Long before the Anzacs, April 25 was the day women in Australia got the right to vote
- Written by Alice Neikirk, Program Convenor, Criminology, University of Newcastle
April 25 1896 was a significant date in the history of women’s legal rights in Australia.
Two things happened on this day: women, including Aboriginal women, voted for the first time in Australia, thanks to a Constitutional Amendment passed by the South Australian parliament in 1894; and, in a world first, women in Australia became able to sit in parliament and participate in government.
The 1894 amendment wasn’t the first South Australian bill that gave women the right to vote, but it was the first to became law. So what was different this time?
From legal non-person to political actor
Prior to 1870, a woman living in a country based on English common law (which included Australia) would have her legal identity absorbed by her husband’s upon marriage. She would became a feme covert, a legal non-person. And any assets she brought to the marriage, or earned, would belong to her husband.
However, one of the most influential British political philosophers of the 19th century, John Stuart Mills (1806–73) argued the only way for societies to progress was for this legal subjugation to stop, and for women to be viewed as equals.
Living in Victorian England, Mills contributed to the 1870 Married Woman’s Property Act which allowed women throughout the Commonwealth to legally maintain control over their own income and some property in marriage.
Partially as a result of this, women across the Commonwealth were increasingly seen as equal partners in marriage by the late Victorian era (about 1870 to 1901).
While they were still firmly responsible for the domestic sphere, middle and upper-middle class women began to take on more public roles to drive reform in education, public health and policing. Trade unions were more supportive of women working, and middle-class women were increasingly working outside the home.
These cultural and legal changes made it easier to pass further new laws.
In 1893, both New Zealand and the state of Colorado, in the United States, saw women gain the right to vote. South Australia was eager to be a part of this global wave of change.
Many of the women who campaigned for universal suffrage in South Australia were involved with global suffrage movements. They travelled internationally, while suffragettes from other countries visited Australia.
One of the most influential South Australian suffragists was Catherine Helen Spence (1825–1901). She was vice-president of the Women’s Suffrage League of South Australia, a journalist, advocate and public intellectual who toured the US and Canada.
Catherine Helen Spence stood for office in 1897, and became Australia’s first woman political candidate.
Wikimedia
A polarising trailblazer
At the same time as suffragists were learning from global political movements, male politicians in Australia were also looking beyond Great Britain for ideas on how to govern.
Charles Cameron Kingston (1850–1908) was the Premier of South Australia from 1893 to 1899, and would go on to become a key figure in the establishment of the Federation in 1901.
Kingston was a contradictory and polarising man. He was both a terrible bully in the political arena, and also an incredibly hardworking politician dedicated to the betterment of the people.
Charles Kingston was the 20th Premier of South Australia, leading a coalition of Radicals, supported by the Labor Party. He won the 1893, 1896 and 1899 elections against the conservatives.
Wikimedia
He originally opposed women getting the vote, but later changed his mind, both due to cultural shifts taking place in Australia, as well as ideas of liberalism being developed globally.
In 1894, a fellow parliamentarian asked Kingston why he had changed his position on women getting the vote, and introduced the bill. His response:
It is only very stupid people who refuse to change their views when they see them as wrong, and it is a characteristic of the wise that as they grow older, they grow wiser.
After the bill was passed, 70,000 adult women came forward to register to vote. Kingston’s wife, Lucy, was the first woman registered.
Adult Aboriginal women were also legally able to vote in South Australia, and some did in the 1896 election. However, others were not informed of their right and some were actively discouraged from voting.
The ability for women to stand for election was also a world first, and an integral part of the 1894 amendment. Women in South Australia wasted no time in exercising this new right.
Catherine Helen Spence not only registered to vote and voted in the 1896 election, but also stood for election in 1897 to be part of the Constitutional Convention. The Constitutional Conventions were a series of meetings to determine and debate the content of Australia’s Constitution.
Statue of Catherine Helen Spence in Adelaide.
Wikimedia, CC BY
She ran against Kingston and other well-known politicians. Although she wasn’t successful, her efforts were honoured in a commemorative $5 banknote issued in 2001.
Who was left behind
Following Federation, Kingston was instrumental in ensuring women who had voting rights at the state level were granted the right to vote at the Commonwealth level. This paved the way for the Commonwealth Franchise Act 1902, which gave women the ability to vote in federal elections.
However, this act was more restrictive than the South Australian voting laws. It excluded people who were “Aboriginal native people of Australia, Asia, Africa or the Islands of the Pacific”. The only exceptions were those who already had the right to vote in state elections.
So while Aboriginal women in SA could vote in federal elections, those in other states such as Queensland (where state laws did not permit them voting rights), were barred from federal voting.
These barriers were only removed in 1962, after which all Australian citizens (still considered British subjects) were able to vote in state and federal elections.
Ultimately, women in Australia gained the right to in part because of powerful people were willing to rethink their positions. This history reminds us social progress has always depended on people’s willingness to collaborate and consider other points of view.
Authors: Alice Neikirk, Program Convenor, Criminology, University of Newcastle
