The Queen_s Daughters in India Katharine C. Bushnell and Elizabeth W. Andrew 1244 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Queen's Daughters in India
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the
world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-
use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: The Queen's Daughters in India

Author: Elizabeth W. Andrew
Katharine C. Bushnell

Commentator: Josephine Elizabeth Grey Butler
Henry J. Wilson

Release date: November 4, 2014 [eBook #47288]
Most recently updated: October 24, 2024

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/47288

Credits: Produced by Chris Curnow, Quentin Campbell and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE QUEEN'S DAUGHTERS IN INDIA
***

Front Cover

Transcriber’s Notes

The old-fashioned English names of towns and
cities in South Asia that are used in the text have

been retained. Variations in the spelling of other
words are unchanged unless noted in the following.

For a complete list of corrections, other changes,
and notes, please see the end of this document.

Clickable links to page numbers in the Table of
Contents appear as 32 rather than 32.
Similarly, links to footnotes in the text appear like
this[3] rather than being underlined like this[3].

The Queen’s Daughters
in India.

BY

ELIZABETH W. ANDREW and KATHARINE
C. BUSHNELL.

WITH PREFATORY LETTERS BY

Mrs. JOSEPHINE E. BUTLER and Mr. HENRY
J. WILSON, M.P.

“Remember them that are in bonds as bound with them.”

LONDON. MORGAN AND SCOTT,
12, PATERNOSTER BUILDINGS, E.C.

To be obtained from the
British Committee of the Federation for the Abolition of State Regulation of Vice, 17,
Tothill Street, Westminster, S.W.;

And from the American Purity Alliance, United Charities’ Building, New York, U.S.A.

1899.

Entered, in the year 1898, by

Elizabeth W. Andrew and Katharine C. Bushnell,

At Stationers’ Hall, London.

DEDICATED

TO

JOSEPHINE E. BUTLER,

PROPHETESS OF THE TRUTH IN CHRIST JESUS; LOVER OF HOLY JUSTICE;

FRIEND OF OUTCAST WOMEN; LEADER OF “THE NEW ABOLITIONISTS”;

WHOM GOD HATH ANOINTED WITH HIS OWN PECULIAR JOY.

BECAUSE, IN THE SPIRIT OF HER MASTER, SHE HATH

“LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED INIQUITY.”

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.

T h i s little book is written under a deep sense of obligation to the
womanhood of the world, but more especially under a sense of duty
to God. A group of women of the British aristocracy have lifted their
voices in advocacy of licensed vice; and their sycophants and
admirers in England and America are either re-echoing their plea or
excusing their conduct. The plea is made primarily for India, but
incidentally for all Christendom, and every effort is being put forth, openly
or covertly, to contaminate public sentiment on this point.
In five States of America, in a little over a year, the attempt has been
made to secure legislation for the compulsory periodical examination of
women; and a strong organization exists on both sides of the water to
promote this infamous object. Under these conditions it is a matter of grave
moment that certain secular, temperance, and religious periodicals which
would have sounded a clear note of warning six months ago, are today
being deceived. They print the outrageous falsehoods that represent India as
having become a menace to the health of England because of the abolition
of brothel slavery in that country. Excuses are made for the shallow-brained
sophistry of those who pretend that the compulsory periodical examination
of women can be divorced from the moral debasement of women, and as
though such compulsory examination were something quite unlike the
notorious Contagious Diseases Acts. High titles and famous names are
quoted as a warrant for advocating the iniquity; and certain men are being
exalted as though famous temperance advocates, who are not themselves
total abstainers, and who are well-known public advocates of licensed
fornication. Thus is introduced into philanthropic movements of the present
day an element of fatal moral confusion, as though a person who boldly
defies the principles of ordinary decency in one direction could be received
as a trusted and efficient promoter of decency along another line; as though
a man could be relied upon as an advocate and apostle of that of which he is
not an example. We do not doubt that some of the persons who do these
things are well-intentioned; but they expend their benevolence on the wolf

and forget the lamb. They would win others to play with them on the asp’s
nest.
We have determined on our knees before God that those who advocate
the compulsory periodical examination of women shall do so knowing what
it means, and knowing also that their friends and neighbours understand
what is being advocated.
We offer no apology for our plainness of speech; to employ smooth
language and obscure phrases in the present crisis would be to trifle with a
deadly enemy—to toy with the Indian cobra.
September, 1897.

From MRS. JOSEPHINE E. BUTLER.

I wish that every woman in the United Kingdom could read this little
book. It tells the truth, the terrible truth, concerning the treatment of certain
Indian women, our fellow-citizens and sisters, by the British Government. I
believe if that truth were known throughout the length and breadth of our
land, it would become impossible for our rulers to continue to maintain the
cruel and wicked Regulations by which these Indian women are enslaved
and destroyed.
I am a loyal Englishwoman; I love my country. It is because of my great
love for her that I mourn so deeply over her dishonour in the promotion of
such legislation and practices as this book exposes, and that I will not cease
to denounce the crimes committed in her name so long as I have life and
breath.
I thank God that the writers of this book have been raised up to plead the
sacred cause of Justice and of Womanhood; and I rejoice to know that God
has bestowed on them a measure of the fearless spirit of the faithful
prophets and prophetesses of old, to rebuke national sin and to preach
repentance to the people.
Josephine E. Butler.
Feb., 1898.

From MR. HENRY J. WILSON, M.P.

Dear Friends,
I am glad you intend to reprint “The Queen’s Daughters in India.”
It brings home to many who will never read Blue Books the terrible facts
about officially-authorized vice; and it shows the moral aspects of the
“Regulation” system, which Blue Books never show.
I remember very clearly how your first Report, in 1892, of what you had
seen, impressed us all as a very careful record of a very careful
investigation.
Then, in 1893, I was a member of the Departmental Committee
appointed to hear your evidence, when your clear testimony, which no
cross-examination could shake, gave abundant evidence of your close
observation and the accuracy of your records.
The impression this made on me was only deepened when, in India, in
1894 (on the Opium Commission), I saw one of the places you had
described with such remarkable closeness of detail.
It is deplorable that we should have to fight this battle again. But so it is.
Princesses and Titled Ladies have added their influence to that of the panic-
mongering materialists, in the endeavour to “make the practice of
prostitution, if not absolutely innocuous, at least, much less dangerous”—
for that is, in the language of the Royal Commissioners of 1871, the object
in view.
I thank God, therefore, that you are able to visit this country again, to
help us both by voice and pen in the renewed agitation which is forced upon
us.
Yours faithfully,
Henry J. Wilson .
Feb., 1898.

CONTENTS.

PAGE
Dedication iii

Preface to First Edition v

From Mrs. Josephine E. Butler vii

From Mr. Henry J. Wilson, M.P. ix

I. Cantonment Life in India 13

II. Seeking the Outcast 32

III. The Habitations of Cruelty 45

IV. The Contagious Diseases Acts 64

V. Pleading for the Oppressed 86

VI. Some Anglo-Indian Moral Sentiments 99

Appendices 113

THE

QUEEN’S DAUGHTERS IN INDIA.

I.

Cantonment Life in India.

A gentleman in India, who had spent many years in military service,
told us the following tradition:—
“In the year 1856, before the Mutiny, Lady —— was one evening
riding out on horseback at Umballa, unattended, when the bridle of
her horse was suddenly seized by a British soldier who was possessed of
evil designs against her. Most earnestly she protested against his violence,
and remonstrated with him that, besides the wrong to her, to injure one of
her social rank would utterly ruin his entire future, as he would be flogged
and dismissed from the army in disgrace. Thereupon ensued a conversation
in which he pleaded extenuation for such a crime so successfully that she
readily accepted his false statement that there was excuse for vice when
soldiers were not allowed to marry. After that experience she sought
opportunity to talk with high military officials concerning the necessity of
protecting high-born ladies from such risks, by furnishing opportunities for
sensual indulgence to the British soldiers, and the result was the elaboration
and extension of a system for the apportionment of native women to
regiments.” We have never been able to verify the exact truth of this
incident, but it probably has a basis in fact. Yet it has had its counterpart in a
recent movement among the aristocratic women of England to re-introduce
the same wicked legislation. It is on this account that the authors have
considered it necessary to print a more extended account of the work in
behalf of the women of India, in which they have had a large share. If the
exceedingly simple style in which they give their story seems to some
readers almost an insult to their intelligence, and lacking in the delicacy of
touch that could be desired, it must not be forgotten for one moment that
they are writing with special regard for those in the humblest ranks of life,
who have often had scant opportunities for education; for it is upon the
daughters of such that the oppressive laws for the licensing of prostitution
fall; and in large part the supposed advantages of licensed prostitution
accrue to the upper social classes, which are, in fact, the lower moral

classes. The crusade against licensed fornication is a war between
respectable daughters of the poor and rich and powerful men and women.
Whether the narrative given above be wholly true or not, the fact remains
that when so-called “Christian England” took control of “heathen India,”
and plots of ground called Cantonments were staked off for the residence of
the British soldiers and their officers, full provision was made for the flesh,
to fulfil the lusts thereof. A Cantonment is a considerable section of land,
sometimes comprising several square miles; and within these Cantonments
much more arbitrary law prevails than the civil law by which the rest of the
country is governed. There are about one hundred military Cantonments in
India. Sometimes these Cantonments have few inhabitants besides the
soldiers and a few traders in groceries, etc., for the soldiers; and again in
some places a whole city has grown up within the Cantonment, and many
Europeans reside therein, feeling more safe in case of threatened trouble
from an uprising of the people against the Government, than outside under
civil law only. All the land of a Cantonment belongs to the Government,
and in case of war the military officials may seize, for residence, all the
houses within the Cantonment without regard to the actual owners of the
buildings, and the commanding officer has the power of expelling any one
he pleases from the Cantonment, without assigning any reason for so doing.
The system devised for furnishing sensual indulgence to the British
soldier, and for protecting him from diseases consequent on such
indulgence, was commonly called the Contagious Diseases Acts, but was
carried out under Cantonment Regulations, and was as follows in its main
features:—
There were placed with each regiment (of about a thousand soldiers)
from twelve to fifteen native women, who dwelt in appointed houses or
tents, as the case might be, called “chaklas.” These women were allowed to
consort with British soldiers only, and were registered by the Cantonment
magistrate, and tickets of license were given them.
Besides the “chakla,” i.e., the Government brothel, there was in each
Cantonment a prison hospital, in which the patients were confined against
their will. To these Lock Hospitals the women were obliged to go
periodically (generally once a week) for an indecent examination, to see
whether every part of the body was free from any trace of diseases likely to
spread from them to the soldiers, as the result of immoral relations. The

compulsory examination is in itself a surgical rape. When a woman was
found diseased, she was detained in the hospital until cured; when found
healthy she was given a ticket of license to practise fornication and was
returned to the chakla for that purpose.
In case a woman tried to escape from the chakla, or from the Lock
Hospital, and was apprehended, she would be taken to the Cantonment
magistrate, who would punish her with fine or imprisonment.
Even the price of the visits of soldiers to the chakla was fixed by military
usage, and was so low that the soldier would scarcely miss what he
expended in vicious indulgence. We have frequently heard in England that
the officers sent out in the English towns to secure recruits for the army
hold out, as an inducement to young men to enlist, the fact that a licentious
life in India is so cheap, and that the Government will see to it that no
disease will follow the soldiers’ profligacy. But this last promise is
altogether false, for statistics show that with all their efforts diseases
increase with the increase of licentiousness, with small regard to the
military surgeons’ efforts to make it physically safe.
When a regiment came into a large Cantonment where there were
barracks, there was generally a large Government brothel to which all the
women were sent for residence, and a guard in uniform looked after them.
When the soldiers were camped out in the open field, tents were set up for
the women at the back part of the encampment. When the soldiers marched,
the women were carried in carts, with British soldiers to guard them, or sent
by train to the destination of the regiment. In charge of the women was
placed a superintendent or brothel-keeper, called the “mahaldarni.” She also
was expected to procure women as desired; and we have ourselves read the
official permits granted these women to go out to procure more women
when needed.
On June 17, 1886, a military order, known among the opponents of State
regulation as the “Infamous Circular Memorandum,” was sent to all the
Cantonments of India by Quartermaster-General Chapman, in the name of
the Commander-in-Chief of the army in India (Lord Roberts). But during
the course of the enquiry of the Departmental Committee of 1893, its real
author was discovered to be Lord Roberts himself, not his Quartermaster-
General.

This Memorandum (Parliamentary Paper No. 197, of 1888) is a lengthy
document, every part of which has painful interest; but we can only give a
faint outline. It specified certain measures to be instituted as means for
looking more carefully after the health of British soldiers, and the
observations therein were to be heeded by the “military and medical
authorities in every command” throughout India. (See Appendix A.)
This order said (and military orders are well-nigh inexorable): “In the
regimental bazaars[1] it is necessary to have a sufficient number of women,
to take care that they are sufficiently attractive, to provide them with proper
houses, and, above all, to insist upon means of ablution being always
available.” It proceeds: “If young soldiers are carefully advised in regard to
the advantage of ablution, and recognise that convenient arrangements exist
in the regimental bazaar [that is, in the chakla], they may be expected to
avoid the risks involved in association with women who are not recognised
[that is, licensed] by the regimental authorities.” In other words, young
soldiers are not expected to be moral, but only to be instructed as to the
safest way of practising immorality. This remarkable document goes on to
suggest that young soldiers should be taught to consider it a “point of
honour” to save each other from contagion by pointing out to their officers
women with whom there was risk of disease. The document calls attention
to the need of more women, and the necessity of making the free quarters
“houses that will meet the wishes of the women”—in order, it is implied,
that they may be the more easily lured to live in them.
The official record of what followed, as a result of effort on the part of
under-officials to carry out the instructions of the Commander-in-Chief
(Lord Roberts) is truly shocking, as might be expected. The officer in
command of the 2nd Battalion Cheshire Regiment sent the following
application to the magistrate of Umballa Cantonment: “Requisition for extra
attractive women for regimental bazaar, in accordance with Circular
Memorandum 21a.” “These women’s fares,” it continues, “by one-horse
conveyances, from Umballa to Solon, will be paid by the Cheshire
Regiment on arrival. Please send young and attractive women, as laid down
in Quartermaster-General’s Circular, No. 21a.” Then he added a note to the
effect that some of the women already at hand were not very attractive,
adding: “Application has been made to the Cantonment magistrate of
Umballa for others, but up to date none have arrived; therefore, it is

presumed a great difficulty exists in procuring the class of young women
asked for.” Evidently it was an amazing thing to these self-styled Christian
military officials that heathen women would not flock to their slave pens!
Another commanding officer writes: “There are not enough women; they
are not attractive enough. More and younger women are required, and their
houses should be improved.” Yet another commanding officer writes: “I
have ordered the number of prostitutes to be increased to twelve, and have
given special instructions as to the four additional women being young and
of attractive appearance.”
Such was the zeal for increasing the facilities for safe vice, provoked by
such military methods as described by this Memorandum, that the
unwillingness of the native women to plunge into a life of shame at the
behest of their conquerors, received scant consideration. A retired soldier,
living at Lucknow, told us of his own observations a few years before: that,
if a native policeman saw a young girl talking indiscreetly, though
innocently, with a man, he would denounce her as a suspected prostitute;
she would be brought before the Cantonment magistrate, and be registered
to live among the soldiers. He said the police made large sums of money by
threatening to thus hand over girls to the magistrate, and demanding bribes
as the alternative of such a horrible fate. A Christian Englishman, holding a
responsible position under the Government, vouched for by the Editor of
the Bombay Guardian, relates what he saw in four Cantonments, where the
instructions of the “Infamous Memorandum” were carried out, in the
following language:—
“The orders specified were faithfully carried out, under the supervision of commanding
officers, and were to this effect. The commanding officer gave orders to his quartermaster to
arrange with the regimental Kutwal [an under-official, native] to take two policemen (without
uniform), and go into the villages and take from the homes of these poor people their daughters
from fourteen years and upwards, about twelve or fifteen girls at a time. They were to select the
best-looking. Next morning, these were all put in front of the Colonel and Quartermaster. The
former made his selection of the number required. They were then presented with a pass or
license, and then made over to the old woman in charge of this house of vice under the
Government. The women already there, who were examined by the doctor, and found diseased,
had their passes taken away from them, and were then removed by the police out of the
Cantonment, and these fresh, innocent girls put in their places.”

There is a whole volume of misery expressed in that last sentence, both
for the fresh, innocent girls, and for the diseased ones turned out of the
Cantonment. It has been repeatedly asserted that this system of regulating

vice was so merciful, even to the girls; for their diseases, it has been
claimed, were never allowed to go beyond the initial stage. But what this
witness states is strictly in accordance with what we found to be the case.
When we visited some of these Lock Hospitals and examined the records
kept there, we noted that in the annual reports no cases of secondary stages
of disease were mentioned; but when we questioned the native physicians in
charge as to whether these ever arose, they answered that frequently such
cases occurred, but when a woman became unfit to practise prostitution,
because of that fact, she was turned out of the Cantonment.
The British officials of India have not shown the slightest concern as to
the spread of disease, even when introduced by their own race among the
natives, but have actually sent these women abroad to scatter disease
wherever they go. And what can a poor Army slave-woman do when thus
turned out? Her caste is broken, because she has lived with foreigners, and
her friends will seldom receive her back; she has been compelled to follow
the soldiers on the march; and when dismissed may be hundreds of miles
away from any human being who ever saw her face before. Practically
almost every industrial door in India is closed to women, the nurse-girl to
foreign children being so exceptional as not worthy of mention among the
hundreds of millions of people. The Cantonment sometimes includes all
there is of city life in the whole region, and the woman has no choice but
the open fields or the jungle. God alone knows the fate of these helpless
creatures, and few beside care to know.
This was the exact state of things, with details too infamous to commit to
paper, until 1886, when the Contagious Diseases Acts which had prevailed
in the military stations of England were repealed as the result of a
remarkable crusade led by Mrs. Josephine Butler. As the dependencies of
Great Britain are all supposed to be governed by the same policy as that of
England the repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts there virtually repealed
them in India. But it was not until 1888 that a despatch was sent to India by
the Secretary of State for India, whose duty it is to attend to such matters,
declaring that the system was “indefensible, and must be condemned.”
A copy of Lord Roberts’ “Infamous Memorandum” fell into the hands of
a Christian gentleman who sent it to England. It was there reprinted and
distributed to every member of the House of Commons, and created a great
sensation, meeting with almost universal condemnation. Following upon the

popular indignation created thereby, the House of Commons on June 5,
1888, passed a unanimous resolution that “Any mere suspension of
measures for the compulsory examination of women, and for licensing and
regulating prostitution in India, is insufficient; and the legislation which
enjoins, authorizes, or permits such measures ought to be repealed.”
The publication of the “Infamous Memorandum” in England had shown
that the existing Indian Cantonment Acts must be condemned, and they
were superseded by rules made under a new law, the “Cantonments Act of
1889.” This was a very specious document, which avoided the issue by
merely placing unlimited powers in the hands of the Governor-General in
Council to “make rules consistent with this Act, for the prevention of the
spread of infectious and contagious disorders within the Cantonment.”
It was so recognised and pronounced upon by the newspapers of India,
which favoured licensed vice. Commenting on the new Cantonments Act
one newspaper said: “The religious fanatics who howled until a weak
Government gave way to their clamour … will probably howl again now at
the way the old order of things will be enforced under another name, but
with very little difference in manner.” Another said: “Their phraseology is
the work of a master in the art of making a thing look as unlike itself as it
well can be.” Many others spoke in the same strain. Immediately the
advocates of the abolition of licensed prostitution took alarm, and began a
vigorous remonstrance; for they saw great danger in any law which put
large discretionary power into the hands of officials. The late Rt. Hon. Sir
James Stansfeld, M.P., and Professor Stuart, M.P., addressed a letter to the
Secretary of State for India concerning this new Act, in which they said,
among other things: “If our interpretation of the new proposed regulations
is correct, they may be used to set up again a system of compulsory
examination of prostitutes, and to regulate and license, within the
Cantonment, the calling of those prostitutes who submit to periodical
examination, and to certify and license those who are pronounced
physically fit.”
The official reply from the Secretary of State for India was to the effect
that the Home Government was unwilling to believe, without positive
proof, that this new Cantonments Act would be used to foster licensed
prostitution.

