Some historical and global examples of tax resistance → women’s suffrage movements → British women’s suffrage movement → Hortense Lane

From the 27 April 1912 edition of The Vote:

A Tax-Resisting Cow.

Kate Lelacheur

We are accustomed to the story of the ass teaching the ancients wisdom; the modern version seems to be that the cow is on the side of the tax-resisters. The story of what happened while Miss [Edith Kate] Lelacheur was attending a sale of a dog cart at Reading for the non-payment of the agricultural land tax on one of her farms might be deemed a practical joke on the part of the revenue authorities, but for the fact that the cow took the matter entirely into her own hands and flouted the bailiffs. In the absence of Miss Lelacheur, a cow was seized for non-payment of other taxes; inquiry elicited the fact that “twice the bailiffs took the cow away and got it three miles or so along the road, but that then it bolted back.” Finally they gave it up, and left Miss Lelacheur the distraining order — and the cow. We wonder whether in due time Suffragists will have reason to worship the cow — taking a different point of view from the Hindus. Meanwhile, we congratulate Miss Lelacheur on her tax resistance and on the noble support of her cow. Later: We hear that force majeure has prevailed; the cow is to be sold — to a tax-resister, we hope!

Also from the same issue:

Tax Resistance.

Under the auspices of the Tax Resistance League and the Women’s Freedom League a protest meeting was held at Great Marlow on April 17, on the occasion of the sale of plate and jewellery belonging to Mrs. [Mary] Sargent Florence, the well-known artist, and to Miss Hayes, daughter of Admiral Hayes. Their property had been seized for the non-payment of Imperial taxes, and through the courtesy of the tax-collector every facility was afforded to the protesters to explain their action. A quiet little group — a large crowd for Marlow — listened attentively to Mrs. Florence, Mrs. [Emily] Juson Kerr, Miss [Margaret] Kineton Parkes, and Miss [Alison] Neilans. Mrs. Sargent Florence had been distrained upon more than once, and intends to continue her passive protest until women have the vote.

At the County Court, Woodbridge, Dr. Elizabeth Knight was charged with keeping a dog without a license and refusing to take out a license for her dog cart; Mrs. H[ortense]. Lane was charged also with refusing to pay the license for her trap. Dr. Knight said she believed taxation and representation should go together; and Mrs. Lane, who was unable to attend, wrote to the Bench saying she refused to pay taxes as a protest against women’s political disability. Mr. Eton White, the presiding magistrate, said his duty was to administer the law as it stood; therefore Dr. Knight was fined £2 10s. and costs, and Mrs. Lane £1 10s. and costs. A protest meeting was afterwards held on Market Hill. Mrs. [Lila] Pratt, hon. secretary of the Women’s Freedom League, Ipswich branch, presided, and an interesting crowd listened appreciatively to the speech of Mrs. [Emma] Sproson who explained the reason why women should adopt the policy of tax resistance and urged upon all women to make the position of the Government intolerable and untenable unless it conceded to women their common human right.

Silver belonging to Miss [Dorinda] Neligan, of Croydon, and Mrs. [Florence Gardiner] Hamilton, of Wendover, was sold for non-payment of taxes on April 16 and 17, and vigorous protests made. At Wendover, in the John Hampden County, an Anti-suffragist from London made a speech.

From the 6 May 1911 issue of The Vote:

Tax Resisters At Woodbridge.

On Thursday, April 20, there were unfamiliar proceedings in the police-court of the town of Woodbridge. Two people had refused to pay their licenses. A strange thing to do, surely, for has not the Government imposed taxation in order to carry on the business of the nation? The result of refusal must be a fine or imprisonment, or how otherwise can money be collected? People are not all yet such good citizens that they give joyfully. But here were two people, following the example of many others, who deliberately refused payment because they wished to demonstrate to the Government and the local authorities that if they exact taxes they must give the equivalent of representation. The magistrates were very sympathetic and listened patiently to the case we put before them.

“You belong to the superior sex, then, I suppose?” said the Chairman to Mrs. [Hortense] Lane.

“No,” she replied; “we look upon the sexes as equal.”

“Do you plead guilty to keeping a dog unlawfully without a license?” I was asked.

“I do not acknowledge it was unlawful,” was the reply. “I am not a person in the eyes of the law.”

On being asked if there was anything I wished to say, I replied: “Yes. I wish to request the Bench to petition Mr. [Prime Minister Herbert Henry] Asquith to give facilities for the Conciliation Bill put down for May 5 to be passed into law. If magistrates would do their part in bringing about this great justice they would not be troubled with Suffragettes in court.”

