A Social History of Women in Ireland, 1870–1970: An Exploration of the Changing Role and Status of Women in Irish Society

By Rosemary Cullen Owens

A Social History of Women in Ireland is an important and overdue book that explores the role and status of women in Ireland from 1870 until 1970, looking at politics, sociology, marriage patterns, religion, education and work among other topics. It provides a vital missing piece in the jigsaw of modern Irish history.

Using a combination of primary research and published works, A Social History of Women in Ireland explores the role and status of women in Ireland. It examines lifestyle options available to women during this period as well as providing an overview of the forces working for change within Irish society. In bringing together a wide-ranging portfolio of material, A Social History of Women in Ireland 1870–1970 fills an important gap in the literature of the period by focusing on the experiences of Irish women, a group so often overlooked in histories of revolutionary men and prominent politicians.

Crucial to a determination of the status of women throughout this period is an examination of the choices available regarding work, marriage and emigration. Rosemary Cullen Owens stresses at all times the importance of class and land ownership as key determinants for women's lives. A decrease in home industries allied to increasing mechanisation on the farm resulted in a contraction of labour opportunities for rural women. With the establishment of an independent farming class, the distinguishing criteria for status in rural Ireland became ownership of land, in which single-minded patriarchal figures dominated. In this context, the position of women declined, and a society evolved with a high pattern of late-age marriages, large numbers of unwed sons and daughters, and an accepted pattern of emigration.

In the cities and towns, the condition of lower-working-class women was especially distressing for most of the period, with particular problems regarding housing, health and sanitation. Through the work of campaigning activists, equal educational and political rights were eventually attained. From the early 1900s there was some expansion in female employment in shops, offices and industry, but domestic service remained a high source of employment. For middle-class women, employment opportunities were limited and usually disappeared on marriage. The civil service — a major employer in an economy that was generally un-dynamic and stagnant — operated a bar on married women for much of the period.

Rosemary Cullen Owens not merely traces these injustices but also the campaigns fought to right them. She locates these struggles in the wider social context in which they took place. This important book restores balance to the narrative of modern Irish history, changing the focus from key male political figures to society at large by unveiling the often forgotten story of the country's women over a tumultuous century of change. In doing so, Rosemary Cullen Owens enriches our understanding of Irish history from 1870 to 1970.
A Social History of Women in Ireland: Table of Contents
Introduction

Part 1. Irishwomen in the Nineteenth Century
- 'A progressively widening set of objectives'—The Early Women's Movement
- Developments in Female Education
- Faith and Philanthropy—Women and Religion
Part 2. A New Century—Action and Reaction
- Radical Suffrage Campaign
- Feminism and Nationalism
- Pacifism, Militarism and Republicanism
Part 3. Marriage, Motherhood and Work
- The Social and Economic Role of Women in Post-Famine Ireland
- Trade Unions and Irish Women
- Women and Work
Part 4. Women in the New Irish State
- The Quest for Equal Citizenship 1922–1938
- The Politicisation of Women Mid-Twentieth Century
Epilogue: A Woman's World?

• Language: English
• Publisher: Gill Books
• Release date: Oct 25, 2005
• ISBN: 9780717164554

Rosemary Cullen Owens

Dr Rosemary Cullen Owens lectures in women’s history at the Women’s Studies Department, University College Dublin. Her publications include Smashing Times: A History of the Women’s Suffrage Movement 1889–1922 (1984), Louie Bennett, A Biography (2001) and A Social History of Women in Ireland, 1870–1970 (2005).

Book preview

INTRODUCTION

Two reasons lie behind the writing of this book—(1) my experience of researching and teaching the history of Irish women, and (2) the consistent encouragement—and prodding—of Dr Margaret MacCurtain. My own particular journey into this field began in the mid-1970s. I wasn’t quite sure where the journey would take me, but I was convinced that there had to be more to the lives of Irish women in the past than history text books then indicated. The late Professor R. Dudley Edwards adroitly steered me in the direction of the women’s suffrage campaign in Ireland—in which his mother had been active. And, as the cliché goes, the rest is history, as I became and remain hooked on discovering, debating and disseminating information on the choices and challenges faced by women in Ireland.

