Secretary, Mrs. [Margaret] Kineton Parkes, 98,
St. Martin’s-lane,
W.C. A silver
cake basket belonging to Miss [L.E.] Turquand, Press Secretary to the Free
Church League for Woman Suffrage, was sold at Sydenham. After a procession
with banners, a successful protest meeting was held. Mrs. Harvey’s house at
Bromley is still barricaded; nothing has happened.
For non-payment of Inhabited House Duty — the amount of which was seven
shillings — Miss Kate Raleigh’s goods were distrained on last week at
Uxbridge. Miss Raleigh naturally made use of the occasion for propaganda
purposes, conversing with the tax collector for some time on the subject of
Woman Suffrage, and presenting him with Suffrage literature, which he
accepted. Before taking his leave he expressed himself as, on the whole, in
favour of women’s claims to enfranchisement.
Miss Evelyn Sharp.
Following on the bankruptcy proceedings against
Dr. Winifred S. Patch, the
next victim is Miss Evelyn Sharp, the brilliant writer and speaker, whose
long service to the Woman Suffrage cause is widely known and honoured. At
the first meeting of “creditors” — again the only creditor is the Government,
but dignified by a plural — Miss Sharp entirely disputed the claim of £56
19s.
10d. in respect of unpaid
income-tax, in view of her political status as an unenfranchised woman, and
the unconstitutional procedure of levying taxes without representation. For
three weeks a bailiff has been in possession of Miss Sharpe’s bed-sitting
room; early this week, however, all her furniture, books, and other
possessions, except her bed and bath, were removed, including even her
typewriter, which is certainly a tool of her craft. An added indignity and,
we say, illegality, is that her letters have not only been opened but
detained for a week. It is expected that the public examination will take
place early in .
The Women’s Freedom League expresses its warm appreciation of the action of
these Suffragists in defending the principle of “No Taxation Without
Representation.”
Tax Resistance protests are multiplying throughout the land, and signs are not wanting that the seedling planted by the Women’s Freedom League is developing into a stalwart tree.
This form of militancy appeals even to constitutionally-minded women; and the ramifications of tax resistance now reach far beyond the parent society and the other militant organisations, necessitating the expenditure of great energy on the part of the officials who work under the banner of John Hampden — the Women’s Tax Resistance League.
Mrs. [Charlotte] Despard is no longer even asked to pay her taxes; the Edinburgh Branch of the W.F.L. is in almost the same happy position; Mrs. [Kate] Harvey has once more heroically barricaded Brackenhill against the King’s officers, and Miss [Mary] Anderson has again raised the flag of revolt in Woldingham.
Dr. [Elizabeth] Knight, with praiseworthy regularity, refuses to pay her dog license and other taxes in respect of a country residence; and these protests never fail to carry to some mind, hitherto heedless, a new sense of the unconstitutional position women are forced to occupy in a country that prides itself on being the home of constitutional Government.
Activities of the Tax Resistance League.
Last week we had five sales in different parts of the country.
On three Tax Resisters at West Drayton and two at Rotherfield, made their protest.
Miss [Kate] Raleigh, Miss Weir, and Miss [Margory?] Lees had a gold watch and jewellery sold on the village green, West Drayton; speakers at the protest meeting were Mrs. [Margaret] Kineton Parkes, Mrs. Hicks, and Miss Raleigh.
Miss Koll and Miss Hon[n]or Morten, of Rotherfield, had a silver salver and gold ring sold from a wagonette in the village street; speakers at the protest meeting were Mrs. [Anne] Cobden Sanderson and Mr. Reginald Pott.
Miss Maud Roll presided.
On Mrs. [Myra Eleanor] Sadd Brown gave an at home at her house when short speeches were made by the Hampstead Tax Resisters who were to have their goods sold on , and by Mrs. [Louisa] Thompson Price, whose case is being further looked into by Somerset House.
There was a very good attendance and many new members were gained for the League.
On , sales took place at Hampstead and at Croydon.
Misses Collier, Mrs. Hartley, Mrs. Hicks, and Dr. Adeline Roberts had their goods sold at the Hampstead Drill Hall and at the protest meeting the speakers were Miss Hicks and Mrs. [Margarete Wynne] Nevinson.
The goods of Miss [Dorinda] Neligan and Miss James were sold at Messrs. King and Everall’s Auction Rooms, Croydon; the protest meeting was addressed by Mrs. Kineton Parkes.
On the sale took place of a ring, the property of Mrs. [Adeline] Cecil Chapman, President of the New Constitutional Society, and wife of Mr. Cecil Chapman, the well-known magistrate, at Messrs. Roche and Roche’s Auction Rooms, 68A, Battersea-rise.
Mrs. Chapman made an excellent protest in the auction room, and afterwards presided at the protest meeting, when the speakers were Mrs. Cobden Sanderson, Mrs. Kineton Parkes, and Mrs. Teresa Gough.
Sequel to Hastings Riot.
As a result of the disgraceful scenes at Hastings on , Mrs. Darent Harrison appealed to the magistrate on Tuesday.
A large number of sympathisers were present and Mrs. [Jane?] Strickland, president of the local National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies, spoke, and Mrs. Darent Harrison.
The magistrate said the matter was not within his province and the Watch Committee must be referred to.
We hope that the result may be adequate police protection when the resisters hold the postponed protest meeting.
On , Mrs. [Margaret]
Kineton Parkes addressed the members of the National Union, at Cardiff, on
“The Principles of Tax Resistance,” with
Dr. Mary Evans in the chair.
On , Mrs. [Anne] Cobden
Sanderson visited Birmingham, and gave a lecture on “Tax Resistance” at the
Annual Meeting of the Women’s Suffrage Society, presided over by Mrs.
[Catherine?] Osler. Mrs. Cobden Sanderson has since left England to attend
the Stockholm Conference, representing the above Society.
During this week goods will be sold which have been seized from Mrs. Lilian
Hicks, Dr. Katherine Heanley
and Miss [Kate] Raleigh.