It should be explained here that Abolitionists have always recognised that
to establish the periodical examination is, in and of itself, to license
prostitution; for there can be no possible excuse for the reiterated
examination of healthy women, in anticipation of possible contagion,
without recognising a certain right to practise prostitution, if the women be
pronounced medically “fit” for such a calling. The periodical examination
of women, then, constitutes the living heart of all those forms of legislation
generally comprised under the term, “The Contagious Diseases Acts,” by
whatever local name such regulations may be known.
We came to England in the winter of 1890–91, it being the first country
visited by us on a round-the-world journey for the World’s W.C.T.U., with
which we were, at that time, officially connected.[2]
During this visit we frequently met and talked with Mrs. Josephine
Butler, known and revered by lovers of purity throughout the world for her
heroic service in the cause of the Abolition of State Regulation of Vice. She
expressed a strong desire that while in India in the course of our journey we
should make a careful investigation into the conditions prevailing there, and
learn, if possible, whether the resolution of the House of Commons of June
5, 1888, was being obeyed. As already noted, this resolution demanded the
repeal of all measures that enjoined, authorized, or permitted the
compulsory examination of women and the licensing and regulation of
prostitution. It was desired also that we should secure for the use of
Parliamentary members of the British Committee of the Federation for the
Abolition of State Regulation of Vice actual proof that the resolution was
being disobeyed, such as would meet the official demand for proof from the
Secretary of State, before he would be willing to believe that the new
Cantonments Act was being used to foster licensed prostitution. The
mission was pronounced by Mrs. Butler “one of the most difficult and even
perilous missions ever undertaken in the course of our great crusade.” After
due consideration and prayer for guidance, we consented to undertake the
task.
The British Committee of the Federation furnished us with all necessary
official documents with which to make ourselves thoroughly conversant
with the history of the C. D. Acts throughout the British dependencies in the
Orient, and supplied us with a letter of introduction to a staunch friend of

the cause in India, with whom we were expected to hold frequent
consultations.
We took our departure from England in the month of July, 1891, going
first of all to South Africa and labouring in the interests of our work there
until the cold season set in and we could proceed to India. Reaching India at
the end of December, 1891, we conveyed our letter of introduction to this
confidential friend, who advised us to proceed northward and consult with a
friend of the cause who understood thoroughly the interior life of the
people, and, it was believed, would give great aid to our mission. Travelling
northward we arrived at the station designated, and sought an interview
with this gentleman.
We intimated to him what we hoped to accomplish in India, with a view
to obtaining an expression from him of his willingness to aid us. With
consternation and embarrassment he protested against our undertaking
anything so foolish and impracticable, declaring from his long experience
that it was utterly impossible for women to get at the truth, and entreating
us to abandon so wild a project. When he saw that we did not yield the
matter, he questioned us as to what we were planning to do, how we should
proceed to get information in a country whose customs and language were
so utterly unknown to us, and concerning a military system with which, as
Americans, we were quite unacquainted. We withheld further confidence,
simply saying with earnestness, “Whether this is practicable or
impracticable, women have a right to this knowledge; and we do not think it
foolish or impracticable to trust God to give us all the information we need,
without human aid.”
He felt the most kindly interest in us personally, and manifested this by
several practical expressions; but doubtless he reasoned that he could not
encourage us in what he believed to be an impossible undertaking.
This experience drove us to God, our only helper. We were strangers in a
strange land, carrying the burden of a sacred secret which weighed us to the
earth. After much prayer and deliberation we called on the chief military
surgeon in charge of the station hospital of —— Cantonment. This official
began almost immediately when we called upon him, and entirely without
suggestion from us, to deplore “the repeal of the C. D. Acts,” and, as he
claimed, the consequent increase of specific diseases. He showed us his
daily report, which illustrated what he said on this subject. These diseases,

he said, were for the most part contracted on the march or in the hills,
especially at Ranikhet. This interview took place on January 4, 1892.
The surgeon said he wondered that people did not, from the moral and
religious point of view, see the injury that the repeal of the Contagious
Diseases Acts was doing, not only to the soldiers but to the whole country;
“and,” he added, “we can do nothing.” We asked, “Is there, then, no form of
regulation now?” He answered emphatically, “None whatever.” He said,
“We can do nothing about the women outside the Cantonment, and there is
the trouble.” He added, “Those inside go on as they used to, and go to the
hospital for treatment when diseased. But,” he continued in an aggrieved
tone, “this is absolutely voluntary; we have no control.”
He said there was a European physician in charge of the hospital, to
whom he had just been talking regarding the matter when we came in. We
said, “There is a European physician in charge, then, is there?” He
answered, “Yes; but the hospital is not for these diseases only, but also for
fevers, dysentery, cholera, and all diseases”; and that there were men there
as well as women. We asked, “Is the Lock Hospital, then, entirely disused?”
He replied, “Why, there is no Lock Hospital.” He added that many good
people were getting their eyes opened now as to the condition of things, and
that even some clergymen had the courage of their moral convictions, and
had come out in favour of the Contagious Diseases Acts.
Previous to leaving England we had received information concerning this
Cantonment and its Lock Hospital. Our information, compared with this
official’s inconsistent statements, convinced us that he was endeavouring to
mislead us. After other and many futile efforts to reach the truth, we gave
ourselves up wholly to prayer, remembering the promise, “They shall come
with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them. I will cause them to
walk by the rivers of waters in a straight way, wherein they shall not
stumble.” We felt sure that any mistake at the outset of our work, such as
giving confidence to the wrong person, or any indiscreet action that might
betray our object in visiting India, would be fatal to our purpose; therefore
we cried to God to preserve us from impatience and to keep our feet from
stumbling.
We went next to Agra and remained there several days, wandering about
the old fort and other places of interest. But surely never was sadder sight-
seeing! The way seemed utterly closed against us. The work stretched, vast

and difficult, before us, and those towering thick walls that surround the
fort, with a deep moat at their foot, represented to our thoughts the pride,
strength, and secrecy of the system which we sought to penetrate, and at
other times the barriers that separated us from the enslaved women whom
we had come to India in the hope of helping.
Nearly five weeks had gone by; the winter season was rapidly passing,
and we were yet without a single clue to guide us in our investigations.
One Sunday we set apart for fasting and prayer—in the morning
instructing the native servants at the Rest House where we were staying to
leave us uninterrupted until the evening, as it was a sacred day with us, and
we wished to be alone. We locked our doors and waited on the Father of
spirits for guidance. Never shall we forget the hours of that day. At the
beginning our hearts seemed completely crushed under a sense of our
absolute helplessness and ignorance; but we know now that we were in the
very place of power—that it was only there that God could reveal Himself
to our waiting spirits. It was at the first, however, inexpressibly dark. Still
we held on, in faith that light would come; and before night, light was fully
given to us both, as to our next step, which was that we were to go to a
friend in a neighbouring city and lay the whole case before her. We obeyed
the guidance; and although our friend was exceedingly hopeless as to our
undertaking, yet she was willing to give us the assistance of her quick
intelligence and long acquaintance with India. She proved of invaluable
service to us in teaching us many simple colloquial phrases, and inducting
us into a knowledge of the customs of the country, thus making us much
more independent in our work and travels.
At this time it became clear to us that we must approach the whole
question from the native side. We had gained nothing in seeking
information from European officials. Our hope now lay in interviewing the
native physicians and the women themselves. We did not at first venture to
ask the way to the Lock Hospital, taking it for granted that this term had
long before fallen into disuse, as the existence of this hospital was officially
denied. But after visiting various hospitals within a Cantonment, and failing
to find the “Cantonment Hospital” so called, which term we were told was
now applied to the place for which we were searching, we asked for the
Lock Hospital, and to our surprise found that in common parlance it was
still so named. Our cab-drivers always understood instantly what we meant

when we used either this term or the native term, which means a hospital
for degraded women. Our first actual interview was held with the dhai, or
nurse, and inmates of a Lock Hospital. Besides much valuable information
gained from them, we learned the native name used to designate the
quarters within the military Cantonments for degraded women, viz., “The
Chakla.”
From this time forward, our way became much more plain, as in the ten
Cantonments visited[3] we found that we needed only to give directions to
our cabmen and they would take us without hesitation both to the Lock
Hospital and to the chakla, these places being perfectly well known to the
natives residing within the Cantonment.
These Cantonments are all under military rule. As our work lay only
within the Cantonments the military regulations, of course, applied to us.
One of these rules made it possible at any time for us to be excluded, for it
refers to “persons whom the Commanding Officer deems it expedient to
exclude from the Cantonment, with or without assigning any reason for
excluding them therefrom” (Cantonments Act, chap. 5, sec. 26, clause 23).
It was necessary, therefore, that we should not attract attention to the fact
that we were making investigations as to whether the resolution of the
House of Commons was being obeyed or not by the military authorities.
Had our errand been suspected, we could have been sent out of the
Cantonment at once, with no explanation and no opportunity for redress.
We therefore proceeded as quietly as possible.
Towards the last our enquiries proceeded very rapidly, for we had learned
to accomplish as much in one day as would formerly have occupied a week.
The winter season was over, and we were now in the month of March, with
the heat of the advancing Indian summer daily increasing in terrible force,
and becoming oppressive to our unaccustomed Anglo-Saxon constitutions.
We travelled by night and worked by day, hastening on to the completion of
our task. At times, arriving at our destination in the middle of the night, we
rested, exhausted, in the ladies’ waiting-room at the railway station, where
there were cane-seated settees, on which we spread our travelling rugs and
remained until the morning. A native woman was always in charge, and
good refreshment-rooms were at hand, so that we saved much time and
avoided publicity in this way. We often travelled in what were known as
“intermediate compartments,” knowing that we should attract less attention

than as first or second-class passengers. We simply asked for guidance at
every step of the way through these months of anxiety and toil; and we
knew that our prayers were answered.
We had various interpreters. One of these was a specially gifted woman.
She had a sweet, plaintive voice, and sang the native songs with touching
effect on the poor women whom we visited; one we always recall as having
been a wonderful instrument through God of moving their hearts. It was a
pilgrim hymn with a recurring strain of warning against the love of the
world, dress, jewellery, and sinful pleasures; and reminding us all that this
life is swiftly passing, and that death may soon overtake us. Often before
the refrain was finished the poor women would be seen sobbing as they
listened, joining in the sorrowful strain that recurred again and again; and as
soon as the song was ended pouring out their pitiful histories and their
protests against the degradation into which they had been thrust by the
infamous system of legalised vice under which they were slaves.

II.

Seeking the Outcast.

A vivid scene comes before us: We are sitting on a mortar bench, built
in a circular form around the trunk of an old tree, in the open court of
a Government chakla in one of the Cantonments of India. Some
thirty or forty girls come trooping around us, either sitting down on
the ground, native style, or bringing their cot-beds with them for
seats.
Our sweet-voiced interpreter sings a plaintive song—native words and
native tune—and when she has finished there is scarcely a dry eye to be
seen. Then follows a simple Gospel message to which all give respectful
heed, and at its close we ask, “Why are you in such a place as this?” Several
answer in brief monosyllables, accompanied by a gesture as though drawing
a line transversely across the brow. “It is our fate! It is our fate!” are the
words used in reply; and our interpreter explains to us that these believe, in
accordance with their religious instructions, that while they were yet babes,
in an unfortunate moment, when left alone by the mother, the messenger of
fate entered the room and wrote the word “prostitute” in invisible characters
across the brow, and that from that moment to struggle against the lot that
awaited them would have been useless.
No wonder that such poor slaves, when once taken and placed with the
British soldiers by some wicked mahaldarni, never dream of trying to get
away; and small wonder if others who had hoped that a better fate might
await them, and who make one ignorant, feeble attempt to escape (and the
women of a people whose customs keep them in perpetual seclusion are
extremely ignorant of the outside world) and are recaptured by the police,
will never be induced to try again, but quickly become convinced that their
fate has been also inexorably fixed from the cradle.
“But,” we say, “God is too good; He would not have it so.” And they
reply hopelessly, “But what can we do? We cannot starve; we cannot cut our
own throats. Oh, that we might die!”

Then they begin to clamour for a chance to tell their individual stories.
One is a girl who was left an orphan at the age of six years. At the tender
age of eleven she says she was taken by an Englishman and kept three years
as his mistress. When he deserted her, there was no door open to receive her
but the chakla. One pretty girl said she had been deceived by a bad woman,
under promise of employment.
Another, with face partly covered by her hands for very shame, said her
husband had sold her to the mahaldarni for money. By graphic gesture and
with the help of the few English words she knew, another told of the
agonies of slow starvation until at last her courage gave way, and she came
to the British soldiers, who were willing to feed her starving body for the
sake of its worth as an instrument of self-indulgence. This is the only right
to existence accorded to many women, even in so-called Christian
countries, where labour is hard to obtain.
A little girl of ten, gaudily arrayed in the style of the others, thus
publishing her candidature for a life of vice before she knew its meaning in
the least, played about among the older ones. A little boy of two, with
beautiful forehead, and other features that betrayed his English blood, had
been forsaken by his father, who had, the girls said, “gone home to
England.” We recall having seen other children of Saxon type at Lucknow,
Meerut, and at Peshawar, left in the same way by fathers who were officers
of the British army in India. While the attempt is being made to create
sentiment in favour of protecting the “innocent wives and children” of
British soldiers, it might be well to inquire which wives and which children
—those that already exist in India, or those that have not yet materialised in
England. God knows which are the real wives and the real children of
soldiers who have, in many cases in the past, entered into a contract with
unsophisticated native women who never dreamed that it was anything less
than lawful marriage!
“These bad women promise us everything and then betray us into this
life,” said several of the girls, referring to the treachery of the mahaldarnis.
They told us of a girl who had recently been set on fire by an angry soldier,
and had been burned to death, and related the story of cruelties practised
upon them by drunken soldiers. A native guard in uniform drew near to
listen. These military guards were there all the time, and were changed
every few hours, the girls told us. As the mahaldarnis who own the girls are

always at hand to watch against the escape of the discontented, the work of
the guard seems to be chiefly to keep order and to prevent the entrance of
native men, as the latter are strictly forbidden to associate with women kept
for the English soldiers.
Two women of mature years now approached, and we were informed that
they were the mahaldarnis. One lived there all the time, and the other was
there with her girls for the time being. They said they had each a salary of
ten rupees a month from the Government. They also took a share of the
girls’ earnings. Another time we went to the hut, close to the chakla, where
one of them lived, and she proudly displayed to us some of the
recommendations she held from British officers. They were grim and horrid
reading; we will give but a single illustration:—
“Ameer has supplied the 2nd Derby Regiment with prostitutes for the past three years, and I
recommend her to any other regiment requiring her for a similar capacity.
“S. G. M——,
“Quartermaster 2nd Derby Regiment.”

As to the methods to which these mahaldarnis resort to procure girls, it
has been touched upon in the personal stories of girls already given, and
will be emphasized necessarily more and more as our story continues.
Mahaldarni Rahiman, met in another Cantonment, told us a story closely
resembling the methods described in a former chapter (page 20), by a
Government official. She said in substance: “If a girl is not sufficiently
attractive to earn a living, I send her away and get another in her place. I get
the women from the bazaar when more are needed. I go to the Cantonment
magistrate, and he gives me five, ten, twenty, or fifty rupees, as the case
may demand. To buy a very young, attractive girl I will be furnished with
fifty rupees. There is always plenty of money to get them with.”
When opportunity afforded, we called upon the other mahaldarni, and she
likewise showed us her recommendations in the handwriting of British
military officials, and other interesting papers which she had carefully
preserved. There was an original copy of her appointment as mahaldarni to
a certain regiment, closing with permission for her to go to Ferozepore to
attend to “certain business of her bazaar.” This was signed by the Colonel of
the regiment. There was a letter written to her by the Staff-Surgeon of the
same regiment, a few days later, saying:—

“Mahaldarni, Seventh Lancers,—You have not brought your women from Meerut and
Ferozepore. You will have to do it or the Colonel will think you have broken faith, as it is now
fifteen days since you received your appointment.”

The Staff-Surgeon evidently thought it an easy task to buy or entrap
twelve or fifteen girls in as many days. Then there was a copy of a letter
addressed by herself to the Cantonment magistrate, which she had
employed some one to write in English for her. This letter stated that she
had brought four new girls with her who had several thousand rupees’ worth
of jewelry with them (probably a lie by way of excuse), but their brothers
had accompanied them (to effect their rescue?) and she asked the magistrate
to require the girls to remain in the chakla, and then their brothers could not
get near them. Native men not being allowed about the chakla, brothers and
husbands who might be bent upon the rescue of female members of their
families, who had been enticed away or stolen by the mahaldarnis, could be
kept at a safe distance.
At other times we had opportunities to revisit this large chakla. There
were about one hundred inmates, and accommodations for many more. The
building was scarcely less than a huge fortification. High blank walls—
excepting tiny well-barred windows high up, surrounded an open space of
ground, or court; and the inner side of the wall was lined with small
numbered rooms for the accommodation of the inmates. Most of the girls,
here as elsewhere, because of constant association with British men, had
learned to speak a little English, while a few spoke quite fluently. Although
we always were accompanied by a good interpreter, yet often we were able
to converse quite freely ourselves with the girls.
Our interpreter recognised one girl on our first visit, whom we shall call
by her nickname, which was “Katy,” and asked her if she was not the girl
who had run after her carriage two or three times, begging the interpreter to
take her away. Katy said she had done so, and with streaming tears
reiterated her desire to escape from a life of which she was so ashamed, and
pleaded with us to take her. When we consented to take her that very day,
she faltered, and then decided that she did not dare try to go until after the
following day, which was the day of the bi-weekly examination, but she
said that if we would give her our address she would come herself on the
day following. As we drove away in our cab, and the girls waved farewell,
poor Katy, with pitiful and despairing countenance, burst into tears. Her

face haunted us for days, and as she did not come of her own accord to us,
in a few days we went after her again.
We learned afterwards that Katy had made ineffectual attempts to come
to us. When we returned to the chakla for her, we found her without
difficulty, and told her our errand. With glowing, happy face, she arrayed
herself in her best garments, arranged her hair neatly and with childish
simplicity, and leaving her few earthly belongings behind, got into the cab
with us. But soon her face clouded, she grew apprehensive, and said she
would have to go and get permission of the Cantonment magistrate before
she could venture to leave. Anticipating not the slightest difficulty in this
matter, when we represented the case to the magistrate and became surety
for the girl’s future good conduct and maintenance by a responsible
Mission, we decided that it was best to let her have her own way. We did
not then know India as we learned it afterwards. But the native policemen,
seeing the girl with us, and being informed or suspecting our errand,
refused, on enquiry, to inform us where the Cantonment magistrate could be
found, and misled us in so far as they gave us any information.
We had a long, wearisome search, from which we learned somewhat of
the difficulties that a poor Government slave-girl would encounter in trying,
unaided, to disentangle herself from a life in the chakla. We took Katy away
in the morning; we drove about, back and forth, mile upon mile, being sent
hither and thither by misleading directions, and at last, considerably after
mid-day, reached the magistrate’s court, and entered. We were received with
respect and given seats. In the course of our search, the girl had told us that
her real fear of leaving without the magistrate’s consent grew out of the fact
that she had made one attempt to run away, and had been caught and fined,
and had not yet paid the fine. She felt that if she went away again, without
permission, it would only be to be ferreted out and fined yet more heavily.
The timid girl, however, did not dare admit the whole truth to us, lest we
might not consent to take her at all. Afterwards, we learned it from most
reliable sources.
The girl had a very wicked mother and sister. An Englishman, who had
known her from childhood, said that Katy had frequently come to him,
saying she wished to be good and wanted to learn to read; but no way
opened, apparently, for her to get free from the evil influences by which she
was surrounded; and at last she was overcome, and became the “kept