Afterwards we held a meeting outside, and Mrs. Stansfield and Mrs. [Isabel] Tippett made clear the meaning of our protest. Up to the present no proceedings have been taken, although we, of course, refused to pay the fines imposed. Can it be that the local authorities are not going to take proceedings? If so, we have gained a moral victory, and it is a good augury for the future of our movement.

Constance E. Andrews.

The Vote tends to refer to people as Mr., Mrs., or Miss Lastname, without any prior reference that clarifies more specifically just who it is they’re talking about. I have been unable to find a first name for “Mrs. Lane” for example, which also makes it difficult to find much more information about her (although she will also appear in some other Vote articles).

Also in the same issue:

Women and Taxation

To the Editor of The Vote.

Dear Madam,— Since December, 1909, when distraint was last levied at my residence on account of my refusal to submit to the tyranny of taxation without representation, I have paid no taxes, and, until quite recently, I have not been unduly pressed. Lately, however, I received an official intimation that unless the amount outstanding for income tax be paid forthwith proceedings would be commenced in the High Court of Justice to recover the same. A lengthy correspondence between Mr. F.M. Spencer Lewin, solicitor, acting for me, and the Secretary of the Inland Revenue Department, has ensued. The concluding paragraphs of Mr. Lewin’s latest communication (to which as yet no answer has been received) contain points of interest to tax resisters, and are quoted below:—

…My client desires me to especially invite your reconsideration of the threat of legal proceedings in the High Court.

The whole purport of Section 86, and what I may term the affiliated sections in the Taxes Management Act, 1880, show that distraint is primarily the remedy, and that proceedings in the High Court are only resorted to in the case of a collector making a return of deficiencies.

The words of Sub-Section 1 of Section 86 are, to my mind, obligatory upon the collector to distrain in the first place: “If a person refuses to pay… such collector may, and he is thereunto authorised and required for non-payment thereof, to distrain, &c.” Surely nothing could be clearer than this.

In case there should still be in your mind the same misapprehension as existed at the time of writing me your letter of the 9^th March last, I would take this opportunity of pointing out once again that there are goods of Miss Lawson’s upon which the distraint could be made, as it has been heretofore, and this fact most be within the knowledge of the Local Tax Authorities.

One does not like to use the word “oppression” in official correspondence, but I am bound to say that if, in face of my distinct statements in this letter, the authorities still persist in using the ponderous machinery of High Court procedure to collect this small amount, it would be as near an injustice as one would expect to get.

 — Yours faithfully, Marie Lawson.
Women’s Tax Resistance League.
April 24, 1911.

From the 8 May 1914 issue of The Vote:

The Government Moves Against Us.

After nearly two years’ delay, during which some attempts have been made to fathom the depths of the Freedom League’s resistance to the Insurance Act — even though Mr. Wedgwood Benn, in the ‘unavoidable absence’ of Mr. Masterman, assured Mr. Jowett in the House of Commons that he had not heard of it — an inspector of the Insurance Commissioners arrived at Headquarters on May 6 and spent what Mark Twain used to call “a variegated time” in interviewing the members of the staff. We anticipate the Government’s next move with lively interest.

Our hon. treasurer, Dr. [Elizabeth] Knight, is still awaiting the announcement that accommodation has been reserved for her in the Government’s “Third-rate Hotel” at Holloway owing to her refusal to recognise the Insurance Act. But the Government has remembered her dog at Woodbridge! Mrs. [Hortense] Lane, who has charge of the dog, has been summoned for non-payment of its license and that of her own dog. Next week we shall have pleasure in reporting the proceedings.

Our secretary, Miss F[lorence].A. Underwood, has been honoured by a letter offering a “final opportunity” to pay Income-tax on a supposititious figure, all other attempts to gain information as to her income having been met by a flat refusal couched in the words, “No Vote, No Information!” Miss Underwood is only surprised that the fertile imagination of the authorities did not put her income at a figure high enough to come under the proposed new working of the Super-tax.

The letter, signed by the solicitor of Internal Revenue, runs as follows:—

I am directed by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue to apply for payment of an arrear of Income-tax, Schedule E, due from you for the year 1913, amounting to £11 13s. 4d., and to acquaint you that unless the same be paid to the Accountant-General of Inland Revenue at this office within seven days from this date, proceedings will be commenced for the recovery thereof without further notice.

As the result of proceedings in the High Court of Justice will be to render you liable to costs, in default of payment, I think it right before the Writ is issued to give you this final opportunity of settling the matter by payment of the duty.