Also in the same issue was a letter from Kate Harvey:
To the Editor of The Vote
Madam,— Will you allow me a short space in your columns to protest against
the sale of my goods, which took place at Brackenhill, Bromley, on
?
Being by training, as well as by temperament, a law-abiding woman, I strongly
object to the necessity for such a course of action; but there is — there
should be — a limit to a woman’s patience. The limit is reached when they
talk of compelling us to contribute towards the salaries of the men who slam
the door in our faces! Resistance is our most effective weapon, for even the
stone wall of stupidity will yield to sufficient pressure.
I am not forgetting our mercies, labeled facilities, or Sir Edward Grey’s
speech; but I have heard of a trick played by ill-mannered boys. A
tempting-looking parcel is thrown right in front of you. When you stoop to
pick it up they pull a string which is invisible to you, and all you get for
your pains is a crick in the back. We must cut that string! — Yours
faithfully,
(from W.F.L. Literature Department, 1s.; post free, 1s. 1d.)
Not long ago, at the final meeting of the Women’s Tax Resistance League, it was decided to present the famous John Hampden Banner (which did such magnificent service at so many women’s protest meetings against the Government’s unconstitutional practice of taxation without representation), to the Women’s Freedom League.
We treasure this standard of former days, and now we are the grateful recipients of an edition of “The Tax Resistance Movement in Great Britain,” written by our old friend, Mrs. [Margaret] Kineton Parkes, with an introduction by another of our friends, Mr. Laurence Housman.
This little book is charmingly produced, and on its outside cover appear a figure of Britannia and the colours of the Women’s Tax Resistance League.
Every reader of The Vote knows that it was the Women’s Freedom League which first organised tax resistance in as a protest against women’s political disenfranchisement, and all our readers should be in possession of a copy of this book, which gives a history of the movement, tracing it back to , when two sisters, the Misses [Anna Maria & Mary] Priestman, had their dining-room chairs taken to the sale-room, because, being voteless, they objected to taxes being levied upon them.
Dr. Octavia Lewin is mentioned as the first woman to resist the payment of licenses.
It is refreshing to renew our recollections of the tax resistance protests made by Mrs. [Charlotte] Despard, Mr. [Mark] Wilks (who was imprisoned in Brixton Gaol for a fortnight), Miss [Clemence] Housman (who was kept in Holloway Prison for a week), Mrs. [Isabella] Darent Harrison, Mrs. [Kate] Harvey (who had a term of imprisonment), Miss [Kate] Raliegh, Mrs. [Anne] Cobden Saunderson, Dr. [Winifred] Patch, Miss [Bertha] Brewster, Dr. [Elizabeth] Knight (who was also imprisoned), Mrs. [Mary] Sargent Florence, Miss Gertrude Eaton, and a host of others too numerous to mention, and last, but not least, Miss Evelyn Sharp, who, as Mrs. Parkes says, “has the distinction of being the last tax resister to suffer persecution at the hands of unrepresentative government in the women’s long struggle for citizenship.”
The full list of tax-resisters appearing at the end of this pamphlet will be found to be of special interest to all suffragists.
I haven’t yet found a copy of this book on-line or available via interlibrary loan.
I might be able to order photocopies of a microfilm version held by a library in Australia, but I’m too cheap and so I’m holding out for a better option.
Any ideas?
Another source I’ve had trouble tracking down is Laurence Housman’s The Duty of Tax Resistance, which comes from the same campaign.
The Vote printed excerpts from it in their issue:
The Duty of Tax Resistance
By Laurence Housman.
Two years ago Members of Parliament determined to place the payment of themselves in front of the enfranchisement of women; and now women of enfranchised spirit are more determined than ever to place their refusal to pay taxes before Members of Parliament.
To withdraw so moral an object-lesson in the face of so shabby an act of political opportunism would be not merely a sign of weakness, but a dereliction of duty.
Nothing can be worse for the moral well-being of the State than for unjust conditions to secure to themselves an appearance of agreement and submission which are only due to a Government which makes justice its first duty.
It is bad for the State that the Government should be able to collect with ease taxes unconstitutionally levied; it is bad for the men of this country who hold political power, and in whose hands it lies to advance or delay measures of reform, that they should see women yielding an easy consent to taxation so unjustly conditioned.
If women do so, they give a certain colour to the contention that they have not yet reached that stage of political education which made our forefathers resist, even to the point of revolt, any system of taxation which was accompanied by a denial of representation.
It was inflexible determination on this point which secured for the people of this country their constitutional liberties; and in the furtherance of great causes, history has a way of repeating itself.
Our surest stand-by to-day is still that which made the advance of liberty sure in the past.
In this country representative government has superseded all earlier forms of feudal service, or Divine right, or the claim of the few to govern the many; and its great strength lies in the fact that by granting to so large a part of the community a voice in the affairs of government, it secures from people of all sorts and conditions the maximum of consent to the laws and to administration; and, as a consequence, it is enabled to carry on its work of administration in all departments more economically and efficiently than would be possible under a more arbitrary form of Government.
But though it has thus acquired strength, it has, by so basing itself, entirely changed the ground upon which a Government makes its moral claim to obedience.
Representative government is a contract which requires for its fulfilment the grant of representation in return for the right to tax.
No principle for the claim to obedience can be laid down where a Government, claiming to be representative, is denying a persistent and active demand for representation.
People of a certain temperament may regard submission to unjust Government as preferable to revolt, and “peaceful penetration” as the more comfortable policy; but they cannot state it as a principle which will bear examination; they can give it no higher standing than mere opportunism.
It may be said that the general welfare of the State over-rides all private claims. That is true.
But under representative government it is impossible to secure the general welfare or a clean bill of health where, to any large body of the community which asks for it, full citizenship is being denied.
You cannot produce the instinct for self-government among a community and then deny it expression, without causing blood-poisoning to the body politic.