woman” of a British soldier at an early age. The soldier brought drink to
their house, which she, in ignorance of the very strict laws to the contrary,
permitted him to do. A native woman in the household of the man who
related the facts to us, complained to the magistrate, and Katy was
summoned to appear before him for punishment.
Frightened at the prospect, she managed to escape to a neighbouring
village, was apprehended, brought back, sentenced to seven months’
imprisonment, and a fine of fifty rupees for contempt of court. When she
had served out her sentence (three months before we knew her) the
mahaldarni was allowed (Katy said) to take her into custody and become
surety for the fine. The English gentleman could not tell us whether the
girl’s statement that the mahaldarni was allowed to become her security was
correct or not; but he believed it to be, from the fact that it was then that she
went to the chakla and for the first time became a common prostitute.
Learning these facts afterwards, we did not longer wonder that Katy had
feared to try to come away without the magistrate’s consent, and had shown
such lack of courage when she faced him.
Almost immediately upon our seating ourselves in the court-room the
poor girl burst into tears and ran outside and hid round a corner. It was with
great difficulty that we persuaded her to come back and face the magistrate,
who apparently was treating her with the utmost kindness. After
considerable parleying in Hindustani and English, the magistrate at last
acceded to our wishes, and wrote out a permit for us to take the girl away
from the Cantonment, although he explained again and again that she or any
other woman was of course free to go; they never attempted to detain a
woman against her will, etc., etc. But Katy was not willing to proceed on
any uncertainty, and she then asked about the fine, and was assured that
would be all right.
The magistrate then explained that she had been arrested on “some
criminal charge,”—he did not quite know what—had fled the Cantonment,
been arrested and brought back and fined fifty rupees for contempt of court.
He made no mention of her long imprisonment in addition. After that he
began to set forth to her, in Hindustani (the meaning of his threats we did
not fully understand), that if she went out of the Cantonment she would
never be safe from the insults of soldiers, nor protected from molestation,
nor allowed ever again to see her relatives, etc., etc., until her courage

wavered, and she said, “Then I don’t want to go.” At this he thundered at
her so angrily that once again she ran from the court-room, and it was with
the utmost difficulty we persuaded her to go back for the final adjustment of
the case. On her return she began to plead to be allowed to see her friends;
and the magistrate, then turning to us, advised us in a kindly tone to take her
to see her mother and sister before removing her entirely from them.
This the girl herself desired, so we felt obliged to accede, and she gave
the cabman the address in Hindustani. Returning in the carriage, down an
unfamiliar street, we alighted, and Katy ran ahead in all haste to find her
mother, while we followed after. To our astonishment, we found we had
entered the chakla again, from a side we had not recognised, and by an
entrance which we had never before seen. We took alarm at once, and
hastened on toward the wretched old woman who lay ill on a cot on the
verandah, with whom Katy was talking earnestly.
A big, coarse woman (this was Katy’s sister, but it must not be forgotten
that we at this time did not know that her family were so disreputable) came
out and sat down on the cot by the sick woman; but as soon as she heard
enough of the girl’s pleading to know that she was asking permission to
escape from her wretched existence, she flew into a passion and struck
Katy, and blow would have followed blow had we not interfered. Poor Katy
flung herself dejectedly into a chair, and could not summon up courage to
follow us against all this opposition; then a British soldier came up and
spoke to her and led her away, while two or three more British soldiers
looked on in contemptuous amusement at the scene. The poor creature was
too cowed in spirit, from constant bad usage, to resist the determination of
officials and soldiers to keep possession of so attractive a slave.
Weigh the soul of that one dark-skinned heathen girl against the diseased
bodies of a standing army of men, and God knows which has most weight
in his sight, even if a whole materialistic nation may have forgotten. Men
and women, Governments and Armies, cannot, combined, reduce the
estimate which He puts upon one immortal soul; but in a near judgment-
day, these will have to drink the full measure appointed for such a crime as
thwarting a woman in her God-given right to lead a decent moral life. When
a Government begins to drag down the moral character of its subjects, it has
begun to dig out its own foundations.

We talked with over three hundred Cantonment women, held to
prostitution by the iron law of military regulation, collected together by
Government procuresses, who were used as the ultimate tools of
administration in carrying out Lord Roberts’ military order for a sufficient
number of attractive women, forced to the indecent exposure of their
persons by misnamed “doctors,” under penalty of fine or expulsion from the
Cantonment, which was tantamount to starvation; imprisoned for several
days of each month, even when in perfect health, in the Lock Hospital;
imprisoned for an indefinite length of time in the hospital whenever found
diseased; often turned out when seriously diseased, with their British
children, to starve, or to spread disease at will among the natives, the final
scapegoats of British profligacy; dismissed to starvation when too old to be
any longer “sufficiently attractive” to the soldier, if only a fresh victim
could be found to take the place; universally so poor as to be weighed down
by debts, and receiving a pittance fixed by military usage, that kept many of
them on the verge of starvation.
What were the circumstances that brought women to such a lot as this?
We will give only a few, in bare outlines, of the many cases not already
mentioned:—
1. A nurse-maid enticed to the chakla by a British sergeant.
2. A wife brought by her own husband, the man himself being engaged by an officer of the
regiment as a servant, and allowed to hold his unwilling wife in such servitude.
3. British, granddaughter of a former Governor-General, daughter of a General, wife of a
Commissioner; eloped with a soldier, and when deserted entrapped by a Mohammedan and kept
as a slave, to whom British soldiers resorted in troops, almost, because a white woman; they
paid the price of shame to her native master; rescued when almost dead. We found her in a
miserably dirty bed at a native Lock Hospital, where the Government allowed her four annas
(about fourpence) a day for subsistence. We ourselves rescued another British woman from the
clutches of the same Mohammedan slave-holder. We found her in a fortified room, built on the
top of a large house, a neck-breaking outside stairway leading to her abode. She had suffered
horribly at the hands of the British soldiers admitted to her. Her reason was injured beyond
repair. In the absence of her master, she was guarded by a native servant armed with a knife,
who had been instructed in her presence to plunge it into her if she tried to escape. A very
courageous gentleman accompanied us, and succeeded in so frightening her master that we were
permitted to lead her away.
4. An orphan seized by a wicked woman and reared to shame.
5. A young girl brought by her own brother and sold to the chakla.
6. Cabul girl of high birth who lost her father in the Afghan war. She was only twelve when
left without protection, and her father’s groom persuaded her to come away with him under
promise of marriage; sold by him to shame. She wept bitterly, exclaiming, “Oh, the shame of
being pointed out as a bazaar woman!” We asked her why she did not go to the Cantonment

magistrate and plead her own case, for she said she had money secreted with which she could
take care of herself, if once she could get away. She replied, “Why should I tell him? I am only a
black woman; I fear him.” When about to return to the south, we revisited this station and
hunted this woman up, offering to assist her to escape; but her courage failed at the last moment,
and we were obliged to leave her behind to her fate.
7. An Egyptian woman from Cairo, enticed away from her home when a child and sold to an
old woman in Quetta, then carried to India.
8. A Kashmiri woman; ill-treated by her husband, she ran away with another man who
promised to make her his wife, but sold her into shame. “It is a bad job; I don’t like it,” she said
in the best English she could control, while the tears were in her eyes.
9. A hill girl of respectable family lost her parents and her husband (perhaps only betrothed,
yet possibly already married), before ten years of age. A deceitful woman came to comfort her in
her grief and unprotected condition, and enticed her to travel with her a month to assuage her
grief; sold her to a British official, with whom she lived one year, when he died. She then
became a chakla woman. She was only sixteen. She said, “It is a bitter life.”
10. A high-caste Brahmin girl, not able to understand a word of the language of her captor,
found deserted and starving. The captor admitted that she was a perfectly respectable girl, yet
she was examined by the surgeon, her name entered on the list of prostitutes, and taken to the
Lock Hospital to be prepared for her fate. The poor thing was so grateful to be taken in and fed,
and little dreamt of what would be demanded of her in return. We tried in vain to make her
understand us, and to warn her of her fate.
11. Taken in famine time by the daughter of a sepoy (native soldier). The soldier sold her at
eleven years of age “to sit in the chakla.” “In all the years of my life, I have not known one day
of happiness; my heart is full of wounds,” was her pathetic ending of the story.
12. We witnessed the purchase of a girl by a mahaldarni. A woman seized the girl as payment
for a debt, and bringing her sold her to the mahaldarni in our very presence.
13. Married at eleven, and widowed almost immediately. After three years with her family as
a widow, she was so miserable that she ran away and wandered in the streets. She was arrested
by the police, and at the age of fourteen put in the chakla.
14. Her husband was beating her cruelly, at the age of fourteen, and she ran away; a
policeman seized her and sent her to the Lock Hospital.
15. Deserted at the age of eleven by her husband; a British man took her by force to his
bungalow. When he discarded her, her family would not receive her again. She was then “taken
by the Government and put in the chakla.”

III.

The Habitations of Cruelty.

I n March, 1892, we arrived at a huge Cantonment about midnight. As
there was no dak bungalow at the place, we spread our rugs on the
settees in the ladies’ waiting-room, and slept till morning. The dak
bungalow is an institution kept up by the Government for the
convenience of military men and their families, although other
travellers take advantage of its shelter, and was preferable to an hotel for
our purpose, for our meals were served in our private rooms always, and we
could lead a very retired life. After breakfast in the dining-room, we went
out and engaged a cab, explaining, as was our custom, to the driver, that we
were Christian missionaries, and in accordance with the teachings of our
religion, we were searching out the most despised and disreputable of
women, to tell them of God’s care for them and to see what we could do for
them; therefore we wished him to drive us to see the chakla women of the
Cantonment. He looked a little bewildered, and then drove off with us.
After traversing a considerable distance, he entered a public garden, and
began to drive slowly, that we might enjoy the flowers and foliage. We
called to him, bidding him drive on rapidly, as we did not care to see the
sights of the Cantonment. He nodded assent, and touching his horse with
the whip, drove away in another direction. Presently he paused before
another object to which he was accustomed to take visitors. Then we called
him from his seat to the cab window, and told him that if he took us out of
our way again, we should be obliged to leave his cab, call another, and
dismiss him. We made sure he understood exactly what we wished, and he
admitted that he did, but intimated that he scarcely thought it a proper place
for us to visit. However, he consented, and drove off, and in a few moments
brought us to an open field where two regiments were encamped.
Fortunately, some drill of an unusual sort was going on, and a good many
people had driven out to witness it; this, therefore, absorbed the attention of
all. The Lord appointed all our seasons for us during our Indian
investigations.

Taking a road leading to the back part of the camp, we left our cab and
driver where several other cabs were standing, and walking along together,
observed by no one, entered one of the ten little tents we found enclosed in
a sort of fence of matting. The women received us cordially, although with
real astonishment at such unusual visitors. The mahaldarni was not a bad-
meaning woman in many regards, and she told us, with great satisfaction, of
a sister of hers who had been promoted from the rank of a common
soldiers’ woman to be a mahaldarni, saying that she had left off her
wickedness, prayed four times a day and read her Koran. She joined with
her girls in expressions of utter abhorrence of the examinations to which the
girls were subjected, saying, “Shame! Shame!”
She told us how the soldiers, when in drink, knocked the poor girls about
in a most cruel manner, and reaching her own conclusion as to the meaning
of our call, advised us not to join their number, telling us that the city was
far preferable. She and the girls told of the heavy fines to which they would
be liable if they did not go to the examinations, or attempted to leave the
Lock Hospital when held there. She said if they made any fuss about the
fine, then they would be imprisoned. A military guard was placed within the
enclosure, in one of the tents; but he had either gone to sleep, or wandered
out to get a view of the exercises that were going on near by. We gave a
simple gospel talk through our interpreter, and she sang and prayed with the
girls; then we made our way to the women of the adjoining Rest Camp.
Again we entered the enclosure surrounding the little tents, and reached
the women without attracting the attention of the guard. They told the same
story of compulsion and fines continually hanging over their heads. Almost
every Cantonment girl we ever questioned, was held to her wretched life by
debt and fines, so that she could not think of getting free without being
apprehended on account of them. Here likewise they warned us not to join
them, but go rather to the city. Again we talked of Jesus, the Friend of the
oppressed, and after song and prayer, bade them good-bye.
Returning to our cab, we told our driver to take us to the Lock Hospital;
and after a long drive under the burning sun, we stopped before buildings
enclosed within a very high brick wall with broken glass on its top to
prevent the escape of inmates. A large, strongly-spiked gateway, with
double doors, gave the impression of a veritable prison; and there, standing
in the open gateway, was an uniformed armed guard. Previous experiences

had not led us to expect anything quite so formidable, although there was
generally some sort of a guard or watchman at hand, and the native
physician usually resided on the premises. We had often said, and promised
God, that, sacred as was the nature of the work, we would never prevaricate
in order to cover up our real object, if closely questioned. We were not
ordinary detectives, playing a part, but Christian women, and the difference
was not to be lost sight of.
Our interpreter had not been instructed as to the full significance of our
work, but was content to ask few questions if only she might be allowed to
follow her bent freely and preach the gospel, which we gladly encouraged
and helped in every way possible, for we should have felt that our mission
was very incomplete had we met these women solely to hear their pitiful
stories, and never utter a word to them of the love of the Heavenly Father,
in the midst of such distressing surroundings. Our interpreter always carried
religious tracts with her; and while we were hesitating to know how to
encounter the armed sentinel, in the simplicity of her holy zeal she walked
up to him, gave him a tract, and said a few words of a helpful nature. The
guard noticed no more than that some ladies were being delayed at the gate,
so he motioned us through, continuing his consideration of the leaflet, and
forgetting to ask our errand. How easy for God to hide his own as He had
hidden us again and again that day from guard and sentinel! We have
frequently been asked how we escaped observation. We can only say that
we made but little effort on our own part to do this, and trusted the Lord to
do it all for us.
A dozen women gathered around us in a ward of the hospital that day.
With them we had a little service, as usual, after which they eagerly poured
out their sad life stories, and told of the oppressions of the system under
which they were held in an evil life. The hospital nurse showed us through
the wards and the examination room, where we found the grim rack for the
torture of the examination, brutal to the patient, but convenient for the
surgeon to do as much villainy as possible in a given length of time. No
diseases are so rife or dreadful in their consequences but that their
compulsory treatment, when it involves the indecent exposure of woman or
man, is worse in its effects than the disease itself. And this in the case of
actual disease. What, then, can be said as an excuse for such exposure
simply to find out whether there be disease? Yes, further, what possible plea

can be made when the object of such compulsory exposure is to discover
whether the subject is “fit”[4] for a life of infamy?
Mrs. Butler has well expressed the encouragement to vice that the
compulsory examination of women leads to in the following words: “We all
approve of healing disease and taking care of the sick, no matter what has
brought on their disease, no matter how sinful and degraded they may be.
The Abolitionists have always pleaded for plenty of free hospital
accommodation for men and women afflicted with this curse. But it will be
clear to you that this law is not for simple healing, as Christ would have us
heal, caring for all, whatever their character, and whatever their disease.
This law is invented to provide beforehand, that men may be able to sin
without bodily injury—if that were possible, which it is not. If a burglar,
who had broken into my house and stolen my goods, were to fall and be
hurt, I would be glad to get him into a hospital and have him nursed and
cured; but I would not put a ladder up against my window at night and leave
the windows open, in order that he might steal my goods without danger of
breaking his neck.”
But to return to the Lock Hospital mentioned. The nurse produced the
records for our examination. In the correspondence book was the copy of a
letter from the military surgeon, informing the Cantonment magistrate of six
girls suspected of disease, and asking that they be apprehended and sent to
the hospital for examination. That looked simple enough, and why not?
Imagine yourself the one apprehended, and the case assumes a different
aspect. A policeman comes to your door and reads a warrant for your arrest
as a common prostitute; you ask on what authority; you are informed that
the name of the informant is not made public, because if a man can be
induced to help trace out diseases—it being regarded as a “point of honour”
to inform other men where danger lurks—his confession must not be made
known, it would injure his reputation. (We are now describing the exact
conditions always existent where there is compulsory examination of
women.)
You contend that you have a right to your good name, and that it is a
principle of justice that no one can be punished on secret and unproved
evidence, and that it is punishment of the worst sort to be taken by a
policeman through the streets to a hospital used exclusively for the
treatment of a certain class of disorders. You are then informed that unless

you will go at once without any trouble, you will be taken out of the town in
which you live, set down as a common vagrant by the roadside, and if ever
again found within the limits of the city in which your parents, brothers, and
sisters live, you will be arrested and put in jail. What will you do? Yet these
were exactly the laws under which these poor women, among whom we
were spending the day, lived.
By such a system of delivering over the bodies of women as public
property, any woman of humble circumstances upon whom any man of
lecherous design casts his eyes, could be made to come to his terms of
existence by the aid of the police force, if necessary, and magistrates of evil
design could condemn any woman to a life of prostitution. And in this
hospital all this wicked compulsion was set down in a book, every page of
which was headed, “Prostitutes attending Voluntary Inspections.”
From the Lock Hospital we drove to a large chakla, and talked with a
group of about twenty girls, among them a little girl of twelve, and another
of four. Everywhere we went among the degraded women of India, we
found children in the chaklas, these Government-regulated brothels, with
their ever-present guards, so that Englishmen knew perfectly that children
were being trained under Government regulation for prostitution. The
advocates of licensed prostitution for India are fond of insisting as an
excuse for licensing the evil, that it does no great harm because the recruits
come from “the prostitute caste.” Repeatedly we made enquiries of
Englishmen, native physicians, and in one case applied to the census office
for some information concerning this special class. Its existence was
practically denied, excepting those cases which can be found in every land,
in which women of all classes may fall into shame and train their daughters
after their own evil ways. It is scarcely necessary in this connection to
mention the temple and nautch girls of India, who are found in civil lines.
They are a wholly distinct class from the enslaved women who are set apart
to minister to the vices of the British soldiers. Among the latter we found
Hindus of all castes, from high-caste Brahmins down; and we also found
Mohammedans, Arabs, Egyptians, Afghans, Kashmiris, Jewesses,—recruits,
in fact, from those among whom “caste” does not prevail. If it were true that
all these chakla women constitute one caste, for what object did the
Government of India, in times past, provide invariably (so far as our
observation extends) for a record of the “caste” of the women to whom

registration tickets were given? The ticket which we purchased of a woman
at Meean Meer in 1892 (a fac-simile of which is given in this volume,
Appendix B) recorded her “name,” “caste,” “registered number,” “place of
residence,” “date of registry,” and “personal appearance.”[5]
But there is a class in India being trained to prostitution, though not a
“caste,” properly speaking, and they are getting their training in the brothels
established and managed by Englishmen, and many of the candidates in this
class are the children of Englishmen, who have been deliberately placed
there, or allowed to go there, by their inhuman fathers. This is, properly
speaking, the prostitute class of India, those born to their fate; the reader
may judge whether the existence of the class justifies licensing it for the
purpose.
In the chakla we sang, “Where He leads me I will follow,” and its
interpretation constituted our Gospel message. With tears in their eyes the
girls assured us, with characteristic gesture, that we were “on their eyes and
on their hearts”; in other words, had won their affections; and spoke
feelingly of the honour it was to them that Englishwomen should come to
see them, saying that usually Englishmen forbade their wives to even look
at them. One girl said that when at Cawnpore missionaries used to come to
them, and that for days after their visits her heart was so sore that it seemed
as if it would burst. The girls stood in the doorway, many of them with
streaming eyes, and waved good-bye as we departed, begging us to come
again soon.
We hastened to the railway station for the three o’clock train. When we
alighted, we spoke a few kind words to our cabman, for he had served us
most faithfully, all these hours under the mid-day glare of the sun, after so
unpromising a beginning. We wished to pay him well, and asked him to set
his own price on his services. The simple, rough native man hesitated a
moment, stammered something unintelligible, burst into tears, and averting
his face with noble shame, said, “I don’t want anything at all. I never saw
anything like this before; I would like to help, too.” Thrusting a coin into
his unwilling hand, ample for both fee and present, we hastened to our seats
in the car, and were soon rolling away to our next destination. We wrote up
our notes of the day’s doings on the way, and arrived at our next field of
operations the following morning at two o’clock, stealing into another
Cantonment unobserved, excepting by the Heavenly Father, without whom

