Wolfenden's Women: Prostitution in Post-war Britain [1st ed.] 9781137440204, 9781137440228

Citation preview

GENDERS AND SEXUALITIES IN HISTORY

Wolfenden’s Women Prostitution in Postwar Britain Samantha Caslin · Julia Laite

Genders and Sexualities in History Series Editors John Arnold King’s College University of Cambridge Cambridge, UK Sean Brady Birkbeck College University of London London, UK Joanna Bourke Birkbeck College University of London London, UK

Palgrave Macmillan’s series, Genders and Sexualities in History, accommodates and fosters new approaches to historical research in the fields of genders and sexualities. The series promotes world-class scholarship, which concentrates upon the interconnected themes of genders, sexualities, religions/religiosity, civil society, politics and war. Historical studies of gender and sexuality have, until recently, been more or less disconnected fields. In recent years, historical analyses of genders and sexualities have synthesised, creating new departures in historiography. The additional connectedness of genders and sexualities with questions of religion, religiosity, development of civil societies, politics and the contexts of war and conflict is reflective of the movements in scholarship away from narrow history of science and scientific thought, and history of legal processes approaches, that have dominated these paradigms until recently. The series brings together scholarship from Contemporary, Modern, Early Modern, Medieval, Classical and Non-Western History. The series provides a diachronic forum for scholarship that incorporates new approaches to genders and sexualities in history. More information about this series at http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/15000

Samantha Caslin • Julia Laite

Wolfenden’s Women Prostitution in Post-war Britain

Samantha Caslin Department of History University of Liverpool Liverpool, UK

Julia Laite Department of History Classics and Arch University of London Birkbeck College London, UK

Genders and Sexualities in History ISBN 978-1-137-44020-4    ISBN 978-1-137-44022-8 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2020 The author(s) has/have asserted their right(s) to be identified as the author(s) of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: Keystone-France / GettyImages Cover design by eStudio Calamar This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Limited. The registered company address is: The Campus, 4 Crinan Street, London, N1 9XW, UK

To the sex worker activists, advocates, and allies who have demonstrated, through their tireless work campaigning for the rights and safety of people who sell sex, just how much the Wolfenden Committee missed by not speaking to the women they dismissed as ‘common prostitutes’.

Series Editor’s Preface

John Wolfenden’s Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution (which was convened in 1954) has attracted the attention of numerous historians, primarily because of its approaches to homosexuality. In contrast, Samantha Caslin and Julia Laite’s Wolfenden’s Women focuses attention on the Committee’s deliberations about prostitution. In the 1950s, women who were labelled ‘common prostitutes’ were marginalized; by editing this critical sourcebook, Caslin and Laite give these women a prominent place in debates about sex, labour, and law in postwar Britain. Prefaced by introductory essays and organized by themes (such as public space; prostitution outside of London; policing; law, jurisprudence, and punishment; causes, prevention, and intervention; third parties and exploitation; and the question of demand), the sourcebook gives readers an insight into the lives of women who sold sex. In common with all the volumes in the ‘Genders and Sexualities in History’ series, Wolfenden’s Women is a multifaceted and meticulously researched scholarly study. It is an exciting contribution to our understanding of gender and sexuality in the past.

vii

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Brian Lewis for sharing his work (and working process) on this book’s companion volume, Wolfenden’s Witnesses. Julia would especially like to thank Helen Self for her generosity many years ago in sharing ideas and materials, and for her groundbreaking work on post-­ war prostitution. We would like to thank the National Archives for permission to reproduce these materials for an academic purpose, as well as the Women’s Library. Permissions were sought in the case of any material that might still be under copyright and all due diligence was taken to contact any individuals who might still have an interest in this material.

Note on Style This book draws mainly on the memoranda of evidence and transcripts of interviews found in the papers of the Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution at the National Archives, London, in the series HO 345/8-16. These papers were originally typed by stenographers and by the secretaries of submitting organizations and the style is not standardized. We have maintained all grammatical infelicities and style choices of the original documents but in places have edited the format for consistency. We have used ellipses (…) to indicate where material has been abridged. For more on how we have selected these excerpts and constructed this book, see the final pages of the introduction.

ix

Contents

1 Introduction: Prostitution and the Law Before the Wolfenden Committee—A Brief History  1 2 Prostitution and Public Space 21 3 Beyond London 43 4 Policing 71 5 Law, Jurisprudence, and Punishment 87 6 Brothels, Off-Street Premises, Privatization121 7 Third Parties and Exploitation151 8 Causes, Intervention, and Pathologization167 9 Demand183 10 Wolfenden’s Missing Women201

xi

xii 

CONTENTS

11 The Report of the Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution235 12 Conclusion: The Legacies of Wolfenden289 Glossary295

CHAPTER 1

Introduction: Prostitution and the Law Before the Wolfenden Committee—A Brief History

Prostitution had troubled the government and the police in Britain long before John Wolfenden was asked to convene the Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution by the Conservative Home Secretary David Maxwell Fyfe in 1954. Indeed, by the 1950s prostitution had been considered one of the most significant modern social problems for at least three-quarters of a century. While prostitution had always presented problems and questions about the control of public space and sexual morality, it was the Victorians who redefined it as one of their great ‘social questions’. In the mid-nineteenth century, concerns about the rampant spread of syphilis during the Crimean War led to the Contagious Diseases Acts of 1864, 1865, and 1869. This legislation required women in ports and garrison towns who were suspected of being prostitutes to register with the police, submit to compulsory genital inspection, and suffer incarceration in a ‘lock hospital’ if an infection was discovered. By the late 1860s, an enormous protest movement had sprung up demanding the Acts’ repeal, claiming they licensed vice, rode roughshod over the constitutional rights of the women, and codified a ‘double standard of sexual morality’ that saw women punished for sexual misdeeds while men’s behaviour was accepted and normalized.1 1  For more on concerns about the morality of the Contagious Diseases Acts see, for example, S Caslin, Save the Womanhood: Vice, urban immorality and social control in Liverpool, c.1900–1976 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2018), pp.  22–23; J Laite, Common Prostitutes and Ordinary Citizens (Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, 2012), p. 7; L Shapiro

© The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_1

1

2 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

These mounting objections to the regulation and thus supposed legitimation of prostitution and to the mistreatment of women labelled prostitutes led to a wider interest in the question of harm and exploitation in the sex industry. In 1879 a shocking expose of young girls being trafficked from Britain to regulated brothels in Belgium led to the appointment of a Joint Select Committee for the Protection of Girls and Young Women in 1881, the first government committee that investigated sexual exploitation and prostitution. This Committee recommended a new law against what was called ‘procuration’, which would make it illegal for someone to ‘procure or attempt to procure a girl or woman to become a common prostitute either within or without the king’s dominions’. A subsequent Criminal Law Amendment Bill dealing with just this issue met with resistance, and it took another major newspaper expose to push the bill through Parliament. William Stead’s 1885 Pall Mall Gazette series, the ‘Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon’, created a panic about children being prostituted in London brothels. With his investigative style of ‘new journalism’, Stead offered scandalous descriptions of rape and abuse within brothels and he wrote that, as part of his investigation, he had been able to purchase a girl, thirteen-year-old Eliza Armstrong, from her mother for just five pounds.2 As a result, public concern about child prostitution and the age of consent became intertwined with concerns about brothels. When the 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act was passed, just over a month after the publication of Stead’s expose, it raised the age of consent from thirteen to sixteen, it outlawed procurement, and it made ‘keeping a brothel’ a non-indictable, and therefore easily prosecutable, offence. Subsequent case law defined a brothel as a place where ‘more than one woman practices prostitution’. The 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act was also the Statute that included the notorious Labouchere Amendment, Sanders, ‘“Equal Laws Based Upon an Equal Standard”: The Garrett Sisters, the Contagious Diseases Acts, and the Sexual Politics of Victorian and Edwardian Feminism Revisited’, Women’s History Review, 24:3 (2015), pp. 389–409. Judith R Walkowitz, Prostitution and Victorian Society: Women, Class and the State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980); Paul McHugh, Prostitution and Victorian Social Reform (London: Croom Helm Ltd, 1980); Catherine Lee, ‘Policing Prostitution in Kent, 1860–1880’, in Social History Annual Conference (University of Exeter, 2007). 2  Rachael Attwood, ‘Vice Beyond the Pale: Representing “white Slavery” in Britain, c.1880–1912’ (UCL, 2013); Gretchen Soderlund, Sex Trafficking, Scandal, and the Transformation of Journalism, 1885–1917 (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2013); Julia Laite, ‘Justifiable Sensationalism.’, Media History, 20.2 (2014), 126–45.

1  INTRODUCTION: PROSTITUTION AND THE LAW… 

3

which was added in its final reading, making ‘gross acts of indecency’ between men a crime. It was this Act that Wolfenden would recommend repealing over seventy years later. Ultimately, however, John Wolfenden’s Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution was little concerned with questions of sexual exploitation in prostitution, or even with brothel-keeping; instead it focused on an older, and more persistent, debate concerning the control of prostitution on the streets. Across the country, several laws were directed against women who solicited prostitution in the streets. The 1824 Vagrancy Act, which was applied across England and Wales, stipulated that ‘any common prostitute’ who was in a public place and ‘behaving in a riotous or indecent manner’ could be fined or imprisoned. This same Act included a clause against ‘importuning for an immoral purpose’ which was used against men who were soliciting men. The 1839 Metropolitan Police Act, in force only in London, made it an offence for ‘any common prostitute to loiter or solicit for the purposes of prostitution to the annoyance of inhabitants or passengers’.3 Outside of London, the Towns and Police Clauses Act of 1847 enacted similar measures, but stated that the ‘common prostitute’ had to be soliciting ‘to the obstruction, annoyance or danger of the residents or passengers’. The legislation in Northern Ireland was broadly comparable: Belfast had the Belfast Improvement Act 1845, which prohibited ‘common prostitutes’ loitering for prostitution or solicitation to the ‘annoyance of … inhabitants or passengers’, and the similar Towns Improvement Act (Ireland) 1854 applied to towns in Northern Ireland.4 All of these laws differed little in practice. Direct evidence of annoyance or obstruction was very rarely required, and police forces developed various systems to identify, sometimes caution, and ultimately permanently label certain women ‘common prostitutes’ which greatly facilitated their arrest for soliciting. They would be introduced as a ‘common prostitute’ in court before their trial began and would almost always be found guilty. By the time the Wolfenden Committee sat in the 1950s, the conviction rate for solicitation offences had reached over 99 per cent, the highest

3  For more on these laws in London, see Julia Laite, Common Prostitutes and Ordinary Citizens: Commercial Sex in London, 1885–1960 (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). 4  Leanne McCormick, Regulating Sexuality: Women in twentieth-century Northern Ireland (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2009), pp. 23–24.

4 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

conviction rate of any offence in the United Kingdom.5 Yet this approach left the courts and the police open to accusations of prejudice and even corruption. As such, the Wolfenden Committee considered with interest the way prostitution was handled under Scottish law. In Scotland, women who solicited were dealt with under the Burgh Police (Scotland) Act 1892 and various pieces of local legislation, such as the Edinburgh Municipal and Police Act 1879. In addition, the Licensing (Scotland) Act 1903 was used to target pubs and hotels where prostitutes gathered, while the Immoral Traffic (Scotland) Act 1902 dealt with living on the earnings of prostitution and with men who solicited in public places for ‘immoral purposes’. Unlike in England and Wales, there was no requirement under Scottish law to prove annoyance, but prosecutions in Scotland required more evidence than just one uncorroborated witness and prosecutions were initiated by the Prosecutor Fiscal rather than by the police. All of this meant that the Scottish system attracted less scandal in the form of accusations of police bribery and the manufacturing of evidence.6 Indeed, the complexities and inconsistencies of the system in England and Wales increasingly gave rise to media storms and scandals. The first of these happened in 1887, when PC Endacott arrested a woman named Elizabeth Cass as a ‘common prostitute’, only to be challenged in court by her respectable employer. The incident saw Endacott on trial for perjury, new orders issues by the Commissioner Charles Warren, and a dramatic drop in arrests for more than three years afterward.7 Then, in 1906, a series of allegations of wrongful arrest, police corruption, and police brutality saw the establishment of the first Royal Commission on the Duties of the Metropolitan Police which, despite its generic name, was heavily focused on prostitution and the policing of other kinds of street offences and vice. Nevertheless, with the arrival of the First World War in 1914 came growing concerns about the spread of immorality in Britain. Promiscuity and prostitution were framed not just as threats to respectability but to the very war effort. The term ‘amateur prostitute’ was applied to young, sexually liberal women who engaged in sexual activity with men 5  Julia Laite, Common Prostitutes and Ordinary Citizens: Commercial Sex in London, 1885–1960 (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2012), p. 75. 6  For more on Scottish prostitution legislation see Roger Davidson and Gayle Davis, The Sexual State: Sexuality and Scottish Governance, 1950–80 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014), pp. 13–35; Louise Settle, Sex for Sale in Scotland: Prostitution in Edinburgh and Glasgow, 1900–1939 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017). 7  Laite, Common Prostitutes, pp. 70–71.

1  INTRODUCTION: PROSTITUTION AND THE LAW… 

5

in exchange for gifts or payment in kind, while soldiers’ camps opened up new markets for prostitution.8 In the late stages of the war, the government introduced Regulation 40D in order to tackle venereal disease within the armed forces. It meant that women who gave venereal disease to servicemen could be imprisoned. Repealed before the end of the war, Regulation 40D was a controversial measure which treated women, and prostitutes in particular, as sources of infection.9 Double standards in the way women and men were regulated continued to plague policy, policing, and prostitution after the First World War. The interwar years saw the Metropolitan Police hit with new waves of scandals concerning their application of England and Wales’ solicitation laws, their corruption, and their mistreatment of prostitutes. In 1922 Sir Almeric Fitzroy, Clerk of the Privy Council, was charged with ‘willfully interfering with and annoying persons in Hyde Park’ after police officers saw him approach a number of women in a single evening. Fitzroy had his conviction overturned when one of the women annoyed, Mrs Turner, was said to be a prostitute.10 Turner’s profession was used to discredit her testimony and the injustice of this shone a light on discrepancies in the way police and courts were handling evidence of annoyance. With the solicitation laws leaving police open to accusations of unfairness and impropriety, the government established the Street Offences Committee in October 1927.11 In many ways a precursor to the Wolfenden Committee, the Street Offences Committee was asked to review the ‘law and practice … in connection with prostitution and solicitation for immoral purposes in streets’. While the Committee conducted its investigation there was further public scandal. In April 1928, Irene Savidge and Sir Leo Chiozza Money were arrested and charged with public indecency after Money was seen kissing 8  Philippa Levine, ‘“Walking the Streets in a Way No Decent Woman Should”: Woman Police in World War I’, Journal of Modern History, 66:1 (1994), pp.  34–78; Angela Woollacott, ‘“Khaki Fever” and its Control: Gender, Class, Age and Sexual Morality on the British Homefront in the First World War’, Journal of Contemporary British History, 29:2 (1994), p. 326. 9  For more on Regulation 40 D see Andrew Grierson Bone, ‘Beyond the Rule of Law: Aspects of the Defence of the Realm Acts and Regulations, 1914–1918.’ (McMaster University, 1995). 10  Helen Self, Prostitution, Women and Misuse of the Law: The Fallen Daughters of Eve (Frank Cass Publishers, London: 2003). 11  Caslin, Save the Womanhood, chapter three; Laite, Common Prostitutes, chapter seven; Stefan Slater, ‘Lady Astor and the Ladies of the Night: The Home Office, the Metropolitan Police and the Politics of the Street Offences Committee, 1927–28’, Law and History Review, 30:2 (2012), pp. 533–573.

6 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Savidge in London’s Hyde Park. As in the Fitzroy case, Money was a man of high social status. Though he and Savidge were both acquitted, the police’s treatment of Money and Savidge differed significantly. Savidge faced extensive re-questioning by the police after her acquittal but Money did not.12 As a result of these high-profile scandals, confidence in the Metropolitan Police’s handling of solicitation and indecency was shaken. In August 1928 the Royal Commission on Police Powers was set up, but there was little actual change.13 When the Street Offences Committee published its final report in November 1928 it recommended the removal of the term ‘common prostitute’ from law and the creation of a gender-neutral law against solicitation. However, these proposals were not enacted. Differences of opinion among Committee members undermined the strength of the report and there was continued debate about the evidentiary threshold that should be applied to the matter of annoyance.14 As such, the interwar years did not see the emergence of any consensus or even clarity about how to manage prostitution on the streets. As had happened during the First World War, the arrival of the Second World War stoked fears about increased opportunities for prostitution and promiscuity. Prostitution was blamed for wartime rises in rates of venereal disease as young women engaged in transactional sex with soldiers. Moreover, there was an explosion, more generally, in the organized and professional commercial sex market at the same time as police numbers were significantly reduced by the war. Once again, problematic wartime regulations were introduced to try to limit the spread of venereal disease. Regulation 33B, introduced in 1942, meant that anyone who was identified by two other people as having passed on venereal disease could be arrested and made to undergo treatment. Though Regulation 33B was not gender specific, it was used until 1947 and it was based on an assumption that promiscuous women were the cause of venereal disease.15 When Britain emerged from the war, it needed to take stock of the immense destruction to housing and infrastructure caused by bombing campaigns, the high numbers of deaths and causalities, and continuing  Self, Prostitution, pp. 5–6.  For a fuller account, see Laite, Common Prostitutes. 14  For more, see Caslin, Womanhood, p. 83. 15  See Pamela Cox, ‘Compulsion, Voluntarism, and Venereal Disease: Governing Sexual Health in England after the Contagious Diseases Acts’, Journal of British Studies, 46:1 (2007), pp. 96–7. 12 13

1  INTRODUCTION: PROSTITUTION AND THE LAW… 

7

food shortages. As Britain began the process of negotiating a people’s peace, ushering a new era of welfare capitalism, its hold on its imperial possessions grew increasingly tenuous. The nation, it was felt, needed a symbol of regeneration, recovery, and rebirth. It was with this in mind that the Festival of Britain was held in 1951, and it was this that made the 1953 Coronation such an immensely significant event. More and more attention was turned to what was widely described as ‘the state’ of London’s streets. The return to peacetime saw arrest rates for solicitation offences in London skyrocket, going from a few hundred before the war, to over 2000 afterward.16 Anecdotally, street prostitution in London had gotten worse after the conflict. Some claimed there were simply more women on the streets; others said there were the same number, but their behaviour had worsened. Police had their own theories about this which they never spoke aloud, to Wolfenden or any other official record. But in their private memoranda, they wondered whether the new policy to pay police officers for their time spent in court had created an incentive that had previously not existed to be more vigilant in the arrest of ‘common prostitutes’. Meanwhile, the legal loopholes created by the 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act’s provisions against brothels and subsequent case law was a cause for concern amongst particular local authorities, especially Westminster City Council, who could not prosecute anyone if the flats or houses were subdivided and rented out to one woman per room. This meant that brothels could operate within the law, and landlords were immune from prosecution. Pressure was being put on the government to close these loopholes and better empower local authorities to shut down brothels in their areas. The Metropolitan Police tried to frame this as a highly localized problem, essentially centring on Paddington, a residential area that had recently been inundated with commercial sex, which had been escalated to one of national urgency.17 Paddington was an area desperate to rebuild and gentrify after a difficult two decades and had undertaken significant hotel construction. The rise in hotels and the rise in prostitution were strangely never correlated, but representatives of the tourism industry were vocal proponents of new measures to clear the streets, claiming that tourists, who arrived in London in greater and greater numbers, especially from the old White Commonwealth, were  Laite, Common Prostitutes, p. 177.  Laite, Common Prostitutes.

16 17

8 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

shocked by the blatant solicitation they saw there. It was ‘the shame of Britain’. The story in London was reported nationally and set the tone for a broader narrative about post-war prostitution being a significant social problem. Though most of the attention was focused on London and though convictions for solicitation in London made up a significant proportion of the national average, there were increases beyond the capital. Whereas during the 1930s and 1940s there were approximately 1–2000 convictions for solicitation in England and Wales each year, by the early 1950s the figure had climbed dramatically to over 10,000  in 1952 and 1953.18 However, it must be noted that there are problems with trying to use regional police statistics to try to work out actual rates of prostitution. Statistics not only reflect the degree to which particular police forces concentrated on the issue, they are also complicated by the fact that prostitution-­related offences were not always handled in the same way across regions. For example, Manchester applied various offences to the policing of prostitution. In Manchester in 1953, 207 women were convicted of obstructing the footpath and 83 women were convicted of aiding and abetting males charged with indecent exposure, with most of these offences being connected to prostitution. By contrast, just eight women were fined for soliciting in Manchester in the same year.19 Yet regional reports do suggest that prostitution was an issue to which police outside of London were paying more attention. For example, Newcastle reported small increases in prosecutions against various prostitution-­related offences: during 1955 there were six prosecutions for permitting, assisting, and keeping brothels, whereas there had been no prosecutions for these offences between 1949 and 1954. Newcastle also saw increases in prosecutions for living on the earnings of prostitution during the 1950s, rising from zero at the start of the decade to three in 1953, one in 1954, and five in 1955.20 Moreover, though reported prostitution offences in post-war Scotland were in the hundreds rather than thousands, prostitution offences in Scotland also increased between 1950 and the end of the 1960s. The average number of yearly offences in

 Self, Prostitution, p. 8.   Conwy Roberts letter to Chief Constable of Manchester, 17th February 1956, HO345/8. 20  Hansard, HC Deb 8th December 1955 vol 547 cc550. 18 19

1  INTRODUCTION: PROSTITUTION AND THE LAW… 

9

Scotland leapt from 158 for the period covering 1950–1954 to 440 for the period covering 1965–1969.21 Yet Scottish witnesses tended to suggest to the Wolfenden Committee that prostitution was not a significant problem in Scotland. Similarly, CH  Watkins, the Chief Constable of Glamorgan told Wolfenden that ‘offences involving prostitution and brothel keeping’ did not ‘exist anywhere in Wales except possibly in the large seaport town of Cardiff’ (though he quickly contradicted himself by admitting that there were ‘occasional’ instances of prostitutes using motor cars). Instead, Watkins said that homosexuality, that other area of the Committee’s remit, was a greater issue in Glamorgan than prostitution.22 Similarly, Liverpool’s Chief Constable Charles Carnegie Martin was keen to impress upon the Wolfenden Committee that his force had the port city’s streets under control by pointing out that there had been just five prosecutions against ‘street walkers’ in 1954, though he did acknowledge that brothels were a problem in the city, with eighty-three warrants executed in connection with brothels in 1954.23 Events in London, therefore, tended to dominate public conversation about vice. At around the same time, a particularly tenacious newspaper reporter, Duncan Webb, made the country aware of the growing problem of foreign organized prostitution and turned the Messina Brothers into notorious celebrities. These five Maltese brothers, who had been born into their parents’ brothel-keeping business, had come to London in the 1930s and gained a reputation for running French women on the streets of the Mayfair and the West End. Webb set about investigating the Messinas and, on 3 September 1950, The People ran his expose on the front page. ‘Arrest these five men!’ the newspaper cried, but the police, unable to prove any charge, took no action.24 It was amid this persistent use of prostitution scandals in newspaper headlines and ongoing pressure from local councils and frustrated police and magistrates that the Conservative Home Secretary, David Maxwell Fyfe, wrote a memorandum to announce his intention to call an ‘independent’ commission to find a solution which, he urged, should be in the form of a law that could 21  Roger Davidson and Gayle Davis, The Sexual State: Sexuality and Scottish Governance. 1950–80 (Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh: 2012), p. 28. 22  CH Watkins witness statement to the Wolfenden Committee, 31st March 1955, HO345/13, pp. 3–4. 23  For more on Martin’s account see Caslin, Save the Womanhood, pp. 191–194. 24  Laite, Common Prostitutes, c. 9.

10 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

more effectively clear prostitutes from the street. As Helen Self has argued, the visibility of prostitution, not prostitution itself, was to Fyfe the key issue.25

Histories and Memories of Wolfenden: Erasing Prostitution Wolfenden succeeded in making prostitution less visible in more ways than one. While prostitution may have been the social problem that was the impetus behind the Wolfenden Committee, it was homosexuality that quickly came to take up more of their time and interest. This is relatively easy to explain. Unlike prostitution, the Committee’s informal directives on homosexuality were far less prescribed: they had not been given a steer, as they had with prostitution, on what they might ideally recommend. Also, unlike prostitution, this Committee represented the first time that homosexuality had been explicitly and formally discussed by any government body and, at a moment when theories about the psychological and medical nature of ‘homosexuals’ were exploding, there was a great deal of ground to cover. Lastly, the Committee was made up mostly of men, who appeared far more interested in questions of male sexuality than women’s sexual labour. Most histories of Wolfenden, both public and academic, have maintained this uneven if understandable interest. They explore the Committee, its findings, and its consequences, almost exclusively from the perspective of the history of homosexuality and the experiences of men who had sex with men in this period. The catalogue entry for the Wolfenden Committee’s final report on the Houses of Parliament archive does not mention prostitution at all, nor is it discussed on the British Library Website’s section devoted to the report. Even the National Archives website and the Parliament website, in discussing their holdings related to Wolfenden, present it as being solely about homosexuality.26 In the academic sphere, more than four times as many books and articles have appeared that discuss Wolfenden in the context of homosexuality than in  Self, Prostitution, pp. 76–77.  UK Parliament, ‘Wolfenden Report’, https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/ transformingsociety/private-lives/relationships/collections1/sexual-offences-act-1967/ wolfenden-report-/; https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/wolfenden-report-conclusion#; [accessed on 23/10/2019] The National Archives, ‘Before and After Wolfenden’, http:// www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/cabinetpapers/themes/before-after-wolfenden-report.htm [accessed on 23/10/19]. 25 26

1  INTRODUCTION: PROSTITUTION AND THE LAW… 

11

the context of prostitution. Helen Self remains the only historian who has explored the Wolfenden Committee in any great depth, and her book Prostitution, Women and the Misuse of the Law: The Fallen Daughters of Eve (2003) remains the authoritative analysis of its origins, proceedings, and consequences. She is joined by work by this book’s editors, Julia Laite and Samantha Caslin, in their own research monographs, as well as some talks and short papers by other scholars.27 In addition, Roger Davidson and Gayle Davis have usefully examined the implications of Wolfenden for prostitution in Scotland, highlighting the importance of not viewing this area of British history solely through the lens of the legal system in England and Wales.28 More broadly, however, historians of sexuality in this period tend, taking their cue from the subjects’ conflation in the Wolfenden Committee, to assume that many things about homosexuality and prostitution were analogous. In his examination of the sexual politics of ‘permissive Britain’, Frank Mort refers to prostitution and homosexuality as ‘two gendered forms of sexuality’, which immediately reveals the dangers of this approach: prostitutes very rarely linked their prostitution to sexuality, preferring to see it as a job.29 This imbalance of scholarship is surprising because, as Helen Self argues, and we would agree, it was in fact prostitution, and not homosexuality, that had been the initial impetus for the calling of the Department Committee in the first place.30 It is even more surprising when one acknowledges that the Committee had far more of a direct and swift impact on legislative change in relation to prostitution than it did in relation to homosexuality. Specifically, the 1959 Street Offences Act removed the need to prove annoyance from solicitation law; yet the law which surrounded homosexuality remained unchanged until a decade after the Committee published their recommendations. Ultimately, more than sixty years on from its Report’s publication Wolfenden continues to be read narrowly and woven into the narrative about permissive Britain in a way

27  Self, Prostitution; Laite, Common Prostitutes, page; Caslin, Save the Womanhood, Chapter Nine esp. pp. 190–196. 28  Roger Davidson and Gayle Davis, ‘“A Festering Sore on the Body of Society”: The Wolfenden Committee and Female Prostitution in mid-twentieth-century Scotland’, Journal of Scottish Historical Studies, 24:1 (2004), pp. 80–98. 29  Frank Mort, Capital Affairs: The Making of the Permissive Society (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010). 30  Self, Prostitution.

12 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

that does not properly account for how differently it approached prostitution. So why have we spent so much more time thinking and writing about Wolfenden’s approach to homosexuality? One reason may be because, in popular history especially, Wolfenden tends to be presented as a celebratory moment which dramatically challenged the authority of the state and church to legislate against same-sex desire. Because of the immense support for LGBTQ+ rights in the present day and the high-profile nature of the issues, this particular history of Wolfenden resonates profoundly. In contrast, the question of the ‘right’ way to deal with prostitution remains extremely controversial, not only among the public, but amongst feminists themselves. Even as the campaign for sex workers’ rights and safety— which overwhelmingly calls for decriminalization—grows, a strong and vocal anti-prostitution feminist campaign has allied itself with religious groups and politicians to demand more criminalization, especially of men who buy sex. Wolfenden’s ‘practical’ approach to prostitution—to push it out of sight—leaves us with little to celebrate on either side of this seemingly unbridgeable divide. As Helen Self has argued, ‘the conflation of homosexuality with prostitution as problems of sexual deviance diminished the clarity with which the issues were perceived’.31 In conflating the two very different issues, Wolfenden performed philosophical contortions to graft together a legal rationale which would justify the Committee’s recommendations to relax the law against homosexuality while strengthening the way the law was used against prostitutes. The problem was that if these were both forms of sexual deviancy, then how could such different proposals be reasonably be reached by a Committee that supposedly wanted to be above moral discussion of these topics? For Wolfenden, the answer was to frame homosexuality as a matter of private morals and thus outside the remit of the law while framing prostitution as a matter of public offence. There is a tendency to regard this as a liberal move, one which officially began a half-­ century long process of securing more rights for gay men and women. But this narrative has been seriously challenged by historians, who argue that Wolfenden was more about controlling and defining gay men than

 Self, Prostitution, p. 82.

31

1  INTRODUCTION: PROSTITUTION AND THE LAW… 

13

liberating them, about ‘privatizing’ morality, as Frank Mort has described.32 Matt Houlbrook, in his important work, shows how in the aftermath of Wolfenden, prosecutions against gay men in public skyrocketed.33 And a wealth of scholarship points to the fact that it was not state-sponsored bodies like Wolfenden that really brought positive change into the lives of LGBTQ+ people: it was the struggles, campaigns, words, and deeds of these people themselves acting as their own advocates. Moreover, just as conflating prostitution and homosexuality mislead Wolfenden and its witnesses, so too does it muddle our historical understanding of prostitution and the law in post-war Britain. It is unproductive and misleading to analogize homosexuality and prostitution. Doing so erases the labour of women, and indeed men, who worked in the sex industry and reduces prostitution to a ‘sexuality’. It conflates and confuses the very different campaigns for decriminalization. It suggests that the legal structures controlling both were similar: but while they were indeed contained within the same statutes, they were enforced entirely separately, with different legal processes, different forms of policing, and dramatically different public attitudes. The persistent conflation of homosexuality and women’s sexual labour, we might suggest, is larger than a simple issue of distraction or oversight. It is part of the systematic way in which women who had been labelled ‘common prostitutes’ have been marginalized, invisibilized, pushed underground, and written out of public and social life with very real and dangerous consequences. The binding together of prostitution with homosexuality and Wolfenden’s public/private solution to this inappropriate pairing meant that the law’s potential to impact the safety of sex workers was written off as necessary collateral. Therefore, we welcomed the opportunity to edit this critical sourcebook exploring the other, far less examined, side of the Wolfenden Committee. We see it as a way of restoring the question of prostitution and the experiences of women who sold sex in this era to a central place in the debate about sexual liberalization, morality, and the law in post-war Britain.

32  Frank Mort, Capital Affairs: The Making of the Permissive Society (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010). 33  Matt Houlbrook, Queer London: Perils and Pleasures in the Sexual Metropolis (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2005).

14 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Forming the Committee, Selecting Evidence and Witnesses, and Holding the Proceedings In August 1954, The Home Office appointed a committee of fifteen commissioners, with John Wolfenden, an experienced public servant who had recently become the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Reading, as its Chairman. Conwy Roberts, Home Office civil servant, was appointed as the Committee’s secretary and quickly became one of the key figures steering the group, and Wolfenden’s advisor and confidant.34 The Committee accepted submitted memoranda of evidence from a variety of mostly invited individuals and organizations, though a handful of memoranda were submitted without invitation. Witnesses were then selected to be called before the committee to answer questions about their submitted evidence and to reflect more generally on the problems of prostitution and homosexuality. Some people, mostly police officers, gave oral testimony only. In some cases, witnesses and organizations were called to speak to only one or the other issue, but in many cases, they were asked questions about both subjects. It would be interesting indeed to compare what the same witnesses said about both, using this book and our companion volume, Brian Lewis’ Wolfenden’s Witnesses (2016), together. The committee sat for sixty-two days, thirty-two days of which were devoted to interviews. They interviewed more than 200 witnesses. Forty-­ two different organizations or associations were represented, and twenty people were interviewed as individuals. Of these organizations and individuals, over half spoke to the issue of prostitution. All these meetings were held in private. The privacy of the proceedings was integral to the project and, to a large extent, spoke to the degree to which the subjects under discussion were considered controversial. As Sir John Wolfenden explained to representatives of the British Medical Association as they were giving evidence on 15 December 1955: [A]s you see, we have a shorthand note taken of all our meetings entirely and completely for our own use, in order that in the weeks and months to come, we shall be able to refresh our memories on exactly what was said. It is in no sense for publication in any way, so that we speak entirely freely and with complete frankness, making no distinction between what is on the

 Self, Prostitution, p. 87.

34

1  INTRODUCTION: PROSTITUTION AND THE LAW… 

15

record and what is off the record, taking it, if you like, that it is all off the record but happens to be recorded.35

Despite these assurances of frankness, however, the Committee were still at pains to be seen to be handling discussions in a respectful and proper manner. It is often noted that members of the Committee referred to homosexuals and prostitutes respectively as ‘Huntley and Palmers’, after a well-known biscuit brand. The supposed purpose of this was to spare the embarrassment and offence of any women privy to the proceedings. That such a step was considered necessary emphasizes the very gendered nature of the discussions and the overall maleness of the Committee. Over the course of their interviews with witnesses, it also became clear who most Committee members felt were reliable and useful witnesses, and who they felt were a relative waste of their time. These judgement calls were based on a complex interplay of individual and social bias, political expediency, and perhaps even personal enmity, but in all cases represented a battle over who was permitted to claim expertise on the subject and which kinds of expertise were valued. Often, this was linked to whether the witness was advocating a stance that was in keeping with, or adverse to, what the Committee had been informally told by the Home Office would be a desirable outcome for the law on prostitution. Yet no groups garnered more invective and dismissal than women’s organizations, especially the Association for Moral and Social Hygiene (AMSH) who had formed in 1915 and had for many years campaigned for the repeal of all laws against ‘common prostitutes’.36 In fact, the private proceedings of the Committee were not simply about protecting the innocence of women; privacy also served to exclude certain groups of women from exerting influence. When the AMSH and the National Council of Women wrote to Wolfenden in October 1954 to object to the Committee’s meetings being held in private, they were treated with derision by the Committee Secretary, Roberts, and Wolfenden.37 Roberts wrote to Wolfenden to suggest that ‘these worthy ladies … want the meeting open so that they can send observers to hear  Wolfenden Minutes of Evidence, 15 December 1955, London, TNA, HO345/15.  Julia Laite, ‘The Association for Moral and Social Hygiene: abolitionism and prostitution law in Britain (1915–1959), Women’s History Review, 17 (2008), pp. 207–223. 37  Association for Moral and Social Hygiene letter to Sir John Wolfenden dated 14th October 1954 and National Council of Women of Great Britain letter to Sir John Wolfenden, dated 20th October 1954. HO345/2. 35 36

16 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

what other witnesses are saying’ and to ‘organise pressure groups’ to ‘counteract evidence with which they do not agree’.38 He was right to suppose as much, since they were effectively cutting these groups off from the conversation. The AMSH were dismissed by Roberts as ‘cranks and busybodies’, and obliquely referred to in other places as ineffective idealists. Despite being the oldest and most respected civil society organization dedicated to the study of prostitution, very little of what they had to say was reflected in the final report. As Helen Self discovered from close examination of the Committee’s correspondence, Wolfenden and the Roberts conspired to keep as many of the AMSH representatives as silent as possible during questioning, and saw that they were, in Self’s words, ‘furtively reduced to a comic turn’.39 For example, when a session began late, Sir John Wolfenden apologized to the police officer witnesses and explained ‘I am afraid we have kept you waiting a very long time. That is because the two lots who preceded you were both a pair of women, so you can understand there has been a good deal of talking going on.’40 It was a frankly preposterous thing to say given that the women had been invited by the Committee to come in to talk, and in both cases the interviews were shorter than average. Wolfenden’s approach to the AMSH was in part due to the Association’s radical stance on prostitution law, but it was in no small part also owing to the Committee’s general dismissal of women speakers. Alongside their reluctance to engage with the AMSH, members of the Wolfenden Committee were also keen to distance themselves from women’s moral reform organizations. The Committee’s attempt to appear ‘modern’ and ‘practical’ meant that they needed to appear to be looking beyond moral issues (including questions of sexual morality in the treatment of women and the role of demand); however, many times they referenced morality themselves. That the Wolfenden Committee was so reluctant to engage with moral reform organizations stood out all the more for the fact that the Committee’s overriding concern about the visibility of prostitution actually had much in common with the preventative approaches that had

 Conwy Roberts letter to Sir John Wolfenden, dated 26th October 1954. HO345/2.  Self, Prostitution, pp. 86–87. 40  Interview transcript of PCs Scarborough and Anderson, HO 345/12. 38 39

1  INTRODUCTION: PROSTITUTION AND THE LAW… 

17

historically been adopted by groups affiliated to moralizing organizations like the National Vigilance Association.41 Representatives of the increasingly professionalized social and psychological sciences also appeared before the Commissioners, and were largely admired and respected for their knowledge and theories about prostitution, but ultimately their evidence was considered largely irrelevant because, in the words of the final report, ‘we do not consider it within our province or competence to make a full examination of the moral, social, psychological and biological causes of homosexuality and prostitution, or of the many theories advanced about these causes’.42 However, the very fact that consideration was given to the possibility of prostitution having a ‘psychological or biological cause’ represented a culmination of attitudes that had developed particularly since the early twentieth century, informed by the entangled ideas of criminology, eugenics, and biological determinism. The ‘social’ causes of prostitution, on the other hand, which had once been so central to understandings of the problem, were marginalized in this new era of welfare capitalism, and witnesses and Committee members routinely dismissed the possibility that poverty and other kinds of social need had caused women to sell sex. The groups who were accorded the most respect, authority, and ultimately weight in the final report were the police, the magistrates, social workers, and community organizations. These groups, however, were also in quite apparent tension with each other. The police were naturally seen as the key authorities on how the law worked in practice and on the problems of controlling street prostitution; but the police often saw the Magistrates and their insistence on certain kinds of evidence and a certain number of prosecutions as a bar to the effective clearing of the streets. At the same time, the Magistrates queried the law itself, which forced them to accept police evidence that was circumspect on the one hand, and hand out meaningless fines on the other when they would have preferred to remand young women into custody. Social workers agreed—and made repeated appeals for more authority within the system in order to intervene to rescue and reform younger women. These roles, which had once been filled by moral reform organizations and church-run charities, had become increasingly professionalized since the Second World War. As a 41  For more on the side-lining of moral welfare groups by Wolfenden see Caslin, Save the Womanhood, Chapter Nine. 42  The Wolfenden Report, p. 23.

18 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

member of the Liverpool Vigilance Association, a social purity organization which sought to prevent prostitution put it in 1952: ‘So many people think that nowadays the Welfare state covers all needed charitable work but this is not the case.’43 Moreover, while police and the magistrates doubted the efficacy of moral intervention, they often replicated preventative moral discourses of the vulnerable and the fallen. For example, the Chief Constable of Liverpool suggested that women police should be given more ‘authority’ to deal with ‘girls’ at risk of being ‘led into this life of prostitution’, while Metropolitan Magistrate Paul Bennett referred to women who solicited near London’s Park Lane as ‘crossgrained creatures with no sensibility’.44 Meanwhile, community organizations questioned the power and performance of police, magistrates, and social workers, as they laid before Wolfenden their ‘cri de Coeur’ as one group put it, for something to be done to clean up the streets and houses in their areas. These appeals, coming especially from the residential London borough of Paddington, appeared to have a most profound effect upon the Commissioners. Most present-day readers will notice a glaring absence in the list of witnesses to the Wolfenden Committee. While three men who were identified as homosexual were called to sit at the table and speak to the Commissioners, no woman who sold sex or who had been arrested as a ‘common prostitute’ was called to speak on her own behalf. The idea of inviting prostitutes to testify was mooted and was considered with some levity by Committee members. Apparently, a paltry attempt was made to recruit two women, who, claimed the Secretary, refused to come to the Home Office to testify. No allowances were made, of course, for the fact that women who had experienced repeated arrests were unlikely to relish the thought of walking into the building that was the seat of the authority that condemned them. In fact, the Committee showed very little initiative or involvement in reaching out to these women: the process was poorly documented, and no names or details ever appeared in any correspondence. The Committee appeared to wish to discuss two key issues—the best way to clear the streets and the best way to word any new law to this  Caslin, Save the Womanhood, p. 189.   C.C.  Martin, Transcript of Evidence, Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution, 31st March 1955, p. 28, HO345/13 and Paul Bennett, Transcript of Evidence, Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution, 5th January 1955, p. 1, HO345/12. 43 44

1  INTRODUCTION: PROSTITUTION AND THE LAW… 

19

effect; and what, if anything, might be done about prostitution that occurred off the street. They were especially interested in what witnesses thought of the term ‘common prostitute’, and of the potential impact of removing the need to prove annoyance in the Metropolitan Police Act of 1839, to bring in a national law that more closely resembled the legal language in Scotland that required only that a woman be proved to be a ‘common prostitute’ who was ‘soliciting for the purposes of prostitution’. Their witnesses, on the other hand, used their memoranda of evidence and interviews to explore a much wider range of issues. They spoke about the social, medical, and psychological causes of prostitution, the ways in which society could intervene to reform young women, the role of the courts, the extent and nature of exploitation and third-party involvement, and the question of licensed or legalized brothels. Most strikingly, the question of demand—men buying sex—came up again and again in witness interviews and, unlike the other topics mentioned here, did not appear to warrant more than a few words in the final report. The huge range and diversity of opinions on offer in the excerpts that follow, read alongside Wolfenden’s final report, reflect the work that the Committee did to forge a superficial sense of consensus for what remained, in fact, very controversial recommendations.

How We Constructed This Sourcebook We have chosen to organize this sourcebook by theme rather than, as our companion volume Wolfenden’s Witnesses does, by category of speaker. We felt that this method of organization was the most effective way to highlight the range of topics, and the diversity of opinions (even within one group or profession), surrounding the question of prostitution. Eight chapters explore different themes found within the submitted evidence and the witness interviews: public space; prostitution outside of London; policing; law, jurisprudence, and punishment; causes, prevention, and intervention; third parties and exploitation; and finally, the question of demand. These chapters are subdivided to show different categories of speakers and submitters: government officials, the police, and magistrates; social workers and probation officers; local authority representatives and community organizations; social scientific and medical professionals; and finally, moral reform and feminist organizations. In all cases we have made it clear whether the excerpt is from submitted evidence, or from an interview transcript; but this will usually be apparent

20 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

to the reader without this signposting. While submitted evidence tended to be carefully framed prose, witness testimonies were more disorganized, idiosyncratic, and candid. Witnesses were sometimes taken off guard, or taken aback, and some were treated with more circumspection or hostility from the Committee than others. Very often, witnesses there to represent organizations moved into expressing their personal opinions. All of this creates a very specific kind of source for historians, which is different from the material found within submitted evidence. Readers will probably notice that often submitted evidence was discussed at the interview but should note that not everyone who submitted evidence was called to appear before the Committee. Chapter 10, entitled Wolfenden’s Missing Women, presents excerpts from published and archival sources that tell us about the attitudes and experiences of women who sold sex both before and after Wolfenden, which we have included as a counterpoint to the Committee’s failure to interview any woman who sold sex. Chapter 11 includes excerpts from the Committee’s final report. Each chapter begins with a short contextualizing and analytical introduction. Finally, at the back of the book readers will find a glossary of laws, Committee members, organizations, and individuals that they can use for reference and further context. Readers can use this sourcebook however they wish, but it is designed to allow researchers, students, and others the opportunity to come to an understanding of the law, politics, and social dimensions of prostitution in this era through an exploration of these key and unprecedented primary sources that were created by the Committee’s investigations and reflections. We hope to encourage more scholarship, especially amongst students, that begins to redress the imbalances and misconceptions in the histories we tell about Wolfenden. The excerpts in the chapters that follow are carefully curated by us as editors, but we have in all instances endeavoured to capture the wide range of topics and opinions that Wolfenden encountered, as well as fascinating moments of heated debate, obfuscation, or startling honesty. We very much hope what follows gives readers new, first-hand insights into the complex history of commercial sex and its control in post-war Britain.

CHAPTER 2

Prostitution and Public Space

The presence of women selling sex on the street and in other public space lay at the heart of the rising concern about prostitution in post-war Britain. That women were soliciting on the street was nothing new: this had been the primary form of solicitation in London and many other cities for more than a century. Ideas about public space, however, had changed dramatically during the first half of the twentieth century. Changes in consumerism and in women’s leisure habits had raised concerns about the supposed moral effects women’s engagement with public space. Then came the destruction wrought by the blitz, which transformed many cities’ business and housing landscapes, adding new urgency to ideas about urban regeneration, national identity, and safe public space. By mid-century, women of all classes had unprecedented access to public space as consumers, leisure-seekers, and workers. At the same time, thousands of young women and their families had been emotionally, physically, and economically affected by the Second World War. Many of these women flocked to bigger cities, and they helped to significantly reshape the uses of public space. Women had, of course, travelled around the country in search of work before this, but after the Second World War there was a sense that their ambitions and lifestyles were pushing them farther and farther from the watchful eyes of their parents. In Liverpool, the Chief Constable expressed concern about young women travelling to the city from Ireland, Manchester, Leeds, and Newcastle, only to turn to prostitution when their experiences of work and economic independence © The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_2

21

22 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

fell short of their expectations. Meanwhile, London continued to act as a magnet for young women seeking out employment, independence, and excitement. The Festival of Britain in 1951 and the Coronation in 1953 ushered in new drives to ‘clean up’ London in a new era of tourism and television. At the same time, concerns about women’s behaviour morphed into bigger questions about the moral image that the nation was projecting to the rest of the world. Arrest statistics are difficult to correlate with relative amounts of street prostitution, but it does seem clear that prostitution had moved into new areas during and just after the war. In London, street prostitution had always existed in pockets scattered throughout the metropolis, but it was nonetheless most concentrated by a large degree in Soho and Piccadilly. After the war, neighbourhood associations and borough councils claimed that it had spread—and gotten far worse—in other places, especially Mayfair and Paddington. Newspapers ran regular exposes on these areas, adding to the sense of crisis. Many of these spatial changes in London had been a product of a decades long, if uneven, campaign against street solicitation and off-street prostitution, which had displaced women and their clients from established areas in Westminster, to neighbouring districts. These districts—Bayswater and Mayfair—also happened to be extremely affluent, mainly residential areas, and readers will note that the Mayfair Association and the Paddington Moral Reform Council—as well as the Borough Council—remark frequently on the incongruous nature of prostitution being seen in such respectable neighbourhoods. These municipal and borough councils proved extremely influential to the Wolfenden Committee, evoking images of ‘ordinary citizens’ being harassed, respectable neighbourhoods being blighted, the whole country feeling ‘shame’, and the ‘shock’ of visitors who saw London’s rampant street prostitution. The Home Office certainly believed that solicitation was an issue that disproportionately affected London, feeding into the London-centric focus of the Wolfenden Committee. The Home Offices’ own memorandum of evidence to the Committee suggested that a large increase in convictions for solicitation was mostly the result of London cases. Reports from other parts of the UK often played down issues with solicitation. Yet the general sense that prostitution was a London problem did not translate into confidence about the wider state of Britain’s streets. Those concerns about ‘ordinary citizens’ being harassed and about neighbourhood decline carried tacit warnings about all of Britain’s urban life. What was

2  PROSTITUTION AND PUBLIC SPACE 

23

less clear, however, was what could be done about the moral state of London’s (and by extension, Britain’s) streets. Wolfenden wanted to avoid accusations of using the law to intervene in matters of personal morality, but, via allusions to public morality and public offence, Wolfenden carved out a justification for using the law to target prostitution on the streets. The Committee did not ignore the influence of police, and municipal and borough councils. Indeed, they appeared to have clout in terms of Wolfenden’s final recommendations. Yet the excerpts below, taken from the Departmental Committee interviews and the memoranda of evidence, reveal a diversity of opinions about prostitution and public space. There were several questions raised by witnesses about how to define public annoyance and disturbance when the offence was collective rather than individual. Interviewees queried the relationship of prostitution to other public nuisances. Police officers challenged the idea that prostitution in public space had really changed very much. Feminist groups continued to rail against the solicitation laws which made prostitution a specific kind of nuisance, and labelled certain women in public space ‘common prostitutes’. There seemed a significant gap, however, between the more nuanced opinions Wolfenden heard, and the ones which the Committee ultimately incorporated into their recommendations, which took collective public offence for granted and worked backwards from there.

Excerpts Government  .  Home Office, Submitted Evidence (Pertaining to England 1 and Wales) For some years past, successive Home Secretaries have been pressed in Parliament, in the Press, and by local authorities, leaders of the Churches and civic organisations, to introduce measures more effective than those provided by the present laws to check the activities of prostitutes soliciting in the streets of London and some of the larger provincial cities. The number of convictions for soliciting and kindred offences in England and Wales rose from 3192 in 1938 to 10,291 in 1952. Most of these cases occurred in London, where the number rose from 2966 to 9756. As will be seen from paragraph 40 below, figures relating to convictions do not necessarily reflect the conditions actually existing in the streets

24 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

at a given time, and opinions may differ as to how far the figures quoted reflect a real increase in the volume of prostitution. There can, however, be no dispute that the conditions in some of the streets of London are deplorable. They are probably without parallel in the capital cities of other civilised countries. Police and Magistrates  .  Paul Bennet, Police Court Magistrate 1 Bennet: … Prostitution is not a thing you can stop, and I think it is rather a waste of time and a mistake to try and stop it. What I object to, what is so much worse today than it used to be, is this soliciting. It has now got to the streets around Park Lane, mainly because of that big United States service there. Then there are those two big hotels which have nothing to do with it, but several friends of mine—ladies—coming out of the Dorchester have told me how some woman has taken their husband by the arm. That thing did not exist as late as 1938 in that part of London, and it is the public order that I think from the public point of view is a thing for the authorities to aim at.  .  PCs Scarborough and Anderson 2 Q. [Linstead]: With your long experience of the West End which dates back to between the wars, the 1930s, would you say the situation is very much the same as it was in the ’thirties? A. [PC Anderson]: I should say about the same. A. [PC Scarborough]: They go from one street to another. Regent street between Glasshouse Street and Piccadilly Circus—back in the ’­thirties Ford’s Motor Showroom, that used to be a regular place, the same as in Jermyn Street and St. James’ Street. It has moved from there to Coventry Street, Glasshouse Street, and Brewer Street. It has merely taken them from one street and put them in another.  .  Association of Chief Officers of Police—Witnesses: Mr C Martin, 3 CBE, the Chief Constable of Liverpool and Mr CH Watkins, the Chief Constable of Glamorgan CHAIRMAN: You would not think, Mr Martin, that there was any advantage, from the point of view of the police in dealing with other more serious crimes, in having these girls more easily accessible, in circulation on the streets, for instance, than practicing in a brothel where it is, as we

2  PROSTITUTION AND PUBLIC SPACE 

25

have heard, more difficult to get at them?—A.  Do you mean that they would be more helpful to the police? Q. We have had it put to us this way, that if—in London—there was any serious attempt to drive them off the streets, that would perhaps in some ways make the work of the police more difficult in connection with other things, that it would not be as easy for the police to know what was going on and know who was about, and so on, if the prostitutes were hidden away either in brothels or in one-girl flats on a call girl system. Is there anything in that, in your experience?—A.  I do not think there is much substance in that, really. There are prostitutes who give information to the police, of course, about various crimes, and quite voluntarily they come to us—I was only saying today to one of my officers: ‘What would happen if there were a call girl system in Liverpool, for example?’, and he said: ‘They would not exist, the street girl would tell us all about them and what they were doing, they would not stand an earthly.’ That is probably some sort of answer to your question, and they would have the protection of their own profession to tell us what was going on in that direction. But some of them do give us information about crime that is going on at times. They are not hostile to the police. [Mr Adair] Q. Are you troubled with either milk bars or public houses where they are being encouraged to go?—A. [Martin] No, not encouraged. It is awfully difficult, you know, in the centre of the city, where these places are packed at times; it is awfully difficult to suggest that anyone encourages them to go in. It is if course a fact that they are more or less, shall I say, for want of a better word, driven into them, in other words that they find they cannot walk the street and that the next best method of getting a man is in a milk bar or a public house. Q.  And that is controlled by your brothel prosecutions? Is that your method of controlling that, controlling the amount of prostitution that goes on?—A. No, I would not say that so much. It does help to control it, but I think there are all sorts of other features. I think generally the standard is improving, and that there are gradually becoming fewer prostitutes than there used to be.  .  Sir Laurence Dunne, MC, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Meeting 4 on 4th October 1955 Q. [Chairman] In between the two dangers that are very clear I think to all of us of (a) on the one hand the consequences of which are clear, and (b) on the other hand the present state of the streets, granted that one is

26 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

not trying to abolish prostitution, granted one is not trying to drive it underground, but still wanting to do something about the public scandal which there is going on, is there anything that can be suggested?—A. [Dunne] There is only this, and as to how far it would work I do not know, and that is to move the market. You would make a schedule of streets in which prostitution per se will be an offence, and drive the women away from that particular locality. That seems to be perfectly feasible. As to whether it is an approach of expediency—it does not have principles, but it might have the effect that you want. Q. [Chairman] They would then go somewhere else?—A. [Dunne] They would then go somewhere else. Q. [Chairman] Chase them around somewhere else?—A. [Dunne] They would have to trade in certain streets that were not scheduled, and the man who wanted his woman would have to go there for her. Q. [Chairman] He would start, I suppose, by knowing that it was no good going to certain streets, because they had been proscribed?—A. [Dunne] Yes. Q. [Chairman] The danger would be, would it not, that before long instead of having streets that were proscribed you would have streets that were prescribed?—A. [Dunne] You would have streets in which it was extremely dangerous to show your nose. Q. [Chairman] That is what I meant.—A. [Dunne] You would have streets that would become complete and absolute danger spots. Non-­ prescribed streets in the vicinity of the main thoroughfares would be …. Q. [Chairman] Rather hot spots?—A. [Dunne] Very dangerous I think to go in after dark. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Is it not the case already that most of these prostitutes are in the hands of ponces, and they have somebody who is responsible for them, so that if we do drive them off the streets are we really making it very much worse for them?—A. [Dunne] There are an awful lot of ponces at the present moment. There are some big ones and some small ones, but a lot of the women really use the ponces as their protector. They are men who perhaps control two, three, four, five or six women, and that sort of thing. I think if you really tackled the thing, and made the possession of an address absolutely essential, suppose, for instance you, made prostitution per se an [28] offence, then I think you would fund the whole thing organised, and the power would drift into a very few hands. At the present moment I think there is safety in numbers, a lot of ponces, but they have not got any very great power. Some of them have, that is to say some have

2  PROSTITUTION AND PUBLIC SPACE 

27

a great many more women than others, and they have more money, and they can do more in the way of providing for their women than others, but at the present moment there is safety in numbers. Q. [Mrs Cohen] If you did not make prostitution per se an offence, but you make any kind of solicitation on the streets an offence, would that not be a possibility?—A. [Dunne] Soliciting for what? MRS COHEN: For anything. CHAIRMAN: For immoral purposes. MRS COHEN: Take, for instance, barrow boys selling on the streets, they are not allowed to go up and worry people, they are not allowed to go up and say “Come and buy my goods”. They have to stand there.—A. [Dunne] Yes. Q. [Mrs Cohen] That is what I mean, any kind of soliciting.—A. [Dunne] The women are there, but they must not make the active approach. Q. [Mrs Cohen] If a woman is found continually loitering in the street night after night, surely the police have a right to say “What are you doing here?” I should expect them to if I were loitering.—A. [Dunne] Yes, they are loitering, but they may pass and re-pass. As long as they are walking along the pavement, along the Queen’s Highway, nobody can say anything to them, unless they are doing something overt to show that they are a rival …. Mrs Cohen: If they keep walking …. Mrs Lovibond: They might be round the corner. Mrs Cohen: I know it is difficult, but I wondered what your reaction was to it?—A. [Dunne] Yes, I can see what you mean, but really that is almost the position now, that in theory if a prostitute chooses just to walk about, and make eyes at somebody as they pass her, of course they should be beyond the law, the rule of the criminal law, but, of course, as a matter of fact if a well-known prostitute pokes her head outside in the West End streets at the present moment and is seen by a policeman he will say “Hello, you have not been on a charge for a fortnight”, and that is what happens. Local Authorities  .  Paddington Borough Council—Witnesses: Councillor P Dyas, 1 Alderman WD Goss, and Mr C Jobson, the Deputy Town Clerk Mr Dyas: I would only like to say that we have had in many cases we have looked at this evidence of organised brothels, and we also know that many

28 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

men come into our Borough just for that purpose, both visiting Americans and British. The matters that trouble me personally most are that in the Borough this soliciting and the various other acts of indecency are being carried on in the public gaze and are offending our citizens, in particular the younger people in the Borough, and that is a great worry. If you like we can be rather Victorian and admit that what goes on behind closed doors is not so worrying as that which is seen in public as an example to everybody living around. … In the Borough these women are parading around in increasing numbers, and are not only just parading around and soliciting but are annoying the citizens in an ordinary physical and moral sense. Round some of our bus stops, for instance by Marble Arch, you can see six or eight of them on a Saturday night mingling with decent women, shouting coarse jokes, and generally being physical nuisances, disregarding the moral side. Further down, for instance, in one of our roads, the Bayswater Road down by a coffee place they would gather there, and if a police patrol came down I know only too well they would gather for a moment round the coffee stall, and there was nothing that the police could about this … we found out later they were buying contraceptives from a coffee stall, but that is a detail … the evidence of what they had been doing was strewn around the parks, in the mews, in people’s front gardens. … The effect that this has on the young people in the Borough is only too obvious. … Mr Goss: At the house where I live we have an entrance of about 10ft long which has six steps up to the front door and a side entrance within that main entrance down to the basement. Prostitutes have been using that front, as they have other fronts along the street. You come out in the morning and you see evidence, a rubber sheath lying there, and I have found as many as three in a morning. We are very disturbed as there is a young girl of 14 years of age in the basement, and her parents and ourselves are naturally disturbed, and we get out first to clear away the evidence before she can see it. You can see them opposite us. There is a garden with overhanging trees and you will see the evidence there of what goes on nightly. We have caught one of these girls, regular girls they are, using the fronts as public convenience and when I went out she was not a bit worried about arranging her dress in front of men and when I said I would speak to the police she just looked at me and said “They had me yesterday and I paid my 40s”, just as offhand as that about it.

2  PROSTITUTION AND PUBLIC SPACE 

29

Civil Society and Charities  .  British Medical Association—Witnesses: Dr R Gibson, Dr DC 1 Carroll, Dr TCN Gibbens, Mr A King, Dr Doris Odlum, Dr EE Claxton Q. [Mr Adair]: Regarding paragraph 140, would you tell us where you get your justification for that: “It is still true that the prostitute’s client is most frequently an unaccompanied male who has taken alcohol and who has probably no intention of seeking a sexual partner until solicited.” A. [Dr Odlum] I am very glad you raised that, because I was going to ask for the permission of the Chairman to make a slight alteration to this sentence. I think that is too sweeping and “very often” is the phrase I would like to use. Q. [Mr Adair]: Not “most often”? Q. [Mrs Cohen]: I had that marked, and I had inserted the words “street walker”, rather than “prostitute” in that case—the normal person hanging around the street, whereas a common prostitute is not necessarily handing about the street. A. [Dr Odlum]: I think that is what we really meant—“street walker”.  .  Paddington Moral Reform Council—Witnesses: Mr Robert Allan 2 MP; Councillor Mrs Eyre and Mr MP Simpson [Mr Allan] I merely wish to emphasize how extremely serious the problem is in Paddington, particularly in Paddington, because that is what I am talking about and because that is what I know about. I happen to have been educated in America, and have a lot of French relations, so I have a lot of Foreigners coming to see me for one reason or another, and I find that they are absolutely disgusted by what they see. We have in Paddington a great many hotels, and the whole area is one which we are striving to improve. The hotels are very good. There are big, new building schemes going on with nice flats with rents anything up to a thousand and over, and yet they are in the middle of these extremely squalid conditions. What goes on now goes on in absolute daylight. I have a friend who lives in a flat on the ground floor and on Saturday morning two weeks ago—they have a sort of drawing room on the ground floor—he looked out—and he lives there with his young family—and a car drew up right in front of his door, and the man and woman in the car began to take off all their clothes right in front of his eyes, beneath his drawing room window. I could give you many instances of this sort of thing. I tell you this merely to emphasize the importance of this problem to Paddington, to the hotel people, and to people who are trying to improve an area which has been allowed to go

30 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

down. As regards concrete suggestions, I think that some of the suggestions made in this memorandum are well worth considering, but I think the first thing is to try to get more police. I know that one is then just perhaps pushing this particular problem away from one area to another, but on the other hand, as Mr Simpson [his colleague] and I were talking about outside, there are other areas where it does not matter so much, if you are going to have prostitutes parading the streets, but it important not to have them in a residential area where you have a lot of young families, and parents are trying to bring their children up decently—it is important they should not see this going on at their doorsteps. My personal feeling— and I am talking only about Paddington—is that that area should be very much more heavily policed. Let us admit that the prostitutes probably will be somewhere, but they should be driven by police control into areas where they will do least harm. I do not think it is probably true to say that the inhabitants of any area see most harm in their own area, because I understand this is prevalent around Victoria, where there are empty offices, and where there is no a large residential population. … Q. [Chairman]: … When the girl has had a pick-up on the Bayswater Road, where does she then go? A. [Mr Adair]: Is she the girl who then goes to the park? A. [Mr Alan]: I do not know, but I would have said that in the park it is more the amateurs, and pure exhibitionism by men, which very often happens. A. [Mrs Eyre]: I fully agree with that. A. [Mr Simpson]: I would like to add to the answer, Sir, if I may. Any nooks or crannies which are convenient for this purpose are resorted to by these women, and one of our preoccupations has been to make these nooks and crannies, such as doorways and porches and basements of unoccupied houses, inaccessible by locks, and even barbed wire. There have been certain mews and garages that became a wholesale resort, but we have put locks on them. The general idea is that if there are any such nooks and crannies that can be used, the Commissioners [the landlords of the Paddington Estate] do what they can to make the inaccessible. The Commissioners, on their property, have done all they can within their realm, that is, where they have a proprietary interest, but that proprietary interest ceases at the pavement—that is beyond our control. So we, therefore, think that there will be very few places now in Paddington to which these women can go, bearing in mind that Paddington is only in the

2  PROSTITUTION AND PUBLIC SPACE 

31

Commissioners’ ownership to one third, and now rather less since more sales have taken place. The women will go to the most convenient places. If they want accommodation under a roof or ceiling, then they appear to leave Paddington. … [Mr Simpson] The Paddington Moral Reform Council are not a body of starry-eyed idealists or cranks. They are people who have an honest desire to help in a situation which really exists, and this memorandum is intended to make suggestions as to what could and should be done in the Paddington area. You, of course, have the broadest outlook necessary towards this problem. This is a cri de coeur from Paddington where unquestionably the trouble today is extremely bad. The local land owners have done all they can up to the threshold of their authority, but they can do nothing beyond it. The suggestions contained in this memorandum are thought to be practical as to some action which could be taken beyond that threshold so as to aid the good-intentioned landlord. The suggestions have purposely been toned down so as to appear, and in fact actually in my view are, sensible and of a kind that could reasonably be introduced and exercised in respect to the problem. The principal point brought out there is the inadequacy of the police force—because the most obvious trouble is the accosting prostitute. There is no effective deterrent at the present time in the method of dealing with her. There is a very serious problem in respect of the immunity of freeholders in general, and relatively easy dodges for the leaseholder who knows how to do this, and there is a general inadequacy of method and power to deal with prostitution at large.  .  Paddington Moral Council (Submitted Evidence) 3 Grievous annoyance, disturbance, embarrassment and distress and in some cases serious damage are experienced and suffered by property owners and their tenants in these areas … and indeed senior officials of Foreign Embassies have made complaints and grave as they are justified. Furthermore many similar complains have been received demonstrating the amazement and disgust of foreign visitors at the sights of prostitution as they see them at the present time. It is though that such conditions must, in addition to their other results, inevitably have a most detrimental effect upon that valuable and invisible export, the Tourist Trade. Thus the women regularly patrol certain streets, and their souteneurs or protectors frequent and observe from these streets. Disturbances frequently arise, and the debris of the traffic is deposited in quantity upon the

32 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

frontages of entirely respectable premises, to the high embarrassment and anger of the inmates. To the same streets, and in addition to those walking there for the purpose, both taxis and private cars convey the men seeking the prostitutes. These vehicles patrol the areas affected in a manner that is obvious and highly detrimental to the interests of the owners and occupiers in the locality. One of the results of this is that respectable men and women are accosted and importuned with a view to immorality, and all too frequently insulted and abused. Because of these experiences, there is a steady flow of complains being received which are couched in terms of high indignation.  .   Association for Moral and Social Hygiene—Witnesses: Mrs Margery 4 Corbett-Ashby; Mrs Elizabeth Abbott; Miss EM Steel, Miss Chave Collisson and Miss DOG Peto OBE Mrs Abbott: But you say, can we not say that solicitation for an immoral purpose might be a provocation—I will use our own phrases—a provocation to debauchery? I do not think a lot of streetwalkers do it. It does not pay the prostitute to behave in that manner, and she does not. It is the innocent girl in the street, on the other hand—and I have seen her do it—who goes and lays her hand upon a man’s arm. Well, you could not call it provocation to debauchery really. I do not know what the police directive at that time was, but I once went up to Soho, and alongside one side of the street were the women and up the other side were the souteneurs with their painted toes; and at either end were policemen in uniform. No arrests were made. It looked exactly was if you had there a lovely closed quarter for prostitution. However I do not know that it was a public provocation to debauchery. I walked through there, but very few of the public did, and they were put off by the police. … Q [Chairman]: Suppose it is to be argued … that behaviour, sexual or otherwise, of adult persons, is really not necessarily the concern of the law. Suppose it was therefore to be said that that it is not the business of the law to try to regulate the sexual behaviour of men and women but it is the concern of the law—it might be argued—to see that the ordinary person, who is not at that moment interested in sexual behaviour, either his own or anybody else’s, that that person should be able to go about the streets of London or any other place in unmolested freedom …. A. [Miss Collisson]: Does not the law, if changed to cover annoyance only, meet that situation? You cannot, by any law, prevent human beings

2  PROSTITUTION AND PUBLIC SPACE 

33

with powdered cheeks and platform soles, or, if you like wearing a small identifying badge, from walking quietly on the streets. It is the point of view of all decent citizens that the annoyance that may be caused by perpetual approaches by one or two persons should be punished. Is it not sufficient to punish annoyance? Q. [Chairman]: By whomsoever the offence is committed? … A. [Miss Peto]: The moment we introduce “for prostitution” or “for an immoral purpose”, it requires proof, which can only be satisfied by the character of the person or by what we would call the complaint of the person annoyed. [She later added] The act of solicitation is seldom as aggravatingly carried out as trying to sell flowers or obstructing by means of a barrow.  .  Mayfair Association—Witnesses: Mrs M Anderson, Mr WR Sloman, 5 and The Earl Howe Lord Howe: I think these women know me by sight now, and I personally do not get involved; but is difficult for me because I have, for example, a number of girls in my house, a number of children, and really, just after dark, it is very unpleasant indeed. There are friends of mine who live at the top of Curzon Street who complain bitterly they cannot keep their windows open at night; one particular friend lives in a flat somewhere opposite the Dorchester, and he said he cannot keep his windows open at night because these women collect, 14 or 15 of them sometimes, outside and use filthy language and make an awful noise. … It has always been a bad area; but it seems now to be much worse than it has ever been, and it seems if anything the nuisance seems to have increased. … Mr Sloman: … It has always been there, but up to the last few years it has been in Shepherd Market, and not much anywhere else; suddenly it has appeared on the main thoroughfares of Mayfair, not only to the detriment of the streets, to the detriment of the peace and quiet of the district, but I would say to the definite inconvenience not only of the local residents but of the visitors to the city. So much so that everyone I think can tell stories of friends who have said that they have never seen anything like this in a capital city before. What we are against is not so much prostitution as such, but the fact that it is where it is and that it is permitted to go on flagrantly where it is … you have quiet streets and the Dorchester Hotel, and so on, and along the walls of the Dorchester, outside the doors, all around that area,

34 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

all the way up Park Lane, there are these hordes of frightful women accosting all males, even if accompanied by ladies. Their brazenness passes all belief at times. … Mrs Anderson: My husband also has to come home after garaging his car at Chesterfield garage, and he has to walk the length of Curzon street. He has to pass always at least, without any exaggeration, five women between Chesterfield garage and our house, which is no. 48, and they all speak to him. If it is cold they say: “come in and have some gin”. And they are quite brazen; there is no discretion about it at all. … Mrs Anderson: It was about six months ago two or three houses away from me, I was awaked by the most awful screaming going on. I went and looked out my window. I found that out of the window of this house was a female throwing all her blankets out the window. She kept telling them that she was just coming. Then eventually a young man climbed up the blankets and got into her room, with everybody in the street watching. … no policeman came along. Then the next night there were four women, one of them standing under my window, yelling to each other about what had gone on the night before; and I was awakened again. … My husband went down and said to them: “Will you please go to bed, you women” and so they all started tapping him and picking on him; and so he went and phoned for a policeman, who eventually came along and he took them off in a taxi to the police station. … Mr Sloman: The point of Mrs Anderson’s story is not so much the story itself, but the fact that all that could happen without any policeman appearing for that period … the point of the story is that we consider Mayfair, despite the official assurance, is not getting sufficient police protection as is necessary because of the presence of large numbers of these women … Mrs Anderson: We know that you cannot [stop prostitution] but we do think it is a crying shame in a town like London that it should be so unashamed. It looks to the visitor as if it were an export, if you like, or a habit. … Mr Sloman: I did start our discussion first of all by saying that we were really dealing only with our own parish, we were not concerned with what happened except in our own back yard.

