Transcribed below is a report which appeared in the Cardiff and Merthyr Guardian 150 years ago today – 18 October 1873.
A meeting was held at the Zoar Chapel, Merthyr, on Tuesday evening, for the purpose of hearing addresses on the Female Suffrage Question. Mrs. Crawshay, of Cyfarthfa Castle, presided, and was supported by Mrs. Fawcett, wife of Professor Fawcett, Miss Lilias S. Ashworth, of Bath, etc.
Mrs. CRAWSHAY, who was received with acclamation, said: “I share with all present their anxiety to hear the two gifted ladies who are my guests tonight; but it has been intimated to me that a few words on my own part would be acceptable to some among the audience; and as I have always found my Merthyr friends most kind and indulgent in listening to me – notwithstanding all my wicked notions – I propose making a remark on the assertion that ‘women don’t want the suffrage.’ (Applause). Mr. Henry James said at Taunton, last week, that if he were sure even half the women of England desired the franchise he would vote for it, and he seemed to fancy that he was acting in accordance with the wishes of the majority of women in England in declining to vote for it. This may to some extent be true – the black slaves did not care to be set free – there must be some little experience of freedom before it is valued. But why should the women of England, who don’t want to vote, be so afraid of the suffrage being given to those women who do? They will no more be obliged to vote than men are. There are many women who do not use this privilege – do not fulfil their duty – but it would be a strong plea to bring forward, that we must not allow any men duly qualified to vote, because some do not care to vote. (Hear, hear, and cheers).
Who is he who knows what proportion of women are anxious to have a voice in making the laws by which they, no less than men, are bound? No one – for the tyranny exercised by some men is so great that they prevent their wives and grown-up daughters hearing any discussion on the subject when anxious to do so. (Hear, hear.) To my knowledge there would have been some here tonight who are kept at home as if they were either children or idiots. Is it likely this state of things will continue? No. Because at some of these meetings the absence of Mrs. or Miss So-and-so will be deplored, and the true reason for her absence given; and those men who act thus tyrannically by their wives and daughters are the very ones who would most shrink from having such conduct traced home to them. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) It is only the most noble and the most generous of husbands and fathers who at the present time allow their women-kind the exercise of intellect; but the others will have to do so, and then Mr. Henry James will find himself obliged to vote for the enfranchisement of women, if he will either gain or retain a seat in the House. (Hear, hear, and cheers.)
I feel sure that one reason why narrow-minded men are so averse to greater independence of thought on the part of women is that they fear it might raise the standard of intelligence throughout the country. This is a strange fear, while there are physiologists who assure us that the mind of woman is in itself an inferior article to man’s mind. Perhaps they will have to modify this idea some day. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) In the year 1801, M. Sylvain Marechal wrote a book in which he discussed the question, ‘Ought women to learn the alphabet?’ This is ironical, but really it is the point where the men went wrong. (Hear, and cheers) They should have resolutely answered ‘No.’ But, only think, had they done so, what a far backward position Europe would hold now, for it is clearly a decree of Providence that one class cannot rise without the rest, any more than one individual can do so. What is the meaning of all the martyrdoms of all the ages? Only that the martyr was in advance of his time; and that is a crime so resented now, no less than in ages past, that though it is no longer punished by physical tortures, mental torture is still in vogue. (Loud cheers.)”
Mr. CHARLES JAMES, after some appropriate remarks, moved the following resolution:- “That the exclusion of women, otherwise legally qualified, from voting in the election of members of Parliament, is injurious to those excluded, contrary to the principle of just representation, and to the laws in force regulating the principles of municipal, parochial, and all other representative governments.”
Mrs. FAWCETT, supported the resolution in an able speech, saying in conclusion that it was a flagrant injustice to exclude such a woman as Lady Burdett Coutts for instance, from the suffrage. They were determined to go on in their endeavours, and they would not be debarred from their purpose by any cry of unnatural alliance between themselves and the Tories. She hoped the time was not far distant when such meetings as the present would become no longer a necessity for the attainment of their object.
Mr. W. JONES, of Cyfarthfa, moved the following resolution, “That a petition to the House of Commons be adopted and signed by the chairman on behalf of this meeting, and that a memorial be forwarded to Mr. Richard and Mr. Fothergill, members for the borough, requesting them to support Mr. Jacob Bright’s Bill to remove the electoral disabilities of women.
