30 August 2017

Fatal Shark Attacks in Mackay Rivers

I've already written in these pages about fatal shark attacks in Queensland rivers, including the Brisbane River, the Logan River and Townsville's Ross Creek. Another one to add to that unfortunate list is the Pioneer River, which runs through the central coast city of Mackay.

The first recorded attack came in December 1939 at Rubbish Dump Creek. This was about 30 metres wide and a popular swimming spot for the locals. It was so named because of a nearby dump, the refuse from which was also thought to attract sharks. One hot day, around noon, 20-year-old railway fireman Frank Gurran was fishing in the creek when he decided to have a quick dip in the water, which was about 3 metres deep. He dived off the rowing boat he was in, but as soon as he resurfaced he cried out 'shark!'. Onlookers thought it might have been a prank, but they sprinted for help when the water turned red.

A bull shark almost 3 metres long had gripped Curran's right leg. He kicked furiously at it until it let go, but it returned and bit into his left foot. Curran managed to scramble to the shore, where a companion helped him. While lying waiting for the ambulance, he directed the application of ligatures to stem the bleeding in his leg, smoked a cigarette, and joked about finally getting time off work for Christmas. Curran was soon rushed to the local hospital, where it was found necessary to amputate his right leg below the knee. He received massive blood transfusions that kept him alive for a while, but he died three days after sustaining his injuries.

The shark that bit him was caught and killed within hours of the attack. Charles Simpson, who boarded with Gurran, baited a hook and line with a bullock's liver after seeing the shark 'lazily cruising up and down the stream'. The shark took the bait and Simpson coaxed it to the bank, where he bludgeoned it with an axe. The shark was landed after another boy put 14 air-rifle pellets into its head. It was reportedly still 'quivering' when the following Mercury picture of the shark and its captors was taken:

Daily Mercury, 18 December 1939.

In later years the Dump Creek area became the site of the Caneland Central shopping complex.

The next fatal river shark attack at Mackay took place in February 1956. Barry Antonini, aged 15 years, was swimming with friends in the Rocklea reach of the Pioneer River one morning. The boys were diving from the bank into deep water and returning to shore. Antonini dived in, resurfaced about 3 metres from the bank, and scrambled back. When a friend pulled him out they saw that Antonini had been bitten deeply on the calf of the right leg and part of the muscle was removed. He was bleeding profusely.

The boys ran to get help from a policeman who was fishing nearby. A tourniquet was applied to the leg and the ambulance arrived, Antonini turned to his friends and said, 'It looks as though I will have to have my leg taken off.' Sadly, he died on the way to hospital.

'Sailing on the Pioneer River, Mackay', c. 1935. (State Library of Qld)

There have been no more fatal attacks in the rivers or creeks of Mackay since that time. So far...

17 August 2017

Constance Clyde of Dutton Park: Author and Suffragette

In August 1951 a 79-year-old Brisbane woman died and was buried in the Hemmant Cemetery. No headstone marks her grave, no newspaper obituary marked her passing, and her life in Brisbane had been generally unremarkable. Yet Constance Jane McAdam had done much to be remembered for.

Constance Clyde, 1903.

I first came across Constance while researching the Brisbane Women’s Prison of the 1930s. She had spent three weeks in Boggo Road in 1935 after being convicted of ‘pretending to tell fortunes for payment’, and subsequently wrote a newspaper article about her experiences there. From that article, the breadcrumb trail of online information revealed a formidably independent woman who had been a writer in New Zealand, Sydney and London, producing a novel and numerous short stories for newspapers and magazines. In London 1907 she spent time in Holloway Prison for her part in a Suffragette protest at the Houses of Parliament. She even managed to get herself ejected from the New Zealand parliament after a one-person protest there. Clearly this was someone who lived a life worth recalling.

That life began in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1872 when she was born as the 11th child of William and Mary Couper. The family emigrated to Dunedin, New Zealand, in 1879. She began her literary career as a young woman writing poetry for the Otago Witness newspaper, and her first paid piece was a short story in the Dunedin Star. She moved to Sydney in 1898, where a major part of her journalistic career was spent writing for the Sydney Bulletin, particularly on the subjects of ‘social, feminist and literary questions’.[1] She wrote under the pen name ‘Constance Clyde’, no doubt a sentimental reference to the river than ran through the city of her birth. She also joined the ‘Yorick Club’, a somewhat bohemian collection of people with ‘a professional interest in literature, visual arts or science’.

