deserved. To begin with their remuneration--it is very poor. They get
from nine to eighteen shillings. Columbine in the pantomime gets five
pounds a week, but then hers is a prominent position. Out of these nine
to eighteen shillings they have to find shoes and petticoats, silk
stockings, etc., etc., so that the pay is hardly adequate to their
expenditure, and quite insufficient to fit them out and find them in
food and lodging. Can it be wondered at, that while this state of
things exists, ballet-girls should be compelled to seek a livelihood by
resorting to prostitution?
Many causes may be enumerated to account for the lax morality of our
female operatives. Among the chief of which we must class--
1. Low wages inadequate to their sustenance.
2. Natural levity and the example around them.
3. Love of dress and display, coupled with the desire for a sweetheart.
4. Sedentary employment, and want of proper exercise.
5. Low and cheap literature of an immoral tendency.
6. Absence of parental care and the inculcation of proper precepts. In
short, bad bringing up.
* * * * *
_Maid-Servants._--Maid-servants seldom have a chance of marrying,
unless placed in a good family, where, after putting by a little money
by pinching and careful saving, the housemaid may become an object of
interest to the footman, who is looking out for a public-house, or when
the housekeeper allies herself to the butler, and together they set up
in business. In small families, the servants often give themselves up
to the sons, or to the policeman on the beat, or to soldiers in the
Parks; or else to shopmen, whom they may meet in the streets. Female
servants are far from being a virtuous class. They are badly educated
and are not well looked after by their mistresses as a rule, although
every dereliction from the paths of propriety by them will be visited
with the heaviest displeasure, and most frequently be followed by
dismissal of the most summary description, without the usual month’s
warning, to which so much importance is usually attached by both
employer and employed.
Marylebone was lately characterised by one of its vestrymen as being
one of the seven black parishes in London. Half the women it is
asserted who are sent from the workhouse, and have situations procured
for them by the parochial authorities, turn out prostitutes. I have
no means of corroborating the truth of this declaration, but it has
been made and sent forth to the world through the medium of the public
press, though I believe it has been partially contradicted by one of
the workhouse authorities; however this may be, there can be no doubt
that the tone of morality among servant-maids in the metropolis is low.
I will not speak in the superlative--I merely characterise it as low. I
had an opportunity of questioning a maid-of-all-work, a simple-minded,
ignorant, uneducated, vain little body, as strong physically as a
donkey, and thoroughly competent to perform her rather arduous duties,
for the satisfactory performance of which she received the munificent
remuneration of eight pounds annually, including her board and lodging.
She said: “I came from Berkshire, sir, near Windsor; father put me to
service some years ago, and I’ve been in London ever since. I’m two and
twenty now. I’ve lived in four or five different situations since then.
Are followers allowed? No, sir, missus don’t permit no followers. No, I
ain’t got no perleeceman. Have I got a young man? Well, I have; he’s in
the harmy, not a hoffisser, but a soldier. I goes out along of him on
Sundays, leastways on Sunday afternoons, and missus she lets me go to
see a aunt of mine, as I says lives at Camberwell, only between you and
me, sir, there ain’t no aunt, only a soldier, which he’s my sweetheart,
as I says to you before, sir.”
Maid-servants in good families have an opportunity of copying their
mistress’s way of dressing, and making themselves, attractive to
men of a higher class. It is a voluntary species of sacrifice on
their part. A sort of suicidal decking with flowers, and making
preparations for immolation on the part of the victim herself.
Flattered by the attention of the eldest son, or some friend of his
staying in the house, the pretty lady’s maid will often yield to soft
solicitation. Vanity is at the bottom of all this, and is one of the
chief characteristics of a class not otherwise naturally vicious. The
housemaids flirt with the footmen, the housekeeper with the butler,
the cooks with the coachmen, and so on; and a flirtation often begun
innocently enough ends in something serious, the result of which may be
to blight the prospect of the unfortunate woman who has been led astray.
There are book-hawkers, who go about the country, having first filled
their wallets from the filthy cellars of Holywell Street, sowing the
seeds of immorality; servants in country houses will pay, without
hesitation large prices for improper books. This denomination of evil,
I am glad to say, is much on the decrease now, since the Immoral
Publications Act has come into operation.