Miss ASHWORTH, who on rising to second the motion, was loudly cheered, said that doubtless many present were convinced of the justice of the claim of women to representation, but she believed more cordial support would be given were they convinced that women were sufferers from the want of representation. Referring to the borough and county members Miss Ashworth observed:- “I have lately been looking through the division list of the House of Commons, and I find that the measure to which I have alluded has not been supported by one particular party, but by Liberals and Tories. Mr. Gladstone has given his adhesion to the principle, and Mr. Disraeli has voted for the Bill over and over again. Indeed, many of the foremost statesmen in the House of Commons have voted for it, and I am pleased to find Mr. Henry Richard (loud cheers) – each year records his vote in favour of the Women’s Disabilities Bill and one of your members for the county – Mr. Talbot – has voted every time for it; but Mr. Vivian has voted against it, and Mr. Fothergill has voted against it. Mr. Vivian’s, I think, is a most hopeless case, because he has voted against it both times lately. (Laughter.)
Now, Mr. Fothergill has missed for two whole years, and I really think if you bring some pressure to bear upon him he will be very likely converted. I unhesitatingly state that it is no credit to any Liberal member in the House of Commons that he should vote against the Women’s Disabilities Bill and as a general election is not perhaps so far off, I say to you, working men, many of whom I believe I see before me, that a man who does justice to women is a man most likely to do justice to himself. When a general election comes round, I ask you, whatever candidates come forward, that they should all be questioned upon this subject, and it should be clearly elicited from them how they intend to vote when they go to the House of Commons. And another thing I should like to ask you to do is to send a largely signed petition to your members. I don’t think Mr. Richard needs one, because he seems always right. Mr. Vivian’s, I repeat, is a hopeless case, but I am sure Mr. Fothergill would appreciate one if it were very widely signed” (laughter, and much cheering) – during which Miss Ashworth resumed her seat. The resolution was seconded and carried amid applause.
The RECTOR of MERTHYR, in supporting a vote of thanks to Mrs. Crawshay, Mrs. Fawcett, and Miss Ashworth, concluded as follows:- “I was at Bath the other day, and was informed that there were thirty thousand women there, and in the height of the season, in excess of men. Why is this? Why, simply for the reason because the young men of the present day don’t do their duty in the way they ought. (Applause.) They ought to set about marrying at once. With this view, then, I hope the measure under discussion will succeed, and I hope the women who do this will get an Act of Parliament passed that a poll-tax be put on every man that is not married. (Laughter and cheering ). The assembly then broke up.
By the end of the 1840’s, the congregation at Bethania Chapel was growing so rapidly due to the revival that occurred following the devastating cholera outbreak in 1849, that the chapel could no longer accommodate them. Indeed, 250 new members were accepted into the chapel on one Sunday alone. The elders of the chapel met on 16 May 1850, and decided that rather than try to enlarge the already huge chapel, it would make more sense to build a new chapel nearby that would act as a sister church to Bethania.
Mr John Hughes, the minister at Bethania took the services at Gwernllwyn for the first two years of its existence until Mr Benjamin Williams (left) became Gwernllwyn’s full time minister in July 1852.
Unlike many other chapels in Merthyr, Adulam was one of those chapels frequented by working class worshipers; its membership did not include an array of financial benefactors and throughout its history struggled to maintain its religious survival. Following the death of Rev Daniel T Williams in 1876, Adulam could not afford to pay for a new minister until 1883 when Rev D C Harris became minister. One of the first things he did on becoming minister was to set about alleviating the debt on the chapel. In 1884 he sent out appeals for aid to relieve Adulam’s financial burden to every household in the area – see above right. It is interesting to note that the name of the chapel is spelt in the English way with two ‘L’s rather than the more usual Welsh way with a single ‘L’.
In 1794 a group of worshippers dissatisfied with the form of worship at Ynysgau Chapel left to start their own cause, and met in the Long Room of the Crown Inn; paying £6 a year for the hire of the room. In 1797 the congregation asked Mr Howell Powell of Newport to come and minister to them, and within a year they decided to build their own chapel.
Within two years of this controversy, Rev Lewis decided to leave the chapel, and in 1810 Rev Samuel Evans (right) was ordained as minister, and it was under his ministry that the chapel began to prosper and eventually became one of the most important chapels in the area.
However, before the end of 1835, Rev Benjamin Owen (right) from Pembrokeshire was invited to become minister of the chapel. Rev Owen proved to be a worthy successor to Samuel Evans, and the chapel went from strength to strength.