Constance moved to London in 1903 to further her career. Her only novel, A Pagan's Love, was published there in 1905. Lawrence Jones provides this analysis of the book:
‘Clyde is explicitly contemptuous of Puritanism, which she dismisses as ‘this coarse, church-belled heathenism’. She sees it as a narrow, barren, blinkered creed suitable for the respectable conformists who live in the Presbyterian Otago community of Waihoa. The attractive alternative offering deliverance from this stultifying religion is paganism. For Clyde, this is a blend of atheism, sexual equality and a new morality. The novel charts the progression of the heroine, Dorothea Wylding, away from Puritanism towards paganism. Growing up in Waihoa, Dorothea is imbued with a strict sense of morality and a belief in respectability. This begins to be undermined when she travels to Sydney, the ‘laughing pagan city’. Here she meets the feminist Ascot Wingfield, an independent career woman and solo mother, who teaches Dorothea of the need for women to have both an intellectual and an emotional life. Dorothea is also reunited with childhood friend Edward Rallingshaw, the pagan of the title. A married man, he tries to persuade Dorothea to live with him in a free love union. Just as he wears the last of her resistance down he dies in a fire. While this at first appears to reinforce the Puritan theological code of transgression and punishment, it eventually results in the defeat of orthodoxy. Returning to Waihoa, Dorothea marries the Rev John Archieson. When she leaves him to return to Sydney he in turn discovers that the Puritan code is limiting. In a final sermon he questions whether ‘there is such a thing as sin’ and declares that ‘it is not the higher but the broader life that we want; we need our minds enlarged rather than our souls purified’. John’s heterodoxy reunites him with Dorothea. The ex-Puritan hero and heroine resolve to work together to free others from the religious and moral bondage they have experienced and to promote ‘a new morality and religion of love rather than law, of fulfillment rather than denial.’[2]
The novel did not find a large audience and I don’t know if Constance ever tried to write another one. Certainly after this time her output was largely confined to short stories for various newspapers, with the occasional piece of journalism, although in 1933 she co-authored a travel/history book titled New Zealand, Country and People.

Her political beliefs saw her make the news in 1907. Constance was naturally drawn to the cause of the Suffragettes and their long struggle for full voting rights for women. This led to her arrest and imprisonment in March 1907 for taking part of the first Suffragette protest outside the British parliament – which followed the defeat of another suffrage Bill - in which there was reported to be prolonged fighting between the protesters and the 500 police who were defending the House of Commons. 75 women were arrested that day. Constance wrote vivid newspaper accounts of these experiences, which I will reproduce in the next article on this website. I am unsure as to the direct and ongoing extent of her involvement in the Suffragette movement, and it is clear from her articles that she set out to get arrested just so she could report from inside the 'belly of the beast', but her writings show that she was clearly a very strong supporter of the struggle. Her actions also show that she was not afraid to see the inside of a prison cell, and like many Suffragettes she wore imprisonment as a badge of honour.

A young suffragette is arrested at the March 1907 protest.
A young Suffragette is arrested at the March 1907 protest.

Her life in Edwardian London seemed to become much quieter after this time, and in 1912 it was reported that she ‘was recently received into the Church by the Jesuit Fathers at Farm street, London.’ On the face of it, this appeared to be a surprising move for a person who had railed against the establishment and conformity for so long, but Constance lost none of her political combativeness.

Her short stories continued to appear various publications in the following years, but any dreams of literary stardom in London must have faded away. She returned to New Zealand - probably during the 1920s - and continued her love/hate relationship with that country. She was admonished in the pages of the Coffs Harbor Advocate in 1925 - with the suggestion that her ankles should be caned - for her article in the Empire Review criticising the people of New Zealand for their general submissiveness. Then, in 1931, Constance was making news again with another parliamentary protest. This time her concern was child abuse, while the New Zealand parliament was considering a Child Welfare Bill.
‘When the Speaker of the House of Representatives was reading prayers this afternoon a woman in the visitors' gallery suddenly and loudly protested against the Child Welfare Act. An attendant persuaded her to remain silent, but when prayers had concluded she recommenced her protest. She tore up a copy of the Act, throwing it to the floor of the House, She was ejected by the police. 
The woman stated subsequently that her name was Constance McAdam, and her pen name Constance Clyde. She said she was a member of the Women's International League of Peace and Freedom, and had not been aware that the House opened with prayer. "At all events, I am the first woman to speak in the New Zealand Parliament," she added.’ (Sydney Morning Herald, 19 March 1931).
Another short insight into her political and social activities was provided by a Brisbane newspaper in 1932:
‘Prominent among New Zealand writers is Constance McAdam Clyde. Articles written by her have appeared in the best English magazines, including the Contemporary and Empire Reviews. Her last publication is a history of New Zealand, in which she collaborated with Alan Mulgan, and which was brought out by Whitcombe and Tombs. Some of her most valuable work has been achieved, however, in assisting to place new writers before the public. Miss Clyde is an ardent advocate of physical culture for both the youthful and middle-aged. She is also, prominent in anti-vivisection matters.’ (Telegraph [Brisbane], 25 June 1932).

It was around this time that she moved to Brisbane and settled in the suburb of Dutton Park. This was the time of the Great Depression, and Constance was by now advertising her services in assisting with the preparation and publication of manuscripts, and she also sought a writing partner. However, in June 1933 she was living at ‘Lavinia’, on Dutton Street, Dutton Park, and subtly advertising her services as a fortune teller.

Constance also became a writer of regular letters-to-the-editor, usually under her birth name and espousing her views on various subjects. In 1933 she wrote about child protectionprison reform, her opposition to the forced sterilisation of ‘mental deficients’ (which she also wrote about in 1934). She also suggested that people should wear ‘a small piece of pale green ribbon’ on Sundays to show their support for ‘a better state of things financial’.

