Women and the British Anti-Slavery Campaigns

William Wilberforce’s name is perhaps the most well-known in discussions on the history of Britain’s abolitionist movement. His devoted work to the campaign helped Parliament to pass the Abolition of Slave Trade Act 1807, which although did not make slavery itself illegal, made the act of trading in slaves a punishable offence. However, whilst the British abolitionist movement was largely dominated by men, there were many women who were active campaigners, with Lady Middleton actually persuading Wilberforce to take up the cause.

In 1823, the first official British society which devoted itself to the abolition of slavery  abroad  was founded. The Society for the Mitigation and Gradual Abolition of Slavery Throughout the British Dominions’s members included William Wilberforce and they were united in their attempts to pressure Parliament into introducing the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833. However, whilst Wilberforce was content with attempts to gradually phase out slavery, Elizabeth Heyrick, a political campaigner from Leicester, published a pamphlet in 1824 entitled “Immediate, not Gradual Abolition”.

She called for a boycott of companies which sold sugar from slavery plantations, and encouraged women to embrace their position of power when purchasing food to follow this boycott. She went so far as to claim that the companies who sold produce made by slavery were thieves, and British people who bought these items were receiving stolen goods.

Elizabeth Heyrick was not alone in her calls for an immediate end to slavery, with the Female Society of Birmingham visiting almost 80% of homes in the area, hoping to persuade the people of Birmingham to join their cause. However, the women’s groups who campaigned against slavery were becoming increasingly frustrated with the slow pace of change, with the male dominated Anti-Slavery Society still championing a gradual end to slavery. Elizabeth Heyrick and the Female Society of Birmingham threatened to withdraw its funding to the National Anti-Slavery Society unless they removed their dedication to gradual change and supported an immediate end to slavery. Other female societies across the country joined suit, and with the threat of losing one fifth of its funding, in May 1830 the Anti-Slavery Society removed the term ‘gradual’ from its demands and adopted the more radical stance of the female societies.

by Benjamin Robert Haydon, oil on canvas, 1841

In 1833 the Slavery Abolition Act was passed which abolished slavery throughout the British Empire, with the exception of the territories under the possession of the East Indian company, the island of St Helena, and the Island of Ceylon. In 1839, following on from the Anti-Slavery Society, the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery society was formed with a view to ending slavery internationally. The society, today known as Anti-Slavery International, changed its name in 1990 and is still campaigning to eradicate slavery at home and abroad.

Traditional ideas of abolitionism focus on William Wilberforce and the parliamentary procedure behind the pivotal acts in anti-slavery history. However without the tireless work of the female campaigners, who at the time were yet to be granted the vote, the pace of abolitionism would have been much slower.

Links and further reading

“Women and Women’s Groups” from The Abolition Project website, http://abolition.e2bn.org/people_38.html

Slavery Trade and Abolition of Slavery, from Black History 4 Schools website, http://www.blackhistory4schools.com/slavetrade/

Teachers’ notes from the National Portrait Gallery’s Anti-Slavery Society Convention portrait, http://www.npg.org.uk/assets/migrated_assets/docs/learning/digital/NPGTeachersNotes_AntiSlaver.pdf

Mary Barbour and the 1915 Glasgow Rent Strike

Glasgow Rent Strike

1915 saw thousands of men up and down the country engaged in fighting the First World War. In the same year, Glasgow’s women were engaged in a fight of their own, a fight they termed to be against ‘the Hun at Home’. In the three years preceding 1915, Glasgow’s population had swelled by almost 70,000 people, with less than 2,000 tenements built to accommodate these newcomers. The landlords responded to this excessive demand for housing by drastically increasing the rents on their properties with very little notice, and evicting those who fell into arrears on their rent. Mary Barbour who was a member of the Independent Labour Party soon became the key activist in the movement against these unjust rents and evictions, and along with Jessie Stephens, Helen Crawfurd, and Agnes Dollan fought a campaign known as the Glasgow Rent Strike. Due to wartime restrictions on trade unions meaning men were unable to participate in strikes, Barbour turned to Glasgow’s women to take up the fight against terrible living conditions and drastic rent increases.

