‘Building a New and Better Order’? Women and Jury Service in England and Wales,c.1920–70

Gender discrimination and juries in the 20th century

“…56 A change of gear occurred with the announcement of the establishment of the Departmental Committee on Jury Service, to be chaired by Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest. At the Morris enquiry in the early 1960s, the SPG was represented by Hazel Hunkins Hallinan, Mary Stocks and Joan Vickers; and evidence to the committee was submitted by the NCW, NUTG, SWC, National Federation of Women’s Institutes (NFWI), National Women’s Citizens Association (NWCA), St Joan’s Alliance, Society of Women Writers and Journalists, Women’s Liberal Federation, Conservative Party’s Women’s Advisory Committee and Suffragette Fellowship (Logan, 2013: 711). Logan (2013: 711) observes that[t]his roll call of organisations—most of which had originated either before, during or shortly after the First World War, and including both self-identifying feminist bodies and ostensibly non-feminist women’s organisations—suggests strongly that the demand for equality on juries was something that rallied support across the women’s movement.…”

“…Cornish’s observations suggest that a consistent element across time and geography is that change occurred as a result of campaigning, and not for any other reason. By the 1960s, however, a practical problem had also emerged (one that has continued to be a feature of the criminal justice system in England and Wales and, arguably, explains to some degree subsequent moves to widen the pool from which jurors could be drawn) 57 : the shortage of potential jurors (Logan, 2013: 711–12).…”

“…Of relevance too is the fact that section 1(b) of the Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919 was eventually deleted in 1971. 60 While it does not appear that section 1(b) had had any significant practical impact on the composition of juries, having been ‘used far less frequently than peremptory challenge to purge a jury of women’ (Logan, 2013: 705), there may well have been more occasions on which it was used than is generally acknowledged (Logan, 2013: 705–706). Similarly, while Anwar et al (2016: 12) identified only 11 cases involving the use of section 1(b) at the Old Bailey between 1921 and 1926, they considered ‘it…possible…that such requests were not always noted in the records’.…”

“… 14. Logan (2013: 705), quoting from The Times , 25 September 1929, 9. See also Hartlepool Northern Daily Mail (1933): ‘“Would it be possible to be judged by an all-men jury?…”

“… 18. Logan (2013: 710) speculates that concerns such as equal pay campaigns might have taken centre stage. …”