She continued telling fortunes under the name ‘Madame Lavinia’, and in 1935 (while living on Merton Road) she was arrested and charged with ‘having pretended to tell fortunes for a fee’. Constance faced the police and the court with characteristic defiance:
'She told me that she only did it as a sideline,' said Constable Davissen, of the Traffic Office. She said that she was a journalist, writing for 'Women's Weekly, 'Women's Budget,' ‘The Women's Mirror’ and several other papers. And before I left she said, 'You can tell the magistrate from me that I will not pay any fine, even if it's only sixpence.’ (The Truth, 7 April 1935)
She told the court that 'I thought that I could do some good in this depression by sympathy, kindness and advice, and especially by telling people that there is nothing wrong with this world except the monetary system.' For Constance, even reading tea leaves could become a political platform.

True to her word, she refused to pay the fine and so was confined inside the nearby Boggo Road prison for three weeks. She didn’t miss the opportunity to write about this experience, and I have already covered that work in this article.

Constance McAdam, 1935.

This proved to be Constance’s last brush with the law. Her newspaper letters now became infrequent and her concerns trivial. In a letter to the Women’s Weekly in 1935 she complained of children getting Christmas presents too early. In 1938 she was unhappy with the etiquette of people listening to household radios, and in 1939 she complained of an accident hotspot on Ipswich Road. In 1940, now aged 68 years, she suggested that the government could save money on pensions by asking rich families to help provide for their elderly relatives. In 1944 a rather insipid poem on the tragedies of love appeared in the Queensland Times. And then, nothing. This must have all felt like a long way from the dreams of the ambitious young writer who travelled by ship from Sydney to London in 1903 with an unpublished novel under her arm.
In the 1949 Queensland Electoral Roll she was listed as a journalist and living at 15 Deighton Road, South Brisbane.

Constance died in Brisbane on 30 August 1951, and was buried in the Hemmant Cemetery. The event passed without mention in the local newspapers. There was no obituary, no funeral notice. It was a quiet end to a life that had petered out in the mundane concerns of suburbia after such an ambitious foray into the bohemian literary circles of turn-of-the-century Sydney and London. Hopefully this article will help make more people aware of the achievements of Constance Jane 'Clyde' McAdam.

Note:
I set out here to put together the most complete online account of Constance McAdam’s life. While that general aim has been achieved, my research has been limited and holes remain. I would appreciate any further biographical information that can be added above.