2  PROSTITUTION AND PUBLIC SPACE 

35

Chairman: That is from your point of view. Mr Sloman: It just happens that our back yard is the showpiece of London. Mrs Cohen: Of course every district in London has this problem. Mr Sloman: But on the other hand you do not have such a concentration of diplomatic and social life as you do get in this area of Mayfair. It is for that reason we have been asked to do something about it; if it had been at Victoria we should not have been complaining so much.  .  Mayfair Association Submitted Evidence 6 The deputation [to the Home Office on 13 January 1955] said that the situation in Mayfair had deteriorated steadily in the past few years, and that soliciting by prostitutes was now being carried on there to such an extent as to constitute a public scandal. Mayfair, although still partly residential contains embassies, hotels and the headquarters of a number of associations and of important industries, all of which attracted numbers of visitors to the area. The state of the streets had provoked much adverse comment from foreign visitors to London, and was gravely detrimental to the amenities and dignity of the area and the reputation of the capital city. It was also a constant source of annoyance and disturbance to residents, who felt most strongly on the matter. It is hardly possible for a man to walk through the area without being accosted and respectable women were frequently insulted. Properties in the area were sometimes acquired outright, by the use of ostensibly reputable proxies, for the express purpose of accommodating prostitutes; and owners, in spite of the most careful precautions and preliminary inquiries, were finding it difficult to prevent their properties from being let or sub-let to prostitutes whom, under the terms of the agreement, they were then powerless to eject.  .  National Council of Women of Great Britain—Witnesses: Lady 7 Nunburnholme, Mrs MF Bligh, Mrs. M. Lefroy Lady Nunburnholme: To-day there is no obscene behaviour and none of the horrors of fifty years ago, but my own experience shows a definite obstruction by women of the streets. I have been reading the evidence of the Commission on Street Offences, 1928 and I find it was brought to their notice the conditions in Jermyn Street. I should like to bring to your notice the conditions in Curzon Street. In the last five years I have spent three or four nights every week in my club at the bottom of South Audley Street. Conditions have distinctly worsened during those five years. Only three or four nights ago I walked home after dinner and found seven of

36 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

these ladies in a bunch together and one of them in a most lovely full red dress was giving a demonstration of dancing of a new step to the admiration of the others on the pavement. Last night quite by chance I went out to post my letters. Coming back to my club there were four of these ladies with their clients on the steps of the club and it was almost impossible to get in to my club. That is, I think, obstruction. The waiters have objected to the noise late at night, when I am not up, of these ladies and their clients. They say they cannot sleep and I myself, with a bedroom facing on, have heard a very great deal of noise going on. Q. [Chairman]: … We are, I think, pretty well aware of the obstruction of streets and other premises that go on. We have had very strong representations made to us about some parts of London and that both from the point of view of residents and from the point of view of passengers in the legal sense. What is not at all easy is to see how to cope with it. If I may put it rather bluntly, one or two points that have been made to us by other witnesses, they would run rather like this. First of all the question, is it agreed that it would be a good thing if the streets of certain parts of London were more presentable for the ordinary passer-by? That moves quickly to the other formulation of that question, would it not be a good thing, however you do it, to clean up the streets? Now that is a crude phase and can easily be misunderstood, but it can, I think be defended, or at any rate made fairly plausible, from this point of view. If it is agreed— and I am only saying if—but if it is agreed that the behaviour of adult men and women, including their sexual behaviour, is not a matter for the criminal law, but if it is also agreed that we should all want to see the streets of London, in particular, made presentable to ourselves, our children and our visitors, is there anything to be said for trying to bring about a state of affairs which will remove this trade from the streets, knowing that would inevitably mean that they will carry on their trade elsewhere? If it is agreed that men and women are likely to go on behaving in this way, however much one would wish them not to, and if it is agreed also that we want to see the streets passable by passengers, how far ought we to go in ensuring that the streets are cleared irrespective of, or taking the full risks of the consequences that might follow? […] Is it worth taking the chance of cleaning up the streets, although it may cause very serious problems of another kind? Mrs Bligh: … I think that with regard to your question, our principle remains, this principle of the higher and equal moral standard of the sexes. I would underline what Lady Nunburnholme said that we do not believe

2  PROSTITUTION AND PUBLIC SPACE 

37

that these problems can be tackled in a short term way. We would agree with the statement you made that to clean up the streets may drive this whole matter underground and we would not agree to any cleaning up which involves increased penalties to the woman. We emphasise in our evidence that prostitution is far too often thought of as a problem solely concerned with women, whereas in every act of prostitution, where it takes place, there is both a man and a woman involved and therefore we would not agree to any cleaning up which involves increased penalties for the woman, but we would agree to the moving on and we believe that the remedy for cleaning up the streets is to increase the police force, including women police in uniform to patrol the streets. A. [Lady Nunburnholme]: I am an old worker in this field. I have been amazed at the quite beautiful dresses that are now abroad in the streets of London. Last night, as I was coming home, I saw eight of these ladies, and that really is a new phenomenon… Now they do go about in what might be called gangs, but they are so beautifully dressed—so exquisite—that you cannot talk about gangs; perhaps you could say groups. That to me is a thing which is new, that grouping of women, so that any individual has to run the gauntlet, instead of just one woman putting an arm on a man’s shoulder or elbow. I am speaking subject to correction, but I think it is a rather new development in this question—I mean, right women within forty yards is quite a lot, and that I counted three nights ago. I may say that in my youth I used to dress entirely from Paris, and I think that their clothes are magnificent. There is very big money behind it. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Is it not beginning to get a little bit difficult now to distinguish a prostitute from an ordinary person? A. [Lady Nunburnholme]: No; they are much better dressed. When I was young, a street walker could be distinguished easily by her appearance, but now the street walker is dressed from the great Houses.  .  Estates and Finances Committee of the Church Commissioners, 8 Submitted Evidence At Paddington the roads and pavements are at present the real trouble. Streets on the Commissioners’ estate are infested in the daytime as well as at night by women and by loitering cars in spite of all the measures taken by them to clean the houses. Male touts, bullies and bosses are also a nuisance hanging about in the background. Respectable people are importuned and have been threatened. In the morning the litter of the traffic may lie about. Young people cannot go out safely, it is said, after dark.

38 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Complaints are frequent. It happens in respectable roads that have never been suspected of having houses undesirably occupied. It becomes disheartening to any landlord to find this happening.  .  Society of Labour Lawyers—Witnesses: Mr Gerald Gardiner QC, 9 Mr Ben Hooberman, Mr PR Kimber, Mr CR Hewitt and Miss Jean Graham Hall Q. [Mr Adair]: You think that these things ought to be openly advertised? A. [Mr Gardiner]: Yes, we think it would be wise for the police not to pay the attention to discreet advertisements of masseuses and manicurists, and so on, and telephone numbers, because that keeps it off the street, and they are still working on their own. … Q. [Mr Rees]: This is simply a layman’s question: are there any legal difficulties at all connected in making solicitation an offence in particular areas?—A. [Mr Gardiner]: I do not think so, because from a practical point of view it would soon be become known, and they would simply go somewhere else. Q. But there are no legal complications?—A. I do not think so. Q. [Mr Adair]: Can you conceive of anywhere that they could go that would not be as great a nuisance as where they are just now?—A. There would be no difficulty in the side streets of the West End at night. Q. People who live there would not agree with that—people who have children—and are bringing up their families.—A. There are very few people living there at all, round the side streets of Bond Street, it is essentially a shopping area. You can deal with it administratively. In Edinburgh they do not in fact just run to prostitutes in [sic] unless they start before the shops are closed, or they start in a street where they do not usually go. And of course you could achieve exactly the same thing by administrative action simply by telling the police to run women in in some streets and not in others. Q. [Mr Mishcon]: There are two points that occur to me on that. The first one is that I am wondering what would be the reaction of the borough council if it made unsuccessful representations to the Home Office that nearly every street in the Metropolitan Borough should not be included—A. That is going to be one of the difficulties. Q. The second one was this: I suppose the chief source of irritation, to use no stronger word, is that there is an assembly of prostitutes in a given area. If you take them out of the principal streets by order of the Home Secretary, are you not very likely then to get very substantial congregations of these people in smaller streets, minor streets? And would not that

2  PROSTITUTION AND PUBLIC SPACE 

39

in fact look far worse than the at all events fairly respectable distance kept between prostitutes in the West End of London?—A. It is a question of degree, is it not? Those now in Park Lane can be moved into the side streets, having regard to the number of side streets.—A. [Miss Hall]: The other point I was going to make is this, that I am not convinced, having spoken to the girls, that they regard prostitution as a matter of supply and demand, and I think if they were all congregated together some of them would in fact drive out the others, to some extent at least. Q. I am just trying to visualise it, you see. It may be that I have got an exaggerated picture in my mind. I am trying to think in terms, you see, of streets in areas where alone prostitutes can solicit, and men going down to those areas because it is known that they are the only streets available in that area. Probably, as I said, my vision is an exaggerated one, but it is not at all pleasant.—A. [Mr Gardiner]: There ought to be a very limited number of prohibited areas. We only contemplate orders applying to residential districts and really principal thoroughfares like Piccadilly and Park Lane—places where the girls batten themselves on the visitors and on the young national service men, whether they want to see them or not—and moved into the side streets off Park Lane and off Piccadilly. I should not have thought there would be very large numbers. Q. You could regard it has been a greater evil to try and get them off the streets altogether than to have this kind of limited street walking in certain areas?—A. Yes, much; it would be a fatal think to drive them off the streets altogether, I am sure. Q. [Chairman]: But you are contemplating congregating all the Piccadilly, Bond Street, Park Lane girls in, shall we say, Golden Square and Brewer Street?—A. [Mr Hewitt]: No, I think that it not really right [sic].—A. [Mr Gardiner]: We are contemplating prohibiting them from very limited areas, leaving the whole of the rest—A. [Mr Hewitt]: That is a very easy inversion of what we have recommended and I am always in danger of making it myself. We do not want certain streets named in which you can solicit for the purpose of prostitution; we want certain streets, a very small number, nominated in which you cannot, in which there is an added danger of doing it. Q. [Chairman]: May I take up the “very small number”? I see what you are getting at very well, but, you see, we have spend [sic] a certain amount of today listening yo [sic] really quite shocking stories of what goes on in a good many of the residential districts in Paddington, and it is not just one place in Paddington, it is quite a lot of places in Paddington, and we

40 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

are all aware of Curzon Street and some of the streets off Park Lane now. I cannot help thinking that if this is going to be at all effective there will have to be quite a lot of prohibited streets, if it is residential areas generically that you are trying to clear. Q. [Mr Rees]: When you talk about a large number, I am not at all sure what the figures are. What are the kind of numbers of streets that you would like to declare?—A. [Mr Gardiner]: I would like to declare Paddington as a residential area. Q. The whole area?—A. The whole area, and about give streets in the West End. It would be very dangerous indeed if it was going to be applied to so many streets as in effect to drive the whole thing underground. Q.  You might achieve the position they have got in Hamburg, for instance, where they have cleared the whole area of the Hamburg Altona and everybody has to go the Reverbahn. Q. [Mr Mishcon]: There again, I think we have to take into account, Mr Gardiner, the position not only of residents here, but people who are visitors from abroad. I am thinking in terms of the good name of London, and when you say that Curzon Street should not be an excepted area, I am sure it would mean that many prostitutes in the West End who do not now congregate there would come there, and of course it is a substantial hotel area. Do you think that is something which is a little undesirable?—A. [Miss Hall]: I asked one of the girls about that and this particular girl said all her clients were visiting Americans, every single one. Of course, it was in the Sackville Street area. She would not go with a man she did not consider a wealthy American business man, and all her clients were that, and she supplied a need which they sought. Q. [Chairman]: So this is part of the tourist trade?—A. Yes, in her view, at least. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Yet the Americans themselves rather complain—I happen to have known during the last week or two quite a lot of Americans who complain about being accosted all round Curzon Street. You see, so many of them go the E.S.U. Club in Charles Street, and all round there, and they are beginning to dislike that very much. Q. [Chairman]: I hope you will not think we are pressing you too much in detail about this, Mr Gardiner, but you see this is a very important suggestion, and it could be an extremely valuable one, and if it is to be entertained, still more if it is a recommendation that is going to be made, we do desperately want to see, if we can, what is the size of it and what are the possible, probable consequences of it, os [sic] if we are talking in detailed

2  PROSTITUTION AND PUBLIC SPACE 

41

terms, which you may think rather finicky, that is why.—A. [Mr Gardiner]: We have always realised that the great danger of our proposal is pressure being brought on the Home Secretary to include too many areas or streets in this way. Q. [Dr Curran]: I am not quite clear in my mind what the difficulties and objections are to driving it underground. If we had to summarise the case for driving it off the streets, what would you say were the objections?— A.  As I understand it, Sir, experience has shown if you start to drive it underground you make it difficult for the men and women to find one another; you then get a third party coming, and as soon as a man finds he can make money by introducing them to four or five, then you will get organised vice, and once you get men engaged financially in sexual exploitation, men know the things other men like and the different varieties, and you get a really very much worse state of affairs than you get at the moment. Street solicitation is the thin in its simplest and cleanest form. They do not offer to go with anybody. They pick and choose. In a quarter of an hour the man is out, and there are no associated vices. Once you get financial exploitation you are just asking for trouble.

CHAPTER 3

Beyond London

By the mid-twentieth century, there was considerable concern about levels of prostitution in London. The Festival of Britain in 1951 and the Coronation in 1953 ushered in drives to ‘clean up’ the city in a new era of tourism and television.1 With the capital city under a moral microscope, the government and police faced increasing pressure to ensure that London appeared respectable.2 Highly visible forms of prostitution were therefore presented as having the potential to undermine the image of London and, by extension, Britain. The Home Office certainly believed that solicitation was an issue that disproportionately affected London, as did the Wolfenden Committee.3 The Home Offices’ own memorandum of evidence to the Committee suggested that a large increase in convictions for solicitation was mostly the result of London cases.4 Moreover, many of those invited to give evidence to the Wolfenden Committee were based in London, and those

1  Adrian Bingham, Family Newspapers? Sex, Private Life, and the British Popular Press 1918–1978 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), p. 165; Tim Newburn, Permission and Regulation: Law and Morals in Postwar Britain (London: Routledge, 1992), p. 51; Frank Mort, ‘Cityscapes: Consumption, Masculinities and the Mapping of London since 1950’, Urban Studies, 35:5 (1998), p. 889. 2  Frank Mort. 3  Though Wolfenden said that his own ‘experience of the streets of London’ was ‘very limited’. See NCW evidence, 13th July 1955, p. 22. 4  Home Office memorandum of evidence.

© The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_3

43

44 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

whose expertise was based on their experiences outside of London tended to play down their own issues with solicitation. For example, the Scottish Home Department suggested to the Wolfenden Committee that there was ‘less controversy on this subject in Scotland than in England’ and suggested that ‘the existing law’, which differed in Scotland, had ‘not been strongly criticised’.5 Solicitation in Scotland was prosecuted under different laws to England and Wales. Most prosecutions were brought under the Burgh Police (Scotland) Act 1892 and the evidence of two witnesses was necessary to make a case. Significantly, in Scotland there was no requirement to prove that the act of solicitation had caused annoyance to anyone.6 Whether it should be necessary to prove that the solicitation had annoyed anyone before the matter could be deemed criminal was a key area of debate for the Wolfenden Committee. As such, much of the Scottish evidence collected and reviewed by the Wolfenden Committee reflected the Committee’s interest in clarifying differences between the law in Scotland and the law in England and Wales, rather than concern about prostitution in Scotland. In fact, discussions between the Committee and Scottish witnesses generally took the view that the law in Scotland was more effective than the law in England and Wales. A key concern for the Committee, however, was whether an approach similar to the one taken in Scotland could be applied to a large city like London. Other cities in England and Wales did not receive the same amount of attention from the Wolfenden Committee as London. How the law in England and Wales worked to affect the streets of London was the Committee’s paramount interest. This marginalization of other areas was not simply down to the Wolfenden Committee. During the 1950s, cities like Cardiff, Glasgow, Liverpool, Manchester, and Portsmouth were identified as having issues with prostitution, but local press and police frequently invoked comparisons to London to make their own localities seem less affected by the issue of solicitation.7 It is telling that two of the witnesses whose evidence is presented in this chapter, Chief Constable of Liverpool, Charles Martin, and the Chief Constable of Glamorgan, Cecil  Scottish Home Department memo of evidence.  See Roger Davidson and Gayle Davis, The Sexual State: Sexuality and Scottish Governance, 1950–80 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014), pp. 13–35; Louise Settle, Sex for Sale in Scotland: Prostitution in Edinburgh and Glasgow, 1900–1939 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017). 7  Liverpool Echo, ‘A Blight On Our City’, 11th January 1956, p. 4. West Sussex Gazette, ‘Local Aspects of the Vice Problem’, 12th September 1957, p. 5. 5 6

3  BEYOND LONDON 

45

Hayden Watkins, were not called specifically to give non-London accounts of prostitution, though this framing certainly shaped their testimony. Rather, they were called to speak on behalf of the Association of Police Chief Officers. During their evidence they were both concerned to convey that they had prostitution under control in their respective jurisdictions. However, in Martin’s case, that did not necessarily mean that he was relaxed about the supposed moral dangers of prostitution. After giving evidence to the Wolfenden Committee and reading the subsequent report, Martin was increasingly overt in drawing parallels between moral order on the streets and the issue of prostitution. In 1957, he established a moral welfare branch of Liverpool’s police force to ‘protect girls exposed to moral danger and keep them from immoral influences’.8 This ‘anti-vice squad’ was made up of plain-clothes policewomen who conducted patrols around the city’s docks and railway stations.9 As such, although the London-centric focus of the Committee marginalized discussion about prostitution and the application of the law in other areas, it is clear that the work of the Committee and the effects of the solicitation laws reverberated far beyond the capital.

Scottish Home Department, Memo of Evidence 1. This memorandum is intended to be read in conjunction with the Home Office Memorandum relating to England and Wales. It is arranged in the same order and enters into detail only where there are material differences between the position in Scotland and that in England. 2. There has been much less controversy on this subject in Scotland than in England, and the existing law has not been strongly criticised. 3. As in England and Wales, prostitution is not in itself a criminal offence: the law of Scotland is directed against the same allied activities. I—Solicitation (or importuning) 4. There have been no recent indications of public concern about this social evil in Scotland; and the Secretary of State has received very few 8  He suggested that this work should complement and not replace the efforts of voluntary and statutory welfare agencies. Liverpool Echo, ‘City Moral Welfare Aid’, 16 December 1957, p. 7. 9  Liverpool Echo, ‘Six Policewomen Start Liverpool Anti-Vice Patrol’, 14th November 1957, p. 9.

46 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

representations about it. In post-war years the annual number of cases in which importuning was proved has averaged only about one-third of the average in the 1930s. 5. There are significant differences between Scots and English law in this field: in Scotland annoyance to residents or passengers need not be proved; importuning of women by men is an offence; and penalties may be heavier. Two general differences in criminal law are also relevant: in Scotland there is a system of public prosecution under which the decision to take proceedings does not rest with the police, and the uncorroborated evidence of one witness is not sufficient to prove a charge. 6. […] Almost all charges of importuning are brought under the Burgh Police (Scotland) Act, 1892 or analogous provisions in local Acts. Section 381 of the Act provides: ‘Every person who in any street (and for the purposes of this section “street” shall include any harbour, railway station, canal, depot, wharf, towing-path, public park, links, common, or open area or space, the strand or sea beach down to low-water mark, and all public places within the burgh), commits any of the following offences shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding forty shillings for each offence; viz., ……………………… (22) Being a common prostitute or streetwalker loiters about or importunes passengers for the purpose of prostitution; (23) Habitually or persistently importunes or solicits, or loiters about for the purpose of importuning or soliciting women or children for immoral purposes’.

Mr J. Anderson, CB and Mr AB Hume, Scottish Home Office Q. [Mr Wells]: What is interesting to know is whether annoyance exists at all to the same degree in Scotland, and whether Scottish law is more effective than English law is, because it would not need a very great revolution to assimilate the English law to the Scottish. A. [Mr Anderson]: We wondered whether the differences in Scots law could be relied on in any way to draw any conclusions that would be helpful to the Committee, but it does seem to us extraordinarily difficult to do that. In the first place, the conditions in Scotland are very different from

3  BEYOND LONDON 

47

those appertaining in London, where I think the main problem arises. The number of cases is so small as to make it very dangerous to generalise from the statistics. One would have thought at first blush that the absence of need to prove annoyance in Scottish law was a very material difference which would be a significant pointer, but one gathers that the need to prove annoyance in England is largely a dead letter since in so many of the cases the women plead guilty and proof is in fact unnecessary. Similarly, the fact that heavier penalties can be imposed for subsequent offences might, I suppose, lead one to think that the Scottish prostitute is driven off the streets by this. That may be so, but I would be very hesitant to draw that as a necessary conclusion, and certainly we have no evidence, if she has been driven off the street, that anything in the nature of a call girl system has arisen. Q. [Mr Wells]: We have got to the point as far as we can tell that the English law cannot be enforced in such a way as to deal with this problem, because if you increase the penalties the women plead not guilty and then there is not sufficient evidence to deal with them. The administration of the present law has been wholly inadequate to deal with it. It is farcical, and we are in this position, that almost anything is better than what we have got. A. [Mr Allen]: I think the Home Secretary was very much hoping that something better would emerge. He is attaching a good deal of importance to it. I think I said right at the beginning that the present law is most unsatisfactory and can be criticised from a number of points of view. A: [Mr Hume]: There is one verbal difference which may be significant between English and Scots law. Although we do not have “annoyance”, we do not use the word “solicit”, it is “importune”, which may possibly be considered as meaning more annoyance than solicitation means. […] Q. [Mr Adair]: In Scotland you must have evidence, not of approach to a single individual, that is not importuning, it has got to be as a rule three or more individuals who have actually been seen. That of course means observation on the part of the police extending over a certain period, and of course in Scotland we must have two witnesses to speak to the facts. […] Q. [Chairman]: We have just heard, not for the first time, that in Scotland there is not anything like the same scale [of prostitutes soliciting] that there is in the West End of London. I suppose it is not possible that a

48 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

contributory reason for that is the Scots law rather than English law about this? Mr Adair: I do not think that comes into it to any great extent at all. Nowhere do you have the gathering of people in the way you have in the West End of London. Mrs Cohen: Is it not also this: the Scottish way of life, as you might say, even in the big towns is much simpler and altogether there is not so much night life of any kind in Scotland. Chairman: Bright lights. Mrs Cohen: I think that also is a contributory cause. You, Mr Chairman, referred to paragraph 24 where it talks about causing annoyance to residents and inhabitants and passengers at large, rather than to the individual, and I think that is a very important point, particularly where it affects London, because all sorts of people stray into the streets which are perhaps known to Londoners as streets to be avoided, and I think for a stranger coming into town and wandering happily down Bayswater Road it is really rather shocking. A. [Mr Hume]: I think I would say, if anything the Scots law is likely to curb this to a greater extent than in England, it is the greater penalties and the chances of imprisonment for subsequent offences, or indeed the first offence in Edinburgh and Aberdeen. We have produced figures to show that imprisonment is used in a greater proportion of cases. A. [Mr Anderson]: The two points to some extent hang together. If you are going to make it possible to impose heavier penalties, you must ensure that you can get convictions, and consequently you may find when you come to consider it that heavier penalties and absence of need to prove annoyance to some extent hang together. […] Q. [Chairman]: … it was the distinction I was trying to make this morning; whether what we are dealing with is simply an offence against public decency, however caused, or whether we think that prostitution itself, which the accompaniment of some infringement of public order, ought by law to be discouraged, and then you run up slap into the problem—are we really prepared to make prostitution an offence, prostitution apart from anything else. Whereas it would seem by doing that we are not really going to do very much in the way of clearing up the streets. I was wondering whether in Scotland with these provisions for a substantial fine and possibly for imprisonment that is getting very near to talking about prostitution as an offence—it is not saying so of course.

3  BEYOND LONDON 

49

A. [Mr Anderson]: I would not have thought that was so. It seems to me that if one were to attempt to rationalise the approach to this problem in the Scottish Act it would be something like this: that the presence of prostitutes in the streets, loitering and importuning, is fundamentally an annoyance. That is, so to speak, a preamble, you do not require to prove it, it is the reason for the enactment. All that you have to prove is the fact of loitering and importuning. That is an entirely personal approach, but it works out something like that. Q. [Mr Adair]: Take the Cosmo case, which after all got great publicity, where you had those girls, none of whom were convicted prostitutes, but they were being sent out from a dance hall as prostitutes. Q. [Mr Wells]: It does not follow, after all, that because they have not got in Scotland the same problem as there is in the West End of London that Scots law would not be effective in solving the problem. It would be a matter of trial and error. What is a comparable town in England with Glasgow, for example? A. [Mr Hume]: Liverpool. Q. [Mr Wells]: Exactly, what is the position in Liverpool compared with the position in Glasgow? […] A. [Conwy Roberts, Secretary]: I think the answer may be that in Liverpool there is also power of imprisonment. A. [Mr Graham-Harrison]: I think in Liverpool and in most of the big cities where the Town Police Clauses Act applies there would be powers of imprisonment, though only for 14 days. […] Q. [Mrs Cohen]: How is it that Liverpool have a power of imprisonment? A. [Conwy Roberts, Secretary]: It is under the Town Police Clauses Act, which applies not only to Liverpool but also to every urban district outside London.

Mr Lionel I. Gordon, Crown Agent Q. [Chairman]: I think the difficulty we are in, putting it quite crudely and untechnically, is that it is widely felt in the south at any rate that is not so much the individual act of soliciting that offends, but the presence and the visible, obvious presence of fairly considerable numbers of these people cluttering up the streets, that the actual approach to a particular man may in itself not constitute annoyance or really be the thing one wants to dispose of; but there are certain streets in the West End of London which

50 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

are not really very palatable and from the point of view of public order and decency it might seem to be that which one should get at rather than individual acts of soliciting. You would take it, I think, that your provisions in Scotland are in fact able to deal with that? A. [Mr Gordon]: Yes, I think they are adequate. I do not think we have that problem to any extent. I may be wrong, there may be difficulties in Glasgow but I do not think we have it to any extent. Q. [Chairman]: Again as a question, is it the case or is it not the case that somewhere in Edinburgh we might, if we looked, find a series of ladies draped along the street?—A. [Gordon] Yes, you might find some. I think you have to look for them. Q. [Chairman]: If I lived in Edinburgh and were that sort of man, I should know where to look? A. [Mr Gordon]: Yes, there are certain streets. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Has Edinburgh altered then within the last six years? A. [Mr Gordon]: I would not say it has altered at all. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Or have you managed to keep the streets clearer than they used to be, shall we put it like that? A. [Mr Gordon]: I would say there is not any change. There may be less women about for all I know, but I do not think there is any inconvenience caused by these women. I do not think, unless in some of the quieter streets, that there is much accosting goes on. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: They are just there? A. [Mr Gordon]: They are there, they have always been with us, and I think they always will be with us. The main complaint in Edinburgh just now—probably the Chief Constable will be able to tell you more about it—is of men going round a certain area in the West End in motor cars stopping women, and innocent women, decent women, and we have had a prosecution under the Immoral Traffic Act for that particular offence. The complaints are coming from ladies about the conduct of men looking for these women. Q. [Mr Wells]: In Edinburgh or Glasgow? A. [Mr Gordon]: Edinburgh. […]: Q. [Chairman]: And you would certainly not wish, Mr Gordon, to get involved in the English difficulty about annoyance? A. [Mr Gordon]: No, I certainly would not. I think, with great respect, we are probably better off in Scotland. […]

3  BEYOND LONDON 

51

Q. [Mr Wells]: You have told us yourself that you have not the same problem in the streets as we have. Do you have a serious problem in cafes or public houses? A. [Mr Gordon]: I do not think so, no. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: When there are Americans about, do you have a lot of amateurs? A. [Mr Gordon]: Very much so and very young amateurs. The Americans seem to get hold of the very young girls. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Would you say really the problem here in Edinburgh, or Scotland—leaving Glasgow out of it—is perhaps more with the amateur than with the prostitute perhaps? A. [Mr Gordon]: Possibly yes, with the amateurs.

James Finlay Langmuir, Stipendiary Magistrate of Glasgow, Memo of Evidence Section 3 of the Vagrancy Act, 1824, does not apply to Scotland. The law governing the suppression of solicitation for prostitution in Glasgow has undergone considerable change. Originally Section 149(30) of the Glasgow Police Act, 1866, provided that ‘every common prostitute or night walker loitering in any road, street, court, or common stair, or importuning passengers for the purpose of prostitution’ was liable to a penalty of Forty Shillings or, in default of payment, to imprisonment for fourteen days. This sub-section was repealed by the Glasgow (Further Powers) Act, 1892, Section 18, which imposed a penalty not exceeding Forty Shillings on ‘every prostitute or street walker who on or near any street loiters about or importunes passengers for the purpose of prostitution’. In 1910 these provisions were in turn repealed and Glasgow adopted Section 382 (22) and (23) of the Burgh Police (Scotland) Act, 1892, which are now the Statutory Provisions enforced in Glasgow. Offenders under Section 381 of the Burgh Police (Scotland) Act, 1892, are frequently before the Glasgow Police Courts. The majority of the offenders plead guilty. In cases which go to trial the evidence is usually provided by two Police Officers who are detailed specially for this duty. They take duty not in uniform and as they continue this duty for a regular period they get to know the prostitutes who frequent their area. This knowledge of the character of the offender is essential to successful prosecution.

52 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

The evidence as to character is usually evidence of a recent cautioning, a recent conviction, or evidence that the offender has been observed persistently loitering at the particular locus. The general evidence is that the prostitute solicits men (usually three or four) in a street by stopping the men and, on some pretext or other, holding him in conversation for some little time. The purpose of the soliciting is usually established by the prostitute and the man resorting to a doorway, basement, or lane adjoining the street. The prostitute is charged with loitering for the purpose of prostitution and the usual caution is administered. This is done in the presence of the man. The man is asked for his name and address and informed that the woman will appear in Court the following morning at 9 a.m. He can appear as a witness if he desires to do so. I can recall only one instance where the man availed himself of this advice. In the normal case the man expresses himself definitely as wishing to have nothing to do with the matter. Offences are prevalent in the centre of the City, particularly in the vicinity of the Centres where coffee stalls have been permitted to stand. The majority of the offences are in the late evening. In many instances one or both of the parties have partaken of drink and the use of lanes, doorways, and basements have occasioned complaints from the proprietors of the properties concerned. Upon apprehension for the first time the woman is cautioned by the Officer on Duty at the Police Station and an official record is kept of the cautioning. If she is apprehended for a further offence the women [sic] is brought before the Court and on conviction is given in suitable cases the benefit of Probation supervision. If she offends further she is fined or sentenced to imprisonment for thirty days. Where the offender is determined to continue this mode of living the imposition of a fine has little to no effect.

James Robertson, Prosecutor-Fiscal of Police, Glasgow, Memo of Evidence So far as this branch of the Committee’s remit is concerned, the greatest number of prostitutes in the City are dealt with in the Stipendiary Magistrate’s Court. This Court takes in the centre part of the City and especially the area where coffee stalls are situated. Prostitutes tend to frequent these coffee stalls and the nearby streets for their clients.

3  BEYOND LONDON 

53

In regard to prostitutes loitering about the streets, on their first arrest they are taken by the arresting officer to the Central Police Office and warned by the Officer on Duty in regard to their conduct. If they are again found loitering for the purpose of prostitution, they are arrested and either detained in custody or allowed bail and appear in Court the day after their arrest. The practice in this Court is that on their first conviction, the Magistrate asks the female Probation Officer to interview the accused and, of the Officer’s advice, generally where there is a chance of the accused mending her ways, a Probation Order is made. Many of these women fall again into their old habits and appear before the Court. In 1953 51 women were convicted of loitering for prostitution. These were dealt with as follows: 43 were fined; 5 were sent to Prison; 3 were placed on probation. While I am not asked to express an opinion, I do feel strongly that the only deterrent to these women is imprisonment. The imposition of a fine is useless as it only means that, instead of three clients the next night, they have four. Their money is easily earned and, if an accused person cannot pay her fine, her woman friends soon help her. I have noticed that in cases where such women are allowed thirty days to pay their fine, the fine is usually paid later on the day on which it was imposed or on the next day. It is a rare occurrence for one of these women to be imprisoned for failing to pay the fine imposed. These women often take their clients to the quieter lanes in the City centre and it happens that the client is assaulted by the woman’s male friends and robbed—this apart from the occasions on which the client, if in a drunken state, has his property stolen from him by the prostitute.

Mr W. Hunter, Assistant Chief Constable, City of Edinburgh and Mr James A. Robertson, Assistant Chief Constable, City of Glasgow Q. [Chairman]: … what would be your estimate of the number of prostitutes plying their trade in the streets of Glasgow at present? A. [Robertson]: I should say 100 at least, of the 90 in this year.

54 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Q. [Mrs Lovibond]: May we know their sentences? A. [Robertson]: 139 who appeared before the court; one had no proceedings, 14 had imprisonment, 115 were fined, and nine were admonished. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: May we ask why the 14 had imprisonment? A. [Robertson]: They had previous convictions within seven years. If this is the second conviction within seven years the Magistrate is entitled to give sentence. Q: [Mr Adair]: That is the local Act as applied by Glasgow. Q [Conwy Roberts, Secretary]: They said they do charge in that case as a separate offence. A. [Robertson]: Yes, it is a separate charge. […] Q. [Chairman]: May I be quite clear about the procedure? The first time that a police officer approaches a woman suspected of being prostitute he cautions her and, as I understand it, writes that caution down in his book so to speak, and gives it to her orally, and that is that. The second time, he takes her along to the station and she is cautioned there. And that caution is recorded in the register? A. [Robertson]: Yes. Q. [Chairman]: After that, if she persists, she is pulled in and brought before the Court? A. [Robertson]: Yes. Q. [Chairman]: So before she is brought before the Court at all you have one so to speak unofficial caution, not registered in the register, and a second one which is. Is that correct? A. [Robertson]: Quite correct. Q. [Mr Wells]: How do you know that the woman has only one official caution if there is no register? A. [Robertson]: We have a central register. It is recorded for our own purposes, not for the Court purposes at that time, but the entry in the constable’s notebook is sent in on a form to the Central Record Office and, although it does not go on her sheet, it is recorded. […] Q. [Chairman]: Could you tell us your procedure about this [the use of plain clothes policemen]? A. [Robertson]: I should say incidentally that one of their main tasks in the evening is to look after the prostitutes and see they are not causing annoyance and importuning. They have other jobs to do of course. They go on day duty again when they do normal

3  BEYOND LONDON 

55

police work. They may be on parking offences during the day, and then come back on this again. They are constantly in touch with it. They do six weeks night duty and three months day duty. Q: [Mrs Lovibond]: Do you have women police? A. [Robertson]: Yes, the women police operate with the plain clothes officers at night. Q. [Chairman]: Out of uniform? A. [Robertson]: In uniform. We have women detective officers employed in plain clothes but they do not do this type of work; they investigate the normal sexual offences. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: When you say you have women police working with the men, do you mean you might have one woman and one man policeman? A. [Robertson]: No. Q. [Cohen]: It is always two women? A. [Robertson]: Two always, or it may be one woman will go with two men if they are taking prostitutes into the police office, a woman officer accompanies them, not to do any executive work, but to help the male police officers. […] Q. [Mrs Cohen]: The old Sauchiehall Street ones [prostitutes] have moved really to Bath Street [in Glasgow]? A. [Robertson]: Yes, it is the incidence of the lanes, etc., which makes it convenient. Q. [Mrs Lovibond]: Do any of them [prostitutes] work in the middle of the day? A. [Robertson]: No, they normally do not work. We find many of these girls are on the National Insurance. Many of them are married, of course, a big proportion of them. […] A. [Mr Hunter]: This is in no order, but the next note is Mr Wells’ point to Mr Robertson on the question of indecent assaults on respectable women. I have made the observation that Mr Robertson said it happened on the outskirts rather than the central area. Mr Wells made the observation that they were protected by the prostitutes operating in the central area. I think, so far as Edinburgh is concerned, that is not the case. It is not a question of the respectable women being protected by the prostitutes in the central area but that in the central area there are many more people going about and it would be more difficult for the person to get away with it, whereas in the outer quieter areas these assaults do take place, rather

56 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

than in the busy areas; but it is not the presence of prostitutes in the central area which protects the respectable women. Q. [Chairman]: It is because some are quiet and some are busy, and not because of the prostitutes? A. [Mr Hunter] That is so. … The situation here with cautions is slightly different. Here the first caution—the girl is seen in the street importuning—in the first instance before they are cautioned at all there must be two, three or four attempts. She must have importuned somebody—not just a woman speaking to somebody and going away—they have got to be satisfied that she was importuning, and her name and address and particulars taken. The first caution goes on the register and in addition a report is submitted to the Court Missionary and she takes up the case at that stage initially, after the first caution. The next time a girl is found, the same thing happens except that we do not, on the second occasion, send her to the Court, but she is cautioned again by the officer on the street; and it is only at the third time that she is taken to the police station and receives a final caution, so before Court proceedings are taken here the prostitute receives three cautions. The next time she comes up, she goes to Court. […] Q. [Chairman]: Could you tell me very roughly, Mr Hunter, what your figures are, to correspond to the Glasgow ones? Do not go into detail, but if Glasgow say they have 120 prostitutes taped, what is your experience? A. [Hunter]: I should say around 50 to 60 at the outside in Edinburgh. In 1955 there were 41 convicted but again we have to be careful with that figure because there may have been repeats. That probably represents something like 30 people, those 41 cases, but I am taking into consideration people cautioned for their first time, not convicted; cautioned at any one time, I think the maximum is somewhere in the region of 50 at the very outside. Q. [Chairman]: Actually walking the streets? A. [Hunter]: That is so. Q. [Chairman]: That gives you no kind of clue about how many engage in this activity and do not walk the streets? A: [Mr Hunter] That is an average. Q. [Chairman]: And that might be anything? A. [Mr Hunter]: That might be anything. In general though I should not think there is a very high proportion not walking the streets.

3  BEYOND LONDON 

57

Q. [Chairman]: Would you think there might be in Glasgow or in Edinburgh anything developing like a call girl system? A. [Mr Hunter]: Definitely not. Q. [Chairman]: You have never come across it? A. [Mr Hunter]: No, we have had allegations that it has occurred and have investigated and found nothing. Q. [Chairman]: What about the other possibility occurring in England of little advertisements stuck up in newsagents [sic] shops? A. [Mr Hunter]: No, we have not come across it. Again, I would say the prostitution in Edinburgh is no problem whatever. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: I was wondering whether at the time of the Festival you had an influx if what we would call, probably, amateurs. A. [Mr Hunter]: The amateur is always present, I think, and the more people there are, the more amateurs. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: You do not have an influx and say; here are these girls all coming in again? A. [Mr Hunter]: Not noticeably. […] Q. [Chairman]: As I understand, Mr Robertson, the Magistrates of Glasgow did not think there was any particular need to alter the law in relation to soliciting, and we recognise that you have what some of us think a great advantage in the actual law in Scotland as contrasted with that in England and do not have to bother about annoyance; but there is a recommendation that the maximum sentence should be increased to a fine of £10 or a sentence of 60 days’ imprisonment. There is just one point, on which I think it is fair to ask a question: as things are at the present time, both here and in the south, the fine is of course very small and some people think it is trifling and so much so as to be almost ridiculous. While it is low there would not be, obviously, any point either from the side of the prostitute or the police in doing anything about let the thing takes its ordinary course. If the fine were to be substantially increased, it is suggested to us elsewhere, there might be the danger of introducing yet another temptation to the policeman’s life. A. [Mr Robertson]: I think that is a possibility. The only answer I could give you is that there are many serious crimes in which police have to take action in which bribery could often be alleged and take place no more than in this particular case. A policeman has to withstand these temptations daily. There are much more serious cases than these where a bribe would be much more profitable.

58 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

I do feel that if this question of bribery of the police came into operation the other prostitutes would very soon bring information to the senior officers of the police, of it taking place. It only needs one to be taken out of turn and they will say: why is she not being dealt with, because she is bribing the police? We would get that. Q. [Chairman]: So the safeguard of the policeman’s honesty or morality is the other prostitutes? A. [Robertson]: Yes, and his own integrity. Q. [Chairman]: Do not misunderstand me on this. I have the very highest opinion of the integrity of the police but I wanted to get clear this point which has been put to us that it would be an increased police temptation and not necessarily in this particular matter simply a money bribe. A. [Mr Robertson]: I have no doubt they might be disposed to offer money to the police; it is whether the police would be disposed to accept. Q. [Chairman]: It would not only be money they might offer; it has been suggested that might happen. A. [Mr Robertson]: The services that they generally give? You may get an odd fellow who may succumb to a temptation, but they know them so well, they know many of their physical conditions. Q: [Mr Adair]: And is it not correct that you have always got two police officers present, usually one fairly senior and a man is going to lose a very great deal in the shape of his pension rights, in the other one giving him away? Q. [Chairman]: I quite see that but I wanted just to get it stated. Mr Hunter, you would say the same? A. [Mr Hunter]: Yes, we do have an increased penalty in Edinburgh, higher than in Glasgow or elsewhere; under the local Act it is £10 or 60 days in Edinburgh. Q. [Chairman]: It is what Glasgow recommend now in fact? A. [Mr Hunter]: Yes, it always has been that here since 1933, £10 or 60 days, and we have never experienced any difficulty with this suggestion of bribery. As has been mentioned earlier it is no different from other offences with which police deal, where there are bigger penalties, and I do not think it is relevant—I do not see why this should be in a different category. Q. [Mr Adair]: Do you find the Magistrates imposing higher penalties? A. [Mr Hunter]: Yes, for the largest year there were 41 convicted—1945. Of that 41, two were sent to prison for 20 days, six—30 days, one—60 days, all without the option of a fine. On fines, the remainder received sentences from admonitions up to £10.

3  BEYOND LONDON 

59

Q. [Mr Adair]: Ten pounds has actually been imposed? A. [Mr Hunter]: Yes. […] Q. [Dr Curran]: What do prostitutes charge here in Edinburgh? It varies from what to what?—A. [Mr Hunter]: From five shillings to fifteen. Q. [Dr Curran]: Fifteen would be the upper limit? A. [Mr Robertson]: We have a higher scale in Glasgow, usually about a pound. We have heard prostitutes boasting, probably out if vanity, that they have been able to earn £30 a week. I think it is a bit of vanity, but some of them say three or four pounds a night. Some of them readily admit of course that they made nothing. A. [Mr Hunter]: I was talking in general terms, commonly ten or fifteen shillings. It depends entirely on the condition of the client; if he is drunk they will charge £5, £10, what they can get away with. […] A. [Mr Hunter]: … We have recently reported a number of males for importuning females. We have had a bit of a problem here with gutter crawlers, motor cars going along Queen Street which is a street affected, two removes from Princes Street, relatively quieter, and in general the locality adjoining there; and we had a number of complaints of respectable women being molested by males stopping them there. We did give it considerable attention and we did report quite a few people for it. Of course the charge is persistently soliciting and importuning, and you have to prove “persistently”. The first people, a caution was sent to them and we also announced in the Press that we were going to take this action before we actually did it—we had never done it before—so we did give the public the benefit of the doubt, with of course the Fiscal’s concurrence, so we have reported a number cases. Only one so far has been dealt with and he was admonished. Unfortunately the learned Sheriff made an observation that there is nothing immoral in talking to a woman in a street. The offence consists of annoying a woman, and if it is not annoying there is no case. I have a note here that there is no question of the annoyance in the charge; it is “persistently importuning females”, but that is the only case which has happened. Q. [Chairman]: Do you get that in Glasgow? A. [Mr Robinson]: Not to the same extent as Edinburgh. We charge those people with disorderly behaviour under the Local Police Act—£10 or 60 days.

60 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Magistrates of the Corporation of Glasgow, Witnesses: Bailie TB Duncan, Bailie TJ Thompson, Mr RD Bryson (Town Clerk’s Department), Mr JF Langmuir (Stipendiary Magistrate, Glasgow), Mr James Robertson (Prosecutor Fiscal of Police, Glasgow) A. [Bailie Thompson]: I would only like to point out that there has been a great reduction in prosecutions and convictions over the last fifty years, as you will see from this report. So far as we know there are 120 prostitutes plying their trade, as it is put here, in the streets of the City. That is a very small proportion to the number of citizens in Glasgow, as Mr Langmuir probably told you. We do not know what is going on behind the scenes. He will have a better idea than I have. In Glasgow when a person is caught importuning, to begin with she is taken into the police offices and given a caution and no action is taken against her. I do not know if that actually happens in other cities or not but it does in Glasgow, and that is to try to prevent those people taking up this life which they might otherwise do. Whether it is successful or not I do not know but I think it is a good thing that the police should caution those girls. […] A. [Mr Robertson]: At the same time [as the woman is cautioned a second time] the officer communicates with the Women’s Help Society— Miss Mackenzie does noble work there—and they contact the girl and try to help her; then the third time, she is brought up. […] Q. [Mrs Cohen]: There is a sentence at the top of that page of which I would like to ask the meaning. It ends: “And possibly with changes in public morality”. Do you think, by that, that public morality has improved, or the other way? A. [Mr Duncan]: Taking it from the figures and our point of view generally, we think the City has risen generally in morality and the standard is higher today than it was. Q. [Chairman]: I had thought it meant partly that but also possibly that public opinion about private morality had changed the other way so that there was a good deal more amateur promiscuity than prostitution. A. [Mrs Cohen]: I do not agree with that sentence, if you mean morality.

3  BEYOND LONDON 

61

A. [Duncan]: I am sure that is difficult to decide, Mr Chairman, that that is the case. What you suggest could not be put in figures, could not be brought home to roost and would be merely an acceptance possibly of a wider outlook. It might be true to say that Press today do lay on the sex side and from that, that people take a wider view of the sex question; but I feel from my point of view that the higher physical standard of the community and the greater degree of economic security women have generally has had its reaction, because although part of the prostitution may be of a social and physical or mental standpoint it also has its economic standpoint, and the more you remove the economic standpoint the lower you bring your figures. It has its effect on the numbers engaged in the traffic. There may be increases in the amateurs, I am not denying it, but the point we are concerned with is prostitution as such from the point of view of the traffic, from an economic standpoint largely. Q. [Mr Adair]: We have heard there are 120 prostitutes plying in the streets of the City of Glasgow, and the total number of persons against whom prosecutions were taken in 1953 was 98; that is to say, not all of them were even once before the Court. In so far as street walkers are concerned, you are not going to suggest that they are only out once a year? A. [Mr Duncan]: Not at all, but from this point of view I must stress it again if you will allow me to come back to it, the question of public nuisance with which we are concerned and with which the police are concerned. If we cannot bring a case to Court because we have no evidence of soliciting or importuning or being actively engaged on the job, although we know they have already a background of conviction, surely that in itself is the answer from our point of view. Q. [Mr Adair]: Is not that a change in the whole attitude of the police towards this question, because you undoubtedly did have men, in years gone by, who made very irregular incursions into the city to watch for importuning? A. [Mr Langmuir]: There are men on it regularly. Q. [Mr Adair]: And that is no longer the case? A. [Mr Langmuir]: Yes. A. [Mr Duncan]: They are still engaged on that job. Q. [Mr Adair]: The importuning has gone down. A. [Mr Robertson]: I do not accept the figure of 120. […] Q. [Mrs Cohen]: May I just say this, as to this figure of 98? There is a difficulty in proving this importuning business, and perhaps the reduction

62 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

of cases is partly because the technique of importuning has so improved that it is difficult for the constables to have them up. A. [Mr Robertson]: It is 98 persons proceeded against, but it does not say how many times these persons appeared before the court, out of 120 known prostitutes. The 120 may be first-timers and second-timers. There were 98 cases …. […] Q. [Mr Wells]: It means 98 occasions on which they were proceeded against, not 98 individuals? Q. [Mr Adair]: There were 98 individual cases before the court, not individuals. Q. [Mr Wells]: So far as you are concerned, there has been no relaxation in the standards of care by the police, compared with 30 or 40 years ago? A. [Mr Thompson]: I would not say that. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: I just wondered about Bath Street. Are that [“high class”] type gone from Sauchiehall Street and Bath Street? A. [Mr Langmuir]: Sauchiehall Street is not a happy hunting ground, but Bath Street is. But the Bath Street type are not any higher or different from the type hanging around the coffee stall.—A. [Mr Thompson]: You are not thinking of the Call Girl type, whom one gets in touch with in a public house or in a restaurant? Q. [Mrs Cohen]: I was just wondering whether there is the Call Girl type. In London, they hand around the streets, as well. I was thinking of the high-class prostitutes, who might hang around Curzon Street. A. [Mr Thompson]: No. You may have a difference in quarters there, but I do not think they grade themselves in any way at all. Q. [Mr Adair]: Or down about the docks? A. [Mr Thompson]: Yes. Even there, you get the lodging house type, the aged hag type, but personally, I have never noticed any particular grading in them. They all wear ultra-fashionable clothes and ultra-­fashionable hats, and so on, but I think underneath there is no difference. Q. [Mrs Lovibond]: What about these women? A. [Mr Langmuir]: The majority of them are in the group, I would say, between 18 and 19, up to 30. Q. [Mrs Lovibond]: And do they work on their own? They are not employed by anybody? A. [Mr Langmuir]: They are not employed by anybody. Q. [Mrs Lovibond]: They are entirely on their own?

3  BEYOND LONDON 

63

A. [Mr Langmuir]: On their own. I do not know of any extensive pooling system at all, or anyone who has a series of them and makes a profit from them.

Christina Mackenzie Submitted Evidence The Law in Scotland differs from that in England in that no prostitute can be cautioned without the corroborative evidence of two policemen. That, I consider, is a most important point … often members of the Police Force told me of individual girls who were in danger of getting into trouble. I had special permission during the War, when on patrol with the police, to speak to ‘teenagers’ who were hanging around. I visited their homes and saw the parents. This proved a very valuable piece of work. With the usual ‘cautions’, I visit them, often the addresses given to the Police are wrong but I usually eventually trace them, and sometimes a previous ‘caution’ changes her name. That is the advantage of one person doing this particular type of work.

Miss Christine Mackenzie, Warden, Women’s Help Committee (Interview) [Miss Mackenzie]: … no legislation is going to be of the slightest use, unless the two sexes are treated equally. I do feel that very strongly. It is a case of supply and demand, but I am quite sure that the way it is done now is wrong. It is a bye-law in Glasgow that a man can importune a woman, but the woman has got to come to court to give evidence against the man doing it. That is quite wrong. If corroborative evidence is given by two police, where a woman is concerned, I do think that corroborative evidence from the police should be sufficient, and it would not be frightfully difficult to get some of them. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: You mean if a man importunes a woman, and two policemen see him doing it, that it is the man who ought to go to court, and not the woman? A. [Miss Mackenzie]: Yes, and not the woman. There was a famous case in Edinburgh about a fortnight ago, of a man who came before the court. He importuned three women; two were not having anything to do with him, and the third was. He came up to court, and I think he was discharged. […]

64 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

[Mackenzie: …] I would say the men who are doing the plain clothes work in Glasgow are particularly chosen people, and they do not do it for very long at a time; there is a rota for them. Another big difficulty we have just now is that with the money they are making they take rooms. They go to a private room, and you would have difficulty in getting into a private room to visit them. We also in Glasgow have a great difficulty, and the police would agree with me here, one part of Glasgow which used to be a very good area, where there are now a great many Indians. So long as one man has the house, he can have in as many as he likes, so that it is difficult to get at them. That is one of the difficulties now in doing constructive work for them. You might try half a dozen times before you get them, and they are not co-operative. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Would you say that the streets of Glasgow, in Sauchiehall and that part, are now clear of prostitutes? I have not been in Glasgow for a long time, but I was told that there were practically no prostitutes around that area. A. [Miss Mackenzie]: Not so much. Of course, it is our coffee stalls that are the curse. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Of course, they are the poorer type? A. [Miss Mackenzie]: Yes, poorer as compared with the better off. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: I heard there was no problem in Glasgow at all, and I just wondered whether you would agree with me. A. [Miss Mackenzie]: Nonsense. There is a huge problem. Q. [Chairman]: You were saying just now, Miss Mackenzie, that the plain clothes men, who are on duty in Glasgow, are carefully chosen and have a rota. A. [Miss Mackenzie]: Yes. Q. [Chairman]: Is it a fair question to ask whether there is a corresponding rota of arrests? In the south we hear of the rather convenient arrangement that the girl on the street is picked up every month, or every two months, in a sort of cycle, so she knows when it is her turn, and she goes and pays her 40s and she is back again. Is there anything corresponding to that cycle? A. [Miss Mackenzie]: Not that I know of. Q. [Mr Adair]: The Assistant Chief Constable would probably be better able to answer that. A. [Miss Mackenzie]: I really am only supposed to do the cautions, and it is just when I happen to get somebody who has been cautioned, who comes up again, that I see them. The Chief would be the person who

3  BEYOND LONDON 

65

would know. They certainly have a tremendous loyalty amongst the known prostitutes, and they have a kitty. I was visiting one a short time ago, and she said to me “It is all right if I am caught out again. I will get my money paid. It will not make any difference. I will just get my money paid.” Q. [Chairman]: That was a kitty among themselves, or was there a man behind this, organising it—a protector? A. [Miss Mackenzie]: I could not say that, but I am told there is. I would not say that. It is a popular opinion that they are financed by certain operators. … [Mr Adair on men soliciting women …] This is the Burgh Police Act, which is adopted into the Glasgow Police Act, “Every person who in any street commits any of the following offences—habitually or persistently importunes or solicits or loiters about for the purpose of importuning or soliciting women or children for immoral purposes.” A. [Mackenzie]: It is not put into force. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: May I just put a question to Mr Adair? Would that be allowed in relation to this? What I want to know is, supposing I was walking in Glasgow and a man came up to me—one of these people who puts himself within the law—and he importunes me, and there happens to be a policeman there and I say “This man has been following me down the street, and trying to get me to go with him” …. A. [Mr Adair]: If he had persistently importuned you, that is to say he had done it three times. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Would the policeman then say to me “Quite right, madam”, and he takes the man’s name and address? I would have to go to court, would I? A. [Mr Adair]: Yes. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Why? A. [Mr Adair]: He would have to get evidence. He did not see it. That is not a case that strikes against women. What is struck at against a woman is that she is seen to importune at least three different men. In this case, if the police officer saw that man importune you in Sauchiehall Street, and saw him follow you in Hope Street and speak to you in Hope Street, and saw you down again at the foot of Hope Street, and he persistently does it, that is an offence and he will prosecute that, or at least he will report it for prosecution, without you having to attend. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: That is what I wanted to get at, and that is what they are getting at, that on an occasion like that the woman would be made to

66 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

give evidence against the man, whereas in the case of a woman, the man never has to go …. A. [Mr Adair]: Not a woman—a case of a common prostitute. That is the distinction. A. [Miss Mackenzie]: I have been for over 33  years in the Glasgow Police Courts, and I have never once seen a man in for that.

Association of Police Chief Officers, Witnesses: Mr CC Martin, Chief Constable of Liverpool and Mr CH Watkins, Chief Constable of Glamorgan Mr Martin: … prostitution, as far as street walking is concerned, is not a problem at all. I think it is borne out by the number of convictions of prostitutes last year, when there were only five. That is very, very few for a big seaport, but then on the other hand there is a good deal of brothel keeping, and last year again there were 83 warrants executed in connection with brothels. … It really is not a problem to us at all, except this brothel keeping, which is a nuisance and it takes up a good deal of police time. Of course, in a seaport obviously there is bound to be a good deal of this going on, and there is some sort of underground system whereby seafaring people are often attracted to these places. They very often are what are known as shebeens—I do not know if you have heard that expression, a shebeen is a place where intoxicating liquor is sold without a licence, and it is usually a combination of shebeen and brothel, and there is, I am afraid to say, a system whereby, as I say, seafaring people are attracted to these places, sometimes through taxi drivers and other people. But usually it goes on indoors, in brothels, and, if I may repeat, these offences will prove there is not very much street walking in Liverpool. In any case it is very difficult to prove, and I do not blame the constable who is rather circumspect about dealing with a prostitute, because after all he has got to prove that she is not only a common prostitute—I dare say you have heard all this before—but he has also got to prove that she is importuning to the annoyance of passers-by and inhabitants, and so on, and that is very difficult to prove, so far as Liverpool is concerned. That may be one of the reasons, of course, where there are so few convictions, but there is not much street walking going on. Of course, the presence of policewomen and policemen on the streets drives them into milk bars and public houses, and places like that, where they get hold of men and take them to brothels or to flats, and so on.

3  BEYOND LONDON 

67

Mr Watkins: Our position, Sir, is quite different from that of Mr Martin in Liverpool, because we have no very large seaport town in the County of Glamorgan. We are as you know a very large industrial county, with a population of about 1¼ million. As far as the offences involving prostitutes and brothel keeping are concerned, one can say the offence does not exist at all, I should say it does not exist anywhere in Wales except possibly in the large seaport town of Cardiff. I consulted with my colleague as to whether he had the occasional case of the prostitute street walking, and so on, but he assures me it is nothing like a serious problem in the city of Cardiff. What he does get is the type of prostitute who is picked up in the city by a motor car, and the act, so to speak, is committed out of the city area; but even there, prostitution, as I say, and brothel keeping generally are not a serious problem as far as the County of Glamorgan is concerned. Q. [Mr Adair]: Are you troubled with either milk bars or public houses where they are being encouraged to go? A. [Mr Martin]: No, not encouraged. It is awfully difficult, you know, in the centre of the city, where these places are packed at times, it is awfully difficult to suggest that anyone encourages them to go in. It is of course a fact that they are more or less, shall I say, for want of a better word, driven into them, in other words that they find they cannot walk the street and that the next best method of getting a man is in a milk bar or a public house. Q. [Mr Adair]: And that is controlled by your brothel prosecutions? Is that your method of controlling that, controlling the amount of prostitution that goes on? A. [Mr Martin]: No, I would not say that so much. It does help to control it, but I think there are all sorts of other features. I think generally the standard is improving, and that there are gradually becoming fewer prostitutes than there used to be. Q. [Chairman]: May I take it from what has been said from two such different areas as yours that generally speaking in the provinces prostitution, in the sense of street walking and soliciting, and so on, is not a serious problem? Would that be the view of your colleagues? A. [Mr Martin]: I would go further than that, I would say it is almost non-existent in many places in the provinces; it is only in big congested areas that you find it to any extent at all. Q. [Chairman]: We have of course had a good deal of evidence of the prevalence of it in London, and especially in the West End of London, and

68 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

certain areas not in the West End, but would it be your view that that really is a problem localised in London? A. [Mr Martin]: I think that really is perfectly true, it is not a problem outside London. A. [Mr Watkins]: I would quite agree, Sir. Q. [Chairman]: And that would be true of even the big cities in England and Wales? A. [Mr Martin]: I am not entitled to speak, really, about Manchester, of course, but it is probably a little rose in Manchester—things are always a little worse in Manchester! I understand from the chief constable of Manchester that it can be a problem unless it is kept under control. I am not suggesting that it is a police problem there at all, I do not think it is, and I am sure you are perfectly right in saying that it is not generally speaking a problem outside London. A. [Mr Watkins]: We have that problem in Glamorgan of a woman receiving men in her house. We often get anonymous letters dealing with that kind of thing, but the thing does not last long, it is not a serious problem from our point of view. There may be something in the Welsh way of life—as Mr Goronwy Rees will know—that in these small Welsh towns the woman who does step off morally on the wrong foot is very soon ostracised, and when that position does arise it does not last for a very long ting. It is not a serious problem so far as my county is concerned.—A. [Mr Martin]: I am glad Mr Watkins has mentioned that, because we have one division, it is the Scotland Road division, I do not know if anyone has heard of Scotland Road, but it is a peculiar district; all the people there are very poor, they are quite decent people, but a strange thing is that we never have a prosecution for a brothel or anything connected with prostitution, because the people there would never allow it. That is what the officer in charge of the division tells me. We have never had a conviction or a complaint or the suspicion of a brothel in that division, and it is one of the most congested areas of the city. Q. [Canon Demant]: Are they natives? Are they Liverpudlians? A. [Mr Martin]: Yes, many of them are third- or fourth-generation Irish but they are all Liverpudlians. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Would you say that was inhabited by a good working class type of person? A. [Mr Martin]: Yes, they are very sound people, industrious people, and although they love in extremely poor conditions I think they have for a certain standard which they are very anxious to maintain.

3  BEYOND LONDON 

69

Society of Labour Lawyers, Witnesses: Mr Gerald Gardiner QC, Mr Ben Hooberman, Mr PR Kimber, Mr CR Hewitt, Miss Jean Graham Hall A. [Mr Gardiner]: In Edinburgh the practice is that as soon as a policeman sees a new girl on the street he warns her that she will receive a visit from the welfare officer. He does that three times. The fourth time she is taken to the police station, and given a good talking to by the police sergeant. If that does no good at all she is treated as a regular. She is not in fact arrested until those steps have been taken. All our evidence from other sources, including the prostitutes themselves, is that there is a real chance of doing something with the entrants. The welfare officer in Edinburgh who has been doing it for 35 years has had very considerable success, and we do not know whether you want to hear her. We got this from the Muir Society, which is a Society of Labour Lawyers in Edinburgh who are not submitting evidence themselves.

CHAPTER 4

Policing

When the then Metropolitan Police Commissioner William Horwood was asked by the 1927 Street Offences Committee to comment on the police’s role in controlling prostitution, he told them that ‘police consider it the most obnoxious part of their duty … very unpopular’.1 There were several reasons why police officers may have felt this way. By the time the Wolfenden Committee sat in 1954, police forces around Great Britain had been under immense pressure to ‘do something’ about prostitution for around seventy-five  years. On the one hand, the police were criticized when they did not take enough action to clear the streets or prosecute brothels. On the other, they found themselves the subject of national scandals for wrongful arrest, corruption, and harassment. In 1887, Police Constable Endacott was charged with perjury for the arrest of Elizabeth Cass for soliciting, after her employer came to her defence.2 In 1906, a series of cases of harassment, abuse, and extortion—many related to prostitution—resulted in a Royal Commission on the Duties of the Metropolitan Police. However, the problem persisted and levels of police prejudice and discretion in interpreting who was and was not soliciting produced further errors. For example, in December 1924, Dora Isaacs was awarded £7 7s 1  William Horwood Testimony before the Street Offences Committee, 1927. National Archives, HO45.12663. 2  David Taylor, ‘Cass, Coverdale and Consent’, Cultural and Social History, 12:1 (2015), pp.  113–136; Judith Walkowitz, ‘Going Public: Shopping, Street Harassment, and Street Walking in Late Victorian London’, Representations, 62 (1998), pp. 9–10 and pp. 16–17.