It is against nature for those who are fit for self-government to offer a submission which comes suitably only from the unfit; nor must you expect those who are pressing for freedom to put on the livery of slaves, and accept that ill-fitting and ready-made costume as though it were a thing of their own choice and made to their own order and taste.
Representative Government man, without much hurt to itself, acquiesce in the exclusion from full citizenship of a sleeping, but not of an awakened section of the community.
And if it so acts toward the latter, it is the bounden duty of those who are awake to the State’s interests to prevent an unrepresentative Government from treating them, even for one single day, as though they were asleep.
They must, in some form or another, force the Government to see that by its denial of this fundamental claim to representation its own moral claim to obedience has disappeared.
That is where the great distinction lies between the unenfranchised condition of certain men in the community who have still not got the vote and the disenfranchised position of women.
It is all the vast difference between the conditional and the absolute.
To no man is the vote denied; it is open to him under certain conditions which, with a modicum of industry and sobriety, practically every man in this country can fulfil.
To woman the vote is denied under all conditions whatsoever.
The bar has been raised against her by statute, and by statute and legal decision is still maintained.
There is the woman’s direct and logical answer to those who say that, after all, she is only upon the same footing as the man who, without a vote, has still to pay the tax upon his beer and his tobacco.
The man is always a potential voter; and it is mainly through his own indifference that he does not qualify; but the woman is by definite laws placed outside the Constitution of those three estates of the realm from which the sanction of Government is derived.
If it asks no sanction of her, why should she give it?
From what principle in its Constitution does it deduce this right at once to exclude and to compel?
We see clearly enough that it derives its right of rule over men from the consent they give it as citizens — a consent on which its legislative existence is made to depend.
But just as expressly as the man’s consent is included in our Constitution, the woman’s is excluded.
From that exclusion the State suffers injury every day; and submission to that exclusion perpetuates injury, not to the State alone, but to the minds of the men and of the women who together should form its consenting voice as one whole.
This submission is, therefore, an evil; and we need in every town and village of this country some conspicuous sign that among women submission has ceased.
What more definite, what more logical sign can be given than for unrepresented women to refuse to pay taxes?
If Women Suffragists are fully awake to their responsibilities for the enforcement of right citizenship, they will not hesitate to bring into disrepute an evil and usurping form of Government which does not make the recognition of woman’s claim its first duty.
The Cæsar to whom in this country we owe tribute is representative government.
Unrepresentative government is but a forgery on Cæsar’s name.
For Suffragists to honour such a Government, so lacking to them in moral sanction, is to do dishonour to themselves; and to offer it any appearance of willing service is to do that which in their hearts they know to be false.
From pamphlet published by The Women’s Tax Resistance League.
1d.
When the Tax Collector called on morning he was met with Mrs. [Isabella] Darent Harrison’s formula for tax collectors since she was made the victim of an organised riot in — “Not at home.”
On this occasion the maid returned to say he had come with a warrant and a bailiff to leave in possession, and must be admitted.
Mrs. Harrison then gave instructions for the tradesmen’s entrance and windows to be locked and bolted, and herself opened the inner front door, closing it behind her and keeping her hand on the handle.
The Tax Collector, who was standing with the bailiff inside the outer front door, asked if he was addressing Mrs. Darent Harrison, and hoped she would allow him to execute his trying task and produced his paper.
Mrs. Harrison asked and was told the names of the local magistrates who had signed the warrant, and explained that her house could only be entered by force.
She had been looking forward to paying her taxes within a very short time, and had been on the point of writing to Somerset House to say so; but as they had not scrupled in war time, and when the measure of justice for which she was fighting was almost certain to be on the Statute Book within a month or two, to come with warrants, bailiffs and all the old hateful methods of coercion, they could only be met by the same old spirit of revolt against tyranny and injustice.
The Tax Collector protested that he could not employ force against a woman — that was quite out of the question.
Mrs. Harrison then suggested that if he did not intend to stand there till he or she collapsed he must either employ force or call in the police to do so.
He scoffed at the idea of sending for the police, but finally sent the bailiff to see if he could find any.
But no police were to be found.
The bailiff was next sent to get his dinner, and when he returned he reported “still no police anywhere to be found.”
It was a complete impasse.
They had been facing one another for three hours, and the Tax Collector seemed equally determined to “do his duty” and not to be guilty of even a technical assault on an elderly woman.
It was only after being taunted with cowardice — with fear of the consequences of meeting moral with physical force — that he finally made an effort to get control of the handle of the door, and so with the assistance of the bailiff to force his way in.
Mrs. Harrison at once told the maids, who had been watching for some time through the glass door, that she was quite ready for luncheon, while the men disappeared into the drawing-room, which the bailiff has occupied ever since.
Mrs. Harrison has not seen him again, but she hears the Tax Collector has left a paper on the piano on which is written something about 5s. per day.
Miss [Kate] Raleigh at Uxbridge
Because of her refusal to pay Inhabited House Duty, Miss Raleigh’s goods were sold by public auction at Uxbridge afternoon.
Miss [Florence] Underwood protested in the sale-room against these goods being sold to pay the tax while women were still disenfranchised.
Miss Raleigh had no objection to paying taxes, but the protest was made because justice was being delayed to women.
Women had not yet got the Parliamentary vote.
There had been no delay in the collection of taxes from women, the warrant in this particular case having been issued with unusual punctuality, but although the clause for the enfranchisement of women had passed through the House of Commons with such a huge majority, there had been no attempt on the part of the Government to give speedy effect to that clause.
We were told that votes for women might be on the Statute Book within a few weeks.
Why, then, could not the authorities delay this sale?
By taxing women who believed that taxation without representation was tyranny, the Government was breaking its truce with women, and by delaying justice to women it was breaking one of the provisions of the Magna Charta, which enacted that justice should not be sold, delayed or denied to anyone.
Miss Evelyn Sharp.
On , the adjourned public examination of Miss Evelyn Sharp before the Registrar was again adjourned, until .