List of the published writings of Constance McAdam (work in progress).
  • Consolation - Song Words, poetry (The Bulletin, 12 December 1896) 
  • Hypnotised, short story (The Bulletin, 9 January 1897) 
  • Dead, poetry (The Bulletin, 31 July 1897; 11 January 1933) 
  • To Save His Soul, short story (The Bulletin, 26 June 1897) 
  • A Woman's Promise, short story (The Queenslander, 11 December 1897) 
  • Mrs Murgan's Snake Bite Cure, short story (The Sydney Mail, 17 December 1898) 
  • Letters from the Grave, short story (The Queenslander, 17 December 1898) 
  • Dreams and Shadows, poetry (The Bulletin, 24 December 1898) 
  • A Woman's Love, short story (The Bulletin, 7 January 1899) 
  • Virgins, Wise and Foolish, poetry (The Bulletin, 28 January 1899) 
  • The Widow, poetry (The Bulletin, 11 February 1899) 
  • Night's Day, poetry (The Bulletin, 11 February 1899) 
  • A Glass of Beer, poetry humour (The Bulletin, 1 July 1899) 
  • A Boarding-House Idyl, short story humour (The Bulletin, 29 July 1899) 
  • The Test of Love, poetry (The Bulletin, 2 September 1899) 
  • Conversely!, short story (The Bulletin, 4 November 1899) 
  • The Saddest Song, poetry (The Bulletin, 9 December 1899) 
  • The Soul of David King, short story (The Bulletin, 9 December 1899) 
  • The Dream Child, poetry (The Bulletin, 23 December 1899) 
  • The Elopement of Lydia, poetry humour (The Bulletin, 6 January 1900) 
  • In the Night, poetry humour (The Bulletin, 20 January 1900) 
  • Love's Climax, poetry (The Bulletin, 24 February 1900) 
  • Why They Killed Mrs Saville, short story (The Australasian, 10 March 1900) 
  • For Ever, poetry (The Bulletin, 28 April 1900) 
  • Mrs Flynn's Sofy, short story humour (The Bulletin, 5 May 1900) 
  • Jones, the Genius Hunter, poetry humour (The Bulletin, 26 May 1900) 
  • The Cleverness of Douglas Fitzgerald, short story (The Australasian, 2 June 1900) 
  • Angela, the Good, short story (The Bulletin, 23 June 1900) 
  • Millar's Water, short story (The Australasian, 7 July 1900) 
  • The Broken Dove, poetry (The Bulletin, 28 July 1900) 
  • Stepmother Bessie, short story (The Australasian, 11 August 1900) 
  • The Man that Came Back, short story humour (The Bulletin, 25 August 1900) 
  • A Faithful Woman, poetry humour (The Bulletin, 8 September 1900) 
  • The Ballad of John Bigley, poetry (The Bulletin, 20 October 1900) 
  • Parson King's Happy Day, short story humour (The Bulletin, 3 November 1900) 
  • Sympathetic Miss Swanston, short story (The Australasian, 29 December 1900) 
  • Pirates, short story (The Bulletin, 29 December 1900) 
  • My Best Friend, short story (The Australasian, 29 June 1901) 
  • Her Good Father, short story (The Newsletter, 28 December 1901) 
  • Pan of the Seashore, poetry (The Australasian, 6 April 1901) 
  • Mr. Shannon's Choice, short story (The Australasian, 19 October 1901) 
  • The Chief Mourner, short story (The Australasian, 16 November 1901) 
  • The Forgiveness of Florence, short story (The Australasian, 14 June 1902) 
  • The Game Eileen Played, short story (The Australasian, 5 July 1902). 
  • An Appeal, poetry (The Bulletin, 19 July 1902) 
  • Mabel's Love Letter, short story (The Australasian, 20 September 1902) 
  • Lizzie's Lie, short story (The Australasian, 15 November 1902) 
  • The Ballad of John Ibbetson, poetry (The Bulletin, 21 February 1903) 
  • A Men's Refuge, short story (The Bulletin, 21 March 1903) 
  • The Diplomacy of Caroline, short story (The Bulletin, 16 May 1903) 
  • The Question of Beer, poetry (The Bulletin, 23 May 1903) 
  • The Enfranchised Woman, prose (The Bulletin, 20 June 1903) 
  • The Difference, poetry (The Bulletin, 27 June 1903) 
  • An Exemplary Mother, short story (The Australasian, 22 August 1903) 
  • The Marrying of Mr. Maxwell, short story (The Australasian, 24 October 1903) 
  • The Commonplace Men, poetry (The Australian Town and Country Journal, 9 December 1903) 
  • A Pilgrim of Love, short story (Colac Herald, 16 September 1904) 
  • His Strange Little Lady, short story (The Australasian, 26 March 1904) 
  • The Tragedy of the Spun-Silk Shawl, short story (The Australasian, 28 May 1904) 
  • Held Cheap, short story (The Australasian, 9 July 1904) 
  • The Ordeal of Mrs Holmes, short story (The Australasian, 26 November 1904) 
  • A Pagan's Love, novel (London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1905) 
  • The Career of Jessica, short story (The Australian Town and Country Journal, 26 February 1908) 
  • The Plan of Elise Blanc, short story (The Australasian, 13 March 1915) 
  • The Pardoning of Jessie, short story (The Australasian, 11 March 1916) 
  • Soldier’s Wives, short story (The Australasian, 23 March 1918) 
  • The Flippancy of Felicia, short story (The Australasian, 3 September 1921) 
  • It's a Young Country Yet, short story (The Australasian, 28 January 1922) 
  • When the Dumb Spoke, short story (The Australasian, 11 February 1922) 
  • The Eyes of John Denne short story (The Bulletin, 27 January 1927) 
  • The Motor-Car Wife, short story (The Australian Woman's Mirror, 27 September 1927) 
  • Elimination, short story (The Australian Woman's Mirror, 3 January 1928) 
  • 'With Shop Attached', short story (The Australian Woman's Mirror, 14 February 1928) 
  • The Magic Dress, short story (The Australian Woman's Mirror, 12 August 1930) 
  • Change of Heart, short story (The Queenslander, 21 March 1935) 
  • Contrasts, poetry (Queensland Times, 3 March 1944)

[1] Kirstine Moffat, ‘The Puritan paradox: an annotated bibliography of Puritan and anti-Puritan New Zealand fiction, 1860-1940. Part 2: reactions against Puritanism’, Kotare: New Zealand Notes and Queries, Vol.3, No.2, 2000.
[2] Lawrence Jones, ‘Puritanism’, The Oxford Companion to New Zealand Literature, ed. Roger Robinson and Nelson Wattie, Melbourne, Auckland: Oxford University Press, 1998, p.130.


12 August 2017

The Ghost That Haunted South Brisbane Cemetery... From 1,000 Miles Away

There was a bit of online trouble back in 2011* when this photo, apparently of an ‘eerie face in the mist’, turned up on the 'Brisbane 'Ghosts Tours'' Facebook page:

Photo of alleged ghost at 'South Brisbane Cemetery'. In truth it was taken in Tasmania.

It was accompanied with the unequivocal claim that it was taken during a South Brisbane Cemetery 'Ghost Tour' on the previous Saturday night, although it did not look like any part of that cemetery. What's more, the photo was taken during daylight.

Then, quite luckily, the same photo also turned up on the ‘Haunted Australia’ Facebook page, with one crucial difference - this time it was full and uncropped. On that page it was correctly identified as being of the Hobart Penitentiary and Chapel, under a glorious blue sky:

Photo of alleged ghost at 'South Brisbane Cemetery'.

