With her husband, Paul Barel (image courtesy of Louise Baghurst)
Even though ‘lockdown’ has officially been eased, my physical freedom is not as it was but, as compensation, and fuelled by an insatiable curiosity and the wonders of the internet, I’ve had no shortage of time and opportunity to wander through time and space in pursuit of various chimera.
One such is a young woman known as ‘Elena Shayne’, author of a single published work, a roman à clef entitled Everyday (Jonathan Cape,1935). As she explained at the outset, ‘Elena’ planned to write about ‘the things that happen to me for a year’. And that, simply, is what she did. Everyday is the book of that year.
(image courtesy of Scott Thompson)
But, to begin at the beginning, I knew nothing of Everyday when I first encountered it, described in a post on the ‘Furrowed Middlebrow’ website. I am not sure what exactly caught my attention, probably the author’s rather unusual name for I began idly to research Elena Shayne on Ancestry.com and quickly realised that she had a rather slippery attitude to names. This was rather intriguing. The name she had used as an author she had also used in Real Life, but it was not the name with which she had been born, and was by no means the only one she was to adopt during her lifetime.
I was sufficiently amused by my genealogical research to pass on an outline to Scott, the owner of the ‘Furrowed Middlebrow’ website, and was delighted when he offered to send me a scan of Everyday. It was only then, on reading the novel, that my research took wings, transporting me back to 1931-1932, and embedding me in the life of a north Devon village.
‘Elena Shayne’ was born Louise Crawshay Parker in September 1909 in Plymouth, Devon. Her mother was Mrs Gertrude Hermione Thomas (née Crawshay), who had been separated from her husband, William Morlais Thomas, a civil engineer, since c 1901. They had married in 1892 and a daughter, Grace Morlais Thomas, had been born in 1893. Gertrude’s father, a member of the Crawshay family of wealthy Welsh ironmasters, had not approved of her marriage and had lived just long enough to see it fail.
At some point Mrs Thomas met, and then lived in Plymouth with, John Thomas Parker, the father of Louise. The family story is that they met on Plymouth Hoe, while each speaking for their Cause – he for Socialism and she for Suffrage. Gertrude Thomas died in January 1911 and when the census was taken three months later baby Louise was living in Plymouth with John Parker, his elderly mother, his sister, and his brother, a house decorator. Parker was described as a ‘commission agent’, but at the age of 13 in 1881 had worked as a box maker. The Parkers clearly belonged to a class very different from that of the Crawshays.
The 1911 census shows that Louise’s half-sister, Grace Thomas, was then living with Gertrude Thomas’ sister, Louise Crawshay, at Batheaston Cottage, Batheaston (on the outskirts of Bath). Poor Grace died in June 1911, aged 18, a couple of months after the census. At this time Grace’s father, William Morlais Thomas, was living in the seaside town of Paignton, Devon, attended by a nurse. He died there in 1914. I have not ordered death certificates for the sad trio (Mr and Mrs Thomas and Grace) but curiosity might yet get the better of me. I’m pretty certain, though, that TB was the culprit.
These are all facts I established in the course of my genealogical research and I was then delighted to find the details vindicated in Everyday where, in a few paragraphs, Elena Shayne relates much of the story of her birth and parentage, telling how she was rescued from the backstreets of ‘Rymouth’, as she calls Plymouth, by her great-aunt Louise, and taken to live with her at ‘Westwater’ (Batheaston).
Elena was five years old, when, after the death of William Morlais Thomas, a court case established that, although she was now known as ‘Louise Crawshay Thomas’, she was not, in fact, his daughter, but that of John Parker. The court case, at the root of which lay a dispute over an inheritance, was widely reported and my supposition that her illegitimacy – or, at least, the widespread knowledge of it – shaped Elena’s life has been borne out in conversation with her daughter. In Everyday Elena certainly blames it for the ostracization she believed she experienced from some sections of ‘society’.
Although she did not inherit from William Thomas’ estate, Elena was subsequently left money by a Crawshay uncle and her aunt Louise, on her death in 1943, left Elena her entire estate, which amounted to something over £4000. So, she was not, I think, without means in her younger years. I only mention finances because in Everyday Elena evinces a delightfully vagabond spirit, something we all know is only possible if the basics of life are covered.
Other than a mention in the press that Elena Shayne had attended school in Bristol, I don’t know anything of her life between the ages of 5 and 22 when, in December 1931, described as ‘Writer’ and with her aunt Louise, she sailed, second-class, to Marseilles. It was the information in the Ranpura’s manifest that was the key to unravelling the roman à clef – for the address supplied by the two women was ‘Lundy House, Croyde Bay, north Devon’. This was the lightbulb moment (to mix the metaphors) which unlocked Everyday, for the address of the author – and central character – as it appears on the opening page of Everyday, accompanying the date of her first diary entry, 23 June 1931, is ‘Hartland House’, Grebe Bay, North Devon’.
I had now anchored Everyday in time and place. For ‘Grebe’ read ‘Croyde’. Lundy is an island in the Bristol Channel; Hartland Point is a rocky outcrop sticking out into the Channel, some miles south of Croyde. By studying online maps and photographs I have become closely acquainted with this north Devon coastal village as it developed through the course of the 20th century, and, with Google Earth, have explored the neighbourhood as it is today. In Everyday the local towns and villages are given pseudonyms, thus, for example, ‘Barum’ is Barnstaple, ‘Barnham’ is ‘Georgeham’, ‘Brandon’ is Braunton, ‘Sandon’ is ‘Saunton, and ‘Hutley’ is ‘Putsborough. Moreover, judicious study of the 1939 Register (a census taken in England at the outbreak of the Second World War) has enabled me to identify many of the people whom Elena encounters. She uses pseudonyms, but her code is easily broken.
Why had Aunt Louise and ‘Elena’ chosen to move from Batheaston to Croyde? In Everyday the move appears permanent, but was not so in Real Life, for Aunt Louise retained Batheaston Cottage and left it to Elena on her death. In Everyday Elena implies that the move had been made because knowledge of her illegitimacy was causing her harm in Batheaston – ‘at last I could hardly bear to go out because of the slights and insults I received’. Croyde was familiar territory to Aunt Louise Crawshay, whose maternal grandfather and an uncle had, in succession during the second half of the 19th century, been rectors of Georgeham, the adjacent village. This family association, it was hoped, would provide protective cachet.
Lundy House 2020
Lundy House, where Elena and Aunt Louise were living, is situated on Moor Lane, a minor road running north out of Croyde and was rented from a farmer who lived in an adjacent house. In Everyday the farmer was ‘James Fisher’, in reality, George Bertram Fowler, who lived there with his aged mother and ran the farm with help from one of his sisters, Mrs Ivy Reed (aka ‘Mrs Rush’ in Everyday). Elena describes the Fisher/Fowler family and its history in some detail, all borne out by my research in genealogical records and newspaper reports. She even mentions that ‘James’ was unlikely to marry while his mother was alive and, sure enough, I see that it was only in 1937, a few months after her death, that he made it to the altar. Remember that Everyday was written some years earlier; Elena could read a situation. Moreover, George Fowler lost no time in selling his farm. His mother died on 30 January 1937 and the 27 March 1937 issue of the North Devon Journal carried an advertisement for the sale of all the livestock and agricultural implements of Lundy House Farm on the instructions of Mr George Fowler (‘giving up farming’).
Looking out of her ‘abode-in-attic’ window in Lundy House, Elena describes her uninterrupted view over bracken and stream to the bay, rejoicing in her solitude. The sea is still there and Lundy House still stands, but over the past 90 years Elena’s world has vanished. The house, available to rent, is now at the centre of Ruda Holiday Park, a sprawling collection of chalets, caravans, and camping pitches, where holiday makers are serviced by all the entertainments thought necessary in the 21st century. Where there was farmyard there is now the Cascades Tropical Adventure Pool, complete with flumes. Everyday describes a landscape and a society on the cusp of change.
In the early 1930s Croyde was already attracting holidaymakers. Elena refers to the ‘Season’, noting that cottagers were keen to let rooms to summer visitors. When describing the great flood that engulfed Georgeham and Croyde in June 1931 she mentions that the damage done was of real consequence to cottagers hoping to profit by the ‘Season’. She, naturally, found the drama of the situation irresistible. Somewhere a postcard may exist of Elena, her dress rolled to her waist, wading, with a friend, through the waters. She describes how ‘some thirty or forty people on the far side of the bridge greeted us with cameras and cheers, and picture-postcards of us were on sale in Grebe and Barum soon afterwards’. I think the postcards were published by Arthur Gammon, who ran the Croyde post office. Wouldn’t it be a coup to unearth this image?
At the time that Elena was writing, Croyde had just, in 1930, become the site of a permanent holiday camp run for its members by NALGO (National Association of Local Government Officers). This was an indication of how holidaying would transform the village after the Second World War. But in 1931 there were only two shops in Croyde (‘three if you count the butcher’s hut’), the local economy was based around farming, and the ‘Devon bus’ ran from Barnstable ‘four times a day in winter and four or five times an hour in the “Season”’.
Croyde Village in the Interwar Years
St Mary’s Road, the main street through Croyde, did not yet have a name; Elena merely refers to ‘the village’. Several of the farms she mentions fronted onto this street. Many of them, still there, retain their original names but have turned themselves into B & Bs, their back lands now filled with holiday lodges. I was amused to note that the carpenter, ‘Mr Flower’, whom Aunt Louise employed to do work in ‘Hartland House’ was undoubtedly William Budd, after whom a restaurant, ‘Billy Budd’s’ (formerly the Carpenter’s Arms), is now named. This seemed a very satisfying conjunction of local history, fact and fiction.
Croyde Village – a postcard posted in 1933
Everyday is packed with details of the lives of both local cottagers and farmers and of those who felt themselves to inhabit a higher echelon. I have deduced that ‘Miss Hunter’, prominent in local society, was Miss Constance Hyde, who lived with her brother and sister in a large Victorian house (‘Mole Manor’, notable for its ‘crude colours’) on the cliff north of Lundy House. ‘Miss Hunter’ comes in for some particularly scathing comment, Elena recounting that she was one of those who ‘would not recognize me’. If she had lived to have known it, I think Elena might have taken some satisfaction in the fact that the Hydes’ ancestral home, built a couple of generations back by the founder of the Birmingham Post, has been swept away, demolished to make way for ‘Baggy Point’, one of the more remarkable of Britain’s modernist houses.
Among others who attract her ire are ‘Cuthbert Fitz-Potter’, in Real Life George Pitts-Tucker, a retired businessman and general manager of the Saunton Golf Club. He organised the Ladies’ Championship, held at Saunton in 1932 and mentioned in Everyday. Elena makes clear she thinks that Pitts-Tuckers, who lived a little further up Moor Lane in Middleborough House, with three unmarried Pitts-Tucker sisters living opposite in Middleborough Cottage, had forgotten that it was only two generations back that, as leather drapers, they were mere Tuckers.
Elena was well-acquainted with Saunton and its golf links, for in a house opposite the entrance to the club lived her dearest friend, ‘Lilian’. In Everyday the Saunton house is ‘Inverary’, in Real Life, ’Knockbeg’. ‘Lilian’ was Margaret (Peggy) Lilian Longfield, daughter of an Anglo-Irish family whose home, Kilcolman House in Co Cork, had been burned down in 1921 during the ‘War of Independence’. Everyday is threaded through with mentions of ‘Lilian’, although we never really get close to her. The two young women seem to have periods of unexplained estrangements, one certainly being when ‘Lilian’ became entangled with a young man, ‘Philip’. But at the close of the book Elena came to the conclusion that ‘…whatever she might do or leave undone, Lilian would always be Lilian to me, to be helped and comforted should she need help and comfort.’ And this turned out to be true, although, from what I have been told, it was ‘Lilian’ who was more often the one who provided the help and comfort. For I have been in contact with Elena’s daughter and grand-daughter and with Peggy Longfield’s niece, all of whom tell me that the two women remained close friends for the rest of Elena’s life and that, after her death, the relationship was continued by her daughter. Indeed, Elena’s daughter stressed her own love for Peggy, who helped bring her up, working as a secretary to support her and Elena.
Knowing how closely Elena’s account of her life in Devon appears to be related to Real Life it would seem wilful to doubt the accuracy of the middle section of Everyday, describing the holiday she spent with Aunt Louise, voyaging to Marseilles and then on to Majorca. As I mentioned at the beginning of this piece, the two can be spotted disembarking from the Ranpura at Marseilles in December 1931. Elena recounts that this was where they transferred for the onward journey to Majorca. Needless to say, on that island and on the return journey by train via Paris she had no end of romantic adventures – adventures that led the Western Press and Bristol Mirror (30 March 1935) to describe her as a ‘modern girl’ [who] ‘obviously knows the art of living as well as the art of writing’. Other reviewers compared her style to that of E.M. Delafield (‘without the coruscation of arrows’) and Beverley Nichols (‘without the mawkishness’). A.G. MacDonnel (The Observer, 17 March 1935) acknowledged her charm and sense of humour, and, presumably rather satisfying to a young writer, The Morning Post applauded her ‘aptitude for pithy, picturesque English’. In fact, Everyday was well and quite extensively reviewed, with hope being expressed for future works. Alas, it was not to be. Her daughter has stressed to me how very prolific Elena was as a writer throughout her life, producing vast quantities of poems and novels, including an updated treatment of Pilgrim’s Progress, and was mortified that, despite being on the books of the Hope Leresche Literary Agency, she never again achieved publication. And this leads me to consider how it was that Everyday ever, as it were, saw the light of day.
Well, among the characters Elena encounters in Devon was one Cocbarlie Bilfather who, living in ‘Torr Cottage’ in the neighbouring village of ‘Barnum,’ she describes as ‘our Novelist, who came to Barnham sixteen years ago, penniless, obscure, and twenty-two, and is now perched upon the rail of fame – chiefly by studies of our local ways’. It was instant recognition – ‘Bilfather’ is, of course, Henry Williamson, of Skirr Cottage, Georgeham. I do have a copy of Patriot’s Progress on my bookshelf but have not yet read The Village Book (1930) and The Labouring Life (1932), which tell of Georgeham life. If it had not been for Covid-19 I would most certainly have already hastened to the British Library and devoured them, as well as other local histories of the area, but such a treat has not yet been possible.
In a few paragraphs Elena paints a seductive picture of Williamson, the man of letters, and his sanctuary, ‘a curious room which smelt of musk and mould’. Thus, it is perhaps no coincidence that Everyday was published by Jonathan Cape, publisher of Williamson’s two Georgeham books. Although I have no proof, I would be amazed if, at the very least, Williamson was not prayed in aid when Elena was looking for a publisher.
However, although Elena Shayne had no further success as an author, she did shine in another sphere. For from 1939, having returned with Aunt Louise to Batheaston and after an interlude in London, she became a leading light of the Bath ballroom-dancing scene. A holder of a Gold Medal from the Imperial Society of the Teachers of Dancing, throughout the war she organised a dance club for soldiers on leave in Bath. She married in 1944, soon after Aunt Louise’s death, but the marriage was short-lived (her daughter tells me that the young man in question, to whom she remained close throughout her life, was gay) and then married again in 1947.
Her second husband, a Bristolian, Paul Barel (1917-2007), was a conscientious objector during the Second World War and had transformed himself from costing clerk to dancer. In 1946, at Elena’s insistence, he changed his name by deed poll from William Cyril Barrell. For a few years the couple ran a health club, ‘Rhythm Therapy’, from Batheaston Cottage and in 1948 had a daughter, Pauline Louise Crawshay Barel. The birth notice in a local north Devon paper made special mention of the fact that the baby was a great-niece of ‘the late Miss Louise Crawshay of Batheaston’. Elena had dedicated Everyday to her great-aunt and there is no doubt of the love between them. However, this second marriage, too, did not last; there was a divorce and in 1957 Paul Barel remarried. Elena Shayne Barel died in 1984 and is buried in Georgeham Cemetery on Incledon Hill.
In my pursuit of Elena Shayne I have, as I’ve mentioned, been in contact with two or three people who remember her very well, each having a special name for her to add to all the others she accumulated in her earlier years. All confirm that she was a very interesting woman, by no means easy, but most definitely memorable. Certainly, her joie de vivre and carefree vagabonding have enlivened my lock-down summer as I accompanied her along country lanes, over the dunes and reefs, up on the cliffs, into dimly lit cottages, on country buses, in tea rooms, on horseback, on ships, in trains, not to mention on a short but lively visit to a Parisian bordello. And for all this entertainment, I offer my appreciative thanks to Furrowed Middlebrow without whom ….
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Today I offer you a studio photograph of Millicent Garrett Fawcett by W & D Downey. Published by Cassell & Co, 1890. She was 43 years old and had already been a leading light of the women’s suffrage movement for over 20 years.
A very good image – mounted. Suitable for framing. £40 + VAT in UK & EU.
In the past I have been concerned about the low profile afforded popularly to Mrs Fawcett. Indeed, in 2013 I wrote a post on the subject:Make Millicent Fawcett Visible.
And in 2016 when there was a suggestion that there should be a statue of a ‘suffragette’ in Parliament Square I did point out that there was already one nearby to Mrs Pankhurst (which I was also determined would not be moved) and one, so often forgotten, to the suffragette movement in general, just down Victoria Street in Christchurch Gardens. That resulted in another post – on Suffragette Statues.
As we all know, the idea of a ‘suffragette’ statue in Parliament Square morphed, thanks to input from Sam Smethers and the Fawcett Society, into the already well-loved statue of Mrs Fawcett. So that she is now indeed publicly visible.
Yesterday’s photograph of Mrs Pankhurst proved very popular, but if you would like demonstrate your loyalty to Mrs Fawcett, here is an excellent opportunity to acquire a photograph of her with which to adorn your desk or wall.
Do email me if you’re interested in buying. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
This photograph of Mrs Emmeline Pankhurst probably dates from c 1907, taken at her desk in Clement’s Inn, headquarters of the Women’s Social and Political Union.
The photograph comes from the collection of Isabel Seymour, who was an early WSPU supporter working in the WSPU office.