© The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_4

71

72 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

damages by Birmingham County Court after being wrongly arrested for solicitation. Isaacs had, in fact, sought £100 as part of her claim against the Birmingham City Police Force, but the judge in the case expressed sympathy for the police.3 In 1928, the harassment during interrogation of Miss Irene Savidge—arrested alongside Sir Leo Money in Hyde Park—led to another enquiry.4 It was a bad year: later in 1928, Sergeant Goddard was arrested and found guilty of bribery and extortion in his dealings with West End clubs and women who sold sex.5 The police had a long memory. They frequently referenced these scandals in their correspondence with each other and the Home Office, and the historian can see the impact they had on arrest rates. In London, dramatic drops in arrests and convictions followed these scandals.6 Indeed, policing statistics showed little consistency over the century before Wolfenden, and little relation to the amount of solicitation or brothel-­ keeping that was happening at any given time. Sometimes, and in some places, police were happy to turn a blind eye to off-street prostitution that was conducted quietly.7 In many areas, police employed a kind of ‘rota arrest’ system for street solicitation. Some individual officers supported the idea of regulation, some were very morally opposed to prostitution, while many others (probably the majority) did not consider it a problem particularly worthy of their attention. The period after the Second World War saw skyrocketing arrest rates. As we noted in the introduction, arrests for solicitation went from around 2000 a year in 1945 to 16,000  in 1955.8 Most of this increase was in London. Some argued that this was clear proof that prostitution had reached unprecedented and totally unacceptable levels on the streets. Others suggested that it was due to a rise in ‘amateur’ prostitution, young women who engaged in transactional sex casually and tended to behave more aggressively on the street. Quietly, the Metropolitan Police Divisional leaders wondered whether it was the fact that they had begun to pay police officers for their time spent in court that was contributing to a higher  Birmingham Daily Gazette, ‘Seven Guineas Instead of £100’, 5th December 1924, p. 6.  Helen Self, Prostitution, p. 5. 5  Heather Shore, ‘“Constable dances with instructress”: the police and the queen of nightclubs in inter-war London’, Social History, 28:2 (2013), pp. 183–202. 6   Stefan Anthony Slater, ‘Containment: Managing Street Prostitution in London, 1918–1959’, Journal of British Studies, 49 (2010), p. 343. 7  Samantha Caslin, Save the Womanhood, p. 66. 8  Julia Laite, Common Prostitutes, p. 225. 3 4

4 POLICING 

73

number of arrests.9 Police were not any more enthusiastic about apprehending women on the street, but at least they were finally getting paid for prosecuting them. Wolfenden spoke to and accepted memoranda of evidence from a range of stakeholders about the policing of prostitution. The Association of Chief Police Officers of England and Wales sent the Chief Constables of Liverpool and Glamorgan as witnesses, and the Chief Constable of Kent had been due to attend the same meeting. Police chiefs from Glasgow and Edinburgh also spoke to the Committee, while probation officers from Cardiff and Kent represented the National Association of Probation Officers. For London, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, a Commander, and the Metropolitan Police Solicitors spoke from their official positions, while individual police constables and sergeants reflected on their many years of experiences with prostitution whilst on the beat. Dorothy Peto, the first superintendent of the Metropolitan Women Police, was part of the group who visited the Committee to give evidence on behalf of the Association for Moral and Social Hygiene, and the then Chief Superintendent of the Metropolitan Women Police, Miss EC Bather, was invited to give evidence along with other members of the Metropolitan Women Police. The perspectives of these men and women were varied, but they mostly agreed that the present law was not fit for purpose and led to many difficulties, including a persistent lack of evidence for ‘annoyance’. Just the same, most felt that increased punishments such as imprisonment for what they viewed as a minor offence would not be appropriate. Other interviewees spoke at length about policing. Many mentioned hearing about or witnessing the system of rota arrests. Neighbourhood associations felt that the police did not take their jobs policing prostitution seriously, and that there were not enough police officers dedicated to the task. Police magistrates questioned the evidence provided by officers in court and the relationship between policing and punishment was also explored by witnesses and the Committee. In particular, it was suggested that bribery was not a significant issue in London and certainly not in the provinces since the low cost of the fines meant that it was not worth attempting to bribe the police. For Wolfenden, then, there was a choice to be made between maintaining what were widely considered to be insignificant fines and raising the fines at the risk of encouraging police corruption. Perhaps, unsurprisingly, these challenges in policing prostitution meant 9

 Julia Laite, Common Prostitutes, p. 176.

74 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

that it was a job that placed officers under increased scrutiny. ‘It is not a job … that everyone is clamouring for … not at all’, one Police Constable told the committee.10 It seems that continuity rather than change marked police attitudes towards prostitution between the early twentieth century and the commencement of Wolfenden’s enquiry.

Excerpts Police and Magistrates  .  Sir John Nott-Bower, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, 1 Commander Robertson, A Division, and Police Court Solicitor Q. [Chairman]: Could I just ask a question about the figures in paragraph 3 on page 2, where you say: “before the war the greatest number of arrests in any one year was 3195 in 1936”—that is to say, between the wars? A. [Nott-Bower]: That is right … that does really refer to the period between the wars. We have got up-to-date figures, which we had not when we sent this in, and the latest figures for the first none months of this year, the total number of arrests was 8395, which is an increase of 1266 on the similar period of last year. … Q. [Dr Whitby]: Can you help us as to whether this steep rise after the war is due to increased police activity or to an actual increase in the number of prostitutes? A. [Nott-Bower]: I should say in the main it is due to increased police activity rather than the increased number of prostitutes. Q: You have evidence in your Department that that is so? A: Indeed, yes. We have given the figures, I think, of the estimated number of prostitutes, and they do not show anything like the same proportion of increase. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: May I ask how you have arrived at those figures of the number of prostitutes? A: We have arrived at the figures of the number of prostitutes by the number of individual women actually convicted during the year, on the assumption that everybody who is in any way an active prostitute is convicted at least once.  Interview with PCs Scarborough and Anderson, Wolfenden Committee.

10

4 POLICING 

75

Q: In a year? A: During the course of a year, and the only way we can estimate the number of prostitutes actually working is to take the figures of the different individual women who have been prosecuted … some of them have been prosecuted a very large number of times indeed, as many as 30 or 40 times during the course of a year. … You see, if you take West End Central, the “C” Division, which comprises the biggest number of all, it shows that the number of prostitutes we estimate has risen from 481  in 1950 to 779 in 1954. There is an appreciable increase in the numbers working. Q: You would not think, then, that there were a large number of what we might call clever prostitutes, who evade detection altogether? A: I do not think any prostitutes are sufficiently clever to evade arrest altogether. I think some of the prostitutes are very careful in their method of solicitation, so as not to give cause for a complaint of annoyance, and then they are much less liable to be arrested than the more forward ones, and that of course is strictly in accordance with the existing state of the law. If a prostitute refrains from causing annoyance, then she is not liable. … Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: I wonder if Sir John would say a word to us about the allegation we have from time to time that there is a sort of rhythm in the arresting of these girls, that they are taken up in a certain routine? Is that in fact so? It sounds as though it very probably is so. A. [Nott-Bower]: … I have interviewed quite a number of men and women who are constantly engaged in this sort of thing, and I have taken the cases of the women who are most frequently arrested; in other words, I think we took women who had been arrested more than twelve times in a year, and I have got actual details of the dates on which those arrests took place. As I have said in my report, the result of that very careful examination does indicate that there is a certain pattern in the arrest of these women. I have tried to explain very briefly in my written evidence what I think accounts for that, which I get from the men actually engaged on the spot, and the officers, and as I say I think it is due partly to the fact that there is almost no limit to the number of arrests they can make, and I think the men think that in a sort of common fairness they ought to spread it a bit. Moreover, as I have said, the courts do not like it at all if the same woman is brought up at very short intervals, the next day, two days later, or three days later, and they indicate their disapproval of that sort of thing by imposing a much smaller penalty than they normally would. …

76 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: Does any pattern indicating once a month, or once a week, or anything of that kind, emerge? A: I think it is more like once a fortnight. That is the most frequent and the most consistent. … Q: [Mr Rees]: Why do the courts not like it? A: I really do not know. The courts in the West End are frightfully busy, and a very large number of prostitutes being produced is apt to dislocate the work of the courts, and I think generally speaking they do not like too much activity being displayed by the police. They think it is rather unnecessary to bring a woman up twice in two or three days. I think I would like to ask Mr Robertson [Assistant commissioner A] to give you an instance of something which happened when he himself was in charge of “C” Division. A. [Mr Robertson]: On that score, as regards how the courts view things like that, there are times in the West End when something happens which necessitates our being a little more strict than we generally are, and in this particular case we flooded the courts to a very large extent and took over 100 prostitutes in at one time. Obviously, that was not very well received, shall I say, by the magistrates, and one told me that if that happened again he would require substantial corroboration in every case which was fought. I put that down, as Sir John has said, to the upsetting of the court arrangements more than anything else. They allow so many to come there for each court, and apart from the charges they stick to that; therefore the charges took up most of this day. Out of that lot, I think two of them pleaded not guilty and both who pleaded not guilty got off. Sir John Nott-Bower: Did you not go further and tell me he said he would discharge any woman who pleaded not guilty? Mr Robertson: Yes, that is so, that is what I meant by the last point. Q. [Canon Demant]: I could understand that the magistrates might in a sort of irritation discharge large numbers of these women, but why should they lower the fine? Is that an implied rebuke to the police? A. [Commander Robertson]: We have not been able to find that out. As Sir John has said, the men employed on this job are very sensitive to how the courts react, and if one gets away it spreads throughout the West End in no time, and you see the results the next day when you are looking at the charge book. …

4 POLICING 

77

Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: I gather that there is no special group of men allocated to this work …. A [Nott-Bower]: You are talking about solicitation in the streets? Q: Yes A: In the West End Central, C Division, they employ what is known as a rowdyism patrol which deals with all forms of rowdyism in the streets, and they are the people who concentrate on the prostitutes. They number I think a sergeant and 14 men at the present time. They are employed for a month at a time and then they are changed. They are selected men of some service, experience and discretion and they are the people who deal mainly with it, although any policeman, man or woman, who is out in the streets if something of that sort is thrust upon them rather flagrantly take action, but the bulk of the work there is done by this rowdyism patrol. Q. [Mr Rees]: This is an unpopular duty, is it? A: It is not at all a popular duty, no. Q: Can you say why? A: I think from the inherent nature of the job, bringing in these unfortunate women one after another. It is a very dull form of duty and entails a good deal of waiting about at the court. It is rather an unpleasant job. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: How far are women police used on that sort of duty? A [Nott-Bower]: Women police are used fairly extensively in the Paddington area. We have a lot of complaints from that area and there has undoubtedly been a big increase in the number of prostitutes in the Paddington and Bayswater Road area. … There is a table here showing the number of arrests made by women police for solicitation, and the number is pretty big.  .  PC Scarborough and Anderson, C Division 2 PC Scarborough: This question of annoyance you mentioned—of course some men are annoyed in different ways. Some men as soon as a prostitute approaches automatically step off the pavement and have nothing to do with her will not even approach her—especially a man who walks regularly where they are regularly soliciting. He knows them as well as we do and takes steps to walk away from them. A prostitute will see it and stand back. Another one will come along and say “no, no, I do not want anything like that” and step away from her, and if she thinks there is something doing she will follow him, catch hold of his arm; he does get annoyed and says “no, no go away”. Others do not mind so much because they are regular people who use the street the same as the prostitutes, they just ignore

78 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

them and walk straight on. Then there is the other type who really like them and stand and talk to them but do not go with them. There are all kinds of annoyance that crop up. It is a hard job to get some …. … Q. [Canon Demant]: If the offence was perhaps accosting and no mention of annoyance—and perhaps increasing the penalties—would that drive the prostitutes off the streets or tend to do so? A. [PC Anderson]: It would greatly assist. Q: What effect would that have on the volume of prostitution? A: I would not say it would stop prostitution at all; it would certainly stop the vast amount of standing on the streets of the West End. Q: And would it make the carrying out of your duties clearer? A: Simpler, Sir, much simpler. … Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: What is the value of the uniform as against plain clothes? The rowdyism squad works in uniform? A. [PC Scarborough]: Yes. Q.: You rely on the uniform to break them up, the appearance of it, but obviously it makes the obtaining of evidence more difficult? A.: No, it does not really Sir. I think if there were any suggestion of plain clothes at all you would run into many other difficulties. The evidence of plain clothes officers never was any good; there was always too much trouble with it—leaving too much underhand work both in the police department and from the prostitutes’ side. I do not think it would be a good thing at all. … Q. [Mr Rees]: How far can you proceed against them simply on charges of loitering? A. [PC Scarborough]: You cannot proceed against them. It is merely our job to prevent loitering—“Come along, move along, please”. Nine out of ten times we do not have to do that. When they see us they go. If there are half a dozen or so who will congregate on the footway in a crowd, there is the obstruction of the footway. There again you have to caution them that if they continue to obstruct the footway they will be arrested. You caution them. Sometimes they are satisfied, sometimes if you come back in an hour’s time you find the same little crowd again and they are arrested. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: How many would you arrest? A. [PC Anderson]: With the assistance of other officers ….

4 POLICING 

79

A. [PC Scarborough]: … all of them, but we never have any trouble even with that. The girls will turn round and say “Yes, all right”.  .  Frank Powell, London Police Court Magistrate 3 (Submitted Evidence) The only evidence [for soliciting to the annoyance] I have ever known produced comes from the arresting officer, and it is frequently of a nature to be quite incredible. Women are stated to have obstructed pedestrians by stopping in front of them and forcing them off the pavement, by placing their hands on their arms to detain them, and so forth, all performed within a few yards of a constable or constables in uniform of whose presence they are perfectly aware. Furthermore, this type of evidence has evolved into almost a set pattern. Frequently the court is asked to infer that a pedestrian was annoyed from some subtle inference drawn by the constable from his retreating back at a distance of some scores of yards. A curious “modus vivendi” arrived at between the police and the prostitutes has obviated this difficulty in the great majority of cases. Prostitutes are apparently content to plead guilty, and most of the “regulars” do so at intervals of about a fortnight. Let me say at once that though this state of affairs may well have originated a good many years ago when the reputation of the force was not nearly as high as it right is now, I am satisfied that with the rarest expectations which have not come before me, there is no question of corrupt pressure by the police, no bribing, and the pleas of guilty are made as matters of expedience quite voluntarily by the women.  .  Frank Powell, London Police Court Magistrate (Interview) 4 Powell: … I am quite certain from all I have heard over the years that police on regular duty in the West End do arrange with prostitutes that they shall take no notice of them for a certain period of time and then say to them—“Mary” or “Susan”, whatever the name is—“it will be your turn on such and such a day”. I have heard of a case—this is purely here say— where a sergeant walked along Piccadilly: this is quite a private inquiry, is it not? Chairman: Absolutely. Powell: A sergeant walked along Piccadilly and there were the girls in the doorways of the various stores and shops and so on, each on their own particular pitch, and of course I understand they fight each other if one gets on to somebody else’s pitch, which may very easily lead to perfectly respectable woman walking along the street with a man, her husband or whoever he is, being assaulted by one of these women because she is taken

80 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

for a prostitute. I have heard of a sergeant walking along the street chucking each girl under the chin and saying—“It will be your turn on Tuesday, your turn on Friday,” and so on. I feel myself … that really this business of apprehending these girls should not be left to male officers but should really be left to the women police. Civil Society and Professional Organizations  .  National Council of Women: Witness Statement by 1 Lady Nunburnholme The Fabian Society held a meeting in Chelsea about a month ago where Miss Jean Graham Hall, a former Probation Officer, and I understand, representing the Labour Lawyers, said that C Division, which includes Curzon Street, was notorious, where there were the most prostitutes and most arrests and she put this down, amongst other things, to the fact that at Marlborough Street and adjoining Bow Street the ladies who were brought up in these Courts were almost invariably fined £2. On the other hand, the book published by the Social Biological Council on ‘Women of the Streets’ has a different view and it says that at Marlborough Street the women are sometimes bound over on sureties under the Justice of the Peace Act, Edward III and fined with sureties up to £60 or in default two months’ imprisonment, whichshows [sic] that even a fine of £60 is not a deterrent. At Bow Street, which is the adjoining Court, all first offenders on the police charge of street walking are asked to see the Probation Officer, so there is conflict of opinion from two very responsible sources.  .  Society of Labour Lawyers—Witnesses: Mr Gerald Gardiner QC, 2 Mr Ben Hooberman, Mr PR Kimber, Mr CR Hewitt and Miss Jean Graham Hall Jean Graham Hall: Two girls said to me, If [sic] I might quote the words— “Only one policeman was really needling into me; he was one I would not go about with when he wanted me to.” Two girls put that point only. There was no suggestion by any of the girls I spoke to, whether I asked them or whether I left it to them. That they were paying any sort of money to the police. They did put the point that it was worth their while to do what they were told, even of course if they were not actually soliciting at that time. In other words, they wished to be on good terms with the police, it was easier. If you were in last week the policeman will say to you especially if you are in Sackville Street—“Get round the corner quick

4 POLICING 

81

because you were in last week.” I asked on many occasions, but there was no suggestion they were in fact passing money over. Q. [Chairman]: Do you think there is any possibility that there might be passing of money if the fines were substantially raised? I would have thought it was just not worth trying to bribe a policeman; it is only £2 a month anyway. A. [Jean Graham Hall]: There is the dislike of going which all the girls do have. It is not only getting up early in the morning, they actually dislike it, and in fact they are very often convicted in another name to their own. I was interested to know that one girl who had a hundred convictions still said she had this queasy feeling when going to Bow Street; she still hated it. Q. [Chairman]: Granted in present circumstances there is no particular point in money passing, do you think that it would be at all likely that money might pass if the sums involved were very much greater than they are now? A. [Mr Hewitt]: If that question is addressed to me, the answer is yes, I think there would be some danger, and I think there always will be men who will be tempted. In the curious atmosphere of prostitution and the law as administered on the lowest levels the thing does tend to lose its moral obloquy. I am not apologising for anything anybody might do, but I have never known at first hand of an instance of a policeman taking money from a prostitute. I have known a lot about it second hand and can only assume it was true. I have personal knowledge of cases in which a policeman has accepted the services of a prostitute. They have been very few, significantly few I think in view of the easy relationship which subsists, and very often a christian [sic] name relationship grows up between girls who are very well known and the policemen who bear no ill-will whatever. I think it would be starry-eyed to deny that a large increase in fines would increase that danger. Q. [Chairman]: I think it is a risk, and a risk that, if it is to be taken, must be taken with open eyes? A. [Mr Hewitt] Yes. Q. [Lady Stopford]: What do the prostitutes say about the women police? A. [Miss Hall]: On the whole the girls I interviewed on this occasion did not in fact have anything to do with the women police. If I may put it this way; in my form of work I only meet the failures of prostitution, the girls who had to be put on probation and things like that. It was for this specific occasion of coming before you that I interviewed the leading lights of the profession. It is the other girls who are in fact of a lower category who

82 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

cannot command the same amount of money who know the women police better, and I think it depends on the individual policewoman. I am rather inclined to believe that they do sometimes prefer policemen, who are rather less inclined to want to do good to them. From what the girls told me— not whether I think it is right or wrong—I think the policewomen want to reform the girls much more often, and the policemen want to have an easier relationship. It is very badly put, but you know what I mean. … Q. [Mr Mishcon]: Do you think as a Society of Lawyers—I am trying to be pedantic in putting this question—that you either have a law which you ask your police to enforce or you do not? You say the police should be instructed to ignore current discreet advertisements of photographic models etc. with telephone numbers. My point is do you not think that you either have a criminal offence or not, not leave it to the discretion of the police what is discreet and what [sic] is not? A. [Mr Hewitt]: I think discretion is reposed in the police to an extraordinary degree in relation to all kinds of laws, particularly betting, gaming, lotteries and so on, and whether it is right or wrong academically it seems to work all right and would work in the same way here. What cannot be cured must be endured.  .  Law Society—Witnesses: Mr LE Barker, Mr AF Stapleton Cotton, 3 Mr GA MacDonald, Mr WO Carter, Mr H Horsfall-Turner, and Mr GR Proudlove Q. [Mr Wells]: May I ask another question, which is tied up with all this question of clearing the streets, namely, whether you gentlemen have any experience a) corrupt relations between the prostitutes and the police and b) of any close tie-up between prostitutes and criminals? A. [Mr Carter]: Speaking for the provinces, Sir, I have no experience of that … Mr Barker might know, from his personal experience in London. A. [Mr Barker]: I have nothing which would really be called evidence, I am afraid, it is only very much a matter of hearsay. … I should say probably a certain amount of it does go on, undoubtedly. Q: And the higher the fine, the greater the inducement? A: Yes. A. [Mr Cotton]: The matter is dealt with in the book called “London After Dark”, which is written by ex-Superintendent Robert Fabian, and I imagine he is a man with considerable experience with regard to the matter of the association of the prostitute and the police. He does deal with that matter there, but I do not think we as solicitors would generally

4 POLICING 

83

speaking come into contact with that, whatever our suspicions might be on occasions. But we do often find associations between prostitutes and criminals, there is no doubt about that. A. [Mr MacDonald]: Speaking also from the provinces, there has been little association between the police and prostitutes over the last twenty years, in my experience. Before that there used to be. Association between prostitutes and criminals is common.  .  Paddington Moral Reform Council (Submitted Evidence) 4 Police activity, however, tends to be insufficient, and the invariable response to enquiry is that this is due to shortage of personnel. While this shortage undoubtedly exists and must be a serious hindrance to the police, this Council feel it necessary to make a point which they regard as of great practical importance. From personal observation by members of the Council, numerous instances have been noted of male police officers adopting what clearly appears to be a much too tolerant, and on occasions even friendly attitude toward the prostitutes.  .  Paddington Moral Reform Council—Witnesses: Councillor P Dyas, 5 Alderman WD Goss, and Mr CE Jobson, the Deputy Town Clerk Q. [Chairman]: … Would you be happy with a situation in which the women police were to a large extent used for this purpose, and for this purpose alone? A. [Mr Allan]: I think that is difficult to answer. They are really becoming so numerous that one wonders whether the police alone could resolve the problem. I do not know. Certainly they have done a great deal, the female police, in Paddington. If anything, in some instances the male police aid and abet it, I am afraid. I do not know what Mr Simpson has to say about this, but I do not know that a large consignment of extra male police is that answer. They should be able to do it, but they apparently do nothing in the park. I was in the park myself not very long ago, and it was truly terrible to see young boys playing football with all this going on around them. They stopped their game of football to change to go home, and just simply stood around laughing at this going on in broad daylight. I was there for over an hour and there was not a sign of a policeman, although it was actually in the park. But it is no good having the police if they do not have the powers to act, or do not act if they are given the powers. …

84 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

A. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: I would like to ask about the men police. Is there something here that really calls for an investigation, or is it really that they adopt a more laissez-faire attitude than the women—they tend to shrug their shoulders? Is there any sort of allegation that they are working in collaboration with the women, or is there any element of bribery, or anything of that sort? A. [Mrs Eyre]: We have definitely had instances, but we have no actually been able to substantiate them, no. People have just said this. We have nothing to substantiate it at all, it is only just a feeling and the fact that we have police going round in an area where these things are actually happening at the time. One cannot help feeling that if they were using their powers these offences would not go on at the time the police were moving around. Q: Would you quarrel with this, that the women seem to dislike being arrested by women police? When they see women police approaching they disappear. So far as the men police are concerned there seems to be a sort of general pattern that the girl gets picked up about once a month, and there seems to be an understanding that they will not be picked up more often than that. That pattern works itself out with the men police, whereas the women police appear to introduce a more psychological element—the girls do not like to be arrested by them. A: I do not think we have any proof of that. We should have to tackle the Superintendent at the police station itself to find that out. Do you not think so, Mr Simpson? A. [Mr Simpson]: I do not think there is any serious criticism of the integrity of the police. I think that stern directives from a high level in the Force as to the attitude to be adopted by the constable might be expedient. The police constable is generally a tolerant sort of men, who gets on with all the members of the public. I have a host of complaints which really give me pain when I read them. Paddington has got to be dealt with effectively, and one of the first things to do is to get the attitude of the Force correct. The women, I think, have a natural dislike for this sort of thing, which is manifest in their method of dealing with these prostitutes. The men have not got the natural feminine antagonism to that sort of thing.  .  Mayfair Association—Witnesses: Mrs M Anderson, Mr WR Sloman, 6 and The Earl Howe Mr Sloman: [The current fine] is a very slight form of income tax, which is very easily paid. It means there would be a terrific waste of time on the

4 POLICING 

85

part of the police, who would have to spend the time off their beat taking these women in. Q. [Mr Adair]: His objection is not only that; but he is on night shift, and he takes her in then. Then the following morning he has got to attend court and lose his sleep. A. [Mr Sloman]: I think it has been said that with this particular law it is futile to expect and intelligent constable to try and enforce it. It is an insult to his mentality, apart from anything else, with the result that he does not bother. A. [Mrs Anderson]: When he has got nothing else to do, perhaps it occurs to him that he might as well take the woman in, and he takes her down to the police station …. Q. [Chairman]: yes, it is a nice cosy arrangement, as we have heard it put before. A. [Mr Sloman]: And I think it makes a laughing stock of anyone who takes the trouble to do something about a nuisance.

CHAPTER 5

Law, Jurisprudence, and Punishment

Modern laws that sought to control prostitution were part of a raft of late Georgian and early Victorian laws concerned with public space, nuisance, vagrancy, and petty crime. As we noted in the introduction, laws against street solicitation differed according to place. In London, two laws, the Vagrancy Act of 1824 and the Metropolitan Police Act of 1839, were used to arrest women who sold sex on the street who behaved ‘in a riotous or indecent manner’ (1824) or ‘to the annoyance of inhabitants or passengers’ (1839). Both laws required that the woman be proved to be a ‘common prostitute’. In other parts of England and Wales, the broadly similar Towns and Police Clauses Act 1847 applied, while the Belfast Improvement Act 1845 and the Towns Improvement Act (Ireland) 1854 meant similar measures were enforced in Northern Ireland. By contrast, Scotland’s Burgh Police (Scotland) Act 1892 and similar pieces of local Scottish legislation did not require proof of annoyance. In practice, the laws relating to England, Wales, and Northern Ireland worked relatively simply and with a very low burden of proof. A woman was proven to be a common prostitute for the first time by a police verbal attestation of a series of previous cautions, or by an initial arrest for indecency. After that, no further proof was needed and she would be introduced as a ‘common prostitute’ before her short trial began at the magistrates’ court. Women almost always pled guilty, and cases were referred to higher courts very rarely.1 The requirement to prove a­ nnoyance 1

 Julia Laite, Common Prostitutes, p. 188.

© The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_5

87

88 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

was similarly loosely interpreted, and the evidence of ‘annoyance’ was always provided by a police officers’ verbal account of having seen someone appearing annoyed. But what constituted annoyance was far from clear and, without the need for those supposedly annoyed by the solicitation to testify in court, the reliance on police officer testimony introduced high levels of police discretion and inference into the proceedings.2 The solicitation laws as they applied in England and Wales were plagued with controversy and gave rise to many scandals. Feminist groups campaigned for decades to have the term ‘common prostitute’ removed, because it was prejudicial and stigmatizing.3 Others advocated the removal of the need to prove annoyance, because it was a hindrance to effective policing.4 Some felt the law should be entirely altered to come in line with American laws that criminalized the selling of sex itself. Others—though by mid-century they were in a definite minority—advocated regulation in the style that was being used by some continental European countries, where street prostitution could only occur in designated areas, and where the vast majority took place in licensed premises off the street. We will consider this last issue in the next chapter on brothels and privatization. What is striking, though, is the degree to which the Committee focused their discussions on the law as it impacted the streets of London. Moreover, they rarely discussed how prostitution was managed beyond England, save for occasional references to the US and, of course, their interest in how the law worked in Scotland. The lack of the need to prove annoyance in Scotland would prove to be a compelling issue for the Committee. Despite ongoing debates and problems with the implementation of the solicitation laws as they pertained to England and Wales, police made efficient use of these measures. By the time that Wolfenden sat, the conviction rate for solicitation-related offences was over 99 per cent, quite possibly the highest conviction rate, by some order of magnitude, of any offence in the United Kingdom.5 The question of what to do with ‘common prostitutes’ after they had been convicted was one of the chief concerns of the Wolfenden Committee. The punishment as it then stood—a 40 shilling (2  Helen Self, Prostitution, p. 8.  Julia Laite, ‘The Association for Moral and Social Hygiene: abolitionism and prostitution law in Britain (1915–1959)’, Women’s History Review, 17:2 (2008), pp. 214. 4  This was the position taken by the National Vigilance Association during the inter-war years, though by the post-war years the organization no longer supported prosecution without proof of annoyance. See Samantha Caslin, Save the Womanhood, p. 83 and p. 196. 5  Laite, Common Prostitutes, 225. 2 3

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

89

pound) fine—was widely regarded as so low as to be ridiculous. Yet, practices associated with sentencing—such as not allowing women time to pay, giving younger women remands into custody, and imprisonment in lieu of fine for offences under the 1824 Vagrancy Act—were seen by many as overly harsh and not fitting the insignificance of the majority of offences. In keeping with more general trends in social work and penal reform, many people felt that punishment was not the key issue, and that new systems of intervention and rehabilitation needed to be introduced for the ‘common prostitute’. Yet, as some of these excerpts below and in the next chapter show, the distance between these new post-war attitudes and much older concepts of ‘penitence’, ‘rescue’, and ‘reform’ for prostitutes was not so great as some people imagined.6 As it was, the Wolfenden Report recommended removing the need to prove annoyance on the grounds that the men who were solicited were hardly ever prepared to give testimony in court. On the issue of punishments, the Report proposed that the maximum fine for a first offence be raised from 40 shillings to 25 pounds. It was recommended that third or subsequent offences be dealt with via a maximum penalty of three months’ imprisonment. The Report argued that imprisonment was a vital tool in dealing with prostitution from both deterrent and reformative points of view. On the one hand, habitual offenders would be deprived of their liberty and, on the other hand, the prospect of a prison sentence might make some younger women more likely to accept a rehabilitative probation order instead. These recommendations influenced the subsequent Street Offences Act 1959, which stated that a ‘common prostitute’ found loitering or soliciting in the street for the purposes of prostitution would be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding ten pounds or, for an offence committed after a previous conviction, to a fine not exceeding twenty-five pounds or, for an offence committed after more than one previous conviction, to a fine not exceeding twenty-five pounds or imprisonment for a period not exceeding three months or both.7

 Samantha Caslin, Save the Womanhood, Chapter Nine, esp. pp. 195–196.  Street Offences Act 1959, section 1(2).

6 7

90 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Government 1.  Home Office, Submitted Evidence (Pertaining to England and Wales) The Committee is asked to consider the law and practice relating to offences against the criminal law in connection with prostitution and solicitation for immoral purposes. 1/

and to report what changes, if any, are in their opinion desirable. The subject [solicitation and the law] is one upon which there has been and continues to be considerable controversy. The present law is admittedly defective, but very different views are held as to the direction in which it should be amended. On the one hand, it is suggested that the law needs strengthening so as to give the police more adequate powers to enable them effectively to discharge their duty of dealing with the nuisance created by prostitutes soliciting in the streets. On the other hand, there is a considerable body of opinion which takes the view that the existing laws are so much out of accord with modern conditions that their meaning now has to be strained; that they apply unequally as between men and women (to the detriment of the latter); and that prostitutes as a class are subject to exceptional measures which deny them the measure of justice accorded to offenders generally. The controversy which the subject has aroused from time to time affords little reason to hope that it would be possible to devise amendments of the law which would give sufficient powers to enable the police to deal effectively with the nuisance of solicitation in the streets, and at the same time meet the views of those who think that prostitutes should not be subject to any penal legislation directed at them as a class. … For the purpose of the present enquiry, however, the Committee will probably wish to direct their main attention to the provisions of the Metropolitan Police Act, 1839 […], the Town Police Clauses Act, 1847 […] and the Vagrancy Act, 1824 […] under which the great majority of proceedings against prostitutes are brought. It may be convenient to append the following summary of the offences created by these three statutes:

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

91

Metropolitan Police Act, 1839, Section 54(11) . a common prostitute or night-walker, and 1 2. loitering or being in a thoroughfare or public place for the purpose of prostitution or solicitation, and 3. to the annoyance of the inhabitants or passengers. Town Police Clauses Act, 1847, Section 28 . a common prostitute or night-walker, and 1 2. loitering and importuning passengers in a street for the purpose of prostitution, and 3. to the obstruction, annoyance or danger of the residents or passengers. Vagrancy Act, 1824, Section 3 . a common prostitute, and 1 2. wandering in a street, highway or place of public resort, and 3. behaving in a riotous and indecent manner.

2.  Home Office, Submitted Evidence (Pertaining to England and Wales) For the purpose of a conviction under section 54(11) of the Metropolitan Police Act, 1839, or section 28 of the Town Police Clauses Act, 1847, it is also necessary to establish that the act of solicitation caused annoyance to the inhabitants (or residents) or passengers. The standard of proof of annoyance required by the courts has varied from time to time and from place to place, but generally speaking the courts are left to infer from the circumstances of the case that annoyance has been caused. Men solicited by prostitutes would almost certainly decline to give evidence, and it is not the practice to ask them to do so; the courts usually convict on the uncorroborated evidence of the arresting police officer, who says that the person accosted appeared to be annoyed. On the other hand, if evidence other

92 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

than police evidence were necessary, it would be virtually impossible to obtain convictions. In reality it is not so much the conduct of any particular individual as the gathering of a number of individuals for the same purpose that causes annoyance; and the annoyance is to the inhabitants or passengers at large rather than to any individual. The law, on the other hand, must deal with the offenders individually, but the annoyance caused to the inhabitants or passengers in general might be unrelated and, indeed, unrelatable, to any individual prostitute. Here lies one of the basic difficulties in devising legislation which will give the police sufficient powers to abate a public nuisance and at the same time will adequately safeguard the liberty of the subject. For many years, societies interested in the welfare and rights of women have been campaigning for the replacement of the statutory provisions dealing specifically with ‘common prostitutes’ by some general provision which would apply to such offences as indecent behaviour, molestation, obstruction and importuning by any person whatever in any street or public place. It is urged that the necessity, under the present law, to charge the accused as a common prostitute introduces her to the court as a person of low moral character whose evidence is presumably worthy of little credit, or gives rise to a presumption that the accused committed the offence with which she is charged and so renders the court less exacting in requiring evidence that she was breaking the law on the occasion charged. The retention of the term ‘common prostitute’ in the present law is further alleged to have undesirable social consequences insofar as it tends to brand convicted women and render their reformation more difficult. It is argued, moreover, that if solicitation for immoral purposes in the streets is an offence against good order it is irrelevant whether the solicitation is by a common prostitute or by any other person; it is not the character of the offender but the fact of the offence that concerns the law. On the other hand the necessity to establish that the accused is a ‘common prostitute’ may be thought to constitute something of a safeguard against the preferring of unfounded charges against innocent women. … … the maximum penalty for an offence under section 54 of the Metropolitan Police Act, 1939 [sic], is a fine of forty shillings. Under the Town Police Clauses Act […] the maximum fine is also forty shillings, but the Justices may, in their discretion, commit the offender to prison for not more than 14 days instead of imposing a fine. Imprisonment may also be

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

93

imposed in those cases dealt with under section 3 of the Vagrancy Act 1824 […]. In practice, comparatively few prostitutes are imprisoned under these provisions, as the following figures will show: Year

No. of convictions

No. of sentences of imprisonment

1949 1950 1951 1952 1953

5766 6843 7822 10,291 10,229

97 86 78 108 95

Police and Magistrates 1.  Sir Lawrence Dunne, Chief Magistrate Q. [Chairman]: Could you tell me, again because I speak in lay ignorance, exactly what it is that entitles a woman to be called, as you mention in paragraph 21, a common prostitute? A. [Dunne]: It is really a woman who is practising the trade of prostitution in public. She attains the status of common prostitute when a man can go into the witness box and swear that she is trading as a prostitute in the streets. Q. Although that is not in itself an offence? A. Although that is not in itself an offence. Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: And it is not dependent upon conviction necessarily? A. Not necessarily, no. She cannot be convicted as a common prostitute until she is a common prostitute. Q. [Chairman]: She does not achieve that status by virtue of a conviction? A. No, it is achieved before, because she could not be convicted unless she was. Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: Evidence of conviction would be sufficient? A. That is the simplest evidence that she is a common prostitute. As a matter of fact they usually start off with charging these girls first with insulting behaviour if they have not a conviction as a common prostitute, and then they probably pay a fine of 10s for that, and the next time they

94 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

are run in for soliciting, for annoyance in the streets and then they are charged as a common prostitute. You ask the fellow “How long have you known this woman?” and he says “I have seen her on the streets for five weeks soliciting.” Q. [Chairman]: It has been said to us, as I am sure it has been said to you often enough, that there is an element of injustice or inequity in defining an offence in terms of the person who commits it, that is to say that an action performed by somebody else which would not be an offence is an offence if it is performed by somebody who is labelled a common prostitute? A. Yes. Q. Does that worry you at all? A. Not in the least, no. Common prostitute is a label which is tagged on. It merely defines a status that she is a common prostitute, and if she has annoyed people then the offence is complete, that is all. It is rather like the suspected person. The suspected person before he can be convicted as a suspected person must have attained the status of a probably suspected person, and that is why in the suspected person case you must always have the evidence of two acts, because he cannot be a person suspected and charged with the offence. Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: It has been said to us that the advantage of having the words “common prostitute” in the section is that it acts as a protection against a woman who is not a prostitute being charged. Is there any likelihood at all of a woman without a background of that kind being charged? Does it in fact serve as a protection? A.  I think it does probably, yes. I have never known a case where a respectable woman who is able to demonstrate and call evidence that she is a respectable woman has ever been charged. Q. And if she were she would not be charged under this section. She would be charged with insulting behaviour? A. Yes. Q. So this section would not in fact be called into operation in the case of a woman with no history behind her, would it? A. No. You get a lot of these funny girls who turn up in the West End, and who throng Piccadilly Circus, and that sort of thing. They do a little importuning on their own account, and if the policeman does not know them, and they are being a nuisance, he charges them with insulting behaviour, but if he sees them the second time doing the same thing he

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

95

charges them with being common prostitutes, and says he has seen them before. Q. If that is the case is there any protection in retaining the “common prostitute”? A. Only that it would be defence to anybody who is charged with soliciting and annoyance, and they would have to prove it if the prosecution failed to show that she was a common prostitute, she was a prostitute active engaged in the trade in the streets. Q.  But that pre-supposes that the police would sometimes charge a woman with no history as being a common prostitute? A. As I say I have never known it done, but they might, in which case it would be a defence. […] [Dunne] I do not mind saying it off the record—that 5 per cent of the charges that come before the court do not really involve annoyance at all. CHAIRMAN: No. May I just interrupt—you mean the annoyance of any one particular man?—A. [Dunne]: Yes. Q. [Chairman]: But is there such a thing as a general widespread annoyance to passers by [sic] and the general public if they see and when they see individual prostitutes soliciting individual other men, or is there a general annoyance caused to passers by [sic] and the general public by the fact that there are parading the streets of the West End large numbers of young women who are obviously prostitutes, and obviously there for the purposes of soliciting? I am trying to distinguish between the annoyance that may well be caused of that kind and not to the individual? A. [Dunne]: I am quite certain that the intention of the statute was to deal with annoyance to the individual; otherwise the well-meaning but easily annoyed man might walk down Piccadilly, Regent Street and Burlington Gardens and afford material for the arrest and fining of every prostitute in the West End and who said she annoyed him—“I am a passenger and you have annoyed me, seeing you about”, although they have not had anything to do with him. The intention of the statute was to prevent women annoying individuals. The public conscience I do not think was concerned. […] Q. [Mrs Cohen]: What about annoyance to people resident in a certain street? It really does annoy them tremendously when they are going in and out of their houses to have these girls hanging around, and that sort of thing? If they complained and said they did not like these girls about their

96 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

homes you would say they would have to put up with it? You would say the streets are public pavements, and anybody can stand there if they want to, is that right?—A. [Dunne] I think there is a great deal in that, that a great deal of genuine annoyance is caused to householders, but I do not think actually that was dealt with by the statute. The intention of the statute was in the word “passengers”; people walking along the streets who are annoyed by the importuning of women who approach them. 2.  Sir John Nott-Bower, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Commander Robertson, A Division, and Police Court Solicitor Q. [Dr Whitby]: What sort of evidence do the police require to call a person a common prostitute, to distinguish them from an enthusiastic amateur? A. [Nott-Bower]: It is a matter of whether she has actually been previously convicted for solicitation, or not. A woman who has not had a conviction gets a warning to start with, after a warning she gets a conviction for insulting words and behaviour, and then the third time she gets a conviction for actual solicitation to the annoyance, and once she had got that she is classified as a common prostitute. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: If she got a warning in one area and the tripped off to another area, she could then have a warning in the other area without the first warning having anything to do with it, could she not? A: That is quite true, yes. Q. [Sir. Hugh Linstead]: Arising out of what we have just been discussing, there apparently is no difficulty on the first occasion in getting convictions on the charge of using insulting words and behaviour; supposing that were the standard charge, that you dropped the question of being a common prostitute or annoying, and simply charged everybody with insulting words and behaviour, what would be the effect of that? A: Of course, the charge, as you know, is using insulting words and behaviour whereby a breach of the peace may be occasioned, and that is really again dependent very much on a sort of convention whereby the courts are prepared to accept the sort of evidence they do, whereas if they were to insist on a high standard of evidence it would be very difficult indeed to prove that there was really any likelihood of a breach of the peace being occasioned. Q.  As you gathered, the purpose of my question was that there has been criticism of charging somebody with being a common prostitute,

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

97

and so on, the assumption immediately being on the face of the charge that she has already been convicted previously; if you can get convictions for using insulting words and behaviour you drop any question of having to satisfy the court that the woman are a common prostitute, and yet apparently you still are able to get your convictions. A: Yes, but she must have been warned before. Q. [Chairman]: Of course, that would also remove annoyance, would it not? Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: That would incidentally remove annoyance, yes. Q. [Mr Adair]: But bring in something which is even more difficult to prove. Q. [Chairman]: But Sir Hugh’s point is that at present in order to establish that this woman is a common prostitute she must already have been charged with insulting words and behaviour, which apparently there is no difficulty in doing. The question is, as I understood it, why cannot that procedure apply throughout, without bringing in the new difficulties which are created by (a) labelling the woman as a common prostitute, which some people think is an injustice, and (b) having to introduce this subjective question of annoyance? Supposing that the whole thing were on this basis, there were no question about annoyance or solicitation or anything else, but that all these women were always charged with insulting words and behaviour? A: I have tried to deal with that question of the necessity of proving that the woman is a common prostitute—we do regard it as a safeguard against the possibility of mistakes, which I think is a very great danger. I suppose that danger exists to some extent where you charge a woman with insulting words and behaviour, she is a woman who has been warned bore and her conduct has got to be fairly offensive before that charge can be brought against her, but to use that charge generally against all prostitutes I think might involve dangers of innocent women being run in. I think also it would be even more difficult a charge to prove in a very large number of cases, than the present one. … A woman has got to be known as a common prostitute before we run her in. If we are going to leave that out altogether and make it possible for the police to arrest anybody, whether convicted before or not, and charge her with insulting words and behaviour, I think there would be a danger of mistakes being made

98 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

… Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: So on the whole you do come down in favour of the present custom and prefer “common prostitute” and “annoying” to “insulting words and behaviour”. A: Yes, I do. … Q. [Mr Diplock]: I should have thought this also, that the effects of this convention, this understanding which exists between the magistrates and the police about common prostitutes, which as a lawyer I regard as being rather deplorable, would be harder to extend to the wider offence of insulting words and behaviour, and I should have thought if they were extended, a woman likely to appeal to the appeal committee in the ordinary case where there was uncorroborated police evidence because the man would not come, she would stand a very good chance of getting off? A: I entirely agree. … Q. [Lord Lothian]: Sir John, if you were going to set about clearing the streets, as the Chairman was saying, would it involve taking policemen off other duties? A. [Nott-Bower]: You cannot set about clearing the streets, under the existing state of the law, at all, in my opinion. … The only way you could stop it would be by increasing the penalties very largely, and then of course you could make it quite an uneconomic proposition to solicit on the streets. Q. [Chairman]: That leads us on to another difficulty, does it not, if we are satisfied so far about your answer to the first one. Let us take the point which has been mentioned twice already, about the greater penalties, that would have the difficulty from your point of view that it would be more difficult to get a conviction. A: Undoubtedly. If you make the penalties heavier then cases will certainly be contested, and once the cases are contested a higher standard of evidence will be necessary. That would mean the employment of at least two policemen, and it would mean probably more prolonged observation, and so long as the law about annoyance remains as it is it would need a much higher standard of proof of annoyance—which at the moment I do not dispute is flimsy in the extreme. Q: It is part of the convention at present?

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

99

A: The policeman can only give his own opinion of what the state of mind of some passer-by is, and the courts are prepared to accept that. I should not have thought myself it was really very valuable evidence. 3.  Frank Powell, London Police Court Magistrate Powell: These prostitutes have long lists of convictions, and it is obvious they will go on doing the same thing and a fine of 40s will never stop them doing it. I know that some of my colleagues do not agree with me that one can use those powers [of remand]. … I can only say from my own experience in Clerkenwell—I do not know if I am being conceited—but we have practically driven prostitutes off the streets by this binding over procedure. I do know that if they land up in court on the next morning they wait until I am not there when they know they will not be bound over, which shows that they fear it. … Q. [Chairman]: Do you think there would be more difficulty in getting convictions [if fines were raised]? A. [Powell]: No, I do not think so. Q. I take it at the present moment a large number of prostitutes who come before you plead guilty. A. Yes, practically all. Q. Because it is routine? A. It is routine, yes … they would fight the case I should think if the penalties were heavier. Q. Would you take more convincing, would you need more evidence than you have now? A. I do not think so. The law of evidence is the same whatever the gravity of the offence charged. … Powell: A big financial penalty might not stop them when they are making that big money, and that is why I think imprisonment really is in many cases the only way of dealing with them. Really they have no morals, no ethics. That is the way to deal with them to convince them that this does not pay and will not be allowed. … I think there will be some who will say that the game is not worth the candle and who will stop it if they go to prison. I think they would, some of them, many of them in fact. I know one friend of mine who, if a prostitute said—“I have an illegitimate child, I find life very expensive and that is why I do this”—would almost fall over

100 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

her to put her on probation, dismiss the case. It is almost encouraging her. One has got to be cruel to be kind. 4.  Frank Powell, London Police Court Magistrate Submitted Evidence While it is appreciated that soliciting can never be stamped out by Act of Parliament and the processes of the law, it is submitted that the streets and other public places can be substantially cleared of the present nuisance by resolute action. Although the clearing up action I envisage might tend to drive vice underground, I think it is better that it should be practically solely underground than both underground and above ground in the streets, as at present. What people do in private is not so important as what they do in public. … Suggestions A Sect 54 of the [Metropolitan Police Act] should be amended so as to delete the words “to the annoyance of passengers”; the bare act of soliciting should constitute the offence. B Penalties Instead of a penalty of 40/-On 1st conviction 40/-2nd conviction £5 3rd conviction £20: with power to impose imprisonment up to three months without the option of a fine. In addition, on any conviction for soliciting, the prostitute to be remanded for medical examination: if found to be suffering from V.D. to be detained for such period as the medical officer of the prison recommends for treatment. Prostitutes found with men in raided brothels to be medically examined and subjected to the same penalties and treatment as if convicted under sect 54 of the Metropolitan Police Act. And why should not the men found with the prostitutes in brothels be liable to arrest and subject to the same monetary penalties as the prostitutes? And, also, to compulsory medical examination: and if found to be infected with VD to be ordered to undergo treatment and remanded on bail from time to time until they produce a certificate that they are cured?

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

101

5.  Paul Bennet, London Police Court Magistrate Q. [Dr Whitby]: Do you think, if the fine were increased, the woman might ask for time to pay and be forced to go back to prostitution in order to find the money to pay? A. [Bennet]: That is why we do not give them time to pay. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: If they cannot pay they go to prison? A. [Bennet]: We fix an alternative.8 We do not give time to pay. I do not think I have ever given a prostitute time to pay. Q. [Mr Adair]: What grounds can you lay down for not giving time to pay? The nature of the offence is no longer a ground for refusing time to pay? A. [Bennet]: I do not question that. There was some legislation in the 1945–50 Government about it, but I am very glad no prostitute has raised the point. They always find the money by 5 o’clock. 6.  PCs Scarborough and Anderson, C Division Q. [Mr Mischon]: Do you think [a higher penalty] would stop them? A. [PC Scarborough]: I do not think they would loiter in the street the way they do now or congregate in groups so much as they do. Q. [Chairman]: But you do not think it would stop them? A. [PC Scarborough]: You would drive them under cover. Q. [Dr Scott]: Then you would agree that that would not be a good thing? A. [PC Scarborough]: It would not be a good thing because it would probably lead to other things as well, such as their employing men friends on the street or other people to do their touting for them. … PC Anderson: I should like to emphasize the fact that the fine of £2 does not mean a thing to the average prostitute. PC Scarborough: No, not when the average prostitute will earn £7 to £8 a night. The good class ones will not take anything less than £50 to £60 a week. The lower type goes down to £20. Q. [Mrs Lovibond]: What do you think about prison sentence?

8  The usual practice that he is referring to is that women were sent to prison for fourteen or more days in lieu of fine payment.

102 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

A. [PC Anderson]: I am very much against that. Prostitution is a means of getting a living. I am fully of the opinion if you put a person—especially a prostitute—in prison she is just the same when she comes out; she will start again, go back on the street again. You are not gaining anything. I think it is more liable to keep them off the street than anything. … A. [PC Scarborough]: I have known one or two remanded for a week in custody while enquiries have been made. They have come out next week and told me exactly what they though. Those one or two that have done that I have never seen since, so it has had some effect.

Civil Society and Professional Associations 1.  Law Society—Witnesses: Mr LE Barker, Mr AF Stapleton Cotton, Mr GA MacDonald, Mr WO Carter, Mr H HorsfallTurner, and Mr GR Proudlove Q. [Dr Whitby]: If prostitution itself is not a crime, and we are considering only public order and decency, from the point of view of the prostitutes do you think that can be regarded as justice, to introduce imprisonment for this type of offence as compared with other offences against public order and decency, remembering the fact that prostitution is not a crime? A. [Mr Cotton]: They would undoubtedly think it was undue restraint of trade, I think. Q. [Chairman]: I was looking at it from a slightly different point of view—you must not think I am being too sympathetic with the consumer in this matter—is it reasonable to send the woman to prison and do nothing with the man? After all, this is an act in which two people take part. A: The soliciting, Sir? Q: It is quite often put to us that after all a certain number of men walk the streets of London soliciting women, and a certain number of men go where they know they will be solicited, that is what they go for; it is true that they are not committing the offence which you set out in section c here necessarily, but on the principles—very crudely put—of supply and demand, what these women are doing, even in c, is signifying that they are available to meet the demand. A: It would be very difficult to define an offence in regard to the male part, would it not, Sir? Q: Some of the States in the United States of America have tried it—I gather they do not always carry it out. But I was not trying to define it or

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

103

to bring the man in necessarily on the present state of the law, but I should have thought once you brought in imprisonment as a possibility for the woman, that was getting a bit over the odds if the man was not going to be touched at all. A. [Mr Barker]: I am not sure that we ever really considered the man, Sir; therefore what I say may only be my own views, but I should have thought if your object was to clean up the streets, which is what I understand it really and truly to be on this particular matter, then if you struck at the woman that was all that was really necessary, the man simply would not exist there. Q. [Chairman]: I was only just wondering whether that had been considered, and whether in fact if one steps up the possible penalty for the woman as far as that, one is not apparently or might seem to be penalising the woman more than would be justifiable, when it could be argued that all she was doing was signifying that she was available to meet a demand. 2.  Magistrate’s Association—Witnesses: Sir Leonard Costello, Mrs MS Crewdson, Mr JP Eddy and Miss Bartha de Blank Mr Eddy: May I just express my own personal opinion, because you appreciate my mandate is confined to homosexuality, and therefore I am speaking purely individually when I speak on this. My simple approach to this question of prostitution is this: prostitution in itself is something to be discouraged. It is immoral, it is contrary to public policy that it should go on, and that means that I would attach no importance whatever to annoyance. I think it is contrary to public policy that young men should be solicited in public places to indulge in fornication, and therefore my whole attitude is against it in itself. That means that I would get rid of this word “annoyance” and that means that I would be all in favour of penalising persons who in fact were proved to be loitering for that purpose, and no other purpose, and I think that is an offence against the public. I just want to add this: personally I am all against labelling anybody a common prostitute, or a common thief, or a common anything else. My own simple view is that when a person is charged with importuning she should come into Court not labelled in advance as a person already convicted possibly several times, but should come into Court quite sure that she is to have a fair trial on the facts of that particular case. I think it is putting the cart before the horse. It is proving convictions, by labelling a person a common prostitute, proving convictions before you have established the particular offence, and therefore I am all against that, and I would be wholly

104 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

in favour of the Scottish system apparently of insisting on two witnesses. I think that is the real protection for the innocent housewife who is referred to in this memorandum. What I would do frankly would be not to go on doing what I think is utterly unjust and contrary to modern principles, to label an individual in advance a common thief or a common prostitute, what I would do, even though it was possibly lightening the law in the case of the person who had already been convicted of prostitution, what I would do would be in every case to insist that the person should only be convictedwhereinfacttheevidenceofawitnesswascorroborated,andIwouldlike— Q. [Mr Adair]: You realise in Scots law the words “common prostitute” occur. A: I know, and I do not like it. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Might I just point out with these women, the greater number of these women, their profession is prostitution. A: Exactly. Q: They acknowledge that they are prostitutes, so why should we hesitate to call them what they are? A: If in fact a person who is charged with being a common prostitute, what is the use of pleading not guilty. Q. [Mr Adair]: She may not be importuning on that occasion, and it is that you have to satisfy. A: I would object to labelling anybody in advance a common prostitute. She may not be. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Prostitution itself is not a criminal offence, and a prostitute is a person who is carrying out her profession of prostitution. Q. [Chairman]: As you might describe commission agents as a profession. A: Prostitution in itself is not an offence, but I would make simply importuning annoyance or no annoyance, an offence. Q: By anybody? A: By anybody. Q: That is apparently another minority opinion you express. … Q. [Chairman]: It has been put to us again that the punishment which these folk would fear most would be imprisonment. A. [Sir Leonard Costello]: Yes. Q. [Chairman]: Not only because it deprives them of their liberty in the ordinary way, but it does of course deprive them of any form of job thereafter, they lose their trade. On the other hand it has been said to us that

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

105

some of them would in fact like nothing more than a quiet month’s holiday in prison to recuperate. 3.  National Council of Women of Great Britain, Submitted Evidence The problems relating to prostitution have been the concern of the N.C.W. since its foundation, and the reform of the Solicitation Laws has been an integral part of the Council’s policy for decades. This policy is based upon the principle of a high and equal moral standard for both sexes. Prostitution is commonly held to be problem relating to women only, but we cannot emphasise too strongly that prostitution involves equally two persons, a man and a woman. In this country, prostitution is not a criminal offence, and in our opinion should not be made so. We believe that private immorality between consenting adults is not a legitimate sphere for state action. This principle was noted and upheld in the Report of the Street Offences Committee 1928m Cmd 3231, page 8, :“In the region of sexual offences, the common law has never taken upon itself the prohibition by criminal sanctions of voluntary illicit intercourse between the sexes, but has confined its intervention to the grosser breaches of sexual morality, such as those which are of unnatural form or aggravated by violence. Neither prostitution nor solicitation are words in themselves descriptive of any offence at common law, and the penal law before us, so far as it deals explicitly with them, may be said to be founded rather on special legislation than on any general principle of the common law.” The N.C.W endorses this view. Our Recommendations are that: . The existing laws relating to solicitation be repealed. 1 2. That these laws be replaced by a single uniform enactment covering annoyance in streets and public places and applicable to both sexes.

4.  National Council of Women of Great Britain, Submitted Evidence The Council is fully aware that the problem of prostitution will remain even if there is a change in the law, and thinks it important to stress the fact

106 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

that the primary cause is not solicitation by women, but the willingness of men to pay for the services which the prostitute offers. Fundamentally therefore, the cure must lie in educational and preventative social measures. This Council did pioneer work for the appointment of Women Police, and emphasised, particularly, how much they could do to assist the homeless girl and prevent her from falling into evil hands. This Council therefore notes with great pleasure the recent increase in the number of Women Police in the Metropolitan Area, and pays grateful tribute to their successful work in this field. This Council urges that the streets should normally be patrolled by men and women police in uniform, and not by plain clothes officers. Solicitation in the streets can be diminished by the exercising of authority to “move on”. 5.  National Council of Women: Witness Statement by Mrs Lefroy JP The whole thing seems to me to be basically tied up with the question of status of women. Is a woman to be considered a complete human being with soul, mind and body or is she something to be considered on the Mohammedan idea of somebody who is without a soul, somebody who is not quite the equivalent of the male? I have been too basically brought up in my youth to feel that I was a human being first and secondly a woman. I have spent a great deal of my energy and my hard-earned monies on this matter of status of women and it is truly fundamental. Really and truly I have also been extremely proud of our laws, our legal system, and was very glad when I found that the principle people, our people, occupied in the Nuremburg Trials were for nearly three years after those Trials giving an enormous amount of time in answering letters from all over the world from legal people who wanted to know how they could bring their laws more in line with our criminal law. In our whole attitude towards the Solicitation Acts we are outraging our general principles of law all the time, and it is all done by dodges, as it were. I think what happened when Josephine Butler got rid of the Contagious Diseases Acts, it seemed to me, putting it in a very colloquial way, a lot of people got together and said “This dreadful thing, what can we do about it? What can we do about this frightful prostitution?” They found they had these Vagrancy Acts, Town Police Clauses Acts, and by manipulating the way in which they were used, they used them as weapons against the prostitute.

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

107

I find it very difficult to know where to begin to argue this matter. It seems so patent that if ever there were a mutual act which involved a man and woman it is in offences of this kind and yet the whole stress is against the woman—against the woman. They really breached one of our main principles which they were not able to do because prostitution is not a crime. These all come under annoyance and they made it possible for the policeman who brings in the women to say “So-and-so, being to my belief a prostitute”. In any other section of criminal law the fact that it has been disclosed before trial that the person against whom the charge is made has a criminal record is quite sufficient to wipe out any finding of guilt and the whole trial has to be set aside because we are so particularly careful that the unfortunate person who is now being charged shall not be hampered in any way by disclosure of past delinquencies. […] Solicitation, incidentally is not a word of art. I am a solicitor. I do not quite know what the difference is and I did get rather a shock when I was over in the States to discover that whereas here you get “No hawkers, no this, that or the other,” it is “No solicitors”, but that is quite a small point. They are none of them legally defined words and when you think of the precision with which larceny is defined and the fact that you had to get a new law to cover technical ways—taking cars without the owners’ consent and you could not prove they had been deprived of them—I do feel that human beings, females, to use the crudest sort of terms they would use in the Acts, are treated outside the law and on a completely different level. Until we can get our solicitation laws amended and out on an equality basis, I think there is no hope for women in any kind of legislative way, culminating in any kind of equal status. I think that women, as a body, ought to stand or fall together. 6.  Paddington Moral Reform Council—Witnesses: Mr Robert Allan MP, Councillor Mrs Eyre, and Mr MP Simpson Q. [Mr Adair]: We have an Act [in Scotland] which was passed in 1892 and which has been operated ever since, which says: “being a common prostitute or street walker, loiters or about or importunes passengers for the purpose of prostitution”. If that were the provision of the Act of Parliament, would that meet your requirement? That is what I am asking. A. [Mr Simpson]: I would go a considerable way towards it. Q: How much further would you like to go? A: I would like presumption that if the woman has not a legitimate excuse for loitering, she is loitering for the purpose of prostitution.

108 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Q: You are going to put in a presumption against her now, and make her responsible for proving to the Court the purpose for which she is standing on a street? A: Yes. Q: Rather than allow the Court to deduce from the circumstances which the police produce that that was the purpose for which she was there. Is that clear? A: That is what I said. I want the Court to presume against the woman if she is a convicted prostitute. Q. [Chairman]: Which, in itself, is an earlier stage of not necessarily presumption, though it is very difficult to be quite clear how to presume a common prostitute or night walker legally. A: the police would have to know the woman. She would have to be a known woman and a convicted prostitute. There are lots of cases where the police know these things; there are thousands of arrests a year, which lead to a lot of records. Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: These women are citizens. What rights are they do have? Is this really a backdoor method of making prostitute illegal without facing straight up to it? You are really going to use every force of the community to get these women convicted, to drive them off the streets, to prevent them practising in their houses. Is that not really the same as taking the major decision and saying prostitution is illegal? What rights are we leaving the women as citizens? A. [Mrs Eyre]: I think you are mistaking us there. Mr Simpson has made it very clear that we have got a very, very grievous problem in Paddington …. … Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: So your answer is that if it moved out into another area—let us say Victoria …. A. [Mr Simpson]: I would not say that. It is not a question of being moved out, but the police would not be so chary of looking for it in certain neighbourhoods. It is very difficult to say where you are to cast a blind eye at a sin; but it would give police power to try and keep it in subjection in a neighbourhood where it should not be at all. That is really what it comes to. Q. [Chairman]: … I believe I am right in saying that there is only one other legal enactment which starts off by defining an offence in terms of the person by whom it has been committed; and there has been very strong representation made to us that to start off the Section of an Act by

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

109

saying “a common prostitute or night walker”—labelling a person already, you see, as being in the only category of persons by whom this offence can be committed—is in itself going quite a long way toward penalising a particular class of citizen. I know that is obviously very arguable. Then on top of that we are now confronted with a presumption that a person in that category, being in a particular place at a particular time, has to establish that she was not there for the purpose of something or other. Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: She is the only person who cannot sit down and smoke a cigarette on a bench in the street. A. [Mr Simpson]: It would only apply to a person who was a convicted prostitute. Q. [Chairman]: But, with respect, she was not convicted of being a prostitute; it is not illegal to be a prostitute. A: Then convicted of one of the offences relating to prostitution. I would ask you to keep in mind all the time the principle behind these suggestion—not blind morality to crush out and eradicate prostitution, but to control it where it does most harm; where it does vital harm it is essential that it should be controlled. Therefore methods and weapons are suggested to combat this difficulty where it must be dealt with. Some of the suggestions may go too far; some may be inadequate and some of them badly expressed, but the principle is there. We have not got the weapons today, and something has got to be done. 7.  Public Morality Council, Submitted Evidence The Parliamentary, Patrol and Propaganda Sub-Committee of the Public Morality Council has for many years studied this social evil and has co-­ operated with the various specialist bodies which make this matter their sole field of service, e.g. the Association for Moral and Social Hygiene, the International Bureau for the Suppression of Traffic in Women and Children. The General Secretary (Mr George Tomlinson) served as Joint Secretary, and later as General Secretary of the International Bureau for the Suppression of Traffic in Women and Children, the British National Committee for the Suppression of Traffic in Women and Children, and the National Vigilance Association. The Council would draw attention to the travesty of justice which takes place in the normal course of procedure in our Courts, a conviction for solicitation to the annoyance is recorded without the evidence of the person annoyed. Large numbers of women designated “common prostitutes”

110 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

are fined 40/- with the speed of long practice, and immediately sent out, in effect, to earn their fine by the same means as that which brought them to the Court. The only evidence in practically all the cases is that of the policeman who alleges that the men so solicited had been annoyed. The only valid evidence should, surely, be that of the person who has been annoyed, but this is not now regarded as necessary. In English law it is not an offence to solicit—it only becomes an offence when solicitation is to the annoyance of anyone, and yet the evidence of that person is not required. This renders the procedure almost farcical. It is, of course, argued that men solicited will not give evidence against the prostitute for a variety of reasons, not wishing to be involved in Court attendance, not wishing to be involved in any publicity which might be given to such cases. This is undeniably true, but it is equally true to say that where solicitation for prostitution does take place it is seldom done in a manner such as to create annoyance to the person solicited. And if the person so solicited chooses either to ignore the solicitation or to say simply: “No thank you”, that generally terminates the whole business. The prostitute, by choosing to live the life she does, finds that whilst she is regarded as an outcast and criminal without committing any legal offence, the customer not only goes scot free, but is looked upon as blameless. It is strongly held by some members of the Council that it would be calamitous to take from the Police the restraining power they now exercise in charging prostitutes with solicitation to the annoyance, particularly in view of the fact that present-day conditions do not oblige these women to follow such a “calling”. What the effect would be if the present practice of dealing with prostitutes by routine convictions and fines were abandoned is a matter for speculation. It is conceivable that such women, if not apprehended by the Police whilst pursing their business would become so emboldened as to cause the considerable increase of solicitation feared by many. On the other hand experience may prove that fear to be ill founded. 8.  Public Morality Council (Interview)—Witnesses: Revd T Holland DD, Revd D Hubert Thomas BA HCF, Mr George Tomlinson Mr Tomlinson: The point, as I see it, is this—I am giving my own opinion on this, that there can be no valid case brought without the evidence of the person annoyed. … Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: May I follow this point up, because it is absolutely basic to this Public Places Order Bill?

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

111

A: Yes. Q: … to which the Public Morality Council have nailed their flag. The essence of this Bill, which is the annex to Document 55, is the proviso at the end of Clause 1 which says that “no person shall be convicted of such offence except upon the evidence of the person aggrieved.” And I take it that this proviso is put in upon grounds of principle, namely, that police evidence is suspect in these cases in the view of the author of this bill? A: I would not say it is suspect. Q: And that, upon the highest grounds of principle the man ought always to be in the box giving evidence as to what happened? A: That is my own view, yes. Q: All the evidence we have had, and I think we can add our own knowledge of human nature, suggests that in fact there are very few men indeed who would be prepared to come and give evidence in these circumstances. A: I can accept that freely; of course that is true. Q: The next stage is this; that being so, the view I would form personally is that as a result of this, you would agree, you are hardly ever likely to be able to get a conviction of a prostitute. The police will hardly ever, in fact, bring cases, and the net result of this will be that the practice of solicitation in the streets will be largely unchecked by arrest or by police action. … Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: … It is absolutely fundamental I think, in the name of the principle that uncorroborated police evidence is suspect; therefore you must bring in the man to support the police evidence. You are prepared that that principle shall stand, no matter what the practical consequences may be; they will have to look after themselves. A: It will be an experiment, I accept that. That is my view. Since we must come down to brass tacks, I think that at present it is a gross injustice, and the evil effects of any charge are probably very much inflated; I think that probably good may result, rather than evil. Q. [Mr Adair]: Is that the unanimous view of your Council? A: No, it is not; I hasten to say it is not. … Q. [Mr Mishcon]: On that line of thought, would it not be your view that prostitution, as such, ought to be made illegal because, quite obviously, the sight of prostitute in the street would encourage quite a number of adults to commit immoral offences, would it not?