No informed person could look at that and think it was a night tour at South Brisbane Cemetery, but that is exactly what Ghost Tours claimed it was. A little bit of Facebook fisticuffs broke out when commenters pointed out it was not the cemetery, but Ghost Tours admin insisted that it was, a stance they only dropped when the photographer himself intervened to point out that it was a photo from the Hobart Penitentiary, Tasmania, taken back in 2006. He went on to say this had been made clear in a part of an email he sent to Ghost Tours, an email they had reproduced online but with the relevant paragraph pinpointing the location edited out.

Ghost Tours admin then claimed to have 'misread' the email, despite their own selective editing of both the photo and the explanatory paragraph in the email to remove any indication of the location. Why had it been edited that way? The most straightforward conclusion would be that this was not mere incompetence, it was a deliberate act intended to deceive.

After I exposed this story online, I received an email containing legal threats from Ghost Tours owner Cameron 'Jack' Sim (via his staff member):
'There have been 3 incidents of people commenting on our Facebook page just to attack our business. We know these people are connected to you and The Friends of South Brisbane Cemetery. We even suspect that some of them may have been invented by you for this sole purpose. We are asking you now to cease and desist or we will have to take action against you. Their comments are defamatory and rude. Our regular customers who follow our Facebook page have written in, upset about what has been happening. This cannot go on.'
The false assumption that the Facebook critics were actually me, or ‘connected’ to me, is a rather paranoid premise on which to base a legal threat. Can I be sued for the comments of other people on Facebook?
'I am also aware of what you have recently posted on 'The Boggo Blog'. Firstly, I am the host on the South Brisbane Cemetery tour. I received the photo and I posted it on Facebook. I mislabelled the photo, I am aware of that and it was a simple mistake. It was very good of our customer to send us these photos and we are very happy they did so. I have apologised profusely for mislabelling it. However, Chris, it was a simple mistake. You have then taken my personal error and broadcasted it, turning it into this ridiculous claim that we have been stealing photos. I am very happy to take responsibility of what happened but not to take responsibility for your outrageous claims.'
This claim of innocent ‘mislabelling’ is contradicted by the selective editing of the text that explained this was not a picture of the cemetery. In fact, even after the discrepancy was pointed out, Ghost Tours still insisted that it was from a night tour at the cemetery. Also, nowhere did I claim that anybody was ‘stealing photos’.
'These ongoing attacks affect, not only Jack, but they affect our staff and customers. They affect me personally and our poor customer that graciously gave us these unexplainable photos.'
In reality, the alleged ‘poor customer’ actually thanked the person from Haunted Australia (who called the Ghost Tour owner an 'immature child' with 'the worst reputation I have ever heard of') for his comments on the Ghost Tour page. The photographer was probably more concerned than anyone about the misuse of his photo.

And so it went on, with claims that I was controlling a 'parade of stooges' who were 'upsetting our ever faithful customers'. It is of course rather unhealthy to assume that random people who criticise you on social media are working together in some kind of conspiracy.

Brisbane Ghost Tours seem to believe that people don't have a right to correct their misinformation. If this had been a simple mistake, it would not have shown up on my radar. We all make mistakes. But this was something quite different. This 'ghost' might not haunt the South Brisbane Cemetery, but the photo should haunt Ghost Tours.

* This has been abridged from an article originally published in September 2011.


05 August 2017

A Brisbane Suffragette in London

Article by Christopher Dawson, MPHA (Qld)


Constance Jane McAdam (1872-1951) was an author who wrote as 'Constance Clyde' and resided in Brisbane during the later years of her life. She spent a few weeks in the women’s prison at Boggo Road in 1935 after being convicted of ‘pretending to tell fortunes for payment’, but this was not her first time inside a prison cell. As a journalist living in London in the 1900s, she had participated in a major demonstration by Suffragettes outside the House of Commons, and was (deliberately) arrested for her troubles. She subsequently wrote two highly interesting newspaper articles on her experiences at the protest and inside prison, both of which are reproduced below.

The struggle for equal voting rights in Britain had gone on for decades, mostly by peaceful means, but by the 1900s the activist women were getting frustrated and turned to direct action. Their first demonstration directly outside parliament took place on 22 March 1907 after a Private Member's Bill to give (some) women the vote was defeated. Prime Minister Henry Campbell-Bannerman voted in favour of the Bill, but he allowed his MPs a free vote. The subsequent failure sparked a large protest outside the House of Commons, which was defended by 500 policemen. There was a prolonged and sometimes violent face-off that resulted in the arrest of 75 of the women.

Constance 'Clyde' McAdam was among those women. She had been born in Scotland, raised in New Zealand, and worked in Australia as a journalist before moving to London to further her literary career. A fiercely independent woman, she set out to get arrested that day so she could provide an insider's account of the protest and the conditions inside prison for the Suffragettes. The result is a fascinating record of those tumultuous days:


‘Through London with the Suffrage Procession.
(By Constance Clyde.)