The photograph is mounted and is 15 x 20 cm (6″ x 8″) and is in good condition for its age. SOLD
Do email me if interested in buying. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
It has been my pleasure to write forewords to a few of the novels reissued in August 2020 by Dean Street Press under their ‘Furrowed Middlebrow’ imprint. The theme this summer is ‘The Village’.
A major part of my commission is to uncover something of the lives of authors who, often very popular in their heyday, have subsequently disappeared beneath the waves of the rolling literary tide. One such is Celia Buckmaster – whose life has something of a novel quality. She would have made a good heroine.
Although the other two novelists I’ve ‘resurrected’ are both named ‘Dorothy’, their backgrounds were very different. The novels of both were well-received by critics and well-loved by readers during the interwar period and well into the 1950s.
Needless to say, reading these novels, all quite delightful, and pondering on the lives of their authors, provided a welcome escape from our national predicament. One is never quite ‘locked-down’ when the imagination can roam freely.
A leaflet on which the WSPU set out eleven questions concerning Lloyd George’s behaviour in introducing a Government measure for Manhood Suffrage in 1913.
Among the many other pertinent questions: ‘Why do you expect us to accept your personal and unofficial advocacy of Woman Suffrage as a substitute for united and official action on the part of the Government as a whole?
Two-sided leaflet, printed in purple. In good condition – some creasing. £100
If interested in buying – email me – elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
4-page programme for one of the 8 matinée performances of this so-popular play, staged in April and May 1907 at the Royal Court Theatre, Sloane Square, under the joint management of John Vedrenne and Harley Granville Barker.
The programme includes the cast list, of course, and a notice that ‘At these Matinées, Ladies are earnestly requested to remove Hats, Bonnets, or any kind of head dress. This rule is framed for the benefit of the audience…’
Kate Frye (suffrage diarist) saw the play on 16 April and wrote a long entry that night in her diary where, including, amongst other comments, ‘I loved the piece – it is quite fine – most cleverly written and the characters are so well drawn. Needless to say the acting was perfection as it generally is at the Court Theatre and the second act – the meeting in Trafalgar Square – ought to draw the whole of London. I was besides myself with excitement over it ‘
This programme belonged to Isabel Seymour, an early worker in the WSPU Clement’s Inn office, She folded the programme into her pocket or handbag and then kept it for the rest of her life.
In good condition – extremely scarce £500
Email me if interested in buying – elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
THIS ARTICLE AND PHOTOGRAPHS ARE MY COPYRIGHT.
PLEASE CONTACT ME IF YOU WISH TO USE ANYTHING POSTED HERE.
Munition workers – mainly women -pose for the photographer. They are wearing their caps and the triangular-shaped munition workers badge can be seen pinned to many of the overall dresses. Young men sit at the front – displaying the fruits of their labours – shells.
The card bears the imprint of the Belle Vue Studios, Bradford – which was one of the best-known in the city and was in business until 1985. There’s no clue as to the name of the factory in the photograph but there were a number of munitions factories in Bradford, including the Low Moor munitions factory that suffered a large explosion in 1916.
In very good condition – appears to have been cut down by about 1 cm at some time – unposted £35 +VAT (UK and EU)
The Holloway Prison brooch was designed by Sylvia Pankhurst and awarded to members of the Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) who had been imprisoned. It was first mentioned in the WSPU paper, ‘Votes for Women’, on 16 April 1909 and was described as ‘the Victoria Cross of the Union’. [It pre-dated the Hunger-Strike medal]. The design of the brooch is of the portcullis symbol of the House of Commons, the gate and hanging chains are in silver, and the superimposed broad arrow (the convict symbol) is in purple, white and green enamel. The piece is marked ‘silver’ and carries the maker’s name – Toye & Co, London, who were also responsible for the hunger strike medals. This brooch is for sale. Such treasures of the suffrage movement are now very scarce. It is in fine condition.
SOLD
Email me if you are interesting in buying. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
The Women’s Guild of Empire organised a demonstration at a critical time just before the General Strike in April 1926. Here we see Flora Drummond supervising the making of the banners that were to be paraded on the Day. The march brought together ‘wives of working men who have had personal experience of strikes’ (as Elsie Bowerman wrote to the editor of ‘The Spectator‘) from all regions of the country, culminating in an Albert Hall meeting, chaired by Mrs Drummond.
A scarce and unusual image – a postcard In fine, unposted, condition SOLD
email me if interested in buying elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
Punch cartoon from the issue for 17 January 1906. ‘The Shrieking Sister’. The Sensible Woman (with her fur stole around her neck) addresses the dishevelled ‘suffragette’ (with a ‘Female Suffrage’ flag tied to her umbrella) – ‘You – help our cause? Why, you’re its worst enemy!’ They are standing outside a hall that advertises ‘Great Liberal Meeting’.
Mrs Pankhurst’s Women’s Social and Political Union had recently appeared on the national scene. Just over two months previously Christabel Pankhurst and Annie Kenney had been imprisoned after interrupting a Liberal party meeting – and this is how the WSPU is now personified. The General Election, which resulted in a Liberal landslide, was in full swing when the cartoon was published.
A full-page Bernard Partridge cartoon. SOLD
If interested in buying, do email me elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
Two snapshots – taken at the rally by John Collins, Kate Frye’s husband.
Here’s an excerpt from Kate’s diary entry for the day, as reproduced in Campaigning for the Vote: Kate Parry Frye’s suffrage diary (now out of print).
Saturday July 3rd 1926 [London: Flat C, 57 Leinster Square]
[After lunch] changed, off with J[ohn] – bus to Marble Arch and walked to Hyde Park Corner. Sat a little then saw the procession of women for Equal franchise rights and to the various meetings and groups. Heard Mrs Pankhurst and she was quite delightful. Also saw Ada Moore – getting very old. Saw Mrs Despard 82 and walked all the way. And the Actresses’ Franchise League.
The tiny snapshots show women and men walking into Hyde Park, with banners. If anyone else was taking photos that day, they do not seem to have made their way into public collections. Very good – very scarce. £20 the two together.
Do email me if you’re interested in buying these shadows of the past. elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
A silver and enamel Women’s Social and Political Union brooch. It was Sold to raise funds for the WSPU and was made by Toye and Co of Clerkenwell Road, London, the firm that made the WSPU’s hunger-strike medal. There is so much spurious material sold as ‘suffragette jewellery’; this is the Real Thing.
The brooch dates from between 1908 and 1914 and is in fine condition. It’s very scarce – and ready to wear.
For sale: £900 + VAT (in Uk and EU).
Email me if interested: Elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
Punch cartoon, 21 October, 1908. Two burglars on their way to ‘suburban night-work’ watch a line of policemen marching the opposite way, into Town, to deal with the Votes for Women demonstration advertised on the poster.
The burglars agree that the ‘sufferajits’ are a good thing, keeping the police occupied as they do. This was the time of the ‘Rush the House of Commons’ demo.
FOR SALE – Full page cartoon by Bernard Partridge. Fine condition £12 SOLD
The paper of the Church League for Women’s Suffrage was published monthly from January 1912. This is the issue for 9 September 1912. Issues of the paper are scarce and this one is in good condition for its age – packed with information. For sale – SOLD
If interested email me: elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
I have had this postcard in stock for about 20 years but, because I couldn’t identify either the women or the occasion, I have never catalogued it. Now, however, ‘Lock-Down’ has given me plenty of time to puzzle and ponder.
The only clue is on the reverse, where the photographer’s name, ‘Duncan, 15 Anlaby Road, Hull’, is printed. William Harper Duncan photographed the people of Hull in the early 20th century, advertising that he specialised in ‘outdoor photography’. He was clearly the obvious man for this commission.
But who are the women? Where are they massed? And why?
When I bought the card I had no magnifying glass with me and had to rely on my eyesight to decipher the partial lettering on the poster on the left of the photo. The one very clear word is ‘Women’s’, while another looked as though it might be ‘Demonstration’. Anyway, the combination caught my attention and was sufficient to entice me to make a purchase, thinking I’d be able to puzzle out the story behind the picture.
Well, as I say, that was 20 years ago and it is only now that I’ve arrived at a partial answer. I’ve spent ages with the British Newspaper Archive trying to figure out what possible Hull Women’s Demonstration I was seeing.
From the weight of the costumes the women are wearing I deduced that it was taken in autumn/winter and from the style that it could be dated to c 1902-1908.
It was clearly an occasion that meant enough to the organisers for them to arrange for Mr Duncan to attend with his camera. However, although I investigated every women’s meeting in the period I couldn’t marry the season and time of day – for it was obviously not taken in the evening – to any significant occasion. Of course I was hoping that I was looking at a suffrage demonstration but could not find evidence of any gathering that fitted into either the suffragist or suffragette campaigns. Nor was there any figure I recognised in the gathering – such as a visiting speaker sent to rouse the local society.
However, I had scanned the photo and blown it up to study the poster’s few visible letters and was once more wrestling with this puzzle when, yesterday, my eye strayed back to the figures wrapped in their winter coats and muffs and was suddenly caught by little dots of white that appeared on a fair number of breasts and lapels.
And there it was. The mystery was solved.
Those white ‘dots’ are in fact white badges – white ribbon badges – the insignia of the British Women’s Temperance Association. So this is a gathering – perhaps a Demonstration – of Hull Temperance women. Many of them may well have been supporters of the suffrage movement, but I think I can be fairly safe in assuming that they were gathered that day in Hull in a temperance capacity.
I have to confess that I’ve not been able to identify the building in front of which the women are standing. The obvious candidate would be the former Assembly Rooms, later rebuilt as the New Theatre, but the arrangement of pillars and steps doesn’t really fit. In the early years of the 20th c women’s groups met in a wide variety of halls and institutes around Hull, but this would appear to be grander and more municipal than most. Perhaps some Hull reader will be able to identify it?
UPDATE (JUNE 2022): A HELPFUL READER TELLS ME THAT THEY ARE STANDING OUTSIDE THE GUILDHALL.
And perhaps a reader, either from Hull or from anywhere else, might be interested in purchasing the card (£20 in fine condition, unposted) and carrying on the research. If so, email me: elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
I find it so satisfying when I am able to bring a photograph such as this to life. I acquired it two years ago but have not yet catalogued it because I could identify neither the banner nor the occasion. However, a little tenacity, a few idle lock-down hours and – EUREKA – I have found the answer.
The card came, with many others, in the collection of suffrage postcards compiled by the Hodgson Sisters . From this context I assumed the card had a suffrage connection, but I had never seen or heard of the banner. The photographer, as you will see from the imprint, was A. Dron of Brondesbury – so, as the Hodgsons were living in West Hampstead, I assumed the occasion pictured occurred in the area.
Even with a magnifying glass I couldn’t make out much more detail and it was only when I scanned the card and blew up the image that I found at the bottom right of the banner what seemed to be the artist’s monogram and a date – W E G S 1910. I felt I was making progress, but I’d never come across those initials when compiling my Art and Suffrage: a biographical dictionary of suffrage artists – and so was not much further forward.
I had tried searching for variations of ‘The Old Order Changeth’ in the British Newspaper Archive, but nothing relating to a banner had emerged. It was only when I searched for ‘banner’ in what I thought might be the local paper for Brondesbury in 1910, that the answer emerged. And it all seems so easy now.
The newspaper report in the Kilburn Times, 17 June 1910, revealed that the banner, a present to the North West London Union of the Women’s Social and Political Union, had been unfurled by Mrs Saul Solomon and was to be carried in the WSPU ‘Prison to Citizenship’ procession on Saturday 18 June. The artist was William Ewart Glasdstone Solomon [WEGS] (1880-1965), Mrs Solomon’s son.
Mrs Georgiana Solomon (1844-1933) was the widow of the governor-general of Cape Colony and had for many years been active in social reform and suffrage movements. By 1910 she was living in West Hampstead and had already been arrested once. Five months after the photograph was taken she was assaulted in the course of the notorious ‘Black Friday’ debacle in Parliament Square and in March 1912 was imprisoned after taking part in the WSPU window-smashing campaign. Her daughter, Daisy, who was also an active WSPU member, featured in one of their publicity stunts, sent in 1909 as a ‘human letter to 10 Downing Street. She also served a prison term and by 1912 was organizing secretary of the Hampstead branch of the WSPU.
Given the family association, it is not surprising that Mrs Solomon’s son, who had been a student at the Royal Academy Schools, should have put his art to the service of the Cause. He later became director of the Sir J.J. School of Art in Bombay (Mumbai) before eventually returning to South Africa, the land of his birth. He is classed as a ‘South African artist’ but we can now appreciate that one of his earlier works was in support of the British women’s suffrage movement.
The newspaper article includes the information that the banner depicts ‘two life-size figures, a man and a woman, and the idea which the artist apparently means to convey is the dawn of a new era of political sex equality. The lettering ‘Political equality’ and ‘The old order changeth, giving place to new’ is conspicuous on the canvas’. I haven’t been able to spot the words ‘Political equality’, but perhaps they are on the reverse.
The Kilburn Times report tells us that the unfurling of the ‘Old Order Changeth’ banner took place at ‘Plympton House’, 154 Willesden Lane, which was the home of Mr and Mrs A.A. Jones, and that speeches were made by Helen Ogston and Flora Drummond. Mrs Eleanor Penn Gaskell was also present. Alas, I cannot identify the two young women holding the banner. Possible candidates that spring to mind are Daisy Solomon and Helen Ogston, but neither look quite like the women in the photograph. Nor are they, I think, any of the Hodgson Sisters.
I now see that the report for the WSPU N.W. London branch carried in the issue of Votes for Women for17 June 1910 declares ‘Let no local women miss the chance of walking in the great Procession under Mr W. E. Gladstone Solomon’s most beautiful banner’.
And there I rest my case…so pleased to have retrieved the story behind this most intriguing of photographs.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
In January 2020 I gave a talk on Fanny Wilkinson, Britain’s first professional woman landscape gardener, to FOLAR (Friends of the Landscape Archive at Reading Unviersity).
Kate Frye (or, rather Mrs Kate Collins), one-time actress and suffragist activist – and an excellent diarist – spent the Second World War at her home, ‘Hill Top’, in the tiny hamlet of Berghers Hill, perched on the ridge above Wooburn Green, Buckinghamshire. Even in this remote spot they were not spared bombing.
On 1 September 1940 Kate noted in her diary ‘German planes – hour after hour – that nasty heavy jerky drone.’ 8 September ‘German planes droning over head – terrific search lights – a great red glow over London – flashes of gunfire and bombs. About 3am things seemed to get quieter and I went to sleep. London had its biggest raid from 5am till daylight – fires, killings and maiming and making people homeless. Most of it down by docks and East End.’ 26 September ‘The sirens went about 12 midnight. German planes have been going round and round for an hour and I heard bombs and gunfire in the distance.’
15 October 1940 ‘Had my bath before 9.30. A raid warning. I could not help thinking of the change from a year ago, when no bombs and a warning put one all in a flutter and now I got into a bath and took no notice.’ 16 October 1940 ‘Evening. Germans had been circling and dropping bombs and then three crumps. I thought our end had come. Folks came from next door and John went out with them to put out paraffin incendiary bomb in The Heights garden. One in our garden by the Woodman’s Hut. I started sweeping up glass and nailing up dust sheet to keep rain out.’ Next day ‘I saw the trees down round the bomb crater. The miracle is we are alive and as far as we can tell the house, except for one window, safe. A great deal of damage to the cottages and to the Kennels [this was a large house owned by Kate’s much richer relations, the Gilbey family].
The Woodman’s Hut Theatre was the local entertainment centre, for it was here that Kate and John staged short community plays. One was ‘a war-time German scene which I am at present calling “Heil Hitler” It is really Brenda Gilbey’s plight visiting in Bavaria.’ Kate had not been impressed by Brenda’s discipleship of Hitler. ‘Heil Hitler’ was staged in the Woodman’s Hut Theatre in January 1940, together with ‘Recalled to Life’, a sketch John had carved from A Tale of Two Cities.
The manuscripts for these sketches haven’t survived, but others have, all designed, in one way or other, to raise morale. One, ‘Go To Pot: a sketch of silly people for silly people’, alludes to wartime conditions, such as paper shortages, as well as to local Wooburn places and people. Another, ‘Babes in the Wood with the Blessed Gerard’, was written for performance by the St John’s Ambulance Brigade cadets, Blessed Gerard being the founder of the Knight’s Hospitallers. The manuscript indicates that over a number of performances lines were updated so that, early in the war, gas was cited as Hitler’s secret weapon but, by 1944, that had been changed by hand to read ‘the pilotless aircraft.’
A third sketch, ‘Time Is with Us’, has as its protagonists two wandering masons whom Kate based on the wooden figures on the front of an ancient building that was once Wooburn’s Royal Oak pub. Through these characters she tells a tale of a witch burned at the top of Windsor Hill, which leads up from Wooburn Green to Berghers Hill. That witch had cursed, ‘As I go up in flames – down shall I come one day in flames to punish you. Bombs – Bombs that’s what ‘twill be.’ ‘If any mother son of you shall be alive until that day or any of the kith and kin of you who stand and laugh shall be on Beggars Hill when Bombs are falling down – then woe to them.’
While John manned an Observation Post and ran the local St John’s Ambulance group, Kate entered, of necessity, into the wartime spirit of ‘make-do-and-men’.For instance, before the war they had often eaten rabbit, a cheap meat, bought from the butcher. But during the war John set out to catch rabbits himself. As Kate wrote: ‘It’s really dreadful work and John has had to kill them’. But she was able to spread the largesse so that ‘all around have all had pies.’ She was remarkably stoical in playing her part in the process, writing in her diary ‘John found he’d snared two bunnies. One dead the other he had to kill. However he was awfully good – got the jackets off beautifully and disembowelled them. I then washed them, cut them up and left them to soak. Cold work.’
Finally, after five and a half years of life such as this, came her diary entry for 8 May 1945 – ‘VE Day and it’s All Over. The wireless has been on and it is so wonderful one is not utterly cut off. John at decoration – what we have in stock and bits of wire and string and a great do and the getting ready to hear the Prime Minister at 3 o’clock.’
Later Kate was ‘on Wooburn Common to see John set light to the Bonfire and try and get some bangs going.’
