Canadian Women Pros And Cons Essay

Were Canadian women always treated equally? The year leading up to 1927, the “Famous Five”: Emily Murphy, Nellie McClung, Henrietta Muir Edwards, Louise McKinney and Irene Parlby felt persecuted about not being persons by law. The women went to the Supreme Court since “Canada Act that said any five persons acting as a unit could petition the Supreme Court for an interpretation of any part of the constitution”(Evidence 1). Returning with a clear denial, the women went to the only highest power back then, the British Privy Council in order to see if their matter could be debated. After the law was altered by Lord Sankey, the women were finally allowed to be persons by law with similar rights as men. By challenging Section 24 of the British North

Admittedly, Murphy wanted to be appointed to the Senate, but since the argument law of 1867 stated that “women are persons in matters of pains and penalties, but are not persons in matters of rights and privileges”(Evidence 2), she decided to do something about it. In fact, Murphy learned that any five persons could petition as a unit and “could ask the Court for an interpretation of any part of the BNA Act”(Evidence 2) from her lawyer brother. Accordingly, in August 1927 Murphy invited the four most prominent women activists that she knew to have as they signed and sent the petition letter. Hence, on March 1928, the “Person’s Case” was finally at the Supreme Court of Canada. “Does the word ‘Person’ in section 24 of the British North America Act, 1867, include female persons?”(Evidence 3) was the question all five Alberta women asked. Unfortunately, on April 24, 1928, the Supreme Court Chief Justice Anglin denied their petition since the public office required to only fit and qualified “persons”, which included only men. Therefore, the women were disappointed, but still eager to

The five Canadian women last shot was to go to the highest power the “Judicial Committee of the Privy Council of England” (Evidence 2). On October 18,1929 Supreme Court’s words were reversed by the Privy Council “The BNA planted in Canada a living tree, capable of growth and expansion ... the word persons in section 24 of the BNA Act includes members of both the male and female sex ... and women are eligible to be summoned and may become Members of the Senate of Canada.”(Evidence 2). On behalf of the Privy Council, Lord Sankey’s words were the “exclusion of women from all public offices is a relic of days more barbarous than ours […] and to those who ask why the word [persons] should include females, the obvious answer is why should it not.” (Evidence 3)surprised the Canadian peoples’ views on women, upside down. Afterward, the “Famous Five” were really relieved that they have won the court and changed the law for