112 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

A: … Can we simplify it and say that, at the present moment, if there is a girl who is leading an immoral life in her own dwelling she is committing no offence—no offence at all. She is a private person and the law does not step in. That is generally accepted is it not? You would not have any officer of the law empowered to come in and investigate your own private life, would you? Q: Forgive me, I am so interested in your answers but I do not think you are equally interested in mind. A: There it is. Very few people will accept that, and therefore what a girl does in her own private lodging is a matter which concerns herself, and her conscience, and her God, and we are not proposing to deal with that. … Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: Why should you choose out of all criminal offences this particular one in which you do not accept uncorroborated police evidence? A: This offence is a very difficult one and it is not often that police evidence is suspect. I want to make that quite clear, it is not that at all. There is not a finer body of men anywhere than our police, and their integrity is beyond question. Let that be accepted; but if the person who is offended is not there to say so, I think it is a cardinal point and destroys the case in every branch of law. Q. [Mr Adair]: Do you know Curzon Street? A: I do. Q: Are you going to say that you cannot go up and down Curzon Street and see people who are deliberately soliciting? A: Yes, Certainly; that is true. Q: On what evidence do you say that it is true? Would it be on the evidence of your own observation? A: And experience, yes. Q: Would you say that there is less observation, or less power of observation, or less experience on the part of the police officers who see that, and can they not come and tell the Court that it took place? A: Not at all. I do not question, as I have said, the veracity or integrity of the police officers. What I do say is, and this is my answer, that for there to be a valid case the person offended should go on saying so, and should appear. Q: So that you prefer that those people should be allowed to use Curzon Street as they choose, and unless somebody who, mark you, is

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

113

probably going to be in Scotland the next day, can afford to wait until the Court sits at Bow Street rather than get home …. A: I want to point out that the girl is committing no offence in asking those persons whether they will do what she wants. … Q: You do not accept that it ought to be an offence for any common prostitute deliberately to solicit or annoy for the purposes of solicitation? A: Solicitation is not an offence. Q: It is an offence in the North (Scotland); you would object to it being an offence in London, is that it? A: I am not prepared to argue on the basis of what you do in Scotland. Q: you would object to a change in the law to make it an offence—that is what I meant? A: Yes, certainly. Q. [Chairman]: There are two alternative ways of dealing with this problem. You can either say that you leave annoyance in the law, but make the person annoyed come forward and so. The completely alternative way is to take annoyance out and make solicitation or loitering for the purpose of solicitation and offence. A: Of course I am not going to support that. What we want is that the person should give evidence if he is annoyed. Q: You want to keep annoyance in and insist on the evidence? A: What I do want to say—of course everybody burks this issue—is that the answer to the situation is “No, thank you” and pass on, and the thing is finished. When solicited all the person has to say is “No, thank you” and the matter ends. [Chairman]: That is very interesting. We have heard of several ways which have been recommended to us for dealing with that situation—but that is a new one. 9.  Progressive League—Witnesses: Mr Alec Craig, Mr Robert Pollard, and Dr Ernest Seeley Dr. Seeley: I would like to put my position like this as a general principle. It is the duty of society to see that no woman is forced into prostitution by economic social pressure, but if nevertheless she chooses to be a prostitute she has a right to be one. Q. [Mr Adair]: And she has a right to go on the streets and accost whoever she chooses to accost?

114 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

A. [Dr. Seeley]: No, that is another question. Does she in fact in doing that cause annoyance? I put it in the same position as anybody who wants to sell bananas from a barrow. Are they in fact causing obstruction and annoyance and so on? 10.  Progressive League Submitted Evidence We entirely support … the Association for Moral and Social Hygiene that the legal category of “common prostitute” should be abolished and that all women charged with street offences should be treated on an equal basis before acquittal or conviction irrespective of their antecedents. This appears to us to be no more than a necessary requirement of natural justice and the fact that it does not obtain in English law is a blot on the national legal system. Furthermore, we consider that the street offences of women should be dealt with under general and not special sexual laws. We find it difficult to arrive at any definition of prostitution which is satisfactory in its application to the conduct of individual women and urge that any laws on the subject should be confined to organized commercial exploitation. It follows that we do not consider that persons who merely provide accommodation for irregular sexual intercourse for couples who are already intent on indulging themselves should be penalised. Indeed, we consider it better in the interests of hygiene and public order that such intercourse should take place under decent conditions rather than be driven into places where venereal disease, pregnancy and public exposure are likely to result. 11.  Association for Moral and Society Hygiene Submitted Evidence The Association for Moral and Social Hygiene in Annual Meeting assembled regards the recommendations of the British Medical Association for the increase of fines for soliciting and for periods of detention in special establishments, together with their proposals for the ascertainment and arrest of young prostitutes, as retrograde measures based on injustice and recalls that injustice, particularly in connections with prostitution, corrupts and degrades both those who suffer under it and the society which inflicts it. The Association for Moral and Social Hygiene therefore calls upon the Departmental Committee on Homosexuality and Prostitution

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

115

to reject such proposals for legislative and police action against prostitutes as both dangerous and ineffective. The Failure of Repressive Law 1. Repressive measures have been tried throughout long periods of history, without effect. No punishment has been too bitter for the prostitute. 2. Repressive measures in practice operated against the woman along have propagated the disastrous idea that there is a different moral law for the two sexes; they tend to force the police to act as the guardians of morals. 3. If solicitation be made an offence against the law, it will merely be driven underground. 4. Heavy fines are disproportionate to the offence, and drive the offender back to her trade to secure the money. 5. “Clearing up the streets” will not safeguard men or women from solicitation. On the contrary, it will increase the use of other methods of approach more subtle and therefore more dangerous to inexperienced youth. 6. Repressive measures against solicitation have a further evil effect. Prostitutes tend to make an increasing use of agents who exploit them by encouraging them to incur debts for clothing, drink, drugs and accommodation. The “call-girl” system is an example of a kind of organisation which cannot be suppressed. 7. Neither law nor police can effectively protect people from sexual temptation. Sir Harold Scott, late Commissioner, Metropolitan Police, has expressed his opinion that “Prostitution cannot be stamped out under the existing law, however stringently it is enforced, and every police officer will agree with me that it is doubtful if any conceivable law could have that effect.” 8. Repressive measures disguised as “reformative” include bitterness against injustice. Repression without concern for causes of wrong conditions have always failed, and MUST ALWAYS FAIL. 9. The Association asserts firmly that there is ample documentary evidence of the failure of repressive law; of the opportunities such law affords for blackmail and corruption; and that repressive law is in the main a recognition of a common guilt in the social conscience.

116 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

12.  Howard League Submitted Evidence The manner in which women actually solicit varies according to individual temperament, the amount of previous “business” done, or even the time of day. But there can be no doubt that quite frequently there is no active accosting at all. The women merely stand quietly in some doorway, often dressed in a manner likely to attract attention. Everyone knows why they are there, and it may well be the potential customer who speakers first, helped along, perhaps, by a smile. Although according to our present law no offence was committed at all, women who passively solicit do find their way into court, and are found guilty of something they have not done. On the other hand, there is active solicitation which can, on occasion, become almost aggressive, with the woman concerned stepping into the path of passers-by and making something of a nuisance of themselves. It is against such behaviour “to the annoyance of the inhabitants and passengers” that legal sanctions exist, such as those provided by the Metropolitan Police Act, 1839. But even where there is active solicitation and some annoyance is caused, it is exceedingly rare that evidence is given by the inhabitants or passengers concerned that they were in fact annoyed. In theory, therefore, the onus of proof seems no longer to be on the prosecution, and this runs contrary to the cardinal principle which underlies English law, that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. … Although we strongly dislike the basis on which the present law is administered, it is difficult to see a satisfactory alternative. A comparatively minor change which we recommend is that the term “common prostitute” be dropped. It has at least the appearance of being inimical to a fair trial, as would be the case if a charge of larceny began with the words “being a common thief”. Nor can we see that “common prostitute” adds anything to the value of the proceedings or the dignity of the courts. 13.  Howard League (Interview)—Witnesses: Mr FE Baker, Miss Mary Hamilton, Dr TCN Gibbens and Mr Hugh J Klare Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: I was going to ask, what do you see as the long-­term result of driving the prostitute off the streets? There seems to be no doubt that through the police and magistrates and possibly as an amendment of the law, you could clear the streets to put it simply. What in fact is going to happen? Are you going to put a stop to the greater part of prostitution? A. [Mr Klare]: That is why we did not consider imprisonment. We think that prostitution is a problem that cannot be dealt with adequately

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

117

by the law. The only thing you can do is to keep the thing within certain limits. You can discourage people who verge on prostitution; it is very difficult to do anything about people who are confirmed prostitutes. We feel that if they were driven off the streets it would undoubtedly go on in some other evil way and have evil effects. We do not think it is a problem which can be dealt with by suppression. … Miss Hamilton: I personally still hold that I do not think that imprisonment is the right way of dealing with prostitution. You may get the one person off the streets; you will perhaps drive your dull girl who is perhaps a little defective off the streets; but you are going to drive your other prostitutes into more vicious ways and you are going to drive them underground. 14.  British Medical Association—Witnesses: Dr Dennis Carroll, Dr Ronald Gibson, Dr TCN Gibbens, Dr Ambrose King, Dr Doris Odlum, Dr Leonard Simpson, and Dr E.E. Claxton Q. [Chairman]: … paragraph 139 (ii), “The system of fines and imprisonment should be increased”—you are prepared to advocate imprisonment? A. [Dr Odlum]: In certain cases where of course imprisonment was being handled intelligently. I think, just segregating them in a prison is not doing any good at all, but if you get this kind of service we envisage elsewhere, where real supervision and rehabilitation is attempted, and where they feel they have a friend and can be followed up after, prison may be the only way of getting hold of them. Q: [Mrs Lovibond]: You would have to send them there for quite a time to do any good, in prison? A. You probably would, yes. Q. Would you consider giving them a long sentence? A. Probably long enough to enable some rehabilitation methods to be undertaken. Q. We would have to alter our prisons a bit, would we not? They do not seem to have a very good way of looking after women. A. I quite agree that in the prison system we have not. Q. Do you think they could be helped in such a way as not to want to go back? A. If you get them young. Of course the recidivist, no: but the young girl who is not, one might say, confirmed in prostitution—I think there is something to be done, and most of the people we discussed it with thought that there was a field for the young girl and young woman who was just beginning, but none at all for the established prostitute.

118 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Q. Do you know of any of these girls who have given it up, who have been in prison? A. I do not know about imprisonment but we have certainly had evidence that some of them have been reclaimed. … A. [TCN Gibbens]: I think if it were possible to arrest the young prostitute in such a way that she could be remanded in custody in a remand centre for several weeks, a great many people could be helped, if there were some machinery to arrest them and bring them under notice and study. Among the young girls, the vast majority of prostitutes I see are quite temporary, and any measure taken would lead them to resist any active help, and there is a much wider variation of opinion on the subject of how effective punitive measures would be after that. Amongst the younger group certainly the voluntary method is likely to be successful with a large proportion ….

Local Authorities 1.  Westminster City Council—Witnesses: Alderman Sir Arthur Howard, Alderman Charles P Russell, Mr W Walsh, and Mr TD O’Brian Alderman Russell: It is of course quite obvious that at the present moment the insignificance of the fine eases the path along of the police and of the prostitute. You can go to Bow street and see lines of them dealt with at the rate of about three a minute, because they all plead guilty and the police have not to prove anything. But of course if these penalties become really severe, and the woman reached a stage at which she was in danger possibly of imprisonment, many of those cases which go through today without discussion of course would be strongly fought, and it would be a very difficult thing in many cases, owing to the impossibility almost of getting anybody to come along and give evidence of annoyance, to get a conviction

Social Science 1.  Dr. Alfred Kinsey I think that the current value of the law has been grossly exaggerated. So far as sexual behaviour is concerned, the social acceptance, or non-­ acceptance of a phenomenon is, we feel, much more important.

5  LAW, JURISPRUDENCE, AND PUNISHMENT 

119

Incidentally, extra-marital intercourse does not run the reputation of almost anybody in the United States. A relationship, as with a mistress on the Continental pattern, would very definitely do so. Social pressure is a thing which is determining the pattern, rather than the law on the subject. […] I think in both England and in the United States we subscribe to the doctrine which Plato laid down in the Republic. After examining the question if what types of sexual activity should be controlled by the social organisation, he reached what seemed to me, when I first read it, an amazing conclusion, that perhaps we should not prohibit any type of sexual activity, but we should penalise the person whose activity becomes a matter of public knowledge and scandal.

CHAPTER 6

Brothels, Off-Street Premises, Privatization

Unlike their continental neighbours and many sites in their empire, Britain had never legalized or regulated brothels. While the Contagious Diseases Acts of the mid-nineteenth century are often described as a ‘regulated system’, in reality this kind of regulation was temporary, spatially limited, and never went so far as to formally recognize or license the brothel. At that point, brothels were not explicitly illegal, but they could be prosecuted if they caused a ‘nuisance’ in a neighbourhood under the Disorderly Houses Acts. In reality this happened but rarely, because vestry and town councils were leery of the costs of prosecuting in a higher court. A series of exposés about the exploitation and debauchery of regulated brothels on the Continent and in London in the 1880s gave rise to the 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act, which made ‘keeping a brothel’ a non-indictable offence, and therefore easier and cheaper to prosecute. The Act did not define what a brothel was but later case law, especially the 1897 case of Singleton v Ellison, defined it as a place where ‘more than one woman’ practised prostitution, and brothel prosecutions skyrocketed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The solidification of the legal definition of a brothel as a place where more than one woman engaged in prostitution affected the way women who sold sex organized their work. Not being able to work together meant that women had to be seen to work from separate, individual dwellings. This could be isolating, dangerous, and impractical. However, it was not unusual for women to try to minimize some of the impact of this legal © The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_6

121

122 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

restriction by working from separate flats within the same building. In the early twentieth century, there were debates about whether these types of premises should also be termed brothels, but it was acknowledged that criminalizing women who worked alone from single flats would have made it even more difficult for women who sold sex to find accommodation. During the early and mid-twentieth century, the law against brothel-­ keeping worked in tandem with the laws used to police prostitution on the streets, making it difficult for women to engage in sex work without being criminalized. In London, most women solicited on the street, and brought clients back to nearby houses, flats, and furnished rooms. Sometimes clubs, bars, pubs, and cafes would have rooms above that were used by women who sold sex, soliciting inside the club. These spaces were priced at a premium by landlords and agents who forced women to absorb the costs of the legal risks they were taking in letting to them. Some women used their own homes for commercial sex, but more commonly women would live in one place and work in another. Outside of London, police forces tended to suggest that brothel-keeping was less of a problem than it was in London. For example, the evidence presented in this chapter shows the Assistant Chief Constable of Edinburgh telling the Wolfenden Committee that brothel-keeping was not a significant problem in that area. However, there were some, such as Liverpool’s Chief Constable, who believed that while the streets could be kept clear of prostitution, it was harder to deal with indoor forms of sex work. According to the Chief Constable of Liverpool, milk bars and public houses proved to be useful soliciting grounds for women during the 1950s; women who sold sex in Liverpool would often solicit in these venues and then take their customers back to flats. The question of what constituted a brothel, and whether all off-street sites for commercial sex should come under the criminal law, continued to plague councils, the police, the Home Office, and moral reform organizations during the post-war years. By the time the Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution met, a series of case laws had determined a complex number of ways that ‘brothel keepers’ could be prosecuted, as well as ways they could escape prosecution. Once again, the issue of women working alone in separate flats within a single building received attention, with witnesses discussing this arrangement with Wolfenden and the Committee. Of particular concern was the way landlords and agents could make themselves immune to charges by renting to

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

123

single women, while taking only perfunctory steps to establish individual rooms within the same building as separate dwellings (such as by adding sinks and hotplates to the rooms). This enabled a network of property owners and dealers to make considerable profits from off-street prostitution with impunity. In the excerpts that follow, interviewees expressed a range of opinions about off-street commercial sex. They described the complex arrangements between women and third parties off the street, as well as the confusing legal system that operated (or, in many cases, failed to operate). While feminist groups and some municipal councils demanded stronger laws against brothels, the striking thing here is the degree to which many speakers implicitly or explicitly advocated for their decriminalization or outright legalization. This is in keeping with the wider interpretation of the Wolfenden Committee’s desire to ‘privatize’ morality, as in to push offensive aspects of it out of sight but to let it continue out of sight unimpeded. Some speakers here refer to this as the ‘Victorian’ way of doing things: out of sight, out of mind. However, this ‘privatization’ approach was seriously complicated by the fact that the Wolfenden Report failed to discuss brothels at all, despite how often the subject of brothels was raised by witnesses. Indeed, Wolfenden never intended to alter the law against brothels in any way. While the Committee sat, the Sexual Offences Act of 1956 was passed by the Conservative government, which included a reiteration of the pre-­ existing laws against off-street prostitution. And so, while Wolfenden’s witnesses articulated solutions to the problem of street prostitution that included some tolerance of ‘brothels’ that operated privately, the Committee’s recommendations, combined with the Sexual Offences Act, left little space for women to operate either on or off the street. Excerpts

Police and Magistrates 1.  Sir John Nott-Bower, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Commander Robertson, A Division, and Police Court Solicitor Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: We know of two problems at the moment; one is prostitutes in the streets, the other is a woman in her own flat. Supposing both those were to be made clearly illegal in the sense that you cleared the

124 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

women out of both those means of carrying on their activity, what is left to them? Are you then going to drive them out of business? Our view up to now has been that it was virtually impossible to do that. Have you got to provide a safety valve somewhere, or is it really possible to clamp down on the whole thing? A. [Nott-Bower]: I should say myself it is quite impossible to clamp down on the whole thing. If you were to do away with both those things, I can see no alternative to a system of licensed houses. Q: Do you regard that with horror yourself? A: Yes, I should. Q: From the police point of view, do you think it would create great difficulties? A: To establish licensed houses, I do not think, from the police point of view, it would give rise to any great difficulties. … Q. [Mr Adair]: You indicate that there will be other methods—call girls and so forth [if the streets are cleared]. There are streets where there are advertisements very openly displayed of hostesses and such like; is anything done to follow these up to test their bona fides? A. [Nott-Bower]: Could Mr Robertson give you some details about the recent call girl case? … A. [Mr Robertson]: The position is at this address which was brought to our notice, it may have been got as an advertisement on a board, we do not know, we have not found out where she advertises, but the fact is she runs this house not with prostitutes who solicit in the street but with part-­ time prostitutes if you like. We do not know who they are. We have watched them coming and we have watched them going, generally one at a time and then a man. During the time of our observation we saw 50 different men go there, well-dressed men, during business hours, discreetly leaving cars round the corner. We do not know these girls and we cannot find out what they do in their spare time when they are not going this, and we are just at a dead end at the moment. Q. [Mr Wells]: May I ask what harm there is in it? A. [Mr Robertson]: We are inundated with complaints from residents in this area. A. [Nott-Bower]: And there is a suspicion that this place is being run as a brothel.

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

125

A. [Mr Robertson]: We know it is being run as a brothel but we cannot prove it. … A. [Mr Robertson]: I can give you details of the Soden case which was the most striking call girl establishment we have dealt with recently. That was, to all intents and purposes, a respectable place—I suppose this is not being published? Mr Soden rang me up the day before yesterday and complained he could not pay my costs which amounted to the reasonable figure of £78. He was an architect employed by the Essex County Council and was on the premises most of the time this was going on and his wife had three girls. Two were over 21 and one was a young person, and really we got in through the young person. The arrangement there was quite simple, that the man desiring to use her premises would ring her up and she would ring round to these people, telephone and arrange for them to be present. She was in league with two other similar organizations, each of which had two girls. In the other cases and in the Soden case the proprietress also obliged, and also the proprietress’s maid when they ran out of other ladies … the maid was so ugly she always sent her into a darkened room with the light off. Nevertheless it was an ordinary call girl system although Mrs Soden and the maid were both on the premises. … Q. [Mr Baker]: How did the man know where to call up in the first place, what was the publicity? A. [Mr Robertson]: There was a kind of grape vine. We could not prove much about that. We did have a woman constable whose duty when she entered the premises was to answer the telephone. While she was there we did have two calls to make appointments; the appointments were made but as far as I know not kept. Q. [Mr Wells]: What was the method of payment in that case? A: It varied somewhat. Mrs Soden normally charged £5 which included the accommodation and the services of the lady. The lady received 30s. … Mrs Soden always paid into a bank and one is able to get a good idea of the amount of business, and the girl got 30s for turning up there. There was a scale. If it were not for ordinary fornication but for other forms of amusement, the scales were higher. They were not so numerous, they came once a month. Q: Did you find the call girls had actual occupations in which they were engaged during the day?

126 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

A: No, they had had occupations, but at the time we went in none had any occupation at all, but they had occasional jobs. I happen to remember one, it was a girl who helped to sell hats when a particular sale was on at one of the big ladies’ outfitter places. She used to take very occasional jobs for a day or two. It is true to say in the ordinary way none of these girls had any other form of employment at all. Q. [Dr Scott]: What were the girls making on this, was the sum involved very large? A: I have not got Mrs Soden’s bank account here but to the best of my recollections she was making in the neighbourhood of £40 a week after deducting expenses. That is nothing to Messina about whom we have heard. I have also seen Mr Alfredo’s account, he was banking sometimes £100 a week and sometimes £300. … A. [Nott-Bower]: the system which goes on already would tend to become more widely spread if you drove it off the streets. Q. [Mr Rees]: Have you any reason to think such establishments are multiplying? A. [Nott-Bower]: I think in recent years the call girl system has increased. I had never heard of it at all before this war. I do not remember any call girl complaint we had before the war. A. [Mr Robertson]: We are dealing with a large number at the moment, running into dozens. … Q. [Mr Diplock]: If you had similar powers of search for brothels as I think you have for betting houses—I think it is a search warrant? A [Mr Robertson]: Plus the power of arrest. Q: Is it the view of the police that with those powers you could control brothels if it were thought desirable to do so? A. [Nott-Bower]: It would strengthen our hand very much. … Q. [Mr Adair]: Might I ask if there is evidence available with regard to the high rents being charged to those women for those flats? A. [Nott-Bower]: There is a great deal of information but not very much evidence. Nobody will say anything; the women themselves will not say anything. A. [Mr Robertson]: It is a well-known practice in the West End that the rent actually paid by the prostitute has no bearing on what is shown in the rent book. Many of these places are controlled by the Rent Restriction

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

127

Act and it is 30s and she may pay as much as £25 a week. There is a forged rent book kept for production if necessary, and we just cannot get to the bottom of these cases at all. Where you get the prostitute, the lessor and the owner all up against you it is just impossible to get anywhere with it. 2.  Association of Chief Police Officers—of England and Wales Witnesses: Mr C Martin CBE, the Chief Constable of Liverpool, and Mr CH Watkins, the Chief Constable of Glamorgan Martin: It really is not a problem to us at all, except this brothel keeping, which is a nuisance and it takes up a good deal of police time. Of course, in a seaport obviously there is bound to be a good deal of this going on, and there is some sort of underground system whereby seafaring people are often attracted to these places. They very often are what are known as shebeens—I do not know if you have heard that expression, a shebeen is a place where intoxicating liquor is sold without a licence, and it is usually a combination of shebeen and brothel, and there is, I am afraid to say, a system whereby, as I say, seafaring people are attracted to these places, sometimes through taxi drivers and other people. But usually it goes on indoors, in brothels, and, if I may repeat, these offences will prove there is not very much street walking in Liverpool. In any case it is very difficult to prove, and I do not blame the constable who is rather circumspect about dealing with a prostitute, because after all he has got to prove that she is not only a common prostitute—I dare say you have heard all this before— but he has also got to prove that she is importuning to the annoyance of passers-by and inhabitants, and so on, and that is very difficult to prove, so far as Liverpool is concerned. That may be one of the reasons, of course, where there are so few convictions, but there is not much street walking going on. Of course, the presence of policewomen and policemen on the streets drives them into milk bars and public houses, and places like that, where they get hold of men and take them to brothels or to flats, and so on. Q. [Chairman]: … there is for you at any rate a certain amount of problem about brothels? A. [Martin]: With brothel keeping there is, yes, because it takes up a lot of police time, it infuriates people in the district—we are getting an awful lot of complaints to the police and the local authority—and it is generally a nuisance to everyone. Q: Though it may be the case, may it, that the fact of the existence of those brothels does relieve you to some extent of the street problem?

128 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

A: So far as the street problem is concerned, I would not say it relieves us, but we do not have the prostitution parading itself in the public eye so much. Q: But, to put it the other way, if you did not have these brothels would it be likely to be the case that you had more of them on the streets? A: Yes, I would say it would mean that they would be pushed out into the streets. But there would necessarily have to be some place for them to go. I think there are almost bound to be brothels, if one may say so. Q: Because naturally enough it has been suggested to us by other witnesses as one way of remedying the state of affairs in London, that to get to a point where brothels were tolerated, if not legalised, would at any rate remove a large amount of the public offence to the indecency which goes on in London. A: A brothel can still be offensive; it may not be offensives to certain people, and it is becoming a terrific problem, but a brothel also in a town is very offensive to people, and it becomes an awful nuisance, and if you do not keep a careful eye on it of course brothel keeping spreads very rapidly, especially in the coloured quarter, where we have to keep a very strict control over them. Q: It is a very tactless or embarrassing question to ask how it is that there are so many brothels, which I take it are illegal? A: I think it is because in those streets in Liverpool, for example, where there is likely to be street walking, there is a good deal of police patrolling going on, by women police especially, and it is a fact—I think I can say this quite safely—that the women police keep the prostitutes off the street, and of course that encourages brothels. Q: It is another tactless and embarrassing question to ask where you would rather have them, on the streets or in the brothel? A: I do not want them at all. Q: No, but take it that you have got to have them. A: If I had to have them, that is not a tactless question, it is an awfully difficult one to answer, but I would hate to have it said of me that I agreed to brothels. I suppose of the two the brothel is the less offensive so far as the public are concerned. A. [Mr Watkins]: I would add to that, Sir, that on the police investigation point of view the question of dealing with the brothel under the law is a very difficult one, it involves days and sometimes weeks of observation to get the necessary evidence in order to bring them before the court. It is not as simple as just walking in and catching them in the act, the courts

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

129

will not accept only that, they want evidence of close observation for weeks on end. Q: [Mr Wells]: Would you agree, putting it this way, about the offensiveness, that street walking must be offensive, but a brothel may be? A. [Martin] Yes—it depends where the brothel is; if it is in a street of brothels, or a street where that sort of life goes on, then it is not so offensive, but of course the value of the property deteriorates, for one thing, and then of course it leads to all sorts of other things in the form of crime. Q. [Chairman]: Yes, I wanted to come on to that point in a moment. A. [Martin]: Crime does emerge from this brothel keeping business. We get all sorts of things going on; grievous bodily harm, that is to say, serious assaults upon people, robberies by the prostitute or a protector, and things like that, emerge from prostitution and brothel keeping. Q. [Mr Wells]: Do you think, if they were legalised and you know where they were and inspected them regularly, that the problem would be mitigated? A. [Martin]: No, I do not really think so, because with brothel keeping and with prostitution, which are forms of corruption, I think, there is always some form of crime eventually associated with them. [It is noted that the submitted evidence suggested most chief constables were opposed to legalisation of brothels]. [Martin]: I think that the punishment for brothel keeping at the moment is rather weak, really; I do not think it has a great deal of effect on people if they are pretty well off and they have been making a good deal of money, it is not difficult for them to start up again elsewhere. A. [Mr Adair]: There is of course the difficulty about a place occupied by a single woman for habitual prostitution—what is the attitude of the chief constables with regards to that? A. [Martin]: Of course, that has always been a problem, but it is really very difficult, because it is going to take an awful lot of proving, I think, and I cannot really suggest a way round it. I suppose it would bring in a tremendous number of people and places as brothels if the law were altered to include a single-woman brothel, but if there were—it depends on the place of, of course—if there were a number of flats in one house and a number of prostitutes living one in each flat, it comes out fairly well, but I should say that the opinion of many chief constables is that there should be some amendment of the law in that respect to include them. But I am not certain myself whether it would be a good thing—and when I say that,

130 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

I am not representing the views of the chief constables now. I am rather doubtful as to whether it would be a wise thing to do. A. [Watkins]: Of course, chief constables generally are divided on the question, but I am rather inclined to agree with Mr Martin that the problem is not a great one, and I do not feel myself that any alteration in the law is justified at the moment. Speaking merely from my experience in Wales, the problem is not a long-lasting one. The type of woman who sets up in her own house and receives men, as I say, does not keep at it for any particular length of time; it does not become a public menace, put it that way. It is rather an odd thing […] we have towns up to about 50,000 population—the problem of the woman who goes morally wrong is not a great one, merely by reason of the fact that practically everybody in the town knows everybody else. 3.  Frank Powell, London Police Court Magistrate Powell: My chief clerk who does not agree with my views I may tell you … said to me “If the committee adopt your views you will drive the prostitutes into the cafes, public houses and so on, and they will do their soliciting there.” … Also he said to me “You will drive vice underground”, to which my answer is that it is better for it to be underground than in the streets of London…not to the extent of having licensed houses. I would not suggest that for a moment. I would probably object to that on moral grounds. … I would rather have it [off the street] than that anybody walking down the street should be accosted in this way. 4.  Paul Bennet, London Police Court Magistrate Bennet: When I was quite a youth—about 18—I came to London and was taken, more out of curiosity, by someone older than myself, to the Pavilion—the Promenade. That place, of course, was done away with by the LCC as undesirable. I am rather doubtful as to whether it was wise. It was a nice carpeted place with a small bar in the corner and there were only men there. Some were there just to see this how, leaning over the bar and watching the show; and others were there to make an assignation with some of these prostitutes. There were about 12 or 14 prostitutes. There was no disorder at all and it was all extremely quiet and orderly. The man would ask the woman to have drink and then the couple would leave. Those women were not young people—which is such an unpleasant

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

131

feature today—but they were women in the thirties, quite well dressed and they quite obviously had their apartment. The pair went off to the apartment. There was no question of any offence against public order there and if prostitution always is on those lines I would not think it so very dreadful except the moral side of it. But the London County Council closed that Promenade. I would not say emphatically really that it should not have been closed, but they were in charge of those places and they close them. To me there was nothing particularly offensive going on. … Bennett: The woman who is in an important way of business—if I may be forgiven that expression—has a flat and takes the man there. They have to pay in proportion. These creatures I deal with in Hyde Park have nowhere to take the man at all. Some of them are married. They come from all over London. Some come from outside London. They mess about in the park there and it is their idea of making money. But why I am strongly against the authorities recognizing the brothel—that is the real brothel—is because I think the moment the authorities do that it becomes semi-respectable. It is recognised by the State as a thing to be catered for, which I think is such a dangerous position. The next step is that mistresses are respected. That of course is a much greater danger. As we know in France men in quiet high positions are known to have mistresses. Mistresses are only mistresses for power or money. … Bennet: I think I have made my point. I think women who wish to take up prostitution find it far too easy. The rewards are far too high. I would like to see the penalties brought into line, but at the same time I think this idea about “fallen sisters” and “wicked men” is not at all the position today. What it was 50 years ago I do not know. I do not think prostitution can be stopped. I do not think we ought to try and stop it. I prefer the Victorian view. They paid no attention to it. It was not recognised. It was only when there was some scandal that it became public I have in mind the Parnell case. I would just like to mention this. I have just finished reading “The life of Gladstone”. In 1993 the author said that Gladstone pleased the radical party because he supported a resolution condemning a system of licensed brothels established under the Contagious Diseases Acts of 1864  in 18 ports and garrison towns. It would be rather interesting to know the views they held then.

132 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

9. Mr W.  Hunter, Assistant Chief Constable, City of Edinburgh and Mr James A. Robertson, Assistant Chief Constable, City of Glasgow Q. [Chairman]: Have you any difficulty […] about brothels or the men behind the girls?—A. [Hunter] There is always the difficulty of course of securing evidence which is a definite difficulty, there is no doubt, but apart from that I should say no. In Edinburgh we do not have very many brothels at all and in general, apart from securing evidence, there is no problem. Q. [Chairman]: In the south [meaning where the law of England and Wales applied], for instance, there is a difficulty, and I do not know what the solution is about the one girl flat. A. [Hunter]: We do not have that. A. [Mr Robertson]: We have it to a very limited extent. But one thing to which I was going to draw your attention—Mr Adair has already referred to the civil remedy of the voidance of the tenancy of a house. We are going to be faced with the difficulty in the future of so many people buying houses and becoming owner-occupiers; you cannot void the tenancy there and one might have thought there would be a possibility of an increase in the penalty there. That is going to be a difficulty in the future. I know that in Glasgow most people are now being forced to buy their own house, with the result that they become the owners of the house and there is no one to throw them out of the house. A. [Mr Adair]: That is a question of adopting in Glasgow what has been a principle in Edinburgh for many years. A. [Robertson]: That is so. With regard to the one girl flat, we have occasional ones, Downham and Keith Row, farmed out flats. We have followed prostitutes quite often and found they went to these places with one man there. One might hope that in the future there might be some legislation which would be statutory notice given to the owner of the flat to terminate the tenancy of the girl, or put her out. He could quite easily take in another one of course, and possibly after three times he could be given a statutory notice, he might be dealt with by something along those lines, I do not know whether it is feasible. Q. [Adair]: What you are striking out is the man who has a number of houses he is letting to single occupants, to girls he knows to be prostitutes, which is exactly the ownership case dealt with not so long ago. Your suggestion then is that such a man ought to receive notice that his premises are being occupied, not as a brothel, but for habitual prostitution; and that, having got such a notice on say three occasions, he should be dealt with for aiding in habitual prostitution? A. [Robertson]: Living on immoral earnings, yes.

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

133

Civil Society and Professional Associations 1.  Association for Moral and Social Hygiene—Witnesses: Mrs Margery Corbett-Ashby, Mrs Elizabeth Abbott, Miss EM Steel, Miss Chave Collisson, and Miss DOG Peto OBE Q. [Chairman]: Well, let us be quite frank about this. It has been suggested to use that one of the worst things that ever happened in London was the closing down of the Empire Bar—or The Empire Promenade, or whatever it was—where all these things were very quietly and decently regulated and where everybody knew why everybody else was there. That was nice, quiet, respectable and unobtrusive way, with no offence to public order and with none of what they call nowadays this cluttering up of the streets. I am not suggesting by any means that the Committee necessarily accepts that view but it is a view which is held, and those who hold that sort of view would say something like this: “We are not trying to abolish prostitution because” they would say “we do not think that is a possibility anyway and all we are concerned about is public order and public decency; and if these things are conducted in an orderly and decently private way in places which are known to be available for this relevant purpose, then would not that be a better solution than the parades in some of the streets in London?” I am not saying for a moment that that is the answer to the point but that is the answer which has been put to us. A. [Miss Collison]: The tolerated brothel, in other words. Q. [Chairman]: Not necessarily. A. [Mrs Abbott]: Well, I am old enough to have been several times to the Empire Bar. I would not say it was then entirely given over to that kind of thing. There were respectable people like myself have known some of the cafes in Piccadilly Circus, such as the Monico. No doubt assignations were made there, but perfectly respectable people were there, too. I do think that when people ask for the streets to be cleared up, as you say, to make them more respectable—I hope this Committee knows what happened after a very moral and well-intentioned committee in New York— the Committee of Fourteen—cleared the streets of New  York. This association wrote to them and said, “We pray you do not do this.” Well, it went into cafes, dives, taxi-cabs, into the really lowdown parts and areas. Though illegal, a proliferation of brothels, either luxurious or shoddy, sprang up. It all came out and in the Seabury Report, which I think we can give information about, where graft and corruption had stopped short only of the Bench. That was the result of making things tidy. It will not work.

134 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

2.  Progressive League—Witnesses: Mr Alec Craig, Mr Robert Pollard, and Dr Ernest Seeley Q. [Mr Adair]: With regard to prostitution do you propose to do away with brothels? … A. [Mr Pollard]: In our view the law should not cover such places, unless there is commercial exploitation in the sense that the place is obviously holding itself out for that sort of trade, and thereby encouraging it, but if it is, as you so very well put it, a place where questions are not asked and so forth, then we definitely think that the law goes too far in suppressing such places, and what is more does harm by doing so. … if you try and widen your definition of a brothel to include a place where people who before coming are bent on illicit sexual intercourse, then you are creating a worse evil than you are trying to cure. … Q. [Hugh Linstead]: Could I move on … to the case of the woman with her own flat. Now there you would say that she should be left alone, what she does behind her own doors, in her own home if you like, is her affair so long as she does not create a nuisance? A. [Dr Seeley]: Yes. A. [Mr Pollard]: We could say that most emphatically. I would say what she chooses to do is her affair entirely, and for other people to interfere would be an outrageous abuse of liberty …. A. [Mr Craig]: I think we would … say that prostitution should not be dealt with as a thing in itself, or sexual conduct. It should again be regarded in the general situation; for instance precisely the sort of nuisance that is described, people coming to the wrong flat, could occur because somebody was carrying on some other trade and they mistake the number … somebody near me has bought a small detached rehabilitated coach-house, and has filled this place with parrots who make an ungodly noise day and night, and there it is. You do not say you have to have a special law against parrots, it comes under the law of public nuisance and of landlord and tenant, and that is what we think the prostitute and sexual conduct should be dealt with under. Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: … People say that they do not mind them, they cannot really say that they get in their way, or interfere with their

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

135

using the street, but that the real problem with their using the street, but that the real problem is that if you live in a small quiet square where there are six or eight prostitutes quietly behaving themselves there is still an interference with quiet enjoyment of normal life. … The essence of the offence is that the women are prostitutes. … A. [Dr. Seeley]: I think that is a thing where we have to learn to put up with each other’s queer ways. I do not think myself anyone has a right to object to the person next door being a prostitute, or something like that. In regard to this business of going to the wrong flat surely it is precisely because of the semi-legal hole in the corner way in which a prostitute has to behave that confusion over flat number is likely to arise. If she pinned up her name on the door, or something like that …. 3.  Mayfair Association—Witnesses: Mrs M Anderson, Mr WR Sloman, and The Earl Howe Q. [Mr Adair]: The suggestion has been made that there should be some sort of licensing system. Do you think the existence of licensed houses would do anything in Mayfair? A. [Mr Sloman]: We have them unlicensed; I do not know whether the difference would be very great. Q. [Chairman]: You do not like them? A. [Mr Sloman]: We do not like them, but we prefer the house to the street practice. At least I do, speaking personally and as a ratepayer. … I do not think anyone would actually approve of the licensing system in this country; I think it would shock the country tremendously. But there is this intermediate call-girl system, which is operating in so many places now, and I think that would probably be less repugnant. Q. [Chairman]: Apart from the moral angle, have you got to take into account also the probability that in this case more and more people along the chain will be making more and more money out of this, and that is, you think, the price you would be prepared to pay for getting them off the streets? A. [Mr Sloman]: It is a shocking thing to say, but I think it is a price any community should pay, shall we say, to preserve the façade. It may be a wrong thing to preserve a façade, but the present state is not a good one.

136 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

4.  Paddington Moral Reform Council, Submitted Evidence In or near streets patrolled by prostitutes there tend to spring up establishments which can only properly be described as drinking clubs which are convenient and much used resorts for these women. In a small area in south Paddington, for example, six or more of these clubs exist wherein drink can be obtained when normal licensed houses are closed. Control of these clubs appears to be quite inadequate and abuses abound. If restrictions are placed upon prostitutes it is thought that their resort to and the number of such places may greatly increase. 5.  Society of Labour Lawyers—Witnesses: Mr Gerald Gardiner QC, Mr Ben Hooberman, Mr PR Kimber, Mr CR Hewitt, and Miss Jean Graham Hall Mr Gardiner: You see, we have assumed that the Committee would take the view that in light of history you cannot by anything you may do abolish prostitution in the largest town in the world; therefore if you push it away in one place it is going to come out in another. Q. [Mr Rees]: Have you thought about where else it would come out? A. [Gardiner]: The moment you take it off the streets and make it difficult for them to find one another, then as I say you have a third party coming in, and at the moment as far as we know there is no organised vice in London—the Messina gang was something quite un-English and quite unknown, and although of course some of the women have their own men, which you cannot stop, apart from that nobody else is financially interested. I was speaking of conditions in London. One keeps one’s eyes open, but if you asked me to find a brothel, I would not know where to find one. I do not think there is a brothel in London, in the continental sense. The brothels we get are simply the cases where more than one prostitute lives in a house, but I have never heard of a brothel in London where you are offered a choice, and I think there Is not any organised vice, and I think it is very important that it should be so, and if you try to drive it off the streets, that is the sort of thing you would get. You would get, as you do in continental towns, men sidling up to you to tell you they can take you somewhere. … Q. [Mr Adair]: I wonder whether you would conceive it as a possibility that an absent landlord ought to have an onus put upon him of a charge of living on immoral earnings if his place is convicted two or three times as a brothel?

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

137

A. [Gardiner]: He could be convicted if he knows it, but it would be a shocking thing to convict a man of living on immoral earnings if he did not know. Q. But he is bound to know immediately there has been a conviction, because an intimation must be made to him by the court that he is to take steps to top the let. If there is another one following on that, would it be unreasonable to say on the second occasion and thereafter it is an onus upon him to show that he did not know? If there is a third conviction hw [sic] will be treated as living on immoral earnings. A. Where the landlord has let the whole house to somebody else, or do you mean where he is the occupying landlord although he may not be there? If he is the man in possession although hr [sic] is not physically there he can be convicted if he knows, and in point of fact courts accept pretty slight indication that he does know. Q.  The indication we were getting was that because he was absent nothing could be done in certain courts. Q. [Mr Mishcon]: I think there are two separate cases that Mr Adair is putting. One is where you have got a warning by the court of conviction of the occupants of a house. The absentee landlord is then quite obviously in receipt of knowledge, and it is up to him to see that the premises are cleared, and if he does not certain steps can follow. There is the other case that Mr Adair I think had also got in mind of where the absentee landlord of such premises clears the first lot of tenants out, or they voluntarily go, and then there is a second occasion and a second conviction, and then there is a third conviction with entirely different sets of tenants. Would you not agree that each set of circumstances would have to be taken, and if the general set of circumstances showed that the man must have known the court would convict. If there were certain extenuating circumstances to show that the man might not have known the court would give him the benefit of the doubt. I should have thought that was the position. A. We have not got very strong views. We feel there is a good deal of hypocrosy [sic] about this. If there is prostitution they have to live somewhere. They cannot buy a house, so they have to be tenants, and there they are, somebody is their landlord. Then you pounce on the landlord because he lets flats to two prostitutes and convict him of living on immoral earnings. It is all a bit hypocritical really. Q. [Mr Adair]: It is put to us that the rentals on the valuation roll are not the true rentals paid by these people and that very substantial sums are passing and he is getting the benefit of them.—A. It is because you make

138 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

it so difficult for them to find accommodation. If a man is running a brothel and really making money out of their immoral earnings, that is one thing if he is simply acting as landlord that is another thing. The girl has to live somewhere. We think landlords have been unduly penalised. These girls have to pay 25 guineas a week—that is because you make it so difficult for the landlords. Q. [Mr Mishcon]: Is not the trouble really a little bit greater than that. It may be awfully hard on the prostitute tenant, I am not discussing that. It may be awfully hard on the landlord, I am not discussing that. But what about the other tenants and the other occupiers? Is it not awfully easy to be terribly tolerant about this unless you happen to be the occupant of a flat next door? A. [Miss Hall]: If you take the areas in which girls do have flats, which is the Bond Street area. They are quite separate dwellings from one another and although they do not live there—they live perhaps at the other end of Clapham—in fact you do get a congregation of flats used for this purpose, and to that extent I would say it does not seem to upset the other tenants. It is only in the isolated case that it does so. These are fact [sic] the girls’ business premises. Q. [Chairman]: We have had brought to our notice a good many of those isolated cases, I am afraid. A. I am sure there are a number. Q. A number of people living in the same house or an adjoining house who have got their children growing up there and who know and cannot help knowing what is going on in another flat on [20] another floor. A. [Mr Hewitt]: This is another aspect of attacking the problem in such a way, pressing it down in such a way as to make it bob up elsewhere, and it has got logical advantages, attractive I think, in that you can cope with it by penalising the landlord and making it impossible for a girl who wants to live a life of prostitution to get a flat. But again, the original thoughts that one had about the grisly alternatives that cropped up—you might get an enormous increase in street indecency. If women cannot get flats they do it in the streets and parks. I am sure that is obvious, but I thought it ought to be said. It boils down to this, that they have in fact got to live somewhere. No doubt there are landlords who are prepared to take the risk of letting flats for an adequate consideration but if there are it may be better they should have flats than do it in the streets. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: You would not agree that in certain areas where there are quite small flats that the quite ridiculous rents that are asked for these

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

139

are due to the landlords being able to let their flats to prostitutes, who will pay anything, and therefore the ordinary young people or couples without families who really want to get flats and just cannot afford the high rents cannot get them? A. [Mr Cohen]: Yes, that is true. A. [Mr Gardiner]: The high rent is due to the fact that unless the landlord owns the house he is in grave danger of losing his lease. We make things difficult for him; that is why he has to get a high rent. A. [Mr Hewitt]: So that he can pay an expensive lawyer to defend him. 6.  British Medical Association; Witnesses: Dr R Gibson, Dr DC Carroll, Dr TCN Gibbens, Mr A King, Dr Doris Odlum, Dr EE Claxton Q. [Mrs Cohen]: I would like to ask a question on paragraph 138 [of the BMA’s submitted evidence]. The second sentence reads: “Nevertheless, in certain brothel a high proportion of the inmates are still found to be infected.” How do you know about that, because we are given to understand that practically no brothels exist in this country? A. [Dr Odlum]: That is not, of course, true. We have got a lot of evidence on that, and we did go into this very carefully. There are a great many brothels in the country and V.D. clinics see quite a lot of the girls from the brothels who are infected. So we really have evidence on this. A. [Mr King]: I can confirm that we see many patients who are infected in brothels—many girls from brothels in the East End. We know there are brothels, and we inform the Police, but no action can be taken because insufficient evidence is available. Q. [Mr Rees]: Can you give any estimate of the number of brothels which you think there are in London? A. [Dr Odlum]: That is quite impossible. … Q. [Mr Adair]: Would you agree, Doctor, that many who say that the [venereal] infection began in a brothel are not distinguishing between a house where only one person does this—that is technically not a brothel, and one where two or three persons do, which is a brothel? A. [Mr King]: My experience in this matter is limited to the East End part of London. It is well known in that part of the world that there is a series of brothels in a well-known street named Cable Street, mostly kept by coloured men who have a series of women there, often feeble-minded

140 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

women obtained in various places for their coloured brethren who arrive by ship; they let a room with one of their prostitutes attached, and that is a traffic going on which is well known to us. How widespread it is I cannot say, it may be limited to just that part of London, but I suspect it is going on in all the major ports of the country. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: These would be small houses with just, say, three or four rooms to let? A. [Dr Odlum]: Not necessarily small; they are let out to these women and somebody acts as entrepeneur [sic] and arranges it all. Q. [Chairman]: It may be important to know whether they are still legally brothels. A. [Dr Odlum]: That of course I do not know. Q. [Chairman]: I think that was perhaps Mr Adair’s point, whether they do come within the rather complicated conditions of the law which make them legally brothels, although they are in your language and ours. A. [Dr Odlum]: We had evidence from all the medical women all over the country who are working in these V.D. clinics and so on, including Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland and so on, and they all said that in the towns there were houses which, if not legally brothels, were in fact brothels. Q. [Chairman]: There is unfortunately a difference, I am afraid. If in fact these tenement houses were such that each of these women had one room let and that was not used by anybody else, then technically, legally, that was not a brothel. Q. [Mr Rees]: Am I right in thinking it would not be a brothel if you had a house with ten women …. Q. [Mr Adair]: Not if you did not have someone who was actually caring for the outside door. Q. [Mr Rees]: If you had not a manager. Q. [Mrs Cohen] I understand these are old-fashioned houses, big houses, not what we call a tenement in Scotland, a building which has a main staircase and everybody’s flat has its own front door. A. [Dr Odlum]: Not necessarily that, no. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: This is a house which is one with a main entrance where somebody had to open the door? Q. [Chairman]: May we say this, when it is said in paragraph 138, in the second sentence, that in certain brothels a high proportion of inmates are still found to be infected—may we say that in that sentence the word

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

141

“brothels” does not necessarily carry the technical, legal connotation of the word? A. [Dr Odlum]: I think that might be a wise thing to say. A. [Mr King]: I should like to make it clear that the places to which I have referred in the East End are legally, technically brothels. A. [Dr Odlum]: Some of them are, but I think there are far more which are not. Q. [Mr Rees]: Have you ever tried to get police action taken against these places? A. [Mr King]: Yes, we have, through the local health authorities, but as far as I know the police may have attempted to obtain evidence—I have not been told about that—but no action has been taken. Q. [Chairman]: That carries on to the point I was going to raise in paragraph 139(iii), the recommendational suggestion with regard to brothels that the law should be strengthened in dealing with them; I wonder whether it was really necessarily, simply the law or the administration of it that ought to be strengthened. A. [Dr Odlum]: The law apparently is very feeble because I have had evidence with regard to a special case in Edinburgh actually where this brothel was always being closed. Q. [Mr Adair]: That is quite possible. She would have to go to another place. A. It was very simple because the fine was minute in proportion to what she was making. Q. It was fifty pounds with a maximum of a hundred. A. That was nothing to her at all and she did do this. Q. I do not think she would do it very often because you can bring in three months’ imprisonment for the third time undoubtedly in the Edinburgh Courts, and most of them do not like to do three months. A.  Anyway that was the general opinion that it was not safeguarded enough by the law or by the practice. … Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Some of our witnesses who have been very anxious to get what you might call the streets cleaned have felt that it would be very much better if we had regular brothels supervised and what might be called properly looked after. I wondered—that is, we are agreeing that we cannot do away with prostitution; on that basis, what is the medical reaction, Dr Odlum? A. [Dr Odlum]: It was unanimously against it. In fact, if I may say so, we have been asked this question by an international body

142 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

quote recently and we have taken evidence on it and we are quite unanimously opposed to it. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: You think the street walkers are better? A. [Dr Odlum]: We think that the organised brothel is the worst possible thing. Q. [Mr Rees]: Could you say why? A. [Dr Odlum]: Because we think it does in fact give more incentive to organised vice. Q: [Mr King]: I personally would be against condoning any immoral practice, but on this particular point it has been the universal experience that the institution of licensed brothels, far from diminishing the incidence of venereal disease, greatly increases it, and where they are closed the incidence falls. It is of course quite impossible to exclude venereal disease by occasional inspection as was done for so long in France. Women in those places sometimes have as many as thirty exposures in one day and the condition is of course infectious during the incubation period, and therefore if the first individual is infected then it is quite possible, though not probable, that the other twenty-nine would be infected. That was done in the war in the Middle East, where the military idea was just that a licensed brothel was the right idea, but it never brought the problem under control; they did not do anything to master it at all until they closed licensed brothels—that is why the French ultimately have given up the licensed brothels, although they have been great advocates of that method for many years. Miss Christine Mackenzie, Warden, Women’s Help Committee [Mackenzie on the suggestion of having tolerance zones] As long as I have breath in my body there should not be State regulation. It is quite a different thing to them being there of their own free will. If we have State regulation we are doing something which would make life more agreeable for us. Q. [Chairman]: On the assumption that they would still operate; either they are on the streets or they are in licensed brothels. A. [Mackenzie]: No, I would completely oppose that. To me it is abhorrent. Q. I want to pursue this, because I think Miss Mackenzie can give us very, very valuable help on this. It would be completely abhorrent to you, as it would be to many of us, but I wonder on precisely what grounds. A. I think it is a great pity that so many people do not realise the difficulties that some people have in living. I was speaking at a meeting one

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

143

night, and speaking just generally on social work, and questions were asked afterwards. One lady got up and she said she did not want to thank the speaker, because she had made her feel most uncomfortable. I said “That is what I came here for.” Q. May I come back to these brothels, for a moment? Let us just suppose that so far as we can tell there is no real hope of abolishing prostitution. Then, let us suppose that if it is conducted in the streets and in the open, it is abhorrent to a good many ordinary citizens as they pass by on their lawful occasions. Precisely why is it a bad thing that those girls, who otherwise would be parading the streets and making a general nuisance of themselves, should be concentrated inside, in certain places, where it would be known that if there were men so wicked as to want this, that was where they could go for it? A. No. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Why? Q [Chairman]: Could I ask why exactly? A. [Mackenzie]: Because I do not see why we should be protected from people who have been stupid enough to do wrong. … A. [Mr Wells]: May I put it to you very crudely? Assuming that prostitution is going on, is it better that it should be conducted in the sight of young boys and girls in the streets, or out of their sight? A. [Mackenzie]: It is amazing how they get to know. Q: [Chairman]: But it would be more difficult for them to get to know it was going on, if it was all done in brothels, than if it was done in Princes Street. A. I do not think it would. It is amazing the way information gets round. Q. [Mr Adair]: Put it this way, Miss Mackenzie. You do know the days when you had your square—Oak Street, Renfrew Street and Gordon Street—where you could say you had at least 20 prostitutes, who just went round and round that square—stood at the street corners for a few minutes, and were regularly there, and were regularly accosting individuals who passed—doing all their accosting, except in Renfrew Street. That was known, and went on for quite a time. Would you rather have that than the circumstances which are being pictured by the Chairman, of putting them off the streets, and making people have to go and search for them in houses? A.  It is very difficult for me, and you will think I am just frightfully stubborn about it, but even if they said they wanted to do it, I, personally,

144 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

would never agree to have it in any way that a certain lot of women were allowed …. Q. [Mr Adair]: Assume we are not licensing. Do not think I am licensing. I am not licensing the brothels at all. I am simply allowing the fact that brothels will exist, and if they are not allowed to be about the street, then they will be in their homes, or in other places. Is it better that they should be out on the streets, parading as I have indicated, or that they should be in their homes or other places, waiting for people to come to them? A. Of course, it is their own choice of how they live …. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Which is the lesser evil? You have got to have one of these evils. Which would you think is the lesser evil of the two? Do you think they are better to be allowed to parade the street? A. Yes, I would allow then to parade the streets, rather than have it on my conscience that I agreed. Q. [Mr Adair]: But you are not agreeing, Miss Mackenzie. Q: [Mrs Cohen]: You are missing the point of the question. You have got to agree. It is difficult for you to do this, I know, with your background, but we have taken it that there are two evils, as you see it, and we want to know which you feel is the lesser of the two evils, parading the streets where people, who abhor that sort of thing may see it, and it annoys them and upsets them, or making the people who want prostitutes search out, and have a little trouble to go and find what they want. A.  They would not have any trouble finding out where they were. I think you should come right into the open and legislate for it, if you are going to do that. Q. You would not drive it underground? A. No, I would not drive it underground. Q. You think it is better out in the open, if you have got to have it at all? A. Yes, and I would make equal laws for men and women.

David Linton, Submitted Evidence Greater Consistency in Sentences for Brothel-Keeping Under Existing Law Third-parties operating brothels should receive sentences nearer the maximum. But where magistrates are satisfied that the person conducting the brothel is a prostitute living with one other for mutual protection against

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

145

violent clients or merely for company, a more lenient sentence of a small fine is enough. In the first case the offence is serious and consists of exploiting the immorality of others. In the second case the offence is the comparatively minor one of disturbing the amenities of neighbours. This is a question of administration of existing law, not of legislative changes. Prostitutes, other than the manager of a brothel, should never be prosecuted as accessories as in these cases the aim should be to remove them from the sphere of organized vice and prosecution merely puts them whole-heartedly on the side of the brothel-keeper. […] The Exclusion of a Single Prostitute from the Designation of “Brothel-Keeper” to Remain The suggestion that a single prostitute should be considered a brothel-­ keeper is neither practical nor just. The proposal appears to emanate from the same quarter as the recent rather callous attempt to evict the families of men who had been sent to prison. This in itself is some indication of the sincerity of the appeal. Many prostitutes carry on activities in rooms which could not be kept under observation. In these conditions the only methods of making a case against them would be by extracting a “confession” or by using informers. In the latter case, it would be necessary to resort to the repulsive method of “proof” said to be used in the United States: the informant protects his own reputation by stating that the woman demanded money then undressed while he did nothing at all. This might be accepted as fair by some of the public who do not realize that an experienced prostitute almost invariably waits for the client to undress first and make some indecent suggestion before she undresses herself, if she does not already know him. Records show numerous blackmail cases arising from this unjust procedure in the United States as an innocent woman has no way of vindicating herself. Virginity is not in itself a proof of innocence. To make a single prostitute into a criminal as a “brothel-keeper” would be an underhand method of making prostitution itself illegal. It would negate the good work of such organizations as the salvation Army and would end voluntary resort to V.D. treatment by prostitutes. Whatever the promises of secrecy they would be unlikely to come forward any more if there was the risk of a serious prosecution. Prostitution treated as crime would break lifelines back to normal life when the occupation begins to

146 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

pall. It is physically unlikely for a lone woman to give rise to such frequent visits of men as to depreciate the amenities of neighbours. If a lone prostitute were forbidden to rent a room, she could, in theory, obtain one by reforming. But no respectable landlady would take the risk of banking on a known prostitute’s reform. Unless the girl were willing to falsify her identity, she would have to do downhill further and obtain a place to live in the house of a less particular landlord—a brothel-keeper. So the real brothels, at present not numerous in London, would begin to develop again.

Local Authorities 1.  Paddington Borough Council—Witnesses: Councillor P Dyas, Alderman WD Goss, and Mr CE Jobson, the Deputy Town Clerk Mr Dyas: As you know, the definition of a brothel in so many words is that it must be two girls or more behind one door at one address. Frequently is the single girl operating from a flat who causes us great trouble, because as I said before we cannot get at them legally … we cannot, to put it vulgarly, smoke them out of their nests. …. Mr Dyas: This is speaking personally, Mr Chairman, and not as the Council who will have avoided the delicate subject of licensed brothels. Personally I would be heartily in favour of them. I was an adjutant in a regiment during the war, and I know how they work. We were abroad for a lot of the time where such a thing is not only known, but regular, and I would have said that it was a very proper way of controlling this sort of problem. Q. [Chairman]: … in that case would it be true to say that a good deal of your problems on the brothel side would disappear, would that be so? A. [Mr Dyas]: Yes, to my mind, Sir, that would clear it up enormously. We have got so many brothels in the Borough, how they are run I cannot say, but obviously disgracefully and in the most imperfect manner, and I would personally be in favour of licensed brothels. [He later continues] Whether the nation can swallow that I do not know. I would be in favour of that enormously. Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: In other words you do feel that human nature in its present state is such that it would be impossible to maintain a drive against ….

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

147

A. We do appreciate that. We felt that we could not maintain the drive from every direction unless there was some outlet. … Dyas: I think it would be beneficial from two points of view; firstly that if we succeeded in getting them off the streets and away from the decent people and the youth of the country, then we would not mind from that point of view if there was an increase in the phone calls, and porters obtaining the sort of services that somebody wanted, but equally I think it would be beneficial to the problem as a whole, because a man would have to be extremely determined to go out and find that sort of method, whereas I submit that they probably run into this through having a few drinks at the local pub and wandering down the streets, and they are therefore much more prone to fall for that vice. … Mr Goss: I agree with my colleague, Councillor Dyas. With licensed brothels there is a measure of control in that there are a number of men who would not go in one because they would not want to be seen going in one, and that might reduce the number of people who would desire to use it, and the girls, when they are licensed, are subject to medical supervision and police control. The owners of these licensed brothels—I remember them from the first war in France—they have to maintain those places with a reasonable degree of outward respectability. By that I mean you can get a drink there, and a little music, but has to be within limits, and must not become a nuisance to the neighbourhood. … I should think the police would be very pleased if they could do something in that direction. … Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: If I may put it this way, would either of them at a Borough Council Election—perhaps I am putting it too highly, but one has got to try to assess somehow or other public opinion—would either of them dare to say “The conditions in Paddington are so shocking that I am prepared to go even to the extent of agitating for licensed brothels in order to get those streets cleaned”. If you did that what do you think would be the effect on public opinion? A. [Mr Goss]: It just depends where you were speaking. If you were speaking in a church hall you would need to be a little bit careful, but, quite frankly, if I were speaking at a meeting in Maida Vale I would have no hesitation in saying that in my opinion the way to get rid of this thing is by this method. If I were speaking in another part of the borough where you do not get much of it, Park Church Ward for example, which is a very

148 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

working class area and therefore you get hardly any of this at all, people there would not understand the purpose of it. A. [Mr Dyas]: I must agree to a fair extent though Alderman Goss and I belong to different parties, but I must admit I would advocate nationalizing them, because I am sure …. A. [Mr Goss]: Could I take a note of that! A. [Mr Dyas]: I would continue with that—I mean I would agree, but I would be prepared to stand up and advocate them. A. [Mr Goss]: I would support him to this extent. I am quite sure that betting shops are coming in sooner or later, and I should think myself that if you can control betting shops then you can control brothels, possibly by the same people. 2.  Westminster City Council, Submitted Evidence The “brothel”, in the sense in which the term was, and perhaps still is, popularly understood, i.e. the house, under the control of a woman keeper, in which a number of prostitutes are installed or employed, and which is visited by men, had, it is believed, ceased to exist in Westminster. There has been no report of any such house in Westminster in the last 15 years. A Brothel in the legal sense is a place resorted to by persons of both sexes for the purposes of prostitution. There must be at least two women using the premises to constitute them a brothel. It is an offence to keep or manage a brothel; or being the occupier or person in charge, knowingly permit premises to be used as a brothel; or being the landlord to let premises with the knowledge that they will be used as a brothel, or wilfully to be a party to their continued use as such. Premises in respect of which prosecutions have been instituted in recent years fall, mainly, into the following classes: a. Houses or flats the tenants of which allow two or more prostitutes to bring men there for the purpose of prostitution b. As in a) except that the tenant is herself a prostitute who also uses the premises for her own prostitution c. Hotel or boarding houses to which prostitutes take different men d. Houses in which a number of rooms are let off to prostitutes and where there is some element of indiscriminate user which justifies reliance on Durose v Wilson. e. Houses or flat to which men go, and to which prostitutes are then summoned by telephone message

6  BROTHELS, OFF-STREET PREMISES, PRIVATIZATION 

149

Medical and Social Science Rosalind Wilkinson, Sociologist, Submitted Evidence (2 of 2) It is possible that, tradition and the pattern of prostitution being what it is in this country, many girls would not go into organised brothels and would find a way of continuing to work independently. Presumably this would be countered to some extent by legislation. A psychoanalyst with whom I once discussed prostitution suggested that, in some cases, the street prostitute may be a girl who, having an unconscious sense of guilt about her prostitution, unconsciously seeks punishment; she solicits in the streets merely to receive the “punishment” of the courts even though she is capable of maintaining a clientele without ever appearing in the streets. Other arguments on the psychological benefits of the street, or independent, soliciting do suggest that not all girls will accept an organization which is created by ordinary people and imposed on them. One of the reasons why they are prostitutes is that they do not like working in ordinary people’s organisations. It is very difficult to predict what would happen if you altered the social and psychological matrix of prostitution to the extent of allowing girls to work in brothels. You might open up a new source of prostitutes and have two different sets of ‘public’ prostitute personalities: those in brothels and those on the streets. As a research worker I am not sure that the institution of official brothels would be the correct way to deal with the current prostitute population: an experimental period might be helpful were it administratively feasible. As an ordinary wife I deplore the setting up of official brothels and would prefer some system of control within the streets.

CHAPTER 7

Third Parties and Exploitation

The first half of the twentieth century was marked by growing international concern about third parties in the sex industry and the role that sexual violence and exploitation played in forcing women into selling sex. ‘White slavery’, or ‘the traffic in women’ as it was more commonly known by mid-century, referred both to the movement of women across borders for sexual labour and to the role that coercion and internal migration played in prostitution within national borders. These concerns ran alongside other ideas about the causes of prostitution that were highlighted in the previous chapter. The United Kingdom had passed several laws targeting third parties in prostitution from the late nineteenth century. The first, the 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act, made ‘procuring or attempting to procure a woman or girl to become a common prostitute’ an offence, so long as the person procured was not ‘already a common prostitute or of known immoral character’. This law was born out of the panic over the transport of young, white English girls to Belgian and French regulated brothels, and the subsequent ‘maiden tribute of modern Babylon’ exposes that William Stead and his allies had used to shock Britain into legal action. This Act was followed by an Amendment to the Vagrancy Act in 1898 which made ‘living on the earnings of a prostitute’ a crime. Prosecutions under this Act were difficult, as they required proof that the man had gotten his money from a ‘common prostitute’, and not from another source. This Act did not require proof of exploitation. In 1912, another © The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_7

151

152 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Amendment to the Criminal Law was passed that made ‘controlling or directing the movements of a prostitute’ a crime and introduced a sentence of flogging for charges under this Act and the 1898 Act. It was a testament to the level of contempt in which pimps and traffickers were held that by the 1920s these offences were the only ones on the statute books that allowed for flogging as a potential sentence. Despite these legal measures, it seems that third-party interest in commercial sex increased in the first half of the twentieth century. This was largely a result of increased criminalization of brothels and street solicitation, which forced women to use more men—touts, landlords, agents, and pimps—to help them steer clear of the law and find clients. Many women were in romantic relationships with men who police identified as their ‘pimps’, but many of these relationships—in keeping with the reality of domestic life more broadly—were marked by abuse and violence. Concerns about third-party profiteers had certainly contributed to the Departmental Committee being called. In particular, a series of newspaper exposes about the Messina Brothers, a gang of fraternal pimps who had come to the United Kingdom from Malta and who engaged a large number of French women to work for them, had provoked considerable outrage. These exposés pointed to police inaction and impotence and suggested that the ‘vice empire’ in the ‘heart of London’ was going completely unchecked. Because it was so often featured in the Sunday papers, this highly organized and exploitative form of prostitution was at the forefront of politicians’ minds by the mid-1950s. Yet, Wolfenden’s conversations about prostitution seemed to operate in complete isolation from the prominent ideas about trafficking, sexual exploitation, and pimping. They asked some witnesses questions about these topics, but rarely pursued them in any great depth. Witnesses, for their part, spoke briefly. Few appeared to know very much at all about the details of third-party involvement in the sex industry, and many simply mentioned anecdotal observations or hearsay about men of colour—especially black Caribbean men—acting as pimps. This is unsurprising: third parties in the sex industry had a long history of being racialized and black, southern European, and Chinese men in particular were especially targeted by police and immigration officials as suspected pimps and traffickers. Many expert witnesses—such as the police—felt that third-party interest in commercial sex would increase significantly if the law against street prostitution was made stronger. This avenue of inquiry was not developed any further.

