logo
  • Home
  • About the Project
  • Browse Letters

The Knox Correspondence October 18, 25, November 1, 1912

Posted on October 18, 1912 by Emily Davison Posted in Letters

The Knox Correspondence October 18, 25, November 1, 1912

This letter of Friday, October 18, 1912, in The Morpeth Herald, is Mr. A. Knox’s

response to Emily Davison’s letter of Friday, October 4 in the same paper. This letter

of the 18th initiates a regular exchange between the two writers that lasted the better

part of a month. Davison carried on the correspondence while she was on a speaking

tour for the WSPU that took her to Wales in early November, a fact she alludes to as

she apologizes for a tardy response. What is remarkable about the exchange is the

good humour and polite veneer both writers show at the beginning of each letter, and

the absolute obstinacy of their arguments. To be sure, Davison’s arguments are

stronger, based on the best contemporary evidence; she responds to Knox with detailed

citations from contemporary experts. When he finds himself out-flanked by her

scientific knowledge, Knox falls back on generalities, stereotypes, and a rhetoric of

“common knowledge” and “usual” behavior in women. What is interesting in these

letters is not so much the arguments each writer advances, but the evidence of

persistent circulation and acceptance of incorrect “common knowledge” about women

and petrified attitudes toward “woman’s sphere” inherent in the culture. Much of the

debate focuses on the size of male and female brains and the correlation between

brain size and intelligence. It is worth noting that supposed correlation between

larger brains and higher intelligence was debunked in popular scientific publications

in the 1890s. The December, 1898 issue of Popular Science (vol. 54, no 11)

contained an article, “Brain weights and Intellectual Capacity,” by Dr. Joseph Simms

who concluded his discussion by writing that “no size or form of head or brain is

incident to idiocy or superior talent is borne out by my observation.” Mr. Knox persists

in clinging to debunked theories and in doing so represents all the prejudice and male

self-satisfaction that the suffrage movement aroused, engaged, and overcame, at last,

after the catastrophe of the First World War.

Here is the exchange between Knox and Davison on October 18th and 25th:

October 18, 1912, To the Editor of The Morpeth Herald, “Woman Suffrage”

Sir,–I shall be grateful is you will allow me to respond to the kind and courteous

letter of Miss E. Davison. There can be but little doubt that a movement has

been initiated for the emancipation of women, and that Miss Davison is one

of its able advocates. I am almost persuaded the movement she upholds is

destined to grow, and when I take into consideration the many willing workers

who are prepared to suffer for their cause, I am led to believe the day is not far

distant when woman’s suffrage will be accepted as part of the Government’s

programme.

Miss Davison is within her rights in characterizing my arguments

as ‘antediluvian.’ They are old, but they are arguments that have lost none of

their strength by being old. If I am in error, I beg to be excused, for we men have

had drilled into us, by the medical faculty, that a woman’s brain weighed less

than a man’s and from this we were led to expect a marked inferiority in that of

the female. Although Miss Davison has taken great pains to assure us of the

contrary, yet we cannot force ourselves to accept her statement that it is an

exploded theory; neither can we take in that the quality of the grey matter in the

female is superior to that of the male. Can we do otherwise when we have the

evidence of a great authority, Sir J. Crichton Brown, before us which says that

as the result of many observations which he is now making, not only is the grey

matter or cortex of the female brain shallower than that of the male, but also

receives less than a proportional supply of blood.

Has Miss Davison ever observed that as soon as the brain has reached

its development there is a greater power of amassing knowledge on the part of

the male? The field has always been open to both sexes, yet in no department

can women be said to have approached men, save in fiction. We have

thousands of women who have [hole in page enjoyed?] a better education and

better [hole in page ] social advantages than a Robbie Burns or a Farraday, and

yet we have neither heard nor seen their work. It has been said the cause of this

is that the female mind has been unjustly dealt with in the past, and that they

cannot be expected all at once to rise to the level of man. The treatment of

women in the past is much to be regretted, but we cannot get over the fact that

this fact indicates one of the causes that go to mark the inferiority of women at

the present day. That she now has exhibited a disposition to emancipate herself

may be owing partly to the easy means of intellectual inter-communication in this

age, where a few women, who have felt the impulses of a higher aspiration, have

been enabled to co-operate in a way that it was impossible in former times and

partly to the views of a great many men, which have led to the encouragement

and assistance, instead of suppression, of their efforts.

It is quite evident Miss Davison did not give proper consideration to the

nature of women’s organization when she advocated the social status of women.

If we look the matter honestly in the face, it is apparent that woman is marked

out by nature for different positions in life, and that her organization renders it

improbable that she will succeed in running on the same lines and at the same

pace with man. Hence the necessity of woman keeping to her own sphere of life.

Supposing, Miss Davison, women had the franchise, would they imagine

that if they, being in the majority, combined to pass laws which were unwelcome

to men, the latter would quietly submit? Would they expect that men should fight

for them in war, if by a majority of votes they should determine upon war? Would

they no longer claim a privilege of sex in regard to the defence of the country by

arms? Legislation would be of little value unless there were a power behind it to

make it respected; and where would Miss Davison look for that power but only

where she could expect to find it, in the opposite sex?

The experiment of giving the women the vote will be tried some day and

may be it will not be so black as it is painted. We can only, as a great Cabinet

Minister said, ‘wait and see,’ Yours, etc.,

A. KNOX

Bedlington Colliery

The Morpeth Herald
« The Suffragists’ Christmas
Women and the Vote »

Read the Book

Available now from the University of Michigan Press:

In the Thick of the Fight: the Writing of Emily Wilding Davison, Militant Suffragette, by Carolyn Collette.

Interview

Carolyn Collette talks about the life of Emily Wilding Davison

Archives

  • January 1913
  • December 1912
  • November 1912
  • October 1912
  • September 1912
  • August 1912
  • June 1912
  • May 1912
  • February 1912
  • December 1911
  • November 1911
  • October 1911
  • September 1911
  • August 1911
  • March 1911

Tags

and Art East Anglian Daily Times Literature M.A.P. Newcastle Daily Journal Paper unknown Science Sunday Times The Croydon Times The Daily Chronicle The Daily Graphic The Evening Standard The Eye Witness The Finsbury and City Teachers’ Journal The Graphic The Irish News The Leeds Mercury The Manchester Guardian The Morning Advertiser The Morning Leader The Morning Post The Morpeth Herald The New Age The Newcastle Daily Chronicle The Newcastle Daily Journal The Newcastle Evening Chronicle The Newcastle Weekly Chronicle The North Mail The Queen The Saturday Review of Politics The Schoolmaster The Standard The Stratford Upon Avon Herald The Sunday Chronicle The Sunday Times The Throne The Throne and Country The Times The Westminster Gazette The World The Yorkshire Observe The Yorkshire Observer The Yorkshire Post The Yorkshire Telegraph The Yorkshire Weekly Post
© 2013 Carolyn Collette and others