hrough the Lords had
yet to be undertaken. The second reading debate began on December 17
and lasted two days. No one could predict what would happen; Lord
Curzon, president of the Anti-Suffrage League, was leader of the House
and chief representative of the Government. The Lord Chancellor [Lord
Finlay], who is in the chair in House of Lords' debates, was an
envenomed opponent. Among other influential Peers whom we knew as our
enemies were Lord Lansdowne, Lord Halsbury, Lord Balfour of Burleigh
and Lord Bryce. On the other hand we could count on the support of
Lord Selborne, Lord Lytton, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop
of London, Lord Courtney and Lord Milner. We looked forward to the
debate and the divisions in the Lords with considerable trepidation.
The Lords have no constituents, they have no seats to fight for and
defend. It is therefore impossible to influence them by any
electioneering arts but we sent to all the Peers a carefully worded
and influentially signed memorandum setting forth the chief facts and
arguments in our favour. The second reading of the Bill was taken in
the Lords without a division, the most important speech against it
being Lord Bryce's; he insisted again and again that the possession of
a vote made no difference. Lord Sydenham had the courage (!) to assert
that the suffrage movement had made no progress in America, and, while
admitting that it had lately been adopted in the State of New York, no
doubt thought that he was giving a fair description when he said: "In
America ... fourteen States have refused the franchise to women and
two, Montana and Nevada, have granted it. The population of the
fourteen States is 43,000,000 and that of the two States is 500,000."
(Twelve States had fully enfranchised their women.)

The real fight in the House of Lords began on Jan. 8, 1918, when the
committee stage was reached. The debate lasted three days and on
Clause IV, which enfranchised women, Lord Selborne made an
extraordinarily powerful and eloquent speech in its favour. The House
was filled and the excitement on both sides was intense. As we were
sitting crowded in the small pen allotted to ladies not Peeresses in
the Upper House on January 10th we received a cable saying the House
of Representatives in Washington had accepted the Women's Suffrage
Amendment to the Federal Constitution by the necessary two-thirds
majority. This we hailed as a good omen. No one knew what Lord
Sydenham thoug