7  THIRD PARTIES AND EXPLOITATION 

153

Excerpts Police and Magistrates  . Sir Lawrence Dunne, Chief Magistrate 1 Sir Lawrence Dunne: That some people are annoyed [by solicitation], and seriously annoyed I do not challenge. I do not think a very large section of the population are annoyed, but that some people are annoyed I have no doubt at all. That it is to some extent a public scandal I do not challenge. Visitors to this country remark upon it, the numbers of women about, and so forth, and they think it is disgraceful, but the point is where does the public interest lie? I think I say before a change is made the difficulty is to find something better. It would be the simplest thing in the world—I think I say in one of these paragraphs—the simplest thing in the world to drive the women off the streets, but if you do it may be you are going to bite off a great deal more than you can chew. There is an interesting case now on the stocks in which the sort of thing that might happen is illustrated. Six or seven men have been charged, an incidentally it would be interesting for you to get a transcript of that case when it comes to the Old Bailey as it will get to the Old Bailey, and the defendants are a man called Wilkinson, Dalmain, Silver, Clements, Falson, Pullinger, Blair, Modevitch, and a woman. They have been charged with living on immoral earnings, and what they have done is they have, I will not say made a corner in flats, but they control a large number of flats. They are entirely populated by prostitutes, and they are screwing these women right, left, and centre. They have all got rent books which show 35s. and 50s. A week, whereas in fact they are paying £20 and £25 a week. They are paying anything up to £250 key money to get into these flats, and very likely they are kicked out at the end of sex months and they cannot get their money back. In the language of the cinema that is a racket that has gone on, and that is the sort of thing which I am frightfully frightened of if you drive the women off the streets and they have to go into a flat and have a telephone number to do any business. That is the sort of thing. Mark you the case has not been committed for trial, and it would certainly be contempt of court even here to suggest they will be convicted or anything of that sort, but I think I can say off the record they will go to trial. That is the sort of thing which I envisage may become very much more common if you drive women off the streets. At the present moment I have no doubt the vast majority of

154 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

prostitutes in the West End have got a business address, and a home address, and they only ply for hire in the streets and do their business at their own flats. If they are driven off the streets they really are completely at the mercy of somebody who will provide them a flat, and I think you will find a great concentration of power in some very very undesirable hands. I think the whole point is traffic in fornication suppressible? My own view is it is not. Where you get vast quantities of humanity living in a very circumscribed area you will always find men who want to have women of those sorts for sexual intercourse, and do what you may if you drive the market off the streets it is going to exist somewhere.  . Sir John Nott-Bower, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Commander 2 Robertson, A Division, and Police Court Solicitor Q. [Dr Whitby]: There have been—probably unfounded—allegations made that with the present set-up there are police who take regular bribes. Have there been any cases of police being brought to prosecution on such an offence? A. [Nott-Bower]: No, I cannot recollect any case in my time of a police officer having been found guilty of bribery from a prostitute. I have always thought myself that there is really no substantial reason for prostitutes to bribe the police, they know quite well that they will get fined 40s. Occasionally, which they regard as part of their business expenses, and I can see nothing they have to gain by adding to those expenses by bribing the police. Q: That would be a reason against introducing more drastic penalties? A: As I said, I think if you introduce progressive penalties it would certainly be liable to increase the temptation. Q. [Mr Rees]: Are you satisfied yourself in fact that bribes are not taken at all? A: As far as I am aware—I would not say that no policeman is ever bribed by a prostitute, but I am not at all worried about it, I do not regard it as a serious problem. … I have never heard of any bribery in connection with either procuration or poncing, and I do not think it is a serious problem. Q. [Mr Wells]: How do you think it is that Mr Messina got away with his activities so long? A: There are very great difficulties in dealing with a case like the Messina case. I think if you want details about the case I would like the solicitor to

7  THIRD PARTIES AND EXPLOITATION 

155

tell you, because he is very familiar indeed with all the details of the Messina case, much more than I am. Q. [Chairman]: I think it would help us in this respect in particular, because if it is supposed by any substantial proportion of the general public that there is some funny business going on, whether it is with the girls or with whoever it is, it would be a very great disembarrassment to us if we knew for certain, as near as man can be certain, that the police were all right on this, and I think that is perhaps behind Mr Wells’ question. A: Perhaps if the Solicitor could tell you something about the Messina case—mind you, I would not like to dispute that there was what you call funny business going on, and probably has been for a very long time, but the difficulties of proving it and establishing these cases are very great indeed. Q: Yes. Would Mr Baker like to say something? A. [Mr Baker]: Yes, Sir. There are five Messinas. … None of these people lived in the West End with these prostitutes, they lived well away. I think I am right in saying it was Alfredo who came to notice because he used, being a fond husband, to bring a nice Rolls Royce motor car to take the lady home at night, and that was how those two were connected together. But, you see, with Alfredo living in Harrowdene Road, and the lady practising in the West End, where she had her business premises and did not live there, it does not always follow that you can see and connect the people together, and that is one of the great difficulties in this class of case. I am going to say, in answer to your question, I have not the least idea whether the time was long or short, but I would point out that when they were originally prosecuted in 1936 they were found no guilty of living on immoral earnings, and that is one of the difficulties. It is always a difficult question, connected with cases of living on the immoral earnings of women in the West End, that they do not live there, you do no usually see the man watching them soliciting in the West End—you do in other places—but this gentlemen, having a nice motorcar, used to turn up and take his wife home—proper of him, but it drew attention to him. Then there was I think a certain amount of publicity in the newspapers. … A. [Nott-Bower]: And at the time they were later convicted, my predecessor I know put this job specially on to the CID. It is normally a thing which is dealt with by the uniformed police in divisions, and various different divisions were concerned; that adds to the difficulties, and when we did get the success I think it was due to the CID handling this job. The

156 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

CID do not like that sort of job at all, they are very busy people dealing mainly with crime, and it is rather an exceptional step to take to detach an experienced CID officer to deal with this class of thing, but it is almost the only way you can do it if you are going to do anything at all. Q. [Chairman]: The sort of thing which has been suggested to us, Sir John, is this: starting on the assumption—and I know there are other assumptions on which one might start—starting on the assumption that what people are particularly disturbed about at the moment is the state of the streets, and public decency, and so on, if a really determined effort were made to clear the streets, no doubt it could be done; what would be the consequences of doing so? You have yourself told us some of them. There I have just one question I would like to ask, to get your opinion again on it before we go on to complicated things about flat farmers, and such-like. It has been suggested to us that to drive the prostitutes off the streets would in fact to some extent reduce the amount of prostitution, because of the chap who gets caught, not having really intended to be caught, and the fact that the thing is offered to him so obviously he falls for it, whereas if he had to go through a third party there would be more difficulty, and he might not. I wonder if you think there is anything in that, and the question would be to what extent if any other methods than solicitation on the streets would in fact reduce the trade. I am not talking about the other complications of it now, but simply that one, the quantitative result. A. [Nott-Bower]: I do not know that I am any better qualified as a policeman to give a view about that, than anybody else, but my personal view is that it would to some extent, but I should have thought myself to a rather small extent, affect the total amount of prostitution, because I believe that in the main prostitution does depend on the demand made by the other sex, so that although there may be—there no doubt are—cases where it is thrust upon them, I would not have thought myself that the total difference would have been very great. Q: It is true of course that the demand creates the supply, but does the presence of the supply sometimes produce the demand? A: It may stimulate the demand to some extent, but I really don’t know. I should have thought myself it would not have had a very great effect. … Q. [Chairman]: … we have gathered that one of the big difficulties [of a successful campaign to clear the streets] would be the one-woman-flat organisation, and I gather, am I right, that from your point of view it

7  THIRD PARTIES AND EXPLOITATION 

157

would be adding to your problems if there were the chance of interposing other layers of people who were making money out of an organization of this kind? A [Nott-Bower]: I think from our point of view, and even more from the point of view of the general public, it would be a very great pity to introduce a large class of people who had a financial interest in prostitution which they have not got now. It is the experience that some prostitutes leave their profession—and they are quite free to do so whenever they like—but of course the more people you get who are financially interested in their activities, the less free they would become to chuck their profession if they wished to do so. I think that is one of the evils which might arise; you bring into existence a fairly large class of people with a financial interest in prostitution which does not exist today. Q. [Canon Demant]: … It perhaps would be worsening from the social point of view, but I do not quite see how it would make the task of the police more difficult. It would transfer their attention from the streets to brothel keeping, importuning, poncing, that sort of thing, would it not? A: The activities of those sort of people would be very much more difficult to detect than the rather blatant, open activities of prostitutes on the streets. We have not got access, we cannot go into hotels and all the sorts of places which will be used.  . Paul Bennet, London Police Court Magistrate 3 Of course this enormous increase is because there is more money in it today. I was surprised when the police—I was asking him how three dreadful brothers put up £3000 for a lease—the money that was in it and how it was well organised. I have seen one or two of these madams who do not solicit at all. They just walk around and see what is happening, and I do not know how big their part in the organization is. I have no seen one lately but there is a certain amount of organisation which, I believe, ebbs and flows. Some person comes along and really organises the thing properly, getting 10 or 12 girls and looking after them properly, giving them decent quarters, decent clothes, pocket money and taking all their earnings—looking after them in that way. Then there is big money in it. But I think it is a waste of time to try and stop it, and I take the view very strongly too that for the authorities to try and regularise it or control it— what is called the logical approach—is extremely dangerous.

158 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

 . PCs Scarborough and Anderson, C Division 4 Q. [Mr Adair]: Do you have many ponces about? A. [PC Scarborough]: Still a great deal. Q: Do you find it difficult to get evidence? A: Very difficult. Q. There are a good many presumptions in your favour if they are living together? A: Yes, but the first thing is to find out where they are living, and of course you have to be so very careful that you are not observed yourself, because once you are observed they are gone again. Q: Do the men loiter around the West End? A: Some do. Some will bring the girl up and see that she gets to work all right. Q: They do not remain? A: No, not all the time. Q: And do not do anything in the way of touting? A: I have never seen them yet. They will remain and go up and have a word or two with the girl. I have even seen them go into the girl’s flat after she has had three or four successful solicitings. We can only think of one thing—he has gone to collect the money. Q: Once you have seen that it becomes and onus on them to prove that they are not getting money? A: Yes, the onus is always on them. Q: Are many prosecuted? A: Quite a few. At the West End Police Station there are already over 20. It is one of the most difficult jobs in the police force. At the West End Central Police Station we have a five-day observation. We observe him from the time he wakes up till the time he goes to bed to prove every possible point that he is not working, he is living solely with the woman, he is living on her earnings. Q: Do you think if you did away with ponces you would do away with prostitution? A: No. Quite a lot of women would not have anything to do with the men at all. Q: If the ponces were removed do you think they would still carry on. A: As fast as you arrest one ponce she will straight away get another one.

7  THIRD PARTIES AND EXPLOITATION 

159

 . Frank Powell, London Police Court Magistrate, Submitted Evidence 5 The ponces, who it need scarcely be said are extremely adroit at keeping under cover, are largely to be found among people of Mediterranean origin. The trade is highly organized and so skilfully conducted that I have never known what one might call a major ponce arrested and charged. … it is only the small fry who are netted. It is right to say that while the men so charged are usually worthless and incorrigibly idle individuals, it is the rarest thing to find any allegation of coercion proved, and the first witness for the defence is usually the woman who is keeping them. Civil Society and Professional Associations  . Howard League—Witnesses: Mr FE Baker, Miss Mary Hamilton, 1 Dr TCN Gibbens and Mr Hugh J Klare Q. [Dr. Curran]: The second point is the danger of being driven underground. A. [Miss Hamilton]: You get the call girl racket in which they can be very much linked up … in the Victoria area in particularly … there should be some legislation as regards these bed and breakfast hotels which are becoming unofficial brothels. There is a certain linking up at the moment with certain groups of men. … We have had six charges in one day of men living on immoral earnings of prostitutes. I think you would have them very much more in the hands of undesirable men of all colours and races who would have that linked up and put them in certain houses rather than run the risk of the first charge. I know certain cases in which a landlord is taking a risk now. He is charging £20 per room in a little, dirty house not far from my own court. He has got girls there. They can bring their men in there, and as far as he is concerned he is prepared to run the risk because of the question of the first office and the fine.  . Mayfair Association—Witnesses: Mrs M Anderson, Mr WR Sloman, 2 and The Earl Howe Q: [Mr Wells]: When did this first become a major problem in this area? A: [Mr Sloman]: It was between 1952 and 1954. Q: And not before that? A: It was there before, but I think it all happened very, very quickly. That is my impression, 1952 to 1954 was the worst period of growth. A. [Mrs Anderson]: I think it was earlier than that.

160 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

A. [Mr Sloman]: I do not think there were so many of the younger people about until this period, the East End type of girl, as opposed to the organised, well-dressed, expensive prostitute. Q. [Lord Lothian]: Do you think they work on their own? A. [Mr Sloman]: I should say they are all organized … 90 per cent of them are all organized, 90 per cent of the women. A: [Lord Howe]: That is the impression that there is a racket going and it is all organised, and I think they are working with these men. As I have already said, there are these men hanging about and you see them talking to the women and then going away a little and just standing in the shadows right up against a house so that they are not too conspicuous …. A [Mr Sloman]: … I can vouch that there is at least one organisation. During the latter part of the war I had a very small flat in St. James’ Place off St. James’s Street. That street was largely empty, mostly bombed property. Opposite to me was a partly bombed house, and next to that was a house which I think had been damaged in which there were two French women. They could not have been more charming in every way, very pleasant to look at and to speak to. One used to meet them out shopping. But something was very well organized from that house, because one was continually being disturbed by large crowds going up at night. … Now these women are working in Curzon Street; and something is being organized there I am sure. I can show you the women this evening.  . Probation Officers Association 3 Q. [Mrs Lovibond]: Miss Williams did say at the beginning that she thought it would be a good idea to clear the streets because of these young girls who go up and get tempted. Surely if the fine was raised it would get rid of those young girls starting to take up the work, the very first offender, or the second time they tried and if they fine was raised they probably would not go on with it any longer …. A. [Miss Williams]: I do think there may be some who could not afford it and would go back, but there is a danger they may be taken into houses— I have in mind the coloured problem, when I say the coloured people I am thinking of the coloured procurers in the seaports—there may be a danger of them being taken into a house like that and having the higher fine paid as long as they turn in their earnings.

7  THIRD PARTIES AND EXPLOITATION 

161

 . Association for Moral and Social Hygiene Submitted Evidence 4 Recommendations which shall Increase the fines for brothel keepers and preferably impose imprisonment Impose imprisonment without the alternative of a fine on the individual who lives wholly or in part on the immoral earnings of others, or Those third-party profiteers who in a group organise vice, and A heavier fine or even imprisonment for landlords who knowingly let their premises to convicted brothel keepers. Local Authorities  . Paddington Borough Council—Witnesses: Councillor P. Dyas, 1 Alderman WD Goss, and Mr C Jobson, the Deputy Town Clerk Q. [Chairman]: There is mention here of the men behind the prostitutes. Is that well known to be prevalent, for instance, in Paddington? With these enormous numbers, shockingly large, of which you have told us, there is a suggestion here that it is believed that there are. Is there any evidence? A: [Mr Dyas]: We have some evidence, yes, Sir Mr Jobson can probably give you far more details than I could. I have spoken to one or two of the police and have heard of some cases. I do not think that anything is envisaged on the scale of the Messina gang who were running a few years ago. It is rather more now a matter of one man seeming to be keeping and running three or four women, and the sort of evidence I have is that in one case I know of there is a black man who has two white women working for him, and in fact keeping him.  . Westminster City Council, Submitted Evidence 2 The Messinas did for a time seek to organise prostitution in Westminster. They imported, or assisted in importing, prostitutes from France; they tried, by “strong-arm” methods, to reserve certain areas as the “beats” for their prostitutes only, and they provided accommodation for the prostitutes in premises the leases of which they had taken in assumed names or through nominees. That they succeeded for so long was due, so far as the Council was concerned, to the fact that none of their premises could be proved to be brothels and that they could not be prosecuted for permitting habitual prostitution because they granted sub-tenancies to prostitutes, and, for the most part, dealt with the prostitutes through third parties.

162 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Medical and Social Science  . Dr Alfred Kinsey 1 Q. [Dr Curran]: […] Do you find that indirect misfortunes happen from not having prostitutes on the streets, such as ponces, male operators practicing on a big scale, or girls being taken up and not being able to escape very easily? A. [Kinsey]: The primary problem, arising out of the legal prohibition of any activity which, in actuality, is common in the population, is the chance of corruption of the police. The tribute levied from prostitution and gambling in the United States by Police Departments, primarily because these activities are illicit, is tremendous. As you know, there was a charge, during the period between the Great Wars, that in New York City the tribute from gamblers alone, which was going directly to top city officials’ pockets, was over 83½ million a year. With the reduction in the demand for prostitutes that is no longer as frequent a source of corruption in the United States, but it is still a very considerable source. I could cite endless very notorious cases which have gone through the Courts, and are therefore on record. Q: Mr Roberts [Secretary of the Committee], what are the other alleged consequences of driving vice underground? A [Committee Secretary Conwy Roberts]: I do not think there were any other things, except that there would be profiteering landlords. A. [Kinsey]: You have already drawn attention to the fact that you have the contact with prostitutes, or with young girls who are not prostitutes. They are going to have it with one or the other. A. [Roberts]: Or some other form of sexual outlet. Q: [Mrs Lovibond]: Are the men punished? If there was no demand for it, you would not have any prostitutes about. A. [Kinsey]: An American social association tried to put through a model prostitution law. It is now on the books in 21 States in the United States, and it penalises the man as heavily, or in most cases more heavily, than it penalises the girl. In the State of Indiana, where there would be tens of thousands of contacts per week with prostitutes—this we have calculated rather carefully—the number of convictions for associating with a prostitute has, over a long period of years, average not more than eight or nine per year, so the law is a dead letter in almost every instance. The police will only move when they want to get a man for something else.

7  THIRD PARTIES AND EXPLOITATION 

163

 . Rosalind Wilkinson, Sociologist, Submitted Evidence 1 of 2 2 … in writing the chapter of my report; “The social behaviour of the Prostitute and her Associates”. … I was attempting to put in a new light an aspect of prostitution which was not easy to understand if one accepted the popular view of the prostitute as an unwilling victim, coerced by a vile exploiter. … I said at the meeting that I knew only of one gang—the Messina brothers’. Clearly care would be taken that I should not learn easily of the existence of gangs or groups with complex organization. While I may have oversimplified there is no doubt that many quite serious-minded people over-complicate, and seem almost to get some satisfaction out of imagining elaborate organizations of women who are virtually enslaved. I might have been wrong, but it seemed that “organized vice” was largely a phantasy in the minds of the public. These terms are reasonable if one recognizes that the organization is an existing social structure to which prostitutes adapt themselves. I have read a description of the arrangement between several prostitutes and a local car hire firm, whereby the taxi men made large sums of money out of the prostitutes, as an organisation which “ran” a group of prostitutes; it was implied that the men organised the women in some way. A group of girls, which I knew very well, found it convenient to live in rooms, at various addresses, of which one particular man was landlord. He made quite a lot of money out of the girls from rents and regularly asked them for sexual favours which were usually granted, although the girls disliked him for he was deformed physically. … I wish to stress that all this is a voluntary association; however much unpleasant exploitation there appears to be to the outsiders, and may actually be involved.  . Katherine Hardwick, Submitted Evidence 3 Cambridge is of particular interest in relation to this problem, as three types of men are concerned—the University undergraduate, from home and overseas, townsmen, and American Service men. As far as I know there is very little trouble with the undergraduate population and local girls and women. I have reason to believe that those of the undergraduate class who wish for such association have “girl friends” from London.

164 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Cambridge has, like other places, a shifting population of men working on building sites etc, and a number of these men, away from their homes, associate with promiscuous women. A minority of American Service men cause considerable difficulty, though in the last few months there has been less trouble, owning probably to better arrangements for their entertainment in camps and town. A number keep permanent rooms in the town as they are frequently allowed to sleep out of camp. My impression is that it is among the American Service men that the main clients of the local prostitute is found. One great problem is the American habit of seeking out the young casual type of girl who is not viciously but out for a good time, and corrupting her hopelessly. It is possible to tell at once from a girl’s manner and attitude if she is associated with the bad type of American. There have been three cases recently of brothel keeping by local inhabitants which were proved in Court, an in each case Americans were involved as clients. The American Authorities are as helpful as circumstances permit, but any man involved in such cases, or in the conception of an illegitimate child, seems to be returned to the States before action can be taken. I have noticed that the young girl who associates with Americans quickly becomes used to a life of promiscuity, and her mind seems blocked to a normal outlook. It is not only the money which is the attraction— mostly given in the form of gifts, rent paid, pleasures and so on—but the cynical outlook on sex and the pseudo-psychology on matters of sex poured into the girls’ minds which makes them feel sophisticated and knowledgable [sic]. There is a small Indian community in Cambridge. Some of the men live with prostitutes, well known to men, and probably live partly on these women’s earnings. The men seem to be well off and many are in the restaurant business. Several young women, admittedly promiscuous, have come from London to live with Indians here, have stayed for a time and returned, and others have come. Two houses (not restaurants) owned by Indians are suspected to be brothels, but no prosecution has been possible. Unfortunately for Cambridge, it is conveniently near London, and there seems to be a good deal of going and coming of undesirable characters of both sexes.

7  THIRD PARTIES AND EXPLOITATION 

165

 . David Linton, Submitted Evidence 4 I request permission to submit the following supplementary evidence on the subject of the Sunday Press revelations regarding “call-girl” prostitution. On 13th March, 1955, in “The People” a journalist known as “Duncan Webb” on the pretext of (justifiably) exposing a third-party “call-girl” organizer, published also the names and full addresses of individual alleged prostitutes. I believe every other newspaper has drawn the line on this. On 20th March the addresses were repeated together with a new address to which one of the women was said to have moved. […] to reveal future addresses like this is not conducive to a prostitute starting a new life even if she tries. The revelation of the full addressee in a recent Court Case was, I understand, confined only to those twenty or so members of the public present in Court. But this journalist and his editor have, in effect, done the same thing for which they were exposing the alleged “call-girl” organizer, and on a colossal scale. They have introduced 5,000,000 readers—plus their adolescent families—to a number of alleged prostitutes regardless of whether or not the woman named were still to be found at the same addresses. To be fair, I would not suggest that Duncan Webb’s motives are wholly bad. If his disclosures were to decrease prostitution he would be justified. But the manner of making them displays a recklessness for which it is difficult to express a deep enough contempt. I shall refrain from commenting on Duncan Webb’s personal record. I have little doubt that, if he wished the Director of Public Prosecutions could take proceedings for obscene libel against this journalist and the Editor-in-Chief of even so great a newspaper as “The People.” The natural result of the publication tending to corrupt is all that would be required. It would be unnecessary to prove that a single corruption had actually occurred. But I would not have troubled to send in this extra evidence if I had though the danger existed only in theory. On 23rd March I visited one of the addresses published and spoke to the woman named. She stated she would shortly be moving as the result of her disgrace. But in the meantime, following 13th March, she received a succession of visitors much younger than her usual clients.

CHAPTER 8

Causes, Intervention, and Pathologization

Practices of ‘rescue’ and ‘reform’ of women who were labelled ‘prostitutes’ were far older than the modern laws that Wolfenden sat to reconsider. Since the early modern period, religious organizations had sought to incarcerate errant women in penitentiaries where they could be saved from their dissolute ways, a practice that continued and increased through the early modern and modern periods.1 Popular ideas about the causes of prostitution focussed either upon narratives of the ‘fallen’ woman who was forced into selling sex through seduction, pregnancy, and abandonment or upon the image of the highly sexualized independent female, who was given over to debauchery and unable to control herself.2 By the nineteenth century, a complex network of religious and philanthropic ‘rescue homes’ and ‘reformatories’ had sprung up all around the United Kingdom.3 Most operated as restrictive spaces where women were unable to leave and were forced into institutional routines, unpaid labour,

1  Paul Griffiths, ‘The Structure of Prostitution in Elizabethan London’, Continuity and Change, 8 (1993), pp. 39–63, 54; Ian Archer, The Pursuit of Stability: Social Relations in Elizabethan London (Cambridge, 1991), p.  212. Tony Henderson, Disorderly Women in Eighteenth Century London: Prostitution and Control in the Metropolis, 1730–1830 (London, 1999). 2  Lucy Bland, Banishing the Beast: Feminism, Sex and Morality (London: Tauris Parke, 2002); Judith Walkowitz, City of Dreadful Delight: Narratives of Sexual Danger in Late Victorian London (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1992). 3  Julia Laite, Common Prostitutes, pp. 34–35.

© The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_8

167

168 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

and religious instruction.4 These homes sought out mostly young women who were ‘at risk’ of becoming prostitutes (because of an early sexual experience or unwanted pregnancy) or who had only just begun to sell sex. The idea was to intervene early and retrain these women for respectable work in domestic service. While the reports of these organizations made much of the cases of young women set back on the right path, they were forced to admit that the vast majority of ‘seasoned prostitutes’ returned to sexual labour as soon as they were released, and the influence of these homes lasted well into the twentieth century.5 Meanwhile, by the late nineteenth century a growing number of ‘social researchers’ and campaigners sought new explanations for prostitution. The idea of the prostitute as ‘oversexed’ faded from prominence and was replaced by ideas about ‘bad character’, ‘laziness’, and ‘love of finery’ which drove silly young women into the sex trade. Some within the social purity movement also noted that working poverty was behind the supply of women into prostitution, as well as what was known as ‘bad homes’.6 Yet while many young women sold sex casually, it was still thought that after one false step a ‘spiral of delinquency’ led many women into lives as full-time prostitutes.7 By the 1950s, this social research had grown into the disciplines we now call social science. Sociologists, psychologists, and criminologists all maintained an interest in the causes of prostitution.8 New methodologies of ‘intervention’, including ideas about professional social work and probation, can be found in the excerpts included here. So too can new narratives of mental and physical pathology, which were developed to explain a woman’s choice to sell sex in an era where, it was assumed, ‘want’ and ‘working poverty’ had been erased by the welfare state. Several times, 4  Jane Hamlett, At Home in the Institution: Material Life in Asylums, Lodging Houses and Schools in Victorian and Edwardian England (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015). 5  See Caslin on Liverpool’s use of rescue homes and refuges for women considered to be at risk of prostitution well into the twentieth century. S Caslin, Save the Womanhood, pp. 18–19, p. 46, p. 200. 6  Lucy Bland, Banishing the Beast: Feminism, Sex and Morality (Tauris Parke, 2001), p. 116. 7  Samantha Caslin, ‘Flappers, Amateurs and Professionals: The Spectrum of Promiscuity in 1920s Britain’, in Kate Hardy, Sarah Kingston and Teela Sanders (eds), New Sociologies of Sex Work (Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, 2010), pp. 11–22. 8  Adrian Bingham, ‘The “K-Bomb”: Social Surveys, the Popular Press, and British Sexual Culture in the 1940s and 1950s’, Journal of British Studies, 50:1 (2011), pp.  156–179; L.  R. England, ‘Little Kinsey: An Outline of Sex Attitudes in Britain’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 13:4 (1949), pp. 587–600.

8  CAUSES, INTERVENTION, AND PATHOLOGIZATION 

169

speakers reference older ideas about prostitution and argue that the ‘poor sisters’ of the Victorian era were no longer to be found amongst the ranks of professional and cunning modern prostitutes. Yet, beneath all this, a centuries old contempt for women who sold sex can be easily found in the words of the witnesses who spoke about the causes of prostitution and the new ways in which such women could be dealt with by authorities.

Excerpts Police and Magistrates  . Paul Bennet, London Police Court Magistrate 1 There is undoubtedly a great increase, and these women, although some of them are very attractive to look at, are cross-grained creatures with no sensibility and I rather fear that although there was the view many years ago in the Victorian age about our fallen sisters, there is nothing “fallen” about it at all. The life offers them so much more than they could ever get by working, and it is a lazy life. They get up at any hour of the morning. They stroll into my court at half past eleven. The police officer has been there since a quarter past ten. I tried remanding them till the next morning in order to give them a bit of trouble, but I found it was giving us more trouble than the prostitute. They are an undisciplined lot.  . Frank Powell, London Police Court Magistrate, Submitted Evidence 2 So much for the general picture of prostitution in the West End. While the palmy days of the war are past, and with them the opportunity to earn the really large money, I have no doubt that an energetic and moderately well-­ favoured prostitute can still earn sums sufficient to tempt a constant stream of recruits. It is a marvel to me how many of the almost grotesque figures can succeed in seducing any male into physical contact: I suppose that drink and a dark street supply the answer.  . Claud Mullins, London Police Court Magistrate, Submitted Evidence 3 The sole justification for the present law that my experience as magistrate brings home to me is the fact that the presence in court of many prostitutes on charges did enable our highly trained Probation Officers to persuade many of the younger prostitutes to abandon their sordid life. The odds were heavy, since usually these women were not trained for any useful form of work and, therefore, their earnings in honourable employment

170 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

were bound to be small, far less than their earnings in prostitution. Nonetheless, many young women were in fact saved. The reform suggested by many women’s organizations (that there should be no charges unless the men who had be “insulted” came as witnesses) would result in almost no charges being brought. Thus fewer women would be persuaded from prostitution. In the case of prostitutes I am convinced that only the sanction behind the law enables probation officers to achieve results. In this respect prostitutes are the reverse of homosexual offenders. I have to admit that the proportion of prostitutes who were diverted to useful employments was not high. Civil Society and Professional Associations  . Association of Headmasters, Headmistresses and Matrons 1 of Approved Schools, Submitted Evidence A questionnaire was returned from fifteen schools involving, over a period of five years, (1947–1952) 1121 girls who had left Approved Schools. Of this number 117 were known to be living promiscuously though there were very few cases where girls were charged with soliciting or prostitution. Most of them lived their lives “within the law”, but nevertheless they were not in regular employment and were known to be living promiscuously. During the period of survey 93 illegitimate children were known to have been born, though not in many cases to the girls termed to be living promiscuously. The number of girls associating with coloured men is very high indeed, a problem more to be found in the North than in the South, although the mixed associations in the London area are very much on the increase at the present time. A very high proportion of the senior girls appear to have been placed on probation prior to committal and during that period have deteriorated morally to an amazing degree. Homosexual practices in girls [sic] schools are not very common and where found can be linked with the sex life into which the girls have dipped quite deeply. It is seldom, if ever, that a true homosexual is found in a Girls Approved School. The following tabulated information was collected from the survey:

8  CAUSES, INTERVENTION, AND PATHOLOGIZATION 

No. licensed No. leading promiscuous lives No. of illegitimate children No. certified under Section 9 No. certified under Lunacy Act No. admitted to Mental Hospitals

171

1121 117 93 8 2 6

 . National Council of Women of Great Britain, Submitted Evidence 2 The Council regards the issue of prophylactic packets to National Servicemen as a suggestion to them that immoral conduct is expected of them, and this must undermine any moral instruction otherwise given. It is in home life and moral training that the answer to the problem of prostitution will be found. Education for adult sex life must be based on respect for the sanctity of human personality and on personal responsibility. High ideals of marriage and family life should be set before young people from their earliest years. These are the best safeguards against sexual indulgence. Finally the Council would emphasise the importance of the acceptance by the community as a whole of the basic principle of a high and equal moral standard for men and women.  . National Council of Women—Witnesses: Lady Nunburnholme, 3 Mrs MF Bligh, Mrs. M. Lefroy [Mrs Lefroy]: I have sat on the Bench and I have seen quite young girls—a girl I remember of about fourteen who was the downfall of three extremely nice, respectable sergeant majors. She had pursued and pestered them all over the place. That child had an unfortunate history and I know you have had evidence before from Miss Hardwick on the large proportion of children and prostitutes who have been outraged in their childhood, who have had an unnatural sex craving stimulated and created. There was a time—I go back a long way, I am seventy-two—but the understanding that I grew up to was that a man divided women into two sorts—the good and the bad—and that he would like a chaste, rather cold person as a wife, but needed a hot temperament for his diversions. That seems to be the principle on which the past generations have carried on. You have doctors among you and you do know that the sex urge is very strong in some women just as it is in men and they have to control it, but the abnormal

172 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

urge is in many, many cases in women created by outrages they have suffered in their childhood.  . Public Morality Council 4 Q: [Chairman]: Dr. Holland, are there any points you would care to make on this part? A: [Dr. Holland]: Except to say this. I am in sympathy with our secretary’s main contentions here. I would bow to the consideration which he very eloquently put forward and which seemed to be accepted by most of the Council that, under the present law, the prostitute is not fairly treated … if it is an anomaly that they can be manhandled without normal evidence given for the manhandling, then I think, whatever the circumstances, they must have justice. A: [Mr Thomas]: I am very sensitive, as my colleague is, about justice for the common prostitute; but we should recognise that there is no longer any reason why these women should become prostitutes through economic circumstances. The situation has changed; they are on the street now because they want to be, they are not forced now. I would just like to repeat my former phrase that we ought not to fall over ourselves backwards in securing justice for the prostitute. She can get plenty of work today. If that was her only alternative I would not say so. Here I am in agreement with Dr. Holland; he and I have agreed on our attitude to this as against the line that our secretary takes. While we agree there is injustice to the prostitute, and so on, I am one of those who think you can go too far, seeing that the circumstances have completely changed in the last ten or fifteen years.  . Public Morality Council, Submitted Evidence 5 The complete answer to the problem of prostitution, as of many other social evils, would be the acceptance and application by the public at large of a right sense of values, and the Public Morality Council firmly believe that this can be found in the realm of true religion. It would perhaps be unrealistic to hope for such a revolutionary change in public thought at once. The situation therefore calls for such education in sexual morality as would make clear the dangers to personal and social life of extra-marital sex intercourse. If happy and lifelong marriage is to be contemplated, constancy and fidelity to one partner is not an intolerable burden, but a joyously undertaken restraint. …

8  CAUSES, INTERVENTION, AND PATHOLOGIZATION 

173

What influences girls to take up such a life as that of a prostitute? Some of the factors involved are: . Unhappiness at home. 1 2. Love of easy money and finery. 3. Sexual assault in early life. 4. Twisted and warped personality. 5. Sexual precocity and predisposition to sex.  . Howard League Submitted Evidence 6 Many potential prostitutes are rather badly adjusted young girls from unhappy homes, with emotional difficulties, unable to stick at any job or to fit into any acceptable social milieu. Usually they drift into prostitution gradually. If nothing is done to arrest this drift, many of them tend eventually to settle in their new way of life and to find for the first time a kind of stability, in a community of kindred spirits, of other prostitutes and criminals who accept them without question—possibly the only people who do. Once this process has occurred, it may be very difficult to help. … We therefore strongly urge the implementation of those provisions in the Criminal Justice Act, 1948, which deal with Remand Centres for young persons between 17 and 21. Any girl below 21 charged for the first time with solicitation should be normally remanded, and if remand in custody is desirable, as it often might be, it should be at such Centres, which should be established in all large towns. During remand, appropriate social inquiries should be made, psychiatric and physical examinations undertaken, and a careful assessment made of the girls’ history and subsequent treatment possibilities. Some of the girls would no doubt be suitable for probation, and others for probation with a requirement of residence in a probation hostel. It may be that special hostels are required for neurotic girls, just as there is a special Approved School for this type (Duncroft), where psychiatric treatment might be given, and a psychiatric social worker could pay special attention to the family situation.  . Howard League—Witnesses: Mr FE Baker, Miss Mary Hamilton, 7 Dr TCN Gibbens and Mr Hugh J Klare Miss Hamilton: … I am concerned with the remedial side of the work. I feel very strongly with regard to these fines: I think they should be increased. I think it is just a farce—I sit every day in Bow Street Court—to

174 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

see girls coming out fined forty shillings. The first offenders are put back for me to see. We try to deal with it from the angle of the social worker. We all feel that this problem as it exists without facilities for the remedial side is something which you just cannot cope with. … Q. [Mr Adair]: Just one question, do you not find that the presence of those women on the streets is the real introduction of the young girl to become a prostitute? A. [Miss Hamilton]: Yes and no. You cannot generalize on that. It is not necessarily the presence of women on the street. Many of the girls graduate from what is rather loosely called the “clip joints” in London— rather low-down clubs they get jobs in and are persuaded to go on the streets. I never generalise as to reasons why a girl becomes a prostitute. I interview them. They are very numerous and varied. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: Do you find many do it because they cannot earn a fairly decent living wage, or do they do it because it is a comparatively easy life? A. [Miss Hamilton]: ‘Most of them drift on to this. They are lazy in the main. I find they do not want to work. They want big money without working. They have no good moral standards and most of them—again I cannot generalize—come from a background of a bad home, not necessarily a poor home I do not mean that at all. … I was talking to a vicar’s daughter this morning who is on the streets, and I still say that is a thoroughly bad home for reasons which I will not go into now. … A. [Miss Hamilton]: We did feel strongly that there should be remand centres for young persons between the ages of 17 and 21 years, and that any girl below 21 years of age charged for the first time for this offence should be remanded to one of these centres for full social enquires, medical reports and if necessary psychiatric reports to be obtained. … Q. [Dr. Curran]: What is your experience as regards problems of dullness and mental illness in prostitution? What happens if you drive it underground? What are the other things that occur? A. [Miss Hamilton]: With regard to the question of mental illness you get two different groups. You get the one that is almost borderline. You get some cases of which have had to recently. One was an epileptic and we have a very bad report from St. Thomas’ Hospital: the other one was a mental defective and had to be dealt with accordingly. You get some of the

8  CAUSES, INTERVENTION, AND PATHOLOGIZATION 

175

older prostitutes who perhaps practice perversions and we find a number of them crack up. … Q: And the mental dullness problem? A: Mental dullness in a certain group, but not the regular prostitute who continues on the streets—the rather slutty little girl. … A [Dr Gibbens]: … on the point of view of juveniles, I have seen up to 300 girls. It is not a very big problem. Strangely enough the very dull— often Irish—immigrant with very low standards is in the minority. The ones we see in the juvenile remand home are extremely unstable girls. A large percentage have been homosexual as well as extremely unstable, with a tendency to suicide. … If they are left on their own they might become serious prostitutes.  . Association of Probation Officers—Witnesses: Mr CB Trusler, Miss 8 Vera Williams and Mr Frank Dawtry Q. [Mr Wells]: [Your submitted evidence] seems to suggest that you think that the girls who go into this trade—at any rate those who are at all reclaimable—are of rather higher quality mentally and aesthetically than the average. That is how I read it. “Painting, craft work, beauty culture, hairdressing and commercial art should have precedence in such homes over domestic training and the more mundane trades.” Commercial art— the girl has to have really quite something to her to be able to make a go in commercial art. I just wondered whether we could have a little amplification there. A. [Miss Williams]: I think behind this was the fact that the type of girl who goes in for prostitution looks upon it in most cases as something glamorous and away from routine, and if the sort of routine domestic training was given—the sort of thing that a good many of them had seen in their early life, baby after baby, washing dishes, etc. in their childhood— there might be very little chance of rehabilitation; but in some girls there is a need for expression. … They have taken an interest and it has been a way of expressing something away from routine—one of the steps toward rehabilitation—something creative which they have lacked hitherto except in their anti-social life. … A. [Mr Dawtry]: the real point is that a girl does not go in for prostitution merely for the sake of prostitution, merely because she enjoys sexual intercourse, but because she thinks it is associated with glamour, highlights and colour and all the other things very often, and she then

176 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

goes to a hostel or home which may be the dullest place imaginable and she may be expected, from the very highest motives of those who organise the hostel, to become a good domestic worker—no glamour whatever, and so she longs to get back to where the colour and the lights may be. … Now the suggestion is that we put them in bright hostels and give them the feeling that they have an alternative way of accounting for something, and if it combines a trade which they can take up and the ability to draw and things of that sort—that is one of the things that is frequently found.  . British Medical Association—Witnesses: Dr Dennis Carroll, 9 Dr Ronald Gibson, Dr TCN Gibbens, Dr Ambrose King, Dr Doris Odlum, Dr Leonard Simpson, and Dr EE Claxton Q. [Dr Whitby]: I wonder whether you have any information as to what proportion of venereal disease comes from the true prostitutes, as distinct from amateurs of various kinds. Of the people coming to the clinic, what proportion of prostitutes and what proportion of non-prostitutes would you say there are? A. [Dr King]: I believe, from my experience of this, that a high proportion of patients acquire their disease from prostitutes. The Co-operative Clinical Group, which is an organisation of which I am Chairman, has been collecting information from the various clinics in the country, in relation to gonorrhoea, which is an easier disease to study than most of the others, as to what proportion of those particular cases of infection have been acquired from various groups of individuals. In fact, we were criticised for undertaking this investigation, on the grounds that the information was readily available, had been collected many times, and it was a waste of time but, in fact, we found that an unexpectedly high proportion of patients did contract their infection from prostitutes. It was, speaking from memory, in the neighbourhood of 40 per cent to 50 per cent and this figure was, of course, boosted to a very great extent by the information we had from sea-ports and very big cities such as this. We had no doubt, on examining those figures, that the main reservoir of infection— as it has been hoped that gonorrhoea, which is suspectible [sic] to modern remedies, would be brought under control—but the main reservoir of infection at the present time is the prostitute. Q. [Dr Whitby]: That is an important statement from our point of view. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: I am very interested in that, because I was given to understand that, generally speaking, the prostitute nowadays is most particular about the care of herself, and attending clinics, and so on. Otherwise,

8  CAUSES, INTERVENTION, AND PATHOLOGIZATION 

177

she is going to lose her trade and the really what you might call good earning prostitute is very careful, and very particular. A. [Dr King]: I think the answer to that must be that there are all levels of prostitutes. There are full-time prostitutes, who regard this as a very important matter; there are others, many of them, of course, who are sub-­ normal mentally, and will not take all the trouble and precautions which you describe, and many others who are part-time prostitutes and like to earn a little money at week-ends, and other times.  0. Miss HL Long, Director of the Women’s and Girls’ Division, Giving 1 Evidence on Behalf of the Central After-Care Association Chairman: […] So far as concerns the prostitution part of our terms of reference, I think it is fair to say that the framework out of which we are looking at it is that we are not specifically concerned with morals here; we are only concerned with the law. Inevitably, of course, ethical considerations come in, but that is not our point of approach in the first instance— although I cannot say that that is in any sense the decision of the Committee. Secondly, I suppose it is fair to say that nobody would really suppose that prostitution can be abolished or eliminated, at any rate in the foreseeable future. It would doubtless be very desirable if it were, but if we are concerned with the immediate future it does not look as if there is much sense in pursuing—as a short term operation—anything based on the assumption that it can be eliminated. So the way we are looking at it chiefly, I think, at the moment is as a matter of public order and public decency— not exclusively that, but that is naturally our first point of approach. We should therefore, I think, be very grateful for any help you can give us, Miss Long, on, for instance, this point: how easy, from your experience of these women and girls, is it for them to start on a career of prostitution? Miss Long: It is the simplest thing in the world. A girl has only to be on the run—she gets picked up by a lorry driver and goes from one lorry driver to another—and it is just too easy. Q. [Chairman]: Without her ever having to parade the streets at all? A. [Long]: Not in the slightest. We have girls on the run for months and they are not picked up because they are not accosting anyone. They go from one lorry driver to another—that is one of the first ways they start and then they go on. They have what they call the chain gangs—they have so many where the lorries start and they are passed on one to another, and they very rarely get picked up for soliciting, extremely rarely. Of the girls who are on the run, and therefore subject to recall, very few of them come back to us.

178 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Q. [Chairman]: For how long can they go on doing that? A. [Long]: We have had some for as long as a year. Q. [Chairman]: And do they deliberately stay doing that? What about the attraction of the bright lights and city life and more money, and so on? A. [Long]: They do tend to come up to the big cities naturally— London, and so on—but generally it is when they are on the run. That is their alternative—that and stealing, and sometimes they do both. Q. [Chairman]: How big a proportion would you say that particular class of girl was of the total picture that we are concerned with? A. [Long]: Do you mean of the girls in Borstal—the delinquents—or do you mean of the whole population? Q. [Chairman]: I really meant—granted that there are some girls like those you have been describing to us—what sort of proportion do they make of the prostitute population? A. [Long]: That is rather difficult to say …. Q. [Chairman]: I am sure it is. A. [Long]: … Because it is rather an interesting point that, although practically 90 per cent of the girls who come to Borstal have been promiscuous for some years, yet they are not people who, when they are older, are the people who are up for soliciting. In fact I think they do run it out of their system—that type of girl—and marriage very often settles them. But they do not form a large proportion of the, what I might call, professional prostitutes. We have got quite a number of girls who are definitely prostitutes—I have one ex-Borstal girl now who is definitely one, she has a very expensive flat and so on—but this is rather interesting: if she sees any other girls on the run, she brings them up to us. She knows perfectly well that she needs a good telling off, but she does bring them up and that is not because they are in any way rivals to her—she never solicits herself— she brings them up because she knows quite well that it is not really the thing. Mrs Cohen: Would you say then that these girls are promiscuous because they want to get away from home or for some reason or other they are on the run? They are not what one might call natural prostitutes? It is not in their nature? A. [Long]: No. Q. [Cohen]: It is not in their emotional makeup that they want that type of life? A. [Long]: I would not say so. Certainly, with the type of girls we are dealing with, it is definitely because of circumstances. There are some, of

8  CAUSES, INTERVENTION, AND PATHOLOGIZATION 

179

course, on the other hand, who do live that sort of life without any reason; for instance, they leave home and there is no reason why they should prostitute at all, but they do. But I would say they were small in number. Dr. Whitby: I would like to clarify this point, Miss Long. By “on the run”, do you mean people not necessarily on the run from the police, but living away from home? A. [Long]: No, from the police. You see if they have been to Borstal, they are on a licence. If they break the conditions of their licence, we can recommend to the Prison Commissioners that they be recalled. It is that, if they have run away from home or from their jobs and we do not know where they are, they are being looked for and they are on the run, or else living rough. […] Q. [Whitby]: And what sort of age group are you talking about? A. [Long]: The Borstal age is seventeen to twentyone [sic], but then we have them on licence up to twentythree [sic]’ that is the age group. Twentyone [sic] is the latest age at which they can be sent to Borstal. […] Q. [Cohen]: You do not feel there is just something within a person which makes them a prostitute but otherwise their morals are normal? A. [Long]: I do not think that, with the Borstal girls, there is any question about it. They just drift into it. I think some of them of course, are over-sexed, but they would be the minority. It is just something which grows and feeds. They have this feeling. What they never have, they never miss. Once they start on this, then they have to go on because it satisfies them. It is like some girls who say that after being with a black man they never want to go with a white man again. Social Science  . Dr. Alfred Kinsey 1 Q. [Dr Whitby]: Is there any rehabilitation scheme for convicted prostitutes? A. [Kinsey]: There have been very few attempts to rehabilitate prostitutes, as apart from any other offenders. There was an extensive programme carried on by the City Board of Health in the State of California. There is a publication on the subject which is exceedingly optimistic in reporting that it has this rehabilitation programme and has not only

180 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

eliminated prostitution from the City of San Francisco, but has made these girls into industrious working girls. Dr. Palmer and I went to San Francisco, and located several hundreds in the first 24  hours, and we have been studying histories of some of the prostitutes in that same city for the last eight years. Q. [Mrs Lovibond]: What is roughly the average age of them? Do you get them starting very young, and do they go on with it? Can anything be done for the very young ones? A. [Kinsey]: I think the average age would be in the early or middle twenties. There are probably not as many young prostitutes as I have seen on your streets, and there are probably not as many really old prostitutes as I have also seen on your streets. Q. [Unidentifiable Committee Member]: That is a very young average age, is it not? I should not think, looking in the streets at the moment, that our average age would be the average age you said. A. [Kinsey]: You will have to take all my figures as approximate, because some of these things are based upon impressions. We have well over 1000 female prostitutes in our histories, and I would have to do calculating which has not yet been done. But that is a personal impression of the picture.  . Katherine Hardwick, Submitted Evidence 2 I desire to offer evidence, and a, willing to be cross-examined thereon. I offer this evidence not on behalf of any Society or Association, but as an individual who has had many years of experience in Social Work, and who comes in contact not only with women, but with a number of the men concerned in the problems with which the Committee has to deal. I have also had some experience of the problem abroad through contact with foreign social workers and other agencies. I have done social work in Liverpool and London, probation work and other social work in Worcester, and am at present working in Cambridge for a social welfare organisation. […] Close acquaintance with a number of young girls and older women who are entering on a life of prostitution or who are confirmed prostitutes has convinced me that the majority are corrupted in early youth, sometimes where they are quite small children, in many cases in their own homes, by father, brother, or lodger. This early experience of sex seems to lie dormant in young children until they come to adolescence, and then awakes, and there are many ready to take advantage of the sexual desire of

8  CAUSES, INTERVENTION, AND PATHOLOGIZATION 

181

these young girls. I was for many years in close contact with a Home where assaulted children, from the age of three up to fifteen, were cared for, for many years if necessary, with great wisdom and love. The physical and psychological difficulties experienced by these children were in many cases beyond expression. The wisdom with which they were helped to overcome them, in normal surroundings, and the way in which they helped one another, showed only too clearly the difficulties facing young girls without such skilled help. Such experience, before or at adolescence, seems to have a disintegrating effect on mind and body, and they become excited, unstable, unable to concentrate for any length of time. Their sexual desires are this highly artificially stimulated, and many often actively seek such experience again and again. By late adolescence they may be leading a life of promiscuity if not actual prostitution. Many such girls are of good intelligence, or could have been so if their energies had not been so early deflected from normal development. Older girls and young women entering on a life of occasional promiscuity, in a quiet way, often come from “good” homes and have had educational advantages. Three I have met recently obtained Grammar School places, but were allowed to leave at fifteen years of age, and got into bad company. In some cases corruption by an older, often married man, and subsequent desertion, starts the degradation.  . Dr. Winifred Rushworth (Hon. Medical Director of the Davidson 3 Clinic, Edinburgh), Submitted Evidence The Davidson Clinic, founded in Edinburgh in 1940, provides [non-­ residential] psychotherapeutic treatment for psychoneuroses and psychosomatic disorders in patients who are unable to afford the fees of private psychotherapists. It is not part of the National Health Service, although patients are referred to it by general practitioners who are in the Service. As it receives no assistance from the National Health Service funds it charges fees, which on average are much less than the cost of treatment, the difference being met by voluntary subscriptions and donations from Trusts, other bodies and private individuals. Treatment is given by medically qualified therapists and also by lay therapists working under the supervision of a medically qualified therapist. […] The technique is not exclusively Freudian or Jungian, but makes use of methods found to be successful by either school. […]

182 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

From time to time, female prostitutes present themselves for treatment, recommended by doctors, clergy or social workers, in the hope that they may be helped to find other ways of living. As a rule such patients do not settle down to the prolonged treatment which is considered necessary to change their attitudes. A woman who has been a habitual prostitute for a period of years and lost all desire to change her way of life offers a poor prospect of success. It is, however, probably that in the treatment of adolescents something is being done to prevent their acceptance of such a mode of life. In dealing with such girls their treatment would include sex education and help in understanding sex problems and in eliciting willingness to accept social responsibility.

CHAPTER 9

Demand

The men who bought sex from women who had been labelled prostitutes were never far from the minds of early feminist campaigners like Josephine Butler who, during the campaigns against the nineteenth-century Contagious Diseases Acts, decried the ‘double standard of sexual morality’.1 This double standard meant that men could engage in transactional and extramarital sex not only with impunity but with the belief that this was natural and normal, while women who did so—even if they had been coerced or forced by these men—were stigmatized, ostracized, and labelled ‘whores’, ‘fallen women’, and ‘prostitutes’. The laws continued to reflect this prevailing belief long after the Contagious Diseases Acts were repealed.2 All the Acts that targeted the nuisance or annoyance of street prostitution were directed at the woman alone. One clause (that addressed ‘indecent behaviour’) could be used against disruptive male clients, but this was usually reserved for arresting men who solicited other men. Brothel law did not implicate clients if they were found during a raid. Feminists contemporary with Wolfenden did not call for the criminalization of the buying of sex, which they felt would prove unenforceable and unjust. They did, however, ask that prostitution policies put the question of demand at the centre of the discussion and to discuss ways that 1  Helen Mathers, ‘The Evangelical Spirituality of a Victorian Feminist: Josephine Butler, 1828–1906’, The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 52: 2 (2001), pp. 282–312. 2  Samantha Caslin, ‘Transience, Class and Gender in Interwar Sexual Health Policy: The Case of the Liverpool VD Scheme’, Social History of Medicine, 32: 3 (2019), pp. 544–564.

© The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_9

183

184 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

men could be encouraged to control their sexual urges. For example, as excerpts presented in this chapter show, the Association for Moral and Social Hygiene and the National Council of Women argued that it was illogical for the law to be applied in such a gendered way. Some members of the Committee sought to justify this by surmising that the women who solicited on the street caused public offence, while their male customers indulged in a private vice. This distinction between public and private was fundamental to the Committee’s overall approach to prostitution, since it was used by the Committee to rationalize using the law to intervene in solicitation despite prostitution itself not actually being illegal. Even those with a more practical and less feminist or moral vantage point spoke at length of the role that the demand for bought sex played in the overall commercial sex landscape. Indeed, the subject of demand might be the most widely discussed subject during the hearings. Witnesses pointed to the fact that prostitution would not exist without a demand. They noted that often clients of prostitutes were more disruptive than the women themselves. They indicated the persistent connections between bought sex and military and merchant marine life, though once again these connections were often explained in terms of men having biological urges for sex which women could exploit. The British Medical Association (BMA) was just one prominent organization that submitted evidence to the Committee, which suggested that it was important to see prostitution as a matter of supply and demand. The BMA’s evidence continued to frame demand primarily around gendered ideas about men’s susceptibility to the ‘temptation’ of readily available sex, though their evidence did propose that some clients used the services of prostitutes out of a ‘psychopathological desire to indulge of forms of perversion’.3 Yet, for the most part, the client was not pathologized in interviews or statements to the Committee. He was largely portrayed as an ‘ordinary man’ participating in a distasteful, but nonetheless prevalent and quite possibly inevitable, activity. What might be most striking for readers of this chapter are the number of references to the role that American troops, stationed in large numbers in Britain in the early years of the Cold War, played in increasing the overall demand for prostitution. These Americans, it was argued, had a lot of money and social capital, and were able to attract large numbers of young women to engage in transactional sex with them. On weekends, many 3

 British Medical Association Submitted Evidence.

9 DEMAND 

185

headed to London and other large cities, contributing—according to several witnesses—to the increase in visible soliciting and public sex that had led to the calling of the Departmental Committee in the first place. The Wolfenden Committee made no mention of this significant—but diplomatically delicate—problem in their final report and recommendations. Indeed, the question of demand on the whole was relegated to a single paragraph of the final report, which addressed the question of ‘curb crawling’, in which they dismissed the possibility of a legal intervention because of the ‘difficulties of proof’ and ‘the possibility of a very damaging charge being levelled at an innocent motorist’.4 The irony of the fact that these were the precise arguments that feminists made against the solicitation laws appeared to be lost on the Committee.

Excerpts Police and Magistrates  .  Sir John Nott-Bower, Metropolitan Police Commissioner, 1 Commander Robertson, A Division, and Police Court Solicitor Chairman: The sort of thing which has been suggested to us, Sir John, is this: Starting on the assumption—and I know there are other assumptions on which one might start—starting on the assumption that what people are particularly disturbed about at the moment is the state of the streets, and public decency, and so on, if a really determined effort were made to clear the streets, no doubt it could be done; what would be the consequences of doing so? You have yourself told us some of them. There is just one question I would like to ask, to get your opinion again on it before we go on to complicated things about flat farmers, and such-like. It has been suggested to us that to drive the prostitutes off the streets would in fact to some extent reduce the amount of prostitution, because of the chap who gets caught, not having really intended to be caught, and the fact that the thing is offered to him so obviously he falls for it, whereas if he had to go through a third party there would be more difficulty, and he might not. I wonder if you think there is anything in that, and the question would be to what extent if any other methods than solicitation on the streets would

4

 Wolfenden Report, 147–148.

186 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

in fact reduce the trade. I am not talking about the other complications of it now, but simply that one, the quantitative result. A. [Nott-Bower]: I do not know that I am any better qualified as a policeman to give a view about that, than anybody else, but my personal view is that it would to some extent, but I should have thought myself to a rather small extent, affect the total amount of prostitution, because I believe that in the main prostitution does depend on the demand made by the other sex, so that although there may be—there no doubt are—cases where it is thrust upon them, I would not have thought myself that the total difference would have been very great. Q: It is true of course that the demand creates the supply, but does the presence of the supply sometimes produce the demand? A: It may stimulate the demand to some extent, but I really don’t know. I should have thought myself it would not have had a very great effect.  .  Frank Powell, London Police Court Magistrate 2 Powell: This revolutionary suggestion that the women found in brothels should be arrested and also the men with them, and I might also remind the Committee of a somewhat comparable provision under the Defence Regulations during the war. You will remember that during the war it was an offence for anybody to use a name other than that by which they were known at the outbreak of war, which of course was aimed at public safety, but it was used by the police in London freely. When they raided a brothel and they found prostitutes in it they usually found that the woman had given the name of the man and they were passing as husband and wife, so they brought them before the court under the Defence Regulation … and by that means one was able to remand them for medical report to find if they were suffering from venereal disease. That Regulation has now been repealed and the prostitutes in brothels cannot be brought before the court because they are not guilty of any offence at all, although I think it is quite obvious they are really assisting in the management of a brothel and the men who go with them are obviously aiding and abetting them in the commission of the offence and, since the law is that a principal in the second degree can be tried, punished and dealt with in all respects as if he were a principal in the first degree, both the prostitutes and the men with them are really committing an offence. … Powell: You get the case of young Service men who come to London on leave; many of them come from good homes and have never been

9 DEMAND 

187

subjected to this sort of temptation in their lives. They are walking down the street and they see an attractive looking girl who solicits. If that girl were not there on the streets, perhaps they would not be solicited at all. They are innocent, so to speak—their way of living, the way they have been brought up—they would not be going to a place where they can be solicited, but because they can be solicited so freely on the public street they are ensnared. Q [Mr Wells]: What are the precise grounds on which you would object to licensed houses? … A. [Powell]: I am a family man, I have three children and five grandchildren. I should hate to think any of them went to a licensed house for sexual intercourse. Of course, I appreciate the psychiatric point of view, the medical point of view, that sexual frustration is probably the cause of nervous disorder, but after all, there is such a thing as continence—I know it may be very trying to some people. Of course, I imagine if you had licensed houses you would get medical inspection of the women there, and that would be a safeguard against venereal disease, I do not know whether it would be a complete one. … I think the present situation is partly brought about by the fact that so many young people are kept at college and school so many years. … It is a long time, quite frankly, for a man with ordinary instincts to contain himself.  .  Paul Bennet, London Police Court Magistrate 3 Q. [Mrs Lovibond]: Mr Chairman, can I ask about the other side? What about these men? There would not be the supply if there was not the demand. How can we get hold of them? A. [Bennett]: I think my short answer is that you have this state of affairs in the large towns and cities. Now, it does not in my experience exist in small towns. I came from a small town in Gloucestershire with a population of 8000. There was no demand for it. There are no prostitutes there. When I was in France in the first world war I was billeted time and time again in small French towns. Every one had a red lamp. Our soldiers queued up but they did not do so in their own home town. Nobody asks these women to go on the streets. These women prefer this life. In fact they come out of domestic employment, so many of them, and it is in most men’s minds—some men’s at all events—when they go to a large city on the spree, as they usually call it, that there will be a quarter where they can go and find a prostitute if they wish. The kind of attitude is, “Well, I

188 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

am quite a man, etc. I have been to London”, and that kind of thing. I do not think prostitution exists at all in our smaller towns. This idea that there is a public demand for it by millions is I think quite mistaken.  .  PCs Scarborough and Anderson, C Division 4 Q. [Lord Lothian]: Do you think if it were spread out over more streets there would be less chance of being caught? A. [PC Scarborough]: No. The streets mostly used in the West End are streets that have been used for years and years. That is where men more or less go for this purpose. Q. [Mr Rees]: And yet new areas have sprung up? A. [PC Scarborough]: Yes, I think they have in a way. A. [PC Anderson]: In some parts it has spread quite a bit. Q. [Sir Hugh Linstead]: Bayswater is a new one? A. [PC Anderson]: Park Lane is a new one. A. [PC Scarborough]: A lot of this has come about since the war with the American forces over here. For instance, take the Paddington area— Paddington Station, Norfolk Square, the Americans come up at the weekend, they bring up the girls to the West End, stay at hotels. That has a lot to do with the young girls. A regular prostitute herself—she does not worry about the Americans at all …. Q: [Mrs Lovibond]: Are there more young girls than there were? … A. [PC Anderson]: Especially the first week of every month. That is when the American gets paid—round about Piccadilly circus, anyway. A. [PC Scarborough]: When they come into town there is always an influx of these young girls. Civil Society and Professional Associations 1.  British Medical Association Submitted Evidence The Demand for Prostitutes 140. It is still true that the prostitute’s client is most frequently an unaccompanied male who has taken alcohol and who has probably no intention of seeking a sexual partner until solicited. Nevertheless, it is also important to regard prostitution as a matter of supply and demand, and not to consider it only from the angle of the female partner. We are

9 DEMAND 

189

persuaded that a genuine and serious demand does exist and must be taken into account. How far this could be subject to controlling influences or to what extent it is inevitable is not a matter on which we feel able to express an opinion. 141. Some of the causes which appear to determine the male demand for prostitutes are: (i) The inability in some circumstances to find a sexual partner who is not a prostitute. (ii) The inability in some circumstances to find female companionship or any companionship other than that of a prostitute. (iii) Certain conditions which make the wife temporarily or permanently an unsuitable or unwilling sexual partner: e.g. pregnancy, general bad health, pelvic morbidity, dyspareunia, excessive fatigue, waning of sexual interest, disharmony or antagonism. (iv) The man may feel that a prostitute relationship does not contain the risks and emotions of an ordinary relationship, such as pregnancy or persistent emotional attachment. It is a time-limited transaction with relatively simple financial and biological implications […]. (v) A psychopathological desire to indulge in forms of perversion, more easily available through prostitutes, or other psychopathic qualities in the man, such as sadism. In view of the frequency with which prostitutes are asked to perform or allow flagellation, this factor may be of considerable importance. (vi) Inadequate personality, including some sense of inferiority, which makes the man unable to consort with women who are not prostitutes. […] We are satisfied that it is of great social importance to make prostitution less obtrusive in big cities and prostitutes less easy to obtain. The ease with which a prostitute can be met is in itself a promoter of the traffic and an active temptation to men of all ages. The young girl who is a potential prostitute cannot understand why she should refrain if easy money is to be earned in this way with impunity. When such young people see flagrant prostitution going on in the streets and parks, they can hardly believe that their elders and those in authority seriously consider it wrong or even undesirable.

190 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

 .  Magistrate’s Association—Witnesses: Sir Leonard Costello, Mrs MS 2 Crewdson, Mr JP Eddy and Miss Bartha de Blank Sir Leonard Costello: I entirely agree with what you said a moment ago, that from the subjective point of view I do not think many men are really annoyed at being accosted. Chairman: The degree of annoyance diminishes with age. A: That may be so. If I may be a little frivolous I remember years ago, I was not quite so old as I am now, I was accosted on one occasion by a lady, if that is the right term to use, and I made conventional, what is I suppose the polite excuse. She said “Oh, never mind, perhaps you will come and see me some time. Here is my card”, and she had a printed visiting card and printed on top were the words “Very patient with elderly gentlemen”.  .  National Council of Women—Witnesses: Lady Nunburnholme, 3 Mrs MF Bligh, Mrs M. Lefroy Canon Demant: I am glad to see the insistence you set upon what you call the higher and equal moral standard for both sexes. I am a moralist, I teach morals and I agree with that entirely. In morals they should be treated alike and that would mean also, I think, in law, that prostitution whether carried on by men or women or people soliciting should be treated alike in the law. But I am not sure that it follows from that that the prostitute who plies her trade publicly is on the same plane as the client, which I think seems to be implied in your document. The client is indulging in a private vice but the prostitute is openly inciting to a particular course of behaviour and I do not see anything unjust in the law taking cognizance of that and penalising it. A. [Lady Nunburnholme]: I think, from an outsider’s point of view and not a technical expert, it is punished when it does not succeed. When the woman succeeds she is not punished. If she fails to attract her client, she is punished, which seems to me an anomaly. Demant: Yes. A. [Mrs Lefroy]: When no evil takes place she is guilty. If the evil that we deprecate takes place she goes off scot free. She has not annoyed anyone. The man has been pleased and accepted the offer. There is no crime at all and there would be no supply if there were not a demand. […] The demand comes from the male side.

9 DEMAND 

191

 .  Paddington Moral Reform Council—Witnesses: Mr Robert Allan 4 MP; Councillor Mrs Eyre and Mr MP Simpson Q. [Chairman]: Would you say, Mrs Eyre, that in fact if they police did take the action which they are entitled to take, the Courts would support them in that? A. [Mrs Eyre]: It would most definitely help, particularly on a stretch like the Bayswater Road, if they police went round there, and were given definite instructions as to the action they must take when they see prostitutes definitely worrying men, as I saw happening only this last Monday at seven o’clock. There were two girls round there. There was no single young man that they left alone, and they were literally bullying them. I think this is a terrible thing, because I have myself a son. You may get a boy walking down a road who may be perfectly clean, but he may be worried to death by one of these girls, and it is quite enough to make him fall. These girls were definitely badgering any man walking along the street or any man in a car who stopped his car for two minutes; they were at the window of the car in next to no time.  .  Public Morality Council 5 Q. [Mrs Lovibond]: … what are we going to do to clean the streets up? There are several associations dealing with this matter, as well as your Morality Council, who have been in front of us, and we have heard many of them saying they are disgusted with the streets around Piccadilly, Paddington and so on. What is going to happen if you cannot catch these women doing that? A. [Mrs Eyre]: I take the view if there were no customers there would be no prostitutes. Q: We are very well aware of that. A: I think it is of great importance that this thing exists because there is a demand for it, and yet your attention is directed to one-half of that problem—that is the woman. Half of it ought, in all equity, to be directed towards the customer, the potential customer, the man who pays the money; and I think that is just glossed over and the poor woman is blamed. Whilst, like Mr Thomas [her colleague], I do not want to fall over backwards in support of this awful business, I do want it to be recognised that the man is at least equally to blame, and it is not simply a question of sweeping the streets clear of these women, it is a question of getting a healthy idea about sex into the minds of the community. …

192 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Q. [Chairman]: IS there any way of bringing that home to the man other than the long-term educational policy that you have in mind? Would you see anything written into the law that would render him liable to a fine? A: I think at any rate he should be treated in the same way as the prostitute, and if one is fined both should be fined. Q. [Mr Adair]: And the prostitute should come forward as a witness to say she was annoyed by him approaching her? A: Now you are getting me. Chairman: It will be a big day at Bow Street when the first case of that kind comes up.  .  Association for Moral and Social Hygiene Submitted Evidence 6 Notes on certain matters relating to American troops vis-a-vis prostitution in lands other than their own. On previous occasions there has been positive evidence of pressure from American authorities for action to change British law. It may well be that no suggestions that British law should be altered to meet the special concern of Americans for their soldiers has been made. But it is useful to recall that wherever the American troops are stations, there is evidence of their resort in large number to prostitutes, whatever the kind of law. …. Behind the prostitutes and their clients are the third-party profiteers— pedlars of pornographic goods, pedlars of drugs, touts who can slip a name and address into the hand of a man, brothel-keepers and traffickers, all bent on exploiting the prostitute each for their own gain, and on fostering the debauchery of men and boys. The demand is stimulated by deliberate action from other sources … but behind all these sources of stimulus is the willingness of otherwise decent men to pay for illicit sex relationships. On this foundation the trade is built. … It is certain that there can be found far more men seeking for sexual pleasure than women soliciting for gain. … The heart of the matter is the unchastity, whether occasional or habitual, of men: and a prudish turning away from the fact that it is in sexual congress that man receives the highest bodily delight. What is needed is not a stirring up for public prejudice against the prostitute, but a stirring up of public conscience, so that it will no longer so easily condone man’s lack of control over his body and its passions. In passion itself there is nothing bad: but it can only be properly exercised in a relationship of love.