Poster displayed in windows during Glasgow rent strikes, 1915 From Glasgow Digital Library, http://sites.scran.ac.uk/redclyde/redclyde/rc028.htm

Barbour called her ‘troops’ to order in kitchens, back yards, and streets across the city until all of Glasgow was involved. The threat of evictions was still looming, so Barbour organised look outs at the end of streets who would alert the community if and when a landlord attempted to evict a family from their home. Upon hearing the call, everyone would rally together to defend their neighbour, throwing whatever came to hand, which was most often flour, peasemeal, or rotting food. By November of 1915, twenty thousand households were withholding their rents in demand of proper social housing. On the 17^th November, 49 striking households were threatened with eviction. This became the final straw, prompting huge demonstrations, and with trade unions now also threatening strike action, legal action against the strikers was dropped, and rents were frozen at pre-war levels. Following on from Rent Strike’s victory the 1919 Housing and Town Planning Act was introduced which brought with it council housing for manual workers throughout the UK. Their collective action serves as a reminder of the potential gains if trade unions and political organisations to join together to fight for social justice.

BBC Video on Mary Barbour

Bibliography

Trish Caird “Mary Barbour and the Glasgow Rent Strike” from Counterfire website, 8^th March 2013, http://www.counterfire.org/articles/199-women-on-the-left/16331-mary-barbour-and-the-glasgow-rent-strike

Education Scotland “Snapshot: Rent Strikes” – http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/higherscottishhistory/impactofthegreatwar/war_societyandculture/rentstrikes.asp

“The Glasgow Rent Strikes” BBC Scotland History – http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/history/modern_scotland/glasgow_rent_strikes/

Asian Suffragettes

One can be forgiven for thinking that all the women in the Suffragette movement were white British. Any mentions of women of colour are few and far between, with the most well-known activists being Emiline Pankhurst and Emily Davidson. Whilst their contribution to the movement cannot be over-stated, Asian women also played a key role, with little being told about their involvement.

According to Shahida Rahman, many Indian women were brought over to Britain as nannies, and after their contract ended, were left to fend for themselves and find passage back to India. Many British people looked upon these women as helpless and oppressed, however as more and more Asian women became outspoken about various political campaigns they were soon regarded with respect.

One of the most prominent women in the whole Suffragette campaign was Sophia Duleep Singh, an Indian Princess and daughter of a wealthy man; Maharaja Duleep Singh. In March 1909 Sophia join the Women’s Social and Political Union, and pledged a considerably large amount of money to the cause. However, from this time onwards, it was not just her money which Sophia donated as she became a devoted and well-known member of the movement.  She also joined the Women’s Tax Resistance League, who withheld their taxes in protest at their lack of political representation. When brought to court over her refusal to pay tax, Sophia made a rousing speech declaring that:

“I am unable conscientiously to pay money to the state, as I am not allowed to exercise any control over its expenditure; neither am I allowed any voice in the choosing of Members of Parliament, whose salaries I have to help to pay. This is very unjust. When the women of England are enfranchised and the state acknowledges me as a citizen I shall, of course, pay my share willingly towards its upkeep. If I am not a fit person for the purpose of representation, why should I be a fit person for taxation?”

So well-known was Sophia, that a letter was written to Lord Crewe in April 1913, asking if “anything could be done to stop her”, and contemplating her eviction from her lodgings in Hampton Court.

Sophia Duleep Singh was by no means the only Asian woman who played her part in the campaign to gain women the vote, with links being established between the women’s movement in India and at home. The delegation of Indian women in the Suffragette procession in June 1911, although small, made such an impression on a Governor on an Indian province that he considered it to be the ‘most significant feature’ of the whole procession, as it highlighted the fact that the “Woman’s Question” was without “race, creed, or boundary”.

For today’s society the participation of Indian women in the Suffragette movement is highly significant. With the abundance of anti-immigrant rhetoric being bound across the media, it is important to highlight the vital role that immigrants have played in the shaping of this country for the better.

