Sir William and Lady Julia Chance: Suffragist campaigners of Godalming

William Chance (1853-1935) and his wife Julia (1864-1949) were stalwart supporters of women’s suffrage in . They moved from London to “Wharfenden House”, Frimley (now part of Lakeside Country Club), following their marriage in 1884. They are listed as residents there in the 1891 Census but by 1897 were preparing to have a house built on Munstead Heath Road, Bramley. Here they met fellow suffragist Gertrude Jekyll and the resulting house called “Orchards”, designed by , is considered to be one of his best. William became the second Baronet Chance following the death of his father in 1902. John Grant in his directory Surrey: Historical, Biographical, Pictorial comments that: “In these days of somewhat hysterical invective indulged in by its opponents of both sexes, it is refreshing that so clear and logical a thinker as Sir William Chance sees none of the disasters ahead oftentimes associated with affording representation to a large class of the thinking community, who are at present only considered eligible for taxation. Sir William wrote recently about the suffragists ‘They know they can expect no help from the present Government, which has betrayed them over and over again. They know it is doubtful whether the new Franchise Bill will pass through this Parliament at all; indeed it is quite possible that the amendments referred to in the memorandum may lead to its rejection. They have got the Government into a fix, and they have no intention of getting them out of it. If the Unionist Party only recognised this they would look on women suffragists as their best friends. They need only lie low and look on while these women do the work of turning the Government out for them.’” Lady Julia Chance was a prolific letter writer on the subject of women’s suffrage to the editors of local and national newspapers. As early as 1908 The Times published a letter in support of the Women’s Liberal Federation inviting David Lloyd George to speak on Women’s Suffrage at a meeting on 5 December (3 Dec 1908). Lady Julia Chance, Christiana J Herringham, Bertha Newcombe, Lady Frances Balfour, Lady Isabel Somerset, Beatrice Webb and Gertrude Jekyll, were among the signatories to this letter. The Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) opposed the invitation. Sir William Chance was supportive of the setting up of a local branch of the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies (NUWSS) he presided over local meetings, including one in Godalming, reported in The Times, 11 February 1909, at which a letter from Dr Alfred Russel Wallace was read. Dr Wallace writes: “As long as I have thought or written at all on politics, I have been in favour of woman suffrage. None of the arguments have any weight with me, except one, which may be thus stated: - All human inhabitants of any one country should have equal rights and liberties before the law; women are human beings; therefore they should have votes as well as men.” A letter from Mrs [Mary] G F Watts, expressing sympathy with the movement, her support for the formation of a local branch, and her readiness to be involved was also read. Mary Watts became President of the Godalming and District Women’s Suffrage Society (NUWSS), Gertrude Jekyll and Sir William Chance Vice-Presidents, and Theodora Powell was secretary. Common Cause, dated 3 March 1910, writes of the Surrey, Sussex and Hants Federation of NUWSS, that the organiser, Miss Gordon, “has been working in Godalming also, where several meetings have been held. Miss T W Powell gave an “At Home” at Munstead Rough, at which there was a large attendance, and where a resolution in favour of the enfranchisement of women was carried unanimously. Mrs Romanes [Romanis] occupied the chair and Miss Gordon and Lady Chance were the speakers.” Lady Julia Chance wrote to Lord Farrer of Abinger, on 15 July 1910, inviting him to give his support to the Guildford Branch of the NUWSS which had been formed the previous February (SHC ref: 2572/1/57 (9)). She added that it was difficult to rouse Guildford to much interest or enthusiasm for the cause because it was largely occupied by “retired” people and a large number of “Antis” owing to the retired Indian element. She continues: “...Guildford badly needs more influential support in its own neighbourhood and if you would consent to be named a VP it would give the cause a great gift”. She includes news of the activities of the Godalming Branch mentioning that Mrs G F Watts was President and Miss Gertrude Jekyll and Lady Midleton were Vice-Presidents. She reported that the branch was launching a vigorous campaign over Surrey with a view to educating the working women and