Maid-servants live well, have no care or anxiety, no character worth
speaking about to lose, for the origin of most of them is obscure, are
fond of dress, and under these circumstances it cannot be wondered that
they are as a body immoral and unchaste.
* * * * *
_Ladies of Intrigue and Houses of Assignation._--The reader will find
more information about “ladies of intrigue” in the annals of the
Divorce Court and the pages of the _Causes Célèbres_ than it is in my
power to furnish him with. By ladies of intrigue we must understand
married women who have connection with other men than their husbands,
and unmarried women who gratify their passion secretly.
There is a house in Regent Street, I am told, where ladies, both
married and unmarried, go in order to meet with and be introduced
to gentlemen, there to consummate their libidinous desires. This
sort of clandestine prostitution is not nearly so common in England
as in France and other parts of the Continent, where chastity and
faithfulness among married women are remarkable for their absence
rather than their presence. As this vice is by no means common or a
national characteristic, but rather the exception than the rule, it can
only expect a cursory notice at our hands.
An anecdote was told me illustrative of this sort of thing that may not
be out of place here.
A lady of intrigue, belonging to the higher circles of society, married
to a man of considerable property, found herself unhappy in his
society, and after some time unwillingly came to the conclusion that
she had formed an alliance that was destined to make her miserable.
Her passions were naturally strong, and she one day resolved to
visit a house that one of her female acquaintances had casually
spoken about before her some little time before. Ordering a cab, she
drove to the house in question, and went in. There was no necessity
for her to explain the nature of her business, or the object with
which she called. That was understood. She was shown into a handsome
drawing-room, beautifully fitted up, for the house was situated in
one of the best streets in May Fair, there to await the coming of her
unknown paramour. After waiting some little time the door opened, and
a gentleman entered. The curtains of the room were partially drawn
round the windows, and the blinds were pulled down, which caused a “dim
religious light” to pervade the apartment, preventing the lady from
seeing distinctly the features of her visitor. He approached her, and
in a low tone of voice commenced a conversation with her about some
indifferent subject.
She listened to him for a moment, and then with a cry of astonishment
recognized her husband’s voice. He, equally confused, discovered that
he had accidentally met in a house of ill-fame the wife whom he had
treated with unkindness and cruelty, and condemned to languish at
home while he did as he chose abroad. This strange rencontre had a
successful termination, for it ended in the reconciliation of husband
and wife, who discovered that they were mutually to blame.
From the Divorce Court emanate strange revelations, to which the press
gives publicity. It reveals a state of immorality amongst the upper
and middle classes that is deplorable; but although this unveils the
delinquencies of ladies of intrigue, they are not altogether the class
we have under discussion. Those who engross our attention are ladies
who, merely to satisfy their animal instincts, intrigue with men whom
they do not truly love. But though we could multiply anecdotes and
stories, it is not necessary to do more than say, they are a class far
from numerous, and scarcely deserve to form a distinctive feature in
the category of prostitution in London.
COHABITANT PROSTITUTES.
The last head in our classification is “Cohabitant Prostitutes,” which
phrase must be understood to include--
1. Those whose paramours cannot afford to pay the marriage fees. This
is a very small and almost infinitesimal portion of the community, as
banns now cost so very little, that it is next to an absurdity to say
“a man and woman” cannot get married because they have not money enough
to pay the fees consequent upon publishing the banns, therefore this
class is scarcely deserving of mention.
2. Those whose paramours do not believe in the sanctity of the ceremony.
There may be a few who make their religious convictions an objection to
marriage, but you may go a very long journey before you will be able to
discover a man who will conscientiously refuse to marry a woman on this
ground. Consequently we may dismiss these with a very brief allusion.
3. Those who have married a relative forbidden by law. We know
that people will occasionally marry a deceased wife’s sister,
notwithstanding the anathemas of mother church are sure to be hurled
at them. Yet ecclesiastical terrors may have weight with a man who has
conceived an affection for a sister-in-law, for whom he will have to
undergo so many penalties.