Mary Robinson, in her contribution to the 1975 Thomas Davis series of lectures on Women in Irish Society, pointed to the significance of the series title and of her paper ‘Women and the New Irish State’. Commenting on the unlikely chance of someone being asked to deliver a paper on ‘Men and the New Irish State’, she concluded that the significance of the title was in fact to highlight the absence of women as a significant force in the new state.¹ Answering the question ‘What is history in Ireland’, Maria Luddy and Cliona Murphy stated in 1990 that it was ‘a narrative account of the doings of men, largely carried out by men, written by men and taught by men’.² Deirdre Beddoe noted in the 1980s that most of us had been conditioned to believe that the concrete body of facts taught us as history, is history, unaware that the package selected for us excluded working people and women.³

Over the past thirty years, publications on both labour and women’s history have increased. It has been my experience, however, that difficulty is encountered by new readers in sourcing material, particularly in the area of women’s history. Margaret MacCurtain commented in 1978: ‘Many Irish women find it difficult to learn about their historical identity, or their role in the life of the country, because they have neither the information readily available, nor the skills of evaluation at their disposal.’⁴ Excellent books (including MacCurtain’s), now out of print, and articles scattered among journals, are not easy for the general reader or the new student of women’s history to obtain. By incorporating the findings of such research and publications in a single volume, this book aims to amend that situation. Utilising a combination of primary research material and published works, this study proposes to explore the role and status of women in Ireland from 1870 to 1970. Examining lifestyle options available to women during this period, it will provide an overview of the forces working for change within Irish society, demonstrating the interaction between women’s groups and other socio/political organisations. While certain chapters cover developments throughout the island of Ireland, the work centres primarily on the Republic.

Part 1 examines the movements and issues that formed the basis for women’s gradual advancement by the turn of the century. Emanating from middle- and upper-class women, such campaigns initially sought parity of education and legal rights for women with their male peers. Both issues were fought against the prevailing ethos of the day regarding the accepted status of women. With both objectives ultimately achieved, the first concerted campaign for suffrage equality emerged. The nineteenth-century phase of this campaign was restrained and limited in nature, but did achieve the important break-through of local government and poor law guardianship rights for propertied women. Many of these early activists had started their public life in the area of philanthropy. The impact of religious endeavour on women’s activity during the nineteenth century is discussed here, as are the differing results of such endeavour on the part of Catholic and Protestant women.

Part 2 looks at a new generation of Irishwomen from 1900 who had benefited from the work of earlier pioneers, particularly in the field of education. Confident, articulate, and in touch with international developments regarding women’s demands, these women took up the fight for political equality in a more militant way. Publicly challenging male politicians and using militant tactics, many were arrested and imprisoned, some adopting hunger strike action in protest at their non-political prisoner status. Increasingly, current political developments within Ireland impinged on such activists. The radicalisation of Irish political life over the next decade or so produced intricate interaction between suffragists and other groups seeking change. Home Rule, Sinn Féin, Labour, the outbreak of War in 1914 and the Easter Rising of 1916—all would involve decisions and sometimes participation by women’s groups, and/or individual women. The decision to ally suffrage commitment with one of these causes—or to prioritise another cause over that of suffrage—led to much soul-searching and disagreement.

Part 3 presents an overview of the social, economic and familial role of women in post-famine Ireland. Crucial to a determination of the status of Irish women throughout the period under review is an examination of the choices available to them regarding work, marriage and emigration. Class and land ownership remained key determinants for much of this period, with consequences for both rural and urban women. The distinguishing criterion for status within rural Ireland became ownership of land, forming the context for a patriarchal society in which strong father/farmer figures would dominate. The issues of class and available choice were significant for urban women also. During the early years of this study, limited female employment opportunities applied across all classes. Women who had to work were badly paid and generally unorganised, domestic service being the primary source of employment for single women. The lack of working class housing, overcrowded slum dwellings with inadequate sanitation and consequent health hazards posed particular problems for mothers. From the early 1900s, other employment opportunities emerged for women in shops, offices and services, although restrictions applied in most of these. In addition to a general review of the types of work available to women, attitudes towards the trade unionisation of women workers are also discussed.

Part 4 examines the status of women in the new Irish state from 1922 to 1970. Following the passing of the Free State Constitution of 1922, the new state guaranteed all its citizens full political rights and constitutional equality. Within a few years, however, a series of acts was passed restricting the employment and public equality of women, with the 1937 Constitution placing a firm emphasis on women’s place within the home. Research cited by Mary Daly based on Irish society in the 1930s and 1940s makes sobering reading.⁵ In the 1930s, Arensberg and Kimball found ‘a rural female class who acquiesced in a subordinate status, eating separately after the men had been fed, and marrying partners chosen by parents to meet certain social aspirations rather than the woman’s personal wishes’. In the 1940s, Humphreys depicted within urban life ‘a strict demarcation of roles, separate socialising by men and women and a definitely subordinate status accorded to females’. Towards the end of the period examined, intimations of change appear. From the 1940s, small but significant groups of women emerge, challenging the status quo. Like earlier reform groups, most had a middle-class background, but they did not have a solely middle-class agenda. Over a fifteen-year period a wide range of reforms were debated and, increasingly, demanded. Beginning with pressure for price control and rationing during the war years, the list of issues expanded to cover other social concerns and discriminatory practices regarding the legal status and employment of women. From the late 1950s, intense debate developed on Ireland’s possible entry into the EEC. Irish women’s groups built up contacts and support within European women’s organisations. Following a UN directive on the status of women in 1968, and sustained pressure by women’s groups and female trade unionists, the Irish government—keen to be seen to meet EEC standards—established in 1970 the first government Commission on the Status of Women. The report of that Commission was published in December 1972, and formed the blueprint for radical change for Irish women.