As soon as the Writ is received it will be put up to auction, and offers for this historic communication between the Monarch and the subject may now be sent to our hon. treasurer for the benefit of the League.

Also from the same issue:

Who Will Bid?

The Women’s Freedom League has defied the Insurance Act ever since it came into force; not one penny has been paid into the Government coffers to lessen Mr. Lloyd George’s deficit. Our members are refusing to pay income tax and, as is well known, our president has for several years treated with contempt cajoling “final opportunities” and “last chances” to pay. This action is a protest against the Government’s betrayal of Liberal principles as applied to women. “No vote, no tax,” is our impregnable position, not to be surrendered until women have equal rights with men in controlling national expenditure. Every Budget Day is an insult to us. Money is demanded of women for the ever-growing millions required to pay the Nation’s debts, all incurred by men, and to pay the salaries of the men who incur them. Voteless women are victims plundered by the Government and powerless to say how their money should be spent. We welcome the indications that the Government is now making a move against us. Our secretary, Miss F.A. Underwood, after having returned many applications from Somerset House for income tax with the message, “No Vote, No Information.” has now received a “final opportunity” letter, the forerunner of a writ against her. Particulars will be found in another column, and we call attention to the fact that the writ, when received, will be put up for auction. Who will bid for this interesting document? In due time it will become historic — an object lesson of the fight women had to wage with “chivalrous” men for freedom. In the meantime we say to the Government: “We are prepared! Do your worst!”

From the 27 May 1911 issue of The Vote:

Imprisonment of Miss [Constance E.] Andrews at Ipswich.

Our Hon. District Organizer for East Anglia has been sent to prison for one week in the second division as a consequence of her plucky and conscientious fight against taxation without representation. Miss Andrews was sentenced a month ago, but was only arrested last Saturday morning. Our prisoner will be released on Friday, May 26, at 8 a.m. from Ipswich Prison, and every member in the district should be there to welcome her. A public meeting will be held in the evening, and will be addressed by Mrs. [Charlotte] Despard and Miss [Marguerite A.] Sidley.

Sale at Woodbridge.

Our report is taken from The East Anglian Daily Times:—

“Do you want a waggon?” seemed to be a sort of catch phrase at Woodbridge yesterday, and the explanation was a huge farm waggon, to be seen in the centre of Market Hill. It bore the names of Knight and Lane, of Cowslip Dairy, Witnesham, and stood there a silent witness to the enthusiasm of two ladies, Dr. Elizabeth Knight and Mrs. [Hortense] Lane, in the cause of “Votes for Women.” The preliminary stages, leading to the seizure of the waggon by the police, have previously been related in our columns. The two ladies named are joint occupiers of a farm, but each separately owns a dog and a governess-car. The law requires “persons” who own such luxuries shall pay a tax for the privilege, and the ladies say, “No, we are not persons in the eyes of the law when the law says certain persons shall have a Parliamentary vote, and therefore if the State won’t have our vote it shall not have our money.”

There was many a sharp contest of wits over the subject of Women’s Suffrage, and from these it was quite evident that there was no real hostile feeling amongst the men present. On the other hand, there were many admissions of belief in the principle that a woman owning property should have a vote for a Parliamentary candidate, but there seemed to be a consensus of opinion against women entering Parliament.

Miss Alison Neilans, the chief star in the local Suffragette firmament on Thursday, stood with her back to one of the waggon wheels and “held her own” with all the half-serious, half-chaffing comment from farmers and merchants’ representatives on the cause of women’s rights.

At length the time for the sale arrived, and the business was very quickly over. Miss Neilans obtained the auctioneer’s permission to give a two-minutes’ speech in explanation of the proceedings, and she occupied 59½ seconds. Then Mr. Arnott mounted the waggon for the purpose of selling it. The bidding started at £3, and mounted quickly to £8, when by slower degrees it reached £9 10s., at which figure the waggon was knocked down to Mr. Rush.

Thereafter the Suffragettes again took possession of the waggon, and Miss Neilans led off in a very capable speech dealing with the well-known arguments about representation and taxation going together, in a bright and original manner. The happy and successful home, she said, was where the man and the woman each took a share in its affairs, and not where one had the upper hand. She disapproved of the nagging woman as much as of the man who beat his wife. The politics of the State was the housekeeping of the nation, and women should have their share in the work.

Mrs. [Isabel] Tippett also addressed the meeting.