Back at Hill Top, they heard the ‘relay of King’s Speech at 9pm. He got along well – here and there some terrible pauses. Then the news and description of all the seething masses of people cheering and it’s just fine. What we have always looked forward to and knew must happen one day – even in our darkest hour, but that it has happened is just a miracle. Then to light flood lamp and all walk round and admire and the house did look pretty. John has worked on it. Then cocoa and biscuits and more wireless at midnight and afterwards.’
You can read the story of Kate’s life here. It will make good lock-down reading. Kate’s diaries, recounting her experience of the Second World War day by day, are now held in the Archives of Royal Holloway, University of London.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Serendipitously, lock-down has given me the opportunity of making closer acquaintance with two cousins, products of that ever-interesting family – the Garretts.
Louisa Garrett Anderson and Margery Spring Rice, members of the generation that came after the pioneering Garrett sisters Elizabeth, Millicent and Agnes, are each the central figure in new books spotlighting aspects of ‘women’s work’ that, although not forgotten, have hitherto not received detailed attention. The books differ in concept in that one is a study of an enterprise and the other is a straight biography, but central to both is evidence of a steely Garrett determination.
Endell Street by Wendy Moore is a study of the military hospital opened in London during the First World War by Dr Louisa Garrett Anderson and her companion, Dr Flora Murray. The hospital was exceptional in that it was the first in which women doctors were able to treat male patients. In fact, the entire staff (with the exception of a few orderlies) consisted entirely of women. Although Dr Murray recounted the work of the hospital in Women as Army Surgeons, published in the immediate aftermath of the war, it is certainly time, a hundred years later, to look at it with fresh eyes.
Louisa Garrett Anderson (1873-1943), daughter of Britain’s pioneer doctor, Elizabeth Garrett, and Flora Murray (1869-1923), daughter of a retired Scottish naval commander, had both studied at the London School of Medicine for Women, with Murray finalising her degree at Durham University. At the turn of the 20th century women doctors still faced considerable difficulty in advancing their careers and Garrett Anderson and Murray, denied positions in general hospitals, were restricted to treating women and children. The professional difficulties with which they had to contend forced them away from the constitutional suffrage movement, led by Louisa’s aunt Millicent, and into Mrs Pankhurst’s militant WSPU. Garrett Anderson even spent time in prison after taking part in a 1912 protest.
Medal issued by the Women’s Hospital Corps. For sale 0 see item 512 in my Catalogue 202 Part 2
The outbreak of war in August 1914 offered an opportunity to escape the medical cage, an opportunity seized by Garrett Anderson and Murray with both hands. Their offer to help in the war effort having been repudiated by the authorities, they struck out on their own. travelling to France in September 1914 to tend wounded soldiers in hospitals they set up themselves, first in Paris and then in Wimereux. They named their outfit the Women’s Hospital Corps and It was the success of these first, small, French-based operations that led them in 1915 to be invited by the War Office to run a military hospital in London. They opened it in an old workhouse in Endell Street, Covent Garden, convenient for the trains bringing the wounded back from France. All involved with the Endell Street hospital were aware that they were operating on sufferance and that any lapse of standards would damage the professional chances of future women doctors
The author has researched diligently, enlisting the aid of diaries, letters and family memories of both staff and patients to paint a more inclusive picture of the hospital and its occupants than that depicted by Dr Murray. These reveal how demanding the work was of all the women. Stretcher bearers and surgeons alike tackled situations they had never previously encountered. Louisa Garrett Anderson was the hospital’s main surgeon and Flora Murray its anaesthetist. Obviously neither they, nor the other women doctors on the staff, had any previous experience of the types of wounds – and patients – they were now treating, but proved very competent in developing the necessary skills. From mid-1916 the hospital trialled the use of a new antiseptic paste, known as BIPP, which proved very successful when used on men sent back to them from the Somme battlefield.
As neither Garrett Anderson nor Murray left direct descendants or private papers it is difficult to get close to them. The image they presented is the one that survives and suggests that both were reserved, with Murray the more resolutely aloof and Garrett Anderson slightly more approachable. These characteristics, while perhaps natural, were also necessary in giving the women the credibility with which to operate such an establishment. Yet it is clear they were greatly appreciated by both staff and patients. Endell Street appears to have been comfortable and sociable, the male patients soon becoming entirely at ease with the idea of being treated by women.
Although it is perhaps difficult to bring the principals to life, Endell Street is characterised by the more personal stories of young women who, travelling from all parts of Britain, Australia, Canada and the US, had the foresight to record their experiences. These are enlivened by the revelations of all-too-human work-centred discontents. The novelists Beatrice Harraden and Elizabeth Robins clearly managed to wring a good deal of drama out of running the hospital library.
Endell Street was decommissioned in the autumn of 1919. During its final year the hospital treated victims of the three waves of the ‘flu pandemic, in February 1919 experiencing more deaths than it had in any month during the war. These deaths included a significant number of staff members.
But, as the author comments, as far as women in medicine were concerned, ‘The war had changed everything, and nothing’. After the war, while some professions were opened up to women for the first time, it was once again made very difficult for women doctors to build a hospital career and young women were again barred from many medical schools. Sadly, after a brief effort, Murray and Garrett Anderson were unable to continue running the hospital for children that they had founded before the war. In the final chapter the author assuages our curiosity and details the ‘afterlives’ of Garrett Anderson and the other women with whom we’ve kept company during the war years in Endell Street.
In the summer of 2017 I very much enjoyed taking part in a a performance of ‘Deeds Not Words’, an immersive drama staged by Digital Drama in the Swiss Church in Endell Street, opposite the site of the hospital. Belief was suspended, and I really felt myself walking through the hospital wards, encountering staff and patients. You can watch a Digital Drama film about the Endell Street hospital here. This is based on some of the material used by Wendy Moore in Endell Street.
Apparently Louisa Garrett Anderson’s one venture into print, a biography of her mother, was prompted by learning that a cousin, Margery Spring Rice (1887-1970), was considering Elizabeth Garrett Anderson as a suitable subject for just such a work. Now Margery, in her turn, has had her life placed under the spotlight- by Lucy Pollard, a grand-daughter. And what a rewarding subject she is. Here all is drama – love, death, affairs, court cases, divorce, blighted lives – set alongside the achievements of a life spent working to improve the lot of working-class women.
Margery Garrett was the daughter of Sam Garrett, a favourite brother of Elizabeth and Millicent. He seems to have been easy going; his daughter was rather more volatile. She was educated at Girton, married in 1911 and had three children before her husband was killed on the Somme in 1916. A disastrous second marriage produced two more children. Equipped with an abundance of energy Margery Spring Rice, as she now was, chanced on the cause of birth control as the subject of her life’s work. This was a subject shunned by the medical profession but one which she recognised as an imperative if poor women were to retain their health and any ability to care properly for the children they did bear.
In 1924, with two friends, she founded a ‘contraception clinic’ in north Kensington, a notoriously impoverished area, retiring only in 1957. It proved very successful with Margery ‘wholeheartedly encouraging and supporting the liberal attitude prevalent among its staff’. In 1939 she wrote Working-Class Wives: their health and conditions (Penguin) which has become a classic, re-published by Virago in 1981.
Margery Spring Rice is a delight to read. Well-written and impeccably referenced, this is no hagiography, Lucy Pollard making clear that Margery Spring Rice was a difficult woman ‘not much given to self-reflection or self-doubt’, ‘full of contradictions’, and, to my mind, all the more interesting for it. She spent much of her life in Suffolk and for a time was close to Benjamin Britten, although, rather poignantly did find herself dropped in later years. I love the cover illustration showing ‘Margery pushing a young friend along the Crag Path in Aldeburgh, New Year 1968’ (Christopher Ellis).
Wendy Moore, Endell Street: the trailblazing women who ran World War One’s most remarkable military hospital, Atlantic Books, 2020, £17.99.
Lucy Pollard, Margery Spring Rice: pioneer of women’s health in the early twentieth century, Open Books Publishers, 2020.
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
I bought this painting about 30 years ago – on an impulse – from a pavement stall in Islington’s Camden Passage market. It hangs in the hallway and I’ve passed it umpteen times a day ever since but it was only at the beginning of this week that I paused on the way to bed to see if it carried a signature . I suppose, back c. 1990, I must have noticed the artist’s name but, if so, I hadn’t given it much thought, it then being a near impossibility to research the ‘unknown’.
There, In the bottom right-hand corner, is, indeed, a very clear and neat signature – ‘Winifred Hartley 1956’. So, rather than going to sleep, I then spent an hour or so with ancestry.co.uk searching for a likely Winifred Hartley, only to realise that not only was the name fairly common but I didn’t even know whether she was married or single.
Frustrated by this apparent brick wall, the next morning I made the bold (but entirely obvious) decision to take down the picture, which had hung undisturbed for at least 20 years (that being, I have to admit, the last time the wall was painted). And, there on the reverse were the two labels that are the key to the identification of the artist.
(photo courtesy of Peter Denton)
One gives her address: Mrs Winifred Hartley, ‘Oakfield’, Woodmansterne Lane, Banstead, Surrey’ and the other, with the heading ‘Banstead Arts Group’, the painting’s title, ‘Housewives’ Choice’. There had also been a handwritten note of the price but this has been torn off, presumably by the dealer who sold it on. But its presence did indicate that the painting had originally been included in a selling exhibition.
It was then, thanks to Ancestry, only the work of a moment to uncover an agreeable depth of information about Winifred Hartley.
She was born Winifred Amy Castle on 29 June 1907 and by 1911, an only child, was living with her parents and maternal grandmother in a pleasant end-of-terrace house, 15 Bourne Road, Crouch End. Her father was clerk to a firm of hardware exporters. By the late 1920s the family had moved to 61 Park Avenue North, close to Alexandra Palace.
Winifred’s son, who subsequently contacted me, tells me that she was educated at Crouch End High School and then attended Sutton School of Art, but by 1925 was working as a bank clerk for the National Provincial Bank. Banks at this time tended to recruit young women only if they had received a thorough education. She was employed at the Bank’s headquarters, 15 Bishopsgate, and clearly took her work seriously, in 1929 passing the examination to become an Associate of the Institute of Bankers. The Institute’s examinations had been open to women since 1919, but I think ten years later it was still relatively rare for a woman to take the Part 2 to qualify as an Associate.
Former headquarters of the National Provincial Bank, 15 Bishopsgate
However, Winifred Castle’s banking career ended on 8 October 1932 when she married Richard Crozier Hartley (1901-1967), a fellow bank employee. At that time women were required to resign on marriage. The couple set up home in Banstead, at the address on the back of the painting, ‘Oakfield’, Woodmansterne Lane. On the outbreak of war in 1939 Winifred was contributing to the war effort by working for the Women’s Voluntary Services in the canteen set up for Banstead’s Air Raid Post, while her husband was an air raid warden for the bank in Bishopsgate. Their only son was born in 1943.
By 1950 Winifred Hartley was treasurer of the recently-formed Banstead Arts Group, a former banker being an eminently sensible appointee. In the 1950s the Banstead Arts Group held classes in painting and drawing several times a week and in the summer organized outdoor sketching expeditions. The Group’s first exhibition, held in October 1949, attracted over 500 visitors and I assume that ‘Housewives’ Choice’ was on display and probably bought at a similar exhibition, c 1956.
In 1982, fifteen years after the death of her husband, Winifred Hartley emigrated to South Africa, to be near her son and his family. She continued painting, clearly, from images I have been shown, delighting in the bright colours of Africa, and died there in January 1994.
I am very fond of the painting which, to my untutored, eye, strikes me as very well executed. I like the composition and the sense of movement. I love the colours and the costumes, particularly the duster coat. I like the idea of gossiping housewives, especially, I must confess, if they’re safely situated in the 1950s. I don’t know Banstead at all, so have no idea if this streetscape is based on reality. Certainly it seems to bear no relation to Banstead High Street as it is now, as shown on Street View. Does anybody recognise this corner (if it is a corner)? Does anybody else have a Winifred Hartley hanging on their wall?
UPDATES: July 2021/September 2023
Such is the interest provoked by my original post that I have now been put in touch, via Sweden, with Winifred Hartley’s son, living in South Africa -and with her grandson, living in the USA – such are the wonders of the internet. Her son has given me permission to include this photograph of his mother, taken in her youth – and her grandson has told me how encouraging his grandmother was of his own artistic endeavours. Winifred Hartley was clearly very much loved – and I now know that at least two other families have paintings by this artist hanging on the wall.
Winifred Hartley
And I do like the simple frame that Mrs Hartley chose for her painting
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
The New River running beside Sadler’s Wells, 1792. Owen’s Row can be seen in the background – at the right-hand side. The grating at this side of the St John’s Road bridge is visible. It was against the equivalent at the other side of the road that in 1841 the drowned baby was found. Credit: Wellcome Images
While researching my previous ‘Lock-Down’ post (see here ) I came across a story that is haunting me. Looking through mid-19th-century newspapers for mentions of Owen’s Row, Islington, I noticed a flurry of articles in 1841 – both in London and in national papers – concerning the sad story of Harriet Longley, on trial at the Old Bailey on a charge of infanticide.
The trial revealed that at about 8 o’clock in the evening of 19 March 1841 Harriet had arrived at Islington Green police station saying ‘she had murdered her child’‘by throwing it into the river’. A policeman had then gone with her to Owen’s Row. Once there she had pointed to the spot where she had thrown the baby into the New River, which at that time ran in front of the houses.
She said she had been sitting on the doorstep of no 19 ‘and the child had been crying the whole time she had been sitting there, and had been crying all the afternoon – she said she had no food for herself, and no milk to give to the child.’
A witness described seeing Harriet nearby at sometime just before 7 o’clock. In March it would by then have been dark, and, doubtless, chilly. I cannot imagine that that stretch of Owen’s Row, half-way between St John’s Street and Goswell Road, was well lit. Presumably that is why Harriet had chosen to sit there. She was noticed by a woman who was visiting number 14 and was still there when the visitor left. But, naturally, that woman didn’t think to speak to her. [Incidentally number 14 Owen’s Row reappears 40 years later in another of my posts, see here. Although totally unrelated that story, too, ended in tragedy.]
Harriet’s was the usual sad story. She was about 22 years old and was herself illegitimate. It would seem she had been brought up by her mother in Clerkenwell but was working as a house maid in Marylebone when she became pregnant. Around 6 months into the pregnancy had left, under what circumstances isn’t revealed, and, for whatever reason, had travelled to Kent. There she had been picked up for vagrancy and imprisoned in Maidstone Jail as a ‘rogue and vagabond’. It was in the prison that, towards the end of February, she had given birth to a girl, whom she named ‘Eliza Harris’. Leaving prison with 18 pence and her baby she had returned to London. She had not seen her mother as she was worried about being ‘scolded’.
By the time she arrived at the Islington police station Harriet had neither money nor baby. All she possessed was ‘a small parcel in her hand, containing a small quantity of bread’. The policeman went on to describe how ‘I offered her some food, some meat, which she had, she appeared to swallow it all whole, without chewing it, till she could swallow no more, and she had some coffee.’
Earlier in the day Harriet had been to the Marylebone workhouse but was refused entry and ‘referred to another parish’.
During the trial the wife of one of the sergeants at the police station told how ‘I was sent for when the prisoner came there – I undressed her, and examined her – I asked her how she came to do it – she said poverty had made her – I thought she had milk – I found her breast in a painful state – she said the child would suck a little, but not much.’
The policeman who went with Harriet to Owen’s Row found the baby ‘between fifty and sixty yards from the place where she pointed out as having thrown it in – the child was on the surface of the water, stopped by the iron grating that goes across the bridge, near St John-street-road – it was dressed in the clothes which I now produce – it was a female child.’
As I explained in my previous post, the New River, bringing water to London from Hertfordshire, used to run right in front of Owen’s Row and wasn’t covered in until 1862. There are no extant images of that precise stretch of the river but the scene was probably similar, if less bucolic, to that depicted in the engraving at the head of this post. There certainly could have been little to separate the path in front of the Owen’s Row houses from the river. In the 1830s the death was reported of a young boy who had drowned after falling into the river while playing there. So, dreadful as it is, we can imagine that it was the work of a moment for poor Harriet, in despair at her situation and tormented by the cries of her starving child, to drop the bundle into the water. By going straight to the police station she made no attempt to avoid the punishment that she must have known would follow.
And so it was that, at the Central Criminal Court, on 5 April 1841 Harriet Longley was sentenced to death. The jury, however, ‘recommended [her] to mercy in consequence of her distressed state’. The plea was accepted by the judge, who was indeed sympathetic to her plight and ‘in an affecting addresss to the prisoner, told her that he and his learned brother (Mr Justice Patteson) would attend to the humane recommendation of the jury, and represent her unhappy case to her Majesty, for the purpose of saving her life’.‘Oh’ [he said] ‘that young women would take warning by your unhappy fate when listening to the voice of seduction, and remember to what dreadful and fatal consequences the first false step but too often leads!’ [Bell’s Messenger, 11 April, 1841.]
That ‘first false step’ was to take Harriet Longley half way round the world – to Van Diemen’s Land (Tasmania). Her sentence was commuted to transportation for 10 years, a comparatively light sentence. One of 180 women convicts, she set sail from London on 14 June 1841 on the Garland Grove, bound for Australia’s prime penal colony. Coincidentally, just 10 days earlier a group of my own ancestors had embarked on the journey to Australia – to Melbourne – from Glasgow. You can read about their perilous adventure here.
Cascades Female Factory, Hobart, 1844
Harriet Longley arrived at Hobart on 10 October 1841. Tasmania’s online records (utterly fascinating) now conjure her up for us. She was 5 feet and 1 inch tall, with a fair complexion, brown hair, a high forehead, grey eyes, a straight nose, a small mouth….and 2 moles on her stomach. She was, I think, based at the main women’s prison, the Cascades Female Factory, but was probably allowed (‘assigned’) to work outside. Her conduct record tells us that in general she appears to have behaved well and that in 1846 she was recommended for a pardon, which was approved on 23 November 1847. For details of life at the Cascades Female Factory see here.
The convict records also show that in May 1843 Harriet Longley was given permission to marry another convict, Thomas Jarvis. He had arrived in Van Diemen’s Land in 1833, transported for stealing a handkerchief from a clerk as he walked across London Bridge. For that Jarvis, who was then 19, had been given a sentence of transportation for life. When one sets this sentence against that meted out to Harriet Longley, we can, perhaps, recognise that mid-19th-century justice, while harsh in so many ways, had taken into account the dire straits in which that young woman had found herself. And had had some pity.