V.H. Galbraith wrote in 1944 that ‘History is the Past—so far as we know it. (It) is made by the historian who has not merely to continue it with the lapse of time but unceasingly to remake it.’⁶ Based on the courses I have taught at the Women’s Education Research and Resource Centre in UCD over the past fifteen years, and on personal research and other published works, this book aims to provide a step in ‘remaking’ the history of women in Ireland more accessible to students and general readers.

A hundred years ago, women had not begun to make the vindication of their rights the prominent political and social problem it has become today (E.R. PENNELL, 1891).

So begins E.R. Pennell’s introduction to an 1891 edition of A Vindication of the Rights of Woman by Mary Wollstonecraft.² First published in 1792, Mary Wollstonecraft’s Vindication has been described by Deirdre Raftery as ‘the work in which all previous arguments for the inferiority of the female mind are synthesised, and new ground was broken’.³ Part of a young liberal and intellectual radical group seeking social and political reform in the revolutionary era, Mary Wollstonecraft argued in particular for female emancipation, having seen that those articulating demands for ‘the rights of man’ did not always wish to extend these rights to women. Her abiding commitment was to establish that human reason was the same in man and woman and, from this point, to argue that all humans are equal. She questioned the contemporary definition of woman’s social role, arguing that the education of women was fundamental to the well-being of the state:

It is time to effect a revolution in female manners—time to restore to (women) their lost dignity—and make them, as a part of the human species, labour by reforming themselves to reform the world.⁴

Wollstonecraft was the first to link education with the idea of financial independence, arguing for change in the traditions and laws which prevented women from working in society:

How many women thus waste life away the prey of discontent, who might have practised as physicians, regulated a farm, managed a shop, and stood erect, supported by their own industry, instead of hanging their heads surcharged with the dew of sensibility … I have seldom seen much compassion excited by the helplessness of females, unless they were fair … How much more respectable is the woman who earns her own bread by fulfilling any duty, than the most accomplished beauty.⁵

The forceful views expressed in the Vindication led to vilification during her lifetime and for many years after her death. With historical reinterpretation of women’s role in society, Wollstonecraft has been accorded her rightful position ‘as the woman who dared to assume the doctrine of human rights for her own sex, and who wrote what may be seen as the first declaration of female independence’.⁶

In 1820 the English philosopher, economist and historian James Mill published a treatise On Government in which he argued that political rights could be removed without inconvenience from certain classes of people, including women, ‘the interests of almost all of whom are involved in that of their fathers or in that of their husbands’.⁷ In response, Tipperary-born Anna Wheeler—an admirer of Wollstonecraft —collaborated with William Thompson (originally from Cork) to produce a definitive work advocating female suffrage. While it was rare in early nineteenth-century England for a man to publicly acknowledge the collaboration of a woman in the writing of a major political work, Anna Wheeler was so acknowledged by Thompson in what Dolores Dooley has described as the ‘first complete statement of a socialist defence of sexual equality’.⁸ The rather unwieldy title of the work is in fact a synopsis of its content: Appeal of one Half of the Human Race, Women, Against the Pretensions of the Other Half, Men, To Retain Them in Political, and Thence in Civil and Domestic Slavery. Published in London in 1825, the work declared:

All women and particularly women living with men in marriage … having been reduced by the want of political rights to a state of helplessness and slavery … are more in need of political rights than any other portion of human beings.

Arguing for equal political, civil and domestic rights for women, the authors stated:

Without them (equal rights) they can never be regarded by men as really their equals, they can never attain that respectability and dignity in the social scale … they could not respect themselves.⁹

Wheeler and Thompson did not claim that a change in laws would automatically lead to emancipation from oppression, accepting that cultural attitudes and public opinion would have to be changed. But legal changes were necessary precursors to such attitudinal change. These equality claims for women were articulated against a backdrop of much social unrest in Great Britain during the 1820s. Common to most western societies, extensive social and economic upheaval was taking place with the development of industrialised capitalism. Contemporaneously, a legacy of enlightenment philosophy and revolutionary ideals of equality synthesised into a liberal ideology. As the emerging middle classes began to play an increasingly prominent role in political and social life, they used their power to press for a voice in the nation’s government through the creation of parliamentary institutions based on a property-qualified franchise (to exclude the lower classes) with full ministerial responsibility (to minimise aristocratic power exercised through court intrigue). They pleaded for the liberal principles of representative government, equality before the law and careers open to talent. As a result of such pressure a gradual democratisation of local and national government took place throughout Great Britain during the 1800s. The Franchise Reform Acts of 1832, 1868 and 1884 significantly shifted the power structure from the traditional wealthy landowning and aristocratic classes to ‘newly rich’ industrialist and professional groups. It was not until 1872 that secret balloting became law, enabling workers in towns and country to use their vote freely without fear of reprisals from employer or landlord. However, in spite of the added enfranchisement of many urban and rural workers towards the end of the century, the parliamentary vote retained two major disabilities. It was primarily property-based rather than person-based, leaving significant levels of the population without a vote. In addition all women, irrespective of whether or not they fulfilled the property qualifications, were excluded.