not even a sparrow can fall. We give this history of one day as a sample; the
work was heavy and painful; but we encouraged each other often with the
words, “Even if we fall by the way, we could not die in better work.”
We visited a Rest Camp at Meerut. As usual, we had no difficulty in
passing the sentinels; God took care of that. We learnt from official records
that the regiment had only been in India two weeks; yet the complete
paraphernalia of vice was at hand. There were fourteen little tents for
women, and near their quarters a huge tent pitched for those who wished to
smoke opium. Think of it, fathers and mothers, boys of the age of from
eighteen years upwards, supplied by their superior officers, before they
could have made a demand for the same, with every convenience for giving
themselves over to debauchery! The sight of their fresh young faces touched
us deeply.
At another place, away up on the northern frontier, we found only five
girls; the others had somehow escaped their cruel bondage. As we entered
the gateway of the mud wall that surrounded their quarters, a native man
standing near threw up his hands in great astonishment, exclaiming, “O
God! (‘Allah’), how wonderful that ladies should come to such a place!” It
was a dreary, weird scene. The evening was piercingly cold, and we were
well wrapped. The old mahaldarni and her girls were trying to warm
themselves by a wretched little pot of charcoal, stretching their thin fingers
by turns over the coals.
While we talked, the sudden night of a country without a twilight came
on, although it was not really very late. One of the girls lighted a native
lamp of the rudest sort—a bit of wick floating in an earthenware cup of oil
—and set it in a niche in the wall. The room was unfurnished excepting the
charpoy, or cot bed, on which we sat. The girls and mahaldarni sat, native
fashion, on the floor, their cotton chuddars and skirts fluttering in the cruel
wind that came in at the open archway, for door there was none.
They said the men of their regiment were very bad, and often when drunk
beat them and robbed them, not only refusing to pay them any money, but
even taking away their cotton quilts and selling them to their own native
servants for a few pice with which to buy drink. They described the case of
one woman who was beaten terribly by a soldier, and cut in the arms and
breast; after this, several of the girls had effected their escape. We have
often spoken of this as one of the most deeply shaded pictures in our

memory, not only because of the dreary, comfortless surroundings, but
because of the cruelty and oppression that weighed these helpless women
down, from which there seemed no hope of escape. We talked to them out
of the fullness of our sympathy, and promised to pray and work in their
behalf, that they, and others like them, might have an opportunity to turn to
a good life.
But turning from the physical injury inflicted on these poor women, we
wish to present a view of their mental sufferings. It has been urged by many
advocates of the regulation of vice that the whole nature of a woman was
changed by her sinful life—that she had no sensitiveness and no deep sense
of the degradation of her position. We utterly deny this on behalf of the
scores of women with whom we have talked in India—whether of high or
of low caste, Hindoo or Mohammedan, and of whatever nationality;
whether brought up in virtue and afterwards betrayed, or brought up from
infancy in vicious surroundings. We deny it even in regard to the
mahaldarnis placed over the women, whom avarice might blind, and the
ordinary routine duties of their position might harden. Yet when their
womanly feelings were appealed to, they always responded, and felt shame
with and for the women under their care.
In all our conversations there was shown a most remarkable patience, on
the part of the women, in regard to the various inconveniences and
hardships which the regulations entailed upon them. The fire of their hatred
and indignation all centred upon the heart of the regulations, the
examinations, and the violation of womanhood which these examinations
were felt to be. It is of no use for any one to deny to us that these women
have deep feelings in regard to their wrongs and their shame. We have felt
the beating of their aching hearts against our own; we have heard histories
that throbbed with the strong agony of betrayed innocence; we have seen a
hopeless woe in eyes that will haunt us for ever.
At Peshawar, the women said, when speaking of the great hardship of
being turned out of the Cantonment, “Where can we go to? We are
prostitutes. No one would give us work.” And again, “Every one under this
Government is treated well but ourselves; we only are despised.”
We do not present these facts with any thought of taking our position
with those who argue that the better regulation of vice implies a better
protection of the degraded women; but rather to show that in the working

out of such regulations the woman is absolutely lost sight of, and only the
prostitute is considered. Every interest in the woman’s character, happiness,
health, life itself, is made subservient to the health and convenience of the
British soldier. Every assertion that would put a humanitarian gloss on the
regulation of vice is utter hypocrisy.
At Meerut, where there were a good many women present, one, without
any question whatever on our part, suddenly broke forth into the most
intense expressions of disgust at the Governmental regulation of vice, in
which those girls gathered about her sympathized, one especially taking
part in the conversation from time to time, and corroborating what was
being said. She said, “The Queen does not approve of this; it is the
Commander-in-Chief and the officers who are doing these things! Oh, what
a shame that the Government does these things!” Then she burst into a
passion of indignation, describing in vivid language and with a natural
eloquence of gesture the whole shameful proceeding, and the humiliation to
which they were subjected.
Words fail to convey the force, and fire, and pathos with which that poor,
untaught woman pleaded the cause of her sisters. It was one voice out of
many protesting against this cruel wrong, and representing the undying
dignity of a woman’s nature, even when forced into a deeper abyss than she
ever voluntarily chose to enter. We asked if the other women felt as this one
did, and they all answered indignantly, “We all hate it.” The first woman
cried out, “It is very disgusting; oh, shame!” We told them it was a grief to
us that those who called themselves Christians should do such things, and
that they ought not to bear the name. She replied bitterly, “Yes; the
Commander-in-Chief, the Colonel, and all of them, all the way down—your
Christian men!—they all favour these things. The Queen does not
countenance it, for she has daughters of her own; and she cares for her
daughters in India also. It is the Commander-in-Chief” (meaning Lord
Roberts).
The accounts we have given in previous pages reveal the extremely
tender age at which some of these girls were thrust into a life of shame by
court proceedings under the Contagious Diseases Acts, when they were
openly enforced. Two Benares girls declared they were taken up by the
police at fourteen, and one Sitapur girl said she was sold to a mahaldarni at
eleven. Much has been said of the horrors of child-marriage in India, and

these atrocities should not be minimized, even though we bear in mind the
usually slender type of Eastern manhood; but what shall we say when the
robust British soldier has had placed at his mercy a little girl of fourteen
years old, of the delicate Oriental type; and this done by regular process of
law “to preserve his health”?
Then again considering the heathen training of these women, we were led
to expect that we should find blindness of the moral sense in relation to this
sort of wrong-doing. On the contrary, they expressed great shame and
humiliation, never tried to justify their sinful acts, spoke almost universally
of their hatred of the life, shed bitter tears, and told us how burdened their
hearts were in thinking of their sins. Unlike what we met elsewhere in
speaking of religion to the natives, they had little desire for controversy.
With not a single exception, we were made welcome, treated courteously,
and listened to and blessed for our message. Even in the case of the
mahaldarnis we found them not inaccessible, but inclined to expressions of
contempt for the whole system of regulation, and of apology for being the
hirelings of such a system—an excuse which must have more weight than
in a country where industries are open to women. Rahiman of Meerut was
an exception. She said she considered her business perfectly legitimate,
because she was in a “Government position.”
Several times we asked the women, “What do you wish us to do for
you?” and were surprised at the answer. Desperately poor as many were,
there was never an appeal for money; rather they said, “Pray for us;” or, “If
you would build us homes, so that we could go to them, and not sin any
more, what more could we ask?” and, “If you will help us to have the
examinations stopped.” Above all, we were astonished at the appeals made
to us concerning the latter outrage. We told none of them our whole object
in coming among them, yet with great care they described and expressed
their abhorrence of the examinations, as well as the wickedness and
illegality of them; and in two or three instances they mentioned that they
had heard of ladies interested in their behalf, and suggested the possibility
that we might do something for them. In one instance several of the women,
after telling us of their humiliation, clasped their hands together, and lifting
their eyes to heaven, prayed to God that He would “help us to help them.”
They invariably exonerated the Queen from all blame in this matter, saying,

“She is a woman herself; she would not do this. She cares for her daughters
in India.”
Says Mrs. Josephine Butler: “It is impossible not to think of the fathers
and mothers of the young Englishmen, mere boys, who go out to India as
soldiers, and who are trained in this disgusting manner by the military
authorities; not only in the indulgence of their vices, but in cowardly and
brutal cruelties towards the weaker sex. It seemed a grand object indeed on
the part of Lord Roberts and his subordinates to aim at sending back their
discharged soldiers to England free from physical disease, regardless of
their manliness, their moral character, their respect for women, and decent
habits of life! Would not the loss of these be bought too dearly by the mere
exemption from physical disease, even if this could be made possible?”
After months of toil, we were now far up towards the north-western
frontier of India. We requested our cabman to drive us to the quarters of the
Government women of the Cantonment. We left the cab just outside the
narrow street. As we walked past the native shops and turned into a little
sort of lane, a woman shouted in great concern from her doorway to us,
“Why do you come here? Don’t come here; all are prostitutes who live
here.” With a smile of re-assurance we replied, “We know it, and you are
just the women we are seeking; we have a message for you.”
With surprise, she then welcomed us most warmly and invited us in,
saying she would go and call all the women and bring them to hear the
message. In a few minutes chairs had been borrowed for us to sit upon, and
nine native women were clustered on the floor at our feet.
We both exclaimed regarding the remarkable personal appearance of the
woman who had addressed us first. She closely resembled, in fine bearing
and apparent intellectuality, a much-beloved mutual friend in Chicago, a
woman of more than local fame in scientific pursuits; it touched us deeply.
With utmost simplicity and confidence this woman came and seated herself
by Mrs. Andrew’s side, leaning her arm across her lap, and many a time
during the interview that followed, her earnest, wistful eyes met ours, while
Mrs. Andrew gently stroked her shoulder, her heart almost breaking with
pity as the woman told her sad story.
A plaintive native song was sung by our interpreter, and tears flowed
freely. After that the simple Gospel message was given. They told us then
some of the painful details of the conditions under which they were living,

saying that they must either meet these conditions or be expelled from the
Cantonment, and added, “If we are expelled, where shall we go? we must
leave all our friends, and no one will give us work. It means great hardship;
we would starve.” Speaking of the hateful examinations, they said the
Queen had forbidden these things, but the officers yet compelled them to go
on.
The woman at Mrs. Andrew’s side told us the following: “Some time ago
a lady in Calcutta saw a woman weeping as she was going to the Lock
Hospital with other women. The lady asked her why she wept. She told why
she was obliged to go, and how she hated the examinations.
“The lady could not understand this, but took the woman home with her,
and closely questioned into the matter. Then the lady said to her, ‘This
ought not to be,’ and promised that she would do all she could for them.
Then the lady went home to England and talked to the Queen. She spoke
with wonderful power in behalf of the poor women of India. She said to the
Queen that she (the Queen) was a woman, and these in India were women,
and their shame was the Queen’s shame, and for them to be outraged was as
though she (the Queen) was outraged, that it was a shame for women to be
treated so when a woman was Queen. Then the Queen ordered it to be
stopped. But the officers still carry it on.” This she added sorrowfully, all
the other women joining in the assertion. Then a sudden thought came into
the woman’s face, and she asked: “Are you like that lady of Calcutta, going
to try to do something to help us?” We told them we would work and pray
for them that help might come and homes be provided for them. They
blessed and thanked us over and over. We told them, “We are your sisters;”
they replied, “We are your slaves.”
Then the woman whom we have especially described lifted her hand and
with impressive solemnity uttered a vow that she would no longer lead a
life of shame.
The next morning we went back to the same place and stopped before the
open door. The old mother was sitting on the floor by a little charcoal fire
preparing the breakfast. The two daughters of the house were putting their
simple little abode in order for the day. The penitent one came forward and
smiled so faint a welcome, and seemed so embarrassed at our coming, that
we at first thought she was offended; but they exclaimed almost instantly,
“We were awake at midnight last night talking of you, and we said it must

have been the true God who had sent you to tell us of your religion.” We
replied that they had been sorely on our hearts, so that we could not sleep,
and that we too were awake at midnight, talking of them and praying for
them. They then poured out blessings upon us, with hands clasped in prayer.
As we talked earnestly and lovingly to them, through our interpreter, the
one who had made the solemn vow came forward and knelt beside Mrs.
Andrew, who was standing, and timidly took her hand. Mrs. Andrew laid it
on the poor girl’s shoulder as on the day before, but the interpreter said,
“Put your hand on her head; she is asking you to bless her.” Tears streamed
from the eyes of the penitent, and she shook with sobs as Mrs. Andrew
fervently blessed her in the name of our God, and pleaded with Him for the
way to open for her escape from bondage. Then in like manner the other
daughter came and was blessed. Then the poor old mother threw herself
with her forehead on the ground, laying her hands on Mrs. Andrew’s feet,
and while Mrs. Andrew prayed over her, groaned and cried bitterly, saying,
“I am a sinner, I am a sinner. For twenty-five years I led a life of shame, and
brought up my daughters to it.”
We then wrote down their names, promising to pray for them, a pledge
which we have faithfully kept ever since.

IV.

The Contagious Diseases Acts.

T h e advocates of State-regulated fornication contend that diseases due
to vice will be best checked by licensed prostitution, combined with
medical care. The Abolitionists hold that morality alone is sufficient,
and that vice is not necessary. It is a square issue; shall it be
immorality and medicine, or shall it be morality?
The Regulationists believe that vice is necessary; the Abolitionists
believe that vice is not necessary, and that virtue must be demanded. A
memorial signed by one hundred and twenty-three British women, of whom
over half belong to the titled aristocracy, presented to the British
Government April 24, 1897, declares:—
“We feel it is the duty of the State, which of necessity, collects together
large numbers of unmarried men in military service, to protect them from
the consequences of evils which are, in fact, unavoidable.”
A memorial, on the other hand, of sixty-one thousand four hundred and
thirty-seven British women, and presented to the Government July 31,
1897, asserts:—
“No permanent diminution of disease will ever be attained by measures
which do not strike primarily at the vice itself.”
The leader of the sixty-one thousand and more, Mrs. Josephine Butler,
answers to the statement of the one hundred and twenty-three: “The
confidence of ultimate victory based on a foundation which cannot be
shaken, enables us to regard with composure the forward advance and
claims of materialism and fleshly indulgence, and to compassionate those—
furious against us to-day—who will be beaten to-morrow, and who will be
forced, before the ‘great cloud of witnesses’ in heaven and earth, to confess
themselves defeated and deserving of defeat.”
The cause of venereal disease is promiscuous relations carried to excess.
The hope of eradicating such disease, then, by licensing its cause, betokens
the extreme of moral blindness, and contradicts all science. Dr. Elizabeth

Blackwell says: “We may as well expect to cure typhoid fever whilst
allowing sewer gas to permeate the house; or cholera, whilst bad drinking
water is being taken, as try to cure venereal disease whilst its cause remains
unchecked.”
A recent official plea for licensed prostitution in the Cantonments of
India declares: “The efforts to teach the soldiers habits of self-control” have
“signally failed.” We wish for a moment to consider the efforts that have
been used in the past. There lies before us a copy of the “Report of the
Army Health Association.” It was printed at Meerut, India, in 1892. We
have also the subsequent reports for several years. In speaking of the efforts
put forth to teach self-control, much is made of the work of this Association
(see Departmental Committee Report, 1897, page 13), as a means that has
been used. This report of the Army Health Association has printed on its
cover such texts as, “Keep thyself pure,” “He that soweth to his flesh shall
of the flesh reap corruption,” etc.; giving the impression that it is a religious
document. In fact it is interspersed all through with Scripture quotations.
The introduction is signed by a Major-General, and the body of the report
is written by an army chaplain, secretary to the Association, who has the
title of Bachelor of Divinity. Four reverends beside, army chaplains, are
named among the list of officers of the Association. The language employed
in the report is often very obscure, and needs close analysis to get at its real
meaning. The introduction is a plea for the re-establishment of the abolished
system of Regulation, and is little more than the expression of a desire to
have legal sanction for what they were already doing illegally, as the report
shows, and it is doubtless for this very reason that the language is so
obscure. In one place it speaks of the “Gospel duty of healing diseases in a
compulsory way,” and as a precedent refers to the “Gospel record of healing
even when a voice had come from the healed protesting against the cure.”
Certainly blasphemy could scarcely go further than to liken the compulsory
indecent exposure of a woman to a miracle of our Lord. Every soldier
should “do his best,” says the report, “by the blessing of Almighty God, to
resist all temptation leading to the evil.” Close inspection proves that in this
case “the evil” in the mind of the writer is not the vice but the disease. The
soldier is recommended to the task of attaining to “self-command on pass,”
i.e., when outside the region of licensed brothels.

The report states that a “Handbook” has been circulated “to all fresh
arrivals in India,” and the closing chapter of the report is a reprint of that
Handbook, which is especially designed for army chaplains to circulate
among the soldiers as a “religious” tract. Interspersed with the quotations of
Scripture texts, is abominable instruction to the effect that a young man who
will confine his visits to the Government licensed brothel can trust the Lord
to keep him from contracting disease. This “religious” tract promises to
keep infected women out of the chakla, and warns the soldier not to go “in
an underhand way” to houses where he will not be protected from
“disease.”
O mothers! can you conceive of what would be your feeling to discover
that your eighteen-year-old boy, as is the son of many an English mother,
was under such “gospel” instruction as this! “We shall never forget what we
owe to Lord Roberts,” says the report; and we might have anticipated that
the author of the “Infamous Memorandum” would likewise be the supporter
of such measures for the instruction of young soldiers. Sir George White,
who succeeded Lord Roberts as Commander of the Indian forces, said, in
the Viceregal Council held in India, July 8, 1897, that “Every effort should
also be made to warn young soldiers of the consequences of immorality in
this country, to point out to them the terrible risks which they run, and to
appeal to their higher moral instincts and to their pride in their manhood to
avoid connections that carry with them grave danger that they will return
home shattered wrecks, unfit alike for military duty or civil life.”
There is not one word here as though evil connections were likewise to
be avoided, even if they were not supposed to carry danger of physical
disease as a result. The “moral” teaching seems to have been all of that
immoral sort that points toward the Government house of shame rather than
to the seventh commandment. How many young soldiers may not have met
their first temptation by having a superior officer point them to the
Government-regulated chakla! Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell says truly: “The
first indispensable condition in the prevention of disease is the steady
discouragement of promiscuous intercourse. Now I assert positively that
such discouragement has never been seriously tried in the army, by
Government, but only by unofficial efforts—efforts which are most
valuable, but entirely lacking in the force of organization, and in the
important recognition and help which Government alone can afford.”

It is easy to assume that the compulsory periodical examination of
women will check diseases due to vice; but the assumption has never been
proved. The statistics of the years during which the C. D. Acts prevailed in
certain military stations in Great Britain, as compared with the statistics of
later years, show a marked decrease since repeal took place, and therefore
that the compulsory examinations in no way diminished disease, but rather
the contrary. And when an unbiased person thoroughly investigates the
history of the controversy on the subject, and is made acquainted with the
course of deceit which has been practised in the past by Anglo-Indian[6]
advocates of licensed vice, in order to maintain an odious system, a belief in
Indian military assertions will not be inspired. The statement is being
heralded to the world that over half the British army in India is suffering
from diseases due to vice. Yet Lord George Hamilton, Secretary of State for
India, was obliged to explain in the House of Commons, January 25, 1897,
that while it had been reported that the aggregate of admissions to hospital
for venereal diseases among the British troops in India amounted in 1895 to
522 per thousand, “This does not mean that 522 men per thousand were
separately and individually admitted, still less does it indicate that 522
soldiers per thousand are incapacitated for duty from this cause. It is
calculated on the latest returns that an average permanent reduction of 46
per thousand is the loss entailed by these diseases.” In other words, instead
of over half being incapacitated from military duty, less than one in twenty
is off duty from this cause mentioned. The larger number, which is
calculated to startle the public into submission to the demands of certain
Anglo-Indian officials, has been secured on the assumption that every
“admission” into hospital means a fresh case, whereas it has been conceded
that all re-admissions from relapse, and every stage of the progress of
disease which requires a new diagnosis, has been reckoned as an
“admission.” A Member of Parliament who has been enquiring about the
hospital records, says:
“I have before me the hospital sheet of a man who was in hospital from January 1st to January
25th in one year. During that time the medical description of his disease was changed four times,
and the man is formally entered and discharged and re-admitted on each of these occasions, the
date of each discharge and admission being entered in the column provided for the purpose. So
that this one man, who has been only once in hospital during the year, actually furnishes four
‘admissions’ to the official record. The same man was again in hospital from the 1st to the 30th
of May, in the following year, during which time the diagnosis being three times changed, he
was entered as admitted and discharged three times.”