The granting of her pardon is the last glimpse I have of Harriet Longley. Now free, she fades once more into the past.I wish I could see for her a happy future.
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Drawing, Sitting Room, 7 Owen’s Row, Islington; Richard Parminter Cuff (British, 1819 – 1883); brush and watercolour and gray wash over graphite; 2007-27-57. Cooper Hewitt, Smithsonian Design Museum.
I have a memory of this watercolour coming up for auction in the early 1990s, although I can no longer identify the sale. It caught my attention then because it is showed the interior of a house that once stood next-door-but-one to my own. At that time I was unable to contemplate buying it, even though it was so decorative and apposite, but the memory of it stayed with me and yesterday, now in lock-down, I idly searched the internet and with pleasure found that the image was now in the public domain, part of a Smithsonian collection.
The caption to the water colour gives some information but I thought I would see what I could do to amplify it now that so much material is available on the internet and I have plenty of time to indulge in idle research.
In fact, I was pleasantly surprised how easily I uncovered the reason why the artist had painted the scene. For in the 1851 census I found the artist, Richard Parminter Cuff, living in that house, 7 Owen’s Row in Clerkenwell, a short distance south of the Angel, Islington.
This is the earliest photograph I have found of Owen’s Row, showing it in 1946 after the ravages of war had taken their toll. 7 Owen’s Row is the 5th house from the right, the second in the row of lower houses. Built in 1775, it comprised a basement, ground floor, first floor, second floor and attic, with two rooms to each floor. The photograph shows the damage done to the row during the 1940 Blitz. In fact, by then three houses (numbers 11 to 13) had been demolished – you can see the wooden buttress supporting the end wall of the terrace. To the far left of the photograph had stood Dame Alice Owen’s Girls’ School, opened in 1886.
Dame Alice Owen’s Girls’ School at the beginning of the 20th century. No 7 Owen’s Row will be on the far right of the photo
The basement of the school was being used as a public air raid shelter when, in the evening of 15 October 1940, it received a direct hit. The building collapsed, killing about 150 people.
Until 1959 numbers 6-10 Owen’s Row remained standing but were then demolished because a new building for Dame Alice Owen’s Girls’ School was to be built on land immediately opposite.
Although in the late-18th century the Owen’s Row houses do seem to have been in single occupation, by the second decade of the 19th century most contained at least two households. This remained so until towards the end of the 20th century. At the time when Richard Cuff was living at number 7 the local papers frequently advertised rooms – or floors – to let in Owen’s Row. In the mid-1850s the weekly rent for one room on the second floor of an Owen’s Row house was 5 shillings. This is now my bedroom.
The majority of the male occupants of the houses were printers, jewellers, clockmakers, or workers in allied trades. The women were lodging house keepers, dressmakers and milliners. The households at no 7 might, in 1851, have been considered slightly more genteel than most. For when that census was taken Richard Cuff, described as ‘artist, engraver (architectural etc)’, was living at number 7 with his younger brother,William, a ‘bookseller -collector’. They constituted one household. The other was headed by John Peacock, ‘Baptist minister at Spencer Place Chapel’, and comprised his wife, son (a printer) and an 18-year-old ‘house servant’. The Chapel was small and situated in a very poor, densely populated area a little to the south of Owen’s Row. That the Cuff brothers should be sharing a house with a non-conformist minister may not have been entirely fortuitous their father, John Harcombe Cuff (c.1790-1852) being a dissenting minister back home in Wellington, Somerset.
Thus, we know that when he painted the watercolour in 1855 Richard Cuff had been living in 7 Owen’s Row for at least four years. However, sometime between 1855 and the next census in 1861 he moved, becoming a lodger in a house in Cumming Street, off the Pentonville Road. By this time his brother William had gone into business as a bookseller with another of their brothers, first in Preston and then in Dover. This could have been a factor in Richard Cuff’s decision to move.
From my knowledge of the proportions of the houses I would suggest that the watercolour is of the front first-floor room of number 7, showing just one of the room’s two windows. Although It is impossible to tell from the 1851 census how the two households were deployed around the house, I suppose we must assume that this room was most likely to have been one of those rented by the artist and his brother. In a search through the local paper, The Clerkenwell News, I found, dated 5 June 1858, an advertisement, headed ‘Unfurnished Apartments’ – ‘To be let, at 7 Owen’s Row, near the Angel, a First Floor and another Room, with use of Kitchen; healthily and cheerfully situated; good references given and required. No other lodgers’. Could this have been inserted at the time when Richard Cuff left the house? Were these his rooms?
Now that we know a little more about the background of the house and its inhabitants let’s look more closely at the decoration of that room in August 1855. Here’s the watercolour again.
Note the plaster moulding frieze, with dentilling, around the ceiling edge, and the marble fire surround. These look entirely typical of the late 18th century but, alas, the originals have long since vanished from the remaining houses so I’m unable to make a direct comparison.
I suspect that there would originally have been a wooden dado rail running round the room but that, considered dated, had already been removed, allowing the wallpaper to flow from ceiling to skirting board.
The wallpaper looks fairly typical of that fashionable in the 1840s/1850s, at a time when printing machines had brought the use of wallpaper within the reach of all but the poorest.
The window we see is hung with light curtains – perhaps those reserved specially for the summer -and are of printed chintz or muslin. They fall generously, as was fashionable, held back by metal (brass?) tiebacks. As I mentioned, the room has two windows, so the volume of the material in that area would have seemed generous as it pooled to the floor. We can see one shutter in the embrasure; these would, of course, have been pulled across in the evening.
The furniture dates from the earlier part of the 19th century, falling under the general heading of ‘Regency’. The 1858 advertisement that I quote above indicates that the first floor of 7 Owen’s Row was let unfurnished so perhaps we are reasonably safe in concluding that the furniture belongs to the Cuff brothers. In which case to my mind they show rather good taste in matching the style and simplicity of the furniture to the proportions of the room. I’m a little intrigued that one of the pieces, that standing under the window, is a work – or sewing – table. Was it merely decorative? The feet both of it and of the central table end in neat brass castors, facilitating easy movement.
The floor appears to be covered, right close to the skirting board, by a carpet – doubtless of English make – light in colouring. The drugget, rather oddly placed between the worktable and the central table is, of course, lying in front of the artist as he works and is, perhaps, there to protect the carpet from his paints. More usually one might expect to find it under a dining table, catching stray crumbs. A patterned hearth rug with a green border lies in front of the metal fender.
Because it is summer the grate is covered with a chimney board, to provide decoration and give some protection against the intrusion of falling birds and insects at a time when the chimney was not in use.
Among the ornaments on the mantle piece are, at each end, a pair of hand-held fire screens, probably made of papier-mache. Tasselled bell pulls hang at each side. Did the Cuffs ring and young Eliza, the ‘house servant’, answer?
As to the room’s decoration as it relates to the Cuff brothers’ trades – were the books lying on the central table part of William’s stock or collection? And was the picture hanging over the mantle piece one of Richard’s engravings, for it certainly appears to be in black and white. And are the other two, more colourful, pictures examples of his painting?
I do wish I could exercise a Street View-type camera and swivel the room around to look out of the window. For the view in 1855 would have been so very different from that of the present day. For then, running along the other side of the narrow Owen’s Row street, was the New River, bringing water from Hertfordshire to its final destination, the New River Company reservoirs just across the road, behind Sadler’s Wells. It was only in 1862 that the New River outside Owen’s Row was covered in. So, looking out of that window, Richard Cuff’s gaze would have travelled over that narrow width of running water and onto the gardens of houses fronting St John’s Street, which led up to the Angel.
And what of the rest of Richard Cuff’s life? I can see that by 1871 he was living at 101 Englefield Road, still in Islington, but to the east of Owen’s Row. He and two of his sisters were the only occupants, apart from a servant, of a comparatively large house. And then by 1880 he had moved again and was now the sole lodger at 5 Thornhill Square, Barnsbury, the house of a ‘commercial agent’and his family. There Richard Cuff occupied two rooms on the first floor and one on the second. All were unfurnished, so perhaps we can picture his elegant Regency furniture, his pictures and his matching papier-mache handheld fire-screens decorating those rooms. It was here that he died on 11 October 1883. He left well over £6000 and, to the British Museum, two letters he had received from John Ruskin, together with many proofs of engravings he’d made for Ruskin. The latter being an exacting master we can assume that Cuff’s engravings were of a high quality.
We’ve caught the merest glimpse into the life of Richard Parminter Cuff and, along with everything else that we will never know, I am left wondering about the woman standing in the sitting room of 7 Owen’s Row in August 1855? On the reverse of the watercolour is a study of the head of a young woman. The information given here – https://tinyurl.com/w3ofoaz – gives the date ‘1885’, but that must be a typo for 1855 – the artist died in 1883. Was the head intended for the figure of the woman? Who was she? and why was she left unfinished? There is a novel to be teased from this picture.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Part of Kate’s diary entry for 9 January 1915, in which she describes her wedding day. It was she who attached the photographs of herself and John.
Kate Frye’s diary, which she kept from the late 1890s until 1958 is very much the diary of a middle-class, albeit impoverished, ‘Everywoman’ of that period. Her experiences, although so particular to her, were shared by millions of others. Thus it was that, in 1919, she had a first-hand encounter with the Influenza – ‘Spanish ‘Flu’ – Pandemic, which, because it could prove quickly lethal, was rightly feared.
John Collins, husband of Kate (nee Frye) had come through the First World War, collecting a Military Cross on the way, and they were about to settle back into civilian life in a small rented flat in Notting Hill when, in February 1919, disaster struck.
On 12 February, to Kate’s horror, John was rushed to hospital – ‘The Prince of Wales Hospital in Marylebone. The old Great Central Hotel where our brief honeymoon was spent.’ The hotel (now the Landmark Hotel, had been taken over in 1916 by the War Office and turned into a military hospital for officers. ‘I had heard the doctor -“Influenza and pneumonia – both lungs”. ‘He is very ill, it is a toss-up if he pulls through.’
The Winter Garden, Great Central Hotel, Marylebone – a postcard kept by Kate all her life as a memento of her one-day honeymoon
So, rather than home-making, Kate’s first days back in London revolved around visits to the hospital.
Thursday 13 February 1919 [London: Notting Hill]
To Hospital 1.45 up to day sister’s room as she had promised the doctor’s report. But she was frightfully cross and rude to me. Sat with John 2 till 4 then was turned out. He looks very bad and is lying propped up by a back rest and in a pneumonia jacket. He is quite sensible but I would not let him talk much. They are frightfully rushed and not enough sisters – 800 patients and many dying of pneumonia.
A ‘pneumonia jacket’ was used to warm the patient’s chest, then one of the few treatments available.
Friday 14 February 1919 [London: Notting Hill]
No one can ever know but those who go through it what these hours of waiting are like and then the Hospital with its inhospitable airs and snubbing attendants. They are bound to answer enquiries concerning the ‘serious’ cases but that is as much as they will do. I stayed until I was driven away. He hates me to go and to leave him like that was so distressing.
Anecdotally, the hospital was not a happy place and, following the ‘flu outbreak, complaints were made in Parliament that patients with flu were being nursed in the same rooms as those recovering from wounds, thus causing a serious possibility of the infection spreading.
John remained in this Marylebone hospital for a month and then, having more or less recovered, was sent to a military convalescent home in Bournemouth. It was housed in the former Mont Dore Hotel (now Bournemouth Town Hall). Kate followed him, staying in digs.
Saturday 12 April 1919 [Bournemouth]
John had been before a Board and been granted 3 weeks sick leave, so that is alright – he is due to leave the Mont Dore today but can arrange to stay until Monday.
Monday 14 April 1919 [London: 12a Colville Terrace]
[Back to London flat] It is very wonderful to be home in our dear little flat and with John practically well again.
Kate’s diary is now housed in the Archives of Royal Holloway College, University of London. I only transcribed a few of the Influenza entries when writing her biography – Kate Frye: the long life of an Edwardian Actress and Suffragette – published as an ebook by ITV – see https://tinyurl.com/qn7rhxq. More useful information can be found in the diary if anyone is writing a study of the Post World War One influenza pandemic.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
I have long advocated the necessity for researching local histories of the women’s suffrage movement and, over the years, a number have appeared, varying in scope and depth of research.
Jennifer Godfrey’s Suffragettes of Kent (for details see https://tinyurl.com/y65pew3w) takes us through Kent’s involvement in the suffrage movement in a series of chapters that pick out elements of the campaign – such as a caravan tour, forcible feeding, the census boycott, arson attacks, and the 1913 NUWSS Pilgrimage – and relate them to the county and its inhabitants. I enjoyed this approach rather more than a conventional chronological narrative as it gave the author the flexibility to research particular ‘stories’ more effectively. She has assiduously mined local papers and introduces us to suffragettes/suffragists who have not previously received much attention.
I mention both ‘suffragettes’ and ‘suffragists’ because the title of the book is something of a misnomer – it is not only ‘Suffragettes of Kent’ that are the subject, but suffragists also. As ever, I imagine, it was thought a mention of ‘Suffragettes’ was better for sales. It is, however, only the suffragists of the NUWSS that are included and mention is only made in passing (p 151) of the activities in Kent of the New Constitutional Society for Women’s Suffrage. What a pity that all the hard work of Kate Frye in her efforts to convert Kent to suffrage are overlooked. My edition of Kate Frye’s suffrage diary, Campaigning for the Vote, is now out of print but you can read something of her work here https://wp.me/p2AEiO-ky.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading Suffragettes of Kent, which is lavishly illustrated, and imagine that it will win readers and stimulate yet further suffrage research in that county
If you live in the Swindon area do check out a new exhibition at the Swindon Museum and Art Gallery. Your ancestors may be represented in:
Auto Memento: Stickyback Photography in Swindon, 1900-1919
Date: 23rd October 2019 – 4th January 2020
Every day
Location: Swindon Museum and Art Gallery, Bath Road
Swindon
SN1 4BA
Time: 11:00 – 16:00
In the early 20th century, a photographic studio in Regent Street, Swindon, offered a unique way of having your picture taken. Stickyback photos were quick, casual, fun and cheap.
The Family Museum acquired its collection of 72 ‘Stickyback’ photographs in September 2016. This exhibition shows the entire set of images and explores this little-documented style of Edwardian popular photography. It offers a unique glimpse of everyday life and ordinary people in Swindon in the last century.
The exhibition also explores the advent and rise of amateur photography during the 20th century through The Family Museum’s extensive archive of family photographs and albums, cameras and photographic ephemera.
This exhibition is a collaboration between The Family Museum and Swindon Museum and Art Gallery.
Cost: Free
And, if interested in the history of family photography, do read The Family Museum’s first issue of its Famzine
Souvenir tissue napkin for Emily Wilding Davison’s funeral: Mrs Sarah Burgess, printer SOLD
Over the years several tissue paper napkins, souvenirs of suffrage events in London, have passed through my hands and I’ve wondered what manner of woman was Mrs Sarah Burgess, whose name appears as their printer at, until 1911, 14 Artillery Lane, Bishopsgate, and then at 4 York Place, off the Strand. A 1908 Street Directory tells me that, trading from the Artillery Lane address, between a horsemeat salesman and a greengrocer, she is ‘Mrs Sarah Burgess, manufacturer of paper switches, cut tissues, lace paper and shelf trimmings & confetti, and stationer, wholesale and export’.
An item in a newspaper titled Good Morning, 5 June 1945, tells a little more about Sarah Burgess. ‘The men who stand on the kerb in some of London’s principal streets and sell anything from a hairpin to a clock-work toy, all know “Auntie”. They have known her for a good many years, but none of them remembers the day she set up business.
She is Mrs Sarah Burgess, who in her shop behind the Strand (the street used to be called Of Alley, but is now York Place), supplies them with the novelties they sell to the passers-by. And she is eighty years old.
It is over 50 years since “Auntie” opened her ”swag” shop, and sold her first balloon to a street vendor. Since then she has been the friend of thousands of kerb-sellers and costers who havecome to her for toys, song-books, street guides, joke books, confetti….
Coronations, royal weddings and Peace Days are the high-spots of “Auntie’s” life.’
Tissue souvenir napkin for King George V’s Coronation £30
For, of course it was not just suffrage events that were commemorated by “Auntie” in her tissue napkins, but coronations, visits from foreign statesmen, the opening of Parliament etc etc. It is clear that, to mark a new event, the souvenir tissues could be issued very quickly. I will have several of these (non-suffrage) tissues for sale in my forthcoming catalogue.
It has, however, been well nigh impossible to find out details of the life of Sarah Burgess. I believe, but cannot prove, that she was born c.1864 in the parish of St Luke’s, just of Old Street, and married a Charles Burgess, who had probably died by the time she set up shop. Charles and Sarah Burgess appear in the 1891 census living at 8 Ironmonger Row; she has no given occupation and his is indecipherable. At the turn of the century, when her sister- in-law was convicted of the manslaughter of her infant son, the Old Bailey record tells us that Sarah’s brother-in-law was a lithographic printer – and there were many other printers living nearby. . The Ironmonger Row area was home to at least one ‘novelty’ manufacturer, Sparagapane, maker of Christmas crackers, the family business of Maud Arncliffe Sennett, a notable suffrage activist. I don’t know whether the proximity of this type of commercial activity had any bearing on Sarah Burgess’s chosen trade.
Tissue napkin commemorating the inspection by the King Emperor of Dominion troops, August 1919 £30
Souvenir tissue commemorating the march of Dominion troops through London, May 1919 £20
Tissue commemorating a Royal Pageant on the Thames, 1919 £30
All the tissues illustrated have been sold. But if you would like to be added to the mailing list for future catalogues, email me elizabeth.crawford2017outlook.com
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
I was very interested to see this image when it appeared on an internet site the other day because I’m not sure I’ve ever before seen a banner of the Catholic Women’s Suffrage Society.