When asked why she had refused to make a statement of her affairs she replied that it was for the same reason that she had resisted the payment of the taxes which the Government claimed from her.
Articles of jewellery belonging to Miss [Kate] Rayleigh were sold on at the Chequers Hotel, Uxbridge, having been seized for non-payment of Imperial taxes.
This is the second occasion on which Miss K. Raleigh, who is a member of the Tax Resistance League, has made a similar protest.
The auctioneer was entirely in sympathy with the protest, and explained the circumstances under which the sale took place.
He courteously allowed Mrs. [Anne] Cobden Sanderson and Mrs. [Emily] Juson Kerr to put clearly the women’s point of view; Miss Raleigh made a warm appeal for true freedom.
A procession was formed and an open-air meeting subsequently held.
Mrs. Cobden Sanderson presided.
Mrs. [Marianne] Clarendon Hyde, Miss [Alison] Neilans and Miss Raleigh addressed an attentive audience.
A resolution was passed protesting against the sale, and calling on the Member of Parliament for the constituency to support the Conciliation Bill when it comes before the House next year.
The various Suffrage Societies were well represented.
The Worship of Athene. — Miss Katherine Raleigh’s lecture on this subject will be of unusual interest, and affords a welcome opportunity for hearing a gifted lecturer on Greek art and mythology.
The proceeds will be given to the Women’s Tax Resistance League, of which Miss Raleigh is a member.
Remember the date, , Caxton Hall; chair to be taken by Dr. Marie Stopes at
On Mrs. [Margaret] Kineton Parkes gave an address on the subject of taxation at the Putney and Fulham Branch of the W.S.P.U., and on Mrs. Diplock gave a drawing-room meeting at Putney-park-avenue.
The Rev. Eliza Wilkes, of California, was in the chair; the speakers were Mrs. Sadd Brown and Mrs. Parkes.
On both occasions great interest was manifested and new tax resisters were enrolled as members of the League.
The public examination of Dr. Patch (Women’s Freedom League) in the bankruptcy proceedings against her by the Inland Revenue Department brought together a large crowd of suffragists belonging to all suffrage societies at Bankruptcy Buildings last Tuesday morning.
The officials were astonished to see women bringing in extra benches and overflowing into the solicitors’ seats and the Press pen.
The usual first item on the programme is the swearing of the alleged bankrupt.
Dr. Patch was therefore invited to take the oath, but replied that that was impossible, as she could not bow to the authority of that Court; a suggestion that she should affirm instead of swearing received the same answer.
The Court, being thus up against an insurmountable obstacle, waited a moment and thought it over.
Dr. Patch refused to answer any questions, “not recognising that the Court had any authority over her,” and the only information that the Court could secure was that she was determined not to pay the tax demanded, and that nothing they could do would maker her.
Asked whether she quite understood the fearful consequences of persistence (imprisonment &c.), she assured the Court that she was prepared for anything that might come.
Further progress seemed difficult, and the solicitor to the Commissioners of Inland Revenue suggested that the proceedings should be adjourned sine die, but the Court preferred to adjourn the case for three weeks, making the cryptic remark that three weeks would be “quite sufficient.”
The next gathering, therefore, will be on at Bankruptcy Buildings, Carey-street.
is the date of the official “Women’s Day,” and very appropriate for the next state of this protest.
Meeting at the Women’s Freedom League Headquarters.
There was a splendid gathering at the meeting at Headquarters to support the protest of Dr. Patch, and keen appreciation was expressed of her courageous stand at this time on behalf of unenfranchised women.
Dr. [Elizabeth] Knight presided, and pointed out that if the Government would enfranchise women much time would be saved that is now spent in endeavours to discover facts about tax-resisters, and the country would be better administered.
Dr. Patch’s statement of her experiences as a tax-resister and of the steps which led to the proceedings of , aroused special interest.
She declared that her action was not prompted by unpatriotic motives, as she was ready to give her utmost to the country — but of her own free will; her protest was against taxation without representation.
Mr. Pethick Laurence said that, as far as he knew, he and Dr. Patch were the only suffragists who had gone through the inconvenient form of protest of bankruptcy proceedings.
It was a form which caused inconvenience to the authorities, and brought home to the public the meaning of the suffrage agitation.
In an interesting survey of the situation to-day he discussed the Report of the Electoral Conference, and insisted that no franchise would be satisfactory which did not achieve equality for men and women.
Even in the most remote and unlikely possibility of the votes of all men being cast on one side and of all women on the other in an important issue, it would only mean the majority rule on which the administration of the country is based.
Mrs. [Charlotte] Despard, a veteran tax-resister, said she had offered to give voluntarily the amount demanded of her by the Revenue authorities to any war charity, but her offer had not been accepted, and spoke strongly on the importance of resisting the possible conscription of voteless women.
The League meant to live up to its title, and women would only be free when they stood shoulder to shoulder as equals with men in the service of humanity.
Miss [Kate] Raleigh, another tax-resister, showed how the very universe works by the power of resistance, and urged the need for continuous resistance to fictitious ideas, including man’s domination of woman.
If conscription of voteless women should be attempted, sex oppression will follow.
Miss [Florence A.] Underwood, in paying tribute to Dr. Patch, as did all the speakers, made a stirring appeal to women suffragists to rally round the Flag and show Parliament, the public, and the Press that they were alive and active and meant to win their victory — the vote on equal terms with men.
On , Dr. [Winifred] Patch, of Highbury (Women’s Freedom League), made her second appearance at her public examination in the bankruptcy proceedings brought against her by the Inland Revenue Department, adjourned from .
The crowd of suffragist sympathisers was far larger than on the previous occasion, and included Mrs. Despard, Dr. and Mrs. Clark; Miss Evelyn Sharp, Mrs. Juson Kerr, Mrs. [Barbara] Ayrton Gould, Miss [Bertha] Brewster, Miss Smith Piggott, Miss [Agnes Edith] Metcalf, Mrs. Kineton Parkes, Miss [Kate] Raleigh, Mrs. Julia Wood, Mrs. [Anne] Cobden Sanderson, Miss Gertrude Eaton, Mrs. Mustard, Mrs. Tanner, Miss [Sarah] Benett, and many others.