Royalty excepted, London has raised but one statue to a woman; that woman be it noted, was a fighter. Opposite Parliament House stands that stone embodiment - Boadicea in full career. Is it not, perhaps, both an emblem and a prophecy? In the streets that surround it there was fought two nights ago a woman's battle, purely physical, for the fight to vote; ladies struggle with policeman; constables in that hysteria to which this class of men are liable, hustled and arrested innocent people - who did not even know that a suffrage riot was in progress! The papers have given but a mild account of the trampling and confusion that led to the arrest of fifty seven suffragettes on that historic evening, when some hundreds of women marched from Exeter-hall to present their petition to Parliament.

The authorised procession that took place the Saturday previous, however, has its own interest, though - a strange omission nowadays - the proceedings did not close with a string of ladies going to gaol. It is the custom of the suffragettes to give an occasional peaceful demonstration in order to show that their violence is of malice prepense, and not innate. On such occasions there come forward the gentler spirits, who, not caring to share in the aggressive methods yet wish to evince their sympathy whenever they can. For without exaggeration, sympathy is the general sentiment of English womanhood towards these twentieth century Boadiceas. That so many of such sympathisers are well to do middle-class women is, perhaps, the best omen for future success. One is not astonished that Lady Frances Balfour, and Lady Strachay rode in the procession, or that the Countess of Carlisle's daughter walked shoulder to shoulder with mill girls carrying a flag. Those women are accustomed to publicity, are conscious that their position permits unconventionality. It is when we see timid burgeois daughters, prim teachers, staid middleclass wives in the ranks that we think enfranchisement may be really at hand. ‘Club secretaries and leading literary lights walked in the procession,' said the 'Evening Standard’… and went on to wonder in somewhat 'servant gal' language 'how they could so 'demean' themselves.

The first few minutes of procession walking are certainly a little trying. The present writer slipped in a little beyond Hyde Park, and for sixty seconds' after felt that the eyes of all London were upon her. Then the newcomer takes courage, raises the head, talks to her neighbor, and glances at the mottoes on the various pink and blue banners - the gentle 'For Hearth and Home,' the more warlike 'We Demand Our Rights,' the insistent 'We ask not Indirect but Direct Influence.' A little later one glances past the file of policemen walking beside us to the crowds that line the footpath. Remarks reach our ears as we step forward.

It is difficult to gauge the London expression. There is generally the dawn of a grin; one sees only the dawn because by the time the smile is fullgrown we are level with the commencement of others further ahead. Sometimes when there is a stoppage, however, one will note a look of surprise as the masculine glance perceives so long a line of walkers - three thousand strong. Comments are frequent, and sometimes free. 'Go home and do housework' was a favourite admonition; it was heard first at Hyde Park, and met us again as we turned down Pall-Mall; later it cropped up once more by Trafalgar-square. 'What is England coming to?' was the disgusted observation of one 'Johnny,' who certainly gave the impression that England would not do much if it stopped at him. Well-known women come in for special comment. Miss Constance Smedley leans from her carriage to give an importunate beggar. 'Here, don't go wasting more of your dad's money,' called a loafer, in allusion to the princely Lyceum Club, organised by this little lady from her father's wealth. The policemen who walk beside us as guards do not know 'whether, to be proud' or ashamed of their position; nor are they quite certain how far to go in order to shield us from the impertinences of the onlookers. 'You musn't point at the ladies, but you can make remarks' is one constable's interpretation of his duties. So the rude; finger is put down, while the more or less rude tongue continues its criticisms.

Nevertheless, the onlookers on the whole are not-inimical; here and there, indeed, is raised a cheer, and the words ‘Good luck to you, ladies,' hearten our spirits. As we pass Pall-Mall there is, I must admit, a little inward shamefacedness. These interested faces at the men's club windows are known to some of us; we have dined with this one, or gone to the theatre with that. We move on, however consoling ourselves with the reflection that we are braver than Cleopatra; she died rather than walk in a precession; we should die rather than not do so!

'Suffragettes Storm the House - Desperate Encounter With the Police - Wholesale Arrests':
The front page of the Daily Mirror after the protests of March 1907.

So we get to Trafalgar-square at last, and Exeter-hall looms in sight; Boys are running about selling a Woman's paper. We are presented with pamphlets telling us to keep on our course; other pamphlets warning us of the horror in store tor us if we do. Portraits of leading suffragettes are handed about among the crowds, while the throng grows thicker, and the traffic ahead of us is stopped. 'Not often London has to give way to women,' says the processionists with glee; and then, guarded by policemen, we enter Exeter-hall, where Zangwill and Keir Hardie and other notabilities encourage us, while an overflow meeting finds inspiration at Nelson's statue.