enlightening them on the suffrage question claiming that “many are quite ignorant on the subject and fall prey to the first “Anti” who tells them that it is…for women to want the vote. We do not hope to educate Mrs Humphrey Ward in the recognition of these alarming facts.” In another letter written by Julia to her cousin Miss Strachey, dated 19 July 1910, she suggests that there should be an immediate canvass particularly among the working classes and trades to prepare the way for the Autumn suffrage campaign. She writes that work has begun in Godalming and urges the NUWSS to encourage other branches to make a similar effort [LSE Women’s Library ref: 9/01/0836]. In a letter from an anonymous “Suffragist” from Godalming published in the Surrey Advertiser on 10 September 1910, Sir William Chance was referred to as a man of standing, stating that “A reference to his public utterances will reveal the fact that he was a convinced suffragist many years before the “suffragettes” were heard of (or the word coined, in fact) in company with the late Lord Salisbury, Mr Balfour, Mr Haldane and many other men of eminence, on the plain ground of elementary right and justice – namely, that women who pay taxes should be granted the rights of citizenship, and should not be classed with criminals and paupers.” A report of an open-air Women’s Suffrage meeting in Godalming was published in the same issue of the Surrey Advertiser. The meeting in Wharf Street was arranged by the Godalming Women’s Suffrage Society and was well attended. Amongst those attending were Sir William and Lady Chance, Mr G T and Mrs Pilcher, Miss Baker [Noeline] (secretary of the Guildford Women’s Suffrage Society), Miss Powell (secretary of the Godalming Women’s Suffrage Society), Miss Burnett and others. Mr John Simpson, a member of the Men’s League for Women’s Suffrage, was the principal speaker and proposed a resolution that women should be given the vote under the terms of the Conciliation Bill. Sir William Chance seconded the resolution which was carried by a large majority. The Surrey Advertiser of 2 November 1910 reported a separate suffragist demonstration and great gathering at Guildford at which Sir William Chance spoke in favour of the resolution on women’s suffrage. He thought women worked equally as well as men in the public sphere. Sharing the podium was Mr A W Chapman, vice- chairman of Surrey County Council. The other speakers included Lady Frances Balfour, Miss Frances Sterling and Mr H N Brailsford. Attendees included Lady Chance, Lady Farrer, Lady Jardine, Lady Roberts Austen, Sir William and Lady Treacher, Sir Owen and Lady Roberts, Sir Robert Hunter, Mrs G F Watts, Gertrude Jekyll, Mrs Corbet, Mr and Mr Basset, Rev. and Mrs Sims, Mrs Springman, Miss Cockle, Miss Todhunter, Dr B Thorne Thorne, Mr H Nevill, Col C T Lane, Col S Babington (former Mayor of Godalming) and Mr A H Olds (representative of the Guildford Teachers Union). The Times reported that Sir William Chance presided at a meeting of the Women’s Local Government Association (WLGA) held in Godalming where Mrs Humphry Ward (Anti-suffrage campaigner), gave the address in which she identified a shortfall in the numbers of women on local governing bodies (2 November 1910). A fuller report of this first annual meeting of the WLGA was published in The Surrey Advertiser of 5 November 1910. Among the large attendance were Sir William Chance, Mrs Davey, Mrs Theodora Williams, Mrs Rendall, Mrs Humphrey Ward and Miss L Parson. There were reports on the forming of branches of WLGA at Haslemere, with Mrs White as secretary, and, at Guildford through the exertion of Miss Fry. Mrs Humphrey Ward gave the address where she expressed her view that women should put effort into local government, serving on councils. Sir William’s support for women’s suffrage took him to platforms outside the local area, and on the 19 November 1910 he addressed an open-air meeting in support of women’s suffrage movement held in Trafalgar Square. Lady Julia Chance also spoke at meetings, as is recorded in John Grant’s Surrey: historical, biographical and pictorial, having recently “given an address at Wonersh on Suffragists and Sex Morality, fearlessly attacking the double standard of morality for men and women, a burning question that is inseparably connected with the movement.” She addressed an afternoon meeting in the village of Hascombe, in the presence of Miss Susan Onslow [a local anti-suffrage campaigner]. Susan wrote a letter to the editor of the Surrey Advertiser giving an account of the meeting (published 7 November 1912). Lady Julia responded with a pithy repost to Susan Onslow’s account of the meeting (published 13 November 1912). The Surrey Advertiser further reported that Lady Julia Chance shared the platform with Lord Farrer at a meeting of the Brockham Women’s Suffrage Society (22 February 1913). Throughout the women’s suffrage campaign Lady Julia wrote a number of articles and booklets, including Words to working women on women’s suffrage (Conservative and Unionist Franchise Association, 1912) [other earlier editions were published from 1909-1910]; Women’s Suffrage and Morality. An address to married women (NUWSS, 1912 and 1913); Wartime work in the National Union (NUWSS, 1915), and The predominance of men in anti-suffrage finance and organisation (Conservative and Unionist Franchise Association, 1913). Her publications were promoted in Common Cause, the NUWSS newspaper and her speeches reported on. On 7 February 1913 Common Cause published a review of her pamphlet “Women’s Suffrage and Morality: an address to married women”, stating that “at the request of the Literature Committee Lady Chance has kindly put her speech into the form of a pamphlet, and hopes that it may be useful to those who are getting up and addressing meetings of working women on the questions of social purity and Women’s Suffrage”. By December 1910 the letters pages of The Times reveals that a controversy had arisen over the canvassing of women in the Godalming and District Borough, carried out by Godalming Suffrage Society. One of the canvassers was Julia Chance. In her letter published in The Times on 16 December 1910, she sought to clarify the situation following a letter from Mr Massie attacking the methodology of the canvass, in which he quoted figures that did not distinguish between women voters and non- voters. She questioned why he did not approach the secretary of Godalming Suffrage Society for information rather than Godalming Town Clerk, “I do not know who informed Mr Massie that the canvass was undertaken by “a few” suffragists. There were many, not few, workers, all unpaid and including among their numbers several women of the working class.” Lady Betty Balfour also took to the letters page to further clarify on 20 December 1910: “Sir – Lady Chance has fully explained the points with regard to the Godalming suffrage canvass which puzzled Mr Massie. The figures with regard to the working class percentage of women occupiers are deduced from the statistics contained in Mr Charles Booth’s book Life and Labour in London (vol. IV., page 391, second series). At the time house-to-house canvass was taken there were some 186,982 women occupiers in London. For the opposition to every step towards the emancipation of women I would refer Mr Massie to Questions relating to Women, 1860-1908 by Miss Emily Davies. There is greater “organized and systematic” support of the demand for women’s enfranchisement than there was for earlier reforms. That fact has no doubt aroused the “organized and systematic opposition” to this further step. I am, Sir, yours faithfully Betty Balfour Conservative and Unionist Women’s Franchise Association, 48 Dover Street, Piccadilly, W. Dec 16” In a letter dated 2 April 1911 from Sir William Chance to his wife’s cousin, Miss Philippa (Pippa) Strachey, he comments on Olive Schreiner’s book Women and Labour and the influence it might have on the cause for women’s suffrage. He also relates that the Godalming branch of the NUWSS had decided to form a small circulating library of suffrage literature and recommends this to other branches (LSE Women’s Library Ref: 9/01/0935). Pippa’s reply to him on the 6 April 1911 states that she thought that establishing libraries in NUWSS branches was a good thing and that she has wanted to do so at her office but hasn’t done so (LSE Ref: 9/01/0936). Lady Chance was a member Godalming Town Council Ladies Committee for the design and commission of the Jack Phillips Memorial Cloister - built to commemorate death of Jack Phillips, the wireless operator on the “Titanic” who sacrificed his life transmitting the SOS calls as the ship sank. Also on the committee were Mary Watts, Iona Davey and Margery Horne, who were all members of the NUWSS. These ladies invited Gertrude Jekyll to join them to advise on garden planting schemes. Mary Watts was President of the Godalming and District Women’s Suffrage Society (NUWSS), Gertrude Jekyll and Sir William Chance Vice-Presidents, Theodora Powell was secretary. In 1912 an eminent physician, Sir Amroth Wright, triggered a debate in the press about the intellectual and mental incapacity of women which, in his opinion, rendered them unsuitable for the rigours of political decision making. In response to this, and a subsequent letter from Miss Markham, The Times published one of Lady Chance’s eloquent letters to the editor under the headline “Lady Chance’s views” on 11 April 1912: Sir - All suffragists and no doubt some anti-suffragists must welcome Miss Violet Markham’s protest in your issue of the 8th inst. That Sir Amroth Wright’s letter does not represent the views of every anti-suffragist is a matter for thankfulness; but, nevertheless, it cannot be forgotten that the letter was commented on both in Parliament and in The Times with approval, and that the NLOWSS [National League for Opposing Women’s Suffrage] have reprinted it in the form of a pamphlet, which they are now circulating “with their compliments”; therefore Miss Markham’s protest must not be taken for more than the expression of her personal opinion. The letters of Dr Leonard Williams, the verses of Mr Rudyard Kipling, and Mr Owen’s book “Women Adrift” have all in turn been hailed with approval by anti-suffragists as a whole, and all these writings are much on the same lines as Sir Amroth Wright’s famous letter. Such utterances make suffragists realize that there is a great moral and mental gulf between them and anti-suffragists – a gulf that all Miss Markham’s courteous and temperate arguments cannot bridge. The gulf is fixed by an innate temperamental difference – the difference that makes intelligent anti-suffragists like Miss Markham quite unable to understand how it is that, if every grievance of women were removed and every wrong righted, suffragists would not cease to demand the vote. This difference is made even more strikingly apparent by the agreement that exists between opposing parties on some points – e.g. Miss Markham’s description of the anti-suffragist’s ideal of what a women’s function in the State should be may be found writ large in the publications of serious suffragist controversialists. Indeed Miss Markham’s letter reads like a paraphrase of a suffragist pamphlet. Suffragists are in full agreement with Miss Markham’s watchword, “Diversity, not uniformity”. They entirely agree, too, as to “Nature’s Salic Law”. When Lord Haldane was asked where he would “draw the line” for women to vote, he answered:- “I do not draw the line, I leave Nature to draw it.” Not so the anti-suffragist. He does not believe that Nature unaided can enforce obedience to her own Salic Law; so he comes to the rescue, and delimits the territory to be occupied by men and women respectively in the State, rules what “functions” are masculine and what feminine, and decides what is the gender of the Parliamentary vote. Now suffragists are quite content to accept Nature’s ruling if she be left to herself to rule, but they are not content to accept the anti-suffragists as her Prime Ministers and interpreters. In conclusion, I should like to allude to Dr Mercer’s excellent letter in your issue of today. He says that if suffragists “can show that the change will be beneficial not to themselves alone, but to the nation at large, they ought to win, and they will win.” He says that the onus probandi as to whether the change will be beneficial lies with the suffragists. Well suffragists ask nothing better than that their critics should give unbiased consideration to the opinions of those countries whose women have the vote. Their experience is surely worth more than many volumes of theories, and it was summed up in the Australian Senate, who in 1910 telegraphed a declaration to the English Prime Minister to the effect that “the extension of the suffrage to Australian women has had the most beneficial results,” and that “the reform has brought nothing but good.” I am yours obediently, Julia C Chance, Orchards, Godalming, April 9” Julia, annoyed by Miss Godden’s letter to The Times editor, regarding the type of publications available for purchase from suffrage shops, responded in a letter published on 13 August 1912, headlined “Nauseous Publications”: “Sir, - I am glad that with your well-known fairness you are allowing the other side to be heard in this controversy. Miss Godden gave a list of 12 pamphlets which she purchased at various suffrage shops. I do not think I am doing her an injustice if I say that her letter would lead anyone not conversant with the facts to suppose that these 12 were typical and representative of “the literature of suffrage societies”. Now, out of these 12 I, who have been to countless suffrage meetings at which literature is always for sale, and who have purchased practically every pamphlet I have seen advertised or displayed during the last three years, have never set eyes on 9 of the number. I do not doubt that Miss Godden managed, by diligently picking out publications whose titles seemed in any way “suggestive” to get together some whose contents rewarded her research for the unpleasant. But if the nine unknown to me are at all comparable to the three I do know, all I can say is it must be as your correspondent, Mr Lacey, suggests, an unsound moral digestion that can find anything “nauseating” in them and in Mr Housman’s “Immoral Effects of Ignorance in Sex Relations” and “Sex War and Women’s Suffrage”. As to the third pamphlet, Miss Sinclair’s “Feminism” it is a criticism of what Councillor Eleanor Rathbone has called Sir Amroth Wright’s “Moral Emetic.” As a good deal of Miss Sinclair’s pamphlet is taken up with verbatim quotations from Sir Amroth Wright’s views on female physiology perhaps this is what Miss Godden has found so “unnatural and indecent”? It is a curious commentary on Miss Godden’s attitude of mind to find Mr Harold Owen (one of the prophets of anti- suffragism) protesting in Women Adrift (chap. Iv pp 61, 62) “against the indignation which plain language concerning the sexes incites(sic) among suffragists. I have known cases in which men dealing straightforwardly and reverently with some of the fundamental truths about the sexes have been rebuked by suffragists for being ‘course-minded.’” It would be quite easy to match all the quotations, physiological and other, Miss Godden has selected as examples of the suffragist “doctrine” of the superiority of women over men by passages picked from any stray handful of anti-suffragist pamphlets and to show equally convincingly that anti-suffragists as a body look upon the female sex as utterly inferior to the male – indeed consider women, as Mr Owen puts it “wholly superfluous” to all “Those material and moral activities which make up a modern community,” and would only admit them to the community at all as “bearers of children and as nursing mothers.” [Women might be, in Mr Owen’s expressive term, “deleted” from every function but that one, and the State would not be the poorer!]. As I do not want to follow Miss Godden’s example I will refrain from quoting any more specimens of “anti-suffrage literature” The above will suffice to prove my point. To select the extremists of any party and to represent them as typical and then to belabour their exaggerated doctrines is no doubt part of “the game” in any controversy. But these tactics become more tiresome when there are so many serious issues needing to be approached and dealt with fairly and reasonably. Surely we have had enough of this unedifying business. Might it not now be dropped with advantage? Yours obediently, Julia C Chance, Orchards, Godalming”

On the 8 November 1913 The Times published a letter from Julia Chance, she again takes issue with the stance of anti-suffragists regarding women and their participation in the political sphere, citing the anti-suffragist novelist, Mrs Humphrey Ward [who lived not far from the Chances in the nearby village of Witley]: Sir,- Mrs Colquhoun has met my statement of a fact within common knowledge - viz., that the majority of educated and thinking women are to be found in the suffrage ranks - by ruling out from the category of educated those women who have had a “higher training”. Comment from me on this method is superfluous. I, wish, however to say that my statement – so curtly impugned by Mrs Colquhoun – that the fact in question is “admitted and deplored by anti-suffragists” is based on the following instances among others: - In a letter in your issue of April 12, 1912 Mrs Humphrey Ward deplored “the almost exclusive staffing of our higher schools and colleges for girls” by suffragists. In the same year an association called the “Local Government Advancement Committee (Anti-Suffrage) was formed in order to put forward the “positive side of anti-suffragism” as a “true alternative to the suffrage agitation” The necessity for this new organization had arisen because the “Women’s Local Government Society”- which had been in existence for over 25 years – had become “in reality” a suffrage society. This new organization resulted in one woman candidate coming forward and in her polling 158 votes, thus leaving unaltered the fact (presumably admitted, if not deplored) that women engaged in local government are almost exclusively suffragists. Another admitted and openly deplored fact is the extreme dearth of women workers for the anti- suffrage cause. It has been officially stated by the Hon. Secretary of the NLOWSS that the band of regular female speakers and organizers is an extremely small one – under a dozen all told. The number of women speakers (not organizers) on the headquarters list of the NUWSS is 157 and there are 16 provincial federations besides, each one with its own list. At the “Summer Schools” for suffrage speakers and workers there were this year 212 students. With regard to Mrs Colquhoun’s inference that the women’s trade unions will not be powerless without votes as history has proved men’s to be, her opinion would be more impressive if she had adduced some evidence in support of it. Yours obediently, Julia C Chance, Orchards, Godalming.” On the 7 September 1913 Sir William Chance wrote a letter to Lord [Thomas Henry] Farrer (SHC ref 2572/1/64), in which he says: “My dear Farrer, I am getting up a big women’s suffrage meeting on Thursday 13 November in Guildford with a men’s platform only. The Bishop of Kensington has assented to preside at it. I much want you to take part in it and, (if you wish) to propose the vote of thanks to the speakers.” Chance continues “The meeting will be held under the auspices of the Men’s League for Women’s Suffrage...which is non-militant and non-party”. Further letters from Sir William Chance to Lord Farrer are preserved in Lord Farrer’s letter books including (SHC ref 2572/1/70) dated 21 June 1916: “My wife told me about your suggestion that a lady be nominated to represent Godalming on the County Council but I do not quite ascertain the position, I read in the last weeks Surrey paper that the vacancy here has been filled by the selection of Dr Page. However, I am seeing Mr Davey on the subject on Wednesday week, when I may hear how the position stands. She says “It is quite useless to put up a woman for the Surrey County Council at this particular moment” but she does not say why.” The Godalming and District Women’s Suffrage Society was involved in supporting the Great Suffrage Pilgrimage of 1913 as it passed through the area, collecting marchers and holding meetings as it progressed. Around 100 pilgrims from the Portsmouth contingency were escorted from Milford by the Godalming Town Band and various vehicles from traps to bicycles were decorated with flowers in suffrage colours of purple, white and green. The banner designed by Gertrude Jekyll for the Godalming and District WSS was given a prominent outing. They arrived at Ockford House, the home of Iona Davey (now the Inn on the Lake), and were given tea. In the evening a meeting was held at the Borough Hall and due to the large number of people an overflow meeting was held outside. Following a collection and distribution of suffrage literature the pilgrims were dispersed to stay in the homes of local members overnight, including that of Lady Julia Chance. On 12 January 1914 the Surrey Advertiser carried a report of the formation of a West Surrey Branch of the Men’s League for Women’s Suffrage. The meeting was chaired by Sir William and many prominent men attended, including Sir Owen Roberts, Commander E C Thornhill (Shalford), Colonel Cutell (), Colonel Bullock (Chiddingfold) Dr Bather, Rev C C Frewe (Blackheath), Mr G T Pilcher and Mr R L Atkinson (Camberley). Letters of apology and support were received from Archdeacon Beresford Potter (Milford), Canon Hunter (formerly of Chiddingfold), Rev Green (Bramley), Rev E R Price Devereaux (Woking), Mr E Bridger (Godalming) and Mr Gilbert H White (Guildford). Seventy members expressed approval for the formation of a new branch including Lord Aberconway, Lord Farrer, the Bishop of Guildford, Sir Sturmy Cave, Sir Charles Crosthwaite (Shamley Green), Rev F C Hill (Shere), Rev A B Gwynne (Compton) Rev A E N Sims (Grayshott), Colonel G Christie (Farnham) and Arthur Jex Davey. They agreed that they would form two sub-branches to cover the parliamentary constituencies of Guildford and Chertsey. The committee president would be Sir William Chance, with vice-presidents Sir Sturmy Cave, Lord Aberconway and Col. Bullock. Mr Giles Theodore Pilcher would take on the role of treasurer. Following the outbreak of the First World War, Lady Julia appealed through the pages of the Surrey Advertiser (12 September 1914), for women to volunteer to carry out civilian war work so as to free men for enlistment as volunteers. She asked those who were interested, of whatever political persuasion, to contact the NUWSS HQ as they were now going to co-ordinate war work through its 600 branches across the country. Lady Chance continued to be involved in the campaign for Women’s Suffrage after the war. A copy of a letter sent to her about the Eighth Congress of the International Woman Suffrage Alliance (IWSA) in 1920 survives in the archives of the IWSA, (held at Manchester University ref IWSA 2/28). The NUWSS was affiliated to the IWSA , which had been founded in 1902 by the American suffragist Carrie Chapman Catt and suffragists across eleven countries. The organisation and its newspaper ,‘Jus Suffragii’, represented the views of non-militant suffragists from twenty-six countries, and continues its work today as the International Alliance of Women.

Contributed by Miriam Farr, The March of the Women project volunteer.

Sources Archive sources held at Surrey History Centre: T C Farrer letter books (SHC refs 2572/1/53, 2572/1/57, 2572/1/63, 2572/1/64, 2572/1/65, 2572/1/70, 2572/1/71/93, 2572/1/72/13, and 2572/1/76/56) Surrey County Council committee minutes, 1907-1913 (SHC ref 603/3) Board of Guardians declarations on acceptance of office (SHC ref BG4/1) Oaths of Surrey Justices of the Peace (SHC ref: QS1/2/1) Acting Magistrates and County Officials (SHC ref QS1/3/35 – QS1/3/55)

Published sources in Surrey History Centre Local Studies Collection: Burkes Peerage and Baronetage; 1912 Horace Cox, Who’s Who in Kent, Surrey and Sussex; 1911 John Grant, Surrey: Historical, Biographical, Pictorial; London Provincial, nd Christopher Hussey, The life of Sir Edwin Lutyens; Antique Collectors Club, 1984 Roderick Gradidge, Edwin Lutyens Architect Laureate; Allen & Unwin, 1981 Jill Liddington, Vanishing for the Vote; Manchester University, 2014 Jane Brown, Lutyens and the Edwardians: an English architect and his clients; Viking Press, 1996 Jane Ridley, The Architect and his wife; Chatto & Windus, 2001 Jane Ridley, ‘Living with Lutyens’; Country Life, 27 June 2002 A S G Butler, ‘The Architecture of Sir Edwin Lutyens’, Vol 1: Country Houses; Antique Collectors Club, 1950 Judith Tankard, Gardens of the Arts and Crafts Movement; Harry N. Abrams, 2004 Sally Festing, Gertrude Jekyll; Viking 1991 Francis Jekyll, A memoir of Gertrude Jekyll; Jonathan Cape, 1934 Sarah Sullivan, Phillips Memorial Park: an arts and crafts tribute to the hero of the Titanic; 2012 Julia Bush, Women against the Vote: female anti-suffragism in Britain; OUP, 2007 Jane Robinson, Hearts and minds, the untold story of the Great Pilgrimage and how women won the vote; Doubleday, 2017 Gertrude Jekyll, ‘Children and Gardens’; Country Life, 1908 Ernest Gaskell, Surrey Leaders: Social and Political, Queenhithe, nd Ordnance Survey map: 15.16, 25 inches to 1 mile, Frimley Green, Basingstoke Canal, Richmond Hill, Frimley Junction, Sturt Lane Junction, 1897 Ordnance Survey map: 31.16, 25 inches to 1 mile, Catteshall Manor, Catteshall, Munstead, Snowdenham, Thorncombe Park, Unstead Wood, 1897 Ordnance Survey map: 31.16, 25 inches to 1 mile, Catteshall, Munstead, Orchards, Snowdenham, Thorncombe Park, Unstead Park, 1916

Newspapers accessed at Surrey History Centre on microfilm: Surrey Advertiser (microfilm) 5/2/1910 - Sir William Chance stood for re-election to SCC Surrey Advertiser (microfilm) 10/9/1910 - letter from “Suffragist”, report of open-air meeting in Godalming Surrey Advertiser (microfilm) 2/11/1910 - Suffragist demonstration in Guildford Surrey Advertiser (microfilm) 13/4/1935 Obituary for Sir William Chance.

Archive sources held elsewhere: Letter from [JC] Chance to [Miss Strachey], 9/7/1910; held at LSE Women’s Library, Ref: 9/01/0938 Letter from Sir William Chance to Philippa Strachey 2/4/1911; held at LSE Women’s Library, Ref: 9/01/0935 Philippa Strachey’s reply to Sir William Chance 6/4/1911; held at LSE Women’s Library, Ref: 9/01/0936

Other publications consulted (not held at Surrey History Centre): Mrs Julia Chance, A Book of Cats: being a discourse on cats with many quotations and original pencil drawings, J M Dent, 1898

Online resources: Accessed via https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/libraries/learning-and-research/adult- online-reference- Times Digital Archive: 3 Dec 1908 - letter signed by Christiana J Herringham, Bertha Newcombe, Lady Julia Chance and others 2 Nov 1910, Local Government Association meeting Godalming 11 Apr 1912, letter “Lady Chance’s Views” 13 Aug 1912, letter “Nauseous Publications” 27 Oct 1913, letter “The Women’s Movement” 8 Nov 1913, letter “The Women’s Movement” 29 May 1915, letter “The Women’s Share” 24 Nov 1916, letter “Women Suffrage” 30 Aug 1949, death notice for Lady Julia Chance 10 Apr 1935, obituary for Sir William Chance Photograph of Sir William Chance addressing supporters of the suffragettes movement, Trafalgar Square, 19 Nov 1910, Getty Images Who Was Who Online Edition