The Second Reading of the Women's Enfranchisement Bill was taken
in the House of Commons on Friday week. Sir George Kemp, in moving the Second Reading, explained that the Bill differed in two respects from the Bill of last year. The £10 qualification was omitted in order to meet the objection that there might be an increase of plural or fagot voting; and marriage was not to disqualify, but a husband and wife were not to be registered as voters in the same borough or county division. The supporters of the Bill would consent to its being referred to a Committee of the whole House. It is surely ridiculous to pretend that the Bill would not still mean in practice distinguishing in favour of unmarried women. No nation could make a more disastrous mistake. The only remedy for that injustice would be to give the vote to all women over a certain age, irrespective of pro- perty qualifications. In other words, once Woman Suffrage in any form is admitted, the logical end must be adult suffrage of both sexes, with men voters in a minority. Mr. Henderson announced that the Labour Party would vote for the Bill only because they hoped to turn it into an Adult Suffrage Bill in Committee. If they failed, they would oppose it on the Third Reading. In the division the Bill was carried by 255 votes to 88. The debate was conducted in a rather thin House. It is impossible to believe in the reality of a movement which aims at a great revolution in our political system and yet can be ignored by the leaders on both sides. The debate was strikingly different from the lively encounter of a year ago on the same subject.
Previous page
