Suffragettes February 11 1914

 

THE MORNING POST FEBRUARY 11 1914

THE BISHOP OF LONDON IN DISFAVOUR

 

The Women’s Social and Political Union have issued a statement made by Miss Phyllis Brady to her solicitor, which, they contend, is in strong contrast to the Bishop of London’s report published in the Morning Post of yesterday. Miss Brady says: “On Saturday morning the Bishop of London saw Kitty Marian and myself. He told me he came as a friend, and saw me alone after Miss Marian. He asked me how I felt. I told him I suffered very much from indigestion, and that I found the operation [forcible feeding] very painful indeed, and that I was feeling very weak. He asked me if I had any complaint to make against the wardresses, and I said no. He said I need not be alarmed about Miss Marian, as she only screamed as a form of protest rather than anything else. When I told her this afterwards she said it was quite wrong, as the screamings were the only way to relieve her feelings, as the operation was so awful. She was afraid otherwise she should go mad. She [Miss Marian] told him she was as well as could be expected in the circumstances, which he might misconstrue. What she meant was that some people in the same circumstances might be dead.” The communication adds that the Women’s Social and Political Union repudiates the Bishop’s statement of facts, and charges him with shielding and siding with the Government and conniving at torture.

Despite the Bishop of London’s statement that he could not receive any more deputations from the Social and Political Union on the question of forcible feeding, two members of the organisation called at London House, St. James’s-square, yesterday, in an endeavour to secure an interview. They were Miss Wallace Dunlop, the leader of previous deputations and Miss Mary Richardson, who has been released under Mr. McKenna’s Act. They drove up in a motor-car at about one o’clock. The door of London House was opened, and they had a few words with the butler, but they were refused admittance and the door was closed. The women remained waiting on the doorstep, and expressed the intention of remaining until they saw the Bishop or were arrested.


THE MORNING POST JANUARY 31 1914 ……….. Militants and Forcible Feeding – Bishop of London’s visit to Holloway – Fears not borne out by facts
THE MORNING POST JANUARY 31 1914 …………View of the Bishop’s visit to Holloway by the Morning Post
THE MORNING POST FEBRUARY 2 1914 ………. Militants and Forcible Feeding – The Bishop of London “In Blinkers”
THE MORNING POST FEBRUARY 10 1914 ………Bishop of London’s second visit to Holloway – The Screams Explained


RETURN TO SUFFRAGETTE NEWSPAPER INDEX

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s