When we think of women campaigning for the vote we tend to think of the Suffragettes, those organised by the Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) led by the redoubtable Emmeline Pankhurst. We may also think of the Suffragists, women who campaigned for the vote within the bounds of the law. These women were principally represented by the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies (NUWSS) led by Millicent Fawcett. But it didn’t have to be all or nothing, deeds or words, there was a middle path or third way in the women’s suffrage campaign. This path was charted by the Women’s Freedom League (WFL) led by Charlotte Despard and others. What was the WFL, this latecomer to the alphabet soup of suffrage societies? How did their tactics differ to those of the better known WSPU and NUWSS and why don’t we all remember the WFL today?
The origins of the WFL are to be found in the WSPU and the leadership style of Mrs Pankhurst. From the moment of its conception, the WSPU was riddled with disagreements, with the members increasingly at odds with decisions made by the leadership. When these disagreements reached breaking point in 1907, seventy members of the WSPU, led by Teresa Billington-Greig and Charlotte Despard, decided to split from the organisation and form their own group, the WFL. A key factor in their decision was the increasingly militant and sometimes violent tactics being advocated by the leadership, without having consulted their members. For the women that split with the WSPU to form the WFL, the lack of democracy in how the former was run was contrary to the spirit and aims of the movement: to give women a vote and a voice. How could the Pankhursts expect the government to give women the vote when they denied this to their own members?
In contrast to the militant and sometimes violent tactics of the WSPU, the WFL ran a non-violent campaign of civil disobedience. They condemned the WSPU’s use of arson and vandalism against property but were not above refusing to pay taxes, marching, and boycotting the government census in 1911.
Like members of the WSPU, law-breaking members of the WFL were imprisoned for their actions, including Despard herself in 1909 (being discharged on the grounds of ill health), and their acts could be just as attention-grabbing. One memorable incident occurred in 1908 when three WFL members, Murial Matters, Violet Tillard and Helen Fox went up to the Ladies’ Gallery in the House of Commons, unfurled a huge banner and chained themselves to the grille. In order to remove the women, the authorities had to remove the entire grille, with them still attached!
The WFL was also excellent at producing propaganda, including the publication of their own newspaper, The Vote. This well-written and popular paper was one of the main ways by which the organisation grew. In the end there were some sixty branches of the WFL across the country, with around 4,000 members. By contrast, at its peak, the WSPU had 2,000 members but then membership was tightly controlled by the Pankhursts. Both organisations though were dwarfed by the NUWSS which had a membership of 50,000 by 1913.
A further divide between the WSPU and the WFL emerged with the outbreak of war in 1914. While the WSPU ceased their campaign and swung their energies behind the war effort, the WFL continued to campaign, advocating pacifism. This was no easy decision for Despard, whose brother John French was in command of forces on the Western Front.
As new statues are being raised to Emmeline Pankhurst and Millicent Fawcett in 2018 as part of the centenary celebrations from women’s suffrage, it is worth reflecting on why Charlotte Despard is not more well-known and being similarly commemorated. It is possible her wartime pacifism, association with Sinn Fein until 1926 and later sympathy for the Soviet Union and support for Communism made her less popular in the interwar period. The bigger question though is the lack of a collective memory of Despard and the WFL today. Perhaps the shadow cast by the Pankhursts is just too big but as we near the centenary of votes for women it is worth remembering Despard, the WFL and the wide variety of ways in which women campaigned for the vote.
By Emily Pugh
Emily is a Citizens project intern and former MA Public History student at Royal Holloway, University of London.
