yourself. She was ruthless in an utterly unaggressive way ... by using the
followers she gathered around her as she was ruthless to herself. ... She suffered
with you & for you.’^19 But, perhaps, what impressed Teresa most was what she
called Emmeline’s ‘assumption of success’.^20 Indeed, Adela and Harry prophe-
sied that their mother would become Prime Minister and Christabel Chancellor
of the Exchequer, a suggestion that older WSPU members did not find incredu-
lous, despite their laughter.^21 In high hopes, in December 1904, the small group
of WSPU members, feeling that in the past women had been ‘too apologetic for
their existence, and too submissive’, boldly asserted their claim to votes on
equal terms with men in a bright yellow pamphlet.^22
Early in the New Year of 1904, Emmeline was disappointed but not surprised
when Christabel’s application for admittance to Lincoln’s Inn to train as a
barrister was refused. Such discrimination against women would be swept away,
she believed, once women had the parliamentary vote. She travelled to London
to be a member of the gathering of suffragists, mainly from the NUWSS, who
waited patiently in a committee room of the Commons on 3 February, the day
after the opening of parliament, to lobby for the inclusion of a women’s suffrage
measure, as a private member’s bill, in the coming session. Such annual cere-
monies were of ‘a most conventional, not to say farcical character’, recollected
Emmeline. The women would make their speeches, the MPs theirs, the women
would thank the friendly members for their support, then the members would
renew their assurances that they believed in women’s suffrage and would vote
for it when they had an opportunity to do so. Then the deputation, ‘a trifle sad
but entirely tranquil’, took its departure, and the MPs ‘resumed the real business
of life, which was support of their party’s policies’.^23 The deputation to friendly
MPs on that 3 February followed the same pattern. Sir Charles McLaren
presided over the meeting and he and other friendly MPs, including Keir
Hardie, expressed their sincere regret that women were still unenfranchised.
Emmeline had not been asked to speak but was determined that the occasion
should not end with the usual civilities. ‘Sir Charles McLaren has told us’, she
suddenly announced, ‘that numbers of his colleagues desire the success of the
women’s suffrage cause ... [but will he] tell us if any member is preparing to
introduce a bill for women’s suffrage? Will he tell us what he and the other
members will pledge themselves to dofor the reform they so warmly endorse?’^24
The embarrassed Sir Charles could not reply. The other suffragists departed in
anger, telling Emmeline she was ‘an interloper, an impertinent intruder’. Who
asked her to say something? What right did she have to ruin the good impres-
sion they had made? No one could tell how many friendly MPs she had
alienated by her ‘unfortunate remarks’. Unrepentant, Emmeline returned to
Manchester with ‘renewed energy’, to ‘blaze’ those new methods that she and
her daughters had thought about.^25
Emmeline continued trying to convert ILPers to the women’s cause by
touring local branches and appealing for support for a women’s franchise bill.
Some hope came in early April when she successfully moved the resolution on
FOUNDATION AND EARLY YEARS OF THE WSPU