The Catholic Women’s Suffrage Society was formed in June 1911 and in 1912 Beatrice Anna Augusta Gadsby BA (1878-1973) worked a banner for the society. The fact that she was responsible for the embroidery is mentioned in a 15 May 1939 Nottingham Evening Post report of a pilgrimage by the St Joan Alliance (as the CWSS was now called) to Walsingham. ‘The society’s banner of white, blue and gold headed the procession’, carried by Beatrice Gadsby and Gabrielle Jeffery, the society’s founder.
However, there are no further details of the design of this ‘blue, white and gold banner’. It might be thought that the ‘Joan of Arc’ banner held in the Women’s Library@LSE fitted the bill – its colouring and subject matter certainly do – but this was created, by the Artists’ Suffrage League, in 1908, three years before the founding of the CWSS.
In my opinion, the banner that was carried in the Walsingham Pilgrimage is more likely to be that in the photo below. I think it is the one, representing Joan of Arc, that is known to have been designed by Edith Craig and presented to the CWSS by Christopher St John.
And that Beatrice Gadsby was responsible for the embroidery. It’s location – and fate – is now unknown
Besides St Joan, the banner bears the names of ‘Iesus’ and ‘Marie’ down the sides of the banner, the name of the society across the bottom.
I think the occasion on which the photograph was taken was probably the women’s ‘Peace with Ireland Demonstration’, organized by the Women’s Freedom League. It was held on 2 July 1921 and the CWSS, with their banner, are noted as comprising ‘Section C’ of the procession.
The banner was present at the ‘Equal Franchise’ rally in Hyde Park on 3 July 1926, alongside a new banner designed by the artist Gladys Hynes, which bore the society’s new name, The St Joan’s Social and Political Alliance.
Here we see Rhoda Garrett, cousin to Elizabeth Garrett Anderson, Millicent Garrett Fawcett and Agnes Garrett, speaking at an important women’s suffrage meeting in 1872. She was the suffrage movement’s star speaker until her early death ten years later.
In addition to their involvement in the suffrage campaign, Rhoda and Agnes Garrett were the first women in Britain to become professionally-trained interior decorators, a career that brought an income and status rather more rewarding than the life of ‘governessing’ or of ‘a daughter-at-home’ that had seemed their respective lots.
Early pioneers are easily forgotten – but today, on the 100th anniversary of women first casting a parliamentary vote, I am honoured to have been invited to unveil a plaque to Rhoda and Agnes Garrett. It is placed on the house in Rustington in Sussex which they rented and where, together with Rhoda’s half-siblings and Millicent and Philippa Fawcett, they went to relax, away from London’s cares and responsibilities. Close by, in a now unmarked grave, Rhoda lies in Rustington churchyard.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the seventeenth – and last:
Mrs Alice Lucas, who stood as a Conservative candidate for the Kennington constituency in London. In fact she was the only woman candidate to stand as a Conservative, having taken over the nomination at the last minute from her husband, who died suddenly in the ‘flu epidemic three days before the election. Lucas had been MP for Lowestoft from 1900 until 1906 and had unsuccessfully contested Kennington in the two 1910 elections. In 1918 neither he nor Mrs Lucas received the Coalition government’s ‘coupon’, which went to the Liberal candidate. Alice Lucas was known in the area, having been chairman of the Lambeth Auxiliary Hospital during the war
Alice Lucas (1853-1924) was a member of a Jewish family and after her nomination a false rumour circulated that she was an enemy alien, born in Germany. This was vigorously denied by her agent. In fact her election address was vehemently anti-German, stating that she wished:
to bring the Kaiser and his associates to trial
to make Germany pay the full cost of the war
to deal most generously with returning soldiers and sailors
and for ‘imprisoned conscientious objectors to remain under government control until it was impossible for them to snatch jobs from returning heroes’ (South London Press, 20 December 1918)
Because she took over the nomination so close to polling day, voting in Kennington was postponed until 20 December when Alice Lucas came second to the Liberal candidate. In fact, by polling 3573 votes she gained 63 more votes for the Conservatives than her husband had polled in December 1910. In 1918 the Liberal winner took 4705 votes and the Labour candidate 2817.
Although Alice Lucas was unsuccessful, it was to be in similar circumstances – that of a woman standing in a seat in which her husband had an interest – that the first woman MP – and several others who closely followed – was to be elected. It was not until 1923, with the election of Margaret Bondfield, that a woman became an MP solely through her own effort.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the sixteenth:
Ray Strachey
Mrs Oliver Strachey, who was standing as an Independent for the Brentford and Chiswick constituency in Middlesex, supported by the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies.
Ray Strachey (1887-1940) (née Costelloe) was educated at Newnham College, where she was an active member of the Cambridge University Women’s Suffrage Society. In 1911 she married Oliver Strachey and by 1913 was chairman of the London Society for Women’s Suffrage, of which her sister-in-law, Philippa, was secretary. From 1916 until 1921 Ray was honorary parliamentary secretary to the NUWSS, responsible for supervising the passage of the 1918 Representation of the People Act.
Common Cause (20 December 1918) reported that she was asked to stand by ‘a large section of the electors, who were dissatisfied with Col Grant Morden [the candidate backed by the Coalition ‘coupon’]. Her meetings are always crowded. One of the things most widely resented was the sayin gof Col Grant Morden ‘the lady candidate ought to stay at home and look after her kiddies’. Mrs Strachey replied “She wants to go to Parliament in order to look after the kiddies. They need mothers there”; and Mrs Henry Fawcett, speaking on her behalf, has said it would be well to have among the 707 members of the House of Commons someone who knew one end of a baby from the other. The candidate herself, however, is not appealing for support on account of her sex. She is asking the elector for their votes, not because she is a woman, but because “she is a good candidate, and will represent them well.”
In her election address Ray Strachey declared:
I stand as a supporter of the Coalition Government. We have kept a united front during the war, and we must keep that unity until a good and lasting peace shall be established abroad, and until we have built up a t home those measures of reconstruction for which the whole nation waits.
It falls to us now to see that the victory is not in vain. This war must be the last war. I therefore support the establishment of a League of Nations, with such immediate mutual disarmament as is safe, and I trust that the question of the future economic policies and tariffs of the whole world will be settled through the agency of the League itself.
With regard to domestic reforms, I believe that housing is the most urgent and important question before us. In it I see the solution of many pressing social evils.
I attach the greatest importance to the question of the pensions to be paid to those brave men who have won our safety for us, and to the widows of those who have laid down their lives. Their well-being must be a first charge upon the State.
I care also, very particularly for the drastic improvement of industrial conditions, for education, and the care of public health and infant welfare,, and for all those public matters which affect the domestic life of the community.
I make no apology for asking you to vote for a woman. Women have their contribution to make to public thought and public service. I believe, with a profound conviction, that men and women should work together for the progress and good government of the Nation as they must for that of their homes. I hold the interests of men and women are so closely bound up together that they cannot be divided, and that what is for the good of one sex, must certainly be for the good of the other. It is for this reason that I support the perfect equality of men and women in the eyes of the law and the state.
The 20 December issue of Common Cause mentioned that Col Morden, in a bid to undermine her candidature, issued a large poster stating in ‘bold scarlet letters that “A Vote for Strachey is a Vote for the League of Nations”. Mrs Strachey naturally displayed this poster with pride, and explained that the League of Nations was what she did stand for before anything else.’ ..Mrs Strachey’s Committee Rooms were said by impartial witnesses to be the liveliest Committee Rooms in London. Many old friends met there, members of the London Society for Women’s Suffrage came forward gallantly to the fray. Much devoted voluntary work was done by members of the Chiswick branch of the LSWS, some of whom came from distant constituencies in order to have the pleasure of doing voluntary work for Mrs Strachey.’
Alas, despite this effort, Ray Strachey came last in the contest, polling 1263 votes to Col Morden’s 9077, with a Labour candidate taking 2620 votes. She stood again at Chiswick in 1922 and this time in a straight fight with Morden (now a Unionist) polled 7804 votes against his 10,150. In 1923, standing again at Chiswick as an Independent, she took 4828 votes, coming second to Morden, with the Labour candidate polling 3216 votes. She did not stand again for Parliament, but in 1931 became private political secretary to the first woman MP, Lady Astor.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the fifteenth:
Miss Emily Phipps, who stood as an Independent in Chelsea.
Emily Phipps’ Election Address (courtesy of University of Bristol Special Collections)
Emily Phipps (1865-1943), headmistress of Swansea Girls’ Secondary School, was the founder of the Swansea branch of the Women’s Freedom League, and president of the Swansea branch of the National Union of Teachers. She was an active member of the National Union of Women Teachers (which lobbied for women’s suffrage and equal pay) and was the Union’s president from 1915 to 1917.
She stood as an Independent candidate, backed by the National Federation of Women Teachers, in Chelsea at the 1918 general election. In her election address she stated:
Although standing as a non-party candidate, I heartily support the policy of utterly defeating German militarism, believing that our glorious victory must be confirmed by such peace as will forr generations prevent a resumption of war.
In Trade, on account of the special circumstances arising out of the war, I support a measure of Protection for our national industries, and Preference for our Colonies, but no Food Taxes.
Other necessary reforms are Equal Pay for Equal Work, irrespective of sex
the establishment of a Ministry of Health, with an adequate proportion of women representatives
the presence of women on all Local bodies and all Reconstruction Committees, on Trade Boards, Education and Health committees, and on Watch Committees of Local Councils
the opening of all Trades and Professions to Women on equal terms with men
the appointment of Women Judges and Magistrates
I also advocate better housing, the provision of a pure milk supply, and adequate wages for all workers, since it is better to prevent disease than to spend millions in trying to cure it.
Illegitimate children should be better protected and should be legitimised on the subsequent marriage of their parents
Divorce laws should be equalised as between men and women and there should be an equal moral standard for the sexes.
Greater attention should be paid to Education, every child should have the opportunity of revealing aptitude for languages, science etc. It is only by utilising all available talents that we can develop the resources of our country. We want more teachers, and they should be well qualified.
Emily Phipps’ only opponent at the election was the sitting Conservative MP, who had the Coalition’s ‘coupon’. Although defeated, she did well to retain her deposit, polling 2419 votes against Sir Samuel Hoare’s 9159..
Emily Phipps qualified as a barrister in 1925, resigned her headship and went to London to act as standing counsel for the National Union of Women Teachers.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the fourteenth:
Christabel Pankhurst, 1918
Miss Christabel Pankhurst, who stood as the Women’s Party candidate at Smethwick, the only woman to be given the Coalition government’s ‘coupon’.
Christabel Pankhurst (1880-1958) had been one of the leaders of the Women’s Social and Political Union as it campaigned for votes for women before the First World War. During the war she had worked alongside her mother, Emmeline Pankhurst, and with Flora Drummond and Annie Kenney, to aid Lloyd George’s war efforts. She was vehemently anti-Asquith, attacking him in the pages of Britannia (the successor to The Suffragette) as pro-German.
In 1917 the Pankhursts relaunched the WSPU as The Women’s Party, the programme of which was based on ‘equality of rights and responsibilities in the social and political life of the nation’. During 1917 and 1918 the Women’s Party campaigned in the industrial heartlands, particularly in South Wales, advocating industrial peace and warning against the dangers of Bolshevism.
When Christabel Pankhurst stood for parliament at Smethwick in 1918 her platform was to:
secure a lasting peace based on obtaining material guarantees against future German aggression
to improve the social conditions of the working classes by a levelling up in society
by industrial salvation and wealth production
to crusade against Bolshevism and ‘shirkers’
Christabel began her two-week campaign in Smethwick at the end of November 1918. At a meeting her mother, Emmeline Pankhurst, explained that Smethwick had been chosen because it was a new constituency – with no sitting member to be aggrieved when the Women’s Party won the seat. As a reward for fighting what Lloyd George termed ‘the Bolshevist and Pacifist element’ Christabel was given a coveted ‘coupon’ of coalition endorsement – and praised the chivalry of the Unionist candidate, who also had a ‘coupon’ but who withdrew to give her a clear run.
Voting took place on 14 December but it was a further two weeks before the results were announced and, in the meantime, Christabel gave her final speech of the campaign on 17 December – not in Smethwick but in London. Her last words, reported in what turned out to be the final edition of Britannia – were –
‘I would not change places with any other MP, because it is like a little bit of the heart of England, is this Smethwick. You have there an intensely patriotic people, a highly progressive people, including a body of working people who have not forgotten that they are citizens as well as workers…It is now for us to rouse ourselves and prepare ourselves for a year more full of duty and of high endeavour than we have ever known since we were born.’
But it was not to be. Christabel was defeated, polling 8614 votes to the Labour candidate’s 9389. She never repeated the experience, nor again became involved in politics, eventually moving to the USA and devoting herself to Second Adventism.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the thirteenth:
Eunice Murray (c 1922)
Miss Eunice Murray, who was standing as an Independent in the Bridgeton constituency in Glasgow. She was the only woman candidate in Scotland.
Eunice Guthrie Murray (1877-1960), the daughter of a Glasgow lawyer, became president of the Glasgow branch of the Women’s Freedom League and by 1913 was president of the WFL in Scotland. During the First World War she worked in a munitions factory and in 1917 she published a novel, The Hidden Tragedy, that centres on the heroine’s involvement in the militant suffrage movement.
Even before the passing of the Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act Eunice Murray declared as early as April 1918 that she would stand as a parliamentary candidate for Bridgeton at the next general election. The Daily Record and Mail, 23 May 1918, reported that she stood for:
Victory of Britain in the war
Women on the reconstruction boards
The restoration of Alsace and Lorraine to France, with the restoration of Belgium, Rumania, Servia, Poland, and Armenia.
The same treatment for Ireland as for other parts of the Empire. If Ireland wished Home Rule, Ireland ought to support herself, and not require our money.
She hoped that when the local veto came into operation in 1920, the bulk of the people would decide to shut the whisky shops.
In the settlement of peace terms, we must demand ton for ton from the enemy in respect of torpedoed vessels.
When the election was called Eunice Murray was supported in her candidature by the Glasgow branch of the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies. Just before polling day Eunice Murray stated in The Common Cause (13 December 1918)
As the only woman candidate nominated in Scotland, i want to place on record my strong appreciation of the sincerity with which my candidature has been accepted. it has been an honest election contest, and I have met no treatment that would not have been dealt out to a man candidate. My opponents are both strong men; and should I be so fortunate as to secure a victory, I shall feel really proud. My woman agent has mapped out the campaign in a masterly fashion; and I have had splendid support.
In the event she forfeited her deposit, polling 991 votes and coming third behind the Liberal (10,887 votes) and Labour (7860 votes). She never again stood for parliament although in 1938 she chaired a Status of Women Conference in Glasgow. She became interested in folk history, writing books on the history of costume and on Scottish Women in Bygone Days (1930), and serving on the committee of the National Trust for Scotland.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the twelfth:
Edith How Martyn, wearing her WFL ‘Holloway’ brooch
Mrs Edith How Martyn, who stood as an Independent candidate (Women’s Parliamentary League) for the Hendon constituency in Middlesex. Unlike many of the women candidates, she did live close to her constituency, in Hampstead Garden Suburb.
Edith How Martyn (1875-1954) was a lecturer in Mathematics at Westfield College, London, and a member of the Independent Labour party when she joined the Women’s Social and Political Union in 1906, one of its first London members. She soon gave up her teaching post to devote herself full time to the suffrage movement and in October 1906 was one of the women arrested in the Lobby of the House of Commons, receiving a two-month prison sentence.
In 1907, with Mrs Charlotte Despard, Edith How Martyn broke away from the WSPU to found the Women’s Freedom League. She believed in passive resistance but not in violent militancy. She was honorary secretary of the WFL from October 1907 until 1911 and was then head of the WFL’s Political and Militant department until 1912, when she resigned, ostensibly through illness, but very disappointed with the results achieved by the League.
At one of her first Hendon election meetings the chair was taken by Miss Councillor E.C. Growse and Alison Neilans, a very active member of the WFL spoke from the platform, mentioning that Edith How Martyn had great experience in political movements, and had taken honors at London University in political science and public administration. Mrs How Martyn mentioned that She stood for sane reform in all directions, and would support any measure which would tend to bring about better conditions of life. She trusted the people of this country did not intend to return in many respects to the kind of life that was tolerated before the war. They had tolerated poverty, disease, ill-health, unequal conditions of income, sweated work and slums. During the war it was realised we had a greater responsibility towards our fellow creatures. She might say, almost without reservation, that she was heartily in support of the Coalition programme, and so long as the Coalition Government carried out that programme, she would be a loyal and hearty supporter of it. But if it departed from the programme or did not attempt to carry it out, then the members of the House of Commons should vote against the Government.
She was in favour of a League of Nations and suggested that the claims of the widows and orphans in the war could be voiced in Parliament just as well by women as by men. She was in favour of everyone having a fair chance in life and more equality between the sexes. Especially did they want the diplomatic profession and the Foreign Office open to women.
She believed Germany and her Allies should make full reparation for all the crimes they had committed.
She was in favour of just as much Free Trade as they could get.
She was in favour of the reform of the House of Lords. One of the first reforms would be to put a few women there; and then the House should be made a more useful Second Chamber than it was now.
Ireland should have Home Rule as quickly as possible, but she did not believe in forcing it upon Ulster by means of machine guns or bayonets. She hoped in time to see separate Parliaments for Ireland, Scotland and Wales – and perhaps two English Home Rule Parliaments – one for the South and one for the North – and then an Imperial Parliament.
She was in favour of the nationalisation of land.
Although it might not be brought about in the next Parliament, some practical steps might be taken in the way of giving more powers to local authorities.
In the 20 December issue of the Hendon and Finchley Times Mrs How Martyn commented ‘Saturday was doubly noteworthy for women, as not only could they vote but could vote for a woman candidate. It was a satisfaction and delight to see women pouring to into the polling stations to use their newly-acquired rights of citizenship.’ She said that she did not really expect to win, although she might have had success in a straight fight with either of the two other candidates. In the event she polled 2067 votes, coming last behind the Unionist (14,431 votes) and Labour (3159 votes). One woman who did turn out to vote for her was Mrs Alice Singer, who, before the War, had been treasurer of the Hendon and Golders Green WSPU. On 14 December 1918 Alice wrote in her diary: I recorded in favour of Mrs Edith How-Martyn for the new constituency of Hendon.