The passing of the Act of Union in 1800 established the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. This involved the loss of Ireland’s native parliament and the absorption of Irish parliamentary representatives into the Westminster parliament. From 1800 until Ireland achieved independence in 1921, all laws governing Ireland would emanate from Westminster. During the nineteenth century a series of movements emerged in England and Ireland aimed at improving the social, economic and political status of women. A number of influences converged to bring such organisations into existence from the 1850s. Richard Evans has noted that it was out of the involvement of middle-class philanthropists in the debates over measures such as women’s rights within marriage, extension of second- and third-level education to women, and the abolition of state regulation of prostitution that organised feminism began.¹⁰ In addition, he cites John Stuart Mill’s 1869 essay on The Subjection of Women as an incalculable influence on feminism.¹¹ During the 1850s in Britain, the forces of reform were realigning, and middle-class concern with social questions was growing after the Chartist challenges of the 1840s. Two other important influences on emerging women’s groups were the experience of many within the anti-slavery movement earlier in the century, and with the Anti-Corn law agitation of the early 1840s. The tactics of the nascent women’s suffrage campaign would be based on those of the Anti-Corn Law League, including the retaining of itinerant lecturers, the holding of indoor public meetings, the production of a steady stream of tracts, handbills and petitions to parliament, and the pressurising of candidates in parliamentary elections.¹² Another significant development was the emergence of a number of associations dedicated to social reform, of which the National Association for the Promotion of Social Science (NAPSS), the parent body of the early feminist movement, was perhaps the most important.¹³ Women were active in many of these associations, and it is at meetings of such organisations, and in their journals, that we find the first debates of many reform issues related to women. Luddy has pointed out that the NAPSS provided an important platform for women activists, and offered a meeting ground for women from Ireland and England.¹⁴

Demands for better educational and employment opportunities for single, middle-class women provided a springboard for a series of further demands including property and child custody rights for married women, female representation on public boards and local authorities, the right to vote in local elections, and ultimately the right to the parliamentary vote. This process, paralleled in most western countries, has been described by R.J. Evans as ‘the history of a progressively widening set of objectives’.¹⁵

It was in fact the 1832 Reform Act which specifically introduced sex discrimination into electoral qualifications with its use of the words ‘male persons’. This was extended in 1835 to include local and municipal government franchises. This act has been described as planting the seed of later female suffrage agitation.¹⁶ Up to 1832 women in England and Ireland had been prevented from voting by custom only, and in medieval times many qualified women had exercised their right to vote. From 1832, however, all women were prohibited from voting by law. The campaign for women’s suffrage therefore took place against a backdrop of ever widening male eligibility for the vote with no recognition of equal rights for women with similar qualifications.

Between 1830 and 1860, the subject of woman and her ‘place’ was not entirely ignored in Irish publications. One such article in 1839 comparing Irish and French women noted approvingly that ‘there is no free country where the women have less of a separate existence than in Ireland’.¹⁷ While conceding the need for new avenues of employment for middle-class women, an article in Dublin University Magazine in 1859 stated: ‘A woman’s mission is to be true to her own womanhood, and surely no nobler portion of this mission is there than the exalting of men.’¹⁸ Two years later it was reported that the issue of the Employment of Women in Ireland had been long and frequently discussed at recent meetings of the Statistical and Social Inquiry Society of Ireland (SSISI) in 1861; while accepting that educated women should not be limited to the profession of governess, the author advised that ‘the sex of a woman, though it may be a misfortune, is not a crime’.¹⁹ Reflecting these discussions, Andrew Rosen has written:

In the 1850s and 1860s there was simply no career offering any degree of intellectual scope, pecuniary reward, and social respectability open to an unmarried middle-class woman. It was primarily as a reaction against the manifest lack of opportunities for unmarried middle-class women that organised feminism began in Britain.²⁰

Similarly, George Dangerfield has commented: ‘When a husband is a woman’s career, the woman without a husband is as good as dead.’²¹ Evans has pointed to the pattern that emerged from these demands:

The rise of these pressure-groups for admitting women to the professions sparked off a kind of chain reaction, as these women found it necessary to campaign for admission into the universities in order to gain the necessary educational qualifications for admission to the professions, and then began to campaign for the vote in order to gain the necessary political power to force the legislative changes which would entitle them to enter the universities.²²