Such was the peaceful procession. A few days later occurred the almost terrible contest between Caxton-hall and Parliament House, this being also necessary for the cause in the opinion of the suffragettes. As a consequence, today not only mill hands but women of good family find themselves in gaol; women such as Mrs. Despard, the sister of Colonel French, left alone by the police in previous riots because of her great popularity. Women who did not even know a suffrage revolt was in progress found themselves to their astonishment taken up for asking: an innocent question, This was the fate of a girl reporter who was in the precincts of the House on merely journalistic business. Similar to her doom was that which befell a shy little novelist who three days before complained that life was dull and bereft of excitement. She had no reason to complain now. She obeyed the historic injunction to 'ask a policeman,' and having refused to pay the magisterial fine is now in Holloway. That now fashionable residence also contains a member of a leading literary club, while at another such club a day later the debate fell through because the proposer was in durance. Under such circumstances, no suffragette now attends a meeting without first making all necessary arrangements should a fortnight's involuntary absence from home result.' (Gympie Times, 30 March 1907)

The following article is Constance's account of conditions inside Holloway Gaol:

‘In Holloway Gaol. A Suffragette's Life.

When I saw the startling notice "Fifty seven Suffragettes Arrested," writes Constance Clyde in the Sydney "Daily Telegraph," my resolve was taken to be one of the next batch who thus showed their desire for the franchise. Several motives influenced me; first, it was my only chance of getting into gaol respectably; secondly, I wished to show my admiration for those brave women who chose this method of warfare at a time when all England was against them. Nevertheless, I confess to a certain nervousness when I stood in Caxton-hall listening to Mrs. Despond (sister of Colonel French) inciting the women to attack the House of Commons. My nervousness increased when I followed close after Viscountess Barberton, as she swept out of the hall bearing the petition. It is difficult for an amateur to get arrested in the daytime, so, after sauntering round Westminster viewing the scene, I went back to Caxton-hall for tea and advice.

Here I learned the right mode of procedure. The best way to get into the clutches of the law is to try and get another woman out of them. The experienced suffragette leads the way, pushing and remonstrating till seized; the "amateur" catches her arm, saying, "Let go my friend" (in reality they may never have met till that moment). Robert, exasperated, then takes her in tow also. A knot of policemen forthwith rush down to prevent an escape, and follow along till called to frustrate some other attempt to enter Parliament by another entrance. By obeying those directions I duly found myself, towards the dusk of that spring evening, in the desired grip of the law, and marched to the adjacent Police Court, was cheered by a cup of tea, and a yellow paper, which affirmed that Constance Clyde had behaved riotously and obstructed the police in the execution of their duty.

Holloway Gaol, London, 1896.

Bailed out by Mr. Pethick Laurence, the well-known husband of one suffragist, the arrested one has a night in which to prepare for her fortnight's incarceration. Appearing at the Police Court at 10 next day, I found an interesting scene. First we assembled in a large room; thence, as our names were called, we moved out into a sunny yard. Here we waited for seven hours, with only one bench between us, while one by one we were called into court. We beguiled the time by consuming the refreshments sent us by the Women's Social and Political Union, and discussing the women's problem with our captors. Most of the policemen expressed themselves in favour of the suffrage. One seemed hurt at criticisms on their manner of arresting ladies, and explained that this was due to the fact that at raid time extra constables were called in who, belonging to the East End, did not yet know the West End method of going through this duly. "Did you see any roughness?" he asked anxiously. I cheered him up by affirming that it was the best-conducted riot I had ever witnessed…

In due time I appeared in court, pleaded guilty to having obstructed the police, and, having refused to pay the fine, was escorted upstairs and placed with my fellow-captives now behind a grating… About 5 p.m. we came down in batches of 12 or so to enter our respective Black Marias, on the steps of which we said good-bye to our friends in blue, and also to the crowd of small boys. Maria is not so black as she is painted, and the ride to Holloway was not the stuffy abomination I had expected. Unpleasant to the degree of misery, however, was our first evening in Holloway "Castle." During the night previous not one of us had slept, and one day in the court had been physically tiring. Now, from 6 till 9, we were locked up, three in each reception cell, with but one seat between us. Venturing to sit on the floor, we found grave objections to this proceeding, and, ringing for the wardress, produced the corpses of the slain. We were then removed into another cell, without any stool at all, and not daring to sit down on the floor, remained standing and walking for four hours longer. At last we were called out again to visit doctor, weighing machine, and bathroom, after which, clad in our loose prison clothes, we clumped in our heavy Holloway boots to a gallery, where each was locked into her cell. These compartments proved to be absolutely clean. Having ascertained this, I got down my legless plank bed, strewed mattress sheets, and blankets upon it, and heard the clock strike 2 as I went to sleep. At half-past 5 I was awakened by the rising bell sounding from far below.

A Day's Food and Work.
The first day in Holloway was most unpleasant; very few of us but complained afterwards of the harsh manners of the wardresses. Our advent, of course, throws much extra work on their shoulders, and as a result they would fling open our doors, shout something at us, and talk to us like naughty children because we did not understand. The day's procedure, once we knew it, was simple. At half-past 5 we rise, and, having washed in a tin basin, fold our bedding in a certain cart-wheel shape, and place it on the lower of two shelves. Then we attack the tin basin, dustpan, and jug with bathbrick and soap. This is the most unpleasant of our duties; we consider that, as we have not been sentenced to hard labour, our work should not be made difficult for us. Now, every housekeeper knows how much easier it is to keep clean enamelled ware than anything made of tin. At 7 we came out to fill our water-jugs, and, returning, place on the lodge tables near the door huge mugs, in which we receive in the morning nondescript tea, in the evening thin cocoa. Each time we receive also a roll of excellent wholemeal bread and butter; the latter, however, is an innovation, and was not enjoyed by the first batch of suffragettes.