Links and further reading

Shahida Rahman, “Asian Suffragettes – Women who made a difference”,  Feminist and Women’s Association blog, http://fwsablog.org.uk/2014/01/09/asian-suffragettes-women-who-made-a-difference/

Rozina Visram, Asians in Britain: 400 years of history, Pluto Press, 2002

Anita Anand, Sophia: Princess, Suffragette, Revolutionary, Bloomsbury Publishing, 2015

British Library Learning – Asians in Britain, http://www.bl.uk/learning/histcitizen/asians/activismpolitics/activismandpolitics.html

The Wales Window of Alabama

The Wales Window of Alabama

On the 16^th September, 1963 the 16^th Street Baptist church in Birmingham, Alabama, was almost totally destroyed a bomb planted there by a splinter group of the Klu Klux Klan. Birmingham was no stranger to civil rights violence, with 50 previous church bombings, and iconic images of police dogs attacking children being spread across the globe. However, this bombing was different as it caused the deaths of four young girls, who were attending Sunday school. Cynthia Westley, Carol Robertson, Denise McMair, and Addie-May Collins all died in the basement of that church, with more being seriously injured. The nation as a whole was stunned. Even fervent separatists were appalled at the loss of life of four young girls, in a place of sanctuary. The incident became a catalyst for the Civil Rights Act which came into effect one year later. However, it was not just the people of America who were shocked into action by this terrible crime. Welsh artist John Petts, having read about the destruction of life and of the church’s stained glass windows, formed a newspaper campaign to raise the money to have the windows replaced. The campaign touched the people of Wales deeply, and people from all religions came together to offer up what they could. Petts imposed a limit on the amount one person was able to donate to the campaign – half a crown – to ensure that no single financier could pay for everything and that the window really was from all the people of Wales.

Having raised well over the £500 target, John Petts travelled to Birmingham to install his artwork in the church. Having been both horrified and inspired by the photographs of civil rights protestors being fired at by bullets and water cannons which forced their arms up above their heads, Petts drew on this image to create one of a Christ-like figure on the cross with arms outstretched above his head. With his palms extended outwards, the image represents both the pushing out of hatred, and the bringing in love and forgiveness. Whilst this figure could represent anyone suffering, many have interpreted it as a black Christ, reminding all those who look upon it, that to condemn anyone for how they look is to crucify Christ once more.

Upon the window’s installation, many of the people of Birmingham could not even locate Wales on a map. However, the knowledge that people from foreign countries heard of their plight, and gave what they could to ease it, helped to remind them that what they experienced in the town known as the Johannesburg of America, was not normal, and that not all white people were against them. The window still stands today as a living reminder of the horrors of the violence of Birmingham, Alabama, and the bonds of friendship that grew out of it.

Links and further reading

Niel Prior, “Alabama church bombing victims honoured by Welsh window” BBC News Website, 10^th March, 2011 – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-12692760

“The Wales Window of Alabama” BBC Radio 4 Documentary, 10^th March 2011

Gary Younge, “American Civil Rights: The Welsh Connection” Guardian article, Sunday 6^th March, 2011 – http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/mar/06/racist-attack-alabama-1963-gary-younge

National Library of Wales Blog, “The Wales Window of Birmingham, Alabama” 12^th September, 2013 – http://www.llgc.org.uk/blog/?p=7152

Father, Who Are the Chartists?, 1844

Millions who labour with skill, my child,

On the land – at the loom – in the mill, my child,

        Whom bigots and knaves

Would keep as their slaves;

Whom tyrants would punish and kill, my child

Millions whom suffering draws, my child,

To unite in a glorious cause, my child

Their object, their end

To mankind befriend,

By gaining for all equal laws, my child

Millions who ever hath sought, my child

For freedom of speech and of thought, my child

Though stripp’d of each right

By the strong hand of might,

They ne’er can be vanquished or bought, my child

Millions who earnestly call, my child,

For freedom to each and to all, my child;

They have truth for their shield,

And never will yield

Till they triumph in tyranny’s fall, my child

This poem was taken from The Northern Star, which was a Chartist newspaper featuring many poems written to inform and inspire. The Chartist movement sought the extension of many political rights at a time when less than 3% of the British population could vote. In 1838, the Chartists developed A People’s Charter with 6 demands.