9 DEMAND 

193

When it is expressed in the buying of a woman’s body and the exploitation of that body for nothing but physical enjoyment, it is the ugliest lust and should not be condoned. It is from this aspect of the question that the public mind is continually turned away and endless studies of the prostitute encourage the idea that on her the whole blame lies. A prostitute has many clients. Any “study” of them is quite unnecessary. An enquiry as to their numbers might be enlightening. These clients range from the very well-known to the unknown—not necessarily bad men: just ordinary men.  .  Association for Moral and Social Hygiene—Witnesses: Mrs Margery 7 Corbett-Ashby; Mrs Elizabeth Abbott; Miss EM Steel, Miss Chave Collisson and Miss DOG Peto OBE Q. [Mrs Ashby]: … As you know our Association has been working all these years with the thought that the relations between the two sexes was a moral one and not a police one. We also drew your attention to the fact that, all through the ages, penalties, sometimes very savage, have been directed against the one sex whereas nothing has been done to diminish the demand by the other sex. We therefore feel that the responsibility for the relations between adults should be placed squarely on both shoulders equally, and we are pressing you to see that the law recognises that fact; so that whereas, on the one hand we would ask for the prostitute to be taken out of a special category in which she is now placed, perhaps not very legally but rather by straining the law, on the other hand we would ask that you strengthen the law where the offence is against the minor, or especially when accompanied by fraud or violence. But I think what we do press you to do most of all is that you should use the weight of your really immense authority, in your report and recommendations, to rouse public opinion to the moral issues involved and to the causes which create and stimulate demand. … Mrs Abbott: … we have had complaints about certain parts of London for ages. We go and investigate; sometimes the complaint is quite right— Piccadilly Circus in the war, for instance. What was the situation? There were more G.I. men looking for girls than there were girls to go round; the American Assistant Provost Marshal made an absolutely false attack on what he called “Licensed women”. We answered him and we answered the authorities. Was it a provocation to debauchery? Well, who was making it? Did anyone arrest a G.I.? Of course not. May I give my latest information, because it is a very serious problem with Many American Soldiers coming into this country? I am most sincere in my admiration of our generous allies, but these soldiers create a difficult problem. Here is a true story I

194 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

heard only a fortnight ago from a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army. His friend’s wife, a very handsome young woman, thought “It is a fine night and the bus is crowded. I shall walk home to Chelsea.” She was outside the Ritz Hotel. Between the Ritz Hotel and the top of Constitution Hill she was accosted by American servicemen fifteen times. She was furious, and when she was asked for the fifteenth time she grabbed the man by the arm—which, of course, was a common assault and said, “No, this is too much. You shall escort me home to Chelsea”. She then dragged the poor young man home with her. They never thought of arresting those service men for accosting a woman, did they? What is the difference? If a prostitute accosts a man, and they walk off together, if she is successful in persuading him to do an immoral act, you cannot do anything; but if she fails to get him, then you can arrest her. … Mrs Ashby: To make it an offence to incite a person to an act which is not in itself an offence is surely completely illogical. Canon Demant: I do not think I agree with that. Mrs Ashby: Then are you prepared to make fornication and adultery offences? Canon Demant: No, but anything that would be a public incitement to them I think I could regard as a legal offence. Miss Collisson: In that case if any incitement is to be an offence, you will have to arrest perhaps 11 per cent of the population of the United States, and probably in this country—the male population—on any given evening, because they are prowling. I am not going to say that most men are offensive—there are always exceptions—but most men are extraordinarily decent except when they are seeking a particular type of woman. Surely if you are going to lay the burden upon the prostitute you must also assume that the man who is there seeking the prostitute is also to be arrested and published. He is also seeking an immoral purpose. Canon Demant: … But the man, as merely a consumer or customer, is not quite in the same position as the man looking for a prostitute and accosting women on the assumption that they are prostitutes. He is guilty of a private vice, if you like, not a public offence. Mrs Ashby: But if he goes out to look for satisfaction, he is the demand. Miss Collisson: The Inciter. Mrs Ashby: The woman would not be there if he were not going to be there. Canon Demant: But there are many men not looking for prostitutes who are inveigled into it.

9 DEMAND 

195

Mrs Ashby: But there are more men looking for prostitutes than women to supply them. … Q. [Mrs Cohen]: It says on page 6 [of your submitted evidence] that girls have no need to solicit near camps; they are themselves solicited. This question about the men always—that it is always the men’s fault, sort of thing—I have a feeling that where there are camps there are girls and women who deliberately go down to these camps. I have heard that when one of Her Majesty’s battleships is in, trainloads of girls—I have seen them all—would go down to Greenock, because the boats are in. These are the sorts of things that are happening in other parts of the country. It is not only just in London, and it is—for the inhabitants of these places … it is really a very difficult life, particularly if you have young people. … A. [Miss Steel]: I would like to speak to this, because we have had evidence of this kind of thing from our welfare workers all over the country, and only just before I came here I was reading about what the present situation is with regard to the American Servicemen in King’s Lynn, and near Burtonwood, and so on. One phrase stuck out from the workers’ reports, and that was that our young girls are being ruined by these men who are there to get what they want from then. It is quite true that on the payday of Americans and, again, when a ship comes into Plymouth—I was there last week—you do get a number of girls and women coming to these places, knowing perfectly well that they can ply their trade. They know where to go: what law is going to stop that? Then men are there with their money, ready to spend it, and the women know that. One of the reports from the King’s Lynn area was that because the men are ready to spend their money in this way, girls have come from away … these are probably amateur prostitutes, not real ones at all.  .  Howard League—Witnesses: Mr FE Baker, Miss Mary Hamilton, 8 Dr TCN Gibbens and Mr Hugh J Klare Miss Hamilton: May I add that that I think there has been a great movement with regard to certain groups of prostitutes. There is a tremendous number in Oxford where there is an American camp. … … Mrs Cohen: There is a colour problem too in the East End. Some of the men run minor brothels there. Miss Hamilton: They run away to the Maltese and they sell them to the Jamaicans.

196 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

 .  Rosalind Wilkinson, Submitted Evidence 9 Prostitutes stress that the majority of clients are married men; one is also struck by the number of regular clients there appear to be. One gets the impression that the majority of clients are made up of respectable married men who have fairly regular resort to prostitutes. Anecdotes tend to stress either eminence or respectability, or the social oddness of the clients. I found, in stories and records, examples of each of the following groups: 1. Men away from home, some of whom do not want sexual services but are merely anxious for female company for a short time. 2. Men who are impotent with the women with whom they have an ordinary relation but who are not impotent with prostitutes. 3. Totally impotent men who are also impotent with prostitutes; these men often demand their money back and generally direct their annoyance with the situation onto the prostitute. 4. Men who want to indulge in perversions in which they do not wish to involve their wives, or in which their wives will not co-operate. 5. Men suffering from stress or traumatic experience. 6. Unmarried men, possibly young and inexperienced. Unattached men unwilling to accept responsibilities or to form a relation with any woman. 7. Men in groups having ‘a night out’, a process which sometimes appears to involve going with prostitutes—occasionally all together. 8. Men in groups, etc. (as 7) who engage prostitutes to perform for them. 9. Men whose wives are temporarily unavailable for sexual purposes. 10. Men who “want a change” from their wives; some of them may rarely be clients; some may be attracted by the taboo associated with prostitution; for some a prostitute may be the quickest, and safest, way of gratifying the wish for a change; some may use the same prostitute regularly, as a mistress but without the responsibilities of keeping the latter. 11. Psychotics; mentally defective men. These groups may overlap. It is probably that most of the men concerned live otherwise socially blames lives (assisted in this perhaps by the existence of prostitution). It is possible that a feature common to all

9 DEMAND 

197

groups may be a tendency to neurotic promiscuity. Many men who qualify for the various categories would not turn to prostitutes.  0.  David Linton, Submitted Evidence 1 I request the Committee’s permission to present certain experiences concerning only prostitution, and conclusions drawn from them. These observations were made during Army service and afterwards in civilian life. The convictions to which they lead are only those of an individual man, but one who is concerned by this social problem. The principle to which these experiences point is this: Third-party profit from prostitution should remain a crime. But prostitution and the solicitation it involves, unless the latter materially annoys an individual, should not be made crimes. Prostitution, being a sin and wrong, should be eliminated where possible. But the elimination of prostitution should stop short of legal persecution which degenerates into the deeper vice of sadism and authority. This last is characteristic of totalitarianism and, I belief, is the greatest danger of all in our age …. Servicemen can preserve little privacy and admit to one another the fact which in civilian life they would hide: that in the male sex those who live consistently chaste lives are in the minority. This unfortunate fact that, on the whole, men are not a very chaste sex was underlined on one occasion in Italy when we were compelled to take prophylactic packets with us on leave. All men know that immorality in men is widely condoned. Then to condemn only women who serve such men is unjust. Clients already outnumber the prostitutes in some places. When prostitutes cannot be found this sometimes leads to unpleasant incidents. This connection is sometimes disputed, but I know of an actual example of it. One evening, my sister-in-law took a short cut across the corner of Hyde Park. She was at that time a stranger to London. She arrived home distressed that she had been pursued by several men. Subsequently I went myself to Hyde Park and saw only four apparent prostitutes but counted shadows of about sixty men who seemed to be seeking them. On a different evening in Hyde Park I saw one car slow up and another stop alongside four girls who ignored them and continued talking. The drivers had apparently mistaken them for prostitutes. So far as Hyde Park is concerned, it is definitely the men who do the soliciting.

198 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

 1.  Christine Mackenzie, Warden, Women’s Help Committee 1 Q. [Mr Adair]: Taking the other side of it, you want them to remain on the streets. So you think it is reasonable to have that group standing around Gordon Street and Hope Street, meeting young men coming out of Central Station into Glasgow, and the first thing that happens to them is they are accosted by these women? Is that reasonable? A. [Mackenzie]: I would say in reply to that, Mr Adair, why should the men accost the women? Q. [Mr Adair]: That is not answering the question. A. [Mackenzie]: Equal rights. Q. [Mr Adair]: Is it reasonable that the first thing that should happen to them in Glasgow as they leave the Central Station is that they should be accosted by women who are there parading? A. [Mackenzie]: If the men, themselves, will accept it. Q. That is not the point, Miss Mackenzie. A. [Mackenzie]: I am sorry. Mrs Cohen: The point us, surely, that it is not a good thing to have these women there at all. A. [Mackenzie]: It is not good for the men, either. Mr Adair: We cannot do away with both men and women, unfortunately. A. [Mackenzie]: I am sorry. I am not a feminist and I disagree with the feminine attitude, because they do not approve of my policy, but I would say equal treatment for men and women. Q. [Mr Adair]: Is it equal treatment to say that you are allowing these to remain there deliberately, largely to accost young men who are coming out of the station? A. [Mackenzie]: They do not need to accost. It is supply and demand. Q. [Mr Adair]: But the girls are there, and they are meeting boys who are just coming out of the Central Station, and accosting them. Mr Wells: And they make money out of it. Mr Adair: And they make money out of it. A. [Mackenzie]: If there was no demand …. Mr Adair: Those are not demanding. Those are young people coming out of Central Station to go somewhere in Glasgow. They have got to go out into Gordon Street, and they cannot do otherwise. Chairman: It sounds as if Mr Adair is not a feminist, but a masculinist. A. [Mackenzie] I am awfully surprised.

9 DEMAND 

199

Mrs Cohen: You have missed the point, really. These are ordinary travellers, not looking for prostitutes. A. [Mackenzie]: Women are ordinary pedestrians. Mrs Cohen: And as they come out, some people hold that it is a bad thing that these women should be on the streets. Even I, coming out of Central Station, would not like to see these women hanging about the streets. That is the point. A. [Mackenzie]: And yet you know they are somewhere else, carrying on in the same way. I think that is shirking it. I think that is a lack of courage. Q. [Mrs Cohen]: That is the point that we wanted to say. A. [Mackenzie]: That is what I meant when I said legislate for it, and come out in the open and do it. Mr Adair: There is no legislation required, if you want to leave them on the streets. A. [Mackenzie]: There is legislation to deal with the men equally with the women. I am sorry I have been most unsuccessful. I have never given evidence at a conference …. Chairman: But you must not think that at all. We have had your view put very strongly and firmly, Miss Mackenzie. We are very grateful for it. You must not mind Mr Adair and Mrs Cohen answering back like this. A. [Mackenzie]: Not at all.

CHAPTER 10

Wolfenden’s Missing Women

Women’s voices were marginalized by the male-dominated Wolfenden Committee. Just three of the Committee members were women and, as Helen Self has argued, Wolfenden and the Committee’s male secretary, Conwy Roberts, conspired to sideline within the proceedings various women’s organizations with experience of dealing with prostitution. The Association for Moral and Social Hygiene (AMSH), which had been campaigning since 1916 for the solicitation laws to be repealed and replaced with a simpler gender-neutral law, had to ask to be heard by the Wolfenden Committee. Eventually, Roberts and Wolfenden agreed that the AMSH, and their supporting societies, could send a deputation of seven people, providing only three or four spoke.1 This failure to recognize, much less capitalize upon, the experience of women who had been involved in legal and welfare discussions about prostitution for more than three decades reflected the extent to which the Committee was framed around voices of masculine authority. The most obvious and egregious impact of this framing was the Committee’s failure to speak to the women directly affected by the solicitation laws. While the Wolfenden Committee did interview three self-­ identified ‘homosexuals’, no woman who had sold sex or identified as a prostitute appeared as a witness. The Wolfenden Committee did not regard speaking to prostitutes as fundamental to their project. Rather than seeing these women as being able to offer vital testimony and unrivalled 1

 Helen Self, Prostitution, 84.

© The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_10

201

202 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

insights into their work, the policing of solicitation, and the impact of the law, Wolfenden considered them a problem to be solved.2 When the possibility of the Committee hearing from women who sold sex did briefly emerge, it was through the efforts of Jean Graham Hall, one of the witnesses who represented the Society of Labour Lawyers. Hall, the Society’s Secretary, had been trained as a social worker and a probation officer before undertaking training to become a barrister in the early 1950s.3 Through her work, Hall had contacts among prostitutes working in Mayfair, and the Society of Labour Lawyers offered to bring two of these women with them when they came to give evidence. These women were described by Gerald Gardiner QC as being of ‘perfectly good character’, and he put it to the Committee that the women had ‘a considerable sense of vocation’ and he noted that they ‘visited a doctor regularly’.4 They also had considerable experience of the criminal justice system, with ‘200 convictions for soliciting’.5 However, the Committee did not appreciate the significance of the opportunity to meet with these women. Some Committee members expressed concern about hearing from ‘sponsored’ women, while Wolfenden later recalled in his memoir how others on the Committee waited in ‘naughty anticipation’ to hear from them.6 Given this unappreciative audience, it is perhaps unsurprising that the two women did not show up to their meeting with the Society of Labour Lawyers and the Committee. The representatives of the Society of Labour Lawyers did try, rather unsuccessfully, to draw upon Hall’s conversations with prostitutes, in a bid to represent these women. Hall described herself in her evidence as having interviewed ‘the leading lights of the profession’ in preparation for her own appearance before the Committee.7 But members of the Committee frequently pushed back against the Society of Labour Lawyers. The Society argued against the implementation of any measures designed to drive prostitution off the streets and out of sight. Referring to Hall’s interactions with prostitutes, they argued that such measures would make prostitution more dangerous and increase the likelihood of the women being exploited by third parties. The Committee appear to have been  Helen Self, Prostitution, 87.  Mort, Capital Affairs, p. 174. 4  Society of Labour Lawyers Witness Interviews, p. 13. 5  Society of Labour Lawyers Witness Interviews, p. 13. 6  Mort, Capital Affairs, 175; Self, Prostitution, 117. 7  Society of Labour Lawyers Witness Interviews, p. 22. 2 3

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

203

underwhelmed by these arguments, with Wolfenden directly challenging Hall’s suggestion that the women’s use of flats did not tend to bother other residents, and with other members of the Committee foregrounding the supposed concerns of residents and tourists in response to the evidence being presented to them.8 Moreover, the Committee did little to try to rectify the lack of testimony from women with direct experience of selling sex. Mort notes that after these two women did not attend their meeting in 1955, the Committee gave up trying to speak to prostitutes and turned their attention towards the matter of homosexuality instead.9 As such, the Committee’s efforts to hear witness testimony from women who sold sex must be described as wholly insufficient. That the Wolfenden Committee did not reach out to prostitutes after this abandoned meeting is indicative of the low levels of priority that the Committee overall afforded to women’s voices in general and to the voices of women who sold sex in particular. No doubt concerns about embarrassment would have deterred the Committee from wanting to be seen to associate closely with prostitutes, but these concerns were not legitimate for a Committee with this task and, in any case, the Committee could have sought alternative ways to include the experiences of prostitutes in their enquiry. Published material and the archival record attest to the fact that there was no shortage of articulate, opinionated, and well-informed women who sold sex in the 1950s who would have been able, in person or in print, to enlighten the Committee on key issues. Accessing the unmediated voices of women who sold sex in this period is close to impossible: the sources we use here are heavily edited autobiographies, sociological studies, and archived reports written by organizations. Unlike Wolfenden, however, we have elected to at least attempt to capture some of the important opinions and experiences of women who sold sex in this period. The sources in this chapter demonstrate the extent to which Wolfenden ignored the concerns of women who worked as prostitutes, and women’s organizations more broadly. The chapter opens with the Society of Labour Lawyers discussing the women who might have taken part, had they been more encouraged by the Committee, and it closes with evidence from the AMSH and the British Vigilance Association, two women’s organizations that strongly disagreed with the final Report. 8  Chairman’s exchange with Hall, p. 20 (and Mishcon and Cohen, p. 11 quoted in chapter one). 9  Frank Mort, Capital Affairs, p. 186.

204 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

More importantly, though, the rest of the chapter presents a range of sources which give an indication of what women who worked as prostitutes might have said to the Departmental Committee on Homosexuality and Prostitution had their opinions been properly sought out. It pays particular attention to the evidence we have about how women who sold sex felt about the law, policing, court, and prison, as well as their reflections on proposed legal changes. The chapter also highlights excerpts from different aspects of their working and personal lives that were almost entirely absent from the Committee’s thousands of pages of submitted evidence and interviews. It cannot be overstated: the Wolfenden Committee’s recommendations, which led directly to profound legal change in how prostitution was controlled and which dramatically impacted the lives of those who were labelled ‘common prostitutes’, were made without the Committee having spoken to a single woman who sold sex.

Excerpts 1.  Society of Labour Lawyers Minutes of Evidence: Witnesses—Mr Gerald Gardiner QC, Mr Ben Hooberman, Mr PR Kimber, Mr CR Hewitt, Miss Jean Graham Hall One of the Wolfenden witnesses for the Society of Labour Lawyers, Jean Graham Hall, was in contact with two women who worked as prostitutes. She arranged for these women to appear with the Society of Labour Lawyers to give evidence; however, the women did not show up. On the second of their appearances before the Committee, representatives of the Society of Labour Lawyers tried to give their impressions of the missing women’s opinions and give a little more detail about their experiences.

Mr Gardiner: Some of Miss Hall’s friends [women working as prostitutes who had been due to appear before the Committee] said in no circumstances would they take a man except on the street, the principal reason being that if they did that there would be a danger of emotional attachment which is the one thing they dread, and in consequence they would never take anyone except off the street. I am sorry in a way these two girls did not come along, because I think the committee would have been interested to hear their point of view. They were both girls with a perfectly good character; they had 200 convictions for soliciting, nothing else at all. Both girls had a good character and a considerable sense of

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

205

vocation. They were girls who visited a doctor regularaly [sic] and would never think of recognising a man if they saw him out and were strongly in favour of increased fines; very much their own point of view, and not always the view the committee might have expected. Chairman: We were very sorry too they did not come. 2.  Marthe Watts, The Men in My Life (London: Christopher Johnson, 1960) Marthe Watts, nee Hucbourg, was born in Marne, France in 1913 and relocated with her mother to Paris after the First World War and the death of her father. Her mother’s remarriage and subsequent neglect led her into the sex trade. After time spent selling sex in France, Spain, Italy and Tunisia, she came to London with her lover and pimp, who arranged for her to marry a British man in order to gain citizenship and avoid deportation as a prostitute under the Aliens Act of 1920. She later became involved with Gino Messina, the eldest of the notorious Messina brothers, who ran an organized prostitution ring in West London in the 1940s and 1950s. Her autobiography, The Men in My Life, was possibly written with the help of the journalist Duncan Webb, who was the reporter responsible for the expose of the Messina Brothers. These news stories, which ran in People on Sunday in 1950, were instrumental in establishing the need and political will for a Departmental Committee on Prostitution. He is probably the recently deceased friend she thanks in her acknowledgements. Marthe Watts’ account of her time in London before, during, and after being a ‘Messina girl’ offers historians a rare first-hand account of selling sex on the streets of London in the era of Wolfenden. In these excerpts, Watts reflects on her arrival in London, the work of soliciting and selling sex, and her encounters with police and other authorities in charge of controlling prostitution in the metropolis.  y London Debut M After my husband had left me at the Tuscan Hotel [in London] I went up to my room. Our friend Maurice had arranged everything from Paris. I was to wait at this hotel for a maid [these were the women who assisted women who sold sex in their flats] to come and fetch me, and while I was waiting I ordered some breakfast and had a wash. The maid was not long in arriving. She was a French woman from Brittany, a little woman with large spectacles who told me that her name was Marie.

206 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

I asked Marie to sit down and have some coffee with me. She told me that an apartment had been reserved for me at Carnaby Street, and that she would take me there. So, after we had finished, Marie arranged for my bags to be brought down, paid the hotel and we took a taxi. It was not far, of course, but I had no idea where we were going as fog, such as I had never seen, started to come down and our range of vision was almost nil. On arriving at Carnaby Street all I saw was a rather sad little street and a dim house made even dimmer in appearance by the fog. I entered into a dirty hall and, going up the narrow dilapidated stairway, I found my apartment there. First of all, there was a little room with a table, two chairs and a desk; then, after that, there was a passage which led to a larger room at the end. Apart from its three large windows, the room had a sinister appearance about it owing to being decorated entirely in black. The floor was also black and there was a large bed, a wardrobe, a sofa and a little table near the bed with a bedlamp, while in the corner behind a screen was an old-fashioned water-jug. A make-shift kitchen had been constructed by partitioning off a part of the passage way and there was a gas-ring for cooking: and a primitive sort of bathroom had been fitted in in the same way.10 This curious apartment was far from being what I had hoped, and was very different from what had been described to me in Paris, but at least, I thought, it was better than I had been accustomed to in North Africa. I later found that it was one of number, all decorated in black and let to prostitutes, that were owned by Colonel X—, a well-known society figure, who was my landlord. There was also a gas fire and, as soon as we arrived Marie put a shilling in the meter and lit it. This made things slightly more cheerful. Then Marie and I started to clean up the apartment and put my clothing in place. After we had done that, we went out to the shops and brought back a few flowers to liven up the room.

10  This apartment has all the markings of a house subdivided by landlords and agents in order to avoid prosecution for keeping a brothel. If a room had a kitchen and a bathroom, it was considered a separate flat and therefore not liable for prosecution as a brothel where ‘more than one woman practiced prostitution’, even if every other room was also rented to women selling sex.

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

207

The fog was thicker and thicker, so that it became impossible to go out to find work.11 I thought that I would telephone Georges12 to tell him my news, but there was no telephone and I had to go out to the Post Office or find a telephone box. Marie accompanied me down one of the little streets off Regent Street and once again there was a complication. Every three minutes I had to put a fresh lot of money in the coin box to continue my conversation and, as I had, not made any provision in advance for the shillings and pennies, I had to stop talking to Georges after six minutes conversation. This distressed me and made me feel more lonely than ever. […] I should say that on this, my first venture [to solicit] on the streets of London, I was not at all sure of myself, as nobody had shown me where I should go. I walked up and down Regent Street where, in the afternoon, I found so many people that I had no idea how one could talk to men by themselves. In addition, I saw the uniformed commissionaires in front of the shops and, so strange was I to this new city, I thought that they could only be police officers and I felt apprehensive accordingly. After having walked up and down for an hour by which time I had covered the whole distance from Piccadilly to Oxford Circus and back several times, a man came up to speak to me. However, he did not speak French, while I, as yet, had not learnt to speak English. It was in these circumstances difficult for us to make progress in understanding each other. However, finally I remembered that I had the address of my apartment written on a small piece of paper in my pocket. So I showed it to him and he came along with me. I did not even know enough English to talk about money. He had a prosperous appearance about him and I thought that I had found a good client. So, when we arrived at the house, I asked him for my present. He took out a pound from his pocket book and that was all. ‘C’est n’est pas assez,’ I told him. ‘Pas assez,’ I repeated, shaking my head. Marie, to whose care I had given the money, also started to explain to him. But, unfortunately, he showed no indication of giving more.

11  This was around 1938, so she is referring to a London fog, but not the famous one of the early 1950s. 12  George was the name of the pimp/boyfriend she had when she first came to London, who stayed back in France.

208 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Nonetheless he stayed for a very long time, though at least he was a man of normal inclinations. At last, I got rid of him …. After that I went back to the streets to find another customer. I continued to walk up and down for a long time until the offices and the shops closed and the rush hour commenced. During this time I had no idea which way to direct my steps, but at last a second client saw me and came towards me. He spoke several words in French and this seemed easy enough. He offered me £2, and we were in good accord with one another. But when we were back at the apartment, it was not quite so straightforward. There had clearly been design behind this client’s apparent generosity as he began by signs, mixed with indifferent attempts at the French language, to indicate that his desires were of perverse nature. I was not then apprised of the unusual demands that London was to make of my services. I was, despite my wide experience, almost totally innocent of the curious practice of flagellation … so that it took me some while to realise that what my new customer wanted was for me to beat him with a cane. Even when I had realised what he wanted, we were no further forward, as I had not come from Paris equipped for this sort of thing. It was settled that, for want of anything else, I should use my umbrella and I carried on. It seemed an inadequate procedure to me, but my client got satisfaction and that was the main thing. We became quite friendly. […] Marie and I got on well together and the next day we went to the Post Office to make an application for my telephone. Then Marie suggested that I should buy a pair of patterned shoes, for it appeared that was an essential part of the get-up of the prostitutes on the streets of London at that time. Indeed, the French girls would wear a sort of uniform of these patterned shoes, white globes, and transparent stockings. I must say that we all looked very smart and some of us quite pretty in our hats and veils— at least, we could lay claim to a more feminine type of charm than the wearers of jeans and football stockings who succeeded us. While on this subject I feel that I must dispel the idea that at that time there was some sort of organization which put French girls on the streets of London, after arranging husbands for them to gain British nationality in the way that I had done. My own story will make it obvious to my readers that it was solely a matter of independent enterprise for a French girl to come to London, and the majority of my fellow countrywomen in the West End had arrived there in just the same manner as I had done.

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

209

First Arrest I found many new clients and I started to collect a clientele who knew my telephone number and would come and call on me by prearrangement. I had worked about six weeks before I was taken up by the police. I was not, however, particularly afraid of them because I knew, from what the other girls had told me, that they would not keep me a long time, and that I would not have the same experiences in England as I had in the Mediterranean countries. One evening, however, towards 7 o’clock I was on Piccadilly when a police officer came towards me and spoke to me. I did not comprehend what he was saying, but I was quite clear as to his meaning. He made me understand that he wanted me to walk in the direction of Vine Street, while he walked behind me. However, when it was clear that I did not know the way, he walked beside me. When we reached Vine Street Police Station I did not appreciate what the officer on duty was saying, as I did not yet know English with enough proficiency. However, they managed to produce another officer from the interior of the police station who spoke French well and he put the necessary questions to me. “How long have you been married?” “Where is your husband?” “How long have you been in London?” All these personal questions were fired at me in police but searching fashion. They then took my keys and put me in one of the cells, where a policewoman took my fingerprints. When I had been in the cell for an hour they let me out and gave me back my keys, telling me that they had been to my flat in order to verify my address. I came out and quickly went back to Duke Street for my dinner. Marie told me that the police had been there and had looked over the apartment. […] The next morning Marie accompanied me to Bow Street to answer the summons that had been issued against me. I was pleasantly surprised at the shortness of the court proceedings. I merely passed in front of the magistrate and a brief interchange took place between us, with the help of an interpreter. After a few minutes the magistrate fined me ten shillings as it was a first offence, and I also had to pay ten shillings for the service of the interpreter. A well-intentioned and much-concerned lady who was evidently the probation officer came up to talk to me, but when she saw that

210 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

I either could not or would not answer her questions, she left me alone. I left the Court with a sense of relief and accompanied Marie to do our shopping at the marché francais (which was our usual name for the Berwick Street Market), then I went to find Georges. This was the first of more than 400 appearances I have made at Bow Street in my role as “common prostitute” and through which, even at two pounds a time, I have contributed substantially to your British Exchequer. Pimping and Immigration Life continued in the routine that I had now established. I had started to make myself some new dresses, and found London a pleasant place to live and work in. Georges continued to come and see me. Then, one night, after he had slept with me and was in the bath in the morning, there was a ring at my door. It was the police. There were four officers and when I opened the door they came in and went through all the rooms. They found Georges in the bathroom and asked him for his passport. He came out and gave it to them, saying that he was one of my clients who had spent the night with me. The police, however, looked for his clothing, and it was lucky that he had only what he was wearing. They told him, however, that they would take his passport and let him have it back in a short time. Then they left …. Then, at the end of a fortnight, the police called on him, returned his passport and notified him that he had forty-eight hours in which to leave England, while, alas, on his passport they had put a large black cross. He was an undesirable alien as far as England was concerned. Georges came to see me and we said a fond au revoir. I cried a great deal, but there was simply nothing that we could do about it. [Marthe goes to France to see her dying grandmother, and a friend begins working in her London flat while she is gone.] After an absence of about two weeks, I arrived back in my London apartment in Duke Street on 1st April 1938, at twelve noon; but alas, at 12:15 the police were there. I thought it was for my passport, but not at all. They rang the bell and Marie went down to open the door. On hearing the sound of voices outside I had thrown my French passport on top of the wardrobe in my bedroom. The inspector came in, however, drew himself up to his full height, and read me out a summons according to which I was, to my own amazement, charged with keeping a brothel. [Marthe is brought to court, remanded into custody, and the magistrates demand that she produce her English husband. She finds him,

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

211

brings him to the police station steaming drunk, and secures the return of her English passport. She never sees her husband again, though she keeps his name for the rest of her life.] I Join the Messina Family [Marthe and her best friend Janine evacuate London during the Blitz for some time.] When I got back to London I found everything changed still more. In particular many of the houses had been bombed and only after difficulty did I find myself another place at the top of a block of flats in Jermyn Street. I resumed my custom of going out very early in the afternoon and spending the evening in the air-raid shelter on the opposite side of the street. … We started to go to the Palm Beach Club in Wardour Street. This was more lively and interesting than the air-raid shelter, but of course there was nothing to do but sit around and drink. … A great many French girls came to this Club each evening, and that is doubtless why the Messina brothers went there regularly also, thinking to find new victims. I should here say something about these sinister brothers who introduced the souteneur as a permanent feature into London prostitution and who were from now on to play so large a part in my life story. There were five of them—Salvatore, Alfredo, Eugenio, Carmelo and Attilio. … It was during the First World War that Papa Messina’s fortunes started to prosper and he built up a chain of brothels in the main cities of Egypt. [The brothers come to London in 1934 and start sending girls onto the street.] The War, of course, was the biggest godsend to the Messinas. London became filled with British and Allied troops and with war workers away from home. Time was short, money was loose, morals were out: and this, of course, is where I came in …. [Janine, her friend, becomes a woman of Carmelo Messina.] I did my best to remain outside their set-up. However, my predicament can be stated quite simply. Above everything in my life I have dreaded loneliness; and now I had lost my best friend to the Messinas and was lonely. The Press Gino also gave us strict instructions that we were not to allow ourselves to be photographed, or be approached by a photographer, under the threat of his gravest displeasure. [She describes being approached by Duncan Webb for a quote, but says that she walked away.]

212 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

But then came that dreadful Sunday of 3rd September 1950, when The People blew up their story about the Messina family. There was this awful scandal on the front page of this paper, which sells its many millions of copies, with all our names and the photographs of the houses in Stafford Street and elsewhere. This by itself was shocking enough, but the next thing that happened was that people came from here, there and everywhere to watch us and look at the houses, as if it was a pilgrimage. I am given to understand that Londoners love a spectacle; if so, we were from now on their spectacle. On Clients Who is the prostitute’s client? It is, as I have endeavoured to show, Mr “Everyman”. The man who is restless, the man who is lonely, the man who has nothing to do, the man whose wife does not understand his peculiarities, the man with strange desires, the young man out on the spree, the middle-aged man away from home, the elderly man beset by sensual desires. They all, as well as I, were the ready prey for such as the Messinas. On Wolfenden Now, of course, things have changed and, thanks to the Report of the University Professor, girls no longer walk the streets of London. London has become like a provincial city with the sex “swept under the carpet”. It is difficult to see how successful this will be in the light of what I have said, while books like Lolita enjoy wide publication, while sex and prostitutes is the principal subject in vogue at the West End theatres. The central theme of the latter part of my story has, after all, been the vast seller’s market in the commodity which we had to offer. […] It may be that, in these modern times, when the money and leisure that were once the privilege of the few have spread to the many, it will not be possible to return to the pre-war days when we French girls openly catered for a limited clientele without, I think, being offensive to the public eye. It seems to me, however, that if prostitution is to be accepted as inevitable, then it is better carried on in circumstances in which girls can make contact with their clients under some form of public supervision.

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

213

3.  CH Rolph, Editor for the British Social Biology Council: Rosalind Wilkinson (Unattributed), Women of the Streets: A Sociological Study of the Common Prostitute (London: Martin Secker & Warburg Ltd., 1955) This book has a very convoluted research, writing and publication history. It is the work of an unattributed sociologist, Rosalind Wilkinson, who was funded in part by the British Social Biology Council and in part by the London School of Economics to do research into prostitution in London and produce a report. She worked under the guidance of Hermann Mannheim at LSE.  She spent a year interviewing women who sold sex, their clients, the police, and others in the criminal justice system. Wilkinson’s research as submitted to the British Social Biology Council was a 200,000 word document, which the BSBC appeared not to like in the least. ‘This is not … the report that the council wanted’ they declared, complaining about how little had been discovered of the backgrounds of prostitute women, and how the interviews, because they were small in number (sixty-nine interviewees by today’s standards is not a small number) meant that their findings were relatively ‘insignificant’. Her work, they complained, was ‘unscientific’ compared to the original aims of the project. The initial research plan was for the research worker, after analyzing arrest and conviction statistics, to ‘consult the CRO files, Division indices and fingerprint records to build up histories of the women concerned. Eventually the particulars will be copied on to statistical punched cards, on which the women’s names will be coded as numbers.’ The original aim of the project therefore had a significant component of identification and surveillance, a far cry from the research that Wilkinson actually conducted. It is unclear precisely what the BSBC hoped to achieve, but it seems that they were attempting to trace the early causes of prostitution and the characteristics of prostitute women, to build up a kind of epidemiology or pathology of prostitution, while also aiding the police in advancing their criminal record keeping.13 Determining that Wilkinson would be ‘unlikely to be able to re-edit it in a scientific form’ they enlisted the editorial help of CH Rolph, the pen name of Cecil Rolph Hewitt, the ex-Chief Inspector of the City of London Police, who had turned to journalism after leaving the force. As Helen Self points

13  Miss French, Sec of BSBC to Miss EC Bather, superintendent of the Metropolitan women police, 12 August 1954, London, The National Archives, MEPO 3/2967.

214 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

out, Rolph was clear in his biography about his opinions of the research, saying that the ‘manuscript was so vivid and human and at the same time so factual and carefully documented that I should like to see it published unchanged.’ He went on to indicate that the only reason it was cut was because it was too long, and does not give any indications of how drastically the BSBC’s opinion of the ‘unscientific’ research differed from his own admiration. In the end, he claimed that his editing had been to the detriment of the original work.14 In accordance with BSBC wishes, he never once mentioned Wilkinson’s name. Wilkinson later sued for copyright but lost the challenge and the ownership of the work.15 Nevertheless, Wilkinson produced what is by far the most comprehensive and methodologically sound study of prostitution in this period. It is arguably the first real sociological study of prostitution to appear in Britain. Wilkinson gave testimony to the Wolfenden Committee as a recognized expert and this is extracted earlier in this book. The excerpts from her research that appear here highlight the first-hand accounts of women who sold sex in London in this period.  xperiences with the Police and in Court E Editor’s note [written by CH Rolph]: Many of the statements attributed to the prostitutes must be taken with reserve as accounts given by them are often inaccurate insofar as they appear to reflect official policy.16 […] Very few prostitutes appear to question the justice of their being arrested. They accept as a fundamental fact that they must be arrested because they are prostitutes, yet they frequently formulate moral justification for their existence in society. … The sanctions do not worry them unduly, except when there is unfairness in their execution. Examples of unfairness in the execution of the law are instanced by every prostitute, and it seemed to me that there were so many stories

 Rolph, Living Twice, as cited by Self, page 191.  Notes from Meeting with Mr C Hill of the HO on June 22, 1954, London, The National Archives, MEPO 3/2967. 16  This line was inserted upon the insistence of the police, who were very unhappy about the sections about the police and prostitution, particularly references to rota arrests and police corruption. The police heavily edited the manuscript and there is no surviving record of the parts that were cut out. From Assistant Commissioner A to Commissioner, 4/8/54, London, The National Archives, MEPO 3/2967. 14 15

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

215

about being arrested when not annoying anyone, that it was difficult to regard them all as fabrications. Jean, who worked in Mayfair: ‘they are supposed to see you annoy three men … they can’t possibly see you do that, because if you had spoken to three men you would have been sure to go with one of them.’ Dollie, from Victoria, said she expected to be picked up every month. ‘The men are told to go out and pick up so many girls. There aren’t nearly so many girls near Victoria in the West End, consequently there aren’t so many to choose from. I was in last week and the week before that.’ Janet, another Victoria girl, said she was taken in ‘every week’. This was an exaggeration, but she did have seventeen arrests in ten months. May said she expected to be picked up every fortnight in Soho and she did indeed make twenty court appearances in fourteen months. Kathleen also said that in Soho she was arrested every fortnight or so and had a record of thirty convictions in fifteen months. A Hyde Park girl who took her customers to her own flat said: ‘I don’t see why some people get away with it—I go into the Park and see boys and these straight girls kissing and cuddling, and they look awful. But me— I’m just walking along the road and a copper comes up and says “It’s your turn tonight”.’ Winnifred suggested that police in the Park regularly arrested a group of three girls in Rotten Row while ignoring others who had been working there for year; certainly it does appear that a known regular prostitute is safer to arrest than a girl who has never been in. Doris, who worked near Euston Station, described the first time she was arrested, which had been on the night before I saw her. ‘After a bit I went to May and said “How’s things?” and she said “Not too bad” and I said “Coming to the Cafe for a cup of tea?” and she said “All right.” So we went to a cafe where we always go, and after we came out we was walking down Euston Road when a fellow across the road called “Hey are you two business girls?” I told him to mind his own business, when two cops came out of a doorway and said “Come on, Doris, it’s your turn.” I said, “But I wasn’t doing nothing”, so they said “You was cautioned in June and in August, wasn’t you? Well you’re coming in now, and we’re taking Anna tomorrow and Betty on Sunday and Jane on Monday.” And a police car drew up and they put me in the back, a saloon car, and drove me to the station.’ Doreen: ‘I met a man in Piccadilly and he had to go to his hotel to get his bag as he wanted an all-night. I was waiting outside when a car drew

216 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

up and the driver asked me to go with him. I just said I was waiting for someone, when two policemen, walking across from Green Park, arrested me. They said in court they saw me approach and annoy seven men.’ Eileen from Soho: ‘They take you in about once a fortnight. It’s not really a matter of when you’re annoying someone because, even if you’re only standing there, that’s what you’re there for.’ Priscilla from Mayfair: ‘Last night I was just slipping out for a paper when the bobby came along and said “It’s your turn”. I couldn’t protest because, of course, he was right. It was my turn.’ … Priscilla said she did not feel she annoyed many people, ‘only the women going to the theatre, and they’re luckier than I, so I don’t care.’ Joyce: ‘Once a lot of us were on board ship … me and about a dozen other tarts, when the police came on board, and for some reason took me as the ring-leader, and I was the youngest there. Marched us off to a little boat—we had to go down a gang-way—one copper, he went in front and I had to go next. As soon as i got there I pushed him, and he went right over, into the drink. Oh, the fuss they made! Said he might have drowned, starting saying in court how much his uniform weighted and all the oil on the water. Got three years in Borstal for that, I did.’ Doreen, a Mayfair girl: court appearances are ‘about the worst part of it [i.e. prostitution]. You go in through that door and everyone’s waiting for you and looking at you. I keep my head down and never look on either side. Then they say those awful words: “Being a common prostitute …” and you feel awful, all the time not knowing who’s watching you at the back of the court. You say “guilty” and get out as soon as you can.’ Lily: When in court, she was scared of the public behind her, giggling and whispering. ‘The policeman promised he would say it quietly and said half of them at the back of the court would not know what it was, anyway. I think a lot just go for a good laugh; they are really low and much worse than those who actually do it.’ Margaret: ‘Nowadays none of the police try to reform me. But they did the first time—lady with a bun [i.e. the probation officer] said: “Would you like me to get you a job” I said: “What, get me job at three pounds a week” and she said: “Well, you can’t expect to earn more”, and I said “And I can’t expect to live on it.” She said, “you know you’ll end up like all these girls do, old, worn and penniless if you carry on.” So I mentioned two who haven’t ended up like that, so I’m not going to. She said “I do wish you’d let me find you a job.” She was nice, but she can’t do anything when she knows a girl’s determined to carry on.’

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

217

Anonymous, Hyde Park: ‘We won’t stand with the man for more than three minutes because of the police.’ Priscilla: ‘No one can possibly grumble about the women police, they do a fine service in assisting the young girl who has had a row with the family and may easily get led astray. But the men police don’t make any difference to the real prostitutes. … What a waste of everyone’s time it is bringing us up here each morning like this—wasting the p.c.’s time, ours and the magistrate’s. It must be particularly annoying for him when he’s terribly busy to have to wade through all the girls like this.’ Anonymous: ‘The Government will always have to collect its licensing money or income tax; they’ll never abolish fines, they’ve got to have their rake-off out of us. How else are they to get our money?’ May, on the proposal to raise fines: ‘It’s difficult to save, with all our expense—the girls won’t be able to pay fifty pound fines. I wouldn’t go to prison neither would the others, it’s not worth it, but what do you think would happen on the streets if they cleared us away like that? It’d not be safe for respectable women to go about. The men demand it. They speak to us first’. Solicitation It is the aim of many streets prostitutes to have sufficient private custom not to need to solicit; a clientele can be built up through contacts made originally in the streets but has continually to be reinforced by periods of soliciting. … Both Doreen (Mayfair) and Eileen (Soho) said they were being forced to out to solicit again having lost all their customers during periods of illness. In the streets the prostitute does not solicit every passer-by, but only those who she may have reason to believe are in no hurry; she recognizes the men who are themselves in search of prostitutes; and these are the men who eventually become customers, as a result of a prostitute’s suggestions. The solicitation of ‘Hello, dear’, or ‘would you like to come home with me?’ may never be spoken in the cases where there is trade; the tacit recognition suffices, terms may be discussed, but sometimes not. … the demand for prostitutes who would go in cars far exceeded the supply. Edith said she would never go again in cars after a man who had taken her to Notting Hill, wanted to do ‘something funny’ and then made her walk back to the Park. Sally had never been and would never go in cars after hearing about the girl who was dumped at Cricklewood and left to find her own way back—‘It was supposed to be only a short-time round

218 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

the bend’. The loss of working time is a major consideration, as is the lack of protection from difficult customers, against whom prostitutes are always on guard. Sadie and a friend were picked up by two men in a car on Bayswater Road, taken out to beyond Elstree and abandoned—but not before the men had had intercourse and then demanded their money back. The girls, being scared on a lonely road fairly late at night, gave it to them.’  rothels and Off-Street Premises B Almost always perversions are only performed indoors; this explains to some extent the popularity of having a room, for the girls is thereby able to satisfy a greater variety of clients. It also explains why some girls prefer to remain outside: ‘You pay perhaps seven guineas a week for a flat, then you have to undress and do all kinds of things’ (Sally, Hyde Park). Much of the property in the West End is now in the hands of flat farmers who demand key money of £25 to £30 from the girl, with rents of up to £20 a week, in advance. There is no security, and a girl may lose her flat a few weeks later with no hope of redress. If she protests the landlord explains that he is only turning her out because she is a prostitute, and action that the county court would uphold. The girls are well aware that they are pawns in a game played by landlords and agents. Jenny said that the most sensible thing would be to legalize prostitution, ‘run proper brothels like they do in Paris, so a girl needn’t go out on the streets. That’s the only way to stop disease.’ … After discussing the effect of prison sentences Marie, a Soho girl, said, ‘The best thing to do would be to open licensed houses, but I wouldn’t go in one myself’. Eileen asked that I do nothing to legalize prostitution in brothels: ‘I’ll not work in a brothel—taking every Tom, Dick and Harry. I won’t ever go with colour—not that anyone can help their colour, but it’s not right somehow. … Edna said anything like nationalization would force the prices down and confine the girls within special houses.’ Attitudes to Clients One Bond street woman said: ‘you become something of a diplomat and something of a psychologist.’ Margaret describes her customers as ‘silly old fools’ for giving her large sums of money, and her aim is ‘to go on exploiting them, taking their money and getting them out again as quickly as possible.’

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

219

Bessie expressed herself freely: ‘You don’t know the things they do and the things they want. Be all right walking down the street, talk to you ever so nice, but when they get alone with us women, well, some of them are like rats in holes. A woman doesn’t know a man; if a wife knew what her husband was really like she’d never live with them no more. We have to chain them up and beat them and jump on them. … Of course I had to learn it all. Didn’t know what the men mean sometimes. Sometimes a man sits beside me and I shudder away from him, if only people knew what you were like, you awful slimy toad, I think.’ Edna, Hyde Park: ‘Some of the men even want to kiss you! Why, they’d mess all your lipstick up. … I get so mad when a man says to me, “But you must get some pleasure out of it, else you wouldn’t do it” … you know, it’s funny, but once I get the money I change. Maybe going to my place in the car we have to talk, and i try to make myself nice and ask what they do. … But the moment we get in and I get the money I feel fed up with them and keep on saying to myself “Hurry up, hurry up and get out.” … I lose all interest, and don’t even notice what is going on, and may suddenly notice he’s been there a long time and say “Come on, put a spurt on.” Gwyneth, always prepared for troublesome customers, clasps a small knife open inside her first during intercourse; she keeps her silver money inside her glove and her notes inside her shoe. The last is a regular practice. Earnings and Work The only commodity she sells is her body, but she does this with the same respect for business as any shopkeeper; her attitude is matter-of-fact and the relationship with clients is always on a commercial basis. …‘It’s a business contract. I’m not just out for any man and all the money I can get. When I go off business I won’t take anyone else. It’s the same as if you opened a shop, if someone came in half an hour after you had closed you wouldn’t serve him.’ The prostitute often assumes not only a uniform but also a mask, the over-emphasized lips, etc., being familiar to everyone, though they are not often apparent in the day-time on the same women. Often it was difficult to recognize the quite ordinary-looking women I met in the mornings as the brightly women on the streets at night. It seems to me to be far from the ‘easy life’ it is reputed to be. Many park and Victoria women report that they stand for hours at a time without customers, some Park girls for half an hour or more without a man passing them. Ena, in Hyde Park, said she hoped to make £4 an evening

220 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

(£1 in cars, £2 if she took the man home), but often did not as she became too tired. … She might solicit as many as twenty men before she obtained a customer. Sally, another Park girl, makes £4 or £5 at week-ends, but often only thirty shillings other evening; her friend Anne said she could make up to £15 a week, not going out each evening. … Eileen (Soho) said that on the whole of the previous night she had not made her fine, but at other times she could get as many as ten men at thirty shillings each. … Margaret stood from five until eight without a client then made £17 before midnight. … Gladys, who solicited in Victoria, suggested that a hard working girl could earn up to £70 a week; she herself solicited only during the afternoons while her husband was at work and made £25 a week. I doubt if Mayfair prostitutes earn more than £60–£100 a week, although I have heard suggestions in court cases that they make up to £200 a week. Outside the West End and Victoria I think few will make more than £20–£30 a week regularly, and many £10–£15. … Nevertheless, even if she makes only £10 a week the street prostitute is earning far more than she could in any job open to her. Pimps Dollie spoke feelingly about the loneliness of a prostitute’s life. Many of the ‘young women’ had boyfriends, and some even kept them. ‘They like to feel they have some hold over them. But it’s no use having to pay a man to stay with you. There’s no companionship.’ May thought it ‘soft’ for a girl to stand on the street, then give all her money to someone else, but suggested that it might be the loneliness of the life which forced girls to do it. Edith said that a girl had so many fellows who meant nothing to her that, when she met someone who did, she hung on to him. Bessie pointed out that ‘A man will never work any more if he knows you are on the game. But some girls feel they need a man of their own and that’s what does it. As soon as he knows you’re going out he won’t work, no matter how little you earn. I do see I get something for myself even though I am keeping my mother.’ Gladys: ‘One of the things I don’t like about prostitution is the way some girls keep men. I can understand it, but I would never do it. The girls are fools. It’s the girls who make ponces. They have so many men and won’t take all-nighters, but they must have someone they feel they belong to. So they have a man they live with. He may have a proper job, but the girls never work in the morning and they want the man with them then,

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

221

so if he has got to go out they tell him to give up his job and they’ll give him plenty of money. That’s how they start. Then they get lazy and go living off one girl after another.’ On Nancy, who had a Maltese ponce: ‘If ever she was a victim, it seems to be to the State, to the law, and not to the ponces. After she lost her boyfriend she drifted from one house to another in the neighbourhood until she was picked up by the police, but while she was with him she was settled and had a base. The provision of this is one of the chief functions performed by ponces.’ Social Support Many will assert that the prostitute remains in this state [of social disorganization and social conflict], and will find contentious my suggestion that she attains a degree of social adjustment through membership of a new social group and through her profession. … Together they form a small, loosely structured society in which the family forms the basic living unit. The family … consists of a prostitute, a man who is almost always technically a ponce, and her, his or their children. There are considerable feelings of community within all the different areas of prostitution and this may explain why, when she has joined on neighbourhood group, a prostitute rarely solicits elsewhere. While prostitutes speak about ‘us women’ or ‘us young ladies’ (a Bond Street term) as applying to the prostitute class as a whole, they also talk of their own locality as if it had features unknown elsewhere. Because these people have the personalities they have, and because they have attained some degree of security but are constantly at war with the larger body of society, one finds contrasts and conflicting tendencies in their treatment of one another. The first thing that struck me was their spontaneous kindness, generosity, and hospitality. ‘Best set of girls in the world, never see a girl without a bed’ (Jenny). They are always taking in people in need of help, their assistance to the new girl in starting up is an example: they will rescue her from drifting; give her food, clothes and money; and show her how to manage on her own; friends who are turned out from digs are given accommodation. … Co-existent with this kindness and cutting right across it one finds intolerance, lack of loyalty, even deliberate betrayal, personal unkindness which are sometimes malicious and sometimes only thoughtless. Amongst themselves prostitutes have formed something of a work organization, and some girls (e.g. Sally) admit that they go out as much

222 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

for the company of the girls and men as for the money. There is a feeling of belonging to a corps and, while there is some criticism of others and occasional scrapping, most of the regular, English prostitutes talk of their work colleagues with some feeling of sisterhood. … Their mutual support reaches almost trade union status, despising amateurs and threatening violence toward any woman who goes below the agreed minimum rate for their neighbourhood. They have a language of their own which is partly composed of criminal slang and partly of technical terms belonging to their trade. 4.  Memorandum of the British Vigilance Association on the Report of the Wolfenden Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution The British Vigilance Association, previously the National Vigilance Association, did not approve of the Wolfenden Committee’s recommendations on solicitation. During the interwar years, this organization had been one of the influences on Home Secretary William Joynson Hicks’ decision to appoint the Street Offences Committee in 1927. At that time, the National Vigilance Association had actually been opposed to a Public Places (Order) Bill drafted by the Association for Moral and Social Hygiene calling for a gender-neutral law against solicitation and requiring ‘complaint by or on behalf of the person aggrieved’ by the solicitation. By the 1950s, however, the newly titled British Vigilance Association had more in common with the Association for Moral and Social Hygiene. Though the Chair of the British Vigilance Association, Lady Nunburnholme, was a witness for the Wolfenden Committee (as part of a group representing the National Council of Women), this was another women’s organization with a long history of being involved in debates about prostitution that was effectively sidelined by Wolfenden. Moreover, as the evidence below suggests, the British Vigilance Association also felt that the three women members of the Wolfenden Committee had not been given enough influence over the final Report. The extracts below are from a British Vigilance Association memorandum outlining the organization’s response to the Wolfenden Report; it comes from 4BVA/E/5 BoxFL349 at the Women’s Library. The British Vigilance Association, while appreciating the very natural concern of the Wolfenden Committee to keep the streets of large cities free of offence, yet considers that much of the second part of their Report

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

223

concerning prostitution is ill advised and inequitable. New problems will be created by this driving underground of vice; and an even more commercialised type of prostitution may well follow. The Report, by recommending the imposition of stringent sentences on prostitutes, merely because of their profession and not because they have caused “annoyance”, discriminates most unfairly between prostitute and customer. The Report also proposes to penalise the prostitute more severely, while rejecting the demand of the three women members for heavier penalties for those who live on her earnings. […] Para. 249. The final sentence (“We feel that the right of the normal decent citizen to go about the streets without affront to his or her sense of decency should be the prime consideration and should take precedence over the interests of the prostitute and her customer”) is deplored as having coloured the whole Report. It is felt that merely driving Prostitution underground is only creating fresh problems. Paras. 251–256. The removal of the requirement to establish “annoyance” is regarded as being inequitable and contrary to the policy of the B.V.A. Paras. 258–262. The Association is in agreement in depreciating the use of the term “Common Prostitute” under the law. Though the argument has been raised in some quarters that “Common Prostitute”, being a professional description, should not be regarded as a term of contempt, the Association considers that the term is undoubtedly objectionable. Though the girls themselves might not necessarily resent the use of the term, the term itself is prejudicial with the General Public. […] Paras 285–286. It is considered that these paragraphs merely advise a “sweeping under the carpet”, and that the resultant extension of the “Call-­girl” system is only a modern version of the Maison de Rendezvous. This new problem would be even more difficult to tackle than that of the brothel. Para. 290. The Association unanimously deplores the words “prostitute’s wares” as being offensive and out of keeping with the tone of the Report. Para. 292. The Association expresses unanimous agreement with the Report in its recommendation against licensed brothels. […]

224 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Para. 303. The Association strongly supports the recommendation by the three women members of the Wolfenden Committee that the maximum penalty for living on the earnings of prostitution should be raised to five years’ imprisonment (Reservation V., p. 128). 5.  Report of the Working Party Set up by the Josephine Butler Society to Study the Effect of the Street Offences Act, 1959 The Association for Moral and Social Hygiene, which testified before the Wolfenden Committee under this name that they had had since 1915, changed their name to the Josephine Butler Society shortly after the Report was released. The previous name, it was felt, reflected the culture of an earlier, interwar period, and the new name capitalized on their founder Josephine Butler, who, as the leading light of the anti-Contagious Diseases Acts campaigns, was a well-known figure who was admired by both the political left and the political right, by the churches and by feminists. The JBS continued to campaign for the decriminalization of street solicitation and for the removal of the term ‘common prostitute’ for decades after the Street Offences Act was passed. This report, which they commissioned immediately after the Act came into effect, sought to examine the immediate impact of this new legislation that they had actively campaigned against. This report is taken from the file 3AMS B/04/16/04 at The Women’s Library, London. The report is referred to below as an ‘interim’ report; however, we have been unable to find any further report. The editors would like to thank the Josephine Butler Society, still active in the present day, for their kind permission to reproduce this report from their archives. The material is arranged under the following headings:



(1) Working Party. (2) Effect of the Act: (a) Clearing of the Streets. (b) Alternative methods of solicitation. (c) The cautioning system. (d) Other preventive measures. (e) Increased organisation of prostitution. (3) Effect of increased penalties. (a) fines; (b) imprisonment.

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

225

( 4) Solicitation by Men. (5) General Interim Conclusions. 1. The Working Party. This working party was set up in February, 1962. It consists of six members, which include a psychiatrist with special experience of problems connected with prostitution, a barrister, two social workers and two officers of the Society. Owing to the confidential nature of the work in which some members are engaged, it is necessary to preserve their anonymity, and consequently only the Chairman has signed the report. It is, nevertheless, a unanimous report. Our survey is as yet by no means complete, and this interim and confidential report is presented subject to further study and investigation. A questionnaire was prepared for the use of our witnesses. These included statutory and voluntary workers in close touch with various aspects of the problem. But it must be emphasised that because so much of the trade has gone underground, the working party has been frustrated in its attempts to obtain the full facts. 2. Effects of the Street Offences Act, 1959. It has been impossible to ascertain whether there is more or less prostitution than before the passing of the Act, nor whether more or fewer prostitutes are actively engaged in the trade. Two prostitutes, interviewed on television (I.T.V. “This Week”, 18.4.6) expressed the opinion that there were more of them than formerly, and as we shall show later, there is some reason to believe that more very young girls are being drawn into this way of life. 2(a) The Clearing of the Streets. However, it was never the intention of the Act to deal with prostitution itself, but with the acknowledged nuisance of soliciting in the streets, particularly in the West End of London. In this the Act has been largely, but not completely, successful. It is the price at which this success has been won which is our concern in this report. The following are some of the relevant figures17: Offences of Street Soliciting

 As published in the Annual Criminal Statistics for England and Wales.

17

226 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

1959 12,264

1960 2403

1961 2298

On April 4th, 1963, in reply to a Question in the House, it was stated that the number of women (in England and Wales) sentenced to imprisonment for offences under the Street Offences Act between 16th August, 1959 and September 30th, 1962 was 1185 and a further 1129 went to prison in default of payment of fines. As a woman may only be sentenced to prison for a third or subsequent offence, the figure (1185) indicates that there is still a substantial, though greatly reduced, number of women being brought before the courts charged with solicitation. A certain number of the older unsuccessful prostitutes are said to have returned to the streets, and there is possibly a cautious appearance there by girls who are experienced and intelligent enough to know the ropes and to be careful. It has been suggested that there may be some increase in outdoor solicitation in other areas than the West End, but the Working Party has not yet taken evidence on this. 2(b) Alternative Methods of Solicitation. We questioned our witnesses as to the alternative methods of securing customers adopted by prostitutes since the passing of the Act. The evidence indicated three main methods, namely: i. The prostitutes congregate in cafés, “near-beer” premises and clubs of various kinds. ii. Many more have adopted what is loosely termed the “call-girl” system and some new types of call-girl seem to have emerged. iii. Others have adopted name-cards over lighted bell-pushes, and the women or their silhouettes are displayed in lighted windows. iv. Use of cafés and clubs by prostitutes. i. Cafes and Clubs In general, the girl may just sit in the cafe or club to attract her own customer, or she may be employed as a “hostess” by the management not necessarily for actual prostitution, but as a means of enticing customers and selling high-priced drinks to them. The near-beer club, which is not licensed, sells lemonade, etc., at fantastic prices. Clubs selling alcoholic liquor must be registered or licensed. Some are respectable, others much

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

227

less so. Work in the more sordid clubs is demoralising and detrimental to a girl’s personality, so that she easily slips into prostitution. Outside the West End, one witness from Stepney reported that girls sleep in rooms over certain cafes where they ply their trade. One witness of experience expressed the opinion that street solicitation had been a greater temptation to the young, foolish and weak man than is solicitation in cafes and clubs, because such a man would probably not have the courage to go inside. On the other hand, in the sample of clients interviewed by Dr. TCN Gibbens of the Maudsley Hospital (see Alison Neilans Memorial Lecture 1962) it appeared that soliciting did not play any considerable part in tempting men to go with prostitutes. Nearly all these men said they first decided to go with one and then allowed themselves to be solicited to ensure they made no mistake. Dr. Gibbens added that a substantial number of men visit prostitutes with other men, for example, men in the forces, or travelling in groups or business contacts who enter clubs together, and where it may be suggested that a man is prudish if he does not conform. To such as these the club may serve as an additional and perhaps unforeseen temptation. From time to time some of the cafés and clubs have been raided and forcibly closed by the police; since the passing of the Licensing Act, 1961, it is less easy for them to re-open. It must be obvious that the atmosphere engendered by many clubs in Soho is suggestive and stimulating to sexual desire to a degree fully equal to that of outdoor solicitation in the streets or to the sight of an expectant row of young women lining the carriage-drive in Hyde Park. The man and youths whose curiosity emboldens them to penetrate behind the indecent pictures and posters outside the clubs to the haunts within in search of strip-tease or merely of “seeing life” are entertained and probably fleeced by “hostesses” in degenerate surroundings. On coming out they may be confronted by a line of lounging men in a side-street, awaiting their turn with a prostitute. ii. Call-Girls. This term originally referred to a centrally organised business know in the United States and run by an agent, who, on application from a potential customer, telephoned one of a number of prostitutes and arranged a meeting. The term is now loosely applied to a number of other types. Far more girls now advertise their “vital statistics” and telephone numbers on shop-boards. When telephoned, the girl gives the man directions how to find her flat. Some who have been in the business for years have an

228 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

established clientele with regular appointments made on the telephone. Opinions vary as to how many of such girls are in the hands of ponces, but it has been pointed out to us that the rent of any premises in Soho or the West End would be beyond the means of a beginner without assistance. Evidence of the operation of these methods was given during the trial of Dr. Stephen Ward, and the evidence also indicated that very young girls were being aided and initiated into the business. Another form of advertising occurred during the first year of operation of the Act, namely, the publication of a periodical known as The Ladies Directory. Each issue consisted mainly of prostitutes’ advertisements, giving names and telephone numbers, together with details which conveyed willingness to indulge in ordinary sexual intercourse, and in some cases, various perverse practices. Publication ceased when its perpetrator was found guilty on three counts in September, 1960. The case went to the Court of Criminal Appeal, which dismissed the appeal on all three counts. Leave was given to appeal to the House of Lords on two counts, and the appeal was again dismissed. We have a report from one provincial town that there is another type of call-girl; one who calls at the doors of her customers. This was noted by Dr. Mary Beveridge, of the Royal Hospital, Sheffield, in an article in the British Journal of Venereal Disease, September, 1962. She writes: One feature not noted previously in British literature is what we in Sheffield have termed the “Call-girl”. She does, in fact, call at the door. The fee mentioned by men has rarely exceeded 20/- One patient stated that the girl arrived to do “washing”. He did, in fact, pay her, but it could not be determined for which service. Call-girls frequently come from other towns, Hull and Nottingham being the ones most frequently named. One girl who admitted to this practice stated that she had escaped from Nottingham where she certainly she had been beaten-up following a Teddy-gang fight. She had multiple scars on her arms. On arrival in Sheffield she received addresses from a Pakistani. Her clientele, she claimed, consisted of eighteen Moslems whom she visited weekly. Many such girls appear to be on tour, commuting, it seems, between Hull and Liverpool and stations between. Many of them know each other and exchange addresses with clients. Their hasty departure from any locality often appears to coincide with accusations regarding infection. At one time we were so impressed by the regularity of these tours as to think them centrally controlled. There has been no proof of this. … Strict non-consumption of alcohol denies the Moslem access to

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

229

social life of the local community and this may well have prompted and accelerated the growth of this call-girl system.

iii. Girls with Lighted Bell-Pushes or Lighted Windows. These were few in number before the Street Offences Act and have greatly increased. Women had rooms in Soho before, but had no need to indicate where they lived because they took their customers home from the streets. In some instances the women live in these flats, with or without a ponce; others rent the use of a room for two or three days a week. Many of them have a maid who answers the door and organises the arrival and departure of the men. It is doubtful if the casual visitor would ring the bell not knowing what kind of a woman he would find, but the existence of the name above the lighted bell-push enables him to find a woman when provided with the address, for instance by a taxi-driver, hotel porter or other intermediary. Soliciting from a window or balcony, either by beckoning or calling to a man in the street has been declared by the Lord Chief Justice to be an offence within the meaning of the Act, (see Smith and others v. Hughes and others, 1960). Some women sit in a lighted window, with or without a net curtain through which their silhouette may be seen. A few still solicit from inside doorways, or sometimes a male tout will solicit in the doorway for a woman living upstairs. 2(c) The Cautioning System In introducing the Street Offences Bill in the House of Commons (29.1.59), the Home Secretary, Mr RA Butler, said: I want the cautioning to be a redemptive attempt to get the woman away from prostitution and not to be part of any charge preferred against her at a later date after two cautions have taken place. … In the case of giving these warnings it is the intention of the Commissioner of Police that the woman should be asked if she is willing to allow her name and address to be sent to a suitable voluntary society.

