Canadian Suffragettes

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IKGH8ehujk&feature=related

You Tube

You Tube

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n65Y8itAcg&feature=related

create a timeline of the major developments in women’s rights

How important was the fight for equality of women in Canadian history?

1 paragraph

pre-writing, rough draft, peer editing, great copy

Overview1900Under the Dominion Elections Act S.C. 1900 c. 12, the only people who can vote in a federal election are ones who have the legal right to vote in a provincial election. Minorities (including women) who are excluded from voting in provincial elections are therefore automatically excluded from voting in federal elections.The Married Women's Property Act S.M. 1900, c.27 gives married women in Manitoba the same legal capacity as men.

1903The Married Women's Property Act S.P.E.I. 1903, c.9 gives married women in P.E.I. the same legal capacity as men.1907The Married Women's Property Act S.S. 1907, c. 18 gives married women in Saskatchewan the same legal capacity as men.1914The Supreme Court of Canada upholds a Saskatchewan law that prohibits Chinese businesses from hiring white women in Quong-Wing v. R..Ontario passes the Act to Amend Factory, Shop and Office Building Act S.O. 1914, c.40, which prohibits "Oriental" persons from employing white females.

1916Women win the right to vote in provincial elections in Manitoba.Women win the right to vote in provincial elections in Saskatchewan.Women win the right to vote in provincial elections in Alberta.

1917An Act to Amend the Provincial Election Act, S.B.C. 1917, c.23 grants women the right to vote in provincial elections in B.C..The War-Time Elections Act, S.C. 1917, c.39 amends the Elections Act but keeps the clause which denies people the right to vote in a federal election if they are not allowed to vote in their own provincial elections. Minorities who are excluded from voting in provincial elections are therefore automatically excluded from voting in federal elections.The Ontario Franchise Act, S.O. 1917 c. 5 grants women the right to vote in provincial elections in Ontario.

1918The Nova Scotia Franchise Act, S.N. 1918, c.2 grants women the right to vote in provincial elections in Nova Scotia.An Act to Confer Electoral Franchise Upon Women, S.C. 1918, c. 20 grants women the right to vote in federal elections.1919The Saskatchewan law challenged in Quong-Wing (1914, above) is amended to delete reference to "Chinese" - S.S. 1918-19, c. 85 s. 3.An Act to Extend the Electoral Franchise to Women and to Amend the New Brunswick Electors Act, S.N.B. 1919, c. 63 grants women the right to vote in provincial elections in New Brunswick.

1920The federal government makes the franchise universal, except for minorities and Aboriginal persons.1922The Election Act, S.P.E.I. 1922, c.5 grants women the right to vote in provincial elections in P.E.I.Married Women's Property Act S.A. 1922, c. 10 gives married women in Alberta the same legal capacity as men.

1928Alberta's Sexual Sterilization Act is enacted. Similar laws are enacted in other provinces.In Edwards v. AG for Canada (The "Persons" Case) [1928] S.C.R. 276, the Supreme Court of Canada decides that a woman is not a "qualified person" and therefore cannot be appointed to the Senate of Canada.1929In Edwards v. AG for Canada (The "Persons" Case) [1930] A.C. 124, the British Privy Council overturns the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada and allows women to be appointed to the Senate.

The Persons Case: The Big 5

Overview5 Albertan women fought to have women declared as persons so they could legally sit in the Canadian Senate

in 1928 the Supreme Court had denied their request

but in 1929 the British Privy Council granted their appeal-

“that the word ‘persons’ in section 24 [of the British North

America Act] includes members both of the male and

female sex... and that women are eligible to be summoned

to and become members of the Senate of Canada.”

Emily Murphy was the leader of the group who had forced the Canadian government to formally declare women as persons and therefore allowed to sit in the Canadian Senate

Emily Murphy had been a judge in Edmonton since 1916. To support her in her battle, she chose four exceptional women: Nellie McClung, Irene Parlby, Louise McKinney and Henrietta Muir Edwards.

They were seasoned militants known for their political and social action, as members of the Alberta legislature and activists in the temperance, suffragette and womenʼs movements.

Emily Murphy

Having done all  --  stand.ʼ We lose so much, both in private and public life, by receding from the ground we have won, either from indolence or some other cause.