Statistics compiled on this basis are absolutely worthless for the purposes
of argument, and indicate, when so used, a lack of conscience as to exact
truthfulness. The official figures of the Indian Army (included in the Report
of the Departmental Committee of 1897, strongly advocating a return to
licensed prostitution), lie before us. It cannot be said that such a report
would be likely to minimize the amount of disease, yet this report, on page
9, distinctly states: “In 1895 an average of 45 men per thousand, or 3,200 in
a force of 71,031 British soldiers in India, were constantly in hospital for
venereal diseases.” Certainly this is sufficiently conclusive. The statement is
heralded to the world that all England is becoming infected from the troops
of diseased soldiers who return yearly to the home-land. One advocate of
licensed prostitution in India says that “thirteen per cent.” of the British
soldiers are “annually invalided home hopelessly incurable for military
purposes.” But referring to the same official statistics, embodied in the
Departmental Committee’s Report, we find that from the year 1887 to the
year 1895, 681 men out of the force of 70,000 and more, were invalided
home from these diseases, or, on an average, 76 men annually out of the
whole force of 70,000; that is, one-ninth of one per cent. Such unworthy
attempts to frighten an unwilling Christian public into acceding to the return
to a system of licensed prostitution, cannot be too strongly condemned.
Many well-meaning persons, on the assumption that “figures will not lie,”
are repeating these exaggerated assertions, and will not take the trouble of
investigating for themselves. The Army Sanitary Commission testified in
1894 that “a compulsory Lock Hospital system in India has proved a
failure.” There could be no higher authority to quote; and the attempt to
check diseases of this sort by the compulsory Lock Hospital system had
then been carried on for the good part of a century in India. If the case could
not be proved by such a prolonged experiment, involving such injustice to
women, surely all honest people should be ready to favour its abandonment.
But it is proposed now in certain quarters to examine men as well as
women. Two wrongs do not make a right. Equality of degradation is not the
sort of equality for Christians to desire. Bring the test home. Could the
reader, without committing sin, go to a physician to be examined in order to
discover whether he or she is “fit” to practise fornication? Then the State
that requires such an act becomes guilty in the sight of God of committing
the act. The guilt of that which is done under actual compulsion rests
wholly upon the State or individual that thus enforces wrong-doing. The

one who advocates the compulsory examination of women stands guilty
before God as the perpetrator of the outrage. It is a fearful thing when the
State becomes the perpetrator of such sin. We know it is argued that the
women and men subjected to such regulations would be only those who are
willing to submit. We will dwell on that point a little further on; at present it
is enough to say, that because a thief is willing to steal, the State is no less
guilty that obliges him to steal.
Certain women are, it seems, being deceived by the pretence that laws are
to be passed which will compel men to attend the periodical examination.
What is the use of women clamouring for such a law as long as men enact
and enforce all our laws? Men will never legislate themselves into the
degradations and inconveniences of the compulsory periodical examination,
and go to reside in hospitals as long as they are afflicted with disease. Will
the Cantonment magistrate leave his judicial bench to go and sit in the Lock
Hospital idly until he is no longer a source of danger to the community?
Will the colonel of a regiment leave his soldiers to mutiny while he goes to
reside in a Lock Hospital for a term of weeks? Such talk is the merest
nonsense until only men of good morals control military affairs, and if they
did there would be small demand for Lock Hospitals in India. The young
soldiers could be readily trained to decency were it not for the utterly
dishonouring views of life held by most of the high-titled officials over
them. On this very proposal to examine men, the Secretary for War, Lord
Lansdowne, said in the House of Lords, in the debate that took place May
17, 1897: “I have discussed that proposal with many high authorities, and I
am bound to tell your lordships that the conclusion to which I am disposed
to arrive is that this practice of regular inspection did not produce the
desired effect; and that it was, on the contrary, regarded, and rightly
regarded, by the men as a brutalizing and degrading practice.” It has
therefore been boldly determined and declared that men shall not be
subjected to periodical examination (although there is not the faintest
possibility of their ever being subjected to this humiliation by physicians of
the opposite sex), for it is “brutalizing and degrading.”[7] Yet it is these very
men who are directly responsible for bringing disease back to England; for
the native women do not go to England. The argument is, that since it
brutalizes and degrades men to cause them to be examined, that they may
not propagate disease in England, therefore the native women of India must
be brutalized and degraded. It is useless to assert that the practice will not

degrade women; we know that the moral nature of a woman is at least as
susceptible of being injured by enforced immodesty as that of a man; in
fact, as soon as it would serve any purpose in making a point in the interest
of self, these very men would boldly proclaim, probably, the greater moral
susceptibility of woman. It seems the extreme of servility for women to
come to the front at this time, and in the face of the utter repudiation of all
intention of examining men, declare for the examination of women. When
men will not yield their dignity one jot, even for the sake of preserving the
health of those women of England who are to become their future wives,
what insolent hypocrisy for them to persuade deluded women to help them
to bring women under practices so “degrading and brutalizing!” What
infinite capacity of servility in the nature of women who will advocate such
degrading, brutalizing treatment of women!
But, we may be asked, Shall women show no concern for the “innocent
wives and children” of diseased men? Again we ask, Which wives and
which children—the British or the Indian? There are hundreds of such
wives and children who have been forsaken by husbands and fathers. There
is almost a nation of Eurasians who curse the day they were given an
unwelcome existence. And their mothers, in large numbers, were honestly
married, to their best belief and intention. Here are the real wives and the
real children in the sight of a just God, and to them should England’s
attention be first turned. The chaklas hold many such unwilling prisoners,
left there by treacherous husbands and fathers. Some day this wife of the
officer or soldier will be turned out to perish of the disease her system could
no longer throw off, and the children will either be retained as soldiers’
prostitutes or sent out to share the fate of the diseased mother. The women
of England are being besought to turn their eyes on the future wives of
British officers and soldiers; it would be for England’s lasting good would
they but persistently keep their eyes on the British officers’ and soldiers’
present wives and children in the far-off East. Were attention more
persistently called to the Indian wife of the British soldier, there would be
much less likelihood of his finding opportunity to entrap an innocent wife in
the home-land.
It was suggested, in the first instance, by Sir George White, successor to
Lord Roberts as Commander-in-Chief of the forces in India, and re-
incorporated in the despatch of the Secretary of State as to immediate steps

to be taken to check venereal disease, that female medical assistants be
employed to conduct the examinations. It is our belief that respectable
women-physicians wish to treat disease—not prostitution. Even if such
were given the full control of Lock Hospitals, which is not likely, we
wonder how many would like to return to their own country bearing
certificates for faithful service, such as Mahaldarni Ezergee of the
Cantonment of Rawal Pindi displayed to us with such evident pride, that
she had been trained in other besides the ordinary duties of a mahaldarni:
“The soldiers were remarkably healthy while the prostitutes were under her
charge.” Again, another officer had testified: “Few soldiers were in the
hospital while the women were under her care.” The surgeon of the
regiment had testified: “Disease has been reduced to a minimum among the
soldiers,” while the women were under Ezergee, “superintendent of the
prostitutes.” This is what Lady Cook describes in a recent American
periodical as “ministrations to women,” while the certificates show that
everything that was done was valued only as it protected the soldiers in
vice; the indications as to the health of the women are never once even
commented upon—all the work for women was done with reference to men.
This being the fact, it is no wonder that in the official reply from India,
dated May 18, 1897, and signed by the Viceroy, Sir George White, and
others, it is declared that “It is doubtful whether the women possessing the
necessary medical qualifications, and of a status sufficiently good to
preclude the possibility of their receiving bribes from the women they have
to examine, would be willing to undertake the work.”[8]
As regards the examination of the women, we take a chapter out of the
history of our India work, in illustration, as recorded in our Journal:
Meerut, India, February 8, 1892.
At half-past seven this morning we went down the Sudder Bazaar to the neighbourhood of the
Lock Hospital, it being examination day. The building is well placed for observation, being at a
point where five streets meet, and several other streets run close by. The hospital is a foreign
bungalow with a verandah in front, inclosed in a high brick wall. Already the girls, in gaudy
apparel and flashy jewelry, were assembling, and in a few moments we counted thirty girls
standing or sitting around, outside the building and outside the gate in the street. They came
walking and riding in ekkas (native carts), and two loads came in cabs. Some of them had
several miles to come from the Rest Camp. The vehicles waited for them across the street, under
the shade trees. The girls went in by twos or threes, as summoned. A tall native policeman stood
about, apparently to keep order. The street was one of Meerut’s busiest thoroughfares. Men and
boys lounged here and there, and even tiny children looked on with interest and curiosity. At one
time we noticed not less than twenty-five men and boys gathered about and discussing the

scene. A police station was close by, and an unusual number of men lingered in front of it,
discussing the women, as their glances and manners indicated. One Eurasian woman brought a
girl, evidently held as a slave to make money for her; she seemed reluctant to even trust her girl
to go alone into the hospital, when her turn came; and as soon as she emerged again, seized her
and led her away, the policemen shouting after her in derision, “Mem Sahib! Mem Sahib!” (the
name for “lady,” applied, as a rule, to white women), to which the Eurasian gave no response.

About a hundred women were examined that morning, waiting their turn
on the public street, while the crowd gathered round to discuss the women
kept by the Government for British soldiers. No wonder the Commander-in-
Chief has decided that the female medical assistants who could be induced
to manage such an affair would hardly be “sufficiently good to preclude the
possibility of their receiving bribes.” The Lock Hospitals of the Orient, as
we studied them in many Cantonments of India, and also in Singapore and
Hong Kong, are for the treatment of prostitution rather than for the
treatment of disease, for the reason that only those who could be quickly
restored to health to go on in their occupation are likely to be retained any
length of time for treatment. We have already referred to the practice of
turning cases of secondary, or advanced, disease out of the Cantonment.
The position at the head of one of these hospitals is not likely to tax one’s
scientific resources much beyond instructing the native women how to
perform ablutions, so strongly urged by Lord Roberts in his Circular
Memorandum, in administering douches, and in diagnosticating and
keeping in hospital all cases of catamenia. We do not marvel if male
surgeons have grown tired of the monotonous round, and with a seeming
burst of generosity propose to give the position to medical women;
particularly, if by such “generous” expressions of appreciation for the
usefulness of women, they can lead over-credulous fine ladies into the
conclusion that at last all the objections to the C. D. Acts have been met.
In spite of holding a degrading position the verdict of the world is “A
man’s a man for a’ that”; but not so the woman who connects herself with
an Eastern Lock Hospital—her dignity would never sustain the shock.
Already the official conclusion is that no woman of intelligence or honesty
would accept such a position. Women cannot afford to become the
scavengers of the profession. We remember interviewing an Englishwoman
in charge of a very large Lock Hospital in an Eastern city; and after this we
went directly to the adjoining general hospital. We were welcomed by the
nurses and treated most cordially until we mentioned, with design, the
Englishwoman at the neighbouring hospital, and that we had been talking

with her. A frozen response abruptly ended further sociability, and we
learned thus that even underling nurses of other hospitals held themselves
as in a position to snub the chief superintendent of a Lock Hospital in the
East.
From the time that the abominable nature of the Contagious Diseases
Acts of England and India were made known, and the Acts held up to public
execration and outlawed, like a condemned criminal, this System has gone
seeking a new alias that its identity might be hidden from the inconvenience
of exposure. Many times these laws have been unmasked, and they have
never been able to survive the exposure of their real name, which was at the
first, “Contagious Diseases Acts.”
Over and over again has this criminal Law, when caught sneaking about,
denied his real name. Like a fatal birthmark, which no power can eradicate,
so this abomination has its birthmark, which, when seen, fixes the identity
beyond all question. That birthmark is the compulsory examination of
women. This cannot be made to serve the desired purpose without all the
essential features of the C. D. Acts. It makes not the slightest difference
whether the law is called the Health Act, as in Australia, Getz’s Projet de
Loi, as in Norway, the Women’s and Girls’ Protection Ordinance, as at
Singapore, the Cantonment Acts or the Cantonments Act, or what not—the
test of the law, as to its identity with the old infamous C. D. Acts, is,
whether women are obliged to submit to compulsory examination. “In fact,
the compulsory examination of women is the C. D. Acts.” Let this one point
be put into law, and all the rest goes without saying. The battle has always
raged around this one central point.
To prove that the compulsory examination of women necessitates the
regulations that always attend it, let us suppose that in a community this one
point is provided for by law, and that the officers of the law are left to
enforce the measure, by whatever regulations are necessary:—
The law demands merely that impure women must be examined regularly for the protection
of the public health.
But the police officer sees at once that to secure this point a list must be kept of the women,
when examined, that notice of requirement can be sent to those not coming voluntarily. Thus
registration of prostitutes comes to pass.
But after examination, those found diseased must be placed by themselves for treatment. Thus
a hospital for prostitutes is established.

Then provision must be made to compel those who are unwilling to attend the examinations
to do so, for it has been the invariable experience that few women will go regularly for
examination unless compelled to do so, and also there must be means of enforcing them to
remain in hospital. Thus the hospital becomes a Lock Hospital, and fines and imprisonments are
imposed on delinquents.
But compulsion cannot be secured without the aid of the police and the magistrate, and it is
most difficult to follow up women, prove their identity, hale them to examination and to Lock
Hospital without being able to keep them located in one tolerated quarter or house where they
may be found—hence segregation is introduced; and this is also done to keep women with
whom association is supposed to be safe—because under constant medical and police
surveillance—separate from those with whom it is supposed to be a risk to associate.
Now we discover that the compulsory periodical examination of women of impure life, when
carried out in actual operation, creates a necessity for all the essential features of every C. D. Act
that has ever been known, namely: Compulsory examination; Registration; Lock Hospitals;
Fines and Imprisonments; Police Surveillance; Segregation.

Yet another thing is needful for the operation of this law requiring
compulsory periodical examination, namely, measures for extending the
operation of the law, so that, as new women are likely to become a source
of contamination, they also may be brought under its operation, and for the
practical and easy operation of the measure, compelled to take up their
residence in segregated quarters. This is the special field of activity in the
operation of the law, and is a deadly menace to the most ordinary liberties
of women. People will loudly advocate that “something must be done” to
confine the houses of ill-fame to certain quarters of a city, without the
slightest care as to how it is done, so long as they need not become
intimately acquainted with a disagreeable subject; they will advocate
measures of the most deadly consequences to others more defenceless than
themselves, and to the ultimate moral tone of the very society in which they
move, and yet heartlessly refuse to consider the responsibility that rests
upon them for their conduct. “Something must be done,” they say, and the
police force must attend to the details; they are too loathsome even to be
considered, yet they refuse to understand that these very loathsome details
which they require the police to work out must utterly ruin the character of
the police into whose hands they have betrayed all the decent rights of
womanhood.
What does it mean to women for men to assume the right to arrest all
suspicious characters and oblige them to live in a certain house or street,
and to appear at the examinations at the Lock Hospitals? Let the banker
sitting in his bank, or the merchant in his shop, consider what it would mean

for him to be accosted in his own place of business, taken off immediately
to the Lock Hospital, examined, and if the doctor so ordered, sent
immediately into exile in a hospital for libertines, with no chance to set his
house in order or to defend his character from the charge of being a
libertine! And even if the charge were true would he not think the
punishment too severe? And then, suppose it were the case that, at the end
of the imprisonment in the hospital, he were required to reside for the rest
of his days in a certain street? This is exactly what is done with women
when once the principle is set up that compulsory periodical examinations
must take place. But the reply is, No women of property or consequence
would ever be so treated. Very true; yet are not these often utterly
profligate? Certainly. So this is a law which will be operated only in the
case of the lowly. Yes, it is a piece of legislation on the part of the mighty to
degrade and rob the daughters of the poor of their most ordinary rights, and
it deserves the most extreme execration that human language is capable of,
on that very account. The day has passed by when it is safe to try to
enunciate such sentiments among a free people. “What are the women
making all this row about?” said one of the daily journals of London, during
our India work; “no high-born ladies will ever be put to inconvenience by
such a law.” Ah! that was one of the principal reasons why such a row was
made.
What does it mean to arrest a suspected case and send her to the
segregated quarter for residence, where any man can assume the right to
insult her and demand entrance at her door at any hour? It means that the
law takes hold of a woman who may have occasionally done wrong and
forces her to do wrong habitually; for after segregation no one will give her
honest work. That law is radically wicked which confirms a human being
into a habitual breaker of one of God’s ten commandments.
And supposing the girl has not actually done wrong, but has conducted
herself imprudently, and brought just suspicion on herself? To put her under
the ban of such a law means to create a prostitute by law. That law is
radically wrong which can be operated with such deadly effect on society as
to actually create evil. Yet everywhere that the C. D. Acts have been
operated such cases have occurred. The mayor of a city in South Africa told
us that when a proposition for the introduction of these regulations was
being entertained by the City Council of that place, and every effort was

made to secure his approval, he was one day accosted by an alderman on
the street, who plucked him by the sleeve, and pointing out a perfectly
respectable-looking woman who was passing by, said, “Now, if we could
get our law we could get that woman.” He started back in horror, thinking
to himself, “And if he could get his clutches on that woman by such a law,
why not on any woman?”
Policemen are not supposed to be infallibly virtuous; and supposing they
could be bribed or blackmailed? A policeman in Queensland confessed that
he had taken a bribe to deliver a pretty girl over to the power of a libertine
by having her registered as a common prostitute, and that he carried out the
dastardly crime. A Christian woman in Cape Colony heard of the arrest as a
common prostitute of a virtuous girl of her acquaintance, and went to the
court to secure her release. There was a keeper of a house of ill-fame whom
she recognised, who came to make accusation against the girl. The Christian
worker appealed to a policeman, whom she knew as a church-member and a
man of good repute, to stand with her for the girl’s defence; but the evil
woman took him to one side and she distinctly overheard her threaten to
blast his reputation if he interfered. The magistrate took the word of this
evil woman, which was corroborated by the falsehoods of the policeman,
and in spite of her protestations, the girl was registered.
Another case was told us by a Wesleyan minister’s wife; it occurred in
England, before the repeal of the Acts. Her most intimate early friend, a
lovely young Christian girl, had a brother who quarrelled with a policeman
who threatened revenge. He watched his opportunity, arrested the sister, and
gave his oath that she was a common prostitute; she was forced through the
examination and registered, and when at last found by her brother, was a
raving maniac as a result of the day’s awful experience, and died shortly
afterward in a madhouse. We might multiply the instances we have
ourselves personally heard on good authority, and relate some of the many
cases known to the history of the movement for repeal, but there is no space
for further enlargement.
Again we say there is something radically wrong with this law, when
women can be so fearfully wronged in its operation, should the police
officers and magistrates be either wicked or weak. Practically such a law
delivers the reputation of women wholly over to the power of the police.
But, some one says, let no case be settled on suspicion; let proof be brought.

The question arises, How secure the proof? In India it was considered
sufficient by Lord Roberts to teach the soldiers that it was “a point of
honour” to save other soldiers from disease by informing against women;
but it has frequently been observed that the soldier will usually point out
another woman rather than the one he has actually associated with, and
women are haled to the examinations who may never have seen the
informant before. It detracts nothing from the peril of girls and women
when the uncorroborated testimony of a self-confessed libertine can be used
against them, and the frequency with which evil men will combine to
utterly break down the testimony of a young woman in case of seduction,
and the unblushing testimony of these men to their own shameful conduct,
which is often treated as a joke by the magistrate, shows that the reputation
of a woman is no safer in the hands of a combination of libertines. Nothing
is much more difficult than to actually prove a woman a prostitute, and
short of absolute proof, the thought of registration, segregation,
imprisonment in a Lock Hospital, etc., is intolerable.
Again, a single act of fornication does not prove prostitution, and how
many acts shall constitute proof? Practically, these are things that the law
never has considered at all; but wherever the compulsory examination has
been established, secret information from libertines is received and acted
upon with little question as to its veracity, and the whole system has
immediately degenerated into a costly effort on the part of the State, paid
for by the taxes of respectable people, to pander to the wishes of libertines,
and keep the houses of ill-fame filled with attractive and healthy inmates,
and thus the State becomes itself the great purveyor of vice. We have said
before repeatedly, and say again, that there is no real evidence that
prostitution has been made safer by the periodical examination of women,
because the false security in vice greatly increases the amount of vice,
which is itself the cause of the diseases in question. Not only does correct
reason testify to this, but also statistics uphold this statement.
We have now shown that the compulsory examination of women brings
into existence, of necessity, every feature of what is commonly called the
C. D. Acts; and that, as that compulsory examination is of itself a sin, so
every feature of the enactments necessary to carry out that law is at each
step liable to fearful abuse, and the system as a whole is ruinous to the
morals of any community.

V.

Pleading for the Oppressed.