• All men to have the vote
• Voting should take place by secret ballot
• Parliamentary elections every year, not once every five years
• Constituencies should be of equal size
• Members of Parliament should be paid
• The property qualification for becoming a Member of Parliament should be abolished

With the exception of yearly parliamentary elections, the other five demands of the Chartists were met. However, the above poem Father, Who Are the Chartists? still has resonance today, and the demands of the whole movement are still highly relevant.

Relevance Today

The poem speaks about a political movement of people united by their class and undivided by gender, race, or religion. It highlights the power of people when they are coordinated in their beliefs and their actions. It demonstrates that the voting rights we enjoy today were fought for by ordinary working people, and the fear those in power had of allowing working class people the right to vote. Whilst voting rights have now been extended to everyone over the age of 18, there is still a long way to go to get everyone engaged in the political process. In the last election, a large percentage of the population chose not to exercise their right to vote, and whist some undoubtedly saw this as an act of political defiance, their voice was still not heard. The power their vote commanded, which was fought so hard for by people like the Chartists, was left unaccounted for. A change in the political system is needed in order to engage more people in the political process and see that the power of the vote not be wasted.

Aphra Benn, Sir Patient Fancy, 1678

Sir Patient Fancy – Aphra Benn, 1678

Epilogue

With her damn’d Stuff, will never cease to teeze us.

What has poor Woman done, that she must be

Debar’d from Sense, and sacred Poetry?

Why in this Age has Heaven allow’d you more,

And Women less of Wit than heretofore?

We once were fam’d in story, and could write

Equal to Men; cou’d govern, nay, cou’d fight.

We still have passive Valour, and can show,

Wou’d Custom give us leave, the active too,

Since we no Provocations want from you.

For who but we cou’d your dull Fopperies bear,

Your saucy Love, and your brisk Nonsense hear;

Indure your worse than womanish Affectation,

Which renders you the Nusance of the Nation;

Scorn’d even by all the Misses of the Town,

A Jest to Vizard Mask, the Pit-Buffoon;

A Glass by which the admiring Country Fool

May learn to dress himself en Ridicule:

Both striving who shall most ingenious grow

In Leudness, Foppery, Nonsense, Noise and Show.

And yet to these fine things we must submit

Our Reason, Arms, our Laurels, and our Wit.

Because we do not laugh at you, when leud,

And scorn and cudgel ye when you are rude.

That we have nobler Souls than you, we prove,

By how much more we’re sensible of Love;

Quickest in finding all the subtlest ways

To make your Joys, why not to make you Plays?

We best can find your Foibles, know our own

And jilts and cuckolds now best please the town;

Your way of writing’s out of fashion gown,

Method, and Rule—you only understand;

Pursue that way of Fooling, and be damn’d.

Your learned Cant of Action, Time and Place,

Must all give way to the unlabour’d Farce.

To all the Men of Wit we will subscribe:

But for your half Wits, you unthinking Tribe,

We’ll let you see, whate’er besides we do,

How artfully we copy some of you:

And if you’re drawn to th’ Life, pray tell me then,

Why Women should not write as well as Men.

Aphra Behn was one of the first British women to make her living out of writing, and as you can see, embraced the opportunity to make her feelings on the status of women known. She has been remembered by Virginia Woolf in A Room of One’s Own as the woman who earned other women the right to speak their minds, and many of her works focused on race, slavery, sexual desire, and gender, all of which were highly controversial topics.

In this Epilogue from Sir Patient Fancy, Behn is mocking some male behaviour and challenging the notion that women were seen as intellectually inferior to men. For me, the key lines are:

Quickest in finding all the subtlest ways

To make your joys, why not make your plays?

It is these lines which I feel speak most about the status of women, both in Aphra Behn’s time, and our own. It speaks to the frustration in the view that women are often viewed as the object of entertainment for men – to please and to entertain, but not to challenge their intellectual standing. For me, this resonates with the No More Page Three campaign, as it too asserts that women offer more to society than titilising entertainment and pleasure, and their representation otherwise is damaging. Aphra Behn challenged this notion through her actions as well as her words, and should be remembered as one of the first people to publicly assert that men and women were intellectual equals.