Before the Act, it had already been required of police officers that they should caution any woman or girl seen soliciting for the first time; and such cautions, particularly if given by women police, were normally preceded by friendly offers of help and advice. What was new in the proposal, therefore, was (a) the invariable requirement of a second caution, and (b)

230 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

that each caution should be accompanied by the suggestion that the woman should allow her name and address to be sent to a social worker. It was hoped by these means to prevent more of the young women from adopting a life of prostitution. The appropriate voluntary organisations were consulted by the Metropolitan Police as to the best means of putting this referral into operation, and agreed that, in the first instance, all cases in London should be referred to on central social worker. So far as we know, only four cases have agreed to be officially referred in this way and all had given false addresses. A few more women but still a very small percentage of those concerned have asked to be put in touch with a probation officer whom they already knew or have called at the police station to be interviewed by the women police. We were also told that some older women are now more ready to accept the help of a probation officer, especially after a third offence when they are liable to imprisonment, and a few are reported to have abandoned prostitution at that point. It is of interest to note that although the Home Secretary stated that he did not wish the cautioning to be part of any charge preferred against the women, yet in the event of the woman denying that she is a prostitute or that she has been cautioned, the police must then produce evidence that she has been cautioned twice and that this is her third attempt at street solicitation. … Moreover, the cautioning be charged under the Act as a common prostitute. System is futile as a “redemptive” measure, partly because the Act itself has driven the young women off the streets. 2(d) Other Preventive Measures. Granted that the cautioning system has failed in its purpose of preventing young women from entering upon a life of prostitution, the working party sought evidence from social workers as to the effect of the Act on other methods of preventive and rescue work. Most social workers are agreed that it is now more difficult to reach the homeless girl than before the passing of the Act. Formerly, vulnerable types of young girl, such as absconders and defectives quickly came under the notice of the police as destitute, found wandering or trying to solicit, e.g., in Hyde Park or a street in the West End. They could be questioned, advised and often helped by being taken to a girls’ shelter, while communication was made with their families. Or they might be charged with soliciting and come into the hands of the probation officer at an early stage. Now, the homeless girl may, for example, be waylaid at the railway station and quickly swept into club life or the call-girl system. It is known that ponces or their agents are on the look-out for the new arrival and after breaking the ice,

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

231

perhaps with a cup of coffee, take her straight to Soho. Soon she is employed as a hostess and in this atmosphere quickly becomes hardened. She is liable to be deliberately frightened by her employer and warned not to talk to the police or a social worker for fear of what may happen to her. She is told that if she should be brought before the court, not to allow herself to be placed under the care of the probation officer, and that someone from the club will befriend her and pay her fine. Thus, the probation officer has little chance of helping her, since it is unlikely that she will be persuaded into agreeing to be put on probation for one or two years. With these induced fears and tighter organisation, preventive work has become exceedingly difficult; and it is not surprising that after the initial excitement of being flattered and “picked up” by a man immediately on arrival in London, the young girl readily lends herself to this way of life. The widespread sale of the more easily obtainable drugs also tends to condition them to a prostitute’s life. These drugs include barbiturates, ‘pep’ pills and drugged cigarettes known as ‘reefers’; and with some persistence, cocaine and heroin may also be obtained. After beginning in this manner the girl has less freedom to choose her customers, to pursue her profession without: the aid of ponces, and to withdraw from a life of prostitution. The more the trade is organised, the more difficult it is for the woman to give it up, and the ponce may provide her with much-needed friendship and protection in an otherwise lonely city. 2(e) Closer Organisation of Prostitution. From what has been said, it is clear that one of the effects of the Street Offences Act is the closer organisation of the trade and the increasing difficulties which prostitutes must face if they wish to practise independently. Probably only the older ones, with a regular clientèle and well-established before the passing of the Act, can now do so. We have described the methods by which young girls are recruited and retained in the grip of the ponce. There is also evidence that girls living in Stepney are taken to the West End and another instance was given us by a friend living in the Knightsbridge Exchange area who was twice telephoned within a short time, first with a request to supply a fifteen-year-old girl for the price of £25, and the second time a man’s voice asked for a sixteen year old. Apparently the would-be procurer said “You know the usual price”. He had obtained a wrong number. One witness who formerly lived in Notting Hill described the deterioration of this district since the passing of the Street Offences Act. Before the Act, a girl used to rent a room in the basement of the house next door, solicit in the streets and bring a man to her

232 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

room, perhaps repeating this several times in one evening. Although such conduct was reprehensible, it was quiet and caused no nuisance to the neighbours. After the passing of the Act, two girls moved in with a male runner or protector who brought men to their room, often from 1 a.m. till 5 a.m. With the noise of the taxis and visiting men, sleep was impossible. She also said that tenants with controlled rents in neighbouring houses had been so maltreated that they were obliged to move away, and their vacant rooms were then re-let to prostitutes at exorbitant rents. 3. The Effects of Penalties. (a) Fines. The larger fines introduced by the Street Offences Act and the fear of imprisonment cause the younger woman to accept the help of third parties. This is another factor driving them into the power of the organisers, from which it is more difficult to escape. (b) Imprisonment. Although the fear of imprisonment has had a beneficial influence on some women, it is generally agreed that three months imprisonment itself does not often lead to reformation. For example, a girl was charged again with soliciting the day after she was released from Holloway. The Prison Commission reported in 1960 as follows: These women and girls (i.e. prostitutes) create a special problem. They do not settle well in prison and are reluctant to work; some of them are not prepared to co-operate in efforts towards their rehabilitation, since they intend to return to prostitution on discharge. At present only the ordinary prison discipline and industry is used in their training. They are not classified as a group, taking their place among women other than first offenders with sentences of a similar nature for other offences. There are obvious disadvantages in treating them as a special group and it would be a new departure for a woman to be classified according to her offence, although now prostitutes have always been excluded from the star class, whatever the nature of their offence.

The ex-prisoner, who is also a prostitute, is uncooperative and few accept accommodation offered by welfare workers, but some of the younger women after two or three terms of imprisonment decide that they have had enough and are more willing to be helped. It is often difficult for them to find and keep a suitable job, because routine and discipline are so unacceptable to them.

10  WOLFENDEN’S MISSING WOMEN 

233

4. Solicitation by Men. In the first few months after the passing of the Act there were frequent complaints from women and girls that they had been solicited by men. Women waiting at bus-stops were pestered and soliciting on railway platforms in the suburbs was also reported. The working party has no recent evidence of this. It is possible that since the trade has become more fully organised, men are now better informed as to where and how to seek a prostitute. At the time when the Street Offences Bill was before Parliament amendments to delete “common prostitute” and substitute “any person” in Section I(1) were met by the reply that men could be prosecuted under Section 32 of the Sexual Offences Act, 1956. (This was stated by the Home Secretary on 29.1.59 when introducing the Bill, repeated by various members in Committee, 18.2.59, 25.2.59 and 4.3,59, also in the debate on the Third Reading 22.4.59 and by the Lord Chancellor, Lord Kilmuir, in the House of Lords 9.6.59). Since the passing of the Act, only one case under this Section has come to our notice. Member of our working party was present in court for the hearing of the case of Charles Doherty, (18.8.59). Two policemen gave evidence that he had soli cited five women in succession, and in two instances was overheard to say, ‘What do you charge?’ and ‘Are you doing business?’. Legal representatives appeared for both sides. The magistrate said that he had no doubt that Doherty did solicit women, but he was not certain whether this, in fact, did constitute an offence under this Section, and he granted the accused an absolute discharge. So far as the working party are aware, no subsequent case has been brought in the Metropolitan Police District under this Section. In another instance, a woman reported that she had been solicited several times by a man in a car in Hampstead. She turned round to walk home, the car turned also and she was solicited again. She took the number of the car and reported immediately to the police. She was willing to lay a charge, but the police said they could do nothing because there was no second witness. In passing it should be noted that the evidence of one police officer is sufficient to convict a woman under the Street Offences Act. Despite the many statements in Parliament, that S.32 of the Sexual Offences Act could be used to prosecute men for soliciting women for prostitution, it has usually been assumed that this clause which deals with “persistently soliciting or importuning for immoral purposes” was originally intended to apply to the prostitute’s “bully” and later it was applied

234 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

to homosexual soliciting. It was invoked for men soliciting women in three cases in the provinces shortly before the passing of the Act. The working party is of the opinion that it would be unjust to apply S.32 to men soliciting women because of the higher maximum penalties, and that this strengthens the case for including solicitation by men for prostitution in the Street Offences Act in the same terms as solicitation by women. But it is of para mount importance that those terms, as at present contained in Section I. (1) of the Street Offences Act, be at the same time radically revised. Interim Conclusions Not only is the Street Offences Act unjust, but it propagates the false idea that the prostitute alone is responsible for the evil of prostitution, whereas the evidence we have collected and the disclosures in the trial of Dr. Stephen Ward alike indicate that it is the demand which stimulates the supply. Our investigations have served to strengthen our basic conviction that prostitution itself should not be made an offence. We welcome the higher maximum penalties for living on immoral earnings in Section 4 of the Act; nevertheless, by driving the trade underground, the Act has played into the hands of those who organise it and third parties appear to have increased in numbers and in the power they wield. We urge that the law against third parties be more rigorously applied. Above all, the law dealing with prostitution must be, and must be seen to be a just a one and must express the equal moral responsibility of both men and women for the offences arising from it. Finally, the working party would re-emphasise the incompleteness of its investigations. The factual evidence has been very difficult to establish but the working party was impressed by the unanimity of the opinions expressed by its witnesses.

CHAPTER 11

The Report of the Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution

This chapter reprints the sections of the Wolfenden Report relevant to prostitution in their entirety.1

Chapter II Our Approach to the Problem 12. It will be apparent from our terms of reference that we are concerned throughout with the law and offenses against it. We clearly recognize that the laws of any society must be acceptable to the general moral sense of the community if they are to be respected and enforced. But we are not charged to enter into matters of private moral conduct except in so far as they directly affect the public good; nor does our commission extend to assessing the teaching of theology, sociology or psychology on these matters, though on many points we have found their conclusions very relevant to our think. 13. Further, we do not consider it to be within our province or competence to make a full examination of the moral, social, psycho logical and biological causes of homosexuality or prostitution, or of the many theories advanced about these causes. Our primary duty has been to consider the extent to which homosexual behaviour and female prostitution should come under the condemnation of the criminal law, and this has presented 1

 Some footnotes in the original report have been removed for the sake of clarity.

© The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_11

235

236 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

us with the difficulty of deciding what are the essential elements of a criminal offense. There appears to be no unquestioned definition of what constitutes or ought to constitute a crime. To define it as “an act which is punished by the State” does not answer the question: What acts ought to be punished by the State? We have therefore worked with our own formulation of the function of the criminal law so far as it concerns the subjects of this inquiry. In this field, its function, as we see it, is to preserve public order and decency, to protect the citizen from what is offensive or injurious, and to provide sufficient safeguards against exploitation and corruption of others, particularly those who are specially vulnerable because they are young, weak in body or mind, experienced, or in a state of special physical, official or economic dependence. 14. It is not, in our view, the function of the law to intervene in the private lives of citizens, or to seek to enforce any particular pattern of behaviour, further than is necessary to carry out the purpose we have outlined. It follows that we do not believe it to be a function of the law to attempt to cover all the fields of sexual behaviour. Certain forms of sexual behaviour are regarded by many as sinful morally wrong, or objectionable for reasons of conscience, or of religious or cultural tradition; and such actions may be reprobated on these grounds. But the criminal law does not cover all such actions at the present time; for instance, adultery and fornication are not offenses for which a person can be punished by the criminal law, nor indeed is prostitution as such. 15. We appreciate that opinions will differ as to what is offensive, injurious or inimical to the common good, and also as to what constitutes exploitation or corruption; and that these opinions will be based on moral, social or cultural standards. We have been guided by our estimate of the standards of the community in general, recognizing that they will not be accepted by all citizens, and that our estimate of them may be mistaken. 16. We have had to consider the relationship between the law and public opinion. It seems to us that there are two over-definite views about this. On the one hand, it is held that the law ought to follow behind public opinion, so that the law can count on the support of the community as a whole. On the other hand, it is held that a necessary purpose of the law is to lead or fortify public opinion. Certainly it is clear that if any legal enactment is markedly out of tune with public opinion it will quickly fall into disrepute. Beyond this we should not wish to dogmatize, for on the matters with which we are called upon to deal we have not succeeded in

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

237

discovering an unequivocal “public opinion,” and we have felt bound to try to reach conclusions for ourselves rather than to base them on what is often transient and seldom precisely ascertainable. Part III Prostitution

Chapter VIII General Considerations 222. By our terms of reference we are required to consider— “the law and practice relating to offenses against the criminal law in connection with prostitution and solicitation for immoral purposes.” So far as our terms of reference relate to offenses in streets and public places, the problems were examined by an earlier Committee (the Street Offenses Committee) set up in 1927 under the chairmanship of the late Lord Macmillan (then Mr Hugh Macmillan, K.C.); and we have studied the report of that Committee in coming to our own conclusions. 223. It would have taken us beyond our terms of reference to investigate in detail the prevalence of prostitution or the reasons which lead women to adopt this manner of life. On the former point we have something to say below in connection with street offenses. On the latter point, we believe that whatever may have been the case in the past, in these days, in this country at any rate, economic factors cannot account for it to any large or decisive extent. Economic pressure is no doubt a factor in some individual cases. So, in others, is a bad upbringing, seduction at an early age, or a broken marriage. But many women surmount such disasters without turning to a life of prostitution. It seems to us more likely that these are precipitating factors rather than determining causes, and that there must be some additional psychological element in the personality of the individual woman who becomes a prostitute. Our impression is that the great majority of prostitutes are women whose psychological make-up is such that they choose this life because they find in it a style of living which is to them easier, freer and more profitable than would be provided by any other occupation. As one of our women witnesses put it: Prostitution is a way of life consciously chosen because it suits a woman’s personality in particular circumstances.

238 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

224. Prostitution in itself is not, in this country, an offense against the criminal law. Some of the activities of prostitutes are and so are the activities of some others who are concerned in the activities of prostitutes. But it is not illegal for a woman to “offer her body to indiscriminate lewdness for hire,” provided that she does not, in the course of doing so, commit any one of the specific acts which would bring her within the ambit of the law. Nor, it seems to us, can any case be sustained for attempting to make prostitution in itself illegal. We recognize that we are here, again, on the difficult borderland between law and morals, and that this is debatable ground. But, for the general reasons which we have outlined in Chapter II above, we are agreed that private immorality should not be the concern of the criminal law except in the special circumstances therein mentioned. 225. Prostitution is a social fact deplorable in the eyes of moralists, sociologists and, we believe, the great majority of ordinary people. But it has persisted in many civilizations throughout many centuries, and the failure of attempts to stamp it out by repressive legislation shows that it cannot be eradicated through the agency of the criminal law. It remains true that without a demand for her services the prostitute could not exist, and that there are enough men who avail themselves of prostitutes to keep the trade alive. It also remains true that there are women who, even when there is no economic need to do so, choose this form of livelihood. For so long as these propositions continue to be true there will be prostitution, and no amount of legislation directed towards its abolition will abolish it. 226. It follows that there are limits to the degree of discouragement which the criminal law can properly exercise towards a woman who has deliberately decided to live her life in this way, or a man who has deliberately chosen to use her services. The criminal law, as the Street Offenses Committee plainly pointed out, “is not concerned with private morals or with ethical sanctions.” This does not mean that society itself can be indifferent to these matters, for prostitution is an evil of which any society which claims to be civilized should seek to rid itself; but this end could be achieved only through measures directed to a better understanding of the nature in of sexual relationships and to a raising of the social and moral outlook of society as a whole. In these matters, the work of churches and of organizations concerned with mental health, moral welfare, family welfare, child and marriage guidance and similar matters should be given all possible encouragement. But until education and the moral sense of the community bring about a change of attitude towards the fact of prostitution, the law by itself cannot do so.

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

239

227. At the same time, the law has its place and function in this matter. We cannot do better than quote the words of the Street Offences Committee: As a general proposition it will be universally accepted that the law is not concerned with private morals or with ethical sanctions. On the other hand, the law is plainly concerned with the outward conduct of citizens in so far as that conduct injuriously affects the rights of other citizens. Certain forms of conduct it has always been thought right to bring within the scope of the criminal law on account of the injury which they occasion to the public in general. It is within this category of offenses, if anywhere, that public solicitation for immoral purposes finds an appropriate place. The statement very clearly represents our own approach and attitude to this part of our inquiry. We are concerned not with prostitution itself but with the manner in which the activities of prostitutes and those associated with them offend against public order and decency, expose the ordinary citizen to what is offensive or injurious, or involve the exploitation of others.

228. We have found it convenient to deal with this part of our inquiry under five broad headings, namely: (a) Street offenses; (b) Living on the earnings of prostitution; (c) Premises used for the purposes of prostitution; (d) Procuration; (e) Miscellaneous.

Chapter IX Street Offenses  he Extent of the Problem T 229. From the evidence we have received there is no doubt that the aspect of prostitution which causes the greatest public concern at the present time is the presence, and the visible and obvious presence, of prostitutes in considerable numbers in the public streets of some parts of London and of a few provincial towns. It has indeed been suggested to us that in this respect some of the streets of London are without parallel in the capital cities of other civilized countries.

240 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

230. Whether or not this particular problem is more serious at the present time than it has been in the past, and if so how much more serious it is, we have no exact means of knowing. The first and obvious place to look for evidence on this point is in the statistics of prosecutions of prostitutes for street offenses; and Tables XII and XVI in Appendix II show the number of prosecutions over the past fifty years. But if the figures of prosecutions are read without regard to their background they may easily produce an erroneous impression. In the first place, the figures relate to the number of prosecutions, and not to the number of individual prostitutes dealt with during the course of a particular year. For instance, while the number of prosecutions in the West End Central Division of the Metropolitan Police District in 1953 was 6829, the number of prostitutes involved was 808. Secondly, the number of prosecutions must depend to some degree on the number of police available for work of this kind and on the vigour of their activity; and this in turn may well depend on public opinion. At any given moment there may be a state of affairs in the streets which arouses public resentment; this may result in increased police activity and in all increased number of prosecutions. But this increased number of prosecutions does not necessarily represent an increase in the number offenses committed; it may be no more than an increase in the p portion brought to court of the existing number of offenders. Further it may then happen that, for one reason or another, police activity dies down, with the consequence that the number of prosecutions decrease in the number of offenses actually committed. 231. A striking example of this last possibility will be found in a comparison of the English figures for the years 1922 and 1923. In 1922, the number of prosecutions in the Metropolitan Police District for street offenses by prostitutes was 2231. In 1923, it fell to 595, the lowest figure ever recorded, and an equally significant drop was discernible in the figures for the rest of the country. The drop in the Metropolis was directly attributed by the then Commissioner of Police to the severe criticism passed on the police, in the Press and elsewhere, as the result of a case in which the London Quarter Sessions found, on appeal, insufficient evidence to show that a person alleged to have been accosted had been “annoyed.” The effect of this criticism, according to the Commissioner was to reduce police action to a minimum, and a year later he reported that the conditions existing in the parks and in some of the West End and other thoroughfares were much less satisfactory than they had been a year or two earlier. A similar drop for a similar reason took place in 1929. These

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

241

examples show that it is dangerous to assume a direct correlation between the number of prosecutions and the number of offenses actually being committed. Equally, it is possible that the substantial increase in the number of prosecutions in England and Wales over the past ten years reflects a conscientious attempt on the part of the police to answer the demand of public opinion that “the streets must be cleaned up.” 232. However this may be, it is evident that the problem is no new one. A senior officer of the Metropolitan Police in his evidence to the Select Committee of the House of Lords on the law relating to the Protection of Young Girls said in 1881: … the state of affairs which exists in this capital is such that from four o’clock, or one may say from three o’clock in the afternoon, it is impossible for any respectable woman to walk from the top of the Haymarket to Wellington Street, Strand. From three or four o’clock in the afternoon Villiers Street and Charing Cross Station and the Strand are crowded with prostitutes, who are there openly soliciting prostitution in broad daylight. At half-past twelve at night a calculation was made a short time ago that there were 500 prostitutes between Piccadilly Circus and the bottom of Waterloo Place ….

And from representations made to the Home Office by voluntary organizations concerned with public morality some forty years later it appeared that prostitutes then solicited in substantial numbers in the areas of Tottenham Court Road, King’s Cross and Charing Cross. We have, in short, no reliable evidence whether the number of prostitutes plying their trade in the streets of London has changed significantly in recent years. What has probably happened is that they have shifted the scene of their activities to other and more residential areas and thereby have given ground for complaints from those ordinary citizens who live in these areas and from those who cannot, in going about their daily business, avoid the sight of a state of affairs which seems to them to be an affront to public order and decency.  he Present Law T 233. Since the report of the Street Offenses Committee deals with the history of the present laws and of the attempts that have been made from time to time to amend them, we do not consider it necessary to go over this ground again ourselves. It will, however, be convenient that we should set out briefly the present law as we find it.

242 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

(a) England and Wales 234. In the Metropolitan Police District and the City of London, every common prostitute or nightwalker loitering or being in any thoroughfare or public place for the purpose of prostitution or solicitation to the annoyance of the inhabitants or passengers is liable to a fine of forty shillings.2 There is no statutory definition of the term “common prostitute,” but the courts have held that the term includes a woman who offers her body commonly for acts of lewdness for payment. (It is not necessary that there should be an act, or offer of an act, of ordinary sexual connection.) 235. In urban areas outside the Metropolitan Police District, every common prostitute who in any street (which includes, for this purpose, any road, square, court, alley and thoroughfare or public passage) to the obstruction, annoyance or danger of the residents or passengers, loiters or prostitution, is liable to a fine of forty shillings or to imprisonment for not more than fourteen days.3 236. A police constable may arrest, without warrant, any person committing within his view the offenses mentioned in the two foregoing paragraphs 237. A common prostitute wandering in the public streets or public highways or in any place of public resort in any part of England and Wales, and behaving in a riotous or indecent manner may be deemed an “idle and disorderly person,” and as such becomes liable to a fine not exceeding five pounds or imprisonment for not more than one month. A prostitute committing the offense after having been convicted as an “idle and disorderly person,” whether in respect of a similar offense or of some other offense qualifying for this designation, may be deemed a “rogue and vagabond,” and as such becomes liable to a fine not exceeding twenty-five pounds or to imprisonment for not more than three months. A person convicted as a “rogue and vagabond” having previously been so convicted may be deemed to be an “incorrigible rogue” and as such may be committed to quarter sessions for sentence. Quarter sessions may impose imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year.4 238. It is an offense for a male person persistently to solicit or importune in a public place for immoral purposes. The maximum penalty is six  1839 Metropolitan Police Act.  1847 Towns and Police Clauses Act. 4  1824 Vagrancy Act. 2 3

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

243

months’ imprisonment on conviction by a magistrates’ court, and two years’ imprisonment on conviction on indictment. The statute does not specify the sex of the persons solicited, and in addition to its application to the solicitation of males by males for the purposes of homosexual acts (as to which see paragraph 116 above) it would seem to apply also to (a) the solicitation of males by males for the purpose of immoral relations with females (for example “touting” on behalf of prostitutes) and (b) the solicitation of females by males for immoral purposes. 239. In some of the larger provincial cities there are in force local Acts containing provisions corresponding broadly with those of the Metropolitan Police Act, 1839. These acts operate concurrently with the Town Police Clauses Act or the Vagrancy Act. 240. There are other enactments which, while not specifically directed to offenses by prostitutes, afford means by which prostitutes soliciting in such a manner as to cause a nuisance sometimes are dealt with by the courts. The following are two examples: (a) Even when no offense has actually been committed, Justices of the Peace have power “to take of all them not of good fame, where they shall be found, sufficient surety and mainprise of their good behaviour towards King and his People”—that is, to order a person to enter into recognizance and find sureties to keep the peace to be of good behaviour, if there are reasonable grounds to fear that he may commit some offense. Failure to comply with the order may be punished by imprisonment for not more than six months. (b) Under Section 54 (13) of the Metropolitan Police Act 1839 (and Section 35 (13) of the City of London Police Act, 1839), any person who, in any thoroughfare or public place, uses any threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with intent to provoke a breach of the peace, or whereby a breach of the peace may be occasioned, is liable to a fine of forty shillings, and may be arrested without warrant by a police constable within whose view the offense is committed.5 241. There are also in force numerous bylaws for the prevention and suppression of nuisances not otherwise punishable in a summary manner. These bylaws frequently contain provisions directed against offensive behaviour in streets and other places of public resort and are occasionally 5  This clause was used frequently against women for the first solicitation arrest, which thereafter established their identity as ‘common prostitutes’ who could be prosecuted under the other section.

244 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

used to deal with offensive behaviour by prostitutes. The maximum penalty for a bylaw offense is a fine of five pounds. (b) Scotland 242. In all burghs other than Edinburgh and Aberdeen, every common prostitute or streetwalker who in any street (which includes for this purpose any harbor, railway station, canal, depot, wharf, towing path, public park, links, common or open and area or space, the strand or sea beach down to low water mark and all public places within the burgh) loiters about or importunes passengers for the purpose of prostitution commits an offense and 10 to a fine of forty shillings. 243. In Edinburgh, every prostitute or streetwalkers who loiters it or importunes passengers for the purpose of prostitution is penalty of ten pounds or alternatively to imprisonment for sixty days; and Aberdeen has a similar provision. 244. In all burghs other than Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Greenock any person who in any street (defined as in paragraph 242 above) habitually or persistently importunes or solicits, or loiters about for the purpose of importuning or soliciting women or children for immoral purposes, commits an offense and is liable to a fine of forty shillings. There are no corresponding provisions in Edinburgh, Aberdeen or Greenock. 245. A person found committing any of the offenses mentioned without a warrant in paragraphs 242 and 244 may be arrested by a police constable. 246. The prosecutor may include in the complaint charging either of the offenses mentioned in paragraphs 242 and 244 a further charge that the contravention has been aggravated by a previous conviction within seven years of a like offense; and in the event of the charge and aggravation being proved a penalty not exceeding forty shillings, or thirty days’ imprisonment without the option of a fine, may be imposed in respect of the aggravation in addition to the penalty imposed in respect of the offense itself. 247. It is an offense for a male person persistently to solicit or importune in a public place for immoral purposes (“) (see paragraphs 116 and 238 above). This provision is of general application throughout Scotland; as in England and Wales, the maximum punishment is six months’ imprisonment on conviction by a court of summary jurisdiction, and two years’ imprisonment on conviction on indictment.

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

245

248. As in England and Wales, there are in force in some areas bylaws directed against offensive behavior in places of public resort. While these are usually concerned with offensive behaviour in general, there are occasionally bylaws related directly to solicitation, of which the following are examples: No person shall loiter for the purpose of prostitution, nor conduct himself or herself in an indecent manner there in (i.e., in the park). No male person shall molest or importune any female, and no prostitute or streetwalker shall loiter or importune any person in the park or islands.  efects of the Existing Law D 249. There was a wide measure of agreement among witnesses that the present law is defective. But there was less agreement between their proposals for its amendment. Some thought that the requirement in England and Wales, to prove “annoyance” should be dropped and the English law brought more into line will that which prevails in the Scottish towns; others felt that there should be no prosecution unless actual annoyance had been caused by words or behaviour offensive to public order and decency and even then only on the evidence of the person alleged to have been annoyed. Some thought that the police should be given more adequate powers to keep the streets free from the more general annoyance caused by the mere visible and obvious presence of prostitutes; others that the mere presence of prostitutes carrying on their trade was no more, and no less, a matter for police intervention than the presence of street photographers or toy-sellers. Many thought that the present law applies unequally as between men and women (to the detriment of the latter), while others urged that the only way to clear the streets was a substantial increase in the present penalties for street offenses. Particularly, it was widely felt that the present system whereby a prostitute is repeatedly brought before the courts and automatically disposed of on pleading guilty and paying a fine of forty shillings, which she regards as an in direct and not very onerous form of taxation or license, is making a farce of the criminal law. It would obviously be impossible to devise any amendment of the law which would meet the several, and often conflicting, points of view which have been put to us. We have therefore asked ourselves two questions: first, whether the law should be amended at all; and secondly, if so, in which direction. So far as the first question is concerned, the general agreement that the law is unsatisfactory seems to us a clear indication that the law should be

246 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

amended, if by amending the law a more satisfactory situation can be brought about. As to the second, we feel that the right of the normal, decent citizen to go about the sun without affront to his or her sense of decency should be the consideration and should take precedence over the inter the prostitute and her customers. 250. The disagreement among our witnesses turns, in effect, on the two controversial questions which, as the Street Committee found, have always arisen when any attempt is made to redefine the law relating to street offences by prostitutes. The first of these is whether “annoyance” should (as in England and Wales) or should not (as in Scotland) be a specific ingredient of the offense. The second is whether the common prostitute should be the subject of express legislation, as at present she is.  he Requirement to Establish “Annoyance” T 251. In England and Wales it is necessary, for the purposes of a conviction for loitering or soliciting for the purposes of prostitution, to establish that the conduct of the prostitute caused “an annoyance” to the inhabitants (or residents) or passengers. The standard of proof of annoyance required by the courts seems to have varied from time to time and from place to place, but at the present time it would appear that the courts are, generally speaking, content to infer from the circumstances of the case that annoyance has been caused. Experience has shown that men solicited by prostitutes almost invariably decline to give evidence. Usually the prostitute pleads guilty, but if she does not the courts are usually prepared to accept the evidence of a police officer who witnessed the offense, to the effect that a person or persons accosted appeared to be annoyed. 252. Many of our witnesses considered it unsatisfactory that a police officer’s attribution of a state of mind to a person accosted should decide the question whether an offense has been committed. We agree that it is unsatisfactory; so did the Street Offenses Committee. At the same time, like the Street Offenses Committee, we recognize it as an irrefutable fact that in general persons accosted will not attend the courts to give evidence. Consequently, to enact that there should be no conviction unless the person alleged to have been annoyed gave evidence and proved personal annoyance would be to enact a dead letter. If only for this reason, we feel able to recommend legislation along the lines of the Public Place order) Bill put forward by some of our witnesses as a basis for legislation. This Bill is designed to repeal all provisions in the existing law referring to solicitation by common prostitutes, and also certain other provisions not

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

247

explicitly referring to solicitation but sometimes used for dealing with cognate offenses, and to replace them with a single enactment directed against any person wilfully causing annoyance to any person in any public place by words or behaviour offensive to public order or decency. There is a proviso that no person shall be convicted of such offense, except upon the evidence of the person aggrieved. … Our witnesses suggested to us that if the offense became one of simple annoyance or obstruction with no reference of any kind to “prostitute,” “prostitution” or “immoral purposes” some, at least, of the present reluctance appear as a witness in these cases would be overcome. We do not think this at all likely. 253. There is the further serious difficulty that in reality it is not so much the conduct of any particular prostitute that causes the annoyance as the presence of numbers of prostitutes in the same place; and this annoyance is to the inhabitants or passengers at large rather than to any individual. That this more general form of annoyance exists, and that it causes no less offense (and may well cause more offense) than individual acts of soliciting is very clear from the evidence we have received. Nevertheless the law must deal with the offenders individually, though the annoyance caused to the inhabitants or passengers in general might be unrelated to and, indeed, unrelatable to, any individual prostitute. 254. The Street Offenses Committee distinguished between overt acts of importuning (by which they meant acts of molestation by offensive words or behaviour) and the frequenting of streets or public places for the purposes of prostitution. In the case of the former, they recommended that the requirement of proving annoyance should be eliminated, largely on the ground mentioned above, namely, that to require the person alleged to have been annoyed to give evidence would be to enact a dead letter. But in recommending that it should be an offense for any person “to frequent any street or public place for the purpose of prostitution or solicitation so as to constitute a public nuisance” they recommended— somewhat inconsistently it seems to us—that the evidence of one or more of the persons aggrieved should be essential to conviction. 255. The proposition that to require the person alleged to have been annoyed to give evidence would be to enact a dead letter applies to the person annoyed by the loitering of prostitutes no less than to the person annoyed by an act of importuning. It probably applies even more, since it is unlikely that a resident in a neighborhood where annoyance is caused by the loitering of prostitutes would be prepared to go to the courts day after day to establish the fact that he was annoyed. Indeed, it seems to us

248 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

unreasonable that he should be required to do so. In our view both importuning for the purpose of prostitution are so self-evidently public nuisances that the law ought to deal with them, as it deals with other self-evident public nuisances, without calling on individual citizens to establish the fact that they were annoyed. 256. We accordingly recommend that the law at present in come in England and Wales be reformulated so as to eliminate the need to establish annoyance from the offenses set out in paragraphs 234 and 235 above.  he Prostitute as the Subject of Express Legislation T 257. The second of the two controversial topics which we mentioned above is the question whether the prostitute should be the subject of express legislation. It has been put to us with some force that the present law is unjust in that it selects a special class of women, designates them “common prostitutes” and provides penalties solely for them, leaving their customers unpunished. It is argued that if there were no customers there would be no prostitutes, and to seek to punish the prostitute while the man is uncondemned is the negation of justice. We should agree that from the moral point of view there may be little or nothing to choose between the prostitute and her customer. But, as we have explained above (and as most of our witnesses would agree), it is not the duty of the law to concern itself with immorality as such. If it were the law’s intention to punish prostitution per se, on the ground that is immoral conduct, then it would be right that it should provide for the punishment of the man as well as the woman. But that is not the function of the law. It should confine itself to those activities which offend against public order and decency or expose the ordinary citizen to what is offensive or injurious; and the simple is that prostitutes do parade themselves more habitually and openly than their prospective customers, and do by their continual presence affront the sense of decency of the of the ordinary citizen. In doing so they create a nuisance which, in our view, the law is entitled to recognize and deal with. 258. We encountered, however, other and more specific objections to the use, in the several statutes mentioned above expression “prostitute” or “common prostitute” in defining a particular offense. Especially, it has been represented to us that u denies to these particular women the degree of justice accord offenders generally. It has been argued (i) that the words “common prostitute” are nowhere defined by statute; (ii) that to define an offense by reference to the category of persons who commit it while the same act might be committed with impunity by others is a legal

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

249

impropriety; (iii) that the affixing of this designation to any person charged with an offense introduces her to the court from the start as a person of low moral character, with an antecedent presumption of guilt; and (iv) that the affixing of this designation tends to brand convicted women and to render their reformation more difficult. 259. On the first point, while it may be true that there is no statutory definition of the term “common prostitute,” the courts have evolved a working formula. On the second point, we would merely observe that in this context the words “common prostitute” are a description of a trade or calling that is not of itself unlawful, and that there are parallels for prohibiting to members of one trade or calling actions which for other persons are not offenses. As regards the third point, we feel, as did the Street Offenses Committee, that this is something which has been suggested rather than proved. It seems to us that the courts are well accustomed to this formula of description and we have no evidence that any injustice results from its use. It is indeed the first fact that has to be established if a charge is to be proved. It is worth recording that no evidence has been submitted to us either by prostitutes or on their behalf which suggests that they themselves feel grievance or fear injustice on this particular point. On the fourth point we should naturally be anxious to recommend any amendment of the law which might tend to assist in the reformation of a prostitute, provided that this could be done without impairing the laws effectiveness: but we have no evidence that this designation has e interfered with reformation and for reasons which we explain below we believe the retention of the words to be necessary for effective operation of the law. 260. Conscious of the strength of feelings which underlie the representations which have been made to us, and recognizing the sincerity (if not always the validity) of the arguments against this formula, we have tried to find some way of meeting them without sacrificing the safeguard from wrongful arrest which the formula seems to afford women who are not “common prostitutes”. For reasons which we have already explained, we find ourselves unable to recommend the formula put forward in the Public Places (Order) Bill as summarized in paragraph 252 above. We therefore explored the possibility of defining the offense by reference to a degree of habitualness or persistence rather than a category of persons. We gave consideration, for instance, to such wording as “Any person who in any public place habitually or persistently loiters or importunes passengers for

250 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

the purposes of prostitution.” Here, however, we found ourselves up against two difficulties. 261. The first is a practical one, and concerns the measures which would be necessary to establish that the loitering was habitual and persistent. Prolonged observation by a plain-clothes officer or officers would almost certainly be necessary to establish a degree of habitualness or persistence sufficient to justify an arrest and subsequent proceedings. In effect, the police would have to employ in relation to the prostitute measures similar to those now employed in relation to the male importuner. Even as the law stands at present, the detection and prosecution of offenses by prostitutes imposes a strain on the resources of police manpower, and if anything is to be done to clean up the streets we do not think that a formula of this sort would be workable. The problem of the prostitute is, in terms of numbers, far greater than that of the male importuner and, for that matter, far more of a public nuisance. In any event, we think it would be too easy to evade the formula by a game of “general post” in which an individual prostitute would not loiter in a particular place though the number of prostitutes in that place at a given time might be constant. 262. Our second difficulty related to the criteria which would enable the police to infer that a person was loitering “for the purposes of prostitution.” We have in mind the possibility that any man might, from ignorance or indiscretion, put herself in a position in which she might be said to be loitering, and by conduct which was quite innocent give rise to a suspicion in the mind of an observant policeman. She might, for example, be waiting for a friend who has been unexpectedly delayed, and from anxiety over the growing a lay inquire the time of a number of male passers-by. While it is most unlikely that a woman in such circumstances would ever find herself convicted of an offense, a policeman might quite legitimately reach the prima facie conclusion that she was loitering for the purposes of prostitution and arrest her accordingly. We cannot help feeling, therefore, that the alternative formula we have considered would give rise to the possibility of the arrest of innocent persons, and we think this is a risk that ought not to be taken. We have accordingly come to the conclusion, with regret, that no alternative formulation is preferable to that which is already familiar to those concerned, and that, on balance, it is better to retain the words “common prostitute” in the definition of the offense. 263. It has been represented to us, as we have noted in paragraph 258 above, that the fact that a woman is charged as a “common prostitute” means that she is thereafter permanently labelled as such, and that to the

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

251

police and for all record purposes she will always be a “common prostitute” even though she may have abandoned prostitution and lived respectably for many years. Consequently, it is urged, the prostitute feels that as long as she remains so labelled efforts at reform and rehabilitation are not worthwhile. It has accordingly been suggested that records of convictions as a common prostitute should be expunged after the lapse of a certain time from the date of the conviction. 264. We have been given no convincing reasons for believing that if a woman abandons the life of prostitution she has anything to fear from the fact that her earlier convictions are recorded, any more than has a person convicted of any other offense. The information recorded by the police has relevance only in the event of her being charged with further offenses at some future date. Unless she is charged again, it never again comes to light. If on the other hand, she resumes her activities, there is no obvious reason why it should not. If, as has been suggested, the label militates against reformation in some cases, its removal may, in others, encourage the prostitute to feel that she is free to recommence her activities with a clean sheet after the stipulated lapse of time. We accordingly recommend no change on this point, relying on the discretion 1 good sense of the courts in this as in other cases. 265. Some of our witnesses have objected to the inclusion in the present law of the grounds (a) that it is contrary to the principles of British law to make the “purpose” of an act an offence when the “purpose”, if achieved, is not an offence; and achieved, is not an offense; and (b) that “purpose” is something which cannot be substantiated by admissible corroborative evidence. If however, the law is to impose penalties in respect of a particular offense, it is necessary that the offense should be clearly defined, and while we recognize some force in the objection we are unable to suggest for this purpose any alternative to the present formulation. Further, this is not the only instance of the inclusion of a “purpose” in the statement of the law. Betting is not illegal: but loitering in the street for the purpose of betting is. Nonurban Areas 266. It will have been observed that the present laws relating to loitering for the purposes of prostitution apply only to urban areas. No doubt at the time these were formulated the problem was peculiar to towns, as, indeed, it largely is today. But we have evidence that public nuisance is caused by women who loiter in certain places situated outside urban areas—notably

252 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

in some places where there are service camps. If the conduct of such women is such as would constitute an offense if committed in a town, it is clearly right that the law should deal with it. We accordingly recommend that the laws relating to the offenses dealt with in this chapter be made of general application. “Curb Crawling” 267. Our attention has been drawn to what we are informed is an increasingly prevalent form of solicitation by men of women, commonly described as “curb crawling.” The form this takes is that a motorist, driving slowly, and overtaking women pedestrians, halts by them with the intention of inviting them into his car. This is undoubtedly a serious nuisance to many well-behaved women, and it does not appear that, from the point of view of prosecuting who are responsible for it, it fits conveniently into any exist offense except at the point where a specific invitation is addressed to an individual. To meet the problem it would be necessary to frame an offense the essential ingredient of which would be driving a motor car for the purposes of immoral solicitation. Whilst we appreciate the reality of the problem, and we consider that it should be kept under review, the difficulties of proof would be considerable, and the possibility of a very damaging charge being levelled at an innocent motorist must also be borne in mind. We do not feel able to make any positive recommendation. Police Procedures 268. Apart altogether from the actual formulation of the law, there are matters of police practice which are relevant to our inquiry. For instance, the methods employed to establish woman charged is a common prostitute vary. In London, the instructions issued to police officers provide that the first time an is seen committing either of the offenses mentioned in graphs 234 and 237 above, she should be cautioned, particulars being recorded in the official pocket book; and that if she repeats the offense she should be arrested and charged. The caution need not have been given on the date of the arrest or by the arresting officer. If it can be proved that the woman has been recently and justifiably cautioned, that is generally regarded as presumptive evidence that she is a common prostitute. Sometimes the provision mentioned in paragraph 240 (b) above is invoked where the police are not able to establish with certainty that the woman is a common prostitute, provided that the woman has, in fact, used “threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour … whereby a breach of the peace

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

253

may be occasioned”; but officers are instructed that whenever practicable a caution should be given for a first offense. 269. In Glasgow, if a woman suspected of being a prostitute is observed in any street, she is watched by the police and if she is seen to importune or accost men the police officer warns her that if she persists in her conduct she may be apprehended. Particulars of this caution are recorded by the officer in his official notebook. These particulars are also reported to a moral welfare worker, who then endeavours to get into touch with the prostitute. If, after being cautioned, the woman repeats the offense she is apprehended and taken to the police station where she is formally cautioned, particulars of the caution being recorded at the station for future reference. If, after these cautions, she repeats the offense, she is brought before the court, where evidence as to the conduct which has led to the cautions serves as presumptive evidence that she is a common prostitute. A similar system operates in Edinburgh, but here the woman is given two cautions on the street before being taken to the police station for the formal caution. 270. Street offenses by prostitutes do not present, in the scottish towns, a problem of the same magnitude as in London, so that the more elaborate machinery which operates there is not necessarily appropriate to London or other towns where a greater problem exists. It seems to us, however, that the system of formal caution at the police station has much to commend it as also has the system of reference to a moral welfare worker. It is possible that if some girls just starting on a life of prostitution are brought up short at this stage they will think twice before taking the further step which brings them into conflict with the courts. Moreover, the recommendations which we make later on as to increased penalties are adopted, there is the possibility that the London prostitutes will be less ready to plead guilty than they are at present and that more elaborate steps than those at present taken will be necessary if the courts are to be satisfied that the woman charged is a common prostitute. We accordingly commend for consideration the rather more formal system of caution which now operates in the Scottish towns. We also recommend that consideration be given to the practicability of extending the practice of referring to a moral welfare worker or to some other officer (for example, a probation officer or court missionary), particulars of a prostitute cautioned for the first time. 271. A second point connected with police practice is this. We have more than once encountered the suggestion that prostitutes in the West

254 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

End of London are arrested in turn about once a fort night on some sort of rota. Our evidence does not support this suggestion. We have examined a record of the arrests of prostitutes in the West End Central Division during the year 1953, when there were 6829 arrests involving 808 prostitutes. Of these 808 prostitutes, 181 were arrested on one occasion only. At the other end of the scale, one was arrested twenty-seven times. Between these two extremes, no regular pattern emerged in relation either to individual prostitutes or individual police officers. Three hundred ninety-five (nearly one-half) of the 808 prostitutes were arrested on five or fewer occasions in the course of the year, and only 88 (11 per cent) were arrested twenty times or more. In some of the cases in the latter category there did appear to be some rough sort of pattern about the dates of the arrests, but not such as to suggest anything in the nature of a predetermined order of arrest. 272. We were told that the courts occasionally show themselves reluctant to impose the full penalty on a prostitute brought before them for a second time in quick succession. We also have the impression that some police officers are reluctant to arrest the same prostitute twice within a short space of time; the number of prostitutes that can be dealt with by the police available at any given time is limited, and it would be surprising if the police did not exercise a certain amount of discrimination of this kind in making their arrests. These factors, combined with an element of chance and, perhaps, some aggressiveness on the part of a particular prostitute, may account for the impression of a rota. Women Police 273. We should like to take this opportunity of recording our appreciation of the work of the women police in this whole field. It seems clear to us, from evidence we have heard, that women police are more effective in keeping prostitutes “on the move” than are their male colleagues, if only because prostitutes appear to resent being arrested by women much more than being arrested by men. But more important is the genuine concern felt by many of the women police about the young prostitute. Our impression is that within the limits of their public duty they are anxious to take every opportunity of diverting the young prostitute from the manner of life which she is in danger of adopting. We should not want to see the women police used exclusively, or even mainly, as a police des moeurs; but we hope that every encouragement will continue to be given to them to take every legitimate chance of dissuading young girls from adopting a life

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

255

of prostitution, by advice and help rather than by involving them in the machinery of the law. Penalties 274. The main reason for our proposal that “annoyance” should be removed from the statement of the law is our belief that an amendment of the law in this sense would ensure that an offender was charged in terms more appropriate to the facts of the situation. We do not expect that the elimination of the requirement to prove annoyance would materially affect the number of prostitutes brought before the courts and convicted. For although this requirement may occasionally have caused difficulties, it has not, in London at any rate, proved a serious obstacle to the arrest and conviction of offenders. So its removal is unlikely to reduce the number of convictions. It seems to us that it is not any major defect in its present formulation which causes the law to be ineffective in dealing with this problem. We have accordingly been obliged to consider whether or not the penalties attached to breaches of it are adequate or inadequate to discourage repetition of the offense. 275. The present maximum fine is forty shillings, for the first or any subsequent offense. This penalty seems to us quite inadequate, in two ways. The amount of the fine was fixed over a hundred years ago, when forty shillings was a not inconsiderable sum. We think that this amount should be brought more into line with the considerable change in monetary values since it was first fixed. Further, it is apparent from the figures of convictions fifty years ago that repeated fines of the same amount, though then an appreciable one, proved futile as a deterrent. They would, in our view, prove just as futile today, even at a higher rate than forty shillings. We therefore believe that if the problem is to be effectively dealt with a system of progressively higher penalties, such as applies in the case of many other offenses, must be introduced. We accordingly recommend that the maximum penalty for a first offense should be a fine of twenty-five pounds; and that the maximum penalty for a third or subsequent offense should be three months’ imprisonment. We would stress that these are maxima, and we recognize that here, as for all other offenses, the courts would be at liberty to award some lesser penalty. 276. Our decision to make this recommendation has not been lightly reached. We are well aware that in the vast majority of cases the prostitute must pay the fines from the proceeds of her prostitution, and that if the fines are increased she will attempt to recoup herself either by passing on

256 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

the cost to her clients or by seeking more customers. If it could be assumed that the prostitute would resort to the first of these alternatives alone, then increased fines would at least have something to commend them in that they would tend to curb demand as well as supply. But the second possibility cannot be overlooked; and that would cause the prostitute to be more active on the streets, with the result that increasing the fine would defeat its own object. 211. For this reason, therefore, that increased and even graduated fines might in themselves prove inadequate, the sanction of imprisonment must in our opinion be available, in the last resort, repeated offenses. In making this recommendation we have two purposes in mind. The first is straightforward deterrence. We believe that most of the prostitutes loitering in the streets are those who are well established in their habits, whom repeated fines have failed to deter. We therefore feel justified in recommending that deprivation of liberty, which would be particularly unwelcome to these offenders, should be available as a sanction which, in an individual case, monetary fines have failed. But equally important is the other strand in our thinking, which may be called the reformative element in punishment. We do not deceive ourselves into thinking that a short term of imprisonment is likely to work where repeated fines have failed. But we believe that the presence of imprisonment as a possible punishment make the courts anxious to try, and the individual prostitutes more willing to accept, the use of probation in suitable cases. As the law stands, a probation order can be made in the case of over fourteen years of age only if the offender expresses, to comply with its imposition and conditions. Since, as is the case, the alternative to probation is a fine of forty shillings the prostitute frequently declines even to see the probation officer. This is regrettable, for we feel that many women who have adopted a life of prostitution could be led to renounce it by inquiry into their personal problems and by advice and treatment which the probation service is well equipped to give them. If the alternative to a probation order were not an insignificant fine but the possibility of ultimate imprisonment, it is probable that some of those who now refuse the help of the probation officer would be more ready to respond to the opportunity of probation if it were offered. The possibility that help of this kind might be accepted by some even of the most persistent offenders seems to us to be a strong argument for including imprisonment as an ultimate penalty. 278. We attach special importance to the use of probation in the case of the young prostitute. We believe that many of the hardened prostitutes on

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

257

the streets today could have been deflected from the life if they could have been compelled to undergo some forum of supervision when they first appeared before the courts. We recognize, however, that the willing participation of the probationer is essential to the success of probation as a method of and accordingly we feel that it would not be appropriate to mend compulsory probation. 279. At the same time, we are anxious to ensure that the young prostitute should benefit fully from the kind of help with personal problems which the probation service and the others available to the courts are particularly fitted to provide, so that she may have every encouragement to abandon the life before she becomes hardened to it. We think that much useful work could be done if every young prostitute brought before the courts at an early stage in her career were remanded for a few weeks, in custody if necessary, in order to enable a full social report to be furnished. This remand would provide an opportunity for probation officers and other social workers to get into touch where possible with the guardians of the girl, to explore the possibilities of placing her in employment, to arrange for a medical or psychiatric examination if this were thought advisable, and so on. It has been found not infrequently that short remands such as we have in mind have enabled probation officers and other social workers to smooth out difficulties which have prevented young offenders from obtaining employment and so compelled or encouraged their continuance in crime. 280. We are aware that the courts have power to remand a convicted offender, in custody if necessary, up to three weeks, for the purpose of enabling inquiries to be made or of determining the most suitable method of dealing with the case. We understand, however, that some courts are reluctant to use this power of remand in relation to an offense for which they can ultimately only impose a fine. We accordingly recommend that courts should be given explicit power to remand, in custody if need be, for not more than three weeks, any prostitute convicted for the first or second time of a street offense, in order to enable a social or medical report to be furnished. In the meantime, we commend the practice of many courts in putting young offenders into touch with the probation officer and with voluntary organizations which exist to help girls in difficulty or trouble. 281. An alternative method by which young offenders could be brought under compulsory supervision has been suggested to us by some of our witnesses. This is that the age up to which young persons may be dealt with under the Children and Young Persons Acts as being in need of “care

258 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

or protection” should be raised to twenty-one. We should ourselves like to see the age for “care or protection” raised to at least to eighteen, and if it were practicable to raise it even higher this would be advantageous from the point of dealing with the young prostitute. We recognize, however, That this raises wider issues (involving, among other things, the liberty of the subject) not peculiar to the prostitute, and the (Children and Young Persons Committee) is at present considering, inter alia, the working of the law relating to proceedings and the powers of the courts, in respect of juveniles brought before the courts as delinquent or as being in need of care or protection or beyond control. We have communicated to this Committee our concern about that part of its general field which falls within our own terms of reference and our hope that the Committee will, in reaching its conclusions, have due regard to the young prostitute. 282. It has been suggested to us that there might, with advantage, be a special system of punishment to include a period of detention in a special residential establishment with a view to rehabilitation. We do not think that this would be desirable, practicable or equitable. In particular, we think that it would be undesirable to segregate prostitutes in a residential establishment. It is clear from the evidence we have received from witnesses experienced in dealing with prostitutes detained in establishments of various kinds that it would be very difficult, in an establishment with this particular population, to provide any program of rehabilitation which would be at all likely to succeed; nor do we believe that a community composed entirely of prostitutes is at all an encouraging background for the restoration of any one of them to a more normal form of living. It is in any event doubtful whether a program of rehabilitation would succeed against a background of compulsory detention; rehabilitation measures, in this as in other fields, depend to a large extent for their success on the willing cooperation of the person concerned. 283. Further, the punishment must bear some relation to the gravity of the offense. Prostitution is not an offense, and the prostitute does not come before the court because she is a prostitute but because, being a prostitute, she has committed some offense. If our recommendations are accepted, she would not be liable to imprisonment for that offense except on a third or subsequent conviction. To submit her to a prolonged period of compulsory detention (and rehabilitation may be a lengthy process) merely because she has committed such an offense would be inequitable.

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

259

If our recommendations result in more prostitutes finding their way to prisons, borstals or approved schools, their segregation from other offenders in these establishments might have advantages for the other offenders, but this possibility does not justify a special system of punishment for prostitutes as such. 284. Some of our witnesses have suggested that the courts in dealing with prostitutes brought before them could make more use of the power, mentioned in paragraph 240(a) above, to require the offender to enter into a recognizance of find sureties for good behaviour. We are aware that some courts use this power in these cases, and the effect is to render the prostitute liable to the payment of substantial sums of money, or imprisonment in default of payment, in the event of her repeating her offense. The power is traced to the Justices of the Peace Act, 1361, and the Corn mission of the Peace granted under the authority of that Act. Legal authorities are not agreed as to all the offenses for which surety for good behaviour may be required; the procedure is normally used to prevent the commission or repetition of a serious offense, or con duct likely to lead to a breach of the peace. Our own view is that since Parliament has prescribed a specific and comparatively trivial penalty for this specific offense, it is not desirable that general powers of this kind should be used to attach, in effect, an inflated penalty to this offense. If, as we think, the present statutory penalties are inadequate, it is by Parliament that they should be increased.  ossible Consequences of Amending the Law P 285. It will be apparent, from the recommendations we have made, that we are not attempting to abolish prostitution or to make prostitution in itself illegal. We do not think that the law ought to try to do so; nor do we think that if it tried it could by itself succeed. What the law can and should do is to ensure that the streets of London and our big provincial cities should be freed from what is offensive or injurious and made tolerable for the ordinary citizen who lives in them or passes through them. 286.6 If this is done, there will doubtless be consequences; and it is our business to try to assess them, at least in outline, lest curing one evil should result in greater evil of a different kind. It must be accepted that for so long as prostitution exists the prostitute will seek customers and the potential customer will seek prostitutes. If the prostitute is not allowed to  (∗) See Reservations I (e) and I (f).

6

260 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

find her customers in the streets, then presumably she and her customers will find other means of meeting each other. It has been suggested to us that to “drive the prostitutes from the streets” is to encourage the closer organization of the trade, with greater opportunities for exploiting prostitutes and greater dangers that new classes of “middlemen” (e.g., taxi drivers and hotel porters) will arise. We think it possible, indeed probable, that there will be an extension of the “call girl” system(“) and, perhaps, a growth in the activities of touts. These are dangers but where they involve exploitation of the prostitute, we should expect the laws which already cover this kind of exploitation to be rigorously enforced and even, as we suggest in paragraph 331 below, extended in their range. Another possible consequence is an increase in small advertisements in shops or local newspapers, offering the services of “masseuses,” “models” or “companions”, but we think that this would be less injurious than the presence of prostitutes in the streets. 287. It has also been suggested to us that if the prostitutes disappeared from the streets the police would be deprived of a useful source of information about crime in general. We have had no evidence that more than a small proportion of prostitutes are connected with serious crime or that any considerable amount of information leading to convictions is obtained from them. Nor could we accept the proposition, if it were put forward, that legislation relating to one field of crime ought to be determined by its consequences in making the work of the police easier or more difficult in another. 288. Suggestions have been made that the police are occasionally bribed by prostitutes with money or other favours; and we recognize that the increased penalties we have proposed may increase, both for the prostitute and for the police officer, the temptation to resort to bribery. We do not, however, consider that this risk is sufficiently serious to outweigh the advantages of the amendments we have proposed. Our opinion is that the general standard of the police in this respect is high; and although no process of recruitment, however stringent, will ensure that every man who joins a large force can be guaranteed to be blameless, we do not believe that the changes we have proposed are likely to result in markedly increased corruption. There are other fields of crime where the temptation to the police to succumb to bribery is, and will continue to be, much stronger than it is here. 289. In any event, there must be set against these disadvantages, which are to a large extent hypothetical, the clear advantage that the ordinary

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

261

citizen would be able to go about his business without the constant affront to his sense of decency which the presence of these women affords. So even if this can be achieved only by risking the dangers we have outlined, we still feel that the time has come to rid the streets of this nuisance and that the risk must therefore be taken. Moreover, we think that the measures we have proposed, even if they can be made effective only at the risk of other evils, might serve, perhaps to a large extent, to discourage new comers to the ranks of the prostitute. We attach great importance to this. Not only does the present law fail to discourage; its inadequacies afford an encouragement in that the very presence of the prostitutes on the streets provides an example which some young women, to whom a life of prostitution had not yet become a fully formed intention, might be tempted to follow. Again, while we fully recognize, as we have said earlier, that the prostitute could not exist in the absence of a demand for her services, demand and supply are not entirely unrelated, and the mere presence of the prostitutes on the streets stimulates a demand for their services. Many men, especially younger ones, who now avail themselves of the services of prostitutes would be less inclined to do so if these services were less readily and obviously available. 290. In short, therefore, we feel that the possible consequences of clearing the streets are less harmful than the constant public parading of the prostitute’s wares. We do not feel that it is “mere hypocrisy” to say this. It would be if we were avowedly trying to extinguish prostitution, for in that case the less open carrying on of the trade would be as objectionable as the more overt. But having taken into account the dangers which might follow from the changes in the law which we have proposed, we think that they would be less injurious to the community in general than the present state of affairs. Licensed Brothels 291. One or two of our witnesses have suggested to us that the obvious and most satisfactory method of clearing the streets is to institute licensed brothels. This course, it is claimed, would ensure that the streets were kept clear, would guarantee some control of the prostitutes in the brothels and would preserve public decency without giving the impression of interference by the criminal law in affairs of private morals. 292. We do not advocate this solution. We have already expressed our view that prostitution can be eradicated only through measures directed to a better understanding of the nature and obligations of sex relationships

262 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

and to a raising of the social and outlook of society as a whole. The licensing and toleration of brothels by the State would make nonsense of such measures, for it would imply that the State recognized prostitution as a social necessity. 293. If, as we have already suggested, the presence of prostitutes on the streets encourages indulgence in promiscuous inter. Course by men who might be less inclined to avail themselves of the services of prostitutes if these services were less readily and obviously available, the existence of tolerated or licensed brothels would provide an even greater encouragement. And if the presence of prostitutes on the streets encourages some women who might not otherwise have done so to enter their ranks, the existence of tolerated or licensed brothels would provide an even greater encouragement to their recruitment. 294. But an even more fundamental objection to the tolerated brothel is its close connection with the traffic in women and children. The continued existence of brothels must obviously depend on a steady supply of new women, and a special body of experts appointed by the League of Nations in 1927 to consider some of the problems connected with this traffic found definite evidence that the demand thus created was met by traffickers and was the cause of both national and international traffic. “It is the existence of licensed houses which supplies the traffickers and their accomplices with a sure and permanent market for their services.” 295. We are not impressed by the argument about “control” of prostitutes in so far as this implies some medical safeguard, for it is obvious that this is more apparent than real; a woman who is absolutely healthy at the time of examination may be infected afterwards and infect others before her own infection is detected. 296. We think it significant that other countries which have given a trial to this alleged solution of the problem have recently closed their maisons tolerées. All but two European countries have now abolished them, and there are at the present time only 19 countries with tolerated brothels as against 119 “abolitionist” countries. In our view, the toleration of brothels by the State would be a retrograde step. Research 297. Such research work as has already been done in connection with female prostitution has been more often from the point of view of sociology and reform than from the point of view of deliberate scientific

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

263

investigation. We still do not know at all precisely what element it is in the total personality of a woman which results in her adopting a life of prostitution, and this, too, would seem to offer a fruitful field for research. At the present time, it is unlikely that sufficient case material would be available for clinical research; but if our recommendations, and more particularly those in paragraphs 278 to 280 which relate to young and first offenders, result in more case material becoming available, we recommend that research into the aetiology of prostitution should be undertaken. As in the case of research into homosexuality, there would be need of teamwork, in which psychiatric social workers would play an important part.

Chapter X Living on the Earnings of Prostitution 298. It is an offense for a male person knowingly to live wholly or in part on the earnings of prostitution. For this purpose, a man who lives with or is habitually in the company of a prostitute, or who exercises control, direction or influence over a prostitute’s movements in a way which shows he is aiding, abetting or compelling her prostitution with others, is presumed to be knowingly living on the earnings of prostitution unless he proves the contrary. And it is an offense for a female for purposes of gain to exercise control, direction or influence over a prostitute’s movements in a way which shows she is aiding, abetting or compelling her prostitution. The maximum penalty in either case is six months’ imprisonment on conviction before a court of summary jurisdiction and two years’ imprisonment on conviction on indictment. 299. Where it appears to a justice of the peace (in Scotland, a court of summary jurisdiction) from information on oath that there is reasonable cause to suspect that any house or part of a house is used by a woman for purposes of prostitution, and that a male person residing in or frequenting the house is living wholly or in part on her earnings, the justice (in Scotland, the court) may issue a warrant authorizing a constable to enter and search the house and to arrest the man. 300. There are no reliable figures relating to males dealt with by the courts prior to 1954 for living on the earnings of prostitution. As explained in paragraph 119 above, up to that year the offense was combined in the English criminal statistics with the offense of importuning by male persons. In 1954, in England and Wales, 114 men were found guilty of the

264 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

offense at magistrates’ courts and 11 at the higher courts. In 1955, the figures were 113 and 14 respectively. These offenders were disposed of as indicated in Table Xml in Appendix II. The number of women convicted of exercising control, direction, or influence over a prostitute’s movements is negligible, and has not exceeded five in any recent year. No figures relating to either offense are available in respect of Scotland, since the Cures for these offenses cannot be identified separately from the list of crimes and offenses used for statistical purposes. 301. In its simplest and most usual form, “living on the earnings of prostitution” consists of an arrangement by which a man lives with a prostitute and is wholly or mainly kept by her. Such a man is commonly known as a “ponce” or souteneur. Detection of this offense is not without its difficulties, and calls for prolonged observation, usually covering several days and nights, in which the attention of the police is directed to such questions as the following: (i) whether the man and woman are living together: this is difficult to establish when the couple live in flats or parts of houses; (ii) whether the woman is, in fact, carrying on prostitution; (iii) whether the man is doing any work; (iv) whether the man watches the woman soliciting; (v) whether the woman is seen to hand the man any money; (vi) whether they go home together after the woman has finished accommodating her customers. The difficulties are increased by the fact that many prostitutes—particularly those operating in the West End of London—live with their ponces at some distance from the area in which they carry on their trade. There is little doubt that the number of prosecutions could be appreciably increased if sufficient manpower were available to undertake the prolonged observation necessary to obtain satisfactory evidence, but we are satisfied that within the resources available to them the police do all they can to deal with this particular offense. 302. Such evidence as we have been able to obtain on this matter suggests that the arrangement between the prostitute and the man she lives with is usually brought about at the instance of the woman, and it seems to stem from a need on the part of the prostitute for some element of stability in the background of her life. As one writer has put it:

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

265

This man may be literally the ‘bully,’ which is another of his titles; he may have forced her into the mode of life and be compelling her continuance in it. But he may also be, whether her legal husband or not, the equivalent a husband to the promiscuous woman; he is frequently only person in the world towards whom she feels affection and sense of possession; he is usually her champion in disputes and her protector in a skirmish. He is despised by the police and by the public outside his trade but he may be nevertheless the one humanizing element in the life of the woman on whom he lives.7

It may be the case that once the arrangement is established the “ponce” makes more and more financial demands on the prostitute. It may also be the case that he sometimes is “literally the bully.” But in the main the association between prostitute and “ponce” is voluntary and operates to mutual advantage. To say this is not to condone exploitation; the “ponce” or “bully” has rightly been the subject of universal and unreserved reprobation, and we have already expressed the view that the law should deal with the exploitation of others. 303. We have no doubt that behind the trade of prostitution there lies a variety of commercial interests, to some of which were refer to below. The evidence submitted to us, however, has disclosed nothing in the nature of “organized vice” in which the prostitute is an unwilling victim, coerced by a vile exploiter. This does not mean that there is not “organization,” in the sense of encouragement to willing girls and women to enter or continue upon a life of prostitution. 304. The present law seems to be based on the desire to protect the prostitute from coercion and exploitation. When it was framed, the prostitute may have been in some danger of coercion; but today, either through the effectiveness of the law or through changes which have removed some of the economic and social factors likely to result in a life of prostitution, she is in less danger of coercion or exploitation against her will. 305. The popular impression of vast organizations in which women are virtually enslaved is perhaps in part due to the indiscriminate use of words which suggest an entirely passive role for the women concerned. We have, for example, learned of an arrangement between several prostitutes and a car-hire firm whereby firm made large sums of money out of the use of their cars by the prostitutes. The firm was said to “run” a group of 7

 Hall, Prostitution a Survey and a Challenge, page 40.

266 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

prostitutes, with the implication that they organized the women’s activities. Another group of prostitutes lived in rooms, at various addresses, of which one particular man was landlord. This man, who had several convictions for brothel keeping and living on the earnings of prostitution, was said to be “running” several girls. In both cases, however much unpleasant exploitation there might appear to the outsider be and might indeed actually be, the association between the prostitute and the “exploiter” was entirely voluntary and operated to mutual advantage. 306. It is in our view an oversimplification to think that those who live on the earnings of prostitution are exploiting the prostitute as such. What they are really exploiting is the whole complex of the relationship between prostitute and customer; they are, in effect exploiting the human weaknesses which cause the customer to seek the prostitute and the prostitute to meet the demand. The more direct methods with which we have dealt above are not the only means by which the trade is exploited; that it continues to thrive is due in no small measure to efforts deliberately made to ex cite the demand on which its prosperity depends. Abraham Flexner, in his work on “Prostitution in Europe,” to which the Street Offenses Committee made reference, says (page 41) “A very large constituent in what has been called the irresistible demand of natural instinct is nothing but suggestion and stimulation associated with alcohol, late hours and sensuous amusements.” At the present time, entertainments of a suggestive character, dubious advertisements, the sale of pornographic literature, contraceptives and “aphrodisiac” drugs (sometimes all in one shop), and the sale of alcoholic liquor in premises frequented by prostitutes, all sustain the trade, and in turn themselves profit from it. With most of these evils the haw attempts to deal so far as it can without unduly trespassing on liberty of the individual; and, as in the case of prostitution it is to educative measures rather than to amendment of the law that society must look for a remedy. 307. It has been suggested to us that the present law penalties for living on the earnings of prostitution are inadequate and should be increased. We feel that the maximum of two years’ imprisonment for which the law provides is adequate for this offense.8

8  Here Wolfenden pointed readers to the reservation by the three women on the Committee.

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

267

Chapter XI Premises Used for the Purposes of Prostitution  he Present Law T 308. It is an offense: (a) for any person to keep a brothel, or to manage, or act or assist in the management of, a brothel; (b) for the lessor or landlord of any premises or his agent to let the whole or part of the premises with the knowledge that they are to be used, in whole or in part, as a brothel, or, where the whole or part of the premises is used as a brothel, to be wilfully a party to that use continuing; (c) for the tenant or occupier, or person in charge, of any premises knowingly to permit the whole or part of the premises to be used as a brothel; (d) for the tenant or occupier of any premises knowingly to permit the whole or part of the premises to be used for the purposes of habitual prostitution. The maximum penalty in each case is a fine of £100 or imprisonment for three months or both. On a second or subsequent conviction it is a fine of £250 or imprisonment for six months or both. For the purposes of the higher penalties, a conviction of any of these offenses counts as a previous conviction in the same way as a conviction of the offense charged. In Scotland, the higher penalties may be imposed only in the Sheriff Courts, and not in other courts of summary jurisdiction. 309. In England and Wales, a person who keeps a brothel also commits an offense at common law for which he is punishable with a fine or imprisonment at the discretion of the court. In practices proceedings are usually taken under the statutory provisions outlined above. 310. In certain burghs in Scotland, there is in operation concurrently with the provisions outlined in paragraph 308, a further statutory provision under which it is an offense, punishable with a fine or imprisonment, without the option of a fine, for sixty days, he the occupier of, or to manage or assist in the management brothel. Under this provision, a magistrate may, on a complaint by the burgh prosecutor, grant a search warrant

268 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

in respect of any premises or place if he is satisfied, on the evidence of a senior police officer and at least one other person not holding any office under the Burgh Police (Scotland) Act, 1892, that there is reasonable ground for believing that the premises are being used as a brothel, and the warrant empowers any constable to arrest the occupier of the premises or any person found therein who manages or assists in managing the brothel. 311. In England and Wales it is an offense for the holder of a justices’ license to permit the licensed premises to be a brothel. The maximum penalty is a fine of twenty pounds, but a licensee convicted (whether under this provision or under the provisions out lined in paragraph 308) of permitting his premises to be a brothel automatically forfeits his license. 312. In England and Wales, where the tenant or occupier of any premises is convicted, under the provisions outlined in paragraph 308, of knowingly permitting the whole or part of the premises to be used as a brothel, the lessor or landlord may require him to assign the lease or other contract under which the premises are held by him to some person approved by the lessor or land lord. Approval for this purpose must not be unreasonably withheld. If he fails to do so within three months, the lessor may (without prejudice to the rights or remedies of any party thereto accrued before the date of the determination) determine the lease or contract, and the court by which the tenant or occupier was convicted may make a summary order for the delivery of possession of premises to the lessor or landlord. If the lessor or landlord, after having the conviction brought to his notice, fails to exercise these rights or, having exercised them by determining the lease or contract, subsequently grants a new lease or contract to the same person without having all reasonable provisions to prevent the recurrence of the offense inserted in the new lease or contract, he is deemed to be a party to any subsequent offense committed in respect of the premises while his landlord-tenant relationship with the convicted person subsists, unless he can show that he took all reasonable steps to prevent the recurrence of the offense. 313. In Scotland, the conviction of any person under the provisions outlined in paragraphs 308 and 310 automatically voids and terminates any lease or arrangement to let relating to the premises concerned as from the date of the conviction; but the rights of the owner, for rent or otherwise, for the year current at the date of the voidance remain unaffected. 314. It will have been observed from paragraph 308 that the law distinguishes between use of the premises “as a brothel” and use “for the purposes of habitual prostitution.” The law may be summarized briefly and in nontechnical language as follows:

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

269

(1) (a) for any person to keep or assist in keeping a brothel; (b) for a landlord (or his agent) knowingly to let premises for use as a brothel; (c) for a tenant, occupier or person in charge to permit premises to be used as a brothel; (2) for a tenant or occupier to permit premises to be used for the purposes of habitual prostitution. Whatever the popular conception may be, in its present legal acceptance in this country a “brothel” means any place resorted to by persons of both sexes and habitually used for the purposes of illicit sexual intercourse. Such a place is a brothel within the meaning of the law whether or not those who resort to it or those engaged in the management thereof receive payment for their services. Premises cannot, however, in law be a brothel unless there are at least two women using them for the purposes of illicit sexual intercourse or acts of lewdness. Rooms or flats let separately to individual women, though they may be in the same building, constitute separate “premises” for this purpose. 315. In practice, premises in respect of which prosecutions are instituted under the law relating to brothels at the present time consist mainly of— (a) houses or flats the tenants of which allow two or more prostitutes to bring men there for the purposes of prostitution The tenant may be a prostitute who also uses the premises for her own prostitution; cases of this sort frequently arise when the prostitute is in financial difficulty (perhaps as a result of having undertaken to pay key money and an exorbitant rent), and consequently allows one or more other prostitutes to bring men to the premises in return for a payment made on each occasion when they use the premises; (b) hotels or boarding houses to which several prostitutes take different men; such premises are frequently used by prostitutes—particularly “part-timers”—who have no premises of their own available for the purpose; (c) houses in which a number of rooms are let off to prostitutes who use them indiscriminately—i.e., where it is apparent that there is no separate letting to individual prostitutes; (d) “call girl” establishments—i.e., houses or flats to which men go and to which prostitutes are summoned by telephone message or some other arrangement.