M a n y times in the course of our conversations with the little women
of India we had promised before leaving them to do what we could
to secure relief and help for them. In the simplicity of their faith and
lack of practical knowledge, several of them had ventured to
intimate that we might go to England and see the Queen, and tell
her their troubles. “For,” they said, “the Queen does not countenance it; for
she has daughters of her own, and she cares for her daughters in India.”
“The Queen is a woman, and we also are women, and our shame is the
Queen’s shame; and for us to be exposed is as though the Queen were
exposed; it is a shame for women to be so treated when a woman is Queen.”
At Peshawar, at Lucknow, and at Meerut, the girls had held us at parting
until they had solemnly lifted their eyes to heaven and asked God’s blessing
on us, and asked Him to help us to help them to get deliverance from their
oppression. God heard the prayer, although their knowledge of Him was
probably very obscure. The sacred promises we gave them and gave Him to
help them, can never be set aside without bringing guilt on our own souls.
They depend upon us to voice their sorrows and plead their cause, by
solemn compact with them and God. May He keep us faithful to the trust!
We carefully prepared the report of our investigations and forwarded this
to Miss Forsaith, of London, Secretary of the British Committee of the
Federation for the Abolition of State Regulation of Vice. Then as the
summer was too far advanced to hold any meetings in India, we proceeded
to Australia, New Zealand, and Tasmania, in the interests of our regular
work. But in the early part of the year 1893 we were summoned to England
to give evidence in person concerning the condition of things in the
Cantonments of India, which went to prove that, although the C. D. Acts
had been ordered to be repealed, the same state of things was being
maintained, under the Cantonments Act of 1889, and that the resolution of
the House of Commons of 1888 had been disregarded.

A Departmental Committee was appointed by the Government to receive
our evidence. This Committee was composed of Mr. George W. E. Russell,
M.P., Under-Secretary of State for India (Chairman); The late Right Hon.
Sir James Stansfeld, M.P.; General Sir Donald M. Stewart, Bart., G.C.B.,
Commander of the Forces in India, before Lord Roberts; Sir James Peile,
K.C.S.I.; Mr. H. J. Wilson, M.P., with Major-General O. R. Newmarch,
C.S.I., as Secretary. The first sitting of the Committee, at the India Office,
London, was April 11, 1893. Before this Departmental Committee we
appeared day after day until the full report of our statements had been made.
In the course of the giving of this evidence, we described with accuracy the
records which we had seen in the various Lock Hospitals of the ten
Cantonments visited when in India, and a telegram was sent by the
chairman of the Committee, Mr. George Russell, giving our description and
requesting that these records be impounded by the India Government and
forwarded to London for reference. Then our full statement was despatched
to India for reply.
Meanwhile, Lord Roberts, who had returned to England, had been
interviewed by a reporter of The Christian Commonwealth, who placed
before him some of our statements regarding the Cantonments of India.
Lord Roberts pronounced them “simply untrue,” and declared that he had
recently made a tour of investigation through the Cantonments, and knew
that our statements were false. His open charges of falsehood against us
were heralded throughout the Empire, and freely discussed by the Press
from the time they were made in April to the time of our second appearance
before the Committee in August.
Upon the receipt of our evidence in India there was a Special
Commission appointed by the Indian Government, to collect evidence in
refutation of our charges, two members of it being instructed to proceed to
England therewith, and to give personal testimony in behalf of the Indian
Government.
The Special Commission did not come before the Committee until
August, and we spent much of the interim in addressing public meetings
throughout Great Britain, and arousing interest in the subject. Many large
and important meetings were also addressed by such well-known leaders as
Mrs. Josephine Butler, the late Sir James Stansfeld, M.P., Mr. Henry J.
Wilson, M.P., and Mrs. H. J. Wilson, Mr. James Stuart, M.P., and many

other Members of Parliament. At the annual conferences and assemblies of
the various denominations, the subject was taken up; many ladies of the
Women’s Liberal Federation and of the British Women’s Temperance
Association, and of other bodies, presented the matter in their meetings, and
ministers of all denominations lent their help. At all these meetings
resolutions were passed condemning legalized vice, and from all of them
memorials were sent to the Government, protesting against the condition of
things prevalent in the Cantonments of India. It was truly touching to
witness the intense interest manifested in the subject by the common
people, the class from whom the soldiers are so largely drawn, and for
whose sake military officials claimed that it was necessary to establish the
chakla system. The mothers and fathers of British lads had their own
opinion as to what was necessary for their boys.
“I’ll buy him off! I’ll buy him off!” exclaimed one woman to us, with
streaming eyes, at the close of one of our meetings. “My boy enlisted to go
to India without my consent and then repented, and I thought it would teach
him a lesson to compel him to abide by his word. He has already got as far
as Gibraltar, I think; but I’ll send the money and buy him off. I cannot
consent to let him go out under officers who will teach him that vice is
necessary.” Another mother expressed great indignation at our statements
regarding the temptations put in the way of young soldiers by their
superiors, and declared she would write to her boy and obtain his
contradiction of them. The reply came back, and the almost broken-hearted
mother caused it to be conveyed to us, together with an exhortation that we
should “cry aloud and spare not.” It was to the following effect:
“Yes, mother, all those ladies say is true, and much more that they do not
know, and you would hardly believe. I have been so harassed and
persecuted that sometimes I have gone to the chakla, pretending to sin, but
God knows I have not; it was the only way to escape their merciless
persecution.”
We have been informed many times that there were military officers who
sneered at virtuous soldiers as lacking proper fighting qualities, and who
deliberately fostered in their soldiers animal propensities, for the sake of the
ferocity of disposition that attends licentiousness.
The names of the special Commissioners were: Mr. Denzil Ibbetson and
Surgeon-Colonel J. Cleghorn, M.D., Inspector-General of Civil Hospitals

throughout the Punjab. In addition to these witnesses from India and
ourselves, Lord Roberts, Quartermaster-General Chapman, and Mr. Hyslop
Bell, of Darlington, were called before the Departmental Committee to give
evidence.
The statements of Lord Roberts and of General Chapman, who were
called before the Departmental Committee in August, proved to be matters
of intense interest, especially as regarded their disagreement as to Lord
Roberts’ knowledge of the Infamous Memorandum. Lord Roberts testified
that, when the Resolution of 1888 was carried in the House of Commons
not permitting the compulsory examination of women or the licensing of
prostitution, he understood those measures to mean abolition, not
modification, of measures for the regulation of prostitution, and proceeded
accordingly. The Resolution meant the abolishing of the periodical
examination, of licensing, of compulsion, of regulation, etc. He declared
that he knew nothing of the Infamous Memorandum which had been issued
in his name, and that he “entirely disapproved” of some of the contents of
that circular, saying, “I certainly would not have approved of that part of the
Circular which referred to providing them with pretty young women.” Lord
Roberts was confronted with a mass of evidence which he little expected.
After his own sweeping contradictions of our statements, he was shown the
report from the Cantonment of Meean Meer which the Special Commission
had brought from India, and in which nearly every statement we had made
was “admitted.” Other prima facie evidence of the truth of our statements
convinced him that our testimony was not to be broken down. As he left the
Committee it was with the conviction that General Chapman was next to be
called, and would give most disagreeable evidence against him as regarded
the Infamous Memorandum and its authorship. Lord Roberts proceeded
immediately to Scotland, and from thence wrote the following letter of
apology:—
Dunbar, Scotland, 11 August, 1893.
Having read the reports of Mr. Ibbetson’s Committee, in regard to the working of the Rules
dealing with the abolition of Lock Hospitals, etc., in Cantonments in India, and also the reports
of the officers commanding the seven stations which the Committee did not visit, I frankly
admit that the statements of the two American missionary ladies, who made a tour through
Upper India in the cold weather of 1891–92, for the purpose of inquiring into the matter, are in
the main correct.
I hoped and believed that the orders issued to give effect to the Resolution of the House of
Commons had been everywhere obeyed. In some stations the Rules have been strictly enforced,

but in others it now turns out this has not been completely the case.
I deeply regret this, and I feel that an apology is due from me to the ladies concerned. This
apology I offer unreservedly.
In doing so, I would remark that I think it would have been better if the missionary ladies had
been commended to the care of the authorities in India. We could have assisted them to carry out
the work on which they were engaged; omissions and shortcomings would have been remedied
at the time; a great deal of unpleasantness would have been avoided; the ladies themselves
would have found their task considerably lightened; and there would have been less chance of
their drawing wrong deductions from some of the circumstances which came under their notice,
as in sundry instances they would seem from Mr. Ibbetson’s Committee Report to have done.
This was owing, no doubt, to a want of knowledge of the language, and of the habits and
customs of the people of India.
Roberts.

This letter was accompanied by a short note to the Chairman requesting
him to annex the letter of apology to the official report of the proceedings of
the Committee.
A few days later General Chapman came before the Committee and
testified with regard to the Circular Memorandum: “It was prepared at
Simla, after the Commander-in-Chief [Lord Roberts] had completed his
annual inspection, and had freely discussed with the officers in command
the various measures which it was proposed to adopt.” General Chapman
described the manner in which it was done as follows: The Commander-in-
Chief gave the instruction that the Circular be prepared; then it was drawn
up by officials in the General’s office under his supervision. The Surgeon-
General was consulted; then the Circular was issued under the authority of
the Commander-in-Chief. It was sent first to the Military Department of the
Government of India, and then sent in every direction to all the authorities
in India. He said he “could not have issued” the Circular “unless Lord
Roberts had seen it; that would have been perfectly impossible.” When
questioned particularly as to Lord Roberts’ knowledge of that part of the
document which, as Lord Roberts expressed it, called for “pretty young
women” to be provided for the soldiers, General Chapman said of these
sentences: “He certainly did approve of them.” When asked how it was that
the Secretary of State laid the blame on him (General Chapman), in the
House of Commons, he replied: “Sir John Gorst said it was necessary to put
the blame on somebody, therefore he put it on me.”
In the meantime a box had arrived from India containing the hospital
records, which had been impounded by the Indian Government, on the
request of the Chairman of the Committee, and they furnished a large

quantity of prima facie evidence, in the very handwriting of the British
officials. These books being placed in our hands, we were able to verify the
statements we had given in evidence concerning these records, and were
also able to place official documents before the Committee which disproved
some of the statements which had been conveyed to England from India by
the hand of the two Special Commissioners. As this well illustrates the utter
unreliability of many Anglo-Indian official assertions, we will copy a
condensed and simplified extract from the proceedings of that session of the
Committee at which we placed official document against official document,
and pointed out irreconcilable differences.
The reader must try to imagine us sitting in one of the spacious rooms of
the India Office. At the head of an oval polished table sat Mr. Russell, the
chairman; to his left sat General Newmarch, Sir Donald Stewart, and Sir
James Peile. To the chairman’s right sat the late Sir James Stansfeld, whose
prerogative it was to conduct the examination; next to him were Mr.
Casserley, Q.C., counsel for our side, and Henry J. Wilson, M.P. At the
opposite end of the table from the chairman sat the stenographer and
ourselves. It is to be understood that Mr. Stansfeld asks the questions and
we answer:
Question—We will pass to the book of requisition for tickets. [This was a book from which
many leaves were torn, leaving counterfoils on which were memoranda signifying that the
extracted leaves were given to the Cantonment Magistrate, calling for tickets for women, who
were thereby certified as under the charge of the physician, and licensed to practise prostitution.]
Answer—I have it.
Q.—And you can number the counterfoils; how many requisitions to the Cantonment
Magistrate for licensed tickets does it say on the 1st of May, 1892?
A.—Twenty-one.
Q.—Does it say on counterfoils of tickets in respect of the nineteen new requisitions on 15th
June, 1892?
A.—It does.
Q.—Therefore that is evidence that the issue of tickets at any rate endured longer than May?
A.—Yes, longer than the 1st of May; it shows that it continued until the 15th of June, 1892.
Q.—At any rate, on the 15th of June a requisition was made for nineteen tickets?
A.—Nineteen tickets.
Q.—According to the Military Reports before us, page 18, on line 940: “Women were
registered, tickets issued, and bi-monthly inspections made between March, 1890, and May,
1892; it was brought to my notice in May, 1892 that tickets were being issued to prostitutes in
Meean Meer; I ordered the discontinuance of the practice at once, and it was reported to me on
the 17th of May, 1892, that no registration of prostitutes in any form whatever then continued;”

and it appears from what you have now produced, that at any rate requisitions were made as late
as the 15th of June; that is so, is it not?
A.—Yes.
Q.—Of those requisitions on that date, the 15th of June, as well as on several other dates, do
you find some, and how many, issued for the Royal Artillery Bazaar?
A.—I counted twenty that were for the Royal Artillery Bazaar women.
Q.—Have you seen the Report of the Commanding Officer for the regiment dated 19th June,
1893, and does it state that no tickets had been issued for the regiment since February, 1891?
A.—Yes, I saw that statement; it is page 2 of the supplementary sheet, line 95, under Meean
Meer. The statement of Captain Goff, commanding the Royal Artillery. That note says, “No
registration of prostitutes or issue of tickets in any form whatever has ever been carried out by
the Royal Artillery since the present battery came to the station, February, 1891.”
Q.—What you find is that twenty tickets were issued?
A.—It is since February, 1891, according to this book some twenty tickets have been issued
for the Royal Artillery.
Q.—Up to what date?
A.—Up to June 15th, 1892.
Q.—You produce a ticket here which you obtained from one of the women; what was the date
of that ticket; was not the date of the year 1892?
A.—It was dated 1892; that we procured at the Artillery Bazaar.
Q.—Did I understand you to say that you found twenty tickets were issued to the women of
the Artillery?
A.—Yes, twenty counterfoils left are of the Royal Artillery.
Mr. Stansfeld to the Committee—That fact, which is testified to by the counterfoils of this
book, is inconsistent with the statement of the Commanding Officer in his Report.

These are but a few of the many instances in which the official records
sent to London for inspection, contradicted the testimony of military
officers.
The first sitting of the Departmental Committee was April 11, its last
sitting August 15, and its report was circulated in Parliament September 11,
1893.
With the acknowledgment from the Commander-in-Chief of the truth of
our statements, a most sweeping victory had been gained for the cause; no
under-official could very well dispute the word of the Commander-in-Chief
of the army. Lord Roberts’ remark that “the ladies themselves would have
found their task considerably lightened” had they been “commended to the
care of the authorities in India,” was the source of a good deal of
amusement on the part of our friends, and led to many a sarcastic comment
on the part of the public press; some of which ran somewhat as follows: “As

Lord Roberts freely admitted that he did not know these things, certainly
had the ladies appealed to him they need not have come back so loaded with
information; this would have greatly lightened their task.” “As there was a
regulation which allowed any suspicious characters to be expelled from the
Cantonments without assigning a reason therefor, the application of this
regulation would greatly have ‘lightened their task,’” etc., etc.
What had been fully established by the evidence cannot be better
expressed than in the recent utterance of the British Committee for the
Abolition of State Regulation of Vice, i.e.:—
“The fact was fully established that the so-called voluntary system had
been completely overridden by extra-legal practices, of which the provision
placing, or interpreted to have placed, venereal diseases under the same rule
as ‘cholera, small-pox, diphtheria, or typhoid fever,’ became the fulcrum or
pivot.” The thing which now remained to be done was to embody the
Resolution of the House of Commons of 1888 in a law which must be
passed by the Government of India, that could not be longer evaded or
disobeyed. After much discussion and consideration, the Secretary of State
for India directed that the Cantonment regulations which related to the
removal to hospital of those persons suspected of contagious or infectious
diseases, must be so altered as to admit of the treatment of contagious
diseases due to vice in a manner that would not be liable to abuse of or
injury to the reputation of women.
Accordingly the Cantonments Act of 1889 in so far as it provided for the
compulsory examination of women suspected of contagious diseases due to
vice, and their forcible detention in hospital under penalty of expulsion
from the Cantonment, was altered to apply only to cholera, smallpox,
diphtheria, or typhoid fever. This was done to protect the character and
reputation of women, for it had been conceded on all sides that hitherto the
only method practicable for getting hold of suspected women was on the
information of male libertines, and that such persons when questioned as to
the source of their contagion, generally sought to cover their own wrong-
doing or protect their real partner in sin by accusing some other woman,
often a perfectly innocent person.
This new Act, called the Cantonments Act Amendment Act, was passed
on February 8, 1895. The point which was gained by the passage of this
new Act was one of great importance, namely, that there were moral and

social questions involved in the treatment of contagious diseases due to vice
which could not be overlooked in the medical management of such
disorders without serious consequences. It was, in the nature of the case,
impossible to place these diseases on the same footing as other contagious
disorders. The reasons for this position have been recently expressed very
concisely and forcibly by the British Committee, in the following
language:—
“1. It casts no stigma on the name or character of a person to assert that he, or she, is affected
with ‘cholera, smallpox, diphtheria, or typhoid fever,’ and it can be ascertained whether such
statement be true without shock to the feelings of the most refined. The opposite is the case with
venereal disease, in regard to which a mis-statement is a virtual libel, and a compulsory
examination is an indecent outrage. 2. As regards the former classes of disease, no conceivable
measures can have any moral bearing; whereas in the latter class compulsory (and in some of its
relations, even voluntary) submission to examination or treatment has the gravest moral
consequences both to the individual and to the community. 3. The procedure under the rules you
propose is as follows: The medical officer is informed by a soldier that a certain woman is
diseased. Believing that, he orders her for examination at the hospital. She may be perfectly
honourable or perfectly healthy. In either case if she refuses to attend she is held to be diseased
and is expelled from the Cantonment. We submit that the whole of this procedure, though it may
be in words the same as in a case of cholera, is in fact utterly different in the means by which
information is secured, in the nature of the evidence as to fact, and in the consequences to the
woman who disputes the fact. The operation of the rules, so far as venereal disease is concerned,
is not general.
“In the Report of the Special Indian Commission appointed in 1893 by the Government of
India to inquire into the working of the regulations, it is stated that so far as venereal disease is
concerned the operation of the rules is ‘practically confined by sheer force of circumstances to
women.’ … ‘Even with regard to them information is difficult to obtain, for a man often does
not know, and still oftener will not tell, which woman has diseased him.’ … ‘Except in the not
infrequent cases where a woman herself applies for medical aid, this (i.e., information necessary
to proceed upon) can only be obtained from men who have been diseased by them.’ It is clear,
then, that a man, as the result of an admittedly immoral act, becomes an informer, and in many
cases a false informer, upon whose testimony the State has to rely for submitting the woman to
the most degrading process. We submit that there is no parallel between venereal disease and
cholera, either in the procedure here indicated, or in the effect of that procedure on moral
conduct, or in the position in which it places the State.”

VI.

Some Anglo-Indian Moral Sentiments.