To vary the proceedings Dr. Patch offered this time to make an affirmation, and answer any questions which seemed to her to merit a reply.
These were not very numerous.
Dr. Patch then stated her position:—
I do not acknowledge the authority of the Court, for it is being employed by the Crown not to fulfill its proper function of adjusting equitably the claims of creditor and debtor, but to enforce an unconstitutional demand, as did the Court of the Star Chamber 250 years ago.
It is to the British Constitution that the British Empire owes its place among the leading nations of the world, and it is the duty of her children to whom her honour is dear to keep her true to those principles.
I was a tax resister before the outbreak of the war.
The political truce with the Government was tacitly accepted by suffragists, and this would have prevented me from beginning tax resistance after war broke out.
I have paid no taxes for many years, and it is a breach of faith of the Government to have just started proceedings against me now.
By taking my money which is at my bank you only prevent me from putting it into War Loan, as I intended to do.
As regards the money left to me by my brother, who fell a few months ago, gallantly fighting for our country, I do not know whether you wish to take this from me.
I am a suffragist, I love my country, but I claim the right to give to my country in my own way what she has no right to take from me by force until women are represented in the Councils of the nation.
I ask that the judgment of bankruptcy against me be annulled.
The Court adjourned the proceedings for another fortnight, pending the receipt of the signed statement of particulars from Dr. Patch, which the authorities are so anxious to add to their documents.
Further developments will be announced.
Luncheon to Dr. Patch at Headquarters
After the proceedings at Bankruptcy-buildings, Dr. Patch was entertained at headquarters to luncheon, for providing which the Minerva Cafe added to its crown of laurels.
Mrs. Despard presided over a large gathering of supporters.
She expressed, amid applause, the warm appreciation and admiration of all for Dr. Patch’s service to the great cause of Votes for Women.
Dr. Clark praised the ability she has displayed in her plucky action, and declared that no class which possesses power gives in without a struggle.
Mrs. Kineton Parkes pointed out the heavy cost at this time of her sacrifice for conscience’ sake, and hoped that a memorial would tell future generations of Dr. Patch’s service to the cause of Votes for Women.
After short speeches from Miss Evelyn Sharp and Mrs. Mustard, Dr. Patch thanked everyone for their support, and used the words of the late Professor Kettle as expressing the attitude of unenfranchised women:
Bound in the toils of hate we may not cease, Free, we are free to be your friends.
Mrs. [Mary McLeod] Cleeves, who made such a determined stand last autumn
against being taxed and unrepresented, and whose dogcart was seized and
sold, is again defying the authorities.
Mrs. Cleeves, as a married woman, is not liable to pay income-tax, but,
regardless of the Act of Parliament which clearly states this position, the
local tax-collector has put in a bailiff in an endeavour to make Mrs. Cleeves
pay taxes which she is not legally bound to do. Mrs. Cleeves handed the
following statement to the official:—
I protest against your being here in possession, and I protest against any
of the goods in this house being seized. Everything here belongs to me, and
as a married woman I am not responsible for the payment of income-tax.
(When I offered to give the tax-collector Mr. Cleeves’s address, he
refused to take it.)
M. McLeod Cleeves.
The Tax Resistance League, as well as ourselves, is going to support Mrs.
Cleeves in any action which it is deemed wise to take, and in the meantime
both Leagues have written to the authorities at Somerset House and Mr. Lloyd
George. The following letter was sent from the League:—
To Inland Revenue Office.
.
Sir,— I have to request your immediate attention to the serious irregularity
in the case of Mrs. Mary McLeod Cleeves, a member of this League. An
assessment was made on Mr. Ed. A.
Cleeves, but in defiance of the assessment Mrs. Cleeves has been receiving
threatening demands, in her own name, for payment of the assessment. She
has, of course, refused to pay it as she is not liable, and no assessment or
charge may legally be made on her.
The local officials, however, have now proceeded to trespass on her
premises, commit damages, and take possession of her goods to recover a sum
which they are forbidden to charge on her, and which will be paid by the
person assessed as soon as he returns to this country, which may be at any
time now. This person has always paid it, and never refused to discharge his
legal obligations.
I may remind you that your department has said, in reply to a question asked
on behalf of Dr. Elizabeth
Wilks, that the Crown cannot seize the property of a married woman in order
to satisfy the husband’s debt to the Crown. The case of Mrs. Cleeves is
absolutely identical with that of
Dr. Elizabeth Wilks, of
Clapton, London, who informed the persons who were sent to levy a distress
on her property that she was not the person charged or liable, and that her
goods could not be seized. On hearing this the persons immediately withdrew,
and declined to proceed with the distraint. She has not been molested since,
but you will recall that after this incident you addressed a letter to her
husband, Mr. Mark Wilks, in which you call his attention to the fact that he
is the only person liable for all taxes, and that if he fails to pay, the
Board’s solicitor will take proceedings against him to make him pay.
You have now been asking him to pay this money for upwards of a year.
I must ask that, as the above is clearly the proper legal procedure, it shall
be adhered to in the case of Mrs. Cleeves also. Will you be good enough to
instruct the local officials that the distraint must be withdrawn, and that
they must refrain from molesting Mrs. Cleeves or trespassing on her property?
I would add that when the assessment was increased last year, Mrs. Cleeves
wished to raise an objection, but was quite properly informed that she could
not be heard, as she had no locus standi in the matter, as
she was not a person who could be charged under any circumstances, and
therefore could have no grievance, but that Mr. Cleeves was the only person
who could be recognised or listened to. It seems inexplicable that the
officials should seize the property of a person whom they have declared to
have no locus standi in the matter.
Requesting your immediate attention to the above facts, I am, yours
faithfully,
Edith How Martyn. Women’s Freedom League, 1,
Robert-street, Adelphi, London, W.C.