Emily Murphy

Emily (1868-1933) was a writer, first female judge in the British Empire

pioneered married womenʼs rights, was national president of the Canadian Womenʼs Press Club, VP of the National Council of Women, and first president of the Federated Womenʼs Institutes of Canada

Henrietta Edwards

Henrietta Muir Edwards, (1849-1933), journalist, suffragist and organizer, fought for equal rights for wives, mothers’ allowances and women’s rights.

She started the Working Girls’ Association in Montréal in 1875, a forerunner of the YWCA. Later, while living in Alberta she compiled two works on Alberta and federal laws affecting women and children.

Louise McKinney

Louise McKinney (1868-1931), politician and temperance campaigner.

She was president of the Dominion Women's Christian Union and elected to the Alberta legislature in 1917 as representative of the non-partisan league.

Irene Parlby

Irene Parlby (1878-1965), suffragette and politician.

She was elected president of the women’s branch of the United Farmers of Alberta in 1916 and became a member of the Alberta legislature in 1921.

She was still a member of Parliament at the time of the Persons Case.

Nellie McClung

Nellie L. McClung (1847-1951), novelist, journalist, suffragette and temperance worker.

She was a member of the Alberta legislature, the only woman on the Dominion War Council, and the first woman on the CBC Board of Governors.

The Case

in 1916 Emily Murphy was the first judge in the British Empire

in one of her first cases the defense lawyer argued that any decision she made would not be legal as she was not legally a person

although the Alberta Supreme Court it gave a jump start to the cause

in the following years, womensʼ organizations would demand Emily Murphyʼs appointment to the Senate

In 1928 the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear the case as it was their legal opinion that women could not be senators as their was no latin word for a female senator (Senator being a latin word)

To Emily Murphy this issue was the pinnacle of 3 decades of womenʼs rights. They had already secured the vote (Federally-1918) and the first female Member of Parliament in 1921 (Agnes McPhail)

The BNA Act (our constitution) was an obstacle that the government used to do nothingin 1927 Emily Murphy discovered a loophole that allowed five persons to petition the Supreme Court. This section also provided that the government would bear the costs of the petition. And so, Emily Murphy invited Nellie McClung, Irene Parlby, Louise McKinney and Henrietta Muir Edwards to cosign a letter asking that the Supreme Court hear and rule on two constitutional questions :

“1. Is power vested in the Governor-General in Council of Canada, or the Parliament of Canada, or either of them, to appoint a female to the Senate of Canada? 2. Is it constitutionally possible for the Parliament of Canada under the provisions of the British North America Act, or otherwise, to make provision for the appointment of a female to the Senate of Canada?”

The requirements to sit in the Senate were:at least 30 years old, hold property, be worth at least four thousand dollars and reside within the province for which they were appointed.

Numerous women met the requirements. It remained to be determined if they were “persons”.

April 24, 1928 that the Supreme Court of Canada declared that women were not persons

Minister of Justice Ernest Lapointe declared that women had a legal right to sit in the Senate and that measures would be taken to change the BNA Act

Emily Murphy was not going to wait for some hypothetical amendment. In May 1928, appealed to the Privy Council in London, England, which was, at that time, the final court of appeal for Canadians.

“Nothing can stop us from winning”, she wrote to her colleagues in arms.

Women as personsthat nothing in the BNA Act stated that the word “persons” did not apply to womenOn the contrary, the proof was that the right to vote given to women at the federal level stemmed from an interpretation of the word “persons” that included women

Women as non-Personson historical considerations and stated that, at the time the BNA Act was drafted, women could not hold public positionsno intention in the Act of admitting women into the Senate

The Legal Arguments

The British Privy Council rejected this argument

if in the past no women had acceded to such a position, it was because custom prevented it

On October 18, 1929, the British Privy Council ruled in favour of women, declaring that they were indeed persons and therefore eligible to sit in the Senate of Canada

The Decision

The AftermathFebruary 1930, Mackenzie King seized the opportunity to be the first leader of the Government to allow women into the Senate and appointed Canada’s first woman senator, Cairine Reay Wilson

She had been active in the Victorian Order of Nurses, the Young Women’s Christian Association, the Salvation Army, the Twentieth Century Liberal Association and the National Federation of Liberal Women of Canada.

Bibliography

http://www.collectionscanada.ca/publications/002/015002-2100-e.html

www.chrc-ccdp.ca