Perhaps parliamentary agitation may soon legitimatize these
connections, and abolish this heading from our category of Cohabitant
Prostitution.
4. Those who would forfeit their income by marrying,--as officers’
widows in receipt of pensions, and those who hold property only while
unmarried.
This class is more numerous than any of those we have yet mentioned,
but it offers nothing sufficiently striking or peculiar to induce us to
dwell longer upon it, as it explains itself.
5. Those whose paramours object to marry them for pecuniary or family
reasons. This is a subject upon which it has been necessary to dilate;
for it includes all the lorettes in London, and the men by whom
they are kept. By lorettes, I mean those I have before touched upon
as prima donnas, who are a class of women who do not call going to
night-houses in Panton Street walking the Haymarket, and feel much
insulted if you so characterize their nocturnal wanderings. The best
women go to three or four houses in Panton Street, where the visitors
are more select than in the other places, where the door porters are
less discriminating. Sometimes women who are violent, and make a
disturbance, are kept out of particular houses for months.
Of course, the visits of kept women are made by stealth, as the men who
keep them would not countenance their going to such places. Perhaps
their men are out of town, and they may then go with comparative safety.
Women who are well kept, and have always been accustomed to the society
of gentlemen, have an intense horror of the Haymarket women, properly
so called, who promenade the pavement in order to pick up men.
And in reality there is a greater distinction between the two classes
than would at first appear. Even if a good sort of woman has been
thrown over by her man, and is in want of money, she will not pick up
any one at a night-house who may solicit her; on the contrary, she will
select some fellow she has a liking for: while, on the other hand, the
Haymarket women will pick up any low wretch who she thinks will pay
her. She will not even object to a foreigner, though all the best women
have a great dislike to low foreigners.
Were I to dwell longer upon this subject it is clear I should merely
be recapitulating what I have already said in a former portion of this
work.
* * * * *
The following narrative was given me by a girl I met in the Haymarket,
when in search of information regarding the prostitution of the
West-end of London. Her tale is the usual one of unsuspecting innocence
and virtue, seduced by fraud and violence. The victim of passion became
in time the mistress of lust, and sank from one stage to another,
until she found herself compelled to solicit in the streets to obtain a
livelihood. She was about twenty-one years of age, beneath the ordinary
height, and with a very engaging countenance. She appeared to be a
high-spirited intelligent girl, and gave her sad tale with unaffected
candour and modesty.
NARRATIVE OF A GAY WOMAN AT THE WEST END OF THE METROPOLIS.
“I was born in the county of ----, in England, where my father was an
extensive farmer, and had a great number of servants. I have three
brothers and one younger sister. I was sent to a boarding school at
B----, where I was receiving a superior education, and was learning
drawing, music, and dancing. During the vacations, and once every
quarter, I went home and lived with my parents, where one of my chief
enjoyments was to ride out on a pony I had, over the fields, and in the
neighbourhood, and occasionally to go to M----, a few miles distant.
On these occasions we often had parties of ladies and gentlemen; when
some of the best people in the district visited us. I had one of the
happiest homes a girl could have.
“When I was out riding one day at M----, in passing through the town,
my pony took fright, and threatened to throw me off, when a young
gentleman who was near rode up to my assistance. He rode by my side
till we came to a hotel in town, when we both dismounted. Leaving the
horses with the hostlers, we had some refreshment. I took out my purse
to pay the expenses, but he would not let me and paid for me. We both
mounted and proceeded towards my home. On his coming to the door of the
house, I invited him to come in, which he did. I introduced him to my
papa and mamma, and mentioned the kind service he had done to me. His
horse was put up in our stables, and he remained for some time, and had
supper with us, when he returned to M----. He was very wealthy, resided
in London, and only visited M---- occasionally with his servants.
“I was then attending a boarding-school at B----, and was about fifteen
years of age. A few days after this I left home and returned to B----.
We corresponded by letter for nearly twelve months.
“From the moment he rode up to me at M---- I was deeply interested
in him, and the attachment increased by the correspondence. He also
appeared to be very fond of me. He sometimes came and visited me at
home during my school holidays for the next twelve months. One day in
the month of May--in summer--he came to our house in his carriage, and
we invited him to dinner. He remained with us for the night, and slept
with one of my brothers. We were then engaged to each other, and were
to be married, so soon as I was eighteen years of age.
