the women, many of whom, in addition to their regular class work, had to teach
sewing and domestic subjects, without extra pay. She remained a member of the
Board until 31 March 1903 when school boards were abolished by the 1902
Education Act. Emmeline felt it was an insult to women representatives, such as
herself, that women were not eligible for election to the local education authori-
ties (LEAs), the new bodies that replaced the school boards. That women
should be barred from such representation in local government, despite the
struggles for such entry over the last twenty years, was galling to her and yet
another indication of women’s secondary status when they lacked the parlia-
mentary vote. Under pressure from the Women’s Local Government Society
and the National Union of Women Workers, the government gave way and
agreed to require LEAs to co-opt women members. By such a process, Emmeline,
who was strongly recommended by the ILP, became a co-opted member of the
education committee on 1 April 1903, a post she held for just over four years.
Appointed to the Committee on Technical Instruction, she learnt, yet again, of
the disadvantages that women experienced in comparison with men. Thus the
Manchester Technical College, considered the second best in Europe, spent
thousands of pounds annually on technical training for men with practically no
provision for women. Even classes in which women might easily have been
admitted, such as bakery and confectionery, excluded them because the men’s
trade unions objected to their being educated for such skilled work.^45 ‘It was
rapidly becoming clear in my mind’, Emmeline wrote of this time in her life,
‘that men regarded women as a servant class in the community, and that women
were going to remain in the servant class until they lifted themselves out of it.’^46
By the time of the 1902 ILP Annual Conference, Emmeline was determined
to bring forward a motion that linked the demand for women’s voting rights to
the necessity for social reform. Thus after the much cheered Keir Hardie had
given his report on his parliamentary work, she moved a resolution that ‘in
order to improve the economic and social condition of women it is necessary to
take immediate steps to secure the granting of the suffrage to women on the
same terms on which it is or may be granted to men’. The resolution was
seconded by Mr. Jowett of Bradford and carried unanimously.^47 Emmeline’s
success, on this occasion, and involvement in ILP politics at the local level,^48
must have been somewhat dampened in what was becoming an increasing
source of irritation to her – the administration of the fund, set up after Richard’s
death for the welfare of her children.
On 18 July 1902 she wrote a short, brisk note to Mr. Nodal, a Stockport
newspaper proprietor and one of the administrators of the fund, complaining
about the way she was being treated. ‘I enclose a cheque [for] £10 for rent of
furniture. I wish to again point out that the arrears are due to no fault of mine.
No demand has ever been made either for rent or insurance receipts.’
Indignantly, Emmeline then refuted a claim that she had lied. ‘My daughter
tells me that a statement has been made that I did not send receipts for monthly
payments. This is not true. I should prefer in future to pay the rent for furniture
WIDOWHOOD AND EMPLOYMENT