Edith How Martyn did not stand again for Parliament, but in 1919 became the first woman member of the Middlesex County Council and was its first woman chairman. She was also actively involved in the birth-control movement and became honorary direction of the Birth Control Information Centre. In 1926 she was founder and first president of the Suffragette Fellowship, which aimed to perpetuate the ‘suffragette spirit’. At the outbreak of the Second World War she emigrated with her husband to Australia.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the eleventh:
Constance Markevicz (courtesy of Glasnevin Trust)
Mme Constance Markevicz, standing as a Sinn Féin candidate in the St Patrick’s constituency in Dublin, the only woman – of the 17 that stood – to win her seat.
Constance Markevicz (née Gore-Booth) was a member of a landed Anglo-Irish family, with an estate at Lissadell House in Co Sligo. She studied art at the Académie Julien in Paris, where she shared a studio with Australian artist Dora Meeson (later Meeson Coates), who later, once she had settled in London, became a founder member of the Artists’ Suffrage League. In Paris Constance met and married a Polish count, Casimir Markevicz, before returning to Ireland in 1903 and eventually joining the nationalist organisation, the Daughters of Erin.
Constance’s sister, Eva, moved to Manchester, where she worked with radical suffragists to campaign for the vote and improve the lot of working women, while Constance continued to campaign for Irish independence, took part in the Easter Rising in 1916 and, as a member of the Citizen Army, was condemned to death. However, because she was a woman, the sentence was immediately commuted to one of life imprisonment and, under a general amnesty, she was released in 1917.
In 1918 she was once again in prison, this time in Holloway, sentenced for taking part in anti-conscription activity, and it was while there that she stood for parliament in December 1918. As the Sinn Féin candidate she took 7835 votes, beating the Irish Parliamentary party candidate (3752 votes), however, like all Sinn Féin elected MPs, then as now, she refused to take her seat in the British House of Commons.
She was still in prison when the first Dail met, but, once released, served as minister of Labour from 1919 to January 1922., becoming the first Irish woman to be a member of the cabinet.
Constance Markievicz took part in the Irish Civil War, opposing the Anglo-Irish treaty. She was re-elected to the Dail in 1923, but, like other Republican members, did not take her seat. In 1926 she joined the new party, Fianna Fáil, and was re-elected as a Fianna Fáil candidate in 1927, but died a few weeks later, before she could take her seat.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the tenth:
Millicent MacKenzie
Mrs Millicent MacKenzie, who stood as a Labour candidate for the University of Wales seat.
Millicent MacKenzie (1863-1942) had been the first female professor in Wales, appointed as the professor of education (women) in 1910 having, most unusually, been allowed to keep her teaching position after her marriage in 1898. She had also been the co-founder of the Cardiff branch of the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies.
Millicent MacKenzie had retired by 1918, when she was the only woman parliamentary candidate standing in Wales. In fact the existing male Labour candidate, Professor Joseph Jones, had given up his place to her.
Millicent MacKenzie’s election platform does not appear to have caught the attention of the press. Her only comment that I can find is a rather bland statement in Common Cause, to the effect that ‘Women have won the vote, let them see to it that it is used to forward the highest interests of humanity’.
At the election Millicent MacKenzie polled 176 votes, the winner, The Rt Hon Herbert Lewis, vice president of the Board of Education, a Coalition Liberal, won with 739 votes. She did not stand again for parliament, devoting her energies to promoting the educational theories of Rudolph Steiner.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the ninth:
(image courtesy of Mirror Online)
Mrs Janet McEwan, who stood as a Liberal in the Enfield constituency in Middlesex, having taken the place of her husband, John McEwan, as prospective candidate after a breakdown in his health. John McEwan presided over the first campaign meeting that she held in Enfield in early December 1918. Janet (or Jenny) McEwan (1860-1921), mother of five, had been an active member of the Free Church League for Women’s Suffrage, holding drawing-room meetings at her home, ‘Carisbrooke’, Culloden Road, Enfield.
Janet McEwan had worked for many years ‘at the maternity centres and on the care committees, the education organisations, and the numerous local agencies which seek to give help wisely where it is needed.
She seeks to place the understanding born of experience and first-hand knowledge at the service of her country in the wider sphere of Westminster. She declares that Parliament will be better for the presence of women, and the work of reconstruction more wisely carried out if men and women of all parties work together in friendly co-operation. ‘(The Vote, 6 December 1918.)
Although Janet McEwan supported the Coalition Government, the Coalition’s backing (its ‘coupon’) had been given to the Unionist candidate, making her chances of success slim. She was reported in Common Cause (13 December 1918) as saying:
It is urgently required that women in general should be stirred from their apathy and led to realise the responsibility upon them to record their votes. There are indications that the poll will be a very small one in proportion to the large electorate. Workers and canvassers are almost unobtainable. This seat might be won by a women if adequate help could be thrown into the division on Polling Day.
Alas, Mrs McEwan suffered the fate of many other unsupported Liberals, and came a poor third (with 1987 votes) behind the Unionist (8290 votes) and the Labour (6176) candidates. She never had a chance of repeating her candidature, dying in 1921, before the next General Election.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the eighth:
Emmeline Pethick Lawrence (centre) with her husband, Frederick and Christabel Pankhurst
Mrs Pethick Lawrence, who was standing as a Labour candidate in the Rusholme constituency of Manchester.
Emmeline Pethick Lawrence had been one of the leaders of the Women’s Social and Political Union until, in the autumn of 1912, ousted, along with her husband, Frederick, after they had both spent a term in prison on a charge of conspiracy to commit damage. They then set up a new organisation, the Votes for Women Fellowship, centring around their paper, Votes for Women. In July 1914 the Pethick Lawrences joined the United Suffragists and gave their paper to the new society.
During the First World war Emmeline Pethick Lawrence was one of those women who backed the idea of a negotiated peace and was one of only three British women able to attend the Women’s Peace Congress, held in the Hague in 1915. She worked for peace during the remainder of the war and when she stood at the 1918 General Election her platform was partly devoted to the idea that the only chance for permanent peace in Europe was a just settlement with Germany.
In her Election Address on domestic matters she wrote:
Social Reconstruction is the business of the next Parliament. I support the resolutions adopted at the Labour Conference of June 1918. These include:
The Restitution of Trade Union Conditions.
National Scheme of Housing carried out with capital supplied by National Government.
National Non-Militaristic Education on basis of social equality from nursery school to University.
Prevention of Unemployment.
Minimum Wage.
Equal Pay for Equal Work.
Increased Old-Age Pensions.
Nationalisation of Railways, Shipping, Canals, Mines, Banks, and Land.
Nationalisation of the Drink Traffic.
Abolition o the Poor Law and Development of Municipal Health Service.
Free Trade and the Open Door in Commerce.
Admission of women to full political rights on an equality with men.
Pensions for Mother, who, deprived of the breadwinner of the family,, have to tend and provide for dependent children.
Repeal of Repressive Legislation
I stand for the immediate repeal of Military Conscription and of every form of Industrial Conscription, believing Conscription to be the supreme expression of arbitrary force in contra-distinction to self-governing freedom.
For the Repeal of D.O.R.A.
For the immediate restoration of civil liberties.
The immediate release of all political prisoners.
The vital question of sex morality can only be dealt with my men and women taking counsel together.
Rusholme was a new seat created in Manchester. In the event Emmeline Pethick Lawrence came third, polling 2985 votes, not far behind the Liberal candidate with 3690 votes. The winning Unionist candidate took 12,447 votes
The Vote, the paper of the Women’s Freedom League, carried a post-election piece in its 17 January 1919 issue, in which Mrs Pethick Lawrence declared: ‘that candidates should make a closer study of the psychology of their electors. Feeling counts infinitely more than opinions at great national crises. Last month the electors were actuated for the most part by a passion for justice, expressed in the minds of many by the demand for “the hanging of the Kaiser”. Appeals to enlightened self-interest,, the prospects of better housing, better wages – nothing moved them as much as this passionate devotion to an idea. “We have learnt at this election we must study the feelings and ideals of the people.”‘ Polling day, Mrs Pethick Lawrence declared, was the happiest day of her life in seeing women carrying out the rights of citizenship, even though the vote of the young and enthusiastic women is still to come.’
Emmeline Pethick Lawrence continued to campaign on women’s issues for the rest of her life , becoming president of the Women’s Freedom League and a vice-president of the Six Point Group.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the seventh:
Alison Garland
Miss Alison Garland, who was standing as a Liberal for Portsmouth South, but did not have the backing of the Coalition Government.
Alison Garland (1862-1939) was speaking, as a Liberal, at meetings of the Central and West of England Society for Women’s Suffrage as early as 1897 and in 1899 was elected president of the Devon Union of the Women’s Liberal Association. In 1899 she was the first woman to address the Indian National Congress, sent by the British Indian Parliamentary Committee.
By 1905 Alison Garland was a member of the executive committee of the Women’s Liberal Federation. She took part in the NUWSS ‘Mud March’ in February 1907 and in 1913 published a suffrage play, The Better Half’, which received glowing reviews in the daily press.
In her 1918 Election Address she wrote:
In the difficult period of Reconstruction there will be industrial problems specially affecting women, and I appeal to the women voters to elect me to speak and work on their behalf.
Women have helped to win the war, and their voice must be heard in the winning of Peace. They have their special point of view in such questions as
the upbringing and protection of children
the maintenance of an equal moral standard for men and women
the housing of the people
the formation of a Ministry of Health
national education
I have been all my life an ardent worker for the emancipation of women, and I would like to complete my labours by advocating their cause in the House of Commons.
I pledge myself to support a Coalition Government, led by Mr Lloyd George, in the settlement of the terms of Peace and any and every measure of Reconstruciton on progressive democratic lines. We have been a united nation to win the war. May this unity be preserved in rebuilding a new and better Britain. We entered into war to end all wars, therefore a League of Nations must be formed to secure the preservation of Peace.
I believe in self-determination for municipalities on all questions relating to Local Government,; therefore I am in favour of full popular control of the Liquor Traffic. Bright and cheerful places of public resort where men and women could gather for social intercourse should be provided.
As ‘self-governing’ nations alone are free, and free people alone are essentially progressive, I would vote for Home Rule for Ireland (with reasonable safeguards for Ulster) and a generous measure of self-government for India.
I favour the continuance of our Free Trade system which, having given us nearly one-half of the world’s Merchant Shipping, has enabled us to save the Allied cause from disaster. I stand by Free Trade because Protection impoverishes industry, encourages profiteering, and probably will be necessary to protect our key industries, but care must be taken that the resulting profits shall go to the State.
The crying need of the nation is the proper Housing of its people both in town and country. The Empire on which the sun never sets should not contain hovels on which the sun never shines. The Government has promised this national task, and they will have my loyal support in this and all measures taken to secure the health of the people.
A minimum wage should be established in every branch of employment to secure a reasonable standard of comfort. This should be regarded as the first charge on every trade and industry.
Alison Garland polled 4283 votes in the 1918 General Election, coming second to the Unionist candidate (with 15,842 votes). Labour came last (3070 votes). She stood again as a Liberal at Dartford (Kent) in the 1922 General Election, coming a very poor third, with 2175 votes. The winner was the National Liberal candidate. She came third again as the Liberal candidate in the Warrington constituency in the 1929 General Election, when the seat was taken by Labour.
Alison Garland did not stand for election again. She was president of the Women’s National Liberal Federation, 1934-36, to whom in her will she eventually left £50, and in 1937 was awarded an OBE for political and public service.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the sixth:
Norah Dacre Fox
Mrs Dacre Fox, standing as an Independent in Richmond, Surrey. Although born in Ireland, she had lived for many years in south-west London so it was a constituency with which she was familiar.
Norah Dacre Fox (1878-1961) had risen to prominence in the Women’s Social and Political Union during 1913 and 1914 and between May and July 1914 was imprisoned three times, on hunger strike. During the First World War she joined Mrs Pankhurst’s campaigns to mobilise workers into munition factories and to prevent industrial unrest.
During these war-time campaigns she supported the Pankhursts’ virulently anti-German policy and carried this forward into her Election Address. The Derby Daily Telegraph (26 November 1918) noted that she confined ‘her programme to the barring of all Germans from responsible public positions inn England, and excluding the Huns for ever from our trade and business. Nothing from her election address appears to have been reproduced in The Common Cause or The Vote – or, rather surprisingly, in Britannia, the Pankhursts’ paper..
However, this message seems to have had some appeal to the Richmond electors as Mrs Dacre Fox took second place at the election, with 3615 votes. The Unionist candidate won, with 8364 votes, but she beat the Liberal and another Independent candidate.
She never stood again for Parliament although, having in the 1930s become a leading member of the women’s section of Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists, she was from 1937 the prospective BUF candidate for Northampton. However, war intervened, the general election did not take place, and Norah Dacre Fox (now Norah Elam) was interned in Holloway as a Nazi sympathiser.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament(Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the fifth:
Mrs Charlotte Despard, who stood as the Labour candidate for North Battersea, a new constituency, backed by support from the Women’s Freedom League. She had been selected by the Labour party after John Burns withdrew his candidature.
Charlotte Despard (1844-1939) had been the leader of the Women’s Freedom League since its formation in 1907, when she led a group away from the Women’s Social and Political Union, dissatisfied with the autocratic style of Emmeline and and Christabel Pankhurst’s leadership. Charlotte Despard advocated, within the structure of a democratic organization, civil disobedience that broke no ‘moral law’, and a need for an awareness of the reality of the social and economic ills that could be remedied if women were enfranchised. During the campaign she was imprisoned on a couple of occasions
Mrs Despard was a vegetarian, a Theosophist and a supporter of the Labour party – or at least she was so long as it was prepared to back women’s suffrage. Thus after 1912, when the Labour party passed a resolution to include women’s suffrage in its programme, the Women’s Freedom League backed Labour party candidates in by-elections.
And so it was that in December 1918 Charlotte Despard was selected as the Labour party candidate for the North Battersea constituency, an area in which she had lived since 1890 and where she ran youth clubs, a welfare clinic, and a soup kitchen. Her election agent was John Archer, who had been the first person of colour to have been elected a mayor in London (for more about him see https://wp.me/p2AEiO-1kg).
Mrs Despard’s Election Address made the following points:
Equal political rights for men and women
Equal pay for equal work
The child as a most important factor in the State
Children to have first consideration in all food schemes
Boys and girls should go to work at a later age
Rigorous inspection of shops and factories where boys and girls work
Adequate provision for disabled men and women
Abolition of Defence of the Realm Act, especially 40D
Free speech, free press, and liberty of individual action
A League of Free Nations
In the NUWSS paper, Common Cause, Mrs Despard wrote:
As a woman Parliamentary candidate, standing for the cause that is nearest to my heart – the cause of the people, I send a word of greeting and recognition to our fellow-workers of the National Union [of Women’s Suffrage Societies] and the ‘Common Cause’.
You, my sisters, have for many years through good and ill report, stood for righteousness in public life and for those urgent reforms in our social system through which alone we can hope for social salvation; and your reward has come in these marvellous, unprecedented changes that have come to pass.
Now that the door of opportunity stands open for women, as well as men, it is good to feel that, in organisations such as yours, the training requisite to success in service has been given. I hope the new Parliament will have women amongst its members; and I firmly believe that their influence and help will be of special use to the nation now. On the ruins of the old world of privilege and convention we are building a new world – just, strong, free. Unity if the only firm basis of such a world. Therefore women must be there.
Mrs Despard polled 5634 votes. The Liberal candidate, her only rival, polled 11,231, winning by a comfortable majority. She never stood again for Parliament, subsequently devoting her remarkable energies to the cause of Irish freedom and Irish socialism.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
Mrs Carruthers (Miss Violet Markham), who stood as an Independent Liberal candidate for Mansfield, Nottinghamshire. She married in 1915 but continued to use her maiden name for her public work.
Violet Markham (1872-1959), daughter of an industrialist and grand-daughter of Sir Joseph Paxton, was an independently wealthy social reformer who, in the years before the First World War, was a leader of the anti-women’s suffrage campaign. However, her views modified during the War and in 1918 she stood as an Asquithian Liberal in Mansfield, where her brother, Sir Arthur Markham, had before his death in 1916, been the MP. It was ironic that Mansfield, which had had a very active suffrage society since the 1890s, should have been contested by a woman candidate who, until very recently, had been so vehemently anti-suffrage.
In her election manifesto Violet Markham declared:
I am proud to feel that the Mansfield Liberals are willing in this contest to give me the same measure of political independence as they accorded to my dear brother. My Radical and Democratic convictions have only been strengthened by the experience of the war. The war has proved in the end a splendid vindication of democracy. I have come forward, therefore, as an Independent Liberal, giving a general support to the Coalition Government in carrying out the Peace on the basis of President Wilson’s fourteen points; but not bound by pledges, and with a free hand to deal with the issues of Reconstruction as they arise on any other matters of Government policy. I am a warm supporter of the ideal of the League of Nations.
I remain a convinced Free Trader, but recognise that the abnormal situation created by the war calls for certain modifications in its practice. I am prepared to consider the question of the protection of Key Industries, which ought to be viewed as part of the nation’s system of defence. Industries to which this protection is accorded should, however, be controlled by the State and their profits devoted to national purposes, not to private gain. Cases of dumping would, I think, be a suitable subject for investigation by one of the Standing Committees of Enquiry, which I hope to see set up by the League of Nations.
As Liberals, we deeply deplore that the war has added yet another chapter entailing much mutual bitterness to the fatal record of misunderstanding between England and Ireland. I have always been a Home Ruler, and am prepared to support a Home Rule Bill or any measure on which the Irish would themselves agree; but I am not prepared after the experience of the war to coerce N.E. Ulster, for which separate arrangements must be made.
Measures concerned with Housing, Health, Wages, Land, will, if adequate, receive my warm support. Such measures must deal fearlessly with the vested interests involved, or they will prove of no account.
In industry we must work for the establishment of a new social order based, not as in the past,, on profit-making and strife, but on the principle of a public service to which all contribute and in which all share.
Violet Markham took third place in the election contest, polling 4000 votes. The Labour candidate took the seat with 8957 votes. The Coalition ‘coupon’ went to a National Democratic candidate who came second. An Independent trailed in fourth place with 878 votes.