“The next day he asked my parents if I might go out with him in his
carriage. My mamma consented. She asked if any of our servants would go
with us, but he thought there was no occasion for this, as his coachman
and footman went along with us. We proceeded to B---- Railway Station.
He left his carriage with the coachman and footman, and pressed me to
go with him to London. He pretended to my parents he was only going out
for a short drive. I was very fond of him, and reluctantly consented to
go with him to London.
“He first brought me to Simpson’s hotel in the Strand, where we had
dinner, then took me to the opera. We went to Scott’s supper rooms
in the Haymarket. On coming out we walked up and down the Haymarket.
He then took me to several of the cafés, where we had wine and
refreshments. About four o’clock in the morning he called a Hansom, and
drove me to his house; and there seduced me by violence in spite of my
resistance. I screamed out, but none of the servants in the house came
to assist me. He told his servants I was his young wife he had just
brought up from the country.
“I wanted to go home in the morning, and began to cry, but he would not
let me go. He said I must remain in London with him. I still insisted
on going home, and he promised to marry me. He then bought me a watch
and chain, rings and bracelets, and presented me with several dresses.
After this I lived with him in his house, as though I had been his
wife, and rode out with him in his brougham. I often insisted upon
being married. He promised to do so, but delayed from time to time. He
generally drove out every day over the finest streets, thoroughfares,
and parks of the metropolis; and in the evenings he took me to the
Argyle Rooms and to the Casino at Holborn. I generally went there
very well dressed, and was much noticed on account of my youthful
appearance. We also went to the fashionable theatres in the West-end,
and several subscription balls.
[Illustration: THE HAYMARKET.--MIDNIGHT.]
“I often rode along Rotten Row with him, and along the drives in
Hyde Park. We also went to the seaside, where we lived in the best
hotels.
“This lasted for two years, when his conduct changed towards me.
“One evening I went with him to the Assembly Rooms at Holborn to a
masked ball. I was dressed in the character of a fairy queen. My hair
was in long curls hanging down my back.
“He left me in the supper-room for a short time, when a well-dressed
man came up to me. When my paramour came in he saw the young man
sitting by my side speaking to me. He told him I was his wife, and
inquired what he meant by it, to which he gave no reply. He then asked
me if I knew him. I replied no. He asked the gentleman to rise, which
he did, apologising for his seating himself beside me, and thereby
giving offence. On the latter showing him his card, which I did not
see, they sat down and had wine together.
“We came out of the supper-room, and we had a quarrel about the matter.
We walked up and down the ball-room for some time, and at last drove
home.
“When we got home he quarrelled again with me, struck me, and gave me
two black eyes. I was also bruised on other parts of the body, and
wanted to leave him that night, but he would not let me.
“In the morning we went out as usual after breakfast for a drive.
“Next evening we went to the Casino at Holborn. Many of the gentlemen
were staring at me, and he did not like it. I had on a thick Maltese
veil to conceal my blackened eyes.
“The gentleman who had accosted me the previous night came up and spoke
to me and my paramour (whom we shall call S.), and had some wine with
us. He asked the reason I did not raise my veil. S. said because I did
not like to do it in this place. The gentleman caught sight of my eyes,
and said they did not look so brilliant as the night before.
“S. was indignant, and told him he took great liberty in speaking of
his wife in this manner. The other remarked that no one could help
noticing such a girl, adding that I was too young to be his wife, and
that he should not take me to such a place if he did not wish me to be
looked at. He told him he ought to take better care of me than to bring
me there.
“When we got home we had another quarrel, and he struck me severely on
the side.
“We did not sleep in the same bed that night. On coming down stairs
to breakfast next morning I was taken very ill, and a medical man
was sent for. The doctor said I was in a fever, and must have had a
severe blow or a heavy fall. I was ill and confined to my bed for
three months. He went out every night and left me with a nurse and
the servants, and seldom returned till three or four o’clock in the
morning. He used to return home drunk; generally came into my bedroom
and asked if I was better; kissed me and went downstairs to bed.