We are determined to do our best to make the authorities abide by their own
Acts of Parliament.
Dividends of Married Women.
All deductions from dividends paid on stock held by married women are illegal,
and married women should write to the secretaries of the companies and request
them to follow the procedure laid down by Parliament and to recover the
income-tax from the husbands, and in future to send the dividend in full.
Steady persistence along the lines afforded by the inconsistencies in the
law must end in drawing the attention of Parliament. Once that attention is
gained, it will be comparatively easy to insist that the first alteration in
the law must be to give representation where taxation is imposed.
Also from the same issue:
Protest at Brighton.
Owing to the enormous pressure put upon our space we are unable to give
details of the final stage of the proceedings taken against Mrs. Jones
Williams for her refusal to pay taxes. The goods seized were sold at the
public auction room. Before selling them the auctioneer allowed Mrs. How
Martyn to make a short explanatory speech, and he himself added that it was
an unpleasant duty he had to perform.
There was also much material about the related campaign of census resistance
in this issue.
One brief note on a meeting of the Great Marlow, Buckinghamshire branch,
mentioned that “Mrs. Scott, of High Wycombe, took the chair, and gave a short
speech on the necessity for tax resistance, which some in the district are
much in favour of.”
On Thursday evening, , a good
public meeting was held in the Town Hall, Uxbridge. The chair was taken by the
Hon. Mrs. [Evelina]
Haverfield, who gave a most earnest and spirited address upon the fundamental
basis of the Suffrage movement. Mrs. [Margaret] Kineton Parkes spoke on the
principles of tax resistance, and gave a short resumé of the work being done
by the society formed to put these principles into practice. Mrs. [Anne]
Cobden Sanderson made an urgent plea to the women of Uxbridge to boycott the
Census, and gave most lucid and logical reasons why the women should refuse
to be counted, and endeavoured to show the serious results which follow to
women from legislation without their consent. This meeting was entirely
given and arranged by Miss [Kate] Raleigh, who is a member of the New
Constitutional Society for Women’s Suffrage, and also the “Women’s Tax
Resistance League.”
On Tuesday, , Dr. [Elizabeth] Knight and Mrs. [Hortense] Lane had a waggon sold for non-payment of taxes, Mrs. [Isabel] Tippett came to speak.
The auctioneer was very sympathetic, and allowed Miss [Anna] Munro to make a short speech before the waggon was sold.
He then spoke a few friendly words for the Woman’s Movement.
After the sale a meeting was held, and Mrs. Tippett and Miss Munro were listened to with evident interest by a large number of men.
The Vote and other Suffrage literature was sold.
In the evening a meeting was held on Cornhill.
A large audience gathered, and listened for an hour.
At the evening, as well as the morning meeting the logic of tax resistance was appreciated.
Ipswich may congratulate itself on a good demonstration.
We are very grateful to Dr. Knight and Mrs. Lane for giving us this opportunity of declaring our faith in “No Vote No Tax.”
Elizabeth Knight also penned a fundraising request for the same issue, to defray the costs of her defense and imprisonment.
A resolution on the militant policy declared that “We continue our policy of resistance to taxes and to the Insurance Act until a measure for Woman Suffrage is on the Statute Book; that Suffragists refuse subscriptions to churches and organised charitable institutions till the vote is granted, with a view to women making their power felt and to show the difference their withdrawal from religious and social work would make…”
Dr. Knight has not yet been consigned to Holloway to serve the sentence inflicted on her for her courageous resistance of Mr. [Lloyd] George’s extortions.
In the meantime, the Waggon was once more seized for taxes at Woodbridge, and Mrs. Tippett and Miss Munro took charge of the protest, which was made .
Miss Kate Raleigh gave a most interesting lecture on the “Daily Life of a Taxpaper [sic] in Ancient Athens” at Dr. Alice Corthorn’s drawing-room meeting held under the auspices of the Women’s Tax Resistance League, on .
Miss Raleigh held her audience spellbound as she showed the man’s day to be full of interests and life, while the woman had nothing beyond her weaving and spinning, even marketing being an excitement denied to her.
The chair was taken by Mrs. [Adeline] Cecil Chapman, who concluded her short speech with this advice to her audience:
“It’s dogged that does it — you must keep on and worry, worry, worry.”
A keen discussion followed, and a hearty vote of thanks was given to Dr. Alice Corthorn and Miss Raleigh.
Woman Scientist’s Protest.
On scientific instruments and book-cases belonging to Miss Ethel Sargent, Botanist of Girton College and President of the Botanical section of the British Association at the Birmingham Conference — a unique distinction — were sold at Girton as a protest against being taxed for national expenditure while she was denied a vote.
The sale attracted wide attention, and Miss Sargent’s dignified speech, maintaining that resistance to taxation without representation was “the only resource for voteless women,” made a deep impression.
Her speech was reported at length in the Press.
Forthcoming Sales.
, Mrs. Bacon and Mrs. Colquhoun will have goods sold for tax-resistance at , at Messrs. Westgate and Hammond, 81, South-street, Romford.
Procession from auction room to open-air protest meeting.
Speakers, Mrs. [Margaret] Kineton Parkes and Miss Nina Boyle.
, Drs. [Francis] Ede and [Amy] Sheppard will have goods sold for tax-resistance at at Messrs. Hawkings, 26, Lisson-grove.
Procession from Marble Arch Tube at sharp.
Speakers, Mrs. [Anne] Cobden Sanderson, Mrs. Kineton Parkes, and others.
There is a waggon on the Cowslip Farm at Witnesham, Suffolk, which has
become quite celebrated. It has been sold twice annually for
and still remains on
the same farm.
It was drawn into Bond’s Sale Yard at Ipswich on
, and the plate on it
disclosed it as the property of
Dr. Elizabeth Knight and Mrs.
