HIS 212 Report: Lord Birkenhead on Women's Equal Voting Rights

This report analyzes Lord Birkenhead's speech in the House of Lords regarding equal voting rights for women in 1928. It examines the historical context, including the rejection of multiple bills due to societal views on women's capabilities in socio-political issues. The report highlights the author's reflections on the contradictions and arguments presented by members of the House of Lords, who often opposed the legislation. The discussion covers key legislations such as the Qualification of Women Act (1918), the Sex Disqualification Act (1919), and the Equal Franchise Act (1928), which gradually granted women more rights. The report also emphasizes the hypocrisy and reluctance of the government in granting equal rights, as well as the author's feelings of frustration and hopelessness. It concludes by emphasizing the significance of the various acts passed between 1918 and 1945 in determining women's lives and the prolonged struggle for the right to vote, culminating in equal voting rights and representation in parliament by the end of 1945.

Running head: HIS 212
HIS 212
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

Lord Birkenhead, 'Speech in the House of Lords Regarding Equal Voting Rights for Women'
Hansard, 22 May, 1928.
The study will have the discussion about the Equal Voting Rights for women, which was
described by “Lord Birkenhead” while attending meetings in “House of Commons”where
multiple bills was rejected, due to the interference of understanding concepts of women equality
in giving votes or standing in parliament (Api.parliament.uk, 2020). The Author, who presents
the contradictions and argument the members of the “House of Lords” have done regarding
women rights by the process of reflection. He explained that due to his position, as Attorney
General he has to accept the views of various lords although, he disagrees with them (Melman,
2016). The thesis statement of the study is to explore the then relation of women with parliament
in the late nineteenth and early twentieth, and their repetitive disallowing of bills for the equal
vote rights, as women were considered immature by the members of “House of Lords” and
“House of Commons”, and unable to adhere themselves to socio political issues.
In the discussion, it will be mentioned that the Equal Franchise was the main basis of
topic, which was debated among Lords. As mentioned by the author, one of the Lord has
depicted that it will put adverse effects on country and Government if democracy is followed, he
preferred oligarchy. The main topic of discussion was that women were not allowed to give the
vote, and there was hesitation in passing the bill, which was adjourned up-to the next election.
According to the author, there is no such relevant argument that was presented by members of
“House of Lords”, it has also been demonstrated that Government people used to back off and
implement hypocritical ideas to bar the equal rights for women. The author has stated that it

becomes irrelevant in this point of time, where government had allowed women for education
and deny sharing place in the government.
There were four main legislations, which were on observation in the early twentieth, one
was “Qualification of Women Act, 1918”, and this allowed women to participate in
functionalities of “parliament”, by becoming permanent members. Secondly, “the Sex
Disqualification Act, 1919”, which initiates equal employment rights to the employees, thirdly,
comes the “Equal Franchise Act, 1928” that gave allowance to women for equally paying rights
to women in acting as permanent members of the government and give vote(Kclpure.kcl.ac.uk,
2020). It has been observed in the history especially in the year 1945, that women could give
vote equally like men. Although, there were less women who participated in debates among the
men in “House of Commons”, and further in case of “House of Lords”, women were not allowed
to participate which followed by a series of legislations and bills passed which affected hugely
on women employment, education especially in the year 1918. The author Lord Birkinhead, has
demonstrated the situation where the bills were continuously passed and refused and was
adjourned by saying that the topic will be discussed in the next election. The author have also
demonstrated that there were times when equality acts or actions were postponed due to
reluctance, ignorance and hypocrisy. Therefore, the informal speech of the author demonstrated
the disgust and hopelessness, which he feels and could not express, was enunciated in the report.
The author’s reflective report has also exemplified in details the historical achievements
regarding women, which mirrored the time of 1918- 1945(Campbell, Childs & Hunt, 2018).
To conclude it can be proliferated that, the various acts determine a huge part the history
from 1918-1945. There were many legislations that were passed to determine the women’s life
due biasness in gender equality. The main focal point of the report is the “right to vote” rights,

which was mentioned by the narrator as a prolonged process of trial and dismissal. In the end of
1945, women were given equal rights to vote as well as given place in parliament and House of
Commons.

References
Melman, B. (2016). Women’s Orients: English Women and the Middle East, 1718–1918:
Sexuality, Religion and Work. Springer(DOI 10.1007/978-1-349-10157-3).
Campbell, R., Childs, S., & Hunt, E. (2018). Women in the House of Commons. Exploring
Parliament, 231. (DOI: 10.1080/13572334.2017.1394736)
Api.parliament.uk. (2020). Retrieved 17 March 2020, from https://api.parliament.uk/historic-
hansard/lords/1928/may/22/representation-of-the-people-equal.
Kclpure.kcl.ac.uk. (2020). Retrieved 17 March 2020, from
https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/files/30807371/2012_Takayanagi_Mari_1069335_ethesis.
pdf.