W e have referred to the discrepancies between the statements of Lord
Roberts and of General Chapman; between Lord Roberts’ first
attempt to discredit our evidence and subsequent admission of its
truth; between the records that had been kept at the Lock Hospitals
which we visited in India and the statements sent home by the Special
Commission. All these things must tend to weaken the faith of the public in
Anglo-Indian representations. They all accord in spirit with the gross
exaggerations which have been put forth, as though a veritable scourge of
such diseases was at the door of England. As to the prevalence of disease,
“Between fifty and sixty per cent. of our Indian army,” is found to be, in
actual fact, only four and one-half per cent. (see page 69), and “Thirteen per
cent. annually invalided home hopelessly incurable,” is found to be, in
actual fact, only one-ninth of one per cent.
“Our power is being sapped—our race defiled—and we are forced to ask
ourselves if no means can be devised of stopping so gigantic an infliction.”
What does this mean in exact figures? How “gigantic” in reality is this
infliction? The official figures of the very document which was meant to
originate the alarm, the Report of the Departmental Committee of 1897
shall testify. The latest year reported in this document is 1895, and as the
law which effectually forbade the compulsory examination of women was
passed on February 8, 1895, the figures show the result only of less than
eleven months covering the existence of that law. Out of a force of 71,031
soldiers in India nineteen more men were sent home to England,
“hopelessly incurable” from vice, in 1895 than in the year 1894. Nineteen
cases represent the size of this “gigantic infliction” which has been made
the occasion of raising such a cry of alarm, and a demand for the return to
licensed prostitution and the re-enslavement of thousands of native women
by compulsory examination measures.
In the year 1894, 111 men were sent home invalided from this cause, and
in 1895, 130 men were sent home—an increase of nineteen cases. We do

not wish to minimize the evil of even these few cases; but is a decent nation
prepared to hazard an attempt to purchase immunity from disease by
plunging into brazen defiance of God’s seventh commandment? What about
the “gigantic [immoral] infliction” of the atheistic assumption that chastity
is a sanitary failure, and fornication a necessity? There is no comparison
between the “gigantic infliction” upon England of a teaching to defy God’s
commandments in the fancied interests of physical health, and the presence
of nineteen additional diseased soldiers in a population of thirty-five
millions.
But if we continue the study of the table of statistics found on page 9 of
the Report referred to, we find that eighty-four more men were sent home to
England in 1894 for diseases due to vice, than during the previous year,
1893. If the increase of disease in 1895 over 1894 is to be attributed to the
Amendment Act of 1895, to what shall we attribute the much more
pronounced increase of 1894 over 1893? Again, there were forty more men
sent home invalided in 1891 than in 1890; and forty-three more sent home
in 1888 than in 1887, and none of these years were under the Amendment
Act of 1895. Therefore it is proved that variations and increases have taken
place that have had nothing to do with the Amendment Act of 1895, which,
when it serves the object of advocates of licensed vice, is held wholly
responsible for the insignificant variation of an increase of nineteen cases.
In view of these facts, we must declare our solemn conviction that the
agitation for a return to legalized prostitution in India is not due to any
feeling of alarm on account of the spread of contagion in the case of the
originators of the agitation, but that an attempt is being made to frighten an
unwilling Christian public into a reluctant consent to return to a system
which regards the whoremonger as a necessity, the commandments of God
a farce, and the slave trade in women an important part of the business of
the State.
Life in India does not tend to the elevation of British morals, and this not
because of the climate, as some contend. The industrial conditions are all
against good morals, and are closely analogous to the conditions that
prevailed in the Southern States of America before the Civil War. Wages are
so low in India as to constitute the native the virtual slave of the Anglo-
Saxon. By means of the pitiful wages paid for work, not one-half the
comfort is provided by white masters to Indian servants that was secured to

the black men in America, by the few of those owners of slaves who were
really humane. The very fact that the slave was a rather scarce article and a
good price paid for him in America, made it to the interest of his owner to
look after his health and comfort to a certain extent. We are not defending
slavery—it is an abomination in the sight of God, whether it exists under
the disguise of abnormally low wages or shows itself openly; and slavery is
always a greater moral curse to the master than to the oppressed. England
virtually owns a whole nation of slaves in her control of India, and the
effect of this fact upon the morals of that country will depend wholly upon
whether she rules to redeem her subjects or to enrich herself. The worst
feature of all in slavery is the appropriation of women by their masters. And
this form of villainy is always excusing itself by slandering the oppressed
women.
“This life is not a life of shame in the sense in which this is true in
England. Most of these women are prostitutes by caste and can feel no
desire to give it up,” says the Report of the Special Commission of 1893.
“They are accepted as safeguards to society, and are not themselves
ashamed of their calling,” says a high military officer. “They feel no shame
about this; they are never recruited from seduced girls, as in England,” says
another of these high and mighty officers, who know so much better how
these girls feel and what they desire than do the poor slaves themselves. To
be sure, they sob and cry and petition for deliverance, and protest their
outraged feelings against the examinations; but that merely proves what
hypocrites they are, and how cleverly they can play a part. “They are as
artful as a waggon-load of monkeys,” said one Anglo-Indian to us; the
“most vicious and degraded of the population,” says another. And yet they
are, many of them, the offspring of British men. One would imagine them
gray-haired in the service of Satan, from these accounts, and yet General
Viscount Frankfort states in the Report of the Special Commission of 1893:
“It is roughly estimated that 50 per cent. [of the girls of the chakla] are of
the age of fourteen to sixteen or so;” and in reply to our evidence as to some
of the girls being as young as “from fifteen to sixteen years of age,” Major
General Sir W. Elles, K.C.B., replies, “The probability is that prostitution is
practised at even younger ages than this.” In reply to our further statement
that many girls are kept at the point of starvation, are always in debt, and
cannot escape on this account, even if otherwise the way might be open,
Colonel T. G. Crawley, commanding Allahabad District, makes the

following calculation (page 360, Departmental Committee Report of
1893):—
“It stands to reason that the women could not be in debt, for if a woman only received six
men daily for twenty-three days in a month, at the rate of only four annas [about fourpence] per
visit, that would represent thirty-four rupees eight annas, and even allowing one-fourth of this to
go to the mahaldarni, rent two rupees, and food at the rate of four annas daily for thirty days, a
woman would have fully seventeen rupees [a little more than one pound] a month clear.”

This for the health of British soldiers and their “future wives” and
“unborn offspring” in England! and fifty per cent. of these victims from
fourteen to sixteen years of age! And will women physicians be induced to
attempt the task of keeping these mere children in health under such
conditions?
Anglo-Indian sentiment would not long content itself with the loss of its
highly prized C. D. Acts. The military officials had professed to abrogate
them when they hid them away under the cloak of the Indian Cantonment
Acts, and then again when they hid them under the cloak of the
Cantonments Act of 1889; but they were at last fairly caught by the
Cantonments Act Amendment Act of 1895, which tore away from them the
pretence of “only treating this as any other contagious disease.”
Regulation had been in operation in India, in one form or another, for the
largest part of a century, and statistics show a steady increase of disease,
with slight variations, during all that time. And the Army Sanitary
Commission, the highest British medical authority, had in 1894 pronounced
this prolonged experiment with licensed vice a failure, in the following
unequivocal language:—
“The facts, so far as we can ascertain them, lead us to the conclusion that a compulsory Lock
Hospital system in India has proved a failure, and that its re-institution cannot consequently be
advocated on sanitary grounds. In stating this conclusion, we may add that we are merely
repeating the opinions which the Army Sanitary Commission have uniformly held, that venereal
diseases in the army of India could not be repressed by such restrictive measures, and in support
of this statement, we may refer to the Memoranda on the Indian Sanitary Reports which have
issued from this office for many years.”

Yet a Departmental Committee was secured in November, 1896, by
Anglo-Indian influence brought to bear upon the Government, to examine
into the matter and report on the prevalence of diseases due to vice; and it
reported, as was expected, in favour of a return to the system of legalized
vice. The Departmental Committee reported at the beginning of the year

1897, on statistics no later than the year 1895. Now the Cantonments Act
Amendment Act became a law in India, February 8, 1895, and how much
time elapsed before this Amendment Act came into practical operation
remains yet to be shown; yet an attempt is made to show that incalculable
mischief has been done during these eleven months of the actual existence
of the law which abolished licensed prostitution. The official statistics of
which they make use do not at all justify the calculations and conclusions
they have drawn therefrom.
At about the time of the report of the Departmental Committee, there was
formed in England an association with the object of securing the re-
establishment of legalized vice in India. The names of high British military
officials make up its membership list, in large part. The association printed
a pamphlet, based upon the Departmental Committee’s Report in favour of
a return to the old conditions, a Report that was calculated to frighten the
public, if possible, into acceding to their demands, on the supposition that a
fearful scourge was upon them, and that no time was to be lost in getting it
under check. Then Lord George Hamilton, on March 26, 1897, sent a
dispatch to the Government of India, calling attention to the Report of the
Departmental Committee, and ordering stricter measures for the
suppression of diseases due to vice, but adding: “There must be no
provision of women, … no registration, … no compulsory examination of
women,” etc., but urging that it was “imperatively necessary that this
disease should not be exempted from the measures adopted to prevent the
spread of other contagious diseases.” “If there be any compulsion, it is
precisely of the same kind as that which has been accepted as necessary and
enforced without any objection in the case of diphtheria or typhoid fever.”
Now the first quotation given effectually contradicts the second, at the
point of the compulsory examination of women; and such instructions were,
in fact, a virtual order to repeal the Amendment Act of 1895, very covertly
expressed, and so it was recognised immediately by the British Committee
for the Abolition of State Regulated Vice, which promptly issued a
memorial on the subject addressed to Lord George Hamilton, Secretary of
State for India.[9]
On April 21, 1897, there appeared in the London Times part of a letter
from Lady Henry Somerset to Lord George Hamilton, in which she
“expresses gratification at finding incorporated in a document of such

importance a statement of inspiring and controlling principles.” She notes
with satisfaction the “inclusion of this disease among other contagious
diseases,” as the “only rational and scientific principle on which its
eradication can be attempted.” “It is not however, proposed to carry out this
principle to its full logical result; and herein lies the point on which she
finds herself at issue with Lord George Hamilton.” At the end of the letter is
affixed the system of legislation best suited to the end, in the opinion of
Lady Henry Somerset, and it will be seen at a glance that her propositions
would indeed carry out the principle to its full, logical end. A special
importance attaches itself to these propositions, because of the strategic
position held by Lady Henry Somerset as president of the British Women’s
Temperance Association of England, and first vice-president of the World’s
W.C.T.U., and her action put her in absolute opposition to the purity
department of both those societies.
The scheme proposed by Lady Henry Somerset is here given in her own
words:
“1. A quarter of each Cantonment should be reserved for such women as are permitted to
remain in camp, and all such women should be compelled to remain in houses or rooms
specifically reserved to each by a registered number. The admission of men to this quarter
should be strictly supervised.
“2. No woman should be allowed to remain in this quarter unless periodically examined by
properly qualified women doctors.
“3. No soldier should be allowed to enter this quarter without having undergone a like
examination and having the same report.
“4. A register should be kept recording the name of each soldier entering the quarter, the
number of the house to which he goes, and the date of such entry.
“5. On any woman being found to be diseased in this quarter, or on any soldier found to be
suffering in like manner, all such persons that the registered visits show to have rendered
themselves liable to contagion should be put in quarantine until such time as their immunity can
be verified.
“6. All consorting with women outside this quarter should render the offender liable to severe
penalty.”[10]

The Shield, official organ of the British Committee for the Abolition of
State Regulated Vice, in its issue of May, 1897, comments as follows upon
this scheme:
“The suggestions above quoted embody the most complete State Regulation of prostitution
which we have ever seen described, in its baldest and most absolute form, and imply the most
complete identification of the State with the purely animal side of the matter which has ever
been proposed. They seem to emanate from a mind influenced for the time solely by the idea of

equality between man and woman, to the exclusion of other considerations. Such proposals
seem indeed to make the sexes equal, but it is an equality of unspeakable degradation for both.”

On May 14 and 17 occurred a debate in the House of Lords on the
question of a return to legalized prostitution in India, in which reference
was made to Lady Henry Somerset’s letter in The Times, and to another
memorial which was shortly “to be made public,” and which was signed by
a very large number of ladies, as an indication that women were no longer,
as formerly, opposed to the system of State Regulation of Vice.[11]
On May 25 The Times published the text of this Memorial, which is
signed by ladies of the aristocracy, together with a few other prominent
women, numbering in all one hundred and twenty-three.
The Government of India proceeded at once to repeal the Cantonments
Act Amendment Act of 1895, in the Viceregal Council held at Simla July 8,
which action had received the approval of Lord George Hamilton by
telegram, July 6, 1897. Since that day, therefore, the military authorities
have been set free to return to the establishment of brothel slavery, the
registration and compulsory examination of women, the employment of
procuresses, and all the infamies which we have described as existing when
we visited India in 1892.
Meanwhile, the women of Great Britain have arisen in mighty protest,
and a Memorial signed by 61,437 women of the United Kingdom,
addressed to Lord George Hamilton, as representative of Her Majesty’s
Government, was presented at the India Office on Saturday, July 31, 1897,
as follows:
“It declares the unaltered and unalterable hostility of the signatories to every form of State
Regulation of Immorality, whether embodied in the system which was known as the Contagious
Diseases Acts or in any other form, including the slightly modified and more subtle garb of
certain Indian Cantonment rules.
“It objects to the principle of all such legislation, a principle based on the assumption of the
necessity of vice. It opposes the system in all its forms, because it inevitably becomes, in regard
to women, an engine of the most shameful oppression, removing the guarantees of personal
liberty which the law has established, and putting their reputation, their freedom, and their
persons absolutely in the power of the police; while in respect to those women who come
immediately under its action, it cruelly violates the feelings of those whose sense of shame is
not wholly lost, and further brutalizes even the most abandoned.
“The Memorialists, while deploring the existence of disease and favourable to moral methods
of diminishing it, urge that no permanent diminution of disease will ever be attained by
measures which do not strike primarily at the vice itself, and express the hope that the

Government of our country will be withheld from the crime of ever again entering into any
compact with evil by its attempted regulation.”

We have been deeply impressed with the thought that, in our search for
the cause of the present moral confusion, we need to go further back than
the influence of high-placed military officers and ladies of the aristocracy.
There have arisen occasions in the past when the Christian public have been
able to successfully resist the invasions of materialistic and immoral
counsels, although they were advocated by the rich and mighty. Only the
blind can be led by the blind: those who have clear vision will not follow
such leadership. Whence this far-reaching influence, then, which has
blinded the eyes of so many? Alas! these are the days of a paralysed faith,
and faith is as indispensable a faculty of the human mind as is reason.
The re-enthronement of faith is the need of the hour. Science we have,
and scholarship: but hesitancy and doubt rule the scientific spirit, and
timidity is the vice of the scholar. The soldier who hesitates and doubts and
grows timid will not win a single battle. His must be the prophetic spirit of
faith which “laughs at impossibilities, and cries, It shall be done.” But the
Church militant has been ridiculed out of the warrior spirit, and has laid
aside its mightiest weapon, faith; and as to leadership, many are pointing to
science and scholarship and crying, “These be thy gods, O Israel!” Science
and scholarship have their place and their power, but they are not the
Christian’s mightiest weapons. Learning cannot take the place of the
inspiration of faith; statistics can never teach morals as forcibly as “Thus
saith the Lord.” More than this: statistics can never overturn the “Thou shalt
not” of an Almighty God.
David has essayed to go forth to meet Goliath, well loaded down with
Saul’s armour, and David will meet with the defeat he deserves if he does
not repent of the folly of matching such weapons against one who defies the
armies of the living God. The warfare is a spiritual not a carnal one. What
wonder that with such weapons courage has failed, the citadel is imperilled,
and “counsels of despair” are urged. But these shall not prevail. That
unrepentant soul shall not go unpunished by the wrath of a just God, who
enters into complicity with the vice of fornication by consenting to the
proposal for its State management.
But can this vice ever be actually exterminated? Probably never entirely
by human law; but neither can stealing, so far as we are able to judge. The

vice of stealing is likely to continue so long as the city of London exists, in
spite of the most excellent human laws. Shall we then license stealing? No
one who has a purse to be protected would advocate such rash legislation.
A conclusive answer to the plea of “a necessary evil” has been already
given by our Judge. Looking upon the vices of those about Him, and the
inevitable crop of increasing vice, with its attendant misery, to which his
people were tending, He cried: “It must needs be that offences come; but,”
He added, “woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” And shall we
listen to proposals to set aside the sentence of Divine Justice for the
tradition of men, and embody in human legislation the teaching, “It must
needs be that offences come; but peace to that man by whom the offence
cometh”? Let us rather, answer every specious array of misleading
statistics, every false doctrine of medicine, every fresh cry of alarm, every
blasphemous utterance against Christ’s sufficient power to redeem, every
infidel attack upon the sanctity of God’s holy law, with the inexorable
“Thou shalt not” of God’s eternal commandment.

NOTES

[1] Trading-posts for the supply of necessaries to the soldiers; but the author means, in explicit
terms, the chakla or brothel.
[2] We resigned June 15, 1896.
[3] The Cantonments we visited were Bareilly, Lucknow, Meerut, Lahore (Cantonment Station,
Meean Meer), Rawal Pindi, Peshawar, Amritzar, Umballa, Sitapur, and Benares. Five of these we
visited a second time.
[4] An official form of expression.
[5] For forms of tickets of registration of prostitutes see Departmental Committee Report (1893),
pages 12, 331, 334, and 335.
[6] A term applied to British residents in India.
[7] When Lieut-General Lord Sandhurst was questioned before the Royal Commission of 1871 as
to the advisability of soldiers being periodically examined by male physicians, he replied that he
preferred to treat his soldiers “as reasonable men, not as brutes.” Let women show at least equal
consideration for women.
[8] Perhaps they had in mind such a case as the woman we interviewed at Cantonment Bareilly.
Her father was Scotch, she said—her mother, Portuguese; she had been trained by Dr. C——. She
went every day to the brothels and examined the women. She owned the brothels, and resided with an
official to whom she was not married. (See page 133, Departmental Committee Report, 1893.)
[9] “Lord George Hamilton himself instigated disregard of his own command by sanctioning the
repeal of the law which had embodied it, upon a pretext so grotesquely irrelevant that an admission
of its ingenuousness is tantamount to a charge of imbecility against the sanctioning Minister.”—The
Shield, November, 1897.
[10] Lady Henry Somerset addressed a letter to Lord George Hamilton, January 27th, 1898,
withdrawing these propositions. But alas! such a tardy withdrawal cannot undo the mischief wrought
to the native girls of India by the repeal of the Cantonment Acts Amendment Act of 1895 (see
Appendix C).
[11] Additional colour was given to this, later, by Lady Henry Somerset placing the name of Lord
Roberts (author of the “Infamous Circular Memorandum,” the history of which we have given in
chapters 1 and 5) on the Advisory Board of the Duxhurst Inebriate Home of the B.W.T.A., at the
Annual Conference of the Association in June, 1897.

APPENDICES.

A. Fac-simile Reproduction of the
Circular Memorandum issued by
Lord Roberts.

B. Fac-simile of a Registration Ticket.

C. Letter To Lord George Hamilton.

Appendix A.

[Transcriber’s Note: The following text is the transcription of a
page of a multi-part document. An image of that page can be seen
here.]

The photographic reduction of the following document was
originally issued by the Friends’ Association for Abolishing the
State Regulation of Vice. It is here reproduced by their
permission.

The Names of the Commander-in-Chief and of the
Quartermaster-General who were in office on the date of issue of
each of the Circular Memorandums mentioned in the following
Parliamentary Return.

According to the Indian Army and Civil Service List, 1870 to 1876;
India List, 1877 to 1886.

On the 4th and 7th Aug., 1893, Lord Roberts disclaimed
knowledge of the contents of the Circular Memorandum of June
17th, 1886 (see pages 63 and 84 of Parliamentary Return [C.
7148], of 1893). But on the 11th Aug., 1893, Lieut.-Gen. E. F.
Chapman, who was Quartermaster-General at the time, gave very
different evidence (see pages 85 to 90 of the same Return). He
stated that Sir F. S. (now Lord) Roberts, the Commander-in-
Chief, went on his usual cold weather tour of inspection in the
early part of 1886, when he would have the fullest opportunity of
consulting the general officers of his command on the subject.
On his return to headquarters he discussed the matter with the
Surgeon-General and the Quartermaster-General. The result of
their deliberations was drawn up by the latter official, sent to Sir
F. S. Roberts for his approval, and then issued by his authority to
the subordinate military officials. A copy was sent to the Military
Department of the Government of India for their information,
and the receipt thereof acknowledged by them.

[Transcriber’s Note: The following text is the transcription of a
page of a multi-part document. An image of that page can be seen
here.]

Fac-simile copy (reduced) of Lord Roberts’ Circular
Memorandum.

EAST INDIA (CONTAGIOUS DISEASES)
——————————

RETURN to an Address of the Honourable The House of
Commons,
dated 4 June 1888;—for,

“COPY of a Circular Memorandum by the Quartermaster
General
in India, dated 17th June 1886.”

——————————
India Office, } J. A. GODLEY,
4 June 1888.} Under Secretary of State for India.
——————————

(Sir John Gorst.)

——————————
Ordered, by The House of Commons, to be Printed,
4 June 1888.
——————————

LONDON:
PRINTED BY HENRY HANSARD AND SON;
AND
Published by Eyre and Spottiswoode, East Harding-street, London, E.C.,
and 32, Abingdon-street, Westminster, S.W.;
Adam and Charles Black, North Bridge, Edinburgh;
and Hodges, Figgis, and Co., 101, Grafton-street, Dublin.

[Transcriber’s Note: The following text is the transcription of a
two-page memorandum within the multi-part document. Images of

those two pages can be seen here (first page) and here (second
page).]

COPY of a Circular Memorandum by the Quartermaster
General
in India, dated 17th June 1886.

(No. 21.)