[Hortense] Lane. A placard described it as Lot 21, and when the other lots had
been sold the auctioneer approached the waggon, followed by a large crowd who
were curious to see what was the meaning of three women being seated inside,
apparently with a set purpose. Just as the crowd assembled
Dr. Knight came into the sale
yard to look after the welfare of her property.
Miss Andrews asked the auctioneer if she might explain the reason for the
sale of the waggon, and, having received the necessary permission was able to
give an address on tax resistance, and to show how it is one of the weapons
employed by the Freedom League to secure the enfranchisement of women. Then
came the sale — but beforehand the auctioneer said he had not been aware he
was to sell “distressed” goods, and he very much objected to doing so. He
declared that he regarded Dr.
Knight and Mrs. Lane as persons, and thereby showed himself to be in advance
of the law of the country. The meeting and the auctioneer together made the
assembly chary of bidding, and the waggon was not sold, which was a great
triumph for the tax-resisters. Further developments are eagerly awaited, for
it is assumed that the Government will not thus easily give up its claim to
tax unrepresented women, and will endeavour to find a less scrupulous
auctioneer. Miss Trott and Miss Bobby helped to advertise the meeting by
carrying placards round the crowded market.
C[onstance].E.A[ndrews].
Women’s Tax Resistance League.
At a Members’ Meeting at the offices of the League on
, with Mrs. [Anne] Cobden Sanderson
in the chair, speeches were given on the following subjects:— “The Recent
Sales and Protests,” by Mrs. Kineton Parkes; “Married Women’s Dividends” — test case, by Mrs. [Ethel] Ayres Purdie; “Married Women and Income Tax,” by
Miss Amy Hicks, M.A.; an interesting
discussion followed.
Sales of the Week.
On , Mrs. Skipwith, 13,
Montagu-square, W., and Gorse Cottage,
Woking, had a silver dish sold at Woking for refusal to pay Property Tax. A
good protest meeting was held, the speaker being Mrs. [Myra Eleanor] Sadd
Brown. On , a clock, belonging to
Miss Bertha Brewster was sold by auction at Wilson’s Repository,
Chenies-mews, Gower-street, because of non-payment of Inhabited House Duty.
At the subsequent protest meeting at the corner of Grafton-street, and
Tottenham Court-road, the speakers were Mrs. Cobden Sanderson, Miss Sarah
Bennet, and others. On at
Eastchurch, Kent, Miss [Kate] Raleigh’s goods were sold for refusal to pay
Imperial Taxes. The speakers were Mrs. Sadd Brown, Mrs. Kineton Parkes, and
Miss Raleigh.
It may sound like a long shot, but have you considered trying to make friends with the tax collector?
It’s a strategy that’s so crazy it just might work!
Here are some examples of where tax resisters or their allies have tried it:
The Peacemakers were eventually successful in winning back war tax resisters Ernest and Marion Bromley’s home, which had been seized for back taxes.
In a retrospective, they claimed:
The Peacemakers were resolute that their confrontation with the government would be on their terms. Believing that the legal system is an instrument of oppression and exists to protect the state and the property of the powerful, they refused to take their case into the courts.
Instead they worked to make the truth known through personal meetings with IRS officials, through continuous leafletting, through appealing to their supporters country-wide to demand justice.… They put enormous energy into building relationships with IRS officials that would allow for honest dialogue.
And always, they challenged and responded to the bureaucracy in a highly personal manner.
Initially it appeared that IRS’ reversal had been an act of faith in the Peacemakers; that it had been touched by the group’s philosophy of truth and their consistent methods.
It wasn’t that complete a victory.
The Commissioner had been sufficiently impressed by these people to where he called for a special investigation — which verified the Peacemakers’ statement.
Dorothy Day wrote of this:
Chuck Matthei had told me the story of his interviews with the head of the Internal Revenue Service, the almost daily dialogue that went on between them, and the frank and “manly” admission, made finally by the IRS chief, that a mistake had been made, that the Peacemakers had Truth on their side.
I felt a great sense of joy and thanksgiving, a sense of hope too, that our officials in Washington D.C. could be approached in this way — with dignity and perseverance, with courtesy, with the recognition that we are all, each one of us, whether government official or radical (one who gets to the roots of things), children of God.
We do believe that we are all brothers and sisters.
We believe, too, that we can only show our love for God by our love for our brothers and sisters.
So we share our joy with you, our readers, and hope we all have a sense of renewed strength and energy to continue our opposition to all violence, to all wars.
Ernest and Marion Bromley pose in front of their home.
Quaker Thomas Watson was seized by the American army during the revolution, and condemned “to be stripped and ironed, and on the next afternoon to be publicly hanged” for refusing to take the continental currency that Congress was using to finance the war, his family was given little hope for him.
“You may go home,” one petitioner was told, “and rest assured your uncle will be hanged.”
But the wife of the prisoner had a warm friend in the landlady of the inn at Newtown; and when was woman’s kindness ever invoked for the relief of suffering, or woman’s tact required in vain?
She was advised not to apply in person for the release of her husband.
The landlady had learned Lord Sterling’s fondness for the creaturely comforts of life; and knew that wine had the effect to soften the severity of his temper.
To take advantage of this disposition, she invited him to a sumptuous dinner.
He did full justice to the delicacies of the table, and willingly partook of the generous old wine, which had been reserved for special occasions.
As the wine warmed the General’s good-nature and disposed him to kindlier feelings, she cautiously introduced the case of the condemned; pitied his condition, cold, and in irons; regarded his treatment as needlessly severe; and at length requested that his fetters might be removed and his clothes restored to him.
He could not resist this appeal of his hostess; and a note was sent to the guard in answer to her request.
The good woman continued her entreaties, and still plied the wine; when, at the proper moment, the wife was introduced.
She fell on her knees before him, burst into a flood of tears, and told him who she was, and, with all the earnestness, feeling, and eloquence of a loving wife pleading for the one she loved best on earth, begged him to spare her husband’s life.
Her entreaties were of a nature hard to be withstood.
He remained some time silent; then, raising her to her feet, he said, “Madam, you have conquered.