Attainment of women’s rights in the educational, legal and political arenas did not automatically occur at the same time in both countries. While the laws governing nineteenth-century Ireland and England were to a large extent similar, the social and political circumstances were quite different. Nineteenth-century Ireland was predominantly rural in character; in 1841 only 20 per cent of the population lived in towns. Unlike industrialised England, there were only three Irish towns with more than 50,000 inhabitants—Dublin, Belfast and Cork. The great famine of 1845–48 was a catalyst for lasting change in Irish society. In 1841, the population stood at just over 8 million; by 1851 this had been reduced to 6.6 million, through death and emigration. Population figures continued to decline throughout the nineteenth century—by 1911 the figure stood at 4.4 million.²³ A number of philanthropic women’s groups worked to help families in the post-famine years; increasingly they sought to teach craftwork to the girls from such families so that they might have a source of income. One young Quaker woman so involved was Anna Fisher (Haslam) from Youghal. From the 1860s, interest developed on employment opportunities for unmarried middle-class women, and branches of like-minded English organisations were formed in Dublin. A somewhat similar chain-reaction to that described above by Evans occurred, although the big educational breakthrough for Irish girls did not occur until the late 1870s. Debates in Ireland on the employment and education of women were not formulated in a vacuum, but were affected by debates occurring in the English women’s movement.²⁴ Activists in Ireland would seek extension of rights enjoyed by English women to Ireland, as well as demanding further equality in areas agreed by women in both countries.

STATUS OF WOMEN UP TO 1870s

In 1866, when a new franchise reform bill to further extend the male franchise was imminent, the first petition seeking female suffrage was presented to the House of Commons. Ironically, it was presented by John Stuart Mill, son of James Mill, who—unlike his father—was a lifelong champion of women’s rights.²⁵ The petition, signed by 1,499 women, included the signatures of twenty-five Irish women, one of whom was Anna Haslam.²⁶ The following year, the first debate on female suffrage in the House of Commons occurred with Mill’s proposed amendment to the 1867 Representation of the People Act. This proposed to replace the word ‘man’ in the act by the word ‘person’. While the amendment failed, it had the effect of focusing various women’s groups throughout England to form a permanent movement in the name of the National Society for Women’s Suffrage. Private bills for women’s suffrage continued to be presented to the House of Commons practically every year into the new century. By 1875 the majority voting against one such bill was only thirteen, despite two very stiff whips. This created so much unease amongst opponents of female suffrage in the House of Commons that a committee was formed ‘for maintaining the integrity of the franchise’.²⁷

It is clear from contemporary records of the late 1860s that the groundwork was being laid for an organised suffrage campaign in Ireland. Correspondence from John Stuart Mill to Thomas Haslam (Anna’s husband) on the feasibility of starting such a society in Ireland shows initial disappointment in 1867 that ‘the immediate prospects are not encouraging’.²⁸ Within a year, however, Mill was ‘very happy to hear of the progress of the movement for women’s suffrage in Dublin’.²⁹ It is clear from journals of the time that ideas of change were taking hold in some quarters. In December 1867, Mr Alfred Webb read a paper to the SSISI on ‘The Propriety of Conceding the Elective Franchise to Women’. Webb, like most Quakers, was a strong supporter of women’s rights. Responding to the argument that many women did not want the vote—an argument against granting women’s suffrage that would be used frequently over the next fifty years—Webb stated succinctly: ‘We should not refuse equal rights to some because others do not appreciate them.’³⁰ In 1870 a paper read to the Cork Literary and Scientific Society on the emancipation of women noted that ‘an impending change is manifest in the present social and political position of women’.³¹ It was reported that interest in the topic was so great that a debate which followed lasted four nights. That same year, the English Women’s Suffrage Journal reported that numerous petitions had been received from Ireland at the House of Commons in support of women’s franchise and the married women’s property bill.

Over the next few years there are reports of suffrage meetings being held in various parts of the country, including Dublin, Cork, Belfast, Carrickfergus, Dungannon, Bandon, Clonmel, Waterford and Limerick.³² Two women in particular were responsible for these developments, Anne Robertson in Dublin and Isabella Tod in Belfast. Anne Robertson was particularly active in Dublin from the late 1860s, organising petitions to parliament and addressing many public meetings. One significant meeting she was involved in took place in April 1870 at Dublin’s Molesworth Hall when the prominent English suffrage campaigner Millicent Fawcett addressed a large public meeting on ‘The Electoral Disabilities of Women’. Among the distinguished audience were Sir William and Lady Wilde, Sir Robert Kane, Provost Lloyd of Trinity College and Sir John Gray MP.³³ Subsequent Dublin meetings addressed by Robertson are reported in English journals alternately as the ‘Irish Society for Women’s Suffrage’ and the ‘Dublin Committee for Women’s Suffrage’. At one such meeting addressed by Robertson in Dublin’s Blackrock in 1871, she pointed out that while women were often told that they should attend to their children rather than to politics, they had not the smallest legal rights as to the education or guardianship of their children:

According to law, the father, whether he be Catholic or Protestant, was always of the right religion; and all his children, the girls as well as the boys, should be brought up to suit his views.³⁴

Robertson argued that the cause of this injustice was the fact that women were not represented in parliament, where the laws were made or reformed, and where the interests of women were too often neglected. While there is some uncertainty as to whether there existed a formal suffrage committee in Dublin at this time, there is no doubt that Robertson was central to activating suffrage debate and laying the groundwork for an organised society.³⁵

Isabella Tod established the Northern Ireland Society for Women’s Suffrage in Belfast in 1871, and linked it to the London Women’s Suffrage Society.³⁶ A seasoned campaigner for women’s educational equality and property rights and repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts, Tod travelled throughout Ireland addressing meetings on the suffrage issue. She argued for the vote on the basis of justice and on women’s right to citizenship. Like most suffragists of the period, Tod sought a relatively restricted franchise, based on current property qualifications. Acquisition of the vote, she argued, would allow women to participate, as individuals, directly in society, not subordinate, but equal to men.³⁷ She sought not only political power for women, but their admission as citizens of the state, exercising moral responsibility and freedom of action. Her three-pronged approach to acquisition of political rights—Poor Law, Local Government and Parliamentary—would be the template followed by the Irish suffrage campaign for the remainder of the nineteenth century.

In 1876, Anna Haslam and her husband Thomas formed the Dublin Women’s Suffrage Association (DWSA).³⁸ Like Tod, Anna Haslam had been prominent in the campaigns for female education, married women’s property rights, and repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts. She and her husband came from Quaker stock; both would remain active in the women’s movement throughout their long lives. In her biography of the couple, Carmel Quinlan has written:

The Haslams devoted their lives to reform. Thomas Haslam was a feminist theorist; his wife was an activist who put his theories into practice, and in her person epitomised his assertion that women, intellectually and morally, were deserving of equitable treatment in politics and before the law.³⁹

Thomas published a number of pamphlets on a series of topics allied to the couple’s work, including birth control, sexual morality and women’s suffrage. In 1874, he wrote and published three issues of a periodical, The Women’s Advocate, the first such Irish publication. While all three issues outlined Haslam’s views on the suffrage question, issue one was primarily addressed to Irishmen. Referring to recent criticism of women degrading themselves by publicly claiming political rights, Haslam asked, ‘If you are so grieved to see so many of our best and noblest women unsex themselves—as you affect to call it—what have you done to prevent (this) necessity … Why have you not come forward, and insisted on their enfranchisement, before they were constrained to enter into the field of controversy on their own behalf?’⁴⁰ Issue 2 gave practical advice on organising local groups for effective political action. This issue was so highly regarded at the time that the leader of the English suffrage campaign, Lydia Becker, ordered five thousand copies of it for distribution.⁴¹ Practical implementation of his advice would be seen in the methods of the DWSA.

Quinlan has pointed to a suffrage meeting held in Earlsfort Terrace in January 1876 as a possible catalyst for the formation of the DWSA.⁴² Isabella Tod was among the speakers at this meeting. The following month, the first meeting of the DWSA was held in Leinster Hall, Molesworth Street (later renamed the Irish Women’s Suffrage and Local Government Association (IWSLGA)). Subsequently, an executive committee was formed. Anna would remain its secretary until 1913 when she stood down and was elected life-president. Mary Cullen has noted that ‘throughout that entire period she did not miss a single meeting and was clearly the driving force in the organisation.’⁴³ Many of the early members and committee were Quaker. Membership was open to both men and women; Quinlan has pointed to the number of influential men associated with the DWSA from its formation; a 1918 retrospective report by the organisation noted: ‘co-operation with men has been a distinguishing feature of the policy of the Association from the first.’⁴⁴

The DWSA remained strictly non-militant in its methods, seeking to influence public opinion by use of petitions, public lectures, appeals to MPs, and letters to the press. Great emphasis was placed on the educational role of the society, and to this end regular meetings were held in members’ homes; additionally larger public meetings were organised, frequently with prominent English and American suffrage speakers.⁴⁵ It sought reform of all legal and social measures discriminating against women, particularly emphasising the need for increased educational opportunities. Much of the society’s time was involved in agitation for married women’s property rights and the repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts which regulated prostitution. With the parliamentary vote as its ultimate aim, initially it sought the local government vote for women, and their right to serve as poor law guardians. Regarding the latter two items, there was discrepancy between the rights accorded women in Ireland and England. The English Poor Law system had been extended to Ireland in 1838, with Boards of Guardians being established to supervise the running of workhouses and to administer poor relief. Rate-paying Irishwomen were eligible to vote for Poor Law guardians on the same terms as men, but unlike women in England and Wales, were not legally qualified to act as Poor Law guardians. Similarly, Irish women householders were not entitled to the municipal franchise—unlike their English counterparts—with the exception of Belfast city and the townships of Blackrock and Kingstown (Dún Laoghaire) where special charters applied. The DWSA argued that attainment of these two measures was essential if women were on the one hand to gain experience in public affairs, while simultaneously proving the value of their contribution.