CIRCULAR MEMORANDUM.—Addressed to General
Officers
Commanding Divisions and Districts
Cantonment Lock Hospitals

Office of Quartermaster General in India,
Army Head Quarters, Simla,
17 June 1886.
In former years His Excellency the Commander in Chief has
frequently impressed on General and Commanding Officers the
Vide Précis of Circulars attached necessity for adopting
stringent measures to reduce the chances of venereal disease
spreading more widely amongst the soldiers of the Army.
2. At the present time His Excellency desires me to give
prominence to the following points which appear to be specially
deserving of consideration by the Military and Medical
authorities in every command.
The treatment of venereal disease generally is a matter calling
for special devotion on the part of the medical profession.
To mitigate the evil now experienced, it is not only necessary
to deal with the cases of troops in hospitals, but to arrange for a
wider-spread effort which may reach the large centres of
population, and, in this view, His Excellency has suggested to the

Government of India the desirability of establishing a Medical
School from which native practitioners trained in the treatment of
venereal disease may be sent to the various towns throughout the
country.
It can no longer be regarded as derogatory to the medical
profession to promote the careful treatment of men and women
who are suffering from a disease so injurious, and in mentioning
the step which his Excellency has taken, he desires me to indicate
the extreme importance in the first instance of medical officers
being prepared to study and practice this particular branch of
their professional work, under the assurance that their doing so
must certainly result in the recognition of their efforts.
Whether or not the Lock Hospital system be extended, it is
possible to encourage in every Cantonment, and in Sudder and
Regimental Bazars, the treatment of those amongst the
population who are suffering from venereal disease. The bulk of
the women who practise the trade of prostitution are willing to
subject themselves to examination by Dhais or by Medical
Officers, if by their so doing they can be allowed to reside in
regimental bazars.
Where Lock Hospitals are not kept up, it becomes necessary,
under a regimental system, to arrange for the effective inspection
of prostitutes attached to regimental bazars, whether in
cantonments or on the line of march.
The isolation of women found diseased, and their maintenance
while under treatment, becomes also a question to be dealt with
regimentally.
In the regimental bazars it is necessary to have a sufficient
number of women, to take care that they are sufficiently
attractive, to provide them with proper houses, and above all to
insist upon means of ablution being always available.
If young soldiers are carefully advised in regard to the
advantage of ablution and recognise that convenient
arrangements exist in the regimental bazar, they may be expected

to avoid the risks involved in association with women who are
not recognised by the regimental authorities.
The employment of Dhais, and insistance upon the
performance of the acknowledged duties, is of great importance.
The removal of women who are pronounced to be incurably
diseased from cantonment limits, should be dealt with as a police
question in communication with the civil authorities.
In regard to the soldiers themselves, there are means at the
disposal of Commanding Officers to enforce a more careful
avoidance of contact with women who are diseased, where
venereal is largely prevalent, the increase of the regimental
police in controlling the movements of the men is imperative.
Frequent medical inspections should be ordered, and every
endeavour should be made to make the men realize their own
responsibility in assisting their officers, by indicating the women
from whom disease has been acquired.
Much may be done to encourage a feeling amongst the men
that it should be a point of honour to save each other where
possible from risk in this matter.
The medical inspection of all detachments before leaving or
entering a cantonment should be enforced by General Officers.
In conclusion, His Excellency desires me to impress upon all
concerned the necessity for meeting the present difficulty by
increased individual effort.
However much legislation may be desired to check the spread
of disease, it is necessary to abandon a sense of false modesty in
dealing with the matter in question, and to recognise that, as in
the case of all other diseases, its open treatment, and the
widespread knowledge of its disastrous effects, are the surest
means of effacing it in each locality.
(By order)
E. F. Chapman, Major General,
Quartermaster General in India.

[Transcriber’s Note: The following text is the transcription of a
page of a multi-part document. An image of that page can be seen
here.]

RELATING TO CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (EAST INDIA)

Précis of Circulars issued in the Quartermaster General’s Department
regarding the adoption of stringent Measures to reduce the chances of
Venereal Disease spreading more widely amongst the Soldiers of the
Army.
Number and Date of
Circular. PURPORT.

No. 43, dated I. Officers commanding troops on the line of march to
20th July 1870. ensure the effective inspection of prostitutes
attached to their regimental bazars.
II. When any woman is found to be diseased, measures
are to be adopted for her isolation on the march, and
her transfer to the first or nearest Lock Hospital for
treatment.

No. 87, dated Forwards a copy of a report by the Sanitary
20th Commissioner with the Government of India,
November reviewing the working of the rules for the prevention
1871. of venereal disease amongst British troops for the
year 1870, and calls special attention to the necessity
of officers commanding stations affording more
efficient and energetic means for preventing the
admission of casuals to the vicinity of the barracks.
Any increase of disease should at once be met by
increased energy on the part of Station and

Regimental authorities, and especially of Regimental
Police.

No. 51, dated Forwards copy of a communication from the
23rd August Government of India to that of Bombay, regarding
1872. the disposal of incurable women attending Lock
Hospitals, in which the former approves of a
proposal to employ an incurable woman on small
wages in the duties of the hospital at Mhow.

No. 80, dated Directs that the practice of levying registration fees
30th from prostitutes be discontinued.
September
1873.
No. 90, dated Calls attention to Circular No. 87 of 1871, and strongly
8th July 1875. impresses upon Officers Commanding Divisions,
Districts, and Stations, the necessity for
strengthening the regimental police of corps when
venereal is on the increase at a station, it being the
general impression that the disease is not, as a rule,
contracted from the registered women, but from
unlicensed prostitutes who wander about the lines as
hawkers, or are employed as coolies by the Public
Works Department.
2. Requests that it may be pointed out to regimental
Commanders, and the Lock Hospital Sub-
Committees, whose special duty it is to supervise the
working of the Lock Hospital rules, how important it
is that they should more actively exert themselves to
check the prevalence of this disease.
No. 35, dated The Commander in Chief in India having had under
8th May 1876. review the annual reports on the working of the
Lock Hospitals at certain stations, His Excellency
regrets to find that the results are not satisfactory
when compared with those of previous years.

2. The Lock Hospital rules, as they stand, appear to
meet all requirements, but it is considered that much
greater vigilance and interest on the part of the local
authorities is required for their efficient working.
3. The authorities most concerned in working out these
rules are Commanding Officers of Regiments and
Batteries, their Medical Officers, and the Sub-
Committees, and their attention is called to the
following points:—
I. The number of women on the register is not
in proportion to the number of men who visit
them.

[Transcriber’s Note: The following text is the transcription of a
page of a multi-part document. An image of that page can be seen
here.]

COPY OF CIRCULAR MEMORANDUM

Number and Date of
Circular. PURPORT.

No. 35, dated II. The improvement of the conditions under
8th May 1876 which the women ply their trade, such as greater
—contd. privacy, facilities for ablution, &c. &c.
III. The kind treatment of the women and
every reasonable inducement being held out to
them to attend the Lock Hospital when suffering
from disease.
4. Commanding Officers of regiments and batteries are
to report at once to the General Officer
Commanding, when any increase of venereal
disease occurs amongst their men. Such reports to
show the supposed causes of the increase, and the
measures adopted for its suppression, and after

remark by the Deputy Surgeon General to be
forwarded to the Quartermaster General’s Office.
5. The Lock Hospital Sub-Committee are to be
assembled at least once a month, and their reports
forwarded to General Officers Commanding.
6. It is considered that a Careful attention to these
points will contribute considerably towards
checking the spread of venereal disease, and His
Excellency hopes that no effort will be spared by
either Regimental, Medical, or Local authorities to
ensure more satisfactory results than have hitherto
been obtained.

No. 67, dated The annual reports on the working of Lock Hospitals
19th August during the year 1875, show that much venereal
1876. disease was contracted when on the line of march;
Commanding Officers’ attention should therefore be
called to Circular No. 43 of 1870, and to the
Medical Regulations which direct the Medical
examination for venereal disease of every unmarried
soldier on the day of his arrival at a new station
from the line of march; and the effective inspection
of the prostitutes accompanying the regimental
bazars.

No. 11, dated As it would appear that the great increase which
28th February prevails in a regiment on the line of march is
1878. attributable in a great measure to illicit prostitution,
requests that the necessity for the exercise of greater
care and vigilance on the line of march may be
urged upon regimental authorities.
2. If necessary, some restriction should be placed on the
men going out of camp, by posting picquets in
different directions, and strengthening them when

cases of venereal increase.

No. 68, dated Draws attention to Circular No. 67 of 1876, and
24th November requests that the instructions therein contained
1880. regarding the medical examination of all unmarried
soldiers on first arrival at a new station may be
carried out, care being taken that the examination of
the men is conducted with the utmost decency.
2. These medical examinations are of importance in
detecting the existence and arresting the spread of
venereal disease.

No. 23, dated Forwards for information and guidance an extract from
23rd April a ruling of the Chief Court, Punjab, regarding the
1883. registration of women convicted of practising illicit
prostitution.

No. 69, dated The Commander in Chief requests that careful attention
26th November of Cantonment Committees and Lock Hospital Sub-
1883. Committees may be directed to the following points,
wherever free quarters for registered women have
been, or may hereafter be, established:—
2. Where cantonment funds can afford it, experienced
and reliable Dhais should be employed to supervise
the registered women.

[Transcriber’s Note: The following text is the transcription of a
page of a multi-part document. An image of that page can be seen
here.]

RELATING TO CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (EAST INDIA)

Number and Date of
Circular. PURPORT.

No. 69, dated 3. Such Dhais should be well paid if the fund can afford
26th November it, and they should be held responsible that:—
1883 I. The women under their charge consort with none but
—continued. Europeans.
II. That they do not entertain a man in any house but
the one allotted them as quarters;
III. That a woman is sent to hospital immediately she is
found to be diseased;
IV. To ensure the latter, the Dhai should examine the
women daily between the periodical inspections of
the medical officer.
4. Soldiers who have been diseased by registered
women, have been frequently known to attribute it
to women met in their walks outside the bazaar, and
the diseased woman has thus been allowed to
practise her trade in this state for sometime without
detection.
5. Every house should therefore be numbered outside,
or in some conspicuous spot inside, and a soldier on
reporting himself sick should not be required to
personally point out the woman from whom he
contracted the disease, but merely to give the
number of her house.
6. If the Dhai does her duty, these measures should lead
to the early detection of disease amongst registered
women.
7. Each house should be provided with a urinal and
means of ablution, and such other preventive
measures, within the means of the Cantonment
Fund, as suggest themselves to local committees
should be freely resorted to.

8. His Excellency will be prepared to sanction any
reasonable expenditure from cantonment funds on
the measures therein suggested.

No. 42, dated Requests that the attention of Officers Commanding
12th July 1884. Stations may be drawn to the desirability when
constructing free quarters for registered women, of
providing houses that will meet the wishes of the
women.
2. Unless their comfort and the convenience of those
who consort with them is considered, the results will
not be satisfactory.

Appendix B.

[Transcriber’s Note: The following text is the transcription of a
two-part document. An image of each part can be seen here (first
part) and here (second part).]

FAC-SIMILE OF A REGISTRATION TICKET OF EXAMINATION
Issued to a Prostitute in India, in 1892, notwithstanding the Resolution of the House of Commons of
June 5, 1888, condemning such registration. The form employed is the one authorized by the East
India Contagious Diseases Act of 1866, which was repealed in 1888.

Appendix C.

LETTER TO LORD GEORGE HAMILTON.

The following is the full text of the letter of retractation which Lady
Henry Somerset addressed to Lord George Hamilton, January 27, as it
appeared in the London daily papers of February 8, 1898:—
Eastnor Castle, Ledbury, Jan. 27, 1898.
Dear Lord George Hamilton,—Your lordship invited me ten months ago to give you my
view of the dispatch that has been addressed to the Government of India on the health of the
army, and in a letter in which I did so I ventured to suggest some methods, moral and
disciplinary, which seemed to me the only ones likely to succeed, because they had at least the
merit of being logical.
I was led to do so by two considerations: first, the dispatch in question seemed to imply that
the Government would give every encouragement to every form of elevating agency, and so
emphasize the altered spirit in which the subject was approached, and that such suggested
supervision would only affect an incorrigible minimum; and second, that the system I had in
mind would be so drastic and penal in its nature as to make State interference odious and finally
impossible. That was ten months ago; and in that time nothing has been done of which the
public has heard to strengthen the forces that make for moral improvement.
What has been done, viz., the repeal of the Indian Acts of 1895, which prohibited inspection,
has been in a direction exactly opposite. It seems to have been the object of the Government to
obtain the maximum of impunity, with the minimum of protest, from those who desire to see the
State shape its actions according to Christian views of ethics. I need not tell your lordship I am
not writing to say how strongly I am still opposed to the course which the Government has
taken; but I find that my letter to your lordship of last year has been taken by many to mean that
I am on the side of the accepted view of State regulation, and I am from time to time quoted as a
sympathizer with such views. I am therefore writing to withdraw any proposals made in that
letter for this reason—that the events of the past year have convinced me of the inadvisability
and extreme danger of the system that in April last I thought might be instituted.
The absence of any serious effort by the Government to bring about a higher standard in the
army is a final proof to me that, as long as regulation of any kind can be resorted to as a remedy,
it will always be regarded as the one and only panacea. My view was that it would be instituted
as an odious but possibly effective auxiliary to moral efforts. I find it will always be accepted as
a convenient substitute. I take the liberty of addressing this explicit withdrawal of an
endorsement in whatever form of the principle of regulation; because it was in a letter to your
lordship that I originally incurred the responsibility. I trust, therefore, to your lordship’s
indulgence to forgive me for troubling you further in the matter.—I remain, my lord, yours very
truly,
(Signed) Isabel Somerset.

The following comments on the above letter appeared in The Christian
(London), February 17, 1898:

REGULATION NO REMEDY.
In our last issue we inserted in full the letter of Lady Henry Somerset, in which she withdrew
from her unfortunate position in relation to the State regulation of vice in India. We refrained,
for the time being, from comment, that her retractation might speak for itself. We feel, therefore,
the more free to remark upon it now.
We rejoice, in the first place, that it has come at all, for it justifies the principles for which we
and other repealers have contended all these years. Lady Henry is convinced of “the
inadvisability and extreme danger” of her former proposals, and recognises now that “as long as
regulation of any kind can be resorted to as a remedy, it will be regarded as the one and only
panacea … [and] will always be accepted as a convenient substitute [for moral reform].”
It is therefore with thankfulness that we note her ladyship’s “explicit withdrawal of an
endorsement in whatever form of the principle of regulation.”
This is all good so far as it goes, but it does not go far enough; and, alas! it comes too late, for
it can never undo the fearful harm her action last year was the means of doing.
A public retractation is a hard and painful process, and we sympathize with Lady Henry in the
mental strain which it must have cost her. But she has not been the only sufferer. It were no
small thing to cause division and discord in so gigantic an organization as that over which she
presided, so that at the present time the movement is crippled and its machinery out of gear. This
might well have elicited an expression of regret, which we hope may yet be forthcoming in
some communication to the Association she has so grievously wronged.
But more than this. Encouraged by her act, the Government claimed the women of England as
its supporters, defied moral sentiment, and, on the crest of the wave of this unhappy dissension,
carried the re-enactment of the infamous C. D. Acts among our sisters in India. It will take long
and weary years of uphill work to undo the mischief that her ill-advised and hasty action
wrought. Meantime, how many Indian women will have succumbed to a shameful life and gone
down to a dishonoured grave?
The weakest point of Lady Henry’s letter is the erroneous assumption on which it is based:
that her proposals themselves were moral, and that if the Government had instituted reforms
they might have successfully co-existed with regulation. But how can regulation under any
circumstances be a remedy? The very terms are self-contradictory. What is morally wrong can
never be experimentally right, and this proposition neither casuistry nor expediency can set
aside. The only remedy is obedience to the law of God; and if material aids be needed, let them
be found in some active measures for the mental, moral, and spiritual improvement of our
soldiers in their leisure hours. This is where reform is needed.

The foregoing Letter, together with the article from The Christian, were
printed in full in The Shield (the official organ of the British Committee of
the Federation for the Abolition of the State Regulation of Vice) of March,
1898, with the following

NOTE BY THE EDITOR.
“We are glad to see that Lady Henry Somerset has now withdrawn from the proposals for the
Regulation of Vice with which her name has become connected. At the same time we regret that
she still appears to think that her scheme could possibly have done good if side by side with it
had been some moralizing agency. Our position is and has uniformly been that Regulation is
essentially under all circumstances a demoralizing agency, and must be so from the very nature
of the case; and that the provision of women certified fit for immoral purposes is necessarily
disastrous whatever be the concomitants of such a proposition.”

Transcriber’s Notes (continued)

Corrections to the Original Text

The following misprints and other errors have been
corrected:

Page 23 - the word “prostitutues” changed to
“prostitutes” (“a system of compulsory
examination of prostitutes”).

Page 42 - the text “to be longer” changed to “to
be any longer” (“when too old to be any longer
‘sufficiently attractive’ to the soldier”).

Page 101 - the word “analagous” changed to
“analogous” (“are closely analogous to the
conditions”).

Other Changes

The following changes to the original text have
been made for clarity or consistency:

The title “Commander-in-chief” changed to
“Commander-in-Chief” throughout to match the
formal title used in original documents.

Page xi - “Anglo Indian” changed to “Anglo-
Indian” in CONTENTS.

Page 42 - the word “unbiassed” changed to
“unbiased”.

Page 87 - “the C.D. Acts” changed to “the C. D.
Acts”.

Page 103 - “prized C.D. Acts” changed to “prized
C. D. Acts”.

Page 107 - the text “World’s W. C. T. U.”
changed to “World’s W.C.T.U.”

Notes

The words “bazar” and “bazaar” appear throughout
the text. The authors normally use “bazaar” in their
narrative while the facsimile copies of Army
documents in Appendix A show both spellings
being used.

Appendix A (pages 114–121) is a transcription of
the facsimiles of original documents. The resulting
text has been slightly reformatted for technical
reasons but retains the general layout of the
original documents along with their inconsistent
spelling. In regard to this latter point the following
issues are noted:

Page 117 - “his Excellency” is inconsistent with
other references to “His Excellency” in the same
document.

Page 118 - the word “insistance” rather than
“insistence” is used.

Appendix C (pages 124–127) uses the word
“retractation”. This is correct in the context in which
it is used. It is a rarely used noun, defined in the
GNU version of the Collaborative International
Dictionary of English as meaning “the act of
retracting what has been said; recantation.”

Changes to Footnotes

The footnotes have been re-indexed using
numbers and collected together at the end of the
last chapter.

Variations in Spelling

The following variations of a word, rank or
descriptive term are present in the original text and
have been retained. The variations occur because
the authors use one spelling in their narrative but
retain any different spelling which occurs in text
that they quote:

“bazaar” and “bazar”
“Hindoo” and “Hindus”

“Lieut-General” and “Lieut.-Gen.”
“memoranda”, “memorandums” and
“memorandum”
“Mohammedan” and “Mohamedun”
“smallpox” and “small-pox”
“today” and “to-day”

Back to top

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE QUEEN'S DAUGHTERS IN INDIA
***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one
owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and
distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties.
Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying
royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of
this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for
nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do
practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law.
Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic
works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work, you indicate that
you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this
agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg electronic
works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you
may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any
way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even
without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a
lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg electronic works. See
paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a
compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying
or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are
removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg works in compliance with
the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work.
You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format
with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with
this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United
States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project
Gutenberg License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work
(any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of
the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with this
eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from texts not protected by
U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without
paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either
with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the
work and the Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the permission of the
copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License terms from this
work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part
of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up,
nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However,
if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than
“Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project
Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the
user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request,
of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must
include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or
distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you

already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group
of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in
writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do
copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in
creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or
other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of
Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a

Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR
BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU
AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR
ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL
DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this
electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any)
you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide
a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or
entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work
electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this
work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or
limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to
make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity
or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner,
any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from
all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg work, and
(c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats
readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people
in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical
to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg and
future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and

how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information
page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational
corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status
by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is
64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516, Montclair NJ 07042,
USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at
the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and
donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of
equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable
donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it
takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for
any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the
solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations
from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning
tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our
small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses.
Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit
card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg concept of a library of
electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are
confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how to make donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and
how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back

back