I must relent at the tears and supplications of so noble and so good a woman as you.
Your husband is saved.”
He immediately wrote a pardon for the prisoner, and ordered his discharge.
The happy pair now returned to their homes rejoicing.
Such friendly meetings do not always end well.
Quaker Henry Paxson found this out when he was visited by the tax collector some 300 years ago:
Paxson kindly treats [the tax collector] with best he had, and when he had filled his wem, and drank plentifully of good cider, he distrains the plates he had eaten on, and the tankard he so freely toped out of, but the wife begged the tankard, and bid him take something in lieu of it.
In , a delegation of Quakers met with the sheriff, his sub-lieutenants, a judge, magistrates, and a tax collector in their area of Pennsylvania.
They reported:
[We] had opportunity of laying before them the reasons and grounds of our refusal to comply with several requisitions, made for the support of, or that have near connection with, war; and to open our principles, and the consistency thereof with the doctrines of the Gospel, as set forth in the New Testament and pointed out by the prophets, and the inconsistency of Christians oppressing one another for conscience sake.
They generally appeared friendly, and to receive our visit kindly, some of them particularly so; and most of them acknowledged that the prophecies concerning the disuse of carnal weapons, pointed to the Gospel dispensation, and was much to be desired.
We had good satisfaction in the performance of this service, believing truth owned it, and that there is encouragement for Friends to use further endeavors of this kind.
The Rebecca Rioters could be cruel, or even deadly, to the keepers of the toll gates they were destroying.
More frequently, they would allow the keepers a few moments to collect their personal belongings and remove them from the building before they demolished it.
And on some occasions, the encounters were almost cordial:
The gate-keeper begged of them not to destroy the furniture, as it was his own; and his wife and child were in bed, but they might do as they liked with the gate and toll-house.
Rebecca went to the door, and ordered her [Rebecca’s] daughters not to touch anything but the gate and the roof of the toll-house, and not to break the ceiling for fear the rain would harm the woman and child in bed.
In their hurry, however, to unroof the house, one of them slipped between the rafters, and his foot got through the ceiling.
Rebecca expressed her sorrow at the accident, as it might cause inconvenience to the gate-keeper.
They behaved remarkably well to the gate-keeper, and frequently desired him and his wife not to be alarmed, as they would not injure them in the least; but at parting Rebecca desired him not to exact tolls at that gate any more.
There was no more persistent foe of the IRS than Vivien Kellems, but:
Miss Kellems stresses that she holds no animosity toward the officials who enforce the tax laws.
When IRS Commissioner Johnnie M. Walker took office earlier she sent him a note outlining their differences but congratulating him on his appointment.
“He sent back a nice thank you note,” she said.
During the tax resistance campaign for women’s suffrage in Britain, good relationships between the resisters and the auctioneers who were enlisted to sell off their goods for taxes allowed them to better use these auctions as rally and propaganda opportunities.
On one occasion:
…the auctioneer opened the proceedings by declaring himself a convinced Suffragist, which attitude of mind he attributed largely to a constant contact with women householders in his capacity as tax collector.
When Kate Raleigh’s property was seized by the tax collector:
Miss Raleigh naturally made use of the occasion for propaganda purposes, conversing with the tax collector for some time on the subject of Woman Suffrage, and presenting him with Suffrage literature, which he accepted.
Before taking his leave he expressed himself as, on the whole, in favour of women’s claims to enfranchisement.
The movement against Thatcher’s Poll Tax initially tried to reach out to the councils who were responsible for setting the budgets that implemented the tax, and to the labor union representing the tax collectors who would be enforcing it, to ask them not to cooperate.
However, this met with very little success.
War tax resister Robin Harper met with a tax auditor and a “frivolous tax coordinator” at an IRS office in .
He described how it went:
I quickly assured them that an accurate accounting should of course be established, but that in no way could I alter my refusal to deliver my tax dollars into the U.S. military machine.
Earlier I had described how my Conscientious Objection was rooted in our Quaker Peace Testimony and how I had performed two years of civilian alternative service with a self-help housing project during the Korean War.
With his defensive posture evaporating, Mr. Means [the “frivolous tax coordinator”] told us that his father fought in the Korean War and came home tormented by post traumatic stress disorder.
Thereafter he would have nothing more to do with guns, “because he had seen what guns can do.”
That gave my supporter, who had lived through World War Two in Germany, an opening.
Drawing a parallel with my war tax refusal, she pointed out how German income taxes funded the governmental atrocities of the Third Reich.
…
At one point, when I was describing how the International Center has been installing solar water purification units in Central American villages, Mr. Means broadened our discussion, noting that the scarcity of safe water is becoming a global problem.
In my followup letter to our interview, I sent him a copy of an eye-opening article from the Resist newsletter discussing this issue in depth.
Near the end I took the opportunity to unfurl the large chart which chronicles my war tax redirection these past forty-one years and to describe how I was first propelled into war tax protest by U.S. nuclear atmospheric bomb testing in Nevada and the Pacific.
After more than three hours (and well past normal lunchtime), the two finally closed the interview with smiles and friendly handshakes.
Mr. Means even admitted that his title of “Frivolous Tax Coordinator” was really a substitute for “Tax Protester Coordinator,” an internal administrative category which Congress had abolished in recent Taxpayer Bill of Rights legislation.
Despite their training to be suspicious (all taxpayers are trying to get away with something), IRS folk, like all human beings, can be positively affected by openness, honesty and sincerity.
Transparency can often trump suspicion.
I have learned how we all hunger for caring, person-to-person exchanges.
Look how a one hour audit stretched into more than three hours, much of which involved genuine sharing far beyond the scope of the audit!
As our discussion rose above tax details, Mr. Means, the tax protester “sheriff,” was led to cast aside some of his official person and let his personal feelings and thoughts come through.
He also became increasingly interested in discerning what makes war tax refusers tick.
I am sure he came to understand that our witness is anything but “frivolous.”
