Political alliances of WSPU and NUWSS

If all suffrage campaigners shared the same goal  then it raises the question of why there were so many different groups? It seems unlikely that it simply individuals who could not work together, though there would undoubtedly have been some personal differences there were also fundamental differences in approach and politics that set the groups apart...

Inside the NUWSS

The most prominent group was the NUWSS. Established in 1897 it's leadership included women from diverse political backgrounds including Millicent Fawcett (wife of Liberal MP Henry Fawcett), Lady Frances Balfour (an aristocrat), Helen Blackburn (daughter of an Irish engineer), Priscilla Bright McLaren (a radical liberal), Eleanor Rathbone (later an independent MP) and Eva Gore-Booth (an Irish poet and Labour activist) (Nationalarchives.go.uk, 2014). It began as a federation of several large local societies, acting primarily as a liaison and co-ordinator with no-power over it's members with a  broadly democratic constitution. The organisation grew and by 1907 found it necessary to reorganise. The new constitution gave the leaders executive power to make decisions. Some of the provincial socities were unhappy with this as they felt that the executive had a conservative bias at odds with their more democratic ideals. This split eventually led to a decentralisation into regional federations in 1910 though not without objection from the executive (Harris, 2007).

Inside WSPU and the formation of the Women's Freedom League (WFL)

The WSPU was formed in 1903 by Emmeline Pankhurst with her daughters Sylvia and Christabel. The rule of the Pankhurst's was semi-dictatorial. Often the leaders took action without even communicating to members that anything was to take place. Some began to take exception to the direction and actions the WSPU was taking in their name and voiced their concerns prompting Emmeline Pankhurst to declare that she intended to run the organisation without interference during a conference in 1907 (Simkin, 2014). In response several prominent members including Charlotte Despard and Theresa Billington-Grieg decided to break away and formed the Women's Freedom League. The WFL was still a militant organisation but in contrast to WSPU was run as a democracy. while not afraid to defy the law they disagreed with the violent methods of the WSPU and confined themselves to passive protests such as refusal to pay taxes((Simkin, 2014).

Party Political

Although those in favour of women's suffrage were united by a common cause, the politics of individuals were as varied as seen anywhere else and the same was true of their opponents. Early support for the movement seemed to be mainly within the Liberal party, as evidenced by John Stuart Mill when he delivered Barbara Leigh Smith Bodichon's petition for the enfranchisement of women to Parliament in 1866. Support from individuals could be seen across the political spectrum. It was sometimes questionable however, as to whether this was offered from an ideological standpoint of shared principles or with a view to party political gain. There were certainly some Liberal MP's who feared the advantages they believed the Conservatives would gain if the vote was granted to women on the same terms as men. They believed that in effect all that would happen was that a million upper and middle class tory voters would be created in one fell swoop. Many of the male politicians of both key parties feared the erosion of traditional family roles that may ensue if women were distracted from their home duties. Ironically given the fears of the other parties regarding the suffragists political persuasion, there seems to have been very little support within the Conservative Party!

Alliances of NUWSS and WSPU

When the NUWSS was established in 1897 it had a constitution that strictly forbade any party political affiliation, though as we have seen members still had their individual politics. In 1909 disillusioned with Asquith's Liberal government many members were advocating an alliance with the Labour Party. This was not the first time women's suffrage campaigners had found common cause with the left-wing. In 1903 WSPU had been linked to the Independent Labour Party (which later became an affiliate of the Labour Party) whose leader Keir Hardie was known to be committed to the idea of equality in the franchise. This proved to be more a marriage of convenience than shared principles (beyond those of gender equality). Many ILP members viewed WSPU as serving middle-class interests because they were campaigning for suffrage on equal terms with men, with the result that in the 1906 election WSPU offered support only for known pro-suffrage candidates such as Keir Hardie. These fears were echoed amongst the Labour politicians the NUWSS were later to seek an alliance with. The move towards alliance with Labour was also resisted by Millicent Garrett Fawcett who wished to maintain a policy of neutrality. However, following the failure of the Conciliation Bills of 1910, 1911 and 1912 (the first of which had led to Black Friday) and a vote at the 1912 Labour Party conference to include women in any franchise reform, an alliance was formed. 

And so...

It is virtually impossible to summarise the politics of the suffrage movement other than to recognise it's diversity. It is well put by June Purvis in her book:
"Far from speaking with one voice, feminists disagreed about the basis and nature of women's oppression and how it should be reformed" (Purvis, 1995).