by Crowe, ‘a man of German birth and German associations’. She asked her
audience, ‘How can you expect the working people of this country to be loyal to
the country when they have grave reason to believe that you have Germans and
Pro-Germans directing the foreign policy of the country?’ Calling upon Grey
and his colleagues to resign, she then pointed out that Britain had entered the
war for the sake of small nationalities, for freedom and liberty, and that it
should now take the honourable course of sending a sufficient force of troops to
Serbia. Further, she insisted that the conduct of the war should be in the hands
of a strong war council made up of the representatives of all the Allied nations
engaged in the war – and that they should sit in Paris.^75 A copy of Britanniain
which Emmeline’s speech was reported was acquired by the Home Office.
The WSPU arranged for a ‘great patriotic meeting’ to be held at the Royal
Albert Hall, on 18 November, ‘to demand the loyal and vigorous conduct of the
war’, a call that most newspapers, including The Times, applauded.^76 However,
six days before the scheduled event, Emmeline sent a letter to interested parties
making it plain that the meeting would focus on the WSPU’s concern about the
‘betrayal of Serbia’, a firm indication that ‘the Prime Minister and Sir Edward
Grey are unfit for the great and responsible positions they hold’.^77 The propri-
etors cancelled the letting. The London Pavilion and other large halls in
Central London also refused to let to the WSPU which now had to fall back on
small meetings held in its new headquarters in Great Portland Street.^78
Newspapers which had once praised Emmeline now turned against her. A
typical response was that of the Morning Advertiserthat claimed that her attack
on Asquith and Grey, was a ‘wrong turning’ since it would ‘foment internecine
trouble, a thing to be avoided at all costs at the present juncture’. Arguing for
the necessity of a united front, it was pointed out that her letter would create
divisions within the British camp, indicating to the enemy that the nerve of the
British nation was destroyed. The move was particularly regretted since Mrs.
Pankhurst and her fellow-workers of the WSPU had called a truce with the
government on the outbreak of war and had done excellent work during the last
fifteen months.^79 But these were not the only criticisms being voiced against
Emmeline.
Many rank-and-file members of the WSPU were again expressing concerns
about her leadership of the WSPU, as the Daily News and Leaderreported. It
was alleged that Emmeline, who was still Honorary Treasurer of the WSPU, was
in charge of between £15,000 to £20,000 of Union funds. She had always
declared, it was asserted, that women could only be governed by consent, and
that her own autocracy was only justified by the consent of the members. ‘Now
she has used that autocracy to divert the funds of the Union to purposes for
which they were never subscribed without making the smallest attempt to
discover whether the members have consented or not.’ Many of Mrs.
Pankhurst’s former supporters, the article continued, ‘feel for these reasons that
her present power over an organisation which she has no moral, or possibly
even legal right to control is fraught with danger to the community and should
WAR WORK AND A SECOND FAMILY