Violet Markham never again stood as a parliamentary candidate, but was one of the first women to be appointed a justice of the peace, and in 1924 was elected a town councillor in Chesterfield, her home town, becoming mayor in 1927. By 1937 she was deputy chairman of the Unemployment Assistance Board and in 1945 was the co-author of a report on the Postwar Organisation of Private Domestic Employment.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the third:
Winifred Carney
Miss Winifred Carney, who stood as a Sínn Féin candidate for the Victoria constituency in Belfast.
Winifred Carney (1887-1943), a Catholic brought up in the Falls Road area of Belfast, was by 1912 in charge of the Women’s Section of the Irish Textile Workers’ Union, before becoming secretary to James Connolly, founder of the Irish Socialist Republican Party. In 1914 she joined Cumann na mBan, the women’s auxiliary of the Irish Volunteers and was present at its first meeting.
Winifred Carney took part in the 1916 Easter Rising and was with Connolly in the Dublin GPO as he was wounded. She was arrested and was eventually moved to England, to Aylesbury Jail, finally released at the end of 1916.
At the 1918 election Winifred Carney polled 539 votes and was heavily defeated, coming last of the three candidates, her defeat due more to politics than to gender, for the Victoria constituency in East Belfast covered the dock area and was traditionally Unionist. It was unsurprising that Winifred Carney lost to a Labour Unionist candidate, even though in other constituencies Sínn Féin were very successful. winning 73 out of the 105 seats they contested.
It is to be noted that, other than including Winifred Carney in the list of women standing for election, the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies did not give any space in their paper, Common Cause, to her manifesto – or give any details of her campaign.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
21 November 2018 marked the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
This is the second:
Margery Corbett Ashby, photographed in 1923
Mrs M.C. Ashby who was standing in Birmingham’s Ladywood constituency as a Liberal candidate, with support from the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies.
Margery Corbett Ashby (1882-1981) was the daughter of a Liberal MP, Charles Corbett, and both her parents were strong supporters of women’s suffrage. She had a university education, trained as a teacher in Cambridge and from 1907 to 1909 was secretary of the NUWSS and in 1910, the year she married, she was an organizer for the Liberal party. She resigned from the NUWSS executive committee in 1914, too committed a Liberal to support the Election Fighting Fund policy, by which the NUWSS was backing Labour party candidates at elections.
After the First World War she took Mrs Fawcett’s place at the Versailles Peace Conference (Mrs Fawcett did not wish to attend) and helped advise Germany on the founding of its women’s police force.
Margery Corbett Ashby’s candidature at the 1918 general election caused some difficulty for the Birmingham Society for Women’s Suffrage which was criticized for supporting her, rather than the Labour candidate, as the latter party had, unlike the Liberals, traditionally supported the suffrage movement. She was also supported by the Society for Discharged Soldiers – who obviously liked point 7 of her Election Address.
In her lengthy Election Address Margery Corbett Ashby made her (Liberal) views clear:
A League of Nations. To make another War impossible, to abolish conscription, to lighten the burden of taxation for armaments, to substitute open treaties, ratified by Parliament for secret diplomacy, to pool raw materials and food for the hungry peoples of the world. I welcome the practical beginnings of the idea in the International Council which will be established at the Peace Table to ration the nations.
Free Trade and No Food Taxes.
Rights of Little Peoples: Home Rule is imperative to give Ireland the same free choice of government we have demanded for Poland, Alsace-Lorraine and Serbia.
Health and Housing: I believe the urgency of housing admits of no delay, and that there must be immediate provision of a) Houses with at least 3 bedrooms, bath room, water laid on, within the average wage-earner’s means. b) A garden or allotment with each house, for those who want it. c) State assistance to encourage municipal enterprise; the adequate taxation of land values; and the right of compulsory purchase of land for all public requirements at the rate-book valuation.
Equal Citizenship: Real equality between men and women before the law in a) all questions of marriage, morals and the home. b) Opportunities of general and technical training. c) Equal pay for work of equal value above a sound minimum for all. d) All trades, industries and professions.
Labour and Leisure. a) A shorter working day and adequate minimum wage, enforced by law if necessary. b) Regularity of income through universal non-contributory unemployed insurance. c) More freedom and consultation in the workshop. d) Public recreations of a wholesome kind
Soldiers, Sailors and Mothers: I believe in Justice without Charity to secure: a) Adequate pensions for widows with dependent children. b) A real right of maintenance for wives. c) Fullest possible help of all kinds to disabled or discharged soldiers and sailors. d) Fair treatment for women war workers. I welcome Mr Asquith’s desire to improve the Old Age Pensions secured by the Liberal Party, and should like to see the pension raised the age limit lowered.
Civil and Industrial Liberty: I support the immediate restoration of a) All British liberties of citizenship; and b) All essential trade union rights for men and women to enjoy the full use of collective bargaining, surrendered or lost during the war.
Trade and Transit: I favour a) The removal of irksome Government control from private industries. b) The encouragement of production by science, canals and railways. c) The continued municipal ownership of electrical supply. In general I should like to see more Municipal Administration and less Whitehall Bureaucracy.
At the December 1918 election Margery Corbett Ashby polled 1152 votes and lost her deposit. She then stood, again unsuccessfully, at every inter-war election except that of 1931. She succeeded Eleanor Rathbone as president of the National Union of Societies for Equal Citizenship and in the late 1920s was the co-founder of the Townswomen’s Guild. She also was president of the Women’s Freedom League. At various times she was also president of the British Commonwealth League, member of the executive committee of the Family Endowment Society and chairman of the Association of Moral and Social Hygiene. Margery Corbett Ashby was made a Dame of the British Empire in 1967.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Today, 21 November 2018, marks the 100th anniversary of the passing of the Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act, by which women were for the first time able to stand for election as members of Parliament.
It was only earlier in the year, on 6 February, that some women (over 30 and fulfilling a small property qualification) had at long last been granted the parliamentary vote and now, as the Great War had come to an end, women actually had the prospect of sitting in the House of Commons.
The short bill, passing rapidly through all stages of the parliamentary process with little opposition, granted the right to stand for election to all women over the age of 21, although any woman of that age would have been unable to vote. A curious situation.
With a general election called for 14 December, there was little time for women to organize election campaigns, but in the event 17 women took to the hustings. Over the next couple of weeks I’ll tell you something about each one of these pioneers, taking them alphabetically.
The first is:
Mary Macarthur (courtesy of Working Class Movement Library)
Mrs W.C. Anderson (Miss Mary Macarthur) who was standing for the Stourbridge (Worcestershire) constituency as a Labour candidate. With the enabling bill passed so close to the election most political parties had already selected their candidates. However Stourbridge Labour party was one of the few organisations that had taken the chance that women would become eligible to stand for election and had already selected Mary Macarthur as their candidate. She was a heroine in that area, having in 1910 led the women chainmakers of Cradley Heath in their battle for better pay. She was, of course, much better known as Mary Macarthur, but it was her married name that appeared on the ballot paper, doubtless leading to confusion among some voters.
Scots-born Mary Macarthur (1880-1921) had been secretary of the Women’s Trade Union League from 1903 and during the pre-war suffrage years had supported the cause of universal adult suffrage rather than the limited women’s suffrage advocated by the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies and the Women’s Social and Political Union.
In her 1918 Election Address Mary Macarthur promised:
I will fight for Free Speech – a Free Press – Free Trial – for Social Economic and Political Freedom.
A Man’s Pay for a Man’s Work. It should be illegal to employ a woman on the same work as a man for less pay. The stand of life must not be lowered by unfair competition.
A Fair System of Taxation. We shall have a war debt of £7000 million. Those who can best afford it must pay. I am against all taxes on food. The Income Tax limit should be raid and further relief given in respect of family responsibilities. Super Taxes and Death Duties should be increased. I am in favour of a Capital Levy exemption possessions under £100 and pressing lightly on possessions under £5000.
Public Good Before Public Profit. Land, Railways, Canals, Coal and Iron Mines, Life Assurance, Banking, Electricity, and similar monopolies should be made public property, run for public good and not for private profit. Equitable compensation should be given to existing owners and shareholders.
Although defeated, as were all but one of the women candidates – and, indeed, many leading male Labour politicians, Mary Macarthur polled a very creditable 7835 votes at Stourbridge.
In the remainder of her short life, Mary Macarthur continued to work for the Women’s Trade Union League and campaigned to set up the International Labour Organisation.
A memorial to Mary Macarthur in the form of three holiday homes where ‘tired working women’ could go for a rest, was launched in 1922 and still operates today – now as the Mary Macarthur Holiday Trust.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Kate Frye had worked as an organiser for the New Constitutional Society for Women’s Suffrage from 1911 until the summer of 1915. In January 1915 she had married her long-time fiancé, John Collins, an actor who had for many years been a member of the Territorial Army. Now an officer, John was stationed at Shoeburyness with the Essex and Suffolk Royal Garrison Artillery until shipping out for France in December 1916. He spent the next two years on the Western Front and in June 1917 was awarded the Military Cross. His letters home to Kate are held by the Imperial War Museum.
One of the pages from her diary in which Kate describes her wedding day. It was she who attached the photographs of herself and John
Letter from John 1 Nov 1918
Dearest
So it is all over or practically so I wonder what happens next. Please to look for a flat for us duckie. I am longing now to get home to my dear one for good. Oh, won’t it be lovely.
It is a very wet day and I have been running about all day expecting anything but I don’t think we shall ever move again except to go home. There is practically no great excitement here over this morning’s news. Everyone seems to take as a matter of course. It feels just like the end of a term at School where one does not quite know the time the train goes home or how to employ ones time until that is known. It is a most peculiar feeling. I expect the feeling will suddenly burst out however. I wonder how the people at home are taking it. Oh dear Muzz you don’t know how lovely it is to think I shall soon be home with you. It is almost unthinkable after all these years but it’s going to come true after all. I am quite well and safe and fancy I have heard the last shell burst that I shall ever hear. I am now thinking of getting up some of the plays and a concert. What about my mustache – shall I take it off yet, or when I get home? There used to be a German Captain in this house. He was in charge of a German Dog School and he had an English wife who was here with him. The old party who owns the house says that his wife hated the Germans much more than the Belgians did. They left one Doberman behind a great big wolf dog not a bad party but a bit wild. Well dearest there is no more news except that I do love you ever so much.
Fondest love
John
On the day the War ended Kate was at home in her cottage at Berghers Hill in Buckinghamshire and wrote in her diary:
Monday November 11th 1918 [Berghers Hill]
I was thinking and wondering every inch of the morning, and could not settle to anything. Was cleaning a collection of shoes about 11.30 in my room, the windows were open – I sat up and listened. Boom-Boom-Boom – then a Hooter and then I thought it time to bestir myself and went in to Agnes then downstairs to Kathleen [the daily maid] and out to listen to the various sounds proclaiming that the Armistice has been signed. And thank God for our many and great mercies. Mother was down the hill and had called at the Manor House – the news was all over the green and soon up here – and the remarks of the hill were marvellous. As soon as I could settle to anything I sat me down and wrote to John. Is he safe, and will he really be spared to come home to me? [She eventually manages to buy a copy of the Daily Telegraph] ‘Yes, the glorious news, as announced ‘Surrender of Germany’ Armistice signed at 5 a.m. Cease fire at 11 a.m. The D.T. has news of Abdication of the Kaiser and Crown Prince, and flight to Holland. The whole of Germany is seething with revolution. It seems as if it will be a second Russia.
Sunday November 17th 1918 [Berghers Hill]
A fine day, though cold. Woke up at 7 and went off to Church as a beginning to my day of Thanksgiving. I did wish I could have had a letter from John but I tried to give a whole hearted thanksgiving for our many and great mercies….[After Church] When I got in the Postie has just been bringing me a letter from John, written on the 11th. Oh I was thankful and feel indeed to have a grateful heart. He is safe and well and of course very very pleased and looking forward to coming home. [In afternoon] Mother, Agnes and I off to the special service of Thanksgiving at 3 o’clock. The Church was just packed, every one there including Sir John and Lady Thomas. Such singing and the reading of that wonderful and extraordinary lesson from Isaiah – a nice sermon from the Vicar and the singing by him more or less of ‘Land of Hope and Glory’.
Kate wrote many plays during her lifetime but the only one published, Cease Fire!, was set at the Front, in a cellar of a ruined house ‘Somewhere in France’, during the final hour before the Armistice was declared. One of the main protagonists is clearly based on John, the character’s military career following the same somewhat idiosyncratic pattern as had his, his deep love for his wife driving the plot. Published by Samuel French in 1921, ‘Cease Fire!’ reads very well today.
Yesterday was surreal – as I found myself at Buckingham Palace to receive an OBE for ‘Services to Education – in particular for promoting knowledge of the women’s suffrage movement’. This was an event so far removed from my expectations from life that to mention ‘wildest dreams’ would be to give it too firm a reality.
However it was a most interesting occasion – wonderfully orchestrated – ceremonial and yet convivial – and I was delighted that the history of the women’s movement should be honoured in this way..
After bidding farewell to the gilt, crystal, and red velvet, to the Beefeaters, the Gurkhas, and the Guards, to numerous paintings of the royal family through the ages, and, noted in passing, to a Jan Steen, a de Hooch, and a Vermeer, I and my family party of 12 enjoyed a merry, afternoon-long lunch.
This statue of Mrs Emmeline Pankhurst, erected by her admiring and loving followers, will remain THE memorial to her at Westminster.
I reported on 15 September the very welcome news that, as a result of a vigorous public protest, Sir Neil Thorne and the Emmeline Pankhurst Trust had withdrawn the planning applications they had made to Westminster Council to remove the existing statue of Emmeline Pankhurst and resite it in Regent’s Park.
They had made these applications in order to make way for a new statue of Mrs Pankhurst that they had commissioned, for reasons that are not entirely clear, and intended to place on Canning Green to the west of Parliament Square.
The planning application came up for consideration at a meeting held on 2 October 2018, the minutes of which were issued on 15 October 2018. Perhaps unsurprisingly the decision was:
That the application be refused on the grounds that it is contrary to the Council’s Saturation policy for the reasons set out on page 18 of the agenda and due to the presence of a second statue of Emmeline Pankhurst in the vicinity.
One of the many new books I have enjoyed in this suffrage centenary year is The Prison Diary of Annie Cobden-Sanderson, edited by Dr Marianne Tidcombe.
Annie Cobden-Sanderson, daughter of the eminent Liberal politician, Richard Cobden, and wife of Arts and Crafts bookbinder and printer, T.J. Sanderson, was one of the first suffragettes to go to prison in London. The diary covers her imprisonment, 1-23 November 1906. The fact that Cobden’s daughter was serving time in Holloway made the headlines and sent a frisson through the Liberal establishment.
The following year she went on a US speaking tour and her prison credentials engendered handsome publicity for her friend Harriot Stanton Blatch’s Equality League.
The book contains both a facsimile of the diary (the original is held at LSE) and a transcription, together with extensive notes by Dr Tidcombe on the characters and events mentioned and a biographical introduction giving a full description of Annie’s life.
Annie Cobden-Sanderson was arrested again in 1909 – on the occasion shown in the photograph above – but that time her fine was paid without her knowledge, depriving her of another short prison term.
This beautifully produced and illustrated book, published by Libanus Press, is available from all bookshops and from Amazon – https://tinyurl.com/y7asmw8g
A planning application has been made to Westminster Council to dismantle this statue of Mrs Pankhurst – which stands as close as possible to the Houses of Parliament.
The plan is to banish this statue to the grounds of Regent’s University, a private university, in Regent’s Park. See the planning application here.
The group behind the application calls itself ‘The Emmeline Pankhurst Trust’ but has no connection with the other Pankhurst Trust that is working to restore the Pankhursts’ home in Nelson Street, Manchester. Nor does it have any connection with the Pankhurst family. Rather, it is a mysterious group led by a former Conservative MP (for Ilford South), Sir Neil Thorne, whose wife, according to a newspaper report, was walking her dog through Victoria Tower Gardens when she encountered Mrs Pankhurst’s statue and, knowing nothing of its history, thought it might be better placed elsewhere.
This statue was funded by the Pankhurst Memorial Fund set up following Emmeline’s death in 1928 and championed by fellow suffragettes Kitty Marshall and Rosamund Massey. Flora Drummond was the chair of the group and Lady Rhondda the treasurer. A fund of £2500 was raised, the statue commissioned, and in 1930 it was unveiled by the prime minister, Stanley Baldwin, with Dame Ethel Smyth conducting the band. See Pathe newsreel of the occasion here.
In the 1950s works in Victoria Tower Gardens endangered the statue but, thanks to the dedication of her surviving friends, it was moved even closer to the Houses of Parliament, to the present site. Ever since 1930 it has been the scene of commemoration, not only by former suffrage campaigners, but by hundreds of thousands of members of the public who have invested their memories in this site. Here is a 1955 newsreel item of former suffragettes meeting by the statue (then in its original position in Victoria Tower Gardens) in celebration.
Sir Neil Thorne and his group propose to create a new statue of Mrs Pankhurst and site it on Canning Green, which is a rather forgotten stretch of grass separated from Parliament Square by a very busy road. Those campaigning for the statue to Millicent Fawcett were at least able to claim for her a site in Parliament Square itself. This proposed new statue to Mrs Pankhurst would be way in the background – separated from Parliament by two main roads and the whole of Parliament Square. What is the sense in that when at the moment she is closer than any figure (other than Oliver Cromwell!) and when photographs of the statue (and the memorial to Christabel Pankhurst at the base) also capture the Mother of Parliaments? If Sir Neil Thorne’s group had their way she would be very lonely, stranded with George Canning on a meaningless piece of grass and all the history invested in the original statue forgotten
Because, unsurprisingly, Westminster Council won’t countenance two statues to Mrs Pankhurst within a short distance of each other, Sir Neil Thorne’s group has had to find a way of removing the original statue, which at the moment is Grade 2 Listed.
There was an attempt to try and move it to her grave in Brompton Cemetery, but that came to nothing. So now their idea is to remove it to the grounds of Regent’s University in far off Regent’s Park, with which Mrs Pankhurst has no association whatsoever. Sir Neil Thorne, however, does – in that he is a member of the Steering Group Committee for the British Chinese Armed Forces Heritage project, a collaboration between the Ming-Ai (London) Institute and Regent’s University. Presumably this association is not unconnected to the offer by Regent’s University to remove the problem of the original statue. Who do you think will see it in the shrubberies of Regent’s Park?