The waggon was then decorated and driven to Ipswich, where a demonstration had been well advertised for 8 p.m. Miss Andrews took the chair and was well received, but the crowd of rowdy youths had considerably increased their forces before Mrs. Tippett, who was the next speaker, had finished, and when Miss Neilans had been speaking a few minutes, the singing and shouting made it quite impossible for the audience to hear a word. As, however, the noisy element were quite few in proportion to those genuinely interested and anxious to hear, Miss Neilans turned her back on the rowdies, and for over half an hour held the serious attention of quite a large section of those around, in spite of the din behind. A collection could not be taken, but many men and women came near and pressed money into the speaker’s hand, and when the meeting ended, it was felt that much sympathy had been gained.

Mrs. Tippett and Miss Andrews gave great help with speaking, and an excellent sale of The Vote was made, both at Woodbridge and Ipswitch.

―Edith How Martyn.

Another article from the same issue concerns a meeting at Caxton Hall and includes this note:

Mrs. Despard, who was in the chair, spoke in cheerful, anticipatory vein of the trend of events. A sense of hope, a sense of expansion, a sense of exhilaration, she said, was in the air; yet, in spite of our confidence, we must not relax our efforts, for it was sometimes in the last stages of work, just before reforms were accomplished, that obstruction became strongest. She spoke of the activity of the Women’s Freedom League at the present time in the direction of Tax Resistance. During the past week she had attended several auction sales of goods of members of the Women’s Freedom League, who were following the example of John Hampden and fighting for a great principle — the right to exercise the duties of citizens and to resist the payment of taxation while their citizenship was unrecognised. Her own goods were to be sold on the morrow, and she would not allow them to be bought in. When they had taken everything she possessed they would have to again imprison her; but she ventured to think that before that day arrived the Conciliation Bill would have passed, and women would begin to come into their own.

Alongside that report was one about the auctioning off of Despard’s property:

Sale of Mrs. Despard’s Goods.

A scene which was probably never equalled in the whole of its history took place at the Oxenham Auction Rooms, Oxford-street, on Friday last. About a fortnight before the bailiffs had entered Mrs. Despard’s residence in Nine Elms and seized goods which they valued at £15. Our President, for some years past, as is well known, has refused to pay her income-tax and inhabited house duty on the grounds that taxation and representation should go together; and this is the third time her goods have been seized for distraint. It was not until the day before — Thursday, noon — that Mrs. Despard was informed of the time and place where her furniture was to be sold. In spite of this short notice — which we learn on good authority to be illegal — a large crowd composed not only of our own members but also of women and men from various Suffrage societies gathered together at the place specified in the notice.

When “Lot 325” was called Mrs. Despard mounted a chair, and said, “I rise to protest, in the strongest, in the most emphatic way of which I am capable, against these iniquities, which are perpetually being perpetrated in the name of the law. I should like to say I have served my country in various capacities, but I am shut out altogether from citizenship. I think special obloquy has been put upon me in this matter. It was well known that I should not run away and that I should not take my goods away, but the authorities sent a man in possession. He remained in the house — a household of women — at night. I only heard yesterday of this sale, and from a man who knows that of which he is speaking, I know that this sale is illegal. I now claim the law — the law that is supposed to be for women as well as men.”

The whole assembly listened in respectful silence to our President’s dignified protest, upon the conclusion of which all Suffragists present, and many other sympathisers left for the Gardenia where a very successful meeting was held.

From the 3 April 1914 issue of The Vote:

Tax Resistance at Ipswich.

On Tuesday, March 31, 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.

In addition, a report on the Women’s Freedom League annual conference noted that:

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…”

Also from the same issue:

Tax Resistance.

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 last Tuesday.

Also from the same issue:

Women’s Tax Resistance League.

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 March 26. 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 March 24 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.

Friday, April 3, Mrs. Bacon and Mrs. Colquhoun will have goods sold for tax-resistance at 3 o’clock, 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. Monday, April 6, Drs. [Francis] Ede and [Amy] Sheppard will have goods sold for tax-resistance at 2 o’clock at Messrs. Hawkings, 26, Lisson-grove. Procession from Marble Arch Tube at 1.30 p.m. sharp. Speakers, Mrs. [Anne] Cobden Sanderson, Mrs. Kineton Parkes, and others.

From the 11 April 1913 issue of The Vote:

Tax Resistance.

The Unsold Waggon at Ipswich.

There is a waggon on the Cowslip Farm at Witnesham, Suffolk, which has become quite celebrated. It has been sold twice annually for the last three years and still remains on the same farm.

It was drawn into Bond’s Sale Yard at Ipswich on Tuesday, April 1, 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 April 3, 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 April 3, 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 April 5, 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 the same day 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.