270 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

316. As we have explained above, premises in the sole occupation of a woman who uses them for her own prostitution do not, in law, constitute a “brothel,” even though they may be in the same building as other premises similarly used. They are, however, clearly “used for the purposes of habitual prostitution” within the meaning of the law; but in the latter context the law provides only for the punishment of the “tenant or occupier” who “permits” such uses, and the courts have held (a) that a woman who is the sole occupier of premises which she uses for the purposes of her own habitual prostitution cannot be convicted of “permitting” the premises to be so used;(12) (b) that a lessee of premises of which he occupies part himself and lets another part to a woman who uses that part for the purposes of habitual prostitution commits no offense since he is, in effect, the landlord of the part sublet and the “tenant or occupier” only of what remains; (13) and (c) that “tenant or occupier” means a tenant in occupation, so that a tenant who has parted with effective control by granting a subtenancy to a prostitute commits no offense. 317. It will be seen, therefore, that under the law as it stands at present several rooms in one building may be let to individual prostitutes with impunity so long as each prostitute reserves her room to her exclusive use. To all outward appearance, a building used in this way is in no way distinguishable from a similar building used by an equivalent number of prostitutes who use their indiscriminately and thus turn the premises, in the eyes of the into a “brothel.” It must be difficult for the ordinary citizen to understand why the appropriate authorities should be able to take action in respect of some premises while they can take none in respect of others which are, to all outward appearance, being used in exactly the same way. This, we think, accounts for complaints that have been made from time to time to the effect that the police are not sufficiently active as regards premises used for the purposes of prostitution. Proposals for Amendment 318. It is evident that the prostitutes and their landlords are aware of the loopholes in the law and are quick to take advantage of them. Various suggestions for amending the law relating to these matters have been put to us by our witnesses. Some witnesses have gone so far as to suggest that the use by a convicted prostitute for her own habitual prostitution of premises of which she is the tenant or occupier should be an offense. By “convicted prostitute” our witnesses presumably meant prostitutes convicted of some offense ancillary to their profession—for example, soliciting—since

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

271

prostitution is, of itself, no offense. To make it an offense for a prostitute to use for the purposes of her own prostitution premises of which she is the occupier would be tantamount to making prostitution itself an offense; and, as we have said earlier, no case for this can, in our view, be sustained. Moreover, the course suggested would be arbitrary in that it would discriminate between prostitution by a woman who has been convicted of soliciting and prostitution by a woman who has not, although the latter may have been conducting herself as a prostitute over a much longer period. 319. Another suggestion, which found more general favour among our witnesses, was that the legal distinction between premises used as a “brothel” and premises used “for the purposes of habitual prostitution” should be eliminated. It is at least arguable that the conduct of the landlord who knowingly lets individual flats or rooms to individual prostitutes differs in degree only, and not in kind, from that of the landlord who lets premises for use as a broth el; and the proposal is, at first sight, attractive. But it seems to us that it would be going too far to apply in its entirety to premises used for habitual prostitution the law relating to premises used as brothels. It would at once mean that it would be an offense knowingly to let premises to a prostitute for the purposes of her own prostitution or knowingly to be a party to the use of premises this purpose. 320. As long as society tolerates the prostitute, it must permit her to carry on her business somewhere. That she ought not to be allowed to carry it on in public will be apparent from what we have said in an earlier chapter; and the law, for a variety of reasons, rightly frowns on the brothel. The only remaining possibility is individual premises. We have therefore reached the conclusion that it would not be right to amend the law in such a way as to make guilty of a criminal offense a person who lets premises to a prostitute who uses them, even with his knowledge, for the purposes of her own habitual prostitution. It is perhaps not out of place to mention here that if premises are let with the intention of their being used for the purposes of prostitution, the lease is wholly unenforceable and the landlord cannot recover the rent or sue upon the lessee’s covenants. 321. This does not, however, mean that a landlord should not have the right to recover possession of premises which are being put to unauthorized use, or that a landlord should be obliged to tolerate the use for the purposes of prostitution of premises of which he is the lessor. We are very conscious of the difficulties experienced by reputable landlords who are anxious to eradicate prostitution from their properties. The tenancy of

272 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

premises occupied by a prostitute frequently constitutes the last link in a chain of leases and sub leases, and in many such cases the superior landlords have let the premises bona fide and at normal rents. In some cases a superior landlord cannot refuse consent to the assignment of a lease or the granting of a sublease, and in others he can only refuse consent for some good reason. Usually, applications to assign or sublet are supported by references so outwardly unimpeachable that no valid objection to the assignment or subletting can be made; yet a few months later the premises assigned or sublet are found to be in use by a prostitute. In some cases, the fact that the premises are so occupied is observed by the landlord or his agent; in some, the first the landlord hears of the matter is that the tenant has been convicted of permitting the premises to be used as a brothel or for the purpose of habitual prostitution, and in some, the matter is brought to his notice in a cautionary letter from the police or local authority to the effect that the premises are being used as a brothel. 322. As we have explained above, in Scotland, the con a tenant of permitting the premises to be used as a brothel automatically terminates the contract of tenancy. In England Wales, there is no such automatic termination, but the landlord the right to require the tenant to assign the lease to some suit person within three months, and if the tenant fails to do this the landlord may then terminate the tenancy. 323. We do not think that a provision on the lines of the law in force in Scotland would work equitably in England and Wales where leases providing for payment of a substantial premium and thereafter of a nominal rent are much more common. Automatic termination of the lease might, where it is of this nature, result in some cases in a penalty disproportionate to the circumstances of the offense. For the same reason, we do not consider it desirable that the landlord should have the right himself to determine the lease on the conviction of the tenant. We do consider, however, that the landlord should have the right, where the tenant has been convicted of a criminal offense in connection with the user of the premises, to apply to the courts for an order determining the lease. Further, we feel that this application could most appropriately be dealt with by the court by which the tenant was convicted. This court has before it, and fresh in its mind, the details of the particular case, and could appropriately draw up a single order embodying all the legal consequences of the conviction. 324. At present, the law gives the landlord the right to require the tenant to assign the lease if he is convicted of “permitting” the premises to be used as a brothel, but not if he is convicted of keeping, or managing, or

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

273

acting or assisting in the management of, a brothel on the premises. This seems to us to be anomalous, and we consider that the rights and duties of the landlord should be the same in each instance. 325. We have already suggested that it would be going too far to apply in its entirety to premises used for the purposes of habitual prostitution the law relating to premises used as brothels. The present law distinguishes, however, as regards premises used for the purposes of habitual prostitution, between those of which the prostitute is herself the tenant and those of which she is not. As we have explained earlier, a prostitute commits no offense if she uses for the purposes of her own prostitution premises of which she is herself the owner or tenant; but a tenant who permits the premises to be used for the purposes of habitual prostitution commits an offense. We think it appropriate that the law should carry this distinction a stage further, and that where a tenant is convicted of permitting a premises to be used for the purposes of habitual prostitution the landlord should have the same rights, in regard to the termination of the tenancy, as he would have if the tenant had convicted of permitting the premises to be used as a brothel. 396. We accordingly recommend that magistrates’ courts in England and Wales should be empowered, on convicting a tenant or occupier of— (i) keeping or managing, or acting or assisting in the management of, a brothel; or (ii) knowingly permitting premises to be used as a brothel; or (iii) knowingly permitting premises to be used for the purposes of habitual prostitution, to make an order either (i) determining the lease or contract of tenancy or license to occupy (without prejudice to the rights or remedies of any party thereto accrued before the date of the determination); or (ii) requiring the tenant to assign the lease or contract of tenancy within a period of three months to some person approved by the landlord, whose approval for this purpose must not be unreasonably withheld.

274 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

327. We consider that the landlord should have the right to be heard, if he so desires, in regard to the making of such an order, and we accordingly further recommend that the police or other authority by whom the proceedings are instituted should be required to notify the landlord of the proceedings and to inform him of his right to apply for such an order in the event of conviction. We envisage that the landlord’s application would be made in writing before the proceedings and dealt with by the court at the time when the tenant is sentenced. If he does not take advantage of this right to apply for an order, or if, in a case where an order is made, he subsequently grants a new lease or contract to the same person without having all reasonable provisions to prevent the recurrence of the offense inserted in the new lease or contract, he should be deemed to be a party to any subsequent similar offense com by the tenant on the premises unless he can show that he took all reasonable steps to prevent the recurrence of the offense. 328. We are aware that difficulties are sometimes encountered in establishing the identity of the landlord, in cases of this sort. To correct these, we recommend that a magistrates’ court show have power to require a tenant charged with any of the offenses mentioned above, under pain of penalty, to disclose the name address of the person to whom he pays his rent. Moreover, since se we have explained earlier, the tenancy in cases of this sort frequently constitutes the last link in a chain of leases, we recommend that there should be similar power to require each immediate lessor in turn to disclose the name and address of his superior lessor. This is of special importance in cases where the premises are being used as a brothel, since in that case each of the superior lessors is in peril of the law as long as the user continues. 329. While the proposals we have put forward would, we think, be of considerable assistance to the landlord in cases where the tenant is convicted of an offense, we recognize that there are many cases where there is no conviction of a tenant but where a land lord experiences difficulty in ridding his premises of prostitution. Although, as we have said earlier, it ought not to be made an offense to let premises for use by a prostitute, we are certain that most reputable landlords would be anxious to free their properties from an encumbrance of this sort, and we have been made aware of some of the difficulties which the legal processes to this end entail. But if the letting of premises for use by a prostitute is not to be a criminal offense (and we have given reasons why in our opinion it ought

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

275

not to be), it follows that any measures which may be necessary to evict her must be outside the field of the criminal law and hence outside our terms of reference. 330. Although, for reasons which will be apparent from what we have said earlier, we think that it would be neither desirable nor practicable to extend to premises used for the purposes of habitual prostitution all the provisions of the law relating to brothels we have reason to believe that certain “flat farmers” derive considerable profits from high rents and key moneys charged to prostitutes. Key money is said to be in the neighbourhood of £100, and may even be as high as £200 in some areas, and the rental charged from £ 20 to £25 a week. Some flats that are let out on these terms where the rent is controlled by law at 30s, a week, sum that is ostensibly charged by the lessor to the prostitute. False rent books are kept showing the maximum permitted charge and the additional profits are often shared between the lessor and the agent who lets the premises. 331.9 It is clearly wrong that unscrupulous landlords and estate agents should profit from the opportunities which the present law affords for the letting of premises to prostitutes at exorbitant rents. We accordingly recommend that a landlord who can be shown to be letting premises at an exorbitant rent or demanding exorbitant key money in the knowledge that they are to be used for the purposes of prostitution should be deemed, for the purposes of the law outlined in the preceding chapter of this report, to be “living on the earnings of prostitution”, and that the same should apply to any agent who can be shown to have knowingly taken part in the transaction. We recognize that the receipt of exorbitant rents will not always be easy to prove; the prostitute is usually reluctant to take any action which might result in her losing her business premises. At the present time, however, even when police have been able to establish the receipt of exorbitant rents, it has not always been possible to secure convictions of the landlords, since some courts have held that the receipt of exorbitant rents does not amount to “living on the earnings of prostitution” within the meaning of the law. Adoption of our recommendation would serve at least to remedy this situation. We recognize, too, the difficulties attendant on the proof of guilty knowledge on the part of the lessor; but these difficulties arise at present in respect of premises used as brothels, and the procedure at present employed in respect of brothels can no doubt be adapted to premises used for the purposes of habitual prostitution. 9

 See reservation I (g).

276 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

332. We think the recommendations we have made go as far as the criminal law can be expected to go so long as prostitution in itself is not to be a crime. We have no doubt that in carrying out her trade the prostitute will continue to give offense to some people; and in this connection we have much sympathy with the respectable tenant who finds a neighbouring flat or house occupied by a prostitute who accommodates her customers there. The activities of prostitutes in these circumstances are the subject of many complaints from neighbouring residents who cannot understand why the police “do nothing about it.” If, however, the prostitute exercises her trade in such a way as to cause a nuisance, there is a remedy available in the civil courts.  rosecution by Local Authorities P 333. In London, the prosecution of offenses relating to the use of premises for immoral purposes is usually undertaken by the metropolitan borough councils. This arrangement seems to stem from the historical developments of the laws relating to disorderly houses, the historical developments of the laws relating to disorderly houses, and in particular from the absorption by the borough councils of the functions formerly vested in the overseers of the poor, upon whom the old enactments placed certain duties in this respect. 334. While the borough councils undertake the actual prosecution, the necessary observation now devolves on the police. If a complaint that premises are being used for immoral purposes is received by the borough council, it is referred to the police for inquiry and report. If the complaint is made to the police, the police make the necessary inquiries and report to the borough council. If the borough council considers that the report discloses evidence sufficient to justify proceedings, these are then instituted by the council. In practice, this arrangement has worked well, but cases have occasionally arisen in which the borough council concerned has been reluctant to institute proceedings though the police reports disclosed evidence sufficient to justify them; in such cases, the police have themselves sometimes prosecuted the offenders. 335. It has been represented to us by several of the metropolitan borough councils that the present arrangements are anachronistic, and that the police should carry out the prosecution, as well as the observation, of these offenses, just as they do in the case of other criminal offenses. Other councils would prefer to retain the function of prosecuting in these cases, on the ground that local authorities have a general duty to supervise the

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

277

good governance on their areas, and that this problem does affect peaceful and orderly governance. It was also suggested that complainants in matters of this sort sometimes prefer to go to the local authority rather than to the police. It seems to us that these considerations, so far as they are valid at all, are equally applicable to numerous other offenses, and that it would be difficult to justify the present arrangement on these grounds. While we see no serious objection to the retention of this initiative by any particular council which may wish to retain it, we consider it more satisfactory that there should be uniformity of practice and that such prosecutions should be undertaken by the police. Statistics 336. Tables XIV and XVII in Appendix II show the numbers of persons convicted during the five years ended 31st December 1955, of the offenses dealt with in this chapter. The tables also show how the offenders were dealt with by the courts.

Chapter XII Procuration 337. It is an offense: (i) to procure a woman or girl to become, in any part of the world, a common prostitute; (ii) to procure a woman or girl to leave the United Kingdom intending her to become an inmate of or frequent a brothel elsewhere; (iii) to procure a woman or girl to leave her usual place of abode in the United Kingdom, intending her to become an inmate of or frequent a brothel in any part of the world for the purposes of prostitution; (iv) to procure a girl under twenty-one to have unlawful sexual intercourse in any part of the world with a third person; (v) to procure a woman or girl, by threats or intimidation, or by false pretences or false representations, to have unlawful sexual intercourse in any part of the world; (vi) to apply or administer to, or cause to be taken by, a woman or girl any substance with intent to stupefy of overpower her so as to enable any man to have unlawful sexual intercourse with her;

278 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

(vii) for a person who is the owner or occupier of any premises, or who has, or acts or assists in, the management or control of any premises, to induce or knowingly suffer a girl under the age of sixteen to resort to or be on the premises for the purpose of having unlawful sexual intercourse with men or with a particular man. A person charged with this offense may be found guilty of the offense described in paragraph 340 below, if the jury are not satisfied that he is guilty of the offense charged or of an attempt to commit it, but are satisfied that he is guilty of the other offense. (viii) to take an unmarried girl under the age of eighteen out of the possession of her parent or guardian against his will, if she is so taken that she shall have unlawful sexual intercourse with men or with a particular man (but a person is not guilty of this offense if he believes, and has reasonable cause to believe, that the girl is eighteen or over); (ix) to detain a woman or girl against her will on any premises with the intention that she shall have unlawful sexual intercourse with men or a particular man, or to detain her against her will in a brothel. (Where a woman or girl is on any premises for the purpose of having un lawful sexual intercourse, or is in a brothel, a person who, with the intention of compelling or inducing her to remain on the premises, withholds from her her clothes or any other property, or threatens her with legal proceedings in the event of her taking away clothes provided by him or on his direction, is deemed to be “detaining” her there; and a woman or girl is not liable to any proceedings, civil or criminal, for taking away or being found in possession of any clothes she needed to enable her to leave the premises); (x) to procure a woman or girl who is a mental defective to have unlawful sexual intercourse in any part of the world (xi) to take a woman or girl who is a mental defective out of the possession of her parent or guardian against his will, with the intention that she shall have unlawful sexual intercourse with men or with a particular man; (xii) for a person who is the owner or occupier of any premises, or who has, or acts or assists in, the management or control of any premises, to induce or knowingly suffer a woman or girl who is a mental defective to resort to or be on the premises for the purposes of

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

279

having unlawful sexual intercourse with men or with a particular man (xiii) to cause or encourage the prostitution in any part of the world of a woman or girl who is a mental defective. (In Scotland, this applies only to a person having the custody, charge or care of the woman or girl.) In England and Wales, a person is not guilty of the offenses numbered (x) to (xiii) above if he does not know and has no reason to suspect the woman or girl to be a mental defective.10 338. The maximum penalty for each of the offenses mentioned in the preceding paragraph is two years’ imprisonment, except as regards (vii), in which case, if the girl is under the age of thirteen, the maximum penalty is life imprisonment. In England and Wales these offenses may be tried only at assizes. In Scotland they may be tried summarily in a Sheriff court if the prosecuting authorities so decide, and in that event the maximum penalty is three months imprisonment. 339. It is an offense for the parent, guardian or any other per son having the custody, charge or care of a girl under the age of sixteen years, to cause or encourage the prostitution of, or the commission of unlawful sexual intercourse with, or indecent assault on, the girl. In Scotland, the offense is extended to include causing or encouraging lewd, indecent and libidinous behaviour towards a girl between twelve and sixteen years of age. Where a girl has become a prostitute, or has had unlawful sexual intercourse or has been indecently assaulted (or, in Scotland, has been the victim of lewd, indecent and libidinous behaviour) a person is deemed for this purpose to have encouraged it if he knowingly allows her to consort with, or to enter or continue in the employment of, any prostitute or person of known immoral character. The maximum penalty is two years’ imprisonment. In England and Wales, the offense may be tried at assizes or quarter sessions; in Scotland, it may be tried summarily in a Sheriff court if the prosecuting authorities so decide, when the maximum penalty is again three months’ imprisonment. 240. It is an offense for any person having the custody, charge or care of a child between the ages of four and sixteen years to allow that child to 10  Most of these offences were stipulated in the 1956 Sexual Offences Act, which had repealed, combined, and replaced several other laws, most significantly the 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act’s provisions against procuration.

280 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

reside in or frequent a brothel. The offense triable on indictment or summarily, and the maximum penalty is imprisonment for six months and a fine of £25. 341. Where it appears to a justice of the peace from information on oath laid by the parent, relative or guardian or a woman or girl, or by any other person who in the opinion of the justice is acting in her interests, that there is reasonable cause to suspect— (a) that the woman or girl is detained in any place within his jurisdiction in order that she may have sexual intercourse with men or with a particular man; and (b) that either she is so detained against her will, or she is under the age of sixteen or is a mental defective, or she is under the age of eighteen and is so detained against the will of her parent or other person having the lawful care or charge of her, the justice may issue a warrant authorizing a constable to search for her and to take her to and detain her in a place of safety until she can be brought before a justice of the peace. The justice before whom she is subsequently brought may cause her to be delivered up to her parent or guardian, or otherwise dealt with as circumstances may permit and require. In its application to Scotland, references in this paragraph to a justice of the peace include reference to a sheriff or sheriff-substitute. 342. The present laws against procuration, like those relating to brothels, owe their existence largely to the efforts in the nineteenth century of various societies formed in connection with one or other aspects of prostitution or regulation of vice. These efforts led eventually to the setting up, in 1881, of a Select Committee of the House of Lords to inquire into the law relating to the protection of young girls. This Committee, to whose report we have referred earlier, found that a certain number of girls had been induced by agents in London to go over to the continent and placed in brothels there. The Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885, now replaced, in England and Wales, by the Sexual Offences Act 1956, by the Sexual Offenses was the result. 343. Since that time, the international activities of the traffic in women and girls have been considerably curbed by international action, first through voluntary societies and later through intergovernmental channels. Of recent years, these measures have her carried out through the

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

281

machinery of the League of Nations and the United Nations with the cooperation of the voluntary bodies. 344. Very few cases of procuration come to the notice of the police in this country at the present time. It has been suggested that this is because the women or girls who become prostitutes do so because they want to and do not need to be “procured.” In order to sustain a charge of procuring it is necessary to establish that some persuasion or influence has been brought to bear on the woman or girl, and this may be negatived by evidence which shows that she was not really “procured” because she needed no procuring at all and acted of her own free will. 345. As regards England and Wales, no precise figures are available to show the number of procuration offenses known to the police or dealt with by the courts prior to 1954, since the heading “procuration” in the criminal statistics includes the offense of living on the earnings of prostitution where this is dealt with on indictment. The average total of all offenses recorded under this heading as known to the police over the past twenty-­ five years is, however, only 27 per  annum so that the number of actual procuration offenses is negligible. It is known that 6 men and 5 women were convicted of such offenses during each of the years 1954 and 1955. In Scotland, figures are available from 1951 onwards. These show that no persons were proceeded against in 1951, 1952 or 1954. Two were proceeded against in 1953, one of whom was discharged without trial, the other being convicted and fined. One was convicted in 1955 and sentenced to imprisonment. 346. No evidence has been placed before us to suggest that the procuration laws are not working satisfactorily, and we make no recommendations concerning them.

Chapter XIII Miscellaneous Provisions  efreshment Houses, Etc R 347. There are in force various statutory provisions for the punishment of keepers of licensed premises and refreshment houses who permit prostitutes to congregate on their premises. 348. In England and Wales, any holder of a justices’ license to sell intoxicating liquor who allows the licensed premises to be the habitual

282 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

resort or meeting place of reputed prostitutes, whether or not the object of their resorting to or meeting at the premises is prostitution, is liable to a fine of £10 for a first offense and a fine of £20 for any subsequent offense. The licensee is not, however, prohibit ed. from allowing such persons to remain on the premises for the purpose of obtaining reasonable refreshment for such time as is necessary for that purpose.() In Scotland, it is a condition of a certificate granted for the sale by retail of excisable liquor that the certificate holder shall not “knowingly permit or suffer men or women of notoriously bad fame … to assemble” in the licensed premises. 349. In England and Wales, any person licensed to keep a refreshment house (not being a place licensed by the justices for the sale of intoxicating liquor) who knowingly suffers prostitutes to assemble at, or continue on, his premises, is liable to a fine of £5 for a first offense. For a subsequent offense a fine of £ 20 may be imposed and the license forfeited; the licensee may also be disqualified from holding a license. In burghs in Scotland, the occupier of any premises or place of public resort used for the sale or consumption of provisions or refreshments of any kind who knowingly harbours prostitutes or allows “persons of notoriously bad fame, or dissolute boys and girls” to assemble therein is liable to a fine of £ 10 or sixty days’ imprisonment. 350. In the Metropolitan Police District and the City of London, the keeper of any premises or place of public resort at which provisions, liquors or refreshments of any kind are sold or consumed who knowingly suffers prostitutes to meet together and remain there is liable to a fine of £5. If he holds a liquor license, he is also subject to any penalties or penal consequences to which he may be lish for committing an offense against the tenor of his license. 351. It has been suggested to us that the street problem in London today might have been less acute if certain licensed premises known in former days as the rendezvous of prostitutes had continued in existence. It is right that the law should guard against the congregation in any one place of undesirables of any type, if only as a precaution against breaches of the peace, and we recommend no change in the law so far as it relates to the congregation of prostitutes in places of refreshment. At the same time, too rigorous an enforcement of the law in this respect might well have the effect, in some places, of driving prostitutes whose conduct at the present time is inoffensive, on to the streets, where their very presence would offend. In two large cities whose chief constables gave evidence to us, certain public houses, cafés and coffee stalls are known to be frequented

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

283

by prostitutes who find their customers there, but in neither of these cities is there any significant street problem. We feel that the use of the statutory provisions we have mentioned might with advantage be confined to instances where the conduct of the prostitutes is such as to give offense to other users of the premises or to neighbouring residents. Aliens 352. Where an alien is convicted of any offense for which a sentence of imprisonment may be awarded in the case of an offender of full age, or of any of the street offenses mentioned in Chapter IX above, the court by which he or she is convicted may recommend that a deportation order (that is, an order requiring the alien to leave and to remain thereafter out of the United Kingdom) be made. Such orders are made by the Secretary of State, who also has power to make a deportation order in any case in which he deems this course conducive to the public good. 353. An alien woman who marries a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies is entitled, on making application therefore to the Secretary of State and taking the oath of allegiance, to be registered as a citizen. The Secretary of State has no power to refuse such an application. It has been alleged that large numbers of foreign prostitutes contract abroad marriages of convenience with United Kingdom citizens and operate here without being liable to registration as aliens and consequent supervision, and to deportation. While such cases have arisen, our information suggests that this problem has been much exaggerated. Of 372 prostitutes arrested for the first time by officers attached to the West End Central police station during the ore 1953 and 1954, only 17 were of foreign birth. Of these, 8 had married British subjects under normal conditions before taking to prostitution, 3 remained single at the time of the inquiry, and I was in alien by marriage. Only 5 of the 17 women had contracted what seemed to be marriages of convenience, and we have no evidence to show that marriages with British subjects are being contracted on an organized basis in the furtherance of prostitution. It would be outside our terms of reference to propose any change in the law relating to the acquisition of citizenship of the United Kingdom. In any event, we doubt whether it would be practicable to give effect to legislation that distinguished between genuineness and otherwise of intention of the parties at the time of marriage without devising an elaborate procedure which this question does not seem important enough to justify. We are content therefore to call attention to the situation as we find it.

284 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Punishment of Offenses 354. In accordance with customary legislative practice, the statutes and bylaws creating the “offenses against the criminal law in connection with prostitution and solicitation for immoral purposes” provide for punishment of the offenders by way of fine or imprisonment. There are, however, in force a number of statutes of general application which provide alternative methods by which the courts can deal with persons brought before them charged with criminal offenses. These alternative methods are outlined in Chapter VI of our report. In practice, they have only a limited application in relation to prostitution offenses, but where appropriate they are used in dealing with these offenses just as they would be in connection with other offenses. … Recommendations (b) Prostitution We recommend:(xix) That the law relating to street offenses [in England and Wales] be reformulated so as to eliminate the requirement to establish annoyance (paragraph 256). (xx) That the law be made of general application (paragraph 266). (xxi) That consideration be given to the possibility of introducing more widely the more formal system of cautioning prostitutes which is in force in Edinburgh and Glasgow (paragraph 270). (xxii) That consideration be given to the practicability of extending the practice of referring to a moral welfare worker particulars of a prostitute cautioned for the first time (paragraph 270). (xxiii) That the maximum penalties for street offenses be increased, and that a system of progressively higher penalties for repeated offenses be introduced (paragraph 275). (xxiv) That courts be given explicit power to remand, in custody if need be, for not more than three weeks, a prostitute convicted for the first or second time of a street offense, in order that a social or medical report may be obtained (paragraph 280). (xxv) That researches be instituted into the aetiology of prostitution (paragraph 297). (xxvi) That magistrates’ courts [in England and Wales] be empowered, on convicting a tenant or occupier of

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

285

(i) keeping or managing, or acting or assisting in the management of, a brothel; or (ii) knowingly permitting the premises to be used as a brothel; or (iii) knowingly permitting premises to be used for the purposes of habitual prostitution, to make an order determining the tenancy or requiring the tenant to assign the tenancy to a person approved by the landlord (paragraph 326) (xxvii) That the landlord has the right to be heard in regard to the making of such an order (paragraph 327). (xxviii) That the courts be empowered to require a tenant or occupier charged with any of the offenses mentioned in Recommendation (xxvi) to disclose the name and address of the person to whom he pays his rent; and that there be similar power to require each lessor of the premises, in turn, to disclose the name and address of his superior lessor (paragraph 328). (xxix) That a landlord letting premises at an exorbitant rent in the knowledge that they are to be used for the purposes of prostitution be deemed, in law, to be “living on the earnings of prostitution”; and that the same apply to any agent knowingly taking part in the transaction (paragraph 331). (xxx) That prosecutions in respect of premises used for immoral purposes be undertaken, as a general rule, by the police (paragraph 335). JF WOLFENDEN JAMES ADAIR.11 MARY G. COHEN.12 DESMOND CURRAN. V. AUGUSTE DEMANT. KENNETH DIPLOCK. HUGH LINSTEAD LOTHIAN. KATHLEEN LOVIBOND.13 VICTOR MISHCON. LILY STOPFORD.14 WILLIAM WELLS.  Subject to reservation 1.  Subject to reservation 5. 13  Subject to reservation 5. 14  Subject to reservation 5. 11 12

286 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

JOSEPH WHITBY. WC ROBERTS, Secretary EJ FREEMAN, Assistant Secretary. 12th August, 1957. Part Four: Recommendations and Reservations 11. The idea of male importuning is unquestionably more repellent to the general public than is the idea of female solicitation. But in fact male importuning is far less of a public nuisance than female solicitation. This is not, I think, only due to the much smaller numbers involved. Males seldom importune other males who do not give them encouragement. Their activities are less obvious, and more subtle and discreet, than is the case with female solicitation. Consequently, as I believe, the general public greatly underestimate (as do the criminal statistics) the amount of male importuning that goes on. Further, the number of male importuners who are prostitutes is admittedly extremely small; very few male importuners are out for financial gain. 12. The statement is made (paragraph 124): “The very fact that the law can impose severe penalties is, however, a considerable factor in producing the present situation that the amount of male importuning in the streets is negligible and that consequently male importuning is not nearly so offensive or such an affront to public decency as are the street activities of female prostitutes.” The inference is that a relaxation of the penalties would result in an increase in male importuning that would constitute a public nuisance of a particularly offensive kind. For a variety of reasons, I would regard the statement just quoted from paragraph 124 as a speculation with no sound foundation. But even if correct, I would suggest that the creation of a class of what would in effect be “common male importuners” on the same lines and with the same safeguards, and with the same penalties, as are proposed for “common prostitutes” would provide an adequate safeguard against the development of brazen activities on the part of male importuners that might be publicly offensive. Reservations I—RESERVATIONS BY MR ADAIR …. 13. … It is clear that the general body of public opinion regards [living on immoral earnings] as among the most shameful and reprehensible offences. … I therefore recommend that [the law] be carefully revised with a view to including … “middlemen”.

11  THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON HOMOSEXUAL… 

287

14. … I recommend that where circumstances show that the landlord or factor is making a business of letting houses, flat or rooms for the purpose of their being used for habitual prostitution, he should be presumed to be living off the earnings of prostitution unless he proves to the contrary. V.—RESERVATIONS BY Mrs COHEN, Mrs LOVIBOND and Lady STOPFORD Maximum Penalty for Living on the Earnings of Prostitution 1. We do not agree with the majority of our colleagues () that the maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment for the offense of living on the earnings of prostitution is adequate. See paragraph 307 of the report. 2. As explained in paragraph 92 of the report, the law must, in prescribing maximum penalties, have regard to the worst case that could arise, and we feel that the present maximum of two years’ imprisonment is quite inadequate to deal with a person who makes business of exploiting prostitution on a large scale. 3. The possibility that the increased penalties for street offenses might encourage closer organization of the trade and result in new classes of “middlemen” also seems to us to call for increased penal. Ties for living on the earnings of prostitution; we think that in. creased penalties would counteract to some extent the dangers envisaged in paragraph 286 of the report. 4. We accordingly recommend that the maximum penalty for the offense of living on the earnings of prostitution be increased to five years’ imprisonment.

CHAPTER 12

Conclusion: The Legacies of Wolfenden

The Wolfenden Report was heralded as the period’s ‘most influential liberal statement’ by many of its early historians. These scholars, who were concerned with its approach to homosexuality, saw it as a crucial moment when official and public attitudes of legal and social condemnation began to thaw.1 Historians have since taken a critical stance on Wolfenden, pointing out that its recommendations on homosexuality took a full decade to be enacted, and that this enactment was not owing to Wolfenden alone.2 They also argue that while Wolfenden advocated for the decriminalization of homosexual acts in private, the final Report reified condemnatory attitudes about public displays of queer sexuality.3 Indeed, as Matt 1  Weeks, Coming Out, chap. 15; Stephen Jeffery-Poulter, Peers, Queers, and Commons: The struggle for Gay Law Reform from 1950 to the Present (London: Routledge, 1991), chaps. 2–5; Antony Grey, Quest for Justice: Towards Homosexual Emancipation (London: Sinclair Stevenson, 1992), chaps. 3–9. 2  Weeks, Coming Out, chap. 15; Stephen Jeffery-Poulter, Peers, Queers, and Commons: The struggle for Gay Law Reform from 1950 to the Present (London: Routledge, 1991), chaps. 2–5; Antony Grey, Quest for Justice: Towards Homosexual Emancipation (London: Sinclair Stevenson, 1992), chaps. 3–9. 3  See, for example, Leslie J.  Moran, ‘The Homosexualization of English Law’, in Didi Herman and Carl Stychin (eds), Legal Inversions: Lesbians, Gay Men, and the Politics of Law (Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 1995), pp.  7–21; Leslie J.  Moran, The Homosexual(ity) of Law (London: Routledge, 1996), pp.  115–17; Houlbrook, Queer London, pp. 242–8, 254; Matthew Waites, The Age of Consent: Young People, Sexuality and Citizenship (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), pp.  106–11; Matthew Waites, ‘The Fixity of Sexual Identities in the Public Sphere: Biomedical Knowledge, Liberalism and the

© The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8_12

289

290 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

Houlbrook argued in his influential work Queer London, Wolfenden leveraged tolerance of private homosexuality against the ‘public queer culture’ of the streets, parks, and pubs.4 When viewed from the perspective of prostitution, it is difficult to see anyone considering the Wolfenden Report a document that represented new, liberal, and permissive attitudes to commercial sex. Wolfenden recommended that the maximum penalty for solicitation be increased. The Report argued that the existing fine of forty shillings was too low and that it did not act as a sufficient deterrent. In its place, Wolfenden argued for a ‘system of progressively higher penalties’, set at maximums of ten pounds for a first offence, twenty-five pounds for a second offence, and three months’ imprisonment for third or subsequent offences.5 Wolfenden’s justification for this increase in sanctions was as contradictory as it was punitive. On the one hand, it was hoped that the increased cost of fines might be passed on to customers and that this might lower ‘demand’. On the other hand, the Report acknowledged that women who worked as prostitutes were also likely to ‘recoup’ their fines through ‘seeking more customers’.6 Therefore, even a system of progressively larger fines had the potential to, in the words of the Wolfenden Report, ‘defeat its own object’.7 Imprisonment was supposed to rationalize this problem away, but this depended upon the idea that the threat of being sent to prison could be used to encourage women to want to ‘reform’ under the watch of the probation service.8 Consequently, the Wolfenden Report’s recommendations were rooted in speculation about how the women involved in

Heterosexual/Homosexual Binary in Late Modernity’, Sexualities, 8:5 (Dec. 2005), 558–9; Jeffrey Weeks, Sex, Politics and Society: The Regulation of Sexuality Since 1800 (London: Pearson; 3rd edn, 2012), p. 314; Weeks, The World We Have Won, pp. 52–5; Hornsey, The Spiv and the Architect, pp. 9–10, chaps. 2–3; Newburn, Permission and Regulation, pp. 61–2; Jeffery-Poulter, Peers, Queers, and Commons, p.  263; Frank Mort, ‘Mapping Sexual London: The Wolfenden Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution 1954–1957’, New Formations, 37 (Spring 1999), 94–5; Derek McGhee, ‘Wolfenden and the Fear of “Homosexual Spread”: Permeable Boundaries and Legal Defences’, Studies in Law, Politics, and Society, 21 (2000), 71–2. 4  Matt Houlbrook, Queer London, p. 271. 5  Wolfenden Report, p. 92. 6  Wolfenden Report, p. 93. 7  Wolfenden Report, p. 93. 8  Wolfenden Report, p. 93.

12  CONCLUSION: THE LEGACIES OF WOLFENDEN 

291

prostitution might react to increases in punishment, without any consultation with these women about what they might want or need. Frank Mort argues that Wolfenden ‘privatized’ sexuality, and this remains a useful framework for considering the interventions of the Committee.9 Nevertheless, Wolfenden’s efforts to delineate between the immorality of sexual acts within the public and private spheres had especially negative consequences for women working as prostitutes. The term ‘privatization’ perhaps connotes more tolerance of prostitution behind closed doors than either the Wolfenden Committee or the 1959 Street Offences Act intended. Certainly, there were reports that indoor forms of prostitution increased in the wake of Wolfenden. For example, by the mid-­1960s there were reports that the Birmingham area of Moseley and the Beech Grove Road area of Newcastle were witnessing increasing instances of brothel keeping.10 Yet brothels were still criminalized. Under Wolfenden’s recommendations, the 1959 Street Offences Act, and its earlier companion, the 1956 Sexual Offences Act, laws against and definitions of brothels remained intact. Wolfenden and the Street Offences Act did not allow for prostitution to operate off the street with any degree of freedom; this could hardly be said to constitute a form of privatization. Instead, the approach towards brothels outlined by Wolfenden was about marginalization, stigmatization, and further criminalization. Indeed, the Report’s handling of brothels showed up the implausibility of Wolfenden’s claims to be uninterested in either making prostitution itself illegal or with trying to abolish prostitution.11 The Wolfenden Report briefly referred to ‘licensed brothels’, but only to swiftly rejected them by claiming that such a policy ‘would imply the State recognised prostitution as a social necessity’.12 After Wolfenden, then, it remained illegal for a woman to work with another woman off the street, which meant that the space in which someone could legally work in prostitution was narrow indeed, and also dangerous. Placing prostitution and the law around it at the centre of the history of sex and sexuality in post-war Britain challenges the narratives of permissiveness and sexual liberalization. This is not to say that the increased 9  Frank Mort, ‘The Ben Pimlott Memorial Lecture 2010: The Permissive Society Revisited’, Twentieth Century British History, 22:2 (2011), p. 273. 10  Birmingham Daily Post, ‘Special Patrol in District’, 5th October 1961, p. 9; Newcastle Evening Chronicle, ’30 Plead for Clean-Up in “Vice Street”’, 4th October 1964, p. 1. 11  Wolfenden Report, p. 95. 12  Wolfenden, Report, p. 97.

292 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

criminalization of prostitution in this era indicates that liberalization was not happening, but rather to say that the criminalization of women who sold sex and their increased stigmatization was a fundamental part of a very particular kind of liberalization, in which certain behaviours were increasingly tolerated, while others were increasingly condemned. Save for the references to well-known cases such as the alleged prostitution of Christine Keeler, the narrative of the permissive 1960s frequently excludes the experiences of women who sold sex. Then, as now, the sexual liberation of sex workers was regarded as distinct from female sexual liberation more broadly, as through the liberation of sex workers was not an intrinsic part of this process. In 1969, the psychiatrist Eustace Chesser published Twentieth Century Woman, in which he shifted the blame for Wolfenden’s shortcomings onto sex workers by suggesting that the Committee had been hindered by the ‘reluctance of prostitutes to give evidence’. The factors which deterred these women from speaking to the Committee and Wolfenden’s lack of effort to engage in conversation with these women were overlooked by Chesser, who still saw the report as a ‘clear pointer’ to the ‘gradual erosion’ of ‘the traditional, repressive attitude to sex’.13 Such claims rested on the notion that the continued marginalization of sex workers was somehow less repressive than decriminalizing sex work and creating opportunities for sex workers to have their voices heard by those with the power to influence policy. Unlike the decriminalization of homosexuality, which took a decade to arrive, the Conservative government rushed to implement Wolfenden’s recommendations on prostitution, which happened to also be precisely what the previous Home Secretary who had called the Committee had wished for in the first place. The 1959 Street Offences Act removed the need to prove that a woman was soliciting to the annoyance of individuals or groups, retained the term ‘common prostitute’, and introduced a graded system of fining, dramatically raising the maximum fine and allowing for prison sentences in default of fine payment. No measures to address male clients were included, and no attempt was made to reckon with off-­ street prostitution or with third parties, other than that which was covered under the 1956 Sexual Offences Act. The 1959 Street Offences Act remains the core legal statute used against street solicitation for the purposes of prostitution in the present day. A brothel continues to be defined as a place where ‘more than  Eustace Chesser, Twentieth Century Woman (London: Arrow Books Ltd., 1969), p. 12.

13

12  CONCLUSION: THE LEGACIES OF WOLFENDEN 

293

one-woman practices prostitution’ and remains illegal. The term ‘common prostitute’ is retained in the law, despite over a century of protests over it being stigmatizing and fundamentally (and uniquely) unjust. Long after the ‘sus laws’ were repealed the United Kingdom continues to employ a law that requires a person be stigmatized before they can be charged. These laws have done precisely what Wolfenden had expected them to do: they have dramatically reduced the visible evidence of prostitution on the United Kingdom’s streets and public spaces and have pushed prostitution underground. Women who sell sex on the street must do so quickly in order to avoid arrest, often making rapid decisions about whether or not to get in clients’ cars. Women who experience abuse, exploitation, and rape are reluctant to go to the police, often because they have outstanding charges for soliciting or brothel keeping themselves. Those who do are often dismissed—demonstrating that the attitudes towards ‘prostitution’ as a ‘pathology’, found in the Wolfenden interviews, are alive and well today. Women turn frequently to third parties, in order to arrange accommodation, pay fines and bail money, and protect them from both violent clients and the police. Women cannot work indoors together without being liable for brothel keeping, meaning that many sell sex in isolated flats which renders them vulnerable to violence and exploitation. Alongside these laws, many sex workers today have to contend with laws against ‘trafficking’ which are used to police migration. When brothels are raided in the name of anti-trafficking, sex workers are often deported.14 14  For a small selection of literature on these issues, see Niki Adams, ‘Anti-Traffic Legislation: Protection or Deportation?’, Feminist Review, 73.1 (2003), 135–39; Laura Maria Augustin, Sex at the Margins: Migration, Labour Markets, and the Rescue Industry (London: Zed Books, 2007); Elizabeth Bernstein, ‘Militarized Humanitarianism Meets Carceral Feminism: The Politics of Sex, Rights, and Freedom in Contemporary Antitrafficking Campaigns’, Signs, 36.4 (2010), 45–71; Elizabeth Bernstein, Temporarily Yours : Intimacy, Authenticity, and the Commerce of Sex (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2007); Sophie Day, On the Game: Women and Sex Work (London: Pluto Press, 2007); Jo Doezema, ‘Loose Women or Lost Women? The Re-Emergence of the Myth of “White Slavery” in Contemporary Discourses of “Trafficking in Women”’, Gender Issues, 18.1 (2000), 23–50; Kate Hardy, Sarah Kingston, and Teela Sanders, ‘New Sociologies of Sex Work’ (London: Ashgate, 2010); Phil Hubbard, ‘Cleansing the Metropolis: Sex Work and the Politics of Zero Tolerance’, Urban Studies, 41 (2004), 1687–1702; Johanna Kantola and Judith Squires, ‘Discourses Surrounding Prostitution Policies in the UK’, in Political Science Association Annual Conference (Aberdeen, 2002); Kamala Kempadoo, ‘Trafficking and Prostitution Reconsidered  : New Perspectives on Migration, Sex Work, and Human Rights’ (Boulder,

294 

S. CASLIN AND J. LAITE

The Wolfenden Committee concluded that ‘the risks’ associated with its recommendations on prostitution were worth undertaking, if it meant that prostitution could be kept out of the sight and mind of ‘ordinary, respectable citizens’. Sex workers’ rights organizations feel that the abuse, exploitation, murder, and criminalization of women who sell sex are far too high a price to pay for this kind of moralistic public order. Since the 1970s, sex workers’ rights organizations have been demanding the decriminalization of street solicitation and brothel keeping, pointing to the way that these laws have stigmatized, criminalized, and victimized women for engaging in labour that is not only legal in the United Kingdom but also often the only alternative to poverty or exploitation in other kinds of work. Over the past decade, there have been increasing calls for new forms of criminalization—namely, the criminalization of clients (that subject so studiously avoided by Wolfenden). Sex workers and the majority of social scientists who research prostitution argue that these measures will serve only to push prostitution further underground, and that women who sell sex will once again become the victims of what is a moral crusade couched in the language of public order and liberal or feminist values. At the time of writing, still more consultations and committees have been called in order to discover the best way to address prostitution in light of proposals to criminalize clients. It remains to be seen whether any real legal change— either in the form of decriminalization or further criminalization—will be undertaken by future legislators. In any case, the battles that rage today demonstrate that the Wolfenden Committee’s attempt to forge or manufacture a consensus around prostitution was superficial at best, even as we continue to live with the consequences of its recommendations.

Co: Paradigm, 2005); Hilary Kinnel, Violence and Sex Work in Britain (London: Willan Publishing, 2008); Julia O’Connell Davidson, Prostitution, Power and Freedom (Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press, 1999); Jane Scoular and Maggie O’Neill, ‘Regulating Prostitution: Social Inclusion, Responsibilization, and the Politics of Prostitution Reform’, British Journal of Criminology, 47 (2007), 764–78; Teela Sanders, ‘The Risks of Street Prostitution: Punters, Police and Protesters’, Urban Studies, 41 (2004), 1017–1703.



Glossary

The Committee1 Sir John Wolfenden (Chairman): started his career as an Oxford philosophy don, then became the headmaster of Uppingham and Shrewsbury Schools, he had been appointed to the vice-chancellorship at Reading in 1950. He was knighted in 1956. James Adair (1886–1982): OBE, was a solicitor, a former procurator fiscal (public prosecutor) for Glasgow and Chairman of the Scottish Council of the YMCA. Mary Cohen (1893–1962): OBE, was vice-president of the Scottish Association of Mixed Clubs and Girls’ Clubs. Dr Desmond Curran (1903–1985): was consultant psychiatrist at St George’s Hospital, London. The Rev. Canon Vigo Auguste Demant (1893–1983): theologian and social commentator, was Regius Professor of Moral and Pastoral Theology at Oxford. Kenneth Diplock (1907–1985): QC, the Recorder of Oxford, was appointed a judge of the Queen’s Bench Division, with the customary knighthood, in 1956. Sir Hugh Linstead (1901–1987): barrister, a pharmaceutical chemist and the Conservative MP for Putney.

1

 These biographies are taken from Brian Lewis, Wolfenden’s Witnesses (London, 2016).

© The Author(s) 2020 S. Caslin, J. Laite, Wolfenden’s Women, Genders and Sexualities in History, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44022-8

295

296 

GLOSSARY

Peter Francis Walter Kerr, 12th Marquess of Lothian (1922–2004): farmed estates in the Borders and subsequently held junior positions in Conservative administrations. Kathleen Lovibond (1893–1976): chaired the Uxbridge Juvenile Magistrates’ Court, was appointed CBE in 1955 and became Mayor of Uxbridge in 1956. Victor Mishcon (1915–2006): the son of a rabbi, was a Brixton solicitor and a Labour member (and chairman) of the London County Council. Goronwy Rees (1909–1979): Principal of the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth. He was forced to resign early because of his controversial approaches. Conwy Roberts (Secretary): A home office civil servant appointed as the Committee’s secretary by the Home Secretary. Roberts did not sit on the Committee as an interviewer, but was always present in the room and had a very large role to play in the selection of memoranda, witnesses, the construction of the proceedings, and in shaping the conclusions of the Committee. The Rev. RFV Scott (1897–1975): minister of St Columba’s Church of Scotland, Pont Street, London. He resigned from the committee before it finished. Lady (Lily) Stopford (1890–1978): ophthalmologist and magistrate; she was married to Professor Sir John Stopford, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Manchester. William Wells (1908–1990): barrister and Labour MP for Walsall and then Walsall North, was appointed QC in 1955. Dr Joseph Whitby (1900–1960): former national bridge champion, was a general practitioner in North West London with wartime psychiatric experience.

The Witnesses This is not an exhaustive list of all of the witnesses and organizations that were interviewed or which submitted evidence to Wolfenden. It is intended as a guide to the passages we have excerpted from submitted evidence, interviews, and the final report.

 GLOSSARY 

297

Professional and Public Organizations Association of Chief Police Officers of England and Wales: This was the official body that brought together the heads of all the police forces of England and Wales, except for the London Metropolitan Police. This body reported directly to the Home Office. It was represented in interview by Mr C Martin, CBE, the Chief Constable of Liverpool and Mr CH Watkins, the Chief Constable of Glamorgan. Association of Headmasters, Headmistresses and Matrons of Approved Schools: Approved schools were public institutions to which children were sent by court order, after committing an offense of being determined to be ‘beyond parental control’. This body was represented in interview by Mr Headley Chamberlain, Mrs J. Bennell, Mr J. Clarke, Miss MM Brown and Mrs MM Jackson. Association for Moral and Social Hygiene: This Association was founded in 1915 and had its roots in the nineteenth century Contagious Diseases Acts repeal campaign and the anti-trafficking movement. It was the chief organization dedicated to the question of prostitution in this period and had been campaigning throughout the interwar years for the repeal of the solicitation laws, the removal of the term ‘common prostitute’ from law and for what they called ‘an equal and high moral standard’. It was represented in interview by Mrs Margery Corbett-Ashby, a suffragist, internationalist and politician; Mrs Elizabeth Abbott; Miss EM Steel, Miss Chave Collisson, the organization’s general secretary and Miss Dorothy  Peto, OBE, a former woman police officer at the CID.  They changed their name to the Josephine Butler Society in 1959. Association of Municipal Corporations: This Association was formed in the late nineteenth century with eighty-three member municipalities to protect the interests and rights of municipal corporations, particularly in regard to national legislation and policy. It was represented in interview by Mr C Barrett, Miss DL Ridd, Councillor BS Langston; Mr EL Russell; Sir Harold Banwell and Mr KP Poole. British Medical Association: This was the professional association and accrediting body of all medical practitioners in the United Kingdom. With a membership of over 68,000 medical practitioners, the BMA promoted themselves as being in the ‘unique position to obtain the views of the profession for governmental and other bodies upon matters of a scientific or

298 

GLOSSARY

medico-social character’.2 It was represented in interview by Dr Dennis Carroll, Dr Ronald Gibson, Dr TCN Gibbens, a psychiatrist who was an expert in prostitution and other sexual matters; Dr Ambrose King, Dr Doris Odlum, Dr Leonard Simpson and Dr EE Claxton, the general secretary. The only woman in this group, Dr Doris Odlum was a Senior Physician for Psychological Medicine at Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Hospital, as well as a Consultant Psychotherapist at London’s St Marylebone Hospital for Psychiatry and Child Guidance. British Medical Council: The council in charge of the registration of doctors, medical education and pharmacopeia in the United Kingdom. They only briefly commented on prostitution, focussing in the main on homosexuality. British Psychological Society: This was the professional association of all registered psychologists in the United Kingdom and was an accrediting body for a discipline that was still in its relative infancy. It was represented in interview by Miss MA Davidson, Dr EB Strauss and Professor PE Vernon. British Social Biology Council: The council began its life as the National Council for Combating Venereal Disease and maintained a ‘social hygiene’ approach to public health and morality into the 1950s. It sent a submission but was not interviewed. Central After-Care Association: This Association, which was disbanded shortly after the Wolfenden Report was published, was dedicated to undertaking the care and supervision of persons after release from a borstal institution or on license from corrective training, preventative detention or imprisonment. They were represented in interview by Mr Frank C. Foster, for borstals and young prisoners; Miss HL Long, for the women’s and girls’ division; and Revd. Martin W. Pinker, for the men’s division. Church Commissioners: With a mandate to support the work and mission of the Church of England, the Church Commissioners were also its funds and estates manager, responsible for distributing and managing the vast wealth of the institution. A decade before Wolfenden, they were in the midst of a scandal over the fact that some properties owned by ecclesiastical landlords were being used as brothels. They were represented at interview by Sir James R. Brown, the Third Church Estate Commissioner.

2

 British Medical Association, Memo of Evidence, Preface.

 GLOSSARY 

299

Church of England Moral Welfare Council: This was the philanthropic body of the Church dedicated to addressing and preventing prostitution and other sexual sins. They were represented in interview by Rev. D. Sherwin Bailey, whose book Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition (1955) had a huge influence on the Church’s approach to homosexuality and was instrumental in establishing Wolfenden and guiding its findings; by Ven EN Millard, and Dr FG Macdonald. Ethical Union: The Union of Ethical Societies was founded in 1896 and became the British Humanist Association in 1967. It submitted evidence but was not called to testify. Estates and Finances Committee of the Church Commissioners: The Paddington Church Commissioners administered Church Estates that had come under scrutiny in the area as suspected brothels and sites of prostitution. General Council of the Bar: This Council represented the interests and concerns of Barristers in the United Kingdom. Glasgow Burgh Magistrates: This association represented the magistrates of the burgh of Glasgow. Howard League for Penal Reform: Born of a merger between the Howard Association (founded 1866) and the Penal Reform League (founded 1907) under the guidance of Marjorie Fry in 1921, this organization campaigned for justice and reform in the criminal justice system in Great Britain. They were represented in interview by Mr FE Baker, Miss Mary Hamilton (a probation officer a Bow Street Police Court), Dr TCN Gibbens (see also British Medical Association witnesses, above) and Mr Hugh J. Klare, the secretary. Institute of Psychiatry: The official body, later the Royal Association of Psychiatrists, representing these professionals in the United Kingdom. Institute of Psycho-Analysis: Formed in 1913, the Institute was the training body for psychoanalysts and represented their professional opinions and interests. Josephine Butler Society: See Association for Moral and Social Hygiene Law Society: This was, and is, the independent body that represented solicitors in the United Kingdom. They were represented at interview by Mr LE Barker, Mr AF Stapleton Cotton, Mr GA MacDonald, Mr WO Carter, Mr H. Horsfall-Turner and Mr GR Proudlove. They were one of the only organizations with more than three delegates who did not include a woman. Magistrates’ Association: Founded in 1920, the Magistrates Association had grown significantly by the 1950s and was becoming the

300 

GLOSSARY

representative body for Magistrates in the United Kingdom. It was represented in interview by Sir Leonard Costello, Mrs MS Crewdson, Mr JP  Eddy, Mr Claud Mullins and Miss Bartha de Blank, the general secretary. Magistrates of the Corporation of Glasgow: An Association representing Glasgow magistrates. They were represented at interview by Bailie TB Duncan, Bailie TJ Thompson, Mr RD Bryson (Town Clerk’s Department), Mr JF Langmuir (Stipendiary Magistrate, Glasgow), Mr James Robertson (Prosecutor Fiscal of Police, Glasgow) Mayfair Association: Established in 1951, it is known today as the Mayfair and St. James Association. The Association represented business owners and managers in Mayfair. It was formed just as the prostitution problem grew more noticeable in Mayfair, especially in the Shepherd Market and Curzon Street area—though their own organization history does not cite this as an impetus. It was represented in interview by Mrs M.  Anderson, Mr WR Sloman and The Earl Howe, known as George Curzon, a Royal Navy Commander, star of stage and screen, and also a landlord with many freeholds in the area. Metropolitan Police: The Metropolitan Police oversaw the policing of the growing metropolis of London and all its boroughs, with the exception of the City of London. In terms of prostitution, the most significant police divisions were A (Hyde Park), B (Victoria), C (Soho and the West End), D (North Soho, coming to be known as Fitzrovia) and F (Paddington). After years of scandals and defamation in the press, the Met hoped for some kind of resolution that would make the policing of prostitution and homosexuality easier for them. It was represented in interview by Sir John Nott-Bower, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner; Mr T.  MacDonald Baker and Mr RET  Birch, solicitors with JJ Wotner and Sons, the police solicitors; Mr A Robertson, Commander of A Department. National Association of Probation Officers: Formed in 1912, this was the professional association of people working in the growing field of probation work, shortly after they had been granted official status though the 1907 Probation of Offenders Act. After 1938, probation was officially overseen by the Home Office. National Council of Women of Great Britain: The National Council of Women were represented by Lady Nunburnholme, a former President of the National Council of Women of Great Britain, British Honorary Vice President of the International Council of Women and Chairman of the British Vigilance Association. Also giving evidence on behalf of the

 GLOSSARY 

301

NCWGB alongside Nunburnholme were Mrs MF Bligh, the Honorary Secretary of the Council’s Moral Welfare Sectional Committee, and Mrs M.  Lefroy, a former NCWGB President and Chairman of the organisation’s Moral Welfare Committee. The NCWGB were concerned about proposals to increase the penalties for solicitation. However, Lady Nunburnholme proposed at a National Council of Women meeting in Worthing in October 1957 that ‘maximum penalties for street offences should be increased and that for a third offence there should be a sentence of three months in prison’.3 Paddington Borough Council: Centred around Paddington Station, the metropolitan borough of Paddington included Bayswater (the north side of Hyde Park), Edgware Road, Westbourne and Maida Vale. In the 1950s, it was the station where American troops stationed near Oxford would arrive in London on weekends. It was an area that had been in decline, and the Council was attempting to rejuvenate it with investment in hotels and its residential spaces. It also had a large amount of cheap and degraded housing stock and was soon to become the site of ‘Rachmanism’. The Council was represented in interview by Councillor P. Dyas, Alderman WD Goss and Mr CE Jobson, the Deputy Town Clerk. Paddington Moral Reform Council: This organization was founded in the late 1940s to campaign for the betterment of the Paddington area, as a direct response to the growing amount of prostitution that was taking place in their area. It was represented by Mr Robert Allan, a conservative M.P. for the area; Councillor Mrs Eyre and Mr MP Simpson, who worked in the tourism industry. Public Morality Council: An influential and long-lived organization that was formed in 1889, during the period of widespread ‘social purity’ campaigns in late-nineteenth century Britain. Its aim was to supress and abolish vice, prostitution, pornography and other ‘immorality’, particularly focused on London. It became the Social Morality Council in 1967. Progressive League: The Progressive League was a British organisation for social reform, founded in 1932 by HG Wells and CEM  Joad under the name Federation of Progressive Societies and Individuals (FPSI). Dedicated to ‘scientific humanism’ and renamed ‘The Progressive League’ in 1940. By the 1960s, it was losing momentum and wound up in 2005. It was represented in interview by Mr Alec Craig, Mr Robert

3

 Worthing Gazette, 30th October 1957, p. 10.

302 

GLOSSARY

Pollard and Dr Ernest Seeley, a leading proponent of sex education and abortion decriminalization. Royal Medico-Psychological Association: The Association was formed in 1840 and received its Royal Charter in 1926. It became the Royal College of Psychiatrists in 1971. Society of Labour Lawyers: Formed when their predecessor the Haldane Society split over the question of required Party membership, this society represented lawyers who were members of the Labour Party. Their aims focussed upon ensuring equal access to justice and improving publicly funded legal aid. It was represented before the Committee by Mr Gerald Gardiner, QC, Mr Ben Hooberman, Mr PR Kimber, Mr CR Hewitt and Miss Jean Graham Hall. The Society of Labour Lawyers told the Committee that driving prostitution off the streets would mean that the women who sold sex would become more dependent on, and therefore more susceptible to exploitation by, third parties. The Society suggested that prostitution should be managed via solicitation being tolerated in some streets and prohibited in others. Westminster City Council: Westminster City Council presided over the wealthiest few miles in the country, that was also home to London's informal ‘red light’ zone, Soho and the growing problem of Shepherd Market. The area was known for both its on- and off-street prostitution, which was fuelled by a thriving West End nightlife. The council was represented in interview by Alderman Sir Arthur Howard, Alderman Charles P. Russell, Mr W. Walsh, a solicitor to the Council and Mr TD O’Brian, the Deputy Town Clerk.

Government Departments Home Office: The Home Office, as the body in charge of all domestic policy in regard to crime, vice, security and immigration, had a vested interested in the findings of the Wolfenden Committee. They were represented in interview by Mr Philip Allen, Assistant Under-Secretary of State (one of the permanent under-secretaries, and one of the leading civil servants in the country), and Mr Francis Graham-Harrison, Assistant Secretary. Prison Commission: The Prison Commission was established under the Prison Act 1877 as a statutory board to administer and inspect prisons in England and Wales, though many powers remained with the Home Office. Its duties included the maintenance of all prisons, the appointment

 GLOSSARY 

303

of prison staff, the inspection of prison buildings and the condition of prisoners. It also submitted annual reports each prison. It took charge of Borstals in 1908, and remand and detention centres in 1948. Scottish Home Department: The Scottish Home Department oversaw key separate Scottish Institutions that were not under the control of the Home Office in Westminster. Relevant institutions included the Scottish prison commission, education department and poor relief. This became the Scottish Executive in the late twentieth century.

Individual Witnesses/Authors of Submissions PC Anderson: A police constable in ‘C’ Division, Soho. He testified along with PC Scarborough. Chief (Woman) Supt. Bather: The most senior woman in the Metropolitan Police Mr Paul Bennett: London Police Court Magistrate Miss BM Denis de Vitre: Assistant Inspector of Constabulary, Home Office Sir Laurence Dunne: Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Mr Lionel I. Gordon: Crown Agent, Scotland Miss Katherine Hardwick: A social worker and probation officer. She submitted evidence but did not testify before the committee. Mr W. Hunter: Assistant Chief Constable, Edinburgh Dr Alfred Kinsey: A very well-known American biologist and sexologist, Kinsey was considered an expert both in homosexuality and prostitution. It was his comments about the visibility of prostitution in London after he had visited the city in the early 1950s that added urgency to the question of legal reform. Mr James Finlay Langmuir: Stipendiary Magistrate of Glasgow David Linton: A (largely self-appointed) expert on the history and sociology of prostitution, who submitted evidence of his ‘observations during army service and later in civilian life’, alongside lengthy recommendations. Miss Christina Mackenzie: A justice of the peace and social worker in Glasgow. She gave evidence as a warden of the Women’s Help Committee. Mackenzie was especially concerned about the gendered double standard in the law and felt that the Committee should pay more attention to the role of the client. She also objected to the Committee’s concerns about prostitution public causing offence and argued that pushing prostitution

304 

GLOSSARY

out of public view was not an appropriate solution to the issue of solicitation. Mr Claude Mullins: London Police Court Magistrate Sir John Nott-Bower: See also Metropolitan Police Mr Frank Powell: London Police Court Magistrate Woman PS Splaton: Metropolitan Police Woman Sergeant. She testified alongside PC White. Mr James A Robertson: Assistant Chief Constable, Glasgow Mr James Robertson: Procurator-Fiscal of Police, Glasgow Dr Winifred Rushworth: Honourable Medical Director of the Davidson Clinic, Edinburgh Mrs Rosalind Wilkinson: Sociologist and author of Women of the Streets: A Sociological Study of the Common Prostitute (1955). For more on Wilkinson and her findings, see Chap. 9, Wolfenden’s Missing Women. PC Scarborough: A police constable in ‘C’ Division, Soho. He testified along with PC Anderson. Woman PC White: Metropolitan Police Woman Constable. She testified alongside PS Splaton. Mrs Marthe Watts (nee Huchbourg): A self-identified prostitute, Marthe Watts came to England after contracting a marriage of convenience to Arthur Watts, who she only saw twice in her life. She was known as one of the women who the Messina Brothers ‘ran’ in Shepherd Market. Upon leaving the gang, she wrote The Men in My Life (1960) reflecting on her experiences selling sex in London and around Europe and North Africa. Marthe Watts was never interviewed by the Wolfenden Committee, but her thoughts on this committee and its recommendations can be found in excerpts in Chap. 11.

The Laws The Departmental Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution had to examine the workings of dozens of different laws and bi-laws related to prostitution around England and Wales, and Scotland. Below we list the key clauses and statutes. It is not an exhaustive list. For more on these laws, see the relevant section of the Wolfenden Report reproduced in Chap.10. 1824 Vagrancy Act 1839 Metropolitan Police Act 1847 Towns Police Clauses Act 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act

 GLOSSARY 

1892 Burgh Police (Scotland) Act 1898 Amendment to the Vagrancy Act 1902 Immoral Traffic (Scotland) Act 1912 Criminal Law Amendment (White Slavery) Act 1956 Sexual Offences Act

305