This pragmatic approach was also reflected in its attitude towards qualification for the franchise. Nineteenth-century demands for women’s franchise ‘on the same terms as men’ inevitably meant on the same property qualification then applicable to men. At a time when many men were without a vote, most women sought parity with their male colleagues, not adult suffrage. As eligibility for the male parliamentary vote was increasingly extended during the course of the century, so too was the potential for drawing more women into the franchise net. However, as women continued to be consistently excluded from any of the new franchise extensions, their anger grew. Cullen has pointed out that socialist feminists criticised suffragists as bourgeois women seeking votes for their own class,⁴⁶ and there is no doubt that many suffragists did have this perspective. However, citing Evans’s description of ‘a progressively widening set of objectives’, it would appear pragmatic policy on the part of women’s groups to proceed one step at a time, rather than demand adult suffrage at this point in time. Despite the quite radical changes in parliamentary structures and representation during the nineteenth century, Great Britain remained a class-structured society. Whereas previously power and representation had been held by an elite of landowning aristocracy, now it was vested in the wealthy middle classes and professional groups. While the nature of the property qualification had changed during the course of the century, it was deemed correct by the majority that representation be linked to property. Socialists would argue for adult suffrage; in time radical feminists would argue that all women should be included in such demands. Fundamentally, however, ‘Nineteenth-century feminism was and remained an essentially middle-class movement.’⁴⁷

In 1883, an act was passed which declared that canvassing and other election work could no longer be salaried. Suddenly, women found they were very much in demand as unpaid party workers, and women’s auxiliaries of the main political parties were formed.⁴⁸ Clearly it was women’s usefulness, rather than a sudden desire to see them involved in politics, that led to the formation of these societies. The Primrose League (Conservative) for example was always under male control, and the role of women in the League was essentially a social one ‘acting as complements to the men’.⁴⁹ By including women in party work and using them as canvassers during elections, such organisations helped to divert attention away from the suffrage issue, and as Andrew Rosen notes, ‘to make women feel that they were not altogether outcasts from the pole of the constitution’.⁵⁰ Significantly, between 1886 and 1892 the House of Commons did not once debate the issue of female suffrage. Within a nationalist perspective, the work of the Ladies Land League during the imprisonment of Charles Stewart Parnell and other leaders of the Land League during the early 1880s, and their subsequent treatment by Parnell on his release can be seen as reflecting the pattern of political utilisation of women at times of difficulty allied to an unwillingness to treat them as equals.

The DWSA was not idle, however. Its general policy during 1881–94 is summarised in their 1918 Report:

When any suffrage resolution or measure was before the House of Commons, letters were sent to all Irish members of Parliament urging them to support the measure. Letters were also sent to the Irish press, explaining the bearing of the particular measure, and asking all in sympathy with it to communicate with their local Parliamentary representative … In 1886, twenty-seven petitions were sent to the House of Commons, and in 1890, seventeen.⁵¹

1884 saw a further extension of the male franchise. Attempts to secure an amendment to the bill seeking a measure of women’s suffrage—supported by several Irish MPs—failed. Prime Minister Gladstone rejected such an amendment on the grounds that the proposed extension of the franchise already involved ‘as much as … it can safely carry’.⁵² Increasingly the possibility of extending the franchise to women came to be viewed in terms of party politics over and above views on the status of women. The unknown effect of a new female electorate on the fortunes of political parties caused many politicians to hesitate.

In 1896 a bill was passed which allowed Irish women fulfilling certain property qualifications to serve as Poor Law guardians. There was some criticism of the bill in both houses. In the Commons one MP declared his opposition to bisexualism in public life,⁵³ while in the Lords, Viscount Clifden complained ‘he did not like to see spouting women out of their place doing men’s work’, concluding that the effect of the bill would be to increase the power of priests on boards of guardians.⁵⁴ The bill—introduced by a supporter of the DWSA, William Johnston of Belfast—was subsequently enacted. In its Annual Report for 1896, the DWSA notes that already two lady guardians had been elected. The Association devoted much of its energies to informing women of their eligibility as electors and encouraging women to stand for election; in this regard in 1897 it published a leaflet ‘Suggestions for Intending Lady Guardians’. In 1897, twelve women were elected as Poor Law Guardians; in 1898 the number rose to twenty-two. Membership and subscription numbers begin to increase from 1896, the report for 1897 advising members that ‘this increase has been largely due to the inclusion of the Poor Law Guardian movement within your sphere of operations.’ The organisation did not intend to sit on its laurels, however. Accepting the 1896 breakthrough as a welcome stepping stone, its report noted:

There is nothing which has happened in our time that has imparted so powerful a stimulus … to our fellow-countrywomen … a stimulus (which) will be powerfully strengthened when in addition, they obtain the Country and the Municipal.⁵⁵

During 1897, debate took place in the House of Commons on a proposed Local Government Bill for Ireland, and in particular on the proposed extension of the bill to include women. One MP, referring to the John Stuart Mill bill of 30 years earlier, commented that most MPs had considered women’s franchise a huge joke. He objected to petticoat government, declaring that the vast majority of women recognised they were not fit to govern in the house, and did not wish to do so. A colleague warned that if ever women got into parliament, the end of the country was nigh.⁵⁶ Despite such reservations the Local Government bill introduced in February 1898 passed through both houses of parliament within six months. Local administration was to be distributed between County Councils, Urban District Councils, Rural District Councils and Boards of Guardians. The franchise for election to these bodies would be the parliamentary franchise, with the addition of Peers and Women, including lodgers. Under its terms, Irish women with certain property qualifications were granted the local government vote. As in England, women would be entitled to sit on district councils if elected, but not on county councils. The DWSA report for that year commented:

It would be difficult to exaggerate the practical importance of this revolutionary measure. It has already enfranchised … probably not fewer than one hundred thousand women; and there can be little doubt that in the course of the next few years a very large proportion of these will exercise the franchises now conferred on them.⁵⁷

In the spring of 1899, eighty-five women were elected as Poor Law Guardians, thirty-one of these also being elected as Rural District Councillors. Four more were elected as Urban District Councillors. The DWSA had reason to be pleased and grounds for optimism. It pointed out that not just those newly elected, but also the new female electorate had participated in a significant new political experience. Like male Home Rulers, women would later point to their competency in local government as justification for greater responsibility. Events would show that women could not become complacent about their newly won rights. In 1903 attempts to have women Poor Law Guardians co-opted rather than elected ‘to relieve them from the worry and turmoil of a popular election’ reinforced the belief of suffragists that women must gain the parliamentary suffrage to ensure maintenance of existing rights.⁵⁸ The DWSA—under its new name of the Irish Women’s Suffrage and Local Government Association (IWSLGA)—now set its sights firmly on attaining that goal. That crucial next step would prove difficult to attain, and twenty years would pass before a partial measure of parliamentary franchise was granted to women. Neither the Poor Law nor the Local Government provisions to Irishwomen had met with any serious opposition; both merely adjusted their position to that of their English counterparts. Nothing new or radical per se was involved. It could indeed be argued that the local government vote was granted with comparative ease to women throughout the British Isles precisely because it was a limited franchise. Significantly, women were disqualified from serving on county councils and boroughs in England and Wales until 1907, and in Ireland until 1911. In Ireland, these bodies were given the fiscal and administrative duties and powers formerly employed by Grand Juries.

It would appear that the more power connected with the office, the longer it was withheld from women. Despite the gradual admission of women to local government boards etc., their role on these was too often seen as an extension of their traditional role in the home. Their advice was welcomed in matters concerning the sick poor, and in the field of health, education and housing.⁵⁹ Undoubtedly, many women actively sought to change conditions in these areas, their philanthropic work and involvement in the women’s movement having made them acutely aware of the appalling conditions endured by much of the population. But from a purely political point of view, within areas of finance and national politics, women’s involvement was viewed as an encroachment on traditional male territory. With the explicit demand for parliamentary suffrage for women, attitudes on both sides became tougher and more emotional. Nonetheless, it is questionable whether even these limited franchises would have been introduced, had it not been for the constant agitation and pressure of the pioneer suffrage organisations during the nineteenth century.

Gains made for women 1859–1909

In addition to the campaigns for suffrage and for female education, there were two other significant issues which absorbed the time and energies of nineteenth-century activists—the campaign for the Repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts, and the demand for Married Women’s Property Rights.

MARRIED WOMEN’S PROPERTY RIGHTS

Nineteenth-century women of the middle and upper classes were not expected to earn their own living, but to remain dependent forever upon a man, initially their father, later their husband. Under the provisions of common law, a married woman could not own property in her own right; upon marriage a woman’s property became her husband’s. While many rich upper-class families could afford to arrange settlements for their daughters in advance of marriage to get around this provision, the majority of married women were not protected in this way. As with other laws affecting them, women’s lack of a political voice left them unable to influence change in their favour; ‘they were governed by laws made by men alone.’⁶⁰ From the mid-1850s, the embryonic women’s movement developing in England included in its range of demands educational rights, expansion of employment opportunities, moral reform, and the right of married women to own property. One activist of the time summarised the legal position of married women in 1854 as follows, ‘A man and wife are one person in law; the wife loses all her rights as a single woman, and her existence