Here is the planning application for the erection of the statue in the grounds of Regent’s University. It contains a spurious attempt to link the fact that the buildings now occupied by Regent’s University were erected by Bedford College – once a woman-only college – and that, therefore, this is a suitable home for Mrs Pankhurst’s statue. This is nonsense – as Mrs Pankhurst was never involved in any campaign to advance women’s education. Such a meretricious elision of historical truth.
Finally, you can read the planning application for the new statue here. You will note that when it was first presented in 2017 it received a number of comments in support. On reading them I think you will get the sense that those supporting the new statue don’t seem to know anything of suffrage history, far less the fact that Emmeline Pankhurst already has a statue.
Of course, if this ‘Pankhurst Trust’ had wanted to erect a new statue to Mrs Pankhurst that did not involve casting the original aside as though it was of no consequence, I would have no objection. But I feel very strongly that we should honour the intention and actions of those who committed their time and money to setting Mrs Pankhurst in such an excellent position next to Parliament. If the group behind these planning applications would like to honour the memory of Mrs Pankhurst they would do better to support the original ‘Pankhurst Trust’ , which is attempting to create a museum in the Pankhursts’ former Manchester home, rather than wasting hundreds of thousands of pounds on an unnecessary piece of statuary and in the process destroying a valuable site of suffrage history.
Time is running out. If you do not agree with these three plans:
to dismantle the existing statue of Mrs Pankhurst from its existing site – OBJECT
to re-erect the original statue in the forecourt of Regent’s University – OBJECT
erect a new statue of Mrs Pankhurst on Canning Green – OBJECT
Updates: 22 August 2018
1. A couple of online petitions have been started – and one, hosted by 38 Degrees – see here – has attracted thousands of signatures. This is pleasingly popularist but, if you live in the UK, is NO SUBSTITUTE for making comments on the 3 planning applications that are being put to Westminster Council. It is imperative in planning matters to go through the proper channels. I have asked the originator of the petition to include links to the planning applications, but nothing has yet been done. UPDATE: A LINK HAS NOW BEEN INCLUDED
The Westminster officer in charge of the case has a responsibility to read all comments made and take notice of them when writing his/her report to the Planning Committee. Even if he/she knows of a petition there is no obligation to take any notice of it.
I am worried that those who only sign the petition will feel they have ‘done their bit’ but will actually have wasted a very real opportunity of making their views known to the Planning Committee.
There is no difficulty in registering objections to the planning applications – hundreds have already done so. No suffragette would have been deterred!
2) The Curator’s Office at the Palace of Westminster has commissioned a very thorough report into the plan to remove Mrs Pankhurst’s statue from Victoria Tower Gardens – published today (22 Aug 2018). Read it here. It makes extremely interesting reading but, to cut to the chase, the verdict is definite. ‘The proposal to move the memorial, therefore, should not be granted planning permission or listed building consent.’ (Page 37)
UPDATE 15 SEPTEMBER 2018
The proposals to remove Mrs Pankhurst’s statue and re-erect it in the grounds of Regent’s University have just been WITHDRAWN.
The planning application to erect a new statue of her on Canning Green is still ‘Pending’.
Hoowever, we would be wise not to be too complacent…this may be some kind of tactical move. Be vigilant.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
My new catalogue – No 198 – will contain a large collection of suffrage ephemera kept all their lives by three sisters, Edith Lizzie (1881-1958), Florence Emily (1882-1967), and Grace Margaret (1887-1966) Hodgson.
Women of the Hodgson family. With mother, Jemima, in the centre it is thought that Grace is on her right, with Mabel back left, next to Florence and with Edith on the right (Photo courtesy of Mabel’s descendants)
They were the daughters of Edward Hodgson (1857-1919) who was, successively, a linen draper, by 1901 a dairy manager and in 1911 was a ‘dairyman, unemployed’. The 1901 census found Florence, who is described as a ‘telegraphist’ (she worked for the Post Office), staying as a boarder, with a fourth sister, Mabel, at the Sunday School Union Home of Rest in Wykeham Road, Hastings. This would suggest that these sisters, at least, had possibly been teachers at Sunday School. Edith and Grace were back home with their parents, living at 31 Lawford Road, Kentish Town – Grace was a schoolgirl and Edith was working as a pupil teacher.
When the next census was taken, in 1911, Grace, who is now a teacher working for the LCC, and Mabel, a telegraphist, were at home with their parents at 39 Estelle Road, Gospel Oak, Hampstead – but there is no trace of Edith and Florence. There are two ‘Census Resistance’ badges in the collection – perhaps once owned by Edith and Florence. By now they, together with Grace, had been active for some time in the Women’s Freedom League and, as they can be found nowhere else on the census, it is to be presumed that they were following the call to boycott. For by this time all the sisters, except Mabel (who married in 1914), were active members of the Women’s Freedom League. It is likely – because there are items of WSPU ephemera in the collection – that they had originally joined the WSPU, but had then moved over to the WFL.
The collection also contains two very rare badges referring to the right of the subject to petition the King. These are associated with the WFL picket of the House of Commons organised by the WFL between July and October 1909. A postcard to ‘Miss Hodgson’ from Mrs Bettina Borrmann Wells, who organised the picket, makes clear that Edith, at least, took part in the picket.
The collection contains many other badges, as well as sashes worn by the sisters, ribbons that may have been worn as neckties, a miniature WFL pennant representing Holloway Prison, and a home-made ‘dolly bag’ – a green drawstring bag with gold carrying straps, on the front of which is sewn a WFL cloth shield badge. It is very unusual to find items of suffrage dress that have a clear provenance. The sisters’ intense interest in suffrage personalities is demonstrated in the large number of real photographic portrait postcards that they bought – and kept. These include members of the WSPU as well as of the WFL.
The sisters continued supporting the WFL with financial donations until at least 1932. They continued to live together for the rest of their lives – latterly at 39 Laurier Road, Dartmouth Park, NW5. Family memory has it that the sisters had one each of the house’s three floors.
The sisters were obviously keen to see something of the world – and in 1930 all three travelled to Tangier and two years later Edith and Grace visited Japan. They probably had other adventures – but these are the only ones that survive in the records.
As with the Stevenson Sisters, about whom I wrote last week, no family memory remained of the involvement of Edith, Florence and Grace in the suffrage movement – nor, indeed, anything else of their lives – the fate, as I’ve mentioned before, of the maiden aunt. It is only since one of Mabel’s descendants took the Collection to an auction house that something of their story has slowly been revealed.
If you would like to receive a copy of the catalogue containing the Hodgson Collection, email me elizabeth.crawford2017@outlook.com
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Place is important to me and sometimes my attention is caught by an incident occurring somewhere I’ve known well. And so it was that four years ago I noticed that a suffragette ‘outrage’ had taken place at the Richmond Post Office. Ella Stevenson, a WSPU member, was charged with placing a packet containing two tubes of phosphorous in the post box attached to the main Richmond Post Office. In my youth I knew this Post Office very well – it is a rather fine building – 70 George Street – but was long ago abandoned by the PO and is currently a branch of Anthropologie. Quite coincidentally, very soon after I had become aware of this incident and had pictured it in my mind, I was asked to value two hunger-strike medals – one awarded to Ella Stevenson and the other to her sister, Geraldine. Other matters have intervened, but now, four years later, here is something of their story.
Ella and Geraldine Stevenson were two daughters in the large family (12 children, I think) of Leader (1826-1907) and Louisa Stevenson (1828-1913). Leader Stevenson, who was an ‘Australia merchant’, was born in London of non-conformist parents, his wife in Tasmania. In the first decade of the 20th century the family was living at 10 Cumberland Road, Kew.
Both Ella [Ellen] (c. 1860-1934] and Geraldine Stevenson (1866-1949) were financial supporters, in a smallish way, of Mrs Pankhurst’s militant suffrage organisation, the Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) and until October 1910 Ella was Literary Secretary of the Richmond and Kew WSPU.
Ella’s first militant action seems to have taken place on 4 December 1909 when, as ‘Ethel Slade’, she was arrested in Rawtenstall, Lancashire, after breaking windows in the local Liberal Club. She had gone north to protest at a meeting held by a government minister, Lewis Harcourt, but had been barred from the theatre where it was being held. She refused to pay a fine and was sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment. It doesn’t appear that the police had yet discovered her real identity.
The following year, in November 1910, as ‘Ethel Slade’, Ella Stevenson was sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment after taking part in demonstrations surrounding the ‘Black Friday’ riot in Parliament Square.
Neither Ella nor Geraldine Stevenson was at home on census night in April 1911 and we may presume they were following the WSPU boycott call. Later in the year, again as ‘Ethel Slade’ Ella was charged with breaking windows in Parliament Street on 21 November – as part of an organised WSPU demonstration (because the government was proposing to bring in a Manhood Suffrage Bill – excluding women). ‘Ethel Slade’ was sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment.
Now, although I know that Geraldine Stevenson earned a hunger-strike medal, I can find no trace of her among suffragettes arrested by the police nor does her name appear in any news reports. However, when she was breaking windows in Parliament Street ‘Ethel Slade’ was accompanied by a ‘Grace Stuart’, who was, in fact, Geraldine Stevenson, using a pseudonym, but keeping her own initials.
Both ‘Ethel Slade’ and ‘Grace Stuart’ were released from prison on 12 February 1912. At the ‘Welcome Breakfast’ ‘Ethel Slade’ said it was a great honour for women to go to prison and mentioned that she was going to volunteer for the next deputation.
A few months later, in March 1912, Grace Stuart was sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment after taking part in an organised WSPU window-smashing campaign – and I suspect it was during this term in Holloway that she earned her hunger-strike medal.
On 5 November 1912, as ‘Ethel Slade’, Ella, with another women, broke 9 plate-glass windows in New Bond Street – and was sentenced to 4 months’ imprisonment. They were protesting against the fact that an amendment to the Irish Home Rule bill that would have allowed for a measure of female suffrage was lost. She went on hunger strike, was forcibly fed, and was released after two weeks.
The former Richmond Post Office
On 5 March 1913 Ella Stevenson was sentenced at the Old Bailey to 9 months’ imprisonment for placing a packet containing two glass tubes of phosphorous in the post box attached to the main Richmond Post Office. It had burst into flames. It is more than likely that she had been given the phosphorous by Edwy Clayton, an analytical chemist of ‘Glengariff’, Kew Road, Kew, whose wife was honorary secretary of the Richmond and Kew WSPU. Around the time of Ella’s sentence, Clayton was charged with conspiracy to commit damage (supplying bomb-making information and materials) and sentenced to 21 months’ imprisonment. He went on hunger strike, was released under the ‘Cat and Mouse’ Act and eluded re-arrest.
When sentencing Ella Stevenson the Recorder said that ‘it was impossible for people to be allowed to go about defying the law because they require some change made in it. Such a condition of affairs would lead to a state of barbarism’. Defendant replied that she would go to prison to carry on the fight as she had carried it on outside’.
No women were allowed in court during her trial and Ella specifically asked for a ‘lady reporter’ to be allowed in court and had also asked for her sister [Geraldine?] to be present. But the Recorder was adamant – ‘No women’. There was something of an outcry about the exclusion of women, and the Commissioners of the Central Criminal Court quickly decided that this would not happen in future.
Ella Stevenson went on hunger strike as soon as she got to Holloway and was forcibly fed. ‘Extraordinary vitality is a splendid thing to have outside prison, it is tiresome inside. I am not downhearted’ she is reported as saying. A report in Votes for Women, 11 April 1913, described how her nostrils were severely injured by forcible feeding and one of her teeth had been knocked out when members of the prison staff were trying to force her mouth open. The Governor reported: ‘the task has been very difficult and disagreeable one owing to her violent resistance; but the medical officer reports that though she exhausts herself by her resistance, there are no serious ill-effects. As to her teeth, the facts are that on one occasion she bit the rubber shield over the doctor’s finger and broke a tooth which was a mere shell owing to decay .Her lip has been sore from an attack of herpes but is now better. These details are distressing and I should be glad to advise a remission of sentence if it were not almost certain that she would on her release commit further offences. I need not say that a strict watch is kept over her condition and every care taken to prevent her injuring herself.’ It is clear, from a letter written to the Home Office by Geraldine Stevenson, that it was one of Ella’s front teeth that was broken – a rather distressing thing to happen to a middle-aged woman in Edwardian Britain
A 17 April 1913 report from Holloway Prison shows that she was given 2.5 pints of ‘Horlicks, Brand’s Essence, Allenbury’s Milk and egg – fed twice by oesophageal tube. Violently resistive the whole time.’
Ella was eventually released from prison on 28 April under the ‘Cat and Mouse’ Act – the Temporary Discharge of Prisoners Act, one of the first four prisoners released under the Act. She did not return to Holloway on 12 May as required – but was re-arrested on 7 August 1913, while selling The Suffragette in Richmond, and was taken back to Holloway to continue her sentence. Her mother had died at home in Kew just over two weeks earlier – on 19 July 1913.
Ella again went on hunger strike and was released on 14 August under the terms of the ‘Cat and Mouse’ Act. While in prison she broke windows and her conduct was deemed ‘Bad’. A Report from the prison’s medical officer (13 August) mentioned that she ‘has forsaken sleep owing to constantly recurring dreams that she has swallowed a drop of water by mistake. Feels extreme satisfaction on finding it is only a dream.’
A ‘Wanted’ Notice for Ella Stevenson appeared in the Supplement to the Police Gazette 2 January 1914. ‘Wanted – for failing to return to Holloway Prison on 22 Aug 1913, as required by the conditions of her discharge under the Prisoners’ Temporary Discharged Act (1913), Ella Stevenson, alias Ethel Slade CRO No S/165568, age refused (about 45), height 5ft 6in; complexion sallow; hair light brown turning grey, and eyes grey.’
Perhaps as a result of this publicity, on 23 January 1914 Ella Stevenson was re-arrested, was once again taken to Holloway, where once again she adopted a hunger-and-thirst strike and was released a few days later (under the ‘Cat and Mouse’). She was arrested again on 17 March, released on 19 March, and re-arrested 23 June, and released 27 June. She described this last occasion: ‘I was arrested in Richmond very early on Tuesday morning, June 23. I attempted to strike the man who arrested me, but was taken to Richmond Police Station where I was held until 2 o’clock and then taken through the streets of Richmond firmly grasped by two men in uniform. Finding the procession was to be of this very public nature, I decided to make the most of the opportunity to get the people to understand, if possible, what was happening. I resisted the whole way telling the people that I was resisting an iniquitous Act on principle. I gave them as much information as I could in the time, and at the railway station and afterwards in the carriage, when several people got in with us, I was able to appeal to them and reason with them without interruption….’The Suffragette, 10 July 1914. Once back in Holloway she again went on a hunger-and-thirst strike, was released on 27 June and does not appear to have been re-arrested before the outbreak of war on 4 August brought the WSPU campaign to an end.
Picturing Ella Stevenson’s activity in George Street and, eventually, that enforced march through Richmond certainly enlivened my rather tedious wait at the bus stop opposite the station as I was on my to the National Archives last week. And, once there, I met her again in files describing her treatment in Holloway and her resistance to it. No real knowledge of the part she and her sister played in the fight for the vote – or, indeed, anything else at all of their lives – has survived within her family. Such is the fate, noted time and time again, of the maiden aunt.
P.S. For a Museum of London surveillance photograph of Ella Stevenson, probably taken when she was in Holloway – see here.
And, quite coincidentally, the Museum of London was earlier this year given the illuminated scroll awarded to Ella Stevenson by the WSPU after one of her imprisonments. All the pieces of the Stevenson jigsaw are falling into place.
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
As part of Bloom! – a festival celebrating horticulture and flowers in York – I was invited give a talk yesterday about Fanny Wilkinson, Britain’s first professional woman landscape gardener, in Middlethorpe Hall, the home of her youth.
Middlethorpe Hall, now owned by the National Trust and run by the Historic House Hotels, is utterly lovely – from its panelled interiors, delicious food, kind staff – to its interesting and well-kept – and extensive – grounds. It retains an appealingly domestic atmosphere and it wasn’t difficult to think of Fanny Wilkinson living there in the 1880s with her mother and sisters.
Yet Fanny was not content with being a ‘daughter-at-home’ and enjoying these beautiful surroundings (although letters show she was delighted to return to Middlethorpe for short breaks) and it was while living here that she developed the ambition of becoming a landscape gardener. Wasting no time, she set off for London and enrolled at the Crystal Palace School of Gardening, run by Edward Milner who had been a pupil of Joseph Paxton. She was the only woman student- and an upper-middle class woman at that. All the others were male artisans – for whom the School was intended.
If you are interested in discovering just how many of London’s open spaces were designed by this one determined woman, you can read all about Fanny Wilkinson’s extremely successful career – and discover how it was intertwined with those of Elizabeth Garrett Anderson, Millicent Fawcett and Agnes Garrett, in Enterprising Women:the Garretts and their circle see https://francisboutle.co.uk/products/enterprising-women/
Copyright
All the articles on Woman and Her Sphere and are my copyright. An article may not be reproduced in any medium without my permission and full acknowledgement. You are welcome to cite or quote from an article provided you give full acknowledgement.
Drawing, Sitting Room, 7 Owen’s Row, Islington; Richard Parminter Cuff (British, 1819 – 1883); brush and watercolour and gray wash over graphite; 2007-27-57. Cooper Hewitt, Smithsonian Design Museum.
Note the plaster moulding frieze, with dentilling, around the ceiling edge, and the marble fire surround. These look entirely typical of the late 18th century but, alas, the originals have long since vanished from the remaining houses so I’m unable to make a direct comparison.
The Family Museum acquired its collection of 72 ‘Stickyback’ photographs in September 2016. This exhibition shows the entire set of images and explores this little-documented style of Edwardian popular photography. It offers a unique glimpse of everyday life and ordinary people in Swindon in the last century.
This postcard is for sale – item 153 in my Catalogue 198 https://wp.me/p2AEiO-1qO. Item 154 is another, unusual, photographic card of Annie Cobden Sanderson, published by the Women’s Freedom League.
Woman and her Sphere 