Locked in again, we sweep the concrete floor with a handleless broom, and, later, receive into our cells a pail, mop, and brush, with which, every morning, save Sunday, we wash the two shelves, the table ledge, the plank bed, the hot water pipe, and finally the concrete floor. This work, however, is light compared with the tin-ware cleaning. Chapel and exercise fill up the rest of the morning. At exercise we walk round and round the courtyard in single file, and all at equal distances. "Reverse," cries the wardress, and we walk round the other way. During this time we are not allowed to talk, but, needless to say, we drop a word occasionally, the strictness of prison rule relaxing as we get near the close of our stay.

From half-past 11 till 12 we are locked in our cells once more, and at midday hear the clanking of tin cans, as some third-class misdemeanants (we belong to the first division), led by the wardress, come round with a waggon load of dinner tins. These hold potatoes with pea stew, boiled beef, pork, and beans, according to the day, and always a roll of brown bread. Save for an excursion to the gallery tap to wash our mugs, afternoon and evening are eventless. We sit in our cells, read, knit, or contemplate our surroundings.

'Self Portrait in Prison Dress', Sylvia Pankhurst 1907.

Physical Weariness.
What do we suffer from most? It is not till the second week that the monotony preys on our spirits, and for most of us, the food being wholesome, is agreeable enough. We suffer much from physical weariness. In chapel we sit on benches without backs, and, unlike the London cab horses, cannot lean upon one another. In the cells we have no heat but a stool, and we are not permitted to lay out our plank beds till after 6. These beds again are as hard as the concrete floor. We have excellent electric light, however, and our cells are well heated, too much so for my taste. In fact, I should really suffer if I did not get up on my stool occasionally and breathe into the ventilator. Every afternoon as the clock strikes 3 I take my little constitutional to that ventilator, while viewing as much of the scenery as I can through the closed window. Till March 31 our electric light is turned on from 6 till about half-past 8; but from April 1 no light is allowed. It is now the summer season, even though the dusk begins before 7, leaving us several hours of idle wakefulness in our comfortless cells. Very dreary were these hours, and we can quite realise that prisoners spend them in devising new means of wickedness.

Our chaplain has amused ns very much. He does not approve of the Suffragettes, and when a prisoner, asked her religion, pronounced herself a member of the Ethical Thought Society, answered abruptly, "Never heard of it." He has preached a sermon against us, counselling us to remember that a woman's best ornament is submission to authority. When he did this after a previous raid a suffragette was ill-advised enough to interrupt him. This, as a wardress explained to me, was very foolish, as it might have led the ordinary criminal women to revolt, and then "we should all for a time have been at their mercy.” We have the laugh at the chaplain, however, for did he not tell us of certain Biblical character that she was a "free agent," "as free as any of you, sisters!" At Easter time we have another chaplain, and he, quite accidentally, I believe, gives a stirring sermon on the necessity of fighting and striving, and disregarding the comments of the world. To which preacher shall we suffragists lend an ear?

Denuded as they are of ordinary furniture, our cells are amply stored with religious literature. Besides Bible, hymnbook, and prayer-book, I have a piece of cardboard with an evening and a morning hymn, and a book, "The Narrow Way," which tells me not to indulge in luxurious living. Besides these is a slate and slate pencil. When I apply for pen and paper, explaining that I am a journalist, the governor seems to think this slate should satisfy my requirements. However, I persuade him otherwise. It is very difficult to know what one may or may not have in gaol, as there are no definite rules except that mirrors, hair pads, and sharp instruments are peremptorily disallowed. The Women's Social and Political Union sends each of us a newspaper every day, and from these we learn what is happening in Holloway. I am allowed but two of the many visitors that apply to see me. It is curious that the first is forbidden to give me the rose she has brought, but the other is permitted to leave a book…

So the days pass on. The visiting magistrate, doctor, and governor come round occasionally, and on Wednesday we visit the baths, which are not quite so well kept as the rest of Holloway. Now, however, the day of freedom dawns. How early we wake, so pleased that we are hardly angry to find that our good clothes and hat have been wrapped in bundles, according to Holloway usage that they are not as neat as we would like them to be. Once again we are weighed, and receive back jewels, money, hair pads (if we wear them), and other accessories. As we march out we hear the band that has come to welcome us. Tickets are given us for the twopenny tube, another ticket for Eustace Miles's restaurant; arrived in London we form into procession again, and, guarded by our friends, the police (now our protectors) enter that well-known tearoom. Here we enjoy our first good breakfast, finding at each plate a bunch of narcissi, with Mr. and Mrs. Patrick Laurence's compliments. For others, as for myself, there are to be club dinners, reception teas, and other honours which, spite of certain unpleasantnesses of gaol life, we feel to be undeserved. Meanwhile give me an armchair!’ (The Mercury, 24 June 1907)

See also: