Yesterday was Persons Day

In 1867 the British North America Act set out the powers and responsibilities of the provinces and of the federal government. This act used the word "persons" when it referred to more than one person and the word "he" when it referred to one person. Therefore, many argued, the act was really saying that only a man could be a person, thus preventing women from participating fully in politics or affairs of state.

Emily Murphy was the first female magistrate in the British Empire and magistrate of a newly created Women's Court operating in Edmonton. On her first day a defendant's lawyer challenged a ruling because she was not a "person" and therefore not qualified to perform the duties of a magistrate.

Women's groups also began pressuring the federal government to appoint a female to the Senate. Despite the support of prime ministers Arthur Meighen and William Lyon MacKenzie King, no appointments materialized. Governments used the persons argument as an excuse to keep women out of important positions.

If only a man could be a person, then when the act also said only "qualified persons" could be appointed to the Senate of Canada, then only men could be appointed.

In 1927 Emily Murphy and four other prominent Canadian women - Nellie McClung, Irene Parlby, Louise McKinney and Henrietta Muir Edwards - asked the Supreme Court of Canada to answer the question "Does the word 'person' in Section 24 of the BNA Act include female persons?"

After five weeks of debate and argument the Supreme Court decided the word "person" did not include women.

The group refused to accept the decision and took the Persons case to the Privy Council in England, which in those days was Canada's highest court.

On Oct. 18, 1929, Lord Sankey, lord chancellor of the Privy Council, announced the decision of the five lords. The decision stated "that the exclusion of women from all public offices is a relic of days more barbarous than ours. And to those who would ask why the word 'person' should include females, the obvious answer is why should it not?"

The Famous Five achieved not only the right for women to serve in the Senate but they and their many contributions paved the way for women to participate in other aspects of public life.