It was back in early 1916 that the North West Mounted Police rounded up some 20 women under questionable circumstances. About to go before the Judge, word got out to the local Edmonton Council of Women who immediately sent some women observers to the court to ensure the accused were fairly treated.
The men of the day insisted they leave the court because of some tardy evidence expected to be introduced. And women of stature had to immediately leave due to protecting their own reputations!
Soon word got out to suffregate Emily Murphy, who went before the provincial Attorney General requesting that the accused should be tried by one of their own sex.
Thus, soon began the very first court for women with none other than Murphy becoming it's first female Police Magistrate. Not only a first for the province, but the entire country to boot.
In short order other women would get similar appointments. Much to the shagrin of male antics of the day, the system of female judges conducted hearings for females soon began to spring up in several venues.
Moving along, because of her expertise, many turned to Murphy and others to seek office in the highest office in the land.
The Canadian Senate!
That battle was eagerly embraced and fought through all the court levels available to the women in Canada. And all reached the same conclusion. They argued that appointments could only go to PERSONS. And a women certainly was not a PERSON in their eyes.
Thus, it was continually ruled that the women lacked the key credential to serve in that chamber.
And the men loved it. Well, at least until the women... the Famous Five, (as they became known) and as pictured below, took matters to the highest court of the land.
That being in England!
After much debate and thought they came down to a finally decision. But first.... here is the actual trial, word for word, and probably very rarely seen in newsprint within Canada.
But first I suggest refilling your cup of coffee... and then begin your long read.
The men of the day insisted they leave the court because of some tardy evidence expected to be introduced. And women of stature had to immediately leave due to protecting their own reputations!
Soon word got out to suffregate Emily Murphy, who went before the provincial Attorney General requesting that the accused should be tried by one of their own sex.
Thus, soon began the very first court for women with none other than Murphy becoming it's first female Police Magistrate. Not only a first for the province, but the entire country to boot.
In short order other women would get similar appointments. Much to the shagrin of male antics of the day, the system of female judges conducted hearings for females soon began to spring up in several venues.
Moving along, because of her expertise, many turned to Murphy and others to seek office in the highest office in the land.
The Canadian Senate!
That battle was eagerly embraced and fought through all the court levels available to the women in Canada. And all reached the same conclusion. They argued that appointments could only go to PERSONS. And a women certainly was not a PERSON in their eyes.
Thus, it was continually ruled that the women lacked the key credential to serve in that chamber.
And the men loved it. Well, at least until the women... the Famous Five, (as they became known) and as pictured below, took matters to the highest court of the land.
That being in England!
After much debate and thought they came down to a finally decision. But first.... here is the actual trial, word for word, and probably very rarely seen in newsprint within Canada.
But first I suggest refilling your cup of coffee... and then begin your long read.
Unknown to most, the five Canadian women chose to use the alphabet to help them decide in who's name the case should be brought forth. Thus, the appellant was listed as being Henrietta Muir Edwards. The case was heard and judgement finally released on 18 March 1929.
On that Monday, John Sankey, as Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, in his full court regalia proceeded through the streets of London. Traveling behind the Symbolic Mace, he would that day deliver the decision on what would become well known as the Persons Case.
In the ruling he announced that the term PERSON indeed included women. He also added that ..."Customs are apt to develop into traditions which are STRONGER THAN LAW AND REMAIN UNCHALLENGED LONG AFTER THE REASON FOR THEM HAS DISAPPEARED.
There is still more to this story, But I shall give your eyes a break till the next blog.
Bart
On that Monday, John Sankey, as Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, in his full court regalia proceeded through the streets of London. Traveling behind the Symbolic Mace, he would that day deliver the decision on what would become well known as the Persons Case.
In the ruling he announced that the term PERSON indeed included women. He also added that ..."Customs are apt to develop into traditions which are STRONGER THAN LAW AND REMAIN UNCHALLENGED LONG AFTER THE REASON FOR THEM HAS DISAPPEARED.
There is still more to this story, But I shall give your eyes a break till the next blog.
Bart
RSS Feed