“When I got well he was kind to me, and said I looked more charming
than ever. For three or four months after he took me out as usual.
“The same gentleman met me again in the Holborn one night while S. had
gone out for a short time, leaving me alone. He came up and shook hands
with me, said he was happy to see me, and wished me to meet him. I told
him I could not. S. was meanwhile watching our movements. The gentleman
asked me if I was married, when I said that I was. He admired my rings.
Pointing to a diamond ring on his finger, he asked me if I would like
it. I said no. He said your rings are not so pretty. I still refused
it; but he took the ring off his finger and put it on one of mine, and
said, ‘See how well it looks,’ adding, ‘Keep it as a memento; it may
make you think of me when I am far away.’ He told me not to mention it
to my husband.
“Meantime S. was watching me, and came up when the man had gone away,
and asked what he had been saying to me. I told him the truth, that the
same man had spoken to me again. He asked me what had passed between
us, and I told him all, with the exception of the ring.
“He noticed the ring on my finger, and asked me where I had got it. I
declined at first to answer. He then said I was not true to him, and if
I would not tell him who gave me the ring he would leave me. I told him
the man had insisted on my having it.
“He thereupon rushed along the room after him, but did not find him. On
coming back he insisted on my going home without him.
“He took me outside to his brougham, handed me in it, and then left me.
I went home and sat in the drawing-room till he returned, which was
about three o’clock in the morning. He quarrelled with me again for
not being true to him. I said I was, and had never left his side for a
moment from the time I rose in the morning till I lay down at night.
“I then told him I would go home and tell my friends all about it, and
he was afraid.
“Soon after he said to me he was going out of town for a week, and
wished me to stop at home. I did not like to remain in the house
without a woman, and wished to go with him. He said he could not allow
me, as he was to be engaged in family matters.
“He was absent for a week. I remained at home for three nights, and was
very dull and wearied, having no one to speak to. I went to my bedroom,
washed and dressed, ordered the carriage to be got ready, and went to
the Holborn. Who should I see there but this gentleman again. He was
astonished to see me there alone; came up and offered me his arm.
“I told him I was wearied at home in the absence of S., and came
out for a little relaxation. He then asked to see me home, which I
declined. I remained till the dancing was nearly over. He got into the
brougham with me and drove to Sally’s, where we had supper, after which
he saw me home. He bade me ‘good-bye,’ and said he hoped to see me at
the Holborn again some other night.
“Meantime S. had been keeping watch over me, it appears, and heard of
this. When he came home he asked me about it. I told him. He swore the
gentleman had connexion with me. I said he had not. He then hit me in
the face and shook me, and threatened to lock me up. After breakfast he
went out to walk, and I refused to go with him.
“When he had gone away I packed up all my things, told the servant to
bring a cab, wrote a note and left it on the table. I asked the cabman
if he knew any nice apartments a long way off from C----, where I was
living. He drove me to Pimlico, and took me to apartments in ---- where
I have ever since resided.
“When I went there I had my purse full of gold, and my dresses and
jewellery, which were worth about 300_l._
“One evening soon after I went to the Holborn and met my old friend
again, and told him what had occurred. He was astonished, and said he
would write to my relations, and have S. pulled up for it.
“After this he saw me occasionally at my lodgings, and made me presents.
“He met S. one day in the City, and threatened to write to my friends
to let them know how I had been treated.
“I still went to the Holborn occasionally. One evening I met S., who
wished me to go home with him again, but I refused, after the ill-usage
he had given me.
“I generally spent the day in my apartments, and in the evening went to
the Argyle, until my money was gone. I now and then got something from
the man who had taken my part; but he did not give me so much as I had
been accustomed to, and I used to have strange friends against my own
wish.
“Before I received them I had spouted most of my jewellery, and some of
my dresses. When I lived with S. he allowed me 10_l._ a week, but when
I went on the loose I did not get so much.
“After I had parted with my jewellery and most of my clothes I walked
in the Haymarket, and went to the Turkish divans, ‘Sally’s,’ and other
cafés and restaurants.