6 FOUNDATION AND EARLY YEARS OF THE WSPU
(MARCH 1903–JANUARY 1906)
1 C. Pankhurst, Unshackled, pp. 42–3; E. S. Pankhurst, TSM, pp. 163–4; A. Pankhurst
Walsh, My mother, p. 29.
2 LL, 13 March 1903.
3 E. S. Pankhurst, TSM, p. 167.
4 EP to Mrs. Glasier, 10 June 1903, Glasier Papers.
5 E. S. Pankhurst, TSM, p. 167; I.L.P. News, August, 1903.
6 Smith, The British women’s suffrage campaign, p. 16.
7 Ibid., Chapter 2. See Introduction, note 32 for a discussion of the terms ‘constitutional’
and ‘militant’.
8 E. Pankhurst, My own story, p. 37.
9 Ibid., p. 36.
10 See Fulford, Votes for women, p. 114. Holton, Suffrage days, p. 108, states that the WSPU
was a ‘ginger group within the ILP’. I suspect that the source of this claim is Sylvia’s TSM,
p. 168, and yet a careful reading reveals that Sylvia does not state that the WSPU was
affiliated to the ILP, although it is implied. Sylvia notes that originally Emmeline
intended the new organisation to be called the Women’s Labour Representation
Committee but changed the name to ‘The Women’s Social and Political Union’ when
Christabel pointed out that the former name had already been chosen by Esther Roper
and Eva Gore-Booth for an organisation they were forming amongst women textile
workers. Sylvia claims that it was her mother’s intention to conduct ‘social as well as
political work’ for the members of the new organisation, which at that time ‘she intended
should be mainly composed of working women, and politically a women’s parallel to the
I.L.P., though with primary emphasis on the vote’. The following evidence in this chapter
illustrates how the new organisation was initially centred in the local labour movement
since the early WSPU members were also members of the ILP. Neither Emmeline in My
own storynor Christabel in Unshackledrepeats Sylvia’s claim that it was the intention
that the WSPU should be mainly composed of working women. Both women, of course,
writing retrospectively, would have no wish to state otherwise since during the active
years of campaigning they constantly emphasised that the WSPU aimed to attract women
of all social groupings. However, see also Sylvia’s 1911 book The suffragette, p. 7, where it
is claimed that the WSPU was founded to be ‘entirely independent of Class and Party’.
Thanks to Sandra Holton and Elizabeth Crawford for discussion of these issues.
11 C. Pankhurst, Unshackled, p. 43.
12 E. Pankhurst, My own story, p. 38.
13 Ibid., p. 38.
14 E. S. Pankhurst, Emmeline Pankhurst, p. 49.
15 C. Pankhurst, Unshackled, p. 44.
16 Teresa Billington-Greig (hereafter TBG) Papers, Emmeline Pankhurst. The home, WL.
17 Rosen, Rise up women!, p. 31; TBG Papers, WL, Box 397, Folder A6.
18 TBG Papers, Early days. 1903–4–5: militancy in plan, in C. McPhee and A. Fitzgerald
(eds), The non-violent militant, selected writings of Teresa Billington-Greig(London and New
York, Routledge, 1987), p. 95; C. Pankhurst, Unshackled, p. 44.
19 TBG Papers, Emmeline Pankhurst. The home.
20 TBG Papers, Teacher Conscience Period 1902–4.
21 TBG Papers, Early WSPU, the Gore-Booth & Roper connection.
22 Clarion, 1 January 1904.
23 E. Pankhurst, My own story, p. 40.
24 Ibid., p. 40.
25 Ibid., p. 40.
26 LL, 9 April 1904.
27 Entry for 5 April 1904, Bruce Glasier Diaries.
NOTES